Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #551  
Old Yesterday, 07:14 PM
Max S. is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Florida, USA
Posts: 2,043
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
The overt act is the expression of being unwelcome and/or abnormal/inferior.

That is an act of harm.

If your mother said she wished you had never been born and wishes you were gone would that be of no harm?
I agree, expressing bigoted acts can cause harm. Directly even.

I don't think that my mother wishing I had never been born or that I would go away is necessarily harmful, but acting upon those wishes certainly can be. That includes telling me.

But do I think it is always wrong for a mother to tell her son that she wished he was never born? Do I think it is always wrong for a mother to tell her son that she wants him to just go away? A very nuanced "no", to both.

~Max
  #552  
Old Yesterday, 07:23 PM
Max S. is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Florida, USA
Posts: 2,043
Quote:
Originally Posted by IvoryTowerDenizen View Post
Youre entitled to your opinion, or course, but I wholeheartedly disagree. A society in which a segment is not wanted, that is a harmful act.
We can agree to disagree on this. I will admit that if I took your position as to whether wanting or wishing something would go away constitutes harm, I would support a ban on bigotry.

~Max
  #553  
Old Yesterday, 07:28 PM
Max S. is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Florida, USA
Posts: 2,043
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
That you left out the most reasonable choice: knowing that victim blaming is likely to be heard like that, you consider if there was a way to make the point, assuming you conclude that the point is reasonable, in a more carefully worded manner. If it is clear that you are at least trying your honest best to make the point, for any given subject that is known to be a tricky one to discuss without causing offense, respectfully, then that effort should be respected, unless the point you are trying to make is one of the few that are far beyond the pale.
Yes, of course. I used curt language for the sake of brevity and to mirror the language in the example I quoted, but in practice I would go to certain lengths to make my opinion more polite, and to distinguish it from victim-blaming in general. Or at the very least I would try to do so after being called out about it.

~Max
  #554  
Old Yesterday, 07:33 PM
Max S. is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Florida, USA
Posts: 2,043
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrDibble View Post
Yes. There is precisely one such context.

That context is a parental figure informing them of the existence of the phenomenon, in a warning fashion.

It is not a public debate where the theory is given any resemblance of credence to.
The followup question: why?

I gave my reasons already. You didn't address them, but opted to answer my question directly. Why do you think the only appropriate context to tell a black teenager about a theory of racial or hereditary intelligence is one where parents do so as a warning?

~Max
  #555  
Old Yesterday, 07:56 PM
Max S. is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Florida, USA
Posts: 2,043
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrDibble View Post
That is correct.

Only a complete child can be a naif bigot. Functioning adults have to either intend the harm, or lie to themselves about the harm. That is precisely correct.
Adults can be naive about other things. Why can't they be naive about bigotry?
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrDibble View Post
I don't see how.

People act based on an absolutely incoherent idea called God, all the time. That doesn't render the idea of God meaningful. It just means people don't need meaningful motivations in order to act.
You and I have a different way of assigning meaning to beliefs. But let's leave the God business out of this thread. I don't think we need to resolve this difference to move forward.

Question 1: Do you think wishing for some thing necessarily implies endorsement of that thing and the processes that are necessary for that thing to realistically happen?
Example 1: If I wish I had your stuffed animal, does that mean I endorse your sadness from having that stuffed animal taken away from you?
Question 2: Do you think wishing for some thing necessarily implies endorsement of the processes that are necessary for that thing to realistically happen, even if you are ignorant of those processes?
Example 2: If I wish I had your stuffed animal, does that mean I endorse your sadness from having the stuffed animal taken away from you, even if I thought you did not like the toy and therefore would not be sad?
~Max
  #556  
Old Yesterday, 08:53 PM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 22,930
Those who characterize racism as something necessarily of those with ill intent (or who are lying to themselves) have a harmfully naive and simplistic either-or understanding. Most of us have implicit beliefs that result in actions that in aggregate have racist impacts. Most are not explicitly of ill intent or even lying to themselves. They are honestly unaware of how their implicit beliefs impact their actions and what impact those actions have. They are ignorant of how institutional inertia which they passively participate in propagates ongoing racist outcomes.

Labeling racism as something of those other bad people, surely not something of we honest folk of good intent, is of real harms.

Making ourselves less ignorant of the racist biases we act upon without any awareness of is made less likely by that simplistic mindset.


Max, as for the curt language- that really in your example was the issue that was potentially offensive.

No question that some will be offended by some ideas no matter how parsed and that sometimes that is justified for that matter. No question that sometimes posters claim no intent to offend when it is hard to believe such a lack and with no regret expressed for the offense given. But I maintain that many discussions are still possible when some level of benefit of the doubt is given. And with tight moderation and containment of a short list of specific subject of discussion.

