Quote:
Originally Posted by bluejays
This is exactly what I'm talking about. Why nibble at the smallest choice of words. Look at what people's issues are on both sides and come to middle ground understanding and bridge the gap about misconceptions. That's all I'm saying. I have no further thing to clarify.
|
Ok, but it’s a fair question, because you went through the effort of saying you “hate to get involved” and then followed it up with a bunch of vague, cliché aphorisms about “meeting in the middle,” so… what middle? Of every issue? What are the two extremes you’re thinking of when you mentioned that specifically? Is the middle always the correct place to be? What if one side is extreme and the other isn’t?
It’s easy to shrug and trot out weightless stuff like “we all just have to listen” or “we must meet in the middle,” but without any point of reference it’s meaningless nonsense. It’s why people poke fun at “both sides, many sides” because sometimes people use it at the dumbest possible moment where it’s pretty clear it isn’t a “both sides” issue… like… I dunno… a thread about Russia labelling LGBT as “extremist” and raiding gay clubs. Where the middle supposed to meet there? What is the other “extreme” side of it?
That situation, by the way, makes “Hyperbole and talking heads looking to quick soundbite that alludes to extremes if X happens. Well, X hardly happens so why not talk things out and see what the best path forward is?” extra funny, as it’s not every day someone says “x hardly happens” in a thread about x happening, but it also shows a pretty high level of ignorance about LGBTQ issues and the types of gains LGBTQ have made in recent history and how fragile those gains are.