No Cause, No Ally

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Interesting observation:  When you become more amenable to new ideas, when you change your mind on a subject, two things appear to happen in the minds of the people you've agreed with.  First, it is taken for granted that you are now 169% on board with every portion of every argument...And second, that you can now be safely treated with contempt, with less cordiality that people who never even considered changing their minds.  People who outright oppose the aims of the people you've agreed with are given carte blanche, while those willing to meet them halfway are ground up into hamburger.

Now, we've discussed a lot of things in the last few days.  I've agreed that certain swear words are inherently ugly.  I haven't changed my mind again, or anything.  I still say that labels are part of the politics of division, and I still stand against their use in any manner other than mere description.  In fact, the idea of self-labeling or labeling others is abhorrent to me.

I have also said that being an eglatarian is part of what I am.  I am not about to change that, because it's the right thing to do...And I don't need anyone's permission to be so.    I do not require the approval of any other eglatarians (feminism, civil rights backers, anything).

And this is good, because I have decided that I can't and won't be anyone's ally in these matters.  I will not tolerate non-eglatarian behavior around me, but that's as far as I'm interested in going, anymore.  Anytime you organize, you bring in politics, and frankly I at this moment in time cannot tolerate any more politics.  You can do that without me.

I am certainly not going to be anyone's dog for the privilege of being an "ally".

[Juana]

Could you explain to me, please, where the "169% on board" and contempt thing came from? Perhaps I missed something, but I'm not sure where either of these things came from.

[Verbal Mike]

And can you explain to me, please, what the kind of label usage is that isn't for description? I don't entirely get that.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Could you explain to me, please, where the "169% on board" and contempt thing came from? Perhaps I missed something, but I'm not sure where either of these things came from.

Last 3-4 pages in Labels, in which I am apparently somewhat less than a person, for failing to agree on all points.

Interestingly enough, ECH vented some stuff a page or two back in the Patriarchy thread, in which he stated that he isn't willing to bend at all.  This was given a pass (granted, it was funny as hell).  I was willing to bend, and I have been made into something that you'd scrape off your shoe if you stepped in it.

Obvious conclusion:  "Alliances" are heirarchies.  The moment you enter one, you become part of the pecking order, and you will face non-stop attempts to make you a good little serf.

So I'll pass on this stuff.  I'll do my thing, you folks do yours.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

And can you explain to me, please, what the kind of label usage is that isn't for description? I don't entirely get that.

Yeah, we discussed this in the Label thread.  Go look there.  I am not interested in discussing it any further.

[tyrannosaurus vex]

I can get behind this sentiment. I can't say I know everything or have the broadest experience in more than a few unrelated areas. Certainly I'm no veteran of the Civil Rights or Women's Rights or LGBTETC Rights movements. In my own way, though, I'm a veteran of the "JUST RIGHTS" movement. I do not care who or what you are, where you come from, your preferred method for tickling your pubic nerves, what you feel like when you wear a dress, what your favorite color is, what kind of music you like (with the exception of Country, which is only enjoyed by people who deserve all the persecution we can throw at them), or anything else that goes into making you a special snowflake.

I'm an egalitarian, and a realist. I know there is injustice and inequality. That there are stereotypes and mountains of unfairness that needs to be worked out. My way of doing this is by not giving one single fuck what you or someone else might use to identify you or categorize you. I believe that if more people were to adopt this attitude, our society would benefit enormously.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

I can get behind this sentiment. I can't say I know everything or have the broadest experience in more than a few unrelated areas. Certainly I'm no veteran of the Civil Rights or Women's Rights or LGBTETC Rights movements. In my own way, though, I'm a veteran of the "JUST RIGHTS" movement. I do not care who or what you are, where you come from, your preferred method for tickling your pubic nerves, what you feel like when you wear a dress, what your favorite color is, what kind of music you like (with the exception of Country, which is only enjoyed by people who deserve all the persecution we can throw at them), or anything else that goes into making you a special snowflake.

I'm an egalitarian, and a realist. I know there is injustice and inequality. That there are stereotypes and mountains of unfairness that needs to be worked out. My way of doing this is by not giving one single fuck what you or someone else might use to identify you or categorize you. I believe that if more people were to adopt this attitude, our society would benefit enormously.

Yep.  It was both threads, mind you, and it went on for some time (especially in the Patriarchy thread).  I finally gave up, and decided that the best thing I can do is just do what I've been doing all along.  The Cause will get by without me.

[Juana]

Could you explain to me, please, where the "169% on board" and contempt thing came from? Perhaps I missed something, but I'm not sure where either of these things came from.

Last 3-4 pages in Labels, in which I am apparently somewhat less than a person, for failing to agree on all points.