It does further seem to me that moderation on needless offense is lax in fora that it should be tight in and that the snark is more often just nasty and without humor or wit.
  #557  
Old Yesterday, 09:07 PM
octopus's Avatar
octopus is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 9,419
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
We used to be better.
Then we started to replace debate with insults and it kinda went downhill from there.
A very persistent and vocal minority want that to be a feature in order to prevent challenge to the ideological orthodoxy of the board. Why? Who knows? It seems a place where everyone thinks in a homogeneous manner would be pointless.
  #558  
Old Yesterday, 09:23 PM
Chisquirrel is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 2,749
Oh come on. You couldn't fit "hive mind" in your post?
  #559  
Old Yesterday, 09:26 PM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 22,930
No one is asking for ideological homogeneity.

The list of what should be outside the pale for discussion even in a tightly constrained manner may be bigger than I’d like, but the idea that some discussions are too offensive to allow is not in and of itself outside what is already done.

There is a place on this board for insults and intentional offense given (once upon a time with some cleverness and funny expected). But yeah GD should not be it.
  #560  
Old Yesterday, 09:44 PM
thorny locust's Avatar
thorny locust is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: Upstate New York
Posts: 1,477
Max, occasionally I find myself in a discussion with someone who doesn't understand what I'm saying.

I'll do my best to explain myself in different words. I'll sometimes do this repeatedly.

But there are occasions when it eventually becomes apparent to me that the other person and I could keep on going around and around on the subject until a hundred years from next Tuesday, but comprehension is not going to be forthcoming; at least, not due to my attempting to explain myself in combination of words number 16, or 316.

I've concluded that this is one of those occasions. I hope that I've been making sense to others posting in, and/or reading, this thread. I hope that I've been making sense to the moderators. I apparently haven't been making any sense to you. You, for what it's worth, are not making any sense to me. I don't think this is going to change; at least, not on this subject.
  #561  
Old Yesterday, 11:47 PM
MrDibble's Avatar
MrDibble is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Cape Town, South Africa &
Posts: 26,920
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max S. View Post
The followup question: why?

I gave my reasons already. You didn't address them, but opted to answer my question directly. Why do you think the only appropriate context to tell a black teenager about a theory of racial or hereditary intelligence is one where parents do so as a warning?

~Max
I said "parental figure", not "parent", that can include teachers.

And as to "why"? For one thing - because anything else carries the same "real harm" risk as shown by my earlier cites about Black youth's response to racism.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Max S. View Post
Adults can be naive about other things. Why can't they be naive about bigotry?
For the same reason they aren't allowed to get away with naivety as an excuse about gun safety if they own a gun, or the rules of the road if they drive a car. Only, with bigotry, their mouth and fingers are the vehicle and the weapon.
Quote:
You and I have a different way of assigning meaning to beliefs. But let's leave the God business out of this thread.
Why? It's a perfectly valid analogy. People acting based on a concept that is cognitively meaningless.
Oh, there's so much assumed social meaning built up around it, which is what they're actually referring to. But the concept itself? Not so much.
Quote:
I don't think we need to resolve this difference to move forward.
I don't think you're interested in "moving forward" at all, by this point. I'm happy to just step out of it, like thorny locust.

Like I said, I don't need to convince you. As things stand, your stance of giving overwhelmingly more weight to abstract ideas than real human pain is just so counter to my values that I see no value in engaging you at all.
  #562  
Old Yesterday, 11:50 PM
octopus's Avatar
octopus is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 9,419
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
No one is asking for ideological homogeneity.

The list of what should be outside the pale for discussion even in a tightly constrained manner may be bigger than Id like, but the idea that some discussions are too offensive to allow is not in and of itself outside what is already done.

There is a place on this board for insults and intentional offense given (once upon a time with some cleverness and funny expected). But yeah GD should not be it.
What discussions are currently banned on this forum besides advocating actual current crimes? I mean there are discussions I won't participate in or initiate but I'm unaware of content bans.
  #563  
Old Today, 12:05 PM
Wrenching Spanners is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: London
Posts: 634
Quote:
Originally Posted by octopus View Post
What discussions are currently banned on this forum besides advocating actual current crimes? I mean there are discussions I won't participate in or initiate but I'm unaware of content bans.
I believe that commenting on the attractiveness of politicians, especially female ones, is considered out of bounds.
  #564  
Old Today, 12:30 PM
Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,659
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
Where is the farewell post posted? Is there a link?
So does anyone have a link to this farewell post?
  #565  
Old Today, 12:40 PM
Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,659
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
So does anyone have a link to this farewell post?
Never mind. Found it.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:44 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017