40516 - Everyone is Awesome

[fuzzy_bricks]

3 hours ago, $20 on joe vs dan said:

being asian, I would say being considered "Yellow" is offensive

it's deeper than just being associated to a color (which is generally offensive at various levels)...yellow in western culture is also associated with cowardice

some contrarian examples to the above is the confusion when African Americans often refer to each other as "Black"...in the case of yellow...I know of zero examples of asians referring to other asians as "yellow".

Also the term "Brown" has  a lot of negative connotations...the obvious being associated w/ turds (NOT the LEGO variety)

Ultimately maybe the bigger issue is it's no longer generally acceptable to make generalizations

This reminds me of the code name scene in Resevoir Dogs.

 

[$20 on joe vs dan]

27 minutes ago, fuzzy_bricks said:

This reminds me of the code name scene in Resevoir Dogs.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MruIam3rASs&t=92s

Xactly...No One wants to be Mr. Pink...or Winston in Ghostbusters

[$20 on joe vs dan]

34 minutes ago, Darth_Raichu said:

This 100%. Where is the color for mixed race trans people? Or the Arab descents? Etc and so forth.

Here I thought the Rainbow flag was supposed to represent REGARDLESS of race.  How is this suppose to project inclusivity?

the problem is the confusion

it's up to the individual to define representation...in which case there will be certain interpretations that will undoubtedly be offensive

it's like each color needs about a page of text to "explain"

this isn't a flag...it's an indictment on current society's ethnic, sexual, political perceptions and sensibilities

[Darth_Raichu]

7 minutes ago, $20 on joe vs dan said:

Xactly...No One wants to be Mr. Pink...or Winston in Ghostbusters

What's wrong with Winston? Somebody has to be the normal guy 😛

[Mathew]

3 hours ago, fuzzy_bricks said:

I've never paid for services rendered at a hospital, especially not at a cash register.

I just did last week. Paid the deductible prior to my wife’s surgery. The hospital even gave me a 15% discount for paying it the same day. 

[Mathew]

Sexuality isn’t something that needs to be paraded. And I don’t think it really belongs in a Lego set. With that said this set is innocuous and frankly boring.  It would have been more interesting if it were yellow mini figs wearing various “hats” if you will instead of monochrome mannequins.  The mannequins have no identity and represent nothing to me. 

Edited May 25, 2021 by Mathew

[$20 on joe vs dan]

1 minute ago, Mathew said:

Sexuality isn’t something that needs to be paraded. And I don’t think it really belongs in a Lego. With that said this set is innocuous and frankly boring.  It would have been more interesting if it were yellow mini figs wearing various “hats” if you will instead of monochrome mannequins.  The mannequins have no identity and represent nothing to me. 

so you're saying when you see an afro hair piece you're not seeing an Afro hair piece..or a woman's hairstyle...they are JUST LEGO hairpieces without ethnicity or sex associated?

if that's the case, kudos.

if you actually acknowledge the differences then that's what this sidebar discussion is about

[Mathew]

16 minutes ago, $20 on joe vs dan said:

so you're saying when you see an afro hair piece you're not seeing an Afro hair piece..or a woman's hairstyle...they are JUST LEGO hairpieces without ethnicity or sex associated?

if that's the case, kudos.

if you actually acknowledge the differences then that's what this sidebar discussion is about

Why use Lego, a children’s toy, to discuss sexual identity in the first place. And yes I get that this is a “18+ set” but it’s too generic  to represent anything other than what is projected on it. In other words it’s like most modern art:  Boring and pretentious. 

Edited May 25, 2021 by Mathew

[$20 on joe vs dan]

10 minutes ago, Mathew said:

Why use Lego, a children’s toy, to discuss sexual identity in the first place. And yes I get that this is a “18+ set” but it’s too generic  to represent anything other than what is projected on it. In other words it’s like most modern art. 

I'm sure parents would rather not go into this at what they perceive as too young...but the reality is, for children that fall into the non-binary or mainstream...they are experiencing these differences and already been given messaging long before they start stacking LEGO and are probably already fairly 'indoctrinated' and likely super confused about it already.

it's not like at age 13 a child is suddenly aware they are "different"...that feeling likely goes back as far as they can remember and it's actually good of LEGO (altho far from perfect) to attempt to address the messaging in a medium that children are active in.

also sexuality isn't about sex...it's identity.  most of us probably take for granted that at a certain age, for example, we knew to use the Men's room and always did without a second thought...now think about what it would be like if the choice was not clear

Edited May 25, 2021 by $20 on joe vs dan

[Gonkalin]

15 minutes ago, $20 on joe vs dan said:

I'm sure parents would rather not go into this at what they perceive as too young...but the reality is, for children that fall into the non-binary or mainstream...they are experiencing these differences and already been given messaging long before they start stacking LEGO and are probably already fairly 'indoctrinated' and likely super confused about it already.

it's not like at age 13 a child is suddenly aware they are "different"...that feeling likely goes back as far as they can remember and it's actually good of LEGO (altho far from perfect) to attempt to address the messaging in a medium that children are active in.

also sexuality isn't about sex...it's identity.  most of us probably take for granted that at a certain age, for example, we knew to use the Men's room and always did without a second thought...now think about what it would be like if the choice was not clear

Very well said. 

