blonde poker forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
March 29, 2024, 07:32:59 AM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
2272476 Posts in 66752 Topics by 16945 Members
Latest Member: Zula
* Home Help Arcade Search Calendar Guidelines Login Register
+  blonde poker forum
|-+  Community Forums
| |-+  The Lounge
| | |-+  Paris horror attack
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. « previous next »
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 ... 26 Go Down Print
Author Topic: Paris horror attack  (Read 52030 times)
Woodsey
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 15846



View Profile
« Reply #30 on: January 07, 2015, 04:58:54 PM »

I'm a bit scared of stepping into this, but...

Woodsey, however you wanna spin it the phrasing of your post was deliberately (perhaps subconsciously deliberate, but still deliberate) provocative. And it did carry connotations of racism. I guess you will argue that you were just asking a harmless question and there is nothing wrong with that. After all, you are not directly saying "lots of Muslims are terrorists". But nevertheless this is (unintentionally) inferred through the wording of your post. You can deny this, and pretend that you genuinely do not understand what was provocative about your post. But you are a clever guy, you know exactly what the phrasing of your post infers. I am not saying you are a racist... but you have written something that has undertones of racism running through it. I know you will just roll your eyes and think "bloody PC brigade again, taking everything so seriously, forcing us to watch our every word and trying to stop us making harmless jokes". But the thing is, there are certain issues about which we have to be careful with what we say and the way that we say it.

Tom, I think you have got to be careful about how you deal with things like this. Going in all gung-ho and calling someone a racist might help you to let off steam. But it is counterproductive. It allows the other person to take the moral high ground ("You called me a racist! That's against the rules. I am really offended." etc). And now the focus is about your 'over-reaction' and the insult you have caused, rather than about the danger of people saying/writing such inflammatory things. It's like trying to argue with a UKIPT supporter. If you really want to try to change their views then discuss things with them using reasonable language and logical arguments; gently, politely but firmly. They might not agree with you and they might not change their mind - but they will listen to you, and you can share viewpoints and have a meeting of minds. If you give in to temptation and allow your emotion to enter the debate by calling them a racist... well, you have lost them from that point onwards. There will be no debate, and no possibility for your opinions to be listened to and respected.



Stu is right. Never argue with a Ukipt supporter- they will deny 3% of the prize pool is raked even though it's there in black and white

I'm a conservative supporter if you must know.
Logged
RED-DOG
International Lover World Wide Playboy
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 46911



View Profile WWW
« Reply #31 on: January 07, 2015, 05:03:52 PM »

I'm a bit scared of stepping into this, but...

Woodsey, however you wanna spin it the phrasing of your post was deliberately (perhaps subconsciously deliberate, but still deliberate) provocative. And it did carry connotations of racism. I guess you will argue that you were just asking a harmless question and there is nothing wrong with that. After all, you are not directly saying "lots of Muslims are terrorists". But nevertheless this is (unintentionally) inferred through the wording of your post. You can deny this, and pretend that you genuinely do not understand what was provocative about your post. But you are a clever guy, you know exactly what the phrasing of your post infers. I am not saying you are a racist... but you have written something that has undertones of racism running through it. I know you will just roll your eyes and think "bloody PC brigade again, taking everything so seriously, forcing us to watch our every word and trying to stop us making harmless jokes". But the thing is, there are certain issues about which we have to be careful with what we say and the way that we say it.

Tom, I think you have got to be careful about how you deal with things like this. Going in all gung-ho and calling someone a racist might help you to let off steam. But it is counterproductive. It allows the other person to take the moral high ground ("You called me a racist! That's against the rules. I am really offended." etc). And now the focus is about your 'over-reaction' and the insult you have caused, rather than about the danger of people saying/writing such inflammatory things. It's like trying to argue with a UKIPT supporter. If you really want to try to change their views then discuss things with them using reasonable language and logical arguments; gently, politely but firmly. They might not agree with you and they might not change their mind - but they will listen to you, and you can share viewpoints and have a meeting of minds. If you give in to temptation and allow your emotion to enter the debate by calling them a racist... well, you have lost them from that point onwards. There will be no debate, and no possibility for your opinions to be listened to and respected.





