|
Who What Now posted:Who does it matter if something is a "sport" or not? what are you a european or something?
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 04:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 19:47 |
|
|
Funky See Funky Do posted:People who make nature documentaries about sharks that are not great white sharks are wasting their lives and everyone else's time. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lgTbQlfOSKE you are incorrect https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZDZ7RP5kog you are wrong https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aQNixrJUk_o of all the wrongest opinions in this thread, you have one of the worst
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 04:59
|
|
|
https://youtu.be/hz2HBk5sKlc Might as well throw a clip up about my favorite shark. Greenland sharks can live for several hundred years.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 05:10
|
|
|
What a parade of freakish liberal nonsense sharks.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 05:10
|
|
|
Funky See Funky Do posted:What a parade of freakish liberal nonsense sharks. The Greenland shark is the literal boomer shark. Slow, fat, blind and old. Clearly the most conservative shark.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 05:17
|
|
|
I like the Greenland shark too but around these parts you just can't admit that.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 05:23
|
|
|
Scientists say addiction is a disease but it's hard for me to accept that. I understand when they explain it academically but the gut feeling is like... dude just have one beer instead of 12 beers lol.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 06:29
|
|
|
TheWeepingHorse posted:I think most anti-CRT "activists" are either liars, or being lied to, but too many of the anti-anti-CRT defenses are uncompelling. Part of the ant-CRT hysteria comes from how people need to feel pride in who they are and where they come from. Many white parents feel like they're having that taken away from them, without enough face-saving angles. Critical histories of our country are totally necessary, but at a high school level, there need to be provisos along the lines of, "part of what makes our country great is that it was founded on ideals of freedom, of an amendable Constitution that guarantees certain rights, and part of realizing that greatness is self-reflection and seeking to make amends for the wrongs of the past." If your response to this idea is something like, "well, white Americans have nothing to be proud about," then you're not helping. You're just hoping that a sizeable and well-resourced portion of the country won't mind having these needs unfulfilled. Then again maybe people who wouldn't eventually reflect and come around could never have been reasoned with no matter how hard you danced around direct language so who knows.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 06:35
|
|
|
ArbitraryC posted:many people will absolutely shut their brain off when you start trying to tell them by definition you can't be racist against white people in america. I think part of the issue with this is "prejudiced" or "bigoted" isn't as entrenched in the public lexicon as "racist". So while you can't be racist against white people in America you can absolutely be bigoted or prejudiced against them, or one minority group can be prejudiced against another, but that's not something that gets discussed as often.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 07:37
|
|
|
E: nvm
scott zoloft fucked around with this message at 10:29 on Nov 4, 2021 |
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 10:21
|
|
|
ArbitraryC posted:The whole issue sort of reminds me of the academic definition of racism, that is to say prejudice + institutional power, which is something that makes absolute sense on paper and academic circles but is basically asking for people to disagree with you when you get outside of the proper circles. I'm a huge pedant and I can understand the urge to rules lawyer these sorts of things but at the end of the day framing is important and many people will absolutely shut their brain off when you start trying to tell them by definition you can't be racist against white people in america. I agree, I think this kind of word game is stupid. It may be an academic definition, but more importantly it is political language/advertising copy which is designed to obfuscate more controversial aspects of their ideas, one of which is the following: even when laws in principle are not racist, in practice they can still allow structural racism to exist. So therefore the laws must explicitly incorporate 'reverse racism', for lack of a better term, in order to counteract against the in practice structural racism. They know that the term 'racist' is a pejorative, and they don't want their ideas to be associated with that word, so they re-define the word 'racist', so that it doesn't apply to them. That's all it is. silence_kit fucked around with this message at 11:02 on Nov 4, 2021 |
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 10:32
|
|
|
SatansOnion posted:I consider myself more of a dial-a-ride dissident I'm a sleeper train slacktivist
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 12:14
|
|
|
