Moniker wrote:Asbestosman, since jskains brought up Asperger's Syndrome I have some thoughts as it relates to labeling. Perhaps, it's just the labeling of certain conditions and the reaction we have to them as the people are somehow flawed or all are without individuality. There are many that have been diagnosed with AS that do not desire to be neuro-typical and are quite proud that they have unique abilities. They would never say they suffered from AS and they are quite outspoken against terms such as "high" and "low" functioning Autism because of the stereotypes those labels carry. I understand your point (if it is indeed your point) that labels can often times (such as jskains mentioning nerds and AS) not allow us to see the persons behind the labels. I hope I am getting it. If not, try again s-l-o-w-l-y. ;)
I believe that was my main point when I was speaking about nerds, and mental conditions. A secondary point was just that the comparison itself can be insulting. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints don't like being compared to polygamists in southern Utah even if we have many things in common. Homosexuals don't like being compared with pedophiles even when those comparisons are not intended to portray homosexuals as pedophiles but rather to point out that sexual behavior doesn't get a free pass because of DNA or lack of conscious choice of orientation.
That's General Leo. He could be my friend if he weren't my enemy. eritis sicut dii I support NCMO
Moniker wrote:I don't understand the dispute, I suppose.
I was probably just trying to be difficult. Why we label Down's Syndome a genetic fault is uncertain to me. Genes are responsible for that difference, but then genes are responsible for skin pigmentation. What separates skin color form Down's Syndome is behavior rather than superficial appearances. However, just that fact that behavior is the difference wouldn't be sufficient. Down's Syndome is something which presents inherent trials in life either for caretakers or for the one with the syndrome. Skin pigmentation, by contrast, is only difficult according to human prejudice and stupidity. There is nothing inherently difficult about it--it is superficial.
Sexual orientation is a little different. It is a behavioral change sort of like Down's Syndrome, but unlike Down's Syndrome I have seen no evidence that it presents inherent difficulties in one's life. Rather the difficulties experienced may be explained by human prejudice--as with skin pigmentation.
Anyhow, that's why I think the situation is difficult.
Well don't be difficult! Pshaw!
Well, Down Syndrome isn't defined as a genetic fault -- it's defined as a genetic disorder. I think it's minor but still significant to not call it a "fault". I think we are in agreement with everything you wrote above. Certainly if there is a genetic mutation that causes strain on an individual then it can be classified in some way. I mean there has to be some classification. I think somehow labeling any group of people as flawed or faulted is never appropriate and many changes have occurred in recent years to change some of the ways in which those with any sort of disability are referred. It's a touchy subject, really.
I agree with your comments about sexual orientation. The harm to an individual is not homosexuality -- the harm is the society that would lambaste those that choose to practice homosexuality.
mocnarf wrote: There does not seem to me that there is an absolute definition for bigot . A person that one man may call a bigot, another man might call a Hero for telling it like it is. There is no final arbitator that will settle who's a bigot and who isn't. So the label bigot is only a personal "oppinion" and everyone has a right to an oppinion, even the dull and the ignorant. IMHO.
I think it's sort of a case of "I know it when I see it". :)
Last edited by Guest on Tue Dec 18, 2007 10:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Moniker wrote:Asbestosman, since jskains brought up Asperger's Syndrome I have some thoughts as it relates to labeling. Perhaps, it's just the labeling of certain conditions and the reaction we have to them as the people are somehow flawed or all are without individuality. There are many that have been diagnosed with AS that do not desire to be neuro-typical and are quite proud that they have unique abilities. They would never say they suffered from AS and they are quite outspoken against terms such as "high" and "low" functioning Autism because of the stereotypes those labels carry. I understand your point (if it is indeed your point) that labels can often times (such as jskains mentioning nerds and AS) not allow us to see the persons behind the labels. I hope I am getting it. If not, try again s-l-o-w-l-y. ;)
I believe that was my main point when I was speaking about nerds, and mental conditions. A secondary point was just that the comparison itself can be insulting. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints don't like being compared to polygamists in southern Utah even if we have many things in common. Homosexuals don't like being compared with pedophiles even when those comparisons are not intended to portray homosexuals as pedophiles but rather to point out that sexual behavior doesn't get a free pass because of DNA or lack of conscious choice of orientation.
I agree! Trying to equate homosexuality as being flawed in some way, or a mental condition, is highly insulting. I suppose it would help if I knew what jskains originally wrote. Where are those comments?
Moniker wrote:I agree! Trying to equate homosexuality as being flawed in some way, or a mental condition, is highly insulting. I suppose it would help if I knew what jskains originally wrote. Where are those comments?
When they annouced that the cute little "dimple" on some people's smile was considered a facial flaw, was it highly insulting? When someone considers my crossed-eyes a genetic flaw, is that highly insulting?
JMS
Great Spirits Have Always Encountered Violent Opposition from Mediocre Minds - Albert Einstein
Moniker wrote:I agree! Trying to equate homosexuality as being flawed in some way, or a mental condition, is highly insulting. I suppose it would help if I knew what jskains originally wrote. Where are those comments?
When they annouced that the cute little "dimple" on some people's smile was considered a facial flaw, was it highly insulting? When someone considers my crossed-eyes a genetic flaw, is that highly insulting?
JMS
Who is "they" and when was that announcement made? I think dimples are too cute!
