First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next  Last
Post Reply U.S. meaning for "equality" unrealistic?
10263 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 10/15/15 , edited 10/17/15
First, let me say that I have nothing at all against equality. Equality is great. Equal rights and all that is great.


My issue is with the U.S. meaning of equality. Somewhere along the lines we started equating "equal" with "exactly the same." That's just not realistic. Men and women, different races... we're all different, and we all have common traits (though there are no absolutes).

We've become afraid to mention them.... and it is so weird, to me. We can't even acknowledge differences, because it is taboo in the States.

I realized that the whole world wasn't that way when I was reading a manga about martial arts. In the manga, the Japanese managers for a professional martial arts league were discussing how it is hard to find a Japanese man who can do well in the ring against larger foreign men in a certain division. They discussed the differences like it was normal. That wouldn't fly at all in the States... you just don't suggest in any way that a race has an advantage or disadvantage.

Yet, in the manga, it was no big deal. It was refreshing to think that people could be so honest about these things without becoming offended in any way. They simply acknowledged things the way they were.

And, I'm not trying to say any race is better or worse... supremacy is just as ridiculous. I just wish we could get to the point that acknowledging our differences didn't offend anyone. Maybe we could even celebrate what God (or nature, if that's how you believe) has given us.

I know someone is going to get offended by this. That is not my intention. I just would like other people's thoughts on the matter.
17217 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
(´◔౪◔)✂❤
Offline
Posted 10/15/15
It isn't just about differences. It's about everything that has led up to how it is being portrayed now.
Posted 10/15/15 , edited 10/16/15
"All men ... are NOT created equal! Some are born swifter afoot, some with greater beauty, some are born into poverty and others born sick and feeble. Both in birth and upbringing, in sheer scope of ability every human is inherently different; Yes that is why people discriminate against one another, which is why there is struggle, competition and the unfaltering march of progress. Inequality is not wrong, equality is. What of the E.U. which made equality a right? Rabble politics by a popularity contest. The Chinese Federation with its equal distribution of wealth? A nation of lazy dullards. But not our beloved Britannia, we fight, we compete, evolution is continuous. Britannia alone moves forward, advancing steadily into the future. Even the death of my son, Clovis, demonstrates Britannia's unswerving commitment to progress. We will fight on, we shall struggle, compete, plunder and dominate, and in the end, the future shall be ours. ALL HAIL BRITANNIA!!!!!"
48603 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / AZ
Offline
Posted 10/15/15

PeripheralVisionary wrote:

"All men ... are NOT created equal! Some are born swifter afoot, some with greater beauty, some are born into poverty and others born sick and feeble. Both in birth and upbringing, in sheer scope of ability every human is inherently different; Yes that is why people discriminate against one another, which is why there is struggle, competition and the unfaltering march of progress. Inequality is not wrong, equality is. What of the E.U. which made equality a right? Rabble politics by a popularity contest. The Chinese Federation with its equal distribution of wealth? A nation of lazy dullards. But not our beloved Britannia, we fight, we compete, evolution is continuous. Britannia alone moves forward, advancing steadily into the future. Even the death of my son, Clovis, demonstrates Britannia's unswerving commitment to progress. We will fight on, we shall struggle, compete, plunder and dominate, and in the end, the future shall be ours. ALL HAIL BRITANNIA!!!!!"


Posted 10/15/15
As one person always said, even if you're superior, that doesn't give you the right to treat people like shit.
4913 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F / Canada
Offline
Posted 10/15/15
I had a friend who was in martial arts and he had to gain weight for a tournament once because his coach wanted him to compete in a heavier weight division. Fighters are divided by weight that way everyone can compete fairly. It's interesting stuff.
39086 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / Your friendly nei...
Offline
Posted 10/15/15

PeripheralVisionary wrote:

As one person always said, even if you're superior, that doesn't give you the right to treat people like shit.


False. That is the whole point of being superior.
10263 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 10/15/15 , edited 10/15/15

Kitahoshi_Hazel wrote:

I had a friend who was in martial arts and he had to gain weight for a tournament once because his coach wanted him to compete in a heavier weight division. Fighters are divided by weight that way everyone can compete fairly. It's interesting stuff.


Yes you are right, however you are forgetting a few things. Different testosterone levels produce different muscle and bone densities. Someone can be the same weight, but be much more compact, and therefore will have more agility and speed, but the same amount of power behind their strikes, due to a natural genetic advantage. There are also other things affected, but I'm just using this as an example.

There are also open weight divisions in some martial arts tournaments, but not really an issue.
6628 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / M / England
Offline
Posted 10/15/15 , edited 10/15/15
That's the progressive idea of equality. By progressive I mean the group of people who call themselves progressives despite being regressive and often get mistaken for liberals despite being authoritarian.
4913 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F / Canada
Offline
Posted 10/15/15

HolyDrumstick wrote:


Kitahoshi_Hazel wrote:

I had a friend who was in martial arts and he had to gain weight for a tournament once because his coach wanted him to compete in a heavier weight division. Fighters are divided by weight that way everyone can compete fairly. It's interesting stuff.


Yes you are right, however you are forgetting a few things. Different testosterone levels produce different muscle and bone densities. Someone can be the same weight, but be much more compact, and therefore will have more agility and speed, but the same amount of power behind their strikes, due to a natural genetic advantage. There are also other things affected, but I'm just using this as an example.

