Paris Attacks

[Lord Raven]

Lord Raven, I didn't call you a Tumblr pleb. You know that I didn't call you a Tumblr pleb. What's with the weird aggression? I didn't aim any insult at you until now and that's because you just come off as twisted and bitter because I didn't actually throw any personal insults. You're appear to be looking for a legitimate argument that could potentially turn nasty.

I'm not really looking for an argument nor did I say you called me a tumblr pleb.  I was clarifying my stance on things and clarifying how your post actually sounded close-minded and how presumptuous you were before I made a post.  You already accused me of supporting the Muslims in the terrorist attacks, then you feared that I would make a post that resembles an "SJW" on tumblr.  Yeah, okay.

You proceeded to argue with me despite me not actually engaging you seriously until now. Maybe you lost your cool because you (evidently) thought that I was trying to passively insult you and that's understandable. If you thought I was trying to insult you on a Pokemon forum then maybe you should have messaged me personally instead of arguing with someone who wasn't interested in talking to you.

Don't tell me how to conduct myself, especially since you pretty much did insult me.

SJW is an insult and for the most part because Tumblr regurgitates the same toxic crap without looking at the actual facts. Like when you (Sylar) thought Elliot Rodgers exclusively killed women because that's what you read on Tumblr. Obviously you'll find less-subjective material on Tumblr but generally it's highly subjective and that's why it should never be used as a news source (the same goes for 4Chan).

This is about the Paris attacks, not Elliot Rodgers or that crap.  But I mean, Rodgers was very very misogynistic, so I think you may have been reading it the wrong way.

You will never find non-subjective material no matter what.  I know that SJW is an insult, but it's also clear you were implying it and it's also frustrating when the label is applied to basically anyone that is in favor of anything relating to, well, social justice.  Stuff on minorities, stuff on feminism, etc.

France is sympathised with because they're in the EU and they're Britain's allies. It's not some conspiracy. They're receiving coverage and attention because there has been a terrorist attack in a country and that attack specifically targeted unarmed civilians who had no means to defend themselves. There was no possible way for these civilians to defend themselves against guns and explosives. It's not even difficult hard to understand.

You're missing the point.  Read my post again.  There is coverage that specifically paints Islam in a negative light and you have no problem with this?  I've brought up examples of this too.

Ever seen a white terrorist in the media?  No, you probably haven't seen those words combined.  Because nobody ever calls them white!  It's because they're always mentally ill or something.  They try to garner up sympathy for white people, then they proceed to call an African America/European a thug or a Muslim person a terrorist.  There is a lot wrong with this and this is actually what happens in this world.  Open your eyes.

Let me further clarify that my experiences in Europe were filled with Islamophobia, and I know many Europeans who have told me the same.  I have ever argued with some British people ON THIS VERY FORUM who advocated crap like how immigrants were a pest to their society (despite being half-Pakistani himself!) and who said that Muslims should go back to their own country instead of trying to advocate Sharia Law in the UK when only a small minority of Muslims want that!  France is sympathized with because it's a majority white country that also happens to have more Islamophobia in its culture than the average country (again, look at any French media and you'll see it, and I can tell you about my experiences in Paris if you really want).  It's known for being much more culturally segregated than a ton of things.

Again, this is not victim blaming, these are facts I've heard from actual people living there.  This, in no way, is the fault of those at the concerts and soccer games and all of that.  This is the fault of the way the government has handled past things and how the media has attempted to portray people who aren't the majority.  This is the fault of all of these perpetuating this ass-backwards culture that we should not even see in the modern west!  Yet we still see it, and those who do not wish to acknowledge it try to attack people who do acknowledge it by throwing labels like SJW at them and try to play the pity card where they're like "wow this just happened why are you arguing?"  But I'm not the one using this as a vehicle in the media to advocate war or worse.  I'm not the one exploiting these people for attention and ratings.  Ultimately I am unable to do anything but talk about this and analyze what the hell went on, because I'm just talking about this on a small forum.

