Let's talk about Homophobia + Aristocracy and Democracy

[Zero]

It's an issue which has been on my mind for a long time. I don't identify as LGBTQI but it has always been interesting for me from a scientific and social point of view.
From my own observations democratic types are less sensitive about sexual preferences and differences, and the most homophobic people I have met were betas. Not unnecessary to point out that I was born and raised in an Islamic dictatorship, yet from a very young age was OK with such matters.
I think aristocratic types have more potential for being homophobic.

***might have mentioned it at some point in the past, so excuse me if I'm being repetitive, just making a comeback after a long time away from the forum.

[Adam Strange]

I think I once saw a Socionics definition of “Aristocracy” as being more willing to assign traits previously associated with a group to an individual, if they believe that an individual belongs in that group.

This seems to me to be prejudicial thinking, in the sense that it “pre-judges” a person by association, rather than taking that person as an individual.

In one sense, it is lazy thinking, and in another it is “quick and frequently accurate” thinking. If you see a tiger, it is probably a good thing to have some prejudices regarding its most likely behavior.

(Even though I am in a democratic Quadra, I initially use previous associations to pre-judge people. I do keep an open mind to new information, though, and so am always willing to modify my prejudices if facts or circumstances dictate.)

The problem that many minorities face is being associated with negative traits, since assigning negative traits to a group is an effective way to exclude that group from sharing in the resources of the majority group.

Trump does this all the time. He isn’t the President of the U.S., he is a divider of society, for the purpose of increasing the wealth of the established. What most people who support him don’t understand is that he doesn’t consider them to be in his own group. His actions make that abundantly clear, to those who aren’t blinded by their fear of losing status (and therefore access to resources) themselves.

All societies seem to create minority groups within themselves. Every country has them. The minorities fight back against this external labeling of themselves by attempting to rename themselves periodically. Negroes became blacks, who became African-Americans. This relabeling can help give the minority access to new considerations and new associations, but the real solution is to change the way that resources are allocated.

After all, ideally, you would not choose whether or not to feed and clothe your children based on their handedness ot hair color.

[Zero]

I think I once saw a Socionics definition of “Aristocracy” as being more willing to assign traits previously associated with a group to an individual, if they believe that an individual belongs in that group.

This seems to me to be prejudicial thinking, in the sense that it “pre-judges” a person by association, rather than taking that person as an individual.

In one sense, it is lazy thinking, and in another it is “quick and frequently accurate” thinking. If you see a tiger, it is probably a good thing to have some prejudices regarding its most likely behavior.

(Even though I am in a democratic Quadra, I initially use previous associations to pre-judge people. I do keep an open mind to new information, though, and so am always willing to modify my prejudices if facts or circumstances dictate.)

The problem that many minorities face is being associated with negative traits, since assigning negative traits to a group is an effective way to exclude that group from sharing in the resources of the majority group.

Trump does this all the time. He isn’t the President of the U.S., he is a divider of society, for the purpose of increasing the wealth of the established. What most people who support him don’t understand is that he doesn’t consider them to be in his own group. His actions make that abundantly clear, to those who aren’t blinded by their fear of losing status (and therefore access to resources) themselves.

All societies seem to create minority groups within themselves. Every country has them. The minorities fight back against this external labeling of themselves by attempting to rename themselves periodically. Negroes became blacks, who became African-Americans. This relabeling can help give the minority access to new considerations and new associations, but the real solution is to change the way that resources are allocated.

After all, ideally, you would not choose whether or not to feed and clothe your children based on their handedness ot hair color.

the whole video can be related to the topic but just the part he points out at 7:15 (in case you don't want to listen to all of it)

[Number 9 large]

I think I once saw a Socionics definition of “Aristocracy” as being more willing to assign traits previously associated with a group to an individual, if they believe that an individual belongs in that group.

This seems to me to be prejudicial thinking, in the sense that it “pre-judges” a person by association, rather than taking that person as an individual.

In one sense, it is lazy thinking, and in another it is “quick and frequently accurate” thinking. If you see a tiger, it is probably a good thing to have some prejudices regarding its most likely behavior.

(Even though I am in a democratic Quadra, I initially use previous associations to pre-judge people. I do keep an open mind to new information, though, and so am always willing to modify my prejudices if facts or circumstances dictate.)

The problem that many minorities face is being associated with negative traits, since assigning negative traits to a group is an effective way to exclude that group from sharing in the resources of the majority group.

