This is the biggest issue in our country tbh, there’s a reason rural people are more bigoted and it’s because they don’t see LGTBQ+/other races/anyone different at all in their tiny world, and not knowing creates fear.
Living in cities you’re constantly surrounded by so many people that you just ignore everyone, and for the most part are just “let everyone do their own thing”. People really need to step out of their comfort zones.
Or at least allow other people to do their thing.
I’m happy in my comfort zone, and am probably the last person to try something new. I’m not interested in leaving my comfort zone. I’m also not about to rip other people out of their comfort zone and harass them. Last time I checked, someone else eating food I never would or being trans when I’m not is no threat to me and my own world. Why would I ever try to threaten theirs?
Eh I’d still suggest it. I won’t force people to but generally it’s good to get out and try new things. You don’t have to like them, but truly we get one life and you don’t want to make it to the end and realize you didn’t try anything. I like my rut too, but I still try to travel, experience new cultures, try that weird new food, talk to someone who’s different from me, go to that risque show that I normally wouldn’t, those are all life experiences that we can only do for so long and then it’s just over.
We go to work and follow our routine every day, a couple times a year try to push the boundaries a bit, you never know what you may like that’s out there
I don’t know. I’m terrified of death but if I knew I would die tomorrow I would definitely NOT be thinking “I regret not trying more things.” I would do more of the same thing I’ve always loved to get as much known happiness before I die. Some people are just not wired that way. I don’t want anyone to feel pushed into trying new things or like they have to just because it’s what everyone else advocates for. As long as you’re able to tolerate those different from you, no problem. “Be open-minded” is really only required insofar as being tolerant, as realizing people who have different perspectives from you may still be good people. You need not be adventurous and into traveling and learning about different cultures and eating that new trendy food to be a decent human being. I’m happy where I am and not making anyone miserable, and I will defend my right to stay in my bubble so long as I don’t start becoming intolerant and mean.
The fact I’m autistic may factor into my perspective. But I don’t think it changes my point at all. My life, my choices, and while I get you’re probably well-intentioned and just want to improve my quality of life, because of my own personal history with this kind of perspective and being told similar things it feels somewhat pushy. There’s a decent chance it is not pushy in reality and it’s only my perception coloring things, especially since you did mention not trying to force anyone into things. If I want to try something new it will come from me choosing it, not about how I need to get out of my bubble or I specifically need to try it or I need to be more open-minded or most relevantly to this conversation, how I’ll regret not trying more things (implicitly, how I’ll regret being the person I am—someone who prefers to stay in their comfort zone).
PBS programs like Sesame Street were the only exposure I had to non-white cultures as a young kid as the city population where I went to schoole at the time was in the upper 90% white range and I mostly hung out with other rural kids because of proximity. A show with people just doing people things was a great way to normalize diversity.
So put them on TV. Expose them that way. I myself am SUPER bitter about conservatives crying about “forced diversity” in media. I just want to shove it down their throats now. But representation is really really important. Just that my motives for it are based on resentment.
Trans folks are such a small sliver of the population, it’s very difficult for most people to know a trans person.
On top of this, many trans people try to live “stealth” so they’re not harassed for simply existing.
It’s sad, because this is a known phenomenon. It’s the “why” of why LGB acceptance has grown in the last several decades, it turns out when friends and loved ones are lesbian, gay, or bisexual, it becomes something people are more willing to accept.
LGB is about 3.5% of the population while T is about 0.3%.
It’s so much harder for people to meet a trans person to begin with, just based on numbers. This puts trans people at a natural disadvantage in being able to grow acceptance in society.
Now this is where I put on my tinfoil fucking hat.
I feel like conservatives chose trans people as a target because they know this, too. They know the small numbers mean acceptance will be an even slower and harder road than for the LGB part of the community. They’re fucking banking on it, so they can continue to sew division and hate.
Very much on point, and this is where the age-old tension between “a duty to come out” versus “a right to choose if and when” remains still relevant.
I do not want to take the position that there is such a duty, but I have to admit that I’m uneasy that our 2010s-present queer media does not even acknowledge the tension.
I think we should normalize referring to people who are straight but haven’t explicitly told people they’re straight as not having “come out” as straight. It’s a heteronormative bias. If anything we actually don’t know if they’re straight. More importantly, I think it helps illustrate the bizarre nature of the “duty to come out” as you call it.
Jfc this one drives me nuts.
Number of times I’ve been party to conversations where the prevailing attitude was that because someone didn’t announce themselves as gay, then they couldn’t possibly be gay.
“Were you talking about sexuality at any point?”
“Had they been attracting the interest of the opposite sex, or same sex for that matter?”
“Was there any conversation or non-verbal interaction where their sexuality might have been vaguely relevant?”
