GDT: Carolina Hurricanes will beat the Vancouver Canucks.

[Navin R Slavin]

It's not just the new owner "virtue signaling". It's a league-wide initiative.

Hockey is for Everyone

 

[Navin R Slavin]

As far as whether there are "problems to be solved"...

If one person says "we should be nice to gay people" and someone else says "I hate Homophobic Slurs", maaaaybe the problem isn't with the person saying "we should be nice to gay people".

 

[Surrounded By Ahos]

It’s so bizarre.

Hockey is for everyone is apparently a divisive statement.

 

[Negan4Coach]

It's not just the new owner "virtue signaling". It's a league-wide initiative.

Hockey is for Everyone

Aha. Whew. So, Betteman's insipidity, not Dundon. So I guess we won't have to endure this again and again.

As far as your 2nd comment, fair enough, but nobody would be saying "I hate Homophobic Slurs" or even thinking about them in the first place if this event hadn't taken place. All this sort of thing does is inspire the exact opposite behavior that it is trying to get rid of.

We have Donald Trump as president due in a large part to a backlash against the constant bombardment of this sort of propaganda.

 

[vorbis]

Aha. Whew. So, Betteman's insipidity, not Dundon. So I guess we won't have to endure this again and again.

As far as your 2nd comment, fair enough, but nobody would be saying "I hate ******s" or even thinking about them in the first place if this event hadn't taken place. All this sort of thing does is inspire the exact opposite behavior that it is trying to get rid of.

We have Donald Trump as president due in a large part to a backlash against the constant bombardment of this sort of propaganda.

ew. no. not even close.

 

[Navin R Slavin]

As far as your 2nd comment, fair enough, but nobody would be saying "I hate ******s" or even thinking about them in the first place if this event hadn't taken place. All this sort of thing does is inspire the exact opposite behavior that it is trying to get rid of.

Well, black people and gay people and women and other folks want equal treatment, and there's some evidence that they don't necessarily have it. So they're going to keep protesting until they do have it. Some people are annoyed by that, and other people call it progress.

We have Donald Trump as president due in a large part to a backlash against the constant bombardment of this sort of propaganda.

Maybe in part. There are a lot of reasons. But if the cost of saying "gay people are also people" over and over is to deal with angry people for a while, so be it. The kids of those angry people will feel differently.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

Aha. Whew. So, Betteman's insipidity, not Dundon. So I guess we won't have to endure this again and again.

As far as your 2nd comment, fair enough, but nobody would be saying "I hate ******s" or even thinking about them in the first place if this event hadn't taken place. All this sort of thing does is inspire the exact opposite behavior that it is trying to get rid of.

So you are saying that the only reason people are racists and bigots is because there are events, protests, etc.. for inclusion and equality in the first place? Do you seriously believe that?

 

[Negan4Coach]

Well, black people and gay people and women and other folks want equal treatment, and there's some evidence that they don't necessarily have it. So they're going to keep protesting until they do have it. Some people are annoyed by that, and other people call it progress.



Maybe in part. There are a lot of reasons. But if the cost of saying "gay people are also people" over and over is to deal with angry people for a while, so be it. The kids of those angry people will feel differently.

Well, it seems to me like we have a less tolerant society now and race relations are at an all time low. I thought they were pretty good in the 80's, at least comparatively speaking. To me that is evidence that the doctrine of "intersectionality", where every potentially marginalized group, no matter how small or outlandish (ie, Otherkin, Gender-f***, etc) is made into the equivalent of every other group's struggle, and presented at every possible opportunity, regardless of any actual "oppression", is backfiring.

If there was an actual problem with gays and others being oppressed in the NHL, then they might have a point, but acting like it is just to have opportunity to advance ones cause annoys alot of people and creates a negative response.

At this rate we'll have a 2nd Victorian Era shortly. There is already evidence that Generation Z is becoming very reactionary in their political leanings.

 

[Negan4Coach]

So you are saying that the only reason people are racists and bigots is because there are events, protests, etc.. for inclusion and equality in the first place? Do you seriously believe that?

No, that isn't what I'm saying at all. I'm saying that this sort of activism has zero positive impact on actual bigots, and tends to alienate folks who are either indifferent to or even mildly sympathetic to other groups.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

No, that isn't what I'm saying at all. I'm saying that this sort of activism has zero positive impact on actual bigots

True, but the events aren't aimed at those bigots.

