Lurker > scar the 1

Dyinglegacy posted...

scar the 1 posted...

Dyinglegacy posted...

Valid or not is predicated upon the person and how they interpret the statement. It also depends on the person saying the statement, how they say it, and what their intent is.

Valid only supposing that facts can be racist

lol, I'm not disagreeing with you, but see how far you get in a convo with someone who calls you or someone else racist for a statement that wasn't racist. "Facts can not be racist" will not win that battle lol.

Yeah I think I know what you mean, but to be fair a conversation where one party calls the other racist is more than likely dead already :)
---

Everything has an end, except for the sausage. It has two.

Dyinglegacy posted...

Valid or not is predicated upon the person and how they interpret the statement. It also depends on the person saying the statement, how they say it, and what their intent is.

Valid only supposing that facts can be racist
---

Everything has an end, except for the sausage. It has two.

Dyinglegacy posted...

I did specify depending on a person's interpretation, and I also said construed, further implying interpretation, and lastly I said could, meaning that a person may or may not interpret the statement that way. I didn't say that it would be construed that way, or that that was what the statement was meaning.

Now, I've explained what I meant, explain what you meant by incorrect statement.

Well then, let's not get bogged down in semantics too far. Of course it technically can be construed as racism, but so can literally anything if you try hard enough. My main point was that if you allow for the possibility that the comment is true, then there's no valid way of construing it as racism. Thanks for being very clear and civil and inviting me to clarify as well.
---

Everything has an end, except for the sausage. It has two.

Dyinglegacy posted...

The comment about most problems being the cause of white men, true or not, could be construed as this type of racism.

This is an incorrect statement.
---

Everything has an end, except for the sausage. It has two.

LordRazziel posted...

Error1355 posted...

BlueJester007 posted...

So, what was the TC really modded for?

Connect the dots between what he said in the top of this topic and the title of the topic he got moderated in.

So, he was using it to back up a claim that it's fucked up uneducated people are having kids?

No, he was saying that non-white people are dumb.
---

Everything has an end, except for the sausage. It has two.

You shouldn't repost modded posts
---

Everything has an end, except for the sausage. It has two.

I don't understand the hypocrisy or the racism tbh. But maybe I'm just an SJW beta soylent cuckboy
---

Everything has an end, except for the sausage. It has two.

Dyinglegacy posted...

shockthemonkey posted...

Shifting demographics giving rise to a less homogenous perception of what it means to be American

I sorely doubt that's why some of the people itt are happy about it lol. It feels like spite happy, or like a smug type of happy, but whatevs.

It's not like it's some kind of tragedy to begin with so why bother getting upset about why people are happy?
---

Everything has an end, except for the sausage. It has two.

Coffeebeanz posted...

scar the 1 posted...

Coffeebeanz posted...

"Goebbels Jr"

I can't imagine how much the Greatest Generation must be facepalming right now

The greatest generation are probably busy being appalled by the concentration camps run and enabled by the current administration.

Literally everyone is appalled by it.

Except for Trump and his supporters obv.

And Trump's supporters were numerous enough to put him in office. So that's a far cry from "literally everyone" tbh.
---

Everything has an end, except for the sausage. It has two.

Coffeebeanz posted...

"Goebbels Jr"

I can't imagine how much the Greatest Generation must be facepalming right now

The greatest generation are probably busy being appalled by the concentration camps run and enabled by the current administration.
---

Everything has an end, except for the sausage. It has two.

Darkman124 posted...

Kineth posted...

omg, white genocide is real?

no

we need to put them in camps first and separate the children from their parents

You mean retirement homes?
---

Everything has an end, except for the sausage. It has two.

Superlinkbro posted...

Foppe posted...

Superlinkbro posted...

Cool.

I heard they get their alcohol from one company/place and have to wait in an extremely long line just to get liquor.

If beer and wine doesnt count as alcohol, then you are mostly correct.

Yeah it's mostly the hard stuff I think.

Anything over 3.5%
---

Everything has an end, except for the sausage. It has two.

