and cntdrzr if you think modern liberalism is intolerant then uh i'd love to know what you think of actually intolerant political philosophies
― omaha deserved 311 (call all destroyer), Friday, 4 December 2009 19:26 (fourteen years ago) link
so i don't understand how having less tolerance for statements that enact or celebrate (straight/white/male) privilege is any loss whatsoever tbrfh
― elmo leonard (elmo argonaut), Friday, 4 December 2009 19:26 (fourteen years ago) link
i would say there is an issue where ppl are NOT in fact self-analyzing their own prejudices/assumptions/thought processes, but in fact are just keeping them quiet, where as in the past ppl used to trumpet such ignorance, & you could say that something has been 'lost' in this transition (or at least, things have def *changed*) but that wasnt really what was being discussed in this thread
― ice cr?m hand job (deej), Friday, 4 December 2009 19:27 (fourteen years ago) link
If anything, I wd advocate for practicing mental discipline, I guess. Not that you CAN'T think things, but that there's a time and place, and it's not, for instance, while you're standing in front of someone talking to them. B/c as much as you owe THEM a fair conversation or interaction that isn't colored by your secksy thoughts, you also owe yourself an interaction that tries to see them for their ideas & contributions and not their slammin' ass.
Just for instance?
― WHY DON'T YOU JUST LICK THE BUS DIRECTLY (Laurel), Friday, 4 December 2009 19:27 (fourteen years ago) link
deej i think we're saying some of the same thing--ppl check what they SAY, not what they THINK
― omaha deserved 311 (call all destroyer), Friday, 4 December 2009 19:28 (fourteen years ago) link
i.e., racist white pplz are more likely to keep racisty thoughts to themselves, which is in many ways a positive in that keeping your offensive ignorance to yourself is better than constantly contributing to a negative atmosphere, although not as much of a positive as if they analyzed racisty feelings & learned why those feelings were rong & dangerous. and in some ways 'something is lost' in that ppl are being extremely dishonest
― ice cr?m hand job (deej), Friday, 4 December 2009 19:29 (fourteen years ago) link
i would say there is an issue where ppl are NOT in fact self-analyzing their own prejudices/assumptions/thought processes
i think this is very true but def doesn't require them to say racist, etc. stuff, obviously. a lot of people who are pointing out racism and sexism all the time have this problem imo
― harbl, Friday, 4 December 2009 19:29 (fourteen years ago) link
oh absolutely
― omaha deserved 311 (call all destroyer), Friday, 4 December 2009 19:30 (fourteen years ago) link
right, and they do that because offending someone warrants stoning and apologizing means you are 100% wrong
fight the real enemy imo; have the dialogue and forgive someone when they say sorry as opposed to second-guessing them and you'll be a happier person (and so will the person you're talking to)
― Huckabee Jesus lifeline (HI DERE), Friday, 4 December 2009 19:30 (fourteen years ago) link
the subtext i get is it's hard for white men to express themselves honestly anymore― harbl, Friday, December 4, 2009 11:19 AM (55 seconds ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalinkit's hard out here for a cracker― jazzgasms (Mr. Que), Friday, December 4, 2009 11:20 AM (37 seconds ago) Bookmark
― harbl, Friday, December 4, 2009 11:19 AM (55 seconds ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink
it's hard out here for a cracker
― jazzgasms (Mr. Que), Friday, December 4, 2009 11:20 AM (37 seconds ago) Bookmark
but yr only gonna find that subtext if yr looking for it. i've said no such thing. i don't see why "white men" would suffer the burden of this relative rigidity more than anyone else. my primary objection is to certainty, rigidity and orthodoxies, and my position is more philosophical than personal. i'm endorsing (and in a way mourning the passing of) a tolerance that sought to built bridges between people/ideas/cultures as a solution to ignorance & intolerance. at the same time, i'm not denying the corollary power & validity of righteous intolerance.
it bums me out that so many people would be so quick to mock and scold me for voicing these ideas. i've tried to treat the subject and everyone involved in this discussion with respect (again, apologies to HI DERE), and i'd like to think that was a two-way street.
― a dimension that can only be accessed through self-immolation (contenderizer), Friday, 4 December 2009 19:35 (fourteen years ago) link
a tolerance that sought to built bridges between people/ideas/cultures as a solution to ignorance & intolerance.
yeah when did this exist again?
― omaha deserved 311 (call all destroyer), Friday, 4 December 2009 19:37 (fourteen years ago) link
I think he's saying...the '60s?
― WHY DON'T YOU JUST LICK THE BUS DIRECTLY (Laurel), Friday, 4 December 2009 19:37 (fourteen years ago) link
Well to be accurate more like the late 60s-early 70s, but who's counting.
