Thunderf00t gets his own FtB blog...

[televator]

I can't see how my analogy could have been so misconstrued except through my having been mislabelled.

The "lid" of political correctness doesn't cause the problem (the lid blowing off/pot boiling over) - it exacerbates a pre-existing one (simmering pot).

And, as I've already pointed out, just because something *sounds* "libertarian" - which is an Americanism with pejorative connotations - doesn't mean that it is motivated by a "libertarian" attitude.

Likewise, the claim that I *sound like* a white racist from the Deep South.

So you say the problem is pre-existing and the best way to deal with it is to do nothing. Dragan, I feel as though you'd be the type of person who'd watch some of the sexual harassment/bigotry scenes in the show Mad Men or even see it unfold in front of you and you'd say "Letting this happen is clearly better than the alternative of actually doing something about it." Even if you aren't the one participating, Dragan, this makes you an enabler.

An enabler of misogynists, an enabler of white racists from the deep South, etc...

 

[ImprobableJoe]

Greetings,

I've edited the post as I left out a section following the Whoopi videos.

And, as I thought, there are still going to be disagreement(s) on this - although I hadn't expected it to be resolved on a first attempt.

Kindest regards,

James

Let me ask you a question:

Do you think that you're being "polite" by sticking "greetings" and "kindest regards" on the ends of your posts, and being dismissive, condescending, and just a teensy bit bigoted in your posts? Do you understand that you can't "resolve" racism to someone who has been a victim of it, or that you can't explain how sexism "really" is to women?

 

[ImprobableJoe]

I can't see how my analogy could have been so misconstrued except through my having been mislabelled.

The "lid" of political correctness doesn't cause the problem (the lid blowing off/pot boiling over) - it exacerbates a pre-existing one (simmering pot).

And, as I've already pointed out, just because something *sounds* "libertarian" - which is an Americanism with pejorative connotations - doesn't mean that it is motivated by a "libertarian" attitude.

Likewise, the claim that I *sound like* a white racist from the Deep South.

So you see the problem is pre-existing and the best way to deal with it is to do nothing. Dragan, I feel as though you'd be the type of person who'd watch some of the sexual harassment/bigotry scenes in the show Mad Men or even see it unfold in front of you and you'd say "Letting this happen is clearly better than the alternative of actually doing something about it." Even if you aren't the one participating, Dragan, this makes you an enabler.

An enabler of misogynists, an enabler of white racists from the deep South, etc...

Well, all of those things, and the fact that he believes that he can talk down to the people who actually deal with those issues, from his place of absolute ignorance, and tell them what they really see and feel. If someone says he's saying all the things that identify them as a bigot, it CANNOT be because he's actually saying those things, it is because as a white guy he can declare whether or not something sounds bigoted to other people.

 

[CommonEnlightenment]

I think that setting people up for certain situations only makes the problem worse. Are you part of the problem or part of the solution?

Do you want to be a person the helps people drive for success or do you want to be a person that creates problems so that you are setting people up for failure? And what are the potential benefits, if any, that could arise out of the second scenario?

If this site is about the latter then you will see me posting less and less around this place.

 

[ImprobableJoe]

I think that setting people up for certain situations only makes the problem worse. Are you part of the problem or part of the solution?

Do you want to be a person the helps people drive for success or do you want to be a person that creates problems so that you are setting people up for failure? And what are the potential benefits, if any, that could arise out of the second scenario?

If this site is about the latter then you will see me posting less and less around this place.

Bye. :lol: :twisted:

 

[CommonEnlightenment]

i would expect little else from someone with a joker avatar........ Just saying.

 

[ImprobableJoe]

i would expect little else from someone with a joker avatar........ Just saying.

I don't think I was expecting some sort of weirdly vague passive-aggressive comment from you. *shrugs*

 

[australopithecus]

Hey kids. Can we not turn into 13 year olds? Thanks.

 

[ImprobableJoe]

Hey kids. Can we not turn into 13 year olds? Thanks.

False equivalence. Don't let the ultimate power go to your head.

 

[australopithecus]

False schmalse.

 

[ImprobableJoe]

False schmalse.

Deep rifts!

 

[Gunboat Diplomat]

I think that setting people up for certain situations only makes the problem worse. Are you part of the problem or part of the solution?

What are you talking about?

 

[televator]

I think that setting people up for certain situations only makes the problem worse. Are you part of the problem or part of the solution?

Do you want to be a person the helps people drive for success or do you want to be a person that creates problems so that you are setting people up for failure? And what are the potential benefits, if any, that could arise out of the second scenario?

If this site is about the latter then you will see me posting less and less around this place.

 

[Dragan Glas]

Greetings,

My take on it was formed a few decades ago, when the "Loony Left", and their daft ideas, were to the fore in the UK.

For example, that you couldn't call a blackboard "black", because it's "racist" - you had to call it "green"(!). And there were similar issues with "whiteboards". Or the suggestion (by a militant feminist in the US) that a certain breed of dog be renamed "Doberperson", because "Doberman" was "sexist" - properly speaking, it's spelled "Dobermann".

