Such is the state of the world right now...

"

innervation wrote:

"

faerwin wrote:

You don't understand. It's the same fight.

Woman in the west don't want to be told what they can't wear.
Woman in the middle east don't want to be told what they have to wear.


Both of them want freedom of wearing whatever the fuck they want to wear.

Western women have had that freedom for so long, what the hell are you talking about? Name one thing women can't wear as dictated by the US government that doesn't involve a work uniform? Now name the punishment for breaking this 'law' - if you can even think of one.

Name one thing a woman must wear in the Middle East. Now name the punishment for disobedience.

These are NOT two sides of the same coin. This is nowhere NEAR the same fight.

I can assure you that woman that wear the hijab are prone to xenophobic comments and are often harassed/intimidated to remove it.

"

SnowCrash wrote:

According to conservatives it's clearly the white christian male that's persecuted.

HOW TO FOSTER BIGOTRY
1. Scour information sources to cherry-pick isolated examples of a certain type of people being bigoted.
2. Draw attention to these isolated examples in a manner that implies representation of an entire movement. Social and conventional media both work great here.
3. Cultivate fear of said movement and exaggerate their size and influence. Make a threat appear pervasive and/or imminent to the audience of subscribers following your cherry-picks.
4. Radicalize your audience by claiming that any "reverse bigotry" employed against the original bigoted "movement" is not real bigotry and is morally justified.

So yes, technically there are some instances of white Christians being persecuted. However, this is rare and usually used by those promoting racism to encourage whites to be racist.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

"

SnowCrash wrote:

According to conservatives it's clearly the white christian male that's persecuted.

HOW TO FOSTER BIGOTRY
1. Scour information sources to cherry-pick isolated examples of a certain type of people being bigoted.
2. Draw attention to these isolated examples in a manner that implies representation of an entire movement. Social and conventional media both work great here.
3. Cultivate fear of said movement and exaggerate their size and influence. Make a threat appear pervasive and/or imminent to the audience of subscribers following your cherry-picks.
4. Radicalize your audience by claiming that any "reverse bigotry" employed against the original bigoted "movement" is not real bigotry and is morally justified.

So yes, technically there are some instances of white Christians being persecuted. However, this is rare and usually used by those promoting racism to encourage whites to be racist.

So basically doing the same thing you did makes a person a bigot? It's almost like i did that for a reason.

"

faerwin wrote:

I can assure you that woman that wear the hijab are prone to xenophobic comments and are often harassed/intimidated to remove it.

My current girlfriend is an ex-Muslim (you know, one of those apostates Islam tells its followers to kill (which might be why I've been somewhat unapologetically Islamophobic recently, although I should emphasize that Islam and the Muslim population are two different things)).

In any case, she's told me she'd like to go back to wearing the hijab. Not because she's returning to religion or anything, it's just comfortable and familiar. It's just clothing, right?

However, she's terrified of people assuming a religion that isn't there merely because of how she's dressed, how her co-workers might react, and harassment from complete strangers in our predominantly Hispanic Catholic Texas city. She hasn't worn it out yet, because she's scared to.

Really got me thinking. I don't have the slightest problem discriminating against a person for beliefs they willingly choose to hold, but assuming someone holds such beliefs based purely on what they're wearing is actually kind of horrible.

"

SnowCrash wrote:

"

CanHasPants wrote:

"

SnowCrash wrote:

Maybe you should actually look for info on the image and see that it has little to do with a Hijab. I guess you have to feel outrage over something.

Sources or it didn’t happen.

Here's a hit instead of making up your own narrative try actually doing some research into the image. Would you know it was suppose to be a Muslim without the hijab? I guess the internet is just to hard to use for conservatives.

That was exactly my point. We have an image that looks like something, you come in here and suggest it is something else, then proceed to judge people over nothing.

If you want to show people an alternative to what they see, then provide a link.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

"

SnowCrash wrote:

According to conservatives it's clearly the white christian male that's persecuted.

