Are people entitled to be racist/homophobic/sexist etc

[Withano]

Do they have that right in today's society?

[Paula D]

That's a very open ended question. What do you mean by it?

Are people allowed to have thoughts? Yes.

Are they allowed to say words? Yes.

Are they allowed to take negative actions against others? No.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

[Withano]

That's a very open ended question. What do you mean by it?

Are people allowed to have thoughts? Yes.

Are they allowed to say words? Yes.

Are they allowed to take negative actions against others? No.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

Interesting. So theyre entitled to hate entire goups as long as they dont act physically, but they can be disrespetful verbally?

I disagree entirely, but this was the type of answer I was looking for.

Are you (for example) fine with people calling a black person an n-word, or just fine with them expressing that they dislike black people?

[Ammi]

Do they have that right in today's society?

..no of course not...but then, it’s not that black and white though is it...because it’s the interpretation of ‘isms’ that’s the thing as well...I might say PHOBIC WITHANO...and you might say, no that wasn’t what was meant etc...and etc...

[Oliver_W]

People can think and say what they think, as long as they're happy to face the consequences. This doesn't include getting physical though

[Matthew.]

no. if they express the view then it is unacceptable but unfortunately there will always be people that are homophobic/racist/sexist etc.

[Ammi]

..’hate’ isn’t always involved though when an ‘ism’ is being accused of...

[Withano]

People can think and say what they think, as long as they're happy to face the consequences. This doesn't include getting physical though

Is there a line with what people can say, or can they say whatever they like

[lewis111]

Everyone has different opinions on what is classed as those thing so it's hard
Like IMO being against same sex marriage means you do not believe gays deserve equality in society therefore you are homophobic - but may see this is an acceptable view

I feel like racism usually has the most clear boundaries as people can't use religious beliefs or "back in my day" to defend their disgusting opinions as often (But I think that's more in the UK whereas in the US it seems more I clear)

[Paula D]

Interesting. So theyre entitled to hate entire goups as long as they dont act physically, but they can be disrespetful verbally?

I disagree entirely, but this was the type of answer I was looking for.

Are you (for example) fine with people calling a black person an n-word, or just fine with them expressing that they dislike black people?So you're not really asking a question, you're making a statement.

That's what I thought.

Look, I don't hate or dislike any group of people but reality is we can NOT force everyone in the world to think the same.

We can force them not to take action because of their bias and that's all we can do.

I just don't get why people think calling someone scum, rat, snake and various other names is ever going to change that person's mind.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

[Kazanne]

People can think and say what they think, as long as they're happy to face the consequences. This doesn't include getting physical though

This^ why should people be told by others what they can think,say and do,as long as they don't hurt anyone I see no problem,

[lewis111]

But to answer the question I suppose yes they are entitled to it because we can't sensor opinions but they should always be called out on them and challanged so those opinions eventually disappear

[Withano]

So you're not really asking a question, you're making a statement.

That's what I thought.

Look, I don't hate or dislike any group of people but reality is we can NOT force everyone in the world to think the same.

We can force them not to take action because of their bias and that's all we can do.

I just don't get why people think calling someone scum, rat, snake and various other names is ever going to change that person's mind.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

I'm not saying you dislike any group of people, I'm interested in your interpretation of the question, as I am Oliver's who answered similarly to you.

[Cherie]

..’hate’ isn’t always involved though when an ‘ism’ is being accused of...

True, the question has far too many layers to give a bland yes or no answer

[Withano]

This^ why should people be told by others what they can think,say and do,as long as they don't hurt anyone I see no problem,

By hurt, do you only mean physically hurt? Is a person entitled to emotionally hurt a group they dislike?

[Crimson Dynamo]

That would depend on who is judging them and interpreting the law.

like you have judged them in your poll

[Withano]

True, the question has far too many layers to give a bland yes or no answer

Well discuss the layers then? You dont have to just use the poll and leave lol

[Paula D]

I'm not saying you dislike any group of people, I'm interested in your interpretation of the question, as I am Oliver's who answered similarly to you.Fair enough, well my interpretation is that the question is too open to have a definite answer.

If the question was are people allowed have their own opinions as long as they don't negatively take action against others then my answer is yes absolutely because otherwise we're into scary territory of removing thoughts from people's heads.



Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

[Withano]

Fair enough, well my interpretation is that the question is too open to have a definite answer.

If the question was are people allowed have their own opinions as long as they don't negatively take action against others then my answer is yes absolutely because otherwise we're into scary territory of removing thoughts from people's heads.



Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

Thats interesting. So they're entitled to it, as long as its more of a secret?

[Kazanne]

By hurt, do you only mean physically hurt? Is a person entitled to emotionally hurt a group they dislike?

Of course not,but you can't make or bully people into liking someone they don't, you cannot control what goes on in peoples heads.but most people know what is acceptable and what's not and don't force their opinions on others.

[Jamie89]

I'd say they have the right but it isn't right, if that makes sense. I see those as being separate things, like I consider those views to be wrong but I think people should be 'entitled' to hold whatever views they have. With that though they should also be allowed to face criticism of their views, and the problem I feel with all of this is that as soon as someone does criticise they are then often criticised for having a criticism and it just becomes an argument about free speech which I feel is often misunderstood.

I'd say where the line gets drawn for me is if someone is inciting violence or hatred, I don't think anyone should be 'entitled' to that because it's imposing onto other people and negatively affecting them and their lives in an extreme way, it's no longer about someone having their personal freedom of speech or thought or even being about the views they hold, but actually placing consequences onto other people without their consent and they don't have the right to do that.

[Paula D]

Maybe a better way of explaining it is to take the gay marriage referendum in Ireland as an example.

My father doesn't agree with gay marriage and we had perfectly civil discussions about it and all I asked him to do was not vote at all because it has no effect in his life really and he agreed.

I didn't ask him to change his view and neither do I have the right to.

Hope that explains it better.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

[Jamie89]

Basically people are entitled to be wrong :laugh:

[Jessica.]

Obviously no.

[Brillopad]

Do they have that right in today's society?

Everyone has a right to an opinion. How they express that opinion is key, but as already stated, interpretation plays a big part too. Should we all we held to ransom by the sensibilities of some and the downright control by others?

[Paula D]

I don't know if you're trying to be passive aggressive or not Withano or you want a genuine debate.

If you don't want debate don't ask such an open question.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

[Firewire]

You can think what you want, but it doesn’t give you the right to actively discriminate. Having thoughts and feelings are different to actions.

[Brillopad]

I don't know if you're trying to be passive aggressive or not Withano or you want a genuine debate.

If you don't want debate don't ask such an open question.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

He only wants one-sided rhetoric. Debate doesn’t Come into it.

[Kazanne]

Do you think this is acceptable AgjfiJsswSo

The older generation just have to die !!

[Brillopad]

You can think what you want, but it doesn’t give you the right to actively discriminate. Having thoughts and feelings are different to actions.

Who is actively discriminating against who? That is the question.

[Withano]

Everyone has a right to an opinion. How they express that opinion is key, but as already stated, interpretation plays a big part too. Should we all we held to ransom by the sensibilities of some and the downright control by others?

I mean whats an acceptable way to express that a person believes women are worth less than men, for example, would be my next question. I cant think of one - obviously I'm aware I can't control their thought, but at what level are they allowed to express that opinion?

[Withano]

I don't know if you're trying to be passive aggressive or not Withano or you want a genuine debate.

If you don't want debate don't ask such an open question.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

I dont want a debate, I want a discussion. Which post did you find passive aggressive, I'm literally just asking questions about peoples responses.

[Oliver_W]

Is there a line with what people can say, or can they say whatever they like

As long as the words don't encourage violence. If I said "I wish someone would punch Withano's face", it would be a bit different to "I really don't like Withano's face, it would be nice if it were punched, but I don't condone that."

Otherwise, yeah, I think people should say what they like as long as they're happy to face the consequences.

[AnnieK]

Should we have the right to take people's rights away? Yes people are entitled to have those views, no they are not acceptable but you can't fight oppression with oppression imo

[Paula D]

I dont want a debate, I want a discussion. Which post did you find passive aggressive, I'm literally just asking questions about peoples responses.No no you're not. You're attempting to put words into people's mouth.

Answer me this question? If we all decided tomorrow that No people are not entitled to any views how do you suggest that's policed?

Do you go around and do surgery to remove thoughts from people's heads?

See how this works?

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

[Cal.]

Of course ****ing not.

[Ammi]

I mean whats an acceptable way to express that a person believes women are worth less than men, for example, would be my next question. I cant think of one - obviously I'm aware I can't control their thought, but at what level are they allowed to express that opinion?

..well obviously you can express an opinion etc as many of us do in these things ...but with that opinion I personally just don’t think it’s helpful/progressive etc with just throwing a ‘label’ and ism at someone ...that’s only going to cause defensiveness and a potential inability to discuss...

[Paula D]

Very well put.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

[Paula D]

Should we have the right to take people's rights away? Yes people are entitled to have those views, no they are not acceptable but you can't fight oppression with oppression imoOf course ****ing not.Very simplistic view of the world.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

[Paula D]

Sorry Ann, that was a reply to Cal

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

[Withano]

No no you're not. You're attempting to put words into people's mouth.

Answer me this question? If we all decided tomorrow that No people are not entitled to any views how do you suggest that's policed?

Do you go around and do surgery to remove thoughts from people's heads?

See how this works?

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

I feel like youre derailing the thread somewhat and I dont completely understand why.. your Irish referendum post made a lot of sense, you clearly stated where your line was, everything after that seemed to be fighting for the sake of it.

[Paula D]

I feel like youre derailing the thread somewhat and I dont completely understand why.. your Irish referendum post made a lot of sense, you clearly stated where your line was, everything after that seemed to be fighting for the sake of it.Oh hang on now, I'm not allowed to post now because I don't agree with you?

You've asked questions, I've answered them. I've asked you questions you haven't answered any of them.

The Irish referendum example is a perfectly valid one. I don't agree with other people's view on it but I believe in their right to hold that view.

What did you not understand about that?

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

[Withano]

Oh hang on now, I'm not allowed to post now because I don't agree with you?

You've asked questions, I've answered them. I've asked you questions you haven't answered any of them.

The Irish referendum example is a perfectly valid one. I don't agree with other people's view on it but I believe in their right to hold that view.

What did you not understand about that?

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

Reread my post and take a breather. Jeeze. I literally said your irish referendum post made a lot of sense.

[Paula D]

Reread my post and take a breather. Jeeze. I literally said your irish referendum post made a lot of sense.Yes but after that I can't ask you questions?

How about you answer some of them?

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

[Withano]

Yes but after that I can't ask you questions?

How about you answer some of them?

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

Which ones specifically.

[Ammi]

Should we have the right to take people's rights away? Yes people are entitled to have those views, no they are not acceptable but you can't fight oppression with oppression imo

..yeah I agree, Annie..with trying to fight oppression with oppression, that whole concept will just create a standing still as opposed to moving forward etc...I mean, if you’re trying to discuss with someone you feel is any type of ‘ism/phobic’...surely it’s about trying to create an understanding of that and how/why it’s felt in the first place to create a common ground of communication..because that person’s views are going to be held by a wider society, not just that one single voice...so closing it all down and name calling etc is not going to help anything to progress...surely we have to hear worries/concerns/fears etc to be able to begin to tackle solutions...

[Paula D]

Which ones specifically.If your belief is that people are not "entitled" to their views how do you suggest policing thoughts?

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

[Cherie]

Should we have the right to take people's rights away? Yes people are entitled to have those views, no they are not acceptable but you can't fight oppression with oppression imo

..yeah I agree, Annie..with trying to fight oppression with oppression, that whole concept will just create a standing still as opposed to moving forward etc...I mean, if you’re trying to discuss with someone you feel is any type of ‘ism/phobic’...surely it’s about trying to create an understanding of that and how/why it’s felt in the first place to create a common ground of communication..because that person’s views are going to be held by a wider society, not just that one single voice...so closing it all down and name calling etc is not going to help anything to progress...surely we have to hear worries/concerns/fears etc to be able to begin to tackle solutions...


.

[Withano]

If your belief is that people are not "entitled" to their views how do you suggest policing thoughts?

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

obviously I'm aware I can't control their thought, but at what level are they allowed to express that opinion?

I guess I more think along the lines of

People have the right to anything that is valid. There isnt a valid reason to hate an entrie group, there isn't a valid reason to steal or murder either. Nobody has that 'right'. (Maybe we're interpreting the word 'entitled' differently)

I'm well aware that I cant change their thought, if a person believes they have the right to steal or murder or hate an entire group, I'd argue that they do not, I wouldn't argue that I can police their thoughts.

[smudgie]

Difficult one.
I would say if someone believes it to be racist, sexist, homophobic then act upon it it’s wrong.
However, if someone genuinely doesn’t believe it, or understand it, they are entitled to their opinions, just as others are entitled to try and explain to them the error of their ways.

[Paula D]

I guess I more think along the lines of

People have the right to anything that is valid. There isnt a valid reason to hate an entrie group, there isn't a valid reason to steal or murder either. Nobody has that 'right'. (Maybe we're interpreting the word 'entitled' differently)

I'm well aware that I cant change their thought, if a person believes they have the right to steal or murder or hate an entire group, I'd argue that they do not, I wouldn't argue that I can police their thoughts.You see you're comparing 2 things that are crimes with something that isn't a crime.

The thoughts are not criminal, some extreme actions are.

That's exactly why I said your question was too broad.

I think we're agreed on most things really I just think people need to step back sometimes and pick the right battles.

Going too far is never going to work.



Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

[Withano]

You see you're comparing 2 things that are crimes with something that isn't a crime.

The thoughts are not criminal, some extreme actions are.

That's exactly why I said your question was too broad.

I think we're agreed on most things really I just think people need to step back sometimes and pick the right battles.

Going too far is never going to work.



Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

The thought that 'I'm entitled to steal' or 'I'm entitled to be a racist' isn't criminal, correct, that was the point I was making (race-based hate crimes are on a similar level to stealing). I've never suggested we should police thoughts - I was asking at what point are they allowed to express their thoughts, and are they even entitled to their thoughts/speech/actions regarding the topic.

[Paula D]

The thought that 'I'm entitled to steal' or 'I'm entitled to be a racist' isn't criminal, correct, that was the point I was making. I've never suggested it was, I've never suggested we should police that - I was asking at what point are they allowed to express their thoughts, and are they entitled to their thoughts/speech/actions regarding the topic.Okay but that's not the original question you asked is it?

That's a fair question.

But here's the thing. You asked earlier if it's okay to hold that view as long as it's secret and the way society is going now it will be secret.

How do you effect change if you don't know people's views?

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

[Withano]

Okay but that's not the original question you asked is it?

That's a fair question.

But here's the thing. You asked earlier if it's okay to hold that view as long as it's secret and the way society is going now it will be secret.

How do you effect change if you don't know people's views?

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

You implied that was your answer to the original question I was asking whether I understood you correctly, I presume not now haha.


If the question was are people allowed have their own opinions as long as they don't negatively take action against others then my answer is yes

[Ammi]

I guess I more think along the lines of

People have the right to anything that is valid. There isnt a valid reason to hate an entrie group, there isn't a valid reason to steal or murder either. Nobody has that 'right'. (Maybe we're interpreting the word 'entitled' differently)

I'm well aware that I cant change their thought, if a person believes they have the right to steal or murder or hate an entire group, I'd argue that they do not, I wouldn't argue that I can police their thoughts.

..there isn’t a valid reason for a phobia though, it’s more establishing where the ‘illogical’ derives from with someone..why fear a group of people as you say that are no threat to you../ ..aren’t going to harm you etc...but that person is feeling a fear by their phobia, so it’s important that, that’s discussed as well...and we can’t discuss what we don’t t know is there in the first place...?...maybe we can never change some views because they’re too instilled and will never be open to change..but it’s all we can do, to try to understand and not ‘throw hate’ back......and rely on laws for cases which are appropriate to infringing on human rights/prejudicing etc...

[Withano]

..there isn’t a valid reason for a phobia though, it’s more establishing where the ‘illogical’ derives from with someone..why fear a group of people as you say that are no threat to you../ ..aren’t going to harm you etc...but that person is feeling a fear by their phobia, so it’s important that, that’s discussed as well...and we can’t discuss what we don’t t know is there in the first place...?...maybe we can never change some views because they’re too instilled and will never be open to change..but it’s all we can do, to try to understand and not ‘throw hate’ back......and rely on laws for cases which are appropriate to infringing on human rights/prejudicing etc...

I'm really not asking whether a person has the right to change a persons racist etc views, I'm asking whether theyre entitled to those views in todays society in the first place.

Discussions are important, and labels are counterintuitive at times, sure, but are we passed the point where these sort of views are ever valid at any time by any person? Or are they still ok in some situations?

[Paula D]

You implied that was your answer to the original question I was asking whether I understood you correctly, I presume not now haha.Fair enough, you presumed wrong.

And maybe I'm not explaining it right. What I'm trying to urge people to do is respect other people views even if you don't like them, otherwise you will never effect change.

If you keep telling people they've no right to views it will only make them dig their heels even more.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

[Paula D]

As someone once said "I hate your views but I defend to the death your tight to have them".

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

[Paula D]

Right I meant

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

[Withano]

Fair enough, you presumed wrong.

And maybe I'm not explaining it right. What I'm trying to urge people to do is respect other people views even if you don't like them, otherwise you will never effect change.

If you keep telling people they've no right to views it will only make them dig their heels even more.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

So, in general, yes a person is entitled to hate groups? Theyre entitled to make this public information? But theyre not entitled to hurt others physically and verbally? In your opinion?

