Obviously those policies don't apply when dealing with people who don't adhere to those policies - I figured I didn't have to spell that out because it's been covered a very long time ago: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance
> Does that include Jihadists and child molester/groomer?
by and large the right-wing administration currently running the white house works with and makes business deals with Islamic Fundamentalist countries and is headed by a child molester [1]. this does not seem to be an issue of "the left", for its many flaws
>I couldn't care less about the race, gender, or sexual orientation of the person
But that makes you a bigot and you know what happens to bigots so put on the shirt, label in your bio and change your speech or HR will have a field day with you. Welcome to the "tolerant" side.
For the past decade or more, the people that drone on about male privilege were arguing conscription would never happen again so it didn't matter. They knew they were telling a lie then, they'll just come up with a new one now.
I think he is saying nobody on the left is complaining about how it is mandatory for men, but voluntary for women making it a sexist policy. People might be complaining about it is happening overall, but not about the sexist part.
Every leftist org ive interacted with places cis-males basically lower status than anyone else. Ive even had that used around me as a slur, almost like they dont really understand.
Attacking people just because they are cis- and AMAB (assigned male as birth) isn't bad. Its your actions that determine good or bad.
And, throwing men into a potential meat grinder of war is unethical. Frankly, it should all be actual volunteer, and not this doublespeak shit of voluntarily required.
Theres also this now public problem. Do trans-women count as men or women? And do trans-men count as men or women? The best answer is "volunteer". But governments are weird, especially the conservative/fascist adjacent ones.
Seems to be that whether it's mandatory or voluntary is based on one's sex, not on any sort of identity.
Which makes sense otherwise a lot of males would be able to opt out by claiming that they are women in their minds or souls or in enactment of gendered stereotypes or whatever it could possibly mean to identify as the opposite sex.
Men are the ones used as cannon fodder mostly because from a reproductive point of view they are more disposable. They also tend to be physically stronger so are more suited to many combat roles that require raw strength.
This is the correct response. I use both GrapheneOS and LineageOS. But LineageOS focus is on delivering newer versions of Android to many phones abandoned by their OEM. GOS exclusively focuses on security and privacy. If you want a reasonably secure phone but don't want Google or Apple inside your device, your best bet is GOS.
>Do you ask the political opinions of everyone you work with
they are the HR of IT ofc they do a ideological sniff test on anybody they even so much as talk to. Can't have anybody disagreeing in this tolerant space.
Everyone does an ideological sniff test of everyone they interact with. You don't want to be friends with wackjobs or racists or whatever, because the odds those people suck in other ways is very, very high.
I also hate the framing of "disagreeing" in these discussions. It's perfectly valid to distance yourself from people because you disagree, and this is something you yourself practice on a daily basis. That is just being human.
I worked with plenty of far-left people, some of whom justified openly during lunch a genocide against whites in South Africa. While I would have preferred not to hear this, I believe that they have the right to work in the same place as me.
Well there is no genocide against white people in South Africa - nice try, grok.
But even if there was - would you want to be friends with people you legitimately believe support genocide? If you say yes, you sound kind of pathetic. You don't have to do that, nobody is making you do that.
I don't want to be friends with people who cannot separate their personal opinions and friendships from their work opinions and colleagues.
Fortunately, I do not have to, because I am able to separate the two. The question you asked made sense only in your mind, because you cannot separate and compartmentalize two different things, and instead mix unmixable things together and create a complete unnecessary mess. This leads to a total mess in proposed solutions. Again, in your mind it makes sense, because a collegue's personal blogging FEELS like a betrayal of a best friend. Not good.
I mean, I would prefer not to work with crazy people, because they're usually also awful to work with.
I'm not saying they should be fired. What I AM saying is that of course people's opinion matter in your relationships. And that includes every relationship, even work ones.
Of course, in a working relationship, people's opinions on work issues matter greatly. It is weird and counter-productive to care about colleagues' personal political views while at work.
In my experience, the enjoyment of working with people and their professionalism does not depend on the awefulness of their political opinions.
Not being able to separate, to only work at work instead of pulling your personal life into it, is a sign of a bad worker.
I do speak from European (healthy work-life balance), but still pragmatic/efficient and free-speech point of view.
> meanwhile they will destroy your financial and private life if you so much as disagree with a made up pronounce.
No they won't. Who do you know, in your real life, that this has happened to?
Because I actually know a few different people who were fired for racist or sexist reasons. I've never met anyone who was fired because they won't use "made up pronouns"
I've seen actors and rich people claim this, but the thing is they don't just disagree with a pronoun. No, they're loud and obnoxious on Twitter and then their movie does bad and they get fired. That's different.
"I've never met anyone who was fired because they won't use "made up pronouns""
> Jordan Peterson lost his application to the Supreme Court of Canada this week for leave to appeal against the decision of the College of Psychologists of Ontario requiring him to undergo compulsory reeducation for various views expressed on social media, all of which were unrelated to the practice of psychology.
>The complaints which resulted in the college’s order were made by people who had never been his patients, and indeed, who had never met him. They were also mostly American and clearly politically motivated.
Compulsory, as in he can't refuse, otherwise they will take his license.
He raised to awareness when complaining about the compelled speech. People were saying that he misunderstood, that he is exaggerating, that there is not a totalitarian attempt to censor speech, that no such thing is going to happen, that freedom of speech is not under threat.
And what do you know, the exact thing he predicted would happen did indeed happen.
Sometimes Discord is still pretty helpful with real-time support. It indeed has its flaws, but some of the best real time help is still given there. I love the C++ discord, it's just filled with gems.
Discord is handy for real-time support as a user, but because those support questions don't become a body of searchable public knowledge over time, they are all doomed. The maintainers will burn out from the endless basic questions.
I hope not towards people that disagree with you or are labeled with an ism since they are monster.
>Extreme acceptance of people from all backgrounds, religious beliefs and sexual orientation?
Does that include Jihadists and child molester/groomer?
>So on this so-called extreme left, what exactly was/is so bad?
That is left as an exercise for the reader if you manage to answer truthfully.
reply