Interesting that people bring up "gays" when I have been commenting on "trans" individuals.
Usually the two go hand in hand, that's why. I'm sure you've NEVER been anti-gay though...
Interesting that people bring up "gays" when I have been commenting on "trans" individuals.
OK, we're good.Full disclosure - i read your post wrong and read 'equality' for inequality, so that's my bad. My reply was not correct as a result.
However - having understood what you were saying correctly now, that is not how you guarantee inequality of outcome. it's how you guarantee inequality of opportunity. It's literally right n your own statement.
And for those within those classes the outcome was actually pretty equal - they were poor with no power. Equality achieved!
So no - that's not how they ensured inequality of outcome. They ensured inequality of opportunity. What the right says is that we should have equality of opportunity.
What the left is saying is that somehow if we CONTINUE to deny equality of opportunity we MIGHT SOMEHOW GET to equality of outcome. This is the theory that somehow two wrongs do make a right.
OK, we're good.
I agree with your final statement. Let me be abundantly clear. . . I favor NO sort of "compensatory" anything, for four reasons. First, as you say two wrongs don't make a right, and the persons who were wronged are beyond caring. Second, the people in disadvantaged groups best able and most likely to take advantage of compensatory bennies are those least likely to need them. I don't imagine Will Smith's kids are gonna need a special program to get into USC, because they are already full paid-up members of that most highly compensated minority, the My Mom And Dad Are Rich And Famous People, indigenous to Lalaland. Third, "That which we achieve to cheaply we esteem too lightly." --Thomas Paine. I went to a very good law school, and I felt like those who got in on "programs" always suffered from it. Lastly, the hostility and division it generates is a social harm, despite the fact that I have rarely if ever come across a legitimate case of "reverse discrimination." The hostility and division are real regardless of how bogus the cause.
In sum, my position is one of "moral suasion." I want people to be aware that there are those whose hill was steeper and rockier because of the groups they were born into. Just to be aware of it, and take it into account. I specifically disapprove of any "compensatory" government programs. Hell, in the U.S. I want the reservations broken up and the Nations de-"recognized." Full legal equality for Natives, and full responsibility as well. If went want "our land" back, there are two ways to go about it. We can get educated, get rich, and buy it back. Or we can gather in counties where we'll be a strong majority and make Native-friendly laws (within the confines of overarching Federal and State law). If we really wanna go big, we can launch a program to all move to the lowest-population state (Wyoming, I believe, of the Lower 48) and make it Native-majority.
So, yeah, I will continue to piss and moan about racism, sexism, etc., and their ongoing effects. But I specifically oppose any governmental action other than making discrimination a crime, where it is now just a civil cause of action. As far as speech and the press go, I fully support the right of any private person or organization to say whatever it wants, and to deny its platform to whomever it wants or whatever viewpoints it chooses, just as I support the right of a hardware store not to sell groceries.
I think they mean to say "unceded," but yeah.
Though I would point out that the fact that the Hundred Acre Wood grabbed from the Oompa Loompas by the Wahoos has no bearing on a title dispute between the Wahoos and the Euros.
Sadly my therapist charges 1010 if i come to him with cbc traumaYou can get rich listening toCBC news.
Virtue signalling and pandering .In NB (not sure rest of Canada but I think some places do this), there is a preface now to mention that "This land was unseeded by X tribe..." "We are on X tribe/people's land" and... TBH, as much as I do support Native Canadians, I'm not sure this should be a thing Government feels it has to do. Because, legitimately, EVERY human on the planet - or their ancestors - have conquered other peoples over history. It's rare that any land taken would be 'seeded' to the victors of conflict/conquering.
I mean, I *get* why it's done, I just don't think it helps anyone to make it a thing.
How? The the chemicals in plastic bags and pesticide that turn children into adult fruitcakes are gone or going.
Put plainly: atrazine shrinks testicles, reduces sperm count, and can even make males grow ovaries.Nov 29, 2011
https://www.nrdc.org › experts › ne...
New study confirms atrazine's effects across a range of species ... - NRDC
Threat: Less Boy, More Girl
A common chemical in plastic may make little boys behave a bit more like little girls.
Put plainly: atrazine shrinks testicles, reduces sperm count, and can even make males grow ovaries.Nov 29, 2011
https://www.nrdc.org › experts › ne...
New study confirms atrazine's effects across a range of species ... - NRDC
You are sure ? Good .I'm sure the only thing Trump cares about is if they're good looking young girls/women that he can grab by the pussy.
Here's the thing - generally speaking that's far less true than is usually portrayed. Or i'll rephrase that - it is less segregated.I want people to be aware that there are those whose hill was steeper and rockier because of the groups they were born into.
OK, racism isn't a problem in the U.S. or Canada. Just the same as being fat or dyslexic or autistic. Good to know.So when i hear people say that "blacks" or some group have a 'steeper hill', my first reaction is to think 'fuck off. Just about everyone has a steeper hill, you just don't give a shit unless it's race based".
Flat earthers are a global phenomenon.OK, racism isn't a problem in the U.S. or Canada. Just the same as being fat or dyslexic or autistic. Good to know.
Did he say that ?OK, racism isn't a problem in the U.S. or Canada. Just the same as being fat or dyslexic or autistic. Good to know.
ahhh there you go again - you can't argue the point so you lie about what i'm saying. You realize that's basically an admission you're wrong but haven't the balls to deal with it.OK, racism isn't a problem in the U.S. or Canada. Just the same as being fat or dyslexic or autistic. Good to know.