6 ms·

Up next: Social Justice for the Short Man, for those with a 'country' accent, for the glasses wearers (in the off-seasons for nerdiness), the straight-up unattr

Up next: Social Justice for the Short Man, for those with a 'country' accent, for the glasses wearers (in the off-seasons for nerdiness), the straight-up unattractive. They are all real, the question we must contend with is: Are all externally imposed, negatively perceived features, protected from measurement/discrimination? What about age? Can you discriminate towards youthfulness if you will, in your time, become old?

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
Kaedon 4y ago
Why is it that in every post about a problem there's this what-about-ism? We can talk about the issue at hand and then the other ones separately.
- OJFord 4y ago
  At some point 'what-about-ism' must become a good faith comparison.
  - Kaedon 4y ago
    That’s fair. I’ve probably been reading too much Blind and miscalibrated.
armchairhacker 4y ago
Then we have social justice for fat people, dumb people, lazy people, people with anger problems, people with personality disorders, criminals, and so on. Where do we draw the line? I argue we don't draw the line at all. Rather, we treat everyone with compassion and respect, and find / judge everyone on their true strengths and weaknesses (vs. those characteristic of whatever group they belong to). Discrimination is OK when the discriminating trait actually matters - i.e. you wouldn't let an idiot or a hot-headed person control a nuclear warhead or perform brain surgery. Similarly, I have nothing against diversity, but I think portraying people of many ethnicities in a movie whose setting would not have people of all ethnicities is weird and something our current culture gets wrong. But you should not be rude to an idiot or angry person, just like you shouldn't avoid putting ethnic people in general movies (and make sure you actually know your setting, e.g. I recall controversy where black people were in a movie on ancient Greece, but black people actually did exist in Greece at the time). (Also I still think people who commit crimes and are dangerous should be locked up. The point is they are locked up to protect and deter others and possibly reform them, not just for intrinsic punishment.) The issue with the current attitude on social justice is that most people don't fall for prejudice or stereotypes, but don't understand why. You don't just avoid stereotypes because they're often wrong (though a lot truly don't line up with statistics), you avoid them because you don't judge people on their surface, people aren't always what they look like, and most people fail at least one stereotype of a group they belong to if not many more. You don't treat someone with respect because they're black or female, you treat them with respect because they're a decent human. Similarly, you don't mistreat someone whose short or fat or even has something wrong with their head which makes them occasionally annoying. But lots of "social justice advocates" don't realize this and hate towards sides which aren't explicitly "protected". EDIT: There's also the practical situation where you can't save everyone. In that case unfortunately I think whatever disadvantaged or stereotyped groups aren't protected by the current society are out of luck. But while you can't always give everyone tangible aid or a thorough evaluation, you can at least treat everyone with respect and common decency.
- TrispusAttucks 4y ago
  This is the way.
  - poisonarena 4y ago
    this is a reddit comment and I have been noticing them much more frequently
- leereeves 4y ago
  > There's also the practical situation where you can't save everyone. In that case unfortunately I think whatever disadvantaged or stereotyped groups aren't protected by the current society are out of luck. If people in the past had felt that way, there would be no protected groups. Society only moves forward because of people who believe they can save disadvantaged or stereotyped groups that aren't already protected.
  - armchairhacker 4y ago
    That quote is what actually happens, not what should happen. I guess what should happen is that the people who are "saved" get picked random. But in practice people almost always have preferences and conscious/unconscious biases.
- teg4n_ 4y ago
  > i.e. you wouldn't let an idiot or a hot-headed person control a nuclear warhead Uhhhhhhh… don’t pay too much attention to politics do you?
- sumedh 4y ago
  Being fat and lazy is under your control, being bald is not.
  - dTal 4y ago
    Is it really? Who would honestly freely choose that?
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
3qz 4y ago
> Social Justice for the Short Man The height wage gap is bigger than the gender wage gap. Short men are more oppressed than average women and everyone knows it
- Retric 4y ago
  Height is correlated to health, intelligence, and good looks. So, no offense for short people, but it’s not clear how much of this is height specific bias.
  - metadat 4y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Height_and_intelligence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Height_and_intelligence Not sure why parent got teh downvotes, there is a small positive correlation. Must be some sensitive shorties around here with more than 500 uovotes.
shp0ngle 4y ago
This page is generated by some kind of algorithms, look at the rest of the site.
allenu 4y ago
Seriously, there's a lot more diversity in advertising these days, but I don't think we'll ever get to the point where companies are open to diversity of attractiveness. (Or people pushing for it.) Can you imagine an Apple ad where you have average looking, or unattractive, people taking photos with the latest iPhone?
- whatshisface 4y ago
  I think we are not far from somebody trying that. We know that people are trained to ignore advertisements by constant practice, and perhaps every possible change will eventually have to be made to stay ahead of the subconscious spam filter.
  - allenu 4y ago
    I suppose the pendulum could swing the other way one day. It might be a fashion thing. People might get tired of seeing attractive people in media all the time. Speaking for myself, I'm genuinely tired of seeing actors looking way too attractive and made up in movies. Let's go back to people looking like regular people who don't have a team of wardrobe and makeup artists behind them.
    - brabel 4y ago
      Watching Netflix, I found that in some countries this is the case: actors are mostly average or bad looking. Sorry, but I hope the fashion does not catch on :D
- dTal 4y ago
  That's already happening and they call it "body positivity". It's mostly about overweight women (obesity rates are skyrocketing and women consume more fashion advertizing) but occasionally includes other forms of unattractiveness, like being old, saggy, or out of shape (rarely more than one at a time though). This underwear ad is from 2015: https://hips.hearstapps.com/cos.h-cdn.co/assets/15/42/4000x2000/landscape-1445032857-1506-dressman56058-group.jpg?resize=1200 https://hips.hearstapps.com/cos.h-cdn.co/assets/15/42/4000x2...:*
edanm 4y ago
> They are all real, the question we must contend with is: Are all externally imposed, negatively perceived features, protected from measurement/discrimination? Define protected. In the legal sense? In the cultural sense? I wouldn't necessarily say we should impose a specific law to ban discrimination against e.g. short people, but for sure I'd be... uncomfortable with an employer deciding to discriminate against someone solely for their height (assuming that the height isn't a relevant factor for their job performance, of course.) Would I think it's ok to be culturally against an employer for doing so? Probably yes. Would I think they should be able to be sued for it? Trickier but probably yes? I'm not sure. Should we have specific laws against it (i.e. in the States, making height a protected class)? Probably unnecessary given that there is no specific historical discrimination against short people.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

