Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

420, Politics and Idiots

2456

Posts

  • MrMisterMrMister Valuing scholarship above all elseRegistered User regular
    edited April 2008
    So, if you can't dress and speak like a white-collar member of the upper class then you don't deserve a voice? Lovely.

  • lunasealunasea Registered User
    edited April 2008
    captmorgan wrote: »
    Why is it when I look at that picture all I can think of is "Fire grape shot!"

    I feel rally s like this are bullshit, you want to get the governments attention. March 200 clean cut people, in tailered suits carrying briefcases into a meeting. Have all the paper work for budget concerns, social impact, policing, taxing structure, extra, extra. Have all the I`s dotted and the T`s crossed.

    200 lawyer looking people are far more scarier, than 20 thousand hippies.

    huh? In any case potheads are part of the population too, they have every right to dress and act within the boundaries of the law (note that this may or may not actually include smoking marijuana). You may have your prejudices against stoners and whatnot but the same kind of thinking can be applied to any group of people, just because you don't like some aspect of them doesn't mean you can discount their political presence out of hand. Besides, are you suggesting that every social movement in a democracy has to be done through high-powered lawyers and a privileged minority? Because, you know, professional lobbyists have had a splendid impact on society.

  • electricitylikesmeelectricitylikesme Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    MrMister wrote: »
    So, if you can't dress and speak like a white-collar member of the upper class then you don't deserve a voice? Lovely.
    You probably deserve a voice but good luck convincing anyone else you do. Pragmatism > idealism.

    The Company: The CYOA game that anybody can join at any time - running now!
  • MrMisterMrMister Valuing scholarship above all elseRegistered User regular
    edited April 2008
    MrMister wrote: »
    So, if you can't dress and speak like a white-collar member of the upper class then you don't deserve a voice? Lovely.
    You probably deserve a voice but good luck convincing anyone else you do. Pragmatism > idealism.

    I hear those kids from the ghetto can't even speak English. If they don't even care enough to clean themselves up before an interview then they shouldn't be shocked that I'm not hiring them.

  • TL DRTL DR Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    Oboro wrote: »
    In that respect, now that I think about it, you guys are sort of like some wings of the LGBT community.

    Potheads and homosexuals. Whoda thunk it?

    We're here!

    We're high!

    Get... some pink popcorn, Timbits, uhh, Doritos, we're out of tofu, and Beaster said he wanted some of those yogurt smoothies.

    eokNV.jpg
  • Al_watAl_wat Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    saggio wrote: »
    I'd just like to point out that BC Bud is superior to all.

    That being said, it can get pretty fucking obnoxious here on 4/20. It was kind of a shitty day today (it snowed yesterday), so that put a damper on things, but when the sun is shining all sorts of stoners come out of the wood work and smoke up publicly. In Vancouver it can get really bad, with Marc Emery usually holding a giant pot smoking rally at the art gallery - thousands of people routinely show up for it, too.

    I think generally that marijuana should be legalized and taxed, and maybe that's because it's just so common here, and no one really views it as a big deal. I just have an issue with it because I don't smoke and as a result I get fucking nausea from the smell. Which can be a pretty big problem on 4/20, obviously.

    Yeah I was pretty pissed with the fucking snow for 4/20. In Ontario (Where I am from originally) it was like summer temperatures...

    Regarding all the hate towards 4/20: I hate stoner idiots and hippies as much as the next man (Marc Emery is a fucking tool) but i dont let that ruin my enjoyment of 4/20. At my old university (UoGuelph) thousands of people meet on this huge grass field and toke up on this date. Sure, there are some hippies and shit, thats inevitable, but the main point of going to me isnt based on some kind of "stick it to the man" mentality , its more about just having a good time. It does feel kinda awesome being there with a few thousand other people, its a spectacle for sure.

    Now, I do have to acknowledge that to some people 4/20 is about "sticking it to the man", and it may have started out like that. But to a lot of people its just about having a good time on that day.

