#opposing views

[dosesofcommonsense]

If the success of your argument depends upon silencing others, it doesn’t sound like a winning argument. You’re just winning because you silenced, censored, and killed the other opinions. That’s not civil disobedience; that’s fraud, coercion, and injustice masquerading as democracy in motion through modern “progressivism”. Just whose progress are they working to achieve?

[qupritsuvwix]

[princesssarcastia]

one of the many things that people have said to me that will live in my head rent free forever, is something SainTalia said when we were going back and forth in the comments of one of their fics, once.

i don’t remember it verbatim, but the general idea is that in fiction, when it comes to morality, there are some fundamental things that either a character is okay with, or a character is  not okay with.  this is not an end-all-be-all rule by any means, infinite diversity in infinite combinations etc. etc.

but i do still think about that a lot.  I find a lack of conviction in a character, or a kind of wishy washy plasticity, to be jarring if it isn’t handled with enough weight or in the right way.

the scene saintalia and i were talking about in a fic, pertained to one main character committing an act of incredible violence and espionage in defense of the other main character.  and the thing saintalia said was, either she’s going to be okay with that, or she isn’t.  actually i went and dug up the comment directly:

That kind of violence isn't something one just "comes around" on. Or at least...I think it's a deep character weakness in writing to have a character freak out and be negative, only to come around later on something that SHOULDN'T BE come around on. Either they have morals, or weird morals, or no morals. But trying to bend around on something like that is basically sacrificing characterization for drama. And that isn't something I've ever approved of in any story I've read.

THAT’S what sticks with me.  some things are a yes, or a no.  and if you have a character start on one answer and switch to the other...unless the story is about how that changes, how the character is changing from one person to become that other person, it really rings false to me.

an example:  the scene in the dark knight (nolan!verse batman movies) where bruce wayne uses waynetech to take control of every cellphone in the city to find the joker.

FOX Like the phone I gave you in Hong Kong. You took my sonar concept and applied it to everybody's phone in the City. With half the city feeding you sonar you can image all of Gotham.

(turns to Batman)

This is wrong.

BATMAN I've got to find this man, Lucius.

FOX But at what cost?

...

FOX I'll help you this one time...

Lucius sits at the console. Batman moves off-

FOX But consider this my resignation.

Batman turns. Fox looks at him, serious.

FOX As long as this machine is at Wayne Industries, I won't be

Lucius Fox has his line in the sand, he is fundamentally not okay with this, and the only way bruce gets him to stay is by destroying the machine in the end.  this is not a thing where bruce can wear lucius down—and to have him change his mind would have been the equivalent of gutting his character.  you can’t really respect him if he finds something deeply wrong but does nothing about it, or does something he thinks is deeply wrong.

what it is, at its core, when people switch sides on important core issues to the plot or their character or the characters around them, is laziness, and oftentimes imo, a fundamental inability to let irreconcilable differences sit. 

it is uncomfortable when two people with diametrically opposed views interact.  it’s heartbreaking when two people who mean the world to each other find themselves completely unable to reconcile their different approaches or beliefs.  and I think more writers should lean into that.  

there’s a reason charles xavier and erik lehnsherr’s relationship has a weight and a gravitas to it that few others ever have: it’s their understanding that they cannot agree on something so fundamental that, despite their genuine affection for each other, they can’t bear to be together.  they have a line in the sand and they will not cross it, not for anything, not for anyone. 

that’s what im looking for, sometimes.  that’s what I wish more people did. 

[baileysbabbles]

I would just like to give a huge shoutout to and recommend watching Jubilee’s YouTube channel. They have these video series called Middle Ground and Spectrum. They bring in regular people with multiple similar and different experiences and have them discuss current issues or hot topics. The discussions never get out of hand. I just love that they’re not scared to bring up these major issues that people are scared to talk about and give people with opposing views a place to discuss their feelings and beliefs without being judged or disrespected.

[freehahahafree]

Civilized debate is near extinct in America.

[libamericaorg]

STUDY: Conservatives Won't Read An Opposing View Even If They're Offered Money To Do So (VIDEO)

STUDY: Conservatives Won’t Read An Opposing View Even If They’re Offered Money To Do So (VIDEO)

Many conservatives have actually said:

“I wouldn’t watch Rachel Maddow if you paid me.”

A new study in the Journal of Experimental Social Psychology tested this very question.

The study told people that they would get a chance to win $10 if they read an opposing opinion on a topic. They would get a chance to win $7 if they chose the opinion that they already agreed with. The given topic was…

View On WordPress

[submissivefeminist]

i love your answer to another anon’s question about how you combine being a feminist sub! it’s the truly great part of bdsm, we can create a setting and circumstances where all this was discussed in pretalk — all these real world aspects of power dynamics, privileges of race and sex and religion, all the why?’s and how?’s and deeper. let’s buck the norms, or engage in some contradictions… either way it’s good to talk about it and be on the same page!

personally i’ve not found kinking with ppl that have opposite viewpoints about trans rights, feminism/misogyny, monogamy/polyamory, ask/guess, safewords/no safewords, and others really works out so well even if you can formulate a way to agree to disagree and play nice anyway

Have you ever found any luck despite fundamental disagreements about feminism/misogyny, or other real world stuff between play partners?

I'd say I never play with people with opposing views like that but that wasn't always true of me lol.

I had a comet partner for 14+ years that goes by Mean Friend on here and he was a republican when we started playing together. He's since switched parties but I can't deny that that was a wild choice on my part that I probably wouldn't make twice.

[qupritsuvwix]

Texas School Administrator Told Teachers To Include Books with ‘Opposing’ Views of Holocaust

Teachers are concerned they will be punished for stocking classrooms with books addressing slavery, racism, and other issues.

An intelligent child who has learned to read is not limited to crap that is taught in schools. There are public libraries. There are books lying around all over the place in homes and businesses, if you know where to look. I found a barber shop in my home town that had a free book exchange in a back room. Take a book, leave a book. I got books at rummage sales, at library book sales, from the free tables at libraries and laundromats. I found books and magazines stacked next to trash in alleys. My father and uncle left books at my granma’s house. I found books on random shelves in class rooms. I never kept a single one of my textbooks, except a university text on the history of film. I have bought old textbooks over the years on poetry and electronics. I have never not had access to books and magazines and catalogs and manuals… and no child should be kept from access to as many books as they can handle.