![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 60 to 84 of 85. Go back in thread:
Posted by alexandra_k on December 3, 2005, at 16:07:56
In reply to Re: just one more...thing I REALLY HATE, posted by Gabbix2 on December 3, 2005, at 0:45:16
I'm confused.
If you are talking to me...
Then I'll need you to take particular bits out of my posts and tell me where your quarrel lies.
Because I'm not sure where this is coming from.> IT's no different when making generalizations about the RICH about Americans, about business owners, you cannot KNOW..
What generalisation is worrying you?
> and why the H*ll is it the U.S businesses here being attacked?
I never meant to 'attack' the businesses.
I was trying to talk about the laws / government policy that preserves the status quo of a radical inbalance in the distribution of wealth...
And where some of those people have the wealth that they have via business profits then business might just have a little something to do with it...> The only way this type of *argument* could have any credibility if every small business in every country every where was evaluated and then perhaps some sort of comparison could be made.
?
What type of argument?> Though I'd guess the amount of small business owners who mistreat employees and those who take advantage would come up pretty much even.
Oh.
Did you think I was having a rant on how small business owners mistreat their employees?
No, Gabbi. That was not a point that I was trying to make.
Minimum wage.
Does the business set the minimum wage or does the government?
I would have thought... The big business owners would be more likely to mistreat their employees.
But then... What do you mean by mistreatment?
Where is this coming from?> And another thing that completely galls me is that these sweeping generalizations are done under the guise of desiring fairness and equality.
What sweeping generalisations?
> I don't see any consistancy here at all.
> All I see is something that seems far more personal than political.I'm sorry that is what you see.
But I don't understand where this is coming from...
Posted by alexandra_k on December 3, 2005, at 16:10:00
In reply to Re: Amen » verne, posted by Gabbix2 on December 3, 2005, at 12:36:12
> > Your preaching is music to this choir member.
> >
> it just galls me when people argue the "superiority" (and i'm not even going to get into that.. it's just a can of worms) of the way things work in their own country in such personal way--Is that what you think I'm doing?
I have problems with the way things are going in NZ...
But when I post about those nobody seems to want to talk about it really.> It's circumstance not virtue that put you where you are.
No sh*t.
I feel fairly insulted that you would think I don't appreciate that.
Posted by alexandra_k on December 3, 2005, at 16:11:51
In reply to Re: just one more... » AuntieMel, posted by Dinah on December 2, 2005, at 12:15:18
You weren't talking about me - were you???
I started this thread from the bottom...
(I do that sometimes)And I thought people were talking to me...
Sorry
:-(
(If you weren't talking to me you can feel insulted if you want)
:-(
Sorry.
Posted by alexandra_k on December 3, 2005, at 16:15:26
In reply to Re: just one more... » AuntieMel, posted by Dinah on December 2, 2005, at 12:15:18
> if small businesses were going under in New Orleans, that it was because they weren't well enough run, and that better ones would come take their place.
hmm. does he mean the big businesses will branch out to take their place :-(
> I am seeing small businesses fail daily here. Assets under water for so long, no cash inflow, lots of expenses, exorbitant wages to get untrained workers because of the housing shortage. The old workers left, and haven't and can't return. Ours is a small business. Of our employees without blood ties to the owners, only half returned to the city. Homes destroyed, spousal jobs lost, schools closed.
yeah. must be hard depending on what kind of business it is too... i bet the 'market' will have changed a lot in New Orleans... With respect to what people want / need to spend money on right now...
> But even in the best times, well... I know that most people see opening a small business as a path to freedom.
Hmm. Work hard and you will be rewarded? Yeah. Hard work... And hope...
>But I sort of see it as admitting you'll be the only one who isn't guaranteed a pay check for the work you've done. There have been times when my bosses didn't get paid. But I and my fellow employees always did.
maybe that tends to be...
a small business ethic
(apologies if i am making a overgeneralisation / assumption)> I wish more could be done for them. It saddens me so to see one after another struggle for air before going under.
:-(
yeah.
Posted by Gabbix2 on December 3, 2005, at 18:15:37
In reply to Re: Gabbi - READ THIS FIRST, posted by alexandra_k on December 3, 2005, at 16:11:51
Nope I wasn't talking about you there were things you've said that applied though.
I never use the word "you" or "people" as a way of getting around confronting someone directly, it's just not me.
