|
Post by Redhunter on Apr 17, 2009 0:44:24 GMT -5
Salted because I'm a salt nut.
Salty or sweet?
|
|
|
Post by Redhunter on Apr 16, 2009 7:59:52 GMT -5
I dunno, why do you?
You, my bluefingered friend, repeatedly refered to the reasons given as 'generalizations' and implied that they did not apply across the board. You did. You refered to them again and again as 'generalizations'...
They fucking aren't.
Why do I bother to keep pointing it out? Oh right, because you keep forgetting about it.
And not to mention that you and DV kept bringing up ONE posters ONE comment from the first few pages as if we were all thinking the same way about the animal thing. And yet, what I managed to get to an actual conclusion with Eric the Blue (which, you may have missed), was that certain generalisations that apply to children equally apply to adults, and that isn't always the case that even in those situations that adults would be the easier ones to handle. This is also a point DV had made much earlier. No, I didn't miss it.
Then again, if you had actually been following, you'd see that eric and I don't hold the same views on that, which is why specifics are important and why a lot od this is degenerating into this kind of shit. I've said it before much earlier at one point what we were saying wasn't that much different, but my attitude towards said situations was what differed. To me, the situation ultimately decides how I would react to a given situation, and that any preconceived ideas I might have would only give me a hint of what to expect, but what I expect may be different to what happens in reality. Yes, certain things you can expect with children, but, they can also be expected with adults, with both cases being dependent on the situation at hand. THUS, my point is presented. A lot of people here HAVE given good reasons, and I haven't said much because I've had no problems with it. The only reason why I chimed in to voice an opinion on here was because I saw what I thought were bad reasons. Yeah, maybe I missed that.
Why don't you humour me and list the reasons and then tell me which are good and which are bad ones.
|
|
|
Post by Redhunter on Apr 16, 2009 7:55:43 GMT -5
Bella.
I just dont' understand why everyone seems to NOT get what you are saying here. Why on earth is this so hard to understand?
And DV, does that still sound similar to racism to you? [/b][/color][/quote] Hey, I understood when she clarified herself with that post. I didn't question it further other than express a curiosity as to why the feelings are so strong (just a curiosity though), but nothing saying that it was wrong. Or maybe you missed that. - ,-[/quote] I really don't think I was talking about any single person much less you specifically.
You really seem worked up to me.
|
|
|
Post by Redhunter on Apr 16, 2009 7:53:50 GMT -5
jesus christ blue, you're just splitting pointless hairs.
My point in teh "theory" conversation was ignored so that you could nitpick it. You were right in what you said, but you dismissed my point for semantics. I suspect you knew what I was saying but you decided to focus on the accuracy of the word "fact".
if this one thinks that everytime everyone uses the word 'hate' it means they are rabid animals, then they shoulda fucking asked and stop making stupid assumptions.
Neither of these conversations are being held up to exact science and absolutes, so just relax a bit on it, okay?
The FACT remains that people say, "I hate carrots" and some others say, "I hate cats" and this is no fucking different except to those who love carrots, cats and children. THEY are taking it to mean what it does not, they are making assumptions and implying.
There are reasons people say they hate carrots, cats and children, and those reasons have been provided. You and others may disagree, but nothing said here has been so outrageous or out of line to warrant this kind of behaviour. It's a discussion and not something we are being graded on. Chill out. But the problem I was pointing out there was that your dig towards trillian who was making a valid point was incorrect. For certain things, it DOES help to be clear so to be able to communicate effectively. Eric the Blue has managed that just fine though.
and like I said, I guess if someone says they "hate" carrots that means they are terrible irrational people. Whatever dude. You're getting really bent out of shape over this. Wait, what? You're the only one trying to ask when you don't understand something?I don't think I said that, I think my point was that if this person really wanted to know, as they were asking me at the time, they could've asked the person they were talking ABOUT instead of making assumptions and asking, "Well, how was I to know?"
I didn't imply this idiotic statement that I'm the only one.
