LogFAQs > #916758963

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, DB2, DB3, DB4, Database 5 ( 01.01.2019-12.31.2019 ), DB6, DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	How is Trump's Approval rating still at 45%?
Zeus 02/01/19 3:22:45 PM #110:	darkknight109 posted... Twenty years ago when social mores were different? Isn't that the point of this entire topic - that social norms change? Except even 20 years ago that was nowhere near acceptable. darkknight109 posted... None of which addresses anything in the point you're responding to. What I pointed out is - regardless of the nature of the slur you're talking about - someone loses their "I didn't know any better" defence the instant the slur is pointed out and explained to them. Oh? And you know for a fact that somebody explained that to them so they actually understood it? I could explain to you that it's offensive to use the word "dark" because it carries the connotation that darker colors are associated with evil and thereby indirectly promotes racism but, unless you internalize that lesson and actually believe it, nothing is going to change. However, if you grew up with that understanding, you'd already believe it so you'd either avoid it or, conversely, do it deliberately in a racist manner. darkknight109 posted... No, your response was always "I think Donald Trump is an old man." You never actually addressed whether you thought what he said was racist or not and it was only after several posts worth of prodding that you arrived at a tenuous "no" answer. Racism requires a certain level of understanding understanding or intent, which again ties back into what I've repeatedly said -- Trump is an old man who doesn't understand those connotations in a way that somebody who grew up in the system would. darkknight109 posted... Which, as previously mentions, shoots a few holes in your earlier assertions in this topic, because it means that you can apparently make statements that are racist without those statements being racist just by dint of being old. Which, as previously mentioned, ties back to context. Again, for instance, if you grew up in an age when you taught to say colored because that was the politically correct thing to say, odds are you're going to innocently say it from time to time. And colored is a far more readily understood slur than animal. darkknight109 posted... Personal anecdotes are not citations. If you think they are, then here's my counterpoint: every senior citizen I've ever met (with one exception - a very bad alcoholic who has numerous life problems) understands evolving social mores and keeps on top of them. Because, again, you don't seem to talk to many people. You have a skewed worldview based on an overly apparent lack of offline communication, which is you insist on having statistics nobody has collected to prove something you should already know. --- (\/)(\/)\|-\| There are precious few at ease / With moral ambiguities / So we act as though they don't exist. <cite>Zeus posted [p:916758963] in How is Tru... [t:77368084]...</cite> <quote><cite>darkknight109 posted...</cite> <quote>Twenty years ago when social mores were different? Isn't that the point of this entire topic - that social norms change?</quote> Except even 20 years ago that was nowhere near acceptable. <cite>darkknight109 posted...</cite> <quote>None of which addresses anything in the point you're responding to. What I pointed out is - regardless of the nature of the slur you're talking about - someone loses their "I didn't know any better" defence the instant the slur is pointed out and explained to them.</quote> Oh? And you know for a fact that somebody explained that to them so they actually understood it? I could explain to you that it's offensive to use the word "dark" because it carries the connotation that darker colors are associated with evil and thereby indirectly promotes racism but, unless you internalize that lesson and actually believe it, nothing is going to change. However, if you grew up with that understanding, you'd already believe it so you'd either avoid it or, conversely, do it deliberately in a racist manner. <cite>darkknight109 posted...</cite> <quote> No, your response was always "I think Donald Trump is an old man." You never actually addressed whether you thought what he said was racist or not and it was only after several posts worth of prodding that you arrived at a tenuous "no" answer. </quote> Racism requires a certain level of understanding understanding or intent, which again ties back into what I've repeatedly said -- Trump is an old man who doesn't understand those connotations in a way that somebody who grew up in the system would. <cite>darkknight109 posted...</cite> <quote>Which, as previously mentions, shoots a few holes in your earlier assertions in this topic, because it means that you can apparently make statements that are racist without those statements being racist just by dint of being old.</quote> Which, as previously mentioned, ties back to context. Again, for instance, if you grew up in an age when you taught to say colored because that was the politically correct thing to say, odds are you're going to innocently say it from time to time. And colored is a far more readily understood slur than animal. <cite>darkknight109 posted...</cite> <quote>Personal anecdotes are not citations. If you think they are, then here's my counterpoint: every senior citizen I've ever met (with one exception - a very bad alcoholic who has numerous life problems) understands evolving social mores and keeps on top of them.</quote> Because, again, you don't seem to talk to many people. You have a skewed worldview based on an overly apparent lack of offline communication, which is you insist on having statistics nobody has collected to prove something you should already know. --- (\/)(\/)\|-\| There are precious few at ease / With moral ambiguities / So we act as though they don't exist. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1