EPTOn November 14 2015 04:42 WhiteDog wrote:
(try talking about women with a feminist, you can't say anything)
(try talking about women with a feminist, you can't say anything)
Not a generalization at all.
US Politics Mega-thread - Page 2526
| Forum Index > Closed |
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please. In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. | ||
|
kwizach
3658 Posts
Not a generalization at all. | ||
|
WhiteDog
France8650 Posts
On November 14 2015 04:52 GreenHorizons wrote: The responsible thing to do is realize that after hundreds of years of oppression and exploitation all of which was called and treated as it is now "Fredrick Douglass is an extremist", "MLK is overreacting, it's not that bad", "This women's suffrage movement is too much", "They already have it easier than us men!", on and on and on you can find the same crowds dismissing calls for the end of exploitation and/or oppression using the same BS rhetoric. Rather than realize they were bigoted assholes in every instance in history they think "surely this is the time where my complaints about their complaints are justified!" Hence going back to fragility. Century after century decade after decade the same groups of people were wrong about people over-blowing oppression and exploitation, why they think suddenly they are right about this time, comes from a long tradition of being oblivious. You really think nothing changed since then ? (it is a candid question) I linked an article about the last nobel prize in economy pointing out that the mortality, suicide rate and drug consumption has been sky rocketing in the poor white population, while it has been decreasing in every other category, poor black included (still higher in the black population). Racism and gender are not sufficient enough to explain the entirety of exploitation and oppression, in the US and in the rest of the world. Someone in a difficult situation feeling oppression or knowing people who suffer oppression despite being a white male will be tempted to consider that whatever the media is saying is false because it is not talking about him. That's just normal behavior - the black feminist movement did the same more or less to the feminist movement back in the sixties where they basically argued that the "white" feminist movement until then was full of white women crying about ridiculous things. I'm not saying it's a good thing nor that it is right, just that it is a normal behavior, a normal reaction. 6000 posts ! Thanks for coming, you prove my point. And yes it is a generalization, maybe I should have said a feminist engaged in a feminist movement, or whatever, but that was just an exemple and the core of the argument. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
And Whitedog, just so you know, this is a well know and a classic tactic to diminish the claims of that any disenfranchised group. To point to another cases of in equality and ask why the group isn’t concerned with that problem. The common joke is “that a woman can only report sexual harassment at her job after she has assure women have the right to vote across the Middle East.” | ||
|
kwizach
3658 Posts
On November 14 2015 05:10 WhiteDog wrote: Thanks for coming, you prove my point. And yes it is a generalization, maybe I should have said a feminist engaged in a feminist movement, or whatever, but that was just an exemple and the core of the argument. I didn't prove your point, I pointed out what you wrote was a generalization, something you just recognized yourself. "A feminist engaged in a feminist movement" is another generalization. If your point is that you cannot say anything about women when talking to engaged feminists, then your point is wrong. Feminists will tend to call out sexist generalizations about women though, which is perfectly justified. This is not to say that as a feminist there aren't feminist thinkers and currents I disagree with on specific issues, because there are, but brushing "feminists" with a single stroke the way you did is certainly not conducive to an enlightened discussion. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23231 Posts
On November 14 2015 05:10 WhiteDog wrote: You really think nothing changed since then ? I linked an article about the last nobel prize in economy pointing out that the mortality, suicide rate and drug consumption has been sky rocketing in the poor white population, while it has been decreasing in every other category, poor black included (still higher in the black population). Racism and gender are not sufficient enough to explain the entirety of exploitation and oppression, in the US and in the rest of the world. Someone in a difficult situation feeling oppression or knowing people who suffer oppression despite being a white male will be tempted to consider that whatever the media is saying is false because it is not talking about him. That's just normal behavior - the black feminist movement did the same to the feminist movement back in the sixties where they basically said that the feminist movement was full of white women crying about ridiculous things. I'm not saying it's a good thing nor that it is right, just that it is a normal behavior, a normal reaction. 6000 posts ! Thanks for coming, you prove my point. And yes it is a generalization, maybe I should have said a feminist engaged in a feminist movement, or whatever, but that was just an exemple and the core of my points. And you can already see the influence of race and economics in the new heroin epidemic. After decades of "personal responsibility" and being "tough on criminals" and so on, now that it's well off white elites and their children getting drug problems, that they can't cover up (often from their parents medicine cabinets) suddenly Republicans are on board with treatment over incarceration. And addiction is a disease, and so on. After destroying millions of families with ridiculous policing and punishments now suddenly after the status quo puts a handful of well off white folks in danger of losing their children to the system they designed for poor folks and minorities, suddenly it's no longer an appropriate system. Pretending it's just coincidence or not a direct result of race and wealth is just absurdly ignorant. | ||
|
TheTenthDoc
United States9561 Posts
Otherwise we start suing UC Berkeley again for sexual discrimination because women applied disproportionately to departments that admit fewer students and as a result fewer women were admitted overall than men, even though most departments actually had a small non-significant bias for men or a significant bias in favor of women (which is often used as a case study of confounding in causal inference). | ||
|
WhiteDog
France8650 Posts
