Historically Oppressed? So What...?

The title of this post refers to one of Dan's most favorite banalities:  HISTORICALLY OPPRESSED!!!  He uses this trite expression in his defense of inane positions and support for those unworthy of the support Dan believes is deserved.  The three main demographics upon whom Dan bestows this label of sorrow are black people, women and the LGBT community.  

It's not as if these groups have not been mistreated throughout history.  Women were chattel long before any particular race was.  Blacks, of course, suffered greatly in American history as well.  The LGBT community?  Not as much as they and their enablers would have us believe, but yes, they have also been mistreated, though their behavior invited it from those who regarded their behavior as the abnormal perversion it is.  (Not at all a justification, but a reality which makes a significant difference which in turn puts them in a unique category.)

The problem with referencing history, however, is that Dan does this to stifle legitimate arguments, positions and opinions with regard to specific issues which arise in our society and culture:

1.  Prostitutes and loose women can't be criticized because women were historically oppressed. 

When Dan sought to disparage Trump on the basis of allegations from women against him, Dan was incensed in his usual pearl-clutching manner that I would scrutinize any of those allegations in any way.  Two of those on the list of "abused" women were Stormy Daniels and another woman whose name I don't feel like looking up again.  Both of these women I referred to as "whores" and "sluts" because they both traded their bodies for money (which makes them whores), and they both insisted they had affairs with Trump (which makes them sluts).  Despite the adjectives being completely accurate and thus appropriate labels, Dan sought to scold me as having insulted all women for calling a couple of whores/sluts whores and sluts...because women have been historically oppressed.

2.  When conversations regarding issue within the black community arise, and they deal with criminality, low academic outcomes, out-of-wedlock births and other negative issues, any attempt to deal with the actual reasons will compel Dan to once again speak of how blacks have been historically oppressed.

3.  And of course, Dan's most favored nation...the LGBT community...can never be discussed truthfully regarding their disorders and immoral behaviors and their demands for special privileges with again hearing Dan whine about how historically oppressed they've been.

But the issue here, and it's reflected in the second question of the title, is what does having been historically oppressed have to do with anything regarding whatever the current issue on the table is.  Since the recent shooting at the Club Q is in the news, I'll focus on the perv community.  And with that, the question is, what does any past oppression have to do with the fact that these people are disordered and immoral?  One can beat up a perv every day of the week and the fact remains the perv is perverted.  

So let's remove the daily beatings from the equation and what's left is the issue the liars...like Dan...wish to avoid.  More to the point, Dan uses the "historically oppressed" angle to stifle discussion of that which matters...of that which is on the table.  The focus is in one direction only...on the pervs and how sad it is they take heat as a result of the revulsion good people have of their perversions.  Dan brought up at Craig's some "sad" news of a "beloved transgendered" friend of his being denied Thanksgiving dinner with the folks.  "Do you know the harm that causes?"  No regard for the harm suffered by the folks knowing their kid turned out to be a perv and actively manifests it.  No.  All opinions and beliefs are to be made subordinate to the whims and whining of the disordered because they were historically oppressed.  

Well, I don't care how oppressed they were in the past when we're speaking to their behaviors in the present.  Bad behaviors have no justification and nothing a segment of society endured in the past factors into the perpetration of those bad behaviors.  It doesn't make the bad behaviors OK, nor does it justify overlooking those behaviors, enabling them, promoting them or refusing to speak truthfully about them.  

What's more, I don't need to hear a thing about past oppression if I encounter oppression taking place now, and given my own beliefs about how folks should be treated, I oppose all unjust treatment of anyone.  Thus, there's really no significance to it and to mention "historical oppression" is just a cheap and dishonest ploy to demonize ("oppress") good people who oppose that which people like Dan embrace, promote and/or enable.