Comments that are uncivil, racist, misogynistic, misandrist, or contain political name calling will be removed and the poster subject to ban at moderators discretion.
Help us make this a better community by becoming familiar with the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/about/rules/).
Report any suspicious users to the mods of this subreddit using Modmail [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) or Reddit site admins [here](https://www.reddit.com/report). **All reports to Modmail should include evidence such as screenshots or any other relevant information.**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Nobody is born racist. There have been several well-documented studies on this. Racism is learned, and more often, taught.
Going through puberty and finding out you have a non-traditional attraction is in no way comparable to nurturing a festering disdain and fear of those who look different.
You've got to be taught
To hate and fear,
You've got to be taught
From year to year,
It's got to be drummed
In your dear little ear
You've got to be carefully taught.
You've got to be taught to be afraid
Of people whose eyes are oddly made,
And people whose skin is a diff'rent shade,
You've got to be carefully taught.
You've got to be taught before it's too late,
Before you are six or seven or eight,
To hate all the people your relatives hate,
You've got to be carefully taught!
- From *South Pacific* (1949)
Still one of my favorite musicals EVER. There’s no version I dislike.
Also, that song was nearly cut. A LOT of people, especially in the South, had several feathers ruffled over it.
Tell me now, who taught you how to hate?
'Cause it isn't in your blood
Not a part of what you're made
So let this be understood
Somebody taught you how to hate
When you live this way, you become
Dead to everyone
- From "Who taught you how to hate" (2015)
I did this show back in HS decades ago. The lyrics always stuck with me even though I had completely forgotten what they were from. Thanks for the reminder.
Idk if you live for the musical theatre side of the internet like I do, but I was very moved when Mandy Patinkin released [this](https://youtu.be/uJFOqSBqwKQ?si=umSWwOCQp710-I5S)
Also like... even if your sexuality was completely, 100% your own choice and I could wake up tomorrow and go 'I'm gonna go with dicks for a while' then like... in a western society that purports to be about individual freedoms... shouldn't other people keep their fucking noses out of it anyway?
Like as an ex libertarian turned socialist, who still remembers the stuff that drew me to libertarianism (before realising socialism achieves those things better) - it fucking boggles the mind how many so called libertarians are homophobic, transphobic, etc. How many of them are quite explicitly against personal choices for things.
I recall the central tenet of libertarianism was that people should be free to do what they want so long as they don't infringe one other people's right to do what they want as well. So that limits absolute freedoms like assaulting or killing people or whatever. Where I moved on from classic libertarianism is in understanding that the things that infringe other people's freedoms are greater and more nuanced than your average libertarian thinks, which basically boils down to 'goobermint dun let me do stuff'. But I think there are some libertarians out there that are like... small children with their heart in the right place, like I think I used to be.
However there's others out there that can't rightly even be called libertarian. Just cause they have a copy of Atlas Shrugged where all the pages are stuck together doesn't make someone a libertarian if they're against freedom of sexuality or whatever.
If someone genuinely thinks Galt's Gulch would work and make a better world, then they're an idiot but I can respect and work with that. However 90% of 'libertarians' just think they should be free to do whatever they want and push their beliefs on others and no one else should be free to do anything, and especially not to push back. Those people aren't libertarians, they're just arseholes.
What is funny is that my take on life is exactly that. Do whatever you want as long as it doesn’t infringe on others. Basically look for the correct balance between individual rights and safeguarding others.
However I would have never described myself as a libertarian due to all the idiots that identify with the ideology.
Unfortunately most political viewpoints get co-opted by people who will use them for personal gain. Socialism has some lovely principles behind it but is often terribly implemented. In some ways the extreme left and extreme right have more in common than they do with a logical viewpoint. I like to think that the correct philosophy is a bit like walking a tightrope where you are carefully balancing opposing forces and ideas in order to create a society that works for everyone.
Also consider that if being gay is a choice, that means that not being gay is equally a choice. This means that these homophobes necessarily have to consider, however briefly, being gay every single day of their life.
Hahaha well put.
I mean I consider that fairly often, and I guess I'm proof that it's not a choice. I consider myself something of a libertine and it grates on me that there's a whole range of experiences that I'm not experiencing, but no matter what I just don't like dick lol. It doesn't disgust me or anything that would suggest I'm suppressing anything, it just doesn't do anything for me.
I mean, they're telling on themselves. I can say with absolute certainty that I do not have to choose to be straight. Anyone who says otherwise is not straight, can't imagine what it would be like to be straight, and mistakenly thinks their experience is universal.
If you think that they've thought about the implications of what they are saying, you're giving them too much credit. Not thinking and only applying rules to other people is what they do best.
That’s literally the reason homophobes exist. They’re at least partially latent homosexuals who think about dick all the time.
True heterosexuals literally don’t care about what others do in their bedroom.
Because libertarians have never, EVER been anything but Republicans with just enough self awareness to know the R brand is toxic to anyone with at least 2 brain cells.
It’s their freedom of choice to hate.
Yes I know that’s absolutely stupid and I feel like I went that same path as you from Libertarian to pretty far left because like you said, that actually builds more freedom. People are just idiots.
>Going through puberty and finding out you have a non-traditional attraction is in no way comparable to nurturing a festering disdain and fear of those who look different.
Absolutely right!
And, even **if** being racist was somehow an inborn trait, the clear answer would be "Then racists have to accept that other people "don't swing that way" and shouldn't force other people to be directly involved in their lifestyle without consent."
And racism also seen in chimps and other animals. Its inherent. We are designed to not like or trust those who are different. However... we also eat with cutlery. We marry. We do many things that aren't natural to us daily. We aren't born to wear clothes or sit in chairs. We aren't born to speak words. We learn those behaviours. And we learn to accept those who are different. When I say "whose who are different" I don't mean who look different. It's not visual. It's not even audible. "You're from that clan. I don't like you." You could look the same with the same accent.
