Magdelin Laundry

[Solumina]

Originally Posted by AshleyO

Shouldn't we be going after Gothicus? I mean he DID just admit that he's everything we're against.

Any time he posts I don't see words I just hear the swishing of a cape and then he's gone, almost like it never happened.

[Despanan]

Originally Posted by AshleyO

Aye, fuck you too, broheim!

YOU SHUT YOUR MOUTH I AM THE DUNGEONMASTER! I WILL SEND OGRES AFTER YOU!

[Jonathan]

Originally Posted by Versus

How much? Specifically, how much has the civil rights era laws against discrimination impacted racism today?

I don't know! I'll be the answer is at least "some" though!

Actually, you specifically asked me that and I said it was an improvement. And it's a little odd that, in regard to that improvement's impact, I can show you evidence towards the current situation. But when you vaguely say "an improvement is an improvement," you are allowed to speak in all-or-nothing terms.

A small improvement is better than none at all. Those aren't all-or-nothing terms.

I didn't accuse you of doing such, nor is that what I asked. Please reread the question or admit you are avoiding it.

OK then, accusations of racism were unfounded. Figured as much.

[AshleyO]

Die mega, block jawed bile guzzler! I tap four blue!

Eat it.

[Despanan]

Originally Posted by AshleyO

Die mega, block jawed bile guzzler! I tap four blue!

Eat it.

Johnathan: Roll a saving throw.

[AshleyO]

Fuck it. I got TRAMPLE.

[Saya]

Originally Posted by Despanan

Yes, but they aren't useful when you're making a very important statement about reality. You can't use feelings, fear and trauma and other stuff we can't articulate as evidence in order to argue that an entire race of people are physically or virtually deficient.

When did I say that its physically incapable for white people to know? All I've said is a) we have no frame of reference to relate to PoC with when it comes to PoC with. We only have the frame of reference of opressors. We can't relate to it because we don't experience it.

I'm not sure I understand what you mean here. I think I'd probably have to talk to a linguist to get some context on this. Can you elablorate/ I don't want to presume.

Did you ever read 1984? Do you remember that part where a colleague of the protagonist was talking about taking words out of the dictionary? Because if people don't have the words to voice dissent with, they can't voice dissent at all?

On a more personal experience with this, I always knew that heteronormativity was a thing and it was wrong, but I could never ever articulate it well. When I learned the word, it was awesome because not only could I avoid long winded analogies and explanations, I could sum it all up in one word. Its a word we created to identify a problem.

Cissexism was similar. I used to go on long tangents when something was cissexist, and it got to a point where I saw cissexism so much but couldn't really point it out because I didn't have the time or the energy to try and explain. Then I learned the word, and I'm much happier for it. Its also awesome because I know there's more articulate people out there who feel the same thing and find words for it. I know I'm not alone when we find words and share them. Its not that heteronormativity or cissexism didn't matter before, it was very very relevant, its just that for a very long time it was not safe for queer people to be out and having these discourses, we have a lot of work to do to equip ourselves with the language necessary to voice dissent.

Its also like when I was younger I internalized biphobia to the point where I really did treat my relationships with women as less than my relationships with men, relationships with women don't count because I'm probably just doing it for attention and I can't be sure of my sexuality at such a young age, etc etc. I never heard differently until I was older and could label my experience accordingly. I couldn't dissent because I didn't know how.

No, white people experience racism. Usually not directly, but we observe it's results. When I was mugged and beaten in the face with a pistol and called a N***** by my assailant, I was not experiencing that black people experience it, rather it was rebounding and being rebroadcast to me through a filter, but it was still racism.

Its still a very very small sample in the grand scheme of things, and filtered through. Ever hear of the book Save The Pearls? The author justifies blackface and racism in the book because once she got called the n word, therefore she knows what racism is. She doesn't.

Its like saying men get sexism because they get called pussy. Sad that it happens but its no where near the level of oppression women face.

I think you are making a serious categorization error here: you are fusing what is polite and appropriate with what is true. They aren't the same things.

As a while person, I can't really be sure if what I know and how I'm saying it is true.

