Lonewolfm16 said:
theApoc said:
Lonewolfm16 said:
theApoc said:
It's always nice to see uninformed hypocritical children rant against other groups uninformed hypocritical children on the other side of the aisle. The self-righteous stupidity in the comments thus far is astounding.
When I first heard about this, quite honestly I was annoyed. There is nothing wrong with the idea of boys being boys and girls being girls. It is not bigotry to subscribe to "traditional" gender roles, nor is it idiocy to feel that the "politically correct" of the world are trying very hard to dictate what is and isn't acceptable. Do you, as a person, like everything and everyone? Do you have a completely open mind when it comes to everything you encounter? No? Then what gives you, or anyone like you the right to tell someone else what is and isn't acceptable?
SOCIETY reinforces gender stereotypes. SOCIETY determines what is and isn't allowed. Not the left, not the right, SOCIETY as a whole. Some people think that presenting these types of concepts to children is confusing. Some people have beliefs that find this type of pandering(and make no mistake, this is pandering), offensive. And regardless of the validity of those beliefs, they have just as much right to them as you do to yours.
Social change should come because of a change in how SOCIETY thinks, feels, behaves. It should not be attained via force or coercion. When a religious radical speaks out, he is quickly labeled as a bigot or fool(well if that person is from the west, other cultures seem to get a free pass no matter what nonsense they spout), yet when someone steps up in the name of "insert this weeks hippy agenda item" they are immediately praised by both the media and the vocal minority as standing up for what they believe.
I personally do not agree with either point of view due to the fact that I do not believe it is my place to DICTATE what others think. But maybe that is just me.
Two things: One, no traditional gender roles are not evil, as long as they are not forced. It should be "a guy wants to hunt, fix cars, wear manly clothes, read war-stories ect ect, fine. A guy wants to wear girly clothes, shop, read fashion mags and romance novels thats fine too. Do what you want" and saying that cross-dressing/ acting in traditionally opposite gender ways is acceptable isn't a attack on more traditional styles. Just a call for tolerance.
two, society is a collection of individuals. The "political correctness" side? They are part of society. And social change happens more easily when you push it. (see civil rights and feminism.)
Name ONE instance where societal change came more easily by "pushing it"? Calling for tolerance is just another form of coercion. EVERYONE, racist, bigot, hippy, communist, socialist, republican, democrat, elitist, etc. Everyone has just as much right to their opinion as anyone else. Telling someone who hates minorities to be "tolerant" is hypocritical and ultimately has little effect on their actual beliefs. You can not force people to change how they think. You can place limits on how they express those thoughts, you can ensure the differing points of view are presented peacefully. But you can not make someone believe something they don't want to.
What you can do, and this is where my initial comment stems from, is inundate people with propaganda. You can manipulate the SOCIAL consciousness and create a false sense of "tolerance". The only problem is that "change" built on a foundation of manipulation lasts only as long as you are the one doing the manipulating.
True societal change ONLY comes with time. It comes from the debate, it comes from the differing points of view. Those who claim their enemies fools tend to be fools themselves.
One example? Did you not read the parenthetical statement after my last sentence? Civil rights, feminism in the 20s and later the 60s, the abolitionist movement in the north, ect ect. And your view seems to be that since some people don't like cross-dressing, cross-dressing shouldn't be allowed on television. How is that a view in favor of freedom? People don't like it? Fine, they retain the right to freedom of thought and speech, they can not like it all you want. And I have the right to call them a idiot and a bigot. Thats how freedoms works. And the Hub has the right to show as many shows in support of cross-dressing as they want.
You're comparing apples and oranges. Civil rights and women's suffrage wasn't about changing people's beliefs, it was about extending constitutionally protected rights to groups who had been deprived of them. When segregation ended, it was "blacks now have the same legal rights as whites", not "blacks now have the same legal rights as whites, and you are banned from thinking they shouldn't".
People's attitudes are changed more easily by taking a non-combative approach, this was why MLK advocated non-violent protest for civil rights, or with Gandhi for expelling the British from India, to show people who was on the moral high-ground. When you have one person being the bully and the other being the victim, it's clear who is morally in the right in the situation.
On the other hand, when you have two sides screaming at one another, in this case one claiming that Shezow is a big conspiracy to turn kids into crossdressers and the other side screaming that anyone who has any issue with the show is a bigoted fascist, no one makes progress, as attacking and insulting people causes them to go into defense mode and makes the idea of them changing their beliefs even more remote.
Also, I haven't heard of anyone saying this show should be banned. Actually, now that I think about it, the article from Ben Shapiro is the only thing I've heard anyone say about this show. I haven't seen a single fox-news pundit talk about it or seen a weekly standard article about it. This whole thing sounds like making a mountain out of a mole hill.