[Paula D]

So, in general, yes a person is entitled to hate groups? Theyre entitled to make this public information? But theyre not entitled to hurt others physically and verbally? In your opinion?Yes. Do no harm is my motto.

That's why the gay marriage example is an extremely good one.

What harm if someone doesn't agree with it but doesn't take any action to prevent it?

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

[AnnieK]

The thought that 'I'm entitled to steal' or 'I'm entitled to be a racist' isn't criminal, correct, that was the point I was making (race-based hate crimes are on a similar level to stealing). I've never suggested we should police thoughts - I was asking at what point are they allowed to express their thoughts, and are they even entitled to their thoughts/speech/actions regarding the topic.

I don't quite understand what you mean by the last sentence? Are they even entitled to those thoughts? Of course they are entitled to them. You can't change peoples thoughts processes and by saying they are not entitled to them will only reinforce in their own minds that their thoughts are right. As I said earlier, you can't fight oppression with oppression. The only way to beat prejudices etc is by education and talking about issues. It pisses me off when people shut people down with" that's racist you cant say that" for example without having a discussion about why it is unacceptable. People who hold firm beliefs about certain groups of society are usually educated from an early age to think that people from different parts of society are wrong so just shutting them down without discussion does no good. Education, talking and discussion is the way forward, not taking people's rights to free speech and even thought as has been suggested away. We have freedom of speech for a reason, to open discussion and hopefully education

[Ammi]

I'm really not asking whether a person has the right to change a persons racist etc views, I'm asking whether theyre entitled to those views in todays society in the first place.

Discussions are important, and labels are counterintuitive at times, sure, but are we passed the point where these sort of views are ever valid at any time by any person? Or are they still ok in some situations?

..I guess they’re entitled to them within the boundaries of legislation and the law..regardless of whether you, I or anyone else finds some views uncomfortable....in total opposition to our own etc...I just think that not hearing those views or stifling them as it were within those boundaries...is tantamount to walking away from a perceived ‘ism’, which surely can’t be ‘right’...

[Withano]

I don't quite understand what you mean by the last sentence? Are they even entitled to those thoughts? Of course they are entitled to them. You can't change peoples thoughts processes and by saying they are not entitled to them will only reinforce in their own minds that their thoughts are right. As I said earlier, you can't fight oppression with oppression. The only way to beat prejudices etc is by education and talking about issues. It pisses me off when people shut people down with" that's racist you cant say that" for example without having a discussion about why it is unacceptable. People who hold firm beliefs about certain groups of society are usually educated from an early age to think that people from different parts of society are wrong so just shutting them down without discussion does no good. Education, talking and discussion is the way forward, not taking people's rights to free speech and even thought as has been suggested away. We have freedom of speech for a reason, to open discussion and hopefully education

Yeh that was just me elaborating what I was asking, are they entitled to their thoughts - you say yes, speech seems more on the edge, and I think the entire forum would agree that actions are unacceptable - I'm more interested in everyones lines of what people are entitled to as far as racism/sexism etc go

[Livia]

If someone wants to get bent out of shape about racism and homophobia, then do something to help those fighting against injustice across the world and stop your self-righteous nit-picking in a country where you are free to be and to love whoever you want.

[Withano]

If someone wants to get bent out of shape about racism and homophobia, then do something to help those fighting against injustice across the world and stop your self-righteous nit-picking in a country where you are free to be and to love whoever you want.

That isnt at all what the thread is about, are you baiting again

[Livia]

That isnt at all what the thread is about, are you baiting again

Baiting? AGAIN?

Seems that's the claim every time I post. Don't try to minimise my opinion, you're not the thought police yet.


It's exactly what the thread is about, whining about how someone's feelings get hurt in this country, while gay people are being thrown off roofs in the middle east.

[Oliver_W]

If someone wants to get bent out of shape about racism and homophobia, then do something to help those fighting against injustice across the world and stop your self-righteous nit-picking in a country where you are free to be and to love whoever you want.

To be fair it's easier to make a stand against someone who won't make you a wedding cake, than it is a toxic culture which grips several countries.


I will add I think any shop or service should have the right to deny custom to anyone for any reason, but the above was just an example

[Withano]

Baiting? AGAIN?

Seems that's the claim every time I post.

Yes pretty much. Its getting a bit much, no.

I've worked in the middle east, and central Africa before btw, and I do believe I did a lot to help exactly what you were describing. That isnt particularly revelavnt to the thread though.

[Livia]

To be fair it's easier to make a stand against someone who won't make you a wedding cake, than it is a toxic culture which grips several countries.


I will add I think any shop or service should have the right to deny custom to anyone for any reason, but the above was just an example

Yeah, I see that. But making someone into a victim because someone else hurts their feelings, only minimises the terrible, violent treatment that gays face all over the globe. Also, where's the celebration of how very far we've come as a country in the last twenty years or so. No mention of that....

[Withano]

Yeah, I see that. But making someone into a victim because someone else hurts their feelings, only minimises the terrible, violent treatment that gays face all over the globe. Also, where's the celebration of how very far we've come as a country in the last twenty years or so. No mention of that....

People literally celebrate that very loudly on a month+ long annual basis.

[Livia]

People literally celebrate that very loudly on a month+ long annual basis.

Not a word on here though... ever.

[Tom4784]

As long as it doesn't translate into action then anyone has the right to be a bigot but everyone else has the right to call them out on their bull****.

Freedom of Speech is not a shield to protect people from being criticised or from having other people form their own opinions on other people's opinions. As I've said for years on this site, Freedom of Speech is a two way street. A person cannot cling to it to justify their opinions but then try to deny someone else from employing their right to freedom of speech to criticise them.

[Kazanne]

If someone wants to get bent out of shape about racism and homophobia, then do something to help those fighting against injustice across the world and stop your self-righteous nit-picking in a country where you are free to be and to love whoever you want.

:clap1::clap1: well said Livia

[jaxie]

Do they have that right in today's society?

Are they allowed to feel and think a certain way, well yes, you can't police thinking. You can only try to educate people away from those views.

Should they always express those views? Well it's best to avoid things that could be upsetting to others but it's not always black and white (no pun intended) in the sense of interpretations.

For instance I have issues personally with religions in the sense that I feel that people, more specifically women, are treated in a misogynist and oppressed way by religious teachings and peoples interpretations of them. I speak out about that because I believe it is wrong. Others sometimes misinterpret that as being against a certain demographic of people. Does that mean I shouldn't speak about it? No I don't think so.

Freedom of speech means they do have an entitlement to express views, even where they are offensive or differ from others. Also if people don't speak about potentially racist views, how can you educate them because you don't know how they feel.

So a complicated question with no simple answers.

With regard the poll I've answered yes because I think people are entitled to think what they want, however offensive it is.

If someone wants to get bent out of shape about racism and homophobia, then do something to help those fighting against injustice across the world and stop your self-righteous nit-picking in a country where you are free to be and to love whoever you want.

Livia's answer is probably the answer with the greatest wisdom.

[AnnieK]

Yeh that was just me elaborating what I was asking, are they entitled to their thoughts - you say yes, speech seems more on the edge, and I think the entire forum would agree that actions are unacceptable - I'm more interested in everyones lines of what people are entitled to as far as racism/sexism etc go

I still don't quite understand what you are getting at? As you say, I can't think of anyone who would not condemn racist / homophobic actions on this forum. I think most people have kind of answered whilst they may or may not agree, you can't stop people thinking anything but acting upon those thoughts is wrong. However, I feel that you have not had the answer you are looking for as you appear to be probing more even when people have answered and in some way intimating their thoughts/opinions are not right. What are your views on the topic? What do you think people are entitled to? I think I know the answer but I don't want to assume either. How do you think you can remove people's entitlements to their own opinion, spoken or unspoken? We have laws in place to ensure that hate crimes and hate speech is illegal, what more do you suggest?

[Tom4784]

If someone wants to get bent out of shape about racism and homophobia, then do something to help those fighting against injustice across the world and stop your self-righteous nit-picking in a country where you are free to be and to love whoever you want.

This is an example of what I'm talking about. If someone is free to spout hate then other people should be free to denounce it, we should not decree the right to respond as 'nitpicking' and make out that people should not take offense because of the situation of the country we live in.

Why should only the hateful be allowed to speak their minds freely?

[AnnieK]

As long as it doesn't translate into action then anyone has the right to be a bigot but everyone else has the right to call them out on their bull****.

Freedom of Speech is not a shield to protect people from being criticised or from having other people form their own opinions on other people's opinions. As I've said for years on this site, Freedom of Speech is a two way street. A person cannot cling to it to justify their opinions but then try to deny someone else from employing their right to freedom of speech to criticise them.

Completely agree, I was trying to get to the bottom of if that is what Withano was trying to say. Freedom of speech is a 2 way street, whichever side of the street you are on

[Livia]

As long as it doesn't translate into action then anyone has the right to be a bigot but everyone else has the right to call them out on their bull****.

Freedom of Speech is not a shield to protect people from being criticised or from having other people form their own opinions on other people's opinions. As I've said for years on this site, Freedom of Speech is a two way street. A person cannot cling to it to justify their opinions but then take offense when someone else employs their right to freedom of speech to criticise them.

How about people of faith? I mean Muslims, a large amount of Christians, about half of Jews... their faith dictates their life. Should they be "called out" because their opinion differs, even if they wish no harm to gay people? What's the most important thing? People's religious freedom or the rights of the homosexual?

[the record, I am not one of the Jews who is against homosexuality...]

Muslims in the Middle East are carrying on a reign of terror against lots of people... women, other Muslims, other faiths, homosexuals... what should we do about them? How do you change their minds?

[Withano]

I still don't quite understand what you are getting at? As you say, I can't think of anyone who would not condemn racist / homophobic actions on this forum. I think most people have kind of answered whilst they may or may not agree, you can't stop people thinking anything but acting upon those thoughts is wrong. However, I feel that you have not had the answer you are looking for as you appear to be probing more even when people have answered and in some way intimating their thoughts/opinions are not right. What are your views on the topic? What do you think people are entitled to? I think I know the answer but I don't want to assume either. How do you think you can remove people's entitlements to their own opinion, spoken or unspoken? We have laws in place to ensure that hate crimes and hate speech is illegal, what more do you suggest?

Thats not true at all, I have seen tens of answers that I was looking for, theyre all very interesting even though they were often different to one another.


My take is - I am very aware I cant police thoughts - thats been brought up a lot for some reason, but I dont believe they are entitled to hate entire groups because there is not a valid reason to do so. In a similar way to how someone out there right now has the belief that they are entitled to murder whoever they want. I believe they are wrong, their belief is invalid (imo)
I do not believe I can police this thought. I just dont believe you can be entitled to something that is fundamentally invalid, although it does, and will happen.

[user104658]

It's not really something one has the "right" to be or not be... It's just something that someone is, surely? Like saying that a racist person doesn't have the right to be racist isn't going to somehow stop them from being internally racist.

If the question is "should people have the right to commit externally racist / sexist / -ist acts or discriminate on those grounds" then the answer is obviously no.

The murky part is whether or not people should have the right to benign(?)ly voice those opinions. That's the only part open to debate. For me personally... I would rather know what ugly thoughts lurk in peoples heads rather than have them pretend to be something that they're not. It's the only way you can ever assess your real opinions of a person :shrug:.

[AnnieK]

It's not really something one has the "right" to be or not be... It's just something that someone is, surely? Like saying that a racist person doesn't have the right to be racist isn't going to somehow stop them from being internally racist.

If the question is "should people have the right to commit externally racist / sexist / -ist acts or discriminate on those grounds" then the answer is obviously no.

The murky part is whether or not people should have the right to benign(?)ly voice those opinions. That's the only part open to debate. For me personally... I would rather know what ugly thoughts lurk in peoples heads rather than have them pretend to be something that they're not. It's the only way you can ever assess your real opinions of a person :shrug:.

Agreed

[Livia]

This is an example of what I'm talking about. If someone is free to spout hate then other people should be free to denounce it, we should not decree the right to respond as 'nitpicking' and make out that people should not take offense because of the situation of the country we live in.

Why should only the hateful be allowed to speak their minds freely?

Who are the hateful? Because I see much more venom and lots of insults aimed at people of faith in this country.

I have lots of gay friends, I don't know any of them who suffer being gay. Them embrace their lives, they have good careers, they're happy in their personal life... I never hear any of them moaning about homophobia, but I do hear them celebrating the fact that they can now marry in this country. I've been "best woman" at a gay wedding, it was the most joyful thing ever. Things are changing here... I'd rather be celebrating that.

[Livia]

It's not really something one has the "right" to be or not be... It's just something that someone is, surely? Like saying that a racist person doesn't have the right to be racist isn't going to somehow stop them from being internally racist.

If the question is "should people have the right to commit externally racist / sexist / -ist acts or discriminate on those grounds" then the answer is obviously no.

The murky part is whether or not people should have the right to benign(?)ly voice those opinions. That's the only part open to debate. For me personally... I would rather know what ugly thoughts lurk in peoples heads rather than have them pretend to be something that they're not. It's the only way you can ever assess your real opinions of a person :shrug:.

Couldn't agree more.

[Tom4784]

How about people of faith? I mean Muslims, a large amount of Christians, about half of Jews... their faith dictates their life. Should they be "called out" because their opinion differs, even if they wish no harm to gay people? What's the most important thing? People's religious freedom or the rights of the homosexual?

[the record, I am not one of the Jews who is against homosexuality...]

Muslims in the Middle East are carrying on a reign of terror against lots of people... women, other Muslims, other faiths, homosexuals... what should we do about them? How do you change their minds?

Religion isn't beyond criticism, believe in whatever faith you want but with Christians in particular (mainly because I'm more familiar with the bible so can talk from more of a position of knowledge when it comes to them), the bible is a mess of contradictions and most Christians choose what passages to follow, if someone chooses to follow passages that are anti-gay but are okay with eating shelfish or wearing mixed fabrics then I think it's as much the right of people to call it out as it is to the Christian to believe in it.

Like with Freedom of speech, people are free to believe in whatever they want and other people are free to question it.

As for your last point, nobody can change another person's mind. All we can do is oppose people who would seek to take people's rights away.

[Ammi]

It's not really something one has the "right" to be or not be... It's just something that someone is, surely? Like saying that a racist person doesn't have the right to be racist isn't going to somehow stop them from being internally racist.

If the question is "should people have the right to commit externally racist / sexist / -ist acts or discriminate on those grounds" then the answer is obviously no.

The murky part is whether or not people should have the right to benign(?)ly voice those opinions. That's the only part open to debate. For me personally... I would rather know what ugly thoughts lurk in peoples heads rather than have them pretend to be something that they're not. It's the only way you can ever assess your real opinions of a person :shrug:.

...sorry I’m finding difficulty at bolding with this bit of technology I’m using atm...but with the last paragraph..?...yeah I agree those benign voices should be heard, but then what...I mean our own opinion is surely less important ../ ..just more self indulgent..than our actions in ‘facing’ that ism...and not throwing names at it, like calling it an ist and walking away or repeatedly calling it an ist etc..(...if that makes sense..)...so the all importance is the communication with these things, otherwise the reaction to someone’s beliefs can be too similar to the beliefs themselves...

[montblanc]

no wtf

[Withano]

It's not really something one has the "right" to be or not be... It's just something that someone is, surely? Like saying that a racist person doesn't have the right to be racist isn't going to somehow stop them from being internally racist.
:.

Oh yeh, there was a thread with people claiming that John from Big Brother was entitled to his homophobic opinion, and I was just like "is he tho?"

I'm still not entirely convinced that I know where I stand on it. Like can you be entitled to hate an entire group of people? Does he have that 'right'? I know it cant be policed, but is it really within your entitlement to hate a group of others?

[Livia]

Religion isn't beyond criticism, believe in whatever faith you want but with Christians in particular (mainly because I'm more familiar with the bible so can talk from more of a position of knowledge when it comes to them), the bible is a mess of contradictions and most Christians choose what passages to follow, if someone chooses to follow passages that are anti-gay but are okay with eating shelfish or wearing mixed fabrics then I think it's as much the right of people to call it out as it is to the Christian to believe in it.

Like with Freedom of speech, people are free to believe in whatever they want and other people are free to question it.

As for your last point, nobody can change another person's mind. All we can do is oppose people who would seek to take people's rights away.


I agree, religion isn't beyond criticism. Personally I don't happen to believe in a God who would not love something he created, and he created us all. In my opinion... let's not turn this into a religious discussion.

Again in my opinion, people get so upset when someone says something hateful to them... instead of seeing the person who would speak in that way as a moron. I am not sticking up for people being hateful. I am saying, let them say what they want, it shows the world who they are. And maybe use that energy where people are really suffering.

I have a recent example... when visiting my fiancé's family in Texas, we both heard one of his relatives say how disappointed his parents must be with him bringing a Jew home. But at least I wasn't black. They said it with no humour... they were in earnest. So instead of a wedding in Texas like we were planning, we're getting married over here and only his parents are invited. The rest of them can go and f--- themselves. Their opinion of me means nothing because they're bigots.

[Paula D]

Oh yeh, there was a thread with people claiming that John from Big Brother was entitled to his homophobic opinion, and I was just like "is he tho?"

I'm still not entirely convinced that I know where I stand on it. Like can you be entitled to hate an entire group of people? Does he have that 'right'? I know it cant be policed, but is it really within your entitlement to hate a group of others?Okay you see this is an example of going too far.

John NEVER said he hated gay people. That's just you putting words into people's mouth again.

I actually thought Shane J's/Courtney's approach was fantastic on it, he called him out on it, listened to his view, told him he disagree, full stop.

He's not going around screaming homophobe so why should other people on his behalf?

It actually drives me mad people getting offended on others behalf.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

[Withano]

Okay you see this is an example of going too far.

John NEVER said he hated gay people. That's just you putting words into people's mouth again.

I actually thought Shane J's/Courtney's approach was fantastic on it, he called him out on it, listened to his view, told him he disagree, full stop.

He's not going around screaming homophobe so why should other people on his behalf?

It actually drives me mad people getting offended on others behalf.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

No thats not an example, I'm aware of what John said and didnt say, but that is what inspired the thread.

[Paula D]

No thats not an example, I'm aware of what John said and didnt say, but that is what inspired the thread.No, you're backing out now because you said the wrong thing With. You can not ask the question is John B entitled to hate people without inferring that he does when he quite clearly doesn't.

This is where arguments are lost, when people make up ****.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

[Withano]

No, you're backing out now because you said the wrong thing With. You can not ask the question is John B entitled to hate people without inferring that he does when he quite clearly doesn't.

This is where arguments are lost, when people make up ****.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

We can both paraphrase til the other stops making sense. Here for example you just said you lost the argument which is fine and all but its not adding much.

[Brillopad]

I'm really not asking whether a person has the right to change a persons racist etc views, I'm asking whether theyre entitled to those views in todays society in the first place.

Discussions are important, and labels are counterintuitive at times, sure, but are we passed the point where these sort of views are ever valid at any time by any person? Or are they still ok in some situations?

So you think you get to decide if a person is racist or not do you.

If a person calls a black person a blatantly offensive name I think most would agree that was racist. If a person disapproves of mass immigration you cannot without doubt class that as racist. You can personally interpret it as so but that does not give you the right to call them a blatantly offensive name based on your interpretation. One is no better than the other.

People have a right to disapprove of mass immigration - it is not an offence to do so. You may not like that but it is not your right to dictate how they can or cannot feel on that subject and many others. Voicing disapproval in itself is not hate - that word is being massively abused by a minority trying to dictate how others should think.

[Tom4784]

Who are the hateful? Because I see much more venom and lots of insults aimed at people of faith in this country.

I have lots of gay friends, I don't know any of them who suffer being gay. Them embrace their lives, they have good careers, they're happy in their personal life... I never hear any of them moaning about homophobia, but I do hear them celebrating the fact that they can now marry in this country. I've been "best woman" at a gay wedding, it was the most joyful thing ever. Things are changing here... I'd rather be celebrating that.

Nobody is beyond criticism. If a religious person holds opinions that are inflamatory to another demographic then that demographic has as much right to respond as the former has to hold that belief and vice versa.

I criticise certain religious people (I'm not painting in broad strokes here, I know that there's a lot of religious people who have no issues with the LGBT) because I feel they use their opinions to justify their hate, I can understand that certain religious folk can't agree to gay marriage not because they are opposed to homosexuality but because they believe marriage is between a man or a woman. I also criticise people who are overly hateful towards religion because everyone has the right to believe what they want to believe in. I dislike organised religion, but I dislike it all equally so I'll often criticise people who are overly hateful towards one religion when they can't see that the problems they have with one religion have been common to all religions at some point or another.

Most people who are LGBT have lived a lot of their lives being made to feel that they are not right, that they are inherently wrong. Even after coming out, a lot of gay people won't feel comfortable showing affection towards their partner in public or talking about the issues that plague the LGBT community to somebody who isn't part of that community. LGBT people are always thinking 'hmm, how open can I really be about myself around this person? How much risk is involved?'

As a bisexual person, I feel very uncomfortable talking to both straight and gay people about troubles I've faced because I've experienced hate from both. I don't speak to many people IRL about the troubles I've faced because there's always going to be an element of distrust there, that you've got to hold things back. It's difficult to put into words how it feels but just because somebody doesn't speak of discrimination does not mean it doesn't happen.

[Withano]

So you think you get to decide if a person is racist or not do you.

If a person calls a black person a blatantly offensive name I think most would agree that was racist. If a person disapproves of mass immigration you cannot without doubt class that as racist. You can personally interpret it as so but that does not give you the right to call them a blatantly offensive name based on your interpretation. One is no better than the other.

People have a right to disapprove of mass immigration - it is not an offence to do so. You may not like that but it is not your right to dictate how they can or cannot feel on that subject and many others. Voicing disapproval in itself is not hate - that word is being massively abused by a minority trying to dictate how others should think.

I agree with all of that, seems a bit of a random thing to bring up though.

[Tom4784]

So you think you get to decide if a person is racist or not do you.

If a person calls a black person a blatantly offensive name I think most would agree that was racist. If a person disapproves of mass immigration you cannot without doubt class that as racist. You can personally interpret it as so but that does not give you the right to call them a blatantly offensive name based on your interpretation. One is no better than the other.

People have a right to disapprove of mass immigration - it is not an offence to do so. You may not like that but it is not your right to dictate how they can or cannot feel on that subject and many others. Voicing disapproval in itself is not hate - that word is being massively abused by a minority trying to dictate how others should think.

Well yes, if someone believes that another person is racist then that is their opinion. you can challenge that opinion but you can't demand they change it or aren't entitled to it.

You have a right to your opinions and everyone else has a right to have their say on those opinions and vice versa.

[Livia]

Nobody is beyond criticism. If a religious person holds opinions that are inflamatory to another demographic then that demographic has as much right to respond as the former has to hold that belief and vice versa.

I criticise certain religious people (I'm not painting in broad strokes here, I know that there's a lot of religious people who have no issues with the LGBT) because I feel they use their opinions to justify their hate, I can understand that certain religious folk can't agree to gay marriage not because they are opposed to homosexuality but because they believe marriage is between a man or a woman. I also criticise people who are overly hateful towards religion because everyone has the right to believe what they want to believe in. I dislike organised religion, but I dislike it all equally so I'll often criticise people who are overly hateful towards one religion when they can't see that the problems they have with one religion have been common to all religions at some point or another.

Most people who are LGBT have lived a lot of their lives being made to feel that they are not right, that they are inherently wrong. Even after coming out, a lot of gay people won't feel comfortable showing affection towards their partner in public or talking about the issues that plague the LGBT community to somebody who isn't part of that community. LGBT people are always thinking 'hmm, how open can I really be about myself around this person? How much risk is involved?'

As a bisexual person, I feel very uncomfortable talking to both straight and gay people about troubles I've faced because I've experienced hate from both. I don't speak to many people IRL about the troubles I've faced because there's always going to be an element of distrust there, that you've got to hold things back. It's difficult to put into words how it feels but just because somebody doesn't speak of discrimination does not mean it doesn't happen.

It's hard to argue with any of that. Thanks for sharing Dezzy... I totally get where you're coming from.

[Brillopad]

Well yes, if someone believes that another person is racist then that is their opinion. you can challenge that opinion but you can't demand they change it or aren't entitled to it.

You have a right to your opinions and everyone else has a right to have their say on those opinions and vice versa.

It is their opinion to believe someone is racist but is not necessarily a proven fact that gives them the right to verbally abuse them by publicly calling them racist. It comes down to abuse in exactly the same way.

[jaxie]

...sorry I’m finding difficulty at bolding with this bit of technology I’m using atm...but with the last paragraph..?...yeah I agree those benign voices should be heard, but then what...I mean our own opinion is surely less important ../ ..just more self indulgent..than our actions in ‘facing’ that ism...and not throwing names at it, like calling it an ist and walking away or repeatedly calling it an ist etc..(...if that makes sense..)...so the all importance is the communication with these things, otherwise the reaction to someone’s beliefs can be too similar to the beliefs themselves...

Great post Ammi. I think the key is being able to discuss and debate and hope that people will learn to think differently. Just calling people a name for their views is pointless and is as bad as the view in the first place.

[Withano]

It is their opinion to believe someone is racist but is not necessarily a proven fact that gives them the right to verbally abuse them by publicly calling them racist. It comes down to abuse in exactly the same way.

How often do you think you have been called a racist on this website?

[Marsh.]

It is their opinion to believe someone is racist but is not necessarily a proven fact that gives them the right to verbally abuse them by publicly calling them racist. It comes down to abuse in exactly the same way.

If it's in response to actual racist abuse then it being their opinion they're not racist means diddly squat too.

Murderers on trial plead not guilty all the time.

[Tom4784]

It is their opinion to believe someone is racist but is not necessarily a proven fact that gives them the right to verbally abuse them by publicly calling them racist. It comes down to abuse in exactly the same way.

I wouldn't call racist an insult, it's an accusation and one that's easily dispelled if it's not true. It does feel a bit rich though as you tend to bandy out phrases such as 'Leftie' 'Remoaner' and other terms for people that don't share your opinions yet you oppose people calling out others as racist. If you consider the latter an insult then does that mean you regularly insult other members too?

As I said when transphobia was a talking point a few weeks back, I don't consider someone saying 'you are transphobic (or in this case, racist) and here's why I think that' to be an insult. That is someone arguing their point. If someone turned around and said 'I think ____ is a transphobic/racist prick' then that is verbal abuse.

I can't consider the accusation of racism or any other forms of bigotry an insult in itself, especially if the accusation is explained fully in a sensible way.

[Tom4784]

It's hard to argue with any of that. Thanks for sharing Dezzy... I totally get where you're coming from.

:love:

[AnnieK]

I wouldn't call racist an insult, it's an accusation and one that's easily dispelled if it's not true. It does feel a bit rich though as you tend to bandy out phrases such as 'Leftie' 'Remoaner' and other terms for people that don't share your opinions yet you oppose people calling out others as racist. If you consider the latter an insult then does that mean you regularly insult other members too?

As I said when transphobia was a talking point a few weeks back, I don't consider someone saying 'you are transphobic (or in this case, racist) and here's why I think that' to be an insult. That is someone arguing their point. If someone turned around and said 'I think ____ is a transphobic/racist prick' then that is verbal abuse.

I can't consider the accusation of racism or any other forms of bigotry an insult in itself, especially if the accusation is explained fully in a sensible way.

I agree again, if a name is levelled at you and an explanation given and you are given the opportunity to disprove that label, it is not insulting and goes back to the freedom of speech that we are all afforded. If there is no chance of a reasoned discussion and it is used as a shut down, then it becomes insulting. I believe the only way forward is people discussing uncomfortable topics and then these being debated in a adult manner - not just you called me this so I will call you that etc etc.

I do believe this country i far more tolerant now and will only continue to improve as education and better protection laws develop BUT we still have a long way to go to total tolerance of all

[user104658]

I'm still not entirely convinced that I know where I stand on it. Like can you be entitled to hate an entire group of people? Does he have that 'right'? I know it cant be policed, but is it really within your entitlement to hate a group of others?

But you're lumping the thought itself in with any action that might be taken based on that thought. Taking direct action motivated by hate of an entire group should never be accepted. Openly directing verbal hate at an entire group is "debatable" (in that it can logically be debated, debate is possible...)

The actual thought attitude itself, though, doesn't logically fall under the banner of rights or entitlements. It has nothing to do with either... It makes no logical sense to try to apply restrictions on inner thought. You could say "no one is entitled to think racist things!" but it's literally not going to stop anyone from thinking racist things... They don't choose to indulge in thinking racist things. They just DO think them. It's like saying to an amputee "no one is entitled to only have one arm" and expecting them to sprout a new one.


So like I said I don't think it's really open to debate whether or not active discrimination, or violent hatred (which would include directed abusive language and aggression, not just physical assault) is ever acceptable. Any civilised person would not accept that behaviour. But also, people's inner thoughts are also not open to debate or possible to restrict. It's just not a thing.

So that leaves the debatable part as simple discussion; are people "entitled" to express those inner thoughts verbally in a calm manner during a debate or discussion. That's the only question and it really comes down to personal preference and again... I would far rather hear those views and form an opinion of the person holding those views accordingly, than have everyone suppress and pretend based on what's "allowed".

I have experienced a quite vivid realnworld example of this. An older customer, who I had liked, on a "bad day" started spouting some really vile opinions about pretty much everything. Race came into it, homosexuality came into it, just a full on rant... Punctuated with "but you're not allowed to say these things any more." Quite clearly demonstrating that he always THINKS these things, he just doesn't say them. This was a customer that I honestly feel like I was "tricked" into thinking was a solid, decent guy... but who is clearly just repressing a whole heap of toxic nonsense. I would rather have known from the start. Surely most people would rather know? My idea of this individual was completely and utterly false.

[user104658]

Great post Ammi. I think the key is being able to discuss and debate and hope that people will learn to think differently. Just calling people a name for their views is pointless and is as bad as the view in the first place.If you mean just screaming "YOU ARE A RACIST I WILL NO LONGER DISCUSS THIS" then sure. But that's not the same as saying "In my opinion, what you have said here is racism because ______". People are quick to take the latter as "name calling" when it's nothing of the sort.

When IS it acceptable to call something out as racism? If the answer is "never", then this is completely stifling to any open and honest discussion, and just as much a shut-down as name calling.

[joeysteele]

It's not really something one has the "right" to be or not be... It's just something that someone is, surely? Like saying that a racist person doesn't have the right to be racist isn't going to somehow stop them from being internally racist.

If the question is "should people have the right to commit externally racist / sexist / -ist acts or discriminate on those grounds" then the answer is obviously no.

The murky part is whether or not people should have the right to benign(?)ly voice those opinions. That's the only part open to debate. For me personally... I would rather know what ugly thoughts lurk in peoples heads rather than have them pretend to be something that they're not. It's the only way you can ever assess your real opinions of a person :shrug:.

Great response.

I agree with this.

[JerseyWins]

They kind of are entitled to it but I'll say "sometimes" because their thoughts/opinions/beliefs can still turn into verbal abuse in the same token. But other than that or unless it involves physical abuse obviously, they're entitled to their opinion even if it's wrong. :shrug:

Basically if they think it but don't act on it to be unfair or cruel to others, they're entitled to what they think and express but they will get the consequences because society has changed whether they like it or not.

[bots]

let's for a moment imagine a world where Donald T didn't have access to twitter, where all directives came from the whitehouse after being sanitised. We would have no idea what a crazy loop Trump is. That's the type of thing that can happen when people are not allowed to express themselves.

[Vicky.]

As long as it doesn't translate into action then anyone has the right to be a bigot but everyone else has the right to call them out on their bull****.

Freedom of Speech is not a shield to protect people from being criticised or from having other people form their own opinions on other people's opinions. As I've said for years on this site, Freedom of Speech is a two way street. A person cannot cling to it to justify their opinions but then try to deny someone else from employing their right to freedom of speech to criticise them.


It's not really something one has the "right" to be or not be... It's just something that someone is, surely? Like saying that a racist person doesn't have the right to be racist isn't going to somehow stop them from being internally racist.

If the question is "should people have the right to commit externally racist / sexist / -ist acts or discriminate on those grounds" then the answer is obviously no.

The murky part is whether or not people should have the right to benign(?)ly voice those opinions. That's the only part open to debate. For me personally... I would rather know what ugly thoughts lurk in peoples heads rather than have them pretend to be something that they're not. It's the only way you can ever assess your real opinions of a person :shrug:.

Both of these said what I would answer but much more eloquently than I would put it^

[Vicky.]

I wouldn't call racist an insult, it's an accusation and one that's easily dispelled if it's not true. It does feel a bit rich though as you tend to bandy out phrases such as 'Leftie' 'Remoaner' and other terms for people that don't share your opinions yet you oppose people calling out others as racist. If you consider the latter an insult then does that mean you regularly insult other members too?

As I said when transphobia was a talking point a few weeks back, I don't consider someone saying 'you are transphobic (or in this case, racist) and here's why I think that' to be an insult. That is someone arguing their point. If someone turned around and said 'I think ____ is a transphobic/racist prick' then that is verbal abuse.

I can't consider the accusation of racism or any other forms of bigotry an insult in itself, especially if the accusation is explained fully in a sensible way.

Also this.

I have been called transphobic many times. I am aware that to some people my views will come across as transphobic, thats entirely their right to think I am transphobic. I disagree, obviously but I do not class 'you are transphobic' as an insult at all

Transphobia is the only phobia or ism I have been accused of though. And 'transphobia' today literally means 'anyone who does not agree that male people are actually female' so the word is totally meaningless.

[Ashley.]

Of course they're entitled. We don't have to agree with them, though.

[Crimson Dynamo]

i must move in the wrong circles because I dont come across anyone being racist/homophobic/sexist

the only time is on here

I hear the odd person at an auction say "coloured bloke" but its hardly KKK and they are not saying it with any malice. I dont know any gay people and dont talk about them or black people so apart from the odd joke about women its not something on my radar tbh

:shrug:

[Brillopad]

I wouldn't call racist an insult, it's an accusation and one that's easily dispelled if it's not true. It does feel a bit rich though as you tend to bandy out phrases such as 'Leftie' 'Remoaner' and other terms for people that don't share your opinions yet you oppose people calling out others as racist. If you consider the latter an insult then does that mean you regularly insult other members too?

As I said when transphobia was a talking point a few weeks back, I don't consider someone saying 'you are transphobic (or in this case, racist) and here's why I think that' to be an insult. That is someone arguing their point. If someone turned around and said 'I think ____ is a transphobic/racist prick' then that is verbal abuse.

I can't consider the accusation of racism or any other forms of bigotry an insult in itself, especially if the accusation is explained fully in a sensible way.

Reactionary, it isn’t complicated - just got sick of people feeling they can call others racist according to their interpretation of their words. You invite that kind of response!

[jaxie]

let's for a moment imagine a world where Donald T didn't have access to twitter, where all directives came from the whitehouse after being sanitised. We would have no idea what a crazy loop Trump is. That's the type of thing that can happen when people are not allowed to express themselves.

