Thank you very much @Etienne and @Savi2024!!!!! ππππ₯ Also thank you @zzzskl, but I dont understand really what you mean. ππ¬
I have now a very difficult statement from our society class from this week:
β‘οΈ WOKE is both good and not good!
I believe the statement is true but we had a very big discussion in the class that it became almost an argument. I believe it is good if for example everybody feels welcome and if everybody is accepted. There is nothing wrong with that right.
BUTTT i dont like that people get angry if you make a mistake like how you have to call a person and you make a mistake. And we had a discussion if it is ok if people feel different and they act in sports of the other gender or they change in the changeroom. I think it is unfair if for example a man can do woman sports in a real competition. And I think that if a man feels as a woman that is ok, BUT they should get a separate changeroom so there is not any problem. But others said that is discrimination, but i dont think that it is discrimination. ππ€·ββοΈπ€·ββοΈ
I believe the statement is true but we had a very big discussion in the class that it became almost an argument. I believe it is good if for example everybody feels welcome and if everybody is accepted. There is nothing wrong with that right.
Disclaimer: this is not what woke means. If it was the definition given to you, this is very much false advertising. Wokeness is the essentialization of human beings based on their sole race, sexual orientation, gender or even religion. It means there is a hierarchy of people based on the apparent group they belong to. For instance because your skin may be dark, you would be de facto a victim of white people. Or just because you are gay you must be given more than an heterosexual. Or if you're a woman, you're going to get advantages that men can't have. It is the exact opposite of being accepted as is: it is pointing out your so called "differences" and being awarded better treatment out of principle. It opposes meritocracy, which means whoever does a better job at something is given their chance, regardless of their color/gender/sexuality/etc. In the context of race, it can be considered reverse reverse racism, which means back to plain old racism.
I very much encourage everyone to watch the movie What is a Woman? if you haven't yet. It is a brilliant summary of these topics and what they entail, on top of being a funny watch.
Many thanks Etienne for your response. It should come as no surprise that I am not convinced - at all - with many of the observations made in your response concerning β in short β museum funding (I am not referring to the new woke topic). Various facts which are presented or assumed by you rather constitute misconceptions of the realities in practice. But I do appreciate your efforts to present your case.
You will understand that β as a lawyer β I like fierce debate. You have informed me in a private message that a special forum has been dedicated to a more extensive discussion on this matter. I will gladly participate and reserve my second incursion for that forum (somewhere this weekend should work).
One of the misconceptions I feel obliged to correct immediately: (former) colleagues and acquaintances who participate in the governance of various cultural institutions museums generally assume a supervisory role and work on a pro bono basis. The salary argument is β to put it mildly β out of order.
I will continue the discussion later in the dedicated forum. It will be a delight to exchange further thoughts there. Apologies to Yue for the tsunami of comments on just one of your many interesting statements!
Thank you @Etienne and @Savi2024!! It is nice that you discuss a lot about it!! π But now there is a special forum for it if you want to say more about it.
Disclaimer: this is not what woke means. If it was the definition given to you, this is very much false advertising. Wokeness is the essentialization of human beings based on their sole race, sexual orientation, gender or even religion. It means there is a hierarchy of people based on the apparent group they belong to. For instance because your skin may be dark, you would be de facto a victim of white people. Or just because you are gay you must be given more than an heterosexual. Or if you're a woman, you're going to get advantages that men can't have. It is the exact opposite of being accepted as is: it is pointing out your so called "differences" and being awarded better treatment out of principle. It opposes meritocracy, which means whoever does a better job at something is given their chance, regardless of their color/gender/sexuality/etc. In the context of race, it can be considered reverse reverse racism, which means back to plain old racism.
I very much encourage everyone to watch the movie What is a Woman? if you haven't yet. It is a brilliant summary of these topics and what they entail, on top of being a funny watch.
Thank you @Etienne we get that definition in our society class. Sorry I dont know how to translate it in a correct way but in Dutch it is maatschappijleer. We talk a lot about things in the society so that is why i call it society class in English so I hope that everybody understands what I mean.
I believe that everybody is equal and that if you are different that is ok. And everybody is welcome and it does not matter what you are or what you think. But this also means that you cant discriminate the other way. It is difficult to explain that. But for example if a man feels a woman and he wants to use the changing room for women I think that is not good. But when I said in the class that you can maybe have a separate room if he does not want to change with men somebody got angry and said that is discrimination to suggest that he gets a separate changing room. And it was discrimination because he feels like a woman so you have to respect that. But I think it is also about safety and it is not right for women if that is allowed. I dont understand what is wrong with giving a separate room for him so he also feels respect but also protecting women. I really mean that. But I dont agree that is really discrimination to say that he cant be in a women changing room.