The deaths of over 100 civilians shouldn't be used an excuse to argue on the internet. Grow some integrity.

I don't understand what integrity is in this instance.  Are you saying integrity is continuing to grieve what happened?  Because over here, we're discussing the issues.  Your entire point seems hinged by the fact that I seem to be coming onto here to look for an argument.  If you honestly think that, then you're being extremely presumptuous which is what led me to post those things to begin with.  You said that I seemed happy or whatever that all those people died, then you were almost expecting me to be an SJW.

You know why I care about how the media portrays Islam?  Because I grew up in a Muslim family, have met many Muslims and have family overseas.  Their lives are going to be affected negatively by the acts of terrorists who do stuff in the name of god when they're only doing it because some crazies came to power and are trying to just see the world burn.  I'm not using this as an excuse to argue.  I'm conveying my thoughts and now is a better time than any to do so.  This will encourage war with middle eastern countries which will further a cycle of hatred and propaganda towards Muslim people.  It's almost as if western countries could use Paris as a jumping point to actually incite a war, because the way the media is portraying it that's exactly what the west wants and that's exactly what the middle east wants.

I'm actually really pissed that you're assuming I'm using this tragedy as an excuse to argue.  No, I am not, and I posted a few rants because quite frankly this whole thing is ludicrous.  It is awful that this tragedy has occurred and it is also awful how the media is dealing with it.  It is also awful how there's gonna be more death and dying because there is some propaganda out there for the need for retribution.  I've seen some absolutely disgusting views - only from white people, in fact - suggesting we go in and eradicate them.  Basically advocating genocide.  You honestly think I have zero integrity here?  I'm just looking at the facts and how all of this started and trying to assess how the situation got so messed up that so many people have died.

I'm not going to continue arguing with either of you. This is it. If either of you have a problem with me or my opinions then you can message me.

At least take some responsibility for your words and pretend like you've read our points.  You nitpicked one minor point that was a late edit and then you took some shots at me.  Come on.  If you don't wanna take a crap then get off the pot, otherwise you're wasting everyone's time and energy.






Do you now see why I was hesitant to express my views on this?  Literally only like 5 people would have my back on this.  Do not insult my character or insinuate anything about it if you don't want an argument.

[Turner]

I take issue with "islamophobia" when used in the same breath as homophobia, transphobia or racism. Nobody is born Islamic, it is a belief. I'm not excusing Islamic discrimination, but there is a big difference between choosing to believe something and being born a certain way.

If attacks on people with racist beliefs was called "Bigotphobia" I can't imagine there'd be as many people standing up.

Calling Charlie Hebdo 'Islamophobic' is about as meaningless as calling the majority of the internet 'Christianophobic', it's basically putting forward the idea that people's beliefs, no matter how hateful, absurd or comical should not be allowed to be criticized or made fun of, despite the fact that this is done daily in Newspapers globally with political and personal beliefs all the time.

I think if you live in a country that is famous for having no laws against blasphemy you need to accept the fact that your religion isn't sacred there and will be challenged freely. Blatant Islamic (or any religious) discrimination is a bad thing but it's absolutely no different from being brought up with any other kind of belief. We can't be apologetic to delusion just because it's commonplace else we'd still be under Christian rule hanging homosexuals and heretics for some nonsense that doesn't exist.

[Lord Raven]

I take issue with "islamophobia" when used in the same breath as homophobia, transphobia or racism. Nobody is born Islamic, it is a belief. I'm not excusing Islamic discrimination, but there is a big difference between choosing to believe something and being born a certain way.

Depends on if you view Islam as a culture and religion hybrid or just purely a religion.  Because often times, you're born into a culture and you're told to conform or be treated as an outsider.  Happens a lot to people born into said culture growing up.

It's also much easier to point out Islam because the countries that it developed in tend to have a very similar culture.  But again, young children are often discriminated against in schools before many even have the chance to make the choice and adults who were born into a Muslim family are often treated as no different regardless of views they have now.

