I’m not quite sure what to make of this individual. To be fair, I’ve seen him be thoughtful and intelligent – though never completely civil. More often, however, he comes across as exceedingly intolerant, and has an unfortunate predilection toward making sweeping generalizations about entire religions, nations, cultures, etc.
Does he give reason? Sure; but he is a philosophical horse-doctor. Every fault, every shortcoming a group of people has ever been associated with indicts that entire group for all eternity. And this, or course, grants license to paint every member of that group with the same brush, including fellow posters. Since well nigh any significant group has faults, Gobear has plenty of targets to fling his feces at.
Frankly, he has turned the corner and despite occasional bouts of lucidity, I consider him a full and three-quarters ignoramus. I’m appalled by it, and I’m surprised he doesn’t take more flack than he already does. Just a few examples:
As usual, there’s a kernel of truth in there. The caste system is a regrettable aspect of Hinduism. Unfortunately for BrightNshiny and many like him, the fact that he and his denomination don’t support discrimination doesn’t absolve him of any sins or grant him the ability to speak out about his beliefs.
Ah yes, since recent terrorists tend to look alike, it’s acceptable to single out everyone who shares that ethnic heritage for scrutiny.
Because there are fundamentalists, gullible people, and of course gullible fundamentalists, we know that that by the law of todus molens that intelligent Christians number less than half of the total group.
A couple bleeding hearts have obviously peed in the punch bowl for anyone with liberal leanings. In fact, liberals are now all anti-patriotic bin Laden apologists.
Certainly there are scores of people in any country with prejudices. Iraq is unique in that they unanimously hate Isreal, Jews, and the US. I guess that’s how they managed the unanimous presidential vote some months back.
**Please note that Goldenhagen’s work has been, let’s just say questioned.. I can’t believe no one took exception to the notion that the entire population was knowingly and directly culpable in the holocaust. Unless you believe in a unique German gene, this paints a pretty dark picture of all people.
Witch’s views were being debated, but nowhere did she make anti-gay statements that would warrant this attack.
I’m not sure that claim one is correct, claim two of Christian hegemonic control I also doubt, but the real point to ponder is why it is acceptable to mock a group just because they are in the majority.
Way to mock an entire nation because they are afflicted with widespread poverty.
I’m still waiting for proof of that last head-slapper. I suppose it is justification for the earlier comment about ‘the help’. Don’t tell me I’m the only one picturing Leona Helmsley here.
I’m not sure what you mean by that. Clearly this isn’t just about the [recent] Hindu comments. I’m pretty far removed from being a touchy-feely advocate of hyper political correctness - but gross generalizations designed to impugn individuals without thought to their own independent views is not benign, in my opinion. It’s ignorance in one of its most dangerous forms.
I have ‘dug’ Gobear on occasion too, but I’m fairly Gobeared-out at this point.
There’s most-always some truth to be had in what gobear has to say … the problem is that sometimes this truth is carried to an end that does not justify the means. I think that can be said for just about anyone who posts about as hot-button topics as are cited in this thread, though. With notable exceptions, of course. All in all, gobear is ahead of a lot of other people on my “People whose opinions I’m tired of because however much fact there is, you can’t avoid the bullshit attached” list. He’s said some regretable things here, to be sure, and I wouldn’t say I agree with even half of his political views. But again, you can do a lot worse than this fellow.
Wow, I’m flattered that Waverly took the time to read my posts and Pit me. You love me, you really love me!!
So she (I don’t know Waverly’s gender, so I hope I’m using the correct pronoun) doesn’t like my opinions? Pity. I have a dark view of human nature, a view borne of many years of experience and education, and it underlies many of my posts. Perhaps you don’t like my POV, but I don’t care. I post to express my opinions, not to curry the favor of the audience.
Anyway, I’m not sure why you have your panties in such a wad. You disagree that India is an extremely dirty place, but still filled with wonders? Hey, sister, I’ve been there, and I’d be happy to send you my photos. I’m not sure how stating the facts is mocking the nation. Am I supposed to say that India is not poor and not filthy?
As for the labor thing, I worked my way through college and spent several years afterward waiting tables, making beds, and doing hotel scut work in Yellowstone, the Tetons, Grand Canyon, and Death Valley. I worked my ass off and always did my best to make customers happy. Now that I’m on the other side, I expect to get service on the level I gave. If I’m paying for a service, I’d better get it.
Re: Iraq. Read a newspaper.
Re: Germany. Read a history book, or better yet, visit the Holocaust Museum here in DC.
