33 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
Newer [  1  2  ] Older
33.
 
Re: Saturday Legal Briefs
Jun 1, 2015, 10:12
33.
Re: Saturday Legal Briefs Jun 1, 2015, 10:12
Jun 1, 2015, 10:12
 
Labels in of themselves are not bad. They are necessary. I don't greet a 5 year old and an adult in the same way. The problems arise when those labels used to discriminate "unfairly" against people.
"Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedies." -- Groucho Marx
32.
 
Re: Saturday Legal Briefs
Jun 1, 2015, 06:47
32.
Re: Saturday Legal Briefs Jun 1, 2015, 06:47
Jun 1, 2015, 06:47
 
It's all bullshit, at least in my opinion. SJW, Gamergater, Atheist+ (thanks for the explanation Space Captain) etc. etc. etc.

These are all groups which have become synonyms for assholes. Why not label someone an asshole and be done with it, since you can pretty much put anyone who ever had an opinion on something or other in one of those groups?

I for one consider myself a fairly progressive person, but I have opinions on matters which could very well put me in all three of these groups, depending on what we are talking about. Does this mean I am an uber asshole, or does that mean that it's so much easier to label someone a "SJW" or a "Gamergater" or whatever, than it is to actively engage with said person in a discussion of whatever matter at hand, or to simply agree to disagree and respect each other's opinion?

Yeah some groups are deserving of the hate they recieve, like for example neo-nazis, or those IS fanatics in Syria and Iraq, but simply hating someone for having an opinion that differs from your own is bigotry, pure and simple. So we invent 'labels' and 'groups' to distance ourselves from the simple fact that we are prejudiced assholes. Every last hypocritical one of us.

I have a nifty blue line!
Avatar 46994
31.
 
No subject
Jun 1, 2015, 06:20
31.
No subject Jun 1, 2015, 06:20
Jun 1, 2015, 06:20
 
InBlack wrote on Jun 1, 2015, 02:53:
It's also dehumanising. It's so much easier to HATE a group than it is to hate a person.

The problem of course is that some groups deserve the hate that they receive. Atheism+ is one of them, now that SJWs have gone mainstream they're also getting the hate they deserve. Though in truth, the difference between the two is minimal. In both cases you're dealing with the perpetually offended.
--
"For every human problem,
there is a neat, simple solution;
and it is always wrong."
--H.L. Mencken
30.
 
Re: Saturday Legal Briefs
Jun 1, 2015, 02:53
30.
Re: Saturday Legal Briefs Jun 1, 2015, 02:53
Jun 1, 2015, 02:53
 
harlock wrote on May 31, 2015, 10:08:
MoreLuckThanSkill wrote on May 31, 2015, 09:55:
SXO wrote on May 31, 2015, 08:40:
I can't even keep up with all the labels being applied to people anymore. It makes me not want to discuss anything with anyone because someone will feel the need to lump me in with one group or another. I can't dislike one group's message, and totally disagree with another. Apparently I'm supposed to pick a side, and I don't want to.

Welcome to a classic human dilemma. Humanity is largely unable to deal with people individually, and must resort to labeling and grouping people(and then feeling hostile or at least disparaging to other groups). We all do it to a certain extent, all we can do is try to recognize it and overcome it.

It's particularly upsetting to me that 'atheist' is getting misused so much these days, or at least tied to some assholery online.

Anyway, don't feel like you are the only one; most people really don't fit easy into any simple classification/group.

its called "territorial behavior".. its common in all the high primate species

youve got families, clans, tribes, nations, cultures, etc.

and then you go to war, to dominate

It's also dehumanising. It's so much easier to HATE a group than it is to hate a person.
I have a nifty blue line!
Avatar 46994
29.
 
No subject
May 31, 2015, 13:24
29.
No subject May 31, 2015, 13:24
May 31, 2015, 13:24
 
Dagnamit wrote on May 30, 2015, 22:55:
See but you're so quick out of the gate with the SJW stuff, that I can't really believe that it's just about ethics in journalism. Someone tell me, what does GG want? Please.

Except of course if I look at the sjw stuff, what do I see? Threats, doxing, "no wrong actions, only bad targets" mentality. Oh and what does GG want? It's already won everything(disclosure, writing stories in a non-biased way, clear ethical policies, bottom feeders have quit, left, or openly apologized for attacking gamers, etc) that it wanted for the most part. Nearly every gaming site that isn't sinking so fast you'd think it hit an iceburg seems to be doing fine. These days it's acting more like a watch dog.
--
"For every human problem,
there is a neat, simple solution;
and it is always wrong."
--H.L. Mencken
28.
 
Re: Saturday Legal Briefs
May 31, 2015, 10:08
28.
Re: Saturday Legal Briefs May 31, 2015, 10:08
May 31, 2015, 10:08
 
MoreLuckThanSkill wrote on May 31, 2015, 09:55:
SXO wrote on May 31, 2015, 08:40:
I can't even keep up with all the labels being applied to people anymore. It makes me not want to discuss anything with anyone because someone will feel the need to lump me in with one group or another. I can't dislike one group's message, and totally disagree with another. Apparently I'm supposed to pick a side, and I don't want to.

Welcome to a classic human dilemma. Humanity is largely unable to deal with people individually, and must resort to labeling and grouping people(and then feeling hostile or at least disparaging to other groups). We all do it to a certain extent, all we can do is try to recognize it and overcome it.

It's particularly upsetting to me that 'atheist' is getting misused so much these days, or at least tied to some assholery online.

Anyway, don't feel like you are the only one; most people really don't fit easy into any simple classification/group.

its called "territorial behavior".. its common in all the high primate species

youve got families, clans, tribes, nations, cultures, etc.

and then you go to war, to dominate
27.
 
Re: Saturday Legal Briefs
May 31, 2015, 09:55
27.
Re: Saturday Legal Briefs May 31, 2015, 09:55
May 31, 2015, 09:55
 
SXO wrote on May 31, 2015, 08:40:
I can't even keep up with all the labels being applied to people anymore. It makes me not want to discuss anything with anyone because someone will feel the need to lump me in with one group or another. I can't dislike one group's message, and totally disagree with another. Apparently I'm supposed to pick a side, and I don't want to.

Welcome to a classic human dilemma. Humanity is largely unable to deal with people individually, and must resort to labeling and grouping people(and then feeling hostile or at least disparaging to other groups). We all do it to a certain extent, all we can do is try to recognize it and overcome it.

It's particularly upsetting to me that 'atheist' is getting misused so much these days, or at least tied to some assholery online.

Anyway, don't feel like you are the only one; most people really don't fit easy into any simple classification/group.
Avatar 54863
26.
 
Re: Saturday Legal Briefs
May 31, 2015, 08:40
SXO
26.
Re: Saturday Legal Briefs May 31, 2015, 08:40
May 31, 2015, 08:40
SXO
 
I can't even keep up with all the labels being applied to people anymore. It makes me not want to discuss anything with anyone because someone will feel the need to lump me in with one group or another. I can't dislike one group's message, and totally disagree with another. Apparently I'm supposed to pick a side, and I don't want to.
25.
 
Re: Saturday Legal Briefs
May 31, 2015, 08:37
25.
Re: Saturday Legal Briefs May 31, 2015, 08:37
May 31, 2015, 08:37
 
now you can be even more justified in feeling superior to these dumbshit wack jobs
24.
 
Re: Saturday Legal Briefs
May 31, 2015, 08:36
24.
Re: Saturday Legal Briefs May 31, 2015, 08:36
May 31, 2015, 08:36
 
Elevatorgate was an online controversy that swept across the atheist and skeptic communities in the wake of American feminist and atheist blogger Rebecca Watson’s public shaming of a man who asked her to join him for coffee in his hotel room while they shared an elevator ride together at the World Atheist Convention in June 2011.
23.
 
Re: Saturday Legal Briefs
May 31, 2015, 08:34
23.
Re: Saturday Legal Briefs May 31, 2015, 08:34
May 31, 2015, 08:34
 
InBlack wrote on May 31, 2015, 04:19:
Wtf is atheism+?

Atheism Plus (also rendered Atheism+) was a movement proposed in 2012 by blogger Jen McCreight. Its original definition was rather nebulous, but in general it is intended to be a subset of the atheism movement that attempts to unite atheists who wish to use their shared atheist identity as a basis for addressing political and social issues and engaging in related activism. Its scope is intended to go beyond the question of (non-)belief to address additional issues, including critical thinking, skepticism, social justice, feminism, anti-racism, and combating homophobia and transphobia. In other words, a place for some of the more liberal (in the American meaning of the word) atheists who are sick of being lumped together with people whose ideals they don't share.

The idea originated as a reaction to the nastiness flung about during a controversy over (sexual) harassment policies at atheist/skeptical conferences, which in turn was a re-ignition of the controversy over sexism in those two movements that had been smoldering since Elevatorgate.

The initiative largely went nowhere, and even proponents don't really use the term anymore. But the phrase remains in use by those implacably opposed to the idea of being an atheist but not being an asshole, particularly Reddit anti-feminists, Gamergate and fans of Thunderf00t. Unironic use of the term is a reliable indicator of an asshole.
22.
 
Re: Saturday Legal Briefs
May 31, 2015, 08:12
NKD
22.
Re: Saturday Legal Briefs May 31, 2015, 08:12
May 31, 2015, 08:12
NKD
 
InBlack wrote on May 31, 2015, 04:19:
Mashiki Amiketo wrote on May 30, 2015, 22:39:
...atheism+...

Wtf is atheism+?

It's like Atheism for radical feminist/SJW types.

The atheist community in general is very dismissive of the kind of magical "my feelings" based reasoning of many SJW positions. Because it reminds them of being just another religion. Feminism especially is incredibly dogmatic and has a lot of sacred cows. It's effectively indistinguishable from a religion. It's got devout followers, deep roots in academia, and is very eager to eject a follower for challenging the status quo. One person's feelings trumps everyone else's facts.

So naturally it comes into conflict with a lot of the mainstream atheists who are into things like reason, and science, and open exchange of ideas.

So the SJWs made the Atheism+ label to signify that "We are atheists, but only secondary to our wacky SJW agenda." It should be called Atheism-

Atheism minus reason. Atheism minus debate. Atheism minus science.
"Sometimes, there are two sides. But more often, one side says it is a car. And one side says it is an umbrella. And only one is right. And the other one doesn’t deserve our attention." -Shepard Smith
Avatar 43041
21.
 
Re: Saturday Legal Briefs
May 31, 2015, 04:19
21.
Re: Saturday Legal Briefs May 31, 2015, 04:19
May 31, 2015, 04:19
 
Mashiki Amiketo wrote on May 30, 2015, 22:39:
...atheism+...

Wtf is atheism+?
I have a nifty blue line!
Avatar 46994
20.
 
Re: Saturday Legal Briefs
May 31, 2015, 01:22
20.
Re: Saturday Legal Briefs May 31, 2015, 01:22
May 31, 2015, 01:22
 
Dagnamit wrote on May 30, 2015, 22:55:
Mashiki Amiketo wrote on May 30, 2015, 22:39:
Yeahyeah Yeah wrote on May 30, 2015, 22:20:
You're going to end up with far more GG critics in prison than GG supporters if laws against such are enforced.

I can't wait. You're also going to find a lot of SJW's, atheism+ and so on supporters in jail.

See but you're so quick out of the gate with the SJW stuff, that I can't really believe that it's just about ethics in journalism. Someone tell me, what does GG want? Please.


You imply that GamerGate is just one entity/thing.
19.
 
Re: Saturday Legal Briefs
May 31, 2015, 00:11
NKD
19.
Re: Saturday Legal Briefs May 31, 2015, 00:11
May 31, 2015, 00:11
NKD
 
Not really opposed to running a market for drugs, but the guy's attempt at having people killed only failed because it turned out the victims and the would-be assassins were part of some elaborate scam to rip the guy off and it was never for real.

But he didn't know that. So he's a fucking psycho who needs to be put away for life.
"Sometimes, there are two sides. But more often, one side says it is a car. And one side says it is an umbrella. And only one is right. And the other one doesn’t deserve our attention." -Shepard Smith
Avatar 43041
18.
 
Re: Saturday Legal Briefs
May 30, 2015, 23:36
18.
Re: Saturday Legal Briefs May 30, 2015, 23:36
May 30, 2015, 23:36
 
Kris Redbeard wrote on May 30, 2015, 23:22:
Dagnamit wrote on May 30, 2015, 22:55:
See but you're so quick out of the gate with the SJW stuff, that I can't really believe that it's just about ethics in journalism. Someone tell me, what does GG want? Please.

More beer.

well, shit. why didn't you just say so?
17.
 
Re: Saturday Legal Briefs
May 30, 2015, 23:22
17.
Re: Saturday Legal Briefs May 30, 2015, 23:22
May 30, 2015, 23:22
 
Dagnamit wrote on May 30, 2015, 22:55:
See but you're so quick out of the gate with the SJW stuff, that I can't really believe that it's just about ethics in journalism. Someone tell me, what does GG want? Please.

More beer.
GROUND BRANCH
Mature Classic Tactical First Person Shooter
Avatar 21244
16.
 
Re: Saturday Legal Briefs
May 30, 2015, 22:55
16.
Re: Saturday Legal Briefs May 30, 2015, 22:55
May 30, 2015, 22:55
 
Mashiki Amiketo wrote on May 30, 2015, 22:39:
Yeahyeah Yeah wrote on May 30, 2015, 22:20:
You're going to end up with far more GG critics in prison than GG supporters if laws against such are enforced.

I can't wait. You're also going to find a lot of SJW's, atheism+ and so on supporters in jail.

See but you're so quick out of the gate with the SJW stuff, that I can't really believe that it's just about ethics in journalism. Someone tell me, what does GG want? Please.
15.
 
No subject
May 30, 2015, 22:39
15.
No subject May 30, 2015, 22:39
May 30, 2015, 22:39
 
Yeahyeah Yeah wrote on May 30, 2015, 22:20:
You're going to end up with far more GG critics in prison than GG supporters if laws against such are enforced.

I can't wait. You're also going to find a lot of SJW's, atheism+ and so on supporters in jail.
--
"For every human problem,
there is a neat, simple solution;
and it is always wrong."
--H.L. Mencken
14.
 
Re: Saturday Legal Briefs
May 30, 2015, 22:20
14.
Re: Saturday Legal Briefs May 30, 2015, 22:20
May 30, 2015, 22:20
 
'Online harassment like Gamergate'. That's adorable.

I'm all in favor of imprisoning people who deliver death/rape threats online. So's most of GG. I'm also in favor of imprisoning people who falsely claim to be threatened with rape/death.

You're going to end up with far more GG critics in prison than GG supporters if laws against such are enforced.
33 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
Newer [  1  2  ] Older