On November 14 2015 05:24 Plansix wrote: So the only way we can address in equality is if we address it for everyone at the same time? Even if the causes for that equality might be different for each separate group? That blacks concerned with racism in the state of Missouri also have to spend part of their time fighting for women’s right and poor white people? And Whitedog, just so you know, this is a well know and a classic tactic to diminish the claims of that any disenfranchised group. To point to another cases of in equality and ask why the group isn’t concerned with that problem. The common joke is “that a woman can only report sexual harassment at her job after she has assure women have the right to vote across the Middle East.” Not at all. I'm not at all talking about the fight against racism. I am just saying that it is understandable for someone to feel like racism or gender inequality is crap even if it is factually wrong. More than that, it bears value. On November 14 2015 05:26 GreenHorizons wrote: And you can already see the influence of race and economics in the new heroin epidemic. After decades of "personal responsibility" and being "tough on criminals" and so on, now that it's well off white elites and their children getting drug problems, that they can't cover up (often from their parents medicine cabinets) suddenly Republicans are on board with treatment over incarceration. And addiction is a disease, and so on. After destroying millions of families with ridiculous policing and punishments now suddenly after the status quo puts a handful of well off white folks in danger of losing their children to the system they designed for poor folks and minorities, suddenly it's no longer an appropriate system. Pretending it's just coincidence or not a direct result of race and wealth is just absurdly ignorant. Totally agree with you. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On November 14 2015 05:29 TheTenthDoc wrote: I agree that in general we should probably lend more credence to accusations of systematic discrimination than our society does, but it's important to actually consider that data that these accusations are based on and explore them fully. Otherwise we start suing UC Berkeley again for sexual discrimination because women applied disproportionately to departments that admit fewer students. The problem with that is that the firms/schools that are guilty of systematic racism often do not release the information. More often than not, they actively avoid collecting it. And this isn’t about placing blame and filing law suits, thought that can happen if a firms/schools refuses to take any action or release any information if there is a perceived issue. Its about acknowledging that a problem exists and making efforts to correct it. A professor from Yale pointed out that they had a 1% increase in black professors in a century. Admitting that no matter what the cause was, the end result isn’t great in 2015. | ||
|
MattBarry
United States4006 Posts
On November 14 2015 05:38 Plansix wrote: The problem with that is that the firms/schools that are guilty of systematic racism often do not release the information. More often than not, they actively avoid collecting it. And this isn’t about placing blame and filing law suits, thought that can happen if a firms/schools refuses to take any action or release any information if there is a perceived issue. Its about acknowledging that a problem exists and making efforts to correct it. A professor from Yale pointed out that they had a 1% increase in black professors in a century. Admitting that no matter what the cause was, the end result isn’t great in 2015. To be fair, getting a minority that was historically oppressed and strongly discouraged from engaging in academia to start doing it will take a long time. If we pressed a button right now that ended racism completely, it would still take time for the problem to correct itself because university professors positions should be meritocratic regardless of the circumstances that led to a majority groups advantage in that department. Now obviously 100 years is a long time but if we're being honest there weren't any serious strides for improving the disposition of blacks until the civil rights movement. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
| ||
KwarK
United States42691 Posts
| ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
| ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
| ||
|
Rebs
Pakistan10726 Posts
On November 14 2015 09:48 xDaunt wrote: The Paris attack will play politically right into the hands of Trump, Cruz, and the other pro-border control republican candidates. Unless the terrorist turn out to be home grown.. actually nevermind it doesnt really matter its a win for pro border control republicans either way regardless of how they spin it. | ||
|
Slaughter
United States20254 Posts
I just found this but I thought in light of recent discussion (racism in the system) I think its relevant. Thought it was a pretty good one. | ||
|
IgnE
United States7681 Posts
On November 14 2015 11:22 oneofthem wrote: bless the atlantic ocean and the nsa There seems to be an implication there that the NSA knew about the impending attacks in Paris and did nothing. Or are you saying that the NSA has such a fearsome reputation that terrorists wouldn't even attempt to plan an attack on the US? | ||
|
WhiteDog
France8650 Posts
On November 15 2015 07:19 IgnE wrote: There seems to be an implication there that the NSA knew about the impending attacks in Paris and did nothing. Or are you saying that the NSA has such a fearsome reputation that terrorists wouldn't even attempt to plan an attack on the US? Even the french secret services "knew". | ||
|
KwarK
United States42691 Posts
On November 15 2015 07:19 IgnE wrote: There seems to be an implication there that the NSA knew about the impending attacks in Paris and did nothing. Or are you saying that the NSA has such a fearsome reputation that terrorists wouldn't even attempt to plan an attack on the US? It's much harder for people from the Middle East to cross the Atlantic than the Mediterranean or the Black Sea. Although I do reject the idea that the NSA would have stopped this, the security services in Europe are no less intrusive. When you make a phone call pretty much everyone can listen to it. When you send an email pretty much everyone can read it. That's the world right now. | ||
|
IgnE
United States7681 Posts
I am using the word "know" here to mean that people with power in the organization consciously recognized the threat and decided upon some course of action in relation to it. The NSA "knows" pretty much everything if we only mean that they have access to information that would have told a person who knew what to look for exactly what was happening. | ||
|
WhiteDog
France8650 Posts
On November 15 2015 07:35 IgnE wrote: I am using the word "know" here to mean that people with power in the organization consciously recognized the threat and decided upon some course of action in relation to it. The NSA "knows" pretty much everything if we only mean that they have access to information that would have told a person who knew what to look for exactly what was happening. Don't quote me on this, but I believe the french secret services basically alerted US officials over the fact that a terrorist group wanted to attack the US by hijacking plane before 9/11. It has been revealed today that french secret service knew since a few month now that terrorist affiliated to isis had the project to attack "a concert hall". The police force even trained such situation. There's a huge area of information needed to really decide upon a course of action. | ||
| ||
