| 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. | ||
|
Kickboxer
Slovenia1308 Posts
Again, if "white privilege" is real and needs to be addressed, so are all other countless forms of privilege. It's a slippery slope. Many of these play a much more important role in our lives compared to skin color. Specifically intelligence and conscientiousness, the biggest two predictors of success in life. So, again, what is your plan on addressing smart privilege? | ||
|
PM_ME_NICE_PUPPERS
Pakistan51 Posts
On September 06 2017 22:30 Doodsmack wrote: It is pretty incredible that Republicans would trade, by an affirmative choice, the bias of the MSM for this caliber of lies from Trump. I mean what if he even lied to them such that they got conned through the nose? I doubt they very much mind being conned / misinformation. As long as he helps them give their donors exactly the tax reform they want, they'll be hunky dory. | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12533 Posts
On September 06 2017 22:34 Kickboxer wrote: It's like I'm not even talking to you people. You keep showering me with smug identity politics wrapped in overly-bigly words while I try to explain my optics as the simple belief in "individual human beings", each with their own privileges and shortcomings. Hey, I'm the king of Europe suddenly. I just decided that Slovenians are subhumans and deserve to be treated unfairly. Of course you might think that's unfair to Slovenians, but consider this, Slovenians aren't just from Slovenia, they're also people who have their own advantages and shortcomings, so... clearly there's nothing wrong with what I did... somehow? | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On September 06 2017 22:34 Kickboxer wrote: It's like I'm not even talking to you people. You keep showering me with smug identity politics wrapped in overly-bigly words while I try to explain my optics as the simple belief in "individual human beings", each with their own privileges and shortcomings. Again, if "white privilege" is real and needs to be addressed, so are all other countless forms of privilege. It's a slippery slope. Many of these play a much more important role in our lives compared to skin color. Specifically intelligence and conscientiousness, the biggest two predictors of success in life. So, again, what is your plan on addressing smart privilege? Did you just complain that we used words that were to large for you to understand? That is sort of a you problem. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18866 Posts
That said, individualization of the concept of privilege doesn't conflict at all with the notion that certain outward characteristics implicate historic discrimination and repression such that they deserve priority. On September 06 2017 22:34 Kickboxer wrote: It's like I'm not even talking to you people. You keep showering me with smug identity politics wrapped in overly-bigly words while I try to explain my optics as the simple belief in "individual human beings", each with their own privileges and shortcomings. Again, if "white privilege" is real and needs to be addressed, so are all other countless forms of privilege. It's a slippery slope. Many of these play a much more important role in our lives compared to skin color. Specifically intelligence and conscientiousness, the biggest two predictors of success in life. So, again, what is your plan on addressing smart privilege? This is boring and still full of the problems Mohdoo pointed out. Repeatedly equivocating with hand-wavy "we're all different!" statements straight out of kindergarten reading time doesn't change the fact that we appropriately treat different attributes....differently..... | ||
|
FueledUpAndReadyToGo
Netherlands30548 Posts
On September 06 2017 22:23 zlefin wrote: because many people do not value truth. also many are too dumb to recognize it. there's simply no consequences for lying. it'd be nice to add some, but I can't think of any good way to add them. The consequence should be that your congress removes him from office or at least call him out and reprimand him. He's either completely misinformed or malignantly misstating facts. Both are unacceptable and he's making policy based on it. | ||
|
PM_ME_NICE_PUPPERS
Pakistan51 Posts
Wow, check your native speaker privilege. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
Uldridge
Belgium5202 Posts
On September 06 2017 22:34 Kickboxer wrote: So, again, what is your plan on addressing smart privilege? I see what you're doing here, but I'm not sure you understand the own merits of your arguments. Everyone has their niche in society, or potentially so. Smart people end up (mostly) in STEM or something that needs higher cognitive function than someone else can manage. This isn't an issue per se. Privilege isn't an issue, per se, in my opinion, as long as it doesn't hamper someone's niche role. You can't say dumb people are being discriminated against becoming a physicist if they can't even comprehend the concepts behind natural phenomena. You can't say ugly people are being discriminated against because they're universally less pleasing to look at. You can't say short people are discriminated against when they can't ride a roller coaster because it could have deadly consequences. Beneficial characteristics (or privilege) can have certain merits without clashing (too hard) with the people that don't have them because there's barely any overlap the niches of the people. It's like saying poor people are discriminated because they can't buy yachts when they want to have one. A poor person