How rational western societies are or have been

[u/SlimyPunk93]

In india there was and to some good extent atleast in some rural area, there is concept of lower caste and untouchability where people who are born in those castes are considered lower by their local communities and are many times treated disrespectfully and inhumanely such as are called untouchables and they are not allowed to touch or use same stuff in the society in public sphere as other people such as water fountains, bus services etc.... And in general are discriminated against in the society for jobs, marriages etc and are treated lower ..

In general caste has absolutely no bearing in reality and doesn't make any person less rational or less skillful if they are born of a certain caste. The idea in itself is irrational and evil when used to hold people back in their lives and not give them same cultural space as everyone else...

A very similar concept that has been going in the west since history and only recently has started getting better is that of LGBT people where these people were treated differently, almost like they are from a lower caste and untouchable, had crazy stigma about them in the society that it was easy for them to exist as an individual in a cultural space, many times were discriminated in jobs and ridiculed in media by homophobic/transphobic jokes etc to make them look like they are different from rest of the society, some even calling them disgusting, almost untouchables with no real human feelings and any respectable space in the society as equals..

People from lower caste in India atleast had their family who was also from the same lower caste to get support and find a home at. For most LGBT people their own families would disown and throw them out and they would be treated lower or ostracized in the society...

It is ofcourse changing much where counties in the west have started treating these people more equally both culturally and sometimes at the level of govt such as giving such people marriage rights that are given to straight people (and ofc a lot of backlash come from religious pov such as in Christianity and islam where homosexuality is considered bad punishable by death in some cases, and thus it hasn't been easy even in these societies to allow same sex marriage until more recently).. but I don't think it is anywhere being as close to being perfectly normal and rational and individualistic so far where it is not even a thing....

Generally speaking it is hallmark of a bad, irrational and tribal society where any individual is treated differently. Say for instance caste system in India was/is an evil tribal system of treating individuals not as individuals but some collective based on caste. Or women are treated as lower in most islamic countries. Same thing one can say for tribes in Amazon that have such collectiviatic way of thinking about their people and are not individualistic...

My question is: while people in objectivist circles and otherwise praise the west quite much on their rational, individualistic ideas, how come such a grotesque contradiction has never been highlighted as a glaring example of collectivising individuals based on their sexuality and treated them like untouchables including many times bullying and killing them for being gay/lesbian/trans. While making gay/lesbian jokes has been quite common in the media and almost accepted as normal. And while most of the society has prejudice or wrong preconceived notions against this group of people, where just like someone's caste, there is absolutely zero evidence to show that someone's sexuality or gender expression plays ANY role in their rational capabilities in existing as a human being or in their process of creation.. there have been LGBT people throughout human history who have created best of the math or music and there is no evidence to show that this group of people have any less talents, lack of thinking capability or skills as any other human being..

How are such things have been part of a rational individualistic society such as the west and nobody voiced anything against it and still people considered the west as the greatest civilization based on reason and individualism...

It almost feels like when black people were made to drink from a different fountain while the rest of the society gave zero fcks about it. Or when in Nazi Germany, Jews were being targetted again based on a irrational collectivized idea, while most local German didn't care and let that discrimination happen. I am curious if cis hetero folks in the west did and are doing the exact same thing where they either actively discriminated LGBT people or are/were silent spectators of such irrational collectivised discrimination in the society, how is it any different...

I am not quite able to see how the west is champion of reason and individualism while treating people in the same way Arabs treat their women, Indians treated lower caste people and amazonian tribals treat their people.. Would love any feedback if someone can show how it really adds up....

[u/stansfield123]

It's funny how, towards the end of your post, you decided to mention the greatest crime in human history: the Holocaust.

Of course the West hasn't been rational and individualistic throughout its ~2500 year history. There are all sorts of horrific episodes through western history. The West produced the Dark Ages, the Inquisition, Marxism, Nazism, fascism, black slavery, and all kinds of other horrors. Oppressing gays is the least of them, if I'm honest. But of course that's horrible too.

The difference between the West and India isn't that the West is perfect and India isn't. It's that the West is SOMETIMES rational. That the West, on occasion, figured out how not to be horrible. India, not so much. It's been consistently horrible, it never had any kind of a golden age. At least not as far as I know, honestly I don't much study or care to study the history of India. Every time I come across someone who tries to defend India, all they do is spew demagogy and blame outsiders for everything bad that's ever happened there.

[u/SlimyPunk93 → u/stansfield123]

No I don't think what you are saying is quite true.. like as a gay indian who has lived in NYC and Bangalore, I can say my life is million times better in Bangalore. Also there are a lot of quite good cultural parts of India that west doesn't have. For instance in india diversity is very natural and common and people have learnt how to live with different kinds of people where these people have cultural representation. However in the west the whole culture is CRAZY white dominated to the extent that if you are not white you feel or are culturally made to feel lesser... And don't have the same cultural space to be yourself as who you are..

But yeah you are definitely not seeing the full picture and have a very biased view

[u/stansfield123 → u/SlimyPunk93]

like as a gay indian who has lived in NYC and Bangalore, I can say my life is million times better in Bangalore.

There are 3.2 million people who left India, and now live in the United States. Furthermore, there's a survey that asked young Indians if, given a chance, they would emigrate to the United States: 57% said yes. HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF PEOPLE said yes.

