!@#% Around and Found Out

[Pragma]

That’s been the refrain throughout. Always been that way. It’s embarrassing, but ultimately sad.

And FYI, it’s not embarrassing because we don’t agree, it’s embarrassing because of the continuous yet thinly veiled intentional misstating of points being made just because folks love trying victimhood on for size lol. I have found that in a lot of cases, there is no one more thirsty for extra ‘victim points’ than those who have never really experienced historical systemic oppression. Folks see marginalized individuals persevering through adversity, and delude themselves into believing that being a member of a marginalized group is all about the perks.

Wow, could not be further from the truth.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[PsyDWannabe]

Wow, could not be further from the truth.

For you.

 

[Sanman]

As opposed to asking each stranger on here for a detailed personal history and then commenting on each one individually? If that was generalizing, then every single poster since the beginning of this thread has been generalizing so I guess that’s already being controlled for. Make sure you tag each person and let them know how you feel, since that’s your preferred approach.

You don't need to ask all of them. Though you certainly can ask the 3-4 responding you currently. You want others to be sensitive to systemic oppression that those included in DEI face, but you don't want to ask about the adversity faced by the other side? Though I have already mentioned several specific groups overlooked, including one in my last response. If you don't want to concern yourself with the individuals speaking directly to you, how about addressing the issues of those groups?

 

[PsyDWannabe]

You don't need to ask all of them. Though you certainly can ask the 3-4 responding you currently. You want others to be sensitive to systemic oppression that those included in DEI face, but you don't want to about ask about the adversity faced by the other side? Though I have already mentioned several specific groups overlooked, including one in my last response. If you don't want to concern yourself with the individuals speaking directly to you, how about addressing those the issues of those groups?

I honestly have no clue what you’re requesting of me. You want me to speak to the adversity faced by interned Japanese Americans during WW2? Is that a joke or are you being serious?

I am describing my observations about an issue that is much more widespread than this particular online community, as I have stated multiple times. As much as you would prefer whatever you prefer, I have no desire to individually interview strangers on an anonymous forum. If the message did not apply to you, kindly step out of the way so others can do with it as they see fit just like you did. As I have made abundantly clear, I’m not trying to convince anyone of anything, but what I will do is continue to state my opinion.

 

[Sanman]

I honestly have no clue what you’re requesting of me. You want me to speak to the adversity faced by interned Japanese Americans during WW2? Is that a joke or are you being serious?

I am describing my observations about an issue that is much more widespread than this particular online community, as I have stated multiple times. As much as you would prefer whatever you prefer, I have no desire to individually interview strangers on an anonymous forum. If the message did not apply to you, kindly step out of the way so others can do with it as they see fit just like you did. As I have made abundantly clear, I’m not trying to convince anyone of anything, but what I will do is continue to state my opinion.

So your argument is your are right and anyone that does not think you are should step out of the way because you did not mean them, you meant random other people not taking part in the conversation? That makes no sense to me.

I want you to speak to the fact that you are for a policy that specifically discludes some minorities that have also faced adversity in this country. Why should we be for putting some minorities ahead of others?

 

[PsyDWannabe]

You don't need to ask all of them. Though you certainly can ask the 3-4 responding you currently. You want others to be sensitive to systemic oppression that those included in DEI face, but you don't want to ask about the adversity faced by the other side? Though I have already mentioned several specific groups overlooked, including one in my last response. If you don't want to concern yourself with the individuals speaking directly to you, how about addressing the issues of those groups?

And besides (trying to glean as much as I can because I’m still a little confused as to what point you’re trying to make): who has stopped anyone from speaking on their personal experiences with adversity? If you’re refusing to disclose your own experience with adversity because you’re afraid of what people will say or because you don’t want to hear folks response to it, that sounds like a personal problem, and has nothing to do with me or anybody on here. Nobody is censoring you.
Everybody is free to share whatever they want to share, as we’ve all been doing this whole time. If you (or anyone) is waiting for me to ask you before you speak, that is purely nonsensical.

 

[PsyDWannabe]

So your argument is your are right and anyone that does not think you are should step out of the way because you did not mean them, you meant random other people not taking part in the conversation? Yhat makes no sense to me.

I want you to speak to the fact that you are for a policy that specifically discludes some minorities that have also faced adversity in this country. Why should we be for putting some minorities ahead of others?

