LogFAQs > #973171110

My only comment is her point about "debate".

Contrapoints saying it's emotional and difficult to expect people to calmly debate their existence (or rights, public perception, etc) is something I fully agree with.

I agree that the ultimate goal should be that we should all be capable of controlling our emotions in order to hopefully persuade others to agree with our cause (well, the goal is that it should be done as default, regardless of if you're trying to persuade someone or not). Yet, it's so disheartening though that we expect these discriminated groups to go above and beyond what is "normally" expected from everyone else, in order to do this. MLK, Mandela, Ghandi, Frederick Douglas, etc. All these people are seen as idols because what they did was so extraordinary...yet we expect all those being discriminated against, to match them. And if they don't we blame them for not being extraordinary.

And I dislike public commentators who essentially tell the public that they are right to judge an argument not by the contents of the ones who make sound arguments, but by the tone and language of those who are extreme.

A goal should also be for people to learn to listen for the content of an argument despite the tone and rhetoric around it, and I'd think that's what public intellectuals would aim to implore upon people.