BLU
Active topics
  1. There's another "C" word that doesn't get used near enough either, and should. But alas! Here we delve into another area of sensitivity...
  2. Originally posted by MattG:Harry, just for the record, you've got the best and most accurate post in this thread, my temper is just getting the better of me this morning

    Haha no worries man, I was just enjoying the term!
    Originally posted by blueeyedboy:[..]
    There's another "C" word that doesn't get used near enough either, and should. But alas! Here we delve into another area of sensitivity...

    You mean contrafibularity, right?
  3. Haha. Yes! That's the word...
  5. I'll make one more post against my better judgment:

    Assumption & Intent

    Recently I heard an account of a man (for the sake of avoiding confusing pronouns, we'll call him Joe) who was at a festival and saw another man (let's say Bob) collapse in a group he was with.

    Joe runs over to Bob and the group and asks,

    "Does he need any help?"

    The group appears disgusted at Joe and - WITHOUT ANSWERING THE QUESTION - reprimands him for assuming that Bob is a "he" when Bob in fact identifies as a "she." This is insensitive and Joe should be ashamed for just walking up and assuming someone's gender.

    Fuck right off. A few key points I will make as to why they can do so.

    Assumption, while best known for occasionally "making an ASS out of U&ME", ha-ha-ha, has a legitimate place in society. Where the line has blurred in terms of "when assumption is appropriate" has really got more to do with stereotypes. It is of course horrendously inappropriate to look at the way someone chooses to walk and say, "well, that person must be gay." It is inappropriate to look at the color of one's skin and assume how intelligent they are, or what food they like to eat, or ascribe a personal attribute based on "other people that look like that."

    HOWEVER, assumption exists at all because our brain associates certain things with the concept of majority. I can assume that when I see someone wearing a cross around their neck, that they believe in Jesus. Might they just think it's a decorative piece of jewelry? Well sure, and good for them - doesn't bother me if that's the case. Because if I were to approach you while you wore a cross and wish you a Merry Christmas, and you informed me that you were in fact Jewish and celebrated Hanukkah instead, it wouldn't change the intent of what I was trying to say to you. Semantically, had I been more informed of your personal situation prior to opening my big fat offensive mouth, yeah I would have chosen different words. But they mean the same thing in context.

    But let's go back to Joe and Bob. I'm not saying that because there are fewer of them, transgender people have less of a place in our society or less right to any respect for who they are as a person. But if the New York Times publishes a federal study (which they did) that says as of 2016, 99.4% of the US population does not identify as transgendered (which it did), should that be the cue for Joe to second-guess himself as he rushes over to help a fellow human in need as he addresses the situation?

    The reason this is an issue is because these pronouns and labels and what-have-you accent the struggle that that community faces. To be reminded with something as simple as a pronoun that you are lumped in with a majority group that you do not associate with has got to be a living hell. I am not, nor should anyone in their right mind, discredit what a hardship those numbers create for someone living that life.

    However, look at intent. In terms of language, Joe is wrong. In the simplest terms, he used the wrong word. He was factually and plainly incorrect. This does not make Joe an opponent of this social movement.

    Stop to consider the following. If you read nothing else in this post, read this:

    -When you introduce yourself to someone you've never met before, do you sign hello as you say it? Do you stop to consider whether or not that person is deaf? The deaf community is within the same one-percentage of the U.S. population as the transgendered community.

    -Furthermore, if you are in America and introduce yourself to someone for the first time, do you say the English word "Hello?" Do you stop to consider whether or not that person speaks English? In 2014, 25% of the U.S. population spoke English less-than-well, and did not speak it at all at home. That number has surely not gone down since.

    Why do we assume these things about people? Because - in a factually rooted and politically correct way, the majorities of people we encounter fit within those boundaries. Are we always right? Absolutely not!!!

    The intent of saying "hello" does not change if you do not speak English.

    The intent of "hello" does not change if you cannot hear me say it.

    The intent of "does he need any help?" does not change if he is in fact a she.

    As we have progressed as a society, we have become aware and respective of different humans' different situations. Some situations have taken far more time, activism, acknowledgment, and work than others. Some are still being fought for. Some haven't been fought for yet. But the more you get your feathers ruffled over someone communicating with you "the wrong way," and the less you scratch beneath the surface of their communication and make a small effort both at understanding their intent and trusting that, upon being informed, that person is able to acknowledge and correct their semantics, the harder you will make this fight for yourself.

    I'm not saying that the transgender community is unanimously respected or that they have reached a point of equal rights. The world has a long way to go to get on the right side of history in this social moment. I'm also not saying that it is MORE the transgender community's problem that these spats happen - the defense is justified and a reaction to a PLETHORA of mistreatment and disrespect. But that does not eliminate the need to work together.
  6. Originally posted by MattG:I'll make one more post against my better judgment:

    Assumption & Intent

    Recently I heard an account of a man (for the sake of avoiding confusing pronouns, we'll call him Joe) who was at a festival and saw another man (let's say Bob) collapse in a group he was with.

    Joe runs over to Bob and the group and asks,

    "Does he need any help?"

    The group appears disgusted at Joe and - WITHOUT ANSWERING THE QUESTION - reprimands him for assuming that Bob is a "he" when Bob in fact identifies as a "she." This is insensitive and Joe should be ashamed for just walking up and assuming someone's gender.

    Fuck right off. A few key points I will make as to why they can do so.

