|
Post by devogirl on Jan 2, 2017 8:06:25 GMT -5
Some ideas are not worth entertaining: white supremacy, homophobia (including religiously motivated), and MRAs/MGTOW. If your entire philosophy rests on holding another group of people in contempt (non-whites, gays, women), you need to rethink your world view.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 2, 2017 11:41:05 GMT -5
Some ideas are not worth entertaining: white supremacy, homophobia (including religiously motivated), and MRAs/MGTOW. If your entire philosophy rests on holding another group of people in contempt (non-whites, gays, women), you need to rethink your world view. "If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle." - Sun Tzu If you are TRULY an enemy of hate, ignorance and bigotry... you might not entertain those ideas for yourself.. BUT it never hurts to have compassion and understanding for the people around you... listen to them so you can understand where they are coming from. Then maybe.. I don't know... aid them in their journey AWAY from ignorance and hate. You can't combat ignorance and hate... with hate. All you will do is alienate them and further entrench them in the hatred and ignorance. Hearing other ideas, doesn't mean you are entertaining them for yourself.. but it will allow you to understand the other person so you can start combating ignorance with knowledge, truth, and experience. JUST my two cents... Notice those two haven't chimed in... and you've proven yourself a champion of nothing and no one. You haven't changed anyone's mind that needs changing.. you haven't deepened understanding... you haven't even been an example of compassion and love... which is the natural enemy to ignorance and hate... BUT if it makes you feel better... do you. My two cents... you are more than welcome to leave that change on the counter.
|
|
|
Post by darthoso on Jan 2, 2017 12:14:36 GMT -5
I'm by no means an expert on feminist theory but feminism today has such a wide definition that applying the label without context is pointless. If the definition is my niece can grow up to do anything she wants and isn't expected by society to sleep with fundamentally shitty people, then sure I'm a feminist. Regarding diversity of ideas. Tolerating intolerance is not required to be a tolerant person, especially when those ideas are founded in hate and anger. These are assholes who are bitter they can't get laid, nothing more. This is where I will continue to disagree. We don't get to pick and choose what the definition of tolerance is. The definition of tolerance is: the ability or willingness to tolerate something, in particular the existence of opinions or behavior that one does not necessarily agree with."the tolerance of corruption" synonyms: acceptance, toleration; More open-mindedness, broad-mindedness, forbearance, liberality, liberalism;patience, charity, indulgence, understanding"an attitude of tolerance toward other people" the capacity to endure continued subjection to something, especially a drug, transplant, antigen, or environmental conditions, without adverse reaction.I disagree that if you feel your view is better, it's ok to be intolerant. Picking and choosing what is right or wrong for any individual is not yours to have. If these guys feel how they feel, I personally disagree and also think they're assholes. But intolerance of their viewpoint is hypocritical IMO. Requiring they change their viewpoint is not a luxury we have as free thinking individuals. So as long as they are not infringing on my rights and my beliefs, I can respectfully disagree with theirs. "All that is required for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing." Constitutionally we agree, I'd defend their legal right to say anything they want. What they don't have the right to is for their ideas to be accepted by society. This whole "liberals aren't tolerant" meme that's been going around is an attempt to do two things: silence decent, and normalize their point of view. Ideas are meant to be defended and debated, but they know they can't defend their ideas (no more than they can get laid) so they hide behind "tolerance" when venturing outside their own echo chamber. Letting bad ideas become normalized is how bad ideas become dangerous ideas in a democracy really quickly. So yes, these people should be shunned by society as a means of keeping them contained. We actually agree on the definition of tolerance. But if someone believes they're entitled to take rights away from others then society has an obligation to fight them. Where we disagree is when that fight starts in terms of society. Legally they shouldn't be touched but that doesn't mean society has to accept them with open arms.
