Author Topic: Liberals vs Conservatives - why does it have to be this way?  (Read 64570 times)

ChewMeUp

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 53
Re: Liberals vs Conservatives - why does it have to be this way?
« Reply #350 on: March 05, 2019, 12:50:57 PM »
the ones in the middle see the racism on the right and the persecution complex on the left and wonder where they fit, given they are attacked from both sides.

Love it and VERY accurate.  I think the persecution complex has far surpassed it's far right counterpart, however.  But both do still exist.  I just think the left sets the bar so far left that they moved the center to the left.  In other words, people who are truly in the middle are now being labeled right wing racists.

Versatile

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 125
Re: Liberals vs Conservatives - why does it have to be this way?
« Reply #351 on: March 05, 2019, 12:59:43 PM »
Versatile, I think it's because when anyone who posts information that is contrary to his views, he labels them as "extreme left" which is inflammatory (and not even remotely accurate) and also dismissing any fact-based arguments. He is name calling and not arguing in good faith. He will argue that people have not given enough "proof" for some argument like patriarchy, but then will also say statistics and journal articles are not "proof" or "fact" and has also come out and said  "I personally don't believe in the patriarchy and there is no way that you can prove that it exists."

I suppose he could argue that he just doesn't "believe" in social constructs, as well as many other abstract concepts, just because? Because you can't touch or taste them or as he says they are just in your head? But then he will invoke male female role models as "real" and the basis for say job or compensation differences, while ignoring they are also a social "construct". 

At think at this point we have to say, people will have their own opinions and prejudices apparently Steveo is "triggered" by the term patriarchy. That's fine. He should just come out and say it, and not waste everyone's time in pretending he is being rational or objective about this topic when he is not.

Labels are bad, I agree totally. Even the words Liberal and Conservative are loaded with presumptions which is unfortunate.

I understand his points and I don't think he is making them in bad faith. Have you ever considered that you both could be right to various degrees? What bothers me is when he shares his personal life experience and he is mocked for it. Just because somebody else has a different experience doesn't mean it invalidates his experiences.

ChewMeUp

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 53
Re: Liberals vs Conservatives - why does it have to be this way?
« Reply #352 on: March 05, 2019, 01:03:33 PM »
Versatile, I think it's because when anyone who posts information that is contrary to his views, he labels them as "extreme left" which is inflammatory (and not even remotely accurate) and also dismissing any fact-based arguments. He is name calling and not arguing in good faith. He will argue that people have not given enough "proof" for some argument like patriarchy, but then will also say statistics and journal articles are not "proof" or "fact" and has also come out and said  "I personally don't believe in the patriarchy and there is no way that you can prove that it exists."

I suppose he could argue that he just doesn't "believe" in social constructs, as well as many other abstract concepts, just because? Because you can't touch or taste them or as he says they are just in your head? But then he will invoke male female role models as "real" and the basis for say job or compensation differences, while ignoring they are also a social "construct". 

At think at this point we have to say, people will have their own opinions and prejudices apparently Steveo is "triggered" by the term patriarchy. That's fine. He should just come out and say it, and not waste everyone's time in pretending he is being rational or objective about this topic when he is not.

Labels are bad, I agree totally. Even the words Liberal and Conservative are loaded with presumptions which is unfortunate.

I understand his points and I don't think he is making them in bad faith. Have you ever considered that you both could be right to various degrees? What bothers me is when he shares his personal life experience and he is mocked for it. Just because somebody else has a different experience doesn't mean it invalidates his experiences.

Not trying to claim anyone is a victim here, but isn't it something that it's mostly right leaning persons (and true centrists) that get mocked and attacked for their views nowadays?  At least on forums like this.  The left tries to normalize it.  It's why we have the "silent majority."
« Last Edit: March 05, 2019, 01:05:23 PM by ChewMeUp »

Versatile

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 125
Re: Liberals vs Conservatives - why does it have to be this way?
« Reply #353 on: March 05, 2019, 01:06:31 PM »

. He is NOT denying racism exists, but is challenging you to prove it is the SOLE reason blacks have poorer outcomes. I'm sure if you pressed him, he would probably admit that racism in the past and in the present probably does play a role, but probably not to the level you believe.

[/quote]

"racism is the SOLE reason blacks have poorer outcomes": no one is arguing this. Can you please show where people are stating this?
[/quote]

Have I misunderstood? Was the study not given as evidence of institutional racism? Perhaps I shouldn't have said "sole", but usually people throw up what they consider their strongest evidence.
 
FrugalTogue?

FrugalToque

  • Global Moderator
  • Pencil Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 649
  • Location: Canada
Re: Liberals vs Conservatives - why does it have to be this way?
« Reply #354 on: March 05, 2019, 01:10:38 PM »
the ones in the middle see the racism on the right and the persecution complex on the left and wonder where they fit, given they are attacked from both sides.

... In other words, people who are truly in the middle are now being labeled right wing racists.

Wow, dude.  It looks to me like you have the serious persecution complex there.

Toque.

partgypsy

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3987
Re: Liberals vs Conservatives - why does it have to be this way?
« Reply #355 on: March 05, 2019, 01:11:56 PM »
No it doesn't invalidate his experiences. But he uses his experiences to deny other people's experiences. And to deny the existence of societal problems. You can see how he uses his experience (I'm assuming as a white male but I could be wrong) that since he hasn't been sexually harrassed or targeted, or that he's never been stopped by the police for no reason, means these aren't really happening. Or if they are for other reasons than sexism or racism. Really any other possible reason than sexism or racism.

I'm a pretty clueless white female, but I am astounded at the level that Steveo and other male posters perceive themselves as the victim, or potentially the victim of say reverse racism or discrimination, at the same time appear oblivious of discount much of American history up and including current events. I would say being called a "troll" for example ranks a bit lower in victimhood than say a statistically significantly increased risk of being shot dead by a police officer during a traffic stop or being incarcerated for a much longer sentence for drug possession of the same amount say compared to a white male. One may hurt your feelings, but the other one is life impacting.     

steveo

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1943
Re: Liberals vs Conservatives - why does it have to be this way?
« Reply #356 on: March 05, 2019, 01:18:26 PM »
Nobody here is extreme left. Nobody. Extreme leftism means forcibly nationalising factories and offices and executing the owners as class enemies. Not a single opinion here has gone anywhere beyond the centre-left. You can call yourself middle-ground all you want, but you're not.

I'm 45 and I've only ever voted for the left. I think that puts your comment and judgement into it's proper perspective. My parents always voted for the left.

Neither the Republican party (far right) nor the Democratic party (center-right) in the United States are left wing.  Who exactly were you voting for?

I'm Australian and I've always voted for the left which is the labour party. You've explained though exactly my thoughts on the left. The left in my opinion is the party on the left. I consider going further than that becoming more extreme. I get the impression as you state that a lot of posters on here are so far to the left the major parties are simply not going to reflect their viewpoints.

ChewMeUp

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 53
Re: Liberals vs Conservatives - why does it have to be this way?
« Reply #357 on: March 05, 2019, 01:22:58 PM »
the ones in the middle see the racism on the right and the persecution complex on the left and wonder where they fit, given they are attacked from both sides.

... In other words, people who are truly in the middle are now being labeled right wing racists.

Wow, dude.  It looks to me like you have the serious persecution complex there.

Toque.

I am missing that part of my brain.  I don't have a victim mentality and never have.  I actually think most people thrive on feeling like a victim.  That goes for right, left and everything in between.  I just don't know how to relate to it.  It's not possible for me to have a persecution complex.  I'm just pointing out what I see.  But based on your previous comment, you have a major chip on your shoulder.  I'd rather not even engage in this type of discussion with you and will probably just step away from it at this point.  It's not why I'm on this site.


ChewMeUp

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 53
Re: Liberals vs Conservatives - why does it have to be this way?
« Reply #359 on: March 05, 2019, 01:28:13 PM »
Nobody here is extreme left. Nobody. Extreme leftism means forcibly nationalising factories and offices and executing the owners as class enemies. Not a single opinion here has gone anywhere beyond the centre-left. You can call yourself middle-ground all you want, but you're not.