At any rate, I'll address this some more later in the post when it is appropriate.

If attacks on people with racist beliefs was called "Bigotphobia" I can't imagine there'd be as many people standing up.

Probably because those beliefs are harmful.  The way the majority of Muslims apply their beliefs are not harmful.

Calling Charlie Hebdo 'Islamophobic' is about as meaningless as calling the majority of the internet 'Christianophobic', it's basically putting forward the idea that people's beliefs, no matter how hateful, absurd or comical should not be allowed to be criticized or made fun of, despite the fact that this is done daily in Newspapers globally with political and personal beliefs all the time.

I don't think talking about Hebdo is a valid argument for Islamophobia, but I never brought him up.  Atrocious and unjustified action of terrorism regardless of whether or not portraying Muhammed is taboo in the east.

I think if you live in a country that is famous for having no laws against blasphemy you need to accept the fact that your religion isn't sacred there and will be challenged freely. Blatant Islamic (or any religious) discrimination is a bad thing but it's absolutely no different from being brought up with any other kind of belief. We can't be apologetic to delusion just because it's commonplace else we'd still be under Christian rule hanging homosexuals and heretics for some nonsense that doesn't exist.

First off, I expected better from you than to outright deny religion.  I'm not religious myself but I'm not going to call it a delusion because I don't agree with it.  But this isn't what I want to argue.

Christians are significantly less discriminated against in the eyes of media and culture than Muslims and Jews.  I'm going to also posit that it's not necessarily just Christians but white people compared to people growing up in a middle eastern culture/religion are given much more the time of day in terms of sympathy than white people.  In many cases neither of them are pardoned simply for their beliefs.

You can challenge Islam however the goddamn hell you want but do not apply the terrorism label to one group of people and then just posit that another group of people is just mentally ill.  There is much more sympathy out here for school shooters who are white than a black NFL player talking trash after making the play that got his team to the Super Bowl.  The latter was portrayed as a thug all over the media.

I'd also like to note that this is strictly a media thing where the majority gets their views.  Our Islamophobia contributes to their phobia of the west, leads to a very "us vs them" mentality that spreads hatred.  Especially since the west armed Afghanistan, the west has lead to the destruction of governments that has allowed ISIS to take over, and the west has continued this string of hatred by further by actually taking a dump on the majority of those country's people.  It's awful propaganda that has led to these tensions.

I'd also like to note that Islam is given a far rougher time in the media than Christianity and Judaism.  Probably because most people who are forced to make these reports are going to vouch for the "white" religion and not the middle eastern one.  That garners more sympathy!

[The Shrub Dragon]

*quietly pushes fingers against skull because i agree with like half of what everyone's saying and disagree with the other half except turner who i really don't agree w at all but let's not go tthere because honestly i don't trsut you*

honestly? the way i see it is best thing to do now if you aren't a politician is to focus on offering solidarity to the french whilst filing away the way that everyone is so quick to offer solidarity to the french yet when the kenyan shooting happened etc etc there was very little jump to change flags etc so that it can be brought up in protest later.  but i do mean later, because at the moment it's still very raw and whilst it obviously is not, to bring up the treatment of others beyond passing acknowledgment does at this point - so soon afterwards - feels something similar to trivialising others' suffering.  presently, it feels like 'we didn't get this treatment so you don't deserve it' as opposed to 'if you're getting this treatment then why can't we??'

it's awful. but it's the act that's awful, not that the act happened in paris.  and that seems to be where the miscommunication is happening

nb: i know im naive u don't have to tell me that i'm naive
edit: solidarity obvs needs to be offered to everyone affected by the shooting and that includes people who are now being bitten against over people's presumptuous and bigoted views

[Lord Raven]

Yeah, Paris weren't the only attacks, but effectively because of the race of the people affected it's easiest to get sympathy for them than like Kenya.

