Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
most Americans think too many people are easily offended
#21
(08-04-2016, 11:29 AM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: Being a Stalinist, Kinser is so far to the Left he ended up on the (true) Far Right.

It does happen that way.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive;
Eric M
Reply
#22
(08-05-2016, 12:18 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(08-05-2016, 12:06 AM)taramarie Wrote:
(08-04-2016, 11:52 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Regressive liberal and regressive leftist seems like different terms. A liberal is more moderately on the left than a leftist.

Of course the sentiments expressed in my favorite rock song are familiar to me; how the new boss can become like the old boss. The despotism of liberty; the dictatorship of the proletariat; well-known phenomenon in history.

Taramarie is an authoritarian, because she feels entitled to determine for everyone who hurts whose feelings, and who is entitled to take offense over what.

5. Free speech must come with no caveat. I agree. Although I tend to think there is such a thing as a hate crime.

4. I am more "regressive" in his terms, which he exaggerates. His views on this item are typically conservative, ethno-centric, and deceptive. This is Clarence Thomas nonsense. I don't want any "ethnic cleansing" against my own race and gender, of course. That is just his exaggerated view of affirmative action. To deny that there are groups that have been oppressed and still need to have opportunities opened up, is just a right-wing point of view. A preview of his #1.

3. I don't engage in this one too much, although kinser might think that I do. But he is himself a good example of #3.

2. No, not me; regulations yes; but no bans unless by consensus.

1. He exaggerates liberal views into a straw man in order to knock them. On the whole, yes, I am "regressive" in his terms, though again, not to the degree that he would label me as. On the whole, he is wrong on #1, and he's just another conservative denouncing liberal positions, not an "intellectual" and certainly not a liberal denouncing "regressive" liberal positions. No, he is the regressive. SJWs would certainly have much grounds for calling him a racist. Such labels are problematic. But "Multi-culturalism is ruining The West?" That is a truly regressive idea, because there ain't no "West" anymore, and it needs to go away anyway as a separate identity. We are one people on one planet, and need to learn from all "races," peoples and traditions and not try to build walls to block out the "reality" flooding in all around us. That's "reality." This guy is probably voting for Donald Trump. No "rational intellectual" he Smile
You are not considerate of others Eric. That is what concerns me. You want to drink and smoke etc i do not care. You want to race around in a car or believe in magical unicorns i do not care although i will think you are stupid. But if you hurt other people, i do have a problem with that. It is bullying. I stand up to bullies because i was bullied. That is the difference between me and authoritarians. You can say whatever you want but crossing the line for me is to bully or be intolerant of different tastes in music or thinking groping is ok regardless of how another feels about being touched that way. Just a couple of examples. The problem between us is the insensitivity.

There you go again. But note again you are so eager to criticize people, that you jump on me before I can have a chance to rephrase or reconsider my statement and edit it. How you manage to do that is amazing, but it just shows how fanatical you are about it.

I am not intolerant of different tastes in music. I have a different theory of aesthetics than the usual post-modern idea that you adopt in order to defend your own tastes, and I have opinions about which "music" is actually good music and which isn't, which should not offend anyone, but which others are free and entitled to disagree with.

Consider what you say before you post it then. I care about including everyone and not judging their tastes or ideas (unless it hurts others). THAT is the exception. I am actually not just defending my tastes. I actually do not like all music that is posted yet i stand back and look at it objectively to find what others like in it whether it is the music or the lyrics or even a memory. Because that is being accepting and part of what we were taught to do in the degree course. I am not disputing that you should not be free to express displeasure over certain music. But to say culture is wrong/should be a certain way to your liking/noise is for boys (boise)/people should like complimentary touching (as another example) is all intolerance of those who like something you do not as well as not caring how others feel. What is wrong about simply saying i do not like it? Or with the other case ok society does not like certain touching. I should be respectful and respect that it is not acceptable? It could be because you are a boomer who wants to change the culture to your liking. But along the way is the collateral damage and those who you do not accept (unacceptable music/culture and its followers) will be pushed aside or preferably changed. Why otherwise would you say it is wrong and should sound different (does not have to sound angry) etc if you did not want to change it? I thought lefties were supposed to be accepting of all differences?
1984 Apollonian Civic
ISFP - The Artist.






Reply
#23
(08-05-2016, 12:33 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(08-05-2016, 12:19 AM)taramarie Wrote:
(08-05-2016, 12:12 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(08-04-2016, 08:50 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: That said, you can just look at Odin.  He is a quintessential Regressive Leftist.  Also it should be noted that the term was coined by Sam Harris who is hardly a conservative.

No, labels for people here don't fit. Knocking other posters here is not the purpose of this forum. Sam Harris though is certainly an atheist and a materialist, so he could be considered not too conscious of reality on that account. He's not dumb. But certainly I wouldn't trust any term that he coins.

Quote:The horseshoe theory of politics is bullshit.

As usual, the opposite from what kinser says is the truth. No, it's correct. Actually, it's a full circle, or a grid; adopted now by the many writers of the many online questionnaires we have shared here.

Wait...you tell kinser to not label someone a quintessential regressive leftist, yet isn't labeling Sam Harris an atheist and materialist essentially labeling someone too?

No, these are terms he adopts for himself.

ok
1984 Apollonian Civic
ISFP - The Artist.






Reply
#24
Eric The Green Wrote:Regressive liberal and regressive leftist seems like different terms. A liberal is more moderately on the left than a leftist.

Eh, I'm not interested in either term above.  The one I am interested in is the "Social Justice Warrior" type. Folks of this specific type have the same attributes as the "regressive leftist".  A "liberal" or plain "leftist" aren't in the same set as said SJW's.

Quote:Of course the sentiments expressed in my favorite rock song are familiar to me; how the new boss can become like the old boss. The despotism of liberty; the dictatorship of the proletariat; well-known phenomenon in history.

Yes, pretty much.

Quote:Taramarie is an authoritarian, because she feels entitled to determine for everyone who hurts whose feelings, and who is entitled to take offense over what.

I'll take a pass here. I have no dog in that fight.


Quote:5. Free speech must come with no caveat. I agree. Although I tend to think there is such a thing as a hate crime.

If the definition of "hate crime" applies to any subset of humans, sure.

Quote:4. I am more "regressive" in his terms, which he exaggerates. His views on this item are typically conservative, ethno-centric, and deceptive. This is Clarence Thomas nonsense. I don't want any "ethnic cleansing" against my own race and gender, of course. That is just his exaggerated view of affirmative action. To deny that there are groups that have been oppressed and still need to have opportunities opened up, is just a right-wing point of view. A preview of his #1.

Uh, when does affirmative action end?  Can it be expanded with new technology like DNA testing? Big Grin



Quote:3. I don't engage in this one too much, although kinser might think that I do. But he is himself a good example of #3.

I have no dog in this fight either.

Quote:2. No, not me; regulations yes; but no bans unless by consensus.