Very good point!

[Marsh.]

Of course they're entitled to whatever views they feel.

People are, however, entitled to challenge those views and call out bigotry. And can do so without having "but it's free speech" used as a lame excuse.

[Vicky.]

Of course they're entitled to whatever views they feel.

People are, however, entitled to challenge those views and call out bigotry. And can do so without having "but it's free speech" used as a lame excuse.

Yes it continually amazes me how so many people use this when someone challenges their views. Do they not realize free speech goes both ways or something?!

[Withano]

Reactionary, it isn’t complicated - just got sick of people feeling they can call others racist according to their interpretation of their words. You invite that kind of response!

If I was called a racist, I would look internally for the reason why. I find it interesting that you keep looking for external excuses.

[DemolitionRed]

Do they have that right in today's society?

People can be badly educated and may therefore express opinions that most of society would find objectionable.

[DemolitionRed]

He only wants one-sided rhetoric. Debate doesn’t Come into it.

You mean like you do when you open threads to demonize Muslims ?

[Brillopad]

If I was called a racist, I would look internally for the reason why. I find it interesting that you keep looking for external excuses.

I’m not looking for excuses - you are the one doing that. I only get called ‘racist’ by the same few people who have an agenda. It”s the hypocricy and obvious shut-down tactics that annoy me.

[Ammi]

..people can also be very highly educated../..well read etc and also have equally homophobic/racist/sexist etc views as well...

[Brillopad]

You mean like you do when you open threads to demonize Muslims ?

You see it as demonise because that suits you. No religion is above discussion or criticism and the day we can no longer do that is the day we really need to worry.

[Northern Monkey]

Well firstly I can’t vote in the poll as it’s too simplistic.

I think this thread is almost a first.Seems like everyone is mostly in agreement.Some very excellent posts in here.
My opinion probably just reflects what’s already been said.
Should we be able to abuse somebody racially or on sexuality or whatever?(i.e ‘you f’king .......) No obviously not.There are laws against hate and harassment and causing distress etc.
Should people have a legal right to express their views?
Yes and you should have the right to counter views you disagree with.
Suppressed views are much more dangerous than views that are out and open to be debated.Nobody can have their mind changed if you don’t know what they think.
A plain example was the rise of the BNP.The last Labour government totally ignored the country’s concerns on immigration and people started reaching out for an extreme party in desperation as no other party(at the time) would listen as they were too scared to be branded racist and be aligned with the BNP.
As for calling people racist,bigot etc.That’s got a bad rap now due to it being used way too frequently and inappropriately these days.The word has been ruined by the sjw hard leftie types using it as an insult.
Of course it is legitimate to call someone racist if you think they are and then it’s not an insult but as Dezzy says an accusation.If you think it’s slanderous then you can refute it with your point of view.
Throwing ‘racist’ out willy nilly has devalued it though so it’s met with skepticism alot.
Also you don’t change minds by calling them names and putting them on the defensive.It’s pretty fruitless.

And yes,John Barnes has every right to express his opinion and Shane J very maturely called him out on it without insults etc.

One point i disagreed with that i read somewhere was that nobody ever changes their views.
At high school age i was and infact many people at school were very homophobic.I did get my view changed from working with gay people and going in gay clubs because they were open later and had good music.Exposure is the best thing to change a view like that.

Most disputes on racism/homophobia etc aren’t over blatant name calling as everyone knows that’s wrong,but a disagreement as to what constitutes racism in usually grey disputable areas.

[Marsh.]

I’m not looking for excuses - you are the one doing that. I only get called ‘racist’ by the same few people who have an agenda. It”s the hypocricy and obvious shut-down tactics that annoy me.
What agenda is that?

[user104658]

I’m not looking for excuses - you are the one doing that. I only get called ‘racist’ by the same few people who have an agenda. It”s the hypocricy and obvious shut-down tactics that annoy me.

I've "called you racist" in the past Brillo and it's not with an agenda or to shut you down. Do I think you are "a racist person"? I obviously don't know you well enough to make a judgement like that - although on calm consideration, I suspect you are not inherently racist for the sake of it, but rather there are certain issues that make you very angry, and that anger sometimes comes out in a "certain way". You have however, made individual posts in the past that have been, in my opinion, racist... and are arguably objectively racist (as you sometimes make assumptions about people based on their race; the definition of racism). This is just a statement of observation / opinion; it's not name calling or even designed to be a put-down, and it's certainly not driven by some other agenda other than to state that opinion, just as you are free to (and frequently do) state your own opinions.

I suppose, on the positive side, the fact that you consider being called racist "name calling" is encouraging because at the very least, it's clear that you do recognise that racism isn't good. Plenty of people are openly and proudly racist and will happily accept the term being thrown their way, which is much more troubling.

[Brillopad]

I've "called you racist" in the past Brillo and it's not with an agenda or to shut you down. Do I think you are "a racist person"? I obviously don't know you well enough to make a judgement like that - although on calm consideration, I suspect you are not inherently racist for the sake of it, but rather there are certain issues that make you very angry, and that anger sometimes comes out in a "certain way". You have however, made individual posts in the past that have been, in my opinion, racist... and are arguably objectively racist (as you sometimes make assumptions about people based on their race; the definition of racism). This is just a statement of observation / opinion; it's not name calling or even designed to be a put-down, and it's certainly not driven by some other agenda other than to state that opinion, just as you are free to (and frequently do) state your own opinions.

I suppose, on the positive side, the fact that you consider being called racist "name calling" is encouraging because at the very least, it's clear that you do recognise that racism isn't good. Plenty of people are openly and proudly racist and will happily accept the term being thrown their way, which is much more troubling.

An opinion - but one given with some thought and honesty. You are entitled to it as I am mine.

[user104658]

You see it as demonise because that suits you. No religion is above discussion or criticism and the day we can no longer do that is the day we really need to worry.

This is where the distinction lies though Brillo;

I personally have no problem at all with you criticising the religion of Islam, or any other religion. I *do* have a problem with you assuming that all or most people with a "middle eastern appearance or middle eastern sounding name" are hardcore Muslims, or necessarily Muslims at all... and you do / have done that in the past.

Muslims can be Middle Eastern, Black, White, Central Asian, South-East Asian... there are 25 million Chinese Muslims... etc.

There are also plenty of people "of middle eastern appearance" who are of other religions or non-religious - especially those who now live in Western countries. There are almost 1 billion followers of Hinduism in India and I would bet a significant amount that you wouldn't be able to tell the difference between someone from India (Hindu) and someone from Pakistan (Muslim) or the Middle East in a line-up...


So this is where your argument has always fallen flat and - you might notice - the ONLY times I have accused you of outright racism. NOT when you criticise Islam... but when you ASSUME people's culture or religion, based on how they look or where they are from, before you know anything more about them. That is racial prejudice... by simple definition... which is synonymous with racism.

[edited to add] Again though, I genuinely don't think that this is something that you do deliberately... it seems to usually be an honest conclusion that you come to. But a misguided one in my opinion. My only (I'm sure unwanted) advice would be to try to reserve judgement until there's enough information to make one without assumptions. But that's advice we could all do to take, I suppose, including myself.

[Withano]

I’m not looking for excuses - you are the one doing that. I only get called ‘racist’ by the same few people who have an agenda. It”s the hypocricy and obvious shut-down tactics that annoy me.

See, thats an external excuse.. 'I'm racist because other people have an agenda'... nobody else gets called it so often.. maybe theres somethig internal you could think about? Justasuggestion.

[Ammi]

This is where the distinction lies though Brillo;

I personally have no problem at all with you criticising the religion of Islam, or any other religion. I *do* have a problem with you assuming that all or most people with a "middle eastern appearance or middle eastern sounding name" are hardcore Muslims, or necessarily Muslims at all... and you do / have done that in the past.

Muslims can be Middle Eastern, Black, White, Central Asian, South-East Asian... there are 25 million Chinese Muslims... etc.

There are also plenty of people "of middle eastern appearance" who are of other religions or non-religious - especially those who now live in Western countries. There are almost 1 billion followers of Hinduism in India and I would bet a significant amount that you wouldn't be able to tell the difference between someone from India (Hindu) and someone from Pakistan (Muslim) or the Middle East in a line-up...


So this is where your argument has always fallen flat and - you might notice - the ONLY times I have accused you of outright racism. NOT when you criticise Islam... but when you ASSUME people's culture or religion, based on how they look or where they are from, before you know anything more about them. That is racial prejudice... by simple definition... which is synonymous with racism.

[edited to add] Again though, I genuinely don't think that this is something that you do deliberately... it seems to usually be an honest conclusion that you come to. But a misguided one in my opinion. My only (I'm sure unwanted) advice would be to try to reserve judgement until there's enough information to make one without assumptions. But that's advice we could all do to take, I suppose, including myself.

...I was just thinking would there be a debate/news story section if we all waited to ‘judge’ as news stories that are ongoing in their conclusions is a large part of it ..:laugh:...people ‘judge’, that’s what humans do...some more than others, but that’s going to be inevitable as well..as is some being more vocal than others etc...anyways, the main thing I wanted to say in support of Brillo..is that some posts may be open to questioning etc...but from the very small snapshot I’ve had of the forum over the last while...she really has quite a lot thrown at her which is very uncomfortable...not questioning a specific posts but specific, deliberate personal insults...it’s hard to really question things that have been questioned in the thread topic if we can’t all even treat each other with respect ...that’s not directed to you personally btw TS..but yeah, some of the personal stuff said to Brillo at times is quite awful and grim...

[Brillopad]

See, thats an external excuse.. 'I'm racist because other people have an agenda'... nobody else gets called it so often.. maybe theres somethig internal you could think about? Justasuggestion.

Coming from you it means nothing. I will never be a racist based on the agenda-driven opinions of that same few. :wavey:

[Withano]

Coming from you it means nothing. I will never be a racist based on the agenda-driven opinions of that same few. :wavey:

But you clearly have an issue with being perceived that way by whichever few youre talking about? It would just make more sense from my perspective to try and understand why they regularly call you that and call nobody else that instead of blaming them and their agenda for calling you that.

It just seems more likely that it is something you are doing than their agenda(?) that they have only against you?

I mean ignore this if you dont have a problem with being called it so frequently, it just seems like you do have a problem with it.

[Brillopad]

...I was just thinking would there be a debate/news story section if we all waited to ‘judge’ as news stories that are ongoing in their conclusions is a large part of it ..:laugh:...people ‘judge’, that’s what humans do...some more than others, but that’s going to be inevitable as well..as is some being more vocal than others etc...anyways, the main thing I wanted to say in support of Brillo..is that some posts may be open to questioning etc...but from the very small snapshot I’ve had of the forum over the last while...she really has quite a lot thrown at her which is very uncomfortable...not questioning a specific posts but specific, deliberate personal insults...it’s hard to really question things that have been questioned in the thread topic if we can’t all even treat each other with respect ...that’s not directed to you personally btw TS..but yeah, some of the personal stuff said to Brillo at times is quite awful and grim...

Thank you Ammi.

[Brillopad]

But you clearly have an issue with being perceived that way by whichever few youre talking about? It would just make more sense from my perspective to try and understand why they regularly call you that and call nobody else that instead of blaming them and their agenda for calling you that.

It just seems more likely that it is something you are doing than their agenda(?) that they have only against you?

I mean ignore this if you dont have a problem with being called it so frequently, it just seems like you do have a problem with it.

I don’t need to understand their way of thinking - they are the problem. Let them self-analyize. The frequency means nothing when it comes from the same few. That in itself speaks volumes.

Done with you now.

[Withano]

I don’t need to understand their way of thinking - they are the problem. Let them self-analyize. The frequency means nothing when it comes from the same few. That in itself speaks volumes.

Done with you now.

But you keep complaining about their way of thinking... i dont understand why you brought this up.

[Kazanne]

...I was just thinking would there be a debate/news story section if we all waited to ‘judge’ as news stories that are ongoing in their conclusions is a large part of it ..:laugh:...people ‘judge’, that’s what humans do...some more than others, but that’s going to be inevitable as well..as is some being more vocal than others etc...anyways, the main thing I wanted to say in support of Brillo..is that some posts may be open to questioning etc...but from the very small snapshot I’ve had of the forum over the last while...she really has quite a lot thrown at her which is very uncomfortable...not questioning a specific posts but specific, deliberate personal insults...it’s hard to really question things that have been questioned in the thread topic if we can’t all even treat each other with respect ...that’s not directed to you personally btw TS..but yeah, some of the personal stuff said to Brillo at times is quite awful and grim...

100% agree Ammi :wavey:

[Tom4784]

Reactionary, it isn’t complicated - just got sick of people feeling they can call others racist according to their interpretation of their words. You invite that kind of response!

People are entitled to call people racists if that's how they feel, Brillo. There's no ifs or buts about it. You can blame the world but it's not going to change the fact that everyone is entitled to freedom of speech, it's not a right that's reserved only for a few.

People are entitled to their thoughts and words even if you don't like them, if you get accused of something that isn't true, it should be easy enough to dispel the accusation. You have accused me of being a terrorist sympathiser multiple times in the past but did I shrink away and cry about it? No I argued my corner and showed you how wrong that accusation was.

If someone accuses you of being racist, it's down to you to defend yourself.

[jet]

...I was just thinking would there be a debate/news story section if we all waited to ‘judge’ as news stories that are ongoing in their conclusions is a large part of it ..:laugh:...people ‘judge’, that’s what humans do...some more than others, but that’s going to be inevitable as well..as is some being more vocal than others etc...anyways, the main thing I wanted to say in support of Brillo..is that some posts may be open to questioning etc...but from the very small snapshot I’ve had of the forum over the last while...she really has quite a lot thrown at her which is very uncomfortable...not questioning a specific posts but specific, deliberate personal insults...it’s hard to really question things that have been questioned in the thread topic if we can’t all even treat each other with respect ...that’s not directed to you personally btw TS..but yeah, some of the personal stuff said to Brillo at times is quite awful and grim...

Absolutely agree. Dreadful, hurtful things that she doesn't deserve at all. Some people should be ashamed of themselves.

[Brillopad]

People are entitled to call people racists if that's how they feel, Brillo. There's no ifs or buts about it. You can blame the world but it's not going to change the fact that everyone is entitled to freedom of speech, it's not a right that's reserved only for a few.

People are entitled to their thoughts and words even if you don't like them, if you get accused of something that isn't true, it should be easy enough to dispel the accusation. You have accused me of being a terrorist sympathiser multiple times in the past but did I shrink away and cry about it? No I argued my corner and showed you how wrong that accusation was.

If someone accuses you of being racist, it's down to you to defend yourself.

No it isn’t - it’s up to you to prove it before you resort to personal insults. At least TS has the honesty and good grace to admit that he doesn’t Know me well enough to make such a sweeping statement.

You on the other hand see your opinion as fact and it isn’t. The burden of proof is the responsibility is on the ‘prosecution’ and if you can’t provide cast iron proof, not just your interpretation of what I have said, but definitive proof your opinion in itself does not justify public personal abuse.

[Shaun]

I voted yes in the sense that they're entitled to have such views and as such are entitled to be ridiculed for having them.

[Tom4784]

No it isn’t - it’s up to you to prove it before you resort to personal insults. At least TS has the honesty and good grace to admit that he doesn’t Know me well enough to make such a sweeping statement.

You on the other hand see your opinion as fact and it isn’t. The onus of responsibility is on the ‘prosecution’ and if you can’t provide cast iron proof, not just your interpretation of what I have said, but definitive proof your opinion in itself does not justify public personal abuse.

Right, I'm just gonna say this and I'm done discussing this part of the thread.

You are happy enough to call people remoaners and lefties, you are happy enough to accuse people of being terrorist sympathisers and that they don't like democracy if they voice their opinions about a vote that didn't go the way they wanted.

But you cry foul when people accuse you of racism, even if they justify it.

http://www.thisisbigbrother.com/forums/showthread.php?t=321734&highlight=http+www+dailymail+co+uk+news+article+46 35394+school+accused+slavery+focing+boy+wash+dishe s+html

You saw a name and a face and assumed derogatory things about them based on that so , as long as they aren't insulting about it, people can accuse you of racism if they so wish.

It seems to me that this is a case of you being happy enough to dish out accusations and the like but you can't take them in return. You want an uneven playing field where nobody can question your views but you are free to brand people with whatever term you like.

If you seriously want to make a point that being called a racist is an insult then you really need to drop all the terms you bust on people since if racist is considered an insult then most of your phrases are too.

It's a two way street, Brillo. It always has been, you can't complain about things that you are more than guilty of yourself.

I'm done with this branch of the discussion, it will not lead anywhere good.

[user104658]

...I was just thinking would there be a debate/news story section if we all waited to ‘judge’ as news stories that are ongoing in their conclusions is a large part of it ..:laugh:...people ‘judge’, that’s what humans do...some more than others, but that’s going to be inevitable as well..as is some being more vocal than others etc...anyways, the main thing I wanted to say in support of Brillo..is that some posts may be open to questioning etc...but from the very small snapshot I’ve had of the forum over the last while...she really has quite a lot thrown at her which is very uncomfortable...not questioning a specific posts but specific, deliberate personal insults...it’s hard to really question things that have been questioned in the thread topic if we can’t all even treat each other with respect ...that’s not directed to you personally btw TS..but yeah, some of the personal stuff said to Brillo at times is quite awful and grim...

I don't know if this is true Ammi or how you're defining it but maybe I've missed something; from my perspective, I don't think anyone here knows enough about Brillo as an individual for it to be true that "awful and grim" personal things have been said to her? Literally all I know is that she's English, female and old enough to have teenage children :shrug:. If other people know more than that and have used personal information to attack her then that is indeed a problem.

