Why do people discrimanate?

[Brad Johnson]

Originally posted by MJ5150
Hehehe....you crack me up Brad, in a good way

Okay.

The dude was asking you to put yourself in a situation. We all realize we can not assume your actions. No one is trying to. What is so hard about simply looking over the situation and giving your opinion?

Why" Because I don't do "simple". I can't turn my brain off. I put a lot of thought into most things I do. It's probably why I probably have very few "doh!" moments.


Simply look over this situation and tell me which process you would use:

You're in a medium sized Midwestern city. You're at the corner of First and Main. There are people of many persuasions about.

Which way do you turn?



You apparently didn't notice but I looked over the situation and did just that, I gave my opinion. Whether or not you or G think it's a good answer is another thing but can you tell me you didn't see an answer? I gave mine.

Where's yours?

This isn't real life here at TB. I can't really type out how to describe you. It's like you always want to remind us that you are different. It makes it difficult to have these conversations since you are always reminding us that you won't do this, or you're not like that. Some of the scenarios I came up with, or read in this thread, are ones I would not always find myself in, but for the sake of the conversation I replied.

While this may be fantasyland for some... I'm me. I'm not pretending to be what I'm not, I won't dumb down my answers for the sake of people who can't keep up. This is a pretty damn good reflection of the real me. If it seems that I'm trying to "remind" you of anything it's because what I'm saying does seem to fall on deaf ears sometimes. Someone says what they'd do in a situation, I respond with what I'd do, someone asks what I would do (even though I've clearly stated what I'd do), I answer again, then I get you telling me I'm always reminding them of...

sometimes you just can't win

As far as answering questions about situations I wouldn't find myself in, would you like the truth, straight up (just like you've been complaining about) or some serious BS?

Yep, either guy could be gay. At this point, it doesn't matter. BTW, the bartender is a really cool gay dude, who doesn't like the Yankees!

It "never" mattered to me all thread long. OTOH It did matter to some.

No one is missing out on anything. We are talking about first impressions. Suppose I go with my first impression, and the person I chose ends up being a great friend. I never get a chance to talk to the other guy. What have I missed out on? The chance the other dude was cool too? Well then, I better to talk to every single person I see just in case I am missing out on someone. I was going to say something about first impressions, but I know that would be assuming so I won't.

Mike, do whatever you deem necessary.

Now...now...now...don't go assuming a shallow conversation would ensue because of what you deem is a "shallow" approach.

-Mike

AGAIN, could you at least read what I wrote. That little joking exchange was writted as one alternative to "stimulating conversation". Don't ASSUME it was anything else, you now have the direct intent of the author in writing

 

[john turner]

wow, this sure has gotten heated.

 

[Brad Johnson]

Originally posted by john turner
wow, this sure has gotten heated.

Not really, at least from my POV.

Or are you reading Coypu's stuff?

 

[Thor]

Originally posted by Brad Johnson
Not really, at least from my POV.

Or are you reading Coypu's stuff?

I have. My astonishment is only second to my revulsion.

 

[Brad Johnson]

Originally posted by Thor
I have. My astonishment is only second to my revulsion.

I imagine intent and move on

 

[Gabu]

Originally posted by Brad Johnson

I don't even do that.

That's okay, I won't hold it against ya!!

I didn't ignore it... it really just didn't work for me.

Okay, but if I ask a question, and you ignore the question because it doesn't work for you, then we can hardly discuss the topic, right? Thinking outside the box is a good thing... But not at the expense of the box.

Honestly? I probably wouldn't talk to either one unless they talked to me first.

I know, but we all do things we wouldn't normally do at times. This might have been Friday the 13th or something...

Other than appearance you've given me nothing to base a choice on... so how could I make a choice?Might as well toss a coin.

I am trying to keep it simple. Describing all the detail we take in and process every second would take a very long time. Even the details themselves are not important. I could ask, if you saw two people, and wanted to interact with one of them, what would you look for in order to decide whom to talk with? In that question no details are included... But you could still answer it.

Yes G, again the gay reference. Guess I should've added the smiley... I was kidding.

Sorry, I know you are a reasonable and friendly person on TB and like to joke around...

