You're not wrong, Frank. It is a postmodern ideology that is presented as doctrine in a lot of places. It uses its own jargon with terms like ally, microaggression, code-switching, decolonization, and intersectionality. I don't mind it as theory so much, but as an ideology it can become dogmatic and imposing. And it IS an ideology, not "just manners" or "just common decency," as many of its adherents claim. And I have two friends who voted for Trump on account of it. It seems like an alarming overreaction to me, but it had brought them to that point.
This is the same thing said about gay people in the 60s. If they just didn’t shove it in our faces…if only they kept quiet. Hiding and keeping quiet…does not work.
Far worse is right. I hesitated to say anything before the election because the threat of fascism is far worse. And I hesitate to say too much now, either, because the lives of many vulnerable people are in danger.
Agreed! I'm tired of the NY Times being too left and egging on the right and visa versa. There is no need for sexual orientation about a person. I listen to both left (NPR) and right (AM) and I find that the right is looking to pick a fight with the Democrats. When will we ever de-escalate this madness when we are truly friends and neighbors.
So you are saying we should shut up about who we are? Virtue signaling is often done to show solidarity with others who are looked down on. Women, Blacks, Gays have stood up and been proud of who they are in order to make those that discriminate against them back down.
Neither right nor wrong. Dualism is part of this problem. Right/left, liberal/conservative, gay/straight, even male/female. It’s the foundation of “othering” to create a group of people to dehumanize and demonize, creating an enemy to blame for the perceived problems of society so that their existence, and thus their elimination, is the path to a better society. Who will we contain, control, intimidate to get our way?
Sexual mores and obsessions with what different folks do “in the bedroom” or what’s in their pants, is a red herring in the political realm. It’s mostly enlisted to elicit an “ew gross” response to something outside one’s own desire or experience. Stirring people viscerally to the ballot box is far more effective than getting them to think about what kind of country we create with policy. Imho that’s how we got he who I shall not name in the White House.
I’ve always been perplexed by the use of the word “snowflake” in the pejorative. A beautiful and unique crystalline individual falling to earth, becoming one with all, with the collective potential to change the place it lands. Peoples in very snow laden regions have many more words pertaining to snow. Now ask around about what people think of snow. Like most things in life, they fall somewhere on that bell curve. Mostly in the middle, like this about it but that not so much, or it’s just part of our everyday (like in those snow laden places). At each end the fewer but more vocal love it/hate it crews. But enough of that metaphor…
The gaffes of this administration are disillusioning their own voters. Voters for the prior administration are disillusioned too, with each other and the media because of the lose of the last major election. I’d love to be able to say there will always be the next election, but can we really, I mean REALLY believe that will happen? That should be something that concerns every American, no matter how they identify.
Are people's sexual orientations usually called out in sports stories? Often? Or almost never? You've got to zoom out here, Frank. The right is very good at finding some silliness on the internet or in a college course etc etc and pretending that's what we care about, and it's convinced a whole swath of liberals as well! You have based an entire rant on a single word in a subhead. Maybe it WAS silly to have it in there, but maybe it's silly to have sports in the news too? Like, it's all entertainment and some people find people's personal lives entertaining?
Franks right. The left (Democrats) have been Balkanizing society with their identity politics for decades, while the Republicans on the right are winning. 33% of the population identifies as conservative, while 27% identify as liberal. Progressives should choose wisely, the hills they want to die on. Gender politics is not one I would choose. The Federalist Society has stacked the courts with far right ideologues who will remain on the courts for decades. Women have lost the right to choose, what's next! Elections matter. Speaking of the Olympics, former figure skater Johnny Weir's appearance (resplendent in his elaborate hair and feather boas), is the gift that keeps on giving to the Conservatives. Folks not aligned with the far right need to remember we are in a battle for the hearts and minds of the American voters. Choose wisely.
Response to Frank Schaeffer's "Identity Impolitic"
I believe you are wrong. First, the presupposition that making a statement about someone's gender is the reason the "libs" lost the election. I would agree that we don't need to know everything about someone's sexual identity, and perhaps it doesn't belong in the story on the athlete's ability; however, sometimes the athletes want that in as part of their story. Why? Because they want acceptance as they are, and they want to let others who are struggling know that they can become what they desire regardless of their gender and sexual identities. You want to shut it out because it makes you uncomfortable, but you are crossing wires here. History and media.
First, there are two points to your historical discussion. We need to look at history for what it was, for its time. I remember a most hated book that was a suggested text from Bob Jones University for homeschool history. It was a text on historical world cultures for 5th grade, and the material was good. The descriptions of the cultures were engaging and interesting. Then we come to the end of the chapter and are given a two-paragraph lecture on how "bad" this culture was because they "didn't know Jesus". This, from a completely non-liberal perspective, was pronouncing judgment on the cultures that predated Jesus based on something they could absolutely do nothing about and feeding that judgment to 10-year-olds. It was meant for my children to read to themselves and instead, we read it aloud together so I could edit out the garbage. Bob Jones wouldn't let the cultures stand for themselves but put them through the kind of judgment you mention. We need to view history as it was, and not from that kind of cultural judgment. I agree.
