|
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. |
United States43764 Posts
On September 24 2016 10:29 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2016 10:22 KwarK wrote:
xDaunt, you refer to black people as vermin. I'm really not sure why you keep coming back to this "prove I had racism in my heart when I said that" shit. We have been over that one already. That's not what I said, and you know it. Though I have no doubt that you wished I said it in your sick little world. Go troll someone else. I'm through with you.
On September 23 2016 05:04 xDaunt wrote:
One of these mayors where BLM is wreaking havoc needs to grow a pair and clear the vermin out.
|
On September 24 2016 10:31 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2016 10:29 xDaunt wrote:On September 24 2016 10:22 KwarK wrote:
xDaunt, you refer to black people as vermin. I'm really not sure why you keep coming back to this "prove I had racism in my heart when I said that" shit. We have been over that one already. That's not what I said, and you know it. Though I have no doubt that you wished I said it in your sick little world. Go troll someone else. I'm through with you. Show nested quote +On September 23 2016 05:04 xDaunt wrote:
One of these mayors where BLM is wreaking havoc needs to grow a pair and clear the vermin out.
And like I said before, that doesn't get you there. Also, I'm shocked, absolutely shocked that you left this one out:
On September 23 2016 05:09 xDaunt wrote:Nah, I prefer vermin for rioters and looters.
|
Yes and in both cases you were refering to BLM as the vermin, the looters and the rioters. That gets you there. If you didn't mean the organization itself but just the people commiting crimes you would have said that. But instead you said that they should get rid of black lives matter, a group which by its name is prodomitinly black people.
|
On September 24 2016 10:36 Sermokala wrote:
Yes and in both cases you were refering to BLM as the vermin, the looters and the rioters. That gets you there. If you didn't mean the organization itself but just the people commiting crimes you would have said that. But instead you said that they should get rid of black lives matter, a group which by its name is prodomitinly black people.
Oh, okay, so any type of criticism and negative labeling of BLM is racist. Got it. We're right back to bizarro, absurd, over-expansive-definition-of-racist-land.
Sorry, but I'm not insane enough to tolerate destructive organizations such as BLM just because they're committing their violence, murder, assault, and larceny in the name of civil rights.
|
On September 24 2016 10:36 Sermokala wrote:
Yes and in both cases you were refering to BLM as the vermin, the looters and the rioters. That gets you there. If you didn't mean the organization itself but just the people commiting crimes you would have said that. But instead you said that they should get rid of black lives matter, a group which by its name is prodomitinly black people.
BLM may contain the word 'black' but it doesn't mean 'black people' any more than calling the BPP vermin would.
Obnoxious of Kwark to bring this up again when his other opponent GGT is taking a break for this disaster.
|
United States43764 Posts
On September 24 2016 10:41 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2016 10:36 Sermokala wrote:
Yes and in both cases you were refering to BLM as the vermin, the looters and the rioters. That gets you there. If you didn't mean the organization itself but just the people commiting crimes you would have said that. But instead you said that they should get rid of black lives matter, a group which by its name is prodomitinly black people. Oh, okay, so any type of criticism and negative labeling of BLM is racist. Got it. We're right back to bizarro, absurd, over-expansive-definition-of-racist-land. Sorry, but I'm not insane enough to tolerate destructive organizations such as BLM just because they're committing their violence, murder, assault, and larceny in the name of civil rights.
Nope, you actually clarified here
On September 23 2016 05:09 xDaunt wrote:Nah, I prefer vermin for rioters and looters.
that you weren't talking about the organization. You were talking about the people. It really does get very tiring having to explain your own words to you over and over. I really wish you'd learn how to read the things you write.
|
United States43764 Posts
On September 24 2016 10:44 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2016 10:36 Sermokala wrote:
Yes and in both cases you were refering to BLM as the vermin, the looters and the rioters. That gets you there. If you didn't mean the organization itself but just the people commiting crimes you would have said that. But instead you said that they should get rid of black lives matter, a group which by its name is prodomitinly black people. BLM may contain the word 'black' but it doesn't mean 'black people' any more than calling the BPP vermin would. Obnoxious of Kwark to bring this up again when his other opponent GGT is taking a break for this disaster.
xDaunt was the one challenging the world to present a single shred of evidence that he's a racist.
|
On September 24 2016 10:45 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2016 10:44 oBlade wrote:On September 24 2016 10:36 Sermokala wrote:
Yes and in both cases you were refering to BLM as the vermin, the looters and the rioters. That gets you there. If you didn't mean the organization itself but just the people commiting crimes you would have said that. But instead you said that they should get rid of black lives matter, a group which by its name is prodomitinly black people. BLM may contain the word 'black' but it doesn't mean 'black people' any more than calling the BPP vermin would. Obnoxious of Kwark to bring this up again when his other opponent GGT is taking a break for this disaster. xDaunt was the one challenging the world to present a single shred of evidence that he's a racist.
So find another shred if it's so damn clear to you that he's your moral inferior.
|
The argument is clear from the left, regardless of what the context/intent is, you are racist for using vermin/animals/monkeys to describe black people. Even if you explain your intent and context you are still racist, so this is a pointless discussion.
|
On September 24 2016 10:44 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2016 10:36 Sermokala wrote:
Yes and in both cases you were refering to BLM as the vermin, the looters and the rioters. That gets you there. If you didn't mean the organization itself but just the people commiting crimes you would have said that. But instead you said that they should get rid of black lives matter, a group which by its name is prodomitinly black people. BLM may contain the word 'black' but it doesn't mean 'black people' any more than calling the BPP vermin would. Obnoxious of Kwark to bring this up again when his other opponent GGT is taking a break for this disaster.
Kwark doesn't seem to understand that we can tarnish people for reasons other than their race. He wants so badly to prove that I am racist, and his futile efforts are just glorious to behold. But yes, for the good of the thread, it should stop.
|
On September 24 2016 07:29 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2016 07:18 biology]major wrote:On September 24 2016 06:55 ticklishmusic wrote:
Privilege isn't like getting Platinum status for Delta with access to the Skyclub and free drinks. It's more like your plane gets there on time and there's no fat smelly guy taking up half your seat and no crying baby next to you. where does it end though, we are all privileged in one way or another. I have functioning limbs, some people do not. I have eyes that see, some people do not. It's called validisme in my language—don't know how to translate it, but basically the fact that society is built for people without handicaps and that disabled persons are discriminated.
Yeah. Ableism in English. Doesn't get as much play as a lot of things, but very much a thing.
|
On September 24 2016 10:48 biology]major wrote:
The argument is clear from the left, regardless of what the context/intent is, you are racist for using vermin/animals/monkeys to describe black people. Even if you explain your intent and context you are still racist, so this is a pointless discussion.
The argument *should* be prefaced by "it's okay to be a little racist, as long as you recognize it and think a little bit about what you say about certain groups", but people leave that bit out and it leads to unproductive arguments.
|
On September 24 2016 10:54 Yoav wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2016 07:29 TheDwf wrote:On September 24 2016 07:18 biology]major wrote:On September 24 2016 06:55 ticklishmusic wrote:
Privilege isn't like getting Platinum status for Delta with access to the Skyclub and free drinks. It's more like your plane gets there on time and there's no fat smelly guy taking up half your seat and no crying baby next to you. where does it end though, we are all privileged in one way or another. I have functioning limbs, some people do not. I have eyes that see, some people do not. It's called validisme in my language—don't know how to translate it, but basically the fact that society is built for people without handicaps and that disabled persons are discriminated. Yeah. Ableism in English. Doesn't get as much play as a lot of things, but very much a thing.
How far do you go to create the world as fair as possible for everyone, though?
There will always be something someone can complain about.. You can't keep filling up public spaces with shit 1/500 people will use, can you?
You should defnitely accomodate for sensory, motoric and mentally impaired people, but where does it, like someone before me, actually end? Does the random person that's afraid of escalators need a stair at every potential place he'll go to? Does the autist that can't handle 90° angles need structures that have them just slightly off?
Isn't this a world where we can say to eachother: "you know what; I can deal with that", instead of: "I demand you do this for me because I want this"?
|
United States43764 Posts
On September 24 2016 10:48 biology]major wrote:
The argument is clear from the left, regardless of what the context/intent is, you are racist for using vermin/animals/monkeys to describe black people. Even if you explain your intent and context you are still racist, so this is a pointless discussion.
It's not quite that simple.
What gets me is that a person with even the slightest bit of self awareness would by this point have asked themselves if it was at all possible that they could have, even subconsciously, drawn upon the dehumanizing rhetoric of the neo-Nazis (currently operating under the name "alt-right") in a way that perhaps they did not intend to. As has been explained at tiresome length before, calling people of other races vermin has a long and very unpleasant history, culminating in the rounding up of the "vermin" and their extermination using rat poison.
I would be fine if xDaunt conceded that it was an unfortunate word choice that did not accurately convey his feelings about those people who, while he utterly condemns their actions, are still human and still deserve the basic amount of respect and decency we afford to all humans. This is the usual course of action taken when someone misspeaks like this and we all move on and it's fine because nobody expects anyone to never have a racist thought, we only expect people to try not to be racist.
