Avoiding eye contact 'everyday racism'

[ReverendHellh0und]

Article is Here





Yeah, it's definitely racism. It's not like people like me are shy and reserved, and have a hard time talking to people or anything.

People pay to go to this school.

 

[Mr Person]

Anyway, this idiotic bull**** is part of why Trump got elected. I'm not saying electing Trump was a rational response (it wasn't), as a rational response would be simply pointing it out for what it is and moving on. But Trump's base is generally not all that rational, so their response to overboard PC crap like this was to elect a giant asshole with rectal insecurity.

Micro-aggression my arse.

I actually would consider it pretty weird if everyone intentionally made eye-contact with everyone in their vicinity, no matter the reason. I'd be thinking "umm....yes? What is it?" or saying it, if they didn't look away.

 

[backpacker]

The people who think it is racist for you to avoid eye contact are the same people who will think it is racist if you "stare" at them by making eye contact. Live your life. Don't worry about what other people think of you.

 

[Napoleon]

Bingo! I think we have gotten so ridiculous that we need resurrect Einstein and Freud. They can work up a new theory to describe human interaction.

"What if I'm looking down, but I have a mirror taped to my shoe?":lamo

What if the other person has a lazy eye? Does it count if only one is looking at them? These are the moral dilemmas of our day.

 

[Absentglare]

That is what we call trying to find problems where none exist. Social justice is just nonsense, people getting offended at everything. I could say I really like that white shirt my parents gave me for my birthday and be accused of white supremacy. All it does is ensure these people can never fully function in society.

Let me first focus on this in particular: "That is what we call trying to find problems where none exist."-- what convinced you of the bold? (Hint: that is purely agenda based, it has no foundation in objective reality).

Now let me focus on this: "Social justice is just nonsense, people getting offended at everything." Have you ever heard of MLKJr? How about the American Revolution? Your position here is either completely ignorant in terms of history or completely amoral, please elaborate.

 

[Carjosse]

Let me first focus on this in particular: "That is what we call trying to find problems where none exist."-- what convinced you of the bold? (Hint: that is purely agenda based, it has no foundation in objective reality).

Now let me focus on this: "Social justice is just nonsense, people getting offended at everything." Have you ever heard of MLKJr? How about the American Revolution? Your position here is either completely ignorant in terms of history or completely amoral, please elaborate.

Wow, you are equating "micro-aggressions" to the civil rights movements where blacks had their rights taken away from them? SJWs are more delusional than I thought. They were not fighting for social justice, they were fighting for justice, real justice. Because micro-aggressions do not exist, no one is harmed by their existence, not making eye contact with people is not racist in anyway, no one's rights are being violated only SJWs are the ones getting up in arms over it.

 

[Absentglare]

This isn't "social justice". It's nonsense.



Yes, it is finding racism in every little thing. Sorry, but it's the truth. It's the "let's find offense in everything" mentality.

I don't care if someone possibly finds my avoidance of eye contact to be subtly problematic. It's not my problem.

Ummm, no, this is just what social justice is; fair treatment of individuals in society. It's certainly not "nonsense", now you contradict yourself. You either understood it (and therefore disqualified it from being described as "nonsense") or you lied earlier. Which is it?

It's not "finding offense"- there is nothing offensive about encouraging awareness and compassion: except perhaps to generally unwitting pawns who defend racism. Who is offended? The strongest language even used by your article is that it's "alienating".

If there is a subtle disparity with regards to how someone is treated across racial lines, that can alienate those people. No amount of willful ignorance on your part can change that unequivocal fact about reality. You can't convince me just because you think it looks cool to make fun of stuff like this, that just reinforces the idea that your position is immature.

 

[Carjosse]

Ummm, no, this is just what social justice is; fair treatment of individuals in society. It's certainly not "nonsense", now you contradict yourself. You either understood it (and therefore disqualified it from being described as "nonsense") or you lied earlier. Which is it?

It's not "finding offense"- there is nothing offensive about encouraging awareness and compassion: except perhaps to generally unwitting pawns who defend racism. Who is offended? The strongest language even used by your article is that it's "alienating".

If there is a subtle disparity with regards to how someone is treated across racial lines, that can alienate those people. No amount of willful ignorance on your part can change that unequivocal fact about reality. You can't convince me just because you think it looks cool to make fun of stuff like this, that just reinforces the idea that your position is immature.

