Woman calls cops another Black Jogger

Page 26 of 70 [ 1117 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29 ... 70  Next

kraftiekortie
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 87,510
Location: Queens, NYC

06 Jun 2020, 12:11 am

People are sometimes afraid to express their condolences. They might not know you well enough. Nothing to do with “hate.”

At least Fnord expressed his condolences. That’s pretty major. It means you’re an important member of the Site.



Last edited by kraftiekortie on 06 Jun 2020, 12:16 am, edited 1 time in total.

IsabellaLinton
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 1 Nov 2017
Gender: Female
Posts: 72,433
Location: Chez Quis

06 Jun 2020, 12:13 am

I like you Sly. I couldn't care less what a person's political beliefs are, so long as they are kind to others.

That's how equality works. I don't draw lines.


_________________
I never give you my number, I only give you my situation.
Beatles


VegetableMan
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 11 Jun 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,208
Location: Illinois

06 Jun 2020, 12:18 am

Pepe wrote:
sly279 wrote:
kraftiekortie wrote:
I’m a Centrist, I get it from all sides—but I’m not hated.

Just because one disagrees with you politically—doesn’t mean one dislikes you as a person.

John Adams and Thomas Jefferson were best friends—but they hated each other politically.

Not been my experience on this site. The day I voted for trump I became an enemy to many here. First they called me horrible things, now they just completely ignore me for the most part which I guess is better then before.
I can only imagine if I was dying in front of them they wouldn’t do anything to help me.
I’d call that hate.


Partisanship is a very big problem in America, yes.


Pick a team, support that team, bash the other team, and turn a blind eye all the bad s**t your team does.

Both teams are dangling by the strings of the oligarchs. The performance theater you see in congress is like pro wrestling. It's nothing but a show to maintain the political divide.


_________________
What do you call a hot dog in a gangster suit?

Oscar Meyer Lansky


TheRobotLives
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 7 Dec 2019
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,092
Location: Quiet, Dark, Comfy Spot

06 Jun 2020, 12:27 am

Pepe wrote:
,,,

So, Darmok got banned?

We can't talk about banned members, yet, we can't know they're banned unless we talk about them.


_________________
Then a hero comes along, with the strength to carry on, and you cast your fears aside, and you know you can survive.

Be the hero of your life.


sly279
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Dec 2013
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 16,181
Location: US

06 Jun 2020, 12:33 am

kraftiekortie wrote:
People are sometimes afraid to express their condolences. They might not know you well enough. Nothing to do with “hate.”

At least Fnord expressed his condolences. That’s pretty major. It means you’re an important member of the Site.


Why do you always have to defend otheres.
No they had no issue expressing with me before trump won the election.


_________________
There is no place for me in the world. I'm going into the wilderness, probably to die


QFT
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 27 Jun 2019
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,456

06 Jun 2020, 12:33 am

cyberdad wrote:
QFT wrote:
But lets do a hypothetical What would have happened if me and my dad were to simply walk in to take the ball without asking (kinda like he threw the bone without asking)? They would call a police. Why? Because they don't trust our motives: they don't know that we won't steal anything. But lets say that we make a really good case to the police that we weren't going to steal anything and lets say the police believes us. They can still get us into trouble for trespassing anyway. But why would police get us into trouble for trespassing if the purpose of anti-trespassing laws is to prevent people from stealing and police believed us we weren't going to steal? The reason is that we made other people worried that we might steal -- and making other people worried is, in itself, a crime. Well, by the same token, throwing biscuits at a dog would make an owner worried you were going to steal it, which, too, is a crime.


Trespassing onto private property to retrieve a ball after being told is a provocative act and you are breaking the law,


Well, what Christian Cooper did is also "provocative" (your word) so I don't see how it would be any less wrong.

cyberdad wrote:
Remember in the Cooper case it was Amy who was breaching a bylaw and potentially she was subject to a fine. Christian didn't break any laws.


