Yeah, just call her out on her appalling lack of originality when coming up with pet names.Similar to what we were discussing yesterday. People need to stop being arrogant and ignorant to the point that they start telling other people what their culture and language should be like.
People Are Calling Out The Spanish Word For 'Black' After Woman Loses Dog
Has political correctness actually gone mad?
- Thread starter Pogue Mahone
- Start date
Pero Negro would have been better?
Just reminds me of those people that call their goldfish goldie. Bit of creativity never goes amiss.
Would you say that to Clifford Joseph Price? "Oy, mate, your pseudonym suggests a lack of imagination"?
London has a "Night Czar" now too.
Not sure why she is called a Czar though, perhaps Sadiq didn't want anyone else to be called mayor as well.......
About the black dog story. While the Spanish word for black is by no means racist, calling you black dog negro when you live in the US is a bit thick.
It's like me moving to the US and calling my sons Dick and Cock. Both very acceptable Dutch names, but kinda asking for it.
It's like me moving to the US and calling my sons Dick and Cock. Both very acceptable Dutch names, but kinda asking for it.
"Lady of the Night" would have worked.
Poetry world split over polemic attacking 'amateur' work by 'young female poets'
Writing in PN Review, Rebecca Watts has slammed the popularity of writers such as Rupi Kaur and Hollie McNish as ‘consumer-driven content’
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2...-attacking-amateur-work-by-young-female-poets
http://www.pnreview.co.uk/cgi-bin/scribe?item_id=10090
Writing in PN Review, Rebecca Watts has slammed the popularity of writers such as Rupi Kaur and Hollie McNish as ‘consumer-driven content’
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2...-attacking-amateur-work-by-young-female-poets
http://www.pnreview.co.uk/cgi-bin/scribe?item_id=10090
If you can’t be elitist about poetry, what can you be elitist about? Free verse was a mistake.
Exactement, mon ami. It's very pretentious to be unpretentious.
Similar to what we were discussing yesterday. People need to stop being arrogant and ignorant to the point that they start telling other people what their culture and language should be like.
People Are Calling Out The Spanish Word For 'Black' After Woman Loses Dog
I'd just rename it Grizzlechops. Much better name for a dog anyway.
Isn't that a old reference to prostitutes?
Yes. Maybe an ill advised joke to make in the political correctness thread.
Just felt I'd heard of it before and wanted to ask. Me & jokes are generally oil and water so I rarely ever judge anyone for their humor.
It's also a simple fact that they are 'less accepting' of gay people because of their culture, & not ignorance or lack of education. The problem is, how do you change a mindset that's been immersed into a culture for centuries ? It's instances like this that are driving people into the alternative political spheres of Le Pen, Wilders, et al. Some people will accept it as a mere inconvenience to the goal of westernized multiculturalism. & some people won't. That's not bonkers, it's reality. & it's not racist either.
Hmm, that's a bit different. Had to google him cos had no idea what his real name is.
It wasn't a serious question, of course its different.
Bigotry against homosexuals due to culture? religion? ignorance? You could be talking about anywhere. Rural England, Bible belt America, or pretty much anywhere else in this planet. Worrying about causing offence (and the potential backlash) by specifying a subset of people seems to be missing the point... Bigotry is bigotry no matter where you come from.
This is my problem with these threads, people gather and moan about side issues and forget about the main issues, or maybe its just easier for them to do that, or maybe the side issue is the main issue for them?
Not being allowed to say something potentially offensive > the offence.
Being non-platformed > hate speech.
Violence breaking out at protests > what is being protested.
Etc...
This is my problem with these threads, people gather and moan about side issues and forget about the main issues, or maybe its just easier for them to do that, or maybe the side issue is the main issue for them?
Not being allowed to say something potentially offensive > the offence.
Being non-platformed > hate speech.
Violence breaking out at protests > what is being protested.
Etc...
https://www.theguardian.com/comment...rson-causing-offence-cathy-newman-free-speech
This has caused quite a ruckus hasn't it? I watched the interview, but i can't really say i'm to familiar with Peterson outside the law controversy a couple of years ago.