[Mathew]

Just now, $20 on joe vs dan said:

I'm sure parents would rather not go into this at what they perceive as too young...but the reality is, for children that fall into the non-binary or mainstream...they are experiencing these differences and already been given messaging...

I question how many children actually are born “non-binary”. Or if it’s just part of the conditioning for us to accept it. It’s foolish to accept modern, pop psychology as a basis for sexuality. We’re defined by nature (and God if you believe) first and foremost. If “non-binary” was the norm then no species would ever survive and the earth would be lifeless. Nature is binary. 

[Gonkalin]

I don't think anyone is saying that Non-binary is the norm. It's simply what feels right for some (and they are certainly in the minority). 

[Mathew]

6 minutes ago, Gonkalin said:

I don't think anyone is saying that Non-binary is the norm. It's simply what feels right for some (and they are certainly in the minority). 

Right. And I have no issues with people who fall through the cracks of nature so to speak. The world needs drag queens and furries to keep things interesting. My concern is that is that we’re all being conditioned by modern society that it is normal. 

[Gonkalin]

20 minutes ago, Mathew said:

Right. And I have no issues with people who fall through the cracks of nature so to speak. The world needs drag queens and furries to keep things interesting. My concern is that is that we’re all being conditioned by modern society that it is normal. 

Some societies are trying to condition people to be more accepting and less judgmental of peoples differences. And this should apply to race and ethnicity as well as gender and sexual orientation.  And it is normal in about 6 percent of the population for being  g ay/lesbian. And I’m sure that number is even higher if you include other variations of gender fluidity.

[Lordoflego]

20 hours ago, $20 on joe vs dan said:

it's one thing to acknowledge physical differences...but please keep in mind there's very few negative connotations w/ "white folks hair" but for many of color, the media has put up a lot of negatives about certain hair types for generations...so some folks may be a bit touchy on the subject...I have tried to fit in for most of my youth trying to obtain the impossible image that the media was telling me was the ideal. And now here's LEGO telling me the yellow minifigure should have a bowl cut. 

Be a rebel! Shave it all.....from a personal experience....blue, green, black, red or white...I look awesome  

[KShine]

If identifying as a cat was an option, lots of people would identify, and choose to live their lives with their feline soul mate.

It is vital for humanity that we have defined meaning in our lives - It keeps us from jumping off the roof, believing we can fly (or from believing we are cats).

[Mathew]

1 hour ago, Gonkalin said:

Some societies are trying to condition people to be more accepting and less judgmental of peoples differences. And this should apply to race and ethnicity as well as gender and sexual orientation.  And it is normal in about 6 percent of the population for being  g ay/lesbian. And I’m sure that number is even higher if you include other variations of gender fluidity.

I understand finding meaning and even purpose in life being different. But what I’m getting at is that I don’t need to be told that I’m part of the problem because I don’t fall into a specialized group based on a sexuality, gender, race or even species. 

Edited May 26, 2021 by Mathew

[raindroplet]

2 hours ago, Mathew said:

I question how many children actually are born “non-binary”. Or if it’s just part of the conditioning for us to accept it. It’s foolish to accept modern, pop psychology as a basis for sexuality. We’re defined by nature (and God if you believe) first and foremost. If “non-binary” was the norm then no species would ever survive and the earth would be lifeless. Nature is binary. 

Science is not on your side here. Nature is not binary. It comes in many forms and flavors. Papayas have 3 different sexes. Male seahorses give birth. Male giraffes are overwhelmingly bisexual. Life started when a cell divided asexually. Nature, despite its cruelties, is the most open-minded goddess of them all. 

The concept of "normal" is a social construct of rules imposed on a minority by the majority. For those born outside of normal, it is oppressive and often unnecessary. 

3 minutes ago, Mathew said:

I understand finding meaning and even purpose in life being different. But what I’m getting at is that I don’t need to be told that I’m part of the problem because I don’t fall into a specialized group. 

Perhaps use that for self-reflection and realize that feeling victimized is exactly how lgbt people feel all the time when they are treated like a problem for engaging with "regular" society. 

Edited May 26, 2021 by raindroplet

[Gonkalin]

17 minutes ago, Mathew said:

I understand finding meaning and even purpose in life being different. But what I’m getting at is that I don’t need to be told that I’m part of the problem because I don’t fall into a specialized group based on a sexuality, gender, race or even species. 

You’re not part of the problem unless you’re mean to other people. If the other people are being mean to you then they are the problem. If people are nice and decent to other people then there is no problem. I’m not religious but the “do unto others as you would have done to you” is what it is about. 

Edited May 26, 2021 by Gonkalin

[Mathew]

16 minutes ago, raindroplet said:

Science is not on your side here. Nature is not binary. It comes in many forms and flavors. Papayas have 3 different sexes. Male seahorses give birth. Male giraffes are overwhelmingly bisexual. Life started when a cell divided asexually. Nature, despite its cruelties, is the most open-minded goddess of them all. 

