3 ms·

I think it's valuable to have multiple lenses. One thing I feel has increased dramatically over the last few decades is that if you use the wrong lens when spe

I think it's valuable to have multiple lenses. One thing I feel has increased dramatically over the last few decades is that if you use the wrong lens when speaking the wrong audience then a witch hunt ensues. Something about the internet has enabled tribalism without personal liability, which is a powder keg of situation that leads to the sort of political outcomes we are currently seeing.

DonHopkins 10y ago
There's no value in looking through what you believe is a "current hysterical liberal lens", when it actually makes you act hysterically dramatic and reinforces your inaccurate prejudices against liberals. cm2187: Can you provide some actual proof that liberals believe that anyone who thinks or suggests otherwise than what you're dramatically parodying should be silenced? Or are you just being as hysterical as you accuse liberals of being?
- cm2187 10y ago
  It sounds dramatically parodying but the reality is that it is pretty much the liberal line for the gender pay gap. As the article suggests there might be many explanations for the married man pay gap that may not involve discrimination. However for the gender gap most large companies have made up their mind. And where I work I am being asked at the end of the year in my appraisal, what have I done to reduce this discrimination. That pretty much qualifies as forced thinking in my book. Agree or do not get paid or promoted. This thinking only looks outrageaous if you replace "gender" by "married man".
  - DonHopkins 10y ago
    I asked for proof, specifically. Link? Not to Alex Jones's web site, because he's just a performance artist playing a character. Are you, too?
  - DonHopkins 10y ago
    So no proof, just more hysteria, then accusations that you're being silenced, then when I ask you again for the proof you refused to provide, you go silent. Nobody's silencing you, you're just being downvoted because you're acting the exact same way you're accusing other people of acting, because you can't prove they're acting that way, but your own words and actions prove you're actually acting that way yourself. That's called "psychological projection".
- dasil003 10y ago
  Your first sentence does not track to me, you're conflating the observer's lens and the lens he's observing. "hysterical" is just editorial, the actual lens in question is just the current popular liberal worldview. And yes, it's possible to believe that that lens has value while simultaneously recognizing that some people use it like a weapon to bludgeon anyone who doesn't conform to the party line. Maybe you think the first comment is in poor taste, but I encourage you to soberly consider: is cm2187 a chauvinist pig at war with equality, or is he a disinterested humorist pointing out an absurdity?

DonHopkins 10y ago

There's no value in looking through what you believe is a "current hysterical liberal lens", when it actually makes you act hysterically dramatic and reinforces your inaccurate prejudices against liberals. cm2187: Can you provide some actual proof that liberals believe that anyone who thinks or suggests otherwise than what you're dramatically parodying should be silenced? Or are you just being as hysterical as you accuse liberals of being?

cm2187 10y ago
It sounds dramatically parodying but the reality is that it is pretty much the liberal line for the gender pay gap. As the article suggests there might be many explanations for the married man pay gap that may not involve discrimination. However for the gender gap most large companies have made up their mind. And where I work I am being asked at the end of the year in my appraisal, what have I done to reduce this discrimination. That pretty much qualifies as forced thinking in my book. Agree or do not get paid or promoted. This thinking only looks outrageaous if you replace "gender" by "married man".
- DonHopkins 10y ago
  I asked for proof, specifically. Link? Not to Alex Jones's web site, because he's just a performance artist playing a character. Are you, too?
- DonHopkins 10y ago
  So no proof, just more hysteria, then accusations that you're being silenced, then when I ask you again for the proof you refused to provide, you go silent. Nobody's silencing you, you're just being downvoted because you're acting the exact same way you're accusing other people of acting, because you can't prove they're acting that way, but your own words and actions prove you're actually acting that way yourself. That's called "psychological projection".
dasil003 10y ago
Your first sentence does not track to me, you're conflating the observer's lens and the lens he's observing. "hysterical" is just editorial, the actual lens in question is just the current popular liberal worldview. And yes, it's possible to believe that that lens has value while simultaneously recognizing that some people use it like a weapon to bludgeon anyone who doesn't conform to the party line. Maybe you think the first comment is in poor taste, but I encourage you to soberly consider: is cm2187 a chauvinist pig at war with equality, or is he a disinterested humorist pointing out an absurdity?