4 ms·

Examples?

by mrep 8y ago

Examples?

skrebbel 8y ago
Everything on https://www.teamblind.com https://www.teamblind.com
- khyryk 8y ago
  First time taking a look at that site and I'm pretty sure a lot of it is trolling. Lots of threads starting with something semi-ridiculous or controversial to solicit lots of responses to which the OP spends an unreasonable amount of time responding to. Classic flame baiting.
SolaceQuantum 8y ago
My first look at Blind rated cities to work in by how hot/available women were there (e.g. comments like "SF sucks, you have to settle on dating uglies" or "NYC women are so much hotter than SV women, no contest where to live"). The question asked to the Blind community was just "where would it be better to live long term" or something completely not to do with dating or women, but the majority of responses were about the hotness of women dates. Later on, I found unsavory relationship advisement going on, and further than that, outright racism against Indians in particular. None of these comments were downvoted, many encouraged and agreed upon. (EDIT: Not downvoted, criticized, sorry.(
- vonmoltke 8y ago
  > None of these comments were downvoted Blind doesn't have downvotes (which could be part of the problem there).
  - SolaceQuantum 8y ago
    Sorry, let me clarify (I sometimes use words inappropriately). None of the responses were critical.
- thtowawayt 8y ago
  > outright racism against Indians in particular. Racism is not illegal and should not be suppressed. It does should also not be encouraged, however. At the end of he day, people do not have the right to feel good. > My first look at Blind rated cities to work in by how hot/available women were there (e.g. comments like "SF sucks, you have to settle on dating uglies" or "NYC women are so much hotter than SV women, no contest where to live"). It may be off topic the original post, but is most definitely relevant to the users. Nothing wrong with rating women. People do it all the time. It's about time it is made less taboo.
  - SolaceQuantum 8y ago
    Please note this is in response of a request for examples of toxic/destructive behavior and advisement, and I provided. Your response indicates you do not understand the context of the conversation (eg. replying to portions of my post in a manner that has nothing to do with the conversation) and thus I cannot reply in a manner that is on-topic.
  - mistersquid 8y ago
    > Nothing wrong with rating women. People do it all the time. It's about time it is made less taboo. In the current context of rampant sexual discrimination, there is everything wrong with "rating women". To be very clear, when "rating women" I presume you are talking about the snap judgements made based on stereotypical beauty attributes relating to physical appearance. The problem with "rating women" in this way is that ranking people according to a very small set of "desirable" attributes neglects or diminishes other very important aspects of what makes a person worth knowing and loving. Appearance becomes a top priority over and against other perhaps more important attributes including loyalty, kindness, and intelligence. Additionally, "rating women" along such lines reinforces the sense that people are fungible sources of (aesthetic) value rather than worthy individuals in their own right. None of this even touches upon the social and psychological problems that result when people are judged on such a small set of shallow traits. While people do judge each other based on appearance all the time, such tendencies are to be resisted and questioned because, for one, the standards of physical beauty are well-known to be shaped by the imperatives of advertising which have established that making people feel insecure drives sales. In fact, it's not taboo to judge people on appearance at all. "Rating women" is a social norm. Not judging women based upon on their appearance is actually the rare exception. EDIT: add preposition; remove duplicate word; delete extraneous space.

Examples?

by mrep 8y ago

Examples?

skrebbel 8y ago

Everything on https://www.teamblind.com https://www.teamblind.com

khyryk 8y ago
First time taking a look at that site and I'm pretty sure a lot of it is trolling. Lots of threads starting with something semi-ridiculous or controversial to solicit lots of responses to which the OP spends an unreasonable amount of time responding to. Classic flame baiting.

SolaceQuantum 8y ago

My first look at Blind rated cities to work in by how hot/available women were there (e.g. comments like "SF sucks, you have to settle on dating uglies" or "NYC women are so much hotter than SV women, no contest where to live"). The question asked to the Blind community was just "where would it be better to live long term" or something completely not to do with dating or women, but the majority of responses were about the hotness of women dates. Later on, I found unsavory relationship advisement going on, and further than that, outright racism against Indians in particular. None of these comments were downvoted, many encouraged and agreed upon. (EDIT: Not downvoted, criticized, sorry.(

vonmoltke 8y ago
> None of these comments were downvoted Blind doesn't have downvotes (which could be part of the problem there).
- SolaceQuantum 8y ago
  Sorry, let me clarify (I sometimes use words inappropriately). None of the responses were critical.
thtowawayt 8y ago
> outright racism against Indians in particular. Racism is not illegal and should not be suppressed. It does should also not be encouraged, however. At the end of he day, people do not have the right to feel good. > My first look at Blind rated cities to work in by how hot/available women were there (e.g. comments like "SF sucks, you have to settle on dating uglies" or "NYC women are so much hotter than SV women, no contest where to live"). It may be off topic the original post, but is most definitely relevant to the users. Nothing wrong with rating women. People do it all the time. It's about time it is made less taboo.
- SolaceQuantum 8y ago
  Please note this is in response of a request for examples of toxic/destructive behavior and advisement, and I provided. Your response indicates you do not understand the context of the conversation (eg. replying to portions of my post in a manner that has nothing to do with the conversation) and thus I cannot reply in a manner that is on-topic.
- mistersquid 8y ago
  > Nothing wrong with rating women. People do it all the time. It's about time it is made less taboo. In the current context of rampant sexual discrimination, there is everything wrong with "rating women". To be very clear, when "rating women" I presume you are talking about the snap judgements made based on stereotypical beauty attributes relating to physical appearance. The problem with "rating women" in this way is that ranking people according to a very small set of "desirable" attributes neglects or diminishes other very important aspects of what makes a person worth knowing and loving. Appearance becomes a top priority over and against other perhaps more important attributes including loyalty, kindness, and intelligence. Additionally, "rating women" along such lines reinforces the sense that people are fungible sources of (aesthetic) value rather than worthy individuals in their own right. None of this even touches upon the social and psychological problems that result when people are judged on such a small set of shallow traits. While people do judge each other based on appearance all the time, such tendencies are to be resisted and questioned because, for one, the standards of physical beauty are well-known to be shaped by the imperatives of advertising which have established that making people feel insecure drives sales. In fact, it's not taboo to judge people on appearance at all. "Rating women" is a social norm. Not judging women based upon on their appearance is actually the rare exception. EDIT: add preposition; remove duplicate word; delete extraneous space.