They both broke the law. Amy broke by having the dog off leash, and Christian broke by giving the dog the bones.

cyberdad wrote:
QFT wrote:
So why is it that you were over-protective when it comes to aspie girls? Thats what made me think that you thought I was some kind of threat to them.

My daughter is autistic


Like I said I am not interested in anyone under 18. But lets say I will be interested in some autistic woman in her 20-s or 30-s? Why would you be against it, unless you view me in a negative way?

cyberdad wrote:
QFT wrote:
I am not sure that there is a correlation. The way I see it is that people on the right are racist against blacks while people on the left are racist against whites, so they are both racist, just different type of racism. So which of these two racisms is more likely to correlate with prejudice against aspies? Good question. Could go either way.

The major difference I see between left and right is economic. But socially Right wingers are highly individualistic and each person is responsible for themselves economically.


Aspies are individualistic too, so that would be one reason why right wingers might not be so bad for aspies after all.

I am not saying that its that simple. I am sure there are both pros and cons on both sides. Its just that in one of your earlier posts you acted as if you have to side with the left in order to help the aspies. So I am trying to point out that its not that simple by giving you some examples of counter-points.

cyberdad wrote:
That's why the rich like right wing philosophy because they don't have to share their wealth.


Thats not always true either. People on the South tend to be poor, yet they tend to side with right wing views. People in academia tend to be rich, yet they tend to side with the left wing views.

cyberdad wrote:
There is a focus on culture/race which breeds xenophobia (although its possible to be national socialists where distribution of wealth is ok so long as it's within one's race).


I think both left and right focus on the race -- just different aspects of it.

cyberdad wrote:
In this sense the Chinese and Japanese and even orthodox jews in Israel are national socialists.


That is a really good point and this is one of the reasons why I am not buying into the "politically correct" narrative. From "politically correct" point of view when Chinese or Japanese or Jews have ethnic pride, thats good, but if Whites have ethnic pride thats bad. Well its double standard.

I guess maybe their point is that Whites inflicted more danage (with Nazi Germany and American Slavery being often cited examples). But they aren't alive today any more. If you look at the type of racism you see today, I doubt that it would be much worse than what you would see in China or Japan.

cyberdad wrote:
Left wingers tend to be more compassionate and see humanity in more collective terms. We tend to want what's best for all people are willing to pay more taxes (if its within our means) to help the downtrodden, the environment and other issues,


Yet left wingers don't feel bad about the innocent babies that are being aborted.

Helping the downtrodden might be a good idea, but not at the expense of other people whose life is also difficult. To put it bluntly, I am all in favor of upper class helping the low class, but I am against middle class having to do it. If the upper class were willing to share just a little bit more out of their millins, then I am sure it would more than make up for middle class being freed from all this.

cyberdad wrote:
QFT wrote:
I think both people on the left and people on the right would agree that "we need to treat everyone the same". The issue is that it is very difficult to define what we mean by the same.
From left wing point of view, the fact that in the past blacks were treated worse than whites means that today we need to treat blacks better than whites and that way "on average" it would be the same. From right wing point of view, the fact that blacks were treated worse in the past is irrelevant since none of those people in the past are alive today; on the contrary, if we punish today's Whites for the behavior of their slave ancestors it is unfair towards them since its not their fault their ancestors did what they did. The point I am trying to make is that I agree that people should be treated equally. I am just saying that its not necesserely true that "equality" always amounts to making things better for blacks. Its more complicated than that.


White spaces in America are a result of ill-gotten gains at the cost to native and black peoples.


The thing is that none of those people are alive today. People shouldn't have to bear the guilt of their ancestors if they, themselves, weren't part of it.

cyberdad wrote:
Much of the crux of the rage in the riots at the moment stems from the way police are seen as storm troopers of the white privilege. Again this is not necessarily left wing as in China the army is storm troopers for Chinese supremacy over the Turkic and Tibetan peoples.


Well, in China the war with Tibet is still raging on, so I imagine it would be a bit more serious than here in the US.

cyberdad wrote:
QFT wrote:
What I was trying to say is this. While blacks have plenty of people outside their group speaking on their behalf, aspies don't seem to (the only examples of NT-s speaking on behalf of aspies are probably their relatives). So thats why I felt like blacks have it easier. Now the reason I brought it up is this. When I asked "why is it not okay to discriminate against blacks yet it is okay to discriminate against aspies" you said "well, discrimination against blacks is historic" -- which seemed to imply that you said blacks have it harder. But since, to me, it doesn't look like blacks have it harder, thats why I challenged that assertion. By the way, since you mentioned you wanted to be an advocate for autism, is it because of your daughter or is it just you deciding it all on your own? I was assuming your daughter is an aspie? Was I correct?


You asked me this earlier so I will answer here. Prejudice tends to stem from hating what is different in other people. Being Jewish doesn't give you a free pass (I notice you tried invoking that card). While there is no such thing as oppression olympics, what is fair is every minority community share a common dislike of black people. Let's not pretend that a Jewish family would be less likely to be angry if their daughter dated a black man any more than a southern redneck family. '


You misunderstood the context in which I mentioned being Jewish. I agree with you that Jewish people are just as prone to anti-black racism as non-Jews. What I was trying to say, however, is this:

a) being both Jewish and aspie at the same time, I can objectively say that aspies are hated more than Jews

b) I can then extrapolate my observation in "a" to say that prejudice against aspies is worse than ethnic prejudices in general

I guess what you might say is that I shouldn't be extrapolating because blacks have it worse than Jews. But you see, if you look at history, thats not true: blacks were only persecutted for few centuries and Jews were persecutted for millenia. Now, if you look at *todays* society then things are different and, yes, probably blacks *do* have it worse than Jews. But -- again if you look at todays society -- then aspies have it even worse than blacks. In other words,

c) If you look at millenia-long history then the most hated group is Jews

d) If you look at today, then the most hated group are aspies

In neither case its the blacks.

I guess blacks "would" be the most hated group if you "specifically" look at the history of American slavery. But that is pretty narrow look isn't it. So that kinda goes back to why is the world so obsessed with America anyway? Well I guess maybe in case of the current events it makes sense since they happend in America. But then why be obsessed with that specific time period of American history instead of being obsessed about right here right now?

cyberdad wrote:
If we want the mainstream public to give autism a chance you need to remove the veil of bias/prejudice/discrimination that's causing a form of mind blindness.


Agreed -- except that both left and right are guilty of prejudice, just a different kind. Thats why I don't see why the leftist brand of prejudice is any better for aspies.

In fact, I will quote what you just said yourself:

a) You mentioned that Chinese, Japanese and Jewish societies can be viewed as National Socialistic. So what makes you think that these brands of prejudice are better for aspies than the pro-White brand of it?

b) You mentioned that left wingers are more collectivist while right wingers are more individualist. Well, the type of prejudice an aspie can fall victim to is "my group of friends doesn't like you so I don't like you". That sounds collectivist, does it not? So that would suggest that right-wing individualism would be a cure for it: a right winger would say "me and you are both individuals so I don't mind the fact that my friends don't like you: I still like you so I will give you a chance".

cyberdad wrote:
My daughter was diagnosed as non-verbal autistic when she was 5. Today she's verbal and has a normal IQ but her delay in speech mean't she has a lot of catching up to do in developing social skills. She's pretty independent now and I as a parent I am very proud of her but I know she will always struggle with friends (she has NT friends at school but they don't want to interact with her outside of school so she only has us outside of school hours). She's recently gone online so I guess that's a milestone.


