-
Welcome to League Of Reason Forums! Please read the rules before posting.
If you are willing and able please consider making a donation to help with site overheads.
Donations can be made via here
SEX!
- Thread starter Otokogoroshi
- Start date
I didn't mean to imply that you were 
. I was merely explaining my perspective in relation to your response. As I said in my previous post, though only in passing, you make a valid point. Identifiability is certainly a factor when choosing the appearance of a certain character type.
. I was merely explaining my perspective in relation to your response. As I said in my previous post, though only in passing, you make a valid point. Identifiability is certainly a factor when choosing the appearance of a certain character type.ladiesman391
New Member
I'm not sexist but if i ever am or have been i apologize as it's not intentional.
I think people just have to stand up for themselves when ever possible, no matter if it's sexism or racism or whatever.
I think people just have to stand up for themselves when ever possible, no matter if it's sexism or racism or whatever.
"I'm not sexist but if i ever am or have been i apologize as it's not intentional. "
Depends who's definition of sexism you're using, as very few peoples definitions are similar, and they vary greatly. For instance I believe that a woman viewing herself as a woman can affect how she approaches her life, therefore making her in some respects different to men who view themselves as men (ie part of how you view yourself is based on your gender) and that will have some good and bad effects, which vary from individual to individual... for many that statement alone is sexist, and to make a similar statement about National or racial identity would be seen by some as racist.
My point is those terms as labels lose pretty much all meaning except in extreme cases of advocating "women should be subservient to men" style thinking (and the same with racial/national comments).
"I think people just have to stand up for themselves when ever possible, no matter if it's sexism or racism or whatever. "
I agree, and not only do I think it is unjust for society to overly regulate alot of supposedly racist/sexist behaviour, but I think it is actually damaging, as alot of women are deprived a chance to be strengthened by minor adversity, it often builds resentment by others, and I think it is sort of a slap in the face to women (minority groups) who are strong and feel the laws are completely unecessary.
Depends who's definition of sexism you're using, as very few peoples definitions are similar, and they vary greatly. For instance I believe that a woman viewing herself as a woman can affect how she approaches her life, therefore making her in some respects different to men who view themselves as men (ie part of how you view yourself is based on your gender) and that will have some good and bad effects, which vary from individual to individual... for many that statement alone is sexist, and to make a similar statement about National or racial identity would be seen by some as racist.
My point is those terms as labels lose pretty much all meaning except in extreme cases of advocating "women should be subservient to men" style thinking (and the same with racial/national comments).
"I think people just have to stand up for themselves when ever possible, no matter if it's sexism or racism or whatever. "
I agree, and not only do I think it is unjust for society to overly regulate alot of supposedly racist/sexist behaviour, but I think it is actually damaging, as alot of women are deprived a chance to be strengthened by minor adversity, it often builds resentment by others, and I think it is sort of a slap in the face to women (minority groups) who are strong and feel the laws are completely unecessary.
Ozymandyus
New Member
Wow. That's a novel argument. Interesting, I guess as a white male I am the most damaged/unlucky of all, as I almost never have to face real adversity, and get everything handed to me on a silver platter! Life just isn't fair I tell you! Darn you rich white parents and your inheritence and your getting me an education and lavishing me with praise and attention!WolfAU said:
Darn you establishment for getting me that job that pays me loads of money for doing absolutely nothing of value that I probably only got because I know other people!
Erm.... k
Though I think you have to agree that life is full of adversity no matter how utopian we may try to make our society. Minor adversity can strengthen an individual, building 'character', making them more aware, strengthening their resolve, teaching them humility etc, while a lack of adversity can often create complacency or over-active feelings of entitlement. There have been times in my life that have been quite difficult, and while I hate that I had to deal with them, I know I am a stronger person for it (though I do have scars from it), and as such have likely since prevented myself further hardship I would've otherwise encountered. I assume you're being sarcastic but if not, then to a degree, maybe you should feel unhappy about it as you have likely been deprived of pportunities to test, prove and better yourself.
As such I see any attempt to legally address this for everyone undesireable (turning everyone into complacant, weak balls of entitlement, not to mention the damage to civil liberties), but that this applies to quite a few so called 'feminist issues', which essentially apply to everyone (ie issues of balancing work/family)... and to attempt to adress them (or enforce them) for women and not men is complete bullshit.