Social justice does not want fair treatment of individuals in society it wants to put minorities on a pedestal.

 

[Absentglare]

:shock:


Shoo...

Wow, that is one impressively top notch rebuttal.

 

[Absentglare]

It's a case of the perpetual victim conplex.

Oh, you're aware that your triggering off of a compassionate plea is a case of exhibiting a "perpetual victim complex"? Fascinating level of self-awareness there.

 

[Mason66]

Let me first focus on this in particular: "That is what we call trying to find problems where none exist."-- what convinced you of the bold? (Hint: that is purely agenda based, it has no foundation in objective reality).

Now let me focus on this: "Social justice is just nonsense, people getting offended at everything." Have you ever heard of MLKJr? How about the American Revolution? Your position here is either completely ignorant in terms of history or completely amoral, please elaborate.

Would it be better to segregate all races so no micro-aggressions happen?

 

[Mason66]

Ummm, no, this is just what social justice is; fair treatment of individuals in society. It's certainly not "nonsense", now you contradict yourself. You either understood it (and therefore disqualified it from being described as "nonsense") or you lied earlier. Which is it?

It's not "finding offense"- there is nothing offensive about encouraging awareness and compassion: except perhaps to generally unwitting pawns who defend racism. Who is offended? The strongest language even used by your article is that it's "alienating".

If there is a subtle disparity with regards to how someone is treated across racial lines, that can alienate those people. No amount of willful ignorance on your part can change that unequivocal fact about reality. You can't convince me just because you think it looks cool to make fun of stuff like this, that just reinforces the idea that your position is immature.

Please explain how a micro-aggression treats somebody unfairly.

 

[Absentglare]

People pay to go to this school.

It was published in a newsletter by their equality and diversity unit.

Why don't right wingers take their own advice and stop trying to censor speech at universities?

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

It was published in a newsletter by their equality and diversity unit.

Why don't right wingers take their own advice and stop trying to censor speech at universities?

I'm not trying to censor anyone. Are you telling me I can't suggest Oxford's whatever unit are a bunch of idiots?

 

[ReverendHellh0und]

Ummm, no, this is just what social justice is; fair treatment of individuals in society. It's certainly not "nonsense", now you contradict yourself. You either understood it (and therefore disqualified it from being described as "nonsense") or you lied earlier. Which is it?

It's not "finding offense"- there is nothing offensive about encouraging awareness and compassion: except perhaps to generally unwitting pawns who defend racism. Who is offended? The strongest language even used by your article is that it's "alienating".

If there is a subtle disparity with regards to how someone is treated across racial lines, that can alienate those people. No amount of willful ignorance on your part can change that unequivocal fact about reality. You can't convince me just because you think it looks cool to make fun of stuff like this, that just reinforces the idea that your position is immature.

She's a woman, and your misogynistic microagressions are very offensive. as a white male you need to check your privilege.

 

[Abbazorkzog]

This Social Justice Warrior crap is getting out of control.

 

[Absentglare]

Wow, you are equating "micro-aggressions" to the civil rights movements where blacks had their rights taken away from them? SJWs are more delusional than I thought. They were not fighting for social justice, they were fighting for justice, real justice. Because micro-aggressions do not exist, no one is harmed by their existence, not making eye contact with people is not racist in anyway, no one's rights are being violated only SJWs are the ones getting up in arms over it.

I'm not "equating"- perhaps you should look up the meaning of the word. Racism is racism, it contains the whole scale from relatively benign (but meaningful on the aggregate) to absolutely horrifying. Its' definition does not change based on the severity of the racism.

Who brought up violating rights? That's a strawman. Are you capable of thinking critically? Drop all your stupid emotional baggage and this hyperdefensive, triggered attitude. Set your emotions aside. Think about this.

What makes you so confident that no amount of alienation occurs with respect to race in this country? Have you lived 325 million lifetimes? Or even the 42 million or so African American lifetimes? Have you studied this from a sociological or psychological perspective?

Where does your strange overconfidence come from?

 

[Absentglare]

Social justice does not want fair treatment of individuals in society it wants to put minorities on a pedestal.

That's complete bull****. Total strawman argument right there. Nowhere in the original article did i see any semblance of putting "minorities on a pedestal." I call horse****.

