1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

People Against Feminism..

Discussion in 'Chit Chat' started by SillyGoose, May 11, 2016.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Gunsmoke

    Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2016
    Messages:
    609
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Manchester, United Kingdom
    Gender:
    Female
    Sexual Orientation:
    Bisexual
    Out Status:
    A few people
    I totally understand what you mean, but I guess it depends on how you define feminism. The example I was using was mainly based around the stereotype of it rather than what it actually stands for at it's core.
    I totally agree with what you're saying because I dislike radical feminists a LOT. I've never actually come across a feminist saying that they were against trans* women in mainstream feminism, however, apparently some of them do which is of course wrong and disgusting and I totally understand that trans* women would feel threatened by that. Sorry if my original reply was a little exclusive, I kind of forgot the whole anti-transwomen argument because it's literally the only feminist argument that I haven't heard (yet, hope I never will).

    Yeah, I see what you mean. I feel the same way when radical members of the LGBTQ+ community talk about killing off straight people. Not only is it totally illogical but basically my entire family is straight and I feel defensive over them when I hear these arguments. God, if only the radicals would stop shouting over the rest of us.
     
    #101 Gunsmoke, May 14, 2016
    Last edited: May 14, 2016
  2. Libertino

    Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2016
    Messages:
    1,195
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    This Side of the Enlightenment
    Gender:
    Male
    Gender Pronoun:
    He
    Sexual Orientation:
    Other
    Out Status:
    Some people
    I agree completely. At this point the appeal to third world countries should be recognized as a logical fallacy. Just because things are worse elsewhere does not mean the issues here are rendered irrelevant. And if you demand that feminists move their focus to third world countries, then so also should LGBT activists or any activist really because there are always worse problems out there, many of them far from home.
     
  3. Eveline

    Full Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2015
    Messages:
    1,082
    Likes Received:
    34
    Location:
    home
    Gender:
    Female (trans*)
    Gender Pronoun:
    She
    Sexual Orientation:
    Lesbian
    Out Status:
    A few people
    Unfortunately, they aren't as invisible as you would believe. This year the pride parade where I live was focused on trans awareness. I was looking forward to my parents being exposed to what it means to be trans and maybe begin to understand what I am going through. The only article in one of the newspapers that we receive was by a trans exclusionary feminist who wrote an article in the new york times. She starts off the article by talking about how she fought for women's rights in the 60s talking about feminism in general, the rest of the article was focused on how much trans women hurt women's rights and other transphobic arguments. At the time I hoped that my family who had rejected me would understand me a bit better, instead I found myself shamefully hiding the paper from my mother, hoping that she hadn't read it and she won't notice that it was missing.

    Later on in the year, my brother started telling me about how politically correct the world has become giving me example of a story he read about a leading feminist that was invited to give a lecture in a university and the LGBT students tried to stop her from giving the lecture because of her anto trans views. (Trans women are men wanting to control women from the inside...) I had a heated argument with my brother who didn't see the problem with her views and felt that the reaction to her giving a lecture was uncalled for. So in other words trans exclusionary feminists are not some fringe group in feminism, they give lectures, write articles to major newspapers and actively hurt trans people. This isn't a hypothetical threat but a very real one and their views have actually hurt me during a period when I was extremely vulnerable and at risk of suicide.

    I understand from where you are coming from and why you feel the need to defend feminism, but it is important to be aware that feminism has some very dark sides to it. Many of the men arguing in this thread have very good reason to go out against feminism because they see it as something that demonizes them through generalizations of men. Remember that gay men aren't really a threat to women and when you put the burden of men being rapists on them, you are hurting them. I lived for years feeling that burden and feeling ashamed at being perceived as male, the people who are most affected by the generalizations are those that are empathetic and sensitive. We need to remember that the problem lies in the men that we are afraid to confront, who are cold and insensitive and cruel, not those that actually listen to what we have to say and care about our words. Unfortunately, our message isn't getting through to those who actually need to hear it.
     