Why the gay reference? Because that ties into what we've been talking about all along. If this is somehow supposed to show an error in thinking re: the gay reference, it should be able to stand up to it

I believe that I can stand up to that, but I don't want to yet. I don't believe that i need to in order to demonstrate what I am saying. The point in my example is that making a decision on who to talk to first is not descrimination. It is just a process that a person uses in order to maximize their chance to have a good interaction.

So far I'm not seeing the problem.

I don't have a problem, we're just talking here.

See, I disagree with this.

I don't think "everyone" has a process... because I know I don't. I wing it. I'll bet I'm not alone.

I don't agree on this point. Whether you "wing it" or not, you do some things that can be called a process. All a process is, is the way that you would do something. In my example, you wanted to talk to one of the people. I don't believe that this is so extraordinary that it can't be explored. You mentioned that I didn't give you enough details to go on, so assuming that you had enough details to go on, what would they be?

One thing this thread has shown is that some people have ideas about what "everyone" does and don't seem to realize the problem with trying to paint with such a broad brush.

Although people are unique, they also have a lot in common with each other. In that commonality, I believe that this can be done. The brush is not that broad anyway, I am asking you what you would do in this senario, not what everyone would do.

I don't really know what I'd do in this sitation until I actually came into it. That's because of all of the "what if's".

At that time I'd have a boatload of details to help me form a plan of action, though it would hardly be as formal as it sounds. Stuff like "how bored "am" I" which would tie into how hard up I was for a conversation... and the answer usually is, I'm not. If we're going to pretend this is a real world scenario I have to answer as I would in that situation.

Okay, that sounds like a good idea. So, you really feel like talking to someone. There are two people there. What is it that you look for in order to determine who you will talk with?

If you mean would I discriminate by not joining in, probably. I have no interest in the Yankees nor much for baseball in general. I'd have nothing to add to the conversation.

Okay, but that's too bad because one of them might have been a very interesting person that you could have become great friends with... But in any case, you made a choice based on something that you discovered about them You found out that they were baseball nuts and then you decided from that information not to talk with them.

This is pretty much the same thing as what Mike is doing in his example. He looks for items that gives him something in common with one of his choices, and then starts there.

There is nothing wrong with that.

 

[Gabu]

Originally posted by Brad Johnson
Simply look over this situation and tell me which process you would use:

You're in a medium sized Midwestern city. You're at the corner of First and Main. There are people of many persuasions about.

Which way do you turn?

I would decide where I wanted to be and then turn appropraitely. If I dd not know where my destination was, I would ask each person that appeared approachable to me for directions. Once I had directions, I would follow them as well as I could and hopfully find myself where I needed to be.

That wasn't too hard. But I don't believe that this approximates my senario at all. In my senario I was asking you what you needed to know in order to interact with a person. You could have answered, I will wait until they speak, then determine which one is talking about something that interests me. Easy as pie.

 

[Gabu]

Originally posted by john turner
wow, this sure has gotten heated.

Not too bad.

Sometimes I feel like a question is getting danced around but not actually addressed. But I am certainly not ticked off about it or anything.. just talking here.

 

[john turner]

Originally posted by Thor
I have. My astonishment is only second to my revulsion.

yeah, maybe i have been focusing too much on his "contributions".

for an enlightening and truly inspiring intellectual journey, take a gander through his past posts. i'll wager there's not a single one that does not attempt to alienate or insult some demographic. that's got to be some kind of record.

 

[Coypu]

Originally posted by john turner
yeah, maybe i have been focusing too much on his "contributions".

for an enlightening and truly inspiring intellectual journey, take a gander through his past posts. i'll wager there's not a single one that does not attempt to alienate or insult some demographic. that's got to be some kind of record.

Atleast I'm not christian...

 

[Brad Johnson]

Originally posted by Gabu
I would decide where I wanted to be and then turn appropraitely. If I dd not know where my destination was, I would ask each person that appeared approachable to me for directions. Once I had directions, I would follow them as well as I could and hopfully find myself where I needed to be.

