All purpose news and politics thread part VI: This Is Not The Time For Posing

[hyped78]

No, just that your takes are deeply predictable, and again, that's a really bizarre stance to take.

It's not bizarre - here in the UK the main minority group are Asians (Pakistan, Bangladesh, India, etc.). In countries like Spain, the main minority group are Latinos/ Hispanics. Not everything has to be US-centric.

[Tendrin]

It's not bizarre - here in the UK the main minority group are Asians (Pakistan, Bangladesh, India, etc.). In countries like Spain, the main minority group are Latinos/ Hispanics. Not everything has to be US-centric.

By all means, lift up their voices too, but it's very strange that your response to someone discussing a specific problem, using a specific scenario, that your response was to immediately jump over black people to what-about. Very interesting, too.

It seems to me, really, that you just want people to be quiet on social issues.

[hyped78]

By all means, lift up their voices too, but it's very strange that your response to someone discussing a specific problem, using a specific scenario, that your response was to immediately jump over black people to what-about. Very interesting, too.

It seems to me, really, that you just want people to be quiet on social issues.

And it seems to me that you're, respectfully, wrong (my opinion, not a fact). You are considering that everyone who is against woke, cancel culture, culture wars and all of that sad stuff ("sad stuff" being my opinion) is an enemy of social issues - that's not true. That's just a radical notion.

[Dalak]

I wasn't diving into the comments section. By comment, I just meant what the people in the article were saying.

In the original article, they mentioned that the measures were outside of what the new law calls for.

https://www.wftv.com/news/local/teac...LBUVT6TVWPDGA/

It seems to me the choices are that the teachers know what they're doing, they don't know what they're doing, or the reporter sucks.

It seems clear to me that the law is being rolled out in a vague way and thus being cautious about losing one's livelihood isn't malicious, as I also quoted what you showed here to give context about how the reporter was criticizing the administrators and teachers while later explaining why they were justified doing what was criticized. I don't believe anyone here has anything other than "Fuck LGBT" in mind for this law, and any details will be ignored in the push to screw over their chosen targets and any who get in the way.

Do you still think the Teachers who have been given their advice from the administrators based on incomplete info are complying maliciously, and if so I think the most important question is Why?

[hyped78]

By all means, lift up their voices too, but it's very strange that your response to someone discussing a specific problem, using a specific scenario, that your response was to immediately jump over black people to what-about. Very interesting, too.

It seems to me, really, that you just want people to be quiet on social issues.

I'll try to give you what, for me, is a good example of radicalism: the book "White Fragility" by Robin DiAngelo claims all white people are racist and any denial of this is further evidence of racism. This book:
https://www.amazon.com/White-Fragili...s%2C292&sr=8-1

Now, you can agree or disagree with this. I disagree. Are there many white people that are racist (and, as a result, ignorant!)? Sure, unfortunately racists still exist everywhere (and not just white people). Are all white people racist, including children who should feel guilty that they are white and privileged? No, that's a radical agenda.

If you think that all white people are inherently racist etc. etc., fine, but I don't agree at all with that and I think that is a very dangerous notion - in fact, interestingly, it's a notion that plays right into right wing speech and voters, also alienating moderate/ centrist voters.

Something else is all the "woke warriors" who want to tear down statues, protest, changing words from "guys" to "folks" or "y'all", and do race swapping of TV/ movie characters... wow, as if that helps anything instead of just polarizing politics even more and feeding right into right-wing fearmongering. Instead of that, advancing social issues should mean donating to charities and food banks, should mean promoting inclusiveness in your company, volunteering to teach minority kids, etc.

Btw, the Asian and Latino thing - I meant no harm. In fact, you might think I'm a troll or whatever, at others have called me ("sealion" takes the prize, I think), but I am honestly trying to have good spirited debate and yet I've been the target of insults just because I think differently from the majority on this thread. Politics is about debate, it's not about cheerleading.

[Mister Mets]

Who let the sealion in?

This is a public forum, not a private conversation between Democrats trying to encourage each other.

No, just that your takes are deeply predictable, and again, that's a really bizarre stance to take.

I don't think you guys want to be judged by this standard. Much of what is said here from the left is quite predictable.

His father also fucked his 42 year younger stepdaughter...

Not his fault, though.

Are you saying that far left-wing folks don't use the word "woke" themselves? That's funny, as if only right-wing folks use it!

The left seems to be using it a lot less now, given the backlash to some of the dumber woke views (abolish the police, schools should be shut down for years to prevent Covid spread, punctuality and objective measures are white culture, total forgiveness of student loans, etc.)