Secondly, we need to examine the activities of history for the damage they did to their societies, for the causal impacts. We have to use the knowledge we have today to examine past activities. We MUST look at how people misused the Bible to justify slavery. We MUST acknowledge the damage we as European invaders did to the cultures and societies we encountered here, and from a Christian point of view the impact that has had on the spread of the gospel. We need to do justice with our knowledge and not just "virtue-signaling" and "hand-wringing". One of the things I most hated about learning history was that we learned dates and names and who did what, but never the why. Why was it that it wasn't until college that we discussed the reparations from WWI that fostered the environment that gave Hitler his foothold and created the financial oppression that made the German people look for a human savior? Why? That is the type of history that must be taught. Instead, now there are revisionists who say the Holocaust never happened because we didn't teach students to think critically and examine causal relationships in history. So, for this reason, I believe we need to apply our 21st century perspective to our study of history. We can't expect them to meet our standards, as they are well past that, but we can critically examine their actions and learn from them. That process involves utilizing our 21st-century perspective.
Finally, you criticize the New York Times for force-feeding sexual preferences to their audiences without knowing whether the athlete herself insisted on that, while you do the very same thing when you section it out and blame "libs" for this propensity. I submit to you, that conservatives are doing the same. Have you looked at the list of unacceptable terms for use on government websites and grand applications? Have you seen that use of the term "Hispanic" is unacceptable? or "disability"? All in an effort to end DEI? This is the same kind of force-feeding that is outright wrong but in reverse. This is erasure, erasing everything that makes people uncomfortable, everything makes them confront wrongs of the past and the need to address them. We used to live in a society that allowed free speech. That meant that we had to tolerate speech we found offensive. That even means that people can put to print out-right lies. But, I submit to you that the problem is not the "force-feeding" to which I refer, but intolerance. You call yourself "liberal" yet you are intolerant of those who use terms you find offensive and unnecessary and liberal's use of those terms is what you blame for Donald Trump's election. Sir, you are conservative in liberal clothing. Donald Trump was elected because, since the onset of the "moral majority", Christian people, seeking to be godly and make godly choices, have been told that their only source for Christian news is "FOX". Christian people have been told they "Cannot" vote for anyone who is pro-abortion because that is this country's "original sin" (What about slavery guys?). Christians who wanted to be right with God and have God's favor in this country have been told for four decades that these are absolutes. They have been told from the pulpit, from their homeschool communities, from their "prophets", that Donald Trump is God's man to restore godliness to this nation. Without those Christian people, whose deception has been entirely cultivated, Mr Trump would not be in office. How are they to hear truth when their only source of information lies to them? Blaming "libs" and "liberal media" is simply trying to misdirect the public from the real issue. Christians were co-opted for this fascist takeover, and that needs to be addressed by Christian leaders like you instead of continually trying to blame the "libs".
Ask me how I know these things, I was in those groups. I know people, I have relatives and family and friends caught in this great lie, and they still believe it despite the evidence, which they are continually told is false. What liberal media writes won't impact them except when they read or hear stuff like this that places the blame where it does not belong.
Was that a theme that the athelete wants to be a part of her public face? You said nothing of that. You easily offended folk are the problem. Get a spine. The GOP is 100% identity politics all the time but, you whine about what the GOP instructs you to whine about. I heard you repeat the myth that Reagan, Thatcher and John Paul 2 looked mean at the Soviet Empire and it crumbled beneath them. That is all non-historical garbage. Where the Left is failing is that they make no attempt to control the national narrative, as your susepttability to Rightwing propoganda demonstrates. The Left can never stop fighting for the oppressed out of such weak mindedness. They must take control of the paradigm so that their daily attempts at justice may advance--not media cowardous.
Left, right, good, evil, blue, red are words and opposites that describe the morality and immorality dilemma we are faced with from the remnants of knowledge.
Let’s trace knowledge and you will find these words right behind you and in front of you.
Knowledge proceeds the human need to excuse a lack of faith.
The DNA of our blood flows in spite of knowledge and therefore poisoned by knowledge.
That should speak volumes of warnings to the future…
Thank you Frank for speaking and raising the bar for the future.
Politics left or right are a part of the same bird. The middle finger bird.