And I will look at the movie you mentioned. But is it easy to understand because sometimes in English they use terms about this topic on youtube and it becomes very difficult to understand.
I'll say true, but morals matter. You shouldn't make friends with psychopaths.
I agree but some people say it is impossible to become friends if the age is very different or between a person who is a christian with a muslim or somebody who does not have a religion or that other differences are a problem. ππ
But I think if you REALLY act like a true friend all the differences dont matter. So i have friends who are much older than me. But they are all very friendly and kind and patient. And I have friends who are muslims or who are Christian and that is also not a problem of course. More important than the differences is how you are as a friend i think. πππ₯
Two new statements and I am curious what you think about them π By the way I just write the statements but that does not mean I agree with them always! π
β‘οΈ To protect the climate, tourists can only make one flight per year!
β‘οΈ Smoking should become illegal like drugs.
What do you think? True β or false β ?
If you want to react to these or other statements in this forum or have another statement, you always can post below! Thank youuu! ππ€π€π€
β‘οΈ To protect the climate, tourists can only make one flight per year!
Limiting people from freely going places is always morally wrong. But I think we should try to limit how much stuff travels across the world (kind of Switzerland style where they make most of the stuff they sell in their own country, and import as little as possible). This will have the most impact on CO2, as well as protect industries in the respective countries.
β‘οΈ Smoking should become illegal like drugs.
I don't think it should be illegal, but it should be banned in most public places.
Limiting people from freely going places is always morally wrong. But I think we should try to limit how much stuff travels across the world (kind of Switzerland style where they make most of the stuff they sell in their own country, and import as little as possible). This will have the most impact on CO2, as well as protect industries in the respective countries.
I don't think it should be illegal, but it should be banned in most public places.
Limiting people from freely going places is always morally wrong. But I think we should try to limit how much stuff travels across the world (kind of Switzerland style where they make most of the stuff they sell in their own country, and import as little as possible). This will have the most impact on CO2, as well as protect industries in the respective countries.
I agree with that. And it is also important that if you want to buy things you can look on vinted or in our country marktplaats too. So you can have it second hand and with marktplaats you can also search for like 3 km from you so you can just pick it up with a bike! π
I don't think it should be illegal, but it should be banned in most public places.
I think that in my country that is already in most public places. I never tried smoking because of how bad it is for your health and it smells like old socks which you changed 10 years ago. π΅βπ«π΅βπ«
More ashtrays should be added in public like store fronts and such so people wouldnt have to throw the cigarette butts on the ground and also why dont all cars have ashtrays also for the same purpose then you have to throw them from the window..
More ashtrays should be added in public like store fronts and such so people wouldnt have to throw the cigarette butts on the ground and also why dont all cars have ashtrays also for the same purpose then you have to throw them from the window..
You never have to throw cigarette butts outside. This is an education problem, not a cigarette problem. The same applies to food packaging
Here cigarettes cost i think atleast 10 euros for the cheapest pack or maybe its even 12 euro now... I read somewhere that most of the price is taxes and in 2022 Finland got 1,1 billion euros from cigarette tax but its just something I read online so I cant say if its true or not but the price is true.
Now i was curious how much cigarettes has cost here before i found a news from 2008 saying they will increase the price of the cheapest cigarette pack to 3.80,- and it wont probably take long that the cheapest is 13.80 - Also here the government would get most money i think if all smoked atleast pack of cigarettes a day, gambled and drinked vodka because from all of these government gets taxes also the government is the only one allowed to provide gambling and strong alcohol, no other stores can sell vodka only alcohol stores own by the government.
Now i was curious how much cigarettes has cost here before i found a news from 2008 saying they will increase the price of the cheapest cigarette pack to 3.80,- and it wont probably take long that the cheapest is 13.80 - Also here the government would get most money i think if all smoked atleast pack of cigarettes a day, gambled and drinked vodka because from all of these government gets taxes also the government is the only one allowed to provide gambling and strong alcohol, no other stores can sell vodka only alcohol stores own by the government.
I think that in Italy the price of cigarettes is around 6 euros at most. But I've never smokedπ€π
