6 ms·

> It's difficult for me to overstate how much I disagree with you. > I don't need more people being shamed for being gay Well he never said anything about bei

> It's difficult for me to overstate how much I disagree with you. > I don't need more people being shamed for being gay Well he never said anything about being gay. Perhaps you’re reading some other concerns into his comment. Imagine two worlds where there is no murder. The first has no murder because no one feels inclined to murder. The second has no murder because there are very strong rules which stop people who feel inclined to do it. Can there possibly be any case made to choose the 2nd over the 1st? Japan is a good example of this principle. Things are a lot more orderly despite a lot weaker enforcement mechanisms.

blackoil 3y ago
It doesn't work selectively, if society can shame you into not taking drugs it will do so everything else non-confirming. In my society not valuing individual freedom girls have/had been shamed into not wearing jeans/skirts, going out for night movie show or even cutting hairs.
- nonethewiser 3y ago
  First, you are conflating being ashamed with people shaming them thers. Second, it doesnt follow that shaming 1 thing means shaming everything. And surely you can recognize that there exist some things that people should be ashamed of?
  - tehbeard 3y ago
    And surely you can recognise that others can have a very different view of what's shameful, that's at odds with your own rosey view of it as a tool against self destructive behaviour? Various religions and political groups have used and continue to use shame against the lgbt community, using monikers like sinful or perverse to shame them for who they are by grading them against some flawed ideal that they themselves often fail to attain.
  - oopsit 3y ago
    [dead]
  - emptyfile 3y ago
    [dead]
- cat_plus_plus 3y ago
  It doesn't work selectively, if society can shame you into not posting homophobic tweets, they will do so with everything else non-conforming?
  - denkmoon 3y ago
    Please head over to X and observe the homophobic tweets.
    - cat_plus_plus 3y ago
      Are you fine with both these tweets and people smoking fentanyl in public, or can social pressure do some good in both cases?
- p91paul 3y ago
  In your society girls go around in underwear? nice! Sorry, I really had to :)
  - ffhhttt 3y ago
    Maybe they are permanently stuck in the 80s and only allow baggy suit pants. Or I guess… it’s probably a bit darker and they are not talking about a western country.
forgingahead 3y ago
Japan is highly homogenous - their immigration policy would be decried by many liberals in the West as "racist". It is a massive factor in how their society is run, and why they are so high-trust that they don't need strong enforcement mechanisms (in some cases. Don't be a Western car exec there for example). There is a show on Netflix called "Old Enough!". It's worth watching to see how some of the high-trust works in practice, and also to perhaps think through if we could be comfortable with the same in our own neighbourhoods and countries. My guess for most people in the Anglo West, the answer would be "No".
- harryVic 3y ago
  Singapore is incredibly diverse and doesn't have any drug problems due to tough laws.
  - forgingahead 3y ago
    That's exactly my point. In high-trust, homogenous societies, you don't necessarily need harsh laws to enforce social norms and "civilised" behaviour. In more heterogenous societies, you have low-trust so you need tough laws to enforce the societal "norms". Japan is the former and Singapore is the latter. Both end up in good places to live, but one has to have the full discussion about the reasons and causes for each.
    - Barrin92 3y ago
      Have you lived in Japan? Because this is an almost stereotypical outsider view of the country. Japan has draconian drug laws, up to 10 years for minor possession. People can be held in detention, repeatedly, for weeks without being formally accused. Police is visibly present in public. All of East Asia is homogeneous. Every country is highly paternalistic and legalistic. North Korea is probably both the most homogeneous and authoritarian country on earth. In reality heterogeneous societies are significantly less prone to this. You could not turn India or the US into comparable police states because nobody would even agree on how to get there. Singapore gets away with it because it's effectively a small city state. A country of similar composition but 10x larger, which happens to actually exist just North, Malaysia, could never maintain that level of repression.
makeitdouble 3y ago
The 2nd has more people diversity than the 1st. You'd think no one wanting to murder you is the best state, but practically people will have strong feelings about a lot of things in life, and it's hard to imagine a healthy society where "that would look bad on me" is enough to restrain you from your deepest anger moments. Having no immediate way to murder you + an active police to protect you should be the barrier to avoid a tragedy. Japan is no exception. People get murdered everyday, but there is a lot of prevention and arrangement to limit the impact of a single individual going berserk. Police patrol will catch you walking down an empty street at 3 AM with a kitchen knife in hand.