  • electricitylikesmeelectricitylikesme Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    MrMister wrote: »
    MrMister wrote: »
    So, if you can't dress and speak like a white-collar member of the upper class then you don't deserve a voice? Lovely.
    You probably deserve a voice but good luck convincing anyone else you do. Pragmatism > idealism.

    I hear those kids from the ghetto can't even speak English. If they don't even care enough to clean themselves up before an interview then they shouldn't be shocked that I'm not hiring them.

    EDIT: Actually this is more accurate to my sentiment - why are you reacting as though I don't actually support the idea these people are supporting. That doesn't mean there aren't obvious difficulties in dealing with a wider population in a manner likely to get it supported by the vast majority of people who are not me.

    The Company: The CYOA game that anybody can join at any time - running now!
  • MrMisterMrMister Valuing scholarship above all elseRegistered User regular
    edited April 2008
    The fact that people get disenfranchised due to their culture is shitty and inegalitarian. And there's a fine line between acknowledging the existence of such cultural elitism and endorsing it. I find a little too much of the latter in the "blaming the victim" mentality where we ridicule stoners for not presenting themselves as would a white collar professional.

  • JebusUDJebusUD Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    MrMister wrote: »
    The fact that people get disenfranchised due to their culture is shitty and inegalitarian. And there's a fine line between acknowledging the existence of such cultural elitism and endorsing it. I find a little too much of the latter in the "blaming the victim" mentality where we ridicule stoners for not presenting themselves as would a white collar professional.

    But some cultures suck.

    You haven't given me a reason to steer clear of you!
  • QuidQuid The Fifth Horseman Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    I like hippies. They're friendly.

    PSN: allenquid
  • electricitylikesmeelectricitylikesme Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    MrMister wrote: »
    The fact that people get disenfranchised due to their culture is shitty and inegalitarian. And there's a fine line between acknowledging the existence of such cultural elitism and endorsing it. I find a little too much of the latter in the "blaming the victim" mentality where we ridicule stoners for not presenting themselves as would a white collar professional.

    To an extent though I have no problem with that. For me the argument to legalize marijuana centers on two ideas: (1) that we reduce the harm done and (2) that people should be free to do as much as they please provided it doesn't harm others and they can remain productive members of society.

    Stoners easily prove (1), but make me a little more sketchy on point 2. Of course, I don't actually care about that very much because I already agree with the basic laws they want, but I hardly think its "blaming the victim" to say that a huge part of getting the public on side for such legislation would be showing how people still achieve their potential despite using marijuana in a recreational capacity. Stoners don't present that image - they present an image which plays to almost every parents fears about what's going to happen to their kids if marijuana were legally available, however far fetched they may be from the likely impact of such legislation.

    It's a lot easier to get the laws changed in our favor then it is to change how people react to imagery, especially when a lot of it is going to be subconscious anyway. Yes, it's not a great state of affairs but it is the state of affairs and people like you and I are not the party which has be convinced.

    The Company: The CYOA game that anybody can join at any time - running now!
  • electricitylikesmeelectricitylikesme Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    Quid wrote: »
    I like hippies. They're friendly.
    There are different kinds of hippies. Also like most people don't mention the "war" and you get along great.

    *"war" referring to whatever their hot button issue with which you're likely to be more moderate is

    The Company: The CYOA game that anybody can join at any time - running now!
  • [Tycho?][Tycho?] Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    MrMister wrote: »
    The fact that people get disenfranchised due to their culture is shitty and inegalitarian. And there's a fine line between acknowledging the existence of such cultural elitism and endorsing it. I find a little too much of the latter in the "blaming the victim" mentality where we ridicule stoners for not presenting themselves as would a white collar professional.

    Thank you.

    This thread seems to be people saying "Hippies are dumb, and they dress differently than me."