The 1st amendment shouldn't be abridged unless the expression thereof causes some sort of harm.  The obvious examples of shouting fire in a crowded spot, incitement to riot, slander, etc. are obvious.  Plain ad-homs shouldn't be banned, unless like this place due to group acceptance as a requisite to being here.  Stuff like "triggers" is just plain silly. Perhaps a collection should be taken for Linus blankets and binkies is warranted?

Quote:1. He exaggerates liberal views into a straw man in order to knock them. On the whole, yes, I am "regressive" in his terms, though again, not to the degree that he would label me as. On the whole, he is wrong on #1, and he's just another conservative denouncing liberal positions, not an "intellectual" and certainly not a liberal denouncing "regressive" liberal positions. No, he is the regressive. SJWs would certainly have much grounds for calling him a racist. Such labels are problematic. But "Multi-culturalism is ruining The West?" That is a truly regressive idea, because there ain't no "West" anymore, and it needs to go away anyway as a separate identity. We are one people on one planet, and need to learn from all "races," peoples and traditions and not try to build walls to block out the "reality" flooding in all around us. That's "reality." This guy is probably voting for Donald Trump. No "rational intellectual" he Smile

What happens when "race" becomes a mish/mash?  I think both David Duke and Rev. Sharpton need to take a DNA test and make the results public, man. Cool  Maybe I'll get lucky and the results for one or both will make 'em shut up.
---Value Added Cool
Reply
#25
(08-05-2016, 12:36 AM)taramarie Wrote:
(08-05-2016, 12:18 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(08-05-2016, 12:06 AM)taramarie Wrote:
(08-04-2016, 11:52 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Regressive liberal and regressive leftist seems like different terms. A liberal is more moderately on the left than a leftist.

Of course the sentiments expressed in my favorite rock song are familiar to me; how the new boss can become like the old boss. The despotism of liberty; the dictatorship of the proletariat; well-known phenomenon in history.

Taramarie is an authoritarian, because she feels entitled to determine for everyone who hurts whose feelings, and who is entitled to take offense over what.

5. Free speech must come with no caveat. I agree. Although I tend to think there is such a thing as a hate crime.

4. I am more "regressive" in his terms, which he exaggerates. His views on this item are typically conservative, ethno-centric, and deceptive. This is Clarence Thomas nonsense. I don't want any "ethnic cleansing" against my own race and gender, of course. That is just his exaggerated view of affirmative action. To deny that there are groups that have been oppressed and still need to have opportunities opened up, is just a right-wing point of view. A preview of his #1.

3. I don't engage in this one too much, although kinser might think that I do. But he is himself a good example of #3.

2. No, not me; regulations yes; but no bans unless by consensus.

1. He exaggerates liberal views into a straw man in order to knock them. On the whole, yes, I am "regressive" in his terms, though again, not to the degree that he would label me as. On the whole, he is wrong on #1, and he's just another conservative denouncing liberal positions, not an "intellectual" and certainly not a liberal denouncing "regressive" liberal positions. No, he is the regressive. SJWs would certainly have much grounds for calling him a racist. Such labels are problematic. But "Multi-culturalism is ruining The West?" That is a truly regressive idea, because there ain't no "West" anymore, and it needs to go away anyway as a separate identity. We are one people on one planet, and need to learn from all "races," peoples and traditions and not try to build walls to block out the "reality" flooding in all around us. That's "reality." This guy is probably voting for Donald Trump. No "rational intellectual" he Smile
You are not considerate of others Eric. That is what concerns me. You want to drink and smoke etc i do not care. You want to race around in a car or believe in magical unicorns i do not care although i will think you are stupid. But if you hurt other people, i do have a problem with that. It is bullying. I stand up to bullies because i was bullied. That is the difference between me and authoritarians. You can say whatever you want but crossing the line for me is to bully or be intolerant of different tastes in music or thinking groping is ok regardless of how another feels about being touched that way. Just a couple of examples. The problem between us is the insensitivity.

There you go again. But note again you are so eager to criticize people, that you jump on me before I can have a chance to rephrase or reconsider my statement and edit it. How you manage to do that is amazing, but it just shows how fanatical you are about it.

I am not intolerant of different tastes in music. I have a different theory of aesthetics than the usual post-modern idea that you adopt in order to defend your own tastes, and I have opinions about which "music" is actually good music and which isn't, which should not offend anyone, but which others are free and entitled to disagree with.

Consider what you say before you post it then. I care about including everyone and not judging their tastes or ideas (unless it hurts others). THAT is the exception. I am actually not just defending my tastes. I actually do not like all music that is posted yet i stand back and look at it objectively to find what others like in it whether it is the music or the lyrics or even a memory. Because that is being accepting and part of what we were taught to do in the degree course. I am not disputing that you should not be free to express displeasure over certain music. But to say culture is wrong/should be a certain way to your liking/noise is for boys (boise)/people should like complimentary touching (as another example) is all intolerance of those who like something you do not as well as not caring how others feel. What is wrong about simply saying i do not like it? Or with the other case ok society does not like certain touching. I should be respectful and respect that it is not acceptable? It could be because you are a boomer who wants to change the culture to your liking. But along the way is the collateral damage and those who you do not accept (unacceptable music/culture and its followers) will be pushed aside or preferably changed. Why otherwise would you say it is wrong and should sound different (does not have to sound angry) etc if you did not want to change it? I thought lefties were supposed to be accepting of all differences?

How you approach music is up to you; I have no dog in that fight, as Rags might say Smile But you cannot impose on me your views of how to approach music.

Yes, I can say culture should be a certain way. I could only wish that I could "impose" it on anyone. I obviously can't, and fortunately I don't want to do any more than express my opinions.

You can learn to respect that I have a different opinion about music and about touching than you do. I certainly did not and do not agree with you that kinser had the right to punch someone out because he saw someone groping. That's what that earlier discussion was about.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive;
Eric M
Reply
#26
(08-05-2016, 12:48 AM)Ragnarök_62 Wrote: Eh, I'm not interested in either term above.  The one I am interested in is the "Social Justice Warrior" type. Folks of this specific type have the same attributes as the "regressive leftist".  A "liberal" or plain "leftist" aren't in the same set as said SJW's.

A better term might be "oppressive leftist." An SJW isn't really regressive; but some of them may be oppressive in the way they behave and talk at times.

Quote:I'll take a pass here. I have no dog in that fight.

I thank you Smile

Quote:What happens when "race" becomes a mish/mash?  I think both David Duke and Rev. Sharpton need to take a DNA test and make the results public, man. Cool  Maybe I'll get lucky and the results for one or both will make 'em shut up.

Indeed; that's the thing. Just as "The West" is becoming irrelevant as something to defend and keep pure, the races are blending over time, and lots of Americans already have some of those "other" races in their DNA. I don't think I do myself; maybe I could have used some Wink
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive;
Eric M
Reply
#27
(08-05-2016, 01:00 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(08-05-2016, 12:36 AM)taramarie Wrote:
(08-05-2016, 12:18 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(08-05-2016, 12:06 AM)taramarie Wrote:
(08-04-2016, 11:52 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Regressive liberal and regressive leftist seems like different terms. A liberal is more moderately on the left than a leftist.