Fuck off with that and calm the fuck down. Well fuck me, Red, what the hell was I doing for the past few pages of this thread? Some of it was good, some was splitting hairs like I said. What part of what I said are you unclear on?Yes, the issue is not black & white, and that is exactly why I was asking questions and so forth. Your vague "generalizations" every paragraph said otherwise. How you can't see that saying that word is not a generalization of it's own while speaking to multiple people who have differing ideas of the subject is confounding.I think that SHOULD'VE been obvious to most people, but then again... here we are explaining that your "i hate children beacause... (and listing those factual reasons)" is different from "I hate blacks because they're loud (which is a biased and racist comment without anything to back it up but racial hatred)"
How wonderful of people to show exactly what I and LF and others have been saying; that dislike of the whole child-rearing process is tantamount to admitting to murder and uncontrollable rage and seething disgust...
Funny I never go this reaction to my stating I hate Fox news or poodles. Guess those are more popular. *smacks his head against the desk* Damn it Red, I've said how many times now, this issue was that SOME (clue, not all) of the reasons given were nothing but hasty generalisations, to which DV made that counter-point of the whole black thing to illustrate it. Fucking hell... And SOME points is a general statement when you aren't addressing them individually, isn't it? Certain reasons given have prompted a curiosity as to find out more, and certainly certain reactions as well. Honestly, what I do or say will have no bearing on the decisions you have made, and I'm fine with that. However, the reasoning given by some have NOT been great, to which the debate stemmed from. You ask for people to respect your choices, then I'll say "Fine, but give me good reasons". What part of, "Don't like anything about them including the following reasons..." isn't good enough for you?
Why don't you go buy an elephant? I see them as equally unwanted items, and you don't see it that way or think they are valid.
I don't think the reasons given FOR having kids has been valid, but I'm unreasonable and vague?
What have you been reading exactly?People DO have good reasons for not wanting kids. Maybe I missed that, but I don't recall you pointing to any reasons specificallly much less as valid points. Do tell.But there are also bad reasons as well. The same applies to wanting to have kids. There are good reasons for having them, and there are bad reasons too. Neither side gets a free pass on decisions made based on bad reasons. In fact, I'd say bad reasons made in the purpose for having children should be scrutinised heavily. Again, in your statement about how you think our specific reasons are generalizations, you generalize the things that you think you have been clear on.
See how this is causing confusion?
How about enough of, 'You' or 'you guys' or 'some' or 'those' and the like and try to actually be specific? I think eric and lf and cait and myself have been rather precise, myself to the point of repeating it all for fucking ever...
Be specific please.
|
|
|
Post by Redhunter on Apr 16, 2009 7:34:14 GMT -5
Or... replace kids with 'carrots' or 'cats'.
Allergic to cats? Well, they make medication to help with that... so, just get a cat, it's the best.
Don't like carrots? Well, I didn't used to like them but they are good for you so I made myself eat them and like them and now I feel sorry for you since you refuse to eat carrots.
Replace this subject with just about anything and no one has a problem with using "hate" to describe someone's personal, that's PERSONAL choice on most other matters.
Insert 'children' into that sentence however...
Red, most of us who have asked "why?" have not gone so far as to say "because reasons X is bad, you should get a kid anyway". All we've done is said "reason X is bad because of A, B and C". *sigh* Why, oh why do I bother sometimes... - ,- I dunno, why do you?
You, my bluefingered friend, repeatedly refered to the reasons given as 'generalizations' and implied that they did not apply across the board. You did. You refered to them again and again as 'generalizations'...
They fucking aren't.
Why do I bother to keep pointing it out? Oh right, because you keep forgetting about it.
And not to mention that you and DV kept bringing up ONE posters ONE comment from the first few pages as if we were all thinking the same way about the animal thing.
|
|
|
Post by Redhunter on Apr 16, 2009 7:31:38 GMT -5
I can't answer how people enjoy having kids... All I know is that I'm right there along side everyone who's happily childfree. But the thing is, I have a twist. Oriet and I tried the whole child thing. Had the best little daughter... sweet tempered, slept a good part of the night... And I came way too close to throwing her out of the second-story window. I didn't feel any 'overwheming love' when I held her... I didn't feel anything but 'SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP' when she cried... I didn't know what she wanted, why she wanted it... But, we had family who did want her, so we let them adopt her. And I promptly got my tubes tied. So now I hear "It's different when it's your child." Well. Nope. Not for me. Life ain't black and white, having a kid ain't the best thing you can do, it's just something that happens. And we either convince ourselves we love it, actually do love it, or try to get rid of it in one way or the other. Once a kid reaches, oh, maybe 7 or 8, then I can deal with them... Everybody?
