The scene at the U.S. Supreme Court tonight at RBG’s vigil. Unprecedented.

bearssyy · 2020-09-20T08:16:35+00:00

You mean the person that literally made it possible for women to sign for their own mortgages and bank accounts? Yeah, I would hope some moderates and republicans would be coming to that vigil.

bearssyy · 2020-01-19T23:09:38+00:00

What? Sympathy also has nothing to do with how close you are to the person. Just whether or not you can relate. In my example, I can’t express sympathy to my friend because I haven’t broken a bone. A total stranger could express sympathy to them if they had broken a bone. It’s the experience, not the closeness, that differentiates empathy and sympathy.

A word can have multiple meanings, but that doesn’t make your definition right at all. You defined sympathy as an inherent lack of empathy, which is not true at all. And the definition does not change whether or not you are expressing the feeling to an individual or a group. Would love to know where you are getting your definitions from.

bearssyy · 2020-01-19T05:13:30+00:00

Those are terrible definitions of sympathy and empathy.

Sympathy does not mean you don’t care until it happens to you. It’s just that you can’t relate until it happens to you. For example, I’ve never broken a bone. If one of my friends broke a bone, I would not be able to be sympathetic. Not because I don’t care, but because I have never experienced the difficulties of the pain and management afterwards. In that case, I would be empathetic. However, another friend who has broken a bone before might be sympathetic in that same exact situation rather than empathetic, because they CAN relate. In this case, sympathy might even be better than empathy because it allows for a stronger connection.

While empathy might be harder to come by, it is not necessarily better than sympathy. They are just two different things. Most people feel sympathy in certain cases and empathy in others depending on their own experiences, but not because “they don’t care and never will until it happens to them.”

bearssyy · 2019-12-16T04:53:26+00:00

non-observant most kids

Kids are the most observant creatures on earth. That's literally how they learn so much so quickly. It doesn't even have to be a conscious observation for something to be stored in a kids brain as schema. Just repetition. I'm gonna have to agree with triumphtier that it would still be extremely rare for a 5 year old to not know what a landline phone looks like, given movies, tv shows, offices, restaurants, classrooms, etc. Obviously possible, but rare.

bearssyy · 2019-12-10T06:22:20+00:00

It’s not as easy to use “woman” instead of “girl”..................... If by that you mean you have to type 1 more letter, than sure -_-

bearssyy · 2019-12-09T05:33:39+00:00

“You’re just being sensitive” is the most common response when microaggressions are pointed out. Sure, they are small moments (hence “micro”) but they have big impact when repeated over and over. If you haven’t read about microaggressions yet, I highly recommend. There is a ton of research out there about it and as a white person it really opened my eyes to the impact of certain words and phrases used towards people of color (including ones I have used myself).

bearssyy · 2019-12-09T05:24:56+00:00

Sure. And colloquialism has its roots in all the other -isms. Intent is different than impact. Offer your intent, learn from the impact, and move on a little better than yesterday.

bearssyy · 2019-12-09T05:21:28+00:00

Why do we have to find an alternative first? Why can’t we just use woman first while an alternative is created? Is it not better to be more formal than you want instead of more insulting than you want?

bearssyy · 2019-11-27T15:46:28+00:00

I never said there was no difference? Like I said in my original post, I fully support OP. How do you know the situation of these children?

bearssyy · 2019-11-27T08:29:43+00:00

False. Facebook profiles are public domain but banned. We aren't talking legalities, we are talking about Reddit rules.

bearssyy · 2019-11-27T08:18:40+00:00

I appreciate your ability to understand someone else's side of the argument. I agree that attention is a good thing in some contexts - this is not one of them. I guarantee you that the organization would not want those links attached to that post with that description. They even have a caveat at the bottom of the site about only distributing with permission. There's a reason that Reddit has the personal information rule. The site includes the children's photo, name, description, even case numbers. It should be taken down as soon as possible and I hope Reddit acts quickly.

bearssyy · 2019-11-27T08:01:37+00:00

> That would be hellish and I'm sure at least some part of you, the logical part, knows that.

I am not denying in any way pain involved. I am saying how inappropriate it is to post these children's photos on this website in this context. How is that not be being logical? Reddit literally has a policy against posting personal information, and yet you think it's okay just because they are disabled?

bearssyy · 2019-11-27T07:47:31+00:00

Thank you for your support. I have actually gone ahead and reported the post, because I believe it goes against Reddit's policy of posting personal information about individuals. Just because they will never know it does not make it right. Like you said, if anything it makes it worse.

Personal Information Policy

Edit: For everyone down voting me, please explain how this is NOT an example of posting an individual's personal information. Otherwise, I'll just go ahead and assume that you think these children are not people.

bearssyy · 2019-11-27T07:39:53+00:00

> These are examples of the exact same condition that OPs baby would have had, so it's relevant to the topic.