If on the other hand, all you mean by "personal attack" is the times that she has been accused of prejudice... I personally don't see how that is outwith the scope of a normal heated adult debate. It's certainly not anything beyond other comments that are often thrown in all directions on here. To use examples from both sides for balance; I've been accused of "being a snowflake" and also "being a misogynist trying to mansplain". I've also had direct jibes made about scant real-world information that IS available about me on here - namely my sh*tty job - made by more than one person, that I would say are far more personal in nature than a post being considered to be racist?

But yes, I would genuinely like to know what it is that's so far over the line as to be considered especially awful. I believe when this has come up in the past, the general idea has been that it's awful "because loads of people are saying the same thing"... but in my opinion, several people individually sharing the same opinion has absolutely nothing to do with "ganging up" or "getting personal".

[Brillopad]

I don't know if this is true Ammi or how you're defining it but maybe I've missed something; from my perspective, I don't think anyone here knows enough about Brillo as an individual for it to be true that "awful and grim" personal things have been said to her? Literally all I know is that she's English, female and old enough to have teenage children :shrug:. If other people know more than that and have used personal information to attack her then that is indeed a problem.

If on the other hand, all you mean by "personal attack" is the times that she has been accused of prejudice... I personally don't see how that is outwith the scope of a normal heated adult debate. It's certainly not anything beyond other comments that are often thrown in all directions on here. To use examples from both sides for balance; I've been accused of "being a snowflake" and also "being a misogynist trying to mansplain". I've also had direct jibes made about scant real-world information that IS available about me on here - namely my sh*tty job - made by more than one person, that I would say are far more personal in nature than a post being considered to be racist?

But yes, I would genuinely like to know what it is that's so far over the line as to be considered especially awful. I believe when this has come up in the past, the general idea has been that it's awful "because loads of people are saying the same thing"... but in my opinion, several people individually sharing the same opinion has absolutely nothing to do with "ganging up" or "getting personal".

I don’t think anyone mentioned ‘loads of people’ - it has more to do with the frequency of certain types of posts from the same few.

I don’t think anyone mentioned the words ‘ganging-up’ either although you often do see the same small group of people ‘circle’ posters and their differing opinions on certain threads. People aren’t blind.

[Morgan.]

They can have the views but should keep them to themselves

[Brillopad]

They can have the views but should keep them to themselves

Why? Everything can be challenged. If people can’t express their opinions, in a reasonable non-attacking way - that is censorship and shut-down tactics which are not appropriate in a democracy.

[Tom4784]

They can have the views but should keep them to themselves

I disagree, people should share their opinion if they wish to do so and they should expect, like all opinions, to be up for criticism and to be challenged.

[Ammi]

I don't know if this is true Ammi or how you're defining it but maybe I've missed something; from my perspective, I don't think anyone here knows enough about Brillo as an individual for it to be true that "awful and grim" personal things have been said to her? Literally all I know is that she's English, female and old enough to have teenage children :shrug:. If other people know more than that and have used personal information to attack her then that is indeed a problem.

If on the other hand, all you mean by "personal attack" is the times that she has been accused of prejudice... I personally don't see how that is outwith the scope of a normal heated adult debate. It's certainly not anything beyond other comments that are often thrown in all directions on here. To use examples from both sides for balance; I've been accused of "being a snowflake" and also "being a misogynist trying to mansplain". I've also had direct jibes made about scant real-world information that IS available about me on here - namely my sh*tty job - made by more than one person, that I would say are far more personal in nature than a post being considered to be racist?

But yes, I would genuinely like to know what it is that's so far over the line as to be considered especially awful. I believe when this has come up in the past, the general idea has been that it's awful "because loads of people are saying the same thing"... but in my opinion, several people individually sharing the same opinion has absolutely nothing to do with "ganging up" or "getting personal".

..so I’m going to zip right over some of your post and completely ignore it, TS...:laugh:...but because I realise in reflection that discussing Brillo was unfair to her..and I apologise to her for doing that...so I’m just going to zip along from that...

...you’ve branched my thoughts out quite a bit though I have to say...you mention ‘adult discussions’...?...and then of some negative personal things which have been said to you because of personal information disclosed..(..I’m so sorry to hear that...)...the internet is a strange place in that when we do disclose about ourselves in the way of explaining etc or for other reasons or just giving out personal information etc...we’re not only disclosing to our closest friends...(..which is what we have a tendency to do in real life...)...we’re disclosing to strangers essentially and also ‘our closest enemies’...(...and most of us have those..)..also obviously to people who can become generally irritated by our opinions on any given day...anyways...

...let’s move on to ‘mansplaining’...because I have to ‘disclose’...:laugh:...that’s a word I haven’t heard before so you had me googling...that then led me to reading a few articles..and to cut it short a little, one article stated that ‘label’ derived from a feminist author...who at a party, had a man explain to her the meaning of her last book...so she had coined the mansplain thing ..so rather than think..oh, that’s interesting to have a male perspective which is a positive thing..she had felt it a negative and completely dismissed an ‘opinion’ by putting a label on it...You’re a man/I’m a woman/you explain and capture my attention/I explain etc and we both absorb and listen, isn’t that the way it all goes down..and ooops, along came a label called mansplaining...which is just quite bizarre...anyways, going back a bit more to the topic...I’m assuming that you didn’t feel the mansplain label type thing being something that you are and indeed an incorrect perception of you and I’m assuming that you felt quite negatively about it being attached to you...maybe being attached because of how you post, the things you post about etc...?...all of this is just assumptions for the sake of the discussion as it were...but is that not the same thing or a similar thing to attaching any ‘ist’ label...in that we don’t really know a person from their opinions and how they express those opinions in internet land in the same way we would know a person in real life and more where their opinions And beliefs derive from...I mean, yes we can only go by someone’s words that are typed, so we’re all entitled to ‘label’ with those words...but does that labelling actually progress anything in the discussion for either ‘side’...is it helpful in any way or is it hindering...like the feminist author I guess, she closed her ears from a perspective that had validity and just went in with that mansplaining thing in dismissal...hmmm, I’m not sure I’m completely on board with the thought process of ..if an ‘ism’ is accused of you, then it’s your responsibility to disprove, either...just because in that disproving or explaining as it were, that person might have to disclose something personal about themselves..maybe a childhood environment that has instilled or specific life experiences...which, then makes me think about what you have said about personal stuff and how it can be ‘used to hurt’...just the last thing to say really is that you ‘mansplain’ so well and so thoughtfully, TS.. that you often get my thoughts running off in many directions...(...the tricky bit is getting them all back together again to concentrate focus...)...

[Ammi]

...jeez, I need to learn paragraphs...

[smudgie]

...jeez, I need to learn paragraphs...

It’s just so good to see you back, beggar the paragraphs.x

[Ammi]

It’s just so good to see you back, beggar the paragraphs.x

...hawwww..:hug:...it’s good to see your lovely face as well, Smudgie...

[Redway]

It’s all rooted in white male privilege. Pisses me off.

[Alf]

It’s all rooted in white male privilege. Pisses me off.That'll be it then. Case closed.

[user104658]

...you’ve branched my thoughts out quite a bit though I have to say...you mention ‘adult discussions’...?...and then of some negative personal things which have been said to you because of personal information disclosed..(..I’m so sorry to hear that...)...the internet is a strange place in that when we do disclose about ourselves in the way of explaining etc or for other reasons or just giving out personal information etc...we’re not only disclosing to our closest friends...(..which is what we have a tendency to do in real life...)...we’re disclosing to strangers essentially and also ‘our closest enemies’...(...and most of us have those..)..also obviously to people who can become generally irritated by our opinions on any given day...anyways...

I suppose that's true, though for me personally the reason I don't disclose too much / prefer to stay anonymous is that my wife is now quite politically active "in the real world" and increasingly so, to the extent that I actually have to be sort of careful with any personal or political opinions that I share "openly" or at least that they're well thought through and carefully worded... which isn't always how TiBB threads go :joker:.

For the rest of it, I actually don't mind / sort of enjoy when people lose their cool and get personal :umm2:. If someone has to attack arbitrary things about you, it's generally because they're struggling to find any way to attack the argument you were trying to make, which means the logic must be solid... so sort of a validation, really.


...let’s move on to ‘mansplaining’...because I have to ‘disclose’...:laugh:...that’s a word I haven’t heard before so you had me googling...that then led me to reading a few articles..and to cut it short a little, one article stated that ‘label’ derived from a feminist author...who at a party, had a man explain to her the meaning of her last book...so she had coined the mansplain thing ..so rather than think..oh, that’s interesting to have a male perspective which is a positive thing..she had felt it a negative and completely dismissed an ‘opinion’ by putting a label on it...You’re a man/I’m a woman/you explain and capture my attention/I explain etc and we both absorb and listen, isn’t that the way it all goes down..and ooops, along came a label called mansplaining...which is just quite bizarre... That's my main problem with it though, that it's so dismissive. Even if someone feels like something is being "manplained" inaccurately, that can still prompt dialogue. It completely over-rides context, ignores content, no opportunity for any discussion that might lead to interesting conclusions... if someone just shouts "Oh geez thanks for mansplaining!!" and expects there to be nothing more to say, how does that help anyone? But it's not that someone thinks I'm incorrect that bothers me, it's the shutting down of any opportunity to discuss why, with sweeping reasons.

In the same way, like I said above, I think it's totally wrong for anyone to reply to something and just say "That's racism! You are racist! Nothing more to say!". Though I do think that's different from just simply using the word "racism" in the context of a full post discussing the exact reasons that you think something isn't right.

I’m assuming that you didn’t feel the mansplain label type thing being something that you are and indeed an incorrect perception of you and I’m assuming that you felt quite negatively about it being attached to you...maybe being attached because of how you post, the things you post about etc...?...all of this is just assumptions for the sake of the discussion as it were...but is that not the same thing or a similar thing to attaching any ‘ist’ label...in that we don’t really know a person from their opinions and how they express those opinions in internet land in the same way we would know a person in real life and more where their opinions And beliefs derive from...I mean, yes we can only go by someone’s words that are typed, so we’re all entitled to ‘label’ with those words...but does that labelling actually progress anything in the discussion for either ‘side’...is it helpful in any way or is it hindering...like the feminist author I guess, she closed her ears from a perspective that had validity and just went in with that mansplaining thing in dismissal...hmmm, I’m not sure I’m completely on board with the thought process of ..if an ‘ism’ is accused of you, then it’s your responsibility to disprove, either...just because in that disproving or explaining as it were, that person might have to disclose something personal about themselves..maybe a childhood environment that has instilled or specific life experiences...which, then makes me think about what you have said about personal stuff and how it can be ‘used to hurt’...

I guess just to go back to the above - and I know this may not be true for everyone - but it's very rare that if I point something out as racism it's with the intent of it being a personal attack or label, it's just that sometimes it feels like skirting around the issue without actually saying it. I'm also never trying to shut down the discussion when doing it and it's totally open to a back-and-forth and elaboration. Usually. I can admit to having off days when I'm just sick of it; though I guess the thing to do in those situations is just not to post at all. It's a work in progress :joker:

just the last thing to say really is that you ‘mansplain’ so well and so thoughtfully, TS.. that you often get my thoughts running off in many directions...(...the tricky bit is getting them all back together again to concentrate focus...)...

Awwwh, thanks :blush2:. Like I said I think it's a work in progress, I have good days and bad days :joker:. The second part there about thoughts running off, I definitely get that, it's happening in my head too and I think I must be one of the worst offenders for derailing threads :think:.

[Ammi]

I suppose that's true, though for me personally the reason I don't disclose too much / prefer to stay anonymous is that my wife is now quite politically active "in the real world" and increasingly so, to the extent that I actually have to be sort of careful with any personal or political opinions that I share "openly" or at least that they're well thought through and carefully worded... which isn't always how TiBB threads go :joker:.

For the rest of it, I actually don't mind / sort of enjoy when people lose their cool and get personal :umm2:. If someone has to attack arbitrary things about you, it's generally because they're struggling to find any way to attack the argument you were trying to make, which means the logic must be solid... so sort of a validation, really.


That's my main problem with it though, that it's so dismissive. Even if someone feels like something is being "manplained" inaccurately, that can still prompt dialogue. It completely over-rides context, ignores content, no opportunity for any discussion that might lead to interesting conclusions... if someone just shouts "Oh geez thanks for mansplaining!!" and expects there to be nothing more to say, how does that help anyone? But it's not that someone thinks I'm incorrect that bothers me, it's the shutting down of any opportunity to discuss why, with sweeping reasons.

In the same way, like I said above, I think it's totally wrong for anyone to reply to something and just say "That's racism! You are racist! Nothing more to say!". Though I do think that's different from just simply using the word "racism" in the context of a full post discussing the exact reasons that you think something isn't right.



I guess just to go back to the above - and I know this may not be true for everyone - but it's very rare that if I point something out as racism it's with the intent of it being a personal attack or label, it's just that sometimes it feels like skirting around the issue without actually saying it. I'm also never trying to shut down the discussion when doing it and it's totally open to a back-and-forth and elaboration. Usually. I can admit to having off days when I'm just sick of it; though I guess the thing to do in those situations is just not to post at all. It's a work in progress :joker:



Awwwh, thanks :blush2:. Like I said I think it's a work in progress, I have good days and bad days :joker:. The second part there about thoughts running off, I definitely get that, it's happening in my head too and I think I must be one of the worst offenders for derailing threads :think:.

...see I don’t see derailing as an offence at all...some of the best and most interesting discussions come from the derailments and not from the track...otherwise without them, we’d only be repeating ourselves over and over and over and fixed in one place within a few topics...:laugh:...your ‘offence’ is actually one of your strengths and a great thing I think...

[DemolitionRed]

The thing is, nobody is really listening when its a subject we feel strongly about. It would take something quite radical to change my view of Muslims and immigrants so when I read Muslims (as a whole) being demonized, I'm going to strongly voice my opinion right back at that person. Who else can I voice it to? If people think that's cruel, perhaps they covertly agree with what that person said or perhaps its because they consider themselves a friend.
That's why I don't have friends on here, regardless of who is on my friends list. I just consider them like minded faceless posters. If I considered them friends, I may allow myself to be influenced because friendship has personal power.

To be racist or overly judgmental, you need confidence. There's a chance of getting lynched for saying the wrong thing in the wrong forum group but if you know you have back up, even if its not directly on that thread or that topic, you know if you get verbally destroyed by opposing opinions you can always reach for the victim card.

Anyone who gets butt hurt on a forum should consider doing something else with their time. If people can dish out resentment and hatred towards whole societies but then take it personally when someone calls them out, they need to stand up and fight their own corner.

[Ammi]

The thing is, nobody is really listening when its a subject we feel strongly about. It would take something quite radical to change my view of Muslims and immigrants so when I read Muslims (as a whole) being demonized, I'm going to strongly voice my opinion right back at that person. Who else can I voice it to? If people think that's cruel, perhaps they covertly agree with what that person said or perhaps its because they consider themselves a friend.
That's why I don't have friends on here, regardless of who is on my friends list. I just consider them like minded faceless posters. If I considered them friends, I may allow myself to be influenced because friendship has personal power.

To be racist or overly judgmental, you need confidence. There's a chance of getting lynched for saying the wrong thing in the wrong forum group but if you know you have back up, even if its not directly on that thread or that topic, you know if you get verbally destroyed by opposing opinions you can always reach for the victim card.

Anyone who gets butt hurt on a forum should consider doing something else with their time. If people can dish out resentment and hatred towards whole societies but then take it personally when someone calls them out, they need to stand up and fight their own corner.

..if we don’t listen though, no matter how strongly we feel..then we’ve just closed our worlds down a bit by not leaving that mind open....?..just reached the end of something and closed it all off..made it all stagnant in our thought processes...

...so far as immigration is concerned for instance, I’ve listened to some very valid and thought provoking reasons why more control is felt to be needed and even why in some cases it may be opposed to completely...that may not have changed my feelings or stance as such in general...but it does prevent my thoughts just staying with their comfort zone of not branching out if that makes sense...and I guess that I’m just not on board with attaching a label on others when it’s essentially a label that’s being opposed or objected to ...yes, we are entitled to but does it hinder by doing, type thing...just to add that I don’t covertly agree, neither do I have my thoughts based on friendships...

[DemolitionRed]

..if we don’t listen though, no matter how strongly we feel..then we’ve just closed our worlds down a bit by not leaving that mind open....?..just reached the end of something and closed it all off..made it all stagnant in our thought processes...

That depends on what we are supposed to be listening to. There's a lot of ignorance surrounding immigration (just an example) and so if I read something that I know to be incorrect, I'll attempt but usually fail to correct their knowledge. What I'm not going to do is listen to them blindly continuing with that rant because its worthless. If, on the other hand, someone rants about something I have little knowledge about I may go off and do my own research on that subject, if I'm interested. If not, then I don't join the topic.


...so far as immigration is concerned for instance, I’ve listened to some very valid and thought provoking reasons why more control is felt to be needed and even why in some cases it may be opposed to completely...that may not have changed my feelings or stance as such in general...but it does prevent my thoughts just staying with their comfort zone of not branching out if that makes sense...and I guess that I’m just not on board with attaching a label on others when it’s essentially a label that’s being opposed or objected to ...yes, we are entitled to but does it hinder by doing, type thing...just to add that I don’t covertly agree, neither do I have my thoughts based on friendships...

I would never say the curbing of immigration isn't needed but all immigrants need to be dealt with on a case by case basis. I understand the huge good immigration brings to this country and I'm aware of the negative consequences of allowing certain types in but a few bad apples shouldn't ruin the whole pick.