This has caused quite a ruckus hasn't it? I watched the interview, but i can't really say i'm to familiar with Peterson outside the law controversy a couple of years ago.
I haven't watched the interview either but I am familiar with Peterson. I've listened to him on a few different podcasts. Very smart and interesting bloke, with some goofy ideas (mainly related to religion/spirituality) but a lot of very sensible ideas too. He's a bit fecking depressing if you listen to him too much, mind you. He does polarise opinion, of course, and the alt-right seem to have taken him on as some sort of figure-head for their movement. So he's damned by association.
That's a very good piece. Far too many interesting exchanges like the interview described in the article end up being nothing more than click-bait, tit for tat nonsense, once they're put through the ringer of social media. We should have more open and honest exchange of ideas, not less.
I’ve listened to Peterson quite a bit. I first took notice of him when he got into hot water with the transgender pronoun thing at his university. When he was talking about that i thought he was great. Clearly very smart, knowledgable and often ran rings around the people opposing him.
But the more i listen to him on other subjects he becomes a little annoying to be honest. He’s a bit of an obscurantist, and seems to prevaricate when someone asks him even the simplest of questions.
He goes on these meandering monologues that often leave you exhausted. So i started to wane on him after initially liking him quite a bit. As for this interview, i did happen to watch it all. I really didn’t think Cathy Newman came out of it well. It’s become a meme at this point, with the phrase “So what you’re saying is….” plastered around the internet.
She just constantly put words in his mouth and didn’t appear to listen to anything he was saying or digest any of it. Some would argue that she was playing devils advocate, but it didn’t appear that way to me. She came across as very disingenuous. She would often challenge him on what SHE said he said, as opposed to actually challenging him on his views and what he did say.
But the more i listen to him on other subjects he becomes a little annoying to be honest. He’s a bit of an obscurantist, and seems to prevaricate when someone asks him even the simplest of questions.
He goes on these meandering monologues that often leave you exhausted. So i started to wane on him after initially liking him quite a bit. As for this interview, i did happen to watch it all. I really didn’t think Cathy Newman came out of it well. It’s become a meme at this point, with the phrase “So what you’re saying is….” plastered around the internet.
She just constantly put words in his mouth and didn’t appear to listen to anything he was saying or digest any of it. Some would argue that she was playing devils advocate, but it didn’t appear that way to me. She came across as very disingenuous. She would often challenge him on what SHE said he said, as opposed to actually challenging him on his views and what he did say.
Agreed. He does an interview with Sam Harris, who patiently tries to unpick some of his more goofy ideas and his responses are infuriatingly tangential.
About JP's initial celebrity moment (the "pronouns bill") and his wrong-ness then:
https://torontoist.com/2016/12/are-jordan-petersons-claims-about-bill-c-16-correct/
His article is here (I'm not watching the full panel discussion): http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-bl...-prof-defied-sjw-on-gender-pronouns-and-has-a
There are many other quotes about free speech, but his particular grievance seems to be that he does not want to change the language he uses to address people. Despite talking about "complexity" and "engaging" others, it seems that when he engages with trans people, he regards them as some kind of mistake whose transgender-ness should be debated with every word he speaks.
And, is it thus an infringement of his free speech if a black student refuses to be called the n-word? Or is it the common courtesy expected from people who aren't assholes?
I have also posted about the problems with his lobster analogy from the interview.*
If you want to see his lobster quote, it's here, from the transcript:
I might go into other parts of the interview sometime, if I'm sufficiently useless at work. So, if someone can find mistakes in my responses, please reply.
*Apart from the biological issues, I think he is also very guilty of this: https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/131/Naturalistic-Fallacy
https://torontoist.com/2016/12/are-jordan-petersons-claims-about-bill-c-16-correct/
The bill proposes adding gender identity and gender orientation to the Canadian Human Rights Act. This means that it would become illegal under the Act to deny someone a job or discriminate against them in the workplace based on the gender they identify with or outwardly express.