THIS... THIS is EXACTLY why some people are
rational, logical, honest, and UNSELFISH to not have children.
I can't imagine exactly how close you were to doing that, but the fact that you think it may've happened speaks volumes against forcing or herding someone towards parenthood under the stupid and irrational and illogical and selfish and dishonest idea that it will somehow "FIX" everything.
NO, not all children are evil little crotch monkeys, but neither are all adults good parents.
Thank you immensely, Magni Zeal, for adding this very real and very sobering bit to the puzzle.
|
|
|
Post by Redhunter on Apr 16, 2009 7:23:51 GMT -5
Since it comes down to the parenting why does that preclude you from having one? You don't have to be a shitty parent with a shitty kid. You can be a good parent with a good kid if you want. Why does anyone have to have any reason other than "I just don't want one?" Your whole post could be rewritten with very little effort to say "Since it comes down to the attitude, why does that preclude you from being one (a Christian)? You don't have to be a shitty Christian with a shitty attitude. You can be a good Christian with a good attitude if you want." - how would you feel if someone kept trying to shove that on you? What would your response be? Would you be happy if the person didn't accept "I just don't want to." and leave it be? People have very valid reasons for not reproducing, just like they have very valid reasons for not being Christian. Just because it's a decision that doesn't conform to "societal norms" doesn't mean that anyone's owed a detailed explanation about why. Or... replace kids with 'carrots' or 'cats'.
Allergic to cats? Well, they make medication to help with that... so, just get a cat, it's the best.
Don't like carrots? Well, I didn't used to like them but they are good for you so I made myself eat them and like them and now I feel sorry for you since you refuse to eat carrots.
Replace this subject with just about anything and no one has a problem with using "hate" to describe someone's personal, that's PERSONAL choice on most other matters.
Insert 'children' into that sentence however...
|
|
|
Post by Redhunter on Apr 16, 2009 7:16:26 GMT -5
I'm curious about one thing. A lot of the reasons people have given for 'hating' kids really seem to center around shitty parenting. That's perfectly reasonable, I can't stand brats either, but it is largely the parents fault the kid is the way it is. And what do those shitty kids who came from shitty parents do when they have kids? They're shitty parents. People teach what they have learned and if they learn it wrong they teach it wrong.
The last thing I want to do is have a kid who hates me the way that I hated my stepfather, that will entertain thoughts of murdering him and committing suicide.
That's part of it. Since it comes down to the parenting why does that preclude you from having one? You don't have to be a shitty parent with a shitty kid. You can be a good parent with a good kid if you want. Or despite my best efforts to do just that, they could still turn out just like me.
|
|
|
Post by Redhunter on Apr 16, 2009 7:09:17 GMT -5
Can you guys talk about ANYTHING without it turning into an all out debate? I used to be one of those "I don't want kids" people, but I grew out of it. And If you're still in your 20s and feel that way, I'm not surprised. But there comes a point in time where you realize that you have more to offer the world than you alone are capable of giving. That's one reason I wanted to have a kid. My wife is the best person in the world - I'm the second best - our child, by default, is patient zero for a new dominant form of human. Consider it our contribution to humanity. Consider my shitty situation and the shittier situation that would come out of having children as my contribution.
