• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Question on Conservative Mindset

luchog said:
Oh please. Everything I have said about conservatives in this country come from my own direct experiences. I was raised in a staunchly conservative, religious-right family, attending hardline-religious-right churches up until I was in my early '30s. These are not stereotypes, these are actual personal observations of people I grew up with and around, viewed through the lens of someone who bought into it up until I started attending college and was more widely exposed to other worldviews.



It is very, very difficult to exaggerate the reactionary-conservative mindset. As individuals they can certainly vary, but as a group (bringing in-group/out-group into play) they are very consistent, and tend strongly toward extremism.



All you have to do is go listen to their pundits like Pat Robertson, James Dobson, Jerry Fallwell, Franklin Graham, and so on. These are not the nutcase fringe, these are mainstream figures with literally millions of followers. Followers who fully believe that natural disasters are sent by G-D to punish the US for legalizing gay marriage, and punish other nations for following "false idols". People who believe that Hillary Clinton was involved in a child sex ring run out of a DC pizza shop. People who literally see Americans, particularly white Americans as "G-D's Chosen People". People who go into outrage about the "War on Christmas". People who fear that there are hordes of atheists and Muslims and hippie new agers who are literally trying to destroy them, and they only survive and hold on to power because it is "G-D's will". And with Trump, they've effectively resurrected the "divine right of kings" for the modern age.
Click to expand...



Do you think your caricature describes most people with a “conservative mindset?”


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Apathia said:
Taking away the perks and advantages of "the landed gentry" in the lest seems to them a persecution. A Class War!

I suppose the same is the mindset of most Evangelical Christians find their religion isn't allowed to dominate in a secular society.
Click to expand...
Well, christianity in various forms has been shaped by being a state religion for over 1500 years. That may explain some of it.

But consider this: We regulate the release of toxic chemicals. If there is grounds to believe that a substance causes harmful effects it is regulated. If certain limits are willfully exceeded that may be grounds for criminal prosecution. That's not controversial, especially not among the left.

What if someone were to come to believe that gayness causes hurricanes... (IIRC Pat Robertson said that?)

Perhaps the difference is not so much in personality but more in what one considersa trustworthy source. In practical terms that's not even as grand as religion vs science. In practice it's: A TV preacher referencing the bible or a TV news anchor referencing a scientific study.


Lithrael said:
ETA: most likely underlying that is the basic human ‘change bad’ butting up against ‘change ok’ as y’all have been discussing. They think society really needs that gatekeeping or it’ll all just go to hell. It’s one thing to ignore what Those Guys Are Doing Over There, the problem is too big for you to tackle alone, but actually raising your hand to participate with them like normal welcome members of society? Well that would make you complicit in the ruining of society. Or just the offending of God or what have you.
Click to expand...
Who's they? From context it's religious conservatives.
I'm not one but I do think that society needs gatekeeping. Democracy, rule of law, human rights... These things need to secured.
All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.
 
GnaGnaMan said:
Well, christianity in various forms has been shaped by being a state religion for over 1500 years. That may explain some of it.

But consider this: We regulate the release of toxic chemicals. If there is grounds to believe that a substance causes harmful effects it is regulated. If certain limits are willfully exceeded that may be grounds for criminal prosecution. That's not controversial, especially not among the left.

What if someone were to come to believe that gayness causes hurricanes... (IIRC Pat Robertson said that?)

Perhaps the difference is not so much in personality but more in what one considersa trustworthy source. In practical terms that's not even as grand as religion vs science. In practice it's: A TV preacher referencing the bible or a TV news anchor referencing a scientific study.
Click to expand...

Exactly Christianity told the inquisition they needed to find and expunge the Jews and they did so. You might disagree with that but they were doing what they viewed as right. So it was a simple difference of opinion.

Really blacks, jews, gays or women it is all the same and all should be dictated by religion.
 
luchog said:
One thing I've noticed about the conservative mindset is just how fragile it is, and how prone to taking offense at anything that challenges its worldview in the slightest.
Click to expand...

Have you noticed similar traits of those with the mindset more towards the other end of the spectrum?
 
eeyore1954 said:
Have you noticed similar traits of those with the mindset more towards the other end of the spectrum?
Click to expand...