In my own country and home city, the police are crooked as hell and the fact that they needed riots to bring attention to the issues that our city faces due to its corrupt police is ludicrous.  This has been happening for years and there was a TV show made to express this and nobody batted an eye to it until riots broke out.  The riots didn't even break out en masse in the city, it broke out for like a day in a very select region of the city when 90% of it was peaceful protesting, but because black people were protesting over a black person dying due to police brutality it was easy fodder to use the "thug" label.

There are seriously numerous examples of this throughout western media.

[lets all go out for some frosty chocolate milkshakes]

can i just butt in here and politely (and ironically) point out that the picture in the OP is from the charlie hebdo protests in january

[Turner]

First off, I expected better from you than to outright deny religion.  I'm not religious myself but I'm not going to call it a delusion because I don't agree with it.  But this isn't what I want to argue.

It is delusional though. It doesn't really matter whether or not you 'agree' with it, the fact is that it simply isn't real. I'm not saying that people shouldn't be allowed to believe in what they want, but we're constantly walking on eggshells with this issue because some people 'really believe it' and are willing to cause horrific amounts of destruction based on their beliefs. If you massacred a bunch of people on a train because you believed a magical frog who lives in space told you it was the right thing to do you'd be lobotomized, treated as absolutely clinically insane and not given the time of day by anyone. Yet somehow, when someone commits a terrorist attack in the name of religion suddenly there are apologists crawling out of the woodwork trying to subtly blame the victims for insulting that person's delusion.

Christians are significantly less discriminated against in the eyes of media and culture than Muslims and Jews.  I'm going to also posit that it's not necessarily just Christians but white people compared to people growing up in a middle eastern culture/religion are given much more the time of day in terms of sympathy than white people.  In many cases neither of them are pardoned simply for their beliefs.

You can challenge Islam however the goddamn hell you want but do not apply the terrorism label to one group of people and then just posit that another group of people is just mentally ill.  There is much more sympathy out here for school shooters who are white than a black NFL player talking trash after making the play that got his team to the Super Bowl.  The latter was portrayed as a thug all over the media.

I'd also like to note that this is strictly a media thing where the majority gets their views.  Our Islamophobia contributes to their phobia of the west, leads to a very "us vs them" mentality that spreads hatred.  Especially since the west armed Afghanistan, the west has lead to the destruction of governments that has allowed ISIS to take over, and the west has continued this string of hatred by further by actually taking a dump on the majority of those country's people.  It's awful propaganda that has led to these tensions.

I'd say it's military occupation that has led to these tensions more than anything else. There are countries out there with far more blatantly racist or islamophobic propaganda than the West and they don't live under the fear of terrorism because they don't have any military involvement in the tensions of the Middle East.

I'd also like to note that Islam is given a far rougher time in the media than Christianity and Judaism.  Probably because most people who are forced to make these reports are going to vouch for the "white" religion and not the middle eastern one.  That garners more sympathy!

More likely because the overwhelming majority of media empires are owned by Jews with a majority Conservative Christian readership. Of course they'll report stories with an anti-Muslim slant, pick up a left-wing newspaper and you'll see Islamic extremist apologists. Pick up a newspaper in the middle east and you're more likely to see a strong anti-west sentiment. Any media outlet will give its demographic what they want, they're not government owned and they don't have any obligation to tell the complete, unbiased truth. They're just there to make money.

It's like going to a pharmaceutical company to diagnose your illness rather than a doctor or GP and then complaining when they just sell you a bunch of their products that don't work. Yes it sucks and it's immoral, but what are you going to do about it? Sue them because you thought they would be honest? If you're complaining about the media then that's really a different issue altogether.

The simple fact is that there is a thriving, growing culture in the Middle East that champions the motions of carrying out terrorist attacks on Western civilians purely in the name of their religion. These people are not only seen as heroes for doing so, but are supported by an extremely large number of people.

The flipside is that a smattering of people in the West are, as a result, suspicious and hateful towards that religion. Like most people, I think that mentality isn't the right way of looking at things because obviously not everyone who believes in X will behave like Y.

