2 2
winsor

Woke is a Joke

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, winsor said:

Bad guess.

The issue is not so much that I don't agree that various things are problems, but that I differ greatly regarding what constitutes a 'solution.'

Gays having to be closeted is not okay, and making a big deal about it is not much better.  I'd rather have someone vote for or against the new sewage plant on it's merits, not because they are part of a particular voting bloc - be it Irish Catholics, or Gays or Masons or whatever.

Making a big deal about 'racism' has the unintended consequence of entrenching racial divides, which is a bad thing from where I sit.

If someone wants to live the role of the opposite sex, I don't see the harm in it.  Enough people have regretted surgical 'transition' for me to look askance at vivisection as part of the deal, particularly if I'm expected to pay for it.  People have undergone cosmetic surgery to achieve all sorts of effects, and I am wildly indifferent to the mass majority of it - so long as they pay for it out of pocket.

Effecting 'transition' on little kids or before the age of majority, however, is a REALLY  BAD IDEA.  I know people who thought they were straight until adulthood, people who came out as straight as adults, and what have you.  Adolescents have a poor track record of making long term decisions, and if someone still wants to live life as something else once they reach majority, fine.

I have reported to, and had report to me, people of a pretty wide range of race, sex, sexual preference and so forth.  Since I never dated at work ('don't put your meat where you get your bread'), whether the women with whom I worked were lesbians or breeders was immaterial.  Actually, you're much more likely to hear about family issues, good and bad, amongst straight women; the lesbians with whom I have worked have been very professional and kept their personal lives to themselves.

If someone is an Ed Wood type, who is straight but likes to wear pretty things, or wants to think of themselves as a 'woman,' it's h a matter of indifference in and of itself.

When the papers breathlessly announced that a 'man' had given birth, I was impressed until I found out that this person had an uterus.  Forgive me if I call bullshit on that story.

I don't have any problem jumping with someone I trust in the air, and that has nothing to do with sexual preference, what they wear besides a jumpsuit, what their great grandparents went through and so forth.  I was routinely assigned to mentor stunning females just off student status because my sole focus was keeping them alive.  I took to Al Gramando's policy that dating people for whom you are responsible is unprofessional - and grounds for instant dismissal.

I reserve the right to determine what is important TO ME.  I do not claim that my position is universal, but will certainly call bullshit if someone actively wants me to buy into make-believe.

 

BSBD,

Winsor

 

 

Another first class example of writing for effect. I especially enjoyed the bit about being "routinely assigned to mentor stunning females just off student status". Given that stunning student females at the DZ, many of whom are likely "breeders", are so common as to be a banality you must have been a busy beaverer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

Another first class example of writing for effect. I especially enjoyed the bit about being "routinely assigned to mentor stunning females just off student status". Given that stunning student females at the DZ, many of whom are likely "breeders", are so common as to be a banality you must have been a busy beaverer.

Hey, you were supposed to praise him for restraining himself and not sexually harassing them.

He's really proud of not doing crimes, it's really difficult you know?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

Another first class example of writing for effect. I especially enjoyed the bit about being "routinely assigned to mentor stunning females just off student status". Given that stunning student females at the DZ, many of whom are likely "breeders", are so common as to be a banality you must have been a busy beaverer.

?

When jumpers came off student status, up jumpers were told to jump with them and keep them safe.

Attractive women were problematic in that some guys would pay more attention to impressing them than to their safety.  There was a shorter list of jumpers that would be assigned to them, where the sole point was to develop safety skills.

I feel badly that one of my charges later married a BASE jumper, and she died from a cliff strike.  It was like losing a little sister.

Upon reflection, it was no less gratifying to have a male neophyte, who had become frustrated with the sport, tell me that they learned to relax and enjoy themselves by jumping with me.

My point is that regardless of whether I found someone attractive or not, they got the same attention to safety and having a good time jumping.  Equal treatment.