  4. Ravienclaw

    Regular Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2014
    Messages:
    183
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    California
    Gender:
    Female
    Sexual Orientation:
    Bisexual
    I don't hate all feminists. I just choose to no longer identify with the feminist label because so many of them have made it problematic and too extreme. Do I agree with a lot of feminist ideology? Yes. But I can support gender equality without having to do it under the feminist label. Why are feminists so quick to attack anyone who says they aren't a feminist? It's pretty gross to be honest.
     
  5. Gunsmoke

    Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2016
    Messages:
    609
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Manchester, United Kingdom
    Gender:
    Female
    Sexual Orientation:
    Bisexual
    Out Status:
    A few people
    *Slightly off topic*

    I am so, so sorry that you had to go through that. I mean I suppose if they were fighting back in the 1960s when transgender wasn't well-known then there's a chance of them being at least kind of ignorant but that is absolutely no excuse for such behaviour, and I fully understand why trans* women might dislike or feel threatened by feminism. It's sad, really, that people who claim to work for social justice can continue to be so small minded.

    No, I understand. I suppose I forget sometimes that some feminists refuse to see trans* girls as women, and I'm sorry for that. Maybe I'm pretty sheltered from the darker sides of feminism seeing as my parents also hold these views and taught them to me, so my views are the ones that I grew up with, but I didn't realise that this sector of feminism was actually a pretty outspoken group. Of course I know that feminism has darker sides, but I guess that to me, these darker sides seemed to be held only by a radical minority, although it seems I'm wrong and I hate that I'm not surprised by that.

    My own belief in feminism is entirely anti-bigot, really. And I hope that you say "you" hypothetically and don't mean me specifically, because I'm pretty sure that I never called men r*pists. And really, the only men that I have problems with in terms of feminism are men who are misogynists: all I said in my shortlist was that those experiences were brought about by men, which is not me being bigoted, because they really were. Also men who ignore women's views and pull up 1,493 statistics to show that "sexism isn't real!!!" but refuse to listen to what women have to say. Either because they don't value our opinions or because they're terrified of being proven wrong, but eh. (I know that it isn't just men who do this... But it mostly is.)
     
    #105 Gunsmoke, May 14, 2016
    Last edited: May 14, 2016
  6. beastwith2backs

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2015
    Messages:
    283
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    The 6/ the socialist utopia.
    Gender:
    Male
    Sexual Orientation:
    Gay
    But LGBT actually do still have it hard here, women don't really. People can still be fired for being gay and trans, and you can't be fired for being a woman. Most of the " problems that women still face" are things like "being afraid to walk to your car", which are just generalizations, not all women feel like that, I'm willing to bet the ones that do are a minority.

    And does it look like I can personally actually help LGBT people in non-western countries? I'm not the one claiming to actively care about equal rights for all people in the world, that would be the feminists. If you really want to start talking about logical fallacies, consider the fact that the "no true" scots has been used no less than 3 times on this thread.( not all feminists..)

    Speaking of equal rights, If feminism is about all equality, not just women's, then please explain what happened last November in the university of York with international men's day, a day to discuss men's issues, however the equality regiment tried to shut this down, for some reason, and they caved in. The argument the equality regiment have was something like " women are strcturally unequal to men, so shut up about men's rights". And then feminists complain that men don't talk about their issues, or they should "man up".

    ---------- Post added 14th May 2016 at 08:22 PM ----------

    This is the problem with feminism. It's a Ideology. ideologies force you to think in one way, without question, and IMMEADIATELY stamp out all criticism, even if it's legit, usually with the same damn talking points.

    I'm going to be quiet honest, I'm getting a bit confused about what we're even talking about anymore?
     
    #106 beastwith2backs, May 14, 2016
    Last edited: May 14, 2016
  7. Libertino

    Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2016
    Messages:
    1,195
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    This Side of the Enlightenment
    Gender:
    Male
    Gender Pronoun:
    He
    Sexual Orientation:
    Other
    Out Status:
    Some people
    No, it doesn't look that way. And it doesn't look like western feminists are in much of a position to help people in non-western countries either. So why are there different standards?