- nonethewiser 3y ago
  > The 2nd has more people diversity than the 1st. Is this a coy way of saying not all diversity is good? Sure you have more would-be-murderers but obviously Id take a less diverse group if thats the diversity. My point with Japan was not about murders. They have laws against murder. Even still, the prevention mechanisms are weaker. Less lethal equipment and training, not positioned in schools, etc. It was more about social expectations that are not enforced but are more strictly followed than in the west because of a sort of shame. The point is not even that more social shaming is strictly better, just that it’s certainly a stronger guide rail on behavior than rules that people otherwise sont care about.
  - makeitdouble 3y ago
    This is a point that feels difficult to make, but yes, to my eyes more diversity is better, even at the cost of slightly more social chaos and a rougher social landscape (with some balance). In a way I think Japan is paying that price in that it has a harder time to adapt to change and is slower to adapt new ideas. Japanese people are inventive and come up with a lot of good ideas, but society's homogeneity and stability means the hurdle to get any idea past the critical point is that much higher. Cash is still the only payment method allowed in a ton of commerce for instance, when Japan actually has so much advance regarding electronic payment variety and barrier to use. On would-be-murderers, I am supposing they're not just different in their murdering intents, but also have different ideas, views of the world, and can deal with some situations better than the more obedient people. I'd see it as the best of both world if we could let them bring new ideas and try different things, while keeping active systems and arrangements preventing them from going to the dark side. I wonder if Canada for instance is succeeding in this balancing act. I don't hate Japan as it currently is, but I think it stagnated way too long and it's becoming a bigger and bigger issue.
fortuna86 3y ago
[dead]
godelski 3y ago
This is a terrible example. Most people do not want to murder, even when very angry. You don't need laws to make people not murder. The laws are for what to do when people do. No matter how universal an attribute is it'll never be 100%. Besides, you'll notice the murder rate is highly localized and associated with economic opportunities. You know why talking about gay people _is_ a good example? Because you probably forgot that not even 10 years ago gay marriage wasn't legal in the US, or most of the world. In fact, only 10 countries did. 10. You probably forgot how heated that topic was. How people would try to shame two men for holding hands in public. We're not talking about some super flamboyant guy like that Key & Peele skit, but the other side of that. I mean just ask any Catholic how well shame works. Cultures change fast. Far faster than just the old people dying. But you don't get to be selective about what should be shameful or not. Times change and what was shameful in the past is considered fine now. In fact objecting to some things, such as gay marriage, have now reversed. Shame isn't defined objectively, just like our morals. So the argument doesn't work without this condition. Speaking of Japan, you know where gay marriage is illegal? Japan. Just June the courts ruled that the ban is constitutional (but other courts have said it isn't). Which just became legal in Korea this year. Didn't even recognize the marriages of foreign diplomats till 2019. In fact, there are only two countries in Asia that have gay marriage: South Korea and Taiwan (2019 but not full rights till 2023). You can probably ask these people about how good shame is too. You're going to need some strong evidence to convince me that Japan's low murder rate is because of its laws.
- darthrupert 3y ago
  Most people do want to murder when very angry, at least for the definition of very angry that I'm familiar with. The problem is that our societies drive more and more people to be very angry.
  - godelski 3y ago
    You want to murder people? Remind me to stay away from you. Are you sure "most" is the correct qualifier or are you looking for "a lot." Those are very different. If you have 100 million people, most means that more than 50 people want to murder and that means there are some VERY effective counter measures out there. But with the same population, if 0.1% of people want to murder, you still got 100k murderers out there, which is still "a lot" in the total sense despite not being in the proportional. Make sure to not confuse these two things, it is extremely important.
seppin 3y ago
[dead]
throwawayq3423 3y ago
[dead]

blackoil 3y ago

It doesn't work selectively, if society can shame you into not taking drugs it will do so everything else non-confirming. In my society not valuing individual freedom girls have/had been shamed into not wearing jeans/skirts, going out for night movie show or even cutting hairs.

