4 ms·
> This is uncomfortable, but it’s possible we have to allow people to say disparaging things about gay people if we want them to be able to say novel things abo
by jordanpg 9y ago
> This is uncomfortable, but it’s possible we have to allow people to say disparaging things about gay people if we want them to be able to say novel things about physics.
What about all the novel things about physics that we won't ever hear from the gay people who are forced out of physics because of a life-threatening climate of hate and bigotry?
- amsheehan 9y agoWhat about whataboutism?
- amdavidson 9y agoJust because a person uses the words "What about" does not make their argument whataboutism. Their argument is 100% relevant to the sentiment that was expressed. If the stated benefit of excluding one group to allow for the free expression of the other is increased scientific discourse, how do we balance that against the loss of discourse from the excluded?
- fvdessen 9y agoSam is asking people to be more inclusive of different ideas, not excluding one group for the benefit of the other. I don't quite get how one jumps from 'we have to tolerate different ideas' to 'people will be excluded'. How does tolerating different ideas excludes people ?
- carapace 9y ago"allow people to say disparaging things about gay people" tolerating [this] different ideas excludes [gay] people
- amdavidson 9y agoIt's trivially easy to imagine this from the opposite perspective. Imagine you worked in a 90% gay office, and it was tolerated to disparage you and remark on the vile nature of your heterosexuality on a daily basis. Only an exceptionally strong willed person would stay very long and it still probably would reduce their output of novel ideas. The argument is not, and should never be, that we should fire people for their thoughts. If someone is strongly socially conservative, that's their right. But is is perfectly reasonable to require people to leave those conversations at home when they head into the office.
- kelukelugames 9y agoI'm okay with comedians writing bad jokes or telling them during open mic. Our society is somewhat tolerant of that. Al Franken did get elected after his rape joke was published. Though in hindsight that is an awful example. But the unreasonable people saying "gay people are evil" are not even pretending to be joking. They have killed. So I think Sam lacks empathy. Try this thought exercise. Replace the word "gay" in Sam's essay with "white" or whatever group you belong to. How does that make you feel? Would you want to work with that person? How well do you think that will go over in SF, HN, or America?
- kansface 9y ago| So I think Sam lacks empathy... But the unreasonable people saying "gay people are evil" are not even pretending to be joking. They have killed. Sam is both gay and jewish... | Replace the word "gay" in Sam's essay with "white" or whatever group you belong to. How does that make you feel? Would you want to work with that person? I don't think "white people are evil" is a controversial statement is SF.
- kelukelugames 9y agoHarvey Weinstein is Jewish. Kevin Spacey is gay. Being X doesn't mean you automatically have empathy for Y. Or even X. As for the second part, valley employees have gotten in trouble for criticizing "white". Wasn't there an outrage over Github?
- exdaedalus 9y agoHave people forgotten about what happened to Alan Turing?