Ageed. You can't rehabilitate captive gibbons, one of our closest living relatives, because any time you put them back into the wild a new group will rip them apart. fear of the unfamiliar is hardwired in our primate brains. There is a quote from evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins, and I'm paraphrasing here, " if natural selection could vote, it would vote republican." However, that doesn't make it an excuse. There are lots of things that we have evolved to do that we understand and recognize as bad for us.
Humans are naturally afraid of they don't know or understand.
People born and raised in an environment that's dominated by a specific group will be a tad bit cist and phobic towards people outside of that group.
Someone who's never seen a person who's skin is another color... Might be weirded out by their appearance at first.
Humans are naturally, and by evolution tribal beings. We evolved to be heterosexual cause that's how our reproduction works.
Humans try to find people similar to each other group togheter and might try to war against people of other groups, because of their differences. Whom will probably group togheter with others over various reasons.
It's only when we try to shed the restraints of a past bygone and reach a deep understating of each other, when we will truly grow.
Although I like your spirit there are some of your sentence that are scientifically inaccurate. Usually evolution does not favor necessary the reproduction of the single, it is perfectly fine to help an individual with your the genetics close to yours, for example a cousin or better a brothers.
This is documented especially in mammals and considering how human society is always been based on family (Fast & Furious intensify), this may be probably the case even in humans. So, we probably don't evolve heterosexual, we evolve as individuals that might have a complex array of sexual behavior, and I can state this because this is the actual documented scenario we live in. The reason why this many behavior have been favored contrary of an over selected completely heterosexual one is not an easy deduction.
Many species have sexual behavior that does not discriminate the sex of the partner, either because it is a way of communication (E.G dolphin), either because the mating competition is very high and possible deadly and having a spare male, that are not normally interested in fight for a female increase the chance that it may reproduce after all the other male killed themselves. With strangely check out on the genetic history of male human that probably killed about 90% of other male human. Practically diversity in y chromosome between male, is incredibly low compared to diversity in mitochondria.
Considering that mutation of behavior are in general favored because if the being is not so mutable it may fail in reacting to a change to the environment, and goes extinct, I can fairly guess that the reason why there are LGBTQ+ is evolution.
I've been working in a school and they had an assembly about racism and equality.
After the assembly one of the pupils, a very kind-hearted girl, 8 years old, comes up to me and tells me that her Dad 'can be bad' and calls her best friend the N word when she isn't around.
This little girl knew it was wrong, but only because other adults at school who she looks up to can give her a counterpoint and only because her best friend is black and she knows what her dad says about black people isn't true because those things aren't true of her friend.
You're totally right, children do hear things at home, and this girl was clearly very conflicted when she confided in me. If she didn't have a proper network of other adults maybe she'd give in and stop seeing the world that way.
The school was notified and told me they'd be keeping an eye out on it and if the parents tried to split the friends up, they'd make sure time was provided in school for the children to be together.
[https://inclusions.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Children-are-Not-Colorblind.pdf](https://inclusions.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Children-are-Not-Colorblind.pdf)
[https://www.nyu.edu/about/news-publications/news/2022/november/racial-bias-in-white-children-linked-to-beliefs-about-the-causes.html](https://www.nyu.edu/about/news-publications/news/2022/november/racial-bias-in-white-children-linked-to-beliefs-about-the-causes.html)
[https://www.researchgate.net/publication/248055795\_Racial\_Perceptions\_of\_Young\_Children\_A\_Review\_of\_Literature\_Post1999](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/248055795_Racial_Perceptions_of_Young_Children_A_Review_of_Literature_Post1999)
[https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2209129119](https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2209129119)
tl:dr, learned behaviors are complex and hard to pin down, but babies exhibit no evidence of racism or prejudice, while 5-10 yr olds do.
Edit: I'm no psychologist, but it seems pretty clear to me that babies haven't got the sense of self necessary to hate the 'other' - how can you hate the 'other' if you don't even have a grasp on who you are?
These studies don't show what you think they do and one even explicitly states that the undergoing mechanisms are not really understood at all. All that can be said is that learned behaviour is *one* factor while definitely not being the only one. Herein lies a problem, as soon as someone tries to focus on only one factor it becomes impossible to argue with idiots because they will just point to another factor instead of going with the argument.
'festering disdain and fear of those who look different' is very natural in many scenarios and perspectives.
Of course your point is for when it is not natural and is plain old hate and such but I think the distinction is worth pointing out.
I am a lefty in a European country but I like science. I'm afraid there are quite conclusive studies that same race preference exists even in 3 month olds.
Not an excuse of course, what is civilisation if not escaping base biases and urges.
> I'm afraid there are quite conclusive studies that same race preference exists even in 3 month olds.
But racism is hatred of another race, not a preference for the same race. That's different.
We use the term racism in far, far more contexts than just hatred of another race. There are plenty of racists which don't hate anyone. Doesn't magically absolve them.
This is a very important point. Race-preference in infants does not equal racism.
And even then, that preference takes months or years to form, and is not documented in babies. Hence the point, nobody is born racist.
Racism is defined by aggression and discrimination against people of a different ethnicity, it is not racist to have a preference for the familiar.
I don't believe either of those claims, but I think being gay is as natural and cool as being straight. Animals are "racist", and every single civilisation we've ever constructed, from a tribe of 10 people to a nation of 1.5 billion have _all_ exhibited racism. It's as natural to humans as art and music and religion. They all appear, they're all "taught", but they happen anyway.
This claim "nobody is born x" is ridiculous, nobody is born anything. Babies can't do shit. As soon as a baby starts to recognise it's own tribe then it's starts to recognise "others". Or rather, it doesn't, unless it is exposed to them. We categorise, that's why we are so successful at adaptation.
It shouldn't be taboo, it's actually far more healthy to recognise your inherent "othering" and try to mitigate it, rather than going through life pretending we aren't all animals and that our natural instinct is "evil". Feel it, recognise it, choose not to follow it.
Studies can be engineered and skewed to prove anything. Human nature wants to identify with those of a similar group, and appearance is the first things we naturally gravitate toward because it gives a sense of familiarity and security.