I'm 45 and I've only ever voted for the left. I think that puts your comment and judgement into it's proper perspective. My parents always voted for the left.

Neither the Republican party (far right) nor the Democratic party (center-right) in the United States are left wing.  Who exactly were you voting for?

I'm Australian and I've always voted for the left which is the labour party. You've explained though exactly my thoughts on the left. The left in my opinion is the party on the left. I consider going further than that becoming more extreme. I get the impression as you state that a lot of posters on here are so far to the left the major parties are simply not going to reflect their viewpoints.

The Democratic party (left) is being split right now.  It's almost impossible to represent a variety of viewpoints through 2 single parties.  And what happens is we end up stereotyping everyone.  You are a Republican?  Racist, bigot, sexist.  You are a Democrat?  Socialist, Communist.

The reality is that most people are none of the above.  But the Democratic party is very much being split right now by Euro-Socialists (NOT communists but definitely much further left for American politics) and more centrist liberals.  The vocal posters here tend to be pretty far left.  I'm not convinced that's a majority of the readers, but the most vocal are for sure pretty far left.

This is my last post on this thread, it's a cluster fuck and nothing positive that will come from it.  People get far too fired up and angry when it comes to politics nowadays.

Versatile

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 125
Re: Liberals vs Conservatives - why does it have to be this way?
« Reply #360 on: March 05, 2019, 01:30:02 PM »
I'm ignoring everything else you posted because it's unrelated to the question.

It's actually relevant. It shows that your simplistic use of statistics is flawed.

Still dodging the question, huh?  Sad.  You have like ten posts there, all at once, just dodging all the evidence.

You're clearly on the border of trolling here, whatever you claim about "voting left".

If I pointed out how black people had low life expectancy during slavery, would you demand a multi-variable analysis to remove genetic factors and lifestyle choices before admitting that slavery was the problem?  I mean, to be consistent, you'd have to, right?

Toque.

God this is frustrating, but I guess that is the reason for this thread. Let me help you out.

Steveo admits that racism exists, as do all sane people, but he has a problem with your simplistic use of statistics. He understands  black Americans overall have poorer health outcomes but logically and reasonably he also understands that there could be many variables that contribute to this reality, and to simplistically chalk it up to racism is unreasonable. Having worked in healthcare I personally can think of lots of alternate variables off the top of my head that does not involve racism. He is NOT denying racism exists, but is challenging you to prove it is the SOLE reason blacks have poorer outcomes. I'm sure if you pressed him, he would probably admit that racism in the past and in the present probably does play a role, but probably not to the level you believe.

Also, these labels are ridiculous. Someone disagreeing with you does not make them a troll. Flinging personal insults seems to be the de-facto response for a lot of people in the off-topics. People can disagree with you for valid reasons, and at any time posters here could be wrong, including myself. That should be the reason people debate, to come to truth. Right?

Sure, you'll admit that sexism exists, but then suddenly one of you will switch over to gaslighting about how the pay gap doesn't really exist because women just choose lower paying careers and more "family time".  Sexism exists, but you'll fight tooth and nail to never attribute any outcome to it and therefore never do anything to address those outcomes, because  we can't show an office building labelled "SEXISM INC" where all the sexist decisions are made and prove that every single biased outcome is the result of a precise input.

You'll admit racism exists, but really, black people just commit more crimes and that has nothing to do with the history of the country, Jim Crow laws, red-lining, poverty and disenfranchisement.  And since I can't show you a multi-variable analysis that follows a 100% complete trail all the way from the red-lines of Flint to the prisons of Michigan, why, you don't have to believe there's anything that can or should be done to fix it.

You'll talk about "institutional racism" as if that means that there have to be actual laws, still in place right to this day, that specifically single out women or minorities for shitty treatment.

Quote
As a moderator, I would think you would have a greater responsibility to not throw the labels around. I don't understand what Steveo has done to warrant the threat of being called a troll, by a moderator nonetheless.

1.  There is a movement among conservatives, where they find a few gay people or minorities, and pretend that they've "walked away" from being liberal because the left has "turned to extremism".  You can look up "walk away campaign".
"Oh, those liberals are so mean because they won't tolerate the little dog whistles I like to use to treat women and minorities like shit.  All I wanted to do was imply sexism is fake, rape is just regret and racism is just black people being preferring lives of crime."

2.  You have no idea what my job as a moderator is.  My main purpose is not to let people throw racist, sexist or otherwise bigoted canards and cliches around, slowly turning this forum into one of the other, shittier parts of the Internet where nobody but white men feel safe.

Toque.

Are you talking about me? I haven't opined on any of this other than I think you shouldn't call Steveo a troll. Do you have a question for me?

I have a pretty good sense of what a moderator does and I would think fairness should matter, even to dissenting opinions. People need to hear alternate viewpoints if nothing else to challenge or validate their own positions. Plus one has to deal in reality as not everybody agrees on the same value system. Many times there are very valid reasons for that. Don't you want to know why? Isn't it better to understand where the other side is coming from? But no, I don't know how you got the job or what your boss's guidelines are for discussion. Is it anything different from normal, fair discourse? I wouldn't think so.








partgypsy

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3987
Re: Liberals vs Conservatives - why does it have to be this way?
« Reply #361 on: March 05, 2019, 01:32:06 PM »
nvrmind
« Last Edit: March 05, 2019, 01:34:00 PM by partgypsy »

FreshPrincess

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 73
Re: Liberals vs Conservatives - why does it have to be this way?
« Reply #362 on: March 05, 2019, 01:32:23 PM »

I'm a pretty clueless white female, but I am astounded at the level that Steveo and other male posters perceive themselves as the victim, or potentially the victim of say reverse racism or discrimination, at the same time appear oblivious of discount much of American history up and including current events.   

I wasn't planning on commenting, but I just can't with this...

There is no. such. thing. as "reverse" racism or discrimination.  There is racism and discrimination. Period. Full stop.

partgypsy

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3987
Re: Liberals vs Conservatives - why does it have to be this way?
« Reply #363 on: March 05, 2019, 01:36:41 PM »

I'm a pretty clueless white female, but I am astounded at the level that Steveo and other male posters perceive themselves as the victim, or potentially the victim of say reverse racism or discrimination, at the same time appear oblivious of discount much of American history up and including current events.   

I wasn't planning on commenting, but I just can't with this...

There is no. such. thing. as "reverse" racism or discrimination.  There is racism and discrimination. Period. Full stop.

It is a term and has a specific meaning. Example in a sentence
"Some people view affirmative action as a form of reverse racism". I can also make a definite argument why it is a stupid term, but there was a reason I used it. Because Steveo has referenced this idea many times, that things have gone "too far". That basically he's a victim of reverse racism. 

https://www.dictionary.com/e/politics/reverse-racism/
« Last Edit: March 05, 2019, 01:43:13 PM by partgypsy »

Versatile

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 125
Re: Liberals vs Conservatives - why does it have to be this way?
« Reply #364 on: March 05, 2019, 01:39:56 PM »
No it doesn't invalidate his experiences. But he uses his experiences to deny other people's experiences. And to deny the existence of societal problems. You can see how he uses his experience (I'm assuming as a white male but I could be wrong) that since he hasn't been sexually harrassed or targeted, or that he's never been stopped by the police for no reason, means these aren't really happening. Or if they are for other reasons than sexism or racism. Really any other possible reason than sexism or racism.

I'm a pretty clueless white female, but I am astounded at the level that Steveo and other male posters perceive themselves as the victim, or potentially the victim of say reverse racism or discrimination, at the same time appear oblivious of discount much of American history up and including current events. I would say being called a "troll" for example ranks a bit lower in victimhood than say a statistically significantly increased risk of being shot dead by a police officer during a traffic stop or being incarcerated for a much longer sentence for drug possession of the same amount say compared to a white male. One may hurt your feelings, but the other one is life impacting.   

What if I were to say to you that both men and women of all ethnicities have both privilege and prejudice practiced for/against them? That when a man says Example A is evidence of a prejudice he is NOT saying Example B of prejudice against a woman is invalidated. Can they both exist? Absolutely.

steveo

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1943
Re: Liberals vs Conservatives - why does it have to be this way?
« Reply #365 on: March 05, 2019, 01:41:24 PM »
the ones in the middle see the racism on the right and the persecution complex on the left and wonder where they fit, given they are attacked from both sides.