    But no one here has specifically made that exact claim. Feminists here have either claimed to fight for women's rights or to fight for gender equality in general. The claim is no more general than that of pro-LGBT people/activists. If I care about and support LGBT rights, then shouldn't I also care about the rights of LGBT people in places like Uganda where they can be killed for being LGBT? After all, LGBT people certainly have it much worse there when over here in the U.S. we are worried about bathrooms and locker rooms as our biggest issue.

    But there is no inherent requirement that those who fight for the rights of or against the discrimination of certain people in their own nation or state or even hometown (be they women or LGBT people or black people or whatever) fight for people all across the world. It isn't feasible to do so. These are statements of ideologies, not statements or practice. Sure, it would be nice if social activists could do something to help people in non-western countries but there's only so much a person can do, and it often isn't even feasible to do anything in countries and cultures like that, when it would require a complete overhaul of their value systems.

    And "No True Scotsman" is only a fallacy if the original claim is being modified for the sake of skirting around a counter-claim. No one seems to be doing that here. The NTS fallacy does not stipulate that "not all X..." is an inherent contradiction. Consider this: if someone says "all men are rapists" and the response is "not all men are rapists" no fallacy has been committed with that second statement. The only criticism would be that the first statement is completely unfair and unfounded. But there's nothing wrong with the second statement. It's a valid objection to the first.
     
    #107 Libertino, May 14, 2016
    Last edited: May 14, 2016
  8. Gunsmoke

    Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2016
    Messages:
    609
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Manchester, United Kingdom
    Gender:
    Female
    Sexual Orientation:
    Bisexual
    Out Status:
    A few people
    There are few to no legalities against LGBTQ+ people, though (please don't start talking about state laws or anything because I am not American and I do not understand. Basically everything I say is based around British law), in the same way that there are not legalities against women. It doesn't mean that discrimination doesn't exist.

    Okay, and how many feminists do you think are able to help female rights in other countries? As if feminism is a job? I still refuse to fully discuss this argument on the grounds of it being entirely hypocritical, but I personally am an 18 year old student with exams this summer, the hell am I going to do?

    Again, that is most likely radical feminism. Since when does saying that I'm a feminist mean that I agree with any of the radical opinions? I don't. Essentially, the only reasons I call myself a feminist and not an equalist are because I support the core ideals of feminism, I was raised as a feminist, and I'm not letting radicals ruin it for me.
    And because I'm really stubborn.

    And isn't every day a man's day? To use obvious examples, America has never had a female President. Britain has had one female Prime Minister, over 20 years ago. You can't possibly say that gender has nothing to do with it.
     
    #108 Gunsmoke, May 14, 2016
    Last edited: May 14, 2016
  9. beastwith2backs

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2015
    Messages:
    283
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    The 6/ the socialist utopia.
    Gender:
    Male
    Sexual Orientation:
    Gay
    Actually, I can. It's pretty much just chance, I guess. Most political leaders are male because well, I guess most people who care about politics are male. It's still a celebration when a woman becomes prime minister/president, but that isn't inequality, and isn't a "goal" to strive for, unless you're saying you want women to be in government positions, not because of their merit, but simply because they own a vagina. I hope that's not what you mean.

    I see that you might not identify with some feminist ideas, but isn't calling one group of feminists "bad" and the another group "good" a "no true Scotsman" fallacy? They both call themselves feminists, so therefore they both are true feminists, except that one group is batshit crazy and pretty much is sexist against both men and women.

    I think that just adds more confusion to this topic. So does feminism exist in a vacuum and anybody can call themselves feminist, or is there a set of ideas that make someone a feminist, therefore making it an ideology/movement? Make up your mind, really.
    You also mention that you were "raised feminist". So you were with a set of ideas, that could be called "feminism"? So it's an ideology? Just like how you can raise children in a religion?

    Another problem I have with feminism is this: why exactly do women need a special group? Shouldn't they be independent, and solve their personal problems by themselves. I truly believe that both men and women are capable of taking care of themselves without a special group to help them? In sense, why are there male feminists?

    About the whole 3rd world thing: well, feminism structures itself like that should be it's job. It's about the equality of all people after all. And when they don't do that, and focus on either really minor issues, or ones that they made up,and people complain, it's apparently a logical fallacy?