Again, I am not having a go at some general concepts of feminism (the concepts of equal work = equal pay, equal opportunities. Though people of the same gender don't get those atm).
Though I think you have to agree that life is full of adversity no matter how utopian we may try to make our society. Minor adversity can strengthen an individual, building 'character', making them more aware, strengthening their resolve, teaching them humility etc, while a lack of adversity can often create complacency or over-active feelings of entitlement. There have been times in my life that have been quite difficult, and while I hate that I had to deal with them, I know I am a stronger person for it (though I do have scars from it), and as such have likely since prevented myself further hardship I would've otherwise encountered. I assume you're being sarcastic but if not, then to a degree, maybe you should feel unhappy about it as you have likely been deprived of pportunities to test, prove and better yourself.
As such I see any attempt to legally address this for everyone undesireable (turning everyone into complacant, weak balls of entitlement, not to mention the damage to civil liberties), but that this applies to quite a few so called 'feminist issues', which essentially apply to everyone (ie issues of balancing work/family)... and to attempt to adress them (or enforce them) for women and not men is complete bullshit.
Again, I am not having a go at some general concepts of feminism (the concepts of equal work = equal pay, equal opportunities. Though people of the same gender don't get those atm).
Ozymandyus
New Member
I completely agree that life is full of adversity, which is why we should remove completely obnoxious arbitrary adversity that unfairly affects one group or groups. You are the one claiming that it is somehow unfair to take away the 'minor adversity' that people who get discriminated against face - ignoring the fact that life has enough adversity for ANYONE, and you are not somehow removing all the learning experiences from life by stopping people from practicing discrimination.
People don't feel entitled because no one called them names or thought they were a piece of shit, they feel entitled when people give them stuff for free. Do you honestly think those two things are related? Should I go around insulting people to build their character? Or will it just make me a douche and make them annoyed or sad? How does a feeling of entitlement have anything at all to do with discrimination? Unless you mean a feeling that you should get what you DESERVE, rather than being denied something arbitrarily - if thats what you mean by entitlement then yes, I believe that stopping discrimination does promote that kind of entitlement.
I'm not being sarcastic by the way: I really have had my professional life handed to me. I have challenged myself by choosing to reject that ease: I quit my job because it was too boring and not rewarding (except monetarily) and am now a highschool biology teacher. Anyway, this whole idea that taking away the 'minor adversity' that discrimination represents is bad for people is crazy to me. If we are not faced with stuff like discrimination and unfair hiring and paying practices, we create other goals and 'minor adversity' for ourselves. Having someone say 'you are good enough and I like you for who you' are does NOT hurt you, it increases your self esteem, makes you stronger, and more able to set your sights even higher.
When someone tells you you are ugly, you may think it makes you stronger, but I don't. I think you take that into yourself, and it changes you. And most studies seem to agree that positive reinforcement works much better than negative. Especially if you get face discrimination consistently and you see another group that Doesn't. That will discourage effort EVERY time. To say that when people put you down or whatever it is a positive experience is completely backwards.
People don't feel entitled because no one called them names or thought they were a piece of shit, they feel entitled when people give them stuff for free. Do you honestly think those two things are related? Should I go around insulting people to build their character? Or will it just make me a douche and make them annoyed or sad? How does a feeling of entitlement have anything at all to do with discrimination? Unless you mean a feeling that you should get what you DESERVE, rather than being denied something arbitrarily - if thats what you mean by entitlement then yes, I believe that stopping discrimination does promote that kind of entitlement.
I'm not being sarcastic by the way: I really have had my professional life handed to me. I have challenged myself by choosing to reject that ease: I quit my job because it was too boring and not rewarding (except monetarily) and am now a highschool biology teacher. Anyway, this whole idea that taking away the 'minor adversity' that discrimination represents is bad for people is crazy to me. If we are not faced with stuff like discrimination and unfair hiring and paying practices, we create other goals and 'minor adversity' for ourselves. Having someone say 'you are good enough and I like you for who you' are does NOT hurt you, it increases your self esteem, makes you stronger, and more able to set your sights even higher.