Trump does this all the time. He isn’t the President of the U.S., he is a divider of society, for the purpose of increasing the wealth of the established. What most people who support him don’t understand is that he doesn’t consider them to be in his own group. His actions make that abundantly clear, to those who aren’t blinded by their fear of losing status (and therefore access to resources) themselves.

All societies seem to create minority groups within themselves. Every country has them. The minorities fight back against this external labeling of themselves by attempting to rename themselves periodically. Negroes became blacks, who became African-Americans. This relabeling can help give the minority access to new considerations and new associations, but the real solution is to change the way that resources are allocated.

After all, ideally, you would not choose whether or not to feed and clothe your children based on their handedness ot hair color.

America has been divided ever since its creation

[Beautiful sky]

I’ve always had friends from all walks of life. Usually what attracts me is warmness. If someone is warm to me and understands my level of sensitivity they are mine to keep.

Yes I did attempt to befriend a gay guy with similar interests as myself at the Farmers market but he was on the sprawl and I was in his way. Some people need to be in a relationship to be happy.

Delta may make judgements and fun of people however that doesn’t equate to how they feel about individuals. They are more about what is theirs, as in their relationships and will proudly wear them.

[Zero]

I’ve always had friends from all walks of life. Usually what attracts me is warmness. If someone is warm to me and understands my level of sensitivity they are mine to keep.

Yes I did attempt to befriend a gay guy with similar interests as myself at the Farmers market but he was on the sprawl and I was in his way. Some people need to be in a relationship to be happy.

Delta may make judgements and fun of people however that doesn’t equate to how they feel about individuals. They are more about what is theirs, as in their relationships and will proudly wear them.

well I know EIIs who seem and maybe are ok with LGBTQI, because they believe in humanity, "the humanist", known as "dostoyevsky" who even tried to understand and believed in the humanity of murders, criminals, etc. The type's philosophy of existence perhaps is to bring more warmness into relations.

Still often EIIs have or agree with the aristocratic standpoints for example: ok love whoever you want, that doesn't harm humanity, but why are you also sucking marriage which is a tradition between a man and a woman into your own socio-cultural movement? I knew a bisexual EII once who was against gay marriage because it is a disgrace to traditions.

Also about

Delta may make judgements and fun of people however that doesn’t equate to how they feel about individuals. They are more about what is theirs, as in their relationships and will proudly wear them.

I think judging and making fun of people does equate to you causing trouble for them in the long run, therefore does say something about how you feel about them or how you will make them feel about themselves. But very true about Delta.

[Beautiful sky]

well I know EIIs who seem and maybe are ok with LGBTQI, because they believe in humanity, "the humanist", known as "dostoyevsky" who even tried to understand and believed in the humanity of murders, criminals, etc. The type's philosophy of existence perhaps is to bring more warmness into relations.

Still often EIIs have or agree with the aristocratic standpoints for example: ok love whoever you want, that doesn't harm humanity, but why are you also sucking marriage which is a tradition between a man and a woman into your own socio-cultural movement? I knew a bisexual EII once who was against gay marriage because it is a disgrace to traditions.

Also about
I think judging and making fun of people does equate to you causing trouble for them in the long run, therefore does say something about how you feel about them or how you will make them feel about themselves. But very true about Delta.

That’s possible that the EII was against traditions. But remember that EII battle shame and agonize over their flaws. Take a transexual EII who feels himself to be a man yet can not open up emotionally to his close relationships (parents).

My parents are Gamma irrational pair and they were often more traditional and unforgiving than I. I don’t think that they would ever accept anyone in the family that comes out as gay and my ILI mother may either attempt to sweep it under the rug, say “it’s shameful don’t talk about it” or would try to change your own views of yourself by many guilty manipulative tactics like convincing you to do things her way or the way that she sees them to be correct. Playing politics.

I think the level of acceptance in Delta comes from their culture (doesn’t everybody’s?” Certainly my ESI aunt (born in the 1940s) and I view human sexuality differently. She is certainly against having gay people in society. I think that the world without diversity is boring.

[Adam Strange]

"If God hates gay people, why does he keep making them?"

[The Reality Denialist]

"If God hates gay people, why does he keep making them?"

God is wavering between masochism and sadism.


I just don't care because all I know that I'm straight who has too low drive to even think about it. I think the world would find its peace if we stop procreating and ended up extinct but that is just me.