You're not wrong, Frank. It is a postmodern ideology that is presented as doctrine in a lot of places. It uses its own jargon with terms like ally, microaggression, code-switching, decolonization, and intersectionality. I don't mind it as theory so much, but as an ideology it can become dogmatic and imposing. And it IS an ideology, not "just manners" or "just common decency," as many of its adherents claim. And I have two friends who voted for Trump on account of it. It seems like an alarming overreaction to me, but it had brought them to that point.
This is the same thing said about gay people in the 60s. If they just didn’t shove it in our faces…if only they kept quiet. Hiding and keeping quiet…does not work.
Not at all what i'm saying, but ok.
Far worse is right. I hesitated to say anything before the election because the threat of fascism is far worse. And I hesitate to say too much now, either, because the lives of many vulnerable people are in danger.
Agreed! I'm tired of the NY Times being too left and egging on the right and visa versa. There is no need for sexual orientation about a person. I listen to both left (NPR) and right (AM) and I find that the right is looking to pick a fight with the Democrats. When will we ever de-escalate this madness when we are truly friends and neighbors.
When the right stops discrimination of people over their sex, color, heritage and status.
So you are saying we should shut up about who we are? Virtue signaling is often done to show solidarity with others who are looked down on. Women, Blacks, Gays have stood up and been proud of who they are in order to make those that discriminate against them back down.
Excellent topic and insightful
Neither right nor wrong. Dualism is part of this problem. Right/left, liberal/conservative, gay/straight, even male/female. It’s the foundation of “othering” to create a group of people to dehumanize and demonize, creating an enemy to blame for the perceived problems of society so that their existence, and thus their elimination, is the path to a better society. Who will we contain, control, intimidate to get our way?
Sexual mores and obsessions with what different folks do “in the bedroom” or what’s in their pants, is a red herring in the political realm. It’s mostly enlisted to elicit an “ew gross” response to something outside one’s own desire or experience. Stirring people viscerally to the ballot box is far more effective than getting them to think about what kind of country we create with policy. Imho that’s how we got he who I shall not name in the White House.
I’ve always been perplexed by the use of the word “snowflake” in the pejorative. A beautiful and unique crystalline individual falling to earth, becoming one with all, with the collective potential to change the place it lands. Peoples in very snow laden regions have many more words pertaining to snow. Now ask around about what people think of snow. Like most things in life, they fall somewhere on that bell curve. Mostly in the middle, like this about it but that not so much, or it’s just part of our everyday (like in those snow laden places). At each end the fewer but more vocal love it/hate it crews. But enough of that metaphor…
The gaffes of this administration are disillusioning their own voters. Voters for the prior administration are disillusioned too, with each other and the media because of the lose of the last major election. I’d love to be able to say there will always be the next election, but can we really, I mean REALLY believe that will happen? That should be something that concerns every American, no matter how they identify.
I do love you, Frank! Never stop being you.
Agree.
Are people's sexual orientations usually called out in sports stories? Often? Or almost never? You've got to zoom out here, Frank. The right is very good at finding some silliness on the internet or in a college course etc etc and pretending that's what we care about, and it's convinced a whole swath of liberals as well! You have based an entire rant on a single word in a subhead. Maybe it WAS silly to have it in there, but maybe it's silly to have sports in the news too? Like, it's all entertainment and some people find people's personal lives entertaining?
The left is a gift to right wing extremists. Wrap it up and put a big red bow on it.
Franks right. The left (Democrats) have been Balkanizing society with their identity politics for decades, while the Republicans on the right are winning. 33% of the population identifies as conservative, while 27% identify as liberal. Progressives should choose wisely, the hills they want to die on. Gender politics is not one I would choose. The Federalist Society has stacked the courts with far right ideologues who will remain on the courts for decades. Women have lost the right to choose, what's next! Elections matter. Speaking of the Olympics, former figure skater Johnny Weir's appearance (resplendent in his elaborate hair and feather boas), is the gift that keeps on giving to the Conservatives. Folks not aligned with the far right need to remember we are in a battle for the hearts and minds of the American voters. Choose wisely.
Response to Frank Schaeffer's "Identity Impolitic"
I believe you are wrong. First, the presupposition that making a statement about someone's gender is the reason the "libs" lost the election. I would agree that we don't need to know everything about someone's sexual identity, and perhaps it doesn't belong in the story on the athlete's ability; however, sometimes the athletes want that in as part of their story. Why? Because they want acceptance as they are, and they want to let others who are struggling know that they can become what they desire regardless of their gender and sexual identities. You want to shut it out because it makes you uncomfortable, but you are crossing wires here. History and media.