“Did you declare your own sexuality to them?”
“Yeah, but that’s different!”
Fuckers never can explain what they think is different about it, funnily enough.
See also: straight people getting in a lather because a gay person is flirting with someone of the opposite sex.
If you’re talking about the US, those figures are out of date 1 2 3
Also a little over 4 in 10 Americans say they personally know a trans person
Neat, but the question is: Are there more openly LGBTQ+ people because their numbers are simply growing, or is it a function of society becoming more accepting, so fewer feel a reason to hide it most of their lives? (my bet is on the latter)
Secondly, even with the increase in trans population, you’re still looking at a way smaller T community than LGB, which still makes acceptance an uphill battle for trans identities.
It’s definitely the latter, the common analogy is to left-handedness and acceptance. Anyone who works in queer health or population health is very familiar with stigmatization vs. identification and under-reporting issues.
Yoooo, didn’t you use to be active on /r/CenturyClub? I recognise your username, though I wouldn’t expect you to remember mine.
Plus, sexuality is really apparent when you see couples; two guys who are together are clearly not straight - you don’t need to get to know either of them to know that.
However, the point for most trans people is that they want to pass, and just live as the gender that corresponds to their gender identity. If they pass it’s just not apparent they’re trans until you get to know them - even leaving the stealth aspect aside.
I feel like conservatives chose trans people as a target because they know this, too. They know the small numbers mean acceptance will be an even slower and harder road than for the LGB part of the community. They’re fucking banking on it, so they can continue to sew division and hate.
I’m sure this was a deliberate choice since they lost on gay acceptance. They are using the same techniques and talking points as well. It’s also backlash since there was more acceptance in some circles and had to jump on it before it became widespread since most people haven’t thought about it before. Got to get that indoctrination in first or else it won’t stick
Re: tinfoil hat,
It wouldn’t surprise me. They did this with abortion rights. The American right used the topic to scare the evangelicals into becoming an ally. “Pro life” and all the rhetoric around calling abortion murder is nothing short of marketing genius. (Evil genius.) How can you even begin to respond to it? You can tell them that abortion isn’t murder until you’re blue in the face and even if you convince someone all they have to do is find folks on the fence and tell them “the left is murdering babies” and they’re on board. It’s so direct. Why would you want to side with the “baby murderers”? More importantly, why would you miss an election? The left are “murderers” sent by “demons” and will take office if you don’t act.
Is that causal or correlative?
Probably both, honestly.
In general, it’s correlative.
However, in practice, it’s also causal, because very often acceptance grows from having a child/loved one who is LGBT.
Dick Cheney was against gay marriage as Vice President, but his daughter is credited for getting him to change his opinion, and now he is pro-gay-marriage. The cause of his change of heart was literally love for his child.
Though trans people being fairly uncommon is certainly an issue on this front as other people have pointed out, it’s quite nice to know that people have become more accepting by very nature of just knowing me
This sort of thing is great motivation for me to continue being out of the closet to the general public :)
Another group that even fewer people know personally or even know about are intersex people https://beehaw.org/comment/666904
It’s so much deeper than that. For a lot of these *phobias, the concept of being friends with such a person is so foreign that merely reading a story about inter-group friendship has a measurable positive impact. See the below excerpt.
- Cernat, V. (2011). Extended Contact Effects: Is Exposure to Positive Outgroup Exemplars Sufficient or Is Interaction With Ingroup Members Necessary?. Journal Of Social Psychology, 151(6), 737-753. doi:10.1080/00224545.2010.522622
Participants who read a story about the friendship between a member of a stigmatized group and the member of another outgroup scored higher on outgroup admiration than a control group and felt less threatened by the prospect of interacting with a member of the target outgroup. However, reduction of outgroup disgust, negative stereotypes, biased beliefs, and anxiety was or tended to be highest among participants who read a story about the friendship between a member of a stigmatized group and an ingroup member. (p. 747)
Basically, it’s like these people have never imagined the target of their bias as someone who you COULD be friends with.
This is why they rail against college education so hard: because a collegiate education often requires you to study things like this, which in turn opens your mind to differing ideas. Which they screech about as “That liberal indoctrination stole my child from me!”
Not to mention in college you’re thrown in with thousands of people of all races, sexes, religions, and culture’s, and you are bound to be exposed to new ways of thinking. If you stay in your home town of 5000 people you never have to be exposed to other ways of thinking.
I’ve heard many formerly conservative peeps say something like that: Nobody indoctrinated me, I just met the people who were supposed to be othered and it turns out they are cool.
For the record: Same at schools - nobody is saying you gotta be gay or trans, but apparently just telling kids that different people exist is a threat to their indoctrinated lifestyle.