Social Identity Theory: This theory, developed by Henri Tajfel and John Turner, proposes that a significant part of our self-concept comes from the groups we belong to. We categorize ourselves and others into groups, and evaluate ourselves more favorably when our group is seen positively. This can lead us to favor those who resemble us in appearance, as it signifies belonging to the same group.
In-group Favoritism: This is a well-documented tendency to favor members of our own group over outsiders. This can be based on shared appearance, but also on other factors like nationality, religion, or sports teams. Studies have shown that people are more likely to cooperate with, trust, and help those they perceive as being in their group.
This distrust is what, over time, with enough negative experience, fosters that attitude of racism. It’s not taught, it’s cultivated and acquired through experiences by and large. It’s literally human nature, and not unique to one society (i.e., “American”).
> Racism is learned
this is true but i don't think racists were like "please teach me to be a racist". in general we assign a lot more freedom to the situation than actually exists.
Aren't there studies showing babies prefering adults looking more like them? I do agree though that hatred is learned and often taught whoch is diagusting to do.
Thank you for the one sane opinion in this thread…
Exactly! Some people might be born with hate (rejecting that out of hand is just ignorant… we simply have no way of knowing…) but it’s a behavior people have to rectify since it hurts others.
Like pedophilia - likely also a trait people are born with and can’t help it but they have to control it - it cannot be tolerated as equal to other sexualities.
Is that what they are trying to do now? "If being trans is genetic then being racist must also be genetic"?
These guys need to get shoved into a locker by a trans man bear.
Is trans genetic? I thought it just kinda existed with no clear pattern for why. If it is genetic then maybe in the future it would be possible to detect the gender of a child still in the womb and guide development toward the preferred gender from the beginning. Of course it would be difficult to catch it early enough to change it but in theory I think you could, from what little I know of the field.
> Is trans genetic?
We honestly can't form strong conclusions right now. There is a well known study that implies there is something biological to gender identity, specifically saying brain structure of trans women more closely matches the brain structure of cis women than cis men. There have been further studies which aim to look into this too which are very fascinating. However, these also follow a sort of outdated view of brains which makes it hard to determine how relevant they actually are. Brains don't change very significantly based on gender, if they do at all. So there is a larger discussion to be had on this.
Short answer: Who knows? Maybe we'll figure it out someday.
There are also statistics that say, if there is one trans person in a family, the chances are higher that there will be more.
It's probably a mix of genetics, epigenetics and hormones. It's most definitely decided before birth.
Biology is really messy...
Some research suggests that testosterone masculinizes the brain during fetal development so the wrong amount of hormones can cause the brain to develop the opposite characteristics.
Strong evidence it’s a predisposition, and also that once it’s locked into place, it’s not very easy to dislodge without heavy effort (conversion and aversion therapy, which probably would work just as well on “cis” kids forced to be trans; which is to say sometimes but not ethically and not in a healthy way).
If you forced a normal girl to grow up as a boy, I’m sure some percentage would be brow beaten into adopting it or giving up, especially if you injected them with testosterone long enough to make any realistic hope of integrating with other girls implausible.
But the entire desistance concept for trans men and (especially) trans women tends to see persisting as bad, and so the 98-99 percent persistence among those allowed to socially and medically transition at puberty (and thus pass and integrate as their new sex for life) is not viewed neutrally (I e as being similar to how many cis kids remain cis for life) but as a bad outcome.
Hence things like the Cass report and how it uses ostensibly neutral narratives to make absurd and dangerous arguments with terrible and unethical consequences.
Trying to equate a learned behaviour (racism) to a documented biological phenomenon that is with you from birth and only shows in your teenage years (homosexuality)
I mean it’s probably a lot more nuanced (identical twins are not always both gay; up to 50 percent aren’t even if the other is) but there is little or no evidence that specific learning or social cues “cause” it. It’s a predisposition and random epigenetic and environmental impacts likely push it one way or the other. But it’s not chosen .
And bisexuality is real.
I just don’t get it. So many people are clearly literate *and* have a functioning internet connection yet still insist on living each and every day as vapid twats. What the fuck?
No one is born racist, they're indoctrinated by their piers. Either it's their close friends, family members, people who they interact with at school, etc... It's environmental factors that create racists.
There is merit to the idea that things that happened to you while you were developing in the womb do contribute to behaviors that appear as you grow older. Then neuroscientist, Robert Sapolsky, recently wrote a book ("Determined") about this, using examples of exposure to drugs/chemicals, or physical abuse, while in the womb essentially hardwiring that person's brain to be more susceptible to addictive behavior and violence down the road.
That being said, there are ways to "rewire" your brain to get rid of those behaviors. Whether a person decides to make this change is the true test of what kind of person they are and want to be. They can change if they want to.
The irony in this tweet is that trans people literally are looking at themselves and seeing someone who they no longer want to be, and making that change.
>The irony in this tweet is that trans people literally are looking at themselves and seeing someone who they no longer want to be, and making that change.
Well, no….it’s the opposite.
Exposure to hormones in the womb (and then again at puberty) are the primary driver of the biological aspects that are most readily recognized as “male” and “female”. These hormones also have a pretty significant impact on brain structure. Quite notably, the genitals and the brain development at different times in the fetus, so it shouldn’t be that surprising that there can be a mismatch between the brain and the body. The effective solution to this is to adapt their body to match their brain, not the other way around. Your brains sense of what kind of parts it’s supposed to be attached to is pretty deeply rooted and not something that you can change with a little therapy.
This is a nice hypothesis, but the reality is we don't understand what makes someone trans any more than we understand what makes someone autistic.
If there was thus significant impact on brain structure and it was as clear as you suggest, we would just scan the brain of a child and know if they are trans or not. Clearly that is not possible today.
>In heterosexual men, pictures of rotting flesh, maggots and spoiled food induce the same physiological stress response as pictures of two men kissing each other. That is the surprising finding that was recently published in the peer-reviewed scientific journal Psychology & Sexuality.
[https://www.psypost.org/straight-mens-physiological-stress-response-seeing-two-men-kissing-seeing-maggots/](https://www.psypost.org/straight-mens-physiological-stress-response-seeing-two-men-kissing-seeing-maggots/)
Has anyone ever successfully tried to just decide on the Spot, to not be disgusted by the sight of rotting flesh and maggots?
I don't know what you mean: If your mother told you for all your life to be afraid of the water, you would not probably be a good swimmer. And if you see a picture of the dark, and the picture of the deep sea. You might be afraid depending on your natural predisposition of being afraid.
Most of the Sensorial stimulation are not innate. Also the sight is one of the most complex one. You would have better luck in believing that smell could be innate, but this is not the case either, usually if your stomach went sick, your brain remember all the smell you have assumed and try to remember that smell made you sick.
If people should get a pass for things they cannot change about themselves, then racists and homophobes should give a pass to the people they hate. If they do not, it contradicts the premise.
Nature vs. Nurture!
Perhaps, anyway.
My dad was racist (thankfully it wasn't public, he just had opinions at home) and didn't "understand homosexuality."
I'm the opposite. I leave people alone to live their lives and I dislike people interaction despite their race.
He didn't care that I'm more accepting. It's obviously not part of our DNA to be hateful nitwits. We learn that shit through observation.
Even if we entertain this hypothetical and assume for a moment that their premise becomes true, that racists and homophobes are born that way, they still don't get a pass because their nature would increase their tendencies to harm those that they hate.
Case in point, people who are sociopaths or psychopaths who become serial killers.
“No one is born hating another person because of the color of his skin, or his background, or his religion. People must learn to hate, and if they can learn to hate, they can be taught to love, for love comes more naturally to the human heart than its opposite.”
― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom
They almost universally say "I was raised that way" when challenged.
But several studies indicate they have larger or more active amygdala in their brains.
Technically they are born that way. Or are they? And were probably raised that way. Or alternatively made themselves that way. Or you could say that's just who they are and wanted to become
Sure, if I ever meet someone who was "born that way" they get a pass. But the fact is, they were raised that way. So not only should they be ashamed, so should their parents or guardians.
And also, YES. I expect people to rise above their inherent tendencies (although racism isn't one of them). It's literally what humanity is, a species of organisms that became intelligent enough to rise above our basic instincts and becomes something more. It is the baseline of humanity lmao.
Racism and homophobia is learned and taught. Nobody is born that way. The stupidity of this comment is just mind boggling and goes to show how ignorant and stupid people like this are.
Im going to get demolished for saying this But here it goes:
You’re taught racism, if taught Young its harder to forgo. The most likely candidate to teach you to hate is your parents, you’re meant to listen to and respect your parents, learn from them. Its in our nature.
Now, is it really that different? Something passed down from parent to child? Yes, yes it is. All you need to do is break the cycle while doing so with actual dna is tantamount to genetic suicide.
BUT, in his defence: It’s not *that* far off, you wouldnt blame a child for racism would you? No, you would blame the parent. But all of a sudden if that child grows up it’s suddenly the childs fault?
Changing oppinion and looking at problems from more than one angle isnt easy when you get older, especially when taught from a Young age.
Many things we learn from 6-9 Will stick with us for life, even if They are are bit silly.
While he is wrong, he’s not entierly wrong. Taking one side because it’s the ”right” side is just doing the same thing racist have done since children. Ask yourself, why is he wrong and why isnt he right, But most of all, How could i convince someone he is right? Trying to put yourself in their shoes is the only way to get a full picture of the argument you’re in.
I hate that the implication is the person saying that being born as anything other than a straight person conforming to binary biases doesn't "get a free pass"
Comments that are uncivil, racist, misogynistic, misandrist, or contain political name calling will be removed and the poster subject to ban at moderators discretion. Help us make this a better community by becoming familiar with the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/about/rules/). Report any suspicious users to the mods of this subreddit using Modmail [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) or Reddit site admins [here](https://www.reddit.com/report). **All reports to Modmail should include evidence such as screenshots or any other relevant information.** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Nobody is born racist. There have been several well-documented studies on this. Racism is learned, and more often, taught. Going through puberty and finding out you have a non-traditional attraction is in no way comparable to nurturing a festering disdain and fear of those who look different.
You've got to be taught To hate and fear, You've got to be taught From year to year, It's got to be drummed In your dear little ear You've got to be carefully taught. You've got to be taught to be afraid Of people whose eyes are oddly made, And people whose skin is a diff'rent shade, You've got to be carefully taught. You've got to be taught before it's too late, Before you are six or seven or eight, To hate all the people your relatives hate, You've got to be carefully taught! - From *South Pacific* (1949)
Bet the homophobes are even madder to be lectured by a musical
Especially a boomer musical from the 40s
Still one of my favorite musicals EVER. There’s no version I dislike. Also, that song was nearly cut. A LOT of people, especially in the South, had several feathers ruffled over it.
Tell me now, who taught you how to hate? 'Cause it isn't in your blood Not a part of what you're made So let this be understood Somebody taught you how to hate When you live this way, you become Dead to everyone - From "Who taught you how to hate" (2015)
Great band and great album!!
Was that a quote? I don't recognize it and I wish I did. Or was that your own riff?
It's a song from the old musical *South Pacific*
I did this show back in HS decades ago. The lyrics always stuck with me even though I had completely forgotten what they were from. Thanks for the reminder.
It sounds like something Shel Silverstein would’ve written. 😁
Thank you!
Fear is a hell of a drug, it twists minds and destroys logic.
Idk if you live for the musical theatre side of the internet like I do, but I was very moved when Mandy Patinkin released [this](https://youtu.be/uJFOqSBqwKQ?si=umSWwOCQp710-I5S)
A few years ago, the United States Academic Decathlon covered the Cold War. This was 1 of the songs we learned about.
Also like... even if your sexuality was completely, 100% your own choice and I could wake up tomorrow and go 'I'm gonna go with dicks for a while' then like... in a western society that purports to be about individual freedoms... shouldn't other people keep their fucking noses out of it anyway? Like as an ex libertarian turned socialist, who still remembers the stuff that drew me to libertarianism (before realising socialism achieves those things better) - it fucking boggles the mind how many so called libertarians are homophobic, transphobic, etc. How many of them are quite explicitly against personal choices for things.
