View Single Post
Old 12-05-2017, 08:06 AM   #110 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
Ecky's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Vermont
Posts: 4,475

Gaptooth (retired) - '00 Honda Insight
Team Honda
Gen-1 Insights
90 day: 54.26 mpg (US)

Such Fit - '07 Honda Fit Sport
90 day: 41.27 mpg (US)

Connect - '15 Ford Transit Connect XL
90 day: 20.61 mpg (US)

K-sight - '00 Honda K-sight
Team Honda
90 day: 45.34 mpg (US)

Aerocivic - '92 Honda Civic CX
90 day: 64.49 mpg (US)
Thanks: 2,292
Thanked 2,062 Times in 1,284 Posts
Originally Posted by freebeard View Post
Un-fermented soy is an estrogen mimic.
So is broccoli. Those countries which eat a lot of soy have some of the longest-lived men in the world. What's the problem?

Originally Posted by freebeard View Post
People who eat with their right hand and don't wash their left are... *sinister*

Originally Posted by redpoint5 View Post
I'm not fond of how the word discrimination is commonly used. To discriminate is to observe and understand differences. It's a necessary skill. Someone who treats someone else unjustly is just an a-hole.
I'm glad you pointed out that, at its most simple, discrimination is practically a definition of life. There are, however, specific kinds of discrimination which act as feedback loops and perpetuate social problems.

Originally Posted by redpoint5 View Post
... and this is brings up another complaint of mine. What's the deal with "hate crimes"? What does motivation for a crime have to do with consequences? Isn't murder normally motivated by hatred? Does it matter if the killer hated Bob in particular, or red-heads in general?
I'm not actually certain regarding the consequences of a "hate crime" vs one of passion (for instance). I can understand why "the law" may be tempted to discriminate against certain belief systems and behavioral patterns which cause systematic (as opposed to isolated) increases in violence. Or, in other words, draw clear lines about what is considered socially acceptable behavior by classifying certain ways of thinking as "wrong". Whether this is good or right or the law's place, I'm not sure, but I can see it being effective.

Originally Posted by Xist View Post
The term "micro aggressions" has never been self-explanatory to me, nor has my curiosity been roused, while I look up other terms and ideas all day.

How is a hate crime a micro aggression? I kill you because you do not capitalize your username, but it is only a micro aggression!

It always sounded like a small mean thing that could be ignored, if there were not hundreds of other mean things.

Then I need a safe space.

Are love crimes better than hate crimes?
A hate crime isn't necessarily a microaggression. However, people who harbor belief systems which are unfairly discriminatory (or even fairly discriminatory) will often pick at those they discriminate against, even if it never comes to a crime. Or, less than that, just the way you behave toward someone is rarely isolated from how you think about them.


I'm a firm believer that "fair" is not always "equal".

Yes, maybe many blacks are more likely to sue a company over being fired on a discrimination basis. Do I envy the unfair protection they have by law enforcement and the judicial system? Do I wake up each morning thinking, "darn, I wish I had been born black in America 30 years ago"?

Is it right for a company to not hire someone for being black, under the basis that they're part of a group which has had widespread severe, systematic, unfair discrimination until very recently*? Because they might still be sensitive about issues they've seen in their own lifetimes? And still exist, at the very least, in pockets around the country?

*I'm ceding this point for the sake of attempting to establish some common ground

EDIT: I suppose it's hard to come to a consensus on what's fair, if you're not going to insist on equal treatment for everyone.

Last edited by Ecky; 12-05-2017 at 08:31 AM..
  Reply With Quote