Where the design community meets.
I think this is a common fallacy. Even application of logic between two groups does not equal justice if one of the groups has been disadvantaged before.
I like the example of a race between two contestants where one of them just got their leg broken with a baseball bat. Even with perfectly fair rules during the race itself, no one would call it "fair".
I hope that explains why "women only" and "white men only" events are not quite the same thing. In one case the goal is to help a traditionally disadvantaged group, in the other the goal is to preserve the advantages of a traditionally powerful group.
Which conference's slogan or agenda is "preserve the advantages of a traditionally powerful group". Your statement oozes logical fallicy.
I'm trying to explain why a hypothetical white-men-only event would not be the same thing. Even with the best intentions in the world, they would de facto be giving an unfair advantage (being able to attend the event) to a group that doesn't need it, thus reinforcing existing imbalances.
So handicap the advantaged or bar them from congregating, however you want to put it to balance the scales a bit, let other groups 'catch up'. Can't beat 2017 social justice logic!
Yep that's exactly it, glad you got it! :)
Affirmative Action 2.0! Neither novel or just ;)
You're missing the point, although I'm unclear on whether it's intentional.
Let me spell it out for you as clearly as possible: if you're like me, you benefit from all sorts of systemic discrimination whether you like it or not. If you want to get rid of said-discrimination, you need to take action against it. This isn't meant to hurt your feelings, but this really isn't about you. Here are your options:
I'm happy to answer any questions you may have.
You are missing the point; and those are YOU'RE options. You are responding to one of my options right now; not accept this groupthink drivel. Happy to keep responding, no questions for you, thanks!
"your" would be the possessive form you're looking for. Accuracy in a debate is important, logically.
And you know a debate is truly over when one party is left resorting to grammar retorts. Grasping at straws, are you (yoda voice).
I thought it was over with the name calling, but call it where you see it. I'm poking fun at you because despite your huff-and-puff as the only rational actor in the room, you're human and make mistakes. As for grasping at straws, it's 5:30 on a Friday and god help me I'm reading your comments on Designer News rather than slipping into an end of week whiskey with my friends; I'll grasp at what I can take.
Maybe take a break from the keyboard. When things cool down try to wonder why so many people took issue with your points (and how you stated them). Even if you wind up not agreeing, at least you'd put the effort into understanding rather than dismissing with a worn-in conclusion that you came here to grieve over.
Life evolves past high school popularity contests; didn’t get the memo? And besides, looking at the upvotes I’m pleasantly surprised by the show of support. Not surprised others don’t want to deal with the mindless horde like I have.
I will never tire of standing up for logic and virtue. Enjoy your whiskey, I’m headed to my friends studio to unwind too. Let me know if you need any more clarity during your journey of self loathing.
Good thing you got an edit in on that 'retorts', right? ;)
Meh, touchscreens don’t work great in the shower but I wanted to keep you focused on more than minutiae ;)
Where the design community meets.
Designer News is a large, global community of people working or interested in design and technology.