It was these sort of over-the-top ideas that caused me to decide that political correctness wasn't helpful.

Hmm. Much like sexism i think there are probably varying degrees of "political correctness", and varying degrees of what will get you a negative reaction. I do recall the switch from "black" to "African American", and then back, and I've always found that one to be a little silly. On the other hand, I've seen a lot of people complain about "political correctness" when they're called out for using insults such as "gay", and that's a case where someone is trying to use it as a shield for their homophobic remark (even if they themselves aren't actually homophobic, the insult itself *is* and using it perpetuates the idea that being homosexual is a bad thing). When people complain about PC, it's usually the latter case; which is why Joe straight up assumed it was the latter case.

I agree regarding some of the ridiculous changes which have occurred.

Personally, I don't use "gay" to mean homosexual, any more than I use "straight" to mean heterosexual. I don't think of myself as "straight".

These are the most acceptable euphemisms chosen by the homosexual community to allow them to gain acceptance in the "white straight male" culture.

I don't particularly like their being used in that way because it just perpetuates the use of euphemisms, and with negative connotations.

If a homosexual calls me "straight", they're implying that they - and all other homosexuals - are its antonym(s): bent, crooked, twisted, warped, etc.

Equally, if a homosexual calls himself/herself "gay", they're implying that I - and all other heterosexuals - are its antonym(s): depressed, sad, unhappy, etc.

[Not to mention that the Scottish regiment known as the "Gay Gordons" are finding themselves something of a laughing stock - and as someone whose family is military on both sides, this is not funny.]

I realise that modern usage of these words have changed, but I think that it would be better if the homosexual community *truly* "came out" and just used the word "homosexual". It can't be misused, like the other two words, and - dare I say - everyone would move on.

Still, I think it's worth pointing out: you *don't* get it. You might partially get it. I think I partially "get" sexism for a variety of reasons. But I'll never truly "get it", as I've never had to grow up with the life experience and socialization that females do (e.g., I have not had to deal with tons of media (viewed from a young age on up) that has a single message: your value as a human being is in how physically attractive you are).

I'd accept that, as a man, I'm not going to get what it's like to be a woman in a number of circumstances - otherwise there wouldn't be the idea of "Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus" to indicate the difference in their perspective on life. I think - and trust - that I can understand them to a certain extent. No man can understand what it's like to be a mother - from being pregnant to giving birth - equally, no woman can understand what it's like to be a father.

At risk of being seen as "condescending" - again! - I think the "physical attractive(ness)" issue is more prevalent in the West. In other cultures, it's more a case of women (still) being seen as chattel.

And, yes, no man really *gets* that - although the Berbers come close.

Kindest regards,

James

 

[Dragan Glas]

Greetings,

I can't see how my analogy could have been so misconstrued except through my having been mislabelled.

The "lid" of political correctness doesn't cause the problem (the lid blowing off/pot boiling over) - it exacerbates a pre-existing one (simmering pot).

And, as I've already pointed out, just because something *sounds* "libertarian" - which is an Americanism with pejorative connotations - doesn't mean that it is motivated by a "libertarian" attitude.

Likewise, the claim that I *sound like* a white racist from the Deep South.

So you say the problem is pre-existing and the best way to deal with it is to do nothing. Dragan, I feel as though you'd be the type of person who'd watch some of the sexual harassment/bigotry scenes in the show Mad Men or even see it unfold in front of you and you'd say "Letting this happen is clearly better than the alternative of actually doing something about it." Even if you aren't the one participating, Dragan, this makes you an enabler.

An enabler of misogynists, an enabler of white racists from the deep South, etc...

Again, televator, you've missed what I've said in the same post in which I gave the simmering pot analogy.

From the self-same post in which I used this analogy, I said this:

Using political correctness as a lid to prevent these will not address the under-lying issues.

In order to address such issues, you need education.

And, for those who can't afford that "privilege", it needs to be provided through public funding. Something which is taken for granted (as a "privilege" perhaps) in Europe, but which the right-wing in America are attempting to dismantle.

Potential religious tensions need to be addressed through teaching Comparative Religion. Over time, the youth will grow up realising that there's nothing "special" about their own religion's perspective on god(s) and may come to give up any potential fundamentalist attitudes. These tensions will dissipate over time.

Cultural tensions, including racial, can be similarly addressed through History and Multi-cultural/Ethnic Studies. In this way, students will learn how different cultures lived and interacted, and - over time - come to appreciate their differences whilst seeing others as fellow human beings. Again, such studies, are being voted down by southern states' legislators - due to racism.

Gender-based issues can be also be addressed through education. Simple contradictions of inequality in pay, for example - an hour's work is an hour's work, regardless of whether it's done by a man, a woman, black, white, by someone in a wheelchair or not - are easily understood by young people today. Again, such additions to the curricula are being voted down by conservatives.

In other words, I'm not suggesting "do nothing (to rock the boat/change anything)", I'm suggesting - what I believe to be - a better solution than political correctness.