You're right of course.

I suppose I reacted the way I did because this isn't the first time Woodsey has made a post of this type or the first time he and I have clashed.

I know what it's like to be deemed guilty by association. One Gypsy commits a crime,(or is suspected) all the rest are tarred with the same brush.

It's very very destructive and causes untold suffering for totally innocent people.



Logged

The older I get, the better I was.
Honeybadger
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1926



View Profile WWW
« Reply #32 on: January 07, 2015, 05:12:22 PM »

Never argue with a Ukipt supporter- they will deny 3% of the prize pool is raked even though it's there in black and white

You nasty racist you Wink
Logged
EvilPie
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 14253



View Profile
« Reply #33 on: January 07, 2015, 05:12:45 PM »


Stu is right. Never argue with a Ukipt supporter- they will deny 3% of the prize pool is raked even though it's there in black and white

Wins thread.
Logged

Motivational speeches at their best:

"Because thats what living is, the 6 inches in front of your face......" - Patrick Leonard - 10th May 2015
George2Loose
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 15214



View Profile
« Reply #34 on: January 07, 2015, 05:14:12 PM »

Muslims at it again or someone else this time?

Edit-yep looks like it.

To try and illustrate how offensive a comment like this is if i had said "Blacks again is it?" Or "some Jew I spose?" Whether I was right or wrong would U think that were acceptable?
Logged

Ole Ole Ole Ole!
Honeybadger
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1926



View Profile WWW
« Reply #35 on: January 07, 2015, 05:21:32 PM »

To try and illustrate how offensive a comment like this is if i had said "Blacks again is it?" Or "some Jew I spose?" Whether I was right or wrong would U think that were acceptable?

Yeah exactly. And also, ask yourself if you would feel comfortable saying "Muslims again?" to a nice, friendly Muslim man/woman sat next to you on the train.
Logged
Woodsey
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 15846



View Profile
« Reply #36 on: January 07, 2015, 05:23:36 PM »

Muslims at it again or someone else this time?

Edit-yep looks like it.

To try and illustrate how offensive a comment like this is if i had said "Blacks again is it?" Or "some Jew I spose?" Whether I was right or wrong would U think that were acceptable?

In the context of the thread about terror I think my question (before I had read the full facts) was perfectly reasonable mate sorry if you don't agree. if anyone thinks I really meant all Muslims and not muslim terrorists in a thread about a terrorist attack, then I dont know what else to say to convince them otherwise?  
Logged
George2Loose
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 15214



View Profile
« Reply #37 on: January 07, 2015, 05:25:53 PM »

So just because there's a racial prejudice in place it's ok to enforce it?
Logged

Ole Ole Ole Ole!
Woodsey
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 15846



View Profile
« Reply #38 on: January 07, 2015, 05:31:27 PM »

So just because there's a racial prejudice in place it's ok to enforce it?

If its a real situation about us/the west/whoever having issues with a particular group doing attacks I don't think it was an unreasonable question/assumption to be honest. Fact is it was muslim terrorists.
Logged
Woodsey
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 15846



View Profile
« Reply #39 on: January 07, 2015, 05:32:54 PM »

Ok I'm not answering question after question just because some of you disagree with what I said. I don't think I've done anything wrong and nobody will change my mind about that, but if you want to debate it amongst yourselves feel free.
« Last Edit: January 07, 2015, 05:37:45 PM by Woodsey » Logged
RED-DOG
International Lover World Wide Playboy
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 46911



View Profile WWW
« Reply #40 on: January 07, 2015, 05:36:09 PM »

I'm happy to answer questions about anything I've said.
Logged

The older I get, the better I was.
DungBeetle
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4925


View Profile
« Reply #41 on: January 07, 2015, 05:40:13 PM »

Moving away from the poor wording of the opening post is it inappropriate for people to make any assumptions based on prior behaviour/current form?