And I was not even thinking about you when I said "It's circumstance, not virtue that put you where you are"
I was commenting on what I see as a prevailing hypocritical attitude toward the American people.
People who pride themselves on being "politically correct" seem to often make exceptions when it comes to Americans.
Generalizations about people aren't just wrong because they hurt people who are already down, they are wrong because they are innacurate and depersonalizing. That doesn't change because the person being stereotyped is seen as being in more comfortable position.
If someone isn't going to make a deragotory assumption about me because I'm on disability
I sure as hell don't want it to be because of my 'lowly' position. I want it to be because they are aware that they can't possibly know my circumstance. Otherwise it's just another prejudice.
Posted by alexandra_k on December 3, 2005, at 18:37:11
In reply to Re: Gabbi - READ THIS FIRST » alexandra_k, posted by Gabbix2 on December 3, 2005, at 18:15:37
> Nope I wasn't talking about you there were things you've said that applied though.
Like what things I've said?
> I was commenting on what I see as a prevailing hypocritical attitude toward the American people.
hypocritical?
> People who pride themselves on being "politically correct" seem to often make exceptions when it comes to Americans.
?
> Generalizations about people aren't just wrong because they hurt people who are already down, they are wrong because they are innacurate and depersonalizing.
not all generalisations are bad...
we wouldn't be able to learn anything new (that wasn't particular) without making generalisations...
i figure the sun will probably rise tomorrow
because it has done so in the past...
but when they are 'judgemental' or disregarding of relevant difference...
Posted by Gabbix2 on December 3, 2005, at 19:08:12
In reply to Re: Gabbi - READ THIS FIRST » Gabbix2, posted by alexandra_k on December 3, 2005, at 18:37:11
> > Nope I wasn't talking about you there were things you've said that applied though.
>
> Like what things I've said?I think they've already been discussed at length.
and I suppose it's not fair, I don't want to go through the whole thread again and point them out because it will re start discussion, which I'm just not into.
One from a while back was was the joke you quoted though"The question on every Americans mind"
> > I was commenting on what I see as a prevailing hypocritical attitude toward the American people.
>
> hypocritical?
>Not you Alex, they were seperate statements I don't mean just on Babble either. And people who are American have expressed hurt about them.
There's not really a question there.
> > People who pride themselves on being "politically correct" seem to often make exceptions when it comes to Americans.
>
> ?They do, I have examples, but they are from my personal experience.. life. I don't want to recite them all.
>
> > Generalizations about people aren't just wrong because they hurt people who are already down, they are wrong because they are innacurate and depersonalizing.
>
> not all generalisations are bad...No, not all of anything is bad. .
> we wouldn't be able to learn anything new (that wasn't particular) without making generalisations...
> i figure the sun will probably rise tomorrow
> because it has done so in the past...I said generalizations about people..
and in my previous post I specified, people who haven't defined themselves by title or belief> but when they are 'judgemental' or
I personally don't care for a lot of them, even if they aren't negative judgements.
My problem with generalizations is that they are seldom accurate, they can't be when discussing individuals, the two are contradictory.
Of course when they are complimentary, or positive they are more acceptable, because they aren't intended to hurt, but I don't think that makes them any more accurate. I understand that they have to be used at times, it's impossible to point out every exception to every statement one makes.But I also really dislike ongoing discussions/arguments about politics/definitions/etc. .. I said how I felt, I stand by it, and it was not directed at you.
So I'm going to cut out now..
Posted by alexandra_k on December 3, 2005, at 19:39:11
In reply to Re: Gabbi - READ THIS FIRST » alexandra_k, posted by Gabbix2 on December 3, 2005, at 19:08:12
> I don't want to go through the whole thread again and point them out because it will re start discussion, which I'm just not into.
> One from a while back was was the joke you quoted though
> "The question on every Americans mind"Ah, I see. Its okay. I think... I started from the wrong end of the thread and assumed (unfairly) that people were talking to me. But it was what that person said on the radio, eh? Sorry... I was a little bit touchy.
Yeah. I remember that one. And you know... If I still believed it was okaky to post that kind of thing... I could be being inconsistent. But I like to think... I've learned better about that. In part cause of talking to you Gabbi dear.