But good for you, glad you're happy. I am too. I am keen on teaching my daughter the same rational and moral skills I've learned throughout my years. That alone is worth the price of admission. I can gripe and complain and bitch about the problems of the world on the internet and debate with people who will never listen or give two shits about what I believe, or I can raise a child/adult to understand all that I find rich in the human experience and who will go out and make a real difference. It's no contest if you ask me. Good for you again.For those of you who decry the lack of "rational ability" in children, the fact that you find that a sticking point only points out your own lack of flexibility and rational ability. Says you. I could say stupid general shit about your situation but that wouldn't necessarily be true either. It is this kind of "You don't' really know what YOU want" mentality that is a big part of what is the issue here. The assumption that someone else KNOWS what is best for you, or that their situation applies wholesale to yours. It's what fundies do and it is irrational.Yes, she's a pain in the ass sometimes, but I see figuring out her "irrational" tendencies to be the supreme mental puzzle - the ultimate brain game. It's a challenge, and I'm a better person for having taken it on, for I now have a better understanding of how my own behavior effects others and a greater empathy for those who have to deal with my less perfect characteristics. Still glad for you. That attitude also exemplifies a selfishness that I used to feel too, the idea that a kid would "harsh my buzz" or kill the party that I lived in my youth. If you're young, it's ok to feel that way - I did. But again...there's a point in your life where selfishness becomes self-defeating - when living to please only yourself turns into a cycle of repetition - the same stuff over and over again - immediately satisfying, but unfulfilling in the long run. Put another way, consumption only takes you so far. At some point, to be fulfilled, one must actually produce something. That may be the case for you, but you are not the spokesman for me. And this "what is fullfilling" crap is YOUR opinion which you are certainly entitled to. Unfortunately your rigid stance leaves people like me in the cold as automatically wrong and 'less than' in your eyes. This arrogance is your undoing as I find it misplaced though well-meaning. I'm also looking forward to reliving my childhood. I get to shop the toy aisle again, go to Disney, and watch cartoons. I now have an excuse to make silly faces, blow poopy noises into my daughter's belly until she screams and laughs with glee, dance like a moron in the kitchen, and make a mess with my food. I do that without kids. If you're too rational to understand why someone would enjoy that, then I feel very sorry for you. Again, great for you and your daughter, but it sucks that you have to take such an, "either your with us or against us" attitude.
You are happy, and I really am happy for you. Unfortunately your situation doesn't afford others the same feelings.
|
|
|
Post by Redhunter on Apr 16, 2009 6:54:32 GMT -5
I tend to start liking or at least tolerating kids when they're older--about sixteen or so years old, especially if (like Harley and Lazy here) they're intelligent and mature for their ages. They start becoming adults and I like that. So, like others have said, I don't use eighteen as the cutoff. When it comes right down to it, yes, my dislike is ENTIRELY personal. But isn't that what most dislikes are about? You, PERSONALLY, don't like something? It's not any more egocentric for me to say that I don't like kids because they don't do anything FOR ME than it is for someone to say that they don't like anything else. Certain pets, sports, TV shows, ANYTHING--it all really comes down to something along the lines of, "I just don't like it" or "I just don't GET it". I don't like sports, either, but people rarely question me as to WHY I don't like sports or sports players. It IS also based on personal experiences, but again, WHY IS THAT WRONG? I dislike children because I don't enjoy being around them, and I don't enjoy being around them because they have NEVER been interesting or fun for me to BE around. Also, I'm going to say this: I don't like kids. Really don't like them. And just like DV and Bluefinger don't understand or have trouble getting how or why people dislike children, I have trouble understanding how people DO like them. But I just accept that it's a PERSONAL dislike or like--it's just one of those things, it's personal, and they're entitled to that. I won't give them shit about it, I won't say anything about it, because they have THEIR personal likes and dislikes just as I do. I only wish that other people could pay me the same same respect towards my decisions as I pay them towards theirs. Bella.
I just dont' understand why everyone seems to NOT get what you are saying here. Why on earth is this so hard to understand?
And DV, does that still sound similar to racism to you? [/b][/color]
|
|
|
Post by Redhunter on Apr 16, 2009 6:48:23 GMT -5
Ultimately, the reasons would be disputed and shown how they are hateful and irrational, and so forth. In this case, where it is dislike of children, we are simply trying to evaluate what is and what isn't a rational reason The point, which I think DV is getting at, is that whilst everyone has reasons for not liking something, certain reasons are not good ones, and what we are trying to do here is ask "Why?". Most likely, we won't be able to change the feelings one has, BUT, at least we can get people to think more about the reasons they may have. This part, especially. Again, I have made a very similar decision as the majority of the people posting on this thread. I support your decision to be childfree, unconditionally so. I also think that people who look down on those who choose not to have kids are incredibly myopic. What blows my mind are the things like Caitsidhe's comments about "losing respect" for me as a "parent and a person" because I have questioned the logic of someone's thought process. Not because I said I had no respect for people who thought differently or who hated kids--but because I was questioning why they thought that way. Or the way the list of reasons to hate kids includes the "fact" that they abuse animals, when that is clearly a very small minority of kids. The fact that you have latched on to ONE simple comment about kids abusing animals when arguing an entire side of a debate as if we are all saying this thing and in spite of the fact that I adddressed this issue and said I didn't personally agree with it while seemingly ignoring the plethora of real and factual reasons that have been given for disliking spending time with children would be part of it.
