Edit for context:

My view is transracial isn’t valid and this person is trying to dogwhistle. I’ve already blocked this person, and now they’re going after my friend saying my friend is transphobic because they disagreed with them about transracial being a thing (they’re purposefully leaving the context out so my friend looks transphobic when what my friend really said was transgender is valid but transracial isn’t)

  • Melvin_Ferd@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    I would say never disengage. We’ve all lost so much disengaging especially if the argument is difficult. It leaves the argument unchallenged and if you can’t answer it and you feel strongly about trans issues what did you think someone casually viewing it would think.

    We need better arguments and we need honesty. If it’s a good argument, it’s a good argument denying it out of feels only weakens the entire thing.

    Lemmy is filled with people who gave the right a red carpet treatment. Probably the last place we should ask questions about engagement to.

    It’s like asking r/relationship about relationship advice. It’s a terrible idea

    • ada@piefed.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 day ago

      You can’t rationally debate someone out of a position they didn’t reach through rational consideration.

      • Melvin_Ferd@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 day ago

        So you allow them to influence other people with their ideas?

        It’s stuff like this why people in real life all share the same opinion on trans issues and other right wing issues. It’s this stuff that has allowed their arguments to spread. It’s a fundamental misunderstanding of what you were supposed to be doing. You gave them a red carpet and helped contribute to the spread of their propaganda by disengaging. Changing their opinion was not ever said as a goal. You need to challenge their opinion to show it is badly formed. If it isn’t then you need to evaluate yours.

        • WoodScientist@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 day ago

          Disengaging does not help spread propaganda. Engaging and giving horrible ideas a platform does help spread propaganda.

          Your “debate bro” advice is about ten years out of date.

          • Melvin_Ferd@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            18 hours ago

            You’re wrong. Completely wrong on so many levels. This is all about engagement. That whole “too enlightened to engage” attitude is exactly how the right managed to take over so much of the online space. Right-wing think tanks and PR firms invested in engagement, nonstop posts, repetition, platform saturation. And it worked.

            People see the same ideas echoed over and over again, and eventually it shapes how they think. That’s why regular, everyday people, people who aren’t even political start parroting right-wing talking points. Even my kids and their friends are saying this stuff.

            It’s not because they believe it. It’s because that’s what they see. All the time.

            The reason it’s gotten this bad? A whole chunk of people on the left thought disengaging was smart. That if they just ignored it, it would go away. It didn’t. It spread. And now we’re here.

        • Almacca@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 day ago

          So you allow them to influence other people with their ideas?

          I’m prepared to trust other people’s intelligence to see through it, and if they can’t, fuck them as well.

          • Melvin_Ferd@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 day ago

            Part of being intelligent is being social. Being social means we mirror and sometimes go with the crowd. That’s just how it is. Which means if you think people are intelligent, it means it also should understand they will be susceptible to certain things like this

        • ada@piefed.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 day ago

          So you allow them to influence other people with their ideas?

          No, absolutely not. I run instances to give gender diverse folk safe spaces. I ban transphobes the instant they appear, I don’t debate them. Offline, I’m visible, active and proud. I am an volunteer at my local parkrun, I’ve spoken openly with people at my workplace, I’ve hosted a queer community radio show, I host a vodcast, and I used to be active in organising events for my local gender diverse community. Because what gets people to change their minds, is an emotional connection with the group they’re targeting. When they start to see us as people, just the same as them, then they start to make choices that aren’t harmful to us, and they start to wind back their own arguments.

          Pushing back is incredibly important, but debating them isn’t effective. Like most people, when confronted with debate points in regards to a topic they hold on to for emotional reasons, they will shift goal posts, and only see the things that validate what they already believe, whilst ignoring the things that challenge it. When they get to the point where they’re ready to challenge their ideas (because their emotional position has shifted) then, lots of the talking points you would normally debate become relevant, but by that stage, it’s a discussion, not a debate.

        • BassTurd@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 day ago

          Absolutely. If people like the idiot this post is referring to are allowed to spew bullshit without push back, then other idiots will believe it and spread it. These people need to be shamed and publicly corrected for their bullshit stance that can hurt others. I say hurt others, because an idea like this can be used to delegitimize transgender people.

          • Melvin_Ferd@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 day ago

            I remember a study once showing that you can skew the views of any group if only 10% of that group change their opinion.

            I think this is really important here because if you’re on an social media and you see nothing but right wing views, I think it does influence lots of people. This is why I get so mad seeing attitudes suggesting we should all just ignore it all like it’s a waste of time.