• Our software update is now concluded. You will need to reset your password to log in. In order to do this, you will have to click "Log in" in the top right corner and then "Forgot your password?".
  • Welcome to PokéCommunity! Register now and join one of the best fan communities on the 'net to talk Pokémon and more! We are not affiliated with The Pokémon Company or Nintendo.

Minority Rights vs Human Rights or something

Hackenfall Backslash

The weirdest mofo you'll ever meet . . . seriously
67
Posts
9
Years
I say the conversation needs to be dropped. I'm gon' say some things that most people won't like. That's fine. Like I said, I'm not here to make friends or butter up to people. Disclaimer: The following post is likely to offend you and/or hurt your feelings. It contains brutal honesty, truth and accountability. Reader discretion is advised.

Racial Privilege and Racism: If you're a minority, get over it. Do certain races enjoy certain ... uh ... social benefits and a generally positive world image? Yes. Rather than lean on them for repatriations and neat bonuses you don't really deserve, how about promoting positive image and change within your own race? Every time I see someone critical of, say, whites, I laugh. Because their race likely keeps hanging around whites, wants to live in white countries, and the like. So shut up. I'm not even white and I'm tired of hearing/reading this ♥♥♥♥. It's old news. I know playing the perpetual victim is fun, but you need to let it go. It's one thing if you're trying to better yourself/your race and whites are preventing that. That's a hostile action, and NOW you're being oppressed. Until that day, pull your weight, do what you're supposed to and shut the ♥♥♥♥ up. If you insist on hanging around whites/living in white countries, leave. They shouldn't have to change for you unless they're being hostile towards other races.

Male Privilege: If you're a woman, get over it. It's not privilege. Rights without responsibility is privilege. The definition is: "a special right, advantage, or immunity granted or available only to a particular person or group of people". Yes, historically, men ran ♥♥♥♥. That wasn't an immunity. These were roles. These were responsibilities.

"But what about the 1800s? Only men could own land and vote! Patriarchy!"

No. And before you go there, women were not treated as property. They weren't considered legal persons. Back then, the legal definition of a person was someone who could own land, and fight in wars. Were women lining up to fight on the frontlines? Inb4 "men wouldn't let them because patriarchy!". They were not. Even today there aren't a lot of infantry-women. There are some, sure. The US Marine Crops Female Engagement Team (Lioness Squad), but if someone declares war on America, the fighting capabilities of the nation will be measured by how many men are ready and able to fight. Not women. There simply aren't enough women to fight in an organised war. It's different with Operation (Insert-Catchy-Name-Here) because there are smaller conflicts spread over a vast area. Try a Female Engagement Team back in World War 2. Wouldn't go well.

When I was in the military, there were females with high PT scores. There were females who were squared-away. Guess what? They were respected, just the same as any male trainee (in Basic at the time). When they acted stupid, they were informed, same as the males. But I digress.

What women have is privilege. I'm not going to cite any references or examples because I shouldn't have to. Anyone capable of decent observation will know what I mean. There is no privilege with responsibility, which is what men had in the past, and have to this day. Do you think the "deadbeat dad" cliche came out of thin air? No. It comes from a man not providing (by choice or circumstance) for his family. Biologically speaking, a man that couldn't provide was worthless. It's not exactly farfetched to see just how prehistoric the human race still is in regard to man-woman relations.

Cis/Gender Privilege: I'm not even wasting my time. Stop being so sensitive. Yes, a lot of folks will find you strange. Me personally? I don't care. I really don't. Again, unless the anti-LBGT crowd is hostile to you in any way, you need to deal with it. Don't like it? Tough. That's life.

That's all I feel like saying. I'm sure SOMEONE will pick apart what I said and twist it around to fit their victim narrative. In anticipation of that, I'll summarise my arguments below.

Race: White people did some ♥♥♥♥. It's old news. Let it go. The same people that are being "held down by whitey" are the same people living in white nations, going to white schools and affiliating white people/companies/organisations. Choose one. Can't have both. Either stay away from them or leave them the hell alone, UNLESS, as I've already said, it ventures into aggressive, KKK territory.

