|
Sweden5554 Posts
On June 26 2013 06:15 Gen.Rolly wrote:Show nested quote +On June 26 2013 06:06 marvellosity wrote:On June 26 2013 06:05 Gen.Rolly wrote:On June 26 2013 06:02 marvellosity wrote:On June 26 2013 06:01 Gen.Rolly wrote:
Why are TL admins taking a stance on a such a hot political issue? Have any of them spoken out about why they are taking such a stance? I am personally turned off by the juxtaposition of politics and something totally unrelated to it. Can we just focus on the games please? There are plenty of other forums to voice your approval or disapproval for any given political/moral topic. Yes, TL admins have spoken about it plenty. It's pretty clear you haven't read the thread. If you don't want to talk about it, don't click on the thread. Easy right? ^^ Can you quote them please? I do not have time to read through 70 pages of thread, sorry. I clicked on the thread to voice my opinion, not to engage in a lengthy discussion about the relationship between politics and esports. Not going to trawl the thread for you, but along the lines of "we're anti-discrimination and for equality, so we're happy to do this, and if you're not happy then tough titties". Paraphrasing a little. Alright thanks. I still feel their position is unnecessary and there is no reason to use their position as TL admins to promote a particular political/moral ideology. If they wanted to offend people, they succeeded.
“It's now very common to hear people say, 'I'm rather offended by that.' As if that gives them certain rights. It's actually nothing more... than a whine. 'I find that offensive.' It has no meaning; it has no purpose; it has no reason to be respected as a phrase. 'I am offended by that.' Well, so fucking what.”
― Stephen Fry
|
To be gay seems kinda like the new emo.
|
On June 26 2013 07:41 derpface wrote:
To be gay seems kinda like the new emo.
That is a very poor comparison.
|
bleh removed post, didn't articulate my thoughts well
|
On June 26 2013 06:58 codonbyte wrote:Show nested quote +On June 26 2013 04:30 Klondikebar wrote:On June 26 2013 04:25 Plansix wrote:On June 26 2013 04:21 Klondikebar wrote:On June 26 2013 04:18 Plansix wrote:On June 26 2013 04:17 Klondikebar wrote:On June 26 2013 04:13 Plansix wrote:On June 26 2013 04:09 Klondikebar wrote:On June 26 2013 03:58 Neemi wrote:On June 26 2013 03:24 Klondikebar wrote:
[quote]
Maybe you could help me out by listing the minorities that you think aren't getting enough attention? Particularly minorities that people refuse to give attention to? I wouldn't go as far as saying people "refuse" to give attention to anyone, but I didn't go into specifics because I feel they are really based on my own experiences (not being disadvantages by any, just noticing them happening) and because I didn't want to derail the thread. But if you want me to list a few: - People literally saying that they couldn't understand how one could ever truly love a fat person - All the kids around the world who are being bullied for having a strange hobby, not having a common hobby or having different tastes - Introverted people (usually dismissed as being boring or uninteresting) - Sick people of any kind (physically disabled people are getting a lot of attention in most cases, but mentally disabled people... they rarely do) - Ugly people (usually covertly, and while being subjective, people who are deemed attractive by many people are more highly rated on pretty much everything other attribute compared to people who are deemed less attractive) - Intelligence - Religion Obviously all these different people are still allowed to marry, but all these people can be made fun of or feel excluded for these very reasons. And because most of them aren't superficial, it's hard for many people to know what it's like to be really introverted, so less people know "what it's like". As far as I know most "white cis straight middle class males" are simply guys tired of being told to respect anything and everything all the time. I'm basing this mostly on my surroundings, so I could be terribly wrong.
So...these straight white guys are tired of being told they can't be assholes? Why am I supposed to feel sorry for these particular straight white guys? I think Plansix below you summarized this way better than I did. It's not about being told "don't be an asshole" and no one is asking you to feel sorry for them, but if we're not supposed to dismiss a group of people for a certain quality because a few members of that group behave in a particular way, then just don't do it at all. None of those people you listed are denied rights. And I don't understand your second response. Could you please clarify? Are you saying you're not supposed to dismiss a group because of the way a few members of that group act but it would just be better if those few members didn't do that? Could you give an example there? So because they were not denied rights, you get to call them privileged by default? If they have terminal cancer, but you didn't know because they don't wear a sign, can you still call them privileged just because you are gay? There's a reason I have stopped responding to your posts. You refuse to acknowledge the definition of privilege in the context of social justice and you have arbitrarily decided it is a personal insult. Even Scarlett tried to correct this dumbass misconception but apparently you people just aren't having it. Go home. Why do you insist on labeling people you don't know or entire social groups? Isn't that exactly what your are fighting against? How you can say that I am privileged just because I date a woman and I happen to be white? Why are you allowed to assume things about me, but I am not allowed to assume things about you? Do you see the flaw with the argument and why some people object to it? No. Because you're not understanding the definition of privilege and you have obstinately refused to do so for the majority of this thread's run. All of those questions would easily be answered if you'd take your head out of your ass and actually admit that you are misunderstanding privilege. Am I privileged because I just happen to be white and straight? Yes If so, why do you gain the ability to assume that about me with only those two pieces of information? Because those are the only two relevant pieces of information needed...duh. And could I make any assumption about someone based solely their race and sexual orientation that would be acceptable? Umm...yeah, you can assume they are privileged. Like I just did above. How are you not following this? In case you haven't noticed, I'm done treating you like you actually have any interest in understanding this. You've decided you don't like this word so you're gonna be butthurt. It's cool. Keep throwing this tantrum. I don't think Plansix realizes that being privileged doesn't make you a bad person, and is in fact completely out of his control. A geography teacher I had in sixth grade once said "There is nothing wrong with being privileged, as long as you understand that you are privileged. If you're privileged and you do not realize it then you are a brat." I female coworker of mine has said that she hates going to the auto mechanic because they refuse to be frank with her about what's wrong with the car. Whenever she goes to the mechanic she brings a guy with her because the mechanics will be frank with the guy, even if he knows even less about cars than she does.
You're incorrect, I totally understand that being privileged doesn't make me a bad person. I never made that argument, or anything close to that. I agreed that I was and I knew that I was not a bad person because of it.
This isn't really that complicated. The word "privileged" is a pejorative and has a negative overtone to it. It may not have started out that way, but it does now. If you are attempting to win over people to supporting gay rights, it is not a good idea to lump their entire demographic together and call them a pejorative. Its really that simple. Some people don't like the word, so use a different word.