Of course the sentiments expressed in my favorite rock song are familiar to me; how the new boss can become like the old boss. The despotism of liberty; the dictatorship of the proletariat; well-known phenomenon in history.

Taramarie is an authoritarian, because she feels entitled to determine for everyone who hurts whose feelings, and who is entitled to take offense over what.

5. Free speech must come with no caveat. I agree. Although I tend to think there is such a thing as a hate crime.

4. I am more "regressive" in his terms, which he exaggerates. His views on this item are typically conservative, ethno-centric, and deceptive. This is Clarence Thomas nonsense. I don't want any "ethnic cleansing" against my own race and gender, of course. That is just his exaggerated view of affirmative action. To deny that there are groups that have been oppressed and still need to have opportunities opened up, is just a right-wing point of view. A preview of his #1.

3. I don't engage in this one too much, although kinser might think that I do. But he is himself a good example of #3.

2. No, not me; regulations yes; but no bans unless by consensus.

1. He exaggerates liberal views into a straw man in order to knock them. On the whole, yes, I am "regressive" in his terms, though again, not to the degree that he would label me as. On the whole, he is wrong on #1, and he's just another conservative denouncing liberal positions, not an "intellectual" and certainly not a liberal denouncing "regressive" liberal positions. No, he is the regressive. SJWs would certainly have much grounds for calling him a racist. Such labels are problematic. But "Multi-culturalism is ruining The West?" That is a truly regressive idea, because there ain't no "West" anymore, and it needs to go away anyway as a separate identity. We are one people on one planet, and need to learn from all "races," peoples and traditions and not try to build walls to block out the "reality" flooding in all around us. That's "reality." This guy is probably voting for Donald Trump. No "rational intellectual" he Smile
You are not considerate of others Eric. That is what concerns me. You want to drink and smoke etc i do not care. You want to race around in a car or believe in magical unicorns i do not care although i will think you are stupid. But if you hurt other people, i do have a problem with that. It is bullying. I stand up to bullies because i was bullied. That is the difference between me and authoritarians. You can say whatever you want but crossing the line for me is to bully or be intolerant of different tastes in music or thinking groping is ok regardless of how another feels about being touched that way. Just a couple of examples. The problem between us is the insensitivity.

There you go again. But note again you are so eager to criticize people, that you jump on me before I can have a chance to rephrase or reconsider my statement and edit it. How you manage to do that is amazing, but it just shows how fanatical you are about it.

I am not intolerant of different tastes in music. I have a different theory of aesthetics than the usual post-modern idea that you adopt in order to defend your own tastes, and I have opinions about which "music" is actually good music and which isn't, which should not offend anyone, but which others are free and entitled to disagree with.

Consider what you say before you post it then. I care about including everyone and not judging their tastes or ideas (unless it hurts others). THAT is the exception. I am actually not just defending my tastes. I actually do not like all music that is posted yet i stand back and look at it objectively to find what others like in it whether it is the music or the lyrics or even a memory. Because that is being accepting and part of what we were taught to do in the degree course. I am not disputing that you should not be free to express displeasure over certain music. But to say culture is wrong/should be a certain way to your liking/noise is for boys (boise)/people should like complimentary touching (as another example) is all intolerance of those who like something you do not as well as not caring how others feel. What is wrong about simply saying i do not like it? Or with the other case ok society does not like certain touching. I should be respectful and respect that it is not acceptable? It could be because you are a boomer who wants to change the culture to your liking. But along the way is the collateral damage and those who you do not accept (unacceptable music/culture and its followers) will be pushed aside or preferably changed. Why otherwise would you say it is wrong and should sound different (does not have to sound angry) etc if you did not want to change it? I thought lefties were supposed to be accepting of all differences?

How you approach music is up to you; I have no dog in that fight, as Rags might say Smile But you cannot impose on me your views of how to approach music.

Yes, I can say culture should be a certain way. I could only wish that I could "impose" it on anyone. I obviously can't, and fortunately I don't want to do any more than express my opinions.

You can learn to respect that I have a different opinion about music and about touching than you do. I certainly did not and do not agree with you that kinser had the right to punch someone out because he saw someone groping. That's what that earlier discussion was about.
I only ask that you respect that people do have different tastes without saying stuff like noise is for boys. You may not think it is insulting but it may be for some. I was just standing up for those who do like that music (which some of it i do not like anyway but i respect it. So i say nothing). Ok i can respect how you approach music as long as you are not insulting people. No you may not think it is insulting but it can come off that way.

2nd line those two conflict with each other. Either you want to or you don't. Sounds like you want to but because you can't (and i am quoting you) you resort to merely expressing your opinion in the hopes of people agreeing with you. Must be tiring tbh. Easier to lay back and let people enjoy what they like. Lol but then again i am no stereotypical culture changer.

I actually do not care what you think about music personally....it is the insults to others. Example: you see me chat to people who say they do not think much of britney spears. Do you see me jump up and down about that? Nope. Because they say they do not like it and i accept that. It is ok! They do not insult that era, that music with a collective smear nor do they worse still insult those who enjoy it.
Yes I am aware i agreed it was ok for him to punch the groper and defend his bf. Normally i am not for violence and am totally ok with the fact you disagree. But he did mention that he spoke to the man several times to back off. He did not listen. So what would your alternative be? Also another question...do you realize women on the whole do not like people groping them and are you enough of a gentleman to respect that they may not like it? One more, are you aware that you may be punched or slapped for doing so? May not be a correct reaction by you but i say this for your welfare. We may disagree but i would hate to think you are punched or slapped for it. I say it for your welfare. Take or leave it.
1984 Apollonian Civic
ISFP - The Artist.






Reply
#28
(08-04-2016, 10:59 PM)taramarie Wrote: Ah that was a very interesting video. Yes we have regressive leftists here in NZ. Banning drugs, attempting to ban cigarettes (smoke free campaign), making chipping your pets compulsory, forcing us to stop using our fires unless we upgrade our fireplace to allow "cleaner smoke" whatever the hell that is. Banning smacking a child. Forcing parents to watch their kids at all times till 16. Talk of banning alcohol. Of course some Americans probably think it is crazy it is illegal to carry a gun around with you depending where in America they come from. An American on the radio said he thinks NZ is draconian and he is going back to America. To Los Angeles.

Of all of those things, I can only possibly agree with one, and that is the limitation of corporal punishment of children. Of course then again, I also support Stefan Molyneux's views on "Peaceful Parenting" as an alternative to corporal punishment.
It really is all mathematics.

Turn on to Daddy, Tune in to Nationalism, Drop out of UN/NATO/WTO/TPP/NAFTA/CAFTA Globalism.
Reply
#29
(08-04-2016, 08:50 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: Also it should be noted that the term was coined by Sam Harris who is hardly a conservative.