[Skepsis]

God is wavering between masochism and sadism.


I just don't care because all I know that I'm straight who has too low drive to even think about it. I think the world would find its peace if we stop procreating and ended up extinct but that is just me.

Only the Abrahamic "true" god. There are countless "gods" out there and many aren't as evil as this one.

[Zero]

"If God hates gay people, why does he keep making them?"

That is the start of a huge debate which brings out questions which nobody seems to be able to answer to actually. If God is omnipotent, he knows the nature of the human he creates, and combined with the environment in which he creates him, he knows if he will be a good person or a bad person, if he will be religious or not, if he will commit suicide or not, then why does he recreate an already clear scenario? It is like watching a movie over and over again

[Protozoa]

"If God hates gay people, why does he keep making them?"

"Because he makes people in his image and loves everyone, but he hates his gayness. So he gives it to the devil. And the defiant devil loves what God hates about himself."

God's Narrator Holy Genesis Memoirs - verse 53 paragraph 4 section 10

[Number 9 large]

"Because he makes people in his image and loves everyone, but he hates his gayness. So he gives it to the devil. And the defiant devil loves what God hates about himself."

God's Narrator Holy Genesis Memoirs - verse 53 paragraph 4 section 10

If god hates gayness and god made everything why did he make gayness

[Chae]

i remember one russian socionics article (might have been parfenov) branding beta as the most bigoted quadra 😅

personally i'd think... wouldn't beta rile the most for a social cause i.e. against oppression and discriminatory bias? it really depends on what group they are part of, though. what branch of historical ideology you belong to is everything in beta, that is what makes them aristocratic.

[Aramas]

i remember one russian socionics article (might have been parfenov) branding beta as the most bigoted quadra ��

personally i'd think... wouldn't beta rile the most for a social cause i.e. against oppression and discriminatory bias? it really depends on what group they are part of, though. what branch of historical ideology you belong to is everything in beta, that is what makes them aristocratic.

I think it's more that Betas like blabbing about their perspectives and views a lot more openly. So they can be homophobic or SJW, but either way you're going to know it. Forthright I guess. Look at Hillary Clinton and the way she said flatout "No" to gay marriage in the past. Then when she was the Democratic candidate she said she had always supported gay rights. It was a total lie and contradiction that was made because she had openly expressed her personal perspective against it in the past. She did all that in spite of boos from the audience of the time and just laughed openly at them. That's beta. Speak their minds all the time and if anyone doesn't like it, screw them. Unless the betas are scheming, then they're the most obsequious fucks on the planet.

This applies more to Beta Js but still.

Deltas are always half nice and half rude.

[Soupman]

i remember one russian socionics article (might have been parfenov) branding beta as the most bigoted quadra 

personally i'd think... wouldn't beta rile the most for a social cause i.e. against oppression and discriminatory bias? it really depends on what group they are part of, though. what branch of historical ideology you belong to is everything in beta, that is what makes them aristocratic.

Actually they do both being authoritarian by nature - whatever moral institution they favour, they actually "fight" the cultural war to make sure only their worldview is the most dominant one. Beta have the aggressive defense of which ever values their demand to be the only one present. Betas are loud, brush, and "unstable" - in their desire to domineer culture. I distinctive describe them as relatively "unstable" because the influence of Betas is only felt as long as they overall domineering force present.

Deltas are passively authoritarian, inflexible on their own absolute morality. They influence society through passively upholding their values and influencing the fabric of society. A delta dominated social fabric is more stable - difficult to uproot given how it's impervious to force only changing with great difficulty through changes made to the culture's soul.

If you want to look at historical parallels:
The American Civil Rights revolution was a Beta upheaval, whilst the British equivalent (60s cultural revolution) despite hostility was more relatively "orderly" were the morality of the culture and underlying institutions were what had to be changed.

Gammas are chaotically individualistic whilst Alphas are passively individualistic - but things get complicated because all quadras have an both an active and suppressed side. Individualists have a suppressed authoritarian side and it's vice versa for authoritarians.

[Adam Strange]

Beta quadra may strive the hardest for social position, and social position is what gives you access to resources. But any person who is afraid of losing their social position can denigrate other people as being sub-human.

Here is an article from one of the most crowded countries on earth (and therefore, where resources for survival are most fought over): https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/ar...olence/587041/

It is worthwhile to remember that Delta quadra is very concerned about respect and being respected, which is also a form of social position.