If someone insists on using the word "privileged", they should not be surprised if someone objects to it. This is because, once again, it is a pejorative. They may attempt to challenge the use of the word and suggest that there are different ways to describe being disenfranchised by society. If you choose to ignore their objection and say "You are privileged and there is nothing you can do about it," then be prepared for them to stop listening to you.
It is really that simple.
|
On June 26 2013 07:50 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On June 26 2013 06:58 codonbyte wrote:On June 26 2013 04:30 Klondikebar wrote:On June 26 2013 04:25 Plansix wrote:On June 26 2013 04:21 Klondikebar wrote:On June 26 2013 04:18 Plansix wrote:On June 26 2013 04:17 Klondikebar wrote:On June 26 2013 04:13 Plansix wrote:On June 26 2013 04:09 Klondikebar wrote:On June 26 2013 03:58 Neemi wrote:
[quote]
I wouldn't go as far as saying people "refuse" to give attention to anyone, but I didn't go into specifics because I feel they are really based on my own experiences (not being disadvantages by any, just noticing them happening) and because I didn't want to derail the thread. But if you want me to list a few:
- People literally saying that they couldn't understand how one could ever truly love a fat person
- All the kids around the world who are being bullied for having a strange hobby, not having a common hobby or having different tastes
- Introverted people (usually dismissed as being boring or uninteresting)
- Sick people of any kind (physically disabled people are getting a lot of attention in most cases, but mentally disabled people... they rarely do)
- Ugly people (usually covertly, and while being subjective, people who are deemed attractive by many people are more highly rated on pretty much everything other attribute compared to people who are deemed less attractive)
- Intelligence
- Religion
Obviously all these different people are still allowed to marry, but all these people can be made fun of or feel excluded for these very reasons. And because most of them aren't superficial, it's hard for many people to know what it's like to be really introverted, so less people know "what it's like".
[quote]
I think Plansix below you summarized this way better than I did. It's not about being told "don't be an asshole" and no one is asking you to feel sorry for them, but if we're not supposed to dismiss a group of people for a certain quality because a few members of that group behave in a particular way, then just don't do it at all. None of those people you listed are denied rights. And I don't understand your second response. Could you please clarify? Are you saying you're not supposed to dismiss a group because of the way a few members of that group act but it would just be better if those few members didn't do that? Could you give an example there? So because they were not denied rights, you get to call them privileged by default? If they have terminal cancer, but you didn't know because they don't wear a sign, can you still call them privileged just because you are gay? There's a reason I have stopped responding to your posts. You refuse to acknowledge the definition of privilege in the context of social justice and you have arbitrarily decided it is a personal insult. Even Scarlett tried to correct this dumbass misconception but apparently you people just aren't having it. Go home. Why do you insist on labeling people you don't know or entire social groups? Isn't that exactly what your are fighting against? How you can say that I am privileged just because I date a woman and I happen to be white? Why are you allowed to assume things about me, but I am not allowed to assume things about you? Do you see the flaw with the argument and why some people object to it? No. Because you're not understanding the definition of privilege and you have obstinately refused to do so for the majority of this thread's run. All of those questions would easily be answered if you'd take your head out of your ass and actually admit that you are misunderstanding privilege. Am I privileged because I just happen to be white and straight? Yes If so, why do you gain the ability to assume that about me with only those two pieces of information? Because those are the only two relevant pieces of information needed...duh. And could I make any assumption about someone based solely their race and sexual orientation that would be acceptable? Umm...yeah, you can assume they are privileged. Like I just did above. How are you not following this? In case you haven't noticed, I'm done treating you like you actually have any interest in understanding this. You've decided you don't like this word so you're gonna be butthurt. It's cool. Keep throwing this tantrum. I don't think Plansix realizes that being privileged doesn't make you a bad person, and is in fact completely out of his control. A geography teacher I had in sixth grade once said "There is nothing wrong with being privileged, as long as you understand that you are privileged. If you're privileged and you do not realize it then you are a brat." I female coworker of mine has said that she hates going to the auto mechanic because they refuse to be frank with her about what's wrong with the car. Whenever she goes to the mechanic she brings a guy with her because the mechanics will be frank with the guy, even if he knows even less about cars than she does. You're incorrect, I totally understand that being privileged doesn't make me a bad person. I never made that argument, or anything close to that. I agreed that I was and I knew that I was not a bad person because of it. This isn't really that complicated. The word "privileged" is a pejorative and has a negative overtone to it. It may not have started out that way, but it does now. If you are attempting to win over people to supporting gay rights, it is not a good idea to lump their entire demographic together and call them a pejorative. Its really that simple. Some people don't like the word, so use a different word. If someone insists on using the word "privileged", they should not be surprised if someone objects to it. This is because, once again, it is a pejorative. They may attempt to challenge the use of the word and suggest that there are different ways to describe being disenfranchised by society. If you choose to ignore their objection and say "You are privileged and there is nothing you can do about it," then be prepared for them to stop listening to you. It is really that simple.
So if another word is used to describe the exact same concept it's chill?