 

BSBD,

Winsor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, winsor said:

Gays having to be closeted is not okay, and making a big deal about it is not much better.  I'd rather have someone vote for or against the new sewage plant on it's merits, not because they are part of a particular voting bloc - be it Irish Catholics, or Gays or Masons or whatever.

 

Since the days of Martin Luther King and Stonewall, the admonition to gays/blacks/minorities/civil rights leaders etc to "shut the fuck up and not make such a big deal about it" has been the #1 tactic by opponents to equality.  But if they had listened to such complaints, we would today not have gay marriage, improving equality for blacks and fairly similar rights for all religions.

So I have no doubt that you would have implored MLK to "not make such a big deal about it" since you weren't racist and therefore he annoyed you.  Fortunately, people like you were ignored, and MLK went on to make a big deal about racism, and ended up making a fairly big difference - even if the whites of the time really wanted him to shut the fuck up.  (And even if they eventually DID shut him up permanently.)

Quote

, whether the women with whom I worked were lesbians or breeders was immaterial.

Might I suggest that when a man manages women, the fact that he divides them into either breeders or lesbians is sort of material?

I've had a lot of women work for me.  One was transgender.  I considered them to be engineers.

Quote

I reserve the right to determine what is important TO ME.

Absolutely.  You can decide not to study CRT, even though you regularly discuss such issues.  Up to you.  When you decide that the entire field of study is worthless and should be discarded, you are now trying to decide what is right FOR OTHERS.  That's where you run into trouble.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, winsor said:

?

When jumpers came off student status, up jumpers were told to jump with them and keep them safe.

Attractive women were problematic in that some guys would pay more attention to impressing them than to their safety.  There was a shorter list of jumpers that would be assigned to them, where the sole point was to develop safety skills.

I feel badly that one of my charges later married a BASE jumper, and she died from a cliff strike.  It was like losing a little sister.

Upon reflection, it was no less gratifying to have a male neophyte, who had become frustrated with the sport, tell me that they learned to relax and enjoy themselves by jumping with me.

My point is that regardless of whether I found someone attractive or not, they got the same attention to safety and having a good time jumping.  Equal treatment.

 

BSBD,

Winsor

Thank you kindly for the lesson on how DZ's operate and the horrendous pressures borne by the few who truly care. Seriously, it's not just your self you're overly full of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, billvon said:

Since the days of Martin Luther King and Stonewall, the admonition to gays/blacks/minorities/civil rights leaders etc to "shut the fuck up and not make such a big deal about it" has been the #1 tactic by opponents to equality.  But if they had listened to such complaints, we would today not have gay marriage, improving equality for blacks and fairly similar rights for all religions.

So I have no doubt that you would have implored MLK to "not make such a big deal about it" since you weren't racist and therefore he annoyed you.  Fortunately, people like you were ignored, and MLK went on to make a big deal about racism, and ended up making a fairly big difference - even if the whites of the time really wanted him to shut the fuck up.  (And even if they eventually DID shut him up permanently.)

Might I suggest that when a man manages women, the fact that he divides them into either breeders or lesbians is sort of material?

I've had a lot of women work for me.  One was transgender.  I considered them to be engineers.

Absolutely.  You can decide not to study CRT, even though you regularly discuss such issues.  Up to you.  When you decide that the entire field of study is worthless and should be discarded, you are now trying to decide what is right FOR OTHERS.  That's where you run into trouble.

You project as a matter of course.

"A man sees in others what he knows of himself."   Socrates

If a writer makes claims that violate the laws of thermodynamics, or bases their thesis on demonstrable falsehoods, it is a fool's errand to 'study' their work.  So it is with CRT.

The 'field of study' is not 'worthless,' it is of negative net value.  You have yet to say anything to dispute the observation that CRT is based on racial differences and is thus divisive.

