Topic: Study: Everyone hates environmentalists and feminists - page 16. (Read 80480 times)
Next thing you know people will believe that Anthropogenic Global Warming is real.
It's been my experience that people hate things that tend to challenge their sense of self-identity.....
You may be defining one type of hate, which exists on occasion. But that is not the whole story. Hate exists as a human emotion and there are likely good reasons for it, based in our survival as a species. Thus it is false to consider a lack of hate as making one a better or superior person. Of course, misplaced hate would be counterproductive, but so would misplaced love or any other emotion.
I think hate became outdated around the time we expected to live in a civilized society. I don't see much function for it now. Hate leads to aggression, and the initiator of aggression is always wrong.
Your notion of civilized society is hated by tribes getting pushed back and their land stolen in the Amazon rainforest
But not the trait itself.
I assumed when you said hate was useful originally, you were speaking to some evolutionary advantage it bestowed to have the capacity to hate other beings. Short of that, I don't buy the premise at all. I don't see the usefulness of hate at all. I don't deny it's part of human nature, but my comment about civilized society is that we know better now than to let our actions be hateful and aggressive towards people who don't deserve it.
It's been my experience that people hate things that tend to challenge their sense of self-identity.....
You may be defining one type of hate, which exists on occasion. But that is not the whole story. Hate exists as a human emotion and there are likely good reasons for it, based in our survival as a species. Thus it is false to consider a lack of hate as making one a better or superior person. Of course, misplaced hate would be counterproductive, but so would misplaced love or any other emotion.
I think hate became outdated around the time we expected to live in a civilized society. I don't see much function for it now. Hate leads to aggression, and the initiator of aggression is always wrong.
Your notion of civilized society is hated by tribes getting pushed back and their land stolen in the Amazon rainforest
But not the trait itself.
I assumed when you said hate was useful originally, you were speaking to some evolutionary advantage it bestowed to have the capacity to hate other beings. Short of that, I don't buy the premise at all. I don't see the usefulness of hate at all. I don't deny it's part of human nature, but my comment about civilized society is that we know better now than to let our actions be hateful and aggressive towards people who don't deserve it.
It's been my experience that people hate things that tend to challenge their sense of self-identity.....
You may be defining one type of hate, which exists on occasion. But that is not the whole story. Hate exists as a human emotion and there are likely good reasons for it, based in our survival as a species. Thus it is false to consider a lack of hate as making one a better or superior person. Of course, misplaced hate would be counterproductive, but so would misplaced love or any other emotion.
I think hate became outdated around the time we expected to live in a civilized society. I don't see much function for it now. Hate leads to aggression, and the initiator of aggression is always wrong.
Your notion of civilized society is hated by tribes getting pushed back and their land stolen in the Amazon rainforest
But not the trait itself.
It's been my experience that people hate things that tend to challenge their sense of self-identity.....
You may be defining one type of hate, which exists on occasion. But that is not the whole story. Hate exists as a human emotion and there are likely good reasons for it, based in our survival as a species. Thus it is false to consider a lack of hate as making one a better or superior person. Of course, misplaced hate would be counterproductive, but so would misplaced love or any other emotion.
I think hate became outdated around the time we expected to live in a civilized society. I don't see much function for it now. Hate leads to aggression, and the initiator of aggression is always wrong.
Your notion of civilized society is hated by tribes getting pushed back and their land stolen in the Amazon rainforest
It's been my experience that people hate things that tend to challenge their sense of self-identity.....
You may be defining one type of hate, which exists on occasion. But that is not the whole story. Hate exists as a human emotion and there are likely good reasons for it, based in our survival as a species. Thus it is false to consider a lack of hate as making one a better or superior person. Of course, misplaced hate would be counterproductive, but so would misplaced love or any other emotion.
I think hate became outdated around the time we expected to live in a civilized society. I don't see much function for it now. Hate leads to aggression, and the initiator of aggression is always wrong.
It's been my experience that people hate things that tend to challenge their sense of self-identity.....
You may be defining one type of hate, which exists on occasion. But that is not the whole story. Hate exists as a human emotion and there are likely good reasons for it, based in our survival as a species. Thus it is false to consider a lack of hate as making one a better or superior person. Of course, misplaced hate would be counterproductive, but so would misplaced love or any other emotion.