|
On June 26 2013 07:53 FallDownMarigold wrote:Show nested quote +On June 26 2013 07:50 Plansix wrote:On June 26 2013 06:58 codonbyte wrote:On June 26 2013 04:30 Klondikebar wrote:On June 26 2013 04:25 Plansix wrote:On June 26 2013 04:21 Klondikebar wrote:On June 26 2013 04:18 Plansix wrote:On June 26 2013 04:17 Klondikebar wrote:On June 26 2013 04:13 Plansix wrote:On June 26 2013 04:09 Klondikebar wrote:
[quote]
None of those people you listed are denied rights. And I don't understand your second response. Could you please clarify? Are you saying you're not supposed to dismiss a group because of the way a few members of that group act but it would just be better if those few members didn't do that? Could you give an example there? So because they were not denied rights, you get to call them privileged by default? If they have terminal cancer, but you didn't know because they don't wear a sign, can you still call them privileged just because you are gay? There's a reason I have stopped responding to your posts. You refuse to acknowledge the definition of privilege in the context of social justice and you have arbitrarily decided it is a personal insult. Even Scarlett tried to correct this dumbass misconception but apparently you people just aren't having it. Go home. Why do you insist on labeling people you don't know or entire social groups? Isn't that exactly what your are fighting against? How you can say that I am privileged just because I date a woman and I happen to be white? Why are you allowed to assume things about me, but I am not allowed to assume things about you? Do you see the flaw with the argument and why some people object to it? No. Because you're not understanding the definition of privilege and you have obstinately refused to do so for the majority of this thread's run. All of those questions would easily be answered if you'd take your head out of your ass and actually admit that you are misunderstanding privilege. Am I privileged because I just happen to be white and straight? Yes If so, why do you gain the ability to assume that about me with only those two pieces of information? Because those are the only two relevant pieces of information needed...duh. And could I make any assumption about someone based solely their race and sexual orientation that would be acceptable? Umm...yeah, you can assume they are privileged. Like I just did above. How are you not following this? In case you haven't noticed, I'm done treating you like you actually have any interest in understanding this. You've decided you don't like this word so you're gonna be butthurt. It's cool. Keep throwing this tantrum. I don't think Plansix realizes that being privileged doesn't make you a bad person, and is in fact completely out of his control. A geography teacher I had in sixth grade once said "There is nothing wrong with being privileged, as long as you understand that you are privileged. If you're privileged and you do not realize it then you are a brat." I female coworker of mine has said that she hates going to the auto mechanic because they refuse to be frank with her about what's wrong with the car. Whenever she goes to the mechanic she brings a guy with her because the mechanics will be frank with the guy, even if he knows even less about cars than she does. You're incorrect, I totally understand that being privileged doesn't make me a bad person. I never made that argument, or anything close to that. I agreed that I was and I knew that I was not a bad person because of it. This isn't really that complicated. The word "privileged" is a pejorative and has a negative overtone to it. It may not have started out that way, but it does now. If you are attempting to win over people to supporting gay rights, it is not a good idea to lump their entire demographic together and call them a pejorative. Its really that simple. Some people don't like the word, so use a different word. If someone insists on using the word "privileged", they should not be surprised if someone objects to it. This is because, once again, it is a pejorative. They may attempt to challenge the use of the word and suggest that there are different ways to describe being disenfranchised by society. If you choose to ignore their objection and say "You are privileged and there is nothing you can do about it," then be prepared for them to stop listening to you. It is really that simple. So if another word is used to describe the exact same concept it's chill?
Generally if you explain things to people and avoid insulting them in the process, they are more likely to accept what you are trying to tell them.
Also, the sky is blue.
|
On June 26 2013 07:50 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On June 26 2013 06:58 codonbyte wrote:On June 26 2013 04:30 Klondikebar wrote:On June 26 2013 04:25 Plansix wrote:On June 26 2013 04:21 Klondikebar wrote:On June 26 2013 04:18 Plansix wrote:On June 26 2013 04:17 Klondikebar wrote:On June 26 2013 04:13 Plansix wrote:On June 26 2013 04:09 Klondikebar wrote:On June 26 2013 03:58 Neemi wrote:
[quote]
I wouldn't go as far as saying people "refuse" to give attention to anyone, but I didn't go into specifics because I feel they are really based on my own experiences (not being disadvantages by any, just noticing them happening) and because I didn't want to derail the thread. But if you want me to list a few:
- People literally saying that they couldn't understand how one could ever truly love a fat person
- All the kids around the world who are being bullied for having a strange hobby, not having a common hobby or having different tastes
- Introverted people (usually dismissed as being boring or uninteresting)
- Sick people of any kind (physically disabled people are getting a lot of attention in most cases, but mentally disabled people... they rarely do)
- Ugly people (usually covertly, and while being subjective, people who are deemed attractive by many people are more highly rated on pretty much everything other attribute compared to people who are deemed less attractive)
- Intelligence
- Religion
Obviously all these different people are still allowed to marry, but all these people can be made fun of or feel excluded for these very reasons. And because most of them aren't superficial, it's hard for many people to know what it's like to be really introverted, so less people know "what it's like".
[quote]
I think Plansix below you summarized this way better than I did. It's not about being told "don't be an asshole" and no one is asking you to feel sorry for them, but if we're not supposed to dismiss a group of people for a certain quality because a few members of that group behave in a particular way, then just don't do it at all. None of those people you listed are denied rights. And I don't understand your second response. Could you please clarify? Are you saying you're not supposed to dismiss a group because of the way a few members of that group act but it would just be better if those few members didn't do that? Could you give an example there? So because they were not denied rights, you get to call them privileged by default? If they have terminal cancer, but you didn't know because they don't wear a sign, can you still call them privileged just because you are gay? There's a reason I have stopped responding to your posts. You refuse to acknowledge the definition of privilege in the context of social justice and you have arbitrarily decided it is a personal insult. Even Scarlett tried to correct this dumbass misconception but apparently you people just aren't having it. Go home. Why do you insist on labeling people you don't know or entire social groups? Isn't that exactly what your are fighting against? How you can say that I am privileged just because I date a woman and I happen to be white? Why are you allowed to assume things about me, but I am not allowed to assume things about you? Do you see the flaw with the argument and why some people object to it? No. Because you're not understanding the definition of privilege and you have obstinately refused to do so for the majority of this thread's run. All of those questions would easily be answered if you'd take your head out of your ass and actually admit that you are misunderstanding privilege. Am I privileged because I just happen to be white and straight? Yes If so, why do you gain the ability to assume that about me with only those two pieces of information? Because those are the only two relevant pieces of information needed...duh. And could I make any assumption about someone based solely their race and sexual orientation that would be acceptable? Umm...yeah, you can assume they are privileged. Like I just did above. How are you not following this? In case you haven't noticed, I'm done treating you like you actually have any interest in understanding this. You've decided you don't like this word so you're gonna be butthurt. It's cool. Keep throwing this tantrum. I don't think Plansix realizes that being privileged doesn't make you a bad person, and is in fact completely out of his control. A geography teacher I had in sixth grade once said "There is nothing wrong with being privileged, as long as you understand that you are privileged. If you're privileged and you do not realize it then you are a brat." I female coworker of mine has said that she hates going to the auto mechanic because they refuse to be frank with her about what's wrong with the car. Whenever she goes to the mechanic she brings a guy with her because the mechanics will be frank with the guy, even if he knows even less about cars than she does. You're incorrect, I totally understand that being privileged doesn't make me a bad person. I never made that argument, or anything close to that. I agreed that I was and I knew that I was not a bad person because of it. This isn't really that complicated. The word "privileged" is a pejorative and has a negative overtone to it. It may not have started out that way, but it does now. If you are attempting to win over people to supporting gay rights, it is not a good idea to lump their entire demographic together and call them a pejorative. Its really that simple. Some people don't like the word, so use a different word. If someone insists on using the word "privileged", they should not be surprised if someone objects to it. This is because, once again, it is a pejorative. They may attempt to challenge the use of the word and suggest that there are different ways to describe being disenfranchised by society. If you choose to ignore their objection and say "You are privileged and there is nothing you can do about it," then be prepared for them to stop listening to you. It is really that simple.
