By embrace, I pretty much meant the scenario portrayed here; things like inviting them to speak at big "conservative" conferences. I'm not saying drive them away with pitchforks, I'm not saying be dicks to them and drive them back fully into the arms of insane leftists. Tolerate them to some extent...don't showcase them, don't turn your party, movement, or conference over to them.
A great example would be Riley Gaines. Something I'll actually almost fully agree with Imp on, minus the standard Impsanity around murderous intent and genocide, of course. She's a liberal through-and-through, and that's fine. She's a feminist...less fine, but sure, you do you, Riley. But she's not a conservative, she's never claimed to be a conservative. Yet all these "conservative" people, talk shows, and conferences keep giving her the mic and, worse, trying to curry favor with her.
It's one thing to talk to her. It's another to invite her to everything, and agree with her on everything just because she doesn't want men in women's sports. The amount of times I've heard "conservatives" (I'm getting tired of putting that in quotes, but it must be done) talk about how important women's sports are is insane. That was never the goal. It's at best a biproduct of defending reality. Yet they're parroting feminist talking points, because they can't help themselves.
People are easily led. For better or worse (worse), these "conservative" leaders are thought leaders. I don't want them pushing literal feminism, and thus at least marginally shifting the whole movement leftward, just because they found a high profile woman who agrees with them (for different reasons) on one dang issue.
I want conservatives to stand on principle. Heck, I want everyone to stand on principle. I can respect a principled leftist or liberal. Say what you mean, don't shift your opinion to court people who disagree with you on everything else, and don't push your followers to believe more in line with your ideological opponents, and current scourge on civilization. That sort of embrace literally pushes the right leftward, and is incredibly damaging.
I don't care about women's sports in the slightest, at least in the professional sense. Sure, girls should be protected, and sports are good learning experiences. Absolutely protect school sports. But professional women's sports? The only reason I don't want men there is because men aren't women. I'm not going to go on at length about how important and vital professional women's sports are. Even outside of the 'lul women's sports' meme, as someone who appreciated the concept of a free market, women's sports can't really stand on its own, and certainly isn't something worth getting bent out of shape over. If there's a female category, males shouldn't play in it. The discussion can end there, without talking about female empowerment and the like.
And it's not just about Riley Gaines. There are tons of liberal, or feminist, or racialist, and similar grifters that the right keeps embracing wholesale. Have these people on, sure. Talk about the issues you agree on, sure. But I'd like a little bit of conservative pushback on nonconservative arguments, instead of changing from a conservative stance to try and court them. That's incredibly damaging in my opinion.
Hell, 99% liberals seem to have helped the right move to the right on issues like transgenderism.
I'm not so sure, as outlined above. Liberals have helped the right move to the left on transgender arguments. The right would be better served if they stayed on the right side of the argument, in my opinion.
Even someone who is 99% liberal can be useful. Being nice and welcoming, while the woke crazies drive people away, can make people move more towards good things...What should not be done is pander on substance to the 99% of these refugees.
Absolutely agreed, actually. But the only way they'll ever be more than at best useful puppets, and at worse saboteurs, is if they get a bit of (polite) pushback on their nonconservative ideas. A 99% liberal is indeed useful...for their potential to become a 98% liberal, a 97% liberal, and so on. But the tradeoff isn't worth it if they're channeling those 1%s back into a wider conservative audience.
Embrace liberals...don't embrace their ideas, would be a better way to put it, I suppose. But the right can't help but embrace the ideas, too, because they've had it drilled into them to care about the leftists. Even though they know it's bull, they seem to want to prove themselves to the "empathetic" side. And it's hurting them massively, and has been for decades...probably centuries and millennia, in fact.
By embrace, I pretty much meant the scenario portrayed here; things like inviting them to speak at big "conservative" conferences. I'm not saying drive them away with pitchforks, I'm not saying be dicks to them and drive them back fully into the arms of insane leftists. Tolerate them to some extent...don't showcase them, don't turn your party, movement, or conference over to them.
A great example would be Riley Gaines. Something I'll actually almost fully agree with Imp on, minus the standard Impsanity around murderous intent and genocide, of course. She's a liberal through-and-through, and that's fine. She's a feminist...less fine, but sure, you do you, Riley. But she's not a conservative, she's never claimed to be a conservative. Yet all these "conservative" people, talk shows, and conferences keep giving her the mic and, worse, trying to curry favor with her.
It's one thing to talk to her. It's another to invite her to everything, and agree with her on everything just because she doesn't want men in women's sports. The amount of times I've heard "conservatives" (I'm getting tired of putting that in quotes, but it must be done) talk about how important women's sports are is insane. That was never the goal. It's at best a biproduct of defending reality. Yet they're parroting feminist talking points, because they can't help themselves.
People are easily led. For better or worse (worse), these "conservative" leaders are thought leaders. I don't want them pushing literal feminism, and thus at least marginally shifting the whole movement leftward, just because they found a high profile woman who agrees with them (for different reasons) on one dang issue.
I want conservatives to stand on principle. Heck, I want everyone to stand on principle. I can respect a principled leftist or liberal. Say what you mean, don't shift your opinion to court people who disagree with you on everything else, and don't push your followers to believe more in line with your ideological opponents, and current scourge on civilization. That sort of embrace literally pushes the right leftward, and is incredibly damaging.
I don't care about women's sports in the slightest, at least in the professional sense. Sure, girls should be protected, and sports are good learning experiences. Absolutely protect school sports. But professional women's sports? The only reason I don't want men there is because men aren't women. I'm not going to go on at length about how important and vital professional women's sports are. Even outside of the 'lul women's sports' meme, as someone who appreciated the concept of a free market, women's sports can't really stand on its own, and certainly isn't something worth getting bent out of shape over. If there's a female category, males shouldn't play in it. The discussion can end there, without talking about female empowerment and the like.
And it's not just about Riley Gaines. There are tons of liberal, or feminist, or racialist, and similar grifters that the right keeps embracing wholesale. Have these people on, sure. Talk about the issues you agree on, sure. But I'd like a little bit of conservative pushback on nonconservative arguments, instead of changing from a conservative stance to try and court them. That's incredibly damaging in my opinion.
Hell, 99% liberals seem to have helped the right move to the right on issues like transgenderism.
I'm not so sure, as outlined above. Liberals have helped the right move to the left on transgender arguments. The right would be better served if they stayed on the right side of the argument, in my opinion.
Even someone who is 99% liberal can be useful. Being nice and welcoming, while the woke crazies drive people away, can make people move more towards good things...What should not be done is pander on substance to the 99% of these refugees.
Absolutely agreed, actually. But the only way they'll ever be more than at best useful puppets, and at worse saboteurs, is if they get a bet of (polite) pushback on their nonconservative ideas. A 99% liberal is indeed useful...for their potential to become a 98% liberal, a 97% liberal, and so on. But the tradeoff isn't worth it if they're channeling those 1%s back into a wider conservative audience.
Embrace liberals...don't embrace their ideas, would be a better way to put it, I suppose. But the right can't help but embrace the ideas, too, because they've had it drilled into them to care about the leftists. Even though they know it's bull, they seem to want to prove themselves to the "empathetic" side. And it's hurting them massively, and has been for decades...probably centuries and millennia, in fact.