HOW TO FOSTER BIGOTRY
1. Scour information sources to cherry-pick isolated examples of a certain type of people being bigoted.
2. Draw attention to these isolated examples in a manner that implies representation of an entire movement. Social and conventional media both work great here.
3. Cultivate fear of said movement and exaggerate their size and influence. Make a threat appear pervasive and/or imminent to the audience of subscribers following your cherry-picks.
4. Radicalize your audience by claiming that any "reverse bigotry" employed against the original bigoted "movement" is not real bigotry and is morally justified.

So yes, technically there are some instances of white Christians being persecuted. However, this is rare and usually used by those promoting racism to encourage whites to be racist.

There is some mild persecution, particularly in internet pop culture by atheists and trolls. Not sure about in the rest of society at large, beyond isolated instances. What I find more interesting is the assertion in the embedded SnowCrash’s quote that only one group can be persecuted, as though there is some limited amount of persecution capital.

Edit: Strikethrough

"

SnowCrash wrote:

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

"

SnowCrash wrote:

According to conservatives it's clearly the white christian male that's persecuted.

HOW TO FOSTER BIGOTRY
1. Scour information sources to cherry-pick isolated examples of a certain type of people being bigoted.
2. Draw attention to these isolated examples in a manner that implies representation of an entire movement. Social and conventional media both work great here.
3. Cultivate fear of said movement and exaggerate their size and influence. Make a threat appear pervasive and/or imminent to the audience of subscribers following your cherry-picks.
4. Radicalize your audience by claiming that any "reverse bigotry" employed against the original bigoted "movement" is not real bigotry and is morally justified.

So yes, technically there are some instances of white Christians being persecuted. However, this is rare and usually used by those promoting racism to encourage whites to be racist.

So basically doing the same thing you did makes a person a bigot? It's almost like i did that for a reason.

Well, to really have your bigotry take off you need the cooperation of bigots on the other side. For example, if you've got a bunch of misogynists, it's going to be hard to convince them that the opposing bigotry is real unless there's an honest-to-god manhating feminist movement out there you can exaggerate the importance of. This feminist movement can then use the misogynists to exaggerate the importance of and validate its own persecution narrative. In this way opposed bigotry movements grow together, increasingly polarizing and politicizing things that weren't that way before.

Because of this, you can't really find fault with steps 1-3 of my guide; if isolated bigotry happened, it happened, and over time enough legitimate examples might be brought to light to show that such movements are indeed real and threatening. Instead, we must never yield on point #4 — reverse bigotry is never morally justifiable.

Edit:

"

CanHasPants wrote:

What I find more interesting is the assertion in the embedded quote that only one group can be persecuted, as though there is some limited amount of persecution capital.

Given the above, obviously any such implication on my part was not intended. Or did you mean Snow?

"

SnowCrash wrote:

Maybe you should actually look for info on the image and see that it has little to do with a Hijab. I guess you have to feel outrage over something.

Little to do with hijab... hmmmmmmmmmmmm



[Removed by Support]

"

Disrupted wrote:

"

SnowCrash wrote:

Maybe you should actually look for info on the image and see that it has little to do with a Hijab. I guess you have to feel outrage over something.

Little to do with hijab... hmmmmmmmmmmmm


[Removed by Support]

Ahmed tells the Guardian about being illustrated by Shepard Fairey as the banner of a movement: ‘It’s about saying, I am American just as you are’

Like i said it has little to do with the hijab.

^So your brain just auto-erases the rest so you can not acknowledge what you wrote is wrong in the least? the hijab is the very focus of the image and the most important icon in it

[Removed by Support]

"

Disrupted wrote:

^So your brain just auto-erases the rest so you can not acknowledge what you wrote is wrong in the least? the hijab is the very focus of the image and the most important icon in it

[Removed by Support]

You have zero common sense. The hijab is to show that its a Muslim women. The flag is to show that its an American women. Would you understand the image if it was just a women?