    And how many of those people would actually call themselves hippies? Yeah, like 3. Just because someone smokes pot and doesn't wear a suit doesn't make them a hippy, nor does it invalidate anything they have to say. I really dont understand the hate on people here have for these so called "hippies". In response to that picture that was posted, several people joked about killing them. At least they're out demonstrating, doing something that they believe in, instead of sitting online making fun of how other people dress.

    ragesig.jpg

  • JebusUDJebusUD Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    Are they demonstrating?

    I would think the majority of them are there because, "Haha! were smoking pot in public!"

    Most of them probably are for legalizeation of it, but not for reasons other than "zomgosh legalize weed cuz I want to smoke it"

    You haven't given me a reason to steer clear of you!
  • Casually HardcoreCasually Hardcore Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    Hello? The local 'hippies' on this campus are some of the must unmotivated, yet the most vocal group of people I know. Try to get them to volunteer to do something productive (like helping moving food for a food drive) and they'll look at you like you're strange and give you rude remarks.

    Now, ask them to attend some anti-anything drive and they're the first ones in line, with the most vulgar t-shirt around. As long as they dont have to do any actual work, they'll be there making the rest of us look like a bunch of college idiots.
    With long armpit hair
    Sticking out like a sore thumb, smelling like dinosaur dung
    These hippies are holier than thou at poorly attended peace marches holding cold veggie dogs
    I'm not your homie or pen pal though I unload ink cartridges as Red State demigods
    Cause smearing a salad on a SUV cant
    Save the black faces at the refugee camp
    There is your sterling Sputnik
    To compliment your unfurling drug fix
    Youve been hoodwinked the secret brotherhood winks as your heroes push it with a
    Branded buttocks
    Now he's an action-pose doll
    Clad in the latest fashion faux-pas
    Just another rapping know-it-all trying to de-politicize those big business ties
    Let me guess, youre a macrobiotic cuisine prep-cook
    With a text book liberal outlook in an oppressed nook
    Couch surfing, but your dads got employment history at Halliburton
    While you dress like wild mermen
    -BusDriver

    This is why I think Political Science degrees are worthless. It's quickly becoming the 'Buisness Degree' of hippies (title used to belong to the Philosophy Degree).

    steam_sig.png
  • QuidQuid The Fifth Horseman Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    JebusUD wrote: »
    Most of them probably are for legalizeation of it, but not for reasons other than "zomgosh legalize weed cuz I want to smoke it"
    And? That's the primary reason I want it legalized. It's got some nifty medical uses too but I would much rather just have a better alternative to alcohol.

    PSN: allenquid
  • SpeakerSpeaker Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    MrMister wrote: »
    So, if you can't dress and speak like a white-collar member of the upper class then you don't deserve a voice? Lovely.

    Last time I checked Good Will sold white-collar shirts, ties and dress pants for $20. How much does weed cost these days?

    Or is this the part where we pout at the horrible inequities of the society The Man built?

    Being walkers with the dawn and morning,
    Walkers with the sun and morning, we are not afraid of night,
    Nor days of gloom, nor darkness -
    Being walkers with the sun and morning.
  • ViolentChemistryViolentChemistry __BANNED USERS
    edited April 2008
    MrMister wrote: »
    So, if you can't dress and speak like a white-collar member of the upper class then you don't deserve a voice? Lovely.

    Can't? I'm sorry, did you just suggest that the majority of the people in that picture can't dress like professionals to show up and fight for a cause? That the majority of the people in that picture can't speak the way they did when they were little rather than like stereotypical "useless pot-heads"? No, fuck that. If it really were a matter of "can't" your righteous indignation would be notably less laughable, but that isn't the case. Smoking pot isn't like being gay or black or a woman, it is a conscious choice you make to do something you know to be illegal. Shit it's not even physical-dependency-forming like crack making crack-heads more deserving of your pity. If your argument is that it shouldn't be illegal because it doesn't stop you from being a productive member of society and doesn't cause anyone any real harm and that keeping it illegal is crushing the ability of corrections to do its job you need to present a professional, well-kept image so that people will give your argument some consideration. Downtrodden my ass.