As for the reasons for protection, all I know is, I don't worry for a second about the people who are openly aggressive about 'people types' because whilst you may not understand their dislike, you absolutely know how they feel about certain issues. The people who never really join in such topics other than to attempt to protect the hater are the people I'm guarded about.

[Brillopad]

The thing is, nobody is really listening when its a subject we feel strongly about. It would take something quite radical to change my view of Muslims and immigrants so when I read Muslims (as a whole) being demonized, I'm going to strongly voice my opinion right back at that person. Who else can I voice it to? If people think that's cruel, perhaps they covertly agree with what that person said or perhaps its because they consider themselves a friend.
That's why I don't have friends on here, regardless of who is on my friends list. I just consider them like minded faceless posters. If I considered them friends, I may allow myself to be influenced because friendship has personal power.

To be racist or overly judgmental, you need confidence. There's a chance of getting lynched for saying the wrong thing in the wrong forum group but if you know you have back up, even if its not directly on that thread or that topic, you know if you get verbally destroyed by opposing opinions you can always reach for the victim card.

Anyone who gets butt hurt on a forum should consider doing something else with their time. If people can dish out resentment and hatred towards whole societies but then take it personally when someone calls them out, they need to stand up and fight their own corner.

THe arrogance of that post is as expected. Some people believe they are always right and always know best. They put themselves on a pedal stool as someone who defends others against all the vile hateful racists. Differing opinions are hateful and people expressing such ‘hate’ should be shut-down because such hateful opinions don’t sit well with them.

Calling people out on their shut-down tactics is not playing the victim card, but of course that is how some will interpret it because it fits with their attempt to undermine that person. Who exactly is butt hurt - you sound like that to me. I have read some of your blogs whining about how you were not going to waste your precious time on a site that doesn’t debate or express opinions in the way you say they should. Some people just insist on seeing themselves as morally and intellectually superior and believe that gives them the right to belittle others.

If such people think all these hateful people should look at themselves and analyize their behaviour they would be doing everyone a favour if they could practice what they preach.

[DemolitionRed]

I know certain people will recognize themselves in what I said and they will probably react as expected.

[Brillopad]

I know certain people will recognize themselves in what I said and they will probably react as expected.

I know certain people will always see what they want to see.

[user104658]

I know certain people will recognize themselves in what I said and they will probably react as expected.

I know certain people will always see what they want to see.

I know da wei

https://www.imageupload.co.uk/images/2018/01/22/unnamedaef3d.png

[Withano]

The thing is, nobody is really listening when its a subject we feel strongly about. It would take something quite radical to change my view of Muslims and immigrants so when I read Muslims (as a whole) being demonized, I'm going to strongly voice my opinion right back at that person. Who else can I voice it to? If people think that's cruel, perhaps they covertly agree with what that person said or perhaps its because they consider themselves a friend.
That's why I don't have friends on here, regardless of who is on my friends list. I just consider them like minded faceless posters. If I considered them friends, I may allow myself to be influenced because friendship has personal power.

To be racist or overly judgmental, you need confidence. There's a chance of getting lynched for saying the wrong thing in the wrong forum group but if you know you have back up, even if its not directly on that thread or that topic, you know if you get verbally destroyed by opposing opinions you can always reach for the victim card.

Anyone who gets butt hurt on a forum should consider doing something else with their time. If people can dish out resentment and hatred towards whole societies but then take it personally when someone calls them out, they need to stand up and fight their own corner.

I wasn't necessarily talking about -on tibb-, I'd like to think that forum members definitely are not entitled to racism/homophobia/sexism etc on tibb. Cos like nobody wants to read that ****.

[Withano]

I know certain people will always see what they want to see.

Yeh, this one mate of mine doesnt see fault in themselves at all, actually when they are given a discriptor of their language they claim its because others have an agenda or some nonsense, and that the discriptor others use to describe them is nothing to do with their language. Its weird, but I guess you're right. My mate will just see what they want to see, and my mate doesnt wanna see fault in their own actions.

[Brillopad]

Yeh, this one mate of mine doesnt see fault in themselves at all, actually when they are given a discriptor of their language they claim its because others have an agenda or some nonsense, and that the discriptor others use to describe them is nothing to do with their language. Its weird, but I guess you're right. My mate will just see what they want to see, and my mate doesnt wanna see fault in their own actions.

Ditto. There are those who get a rather unsavoury rep for shall we say shadowing but still see no fault in themselves. Not going there with you yet again. My ignore button needs some exercise.

[Redway]

That'll be it then. Case closed.



?

[Alf]

?What's your question?

[Redway]

What's your question?


What do you mean case closed?

[Alf]

What do you mean case closed?I was being sarcastic to your post which said "it's all rooted in White male privilege"

As a White male, you purpously discriminated against me, but instead of being a crying victim about it, I'll come back at you with sarcasm instead.

[Withano]

Does suggesting that white males have privilege count as discrimination? Seems like the opposite.

[Alf]

Does suggesting that white males have privilege count as discrimination? Seems like the opposite.Don't take away my victimhood, as a White straight man, that's all I have to be a victim. I just want to be equal with all the other victims

[Withano]

Don't take away my victimhood, as a White straight man, that's all I have to be a victim. I just want to be equal with all the other victims

I can relate to this on a personal level.

[Brillopad]

Does suggesting that white males have privilege count as discrimination? Seems like the opposite.

Sounds like a massive chip on ones shoulder to me. :sleep:

[Redway]

Sounds like a massive chip on ones shoulder to me. :sleep:

It’s true though.

[Redway]

I was being sarcastic to your post which said "it's all rooted in White male privilege"

As a White male, you purpously discriminated against me, but instead of being a crying victim about it, I'll come back at you with sarcasm instead.

Who told you I’m Caucasian?

[Brillopad]

I wasn't necessarily talking about -on tibb-, I'd like to think that forum members definitely are not entitled to racism/homophobia/sexism etc on tibb. Cos like nobody wants to read that ****.

And there we come back to people like you who think they have the right to decide who exactly is being racist. People who want to play judge and jury over the thoughts and opinions of others and shut down any opinions they believe challenge theirs.

Unless people are being blatantly abusive and offensive in their language they have equal rights to the expression of their views on issues such as immigration. Challenging mass immigration is not racism and it is not your right to label it as such. The very way in which some on here do so can also be called pretty damn hateful and manipulative.

[Withano]

Firstly; Not going there with you yet again. My ignore button needs some exercise.
:oh:

Secondly;
And there we come back to people like you who think they have the right to decide who exactly is being racist. People who want to play judge and jury over the thoughts and opinions of others and shut down any opinions they believe challenge theirs.

Unless people are being blatantly abusive and offensive in their language they have equal rights to the expression of their views on issues such as immigration. Challenging mass immigration is not racism and it is not your right to label it as such. The very way in which some on here do so can also be called pretty damn hateful and manipulative.

No hunny, there are tibb rules, and racism etc is obviously against them.. Why do you keep bringing up immigration, sounds like a massive chip on the shoulder to me. For somebody who doesnt see themselves as racist, you're certainly talking about yourself a lot in this thread.

[thesheriff443]

Hurting people is easy getting away with it is the hard part

[Brillopad]

Firstly;
:oh:

Secondly;


No hunny, there are tibb rules, and racism etc is obviously against them.. Why do you keep bringing up immigration, sounds like a massive chip on the shoulder to me. For somebody who doesnt see themselves as racist, you're certainly talking about yourself a lot in this thread.

There are tibb rules hunny but they are being abused by those trying to close down different views. Something isn't racist because you say so. You have an opinion not the rulebook.

I do not see myself as racist but that is not my concern and never has been. My concern is about the attempted shut-down by the manipulative. I have no time for radical PC. Got it now hun!

I talk about myself and my experience on here because certain individuals have repeatedly accused me of that because I have been open about my views on mass immigration and the wearing of burkhas in the West, you being one of the worst offenders - so don't try to play the innocent by pretending to wonder what immigration has to do with it - the very fact you try to do that shows you know exactly what you do. Neither of those opinions in themselves make me racist - unless of course I was calling immigrants and people of colour ugly names and stating I viewed them as inferior. Show me where I have said that! Most can see that, others don't care because they just want to manipulate people into their way of thinking on issues such as immigration.

Btw the question on your poll is a totally loaded question rendering it pretty invalid as you are suggesting that what you say is racist is racist and anything different to your view is ignorance. Yes mate, if you say so.

[Brillopad]

Hurting people is easy getting away with it is the hard part

People get hurt - it's called life. You can't always legislate against it.

Some things need to be legislated against such as racism, sexism etc, but that is not a licence for the extreme to shut down the honest concerns of others. Some people will always try it on and try to control how others think. It's a power thing.

[user104658]

I just have to add here, I genuinely don't think that anyone on TiBB has ever been accused of racism for questioning mass immigration? It's really not about the stance, it's about the arguments used to justify that stance.

e.g.

"I'm against mass immigration because our country simply cannot economically handle the influx of people, we don't have the infrastructure" <-- Not racist in the slightest

"I'm against immigration because I'm worried about sleeper terrorists entering the country" - STILL not racist.

"I'm against immigration because I believe that most men from certain other cultures are violent and dangerous by nature and will attack and abuse people here" - getting kind of racist now



Also the idea that people don't "get to decide who is racist or not" - well, that's true, if you're talking in objective terms... but everyone is free to form their own view of someone, so it's perfectly reasonable for anyone to say to anyone else, "I find you to be racist". It's an opinion of someone... you DO get to decide that. It's really absolutely no different from saying "I find you snowflakey" or "I think you are too PC" or any other opinion that a person might have of another person. That opinion may or may not be factually accurate, but it is still "true that it is that person's opinion".

All that said; I find myself agreeing with what Ammi said earlier in the thread, and that labelling on both sides probably isn't helpful in any way. However... you can't really complain about someone calling you racist if you are happy to call them a snowflake, a "lefty", or PC... and vice versa.

[Alf]

Who told you I’m Caucasian?Nobody did, what you talking about?

[Redway]

Nobody did, what you talking about?


“As a White male, you purpously discriminated against me“

Unless you’re saying that pointing out how damaging white male privilege is is discriminatory and bigoted. I see.

[DemolitionRed]

There is nothing wrong with stating an opinion or belief so long as the person posting it excepts it as testable. When a poster on here recently started a thread about transgenderism, it was obvious from the very first post that it was an opinion backed up with logical support. She didn't get angry when people strongly debated her values and so what happened there was, the thread went on for numerous days with reasonable and intellectual dialogue.

When someone posts half-baked misguided opinion's or show a negative attitude or intolerance towards certain kinds of people and when those opinions are delivered without logical support or insufficient reasoning, and come with a strong tone of prejudice; its going to be open to scrutiny. Because its an opinion and not a fact, that scrutiny is going to be at a personal level. Values are bound to be questioned and facts are going to be delivered in an attempt to change that persons thought process. If that person refuses to listen to facts and continues to deliver the same rhetoric, then inevitably people will form their own opinions of that poster and they may not be pleasant ones.

[Tom4784]

There are tibb rules hunny but they are being abused by those trying to close down different views. Something isn't racist because you say so. You have an opinion not the rulebook.

I do not see myself as racist but that is not my concern and never has been. My concern is about the attempted shut-down by the manipulative. I have no time for radical PC. Got it now hun!

I talk about myself and my experience on here because certain individuals have repeatedly accused me of that because I have been open about my views on mass immigration and the wearing of burkhas in the West, you being one of the worst offenders - so don't try to play the innocent by pretending to wonder what immigration has to do with it - the very fact you try to do that shows you know exactly what you do. Neither of those opinions in themselves make me racist - unless of course I was calling immigrants and people of colour ugly names and stating I viewed them as inferior. Show me where I have said that! Most can see that, others don't care because they just want to manipulate people into their way of thinking on issues such as immigration.

Btw the question on your poll is a totally loaded question rendering it pretty invalid as you are suggesting that what you say is racist is racist and anything different to your view is ignorance. Yes mate, if you say so.

Right, I was done here but I need to comment on this post.

Nobody has ever tried to shut you down, what you see as people 'shutting you down' is actually just other people having their say on what you've said. That's the problem here. You see other opinions as people trying to shut you down and you use that to try to silence other people by making out that views that are in opposition to yours are an attack on you.

You claim people try to shut you down but in actuality, it's often you that's guilty of that because you can't recognise that people can have opinions too, it's not a right that's exclusive to you.

As I've said plenty of times (but you've ignored it just as much) If someone accuses you of something in a way that's reasonable and does not use insulting language then it's down to you to combat that accusation. Trying to make out that an accusation is an insult doesn't work when you are no stranger to hurling out accusations yourself. You don't realise that, because you don't defend yourself and instead you try to instead prevent people from calling you racist in the first place that it just makes you look guilty of that accusation since you are more concerned about the accusation then proving it's not true.

[Tom4784]

As for the whole white privilege thing, pointing it out is not bigoted or discrimination. I've never faced discrimination on the grounds of being a white male, having someone point out that white males don't often have experiences with being on the receiving end of discrimination is not an attack, it's pretty much a fact. I've only ever faced discrimination on accounts of being bisexual and that doesn't occur if people don't think I'm anything other than straight.

Having known what discrimination actually feels like when it comes to my sexuality, I can say with certainty that I've never had to deal with discrimination when it comes to my gender or race.

[Brillopad]

Right, I was done here but I need to comment on this post.

Nobody has ever tried to shut you down, what you see as people 'shutting you down' is actually just other people having their say on what you've said. That's the problem here. You see other opinions as people trying to shut you down and you use that to try to silence other people by making out that views that are in opposition to yours are an attack on you.

You claim people try to shut you down but in actuality, it's often you that's guilty of that because you can't recognise that people can have opinions too, it's not a right that's exclusive to you.

As I've said plenty of times (but you've ignored it just as much) If someone accuses you of something in a way that's reasonable and does not use insulting language then it's down to you to combat that accusation. Trying to make out that an accusation is an insult doesn't work when you are no stranger to hurling out accusations yourself. You don't realise that, because you don't defend yourself and instead you try to instead prevent people from calling you racist in the first place that it just makes you look guilty of that accusation since you are more concerned about the accusation then proving it's not true.


It's not just me - some of the left thinkers on here do it to any poster who has differing views although some do seem to do it more with some posters than others. Many people have said the same, let's please pretend it is just me saying it.

And no I shouldn't have to defend myself from insults for views that are not expressed in an insulting or personal way. I only get personal with those that get personal with me.

As for me attempting to shut down others - again only when they try that with me.

[Brillopad]

There is nothing wrong with stating an opinion or belief so long as the person posting it excepts it as testable. When a poster on here recently started a thread about transgenderism, it was obvious from the very first post that it was an opinion backed up with logical support. She didn't get angry when people strongly debated her values and so what happened there was, the thread went on for numerous days with reasonable and intellectual dialogue.

When someone posts half-baked misguided opinion's or show a negative attitude or intolerance towards certain kinds of people and when those opinions are delivered without logical support or insufficient reasoning, and come with a strong tone of prejudice; its going to be open to scrutiny. Because its an opinion and not a fact, that scrutiny is going to be at a personal level. Values are bound to be questioned and facts are going to be delivered in an attempt to change that persons thought process. If that person refuses to listen to facts and continues to deliver the same rhetoric, then inevitably people will form their own opinions of that poster and they may not be pleasant ones.

I could say exactly the same about you. You are intolerant of people you have judged in exactly the same way as you accuse others of. I find you very judgemental when you can't convince people to see things your way.
That is neither endearing or pleasant either.

You can question someone's 'values' but that does not give you the right to then patronize because you see them as being different to yours - something you do lot. So please less of the holier than thou act - it's trying

[Brillopad]

Right, I was done here but I need to comment on this post.

Nobody has ever tried to shut you down, what you see as people 'shutting you down' is actually just other people having their say on what you've said. That's the problem here. You see other opinions as people trying to shut you down and you use that to try to silence other people by making out that views that are in opposition to yours are an attack on you.

You claim people try to shut you down but in actuality, it's often you that's guilty of that because you can't recognise that people can have opinions too, it's not a right that's exclusive to you.

As I've said plenty of times (but you've ignored it just as much) If someone accuses you of something in a way that's reasonable and does not use insulting language then it's down to you to combat that accusation. Trying to make out that an accusation is an insult doesn't work when you are no stranger to hurling out accusations yourself. You don't realise that, because you don't defend yourself and instead you try to instead prevent people from calling you racist in the first place that it just makes you look guilty of that accusation since you are more concerned about the accusation then proving it's not true.

No, I am more concerned with you thinking you can browbeat people into silence with aggression and name-calling - something you have been criticized for on many occasions by several different people. You will keep trying to twist the blame in my direction though - I wonder why!

[Brillopad]

I just have to add here, I genuinely don't think that anyone on TiBB has ever been accused of racism for questioning mass immigration? It's really not about the stance, it's about the arguments used to justify that stance.

e.g.

"I'm against mass immigration because our country simply cannot economically handle the influx of people, we don't have the infrastructure" <-- Not racist in the slightest

"I'm against immigration because I'm worried about sleeper terrorists entering the country" - STILL not racist.

"I'm against immigration because I believe that most men from certain other cultures are violent and dangerous by nature and will attack and abuse people here" - getting kind of racist now



Also the idea that people don't "get to decide who is racist or not" - well, that's true, if you're talking in objective terms... but everyone is free to form their own view of someone, so it's perfectly reasonable for anyone to say to anyone else, "I find you to be racist". It's an opinion of someone... you DO get to decide that. It's really absolutely no different from saying "I find you snowflakey" or "I think you are too PC" or any other opinion that a person might have of another person. That opinion may or may not be factually accurate, but it is still "true that it is that person's opinion".