Wow that is a lot of achievement. I started speaking at the normal age (probalby around 1). I have Asperger rather than autism so people with Asperger start talking normally. But I probably struggle with friends more than your daughter since nobody talks to me on campus. Although at the same time its also true that things became more difficult when I was older. In my case I didn't care about friends at all until I was 21, then at the 21 I made U-turn from not caring to being outright desperate, so I guess that being desperate pushed people away. Before I was 21 they were more willing to give me some overtures and attempt to befriend me -- although I didn't make use of it since back then I didn't really care.

cyberdad wrote:
Yes I wanted to be an advocate but scaled back my plans because I found NT parents of autistic kids are essentially no different to any other NT people and I found I had nothing in common with them other than they are just focused on their own kids.


I would say it is a good argument *in favor* of being an advocate: you would attempt to do something that nobody else is trying to do and perhaps attempt to change their mind.

cyberdad wrote:
I also wanted to rehaul services


What does the term "rehaul" mean?

cyberdad wrote:
but lost interest as professionals working with autistic kids are all looking after themselves.


Can you elaborate?



sly279
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Dec 2013
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 16,181
Location: US

06 Jun 2020, 12:36 am

TheRobotLives wrote:
Pepe wrote:
,,,

So, Darmok got banned?

We can't talk about banned members, yet, we can't know they're banned unless we talk about them.

Basically the only way you’ll know is if we talk about them enough the mods will put stop to it and issue warning.


_________________
There is no place for me in the world. I'm going into the wilderness, probably to die


funeralxempire
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 41
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 34,202
Location: Right over your left shoulder

06 Jun 2020, 12:36 am

TheRobotLives wrote:
So, Darmok got banned?

We can't talk about banned members, yet, we can't know they're banned unless we talk about them.


That's a real catch-23** situation.

**@1:19


_________________
The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.
If you're not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the oppressing. —Malcolm X
Just a reminder: under international law, an occupying power has no right of self-defense, and those who are occupied have the right and duty to liberate themselves by any means possible.


funeralxempire
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 41
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 34,202
Location: Right over your left shoulder

06 Jun 2020, 12:37 am

sly279 wrote:
TheRobotLives wrote:
Pepe wrote:
,,,

So, Darmok got banned?

We can't talk about banned members, yet, we can't know they're banned unless we talk about them.

Basically the only way you’ll know is if we talk about them enough the mods will put stop to it and issue warning.


So, we'll take turns asking, they can't ban us all.


_________________
The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.
If you're not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the oppressing. —Malcolm X
Just a reminder: under international law, an occupying power has no right of self-defense, and those who are occupied have the right and duty to liberate themselves by any means possible.


funeralxempire
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 41
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 34,202
Location: Right over your left shoulder

06 Jun 2020, 12:51 am

sly279 wrote:
Why do you always have to defend otheres.
No they had no issue expressing with me before trump won the election.


We tend to be hard-headed, prone to misinterpreting other's ways of expressing concepts, aloof with a tendency to forget about whatever's outside of the spotlight sometimes. Unfortunately this leads to the same of social awkwardness on here that we deal with in real life. What happens when you combine a selection of people with toxic traits.

Whether it's whiny or angry or defeatist or whatever, we are what we are.
This community, one other forum, my co-workers and both of my parents and one of my brothers are the only people I interact with regularly. Even the person on here I dislike the most is still closer to being a friend than the opposite.

Does that mean sometimes I'm my own imaginary friend? :eew:


_________________
The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.
If you're not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the oppressing. —Malcolm X
Just a reminder: under international law, an occupying power has no right of self-defense, and those who are occupied have the right and duty to liberate themselves by any means possible.


funeralxempire
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 41
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 34,202
Location: Right over your left shoulder

06 Jun 2020, 1:01 am

QFT wrote:
funeralxempire wrote:
don't believe you're that naive, and that's why it's frustrating to keep encountering the same sorts of deflections from this. To be fair, you're not the only one doing it, but Robo's demonstrated a much more nuanced understanding of this topic in her posting history as compared to yours which... honestly, kinda doesn't do you any favours on this topic although to be fair, it's not like it's a topic you mention a lot.


Simply saying "your posts suck" without saying which ones is a judgemental attitude right there. You don't like when black people are being prejudiced against on the basis that they are black? Yet you did the same thing to me just now.

