Specieism, racism, and sexism

[Mischief]

The vast majority of humans wouldn't be considered racist or sexist,

I disagree. IMO, only someone who has lived a sheltered, insular, existence would believe this.

All three systems of belief arise from a belief that others, who are not like us, are lesser than we and those like us.

Mod Post
A reminder of the debate forum rules:

On-topic: Keep on topic - avoid making off-topic posts. This includes “empty” responses, or general chit-chat, such as "lol, Ha, "I agree" or "this thread is silly, why can't we stop making threads about this?". Do not derail threads. Only post responses when you have something to contribute to the debate. If a topic is of no interest to you, then don't post in the thread. If a topic brings up another issue, start a new thread.

So, for example, if someone started a Holocaust apologist thread, our options are limited to either not posting in the thread or engaging in a discussion which takes the proposition as a worthy one?

I think that stifles discussion.

 

[beancounter]

So, for example, if someone started a Holocaust apologist thread, our options are limited to either not posting in the thread or engaging in a discussion which takes the proposition as a worthy one?

I think that stifles discussion.

No. You do not have to regard the opinion favorably, you simply can not try to dismiss the discussion itself.

Or to put it another way, there is a difference between disagreeing with a topic, and dismissing/discouraging discussion of the topic.

 

[Mischief]

No. You do not have to regard the opinion favorably, you simply can not try to dismiss the discussion itself.

Or to put it another way, there is a difference between disagreeing with a topic, and dismissing/discouraging discussion of the topic.

Well, I don't see the point in engaging seriously in certain discussions, such as Holocaust denial, justification for abuse, etc. It seems that you're saying that we have to either not post in those kinds of discussions (thereby implicitly agreeing with such viewpoints) or, if we do, act as if those are valid viewpoints with which we just happen to disagree.

 

[Freesia]

My personal opinion on this is that all have a right to happiness no matter what their species, race or gender, sexuality, or ability/health level.

So it is strange to make distinctions between gender and race or any of the other things as it just belies the real issue: that some tend to dominate and create situations which benefit some and not others, instead of creating situations of equality.

 

[ledboots]

Mod Post
A reminder of the debate forum rules:

On-topic: Keep on topic - avoid making off-topic posts. This includes “empty” responses, or general chit-chat, such as "lol, Ha, "I agree" or "this thread is silly, why can't we stop making threads about this?". Do not derail threads. Only post responses when you have something to contribute to the debate. If a topic is of no interest to you, then don't post in the thread. If a topic brings up another issue, start a new thread.

It's okay, just keep deleting posts that you feel are off-topic or in any way humorous. That's the way to keep a discussion going!

All those prejudices in the OP are wrong. Saying one thing is "more wrong" than the other seems ridiculous to me. Torturing a cat is more wrong than torturing a dog? A pig? An oyster? Stoning a female to death for adultery is more wrong than hanging a man for being black? Who can make these distinctions?

 

[Spang]

The vast majority of humans wouldn't be considered racist or sexist...

The majority of white people are racist, and the majority of men are sexist, by default. Of these racists and sexists, there are those who are completely aware and proud, and those who are aware and constantly adjusting their settings. Not being a racist or a sexist is a continual struggle. Then there are those who are unaware, and those who are in denial.

 

[Envy]

It seems that you're saying that we have to either not post in those kinds of discussions (thereby implicitly agreeing with such viewpoints)

Considering how many discussions there are on the Internet, I can't see that viewpoint as being either healthy nor true.

All those prejudices in the OP are wrong. Saying one thing is "more wrong" than the other seems ridiculous to me. Torturing a cat is more wrong than torturing a dog? A pig? An oyster? Stoning a female to death for adultery is more wrong than hanging a man for being black? Who can make these distinctions?

No one can, it's all opinions.

 

[Mikkel]

For me, I guess it would depend on the situation and what 's done. Of cause it isn't Ok, but it's worse to be killed becaue of it than loose a job I think.

 

[kibbleforlola]

It's okay, just keep deleting posts that you feel are off-topic or in any way humorous. That's the way to keep a discussion going!