But Sam Harris IS an Islamophobic imperialist bigot who invented the term to justify his Islamophobia.
#MakeTheDemocratsGreatAgain
Reply
#30
(08-05-2016, 10:36 AM)Kinser79 Wrote:
(08-04-2016, 10:59 PM)taramarie Wrote: Ah that was a very interesting video. Yes we have regressive leftists here in NZ. Banning drugs, attempting to ban cigarettes (smoke free campaign), making chipping your pets compulsory, forcing us to stop using our fires unless we upgrade our fireplace to allow "cleaner smoke" whatever the hell that is. Banning smacking a child. Forcing parents to watch their kids at all times till 16. Talk of banning alcohol. Of course some Americans probably think it is crazy it is illegal to carry a gun around with you depending where in America they come from. An American on the radio said he thinks NZ is draconian and he is going back to America. To Los Angeles.

Of all of those things, I can only possibly agree with one, and that is the limitation of corporal punishment of children.  Of course then again, I also support Stefan Molyneux's views on "Peaceful Parenting" as an alternative to corporal punishment.

Well if caught slapping a child here the child protection agency takes the child away and either charges the parent of child abuse or locks them up depending on the situation. Just my opinion i think it is a tad extreme.
1984 Apollonian Civic
ISFP - The Artist.






Reply
#31
(08-05-2016, 12:33 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(08-05-2016, 12:19 AM)taramarie Wrote:
(08-05-2016, 12:12 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(08-04-2016, 08:50 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: That said, you can just look at Odin.  He is a quintessential Regressive Leftist.  Also it should be noted that the term was coined by Sam Harris who is hardly a conservative.

No, labels for people here don't fit. Knocking other posters here is not the purpose of this forum. Sam Harris though is certainly an atheist and a materialist, so he could be considered not too conscious of reality on that account. He's not dumb. But certainly I wouldn't trust any term that he coins.

Quote:The horseshoe theory of politics is bullshit.

As usual, the opposite from what kinser says is the truth. No, it's correct. Actually, it's a full circle, or a grid; adopted now by the many writers of the many online questionnaires we have shared here.

Wait...you tell kinser to not label someone a quintessential regressive leftist, yet isn't labeling Sam Harris an atheist and materialist essentially labeling someone too?

No, these are terms he adopts for himself.

You on the other hand label me a "bully," when that term more properly applies to yourself.

Ok so you have been editing your posts. Eric, you are a bully. It is a label based on truth. A person who would rather we change to suit you whether it be to prefer what you deem is music or ok touching. Someone who knows he cannot physically force people to change culturally to suit him so he berates till it sticks. If anyone is upset that they are being berated it is the wrong attitude and they are in the wrong....apparently. Classic bully tactic. That is why i call you one. Sad part is i genuinely think you really do not think it is wrong. Do not inappropriately touch people. They do not like it and we should be sensitive to how they feel. It is their body so respect it. Likewise, culture should not change just because you do not like it. The world does not revolve around you. It includes many people and we should be respectful of that. There will be differences and those differences can allow us to see or hear in a way we never had considered before.
1984 Apollonian Civic
ISFP - The Artist.






Reply
#32
(08-06-2016, 01:54 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(08-05-2016, 03:33 PM)taramarie Wrote:
(08-05-2016, 12:33 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(08-05-2016, 12:19 AM)taramarie Wrote:
(08-05-2016, 12:12 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: No, labels for people here don't fit. Knocking other posters here is not the purpose of this forum. Sam Harris though is certainly an atheist and a materialist, so he could be considered not too conscious of reality on that account. He's not dumb. But certainly I wouldn't trust any term that he coins.


As usual, the opposite from what kinser says is the truth. No, it's correct. Actually, it's a full circle, or a grid; adopted now by the many writers of the many online questionnaires we have shared here.

Wait...you tell kinser to not label someone a quintessential regressive leftist, yet isn't labeling Sam Harris an atheist and materialist essentially labeling someone too?

No, these are terms he adopts for himself.

You on the other hand label me a "bully," when that term more properly applies to yourself.

Ok so you have been editing your posts. Eric, you are a bully. It is a label based on truth. A person who would rather we change to suit you whether it be to prefer what you deem is music or ok touching. Someone who knows he cannot physically force people to change culturally to suit him so he berates till it sticks. If anyone is upset that they are being berated it is the wrong attitude and they are in the wrong....apparently. Classic bully tactic. That is why i call you one. Sad part is i genuinely think you really do not think it is wrong. Do not inappropriately touch people. They do not like it and we should be sensitive to how they feel. It is their body so respect it. Likewise, culture should not change just because you do not like it. The world does not revolve around you. It includes many people and we should be respectful of that. There will be differences and those differences can allow us to see or hear in a way we never had considered before.

It is ludicrous to consider me a "bully." I merely am frank with my opinions. If you call people names like that, it is you who are the bully. pot kettle black. And you are a gangster, because you try to get support from others for your bullying. I do not approve of kinser punching someone out who he thinks is groping someone, and groping should not be illegal unless harrassing or violent. End of story. That is not bullying; it is my opinion. So, stop bullying people Taramarie. I've a right to express my opinions. I will continue to do it.

I cannot help it if people agree with me.It would be gangster behaviour if i deliberately tried to get people on my side. They post of their own free will. Nice how you turn it around though. I am not the one who is not considerate of how EVERYONE feels. I am not the one who thinks inappropriate touching without prior consent is ok. I am not the one who says insensitive shit bashing what people clearly love nor wanting to see it and understand it through their eyes and i am not narcissistic enough to think my culture is better and that others should change because gosh darn it i cannot force them to change to suit me so i will speak out for it instead in the hopes they will follow my lead. That is not inclusive. That is not accepting. That is cult leader behaviour if anything as well as in many cases insensitive to others feelings. Btw i never said groping should be illegal. But it should be common human decency to respect a man or a woman enough to not touch them that way unless you know it is ok with them. I do hope you do not go around doing that to people. Kinser had every right to punch him when he had given him several warnings beforehand. If you do have a solution to get someone off someone when they will not listen i am all ears. But sometimes force is needed when someone is clearly not listening and is being forceful. Trust me i know as a victim of sexual assault. I certainly did not think it was complimentary for someone to be touching me that way. It is not bullying for someone to step in and tell you to consider the feelings of others.
1984 Apollonian Civic
ISFP - The Artist.






Reply
#33
(08-06-2016, 01:54 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(08-05-2016, 03:33 PM)taramarie Wrote:
(08-05-2016, 12:33 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(08-05-2016, 12:19 AM)taramarie Wrote:
(08-05-2016, 12:12 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: No, labels for people here don't fit. Knocking other posters here is not the purpose of this forum. Sam Harris though is certainly an atheist and a materialist, so he could be considered not too conscious of reality on that account. He's not dumb. But certainly I wouldn't trust any term that he coins.


As usual, the opposite from what kinser says is the truth. No, it's correct. Actually, it's a full circle, or a grid; adopted now by the many writers of the many online questionnaires we have shared here.

Wait...you tell kinser to not label someone a quintessential regressive leftist, yet isn't labeling Sam Harris an atheist and materialist essentially labeling someone too?

No, these are terms he adopts for himself.

You on the other hand label me a "bully," when that term more properly applies to yourself.

