All lives matter?

[PickelledEggs]

It's really not though, no more than gays who tell me I have no right to be involved in their struggle ( and I have met just as many online as I have BLM who sat that). That doesn't mean the LGBT movement is non- inclusive for heterosexuals, it just means there are segments that feel so marginalized they don't want outsiders to help.

Edit: same with feminists, I have met one or two that feel that way. Otherwise every woman I have known is either indifferent that you are a decent human being, or finds it cool for a guy to identify with and support the movement.

I don't see any double standards, so I wouldn't say that, no.

So if a BLM community member calls for dead cops, it's not a double standard to their "lives matter" part of their "black lives matter" slogan? I just want to make sure if this is or isn't what you're saying. Because to me, as someone that understands and even agrees with some of the points of the BLM movement, it seems a little hypocritical to say "black lives matter" followed up with a variation of "kill the cop".

I posted this in a different thread, but: http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/Eric-Garner-Manhattan-Dead-Cops-Video-Millions-March-Protest-285805731.html

If ^ that and things like that (riots, general hostility, etc) is not the representation of BLM, which I would say it isn't, they need to be more clear that they are distancing themselves from those violent bad apples. Because when there bad apples and the movement doesn't do what it can to distance it from them, the movement becomes what the bad apples are. This is already true with BLM and Feminsim. While I agree that black lives matter too and need to be given a more equal playing field, the movement has quickly become toxic because of these bad apples that the BLM community does not distance themselves from. Same thing with Feminism. While I agree that women should be treated with a more equal playing field, the toxic front-runners have morphed the movement in to a shit show. Both have become a completely different and very hostile moment from their more virtuous beginnings.

The LGBT community, as far as I'm aware, doesn't call for dead priests and doesn't start violent riots. It's pretty hard to compare those two for that reason.

[drunkenshoe]

I get BLM and I consider their cause righteous and their methods typical of other similar social movements. It's never perfect. For me though, while violence is to be expected, it isn't okay. I'm not ever going to give violence a pass simply because it is human nature. I also believe just because a group is oppressed doesn't mean their actions can't be criticized. To avoid doing so is patronizing.

Agreed. It's just the common lack of perspective feels like a thorn in my thumb at most times. I really don't look at this from just one angle. [For example, I have a close friend couple living in South Africa and this issue is very different there from their perspective. (White couple)]

I feel like because of my comment about empathy and my problem with identity politics people incorrectly think I've adopted others positions that I haven't.

I get that. It happens to me a lot here.

You are correct when you said what I'm talking about is an ideal, but I often operate from a place of idealism, a world of possibilities. I see the world in terms of ideas and no idea is beyond questioning, even if it hurts people's feelings, which I bend over backwards to avoid doing most of the time. I value empathy, I see the value of identity politics but I become frustrated when people only operate from that vantage point. I sincerely believe there is a problem in some areas of society, on the Left and Right, with groupthink, where you follow the narrative or you will be punished. That is my real beef.

This is what I have been trying to point out in this forum on many various topics. But unfortunately, the really big problem you describe above is a subject of a field which most Western people seem to believe is a subject of a made up field for political purposes.

What sparked my ire reading pr's posts about cultural marxism. What was the massive topic of social sicences until a few decades ago, now is a series of vlogs limited to 'liberal arts and gender issues' and how SJW groups is a threat to humanity: 'Regressive Left'  

This level of dumbing down and propaganda turns over my stomach, GSO. Common Western opinion/vision is having a brain hemorrhage. I'm very fond of it and it makes me angry. I'm serious about this. And I don't think I'm smarter or more intelligent than anyone...naaah not even close. But these are basic, best qualities of the culture in question and watching this specific bullshit is painful than any other. It almost seems to me that most Westerners don2t know much about their own culture and they don't respect it a bit either.