    I sometimes wonder how many feminists radical or otherwise, actually stop to think about whether something they believe might be wrong...or at the least, question the logic behind what they believe....

    ---------- Post added 14th May 2016 at 10:20 PM ----------

    Well in practice, what are people who cal themselves feminists actually doing? What will they do after issues in the west are finally fixed? Will their movement end, like it should? You tell me, I'm too afraid to say anything no more.

    If the NTS Fallacy hasn't been used then why have I seen some people say this group of feminists are the "real feminists" and this group of feminists are " bad radicals" and I don't support them"?

    ---------- Post added 14th May 2016 at 10:21 PM ----------

    Well in practice, what are people who cal themselves feminists actually doing? What will they do after issues in the west are finally fixed? Will their movement end, like it should? You tell me, I'm too afraid to say anything no more.

    If the NTS Fallacy hasn't been used then why have I seen some people say this group of feminists are the "real feminists" and this group of feminists are " bad radicals" and I don't support them"? I wrote that last bit really terribly, so I guess that's why it sounded wrong?
     
    #109 beastwith2backs, May 14, 2016
    Last edited: May 14, 2016
  10. Libertino

    Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2016
    Messages:
    1,195
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    This Side of the Enlightenment
    Gender:
    Male
    Gender Pronoun:
    He
    Sexual Orientation:
    Other
    Out Status:
    Some people
    I don't know. I'm not a self-identified "feminist", so that's not really a question I could answer. My guess is that they would continue to focus on individual isolated instances of discrimination as they occur, much the way the ACLU acts when civil liberties are violated. Because we all know that just because something is illegal, doesn't mean those laws won't be broken. People will always try. So there has to be someone out there taking up issues when no one else will.

    Well it depends on how the definition of "feminism" is being used. Those people are setting a standard for feminism and then comparing sub-groups who self-identify as "feminists" to that standard. No effective conversation can be had if we don't agree on a definition of "feminism". Once we agree on that, we can compare self-proclaimed feminists to that definition without using a fallacy. We just can't say things like "all feminists care about men's rights", because we know that's not true and someone could come up with a counterexample. It's the "all feminists do X" statements that can lead to fallacies.
     
  11. beastwith2backs

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2015
    Messages:
    283
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    The 6/ the socialist utopia.
    Gender:
    Male
    Sexual Orientation:
    Gay
    Actually, you just brought up a legitimate problem here, and it's exactly what I'm trying to get at, and it's that the dictionary definition of feminism doesn't always(barely) aligns with what feminists actually do. And don't actions speak louder than words, right? Whether or not radical feminists are the majority or not, they're clearly big enough to have a lot of people not like them, and disagree with them, strongly.
    But then when you point out why you disagree with them, those same radicals will actually resort to the dictionary definition of feminism, and say that that's what they're doing, even though their actions don't align with their...grrrr...these people are so irritating! It's like they have some mental block to seeing how any of what they do might just be wrong! All the time! how can any one with a sane mind be this...well...retarded? Radical feminists legitimately piss me off, and usually when I say "feminist" I'm probabbly most likely talking about them.
     
  12. Matto_Corvo

    Full Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2015
    Messages:
    2,270
    Likes Received:
    50
    Location:
    Portland, Oregon
    Gender:
    Male (trans*)
    Gender Pronoun:
    He
    Sexual Orientation:
    Gay
    Out Status:
    Out to everyone
    I kinda equate that mental block to the same mental block Christians have when it comes to homosexual.
     
  13. beastwith2backs

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2015
    Messages:
    283
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    The 6/ the socialist utopia.
    Gender:
    Male
    Sexual Orientation:
    Gay
    Yes! Exactly! That's a very clever observation, actually!
     
  14. Gunsmoke

    Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2016
    Messages:
    609
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Manchester, United Kingdom
    Gender:
    Female
    Sexual Orientation:
    Bisexual
    Out Status:
    A few people
    Okay, feminism is not a religion. And when did I say that feminism isn't an ideology? You could argue that it is an ideology, but does it really matter? If you're challenging the beliefs of a certain movement, is it really important? I don't really want to explain Social Learning Theory to you, but the fact is that many parents pass on their beliefs to their children, and I suppose that when the child is old enough, they can decide whether or not they agree with these beliefs. That's how I see it, at least. I decided that I agreed with the view of women's rights that my parents hold, which is the non-radical type of feminism. I've already explained why I continue to use that label.

    No, that is NOT what I am saying at all. For a really long time, women have been extremely under-represented in government. I am not a villain because I would like to see that change.
    Okay, and why do you think women have less of an interest in politics? It's not really true. But with that sort of argument, let me point out what you're implying:

    a) That women are literally born with little to no interest in politics; that from the moment we have a working brain, we decided not to care.
    b) That women are socialised not to be interested in politics, but rather, we should care about housework and sewing and leave the academics to the men.

    Or, option C, you can say that the problem lies not within a woman's interest, but that they have fewer resources or that once they get into politics, they are prevented from climbing the ladder, as it were.

    And before you tell me to make up my mind, we can apply your argument to LGBTQ+ supporters. If you don't think of yourself as one then please look at this hypothetically: there are those of us who just want equal rights, and THEN there are LGBTQ+ supporters who say that cisgendered people should kill themselves and that all straight people are inherently evil. Both groups would call themselves LGBTQ+ supporters, you see.
     
  15. Matto_Corvo

    Full Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2015
    Messages:
    2,270
    Likes Received:
    50
    Location:
    Portland, Oregon
    Gender:
    Male (trans*)
    Gender Pronoun:
    He
    Sexual Orientation:
    Gay
    Out Status:
    Out to everyone
    Okay, let me put it this way.
    People who say they are for an equality movement but then say a group of people should die all have mental blockages that they need to address because they are caring around a lot of bitterness and hate that they are taking out on a generation of people that did nothing to contribute to pass suffering. In fact, some of the same people they are damning are also the ones who are trying to help them reach a place where we are all equal.

    Be this feminist who say that men should die.
    Homosexuals who say cisgender people should die.
    Black people who say white people, and even other minilrities, should die.
    And the list can go on because there of many many equality movements out there, and there will always be radical extremists that take things to far.

    Violence is the action of a 5 year old. Adults talk things out and try to find that compromise that benefits everyone.
     
  16. beastwith2backs

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2015
    Messages:
    283
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    The 6/ the socialist utopia.
    Gender:
    Male
    Sexual Orientation:
    Gay
    So what do you want to blame on the fact that there aren't a lot of women in government positions? How are women granted less resources than men to go into politics? What resources? Are you saying that you actually think the GOVERNMENT treats women unequally? Why do you never mention any specifics, this is very general and could mean anything, really.

    how ironic it is for you to mention academics, actually! For the past few decades men have been the minority in universities. I don't see no feminist complaining about this. I don't see anyone saying that men are socialized to not get into university as much as women, or being programmed since birth to not care about academics. You don't see this, just women, because women are a special class, apparently.

    excuse my French, but how in the fuck did I imply A or B? what about anything I said hints" oh he probably thinks that women are programmed since birth to not care and should leave all politics to men and be housewives". I wasn't actually implying anything except what that statement meant at face value. I have NO IDEA why you'd perceive it like that.

    What I meant is, to put more clearly, that women and men nowadays both have the equal right to decide what to do with their lives. However, it seems that less women are interested in politics, for whatever reason, so there aren't that many, and that's that, I guess. In no way did I imply that women should be housewives instead! Are you trying to paint me as misogynistic? You know Gandhi did you we should be the change we wish too see in the world,mabye you could be that change by being in politics?

    About the LGBTQ+ supporters ( paradox? Ca. I call it a paradox?, I'm calling it a paradox!)

    You're right, kind of. There are crazies in all groups. they have Extremely dangerous ideas that if implemented, could cause serious havoc. However, they shouldn't be silenced, they should still be allowed to teach their crazy dogmas in private, and not to be taken seriously by anyone normal.