In any case, while I don't know what specific posts you are referring to, let me tell you something general about the way I communicate (not just on race issue but on "any" issue). Suppose the topic case two sides, say A and B. And suppose the person I am talking to understands the side A but completely misses the side B. In this case I will keep hitting them over their head with side B. That doesn't mean that I don't see both sides. I very much do. But whats the point of talking about side A if we both agree on them? So I just talk about side B.

Now, as far as this thread is concerned, I can prove to you that I can see both sides by directing you to my reply at the top of p.10. In that reply I said "I think both of them made big mistakes" and presented both sides. But then everyone agreed with me about Amy's mistakes yet kept denying Christian's mistakes -- so that is what prompted me to emphasize more and more how it was Christian who was in the wrong, since this was the point that people kept denying.

As far as my other posts on race issues, it might be something similar. I noticed that wrongplanet is very much left wing. So, as a result of this, the "points that people don't see" would tend to fall on the right -- which is why my habbit of pointing them out would make me sound right wing. I imagine that if I were to go to some message board where most people are right wing, I would end up making left-wing arguments for that exact reason.

I realize that this is probably one of the main ways I alleinate people: if I keep presenting the "opposite" opinions to them it seems like I just want to argue. I guess I haven't worked out the ways of "pointing out the missing points" without ending up like I am on the opposite side completely. I mean I could, but then I have a sense that people don't hear me, which makes me emphasize it more and more. So I guess I need to learn the strategy of communicating whatever I feel that people are missing without sounding like I am totally ignoring anything else (and no I am not ignoring other things, I just make myself sound like I do). So thats the communication thing I have to learn.


For starters, appearing prejudiced towards someone based on traits they can't control (race, where you're from, etc) is different than being motivated by the views of theirs you've been exposed to. For what it's worth I've also argued strongly against assuming white southern posters on here are racist in defence of Twisty not long after he had slandered me (to be fair, I went after him far harsher than you've ever seen from me, got the apology I wanted and felt the need to make it clear that I bore no further ill will). I'm usually pretty quick to dissent when a lot of my fellow Canadians bash on the US. I'm not certain where you're from, I post that more to point out that it isn't just the groups that are sometimes assumed to be 'left wing pet causes' that I feel the need to argue in defence of depending on the situation.

I thought it would be both rude and obsessive to actually provide a list of criticisms of a bunch of your posts. I figured it was already kinda weird to put that much effort into trying to be balanced instead of judging people based just on the most recent interaction. I guess basically because I think I'm unreasonable in how I approach 'researching people' that without you specifically saying you'd like that sort of precise feedback, I'd feel it's unreasonable to even consider preparing that.

I'll do it if you'd really like it, but I'm lazy and using this to procrastinate from working on music, so I'd prefer to stick to broader observations because it isn't just in this thread or on the topic of police brutality.

I saw those posts, and I don't disagree you do seem at least somewhat motivated by playing devil's advocate in this thread. Further, for the extent to which it deserves credit, I found your points about how your kid would be your kid regardless of background (I'm not sure why the comparison between having your own kid who's mixed vs. adopting a white kid occurred, but whatever, not questioning it) to be something positive to point out.

kraftiekortie wrote:
There is lots of subtle racism in the US. It’s a subconscious thing at times. Many people aren’t consciously aware of their own subtle racism.


This is a well-worded way to express this. :nerdy:


_________________
The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.
If you're not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the oppressing. —Malcolm X
Just a reminder: under international law, an occupying power has no right of self-defense, and those who are occupied have the right and duty to liberate themselves by any means possible.


Brictoria
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Aug 2013
Age: 50
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,998
Location: Melbourne, Australia

06 Jun 2020, 1:05 am

VegetableMan wrote:
Pepe wrote:
sly279 wrote:
kraftiekortie wrote:
I’m a Centrist, I get it from all sides—but I’m not hated.