simply understands he's poor (hopefully, I know some don't though) and he works, lives to maintain/better his situation. An ugly person shouldn't be delusional by thinking he could become a model simply because he feels like he was born to be a model and subsequently become disenfranchised of becoming a model and become bitter and spiteful and whatever. An ugly person should understand that he's ugly and he has other merits than his beauty. It becomes a whole lot different when privilege becomes (arbitrarily) discriminatory because of socioeconomic practices. A black person isn't less intelligent or isn't less competent per se than a white person, but white people get jobs easier. Same with males and females. It's stupid, but it happens. And this needs to become less of an issue. White privilege would be fine if it didn't arbitrarily give advantages where it makes disadvantages. Equal opportunity for people competing on same merits is the issue here, not comparing beautiful people with ugly people or poor people and rich people. The entire discussion becomes WAY more complex when you include even other factors, like capital, or opportunity, but that's not what we're talking about at the moment I guess. On September 06 2017 22:43 Plansix wrote: Did you just complain that we used words that were to large for you to understand? That is sort of a you problem. Come on, Plansix, don't be ableist now.. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15743 Posts
On September 06 2017 22:49 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: https://twitter.com/PRRIpoll/status/905426681397202945 Stats like this don't do the actual effect justice. The amount of people who identify as a religious group because it is a big part of their family or community, but would not vote or advocate for policies related to these beliefs, is enormous. This is most pronounced when it comes to gay marriage. Modern internet-based society has made it nearly impossible for evangelical beliefs to survive the market of ideas. There's just too much cultural and social exchange for appeals to tradition to survive. Very few arguments are less convincing than appeals to tradition. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18866 Posts
On September 06 2017 22:49 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: https://twitter.com/PRRIpoll/status/905426681397202945 Two of my best friends from high school are evangelical pastors and I'm doing my best to agitate them into action. It seems to be working. | ||
|
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
It's obviously bad to use such a field of inquiry to distract from the other reasons that one person might have an easier life than another (such as ethnicity) that don't even have the excuse of being based on contribution to society or what have you. | ||
|
Uldridge
Belgium5202 Posts
The only thing you can do to make it more fair is to streamline everything to the lowest common denominator, which is already being done to some extent. This is partly why bureaucracy exists imo (and services like helping with taxes and insurance and whatever). | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On September 06 2017 22:45 PM_ME_NICE_PUPPERS wrote: Wow, check your native speaker privilege. I could have just told him to read a book or educate himself. Expressing pride in one’s ignorance is beyond fucking basic. On September 06 2017 22:50 Uldridge wrote: Come on, Plansix, don't be ableist now.. Unsure if sarcasm. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15743 Posts
On September 06 2017 22:53 Aquanim wrote: I'm not sure this argument deserves to be treated with as much contempt as it has been. The fact that I have significantly above average intelligence means that in many ways my life is easier and has more material perks than the life of somebody who does not have above average intelligence. Whether that is fair or not, and what role (if any) the greater society should play in ensuring that everybody has a fulfilling life, are legitimate fields of inquiry. It's obviously bad to use such a field of inquiry to distract from the other reasons that one person might have an easier life than another (such as ethnicity) that don't even have the excuse of being based on contribution to society or what have you. Highly intelligent people serve distinct purposes and move society forward in ways that others can not. There is no such exclusivity for men or white people. It is similar to how leaders are necessary to herd the followers. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18866 Posts
On September 06 2017 22:53 Aquanim wrote: I'm not sure this argument deserves to be treated with as much contempt as it has been. The fact that I have significantly above average intelligence means that in many ways my life is easier and has more material perks than the life of somebody who does not have above average intelligence. Whether that is fair or not, and what role (if any) the greater society should play in ensuring that everybody has a fulfilling life, are legitimate fields of inquiry. It's obviously bad to use such a field of inquiry to distract from the other reasons that one person might have an easier life than another (such as ethnicity) that don't even have the excuse of being based on contribution to society or what have you. The contempt, as knee-jerk as it may be, stems from routine associations with discussions involving race relations. When folks consistently try and whatabout their way out of acknowledging that the US has a uniquely awful past of race-based discrimination and subjugation, "legitimate" asides start to look illegitimate as a matter of course. What you're speaking about relative to intelligence is absolutely a thing and I'd argue that our terrible attitudes towards academic failure and trade schools lie at its heart, but at the end of the day, this needn't be a zero-sum game. | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12533 Posts