If passed, the bill would also add gender identity and gender expression to the Criminal Code in two ways:
Section 718.2(a) is about how a sentence should be increased or reduced to account for any relevant aggravating or mitigating circumstances.
Section 718.2(a)(i) speaks about offences where evidence shows that action was motivated by bias, prejudice, or hate based on social groups. This list already includes race, national or ethnic origin, language, colour, religion, sex, age, mental or physical disability, and sexual orientation.
2. Section 318 is about hate propaganda.
Subsection 318(4) adds gender identity and gender expression to the definition of an identifiable group for the purposes of “advocating genocide.” This legislation would protect transgender and gender non-binary peoples from being a targeted group in an act of genocide.
...
In a panel discussion on TVO’s The Agenda in October, Peterson said not only would not using someone’s preferred pronouns be considered discrimination under the new human rights legislation, it would be a form of hate speech.
“That’s why I made the video. I said that we were in danger of placing the refusal to use certain kinds of language into the same category as Holocaust denial.”
In the same discussion, he said:
“If they fine me, I won’t pay it. If they put me in jail, I’ll go on a hunger strike. I’m not doing this. And that’s that. I’m not using the words that other people require me to use. Especially if they’re made up by radical left-wing ideologues.”
...
“I don’t think there’s any legal expert that would say that [this] would meet the threshold for hate speech in Canada,” she says.
Our courts have a very high threshold for what kind of comments actually constitutes hate speech, and the nature of speech would have to be much more extreme than simply pronoun misuse, according to Cossman.
“The misuse of pronouns is not equivalent to advocating genocide in any conceivable manner,” she continues. “If he advocated genocide against trans people, he would be in violation, but misusing pronouns is not what that provision of the code is about.”
If passed, the bill would also add gender identity and gender expression to the Criminal Code in two ways:
- Section 718.2 is about what principles should be taken into consideration when a court imposes a sentence.
Section 718.2(a)(i) speaks about offences where evidence shows that action was motivated by bias, prejudice, or hate based on social groups. This list already includes race, national or ethnic origin, language, colour, religion, sex, age, mental or physical disability, and sexual orientation.
2. Section 318 is about hate propaganda.
Subsection 318(4) adds gender identity and gender expression to the definition of an identifiable group for the purposes of “advocating genocide.” This legislation would protect transgender and gender non-binary peoples from being a targeted group in an act of genocide.
...
In a panel discussion on TVO’s The Agenda in October, Peterson said not only would not using someone’s preferred pronouns be considered discrimination under the new human rights legislation, it would be a form of hate speech.
“That’s why I made the video. I said that we were in danger of placing the refusal to use certain kinds of language into the same category as Holocaust denial.”
In the same discussion, he said:
“If they fine me, I won’t pay it. If they put me in jail, I’ll go on a hunger strike. I’m not doing this. And that’s that. I’m not using the words that other people require me to use. Especially if they’re made up by radical left-wing ideologues.”
...
“I don’t think there’s any legal expert that would say that [this] would meet the threshold for hate speech in Canada,” she says.
Our courts have a very high threshold for what kind of comments actually constitutes hate speech, and the nature of speech would have to be much more extreme than simply pronoun misuse, according to Cossman.
“The misuse of pronouns is not equivalent to advocating genocide in any conceivable manner,” she continues. “If he advocated genocide against trans people, he would be in violation, but misusing pronouns is not what that provision of the code is about.”
His article is here (I'm not watching the full panel discussion): http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-bl...-prof-defied-sjw-on-gender-pronouns-and-has-a
There are many other quotes about free speech, but his particular grievance seems to be that he does not want to change the language he uses to address people. Despite talking about "complexity" and "engaging" others, it seems that when he engages with trans people, he regards them as some kind of mistake whose transgender-ness should be debated with every word he speaks.
And, is it thus an infringement of his free speech if a black student refuses to be called the n-word? Or is it the common courtesy expected from people who aren't assholes?