Superlinkbro posted...

Cool.

I heard they get their alcohol from one company/place and have to wait in an extremely long line just to get liquor.

Only the government can sell alcohol. Restaurants and bars are still allowed to serve, but what they sell can't leave the premises.

The lines aren't longer than any regular store.
---

Everything has an end, except for the sausage. It has two.

Yeah I didn't know this and it's super cool and definitely deserves a bump
---

Everything has an end, except for the sausage. It has two.

That's what higher education is all about
---

Everything has an end, except for the sausage. It has two.

I mean sure, if you want to frame concentration camps with "at least we don't kidnap your children anymore" then go ahead
---

Everything has an end, except for the sausage. It has two.

iPhone_7 posted...

scar the 1 posted...

I'm not sure how useful it is to declare that "this is better than what was before". To me it looks very much like this was the end goal from the beginning. Outrage people with the horrible separation, then do the EO and you get your concentration camps anyway.

I dont know what more you can demand from this administration though. He failed repealing Obamacare. Hes made it clear hes going to do whatever he can to declare victory on Immigration before the midterms. This administration is going to go through with whatever they can get away with.

Putting an end to separation is not nothing. These kids that are by themselves are going to be affected by it for the rest of their lives. Last thing we need is a news story about some of the pre-teens/teens hanging themselves.

No, it's definitely nothing. They put the separation in place to begin with, now they "put an end to it" while they keep the zero-tolerance policy in place as well as bake it into an executive order along with some other policies that enable and facilitate concentration camps. It's a win for the administration, and to me it looks like what they were going for all along.
---

Everything has an end, except for the sausage. It has two.

gunplagirl posted...

Better yet, trump comes out looking like a hero for reuniting the families. And people who were outraged are satisfied because suddenly the concern of split families is resolved. Them being detained is now a okay as long as they're together, the consensus seems to be.

Oh yeah it's obviously a thing they're gonna bring up come midterm elections
---

Everything has an end, except for the sausage. It has two.

iPhone_7 posted...

gunplagirl posted...

Indefinite detention of minors with their parents isn't any better

Im sure its not indefinite. And having the parents around is hell of a lot better. I dont know how anyone can seriously claim otherwise.

Groups of kids in cages and theyre all crying for their parents. The barely older ones having to change the younger ones diapers. A pre-teen/teen curling up on the floor crying, feeling all alone.

I feel like people are not fully grasping the extent of what these children are going to though.

Traumatized children womp womp. #MAGA

I'm not sure how useful it is to declare that "this is better than what was before". To me it looks very much like this was the end goal from the beginning. Outrage people with the horrible separation, then do the EO and you get your concentration camps anyway.
---

Everything has an end, except for the sausage. It has two.

https://twitter.com/CarwilBJ/status/1009523194892435456

I've just read the Trump Executive Order. It's not a solution, and it makes some things worse.

Here's what it actually does
1. Codifies Jeff Sessions' "zero tolerance" directive until new immigration legislation is passed.
2. Limits the definition of family to parent-child pairs. Aunts, uncles, grandparents, etc. are excluded.
3. Puts families under Homeland Security custody during criminal, immigration cases. Previously, children and detained families had to be held in facilities contracted by the Department of Health and Human Services.
3c. Authorizes the military to build new prisons for migrant families.
3d. Allows all Federal departments to offer their buildings as prisons.
3e. Authorizes the DOJ to try to wriggle out of the Flores Agreement.
4. Orders parents to be prosecuted first in immigration courts

Text of EO: https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/affording-congress-opportunity-address-family-separation/

Update: The New York Times reports that HHS has said "There will be no grandfathering of existing cases"i.e., the already separate kids will not be reunited with their parents any sooner. And that the Justice Department says it is unclear whether the government will still incarcerate adult and send kids to HHS after 20 days if a judge doesn't overrule the Flores agreement. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/20/us/politics/trump-immigration-children-executive-order.html

---

Everything has an end, except for the sausage. It has two.