Personally I am aware of a stereotype of liberals who are offended at everything but I do not know any liberals who are actually like that. I do know conservatives that are highly sensitive and defensive. Not a representative sample.
 
eeyore1954 said:
Have you noticed similar traits of those with the mindset more towards the other end of the spectrum?
Click to expand...


Only the mythical ones that conservatives like complaining about at every possible opportunity. The very existence of liberals seems to be painful to conservatives, given how often they whinge on about them.

In the US, since at least Nixon, conservative politicians and religious figures in this country have made a profession of being offended by everything that isn't straight, white, cisgendered, and male. They make up elaborate conspiracy theories about how homosexuals are raping and recruiting children, how hispanic people are stealing their jobs, how black people are scamming welfare benefits, how transpeople are going into bathrooms to attack their women, how Jews and foreigners are destroying our economy, how Muslims are trying to impose sharia law on good Christians, how the younger generation's music is destroying the moral fabric of society, how young people using cannabis are destroying the moral fabric of society, how everything bad that happens in the country that cannot be directly blamed on one of these groups is G-D's punishment for too much tolerance of said groups.

They're offended by people saying "happy holidays" instead of "merry Christmas" and putting up non-religious holiday displays. They're offended by disabled people wanting reasonable accommodations at work and getting special parking spaces. They're offended by scientists trying to convince them of the reality of climate change, and the need to take action to prevent wholesale destruction of the environment. They're offended by gays and lesbians getting married. They're offended by transpeople wanting to be recognized as being their identified gender. They're offended by the idea of giving universal healthcare to poor people. They're offended by the idea of giving free education to poor people. They're offended that they can no longer discriminate against people with impunity under the guise of "religious freedom". They're offended at the idea of waiting periods and universal standardized background checks for purchasing firearms. They're offended by the idea of being taxed to pay for government services (even the ones they depend on). They're offended by the very existence of atheists.

When I was younger, they were offended by pornography, by music lyrics, by women's rights, by interracial marriage. They were offended by laws and court rulings that said they could not mandate Christian prayer in public schools, and that children could not be compelled to say the Pledge of Allegiance.

They're offended that they're not allowed to use racial slurs, openly lionize mass murderers, and celebrate brutally repressive and treasonous insurgents without being called out for bigotry and hate.

There are plenty of examples of most of those posted by people on this very board. Look at any of the old gay marriage threads, any of the current transgender threads, the free education threads, the universal healthcare threads, and so on.

Sure, there are a few fringe whackadoodles on the far left who are offended by everything, but they're not the mainstream of liberalism/progressivism the way that the professionally offended conservatives are the mainstream of conservatism.
 
Last edited:
luchog said:
Only the mythical ones that conservatives like complaining about at every possible opportunity. The very existence of liberals seems to be painful to conservatives, given how often they whinge on about them.

In the US, since at least Nixon, conservative politicians and religious figures in this country have made a profession of being offended by everything that isn't straight, white, cisgendered, and male. They make up elaborate conspiracy theories about how homosexuals are raping and recruiting children, how hispanic people are stealing their jobs, how black people are scamming welfare benefits, how transpeople are going into bathrooms to attack their women, how Jews and foreigners are destroying our economy, how Muslims are trying to impose sharia law on good Christians, how the younger generation's music is destroying the moral fabric of society, how young people using cannabis are destroying the moral fabric of society, how everything bad that happens in the country that cannot be directly blamed on one of these groups is G-D's punishment for too much tolerance of said groups.

They're offended by people saying "happy holidays" instead of "merry Christmas" and putting up non-religious holiday displays. They're offended by disabled people wanting reasonable accommodations at work and getting special parking spaces. They're offended by scientists trying to convince them of the reality of climate change, and the need to take action to prevent wholesale destruction of the environment. They're offended by gays and lesbians getting married. They're offended by transpeople wanting to be recognized as being their identified gender. They're offended by the idea of giving universal healthcare to poor people. They're offended by the idea of giving free education to poor people. They're offended that they can no longer discriminate against people with impunity under the guise of "religious freedom". They're offended at the idea of waiting periods and universal standardized background checks for purchasing firearms. They're offended by the idea of being taxed to pay for government services (even the ones they depend on). They're offended by the very existence of atheists.

