Minecraft creator and fellow Exile Notch banned from 10 year anniversary celebration for wrongthink

"

rojimboo wrote:

...

"

Boem wrote:

"

rojimboo wrote:

...

1)I used "socially destroyed" for a reason, some people's life where ruined by a charge of rape that was never factually backed up.

As for the "law against slander" it's kind of hard to press charges against anonymous accounts or groups using social media as cover for their actions.

You know about the Brett Kavanaugh case?

Serious impacts to his life, no substantial facts or evidence put forward by the person making the claim.

2) straight vs gay? When did straight people hold a meeting to surpress gays? If anything i would throw that ball in the religious camp and something to all my knowledge that is rightfully decreasing.(let's pretend ignorance about islamic states for the sake of argument)

I don't know about you, but i don't run up to people and ask their sexual orientation, i just see people and what they do in their bedroom is of no concern to me.

What about gay people pretending to be straight? Are they part of the oppressors or the oppressed? Are they banking on priviliges and insulting gays by doing so?
How does this stuff work exactly where the world is divided in neat boxes.

You realize that's why i asked the "homogeneous majority" question right.

How about individuals just being strong and not some groups?

Your bassicaly saying if i got this right that no straight man can ever have a more difficult life then a gay man because he is part of the majority?
Like, i hope your not, but i wonder what else such a mental dualistic framework is usefull for.

3) So you are for equality of outcome, you would rather have a women to fill a position by inforced quota's even if a man is available that would be better at the task at hand. (or change it around, a man when a women has better credentials for a position)

You don't see how society at large loses out if you fill positions with less capable people then are available in the market by enforcing quota's on institutions?

Disadvantaged in the past is something i would like some more nuance in though, what we talking about here? Was he poor, where his ancestors enslaved, did he get beaten as a kid or bullied, how about ignored by his parents, his grandparents gassed, emotionally damaged?
(if it's not yet clear, just showing how stupendous it would be to enforce or write law around this notion that would not spiral out of control depending on person in charge)

Everybody alive was disadvantaged at one point in time.

My view is quite easy, it's not about the cards you get in life but how you play them. And that's a game everybody can play against himself, maximize your cards.

Peace,

-Boem-

"

Your bassicaly saying if i got this right that no straight man can ever have a more difficult life then a gay man because he is part of the majority?
Like, i hope your not, but i wonder what else such a mental dualistic framework is usefull for.

"

rojimboo wrote:

"

Boem wrote:

And please, define majority for me.

Straight vs gay people.

"

What majority we talking about here that is so homogeneous that they experience no obstacles in their life to overcome?

Strawman, never said that.

Just that people in the majority, don't encounter many of the obstacles minorities.

It's just the way of the world, always has been. The majority bullies the minority to no end. Which is why the strong need to defend the less strong minority.

"

Boem wrote:

How gracious of you /tips hat

1) i was simply mentioning the kavanaugh case because it is a high profile one.

Are you saying he was not socially effected by the accusations simply because he won and has a solid job ?_?

Can you imagine having your picture all over the nation with rape accusation next to it and being publicly discussed in all of the news-papers.
But that doesn't mater because he is well of?

I don't understand that kind of empathy, sorry.

"

2) give me some examples of rights not afforded to gay people or obstacles put in their path by the state because they are gay.

Or we talking emotional and social distress that somehow outweighs that of a straight man in todays society? And how are we quantifying this exactly?

I'm curious how you back up your claim. Are some people bigots against gay people, for sure but that's nothing new. Just like tall people have a different life experience compared to little people.

Society as far as i am concerned is pretty tolerant against all sorts of people nowadays and only seems to be improving in that regard so i don't see any reason to sound the alarm.

"

3) and the substantive model is considered "unstable" because it has to many factors to account for and an ever broadening of the definition of disadvantage.

As for the whole rich kid vs poor kid, both are capable to enter based on merit. The difference is that the poor kid will have to get a loan while the rich kid does not.