I have also posted about the problems with his lobster analogy from the interview.*
If you want to see his lobster quote, it's here, from the transcript:
Because the lobster, we evolved from lobsters in evolutionary history, about 350 million years ago. Common ancestor. And lobsters exist in hierarchies, and have a nervous system attuned to the hierarchy. And that nervous system runs on serotonin, just like our nervous systems do. And the nervous system of the lobster and the human being is so similar, that antidepressants work on lobsters.
...
I’m saying that it’s inevitable that there will be continuity in the way that animals and human beings organize their structures. It’s absolutely inevitable! And there is one-third of a billion years of evolutionary history behind that! Right? That’s so long, that a third of the billion years ago, there weren’t even trees! It’s a long time.
You have a mechanism in your brain that runs on serotonin. That’s similar to the lobster mechanism, that tracks your status. And the higher your status, the better your emotions are regulated. So as your serotonin levels increase you feel more positive emotion and less negative emotion.
...
I’m saying that it’s inevitable that there will be continuity in the way that animals and human beings organize their structures. It’s absolutely inevitable! And there is one-third of a billion years of evolutionary history behind that! Right? That’s so long, that a third of the billion years ago, there weren’t even trees! It’s a long time.
You have a mechanism in your brain that runs on serotonin. That’s similar to the lobster mechanism, that tracks your status. And the higher your status, the better your emotions are regulated. So as your serotonin levels increase you feel more positive emotion and less negative emotion.
I might go into other parts of the interview sometime, if I'm sufficiently useless at work. So, if someone can find mistakes in my responses, please reply.
*Apart from the biological issues, I think he is also very guilty of this: https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/131/Naturalistic-Fallacy
This lobster thing is absolutely bizarre.
Oh god, those podcasts were brutal!
I'm a huge Sam Harris fan so was quite looking forward to listening to these when he announced them. But feck me it was hopeless. Think it was the first one they done when they went on for over an hour about the definition of truth.
Until Sam basically said feck it and called it a day.
I think it's that we as human beings are inherently shellfish.I've read it three times and I've got feck all idea what his point is?
I thank you all, my uber has arrived.
It's the side issues that make up the bigger issues though isn't it ? Whataboutisms don't relate to the fact that there are whole cultures who are far less tolerant to certain things than others.
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/johann-hari/can-we-finally-talk-about_b_828037.html
> the idea to implement hierarchies
I think those spawned from some human minds.
> there's quite a bit of evolutionary history to them.
There is evol history for hierarchies. I don't believe there is any evolutionary history for the *idea to implement* hierarchies.
The hierarchies being criticised are structural positions in society, like owners of the means of production, or, say, slave owners in a slave society, which apply to classes or groups of people. These are in contrast with the individualised dominance hierarchies/pecking order he is comparing it with. Further, these hierarchies (owner-worker or master-slave) are social constructions, products of a particular system. Finally, it seems that the level of hierarchy/egalitarianism in human societies has varied over time.
I think those spawned from some human minds.
> there's quite a bit of evolutionary history to them.
There is evol history for hierarchies. I don't believe there is any evolutionary history for the *idea to implement* hierarchies.
The hierarchies being criticised are structural positions in society, like owners of the means of production, or, say, slave owners in a slave society, which apply to classes or groups of people. These are in contrast with the individualised dominance hierarchies/pecking order he is comparing it with. Further, these hierarchies (owner-worker or master-slave) are social constructions, products of a particular system. Finally, it seems that the level of hierarchy/egalitarianism in human societies has varied over time.
The willingness to mention the shortcomings of other cultures, like homophobia in Islam is not racist I agree. Wilders however is definitively racist though.
Yeah, i actually did a bit of digging too find out what this was about. As far as i know he likes the alt-right as little as he does the extreme left, but is still seen as some kind of leader by them in the "culture wars". Truth be told, the alt-right will cling onto anyone who criticizes the left and, since they are few and far between them who is either not a bigoted arse or a total loony (Stefan Molyneux comes to mind) a seemingly clever bloke like Peterson will obviously seem like an attractive target to claim
Yeah, i can understand his point, but it seems like a classical case of Maslow's hammer, him being a clinical psychologist and all. Reminded me a bit of Jared Diamonds Guns, germs and steel, who is a very good read, but is very colored by his background as an anthropologist and becomes a tad to deterministic. Hell, i think any academic discipline often gets to eager to explain the world by their own frame of reference.
