4 ms·

Racism is far more complicated than that. Giving an oppressed group a safe space is not the same as excluding that group. That is completely missing the point o

Racism is far more complicated than that. Giving an oppressed group a safe space is not the same as excluding that group. That is completely missing the point of why racism is a problem. Racism is not anything that takes race into account.

voldacar 5y ago
Your moral framing depends on language manipulation which in turn depends on who is able to most successfully wield power in the public square. Who decides who is part of an "oppressed group"? Challenge mode: your answer must not contain "we" And chaz was hardly a "safe space" as another comment pointed out. It also was not "given"
- user-the-name 5y ago
  > Your moral framing depends on language manipulation What does this mean? This applies to every single moral judgement, and that is perfectly fine and normal. That is what morals are.
  - enchiridion 5y ago
    No, it doesn’t and it’s not. It is possible to reason about morals without subtlety deceitful language games. I’d also like to point out that your comment likely uses the very same tactics that GP is complaining about. Clearly when saying “manipulation”, GP meant that they are upset with language designed to foster a foregone conclusion. So you either: 1. Think that is acceptable, which it’s not. 2. Are changing the definition of “manipulation” to mean something more like “use”, which was clearly not intended here. Neither option is conducive to honest moral discourse. If you want to reinforce your current beliefs, go ahead and continue the same way. If you are interested in an honest debate, give GP the best interpretation possible, and see if you position still holds up. As a final point of why these language games are not conducive to honest debate, you did not address the latter points that GP brought up.
scarab92 5y ago
I'm open to arguments that the benefits of such safe spaces outweigh the negatives, however pretending that this isn't race-based discrimination is disingenuous.
- user-the-name 5y ago
  Is "race-based discrimination" always "racism"?
  - scarab92 5y ago
    Yes
    - user-the-name 5y ago
      Justification?
  - kofejnik 5y ago
    Yes
    - user-the-name 5y ago
      Justification?
      - kofejnik 5y ago
        Dictionary definition. I won’t engage any further
        user-the-name 5y ago
        "prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism by an individual, community, or institution against a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular racial or ethnic group, typically one that is a minority or marginalized." is what I get. There are a lot more words in there, and those words are pretty important.

voldacar 5y ago

Your moral framing depends on language manipulation which in turn depends on who is able to most successfully wield power in the public square. Who decides who is part of an "oppressed group"? Challenge mode: your answer must not contain "we" And chaz was hardly a "safe space" as another comment pointed out. It also was not "given"

user-the-name 5y ago
> Your moral framing depends on language manipulation What does this mean? This applies to every single moral judgement, and that is perfectly fine and normal. That is what morals are.
- enchiridion 5y ago
  No, it doesn’t and it’s not. It is possible to reason about morals without subtlety deceitful language games. I’d also like to point out that your comment likely uses the very same tactics that GP is complaining about. Clearly when saying “manipulation”, GP meant that they are upset with language designed to foster a foregone conclusion. So you either: 1. Think that is acceptable, which it’s not. 2. Are changing the definition of “manipulation” to mean something more like “use”, which was clearly not intended here. Neither option is conducive to honest moral discourse. If you want to reinforce your current beliefs, go ahead and continue the same way. If you are interested in an honest debate, give GP the best interpretation possible, and see if you position still holds up. As a final point of why these language games are not conducive to honest debate, you did not address the latter points that GP brought up.

scarab92 5y ago

I'm open to arguments that the benefits of such safe spaces outweigh the negatives, however pretending that this isn't race-based discrimination is disingenuous.

user-the-name 5y ago
Is "race-based discrimination" always "racism"?
- scarab92 5y ago
  Yes
  - user-the-name 5y ago
    Justification?
- kofejnik 5y ago
  Yes
  - user-the-name 5y ago
    Justification?
    - kofejnik 5y ago
      Dictionary definition. I won’t engage any further
      - user-the-name 5y ago
        "prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism by an individual, community, or institution against a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular racial or ethnic group, typically one that is a minority or marginalized." is what I get. There are a lot more words in there, and those words are pretty important.