I worded that poorly. What I meant to say is that you don't seem to realize that "privileged" is not an insult at all. How can calling someone privileged be a pejorative when being privileged is completely outside of your control? Calling someone "privileged" is making a statement about how society treats them, and only that. It is saying absolutely nothing about what sort of person they are.
|
Sweden5554 Posts
On June 26 2013 07:48 Fission wrote:
bleh removed post, didn't articulate my thoughts well
(Sorry I peaked at your original post)
But what he meant (I think) or at least what I meant by quoting it is if the offence you're feeling is baseless. or based on the loss of a wrongfully held privilege then by all means, feel offended, but don't think anyone will give a shit. Offence in and of itself is not a reason not to do something.
|
On June 26 2013 07:56 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On June 26 2013 07:53 FallDownMarigold wrote:On June 26 2013 07:50 Plansix wrote:On June 26 2013 06:58 codonbyte wrote:On June 26 2013 04:30 Klondikebar wrote:On June 26 2013 04:25 Plansix wrote:On June 26 2013 04:21 Klondikebar wrote:On June 26 2013 04:18 Plansix wrote:On June 26 2013 04:17 Klondikebar wrote:On June 26 2013 04:13 Plansix wrote:
[quote]
So because they were not denied rights, you get to call them privileged by default? If they have terminal cancer, but you didn't know because they don't wear a sign, can you still call them privileged just because you are gay? There's a reason I have stopped responding to your posts. You refuse to acknowledge the definition of privilege in the context of social justice and you have arbitrarily decided it is a personal insult. Even Scarlett tried to correct this dumbass misconception but apparently you people just aren't having it. Go home. Why do you insist on labeling people you don't know or entire social groups? Isn't that exactly what your are fighting against? How you can say that I am privileged just because I date a woman and I happen to be white? Why are you allowed to assume things about me, but I am not allowed to assume things about you? Do you see the flaw with the argument and why some people object to it? No. Because you're not understanding the definition of privilege and you have obstinately refused to do so for the majority of this thread's run. All of those questions would easily be answered if you'd take your head out of your ass and actually admit that you are misunderstanding privilege. Am I privileged because I just happen to be white and straight? Yes If so, why do you gain the ability to assume that about me with only those two pieces of information? Because those are the only two relevant pieces of information needed...duh. And could I make any assumption about someone based solely their race and sexual orientation that would be acceptable? Umm...yeah, you can assume they are privileged. Like I just did above. How are you not following this? In case you haven't noticed, I'm done treating you like you actually have any interest in understanding this. You've decided you don't like this word so you're gonna be butthurt. It's cool. Keep throwing this tantrum. I don't think Plansix realizes that being privileged doesn't make you a bad person, and is in fact completely out of his control. A geography teacher I had in sixth grade once said "There is nothing wrong with being privileged, as long as you understand that you are privileged. If you're privileged and you do not realize it then you are a brat." I female coworker of mine has said that she hates going to the auto mechanic because they refuse to be frank with her about what's wrong with the car. Whenever she goes to the mechanic she brings a guy with her because the mechanics will be frank with the guy, even if he knows even less about cars than she does. You're incorrect, I totally understand that being privileged doesn't make me a bad person. I never made that argument, or anything close to that. I agreed that I was and I knew that I was not a bad person because of it. This isn't really that complicated. The word "privileged" is a pejorative and has a negative overtone to it. It may not have started out that way, but it does now. If you are attempting to win over people to supporting gay rights, it is not a good idea to lump their entire demographic together and call them a pejorative. Its really that simple. Some people don't like the word, so use a different word. If someone insists on using the word "privileged", they should not be surprised if someone objects to it. This is because, once again, it is a pejorative. They may attempt to challenge the use of the word and suggest that there are different ways to describe being disenfranchised by society. If you choose to ignore their objection and say "You are privileged and there is nothing you can do about it," then be prepared for them to stop listening to you. It is really that simple. So if another word is used to describe the exact same concept it's chill? Generally if you explain things to people and avoid insulting them in the process, they are more likely to accept what you are trying to tell them. Also, the sky is blue.
So there's no objection to the actual concept, it's just that 'privileged' sort of bothers you and some other people. I guess I just don't see why it matters. Just quit seeing it as an offensive term since you have no actual problem with the concept behind the use of the word
|
On June 26 2013 08:01 salle wrote:Show nested quote +On June 26 2013 07:48 Fission wrote:
bleh removed post, didn't articulate my thoughts well (Sorry I peaked at your original post) But what he meant (I think) or at least what I meant by quoting it is if the offence you're feeling is baseless. or based on the loss of a wrongfully held privilege then by all means, feel offended, but don't think anyone will give a shit. Offence in and of itself is not a reason not to do something.
Wait, where do I have to click to see the original unedited post? I know on some websites you can see an edit history of a post (such as on wikipedia).
|
On June 26 2013 08:04 codonbyte wrote:Show nested quote +On June 26 2013 08:01 salle wrote:On June 26 2013 07:48 Fission wrote:
bleh removed post, didn't articulate my thoughts well (Sorry I peaked at your original post) But what he meant (I think) or at least what I meant by quoting it is if the offence you're feeling is baseless. or based on the loss of a wrongfully held privilege then by all means, feel offended, but don't think anyone will give a shit. Offence in and of itself is not a reason not to do something. Wait, where do I have to click to see the original unedited post? I know on some websites you can see an edit history of a post (such as on wikipedia).
admins/moderators see it. You don't.
|
Am I the only one who saw the logo and thought of MLP: FiM and not gays?