 

BSBD,

Winsor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, JoeWeber said:

Thank you kindly for the lesson on how DZ's operate and the horrendous pressures borne by the few who truly care. Seriously, it's not just your self you're overly full of.

If you have anything to add, great.  Abuse I can get anywhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, winsor said:

?

When jumpers came off student status, up jumpers were told to jump with them and keep them safe.

Attractive women were problematic in that some guys would pay more attention to impressing them than to their safety.  There was a shorter list of jumpers that would be assigned to them, where the sole point was to develop safety skills.

I feel badly that one of my charges later married a BASE jumper, and she died from a cliff strike.  It was like losing a little sister.

Upon reflection, it was no less gratifying to have a male neophyte, who had become frustrated with the sport, tell me that they learned to relax and enjoy themselves by jumping with me.

My point is that regardless of whether I found someone attractive or not, they got the same attention to safety and having a good time jumping.  Equal treatment.

 

BSBD,

Winsor

Hi Winsor,

Re:  Attractive women * were problematic in that some guys would pay more attention to impressing them than to their safety.

Back in the day, that was referred to as 'The bird and the bees.'

Nothing new here.  Move on, folks.

Jerry Baumchen

*  If she had not been attractive, I would have never met my wife.  It is what it is.  I recommend that you do not try to change it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, winsor said:

The 'field of study' is not 'worthless,' it is of negative net value.  You have yet to say anything to dispute the observation that CRT is based on racial differences and is thus divisive.

It is indeed divisive - because white men who stand to lose privilege do not like it.   So it was with MLK, and Desmond Tutu, and Harvey Milk, and Elie Wiesel, and Malcolm X, and Nelson Mandela.  All divisive, often hated figures in history who nonetheless made a big difference, and we are better off today for their divisiveness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, JerryBaumchen said:

Hi Winsor,

Re:  Attractive women * were problematic in that some guys would pay more attention to impressing them than to their safety.

Back in the day, that was referred to as 'The bird and the bees.'

Nothing new here.  Move on, folks.

Jerry Baumchen

*  If she had not been attractive, I would have never met my wife.  It is what it is.  I recommend that you do not try to change it.

 

I really shouldn't have gone down that particular rabbit hole.

From the standpoint of the workplace, the only thing that matters is if I trust their work.  There are people I don't particularly like, and I avoid conversing with them, but I would stake my life on their numbers.  There are people I like a lot that I wouldn't hire.

 

BSBD,

Winsor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, billvon said:

It is indeed divisive - because white men who stand to lose privilege do not like it.   So it was with MLK, and Desmond Tutu, and Harvey Milk, and Elie Wiesel, and Malcolm X, and Nelson Mandela.  All divisive, often hated figures in history who nonetheless made a big difference, and we are better off today for their divisiveness.

Good racism, I get it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, winsor said:

If a writer makes claims that violate the laws of thermodynamics, or bases their thesis on demonstrable falsehoods, it is a fool's errand to 'study' their work.  So it is with CRT.

Yet when that writer is a "journalist" you just claim you get your information from all kinds of sources....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, winsor said:

I am nor alone in viewing the Woke crowd as sanctimonious and humorless:

Of course you're not alone.  Plenty of people think skydivers all have a death wish, and jump because they wish to narrowly cheat death, all the while looking forward to the day they die skydiving.

And since there's a lot of them, they must be right, eh?  Remember - the plural of opinion is fact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SkyDekker said:

You don't want discourse, you want confirmation of your self-perceived superiority.

If someone has a basis to support another standpoint, great.  If all they have is abuse, it tends to suggest that they are given to a mediocre thought process - if any.

The whole good/bad thing is, of course, subjective.  Mutual loathing does not imply that one side is better or worse than the other, just that they are not compatible.

I do not consider my standards to be universal, and have no expectation that I should ever get full agreement.  If someone disagrees and sees fit to make their case in a coherent manner, I will certainly take it under advisement.

 

BSBD,

Winsor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

2 2