I think it's important that people think about the reasons they have for holding viewpoints. I think that applies to everybody, including me. Asking people to think about their reasons or discussing those reasons are all I'm doing here. But in some circles, I guess that means I lose respect. So be it, I guess. Those points have been listed ad nauseum for pages now and you compared it to a stupid racist attitude.
|
|
|
Post by Redhunter on Apr 16, 2009 6:42:42 GMT -5
Red, many of the things that are "inherent" to babies are also inherent to adults. Crying, for example. That all babies cry is true--but why it isn't also acknowledged to be true for adults as well confuses me. Some babies don't cry much at all; some babies cry about the same amount as some adults cry, and some cry for the same reasons. Some adults cry and they can't tell you why they're crying. Some adults cry because they're in pain and it won't stop. This really isn't any different than it is for babies. Not all children are loud. I certainly wasn't a loud kid, and neither was my sister; I rarely cried, too, and then only when I was really sick. Rarely is still crying. One of the points was, "Babies cry." 99% of the time that is absolutely true, and the amount has NOTHING to do with that fact as most kids DO cry a lot. We aren't so shut off from teh "real" world that we don't knows this and it is insulting for you to speak down to us as if we are wholly unfamiliar with babies and their actions. I raised three brothers and babysat all over my neighbourhood. I have probably changed as many diapers as half the single parents out there. I am fullly aware that some babies are "better" than others but it does not erase the fact that babies cry, they crap and are expensive and I dont' want anything to do with any of that. I think part of what I'm objecting to is the double standard that some posters seem to be displaying toward kids--they would hate kids for crying (about legitimate things, even), but they wouldn't hate adults for doing the same thing. WHAT? Who the fuck said that?
I think if we don't like the crying, pooping and mess and money that babies create that we wouldn't fucking like it from anybody else!
At least if you are going to be outraged, base it on what is said and not what you think we might be implying. Asking honest questions is easier than making up shit like that. [/quote] What Buefinger and I are both objecting to is the use of hasty generalizations. Which is where you and bluefinger are dead fucking wrong. The reasons are many and legitimate. You just don't seem to like the outcome, which is obviously your right to do, but that doesn't give you or anyone else to put words in our mouths, generalize yourselves (there are more than one anti-child poster here and not all of us are sying we "hate") or to compare us to MINDLESS hatred based on skin colour.[/quote] Nobody is saying that people should all love kids, not even that all people shouldn't dislike kids. And that is YOUR opinion. Mine is not the same as yours. [/quote] It's the blanket generalizations being used to justify "hate" that's drawing the debate. You might use the word "hate" as a colloquialism; but several posters have made it explicit that they are NOT using the slang term. Then you feel they are a danger to children?[/quote] Especially in light of that fact, I don't think it's fair to say that Trillian was making a snotty comment about it's use; you and eric the blue are the only ones who've bothered to clarify that you're using it as a colloquialism. Other posters haven't done so, and Trillian would be within the bounds of common sense to say she certainly got a different impression.[/quote] Her tone WAS snotty, in my opinion, and her question of, "Well, how was I supposed to know?" is stupid as she is asking me instead of asking the person that she was referencing. It was MORE work to make the assumption and to run with it and THEN ask what was meant. THAT is why I responded by saying she was being snotty.
See that? Calm and rational explanation that you don't have to agree with. Just like the OP is. All that was needed was a question instead of assumptions, attitude and accusations of racism.[/quote]
|
|
|
Post by Redhunter on Apr 16, 2009 6:32:04 GMT -5
Okay, I missed this, so I'm replying quickly: NO!
Black people are NOT loud.
CHILDREN ARE LOUD.
That's why it doesn't hold water.
