Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Microaggressions?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by pancreasman View Post
    Thank you for your kind words. I'm actually fine and quite cheerful. I used to regard Tweb as a place of reasonable discussion where multiple viewpoints can be explored. Since the 'event' I had continued my own efforts at civility and non-kneejerk type thinking.
    It still is a place of reasonable discussion where multiple viewpoints can be explored. It just requires the people who complain about the atmosphere of the forum to take a step back and realize that most of their whining about the subject is actually a major contributing factor to why the debate-climate is as it is right now. The majority of the people who are accused of being toxic and mean-spirited are actually prepared to have civilized discussions with people, just as long as the other person in the debate is prepared to reciprocate the sentiment.

    Originally posted by pancreasman View Post
    I now have arrived at the point where I no longer consider this possible. The whiny and aggressive hard right has captured the site and there is no longer any open dialogue.
    First, you come of as quite whiny yourself in this post, and second, that there is no longer any open dialogue is quite simply not true. You're still able to post pretty much whatever opinion you like on these forums without getting censored, which is all that is required for open dialogue. Even starlight with his IMO repugnant opinion that people should be allowed to kill their own children up to three months after birth hasn't been censored for that viewpoint. Condemned? Yes, and rightly so IMO. Censored? no.

    Originally posted by pancreasman View Post
    As an example, someone I considered my friend, CowPoke, seems to have embarked on a campaign of snide dismissal, not just of ideas he doesn't like, but of people and their characters. This saddens me because I thought he was one of the good ones. I shall say nothing of Seer's constant generalised complaining.
    More often than not Seer's "constant generalised complaining" is completely overshadowed by the massive whinefest from his detractors that comes as a result of his threads.

    Originally posted by pancreasman View Post
    Consequently I have decided to treat Tweb as an amusing rump of nutty conservatives. They are like dinosaurs, the last of their kind, complaining about the red glow of the coming asteroid.
    This just oozes of self-righteousness and small-mindedness, the very thing you disparaged and accused people of exhibiting below.

    Originally posted by pancreasman View Post
    I find it funny that amid all the snide snarkiness, the accusations of lying and stupidity, the complete refusal to accept that someone can hold a contrary opinion in good faith and based on reasonable thinking, the one thing guaranteed to get an infraction is saying a 'naughty' word. How childish. I'm Australian, this is how we talk to adults as I'm sure you know.
    Unfortunately for you this is not your forum and you don't get to set the rules. Suck it up.

    Oh, and your point about people on these forums being unable to accept that someone can hold a contrary opinion in good faith and based on reasonable thinking? That's just as false as your notion that open dialogue is no longer possible on TWeb.

    Originally posted by pancreasman View Post
    I intend to pop in now and again and drop a bomb every now and then until I'm banned. Then I shall not miss it ... ever.


    Or, you could act your age and simply refrain from posting or even lurking on these forums. There's this thing called self-restrain, I've no idea if you've heard about it.

    Originally posted by pancreasman View Post
    I will be a little sad to see the last of reasonable people like you and Sam and others, but the putting up with the self righteous small minded morons is just too big a price to pay.

    Pman
    You do realize that this whole reply to fm93 that you made public is nothing more than a blatant exercise in self-righteous small mindedness, right?
    ~Formerly known as Chrawnus~

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by fm93 View Post
      When I specifically say that I'm drawing a parallel regarding the effects, and you respond with irrelevancies about the nature of the event, I can't help but wonder if maybe your thinking is the one that's misguided.

      If you really can't let it go, we can change the analogy to mosquito bites, which, as anyone who's had to spend a significant amount of time outdoors in the summer can attest, are awfully hard to avoid, even with measures like bug spray or long-sleeved clothing.
      Let's say that you're right about the effect that these micro-aggressions (which is somewhat of a misnomer IMO, because people aren't actually actively going out of their way to be aggressive when they engage in them) have on people. Quite frankly I don't see why there should be any obligation at all to refrain from these, to be completely honest, ultimately harmless acts of "micro-aggressions" (I can hardly refrain myself from rolling my eyes whenever I write the term). The fact that people complain about these minor annoyances is nothing more than a sign that people today have taken their victim complexes to ridiculous extremes.

