Inclusive Language and diversity in climbing

ViperScale wrote:

I don't keep track of all the different ones but out of all the ones I have seen I think 2 of them if you look at the details of the events should not have had lethal force applied. But you have to look at the entire event not just what you read in the news because they leave out details alot of times to make it look worst than it was. Not to say leathal force was 100% necessary in all of them but there was enough of a screw up by the person who died that you can say ok i understand why someone in the heat of the moment would have shot them.

We have video for quite a few of these. I recommend looking up the following names and watching the cell phone footage of their killing: Oscar Grant (California), Walter Scott (North Carolina), Laquan McDonald (Illinois), Samuel DuBose (Ohio), and John Crawford (Ohio). These five videos are a good place to start. I agree that it was a mistake for the officer in each case to kill these men. And I realize that everybody makes mistakes and doing so doesn't make someone an awful person. On the other hand, we need to get to the point where we can all acknowledge that these types of mistakes have devastating effects on people's lives, that they can be avoided with better training in cultural competency and de-escalation, and that they happen disproportionately to black Americans. If we can all agree that these men should not have lost their lives, that's a good starting point. I'd think as humans we'd all want to minimize this unnecessary killing. And not a single one of these men posed a threat to the officer that killed him. Please watch the video. It's pretty clear. Shouldn't there be some accountability?

Kalil Oldham wrote:

We have video for quite a few of these. I recommend looking up the following names and watching the cell phone footage of their killing: Oscar Grant (California), Walter Scott (North Carolina), Laquan McDonald (Illinois), Samuel DuBose (Ohio), and John Crawford (Ohio). These five videos are a good place to start. I agree that it was a mistake for the officer in each case to kill these men. And I realize that everybody makes mistakes and doing so doesn't make someone an awful person. On the other hand, we need to get to the point where we can all acknowledge that these types of mistakes have devastating effects on people's lives, that they can be avoided with better training in cultural competency and de-escalation, and that they happen disproportionately to black Americans. If we can all agree that these men should not have lost their lives, that's a good starting point. I'd think as humans we'd all want to minimize this unnecessary killing. And not a single one of these men posed a threat to the officer that killed him. Please watch the video. It's pretty clear. Shouldn't there be some accountability?

I agree everytime an officer uses lethal force someone should always review the case. but the first one you listed was a 12 year old kid who had a real firearm which could have killed a human, sure it was a really weak weapon but no way an officer could have known from looking at it. So sure I could look up all of these but if the first one you listed was a case where the officer did what he should have done by killing the kid who had a firearm I am not going to go through all of these (most likely cases I have seen before may or may not have been valid since I don't remember them all). Like I said earlier some of the ones I have seen the officer 100% was wrong and no reason he should have used lethal force but alot rarer than most news and groups like to make it out to be.

AndrewArroz wrote:

I'm going to assume you're asking a real question: It's sexist because A) it assumes all girls want to play with Barbie. B) Is a guy REALLY surprised that a 12-year-old girl kicks ASS at climbing (she was much better than he was) or is he just patronizing her? If so, what rock has he been living under?

No you dip. He said it (assuming this isn't fanfic) as a compliment, remarking that it's unusual for a girl to do what she did. 

Bill Czajkowski wrote:

How would you spell it with less?

It used to be LGBT, which is one less, although your assumption that it would be less is odd considering it's now infinitely long

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KEVazq9FBbU

mediocre wrote:

The only problem is that these mistakes cost innocent people their lives. I'm not anti-cop by any means, but if you don't see overt racism in at least a couple of these shootings/beatings going back to Rodney King then you're ignoring the real problem.  

I'm not saying there's no bad cops, or racist cops, but there's less out there than we're led to believe.

I think there's more good than evil. Racism exist sure, but mistakes are going to happen. No one is perfect and to say all cops suck(not implying you mean that) is not okay. Most people arguing cops are racists are young people(campus kids) with less life experience and don't understand their(cops) job. You can't deny facts, and if you read the facts, and you're a cop, you're going to be VERY cautious, after all you are risking your life. Once bit, twice shy.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=iKcWu0tsiZM

Dave Kos wrote:

My point is that you expressed butthurt toward Frank for not taking your obvious race bait, even though he already took the time to explain his position quite clearly.  That was pathetic.  (And trying to backpedal by suddenly introducing content from other threads is extra weak sauce...)

Using "white male" or any adjective that associates any race and/or gender with generally negative characteristics, as you did, is racist and sexist by definition.  Your prior comments about "white males " is racist at face value.  You absolutely did use "white male" as a pejorative, but your particular brand or racism is so instinctual that you can't see it, even in a thread about "language."