"In order to stabilize world population, we must eliminate 350,000 per day"
Jacques Yves Cousteau
Jacques Yves Cousteau
Long time before we are anywhere near standing room only on earth, we will have determined ways for moving out to the stars. Of course, we may not have to if Neal Adams is anything like correct:
http://youtu.be/oJfBSc6e7QQ?list=PL5A1097F4E958728D
It's been my experience that people hate things that tend to challenge their sense of self-identity. If you hate the idea of having to change the way you live your life (don't drive the sports car or gas guzzling SUV you love) because you feel society is imposing a set of values on you that you don't share and it's threatening your personal freedom, then you're probably going to hate environmentalists. I think the same thing goes for feminists, though that seems a more complex issue. For some reason, some people are really offended by the notion of a group of women who identify themselves as victims of other groups in society, and seek to empower themselves. Perhaps the offense comes from not sharing the view that they're victims in the first place, or the belief they're manufacturing their own circumstances. I don't quite see it. To me, it appears the pushback on feminists stems from men who view women as subservient and want to keep it that way. But I don't really know, I can't speak too much to that particular mindset.
Yup, don't 'hate' either group. Just think they are mis-guided and give themselves bad names.
environmentalists - back off its not THAT bad. work on pollution and waste like we did in the US in the 80's and 90's we did a lot of great things then.
feminists - In the US it isn't that bad either. a woman having to buy their own abortion meds is not an attack on woman.. forcing men to pay for it is an attack on men (and everyone else)
Real Feminism is equal rights which I am for, Not entitlements.
I feel the same way about Race and Sexuality. Equal rights, not greater rights.
environmentalists - back off its not THAT bad. work on pollution and waste like we did in the US in the 80's and 90's we did a lot of great things then.
feminists - In the US it isn't that bad either. a woman having to buy their own abortion meds is not an attack on woman.. forcing men to pay for it is an attack on men (and everyone else)
Real Feminism is equal rights which I am for, Not entitlements.
I feel the same way about Race and Sexuality. Equal rights, not greater rights.
"I will no longer be participating on Fridays due to the lack of disrespect that I was shown today."
If only the teacher had shown sufficient disrespect, she could have had more florescent and carefully crafted anatomically correct vagina cookies next Friday too?
This can't be real.
If only the teacher had shown sufficient disrespect, she could have had more florescent and carefully crafted anatomically correct vagina cookies next Friday too?
This can't be real.
Good catch
Pretty sure she's talking about poor people that have to many kids while not working much and depending on social programs.
Pretty sure everyone and her knew she was talking about getting rid of non whites, not just "poor people". The context of that is 1973. What was going on around that time and the decades before that?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_riots#1960s
But I guess if she is talking about getting rid of poor people in general, no matter the race, not fit for her social class that makes her an icon for the left, the so called defenders of the poor?
Interesting...
Can you imagine the outrage there would have been if it were a forty year old black father who sent dick shaped lollies to kids?
Not so equal now that the gender roles are reversed
Not so equal now that the gender roles are reversed
"I will no longer be participating on Fridays due to the lack of disrespect that I was shown today."
If only the teacher had shown sufficient disrespect, she could have had more florescent and carefully crafted anatomically correct vagina cookies next Friday too?
This can't be real.
If only the teacher had shown sufficient disrespect, she could have had more florescent and carefully crafted anatomically correct vagina cookies next Friday too?
This can't be real.
Pretty sure she's talking about poor people that have to many kids while not working much and depending on social programs.
Q: If you were a lawyer again, what would you want to accomplish as a future feminist legal agenda?
JUSTICE GINSBURG: Reproductive choice has to be straightened out. There will never be a woman of means without choice anymore. That just seems to me so obvious. The states that had changed their abortion laws before Roe [to make abortion legal] are not going to change back. So we have a policy that affects only poor women, and it can never be otherwise, and I don’t know why this hasn’t been said more often.
Q: Are you talking about the distances women have to travel because in parts of the country, abortion is essentially unavailable, because there are so few doctors and clinics that do the procedure? And also, the lack of Medicaid for abortions for poor women?
JUSTICE GINSBURG: Yes, the ruling about that surprised me. [Harris v. McRae — in 1980 the court upheld the Hyde Amendment, which forbids the use of Medicaid for abortions.] Frankly I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of. So that Roe was going to be then set up for Medicaid funding for abortion.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/12/magazine/12ginsburg-t.html?pagewanted=all
---------------------------
Eugenics...
That message is ironically riddled with grammatical inconsistencies.
Those "grammatical inconsistencies" were all metaphors for her unique and so succulent looking vagina cookies....
That message is ironically riddled with grammatical inconsistencies.
Jump to: