It’s fine to discriminate against bigots and bullies

Post Reply New Topic

Part of the problem is that hating feels powerful, is easy, comes "naturally" because it's in the primitive wiring we all have. If you are relatively powerless, or powerful but insecure, and averse to mental effort (lazy or overwhelmed), you're going for the shortcut. Also, it's a great way to keep subgroups of peasants at one another's throats, so you can rob them blind while they're distracted.

The trick is to find a way to make that "easy" option more difficult and uncomfortable. Certain types of social shaming have been used for this and still are, if you look closely (with mixed results). There are also a few "recovered haters" who recovered because they were forced outside their "bubble" (i.e. had to interact, genuinely, with those they believed were hateworthy) and found they'd been scammed into the hating racket.

Depends on the methods used and the agenda and what all starts falling under the category of bigoted and bullying, how minuscule it starts becoming.

I disagree. If someone is purposely made to feel bullied, or made to feel offended, then something has to be done. This sort of behavior can not be tolerated in a business, school, church, or whatever.

That's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about where over reacting comes into play. The thing with 'something has to be done' is, it can cross the line from justice to vengeance for the sake of sanctification. This is the danger of hate being used to combat hate as I see it. And when I say hate combating hate, I mean just that. Not the scenario you were giving. There's a difference.

This article is complete BS. And I say that before I noticed it was written by Laurie f*****g Penny. Anything she writes is premium grade garbage.

Well, I'm talking about legitimate, proven cases of bullying and bigotry. People who use those charges against others for gain or cruelty are the real bullies and bigots, and should be dealt with.

Hopefully a door won't be opened for them to exploit.

Just how would it be opened?

Overzealousness.

Would there have been such an outcry of disapproval if a female employee of a national child care chain had said "Women are naturally better at looking after children" ? I have a feeling not.

Whether someone is suitable for a job should be based on the quality of skills they have that are needed for that job , and not pre-emptive opinions based on gender.

In that sense Damore is wrong with his blanket statement. Whether that makes him a bigot rather than guilty of faulty thinking is debatable.

Men and women are both capable of ,for want of a better phrase,"nasty behaviour" . The reality is though that men are more likely to be pulled up for it.
Men are often see as oppressors and privileged, irrespective of social status, for the mere random fact of being male.

Was google right to fire him? Was his behaviour likely to cause discord within the company and effect performance.? Most probably. Should he have been given an official warning rather than being promptly fired - there is a strong case that that would have been more appropriate.

I hope Damore absolutely crushes Google in this case. It's a complete disgrace what happened to him.

And bullies making themselves appear the to be victims of bullying while making thier victims out to be the bullies. I've seen this enough times IRL to know that it happens often enough. Bullies are often sociopaths and are very proficient at manipulation and deception.

These people that want all these nannying laws so much for thier protection need to realize that the laws intended to protect them may someday be used to f**k them over.

OR they can just pack up and leave to countries that let them hire the people they need that can get the work done instead of losing money on unqualified diversity hires and payouts over baseless sexual harassment lawsuits by whiny, entitled children rendered beyond reproach by mob justice.


In that case look forward to businesses compiling black lists of employees that ever filed lawsuits over harassment and sharing them with other businesses via TOR.


It's what we get for allowing low IQ people the vote.

Are you serious?

I don't think that disenfranchising people is a good idea.

If that was the case, just imagine how many conservative voters would be banned from the voting rolls.

A study once showed conservatives tend to have lower IQs than average and so do racists and people who are very closed minded and judgmental. I remember seeing multiple sources about it.