What about Mexican Americans
---

Everything has an end, except for the sausage. It has two.

Esrac posted...

I think the Opinion Corridor is less about legitimate criticism and more about the phenomenon of self-censorship due to fear of social backlash and ostracism. Which may lead to faulty understanding of public opinion. I don't know if that kind of thing contributed to the media and Democrats taking the Trump campaign seriously enough until it was too late, but it wouldn't surprise me. Though technically I think the Opinion Corridor is specific to Sweden.

I would say that the Swedish opinion corridor was a bit of a half truth. I recognize that there were definitely some things the media would hunt you down if you said. There were some instances of pretty bad "witch hunts". However the conservative nationalists that liked to invoke this opinion corridor accusation often said much worse things than what any sensible person would have found acceptable. After all, they're a party with a very recent history of neo Nazism, and to this day have a lot of neo Nazi connections. And there were some manufactured stories that weren't exactly true that sort of added fuel to the fire.
---

Everything has an end, except for the sausage. It has two.

Esrac posted...

We already have that phenomenon. It's called the Overton Window, similar to the Opinion Corridor, but models political debate as an expanding and sliding scale of what is and is not acceptable in civil discourse. I think it mostly applies to public discourse and media though.

For example, let's consider gender issues. You could say the window has been sliding to the Left, because talking about non-conventional gender identity and women's issues is increasingly acceptable and encouraged while sticking to the gender binary and traditional gender roles is increasingly frowned upon. You could also say it has become more narrow because talking about those issues using a lens other than feminism is becoming less acceptable.

Probably not a perfect example, but you probably get the idea.

Now, I'm not saying we need to take "Kill the gays, blacks, and jews" as legitimate political discussion. But I do think we need to be able to make room for Conservative voices (not trying to say conservatives are racist, but the hardcore racists are often far right). And I think we have to at least be willing to discuss uncomfortable topics and the implications that may be associated with them with immediately crying racism, homophobia, sexism, etc.

In that regard, I would use James Damore's memo as an example. The media maligned it as sexist, but if you actually read it there is nothing so malevolent there. It reads more like "There are differences between men and women that seem to at least partially originate in our biology. If we want to get more women involved in tech, we need to account for that. Here are some suggestions." The response to that from Left leaning media was something like "Google techbro says women can't handle tech".

Do you see what I mean?

Yeah I see what you mean, and I mostly agree with you. Didn't know about the term Overton Window though, thanks for that.
And I still think it's a tricky balance. It doesn't get any easier when legitimate criticism gets dismissed because "you're just enforcing an opinion corridor". And of course, the whole clickocracy makes things a lot trickier, since media outlets feed off of outrage, not sensible discourse.
---

Everything has an end, except for the sausage. It has two.

Esrac posted...

I'm looking beyond just this message board and at population of political activism in general. When I talk about the Left (I know it isn't a monolith, but bear with me for brevity) being unwilling to engage and too eager to disparage the moderates who are willing to engage and smearing moderate liberals and conservatives as the worst of the alt-right, I am talking about a series of events I've observed.

I already mentioned Laci Green. But Cassie Jay had her reputation smeared by feminist protesters and news media because she made a film that suggested maybe some MRAs have a few good points.

Maajid Nawaz, a moderate Muslim critical of radical Islam, just recently got an apology and settlement from the SPLC after they labelled him an anti-Muslim extremist a couple years ago.

Bret Weinstein, the former Evergreen professor, was labelled a racist, harassed and stalked by progressive protesters and pressured into resigning by the college administration because he made a statement that compelling white faculty and students to stay off campus during the traditional Day of Absence was not a good thing to do.

And so on.

Not even talking about the far-right inflammatory folks like Milo and Richard Spencer.

Yeah, I agree that the left has a lot of problems. But again this is a difficult balance to strike, because yes of course there should be room for moderates and for compromise, but at the same time I can very well understand the fear of shifting the boundaries of what's acceptable to say in public discourse etc.
---

Everything has an end, except for the sausage. It has two.