Posted by Gabbix2 on December 3, 2005, at 19:57:20
In reply to Re: Gabbi - READ THIS FIRST » alexandra_k, posted by Gabbix2 on December 3, 2005, at 19:08:12
I came back to post to you and see you've already posted to me.
I had wanted to apologize for sounding terse.
It's not a personal thing, I only speak out when I feel really compelled to, when I'm really passionate about something, or angry.Aside from that, ongoing discussions of almost any sort physically drain me. I realize some people thrive on them, for me they are energy vampires, and that's where the terseness comes from (you'll notice a pattern)
It's just plain weariness, fighting the fact that my eyes are crossing.. not personal.
You know like one of those times you're in a really crowded shop and you can't find what you're looking for and you're worried cause you probably can't afford it anyway.. and you bump someone and you're just too dazed to apologize cause any extra word just seems toooooooo difficult to get out.
It's that kind of feeling. : )Or at least it made sense to me.
Posted by Gabbix2 on December 3, 2005, at 20:38:45
In reply to Once Again.. » Gabbix2, posted by Gabbix2 on December 3, 2005, at 19:57:20
Posted by verne on December 3, 2005, at 21:13:37
In reply to Once Again.. » Gabbix2, posted by Gabbix2 on December 3, 2005, at 19:57:20
I like to present an idea, make a statement, or show off something I found rummaging around in my head, and then run for the hills.
I never liked debate. I look at other points of view the way I might look at a painting or sculpture. I can't "disagree" with what someone else sees or experiences.
Imagine if you said you liked chocolate chip ice cream and I said I disagreed? Whether the topic is the origin of the universe or the flavor of ice cream, it's all the same to me. In the end, there's nothing to disagree about.
When I do get into an "argument" I just keep presenting my view from as many angles as possible without much real discussion. I'm just not quick enough on my feet to fence with people.That's not to say, I won't listen to others and even change my mind. Sometimes I will even shift paradigms, or as I like to say, move to a new crawlspace.
Verne
Posted by alexandra_k on December 3, 2005, at 21:32:51
In reply to Me too » Gabbix2, posted by verne on December 3, 2005, at 21:13:37
yeah. i'm sorry guys.
i'm just used to doing that.
i guess i do it on autopiolet most of the time.
and when i'm tired...
is probably when i'm at my worst.
and when i'm particularly argumentative...
i think thats kind of my version of going for a run
it is a way for me to vent some of that energy.sometimes...
its something i kind of need to do.
well... maybe not 'need'
but it helps me.
but i really don't mean to hurt / annoy
other people along the way.i think....
just to ignore me if you are finding me hard to take.
sometimes i read posts i've written later...
and i don't know what to make of them myself.
Posted by alexandra_k on December 3, 2005, at 21:36:42
In reply to Me too » Gabbix2, posted by verne on December 3, 2005, at 21:13:37
> I like to present an idea, make a statement, or show off something I found rummaging around in my head, and then run for the hills.
>
> I never liked debate. I look at other points of view the way I might look at a painting or sculpture. I can't "disagree" with what someone else sees or experiences.
>
> Imagine if you said you liked chocolate chip ice cream and I said I disagreed? Whether the topic is the origin of the universe or the flavor of ice cream, it's all the same to me. In the end, there's nothing to disagree about.
>
> When I do get into an "argument" I just keep presenting my view from as many angles as possible without much real discussion. I'm just not quick enough on my feet to fence with people.
>
> That's not to say, I won't listen to others and even change my mind. Sometimes I will even shift paradigms, or as I like to say, move to a new crawlspace.hey.
well i hope... i never disrespect your experiences, your opinion, and / or your point of view. i like to argue about things... but thats because (for me) it is about pushing ones understanding a bit deeper (learning new things, relinquishing the false etc). But I *do* appreciate that not everybody is into that. and... if i tried to express myself and someone had a go at my logical distortions...grr.
thats happened often enough (not on the boards)
for me to know that i really don't cope with that very well at all.
Posted by Gabbix2 on December 3, 2005, at 23:03:45
In reply to Me too » Gabbix2, posted by verne on December 3, 2005, at 21:13:37
> I never liked debate. I look at other points of view the way I might look at a painting or sculpture. I can't "disagree" with what someone else sees or experiences.