[Aramas]

Beta quadra may strive the hardest for social position, and social position is what gives you access to resources. But any person who is afraid of losing their social position can denigrate other people as being sub-human.

Here is an article from one of the most crowded countries on earth (and therefore, where resources for survival are most fought over): https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/ar...olence/587041/

It is worthwhile to remember that Delta quadra is very concerned about respect and being respected, which is also a form of social position.

So in other words, you're saying that beta homophobia is just a way of jockeying for position by engaging in exclusive behavior. That makes a lot of sense. It didn't make much sense to me as a thing in itself. Some Betas are not homophobic at all and some are gay themselves. But homophobia as a method for reducing competition for positions in a hierarchy does make sense.

Respect isn't really a thing though. Everyone has a different set of behaviors they define as being respectful.

[Adam Strange]

So in other words, you're saying that beta homophobia is just a way of jockeying for position by engaging in exclusive behavior. That makes a lot of sense. It didn't make much sense to me as a thing in itself. Some Betas are not homophobic at all and some are gay themselves. But homophobia as a method for reducing competition for positions in a hierarchy does make sense.

Respect isn't really a thing though. Everyone has a different set of behaviors they define as being respectful.

The root of all conflict is competition for resources to propagate your DNA molecules at the expense of other propagators of different DNA molecules.

It is sometimes advantageous to form temporary alliances with other DNA molecules, but when push comes to shove, we are programmed to ensure that our code (and that of our offspring) survives.

Consequently, peace endures as long as the resources hold out.

I was surprised to learn that half the population thinks there will be a world war in the next ten years. This is totally unnecessary. We have plenty of stuff, and the potential exists to use it and distribute it more efficiently. Some billionaires might have to accept less, though.

Perhaps they could be persuaded to a more equitable distribution of resources if their choice was between "liberty, equality, fraternity" and the guillotine.

[Aramas]

The root of all conflict is competition for resources to propagate your DNA molecules at the expense of other propagators of different DNA molecules.

It is sometimes advantageous to form temporary alliances with other DNA molecules, but when push comes to shove, we are programmed to ensure that our code (and that of our offspring) survives.

Consequently, peace endures as long as the resources hold out.

I was surprised to learn that half the population thinks there will be a world war in the next ten years. This is totally unnecessary. We have plenty of stuff, and the potential exists to use it and distribute it more efficiently. Some billionaires might have to accept less, though.

Perhaps they could be persuaded to a more equitable distribution of resources if their choice was between "liberty, equality, fraternity" and the guillotine.

What if you don't want offspring?

[Adam Strange]

What if you don't want offspring?

@Aramas, two things.

One, your particular line of DNA will terminate. Your direct line has been reproducing for 4.5 billion years, but that's not to say it will continue to do so.

Two, you will probably die with lots of toys. (Kids are expensive, but in my own opinion, worth it.)

[Zero]

So in other words, you're saying that beta homophobia is just a way of jockeying for position by engaging in exclusive behavior. That makes a lot of sense. It didn't make much sense to me as a thing in itself. Some Betas are not homophobic at all and some are gay themselves. But homophobia as a method for reducing competition for positions in a hierarchy does make sense.

Respect isn't really a thing though. Everyone has a different set of behaviors they define as being respectful.

In an Islamic society where premarital sex is forbidden and punished by law, where the woman would be killed and the man faced extreme punishment if there are witnesses and reports of such relations, I have met many young men, one of whom was a SLE, who due to extreme gender segregation, chose to please themselves sexually with their same sex friends. Afterwards I had the chance to observe most homophobic men in such societies, have had experiences or are in relation with the same sex. This particular SLE however was extremely homophobic, and did not find this paradox disturbing by any means. He had his fun when the opportunity existed, and to the eye of the society, he was respected as a boy loyal to his hierarchy

[Aramas]

It's an issue which has been on my mind for a long time. I don't identify as LGBTQI but it has always been interesting for me from a scientific and social point of view.
From my own observations democratic types are less sensitive about sexual preferences and differences, and the most homophobic people I have met were betas. Not unnecessary to point out that I was born and raised in an Islamic dictatorship, yet from a very young age was OK with such matters.
I think aristocratic types have more potential for being homophobic.

***might have mentioned it at some point in the past, so excuse me if I'm being repetitive, just making a comeback after a long time away from the forum.