      I do like your analogy though, because it quite aptly describes that these micro-aggressions actually are, namely minor and ultimately harmless annoyances that you're going to have to live with if you want to operate in society, just as mosquito bites are minor and ultimately harmless annoyances that you're simply going to have to deal with if you want to be outside during the summer.


      Originally posted by fm93 View Post
      You mean like your propensity to act like allowing gay couples to get married is an attack on your churches?
      Has currently occured exactly zero times = propensity, according to fm93
      ~Formerly known as Chrawnus~

      Comment


      • #33
        I now have arrived at the point where I no longer consider this possible. The whiny and aggressive hard right has captured the site and there is no longer any open dialogue.
        I don't know about you, but the forums are just as conservative as they were when I joined them years ago. You really got to tone the hostile rhetoric down a few notches.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by Knowing Thomas View Post
          I don't know about you, but the forums are just as conservative as they were when I joined them years ago. You really got to tone the hostile rhetoric down a few notches.
          The most ideologically obnoxious "conservatives" have left and/or been banned.
          Don't call it a comeback. It's a riposte.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by pancreasman View Post
            Anybody who disagrees with the conservative rump here is accused of 'whining' or being too sensitive, while day after day, Seer(and the rest) whine and moan about how badly the world is treating them and their favourite retrograde philosophy. It's hypocrisy at its finest. We have a term here: 'Whingers', and this site is full of them. As long as you're whinging about the 'right' cause, you'll be fine.

            As I've said before, I can cheerily say this is complete Edited by a Moderator and I'm happy to call it such.
            I have a lot of time for you, Pman, but not when you're like this. The more I reread your post, the less I understand just what you would like Seer et al to do.

            They post about changes in society that they feel negatively affect it, or impact on values, practices and mores that they hold dear. You evidently share few of those values; but do you expect them NOT to post about these things? I assume that if society was moving in a more 'conservative' direction you'd be OK with people posting threads against that(if they felt that way).

            This is the Civics forum - so it's going to be full of people with entrenched political positions, and many of the posters here are American Christians and so share a broad set of political values that you don't hold to. And they're going to argue against and even attack those who hold different views. Why? Because (AFAICT) they sincerely believe that changes towards more 'progressive' positions will (and do) have a negative effect on society.

            Perhaps (I can agree) some should try harder to be more civil towards those who differ from them. But I note that when the political winds blow the other way, plenty on the other side of the fence do just what you condemn here. The 'progressives' out there haven't hesitated to attack people's livelihoods (cake shops, Eich, et al), to smear, bully, intimidate and lie (Scientist shirts, Hugo awards) despite 'winning' and having their values enshrine in law ad social approval. There's 'hypocrisy' on both sides.
            ...>>> Witty remark or snarky quote of another poster goes here <<<...

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Jedidiah View Post
              The ones who get pasted are guys like fm93, who never fails to defend
              Not only is this an exaggeration, it's also one-sided. You and others never fail to attack every little thing that comes along that you don't agree with. More to the point, in the instances when I do post in these threads, I always explain specifically where my disagreement with the OP's argument or approach lies. You, on the other hand, resort to vague insults like "foolish" and "idiot" without explaining why you disagree with the argument.

              And besides, even if I actually did "defend every little thing that comes along," there would be nothing wrong with that if your position on all those issues was actually mistaken. You phrase your complaint as if merely defending a bunch of things is itself a problem, without trying to show that those things are allegedly indefensible.