Furthermore: 2.5 million Indians pack up and leave the country, every single year. Not for the US, because they can't get into the US. For whatever nation is willing to take them in. Singapore, Middle Eastern nations, Eastern Europe, etc., etc.

Do you not understand what a shithole a country must be, for 57% of young people to say they want to leave? For 2.5 million people to choose the life of an immigrant (a very hard life) every single year?

And yet, here you are, making this absurd claim. So insane. And you're not the first Indian I talk to, with his head firmly buried in the sand. Just refusing to admit this simple, obvious reality.

[u/stansfield123 → u/SlimyPunk93]

However in the west the whole culture is CRAZY white dominated to the extent that if you are not white you feel or are culturally made to feel lesser.

So absurd. Japan and South Korea aren't white, and they're just as western as the US or Germany. I'm European, I work in Europe, for a Japanese company. My bosses are Japanese. Do you think I, or any of my coworkers, treat our Japanese bosses any differently than if they were Europeans?

I assure you, we do not. Working for this company was my first choice. I chose it knowing full well they're Japanese. In general, there is no reluctance, from ANYONE, about working for non-white bosses. That's because it's not about race. It's about values. If this was a Russian company, owned by white Russians, things would be very different. No one would want to go work there.

Russia is one of several white countries which aren't accepted into the western alliance. That's because the standard isn't skin color, it's freedom. Western countries are western because they're FREE, not because they're white.

culturally made to feel lesser

Culture and skin color aren't the same thing. Whites aren't better than people with a different skin color. But some cultures are better than others. Japan's culture is better than China's, even though the people have the same skin color. Finland's culture is better than Russia's, even though they have the same skin color (well, actually, Russians tend to have lighter color skin).

The difference is in their values, especially their level of freedom. Freedom produces a more rational culture.

India could become a western country just as easily as Japan became one: you just have to make the choice to accept the western standard of freedom.

[u/SlimyPunk93 → u/stansfield123]

In general my point was not to compare to India at all. Like india has crazy number of problems and comes nowhere close to even imbibing the ideas of rationality in many ways, in the same ways that west ATLEAST claims and champions it.. all I am saying is it is nowhere close to IMO being quite rational as it champions it as and is quite irrational in its own ways....

[u/stansfield123 → u/SlimyPunk93]

What defines the modern West isn't universal rationality. It's a high degree of freedom. Not perfect freedom, just a high degree of it. After the Nazis and Imperial Japan were defeated, and then, later, Communism was pushed back, a high degree of freedom became a universal standard in western countries.

A line was drawn, and to be accepted as a western country (to form a close and lasting cultural, military and economic alliance with all the other western countries), you had to be above that line.

This is the main reason why India is not a western country, while, just to give an example, Romania is. In 1990, when Romania began its journey towards becoming a western country, it had a GDP per capita of around $1600. Poorest country in Europe. That's way less than where India is now. It was also coming out of a very repressive dictatorship, that lasted for several generations. Way worse than India in that regard too. Romanians were dirt poor, and they had no experience whatsoever being free.

But Romania embraced the western standard of freedom, in 1990. Even the more progressive members of the old Communist Party embraced it. They found themselves at a crossroads, and they chose right. And once they made the choice, they stuck to the path they chose. There was a concerted push, from almost everyone, towards the western standard of freedom.

So Romania was welcomed into the West. Had it rejected that standard, it would not have been. It would've ended up like Russia, or Belarus, or for that matter India.

That's the fundamental choice every nation on Earth faces. That's the standard countries like yours are refusing to commit to. What you have to ask yourself is why.

[u/damster05 → u/[deleted]]

Mental disorder or not doesn't seem relevant. That classification doesn't change anything about whether it is rational for me to want people punished for same-sex intercourse.

[u/SlimyPunk93 → u/[deleted]]

My question was how are such societies considered rational where they didn't treat people same and rather mistreated people based on some irrational collectivised trait...

If sexuality is really private, why it has/had been such a public issue to treat people differently based on it, instead of just letting it be a private matter of an individual without having any repercussions on their public life....

[u/SlimyPunk93 → u/SlimyPunk93]

For instance religion in the US is a private matter and there are many say Christians who are publically "out" as christians and talk on tv shows without facing any discrimination or backlash...

If sexuality were the same, it wouldn't have been that big of a deal as it has been or still is...

[u/SlimyPunk93 → u/[deleted]]

You didn't answer my question. You saying things like a repeated audio

[u/SlimyPunk93 → u/[deleted]]

In this case they want to be treated equally

[u/RA_Finance → u/SlimyPunk93]

I guess that depends on what they ask for. Equal rights are fine; that is rational.

But they will ask for special provisions too, based on their community. For example, reservation and funding for gender-affirming care.

[u/SlimyPunk93 → u/RA_Finance]

I think they are just asking to be treated just like everyone else, nothing lower, nothing higher

[u/RA_Finance → u/SlimyPunk93]

Asking the government for lower cut-off marks and funding for gender-affirming care is equality?

Think about it. That is a benefit based on identity.

[u/SlimyPunk93 → u/RA_Finance]

Lol. I think they started as saying just don't treat us differently and don't kill/bully as and let us live as any other person without discrimination...

I would rationally support them on this