All that said; I find myself agreeing with what Ammi said earlier in the thread, and that labelling on both sides probably isn't helpful in any way. However... you can't really complain about someone calling you racist if you are happy to call them a snowflake, a "lefty", or PC... and vice versa.

Yes everyone is free to form their own view and state it as their opinion. But some on here don't do that - they present their opinion as if it were a proven fact.

If people don't want to be called snowflakes, lefty or PC than don't call others bigots, racist or homophobic based on very little then. It isn't rocket science. From my experience it is nearly always those on the left that start with the name-calling.

[Tom4784]

No, I am more concerned with you thinking you can browbeat people into silence with aggression and name-calling - something you have been criticized for on many occasions by several different people. You will keep trying to twist the blame in my direction though - I wonder why!

When have I ever tried to 'browbeat' anyone into silence?

I literally ****ing preach that freedom of speech is a two way street, that people can have controversial opinions and everyone is entitled to their views on everyone else's opinions. I've been saying that all thread, i've been saying that for years.

You've just proved what I've said to be true, I was not attacking you, I had an opinion on what you've said and now you're trying to invalidate that opinion by denouncing it as an attack that makes no sense since it's ignored what I've said all thread. You are incapable of dealing with opinions that are not your own, this reply is proof of that.

I can see that you are trying to draw me into an argument to paint me as the bad guy though so I'm going to end the discussion here since it won't lead to anything good if you're just going to make out that everything I say is an attack on you even when it makes no sense to do so.

[Brillopad]

When have I ever tried to 'browbeat' anyone into silence?

I literally ****ing preach that freedom of speech is a two way street, that people can have controversial opinions and everyone is entitled to their views on everyone else's opinions. I've been saying that all thread, i've been saying that for years.

You've just proved what I've said to be true, I was not attacking you, I had an opinion on what you've said and now you're trying to invalidate that opinion by denouncing it as an attack that makes no sense since it's ignored what I've said all thread. You are incapable of dealing with opinions that are not your own, this reply is proof of that.

I can see that you are trying to draw me into an argument to paint me as the bad guy though so I'm going to end the discussion here since it won't lead to anything good if you're just going to make out that everything I say is an attack on you even when it makes no sense to do so.

I'm not actually - most of the time I try and avoid you it's just not worth it. But sometimes I feel your comments need to be responded to.

[DemolitionRed]

I could say exactly the same about you. You are intolerant of people you have judged in exactly the same way as you accuse others of. I find you very judgemental when you can't convince people to see things your way.
That is neither endearing or pleasant either.

You can question someone's 'values' but that does not give you the right to then patronize because you see them as being different to yours - something you do lot. So please less of the holier than thou act - it's trying

You see, here's the thing. What I said didn't imply to anyone in particular. It was you who recognized yourself in my words. You then come back making accusations directly at me.

It always feels as though your looking for a fight. I've seen entire threads (that I haven't taken part in) where you are gunning for a fight. Much as I love a bit of a verbal scrap, I honestly don't have enough hours in the day to keep you amused, so on that note, I'll leave you to it.

[Brillopad]

You see, here's the thing. What I said didn't imply to anyone in particular. It was you who recognized yourself in my words. You then come back making accusations directly at me.

It always feels as though your looking for a fight. I've seen entire threads (that I haven't taken part in) where you are gunning for a fight. Much as I love a bit of a verbal scrap, I honestly don't have enough hours in the day to keep you amused, so on that note, I'll leave you to it.

Recognising it was hardly difficult bearing in mind you say it to me quite a lot, which is part of the problem. I'm not stupid. If you were either a totally peaceful person who liked to avoid any kind of conflict or didn't feel I had a valid point in some things I say - you would simply avoid me. You do so half-heartedly now and again but you always have to put your two pennies worth in at some point.

You see, like me, you have your moments, so not really in a position to judge on that one either.

[jet]

Yes everyone is free to form their own view and state it as their opinion. But some on here don't do that - they present their opinion as if it were a proven fact.

If people don't want to be called snowflakes, lefty or PC than don't call others bigots, racist or homophobic based on very little then. It isn't rocket science. From my experience it is nearly always those on the left that start with the name-calling.

Absolutely...and it's always the same small group who call you racist and start picking at you. I don't see it myself - I don't always agree with your opinions, but racist, no. You just have different views that don't fit inside the others little rigid box.
Nobody else calls you racist but those few with their 'you must see things like we do' group - think. That points to them being the problem, not you.

[Withano]

I was gonna comment on that post, but others have summed my thoughts on it nicely.
"One of the worst offenders" is, I mean, whatever. I have never called you a racist, I don't know you well enough to make that summary Brillo.
Also it's less to do with your boring 'mass immigration' threads, and more to do with coming into a terrorism thread and blaming muslims instantly, it's more to do with you seeing a photo of a boy and his name in an article and having a rant about his culture that you presumed you knew about. It's more to do with the underlying tone in your posts that scream ugly.
And even through all of these insane posts, which others can call racism, it's their prerogative, and it's their opinion - but I have not - the closest I got (I checked yesterday) was saying something like "it's like you want people to see you as a racist or something" and I feel well entitled in saying that because it's constant and excessive. You never defend yourself well against these allegations, you give people plentiful reasons to make these allegations, and you, yourself, right here, have saw a post about racism in general and made t about yourself on tibb.

If you don't consider yourself racist, stop giving us reason to suspect otherwise.

I will continue to not call you a racist, I don't know you personally. If I see a post that I suspect to be racist, I will call you or anyone else up on it, and you can either defend your stance or blame my ****ing agenda, I don't really care.

[Brillopad]

I was gonna comment on that post, but others have summed my thoughts on it nicely.
"One of the worst offenders" is, I mean, whatever. I have never called you a racist, I don't know you well enough to make that summary Brillo.
Also it's less to do with your boring 'mass immigration' threads, and more to do with coming into a terrorism thread and blaming muslims instantly, it's more to do with you seeing a photo of a boy and his name in an article and having a rant about his culture that you presumed you knew about. It's more to do with the underlying tone in your posts that scream ugly.
And even through all of these insane posts, which others can call racism, it's their prerogative, and it's their opinion - but I have not - the closest I got (I checked yesterday) was saying something like "it's like you want people to see you as a racist or something" and I feel well entitled in saying that because it's constant and excessive. You never defend yourself well against these allegations, you give people plentiful reasons to make these allegations, and you, yourself, right here, have saw a post about racism in general and made t about yourself on tibb.

If you don't consider yourself racist, stop giving us reason to suspect otherwise.

I will continue to not call you a racist, I don't know you personally. If I see a post that I suspect to be racist, I will call you or anyone else up on it, and you can either defend your stance or blame my ****ing agenda, I don't really care.

You do that and I will continue to say my piece to.

[Ammi]

That depends on what we are supposed to be listening to. There's a lot of ignorance surrounding immigration (just an example) and so if I read something that I know to be incorrect, I'll attempt but usually fail to correct their knowledge. What I'm not going to do is listen to them blindly continuing with that rant because its worthless. If, on the other hand, someone rants about something I have little knowledge about I may go off and do my own research on that subject, if I'm interested. If not, then I don't join the topic.



I would never say the curbing of immigration isn't needed but all immigrants need to be dealt with on a case by case basis. I understand the huge good immigration brings to this country and I'm aware of the negative consequences of allowing certain types in but a few bad apples shouldn't ruin the whole pick.

As for the reasons for protection, all I know is, I don't worry for a second about the people who are openly aggressive about 'people types' because whilst you may not understand their dislike, you absolutely know how they feel about certain issues. The people who never really join in such topics other than to attempt to protect the hater are the people I'm guarded about.

..yeah I think on a small forum such as this is and in this section in particular, we do fairly much get a feel about opinions on certain topics which reoccur frequently..and obviously immigration being one over the last few year for various reasons/and with media attention...I have to say though...(and I have seen many 'rants' in my time..:laugh:...)..I don't think I've ever seen one from any present/regular poster which I would have felt required a label of 'racist'...hmmm, there are some things that maybe over a year ago, my thoughts may have been slightly different with this for instance...but then there are things in life../..specifics etc which make us think more and even cause us to reassess etc...that's something that happens to all of us, isn't it..our life experiences/our environments..our 'stories' as it were, these are all things that mould and form or opinions, views...and yes, even our 'judgements'...anyways, what I mean is...even when someone's opinions have a tendency to be quite fixed or quite focused or quire 'ignorant' as you describe...I would assume there are reasons for that../reasons which have been formed through their own lives, experiences and through their own 'story'...in the public context of a forum, as with the discussion I had with TS...its completely understandable as well that members can be very wary of divulging personal 'stories'/experience, information which could give a better understanding of their opinions/views etc..that's obviously an individual thing and it has to feel comfortable for the person 'disclosing' ...so 'correcting' really isn't something that's in our control...and 'correcting' is like saying..something is wrong with you..:fist:../I m trying to correct your mistake etc when views and opinions aren't mistakes, they're what a person feels...I find anyway that using things like statistics and such the like is completely ineffective with anyone who may have great fears/worries/anxieties about something their thought focus on quite highly...I guess its like someone who was afraid of spiders for instance ..and then saying, look statistics show..so you're wrong to worry now hush..:fist:...so how does 'correction' happen, I mean how is it even a possibility..?..surely through communication and attaching labels will only ever delay/slow down/or break off etc...so completely counter-productive with any possible progress...anyways as I say, I have very rarely seen 'ists' on the forum...maybe questionable posts sometimes..?..and obviously those posts have been questioned and those questions been responded to etc ...those responses may not be something we can agree with ourselves in our own thoughts ..but it also doesn't indicate that the person with those responses is an 'ist' either...all that will ever do is to break down all communication and create distance...and Lord with Brexit and the split/divided vote we had there, creating more distance with opinions in this country on some very emotive topics seems like the last thing that would be progressive for any of us...

[Ammi]

Absolutely...and it's always the same small group who call you racist and start picking at you. I don't see it myself - I don't always agree with your opinions, but racist, no. You just have different views that don't fit inside the others little rigid box.
Nobody else calls you racist but those few with their 'you must see things like we do' group - think. That points to them being the problem, not you.

..yeah pretty much this bit in bold..see mine was the long and yours is the short of it..:laugh:.darn you, jet..(I will work on those shorter posts..)...

[Ammi]

..I think what I'm trying to say..(..badly..)..is that we wouldn't put labels on our children..like you're the smart one, you're the dumb one, you're the this one, you're the that one..some positive, some negative etc..labels are just not conducive in the context of discussions and communication...although they're an 'entitlement' all of us can use, they will hinder any moving forward that was hoped for...

[Withano]

You do that and I will continue to say my piece to.

Literally nobody was asking you to do anything else lol. Only you decided to take a general thread about racism personally. Do you have anything to add to the topic or you wanna talk about yourself some more?

[jet]

..yeah pretty much this bit in bold..see mine was the long and yours is the short of it..:laugh:.darn you, jet..(I will work on those shorter posts..)...

Ammi :lovedup: Your posts are never long enough for me, I always want more.

[Brillopad]

Literally nobody was ayou that sking you to do anything else lol. Only you decided to take a general thread about racism personally. Do you have anything to add to the topic or you wanna talk about yourself some more?

You do that enough yourself for some bizarre reason. :shrug:

[Withano]

You do that enough yourself for some bizarre reason. :shrug:

if this thread is anything to go by, its probably cos youre very willing to bring yourself up and talk about yourself for 3 or so pages

[DemolitionRed]

..yeah I think on a small forum such as this is and in this section in particular, we do fairly much get a feel about opinions on certain topics which reoccur frequently..and obviously immigration being one over the last few year for various reasons/and with media attention...I have to say though...(and I have seen many 'rants' in my time..:laugh:...)..I don't think I've ever seen one from any present/regular poster which I would have felt required a label of 'racist'...hmmm, there are some things that maybe over a year ago, my thoughts may have been slightly different with this for instance...but then there are things in life../..specifics etc which make us think more and even cause us to reassess etc...that's something that happens to all of us, isn't it..our life experiences/our environments..our 'stories' as it were, these are all things that mould and form or opinions, views...and yes, even our 'judgements'...anyways, what I mean is...even when someone's opinions have a tendency to be quite fixed or quite focused or quire 'ignorant' as you describe...I would assume there are reasons for that../reasons which have been formed through their own lives, experiences and through their own 'story'...in the public context of a forum, as with the discussion I had with TS...its completely understandable as well that members can be very wary of divulging personal 'stories'/experience, information which could give a better understanding of their opinions/views etc..that's obviously an individual thing and it has to feel comfortable for the person 'disclosing' ...so 'correcting' really isn't something that's in our control...and 'correcting' is like saying..something is wrong with you..:fist:../I m trying to correct your mistake etc when views and opinions aren't mistakes, they're what a person feels...I find anyway that using things like statistics and such the like is completely ineffective with anyone who may have great fears/worries/anxieties about something their thought focus on quite highly...I guess its like someone who was afraid of spiders for instance ..and then saying, look statistics show..so you're wrong to worry now hush..:fist:...so how does 'correction' happen, I mean how is it even a possibility..?..surely through communication and attaching labels will only ever delay/slow down/or break off etc...so completely counter-productive with any possible progress...anyways as I say, I have very rarely seen 'ists' on the forum...maybe questionable posts sometimes..?..and obviously those posts have been questioned and those questions been responded to etc ...those responses may not be something we can agree with ourselves in our own thoughts ..but it also doesn't indicate that the person with those responses is an 'ist' either...all that will ever do is to break down all communication and create distance...and Lord with Brexit and the split/divided vote we had there, creating more distance with opinions in this country on some very emotive topics seems like the last thing that would be progressive for any of us...

You write like your talking to me. There's a real knack to that and not something I'm very good at.

If someone makes a statement they can't later claim that as an opinion. An opinion is a belief, a statement is supposed to be factual. If I read anything that looks like a statement and I suspect that statement is inaccurate, I will, if its a subject I'm interested in, go off and research it for myself. If its incorrect then I think its only right that I or someone else corrects it because without correction, it could easily become someone else's truth. I subscribe to the Independent and I regularly join in on their comment section. If I know a story is inaccurate, I'll state that because nobody should be reading inaccurate information.

I have given away more information on this channel about my understanding of the Middle East than I would ever care to give to anyone other than close friends and I've done so out of pure frustration and the need to get my point across. That information makes me feel vulnerable and even annihilated because although its something that has fundamentally affected my life and the life of my family and its something I'm still grieving, on here, its just empty words.
I've watched Jet talk about his personal stuff with the IRA and at times I've jumped back but then I remind myself about the rawness he feels when he opens that pandoras box and I make myself listen to him and relate to what he's saying. I feel his anger and frustration and I know how familiar that emotion is. Opening yourself up on a forum of strangers isn't something I'd recommend, especially if you have enemies that may, at a later date, use those words against you.

[DemolitionRed]

deleted

[user104658]

..I think what I'm trying to say..(..badly..)..is that we wouldn't put labels on our children.

Oh I dunno - my 8 year old is actually HORRENDOUSLY racist :joker:. The difference, of course, is that she doesn't really know any better yet.

...she refused to get a book about a fairy from her school library because the fairy was black... :facepalm:...

[Tom4784]

Not our TS raising the next generation of white supremacists!

[DemolitionRed]

Oh I dunno - my 8 year old is actually HORRENDOUSLY racist :joker:. The difference, of course, is that she doesn't really know any better yet.

...she refused to get a book about a fairy from her school library because the fairy was black... :facepalm:...

:unsure:

[Ammi]

Oh I dunno - my 8 year old is actually HORRENDOUSLY racist :joker:. The difference, of course, is that she doesn't really know any better yet.

...she refused to get a book about a fairy from her school library because the fairy was black... :facepalm:...

...:laugh:..that’s really interesting as well, which goes back to what you said about your ‘offence’ of derailment in topics, but you’ve branched out my thoughts again with that little thing..(I’m going to assume, yes that old assumption thing again...)...that in school/in her environment etc, she hasn’t experienced ethnicities very much yet...so she’s quite fixed in her lovely head of all the things that a fairy should be...so she can’t think of it as being a fairy if it doesn’t fit in with that...all very logical really...and that goes down the whole route as well of are there enough varied ethnic characters in children’s books/children’s TV etc to represent the wider world we live in in this moment in time...and characters representing sexualities as well...also physical appearances in terms of, are those fairies all very and too ‘perfect’ in their shape/in their facial structure etc, do they have to be physically beautiful fairies with what society would see as beautiful and what books are teaching children to define beautiful...because it’s obviously how fairies have been represented to her that’s the thing...anything other than that representation is just darn well not a fairy...:laugh:...and that little girl wants a fairy...:fist:...obviously you’ll be a big part in expanding her world of fairies, but in doing that you’ll be listening to her first in understanding what it is about specific fairy representatives she’s not comfortable with and having all of those chats together, as opposed to just labelling her a fairy hater and no she must stop thinking like that...YOU’RE NOT ENTITLED TO LITTLE MISSY TS..!!!..which will only ever hinder her thoughts and feelings from being expanded...you’ve sent my own thoughts off again, TS, which is something you do very often I have to say...you have a great day with that little fairy lady of yours...

[Ammi]

..or as Dezzy said, maybe you are raising little white supremists up there in Scotland...:laugh:...