However, to some extent I don't think it's difficult to understand where they're coming from and I equally don't think it's the most pressing issue here. You don't even need the media to reach their train of thought, the facts are overwhelmingly that terrorist attacks happening in the West are driven by specifically Islamic extremists with Anti-Western goals. If there was an unusual number of Red vans exploding in crowded public places around European cities, you could be forgiven for being suspicious or scared of Red vans if you lived in a European city and wanted some kind of action taken against them.

I really struggle to see the debate here. There is definitely a case to be made against Islamophobia and it is true that we shouldn't suddenly become overnight terrorist bigots blowing up mosques and gunning down civilians in Muslim spaces in the West just because of a few violent extremists, but that hasn't happened yet and it definitely shouldn't be the first word on people's lips when an event like this happens.

I would prefer it if we got a solid idea of what the terrorists want and then took appropriate military action that would protect civilians and cause the least amount of terrorist attacks in future. I think that's the most sensible thing to do.

[Lord Raven]

It is delusional though. It doesn't really matter whether or not you 'agree' with it, the fact is that it simply isn't real. I'm not saying that people shouldn't be allowed to believe in what they want, but we're constantly walking on eggshells with this issue because some people 'really believe it' and are willing to cause horrific amounts of destruction based on their beliefs. If you massacred a bunch of people on a train because you believed a magical frog who lives in space told you it was the right thing to do you'd be lobotomized, treated as absolutely clinically insane and not given the time of day by anyone. Yet somehow, when someone commits a terrorist attack in the name of religion suddenly there are apologists crawling out of the woodwork trying to subtly blame the victims for insulting that person's delusion.

You're comparing religion to a magical frog thing.  You're already not very credible with this point right now, but this is not the point.  The fact that you think I am victim-blaming here - which I am not doing, and I'm not even doing it subtley because I have definitely watched the way I worded it here - is also a misconception.

Religion is not inherently delusional, and people get touchy because you use incredibly loaded words.  There's a difference between not believing in it and outright declaring it is the incorrect way to do it.

Nobody is acting like an apologist here.  In fact, the apologists are directed towards those who follow the religion who do not conduct such vile actions.  I am not sure what point you are trying to make either other than take a dump on religion, because the validity of religion is not what this discussion is about.

I'd also like to note that this probably would not happen in that instance, and the dude would not actually be reviled by people to the extent that the media is pushing this anti-Islam agenda out.  You're really kidding with that example right?  Because that dude would most likely just be put into trial and sentenced to death without a media stir.  If he were white then it's just a mental illness that is again pushed forward because he was a white male, and if he weren't white then he would be crazy and people would be calling for his head.  This is no different than what is actually happening now with Muslims, except that his "religion" consists of one person and Islam consists of many people.

Regardless of whether or not the dude was Christian or Atheist, he would still only be labeled as mentally ill.  Islam is also given a weird sort of culture-religion hybrid treatment too, so don't forget that.

I'd say it's military occupation that has led to these tensions more than anything else. There are countries out there with far more blatantly racist or islamophobic propaganda than the West and they don't live under the fear of terrorism because they don't have any military involvement in the tensions of the Middle East.

Yes, and what has spurned the military occupation?  What causes people to join the military to do this kinda stuff?  It's the anti-eastern propaganda.  And that whole viewpoint has spread like wildfire in an atrocious way.

More likely because the overwhelming majority of media empires are owned by Jews with a majority Conservative Christian readership. Of course they'll report stories with an anti-Muslim slant, pick up a left-wing newspaper and you'll see Islamic extremist apologists. Pick up a newspaper in the middle east and you're more likely to see a strong anti-west sentiment. Any media outlet will give its demographic what they want, they're not government owned and they don't have any obligation to tell the complete, unbiased truth. They're just there to make money.

You're acting as if I am saying this does not make sense.  It does make sense, but it is completely messed up.

