lol individualism is about not subscribing to identities
I am the creative nothing that can not be named.
I hope I answered your question.
No you're not, you're a very special snowflake
You can not label the unique. You are blind like new born kitten. I pity you.
So you can't conceive of anything which doesn't have a pre-existing label, and apparently human names aren't good enough.
You sound like a reactionary. I can understand why someone who is obsessed with categorizing the world into simplistic groups for ease of generalization would be frustrated by individuals who don't fit neatly into any particular group.
It's good you made a post, but I don't understand what you mean by any of this.
Individuality is made possible by people's memberships of specific groups. Without such groups, we would be a formless mass
Why are you so stupid?
Without such groups, we'd be individuals, you dolt.
Except groups are made up of individuals, you spooked ragamuffin. Read Stirner.
But without individuality
But what is an individual?
A creative nothingness which cannot be described.
the filename should be אני יודעת* since it's a girl in the gif
Prove that I can't be an individual without being a member of a specific group
A person is the sum of millions of memories and dreams, countless personality traits, dozens of hobbies and passions, numerous aspirations and fears, and at least a few different roles in society. Why do you think it's reasonable to expect that all to be summarized into a single label?
Why don't you tell us what you think your identity is?
Anyone whose primary concern regards their capacity for 'self-expression' and 'individuality' is a middle class degenerate tbh.
But the point is, those things would all converge a great deal if we didn't have groups
You've got it completely backwards. Social groups form because like-minded people want to be together. Identity groups form because idiots find it easier to think of the world in terms of a small number of homogeneous groups than a large number of individuals.
I'm not talking about groups as organisations, I mean groups as categories. What I mean is we are made unique by these categories, so they should be parts of our identity that we embrace and integrate with rather than rejecting
So you're saying that black people should embrace the stereotype of blackness because they are black? How can embracing an identity defined by other people make you more of an individual?
It's more that they should embrace blackness. If they don't, they'll end up in the garden of 'common humanity', which is a loss of individuality, and not a gain.
I don't know what you mean 'defined by other people'. Even if a category is defined by other people, we might still find that our membership of that category is a part of who we are.
What kind of cheese is that?
I don't know
What does it even mean to "embrace blackness"? Why are we embracing random physical attributes?
This entire thread has left me bewildered. Are you deeply autistic by any chance?
To admit blackness into their identity. It's a purely internal shift. What it means externally is different for each person.
I would see an individualist, as being likely to reject his blackness, seeing it as something that is apart from himself and oppressing him rather than being part of himself and shaping him.
Or maybe a black person would be more likely to embrace it, having figured it out. Whereas a white person would be more likely to refuse to accept their race at any opportunity.
Post more Jennifer Connelly gifs pls, she's a top 3d waifu
Last two I have
Identity comes from experience, not "membership". Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice are not in Black Lives Matter.