Breaking the narrative, creating new ones by theory and practice is a western invention. Too many people died for it, too many struggles went down. It's a very long process. So this going back to general right wing regressive, conservative mainstream of personal point of views bullshit in human right issues and home cooked "this is wroooong" has no orginality for me, because it is the freaking most ancient narrative itself. Well, I mean in the sense of creating vicitmhoods and imaginary problems that has nothing to do with reality; taking events with face value. Criticism is not 'this has flaaaaaws'. No shit, everyhing has flaws. t's the first condition of existance. If you are looking for something flawless or anything close to that you are living in delusion.

Go around the net and peek about what people talk about this subject generally. Race, gender..etc issues. You'll see nothing but a huge certain group 'discussing' these issues without any point but just under 'god ow I hate SJWs and regressive left'. This is the narrative that needs to be broken.

And yes very overwhelmingly they are white, male and heterosexual. And this is the new victimhood sold to millions of young people, they buy it and then they sell it over and over again to themselves and others. Everything is against them, yet they are the only group whose life won't change even if the worst happen to their society.

There is litreally a mass of people out there who are pissed of about things they have never lived in their lives, never experienced anything close that they make vlogs about them because they are annoyed by people who actually did and yelling out loud angry.

And saying all these things out loud makes you an extremist, someone who hates being male and white or obviously the white het male. How fucking dumb is that? 

You know why. It's often difficult for people to view a situation from a vantage point other than their own when everything their experience is designed to support their current worldview. Why can't religious people just see a world with no god? It's not that easy. Add to that the fact black people are essentially telling white people, "You created this situation, you have privilege, you have the power in this society and therefore you have to change it." It isn't always easy accept.

You know what, I lately realised how much I actually expect from the members of this forum also from people generally. About this forum, I have no idea why, probably because somehow I got attached to it and its regulars. I get angry at them for not really looking into something from many levels about their own opinions, doesn't matter if I agree with it or not. That part really doesn't matter. Sometimes I really don't even care about the issue but how people evalaute it. It's weird. Oddly personal.

About idealism...Causes me nothing but pain, lol. Literally screwed my life up. I left my childhood dream job and the city I grew up in. And I won't be able to get out of it. It's also an occupational hazard. But I started to learn to get out of it when it is necessary while try to figure something out. Otherwise, I am with you on ideals all the way, but one needs to stomp on it when thinking about real life. After all, we are just animals.

[drunkenshoe]

Can you explain to me what you think my position is on this? You give me the impression that you have zero clue.

I do have a clue, Steve. I read your posts. My reaction is to your response to some poster on supporting certain movements and your supposed way of 'criticism' of his stance. 

And what happened to me is that I stopped blindly jumping in to movements because people's feelings are hurt and instead look at the issue more objectively and piece by piece.

You haven't jumped on movements before. As far as I know you were always aware of the mutual bullshit going on. You also used to give good reactions to that bullshit.


Now you sound like you are in some 'team' and keeping track on who is in which one.

[PickelledEggs]

I do have a clue, Steve. I read your posts. My reaction is to your response to some poster on supporting certain movements and your supposed way of 'criticism' of his stance. 

You haven't jumped on movements before. As far as I know you were always aware of the mutual bullshit going on. You also used to give good reactions to that bullshit.


Now you sound like you are in some 'team' and keeping track on who is in which one.

So before I respond to anything else you post in this thread, explain what you think my stance is. "I do understand" doesn't tell me anything. You seem to be severely misinterpreting my position.

Sent from your mom.

[GSOgymrat]

Several people, here on this very forum have actually argued that blacks can not be racist by definition. It's impossible for black people to be racist. The reality is, blacks are actually the most racist people in all of the US, but you can't bring that reality up or people get really offended.

I just want to point out that "racism" has more than one definition, which can cause confusion. Some say blacks in American can't be racist because they lack the institutional power to affect the lives of white people. Similarly whites living in China can't be racist against Chinese people because whites are the minority. I prefer to say blacks can be prejudiced or bigoted because when talking about individuals that is often what people mean. Same thing with homophobic, which is a term I don't like because not every prejudice against homosexuals is based on fear. I prefer "He's bigoted against gay people" or "Tina is black and prejudiced against white people." I think it is more precise.

