Bay 12 Games Forum

You can't change society without, well, changing some things we used to take for granted. I understand that you get pissed, hell I can get pissed sometimes as well, but there are a lot more cases in which someone else is getting pissed because they were passed up on for man or a white person.
However, opposing anti-bigotry carries the problem that only a very small part of it actually serves solely to harm the majority (I'll refer to that as SAWCASMs further on, for Straight Able-bodied, White, Cis, Afluent, Men). In most cases, SAWCASMs being disadvantaged is but a side effect of people trying to improve the position of a disadvantaged group. Opposing that would be an advantage to us, because we're no longer annoyed, but it comes at the cost of halting progress for other groups. The other, more humane option would be t bite through and focusing on eradicating standard bigotry, because then there will be no need for anti-bigotry any more (you don't see anyone fighting for the right to work or vote, now do you?)

Hey guys, bigotry is a two-way street. Typically with the actual bigots and the "Anti-bigots", the ones who take the opposite extreme.

The black man who expects government loans for being black is as much a bigot as the white man who believes black people should leave America.
The gay man who thinks straight people are evil is just as much a bigot as the straight man who hates gays.
The "feminists" who think Women are the betters of society are just as much of bigots as the "masculinists" who believe men are superior.

I don't entirely agree with your reasoning. You're right in identifying that there's a scale on which people can lie. However, you make 3 assumptions that I do not agree with.
First of all, you assume that the 'common extremes' on the scale are close to the true extremes. For that to be true, there would have to be just as many female supremacists as male supremacists. But, even though I admit I used to be of the later brand (don't worry, I got better) for some time, I am the only person I know or have spoken to that actually has claimed that women are better than men. Likewise, I know plenty of people that don't like gays at all, even in the Netherlands, yet I have yet to meet a gay person that openly hates straight people. Now, as a result of this, your idea of the extremes seems to have shifted, and you equate, for example, violent misogynists with feminists critical of modern culture. I don't think it's fair to equate the extreme on one side with a reasonably moderate viewpoint on the other side just because they're equally common and on opposite sides of the scale.

Your second assumption is that the ideal lies somewhere in the middle. We can agree that the extremes are undesirable, of course, but that doesn't mean that the most desirable position is smack-dab in the center. This would be true in a vacuum, but a vacuum sucks all content out of an idea. In our current society, for example, black people face a lot of prejudice. So, life in general is already lopsided for them on that scale. Sitting in the center would do nothing for them because then you neither stimulate nor oppose racism, while the latter is much more beneficial to everyone then doing nothing at all.

Your last assumption is that either side of the scale has the same weight. So what if a black person hates whities? Black people are already disadvantaged and, in general, taken less serious than whities, so their hate is not likely to have a lot of lasting impact. It may be uncomfortable, true, and therefor not recommendable, but is a bit of discomfort really that problematic in the face of what said black person probably has experienced? Add to that the point that your idea of the center is probably not truly the center and that it is very hard for anyone to see what the true center would be (blame our culture), and I don't think you should judge a black person that doesn't like whities at the same rate as a KKK member.

Affirmative action programs are bigoted laws.
NAACP is a bigoted organization, if they were also violent towards whites they would be as bad as the KKK.
The fact that businesses want people to learn Spanish in a predominantly English speaking community just to cater to a few, likely illegal, immigrants from Mexico is just as bigoted as the guy who thinks the immigrants should be forced to learn English.

It's unsettling that you shove 12% of the US population under the denominator "likely illegal immigrant." That aside, you seem awfully protective of the majority culture in the face of groups and laws that don't even threaten it. So what if people are requested to learn a second language? It improves communication both with a significant part of society and with some of the most important trade partners of the US. So what if the NAACP is critical of majority culture? It's not majority culture that constantly has to fight for it's ground in the face groups like the GOP. So what if some laws prefer disadvantaged people over the rest? The fact that those people are disadvantaged means they need help most and keeping that away from them is just callous.

In fact, "bigotry" is any preconceived hatred or dislike, or feeling of superiority over, a group for a characteristic, usually one out of their control. Meaning the ones who feel it is wrong to not like a trans-women after learning of it, is no better then the one who thinks it's wrong to like them at all.

Hooooly hell, you're stepping over power differences, discrimination and a lopsided majority culture really fast here.

However, "anti-bigotry" is almost always excused under explanations that are clearly irritating to anyone under the so called "majority" group.

