On Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 7:01 AM, Russell Coker <russell@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Obviously my previous message wasn't clear enough.
> The discussions about "humor" concern members of one group making "jokes"
> about members of a less privileged group. For example if a woman makes a joke
> about men or a non-white person makes a joke about whites then it's not a
> problem. But the reverse would be a problem.
So to make clear what you are saying: Are you saying that due to the
fact that I am ticking pretty much all the "privilege" boxes as I am:
* white (for the sake of this discussion; don't get me started on how
scientifically _wrong_ the notion of humans "races" and "colour" are)
* in my thirties
* financially stable
* living in a country with a reasonably good economy
it is somehow more OK to use abrasive language, actions or similar
towards me, assuming I am not consenting and/or actually hurt by
what's being said and done, than towards others?
Unless my logic fails me, I can not see how this is not discriminating
against me. The implied assumption seems to be that I am better off
than most and thus need to take more and/or am required to have a
Not given consenting adults (or adolescents in the case of jokes),
neither is OK. No one gets to decide it's OK to be abusive towards
another person because they have it "less bad". This goes _directly_
against the CoC.
> Now if Barak is going to advocate for an exemption to the CoC for "humor" then
> I think he could start by giving some examples of jokes that he would be happy
> for people to make about his religion/race.
Again, a red herring.
Please respect the privacy of this mailing list. Some posts may be declassified
3 years after posting as per http://www.debian.org/vote/2005/vote_002
To UNSUBSCRIBE, use the web form at <http://db.debian.org/>.