nonethewiser 3y ago
First, you are conflating being ashamed with people shaming them thers. Second, it doesnt follow that shaming 1 thing means shaming everything. And surely you can recognize that there exist some things that people should be ashamed of?
- tehbeard 3y ago
  And surely you can recognise that others can have a very different view of what's shameful, that's at odds with your own rosey view of it as a tool against self destructive behaviour? Various religions and political groups have used and continue to use shame against the lgbt community, using monikers like sinful or perverse to shame them for who they are by grading them against some flawed ideal that they themselves often fail to attain.
- oopsit 3y ago
  [dead]
- emptyfile 3y ago
  [dead]
cat_plus_plus 3y ago
It doesn't work selectively, if society can shame you into not posting homophobic tweets, they will do so with everything else non-conforming?
- denkmoon 3y ago
  Please head over to X and observe the homophobic tweets.
  - cat_plus_plus 3y ago
    Are you fine with both these tweets and people smoking fentanyl in public, or can social pressure do some good in both cases?
p91paul 3y ago
In your society girls go around in underwear? nice! Sorry, I really had to :)
- ffhhttt 3y ago
  Maybe they are permanently stuck in the 80s and only allow baggy suit pants. Or I guess… it’s probably a bit darker and they are not talking about a western country.

forgingahead 3y ago

Japan is highly homogenous - their immigration policy would be decried by many liberals in the West as "racist". It is a massive factor in how their society is run, and why they are so high-trust that they don't need strong enforcement mechanisms (in some cases. Don't be a Western car exec there for example). There is a show on Netflix called "Old Enough!". It's worth watching to see how some of the high-trust works in practice, and also to perhaps think through if we could be comfortable with the same in our own neighbourhoods and countries. My guess for most people in the Anglo West, the answer would be "No".

harryVic 3y ago
Singapore is incredibly diverse and doesn't have any drug problems due to tough laws.
- forgingahead 3y ago
  That's exactly my point. In high-trust, homogenous societies, you don't necessarily need harsh laws to enforce social norms and "civilised" behaviour. In more heterogenous societies, you have low-trust so you need tough laws to enforce the societal "norms". Japan is the former and Singapore is the latter. Both end up in good places to live, but one has to have the full discussion about the reasons and causes for each.
  - Barrin92 3y ago
    Have you lived in Japan? Because this is an almost stereotypical outsider view of the country. Japan has draconian drug laws, up to 10 years for minor possession. People can be held in detention, repeatedly, for weeks without being formally accused. Police is visibly present in public. All of East Asia is homogeneous. Every country is highly paternalistic and legalistic. North Korea is probably both the most homogeneous and authoritarian country on earth. In reality heterogeneous societies are significantly less prone to this. You could not turn India or the US into comparable police states because nobody would even agree on how to get there. Singapore gets away with it because it's effectively a small city state. A country of similar composition but 10x larger, which happens to actually exist just North, Malaysia, could never maintain that level of repression.

makeitdouble 3y ago

The 2nd has more people diversity than the 1st. You'd think no one wanting to murder you is the best state, but practically people will have strong feelings about a lot of things in life, and it's hard to imagine a healthy society where "that would look bad on me" is enough to restrain you from your deepest anger moments. Having no immediate way to murder you + an active police to protect you should be the barrier to avoid a tragedy. Japan is no exception. People get murdered everyday, but there is a lot of prevention and arrangement to limit the impact of a single individual going berserk. Police patrol will catch you walking down an empty street at 3 AM with a kitchen knife in hand.

nonethewiser 3y ago
> The 2nd has more people diversity than the 1st. Is this a coy way of saying not all diversity is good? Sure you have more would-be-murderers but obviously Id take a less diverse group if thats the diversity. My point with Japan was not about murders. They have laws against murder. Even still, the prevention mechanisms are weaker. Less lethal equipment and training, not positioned in schools, etc. It was more about social expectations that are not enforced but are more strictly followed than in the west because of a sort of shame. The point is not even that more social shaming is strictly better, just that it’s certainly a stronger guide rail on behavior than rules that people otherwise sont care about.
- makeitdouble 3y ago
  This is a point that feels difficult to make, but yes, to my eyes more diversity is better, even at the cost of slightly more social chaos and a rougher social landscape (with some balance). In a way I think Japan is paying that price in that it has a harder time to adapt to change and is slower to adapt new ideas. Japanese people are inventive and come up with a lot of good ideas, but society's homogeneity and stability means the hurdle to get any idea past the critical point is that much higher. Cash is still the only payment method allowed in a ton of commerce for instance, when Japan actually has so much advance regarding electronic payment variety and barrier to use. On would-be-murderers, I am supposing they're not just different in their murdering intents, but also have different ideas, views of the world, and can deal with some situations better than the more obedient people. I'd see it as the best of both world if we could let them bring new ideas and try different things, while keeping active systems and arrangements preventing them from going to the dark side. I wonder if Canada for instance is succeeding in this balancing act. I don't hate Japan as it currently is, but I think it stagnated way too long and it's becoming a bigger and bigger issue.

fortuna86 3y ago

[dead]

godelski 3y ago

This is a terrible example. Most people do not want to murder, even when very angry. You don't need laws to make people not murder. The laws are for what to do when people do. No matter how universal an attribute is it'll never be 100%. Besides, you'll notice the murder rate is highly localized and associated with economic opportunities. You know why talking about gay people _is_ a good example? Because you probably forgot that not even 10 years ago gay marriage wasn't legal in the US, or most of the world. In fact, only 10 countries did. 10. You probably forgot how heated that topic was. How people would try to shame two men for holding hands in public. We're not talking about some super flamboyant guy like that Key & Peele skit, but the other side of that. I mean just ask any Catholic how well shame works. Cultures change fast. Far faster than just the old people dying. But you don't get to be selective about what should be shameful or not. Times change and what was shameful in the past is considered fine now. In fact objecting to some things, such as gay marriage, have now reversed. Shame isn't defined objectively, just like our morals. So the argument doesn't work without this condition. Speaking of Japan, you know where gay marriage is illegal? Japan. Just June the courts ruled that the ban is constitutional (but other courts have said it isn't). Which just became legal in Korea this year. Didn't even recognize the marriages of foreign diplomats till 2019. In fact, there are only two countries in Asia that have gay marriage: South Korea and Taiwan (2019 but not full rights till 2023). You can probably ask these people about how good shame is too. You're going to need some strong evidence to convince me that Japan's low murder rate is because of its laws.

darthrupert 3y ago
Most people do want to murder when very angry, at least for the definition of very angry that I'm familiar with. The problem is that our societies drive more and more people to be very angry.
- godelski 3y ago
  You want to murder people? Remind me to stay away from you. Are you sure "most" is the correct qualifier or are you looking for "a lot." Those are very different. If you have 100 million people, most means that more than 50 people want to murder and that means there are some VERY effective counter measures out there. But with the same population, if 0.1% of people want to murder, you still got 100k murderers out there, which is still "a lot" in the total sense despite not being in the proportional. Make sure to not confuse these two things, it is extremely important.

seppin 3y ago

[dead]

throwawayq3423 3y ago

[dead]