andrewducker (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
andrewducker) wrote2003-07-19 09:01 am
andrewducker) wrote2003-07-19 09:01 am
You and me. We're in this together.
John Gilmore: I was ejected from a plane for wearing "Suspected Terrorist" button.
I'm glad that someone has the moral pigheadedness to stand up for themselves. Because I suspect that I wouldn't.
I'm glad that someone has the moral pigheadedness to stand up for themselves. Because I suspect that I wouldn't.
Re:
Actually, in honesty, I think it was just the user icon. Looks like a bloke to me. Didn't mean nothin' by it....
And I'm not looking to argue (honest!), but why do you disagree? Just curious.
no subject
I disagree because I don't think what the guy did was extreme enough to justify a breach of his right to wear what he wants. It wasn't offensive, and it didn't give reasonable fear that he was going to harm other people (what terrorist have you ever heard of who wore an "I'm a terrorist" badge?).
Yes, it could have been seen by a relative of a 9/11 victim, but that was no more likely on the plane that walking along the street. And, really, a lot of things offend and upset a lot of people. People are allowed to be offensive and insensitive.
As for "what if it had started a fight?", I have absolutely zero patience with the argument that there are excuses for people to start physical fights (not to defend themselves, but to start physical fights). There are people who don't think they should have to share plane space with, say, Muslims. Should the Muslim passengers remove outward insignia of their religion, in case they're blamed for starting a fight? Either we have social boundaries (e.g. "physical violence is wrong"), or we don't.
Yes, the guy (who sounds like an arrogant and rather racist arsehole) didn't show a great deal of concern for his fellow passengers. But, that's not a condition of carriage. If it was, then the wanker who shot his seat back into my face last week, or the person who spent an hour regaling me with reasons why young women such as myself shouldn't travel alone when I was on a train once, would get booted. But if we're going to start having "being a nice, sensitive person" be a condition of service provision, then that should be debated and made public and subjected to appropriate scrutiny.
It means that about 60% of the population will never fly again...
no subject
And wouldn't that be great? :-) Both ecologically and socially...
no subject
Argument-twisting witch. Yes, it would, but I'm not sure that's the best criterion, not least because I might not qualify.
no subject
Hmmm... I dunno. Let's say everyone gets one free trip (past their 16th birthday, it would be unfair to penalise children) on each form of transport available to them. If they cause trouble on that trip, they can be banned. (Trouble could include "unreasonably reporting others" - so that a racist who reports a Middle Eastern type for "flying while Muslim" would get banned for being a troublemaker.) You can appeal an unreasonable banning. A banning wears off after 5 years. If you get banned 3 times, though, it never wears off....
Okay, so it wouldn't really work.... This is what amused me about an earlier poster's comment: so far from having "a slavish compulsion to obey" I actually want to be World Dictator.
But you make good points (as usual) and now I'm not sure whether I'm right any more. Need to go away and think about this some more.
no subject
Distributed societies are great, but being able to meet the distributed people is even better.
no subject
no subject
and you'll get not argument from me on the ecological side of things. Just on the social...
no subject
Re:
First off, I agree, the airline over-reacted. I think, if cooler heads had prevailed, they could have allowed him to travel, and nothing would have came of it. However, you mention 'condition of carraige'. One of those, is, frankly, that you comply with the captain's wishes. This guy could have, easily, and didn't. I have no sympathy for him at that point. He'd made his statement, and could have saved everyone on the plane, including himself, a lot of grief by accepting that he had, and complying with request. When he didn't, he lost any respect from me he may have gained for making the statement in the first place.
Your 'what if it started a fight' statement is correct. And I agree. However, the captain has to make a judgement call. However poorly he makes it, he has that right - the safety of the plane must come first. Again, to comply with his judgement call wouldn't have cost anything.
Lastly, I made a mistake re Yonmei. That's not sexist, it's a mistake. This may seem silly, but I genuinely don't appreciate you labelling me as sexist, when you know nothing about me. I interpreted an unclear image, and the impression it gave me - last I heard, that was what art was about. I reserve the right to have poor judgement/artisitic sense, without being labelled a derogatory term.
no subject
Like
Re:
That yonmei's sex has no bearing on her argument?