              Your post shows little objectivity just bile. You used to be an alright guy in spite of being a liberal. What changed?
              Do you have counterexamples that rebut his claims?
              Last edited by fm93; 07-04-2015, 09:55 AM.
              Learn to do right; seek justice. Defend the oppressed. Take up the cause of the fatherless; plead the case of the widow.--Isaiah 1:17

              I don't think that all forms o[f] slavery are inherently immoral.--seer

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by Spartacus View Post
                The most ideologically obnoxious "conservatives" have left and/or been banned.
                Yeah, but I'm still here.
                The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Chrawnus View Post
                  Let's say that you're right about the effect that these micro-aggressions (which is somewhat of a misnomer IMO, because people aren't actually actively going out of their way to be aggressive when they engage in them) have on people. Quite frankly I don't see why there should be any obligation at all to refrain from these, to be completely honest, ultimately harmless acts of "micro-aggressions"
                  Often times they invoke factually incorrect assumptions, such as in the "No, where are you really from" example that I mentioned.

                  The fact that people complain about these minor annoyances is nothing more than a sign that people today have taken their victim complexes to ridiculous extremes.

                  I do like your analogy though, because it quite aptly describes that these micro-aggressions actually are, namely minor and ultimately harmless annoyances that you're going to have to live with if you want to operate in society, just as mosquito bites are minor and ultimately harmless annoyances that you're simply going to have to deal with if you want to be outside during the summer.
                  Well, yes, but are you telling me that you've never complained about mosquitos? Would you not agree that "Mosquito bites on their own are simply minor annoyances, but still, it sure would be nice if we could avoid or get rid of them"?

                  Has currently occured exactly zero times = propensity, according to fm93
                  You've never seen his threads about some pastor protection bill, or the various other comments he's made about SSM?
                  Learn to do right; seek justice. Defend the oppressed. Take up the cause of the fatherless; plead the case of the widow.--Isaiah 1:17

                  I don't think that all forms o[f] slavery are inherently immoral.--seer

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by fm93 View Post
                    You've never seen his threads about some pastor protection bill, or the various other comments he's made about SSM?
                    Dear fm,

                    Instead of acting like a pissy little backstabbking gossip*, would you please address these issues to me? I'll do my best to answer. If you don't have actual examples to discuss, then I'd suggest you put a cork in it.

                    Thanks



                    *no, I don't think you ARE that, but currently, that's the way you're acting.
                    Last edited by Cow Poke; 07-04-2015, 09:58 AM.
                    The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by MaxVel View Post
                      This is the Civics forum - so it's going to be full of people with entrenched political positions, and many of the posters here are American Christians and so share a broad set of political values that you don't hold to. And they're going to argue against and even attack those who hold different views. Why? Because (AFAICT) they sincerely believe that changes towards more 'progressive' positions will (and do) have a negative effect on society.
                      If I may ask, what part of that necessitates attacking the PEOPLE who hold different views, instead of merely the views themselves? I mean, we often hear from the conservative posters "Love the sinner, hate the sin" when it comes to homosexuality, but then in the political debates, it almost seems as if the motto changes to "Hate the dissent AND hate the dissenter."

                      Perhaps (I can agree) some should try harder to be more civil towards those who differ from them. But I note that when the political winds blow the other way, plenty on the other side of the fence do just what you condemn here. The 'progressives' out there haven't hesitated to attack people's livelihoods (cake shops, Eich, et al), to smear, bully, intimidate and lie (Scientist shirts, Hugo awards) despite 'winning' and having their values enshrine in law ad social approval. There's 'hypocrisy' on both sides.
                      Certainly no one side has a monopoly on hypocrisy, but many of the non-conservative posters here have specifically said that they disagree with some of those actions. Why are they (we, technically, since I'm included in that group) still being attacked alongside the others, even though we didn't endorse those things?
                      Learn to do right; seek justice. Defend the oppressed. Take up the cause of the fatherless; plead the case of the widow.--Isaiah 1:17

                      I don't think that all forms o[f] slavery are inherently immoral.--seer

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by fm93 View Post
                        You mean like your propensity to act like allowing gay couples to get married is an attack on your churches?
                        fm,

                        I think, without realizing it, you're validating my criticisms of you. When I claim you seem to be LOOKING for an excuse to be offended, you do things like this. You take a swipe, I ask you to back up the claim, I pledge to be nicer to you, and you talk ABOUT me instead of TO me.

