Disney You support?

It's not.

But I think you're really mischaracterizing the situation if you think it's "dressing in a costume." The problem isn't that a guy dressed like a fairy with makeup. The problem is that a guy is trying to normalize men dressing in women's clothes with makeup to children.

The message in context is the issue here, not just the wearing of women's clothing and makeup.

 

So in your view, rap becoming popular was like passing Obamacare in Congress. If you dont like people deciding things informally without some centralized authority telling them, how did you ever align yourself with small government conservativism or freedom in general?

 

And this is real. As a parent, you can think you can shelter your kid from all of life’s craziness and evil. But kids are incredibly inquisitive, see and hear everything, and listen intently. They know far more than we think. In my opinion, it is much better to have some control over life’s exposure by talking with them rather than fruitlessly sheltering them.

 

No.

 

Ok, so people deciding things informally and collectively isn't the same as an authority representing a collective of people deciding something, thanks!

 

Once again, not remotely the same level of concern for me compared to trying to normalize that kids just get shot to death in this country at an alarming rate, "but that's the price we have to pay so that Jimbob can own whatever gun makes him feel more secure."

 

I can tell you first hand that this type of trauma does not go away. My kids lost friends in Parkland. Hell, my son was live-texting with a friend hiding in a classroom during Parkland. One of my very good friends’ kids were pall-bearers at a funeral.

That was very real, and as a parent I felt like a complete failure because there was absolutely nothing I could do to ease my Childrens’ pain from that. So I can assure you, from my experience, there is no measure of distance between the concern over children getting murdered at their school vs. concern that some guy at Disney was costumed in a dress to sell over-priced clothes.

 

Things ebb and flow, of course, and anything can happen. I personally think it's unlikely that things will go back the way they were though.

I believe a lot of the thinking around LGBT issues flows from the broader changes in gender roles. I think the changes around traditional gender roles paved the way for same sex marriage, for example, because the traditional roles, rights, and responsibilities of husbands vis a vis wives no longer applied for the most part. At that point, then, limiting marriage to persons of the opposite sex made less sense. I recall RGB making that very point.

The reason I don't think we will go back to traditional gender roles is because I don't think women want that, even if relatively more men might support it. From what I can tell, for example, it's mostly men who are upset about no fault divorce laws because women are typically the ones filing for divorce. I think even women who want traditional families like the independence that comes with a formal education and having their own income. All this to say I guess, that I don't see how LGBT acceptance moves in the other direction absent a reversion to traditional gender roles generally - and I'm not sure I see that happening at least through democratic means.

 

Nice sneaky moving of the goal posts there. Now we're talking about "centralized authority" as opposed to mere "authority."

But here's my answer: I think progressives have been using this one-two punch of sorts between mobilized minorities influencing the standards through dissent and intimidation and centralized authorities subsidizing and enabling them.

Such a cycle will push the culture to the left by force, then the politics to the left. So the only way to fight back is playing the same game.

As far as why I was ever a fan of libertarianism in the first place, I still am under certain circumstances, I just don't think it's practical in today's climate. In order for libertarianism to work, there needs to be this general accepted baseline of values that society expects. For example, society may expect you not to be a delinquent gambler and womanizer, but the law shouldn't stop you from engaging in that lifestyle. But that only works if society has this general expectation for you not to be a delinquent gambler and womanizer. When vices become glamorized at the expense of virtue, you're destined for a society that will destroy itself from within.

 

As usual, you bring up a pretty good point. But when you talk about gender roles, you seem to be talking about traditional traditional gender roles. I'm not even asking for that. I'm just asking for us to go back to like 2007. Women can be breadwinners, men can be stay-at-home dads. But there has to be SOME differences between men and women. Once you take away clothes, gender labels, and genitalia, there's really nothing left.

 

How are you wrong? This is what you said:

Most of my friends were liberals when we were raising our kids. None of us did that. I coached my kids baseball and soccer teams for 20 years, was a Cub Scout leader and Indian Princess dad. I could give you a laundry of things we did together.
So, yeah, to claim that I and others didn't raise our kids but left it all to others is pathetic.
You should be ashamed of yourself.

 

Yeah, seeing a pride display in Target is probably more damaging to the idea of 'gay culture' than going back to like I dunno, pre-sexual revolution. The latter would represent some kind of actual vibrant counterculture or actual taboo and deviance. Now homosexuality is just incorporated into the sameness & flatness of our overall culture, like everything else. Pride month is just another way to market in the doldrums of summer. Seeing two women raise a kid in the suburbs and worry about college applications and such is just conventional heteronormativity with a different set of faces. Its completely unremarkable, and not particularly different or radical.

 

You're right that it's not the same.

You're wrong in assuming that there hasn't been this "you scratch my back, I scratch yours" dynamic between the vocal activist wings of the populace dramatically influencing the culture to the left and this "centralized authority" you are discussing.

 

Did you guide your kids into certain standards that you thought were appropriate and away from ones you thought were inappropriate?

Where do those standards come from?

 

Parkland was very difficult for my daughter. I grew up in Coral Springs (Taravella high), so while I live in Arizona now, to say this hit close to home was a literal truth. My daughter was in Middle School at the time, and her class wanted to do something to memorialize the kids who passed. The Principal was against it, and I had a very frank decision with him saying the neighborhood in Parkland was very similar to the one we lived in Gilbert. It was just sawgrass instead of saguaros, and the empathy the kids here felt and sadness was something they needed to express. Especially because they will never be able to understand why this happened, as I don't think anyone can. Uvalde hit my son very hard because he is the same age. How do explain this kind of violence against innocent kids?

A man in a dress wearing makeup? That's easy. People are different and different isn't inherently good or bad. It's just inherently different, and we get to make up our own minds what difference we like and don't like. We should also accept that people are different, and as long as it doesn't effect us, allowing people to be different and accepting it paves way for people to accept us, because in our own unique way(s), we're different to.

And this culture war? We've been fighting it for generations. First, it was desegregation that was going to cause the downfall of western culture. Then it was gay rights. Now, it's gender dysphoria. It's all the same fight, using the same language against it, and it's all bunch of crap in my opinion. Why can't we simply celebrate that people are different and allow for differences if it doesn't effect us? And a person next to my kid being black isn't going to make my kid suddenly like rap music, just like a gay person next to my kid isn't going to make him/her gay, or a trans person is going to make him/her a cross dresser. Not unless that's what they want, and make their own decisions.

 

Most people don't give a crap. And the more outrage you show. The more you stamp your feet like a child. The more you try to create these boogeymen. The more you will lose. You are basically calling everyone like this a child predator. Cross dressing has been around for millennia. Millennia. Another culture baloney war. Pass. Pass. Pass.

This doesn't move the needle where the right needs it to. If you think this is going to trump abortion rights, you are in for a serious let down.

 

Of course. A basic sense of right and wrong,
I hope you didn’t raise your kids with the same lack of decency and morality that you display here

 

I know it’s is slightly off topic, but this is a formidable point. Religion, regardless of faith, used to form the “generalized accepted baseline of values that society accepts.” The Abraham-based religious were all fairly consistent with general societal values. But through so many compounding reasons, religion itself has slipped was an influencer. Yet nothing has stepped forward to gap-fill the values demanded by the respective churches.

That, as I see it, is really a challenge that society needs to meet.

 

You can bitch about the 2nd Amendment all you want. I haven't heard a single practical solution that would end mass shootings from anybody.

 

It wasn't a problem until they were told it was and they gobbled it up. The hook is still in some of their mouths.