Because god forbid that a member of the majority would be annoyed by a person from a minority group trying to improve the situation for her group? Fuck those people, they don't deserve a better life, right?

You seem to think that anti-bigotry is something people do because they want to troll you. But considering the kind of flack you usually get for being critical of the majority (something that I have not experienced strongly personally, but I've seen plenty of it happen to others), I'd say anyone doing it to be contrary would be sick of it really fast. So there must be something else driving people... I'll let you fill in what that means.

MetalSlimeHunt was towards the center of the "scales", he wasn't acting like a bigot, and he had nothing against transgendered people themselves but simply the fact that he didn't want to be in a physical or romantic relationship with one as it made him uncomfortable. He is simply one of the "majority".
In fact, those who argued against him presented behavior much closer to the "anti-bigot", an equal evil, by thinking him wrong for not being attracted to someone based on their physical history he was previously unaware of.

Is it really evil to want to shift the center? I believe everyone would be better of if preconceived notions about trans* people would vanish from our culture and people would be no longer indoctrinated by society to think of trans* people in this way. Fuck me for dreaming of a better society, right?

Quote from: Virex on October 11, 2012, 01:42:17 pm

If you recognize that the current situation is not ideal, why stick to your guns? It's not that I think it's hypocritical, just stubborn. It's like you recognize that feeling uncomfortable around people of color is racism, yet you make no effort to get more comfortable. It's one thing to have those feelings, but it's another thing to realize they're problematic and still make no effort to improve yourself. Of course, I can't force, nor expect you to do anything and you may have already attempted to change, in which case, feel free to ignore my request.

What guns? Do I decide who I'm attracted to?

Erm, yes? It would be rather problematic if I were to have to decide for everyone who to like or not to like . You're free to decide for yourself who you'll like, all I ask for is to realize that whatever you decide may not be ideal. I, and others with me, may agree or disagree with your choice, but all I can and will do is chip in a polite request.

Why am I in school anyway? I'm probably biased against the unemployed.

If you are and you don't want to be, change it . You can't be perfectly balanced and understanding of everyone at all the time, and there's a need to take care of yourself, but if you decide to not do anything, well, expect people to disapprove of that.

If you're going to be consistent you should go and question *all* of your preferences (do you dislike sushi because you're biased against the Japanese culture? hmm, come to think of it, all ethnic restaurants are kinda racist...), in which case I hope you have a nice mental breakdown.

That's why you focus on the things that have a large impact. Doing something beats doing nothing. I'm sure we could have a lengthy discussion about the relative merit of different ethnic restaurant chains and their impact on society, but in the end, things like employing people, befriending people, or engaging in a relationship with someone are the kind of things that really make a difference in people's lives.

Quote from: Virex on October 11, 2012, 08:33:55 am

Quote from: DJ on October 11, 2012, 07:09:56 am

If I found out that a woman I was dating used to be a prostitute it would kill the sexual attraction because I could never get it out of my head and I'd feel all icky if we had sex.

While it's OK to not date a former prostitute because it makes you feel 'icky', the reason you're feeling icky is probably a form of prejudice stemming from society's view regarding sex workers and promiscuous women. As such, I don't think you should be berated for feeling that way, but I would like to ask you to recognize that they stem from a twisted cultural element, which would ideally being the first step to changing the way you're likely to feel.

And the fact that they're way more likely to carry veneral diseases? I think that's a major turn-off for most people.

It's one thing to use disease frequency to make policies, but it's another thing entirely to use them to judge individual persons

Most of it seems to be in; movement, combat, buying and transporting units, capturing buildings, leveling up and healing on bases.

Quote from: MaximumZero on October 06, 2012, 10:00:03 pm

That seems like a good way to take an elbow in the jaw.

I think the only method better than it in that regard would be in a country with styles of elbowboxing that allows headbutts.

So, Capoeira?

 

Quote from: kaijyuu on September 19, 2012, 11:46:54 am

Anything called a "buckyball" has to be awesome.

"buckyball" is short for "buckminsterfullerene ball".

Absolutely no-one calls them "buckminsterfullerene balls" though. Hell, you got to be lucky for people to not just call them C60 or C70, depending on the type of buckyball they're referring to.

Quote from: Euld on September 19, 2012, 11:17:10 am

Now we have diamonds that are harder than diamonds.

fun fact: we found things that were harder than diamond a few years back.

carbon nanotubes.

CNTs are anisotropic though, and only stronger than diamond on the scale of individual strands, so they don't really count.