I don't know jskains, do you consider it an insult when someone questions your mental stability, your intelligence, or your attractiveness? Me thinks you find that highly offensive. :)
Moniker wrote:I agree! Trying to equate homosexuality as being flawed in some way, or a mental condition, is highly insulting. I suppose it would help if I knew what jskains originally wrote. Where are those comments?
When they annouced that the cute little "dimple" on some people's smile was considered a facial flaw, was it highly insulting? When someone considers my crossed-eyes a genetic flaw, is that highly insulting?
JMS
Who is "they" and when was that announcement made? I think dimples are too cute!
I don't know jskains, do you consider it an insult when someone questions your mental stability, your intelligence, or your attractiveness? Me thinks you find that highly offensive. :)
There is certainly a difference in approach. When beastie did it, it was just to sidetrack my questions. Now if my psychologist decided that I needed extra help, that would not be offensive.
As for my IQ, people who know me know how smart or dumb I am. Those are the only people I care about. As for my attractiveness, I'll tell ya right now. I am ugly.. And I am really feeling sorry for this kid.
JMS
Great Spirits Have Always Encountered Violent Opposition from Mediocre Minds - Albert Einstein
Moniker wrote:I agree! Trying to equate homosexuality as being flawed in some way, or a mental condition, is highly insulting. I suppose it would help if I knew what jskains originally wrote. Where are those comments?
When they annouced that the cute little "dimple" on some people's smile was considered a facial flaw, was it highly insulting? When someone considers my crossed-eyes a genetic flaw, is that highly insulting?
JMS
Who is "they" and when was that announcement made? I think dimples are too cute!
I don't know jskains, do you consider it an insult when someone questions your mental stability, your intelligence, or your attractiveness? Me thinks you find that highly offensive. :)
There is certainly a difference in approach. When beastie did it, it was just to sidetrack my questions. Now if my psychologist decided that I needed extra help, that would not be offensive.
As for my IQ, people who know me know how smart or dumb I am. Those are the only people I care about. As for my attractiveness, I'll tell ya right now. I am ugly.. And I am really feeling sorry for this kid.
JMS
Well, if your spouse likes you that's all that matters? If you're ugly, cross eyed, mentally unstable, low intelligence and yet found a mate I think you have a winning combination. ;)
Cause it's all about passing those genes on. Right?
Moniker wrote:I agree! Trying to equate homosexuality as being flawed in some way, or a mental condition, is highly insulting. I suppose it would help if I knew what jskains originally wrote. Where are those comments?
When they annouced that the cute little "dimple" on some people's smile was considered a facial flaw, was it highly insulting? When someone considers my crossed-eyes a genetic flaw, is that highly insulting?
JMS
Who is "they" and when was that announcement made? I think dimples are too cute!
I don't know jskains, do you consider it an insult when someone questions your mental stability, your intelligence, or your attractiveness? Me thinks you find that highly offensive. :)
There is certainly a difference in approach. When beastie did it, it was just to sidetrack my questions. Now if my psychologist decided that I needed extra help, that would not be offensive.
As for my IQ, people who know me know how smart or dumb I am. Those are the only people I care about. As for my attractiveness, I'll tell ya right now. I am ugly.. And I am really feeling sorry for this kid.
JMS
Well, if your spouse likes you that's all that matters? If you're ugly, cross eyed, mentally unstable, low intelligence and yet found a mate I think you have a winning combination. ;)
Cause it's all about passing those genes on. Right?
But we can still point to genetic flaws I have without getting emotional. I am fat, a genetic flaw. I have crossed eyes, a genetic flaw. I accept that. I don't cry about it and demand I get special treatment.
Can fatness be given an "alternative lifestyle" treatment too?
JMS
Great Spirits Have Always Encountered Violent Opposition from Mediocre Minds - Albert Einstein
Moniker wrote:I agree! Trying to equate homosexuality as being flawed in some way, or a mental condition, is highly insulting. I suppose it would help if I knew what jskains originally wrote. Where are those comments?
When they annouced that the cute little "dimple" on some people's smile was considered a facial flaw, was it highly insulting? When someone considers my crossed-eyes a genetic flaw, is that highly insulting?
JMS
Who is "they" and when was that announcement made? I think dimples are too cute!
I don't know jskains, do you consider it an insult when someone questions your mental stability, your intelligence, or your attractiveness? Me thinks you find that highly offensive. :)
There is certainly a difference in approach. When beastie did it, it was just to sidetrack my questions. Now if my psychologist decided that I needed extra help, that would not be offensive.
As for my IQ, people who know me know how smart or dumb I am. Those are the only people I care about. As for my attractiveness, I'll tell ya right now. I am ugly.. And I am really feeling sorry for this kid.
JMS
Well, if your spouse likes you that's all that matters? If you're ugly, cross eyed, mentally unstable, low intelligence and yet found a mate I think you have a winning combination. ;)
Cause it's all about passing those genes on. Right?
But we can still point to genetic flaws I have without getting emotional. I am fat, a genetic flaw. I have crossed eyes, a genetic flaw. I accept that. I don't cry about it and demand I get special treatment.
Can fatness be given an "alternative lifestyle" treatment too?
JMS
You don't demand special treatment? Good for you! I suppose that you should take back your marriage license (PRONTO!), put your baby up for adoption as soon as it is born, and null away any other rights that all the other citizens have that you should NOT have because of these genetic disorders of yours. :)