The "Is this Offensive?" Game - Round 2

[notyou2]

I find people that post on the internet offensive and vulgar.

[tzor]

Without going into the details.

1. It's a generalization of something where known exceptions are common.
2. It uses a absolute among a variable population on a scale with a massive standard deviation.
3. The argument as eugenic overtones.
4. It is only designed to make the person giving the statement a false sense of superiority.

In short: "Lazy and Stupid" are by their nature impossible to assign to a group. An individual, perhaps, but not a group, unless you are specifically talking about the intersection of the group of lazy people and the group of stupid people as determined individually, not by a group.

[Lootifer]

But does the generalisation offend you?

I dont like the generalisation, so I guess I find it offensive.

Having said that people getting easily offended is stupid.

I guess my personal middleground is I am not particularly offended, but I do think [the person making the statement] is a retard.

[new guy1]

People, he could have said any race and it would have sparked an argument. If he had said "does this offend you? The words 'lazy and stupid'", he would not have gotten a response from anyone that was a 10. Adding context like "black people" is the same as putting "dogs, cats, or any other animal". It offends more people to certain degrees. We get offense is a relative concept, but the OP doesnt ask for the definition, it asks for your personal offense level. We get alot of people are voting 10 because he added black people, but he did not ask if it was racist or how you personally felt about it or whether this should be "Is this offensive" vs "Is this Racist?". Just vote so he can get his information . Why does this forum always start debates over everything?

[Army of GOD]

People, he could have said any race and it would have sparked an argument. If he had said "does this offend you? The words 'lazy and stupid'", he would not have gotten a response from anyone that was a 10. Adding context like "black people" is the same as putting "dogs, cats, or any other animal". It offends more people to certain degrees. We get offense is a relative concept, but the OP doesnt ask for the definition, it asks for your personal offense level. We get alot of people are voting 10 because he added black people, but he did not ask if it was racist or how you personally felt about it or whether this should be "Is this offensive" vs "Is this Racist?". Just vote so he can get his information . Why does this forum always start debates over everything?

^^this guy

[Army of GOD]

One more day of voting until the trademarked Army of GOD's Offenisve-meter is set!

[new guy1]

People, he could have said any race and it would have sparked an argument. If he had said "does this offend you? The words 'lazy and stupid'", he would not have gotten a response from anyone that was a 10. Adding context like "black people" is the same as putting "dogs, cats, or any other animal". It offends more people to certain degrees. We get offense is a relative concept, but the OP doesnt ask for the definition, it asks for your personal offense level. We get alot of people are voting 10 because he added black people, but he did not ask if it was racist or how you personally felt about it or whether this should be "Is this offensive" vs "Is this Racist?". Just vote so he can get his information . Why does this forum always start debates over everything?

^^this guy

Pfft, Im drunk and Im posting this crap. Take my word for it though, otherwise Ill rage.

[BigBallinStalin]

People, he could have said any race and it would have sparked an argument. If he had said "does this offend you? The words 'lazy and stupid'", he would not have gotten a response from anyone that was a 10. Adding context like "black people" is the same as putting "dogs, cats, or any other animal". It offends more people to certain degrees. We get offense is a relative concept, but the OP doesnt ask for the definition, it asks for your personal offense level. We get alot of people are voting 10 because he added black people, but he did not ask if it was racist or how you personally felt about it or whether this should be "Is this offensive" vs "Is this Racist?". Just vote so he can get his information . Why does this forum always start debates over everything?

^^this guy

Pfft, Im drunk and Im posting this crap. Take my word for it though, otherwise Ill rage.

You spoke the truth, so...

[AAFitz]

People, he could have said any race and it would have sparked an argument. If he had said "does this offend you? The words 'lazy and stupid'", he would not have gotten a response from anyone that was a 10. Adding context like "black people" is the same as putting "dogs, cats, or any other animal". It offends more people to certain degrees. We get offense is a relative concept, but the OP doesnt ask for the definition, it asks for your personal offense level. We get alot of people are voting 10 because he added black people, but he did not ask if it was racist or how you personally felt about it or whether this should be "Is this offensive" vs "Is this Racist?". Just vote so he can get his information . Why does this forum always start debates over everything?

What would you propose the new use of the forum be, if not to debate?

And be careful, you are very close to what I would consider debating how people should respond to a particular thread...

[Army of GOD]

According to CC, "blacks are lazy and stupid" measured at 6.9 AoGs (SI unit for offensiveness).

New poll is up.

[Man United]

"Blacks are better than whites at basketball" does not even slightly offend me.

[Army of GOD]

god dammit, how do I reset the poll?