Yes, you are so concerned with scoring some "I care points" that you cannot see the obvious, absurd irony in your own words.  

And there again is the answer to the question you posed to Frank: Many reasonable people don't even bother to have these discussions because there's no point in trying to refute those who believe in the Orwellian logic of "All races are equal, but one race is less equal than others."

You read more books than I have.  Wow, that's a strong argument.

Wow, where to start.  You're like the hustler on the street with the three caps and ball.  Constantly a moving target of topic and inconsistent prior statements.  First, FrankPS is a moron who has refused to disavow white supremacist groups in other threads.  Not sure what "race bait" you're referring to, but if you mean trying to a make a valid argument vs. ad hominem argument, then guilty as charged.

Second, you were the one who asked for other examples of what I referenced.  Now, that I've provided you with an example of what YOU asked for, you claim I'm backpedaling.  

Third, Frank made the lame "I care point" comment as a way of dodging an issue I raised.  Do I care about racial sensitivity and inclusivity?  Yes.  If you think that's a bad thing, that reflects poorly on you, not me.

Fourth, you're correct about the "Orwellian" comment, which fits neatly within this discussion since it suggests that some appear to believe that women and people of color are less equal.  And you are right, as this thread shows, there seems to little to gain from trying to educate them to the contrary.  

Fifth, you were the one who brought up Kafka.  When I asked you the point YOU were trying to make when you raised it, you dodged, which pretty mich confirms that you had no point to make.  You're just flinging crud against the wall and hoping something sticks.  Finally, I suppose your "white male" rant is proof that white males do get butt hurt when the subject of racial insensitivity is discussed.  Maybe you should have thicker skin.  After all, words only hurt you if you let them.

Fat Dad wrote:

  First, FrankPS is a moron who has refused to disavow white supremacist groups in other threads.  

Daddy-o, name-calling comes from those that have no credible argument. It's childish, but to be expected from certain segments of our society. 

Oh, and I love the "refused to disavow" comment. I can see you now, "Say it, Frank. If you don't say it, you're a Nazi." Classic! Classic elementary-school stuff. 

Name-calling? Do you throw things when you get mad, too?

Third, Frank made the lame "I care point" comment as a way of dodging an issue I raised.

It was pointed out upthread that the use of the word, "lame," is insensitive to disabled people. Where is your compassion for the handicapped? :) 

You are becoming what you hate. 

Jaren Watson wrote:

No need to be vague, ViperScale. Go ahead and delineate the characteristics you think are inherent in different races. 

I predict the moment you put your thoughts into actual words, you'll realize how absurdly illogical and racist the position is that you've taken.

People respond to their environments. We have the same genes. We share the same needs. We find fulfillment and happiness in the same ways. 

No "race" of human beings has any particular claim on courage, honesty, honor, work ethic, compassion, etc. To argue otherwise, namely, exactly what you've said above, is the very definition of racism.

This is a problem with common problem with liberal thinking.  They can't discriminate between the idea of 2 groups being different and inferiority/superiority.  For example, everyone learns mean and women are different at a very young age and yet when a rational person makes the statement that men and women are different, a good liberal will immediately jump on them (because they can't help themselves) and call them sexist.  They are equating 2 different ideas.  Just because 2 things are different, does not inherently make 1 better than the other.  Is an apple better than an orange?  They are obviously different.  Same goes for race... If you look broadly enough you will find that there are some cultural differences between different races (obviously not every individual person of a particular race adheres to those, but there are general trends).  Different cultures value different things.  That is neither good nor bad.  It just is...  Ignoring it or shouting down people who point that out, doesn't really change it.  I guess if you are a liberal it makes you feel better and let's you show  how open minded you are or something like that.

Please don't confuse us liberals with progressives

Jaren Watson wrote:

In all honesty, I don't have the foggiest notion of where to begin to address this hot mess of an argument.

Let's focus on a single point and ignore the rest.

Consult your local dictionary and see if there's a distinction between culture and race.

If you can accomplish this without hurting yourself, we can address the rest of your comments.

Culture is created from the race though, so although you add more races into a culture it can change it still goes back down to the differences in the DNA of a race and how they learn to deal with different things. You take different races and put them through the same training and you will find differences between them. Nothing wrong with this though, why does everyone want to be the same?

ViperScale wrote:

Culture is created from the race though

>facepalm<

ubu wrote:

>facepalm<

Have you ever spent 6+ months living in a completely different culture than your own? Not just on vacation but living in their culture working with them every day?