Esrac posted...

I don't see a lot of attempt at discussion in general. I do see attempts at discussion getting protested or ostracized through "no platforming" policies, etc. It doesn't seem like the political Left is very willing to talk to the political Right. The more moderate ones who suggest or attempt to do so face a lot of backlash from the less diplomatic ones.

A go-to example is the feminist activist and sex-ed youtuber Laci Green, who was doxxed, harassed, and had her reputation smeared by others on the Left because she suggested that those on the Left should actually talk to those on the Right.

I'm not going to pretend they're going to change the minds of most actual Nazis. I think if you're actually a full-on Nazi, your radical beliefs are probably set in stone. But most people on the Right aren't Nazis. Refusing to engage with moderate conservatives, or even center-left figures who might be a little problematic, isn't going to help the situation. Labeling the moderate ones alt-right nazis really isn't helping either.

I won't say I have a flawless grasp on the situation, because confirmation bias is a b**** and I'm as vulnerable to it as anyone, but it does seem to me that the Left is less willing to engage in civil discussion than I would like to see. That doesn't excuse trolls on the Right throwing around insults like "cuck" and "soyboy" who just want to gloat because they're the ones currently in power, of course.

I'm sorry if I'm rambling and getting off topic. I'm running on two hours of sleep and red bull. Just had to bring my daughter to school after an all-nigh, 10-hour shift at work and I'm not super-coherent.

This comes down to where we're looking, I think. I was talking specifically about people on this board. I see now, compared to previous years, more people who are openly and expressly "revolutionaries" rather than moderates.
But ultimately I think there is a point in what gunplagirl is saying, although I'm not sure I agree with all of it. What I do agree with is this:
There's a fundamental difference between tolerating differing opinions and tolerating what amounts to intolerance (or worse), and failing to acknowledge that leads the the kind of false balance of "both sides are equally bad", which I completely disagree with. Beyond that, however, is where it gets tricky, because drawing a clear line between what's an acceptable differing opinion and what is completely unacceptable is tricky, and it's also tricky to figure out who should do it.
---

Everything has an end, except for the sausage. It has two.

Esrac posted...

I would like to think most people can agree that compiling and posting someone's personal information and releasing it to other people that might be willing to harass, threaten, or harm them and their families is generally bad form regardless of sides.

Otherwise, I guess they're in the "No bad tactics, only bad targets" camp. In which case, they're opposed to doxing or harassment when it happens to someone they sympathize with, but are all for it when it's someone they oppose.

Reminds me of a certain poster here who was critical of public figures like Anita Sarkeesian getting harassed online back during and before Gamergate. But when Ivanka Trump is getting harassed in person on an airplane, he had no problem with that.

I guess I'm saying a little consistency would be nice.

I dunno, I'm seeing more and more people giving up. Giving up in the sense that they feel that talking is not going to work on people they consider fascist, Nazi, whatever. Using a reasoning along the lines of "fascists welcome the discussion, because in the end they don't care about words, they care about action". So yeah, there is probably a decent amount of people out there who are suffering from some sort of cognitive dissonance, but I'm sure there's also a sizable chunk of people who are quite consistent in there reasoning. Even if you strongly disagree with it.
---

Everything has an end, except for the sausage. It has two.

hm
---

Everything has an end, except for the sausage. It has two.

Esrac posted...

Its remarkable how we can see someone who would've been outraged at doxing under other circumstances is in favor of it when its targeting people they disapprove of.

I don't know that it's necessarily remarkable. It just indicates that what they take issue with isn't the practice of doxxing in principle, it's the application.

If you can find instances of them saying anything close to "doxxing is unconditionally wrong and should never be done", then I'll agree that it's hypocritical, for sure.
---

Everything has an end, except for the sausage. It has two.

"It's the leftist extremists' fault that we have Donald Trump"

"It's the parents' fault that we take their kids away"
---

Everything has an end, except for the sausage. It has two.

Sephiroth1288 posted...