[BigBallinStalin]

god dammit, how do I reset the poll?

Delete one of the poll options, submit, then repaste it back in?

[Army of GOD]

god dammit, how do I reset the poll?

Delete one of the poll options, submit, then repaste it back in?

[BigBallinStalin]

Not offensive - 0,
but definitely incorrect/poorly worded.

[Lootifer]

le sigh, we've explained this.

I was hoping for something more interesting than our usual good bigotry vs bad bigotry crap.

[Lootifer]

why did spoiler tags not work? :S

[Army of GOD]

iunno =(

[Lootifer]

I saw it though so your effort wasnt wasted

[new guy1]

People, he could have said any race and it would have sparked an argument. If he had said "does this offend you? The words 'lazy and stupid'", he would not have gotten a response from anyone that was a 10. Adding context like "black people" is the same as putting "dogs, cats, or any other animal". It offends more people to certain degrees. We get offense is a relative concept, but the OP doesnt ask for the definition, it asks for your personal offense level. We get alot of people are voting 10 because he added black people, but he did not ask if it was racist or how you personally felt about it or whether this should be "Is this offensive" vs "Is this Racist?". Just vote so he can get his information . Why does this forum always start debates over everything?

What would you propose the new use of the forum be, if not to debate?

And be careful, you are very close to what I would consider debating how people should respond to a particular thread...

I should rephrase, why discuss if it is racist when it is asking if its offensive? You should discuss the level of offensiveness and if racism had something to do with it then throw in "I probably wouldnt have been quite as offended if race wasnt involved" and it suddenly becomes a tag on to WHY it offended you. And I am not debating what should be posted, Im just saying I opened this topic expecting to read funny comments/more offensive remarks/"oh god thats so offensive", not "Why you gonna throw that entire race under the bus? Thats so racist, you need to rename this topic". I wouldnt say Im starting a debate, Id say Im trying to put the debate on the correct topic

[jay_a2j]

It's not offensive, it's ignorant. When you use blanket statements it shows you aren't very bright.

^ This STILL holds true and will continue to be so as long as these polls are BLANKET STATEMENTS!

[Lootifer]

Not 100% sold.

There's a biological reason why black men tend to be superior than white men at sport, over and above the cultural differences.

I dont think its biological that makes, in a very very very general sense, black people showing evidence of being lazier (as relfected by say welfare statistics). Its a cultural thing; black people fall into, on average, lower socioeconomic groups, than their white counterparts. There's a cause and effect relationship between low socio-economic groups and the use of welfare.

Compared to the basketball thing; there is some element of genetics involved. Here is a quote from run-down that describes the point im trying to make:

Scientists are definitive in their findings that athletes of West African ancestry are the most anaerobically efficient athletes, East African are the fittest aerobically, and whites fall in the middle.

For years it was axiomatic that muscles have two types of fibers - white, or fast-twitch, which were thought to be adapted for power movements, such as leaping or sprinting; and red, or slow-twitch, which were adapted for endurance. Now we know the model is more complicated. There are in fact two different types of fast-twitch fibers, one more metabolically efficient. Whites on average have a higher percentage of slow-twitch fibers than West African blacks who generally have more of both types of fast-twitch fibers.

Geneticist and exercise physiologist Claude Bouchard at Laval University in Quebec City, has run numerous experiments comparing two populations, French-Canadian and West African students. Using long needles inserted into the thighs of test subjects, Bouchard's team extracted tiny sections of fibers, which look to the naked eye like pieces of raw meat. They were chemically treated to reveal metabolic differences, put on a glass slide, and slipped under a high-power microscope, where they appeared as a collage of tiny red and white crocodile scales. The West Africans, by a ratio of approximately two to one, had more of the larger fast-twitch fibers. The researchers concluded that the force generating capacity of type-II muscle fibers at high velocity, the speed and tempo of movements, and the capacity of an individual to adapt to exercise training are all genetically influenced.

Although physical activity can improve fitness, it generally cannot alter a person's biological endowment by converting fast-twitch fibers to slow-twitch ones, or vice versa (although people do gradually and permanently lose fast-twitch muscles as a result of aging). It's estimated that 40 percent is due to environmental influences such as exercise, whereas 45 percent is associated with genetic factors (the remaining 15 percent is due to sampling error). At the far end of the performance bell curve in sprinting, where small differences can be crucial, genetics clearly circumscribes possibility.

An extreme (and not quite accurate but makes the point) analogy would be to say Men are better basketball players than Woman.

Oh and my point I gues is that stating a fact of life cannot be offensive.