Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The defiance of an 'untouchable' New York subway worker

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 88 posts

Re: The defiance of an 'untouchable' New York subway worker

#11

Post by voltooid »

briandear wrote: post #10
ams6110 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's called hate here, when for example a person regards homosexuality as immoral and opposes gay marriage. I've rarely heard anyone publicly claim that such people just have different social standards, or if they do, they are vilified for defending hate. Any time in history when one group has been oppressed by another, it's been considered normal by majority social standards of the time. When those standards change,…

Some people might not want giraffes allowed in movie theaters, that doesn’t mean those people hate giraffes. Disagreeing with someone isn’t hate.

I am wondering now if you read the linked article. There is logic in not wanting a giraffe in your field of vision at a movie hall. Actively discriminating against people because of arbitrary conditions of their birth is not that logical. Active discrimination in the life of "untouchables" means that they are viewed as dirty or lowly. I think it is a bit simplistic to think that it is ok to actively stick to demeaning and derogatory practices because it is societally accepted or because that's "just how things are".

Re: The defiance of an 'untouchable' New York subway worker

#12

Post by tacomonstrous »

voltooid wrote: post #4
tacomonstrous wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the main benefits in India of increasing urbanization is the accompanying anonymity. I would assume this incident didn't occur in a big city. Did it?

People that do want to hate others, will find reasons to hate.

My point had little to do with that. A city with millions of people and a large migrant population offer an opportunity to escape the communal memory that smaller populations can sustain. Unlike race, caste isn't an obviously visible feature, and even someone bent on discrimination will have a harder time discerning the relevant signifiers.

Re: The defiance of an 'untouchable' New York subway worker

#13

Post by [deleted] »

INvidiA wrote: post #9
ams6110 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's called hate here, when for example a person regards homosexuality as immoral and opposes gay marriage. I've rarely heard anyone publicly claim that such people just have different social standards, or if they do, they are vilified for defending hate. Any time in history when one group has been oppressed by another, it's been considered normal by majority social standards of the time. When those standards change,…

But that's the issue. If someone simply sees homosexuality as a something that isn't "approved by God" or something of that nature, and they in their minds are just going along with God's law, are they really hating something? I've heard many anti-gay marriage people say that they have no problem with gay people but that they just oppose gay marriage. Is that cognitive dissonance? Almost certainly, but is it hate? I…

[deleted]

Re: The defiance of an 'untouchable' New York subway worker

#14

Post by voltooid »

INvidiA wrote: post #9
ams6110 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's called hate here, when for example a person regards homosexuality as immoral and opposes gay marriage. I've rarely heard anyone publicly claim that such people just have different social standards, or if they do, they are vilified for defending hate. Any time in history when one group has been oppressed by another, it's been considered normal by majority social standards of the time. When those standards change,…

But that's the issue. If someone simply sees homosexuality as a something that isn't "approved by God" or something of that nature, and they in their minds are just going along with God's law, are they really hating something? I've heard many anti-gay marriage people say that they have no problem with gay people but that they just oppose gay marriage. Is that cognitive dissonance? Almost certainly, but is it hate? I…

Engaging in discriminatory, derogatory and demeaning behaviour actively. That comes from hate. The experiences of the person featured in the linked article, that could only come from hate.

I think people that oppose gay marriage do so because of hate. But found a neat little loophole out of being called hateful by claiming that they have no problem with gay people.

My reasoning is this: taking any kind of stance on any subject requires some kind of motivation. If you are moved to spend energy on something, you are motivated by some need to do so. If you oppose something that does not directly affect you, the reason is most probably hate.

Re: The defiance of an 'untouchable' New York subway worker

#15

Post by voltooid »

tacomonstrous wrote: post #12
voltooid wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People that do want to hate others, will find reasons to hate.

My point had little to do with that. A city with millions of people and a large migrant population offer an opportunity to escape the communal memory that smaller populations can sustain. Unlike race, caste isn't an obviously visible feature, and even someone bent on discrimination will have a harder time discerning the relevant signifiers.

People's last names often give away their caste, sometimes where they come from. I have seen people being treated poorly because of the way they dressed - that is the rich/poor divide. Also, a lot of Indians, even in cities, do still dress according to their religion or caste.

Re: The defiance of an 'untouchable' New York subway worker

#16

Post by nkrisc »

briandear wrote: post #10
ams6110 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's called hate here, when for example a person regards homosexuality as immoral and opposes gay marriage. I've rarely heard anyone publicly claim that such people just have different social standards, or if they do, they are vilified for defending hate. Any time in history when one group has been oppressed by another, it's been considered normal by majority social standards of the time. When those standards change,…

Some people might not want giraffes allowed in movie theaters, that doesn’t mean those people hate giraffes. Disagreeing with someone isn’t hate.

Ok if we're using this bizarre analogy, it's as if you never even could tell if there was a giraffe in the movie theater or not, but if there was, you want it gone.

When a gay couple gets married on the other side of the country, do you notice? Does your life change? If it's the mere idea of it you're opposed to, then that's bigotry, not some practical concern like a giraffe blocking your view of the screen.

Re: The defiance of an 'untouchable' New York subway worker

#17

Post by quantummkv »

A better way to allegorize the Indian caste system would be the racism in USA. No one in urban centers or in the new generations is racist against black people. Go to the folks from the older generations and in the hinterlands and you will find that racism still exists somewhat.

A similar trend is present in India. The new kids in urban centers don't care about caste. The old people in the villages and hinterlands? They do somewhat.

And then you always have the politicians on every side of the spectrum who artificially inflate caste and race issues for their own gains.

Re: The defiance of an 'untouchable' New York subway worker

#18

Post by INvidiA »

nkrisc wrote: post #16
briandear wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some people might not want giraffes allowed in movie theaters, that doesn’t mean those people hate giraffes. Disagreeing with someone isn’t hate.

Ok if we're using this bizarre analogy, it's as if you never even could tell if there was a giraffe in the movie theater or not, but if there was, you want it gone. When a gay couple gets married on the other side of the country, do you notice? Does your life change? If it's the mere idea of it you're opposed to, then that's bigotry, not some practical concern like a giraffe blocking your view of the screen.

If you believe God's law is paramount and have convinced yourself that God's law does not allow for gay marriage, then your opposition is not based on hate, but rather based on your conception of what's proper and what's not.

This urge to thrust "hate" on people is dangerous because is dehumanizes them. If someone is hateful, then they are evil, and evil people deserve punishment.

So the thinking goes, but it is regressive thinking.

The disagreement about gay marriage stems for many from religious doctrine and what is traditional social practice, not hate.

Re: The defiance of an 'untouchable' New York subway worker

#19

Post by goutham2688 »

INvidiA wrote: post #5

These sort of class distinctions are much less pronounced in America, which is why so many oppressed or impoverished people from elsewhere yearn to travel here and make a new life. It's nice to hear about someone who was able to realize the American Dream and escape the class prejudice of their home country.

https://www.thenewsminute.com/article/when-caste-follows-you...

Indians who are deemed lower caste are converting to Christianity to escape the tag.

Re: The defiance of an 'untouchable' New York subway worker

#20

Post by Blackthorn »

quantummkv wrote: post #17

A better way to allegorize the Indian caste system would be the racism in USA. No one in urban centers or in the new generations is racist against black people. Go to the folks from the older generations and in the hinterlands and you will find that racism still exists somewhat. A similar trend is present in India. The new kids in urban centers don't care about caste. The old people in the villages and hinterlands? T…

> No one in urban centers or in the new generations is racist against black people.

I'm sorry but this is just wrong, and you can prove it to yourself by reading the news any day.

Post reply on HN