(February 11, 2017 at 6:24 pm)SteelCurtain Wrote:

(February 11, 2017 at 6:03 pm)CapnAwesome Wrote: Not sure who you mean by 'you lot.' I don't think I fit very well in any sort of political group. Regardless of mine or anybody else's political opinions, the left has been the one who has been promoting protecting everybodies feelings for the last decade and change. I find it funny that now nazis are complaining about hurt feelings. Fuck your feelings. Fuck people for being nazis. The teacher is 100% correct. She's under no obligation to write a letter of recommendation for a nazi or a communist or anyone else. Since when are we not allowed to be prejudiced against bad ideas?

This is what the left has been saying all along, though. It's not that you "can't hurt anyone's feelings," it's that if you do say stupid shit, you can expect a response from people. If you put a swastika up or dox a transexual student at a rally, you can bet people are going to have a vehement response to that. You can't have it both ways. Where people get it fucked up is that they translate "I won't stand for this quietly" to "you can't say those things." No, you can say them. I'm just going to tell you why you're wrong.

We agree that the teacher is 100% correct in not wanting to be associated or place her reputation on the line for a kid that thinks it's okay to troll people with swastikas. Maybe it's just immaturity, maybe he's a real neo-nazi, maybe he actually doesn't know what he's doing. Fine. But I still am not required to be associated with it.

The left says you can't hurt muslim's feelings, or you are an islamophobe. I mean, that's not right wing people who are saying that. Now nazis have just taken the same idea and are applying it to them. I feel like things like trigger warnings and safe spaces have their root in the same place. The left just wants to apply the idea just to minorities, but the idea is the same: That hurtings people's feelings is worth an over the top response. In this case suspending a teacher. Hardly the first teacher to be suspended for spurious reasons by an overly-politically correct society.

 What I am saying is that now other people have taken the same idea (that hurting someone's feelings is some major thing) apparently even to apply to nazis. It's the exact same idea, just applied to a different group of people. That's what I mean by the left is now laying in the bed they made. What sort of world have we made when you can't even offend a nazi?

(February 11, 2017 at 6:51 pm)CapnAwesome Wrote: What sort of world have we made when you can't even offend a nazi?

We haven't made that world. We have made the world we the Nazi is accountable for his words/actions just like everyone else, and the right or the anti-SJW/PC movement want to frame it like safe spaces and trigger warnings mean more than they do, or that people who take the idea and make a farce out of it are representative of what the idea means in the first place.

If you call someone a nigger on Twitter or make ape memes about a black actress, you are a racist at the very least, and you are often publicly held accountable for your idiocy. Your ideas aren't 'shut down' or 'censored' because people tell you to fuck off. You can continue tweeting until Twitter decides that you represent a threat to their ability to make money or you have violated their terms of use, or you can continue yelling in the streets until some idiot punches you.

The "PC World" people cry so much about is literally the exact same thing they are accusing the left of doing. They don't want to hear opposition, so they call people who protest and speak out against them "anti-free speech" and "snowflakes" and "triggered SJWs," then go use the exact same tactics themselves.

(February 11, 2017 at 7:02 pm)SteelCurtain Wrote:

(February 11, 2017 at 6:51 pm)CapnAwesome Wrote: What sort of world have we made when you can't even offend a nazi?

We haven't made that world. We have made the world we the Nazi is accountable for his words/actions just like everyone else, and the right or the anti-SJW/PC movement want to frame it like safe spaces and trigger warnings mean more than they do, or that people who take the idea and make a farce out of it are representative of what the idea means in the first place.

If you call someone a nigger on Twitter or make ape memes about a black actress, you are a racist at the very least, and you are often publicly held accountable for your idiocy. Your ideas aren't 'shut down' or 'censored' because people tell you to fuck off. You can continue tweeting until Twitter decides that you represent a threat to their ability to make money or you have violated their terms of use, or you can continue yelling in the streets until some idiot punches you.

The "PC World" people cry so much about is literally the exact same thing they are accusing the left of doing. They don't want to hear opposition, so they call people who protest and speak out against them "anti-free speech" and "snowflakes" and "triggered SJWs," then go use the exact same tactics themselves.

Yeah, they are using that exact same tactics. That's exactly what I said in my first post, which you objected to even though now it appears you agree with me.

I take a larger view of these things, which is that the very idea that being offended isn't this terrible terrible thing that people make it out to be. That's regardless of whether or not you are right wing or left wing. However the idea of a hyper-offended society, which this case is a symptom of, definitely originates with the left wing, I started seeing it personally in the early 2000s when applying to Islam. Left wing people saying that you can't offend Muslims, as though offending someone is the same as assaulting them. Now right wing people has seen the usefulness of it (it allows you to criticize others and shield yourself from criticism) and are applying it to themselves. That's what I meant by the left is laying in the bed they made for themselves.

For some people everything falls into a left/right dichotomy. That it's fair for left wingers to use and not for the right. For me I take a broader view of the whole thing. We need to be a less politically correct society across the board. People getting their feelings hurt is not a cause to actually have an affect on someone's life or job. If a teacher wants to not endorse someone for being a nazi (or a radical muslim) then that's fine. I bet if this case were about a teacher withdrawing support for someone for being a Muslim who had all the same beliefs as that nazi (or swastika drawer, since who knows.) Then left wing people would be throwing a fit.

I just don't think that's the case. If this person would have been Islamic, and written a screed about jihad, no---the left would not be throwing a fit. They would be throwing a fit if it were a Muslim kid and he wrote "Inshallah" on his arm or something, and she rescinded her recommendation based on that.

My point in all this is that it's not a symptom of anything new in human culture. It's a result of the ability for any person to reach the entire world right immediately, and the entire world having the ability to respond, and groups coopting responses. So the reactions are more widespread, and mob mentality continues to rule. This isn't going to change. To expect any differently is ludicrous. It is human nature. And the better response is to not treat social media (espcially Twitter) like no one can hear you or respond.

I don't agree with all (or most) of the reactions that people have, but to claim that they are not valid is the same problem you are talking about. People shouldn't react the way you don't want them to because it upsets you.

Isn't this why we have deadly weapons?