Like i said people have different hands to play in life and an argument could be made that the poor kid will value things more highly in comparison to the rich kid and as a result will outperform him because of motivation and higher necessity.

We can make up many cases both pro rich kid and pro poor kid. Facts remain that nothing prevents the poor kid from entering a higher education if he shows merit.

And if there is enough merit, people can even open the door for him with funds and other tools that exist to attract people that show promise.

And if he succeeds, his kid is going to be a rich kid.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

"

rojimboo wrote:

"

Boem wrote:

And please, define majority for me.

Straight vs gay people.

"

What majority we talking about here that is so homogeneous that they experience no obstacles in their life to overcome?

Strawman, never said that.

Just that people in the majority, don't encounter many of the obstacles minorities.

It's just the way of the world, always has been. The majority bullies the minority to no end. Which is why the strong need to defend the less strong minority.

Jimbo, you're forgetting a very important truth, which is: human beings do not live regionally, or nationally, or globally. They live locally.

I grew up white in the Detroit area. I was the minority. Most of my high school class happened to be Muslims, ethnically from Central Asia.

I could get in my car right now and drive less than ten miles to a room full of people where gay people are the majority. The Tool Box, I think it's called. In that space, I'd be the minority.

Females are the majority of just about every nation. Yet — to take a shot in the dark — you probably believe males have the upper hand. I'd ask you to take that idea to a male nurse or a male teacher.

Minority and majority are situational. The same group can be oppressed here and oppressor there. And you can get some very unpleasant results when a group that believes they are an oppressed minority happens to be the majority, and the group they view as their oppressor is the minority. For instance, 1930's Germany.

There was only one correct set of answers to Boem's questions:

"The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities." — Ayn Rand

"

rojimboo wrote:

Scrotie, you've unintentionally

"

rojimboo wrote:

fallen into my trap where it is shown majorities (local or situational who cares) can and will bully minorities, just because they can.

Is it then so surprising we try to protect them?

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

Of course it's not a surprise. But your method for doing so sucks.

"

rojimboo wrote:

....

"

There are quite a few examples, but overcoming these obstacles shouldn't be a necessity, the obstacles shouldn't be there in the first place, because they exist in the mind of the prejudiced, i.e. it's their fault not vice versa.

"

Even you acknowledge it's an uphill struggle for the impoverished kid.

"

Boem wrote:

"

rojimboo wrote:

....

I look like a hippie and i am sure people have prejudice against me when i walk around in my loose shirts and run down pants, black beard and long hair.

So fucking what?

Of course people should overcome the obstacles in their path, what kind of demeaning logic did people instill in you?

People make up their mind about other people on the drop of a dime. And if you want something or need anything it's on you to prove them how wrong they where.
I can't even count how many times i have gotten the "hmm, your smarter then you look" comment from people.

I consider outperforming the prejudice people have of me as a challenge and a compliment.

I have trouble visualizing how grey the world must look to people who actually believe the ball is in the other persons camp to magically "change their mind".

"

There are quite a few examples, but overcoming these obstacles shouldn't be a necessity, the obstacles shouldn't be there in the first place, because they exist in the mind of the prejudiced, i.e. it's their fault not vice versa.

That's so fucking entitled it's hard to comprehend for me. And it's a great injustice to all the people before you that did their absolute best to get gays accepted in society by demonstrating they are just regular people while "dealing with it".

And to great success, they achieved a great deal by "dealing with it", overcomming the obstacles placed in their path and going about their way in life, not giving a fuck about the prejudice of others or showing them wrong.

Life must be freaking hard if you really want it to be.

As for the

"

Even you acknowledge it's an uphill struggle for the impoverished kid.

No i didn't, your reading into it what you wanna read in to it.

Anyway i'm out, can't stand the entitled my suffering is bigger then your suffering attitude for to much and i got other stuff to do.

I sure hope you get out of that "the world is out to get me mind-set" though.
Believe me, nobody cares enough about you to roadblock you in life.

Peace,

-Boem-