On September 06 2017 22:53 Aquanim wrote: I'm not sure this argument deserves to be treated with as much contempt as it has been. The fact that I have significantly above average intelligence means that in many ways my life is easier and has more material perks than the life of somebody who does not have above average intelligence. Whether that is fair or not, and what role (if any) the greater society should play in ensuring that everybody has a fulfilling life, are legitimate fields of inquiry. It's obviously bad to use such a field of inquiry to distract from the other reasons that one person might have an easier life than another (such as ethnicity) that don't even have the excuse of being based on contribution to society or what have you. The response is used because smart privilege shouldn't quite be fixed. You're not going to engage less intelligent people into physics labs just to be "fair" to them, that wouldn't make sense. So by equating the two, dishonest people get to pretend that we're engaged in an illogical process. Of course it's not a serious argument. And of course the same type of people will then turn around and demand that you hire more "conservative" professors than what happens organically out of a desire to be fair & balanced, but hey at some point we're past surprise aren't we. | ||
|
Doodsmack
United States7224 Posts
Dozens of lobbyists, contractors and others who make their living influencing the government pay President Trump’s companies for membership in his private golf clubs, a status that can put them in close contact with the president, a USA TODAY investigation found. Members of the clubs Trump has visited most often as president — in Florida, New Jersey and Virginia — include at least 50 executives whose companies hold federal contracts and 21 lobbyists and trade group officials. Two-thirds played on one of the 58 days the president was there, according to scores they posted online. Because membership lists at Trump’s clubs are secret, the public has until now been unable to assess the conflicts they could create. USA TODAY found the names of 4,500 members by reviewing social media and a public website golfers use to track their handicaps, then researched and contacted hundreds to determine whether they had business with the government. The review shows that, for the first time in U.S. history, wealthy people with interests before the government have a chance for close and confidential access to the president as a result of payments that enrich him personally. It is a view of the president available to few other Americans. ... Trump marked his 100th day in office by visiting a factory owned by a company run by a member of his New Jersey golf club. Standing behind Trump as he signed two executive orders was Robert Mehmel, president of the company that owns the Harrisburg, Pa., factory and another company that sells radars and electronics to the military, including about $54 million worth of contracts last year. Like millions of golfers, Mehmel registered his handicap on a public U.S. Golf Association website that golfers use to track their handicaps and check the scores of other players. The site requires golfers to sign up through a club and lists when and where they played. Only members are allowed to associate their handicaps with Trump’s clubs, said Kyle Littlefield, a pro at Trump National Golf Club-Bedminster. Mehmel registered his handicap there. He posted scores from seven rounds of golf at the club this year. Five were in days in May, June and August when Trump was visiting. Mehmel did not respond to phone calls or emails. ... One lobbyist for U.S. and Canadian airports mentioned his membership to Trump at a White House meeting in February. “I’m a member of your club, by the way,” Kevin Burke said, in an exchange captured by C-SPAN. “Very good, very good” Trump replied. www.usatoday.com | ||
|
Doodsmack
United States7224 Posts
On September 06 2017 22:34 PM_ME_NICE_PUPPERS wrote: I doubt they very much mind being conned / misinformation. As long as he helps them give their donors exactly the tax reform they want, they'll be hunky dory. It's voters who made the choice, not the politicians...the politicians know he doesn't belong there. | ||
|
Nevuk
United States16280 Posts
On September 06 2017 22:11 Kickboxer wrote: You're factually wrong on IQ. Latest research shows it is largely inherited. Unless you're information-deprived or malnourished (these will lower your IQ), the genetic component is overwhelming. There is no program that will make people smarter. As far as looks vs. race, are you serious? Being good looking is an INCREDIBLY powerful asset in all walks of life. It's so much more important than skin color I can't even believe anyone could disagree. Also, ask any short guy about his discrimination experiences. Some of them can't even order drinks in a crowded bar. Can I get a link to this latest research on IQ proving this fact? | ||
| ||
|
|
OSC
Escore
IntoTheTV X SOOP
CranKy Ducklings
Sparkling Tuna Cup
Shopify Rebellion Sundays
Spirit vs Mixu
Clem vs TBD
RSL Revival
Serral vs Rogue
BlizzCon
IdrA vs MC
Replay Cast
Afreeca Starleague
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