, and tends to alienate folks who are either indifferent to or even mildly sympathetic to other groups.

Well, if someone gets alienated by an event like this enough to say "I hate *****s", then they are actual bigots, regardless of what prompted them to say it, so f*** them.

EDIT: Meant to type AREN'T (not Are) in the first sentence.

 

[Negan4Coach]

True, but the events aren't aimed at those bigots.



Well, if someone gets alienated by an event like this enough to say "I hate *****s", then they are actual bigots, regardless of what prompted them to say it, so **** them.

EDIT: Meant to type AREN'T (not Are) in the first sentence.

And this is precisely what alienates them. "Oh, you think this is dumb or you don't agree? You're a BIGOT".

So then you have people just throw up their hands at some point and go "Fine. I'm a bigot. Now what? Oh, I know. I'll vote for Trump". Because people don't like to be told what to think. It's basic psychology.

I mean if you go to the Hurricanes Facebook page, you have a gay activist on there threatening to call the employers of everybody who posts anything critical of the event. I'm sure that won over a bunch of people.

 

[Boom Boom Apathy]

And this is precisely what alienates them. "Oh, you think this is dumb or you don't agree? You're a BIGOT".

That's not what you said in your post, nor what I said. You said, the event causes them to say "I hate ******s". It has nothing to do with agreeing or disagreeing, it's intolerance and hate toward members of that group because of sexual beliefs or orientation. You may not like it, but that's the definition of a bigot. So yes, if somebody feels the need to say that, just because of an event like this, they are an actual bigot.

So then you have people just throw up their hands at some point and go "Fine. I'm a bigot. Now what? Oh, I know. I'll vote for Trump". Because people don't like to be told what to think. It's basic psychology.

That's a cop-out excuse for having bigoted views. "Nobody is going to tell me I can't hate ******s!"

 

[the halleJOKEL]

wow this conversation has actually been an incredibly enlightening window into how we ended up with trump as president

working the tech industry has completely insulated me from this backwards logic

 

[Novacane]

Yikes

 

[Navin R Slavin]

No, that isn't what I'm saying at all. I'm saying that this sort of activism has zero positive impact on actual bigots, and tends to alienate folks who are either indifferent to or even mildly sympathetic to other groups.

Historically speaking, you're incorrect.

It was incorrect when black people were saying "we'd like to not be slaves please." That tended to alienate indifferent folk -- until it didn't.

It was incorrect when women were saying "we'd like to vote please". That tended to alienate indifferent folk -- until it didn't.

It was incorrect when gay people were saying "we'd like to not be arrested please." That tended to alienate indifferent folk -- until it didn't.

It's incorrect now when black people are saying "we'd like to not be incarcerated at 5x the rate of white people for the same crimes committed please."

It's incorrect now when women are saying "we'd like not to be sexually assaulted please -- no, really, seriously, it's still happening and we're tired of it."

Because the point of all rights revolutions is not to convince bigots of anything -- that's pointless and will never happen. The point is to convince the indifferent people, over enough time, to not be indifferent any more. And it works. Historically, it works.

You may feel like it's "worse" now, but the only thing that's "worse" is that right now we're all forced to confront, again, the prejudices and resentments that have always been there. Maybe to you, it *feels* worse. Maybe you thought everything was cool! But when people tell you it's not, you can choose to believe them, or not. Either way, people will always fight for fairness as they see it. It's the nature of mankind.

If you're inclined to a good read, The Better Angels of Our Nature by Steven Pinker is pretty damned great.

 

[Navin R Slavin]

Also, here's a link to a review of Pinker's latest book, Enlightenment Now, which I am super psyched to read:

Can Science Justify Itself?

 

[Negan4Coach]

That's not what you said in your post, nor what I said. You said, the event causes them to say "I hate ******s". It has nothing to do with agreeing or disagreeing, it's intolerance and hate toward members of that group because of sexual beliefs or orientation. You may not like it, but that's the definition of a bigot. So yes, if somebody feels the need to say that, just because of an event like this, they are an actual bigot.



That's a cop-out excuse for having bigoted views. "Nobody is going to tell me I can't hate ******s!"

I meant that there is almost zero chance that the disgusting rednecks in section 201 would have been ranting about "F-ing Homophobic Slurs" had this event not occured. Sadly, Lurkerbee would have still likely have had to listen to their dissertation on truck nuts.

 

[Navin R Slavin]

I meant that there is almost zero chance that the disgusting rednecks in section 201 would have been ranting about "F-ing ******s" had this event not occured. Sadly, Lurkerbee would have still likely have had to listen to their dissertation on truck nuts.

This is fine. Because over time, more and more people will stand up and say "hey, man, that is not cool and there are kids here, cut it out or I'll find an usher." And that guy will get tired of looking like a dick in front of his friends -- or, more likely, his friends will get tired of being associated with a dick in public.

 

[Negan4Coach]

Historically speaking, you're incorrect.

It was incorrect when black people were saying "we'd like to not be slaves please." That tended to alienate indifferent folk -- until it didn't.

It was incorrect when women were saying "we'd like to vote please". That tended to alienate indifferent folk -- until it didn't.

It was incorrect when gay people were saying "we'd like to not be arrested please." That tended to alienate indifferent folk -- until it didn't.

It's incorrect now when black people are saying "we'd like to not be incarcerated at 5x the rate of white people for the same crimes committed please."

It's incorrect now when women are saying "we'd like not to be sexually assaulted please -- no, really, seriously, it's still happening and we're tired of it."

Because the point of all rights revolutions is not to convince bigots of anything -- that's pointless and will never happen. The point is to convince the indifferent people, over enough time, to not be indifferent any more. And it works. Historically, it works.

You may feel like it's "worse" now, but the only thing that's "worse" is that right now we're all forced to confront, again, the prejudices and resentments that have always been there. Maybe to you, it *feels* worse. Maybe you thought everything was cool! But when people tell you it's not, you can choose to believe them, or not. Either way, people will always fight for fairness as they see it. It's the nature of mankind.

If you're inclined to a good read, The Better Angels of Our Nature by Steven Pinker is pretty damned great.

I get it- I just don't equate weak sauce modern SJW tactics with those of say, the Civil Rights movement or the Sufferagettes. I disagree with MLK that history is an arc that bends towards justice, I see it as a pendulum that swings too and fro- and the harder you push in one direction the harder it comes back.

I've actually heard of that book- I believe I read some excerpts from it while subjecting myself to the depridations of Salon.com or HuffPo, which I do on a daily basis.

This is a good article, proposing that brain chemistry is behind your political affiliations. Which to me indicates that it is pointless to try to indoctrinate.

Conservative and liberal brains may be wired differently

 

[Negan4Coach]

This is fine. Because over time, more and more people will stand up and say "hey, man, that is not cool and there are kids here, cut it out or I'll find an usher." And that guy will get tired of looking like a dick in front of his friends -- or, more likely, his friends will get tired of being associated with a dick in public.

Quite frankly if I had heard those idiots carrying on like that I would have told them to shut their mouths. But then again I'm a large man who is no stranger to violence.

But hopefully you guys can see that there is a difference between people who think virtue signaling is dumb and even insulting (if their point was- hey, there are way to many "CIS" white heteros in the NHL- that shit has to change) and assholes who just straight up hate homosexuals.

 

[Navin R Slavin]

I get it- I just don't equate weak sauce modern SJW tactics with those of say, the Civil Rights movement or the Sufferagettes.

It's a lot cheaper to talk shit on Facebook than it is to stand up and say "hey man, that's uncool, be quiet." But they're not wholly unrelated.

I disagree with MLK that history is an arc that bends towards justice, I see it as a pendulum that swings too and fro- and the harder you push in one direction the harder it comes back.

So far, history has mostly disagreed with you -- though there are clearly periods of retrograde motion.

I've actually heard of that book- I believe I read some excerpts from it while subjecting myself to the depridations of Salon.com or HuffPo, which I do on a daily basis.

Read it. It's brilliant. It's one of the best summations of the history of human violence that has ever been put on paper.

This is a good article, proposing that brain chemistry is behind your political affiliations. Which to me indicates that it is pointless to try to indoctrinate.

Conservative and liberal brains may be wired differently

Pinker addresses this directly, while also noting that classical liberal thought -- rationality, individual freedoms, nonviolence, gentle commerce -- has continued to drag "conservative" values ever rightward, never noticeably in the short term, but inevitably in the long term. It's fascinating stuff.

 

[tarheelhockey]

We’re all on the same team here.

If you must, please continue this discussion on the Politics forum (not a different thread in the Canes forum).