Not giving both sides of an argument your platform to opine on if one of the sides is plainly bigoted and/or anti-scientific
this post was submitted on 10 Feb 2025
67 points (93.5% liked)
Ask Lemmy
28488 readers
2273 users here now
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either [email protected] or [email protected].
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email [email protected]. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try [email protected] or [email protected]
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Not every argument has two sides. Some have five sides. Some have one side. Pigeonholing everything into a duality hampers our ability to understand nuance.
But I guess it does make for better television.
"Joe Rogan presents both sides of the vaccine debate!"
Joe Rogan may have brought two different opinions; he did not bring on a proportional number representing the actual consensus.
Which would be like 99 vaccine scientists and infectious disease specialists for every loony.
If I get to my dentist on time, he makes me wait 20 min.
If I get to my dentist 10 min late he refuses to see me.
I've experienced this myself, and it is a double standard.
Yeah if the dentist makes you wait for 20 minutes, you definitely should have the right not to see him
How long before I get the right to sit the dentist in the chair and extract all their teeth?
Every dentist could get a full set of dentures throughout their college education.
Exclusive spaces for women and minorities while requiring male spaces to accept women and minorities. Like women or black only colleges and associations.
Sorry fellow white dudes, we still have so many comparative advantages and there is too much systemic racism and misogyny left to address before a white or men only club is in any way comparable.
I agree in regards to whites only spaces, but men's only spaces have apolitical reasons to exist (just as not all of the reasons for women's only spaces to exist are political.) The experience of being male is just different and sometimes some people just need space to discuss.
We aren't talking about men's support groups for victims of violence, or things of that nature.
This actually is still helpful for us white dudes, if you meet another white guy that gets pissy about exclusive spaces you know that person isn’t worth talking to anymore!
No, that is a double-standard, it’s just a double-standard you’re arguing is justified.
The definition of a double standard is that it's unjust. At least, in common English.
load more comments
(1 replies)
it would be more of a double standard if the two groups were on equal footing, but they're not.
Reverse discrimination is not an answer to the issue of discrimination - it is discrimination in itself.
Excluding any group of people is not only wrong in itself, but likely to drive a negative response from the people excluded, likely fueling movements against it - and against equality activists at large. You'll be seen as hypocrites at best, and along with you everyone who just genuinely wishes for people to become fully equal.
This is not the way.
Reverse discrimination isn't a thing. It is a good sign that the person using the term is a moron because as you noted, discrimination is just discrimination.
But minorities and women having their own spaces isn't discrimination. Women's sports leagues isn't discrimination. It is a response to being discriminated against for decades or centuries. So are black colleges, which were a response to being excluded from most universities. They exist because otherwise they wouldn't have been able to do those things because of the actual discrimination. It simply isn't the same thing at all because of the larger context.
On a side note, the whole transphobic 'no trans women in women's sports' bullshit is discrimination because it further excludes an even smaller portion of the population that is discriminated against even more than women.
load more comments
(11 replies)
Add to this the previously white fictional characters being replaced with actors of color and I couldn't care less. The market will decide if it was a good idea with ratings. Sometimes it's a smashing success other times a complete disaster.
I remember seeing some neckbeard-ass post on Reddit when the live-action Little Mermaid trailer came out, saying how it wouldn't make sense for somebody living in that region of the ocean to have dark skin because of the longitude and depth of the water, etc...
Like... You're really trying to argue the scientific accuracy of... [checks notes] ... a fucking MERMAID? Spare everybody the mental gymnastics and just say you don't like black people.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Asking as a brown person, can you tell me what advantages white people are receiving that I'm not?
I scanned your comments and you're not totally off your rocker, so I'll not be as big of an ass as I usual am.
Your experience is an anecdote. The plural of anecdote is not "data".
The data shows that minorities are unfairly targeted by police. Arrested more, released more as innocent. Prosecuted more for the same rate of incidence.
The data shows that having an "ethnic" name gets fewer responses to an identical resume.
The data shows that for literal decades, some would say still, minorities couldn't get home loans in good areas with good schools.
What benefit do white people have? I have never, literally not once, thought or cared about my race. My privilege is getting to live without noticing my race in any meaningful context. That's why white people have to be "woken". We're comfortably asleep in our bubble, from birth.
If you don't see it, great! But that might say less about reality, and more about your ability to perceive it.
What benefit do white people have? I have never, literally not once, thought or cared about my race. My privilege is getting to live without noticing my race in any meaningful context. That's why white people have to be "woken". We're comfortably asleep in our bubble, from birth.
Yeah, I got to do all that too. None of it required some special place for minorities and women to go to. All it required was people not talking about race every 5 seconds. What even is this hypothetical safe space for women and minorities that white people would theoretically be upset about anyway?
And yes, I find it far easier and more effective to change my perception of reality than try to make reality conform to my emotional state.
I think people who want to be offended will find something to take offense over and people who want to play victim will find something to claim persecution over. And I think when everyone shouts about how racist and unfair everything is all the time, it detracts from the most heinous actionable items.
I always hate talking in vague generalities. I like specific events, and specific courses of action.
It's all a sliding scale of course. It's the age old push and pull off nature vs nurture; being a product of the environment that created you and free will.
I think it's telling that white people on the left are more concerned with systemic racism than minorities in general are.
Do you think it's ok to have a women's only space for women who have been raped by a man and are scared and scarred?
Also I disagree that minorities are less concerned about systemic racism, as everything I've learned about it has come from minorities. Maybe white people are louder about it, but duh, there's more of them.
Actually no, I don't think women's only spaces for rape are necessarily beneficial, because I'll point to the stupid man vs bear argument.
That's the same thinking that people use to keep trans people out of specific bathrooms. Fear of some small few despicable criminal elements shouldn't be used as an excuse to sow fear against entire swathes of population.
A women who has been raped shouldn't be coached into believing that all men are rapists and should be assumed to be rapists. Additionally, allowing men in would serve to destigmatize the concept of male rape. Where are men who have been sexually assaulted supposed to go?
As for the minorities being less interested, I was simply going off some polling numbers I saw during the election. I forget which stats specifically but I remember seeing some numbers that struck me as counterintuitive. Think it was something like Hispanics here actually being in favor of stronger border control and whatnot.
There are people out there that would not hire you based on the only thing I know about you. I've met enough of them that I have to assume there are more.
load more comments
(4 replies)
I can talk back to the police in a non-violent setting without getting shot.
As a white male, there is zero chance of deing discriminated against when applying for 95% of jobs.
I can walk into most buildings without being questioned. Nobody has ever told me that I don't belong somewhere because of who I am.
While whites that live in poverty can face some discrimination compared to middle class whites, $100 in clothing is enough to fit in most public spaces without drawing any attention. Minorities can't do that.
Those are the most obvious things, but they also mean that my economic and social standing basically went up my entire life by just being polite and working. That builds on itself, and while not all white men are successful. Being white isn't one of their hurdles.
All of those things are advantages compared to people who are not white males.
load more comments
(9 replies)
I don't know your situation, but I certainly can tell you that at least in the Western Hemisphere, in the aggregate descendants of indigenous people and slaves are overcoming systemic injustice that robbed their ancestors of economic advantages, dignity, and liberty, and often introduced intergenerational trauma as well. And I don't mean, like, in the past, redlining for example was legal within our parents lifetime and related forms of discrimination are still practiced today.
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(9 replies)
Some people can be trusted with some responsibility, and others can't.
view more: next ›