• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Avoiding eye contact 'everyday racism'

Mr Person said:
Have you overlooked the fact that this is a political message board, so criticizing a political message we disagree with is exactly the kind of thing we're supposed to be doing here or is just a good day for trolling?
Click to expand...

LOL you think this is reasoned political disagreement?

It's more like an SJW bashing circlejerk. I'm pretty sick of young kids who take feminism and civil rights for granted taking a term used to describe Gandhi and MLKJ to drag through the mud in this despicable culture war. There's nothing inherently wrong with encouraging people to be considerate. It is increasingly important as globalization increases the tension brought about by geographical, sociological, and cultural diversity; especially in contexts like universities where differing factions are forced to interact.

Universities have unique challenges in fostering an inclusive atmosphere. It's not like every suggestion and policy proposal is perfect, but they're not as ridiculous as people misrepresent them to be.

But i take most issue with your implication here that i'm trolling; i can assure you that i'm not. I'm dead serious and i'm extremely passionate about maintaining an attitude of respect for other people. I just wish other people weren't so hostile to the mere suggestion written on a newsletter that was never sent to them. I guess it's asking too much to request that the people crying about triggered snowflakes try to take their emotional outbursts down a few notches.
 
TheGoverness said:
:lamo:lamo:lamo:lamo

Yeah, I'm the one lumping together concepts that don't apply.

But keep on going, Absent. You're doing a fantastic job at making my point, I must say.
Click to expand...

If you have an argument, you should find it suspicious that you are unable to articulate it.
 
Absentglare said:
LOL you think this is reasoned political disagreement?

It's more like an SJW bashing circlejerk. I'm pretty sick of young kids who take feminism and civil rights for granted taking a term used to describe Gandhi and MLKJ to drag through the mud in this despicable culture war. There's nothing inherently wrong with encouraging people to be considerate. It is increasingly important as globalization increases the tension brought about by geographical, sociological, and cultural diversity; especially in contexts like universities where differing factions are forced to interact.

Universities have unique challenges in fostering an inclusive atmosphere. It's not like every suggestion and policy proposal is perfect, but they're not as ridiculous as people misrepresent them to be.

But i take most issue with your implication here that i'm trolling; i can assure you that i'm not. I'm dead serious and i'm extremely passionate about maintaining an attitude of respect for other people. I just wish other people weren't so hostile to the mere suggestion written on a newsletter that was never sent to them. I guess it's asking too much to request that the people crying about triggered snowflakes try to take their emotional outbursts down a few notches.
Click to expand...

Like I have always said there is a line between being polite and being politically correct. MLK and Gandhi were never SJWs they actually fought for real rights and against real discrimination not imagines micro-aggressions.
 
Napoleon said:
You're just going to have start shaking every black person you see while looking them in the eyes and screaming that you acknowledge their existence.
Click to expand...

That's a fast way to fubar.
 
Absentglare said:
LOL you think this is reasoned political disagreement?

It's more like an SJW bashing circlejerk. I'm pretty sick of young kids who take feminism and civil rights for granted taking a term used to describe Gandhi and MLKJ to drag through the mud in this despicable culture war. There's nothing inherently wrong with encouraging people to be considerate. It is increasingly important as globalization increases the tension brought about by geographical, sociological, and cultural diversity; especially in contexts like universities where differing factions are forced to interact.

Universities have unique challenges in fostering an inclusive atmosphere. It's not like every suggestion and policy proposal is perfect, but they're not as ridiculous as people misrepresent them to be.

But i take most issue with your implication here that i'm trolling; i can assure you that i'm not. I'm dead serious and i'm extremely passionate about maintaining an attitude of respect for other people. I just wish other people weren't so hostile to the mere suggestion written on a newsletter that was never sent to them. I guess it's asking too much to request that the people crying about triggered snowflakes try to take their emotional outbursts down a few notches.
Click to expand...

If someone thinks that trying to control random eye movement is an extension of the work of Gandhi or MLKJ then they're an idiot. Period. Stop pretending that every bit of minutia is a civil rights issue the size of Everest.
 