|
On June 26 2013 07:58 codonbyte wrote:Show nested quote +On June 26 2013 07:50 Plansix wrote:On June 26 2013 06:58 codonbyte wrote:On June 26 2013 04:30 Klondikebar wrote:On June 26 2013 04:25 Plansix wrote:On June 26 2013 04:21 Klondikebar wrote:On June 26 2013 04:18 Plansix wrote:On June 26 2013 04:17 Klondikebar wrote:On June 26 2013 04:13 Plansix wrote:On June 26 2013 04:09 Klondikebar wrote:
[quote]
None of those people you listed are denied rights. And I don't understand your second response. Could you please clarify? Are you saying you're not supposed to dismiss a group because of the way a few members of that group act but it would just be better if those few members didn't do that? Could you give an example there? So because they were not denied rights, you get to call them privileged by default? If they have terminal cancer, but you didn't know because they don't wear a sign, can you still call them privileged just because you are gay? There's a reason I have stopped responding to your posts. You refuse to acknowledge the definition of privilege in the context of social justice and you have arbitrarily decided it is a personal insult. Even Scarlett tried to correct this dumbass misconception but apparently you people just aren't having it. Go home. Why do you insist on labeling people you don't know or entire social groups? Isn't that exactly what your are fighting against? How you can say that I am privileged just because I date a woman and I happen to be white? Why are you allowed to assume things about me, but I am not allowed to assume things about you? Do you see the flaw with the argument and why some people object to it? No. Because you're not understanding the definition of privilege and you have obstinately refused to do so for the majority of this thread's run. All of those questions would easily be answered if you'd take your head out of your ass and actually admit that you are misunderstanding privilege. Am I privileged because I just happen to be white and straight? Yes If so, why do you gain the ability to assume that about me with only those two pieces of information? Because those are the only two relevant pieces of information needed...duh. And could I make any assumption about someone based solely their race and sexual orientation that would be acceptable? Umm...yeah, you can assume they are privileged. Like I just did above. How are you not following this? In case you haven't noticed, I'm done treating you like you actually have any interest in understanding this. You've decided you don't like this word so you're gonna be butthurt. It's cool. Keep throwing this tantrum. I don't think Plansix realizes that being privileged doesn't make you a bad person, and is in fact completely out of his control. A geography teacher I had in sixth grade once said "There is nothing wrong with being privileged, as long as you understand that you are privileged. If you're privileged and you do not realize it then you are a brat." I female coworker of mine has said that she hates going to the auto mechanic because they refuse to be frank with her about what's wrong with the car. Whenever she goes to the mechanic she brings a guy with her because the mechanics will be frank with the guy, even if he knows even less about cars than she does. You're incorrect, I totally understand that being privileged doesn't make me a bad person. I never made that argument, or anything close to that. I agreed that I was and I knew that I was not a bad person because of it. This isn't really that complicated. The word "privileged" is a pejorative and has a negative overtone to it. It may not have started out that way, but it does now. If you are attempting to win over people to supporting gay rights, it is not a good idea to lump their entire demographic together and call them a pejorative. Its really that simple. Some people don't like the word, so use a different word. If someone insists on using the word "privileged", they should not be surprised if someone objects to it. This is because, once again, it is a pejorative. They may attempt to challenge the use of the word and suggest that there are different ways to describe being disenfranchised by society. If you choose to ignore their objection and say "You are privileged and there is nothing you can do about it," then be prepared for them to stop listening to you. It is really that simple. I worded that poorly. What I meant to say is that you don't seem to realize that "privileged" is not an insult at all. How can calling someone privileged be a pejorative when being privileged is completely outside of your control? Calling someone "privileged" is making a statement about how society treats them, and only that. It is saying absolutely nothing about what sort of person they are.
How society views a word and the meaning have almost no connection. What the privileged means academically does not apply. A faggot is a bundle of sticks or a cigarette in England, but I don't break that bad boy out here in the US. The state of Massachusetts misuses the word "wicked" all the time. How people view the word "privileged" is not within our control. People say "privileged rich kids" as a negative, not as a statement of fact. It is a pejorative for a lot of people, which is why people object to its use to describe them. People do not like being called things they perceive as insulting.
From a pragmatic point of view, people do not like the word, so it may be better to use a different word or set of words.
|
On June 26 2013 08:09 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On June 26 2013 07:58 codonbyte wrote:On June 26 2013 07:50 Plansix wrote:On June 26 2013 06:58 codonbyte wrote:On June 26 2013 04:30 Klondikebar wrote:On June 26 2013 04:25 Plansix wrote:On June 26 2013 04:21 Klondikebar wrote:On June 26 2013 04:18 Plansix wrote:On June 26 2013 04:17 Klondikebar wrote:On June 26 2013 04:13 Plansix wrote:
[quote]
So because they were not denied rights, you get to call them privileged by default? If they have terminal cancer, but you didn't know because they don't wear a sign, can you still call them privileged just because you are gay? There's a reason I have stopped responding to your posts. You refuse to acknowledge the definition of privilege in the context of social justice and you have arbitrarily decided it is a personal insult. Even Scarlett tried to correct this dumbass misconception but apparently you people just aren't having it. Go home. Why do you insist on labeling people you don't know or entire social groups? Isn't that exactly what your are fighting against? How you can say that I am privileged just because I date a woman and I happen to be white? Why are you allowed to assume things about me, but I am not allowed to assume things about you? Do you see the flaw with the argument and why some people object to it? No. Because you're not understanding the definition of privilege and you have obstinately refused to do so for the majority of this thread's run. All of those questions would easily be answered if you'd take your head out of your ass and actually admit that you are misunderstanding privilege. Am I privileged because I just happen to be white and straight? Yes If so, why do you gain the ability to assume that about me with only those two pieces of information? Because those are the only two relevant pieces of information needed...duh. And could I make any assumption about someone based solely their race and sexual orientation that would be acceptable? Umm...yeah, you can assume they are privileged. Like I just did above. How are you not following this? In case you haven't noticed, I'm done treating you like you actually have any interest in understanding this. You've decided you don't like this word so you're gonna be butthurt. It's cool. Keep throwing this tantrum. I don't think Plansix realizes that being privileged doesn't make you a bad person, and is in fact completely out of his control. A geography teacher I had in sixth grade once said "There is nothing wrong with being privileged, as long as you understand that you are privileged. If you're privileged and you do not realize it then you are a brat." I female coworker of mine has said that she hates going to the auto mechanic because they refuse to be frank with her about what's wrong with the car. Whenever she goes to the mechanic she brings a guy with her because the mechanics will be frank with the guy, even if he knows even less about cars than she does. You're incorrect, I totally understand that being privileged doesn't make me a bad person. I never made that argument, or anything close to that. I agreed that I was and I knew that I was not a bad person because of it. This isn't really that complicated. The word "privileged" is a pejorative and has a negative overtone to it. It may not have started out that way, but it does now. If you are attempting to win over people to supporting gay rights, it is not a good idea to lump their entire demographic together and call them a pejorative. Its really that simple. Some people don't like the word, so use a different word. If someone insists on using the word "privileged", they should not be surprised if someone objects to it. This is because, once again, it is a pejorative. They may attempt to challenge the use of the word and suggest that there are different ways to describe being disenfranchised by society. If you choose to ignore their objection and say "You are privileged and there is nothing you can do about it," then be prepared for them to stop listening to you. It is really that simple. I worded that poorly. What I meant to say is that you don't seem to realize that "privileged" is not an insult at all. How can calling someone privileged be a pejorative when being privileged is completely outside of your control? Calling someone "privileged" is making a statement about how society treats them, and only that. It is saying absolutely nothing about what sort of person they are. How society views a word and the meaning have almost no connection. What the privileged means academically does not apply. A faggot is a bundle of sticks or a cigarette in England, but I don't break that bad boy out here in the US. The state of Massachusetts misuses the word "wicked" all the time. How people view the word "privileged" is not within our control. People say "privileged rich kids" as a negative, not as a statement of fact. It is a pejorative for a lot of people, which is why people object to its use to describe them. People do not like being called things they perceive as insulting. From a pragmatic point of view, people do not like the word, so it may be better to use a different word or set of words.
