If those are the rules, the rules here are pretty messed up.
rules should apply to everybody equally. Dehumanizing language should be allowed for anyone, if it isn't allowed.>NOBODY was advocating for the eradication of males. The hypothetical presented it, and it was on the line. The conversation was brought over the line into KILL THE MEN RIGHT NOW by people who took it there out of fear, not to answer the hypothetical
the hypothetical expressed a top explicitly argued in favor of throughout the entire thread involved specifically getting rid of a massive chunk of the population. You can call it hypothetical, and that's fine, but in that case, if I made the exact same thread, but swapped out the words men for black people, it should be just as acceptable.
you know that wouldn't be the case, however. You would delete the thread. This is why I say the rules are not fair, they are not just, they applied differently for different peoples, and that is wrong. If it is not okay to hypothetically advocate the genocide of a particular race, it should not be okay to hypothetically advocate the genocide of particular gender.>... i hope you will remain this empathetic and passionate when other groups are gently brushed up against, like has happened in this OP.
I always have, consistently, throughout the years.
Do you know why?
because I apply my principles to everyone. Regardless of race, color or Creed. Everybody equaly gets the same treatment. Everyone enjoys the same rights. everyone is held accountable to the same laws. That is what I desire.>...here's a deal. i can understand where you're coming from, Noonim. If you can help me by not being racist in the future, i can assure you that the staff will take reports against this sort of thread more seriously in the future too.
What I had done was not racist. demonstrating an inconsistency with in somebody else's logic using historic examples, explicitly examples that that person disagrees with, as does the person using them as an example, is not racist
You know well that I am not a racist.
I have some distaste for particular cultures, but that is all. And that is not raised. Race does not equate to culture.
I have not been, was not, and will never be, a racist, or act in a racist manner. I wholeheartedly deny, and rather strongly take offense, at the insinuation that I have been. I have not.>do you not feel as if this is... just maaaaaybe the pot calling the kettle black?
as stated, I never brought it up until after you had decided to shut down a particular argumentation against OP.
Though personally I don't think it's a particularly radical assumption, given op spent the entirety of that thread defending, and arguing for, what he had said in the op.
Do you not think what was said in the op involved genocide?
Do you deny that op spend his time with in the thread specifically arguing that the answer to his question was yes?>Why do you assume the worst of people, going from 0 to genocide like this, and then expect some sort of grace in return?
Because OP spent his time with in the thread arguing that the answer to his question was yes.
Ops hypothetical explicitly involved getting rid of a massive chunk of the population. A specific group of the population.>You brought up genocide, and turned the topic into genocide. Your side of the argument then implicated racism, and ran with it.
I am sorry, but, it is a fact that the op contained within the given scenario genocide.
So, no, I didn't just pull it up out of the aether.
I did not imply racism, I implied bigotry.
This site as you put it brought up the racist arguments used in the past with the same exact statistics that op was using in regards to gender as a case and point for why his standards not only do not work, but, are inconsistent on his part.>Because they're different things, with totally different contexts. "Why can i throw the tennis ball at the wall, but not at the window?" Because the ball bounces off of one, and crashes through the other, causing property damage.
A better case would be "why can I throw a tennis ball at Jerry, but not at Jim?", "Because Jim has been hit by a tennis ball in the past."