First, there are two points to your historical discussion. We need to look at history for what it was, for its time. I remember a most hated book that was a suggested text from Bob Jones University for homeschool history. It was a text on historical world cultures for 5th grade, and the material was good. The descriptions of the cultures were engaging and interesting. Then we come to the end of the chapter and are given a two-paragraph lecture on how "bad" this culture was because they "didn't know Jesus". This, from a completely non-liberal perspective, was pronouncing judgment on the cultures that predated Jesus based on something they could absolutely do nothing about and feeding that judgment to 10-year-olds. It was meant for my children to read to themselves and instead, we read it aloud together so I could edit out the garbage. Bob Jones wouldn't let the cultures stand for themselves but put them through the kind of judgment you mention. We need to view history as it was, and not from that kind of cultural judgment. I agree.
Secondly, we need to examine the activities of history for the damage they did to their societies, for the causal impacts. We have to use the knowledge we have today to examine past activities. We MUST look at how people misused the Bible to justify slavery. We MUST acknowledge the damage we as European invaders did to the cultures and societies we encountered here, and from a Christian point of view the impact that has had on the spread of the gospel. We need to do justice with our knowledge and not just "virtue-signaling" and "hand-wringing". One of the things I most hated about learning history was that we learned dates and names and who did what, but never the why. Why was it that it wasn't until college that we discussed the reparations from WWI that fostered the environment that gave Hitler his foothold and created the financial oppression that made the German people look for a human savior? Why? That is the type of history that must be taught. Instead, now there are revisionists who say the Holocaust never happened because we didn't teach students to think critically and examine causal relationships in history. So, for this reason, I believe we need to apply our 21st century perspective to our study of history. We can't expect them to meet our standards, as they are well past that, but we can critically examine their actions and learn from them. That process involves utilizing our 21st-century perspective.
Finally, you criticize the New York Times for force-feeding sexual preferences to their audiences without knowing whether the athlete herself insisted on that, while you do the very same thing when you section it out and blame "libs" for this propensity. I submit to you, that conservatives are doing the same. Have you looked at the list of unacceptable terms for use on government websites and grand applications? Have you seen that use of the term "Hispanic" is unacceptable? or "disability"? All in an effort to end DEI? This is the same kind of force-feeding that is outright wrong but in reverse. This is erasure, erasing everything that makes people uncomfortable, everything makes them confront wrongs of the past and the need to address them. We used to live in a society that allowed free speech. That meant that we had to tolerate speech we found offensive. That even means that people can put to print out-right lies. But, I submit to you that the problem is not the "force-feeding" to which I refer, but intolerance. You call yourself "liberal" yet you are intolerant of those who use terms you find offensive and unnecessary and liberal's use of those terms is what you blame for Donald Trump's election. Sir, you are conservative in liberal clothing. Donald Trump was elected because, since the onset of the "moral majority", Christian people, seeking to be godly and make godly choices, have been told that their only source for Christian news is "FOX". Christian people have been told they "Cannot" vote for anyone who is pro-abortion because that is this country's "original sin" (What about slavery guys?). Christians who wanted to be right with God and have God's favor in this country have been told for four decades that these are absolutes. They have been told from the pulpit, from their homeschool communities, from their "prophets", that Donald Trump is God's man to restore godliness to this nation. Without those Christian people, whose deception has been entirely cultivated, Mr Trump would not be in office. How are they to hear truth when their only source of information lies to them? Blaming "libs" and "liberal media" is simply trying to misdirect the public from the real issue. Christians were co-opted for this fascist takeover, and that needs to be addressed by Christian leaders like you instead of continually trying to blame the "libs".
Ask me how I know these things, I was in those groups. I know people, I have relatives and family and friends caught in this great lie, and they still believe it despite the evidence, which they are continually told is false. What liberal media writes won't impact them except when they read or hear stuff like this that places the blame where it does not belong.
You sir, are wrong.
The New York Times is anything but a liberal newspaper. It is the extreme right and the extreme moderate that are focused on identity politics.
Was that a theme that the athelete wants to be a part of her public face? You said nothing of that. You easily offended folk are the problem. Get a spine. The GOP is 100% identity politics all the time but, you whine about what the GOP instructs you to whine about. I heard you repeat the myth that Reagan, Thatcher and John Paul 2 looked mean at the Soviet Empire and it crumbled beneath them. That is all non-historical garbage. Where the Left is failing is that they make no attempt to control the national narrative, as your susepttability to Rightwing propoganda demonstrates. The Left can never stop fighting for the oppressed out of such weak mindedness. They must take control of the paradigm so that their daily attempts at justice may advance--not media cowardous.
Left, right, good, evil, blue, red are words and opposites that describe the morality and immorality dilemma we are faced with from the remnants of knowledge.
Let’s trace knowledge and you will find these words right behind you and in front of you.
Knowledge proceeds the human need to excuse a lack of faith.
The DNA of our blood flows in spite of knowledge and therefore poisoned by knowledge.
That should speak volumes of warnings to the future…
Thank you Frank for speaking and raising the bar for the future.
Politics left or right are a part of the same bird. The middle finger bird.
Jaywalklife