Welcome to INTJ Forum

This is a community where INTJs can meet others with similar personalities and discuss a wide variety of both serious and casual topics. If you aren't an INTJ, you're welcome to join anyway if you would like to learn more about this personality type or participate in our discussions. Registration is free and will allow you to post messages, see hidden subforums, customize your account and use other features only available to our members.

poizon

The "Everyone is Equal" Lie

124 posts in this topic
3 hours ago, poizon said:

It's a discussion about the equality mindset and freedom of speech is just a vehicle in which people use to change the law to make things unequal (like you mentioned about people wanting to take a minority groups' rights away for example).

 

"And if we're all trash than let it be so. I can live with that. " What?

 

We could simply use the LGBT and neo-nazi example again. They both attempt to marginalize each other but don't seem to have enough power to have their way (thankfully).

No marginalized group is seeking to make things unequal for others. If it feels that way then refer to what I previously stated.

You're saying there are no equal or unequal people. I'm saying if that is so then we're all trash. Not literally, figuratively.

No marginalized group can oppress another without permission from the dominant society. Neo-Nazis beliefs are main stream. White supremacy is the foundation of this system. And even that overlaps with being a LGBT individual. What neo-nazis want is a more overt system of discrimination instead of the less sinister version we already have. So you're going to have to save your gratitude for another day.

Edited by Maiohmy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Maiohmy said:

No marginalized group is seeking to make things unequal for others. If it feels that way then refer to what I previously stated.

You're saying there are no equal or unequal people. I'm saying if that is so then we're all trash. Not literally, figuratively.

Ni marginalized group can oppress another without permission from the dominant society. Neo-Nazis beliefs are main stream. White supremacy is the foundation of this system. And even that overlaps with being a LGBT individual. What neo-nazis want is a more overt system of discrimination instead of the less sinister version we already have. So you're going to have to save your gratitude for another day.

You think that neo-nazi's aren't marginalized?? I'm going off of the official definition of marginalized here btw "treat (a person, group, or concept) as insignificant".

 

Well I got the impression that to you "unequal" mean't lower class and "equal" meant higher class. That's what my intuition got and that's why I said that.

In my position with my definitions of equal and non-equal. I simply believe that everyone is unequal.

 

I would say that any group of people can opress another. Maybe on different scales depending on the group but no group is 100% free from oppression. 

Definition I'm going by : "keep (someone) in subservience and hardship, especially by the unjust exercise of authority.".

 

I don't think that neo-nazis' beliefs are mainstream or accepted. I'd love to hear how you think that's true though.

I guess you could say a form of white supremacy was a part of the foundation of many western countries, but what does that have to do with modern times? Are you insinuating that our current society is ruled by the same concept?

Regardless of what a group wants, its voice will be heard and its people protected by the law period.

 

I don't know what you're trying to say with that whole gratitude comment :huh:

Edited by poizon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, poizon said:

You can talk bad about Nazis all you want but under the law they should be just as protected as you or me. Based on the quote above, I get the feeling you're the one who's selectively supporting rights for specific groups of people but not for anyone who you don't agree with. You can of course correct me if I'm wrong, I'm just making an observation based on what you've said (the bolded specifically).

"Under law and just as protected" is meaningless drivel since law clearly assigns additional protections to some members of society. And that's that.

You're just making the rest up. More groundless assumptions.

10 minutes ago, poizon said:

Well what about that talk about gender pronouns in Canada? Wasn't that a huge issue? Is it still? I'm not too up to date on it.

 

11 minutes ago, poizon said:

I've been talking nothing but free speech, equal rights, and the reality of "equality" and you think I'm the kind of person that would want "self-censorship by virtue of browbeating from FOS advocates."?

Remarkable then that you immediately jump to LGBT issues to make your  points - which are in themselves suspect.

Enough of the feigned universal nobility already. Now just answer the question you've dodged: What exactly do you want to say in the name of freedom of speech that is currently under threat?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, poizon said:

I don't think that neo-nazis' beliefs are mainstream or accepted. I'd love to hear how you think that's true though.

I guess you could say a form of white supremacy was a part of the foundation of many western countries, but what does that have to do with modern times? Are you insinuating that our current society is ruled by the same concept?

Regardless of what a group wants, its voice will be heard and its people protected by the law period.

Then you aren't too familiar with what neo-nazi want. They have always been mainstream.

White supremacy is anything that sees white people as better than everyone else. This exists in many forms and hasn't gone anywhere.

Idc if the law protects neo-nazis. My concern is the law adhering to their agenda. Which will not go to hurt their group or any white person--whether their with them or not. It will however change the lives of every "other" in this country and undoubtedly cause damage, harm and probably death if they could have it their way. 

The law can protect their rights. I sure as hell won't and will not care if anyone else doesn't either. If these are your principles, stand by them for sure. Neo-nazis are looking out for you too ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

7 minutes ago, Maiohmy said:

It will however change the lives of every "other" in this country and undoubtedly cause damage, harm and probably death if they could have it their way. 

The law can protect their rights.

I don't believe that in your country, the criminal provisions on murder draw any distinction based on the colour of the skin of either the victim or the charged person.  Nor that any such change is likely in the foreseeable future.

Are you getting wildly carried away by your own imagination?

Edited by Major Chord

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Major Chord said:

I don't believe that in your country, the criminal provisions on murder draw any distinction based on the colour of the skin of either the victim or the charged person.

That's patently misleading since sentencing is part of the  US criminal justice system. Comparative sentencing evidences significant discriminatory bias against women and minorities as relative to both victim and perpetrator of murder. White male supremacy is perpetuated from both angles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, rickster said:

"Under law and just as protected" is meaningless drivel since law clearly assigns additional protections to some members of society. And that's that.

You're just making the rest up. More groundless assumptions.

 

Remarkable then that you immediately jump to LGBT issues to make your  points - which are in themselves suspect.

Enough of the feigned universal nobility already. Now just answer the question you've dodged: What exactly do you want to say in the name of freedom of speech that is currently under threat?

Ah, ok. Glad to know you're not one of those people then. I must have totally misinterpreted your post in that other thread. Interesting how you chose to simply dismiss the claim rather than refute it though. It's not like I specifically quoted you on it or anything.

 

What's so remarkable about it? What do you mean by suspect in this context?

 

You mean like the 4 you dodged and purposefully cut out of my quote?

 

Personally, I don't have anything to say that would get me thrown in jail such as yelling fire in a crowded movie theater but there are other things that I could talk about that could get me into social trouble. AKA have social repercussions for having an unpopular opinion, but it's not against the law to disagree with me and I wouldn't be jailed for my words alone.

There's plenty of people who've been beaten for their beliefs whether they're PC or not. People ought to be protected from physical violence though.

 

30 minutes ago, Maiohmy said:

Then you aren't too familiar with what neo-nazi want. They have always been mainstream.

White supremacy is anything that sees white people as better than everyone else. This exists in many forms and hasn't gone anywhere.

Idc if the law protects neo-nazis. My concern is the law adhering to their agenda. Which will not go to hurt their group or any white person--whether their with them or not. It will however change the lives of every "other" in this country and undoubtedly cause damage, harm and probably death if they could have it their way. 

The law can protect their rights. I sure as hell won't and will not care if anyone else doesn't either. If these are your principles, stand by them for sure. Neo-nazis are looking out for you too ;)

Mainstream:

"the ideas, attitudes, or activities that are regarded as normal or conventional; the dominant trend in opinion, fashion, or the arts."

Still don't think the majority of Americans are walking around thinking "Hmmm, whites are superior to me" or "Hmmm, i'm white, therefore I'm superior".

 

Hmmm, define "better". American culture often tells us that Asian-Americans are the smartest. Is that Asian supremacy? African-Americans dominate a lot of the music industry and sports. Is that black supremacy? Tons of actors are Jewish. Is that Jewish supremacy? I mean, it's constantly shown to the American people every day through media that actors, athletes, musicians, etc. are often majorly one race giving the idea that perhaps those races are superior in that field. Would you say that's misleading and there should be more White-Americans in certain sports, or more White-Americans in the mainstream music industry?

 

Yes, I agree. The agendas of neo-nazis should not come true. They are completely against the constitution and everything America stands for. But I care that neo-nazis are protected by the law becuase if they aren't, then who's to say that other groups should not be protected as well?

 

Neo-nazi's rights are your rights too. You're saying something that one of them would probably say. "The law can protect their rights. I sure as hell won't and will not care if anyone else doesn't either." could be said by a racist about blacks for example. Does this mean that Asian, Mexican, White etc.-Americans shouldn't care about African-American issues?

If being a part of a group is the only reason to support a group, then that's some irresponsible **** for a citizen of a civilized democracy.

 

 

Now I'm possibly a Nazi according to you? Tell me you're joking.

Edited by poizon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, rickster said:

That's patently misleading since sentencing is part of the  US criminal justice system. Comparative sentencing evidences significant discriminatory bias against women and minorities as relative to both victim and perpetrator of murder. White male supremacy is perpetuated from both angles.

So you have a sentencing problem.

That is different from the suggestion that the law accords special rights to white males.

Rights are something that the person is entitled to. In your country, it may be that judges are observed to have a tendency to award lighter sentences to white males. It doesn't mean that white males are entitled by law to lighter sentences. That is, If you get a heavy sentence, you have no legal basis to appeal on the ground that the colour of your skin is white.

If there is sentencing bias, that is a serious issue but it shouldn't be confused with issues about rights.

Edited by Major Chord

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, rickster said:

That's patently misleading since sentencing is part of the  US criminal justice system. Comparative sentencing evidences significant discriminatory bias against women and minorities as relative to both victim and perpetrator of murder. White male supremacy is perpetuated from both angles.

Whoa whoa, did you just say that there's bias against women when it comes to murder cases? or did I read that wrong?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Problem with women is that they tend to kill a lot fewer people than men. Thus there are relatively few opportunities to mete out harsh sentences against women killers.

In the US, there are nine male murderers for every 1 female murderer. It's so unfair. Clearly, no equality here.

Edited by Major Chord

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, poizon said:

What's so remarkable about it? What do you mean by suspect in this context?

Because the so-called anti-PC movement seem to be nursing a butthurt about legalized same-sex marriage, and their rage has boiled over with advancements in transgendered rights and issues. That's how they red-flag themselves.

51 minutes ago, poizon said:

Personally, I don't have anything to say that would get me thrown in jail such as yelling fire in a crowded movie theater but there are other things that I could talk about that could get me into social trouble.

My reference is to the fact that law determines limitations on free speech. As I've said from the get-go: you can't legislate respect. Within the social contract those who air unpopular opinions will never be silenced but they must expect significant social push-back from many quarters. Many currently believe their "rights" are being impinged upon because they misread the tolerance limitations of social groups.

37 minutes ago, Major Chord said:

So you have a sentencing problem.

That is different from the suggestion that the law accords special rights to white males.

Correct. But I stated that the American CJS in practice accords favorable treatment to white males as both victims and perpetrators of murder. My point being that aspects of the CJS conflict with law creating favorable discriminatory outcomes for white males.

37 minutes ago, poizon said:

Whoa whoa, did you just say that there's bias against women when it comes to murder cases? or did I read that wrong?

You did read it wrong. Sentencing is hierarchical according to race and gender of both victim and perpetrator with regards to murder e.g. sentencing of a non-white woman (esp. lesbian) for the murder of a white man will generally be harsher than that meted out to a white woman.

But on a case by case basis it appears women in general  fare better than men in terms of both prosecution and sentencing when it comes to murder, and especially the death sentence. And the reasons for this bias have little to do with feminism...before anybody decides to get on that crazy train.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as violent crimes are concerned, it is very easy to see why women tend to get lighter sentences. The degree of violence involved is a relevant sentencing factor (the more violent, the heavier the sentence).

Basically women are a lot less violent than men. They commit far fewer violent crimes and even when they do, the degree of violence tends to be less.

Edited by Major Chord

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, rickster said:

Because the so-called anti-PC movement seem to be nursing a butthurt about legalized same-sex marriage, and their rage has boiled over with advancements in transgendered rights and issues. That's how they red-flag themselves.

My reference is to the fact that law determines limitations on free speech. As I've said from the get-go: you can't legislate respect. Within the social contract those who air unpopular opinions will never be silenced but they must expect significant social push-back from many quarters. Many currently believe their "rights" are being impinged upon because they misread the tolerance limitations of social groups.

 

You did read it wrong. Sentencing is hierarchical according to race and gender of both victim and perpetrator with regards to murder e.g. sentencing of a non-white woman (esp. lesbian) for the murder of a white man will generally be harsher than that meted out to a white woman.

But on a case by case basis it appears women in general  fare better than men in terms of both prosecution and sentencing when it comes to murder, and especially the death sentence. And the reasons for this bias have little to do with feminism...before anybody decides to get on that crazy train.

Can you be specific? How is this butthurt being manifested. I'm not purposefully playing ignorant here. I'm genuinely interested in what you mean specifically.

 

I agree, as long as noone's rights are actually infringed upon and the law is being followed.

 

I see, so non-white women get it harsher yet generally women get it easier despite the fact that you just said

2 hours ago, rickster said:

That's patently misleading since sentencing is part of the  US criminal justice system. Comparative sentencing evidences significant discriminatory bias against women and minorities as relative to both victim and perpetrator of murder. White male supremacy is perpetuated from both angles.

So what if a black man or a black woman murdered a white man. Who's sentence would be lighter?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, poizon said:

Can you be specific? How is this butthurt being manifested. I'm not purposefully playing ignorant here. I'm genuinely interested in what you mean specifically.

As a renewed campaign to undermine minority rights and women's rights, most obviously a vitriol-laden narrative about where transgendered persons should and should not piss and poop as well as how they're to be referred. That and marriage equality is deemed to evidence of society's "having gone too far" and that balance needs to be "restored". The attacks on women are far more insidious and determined, and go right to reproductive rights.

32 minutes ago, poizon said:

I see, so non-white women get it harsher yet generally women get it easier despite the fact that you just said

Different statistics serve different purposes. Discrimination exists within and without bias. And the point of nuanced discussions isn't to support confirmation bias.

32 minutes ago, poizon said:

So what if a black man or a black woman murdered a white man. Who's sentence would be lighter?

It needs to be clarified that with female murderers the progress of crime and punishment proceeds from likelihood of serious charges through jury verdict to capital punishment. At each stage the likelihood of progress to capital punishment is significantly eased compared to men. Murder itself is subject to degrees of seriousness, likelihood of re-offense etc.

As for your actual scenario, I'd be winging it if I made a call since I don't have the data, but would still refer to the above. As earlier however, the sexuality of the woman is a co-factor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

47 minutes ago, rickster said:

 

It needs to be clarified that with female murderers the progress of crime and punishment proceeds from likelihood of serious charges through jury verdict to capital punishment. At each stage the likelihood of progress to capital punishment is significantly eased compared to men. Murder itself is subject to degrees of seriousness, likelihood of re-offense etc.

As for your actual scenario, I'd be winging it if I made a call since I don't have the data, but would still refer to the above. As earlier however, the sexuality of the woman is a co-factor.

Yup, it's unfair. Women's lower levels of testosterone makes them less violent. Google phrases such as "America's deadliest gun shootings" or "America's most famous serial killers" - you'll find that women are just so grossly underrepresented.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Major Chord said:

Yup, it's unfair. Women's lower levels of testosterone makes them less violent. Google phrases such as "America's deadliest gun shootings" or "America's most famous serial killers" - you'll find that women are just so grossly underrepresented.

Well that's right.  More evidence that we still have a long way to go with getting the ladies up to gender parity.   :laugh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Major Chord said:

 

I don't believe that in your country, the criminal provisions on murder draw any distinction based on the colour of the skin of either the victim or the charged person.  Nor that any such change is likely in the foreseeable future.

Are you getting wildly carried away by your own imagination?

"If they had it their way." Not that would be allowed. Can you read?

5 hours ago, poizon said:

Still don't think the majority of Americans are walking around thinking "Hmmm, whites are superior to me" or "Hmmm, i'm white, therefore I'm superior".

You'd be surprised, lol. Lots of minorities think white people are better than them. What a sad lot they are.

5 hours ago, poizon said:

Hmmm, define "better". American culture often tells us that Asian-Americans are the smartest. Is that Asian supremacy? African-Americans dominate a lot of the music industry and sports. Is that black supremacy? Tons of actors are Jewish. Is that Jewish supremacy? I mean, it's constantly shown to the American people every day through media that actors, athletes, musicians, etc. are often majorly one race giving the idea that perhaps those races are superior in that field. Would you say that's misleading and there should be more White-Americans in certain sports, or more White-Americans in the mainstream music industry?

 

Yes, I agree. The agendas of neo-nazis should not come true. They are completely against the constitution and everything America stands for. But I care that neo-nazis are protected by the law becuase if they aren't, then who's to say that other groups should not be protected as well?

 

Neo-nazi's rights are your rights too. You're saying something that one of them would probably say. "The law can protect their rights. I sure as hell won't and will not care if anyone else doesn't either." could be said by a racist about blacks for example. Does this mean that Asian, Mexican, White etc.-Americans shouldn't care about African-American issues?

If being a part of a group is the only reason to support a group, then that's some irresponsible **** for a citizen of a civilized democracy.

 

 

Now I'm possibly a Nazi according to you? Tell me you're joking.

I'm not going to hold your hand through white supremacy 101. I think you're perfectly capable of understanding the concept.

Still don't care about neo-nazis/white nationalists/whitesupremacists. The government can protect their right to beat down on non-whites, feminists or LGBT people. I don't have to or care.

No, you're not Nazi. A Nazi would be direct and proud of their bigotry. Not that you're a bigot. Just stating what a neo-nazi would actually do. I think you think I'm attacking you so you're being defensive instead of reading. This is not an attack on you. I just don't care for neo-nazis. It is not in my best interests to care when they'd rather see me dead. Yes, believe it or not neo-nazis/white supremacists are not adverse to the idea of killing non-whites. Unless it's their waifus. Submit to white supremacy like they have and you can be their pet too (not literally you, I think I have to state that).

5 hours ago, rickster said:

That's patently misleading since sentencing is part of the  US criminal justice system. Comparative sentencing evidences significant discriminatory bias against women and minorities as relative to both victim and perpetrator of murder. White male supremacy is perpetuated from both angles.

Mhm

Edited by Maiohmy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Maiohmy said:

"If they had it their way." Not that would be allowed. Can you read?

You'd be surprised, lol. Lots of minorities think white people are better than them. What a sad lot they are.

Sure I can. Can you write? If you can, you must be living in mortal fear every day. After all, according to you, anybody who thinks that whites are superior is a neo-Nazi, and neo-Nazis basically want to kill you, and the law will defend their rights to kill you. Awwww, what a scary place you live in.

Edited by Major Chord

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Major Chord said:

Sure I can. Can you write? If you can, you must be living in mortal fear every day. After all, according to you, anybody who thinks that whites are superior is a neo-Nazi, and neo-Nazis basically want to kill you, and the law will defend their rights to kill you. Awwww, what a scary place you live in.

Mhm. Give or take grammer/spelling from typing on my phone. 

I never said thinking white people are better than you makes you a neo-nazi. Can you really not read?

So, you want me to change my mind or change my tone? Just trying to see your angle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Maiohmy said:

So, you want me to change my mind or change my tone? Just trying to see your angle.

I can see yours. It's always the same thing, from one thread to another, I guess Distance summed it up quite well earlier in this thread. 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing about the so-called minority groups is that their minority status provides them a justification for their status in life. If they are not successful, then they can blame the oppression of the majority group for it. Thus women who are not promoted will blame it on sexism. Blacks will blame racism. This is a psychological defence trick in that it avoids having to admit to oneself that one is not the ubermensch that one imagines oneself to be. It is due the oppression by the other.

Although I am a straight white guy, yet I am not a billionaire entrepreneur. I cannot blame that on anyone's oppression. I am just not gifted in that way. I could have been. I could have invented the next big thing. But I didn't know what to invent.

I reckon that the anger we see from minority groups comes from unmet expectations rather than a corrupt system. That they will always find something else to direct it towards. Someone to blame. That whatever the deficiencies in the system, it is basically pretty fair and that their lowly status is entirely down to their own shortcomings. 

Edited by thod

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Major Chord said:

I can see yours. It's always the same thing, from one thread to another, I guess Distance summed it up quite well earlier in this thread. 

This all comes down to if I need my views validated or not. I have no problem being vocal about what I think and why. Whether someone wants to accept them or not is not my problem. Disagree. That's all you have the power to do.

 
 
...... added to this post 27 minutes later:
 
45 minutes ago, thod said:

I reckon that the anger we see from minority groups comes from unmet expectations rather than a corrupt system. That they will always find something else to direct it towards. Someone to blame. That whatever the deficiencies in the system, it is basically pretty fair and that their lowly status is entirely down to their own shortcomings. 

The problem with your analysis is that majority of black people have achieved success and higher education (especially us uppity black women, right?). So you're talking about a minority within a minority demographic who can't seem to get it together generation after generation. The same with poor whites who can't succeed and blame being poor. But do pardon me. I know class barriers exist to people like you. But you just can't see race as a problem for people despite harboring the very attitudes that make black people speak out about what they face.

Surely you know you're not the first white guy to say these things. You won't be the last but just know, no one cares. You're not the first person I've had to tell this to but I think it has to be said for people like you to understand. You haven't changed anything. Black people are going to keep speaking out. All non-whites and marginalized groups will. I hope you keep complaining about it too. The internet is your soapbox. Just let it all out, thod. All these non-white Hispanics, Asians, natives and especially black people, just ruining your good time and hurting your brain speaking about what they face in life in a world that favors white people.

If there's one thing this forum has taught me is how to behave in face of racism. Black people have always and will continue to be resilient and I'm forever grateful for what that has taught me.

Still a fucking shame a thread about equality comes down to slandering black people not driven any of my post for once but my mere participation. Jfc. 

Edited by Maiohmy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely we aren't equal in that we are exactly the same, but the "everyone is equal" is an approximation that we really are mostly the same. We share most of the same DNA, like 99.5%, with one another. Compare this with chimps who approximately 98% with us.

 It is only when we start exaggerating our differences for what is often political power will you find the self anointed kings of superiority claiming that they are where they are because they are better than everyone else and deserve it.  Not a self-interested confirmation bias in the least! There is no objective criteria in which we have available to determine the degree of inequality. We can measure certain traits, but never the entire organism. Any such claims currently to unequalize humans from one another is surely pseudoscience and are false. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now