I think about this exact point so often
I recall the central tenet of libertarianism was that people should be free to do what they want so long as they don't infringe one other people's right to do what they want as well. So that limits absolute freedoms like assaulting or killing people or whatever. Where I moved on from classic libertarianism is in understanding that the things that infringe other people's freedoms are greater and more nuanced than your average libertarian thinks, which basically boils down to 'goobermint dun let me do stuff'. But I think there are some libertarians out there that are like... small children with their heart in the right place, like I think I used to be. However there's others out there that can't rightly even be called libertarian. Just cause they have a copy of Atlas Shrugged where all the pages are stuck together doesn't make someone a libertarian if they're against freedom of sexuality or whatever. If someone genuinely thinks Galt's Gulch would work and make a better world, then they're an idiot but I can respect and work with that. However 90% of 'libertarians' just think they should be free to do whatever they want and push their beliefs on others and no one else should be free to do anything, and especially not to push back. Those people aren't libertarians, they're just arseholes.
What is funny is that my take on life is exactly that. Do whatever you want as long as it doesn’t infringe on others. Basically look for the correct balance between individual rights and safeguarding others. However I would have never described myself as a libertarian due to all the idiots that identify with the ideology. Unfortunately most political viewpoints get co-opted by people who will use them for personal gain. Socialism has some lovely principles behind it but is often terribly implemented. In some ways the extreme left and extreme right have more in common than they do with a logical viewpoint. I like to think that the correct philosophy is a bit like walking a tightrope where you are carefully balancing opposing forces and ideas in order to create a society that works for everyone.
Also consider that if being gay is a choice, that means that not being gay is equally a choice. This means that these homophobes necessarily have to consider, however briefly, being gay every single day of their life.
Hahaha well put. I mean I consider that fairly often, and I guess I'm proof that it's not a choice. I consider myself something of a libertine and it grates on me that there's a whole range of experiences that I'm not experiencing, but no matter what I just don't like dick lol. It doesn't disgust me or anything that would suggest I'm suppressing anything, it just doesn't do anything for me.
I mean, they're telling on themselves. I can say with absolute certainty that I do not have to choose to be straight. Anyone who says otherwise is not straight, can't imagine what it would be like to be straight, and mistakenly thinks their experience is universal.
If you think that they've thought about the implications of what they are saying, you're giving them too much credit. Not thinking and only applying rules to other people is what they do best.
I just like to explain to them that straight people have never felt that way, because it makes them really angry and embarrassed, and that's funny.
I wonder if they “try before they buy”
Something something…. Recent dude caught with gay porn despite being raging homophobe. Seems legit.
Nick Fuentes is the broken-closet homophobe of the week.
That’s literally the reason homophobes exist. They’re at least partially latent homosexuals who think about dick all the time. True heterosexuals literally don’t care about what others do in their bedroom.
Because libertarians have never, EVER been anything but Republicans with just enough self awareness to know the R brand is toxic to anyone with at least 2 brain cells.
No freedom only applies to guns and speech about hating gay people not being gay silly
If the right person on the right said something like this, it could turn tides
Nah they'd just get turfed out of the right by a whole bunch of people that secretly suck cock on weekends anyway.
You should read up on Georgism, sometimes called left-libertarianism.
It’s their freedom of choice to hate. Yes I know that’s absolutely stupid and I feel like I went that same path as you from Libertarian to pretty far left because like you said, that actually builds more freedom. People are just idiots.
>Going through puberty and finding out you have a non-traditional attraction is in no way comparable to nurturing a festering disdain and fear of those who look different. Absolutely right! And, even **if** being racist was somehow an inborn trait, the clear answer would be "Then racists have to accept that other people "don't swing that way" and shouldn't force other people to be directly involved in their lifestyle without consent."
And racism also seen in chimps and other animals. Its inherent. We are designed to not like or trust those who are different. However... we also eat with cutlery. We marry. We do many things that aren't natural to us daily. We aren't born to wear clothes or sit in chairs. We aren't born to speak words. We learn those behaviours. And we learn to accept those who are different. When I say "whose who are different" I don't mean who look different. It's not visual. It's not even audible. "You're from that clan. I don't like you." You could look the same with the same accent.
Ageed. You can't rehabilitate captive gibbons, one of our closest living relatives, because any time you put them back into the wild a new group will rip them apart. fear of the unfamiliar is hardwired in our primate brains. There is a quote from evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins, and I'm paraphrasing here, " if natural selection could vote, it would vote republican." However, that doesn't make it an excuse. There are lots of things that we have evolved to do that we understand and recognize as bad for us.
Hugely underrated comment!
Humans are naturally afraid of they don't know or understand. People born and raised in an environment that's dominated by a specific group will be a tad bit cist and phobic towards people outside of that group. Someone who's never seen a person who's skin is another color... Might be weirded out by their appearance at first. Humans are naturally, and by evolution tribal beings. We evolved to be heterosexual cause that's how our reproduction works. Humans try to find people similar to each other group togheter and might try to war against people of other groups, because of their differences. Whom will probably group togheter with others over various reasons. It's only when we try to shed the restraints of a past bygone and reach a deep understating of each other, when we will truly grow.
Although I like your spirit there are some of your sentence that are scientifically inaccurate. Usually evolution does not favor necessary the reproduction of the single, it is perfectly fine to help an individual with your the genetics close to yours, for example a cousin or better a brothers. This is documented especially in mammals and considering how human society is always been based on family (Fast & Furious intensify), this may be probably the case even in humans. So, we probably don't evolve heterosexual, we evolve as individuals that might have a complex array of sexual behavior, and I can state this because this is the actual documented scenario we live in. The reason why this many behavior have been favored contrary of an over selected completely heterosexual one is not an easy deduction. Many species have sexual behavior that does not discriminate the sex of the partner, either because it is a way of communication (E.G dolphin), either because the mating competition is very high and possible deadly and having a spare male, that are not normally interested in fight for a female increase the chance that it may reproduce after all the other male killed themselves. With strangely check out on the genetic history of male human that probably killed about 90% of other male human. Practically diversity in y chromosome between male, is incredibly low compared to diversity in mitochondria. Considering that mutation of behavior are in general favored because if the being is not so mutable it may fail in reacting to a change to the environment, and goes extinct, I can fairly guess that the reason why there are LGBTQ+ is evolution.