If Versus says a sentence, and then I say the same sentence, it can be considered rude, or even racist depending upon that sentence's content, but it has no effect whatsoever on the truth value of the statement.

But you never know for sure if what Versus said in once instance is true again in another instance, because there's too much nuance and variety to account for that we are ignorant of.

There's other reasons why obama can't be aggressive in that debate. Mainly that he's largely a water-down version of Romney, and also he's so far ahead in his lead that all he has to do is not fuck up and he'll win.

Last poll I got from reuters said he and Romney are neck in neck in swing states, where it really matters.

I can't see Obama as a watered down Romney. He's no socialist, but shit life is going to be radically different for women, queers and PoC under Romney if he gets elected.

Obama was aggressive in his debates with McCain (though I'm sure he had to worry about being seen as an angry black man then as well).

It would be ridiculous to demand that you demonstrate that elevators are scary on an empirical level (though you can, very easily) But no, I'm not going on your feeling and experiences, because I knew about the A+ situation before ever meeting you.

Um, we never met. And that happened while we were both on Gnet. And a lot of assholes wouldn't take it at face value that elevators are scary. And it wasn't really what she was trying to say anyway, she said she wasn't scared, it was mine and Solumina's point on why its a bad idea to solicit women in elevators.

Umm...I have racist experience to relate to, both in direct observation of it, and being the target of it's blowback. Now that I have been victimized and assaulted by the NYPD, I can begin to extrapolate what some people who have been in similar situations might feel. Is it exact? certainly not, but no two experiences are alike, and you have no right to police my feelings anymore than I have a right to police yours and so we are at an unprovable empass. See the problem?

Getting arrested isn't equatable to being afraid of police all your life. Its not equatable to knowing that because of the colour of your skin, the police can lynch you and face no repercussions. Its not the same as being blamed for your own murder because you were wearing a hoodie. Its not the same as being told that you won't be getting a rrape kit because it takes two to tango so it probably didn't happen. You have one or two small experiences, but in both situations you would be treated way better than if you were black because thats what privilege is. My family is the result of assimilation and genocide and I'll never get it because its way too watered down and filtered for me to really relate.

Yes but it's not useful for making an objective determination about the abilities of another. That's the point. You're making a serious categorization error, as I said before.

The presence of errors does not prove that those errors are a result of an inherent inability to understand.

The consistancy of errors does. The inability to understand is repeatable, time and time again. I have never ever met a cisman who really understands sexism. Lots of men are good about it and sympathetic and listen, but they know they don't really understand and don't pretend to.

[Despanan]

Originally Posted by Solumina

It is also really important to know that no matter how much time and energy you put into learning a language unless you are a native speaker you will never know and understand it as well as a native speaker. You can learn to be fluent and to communicate easily but there will be things beyond your understanding, most of them will be subtleties, little grammar quirks, obscure slang, or words that have the same definition but slightly different connotations.

Okay, now prove this claim empirically. See the problem?

[Despanan]

Saya, before we continue this can you please address my first point in the trifecta as to why your argument fails?

Because you still have not addressed the fact that it's contradictory. and I'd rather you take these on in order, I numbered them 1-3 for a reason.

[Solumina]

You want me to link you studies of native vs non-native speakers?

I will but you'll have to give me time, I no longer have access to CNU's database (apparently you get locked out of the system if you don't use it for over a year) so it may take a while.

[Jonathan]

Despanan I got an 8. Did I just turn into a whale, and is it awesome?

[Solumina]

Not exactly what I was looking for (and it has an unfortunately small sample size) but still very applicable to the discussion http://ilabs.washington.edu/kuhl/pdf..._Kuhl_2003.pdf, I'll still keep looking thought

[Despanan]

Originally Posted by Jonathan

Despanan I got an 8. Did I just turn into a whale, and is it awesome?

Oh you are fucked now

[Versus]

Originally Posted by Jonathan

I don't know! I'll be the answer is at least "some" though!