[drunkenshoe]

So before I respond to anything else you post in this thread, explain what you think my stance is. "I do understand" doesn't tell me anything. You seem to be severely misinterpreting my position.

Sent from your mom.

I didn't even say anything about your position, but about how you respond to a specific poster in several threads about his general stance in the post above. And this is related to your general attitude to connected issues. 

There is a group founded for a specific casue. It's a messed up issue on racism between specifically black and white races in a certain country. And concerning this thread, your stance is about why black lives matter is about black lives matter, because they obviously about black lives. You have the same stance about feminism in your terms 'the' SJW. Why it is about women but not also men. Somehow you take it as some deliberate divisive action. No, it is the nature of all protest groups.

And after all that we talked about black crime and generally reached a consensus on black crime rate and started to discuss about its causes that there is also big bias in the juicidal system against these people -hint there is a big difference between black lives and white lives unfortunately- you are posting sarcastic few liners as if someone can't support BLM and also be aware of black crime rate along with their hostile reactions. Or as if someone can't be a feminist out of SJW groups. Reminder, these two groups are just several years old.

I don't know if you read the posts I wrote to GSO, but you are in the group that gets critcised there. Basically, all your critcism is based on why the specific group of blah blah is about blah blah but doesn't include the other blah blah and how this is a dangerous ideology, while you haven't lived any of the real life issues yourself.

(Please don't come back to me as 'bu you don't know my life and what I go through'. I know that -like me- your skin colour or sexual orientation has never been an issue to change your life for the worse. This goes for most of us here in this forum and this is crucial in reacting to these specific issues. Yeah the ugly truth. If it was you'd be reacting to these groups differently even not agreeing on a lot of things about them)

You are posting videos made for teenagers designed to elicit emotional reactions. They obviously get to you. It's basically childish stuff.

You are not offering a criticism or an explanation, but pitching a common place mainstream idea of a specific goup overwhemingly dominated by white heterosexual males and repeating a made up politcial propaganda that has been going around for the last few years. Regressive left bullshit.

For fuck's sake, Pickel. You have just told Shiranu that 'he sounds as if hates being white and male'. WTF? Does that sound like a healthy reaction to you? It's normal for a freaking religious nutjob to come here to throw that shit around on us. You are aware that you are personally offended that a white het male is supporting SJW groups? Because you are.

And as the last thing, you have this impatient fed up annoyance in your posts as if the existence of SJW groups is some deliberate injustice done to you personally. Like almost some sort of a conspiracy is going on.

None of these^are real. Fear. Frustration. Expectation. Not being able to see what the future will bring. Social media bullshit. Propaganda. They are all colliding together.

You are living in an era of your culture where certain identities are challenged -in a good or bad way- also a time of a great change in your country and the world. I am hoping Trump will lose and things will get calm down and I know this will make a difference on all Americans here, because it will make a difference on the general climate. You'll see how much of this bullshit is happening because of this weird, hostile election season afterwards.

American people are scared -rightfully- stressed out about certain issues more than the usual. Everyone feels like they need to pick a side. About anything. But this is not correct. This is just a strong need right now.

I know that fear. Very well. It's not a sudden thing but something that becomes a part of you and your life without you even notice it and affect all your judgement, vision and how you see yourself and your environment. World gets smaller, colours lose shades and you don't even get what has actually changed.

This is what I think and feel about you and your opinions on the subject. Personally, I see/feel a sharp change. Frankly, I don't think you are racist or sexist but just reacting to a bombardment of several propaganda from all corners that has been going on for some time. While you see yourself as staying away from movements and groups, you are acually embracing the biggest one in my opinion. The common narrative. Mainstream bullshit. I don't like it. But then who am I? This is just my personal reaction to you. You can consider as it is sincere or say fuck you and ignore it all, needlessly to say.