|
|
|
Post by newjess on Jan 2, 2017 12:51:51 GMT -5
I'm by no means an expert on feminist theory but feminism today has such a wide definition that applying the label without context is pointless. If the definition is my niece can grow up to do anything she wants and isn't expected by society to sleep with fundamentally shitty people, then sure I'm a feminist. Regarding diversity of ideas. Tolerating intolerance is not required to be a tolerant person, especially when those ideas are founded in hate and anger. These are assholes who are bitter they can't get laid, nothing more. This is where I will continue to disagree. We don't get to pick and choose what the definition of tolerance is. The definition of tolerance is: the ability or willingness to tolerate something, in particular the existence of opinions or behavior that one does not necessarily agree with."the tolerance of corruption" synonyms: acceptance, toleration; More open-mindedness, broad-mindedness, forbearance, liberality, liberalism;patience, charity, indulgence, understanding"an attitude of tolerance toward other people" the capacity to endure continued subjection to something, especially a drug, transplant, antigen, or environmental conditions, without adverse reaction.I disagree that if you feel your view is better, it's ok to be intolerant. Picking and choosing what is right or wrong for any individual is not yours to have. If these guys feel how they feel, I personally disagree and also think they're assholes. But intolerance of their viewpoint is hypocritical IMO. Requiring they change their viewpoint is not a luxury we have as free thinking individuals. So as long as they are not infringing on my rights and my beliefs, I can respectfully disagree with theirs. I've been marinating on this for a while and think I'm ready to tackle this. It's a big concept and a divergent issue.. there's definitely not a single answer. I think part of the problem is that people equate being "intolerant" to being an asshole. One can be intolerant of something and still be respectful about it. Does being intolerant of oppression automatically make you an asshole? No... but immediately dismissing people before hearing them out does. I do not tolerate oppression. MGTOWs and MRAs are prejudiced against women. They discriminate and stereotype women which further perpetuates the cycle of objectification, rape culture, and other damaging constructs. In the western world we have come a long way in terms of these constructs, but it is far from perfect. And women in countries with child marriage, sex trafficking, female genital mutiliation? These guys are NOT just assholes, this mentality is disturbing and scary. So no... I do not tolerate their viewpoint. Do I require them to change it? No... but will I advocate for respectful debate, critical self-examination? Yes. If tolerance is just sitting back and allowing people to be oppressed, then I have no desire to be tolerant. Maybe we're arguing semantics, but to me, tolerance means trying to understand where someone comes from (I could list a million reasons why these guys are probably MGTOWs and MRAs) but that doesn't mean I have to support or even TOLERATE their point of view. But I don't agree with blindly being an asshole about it either... that doesn't change anything. I believe wholeheartedly in discussion, debate, and self-examination.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 2, 2017 13:00:40 GMT -5
This is where I will continue to disagree. We don't get to pick and choose what the definition of tolerance is. The definition of tolerance is: the ability or willingness to tolerate something, in particular the existence of opinions or behavior that one does not necessarily agree with."the tolerance of corruption" synonyms: acceptance, toleration; More open-mindedness, broad-mindedness, forbearance, liberality, liberalism;patience, charity, indulgence, understanding"an attitude of tolerance toward other people" the capacity to endure continued subjection to something, especially a drug, transplant, antigen, or environmental conditions, without adverse reaction.I disagree that if you feel your view is better, it's ok to be intolerant. Picking and choosing what is right or wrong for any individual is not yours to have. If these guys feel how they feel, I personally disagree and also think they're assholes. But intolerance of their viewpoint is hypocritical IMO. Requiring they change their viewpoint is not a luxury we have as free thinking individuals. So as long as they are not infringing on my rights and my beliefs, I can respectfully disagree with theirs. I've been marinating on this for a while and think I'm ready to tackle this. It's a big concept and a divergent issue.. there's definitely not a single answer. I think part of the problem is that people equate being "intolerant" to being an asshole. One can be intolerant of something and still be respectful about it. Does being intolerant of oppression automatically make you an asshole? No... but immediately dismissing people before hearing them out does. I do not tolerate oppression. MGTOWs and MRAs are prejudiced against women. They discriminate and stereotype women which further perpetuates the cycle of objectification, rape culture, and other damaging constructs. In the western world we have come a long way in terms of these constructs, but it is far from perfect. And women in countries with child marriage, sex trafficking, female genital mutiliation? These guys are NOT just assholes, this mentality is disturbing and scary. So