MWil23 Posted January 31, 2018 Author Share Posted January 31, 2018 1 hour ago, ramssuperbowl99 said: Welcome to arguing in the 21st century. People know they can't defend that ridiculous mascot directly, but still want to, so they defend it indirectly with vague crap like "everyone is offended today" without having the stones to say "this mascot shouldn't offend people", or they posit some ridiculous hypothetical/false equivalence, or they say that it's not the worst thing that minority groups have to deal with (leaving out the part that it's still bad), so it shouldn't be changed. May as well lock it up. Not speaking at you at all, but people also hate SJW's behind a keyboard labeling people with one word titles like "misogynist, racist, etc." and then telling them what they meant and what they should say/do/think. One word labels are always easier than the alternative, which actually involves active listening and appropriate discussion/understanding. This is what I think of arguing in the 21st century, both your paragraph and my sentences above. It's one of the many reasons I deleted my twitter and facebook. JMHO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MOSteelers56 Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 1 minute ago, MWil23 said: Not speaking at you at all, but people also hate SJW's behind a keyboard labeling people with one word titles like "misogynist, racist, etc." and then telling them what they meant and what they should say/do/think. One word labels are always easier than the alternative, which actually involves active listening and appropriate discussion/understanding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MWil23 Posted January 31, 2018 Author Share Posted January 31, 2018 4 minutes ago, MOSteelers56 said: Not sure what's confusing, especially if you've ever seen this hilarious and yet true video: Here's an example: Guy 1: I don't think that Chief Wahoo is a big deal. It wasn't meant to be racist. It was done by a 17 year old and supposed to be a mascot caricature who was happy about winning baseball games. You have to consider intent. SJW: Wow dude. You're an out of touch RACIST. That happens a lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GSUeagles14 Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 21 minutes ago, MWil23 said: Not sure what's confusing, especially if you've ever seen this hilarious and yet true video: Here's an example: Guy 1: I don't think that Chief Wahoo is a big deal. It wasn't meant to be racist. It was done by a 17 year old and supposed to be a mascot caricature who was happy about winning baseball games. You have to consider intent. SJW: Wow dude. You're an out of touch RACIST. That happens a lot. not really sure why you had to explain that, we saw a pretty good example of it on this thread. i think everyone agrees this should be locked up and move on. no real baseball discussion is happening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MOSteelers56 Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 That’s not what I’m confused about lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.