5 ms·

What about a queer person in Eastern Oregon who wants Oregons more progressive laws, rather than living under Idahos?

Grishnakh 10y ago
When in Rome... If you're that out-of-step with the people around you, you'd be better off just moving, instead of trying to force everyone around you to adopt your mindset. Minorities don't have a right to force their views on the majority, though they do have a right to basic civil rights. But there's only so much change that's feasible: attitudes take generations to change, since you usually have to wait for the people with the wrong attitudes to literally die out. Also, I'm not saying that eastern Oregonians actually want to join Idaho, I don't know because I don't live in eastern OR. This is just an example. That's why I proposed a referendum with so many different choices: maybe the people there would prefer to join with eastern WA only, and not be part of ID at all. I would, however, support a tax credit (not deduction) for anyone moving because of redrawn state borders.
- ZanyProgrammer 10y ago
  Sure just give them a six figure Bay Area tech job so they can afford to move.
  - Grishnakh 10y ago
    Portland doesn't cost nearly as much to live in as the Bay Area. And you do realize there's other places in the country to live, right? There's tons of moderately-progressive cities across the nation that don't cost that much. Austin is a pretty good example.
    - ZanyProgrammer 10y ago
      The point being that moving is expensive in general. I recently moved back to Portland from the Bay Area for a decent paying tech job, and it still cost me an arm and a leg. A lower cost of living doesn't mean that it's cheap to move. Also people need to learn to live with minorites and give them rights. Applying radical Wilsonian determination to the US sounds very libertarian.
      - Grishnakh 10y ago
        No, it'll be free to move. Did you miss the part about a tax credit that I proposed? As for living with minorities, there's only so much you can legislate, and if you push too much, you get a big backlash and the next thing you know, Republicans control both houses of Congress, state legislatures, and Ted Cruz is President. There's a lot of things people need to do. They need to abandon hip-hop music and religion too, and they also need to build a Moon base, and they really need to build me a giant mansion in Hawaii. I'm going to be waiting around a long time for people to do all these things I think they need to do.... >Applying radical Wilsonian determination to the US sounds very libertarian. And trying to marginalize people you don't agree with sounds very authoritarian.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
- objclxt 10y ago
  > If you're that out-of-step with the people around you, you'd be better off just moving, instead of trying to force everyone around you to adopt your mindset That's some real victim blaming there. By your logic, if I'm being sexually harassed by my employer I should just change jobs. I shouldn't complain, or try to enact any real, meaningful change and stay in my current job - no, I should voluntarily leave due to their illegal behavior. I hope you're not a manager or CEO, because frankly your solution to an employee coming to you complaining about discrimination seems to be to just tell them to get another job. > Minorities don't have a right to force their views on the majority, though they do have a right to basic civil rights That depends on their views. If your view is backed by the law, then yes, you do have the right to force your view on the majority. I think you have confused the fact the views of many minorities are basic civil rights, like the right to not be discriminated against. Someone who is trans probably believes they should be treated the same as somebody who is cis. Given that view is enshrined in law, I'm pretty sure they have a right to enforce it on the majority. > But there's only so much change that's feasible: attitudes take generations to change, since you usually have to wait for the people with the wrong attitudes to literally die out. Except with your plan, everyone experiencing discrimination has moved away, so these attitudes never die out because there's nobody to correct the behavior in the first place. > I would, however, support a tax credit (not deduction) for anyone moving because of redrawn state borders ...which would effectively mean the government is subsidizing discrimination. You are bribing minorities to move out of areas discriminating against them, at great cost to them (finding a new job, a new place to live, etc) and at zero cost to those who wanted them out in the first place.
  - logfromblammo 10y ago
    As the employee experiencing the illegal/unethical behavior, you actually would be better off just changing jobs, if you don't have a union or government agency to back you up every moment of the remainder of your career with that company. It isn't fair, but that's the way it is. If the 800-pound gorilla steals your peanut, you don't fight him for it. You just go find yourself another peanut and eat it more quickly. Evasion favors the weaker party more than a toe-to-toe, blow-for-blow battle. It's very difficult to be the minority, no matter where you are, unless you have a synthetic tribe to back you up. You don't have to run away, per se, but you do need to go to ground with your people whenever it becomes necessary. If you don't have enough friends, or the friends you have don't have enough power, you basically have to back down on everything, right or wrong. That's the way the real world works. You can live in the world that is, and you can dream about the world that you want, but it is unwise to confuse the two.
- philwelch 10y ago
  > Minorities don't have a right to force their views on the majority, though they do have a right to basic civil rights. That will probably be a relevant point in another 200 years when we've addressed the "basic civil rights" thing. As of 2016 it's a bit theoretical still.