no... I do not tolerate their viewpoint. Do I require them to change it? No... but will I advocate for respectful debate, critical self-examination? Yes. If tolerance is just sitting back and allowing people to be oppressed, then I have no desire to be tolerant. Maybe we're arguing semantics, but to me, tolerance means trying to understand where someone comes from (I could list a million reasons why these guys are probably MGTOWs and MRAs) but that doesn't mean I have to support or even TOLERATE their point of view. But I don't agree with blindly being an asshole about it either... that doesn't change anything. I believe wholeheartedly in discussion, debate, and self-examination. NO where does the definition of tolerance include supporting that view point... at all. I don't think TC or anyone that wants to hear them out stated that or thinks that. I go back to my earlier statement. IF you are truly interested in being a champion of good... and an enemy of ignorance and hate... THEN you WOULD want to hear out the people that claim they might support aspects of this. You won't help bring them to the truth by being just a big an ass hole but in a different way. You will get them further entrenched in their viewpoint. AND TO BE FAIR... there will be die hards whose mind you will NEVER change. So once you've heard them out and realize that... isolate, marginalize... empower those that fight ignorance and hate... and show caring and compassion for those that might be lost or might not truly understand whose mind can be informed and shaped for the better. Unless an individual is that weak and easily swayed, they lose NOTHING by showing some compassion, patience, and understanding BY HEARING someone out. EVERY encounter with another human being is an opportunity to make you stronger.. hone in your reasoning... logic.. your skills in understanding others and yourself... so you can help make yourself and others continually better. SO NO.. I don't think any of us are saying that tolerance equals supporting their viewpoint. Rather you hear them out so you can learn something about them and maybe yourself. If you learn something about them.. you might be the right person and find a way to bring them closer to some form of truth... away from ignorance and hate.
|
|
|
Post by darthoso on Jan 2, 2017 13:05:02 GMT -5
Some ideas are not worth entertaining: white supremacy, homophobia (including religiously motivated), and MRAs/MGTOW. If your entire philosophy rests on holding another group of people in contempt (non-whites, gays, women), you need to rethink your world view. "If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle." - Sun Tzu If you are TRULY an enemy of hate, ignorance and bigotry... you might not entertain those ideas for yourself.. BUT it never hurts to have compassion and understanding for the people around you... listen to them so you can understand where they are coming from. Then maybe.. I don't know... aid them in their journey AWAY from ignorance and hate. You can't combat ignorance and hate... with hate. All you will do is alienate them and further entrench them in the hatred and ignorance. Hearing other ideas, doesn't mean you are entertaining them for yourself.. but it will allow you to understand the other person so you can start combating ignorance with knowledge, truth, and experience. JUST my two cents... Notice those two haven't chimed in... and you've proven yourself a champion of nothing and no one. You haven't changed anyone's mind that needs changing.. you haven't deepened understanding... you haven't even been an example of compassion and love... which is the natural enemy to ignorance and hate... BUT if it makes you feel better... do you. My two cents... you are more than welcome to leave that change on the counter. I like how we both replied with a little quote off. I'd love to debate someone with these views. The issue though is that they don't want the debate because they know their ideas don't hold up. Maybe they do inside that echo chamber but not here. While I agree we need to reach out, we can't normalize these discussions either. Changing someone's mind who's been seduced by confirmation bias is incredibly difficult, especially when those ideas point to others as a scapegoat for their own life failures. Society has a long and ugly history of that.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 2, 2017 13:14:22 GMT -5
"If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle." - Sun Tzu If you are TRULY an enemy of hate, ignorance and bigotry... you might not entertain those ideas for yourself.. BUT it never hurts to have compassion and understanding for the people around you... listen to them so you can understand where they are coming from. Then maybe.. I don't know... aid them in their journey AWAY from ignorance and hate. You can't combat ignorance and hate... with hate. All you will do is alienate them and further entrench them in the hatred and ignorance. Hearing other ideas, doesn't mean you are entertaining them for yourself.. but it will allow you to understand the other person so you can start combating ignorance with knowledge, truth, and experience. JUST my two cents... Notice those two haven't chimed in... and you've proven yourself a champion of nothing and no one. You haven't changed anyone's mind that needs changing.. you haven't deepened understanding... you haven't even been an example of compassion and love... which is the natural enemy to ignorance and hate... BUT if it makes you feel better... do you. My two cents... you are more