― WHY DON'T YOU JUST LICK THE BUS DIRECTLY (Laurel), Friday, 4 December 2009 19:38 (fourteen years ago) link
(woah - I am working a 12 and 1/2 hour day today and this is the first time I've looked at this thread since yesterday and I just needed to say GOD DAMN! It just keeps going and going.)
― bear say hi to me (ENBB), Friday, 4 December 2009 19:38 (fourteen years ago) link
that world still exists in elementary schools around the country btw
― max, Friday, 4 December 2009 19:38 (fourteen years ago) link
did any of you see the ass on that one tho? I mean seriously...
― I see what this is (Local Garda), Friday, 4 December 2009 19:39 (fourteen years ago) link
imo it's bullshit to say that existed in the 60s
― omaha deserved 311 (call all destroyer), Friday, 4 December 2009 19:39 (fourteen years ago) link
i would say there is an issue where ppl are NOT in fact self-analyzing their own prejudices/assumptions/thought processes, but in fact are just keeping them quiet, where as in the past ppl used to trumpet such ignorance, & you could say that something has been 'lost' in this transition (or at least, things have def *changed*) but that wasnt really what was being discussed in this thread― ice cr?m hand job (deej), Friday, December 4, 2009 11:27 AM (7 minutes ago) Bookmark
― ice cr?m hand job (deej), Friday, December 4, 2009 11:27 AM (7 minutes ago) Bookmark
baseline cultural message now is more like "don't say anything that even vaguely suggests you are thinking any of the 1,000 taboo items on this comprehensive list, ever, under any circumstance." and i think it kills honest discourse. i think people hide their feelings and prejudices, lie about them, and don't "examine them".
i accept that it's probably a consequence of a much greater good, but it's still interesting to think about from other perspectives. imo.
― a dimension that can only be accessed through self-immolation (contenderizer), Friday, 4 December 2009 19:39 (fourteen years ago) link
btw contenderizer one problem with what youre saying is--removing race from the occasion--that its the responsibility of the person who is offended to forgive and educate the person who offended them, and not, instead, the responsibility of the person who did the offending to apologize and educate their dam selves
― max, Friday, 4 December 2009 19:39 (fourteen years ago) link
we live in different cultures i think????
― Lamp, Friday, 4 December 2009 19:42 (fourteen years ago) link
but yr only gonna find that subtext if yr looking for it. i've said no such thing. i don't see why "white men" would suffer the burden of this relative rigidity more than anyone else.
i assumed this because you didn't say specifically what kinds of statements are not allowed that you wish were allowed (yes of course i would add people other than white men). if you mean people can't say what's their favorite food without feeling ashamed then yes, it would apply to everyone.
― harbl, Friday, 4 December 2009 19:43 (fourteen years ago) link
xp yeah that really feels like it applies to the nations small enclaves of privileged "liberal" white ppl only
― omaha deserved 311 (call all destroyer), Friday, 4 December 2009 19:44 (fourteen years ago) link
c, to be honest with you, i think the nostalgic element of your argument is getting in the way of your argument -- besides not really understanding when this golden age of "tolerating intolerance" actually existed, it's reading like a reactionary yearning for the "good old days" even if that's not your intent.
― elmo leonard (elmo argonaut), Friday, 4 December 2009 19:45 (fourteen years ago) link
― max, Friday, December 4, 2009 2:39 PM (4 minutes ago)
v otm
― harbl, Friday, 4 December 2009 19:45 (fourteen years ago) link
this thread is kind of mindblowing, kudos to the calm discoursive participants
― WmC, Friday, 4 December 2009 19:45 (fourteen years ago) link
of course a utopian state of tolerant openness never really existed. but it WAS a big part of baseline liberal philosophy in america - evolving in the late 60s and becoming widespread (orthodox) in the 70s. and receding in the 80s/90s.
or at least that's how it seemed to me... (comment about how it existed and still exists in "elementary schools" is perhaps more otm than i want to admit.)
― a dimension that can only be accessed through self-immolation (contenderizer), Friday, 4 December 2009 19:46 (fourteen years ago) link
tbh i think you gotta separate that rhetoric from how people were actually acting.
― omaha deserved 311 (call all destroyer), Friday, 4 December 2009 19:47 (fourteen years ago) link
it's reading like a reactionary yearning for the "good old days" even if that's not your intent.
I think that people are reading this into contenderizer's argument and that's not really where he's coming from. He's trying to say that it's holding us back from being a more vibrant, open, progressive, accepting culture that has yet to exist. I think.
xps
― kingkongvsgodzilla, Friday, 4 December 2009 19:48 (fourteen years ago) link
Like we were making headway towards something and then backslid. Not a place where white men ruled, but a place where you could express your love of flogging - if that's your thing - and people wouldn't look down on you for it.