Ok so you have been editing your posts. Eric, you are a bully. It is a label based on truth. A person who would rather we change to suit you whether it be to prefer what you deem is music or ok touching. Someone who knows he cannot physically force people to change culturally to suit him so he berates till it sticks. If anyone is upset that they are being berated it is the wrong attitude and they are in the wrong....apparently. Classic bully tactic. That is why i call you one. Sad part is i genuinely think you really do not think it is wrong. Do not inappropriately touch people. They do not like it and we should be sensitive to how they feel. It is their body so respect it. Likewise, culture should not change just because you do not like it. The world does not revolve around you. It includes many people and we should be respectful of that. There will be differences and those differences can allow us to see or hear in a way we never had considered before.

It is ludicrous to consider me a "bully." I merely am frank with my opinions. If you call people names like that, it is you who are the bully. pot kettle black. And you are a gangster, because you try to get support from others for your bullying. I do not approve of kinser punching someone out who he thinks is groping someone, and groping should not be illegal unless harrassing or violent. End of story. That is not bullying; it is my opinion. So, stop bullying people Taramarie. I've a right to express my opinions. I will continue to do it.

Funny for someone who thinks he is enlightened you do an awful lot of closing ears eyes and learning to respect everyone and their taste in music or respect feelings. I also will continue to watch you like a hawk while on here and call you out when i see you being insensitive to someone. Watch what you say.
1984 Apollonian Civic
ISFP - The Artist.






Reply
#34
(08-06-2016, 02:24 PM)taramarie Wrote:
(08-06-2016, 01:54 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(08-05-2016, 03:33 PM)taramarie Wrote:
(08-05-2016, 12:33 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(08-05-2016, 12:19 AM)taramarie Wrote: Wait...you tell kinser to not label someone a quintessential regressive leftist, yet isn't labeling Sam Harris an atheist and materialist essentially labeling someone too?

No, these are terms he adopts for himself.

You on the other hand label me a "bully," when that term more properly applies to yourself.

Ok so you have been editing your posts. Eric, you are a bully. It is a label based on truth. A person who would rather we change to suit you whether it be to prefer what you deem is music or ok touching. Someone who knows he cannot physically force people to change culturally to suit him so he berates till it sticks. If anyone is upset that they are being berated it is the wrong attitude and they are in the wrong....apparently. Classic bully tactic. That is why i call you one. Sad part is i genuinely think you really do not think it is wrong. Do not inappropriately touch people. They do not like it and we should be sensitive to how they feel. It is their body so respect it. Likewise, culture should not change just because you do not like it. The world does not revolve around you. It includes many people and we should be respectful of that. There will be differences and those differences can allow us to see or hear in a way we never had considered before.

It is ludicrous to consider me a "bully." I merely am frank with my opinions. If you call people names like that, it is you who are the bully. pot kettle black. And you are a gangster, because you try to get support from others for your bullying. I do not approve of kinser punching someone out who he thinks is groping someone, and groping should not be illegal unless harrassing or violent. End of story. That is not bullying; it is my opinion. So, stop bullying people Taramarie. I've a right to express my opinions. I will continue to do it.

I cannot help it if people agree with me.It would be gangster behaviour if i deliberately tried to get people on my side.
YOu do, and it's reprehensible behavior.

Quote:They post of their own free will. Nice how you turn it around though. I am not the one who is not considerate of how EVERYONE feels.

Quote:You are the one. You are proving it again now.

[quote]
I am not the one who thinks inappropriate touching without prior consent is ok.

I don't advocate it. I don't people punched and thrown in jail over it. That you failed again to grasp my point shows that you are a bully.


I am not the one who says insensitive shit bashing what people clearly love nor wanting to see it and understand it through their eyes and i am not narcissistic enough to think my culture is better and that others should change because gosh darn it i cannot force them to change to suit me so i will speak out for it instead in the hopes they will follow my lead. That is not inclusive. That is not accepting.
I am free to express my opinions. You keep trying to shut me up. You are the bully.

Quote: That is cult leader behaviour if anything as well as in many cases insensitive to others feelings. Btw i never said groping should be illegal. But it should be common human decency to respect a man or a woman enough to not touch them that way unless you know it is ok with them. I do hope you do not go around doing that to people. Kinser had every right to punch him when he had given him several warnings beforehand.

so you believe in taking tha law in your own hands and you believe in violence. You are one angry girl, and really stupid.

Quote: If you do have a solution to get someone off someone when they will not listen i am all ears. But sometimes force is needed when someone is clearly not listening and is being forceful. Trust me i know as a victim of sexual assault. I certainly did not think it was complimentary for someone to be touching me that way. It is not bullying for someone to step in and tell you to consider the feelings of others.

Your sexual assaults were too bad, and I'm sorry about it for you but they have no relationship to this discussion. You are just expressing your resentment over your past by insulting me. You are a bully; period. You have no business trying to change my behavior. Mind your own f**king business, creepy girl.

Taramarie, you are the best example of someone who is too easily offended. More than that, you are a gangster and a bully, who carries grudges forever.

I will go back to ignoring your posts until you change your behavior towards me.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive;
Eric M
Reply
#35
(08-06-2016, 03:19 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(08-06-2016, 02:24 PM)taramarie Wrote:
(08-06-2016, 01:54 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(08-05-2016, 03:33 PM)taramarie Wrote:
(08-05-2016, 12:33 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: No, these are terms he adopts for himself.

You on the other hand label me a "bully," when that term more properly applies to yourself.

Ok so you have been editing your posts. Eric, you are a bully. It is a label based on truth. A person who would rather we change to suit you whether it be to prefer what you deem is music or ok touching. Someone who knows he cannot physically force people to change culturally to suit him so he berates till it sticks. If anyone is upset that they are being berated it is the wrong attitude and they are in the wrong....apparently. Classic bully tactic. That is why i call you one. Sad part is i genuinely think you really do not think it is wrong. Do not inappropriately touch people. They do not like it and we should be sensitive to how they feel. It is their body so respect it. Likewise, culture should not change just because you do not like it. The world does not revolve around you. It includes many people and we should be respectful of that. There will be differences and those differences can allow us to see or hear in a way we never had considered before.

It is ludicrous to consider me a "bully." I merely am frank with my opinions. If you call people names like that, it is you who are the bully. pot kettle black. And you are a gangster, because you try to get support from others for your bullying. I do not approve of kinser punching someone out who he thinks is groping someone, and groping should not be illegal unless harrassing or violent. End of story. That is not bullying; it is my opinion. So, stop bullying people Taramarie. I've a right to express my opinions. I will continue to do it.

I cannot help it if people agree with me.It would be gangster behaviour if i deliberately tried to get people on my side.
YOu do, and it's reprehensible behavior.

Quote:They post of their own free will. Nice how you turn it around though. I am not the one who is not considerate of how EVERYONE feels.

Quote:You are the one. You are proving it again now.

Quote: I am not the one who thinks inappropriate touching without prior consent is ok.

I don't advocate it. I don't people punched and thrown in jail over it. That you failed again to grasp my point shows that you are a bully.