Shouldn't the responsibility rest on the individual being described as "privileged" to determine whether it's a mindless misused/insulting version of the word vs. a genuine application of the concept?
I'm pretty sure if you point angrily and snarl "FAG!" to a gay person in the UK it's still pretty offensive. You can tell when it's being used to describe a cig vs. as an insult
|
United Kingdom36161 Posts
On June 26 2013 08:09 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On June 26 2013 07:58 codonbyte wrote:On June 26 2013 07:50 Plansix wrote:On June 26 2013 06:58 codonbyte wrote:On June 26 2013 04:30 Klondikebar wrote:On June 26 2013 04:25 Plansix wrote:On June 26 2013 04:21 Klondikebar wrote:On June 26 2013 04:18 Plansix wrote:On June 26 2013 04:17 Klondikebar wrote:On June 26 2013 04:13 Plansix wrote:
[quote]
So because they were not denied rights, you get to call them privileged by default? If they have terminal cancer, but you didn't know because they don't wear a sign, can you still call them privileged just because you are gay? There's a reason I have stopped responding to your posts. You refuse to acknowledge the definition of privilege in the context of social justice and you have arbitrarily decided it is a personal insult. Even Scarlett tried to correct this dumbass misconception but apparently you people just aren't having it. Go home. Why do you insist on labeling people you don't know or entire social groups? Isn't that exactly what your are fighting against? How you can say that I am privileged just because I date a woman and I happen to be white? Why are you allowed to assume things about me, but I am not allowed to assume things about you? Do you see the flaw with the argument and why some people object to it? No. Because you're not understanding the definition of privilege and you have obstinately refused to do so for the majority of this thread's run. All of those questions would easily be answered if you'd take your head out of your ass and actually admit that you are misunderstanding privilege. Am I privileged because I just happen to be white and straight? Yes If so, why do you gain the ability to assume that about me with only those two pieces of information? Because those are the only two relevant pieces of information needed...duh. And could I make any assumption about someone based solely their race and sexual orientation that would be acceptable? Umm...yeah, you can assume they are privileged. Like I just did above. How are you not following this? In case you haven't noticed, I'm done treating you like you actually have any interest in understanding this. You've decided you don't like this word so you're gonna be butthurt. It's cool. Keep throwing this tantrum. I don't think Plansix realizes that being privileged doesn't make you a bad person, and is in fact completely out of his control. A geography teacher I had in sixth grade once said "There is nothing wrong with being privileged, as long as you understand that you are privileged. If you're privileged and you do not realize it then you are a brat." I female coworker of mine has said that she hates going to the auto mechanic because they refuse to be frank with her about what's wrong with the car. Whenever she goes to the mechanic she brings a guy with her because the mechanics will be frank with the guy, even if he knows even less about cars than she does. You're incorrect, I totally understand that being privileged doesn't make me a bad person. I never made that argument, or anything close to that. I agreed that I was and I knew that I was not a bad person because of it. This isn't really that complicated. The word "privileged" is a pejorative and has a negative overtone to it. It may not have started out that way, but it does now. If you are attempting to win over people to supporting gay rights, it is not a good idea to lump their entire demographic together and call them a pejorative. Its really that simple. Some people don't like the word, so use a different word. If someone insists on using the word "privileged", they should not be surprised if someone objects to it. This is because, once again, it is a pejorative. They may attempt to challenge the use of the word and suggest that there are different ways to describe being disenfranchised by society. If you choose to ignore their objection and say "You are privileged and there is nothing you can do about it," then be prepared for them to stop listening to you. It is really that simple. I worded that poorly. What I meant to say is that you don't seem to realize that "privileged" is not an insult at all. How can calling someone privileged be a pejorative when being privileged is completely outside of your control? Calling someone "privileged" is making a statement about how society treats them, and only that. It is saying absolutely nothing about what sort of person they are. How society views a word and the meaning have almost no connection. What the privileged means academically does not apply. A faggot is a bundle of sticks or a cigarette in England, but I don't break that bad boy out here in the US. The state of Massachusetts misuses the word "wicked" all the time. How people view the word "privileged" is not within our control. People say "privileged rich kids" as a negative, not as a statement of fact. It is a pejorative for a lot of people, which is why people object to its use to describe them. People do not like being called things they perceive as insulting. From a pragmatic point of view, people do not like the word, so it may be better to use a different word or set of words.
