Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to The Lounge |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Thanks, OP and certainly a hot topic. What I fail to understand, genuinely understand is why people still think it is ok to question the experience of minorities. When my boss (of Indian descent) tells me about a micro aggression, you know the sort of thing when people assume because you have Indian heritage you MUST know everythign about how to make a good curry" - of course, on the surface it does not seem offensive. But if they tell me it offends them, that suffices. It means it is insulting! " Because giving anyone a position of “you can’t be questioned” is ridiculous I’ve got a friend that works at a very high level of a big credit company. You wouldn’t believe how often the race card gets pulled out in an attempt to get settlements out of the company | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Thanks, OP and certainly a hot topic. What I fail to understand, genuinely understand is why people still think it is ok to question the experience of minorities. When my boss (of Indian descent) tells me about a micro aggression, you know the sort of thing when people assume because you have Indian heritage you MUST know everythign about how to make a good curry" - of course, on the surface it does not seem offensive. But if they tell me it offends them, that suffices. It means it is insulting! Because giving anyone a position of “you can’t be questioned” is ridiculous I’ve got a friend that works at a very high level of a big credit company. You wouldn’t believe how often the race card gets pulled out in an attempt to get settlements out of the company " I hear you and I would say that for the sake of changing things in society, for the time being it is probably a price we need to pay, that some people may get away with things that they would not get away with in a fairer, more balanced society. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The last post filled up just as I'd asked someone a question. (They didn't answer it previously). I'm hoping they take this opportunity to do so. Cheers, Gbat" https://comresglobal.com/polls/bbc-radio-4-today-muslim-poll/ One in four (27%) British Muslims say they have some sympathy for the motives behind the attacks on Charlie Hebdo in Paris. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"As a guy who has suffered from Racism sInce I was a kid unfortunately Racism is going to be a issue due to those who are Racist " And do you think people are beginning to understand the issue a bit better? Are there small signs of things imporving? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"What I fail to understand, genuinely understand is why people still think it is ok to question the experience of minorities. " It must be like that drop of water that splashes onto your forehead. If you're in the shower, no bother. If you're chained between two posts and it goes on and on and on and you can't stop it or move away from it, well I'm guessing that's a very different thing. "It's only a drop of water. Don't be so up tight!" Try saying that after the ten thousandth drop. And of course, that's only talking about low level "micro" stuff, not petrol bombing your house. Gbat | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Thanks, OP and certainly a hot topic. What I fail to understand, genuinely understand is why people still think it is ok to question the experience of minorities. When my boss (of Indian descent) tells me about a micro aggression, you know the sort of thing when people assume because you have Indian heritage you MUST know everythign about how to make a good curry" - of course, on the surface it does not seem offensive. But if they tell me it offends them, that suffices. It means it is insulting! Because giving anyone a position of “you can’t be questioned” is ridiculous I’ve got a friend that works at a very high level of a big credit company. You wouldn’t believe how often the race card gets pulled out in an attempt to get settlements out of the company I hear you and I would say that for the sake of changing things in society, for the time being it is probably a price we need to pay, that some people may get away with things that they would not get away with in a fairer, more balanced society." I gotta disagree. If you want equality, aim for that. You don’t get that by giving people a “you can’t question anything they say” status. If anything that makes the matter worse. Because you then have a “don’t hire a black guy, he can pull the race card and we’re fucked” situation | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"What I fail to understand, genuinely understand is why people still think it is ok to question the experience of minorities. It must be like that drop of water that splashes onto your forehead. If you're in the shower, no bother. If you're chained between two posts and it goes on and on and on and you can't stop it or move away from it, well I'm guessing that's a very different thing. "It's only a drop of water. Don't be so up tight!" Try saying that after the ten thousandth drop. And of course, that's only talking about low level "micro" stuff, not petrol bombing your house. Gbat" Good analogy! But how do we find a way forward? We need to raise it, call it out because if we do not we are "tolerating" something that is inherently wrong and inhuman? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" https://comresglobal.com/polls/bbc-radio-4-today-muslim-poll/ One in four (27%) British Muslims say they have some sympathy for the motives behind the attacks on Charlie Hebdo in Paris. " Which is quite some distance from "27% of UK Muslims support the Charlie Hebdo attacks" as you stated in your original post. Can't you see how using a stand alone and inaccurate quote from a survey paints a different picture from the real one? Thank you for posting the source of data, which is what I asked you to do in the first place. Gbat | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Thanks, OP and certainly a hot topic. What I fail to understand, genuinely understand is why people still think it is ok to question the experience of minorities. When my boss (of Indian descent) tells me about a micro aggression, you know the sort of thing when people assume because you have Indian heritage you MUST know everythign about how to make a good curry" - of course, on the surface it does not seem offensive. But if they tell me it offends them, that suffices. It means it is insulting! Because giving anyone a position of “you can’t be questioned” is ridiculous I’ve got a friend that works at a very high level of a big credit company. You wouldn’t believe how often the race card gets pulled out in an attempt to get settlements out of the company I hear you and I would say that for the sake of changing things in society, for the time being it is probably a price we need to pay, that some people may get away with things that they would not get away with in a fairer, more balanced society. I gotta disagree. If you want equality, aim for that. You don’t get that by giving people a “you can’t question anything they say” status. If anything that makes the matter worse. Because you then have a “don’t hire a black guy, he can pull the race card and we’re fucked” situation " I think, where I am coming from, and I cannot prove it with stats but hear me out: I believe the positive discrimination is far outweighed by racism. I also believe that minorities do not actually want positive discrimination as an act of favourism; they want (speaking to friends) to earn their merits in the same way as people from the main community do. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Thanks, OP and certainly a hot topic. What I fail to understand, genuinely understand is why people still think it is ok to question the experience of minorities. When my boss (of Indian descent) tells me about a micro aggression, you know the sort of thing when people assume because you have Indian heritage you MUST know everythign about how to make a good curry" - of course, on the surface it does not seem offensive. But if they tell me it offends them, that suffices. It means it is insulting! Because giving anyone a position of “you can’t be questioned” is ridiculous I’ve got a friend that works at a very high level of a big credit company. You wouldn’t believe how often the race card gets pulled out in an attempt to get settlements out of the company I hear you and I would say that for the sake of changing things in society, for the time being it is probably a price we need to pay, that some people may get away with things that they would not get away with in a fairer, more balanced society. I gotta disagree. If you want equality, aim for that. You don’t get that by giving people a “you can’t question anything they say” status. If anything that makes the matter worse. Because you then have a “don’t hire a black guy, he can pull the race card and we’re fucked” situation " And BTW, if you don’t think that’s not already happening, your so wrong. Years ago minorities weren’t hired because of racism. You’ll find that now it way more likely they aren’t hired because big companies can’t be bothered dealing with all the race related HR issues that come along with it. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The last post filled up just as I'd asked someone a question. (They didn't answer it previously). I'm hoping they take this opportunity to do so. Cheers, Gbat https://comresglobal.com/polls/bbc-radio-4-today-muslim-poll/ One in four (27%) British Muslims say they have some sympathy for the motives behind the attacks on Charlie Hebdo in Paris. " Can someone explain to me the link between black footy players getting racial abuse and a random survey about some muslim attitudes to the Charlie hebdo attacks? Thanks in advance  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Thanks, OP and certainly a hot topic. What I fail to understand, genuinely understand is why people still think it is ok to question the experience of minorities. When my boss (of Indian descent) tells me about a micro aggression, you know the sort of thing when people assume because you have Indian heritage you MUST know everythign about how to make a good curry" - of course, on the surface it does not seem offensive. But if they tell me it offends them, that suffices. It means it is insulting! Because giving anyone a position of “you can’t be questioned” is ridiculous I’ve got a friend that works at a very high level of a big credit company. You wouldn’t believe how often the race card gets pulled out in an attempt to get settlements out of the company I hear you