Love it and VERY accurate.  I think the persecution complex has far surpassed it's far right counterpart, however.  But both do still exist.  I just think the left sets the bar so far left that they moved the center to the left.  In other words, people who are truly in the middle are now being labeled right wing racists.

Exactly. I'm just going to ignore the poor arguments and personal attacks going forward. It's not worth it. This is the issue - they are so upset with being called extreme leftists but in my life time I've never encountered the left being so extreme. This isn't the left of my life or my parents and it's not something that I am going to support.

steveo

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1943
Re: Liberals vs Conservatives - why does it have to be this way?
« Reply #366 on: March 05, 2019, 01:43:03 PM »
As a moderator, I would think you would have a greater responsibility to not throw the labels around. I don't understand what Steveo has done to warrant the threat of being called a troll, by a moderator nonetheless.

It's how they silence the other side.  Disagree with them, label them, ban them.

It's not worth arguing with them.

Seriously there argument and proof are really low quality and then they rant and rage. I thought it was getting better yesterday but I don't think it will. It's almost like know they've lost the debate and all they have left is a tantrum.

FreshPrincess

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 73
Re: Liberals vs Conservatives - why does it have to be this way?
« Reply #367 on: March 05, 2019, 01:43:24 PM »

I'm a pretty clueless white female, but I am astounded at the level that Steveo and other male posters perceive themselves as the victim, or potentially the victim of say reverse racism or discrimination, at the same time appear oblivious of discount much of American history up and including current events.   

I wasn't planning on commenting, but I just can't with this...

There is no. such. thing. as "reverse" racism or discrimination.  There is racism and discrimination. Period. Full stop.

You may not agree with the term but it is a term and has a specific meaning. Example in a sentence
"Some people view affirmative action as a form of reverse racism".

https://www.dictionary.com/e/politics/reverse-racism/

The definition itself kind of agrees with my point:

"...it's actually just another version of good ol’ fashioned racism."  I do get that it's a thing for people to say - so, you are correct, I believe it is an incorrect thing to say because racism is racism is racism.  It's a personal pet peeve.

partgypsy

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3987
Re: Liberals vs Conservatives - why does it have to be this way?
« Reply #368 on: March 05, 2019, 01:44:26 PM »
As a moderator, I would think you would have a greater responsibility to not throw the labels around. I don't understand what Steveo has done to warrant the threat of being called a troll, by a moderator nonetheless.

It's how they silence the other side.  Disagree with them, label them, ban them.

It's not worth arguing with them.

Seriously there argument and proof are really low quality and then they rant and rage. I thought it was getting better yesterday but I don't think it will. It's almost like know they've lost the debate and all they have left is a tantrum.


I'm sorry you are so misunderstood. At least you tried to illuminate us.

shenlong55

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 535
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Kentucky
Re: Liberals vs Conservatives - why does it have to be this way?
« Reply #369 on: March 05, 2019, 01:50:59 PM »
I'm ignoring everything else you posted because it's unrelated to the question.

It's actually relevant. It shows that your simplistic use of statistics is flawed.

Still dodging the question, huh?  Sad.  You have like ten posts there, all at once, just dodging all the evidence.

You're clearly on the border of trolling here, whatever you claim about "voting left".

If I pointed out how black people had low life expectancy during slavery, would you demand a multi-variable analysis to remove genetic factors and lifestyle choices before admitting that slavery was the problem?  I mean, to be consistent, you'd have to, right?

Toque.

God this is frustrating, but I guess that is the reason for this thread. Let me help you out.

Steveo admits that racism exists, as do all sane people, but he has a problem with your simplistic use of statistics. He understands  black Americans overall have poorer health outcomes but logically and reasonably he also understands that there could be many variables that contribute to this reality, and to simplistically chalk it up to racism is unreasonable. Having worked in healthcare I personally can think of lots of alternate variables off the top of my head that does not involve racism. He is NOT denying racism exists, but is challenging you to prove it is the SOLE reason blacks have poorer outcomes. I'm sure if you pressed him, he would probably admit that racism in the past and in the present probably does play a role, but probably not to the level you believe.

Also, these labels are ridiculous. Someone disagreeing with you does not make them a troll. Flinging personal insults seems to be the de-facto response for a lot of people in the off-topics. People can disagree with you for valid reasons, and at any time posters here could be wrong, including myself. That should be the reason people debate, to come to truth. Right?

As a moderator, I would think you would have a greater responsibility to not throw the labels around. I don't understand what Steveo has done to warrant the threat of being called a troll, by a moderator nonetheless.

I think a lot of it may be due to what people mean when they are talking about institutional racism or sexism. Steveo has flatly denied that institutional racism exists, but if it does it is racist against whites.

Oh yeah, I think a huge problem is that people aren't on the same page as far the agreed-upon definitions of what they are discussing, as these terms have certainly changed quite a bit in my lifetime. Sometimes people are talking about wildly divergent points when they think they are talking about the same thing.

I'll let Steveo define what he believes as far as your second point.

He won't.  I've asked him multiple times to explain his definition of patriarchy already.  I'm left to assume that he is purposefully arguing against a straw man that most of the posters here are not arguing 'for' while pretty much ignoring what they actually post.  I continue to hope that I'm wrong and he'll eventually address the issue, but I wouldn't hold my breath.

Boofinator

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1432
Re: Liberals vs Conservatives - why does it have to be this way?
« Reply #370 on: March 05, 2019, 01:51:28 PM »
Me: *Have a degree in statistics. Pull out 7-10 references to support my argument*

Someone else: "Your view of statistics is too simplistic."

A third person: "Mathlete, good political discourse means acknowledging that both of your viewpoints are equally valid. So sayeth I, the centrist"
\

I hate to break out the cliché, but there are lies, damned lies, and statistics. I don't question your competence nor that of the researchers, but the conclusions are often drawn to support the concluder's beliefs, and this really has nothing to do with statistics. For example, race correlates with opioid prescriptions for children does not imply racism causes a reduction in opioid prescriptions for children. That may be the case, but it was in no way proven by that study. (I realize others may disagree, though.)

steveo

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1943
Re: Liberals vs Conservatives - why does it have to be this way?
« Reply #371 on: March 05, 2019, 01:52:05 PM »
I'm ignoring everything else you posted because it's unrelated to the question.

It's actually relevant. It shows that your simplistic use of statistics is flawed.

Still dodging the question, huh?  Sad.  You have like ten posts there, all at once, just dodging all the evidence.

You're clearly on the border of trolling here, whatever you claim about "voting left".

If I pointed out how black people had low life expectancy during slavery, would you demand a multi-variable analysis to remove genetic factors and lifestyle choices before admitting that slavery was the problem?  I mean, to be consistent, you'd have to, right?

Toque.

God this is frustrating, but I guess that is the reason for this thread. Let me help you out.

Steveo admits that racism exists, as do all sane people, but he has a problem with your simplistic use of statistics. He understands  black Americans overall have poorer health outcomes but logically and reasonably he also understands that there could be many variables that contribute to this reality, and to simplistically chalk it up to racism is unreasonable. Having worked in healthcare I personally can think of lots of alternate variables off the top of my head that does not involve racism. He is NOT denying racism exists, but is challenging you to prove it is the SOLE reason blacks have poorer outcomes. I'm sure if you pressed him, he would probably admit that racism in the past and in the present probably does play a role, but probably not to the level you believe.

Also, these labels are ridiculous. Someone disagreeing with you does not make them a troll. Flinging personal insults seems to be the de-facto response for a lot of people in the off-topics. People can disagree with you for valid reasons, and at any time posters here could be wrong, including myself. That should be the reason people debate, to come to truth. Right?

As a moderator, I would think you would have a greater responsibility to not throw the labels around. I don't understand what Steveo has done to warrant the threat of being called a troll, by a moderator nonetheless.

I think a lot of it may be due to what people mean when they are talking about institutional racism or sexism. Steveo has flatly denied that institutional racism exists, but if it does it is racist against whites.