                        This, I think, is my biggest complaint with those who I deem "crybabies" or... whatever other disparaging term I use.

                        I deal a LOT with the less fortunate, and I see it as my "gift" to be able to pick out or call out, or encourage out (whatever you want to call it) those who seem to have a drive to "rise above their circumstances", and leave the whiners to somebody else to manage.

                        Perhaps that carries over here. Our Jobs for Life program, our Car Clinic, our Welding Training program, our involvement in Habitat for Humanity --- all of the programs we fund, start, or are involved in, I look for those who are actually wanting to do something for themselves, and I'll go to bat for them, encourage them, and do everything I can to help them. I seem to be a pretty good judge of character in that regard, because our graduation rate, for example, in our Jobs for Life program has been 100% for the first class, and only ONE dropout in the second class, and that was our only white guy. ALL of they other participants have been black. (Which is why I love it when the lefties here try to imply I'm racist )

                        ANYWAY... there seem to be those who want to get ahead, and they just need some encouragement. Then there are those who just want to complain about how bad they have it, and nothing is going to change that.

                        It appears to me - and I could be way wrong - that you represent that group that just wants to sit back and complain about how bad life is, with no real intent to do anything about it but complain.

                        I think about the "wandering in the desert" when people "murmured" about Moses, and their challenges. My black associate Pastor always said "murmur means to mumble and complain with no real intent to do anything to solve the problem".

                        So, I have said several times I intend to be nicer to you - as I have ALREADY been nicer to JimL (that was one of your murmurrings ) - and it's time now to see what you're made of.

                        your move
                        The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by fm93 View Post
                          If I may ask, what part of that necessitates attacking the PEOPLE who hold different views, instead of merely the views themselves? I mean, we often hear from the conservative posters "Love the sinner, hate the sin" when it comes to homosexuality, but then in the political debates, it almost seems as if the motto changes to "Hate the dissent AND hate the dissenter." Certainly no one side has a monopoly on hypocrisy, but many of the non-conservative posters here have specifically said that they disagree with some of those actions. Why are they (we, technically, since I'm included in that group) still being attacked alongside the others, even though we didn't endorse those things?
                          Well, I think that also goes both ways. I've seen 'progressives' (for want of a better term) here calling people 'bigots' and accusing them of homophobia, as well as making various snide remarks about their religion and beliefs. Maybe it's just the culture here - and both groups are responsible for that. Certainly 'progressives' want not just to gain acceptance of a view they have, but silence dissenting voices, and force compliance with that view, by using state power.

                          I can understand 'conservatives' feeling threatened not just by that view, but by people who promote it, because it will eventually lead to them facing loss of employment, social opprobrium, and possibly fines and even imprisonment. In that environment, arguing for that view is supporting those outcomes. Someone like CP could face a reduction in income (if churches lose their tax status), restrictions on what he can say (including prohibitions on saying what he believes the Bible to teach) and possibly arrest, trial fines and imprisonment for simply practicing his religion as it has been practiced for generations past. So it's not just an intellectual exercise to discuss it here, but something that could have major effects on his life.


                          Hypothetical:

                          If 'conservatives' were arguing for, and succeeding, in getting legislation passed making it illegal for Asian Americans to hold certain jobs, restricting freedom of movement and association for Asian Americans; pushing for legislation to 'return' Asian Americans to their 'country of origin', would you not feel threatened? Would you not feel that TWeb posters arguing in favour of those things as a long-overdue social advance were effectively attacking you?

                          If I was to argue in support of the principles behind those changes - but not push for the more extreme changes advocated by some - would you feel comfortable with me? Or would you see me as tacitly aiding the more dangerous extremes of the movement?



                          Sure you don't want to put Christians in jail, close churches, or force them to modify their religious beliefs to suit your views, but you're arguing for the same things as people who do.
                          ...>>> Witty remark or snarky quote of another poster goes here <<<...

