It would take me time to quote studies to this effect, but I’m pretty damn sure things are changing in that sense, and I’m getting away with stuff that would have been deemed unthinkable back when I was a child (and, in fact, still are, back where I was born and raised).
I meant I don’t expect the facts that I’m straight, white, and male to change. While in principle I’m glad I have the freedom to have sex with a man (and would prefer if e.g. it became illegal to fire me for doing so), I don’t think I’d ever take advantage of that freedom. So the idea that it’s in my own selfish interest to fight for social justice is attractive, but false (and it’s a rationalisation that I used to believe, which is why I suggested you were rationalizing).
So, yeah, Imm, I won’t stop you from posting your unspeakable arguments, but I’m just not interested in engaging you in them. And that’s a rationalist’s reaction. A normal person would simply heuristic that you’re a prejudiced person looking for arguments after the fact, and a non-rationalist who’s committed to “social justice” would let you know that they’re not interested in hearing you out without bothering to be nearly as apologetic as I’m being. And, frankly, I can’t find it in my heart to blame them.
Wow. You asked what the problem with the SJWs was, I tried to give a simple, obvious example, and you immediately pattern-matched me as a racist and decided to ignore me. That’s about as good an example as I could ask for. What would you think about someone who responded the same way to the suggestion that god didn’t exist, or that astrology didn’t work, or that the earth was six billion years old?
(And note that the converse isn’t true; I see plenty of atheists seriously engaging with religious folk, thinking about what they say and responding to their points. Scientists get frustrated by e.g. the ID folks, but I still see people patiently going over what we know and why we know it, with footnotes—sure, some will slam the door and stop thinking about it, but most are still open to the possibility that they might be wrong.)
“While in principle I’m glad I have the freedom to have sex with a man (and would prefer if e.g. it became illegal to fire me for doing so), I don’t think I’d ever take advantage of that freedom.”
Thing is, I’m pretty sure I would… as soon as I’ve finished cutting all ties with my ancestral land so that the consequences wouldn’t come to bite me in some roundabout way. But I might not be that prudent or patient. Give me liberty and give me cock(adooloo)! :P
Now, for the misunderstanding:
“and you immediately pattern-matched me as a racist and decided to ignore me. ”
Not quite. I just decided the chance was high enough that I wasn’t willing to risk my time and effort. Not quite the same thing as pegging you as guilty until proven otherwise and then dismissing you outright.
“What would you think about someone who responded the same way to the suggestion that god didn’t exist, or that astrology didn’t work, or that the earth was six billion years old?”
And I’ve met atheists who were jerks (Atheism Warriors?), back when I was religious, in societies where they were powerful enough that they could take their stance for granted. If it weren’t for my confidence in my own capacity to counter their arguments (my actual belief in the dragon in my garage), and my endless reserves of youthful energy, Same for Trotskyst and Anarchist jerks (“Engineers are the most alienated of all!”), libertarian jerks (“Poverty? What’s poverty? Having less cable channels than the neighbors?”), and so on and so forth.
At my age, please forgive me for being very cautious about engaging anyone who even looks like a Warrior of any sort in debate. If we get to know each other later and I find that I can trust you not to be a Warrior, I’ll discuss this at length with you… by PM (because, frankly, our reputation is bad enough as is).
I meant I don’t expect the facts that I’m straight, white, and male to change. While in principle I’m glad I have the freedom to have sex with a man (and would prefer if e.g. it became illegal to fire me for doing so), I don’t think I’d ever take advantage of that freedom. So the idea that it’s in my own selfish interest to fight for social justice is attractive, but false (and it’s a rationalisation that I used to believe, which is why I suggested you were rationalizing).
Wow. You asked what the problem with the SJWs was, I tried to give a simple, obvious example, and you immediately pattern-matched me as a racist and decided to ignore me. That’s about as good an example as I could ask for. What would you think about someone who responded the same way to the suggestion that god didn’t exist, or that astrology didn’t work, or that the earth was six billion years old?
(And note that the converse isn’t true; I see plenty of atheists seriously engaging with religious folk, thinking about what they say and responding to their points. Scientists get frustrated by e.g. the ID folks, but I still see people patiently going over what we know and why we know it, with footnotes—sure, some will slam the door and stop thinking about it, but most are still open to the possibility that they might be wrong.)
“While in principle I’m glad I have the freedom to have sex with a man (and would prefer if e.g. it became illegal to fire me for doing so), I don’t think I’d ever take advantage of that freedom.”
Thing is, I’m pretty sure I would… as soon as I’ve finished cutting all ties with my ancestral land so that the consequences wouldn’t come to bite me in some roundabout way. But I might not be that prudent or patient. Give me liberty and give me cock(adooloo)! :P
Now, for the misunderstanding:
“and you immediately pattern-matched me as a racist and decided to ignore me. ”
Not quite. I just decided the chance was high enough that I wasn’t willing to risk my time and effort. Not quite the same thing as pegging you as guilty until proven otherwise and then dismissing you outright.
“What would you think about someone who responded the same way to the suggestion that god didn’t exist, or that astrology didn’t work, or that the earth was six billion years old?”
That they’ve been faced with people promoting these ideas who were both smug and unconvincing, engaged them in good faith, and got burned for it, learning nothing and feeling hurt and insulted. I would blame those people who ruined the audience for me, like a salesman finding a hostile populace in the wake of Howard Hill.
And I’ve met atheists who were jerks (Atheism Warriors?), back when I was religious, in societies where they were powerful enough that they could take their stance for granted. If it weren’t for my confidence in my own capacity to counter their arguments (my actual belief in the dragon in my garage), and my endless reserves of youthful energy, Same for Trotskyst and Anarchist jerks (“Engineers are the most alienated of all!”), libertarian jerks (“Poverty? What’s poverty? Having less cable channels than the neighbors?”), and so on and so forth.
At my age, please forgive me for being very cautious about engaging anyone who even looks like a Warrior of any sort in debate. If we get to know each other later and I find that I can trust you not to be a Warrior, I’ll discuss this at length with you… by PM (because, frankly, our reputation is bad enough as is).