In the 80s when I read that a bomb had gone off in the UK, I would be thinking in my head that it was the IRA before the perpetrator was known.  Would this be inappropriate and anti-catholic?  Should I have equally weighted the possibility of it being Japanese terrorists and kept a completely open mind until confirmation?

The first headline I saw today was "Terror attack in France" with no other details.  What percentage of people would think there is an islamic connection given the last couple of years?  Does that make them bad people?
Logged
doubleup
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7049


View Profile
« Reply #42 on: January 07, 2015, 05:41:27 PM »

These people were murdered because they wrote satirical pieces about Islam.

The religion is implicated in this atrocity and there is no point in denying it.
Logged
Honeybadger
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1926



View Profile WWW
« Reply #43 on: January 07, 2015, 05:47:18 PM »

In the context of the thread about terror I think my question (before I had read the full facts) was perfectly reasonable mate sorry if you don't agree. if anyone thinks I really meant all Muslims and not muslim terrorists in a thread about a terrorist attack, then I dont know what else to say to convince them otherwise?  

I know you think that your question was reasonable. But some people (myself included) think you are wrong, and that it was not a reasonable way to phrase the question. You can pretend to us that you have no idea why anyone would be offended. And you can argue that "I was just asking a question, that's all. No harm in that." But really you know perfectly well the implicit meaning that was contained in the phrasing of your question. You might not think it is important, that it is harmless. I disagree - I think this sort of thing is dangerous. And I think it needs to be challenged every single time.

There is so much hatred, fear and prejudice in the world already. And every single time a comment with such inferences is made, it just puts a tiny little bit of extra fear and prejudice into the pot. Like a drip, drip, drip effect. And eventually these things become normalised. It's like someone constantly telling sexist jokes. They may not really be sexist themselves, and perhaps the comedic device in their jokes actually makes them funny if you ignore the sexist content. But every single time a sexist joke is told and is not challenged it is just one tiny step towards normalising sexist viewpoints and giving permission for others to hold these views, both subconsciously and consciously.

I know you like to play a particular part on Blonde; that of the anti-liberal who is not afraid to "say things as they are" and is known for playfully stirring up a bit of trouble. And of course debate and argument makes this forum a more interesting and richer environment. But IMO we all have a responsibility to increase the love and respect in the world, and try our best to avoid adding to the constant drip-drip of mistrust, hatred and prejudice. And often this means being a little careful with the way we say things.

I am glad your post has been challenged, even if you do not change your mind. I believe that we should all aim to challenge every single racist, sexist etc comment or joke we hear. Not by steaming in and insulting the person who made the comment, but by calmly and respectfully saying that we do not like this sort of comment. Every time we challenge such things we take a tiny, tiny step towards stopping the drips.
Logged
RED-DOG
International Lover World Wide Playboy
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 46911



View Profile WWW
« Reply #44 on: January 07, 2015, 05:48:45 PM »

Moving away from the poor wording of the opening post is it inappropriate for people to make any assumptions based on prior behaviour/current form?

In the 80s when I read that a bomb had gone off in the UK, I would be thinking in my head that it was the IRA before the perpetrator was known.  Would this be inappropriate and anti-catholic?  Should I have equally weighted the possibility of it being Japanese terrorists and kept a completely open mind until confirmation?

The first headline I saw today was "Terror attack in France" with no other details.  What percentage of people would think there is an islamic connection given the last couple of years?  Does that make them bad people?


This is just my opinion of course, but I think firstly there should be a distinction between what you think and what you actually say. What you privately suspect won't make life difficult for innocent people.

Secondly, thinking "I bet it was the IRA" is different than thinking " I bet it was the Catholics"


I fully take your point, but I hope you can you see mine.
Logged

The older I get, the better I was.
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 ... 26 Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.252 seconds with 20 queries.