Oh yeah, I think a huge problem is that people aren't on the same page as far the agreed-upon definitions of what they are discussing, as these terms have certainly changed quite a bit in my lifetime. Sometimes people are talking about wildly divergent points when they think they are talking about the same thing.

I'll let Steveo define what he believes as far as your second point.

I have never denied that sexism or racism exists. I've never denied that institutional racism existed in the past but today it is becoming more and more a thing of the past and I don't believe that it exists systemically today.

I've gone over this already though and the people who disagree with me cannot provide any logical coherent argument against my point.

I'll state what a stated earlier but in some more detail:-

Do you believe that statistics are the basis for your proof in the patriarchy & institutional racism ? If so then you must believe in a matriarchy as men commit suicide much more significantly than woman and men die on average younger than women.

These points follow on from each other utilising the logic of the people who are all in a state over the proof that patriarchy & institutional racism exist.

You can't have the argument both ways if you are being logical.

Of course like myself you can state that society is complex and it's not as simple as western society being a matriarchy or a patriarchy. That is all I am stating and there is nothing at all wrong with believing that.

This then leads onto the whole point of this thread. There are various techniques that leftists who are way more further to the left than most western political parties utilise that do not appear to be techniques that people of good moral character utilise and these techniques like violence in my opinion are the sort of stuff that shouldn't be tolerated. This can be encapsulated in the idea of vilifying anyone who disagrees with their simplistic and blunt social theories.

steveo

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1943
Re: Liberals vs Conservatives - why does it have to be this way?
« Reply #372 on: March 05, 2019, 01:54:16 PM »
Nobody here is extreme left. Nobody. Extreme leftism means forcibly nationalising factories and offices and executing the owners as class enemies. Not a single opinion here has gone anywhere beyond the centre-left. You can call yourself middle-ground all you want, but you're not.

I'm 45 and I've only ever voted for the left. I think that puts your comment and judgement into it's proper perspective. My parents always voted for the left.

Neither the Republican party (far right) nor the Democratic party (center-right) in the United States are left wing.  Who exactly were you voting for?

I'm Australian and I've always voted for the left which is the labour party. You've explained though exactly my thoughts on the left. The left in my opinion is the party on the left. I consider going further than that becoming more extreme. I get the impression as you state that a lot of posters on here are so far to the left the major parties are simply not going to reflect their viewpoints.

The Democratic party (left) is being split right now.  It's almost impossible to represent a variety of viewpoints through 2 single parties.  And what happens is we end up stereotyping everyone.  You are a Republican?  Racist, bigot, sexist.  You are a Democrat?  Socialist, Communist.

The reality is that most people are none of the above.  But the Democratic party is very much being split right now by Euro-Socialists (NOT communists but definitely much further left for American politics) and more centrist liberals.  The vocal posters here tend to be pretty far left.  I'm not convinced that's a majority of the readers, but the most vocal are for sure pretty far left.

This is my last post on this thread, it's a cluster fuck and nothing positive that will come from it.  People get far too fired up and angry when it comes to politics nowadays.

This is what i think is happening. At least this thread has made me realise how far to the left some people are.

steveo

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1943
Re: Liberals vs Conservatives - why does it have to be this way?
« Reply #373 on: March 05, 2019, 01:59:25 PM »
I'm ignoring everything else you posted because it's unrelated to the question.

It's actually relevant. It shows that your simplistic use of statistics is flawed.

Still dodging the question, huh?  Sad.  You have like ten posts there, all at once, just dodging all the evidence.

You're clearly on the border of trolling here, whatever you claim about "voting left".

If I pointed out how black people had low life expectancy during slavery, would you demand a multi-variable analysis to remove genetic factors and lifestyle choices before admitting that slavery was the problem?  I mean, to be consistent, you'd have to, right?

Toque.

God this is frustrating, but I guess that is the reason for this thread. Let me help you out.

Steveo admits that racism exists, as do all sane people, but he has a problem with your simplistic use of statistics. He understands  black Americans overall have poorer health outcomes but logically and reasonably he also understands that there could be many variables that contribute to this reality, and to simplistically chalk it up to racism is unreasonable. Having worked in healthcare I personally can think of lots of alternate variables off the top of my head that does not involve racism. He is NOT denying racism exists, but is challenging you to prove it is the SOLE reason blacks have poorer outcomes. I'm sure if you pressed him, he would probably admit that racism in the past and in the present probably does play a role, but probably not to the level you believe.

Also, these labels are ridiculous. Someone disagreeing with you does not make them a troll. Flinging personal insults seems to be the de-facto response for a lot of people in the off-topics. People can disagree with you for valid reasons, and at any time posters here could be wrong, including myself. That should be the reason people debate, to come to truth. Right?

As a moderator, I would think you would have a greater responsibility to not throw the labels around. I don't understand what Steveo has done to warrant the threat of being called a troll, by a moderator nonetheless.

I think a lot of it may be due to what people mean when they are talking about institutional racism or sexism. Steveo has flatly denied that institutional racism exists, but if it does it is racist against whites.

Oh yeah, I think a huge problem is that people aren't on the same page as far the agreed-upon definitions of what they are discussing, as these terms have certainly changed quite a bit in my lifetime. Sometimes people are talking about wildly divergent points when they think they are talking about the same thing.

I'll let Steveo define what he believes as far as your second point.

He won't.  I've asked him multiple times to explain his definition of patriarchy already.  I'm left to assume that he is purposefully arguing against a straw man that most of the posters here are not arguing 'for' while pretty much ignoring what they actually post.  I continue to hope that I'm wrong and he'll eventually address the issue, but I wouldn't hold my breath.

Let's be very clear I don't believe in any form of the patriarchy. We have western society. It's not a patriarchy. It's not a matriarchy. It's the social structure that we have created. I am not discussing the patriarchy because it's a social construct that you and others have made up to view the world from. I think it's an extremely poor way to view the world.

It is pretty funny that you actually accuse me of not facing the issue as well.


GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 16041
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Liberals vs Conservatives - why does it have to be this way?
« Reply #375 on: March 05, 2019, 02:00:42 PM »
Nobody here is extreme left. Nobody. Extreme leftism means forcibly nationalising factories and offices and executing the owners as class enemies. Not a single opinion here has gone anywhere beyond the centre-left. You can call yourself middle-ground all you want, but you're not.

I'm 45 and I've only ever voted for the left. I think that puts your comment and judgement into it's proper perspective. My parents always voted for the left.

Neither the Republican party (far right) nor the Democratic party (center-right) in the United States are left wing.  Who exactly were you voting for?

I'm Australian and I've always voted for the left which is the labour party. You've explained though exactly my thoughts on the left. The left in my opinion is the party on the left. I consider going further than that becoming more extreme. I get the impression as you state that a lot of posters on here are so far to the left the major parties are simply not going to reflect their viewpoints.

The Democratic party (left) is being split right now.  It's almost impossible to represent a variety of viewpoints through 2 single parties.  And what happens is we end up stereotyping everyone.  You are a Republican?  Racist, bigot, sexist.  You are a Democrat?  Socialist, Communist.

The reality is that most people are none of the above.  But the Democratic party is very much being split right now by Euro-Socialists (NOT communists but definitely much further left for American politics) and more centrist liberals.  The vocal posters here tend to be pretty far left.  I'm not convinced that's a majority of the readers, but the most vocal are for sure pretty far left.

This is my last post on this thread, it's a cluster fuck and nothing positive that will come from it.  People get far too fired up and angry when it comes to politics nowadays.

This is what i think is happening. At least this thread has made me realise how far to the left some people are.

You have to remember that the "center" in the US looks kinda right wing to most of the rest of the world.

steveo

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1943
Re: Liberals vs Conservatives - why does it have to be this way?
« Reply #376 on: March 05, 2019, 02:01:03 PM »
Me: *Have a degree in statistics. Pull out 7-10 references to support my argument*

Someone else: "Your view of statistics is too simplistic."