[PickelledEggs]

This is what I think and feel about you and your opinions on the subject. Personally, I see/feel a sharp change. Frankly, I don't think you are racist or sexist but just reacting to a bombardment of several propaganda from all corners that has been going on for some time. While you see yourself as staying away from movements and groups, you are acually embracing the biggest one in my opinion. The common narrative. Mainstream bullshit. I don't like it. But then who am I? This is just my personal reaction to you. You can consider as it is sincere or say fuck you and ignore it all, needlessly to say.

That is not a representation of my position on this subject. That is your reasoning of why I have the position.

What are you assuming my position is?

[PickelledEggs]

Once I know if you understand what my specific view on all of this is, I can discuss this with you. It's a waste of my time and energy to discuss something with someone that that is arguing with me about something they misinterpreted.
I don't want a "why" I have whatever position you think it is. If you want to discuss the "why" after we clear up the other thing, fine. But let's not get ahead of ourselves.

As for the comment I made about Shiranu hating being a white male, it's an observation I made that reminds me of this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ilCmywMin8I

(it kind of loops too much for my taste, but you get the point)

[Nonsensei]

I haven't really weighed in here, and that's because I honestly didn't know much about BLM beyond what I had heard in the media and various other biased sources.

So I decided to go right to the horse's mouth, the BLM website which is strangely enough a .com instead of a .org. Not sure if that is significant or not.

I took a trip over to the guiding principles section.

Black Lives Matter is an ideological and political intervention in a world where Black lives are systematically and intentionally targeted for demise.  It is an affirmation of Black folks’ contributions to this society, our humanity, and our resilience in the face of deadly oppression.

Alright, good enough. Maybe a little dramatic, but people who feel oppressed tend to do that when describing the nature of their oppression.

First Section titled: Diversity

We are committed to acknowledging, respecting and celebrating difference(s) and commonalities.

Great. Nothing inherently wrong here. Sounds fine.

Second Section title: Restorative Justice

We are committed to collectively, lovingly and courageously working vigorously for freedom and justice for Black people and, by extension all people. As we forge our path, we intentionally build and nurture a beloved community that is bonded together through a beautiful struggle that is restorative, not depleting.

Okay, community building is fine. Not really sure what they mean by restorative instead of depleting. Those words don't seem like they fit into the concept they are trying to convey. It would be nice if I could click on these sections for more detailed thoughts but that doesn't seem to be an option.

Third Section title: Unapolagetically Black

We are unapologetically Black in our positioning. In affirming that Black Lives Matter, we need not qualify our position. To love and desire freedom and justice for ourselves is a necessary prerequisite for wanting the same for others.

I don't really know what it means to be "black" in your positioning. That doesn't make sense to me at all, and a cynical part of me suspects that the person who wrote it doesn't have a coherent idea of what it means either. Sounds like something that was added to the site because it sounded good. The rest is fine. Of course such a simple statement of demand for equality does not need to be qualified, when considered on its own.

Fourth Section title: Globalism

We see ourselves as part of the global Black family and we are aware of the different ways we are impacted or privileged as Black folk who exist in different parts of the world

Uh I guess my strongest reaction to this statement is "why?". What do African Americans have in common with black people in any other part of the world other than the tone of their skin and a common genetic ancestry (which by the way every human on Earth actually shares at some point in the tree).

Fifth Section title: Black Women

We are committed to building a Black women affirming space free from sexism, misogyny, and male‐centeredness.

Well, it was smooth sailing until now. Although this section is titled "Black Women" it doesn't really have anything to do with being black. This is new age feminism infecting a movement that doesn't really have anything inherently to do with it.

Sixth Section title: Collective Value

We are guided by the fact all Black lives, regardless of actual or perceived sexual identity, gender identity, gender expression, economic status, ability, disability, religious beliefs or disbeliefs, immigration status or location

Oh my goodness, and the kitchen sink too. Its nice that this movement is so inclusive. Unless, you know, you're a CIS white male. In that case you're on your own. Not invited to this wonderful new world of equality BLM is going to summon through sheer force of righteousness.

Seventh Section title: Transgender Affirming

We are committed to embracing and making space for trans brothers and sisters to participate and lead. We are committed to being self-reflexive and doing the work required to dismantle cis-gender privilege and uplift Black trans folk, especially Black trans women who continue to be disproportionately impacted by trans-antagonistic violence.

Yee haw gentlemen start your engines. Sorry, sorry. I mean gentlepersons. The Black Women section was pretty bad about having nothing to do with racial injustice, but this one basically comes right out and declares that BLM is either being hijacked by SJW's or has been completely hijacked by SJW's. Anyone remember when this movement was about cops shooting black people unnecessarily? I guess those days are long gone. I wonder if black people who think of themselves as part of BLM are even aware of how many other non-black groups the movement is presently trying to cram into its agenda.

Eighth Section title: Black Villages

We are committed to disrupting the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and “villages” that collectively care for one another, and especially “our” children to the degree that mothers, parents and children are comfortable.

This section baffles me because I am unable to figure out who it is supposed to appeal to.

Ninth Section title: Empathy

We are committed to practicing empathy; we engage comrades with the intent to learn about and connect with their contexts.

Unless you're a CIS white male i guess.

Tenth Section title: Black Families

We are committed to making our spaces family-friendly and enable parents to fully participate with their children. We are committed to dismantling the patriarchal practice that requires mothers to work “double shifts” that require them to mother in private even as they participate in justice work.

More SJW/modern feminism stuff. The boogeyman patriarchy lives here. Doesn't really have anything to do with racial issues. Also curious about what they mean by "justice work".

Eleventh Section title: Loving Engagement

We are committed to embodying and practicing justice, liberation, and peace in our engagements with one another.

Great. Hard to argue with that, though that's probably because the statement is so simplistic that there's literally nothing to discuss.

Twelfth Section title: Queer Affirming

We are committed to fostering a queer‐affirming network. When we gather, we do so with the intention of freeing ourselves from the tight grip of heteronormative thinking or, rather, the belief that all in the world are heterosexual unless s/he or they disclose otherwise.

I can almost smell the overwieght purple haired white girl that wrote all these SJW sections. Again I am forced to ask, what does this have to do with racial issues?

Thirteenth Section title: Intergenerational

We are committed to fostering an intergenerational and communal network free from ageism. We believe that all people, regardless of age, shows up with capacity to lead and learn.

LOL even ageism is included. I guess it is literally the case that everyone is invited to this movement except heterosexual white men under the age of 60.

It appears that the BLM movement has swallowed the poison pill that is the SJW community. What started as a movement born from an outcry against racial oppresseion has now become something that, according to these principles, has only a passing relationship to black people and racial issues. SJW's have burrowed beneath the skin of this movement and consumed it from within and now it is nothing more than a puppet, animated to promote an agenda not its own.

[Baruch]

Occupy and Tea Party were taken over by agents of The Man ... just like in the bad old 1960s.  There are no social movements, that aren't coopted by the authorities.  They can't afford to not control everything, or they end up in the Plac du Concorde.

[Shiranu]

I was gone all day, and man do I have alot of text to shift through now :|...

Would you give Christians the same level of forgiveness if they torched up small businesses and homes every time they were "persecuted?"

If we are going to be calling out illogical comparisons, then I think comparing the way Christians are treated and the way African Americans are treated by society is hands down the most illogical comparison to have been posted these last few days.

...to the point where you seem like you hate that you were born white and you hate that you were born male....

As I have said before, I don't hate being "born white" because I was never been identified as white until I removed my mom's last name and moved out of a very bigoted part of the United States (when I was 20). I would love to be considered white, I think that would be wonderful. But as it stands, people see a "foreign" first name, a Latin last name (and before that a Latin-Middle Eastern hyphenated last name), olive skin and black hair, beard and eyes and insisted that I was not white.

I am "3/4ths" white, I was raised by white grand parents, I went to a Lutheran church, etc. ... I am in every way culturally white but was never allowed to be part of the white culture because I was mixed. Likewise I was always a bit of an oddity when I hung out with the Latinos, because I wasn't brown and I didn't speak Spanish, nor could I understand the struggles they went through at home or the nuances of their culture.

