5 ms·

I don’t think that’s true. If you visit a convicted rapist in prison when nobody else will do you condone rape? Or are you performing an act of kindness? I thi

I don’t think that’s true. If you visit a convicted rapist in prison when nobody else will do you condone rape? Or are you performing an act of kindness? I think the ironic and not obvious answer here is that we stop committing people to the garbage heap of humanity via religious-like shunning. That reaction is what gives bad ideas power. People are complicated. You can’t boil them down to a true nature that is “good” or “bad”. That’s “us vs them”. Only ideas can be judged that way and history decides what the bad ideas are.

klmadfejno 5y ago
Now you're conflating a crime that was committed vs. an uncovered privately held belief. Visiting a repentant criminal doesn't condone their crime, obviously. Visiting a rapist who speaks freely, or privately just to you, about how much he enjoys rape certainly begs the question of why you're doing what you're doing. Employing such a person who says these things speaks volumes about your concern for the feelings of people who feel threatened or have suffered sexual assault in the past, especially on your team. All of this boils down to how much legitimacy we're willing to offer people based on what we know about them. If you want to offer the worst of the worst people just enough legitimacy to have a human conversation once in a while, I think that's defensible. If you think one's reputation doesn't have massive reprecussions on which social groups you welcome them into I think you're naive.
thatguy0900 5y ago
" Only ideas can be judged that way and history decides what the bad ideas are." Well, historians do. Subject to change.
- listless 5y ago
  Accurate. Although I suppose I was referring to "history is written by the victor". America is a great nation, but had the revolution failed, it would have been a disgraceful insurrection instead.
  - jfengel 5y ago
    Honestly, it wouldn't even be that much. It would be a trivia question. Even now the American revolution is kind of a non-event to the British. It is of less interest to them than the French revolution, which led to the Napoleonic wars and ultimately the rather drastic reshaping of European nations. George III is the villain in the American version of the story, but he's mostly known in the UK for his long, sad descent into madness. They had their own Civil War in the 17th century, and even that tends to be glossed over in British history classes. They've just got so much more history than Americans do that it's just unfathomable. They don't really spare a lot of thought for the successful revolution, and an unsuccessful one would have been a footnote.
cjohnson318 5y ago
Visiting a criminal in prison does not condone their crime. Associating with someone that commits crimes, while turning a blind eye to their criminal behavior, does condone their crimes. What do you mean by "stop committing people to the garbage heap of humanity via religious-like shunning"? Do you have a social group in mind that does not enforce its own social norms?
- mistermann 5y ago
  > Visiting a criminal in prison does not condone their crime. Associating with someone that commits crimes, while turning a blind eye to their criminal behavior, does condone their crimes. To me, this does not seem logical (for the dictionary definition of "condone"). Would you mind explaining your reasoning?
  - cjohnson318 5y ago
    This was related to the parent comment that asked, rhetorically, if visiting an incarcerated rapist meant that you condoned rape. I was pointing out that visiting a criminal does not directly imply that you condoned the actions that landed them in prison. However, if you know someone that is committing crimes, and you do nothing to stop them, then you do condone their behavior. I hope that clears it up?
- smolder 5y ago
  Everyone enforces norms some way or another, but their statement implies an unwillingness to forgive transgressions, which isn't a given. Nowadays people's mistakes quite easily become viral memes that are their legacy. Huge mobs of shallowly interested detractors are unforgiving and can cause disproportionate harm.
- listless 5y ago
  I don't think you have to "turn a blind eye". It's not a zero-sum game. But it does mean you have to engage with people. Shunning would be the opposite of that. The best modern-day example of how we should all live is probably Daryl Davis... "It's when the talking ceases that the ground becomes fertile for violence. If you spend five minutes with your worst enemy — it doesn't have to be about race, it could be about anything...you will find that you both have something in common." https://www.npr.org/2017/08/20/544861933/how-one-man-convinced-200-ku-klux-klan-members-to-give-up-their-robes https://www.npr.org/2017/08/20/544861933/how-one-man-convinc...
xenadu02 5y ago
There is obviously a balance to be struck here and I don't think we yet have a great framework for thinking about such problems. A lot of what makes a nice society is social norms and conventions. The group must have a way of punishing bad behavior or that system falls apart. If there are no consequences for "acting like a Karen" what is the social incentive to stop behaving like an angry toddler anytime you don't get your way? Now extend this to even more extreme behavior like people who say you should be killed just for existing because you're an abomination. Is the argument that we should just get along and there shouldn't be any social consequences for that? Such a view would be incredibly naive at best. On the flip side clearly people's views do sometimes change, people make mistakes, etc. Changing minds and hearts is a process, not a one-time event, so complete shunning for any perceived slight is rather extreme and can be counterproductive.
- exporectomy 5y ago
  > A lot of what makes a nice society is social norms and conventions. The group must have a way of punishing bad behavior or that system falls apart. Yes. But it's a problem when different cultures coexist and see each other's good behavior as bad. Societies that kill their "abominations" are also enforcing their social norms. And they may even be right to do so given the environment they live in and their desire to continue existing as a society. Modern western culture has the luxury of being very tolerant of diverse types of people because we're so wealthy and safe, but many societies or their members are closer to the brink and the presence of too many ineffective or counter-productive members is an existential threat.
- watwut 5y ago
  Interestingly, the most common use of Karen I have seen is women being assertive and actually right. Yes, sometimes it is in racist or exaggerating context. But, most often, Karen is used to shut up woman who don't want to be doormat or is telling you off for good reason.
  - exporectomy 5y ago
    You can respectfully communicate your feelings about somebody without being horrible and hurting people or losing control and getting laughed at. It's not easy but women shouldn't aspire to be bitches because they might succeed and then everyone suffers.
plank_time 5y ago
> we stop committing people to the garbage heap of humanity via religious-like shunning There’s also religious-like forgiveness too. Some incredible acts of forgiveness were accomplished by very religious people. Pope John Paul II immediately forgave the person who almost killed him.