When in Rome... If you're that out-of-step with the people around you, you'd be better off just moving, instead of trying to force everyone around you to adopt your mindset. Minorities don't have a right to force their views on the majority, though they do have a right to basic civil rights. But there's only so much change that's feasible: attitudes take generations to change, since you usually have to wait for the people with the wrong attitudes to literally die out. Also, I'm not saying that eastern Oregonians actually want to join Idaho, I don't know because I don't live in eastern OR. This is just an example. That's why I proposed a referendum with so many different choices: maybe the people there would prefer to join with eastern WA only, and not be part of ID at all. I would, however, support a tax credit (not deduction) for anyone moving because of redrawn state borders.

ZanyProgrammer 10y ago
Sure just give them a six figure Bay Area tech job so they can afford to move.
- Grishnakh 10y ago
  Portland doesn't cost nearly as much to live in as the Bay Area. And you do realize there's other places in the country to live, right? There's tons of moderately-progressive cities across the nation that don't cost that much. Austin is a pretty good example.
  - ZanyProgrammer 10y ago
    The point being that moving is expensive in general. I recently moved back to Portland from the Bay Area for a decent paying tech job, and it still cost me an arm and a leg. A lower cost of living doesn't mean that it's cheap to move. Also people need to learn to live with minorites and give them rights. Applying radical Wilsonian determination to the US sounds very libertarian.
    - Grishnakh 10y ago
      No, it'll be free to move. Did you miss the part about a tax credit that I proposed? As for living with minorities, there's only so much you can legislate, and if you push too much, you get a big backlash and the next thing you know, Republicans control both houses of Congress, state legislatures, and Ted Cruz is President. There's a lot of things people need to do. They need to abandon hip-hop music and religion too, and they also need to build a Moon base, and they really need to build me a giant mansion in Hawaii. I'm going to be waiting around a long time for people to do all these things I think they need to do.... >Applying radical Wilsonian determination to the US sounds very libertarian. And trying to marginalize people you don't agree with sounds very authoritarian.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
objclxt 10y ago
> If you're that out-of-step with the people around you, you'd be better off just moving, instead of trying to force everyone around you to adopt your mindset That's some real victim blaming there. By your logic, if I'm being sexually harassed by my employer I should just change jobs. I shouldn't complain, or try to enact any real, meaningful change and stay in my current job - no, I should voluntarily leave due to their illegal behavior. I hope you're not a manager or CEO, because frankly your solution to an employee coming to you complaining about discrimination seems to be to just tell them to get another job. > Minorities don't have a right to force their views on the majority, though they do have a right to basic civil rights That depends on their views. If your view is backed by the law, then yes, you do have the right to force your view on the majority. I think you have confused the fact the views of many minorities are basic civil rights, like the right to not be discriminated against. Someone who is trans probably believes they should be treated the same as somebody who is cis. Given that view is enshrined in law, I'm pretty sure they have a right to enforce it on the majority. > But there's only so much change that's feasible: attitudes take generations to change, since you usually have to wait for the people with the wrong attitudes to literally die out. Except with your plan, everyone experiencing discrimination has moved away, so these attitudes never die out because there's nobody to correct the behavior in the first place. > I would, however, support a tax credit (not deduction) for anyone moving because of redrawn state borders ...which would effectively mean the government is subsidizing discrimination. You are bribing minorities to move out of areas discriminating against them, at great cost to them (finding a new job, a new place to live, etc) and at zero cost to those who wanted them out in the first place.
- logfromblammo 10y ago
  As the employee experiencing the illegal/unethical behavior, you actually would be better off just changing jobs, if you don't have a union or government agency to back you up every moment of the remainder of your career with that company. It isn't fair, but that's the way it is. If the 800-pound gorilla steals your peanut, you don't fight him for it. You just go find yourself another peanut and eat it more quickly. Evasion favors the weaker party more than a toe-to-toe, blow-for-blow battle. It's very difficult to be the minority, no matter where you are, unless you have a synthetic tribe to back you up. You don't have to run away, per se, but you do need to go to ground with your people whenever it becomes necessary. If you don't have enough friends, or the friends you have don't have enough power, you basically have to back down on everything, right or wrong. That's the way the real world works. You can live in the world that is, and you can dream about the world that you want, but it is unwise to confuse the two.
philwelch 10y ago
> Minorities don't have a right to force their views on the majority, though they do have a right to basic civil rights. That will probably be a relevant point in another 200 years when we've addressed the "basic civil rights" thing. As of 2016 it's a bit theoretical still.