• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Belinda Carlisle

This is not an "observation":

"I know. But the kind of people attracted to the east and west coasts are... you know."

It's an (at best) ignorant generalization.

I see it as some people like to live where there is a lot of excitement. The problem is, that attract all kinds, so there are not just nice people living there.

There is also a lot of narcotic activity.
 
I see it as some people like to live where there is a lot of excitement. The problem is, that attract all kinds, so there are not just nice people living there.

There is also a lot of narcotic activity.
<Sigh> There are "not just nice people" living everywhere, as evidenced (just to give one example) by some very high murder rates away from the coasts. And there's a lot of narcotic activity everywhere as well, as evidenced by the opioid epidemic, among other things. Wouldn't it be better just to refrain from making snarky generalizations you have no real basis for?
 
I see it as some people like to live where there is a lot of excitement. The problem is, that attract all kinds, so there are not just nice people living there.

There is also a lot of narcotic activity.
Define “narcotic”. Oxy addiction is a huge problem in rural areas, that’s why it’s called hillbilly heroin.
 
Last edited:
"Running away from LA kept my demons in check." - Kathy Valentine. p 242

You want to know something? That is something I JUST NOW read in her book. Several chapters after the home invasion that started this observation. The first page where I had last left off of reading from the day before.
 
"Running away from LA kept my demons in check." - Kathy Valentine. p 242

You want to know something? That is something I JUST NOW read in her book. Several chapters after the home invasion that started this observation. The first page where I had last left off of reading from the day before.
You want to know something else that's "very stupid"? Reading about a few incidents in a book and thinking that constitutes enough real knowledge to allow you to make grand generalizations about millions of people and huge regions you know little or nothing about. But hey, I've only lived on the East Coast for 30+ years and on the West Coast for 30+ as well. So sure, why don't you educate me about my own reality from your position of ignorance.

Look, when you say something dumb, there are a couple ways you can go. You can try to defend it, or say you didn't actually say what you said, or insist that everyone is misunderstanding you, or even double down. But that only increases the dumbness. Alternatively, you can just admit, yeah, that was pretty dumb, and then try to be less dumb in the future.

Which one sounds like a more useful strategy?
 
Last edited:
Worth repeating.
I see you're taking the double-down approach. :rollno:

Nah, it's not worth repeating. Because it said next to nothing the first time, and says less now. You still don't know anything about the people and places you generalize about. When you don't know what you're talking about, the best approach is to stop talking about it.

Congrats, you managed to derail your own thread. Don't see that often, but you did it.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: DrMole and GregC
Even if I accepted that LA is not how I inferred it to be, how would you interpret that quote that I posted by the band member?

There's nothing to interpret. It's one person saying she had a bad experience.

The issue, which you keep missing, has to do with the formation of large, general judgments on the basis of little or no information. Doing that is dumb at best, usually annoying, and quite frequently offensive (or worse, as in the case of racism, sexism, and similar -isms).

It would be like reading that, say, Tom Petty had a problem with this one bassist and concluding that people attracted to that instrument are ... you know. Except more noxious, because you called it a question of morality. Something you're not qualified to judge in millions of people you don't know.

And for the final cherry on top, you read about something in LA ... and then started trying to slag the East Coast, where LA most definitely is not. At least, not last time I looked.

Insisting on uninformed judgments based on little or no actual knowledge, especially around people who do have some idea what they're talking about, is never a good look.

Again, when you don't know what you're talking about, the most useful thing is to admit you don't know and stop talking about it.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: DrMole and GregC