Comment

Comment on New to lemmy. Is there a version of /r/changemyview?

Sentient_Door_Hinge@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨11⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

That’s not the point. It’s not always about changing your view, but being able to defend and maybe refine your view to a more logically consistent position. Even as a lurker, it’s nice to be able to watch debates on positions that you almost entirely agree or entirely disagree with and read the arguments for and against it. I feel it helps solidify my logically consistent moral views of the world and makes me rethink the ones that are not.

I agree with op that this kind of topic and I would say realistically any topic should be allowed. As long as it’s actively moderated and both sides are constructively arguing for or against the position. It’s definitely one of the few communities I missed the most from Reddit and I wish it was as big here as well.

source

Sort:hotnew top

grue@lemmy.world ⁨11⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
I feel like Change My View is useful for topics in which reasonable minds might differ in opinion.

Fundamental human rights are not one of those topics.

source
ada@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨11⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
So, you’d be ok with someone arguing that maybe a discussion about racism is warranted, because sometimes, a bit of racism is warranted?

Or is that only ok when it’s trans people?

'cause if you want logical and consistent, that’s something you need to ask yourself. Why is it that folk are quite willing to discuss the erasure of rights of just one class of people, when it’s not something you’d even consider talking about with most other groups?

There is no consistency in that desire, it’s not driven by a desire to be logically consistent. This is driven by political interests and think tanks trying to create social divide. It’s not a co-incidence that you just want to consider the logical merits or trans folk, right now, at this moment in history.

Until you’re willing to face the reasons behind that, and the impact your social context has on you, you can’t be logically consistent.

source
- Sentient_Door_Hinge@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨11⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  Yes I would be ok with that kind of question. That argument would be torn apart pretty easily. If you’re curious, at some point some of those topics were allowed on that subreddit and you should still be able to find them.
  
  If your concern is that it’s possible it becomes a weakly moderated cesspool of propaganda or whatever then fine. Until that happens, I don’t understand what the issue is with allowing a moderated debate on sensitive topics by people that are genuinely arguing for or against some position.
  
  source
  - ada@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨11⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    
    That argument would be torn apart pretty easily
    
    Sure. The argument can be torn apart. But that doesn’t change anything. What changes when you make those sorts of arguments is simply that it gives a green light to pushing back against marginalised people.
    
    If argument being torn apart was enough, the argument against trans folk in sport wouldn’t even be an argument. But it is, because there is a political interest in creating harmful narratives about trans folk, and using exclusion from sport as a wedge to normalise exclusion in other areas. Which is exactly what is happening.
    
    So if you’re ok with that sort of question, I think you need to spend a bit more time looking at the context those questions exist in. Why is it now that people want to suddenly talk about trans people in sports. It’s not because the trans folk have been doing anything different. It’s because there is an explicit motivation to create a culture war, with trans folk as the targets. You shouldn’t be ok with being part of that.
    
    source