klmadfejno 5y ago

Now you're conflating a crime that was committed vs. an uncovered privately held belief. Visiting a repentant criminal doesn't condone their crime, obviously. Visiting a rapist who speaks freely, or privately just to you, about how much he enjoys rape certainly begs the question of why you're doing what you're doing. Employing such a person who says these things speaks volumes about your concern for the feelings of people who feel threatened or have suffered sexual assault in the past, especially on your team. All of this boils down to how much legitimacy we're willing to offer people based on what we know about them. If you want to offer the worst of the worst people just enough legitimacy to have a human conversation once in a while, I think that's defensible. If you think one's reputation doesn't have massive reprecussions on which social groups you welcome them into I think you're naive.

thatguy0900 5y ago

" Only ideas can be judged that way and history decides what the bad ideas are." Well, historians do. Subject to change.

listless 5y ago
Accurate. Although I suppose I was referring to "history is written by the victor". America is a great nation, but had the revolution failed, it would have been a disgraceful insurrection instead.
- jfengel 5y ago
  Honestly, it wouldn't even be that much. It would be a trivia question. Even now the American revolution is kind of a non-event to the British. It is of less interest to them than the French revolution, which led to the Napoleonic wars and ultimately the rather drastic reshaping of European nations. George III is the villain in the American version of the story, but he's mostly known in the UK for his long, sad descent into madness. They had their own Civil War in the 17th century, and even that tends to be glossed over in British history classes. They've just got so much more history than Americans do that it's just unfathomable. They don't really spare a lot of thought for the successful revolution, and an unsuccessful one would have been a footnote.

cjohnson318 5y ago

Visiting a criminal in prison does not condone their crime. Associating with someone that commits crimes, while turning a blind eye to their criminal behavior, does condone their crimes. What do you mean by "stop committing people to the garbage heap of humanity via religious-like shunning"? Do you have a social group in mind that does not enforce its own social norms?

mistermann 5y ago
> Visiting a criminal in prison does not condone their crime. Associating with someone that commits crimes, while turning a blind eye to their criminal behavior, does condone their crimes. To me, this does not seem logical (for the dictionary definition of "condone"). Would you mind explaining your reasoning?
- cjohnson318 5y ago
  This was related to the parent comment that asked, rhetorically, if visiting an incarcerated rapist meant that you condoned rape. I was pointing out that visiting a criminal does not directly imply that you condoned the actions that landed them in prison. However, if you know someone that is committing crimes, and you do nothing to stop them, then you do condone their behavior. I hope that clears it up?
smolder 5y ago
Everyone enforces norms some way or another, but their statement implies an unwillingness to forgive transgressions, which isn't a given. Nowadays people's mistakes quite easily become viral memes that are their legacy. Huge mobs of shallowly interested detractors are unforgiving and can cause disproportionate harm.
listless 5y ago
I don't think you have to "turn a blind eye". It's not a zero-sum game. But it does mean you have to engage with people. Shunning would be the opposite of that. The best modern-day example of how we should all live is probably Daryl Davis... "It's when the talking ceases that the ground becomes fertile for violence. If you spend five minutes with your worst enemy — it doesn't have to be about race, it could be about anything...you will find that you both have something in common." https://www.npr.org/2017/08/20/544861933/how-one-man-convinced-200-ku-klux-klan-members-to-give-up-their-robes https://www.npr.org/2017/08/20/544861933/how-one-man-convinc...

xenadu02 5y ago

There is obviously a balance to be struck here and I don't think we yet have a great framework for thinking about such problems. A lot of what makes a nice society is social norms and conventions. The group must have a way of punishing bad behavior or that system falls apart. If there are no consequences for "acting like a Karen" what is the social incentive to stop behaving like an angry toddler anytime you don't get your way? Now extend this to even more extreme behavior like people who say you should be killed just for existing because you're an abomination. Is the argument that we should just get along and there shouldn't be any social consequences for that? Such a view would be incredibly naive at best. On the flip side clearly people's views do sometimes change, people make mistakes, etc. Changing minds and hearts is a process, not a one-time event, so complete shunning for any perceived slight is rather extreme and can be counterproductive.

exporectomy 5y ago
> A lot of what makes a nice society is social norms and conventions. The group must have a way of punishing bad behavior or that system falls apart. Yes. But it's a problem when different cultures coexist and see each other's good behavior as bad. Societies that kill their "abominations" are also enforcing their social norms. And they may even be right to do so given the environment they live in and their desire to continue existing as a society. Modern western culture has the luxury of being very tolerant of diverse types of people because we're so wealthy and safe, but many societies or their members are closer to the brink and the presence of too many ineffective or counter-productive members is an existential threat.
watwut 5y ago
Interestingly, the most common use of Karen I have seen is women being assertive and actually right. Yes, sometimes it is in racist or exaggerating context. But, most often, Karen is used to shut up woman who don't want to be doormat or is telling you off for good reason.
- exporectomy 5y ago
  You can respectfully communicate your feelings about somebody without being horrible and hurting people or losing control and getting laughed at. It's not easy but women shouldn't aspire to be bitches because they might succeed and then everyone suffers.

plank_time 5y ago

> we stop committing people to the garbage heap of humanity via religious-like shunning There’s also religious-like forgiveness too. Some incredible acts of forgiveness were accomplished by very religious people. Pope John Paul II immediately forgave the person who almost killed him.