There are also open weight divisions in some martial arts tournaments, but not really an issue.


I idolize women like Major Lisa Jaster (http://www.newsmax.com/TheWire/maj-lisa-jaster-woman-army-ranger/2015/10/14/id/696107/) and Kacy Catanzaro (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kacy_Catanzaro) for challenging themselves instead of giving into their limitations. I'm sure they had some genetic advantages, but I don't think that means everyone else should just stop trying.

When I was growing up, my best friend was naturally gifted with drawing, but I have no doubt that I could have been just as good if I'd put in the time and effort. It would have taken me longer and I would probably end up creating my own style, but I don't think that would have been a bad outcome. Martial arts isn't just about how strong you are, but about how well you know your own body. I think it's possible to turn your disadvantages into advantages in some circumstances.
10263 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 10/15/15

Kitahoshi_Hazel wrote:


I idolize women like Major Lisa Jaster (http://www.newsmax.com/TheWire/maj-lisa-jaster-woman-army-ranger/2015/10/14/id/696107/) and Kacy Catanzaro (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kacy_Catanzaro) for challenging themselves instead of giving into their limitations. I'm sure they had some genetic advantages, but I don't think that means everyone else should just stop trying.

When I was growing up, my best friend was naturally gifted with drawing, but I have no doubt that I could have been just as good if I'd put in the time and effort. It would have taken me longer and I would probably end up creating my own style, but I don't think that would have been a bad outcome. Martial arts isn't just about how strong you are, but about how well you know your own body. I think it's possible to turn your disadvantages into advantages in some circumstances.


I agree that a natural disadvantage or advantage should not keep you from doing what you want to do... to a degree.

I still think that mandatory physical fitness levels should be met, and not adjusted for gender, in JOBS that require stress on the body such as infantry. That is more to do with not wasting lives needlessly, by allowing under-qualified people in, just for the sake of "fairness." But, that really is only things involving lives, and at the end of the day, I think it should be based on performance.

Kenichi: The Mightiest Disciple (which is not at all the anime I was originally referring to), is an unrealistic marital arts anime... but I really loved the fact that a major theme was that the main character had no natural talent, but through immense amounts of training became a great marital artist.

I do think people should do what they want, and try to work hard at it. I just don't think that equates to denying the reality of natural differences.
4913 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F / Canada
Offline
Posted 10/15/15

HolyDrumstick wrote:

I still think that mandatory physical fitness levels should be met, and not adjusted for gender, in JOBS that require stress on the body such as infantry. That is more to do with not wasting lives needlessly, by allowing under-qualified people in, just for the sake of "fairness." But, that really is only things involving lives, and at the end of the day, I think it should be based on performance.


That's what's so great about Major Lisa Jaster:


"A lot of doors can open for women if we go about it the right way," she said. "The right way includes being professional, thick skinned, and ensuring that we minimize any special treatment. I know that I am physically fit. I am mentally tough. I know that I have all the ingredients to be successful. I volunteered because I want to make sure the standards do remain high and that the women coming out at the far end of Ranger School will be respected for their accomplishments rather than being judged for making things easier."


It's hard not to admire someone like that.
10263 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 10/15/15 , edited 10/15/15

Kitahoshi_Hazel wrote:


HolyDrumstick wrote:

I still think that mandatory physical fitness levels should be met, and not adjusted for gender, in JOBS that require stress on the body such as infantry. That is more to do with not wasting lives needlessly, by allowing under-qualified people in, just for the sake of "fairness." But, that really is only things involving lives, and at the end of the day, I think it should be based on performance.


That's what's so great about Major Lisa Jaster:


"A lot of doors can open for women if we go about it the right way," she said. "The right way includes being professional, thick skinned, and ensuring that we minimize any special treatment. I know that I am physically fit. I am mentally tough. I know that I have all the ingredients to be successful. I volunteered because I want to make sure the standards do remain high and that the women coming out at the far end of Ranger School will be respected for their accomplishments rather than being judged for making things easier."


It's hard not to admire someone like that.


Yeah, not to mention her age, alone.

I will say I disagree with


"The right way includes being professional, thick skinned, and ensuring that we minimize any special treatment."


I would say "The right way includes being professional, thick skinned, and ensuring that we eliminate any special treatment.


As someone who was in the military... you just don't cut corners when involving lives, simply to make things "fair."


However, as far as I know, they only adjusted the amount of times a person could re-attempt the cycles, for females. As far as I know, they still have to meet the same standards in the end. So, that's not really terrible.
4913 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F / Canada
Offline
Posted 10/15/15

HolyDrumstick wrote:


"The right way includes being professional, thick skinned, and ensuring that we minimize any special treatment."


I would say "The right way includes being professional, thick skinned, and ensuring that we eliminate any special treatment.


As someone who was in the military... you just don't cut corners when involving lives, simply to make things "fair."


However, as far as I know, they only adjusted the amount of times a person could re-attempt the cycles, for females. As far as I know, they still have to meet the same standards in the end. So, that's not really terrible.


The ways in which I think a little special treatment in warranted is that I've heard there aren't very many female sized uniforms and having an ill fitting uniform makes it very difficult to perform your duties so I wouldn't say that eliminating them is a good idea. I think there's an element of common sense involved when it comes to "special treatment".

Posted 10/15/15
I don't agree with equality in the least. Even if it is written in law, people will sometimes deny others of their rights.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.