Nobody has anything to say about Blizzard?

Definitely cynical, not narrow minded though. I've tried extremely hard to try and figure out where these people are coming from. No matter what way I look at it it makes absolutely no sense to me.

"

DarthSki44 wrote:

The NFL dealt with this (and continues to a lesser degree) with the kneeling during the national anthem by all-around selfish jerk Colin Kaepernick.

Honestly, the Kapernick thing reminds me a lot more of Rosa Parks. She went against the social norm and while it did eventually lead to change anyone unwilling to accept that racism is still a problem so many years later isn't willing to own their personal bias and prejudice.

Standing up to, (or kneeling in his case) injustice is something everyone can get behind - and a silent protest at that, no raging on twitter, no blogs full of angst, no recruitment drive.

But not everyone sees the injustice, and many would rather turn a blind eye.

Not even less than 100 years ago Black American Men were thought to be incapable of learning to fly or operate complex machinery. The only reason that changed was because there were men willing to stand up in the face of that adversity and prove how wrong that perception was.

Just a few hours ago I was reading about two police officers who accosted this young couple because apparently their young 4 year old had taken a doll. The one time I remember I shoplifted as a child I didn't even realize what I had done, I hadn't yet learned the concept of paying for something or ownership or how stores worked I was too young.

The overly aggressive confrontation was almost surely a skin color issue. I'm not sure if its a deep-seeded hatred or outright fear of darker skin. Of course, maybe the person(s) in question were simply going to take out their aggression given the opportunity.

But I bet if the people were a lighter skin color the police in question would have acted far more reasonable.

"

SeCKSEgai wrote:

"

DarthSki44 wrote:

The NFL dealt with this (and continues to a lesser degree) with the kneeling during the national anthem by all-around selfish jerk Colin Kaepernick.

Honestly, the Kapernick thing reminds me a lot more of Rosa Parks. She went against the social norm and while it did eventually lead to change anyone unwilling to accept that racism is still a problem so many years later isn't willing to own their personal bias and prejudice.

Standing up to, (or kneeling in his case) injustice is something everyone can get behind - and a silent protest at that, no raging on twitter, no blogs full of angst, no recruitment drive.

But not everyone sees the injustice, and many would rather turn a blind eye.

Not even less than 100 years ago Black American Men were thought to be incapable of learning to fly or operate complex machinery. The only reason that changed was because there were men willing to stand up in the face of that adversity and prove how wrong that perception was.

Just a few hours ago I was reading about two police officers who accosted this young couple because apparently their young 4 year old had taken a doll. The one time I remember I shoplifted as a child I didn't even realize what I had done, I hadn't yet learned the concept of paying for something or ownership or how stores worked I was too young.

The overly aggressive confrontation was almost surely a skin color issue. I'm not sure if its a deep-seeded hatred or outright fear of darker skin. Of course, maybe the person(s) in question were simply going to take out their aggression given the opportunity.

But I bet if the people were a lighter skin color the police in question would have acted far more reasonable.

Again, and the reason I brought up this example, the message is totally fine, and social justice / equality is something to fight for.

Just do it in your own time. Start your own organization, hold your own press conference, ect...

Dont insult the American Flag, our Veterans, and those serving society to protect us. I dont even care if you say that's not what the message was about, because that's how it looks.

Pardon me if I dont weep for the millionaire dude, with every advantage, that has his mind poison by his GF, and now hates America. He sure as fuck loved it before as the cash rolled in.

Anyways dont want to get to sidetracked here, but Kapernick is no Rosa Parks or MLK. Give me a break.

"

DarthSki44 wrote:

Again, and the reason I brought up this example, the message is totally fine, and social justice / equality is something to fight for.

Please caveat that with "equality of opportunity" because it's the exact opposite of equality of outcome which most people are resisting.

And rightfully so.

Thinking the opposite of MLK is what MLK stood for is on the verge of idiocracy.

"

MLK wrote:

I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: "We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal." I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave owners will be able to sit down together at a table of brotherhood. I have a dream that one day even the state of Mississippi, a state, sweltering with the heat of injustice and sweltering with the heat of oppression, will be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice. I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. I have a dream today.

All social justice wariors went "woops" when they go over the bolted part i imagine.

Peace,

-Boem-

"

Boem wrote:

"

DarthSki44 wrote:

Again, and the reason I brought up this example, the message is totally fine, and social justice / equality is something to fight for.

Please caveat that with "equality of opportunity" because it's the exact opposite of equality of outcome which most people are resisting.

And rightfully so.

Thinking the opposite of MLK is what MLK stood for is on the verge of idiocracy.

