logicp_writings/collectivist_theology/Fighting_For_Reality.md

Fight For One's Reality

Literally as stated.

Somehow, this is not always the logical conclusion of those considering loss of bodily authonomy or censorship as a means of sanitizing society. They demand that society be made clean for them, for only they were willing to see and recognize uncomfortable truths, on the basis that those which remain mentionable in society (which conveniently are those they seem to focus on for political power) are those which they contend are the most difficult to grapple with.

Selectivity

Any selectivity is necessarily a shaping of the lense and banishment of real world subject. One might say that we already live as a form unable to see the entirety of the world, thus we cannot rely on seeing the whole picture anyway and can benefit from of being purposefully selective in what is being kept out from one's frame, allowing purposeful thought to be put into it -> it is now an unimplemented action which could move us forward

Queer and Childhood

Queer Theorists choose, ultimately, the child as the site of their desires and subjectivity. If we live in a world which is organized most fundamentally to limit potential for change which brings about universal betterment, then one must necessarily combat it at the weakest point. That is, the place where knowledge and habit of standards, norms, and, quite simply, PATTERNS which sustain society have not yet been completely habituated in the child, as they're not thoroughly expressed and reinforced.

From the Queer Theoretical perspective, anything which is a human pattern is an artifact of or a mechanism for oppression. But what does that say about that which can be sustained within Queer Theory?

Queer Theoretical Paradox of Normativity

• Exclude known patterns, but not all
• Create new patterns that are themselves known patterns
  • recognizable
  • accepted
  • even glorified
  • signal one's folk nationalism
• The pattern is rejection of the very things which make human life challenging
  1. That we are a sexually reproducing species is one of the most horrifying aspects of human life
  2. The medical establishment still cannot perform miracles:
  3. This is a new form of miracle
  4. Transitioning to that which you cannot face winning the approval of is a means of laying one's claim to a territory which, in another view, remains unexplored.
  5. Immoral facts: some may not be socially acceptable or biologically adequate to have offspring
  6. Why let existence of rejection be a thing at all?
  7. If God made that happen, it means life was created incomplete -> we still need a fair existence where everyone can succeed whether in the meta sense, or in the way that matters most to them.

Meta Sense

The Meta Sense? Why do we even have to have an understanding of this? It's simply a nod to abstraction. Doesn't it make sense that when there are multiple ways to perceive your signifier in an event (evaluations, etc), you will choose to allow attention to be brough tto each with some degree of bias, whether by avoiding certain ones, or to promote certain ones to one's benefit, even if that benefit might be sought through choosing the ones which appear to cause one to be presented as the most self-critical. That is, the ones which cause one to be perceived as self-critical.

Regardless of which description is most applicable, we cannot remove human bias, just as an individual always experiences a moment of reflection where they have a new perspective on a previous assumption, you can guarantee that everyone at lesat suspects that other people have bias, if not themselves.

All this to say: any act of normalization necessarily produces bias to that which one is aware of, and particularly so if one has association to what instance of normality is in question.

So, with this in view, wouldn't it make sense that biases are never fair unless we induce the biases which offset the unfair biases already extant?

Well, no, that cannot be done, because for every bias wihc you enumerate, there exists an infinite set of similar biases which you devalue an dignore. You can't possibly do anything but to increase the degree and focus of the biases, which are now being performed in an explicitly biased way which is not only an inelegant solution, but something which causes an even more complicating set of effects that are unmeasurable and uninumerable.

Tautological

The other way of looking at this is in the sense of a tautology. A metadescription of something whereby a meta representation of a concept is brought about, where it is without quantity but is determinate insofar that it can be attributed to a known concept, should itself describe the concept in such a way that it is true in all the ways that can be considered within that system.

Biases

How to get around bias? How do you make bias matter less?

• We need to reword bias and say "known preferences". How do we make them matter less?
• More ways to succeed but not simply by permitting everything to be successful. Potential and capacity for success can be sought, but the understanding is that such a pursuit has its own biases already. One cannot get away from it. One must always be vigilant in finding it and having no tolerance for it, at least without it being explicitly declared as biased.

How ironic that the cultural phenomena which enable transition to and activation of tools of systemic analyses, which will srely reduce everyone to the most limiting of categories, have been themselves organized into their form through critique of humanity's tendency to permit the liiting categorization of things. Obviously we don't benefit from an enforced process of reducing ourselves in this way, especially through an unfeeling and unrelenting machine, but that doesn't mean that all categorization is without use or legitimacy.

The fact is, categorization, if sought, might be best sought in breathing new transactory processses to life between subjective human perspectives where they each aspire to benevolence and betterment which doesn't require the destruction of one over the other. That is to say, as we can already agree that human subjectivity guies the tendency for varying perceptions on the same matter, the agreemtn can extend to the acknowledgment that categories have not been finalized and , as such, the pursuit of categories must not be used to erase what is nown or to insist that one's adversary is wrong, but to take circumstances where language is not being uised for active dialogue and to introduce a new system of description and categorization which re-invigorates thinking and discussion.

The issue is that the way new categories or systems of thought have been introduced mostly fail to do that. Many would argue, for example, that gender identity does that very thing.

Gender Identity's Solution to Bias

Gender Identity aims to look at the entirety of the human experience and come to understand the ways in which categorization fails to describe, acknowledge or otherwise account for the human experience or reality of human life. It does this through a variety of means, but mostly: Focusing on the ways in which we are categorize as people in society.