However xDaunt decided to insist that he alone is immune to historical context, that the words he chooses are in no way influenced by the ways he's heard them used before and that at no point in his life did he ever, even subconsciously, pick up any of the latent racism in his surroundings. xDaunt, as a child seeing a racist adult treat a black person differently to a white person in subtle ways, was somehow able to exclude that example from his pool of social interactions as he learned how people treat people before he even knew what racism was. And on account of that superpower, which we must all take him at his word that he possesses, we must all conclude that when he says black people are vermin he didn't mean it in the racist rhetoric way where they are subhumans but rather in some other way.
It's not about whether you sometimes say or do things towards one race that you wouldn't to another. You should try not to do that but nobody demands a standard of perfect racial objectivity, we're not robots and nobody is colourblind. It's about expressing regret when you slip up, engaging in reflection and trying to better yourself. xDaunt has made his stance on that pretty clear, it wasn't unfortunate, he didn't misspeak, he said exactly what he meant and he stands by it.
|
United States43764 Posts
On September 24 2016 11:04 Uldridge wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2016 10:54 Yoav wrote:On September 24 2016 07:29 TheDwf wrote:On September 24 2016 07:18 biology]major wrote:On September 24 2016 06:55 ticklishmusic wrote:
Privilege isn't like getting Platinum status for Delta with access to the Skyclub and free drinks. It's more like your plane gets there on time and there's no fat smelly guy taking up half your seat and no crying baby next to you. where does it end though, we are all privileged in one way or another. I have functioning limbs, some people do not. I have eyes that see, some people do not. It's called validisme in my language—don't know how to translate it, but basically the fact that society is built for people without handicaps and that disabled persons are discriminated. Yeah. Ableism in English. Doesn't get as much play as a lot of things, but very much a thing. How far do you go to create the world as fair as possible for everyone, though? There will always be something someone can complain about.. You can't keep filling up public spaces with shit 1/500 people will use, can you? You should defnitely accomodate for sensory, motoric and mentally impaired people, but where does it, like someone before me, actually end? Does the random person that's afraid of escalators need a stair at every potential place he'll go to? Does the autist that can't handle 90° angles need structures that have them just slightly off? Isn't this a world where we can say to eachother: "you know what; I can deal with that", instead of: "I demand you do this for me because I want this"?
Don't we normally just apply a reasonable standard? Instead of "provisions must be made for disabled people" we use "reasonable provisions must be made for disabled people".
|
I think people are free to say whatever they want and other people are free to be offended.
That's how we can get a discussion going.
Can the person defend his/her point using logic and reasoning?
Is the message REALLY offensive or is there some offensive industry that makes money in this whole thing?
Will the person saying offensive stuff be convinced if wrong?
Will the person getting offended be accepting that if right?
You can't boil all of your feelings inside. Gotta discuss it.
|
Calling black people monkeys is racist, calling Jews rats is racist as well. As Kwark pointed out, if you're working yourself through the Nazi cookbook you're probably on racist territory.
This also isn't dependent on what your motivations are. Everybody knows that those things are widely being perceived as racist statements so the will-full ignorance of this convention already says enough.
Denying this is like saying that Pussy Riot doesn't harbor any anti-religious feeling and that they just ended up in a church accidentally, nobody with a brain is actually going to believe it.
|
On September 24 2016 11:04 Uldridge wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2016 10:54 Yoav wrote:On September 24 2016 07:29 TheDwf wrote:On September 24 2016 07:18 biology]major wrote:On September 24 2016 06:55 ticklishmusic wrote:
Privilege isn't like getting Platinum status for Delta with access to the Skyclub and free drinks. It's more like your plane gets there on time and there's no fat smelly guy taking up half your seat and no crying baby next to you. where does it end though, we are all privileged in one way or another. I have functioning limbs, some people do not. I have eyes that see, some people do not. It's called validisme in my language—don't know how to translate it, but basically the fact that society is built for people without handicaps and that disabled persons are discriminated. Yeah. Ableism in English. Doesn't get as much play as a lot of things, but very much a thing. How far do you go to create the world as fair as possible for everyone, though? There will always be something someone can complain about.. You can't keep filling up public spaces with shit 1/500 people will use, can you? You should defnitely accomodate for sensory, motoric and mentally impaired people, but where does it, like someone before me, actually end? Does the random person that's afraid of escalators need a stair at every potential place he'll go to? Does the autist that can't handle 90° angles need structures that have them just slightly off? Isn't this a world where we can say to eachother: "you know what; I can deal with that", instead of: "I demand you do this for me because I want this"?
Yeah pretty much. You can't build a world around random phobias. But It would be significantly dickish if you made a subway car where all the seats were covered in pictures of thousands of spiders.
Handicapped access is still something a lot of places are working on. Things like learning disabilities have well-known coping mechanisms that can be implemented. Taking the time to learn how to speak correctly to deaf people takes like literally 30 seconds and makes other people's lives a lot easier. More than anything, combating ablism is about recognizing the ways in which our assumptions and use of language like "everyone can" is inaccurate and potentially offensive. (And there's plenty of straight up dickish stuff in the culture about intellectual, learning, and emotional disorders.)
|
On September 24 2016 11:08 KwarK wrote:
Don't we normally just apply a reasonable standard? Instead of "provisions must be made for disabled people" we use "reasonable provisions must be made for disabled people".
