this post was submitted on 18 Aug 2025
786 points (98.3% liked)
Greentext
6982 readers
1024 users here now
This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.
Be warned:
- Anon is often crazy.
- Anon is often depressed.
- Anon frequently shares thoughts that are immature, offensive, or incomprehensible.
If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
...
"If there's a rational reason to reject someone, like [...]or your sexual orientation is not compatible, then it's fine rejecting them but not disliking or being repulsed by them."
Second paragraph, towards the end. So what else didn't you bother to read / try to understand ?
Are the sexual orientations of gay men and women compatible ? Did I imply that anywhere ?
I, personally, don't like mint chocolate. When I put it in my mouth, I feel a visceral feeling of disgust, and spit it out. There is no logic behind this - it is just what I like and don't like.
We're not talking about food, were talking about people. If they're not harming anyone, they deserve to be treated with respect, as equals. Treating people with respect includes overcoming any prejudice you may have internalised growing up. Also having a visceral reaction, not an excuse. Visceral reactions can be questioned, and their causes deconstructed. It is possible to grow up as a person even as adult. Racism is visceral reaction, and it still wrong. At least in the reality of moral objectivism that I live in.
But I am curious, do some groups of people give you a "visceral feeling of disgust" like mint chocolate gives you ? What groups of people would those be ?
Yeah, and you can choose whomever you like as a partner, but repulsion for an entire group of people not doing any harm like poor people or shy people, is the realm of irrational hatred or fear, and that's never ok. Or are you saying it's ok or normal being viscerally repulsed by poor or shy people ?
Again visceral feeling are not an excuse, you're have higher reasoning, and are supposed to at least try to understand and control your feelings if you want to treat other people fairly. Otherwise there's no sense of accountability for your actions, you just go by pretending you're a mere vessel to your emotions, and stay indifferent to how your behaviour affects other people.
If the only thing turning off a woman in a man is that he is bisexual then yeah, that's what being prejudiced is. Same guy, same level of physical attractiveness, just as good a person, but straight : desirable. Exact same person but bisexual man : repulsive and less than a real man. That's a biphobic woman, she doesn't see bisexual men as worthy of the same level of respect as straight men, as equals to straight men.
But I get the sense that your ethics and mine don't mix.
Look. I'm not a philosopher or a historian of Ideas, so my knowledge of moral relativism and moral objectivism or universalism, is at a highschool level, so I think what I'm saying and how I'm saying is perfectly understandable in every day language without resorting to philosophical semantics (and frankly I don't even know why you brought up physics in a story about social issues).
In my stance of moral objectivism, I hold my ex accountable for her prejudice against bisexual and gay men, because it's a stance where seeing bisexual men as inferior and repulsive is wrong regardless of your personal history, culture and upbringing, since being a bisexual man does no harm to anyone and if that bothers you you should get a life.
In your stance of what I see as moral relativism, it's unfair to hold my ex accountable for her prejudice because the context of her "visceral feeling of disgust" is what is truly important, and she's just unjustly misunderstood.
Those two stances are not compatible.
I mean, I'm referring to sexual repulsion. This is typically what people are referring to when they talk about having a preference against some person or other. It manifests as a visceral negative reaction, very similar to what one might feel if they think about eating something they find gross. A gay man would find the idea of sleeping with a woman repulsive. He can still treat women with respect. In the same way, a woman can find the idea of sleeping with a bi guy repulsive, and can still treat bi men with respect. This is an incompatibility in sexual orientation.
I could just as easily swap in what kind of shoes the guy wears, the guy's political affiliation, the accent the guy has, the way he has chosen to style his hair, or literally anything else.
Certainly. I'm straight. The idea of sleeping with another man gives me a visceral feeling of disgust. This is fine. I am completely comfortable admitting this, because this is my sexual preference.
It is 100% okay to feel whatever feelings one feels. If the thought of sleeping with someone who is poor or shy is repulsive to you, then that is fine. You don't have to sleep with them.
Because I don't think you know what the word "objective" means.
The Aztecs thought it was right to sacrifice children to the gods by cutting their hearts out. We don't. Moral relativism says that both of these points of view are equally valid in their respective cultures. I happen to think that this is more or less the correct point of view, since any kind of objective morality is literally impossible because all morality is is values, and values are pure subjectivity. But that's an academic distinction.
My point fits squarely within good ol' fashioned liberal western ethics, which you identified as "does no harm to anyone".
Being sexually repulsed by bisexual men, and expressing this preference by simply not sleeping with them harms no one.
I could give a detailed answer like I did till now but why bother.
No to all you've just said.
Also moral relativism and nihilism is edgelord garbage, I thought so when I was a highschooler and I always will. You can and you should have some universalism regarding morals. You shouldn't fuck children, no matter the culture or time in history. Pain is also universal and so is the evil of inflicting it for pleasure or callousness. I could go on but you and I have nothing to say to each other.
Sounds like you've realized I'm right but just don't want to admit it.