What policy am I for? What policy are you referencing? Because I feel like I’m getting further and further away from your point. When have I ever said we should put one minority ahead of others (and which minority group would that be)? I specifically said, and I am paraphrasing, ‘progress is often uneven and stepwise, but incremental steps in the right direction across all groups is better than sitting on our hands until somebody magically comes up with a perfect solution to host everyone to the finish line at the same time, because with that approach, the only people benefiting are those who are currently benefiting from the status quo (and who understandably are more passive and lackadaisical in efforts to shift the status quo).

So, once I again I implore you, please direct me to these policies I endorsed that are intended to advance one minority group while keeping the other minority groups down, because you keep referencing it. And don’t forget to specify which minority group I am championing above and beyond the others.

 

[borne_before]

And besides (trying to glean as much as I can because I’m still a little confused as to what point you’re trying to make): who has stopped anyone from speaking on their personal experiences with adversity? If you’re refusing to disclose your own experience with adversity because you’re afraid of what people will say or because you don’t want to hear folks response to it, that sounds like a personal problem, and has nothing to do with me or anybody on here. Nobody is censoring you.
Everybody is free to share whatever they want to share, as we’ve all been doing this whole time. If you (or anyone) is waiting for me to ask you before you speak, that is purely nonsensical.

I think Sanman is saying that the way DEI conceptualizes adversity/systemic oppression is myopic and that the individual is always more complex and that will ultimately hinder the goal of making things better for everyone. That DEI proponents are glad to make generalizations based on group membership, which is repugnant to many who view the individual best unit of analysis.

 

[PsyDWannabe]

I think Sanman is saying that the way DEI conceptualizes adversity/systemic oppression is myopic and that the individual is always more complex and that will ultimately hinder the goal of making things better for everyone. That DEI proponents are glad to make generalizations based on group membership, which is repugnant to many who view the individual best unit of analysis.

I guess that was lost on me between the putting words in my mouth and attributing policies to me that definitely were not endorsed by me.

Maybe it’s your rephrasing, but you presented a much clearer version of what they were trying to say.

I will also add that for some reason posters on this board have me as the Ministry of DEI affairs of the USA 😂 I have never been on a single DEI board/committee in my life, and I am staying away from them for the time being because I think a lot of them are being disingenuously convened and governed by people who truly don’t know what they’re doing and who just happen to be riding the recent political waves. That’s why I made the point, and always make a point to mention that I am speaking on the issues at large. Issues that existed well before DEI became a thing, and have existed since the beginning of time. I don’t align myself with any one DEI policy, which varies from place to place anyway. I’ve been having these very difficult conversations since before some people on this forum were born. DEI can only have so much of an effect if individuals still have a death grip on harmful and prejudiced attitudes which they refuse to examine nor process. I’m not trying to change anyone’s mind, I know better. Still, one of my main motivations has always been to prevent those attitudes from doing more harm than they already have.

 

[borne_before]

Oh I peeped this way way way back, at this point I’m very familiar with all the tricks. I think we all know by now that we’re not dealing with anyone who is willing to be talked out of their stance, all we are doing is listing points for consideration for whomever may be interested in posterity. That’s why I refuse to shut up about it.

My favorite part of this go-round was someone calling me “frustrated“ and “overwhelmed“, only to spew the very same frustration and overwhelm in my direction because I called them out 😂😂😂 You can’t make this up. The speed with which they went from benevolent all-knowing therapist projecting their emotions onto me, to exhibiting the exact same frustration and overwhelm they just had accused me of one breath ago was record-breaking.

But the funniest part is that they thought discrediting me by labeling me with random negative emotions was going to stop anything lmao. As the young ones say, “you thought”. It would be funny if it weren’t so sad.

Wait, we're you not feeling frustrated and overwhelmed? I sure and heck was and am. I was trying to validate. I'm sorry if I mininterpreted that.

 

[Fan_of_Meehl]

Damn and here I thought all of those times I had racist remarks hurled at me, people get into physical altercations with me, cops follow me home, etc I was facing oppression. Please tell me more about how only people with your point of view have been oppressed.

Not for nothing, the only members of a racial minority group still living that were all unilaterally held against their will are Japanese Americans during WWII. A group not included in DEI initiatives.