    Assumption, while best known for occasionally "making an ASS out of U&ME", ha-ha-ha, has a legitimate place in society. Where the line has blurred in terms of "when assumption is appropriate" has really got more to do with stereotypes. It is of course horrendously inappropriate to look at the way someone chooses to walk and say, "well, that person must be gay." It is inappropriate to look at the color of one's skin and assume how intelligent they are, or what food they like to eat, or ascribe a personal attribute based on "other people that look like that."

    HOWEVER, assumption exists at all because our brain associates certain things with the concept of majority. I can assume that when I see someone wearing a cross around their neck, that they believe in Jesus. Might they just think it's a decorative piece of jewelry? Well sure, and good for them - doesn't bother me if that's the case. Because if I were to approach you while you wore a cross and wish you a Merry Christmas, and you informed me that you were in fact Jewish and celebrated Hanukkah instead, it wouldn't change the intent of what I was trying to say to you. Semantically, had I been more informed of your personal situation prior to opening my big fat offensive mouth, yeah I would have chosen different words. But they mean the same thing in context.

    But let's go back to Joe and Bob. I'm not saying that because there are fewer of them, transgender people have less of a place in our society or less right to any respect for who they are as a person. But if the New York Times publishes a federal study (which they did) that says as of 2016, 99.4% of the US population does not identify as transgendered (which it did), should that be the cue for Joe to second-guess himself as he rushes over to help a fellow human in need as he addresses the situation?

    The reason this is an issue is because these pronouns and labels and what-have-you accent the struggle that that community faces. To be reminded with something as simple as a pronoun that you are lumped in with a majority group that you do not associate with has got to be a living hell. I am not, nor should anyone in their right mind, discredit what a hardship those numbers create for someone living that life.

    However, look at intent. In terms of language, Joe is wrong. In the simplest terms, he used the wrong word. He was factually and plainly incorrect. This does not make Joe an opponent of this social movement.

    Stop to consider the following. If you read nothing else in this post, read this:

    -When you introduce yourself to someone you've never met before, do you sign hello as you say it? Do you stop to consider whether or not that person is deaf? The deaf community is within the same one-percentage of the U.S. population as the transgendered community.

    -Furthermore, if you are in America and introduce yourself to someone for the first time, do you say the English word "Hello?" Do you stop to consider whether or not that person speaks English? In 2014, 25% of the U.S. population spoke English less-than-well, and did not speak it at all at home. That number has surely not gone down since.

    Why do we assume these things about people? Because - in a factually rooted and politically correct way, the majorities of people we encounter fit within those boundaries. Are we always right? Absolutely not!!!

    The intent of saying "hello" does not change if you do not speak English.

    The intent of "hello" does not change if you cannot hear me say it.

    The intent of "does he need any help?" does not change if he is in fact a she.

    As we have progressed as a society, we have become aware and respective of different humans' different situations. Some situations have taken far more time, activism, acknowledgment, and work than others. Some are still being fought for. Some haven't been fought for yet. But the more you get your feathers ruffled over someone communicating with you "the wrong way," and the less you scratch beneath the surface of their communication and make a small effort both at understanding their intent and trusting that, upon being informed, that person is able to acknowledge and correct their semantics, the harder you will make this fight for yourself.

    I'm not saying that the transgender community is unanimously respected or that they have reached a point of equal rights. The world has a long way to go to get on the right side of history in this social moment. I'm also not saying that it is MORE the transgender community's problem that these spats happen - the defense is justified and a reaction to a PLETHORA of mistreatment and disrespect. But that does not eliminate the need to work together.
    Fantastically well said...

    (and P.S. to me, the intent of Merry Christmas is me saying Happy Holidays. To some of us, things are just ingrained in us, nothing more, nothing less)

    And... out of curiosity... if Bob collapsed and was unable to respond, how would Joe know how he identifies? And instead of being disgusted and reprimanding Joe, shouldn't they be appreciative that Joe was being a decent human being and trying to help out another fellow human, even though he they were obviously a complete stranger?
  7. Correct
  8. What my main problem with these kind of things is, is that is polarizes us even more. Because I think that when things like this occure, most of the people who are being ''helped'' by changing ''Merry Christmas'' or ''Ladies and gentlemen'' really don't give a fuck. They are smart and strong enough to just read between the lines and hear if someone does it out of good intent or not.

    But there is a minorty in every kind of ''group'' of people who are just so noisy and with the media jumping on top of them and letting them act like they are the ''Gay community'' or the ''Left'' or the ''Right'' or whatever, it just makes the big group of normal and well thinking people also look like weird.
  9. I've really found it interesting reading everyone's take on the ladies and gentlemen discussion. I feel like I've found common ground on the issue. In fact I feel some people have said what I wanted to say only much better so thank you.
  10. Originally posted by bartajax:What my main problem with these kind of things is, is that is polarizes us even more. Because I think that when things like this occure, most of the people who are being ''helped'' by changing ''Merry Christmas'' or ''Ladies and gentlemen'' really don't give a fuck. They are smart and strong enough to just read between the lines and hear if someone does it out of good intent or not.

    But there is a minorty in every kind of ''group'' of people who are just so noisy and with the media jumping on top of them and letting them act like they are the ''Gay community'' or the ''Left'' or the ''Right'' or whatever, it just makes the big group of normal and well thinking people also look like weird.
    LOL. You are right. Someone decides they will task themselves with speaking for the people without any thought of first consulting the people!
  11. Matt, as soon as you said 'Bob' I immediately thought of one past memory on this site.
  12. Would love to hear his take on these social issues