4 ms·

I had the same reaction to the South photo. I often wonder how much of what I see today as "normal" will be perceived as horrible / offensive / wrong in 50 yea

by cpayne 11y ago

I had the same reaction to the South photo. I often wonder how much of what I see today as "normal" will be perceived as horrible / offensive / wrong in 50 years time. Gay marriage is an obvious one, (Australian) treatment of refugees, anything else?

justinator 11y ago
Our use of non-renewable energy sources, or just even the use of gasoline/diesel in personal automobiles. It wasn't that long ago that leaded gasoline was a thing.
- meowface 11y ago
  Ignorance regarding energy and lead can stem from lack of scientific advance. When there's only a little bit of evidence suggesting lead is neurotoxic, compared to a mountain of it, it seems like less of a threat. By contrast, there's really no ethical excuse for why anyone in any time period would seek to ban gay marriage or racial integration.
  - justinator 11y ago
    I mean, that's cool. The question I was answering was, > I often wonder how much of what I see today as "normal" > will be perceived as horrible / offensive / wrong in 50 > years time. And technologies that are polluting our environment for selfish gains fits! I'm sure we could dig [0], and find a majority who thought ethnic groups were somehow not actually 100% human and thus, OK to treat as such, and only with scientific evidence, that was overturned - perhaps that was the #1 excuse for abuse of ethnic groups, and I'm talking genocidal proportions. There are people who now still don't believe being gay isn't anything but a choice someone makes. Which I'm sure you and I know understand as a bat-shit crazy stance. I mean, you tell me - how long ago was it that the majority around you thought along similar lines when it came to trans-folk? A few months? Do you think scientific evidence is going to help, or hurt these people live much better lives? [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Untermensch https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Untermensch
tikhonj 11y ago
The other way around is even more interesting to me: what taboos now aren't absolutely necessary? What will be allowed in the future which is virtually unthinkable today? I hope there's a lot more of that than the opposite.
- Kristine1975 11y ago
  More drugs getting legalized? Incest no longer being taboo? Polygamy?
WildUtah 11y ago
"Gay marriage is an obvious one, (Australian) treatment of refugees, anything else?" I'm pretty sure gay marriage will be seen as just as normal and wholesome in 50 years as it is today or even more so. Though there will be fewer gay people if the theory that homosexuality is genetic proves out unless we have a boom in surrogacy. The German and EU treatment of supposed refugees will be seen as a tragic moment, probably. Australia's current policy will be the one that any rich liberal nations that persist in being rich and liberal in fifty years will have chosen. Look at the UN population projections. It's clear that indiscriminate migration will overwhelm nations with lower than sustainable birth rates. Those that import many millions of people from backwards nations with extra high birth rates will see their founding populations reduced to tiny minorities and their countries newly backwards. Prohibition is the obvious choice.
- dctoedt 11y ago
  > Though there will be fewer gay people if the theory that homosexuality is genetic proves out unless we have a boom in surrogacy. Or unless homosexuality correlates with some combination of genetic traits carried by heterosexuals --- if that turned out to be the case, then we'd expect gay people to continue to be born from time to time, due purely to the mix-and-match reproduction of heterosexuals, even if no gay person ever had children.

by cpayne 11y ago

justinator 11y ago

Our use of non-renewable energy sources, or just even the use of gasoline/diesel in personal automobiles. It wasn't that long ago that leaded gasoline was a thing.

meowface 11y ago
Ignorance regarding energy and lead can stem from lack of scientific advance. When there's only a little bit of evidence suggesting lead is neurotoxic, compared to a mountain of it, it seems like less of a threat. By contrast, there's really no ethical excuse for why anyone in any time period would seek to ban gay marriage or racial integration.
- justinator 11y ago
  I mean, that's cool. The question I was answering was, > I often wonder how much of what I see today as "normal" > will be perceived as horrible / offensive / wrong in 50 > years time. And technologies that are polluting our environment for selfish gains fits! I'm sure we could dig [0], and find a majority who thought ethnic groups were somehow not actually 100% human and thus, OK to treat as such, and only with scientific evidence, that was overturned - perhaps that was the #1 excuse for abuse of ethnic groups, and I'm talking genocidal proportions. There are people who now still don't believe being gay isn't anything but a choice someone makes. Which I'm sure you and I know understand as a bat-shit crazy stance. I mean, you tell me - how long ago was it that the majority around you thought along similar lines when it came to trans-folk? A few months? Do you think scientific evidence is going to help, or hurt these people live much better lives? [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Untermensch https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Untermensch

tikhonj 11y ago

The other way around is even more interesting to me: what taboos now aren't absolutely necessary? What will be allowed in the future which is virtually unthinkable today? I hope there's a lot more of that than the opposite.

Kristine1975 11y ago
More drugs getting legalized? Incest no longer being taboo? Polygamy?

WildUtah 11y ago

"Gay marriage is an obvious one, (Australian) treatment of refugees, anything else?" I'm pretty sure gay marriage will be seen as just as normal and wholesome in 50 years as it is today or even more so. Though there will be fewer gay people if the theory that homosexuality is genetic proves out unless we have a boom in surrogacy. The German and EU treatment of supposed refugees will be seen as a tragic moment, probably. Australia's current policy will be the one that any rich liberal nations that persist in being rich and liberal in fifty years will have chosen. Look at the UN population projections. It's clear that indiscriminate migration will overwhelm nations with lower than sustainable birth rates. Those that import many millions of people from backwards nations with extra high birth rates will see their founding populations reduced to tiny minorities and their countries newly backwards. Prohibition is the obvious choice.

dctoedt 11y ago
> Though there will be fewer gay people if the theory that homosexuality is genetic proves out unless we have a boom in surrogacy. Or unless homosexuality correlates with some combination of genetic traits carried by heterosexuals --- if that turned out to be the case, then we'd expect gay people to continue to be born from time to time, due purely to the mix-and-match reproduction of heterosexuals, even if no gay person ever had children.