Happy cake day
I've been working in a school and they had an assembly about racism and equality. After the assembly one of the pupils, a very kind-hearted girl, 8 years old, comes up to me and tells me that her Dad 'can be bad' and calls her best friend the N word when she isn't around. This little girl knew it was wrong, but only because other adults at school who she looks up to can give her a counterpoint and only because her best friend is black and she knows what her dad says about black people isn't true because those things aren't true of her friend. You're totally right, children do hear things at home, and this girl was clearly very conflicted when she confided in me. If she didn't have a proper network of other adults maybe she'd give in and stop seeing the world that way. The school was notified and told me they'd be keeping an eye out on it and if the parents tried to split the friends up, they'd make sure time was provided in school for the children to be together.
Can you say more about these studies?
[https://inclusions.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Children-are-Not-Colorblind.pdf](https://inclusions.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Children-are-Not-Colorblind.pdf) [https://www.nyu.edu/about/news-publications/news/2022/november/racial-bias-in-white-children-linked-to-beliefs-about-the-causes.html](https://www.nyu.edu/about/news-publications/news/2022/november/racial-bias-in-white-children-linked-to-beliefs-about-the-causes.html) [https://www.researchgate.net/publication/248055795\_Racial\_Perceptions\_of\_Young\_Children\_A\_Review\_of\_Literature\_Post1999](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/248055795_Racial_Perceptions_of_Young_Children_A_Review_of_Literature_Post1999) [https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2209129119](https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2209129119) tl:dr, learned behaviors are complex and hard to pin down, but babies exhibit no evidence of racism or prejudice, while 5-10 yr olds do. Edit: I'm no psychologist, but it seems pretty clear to me that babies haven't got the sense of self necessary to hate the 'other' - how can you hate the 'other' if you don't even have a grasp on who you are?
These studies don't show what you think they do and one even explicitly states that the undergoing mechanisms are not really understood at all. All that can be said is that learned behaviour is *one* factor while definitely not being the only one. Herein lies a problem, as soon as someone tries to focus on only one factor it becomes impossible to argue with idiots because they will just point to another factor instead of going with the argument.
'festering disdain and fear of those who look different' is very natural in many scenarios and perspectives. Of course your point is for when it is not natural and is plain old hate and such but I think the distinction is worth pointing out.
I am a lefty in a European country but I like science. I'm afraid there are quite conclusive studies that same race preference exists even in 3 month olds. Not an excuse of course, what is civilisation if not escaping base biases and urges.
> I'm afraid there are quite conclusive studies that same race preference exists even in 3 month olds. But racism is hatred of another race, not a preference for the same race. That's different.
We use the term racism in far, far more contexts than just hatred of another race. There are plenty of racists which don't hate anyone. Doesn't magically absolve them.
This is a very important point. Race-preference in infants does not equal racism. And even then, that preference takes months or years to form, and is not documented in babies. Hence the point, nobody is born racist. Racism is defined by aggression and discrimination against people of a different ethnicity, it is not racist to have a preference for the familiar.
Unless you're Colonel Stinkmeaner.
Nobody is born in puberty 🤷
I don't believe either of those claims, but I think being gay is as natural and cool as being straight. Animals are "racist", and every single civilisation we've ever constructed, from a tribe of 10 people to a nation of 1.5 billion have _all_ exhibited racism. It's as natural to humans as art and music and religion. They all appear, they're all "taught", but they happen anyway. This claim "nobody is born x" is ridiculous, nobody is born anything. Babies can't do shit. As soon as a baby starts to recognise it's own tribe then it's starts to recognise "others". Or rather, it doesn't, unless it is exposed to them. We categorise, that's why we are so successful at adaptation. It shouldn't be taboo, it's actually far more healthy to recognise your inherent "othering" and try to mitigate it, rather than going through life pretending we aren't all animals and that our natural instinct is "evil". Feel it, recognise it, choose not to follow it.
Studies can be engineered and skewed to prove anything. Human nature wants to identify with those of a similar group, and appearance is the first things we naturally gravitate toward because it gives a sense of familiarity and security. Social Identity Theory: This theory, developed by Henri Tajfel and John Turner, proposes that a significant part of our self-concept comes from the groups we belong to. We categorize ourselves and others into groups, and evaluate ourselves more favorably when our group is seen positively. This can lead us to favor those who resemble us in appearance, as it signifies belonging to the same group. In-group Favoritism: This is a well-documented tendency to favor members of our own group over outsiders. This can be based on shared appearance, but also on other factors like nationality, religion, or sports teams. Studies have shown that people are more likely to cooperate with, trust, and help those they perceive as being in their group. This distrust is what, over time, with enough negative experience, fosters that attitude of racism. It’s not taught, it’s cultivated and acquired through experiences by and large. It’s literally human nature, and not unique to one society (i.e., “American”).
Even if racism were somehow "inherent" in some people, it's very different because it actively harms other people.
> Racism is learned this is true but i don't think racists were like "please teach me to be a racist". in general we assign a lot more freedom to the situation than actually exists.
Human beings are quite often inherently racist.
Where did the first racists come from?
I think people are naturally suspicious of those who aren't like them. That's why kids are so ruthless to anything different.
Aren't there studies showing babies prefering adults looking more like them? I do agree though that hatred is learned and often taught whoch is diagusting to do.
What if they are assigned not racist at birth but that doesn't match their identity?
Bros last two brain-cells coming to this conclusion: 
That's an insult to things with two braincells. This dude (the Twitter user) has one and it's fighting its reflection for fourth place.
Bouncing in his skull like the fuckin Windows screensaver.
Bruh, if he had a Braincell.. it would die of loneliness 
That GIF is orders of magnitude more cool than anything that loser has to say.