    DAMM
    Drunks Against Mad Mothers
  • MrMisterMrMister Valuing scholarship above all elseRegistered User regular
    edited April 2008
    Stoners don't present that image - they present an image which plays to almost every parents fears about what's going to happen to their kids if marijuana were legally available, however far fetched they may be from the likely impact of such legislation.

    You don't actually know much at all about that girl because she has a cheek ring. The only reason that people would react so negatively to that mode of dress is that it represents a different and scorned culture. It doesn't strike me as very different from people who discriminate against urban youth because they think their mode of dress and speech mean that they're criminals. In either case, it's mostly harmful prejudice.

  • ViolentChemistryViolentChemistry __BANNED USERS
    edited April 2008
    Speaker wrote: »
    MrMister wrote: »
    So, if you can't dress and speak like a white-collar member of the upper class then you don't deserve a voice? Lovely.

    Last time I checked Good Will sold white-collar shirts, ties and dress pants for $20. How much does weed cost these days?

    Or is this the part where we pout at the horrible inequities of the society The Man built?

    Good stuff? More than twice that. So that $20 won't even force them to skip a baggy if they're being at all responsible with their spending.

    DAMM
    Drunks Against Mad Mothers
  • SpeakerSpeaker Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    MrMister wrote: »
    Stoners don't present that image - they present an image which plays to almost every parents fears about what's going to happen to their kids if marijuana were legally available, however far fetched they may be from the likely impact of such legislation.

    You don't actually know much at all about that girl because she has a cheek ring. The only reason that people would react so negatively to that mode of dress is that it represents a different and scorned culture. It doesn't strike me as very different from people who discriminate against urban youth because they think their mode of dress and speech mean that they're criminals. In either case, it's mostly harmful prejudice.

    I know that she is the type of person who wanted to join that culture.

    If she is "expressing herself" with her appearance, how can you pretend that her appearance is free of content?

    Being walkers with the dawn and morning,
    Walkers with the sun and morning, we are not afraid of night,
    Nor days of gloom, nor darkness -
    Being walkers with the sun and morning.
  • QuidQuid The Fifth Horseman Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    Speaker wrote: »
    Or is this the part where we pout at the horrible inequities of the society The Man built?
    I hate that guy.

    PSN: allenquid
  • SpeakerSpeaker Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    Quid wrote: »
    Speaker wrote: »
    Or is this the part where we pout at the horrible inequities of the society The Man built?
    I hate that guy.

    You know you want to be him.

    Being walkers with the dawn and morning,
    Walkers with the sun and morning, we are not afraid of night,
    Nor days of gloom, nor darkness -
    Being walkers with the sun and morning.
  • electricitylikesmeelectricitylikesme Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    MrMister wrote: »
    Stoners don't present that image - they present an image which plays to almost every parents fears about what's going to happen to their kids if marijuana were legally available, however far fetched they may be from the likely impact of such legislation.

    You don't actually know much at all about that girl because she has a cheek ring. The only reason that people would react so negatively to that mode of dress is that it represents a different and scorned culture. It doesn't strike me as very different from people who discriminate against urban youth because they think their mode of dress and speech mean that they're criminals. In either case, it's mostly harmful prejudice.
    No I don't, and like I said, I don't actually care because their position logically makes sense. Put yourselves in the shoes of every concerned parent in the lower and middle class who wants their children to go upwardly mobile though, and imagine what they're thinking about "legalize marijuana" legislation when presented with the image of what they are going to assume, for all intents and purposes, is representative youth who use marijuana.

    The Company: The CYOA game that anybody can join at any time - running now!
  • MrMisterMrMister Valuing scholarship above all elseRegistered User regular
    edited April 2008
    Speaker wrote: »
    MrMister wrote: »
    So, if you can't dress and speak like a white-collar member of the upper class then you don't deserve a voice? Lovely.

    Last time I checked Good Will sold white-collar shirts, ties and dress pants for $20. How much does weed cost these days?