Interestingly enough, ECH vented some stuff a page or two back in the Patriarchy thread, in which he stated that he isn't willing to bend at all.  This was given a pass (granted, it was funny as hell).  I was willing to bend, and I have been made into something that you'd scrape off your shoe if you stepped in it.

Obvious conclusion:  "Alliances" are heirarchies.  The moment you enter one, you become part of the pecking order, and you will face non-stop attempts to make you a good little serf.

So I'll pass on this stuff.  I'll do my thing, you folks do yours.

I haven't gotten to any of those pages yet. I'll check them out.

I think the word choice of "allies" was meant to imply that a person who is working with a group (let's go back to women) is working hand in hand with them, but I can see what you're getting at. It might start out as "working with us' but it can become "working for us".

[tyrannosaurus vex]

I can get behind this sentiment. I can't say I know everything or have the broadest experience in more than a few unrelated areas. Certainly I'm no veteran of the Civil Rights or Women's Rights or LGBTETC Rights movements. In my own way, though, I'm a veteran of the "JUST RIGHTS" movement. I do not care who or what you are, where you come from, your preferred method for tickling your pubic nerves, what you feel like when you wear a dress, what your favorite color is, what kind of music you like (with the exception of Country, which is only enjoyed by people who deserve all the persecution we can throw at them), or anything else that goes into making you a special snowflake.

I'm an egalitarian, and a realist. I know there is injustice and inequality. That there are stereotypes and mountains of unfairness that needs to be worked out. My way of doing this is by not giving one single fuck what you or someone else might use to identify you or categorize you. I believe that if more people were to adopt this attitude, our society would benefit enormously.

Yep.  It was both threads, mind you, and it went on for some time (especially in the Patriarchy thread).  I finally gave up, and decided that the best thing I can do is just do what I've been doing all along.  The Cause will get by without me.

We should start an Egalitarian Movement, and then identify groups of people who do not meet the standard of Egalitarian, so we can shun them.

[/joke]

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Could you explain to me, please, where the "169% on board" and contempt thing came from? Perhaps I missed something, but I'm not sure where either of these things came from.

Last 3-4 pages in Labels, in which I am apparently somewhat less than a person, for failing to agree on all points.

Interestingly enough, ECH vented some stuff a page or two back in the Patriarchy thread, in which he stated that he isn't willing to bend at all.  This was given a pass (granted, it was funny as hell).  I was willing to bend, and I have been made into something that you'd scrape off your shoe if you stepped in it.

Obvious conclusion:  "Alliances" are heirarchies.  The moment you enter one, you become part of the pecking order, and you will face non-stop attempts to make you a good little serf.

So I'll pass on this stuff.  I'll do my thing, you folks do yours.

I haven't gotten to any of those pages yet. I'll check them out.

I think the word choice of "allies" was meant to imply that a person who is working with a group (let's go back to women) is working hand in hand with them, but I can see what you're getting at. It might start out as "working with us' but it can become "working for us".

It's not the "working for us" thing, and it's not the nastiness.  It's the idea that once you take one step, you have to jump all the way into lockstep or you're scum.

And I'm not willing to do that.

Like I said, I'm still gonna do what I've always done, but I'm not going to get involved in any movements, causes, or any other damn thing.  The price tag is a little too rich for my blood.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

I can get behind this sentiment. I can't say I know everything or have the broadest experience in more than a few unrelated areas. Certainly I'm no veteran of the Civil Rights or Women's Rights or LGBTETC Rights movements. In my own way, though, I'm a veteran of the "JUST RIGHTS" movement. I do not care who or what you are, where you come from, your preferred method for tickling your pubic nerves, what you feel like when you wear a dress, what your favorite color is, what kind of music you like (with the exception of Country, which is only enjoyed by people who deserve all the persecution we can throw at them), or anything else that goes into making you a special snowflake.

I'm an egalitarian, and a realist. I know there is injustice and inequality. That there are stereotypes and mountains of unfairness that needs to be worked out. My way of doing this is by not giving one single fuck what you or someone else might use to identify you or categorize you. I believe that if more people were to adopt this attitude, our society would benefit enormously.

Yep.  It was both threads, mind you, and it went on for some time (especially in the Patriarchy thread).  I finally gave up, and decided that the best thing I can do is just do what I've been doing all along.  The Cause will get by without me.

We should start an Egalitarian Movement, and then identify groups of people who do not meet the standard of Egalitarian, so we can shun them.

[/joke]

That would be funny, if only it were funny.