than welcome to leave that change on the counter. I like how we both replied with a little quote off. I'd love to debate someone with these views. The issue though is that they don't want the debate because they know their ideas don't hold up. Maybe they do inside that echo chamber but not here. While I agree we need to reach out, we can't normalize these discussions either. Changing someone's mind who's been seduced by confirmation bias is incredibly difficult, especially when those ideas point to others as a scapegoat for their own life failures. Society has a long and ugly history of that. I guess you guys haven't been paying attention this election. Racism has been marginalized for a long time... on the fringe of polite society. YET that ignorance and hatred has been allowed to secretly grow and fester under the alt right and other fringe groups like them. The dems instead of reaching out to the middle working white class in the rust belt... surrounded themselves with sycophants and people that thought EXACTLY like them. I LOVE stories like Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings... because the lesson they constantly teach IS THAT just because you forget about something....... or it's not on the forefront of your mind... doesn't mean that the evil isn't growing in the dark. ALSO you never know what part someone is going to play in helping you defeat that evil... Look at Golumn. Racism was normalized in the dark... Look at Trump's rhetoric... look at Bannon's appointment.. all the stories NPR has done recently on the alt right... and it did so in the shadows.. NOT because those of us that despise ignorance and racism talked about it and normalized it. We marginalized them... and they found others like themselves... others they felt safe around... recruited more and more... AND IF YOU THINK FACTS matter after this election.. IF YOU THINK YOU CAN recruit people to the truth by reason and facts alone.. you are just as deluded as the left has been. You can't browbeat people with cold hard logic and reasoning... YOU DO SO by relating to them.. by speaking to their emotions... to their souls.. to who they are and who they might want to be. SO I REJECT your premise that just by hearing them out, we will normalize them. This election season SHOUDL HAVE taught us otherwise. We can reject and marginalize a viewpoint WITHOUT marginalizing the people that hold it.... and possible recruits to that viewpoint. There is a certain maturity, inner strength, and self possession that comes with being able to do so with compassion and patience... SO maybe it's not for everyone. BUT if you don't actively seek to understand your opponent (the viewpoint NOT the people).. then you will only win half the time... if you don't even know yourself and you marginalize the people instead of the viewpoint... you're not going to do anything to champion the cause of stamping out ignorance and hate.
|
|
|
Post by newjess on Jan 2, 2017 13:32:18 GMT -5
I've been marinating on this for a while and think I'm ready to tackle this. It's a big concept and a divergent issue.. there's definitely not a single answer. I think part of the problem is that people equate being "intolerant" to being an asshole. One can be intolerant of something and still be respectful about it. Does being intolerant of oppression automatically make you an asshole? No... but immediately dismissing people before hearing them out does. I do not tolerate oppression. MGTOWs and MRAs are prejudiced against women. They discriminate and stereotype women which further perpetuates the cycle of objectification, rape culture, and other damaging constructs. In the western world we have come a long way in terms of these constructs, but it is far from perfect. And women in countries with child marriage, sex trafficking, female genital mutiliation? These guys are NOT just assholes, this mentality is disturbing and scary. So no... I do not tolerate their viewpoint. Do I require them to change it? No... but will I advocate for respectful debate, critical self-examination? Yes. If tolerance is just sitting back and allowing people to be oppressed, then I have no desire to be tolerant. Maybe we're arguing semantics, but to me, tolerance means trying to understand where someone comes from (I could list a million reasons why these guys are probably MGTOWs and MRAs) but that doesn't mean I have to support or even TOLERATE their point of view. But I don't agree with blindly being an asshole about it either... that doesn't change anything. I believe wholeheartedly in discussion, debate, and self-examination. NO where does the definition of tolerance include supporting that view point... at all. I don't think TC or anyone that wants to hear them out stated that or thinks that. I go back to my earlier statement. IF you are truly interested in being a champion of good... and an enemy of ignorance and hate... THEN you WOULD want to hear out the people that claim they might support aspects of this. You won't help bring them to the truth by being just a big an ass hole but in a different way. You will get them further entrenched in their viewpoint. AND TO BE FAIR... there will be die hards whose mind you will NEVER change. So once you've heard them out and realize that... isolate, marginalize... empower those that fight ignorance and hate... and show caring and compassion for those that might be lost or might not truly understand whose mind can be informed and shaped for the better. Unless an individual is that weak and easily swayed, they lose NOTHING by showing some compassion, patience, and understanding BY HEARING someone out. EVERY encounter with another human being is an opportunity to make you stronger.. hone in your reasoning... logic.. your skills in understanding others and yourself... so you can help make yourself and others continually better. SO NO.. I don't think any of us are saying that tolerance equals supporting their viewpoint. Rather you hear them out so you can learn something about them and maybe yourself. If you learn something about them.. you might be the right person and find a way to bring them closer to some form of truth... away from ignorance and hate. Dude... did you read my post at all? You literally repeated exactly what I said and then made it sound like you were arguing with me. Let me break this down for you: "IF you are truly interested in being a champion of good... and an enemy of ignorance and hate... THEN you WOULD want to hear out the people that claim they might support aspects of this." My response: Does being intolerant of oppression automatically make you an asshole? No... but immediately dismissing people before hearing them out does. "You won't help bring them to the truth by being just a big an ass hole but in a different way. You will get them further entrenched in their viewpoint." My response: But I don't agree with blindly being an asshole about it either... that doesn't change anything. I believe wholeheartedly in discussion, debate, and self-examination. "they lose NOTHING by showing some compassion, patience, and understanding BY HEARING someone out." My response: to me, tolerance means trying to understand where someone comes from I never argued anywhere that tolerance equals supporting someone's viewpoint. PLEASE actually read responses before replying. You have a habit of doing this. Thanks.
|
|
|
Post by newjess on Jan 2, 2017 13:49:22 GMT -5
Just to be clear, since we're discussing definitions:
I think we all agree that to practice tolerance is to try and understand where someone is coming from.
But to TOLERATE something is to "allow the existence, occurrence, or practice of (something that one does not necessarily like or agree with) without interference."
So, if you believe in interfering with belief systems such as the KKK, radical Islamic terrorism, sexism, etc etc.. then you do not TOLERATE them. A.K.A. You are intolerant of what they believe in.
So, even though you are intolerant of the belief system, you can still practice tolerance by trying to foster discussion and critical self-examination. Make sense?
|
|
|
Post by Hopper on Jan 2, 2017 13:55:17 GMT -5
I don't have anything to say regarding this debate, but I do so in regards to the original topic.
This subculture of MGTOW is a sad one indeed. Judging by the example posted and some other things I've read, it seems that these men ignore the idea that it may be perhaps their own fault and their own attitudes that are preventing them from being in good relationships of any kind with women.
Sadly, because they don't seem to know what to do about their insecurities, they become frustrated and trap themselves in a bubble of self pity and when threatened, take out their fustrations on women who don't react positively towards them.
Now the best way to deal with any kind of rejection is to be honest with yourself and take into account what you need to work on the next time and always be willing to learn about not only yourself, but how thers view you to, then you'd be a more positive person, not perfect but positive.
Right, that's my 2p on the counter, be careful, it's not chocolate.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 2, 2017 13:57:25 GMT -5
Just to be clear, since we're discussing definitions: I think we all agree that to practice tolerance is to try and understand where someone is coming from. But to TOLERATE something is to "allow the existence, occurrence, or practice of (something that one does not necessarily like or agree with) without interference." So, if you believe in interfering with belief systems such as the KKK, radical Islamic terrorism, sexism, etc etc.. then you do not TOLERATE them. A.K.A. You are intolerant of what they believe in. So, even though you are intolerant of the belief system, you can still practice tolerance by trying to foster discussion and critical self-examination. Make sense? We might have the same understanding of tolerance but our course of action that we draw from that understanding is starkly different. THIS SOURCE of this part of the discussion came from wanting or not wanting to hear out some that said they found truth in this. Some seemed to say to hell with them and their viewpoint.. I'm not entertaining why they think it true.. because to listen to them is tantamount to normalizing or giving it credence. IF you are NOT saying that then apologies... BUT again.. how personally you seemed to take it and your reactions speaks again to the lack of patience... desire to understand each other.. and compassion and illustrates a desire to be right and own the truth... IF I had misunderstood you and we are actually saying the same thing.. then great. It's due to my misunderstanding and shortcomings. Still doesn't take away from what I am saying. See the end of my last comment. Our country and our world would be better served by people being more patient, understanding, and compassionate with each other... even those that seem to espouse ignorance, bigotry, and hate. I feel sorry for them... that they are so hurt and lost that they have THIS as their lenses for how they view the world.
