6 ms·
Recognizing you have feelings isn't wrong. It's how you learn to control your actions and reason your response.
by ty6853 2y ago
Recognizing you have feelings isn't wrong. It's how you learn to control your actions and reason your response.
- slg 2y ago[flagged]
- ty6853 2y agoOr alternatively, someone else with homophobic feelings will use my comment to reflect and realize it's OK to acknowledge their feelings while acknowledging the rights and freedoms of others. I welcome gays the freedom to kiss in public, just as they must accept my freedom to discuss my feelings. It's a two sided coin, and I'm not sure it's a loaded coin as you imply.
- slg 2y ago[flagged]
- theoreticalmal 2y ago[flagged]
- slg 2y ago[flagged]
- ty6853 2y agoTolerance means little if it's about stuff that you have nothing but good or neutral opinions and feelings about. The virtue of tolerance is accepting that which gives you unpleasant opinions or feelings. This is the kind of tolerance that actually takes meaningful effort to develop. You're limiting tolerance to a form where it has little to no value.
- HeatrayEnjoyer 2y ago[flagged]
- throw10920 2y ago[flagged]
- HeatrayEnjoyer 2y ago[flagged]
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- dang 2y agoCould you please stop posting unsubstantive comments and flamebait? You've unfortunately been doing it repeatedly. It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for. If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful.
- HeatrayEnjoyer 2y agoI do not believe that is the case, but since I cannot see most of this thread I cannot even review it.
- dang 2y agoYou should be able to see the entire thread if you turn 'showdead' on in your profile. The only posts that don't show up that way are ones which their author deleted. However, your comments have been breaking the site guidelines regardless of what else is in the threads: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43343978 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43343978 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43343961 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43343961 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43343926 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43343926 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43343860 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43343860 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43298307 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43298307 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43298121 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43298121 I know it always feels like the other person started it and did worse (and indeed, many of the comments you were replying to were bad ones that got deservedly flagged), but we need you* to follow the guidelines regardless of what anyone else is doing. Any other approach just invokes a downward spiral (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=downward%20spiral%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor...). * I don't just mean you, of course, but everyone who is posting to HN.
- s1artibartfast 2y agoEvery time I see this link people act as if it is a solved problem. It is called a paradox for a reason. It also presupposes that intolerance always outcompetes tolerance in the marketplace of ideas, which I strongly disagree with. The problem intolerance of intolerance actually tries to solve is one of purity. A pure society is the only way to avoid risking discomfort
- ThrowawayR2 2y agoThe paradox of tolerance is not a law of physics. It doesn't automatically win you the argument because it was always merely some dude's opinion. Moreover, given that the public mood has turned decidedly anti-progressive, it's really, really a bad idea to bring up the paradox of tolerance because they might just adopt it and decide you're the intolerant ones that don't have to be tolerated.
- throw10920 2y ago> it's really, really a bad idea to bring up the paradox of tolerance because they might just adopt it and decide you're the intolerant ones that don't have to be tolerated. If the use of a meta-position like this is contingent on a particular set of people being in charge and using it, that means that it wasn't a good meta-position to begin with. Either you believe that we shouldn't tolerate "intolerant" people (and accept that being turned against you when you're not in power), or you don't. Only believing in it (or supporting it) when you have the power to enforce it on your political opponents is hypocritical and deeply evil.
- ThrowawayR2 2y agoYes, agreed. I've made that same point to progressives who quoted the paradox of tolerance many times but it fell on deaf ears. Perhaps they'll listen now.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago[flagged]
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- wkat4242 2y agoIt's because you're berating their identity. It's similar to sharing your feelings when you're offended by a black person walking on the street. We don't tolerate people complaining about that. Why would the LGBT community be treated differently?
- ty6853 2y agoFirst of all, I entirely reject your premise. Second of all, I want to really zero in on "we don't tolerate." I want to know who we is, and how they plan on stopping me from expressing my feelings. Because last I checked we even tolerate nazis in the town square in this country, because the alternative is even worse.
- wkat4242 2y agoHow is it different? People being gay or trans is just like people being black or white. They are born that way. We just give them the tools and trust so they don't have to hide it. Having them hide it doesn't make them not gay. And it doesn't matter because there's nothing bad about that anyway. And how the non toleration works? Well through law. Discrimination and racism are a crime. Even though the white house is full of white supremacists now. And male chauvinists too. Even white women get the short end of the stick. They're already unwelcome in the military (trump fired the female head of the coast guard and the black chief of staff)
- ty6853 2y agoI think you're imagining a caricature of someone who gets a negative feeling from seeing homoerotic activity. Whatever it is, you're talking about someone else. I get a negative feeling, but I have no explanation for it nor any desire to stop gay people from being gay or black people from walking. By all means, kiss whoever you like for all to see. Good luck on you law, because it will only be struck. You're going to need a constitutional amendment.