Sex/Gender: Men have power, but also responsibility. Until I see feminists tackling male issues (instead of tackling female issues claiming they help males too without evidence to support this), until I see feminists talking about the courts or marriage laws, until I see open and honest dialogue taking place without the 'M' word being used, until I see women going for STEM and other hard degrees and being prohibited from obtaining them (essentially proof of the wage gap/employment gap), you lot will get no quarter from me. Either practice equality or don't, but be honest about it for Christs' Sake!

Sexuality: Your sexual identity/orientation is seen as strange (or queer, as the true definition means 'strange'). No one cares as much as you think they do. Only religious whackjobs with nothing better to do. I certainly don't care. I personally find gay males much easier to deal with than straight ones. Let people say what will about you, but defend yourself if need be. Okay? OKAY!
 
Last edited:
5,983
Posts
15
Years
Yet another thread about human rights that has devolved into MRAs attacking Feminism instead of discussing how to help their fellow man. :^)

I don't think many of us actually identify as MRAs, it's pretty obscure off the internets (nothing is obscure on the internets).

I think the reason that many of us identify as wanting to fight for "human rights" instead of "minority rights" is because they are sick and tired of the divisive discourse that surrounds the debate they hear on social justice. It might be a great cause and all, but people can get tired of anything if it's abrasive enough. Much of internets social justice is really really bad packaging. Everybody needs something to argue about.
 

Keiran

[b]Rock Solid[/b]
2,455
Posts
13
Years
I don't think many of us actually identify as MRAs, it's pretty obscure off the internets (nothing is obscure on the internets).

I think the reason that many of us identify as wanting to fight for "human rights" instead of "minority rights" is because they are sick and tired of the divisive discourse that surrounds the debate they hear on social justice. It might be a great cause and all, but people can get tired of anything if it's abrasive enough. Much of internets social justice is really really bad packaging. Everybody needs something to argue about.

Sorry, but you don't 'fight' for human rights by doing things like telling minorities to "just get over" institutionalized racism. Just about all of the divisiveness in these threads is coming from the anti-SJ folks. No one is telling men how to deal with their issues (in fact most feminists encourage men to speak up about it??), and y'all need to relax when it comes to the policing of how other groups of people deal with theirs. I mean..look at the Men's Rights thread...instead of discussing the issues men face and what can be done about them...the thread was almost entirely about bashing activism...just like every other human rights related thread.

I also think a lot of you are confusing trolls for actual feminists...which explains the undeserved hate Tumblr gets. A lot of those images circulating the internet of "crazy SJW rants" are almost always anti-Feminists. For example, the trending Twitter hashtag about "ending fathers day" was actually a 4chan prank trying to make feminism look bad. These sorts of people are everywhere. The sad thing is, people are so desperate to get their anti-SJW rocks off that they'll gobble it up and believe it - why? Misogyny, most likely.


tldr: You all need to stop being so bitter about what women and other groups of people do to deal with their oppression, and until then no one will take your "human rights" seriously.
 

Star-Lord

withdrawl .
715
Posts
15
Years
And actually, I take Klonopin, but thanks for the suggestion.

Get your dosage checked imo you seem awfully worked up over nothing.



Man, you are one huge victim, and it's actually kind of sickening. You're limiting the scope of those jokes to the worst of the worst - just like any social justice warrior who plays the "privilege" card would.

??????????????????? I have absolutely no idea how you came to this conclusion. Me not thinking certain jokes are funny doesn't mean I'm a victim at all like... what the hell? lol.



Nope, doesn't move me one bit. You being repulsed by the female body tells me one of two things, and I'm keeping both of them to myself. I didn't touch on it because it's meaningless.

Feminism helped me realize that saying I'm repulsed by the female body is in fact a bad thing? That's hardly meaningless.

Sexuality: Your sexual identity/orientation is seen as strange (or queer, as the true definition means 'strange'). No one cares as much as you think they do. Only religious whackjobs with nothing better to do. I certainly don't care. I personally find gay males much easier to deal with than straight ones. Let people say what will about you, but defend yourself if need be. Okay? OKAY!