Is Obama loud? Is Oprah loud? Not once in a while, but are they say, Flava Flav loud?
OF course not.
ALL babies cry. ALL of them.
I don't like crying babies. For this reason, I dont' hang around babies if I can help it.
Blacks are loud is a stereotypical fallacy that is only sometimes true.
Babies have certain qualities that are inherent to ALL babies and those qualities are what I don't like about babies. One is a legitimate and real complaint that is true in 99.9% of all babies and WILL change as that child develops naturally. One is a tired cliched based on hatred of skin colour. NOT the same. FUCK, stop for a second! Red, just read carefully for a moment. In the context DV made the statement, it was as an example, not an actual statement made by herself. An example to highlight the folly of hasty generalisations. That's fine, but her example is still her words and her words are wrong.
Black people AREN'T all loud that is a biased and WRONG statement based on a pre-existing IRRATIONAL hatred and is only true based on individuals and individual experiences.
Babies DO all cry/poop/cost lots of money/are a lot of responsibility/etc. that is a TRUE statement based on fact and personal experience which has proven true EVERY single time.
What the fuck don't you get?It is valid because it IS a stereotypical fallacy, presented here to highlight the problem! You miss the point in this case. Yes, I apparently have missed the point of comparing dislike of children based on the actual actions of all children to hating black people for the erroneous assumption that they are all loud.
I guess I don't like being called a bigot for disliking things I find annoying, things I myself and everyone who has ever lived on this planet has also done. Imagine being offended at comparing a basic fact of human physiology to unfounded bigotry! Crazy!And as I told Blue, that is valid. That is a reason that is more of an excuse or a by-product. As I didn't say that, I'm certainly not defending it. But neither does it take the valid points away.
Children are a lot of work, money and mess, and many folks are not willing to do that or go that route. Many on the other side are treating kids as if they are grown adults in that some babies are to be given the benefit of the doubt when that is preposterous.
if someone says, "I dislike babies because they bawl their heads off," you might not agree with the reason for their not liking babies, but you can't possible say, "until that baby proves otherwise, I'm gonna assume it WON'T cry."
That's ridiculous. ALL BABIES CRY!
Some people hate dogs because dogs bark and shit. That is not the same as racism because 99% of dogs DO bark and shit! I don't see logic in giving a dog the benefit of the doubt till he barks or shits, I think it's safe to assume he will do as all other dogs do. Now, is that hatred justified? I dunno. That's a whole other thing. Is it ILLOGICAL to avoid dogs because one cannot stand to be around dogshit and barking? I don't think so.
Again, you might not agree that it is a valid reason to hate dogs, but it is not as arbitrary as hating a race of people and I find that insulting to say so. There IS a list of reasons why some folks don't like dogs or kids, but that 'black' thing is pure mindless racism. Firstly, 'many on the other side treating kids as grown adults' is another hasty generalisation, because what we have been saying does nothing to insinuate that nor promote that. We have been mostly trying to understand the reasoning AND pointing out what is bad reasoning. You countered my point of you NOT going to RR because they are not people you generally care to hang around with 'i give everyone the benefit of the doubt till they prove they are worthy of it'.
If that is the logic you are using, then you are waiting to see if all children cry before you decide they cry. To me that is silly. Not all RR'ers are fucking idiots, but generally, the board caters to fucking idiots. But no, not everyone there is a fucking idiot. True. But when you find a fucking idiot over there, it's not a fucking surprise, right?
It's even LESS of a surprise with babies because they ALL cry. They all do. It's not their fault, it's nothing to do with racism, it is a mutherfucking fact. AND it is a fact that baby crying is annoying to me. Therefore it is apt for me to say that all babies cry and NOT apt to say all RR'ers are fucking idiots yet we both decide not to do those things that will more than likely annoy us.
Maybe it was dumb for me to use RR as an example since I shouldn't have to explain why disliking children is not the same as being a bigot anyway but I thought you could see that people avoid places that annoy them, and crying is annoying and it is something all babies do therefore it is not arbitrary or pointless as racism is. [/quote] Secondly, we aren't saying to give benefit of the doubt at every turn, just the problem of certain generalisations and certain reasons. BABIES FUCKING CRY. ALWAYS. THEY POOP AND ARE EXPENSIVE.
