521–525 of 525 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think has more to do with the fact that any sort of vocal veganism is considered obnoxious in the US. So yeah, anyone who tells you they're vegan will be labeled as obnoxious.
Yeah if only we could figure out how it got associated with obnoxious people in the first place.
We have these ethical giants among us, screaming "bullshit" and making assumptions about the rest of us based on their personal values.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Only thing you can do about that, IMO, is to not be reactionary and not make arguments that seem in the slightest threatening to people. Taking the marriage example, if someone brings up "the sanctity of marriage", instead of just being against that idea, I point out that I agree marriage is sacred and as such I don't want it being subject to definitions in a vote, or having sacred religious ceremonies attached to ta…
As a white, straight, cisgender male, I don't have to give anybody much to react to. When I go at somebody because they're being horrible, it's a choice (and one borne of a certain kind of community; as a white, straight, cisgender male, it's really hard for those reactionaries to bite me). Were I black or gay or trans or a woman and American reactionaries are threatened by me for existing , it is not a choice. When…
Everyone else is at risk, but white men are some homogeneous group that bands together to hold everyone else back. Do I have that right?
We are the dominant species because we deserve it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As a white, straight, cisgender male, I don't have to give anybody much to react to. When I go at somebody because they're being horrible, it's a choice (and one borne of a certain kind of community; as a white, straight, cisgender male, it's really hard for those reactionaries to bite me). Were I black or gay or trans or a woman and American reactionaries are threatened by me for existing , it is not a choice. When…
> Were I black or gay or trans or a woman and American reactionaries are threatened by me for existing, it is not a choice. Everyone else is at risk, but white men are some homogeneous group that bands together to hold everyone else back. Do I have that right?
To remove any ambiguity: what I am saying is that straight white men are, in general, the beneficiaries of positive cultural assumptions in ways that women and blacks and LGBT folks are not, and those assumptions have ripple effects that cascade into significant social benefits. American reactionaries really fucking like those social benefits, are threatened by the prospect of losing them (and, when it comes to poorer reactionaries, are afraid of losing what little status they convey over, say, poor blacks), and will fight to protect them.
"Rich reactionaries use poor black people to distract poor white people" is neither new nor controversial and pointing out that they do the same thing with women and LGBT folks--how do you think nonsense peddlers like Jordan Peterson and Stefan Bad History Molyneux get anywhere if not for this?--is not a stretch.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am not so sure about the "as a consequence" part. If people engineer a fix, it is because the problem is grave enough that it calls for a fix, on the other hand it might be so grave that engineering anything beyond simple stick and stone tools might become impossible. The problem we are talking about here is in the geologic scale of things (250 million years without a precedent perhaps, going back to the Permian-Tr…
> And as for people messing up first and cleaning after, I'm not so sure either. That's not the way things turned out to be with the Ozone Layer Hole. I'm not sure what you mean? We switched from CFCs and the hole has been shrinking ever since.