I'd totally believe you if it weren't the fact that people have threatened to kick the ♥♥♥♥ out of me for being gay. Like you add that part about "defending yourself if need be" but it completely contradicts the earlier because we wouldn't need to defend ourselves if people "truly didn't care as much as we think they did"
 

Hackenfall Backslash

The weirdest mofo you'll ever meet . . . seriously
67
Posts
9
Years
It contained none of those things. Brutal maybe, but certainly not honest.
It contained all of those things. You might want to look up the definition of the words. I won't argue with you though. I don't need to. At least two people agree, and given the fact you didn't even read what I wrote, you're irrelevant.

Ahem . . .

mtv-next-500-1386344677.jpg

My opinion:

Human rights= treating everyone the same regardless of skin colour, gender sexuality etc.

Minority rights= Treating everyone differently based on their labels and incorrectly blanket terming non-minorities as privileged in an attempt to shame them for historical occurences. It's born of the same mentality shared by people of the past but tipped in the opposite direction. Not progressive at all.
How can we progress with whitey keepin' us down? We need jobs we're not qualified for and special incentives because we're victims of the white-ocracy!
 
4,181
Posts
10
Years
I also think a lot of you are confusing trolls for actual feminists...which explains the undeserved hate Tumblr gets. A lot of those images circulating the internet of "crazy SJW rants" are almost always anti-Feminists. For example, the trending Twitter hashtag about "ending fathers day" was actually a 4chan prank trying to make feminism look bad. These sorts of people are everywhere. The sad thing is, people are so desperate to get their anti-SJW rocks off that they'll gobble it up and believe it - why? Misogyny, most likely.

There are "feminists" that seriously try to push the "women above men" agenda though. A vocal minority, but one that only harms people who actually want so that they give off a bad impression of feminism.
 

Keiran

[b]Rock Solid[/b]
2,455
Posts
13
Years
There are "feminists" that seriously try to push the "women above men" agenda though. A vocal minority, but one that only harms people who actually want so that they give off a bad impression of feminism.

Okay, I understand that. But those people need to be ignored and not used as a prop for anti-feminist arguments.
 

Star-Lord

withdrawl .
715
Posts
15
Years
yawn @ most of that but anyway

If I saw two gay people kissing I would not want to see it and would leave the area. Not attack them or anything, just leave. Is that an acceptable level of homophobia?

Yes and No. I think it's fine not to like the act of kissing another guy, I guess. I mean I don't see what the big deal is (I kiss girls despite being gay), but I think leaving is kind of silly when gay people don't really do that when straight couples kiss. It's like it's expected that they just sort of grow up and deal with it.

Anyway, a bit off track, what I was going to say was that your personal experience should not be the basis for sweeping calls for political action for minorities.

The fact I nearly got beat up for no sole reason other than I'm gay is not a reason for political action? Really? Do you think it's acceptable to just be silent in the face of stuff like that?

No, but minorities think so and want to base the world off of "the individual that attacked me was white, whites are the problem" rather than "this one dude hurt me but I should only blame him, not the majority of peaceful people that he belongs to."

Nobody thinks that all straights/whites/whatevers will do that. But the fact still lies in that I've never been threatened to be beat up for being gay by ANOTHER GAY PERSON, only straight people. That's the entire point.
 

Star-Lord

withdrawl .
715
Posts
15
Years
Congratulations with the whole "yawn @ most of that" comment. If you can't take other peoples opinions seriously don't expect them to do the same for you.

It's not so much "seriously" as much as I'm not interested/have the time to read about ~700 words of stuff that ultimately always seems to miss the point. I've read many of your posts before and the general trend is I find that they're way too wordy and lack substance, sorry.



"Nobody thinks all whites are guilty of assaulting homosexuals but because they threatened to do it to me but gays haven't they're still the problem".
I take issue that you blame your grievances on being gay and the other person being straight rather than the other person just being an ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥.

I don't... do that. You've been misunderstanding the point. Gay people are aware that not all straight people do that? Or else we wouldn't have straight friends (Which would be tough) but we're also allowed to be WARY since this NEVER happens with gay people.