I think I get your point and I agree. What I hear you saying is that the DEI proponents would have a stronger position if they applied the principles that they identify as central to their cause (e.g., that all or any racial minority groups that have suffered oppression/mistreatment merely because of their racial/ethnic qualities should be championed--not just some) across the board including, for example, Japanese Americans during WWII. I saw your comment as encouraging them to strengthen their argument by way of increasing the internal consistency of their position.

 

[borne_before]

I guess that was lost on me between the putting words in my mouth and attributing policies to me that definitely were not endorsed by me.

Maybe it’s your rephrasing, but you presented a much clearer version of what they were trying to say.

I will also add that for some reason posters on this board have me as the Ministry of DEI affairs of the USA 😂 I have never been on a single DEI board/committee in my life, and I am staying away from them for the time being because I think a lot of them are being disingenuously convened and governed by people who truly don’t know what they’re doing and who just happen to be riding the recent political waves. That’s why I made the point, and always make a point to mention that I am speaking on the issues at large. Issues that existed well before DEI became a thing, and have existed since the beginning of time. I don’t align myself with any one DEI policy, which varies from place to place anyway. I’ve been having these very difficult conversations since before some people on this forum were born. DEI can only have so much of an effect if individuals still have a death grip on harmful and prejudiced attitudes which they refuse to examine nor process.

I hate that I am currently engaging you in two conversations. But, I gotta get to the taco stand with the toddler, babe, and wifey.

I think this is a very important and cogent viewpoint. It's well said. I urge other posters to read it. I don't think you'll find anyone here who disagrees with it's main thesis: there's disingenuity on both sides of the discussion, that DEI has it's issues, but that maybe we shouldn't throw the baby out with bathwater as DEI is a recent phenomena and trying, imperfectly, to correct something hard - with generations of momentum.

 

[PsyDWannabe]

Wait, we're you not feeling frustrated and overwhelmed? I sure and heck was and am. I was trying to validate. I'm sorry if I mininterpreted that.

The frustration and overwhelm was less the issue honestly; the confident presumption that I’ve never been challenged on such issues was the shocking part because all I do is get challenged on these issues by people who abhor the very idea 😂😂

No worries, thank you for explaining your perspective and attempting to validate! Therapist-mode just automatically kicks in sometimes, I’ve been there several times.

 

[borne_before]

The frustration and overwhelm was less the issue honestly; the confident presumption that I’ve never been challenged on such issues was the shocking part because all I do is get challenged on these issues by people who abhor the very idea 😂😂

No worries, thank you for explaining your perspective and attempting to validate! Therapist-mode just automatically kicks in sometimes, I’ve been there several times.

That was pretty dick of me - I’m sorry. I made some assumptions and made an ass of me.

 

[PsyDWannabe]

I hate that I am currently engaging you in two conversations. But, I gotta get to the taco stand with the toddler, babe, and wifey.

I think this is a very important and cogent viewpoint. It's well said. I urge other posters to read it. I don't think you'll find anyone here who disagrees with it's main thesis: there's disingenuity on both sides of the discussion, that DEI has it's issues, but that maybe we shouldn't throw the baby out with bathwater as DEI is a recent phenomena and trying, imperfectly, to correct something hard - with generations of momentum.

Agreed. It seems like anyone who says anything slightly pro equality and equity is considered a DEI zealot antichrist, and anyone who says anything remotely against is considered an anti-DEI antichrist. And I’m just here like ‘we can have this conversation without even mentioning DEI’ because all it is apparently a trigger word that distracts everybody and causes them to muffle their ears.

#mmmmmTACOS Please go enjoy your Saturday night with the family, don’t be like us old ornery debaters engaged in this death match with no resolution in sight 👵🧓

 

[borne_before]

Agreed. It seems like anyone who says anything slightly pro equality and equity is considered a DEI zealot antichrist, and anyone who says anything remotely against is considered an anti-DEI antichrist. And I’m just here like ‘we can have this conversation without even mentioning DEI’ because all it is apparently a trigger word that distracts everybody and causes them to muffle their ears.

#mmmmmTACOS Please go enjoy your Saturday night with the family, don’t be like us old ornery debaters engaged in this death match with no resolution in sight 👵🧓

It’s def a trigger. As my wife is driving us to tacos, I wanna get something down. I think DEI initiatives have their heart in an admirable way. But, the triggering part is the implementation. Like going back to OP - letting students, based off little and superficial interaction and knowing little more than demographics and perceived group membership - make that decision - man, that’s just soulless.