Or should I describe it as a "augmented form of political correctness", which includes education rather than just calling people on epithets?

Kindest regards,

James

 

[Dragan Glas]

Greetings,

I've edited the post as I left out a section following the Whoopi videos.

And, as I thought, there are still going to be disagreement(s) on this - although I hadn't expected it to be resolved on a first attempt.

Kindest regards,

James

Let me ask you a question:

Do you think that you're being "polite" by sticking "greetings" and "kindest regards" on the ends of your posts, and being dismissive, condescending, and just a teensy bit bigoted in your posts? Do you understand that you can't "resolve" racism to someone who has been a victim of it, or that you can't explain how sexism "really" is to women?

With all due respect, ImprobableJoe, do you understand what it's like to be equated with sociopaths? Who *can't* understand what it's like to empathise with another's fear, pain and suffering?

That's how I've felt you've been dismissing me. On top of your mislabelling me and your assumption that my motivation was "racism/sexism/creepiness".

I may not have suffered racism as you - or others - have, but I have been on the receiving end of "bullying", if you'll allow me that much similarity in experience.

Ever had to plead with classmates to help you find your glasses because, without them, your eyesight's so poor you have little hope of finding them on your own, and your classmates are afraid that they'll fall foul of the bully - who took them off you and hid them - if they do help you? He was only there for two years - the critical two leading up to what you call graduation high school - but in that time, my grades fell from amongst the top in the class to average by the time I did my exams - which materially affected my life.

I stand by my belief that merely telling someone "you can't say that!", without addressing the underlying attitude through education, is a poor policy.

Is that being dismissive or being condescending?

I don't believe that I tried to "explain how sexism *really* is to women" - if I gave that impression, I apologise.

As for my use of "greetings"/"kindest regards" - I use them in the same way that one might use "Dear Sir/Madam" and "Yours sincerely" in a letter. I realise it may seem quaint - or condescending if the content of the post reinforces that impression - but I feel more comfortable using them rather than just dive in. After all, if I had dropped their use during our - hopefully coming-to-a-close - disagreement, would you not think that I was "throwing off the gloves" - or worse, that you might think I was revealing my true colours, in that I only "pretended" to be civil, until someone irritated me enough to "forget" to be polite?

Well, all of those things, and the fact that he believes that he can talk down to the people who actually deal with those issues, from his place of absolute ignorance, and tell them what they really see and feel. If someone says he's saying all the things that identify them as a bigot, it CANNOT be because he's actually saying those things, it is because as a white guy he can declare whether or not something sounds bigoted to other people.

Having read back the various posts, I can see how I may have appeared to you - nevertheless, my posts lacked the motivation you attribute(d) to them.

And, as I said above, the "ignorance" is relative, not "absolute".

May I say - with all due respect - that if you reread your posts, you may realise that you came across as someone with a massive chip on your shoulder regarding those you see as "privileged".

And if I may draw this disagreement to a soon-to-be close, ImprobablyJoe, I apologise for my contribution to our misunderstanding.

Errr,...Kindest regards,

James

 

[)O( Hytegia )O(]

Do you think that you're being "polite" by sticking "greetings" and "kindest regards" on the ends of your posts, and being dismissive, condescending, and just a teensy bit bigoted in your posts?

With all due respect,
James does that uniformly.

In every post I've ever read from him on this entire website. Ever.

It's his bread in which he stacks his well-made sandwiches for people to enjoy - if one could eat a discussion, of course.

 

[Frenger]

Greetings,

I realise that modern usage of these words have changed, but I think that it would be better if the homosexual community *truly* "came out" and just used the word "homosexual". It can't be misused, like the other two words, and - dare I say - everyone would move on.

I don't want to strawman you dragan glas so I shall ask first.

Are you really saying that if homosexuals could agree on a term that can't be misused, the whole problem of inequality (towards that particular group) would vanish? Or it would at least go some way to resolving the problem?

 

[ImprobableJoe]

[
With all due respect,
James does that uniformly.

In every post I've ever read from him on this entire website. Ever.

It's his bread in which he stacks his well-made sandwiches for people to enjoy - if one could eat a discussion, of course.

I find it insincere and fake, so of like stacking sandwiches, ice cream, and broken glass between slices of bread and calling it all sandwiches.

 

[)O( Hytegia )O(]

I find it insincere and fake, so of like stacking sandwiches, ice cream, and broken glass between slices of bread and calling it all sandwiches.

ImprobableJoe,

If it were to be insincere, then it wouldn't be a uniform thing that echoes throughout all of his posts. "Insincere" in this case designating that he did it on purpose in direct conflict with his tone. It can't be "Insincere" if he uses that format uniformly throughout all of his posts.

For example, if I were to sarcastically place this post in letter format and in proper tone and specter use it to rag on your inability to distinguish a user's common posting traits and to mock your lackluster ability to grasp the failing on your part with your accusation, then perhaps you would have a point in calling my post "insincere." But James did nothing of the sort. He simply uses that to sign on and off and to give order to his statements.

Not everyone is an insincere twat.

With All Due Respect,

Hytegia