Just because one disagrees with you politically—doesn’t mean one dislikes you as a person.

John Adams and Thomas Jefferson were best friends—but they hated each other politically.

Not been my experience on this site. The day I voted for trump I became an enemy to many here. First they called me horrible things, now they just completely ignore me for the most part which I guess is better then before.
I can only imagine if I was dying in front of them they wouldn’t do anything to help me.
I’d call that hate.


Partisanship is a very big problem in America, yes.


Pick a team, support that team, bash the other team, and turn a blind eye all the bad s**t your team does.

Both teams are dangling by the strings of the oligarchs. The performance theater you see in congress is like pro wrestling. It's nothing but a show to maintain the political divide.


I'd suggest it's also a case of finding the most outrageous supporter of the other team, pick their most outrageous beliefs, then tar the entire support base of the other side as having these views, rather than having the intelectual honesty to see that this WAS an outlier and trying to understand the other side is made of many people with (often divergent) individual views, motivations, and goals.

Similarly, framing a policy from the other side's team in the worst, most extreme way (often ignoring "inconvient" facts\parts of the policy) and aguing against it on this basis rather than listening to the other sides' explanation\reasoning behind the policy.

Sadly, intellectual discourse has gone out of favor having being replaced with "my side, right or wrong".

Personally, if I come across something I may not agree with, I like to try and take the opposing view to understand WHY the action\decision could have occurred (often arguing against my "prefered" side), rather than assume my instinctive reaction is correct. Sometimes it reinforces my belief, sometimes it reverses it, and as new facts come to light I go through the same exercise again.



kraftiekortie
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 87,510
Location: Queens, NYC

06 Jun 2020, 3:18 am

“White” is not an ethnic group.

The only people who believe “white people” comprise an ethnic group are “white nationalists.”



auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 115,219
Location: the island of defective toy santas

06 Jun 2020, 3:19 am

race is IMHO largely a defective social construct.



cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 58
Gender: Male
Posts: 36,036

06 Jun 2020, 3:27 am

QFT wrote:
Well, what Christian Cooper did is also "provocative" (your word) so I don't see how it would be any less wrong.
They both broke the law. Amy broke by having the dog off leash, and Christian broke by giving the dog the bones.

Can you show me a law where giving a dog bones is illegal?

QFT wrote:
Like I said I am not interested in anyone under 18. But lets say I will be interested in some autistic woman in her 20-s or 30-s? Why would you be against it, unless you view me in a negative way?

How often do you come across an autistic woman in Berkley? I have worked or studied in more than 15 different universities over the last 30 years in 2-3 different countries and never once met one autistic female, I met one autistic male but he was a mature age student.

QFT wrote:
Aspies are individualistic too, so that would be one reason why right wingers might not be so bad for aspies after all. I am not saying that its that simple. I am sure there are both pros and cons on both sides. Its just that in one of your earlier posts you acted as if you have to side with the left in order to help the aspies. So I am trying to point out that its not that simple by giving you some examples of counter-points.

Fair enough, I don't want to stop you from being who you are and what you value, people are different.

QFT wrote:
Thats not always true either. People on the South tend to be poor, yet they tend to side with right wing views. People in academia tend to be rich, yet they tend to side with the left wing views.

Which is technically another generalisation. In academia I meet plenty of selfish self-centred bastards (the higher education system is crawling with such types).

QFT wrote:
I guess maybe their point is that Whites inflicted more danage (with Nazi Germany and American Slavery being often cited examples). But they aren't alive today any more. If you look at the type of racism you see today, I doubt that it would be much worse than what you would see in China or Japan.

Central Asians, east Asians and caucasians have murdered more people than anyone else. These regions have been in states of perpetual warfare until 1945.

QFT wrote:
The thing is that none of those people are alive today. People shouldn't have to bear the guilt of their ancestors if they, themselves, weren't part of it.

They are beneficiaries of colonialism which is why call this the post-colonial era historically.

