Are the majority of posh people, bisexual?
They tend to be very comfortable with themselves,but I noticed a culture of bisexuality in upper class england
'Are the majority of posh people bisexual?', 'is Britain racist?', 'I often see grown men eyeing up school girls', etc.
Yet, missing from all of these topics is any semblance of rational thought. Think about it. Think about how your entire thought process is orientated around faith rather than observation or rational analysis; it's entirely mythological. You cannot conceptualise an entire subset of the population who conform or opt-in to a particular label as anything, so right from the very outset the premise of your argument is at best mythological and at worst malicious, prejudicial and slanderous.
Who are men? Who are women? Who or what is Britain? Who are bisexual people? Who are disabled people? The perpetrators of this bull**** division are those who use such meaningless labels. Men are individuals, women are individuals, they aren't a collective group - the moment you refer to them as a collective, the moment you diverge from referring to them as individuals, is the moment you step into the confines of mythology. It's the very moment you erode their individualism.
The seeds of prejudice are still as plentiful as they were in the 60's, however our prejudices have just migrated from what are now socially unacceptable prejudices (genuine racism, genuine homophobia, genuine misogyny, etc.) to positive prejudices or own-group biases. However, here's the real stickler: rather than tackling prejudice, this mode of thought at best reinforces imagined differences (for the purposes of further the interests of the few), and at worst reverses age-old prejudices (it's not 'misogyny', it's 'male privilege', it's not racism, it's 'white privilege'). When you emphasise imagined or mythological differences based around race, sexuality, gender, nationality or whatever else, with absolutely no quantifiable data to back up your assertions, you emphasise difference where none has been proven to exist.
What's worse, behind the mythological and imagined identities which more often than not supersede any real, physical or biological differentiation, the individual is no longer an individual, he or she is a category; he or she becomes a category specifically for the purposes of manufacturing someone else's nefarious self-serving interests (politicians, corporations, MSM, higher education, charity sector, whatever). The politicians get votes, the corporations get access to a massive pool of cheap labour and positive public relations, the MSM sells clicks and the higher education sector gets research funding (much like the charity sector).
To amass social capital, or wealth, one group needs to be pitted against another group. The narrative is irrelevant, as long as it's convincing. It can mythological, it can be faith based, it can be prejudicial - it doesn't matter. It just has to exist.
What's worse, within the state of pathological labelling you become the very personification of the very prejudice they claim to be opposed to. They'll tell you that you are more than your ethnicity, ethnicity is arbitrary; yet ethnicity is the only prism through which they view you. The same goes for gender, sexuality and every other feature of your 'identity' (again, a mythology) they simultaneously deem to be arbitrary yet all encompassing. The woman isn't a woman until she has been viewed through the prism of masculinity, or 'the patriarchy.'
The last thing society needs is the perpetuation of own-group biases. It's what they want. We're easier to organise, categorise, label, pathologise and appeal to that way. It's easier to pit us off against each other. Yet, when you look at it rationally, none of it exists. None of it. It's a great big abyss of prejudice, accentuated narratives, falsehoods and own-group biases. It's all fiction.
Identity is now the national religion. Who suffers? The individual.
Yet, missing from all of these topics is any semblance of rational thought. Think about it. Think about how your entire thought process is orientated around faith rather than observation or rational analysis; it's entirely mythological. You cannot conceptualise an entire subset of the population who conform or opt-in to a particular label as anything, so right from the very outset the premise of your argument is at best mythological and at worst malicious, prejudicial and slanderous.
Who are men? Who are women? Who or what is Britain? Who are bisexual people? Who are disabled people? The perpetrators of this bull**** division are those who use such meaningless labels. Men are individuals, women are individuals, they aren't a collective group - the moment you refer to them as a collective, the moment you diverge from referring to them as individuals, is the moment you step into the confines of mythology. It's the very moment you erode their individualism.
The seeds of prejudice are still as plentiful as they were in the 60's, however our prejudices have just migrated from what are now socially unacceptable prejudices (genuine racism, genuine homophobia, genuine misogyny, etc.) to positive prejudices or own-group biases. However, here's the real stickler: rather than tackling prejudice, this mode of thought at best reinforces imagined differences (for the purposes of further the interests of the few), and at worst reverses age-old prejudices (it's not 'misogyny', it's 'male privilege', it's not racism, it's 'white privilege'). When you emphasise imagined or mythological differences based around race, sexuality, gender, nationality or whatever else, with absolutely no quantifiable data to back up your assertions, you emphasise difference where none has been proven to exist.
What's worse, behind the mythological and imagined identities which more often than not supersede any real, physical or biological differentiation, the individual is no longer an individual, he or she is a category; he or she becomes a category specifically for the purposes of manufacturing someone else's nefarious self-serving interests (politicians, corporations, MSM, higher education, charity sector, whatever). The politicians get votes, the corporations get access to a massive pool of cheap labour and positive public relations, the MSM sells clicks and the higher education sector gets research funding (much like the charity sector).
To amass social capital, or wealth, one group needs to be pitted against another group. The narrative is irrelevant, as long as it's convincing. It can mythological, it can be faith based, it can be prejudicial - it doesn't matter. It just has to exist.
What's worse, within the state of pathological labelling you become the very personification of the very prejudice they claim to be opposed to. They'll tell you that you are more than your ethnicity, ethnicity is arbitrary; yet ethnicity is the only prism through which they view you. The same goes for gender, sexuality and every other feature of your 'identity' (again, a mythology) they simultaneously deem to be arbitrary yet all encompassing. The woman isn't a woman until she has been viewed through the prism of masculinity, or 'the patriarchy.'
The last thing society needs is the perpetuation of own-group biases. It's what they want. We're easier to organise, categorise, label, pathologise and appeal to that way. It's easier to pit us off against each other. Yet, when you look at it rationally, none of it exists. None of it. It's a great big abyss of prejudice, accentuated narratives, falsehoods and own-group biases. It's all fiction.
Identity is now the national religion. Who suffers? The individual.
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by Blue_Mason
They tend to be very comfortable with themselves,but I noticed a culture of bisexuality in upper class england
How many actual upper class people do you know? And how many are bisexual?
Posted from TSR Mobile
Yes they are all bisexuals that share knitting patterns and working class are all cis gendered knuckle staggers. Next question?
Original post by WokSz
Yep, and some of them are gay. Believe it or not, the upper class are also human beings.
Well that is debatable
Original post by Gears265
Well that is debatable
They're robots
Original post by Blue_Mason
They tend to be very comfortable with themselves,but I noticed a culture of bisexuality in upper class england
All posh people in England are exactly identical to one another. Therefore, yes, you are right. << Warning. This message may contain heavy and deliberate use of typical English upper-middle-class irony.
Original post by ellie0497
They're robots
No, they are lizards
Original post by Gears265
No, they are lizards
they're snakes hiiisssssss
Original post by ellie0497
they're snakes hiiisssssss
Illuminati confirmed
Quick Reply
Latest
Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
