Ignorance and freedom of speech

[Roih Uvet]

Tee the Wicked in Drag

Roih Uvet

Tee the Wicked in Drag

Roih Uvet

As odd as it might seem, your average SJW seems to take more time for race, and especially sex, issues. Hence why they blame everything on "white men" and not "rich white men." In fact, when poverty as an issue is brought up, it's given some lip service but quickly moved on from. White men, even though they are poor in a capitalist country and therefore have no real power, actually have all of the power. Poor rednecks with nowhere to sleep at night but a couch are actively oppressing the likes of Oprah Winfrey and Jay-Z with their white maleness.

SJWism itself is more classist than the term "social justice warrior."

I'm not gonna comment, as I really have nothing to say that you won't place in much better wording. Just know that you're a shady b***h and I hate you. twisted

Yes, dear.

Btw, I have no problem with homosexuals or drag queens or whatever other weirdo s**t you're into. wink One benefit of being a sociopathic nutcase like myself is open-mindedness. I legitimately don't care what you do in your free time. The downside is I also don't care how offended you get when I call one of my buddies a f*****t for doing something effete.

I can't afford to pull of decent drag, unfortunately. I did dress as a pregnant hooker this past Halloween though.

You do realize I'm a bisexual man married to another bisexual man? And I use the word f** all the time, as I would rather make the word empowering than whine about how it is "a hurtful slur"

I can believe that. I'm a technocrat when it comes to the government and on macro scale politics, I have rather libertarian views about how one should conduct their personal life. Why? Because the macro scale seriously matters and whatever stupid ideas some idiot has does not. What matters, from his perspective, is if he gets his socks on, shows up to work, and does his job.

And I think the biggest enemies to my outlook are the Religious Right and SJWs, because they want to meddle in my personal life and yours while ignoring the very real, very practical concerns that actually matter.

[Kaltros]

Yoshpet

Don't understand when people talk about banning/punishing bigotry, as that would be a bigoted action itself.

Bigotry is to be intolerant of a view or a group of people. Ostracizing bigots is hypocrisy.

It's not intolerance itself that is bad, but rather the fact that certain Bad People are intolerant. But when Good People are intolerant, it must be good, because how could Good People do anything bad?

The hypocrisy vanishes when you look at as a question of "Who? Whom?" instead of "What?"

Who are The Good Guys? Whatever they do is justified. Who are The Bad Guys? Whatever they do is wrong.

It's only hypocritical if you remove that Good Guy/Bad Guy split that goes into most thinking on the subject.

[Kaltros]

Tee the Wicked in Drag

Kaltros

This makes me picture a nasty gangster, who says: "You're free to say whatever you want, but keep in mind, I don't like what you say, I may hafta shoot you and dump you in the river. Just saying. You're totally free to say whatever you want, but there could be consequences."

Just remember, consequences can also be good. I think a lot of people tend to forget that.

If you're the gangster.

[Trashy Cinnabon]

Kaltros

Yoshpet

Don't understand when people talk about banning/punishing bigotry, as that would be a bigoted action itself.

Bigotry is to be intolerant of a view or a group of people. Ostracizing bigots is hypocrisy.

It's not intolerance itself that is bad, but rather the fact that certain Bad People are intolerant. But when Good People are intolerant, it must be good, because how could Good People do anything bad?

The hypocrisy vanishes when you look at as a question of "Who? Whom?" instead of "What?"

Who are The Good Guys? Whatever they do is justified. Who are The Bad Guys? Whatever they do is wrong.

It's only hypocritical if you remove that Good Guy/Bad Guy split that goes into most thinking on the subject.

But what is "good"? What is "bad"? Who gets to decide, and why do they get to decide? Why does everything have to be binary?

[Kaltros]

Tee the Wicked in Drag

Kaltros

Yoshpet

Don't understand when people talk about banning/punishing bigotry, as that would be a bigoted action itself.

Bigotry is to be intolerant of a view or a group of people. Ostracizing bigots is hypocrisy.

It's not intolerance itself that is bad, but rather the fact that certain Bad People are intolerant. But when Good People are intolerant, it must be good, because how could Good People do anything bad?

The hypocrisy vanishes when you look at as a question of "Who? Whom?" instead of "What?"

Who are The Good Guys? Whatever they do is justified. Who are The Bad Guys? Whatever they do is wrong.

It's only hypocritical if you remove that Good Guy/Bad Guy split that goes into most thinking on the subject.

But what is "good"? What is "bad"? Who gets to decide, and why do they get to decide? Why does everything have to be binary?

It's tribalism hardwired in the brain, I suppose. And what's good or bad depends on the tribe you're a member of. Each tribe seems to have a set of sacred cows. You can tell you've touched on a sacred cow when the members of the tribe start pelting you with crazy rants and homicidal rage for even thinking of disturbing the sacred cow.

[Roih Uvet]

Kaltros

Tee the Wicked in Drag

Kaltros

Yoshpet

Don't understand when people talk about banning/punishing bigotry, as that would be a bigoted action itself.

Bigotry is to be intolerant of a view or a group of people. Ostracizing bigots is hypocrisy.

It's not intolerance itself that is bad, but rather the fact that certain Bad People are intolerant. But when Good People are intolerant, it must be good, because how could Good People do anything bad?

The hypocrisy vanishes when you look at as a question of "Who? Whom?" instead of "What?"

Who are The Good Guys? Whatever they do is justified. Who are The Bad Guys? Whatever they do is wrong.

It's only hypocritical if you remove that Good Guy/Bad Guy split that goes into most thinking on the subject.

But what is "good"? What is "bad"? Who gets to decide, and why do they get to decide? Why does everything have to be binary?

It's tribalism hardwired in the brain, I suppose. And what's good or bad depends on the tribe you're a member of. Each tribe seems to have a set of sacred cows. You can tell you've touched on a sacred cow when the members of the tribe start pelting you with crazy rants and homicidal rage for even thinking of disturbing the sacred cow.

This is pretty accurate.

[King Shining Heaven]

I agree with this. I hate it when people do that. "Why are people getting angry? I have freedom of speech!" "He can say what he wants! it's freedom of speech!". Yeah, well, that's great, but I also have freedom of speech and I'm going to use it to say how your speech is messed up. If you can't deal with people's reactions, then it's best to stay quiet.

[Riviera de la Mancha]

Why is it that people seem to think freedom of speech is the equivalent to freedom of consequences?
The short answer is that the first amendment and the right to due process do protect people from certain kinds of consequences. I can't very well be excused for clocking you in the face because you were passing out a flyer supporting gay rights.

Why is such ignorance not called out when utilized in the media? Or in politics, for that matter?
Another short answer: it is "called out". Usually by other people who ask why its not "called out" more.

And another question, why are the consequences often themselves, seemingly discriminatory?(MAN Robertson gets his show back, but WOMAN Paula Deen does not)
The key word there is "seemingly". Sometimes its just the unique facts of each situation.