As for Autz’s asinine post, there is a difference between stereotyping (bad) and generalization (not always accurate but often useful). I can just see your revison of history ttxts:
“On December 7, 1942, certain individuals not representing the Japanese as a whole in any way attacked Pearl Harbor, an action we do not wish to condemn because there are two sides to every story.”
I’m not sure how you pick out a male Muslim by sight if he isn’t of middle eastern origin, but the logic isn’t mine. You can interpret this any way you wish and draw your own conclusions.
Whether I agree with him all the time or not Gobear is and will continue to be one of my favorite posters.
I find him to be well-read, well-educated, well-traveled and humorous.
He has always been polite to me and expressed his opinions very passionately.
I would rather disagree with him but walk away considering some of the points he makes than read other posts where people talk about subjects they have no knowledge of.
I also think Waverly is guilty of not reading my posts carefully. For example, she claims that I said “Most Christians are dumb,” but she quotes me as saying,"
“A large segment” is not equivalent to “most Christians,” and she ignores that I said “there are many intelligent, thoughtful Christians.”
I thinkeverybody should be questioned, but I think it’s ludicrous to treat all people as being equally likely to commit terrorism.
I guess the definition of the word “single” has changed since I last checked. How does “keep an eye open for everyone matching certain characteristics” equal “singled out”? I guess I just don’t get it… the means of investigating is to NARROW one’s focus, not broaden it as much as possible.
Maybe that’s why security at airports is such a joke.
gobear, if I might (and feel free, either of you [Waverly or gobear] to tell me I mightn’t):
Waverly’s male.
I think the point he is trying to make is that sometimes you’ll take facts 1 through 15 and go to point 25, when in his opinion (and sometimes I share this with him) point 20 is about as far as you can reasonably go.
Sometimes your manner of stating something tends to imply that any other viewpoint is ill-based. At least, that’s the opinion I have. While you certainly shouldn’t be currying your responses to what the general SDMB person will want to see, I think it beneficial to at least make sure you’re saying what you think … that your opinion is borne out of what you are saying to the best (or most reasonable, perhaps) of your abilities.
IMO. YMMV. Etc. And as I said there are any number of people on this MB who are as guilty of this as you are, and many moreso. A brief foray into GD would yield more than you could poke a stick at.
So in the very same paragraph you said the the unthinking Xtians are a “large segment”, that there are many intelligent, thinking Xtians, but that they are a minority.
Sounds maybe a bit conflicting. Maybe it’s just adjective abuse?
Gobear, you’ve made a few more incorrect assumptions. I’m neither female nor do I like you. But hey, why fuck up your batting average now?
You can describe India any way you like, but I happen to feel it is demeaning to compare so many people’s country of origin as a latrine.
A have a couple cite requests, if cites exist as you claim:
**Which newspaper and in which issue is there a report of all Iraqis hating Jews, Israel, and the US?
Where in the Holocaust Museum is the exhibit stating that the vast majority of Germans were members of the Nazi party who knowingly participated in the Holocaust?**
I’m so glad to you included your resume as support for your reference to service professionals as ‘the help’. Does this make you the most knowledgeable [ex-] service professional on the board? I’m sill curious how you came up with that.
Jebus, what thrilling masturbatory word play. You state: “there are many intelligent, thoughtful Christians, but they are a minority”.
Minority: the state of having less than half (OED def. #3) Most: the majority of (OED def. #2)
Since you are smart enough to know this, I can only conclude you are putting us on. So tell us, why say one thing and then claim to have said another with word contortion?
I like that about gobear and several other posters here. I find it highly annoying when people try to qualify their statements about right and wrong with “that’s just my opinion.” If gobear or anyone else holds to a particular viewpoint it seems reasonable to me that they’d believe themselves correct and everyone else incorrect.
There is an implied assumption here and I think the lack of an explicit statement of this assumption is part of the disconnect which sparked this thread. The implied assumption here is that given the current geopolitical situation and the distribution of wealth/power/etc therein, certain groups, mostly made up of individuals sharing ethnic traits, are more likely to commit terrorism than other groups, mostly made up of individuals sharing other ethnic traits. The statement without this assumption being clearly spelled out could also be read as a bigoted remark. An insinuation that it is a trait of the ethnicity as opposed to a offshoot of the geopolitical realities of the current time.
I’ll assume this is an innocent question. You are referring to the noun. As a verb, single means to “regard separately”, and though on this rare occasion I don’t think the OED gives the best definition, it implies in this context that people meeting the described criteria are treated differently than those that don’t. Make sense?
Now, see, I’ve got to disagree with you there, MGibson. My opinion is just that, my opinion. It is my take on a situation. Others are entitled to their take and I don’t necessarily think their take is wrong. Ill-informed, asinine and laughable, perhaps, but not wrong.