So... which way did you turn. I need an answer

That wasn't too hard. But I don't believe that this approximates my senario at all. In my senario I was asking you what you needed to know in order to interact with a person. You could have answered, I will wait until they speak, then determine which one is talking about something that interests me. Easy as pie.

I asked which way you'd turn. I still don't know.



You may be satisified with your answer (as I was with mine) but apparently that makes no difference.

BTW I did answer the question, I said since the one guy was already talking to the bartender and since I was in a bar and might as well get a drink, with no more than I have to go on, I'd probably talk to the guy talking to the bartender.

Now the funny thing is, even though I said that, you and Mike tell me I'm dancing around the question

 

[Brad Johnson]

Originally posted by Coypu
Atleast I'm not christian...

Yeah, you've definitely got that going for ya.

 

[Brad Johnson]

Originally posted by Gabu
Not too bad.

Sometimes I feel like a question is getting danced around but not actually addressed. But I am certainly not ticked off about it or anything.. just talking here.

See my response

Dancing is in the eye of the beholder.

 

[Gabu]

Originally posted by Brad Johnson
So... which way did you turn. I need an answer

Left.

You may be satisified with your answer (as I was with mine) but apparently that makes no difference.

BTW I did answer the question, I said since the one guy was already talking to the bartender and since I was in a bar and might as well get a drink, with no more than I have to go on, I'd probably talk to the guy talking to the bartender.

You are right. I think I got too wrapped up in what you had said before that. Sorry about missing that.

Now the funny thing is, even though I said that, you and Mike tell me I'm dancing around the question

No, I was wrong in that regard. But with regard to my other comments, I believe I have a pretty good point.

The point is just that when people are going to interact with each other, they gather what information they can, and then choose how to approach the each other for the interaction.

That is a normal social process.

Building on that, a person who does not like baseball may choose not to hang out with people who do like baseball. This does not mean that he hates people that like baseball. It just means that he would prefer to hang out with people of similar interests.

You can substitute baseball for anything you like. Maybe a person would miss some good opportunities or maybe not. But it doesn't matter very much IMO, because there is not a shortage of opportunities but there is a shortage of time.

 

[Brad Johnson]

Originally posted by Gabu


That's okay, I won't hold it against ya!!



Okay, but if I ask a question, and you ignore the question because it doesn't work for you, then we can hardly discuss the topic, right? Thinking outside the box is a good thing... But not at the expense of the box.



I know, but we all do things we wouldn't normally do at times. This might have been Friday the 13th or something...

Okay, an honest answer is not what you're looking for (because that's what I gave). Let me pretend I wanted to talk to someone real bad. And it's Friday the 13th.

I'd talk to the person I was nearest. So if the bar was nearer the door than where the Latino man sat, I'd talk to the White guy.

Is that a good enough answer? It's simple and completely imaginary

I am trying to keep it simple. Describing all the detail we take in and process every second would take a very long time. Even the details themselves are not important. I could ask, if you saw two people, and wanted to interact with one of them, what would you look for in order to decide whom to talk with? In that question no details are included... But you could still answer it.

No, "you" could answer that question. I guess I'll never really get that point across.

I can honestly say that situation has never and will never happen to me. I will not go into a bar and think "Hey, I NEED to talk to someone, which of these two strangers should I engage in conversation?". In my world that's a ridiculous situation, as ridiculous in fact as you standing on an imaginary corner and telling me which way you'd turn

Sorry, I know you are a reasonable and friendly person on TB and like to joke around...

I try.

I believe that I can stand up to that, but I don't want to yet. I don't believe that i need to in order to demonstrate what I am saying. The point in my example is that making a decision on who to talk to first is not descrimination. It is just a process that a person uses in order to maximize their chance to have a good interaction.



I don't have a problem, we're just talking here.

I don't agree on this point. Whether you "wing it" or not, you do some things that can be called a process. All a process is, is the way that you would do something. In my example, you wanted to talk to one of the people. I don't believe that this is so extraordinary that it can't be explored. You mentioned that I didn't give you enough details to go on, so assuming that you had enough details to go on, what would they be?

LOL

I've explained my process. I couldn't use my process in your scenario because it is not allowed.