 

[Absentglare]

Would it be better to segregate all races so no micro-aggressions happen?

... no. What?

If they published the same basic guideline "try to treat all people the same," would you be all pissed off about it?

Please explain how a micro-aggression treats somebody unfairly.

An individual incident is not meaningful by itself, but our lifetimes are constructed entirely of individual incidents. Human beings are perceptive, they might notice when the shopkeeper watches them like a hawk but ignores their white friends. That alone is just one little thing, but it exists within the framework of all other little things. Society transmits consistent archetypes of humans; nerd, jock, geek, thug-- these archetypes have unseen influence over our reasoning and our behavior.

I think it helps it we try be aware of how we might unintentionally participate in such framework. It's not really a big deal either way, as i said, individual incidents are not meaningful by themselves.

 

[Carjosse]

I'm not "equating"- perhaps you should look up the meaning of the word. Racism is racism, it contains the whole scale from relatively benign (but meaningful on the aggregate) to absolutely horrifying. Its' definition does not change based on the severity of the racism.

Who brought up violating rights? That's a strawman. Are you capable of thinking critically? Drop all your stupid emotional baggage and this hyperdefensive, triggered attitude. Set your emotions aside. Think about this.

What makes you so confident that no amount of alienation occurs with respect to race in this country? Have you lived 325 million lifetimes? Or even the 42 million or so African American lifetimes? Have you studied this from a sociological or psychological perspective?

Where does your strange overconfidence come from?

If these micro-aggressions bother you have much bigger problems, namely mental issues that prevent you from understanding the meaning of speech and actions. You are trying to forcibly change people's speech which you have no right to do. You have problems understanding words and actions, and because of that you are finding racism, or sexism, or whatever where is none to be found. A person is not asking where your accent is from due to racism, they are more than likely just asking because they want to know.

As an example SJW types get up in arms when I mention South African Coloureds simply because I used the word coloured. They also do not like the fact that Afrikaans is gaining massive popularity in South Africa. SJWs do not understand context or meaning.

 

[Absentglare]

I'm not trying to censor anyone. Are you telling me I can't suggest Oxford's whatever unit are a bunch of idiots?

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.

She's a woman, and your misogynistic microagressions are very offensive. as a white male you need to check your privilege.

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.

 

[TheGoverness]

Ummm, no, this is just what social justice is; fair treatment of individuals in society.

They don't want fair treatment. They want "special" treatment. The people that believe in this microagression BS, want everyone else around them to placate to their sensibilities.

It's certainly not "nonsense", now you contradict yourself. You either understood it (and therefore disqualified it from being described as "nonsense") or you lied earlier. Which is it?

I could care less about your silly semantics games.

It's not "finding offense"- there is nothing offensive about encouraging awareness and compassion: except perhaps to generally unwitting pawns who defend racism.

You are the King of Strawmans. And how nice of you to imply that I'm some defender of racism.

Who is offended? The strongest language even used by your article is that it's "alienating".

The people that believe in these "microagressions" are the ones who find minute things like avoiding eye contact offensive. This is not that hard to understand.

If there is a subtle disparity with regards to how someone is treated across racial lines, that can alienate those people. No amount of willful ignorance on your part can change that unequivocal fact about reality.

Oh, I understand it is a reality. The reality is that unfortunately, there ls a group of perpetual victims, who take offense to every little trivial thing in existence.

You can't convince me just because you think it looks cool to make fun of stuff like this, that just reinforces the idea that your position is immature.

My position is not "immature", and I'm not doing this to be "cool".

 

[TheGoverness]

She's a woman, and your misogynistic microagressions are very offensive. as a white male you need to check your privilege.

I'm also gay, so that's double offensive. Why must he be so homophobic and sexist?

 

[sanman]

micro-aggressions.
I suspect we'll see nano-aggressions soon after...

Don't forget pico-aggressions, and after that come atto-aggressions

We may have to break things down at the quantum level, because that's when things get fuzzy

 

[Ikari]

Don't forget pico-aggressions, and after that come atto-aggressions

We may have to break things down at the quantum level, because that's when things get fuzzy

Then we're going to have superpositions of aggression, someone will have to write down the Hamiltonian so we know which aggression states are at play.