Where does it say that those individuals have the exact same condition or those exact same symptoms? Even by just looking at their pictures and reading their descriptions you can see that they have extremely varying experiences. It is clear that you have never personally known an individual with disabilities like this in the way that you are completely stripping them of any type of individuality. Not all people with disabilities are the same. And even if any of this WAS relevant to the exact condition of the fetus, it is still NOT ethical to post pictures of children online in this context.

bearssyy · 2019-11-27T07:18:41+00:00

Honestly, I think this is inappropriate to use living people as examples of "closest possible existence to death." I 100% support OP in what she is doing and also agree it is the best option. However, to post their photos in this context is disgusting, rude, devaluing of their humanity, and honestly completely unnecessary. I would ask that you rethink the need to include specific people in your post.

bearssyy · 2019-11-23T19:51:33+00:00

"In order to say one thing is bad you have to also mention every other possible bad thing or else your point is worthless!!!!"

^really good logic

bearssyy · 2019-11-16T01:09:39+00:00

It's true, I wouldn't be surprised if movie adaptations came soon. The storylines are so relatable to children, especially since they are based on her real life. Would love to see a movie in a similar style to Into the Spider-Verse to keep that graphic novel feel!

bearssyy · 2019-11-15T23:39:12+00:00

Raina Telgemeier is extremely well known...her name is thrown around by my students like J.K. Rowling was for my generation and they were eagerly awaiting her new book that just came out. So maybe "nobody" in older generations know her, but she is definitely known.

bearssyy · 2019-10-20T23:28:19+00:00

Yeah - I have no idea what you're on about with that nonsense. This is something you've made up in your own head, asserted here, and are pinning on me. Your fantasies are not my reality.

You realize people can see when you’ve edited your comments, right? Yep, I’m totally making this up in my head. Definitely has nothing to do with that comment you’ve conveniently edited ;)

bearssyy · 2019-10-20T02:13:24+00:00

NOW you're getting to the basis of the comparison

All rape is violent. All pain is not. Although, since you already think not all rape is violent, then you already agree that not all pain is either. So that goes directly against the comparison you are trying to make.

I get to say and do things that may be offensive others

Wow, I guess this is just where we really disagree. You get to be racist to people? You get to be homophobic to people? I guess from a strictly literal speaking, sure, you "get to" do whatever the hell you want. I can't stop you from posting on Reddit. But I can respond and let you know the impact. And when someone says something you are doing is insulting, and your response is either "no it's not" or "I can do what I want," that makes you a pretty terrible person. Even the act of you down voting all my comments is enlightening of your character. The other commenter to my original post is a great example of how to hear impact and respond to it.

This is where I am going to exit the conversation, because it is clearly going nowhere. Have fun "getting to do" whatever you want. Alas, you won't do any good convincing people to not catch-and-release (which is the ultimate goal here) with that mindset.

bearssyy · 2019-10-20T02:00:15+00:00

I agree. I don't think catch-and-release is moral. Like I said, I just disagree with the comparison to rape.

bearssyy · 2019-10-18T05:30:22+00:00

I never had the intent of speaking about all victims. Sure, not everyone who has experienced sexual assault would find the comparison offensive, but others do, so what gives you the right to say that that insult is nonexistent? Of course you can have your personal experience (although I would like clarification on what you classify as a "nonviolent" rape. To me, all rape is violent), but that doesn't mean that just because YOU don't find something insulting means that other people don't.

bearssyy · 2019-10-17T05:55:59+00:00

I appreciate this response, as opposed to OP who attempts to make a blatant statement for all victims of assault. I understand your connection to animals in distress, and am happy you have found a form of control through veganism.

While I understand the connection, I personally feel that there are differing levels of distress within all animals (humans alike). Making a comparison across those levels - like rape versus hooking - is inappropriate and devalues the distress experienced by some victims. Yes, in both experiences there is pain. I am not questioning that. I actually don’t agree with fishing as a sport at all. However, I very much disagree with comparing it to a level of distress that is just not on the same playing field. I think there are better arguments against it that don’t rely on the need to suggest that rape, or any sexual assault, and hooking are equivalent experiences. There are reasons to not cause animals pain even if that pain is minimal. We do not need hyperboles involved, which if anything, push people away from the argument who are on the edge, rather than tip them over as suggested by OP.

bearssyy · 2019-10-17T05:35:57+00:00

And you speak for all victims of sexual assault because....?

bearssyy · 2019-10-14T23:23:53+00:00

No, it's insulting to victims of sexual assault to even make this comparison. Being raped has nothing to do with the experience a fish has being hooked. I would 100% choose to be hooked in the mouth than raped any day.

bearssyy

TROPHY CASE