    However, the problem arises when they are Actullay taken seriously. Academically or being painted in a good light by the media. that's what's happening with radical feminists, black lives matter, and other crazy SJW movements. Someone on here mentioned earlier that universities/colleges, are now pretty much glorified tumblr pages. I think they said that because now there's "safe spaces" where you can go to stay away from people who look different from you, speakers are rudely interrupted and banned for saying the wrong things, and speech codes. Fucking speech codes. You can now say the wrong things. Wow.
    And student activists, someone said earlier that they're not a big deal, but I think they are, because these people are the future, and they hold some pretty scary beliefs, like all white people are racist, are minorities are oppressed, men should have curfews, and that communism should be put in place, instead of capitalism. Where are they getting these ideas from? Exactly, what they learned at university. The worst part is how some proffesional actually encourage this, like Melissa click, even though it might be bad for the students mental and psychical health. If you don't think this is bad consider that there is now " a whiteness history month" at the Portland community college. If these people are the future then, the future looks very morose.
     
  17. Gunsmoke

    Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2016
    Messages:
    609
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Manchester, United Kingdom
    Gender:
    Female
    Sexual Orientation:
    Bisexual
    Out Status:
    A few people
    Why are you so desperate to paint me as a radical? Please stop accusing me of saying things that I am not. Why would I know specifics any better than you? Feminism isn't a hobby that I have. I don't spend my time sat at a computer salivating and desperately searching for ways to present women as victims. All I pointed out was that there are less women in politics than men and that it must have something to do with gender, which is hardly a leap.

    And no, I am not calling you a misogynist. Whatever I said for point B was hypothetical. I know that you're not sexist, and I apologise if you thought that I was implying that. The most likely explanation for the under-representation of women in politics is most likely point B, however, if you consider it logically. As for your point about universities, then honestly I don't know. I heard that it was because men often go into business rather than higher education, but I really don't know.

    I'm sorry, but what you're saying - is it based around American universities?

    I agree with you on this, actually. I have nothing to add to your points but I do agree with most of them, the radicals should not be listened to or taken seriously, although I would not call Black Lives Matter a radical group. Maybe when black teenagers aren't getting murdered by the police I'll think it's radical.
     
  18. Secrets5

    Full Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2015
    Messages:
    1,964
    Likes Received:
    77
    Location:
    UK
    Gender:
    Female
    Gender Pronoun:
    She
    Sexual Orientation:
    Bisexual
    Out Status:
    A few people
    I think people are confusing diversity and equality, though.

    Equality - treating everyone the same regardless of ''protected characteristics''
    Diversity - having a group with people of a variety of ''protected characteristics''

    In terms of a government, an equal government would be one that would hire the people best for being an MP or PM ,regardless if their ''protected characteristic'' was male or female (or NB).

    A diverse government would be one that would hire people on the basis of ''protected characteristics'' by making a 50:50 male/female (33:33:33 if you include NB) split even if people in that split weren't the best for the MP or PM role.

    Although I focused on gender for the purpose of this, this could be for any ''protected characteristic''.

    People who are (not all, but I think most) women, LGBT, black have been asking for equality for years, and just because they've realized they aren't having it their way, they are now asking for diversity.

    With the addition of ''affirmative action'' (also known as positive discrimination) making it look like discrimination is okay, providing the person is male (unless it was a traditionally female job such as teaching), cis-het and white.

    People claim this is to ''eradicate past inequalities'' but I feel this will just create a new kind of inequality; might not happen in every country over night, but there's a possibility - 800 years or so in the future (homosexual relationships were accepted until around the 1300s).

    I think, instead, the education system and other authorities needs to be reworked to benefit future generations so there's no need for (positive) discrimination in the work force as that's unfair to people who have worked for the qualifications, but cannot get it on the basis of ''protected characteristics'' being the majority. In any case, it would be very hard to create a work force with people who are just LGBT unless you specifically asked for details, as these things aren't seen on first appearances (unless there's added detail such as rainbow wristband or something).

    I hope I haven't offended anyone with my speech, for the most part* I'm in favor of equality, not diversity. I think I've written quite well in terms of phrasing but please ask if you're unsure of what I meant. If you think I've just randomly typed this, I've based my response on what EmeraldEyes and beastwith2backs are commenting on but didn't know what to quote.