"

MLK wrote:

I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: "We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal." I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave owners will be able to sit down together at a table of brotherhood. I have a dream that one day even the state of Mississippi, a state, sweltering with the heat of injustice and sweltering with the heat of oppression, will be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice. I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. I have a dream today.

All social justice wariors went "woops" when they go over the bolted part i imagine.

Peace,

-Boem-

A fair point, but outcome is inherently skewed from the social bias (conscious or not) to begin with.

People are not born as bigots or with bias, but they are born ignorant. Society teaches them from there.

I'm fairly certain most people believe we should all be treated fairly and equally in general, but what that actually means varies greatly from experience and region, to cultural acceptance, and societal norms.

It's a tricky path to navigate when looking at it globally, and considering multiple value systems.

"

DarthSki44 wrote:

A fair point, but outcome is inherently skewed from the social bias (conscious or not) to begin with.

People are not born as bigots or with bias, but they are born ignorant. Society teaches them from there.

I'm fairly certain most people believe we should all be treated fairly and equally in general, but what that actually means varies greatly from experience and region, to cultural acceptance, and societal norms.

It's a tricky path to navigate when looking at it globally, and considering multiple value systems.

I dont even understand how you can say "people are not born with bias", because it is so blatantly wrong and easily proven to be false.

Everybody exhibits bigotry towards their perceived out-group and that's a good thing, it means that a father or mother is more likely to save his own child when put in front of the question "save your own child or a random child".

Equality of opportunity has nothing to do with bias or with prejudice, because its a moral sentiment of the judiciary and not of the social fabric.
That's why the depictions of "justitia" are blindfolded in ancient sculptures.(the goddess in PoE is derived from her statue for example)

It's up to the judiciary to combat excessive bias within institutions in the form of randomized jury's picking members from a random assortment of people within the social fabric.

Nobody is prosecuted by law for being a bigot or for his prejudice, but is when he takes physical action based on that.

A KKK member for example has bigotry towards all non-white ethnic groups but is not taken into custody for that because we live in a free society, however when he infringes on somebody else his rights by acting upon that bigotry he is taken to the judiciary where everybody is "equal in front of the law" and judged "by a group of his peers".

Social fabric is incapable of functioning without bigotry and bias, because they are fundamental survival traits humans have.(showing favor to your in-group in opposition of outgroups)
Racial bigotry is simply a derivative of this basic human trait or perhaps we should call it a "weaponization" of this basic trait.

That's why classical liberals say "we will never get rid of bigotry", since they aknowledge human nature. We don't have to like it and everybody is free to associate with whomever they want, up to the point where they infringe on somebody else his rights.

And this makes the current social movement dangerous, since it wants to exalt social groups above others instead of putting them all equally next to one another and being "collorblind" as we used to call it.

To think people are born blank slates has been disproven quite some time ago.
I think it's generally accepted that a combination of nature vs nurture gives rise to the human experience.

A child is born with in-group preference, but wether it turns into collorblindness true cultural teachings or collorbias is most likely more accurate though i would have to look up the current science on it.

Peace,

-Boem-

"

Boem wrote:

"

DarthSki44 wrote:

A fair point, but outcome is inherently skewed from the social bias (conscious or not) to begin with.

People are not born as bigots or with bias, but they are born ignorant. Society teaches them from there.

I'm fairly certain most people believe we should all be treated fairly and equally in general, but what that actually means varies greatly from experience and region, to cultural acceptance, and societal norms.

It's a tricky path to navigate when looking at it globally, and considering multiple value systems.

I dont even understand how you can say "people are not born with bias", because it is so blatantly wrong and easily proven to be false.

I couldnt disagree with you more here. There are no studies or scientific data that indicate racism, bias, bigotry, or prejudice are genetic or inherited traits.

Children are taught these things based in their environment, their culture, society overall.

You are not a racist at birth. That is preposterous.

"

DarthSki44 wrote:

You are not a racist at birth. That is preposterous.

Prejudice isn't racism.

Racism is a form of prejudice.

And prejudice is a form of discernment and making sense of the world.

that's why a child walks toward his mother when given the choice and not to some random stranger before the ego and language centers are developed.(bias between the known and unknown)

All this to say, yes humans are born with prejudice and bias and thats a good thing, it's why we survived up to this point.
you can look at studies of aposomatic signals and children if your interested in evolution and innate prejudices or bias.

your bassicaly saying evolution didn't happen because it is a continual repetition of prejudice between option A and B.
Alternatively if you don't believe in free will one could argue the world or nature itself is biased and humans evolve based on that notion of bias, which still doesn't change anything.