and I would say that for the sake of changing things in society, for the time being it is probably a price we need to pay, that some people may get away with things that they would not get away with in a fairer, more balanced society. I gotta disagree. If you want equality, aim for that. You don’t get that by giving people a “you can’t question anything they say” status. If anything that makes the matter worse. Because you then have a “don’t hire a black guy, he can pull the race card and we’re fucked” situation I think, where I am coming from, and I cannot prove it with stats but hear me out: I believe the positive discrimination is far outweighed by racism. I also believe that minorities do not actually want positive discrimination as an act of favourism; they want (speaking to friends) to earn their merits in the same way as people from the main community do." I’d completely disagree and say that “positive discrimination” does far more harm then good for the cause. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" https://comresglobal.com/polls/bbc-radio-4-today-muslim-poll/ One in four (27%) British Muslims say they have some sympathy for the motives behind the attacks on Charlie Hebdo in Paris. Which is quite some distance from "27% of UK Muslims support the Charlie Hebdo attacks" as you stated in your original post. Can't you see how using a stand alone and inaccurate quote from a survey paints a different picture from the real one? Thank you for posting the source of data, which is what I asked you to do in the first place. Gbat" I don't think my quote posts a different picture. Anyone who has sympathy for someone who would kill people for a drawing is an extremist. Just like anyone who has sympathy for the KKK is a racist. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The last post filled up just as I'd asked someone a question. (They didn't answer it previously). I'm hoping they take this opportunity to do so. Cheers, Gbat https://comresglobal.com/polls/bbc-radio-4-today-muslim-poll/ One in four (27%) British Muslims say they have some sympathy for the motives behind the attacks on Charlie Hebdo in Paris. Can someone explain to me the link between black footy players getting racial abuse and a random survey about some muslim attitudes to the Charlie hebdo attacks? Thanks in advance "Maybe read the previous thread? It has the context. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Thanks, OP and certainly a hot topic. What I fail to understand, genuinely understand is why people still think it is ok to question the experience of minorities. When my boss (of Indian descent) tells me about a micro aggression, you know the sort of thing when people assume because you have Indian heritage you MUST know everythign about how to make a good curry" - of course, on the surface it does not seem offensive. But if they tell me it offends them, that suffices. It means it is insulting! Because giving anyone a position of “you can’t be questioned” is ridiculous I’ve got a friend that works at a very high level of a big credit company. You wouldn’t believe how often the race card gets pulled out in an attempt to get settlements out of the company I hear you and I would say that for the sake of changing things in society, for the time being it is probably a price we need to pay, that some people may get away with things that they would not get away with in a fairer, more balanced society. I gotta disagree. If you want equality, aim for that. You don’t get that by giving people a “you can’t question anything they say” status. If anything that makes the matter worse. Because you then have a “don’t hire a black guy, he can pull the race card and we’re fucked” situation I think, where I am coming from, and I cannot prove it with stats but hear me out: I believe the positive discrimination is far outweighed by racism. I also believe that minorities do not actually want positive discrimination as an act of favourism; they want (speaking to friends) to earn their merits in the same way as people from the main community do. I’d completely disagree and say that “positive discrimination” does far more harm then good for the cause. " You are supporting my argument actually. For the record, I am not saying I support positive discrimination. I see it as an interim with companies... society trying to change. It is not good, it is not good for those who benefit from it. I am seeing it as something that perhaps we need to tolerate temporarily until such times that people really ask for qualifications, experience, motivation etc rather than somebody's ethnicity. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Thanks, OP and certainly a hot topic. What I fail to understand, genuinely understand is why people still think it is ok to question the experience of minorities. When my boss (of Indian descent) tells me about a micro aggression, you know the sort of thing when people assume because you have Indian heritage you MUST know everythign about how to make a good curry" - of course, on the surface it does not seem offensive. But if they tell me it offends them, that suffices. It means it is insulting! Because giving anyone a position of “you can’t be questioned” is ridiculous I’ve got a friend that works at a very high level of a big credit company. You wouldn’t believe how often the race card gets pulled out in an attempt to get settlements out of the company I hear you and I would say that for the sake of changing things in society, for the time being it is probably a price we need to pay, that some people may get away with things that they would not get away with in a fairer, more balanced society. I gotta disagree. If you want equality, aim for that. You don’t get that by giving people a “you can’t question anything they say” status. If anything that makes the matter worse. Because you then have a “don’t hire a black guy, he can pull the race card and we’re fucked” situation I think, where I am coming from, and I cannot prove it with stats but hear me out: I believe the positive discrimination is far outweighed by racism. I also believe that minorities do not actually want positive discrimination as an act of favourism; they want (speaking to friends) to earn their merits in the same way as people from the main community do. I’d completely disagree and say that “positive discrimination” does far more harm then good for the cause. You are supporting my argument actually. For the record, I am not saying I support positive discrimination. I see it as an interim with companies... society trying to change. It is not good, it is not good for those who benefit from it. I am seeing it as something that perhaps we need to tolerate temporarily until such times that people really ask for qualifications, experience, motivation etc rather than somebody's ethnicity." The problem with such approach is that it is never temporary. India imposed reservation system based on caste in 1950. It's been 70 years. I have seen students from richer households get into good universities and government jobs by scoring much less than someone from a poorer household who scored much better marks just because the person is from lower caste. Politicians are afraid to remove reservation because of vote bank politics. As a result, people who belong to the higher caste move to other countries even if they good jobs in India, just because they don't want their children to face the same problems they faced. Positive discrimination is a slippery slope. Education and activities in schools that bring together people of different races and respecting each other is the way to go. It will take time. But it will work. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Thanks, OP and certainly a hot topic. What I fail to understand, genuinely understand is why people still think it is ok to question the experience of minorities. When my boss (of Indian descent) tells me about a micro aggression, you know the sort of thing when people assume because you have Indian heritage you MUST know everythign about how to make a good curry" - of course, on the surface it does not seem offensive. But if they tell me it offends them, that suffices. It means it is insulting! Because giving anyone a position of “you can’t be questioned” is ridiculous I’ve got a friend that works at a very high level of a big credit company. You wouldn’t believe how often the race card gets pulled out in an attempt to get settlements out of the company I hear you and I would say that for the sake of changing things in society, for the time being it is probably a price we need to pay, that some people may get away with things that they would not get away with in a fairer, more balanced society. I gotta disagree. If you want equality, aim for that. You don’t get that by giving people a “you can’t question anything they say” status. If anything that makes the matter worse. Because you then have a “don’t hire a black guy, he can pull the race card and we’re fucked” situation I think, where I am coming from, and I cannot prove it with stats but hear me out: I believe the positive discrimination is far outweighed by racism. I also believe that minorities do not actually want positive discrimination as an act of favourism; they want (speaking to friends) to earn their merits in the same way as people from the main community do. I’d completely disagree and say that “positive discrimination” does far more harm then good for the cause. You are supporting my argument actually. For the record, I am not saying I support positive discrimination. I see it as an interim with companies... society trying to change. It is not good, it is not good for those who benefit from it. I am seeing it as something that perhaps we need to tolerate temporarily until such times that people really ask for qualifications, experience, motivation etc rather than somebody's ethnicity." I’m not supporting it at all. Actually the opposite. Now if we wanna talk about other forms of affirmation action, I’m all ears. Such as banks having special loan/mortgage options for minorities whose family don’t own property. Those I fully support. But the idea of “don’t question their words because they’re a minority” - yeah fuck that. You’re very wrong in my opinion there | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Thanks, OP and certainly a hot topic. What I fail to understand, genuinely understand is why people still think it is ok to question the experience of minorities. When my boss (of Indian descent) tells me about a micro aggression, you know the sort of thing when people assume because you have Indian heritage you MUST know everythign about how to make a good curry" - of course, on the surface it does not seem offensive. But if they tell me it offends them, that suffices. It means it is insulting! Because giving anyone a position of “you can’t be questioned” is ridiculous I’ve got a friend that works at a very high level of a big credit company. You wouldn’t believe how often the race card gets pulled out in an attempt to get settlements out of the company I hear you and I would say that for the sake of changing things in society, for the time being it is probably a price we need to pay, that some people may get away with things that they would not get away with in a fairer, more balanced society. I gotta disagree. If you want equality, aim for that. You don’t get that by giving people a “you can’t question anything they say” status. If anything that makes the matter worse. Because you then have a “don’t hire a black guy, he can pull the race card and we’re fucked” situation I think, where I am coming from, and I cannot prove it with stats but hear me out: I believe the positive discrimination is far outweighed by racism. I also believe that minorities do not actually want positive discrimination as an act of favourism; they want (speaking to friends) to earn their merits in the same way as people from the main community do. I’d completely disagree and say that “positive discrimination” does far more harm then good for the cause. You are supporting my argument actually. For the record, I am not saying I support positive discrimination. I see it as an interim with companies... society trying to change. It is not good, it is not good for those who benefit from it. I am seeing it as something that perhaps we need to tolerate temporarily until such times that people really ask for qualifications, experience, motivation etc rather than somebody's ethnicity. I’m not supporting it at all. Actually the opposite. Now if we wanna talk about other forms of affirmation action, I’m all ears. Such as banks having special loan/mortgage options for minorities whose family don’t own property. Those I fully support. But the idea of “don’t question their words because they’re a minority” - yeah fuck that. You’re very wrong in my opinion there " The thing is though that your stance on this topic is very similar to that of yours with regards to women; distrust of motives and determination to maintain balance of opportunity without making attempts to redress imbalance. I agree with your sentiment of equality but that’s all | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Thanks, OP and certainly a hot topic. What I fail to understand, genuinely understand is why people still think it is ok to question the experience of minorities. When my boss (of Indian descent) tells me about a micro aggression, you know the sort of thing when people assume because you have Indian heritage you MUST know everythign about how to make a good curry" - of course, on the surface it does not seem offensive. But if they tell me it offends them, that suffices. It means it is insulting! Because giving anyone a position of “you can’t be questioned” is ridiculous I’ve got a friend that works at a very high level of a big credit company. You wouldn’t believe how often the race card gets pulled out in an attempt to get settlements out of the company I hear you and I would say that for the sake of changing things in society, for the time being it is probably a price we need to pay, that some people may get away with things that they would not get away with in a fairer, more balanced society. I gotta disagree. If you want equality, aim for that. You don’t get that by giving people a “you can’t question anything they say” status. If anything that makes the matter worse. Because you then have a “don’t hire a black guy, he can pull the race card and we’re fucked” situation I think, where I am coming from, and I cannot prove it with stats but hear me out: I believe the positive discrimination is far outweighed by racism. I also believe that minorities do not actually want positive discrimination as an act of favourism; they want (speaking to friends) to earn their merits in the same way as people from the main community do. I’d completely disagree and say that “positive discrimination” does far more harm then good for the cause. You are supporting my argument actually. For the record, I am not saying I support positive discrimination. I see it as an interim with companies... society trying to change. It is not good, it is not good for those who benefit from it. I am seeing it as something that perhaps we need to tolerate temporarily until such times that people really ask for qualifications, experience, motivation etc rather than somebody's ethnicity. I’m not supporting it at all. Actually the opposite. Now if we wanna talk about other forms of affirmation action, I’m all ears. Such as banks having special loan/mortgage options for minorities whose family don’t own property. Those I fully support. But the idea of “don’t question their words because they’re a minority” - yeah fuck that. You’re very wrong in my opinion there The thing is though that your stance on this topic is very similar to that of yours with regards to women; distrust of motives and determination to maintain balance of opportunity without making attempts to redress imbalance. I agree with your sentiment of equality but that’s all" I’ve literally said I agree with affirmative action so I dunno where you get the idea I’m against addresses imbalances I’m never going to be for giving anyone a “anything they say is true” card | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I don't think my quote posts a different picture. Anyone who has sympathy for someone who would kill people for a drawing is an extremist. Just like anyone who has sympathy for the KKK is a racist." Here's what you originally said: "If we are looking for comparison, 27% of Muslims in Britain supported the Charlie Hebdo attackers." Here's what the survey you referenced actually said: "One in four (27%) British Muslims say they have some sympathy for the motives behind the attacks on Charlie Hebdo in Paris." There's a huge disparity between what you said and what the survey said. And I'd go further. In the survey, the next bullet point leads on from that above. (The word However, inextricably links the two points). "However, two thirds (68%) say acts of violence against those who publish images of the Prophet can never be justified while a quarter (24%) disagree." Your original post is inaccurate. Nowhere in that survey does anyone claim that 27% of UK Muslims supported the Charlie Hebdo attacks. I think that by circulating the wrong info, you are fuelling the flames of racists. They'd love to think there's a good reason to hate people for being Muslim and you are providing them with the veneer of such an excuse. For what it's worth, from reading your other content on this post and on Part 1, I don't think you are doing this deliberately or with any malice. Gbat | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I don't think my quote posts a different picture. Anyone who has sympathy for someone who would kill people for a drawing is an extremist. Just like anyone who has sympathy for the KKK is a racist. Here's what you originally said: "If we are looking for comparison, 27% of Muslims in Britain supported the Charlie Hebdo attackers." Here's what the survey you referenced actually said: "One in four (27%) British Muslims say they have some sympathy for the motives behind the attacks on Charlie Hebdo in Paris." There's a huge disparity between what you said and what the survey said. And I'd go further. In the survey, the next bullet point leads on from that above. (The word However, inextricably links the two points). "However, two thirds (68%) say acts of violence against those who publish images of the Prophet can never be justified while a quarter (24%) disagree." Your original post is inaccurate. Nowhere in that survey does anyone claim that 27% of UK Muslims supported the Charlie Hebdo attacks. I think that by circulating the wrong info, you are fuelling the flames of racists. They'd love to think there's a good reason to hate people for being Muslim and you are providing them with the veneer of such an excuse. For what it's worth, from reading your other content on this post and on Part 1, I don't think you are doing this deliberately or with any malice. Gbat " When someone says that they have sympathies towards motives of terrorists, isn't that saying they are supportive to it? That's 27%. And what do you think about the fact that 24% or them feel that the act of violence can be justified? What about the person in the previous thread who was claiming that percentage of racists among British is higher than percentage of extremists among Muslims? Isn't that a made up statement that flames more racial tensions in the country? Or is spreading lies about the majority is acceptable? I am not trying to fire flames against the Islamic community. But no one should get a free pass against criticism just based on minority status. It's funny that people would get so pissed off about some racists on the internet posting monkey emojis in social media, but no one in liberal community batted an eye for bigger problems like the parents in Birmingham protesting against LGBT education in front of schools and shouting abuses at teachers. I am a classic liberal myself. You could call my arguments whataboutism. But as long as liberals in the country pick and choose their fights against bigotry based on who the offenders are rather than what they did, the liberal movement in the country is going to be seen as a joke. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"When someone says that they have sympathies towards motives of terrorists, isn't that saying they are supportive to it?" No. For instance, I support the reunification of Ireland, I don't support terrorism. "And what do you think about the fact that 24% or them feel that the act of violence can be justified?" It's reprehensible. But to nitpick, it's violence at all levels, not necessarily the murders in Paris. " What about the person in the previous thread who was claiming that percentage of racists among British is higher than percentage of extremists among Muslims? Isn't that a made up statement that flames more racial tensions in the country? Or is spreading lies about the majority is acceptable?" There's three questions there. 1. I'm not responsible for their statements or beliefs. 2. I don't know. I don't have the data. Do you? 3. No, but a majority community will suffer a lot less than a minority community. There's a lot of built in support. " [ ... ] but no one in liberal community batted an eye for bigger problems like the parents in Birmingham protesting against LGBT education in front of schools and shouting abuses at teachers." Yes they did. In fact that LGBT(Q+) education is only allowed BECAUSE of the actions of right thinking people. " You could call my arguments whataboutism. But as long as liberals in the country pick and choose their fights against bigotry based on who the offenders are rather than what they did, the liberal movement in the country is going to be seen as a joke." Two statement quote. Two statement answer. Yes, that is how I see your arguments. Yes, that is how liberal arguments are seen by many. Thanks, Gbat | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" No. For instance, I support the reunification of Ireland, I don't support terrorism. " Fair enough " It's reprehensible. But to nitpick, it's violence at all levels, not necessarily the murders in Paris. " Not really. The poll question was clearly about "Act of violence against people publishing pictures of Prophet". " There's three questions there. 1. I'm not responsible for their statements or beliefs. 2. I don't know. I don't have the data. Do you? 3. No, but a majority community will suffer a lot less than a minority community. There's a lot of built in support. " 1. You claimed and seemed to be upset that I was spreading fake news about one community. You don't care that other people were actually doing the same thing about another community? 2. I don't have any either. So it's wrong to make allegations without knowing ground truth? 3. In the end, people will get affected. Just because someone belongs to a majority community, it doesn't mean their feelings can be taken for granted. It's not like the majority community are all very rich and have fantastic financial and emotional support. " Yes they did. In fact that LGBT(Q+) education is only allowed BECAUSE of the actions of right thinking people. " No. When the protests happened, the liberal community had its mouth shut. The school teachers and admins had to wage a legal battle to keep the protestors away, while going through all this trauma of random guys calling them names. I don't remember seeing any uproar or even voices raised compared to the backlash we are seeing now for some racists posting racist emojis in social media. " Two statement quote. Two statement answer. Yes, that is how I see your arguments. Yes, that is how liberal arguments are seen by many. Thanks, Gbat " Correct. People can clearly see through the hypocrisy in most people who call themselves liberals these days. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" But the idea of “don’t question their words because they’re a minority” - yeah fuck that. You’re very wrong in my opinion there " Just for the record I did not say or imply that! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" People can clearly see through the hypocrisy in most people who call themselves liberals these days." So you’re saying “Do not confront anything unless you confront everything”? That would be a shit work ethic for anyone in any kind of legal enforcement role wouldn’t it? Imagine, “you can’t give me a ticket for speeding because there’s still an unsolved burglary. Either confront it all at once or not at all.” How come it doesn’t seem to apply to you? You’ve pointed out discrimination and terrorism from Muslims, but not once have you mentioned people parking in disabled bays while they are fit and healthy. I’m done here, but I expect you’ll want the last word. Gbat | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" People can clearly see through the hypocrisy in most people who call themselves liberals these days. So you’re saying “Do not confront anything unless you confront everything”? That would be a shit work ethic for anyone in any kind of legal enforcement role wouldn’t it? Imagine, “you can’t give me a ticket for speeding because there’s still an unsolved burglary. Either confront it all at once or not at all.” How come it doesn’t seem to apply to you? You’ve pointed out discrimination and terrorism from Muslims, but not once have you mentioned people parking in disabled bays while they are fit and healthy. I’m done here, but I expect you’ll want the last word. Gbat " People can pick the battles they want to wage. The question is how do you pick the battle. When you look at seriousness, those protests against LGBT education seem to be much more damaging to liberal causes than trolls on internet writing comments. I would have expected at least some liberal groups to have chosen this as their battle. But no. Even political parties stayed silent. If we look at all similar events, there is a clear pattern that people who call themselves liberals seem to be picking their battles based on race of the offenders than the actual issue. That probably makes them racists too. That's just my observation and that's what many other people I know feel too. For a moment, I will accept that them choosing their battles has nothing to do with race and that's fine. Then why do they keep telling stuff like "If you are silent, you are siding with the oppressor"? Maybe other people too have their own battles to pick? What if one player in the team didn't take the knee and claims that there are other issues that he cares about, but not this? Would the people have left him alone? You don't have to answer that. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