― kingkongvsgodzilla, Friday, 4 December 2009 19:49 (fourteen years ago) link
The flogging-acceptable place never existed, I'm pretty sure.
a place where you could express your love for slavery--if that's your thing--and people wouldn't look down on you for it
― jazzgasms (Mr. Que), Friday, 4 December 2009 19:50 (fourteen years ago) link
slavery lol XP!!!!
― harbl, Friday, 4 December 2009 19:50 (fourteen years ago) link
: )
― harbl, Friday, 4 December 2009 19:51 (fourteen years ago) link
I've heard there is a place on 5th & Spring where people do this
― pash rules everything around me (Curt1s Stephens), Friday, 4 December 2009 19:51 (fourteen years ago) link
But no, really. A place where someone could go to a person of their preferred gender and be like "Hey, whips and chains" and that person could be free to be all like "Yes, I'm consensual" or "No, sorry, that's not my thing."
― kingkongvsgodzilla, Friday, 4 December 2009 19:53 (fourteen years ago) link
craigslist.org
― jazzgasms (Mr. Que), Friday, 4 December 2009 19:53 (fourteen years ago) link
gay bar
― pash rules everything around me (Curt1s Stephens), Friday, 4 December 2009 19:54 (fourteen years ago) link
btw contenderizer one problem with what youre saying is--removing race from the occasion--that its the responsibility of the person who is offended to forgive and educate the person who offended them, and not, instead, the responsibility of the person who did the offending to apologize and educate their dam selves― max, Friday, December 4, 2009 2:39 PM (4 minutes ago)
i think that it IS the responsibility of offended people to forgive, educate and understand - to the extent possible, depending on the nature of the offense. and sure, i think it's the responsibility of those who offend to apologize, learn and understand. basically, everyone is obliged to give one another the benefit of the doubt and to treat one another with a measure of compassionate open-mindedness.
understand that this argument only makes sense when the point of offense/contention is relatively minor. not saying that we should always smile and try to understand those who abuse and oppress us.
― a dimension that can only be accessed through self-immolation (contenderizer), Friday, 4 December 2009 19:54 (fourteen years ago) link
no i really disagree with that
― harbl, Friday, 4 December 2009 19:56 (fourteen years ago) link
giving people the benefit of the doubt is important but not everyone's opinions are equivalent
― harbl, Friday, 4 December 2009 19:58 (fourteen years ago) link
not everyone's opinions are important either
― jazzgasms (Mr. Que), Friday, 4 December 2009 19:59 (fourteen years ago) link
definitely not
― harbl, Friday, 4 December 2009 20:00 (fourteen years ago) link
also:
agree that what i'm saying DOES seem to square with the "political correctness has gone TOO FAR!!!" arguments you hear on fox, and with the sort of things that poor sad white mans supposedly say now that they don't entirely run the whole game. in idealizing a bygone moment that never really existed, i'm giving in to the fundamental conservative impulse. so i'll take all punches on that score.
but i'd like to think that kingkonggodzilla's right, and that what i'm doing is looking forward for a way out of the deadlocked, polarized, endlessly outraged culture war that we seem to have locked ourselves into.
― a dimension that can only be accessed through self-immolation (contenderizer), Friday, 4 December 2009 20:00 (fourteen years ago) link
contenderizer you keep discussing this on a level of abstraction that doesn't exist so it's all kind of shrug
― horseshoe, Friday, 4 December 2009 20:01 (fourteen years ago) link
You can't promote tolerance in those who are intolerant by being dismissive and intolerant yourself.
― kingkongvsgodzilla, Friday, 4 December 2009 20:01 (fourteen years ago) link
i feel a lot less outrage when i don't spend all my time educating people on how they should treat me but ymmv!
― harbl, Friday, 4 December 2009 20:01 (fourteen years ago) link
OTM x 1000%
― jazzgasms (Mr. Que), Friday, 4 December 2009 20:01 (fourteen years ago) link
iving people the benefit of the doubt is important but not everyone's opinions are equivalent― harbl, Friday, December 4, 2009 11:58 AM (2 minutes ago) Bookmark
― harbl, Friday, December 4, 2009 11:58 AM (2 minutes ago) Bookmark
note that offense exists everywhere. christians get offended by gay pda's. bigots get offended by the suggestion that their race is not superior. being offended doesn't mean that you don't have to try and understand.
― a dimension that can only be accessed through self-immolation (contenderizer), Friday, 4 December 2009 20:03 (fourteen years ago) link
"offended people are NOT necessarily any more correct"
― a dimension that can only be accessed through self-immolation (contenderizer), Friday, 4 December 2009 20:04 (fourteen years ago) link
everytime i see this thread title i get "ass like that" by eminem in my head, goddamn it.
― Mountain Dewm (M@tt He1ges0n), Friday, 4 December 2009 20:05 (fourteen years ago) link