That one word of type doesn't deserve this much attention, when it was a mistake?
That innocent until proven guilty is still a pretty good rule of thumb?
That the 'sexist' comment was obviously sarcasm?
That you could just have given me a chance?
That your labelling of me probably annoyed me far more than my temporary mistaken idea of yonmei's sex annoyed her? (I assume she found it more amusing than anything else. Well, I would have.)
That your labelling of me is exactly the sort of thing that would have pissed you off, if I'd have labelled you?
Especially if it had been based on a single, random comment.
Bizarrely enough, I haven't been bitten by a radioactive spider, and I rarely wear red (it clashed with my skin). I *get* the whole user icons don't have to be anything like the user. It was an association - a mistaken one.
You know what? Forget it. Choose to label based on one mistake. Have your perception of me. Knock yourself out.
no subject
Damn,
I'd also point out that plenty of people use icons on livejournal that do not relate to their gender, so even if you'd thought my Mo icon was a bloke, that still doesn't mean I am.
no subject
Or are people not entitled to make mistakes any more?
no subject
Oh boy, if you think this is being hung out to dry... :-)
No, I accept that this is an honest/sexist mistake, and one that I'm used to in real life. If I got pissed off every time someone looked at me and concluded "Tall, short hair, no make-up, must be a bloke" I'd spend too much time being pissed off about that. It would get boring. So I don't. I just mutter about people who see but do not observe.
Or are people not entitled to make mistakes any more?
Fah. Of course people make mistakes. I certainly do. We live in a sexist, heterosexist, racist, patriarchal culture: you have to consciously decide that you will not be taken in by the culture's lies, and no one ever turns round and rises up perfectly free of cultural assumptions overnight. Making mistakes is totally forgiveable: you admit you made a mistake, you apologise if the mistake was offensive, you resolve not to make that mistake again, you move on. But entitled to make mistakes is kind of an odd way of putting it, isn't it?
It reminds me of a story I read on IBM's intranet, about 13 years ago. A big American hardware company had made a contract with a Japanese manufacturer to supply widgets. (I've heard this story several times since then, and the name of the hardware company always varies depending on the employer of the person telling it. At IBM, it was Hewlett-Packard.) The American company wasn't sure of the Japanese company's quality standards, so they laid down explicitly in their contract that they wanted 94% perfection on the production run: no more than 6% of the widgets provided could be defective, or they would cancel the contract. The first shipping of the widgets, 200 of them, arrived. At the top of the shipping crate there was a note attached to a package of 12 widgets separated off from the rest. The note said "We're not sure why you wanted 6% defective widgets, but we produced them for you anyway."
The American company thought 94% was a high standard of perfection. The Japanese company's standards were 100% perfection.
People do make mistakes. Always. And an honest mistake, honestly acknowledged, should never be a problem. But entitled to make mistakes? I don't know if that's the way I'd put it.
no subject
I do think they're entitled to understanding and forgiveness.
(insofar as people are entitled to anything)
This no no way relates to any of the rest of this discussion, it's just an observation triggered by the wording.
no subject
How about, "entitled to a genuine mistake"?
Or, better yet, "reserve the right to be mistaken about something, sometime, somewhere, and given the freedom to have that mistake corrected, and go on living life quite happily without it being blown out of proportion, or being unfairly labelled".
Either way, I am sorry - obviously. And that's sorry I made the mistake, especially if it caused the offense, not sorry about it just because it's now caused me to be annoyed/upset. Yay - you're female. Now I know that, I look at your argument in a whole different light. ;+)
*sigh*
That was a joke. Just in case.
I'm a bloke. I think like a bloke. I occasionally make mistakes, which is definitely like a bloke. I am, however, not sexist. Dumb, occasionally, maybe. But not sexist.