The left openly glorifies terrorism at this point. It's awfully sick the kind of lengths people will go as long as they've deluded themselves into believing everyone they don't like is a literal Nazi.

It's amazing how, in the same paragraph, you can be sickened by comparisons to Nazism and accuse people of glorifying terrorism. This is really the kind of quality content I expect from you.
---

Everything has an end, except for the sausage. It has two.

Except if it's the lives of Latino refugee children, huh
---

Everything has an end, except for the sausage. It has two.

It's actually kinda fun
---

Everything has an end, except for the sausage. It has two.

Bump
---

Everything has an end, except for the sausage. It has two.

Wa!
---

Everything has an end, except for the sausage. It has two.

I think Colbert is probably really smart, but I don't enjoy his political commentary very much. I agree that the Colbert Report was better.
---

Everything has an end, except for the sausage. It has two.

Try getting Zack in FF VII then we can talk
---

Everything has an end, except for the sausage. It has two.

Grischnak posted...

I don't know about Sweden but I know in the US there are a lot of resources to help people get out of abusive relationships:

http://www.thehotline.org/help/

There are probably similar hotline services in Sweden. This report specifically talks about how public agencies such as healthcare and social services failed to e.g., ask questions about violence, make risk assessments, etc. Things that they are supposed to do.
---

Everything has an end, except for the sausage. It has two.

Grischnak posted...

I'm not entirely what the point of this topic is. What is "society is failing to give these victims proper support" implying? Do you want the government to have some sort marriage equivalent to CPS? Where the government can come in and end marriages and forcibly separate spouses if they think they're in a bad relationship?

It's implying that in 2016 and 2017, these 21 victims were all in contact with government agencies, and the government agencies themselves are acknowledging that they need to get better at cooperating so that they can identify and prevent cases where there's a risk of bodily harm. The government themselves are tasking four specific agencies to get better at this.

I posted the topic because the last couple of days I've seen several posters show significant ignorance as to what living in an abusive relationship entails, and this shows part of the picture.
---

Everything has an end, except for the sausage. It has two.

ROBANN_88 posted...

scar the 1 posted...

I couldn't managed to get the Google Translate thing working

i've noticed recently that if you just put in the link, and try to make it translate the page that way, it just completely fails to do anything, atleast with SVT.

Yeah, it seems like SVT is blocking Google Translate's crawler somehow. Which is silly, probably they just block crawlers in general in some way, or maybe I'm completely wrong. Shouldn't be much crawling going on here.
---

Everything has an end, except for the sausage. It has two.

But to attempt to begin to answer your questions:
There are several reasons why they might be afraid to leave. They might be afraid for their life, or afraid for the life of their partner. Quite often they don't categorically hate their partner, on the contrary they still love them and don't wish them harm. There are often issues of internalizing blame, i.e., "it's my fault he's being abusive, I deserved it". The list goes on and on. It's not just one blanket answer, although this report illustrates that fear for their lives is justified.
---

Everything has an end, except for the sausage. It has two.

fenderbender321 posted...

I don't understand...these women are physically being stopped from leaving the relationship? By what? Are they handicapped? Are they being tied up and kidnapped? Or are their just aspects of the relationship they don't want to do without and are trying to have their cake and eat it too?

Yes, it's quite clear you don't understand. I don't mean this in any sort of condescending way, but there are tons and tons of stories out there, told by people who used to be in really abusive relationships. And I recommend you read up on it. Better you read first hand accounts than some privileged CEmen trying to lecture you about it.
---

Everything has an end, except for the sausage. It has two.

COVxy posted...

No idea, my intuition says no though. That you'd get a fit with the same slope but an infinitely large intercept.

My guess is you'd need to do something clever with dot products to find the line that runs orthoganal to least squares fit.

Well given that linear regression in itself is based on something clever with dot products, I would guess the same. But I suppose you're right, if you define the inner product such that orthogonality is the same as Euclidean parallelism, then you might have a suitable norm.
---

Everything has an end, except for the sausage. It has two.