A Queer Theorist would allege to do this, but why, then, do all the categories all seem to be sex-related? There are probably different ways of examining this:

• The first is to look at the origins of Queer Theory which takes us to Gayle Rubin's "Thinking Sex", which specifically sought radical politicization of sex.
• The second would be to realize that Queer Theory is a rejection for the proposal of human life as we understand it. It would probably be rejecting the ways in which our accepted domain of knowledge has limited what we understand about human existence and the human experience, but it does this without grappling with the consideration that it is taking fundamental aspects about life tha tit dislikes and claiming that these aspects are arbitrary, unreal, set for the purpose of maintaining oppressive structures of domination, and something that can be overcome. That is, of course, something which logically extends from the belief that man is creator. We can quite simply decide to not accept biological sex as true and, at the very least, we can reimagine and revisit the way language is used and make the change of reality begin there. If language already affects our understanding and limits of our subjectivity, then even the prospect of our solution disappointing us can be attenuated and consolidated once language adapts and shifts our perspective. The most important factor to maintain is our goal of emancipation from all oppression and our understsanding that man, as man is creatig the objects of reality, he is instrinsically also creating the state, the culture, nature and ourselves.

This is not merely limited to sex, gender, or how we identify ourselves through/with them, but hte very nature of what a human is or what constitutes reality.

How Queer Theory Became Right Wing

August 6, 2022

• Ultimtaely need an evaluative mechanism which makes everyone a member of its nation - the Queer Nation
• It is the only way to proclaim uniqueness, but that becomes the standard for being a human; everyone else is less human, less evolved and less authentic
• It forces the child to commit themselves to your political ideology from an early age, negating the uncertainty of them having their own sociopolitical journey
• In their social environment, this ideology is presented as the only option for demonstrating piety and moral virtue
• Since it aligns with all the entertainment sources, the academic institutions, the will of the state as presented in its default modalities, and the expectations of other families, it is the proper structure
• The Queer Family is a political family that exudes folk nationalism
• Its symbols and language are being shown from the rooftops and balconies. Every business establishment keeps the flag presented whether they are true believers or whether they participate out of thoughtless, self-interest

We always envision a right-wing mindset which is extremely religious, afraid of cultures outside of tehir own, racist, against equality of women, and just generally regressive in order to maintain tradition and status-quo, but this caricature is alos something which was presened as a culture, such as that of the Neo-Nazi, or an old confederate.

These things fit perfectly well with the Queer movement, however:

1. Extremely religious: raising consciousness towards a belief that humans will be free of oppression. Oppression from what? Reality itself
   • The concept of queer oppression is classically understood as something to do with one's sexual orientation, but that is simply not the case. Queer is that which disrupts normativity. This means that

Defending Against Mutilation

August 16, 2022

Did anyone ever expect to be dealing with such an issue in their adult lives? The idea that never-before discovered swathes of children are actually bearing minds which are incompatible with their bodies has become increasingly popular, and many are agreeing to or even initiating the suggestion themselves to enlist their child into a lifelong surgical, endocrinological and pharmaceutical battle with their body in order to mould it into a form which matches how they feel.

To be clear, they are in a battle to transform their body into something which consolidates how the negative emotions that they feel, but it's not clear that you can really discern a separate target between the negative emotion one has when considering their conception of being and its relationship to their physical form, and their supposedly understanding and conception of a form whereby their emotional state would be ideal. It is perhaps that these two things are the same thing, but we must disambiguate this later.

But, yes, how they feel. How they feel about what? Well, why would your body make you feel anything at all? Without a body, we have no bodily experience.

So what is it to feel as a man vs a woman? It is not touch and smell that are affecting thoughts about how one feels with a male body vs a female one. The eyes do not change function, though they might appear differently to others. Is that the feeling? That of being watched and considering what the observer sees? What the observer desires? What they imagine and assume? Is it to feel desired? To desire?

Otherwise, the only feelings that are different are sexual ones, because they have different sexual organs, erogenous patterns, and though some interventions can lead to lifeless appendages being added or taken away, or development of breasts that may, over time, develop an erogenous zone, this will never yield the experience of a woman with her original sex organs and appendages.

Physical Identity Groups

August 12, 2022 You cannot avoid creating a de facty ation. As soon as you identify a group association or identity, you produce an axiology from which to understand all actions and events in teh world.

So, even by defining a group wherein no observable human characteristics are necessary as a precondition to one's membership, you already have the means for national alignment insofar that one can have an opinion as to the validity of the group.

But try to define any identity group without physical characteristics and you will find yourself hard-pressed, because even as a supporter without the necessary characteristics, you are now an outsider who has participated on teh basis of one's willingness to serve. You serve that nation and its interests.

Does Queer not have its characteristics? They certainly seem to utilize highly visible signifiers and symbols, by them sexual, gender caricature-deriving, culturally appropriated symbols and images, or the centering, emphasizing and presenting of one's bodily distinction, such as a disability. QT works hard to make identity superficial such that everyone's level of participation, or lack thereof, is assumed to be visibly deducible.

When starting participation so young, inclination to participate can come about for many reasons. Obviously, one of the most concerning has been that it is already difficult for any human to gauge whether they are developing into both what they would like to become, as well as whether they are developing into the thing that society expects thm to be developing into. Part of the new confusion comes into play when facing the option of interpreting the world through a belief that the world recognizes them a per their physically observable identity, and expectations about their development as per their visible identity are a form of bigotry.

That is, it does seem that your potential is hidden from you, and your "less than ideal" reaction is diminishing me, but then the LGBTQ identity does itself impose its own set of expectations because it cannot be a valid queer identity if it has an essence - this was even said of homonormativity, which actually came to be correlating to a notion of homosexuality that has become too concrete to be queer. Essentially, your sense of self must be forever sacrified and put in service tot eh ideal of queer which are to dismantle all existing hierarchies and replace them withou a moral hierarchy of anti-normativity. A hierarchy where those who have the most deeply inveted modifications to their body, particularly if it were done as a means of consolidating pain and angst, or out of a belief that it were done for that purpose,