In answer to your modified scenario, where I now have enough details to go on, who would I talk to first?

That would be based on those new details. Since I really don't have them I still really can't answer the question. You can just use my pretend answer from earlier in the post.

Sorry G but this is just getting more and more inscrutable. If I wanted to talk to someone I'd talk to them. Period. I have never in my life been so desperate for companionship that I thought "I must talk to SOMEONE". That's why I can't answer what, for me, amounts to a silly situation any better than I have. Is that getting through? I'm tired of trying to explain it.

Although people are unique, they also have a lot in common with each other. In that commonality, I believe that this can be done. The brush is not that broad anyway, I am asking you what you would do in this senario, not what everyone would do.

That's funny because while you're asking me what "I" would do and I'm telling you what "I" would do, you're telling me that based on others, my answer should be better.

Okay, that sounds like a good idea. So, you really feel like talking to someone. There are two people there. What is it that you look for in order to determine who you will talk with?

A pulse.

Okay, but that's too bad because one of them might have been a very interesting person that you could have become great friends with... But in any case, you made a choice based on something that you discovered about them You found out that they were baseball nuts and then you decided from that information not to talk with them.

Nice leap.

That's one conclusion to jump to. I didn't say they were baseball nuts, they were Yankees fans, which is not necessarily the same thing. By listening to their conversation they're apparently not all that bright either. Judging by their actions they're fairly uncouth too.

That's hardly the same as dismissing them because they're wearing baseball jerseys, for example.

This is pretty much the same thing as what Mike is doing in his example. He looks for items that gives him something in common with one of his choices, and then starts there.

Mike has never explained how he came to his conclusion about the bar people's sexuality. How is that the same thing?

There is nothing wrong with that.

If you say so.

 

[MJ5150]

"You can't address the issues that brad raised so you choose to post a illogical and nonsensical pseudo personal attack."
Yikes!! Actually, I was being completely honest. I was having a hard time putting in to type what I was thinking without making it into the longest post of all time. Pseudo personal attack? Interesting choice of words. Come on now, stop being so grouchy.

Brad.....if you considered my thoughts in that post to be a pseudo personal attack, I sincerely apologize. I am not here to attack anyone, or avoid anything. I was honestly trying to condense how I felt into a paragraph, instead of a page.

"So how does that turn into it not being a place where they can feel safe?"
Can they feel safe there? Sure can. They can feel safe sitting in a booth at Denny's with other gay people. The purpose of this club is not to let gay people gather safely, it is for gay people to hang out with gay people. If it was for their safety, it would not allow anyone but gay people inside. It would also be much more difficult to find. If someone wanted to open a place where gay people could hang out safely, they certainly wouldn't open shop right in the middle of a bustling downtown and have big neon signs advertising drinks and dancing. Then a big sign that says Gay Bar on the door.

"As far as answering questions about situations I wouldn't find myself in, would you like the truth, straight up"
The question is not about IF you would be in the situation. So far, I think they have all been hypothetical situations. As I said, I posed a scenario that I would not find myself in. Instead of making sure everyone knew I wouldn't be a part of it, I replied to it for the sake of the conversation. Brad, you get asked, what would you buy if you won a million dollars? Judging from what you have told me so far, I would conclude that your answer would be, "Don't assume I would do anything to win a million dollars". My assumption may be wrong.

"You're in a medium sized Midwestern city. You're at the corner of First and Main. There are people of many persuasions about. Which way do you turn?"
I will gladly play along. I would turn towards the direction of where most of the people are. I like people, so I prefer to be around them, I would go where the pepople are.

"little joking exchange was writted as one alternative to "stimulating conversation".
What did I incorrectly assume here? What is the alternative to stimulating? Non-stimulating. Shallow, and non-stimulating are similar to me. Your point was clear...the simple approach people like me use will tend to lead to those types of conversations.

"Of my own current personal and professional relationships, which number in the hundreds, two are based on what people do or did in the bedroom"
You did it twice in your life, I did it once. My comment was foolish since it was not true. Her comment was foolish since it is not true either. That comment was basically the same as mine...a sweeping generalization. For some reason, you "got" that one, but didn't "get" mine.