Democrats and aristocrats have an equal capacity for homophobia. The Democratic quadras can at times have a very despotic mindset that outstrips the aristocrats and their shenanigans. Aristocrats are usually mindful of organizing and ordering competing factions without letting any one have all the control. Democrats on the other hand expect monolithic adherence to a singular entity. Look at France during the Reign of Terror period if you want to see Democratic quadras gone bad.

Oddly enough, you are correct, and I agree, that Betas in my experience are the most openly homophobic and aggressively against people who don't fit their norms. I can't understand why myself. What causes such a strong emotional reaction in these people? It's possible, though, that while Betas are the most obviously homophobic, other quadras have the same degree of homophobia, but aren't as combative with things they disagree with. Betas tend to have fairly strongly held principles and they get mean when they see other people not toeing the line with what they see as right.

I imagine that the Beta quadra just has a very reactive immune system. Anything that doesn't fit the plan or the vision must be exterminated to preserve the goal.

[Zero]

Look at France during the Reign of Terror period if you want to see Democratic quadras gone bad.

Interesting. Any suggestions for books/resources?

[Skepsis]

Men create(d) god(s) and religions surrounding them to control groups of people, especially for things pertaining to survival, like war and reproduction. Sin was one of those imaginary concepts that was attached to homosexuality because basically it doesn't lead to reproduction and heaven forbid, people enjoy orgasms and bodily pleasure with people they are attracted to. You are supposed to save yourself for the mind blowing existential orgasm known as heaven, or for an eternal existence of tranquility; take your pick. It is hard to control people who do what feels right and good to them on a personal level. It jeopardizes the hierarchy and authority.

[Aramas]

Men create(d) god(s) and religions surrounding them to control groups of people, especially for things pertaining to survival, like war and reproduction. Sin was one of those imaginary concepts that was attached to homosexuality because basically it doesn't lead to reproduction and heaven forbid, people enjoy orgasms and bodily pleasure with people they are attracted to. You are supposed to save yourself for the mind blowing existential orgasm known as heaven, or for an eternal existence of tranquility; take your pick. It is hard to control people who do what feels right and good to them on a personal level. It jeopardizes the hierarchy and authority.

Basically, it's hard to centralize when people are doing what they want. Therefore obedience is the only true morality.

[Skepsis]

Basically, it's hard to centralize when people are doing what they want. Therefore obedience is the only true morality.

Only the morality of dogmatic belief systems. There are other forms of morality.

[Zero]

Men create(d) god(s) and religions surrounding them to control groups of people, especially for things pertaining to survival, like war and reproduction. Sin was one of those imaginary concepts that was attached to homosexuality because basically it doesn't lead to reproduction and heaven forbid, people enjoy orgasms and bodily pleasure with people they are attracted to. You are supposed to save yourself for the mind blowing existential orgasm known as heaven, or for an eternal existence of tranquility; take your pick. It is hard to control people who do what feels right and good to them on a personal level. It jeopardizes the hierarchy and authority.

Yes, there would still be homophobia if religion never existed

[roger557]

All you need is love....

[Beautiful sky]

All you need is love....

I second this. Life is too short. Be who you are.

[Singu]

"In my experience, gay people have been X."
"In my experience, Betas have been X."

Honestly, how is it helpful to fight stereotypes with stereotypes? This is so idiotic that I wonder if people still have functioning brains.

The entire point of stereotypes is that it's based on your own limited observations, or lack thereof. It cannot, for instance, imagine that gay people could also be X, Y, Z... Because that's sort of an abstract imagination or abstract logical rules that's not based on any observations.

[Skepsis]

It is the power of the largest monotheistic religions which has led to their ownership of all of the gods and making their god the only acceptable one. It even affects how we think about gods. Very few talk about the kind of god they believe in, it is biased by monotheism, the "one true god" and other means of thought control.

[Bento]

It's an issue which has been on my mind for a long time. I don't identify as LGBTQI but it has always been interesting for me from a scientific and social point of view.
From my own observations democratic types are less sensitive about sexual preferences and differences, and the most homophobic people I have met were betas. Not unnecessary to point out that I was born and raised in an Islamic dictatorship, yet from a very young age was OK with such matters.
I think aristocratic types have more potential for being homophobic.

***might have mentioned it at some point in the past, so excuse me if I'm being repetitive, just making a comeback after a long time away from the forum.

