You must log in or register to comment.
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.
Not giving both sides of an argument your platform to opine on if one of the sides is plainly bigoted and/or anti-scientific
“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.
i am not 100% confident but this question reminds me of the paradox of tolerance argument.
People often ask me how or why I work for a media company that works in front of recording footage if I have stage fright. One does not necessitate having to expect the other, which is good because there’s very little I can do work-wise.
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.
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.
It isn’t an “answer” to anything, it is necessary for a feeling of safety and togetherness in certain vulnerable people at certain times. You must get past the fact that you weren’t invited and accept that this is good for some of us. Give in a little, and take in so much more in the long run
No, that is a double-standard, it’s just a double-standard you’re arguing is justified.
it would be more of a double standard if the two groups were on equal footing, but they’re not.
The definition of a double standard is that it’s unjust. At least, in common English.
Mmmmm…meta-injustice…(drool)
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!
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.
My only argument against that stuff is make a whole new character or your just pandering disingenuously.
But for the most part I agree.
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.
Asking as a brown person, can you tell me what advantages white people are receiving that I’m not?
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.
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.
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.
That doesn’t make it systemic. It means there are morons out there, and some of them own businesses.
enough of them and it becomes systemic
Someone asked what the privilege was, and I told them one. Nobody said anything about systemic.
Tbc there are systemic injustices, just not mentioned here lol
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.
Well so far I haven’t been shot by any cops that I’ve interacted with, have not been discriminated against in employment, nor been questioned as to my presence in any building. But if you want to feel guilty, go ahead, it’s a free country. My dad came to this country with $6 in his pocket and did quite well.
Almost sounds insulting though, kinda smacks of telling minorities who succeed "oh, you did so good despite your obvious disadvantages. " Like that scene from Star Trek (2009) with the Vulcans giving Spock shit for having a human mother.
Well so far I haven’t been shot by any cops that I’ve interacted with
maybe you’re just not brown enough ! fat chance
So because you have not experienced those things, all non white people have? No.
As a white male I know I have privilege and use it to help those that don’t. When I see someone of color being shit on by people in power, like cops, or other people who think they’re above them, I step up in and say something at minimum.
K
If you don’t let white men have a space at the table they’ll make their own and they won’t let anyone else sit with them, just saying.
We already do, and have done, for centuries.
Sure that’s fair I’d argue a classist view is more suitable than a gendered one. Regardless, I’m talking more about within progressive circles. If you want the support of people not in your specific circumstances or ‘group,’ you need to support them in facing their issues. Some of the issues young men are facing are loneliness, feelings of worthlessness (not being able to provide) and social exclusion. You may personally think these are not issues, but young men very much do. By not supporting them in their causes you make it much harder to convince them to support you in yours. I think a suitable analogy can be found in the LGBT community. Gay people who aren’t trans support trans people and their issues while trans people who aren’t gay support gay people and their issues. The unity between these groups strengthens the overall movement.
It’s a messaging program. Liberals want to provide mental health care and improve the minimum wage. That directly addresses what those young men need.
Well… are they? Have they been? If not then there is still a need for it in progressive spaces
A need for what though? I guess I just don’t know what the ask is here.
A recognition that people are lonely? That it’s hard to provide for people? That message seems pretty alive in leftist spaces, no? Hating capitalism, building community, it’s kind of their thing.
This is why I think it’s a messaging problem. I think the solution is there, and it’s just not packaged up for these people in a simple to understand way.
Well not saying the kinda stuff said at the start of the comment chain would be a good start.
Some people can be trusted with some responsibility, and others can’t.
Four lefts aren’t a right, but three lefts are.
How about 4 slight lefts?
A bubble bastard. It sounds like a double standard, but it most certainly is not.
A triple standard
Binary
What about boolean though? /s
Men hitting women is different from women hitting men.
Nope, exactly the same.
It’s more common for a woman to hit a man as a self-defense, but this doesn’t mean women are not capable of an assault, it does happen and is no less violent.
We should look at the exact circumstances, not genders.
Bullshit. Nobody should hit anyone, and it’s illegal both ways.
So, if I hit Rhonda Rousey with my weak-ass jab and she uppercuts me through the ceiling in response, I should still be the one who gets the harsher punishment, right?
Dumbass misandrist logic. Just accept that no one should be hitting anyone and punish violent abusers equally.
Hahaha you chose the only argument that could’ve sounded dumber than the OP comment🤣