At any rate, it is a pretty messed up idea that "giving their demographic what they want" is what amounts to fear mongering.  The point is that this behavior has led to this stuff.  I'm very well aware of the idea of making money, if you didn't notice the fact that I pointed out someone who accused me of lacking integrity that the media outlets he heard this from are actually profiting off of this.

It's like going to a pharmaceutical company to diagnose your illness rather than a doctor or GP and then complaining when they just sell you a bunch of their products that don't work. Yes it sucks and it's immoral, but what are you going to do about it? Sue them because you thought they would be honest? If you're complaining about the media then that's really a different issue altogether.

I am complaining about media, government, and societal attitudes/issues.  All of those have gone hand in hand.

Before you point this out as "subtle victim blaming", I'm going to point out that the views of 150 different people does not constitute the views of the general society.  150 dead people had nothing to do with this; it's more the millions or billions of people out west as a whole.

The simple fact is that there is a thriving, growing culture in the Middle East that champions the motions of carrying out terrorist attacks on Western civilians purely in the name of their religion. These people are not only seen as heroes for doing so, but are supported by an extremely large number of people.

I don't think it's an "extremely" large number of people, because they rule by fear and spread their propaganda in ways not unlike us.  The west has indeed given them fodder to work with - ie an endless cycle of hatred.  And the west was given more fodder to work with so the media outlets can milk this incident and inspire fear among the people to fight another pointless war that will result in more and more of this crap.

The flipside is that a smattering of people in the West are, as a result, suspicious and hateful towards that religion. Like most people, I think that mentality isn't the right way of looking at things because obviously not everyone who believes in X will behave like Y.

Which is crazy ironic because of the number of religious attacks carried out by Christian groups that are not painted in the same way.  It's dumb as hell because of the mental gymnastics involved in looking at one group of people as tribal, inferior, and violent when their own group has done the same and continues to do the same.

However, to some extent I don't think it's difficult to understand where they're coming from and I equally don't think it's the most pressing issue here. You don't even need the media to reach their train of thought, the facts are overwhelmingly that terrorist attacks happening in the West are driven by specifically Islamic extremists with Anti-Western goals. If there was an unusual number of Red vans exploding in crowded public places around European cities, you could be forgiven for being suspicious or scared of Red vans if you lived in a European city and wanted some kind of action taken against them.

I don't really care to understand it (and I do, I'm not stupid), but I do care that it's a vile mindset to slip into.

There have been shootings everywhere around the US and in the west by the way, and they have taken more lives as a whole than terrorist attacks.  There's no outrage over this unless the victim is not white.  Again, there is far more sympathy for the white male.  I am not saying this is unbelievable or hard to understand, but the fact is that this remains an issue that needs to be fixed.  It doesn't matter what I can do about it, I ultimately cannot, but I'm also gonna call it out when I see it.

I really struggle to see the debate here. There is definitely a case to be made against Islamophobia and it is true that we shouldn't suddenly become overnight terrorist bigots blowing up mosques and gunning down civilians in Muslim spaces in the West just because of a few violent extremists, but that hasn't happened yet and it definitely shouldn't be the first word on people's lips when an event like this happens.

I never suggested anything of the sort.  I never even tried to imply this.  The discrimination is less violent and more social in nature anyway, but I digress.

The issue is everything to do with how we react and the fact that this is happening.  I also get the idea that umbreon#100 basically doesn't see that this sort of racism and social discrimination isn't a thing, but I'm not sure where he stands on that because I just read 5 paragraphs of what amounts to an ad hominem attack.

I would prefer it if we got a solid idea of what the terrorists want and then took appropriate military action that would protect civilians and cause the least amount of terrorist attacks in future. I think that's the most sensible thing to do.

That's the other thing.  I simply don't trust people to do this.

The terrorists basically want power anyway and just use propaganda to bring allies against the west.  It's easy.  It's the same stuff we do here.  This is why I keep commenting on the vicious cycle anyway, because one has led to the other and back again.