I'd suggest you didn't bust it out in the UK either, dear.
edit: fag can be cigarette, not faggot btw 
|
My issue with "privilege" has always been that people say it as if you should feel bad about it. It's always like "yeah, you would say that, you're privileged." But then at the same time everyone insists that it isn't my fault if I'm privileged. Well, then stop saying it like it's my fault! I can feel sorry that people aren't privileged, but I certainly shouldn't feel guilty about it, because I am not the arbiter of privilege in society.
|
On June 26 2013 08:12 FallDownMarigold wrote:Show nested quote +On June 26 2013 08:09 Plansix wrote:On June 26 2013 07:58 codonbyte wrote:On June 26 2013 07:50 Plansix wrote:On June 26 2013 06:58 codonbyte wrote:On June 26 2013 04:30 Klondikebar wrote:On June 26 2013 04:25 Plansix wrote:On June 26 2013 04:21 Klondikebar wrote:On June 26 2013 04:18 Plansix wrote:On June 26 2013 04:17 Klondikebar wrote:
[quote]
There's a reason I have stopped responding to your posts. You refuse to acknowledge the definition of privilege in the context of social justice and you have arbitrarily decided it is a personal insult. Even Scarlett tried to correct this dumbass misconception but apparently you people just aren't having it. Go home.
Why do you insist on labeling people you don't know or entire social groups? Isn't that exactly what your are fighting against? How you can say that I am privileged just because I date a woman and I happen to be white? Why are you allowed to assume things about me, but I am not allowed to assume things about you? Do you see the flaw with the argument and why some people object to it? No. Because you're not understanding the definition of privilege and you have obstinately refused to do so for the majority of this thread's run. All of those questions would easily be answered if you'd take your head out of your ass and actually admit that you are misunderstanding privilege. Am I privileged because I just happen to be white and straight? Yes If so, why do you gain the ability to assume that about me with only those two pieces of information? Because those are the only two relevant pieces of information needed...duh. And could I make any assumption about someone based solely their race and sexual orientation that would be acceptable? Umm...yeah, you can assume they are privileged. Like I just did above. How are you not following this? In case you haven't noticed, I'm done treating you like you actually have any interest in understanding this. You've decided you don't like this word so you're gonna be butthurt. It's cool. Keep throwing this tantrum. I don't think Plansix realizes that being privileged doesn't make you a bad person, and is in fact completely out of his control. A geography teacher I had in sixth grade once said "There is nothing wrong with being privileged, as long as you understand that you are privileged. If you're privileged and you do not realize it then you are a brat." I female coworker of mine has said that she hates going to the auto mechanic because they refuse to be frank with her about what's wrong with the car. Whenever she goes to the mechanic she brings a guy with her because the mechanics will be frank with the guy, even if he knows even less about cars than she does. You're incorrect, I totally understand that being privileged doesn't make me a bad person. I never made that argument, or anything close to that. I agreed that I was and I knew that I was not a bad person because of it. This isn't really that complicated. The word "privileged" is a pejorative and has a negative overtone to it. It may not have started out that way, but it does now. If you are attempting to win over people to supporting gay rights, it is not a good idea to lump their entire demographic together and call them a pejorative. Its really that simple. Some people don't like the word, so use a different word. If someone insists on using the word "privileged", they should not be surprised if someone objects to it. This is because, once again, it is a pejorative. They may attempt to challenge the use of the word and suggest that there are different ways to describe being disenfranchised by society. If you choose to ignore their objection and say "You are privileged and there is nothing you can do about it," then be prepared for them to stop listening to you. It is really that simple. I worded that poorly. What I meant to say is that you don't seem to realize that "privileged" is not an insult at all. How can calling someone privileged be a pejorative when being privileged is completely outside of your control? Calling someone "privileged" is making a statement about how society treats them, and only that. It is saying absolutely nothing about what sort of person they are. How society views a word and the meaning have almost no connection. What the privileged means academically does not apply. A faggot is a bundle of sticks or a cigarette in England, but I don't break that bad boy out here in the US. The state of Massachusetts misuses the word "wicked" all the time. How people view the word "privileged" is not within our control. People say "privileged rich kids" as a negative, not as a statement of fact. It is a pejorative for a lot of people, which is why people object to its use to describe them. People do not like being called things they perceive as insulting. From a pragmatic point of view, people do not like the word, so it may be better to use a different word or set of words. Shouldn't the responsibility rest on the individual being described as "privileged" to determine whether it's a mindless misused/insulting version of the word vs. a genuine application of the concept?
In general, the burden of not insulting the audience falls on the speaker. It is also a terrible idea to tell your insulted audience that it is their job to view the word in a different manner and it is their fault for being insulted.
There are plenty of accurate words out there that we do not use because of their implications in society.
|
On June 26 2013 08:21 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On June 26 2013 08:12 FallDownMarigold wrote:On June 26 2013 08:09 Plansix wrote:On June 26 2013 07:58 codonbyte wrote:On June 26 2013 07:50 Plansix wrote:On June 26 2013 06:58 codonbyte wrote:On June 26 2013 04:30 Klondikebar wrote:On June 26 2013 04:25 Plansix wrote:On June 26 2013 04:21 Klondikebar wrote:On June 26 2013 04:18 Plansix wrote:
[quote]
Why do you insist on labeling people you don't know or entire social groups? Isn't that exactly what your are fighting against? How you can say that I am privileged just because I date a woman and I happen to be white? Why are you allowed to assume things about me, but I am not allowed to assume things about you?