A third person: "Mathlete, good political discourse means acknowledging that both of your viewpoints are equally valid. So sayeth I, the centrist"
\

I hate to break out the cliché, but there are lies, damned lies, and statistics. I don't question your competence nor that of the researchers, but the conclusions are often drawn to support the concluder's beliefs, and this really has nothing to do with statistics. For example, race correlates with opioid prescriptions for children does not imply racism causes a reduction in opioid prescriptions for children. That may be the case, but it was in no way proven by that study. (I realize others may disagree, though.)

It's amazing how people can't see this. It's so amazing I'm wondering if they are even trying. I said earlier no sane person would jump to the conclusions that Torque for instance came up with. It's so over the top.

OurTown

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1246
  • Age: 50
  • Location: Tennessee
Re: Liberals vs Conservatives - why does it have to be this way?
« Reply #377 on: March 05, 2019, 02:01:28 PM »
Racism is real and it sucks.  Racists are assholes.  I hate racists. 

So there is a lot of exaggerating going around on college campuses and online about what is "racism."  You can read about it here:  http://victimhoodculture.com/

Essentially, if you declare that everything is racist, then effectively nothing is racist.  We should probably define what is "racist" and stick to it.  There is also prejudice and insensitivity, neither of which is necessarily a great thing but they can be distinguished from outright racism.

If you are a racist reading my post and you think I am somehow on your side, you can fuck off.  Racism has no place in our society or our discourse.   

steveo

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1943
Re: Liberals vs Conservatives - why does it have to be this way?
« Reply #378 on: March 05, 2019, 02:04:20 PM »
You have to remember that the "center" in the US looks kinda right wing to most of the rest of the world.

Maybe but geez the left looks pretty dysfunctional. I've never experienced such poor reasoning ability coupled with such over the top dramatics when it comes to personally attacking people. I'm serious as well.

shenlong55

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 535
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Kentucky
Re: Liberals vs Conservatives - why does it have to be this way?
« Reply #379 on: March 05, 2019, 02:19:28 PM »
He won't.  I've asked him multiple times to explain his definition of patriarchy already.  I'm left to assume that he is purposefully arguing against a straw man that most of the posters here are not arguing 'for' while pretty much ignoring what they actually post.  I continue to hope that I'm wrong and he'll eventually address the issue, but I wouldn't hold my breath.

Let's be very clear I don't believe in any form of the patriarchy. We have western society. It's not a patriarchy. It's not a matriarchy. It's the social structure that we have created. I am not discussing the patriarchy because it's a social construct that you and others have made up to view the world from. I think it's an extremely poor way to view the world.

It is pretty funny that you actually accuse me of not facing the issue as well.

I didn't ask what you believe in.  I asked how you personally define the word patriarchy.  In other words, what are you referring to when you use the word patriarchy?
« Last Edit: March 05, 2019, 02:25:15 PM by shenlong55 »

Boofinator

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1432
Re: Liberals vs Conservatives - why does it have to be this way?
« Reply #380 on: March 05, 2019, 02:20:57 PM »
Racism is real and it sucks.  Racists are assholes.  I hate racists. 

So there is a lot of exaggerating going around on college campuses and online about what is "racism."  You can read about it here:  http://victimhoodculture.com/

Essentially, if you declare that everything is racist, then effectively nothing is racist.  We should probably define what is "racist" and stick to it.  There is also prejudice and insensitivity, neither of which is necessarily a great thing but they can be distinguished from outright racism.

If you are a racist reading my post and you think I am somehow on your side, you can fuck off.  Racism has no place in our society or our discourse.   

Well put.

ETA: Here's how the dictionary defines racism: "racism: the notion that one's own ethnic stock is superior"
« Last Edit: March 05, 2019, 02:28:21 PM by Boofinator »

partgypsy

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3987
Re: Liberals vs Conservatives - why does it have to be this way?
« Reply #381 on: March 05, 2019, 02:21:57 PM »
I'm ignoring everything else you posted because it's unrelated to the question.

It's actually relevant. It shows that your simplistic use of statistics is flawed.

Still dodging the question, huh?  Sad.  You have like ten posts there, all at once, just dodging all the evidence.

You're clearly on the border of trolling here, whatever you claim about "voting left".

If I pointed out how black people had low life expectancy during slavery, would you demand a multi-variable analysis to remove genetic factors and lifestyle choices before admitting that slavery was the problem?  I mean, to be consistent, you'd have to, right?

Toque.

God this is frustrating, but I guess that is the reason for this thread. Let me help you out.

Steveo admits that racism exists, as do all sane people, but he has a problem with your simplistic use of statistics. He understands  black Americans overall have poorer health outcomes but logically and reasonably he also understands that there could be many variables that contribute to this reality, and to simplistically chalk it up to racism is unreasonable. Having worked in healthcare I personally can think of lots of alternate variables off the top of my head that does not involve racism. He is NOT denying racism exists, but is challenging you to prove it is the SOLE reason blacks have poorer outcomes. I'm sure if you pressed him, he would probably admit that racism in the past and in the present probably does play a role, but probably not to the level you believe.

Also, these labels are ridiculous. Someone disagreeing with you does not make them a troll. Flinging personal insults seems to be the de-facto response for a lot of people in the off-topics. People can disagree with you for valid reasons, and at any time posters here could be wrong, including myself. That should be the reason people debate, to come to truth. Right?

As a moderator, I would think you would have a greater responsibility to not throw the labels around. I don't understand what Steveo has done to warrant the threat of being called a troll, by a moderator nonetheless.

I think a lot of it may be due to what people mean when they are talking about institutional racism or sexism. Steveo has flatly denied that institutional racism exists, but if it does it is racist against whites.

Oh yeah, I think a huge problem is that people aren't on the same page as far the agreed-upon definitions of what they are discussing, as these terms have certainly changed quite a bit in my lifetime. Sometimes people are talking about wildly divergent points when they think they are talking about the same thing.

I'll let Steveo define what he believes as far as your second point.

I have never denied that sexism or racism exists. I've never denied that institutional racism existed in the past but today it is becoming more and more a thing of the past and I don't believe that it exists systemically today.

I've gone over this already though and the people who disagree with me cannot provide any logical coherent argument against my point.

I'll state what a stated earlier but in some more detail:-

Do you believe that statistics are the basis for your proof in the patriarchy & institutional racism ? If so then you must believe in a matriarchy as men commit suicide much more significantly than woman and men die on average younger than women.

These points follow on from each other utilising the logic of the people who are all in a state over the proof that patriarchy & institutional racism exist.

You can't have the argument both ways if you are being logical.

Of course like myself you can state that society is complex and it's not as simple as western society being a matriarchy or a patriarchy. That is all I am stating and there is nothing at all wrong with believing that.

This then leads onto the whole point of this thread. There are various techniques that leftists who are way more further to the left than most western political parties utilise that do not appear to be techniques that people of good moral character utilise and these techniques like violence in my opinion are the sort of stuff that shouldn't be tolerated. This can be encapsulated in the idea of vilifying anyone who disagrees with their simplistic and blunt social theories.

Well I'm glad you posted this, because of the way you posted, I didn't really understand your beliefs since you didn't actually state them.

Your logic needs work. When anyone uses statistics, is is to support a framework or theory.
For example you state: "If so then you must believe in a matriarchy as men commit suicide much more significantly than woman and men die on average younger than women." What is the mechanism that a matriarchy has been created in the United States, especially given the relatively recent ability for women to vote or other basic rights and priviledges? Now that you've explained why there is this matriarchy, what is the mechanism that it is causing men, such as by oppression to kill themselves, or to die younger? Are there other explanations that make more sense? Is there other information that supports this view, or do other facts undermine this theory, such as such as men committing rape and other violent crimes at a higher rate, or that men across the world regardless of societal structure have a shorter life span?

For example, here are facts. Females have less assets than males. Here in the US, and certainly much more so in other cultures that say an anthropologist would define as a patriarchy. There using this as a unifying theory, this explanation provides many mechanisms to explain this difference. Everything from in the past not them having legal rights to vote or to have assets or bank accounts, to differences in inheritances, educational attainment, to job access. Any one "fact" or piece of evidence needs to be weighed both how it fits in the framework or theory you have going, as well as alternative explanations.   A theory works when it a) explains a large amount of the evidence, b) there is not a compelling alternative explanation, and c) it can make predictions. There is also the law of parsimony. Because "science", one would rather have a theory that explains say 80% of findings, than a dozen isolated fragmentary theories that explains 85%.

Please explain to me your theory of matriarchy and its mechanisms.
 
Then others can compare your theory, to the frame work of patriarchy. And what mechanisms it uses to explain these pieces of information. Then you can actually see, which one has the preponderance of evidence. I don't think you actually want to do that.

Same thing for your claims of "extreme left" and hence racism against whites, versus claims of long-standing and entrenched racism against minorities in US society.

Same thing for your claim of calling people on the left "violent" (I guess compared to people on the extreme right?). 

Go ahead.
« Last Edit: March 05, 2019, 02:31:58 PM by partgypsy »

steveo

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1943
Re: Liberals vs Conservatives - why does it have to be this way?
« Reply #382 on: March 05, 2019, 02:37:01 PM »
@partgypsy - you just aren't anywhere near getting what I am stating. You are so far off I can't really respond to what you wrote beacuse it's nothing at all like I stated. Try and discuss my points rather than stuff you just make up in your head.

I don't believe that my logic needs more work and a good way to view that is to clearly state that you haven't actually responded to what I stated. You seem to not understand my point and that is required prior to stating my logic is incorrect.

I'll try to explain the same point again (which I've done multiple times within this thread and you still don't get it):-

1. The use of blunt statistics are not proof of a patriarchy existing or institutional racism.
2. I don't believe in a patriarchy which is a social construct which you and others use to view the world. I also don't believe it's helpful and my proof is your and others inability to actually respond to clear flaws in your reasoning. I would also add that the vilification of myself is proof that there is something not quiet right in the way that you engage with the world and this seems to be a common theme of people that believe in the patriarchy.
3. I believe that institutional racism has existed in the past but currently this is not systemic.

My point regarding utilising the facts that I provided which are that men commit suicide more than women and men die on average younger than women is that these statistics do not prove that a matriarchy exists. They may be pointers to some problems within society that need to be addressed but when we address those problems it would be extremely stupid to rant and rage about racism and the matriarchy. I would use those statistics to try and look into the problem in detail and maybe the conclusion will be well all we can do is educate people on these issues and provide some support.

I will actually engage in your comment regarding females having less assets than males. This is a complex issue. For instance my wife has less Super (retirement accounts in Australia) than myself. My wife has also earned less than me due to having 3 kids and not having as high a paying a job. My wife would also get 1/2 of my Super if we divorced. She would also get all my assets if I die. My mum is in the same position with my dad. I understand that this is an anecdotal piece of evidence but the point being that the use of blunt statistics can provide a false impression. My take is to focus on opportunities rather than outcomes.

My advice to you is to try and look at statistics with some common sense. If you can't do this then I assume that you believe in a matriarchy as men commit suicide more than women and die on average at a younger age than women. Maybe the best question is do you believe in a matriarchy due to these statistics ? If not why not beacuse you are not being internally consistent. I'll try to explain this in some more detail - if statistics are the basis of proof of your theory then you have to accept statistics that do not back up your theory otherwise you are cherry picking facts.

If you don't believe in the matriarchy then you are cherry picking facts whereas I am stating that these statistics are not proof of any dominant social structure. They are just pointers to potential issues.
« Last Edit: March 05, 2019, 02:43:40 PM by steveo »

Davnasty

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2503
Re: Liberals vs Conservatives - why does it have to be this way?
« Reply #383 on: March 05, 2019, 02:44:38 PM »
Anyone else find it interesting that steveo is always the first person to bring up the word Patriarchy?

steveo

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1943
Re: Liberals vs Conservatives - why does it have to be this way?
« Reply #384 on: March 05, 2019, 02:50:40 PM »
Racism is real and it sucks.  Racists are assholes.  I hate racists. 

So there is a lot of exaggerating going around on college campuses and online about what is "racism."  You can read about it here:  http://victimhoodculture.com/

Essentially, if you declare that everything is racist, then effectively nothing is racist.  We should probably define what is "racist" and stick to it.  There is also prejudice and insensitivity, neither of which is necessarily a great thing but they can be distinguished from outright racism.

If you are a racist reading my post and you think I am somehow on your side, you can fuck off.  Racism has no place in our society or our discourse.   

This here is interesting as is that link. Real racism is disgusting.

steveo

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1943
Re: Liberals vs Conservatives - why does it have to be this way?
« Reply #385 on: March 05, 2019, 02:55:27 PM »

I'm a pretty clueless white female, but I am astounded at the level that Steveo and other male posters perceive themselves as the victim, or potentially the victim of say reverse racism or discrimination, at the same time appear oblivious of discount much of American history up and including current events.   

I wasn't planning on commenting, but I just can't with this...

There is no. such. thing. as "reverse" racism or discrimination.  There is racism and discrimination. Period. Full stop.

I think we should be extremely clear on these points. There is racism. It exists. There is discrimination. There is also positive discrimination or you could call it affirmative action:- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirmative_action.

Do you not believe in any form of affirmative action/positive discrimination ?

My impression is that people further to the left of myself definitely believe in positive discrimination and believe it is a good thing. I'm not sure on this issue. I think it can actually hurt the people it is meant to be helping.
« Last Edit: March 05, 2019, 07:20:37 PM by steveo »

MasterStache

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2532
Re: Liberals vs Conservatives - why does it have to be this way?
« Reply #386 on: March 05, 2019, 02:56:29 PM »
You have to remember that the "center" in the US looks kinda right wing to most of the rest of the world.

Maybe but geez the left looks pretty dysfunctional. I've never experienced such poor reasoning ability coupled with such over the top dramatics when it comes to personally attacking people. I'm serious as well.

Do you even realize that you continually attack people by calling them dysfunctional, regularly referring to them as extreme, insinuating that they are ignorant, etc. etc.?

I am just asking because there sure seems to be a lot of double standards on your part. Why not just stick to debating what you disagree with? Reading through the thread I get the impression you are so fed up and just wanting to go off on everyone.

shenlong55

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 535
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Kentucky
Re: Liberals vs Conservatives - why does it have to be this way?
« Reply #387 on: March 05, 2019, 03:00:10 PM »
Anyone else find it interesting that steveo is always the first person to bring up the word Patriarchy?

Yep.  And yet, he can't seem to define it...

partgypsy

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3987
Re: Liberals vs Conservatives - why does it have to be this way?
« Reply #388 on: March 05, 2019, 03:03:36 PM »
@partgypsy - you just aren't anywhere near getting what I am stating. You are so far off I can't really respond to what you wrote beacuse it's nothing at all like I stated. Try and discuss my points rather than stuff you just make up in your head.

I don't believe that my logic needs more work and a good way to view that is to clearly state that you haven't actually responded to what I stated. You seem to not understand my point and that is required prior to stating my logic is incorrect.

I'll try to explain the same point again (which I've done multiple times within this thread and you still don't get it):-

1. The use of blunt statistics are not proof of a patriarchy existing or institutional racism.
2. I don't believe in a patriarchy which is a social construct which you and others use to view the world. I also don't believe it's helpful and my proof is your and others inability to actually respond to clear flaws in your reasoning. I would also add that the vilification of myself is proof that there is something not quiet right in the way that you engage with the world and this seems to be a common theme of people that believe in the patriarchy.
3. I believe that institutional racism has existed in the past but currently this is not systemic.

My point regarding utilising the facts that I provided which are that men commit suicide more than women and men die on average younger than women is that these statistics do not prove that a matriarchy exists. They may be pointers to some problems within society that need to be addressed but when we address those problems it would be extremely stupid to rant and rage about racism and the matriarchy. I would use those statistics to try and look into the problem in detail and maybe the conclusion will be well all we can do is educate people on these issues and provide some support.

I will actually engage in your comment regarding females having less assets than males. This is a complex issue. For instance my wife has less Super (retirement accounts in Australia) than myself. My wife has also earned less than me due to having 3 kids and not having as high a paying a job. My wife would also get 1/2 of my Super if we divorced. She would also get all my assets if I die. My mum is in the same position with my dad. I understand that this is an anecdotal piece of evidence but the point being that the use of blunt statistics can provide a false impression. My take is to focus on opportunities rather than outcomes.