Carjosse said:
Like I have always said there is a line between being polite and being politically correct. MLK and Gandhi were never SJWs they actually fought for real rights and against real discrimination not imagines micro-aggressions.
Click to expand...

What makes you think subtlety is imagined? Subtlety is still real, it's just not individually significant. That's the origin of the micro part of the microaggression term, it's supposed to prevent social justice hater snowflakes from getting triggered by their guilt the moment they hear it.

Napoleon said:
If someone thinks that trying to control random eye movement is an extension of the work of Gandhi or MLKJ then they're an idiot. Period. Stop pretending that every bit of minutia is a civil rights issue the size of Everest.
Click to expand...

Apparently you two are ignorant on the origin of the term SJW. It originated to describe people who fought for social justice like Gandhi and MLKJr. Then, right wing hipsters decided to make it sarcastic and turn it into a pejorative for use in their culture war.

BTW: i was talking about the term SJW. If your argument is that it doesn't apply to this topic, why don't you bring it up to the people who are bashing SJWs in this thread like that's somehow relevant? Your "is an extension of the work of" strawman is misguided.
 
Absentglare said:
Apparently you two are ignorant on the origin of the term SJW. It originated to describe people who fought for social justice like Gandhi and MLKJr. Then, right wing hipsters decided to make it sarcastic and turn it into a pejorative for use in their culture war.

BTW: i was talking about the term SJW. If your argument is that it doesn't apply to this topic, why don't you bring it up to the people who are bashing SJWs in this thread like that's somehow relevant? Your "is an extension of the work of" strawman is misguided.
Click to expand...

Misguided? Lmao. By all means - please explain how anything Gandhi or MLKJ ever said can be interpreted to mean that micromanaging eyeballs and hair follicles (or whatever the next wisp of minutia turns out to be) should be the greatest civil rights issue of our day. People who believe that deserve the insults they're subjected to in this thread. There's a reason why SJW became a pejorative and this garbage about eye movement is a great example of why.
 
Last edited:
Napoleon said:
Misguided? Lmao. By all means - please explain how anything Gandhi or MLKJ ever said can be interpreted to mean that micromanaging eyeballs and hair follicles (or whatever the next wisp of minutia turns out to be) should be the greatest civil rights issue of our day. People who believe that deserve the insults they're subjected to in this thread. There's a reason why SJW became a pejorative and this garbage about eye movement is a great example of why.
Click to expand...

You are very confused. I brought up MLKJr and Gandhi because of this line:

Carjosse said:
Social justice is just nonsense
Click to expand...

I never equivocated it with " micromanaging eyeballs and hair follicles".

In any case, you seem extremely ignorant on this issue. You bring up hair follicles as an obvious case of dishonesty (perhaps this is just a joke to you- that would explain the carelessness of your posts). You don't seem to realize that avoiding eye contact can be racist if eye contact is more likely to be avoided when the other person is of a certain race. That's just a true fact. You might think it's not important, or offensive, or alienating, or harmful, or bad; but at the end of the day, that's just your opinion, and you have no valid reason to cry so hard about someone else having a different one.
 
Interesting how times change. I remember in a class 30 years ago being told that we should NOT judge people based on eye contact. In some cultures, it is considered rude to make eye contact. Navaho, Japanese, and Hispanic all have this trait of looking away from people. Introverted people probably are more likely to avoid eye contact. People with low self esteem are likely to avoid eye contact.
We should not judge people based on cultural or personal traits that should have NOTHING to do with the ability to do whatever the job requires.
Just another form of discrimination.
 
Absentglare said:
Apparently protesting a speech by Milo or Coulter is "censorship" based on the right wing agenda-driven definition, so now i'm just using that redefinition.



See this is exactly what i'm talking about. Thank you for making my point. You have no actual interest in actually discussing the merits of this advisement. You're here to participate in tribalism by patting yourselves on your backs for making fun of people and trolling people who have genuine interest in social progress.
Click to expand...

Protesting it is not censorship.

Preventing it from happening is.
 
Roadvirus said:
First: A "equality and diversity unit"? Seriously? *facepalm*

Second: Whoever came up with this list needs a serious mental evaluation.