It gets super tricky when you start with the nature vs nurture discussion since it's often very hard to measure which takes precedence and especially when looking back at something like a hunter-gatherer society the best you can do is make a qualified guess. No there is no doubt that for example the agricultural revolution and the division of labor reinforced social hierarchies, but i would be wary to claim they outright created them.
There have been plenty of examples both through history and present of pastoral nomadic tribes or hunter/gatherer tribes that has created quite complex social structures. I am by no means any expert on the field, but i do find it fascinating
It's like a parody of reductive reasoning. Lobsters did it before we had trees, so you fill in the blanks.
Pointing out Islam (and other religions for that matter) is homophobic isn't racist. It's an idea, an ideology. Islam isn't a race, people choose to subscribe to it. There's definitely a few morons though who think that all Muslims are brown people and all brown people are Muslims, therefore they're one and the same.
That's the thing though, even Islam isn't inherently homophobic. It all comes down to your personal interpretation of the scriptures and the teachings you choose to believe. Exactly the same as Christianity, and, I'm assuming, some other religions too.
There's definitely a lot of them that are more than accepting of gay people and adhere to the rest of Islam just fine. It sounds like it's just the texts that go off on the gays, women and non believers. Some people manage to leave that stuff out, others don't I guess.
Bit like the Christian bible....
You 2 are both right tho which is why I don't like generalisations.
You 2 are both right tho which is why I don't like generalisations.
It's shit like this that winds me up, leaves me flabbergasted.
The sheer audacity:
The sheer audacity:
Why? I might not agree with some Uni's decisions about who to invite to speak and who not to but they have the right to invite who they like. Free speak doesn't mean the right to speak anywhere you choose even when the owners of a particular place don't want you there.
Did you watch it? The banning of certain newspapers, people and ideas (i.e. Conservatives on social media) - I think that's rather draconian, especially for a University where I think every single random and even extreme view should be heard. Might be extreme to someone, might not be to someone else. Heck I guess even thinking about women getting equal rights and blacks being on par with whites was regarded as extreme once upon a time...
In reference to post #4154:
Am I being a humourless, elitist twat for thinking the following 'poem' (by an award-winning poet) is just awful? Should all who consider themselves writers, poets, musicians be heard or read?:
Related article:
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2...-attacking-amateur-work-by-young-female-poets
Am I being a humourless, elitist twat for thinking the following 'poem' (by an award-winning poet) is just awful? Should all who consider themselves writers, poets, musicians be heard or read?:
Bums
People talking every day about
The topic of the year
Is it fun to shake about or just a thing for us to jeer at
Have I seen the videos?
Do I think that they’re ok?
People asking me about bums
Everyday
Anaconda bums from Nikki Minaj
Kim Kardashian’s new photoshoot
Is it racist, is it class?
JLo’s and Iggy’s latest dance
Pretending to be lesbians
Female bums,
oiled and greased,
more striptease for MTV
Is J-Lo’s bum too old? we cry
Is Iggy’s bum too white?
But J-Lo’s 43 they say
As we slag her off all night
Then Meghan Trainer steps up and it’s all about the bass again
And the beats are so damn good and the lyrics stick inside your head
Conversations starts again
Fleshy bits are better
Her mum says men don’t like it thin
Questions, comments flooding in
Is it all about the bass, is it all about the bass?
Can Miley Cryus twerk
Has that girl got no damn taste?
Everyday I get the same discussions bouncing in my face
Is it female liberation to dance the way you want
Or is it corporate US making money selling women’s bodies
Is it wrong?
Is it positive for girls with bigger bums>
Is it just a bit of fun
Is it fair?
Isss itttt faiiiiirrr?
And truthfully my answer is I just don’t fecking care.
It’s a bum.
I have one.
My mum does too.