When someone tells you you are ugly, you may think it makes you stronger, but I don't. I think you take that into yourself, and it changes you. And most studies seem to agree that positive reinforcement works much better than negative. Especially if you get face discrimination consistently and you see another group that Doesn't. That will discourage effort EVERY time. To say that when people put you down or whatever it is a positive experience is completely backwards.
WolfAU said:
I don't know about you, but I'm a white male and I haven't gotten any of that. In a way the majority can be just as discriminated against as minorities. For example, most non-white people hold that I can't say "the n word" due to the fact that I'm white, and I somehow "owe" them something. Everyone knows all white people's ancestors owned slaves on plantations!
I also have difficulty with college, especially scholarships. You can get scholarships just for being Native American, Black, Hispanic, a female, pregnant, etc. , but none for being a white middle-class male. I'm a dime a dozen, and being recognized is a lot harder in some cases.
Also, if I say anything about other races I'm automatically assumed racist. I can say "black colloquial language seems weird to me", and all of a sudden I'm racist. But a black kid calling me a "cracker" is all of a sudden hilarious to everyone else and is perfectly fine.
Dunno if your post was really serious or not, but just saying.
Ozymandyus
New Member
Well, it is serious, but I will grant that my situation has far more to do with being from a wealthy family than being a white male. That's where the real discrimination comes into play - even if you are a genius and are well qualified, if you show up to a meeting without looking the part and having certain social mannerisms and knowledges that are learned in circles of wealth and influence, you don't have a chance. Being a white middle class male even, you may not stand out but you have all kinds of advantages that may not be readily apparent. Your chances of growing up in a neighborhood where there are gangbangers, for example, is significantly less.
The biggest discrimination by far is against impoverished people. But the other types of discrimination are just as real and insidious, and to deny any of them is wrong in my opinion. Its sad that the structure of the society for the last 300 years has distributed wealth as it has which requires certain consideration in terms of race and sex etc, which then becomes unfair for less connected or affluent members of majority races, but in general we just need to recognize how our preconceptions and our advantages confer those preconceptions and advantages to the next generations and become self perpetuating stereotypes which are harmful to all of us.
With sexism the harmful effects are more clear and less convoluted by these other factors. Despite the fact that women come from wealthy families as often as men, they are pushed towards other activities, and generally given less permission and power than men. It clearly develops into a schism between the way we compensate and reward men for work vs the way we compensate women. It alters the way we think and makes us judge prematurely and unfairly.
As for the 'reverse racism' that people talk about where other people can say all kinds of shit about them but they can't... that's total bullshit in my experience. If you call someone a 'cracker' you will get the shit beat out of you if you are in a certain neighborhood, and same if you use the n-word. If you use either word in pleasant company you don't have a chance for a job or to be viewed positively. The thing is, we don't even associate the word cracker with a history of slavery or anything negative, so it's just funny to me to try to compare them - but the truth remains.
The biggest discrimination by far is against impoverished people. But the other types of discrimination are just as real and insidious, and to deny any of them is wrong in my opinion. Its sad that the structure of the society for the last 300 years has distributed wealth as it has which requires certain consideration in terms of race and sex etc, which then becomes unfair for less connected or affluent members of majority races, but in general we just need to recognize how our preconceptions and our advantages confer those preconceptions and advantages to the next generations and become self perpetuating stereotypes which are harmful to all of us.
With sexism the harmful effects are more clear and less convoluted by these other factors. Despite the fact that women come from wealthy families as often as men, they are pushed towards other activities, and generally given less permission and power than men. It clearly develops into a schism between the way we compensate and reward men for work vs the way we compensate women. It alters the way we think and makes us judge prematurely and unfairly.
