Are we going to admit Universities are producing thin-skinned people?

[Michael Hardner]

9 hours ago, Argus said:

 For example, I can say anything derogatory about Americans and not risk the accusation. If I say something unflattering about Muslims, though, who are not a race, I'd get that accusation, even if what I say is accompanied by evidence supporting the statement.  The same word is used if I say something unflattering about some other group, blacks, as a group, and using statistics. People don't want to hear it, true or not. IT offends them so they lash out with insults.

Your statement with regards to peoples' misunderstandings about the wrongs of generalization is likely true IMO.  

But I do believe you can civilly call out a statement as 'racist' and engage in a conversation.  That, to me, is a mutual exploration of what 'racist' really means, and it is an attempt to converse and understand.  Otherwise, we are censoring words and creating 'safe spaces' so that racists can never be offended, right ?

Now, a blanket accusation that someone is 'racist' is not the same.  That to me IS an insult because the two people in the conversation likely have a different definition of what that means and the accusation cuts the conversation off.

As a side observation, your observation of how generalizations work is very consistent to me.  But most people aren't prepared to have that honest a conversation.  If they were, then you could maybe talk about causes, which is even a more difficult conversation.  (With regards to religion, though, your hypothesis that "in the absence of anything else, religion is the cause" doesn't work.  At some point we'll be able to explore causes more freely on MLW.)

[Michael Hardner]

4 hours ago, Moonlight Graham said:

The school feared the backlash that would result from removing aboriginal protestors.  They cowered.  They were bullied.

 

Maybe that's right.  Do we know ?

[GostHacked]

13 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Not to refer to another person, for sure, to their face.  Unless you want to insult.  Try referring to statements, ideas, and actions - it's easier to define something succinct like that.

It's not an insult if it is true.

[Michael Hardner]

Just now, GostHacked said:

It's not an insult if it is true.

Yes, it's still an insult.  Insults aren't defined by what one person thinks to be true or there wouldn't be such a thing as insults.

[GostHacked]

12 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

It's comforting though not surprising that you follow principles, but I was actually asking about the term 'racist' specifically.  I don't use the term 'snowflake' but I know what it means and I would tacitly accept the term in some instances - fair or not.  I would also recognize the behavior it describes, in fact I HAVE done that.  I don't think I would ever use the term to someone who fits the description, but rather speak to their values.

ex. Bad: "Sorry, snowflake suck it up people aren't going to listen to you" Better: "You know, I hear you.  The world is cruel.  Reach out to others for strength because it isn't going to change"

You'll push back on this but not take trolling to task? Seems kind of counter productive.

[Michael Hardner]

Again, since we aren't talking about moderation I assume you mean in-person trolling.  My question: how is anything in my above quote trolling ?  I think speaking to the ostensible virtual snowflake in my example is done at their level.

[GostHacked]

8 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Yes, it's still an insult.  Insults aren't defined by what one person thinks to be true or there wouldn't be such a thing as insults.

Applying the proper label to someone because they are that way is not an insult. This is why we have the term snowflake to describe these people who are easily butt-hurt by every day language.

[GostHacked]

3 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Again, since we aren't talking about moderation I assume you mean in-person trolling.  My question: how is anything in my above quote trolling ?  I think speaking to the ostensible virtual snowflake in my example is done at their level.

Come on Mike, are you simply playing stupid here? Is it because you cannot follow a conversation properly which results in replies that do not make any sense?

[Michael Hardner]

Quote

Applying the proper label to someone because they are that way is not an insult. This is why we have the term snowflake to describe these people who are easily butt-hurt by every day language.

We're talking about decorum here, so it should apply to all people regardless of political stance.  Would you call somebody offended by the term 'racist' a snowflake ?

These terms are self-justifying: nobody really uses them to define themselves, but they're used by others to basically denigrate them and apply different rules to dealing with them.

[Michael Hardner]

5 minutes ago, GostHacked said:

Come on Mike, are you simply playing stupid here? Is it because you cannot follow a conversation properly which results in replies that do not make any sense?

I don't play stupid.  If things are even a little unclear, I should be able to ask for clarification.  I didn't understand what you were saying about trolling, but I would like to.  Communication is a two-way street, so if you want me to get it I ask you to try to clarify.

[Michael Hardner]

15 minutes ago, GostHacked said:

You'll push back on this but not take trolling to task? Seems kind of counter productive.

If I had to guess at what you mean, I would say you're asserting that I don't consider the personal insult of 'racist' to be insulting/trolling.  But that's wrong, because I do.

[dialamah]

7 hours ago, TimG said:

Then why weren't security called in to move them? Are you saying that security is simply incompetent and allowed an event to be disrupted when the protesters could be peacefully  relocated? Or perhaps the threat of violence from the protesters was overt enough to give them pause. I think the latter because people who pull these kinds of stunts are bullies who are not afraid to use violence to impose their will on others.