Sits on hers 60 hours a week
A nurses bum with aching cheeks
My mum has a flat bum, bonier than me
My daughter says her bum is the best bit of her body
Cos it’s soft
My gran has got a bum
It sits alone a lot
My friend has got a doctor’s bum that never ever stops
Before my granddad died he had a bum
Ghandi did as well
There’s a bum between the legs of the president of Brazil
That woman, running a massive fecking country over there
Most people’s bum have hair on
Though we don’t like to admit it
The first women into space covered her bum with a padded spacesuit
When Rosa parks sat on a bus her bum refused to move for bums more light
And she was taken with all the other bums who marched for civil rights
Happy people have bums
Depressed people do as well
If you do not wipe your bum, your bum will really smell
You use you bum to run
You also use your bum to sit
Having a slightly smaller bum does not make you a skinny bitch
Having a slightly larger bum does not make you a big booty ho
Last weekend 40,000 bums sat on seats waiting for a goal from the England Women’s football team who used their butt muscles to kick and pass
The Williams sisters use their bums to move from side to side very fast
So when you ask me what I think of female bums, I like them, I think they’re great
I wish there were more of them in parliament, businesses and sports games
And men’s bums too, in case you wonder, I like them just the same
Like a personal piece of fat for everyone to sit on when you’re drained
Saves you carrying a cushion or a pillow in your bag
And if your bum is fit and healthy
It’s the best you’ll ever have
People talking every day about
The topic of the year
Is it fun to shake about or just a thing for us to jeer at
Have I seen the videos?
Do I think that they’re ok?
People asking me about bums
Everyday
Anaconda bums from Nikki Minaj
Kim Kardashian’s new photoshoot
Is it racist, is it class?
JLo’s and Iggy’s latest dance
Pretending to be lesbians
Female bums,
oiled and greased,
more striptease for MTV
Is J-Lo’s bum too old? we cry
Is Iggy’s bum too white?
But J-Lo’s 43 they say
As we slag her off all night
Then Meghan Trainer steps up and it’s all about the bass again
And the beats are so damn good and the lyrics stick inside your head
Conversations starts again
Fleshy bits are better
Her mum says men don’t like it thin
Questions, comments flooding in
Is it all about the bass, is it all about the bass?
Can Miley Cryus twerk
Has that girl got no damn taste?
Everyday I get the same discussions bouncing in my face
Is it female liberation to dance the way you want
Or is it corporate US making money selling women’s bodies
Is it wrong?
Is it positive for girls with bigger bums>
Is it just a bit of fun
Is it fair?
Isss itttt faiiiiirrr?
And truthfully my answer is I just don’t fecking care.
It’s a bum.
I have one.
My mum does too.
Sits on hers 60 hours a week
A nurses bum with aching cheeks
My mum has a flat bum, bonier than me
My daughter says her bum is the best bit of her body
Cos it’s soft
My gran has got a bum
It sits alone a lot
My friend has got a doctor’s bum that never ever stops
Before my granddad died he had a bum
Ghandi did as well
There’s a bum between the legs of the president of Brazil
That woman, running a massive fecking country over there
Most people’s bum have hair on
Though we don’t like to admit it
The first women into space covered her bum with a padded spacesuit
When Rosa parks sat on a bus her bum refused to move for bums more light
And she was taken with all the other bums who marched for civil rights
Happy people have bums
Depressed people do as well
If you do not wipe your bum, your bum will really smell
You use you bum to run
You also use your bum to sit
Having a slightly smaller bum does not make you a skinny bitch
Having a slightly larger bum does not make you a big booty ho
Last weekend 40,000 bums sat on seats waiting for a goal from the England Women’s football team who used their butt muscles to kick and pass
The Williams sisters use their bums to move from side to side very fast
So when you ask me what I think of female bums, I like them, I think they’re great
I wish there were more of them in parliament, businesses and sports games
And men’s bums too, in case you wonder, I like them just the same
Like a personal piece of fat for everyone to sit on when you’re drained
Saves you carrying a cushion or a pillow in your bag
And if your bum is fit and healthy
It’s the best you’ll ever have
Related article:
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2...-attacking-amateur-work-by-young-female-poets