As for the 'reverse racism' that people talk about where other people can say all kinds of shit about them but they can't... that's total bullshit in my experience. If you call someone a 'cracker' you will get the shit beat out of you if you are in a certain neighborhood, and same if you use the n-word. If you use either word in pleasant company you don't have a chance for a job or to be viewed positively. The thing is, we don't even associate the word cracker with a history of slavery or anything negative, so it's just funny to me to try to compare them - but the truth remains.
ladiesman391
New Member
That's exactly my point. Some things one woman will consider sexist may not be considered sexist by another and what I meant by my statement is that I don't intentionally go out looking to discriminate against women, or anybody else for that matter, but if I say or do something that I thought was okay but actually offends or comes of as discriminatory, I apologize for that. Some things are just hard wired in your brain from a young age and can be hard to alter, as I grew up with three brothers and no sisters I probably have some bad habits I developed from my youth that I'm not aware are considered offensive but would appreciate someone pointing it out to me rather than some one that just sits there and takes it personally and says nothing, ie not standing up for themselves... which relates to my second statement above. I would stand up for myself when discriminated against.WolfAU said:
Regarding the whole depriving people of minority diversity issue, I call bullshit.
Ayaan Hirsi Ali's experiences as a female in an Islamic family have undoubtedly helped shape her into a strong and outspoken woman, but does that in any way justify the sexism she was subjected to through her childhood?
Sure, sexism in our society isn't as bad, but I think the principle still applies. If a victim of discrimination, sanctioned and however slight, becomes a better person for it, it does nothing to excuse the discrimination to begin with.
Even so, I think you'll find that few victims of discrimination become appreciably stronger for it. It has a net detrimental effect. Most people would be far more successful if given the same implicit rights and opportunities as everyone else (as far as society allows).
Finally, from a more ethical standpoint, I don't believe it's okay for anyone to be forced into a situation on the basis of something they did not choose and cannot reasonably change (and you see how getting a sex change affects the level of discrimination you face in almost any society). Even if the situation is escapable, the fact that they must escape it, often with a great deal of resistance, whilst others need never bother is, to me, unacceptable.
Ayaan Hirsi Ali's experiences as a female in an Islamic family have undoubtedly helped shape her into a strong and outspoken woman, but does that in any way justify the sexism she was subjected to through her childhood?
Sure, sexism in our society isn't as bad, but I think the principle still applies. If a victim of discrimination, sanctioned and however slight, becomes a better person for it, it does nothing to excuse the discrimination to begin with.
Even so, I think you'll find that few victims of discrimination become appreciably stronger for it. It has a net detrimental effect. Most people would be far more successful if given the same implicit rights and opportunities as everyone else (as far as society allows).
Finally, from a more ethical standpoint, I don't believe it's okay for anyone to be forced into a situation on the basis of something they did not choose and cannot reasonably change (and you see how getting a sex change affects the level of discrimination you face in almost any society). Even if the situation is escapable, the fact that they must escape it, often with a great deal of resistance, whilst others need never bother is, to me, unacceptable.
"Ayaan Hirsi Ali's experiences as a female in an Islamic family have undoubtedly helped shape her into a strong and outspoken woman, but does that in any way justify the sexism she was subjected to through her childhood?"
No and I'm not saying it does... but at the same time minor shit like a few guys making sexual comments about your appearance I cannot see how that justifies acting like its the end of the world or reporting it to authorities, especially when men (and everyone) get comments about their appearance (ie I've been given shit about wearing glasses and having a geeky appearance), so I find it hard to buy it when women cry that such comments are so destructive when people who give me similar shit I tell them to f-off and thats the end of it.
If we do tell women its not only ok, but important for them to take issue with this kind of stuff, we are encouraging them to have a kind of lazy complacency and not to stick up for themselves (to let others do it for them), which I think is damaging when it comes to issues which people won't stick up for them in.
I'm not trying to excuse sexism, I'm saying that people are assholes, this is an unavoidable fact of life, and people will be insulted, humiliated or rejected for things based on peoples prejudices (ie my legal studies teacher was a radical feminist and had it in for most men she taught and the 'popular' female students, as I mentioned before), these prejudices are less about philosophies and more about personal ideals (ie how committed are you to the idea of human equality... etc), as such I would consider alot of men who make sexist comments about women, less sexist, and more just good old fashioned assholes, as often you'll see similar contempt for alot of men, or alot of different racial of belief systems (ie they're just intolerant and oppinionated by their nature)...
As such combating these issues at a personal level is problematic, but I do feel equality under the law (both in principle and in practice) is important.
Re detriment... absolutely, with any test, some rise to it and some fail it, but my point is removing these obsticals is... a) Impossible and b) undesireable, as it would remove most of the point of life, giving us chances to prove ourselves. I'm simplifying it obviously.