If there is anything I would "hate" being, it's that I would hate being born to my mother's family who's father was Middle Eastern and who's mother was Irish/Italian. I would "hate" being born to an French/Irish father who had a Latin last name because of his Roman Catholic heritage and not because he was Latino.

But frankly... I am proud of all my heritage, particularly my Irish... and that is about as white as it gets.

As for hating being male; I'll confess, I do think the female gender probably fits me better, and in another life I might consider myself transgender. But after 26 years of being a male I am comfortable with having a penis and frankly thankful for the biological and social privileges that gives me. And even if I did considered myself transgendered that would have nothing to do with the feminist movement because I don't feel you can ever "truly" be a woman if you were originally a man.

If we are going to accuse people of not understanding where the other's are coming from, I just thought I would clear that up.

So if a BLM community member calls for dead cops, it's not a double standard to their "lives matter" part of their "black lives matter" slogan? I just want to make sure if this is or isn't what you're saying. Because to me, as someone that understands and even agrees with some of the points of the BLM movement, it seems a little hypocritical to say "black lives matter" followed up with a variation of "kill the cop".

And if the leaders and the movement itself agreed with it, or even stayed silent about it, then you would have a point. The BLM is NOT about that, and it has made that expressively clear plenty of times.

... they need to be more clear that they are distancing themselves from those violent bad apples.

And herein lies the problem, and it expands to feminism as you mentioned as well; these movements DO distance themselves, clearly, from these actions. The major issue is that this distancing is ignored. You can say something as clearly as you want, but if the media refuses to report it and only continues to print, "If it bleeds (or screams) it leads.", then it is not a failing of the movement but of a society that chooses to ignore what they are actually saying and instead continues to only listen to their one side of the argument.

[Blackleaf]

If we are going to be calling out illogical comparisons, then I think comparing the way Christians are treated and the way African Americans are treated by society is hands down the most illogical comparison to have been posted these last few days.

If I were comparing the kind of persecution that each group had to deal with, yes, it would be illogical. However, that was not the point of the comparison, and you're evading. The point is that the good acts of some members of a group do not justify the violence of others in the same group. I don't care if BLM activists collect money for charity when they're burning down neighborhoods over the deaths of criminals.

[PickelledEggs]

The point is that the good acts of some members of a group do not justify the violence of others in the same group.

Yes^

If the violent members do not represent the BLM movement, the BLM movement needs to separate them from their identity. If you don't prune dead branches off your rose bush, the whole plant gets sick. And this is what happened to the BLM movement.

[Shiranu]

If I were comparing the kind of persecution that each group had to deal with, yes, it would be illogical. However, that was not the point of the comparison, and you're evading. The point is that the good acts of some members of a group do not justify the violence of others in the same group. I don't care if BLM activists collect money for charity when they're burning down neighborhoods over the deaths of criminals.

Then all atheists should be held responsible for the acts of Pol Pot and his regime? After all, the good of some does not justify the evils of others.

You can use that argument against any group to make them look bad; BLM, the police, communists, liberals, republicans, Buddhists, Christians, Muslims... You get the idea.

The problem is you can't say don't hold one side to that standard when you hold another to the same. The bad acts of BLM reflect the small percentage of bad seeds, just as the bad acts of cops reflect the small percentage of bad cops... the major difference being that too many bad seeds hold positions of power in the police force and the PDs are suppose to be held to a higher standard.

Also you show severe lack of understanding of why rioting happens and casually imply that they were criminals and therefore you shouldn't be as upset, as if criminals have less right to be treated like humans. That is a painfully American world view in several ways....

[Shiranu]

Yes^

If the violent members do not represent the BLM movement, the BLM movement needs to separate them from their identity. If you don't prune dead branches off your rose bush, the whole plant gets sick. And this is what happened to the BLM movement.

And again, they do. Just because the anti-BLM ignore it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. And you are seriously doing the exact thing you have criticised people for doing towards police, as well as what you just liked Black for criticising!

I really cannot believe you want to talk about double standards when you have done this thread after thread.