QFT wrote:
You misunderstood the context in which I mentioned being Jewish. I agree with you that Jewish people are just as prone to anti-black racism as non-Jews. What I was trying to say, however, is this:
a) being both Jewish and aspie at the same time, I can objectively say that aspies are hated more than Jews
b) I can then extrapolate my observation in "a" to say that prejudice against aspies is worse than ethnic prejudices in general
I guess what you might say is that I shouldn't be extrapolating because blacks have it worse than Jews. But you see, if you look at history, thats not true: blacks were only persecutted for few centuries and Jews were persecutted for millenia. Now, if you look at *todays* society then things are different and, yes, probably blacks *do* have it worse than Jews. But -- again if you look at todays society -- then aspies have it even worse than blacks. In other words,
c) If you look at millenia-long history then the most hated group is Jews
d) If you look at today, then the most hated group are aspies
In neither case its the blacks.

Again with the oppression olympics? Jews are historically despised in Europe only because jews were responsible for the renaissance and many of the great academic, commercial and historical milestones and they obviously generated a lot of jealousy and suspicion. In the Arab world they became unpopular only after the formation of the state of Israel and some of the hatred is perhaps justified. In the rest of the world nobody knows the difference between a jew and a whiteman.

In stark contrast every single cultural and ethnic group look down on black Africans. I have seen darker peoples in the Philippines, India and even Melanesia who openly dislike Africans. Even our aboriginal Australians who are currently marching in BLM marches in Melbourne as we speak get into gang wars with african youth in Sydney and Melbourne. This is why I try give Africans a fair hearing as they have it worst.

QFT wrote:
I guess blacks "would" be the most hated group if you "specifically" look at the history of American slavery. But that is pretty narrow look isn't it. So that kinda goes back to why is the world so obsessed with America anyway? Well I guess maybe in case of the current events it makes sense since they happend in America. But then why be obsessed with that specific time period of American history instead of being obsessed about right here right now?

Because the two are connected. In funerals among African Americans there is a lot of open grieving where the pastor talks of the all the potential a person had when they passed away and all the obstacles in their lives which are a relic from the past. Apaprently this is a common theme in African American funerals. The past always looms over African Americans and they are reminded of their inferiority every day they walk in the street.

QFT wrote:
Wow that is a lot of achievement. I started speaking at the normal age (probalby around 1). I have Asperger rather than autism so people with Asperger start talking normally. But I probably struggle with friends more than your daughter since nobody talks to me on campus. Although at the same time its also true that things became more difficult when I was older. In my case I didn't care about friends at all until I was 21, then at the 21 I made U-turn from not caring to being outright desperate, so I guess that being desperate pushed people away. Before I was 21 they were more willing to give me some overtures and attempt to befriend me -- although I didn't make use of it since back then I didn't really care.

My daughter is going through that phase now. There's female friends at school who spend time with her at recess and lunchtime and she keeps asking me if I have met their parents (which I have) she's always trying to socially engineer outings (including giving me phone numbers) but the bloody parents have told me their daughters have their own friends and that's why they don't invite my daughter to outings or to their birthdays. I am relieved she doesn't have a birthday party this year because I actually hate the parents of the other kids and the kids themselves seem to like her but they prefer to keep their distance.

QFT wrote:
I would say it is a good argument *in favor* of being an advocate: you would attempt to do something that nobody else is trying to do and perhaps attempt to change their mind.

Not interested anymore

QFT wrote:
What does the term "rehaul" mean?
QFT wrote:
Can you elaborate?

Re-organise...the services for autistic kids is terrible, professionals I have come across as making careers out of the suffering of parents. I could write pages on my experiences as a parent but I'll refer you to the 120,000 posts I made on the parent section of WP



cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 58
Gender: Male
Posts: 36,036

06 Jun 2020, 3:32 am

kraftiekortie wrote:
“White” is not an ethnic group.

The only people who believe “white people” comprise an ethnic group are “white nationalists.”


And people in governments who design census