Hey...I just want to say something...I really appreciate everyone who is participating in this. I have learned alot about people over the past few days. In dealing with people I do not know, I see I need to not be so emphatic about what I say. Amongst my group of friends I deal with personally, I can say some of the things I did, and they "get" the point. I know none of you, so my intent is lost on the keyboard and lack of familiarity with who I am, and who you are.

-Mike

 

[Brad Johnson]

Originally posted by Gabu
Left.

Thanks... that's the only correct answer.

You are right. I think I got too wrapped up in what you had said before that. Sorry about missing that.

np

No, I was wrong in that regard. But with regard to my other comments, I believe I have a pretty good point.

I disagree.

The point is just that when people are going to interact with each other, they gather what information they can, and then choose how to approach the each other for the interaction.

Actually that's been my point all along. In my case I gather more information than most, apparently.

That is a normal social process.

Building on that, a person who does not like baseball may choose not to hang out with people who do like baseball. This does not mean that he hates people that like baseball. It just means that he would prefer to hang out with people of similar interests.

You're oversimplifying my scenario.

You can substitute baseball for anything you like. Maybe a person would miss some good opportunities or maybe not. But it doesn't matter very much IMO, because there is not a shortage of opportunities but there is a shortage of time.

Sorry but that really doesn't make sense to me... you need both. Opportunities without time are about as useless as time without opportunities.

If there's a limit of time and you waste opportunities...

 

[Brad Johnson]

BTW I think I'm done with this. It's a nice in theory but judging from the last few posts I don't think I'm getting through.

 

[MJ5150]

"I didn't say they were baseball nuts, they were Yankees fans, which is not necessarily the same thing."
Brad...you admitted you care little for baseball or the Yankees, so let me tell ya something you would already know if you did.......Real Yankee fans are baseball nuts. Rapid baseball nuts.

"Mike has never explained how he came to his conclusion about the bar people's sexuality"
Yeah I did. Waaayyyy back around page one, I said they identified themselves as such.

"I will not go into a bar and think "Hey, I NEED to talk to someone"
No one said you need to, it was if you felt like you wanted to. You would never feel compelled to, so our scenarios do not apply to you Brad. People who might feel like we have described would gladly answer the question. I don't NEED to either. I know that I personally will have a better time if I mingle in the crowd, making friends, but that is just me. I don't know if anyone else is like that. That is, unless I run into some Yankee fans! Hehehe <------joking

-Mike

 

[Gabu]

Originally posted by Brad Johnson
Okay, an honest answer is not what you're looking for (because that's what I gave). Let me pretend I wanted to talk to someone real bad. And it's Friday the 13th.

I'd talk to the person I was nearest. So if the bar was nearer the door than where the Latino man sat, I'd talk to the White guy.

Is that a good enough answer? It's simple and completely imaginary

Okay, sorry I tried. I can accept that you and I have a different way of looking at things.

No, "you" could answer that question. I guess I'll never really get that point across.

I can honestly say that situation has never and will never happen to me. I will not go into a bar and think "Hey, I NEED to talk to someone, which of these two strangers should I engage in conversation?". In my world that's a ridiculous situation, as ridiculous in fact as you standing on an imaginary corner and telling me which way you'd turn

I have understood this. But on the other hand, I feel you were more intent on demonstrating that the senario itself is impossible, than trying to imagine yourself in it. That's okay, you answered anyways, and I appreciate it.

I've explained my process. I couldn't use my process in your scenario because it is not allowed. ... Sorry G but this is just getting more and more inscrutable. If I wanted to talk to someone I'd talk to them. Period. I have never in my life been so desperate for companionship that I thought "I must talk to SOMEONE". That's why I can't answer what, for me, amounts to a silly situation any better than I have. Is that getting through? I'm tired of trying to explain it.

I hear you. I am sorry to pester you so much about it. I suppose that our different ways of looking at things make it hard to agree on some things. But it's no big deal. The world keeps turning...

If you say so.

I took out some of your quote so as not to rehash anything. I feel that I got my point out, but I can't control how it is interpreted. So, I will leave it at what we have already said.