    Note this is my opinion:
    *Equality for things that will impact on other people's lives not just the employee such as teaching, nursing, doctor, surgeon, translator (language), firefighters, police**
    *Diversity for things that won't impact on other people's lives or is subjective such as music, art, architecture (in terms of design), some call centers

    **In regards to police's institutional racism, they should be trained better in an objective way. So if someone's doing something wrong, they should be stopped for it, regardless of race (or any other ''protected characteristic'').
     
    #118 Secrets5, May 15, 2016
    Last edited: May 15, 2016
  19. Libertino

    Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2016
    Messages:
    1,195
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    This Side of the Enlightenment
    Gender:
    Male
    Gender Pronoun:
    He
    Sexual Orientation:
    Other
    Out Status:
    Some people
    You're completely right on that, Secrets5. Equality is imperative. Diversity is not. That does not mean diversity doesn't have its functions. For example, if you are looking for a general portrait of what life in a certain city is like, you might strive for diversity, in the sense that you want to hear from the perspectives of the widest variety of people living in that city. That is when diversity is called for. It also does mean we shouldn't work to end discrimination in the process. But diversity is not called for under the law--the law must make sure there is equality, but it can't make sure there is diversity without selecting people (for office, for a job, for education) on reasons other than merit.

    I am full Hispanic; when applying to college, I almost considered ticking the "white (non-Hispanic)" box (which is what I outwardly appear to be, since I have light skin compared to many other Hispanics) because I didn't want my acceptance into college affected by my ethnicity.

    ---------- Post added 15th May 2016 at 08:43 AM ----------

    As I said before, communism and socialism are simply different economic theories--you cannot silence people who support communism. People have a right to support it.

    Secondly, you are speaking of extreme examples as if they are the norm, for which there is no evidence. Right-wing blogs and biased YouTube videos are not where you learn about what goes on at universities. Attending universities is where you learn about it. Where are the universities teaching that all white people are racist or that men should have curfews?

    I agree that these extremist views should not be taken seriously, and there are examples of academics going too far (Melissa Click has been fired and publicly shamed for what she did, and rightly so). But that does not mean this is some kind of epidemic. And thirdly, if a "safe space" is simply a place where people of similar attitudes can meet without threat of being harassed (i.e. like this very site, Emptyclosets.com) then I have no issue with them. You cannot demand that a campus itself be a safe space, but you can have individual groups that are. And I support the right to form them.
     
    #119 Libertino, May 15, 2016
    Last edited: May 15, 2016
  20. beastwith2backs

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2015
    Messages:
    283
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    The 6/ the socialist utopia.
    Gender:
    Male
    Sexual Orientation:
    Gay

    I wasn't trying to paint you as a radical feminist! You said you weren't. So I'll take your word for it. I'm not desperate to paint you as anything, I'm just responding to what you say, and that's it. The point you made about men going to business more than higher education, is exactly what I was saying with women and government, just with switched genders.

    About black lives matter....yeah, I'm sorry they are a black supremacist group. They pretty much try to paint the picture that blacks being killed by WHITE police is a such a big problem when it isn't. Trevoyn martin and that other kid from Ferguson were both criminals known to the police. And they only seem to care when it's a white police man who kills a black guy, not when it's black vs black, or white guy vs black officer, or white vs white, which are for more common to happen. Especially black vs black! They only seem to care when it's black person can white cop, and then scream racism for some reason....

    ---------- Post added 15th May 2016 at 01:07 PM ----------

    Communism and socialism are almost the same thing aren't they? Correct me if I'm wrong.

    I never said that people who support communism shouldn't be silenced, anymore than people who support the KKK should be silenced, I just said that they should be taken seriously, which is exactly what's happening with social justice warriors.

    I don't watch right-wing stuff. Where are universities teaching that all white people are racist? Portland community college is one that I already mentioned. And yes I watch YouTube videos, but I also click the links provided to articles, and original videos to see if I agree, and for the most part I do. For the most part.

    But don't those extreme examples show that something must be terribly wrong? Where are people getting these ideas from?
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.