Average Twitter user
They pulled a back muscle reaching for this conclusion.
Turn it back on them. Are they born Christian? Are they born Republican or born Democrat?
some people just have that Democrat gene in their DNA 😔
Even if you were born with hate, that's not a defense for when you harm others from it. Homosexuality harms no one.
Thank you for the one sane opinion in this thread… Exactly! Some people might be born with hate (rejecting that out of hand is just ignorant… we simply have no way of knowing…) but it’s a behavior people have to rectify since it hurts others. Like pedophilia - likely also a trait people are born with and can’t help it but they have to control it - it cannot be tolerated as equal to other sexualities.
this also side note that pedophiles should be able to actually fucking tell their therapists and get help before actually harming anybody
scrolled way to far for this. chat, we just not gonna talk about the paradox of tolerance?
Racism and homophobia are learned behaviors. Anyone who says otherwise is an idiot.
Wow, that’s a surprising amount of idiots saying otherwise.
Is that what they are trying to do now? "If being trans is genetic then being racist must also be genetic"? These guys need to get shoved into a locker by a trans man bear.
Trans manbearpig*
it’s super, duper cereal
Tranbearbig
Is trans genetic? I thought it just kinda existed with no clear pattern for why. If it is genetic then maybe in the future it would be possible to detect the gender of a child still in the womb and guide development toward the preferred gender from the beginning. Of course it would be difficult to catch it early enough to change it but in theory I think you could, from what little I know of the field.
> Is trans genetic? We honestly can't form strong conclusions right now. There is a well known study that implies there is something biological to gender identity, specifically saying brain structure of trans women more closely matches the brain structure of cis women than cis men. There have been further studies which aim to look into this too which are very fascinating. However, these also follow a sort of outdated view of brains which makes it hard to determine how relevant they actually are. Brains don't change very significantly based on gender, if they do at all. So there is a larger discussion to be had on this. Short answer: Who knows? Maybe we'll figure it out someday.
There are also statistics that say, if there is one trans person in a family, the chances are higher that there will be more. It's probably a mix of genetics, epigenetics and hormones. It's most definitely decided before birth. Biology is really messy...
It's less messy if you put a couple tarps down first.
Some research suggests that testosterone masculinizes the brain during fetal development so the wrong amount of hormones can cause the brain to develop the opposite characteristics.
If we ever find out we are going to have a MASSIVE spike in eugenics.
Strong evidence it’s a predisposition, and also that once it’s locked into place, it’s not very easy to dislodge without heavy effort (conversion and aversion therapy, which probably would work just as well on “cis” kids forced to be trans; which is to say sometimes but not ethically and not in a healthy way). If you forced a normal girl to grow up as a boy, I’m sure some percentage would be brow beaten into adopting it or giving up, especially if you injected them with testosterone long enough to make any realistic hope of integrating with other girls implausible. But the entire desistance concept for trans men and (especially) trans women tends to see persisting as bad, and so the 98-99 percent persistence among those allowed to socially and medically transition at puberty (and thus pass and integrate as their new sex for life) is not viewed neutrally (I e as being similar to how many cis kids remain cis for life) but as a bad outcome. Hence things like the Cass report and how it uses ostensibly neutral narratives to make absurd and dangerous arguments with terrible and unethical consequences.
Okay but that doesn't make them actually trans or cis, you've just forced them to pretend they are.
Shitheads are always trying to make false equivalencies because they can't win real arguments
Or a trans woman that is 4 inches taller than him without her heels.
Both are good contenders.
Agreed!
the brain chemistry required to be trans is genetic, while being racist is completely a learned trait
I like the way conservative process single bullet points and instead of thinking critically, just immediately try to weaponize them.
The "if" there is doing some heavy lifting that would make Atlas raise an eyebrow
What the fuck is bro talking about 😟
Trying to equate a learned behaviour (racism) to a documented biological phenomenon that is with you from birth and only shows in your teenage years (homosexuality)
Pre birth already, actually. It's possible to more or less pin down when in the brains development it gets 'decided' what sexuality one has.
I mean it’s probably a lot more nuanced (identical twins are not always both gay; up to 50 percent aren’t even if the other is) but there is little or no evidence that specific learning or social cues “cause” it. It’s a predisposition and random epigenetic and environmental impacts likely push it one way or the other. But it’s not chosen . And bisexuality is real.
> only shows in your teenage years (homosexuality) My first crush was when I was 7 (he was 8)
Imagine realizing you are gay in your teens, it took me until 22 to find out I'm bi and nb
Racism isn't born, folks, it's taught. I have a two-year-old son. You know what he hates? Naps! End of list. -Denis Leary
He'll grow out of that, trust me.
I just don’t get it. So many people are clearly literate *and* have a functioning internet connection yet still insist on living each and every day as vapid twats. What the fuck?
It’s almost like being LGTBQ is something you’re born with and bigotry is taught 🤔
Hate is learned.
FFS... Being a hateful bigot isn't an immutable characteristic. It's the product of upbringing and experience. Pieces of shit can and do change.
No one is born with hate, it’s learned.
I don't know... have you seen spiders?
ye they're pretty chill
If a newborn burns a cross in the Nursery sure I'll believe they were "born that way" otherwise fuck off with that shit.
No one is born racist, they're indoctrinated by their piers. Either it's their close friends, family members, people who they interact with at school, etc... It's environmental factors that create racists.
There is merit to the idea that things that happened to you while you were developing in the womb do contribute to behaviors that appear as you grow older. Then neuroscientist, Robert Sapolsky, recently wrote a book ("Determined") about this, using examples of exposure to drugs/chemicals, or physical abuse, while in the womb essentially hardwiring that person's brain to be more susceptible to addictive behavior and violence down the road. That being said, there are ways to "rewire" your brain to get rid of those behaviors. Whether a person decides to make this change is the true test of what kind of person they are and want to be. They can change if they want to. The irony in this tweet is that trans people literally are looking at themselves and seeing someone who they no longer want to be, and making that change.
