11-14-2017, 02:07 AM
(11-13-2017, 10:02 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I think there needs to be a recognition of balance. If something is said that could be construed as prejudicially based, we ought to say just that. But labeling someone as an -ist doesn't provide much room for dialogue and is just aggressive. Honestly, the more I have thought about this after observing some of these conversations on here is that using the -isms puts people immediately on the defensive and so shuts down conversation. We need to be able to discuss how certain things being said are based in prejudicial attitudes and can be harmful, but without making it into the pissing match it tends to become.
Looks like your learning. I look forward to productive conversations