Third: When is breathing a certain way going to be seen as "racist" or "Micro-aggression" or whatever these box of rocks call it?
Click to expand...

This is what happens when life is so easy for people that they have to go looking for something to complain about.

Normal people should just ignore them.
 
Absentglare said:
Another lie. Studies have shown since the 70s that blacks are often implicitly racist against other blacks.
Click to expand...

And of course whites, and everybody else.
 
Mason66 said:
Protesting it is not censorship.

Preventing it from happening is.
Click to expand...

Well i would argue it's not so simple. One side protests, the other side counter protests. It takes two to tango, so they both have to participate for conflict to occur. Admittedly, one side may be the initiator while the other is not; though my impression is that both sides of such a conflict are often provocative.

Mason66 said:
And of course whites, and everybody else.
Click to expand...

Correct. Racism is a behavior, it does not have any ethnic requirement with regards to the person whose behavior is racist.
 
Absentglare said:
Well i would argue it's not so simple. One side protests, the other side counter protests. It takes two to tango, so they both have to participate for conflict to occur. Admittedly, one side may be the initiator while the other is not; though my impression is that both sides of such a conflict are often provocative.



Correct. Racism is a behavior, it does not have any ethnic requirement with regards to the person whose behavior is racist.
Click to expand...

Incorrect 'racism' is not a 'behaviour' independent of the apparent 'race' of the participants. To pretend that it is is absurd.
 
Roadvirus said:
First: A "equality and diversity unit"? Seriously? *facepalm*

Second: Whoever came up with this list needs a serious mental evaluation.

Third: When is breathing a certain way going to be seen as "racist" or "Micro-aggression" or whatever these box of rocks call it?
Click to expand...

I don't know about Third. Surely ceasing to breath is racist if the medical practitioner seeking to keep one alive is of a different 'race'? Kind of like seeking to prove that he or she is incompetent.
 
Absentglare said:
Apparently protesting a speech by Milo or Coulter is "censorship" based on the right wing agenda-driven definition, so now i'm just using that redefinition.
Click to expand...


Protesting is fine, but when you start rioting, smashing windows and doing violence on others, until the speech is shut down, that is censorship. why do you support violence? Didn't you see what happened to your ilk when the right started fighting back?




See this is exactly what i'm talking about. Thank you for making my point. You have no actual interest in actually discussing the merits of this advisement. You're here to participate in tribalism by patting yourselves on your backs for making fun of people and trolling people who have genuine interest in social progress.
Click to expand...


again with your native american micro-aggressions and all of this over your mysogonistic and homomphobic microaggressions towards The Governess.... when will you check your privilege? Are you demanding a save space? I believe the loft here at dp may be your closest bet.
 
Sweden said:
Incorrect 'racism' is not a 'behaviour' independent of the apparent 'race' of the participants. To pretend that it is is absurd.
Click to expand...

You misread what i wrote. The race of the person whose behavior is racist is irrelevant.

If someone says something racist about Asians, that someone can be white, black, Asian- doesn't matter. What they said is either racist or not, it doesn't magically become racist only if an Asian person hears it.
 
Absentglare said:
There's nothing inherently wrong with encouraging people to be considerate.
Click to expand...

I have no problem with encouraging others to be considerate.

But when some dingleberry starts calling it "racist" or whatever for not making eye contact with a minority, then it becomes absurd garbage that is subject to justified ridicule.

Universities have unique challenges in fostering an inclusive atmosphere. It's not like every suggestion and policy proposal is perfect, but they're not as ridiculous as people misrepresent them to be.
Click to expand...
In cases like this, they are overdoing it with this idiocy.
 
Ikari said:
I don't look anyone in the eye as to avoid inviting conversation, lol.
Click to expand...

Many people rarely make eye contact because it's uncomfortable for them.

If it's a young black male I'll be watching his hands and his movements more than his eyes.

I want to stay alive.

If it's a nice old black lady or man or child I'll smile, say hello and go on my way.

All this has nothing to do with racism......just common sense.

:2usflag:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom