What type of Discrimination do YOU think is ok?

[AMT]

I've been reading several threads on the board, and it seems that several members feel certain types of discrimination are ok. (i.e. sexist jokes, forcing people of a certain BMI to take extra classes, prejudice against religion, etc.)

I was curious as to what types of groups you feel its ok to discriminate against, and the reasons for it.

If you feel that stating your prejudical tendancies could get you unduly yelled at, please pm me. I promise to post your comments without stating your name in the interest of anonymity.

[Spoonist]

I think that you need to make some sort of list to pick from otherwise there are too many to mention.

I mean life is full of discrimination depending on how you define it and there are plenty of positive discrimination to boot.
Examples:
I'm for discrimination of "regular" people so that special needs people can have an easier life. (Like handicap parking spaces).
I'm for age discrimination so that we can protect children until they can be safely mature. (Like alcohol age limits).
I'm for discrimination of the unqualified so that only trained people can do the task. (Like electricians).
etc
etc
etc

[AMT]

I don't want to make a list. I want to have all options open for anyone to mention.

Making a list limits the discussion I want to engender.

[bobalot]

Did you even read the sexist joke thread? About two people think it's okay.

As for discrimination, anything you have a personal choice over that has a quantifiable negative impact on yourself or others is fair game.

[AMT]

Did you even read the sexist joke thread? About two people think it's okay.

Yes? And? I don't care about how many subscribe to a belief. I want to see why people think the way they do about certain things.

As for discrimination, anything you have a personal choice over that has a quantifiable negative impact on yourself or others is fair game.

Then feel free to name some, with the reasons why you feel that way.

[Covenant]

Are you talking about bigotry instead of a prejudice or a discriminatory method?

Discriminating between people with a dangerous BMI and a healthy BMI when deciding who should be pressured into a Fitness course isn't bigoted, even if it is a bit crude. I wouldn't approve of that, but I don't feel offended by it. Discriminating between those groups when deciding who gets an A in math, or who you tell nasty jokes about, or who you think is the least intelligent, that's bigoted. If it's not bigotry, and the discriminatory method is rational, then it's really just a sorting algorithm. The term 'discrimination' is a loaded term, but it's what you call when you say "Okay, ladies, you can't use the same bathrooms as men. We all know you want to use the urinals, but we're sorry, you can't. And men, same goes for you. Who knows what goes on in there, but you'll never know." Thusly we've created a discriminatory system. Separate but equal perhaps? Evil!

So some things make sense. Different bathrooms make sense, don't they? Now, I don't want people to discriminate "against" any group, but I also don't want people who fall within similar categorizations to start seeing themselves as 'groups' in the first place, and add to the list of tribal affiliations used to spread nastiness.

Similarly, some people who say that highly religious people (or just those kinds of highly religious people) are people they don't like might be bigoted jerks, or they might be unhappy that those people are trying to take away their rights or throw them in prison or set fire to crosses on their lawn. Using that as a justification to slash their tires, however, is a bit out of line.

[Aaron]

I think less of healthy folks who opted not to serve in the military, I'm not sure whether that fits under bigotry, discrimination or prejudice. I am however aware of it and try not to let it effect my judgment, hell I actually feel really bad about it.

[Samuel]

You missed the boards motto- we openly discriminate against stupid people. It is okay to discriminate against people based on ability when determining issues of competence.

I think less of healthy folks who opted not to serve in the military, I'm not sure whether that fits under bigotry, discrimination or prejudice. I am however aware of it and try not to let it effect my judgment, hell I actually feel really bad about it.

I think that would be prejudice. Do you dislike that because you feel that you have to make up for that, because it seems spineless, etc?

[Aaron]

I think that would be prejudice. Do you dislike that because you feel that you have to make up for that, because it seems spineless, etc?

Those are two of the reasons. Others are:

Would likely help alleviate the disgust we're held in by the general public, helps expose people to the wider world, instills discipline, serves as a great melting pot, etc.

[Stark]

Discrimination isn't always wrong. Discimrinating between rational and irrational, healthy and unhealthy, is a good thing. Prejudice and UNFAIR discrimination is a problem, as Covenant says.

As an example, men and women are different. They are not the same. Most of the time there's no functional difference and no reason for sexism, but in some situations one is actually preferred. OH NO I'M SEXIST!

[AMT]

Again, let me clarify;

I am not wishing to discuss whether any one specific discriminatory belief is either "right" or "wrong". I only wish to know what specific board members discriminate against and the reasons why they make that choice the way they do.

If someone else wishes to make a topic regarding the morality of Discrimination in general, please feel free.

[Sela]

Then, quite frankly sir, you seem to be a bit dumb. Covenant explained *why* your question was stupid, but I can see that you need a more direct blow. I'm happy to deliver it:

I discriminate against *EVERYTHING*. It's why I'm such a successful (knock on wood) human being! I've learned to take a set of circumstances and use those criterion to form judgmenets (ie: critical thinking . . .DISCRIMINATING). So you want to know what specifically I discriminate against?

I discriminate colors, for starters; I make sure to differentiate red from blue from green from yellow, etc. etc. This color-differentiation has helped me to better appreciate almost everything in life ranging form art to more practical things like danger signs on the road. I discriminate sounds - qutie regularly - how else would I be able to understand spoken word? Or for that matter follow a single conversation from out of a jumble? Even as I'm typing this I'm discriminating between the sounds of conversation, the hum of the CPU fan, and then sound of my fingers on the keyboard. I discriminate against athletic vs. non-athletic people. Mercifully, you can usually tell at a glance when someone is sufficiently unhealthy that they couldn't possibly outrun you. Though this type of information is usually not so useful it's such an easy fact to file away in the ole' nogging that it's worth doing. I discriminate between professionals and amateurs. Can you imagine how poor my next physical would be if I didn't? If I went to my roommate and asked him to perform an ophthalmoscopic examination to check for choroidals - and then treated it like I'd gone to an actual ophthalmologist?!

I discriminate good and bad smells, and the smell of food when I'm hungry. This trait has served my appetite well, and no doubt for my evolutionary ancestors it was all the more useful.

Let's go one step further - I discriminate between YOU and other board members' names. If I couldn't do that I couldn't tell your comments apart from Starks and Covenant's! I discriminate between the intelligent and the un-intelligent. Granted this is far harder to do as 'intelligence' is usually not readily apparent. But when someone has had the answer to their question slammed in their face repeatedly and *STILL* manages to epically miss the point like you seem to be doing right now, it doesn't take a whole team of genius to realize that they need to be discriminated against. We need to put them in a separate category of "people who require extra explanation on this subject" and then deliver said explanation.


There's nothing I won't discriminate between. Generalizing? Now that's another story - and I still feel that's acceptable. Prejudice/Bigotry? I think I can honestly say that regardless of what I actually have a prejudice or bigotry on, there's *NOTHING* that I feel one should be prejudiced or bigoted about. But you seem to insist on trying to flanderize (TVtropes word, look it up) "discrimination" into some sort of all-encompassing cloud of evil and quite frankly I think you need to cut that out. . . now. . . before you find yourself "discriminated" off the board.

[Teebs]

My instinct would be to say that I'm ok discriminating over relevant characteristics to the matter at hand.

To use the example of the very obese, I'm ok with discrimination against them in flying with higher prices or restrictions on when they can fly and where they can sit because they can be a safety hazard due to their size and do take up more space and cost the airline more in fuel. In this case their obesity is a relevant characteristic. However, I'm not ok with them being discriminated against for jobs just because of their weight because it doesn't affect their ability to do the job (obviously this makes assumptions about the nature of the job and just how overweight they are).

So some discrimination on some characteristics can be ok in some circumstances and wrong in others.

[AMT]

Then, quite frankly sir, you seem to be a bit dumb. Covenant explained *why* your question was stupid, but I can see that you need a more direct blow. I'm happy to deliver it:

I discriminate against *EVERYTHING*. It's why I'm such a successful (knock on wood) human being! I've learned to take a set of circumstances and use those criterion to form judgmenets (ie: critical thinking . . .DISCRIMINATING). So you want to know what specifically I discriminate against?

I discriminate colors, for starters; I make sure to differentiate red from blue from green from yellow, etc. etc. This color-differentiation has helped me to better appreciate almost everything in life ranging form art to more practical things like danger signs on the road. I discriminate sounds - qutie regularly - how else would I be able to understand spoken word? Or for that matter follow a single conversation from out of a jumble? Even as I'm typing this I'm discriminating between the sounds of conversation, the hum of the CPU fan, and then sound of my fingers on the keyboard. I discriminate against athletic vs. non-athletic people. Mercifully, you can usually tell at a glance when someone is sufficiently unhealthy that they couldn't possibly outrun you. Though this type of information is usually not so useful it's such an easy fact to file away in the ole' nogging that it's worth doing. I discriminate between professionals and amateurs. Can you imagine how poor my next physical would be if I didn't? If I went to my roommate and asked him to perform an ophthalmoscopic examination to check for choroidals - and then treated it like I'd gone to an actual ophthalmologist?!

I discriminate good and bad smells, and the smell of food when I'm hungry. This trait has served my appetite well, and no doubt for my evolutionary ancestors it was all the more useful.

Let's go one step further - I discriminate between YOU and other board members' names. If I couldn't do that I couldn't tell your comments apart from Starks and Covenant's! I discriminate between the intelligent and the un-intelligent. Granted this is far harder to do as 'intelligence' is usually not readily apparent. But when someone has had the answer to their question slammed in their face repeatedly and *STILL* manages to epically miss the point like you seem to be doing right now, it doesn't take a whole team of genius to realize that they need to be discriminated against. We need to put them in a separate category of "people who require extra explanation on this subject" and then deliver said explanation.


There's nothing I won't discriminate between. Generalizing? Now that's another story - and I still feel that's acceptable. Prejudice/Bigotry? I think I can honestly say that regardless of what I actually have a prejudice or bigotry on, there's *NOTHING* that I feel one should be prejudiced or bigoted about. But you seem to insist on trying to flanderize (TVtropes word, look it up) "discrimination" into some sort of all-encompassing cloud of evil and quite frankly I think you need to cut that out. . . now. . . before you find yourself "discriminated" off the board.

So in other words you ignore the examples I placed in the OP because you're too busy patting yourself on the back for being "clever", and thus do not wish to participate. Got it!

That, or you lack basic inference based on material examples provided.

[salm]

I think it´s ok to discriminate against people who belong to groups which are known to have very bad moral values.
Examples for such groups are nazis, fascist, some types of religous people, nationalists, terrorists and so on.

[Havok]

I discriminate against smokers. Their nasty habit infringes on my fresh air and they fucking stink.
I discriminate against people that I find to be devoutly religious. I no longer value their opinions nor trust them to make what I feel to be correct or rational decisions.
I discriminate against blonds. I have found, they give the worst blowjobs and they are just dumber, what can I say.

[Covenant]

I think you're still leaving it a bit vague. I'll try to be concise but I'm still unsure. Do you mean "What groups do you think it's okay to talk shit about," or "What groups do you think it's okay to deny services/some rights/some privacy provisions to" or just something as basic as "What groups do you recognize as being very different from you?" And are you making a distinction between action and thought?

Or is it everything? I'm just confused, because I worry that the intent is to paint the board--or broad members of the board--as intolerant or actively bigoted. I know that's really neither here nor there, but I think it colors the responses you're going to get. I also think that it's still important to remember that discrimination is still an ethics-neutral position until intent or justification is examined.

For example, I certainly make a mental note when someone identifies themselves, intentionally or unintentionally, as a creationist or a racist or as a baker--all for different reasons. I like bakers, and I'd like to talk about food. I dislike racists, and I don't want to associate with people like that all. I dislike creationists, but that's not the sort of thing that makes them entirely distasteful as a person, I'll just try to avoid that subject entirely unless they try to talk about it--and if their self-identification of religion then leads to defamatory speech about gays or scientists or other religions, I'll consider speaking up the same as I would here, though a little more polite.

Now, if you ask me about the way I feel, rather than how I act, that's a whole different can of worms. Do I think it's great for me to be so angry and upset at religious people simply because they're religious? No, but given my experience, I don't think my feelings are wrong or evil. I don't like how things make me feel, but as a person with a certain brand of rational thinking, I feel certain ways about certain groups. My feelings, based on my experiences, aren't universal and they're generally not actionable. So that's discriminatory thought but not discriminatory action, except when it is, in which case I'm usually trying not to make those actions prejudicial?

In a broad sense, it gets back to the "You're intolerant of intolerant people!" idiocy that might confuse a highschooler but nobody else. Why would someone think it's okay to be intolerant, IE discriminatory affected via impatience and dislike, of someone whose only reason for targetting is their own intolerance to someone else? Because while there's no rational reason to affect peer pressure on blacks to go away, or on scientists to stop discussing science... there IS a rational reason to affect peer pressure on people whose intolerances aim to hurt others or inflict damage on the public indirectly. If you want to go to Church because it makes you happy, and your Church is merely a place you go--like a movie theater or a book club--to discuss the human experience and our purposes in life... then that's fine, I may think it's silly, but I frankly think organized sporting events are silly too, just not silly enough to dislike people for.

When your Churches, or book clubs, or theaters, start including media or activities that propose gay people should be denied rights, or that a campaign of misinformation about medicine be organized, or any of the other more controversial things they say... let alone the time, energy, and potentially traumatic indoctrination they sometimes visit on children.... all this kind of stuff, that's to the point where there may be a question of it's cost to the public health of a nation or a planet. And we're not talking about 'public health' in the same sense that a nation of the obese is less healthy (and more expensive) than one of athletic non-drinking smoke-free non-drug using people. I will agree that there's a lot of punitive discrimination that goes hand-in-hand with rational stuff. Making just the fat kids go to the BMI class is partially punitive, only because a health-and-fitness class should be taken by everyone. How many people go through college alright and then fat-the-fuck-up outside of it? In any case, I wanted this to be concise, but these are complex issues for anyone who wants to be accepting of everyone--but finds a lot of people who have unacceptable behavior.

Still, actions and thoughts are not equal.

[Surlethe]

Poor fucking judgment. Split the f-word tangent to the HoS.

Edit: Goddammit, this was a necro. I totally missed that. Split the rest of the offending posts to HoS and locked. If you want to add some thoughts, make a new thread and link back to this one. (And make sure that your thoughts are worth adding.)