[P3nT4gR4m]

I can get behind this sentiment. I can't say I know everything or have the broadest experience in more than a few unrelated areas. Certainly I'm no veteran of the Civil Rights or Women's Rights or LGBTETC Rights movements. In my own way, though, I'm a veteran of the "JUST RIGHTS" movement. I do not care who or what you are, where you come from, your preferred method for tickling your pubic nerves, what you feel like when you wear a dress, what your favorite color is, what kind of music you like (with the exception of Country, which is only enjoyed by people who deserve all the persecution we can throw at them), or anything else that goes into making you a special snowflake.

I'm an egalitarian, and a realist. I know there is injustice and inequality. That there are stereotypes and mountains of unfairness that needs to be worked out. My way of doing this is by not giving one single fuck what you or someone else might use to identify you or categorize you. I believe that if more people were to adopt this attitude, our society would benefit enormously.

Yep.  It was both threads, mind you, and it went on for some time (especially in the Patriarchy thread).  I finally gave up, and decided that the best thing I can do is just do what I've been doing all along.  The Cause will get by without me.

Been saying that, about any cause anyone has ever had, since I first became aware of the fucking things. I will mock any cause I'm presented with and the cause will get all pissy with me and do absolutely nothing aside from make angry little faces which, let's face it, is about as much as any cause can ever do about anything and, yeah, they seem to manage it quite well with or without my support.

[Juana]

Could you explain to me, please, where the "169% on board" and contempt thing came from? Perhaps I missed something, but I'm not sure where either of these things came from.

Last 3-4 pages in Labels, in which I am apparently somewhat less than a person, for failing to agree on all points.

Interestingly enough, ECH vented some stuff a page or two back in the Patriarchy thread, in which he stated that he isn't willing to bend at all.  This was given a pass (granted, it was funny as hell).  I was willing to bend, and I have been made into something that you'd scrape off your shoe if you stepped in it.

Obvious conclusion:  "Alliances" are heirarchies.  The moment you enter one, you become part of the pecking order, and you will face non-stop attempts to make you a good little serf.

So I'll pass on this stuff.  I'll do my thing, you folks do yours.

I haven't gotten to any of those pages yet. I'll check them out.

I think the word choice of "allies" was meant to imply that a person who is working with a group (let's go back to women) is working hand in hand with them, but I can see what you're getting at. It might start out as "working with us' but it can become "working for us".

It's not the "working for us" thing, and it's not the nastiness.  It's the idea that once you take one step, you have to jump all the way into lockstep or you're scum.

And I'm not willing to do that.

Like I said, I'm still gonna do what I've always done, but I'm not going to get involved in any movements, causes, or any other damn thing.  The price tag is a little too rich for my blood.

And what you're doing is excellent. Can you give me an example of "lockstep", please?

[The Good Reverend Roger]

I can get behind this sentiment. I can't say I know everything or have the broadest experience in more than a few unrelated areas. Certainly I'm no veteran of the Civil Rights or Women's Rights or LGBTETC Rights movements. In my own way, though, I'm a veteran of the "JUST RIGHTS" movement. I do not care who or what you are, where you come from, your preferred method for tickling your pubic nerves, what you feel like when you wear a dress, what your favorite color is, what kind of music you like (with the exception of Country, which is only enjoyed by people who deserve all the persecution we can throw at them), or anything else that goes into making you a special snowflake.

I'm an egalitarian, and a realist. I know there is injustice and inequality. That there are stereotypes and mountains of unfairness that needs to be worked out. My way of doing this is by not giving one single fuck what you or someone else might use to identify you or categorize you. I believe that if more people were to adopt this attitude, our society would benefit enormously.

Yep.  It was both threads, mind you, and it went on for some time (especially in the Patriarchy thread).  I finally gave up, and decided that the best thing I can do is just do what I've been doing all along.  The Cause will get by without me.

Been saying that, about any cause anyone has ever had, since I first became aware of the fucking things. I will mock any cause I'm presented with and the cause will get all pissy with me and do absolutely nothing aside from make angry little faces which, let's face it, is about as much as any cause can ever do about anything and, yeah, they seem to manage it quite well with or without my support.

Yes, well, I've bought into that sentiment...But for a slightly different reason.  I have enough power structures to deal with, and ANY organization or cause is a power structure.  And the consequences for being in a power structure is a continual power struggle, and again, I have enough on my plate.

[Verbal Mike]

And can you explain to me, please, what the kind of label usage is that isn't for description? I don't entirely get that.

Yeah, we discussed this in the Label thread.  Go look there.  I am not interested in discussing it any further.

Umm okay, just you brought it up again here. I did read that thread patiently and don't think I missed anything. Unless you mean labels as uniforms, a concept which I understand and find useful. I just don't entirely get the holy rage against labels as a whole with the exception of description, when description sounds to me like almost all uses of labels ever.

In any case, if you don't want to continue discussing this, I'll just remain slightly confused, which I'm fine with.