    Or is this the part where we pout at the horrible inequities of the society The Man built?

    Speaking like a white-collar professional is probably the more difficult part of the equation, and it's substantially more difficult if that's not your native dialect of English. I was raised using the received pronunciation and diction of academic and business English, which makes it much easier for me to present arguments in a way that seems learned and respectable. However, yes, even the clothes are a barrier of entry. To someone without much money, a suit can be quite expensive, and appearing in shabby or ill-fitting clothes makes the speaker seem less respectable. This is especially true if the person doesn't have a regular occasion to wear a suit, and would have to invest in the outfit specifically for the occasion.

    This is, of course, more topical to the situation of the poor than it is to college students who want more weed. However, it is a counterpoint to the idea that we should only respect messages that come to us in the language and attire of the privileged.

    In this case, I would ask why a person should be forced to take out their piercings to be heard. It's stupid to dismiss people based entirely on the fact that they have a certain manner of dress, just as it would be stupid to dismiss a person for speaking with a particular accent or for otherwise displaying an obvious marker of their background.

  • electricitylikesmeelectricitylikesme Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    Speaker wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    Speaker wrote: »
    Or is this the part where we pout at the horrible inequities of the society The Man built?
    I hate that guy.

    You know you want to be him.

    We don't want to stop the exploitation, we strive to become the exploiters.

    The Company: The CYOA game that anybody can join at any time - running now!
  • QuidQuid The Fifth Horseman Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    Speaker wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    Speaker wrote: »
    Or is this the part where we pout at the horrible inequities of the society The Man built?
    I hate that guy.

    You know you want to be him.
    I technically am him.

    PSN: allenquid
  • MrMisterMrMister Valuing scholarship above all elseRegistered User regular
    edited April 2008
    Speaker wrote: »
    If she is "expressing herself" with her appearance, how can you pretend that her appearance is free of content?

    I never said her appearance is free of content. What I said was that her appearance is free of the sort of content that should disqualify her from public discourse.

  • JebusUDJebusUD Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    Quid wrote: »
    JebusUD wrote: »
    Most of them probably are for legalizeation of it, but not for reasons other than "zomgosh legalize weed cuz I want to smoke it"
    And? That's the primary reason I want it legalized. It's got some nifty medical uses too but I would much rather just have a better alternative to alcohol.

    Im just saying its not some high and mighty lets go protest this injustice thing. Its just I "want me some weed".

    You haven't given me a reason to steer clear of you!
  • SpeakerSpeaker Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    MrMister wrote: »
    Speaking like a white-collar professional

    Yes, I'm quite sure it would be simpler to make your case if the subject was not the appearance of middle class white kids at a pot smoking protest.
    However, yes, even the clothes are a barrier of entry. To someone without much money, a suit can be quite expensive, and appearing in shabby or ill-fitting clothes makes the speaker seem less respectable. This is especially true if the person doesn't have a regular occasion to wear a suit, and would have to invest in the outfit specifically for the occasion.

    Yes MrMister, explain to me how it is for people without much money. Enlighten my beknighted inexperience.
    This is, of course, more topical to the situation of the poor than it is to college students who want more weed. However, it is a counterpoint to the idea that we should only respect messages that come to us in the language and attire of the privileged.

    It is an attempt to blur the line between people who have no choice and people who choose to appear a certain way.
    In this case, I would ask why a person should be forced to take out their piercings to be heard. It's stupid to dismiss people based entirely on the fact that they have a certain manner of dress, just as it would be stupid to dismiss a person for speaking with a particular accent or for otherwise displaying an obvious marker of their background.

    I wasn't aware that cheek piercings were an obvious sign of someone's background. It's probably because I don't buy the blurring of the line you are trying to produce between someone with black skin or an accent and a middle class kid who chooses to appear a certain way.