[SirBlaziken]

I love how a topic meant towards mourning the loss of the many innocent lives taken Friday night has turned into one big argument.

This is my stance: Those lives shouldn't have been lost. Nonwhite people in europe are going to catch a lot of hell since the terrorist stereotype is going to be pushed even more than it was already, causing a lot more drama within France as well as throughout the world. Lastly, people need to remember it's one small sect within a group of people who are committing this heinous crimes, not an entire ethnicity or religion, and the fact that people are making blanket generalizations on the entirety of said group of people makes me sick.

I'm not trying to start another argument here, and anyone disagrees with what I have to say, please feel free to take it up with me in PM's instead of arguing about it here, causing everyone (including the admins) an even bigger headache. Thank you.

[lets all go out for some frosty chocolate milkshakes]

me in my burqa shocked at all of this terrible arguing itt on our good and green peaceful forum for sharing our love of the Pokémon!©®™ franchise and franchise accessories  -----> 





my 2 cents: its a real shame that civillans get caught up in what is essentially awful and bizarre double standards re: religion/angry religious extremism/war profiteering cos no matter what they're always the ones to suffer and never the ones who made said dumb/inflammatory decisions in the first place. its always a shame and rip to those who died and i really wish society would get over islam as the new boogeyman.

(for historical context about the tragedy of holy war see also: the Crusades)



ps: @echo: fwiw, on behalf of the thread im sorry ur topic turned into a big high moral ground scrabble, no-one read the literal first line of ur post/took the hint

[SirBlaziken]

Someone else who's being rational (besides for Kpyna) and not arguing on this topic? I almost spat my food reading that.

Basically, stop the squabbling and take it to pm's if need be. As Kpyna said, if she wanted it to be a debate, she would've made the topic there.

[Lord Raven]

ps: @echo: fwiw, on behalf of the thread im sorry ur topic turned into a big high moral ground scrabble, no-one read the literal first line of ur post/took the hint

Amusingly enough, we talked in private about how she didn't want to incite any sort of debate on a European forum about this.  Sadly I took it there because I wasn't gonna take umbreon's accusation lying down.


I'm not going to tell everyone to chill out, but the only sense of ad hominem here has been from a single poster.  Me and Turner have kept it fairly rational, and a debate over an issue that results from decades of complex social and political crap is natural.  I'm not gonna be the one to say "I feel sorry for those victims" because that goes without saying, and but I feel it's important to actually talk about the cause of this and not talk about just what happened.

Debates happen everywhere and the fact that people are getting a little bit tense about the fact that people are arguing is a little bit...  I'm not sure of the term.  Discouraging?  Like, we get that this was a horrific thing, but let's talk about it beyond the tragedy that it was.  Let's talk about how government, media, and society has failed them and made these people into victims - and they continue to fail them by fear mongering and inciting a necessity for revenge that should not be there.

The fact that I was accused of a) thinking that it was right for these people to die and b) using this as a platform to start a debate is disingenuous and very insulting.  I wanted to clarify my viewpoint without being labeled an SJW and I want people to at least understand where I'm coming from here without someone needlessly attaching that label to us.  It's a loaded word that for whatever reason is used ironically to bring down people who honestly think there is injustice in the world.

It's kinda funny anyway because Turner and I are pretty much in agreement with most of this and pretty much in agreement that the media is all sorts of messed up but we only disagree on one fundamental thing which is not even relevant to this discussion.

[SirBlaziken]

Then why not simply take the moral high ground and simply just leave it be, or take it up with him in PM's?

[Lord Raven]

Because it's a public forum and I am allowed to express my opinion.  And my opinion is relevant to the topic at hand.

[sylar]

all these liberals ruining the good debates because touching on the tough subjects makes them feel a bit funny.

this is all worth talking about, somehow i feel people telling the other people trying to discuss the white privilege in action here to "take it elsewhere" or "drop it to look like the bigger person" are just uncomfortable that their blissful ignorance towards oppression so close to home is being challenged.

really awkward but not surprising here.