|
|
|
Post by newjess on Jan 2, 2017 14:05:46 GMT -5
Just to be clear, since we're discussing definitions: I think we all agree that to practice tolerance is to try and understand where someone is coming from. But to TOLERATE something is to "allow the existence, occurrence, or practice of (something that one does not necessarily like or agree with) without interference." So, if you believe in interfering with belief systems such as the KKK, radical Islamic terrorism, sexism, etc etc.. then you do not TOLERATE them. A.K.A. You are intolerant of what they believe in. So, even though you are intolerant of the belief system, you can still practice tolerance by trying to foster discussion and critical self-examination. Make sense? We might have the same understanding of tolerance but our course of action that we draw from that understanding is starkly different. THIS SOURCE of this part of the discussion came from wanting or not wanting to hear out some that said they found truth in this. Some seemed to say to hell with them and their viewpoint.. I'm not entertaining why they think it true.. because to listen to them is tantamount to normalizing or giving it credence. IF you are NOT saying that then apologies... BUT again.. how personally you seemed to take it and your reactions speaks again to the lack of patience... desire to understand each other.. and compassion and illustrates a desire to be right and own the truth... IF I had misunderstood you and we are actually saying the same thing.. then great. It's due to my misunderstanding and shortcomings. Still doesn't take away from what I am saying. See the end of my last comment. Our country and our world would be better served by people being more patient, understanding, and compassionate with each other... even those that seem to espouse ignorance, bigotry, and hate. I feel sorry for them... that they are so hurt and lost that they have THIS as their lenses for how they view the world. I do think we feel the exact way on the subject. But, you said "how personally you seemed to take it and your reactions speaks again to the lack of patience... desire to understand each other.. and compassion and illustrates a desire to be right and own the truth" I am really confused as to where my reactions ever gave you this impression. Please quote me or explain where I gave off this impression if you are going to make such accusations.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 2, 2017 14:09:36 GMT -5
We might have the same understanding of tolerance but our course of action that we draw from that understanding is starkly different. THIS SOURCE of this part of the discussion came from wanting or not wanting to hear out some that said they found truth in this. Some seemed to say to hell with them and their viewpoint.. I'm not entertaining why they think it true.. because to listen to them is tantamount to normalizing or giving it credence. IF you are NOT saying that then apologies... BUT again.. how personally you seemed to take it and your reactions speaks again to the lack of patience... desire to understand each other.. and compassion and illustrates a desire to be right and own the truth... IF I had misunderstood you and we are actually saying the same thing.. then great. It's due to my misunderstanding and shortcomings. Still doesn't take away from what I am saying. See the end of my last comment. Our country and our world would be better served by people being more patient, understanding, and compassionate with each other... even those that seem to espouse ignorance, bigotry, and hate. I feel sorry for them... that they are so hurt and lost that they have THIS as their lenses for how they view the world. I do think we feel the exact way on the subject. But, you said "how personally you seemed to take it and your reactions speaks again to the lack of patience... desire to understand each other.. and compassion and illustrates a desire to be right and own the truth" I am really confused as to where my reactions ever gave you this impression. Please quote me or explain where I gave off this impression if you are going to make such accusations. As I said... if we are saying the same thing.. then my apologies for my misunderstanding.
