That does have nothing much to do with reality. I have no problems with trans-people or even otherkins (which i never met btw).
Of course not all our hardware works 100% identical, but that doesn’t change reality of the hardware being mostly the same :-)
I really fail to see your connection between being open-minded towards others and being “antirealist”. The trans-brain isn’t different from any one else’s. The gender-dysphoria in it is. Still has no influence on respect. At least it SHOULD not have.
Let Me ask a question, and I think this question will help you understand what I’m talking about. If you met a monkey-kin at an ice cream social, having initially perceived them to have a human body, would you upon being properly introduced, hypnotise yourself into seeing a monkey tail behind them?
Well, why should I do that? And why would i? What benefit was gained for the monkeyman or me?
Though I would be amazed by my fantasy if I could actually pull that off.
Do you do that? And, haven’t not yet met or even heard of someone identifying as a monkey (or anything else nonhuman), I would have a lot of questions. And I mean actually identifying as such, not just larping as a furry or doing it as some kind of kink.
Anyhow, it would still not really make a strong point as to being “anti reality”. First, you knew before you’d hypnotize yourself, it is objectively a human. As a monkey couldn’t even tell you it is one. It just is.
I would classify that as an incredible Fantasy (not meant in a condescending way!) But not an opposition to reality. A wide opened mind with a fantastic imagination. That.
I do do everything I can to see that monkey tail. Like I said, I value that person’s identity over the social construct of species.
I’ve never met a monkey-kin either. It’s actually a super rare kintype. I think that’s because monkeys are so closely related to humans, that all the monkeys out there don’t tend to notice their species dysphoria. It’s too subtle.
But I’m dating a shark I met online. Its name is Ivy. Ivy’s come to visit Australia, and while it was here, I put in the effort to perceive its tail. It really likes getting its tail stroked, so I did that. There was no physical contact in consensus reality, but Ivy really liked it.
If Ivy heard you say that it’s objectively a human, Ivy would be sad. That’s not the way Ivy sees it. Ivy doesn’t want to be a human. Ivy’s a shark. It doesn’t believe in species the same way you believe in species. Neither do I. Neither of us thinks species is so important that it should be held above people’s identities.
You’re evidently on the far right end of open-mindedness. That’s cool. In a stupid world like this even more so.
Of course I wouldn’t want it to be sad. Yet I would have tons of questions that only the “objective reality”-ivy could answer.
I mean, it’s pretty obvious it’s no shark but a human that sees itself as a shark. But also as a human, or else it would’ve drowned already trying to get to its kin. And not found their way to you. Or even you online.
Don’t get me wrong, I have absolutely no problem with whatever someone identifies as. Due to my voluntary work, I got some friends with DIS, so i, too, had my encounters with “subjective reality”, even in the form of a protective wolf.
But, I also see the underlying issue. Dysphoria is not a healthy thing and rarely leads to a fulfilled and happy life. (Not saying DIS is the same, but symptoms overlap). A body-dyphoria where you can’t stand the existence of your left leg can be “cured” by just removing it. Gender-dysphoria can be helped with hormones. But species? That sure can only end up highly depressed.
Doesn’t mean I wouldn’t treat that person with respect or not take her otherkin not serious.
But there are limits. How do I respectfully treat a shark? Put it in a watery cage to be safe and throw it into the ocean? Probably not. The moment I talk with it, I already don’t take it serious, do I?
BTW, I would prefer to not be human too. This species is the worst. And I also would prefer to be a Disney princess where birds land on my arms and talk to me. But I am human and no princess, and birds fly away. What good would it do me if I just started to believe I am what I would prefer to be? (Supposing I could)
Thank you for trying to respect Ivy. But I hope you won’t mind if I think what you’re saying is ironic. See, you’re treating Ivy like a human in order to protect it from the consequences of your realism.
Sharks can’t talk. That’s a fact most people can agree is objective. But if you treat sharks as a social construct and consider Ivy a shark, then suddenly there’s a talking shark! It’s Ivy!
That’s what antirealists call magic. I just took responsibility over My beliefs about reality, and changed them in a way that brought talking sharks into the world. I cast a spell of prestidigitation to create a talking shark. And it’s a simple parlor trick, but I hope it demonstrates the function of antirealist magick nearly.
Now, if Ivy is a talking shark who can’t breathe water, can you see how it’s possible to respect Ivy’s identity and treat its dysphoria without abusing it?
No irony was meant. Sorry it that might’ve come across as such. I’m a very cynical person. Didn’t mean any disrespect. I would TRY my best to treat it however it wants to be treated. But lacking information, i could only approximate very little. I would maybe have trouble wrapping my head around that fact and try to see if it would require “help” or if everything is fine as it is. Or maybe misanthropy went weird or…
But if you just changed your belief that sharks can talk. It’s also no shark anymore, is it? We have language and words to convey certain things and meanings. If you just change it, what use does it have?
A speaking shark is no shark, a human being sharky isn’t a human. So do you more see something NEW? Like sharkman? humark? A speaking shark that can travel on land and use the internet to meet humans like you. But neither shark nor human.
Why is it important to you to call this “antirealist magick” instead of e.g. “highly vivid fantasy born by the desire to treat everyone as they see themselves, no matter what”? It’s an admirable treat, don’t get me wrong. Maybe I’m just nitpicky on labels, but “antirealist” sounds dumb (no offense meant) in a world where objective reality needs to exist or else this conversation wouldn’t exist.
Anyhow, you seem like a very lovely colorful being, so i just repeat myself: no offense meant, just call it scientific curiosity to everything not “normal” and boring.
If we didn’t have a concept of sharks, Ivy wouldn’t have any words to describe what it feels and how it wants to be seen, and it would be harder for Me to affirm its identity by petting it on the dorsal fin and complimenting its teeth.
Plus, studies show our self-esteem is more strongly impacted by the values of the culture we’re raised in than our own values. Ivy’s self-esteem is dependent on being a shark, so we have limited room to redefine the entire concept of sharks. Every departure we make from Ivy’s cultural idea of sharkness requires stronger magic to fulfill without causing dysphoria.
And calling it magic is useful for precisely this present situation: Talking about techniques to strengthen the magic. In fact, calling it making appeals to our cultural ideas of magic and makes the magic stronger. Words like delusion or fantasy have a negative connotation and can weaken the magic or have harmful side effect. What we’re doing here is using our culture as the raw materials to engineer new social constructs to serve our needs. We don’t have unlimited power, this is a delicate process. There are plenty of conflicting needs. But with knowledge and skill, we can build the ideas to make everyone happy.
Oh I wouldn’t say “fantasy” is negatively connotated. “Delusion”, unless used in a medical diagnosis, surely is, yes.
Apologies btw for using that term on you. I tend to come across harsher than I often intend to :)
What we’re doing here is using our culture as the raw materials to engineer new social constructs to serve our needs[…]
How eloquently put. Makes total sense now. Definitely nothing I regularly come across, but you explained it very well. Thanks for that insight. If everyone is happy and no harm is done, no harm is done :)
Circling back to the initial use of the word “sanity”, you came across as being high as a kite, but you’re just…differently wired. Nothing insane here.
I wish you guys the best!
That does have nothing much to do with reality. I have no problems with trans-people or even otherkins (which i never met btw). Of course not all our hardware works 100% identical, but that doesn’t change reality of the hardware being mostly the same :-) I really fail to see your connection between being open-minded towards others and being “antirealist”. The trans-brain isn’t different from any one else’s. The gender-dysphoria in it is. Still has no influence on respect. At least it SHOULD not have.
Let Me ask a question, and I think this question will help you understand what I’m talking about. If you met a monkey-kin at an ice cream social, having initially perceived them to have a human body, would you upon being properly introduced, hypnotise yourself into seeing a monkey tail behind them?
Well, why should I do that? And why would i? What benefit was gained for the monkeyman or me? Though I would be amazed by my fantasy if I could actually pull that off.
Do you do that? And, haven’t not yet met or even heard of someone identifying as a monkey (or anything else nonhuman), I would have a lot of questions. And I mean actually identifying as such, not just larping as a furry or doing it as some kind of kink.
Anyhow, it would still not really make a strong point as to being “anti reality”. First, you knew before you’d hypnotize yourself, it is objectively a human. As a monkey couldn’t even tell you it is one. It just is. I would classify that as an incredible Fantasy (not meant in a condescending way!) But not an opposition to reality. A wide opened mind with a fantastic imagination. That.
I do do everything I can to see that monkey tail. Like I said, I value that person’s identity over the social construct of species.
I’ve never met a monkey-kin either. It’s actually a super rare kintype. I think that’s because monkeys are so closely related to humans, that all the monkeys out there don’t tend to notice their species dysphoria. It’s too subtle.
But I’m dating a shark I met online. Its name is Ivy. Ivy’s come to visit Australia, and while it was here, I put in the effort to perceive its tail. It really likes getting its tail stroked, so I did that. There was no physical contact in consensus reality, but Ivy really liked it.
If Ivy heard you say that it’s objectively a human, Ivy would be sad. That’s not the way Ivy sees it. Ivy doesn’t want to be a human. Ivy’s a shark. It doesn’t believe in species the same way you believe in species. Neither do I. Neither of us thinks species is so important that it should be held above people’s identities.
You’re evidently on the far right end of open-mindedness. That’s cool. In a stupid world like this even more so.
Of course I wouldn’t want it to be sad. Yet I would have tons of questions that only the “objective reality”-ivy could answer. I mean, it’s pretty obvious it’s no shark but a human that sees itself as a shark. But also as a human, or else it would’ve drowned already trying to get to its kin. And not found their way to you. Or even you online.
Don’t get me wrong, I have absolutely no problem with whatever someone identifies as. Due to my voluntary work, I got some friends with DIS, so i, too, had my encounters with “subjective reality”, even in the form of a protective wolf.
But, I also see the underlying issue. Dysphoria is not a healthy thing and rarely leads to a fulfilled and happy life. (Not saying DIS is the same, but symptoms overlap). A body-dyphoria where you can’t stand the existence of your left leg can be “cured” by just removing it. Gender-dysphoria can be helped with hormones. But species? That sure can only end up highly depressed.
Doesn’t mean I wouldn’t treat that person with respect or not take her otherkin not serious. But there are limits. How do I respectfully treat a shark? Put it in a watery cage to be safe and throw it into the ocean? Probably not. The moment I talk with it, I already don’t take it serious, do I?
BTW, I would prefer to not be human too. This species is the worst. And I also would prefer to be a Disney princess where birds land on my arms and talk to me. But I am human and no princess, and birds fly away. What good would it do me if I just started to believe I am what I would prefer to be? (Supposing I could)
Thank you for trying to respect Ivy. But I hope you won’t mind if I think what you’re saying is ironic. See, you’re treating Ivy like a human in order to protect it from the consequences of your realism.
Sharks can’t talk. That’s a fact most people can agree is objective. But if you treat sharks as a social construct and consider Ivy a shark, then suddenly there’s a talking shark! It’s Ivy!
That’s what antirealists call magic. I just took responsibility over My beliefs about reality, and changed them in a way that brought talking sharks into the world. I cast a spell of prestidigitation to create a talking shark. And it’s a simple parlor trick, but I hope it demonstrates the function of antirealist magick nearly.
Now, if Ivy is a talking shark who can’t breathe water, can you see how it’s possible to respect Ivy’s identity and treat its dysphoria without abusing it?
No irony was meant. Sorry it that might’ve come across as such. I’m a very cynical person. Didn’t mean any disrespect. I would TRY my best to treat it however it wants to be treated. But lacking information, i could only approximate very little. I would maybe have trouble wrapping my head around that fact and try to see if it would require “help” or if everything is fine as it is. Or maybe misanthropy went weird or…
But if you just changed your belief that sharks can talk. It’s also no shark anymore, is it? We have language and words to convey certain things and meanings. If you just change it, what use does it have? A speaking shark is no shark, a human being sharky isn’t a human. So do you more see something NEW? Like sharkman? humark? A speaking shark that can travel on land and use the internet to meet humans like you. But neither shark nor human.
Why is it important to you to call this “antirealist magick” instead of e.g. “highly vivid fantasy born by the desire to treat everyone as they see themselves, no matter what”? It’s an admirable treat, don’t get me wrong. Maybe I’m just nitpicky on labels, but “antirealist” sounds dumb (no offense meant) in a world where objective reality needs to exist or else this conversation wouldn’t exist.
Anyhow, you seem like a very lovely colorful being, so i just repeat myself: no offense meant, just call it scientific curiosity to everything not “normal” and boring.
If we didn’t have a concept of sharks, Ivy wouldn’t have any words to describe what it feels and how it wants to be seen, and it would be harder for Me to affirm its identity by petting it on the dorsal fin and complimenting its teeth.
Plus, studies show our self-esteem is more strongly impacted by the values of the culture we’re raised in than our own values. Ivy’s self-esteem is dependent on being a shark, so we have limited room to redefine the entire concept of sharks. Every departure we make from Ivy’s cultural idea of sharkness requires stronger magic to fulfill without causing dysphoria.
And calling it magic is useful for precisely this present situation: Talking about techniques to strengthen the magic. In fact, calling it making appeals to our cultural ideas of magic and makes the magic stronger. Words like delusion or fantasy have a negative connotation and can weaken the magic or have harmful side effect. What we’re doing here is using our culture as the raw materials to engineer new social constructs to serve our needs. We don’t have unlimited power, this is a delicate process. There are plenty of conflicting needs. But with knowledge and skill, we can build the ideas to make everyone happy.
Oh I wouldn’t say “fantasy” is negatively connotated. “Delusion”, unless used in a medical diagnosis, surely is, yes. Apologies btw for using that term on you. I tend to come across harsher than I often intend to :)
How eloquently put. Makes total sense now. Definitely nothing I regularly come across, but you explained it very well. Thanks for that insight. If everyone is happy and no harm is done, no harm is done :) Circling back to the initial use of the word “sanity”, you came across as being high as a kite, but you’re just…differently wired. Nothing insane here. I wish you guys the best!