When I was younger, they were offended by pornography, by music lyrics, by women's rights, by interracial marriage. They were offended by laws and court rulings that said they could not mandate Christian prayer in public schools, and that children could not be compelled to say the Pledge of Allegiance.

They're offended that they're not allowed to use racial slurs, openly lionize mass murderers, and celebrate brutally repressive and treasonous insurgents without being called out for bigotry and hate.

There are plenty of examples of most of those posted by people on this very board. Look at any of the old gay marriage threads, any of the current transgender threads, the free education threads, the universal healthcare threads, and so on.

Sure, there are a few fringe whackadoodles on the far left who are offended by everything, but they're not the mainstream of liberalism/progressivism the way that the professionally offended conservatives are the mainstream of conservatism.
Click to expand...

Perfect. Just perfect. :thumbsup:
 
GnaGnaMan said:
Well, christianity in various forms has been shaped by being a state religion for over 1500 years. That may explain some of it.

But consider this: We regulate the release of toxic chemicals. If there is grounds to believe that a substance causes harmful effects it is regulated. If certain limits are willfully exceeded that may be grounds for criminal prosecution. That's not controversial, especially not among the left.

What if someone were to come to believe that gayness causes hurricanes... (IIRC Pat Robertson said that?)

Perhaps the difference is not so much in personality but more in what one considersa trustworthy source. In practical terms that's not even as grand as religion vs science. In practice it's: A TV preacher referencing the bible or a TV news anchor referencing a scientific study.
Click to expand...

I haven't responded to this because I don't get what you are saying. Religions should be regulated? Religions should not be regulated? Should the law mandate that the child of a Jehovah's Witness must receive a blood transfusion if necessary in spite of the parents religious beliefs and objections? should we let conservative Christians continue dominance, because whatever secular objections we have are no more rational and factual than their beliefs? Sorry I just don't get the point.
 
ponderingturtle said:
Yes and no. It seems to be a rejection that their birth gave them a leg up in the world. Kavanaugh really hits that well when he claims unlike minorities he got into Yale on just hard work. Of course he was also a legacy. And largely they don't see the hypocrisy there.
Click to expand...

He had the advantages of being of the "Norm."
 
GnaGnaMan said:
What if someone were to come to believe that gayness causes hurricanes... (IIRC Pat Robertson said that?)

Perhaps the difference is not so much in personality but more in what one considersa trustworthy source. In practical terms that's not even as grand as religion vs science. In practice it's: A TV preacher referencing the bible or a TV news anchor referencing a scientific study.

(...)

Who's they? From context it's religious conservatives.
I'm not one but I do think that society needs gatekeeping. Democracy, rule of law, human rights... These things need to secured.
Click to expand...

All good points. I’m not opposed to gatekeeping where it’s appropriate, applied constructively, well thought out etc; so it’s down to a difference of opinion in a lot of cases and ways.

But with this stuff what I’ve seen is a real sort of disgust at the idea that people are forced to play nice with the hellbound abominations. Even people of the ‘gays are fine as long as they don’t act like it in public’ bent still absolutely bristle at the idea that the cake guys aren’t allowed to refuse them service.

The whole problem there is if I think antivax is a danger to society because it makes everybody get measles and the other guy thinks doing gender differently is a danger to society because it makes everybody feel skeevy and confused and threatens all kinds of immortal souls, me and that guy aren’t gonna see eye to eye, like, ever.

The differences between the groups are still stark when the situations are a little more analogous.
“I don’t want to serve you because you’re gay, and I feel being gay is harmful to people and their acceptance is bad for the country in general and I don’t want to feel like I’m endorsing that”
“I don’t want to serve you because you’re a prominent politician whose views I feel are harmful to people and bad for the country in general and I don’t want to feel like I’m endorsing that”

Apart from the difference between ‘being gay’ and ‘having a political affiliation,’ the person disagreeing with the politics could go on all day about specific things that bother them; the person disagreeing with being gay has, what, it’s icky and not how you’re supposed to do things and God agrees with me, and people will get fake married for tax reasons?

