Its hard to tell just what we lost when subtracting zero from zero in a refusal to sell-out others.

What is qtns's definition of insanity again? Doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results?

However I can tell you that being the sole target left standing when a society was ready to make concessions was the result of the Gays adopting your notion of selling out the BLers.

Now whether you agree with this realpolitik or not, could they have made any concessions if they'd given it all away prior to being offered acceptance?

Further, there is the danger of projecting a "price." As you point out, nobody is offering. So how can the party who has not been offered anything know what will be valued when the bargaining finally comes?

For the bazillionth time, we are not the gays. We are not the blacks. We cannot model ourselves on those minorities when it comes to political activism. What worked for them has not worked for us, and likely will not, at least in the initial stages. Secondly, someone has to make the first step, and since we're the minority seeking to change things, that burden lies with us. If you think that society is going to offer us anything out of the blue in the way of a concession, then I may have to reassess your intelligence level. I can tell you right now: it ain't gonna happen.

You assume that THEY want nothing from us other than an gesture of submission. But ultimately they have to tell their constituency that they wanted something and got it. That something will be selected to sound acceptable. And THAT presumes insincerity. What if they want something specific?

Yes, because that's what experience has shown me. As it stands right now, they want fuck-all from us except total submission and possibly our mass suicide.

That's pure drivel.

They believe the worst of us already.

Well, that's real fucking easy for you to say when you aren't the one standing out in the open providing a target. And you'll note that I managed to make an LGF over the last few years that I am allowed to spend time with alone. I didn't do that by pompously trumpeting GLer pride or convincing her family that they were idiots for thinking sex with kids was bad. I had to show them that I was on their side. That was my responsibility because I was the one who wanted the LGF, and there was no reason they had to concede to my wishes. None. So, frankly, you don't know what the fuck you're talking about. I have genuine experience in the matter. You have zip.

Am I making it worse by arguing that we have credible reasons and principles? No.

The only thing that would make it worse is if, instead of challenging them to think, I confirmed that even Pedos think we secretly want to jump their kids.

That isn't the point I've been making here and you know it. I am not asking you to change your principles. I am asking you to be more flexible and understanding of people who disagree with you. And also to put your money where your mouth is. You see, it's oh so easy to sit there in your anonymous cocoon and beat your chest. You can say whatever you like without any real world consequences. Meanwhile, those of us who are out have to explain to those in our lives that, no, we're not all militants who want to overthrow millions of years of evolution so that kids can have sex with adults. Do you know how absurd that sounds to most people?

And I'm sorry if you believe that my continued ability to fight from the shadows makes my support for GC or any other cause of ours hypocritical. If I believed that putting my *ss on the line would lead to tangible improvements, I just might.

Well, how convenient for you, then, because it ain't gonna happen if only a handful of people are ever willing to actually fight openly for the cause they claim to believe in. You can rest assured that your identity will remain secret until you shuffle off your mortal coil, then. Lucky you.

But you have continually told us that it hasn't done squat for you. And all I've seen is that its made you vulnerable to "jamming" when you have tried to do things for the movement.

Ugh. Have I gotten as far as I would like? No, but I did manage to score a major victory in the form of winning an LGF. It took me a long time to get to that point, but I did it.

And ( irony-alert ) you are defending one anonymous coward from another. And all this occasioned by the real progress made by those anonymous cowards at B4UACT.

Yes, but Ethan isn't the one trying to completely rearrange society to his liking, so there's that.

I would be delighted to see another PNVD. And I cheer whenever our out brethren make progress. But I cannot pragmatically see why we should abandon everything which may be done from the shadows, regardless of how galling you find closeted activists to be.

Pragmatism? Funny that, coming from you. Everything you have said up until this point has been an open subversion of pragmatism, and indeed you have at times fallen just short of calling me a psychopath for acknowledging there is value in pragmatism. So you'll excuse me if I find your defense on those grounds a little dubious.

Untrue. But apparently you haven't been reading me.

Oh, I think I have. You proclaim the absolute rightness of sticking to your absolutist principles come hell or high water! Except, you know, in real life, where it counts. Funny how that works.

Since I recently cited FAQ Q4 and Q7, I won't go back into that.

Right. Well, thanks for nothing, then.


Not MORE. I'll leave all the hokum about "virtue" to Ethan. But not less.

Society has deemed that this possibility among a few is a non-issue regarding the motives of most in asking for legal reform. And here society happens to be correct. Arguments that various minorities are prone to contain more rapists, and enough would-be rapists to be treated differently under the law have been raised for almost every demographic and rejected as slurs.

Gays aren't less predatory that everyone else; just as Jews aren't less avaricious &tc. But if I were to claim that Jews who advocate for political reform in finance should be looked at skeptically and with an assumed bias in favor of their selfish interests, I would rightly be deemed to be a bigot. And if a Jewish socialist believed in attacking a Jewish Capitalist by telling folks to not trust those avaricious Jews; what would we make of this?

I just don't believe that Pedos are some magical exception where the slur is valid. Not even when its floated by a Ped.

I agree with this, but there is the added factor that unlike straights or gays, we cannot legally sexually interact with our preferred partners at all. That little fact cannot be ignored or explained away. We have to address it, because it does change the dynamic significantly.

RLY? You spend this long attacking me for holding Ethan to what VirPed says, and you haven't bothered to read what they say?

I wasn't attacking you. The whole gist of my involvement in this thread was to try to convince you to not be such a hard-ass towards those who disagree with you because you don't know their struggles in real life. And I asked for your position on what VirPed is about because, you know, I wanted your position on it. Forgive me. I won't make that mistake again.

He has structured a simple syllogism for you to complete.[...]

Never mind. Too late now.