Re Ozy, the 'immutable' argument I haven't really found that compelling, especially when compared with something as elusive as 'what is choice/free will?'. If women couldn't do their job as well as men I would feel very comfortable discriminating against them based on that, however there are few (if any) areas that I believe that is the case... I also think it is virtuous for individuals to weigh individual decisions based on their merits (ie an employee) rather than based on stereotypes, but again, this goes less for OMGSEXISM and more to a persons wisdom/virtue, ability to see through the superficial etc.
re cracker, in some ways historical factors are irrelevent to the simple factor it shows clear discrimination, and I can hardly see valid social reasons why one should be ok and others shouldn't, beyond declaring things like 'black people are more touchy about it'.
No and I'm not saying it does... but at the same time minor shit like a few guys making sexual comments about your appearance I cannot see how that justifies acting like its the end of the world or reporting it to authorities, especially when men (and everyone) get comments about their appearance (ie I've been given shit about wearing glasses and having a geeky appearance), so I find it hard to buy it when women cry that such comments are so destructive when people who give me similar shit I tell them to f-off and thats the end of it.
If we do tell women its not only ok, but important for them to take issue with this kind of stuff, we are encouraging them to have a kind of lazy complacency and not to stick up for themselves (to let others do it for them), which I think is damaging when it comes to issues which people won't stick up for them in.
I'm not trying to excuse sexism, I'm saying that people are assholes, this is an unavoidable fact of life, and people will be insulted, humiliated or rejected for things based on peoples prejudices (ie my legal studies teacher was a radical feminist and had it in for most men she taught and the 'popular' female students, as I mentioned before), these prejudices are less about philosophies and more about personal ideals (ie how committed are you to the idea of human equality... etc), as such I would consider alot of men who make sexist comments about women, less sexist, and more just good old fashioned assholes, as often you'll see similar contempt for alot of men, or alot of different racial of belief systems (ie they're just intolerant and oppinionated by their nature)...
As such combating these issues at a personal level is problematic, but I do feel equality under the law (both in principle and in practice) is important.
Re detriment... absolutely, with any test, some rise to it and some fail it, but my point is removing these obsticals is... a) Impossible and b) undesireable, as it would remove most of the point of life, giving us chances to prove ourselves. I'm simplifying it obviously.
Re Ozy, the 'immutable' argument I haven't really found that compelling, especially when compared with something as elusive as 'what is choice/free will?'. If women couldn't do their job as well as men I would feel very comfortable discriminating against them based on that, however there are few (if any) areas that I believe that is the case... I also think it is virtuous for individuals to weigh individual decisions based on their merits (ie an employee) rather than based on stereotypes, but again, this goes less for OMGSEXISM and more to a persons wisdom/virtue, ability to see through the superficial etc.
re cracker, in some ways historical factors are irrelevent to the simple factor it shows clear discrimination, and I can hardly see valid social reasons why one should be ok and others shouldn't, beyond declaring things like 'black people are more touchy about it'.
ImprobableJoe
New Member
Not novel at all. Republicans have spent the last couple of decades claiming that black folks in America should STFU about racism and feel glad for slavery, because right-wing racism against black people in America is better than being poor in Africa. So, THANK GOODNESS FOR THE SLAVE TRADE!Ozymandyus said:
That's the view that Republican voters and Fox "News" viewers support, which means it isn't THAT small of a minority.
Ozymandyus
New Member
Really? So when you said:WolfAU said:
You were not implying that racist/sexist behavior is actually GOOD for people, and they should stfu because it is just making the assholes EVEN MORE of assholes? And also, that it is an injustice to tell assholes that they need to stop being assholes because its screwing up peoples lives and contributing to the gap in minority pay, their representation in various legal institutions, their personal self esteem, etc etc?WolfAU said:
Saying that racism/sexism is, in essence, for their own good seems a bit like an excuse to me.
Not sure what you are talking about - I am not making any sort of immutable argument nor have I used that word that I recall. If you are referring to my reference to simple facts about the likelihood of someone from a wealthy background getting a good job, vs someone with a poor background getting a good job, I am not calling such situations immutable by any means. In fact, we can quite clearly change them, all we have to do is do our best to stop discriminating and stop distributing education based on wealth, race and sex! It's that easy!