I think you are assuming things for which you have no evidence, other than that you don't like protesters, or at least these particular protesters.   

[cybercoma]

14 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

PC is more of a non-descript descriptor like 'snowflake' and 'SJW' I think.  If someone called you those things it could be an insult, but calling some 'racist' is an insult.  Plenty of right - of - centre people are 'offended' by being called that, and they report it.  Rightfully so.

So essentially you've all decided to make MLW a safe space for racists. Good to know. Enjoy Junior Stormfront.  This forum is utter garbage now if that's the case.

[cybercoma]

14 hours ago, bcsapper said:

I think they are only offensive if they are wrong.

Riiiight. Funny how you'er so concerned about how being called racist is offensive, but not at all concerned about the offensiveness of the racism itself. Must be nice to have the social standing to dictate to others when they've experienced racism or not.

[cybercoma]

14 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Maybe 50 years of racist caricatures in popular culture might have something to do with it ?  We were taught Sounder in junior high.  Simple morality is what it is.

If it was simple morality, you would fight against the racism, not coddling the POS who perpetrates it.

[Michael Hardner]

6 minutes ago, cybercoma said:

So essentially you've all decided to make MLW a safe space for racists. Good to know. Enjoy Junior Stormfront.  This forum is utter garbage now if that's the case.

What is a 'racist' ?  Are you one ?

[cybercoma]

1 minute ago, Michael Hardner said:

What is a 'racist' ?  Are you one ?

It's pathetic that you even have to ask. Shows how skewed your judgment has become. Charles Anthony's radical conspiracy mindset has poisoned you.

Edited December 22, 2016 by cybercoma

[Michael Hardner]

I'll step aside the personal comments here.  I'll ask again what is a 'racist' ?    I wouldn't say I have never had a racist thought or word.  I wouldn't excuse myself that way.

MLW won't become a Junior Stormfront but we also won't ban people who offend the most sensitive person on the internet. I sincerely hope that comforts you.

The best dialogue is difficult, and complex and these discussions fall into that category IMO.  The alternative is segregated discussion, segregated and Balkanized culture, degeneration of community and dehumanization of those who don't agree with us.

[Guest]

29 minutes ago, cybercoma said:

Riiiight. Funny how you'er so concerned about how being called racist is offensive, but not at all concerned about the offensiveness of the racism itself. Must be nice to have the social standing to dictate to others when they've experienced racism or not.

Oh I am.  That's why I'm not a racist, I guess.

[drummindiver]

11 hours ago, eyeball said:

You tell me.

And I'll be sure to do so when that happens.

Oy vei history denier.

[drummindiver]

13 hours ago, Argus said:

There are no absolutes, but in today's society it is certainly considered a major foul to use racist language. There certainly are a few instances where it is deserved. But think of the many, many MANY times it has been used here. How many of them were in response to a directly, obviously, clearly racist statement. Ie, "N... are inferior to white men!" Never, as far as I'm aware. Instead it's usually used, at least here, whenever anyone makes a statement with regard to a group which SJWs consider to be under their protection. For example, I can say anything derogatory about Americans and not risk the accusation. If I say something unflattering about Muslims, though, who are not a race, I'd get that accusation, even if what I say is accompanied by evidence supporting the statement.  The same word is used if I say something unflattering about some other group, blacks, as a group, and using statistics. People don't want to hear it, true or not. IT offends them so they lash out with insults.

 

 

Exactly. The asounding bigotry towards the States who are our closest ally and share our morals and values is beyond saturation on MLW. Mention the tens if thousands of Islamic terrorist atracks this year alone you are branded xenophobic. 

[Argus]

13 hours ago, dialamah said:

Wow, passive resistance is the same as punching someone!   The ideas here get more bizarre by the day.

When someone stands in your way and physically prevents you from going somewhere you want to go, that can't be described as passive. It's force. 

[bush_cheney2004]

5 hours ago, drummindiver said:

Exactly. The asounding bigotry towards the States who are our closest ally and share our morals and values is beyond saturation on MLW. Mention the tens if thousands of Islamic terrorist atracks this year alone you are branded xenophobic. 

 

True....anti-American bigotry is widely accepted in Canadian culture as normal and healthy.  The very definition of the Canadian identity depends on it.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

True....anti-American bigotry is widely accepted in Canadian culture as normal and healthy.  The very definition of the Canadian identity depends on it.

I once mentioned to that to my Wife's family at a gathering.  I was almost excommunicated.

[GostHacked]

7 hours ago, drummindiver said:

Exactly. The asounding bigotry towards the States who are our closest ally and share our morals and values is beyond saturation on MLW. Mention the tens if thousands of Islamic terrorist atracks this year alone you are branded xenophobic. 

It's not bigotry to the whole of the US. Just parts of the government. That's the clarification needed, otherwise you'd be doing the same as those who are slandering all of Islam here.