    Being walkers with the dawn and morning,
    Walkers with the sun and morning, we are not afraid of night,
    Nor days of gloom, nor darkness -
    Being walkers with the sun and morning.
  • GungHoGungHo Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    MrMister wrote: »
    So, if you can't dress and speak like a white-collar member of the upper class then you don't deserve a voice? Lovely.
    While you don't have to dress like a suit, I have a problem with the "can't" part, because if you're picking weed over clean clothing and an education, then not being able to get weed legally isn't really the worst of your problems. Last time I heard, a "dime" bag didn't actually cost a dime.
    Quid wrote: »
    JebusUD wrote: »
    Most of them probably are for legalizeation of it, but not for reasons other than "zomgosh legalize weed cuz I want to smoke it"
    And? That's the primary reason I want it legalized. It's got some nifty medical uses too but I would much rather just have a better alternative to alcohol.
    As long as someone's admitting it, that's fine for me. What gets me is the folks who will admit to anything but "I wanna be able to get lit without worrying about the cops hassling me", when everyone knows damn good and well you just wanna smoke it.

    "Adios, mofo" -- TX Gov Rick Perry (R)
  • JebusUDJebusUD Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    MrMister wrote: »
    Speaker wrote: »
    If she is "expressing herself" with her appearance, how can you pretend that her appearance is free of content?

    I never said her appearance is free of content. What I said was that her appearance is free of the sort of content that should disqualify her from public discourse.

    I dunno. Piercings in random places that look painful and to me pretty ugly are generally signs of what someone is going to be like. I assume that she is an idiot because that looks like an idiotic place to get a piercing.

    You haven't given me a reason to steer clear of you!
  • MrMisterMrMister Valuing scholarship above all elseRegistered User regular
    edited April 2008
    Speaker wrote: »
    I wasn't aware that cheek piercings were an obvious sign of someone's background. It's probably because I don't buy the blurring of the line you are trying to produce between someone with black skin or an accent and a middle class kid who chooses to appear a certain way.

    The lines are blurry. What about the inner city kid who dresses like all his friends? Should we ignore him as well?

    Really, I'm curious to know what about not appearing in a suit, or having a piercing, or having dyed hair, is so offensive that it warrants dismissal from public discourse.

  • QuidQuid The Fifth Horseman Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    JebusUD wrote: »
    Quid wrote: »
    JebusUD wrote: »
    Most of them probably are for legalizeation of it, but not for reasons other than "zomgosh legalize weed cuz I want to smoke it"
    And? That's the primary reason I want it legalized. It's got some nifty medical uses too but I would much rather just have a better alternative to alcohol.

    Im just saying its not some high and mighty lets go protest this injustice thing. Its just I "want me some weed".
    Er, different people care about different things. And it's a ban that puts thousands in prison with convicted murderers for having the audacity to use/sell a safer drug than what the government allows so I'd say it's rather protest worthy.

    PSN: allenquid
  • MrMisterMrMister Valuing scholarship above all elseRegistered User regular
    edited April 2008
    JebusUD wrote: »
    I dunno. Piercings in random places that look painful and to me pretty ugly are generally signs of what someone is going to be like. I assume that she is an idiot because that looks like an idiotic place to get a piercing.

    Next up: women in heels no longer to be listened to. Those things hurt, are impossible to be active in, and can do unfortunate things to your tendons. What taardvarks women can be.

  • QuidQuid The Fifth Horseman Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    JebusUD wrote: »
    I dunno. Piercings in random places that look painful and to me pretty ugly are generally signs of what someone is going to be like. I assume that she is an idiot because that looks like an idiotic place to get a piercing.
    Well now you're just being ridiculous and judgemental.

    PSN: allenquid
  • SpeakerSpeaker Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    MrMister wrote: »
    Speaker wrote: »
    If she is "expressing herself" with her appearance, how can you pretend that her appearance is free of content?

    I never said her appearance is free of content. What I said was that her appearance is free of the sort of content that should disqualify her from public discourse.

    It would be against the law to disqualify her from public discourse.

    In reality, she is being dismissed and her opinion given less weight.