It still ends up with us having innate prejudices passed down the generation in order to sustain the species.(entire concept of self-preservation goes here)

Peace,

-Boem-

"

Boem wrote:

"

DarthSki44 wrote:

You are not a racist at birth. That is preposterous.

Prejudice isn't racism.

Racism is a form of prejudice.

And prejudice is a form of discernment and making sense of the world.

that's why a child walks toward his mother when given the choice and not to some random stranger before the ego and language centers are developed.(bias between the known and unknown)

All this to say, yes humans are born with prejudice and bias and thats a good thing, it's why we survived up to this point.
you can look at studies of aposomatic signals and children if your interested in evolution and innate prejudices or bias.

your bassicaly saying evolution didn't happen because it is a continual repetition of prejudice between option A and B.
Alternatively if you don't believe in free will one could argue the world or nature itself is biased and humans evolve based on that notion of bias, which still doesn't change anything.

It still ends up with us having innate prejudices passed down the generation in order to sustain the species.(entire concept of self-preservation goes here)

Peace,

-Boem-

Its simply impossible. You are saying prejudice is a genetic trait past down. That's insanity imo, and I've never seen any responsible science to back that up, or any genes identified as pre-racist or prejudice sensitive, or similar.

Unless you are talking about the most basic survival traits, which have nothing to do with our conversation at all really. Sure I guess I'm prejudice against fire becuae it may burn me, or a lion because it could eat me, but again, not what we are talking about in even a remote sense.

Are you really suggesting that I may, at birth, identify another race as dangerous from my own race, as part of discernment? With no context or experience. Just flat out, racial prejudice, day 1, as part of human instinct?

It's quite the argument, one that I think extremists would embrace. "Listen, we are born this way, its survival"

"

DarthSki44 wrote:

"

Boem wrote:

"

DarthSki44 wrote:

You are not a racist at birth. That is preposterous.

Prejudice isn't racism.

Racism is a form of prejudice.

And prejudice is a form of discernment and making sense of the world.

that's why a child walks toward his mother when given the choice and not to some random stranger before the ego and language centers are developed.(bias between the known and unknown)

All this to say, yes humans are born with prejudice and bias and thats a good thing, it's why we survived up to this point.
you can look at studies of aposomatic signals and children if your interested in evolution and innate prejudices or bias.

your bassicaly saying evolution didn't happen because it is a continual repetition of prejudice between option A and B.
Alternatively if you don't believe in free will one could argue the world or nature itself is biased and humans evolve based on that notion of bias, which still doesn't change anything.

It still ends up with us having innate prejudices passed down the generation in order to sustain the species.(entire concept of self-preservation goes here)

Peace,

-Boem-

Its simply impossible. You are saying prejudice is a genetic trait past down. That's insanity imo, and I've never seen any responsible science to back that up, or any genes identified as pre-racist or prejudice sensitive, or similar.

Unless you are talking about the most basic survival traits, which have nothing to do with our conversation at all really. Sure I guess I'm prejudice against fire becuae it may burn me, or a lion because it could eat me, but again, not what we are talking about in even a remote sense.

Are you really suggesting that I may, at birth, identify another race as dangerous from my own race, as part of discernment? With no context or experience. Just flat out, racial prejudice, day 1, as part of human instinct?

It's quite the argument, one that I think extremists would embrace. "Listen, we are born this way, its survival"

Your claim was children aren't racist at birth and i agree.

My statement was that children have prejudices at birth, which is why i started of with discerning the difference between prejudice and racism.

Prejudice simply means a preference between two available option which might or might not be based on incomplete information.

It's not my fault that you stated my claim wrong you know?

Bias isn't the same as racism, similar to how prejudice isn't the same as racism. They can be racist but they aren't inherently only in a niche scope of their meaning.

For example :

When you ask a random person on the street to assemble a basket team and give them four options of five players each who will compete against one another.

You tell them, if your chosen team wins, you get 100$ from me and the available options are

-five black men
-five white men
-five black women
-five white women

Most people will answer with "ill go for the five black men" because of prejudice and bias, but not racism or sexism.

Because statistically speaking it gives the best odds to win the bet.

Their aim is to win the money, not discriminate based on race or gender.
They are using prejudice and bias but they are not employing racism(racial hatred based on that discernment)

Perhaps im being obtuse about it, but i think it's quite important nowadays to highlight these differentiations i thought were commonplace knowledge five years ago. Not saying you don't know btw, but perhaps people read this that didn't.

So yeah children aren't born racist, that's not what i said or implied.

Peace,

-Boem-

edit : your trying to conflate "prejudice" "bias" and "racism" as if they all mean the same thing.
They don't and i assume you know this.