Do you see the flaw with the argument and why some people object to it? No. Because you're not understanding the definition of privilege and you have obstinately refused to do so for the majority of this thread's run. All of those questions would easily be answered if you'd take your head out of your ass and actually admit that you are misunderstanding privilege. Am I privileged because I just happen to be white and straight? Yes If so, why do you gain the ability to assume that about me with only those two pieces of information? Because those are the only two relevant pieces of information needed...duh. And could I make any assumption about someone based solely their race and sexual orientation that would be acceptable? Umm...yeah, you can assume they are privileged. Like I just did above. How are you not following this? In case you haven't noticed, I'm done treating you like you actually have any interest in understanding this. You've decided you don't like this word so you're gonna be butthurt. It's cool. Keep throwing this tantrum. I don't think Plansix realizes that being privileged doesn't make you a bad person, and is in fact completely out of his control. A geography teacher I had in sixth grade once said "There is nothing wrong with being privileged, as long as you understand that you are privileged. If you're privileged and you do not realize it then you are a brat." I female coworker of mine has said that she hates going to the auto mechanic because they refuse to be frank with her about what's wrong with the car. Whenever she goes to the mechanic she brings a guy with her because the mechanics will be frank with the guy, even if he knows even less about cars than she does. You're incorrect, I totally understand that being privileged doesn't make me a bad person. I never made that argument, or anything close to that. I agreed that I was and I knew that I was not a bad person because of it. This isn't really that complicated. The word "privileged" is a pejorative and has a negative overtone to it. It may not have started out that way, but it does now. If you are attempting to win over people to supporting gay rights, it is not a good idea to lump their entire demographic together and call them a pejorative. Its really that simple. Some people don't like the word, so use a different word. If someone insists on using the word "privileged", they should not be surprised if someone objects to it. This is because, once again, it is a pejorative. They may attempt to challenge the use of the word and suggest that there are different ways to describe being disenfranchised by society. If you choose to ignore their objection and say "You are privileged and there is nothing you can do about it," then be prepared for them to stop listening to you. It is really that simple. I worded that poorly. What I meant to say is that you don't seem to realize that "privileged" is not an insult at all. How can calling someone privileged be a pejorative when being privileged is completely outside of your control? Calling someone "privileged" is making a statement about how society treats them, and only that. It is saying absolutely nothing about what sort of person they are. How society views a word and the meaning have almost no connection. What the privileged means academically does not apply. A faggot is a bundle of sticks or a cigarette in England, but I don't break that bad boy out here in the US. The state of Massachusetts misuses the word "wicked" all the time. How people view the word "privileged" is not within our control. People say "privileged rich kids" as a negative, not as a statement of fact. It is a pejorative for a lot of people, which is why people object to its use to describe them. People do not like being called things they perceive as insulting. From a pragmatic point of view, people do not like the word, so it may be better to use a different word or set of words. Shouldn't the responsibility rest on the individual being described as "privileged" to determine whether it's a mindless misused/insulting version of the word vs. a genuine application of the concept? In general, the burden of not insulting the audience falls on the speaker. It is also a terrible idea to tell your insulted audience that it is their job to view the word in a different manner and it is their fault for being insulted. There are plenty of accurate words out there that we do not use because of their implications in society.
Uh no I sort of meant the context should make it pretty fuckin simple to tell when it's being used respectably vs. when someone is just being petty. I'm not saying you have to. But to me it just seems super simple to tell the difference between someone insulting me vs. invoking a legitimate concept in discussion
imo
"You're just a privileged white boy so your life is ezpz" vs. using it to explain why a certain group of people might struggle with something more than others... C'mon
|
On June 26 2013 08:13 marvellosity wrote:Show nested quote +On June 26 2013 08:09 Plansix wrote:On June 26 2013 07:58 codonbyte wrote:On June 26 2013 07:50 Plansix wrote:On June 26 2013 06:58 codonbyte wrote:On June 26 2013 04:30 Klondikebar wrote:On June 26 2013 04:25 Plansix wrote:On June 26 2013 04:21 Klondikebar wrote:On June 26 2013 04:18 Plansix wrote:On June 26 2013 04:17 Klondikebar wrote:
[quote]
There's a reason I have stopped responding to your posts. You refuse to acknowledge the definition of privilege in the context of social justice and you have arbitrarily decided it is a personal insult. Even Scarlett tried to correct this dumbass misconception but apparently you people just aren't having it. Go home.
Why do you insist on labeling people you don't know or entire social groups? Isn't that exactly what your are fighting against? How you can say that I am privileged just because I date a woman and I happen to be white? Why are you allowed to assume things about me, but I am not allowed to assume things about you? Do you see the flaw with the argument and why some people object to it? No. Because you're not understanding the definition of privilege and you have obstinately refused to do so for the majority of this thread's run. All of those questions would easily be answered if you'd take your head out of your ass and actually admit that you are misunderstanding privilege. Am I privileged because I just happen to be white and straight? Yes If so, why do you gain the ability to assume that about me with only those two pieces of information? Because those are the only two relevant pieces of information needed...duh. And could I make any assumption about someone based solely their race and sexual orientation that would be acceptable? Umm...yeah, you can assume they are privileged. Like I just did above. How are you not following this? In case you haven't noticed, I'm done treating you like you actually have any interest in understanding this. You've decided you don't like this word so you're gonna be butthurt. It's cool. Keep throwing this tantrum. I don't think Plansix realizes that being privileged doesn't make you a bad person, and is in fact completely out of his control. A geography teacher I had in sixth grade once said "There is nothing wrong with being privileged, as long as you understand that you are privileged. If you're privileged and you do not realize it then you are a brat." I female coworker of mine has said that she hates going to the auto mechanic because they refuse to be frank with her about what's wrong with the car. Whenever she goes to the mechanic she brings a guy with her because the mechanics will be frank with the guy, even if he knows even less about cars than she does. You're incorrect, I totally understand that being privileged doesn't make me a bad person. I never made that argument, or anything close to that. I agreed that I was and I knew that I was not a bad person because of it. This isn't really that complicated. The word "privileged" is a pejorative and has a negative overtone to it. It may not have started out that way, but it does now. If you are attempting to win over people to supporting gay rights, it is not a good idea to lump their entire demographic together and call them a pejorative. Its really that simple. Some people don't like the word, so use a different word. If someone insists on using the word "privileged", they should not be surprised if someone objects to it. This is because, once again, it is a pejorative. They may attempt to challenge the use of the word and suggest that there are different ways to describe being disenfranchised by society. If you choose to ignore their objection and say "You are privileged and there is nothing you can do about it," then be prepared for them to stop listening to you. It is really that simple. I worded that poorly. What I meant to say is that you don't seem to realize that "privileged" is not an insult at all. How can calling someone privileged be a pejorative when being privileged is completely outside of your control? Calling someone "privileged" is making a statement about how society treats them, and only that. It is saying absolutely nothing about what sort of person they are. How society views a word and the meaning have almost no connection. What the privileged means academically does not apply. A faggot is a bundle of sticks or a cigarette in England, but I don't break that bad boy out here in the US. The state of Massachusetts misuses the word "wicked" all the time. How people view the word "privileged" is not within our control. People say "privileged rich kids" as a negative, not as a statement of fact. It is a pejorative for a lot of people, which is why people object to its use to describe them. People do not like being called things they perceive as insulting. From a pragmatic point of view, people do not like the word, so it may be better to use a different word or set of words. I'd suggest you didn't bust it out in the UK either, dear. edit: fag can be cigarette, not faggot btw
Good to know, even though I don't smoke.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