Sure, hate crimes happen but they shouldn't be treated differently from crimes motivated by other reasons. So no, I don't think because someone got beat up for being a certain way requires a whole political movement to seek reparations.

speechless really.

You're no more special than victims who get attacked for other reasons. Imagine "the kids who got teased for having glasses" starting a movement.

Not at all comparable considering that contacts are a thing that exist and that eyeglasses bullying is hardly a thing beyond the playground.

They couldn't help being bullied for their poor eyesight but they learnt to either a) report it to authority so it could be handled like any other harmful behaviour

You do realize there's been times things like this have been reported by minorities and haven't had it taken seriously because THEY'RE A MINORITY right?

b) deal with being attacked for who they were.

This is a disgusting mindset to think this is acceptable.

It can happen to anyone, even me, a straight, white, male. I got bullied and ostracised in school for being who I was, a quiet, weak dork but I can identify that it was just the problem of a few mean people, not their shallow features like skin colour.

Everybody knows this.

As I said before I have a lot of confidence in authority to deal with issues for minorities like any other problem, moreso than if someone who was not a minority claimed they had faced crime or discriminatory behaviour.

Yeah that sure explains why racial profiling in the states is still a thing.
 
10,078
Posts
15
Years
  • Age 32
  • UK
  • Seen Oct 17, 2023
Do you think it's better to fight specifically for the rights of minorities (think lgbt people or poc) or to fight for general, all encompassing "human rights"?

Personal Position:
My viewpoint is that focusing on minority rights is necessary in order to balance human rights as a whole.

Reasoning/Evidence:
Without focusing somewhat on the problems that individual groups face, it can be hard to actually understand what is happening to them. My personal experience, as far as human rights go, is centered around LGBT rights - I know that the people who were on the fence about their feelings needed time and plenty of talks to help understand my point of view, and the differences in my life. I would assume I can extend this need to the nation in general; there are people in my country that are still 'on the fence' about homosexuals as they have little/no actual experience of them, they have real understanding of negatives of identifying as gay, openly.

There is one solid advantage that the LGBT community has over other minorities - the fact it is (more often than not) a hidden attribute. It is not a skin colour or a religious accessory that is so easily spotted. Whilst I do not personally know how it feels, I would imagine that their persecution, and fears relating to this, are even greater.

Assuming that exposure is the key, splitting up human rights into facets and minorities is the only real way to educate and highlight key differences. Whilst human rights should definitely be drilled home too, it doesn't help anyone understand religious traditions, ways of life, or the pain and suffering that group go through.

Some people will always go to the extreme - maybe its a sense of doing whatever it takes to gain their rights they deserve, or maybe it's an individual power trip. What needs to be remembered is that individuals do not normally act for the group. Their actions should not reflect on those doing things peacefully. In some ways, I think our news/journalists are to blame for constantly focusing on the extreme variants of protests. Some channels and newspapers definitely handle extremism and protesting in different ways - recently I would say BBC has done a good job at tackling issues of different groups (for example, they have many documentaries on BB3 aimed at the late-teen generation, which are normally quite informative).

Responses:
Moogles said:
Or else we wouldn't have straight friends (Which would be tough) but we're also allowed to be WARY since this NEVER happens with gay people.

Alas, there definitely are homophobic people even in the gay community. There's also (at least, in my community) a slight divide between gays and lesbians - let alone the fact that transgender, which is totally separate IMO, is not 100% accepted amongst us despite being a key part of LGBT.

Limerent said:
You're no more special than victims who get attacked for other reasons. Imagine "the kids who got teased for having glasses" starting a movement. They couldn't help being bullied for their poor eyesight but they learnt to either a) report it to authority so it could be handled like any other harmful behaviour or b) deal with being attacked for who they were.

I feel you have a point, but we should make a distinction here. Bullying at a school level is not the same as bullying at an adult level. Whilst children are learning, they make mistakes and these things happen - of course they should be dealt with swiftly, but they happen. In an adult environment, say a work place, the stakes are a lot higher - racism or homophobia could lead to you not getting a job, missing a promotion, being belittled by your colleagues and actually becomes a crime.