My point is that it is neither good nor bad in an of itself... It's impossible to predict its harm, so arguing its wrong because it always causes a set amount of damage (in the same way as me stealing X amount of money or stealing a car can do a measureable form of harm) is kinda weak... so the alternative argument to that is about ideals, and I'm saying that... short of a utopian esque world where everyone is tolerant, patient and understanding, there will always be this nature WITHIN PEOPLE (again, inequality under the law is more measureable and important). As such I think life requires individuals to just take some BS in their stride, again I point to my own life where I had it pretty tough in highschool, and while the experience at the time was very unpleasant, I feel I have tougher skin for it... to the point that if given the opportunity to magically 'undo' those events, I'm not sure I would.
Again, I am not condoning people being assholes, but it is foolish to expect everyone to hear you out fairly, treat you kindly, with compassion, free of their own prejudices whatever they may be (I know a woman who admitted to disliking me simply because I was similar in appearance to someone she despised).
I'm saying its impractical to tell assholes not to be assholes, and its unjust to tell assholes its illegal to be assholes. And the idea that a few offensive words can lead to litigation (ie sexually commenting about a woman) when non-sexual insults can be as viscious as you like without landing you in trouble I take issue with.
I see equal pay arguments as seperate from what I'm raising, which is more to do with essentially 'common courtesy'.
"Saying that racism/sexism is, in essence, for their own good seems a bit like an excuse to me."
Depends what we're defining as sexism. Again I am not talking about big stuff like pay disparity or institutional issues such as laws restricting women's freedoms (which as a humanist I am opposed to).
The 'immutable' argument, you're right, I was actually responding to doloafing... I'm a bit over-tired atm, I just finished my last exam 2 hours ago.
IJoe, do you just sit there dreaming up ways to compare me to republicans? It always makes me laugh as I've mentioned, Australia doesn't really have that political philosophy (our parties are Labour, which as the name implies is heavy into the working class stuff, and liberal, which, also as the name implies, tends to prefer social/financial libertarianism... in practice anyway, till John Howard started sucking up to Bush.... There is a family first party that is a bit of a worry).
That said I do think African-American's running around with a chip on their shoulder, blaming all their problems on racism is kinda childish, and does nothing to really bridge gaps and solve these problems, generally it aggrevates them (the problems).
"...because right-wing racism against black people in America is better than being poor in Africa. " Thats probably true, though it doesn't speak to the morality of slavery, and the reaction by many to emancipation.
Again, I am not condoning people being assholes, but it is foolish to expect everyone to hear you out fairly, treat you kindly, with compassion, free of their own prejudices whatever they may be (I know a woman who admitted to disliking me simply because I was similar in appearance to someone she despised).
I'm saying its impractical to tell assholes not to be assholes, and its unjust to tell assholes its illegal to be assholes. And the idea that a few offensive words can lead to litigation (ie sexually commenting about a woman) when non-sexual insults can be as viscious as you like without landing you in trouble I take issue with.
I see equal pay arguments as seperate from what I'm raising, which is more to do with essentially 'common courtesy'.
"Saying that racism/sexism is, in essence, for their own good seems a bit like an excuse to me."
Depends what we're defining as sexism. Again I am not talking about big stuff like pay disparity or institutional issues such as laws restricting women's freedoms (which as a humanist I am opposed to).
The 'immutable' argument, you're right, I was actually responding to doloafing... I'm a bit over-tired atm, I just finished my last exam 2 hours ago.
IJoe, do you just sit there dreaming up ways to compare me to republicans? It always makes me laugh as I've mentioned, Australia doesn't really have that political philosophy (our parties are Labour, which as the name implies is heavy into the working class stuff, and liberal, which, also as the name implies, tends to prefer social/financial libertarianism... in practice anyway, till John Howard started sucking up to Bush.... There is a family first party that is a bit of a worry).
That said I do think African-American's running around with a chip on their shoulder, blaming all their problems on racism is kinda childish, and does nothing to really bridge gaps and solve these problems, generally it aggrevates them (the problems).
"...because right-wing racism against black people in America is better than being poor in Africa. " Thats probably true, though it doesn't speak to the morality of slavery, and the reaction by many to emancipation.