(no subject)

[oyceter]

So I've calmed down a little and actually read through the entire thing. And wow. Am trying very hard not to get worked up again. The gender essentialist stuff in and of itself would piss me off, not even considering that he's using it as a piece of "proof" to further his very fallacious chain of reasoning.

And as hesychasm so kindly pointed out, yonmei and cesperanza have written rebuttals, which is good, because so far they are much more coherent than me.

ETA: I take it back. I am ranting anyway. Because the gender essentialist crap really pisses me off and his whole, oh gay people do have the right to marriage! It's like back in the days of non-interracial marriage -- you do have the right to marriage! Of course, with the small footnote that it is limited to a certain pool of people who look like you! I'm sorry. Yonmei goes into the whole marriage without sex thing but I haven't read far enough to see if she (he? I tend to assume LJ people are female, ironic for my gender essentialist argument) points out that his argument itself is very scarily like the Jim Crow laws. Blacks have the right to sit on buses -- just in the back. Blacks of course have the right to go to school! Just these certain ones though. Because of course the whole separate but equal thing was totally fair.

And I am pissed off beyond the telling at the gender essentialism. Wait, only a father can provide moral groundwork? WTF?! Because we poor women are too weak and coddle the children too much, and of course, we are all freaking the same because we have two X chromosomes? Nothing about cultural influence there, or maybe that the centuries confining women to the home space may have caused this, as opposed to genes. Oh no, a woman, any woman, no matter what, will without fail be coddling and cannot possibly *gasp* reprimand her child to provide a moral framework. Uhh, I'm sorry.... surely it wasn't my mother who taught me lying was bad?

I'm sorry. That's honestly the stupidest thing I've read for a very long time. And I'm not being good and logical about it like I'm sure other LJ people are, but oh well.

Ugh. To think I went to his signing.

Comments

[jennyo.livejournal.com]

Yonmei's dissection will make you very happy; this whole thing has made me...well, I personally want to tell him, "If you are basically going to state Mormon doctrine as fact -- and obviously, you based this all on the Proclamation on the Family, which you know in your heart is a filthy lie -- you need to say up front that you're basing your entire argument on the fact that your church has said that God has said that gender is eternal and essential, heterosexual nuclear families are eternal and essential, and mumble mumble the polygamy stuff because of the Proclamation on the Family."

OSC not only knows what he did, he's lying a second time for the Lord by refusing to admit that everything he did was based on the assumption that the LDS Proclamation on the Family has more legal and moral weight than the historical and logical evidence, which is intellectual dishonest and sloppy, given that the Mormons will eventually give in the way they did in 1978 when the government told 'em to stop being overtly racist or lose their tax-exempt status. So he's being a coward and a propagandist.

As a former Mormon, I have to mutter, "fucking lying fuckheads" because wow, the things one will do to maintain a large financial empire that won't disclose financial records to the membership, let alone anyone else and spends less than 1% of its budget on the needy.

[oyceter]

Thanks. Had no idea if all that stuff about the holiness of the nuclear family and the gender essentialist whatnot was jusonalnion stated as fact or something else.

But just... argh! The entire argument is based on premises I find incredibly offensive that he takes for a pure fact!