forum Debate. Debate. Debate.

Started March 14, 2019 by Deleted user

tune

Edit topic

Black hair isn't "sacred" but it still feels icky when white people appropriate it

(Yeah cho chang in harry potter? Her name is the British equivalent to Ching Chong.)

Bruhhhhhhhh.

NO, WE DON'T EAT FUCKING CATS AND DOGS, some cultures do and you know why? THEY NEED TO SURVIVE. Why do you care about what other people eat?

And also. Who says people can't eat cats and dogs. Honestly American culture is so sensitive.

Don't go up to someone and ask them if they're chinese/japanese/korean UNLESS you know for certain. Just a reminder that NOT ALL ASIANS are the same, there is more than just Chinese. If you are unsure, just go up to someone and ask what their ethnicity is. Thats literally it, that's all you have to do. I can positively tell you that it is so offensive when people come up to me and ask. Indians are asian, Filipinos are Asian, Vietnamese are asian, Isreal is part of Asia, so is Iran and Pakistan, Irag, Nepal, I could name so much more.

Lol I might be technically Asian. (Checking those boxes is weird. I don't know where to go.)

Saying all Asians have squinty eyes is the same as saying all blacks aren't educated.

Though one is a physical feature. So you might be right, but it doesn't seems so. Also. How to write Asian eyes? I have a lot of Asian characters.

Black hair isn't "sacred" but it still feels icky when white people appropriate it

I mean, I'm not black, so I can't be an authority. But why is it bad?

Write them as normal eyes, though it is a common feature for asians to have monolids or hooded eyes.

It's a tad insulting that white celebrities can be praised for their innovative new boxer braids while Black women who wear box braids to protect their hair get denied jobs for their hair being unprofessional.

So you might be right, but it doesn't seems so.

explain

One is a physical characteristic and one is an assumption of situation in life of mental prowness. Seems like different categories.

It's a tad insulting that white celebrities can be praised for their innovative new boxer braids while Black women who wear box braids to protect their hair get denied jobs for their hair being unprofessional.

Well I think the solution is saying that both are acceptable or good.

One is a physical characteristic and one is an assumption of situation in life of mental prowness. Seems like different categories.

Alright well let me put it this way, saying all Asians have squinty eyes is the same thing as saying all Americans have Blonde hair, except one gets you made fun of and beat up.

It's a tad insulting that white celebrities can be praised for their innovative new boxer braids while Black women who wear box braids to protect their hair get denied jobs for their hair being unprofessional.

Well I think the solution is saying that both are acceptable or good.

Sure in an ideal world where systemic racism is abolished, that'd be dandy. Unfortunately not the case.

Lol I might be technically Asian. (Checking those boxes is weird. I don't know where to go.)

I've been contemplating on whether or not I should address this for nearly 11 minutes, but whatever.

I don't mean to seem rude nor hostile here, but why should that matter? Even if you were technically Asian, it doesn't give you an excuse to say those things

I hate the whole "you're accountable for what your friends do" mentality that some people have (in most cases)
Case in point: the absolute shitstorm that followed Contrapoints' Opulence video :/

Lol I might be technically Asian. (Checking those boxes is weird. I don't know where to go.)

I've been contemplating on whether or not I should address this for nearly 11 minutes, but whatever.

I don't mean to seem rude nor hostile here, but why should that matter? Even if you were technically Asian, it doesn't give you an excuse to say those things

Oh that's not meant to be anything but casual commentary on my life. I've heard it's sort of a common deal not to know where you fit on the ethnicity forms. Has nothing to do with what I feel I can say.

Lol I might be technically Asian. (Checking those boxes is weird. I don't know where to go.)

I've been contemplating on whether or not I should address this for nearly 11 minutes, but whatever.

I don't mean to seem rude nor hostile here, but why should that matter? Even if you were technically Asian, it doesn't give you an excuse to say those things

Oh that's not meant to be anything but casual commentary on my life. I've heard it's sort of a common deal not to know where you fit on the ethnicity forms. Has nothing to do with what I feel I can say.

Yeah, I was just curious, sorry, but I see why, Blasians and Wasians don't really fit into either communities because they're "not enough of either race" and that's just sad. No one should feel like they don't belong

Never heard those terms before. I'm half Saudi btw in case you didn't know that yet.