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by MaxVel View Post
                            Someone like CP could face a reduction in income (if churches lose their tax status),
                            MOST of my ministry has been bivocational, and since I'm drawn primarily to crisis managment and problem resolution, most of the churches I've pastored in the past 20 years have either had NO salary for pastors because of their situation, or very low salary, the pastor being dependent on outside income.

                            I've owned my own computer consulting business for the past 30 or so years, so I've not had to rely on Church income in those situations. HOWEVER, many Churches have struggled to pay their pastors, and the BIGGEST hit would be the loss of the ministerial housing allowances (which has already been challenged in the courts). In this, a minister (certain restrictions apply) can declare up to 100% of his CHURCH salary as NON-TAXABLE housing allowance, up to the fair market rental value of the home he lives in - even if it's the Church parsonage. LONG story there, but suffice it to say that this mechanism allows a lot of smaller churches to provide a livable wage for a pastor.

                            That could all go away in the current climate.

                            restrictions on what he can say (including prohibitions on saying what he believes the Bible to teach)
                            Never stopped me before, but, yes... this is a real threat.

                            and possibly arrest, trial fines
                            been there, done that

                            and imprisonment for simply practicing his religion as it has been practiced for generations past. So it's not just an intellectual exercise to discuss it here, but something that could have major effects on his life.
                            EGGzackly. And some of the leftists here would applaud that.
                            The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by pancreasman View Post
                              Totally as expected. fm was nice enough to send me an encouraging note enquiring after my well being. I shall post the reply I gave him here.
                              As an example, someone I considered my friend, CowPoke, seems to have embarked on a campaign of snide dismissal, not just of ideas he doesn't like, but of people and their characters. This saddens me because I thought he was one of the good ones. I shall say nothing of Seer's constant generalised complaining.


                              So, instead of trying to talk TO your "friend", you talk ABOUT him? Adrift, on the other hand, has talked TO me (I would have preferred he had done it in private, but nonetheless, he addressed me instead of talking ABOUT me) and I took to heart what he said.

                              I don't get this, Pman -- I've always considered you a friend, and I won't write you off even though you seem bent on breaking the rules here by using profanity and venting anger. I don't get that. I don't get the anger.

                              Why can't you see that you're doing exactly what you are accusing us of doing? But I'm modifying my approach. You can't do that? If I can be good friends with a lesbian atheist Jew who, at first, was out to get me fired, why can't you remain friends with somebody who has drastically different views than you do?

                              I'm not going to stop considering you a friend just because you're being horsey, Pman. Friendship doesn't work that way.
                              The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                                MOST of my ministry has been bivocational, and since I'm drawn primarily to crisis managment and problem resolution, most of the churches I've pastored in the past 20 years have either had NO salary for pastors because of their situation, or very low salary, the pastor being dependent on outside income.
                                Here's how good God is.... the current Church I'm pastoring was headed to financial disaster. The previous pastor had tried to turn an older established congregation into a "praise and worship modern" church - all at once - no "transition" whatsoever. They lost almost all of their tithers, were paying bills by depleting their savings, and were discussing the possibility of selling their building to another congregation of a different denomination.

                                Over the past 2 1/2 years, things have drastically turned around, and even though I had agreed to serve as pastor at a very nominal stipend, they have seen God's blessings and have insisted on raising my salary, not just once, but three times in one budget year, to a figure I would never have imagined they would be able to offer. At the same time, we have reinstated the mission giving (which had been cut off because of bad financial times) and INCREASED the mission giving to a minimum of 10% of all undesignated income.

                                God is SO good!!!!
                                The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by Cow Poke, Yesterday, 10:14 PM
                                1 response
                                16 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Faber
                                by Faber
                                 
                                Started by Cow Poke, Yesterday, 05:33 PM
                                3 responses
                                24 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, Yesterday, 09:17 AM
                                21 responses
                                103 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Cow Poke  
                                Started by Gondwanaland, 10-24-2021, 04:51 PM
                                8 responses
                                51 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Cow Poke  
                                Started by Gondwanaland, 10-24-2021, 12:16 PM
                                56 responses
                                242 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Markus River  
                                Working...
                                X