Daystrom Institute Technical Library
https://ns2.ditl.org/forum/
stitch626 wrote:It would be similar to someone grouping Jews and Muslims just because their religions originated on the other side of the world (from America, I mean).
You know, I really don't give a flying fuck whether people like to be grouped in with someone. I certainly don't give two shits if someone chose to put me in with bi or homosexuals.ChakatBlackstar wrote:
Well, it's kind of like how hetrosexuals don't like being grouped with bisexuals or homosexuals.
Well, actually I'm a Chakat so...Cpl Kendall wrote:The sooner people stop identifying themselves as a certain group the sooner we can all just be humans.
Fair enough.ChakatBlackstar wrote:
Well, actually I'm a Chakat so...
Sure, why not.stitch626 wrote:Can I claim to be a Tribble... with mechanical arm attachments?
Fine. Not liking the color blue is not a chemical reaction, neither is it a social construct.Duskofdead wrote:Your basis for saying they are the same was saying you just don't like onions. Onions on your tongue is a chemical reaction. Being prejudiced isn't, it's a social construct.
Granted. How one reacts to the situation is different. I am not going to protest against onion rights or try to deny that onions exist or start burning onion... patches? or walk up to someone and call them a gaddamn onion eater.sunnyside wrote:Well in the sense of the Bene Gesserit sure.Mikey wrote:I didn't believe Noam Chomsky back then, I don't believe in the same type of mechanism now - but I understand your point, Jim. The difference that I see is that IF there was some sort of biological a/o Jungian principle at work regarding bigotry, a true evolved human should be able and willing to consciously overcome it.
I'll accept that Jim might not be able to like onion.
And maybe I can accept that some people couldn't watch some guy sucking cock without wincing.
However that's just a gut reaction. I don't think Jim has a problem with say, onion farmers, and I doubt he has a bad reaction if he knows someone else has onion in their hamburger.
I think that's the difference.
I look DAMN good in a pink shirt. It works well with my skin tone.Mikey wrote:Hey, I got a manicure once.
That is a dominence thing, not a sexual behavior. There is no penetration and deninitely no stimulation.Teaos wrote:A homosexual dolphin or Bonobo will still knock up a female of their species so it has no ill effects. Basically they will stick it in any hole they can.
I know Lions quite often engage in homosexual acts.
Teaos, I'm just playing devil's advocate here to answer your question, because my forte is more ethnic groups and such rather than sexuality or gender studies. However what is offensive about lumping them together is that it's an indirect statement of "heterosexual is good, natural, the norm. Everything which is not heterosexual is a deviation and should be lumped together in one category." I know you personally don't mean that when you ask the question, but that assumption is built into the idea of lumping them together. It's the same reason polls no longer ask if you are "white" or "colored." Technically any non-white person is a "colored" person or "non-white person", but the reason you don't ask that is because it normalizes white and alienates everything else.Teaos wrote:How would you find it offensive to be grouped with homosexuals?
Something isnt insulting unless you find what your being grouped with insulting.
You're a presumably straight white guy. So yes, technically, you are correct that putting groupage behind us would be great. In practice, though, not walking around "being" a certain race is a luxury for you, becuase you are white, the normalized group in our cultures (both US and Canada). If you were black or Asian or any visible minority really, the ability to just "leave race behind when you walk out the door" is not up to you. It's up to what happens that day and how people react to you.Cpl Kendall wrote:You know, I really don't give a flying **** whether people like to be grouped in with someone. I certainly don't give two shits if someone chose to put me in with bi or homosexuals.ChakatBlackstar wrote:
Well, it's kind of like how hetrosexuals don't like being grouped with bisexuals or homosexuals.
The sooner people stop identifying themselves as a certain group the sooner we can all just be humans.
No shit. I believe I've been clear that I don't care who you are, what you are or who you like to fuck. You are a human and that's what I see when I look. Yes I am white and straight so I don't recieve the racism that minorities do. I am however a Veteran in a country where soldiers are scum and an athiest in a town where bible humping is the norm.Duskofdead wrote:
You're a presumably straight white guy. So yes, technically, you are correct that putting groupage behind us would be great. In practice, though, not walking around "being" a certain race is a luxury for you, becuase you are white, the normalized group in our cultures (both US and Canada). If you were black or Asian or any visible minority really, the ability to just "leave race behind when you walk out the door" is not up to you. It's up to what happens that day and how people react to you.