Kaedon 4y ago

Why is it that in every post about a problem there's this what-about-ism? We can talk about the issue at hand and then the other ones separately.

OJFord 4y ago
At some point 'what-about-ism' must become a good faith comparison.
- Kaedon 4y ago
  That’s fair. I’ve probably been reading too much Blind and miscalibrated.

armchairhacker 4y ago

Then we have social justice for fat people, dumb people, lazy people, people with anger problems, people with personality disorders, criminals, and so on. Where do we draw the line? I argue we don't draw the line at all. Rather, we treat everyone with compassion and respect, and find / judge everyone on their true strengths and weaknesses (vs. those characteristic of whatever group they belong to). Discrimination is OK when the discriminating trait actually matters - i.e. you wouldn't let an idiot or a hot-headed person control a nuclear warhead or perform brain surgery. Similarly, I have nothing against diversity, but I think portraying people of many ethnicities in a movie whose setting would not have people of all ethnicities is weird and something our current culture gets wrong. But you should not be rude to an idiot or angry person, just like you shouldn't avoid putting ethnic people in general movies (and make sure you actually know your setting, e.g. I recall controversy where black people were in a movie on ancient Greece, but black people actually did exist in Greece at the time). (Also I still think people who commit crimes and are dangerous should be locked up. The point is they are locked up to protect and deter others and possibly reform them, not just for intrinsic punishment.) The issue with the current attitude on social justice is that most people don't fall for prejudice or stereotypes, but don't understand why. You don't just avoid stereotypes because they're often wrong (though a lot truly don't line up with statistics), you avoid them because you don't judge people on their surface, people aren't always what they look like, and most people fail at least one stereotype of a group they belong to if not many more. You don't treat someone with respect because they're black or female, you treat them with respect because they're a decent human. Similarly, you don't mistreat someone whose short or fat or even has something wrong with their head which makes them occasionally annoying. But lots of "social justice advocates" don't realize this and hate towards sides which aren't explicitly "protected". EDIT: There's also the practical situation where you can't save everyone. In that case unfortunately I think whatever disadvantaged or stereotyped groups aren't protected by the current society are out of luck. But while you can't always give everyone tangible aid or a thorough evaluation, you can at least treat everyone with respect and common decency.