I think many fear that the individual will be lost.

 

[PsyDWannabe]

It’s def a trigger. As my wife is driving us to tacos, I wanna get something down. I think DEI initiatives have their heart in an admirable way. But, the triggering part is the implementation. Like going back to OP - letting students, based off little and superficial interaction and knowing little more than demographics and perceived group membership - make that decision - man, that’s just soulless.

I think many fear that the individual will be lost.

Very astute. On a broader scope, I think the fear of loss is the core emotion driving all sides of the conversations and arguments. You have folks who are terrified to lose what they currently have, and you have folks who are fighting tooth and nail not to lose more than they’ve already lost. Very difficult to loosen the reins on either side with all that is perceived to be at stake.

 

[borne_before]

Very astute. On a broader scope, I think the fear of loss is the core emotion driving all sides of the conversations and arguments. You have folks who are terrified to lose what they currently have, and you have folks who are fighting tooth and nail not to lose more than they’ve already lost. Very difficult to loosen the reins on either side with all that is perceived to be at stake.

Grace is needed. I wonder if we could get the other participants to briefly state their side regarding what is the motivation on both sides here? Maybe that would yield something new?

 

[alice_in_neuro_wonderland]

Calling someone's argument invalid because DEI makes then uncomfortable and that their views are due to bias without any backup to the assertion to come back at a point are a few recent. You haven't resorted to it as frequently or as basely as others, to be fair.

Look, I’m sorry if I made you or anyone else feel invalidated. Never my intention. I’m struggling to see when I did that, and would appreciate some examples so I can avoid it in the future.

 

[alice_in_neuro_wonderland]

You and I have very different (almost opposite) approaches towards the same goal, and I think what recent conversations have shown is that the approach is irrelevant so anyone trying to make it about the approach is gaslighting and manipulating their way out of whatever it is they’re trying to avoid. Fortunately, I didn’t just start having these conversations yesterday, and the above has played out so often in the real world that I can see it coming in my sleep.

They chastised me for being too zealous and then you came in with a more tempered approach. Yet here we are

p.s. I highly and strongly admire your approach!!!!!!

I noticed this too. 😬 It's why I kept trying to leave this thread, because it seemed to be dominated by toxic tactics, but now the tide's seem to shift a bit in what feels like the right direction (of listening, self-reflecting, etc). And for what it's worth, I highly admire your approach as well--you're not afraid to call out bs in a way that makes me want to go "hell yeah!" when reading your posts 😆✊

 

[alice_in_neuro_wonderland]

Prolly not the best way to make a process comment, you're right - I did get frustraited. I am not immune to that emotion - just ask my toddler and wife.

You know, when you're sitting with a patient and you were just together as a team trying to figure something out together. You're in the moment, you're listening to your patient, you're rooting for them, you're not doing much, they're doing it, you're just with them. It feels creative, it feels like discovery. Then something happens, the patient brings up a current event or they get hooked by the past. It's like all the spark of the connection and creativity, left the room and they start repeating/scripting a story - often the same conceptualized story about themselves or others they've brought up many times before.

That's what I felt there - I hope that's a better way to communicate my thinking? I guess what I am saying is that you have your own thoughts about this stuff and I really want to hear them but you're towing a line that makes it hard to discover with you. Is there fear of nonconformity there? Is there fear of repercussions for not toeing the line? You've got a lot to bring to this discussion, but it feels like I'm talking to concept rather than individual.

That's my frustration with this stuff.

I actually feel like this is sincere feedback on my approach, and I appreciate it. I'll take that into account. I wonder if my seeming like a concept rather than an individual is because I try to stay away from being too vulnerable on here, as this hasn't been a place that feels conducive to that being received well. I think dipping my toe in the water with sharing my personal biases was about as vulnerable as I risked being, and that was shreddeddddd 😂😅

 

[alice_in_neuro_wonderland]

I guess that was lost on me between the putting words in my mouth and attributing policies to me that definitely were not endorsed by me.

Maybe it’s your rephrasing, but you presented a much clearer version of what they were trying to say.