I am not the one who says insensitive shit bashing what people clearly love nor wanting to see it and understand it through their eyes and i am not narcissistic enough to think my culture is better and that others should change because gosh darn it i cannot force them to change to suit me so i will speak out for it instead in the hopes they will follow my lead. That is not inclusive. That is not accepting.
I am free to express my opinions. You keep trying to shut me up. You are the bully.

Quote: That is cult leader behaviour if anything as well as in many cases insensitive to others feelings. Btw i never said groping should be illegal. But it should be common human decency to respect a man or a woman enough to not touch them that way unless you know it is ok with them. I do hope you do not go around doing that to people. Kinser had every right to punch him when he had given him several warnings beforehand.

so you believe in taking tha law in your own hands and you believe in violence. You are one angry girl, and really stupid.

Quote: If you do have a solution to get someone off someone when they will not listen i am all ears. But sometimes force is needed when someone is clearly not listening and is being forceful. Trust me i know as a victim of sexual assault. I certainly did not think it was complimentary for someone to be touching me that way. It is not bullying for someone to step in and tell you to consider the feelings of others.

Your sexual assaults were too bad, and I'm sorry about it for you but they have no relationship to this discussion. You are just expressing your resentment over your past by insulting me. You are a bully; period. You have no business trying to change my behavior. Mind your own f**king business, creepy girl.

Taramarie, you are the best example of someone who is too easily offended. More than that, you are a gangster and a bully, who carries grudges forever.

I will go back to ignoring your posts until you change your behavior towards me.
No I do not and there is not one post that you can point to that proves that I do. People merely agree with me and i do not get them to gang up on you. I am quite capable of handling you myself. Your own posts which you put up yourself are more than enough for just me to point out your insensitivity to others. Shall I quote you one more time? Thing is it takes a sensitive person to understand how insensitive you sound. And no freedom of speech does not give you the right to not care about others. At least children have an excuse as they do not know any better. I do not know what your excuse is.
I do when it comes to defending others.
I already clarified that others only comment support by their own choice. I do not include them. This is between you and me buster. I am capable of handling you without others support so there goes your gangster theory. You are just pissed that others happen to agree with me by the looks of things. Not surprising really. I am defending differences as well as the right to not have some creepy arse fondler touching up people who should have the say of what happens to their body.


As for taking the law into my own hands, lets weigh what happened to Kinser and his bf. He warned the guy to stop touching his bf. Several times. I cannot remember whether he was the one who punched the guy or whether his bf did. Kinser can clarify if he is paying attention to this thread. But the fondler did not take any notice from what i remember he said. So, he punched him. Now lets think about this...if he had called the cops, do you think this is something worthy of their time? How long would it take for them to get there? Also from what we are hearing on cops behaviour of late (not all but you sure as heck cannot trust them all) would they be trust worthy to take care of the situation? So I ask again, what do you think would be the appropriate reaction to a man who is fondling your partner who does not listen to your pleads for him to stop?
As for ignoring this is a case of someone who would rather hide than hear everyone and respect differences. This is not tolerance. I am skeptical that you are for tolerance and inclusion. Very doubtful. 
Oh as for resentment from my past....no. I bring it up because I know what it feels like to have someone think they have any right to touch me in that sort of manner without my prior consent. I see you in a similar sort of light like my attacker. I also bring it up because I want to let you be aware people will more than likely not like being handled in that sort of manner so you understand how they may feel. I am protecting them from you by getting you to be aware of their FEELINGS. I believe you that you...unlike my attacker would back off when given the no. But you should be given some sign of consent before engaging in that. Also surprise surprise, i actually am concerned you would get slapped by them. Last reason i bring it up is because it is similar to the fact you do not care about how others feel about insensitive comments on music others adore. You likewise do not care (it seems) how others feel about certain forms of touching. THAT is the connection and why i bring it up.  There we go, all clarified.
1984 Apollonian Civic
ISFP - The Artist.






Reply
#36
http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/28486/

collegefix Wrote:William Nardi - Roger Williams University •August 15, 2016
   
[Image: diversitytraining.Shutterstock-370x242.jpg]Oregon State University is developing an online course centered on “social justice” that new students will soon be required to take.
The course will debut as a pilot program during the fall term, which starts in late September, and the full roll-out will happen toward the beginning of winter term, which starts in January, a university official told The College Fix via email.
The new program “is intended to provide all students entering Oregon State University an orientation to concepts of diversity, inclusion, and social justice and help empower all OSU students to contribute to an inclusive university community,” campus documents state.
“Social justice” is largely a progressive phrase mainly used to tout left-leaning agendas such as environmentalism, socialism, feminism and gay rights. Oregon State would not be the first public university to mandate such a curriculum. At UMass Amherst, students are required to take two “social justice” classes to earn diploma, for example.
Oregon State’s course, as proposed, would consist of five online modules that include a primer on “social justice efforts in Oregon and at OSU,” instruction on how campus diversity advocates define “an inclusive and equitable university community,” details on how students can “incorporate the pursuit of social justice within their university experiences,” and information on how to “explore opportunities for engagement in ongoing social justice learning.”
Oregon State is no stranger to social justice training. Last year, the public university spent $11,500 on three racially segregated social justice retreats for students that examined topics such as white privilege, racism and oppression, according to financial records obtained by The College Fix through a public records act request.
Training: ‘How to identify bias incidents’
As for OSU’s new online course, the modules will remain under development through the fall, an effort led by a committee of students and faculty who have worked throughout the spring and summer to gather feedback on content from campus community members to finalize the finished product, according to Angela Batista, Oregon State University’s interim Chief Diversity Officer, in an email to The College Fix.
Asked to expand on the “expectations for an inclusive and equitable university community,” Batista said the committee is still finalizing these guidelines, but that in general, “we feel that every student has a role to play in creating and sustaining an equitable and inclusive university community – one that is defined by shared respect for diverse backgrounds, perspectives, ideas and the ways that individuals live.”
Asked how Oregon State defines social justice, Batista said that is also a work in progress.
As proposed, the course will aim to teach students that “systemic and local inequities exist and that we all play a role in creating an OSU community that resists and corrects injustice,” according to the university’s website. It will also explain “how to identify bias incidents and learn how to interrupt bias in in our daily lives.”
The university maintains a large Bias Response Team, consisting of seven high-ranking campus administrators who decide how to respond to reports of perceived harassment. Their responses might include “involvement of campus safety offices, providing access and referrals to campus resources, investigation of the incident, and coordinating a community response,” the team’s website states.
‘Oppression Studies’
Batista told The Fix the bias response protocol does not hinder free speech or tough conversations.
“The goal of our bias incident response isn’t to stop or prevent anyone from exercising their right to engage in free speech within social media channels or elsewhere. Instead, we seek to educate community members about the harmful impacts of bias incidents, and to provide care and support to community members who may be hurt or negatively affected,” Batista said. “It’s not about avoiding hard conversations or difficult ideas, but promoting and creating a safe and inclusive community where everyone has the ability to fully participate in these conversations.”
But the new program has garnered at least one critic, who points out online courses can be intimidating for students who don’t want to challenge their campus administration.
“A student has no method of dissenting during an online training session on the necessity of complying with the university’s diversity dictates. Indeed, students might reasonably fear that agreeing with the ideology of the trainers is a precondition of coming to campus,” noted Robby Soave, an associate editor at Reason.
“Students are no longer merely required to grapple with leftist ideas in the classroom—they increasingly must live, sweat, and breathe ‘oppression studies,'” Soave wrote. “It is no wonder that so many of them have developed a healthy disrespect for the principles of the First Amendment. They are being trained — not taught, but trained — to think everything that offends them is a bias incident.”

