Maybe one day you will get to the point where you stop looking for problems in other people and pointing them for them to fix, and pushing and pushing when they politely disagree with your assessment.
This is merely a
tu quoque designed to distract from my mentioning that your reaction is to deny rather than to examine. Mentioning my faults doesn't change yours.
Change won't happen if no one pushes for it. So, it's unlikely I'll stop pushing.
I have heard your points, and politely disagree wholeheartedly with your reasoning skills and perspective. Thank you for your input.
You're welcome. I am sure you will hear more of them in the future. As for your analysis of my reasoning skill and perspective, you should question them. I welcome it. You should also question your own, as I do mine. I think this conversation would be much more productive if you questioned your own reasoning skills and perspective in the same way I question mine.
According to your definition you are a bigot.
At times, yes. I try to minimize those times.
According to my understanding of what you think about bigotry, you see me as a bigot and yet fail to see yourself in your mirror as a bigot as well.
I have no doubt that is your understanding, even though I have said multiple times in this thread, and every recent thread other on similar topics, that I struggle with the same cognitive shortcuts and prejudices as everyone else. Perhaps you can explain why, even though I have stated multiple times that I am no different in this regard, you think that I feel I am different?
From my perspective I have not seen much in the way of understanding my perspective other than the token... yea go ahead and say your piece so we can get to the part where I start attacking it.
You gave up trying to explain your position to me in the other thread without my making a single critical comment or pointed question (I asked a clarifying question). If I were to guess at your motivations, it would probably include among them that you realized you couldn't justify your position to someone who didn't share your religious belief, and therefore such criticism was inevitable. I agree this was likely, because you hold misogynistic beliefs that you rationalize through your religion. My statement that your beliefs are misogynistic is not a lack of understanding of your position, it comes from an understanding of your position. I can understand your position and still find it ugly.
Your actions have in no way shown me that understanding other people is important to you, nor your effect on them, and I fail to see you treating people as reasonable adults I see you as playing with words an pushing your position. I get the feeling you have on your facade of politeness and fairness but that's all it seems to be because your actions don't back it up.
What about my actions (I presume you mean posts) would be different, if I felt that understand your position is important, but still strongly disagreed with that position, versus my current posting? What about my actions would be different if I treated you as a reasonable adult who held an ugly belief, versus my current posts?
I see you as Buffy the Bigot slayer, and you will stop at nothing until you have killed all of the people you think are bigots and railroad anyone in your way. You have done or said nothing to prove otherwise to me.
IN one sense, you are correct. I will keep posting against racism, sexism, etc., and in particular post debating people who defend it, trying to persuade them to not be racist, sexist, etc. I don't wish to railroad people, but I won't let wrongness go unchallenged in an effort to be pleasant or well-liked. In part, that's because there is never a way to challenge racism, sexism, etc. that is considered polite. No matter what you say or how you say it, the person with privilege will always accuse you of impoliteness. Always.
As to your last line, you have dismissed everything I have said to you and about you so why would you not immediately dismiss such a claim? Does a leopard change his spots?
You confuse "dismiss" with "disagree". I never dismiss you. I will try to make more of an effort to make that clear.
As to the being coy, oh yes you were. I was not “surprised at your standard”, but knew you were intentionally avoiding the point again.
The thing is, you were, and are, wrong about me being coy. Even in this very thread, when colton said my words were hateful, my response was to evaluate that and try to find a way to say what needed to be said in a less hateful way. Ten, or five, years ago I probably would have reacted differently. I still need to do better. However, I described how I have behaved in the past (at least, at times) and how I think I should behaved. Nothing coy about it. Frankly, I think it's unfortunate for you that you don't think that is the best approach. You blind yourself to many things by assuming everyone else is unreasonable.
We are in the middle of a discussion about how you screw around with words to try to gain an advantage in an argument, and you throw in a line about my "trying to kid" in a negative way? I trust you did not intend to compare my negatively perceived actions to a child, but you did.
I'm 90% sure you're joking here. However, for the other 10%, I'll treat it seriously.
I apologize that I used a poor word choice. While "kid" has no connection to childhood when used as a verb, I can see where in this discussion, you would have made that connection. I apologize for diminishing you in that fashion. I'll use other words from here on out, to make sure that I don't offer that impression again.
You know you would have already decided before you told your child no to the candy bar that it is not abuse in your eyes.
You are are correct, I would have decided that when I told my kid no. However, as a freethinker, I have also committed myself to reevaluating my decisions based upon new input. So, when I have new input that I have no reason to distrust, I reevaluate.
If somebody accused you of it you would state your reasons why it is not abuse in your opinion, which is a defense of your actions.
Why do you assume this about me? I guess you are telling me what you would do, and assuming that t I would do the same thing (I could be wrong, of course).
... then move on without saying anything if you rejected it.
I never claimed I wouldn't say anything. IIRC, I claimed I might discuss it if I disagreed.
And yet again you incorrectly assume you understand what I am saying, or intentionally change your focus. The question is not about if the bigot label comes and goes as the actions seen as bigot actions come and go. The question and point is what you see as actions that make someone a bigot, I see differently.
I had not thought about that. I agree we should be talking about the same thing, to the best degree possible. Could we start with one clarification? Are you saying you think there might be a difference in what we as racist/sexist/etc. actions, or are you saying that we disagree with the standard that makes those particular actions an act of bigotry, as opposed to, e.g., negligent or or ignorant (or both)?
The line actions cross to define them as bigotry, is in a much different place for me versus where you have them, ...
Could you offer an example?
Could have saved yourself some time if you took the time to understand what I was saying.
I'll keep trying to improve.
What’s wrong with children? Do you have some sort of fear/hatred/contempt of children to view this in a negative light?
The whole point of using a child in your analogy was that the child themself would not have the rational capacity to decide for themself when to buy candy bars, so you, as the adult, have to decide for them, AFAICT. So, there's no insult to children when I say you should be comparing disadvantaged groups to children. it's avoiding the insult, one with a long and deep cultural history, of saying the disadvantaged groups don't know what's best for them.
I actually hold my children in very high regard, so you would think this would be one of the highest compliments.
You like being called a child? Or, you don't like it, but black people/women should?
So who I truly hate does not matter, all that really matters is that you claim I am showing hatred for someone or something. My perspective does not matter, it is only yours that is important. Got it.
The alternative is that you could go around offending people without intending to do so. My own thought is that you don't want to give offense, even unintentionally. I could be wrong.
You're welcome.