- wkat4242 2y ago
- wegfawefgawefg 2y agoThis is not reasonable. That doesnt make him prejudiced. He just likes bananas and doesnt like natto. I dont want to see morbidly obese people naked either, its gross to me.
- mschoch 2y ago[dead]
- slg 2y ago>That doesnt make him prejudiced It is literally the dictionary definition of prejudice. From Merriam-Webster[1]: >1. b (1) - an adverse opinion or leaning formed without just grounds or before sufficient knowledge They directly said "two dudes kissing... feels wrong to me but when I try to come up with an explanation I have none." That is an "adverse opinion" they immediately admit to holding "without just grounds". [1] - https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/prejudice https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/prejudice
- ty6853 2y agoWhich provides the nexus, are we being prejudiced when we arrest the couple banging on a park hill in view of public? Or is there actually some deteriorated outcome from that other than it don't seem right.
- johnny22 2y agofor one it is against the law in a lot of places :) Why it's against the law is another discussion.
- ty6853 2y agoSure it being against the law allows an arrest. But in reality someone usually has to call it in, and unless there is a reward in it for them their real reason is it is bothering them somehow. If you grill at the park, beer in hand, while grilling up an American classic of burgers and dogs for your onlooking happy family, in reality there is about 99% chance anyone seeing it is at worst going to ask you to put a coozy on it in the politest way (and rarely even that). Even though it is illegal. Now if you get sloppy and harass people, or look homeless, the calls will start. Banging in the park in open sight on a hill? Odds are totally inverted. There's something more than law at play.
- gggtttkkk88 2y ago[flagged]
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago> Recognizing you have feelings isn't wrong. It's how you learn to control your actions If you’re afraid of the monster under your bed, the solution isn’t to clench you teeth—it’s to learn there’s no monster. Recognising the bias is good. We all have subconscious biases based on fear and disgust. But the solution is to learn more about the thing so it stops triggering a reptilian response.
- ty6853 2y agoYes I agree 100%, although I admit the reptilian response might never fully attenuate. Which leads me to, is public nudity/display of sex something we feel is wrong based on fear or disgust? Or because there is a scientific basis of degraded life outcomes? There can be health hazards in say most indoor spaces but for say printed material those biohazard don't exist. I'm seeking to find if I'm being a reptile here.
- kerkeslager 2y agoI think it's not even reptilian--it's cultural (assuming you're from the US) based in the American history of Puritanism and related strains of Christianity. There are a ton of human cultures that don't vilify nudity. Germany, for example, has a much more relaxed attitude toward nudity.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago> although I admit the reptilian response might never fully attenuate That’s fine. The problem is in the bits between your senses and the reptilian brain. When a kid screams for their iPad on a plane, the reptilian part of their brain is legitimately freaking out. You’re not going to ever shut that off. But the adults in their life should attempt to disconnect it from the stimulus.m If you’ve genuinely never overcome a fear or disgust, this could be a rewarding learning opportunity. Go to a pride event.
- ty6853 2y agoI've been to multiple pride events, a gay nightclub, drag shows, have gay friends, and been to the odd party that was 90+% gay. Had a great time, no problems, and liked the people. I've learned to look past the feeling, but it doesn't shut off.
- yellowapple 2y agoWhy should that action be controlled?
- ty6853 2y agoLearning to control your actions doesnt necessitate controlling 'that' action, it gives you the option. Having the options beyond following your impulsive feelings is useful.
- yellowapple 2y agoOkay, then why is that particular action "useful" to control?
- ty6853 2y agoI have no idea what 'that' action is youre referring to. In generic terms some impulse actions are good (move hand from burning thing), some indifferent, and some bad ( ie dog barking annoys someone so they punch the dog). What's useful is the option and ability to do either. I wouldn't want to let go of a hot pan only to have it fall on a baby, even though I'd otherwise drop it.
- roenxi 2y agoIf it is at all helpful in interpreting the response, ~60% [0] of people aren't capable of doing that and will interpret you having feelings as equivalent to you accepting homophobic role models. Because they literally don't know how to construct their own values by independent reflection. It was eye-opening to me discovering just how limited most humans are on that sort of basic empathy; I had no idea it was that big a blind spot. But it explains some of the weirder downvote storms. [0] https://azatris.github.io/levels https://azatris.github.io/levels
- account42 2y agoIt's also a perfectly natural reaction that is built into many people's biology.