Geez, what a fucking waste of time and money.  OK, anyone who majors in Oppression Studies deserves a huge student loan boat anchor and a minimum wage job for life. Tongue   Oh, and may all "special snowflakes" land in Hel and so their tender hearts melt in the heat blast.


What is collegiate life coming to?  It sure ain't about getting smart or broadening horizons anymore. 

Here's to you Oregon State:
[Image: 20160805_safe.jpg]

SJW's  : Phhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhtttttttttttttttttttttttttttttt~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Tongue Tongue Tongue
---Value Added Cool
Reply
#37
(08-15-2016, 05:41 PM)Ragnarök_62 Wrote: http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/28486/

collegefix Wrote:William Nardi - Roger Williams University •August 15, 2016
   
[Image: diversitytraining.Shutterstock-370x242.jpg]Oregon State University is developing an online course centered on “social justice” that new students will soon be required to take.
The course will debut as a pilot program during the fall term, which starts in late September, and the full roll-out will happen toward the beginning of winter term, which starts in January, a university official told The College Fix via email.
The new program “is intended to provide all students entering Oregon State University an orientation to concepts of diversity, inclusion, and social justice and help empower all OSU students to contribute to an inclusive university community,” campus documents state.
“Social justice” is largely a progressive phrase mainly used to tout left-leaning agendas such as environmentalism, socialism, feminism and gay rights. Oregon State would not be the first public university to mandate such a curriculum. At UMass Amherst, students are required to take two “social justice” classes to earn diploma, for example.
Oregon State’s course, as proposed, would consist of five online modules that include a primer on “social justice efforts in Oregon and at OSU,” instruction on how campus diversity advocates define “an inclusive and equitable university community,” details on how students can “incorporate the pursuit of social justice within their university experiences,” and information on how to “explore opportunities for engagement in ongoing social justice learning.”
Oregon State is no stranger to social justice training. Last year, the public university spent $11,500 on three racially segregated social justice retreats for students that examined topics such as white privilege, racism and oppression, according to financial records obtained by The College Fix through a public records act request.
Training: ‘How to identify bias incidents’
As for OSU’s new online course, the modules will remain under development through the fall, an effort led by a committee of students and faculty who have worked throughout the spring and summer to gather feedback on content from campus community members to finalize the finished product, according to Angela Batista, Oregon State University’s interim Chief Diversity Officer, in an email to The College Fix.
Asked to expand on the “expectations for an inclusive and equitable university community,” Batista said the committee is still finalizing these guidelines, but that in general, “we feel that every student has a role to play in creating and sustaining an equitable and inclusive university community – one that is defined by shared respect for diverse backgrounds, perspectives, ideas and the ways that individuals live.”
Asked how Oregon State defines social justice, Batista said that is also a work in progress.
As proposed, the course will aim to teach students that “systemic and local inequities exist and that we all play a role in creating an OSU community that resists and corrects injustice,” according to the university’s website. It will also explain “how to identify bias incidents and learn how to interrupt bias in in our daily lives.”
The university maintains a large Bias Response Team, consisting of seven high-ranking campus administrators who decide how to respond to reports of perceived harassment. Their responses might include “involvement of campus safety offices, providing access and referrals to campus resources, investigation of the incident, and coordinating a community response,” the team’s website states.
‘Oppression Studies’
Batista told The Fix the bias response protocol does not hinder free speech or tough conversations.
“The goal of our bias incident response isn’t to stop or prevent anyone from exercising their right to engage in free speech within social media channels or elsewhere. Instead, we seek to educate community members about the harmful impacts of bias incidents, and to provide care and support to community members who may be hurt or negatively affected,” Batista said. “It’s not about avoiding hard conversations or difficult ideas, but promoting and creating a safe and inclusive community where everyone has the ability to fully participate in these conversations.”
But the new program has garnered at least one critic, who points out online courses can be intimidating for students who don’t want to challenge their campus administration.
“A student has no method of dissenting during an online training session on the necessity of complying with the university’s diversity dictates. Indeed, students might reasonably fear that agreeing with the ideology of the trainers is a precondition of coming to campus,” noted Robby Soave, an associate editor at Reason.
“Students are no longer merely required to grapple with leftist ideas in the classroom—they increasingly must live, sweat, and breathe ‘oppression studies,'” Soave wrote. “It is no wonder that so many of them have developed a healthy disrespect for the principles of the First Amendment. They are being trained — not taught, but trained — to think everything that offends them is a bias incident.”

Geez, what a fucking waste of time and money.  OK, anyone who majors in Oppression Studies deserves a huge student loan boat anchor and a minimum wage job for life. Tongue   Oh, and may all "special snowflakes" land in Hel and so their tender hearts melt in the heat blast.


What is collegiate life coming to?  It sure ain't about getting smart or broadening horizons anymore. 

Here's to you Oregon State:
[Image: 20160805_safe.jpg]

SJW's  : Phhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhtttttttttttttttttttttttttttttt~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Tongue Tongue Tongue
I see no problem in this as long as it is balanced in inclusion etc. Seems to me the whiners are the insensitive folk who are whining because they are the crybabies. Is it not an irony.....someone is always crying about something. Whether it is the said "crybabies" or those taking the time out of their lives to draw a picture whining about the whiners. At least the "Crybabies" are addressing what needs addressing....although i think they could be more balanced about what needs to be addressed as well as they should realize also that the more they go on the more push back they will get. So teaching the young is a good approach. Hey the religious warp minds that way too!

p.s. I feel this way due to the fact we were already being taught all of this without needing a course on this. That is why we are ahead in some respects culturally compared to America. We could improve though on cannabis (govt fault as the public loves cannabis.....nz is one of the top countries in the world that uses it) and we could improve on pollution.

Given how i was raised it scares me to see how insensitive America is becoming. I hope it does not spread. Not giving a fuck about others is if anything a lack of civic attitude. We should care about others. How awful the world would be if we did not. If we didn't here our SVA would not exist. Kiwi millies pulling together, helping others in need. Saving the lives of many. Helping each other. We need to care. If we don't....I am scared of that future. If that makes me a SJW for caring about others so be it. I am proud to actually care.
1984 Apollonian Civic
ISFP - The Artist.






Reply
#38
(08-16-2016, 04:10 AM)taramarie Wrote:
Rags Wrote:Geez, what a fucking waste of time and money.  OK, anyone who majors in Oppression Studies deserves a huge student loan boat anchor and a minimum wage job for life. Tongue   Oh, and may all "special snowflakes" land in Hel and so their tender hearts melt in the heat blast.