[Panfoot]

Something else is all the "woke warriors" who want to tear down statues, protest, changing words from "guys" to "folks" or "y'all", and do race swapping of TV/ movie characters... wow, as if that helps anything instead of just polarizing politics even more and feeding right into right-wing fearmongering. Instead of that, advancing social issues should mean donating to charities and food banks, should mean promoting inclusiveness in your company, volunteering to teach minority kids, etc.

Inclusivity and representation is "polarizing"? Come on man

[hyped78]

Inclusivity and representation is "polarizing"? Come on man

No, it's not and it will never be. We agree on that.

But I gave these examples: tearing down statues (e.g. what they did to the Churchill statue here in London), protesting (and by this I meant violent protests including rioting and looting, I don't mean peaceful protests), changing words from "guys" to "folks" or "y'all" (this is completely silly), forced race swapping of characters. This is not "inclusivity and representation", this is radicalism.

[Mister Mets]

It seems clear to me that the law is being rolled out in a vague way and thus being cautious about losing one's livelihood isn't malicious, as I also quoted what you showed here to give context about how the reporter was criticizing the administrators and teachers while later explaining why they were justified doing what was criticized. I don't believe anyone here has anything other than "Fuck LGBT" in mind for this law, and any details will be ignored in the push to screw over their chosen targets and any who get in the way.

Do you still think the Teachers who have been given their advice from the administrators based on incomplete info are complying maliciously, and if so I think the most important question is Why?

I think there's a better than even chance that there is significant malicious compliance from teachers and administrators, especially those seeking media attention.

As I've covered numerous times, "malicious compliance" has a specific definition, distinct from complying maliciously. I gave the reason why people would do it; they want the law to fail.

Speaking of, just saw this:

It seems dishonest to say that these are the most controversial views held on the left.

The left-wing equivalent of someone who thinks abortion shouldn't be an option for a ten year old girl raped by her mother's boyfriend would be someone who thinks abortion should be legal for any reason at any stage and that taxpayers should pay for it.

[Tendrin]

No, it's not and it will never be. We agree on that.

But I gave these examples: tearing down statues (e.g. what they did to the Churchill statue here in London), protesting (and by this I meant violent protests including rioting and looting, I don't mean peaceful protests), changing words from "guys" to "folks" or "y'all" (this is completely silly), forced race swapping of characters. This is not "inclusivity and representation", this is radicalism.

... oh brother.

[hyped78]

... oh brother.

So you agree with that? All of that or part of it?

You agree with destroying/ attacking Winston Churchill's statue?
You agree with rioting and looting as part of protests?
You agree that saying "hey guys" is wrong and everyone should stop saying that?

No, really, do you agree with all of that? (I hope that's not the case, or else it just goes to show what I've been saying all along - radical agendas). I am quite interested in understanding that.

[worstblogever]

Who let the sealion in?

No "hello"? No arguments? Nothing? Just petty insult out of nowhere? Really?

No wonder democracy in the US is in the state it's in...

Interesting that you instantly thought you were who they were referring to. An admission, really.

[hyped78]

Interesting that you instantly thought you were who they were referring to. An admission, really.

It doesn't take a genius to realize they were referring to me (happy to be corrected, though), that doesn't make it an "admission". I thought you weren't getting dragged into that poor show.

It's pathetic to call someone else a "troll" or a "sealion" just because you don't agree with that person's views (unless you've been insulted or the person is flat out lying, trying to pass opinions as facts, etc.). It shows lack of tolerance, it shows ignorance, lack of culture/ education and civility. The same thing these folks accuse the Maga mob of. No different.

[Dalak]

I think there's a better than even chance that there is significant malicious compliance from teachers and administrators, especially those seeking media attention.

As I've covered numerous times, "malicious compliance" has a specific definition, distinct from complying maliciously. I gave the reason why people would do it; they want the law to fail.

And with no evidence left you assume they are still being malicious about it when you assume others aren't who clearly are (Mitch McConnell, Ron DeSantis, etc). Well at least you're consistent in your assumptions: Liberals = Malicious and hiding their true beliefs, Conservatives = Doing what they feel best for kids and country with no maliciousness, regardless of the lies and misinformation they use to excuse themselves. If you don't want to admit why you feel this way or even analyze it then that's your choice, but it's not something I intend to forget.

[Spidey5640]

It doesn't take a genius to realize they were referring to me (happy to be corrected, though), that doesn't make it an "admission". I thought you weren't getting dragged into that poor show.

It's pathetic to call someone else a "troll" or a "sealion" just because you don't agree with that person's views (unless you've been insulted, of course). It shows lack of tolerance, ignorance, lack of culture and civility. The same thing you would accuse the Maga mob of. No different.

This is pretty par for this thread. Don't expect anything different.