[user104658]

It's basically as you say Ammi; little Scottish village where there is basically next to zero ethnic diversity. I actually don't think her school has ANY other "visible" ethnicity at all :think:. There's a girl in her class who is something like 1/4 Native American, and she knows two kids who are 1/2 Iranian but at most their skin tone is "very light tan" and so close to white that kids most likely have no idea that there's any difference. And that's basically it! Chalk white Scottish kids otherwise.

We hadn't even really thought about it but now are trying to introduce some... Wider worldview.

[jet]

It's basically as you say Ammi; little Scottish village where there is basically next to zero ethnic diversity. I actually don't think her school has ANY other "visible" ethnicity at all :think:. There's a girl in her class who is something like 1/4 Native American, and she knows two kids who are 1/2 Iranian but at most their skin tone is "very light tan" and so close to white that kids most likely have no idea that there's any difference. And that's basically it! Chalk white Scottish kids otherwise.

We hadn't even really thought about it but now are trying to introduce some... Wider worldview.

:)
I remember back in the day when I was in primary school my mother had Pakistani friends, and their son was put into my class in school when they moved back over here from Liverpool. I claimed him as my friend and I thought I was special because I had a friend who didn't look like everyone else. I remember saying on several occasions to the other kids 'he's MY friend, not yours, my Mummy said you're not allowed to be his friend"! The other kids used to offer him sweets and stuff, they all wanted to be his friend too, but I was having none of it. :hee: I was about 7 or thereabouts. :laugh:

[Jay.]

no. hate people for their personality sure or their looks but for nothing they can't change imo, i mean it's literally 2018 not 1918 anymore

[Tozzie]

people should be allowed to think what they like but in this day and age we are all being conditioned to think the same way and to accept everything and if you don't then people are made to feel as though they are a bad person. Personally I don't think that is right. Having a view other than the view that todays society thinks you should have does not make one a bad person. We are not allowing people to exercise their right to have a point of view for fear of being 'shot down' so most people who don't conform to todays society will keep their mouths shut. For us all to think the same way would mean we are brainwashed and conditioned. This world is full of offended people these days and personally I think its bloody ridiculous.

[user104658]

people should be allowed to think what they like but in this day and age we are all being conditioned to think the same way and to accept everything and if you don't then people are made to feel as though they are a bad person. Personally I don't think that is right. Having a view other than the view that todays society thinks you should have does not make one a bad person. We are not allowing people to exercise their right to have a point of view for fear of being 'shot down' so most people who don't conform to todays society will keep their mouths shut. For us all to think the same way would mean we are brainwashed and conditioned. This world is full of offended people these days and personally I think its bloody ridiculous.There is no single minded consensus in "today's society" though, its split straight down the middle... So this doesn't really make sense. Which are you suggesting that people are expected / conditioned to conform to?

If anything, the only thing its difficult to be, is nuanced and conscious of both points of view :think:.

[Withano]

people should be allowed to think what they like but in this day and age we are all being conditioned to think the same way and to accept everything and if you don't then people are made to feel as though they are a bad person. Personally I don't think that is right. Having a view other than the view that todays society thinks you should have does not make one a bad person. We are not allowing people to exercise their right to have a point of view for fear of being 'shot down' so most people who don't conform to todays society will keep their mouths shut. For us all to think the same way would mean we are brainwashed and conditioned. This world is full of offended people these days and personally I think its bloody ridiculous.

I would say the average racist/homophobe/sexist etc is a bad person, they're certainly not a good, understanding, or compassionate one.
I feel like your point would only make sense if these people didn't know they were bad people, but I'd imagine that they'd know that most people see them that way? So I doubt that would impact their words? Would it?

Also your last sentence implies that it is ridiculous to be offended by racism/homophobia/sexism etc? Is that what you meant to say?

[Brillopad]

I would say the average racist/homophobe/sexist etc is a bad person, they're certainly not a good, understanding, or compassionate one.
I feel like your point would only make sense if these people didn't know they were bad people, but I'd imagine that they'd know that most people see them that way? So I doubt that would impact their words? Would it?

Also your last sentence implies that it is ridiculous to be offended by racism/homophobia/sexism etc? Is that what you meant to say?

At no point did she specify what people were offended by. As we all know all these PC people needing safe spaces get offended very easily by very little. Besides, again as any reasonable person knows, the Definition and opinions of the PC brigade can be a little hysterically biased to say the least.

I would say the average PC bully who tries to control and marginalise others who will not conform to their way of thinking is a bad person. A bully is a bully whatever label they hide behind.

The behaviour of many left wingers of late has been pretty dictorial to say the least. There are no good dictators and no pleasant extremes.

[Tozzie]

I would say the average racist/homophobe/sexist etc is a bad person, they're certainly not a good, understanding, or compassionate one.
I feel like your point would only make sense if these people didn't know they were bad people, but I'd imagine that they'd know that most people see them that way? So I doubt that would impact their words? Would it?

Also your last sentence implies that it is ridiculous to be offended by racism/homophobia/sexism etc? Is that what you meant to say?

My last sentence never mentioned anything about racism, homophobia, sexism, you said that not me............people are shouting 'I'm offended' for just about anything these days. I'm overweight and people have in the past called me names or said something rotten and while I might feel a bit sad about it at first I don't feel the need to shout 'i'm offended' I just feel sorry for the person who felt the need to try upset me because it speaks volumes about the type of person they are and then I get on with my day.

[Withano]

I would say the average PC bully who tries to control and marginalise others who will no conform to their way of thinking is a bad person. A bully is a bully whatever label they hide behind.

The behaviour of many left wingers of late has been pretty dictorial to say the least. There are no good dictators and no pleasant extremes.

I don't know what left wingers have to do with this unless you're calling right wingers racist/homophobic/sexists?

But still yes, I believe they're bad people, obviously. Do you think they're good people in general?

[Withano]

My last sentence never mentioned anything about racism, homophobia, sexism, you said that not me............people are shouting 'I'm offended' for just about anything these days. I'm overweight and people have in the past called me names or said something rotten and while I might feel a bit sad about it at first I don't feel the need to shout 'i'm offended' I just feel sorry for the person who felt the need to try upset me because it speaks volumes about the type of person they are and then I get on with my day.

Well the thread is about racism, homophobia and sexism, I was unsure how much of your post was ontopic.

[Brillopad]

I don't know what left wingers have to do with this unless you're calling right wingers racist/homophobic/sexists?

But still yes, I believe they're bad people, obviously. Do you think they're good people in general?

I’m simply going by the often shouty left wingers on here. Ring any bells.

[thesheriff443]

People have the right to be anti gay anti race and have sexist views, it's more about who, how and where they are voiced.

[Withano]

I’m simply going by the often shouty left wingers on here. Ring any bells.

So your post wasn't about the topic either? You guys need to start making this clearer :joker:

[Brillopad]

So your post wasn't about the topic either? You guys need to start making this clearer :joker:

You do love playing the joker - is that another label you like to hide behind. :joker:

[Withano]

You do love playing the joker - is that another label you like to hide behind. :joker:

Anything you want to add to the topic, or you want to talk about me some more (against the rules btw).

[Brillopad]

Anything you want to add to the topic, or you want to talk about me some more (against the rules btw).

As it baiting - or does it only count when others do it? :hehe:

[thesheriff443]

Can you two just stop replying to each other's posts, it's constant.

[Brillopad]

Can you two just stop replying to each other's posts, it's constant.

I think I can oblige there sheriff.

[user104658]

At no point did she specify what people were offended by. As we all know all these PC people needing safe spaces get offended very easily by very little. Besides, again as any reasonable person knows, the Definition and opinions of the PC brigade can be a little hysterically biased to say the least.

I would say the average PC bully who tries to control and marginalise others who will not conform to their way of thinking is a bad person. A bully is a bully whatever label they hide behind.

The behaviour of many left wingers of late has been pretty dictorial to say the least. There are no good dictators and no pleasant extremes.

Honestly Brillo, I do feel the need to point out to you (and your regular defenders) that in this one post alone, you have used, with the clear intent to insult;

"PC people"
"PC brigade"
"PC bully"
"Bully"
"Left-wingers"
"Dictators"

And in your user title,

"Snowflakes"




I know you will probably fall back on "it wasn't me who started it" here, but honestly, I don't think at this point t you have a leg to stand on when you complain about being called racist. It's just ridiculous.

[Tom4784]

people should be allowed to think what they like but in this day and age we are all being conditioned to think the same way and to accept everything and if you don't then people are made to feel as though they are a bad person. Personally I don't think that is right. Having a view other than the view that todays society thinks you should have does not make one a bad person. We are not allowing people to exercise their right to have a point of view for fear of being 'shot down' so most people who don't conform to todays society will keep their mouths shut. For us all to think the same way would mean we are brainwashed and conditioned. This world is full of offended people these days and personally I think its bloody ridiculous.

Anyone is entitled to believe that skin colour, sexuality and gender determines a person worth and anyone is entitled to take issue with that view. Having those kinds of views does make someone a bad person though because they are choosing to think of people as lesser human beings based not on merit but circumstances of birth, they're entitled to think that way but that doesn't make them any less of a ****ty human being.

I often find people who claim they are being shut down simply don't have the conviction to stand by their own views because not everyone universally agrees with them and praises them for having those views. They want freedom of speech to be a shield to protect them from alternate views to their own or criticism but that's not how it works.

People are as entitled to their offence as you are to say what you want. Nobody is saying you can't believe what you want to believe but ALL opinions come with consequences, if you can't handle criticism and see it as a way to shut people down then it's obvious you don't either understand what freedom of speech or you believe that not everyone is entitled to it.

If all it takes to shut down an opinion is criticism then people who feel that way must have no faith in their own thoughts and views.

[Brillopad]

Honestly Brillo, I do feel the need to point out to you (and your regular defenders) that in this one post alone, you have used, with the clear intent to insult;

"PC people"
"PC brigade"
"PC bully"
"Bully"
"Left-wingers"
"Dictators"

And in your user title,

"Snowflakes"




I know you will probably fall back on "it wasn't me who started it" here, but honestly, I don't think at this point t you have a leg to stand on when you complain about being called racist. It's just ridiculous.

Quite honestly I wouldn’t expect you to say anything different.

[Brillopad]

Anyone is entitled to believe that skin colour, sexuality and gender determines a person worth and anyone is entitled to take issue with that view. Having those kinds of views does make someone a bad person though because they are choosing to think of people as lesser human beings based not on merit but circumstances of birth, they're entitled to think that way but that doesn't make them any less of a ****ty human being.

I often find people who claim they are being shut down simply don't have the conviction to stand by their own views because not everyone universally agrees with them and praises them for having those views. They want freedom of speech to be a shield to protect them from alternate views to their own or criticism but that's not how it works.

People are as entitled to their offence as you are to say what you want. Nobody is saying you can't believe what you want to believe but ALL opinions come with consequences, if you can't handle criticism and see it as a way to shut people down then it's obvious you don't either understand what freedom of speech or you believe that not everyone is entitled to it.

If all it takes to shut down an opinion is criticism then people who feel that way must have no faith in their own thoughts and views.

Indeed opinions and behaviours come with consequences and it is about time that those on both sides of the coin face those consequences.

[Tom4784]

Indeed opinions and behaviours come with consequences and it is about time that those on both sides of the coin face those consequences.

People who have spoken out against racism, Homophobia, sexism and equality have faced the consequences of doing so for years. People have been killed for their views by others wanting to hold on to their hatred. Is that not enough for you?

If the biggest consequence you ever face for your views is somebody thinking that you are a racist then you should be thankful that it's an accusation you SHOULD be able to destroy easily if it's not true. Be thankful you live in an age where at worse, your views are looked on with just disgust and nothing more.

[user104658]

Quite honestly I wouldn’t expect you to say anything different.

I'm only pointing out the facts; you are a name-caller who doesn't like being called names. You need to make a decision.

[Mystic Mock]

I think that people should be allowed to say what they want as long as it's not threatening violence, however I don't agree with any of those prejudices so I also am entitled to argue on the person who shares those views in a democratic society.

[Brillopad]

People who have spoken out against racism, Homophobia, sexism and equality have faced the consequences of doing so for years. People have been killed for their views by others wanting to hold on to their hatred. Is that not enough for you?

If the biggest consequence you ever face for your views is somebody thinking that you are a racist then you should be thankful that it's an accusation you SHOULD be able to destroy easily if it's not true. Be thankful you live in an age where at worse, your views are looked on with just disgust and nothing more.

What hatred? There you go again with the hate. What are my views exactly - that I have issues with mass immigration and the wearing of Burkhas in Britain- what a hateful person that makes me. I shoud be strung up! What exactly have I said that deserves ‘anything more’?

‘Prejudices are prejudices, but peoples’ opinions are not prejudices just because you want them to be. That you think you can rationalise your hatefulness against a group of people behind some false prejudice label is disgusting and goes against every principle you claim to uphold.

Just because you have come to a conclusion on a group of people does not make it a universal truth. Closing the windows of discussion and opening a window of blind hate is prejudice in itself. And that is exactly the type of mentality that enabled people to behave so terribly to other groups in the past, be they African Americans, gays Jews, etc’.

Not my words - but so very true. Your opinions are not fact because you say they are and do not therefore justify your actions. You love to take the moral high ground and put labels on others in an attempt to shut down opinions to your views. Prejudice exists in all shapes and sizes but you attach that label to others in your futile attempt to control their opinions, or at least the expression of said opinions. It makes you no better and no different to what you accuse them off. So carry on revelling in the illusion of moral superiority - as it is just that an illusion.

[Withano]

When has anyone on tibb ever come to the conclusion that an entire group of people are racist? I've never seen that happen.

[Brillopad]

When has anyone on tibb ever come to the conclusion that an entire group of people are racist? I've never seen that happen.

Couldn’t be all those blatantly stating or implying people on here are an ‘ist’ because they have different views to them on certain issues. Nope - absolutely impossible. Doesn’t happen - we must all just be imaging it.

[Kizzy]

I would say they are yes, but it helps if they own it and acknowledge their prejudice.

[joeysteele]

I think that people should be allowed to say what they want as long as it's not threatening violence, however I don't agree with any of those prejudices so I also am entitled to argue on the person who shares those views in a democratic society.

Exactly Mock, good to see you back,at last.

Definitely such hateful views should be challenged in any democratic society but also out of simple decency too.
Because such held hate and prejudices can and often are dangerous.

[Withano]

Couldn’t be all those blatantly stating or implying people on here are an ‘ist’ because they have different views to them on certain issues. Nope - absolutely impossible. Doesn’t happen - we must all just be imaging it.

That's More about individuals than groups though? I've never seen anyone imply that any single group were all racists. That would be an insane comment to make. Do you have an example of a time that this happened? :suspect:

[user104658]

Couldn’t be all those blatantly stating or implying people on here are an ‘ist’ because they have different views to them on certain issues. Nope - absolutely impossible. Doesn’t happen - we must all just be imaging it.Who else on here has been called racist, though? Genuinely?

[Brillopad]

That's More about individuals than groups though? I've never seen anyone imply that any single group were all racists. That would be an insane comment to make. Do you have an example of a time that this happened? :suspect:

The group are those individuals, including myself, who have been called racist, bigot, homophobic, you name it, by those of the PC persuasion - ie considerably more than one person has been called racist on here, as you well know, as this is an issue that has been raised on many occasions. It is a problem. Don't try to make out it is just 'racist' me objecting to being called racist. You aren't convincing anyone - you do know that don't you!

[Brillopad]

Who else on here has been called racist, though? Genuinely?

Seriously! See my above post. It is not exactly uncommon and it is not only me that has been on the receiving end of it. We all know it.

[Brillopad]

When has anyone on tibb ever come to the conclusion that an entire group of people are racist? I've never seen that happen.

Several different individuals who don't share the PC views or the way in which their views are interpreted or expressed = a GROUP. Not rocket science!

[user104658]

Seriously! See my above post. It is not exactly uncommon and it is not only me that has been on the receiving end of it. We all know it.

Who else, though? It's a simple enough question.

[Brillopad]

I think that people should be allowed to say what they want as long as it's not threatening violence, however I don't agree with any of those prejudices so I also am entitled to argue on the person who shares those views in a democratic society.

Who said no-one could argue about it - the issue is calling people racist, bigot, homophobe etc. Not the same I think you will agree as you come across as a reasonable person.

Unless someone says something blatantly offensive that to the majority of people was clearly prejudice, it is not a for any one person or small group of like-minded people to play judge and jury by firing insults at people.

[user104658]

Unless someone says something blatantly offensive that to the majority of people was clearly prejudice

But you have only been called racist on threads where you have done that. To my knowledge, you have NOT been called racist for simply posting arguments against immigration / religion etc. People have strongly disagreed with your views on those threads and questioned why you are so fearful, but no one has shouted "hey that's racist!". Except on threads where you have shown baseless racial stereotyping / made assumptions based on race.

Can you actually show any examples of times that you or anyone else has actually been accused of racism for questioning immigration? You keep saying that it happens, but I've yet to see even one example.

[Brillopad]

But you have only been called racist on threads where you have done that. To my knowledge, you have NOT been called racist for simply posting arguments against immigration / religion etc. People have strongly disagreed with your views on those threads and questioned why you are so fearful, but no one has shouted "hey that's racist!". Except on threads where you have shown baseless racial stereotyping / made assumptions based on race.

Can you actually show any examples of times that you or anyone else has actually been accused of racism for questioning immigration? You keep saying that it happens, but I've yet to see even one example.

One thread that I recall I believed a mother had over-reacted to her son's school punishment of washing dishes as I believed she was a Muslim woman who would strongly disapprove of her son doing the washing up. String me up.

On reflection maybe I did jump the gun but no-one can, without doubt, label me based on that. Stuff and nonsense as if all the left-wingers on here are so damn perfect.