You’re using obscure examples that don’t necessarily make sense. Male seahorses give birth yes but it’s because the female deposits her eggs inside him.  Biologically the male seahorse still produces the semen required to fertilize the eggs.  There are very few species of life capable of Parthenogenesis. Fascinating but nature most definitely is not asexual as a norm. 

Edited May 26, 2021 by Mathew

[Gonkalin]

In all seriousness, I’ve enjoyed this dialogue. People have been civil about a challenging subject. I’m appreciative for that. 

[exracer327]

2 hours ago, KShine said:

If identifying as a cat was an option, lots of people would identify, and choose to live their lives with their feline soul mate.

 

[Darth_Raichu]

2 hours ago, raindroplet said:

Science is not on your side here. Nature is not binary. It comes in many forms and flavors. Papayas have 3 different sexes. Male seahorses give birth. Male giraffes are overwhelmingly bisexual. Life started when a cell divided asexually. Nature, despite its cruelties, is the most open-minded goddess of them all. 

 

You have to reach out to include single cell organisms like bacteria for that statement to be remotely true.  Outside of single cell organisms, the majority of life forms need female and male sexes to procreate. 

2 hours ago, raindroplet said:

The concept of "normal" is a social construct of rules imposed on a minority by the majority. For those born outside of normal, it is oppressive and often unnecessary. 

Perhaps use that for self-reflection and realize that feeling victimized is exactly how lgbt people feel all the time when they are treated like a problem for engaging with "regular" society. 

It is necessary for a society to function by constructing norms based on majority.  Society will be crippled to a crawl if it has to consider every single permutation of the outlier before it makes any move.  

it is a matter of practicality.  Even when looking at something as simple as how many fingers humans have.  Vast majority of people are born with 10 fingers.  However, nature produces people who were born with more than 10 and less than 10.  Heck, I went to school with someone with 11 fingers.  Should every glove manufacturer produces pairs with 11, 12, and 9 fingers in the name of inclusivity?  Even if you say yes, the manufacturer that does would need to spend resources to accommodate small minority of customer instead of using the resource to invent and produce better more stylist gloves for the majority, ie the oppressing 10 fingered humans.

[Darth_Raichu]

3 hours ago, Gonkalin said:

Some societies are trying to condition people to be more accepting and less judgmental of peoples differences. And this should apply to race and ethnicity as well as gender and sexual orientation.  And it is normal in about 6 percent of the population for being  g ay/lesbian. And I’m sure that number is even higher if you include other variations of gender fluidity.

 

2 hours ago, Gonkalin said:

You’re not part of the problem unless you’re mean to other people. If the other people are being mean to you then they are the problem. If people are nice and decent to other people then there is no problem. I’m not religious but the “do unto others as you would have done to you” is what it is about. 

Exactly why I sit back and just watch how the issue of trans athletes in women sports is going to unfold...

Trans athletes are always welcome in men sports which have been inclusive for a long time.

[raindroplet]

1 hour ago, Darth_Raichu said:

You have to reach out to include single cell organisms like bacteria for that statement to be remotely true.  Outside of single cell organisms, the majority of life forms need female and male sexes to procreate. 

It is necessary for a society to function by constructing norms based on majority.  Society will be crippled to a crawl if it has to consider every single permutation of the outlier before it makes any move.  

it is a matter of practicality.  Even when looking at something as simple as how many fingers humans have.  Vast majority of people are born with 10 fingers.  However, nature produces people who were born with more than 10 and less than 10.  Heck, I went to school with someone with 11 fingers.  Should every glove manufacturer produces pairs with 11, 12, and 9 fingers in the name of inclusivity?  Even if you say yes, the manufacturer that does would need to spend resources to accommodate small minority of customer instead of using the resource to invent and produce better more stylist gloves for the majority, ie the oppressing 10 fingered humans.

The wonderful world of flowers alone would disagree. They're are all pretty kinky. And we can't prescribe concepts like male or female to other organisms, because they are human conceptions applied to things that have no need for them. It says more about our societay's expectation of defined sexes than it does the animal when we try to assign binary gender to other things.

Your later example doesn't apply here though. The animosity people feel towards this set is the proof that there is still a lot of anti-l gbt resentment in society. If a company wants to make 6-fingered gloves for a small portion of their audience, no one is going to complain. The company is servicing a small portion of their audience who has gone unrepresented in the market. Similarly, LEGO makes a lgbt set and it's just one in their entire catalog. However, people come crawling out of the woodwork to complain that it's "too political." What's the only difference here? I can't see anything other than people bristling at the idea of l gbt people being treated as equals. 

The government isn't forcing companies to make 6 finger gloves. As society moves forward, groups of people are able to see themselves/their needs represented in more products and media. If you don't need a 6 finger glove, then just don't buy it. Complaining about it does nothing but make the 6-finger folk feel unwelcome. 

I'm gonna stop here for now though, 'cuz I've said my piece and don't want to make any more waves. I like you guys too much to drag us down any further. Everyone is awesome.  

Edited May 26, 2021 by raindroplet