3 ms·

> Voting no because you don't understand something is expressing hate for things that you don't understand It's a stretch to call it "hate". I mean, as long as

> Voting no because you don't understand something is expressing hate for things that you don't understand It's a stretch to call it "hate". I mean, as long as we're playing with words, maybe you can classify "No opinion" as masked hate". A No vote IS NOT BIGOTRY. I like Chocolate ice cream more than Vanilla, and would vote NO on a school survey asking what flavor to serve in the cafeteria. I'm not bigoted against Vanilla

ebg13 7y ago
> I like Chocolate ice cream more than Vanilla This is not analogous unless you actually think that schools should not teach numerals or if the only reason you like chocolate is because you don't know what vanilla is. Choosing between two things by preference is also not analogous to choosing yes or no for one thing. > A No vote IS NOT BIGOTRY. It is IF you vote no BECAUSE you don't understand. That's called xenophobia. If you don't have a note from a psychiatrist excusing your behavior because of a medical condition, xenophobia is bigotry. Bigotry against vanilla and Martians, it turns out, is not considered to be a big deal (yet) so you're probably safe.
- writepub 7y ago
  Here's a refresher of the definition: "intolerance toward those who hold different opinions from oneself" None of the scenarios described in your tirade fits the definition. And back to the original article, it's highly likely that the audience understood "Arabic" numerals to mean actual numerals in Arabic script. The only definitive way to deduce bigotry is from a follow up question that has amongst other choices, one for "because I dislike XYZ people". Everything else is speculation - if you don't believe me, submit this for publication in any peer reviewed academic journal. "Never Attribute To Malice What You Can Attribute To Stupidity" - the respondants (likely) didn't know Arabic Numerals referred to what they already use, and the question is setup to exploit the general lack of knowledge on the matter, and spin a native on bigotry. Because, a story on bigotry is a LOT more click baitey than simple ignorance. BTW - you seem intent on pushing a "bigotry" narrative, and FUD-ing in general. Are you the author? Or the person cited in the article tweeting an obvious non sequitur, claiming this unscientific, non-conclusive data to be evidence of bigotry?

ebg13 7y ago

> I like Chocolate ice cream more than Vanilla This is not analogous unless you actually think that schools should not teach numerals or if the only reason you like chocolate is because you don't know what vanilla is. Choosing between two things by preference is also not analogous to choosing yes or no for one thing. > A No vote IS NOT BIGOTRY. It is IF you vote no BECAUSE you don't understand. That's called xenophobia. If you don't have a note from a psychiatrist excusing your behavior because of a medical condition, xenophobia is bigotry. Bigotry against vanilla and Martians, it turns out, is not considered to be a big deal (yet) so you're probably safe.

writepub 7y ago
Here's a refresher of the definition: "intolerance toward those who hold different opinions from oneself" None of the scenarios described in your tirade fits the definition. And back to the original article, it's highly likely that the audience understood "Arabic" numerals to mean actual numerals in Arabic script. The only definitive way to deduce bigotry is from a follow up question that has amongst other choices, one for "because I dislike XYZ people". Everything else is speculation - if you don't believe me, submit this for publication in any peer reviewed academic journal. "Never Attribute To Malice What You Can Attribute To Stupidity" - the respondants (likely) didn't know Arabic Numerals referred to what they already use, and the question is setup to exploit the general lack of knowledge on the matter, and spin a native on bigotry. Because, a story on bigotry is a LOT more click baitey than simple ignorance. BTW - you seem intent on pushing a "bigotry" narrative, and FUD-ing in general. Are you the author? Or the person cited in the article tweeting an obvious non sequitur, claiming this unscientific, non-conclusive data to be evidence of bigotry?