Jophiel wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
given that the DoD said that they weren't going to implement anything "in the middle of a war", I don't see a change happening anytime soon
Stuff I've heard from the administration and Dept of Defense all points to a 2011 implementation.
I guess 2011 will be a great year!
That's funny, because I heard the exact opposite. I actually heard that the fact that no time table was given is upsetting people. I don't know which one is accurate, but I do find it funny that you have all this faith in the DoD. This is probably the same people who ended "Operation Iraqi Freedom". Yea, we just changed the name.....and somehow people just went on about their ways....
Allegory wrote:
No, they are, at least in their mind.
You don't seem to know much about how the majority of bigots tend to think and act. They don't gallivant around in white robes, yelling ******, and throwing bricks through windows.
If you happen to be bored, I suggest you take some time to browse around the stormfront message boards (a self proclaimed white nationalist and racial realist community). These are what the vast majority of bigots are like. They are generally decent people who aren't typically violent towards nonwhites. They largely advocate political and personal change. They are interested in having discussion and debates about race, and have facts and data they believe supports their opinions and arguments. Honestly, they're fairly reasonable people; they just happen to be wrong about a few things and unwilling to change their opinion on those topics. They're very much aware many other people think they're bigots, and they think those people are wrong.
Modern bigots are very much in denial, because being a bigot is seen nearly universally as a negative quality. Bigots don't think they're bigots. They think they are those who have examined the facts more closely than others and come up with a better, more correct answer. They take a statistic that could very reasonable be taken to support their stance, and choose to use it. A disproportionate number of crimes are committed by blacks, and without considering many other factors could be reasonably used to justify separating blacks and whites.
Modern bigotry is mostly about cognitive biases.
You don't seem to know much about how the majority of bigots tend to think and act. They don't gallivant around in white robes, yelling ******, and throwing bricks through windows.
If you happen to be bored, I suggest you take some time to browse around the stormfront message boards (a self proclaimed white nationalist and racial realist community). These are what the vast majority of bigots are like. They are generally decent people who aren't typically violent towards nonwhites. They largely advocate political and personal change. They are interested in having discussion and debates about race, and have facts and data they believe supports their opinions and arguments. Honestly, they're fairly reasonable people; they just happen to be wrong about a few things and unwilling to change their opinion on those topics. They're very much aware many other people think they're bigots, and they think those people are wrong.
Modern bigots are very much in denial, because being a bigot is seen nearly universally as a negative quality. Bigots don't think they're bigots. They think they are those who have examined the facts more closely than others and come up with a better, more correct answer. They take a statistic that could very reasonable be taken to support their stance, and choose to use it. A disproportionate number of crimes are committed by blacks, and without considering many other factors could be reasonably used to justify separating blacks and whites.
Modern bigotry is mostly about cognitive biases.
I'm not debating on the overall concept of bigotry. I'm referencing specifically to this situation. You may be 100% accurate on your study, but that isn't the case here.
Women and men are often segregated in sleeping and showering scenarios. There is absolutely no reason why they are separated other than personal comforts. Men and women sleep together all of the time, why can't they share public rooms or showers? It doesn't matter if the person next to you is a man, woman or a dog. None of that has anything to do with you sleeping or showering. Yet, as a society, we're ok with that. At the same time, men who express the same comfort issues with other men are frown upon as if it is somehow different.
So, either the women are bigots for not wanting to be in close quarters with men or the men are not bigots. Which one is it? Unless you can show how the scenarios are somehow different, both can't be true.
Belkira wrote:
Why can't it be both...?
Because I was talking about the assumption that "everyone is heterosexual". In reality, everyone knows that everyone isn't heterosexual, but they are assumed to be and treated as such. If they are seen otherwise, then they will be kicked out. That's the whole point of DADT. His post was claiming otherwise, so the two can't coexist.
Belkira wrote:
The justification is that men have the same anatomy as men, and women have the same anatomy as women.
Did you comprehend anything I just wrote or are you purposely being dense? That's not a justification. You just stated the obvious. No two people are the same, regardless of sex, race or color. That isn't a justification to treat anyone differently. There has to be a reason other than "they are different" to treat them differently. Else, there is no point in "equality". Just because another lady at work has a "supermodel body" doesn't mean she should be treated differently than you (if you don't also have a supermodel body. Now, if your job was modeling, then now you have a justification. Working a bank, there isn't a justification. That's how it works.
So, what is your justification? If all you have is "I don't have a *****", then ok. That would clear up a lot of things.
Belkira wrote:
It ends in the places where you aren't required to be naked. You know this, you've been in public showers and restrooms before. Don't be a moron.
Why does it end there? So you admit that it has nothing to do with the anatomy. The man's anatomy doesn't change in the office. You're just more COMFORTABLE in the office because you can't see their anatomy and they can't see yours. This is all psychological. If it were about anatomy, it would be consistent. It isn't consistent because it's not the fact that Joe has a *****, it's because you don't want to see Joe's ***** nor do you want him to see you naked.
You know this to be the truth, I'm not so sure why you decide to pretend as if it weren't. To further prove my point, let's take the pool as an example. This is where both women and men are mostly naked sharing one body of water. It's ok, why? Private parts are hidden, that's why. If it were about the anatomy, the pool would be segregated also. Only areas such as spas or other areas where people are naked are they segregated. So, this is clearly about seeing each other private parts and not the simple fact that they are different.
Belkira wrote:
You're both naked. Get it? Stop being obtuse.
How does the person next to you affect you washing yourself if that person is washing him or herself? Most people tend to shower naked, so being naked doesn't make a difference. Even still, how is that person being naked affect your ability to wash yourself?
