Why specifically do you think the perceived mental illness of being into drag disqualifies them from having enough reason or intelligence to be worth listening to?
Ideas for inclusive conservation podcasts - Pattie Gonia
- Thread starter Mscarl (she/they)
- Start date
Why not interview Wyn Wiley instead of the character he plays sometimes? I’m assuming he has the same environmental mindset and can speak to the same issues. As mentioned previously, drag is a performance, right? Why interview the character instead of the actor?
To me, an interview with Pattie Gonia is no different than an interview with Ron Swanson, Mike Baxter, or Cam Hanes. They are all characters created for entertainment. And all of their opinions should be treated appropriately.
Same as Exhausted posting as a character. Why the alias? Why not post as yourself.
idelkslayer
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2013
- Messages
- 305
I don't think i said it did. I responded to your previous post. I agreed with you that mental illness does not lessen one's standing or value as a human being. My comment made no judgement about what condition or attitudes qualify as mental illness. That's why I said "setting aside", effectively separating my comment from the topic at hand and addressing mental illness in broad terms.
I will add this. Conservation does not need more LGBT people any more than it needs more iron workers, or more skateboarders, or (insert random group of people). Conservation needs more people, more individuals. Targeting specific groups of people is arbitrary and seems more concerned with getting attention and promoting their own special interests than in supporting Conservation or any other issue. Especially when the special interest is defined by something so unrelated as sexual preferences or perceived identity. It's pandering and condescending.
My personal thought on the matter is that mental illness is at play in trans people. I have compassion for anyone in that situation but in the case of adults they can pursue whatever course of action they choose. It doesn't disqualify them from having opinions on conservation but a clear confusion about basic biology doesn't inspire confidence.
Mentally ill people shouldn't be around weapons. Pronouns are the first clue that anything being said is already well below the IQ needed for a legitimate, intelligent conversation. Living in CA is bad enough with these types of people. Do not give it the dignity of a conversation as the goal is completely self centered and not remotely concerned about hunting. Ban the troll and keep the forum clean.
WanderWoman
Well-known member
I’m not advocating either way for Randy to do such a podcast; that’s up to him. The fact that someone here makes a suggestion for a podcast topic/episode, and there are 3 pages of people questioning/nitpicking such suggestion and/or the poster, may be a reason itself to do such an episode, however.
Whether you personally resonate with Pattie Gonia or understand the trans community is irrelevant (but perhaps there’s an opportunity should such an episode come to fruition). What’s relevant is, Pattie Gonia may reach a demographic that traditional hunting media never will. If we can get those audiences to care about hunting, public lands, and wildlife management, that is a win. Regardless of whether or not they participate.
Now, imagine being trans or a different part of the LGBQT+ community and being curious about conservation/public lands and hunting in particular. Then you stumble upon this forum and read some of these comments, of which a handful are pretty alienating. Instead of gaining a potential ally, perhaps we created an opponent. Then, the next time a ballot measure comes up that affects hunting or public lands, how do you think they are going to vote? Perhaps against the people who made them feel unwelcome?
Part of why I hate the culture war BS as it detracts and distracts from so many other important things.
You don't have to understand or agree with everyone's situation (why the 80-20 rule is awesome), but allowing for and encouraging diversity is a good thing.
Whether you personally resonate with Pattie Gonia or understand the trans community is irrelevant (but perhaps there’s an opportunity should such an episode come to fruition). What’s relevant is, Pattie Gonia may reach a demographic that traditional hunting media never will. If we can get those audiences to care about hunting, public lands, and wildlife management, that is a win. Regardless of whether or not they participate.
Now, imagine being trans or a different part of the LGBQT+ community and being curious about conservation/public lands and hunting in particular. Then you stumble upon this forum and read some of these comments, of which a handful are pretty alienating. Instead of gaining a potential ally, perhaps we created an opponent. Then, the next time a ballot measure comes up that affects hunting or public lands, how do you think they are going to vote? Perhaps against the people who made them feel unwelcome?
Part of why I hate the culture war BS as it detracts and distracts from so many other important things.
You don't have to understand or agree with everyone's situation (why the 80-20 rule is awesome), but allowing for and encouraging diversity is a good thing.
Last edited:
sapperJ24
Well-known member
Not sure you meant it this way, but the usage of 'it' when referring to a transgender individual is often considered offensive and dehumanizing by that community. Just a heads up.
Rack Daniels
Well-known member
I understand why, that’s obvious. Unfortunately if he is a he and says he’s a she and the other disagrees, it can be very difficult to navigate dialogue…
sapperJ24
Well-known member
For sure. Not only difficult, but potentially uncomfortable for the person trying to be considerate. In the real world, when unsure I go with the proper/preferred name. If they introduce themselves at Patty, then Patty it is.
Gerald Martin
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2009
- Messages
- 9,481
I’ve been reading through this thread and thinking about how many times my sexuality or self-identity has been relevant to whether or not I can access the outdoors or participate in advocacy for conservation. I can’t think of any time where that is relevant.
IMO, as I look at Patti Gonia I see a white man trying to appropriate the issues of equality and inclusion that minority races and women are actually experiencing and turn attention towards himself for his benefit.
What perspective does a white man who dresses in female clothing and identifies as a woman in some settings and switches back to dressing and identifying as a man at other times bring that adds value to the conversation when how he self-identifies is the only reason he’s asked to have the conversation?
I was born with what I have self- diagnosed as neuro-divergence based on how my brain processes information and how I interact with what I experience in life. I also have biological predilections of my sexuality that I have chosen to express as I deem appropriate.
As I have lived life, I have come to the realization that I would prefer to be able to be accepted by everyone in society as a self-identified multi-millionaire and my actions and purchases that I make in that identity be respected and accepted as legitimate. Society’s rigid insistence that I constrain my behavior to reflect the reality of my bank account balance has been the source of incredible mental and emotional frustration knowing that I will experience overt repression and violence if I choose to conduct financial transactions in harmony with my financial self-identity. I feel like a million bucks. Society doesn’t accept that I have a million bucks.
Do I deserve to have a platform to share my perspective on the outdoors and conservation based on the above mentioned criteria? I guess I never thought it was relevant before now.
IMO, as I look at Patti Gonia I see a white man trying to appropriate the issues of equality and inclusion that minority races and women are actually experiencing and turn attention towards himself for his benefit.
What perspective does a white man who dresses in female clothing and identifies as a woman in some settings and switches back to dressing and identifying as a man at other times bring that adds value to the conversation when how he self-identifies is the only reason he’s asked to have the conversation?
I was born with what I have self- diagnosed as neuro-divergence based on how my brain processes information and how I interact with what I experience in life. I also have biological predilections of my sexuality that I have chosen to express as I deem appropriate.
As I have lived life, I have come to the realization that I would prefer to be able to be accepted by everyone in society as a self-identified multi-millionaire and my actions and purchases that I make in that identity be respected and accepted as legitimate. Society’s rigid insistence that I constrain my behavior to reflect the reality of my bank account balance has been the source of incredible mental and emotional frustration knowing that I will experience overt repression and violence if I choose to conduct financial transactions in harmony with my financial self-identity. I feel like a million bucks. Society doesn’t accept that I have a million bucks.
Do I deserve to have a platform to share my perspective on the outdoors and conservation based on the above mentioned criteria? I guess I never thought it was relevant before now.