Yes, bullying in school might be considered a crime too, but I believe the scale is different and significant.

Conclusion (tdlr):
Minority rights should eventually lead to equal human rights. Focusing on groups may help educate people on the problems they face, and hopefully realise the injustice themselves. Sometimes, too much focus is put on extremist groups rather than your typical citizen, and some minority groups definitely get overshadowed by LGBT and some forms of racism. Hopefully this is a problem that can be addressed in the future, as a win for one majority group should (in theory) help the others too - paving the way forward to equality.
 
Last edited:
68
Posts
9
Years
  • Age 31
  • Seen Nov 2, 2014
I've met one openly gay person in real life

Read this very carefully. I'm just saying, if you're straight and have only ever met one openly gay person, maybe you're not the best person to talk about how gays should feel or how they should handle the oppression they face?

Caller_100, science lady, do you think what men did to you in the lab was socially acceptable? Would management or public opinion been approving of their actions? Definitely not. There are a few bad apples but it's not the fault of a certain gender. I'm actually concerned that women have certain powers over men. You had a basis for reporting those men but women can use the threat of fabricated male abuse and get us in trouble when we've done nothing wrong but nobody would believe us. For me that is an MRA issue of action without merit/evidence based on stereotypes which is why I'm against the power minorities want to hold and expand over policy makers and management.

Thank you for this part, though. Thank you for listening to what I was saying and then making a response. I'm fine agreeing to disagree with you - I just don't want my argument misrepresented, so thank you.

I didn't actually ever report anyone - it wasn't like it was anything I couldn't deal with or that I needed to tattle for. =) And I should also say that the majority of men in my classes/workspaces have been wonderful people, and I'm not blaming all males as a group for how a minority of males treat women. When I say that men are inherently privileged, I'm not trying to make a moral statement at all. Most men aren't misogynistic jerks, thank goodness. Some men are, but that's not even a point I'm trying to make. That's a completely separate issue from the issue of privilege (okay, maybe not COMPLETELY, but I think it can be left out for now).

I guess I just want to make the distinction between what you're saying and what I believe. I don't want minorities or any group to have more powers, rights, privileges, respect, you name it, than another. The end goal is equality. But I think that minority rights' groups are important because they give a strong, concentrated voice to people who have historically had their opinions neglected. It's important to listen to those opinions and give them equal weight to the views of the majority (white/men/straight/etc.). If it feels like people are giving more weight to the views of minorities, I think that's mostly because giving any weight at all to the views of minorities is a shift in the status quo. But really, anyone with any sense (and there will always, unfortunately, be extremists on both sides of an argument) really just wants to give everyone's views equal weight, not to put one group above another.
 

Neil Peart

Learn to swim
753
Posts
14
Years
But really, anyone with any sense (and there will always, unfortunately, be extremists on both sides of an argument) really just wants to give everyone's views equal weight, not to put one group above another.

Those same people with "any sense" would call themselves egalitarians, IF they had any sense.
 
287
Posts
11
Years
The rights of all groups must be approached on a case-by-case basis. As has been already established, different groups have differing needs. To deny that this individualization is essential is basically like saying you could take just one medication for everything. Doesn't work like that, different medications are used for different health problems.
 
286
Posts
10
Years
I don't wanna sound childish, but I didn't type up that long post for it to be ignored, and I'd appreciate a reply, even if it is just to bow out (especially if you're both going to continue posting in this thread with points I've already countered).

Also, I find it funny that you (Undertaker, Alex and Limerent) are basically arguing against yourselves. Nobody else in this thread has said that privilege means that you can't have problems or anything of the sort, and yet you still insist on arguing as if we have. Being privileged does not mean that you're a bad person and I never said that in any of my posts, so could all of you PLEASE stop playing the victim card.


"I'm a straight white cis male and minorities getting angry at oppressors makes me uncomfortable because I'm too up my own ass to admit that maybe I have it a little better than some people". Grow up dude. I don't know why you have such a weird internalised paranoia (I'm still laughing at "minorities can get away with it") but you need to suck it up and take a look at the bigger picture.