I will also add that for some reason posters on this board have me as the Ministry of DEI affairs of the USA 😂 I have never been on a single DEI board/committee in my life, and I am staying away from them for the time being because I think a lot of them are being disingenuously convened and governed by people who truly don’t know what they’re doing and who just happen to be riding the recent political waves. That’s why I made the point, and always make a point to mention that I am speaking on the issues at large. Issues that existed well before DEI became a thing, and have existed since the beginning of time. I don’t align myself with any one DEI policy, which varies from place to place anyway. I’ve been having these very difficult conversations since before some people on this forum were born. DEI can only have so much of an effect if individuals still have a death grip on harmful and prejudiced attitudes which they refuse to examine nor process. I’m not trying to change anyone’s mind, I know better. Still, one of my main motivations has always been to prevent those attitudes from doing more harm than they already have.

I think this deserves repeating. Very well said.

 

[alice_in_neuro_wonderland]

I think I get your point and I agree. What I hear you saying is that the DEI proponents would have a stronger position if they applied the principles that they identify as central to their cause (e.g., that all or any racial minority groups that have suffered oppression/mistreatment merely because of their racial/ethnic qualities should be championed--not just some) across the board including, for example, Japanese Americans during WWII. I saw your comment as encouraging them to strengthen their argument by way of increasing the internal consistency of their position.

This is just my opinion, but all of your posts make me feel that you would likely find teaching a statistics course irl deeply satisfying. If you're not already, of course 😊

 

[alice_in_neuro_wonderland]

Grace is needed. I wonder if we could get the other participants to briefly state their side regarding what is the motivation on both sides here? Maybe that would yield something new?

I love this idea. I think that would go a long way toward reminding folks that likely all of us are very well-intentioned in our own ways and for understandable reasons.

 

[Pragma]

Well, things got a lot more civil - it is nice to see people talking about things with less generalization and more benefit of the doubt. Kudos to everyone for turning this into a more pleasant Saturday evening

 

[borne_before]

I actually feel like this is sincere feedback on my approach, and I appreciate it. I'll take that into account. I wonder if my seeming like a concept rather than an individual is because I try to stay away from being too vulnerable on here, as this hasn't been a place that feels conducive to that being received well. I think dipping my toe in the water with sharing my personal biases was about as vulnerable as I risked being, and that was shreddeddddd 😂😅

Dude, I totally get it and yikes - you took a risk with vulnerability and it was terrible. Online forums are pretty terrible ways to communicate - so much is lost in text. And I say that as someone with dysgraphia! This place can def feel like a barbershop. You, know - there is very loud and opinionated regulars who have been coming here forever for their haircuts every Saturday. But, just know that they volunteer a ton of their time and really do have your/ours/and the fields best interests at heart. But, I just really hope you know that you are welcome here - even if you dare disagree. I am glad you are here debating this stuff. You've given me a lot to chew on. I'm grateful for your effort and better off because of it.

 

[Pragma]

DEI can only have so much of an effect if individuals still have a death grip on harmful and prejudiced attitudes which they refuse to examine nor process.

I think this deserves repeating. Very well said.

This brings me to the question about what the endgame is. What is the goal? Everyone focuses on the problem (and it will take longer for a huge majority of society to take hold on that). In schools, workplaces, everywhere, you have a bunch of humans and the good ones want to help problems get solved. What will the metric be to say that an objective has been accomplished?

I admit that is a difficult if not impossible question to ask. A lot of these problems get solved generationally and through policies, even if the true work happens one interaction at a time. But the small wins are the ones that need to be defined here towards those objectives, and clarified over time so that they work for now and also for later.

 

[Sanman]

What policy am I for? What policy are you referencing? Because I feel like I’m getting further and further away from your point. When have I ever said we should put one minority ahead of others (and which minority group would that be)? I specifically said, and I am paraphrasing, ‘progress is often uneven and stepwise, but incremental steps in the right direction across all groups is better than sitting on our hands until somebody magically comes up with a perfect solution to host everyone to the finish line at the same time, because with that approach, the only people benefiting are those who are currently benefiting from the status quo (and who understandably are more passive and lackadaisical in efforts to shift the status quo).

So, once I again I implore you, please direct me to these policies I endorsed that are intended to advance one minority group while keeping the other minority groups down, because you keep referencing it. And don’t forget to specify which minority group I am championing above and beyond the others.

