4 ms·

I think your interpretation of their statement is not something they would agree with. Which means you are arguing against a strawman. You are welcome to feel

I think your interpretation of their statement is not something they would agree with. Which means you are arguing against a strawman. You are welcome to feel that you have no responsibility to consider the difficulties other people have gone through. However, you may have a harder time connecting and relating to other people as a result. And that implies many other potentially undesirable ramifications...

lacampbell 9y ago
You are welcome to feel that you have no responsibility to consider the difficulties other people have gone through. However, you may have a harder time connecting and relating to other people as a result. And that implies many other potentially undesirable ramifications... Your transparent attempt to assume the moral high ground has been noted. There is nothing in what I said that precludes me feeling empathy for individuals. Insinuating that - because I reject guilt via membership of demographic groups, I must have relationship difficulties or be a bad person - is reprehensible. If you are unable to make a point, you may find silence serves you best.
- dwaltrip 9y ago
  > Your transparent attempt to assume the moral high ground has been noted. I wasn't attempting to do so. I probably could have been a little more careful with my wording, though. > because I reject guilt via membership of demographic groups It's not "guilt". It's simply acknowledging legitimate societal dynamics, and being considerate of these things when interacting with others. Here's a basic example that I find very analogous: Imagine having friend who is currently struggling with money, and you have just received a large bonus. It seems very reasonable to be a bit more careful with how one shares the good news with this friend. In fact, it isn't hard to imagine a scenario in which one unintentionally comes off as a jerk if they didn't remember about the friend's situation. If someone has experienced very little discrimination in life, then how is it unreasonable to tread carefully when asking difficult and potentially naive questions about discrimination to those who have experienced a fair amount?
  - lacampbell 9y ago
    I wasn't attempting to do so. I probably could have been a little more careful with my wording, though. Alright, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. Here's a basic example that I find very analogous: Imagine having friend who is currently struggling with money, and you have just received a large bonus. It seems very reasonable to be a bit more careful with how one shares the good news with this friend. In fact, it isn't hard to imagine a scenario in which one unintentionally comes off as a jerk if they didn't remember about the friend's situation. If someone has experienced very little discrimination in life, then how is it unreasonable to tread carefully when asking difficult and potentially naive questions about discrimination to those who have experienced a fair amount? I can be sympathetic about the plight of an individual. But I am not of the opinion that living in a society full of people that belong to my groups is a net-negative for people that don't belong to my groups. Which seems to be the underlying assumption of wringing your hands over being a 'privileged white male'.
    - dwaltrip 9y ago
      > living in a society full of people that belong to my groups is a net-negative for people that don't belong to my groups This is not a statement I would ever make, or an analysis I would find valuable to explore. Trying to compare the overall net gains and losses that different groups in society receive from each other seems both incredibly impossible, as well as unable provide any concrete, actionable information. > wringing your hands over being a 'privileged white male'. Once again, I doubt the author of the linked article would agree with this characterization. To me, it seems the author is simply trying to be considerate about a touchy, complex issue. Being disappointed that the company one works for is lacking in diversity is NOT the same thing as being wracked with guilt over one's cultural background or privilege. Edit: Made a few tweaks and tried to make my points more clearly. Hopefully you weren't already replying.
      - lacampbell 9y ago
        Privilege is a left-wing conspiracy theory. It is not rigorously defined and has no consistent logical basis. Is my point clear? I reject the very notions upon which you want to base this discussion. If you don't see guilt and hand-wringing when you see Yesterday, I had a wide-ranging Slack conversation with some very nice people who patiently allowed this privileged white male to repeatedly touch the third rail of diversity and inclusion. then you are being deliberately obtuse. No self-respecting person would write that.

lacampbell 9y ago

You are welcome to feel that you have no responsibility to consider the difficulties other people have gone through. However, you may have a harder time connecting and relating to other people as a result. And that implies many other potentially undesirable ramifications... Your transparent attempt to assume the moral high ground has been noted. There is nothing in what I said that precludes me feeling empathy for individuals. Insinuating that - because I reject guilt via membership of demographic groups, I must have relationship difficulties or be a bad person - is reprehensible. If you are unable to make a point, you may find silence serves you best.

dwaltrip 9y ago
> Your transparent attempt to assume the moral high ground has been noted. I wasn't attempting to do so. I probably could have been a little more careful with my wording, though. > because I reject guilt via membership of demographic groups It's not "guilt". It's simply acknowledging legitimate societal dynamics, and being considerate of these things when interacting with others. Here's a basic example that I find very analogous: Imagine having friend who is currently struggling with money, and you have just received a large bonus. It seems very reasonable to be a bit more careful with how one shares the good news with this friend. In fact, it isn't hard to imagine a scenario in which one unintentionally comes off as a jerk if they didn't remember about the friend's situation. If someone has experienced very little discrimination in life, then how is it unreasonable to tread carefully when asking difficult and potentially naive questions about discrimination to those who have experienced a fair amount?
- lacampbell 9y ago
  I wasn't attempting to do so. I probably could have been a little more careful with my wording, though. Alright, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. Here's a basic example that I find very analogous: Imagine having friend who is currently struggling with money, and you have just received a large bonus. It seems very reasonable to be a bit more careful with how one shares the good news with this friend. In fact, it isn't hard to imagine a scenario in which one unintentionally comes off as a jerk if they didn't remember about the friend's situation. If someone has experienced very little discrimination in life, then how is it unreasonable to tread carefully when asking difficult and potentially naive questions about discrimination to those who have experienced a fair amount? I can be sympathetic about the plight of an individual. But I am not of the opinion that living in a society full of people that belong to my groups is a net-negative for people that don't belong to my groups. Which seems to be the underlying assumption of wringing your hands over being a 'privileged white male'.
  - dwaltrip 9y ago
    > living in a society full of people that belong to my groups is a net-negative for people that don't belong to my groups This is not a statement I would ever make, or an analysis I would find valuable to explore. Trying to compare the overall net gains and losses that different groups in society receive from each other seems both incredibly impossible, as well as unable provide any concrete, actionable information. > wringing your hands over being a 'privileged white male'. Once again, I doubt the author of the linked article would agree with this characterization. To me, it seems the author is simply trying to be considerate about a touchy, complex issue. Being disappointed that the company one works for is lacking in diversity is NOT the same thing as being wracked with guilt over one's cultural background or privilege. Edit: Made a few tweaks and tried to make my points more clearly. Hopefully you weren't already replying.
    - lacampbell 9y ago
      Privilege is a left-wing conspiracy theory. It is not rigorously defined and has no consistent logical basis. Is my point clear? I reject the very notions upon which you want to base this discussion. If you don't see guilt and hand-wringing when you see Yesterday, I had a wide-ranging Slack conversation with some very nice people who patiently allowed this privileged white male to repeatedly touch the third rail of diversity and inclusion. then you are being deliberately obtuse. No self-respecting person would write that.