You're no more special than victims who get attacked for other reasons. Imagine "the kids who got teased for having glasses" starting a movement. They couldn't help being bullied for their poor eyesight but they learnt to either a) report it to authority so it could be handled like any other harmful behaviour or b) deal with being attacked for who they were.
People with glasses don't have history of being persecuted and oppressed the same way poc, lgbt people and women do. Make fun of someone with glasses, you're a bully. Make fun of someone for being gay, you're contributing to and the product of an oppressive system that's existed for generations.

That last part is... awful, honestly. As someone who is gay, being told to "deal with" homophobia is incredibly offensive and I think you should try and open your eyes a little more instead of being blind to the struggles of other people.

Is that an acceptable level of homophobia?
No level of homophobia is acceptable.


So what I'm gathering from your posts is that you think that gay and straight people are equal in society? Am I right in saying that? I'd really like a straight answer here.
 
Last edited:
5,983
Posts
15
Years
Sorry, but you don't 'fight' for human rights by doing things like telling minorities to "just get over" institutionalized racism. Just about all of the divisiveness in these threads is coming from the anti-SJ folks. No one is telling men how to deal with their issues (in fact most feminists encourage men to speak up about it??), and y'all need to relax when it comes to the policing of how other groups of people deal with theirs. I mean..look at the Men's Rights thread...instead of discussing the issues men face and what can be done about them...the thread was almost entirely about bashing activism...just like every other human rights related thread.

I also think a lot of you are confusing trolls for actual feminists...which explains the undeserved hate Tumblr gets. A lot of those images circulating the internet of "crazy SJW rants" are almost always anti-Feminists. For example, the trending Twitter hashtag about "ending fathers day" was actually a 4chan prank trying to make feminism look bad. These sorts of people are everywhere. The sad thing is, people are so desperate to get their anti-SJW rocks off that they'll gobble it up and believe it - why? Misogyny, most likely.

tldr: You all need to stop being so bitter about what women and other groups of people do to deal with their oppression, and until then no one will take your "human rights" seriously.

Well, that's just the thing. Nobody likes being told what to do. And it's a shame really that on the internet (I will have to use this qualifier over and over again) that this is what activism turns into. Armchair activism with young folk who feel entitled to tell other people what to do. When it comes down to what matters, I don't think most people feel are actually misogynistic or are against the rights of those less privileged. Most of our discussion here is based on what goes on in the internet. It's very meta, but unfortunately hardly applicable to the real world. When was the last time anybody talked about pride parade? Or instances of racism as they've experienced it (I made a thread about that way back in the day)? The discussion here is so abstract and ungrounded in reality, so much that it descends into people criticizing each other because I feel that there's nothing substantial to talk about.

People react to people telling them what to do, what to feel, what kind of language to use, and I feel that's what our "MRAs" here are really reacting against. I imagine that a lot of people, on the internet especially, really don't like the idea of people telling them how to do things. At the end of the day it's just a whole lot of posturing about nothing which is why it is in my opinion that these sort of internet activism things (like the ones you see in social media among friend groups) are useless. I mean, the point of activism is to change beliefs, and if you aren't accomplishing that then something's wrong, right? There's a million ways to be active for the causes you value, but unfortunately on the internet too many people only know how to do one thing too well.

And in addition, there is a whole ♥♥♥♥ton of baiting going on. You will have people say extreme things they will then take back - we even have examples of this in D&D. People on both "sides" of the argument (but like I've said it's an argument about nothing, and most of these people are probably on the same side of the human rights spectrum). People end up overstating whatever it is they believe just to make a point, but the more of that occurs and the more people take it seriously, the less the discussion is based in reality and the less it means. Like, this isn't productive, is it? Any of it? I personally don't care about any one person's opinion, because it doesn't mean anything. In the big picture, what counts is making the cause attractive and easy to understand. That is what activism is to be all about.
 
Last edited:

Oryx

CoquettishCat
13,184
Posts
13
Years
  • Age 31
  • Seen Jan 30, 2015
False. As long as you don't hurt anyone, deny them employment based on irrelevant factors or verbally abuse them you can have whatever opinion you'd like. I am allowed to not like you, or people like you.