My advice to you is to try and look at statistics with some common sense. If you can't do this then I assume that you believe in a matriarchy as men commit suicide more than women and die on average at a younger age than women. Maybe the best question is do you believe in a matriarchy due to these statistics ? If not why not beacuse you are not being internally consistent. I'll try to explain this in some more detail - if statistics are the basis of proof of your theory then you have to accept statistics that do not back up your theory otherwise you are cherry picking facts.

If you don't believe in the matriarchy then you are cherry picking facts whereas I am stating that these statistics are not proof of any dominant social structure. They are just pointers to potential issues.

I guess we are even because you completely missed my point as well. Any two isolated facts neither proves or disproves a theory, whether it is a matriarchy or patriarchy. Facts and statistics are used to support or disprove a framework of understanding, which also includes a mechanism, or multiple mechanism. If you don't even understand what a theory or a construct is, then, I can't really help you.

Ps I don't need any help with logic. I have a phd in the sciences, and have done plenty of experimental design, statistics and even programming for my job. And btw I know you probably assume I "believe" in the patriarchy. I believe there are multiple models or framework to understand the world. Patriarchy and matriarchy were coined by anthropologists to make sense of different kind of societal structures. I think you you are taking the term patriarchy way too personally. I also agree with you, that while the US (as well as the majority of societies are patriarchal) we have a more egalitarian social structure now, which is good.  As a female I do not like the current administration and conservative branch of the government because (maybe because of their efforts to woo evangelicals, or just good ol' boyism) are trying to roll back laws and protections for females, which is regressive and NOT good. This includes the "gag rule" for ngos working in other countries, attacking planned parenthood, and redefining what rape and sexual assault is, to how rapes and sexual assaults need to be reported on campus. I also believe there should be paid maternity leave. Currently while "officially" women cannot be fired from their jobs for becoming pregnant, they can only take 16 weeks off before being eligible to be fired for that reason, and there is no mandatory paid leave. Daycare options suck in this country as well.   
« Last Edit: March 05, 2019, 03:09:00 PM by partgypsy »

steveo

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1943
Re: Liberals vs Conservatives - why does it have to be this way?
« Reply #389 on: March 05, 2019, 03:31:41 PM »
Any two isolated facts neither proves or disproves a theory, whether it is a matriarchy or patriarchy. Facts and statistics are used to support or disprove a framework of understanding, which also includes a mechanism, or multiple mechanism.

I'm cool with this.

I believe there are multiple models or framework to understand the world.

Of course.

atriarchy and matriarchy were coined by anthropologists to make sense of different kind of societal structures. I think you you are taking the term patriarchy way too personally.

The issue is how helpful these theories are. I'll give an example which I find stupid as well. Lots of guys believe in the Alpha male concept. I find this concept stupid. It doesn't in my opinion reflect reality or help guide your actions. So there are social theories that in my opinion aren't helpful. I think that the idea of the patriarchy is one of those theories.

I also agree with you, that while the US (as well as the majority of societies are patriarchal) we have a more egalitarian social structure now, which is good.

We have a much more egalitarian social structure and that is good. Unfortunately we also have people who appear to have really strong beliefs that society is so unfair. I don't believe this. Sure there are things to change but it's not like society is so bad. It's actually good.

As a female I do not like the current administration and conservative branch of the government because (maybe because of their efforts to woo evangelicals, or just good ol' boyism) are trying to roll back laws and protections for females, which is regressive and NOT good. This includes the "gag rule" for ngos working in other countries, attacking planned parenthood, and redefining what rape and sexual assault is, to how rapes and sexual assaults need to be reported on campus. I also believe there should be paid maternity leave. Currently while "officially" women cannot be fired from their jobs for becoming pregnant, they can only take 16 weeks off before being eligible to be fired for that reason, and there is no mandatory paid leave. Daycare options suck in this country as well.

I'm pretty much on-board with most of this stuff. I do think you need to call rape rape. I would hate to someone tried for rape when they whistled at a woman. These are good examples though. In Australia now guys really shouldn't wolf whistle women. I still think this sort of stuff happens too much but the cultural change has been pretty significant. I think we have similar maternity laws however when my wife gave birth she received 3 months additional paid leave. My sister in law is now receiving 1 year paid leave. Daycare in Australia is pretty good but it's expensive. I also live in a big city and I assume people in the country don't have the same level of facilities.

steveo

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1943
Re: Liberals vs Conservatives - why does it have to be this way?
« Reply #390 on: March 05, 2019, 03:36:45 PM »
You have to remember that the "center" in the US looks kinda right wing to most of the rest of the world.

Maybe but geez the left looks pretty dysfunctional. I've never experienced such poor reasoning ability coupled with such over the top dramatics when it comes to personally attacking people. I'm serious as well.

Do you even realize that you continually attack people by calling them dysfunctional, regularly referring to them as extreme, insinuating that they are ignorant, etc. etc.?

I am just asking because there sure seems to be a lot of double standards on your part. Why not just stick to debating what you disagree with? Reading through the thread I get the impression you are so fed up and just wanting to go off on everyone.

This is just so over the top.

I am frustrated though. I call people extremist leftists because I consider myself on the left. There was push back on this point and I stated I've always voted for the left and these theories are far beyond my vision of the left. I stand by this comment but I'm happy to use another term. As for insinuating they are ignorant I think I've been pretty clear on stating that people have an inability to prove things they state they can prove. I'll also call the way a bunch of people debate on here dysfunctional.

For the record I have been attacked left, right and centre and yet you don't seem to comment on that.

ChewMeUp

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 53
Re: Liberals vs Conservatives - why does it have to be this way?
« Reply #391 on: March 05, 2019, 03:41:20 PM »
I also believe there should be paid maternity leave. Currently while "officially" women cannot be fired from their jobs for becoming pregnant, they can only take 16 weeks off before being eligible to be fired for that reason, and there is no mandatory paid leave. Daycare options suck in this country as well.

Ok, I guess I can't help but post one more :)

If not covered under FMLA, you can absolutely be fired due to pregnancy related absences.  There is no 16 week safety net.  Any employer with less than 50 employees is not bound by the FMLA.

More relevant to this conversation, and "Liberals vs Conservative:  why does it have to be this way?" - you mentioned you dislike the current administration because you believe they are out to screw over women.  Then in the same paragraph mention how you think we need paid maternity leave and protections for pregnant women.  Yet this administration is probably closer to making that happen than any I've ever seen in my lifetime.  The president campaigned on it, continues to campaign on it, and it's in his budget.  Another Republican Senator introduced actual legislation to do just that.  The same with massive Criminal Justice Reform that was actually passed.  All the talk of this racist administration, while they were passing massive criminal justice reform which was targeted at helping minority communities and unjust sentencing.

If we weren't so focused on our side vs your side, maybe we could focus on some of the good things that are actually happening.  And if we could actually focus on some of the good things, maybe we would make the progress that we all seem to be seeking.  But first we would have to recognize that most of us all want the same thing but don't seem to realize it.

This thread is a great example of how polarized we have become, to the point we can't even recognize when we are getting exactly what we are wanting.
« Last Edit: March 05, 2019, 03:44:36 PM by ChewMeUp »

Sailor Sam

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4371
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Steel Beach
  • Semper...something
Re: Liberals vs Conservatives - why does it have to be this way?
« Reply #392 on: March 05, 2019, 03:54:34 PM »
1. The use of blunt statistics are not proof of a patriarchy existing or institutional racism.

I think I've been pretty clear on stating that people have an inability to prove things they state they can prove.

@steveo, I'm with you here. The statistics that have been quoted - pain medication for black children, men dying earlier than women simply cannot, when taken as pure statistics, prove racism or matricarchism exist. All they can conclude is that some sort of phenomenon has been observed. It's up to other disciplines to discover the sociological or physiological, or anthropological reason that drives the statistic to exist.