I’ve seen a few people gender-bothering with statistics about high suicide rates, which boggles me so hard because it’s the same thing as ‘we can’t have gays in the military because they’re a blackmail risk.’ The blackmail risk is BECAUSE you said they can’t let people find out they’re gay! The high suicide rate is BECAUSE you’re trying to alienate them from society!
 
Last edited:
Apathia said:
I haven't responded to this because I don't get what you are saying. Religions should be regulated? Religions should not be regulated? Should the law mandate that the child of a Jehovah's Witness must receive a blood transfusion if necessary in spite of the parents religious beliefs and objections? should we let conservative Christians continue dominance, because whatever secular objections we have are no more rational and factual than their beliefs? Sorry I just don't get the point.
Click to expand...
I tried to come up with circumstances which would make me exhibit homophobic behavior.

There are a number of cognitive biases related to how we draw inference about other people. Our biases are often self-serving.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attribution_bias

We tend to assume that other people's behavior reflects an underlying disposition rather than circumstance. We prefer to explain our own behavior by circumstance. These tendencies can manifest in very dysfunctional ways.

Consider US mass incarceration. The land of the free has a much higher proportion of its citizens in jail than any other country.
If you jump to the conclusion that people who commit crimes do so because they are simply criminal then mass incarceration will be the only logical solution.
Other countries manage to have lower crime rates AND lower incarceration rates.
That there's a racism connection is pretty obvious but I also think it's complicated. A culturally promoted tendency to write people off as just being a certain way may persist even in people who do not believe in color-coded dispositions.
 
Through my research for my book I have found a lot of scientific evidence that shows both homosexuality and transgender are actually provable in the brain structures. For instance, the amygdala of men and women are different sizes. Like, an expert could measure the amygdala in a brain and tell you if the individual is male or female.

A trans person's brain has the amygdala of the gender they identify as. As in, a man who identifies as a woman has an amygdala the size you would expect to be found in women.

There are other things as well, such as response to various hormones, etc...

So this alters my question. Now, if you know these behaviours have a physical, proven basis and are not just something somebody came up with, would you still support a business owner refusing to serve the individual?

To my mind, this is more like refusing someone based on a disability.

Also, could we support a religious basis for the refusal? As a disabled person, I would say no.
 
GnaGnaMan said:
I tried to come up with circumstances which would make me exhibit homophobic behavior.

There are a number of cognitive biases related to how we draw inference about other people. Our biases are often self-serving.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attribution_bias

We tend to assume that other people's behavior reflects an underlying disposition rather than circumstance. We prefer to explain our own behavior by circumstance. These tendencies can manifest in very dysfunctional ways.

Consider US mass incarceration. The land of the free has a much higher proportion of its citizens in jail than any other country.
If you jump to the conclusion that people who commit crimes do so because they are simply criminal then mass incarceration will be the only logical solution.
Other countries manage to have lower crime rates AND lower incarceration rates.
That there's a racism connection is pretty obvious but I also think it's complicated. A culturally promoted tendency to write people off as just being a certain way may persist even in people who do not believe in color-coded dispositions.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the clarity. :thumbsup: to all your post.
 
This thread was interesting in illustrating the way many people have a knee jerk response to certain triggers. "Conservative" ... the word alone, disregarding everything I said in the op... was such a trigger. I wonder what would have happened had I not used that word. Probably something similar. Wish I had a comparison from the pre-Trump era. Would provide an interesting view on the claims that El Cheeto has made us more divisive.
 
Magrat said:
Through my research for my book I have found a lot of scientific evidence that shows both homosexuality and transgender are actually provable in the brain structures. For instance, the amygdala of men and women are different sizes. Like, an expert could measure the amygdala in a brain and tell you if the individual is male or female.

A trans person's brain has the amygdala of the gender they identify as. As in, a man who identifies as a woman has an amygdala the size you would expect to be found in women.

There are other things as well, such as response to various hormones, etc...

So this alters my question. Now, if you know these behaviours have a physical, proven basis and are not just something somebody came up with, would you still support a business owner refusing to serve the individual?

To my mind, this is more like refusing someone based on a disability.

Also, could we support a religious basis for the refusal? As a disabled person, I would say no.
Click to expand...
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3092984/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom