Agenda 21

[RageBeoulve]

Yeah.  I know I have an over-developed sense of justice, and it seems unjust to me that people are allowed - encouraged, even - to be content with remaining stuck in a state of dependence, enabling them to remain as children.  Children are easier to manipulate and handle than adults, I guess.  *sighs*

That was why i was so depressed. I felt trapped in a life of powerlessness and dependency. I realized doing stuff made me happy and gave my life meaning. He seems to have to figure this out for himself the hard way. He is not happy inside. Like me, his subconscious is telling him DO SOMETHING!

 

I love that you're kicking ass and taking names, DFG.   Awesome.

It is awesome.

[odeon]

Don't try, babelet. They're just faggots and they'll never be as mature or understanding as you. I talk a little rough, so i'm the devil to them. Let it be.

This is sig material.

I like how you try to discount what I say by applying your emotions to it.

It was better to write the above instead of "don't flatter yourself". I've tried reasoning with you and it didn't work. I've tried pointing out that if you want an actual discussion, you might start by skipping the name-calling, and it didn't work. I've tried to ask you to back up at least some of your shit instead of the strawman. Didn't work either.

The vast majority of your opinions are now little more than background noise and as such not worth discussing. I like how you are bothered by the few responses you get, though.

[odeon]

He just does what he sees everyone else doing, much the way one of those little dancing monkeys at the circus does.

I thought he was being bashed for being racist.  Is everyone here racist?

Nope. Most aren't.

[odeon]

There is no contest. this isn't a pissing match, rage. But of course if someone says something to me I'm going to respond.
boy I feel like I'm on the school playground. 

Its always the fucking school playground when you're involved, you little punk. I'm asking you to back up your shit. You think you can mess around with someone's personal information? Try it with me, tough guy. I could expose your entire life.

The irony.

[sg1008]

I'm gonna dip my toe in and sugg....

nevermind. never fucking mind.

[RageBeoulve]

Don't try, babelet. They're just faggots and they'll never be as mature or understanding as you. I talk a little rough, so i'm the devil to them. Let it be.

This is sig material.

I like how you try to discount what I say by applying your emotions to it.

It was better to write the above instead of "don't flatter yourself". I've tried reasoning with you and it didn't work. I've tried pointing out that if you want an actual discussion, you might start by skipping the name-calling, and it didn't work. I've tried to ask you to back up at least some of your shit instead of the strawman. Didn't work either.

The vast majority of your opinions are now little more than background noise and as such not worth discussing. I like how you are bothered by the few responses you get, though.

And I've tried to explain that calling things you don't like to think about "strawmen" is a bit silly.

[RageBeoulve]

There is no contest. this isn't a pissing match, rage. But of course if someone says something to me I'm going to respond.
boy I feel like I'm on the school playground. 

Its always the fucking school playground when you're involved, you little punk. I'm asking you to back up your shit. You think you can mess around with someone's personal information? Try it with me, tough guy. I could expose your entire life.

The irony.

I've literally provided stacks of documents to support my argument. You? You've provided one liners and cocky jabs.

The irony x2

[sg1008]

Ok, alright....I'll bite.

So......there is this thing that homophobes say about gay people when they demand 'rights', that they are in fact demanding 'special rights' and 'special protections', or that their issues are 'special issues'...meaning something 'extra' that somehow 'excludes' everyone else.

It is a curious thing that certain corners of society can be so entrenched in their privileged status quo, and they can be so desensitized to what is institutionalized bigotry, that when someone challenges that bigotry or status quo- or merely points it out- they are called out for engaging 'favoritism' or 'reverse prejudice'.

It's the situation of an oppressor who fears that 'justice' is equivalent to turning the tables rather than balancing them... in other words, such little faith they have in humanity and in their own innocence. They don't want to be excluded in the way that they have excluded, they don't want to be subject to the treatment that others were subject to, and they fixate on that aim, on that protectiveness, to the point that they actually continue to elevate concerns of their 'own' at the expense of perceived 'others'.

They are people who are so used to having 'more' say in things of law and society, that when the scales are balanced, they perceive they have 'less' say (even if equal to everyone else). Then they delude themselves into thinking they are loosing 'rights' and 'voice', when really, the only thing they are loosing is their privilege.

[Beardy McFuckface]

Something like affirmative action, yes I find that racist since I find it patronising they can't hire ie. a black person for their skill and only doing so for the colour of his skin.

However, giving more rights to minorities, gay people etc. is awesome in my books. No special treatment there, if anything they're getting rights they should have had in the first place. No one should be seen as a second class citizen.

[ProfessorFarnsworth]

Something like affirmative action, yes I find that racist since I find it patronising they can't hire ie. a black person for their skill and only doing so for the colour of his skin.

Wouldn't be as much of a problem if it was tweaked to declare that the person with higher qualification gets highest priority. So in a situation of a black having greater qualification than a white candidate, they are guaranteed the job strictly for the merit of his/her skill, rather than discarded because of their race. Ironically, isn't that what affirmative action should really be doing? Ensuring education is rewarded and equal opportunities are granted?

[RageBeoulve]

Ok, alright....I'll bite.

So......there is this thing that homophobes say about gay people when they demand 'rights', that they are in fact demanding 'special rights' and 'special protections', or that their issues are 'special issues'...meaning something 'extra' that somehow 'excludes' everyone else.

It is a curious thing that certain corners of society can be so entrenched in their privileged status quo, and they can be so desensitized to what is institutionalized bigotry, that when someone challenges that bigotry or status quo- or merely points it out- they are called out for engaging 'favoritism' or 'reverse prejudice'.

It's the situation of an oppressor who fears that 'justice' is equivalent to turning the tables rather than balancing them... in other words, such little faith they have in humanity and in their own innocence. They don't want to be excluded in the way that they have excluded, they don't want to be subject to the treatment that others were subject to, and they fixate on that aim, on that protectiveness, to the point that they actually continue to elevate concerns of their 'own' at the expense of perceived 'others'.

They are people who are so used to having 'more' say in things of law and society, that when the scales are balanced, they perceive they have 'less' say (even if equal to everyone else). Then they delude themselves into thinking they are loosing 'rights' and 'voice', when really, the only thing they are loosing is their privilege.

Everyone of all race, creed, and gender is losing rights faster than they realize it. Something has to be done about it. Political party, race, social justice movements, etc. are all ways of distracting you from that.

The truly privileged is sitting in our white house. In our nation's capitol. Don't you guys realize that they should be obeying our commands? Instead most look up to them now as some sort of religious dieties. Its quite shocking to me, and an obvious gateway to tyranny.

[Beardy McFuckface]

Something like affirmative action, yes I find that racist since I find it patronising they can't hire ie. a black person for their skill and only doing so for the colour of his skin.

Wouldn't be as much of a problem if it was tweaked to declare that the person with higher qualification gets highest priority. So in a situation of a black having greater qualification than a white candidate, they are guaranteed the job strictly for the merit of his/her skill, rather than discarded because of their race. Ironically, isn't that what affirmative action should really be doing? Ensuring education is rewarded and equal opportunities are granted?

I thought that's usually how it's supposed to be in the workplace. Wouldn't call that affirmative action, just common sense.

[sg1008]

Something like affirmative action, yes I find that racist since I find it patronising they can't hire ie. a black person for their skill and only doing so for the colour of his skin.

Wouldn't be as much of a problem if it was tweaked to declare that the person with higher qualification gets highest priority. So in a situation of a black having greater qualification than a white candidate, they are guaranteed the job strictly for the merit of his/her skill, rather than discarded because of their race. Ironically, isn't that what affirmative action should really be doing? Ensuring education is rewarded and equal opportunities are granted?

Affirmative action- what it actually is meant to do is protect minorities from discrimination. It's a fact that very few employers actually hire strictly on the merit of qualification. A lot of hiring has to do with perceived qualification, and also the willingness of the employer to work with someone. If someone is highly qualified but the employer dislikes them, it's within their right not to hire them.

Now, it is generally perceived as much easier for a person to relate to other people of their same community. If the majority of employers start out as male, white, upper/middle class, neurotypical, it is very likely they will favour people of their similar culture- mainly because it is who they are used to working with, and who they are used to serving.

I hate it when people assume that employers hire strictly based on qualification. That's a goddamn lie. It ain't unnatural to want to hire people who you feel comfortable with (or who your team will feel comfortable with), in fact that is good hiring practice.

The only problem is, the way society was- only a certain culture of people (male, white, upper/middle class), who have been favoured for centuries, are the people in the power positions. People don't open their minds if don't have too. They prefer comfort and constancy.

Anyone of any minority knows that in order for people such as that to hire someone outside of their general community, they need an INCENTIVE. Thats what affirmative action does. If nothing else, businessmen and politicians understand incentives...it is therefore logical to apply one for the quickest results.

[ProfessorFarnsworth]

Something like affirmative action, yes I find that racist since I find it patronising they can't hire ie. a black person for their skill and only doing so for the colour of his skin.

Wouldn't be as much of a problem if it was tweaked to declare that the person with higher qualification gets highest priority. So in a situation of a black having greater qualification than a white candidate, they are guaranteed the job strictly for the merit of his/her skill, rather than discarded because of their race. Ironically, isn't that what affirmative action should really be doing? Ensuring education is rewarded and equal opportunities are granted?

I thought that's usually how it's supposed to be in the workplace. Wouldn't call that affirmative action, just common sense.

Eh, people sometimes value the trivialities more than the logic of having greater productivity, but in most cases it's about how you look and whenever or not it attracts more customers, thereby more sales (at least for retail). In other cases the boss has personal tastes and rather have a person who obeys him/her or suits their desires than someone more qualified.

[RageBeoulve]

Ignore the real enemy, guys. Mhm.