Okay. Now can you please tell me:

1) Why mentioning the progress in the civil rights movement is part of your argument that currently wealth has a bigger impact then race on PoC if you can't describe how it effects the current impact of race on PoC

2) Why the fuck you can compare racism with ANYTHING if your evidence about it's current state is, by your own fucking admission, beyond your understanding.

[Versus]

Originally Posted by Versus

Okay. Now can you please tell me:

1) Why mentioning the progress in the civil rights movement is part of your argument that currently wealth has a bigger impact then race on PoC if you can't describe how it effects the current impact of race on PoC

2) Why the fuck you can compare racism with ANYTHING if your evidence about it's current state is, by your own fucking admission, beyond your understanding.

Damn. When I'm good, I'm good.

[Solumina]

Well fuck, not having database access is really fucking frustrating, I keep finding abstracts that are really promising but I need a subscription to see the article itself and those things are fucking expensive. I don't have it in me to deal with particularly aggravating research at the moment, especially when it isn't even benefiting me so I'm going to go do all of the things I've been putting of doing today.


V, even when you're bad you're good.

[Versus]

Yeah. I'm definitely going to remember that one for the next time I hear it.

[Jonathan]

Originally Posted by Versus

Okay. Now can you please tell me:

1) Why mentioning the progress in the civil rights movement is part of your argument that currently wealth has a bigger impact then race on PoC if you can't describe how it effects the current impact of race on PoC

2) Why the fuck you can compare racism with ANYTHING if your evidence about it's current state is, by your own fucking admission, beyond your understanding.

1. It was in part a response to Saya's webcomic that seemed to be retort to my own tongue in cheek post about generational wealth. It was to affirm that yes, things used to be very bad. I posted a small list of protected classes to show that there are clear differences between the world 2 or 3 generations ago and the current one.

2. Factors such as access to education opportunities and jobs can be withheld based on financial means, in very direct ways. Factors like credit score or immediate vicinity property values in the case of ownership. That doesn't even have to pretend be subtle or insidious, it is out and proud - you get a flat out no because one's economic standing isn't up to par. (really interesting filter here)

[Versus]

Originally Posted by Jonathan

I posted a small list of protected classes to show that there are clear differences between the world 2 or 3 generations ago and the current one.

I understand what the outline differences are. What you are withholding is what the tangible differences are. What has the relevant items on that list done to change racism? You are withholding because, as you just said, you don't know and are making an assumption. Which is why when you say:

2. Factors such as access to education opportunities and jobs can be withheld based on financial means, in very direct ways. Factors like credit score or immediate vicinity property values in the case of ownership. That doesn't even have to pretend be subtle or insidious, it is out and proud - you get a flat out no because one's economic standing isn't up to par. (really interesting filter here)

It does not answer my question, so I'll try to rephrase it for you.

How can you compare wealth, a value that you understand, to racism, a value that you just admitted you do not understand? How can you come to your conclusion?

Go ahead. I'll wait.

[Jonathan]

Well, a tangible difference is you can point at wealth or the lack thereof without much confusion. We don't have to make assumptions or inferences from non-overt or subtle manifestations of a phenomena.

[Versus]

Excuse me, did you just say that you have to (as in, impossible not to) make assumptions to understand the impact that something like equal opportunity has had? And if so, does that mean that if I provide you with a direct cause and effect, that you are wrong?

Also, you haven't answered my question.

[Jonathan]

We can make an assumption that something like equal opportunity is good and has had a good impact, which nobody is questioning here. Zooming in on any particular case, it seems it would be difficult to establish direct causality, in the sense of "But for this, that never would have happened". Some things are just really tough to quantify. I'm not going to say it's impossible since I don't know what you are clearly waiting to pull out of your sleeve in a home-run forum shaking revelation of me gettin' served.

[Versus]

I heard that if I win an argument, racism will be ended forever.

So, that just leaves how you made your assertion that wealth has a bigger impact then racial inequality on PoC when you yourself do not understand racial inequality.

Still waiting.

[Jonathan]

When you win the argument and end racism forever, wealth disparity will be a bigger social problem by default if nothing else. This paradox will destroy us all.

[AshleyO]

This will be the frame of the American communist revolution.