All those prejudices in the OP are wrong. Saying one thing is "more wrong" than the other seems ridiculous to me. Torturing a cat is more wrong than torturing a dog? A pig? An oyster? Stoning a female to death for adultery is more wrong than hanging a man for being black? Who can make these distinctions?

Or what about a brown woman wearing a hijab being discriminated against? Is that sexism or racism? Is it worse if we call it racism instead of sexism? You really can't make that call, and really it's a gross combination of multiple prejudices.

 

[Envy]

Or what about a brown woman wearing a hijab being discriminated against? Is that sexism or racism? Is it worse if we call it racism instead of sexism? You really can't make that call, and really it's a gross combination of multiple prejudices.

Would that not be situational? There's too many factors involved in discrimination to make blanket statements as well.

 

[Clueless Git]

Sexism against males bothers me both the most and the least.

It bothers me the least because suppression of males, as a group, is impossible past the point that males allow it.

It bothers me the most because pissing off males, as a group, is dangerous to any other group that does that.

The reason for that lies within the fact that ALL rights are ultimately dependent on might to enforce them.

That makes the existent of rights for ALL groups entirely dependent on those who have the superior might.

Those who have the superior might, as a group, are, quite obviously, males.

 

[rainforests1]

Mischief has their mind on Hitler far too often. Focus more on the present and future, and less on the past.

The majority of white people are racist, and the majority of men are sexist, by default.

I question whether this is accurate, and I have no idea why you're looking at one race as being worse than the others.

 

[Ann Chovie]

I question whether this is accurate, and I have no idea why you're looking at one race as being worse than the others.

I agree ..I do not think it is an accurate statement at all and what evidence do you have that this is the case?

Obviously SOME white people are racist but there tends to be an assumptions that ONLY white people are racist when in fact racism exists in all races.

 

[Wolfie]

I'm not racist. I hate everyone equally.

 

[Clueless Git]

Not being a racist or a sexist is a continual struggle.

Your confusing not being racist or sexist with keeping up with the daily changes in PC police policy there, Spang.

Non racism is obliviousness to race and non sexism is obliviousness to gender.

PC is an industry based on nothing more than keeping race and gender forefront in everyone's minds.

Obviously it's a continual struggle trying to kill something off by doing exactly the thing that ensures it will thrive and survive.

 

[Ann Chovie]

Your confusing not being racist or sexist with keeping up with the daily changes in PC police policy there, Spang.

Yes this is so true.

Perfect example being a client I saw ten minutes after scanning this thread..

He is a man in his late 70's who was praising his neighbours for the kindness and support they were showing during his illness.

While telling me he used several terms to describe his neighbours race and ethnicity which were totally un-PC and in some circles would have raised groans and rebuke.

But he is not moving in such circles, and he is not aware that the goal posts are constantly moving.

He is 70 and using words he thought were correct and PC because at the time he learnt them they WERE .

He did not intend to be offensive or racist he was merely using the words descriptively.

Not knowing the current PC term does not make him a racist.

 

[Freesia]

70 isnt that old. No excuses. My father is almost 68 and he remembers the 1960s and all the protests and civil rights movements etc. There was a lot more interesting political talk going on when he was young in the 1960s than there is today even.

 

[Freesia]

Perfect example


of


a racist.

I fixed your post about that man for you.

Didnt have to add any words, just deleted some, did the trick.

 

[Clueless Git]

I fixed your post about that man for you.

Didnt have to add any words, just deleted some, did the trick.

Praising his ethnic minority neighbours (for their kindness) without knowing the PC word of the day makes the man a racist?

'Nice' attack on an elderly cancer patient, one you don't even know, though.

 

[Ann Chovie]

70 isnt that old. No excuses. My father is almost 68 and he remembers the 1960s and all the protests and civil rights movements etc. There was a lot more interesting political talk going on when he was young in the 1960s than there is today even.

Yes, and in the 1960's my client would have been in a working enviroment keeping up with the latest PC words and using them accordingly.

Today his enviroment is home..he is retired, ill and housebound using those same words , completely unaware that they are no longer PC .

For the record when I suggested other words he should use instead he apologised profusely for not being 'up with the times' and used them instead.

Racist? Please!