I think Sanman is saying that the way DEI conceptualizes adversity/systemic oppression is myopic and that the individual is always more complex and that will ultimately hinder the goal of making things better for everyone. That DEI proponents are glad to make generalizations based on group membership, which is repugnant to many who view the individual best unit of analysis.

I guess that was lost on me between the putting words in my mouth and attributing policies to me that definitely were not endorsed by me.

Maybe it’s your rephrasing, but you presented a much clearer version of what they were trying to say.

I will also add that for some reason posters on this board have me as the Ministry of DEI affairs of the USA 😂 I have never been on a single DEI board/committee in my life, and I am staying away from them for the time being because I think a lot of them are being disingenuously convened and governed by people who truly don’t know what they’re doing and who just happen to be riding the recent political waves. That’s why I made the point, and always make a point to mention that I am speaking on the issues at large. Issues that existed well before DEI became a thing, and have existed since the beginning of time. I don’t align myself with any one DEI policy, which varies from place to place anyway. I’ve been having these very difficult conversations since before some people on this forum were born. DEI can only have so much of an effect if individuals still have a death grip on harmful and prejudiced attitudes which they refuse to examine nor process. I’m not trying to change anyone’s mind, I know better. Still, one of my main motivations has always been to prevent those attitudes from doing more harm than they already have.

I think I get your point and I agree. What I hear you saying is that the DEI proponents would have a stronger position if they applied the principles that they identify as central to their cause (e.g., that all or any racial minority groups that have suffered oppression/mistreatment merely because of their racial/ethnic qualities should be championed--not just some) across the board including, for example, Japanese Americans during WWII. I saw your comment as encouraging them to strengthen their argument by way of increasing the internal consistency of their position.

So, now that I am home and not running around I can wade through this and discuss a bit more in depth. I may have misinterpreted your comments as a lot things were said by a lot of people. However, my read on the comment you made was that those disagree with DEI initiatives, such as those commenting here, were misstating points and wrapping themselves in victimhood to keep things the way they are. Certainly there are those who might do that, but I don't believe it is anyone participating in the conversation here.

The point I was trying to make is that many DEI policies and initiatives being discussed lack both the internal consistency to meet the goals they purport to be pushing for (they are too broad create actual diversity in each individual field and do little to address all the historical marginalization in the United States. They also remove the ability for those at the local level to make decisions based on the characteristics of the individual.

While "progess" may be stepwise, I am not sure that we should be okay with it being applied unevenly. Because progress is not picking a candidate based on the fact that they are simply Black or Hispanic any more than it would be to defaulting to the White male when presented with equally appealing candidates. All that creates is a slightly different class of elites. Diversity is multifactorial. If the people that stand to benefit from a policy are okay with it being imperfect and leaving out certain groups because it benefits them, are they acting any more beneficently than the group that they are replacing? Said another way, if a black man or a white woman put in charge of decision making is only interested in furthering the careers of people like them, are we accomplishing anything or simply furthering more of the same? If we are only furthering more of the same, maybe that whole thought process needs to be thrown out and different process put in place.

 

[Sanman]

Very astute. On a broader scope, I think the fear of loss is the core emotion driving all sides of the conversations and arguments. You have folks who are terrified to lose what they currently have, and you have folks who are fighting tooth and nail not to lose more than they’ve already lost. Very difficult to loosen the reins on either side with all that is perceived to be at stake.

Certainly that is a large portion of the issue on all sides. For me, the other troubling issue is the language used. The language "overrepresented minorities" used in diversity discussions suggests that minorities are only allowed to accomplish so much in this country. Is that really the ideology we want to embrace?

 

[alice_in_neuro_wonderland]

Dude, I totally get it and yikes - you took a risk with vulnerability and it was terrible. Online forums are pretty terrible ways to communicate - so much is lost in text. And I say that as someone with dysgraphia! This place can def feel like a barbershop. You, know - there is very loud and opinionated regulars who have been coming here forever for their haircuts every Saturday. But, just know that they volunteer a ton of their time and really do have your/ours/and the fields best interests at heart. But, I just really hope you know that you are welcome here - even if you dare disagree. I am glad you are here debating this stuff. You've given me a lot to chew on. I'm grateful for your effort and better off because of it.

Thank you, I appreciate the validation and the warm words 😊 And the perspective! The barbershop regulars analogy made so much sense to me. I can definitely see that. 😅 I hope they and everyone else knows I mean no disrespect to anyone, ever. Just happy to have a voice and be able to put my opinion out there. Hopefully without triggering any recriminations.

Side note, you mentioning dysgraphia definitely made my nerdy neuro senses salivate🤤

 

[Sanman]

Thank you, I appreciate the validation and the warm words 😊 And the perspective! The barbershop regulars analogy made so much sense to me. I can definitely see that. 😅 I hope they and everyone else knows I mean no disrespect to anyone, ever. Just happy to have a voice and be able to put my opinion out there. Hopefully without triggering any recriminations.

Side note, you mentioning dysgraphia definitely made my nerdy neuro senses salivate🤤

I won't speak for anyone else even though I know this sentiment is shared among other regulars. Standing toe to toe and debating gets you more respect in my eyes not less. That is how we all learn. It's a lot like boxing. Two people might stand across from one another and beat the hell out of each other and even seem to hate one another. However, at the end of the day, the person across the ring always gets more respect than those too afraid to step in the ring in the first place.

 

[WisNeuro]

Wow, this one blew up after I left for date night, and looks like most people returned to a sense of civil discourse, kudos, most of you.

I won't speak for anyone else even though I know this sentiment is shared among other regulars. Standing toe to toe and debating gets you more respect in my eyes not less. That is how we all learn. It's a lot like boxing. Two people might stand across from one another and beat the hell out of each other and even seem to hate one another. However, at the end of the day, the person across the ring always gets more respect than those too afraid to step in the ring in the first place.

Nothing wrong with vigorous discourse. @Pragma have gotten into it pretty heatedly on at least one or two occasions and still manage to grab a beverage together when we are at the same conference. I've called @borne_before out onto the mat at least a couple times. @Sanman I'm not sure if we've argued about much besides me calling you out for pretending to be a white man.

But yeah, people would be surprised at how much they actually agree on about a certain nuanced subject if they just listened and did not assume an antithetical position about people across the board. One of the benefits about having a very diverse group of friends, across a multitude of variables.

 

[smalltownpsych]

Thank you, I appreciate the validation and the warm words 😊 And the perspective! The barbershop regulars analogy made so much sense to me. I can definitely see that. 😅 I hope they and everyone else knows I mean no disrespect to anyone, ever. Just happy to have a voice and be able to put my opinion out there. Hopefully without triggering any recriminations.

Side note, you mentioning dysgraphia definitely made my nerdy neuro senses salivate🤤

I stopped participating in this debate quite a few pages ago, but did skim through some of the debate last night. Yes, many of the regular posters can have some strong opinions and I have argued with them on a few points before as I definitely have some perspectives that are counter. I hope that you continue to bring your own perspective to the mix as it has been part of helping to temper this debate which in my mind also helps it be more productive. 😊

As far as DEI goes, I have experienced the dynamic of it becoming akin to a religious belief and have been part of unhealthy group exercises to “promote DEI” that actually appeared to be quite the opposite. This is not to say that any poster on this board has done this, just to share that I personally have questions about how this is implemented in other settings. What I have seen is that certain perspectives are presented as though they are absolutes and the group shaming and silencing of dissenting opinions. At one presentation, I knew several of the presenters personally and I know that their intent was to embarass and shut down the males in the room as they stated it to me very clearly and justified it as a way of “righting historical wrongs” or just demeaning the fact that anyone who ever benefitted from privilege could ever be hurt by this.
I am old enough to remember when our society did this type of open mocking to women and minorities and it was completely accepted. It wasn’t good then and I am really glad much of that was stamped out (and it was), but should I stand by quietly and allow it to occur now? What is funny is that in the above situation, I was the supervisor and it didn’t matter. Power is an interesting dynamic.

 

[tombreaz]

Superpowers, obviously. Just like your superpower of being all-knowing of every interaction of their lives. 😂

Now you're being disingenuous. And still not answering. Classic response when the argument has been lost so thanks for that.

 

[borne_before]

Hey, I know this doesn't relate to convo. But, I'm super happy with how this changed direction. Much love.

 

[NewNeuroDemic]

My dudes...what has happened to my lil' post?!

 

[WisNeuro]

My dudes...what has happened to my lil' post?!