I really am running out of the will to participate in LJ any more. Is there any reason why we ("we", being people in general) can't just discuss a topic without jumping down each other's throats?
no subject
No. No one's entitled to make mistakes. As Andrew says above, people are entitled to forgiveness and understanding, not mistakes.
Admitting that you sometimes make sexist mistakes is not a big deal. You graciously apologised, and thank you. There is a distinction between admitting "I sometimes make sexist mistakes" and "I'm a sexist", and what makes me uncomfortable is your apparent insistence that you're bygod entitled to make sexist mistakes. Which may not be what you're saying.
"Everyone makes mistakes" (which is perfectly true) is not the same thing as "Everyone is entitled to make mistakes" (which isn't universally true). Entitlement is a function of privilege. When a man claims he's entitled to make mistakes, when the specific mistake he made was a sexist one, this to me doesn't look like an admission of responsibility/request for understanding/forgiveness (an appropriate reaction for someone who's made a mistake) but a declaration of male privilege. This may not be the impression you're trying to give, but it is the impression you are successfully giving me.
I really am running out of the will to participate in LJ any more. Is there any reason why we ("we", being people in general) can't just discuss a topic without jumping down each other's throats?
Actually, this is one of the things I like about an online environment: it's possible to explore every avenue of an argument at your own pace.
no subject
An error or fault resulting from defective judgment, deficient knowledge, or carelessness.
A misconception or misunderstanding.
v. mis·took, mis·tak·en, mis·tak·ing, mis·takes
v. tr.
To understand wrongly; misinterpret: mistook my politeness for friendliness.
To recognize or identify incorrectly: He mistook her for her sister.
I was going to ignore this (God knows I should, it's making me ill), but no, I can't. People ARE entitled to mistakes. As much as your are entitled to anything else, you are entitled to be flawed. It's what makes us both unique, and human. People aren't entitled to misconceptions that aren't mistakes, perhaps - that's a different argument. As for being sorry, or contrite for a mistake, or learning from it, that's a moral obligation. However, inasmuch as I have never met a perfect human being (unless you plan on holding yourself up in that regard?), I think we are entitled to make mistakes. Our flaws, our imperfection, give us that right. I don't believe anyone is entitled not to expect me to make mistakes. I am not perfect, and have never claimed to be. I claim the right to make mistakes - it's part of my genetic imperfection. I claim the moral right to learn from my mistakes, and apologise for them. But no one, no where, is going to tell me I cannot make a mistake, that I don't have the right to be mistaken.
no subject
I don't believe anyone is entitled not to expect me to make mistakes.
I agree. There is no entitlement involved in making mistakes or not making them. As you say, making mistakes is part of being imperfect. But arguing that no one is entitled to expect other people not to make mistakes is - in my view - a completely different thing from claiming that you are entitled to make mistakes. There is no "entitlement". There is only - or should be - understanding and forgiveness. I don't accept either that you're entitled to expect me not to make mistakes, or that I'm entitled to make mistakes, or the other way round - just that we should all accept that people do mistakes, everyone does, and this is why we all need to understand and forgive other people's mistakes as well as our own.
no subject
Personally, I don't care if people think I'm a man, woman, flying fish or an alien, unless we are in some context in which it could possibly have any bearing. I don't usually stand for/approve of any stereotyping (whilst admitting that certain parts of certain stereotypes may indeed be true for certain individuals, that doesn't make the whole package valid) [but I do hate those folsk who take any opportunity to go on about gender/sexism/prejudice 'issues' at the drop of a hat when it's not really relevant :-) ]
Personlly, I kind of though yonmei's icon looked like Harry Potter and so didn't pay it much heed (it seems tobe a popular theme in many places, and so says no more to me about theposter than the fact tnat mine looks like a Southpark character [for the record, I;m not the world's greatest SP fan, the image just ticked me)
no subject
And while I know you're not specifically supporting anyone here, I appreciate the viewpoint. You said what I would like to have said far better than I could have.
no subject
Well, you would think that, you're a guy. :->
Sarcasm intended.
no subject