Those are not generalizations and are specific FACTUAL reasons. The sooner you stop seeing legitimate complaints as mindless lumping the better we will both be on this. [/quote] Thirdly, a racist will have a 'list of reasons' why he/she is racist (though he/she might not say outright, but the reasons given would present itself in such a way). The reasons may still be mindless, but you can still expect to get reasons for why. True, and the reasons for hating children or babies are fucking valid ones that are based on facts. I can't believe I'm having to explain what babies actually do in the real world. [/quote] Ultimately, the reasons would be disputed and shown how they are hateful and irrational, and so forth. In this case, where it is dislike of children, we are simply trying to evaluate what is and what isn't a rational reason Then address the valid reasons given and stop comparing us to racists.[/quote] The point, which I think DV is getting at, is that whilst everyone has reasons for not liking something, certain reasons are not good ones, and what we are trying to do here is ask "Why?". Most likely, we won't be able to change the feelings one has, BUT, at least we can get people to think more about the reasons they may have.[/quote] If you've read up till now, you'd have seen that; mess, noise, money, time, effort and other reasons have been given as to why some people don't want to be around children or have them. Those facts have nothing to do with hating a group of people with a different skin colour based on a stereotype. Capice?[/quote]
|
|
|
Post by Redhunter on Apr 16, 2009 6:10:19 GMT -5
I don't know about hostility, but put me down for "intense dislike" and "extreme aversion." I don't want to kill children or hurt them, I just don't like them as a general whole. I think that SHOULD'VE been obvious to most people, but then again... here we are explaining that your "i hate children beacause... (and listing those factual reasons)" is different from "I hate blacks because they're loud (which is a biased and racist comment without anything to back it up but racial hatred)"
How wonderful of people to show exactly what I and LF and others have been saying; that dislike of the whole child-rearing process is tantamount to admitting to murder and uncontrollable rage and seething disgust...
Funny I never go this reaction to my stating I hate Fox news or poodles. Guess those are more popular.
|
|
|
Post by Redhunter on Apr 16, 2009 5:59:54 GMT -5
Slang... make friends with it.
And just to clarify, I don't mean find the word "slang" in the dictionary and ask it to go to the movies, okay? I'm utilizing colourful language that is not to be taken as the Real McCoy all the time and you can take that to the bank, mi amigo. Then this is no better than using the word theory in its colloquial context when talking about matters of science, where the word Theory has a very specific definition. jesus christ blue, you're just splitting pointless hairs.
My point in teh "theory" conversation was ignored so that you could nitpick it. You were right in what you said, but you dismissed my point for semantics. I suspect you knew what I was saying but you decided to focus on the accuracy of the word "fact".
if this one thinks that everytime everyone uses the word 'hate' it means they are rabid animals, then they shoulda fucking asked and stop making stupid assumptions.
Neither of these conversations are being held up to exact science and absolutes, so just relax a bit on it, okay?
The FACT remains that people say, "I hate carrots" and some others say, "I hate cats" and this is no fucking different except to those who love carrots, cats and children. THEY are taking it to mean what it does not, they are making assumptions and implying.
There are reasons people say they hate carrots, cats and children, and those reasons have been provided. You and others may disagree, but nothing said here has been so outrageous or out of line to warrant this kind of behaviour. It's a discussion and not something we are being graded on. Chill out.
Come on, Red, that's no argument to use against someone who is quite rightly pointing out the problems of using certain words in their colloquial form when for others, they go about the specific meaning derived from Proper English. Maybe SPECIFIC posters and their SPECIFIC words could be used so that when THEY start lumping us all into one big lump of wrong then WE wouldn't be applying their words improperly.
The sooner that some stop treating this as a black and white issue the better, I think.
And yes, I'm wrong because I realize that not everyone in the world means "let's kill him for saying that" type of hate and that sometimes "I hate american idol" is just a statement that means they strongly dislike the show and wouldn't watch it if they could help it.
Jesus christ... Here's another one for future reference, "Stupid" doesn't always mean that someone or something has a lower I.Q., and sometimes, "THat sucks" doesn't involve actual vacuum pressures.
Then again, I'm not making irrational assumptions here and I'm trying to ask when I don't understand something.
|
|