Blasian means that your half black and half asian
Wasian means your half white and half asian

How you react to a split second situation doesn't dictate your moral code

I thought about this yesterday. I disagree a little bit.

How you react to a split second situation doesn't dictate your moral code

I thought about this yesterday. I disagree a little bit.

When you're in a life or death situation, or just a simulation like what we were discussing, your heart is pounding, your palms are sweaty. You don't have time to think about the right thing to do. You have to react now, because if you don't, you or someone else could die. You don't get the luxury of those precious seconds to decide the moral way to do things. You freeze, you run, or you fight. You don't wonder "hmm is it against my moral code to punch someone". Whether or not you think it's right to punch someone, you'd punch them when it came down to it. You do what it takes to survive, because no matter what guidelines you set for yourself, you do what you have to survive, because at your core, your instincts don't care about what's the right thing to do, they care about keeping you alive and getting you out of the situation. Your instincts are separate from your morals.

How you react to a split second situation doesn't dictate your moral code

I thought about this yesterday. I disagree a little bit.

Dom
Say you're a decent person, you don't fight, very passive
Then somebody tries to murder you or some shit
Life or death
You're probably gonna want to live, so you beat the shit outta that murderer

It kind of depends. Has the person taken a vow of nonviolence of something?

How you react to a split second situation doesn't dictate your moral code

I thought about this yesterday. I disagree a little bit.

When you're in a life or death situation, or just a simulation like what we were discussing, your heart is pounding, your palms are sweaty. You don't have time to think about the right thing to do. You have to react now, because if you don't, you or someone else could die. You don't get the luxury of those precious seconds to decide the moral way to do things. You freeze, you run, or you fight. You don't wonder "hmm is it against my moral code to punch someone". Whether or not you think it's right to punch someone, you'd punch them when it came down to it. You do what it takes to survive, because no matter what guidelines you set for yourself, you do what you have to survive, because at your core, your instincts don't care about what's the right thing to do, they care about keeping you alive and getting you out of the situation. Your instincts are separate from your morals.

But it's not about thinking. If a person is trained in swordplay, and someone swipes at you, you parry without thinking. if you build up a code or skill or habit inside of yourself, it will be branded to your bones. You won't have to think about it. You change your instincts based on the way you have chosen to live.

How you react to a split second situation doesn't dictate your moral code

I thought about this yesterday. I disagree a little bit.

When you're in a life or death situation, or just a simulation like what we were discussing, your heart is pounding, your palms are sweaty. You don't have time to think about the right thing to do. You have to react now, because if you don't, you or someone else could die. You don't get the luxury of those precious seconds to decide the moral way to do things. You freeze, you run, or you fight. You don't wonder "hmm is it against my moral code to punch someone". Whether or not you think it's right to punch someone, you'd punch them when it came down to it. You do what it takes to survive, because no matter what guidelines you set for yourself, you do what you have to survive, because at your core, your instincts don't care about what's the right thing to do, they care about keeping you alive and getting you out of the situation. Your instincts are separate from your morals.

But it's not about thinking. If a person is trained in swordplay, and someone swipes at you, you parry without thinking. if you build up a code or skill or habit inside of yourself, it will be branded to your bones. You won't have to think about it. You change your instincts based on the way you have chosen to live.

You regularly practice swordfighting. You don't regularly practice being kidnapped or someone pointing a gun at you.

True. But where does a moral code keep a person from defending themselves in such a situation? And if it did, wouldn't that mean that the person would have had to make the choice and thus face the possibilities? Granted, they might slip in such a case because of having no practice, but this could be blamed on the highest stakes of personal protection. The theory could easily not hold true for lesser stressors.

True. But where does a moral code keep a person from defending themselves in such a situation?

Our whole point is that it doesn't

And if it did, wouldn't that mean that the person would have had to make the choice and thus face the possibilities?

You see an opportunity and take it, again, you don't have time to weigh your options to see which is the most moral.

Granted, they might slip in such a case because of having no practice, but this could be blamed on the highest stakes of personal protection. The theory could easily not hold true for lesser stressors.

I don't even know what this says

Granted, they might slip in such a case because of having no practice, but this could be blamed on the highest stakes of personal protection. The theory could easily not hold true for lesser stressors.

I don't even know what this says

They could fuck up in a life/death situation because they didn't prepare themselves and-
I have no fucking clue what the rest says but 'lesser stressors' rhymes and that pleases my toddler brain