Skip to main content

my political stance

Those who read my blog know that I find objection with the political right.

The other day my son and I had a discussion about this and he asked me what my political stance was. He wanted to know how to develop his own thinking on defending his own views to others.

I told him that I use a basic formula.

Every person has basic dignity and is entitled to self-determination. This means that they have a right to gainful employment which then gives them shelter and enough sustenance to lead productive and fulfilling lives. When that is threatened people get understandably upset.

People also have a right to hold their own personal ideas and beliefs and as long as they do not harm anyone they can practice whatever religion they wish. They should also have responsibility over their own sexual practices (provided they are consensual) and to do with their bodies what their conscience permits them to.

The political right has tended to align itself with policies that undermine these basic concepts. They tend to discriminate based on religious beliefs, race and issues like abortion have become political hot potatoes. The reason this has happened is that the right wants to mix politics with religious morality which is a historically dangerous Molotov cocktail. When you go beyond fiscal policies and governing infrastructure you are asking for trouble.

I can find no better examples of the caustic results of politics mixing with religion than the Spanish inquisition or the Crusades. These debacles are the result of overlapping two spheres which should remain apart.

Using my model I then explained to my son that Trump’s illegal travel ban went against the notion that people are innocent until proven guilty and cannot be discriminated against by virtue of the country from where they originate or the religion they practice. Using this same twisted logic, this asinine order could equally have been extended to prohibit residents of Chicago from travelling to other States by virtue of the threat they pose given that city’s high murder rate.

I vote knowing that all parties and politicians are flawed because humanity is flawed but I will not align myself with white nationalists or discriminatory policies which seek to enrich the few at the expense of the many.

Upholding human dignity and personal rights and freedoms is paramount and those of who are transgender should want that all the more. Given the right's modus operandi we are then not at all surprised to learn that they are the ones who find most objection with us.

Comments

  1. Well said, Joanna. To these quotes from your post "The political right ... tend to discriminate based on religious beliefs, race and issues like abortion ... the right wants to mix politics with religious morality ..." I would add, why do they do this, which is all the more insidious. The reason, I believe, is that they have no compunctions about playing a zero-sum game, where they win and everyone else loses, and thus they are upending the playing ground which prevents some from earning a good income, living well and in the pursuit of happiness, and all the rest.

    Interestingly, they even do this to themselves. The Right's leadership - now headed by Trump, Ryan, McConnell et al - are happy to upset the field toward themselves while stealing from the less-powerful in their own party and ideology.

    Thus, it's all about "I win, you lose" and thus they are paranoid about protecting their ill-gotten gains and must put others down in order to hold themselves up.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Replies
    1. Much more than hypocrites. It's more insidious than that.

      Delete
  3. That was very well said and reasoned Joanna. I absolutely agree with everything that you said.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

prejudice disguised as objective rectitude

So here is Professor Jordan Peterson perhaps justly calling out the excesses of political correctness gone mad. But then he extends it to not indulging transgender people the basic dignity of being addressed in their preferred pronoun. To do so for him would cost nothing and to stand on literal principle seems to serve little use other than to send a message of disdain.

If you have transitioned or even live as the opposite gender is costs me nothing to address you in your preferred pronouns. What difference does it make to me and what am I trying to tell you when I don't?

Peterson wants to stand on his rights to call reality what it is except that in this case the exact objective escapes me. But of course the right wing Federalist is in love with him because he calls a spade a spade.

If I see a rock I can call it that but then the rock doesn’t have any feelings. To address a transgender woman "her" and "she" is not undermining my rights as a person in any way b…

looking past cross gender arousal

Jack’s latest Crossdreamers post got me thinking about cross gender arousal and how it could be avoided; also whether it even matters. This with particular focus on the inability to relate of someone on the outside looking in.

You see, sexuality is a very complicated thing to begin with and when you then add gender identity ambiguity it becomes a recipe to really confuse someone.

So imagine that you are a little boy who identifies as a girl but then along comes puberty and short circuits everything by having the sex you identify with also be the sex you are attracted to. For in essence this is what happens to all all male to female gender dysphoric trans persons who are attracted to women.

So I ask myself: can I imagine a scenario where this inherent contradiction would not produce sexual confusion? The answer is that I cannot.

I am in the unique position, like many of you, to have experienced an early identification with the feminine become sexualized later on. This brought confusion…

"Oh please its 2016!"

I have mentioned before that I have a lovely young couple living above the unit next to mine. Well the other day as I was getting in the door, she and I overlapped for the first time with me dressed as a woman.

We had a nice conversation and at some point I mentioned the obvious which was that I had told her future husband that they might see me in a different guise from time to time so they wouldn't wonder about who the strange woman was. She just looked at me almost rolling her eyes while smiling from ear to ear and said:

"Oh Please it's 2016!"

For the record she was also very complementary regarding my choice of attire.

I could care less at this point in my life what people think but it is still lovely to see the millennial generation's freedom of spirit and acceptance so lacking in previous generations. Yes they have their own foibles, as does every generation, but this area certainly isn't one of them.