    I for one am not prepared to cry buckets over the horrendous moral catastrophe of those who join a culture because they like the asthetic of rejecting mainstream involvement being judged as people who have rejected mainstream involvement. Buy the ticket, take the ride.

    Being walkers with the dawn and morning,
    Walkers with the sun and morning, we are not afraid of night,
    Nor days of gloom, nor darkness -
    Being walkers with the sun and morning.
  • JebusUDJebusUD Registered User regular
    edited April 2008
    MrMister wrote: »
    JebusUD wrote: »
    I dunno. Piercings in random places that look painful and to me pretty ugly are generally signs of what someone is going to be like. I assume that she is an idiot because that looks like an idiotic place to get a piercing.

    Next up: women in heels no longer to be listened to. Those things hurt, are impossible to be active in, and can do unfortunate things to your tendons. What taardvarks women can be.

    Yeah, heels are pretty silly and I am more likely to take people in platforms or flats seriously.

    You haven't given me a reason to steer clear of you!
  • ViolentChemistryViolentChemistry __BANNED USERS
    edited April 2008
    MrMister wrote: »
    Speaker wrote: »
    If she is "expressing herself" with her appearance, how can you pretend that her appearance is free of content?

    I never said her appearance is free of content. What I said was that her appearance is free of the sort of content that should disqualify her from public discourse.

    No one said it disqualifies her from discourse. Quite the contrary, it is included as a part of her discourse. And that's what makes it counter-productive. Of course, she already knows this. She didn't show up there with the intent of persuading anyone of anything (except maybe to give her some free bud), and that's a problem. That makes the case harder to argue from the plethora of valid arguments in favor of legalization. No one is saying she's not allowed to dress like she does, what people are saying is that presenting herself as she does is counter-productive to her alleged cause, and I'm saying she's well aware of that. I know and have known plenty of hippies. They aren't helping, and are in fact getting in the way. This irritates the fuck out of me. You already have the right to be a hippie anyway, that's not a right that needs to be fought for and that's not the right they're claiming to fight for. Your righteous indignation is misplaced.

    DAMM
    Drunks Against Mad Mothers
  • ViolentChemistryViolentChemistry __BANNED USERS
    edited April 2008
    MrMister wrote: »
    Speaker wrote: »
    MrMister wrote: »
    So, if you can't dress and speak like a white-collar member of the upper class then you don't deserve a voice? Lovely.

    Last time I checked Good Will sold white-collar shirts, ties and dress pants for $20. How much does weed cost these days?

    Or is this the part where we pout at the horrible inequities of the society The Man built?

    Speaking like a white-collar professional is probably the more difficult part of the equation, and it's substantially more difficult if that's not your native dialect of English. I was raised using the received pronunciation and diction of academic and business English, which makes it much easier for me to present arguments in a way that seems learned and respectable. However, yes, even the clothes are a barrier of entry. To someone without much money, a suit can be quite expensive, and appearing in shabby or ill-fitting clothes makes the speaker seem less respectable. This is especially true if the person doesn't have a regular occasion to wear a suit, and would have to invest in the outfit specifically for the occasion.

    This is, of course, more topical to the situation of the poor than it is to college students who want more weed. However, it is a counterpoint to the idea that we should only respect messages that come to us in the language and attire of the privileged.

    In this case, I would ask why a person should be forced to take out their piercings to be heard. It's stupid to dismiss people based entirely on the fact that they have a certain manner of dress, just as it would be stupid to dismiss a person for speaking with a particular accent or for otherwise displaying an obvious marker of their background.

    You're right. All those girls who never wanted to go out with me in high school because all I ever talked about were cars and videogames were oppressive assholes. *snort* The way you present yourself directly affects the level of influence you can garner with people. This isn't us making rules, this is a fact of persuasion. Pot-heads aren't oppressed. Deal with it.

    DAMM
    Drunks Against Mad Mothers
Sign In or Register to comment.