You're talking about what's "allowed", not what's acceptable. In addition, you aren't in a position to tell another person what they find acceptable and unacceptable. What you "can" do is very different from what you "should" do. I can walk up to strangers on the street and tell them that I hate them for no reason at all. However, I wouldn't find that acceptable behavior. A friend can lie to me and tell me they'll meet me somewhere, and then have me go out of my way to meet them and never show up. However, I'd find that behavior unacceptable and there would be a consequence - the loss of my friendship.

You can be homophobic, but that doesn't mean anyone has to accept it, and hopefully most people won't because it's an abhorrent position to stand for. Unfortunately the grim reality is plenty of people will accept it, because our society still espouses a lot of homophobic ideals. Doesn't mean Grey Wind has to accept homophobia though.
 
68
Posts
9
Years
  • Age 31
  • Seen Nov 2, 2014
Hate crimes are not more important than other crimes. It doesn't deserve special attention. I don't care if you get hurt in a street robbery or homophobic attack. They deserve the exact same response from the police and judicial system. If it's the same action it deserves the same level of punishment regardless of motive.

Okay, treat them the same in terms of punishments under the law, but the motive still needs to be addressed. If a crime occurred due to homophobia, than obviously homophobia is an issue that needs to be addressed.

99% of the people that existed in "oppressive" time periods are dead. What you want is revenge/special treatment because most of society is not against you.

We've said this several times: No one wants revenge. No one wants "special" treatment. Just equal treatment. That's what we're arguing for. You're arguing against an argument that no one here is making.

Yes there are anti-discrimination laws. That's obviously a big deal. But that doesn't mean that a lot of people aren't still prejudiced, even if just a little bit. And that little bit builds up.

Have you tried filing a police report, a complaint to your workplace ombudsman (not employer) or school administration if you're being discriminated against? I bet you haven't, all you do is scream at the population who aren't responsible for your troubles.

We're adults. We expect other adults to take responsibility for their thoughts and actions without always needing to tattle-tale on them.

False. As long as you don't hurt anyone, deny them employment based on irrelevant factors or verbally abuse them you can have whatever opinion you'd like. I am allowed to not like you, or people like you.

But in the end, if someone dislike someone purely because of their sexuality, that still makes them a terrible person. Nothing you can do about it legally if they're not hurting anyone, but that doesn't make it okay.

Laws shouldn't be based off accommodating people for inconsequential factors like skin colour, sexuality or gender. That's the epitome of discrimination. But nope, you think that's ok because minorities are always oh so oppressed by us evil non-minorities.

Exactly, laws should treat everybody the same, regardless of skin color, sexuality, or gender. Sometimes they don't (gay marriage, for example), and that's a problem, but the problem extends a lot further than just the law. None of us here have argued for laws that would oppress non-minorities. We've argued that sometimes non-minorities and minorities alike have biases that sometimes make many aspects of life a little or a lot more difficult for minorities.
 
68
Posts
9
Years
  • Age 31
  • Seen Nov 2, 2014
Legally you are treated equally. Apart from gay marriage, which I oppose on the grounds that relationships shouldn't require state recognition and should be no different than two people of any creed signing a contract to own a property.

Wait, wait. You oppose gay marriage because... you think everyone has the right to be in a relationship? I'm confused.

Making legislation to specifically protect minorities is not equal, it's discriminatory.

Not if the minorities are already facing increased discrimination. Then it's just equalizing the playing field.

Blanket statements that "all gays are treated worse off than straights" are just individual opinion really

Again, not what we're saying. We're saying straight people don't face discrimination for being straight, not that being straight automatically makes every aspect of your life sunshine and gumdrops.

I'm really trying to explain this the best I can. But what keeps happening is that Grey Wind and I are telling you about something that we experience every day of our lives and you're denying that it exists. How can you deny that something that people actually experience isn't real? It's like if I told you I have a dog and you told me I didn't. Um, yes I do? It's right there.
 
Back
Top