One of the hypothesis behind the racial difference in pain management is, of course, racism. You've howled to the moon that pure statistics cannot prove that the difference in prescribing is driven by racism. As I said, I agree with you. However, the flip side is also true. The blunt statistics cannot be used to disprove racism, either. The 'extreme leftists' you so quiver at may in fact be expressing unsubstantiated opinion. But, so are you.
« Last Edit: March 05, 2019, 03:56:07 PM by Sailor Sam »

steveo

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1943
Re: Liberals vs Conservatives - why does it have to be this way?
« Reply #393 on: March 05, 2019, 04:18:59 PM »
The 'extreme leftists' you so quiver at may in fact be expressing unsubstantiated opinion. But, so are you.

Exactly. The difference is that I aware of this. I accept I have an opinion and I don't try to dress it up as a proven theory and that anyone who disagrees with me is insert a derogatory term.

Sailor Sam

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4371
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Steel Beach
  • Semper...something
Re: Liberals vs Conservatives - why does it have to be this way?
« Reply #394 on: March 05, 2019, 04:26:46 PM »
The 'extreme leftists' you so quiver at may in fact be expressing unsubstantiated opinion. But, so are you.

Exactly. The difference is that I aware of this. I accept I have an opinion and I don't try to dress it up as a proven theory and that anyone who disagrees with me is insert a derogatory term.

Then why are you so adamant that institutionalized racism and patriarchy don't exist? The farthest we can get is that some people have an unsubstantiated theory that <insert social phenomenon> stems from racism/patriarchy, and that you have the equally unsubstantiated theory that <social phenomenon> does not stem from racism/patriarchy.

edit: syntax
« Last Edit: March 05, 2019, 04:31:56 PM by Sailor Sam »

steveo

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1943
Re: Liberals vs Conservatives - why does it have to be this way?
« Reply #395 on: March 05, 2019, 04:47:42 PM »
The 'extreme leftists' you so quiver at may in fact be expressing unsubstantiated opinion. But, so are you.

Exactly. The difference is that I aware of this. I accept I have an opinion and I don't try to dress it up as a proven theory and that anyone who disagrees with me is insert a derogatory term.

Then why are you so adamant that institutionalized racism and patriarchy don't exist? The farthest we can get is that some people have an unsubstantiated theory that <insert social phenomenon> stems from racism/patriarchy, and that you have the equally unsubstantiated theory that <social phenomenon> does not stem from racism/patriarchy.

edit: syntax

It's not as simple as what you are implying. Yet again you guys attack a viewpoint that I haven't expressed. I can see the complexity of an issue and I'm also not sure about what to do about various issues.

I don't see institutionalized racism within society today much if at all. I see affirmative action which is positive discrimination. I accept that this occurs to try and help people that are in various demographics that currently are not represented as much within various areas of society.

I also don't see much if any racism within society.

That doesn't mean that there wasn't institutionalised racism or whatever in the past in society. It also doesn't mean that nothing should be done plus there are things being done. It also doesn't mean that there are pockets of racists or institutions that discriminate against people (but not in the positive fashion).

I think that given time a lot of the statistical studies that purport that there are differences in society will change to be more equitable but I doubt we will ever have a completely equitable society. The point being that maybe we've done so much to improve the situation (you can call this the patriarchy if you want too) that if people are just patient the world will move into a state where people don't keep going on about race or gender or sexuality and it becomes basically a non-issue.
« Last Edit: March 05, 2019, 04:54:18 PM by steveo »

MasterStache

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2532
Re: Liberals vs Conservatives - why does it have to be this way?
« Reply #396 on: March 05, 2019, 04:54:16 PM »
You have to remember that the "center" in the US looks kinda right wing to most of the rest of the world.

Maybe but geez the left looks pretty dysfunctional. I've never experienced such poor reasoning ability coupled with such over the top dramatics when it comes to personally attacking people. I'm serious as well.

Do you even realize that you continually attack people by calling them dysfunctional, regularly referring to them as extreme, insinuating that they are ignorant, etc. etc.?

I am just asking because there sure seems to be a lot of double standards on your part. Why not just stick to debating what you disagree with? Reading through the thread I get the impression you are so fed up and just wanting to go off on everyone.

This is just so over the top.

I am frustrated though. I call people extremist leftists because I consider myself on the left. There was push back on this point and I stated I've always voted for the left and these theories are far beyond my vision of the left. I stand by this comment but I'm happy to use another term. As for insinuating they are ignorant I think I've been pretty clear on stating that people have an inability to prove things they state they can prove. I'll also call the way a bunch of people debate on here dysfunctional.

For the record I have been attacked left, right and centre and yet you don't seem to comment on that.

It's over the top yet you proceed to explain why you posited all of it? Ummm, ok.

steveo

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1943
Re: Liberals vs Conservatives - why does it have to be this way?
« Reply #397 on: March 05, 2019, 04:55:21 PM »
You have to remember that the "center" in the US looks kinda right wing to most of the rest of the world.

Maybe but geez the left looks pretty dysfunctional. I've never experienced such poor reasoning ability coupled with such over the top dramatics when it comes to personally attacking people. I'm serious as well.

Do you even realize that you continually attack people by calling them dysfunctional, regularly referring to them as extreme, insinuating that they are ignorant, etc. etc.?

I am just asking because there sure seems to be a lot of double standards on your part. Why not just stick to debating what you disagree with? Reading through the thread I get the impression you are so fed up and just wanting to go off on everyone.

This is just so over the top.

I am frustrated though. I call people extremist leftists because I consider myself on the left. There was push back on this point and I stated I've always voted for the left and these theories are far beyond my vision of the left. I stand by this comment but I'm happy to use another term. As for insinuating they are ignorant I think I've been pretty clear on stating that people have an inability to prove things they state they can prove. I'll also call the way a bunch of people debate on here dysfunctional.

For the record I have been attacked left, right and centre and yet you don't seem to comment on that.

It's over the top yet you proceed to explain why you posited all of it? Ummm, ok.

You are right. I should probably not have bothered responding to you because you clearly weren't discussing anything in good faith. I get it.

Sailor Sam

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4371
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Steel Beach
  • Semper...something
Re: Liberals vs Conservatives - why does it have to be this way?
« Reply #398 on: March 05, 2019, 04:58:01 PM »
The 'extreme leftists' you so quiver at may in fact be expressing unsubstantiated opinion. But, so are you.

Exactly. The difference is that I aware of this. I accept I have an opinion and I don't try to dress it up as a proven theory and that anyone who disagrees with me is insert a derogatory term.

Then why are you so adamant that institutionalized racism and patriarchy don't exist? The farthest we can get is that some people have an unsubstantiated theory that <insert social phenomenon> stems from racism/patriarchy, and that you have the equally unsubstantiated theory that <social phenomenon> does not stem from racism/patriarchy.

edit: syntax

It's not as simple as what you are implying. Yet again you guys attack a viewpoint that I haven't expressed. I can see the complexity of an issue and I'm also not sure about what to do about various issues.

I'm singular (unless I've been uninformed about my assimilation into the Borg, which given the Borg would be quite surprising), I didn't attack you, and I'm discoursing at a pretty high level. I've pointed out an interesting fact about your statistics argument, and I'd like to discuss it.

sherr

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1074
  • Age: 35
  • Location: North Carolina, USA
Re: Liberals vs Conservatives - why does it have to be this way?
« Reply #399 on: March 05, 2019, 05:23:09 PM »
The same [Republican Senator introduced] with massive Criminal Justice Reform that was actually passed.  All the talk of this racist administration, while they were passing massive criminal justice reform which was targeted at helping minority communities and unjust sentencing.

Okay. I mean I agree, yes it's great that this passed. Let's not forget however that this was an extremely bipartisan bill, passing 87-12 in the Senate (and all 12 "NOs" were R) and 358-36 in the House (and all 36 "NOs" were R).

Let's also not forget that Trump:
A) Needs every bit of good PR he can get.
B) Would have obviously been overridden if he had vetoed it.

I think the point that we can all look at the one or two good things that have happened is a valid one, but it's not like this is incredibly strong evidence that Trump is not a racist. It's not like Trump was the driver behind this reform, people had been trying to get it done since 2015.