Yeah, I was just going a bit slippery slope there, but it's something I'm pretty afraid of actually. I don't want to see a world devolved into complete pampering to everyone's necessities. If everywhere becomes a nursing home, I won't feel challenged any longer. Yes, it's an extreme, but I can imagine some people might want the safe world instead of a safe space.
On September 24 2016 11:44 Yoav wrote:
Yeah pretty much. You can't build a world around random phobias. But It would be significantly dickish if you made a subway car where all the seats were covered in pictures of thousands of spiders.
Handicapped access is still something a lot of places are working on. Things like learning disabilities have well-known coping mechanisms that can be implemented. Taking the time to learn how to speak correctly to deaf people takes like literally 30 seconds and makes other people's lives a lot easier. More than anything, combating ablism is about recognizing the ways in which our assumptions and use of language like "everyone can" is inaccurate and potentially offensive. (And there's plenty of straight up dickish stuff in the culture about intellectual, learning, and emotional disorders.)
Let's make a subway car where every seat has a different phobia attached to it so people can choose where to sit based on what seat doesn't scare them off!
Sure, I'm all for making people lives better, but I don't want it to be complete pampering or whatever.
Consider this: before becoming an adult, certain people with disadvantages, whatever they may be, will have gone through a harsh part of life: it's when they grow up. Kids arecan be nasty assholes, and I like to believe most people that grow up, with caring parents, a competent teaching staff, the surrounding gauntlet of inexperienced children making weird comments, you kind of learn to shield yourself already and cope with your situation. Unless you've been completely shielded off yourself and haven't been able to make your own shield. It's like children growing up in a almost germ free environment because the parent are afraid of it getting sick: it'll develop a shitton of allergies. Let the immune system develop on its own.
I think it's an insult to people that they can't take care of themselves to a certain extent and that, if they do need help, they also have the experience to know when and how to ask for it.
|
On September 24 2016 11:59 Uldridge wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2016 11:08 KwarK wrote:
Don't we normally just apply a reasonable standard? Instead of "provisions must be made for disabled people" we use "reasonable provisions must be made for disabled people". Yeah, I was just going a bit slippery slope there, but it's something I'm pretty afraid of actually. I don't want to see a world devolved into complete pampering to everyone's necessities. If everywhere becomes a nursing home, I won't feel challenged any longer. Yes, it's an extreme, but I can imagine some people might want the safe world instead of a safe space. Show nested quote +On September 24 2016 11:44 Yoav wrote:
Yeah pretty much. You can't build a world around random phobias. But It would be significantly dickish if you made a subway car where all the seats were covered in pictures of thousands of spiders.
Handicapped access is still something a lot of places are working on. Things like learning disabilities have well-known coping mechanisms that can be implemented. Taking the time to learn how to speak correctly to deaf people takes like literally 30 seconds and makes other people's lives a lot easier. More than anything, combating ablism is about recognizing the ways in which our assumptions and use of language like "everyone can" is inaccurate and potentially offensive. (And there's plenty of straight up dickish stuff in the culture about intellectual, learning, and emotional disorders.) Let's make a subway car where every seat has a different phobia attached to it so people can choose where to sit based on what seat doesn't scare them off! Sure, I'm all for making people lives better, but I don't want it to be complete pampering or whatever. Consider this: before becoming an adult, certain people with disadvantages, whatever they may be, will have gone through a harsh part of life: it's when they grow up. Kids arecan be nasty assholes, and I like to believe most people that grow up, with caring parents, a competent teaching staff, the surrounding gauntlet of inexperienced children making weird comments, you kind of learn to shield yourself already and cope with your situation. Unless you've been completely shielded off yourself and haven't been able to make your own shield. It's like children growing up in a almost germ free environment because the parent are afraid of it getting sick: it'll develop a shitton of allergies. Let the immune system develop on its own. I think it's an insult to people that they can't take care of themselves to a certain extent and that, if they do need help, they also have the experience to know when and how to ask for it.
Or we could make subway seats with abstract patterns, words from famous books, matrix-style faux code, pictures of Nicholas Cage, or literally anything that's not spiders. I'm not saying we need to radically overhaul society. I'm saying being a not-dick entails figuring out that there are things you can do that make people uncomfortable. If you wear a T-shirt with a picture of a distended asshole on it, you will make people uncomfortable. If you have some point you're trying to make with it or its required by your fucked up religious beliefs, more power to you. But other people will call you an asshole and its good to be able to defend yourself as a decent person.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
