all 19 comments

[–]HurkaDurka 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Child labor trafficking doesn't get any attention, in the U.S. and around the world. It only seems to matter if it's sexual, and even then, barely matters. These things should be number one priority as far as I'm concerned.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Interesting fact. Voting rights for women were strongly opposed by Indusrty, because they understood that it women had voting rights then they would organize to abolish child labor.

Women gained sufferage, and child labor was abolished.

The world would likely be a brighter place if mother's and daughters were placed in more positions of accountable power.

Not all, though. Especially, not the kind that would cackle gleefully during an interview about a lynched dictator. There are always exceptions...

[–]HurkaDurka 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I don't buy any of that. Sounds like feminist propaganda and anecdotal circumstances at best.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

That IIRC.

However, if your not into that sort of thing then you'll probably find this entertaining.

(https://youtu.be/y0TgCgdvJ2c?t=37)

[–]HurkaDurka 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I used to love that show. Good, offensive humor. And I'm not necessarily against feminism, just super sceptical about things coming from their camp. Too many bad experiences, I suppose, so I'm probably a bit prejudice.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (13 children)

Trigger warning... :-/

[–]wizzwizz4 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (12 children)

For people who managed to get out of Scientology, but are still traumatised and don't really want flashbacks.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (11 children)

Yeah. I know.

It's sad that people are chipping away at free speech rights. It's a censorship inducing device.

[–]wizzwizz4 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

?? Please explain the relevance of this comment. I don't understand where you got this from.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (9 children)

Trigger warning creates a dangerous precedent.

It suggest that people have the right to force others to preannounce the possibility that they might state something that may be percieved as offensive.

Pepole should not feel entitled to be warned about what another person says, or believes.

The next step will be encouraging those individuals who are "concerned" to about hearing "triggering" statements to avoid them all together. This brainwashing is a literal form of to self induced censorship. Internal thought policing.

Reality is not rainbows and sunshine. Ugly realities need to be acknowledged, and fully understood.

Trigger warnings are censorship devices.

[–]wizzwizz4 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

It's a kindness to those with brains that don't function exactly the way yours does, or who otherwise don't want to be exposed to certain content without being able to mentally prepare themselves first.

Please stop invoking the slippery slope fallacy.

It suggests that people have the right to force others to preannounce

It's a kindness. Next you'll be saying that giving to charity suggests that charities have the right to rob people. (Unless you can explain why one follows and the other doesn't.)

that they might state something that may be percieved as offensive.

"perceived", and it's not about offense. It's about psychological triggers, not about "getting triggered". I'd like a warning if somebody's going to post a big picture of staring eyes (I can't find an example) because that would be unsettling; if I had PTSD I'd seriously want a trigger warning for something that might trigger a relapse.

The next step will be encouraging those individuals who are "concerned" to about hearing "triggering" statements to avoid them all together.

You are missing the point.

This brainwashing is a literal form of to self induced censorship. Internal thought policing.

It's not about ideas. It's about psychological damage caused by the events set out in the text, and people who have experienced it not having to relive it. Those people are already aware of the issues with Scientology, having experienced it, so they don't need to relive it constantly.

Reality is not rainbows and sunshine.

And the people who need trigger warnings know that better than you do.

Ugly realities need to be acknowledged, and fully understood.

You are being selfish if you are trying to prevent people from putting up trigger warnings simply so you can think of people as "acknowledging ugly realities".

Trigger warnings are censorship devices.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (7 children)

Now that you have accused me if being selfish, I formally asking you to trigger warn me with the following statement, "FORUM SLIDE TRIGGER WARNING".

Please trigger warn me each every time that you respond to any of my comments or posts, because I often feel traumatized when you try to change the topic, avoid the facts, or insert emotionally charged statements.

Please be considerate of my feelings, as I may feel that it is better/necessary to avoid reading your potentially traumatizing, or potentially offensive comments.

Please be kind and considerate of my feelings on this matter, as you do not know me, or my background, or what I have been through.

You cannot be expected to understand how traumatized I may sometimes feel based on your accusation. Your kindness in respecting this formalized trigger warning request is deeply appreciated.

 

However, If you decide to ignore my appeal to your kind and considerate nature, and instead invoke your Constitutional Free Speech Rights, then I WILL BE HERE TO DEFEND YOUR FREE SPEECH RIGHTS; IN SPITE OF YOUR ODIOUS HYPOCRICY.

 .

What's it going to be? Will you respect my formal request, and appeal to kindness???

[–]wizzwizz4 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

I have a suspicion that you're not being serious. But if this is really an issue for you, feel free not to read further.

Edit: this is all marked with the "spoiler" tag, which should serve to hide it from view by default. However, this appears to be broken on Saidit at the moment. I'm reporting the bug.

In the meantime, feel free not to scroll down.

Padding md-spoiler-text
Padding
Padding
Padding
Padding
Padding
Padding
Padding
Padding
Padding
Padding
Padding
Padding
Padding
Padding
Padding
Padding
Padding
Padding
Padding
Padding
Padding
Padding
Padding
Padding
Padding
Padding
Padding
Padding
Padding
Padding
Padding
Padding
Padding
Padding
Padding
Padding
Padding
Padding
Padding
Padding
Padding
Padding
Padding
Padding
Padding
Padding
Padding
Padding
Padding
Padding
Padding
Padding
Padding
Padding
Padding
Padding
Padding
Padding
Padding
Padding
Padding
Padding
Padding
Padding
Padding
Padding

Let's use an example. If you had a friend who'd recently been raped, then you'd avoid making rape jokes around them for at least a few weeks. Because, despite disagreeing with you, I assume that you are a decent fellow human being who I am talking to and need to be nice to… (breathe.)

Anyway, you can't do that on the web. Your audience is so big, and if you were to try to do that you'd end up not talking about anything. However, the web has an advantage over conversations: if you don't want to be forced to experience something, and you know that it's coming up, you can skip past it.

Hence the trigger warning. Remember that free speech doesn't mean you can force people to listen. And it's nice to warn people that they might be adversely affected if they choose to listen to you, because you're discussing things that others might not want to hear. Like being enslaved in a cult. Or children dying. Or graphic depictions of murder.

It doesn't prevent you from saying what you were doing to say.

Now, to address your tangential concerns:

when you try to change the topic,

I really hope that I wasn't doing this. Can you quote me doing that so I know, and can avoid doing so in future?

avoid the facts,

I wasn't doing that in this case. There aren't really any facts to ignore – at least, not in the usual sense of the word.

or insert emotionally charged statements.

Now, I did do this. But I don't think it was unwarranted, considering that we are discussing a measure to prevent people from inadvertently hurting others and the primary driving factor towards this is empathy – an emotional phenomenon.

Please stop tone-policing.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Watch as this comment chain slides off of the page.

I didn't ask for a spoiler message. I asked for a forum sliding trigger message before each of your responses.

Are you now gnoring my formal request?

[–]wizzwizz4 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

You're not even on the debate pyramid. You're not even listening to what I'm saying, so I'm just going to give up.