>
> Imagine if you said you liked chocolate chip ice cream and I said I disagreed? Whether the topic is the origin of the universe or the flavor of ice cream, it's all the same to me. In the end, there's nothing to disagree about.That's it! That's Exactly how I feel
Unless I think it's something hurtful, and something I can actually change..
I just think "Okay, that's what you believe"
And I'm really fine with it, a lot of people think there is some undercurrent of hostility but there just isn't.
My views change all the time too, usually by reading something, or just observing. There's probably two things in my whole life I have a firm opinion on : ) My life is more about curiosity and wonder than firm beliefs.
Posted by Gabbix2 on December 4, 2005, at 0:11:48
In reply to Re: Me too, posted by alexandra_k on December 3, 2005, at 21:36:42
>>sometimes i read posts i've written later...
and i don't know what to make of them myself.And you know you're the **only one** on Babble who does that : ) : )
Posted by AuntieMel on December 5, 2005, at 15:49:15
In reply to Re: Amen » verne, posted by Gabbix2 on December 3, 2005, at 12:36:12
"It's circumstance not virtue that put you where you are."
Indeed, indeed. At the *very least* it is circumstance that determines your starting position.
In my ideal society everyone would have an equal chance for a good education. And we would get back to the days where "college prep" isn't considered the only good education. We would respect that a lot of people's talents don't lie in that direction and a good education would provide some other training.
No one would live in poverty, but those who *choose* not to work would also not be showered with the same goodies those who work get. <Remember this is my ideal, which assumes that there is some way to determine who chooses not to work and who can't work>
Everyone willing to work would have access to good and inexpensive child care so that they can realize the money they earn.
All disabled people will get good case workers to help determine what assistance they need and to be their advocate, so that they do not have to be made to feel inferior. This applies to mentally disabled as well as physically disabled. If the disability is temporary, that advocate will assist with any treatment needed.
Public housing will be more discrete, mingling with non-public housing wherever possible.
I could go on, but I'm tired.
Posted by Gabbix2 on December 5, 2005, at 20:36:17
In reply to Re: Amen » Gabbix2, posted by AuntieMel on December 5, 2005, at 15:49:15
> "It's circumstance not virtue that put you where you are."
>
> Indeed, indeed. At the *very least* it is circumstance that determines your starting position.I was actually referring to the Countries people live in, and my distaste for those (please not soley babblers) who criticize, particularly U.S citizens who are taking a beating these days, when it's just circumstance that they don't live there.
I mean, I don't know about you, but I don't have a whole lot to say about what my Government does, bad or good and I'd really be offended by people associating me with it, if an unpopular decision was made. And I won't brag about being Canadian, because I had nothing to do with it. Yes, I'm happy, lucky..
but really, it's who I am as a person that makes me proud or not.After all that.. whew!
I certainly agree with your post though.
>
> In my ideal society everyone would have an equal chance for a good education. And we would get back to the days where "college prep" isn't considered the only good education. We would respect that a lot of people's talents don't lie in that direction and a good education would provide some other training.
>
> No one would live in poverty, but those who *choose* not to work would also not be showered with the same goodies those who work get. <Remember this is my ideal, which assumes that there is some way to determine who chooses not to work and who can't work>
>
> Everyone willing to work would have access to good and inexpensive child care so that they can realize the money they earn.
>
> All disabled people will get good case workers to help determine what assistance they need and to be their advocate, so that they do not have to be made to feel inferior. This applies to mentally disabled as well as physically disabled. If the disability is temporary, that advocate will assist with any treatment needed.
>
> Public housing will be more discrete, mingling with non-public housing wherever possible.
>
> I could go on, but I'm tired.
Posted by AuntieMel on December 7, 2005, at 10:13:54
In reply to Re: Amen » AuntieMel, posted by Gabbix2 on December 5, 2005, at 20:36:17
The first time I went to Poland was in the early '90s, soon after it opened up to the west. My thought at the time was "My, my, Americans just don't know how good we've got it"
Not too long after that I went to Kazakhstan and one of my first thoughts was "My, my, the Poles don't realize how good they've got it"
But - in talking to the locals of Atyrau, they insisted they were happy with things the way they were, thank you very much, and didn't *want* any modernization or western ways, so please take your money and go home.
Meaning, I guess, that it's *our* version of what *we* think they should be living like that may be the most faulty.
Posted by AuntieMel on December 7, 2005, at 10:15:01
In reply to Re: Amen » AuntieMel, posted by Gabbix2 on December 5, 2005, at 20:36:17
One thing, though. I'll never complain about any American public restroom again.
Posted by verne on December 7, 2005, at 10:26:11
In reply to Re: An addition » Gabbix2, posted by AuntieMel on December 7, 2005, at 10:15:01
I had to rethink using public restrooms when all I saw was a hole in the floor in Italy. Back in my Eurorail Pass days I would hop a train to Germany just to go to the bathroom.
Verne
Posted by AuntieMel on December 8, 2005, at 14:19:31
In reply to Re: An addition » AuntieMel, posted by verne on December 7, 2005, at 10:26:11
At least the holes in the floor in Italy have porcelain on them and they flush.
Those didn't bother me in the least.....
Posted by Gabbix2 on December 8, 2005, at 16:40:20
In reply to Re: It's all relative, isn't it? » Gabbix2, posted by AuntieMel on December 7, 2005, at 10:13:54
> The first time I went to Poland was in the early '90s, soon after it opened up to the west. My thought at the time was "My, my, Americans just don't know how good we've got it"
>
> Not too long after that I went to Kazakhstan and one of my first thoughts was "My, my, the Poles don't realize how good they've got it"
>
> But - in talking to the locals of Atyrau, they insisted they were happy with things the way they were, thank you very much, and didn't *want* any modernization or western ways, so please take your money and go home.
>
> Meaning, I guess, that it's *our* version of what *we* think they should be living like that may be the most faulty.I think that's a lot of it. Personally I don't want the "special smile" my grade 3 teacher reserved for the poor kids.
But I do want understanding that appearances are not the entire story, I'd like that for everyone though.
On a slightly different note..
I had a friend of mine who prided herself (truly) on being p.c. This was years ago when the P.C movement was huge.
She made a comment about "another rude American" when we were in a store once.
I asked her "Carrie, when someone is a visible minority, and does something other people think is rude, you're the first one to say "You have to understand their culture"
"Why is it you think it's okay to make generalizations about Americans?"
She said "Oh, like you're *really* going to hurt them"
I think my brain started smoking..
I mean, that's not exactly the point of not judging people as far as I know.
And on top of that, by not being consistant you're being just as insulting toward the minority culture.
You're saying one should know better, and that the other is unequal and therefore we should "be extra nice to them"
It makes me understand why Buffy St. Marie sang "If the bad guys don't get you, then the good guys will"
Posted by gardenergirl on December 8, 2005, at 17:30:56
In reply to Re: An addition » verne, posted by AuntieMel on December 8, 2005, at 14:19:31
The ones in Japan have porcelain, too. But I can't tell you how relieved (pardon the pun) I always was when I saw a sign that said, "Western toilet".
And those holes seem really small when you are on a moving train, swaying back and forth with the train's motion. Handles on either side of the "stall" came in really handy.
:)
gg
Posted by AuntieMel on December 9, 2005, at 12:11:53
In reply to And all a little weird to me... » AuntieMel, posted by Gabbix2 on December 8, 2005, at 16:40:20
"But I do want understanding that appearances are not the entire story, I'd like that for everyone though."
So true, so true. That is actually the point of one of the books I was recommending. Those who really *do* amass money don't look wealthy at all. And everyone I ever knew with the big house, new car, designer clothes was actually in credit card debt up to their eyebrows and one paycheck away from homelessness.
Never judge a book by it's cover.
I had precious little when I was growing up, but you couldn't tell much difference by looking at me. I got the latest jeans used for $2.00 and made a lot of my own stuff. Even now I am cheap and drive a car 'till it drops, etc.
"And on top of that, by not being consistant you're being just as insulting toward the minority culture.
You're saying one should know better, and that the other is unequal and therefore we should "be extra nice to them"Indeed. If you have to be nice to some and not others, what you are really saying is that you are superior to those you are being nice to. You're not being sensitive, you're being magnanimous.
Posted by Gabbix2 on December 9, 2005, at 14:24:03
In reply to Re: And all a little weird to me... » Gabbix2, posted by AuntieMel on December 9, 2005, at 12:11:53
You're not being sensitive, you're being magnanimous.
>Ah, thank you for summing that up for me, that's it, exactly!
Go forward in thread:
Psycho-Babble Politics | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.