It depends on the upbringing, not on the sociotype or reinin dichotomy. Socionics is nice and all but useless when people try to apply it to complex matters like homophobia.
IME most alphas I've met are vegans but that does not mean that alphas are more likely to be vegan. It's a coincidence. Or if I try really hard: a correlation. But not a causation like alpha=>vegan

[golden]

It depends on the upbringing, not on the sociotype or reinin dichotomy. Socionics is nice and all but useless when people try to apply it to complex matters like homophobia.
IME most alphas I've met are vegans but that does not mean that alphas are more likely to be vegan. It's a coincidence. Or if I try really hard: a correlation. But not a causation like alpha=>vegan

Mostly this.

Anecdotally, I grew up in a racist, sexist, homophobic place raised by racist, sexist, homophobic parents. They were gamma. I started to realize something was wrong by the time I was 3. I didn’t fit into the town or my family because of my questioning and rejecting the values around me.

As for why I didn’t adopt all the values I was raised with, I think it was

* influence of mass culture, which had largely moved away from these backward ideas
* avid reading, which means both dealing with facts and developing insight
* taking things, such as religion, at face value in a search for logic (“love thy neighbor” means every neighbor)
* going to school with people of color; being a theater nerd with all the fabulous gay friends

My experience with betas is that they will fight about what they think is right or at least will be vocal about it. So if they are homophobic or racist they might not pull punches or be secretive. Therefore you’ll just notice beta homophobes and racists more than the same from other quadras.

[Zero]

It depends on the upbringing, not on the sociotype or reinin dichotomy. Socionics is nice and all but useless when people try to apply it to complex matters like homophobia.
IME most alphas I've met are vegans but that does not mean that alphas are more likely to be vegan. It's a coincidence. Or if I try really hard: a correlation. But not a causation like alpha=>vegan

No it doesn't depend on upbringing, my family members were homophobic and I was raised in a society which punishes homosexuality by execution

[Finaplex]

@ op, yup.

[Tallmo]

I think most men are homophobic, whether they admit it or not. I am also slightly homophobic, although I do have gay friends.

It is natural to be homophobic if you are a man because masculinity is a lot about repressing your feminine side and projecting it onto women, so you don't really want to be too involved with feminine men, because they are not "real men", by this standard.

[Finaplex]

I think most men are homophobic, whether they admit it or not. I am also slightly homophobic, although I do have gay friends.

It is natural to be homophobic if you are a man because masculinity is a lot about repressing your feminine side and projecting it onto women, so you don't really want to be too involved with feminine men, because they are not "real men", by this standard.

its not really a phobia, its stupid to be called a phobia. its more of a "ick" factor. Its icky to them and makes them uncomfortable. And almost a decade of being out I don't blame them. I actually don;t tell people because it turns into more of a hassle then its worth. I also cringe when I see people coming out on TV and what-not, because basically what you are doing is saying Hi I'm Jon and I like dick. Its not really anyone's business. The trouble is that when people are moving past the small talk phase in their time together you do need to start talking about your personal life and that is, at least for me, where the trouble starts.

The thing that gets me is when there is a very masculine man who is also gay, because then there is this potential threat that exists.

[Beautiful sky]

I recall driving somewhere far with an LSE friend a few years back and him mimicking the stereotypical gay and flamboyant gestures and me laughing at his antics and him saying “I have nothing against gay men, MY BUDDY is gay.” That is Delta ST for you. The NFS are “give me people to love on.” But if I were to hear them express negative and degrading comments I would react with moral inappropriateness. I would tell him “it’s rude, unkind, what if YOUR own child was gay would you behave in such a harmful manner?” I would come down hard like Judge Judy

[Finaplex]

I recall driving somewhere far with an LSE friend a few years back and him mimicking the stereotypical gay and flamboyant gestures and me laughing at his antics and him saying “I have nothing against gay men, MY BUDDY is gay.” That is Delta ST for you. The NFS are “give me people to love on.” But if I were to hear them express negative and degrading comments I would react with moral inappropriateness. I would tell him “it’s rude, unkind, what if YOUR own child was gay would you behave in such a harmful manner?” I would come down hard like Judge Judy

Yeah this is why delta STs are annoying because they are always needing/wanting consciously or subconsciously these ethical corrections and I have no care to spend life doing this for them. I think this is how they relieve stress and deal with power and hierarchies. Its a way of mocking, yet at its heart not believing their own mocking. Joking, not joking. Sorry, not sorry.