|
|
|
Post by darthoso on Jan 2, 2017 14:40:09 GMT -5
I like how we both replied with a little quote off. I'd love to debate someone with these views. The issue though is that they don't want the debate because they know their ideas don't hold up. Maybe they do inside that echo chamber but not here. While I agree we need to reach out, we can't normalize these discussions either. Changing someone's mind who's been seduced by confirmation bias is incredibly difficult, especially when those ideas point to others as a scapegoat for their own life failures. Society has a long and ugly history of that. I guess you guys haven't been paying attention this election. Racism has been marginalized for a long time... on the fringe of polite society. YET that ignorance and hatred has been allowed to secretly grow and fester under the alt right and other fringe groups like them. The dems instead of reaching out to the middle working white class in the rust belt... surrounded themselves with sycophants and people that thought EXACTLY like them. I LOVE stories like Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings... because the lesson they constantly teach IS THAT just because you forget about something....... or it's not on the forefront of your mind... doesn't mean that the evil isn't growing in the dark. ALSO you never know what part someone is going to play in helping you defeat that evil... Look at Golumn. Racism was normalized in the dark... Look at Trump's rhetoric... look at Bannon's appointment.. all the stories NPR has done recently on the alt right... and it did so in the shadows.. NOT because those of us that despise ignorance and racism talked about it and normalized it. We marginalized them... and they found others like themselves... others they felt safe around... recruited more and more... AND IF YOU THINK FACTS matter after this election.. IF YOU THINK YOU CAN recruit people to the truth by reason and facts alone.. you are just as deluded as the left has been. You can't browbeat people with cold hard logic and reasoning... YOU DO SO by relating to them.. by speaking to their emotions... to their souls.. to who they are and who they might want to be. SO I REJECT your premise that just by hearing them out, we will normalize them. This election season SHOUDL HAVE taught us otherwise. We can reject and marginalize a viewpoint WITHOUT marginalizing the people that hold it.... and possible recruits to that viewpoint. There is a certain maturity, inner strength, and self possession that comes with being able to do so with compassion and patience... SO maybe it's not for everyone. BUT if you don't actively seek to understand your opponent (the viewpoint NOT the people).. then you will only win half the time... if you don't even know yourself and you marginalize the people instead of the viewpoint... you're not going to do anything to champion the cause of stamping out ignorance and hate. Completely agree, the failure to offer a populist alternative is why they lost. That said, Bernie wouldn't have needed to say anything hateful to win by a landslide. He would have redirected that anger in a positive direction and the die hards would have gone back to the shadows. If we're debating the merits of MRA, I don't know how to debate that person without completely destroying their arguments. Is it my place to play pseudo physiologist and try to get at why they believe these things? How do you unrecruit someone without questioning their emotional intelligence or being sad for them (which in itself might be taken as an insult driving them deeper away)?
|
|
|
Post by newjess on Jan 2, 2017 15:09:41 GMT -5
Yeah, I knew people would jump on that. I think it comes down to what your definition is of what being "intolerant" means to you. Personally I don't promote hate on any level, regardless of the reasons people give me to hate. Even if they hate me and everything that I stand for. I don't have to agree, or even accept their platform and I definitely don't have support their claims to tolerate their existence. Is their stance detrimental to women? Maybe. But what are you going to do? Shut them up? Silence them? Refuse them rights? Harm them? Call them names until they disappear? Scream profanity until they listen? Or do we create our own platforms that gives an alternative and voice to what we choose to stand for? I guess I don't see what hate or intolerance will do in our favor on many levels. If anything, it drives the opposite opinions further away instead of creating discussion that can lead to a common understanding. You assume "they" don't want to hear you, or hear reason. How are are talking to them? Justifying intolerance is something I will continue to stand against because think of how many other groups of people are doing the same in the name of their own values. I can't speak for everyone else, but I think you and I are saying the same thing just in a different way. I also think it has more to do with semantics. I will also always stand against harming others, refusing rights etc. That's why if a group of people is harming others, refusing rights, etc... then I stand against it. What does this mean? Well for me, it means being active about the issue. Trying to have debate, discussion, offer aid to those who need it, and try to educate myself and be the best person I can be. It is a very grey area. Like I mentioned before, intolerance can simply mean not tolerating a belief system. I do not tolerate the belief system of the KKK... I do not believe they have the right to inflict harm onto people, which they do. Do they have the right to get together and talk about what they believe in? Yeah... sure. But spreading hateful and violent rhetoric about a group of people is damaging and harmful to that group of people. In MY opinion, MGTOWs and MRAs have the right to organize and talk about their beliefs. But the movement itself spreads rhetoric that is damaging, violent, harmful and degrading to women. So, I question it, ask them why they believe it, where do those beliefs come from (re: para85), etc. I am tolerant in the sense that I foster open dialogue and respectful debate, but I do not tolerate their viewpoint. I hope you don't feel like we are jumping on you or attacking you. I actually really like that you are able to bring up issues that foster such great discussion.
|
|