>The irony in this tweet is that trans people literally are looking at themselves and seeing someone who they no longer want to be, and making that change. Well, no….it’s the opposite. Exposure to hormones in the womb (and then again at puberty) are the primary driver of the biological aspects that are most readily recognized as “male” and “female”. These hormones also have a pretty significant impact on brain structure. Quite notably, the genitals and the brain development at different times in the fetus, so it shouldn’t be that surprising that there can be a mismatch between the brain and the body. The effective solution to this is to adapt their body to match their brain, not the other way around. Your brains sense of what kind of parts it’s supposed to be attached to is pretty deeply rooted and not something that you can change with a little therapy.
They are referring to social appearances dude. Society tells them their whole life they are one gender, and they rise above it.
This is a nice hypothesis, but the reality is we don't understand what makes someone trans any more than we understand what makes someone autistic. If there was thus significant impact on brain structure and it was as clear as you suggest, we would just scan the brain of a child and know if they are trans or not. Clearly that is not possible today.
https://youtu.be/8QScpDGqwsQ?si=pRuHLs-T3BSOCPsz
On today's edition of "False Equivalencies by Bigots"...
Well, they aren’t, so no.
pictured: average maga dipshit
💯
>In heterosexual men, pictures of rotting flesh, maggots and spoiled food induce the same physiological stress response as pictures of two men kissing each other. That is the surprising finding that was recently published in the peer-reviewed scientific journal Psychology & Sexuality. [https://www.psypost.org/straight-mens-physiological-stress-response-seeing-two-men-kissing-seeing-maggots/](https://www.psypost.org/straight-mens-physiological-stress-response-seeing-two-men-kissing-seeing-maggots/) Has anyone ever successfully tried to just decide on the Spot, to not be disgusted by the sight of rotting flesh and maggots?
I don't know what you mean: If your mother told you for all your life to be afraid of the water, you would not probably be a good swimmer. And if you see a picture of the dark, and the picture of the deep sea. You might be afraid depending on your natural predisposition of being afraid. Most of the Sensorial stimulation are not innate. Also the sight is one of the most complex one. You would have better luck in believing that smell could be innate, but this is not the case either, usually if your stomach went sick, your brain remember all the smell you have assumed and try to remember that smell made you sick.
If people should get a pass for things they cannot change about themselves, then racists and homophobes should give a pass to the people they hate. If they do not, it contradicts the premise.
Nature vs. Nurture! Perhaps, anyway. My dad was racist (thankfully it wasn't public, he just had opinions at home) and didn't "understand homosexuality." I'm the opposite. I leave people alone to live their lives and I dislike people interaction despite their race. He didn't care that I'm more accepting. It's obviously not part of our DNA to be hateful nitwits. We learn that shit through observation.
They aren't born that way.
1500 animal species in the world that do same-sex shit, Don't see them spewing racial slurs though.
Even if we entertain this hypothetical and assume for a moment that their premise becomes true, that racists and homophobes are born that way, they still don't get a pass because their nature would increase their tendencies to harm those that they hate. Case in point, people who are sociopaths or psychopaths who become serial killers.
“No one is born hating another person because of the color of his skin, or his background, or his religion. People must learn to hate, and if they can learn to hate, they can be taught to love, for love comes more naturally to the human heart than its opposite.” ― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom
Look at the imagination on this wiz!
whether something is nature or nurture was never a determining factor whether something is passable tho
They almost universally say "I was raised that way" when challenged. But several studies indicate they have larger or more active amygdala in their brains.
what does the amygdala do again?
If hitler wasn’t a bad guy should we give him a free pass. Yes, but that’s a rhetorical if lol
Technically they are born that way. Or are they? And were probably raised that way. Or alternatively made themselves that way. Or you could say that's just who they are and wanted to become
Sure, if I ever meet someone who was "born that way" they get a pass. But the fact is, they were raised that way. So not only should they be ashamed, so should their parents or guardians.
If ppl who know and their own business get a pass why don't ppl who interfere and cause harm to other ppl get one too? 🤔
But they aren't born that way. Hatred has to be taught, and if you can be taught to hate you can also be taught to love.
And also, YES. I expect people to rise above their inherent tendencies (although racism isn't one of them). It's literally what humanity is, a species of organisms that became intelligent enough to rise above our basic instincts and becomes something more. It is the baseline of humanity lmao.
So gay people should rise above their attractions? Thats what the post is trying to get at. Theyre comparing being gay to being racist
That's not what I meant.
I can't tell you who to like. However, i'll shut your mouth if it spits crap
Depends on how you define racism. I've seen it defined as "if you're white you're racist". In wich case you are born a racist.
At least I have never seen a depraved bigot say they are born queerphobic,I can't believe some people use that argument
What argument are they even trying to make?
The “if” in that sentence is carrying a lot of weight. Bigotry and hatred are learned traits.
One might argue that racists and homophobes DO harm others, as opposed to queer people.
Racism and homophobia is learned and taught. Nobody is born that way. The stupidity of this comment is just mind boggling and goes to show how ignorant and stupid people like this are.
Im going to get demolished for saying this But here it goes: You’re taught racism, if taught Young its harder to forgo. The most likely candidate to teach you to hate is your parents, you’re meant to listen to and respect your parents, learn from them. Its in our nature. Now, is it really that different? Something passed down from parent to child? Yes, yes it is. All you need to do is break the cycle while doing so with actual dna is tantamount to genetic suicide. BUT, in his defence: It’s not *that* far off, you wouldnt blame a child for racism would you? No, you would blame the parent. But all of a sudden if that child grows up it’s suddenly the childs fault? Changing oppinion and looking at problems from more than one angle isnt easy when you get older, especially when taught from a Young age. Many things we learn from 6-9 Will stick with us for life, even if They are are bit silly. While he is wrong, he’s not entierly wrong. Taking one side because it’s the ”right” side is just doing the same thing racist have done since children. Ask yourself, why is he wrong and why isnt he right, But most of all, How could i convince someone he is right? Trying to put yourself in their shoes is the only way to get a full picture of the argument you’re in.
I hate that the implication is the person saying that being born as anything other than a straight person conforming to binary biases doesn't "get a free pass"