What is collegiate life coming to?  It sure ain't about getting smart or broadening horizons anymore. 

Here's to you Oregon State:
[Image: 20160805_safe.jpg]

SJW's  : Phhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhtttttttttttttttttttttttttttttt~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Tongue Tongue Tongue

Tara Wrote:I see no problem in this as long as it is balanced in inclusion etc. Seems to me the whiners are the insensitive folk who are whining because they are the crybabies. Is it not an irony.....someone is always crying about something. Whether it is the said "crybabies" or those taking the time out of their lives to draw a picture whining about the whiners.

That's an interesting take. It is of course as valid as a POV that such illustrations are meant to mock something others of us find utter ridiculous. I think SJW's are ridiculous because it seems to me they are invading my thought space with assorted "concerns" that are overblown at times. In the US they waste their time yelling at others who don't ascribe to their narrow interests.  I think if you go back far enough, almost anyone can find something some other group said/did about/to whatever group(s) those anyone's belong to.

Quote:At least the "Crybabies" are addressing what needs addressing....although i think they could be more balanced about what needs to be addressed as well as they should realize also that the more they go on the more push back they will get.

I do think their are more logical "groupings" in some cases though.  I think economic class would be one of those. Casting concerns based on economic class rather than ethnic type is more functional due to the direct correlation between lower classes and assorted minorities.  Economic class of course is something fat cats here would prefer to keep buried because any question about the lot of lower classes in the face of neo-liberalism/gobalization shows how awful those economic memes really are. The other problem of using what I think are divisive groupings is that , let's say about slavery, is that there are lots of folks who have no family history of being a part of that.  There is also the butt in other folks' business angle. I know I'd question having to spend $ on tuition to take "sensitivity, Oppression Studies, whatever" because my family didn't do that stuff and being mixed race myself makes it just weird. Likewise, I don't expect everyone to pander to let's say Native American stuff. Yes, bad stuff happened, but it isn't something I dwell on.  I also don't get worked over sports Teams named Red Skins, Braves, etc.

Quote: So teaching the young is a good approach.

It's OK to have generic stuff like "just because someone is different, doesn't make them inferior or scary" sort of thing.

Quote: Hey the religious warp minds that way too!

No argument here. Fundamentalists of all stripes, not just Christian ones are likewise narrow minded and wish to foist their version on others even if others do not want it. They also want to rule over others' lives and though patterns , when they should butt the fuck out. Believe me, here in Bible Belt, I see lots of this nonsense.  I really don't think I should have to follow them on what I choose to put in my body.  If I want to use weed, I should be able to. I do use nicotine and caffeine and since I use those substances in a manner that does not harm others' health, I demand a right to use those substances and others like THC even if it hurts others feelings or whatever.

Quote:p.s. I feel this way due to the fact we were already being taught all of this without needing a course on this. That is why we are ahead in some respects culturally compared to America.

Yes, that could be cultural or something. I'm not hip to what's going down in NZ. Some stuff like race moves slowly due to inter marriage, especially wrt Hispanics. I think over time the Hispanic thing will sort out. Other stuff like LGBT is more problematic. Of course wrt LGBT, the question is also easy:  How the fuck does someone elses' partner preference interfere with your well being?  I think in the vast majority of cases, it doesn't do a damn thing. That means that folks can partner with others in any way that doesn't involve someone who is vulnerable, say kids.

Quote:We could improve though on cannabis (govt fault as the public loves cannabis.....nz is one of the top countries in the world that uses it)

I share the pain here.  The DEA here just nixed weed.  That agency is clueless wrt science to say the least. Politics is used instead of rational science on a fucking plant.

Quote: and we could improve on pollution.

Yeah, like planting hemp [low THC] weed plants for fiber instead of cotton.  However, getting assorted government agencies/people to see that is another question.

Quote:Given how i was raised it scares me to see how insensitive America is becoming. I hope it does not spread. Not giving a fuck about others is if anything a lack of civic attitude.

Again, it goes back to the fact, as a culture, Americans don't like being told what to do. That is why prohibition crashed. Banning this or that just creates black markets.

Quote: We should care about others. How awful the world would be if we did not.

I think for the US, the better thing is to point out who is butting into others' business and work to stop that. That also goes to wars of choice. Crusades to make other nation states is quite the arrogant attitude wrt foreign policy.  We've been doing that and it's a Neocon project.  That is why I think Neocons are just evil. It is not our place to stand in judgment of how other nations are run. Mind you , that does not preclude helping other nation states when it comes to natural disasters or some sort of famine. With that in mind, using $ wasted on wars of choice on rebuilding our 3rd world infrastructure needs to be a major priority.

Quote: If we didn't here our SVA would not exist.

I don't know what a SVA is.

Quote: Kiwi millies pulling together, helping others in need. Saving the lives of many. Helping each other. We need to care. If we don't....I am scared of that future. If that makes me a SJW for caring about others so be it. I am proud to actually care.

Caring isn't the issue.  SJW's are those who care to the point of conflating it to the point they condemn all who do not care about their pet concern. Different people have different concerns and how they prioritize them.  I care about say dogs, but I don't condemn others who care about cats.
---Value Added Cool
Reply
#39
[/quote]

Caring isn't the issue.  SJW's are those who care to the point of conflating it to the point they condemn all who do not care about their pet concern. Different people have different concerns and how they prioritize them.  I care about say dogs, but I don't condemn others who care about cats.
[/quote]

and this attitude is why you can't understand the SJW point of view anymore than the rest of us that think like this.

Glad to know my cats aren't offensive. Smile
Reply
#40
"Caring isn't the issue.  SJW's are those who care to the point of conflating it to the point they condemn all who do not care about their pet concern. Different people have different concerns and how they prioritize them.  I care about say dogs, but I don't condemn others who care about cats.
[/quote]

and this attitude is why you can't understand the SJW point of view anymore than the rest of us that think like this.

Glad to know my cats aren't offensive. Smile"
[/quote]

To Danielle. Yes they have different concerns which is why i have so many squabbles with Eric as he does not care about the differences. Only about how we all should see the world aka his way. Examples are music and what he considers appropriate touching without caring how others think. Hmm ok so if they condemn those who do not care about a pet concern and only see things their way without considering everyone else that is not me. I have consistently been thinking of how others feel and trying to find a balance. Can't be all "my way or the highway." Tribalism......shudder.
1984 Apollonian Civic
ISFP - The Artist.






Reply


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  1929 - Interviews With Elderly People Throughout The US taramarie 3 443 08-25-2019, 11:47 AM
Last Post: pbrower2a
  This Is What the Rest of the World Thinks of Americans In 2019 taramarie 0 236 05-24-2019, 04:06 AM
Last Post: taramarie
  Those people in the upper midwest Eric the Green 46 12,910 12-10-2016, 06:21 PM
Last Post: pbrower2a
  Most Americans say children are better off with a parent at home Dan '82 19 5,039 10-19-2016, 03:41 PM
Last Post: pbrower2a

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)