Oh boy.

grabs popcorn

ViperScale wrote:

Have you ever spent 6+ months living in a completely different culture than your own? Not just on vacation but living in their culture working with them every day?

No, but I've eaten at a couple different Ethiopian restaurants, and used to have a subscription to National Geographic, so...

ViperScale wrote:

You know what alot of this is cultural and these days if you say anything that has to do with a certain race you are called racist. I spent 6 months living in Africa doing humanitarian aid work and there are certain cultural things that have to do with different races that sometimes cause these things. That doesn't mean everyone from a certain race will act that way but you know what normally if a race has a certain stereotype it isn't because people just made it up these days, it is because a large percent of that race acts that way. The best way to kill a stereotype is to get your race to stop acting that way. I think these days "racism" comes more from people experience bad interactions with a group than from imagined things, maybe certain groups should figure out what causes people to not like them and get others from their group to stop behaving in that way.

Not to say that sometimes people take these things to an extreme but it isn't always because of some made up imagined trait of a group. Everyone on this planet if you see a person acting a certain way you make assumptions about them based on how you see them act. This is how we group people and how we alot of times make choices on if we want to talk to someone or not, this isn't always race based but the same thing sometimes applies to races based on experiences you have had with a group or race over time. There is a problem with people who may have grandparents or parents who instill certain thoughts about groups and causes a person to not learn on their own or they run into a really bad group that rubs them the wrong way and they want to avoid everyone from that group now.

This isn't always a bad thing. If people that act a certain way hurt you more than one time you learn to not trust that group anymore.

Viper, I'm quoting this one, but replying to the continued comments.

I don't disagree with you, culture has a lot to do with how all of us operate in our society and in the groups we are associated with.

A problem comes up when "race" is used interchangeably with "culture" though. If nothing else, good luck pinning down what "race" even means.

We have a great many refugees in Boise. The two main groups from Africa are people who came from camps in Somalia, and people who are Congolese.

These groups are entirely different cultures, yet ignoramuses will simply see skin color and be idiotic.

The real irony is that the Congolese are coming from a huge, cosmopolitan, multi-million population city, between Brazzaville, and the other (I'm forgetting the name, but it's just across the river) city.

These are urbanites who speak multiple languages, and then come to Boise, which is still....not exactly cosmopolitan.

Regarding police and firearms? Yes, there are totally unacceptable shootings, and yes, it is not as clear cut as the first YouTube  clip that gets slapped on the internet.

It isn't always a race thing, either. We've been in Boise since 1980, and have watched our police department change, slowly, over the decades. 

Here, what I would call "suicide by cop" has happened far too often, including a neighbor a few doors up. That's an awful thing, to lay there at night, waiting for the shots to be over. So sad.

Now? It is much more likely they will save that life, also.

Our police force also has a few women, a few others who are not stereotypical big cop dudes. And, the "neanderthal" image is being changed, even with the guys who still look it. 

Bottom line, though, and a really tough one? I pay these people to shoot to kill, if that's what it comes to.

I've never had to make that call myself, and hope I never will.

So. Improve the process. Improve the training. Improve the hiring. 

Remember, for my generation, the cops were "pigs". Most of us don't think that now. A lot has changed for the better.

Best, Helen

"Pursue justice, love mercy, and walk humbly...."

ViperScale wrote:

Have you ever spent 6+ months living in a completely different culture than your own? Not just on vacation but living in their culture working with them every day?

Plus, I went to grad school at Berkeley, and that was DEFINITELY a completely different culture from my own, and for a lot longer than a piddly 6 months.  Check mate!

ViperScale wrote:

Culture is created from the race though

FFS, no. Culture is social customs, collective intellectual achievement/tradition. "Race" has not a single thing to do with it. 

"Race" isn't even a thing, it's an artificial construct with no scientific validity. You're trying to ascbribe variations in physical features to discrete categories, calling that "race" when those features exist on a spectrum with no discrete boundaries and no hard genetic differentiation. 

ubu wrote:

Plus, I went to grad school at Berkeley, and that was DEFINITELY a completely different culture from my own, and for a lot longer than a piddly 6 months.  Check mate!

So you have never lived in a completely different culture aka a country on the other side of the planet from where you live for 6+ months. I don't know where you are from but moving say from east coast to west coast of the US isn't a completely different culture.

ViperScale wrote:

So you have never lived in a completely different culture aka a country on the other side of the planet from where you live for 6+ months. I don't know where you are from but moving say from east coast to west coast of the US isn't a completely different culture.

Berkeley is a different planet, lol!

Best, H.