Mu Zeta posted:Scientists say addiction is a disease but it's hard for me to accept that. I understand when they explain it academically but the gut feeling is like... dude just have one beer instead of 12 beers lol. I don’t buy that either. I think it’s mostly classified as a disease so it can be treated and covered by insurances. Which is a good thing. I could see insurance companies refusing to pay for liver transplants or something because the patient was an alcoholic or something.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 14:26
|
|
|
It is more or less impossible to get a liver transplant if you've so much as looked at a bottle of booze in the last three years. Also addiction is a disease in the same way depression and schizophrenia are diseases. Just because you can't see a bone poking through skin doesn't mean there isn't something seriously wrong.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 14:30
|
|
|
Classifying it as a disease reduces stigma and increases the likelihood an addict will seek treatment. It also increases empathy on the part of the caregiver. If it's seen as an illness that needs to be treated instead of a moral failure that should be punished, that's just better all around. Especially since there is often an associated component of mental health or self esteem, so stigmatizing increases feelings of shame, guilt, or worthlessness that are then self medicated by the addiction creating a feedback loop. Addiction isn't rational, it's a defect in the brains normal reward systems getting hijacked.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 14:34
|
|
|
Flowers for QAnon posted:Lmao. “You should just talk to the people who want to lynch you, NOT agree with them, dummy!” Flowers for QAnon posted:*gets shot in the head* oh well, I’m sure they learned a valuable lesson! you have some issues
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 14:43
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:It is more or less impossible to get a liver transplant if you've so much as looked at a bottle of booze in the last three years. Ideally we would be living in a world where replacement livers grew on trees and this wouldn’t be an issue. But IMO it makes a lot of sense to deprioritize people who have destroyed their livers with alcohol abuse in the queue
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 14:59
|
|
|
I’m an alcoholic (sober now) and so are a lot of people in my extended family and there really is something hosed up with your brain that makes you do it. Of course you do have agency in choosing to drink in the first place, but your brain can definitely be rigged in a certain way where once you start drinking whatever your plans were previously just evaporate and you convince yourself you should just keep drinking even when there is obvious evidence to the contrary. Once you start it just completely bypasses your normal ability to make judgments and plan your actions, it’s really frustrating. And of course once you hit a certain point you literally have to drink regularly or you get really sick, so you are constantly in that state of having that blind spot in your ability to make judgments about your actions
ChunTheUnavoidable fucked around with this message at 15:05 on Nov 4, 2021 |
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 14:59
|
|
|
One might as well say "I don't buy asthma as a 'disease'. Just, like, breath normal instead of gasping, idiot!"
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 15:29
|
|
|
ArbitraryC posted:I feel like there's a lot of shooting yourselves in the foot with messaging over issues like these. At it's core in a social studies curriculum CRT is just accurate and honest social studies, there's no factually alternative version of history it's just history. The whole issue sort of reminds me of the academic definition of racism, that is to say prejudice + institutional power, which is something that makes absolute sense on paper and academic circles but is basically asking for people to disagree with you when you get outside of the proper circles. I'm a huge pedant and I can understand the urge to rules lawyer these sorts of things but at the end of the day framing is important and many people will absolutely shut their brain off when you start trying to tell them by definition you can't be racist against white people in america. A lot of this exists because of the variance in quality of what passes for "CRT" within that kind of education genre. You have the legit, history-teaching truth of the racist history of the US that nobody should really be trying to remove mixed in with race grifters like Kendi and DiAngelo that really provide no educational use other than egging on the weird authoritarian liberal cult that's grown around the increasingly granulated and faux-academic woke consulting industry.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 15:32
|
|
|
ArbitraryC posted:The whole issue sort of reminds me of the academic definition of racism, that is to say prejudice + institutional power, which is something that makes absolute sense on paper and academic circles You can't be racist against white people, but it's because "white people" is not a racial classification it's a system of privilege designed deliberately to exclude the other based on the whims of whoever is currently defining "white people."
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 15:37
|
|
|
Oh god, you said the P-word...
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 15:38
|
|
|
I was definitely addicted to cigarettes once upon a time, despite not really enjoying alcohol, or ever being interested in drugs, and I can see why addiction functions like a disease, but also why its not really the same. I remember the way your brain tells you, "no, its fine, you'll quit tomorrow." After quitting, I never had any interest again. My totally unscientific, and probably wrong thinking is that the chemical addiction is not the disease, per se, but the underlying issues that drive you to find something to get addicted to functions as, and needs treatment as a disease.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 15:39
|
|
|
nvidiagouge posted:A lot of this exists because of the variance in quality of what passes for "CRT" within that kind of education genre. You have the legit, history-teaching truth of the racist history of the US that nobody should really be trying to remove mixed in with race grifters like Kendi and DiAngelo that really provide no educational use other than egging on the weird authoritarian liberal cult that's grown around the increasingly granulated and faux-academic woke consulting industry. who are kendi and diangelo? as someone who graduated with history degree(lol) my opinion is kinda teach history as clearly and unfiltered as possible and let people make up their own minds. i lean more towards the liberal/progressive side of the "history war" because the rights idea of history is either weird jingoism or hosed up evangelical poo poo. the lefts biggest issue to me is trying to make every problematic figure in history(most figures) equaly bad. like andrew jackson and columbus and calhoun and the confederacy are easy because gently caress em, but the weird "there can be no heroes because heroes=perfect" is dumb. point out the bad and lovely folks and don't make statues of them but actual complex characters of histories should be taught fully though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 15:42
|
|
|
blarzgh posted:I was definitely addicted to cigarettes once upon a time, despite not really enjoying alcohol, or ever being interested in drugs, and I can see why addiction functions like a disease, but also why its not really the same. I remember the way your brain tells you, "no, its fine, you'll quit tomorrow." After quitting, I never had any interest again. My totally unscientific, and probably wrong thinking is that the chemical addiction is not the disease, per se, but the underlying issues that drive you to find something to get addicted to functions as, and needs treatment as a disease. As you get into middle age it becomes more and more obvious that there really is a subset of substance abusers that just cannot help themselves and it totally has something to do with their brain, not because they're just pieces of poo poo or whatever.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 15:42
|
|
|
Dapper_Swindler posted:who are kendi and diangelo?
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 15:43
|
|
|
Dapper_Swindler posted:who are kendi and diangelo? So, there's a whole industry now on race-based consulting and people like Ibram Kendi and Robin DiAngelo are two of the most egregious examples of peddlers of the more useless forms that are still fairly appealing to a certain set of liberal. You get way out into idiot territory where they're ranting about how things like punctuality, objectivity, rigor, math, deadlines, basically any sort of structure in society that can possibly reflect badly on minorities when measured objectively are functions of white supremacy and need to be rejected. At it's base it's a post-modern religion that rejects any form of structure it doesn't like the results of and replaces it with with an ever-shifting set of instructions handed down by "academics" and speakers whose authority either comes from their own declared identity or their place in the hierarchy of the religion. None of their material has been tested or reviewed to see if it actually works in functional pedagogy, it's just caught on with liberals who work in education through word of mouth and it's been instituted in lots of places as recommended reading and there's a whole consulting industry that charges ridiculous amounts to send speakers out and lecture people on how racist they are and how badly they need to deconstruct anything resembling an objective structure and replace it with their cult version of racial politics.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 15:51
|
|
|
Work in a liquor store for a few days and you will see just how much alcoholism is a disease. When you hand a pint of cheap vodka to the same guy every day, three times a day it begins to sink in. His hands shake the whole time and he can’t look you in the eye because of his shame over the state he is in. He doesn’t want this vodka, he needs it to live. Addiction is a terrible disease.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 15:52
|
|
|
Dolphin posted:Is there a single "founding father" who wasn't a huge piece of poo poo? The list is basically John Quincy Adams and Ben Franklin. There were actually quite a few minor figures at that time who had fairly non-repugnant views as well. Washington leaned towards not awful but still had issues.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 15:54
|
|
|
ArbitraryC posted:The whole issue sort of reminds me of the academic definition of racism, that is to say prejudice + institutional power, which is something that makes absolute sense on paper and academic circles but is basically asking for people to disagree with you when you get outside of the proper circles. I'm a huge pedant and I can understand the urge to rules lawyer these sorts of things but at the end of the day framing is important and many people will absolutely shut their brain off when you start trying to tell them by definition you can't be racist against white people in america. If people are working off of two different definitions of "racism," then no dialog can continue until you agree on terms. In most academic contexts, it's going to be prejudice plus institutional power. In many other day-to-day conversations, that's not going to be the accepted definition. You either have to persuade the other parties to use your definition, or you have to find some other linguistic workaround to keep things clear. Outside of those academic contexts, there is no rhetorical utility in telling somebody that they're using the word "racism" wrong; outside of those academic contexts, that kind of prescriptivism is no better than, say, telling somebody that "decimate" can only mean "reduce to a tenth." The other person is probably going to disregard your arguments and tune you out!
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 15:55
|
|
|
nvidiagouge posted:The list is basically John Quincy Adams and Ben Franklin. There were actually quite a few minor figures at that time who had fairly non-repugnant views as well. Washington leaned towards not awful but still had issues.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 15:57
|
|
|
Dolphin posted:Is there a single "founding father" who wasn't a huge piece of poo poo? adams and franklin and some of the lesser known ones were pretty ok and progressive for their times. i hate the hosed up cult worship of the founders but i find most of them super interesting but super loving flawed people who probably should be learned about though with good context especially in like college or upper high school. nvidiagouge posted:So, there's a whole industry now on race-based consulting and people like Ibram Kendi and Robin DiAngelo are two of the most egregious examples of peddlers of the more useless forms that are still fairly appealing to a certain set of liberal. You get way out into idiot territory where they're ranting about how things like punctuality, objectivity, rigor, math, deadlines, basically any sort of structure in society that can possibly reflect badly on minorities when measured objectively are functions of white supremacy and need to be rejected. At it's base it's a post-modern religion that rejects any form of structure it doesn't like the results of and replaces it with with an ever-shifting set of instructions handed down by "academics" and speakers whose authority either comes from their own declared identity or their place in the hierarchy of the religion. None of their material has been tested or reviewed to see if it actually works in functional pedagogy, it's just caught on with liberals who work in education through word of mouth and it's been instituted in lots of places as recommended reading and there's a whole consulting industry that charges ridiculous amounts to send speakers out and lecture people on how racist they are and how badly they need to deconstruct anything resembling an objective structure and replace it with their cult version of racial politics. so basicaly taking uber post modern history and using it as cottage industry. i think part of the reason its taking off is because until like 20 years ago, history was either super dry or super dumbed down and almost always about dead white dudes who could do no wrong. like sure you had Zinn but zinn has his own massive issues.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 15:59
|
|
|
TheWeepingHorse posted:If people are working off of two different definitions of "racism," then no dialog can continue until you agree on terms. In most academic contexts, it's going to be prejudice plus institutional power. In many other day-to-day conversations, that's not going to be the accepted definition. You either have to persuade the other parties to use your definition, or you have to find some other linguistic workaround to keep things clear. Outside of those academic contexts, there is no rhetorical utility in telling somebody that they're using the word "racism" wrong; outside of those academic contexts, that kind of prescriptivism is no better than, say, telling somebody that "decimate" can only mean "reduce to a tenth." The other person is probably going to disregard your arguments and tune you out! This highlights one of the big problems with the modern Democratic party, which is that their base is now the educated elite and certain minorities rather than the working class in general. This is probably a bad situation to be in when the demographics of the country are trending towards a more stratified society by class and income. You can see kind of a realization of this with some of their attempts at governing lately, but as long as they let the elite progs take the lead on that stuff, it's going to alienate a lot of regular people.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 15:59
|
|
|
How prevalent are they? I've heard my family rant about things like "The left thinks teaching math is racist!" and I never have any idea what they are talking about. Most of the time, niether do they. We should teach kids to count in base 12 on their knuckles though. Being able to count to 144 instead of 20 is pretty cool. It's too bad our white supremacist educational system discriminates against sumerians.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 15:59
|
|
|
Dolphin posted:"Issues" like "owning slaves" Yeah, but also putting it in his will he wanted them all freed when he died because he found the whole thing rather distasteful despite admittedly taking part in it. Sounds lovely by today's standards but it was actually on the more radical side of things at the time. The brand-new US was constantly under threat by enemies at home and abroad so he had to make concessions to the slave states to keep it from collapsing internally and keep up appearances but it's pretty obvious from his later writings and how he spelled things out in his will that he recognized the hypocrisy of being a supposed scion of liberty and a slave owner at the same time. Franklin and Quincy Adams were both outright abolitionists, though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 16:04
|
|
|
nvidiagouge posted:Yeah, but also putting it in his will he wanted them all freed when he died because he found the whole thing rather distasteful despite admittedly taking part in it. Sounds lovely by today's standards but it was actually on the more radical side of things at the time. The brand-new US was constantly under threat by enemies at home and abroad so he had to make concessions to the slave states to keep it from collapsing internally and keep up appearances but it's pretty obvious from his later writings and how he spelled things out in his will that he recognized the hypocrisy of being a supposed scion of liberty and a slave owner at the same time. he also wasnt jefferson or hamilton, both overated assholes. madison was ok though. sorta.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 16:08
|
|
|
nvidiagouge posted:Yeah, but also putting it in his will he wanted them all freed when he died because he found the whole thing rather distasteful despite admittedly taking part in it. Sounds lovely by today's standards but it was actually on the more radical side of things at the time. The brand-new US was constantly under threat by enemies at home and abroad so he had to make concessions to the slave states to keep it from collapsing internally and keep up appearances but it's pretty obvious from his later writings and how he spelled things out in his will that he recognized the hypocrisy of being a supposed scion of liberty and a slave owner at the same time.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 16:10
|
|
|
Dolphin posted:Washington was friends with Franklin, I don't think he gets the benefit of the doubt on the slavery issue. Washington is a complicated figure because they wanted to make him king after the revolutionary war and he declined. He had this very high esteem among all the colonies and used it multiple times to keep the whole thing from collapsing. Something worth remembering is the chronological order of things historically and what had to happen for other things to happen. Basically, the US started the global collapse of Monarchy, which was using a slave system everywhere. That collapse allowed more liberal governments to be installed in Europe that would abandon slavery before the US. It was a domino kind of effect and the US ended up late to the party in ending slavery because of it's own internal issues. However, there's a good chance that if Washington insisted on using his power to end slavery when he had the chance, the entire US would have collapsed under internal strife and the British Monarchy could reassert itself, perhaps meaning none of the eventual revolutions in Europe would come to pass.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 16:16
|
|
|
That's a pretty stereotypical view of American history and totally discards the actual motivations behind the revolution.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 16:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 19:47 |
|
|
The function of DiAngelo and Kendi, along with a lot of other racial therapy sessions, is to provide a ritualistic session for white people (primarily women) to symbolically separate themselves from whiteness and thus not be bad. People feel this friction because anyone working anything more than a service job in the United States is the moral equivalent of a slaveholder or a Nazi, but people cannot deal with the attendant guilt that causes and so it requires mass psychiatric counseling.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2021 16:24
|
|