TrispusAttucks 4y ago
This is the way.
- poisonarena 4y ago
  this is a reddit comment and I have been noticing them much more frequently
leereeves 4y ago
> There's also the practical situation where you can't save everyone. In that case unfortunately I think whatever disadvantaged or stereotyped groups aren't protected by the current society are out of luck. If people in the past had felt that way, there would be no protected groups. Society only moves forward because of people who believe they can save disadvantaged or stereotyped groups that aren't already protected.
- armchairhacker 4y ago
  That quote is what actually happens, not what should happen. I guess what should happen is that the people who are "saved" get picked random. But in practice people almost always have preferences and conscious/unconscious biases.
teg4n_ 4y ago
> i.e. you wouldn't let an idiot or a hot-headed person control a nuclear warhead Uhhhhhhh… don’t pay too much attention to politics do you?
sumedh 4y ago
Being fat and lazy is under your control, being bald is not.
- dTal 4y ago
  Is it really? Who would honestly freely choose that?

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

3qz 4y ago

> Social Justice for the Short Man The height wage gap is bigger than the gender wage gap. Short men are more oppressed than average women and everyone knows it

Retric 4y ago
Height is correlated to health, intelligence, and good looks. So, no offense for short people, but it’s not clear how much of this is height specific bias.
- metadat 4y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Height_and_intelligence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Height_and_intelligence Not sure why parent got teh downvotes, there is a small positive correlation. Must be some sensitive shorties around here with more than 500 uovotes.

shp0ngle 4y ago

This page is generated by some kind of algorithms, look at the rest of the site.

allenu 4y ago

Seriously, there's a lot more diversity in advertising these days, but I don't think we'll ever get to the point where companies are open to diversity of attractiveness. (Or people pushing for it.) Can you imagine an Apple ad where you have average looking, or unattractive, people taking photos with the latest iPhone?

whatshisface 4y ago
I think we are not far from somebody trying that. We know that people are trained to ignore advertisements by constant practice, and perhaps every possible change will eventually have to be made to stay ahead of the subconscious spam filter.
- allenu 4y ago
  I suppose the pendulum could swing the other way one day. It might be a fashion thing. People might get tired of seeing attractive people in media all the time. Speaking for myself, I'm genuinely tired of seeing actors looking way too attractive and made up in movies. Let's go back to people looking like regular people who don't have a team of wardrobe and makeup artists behind them.
  - brabel 4y ago
    Watching Netflix, I found that in some countries this is the case: actors are mostly average or bad looking. Sorry, but I hope the fashion does not catch on :D
dTal 4y ago
That's already happening and they call it "body positivity". It's mostly about overweight women (obesity rates are skyrocketing and women consume more fashion advertizing) but occasionally includes other forms of unattractiveness, like being old, saggy, or out of shape (rarely more than one at a time though). This underwear ad is from 2015: https://hips.hearstapps.com/cos.h-cdn.co/assets/15/42/4000x2000/landscape-1445032857-1506-dressman56058-group.jpg?resize=1200 https://hips.hearstapps.com/cos.h-cdn.co/assets/15/42/4000x2...:*

edanm 4y ago

> They are all real, the question we must contend with is: Are all externally imposed, negatively perceived features, protected from measurement/discrimination? Define protected. In the legal sense? In the cultural sense? I wouldn't necessarily say we should impose a specific law to ban discrimination against e.g. short people, but for sure I'd be... uncomfortable with an employer deciding to discriminate against someone solely for their height (assuming that the height isn't a relevant factor for their job performance, of course.) Would I think it's ok to be culturally against an employer for doing so? Probably yes. Would I think they should be able to be sued for it? Trickier but probably yes? I'm not sure. Should we have specific laws against it (i.e. in the States, making height a protected class)? Probably unnecessary given that there is no specific historical discrimination against short people.