Safe spaces are bullshit, and let me tell you why. You shouldn't be able to discriminate against anyone on the grounds of sexuality or religion or what-have-you anywhere. I fuckin' see this behavior all the time, people want to hide behind terms and words to avoid confrontation and it's fucking bullshit, if someone discriminates against you go get the cops, beat the shit out of them, or fuck off. Looking down your nose at them and boldly declaring that "this is a safe space" does nothing but aggravate one party and give the other party a trump card (no pun intended, but gladly welcomed) to abuse freely instead of standing up for themselves with logical argument and human integrity.
It's NOT unreasonable to want to have a place you can be yourself. That's a lot of what makes America great already: those places exist. What bothers me is telling me I can't criticize someone just because they're part of certain groups.
So, someone doesnt want to associate with someone and the proper response is "get a cop to beat the shit out of them."
Love and tollerance amiright
Where the hell did you get 'doesn't want to associate with someone'?
If someone doesn't want to associate with you, they don't get to have the pleasure of your company.
If someone refuses to hire you on a basis unrelated to your ability to fulfill the job requirements, due to pre-existing prejudice, that's fucked up. Yeah, it hurts them, a little. Having an employee who's slightly worse at their job is not as big of an impact as not having a job, in a capitalist society, especially if you're poor in the first place.
If someone starts using slurs, you tell them to fuck off if you think you're able to, or get someone bigger to tell them for you if you're worried they might try hurting you if you do it yourself.
And finally, those were three different statements, not combined. "Go get the cops", as in, report them. "Beat the shit out of them", as in, confront them. "Fuck off", as in, ignore them and (probably) leave.
Rather than doing the exact same thing you are angry and frustrated with your 'idealized' opponents(we all have 'idealized' versions of 'the opposition' or 'the enemy' or what-have-you to use as models for how they would respond) for, take a second and try to steelman, instead of strongman. Benefit of the doubt is a wonderful thing for fostering cooperation and trust.
Thats trying to legislate morality. If you don't like someone you don't need to be anywere near them. If some buissness owner doesnt want to hire a black guy don't shop there, you don't want to hire a racist don't hire a racist.
Seriouslly this isn't hard.
So, a. we do legislate morality, when normal moral practices fail. That's why things like, oh, killing people, or theft, or death threats, are all punishable by law. As well as stalking, vandalism, and fraud. Fraud in particular seems like an excellent case to compare. If someone cheats people, just don't do business with them. Why even bother prosecuting fraud? It'll be taken care of naturally, after all, since no one will trust them anymore.
That's before getting into cases where it's widespread, which in more than a few parts of the country, racism is. It's present a little bit, just about everywhere, that's the human condition and to some extent the cultural one, but when you can't get a job because most of the business owners don't want to hire a black guy? And you can say 'well then get a job with the rest'. But finding a job can be hard enough in a lot of those parts of the country, since they tend to be the parts that aren't well-off economically speaking. 40% of your options going out the window? Well, first off, by game theory and economic principles, that puts you in a worse bargaining position, and second off, in practical terms, that makes it much more difficult to find a job. Contrary to popular belief, it's not just hard work that determines whether you have a job.
And
that's before we get into the whole 'imperfect information' factor of economics, where we don't always know if the person we're hiring is sexist/racist and will harass/belittle other employees at work! We don't know if the shop owner doesn't have any black employees because that's just how it worked out due to random chance or because they didn't want to risk having something stolen, and they think the best way to do that is not to hire any of those colored folks.
Trust is a two-way street, dammit, and cooperation beats defection in the long run.
Finally: You can hurt someone in far more ways than physical, but just because there aren't bruises doesn't mean it's okay, or should be okay.
... well yeah. That's where the legislation comes in.
And again, not always particularly viable. Markets aren't an unlimited resource, nor businesses that will sell to them.
So you want the government to be powerful enough to punish dissidence for not conforming to your morality
I want the government to be powerful enough to defend me from people whose morality makes me an evil person who deserves whatever they get.
All men are created equal
So all men can be with who they want when they want
Would you like me to force say a jew to hire a nazi? Of course you wouldn't.
There is a slight modicum of difference in how much control you can exert over those two things. Judaism is a faith, but it's also treated as an ethnicity. Nazi-ism is something you can choose not to be. Being born female, being born black, being trans, being born/becoming gay? These are not things you can control. That last two there's scientific evidence for how it happens, even (partially genetic, but largely biological processes to do with hormones during gestation).
Author
Topic: Doc Helgoland's Asylum for the Politically American: T+0 (Read 1420407 times)