Exactly. Go down that road long enough, you do get the nazis, which is exactly what happened. It was the logical conclusion of the confluence of eugenics and the rise of fascism.
That’s an… unusual definition.
Self-cutters? They’re focused on a positive-outcome. (That it has become associated with the scars rather than positive focusing the mind and blotting out mental pain is by-the-by.)
People committing suicide? They’re focused on a positive-outcome. (That it has become associated with the practice of death rather than positive avoidance-of-suffereing is by-the-by.)
Racial segregation is focused on positive outcomes by those doing the focusing. (That it has become associated with the concerns of those who do not want to be segregated, rather than positive benefits enjoyed by those who enforce the segregation is by-the-by.)
Hell, rape is focused on positive outcomes, by those doing the focusing. (That it has become associated with the suffering of the victim rather than pleasure obtained by the person in power is by-the-by.)
1 Like
“But the ugly marks/are worth the momentary gains…”
I think calling it a pseudoscience is quite charitable! My understanding is that most of the “science” part of eugenics involved people making hypotheses and then lying and saying they had done experiments they hadn’t done. I think they had learned something from phrenology which was abandoned as quackery when, having been put to the test, it failed to demonstrate that white people were smarter than black people. Eugenicists avoided that pitfall by never putting anything to the test.
But I think the basic idea of eugenics is actually still rampant in people’s thinking. Recently Ontario (and many jurisdictions, I think, but I’m familiar with Ontario) has done a lot to try to improve accessibility for people with disabilities in terms of legislation and regulations, but the resistance is very strong. People are outwardly tolerant ofpeople with mobility disabilities and people with vision impairments. but they are much less tolerant of any kind of mental disability (and of deafness which people often mistake for a development disability).
Even when people are tolerant or even supportive it seems to mostly come from a sense of charity or pity. The thinking is mostly that it is unkind to exclude those people, not that we are all better off for having people with different life experiences participate. I think that’s part of why it is easier for people to “accept” people in wheelchairs, it’s because they are generally going to agree that it would be nice if we had the medical technology to eliminate the need to bulky mobility devices. A person who sees the disability as a bad thing in itself isn’t likely to get too much of a challenge from a person who can’t stand up, because there is a good chance that person would rather be able to stand up, all things being equal.
But then you have a group like Autism Speaks that is a massive charity that seeks to “cure” autism. No minimization of the hardship that some people with autism and their families go through, but the neuro-atypical people I know don’t want a “cure” and Autism Speaks seem very much to be advocating eugenics by a different name.
A tip of the hat octopus to that.
Assholes. The answer to that question is definitely assholes.
1 Like
Well how else would you describe it? Your post is full of pointlessly emotive examples, some of which I take exception to as I don’t think they illustrate the point you’re trying to make. I understand that eugenics is distasteful and I don’t believe that we actually differ in our assessment of it one iota. However it remains that any approach to any thing (be that thing, goal or act good or bad) can be focussed on achieving an objective, or focussed on its opposite. War can be begun in order to gain victory or to defeat an enemy. Medical services can be created to improve health or to prevent diseases. Religions can be founded to disseminate enlightenment or to combat immorality. Education can be improved in order to increase the sum of human knowledge or to eradicate the ill of human ignorance.
I know that this is heresy here, but AFP can be A real F C sometimes.
If anything can be focused on its positive affects, then that tells us absolutely nothing. The positive aspects focus can be removed from the equation, as it exists on both sides.
Hmmm. Many animals have benefited as a species from our domestication (in that they’ve spread far wider than they would have done without our intervention). Same goes for plants. So would ‘selection in their interest rather than ours’ actually have been in their interests?
Totally with you on the way that it turned out though. I think that it’s the tendency of any pseudoscientific ideology is (as the assumptions of adherents turn out to be rubbish) to turn against the interloping other - that is they quickly become negative, anti movements. And Eugenics was always founded upon the petty prejudices of the WASPs’ privileged elites.
1 Like
Alright, no one was saying eugenics was good, but the difference between positive and negative can be seen in all those examples. We’re talking about positive as creating outcomes/seeing things that are there vs. negative as avoiding outcomes/seeing things that are missing, not as good and bad. Eugenics and Dysgenics are exactly the same thing, just framed differently - we’re trying to breed good people vs. we’re trying to weed out bad traits. It’s the same thing and equally nonsensical, and @AnonyMouse is on board with that.
Suicide could be committed to stop pain being currently experienced (negative) or to get to a happy afterlife (positive - not that this is actually a thing).
Racial segregation could be to keep away the dirty other races (negative) or to allow each race to maintain and build its heritage and culture (positive - and total bullshit, but this is the way a lot of racists frame the discussion these days since good ol’ fashioned hating blacks is frowned upon - people talk up how they should feel proud of being white instead of talking down how bad it is to be black, trying to mirror language used by oppressed groups).
And, hesitate to say, but cutting is super fantastic. Wish I was allowed to do that.
2 Likes
Well, consider that thought while watching this clip of F1 racing drivers (hopefully skipped to the correct moment as I find F1 fairly dull and wouldn’t want to bore you):
Michael Schumacher was widely castigated in this race, because instead of taking a positive approach of trying to win the race and the championship, he took a negative approach in preventing his opponent from winning (at the cost of being knocked out of the race). And in fact his career has been plagued with similar accusations even without such drastic actions as this.
1 Like
Thank you! Faith in humanity is restored!
This sure happens a lot in sports. How many times have you seen a team go up a few points and then play “defensively” to try to maintain their lead only to gradually lose. It’s like they think that the way there were playing that got them the lead in the first place was a mistake.
Oh, uh, isn’t that right Comrade? (had to get back on topic for the thread)
1 Like
Human beings are human. None of us are perfect, yeah?
Also, if you dislike her, fine, but there is no need to deploy that sort of gendered term, eh.
2 Likes
Was that, by any chance, made by someone with rainbow hair?
“However, I doubt majority of the multi colored hair crew has gotten past making crappy html web link based decision making “adventures”.”
2 Likes
Apparently not:
https://twitter.com/bphennessy
http://bphennessy.com/
I found it via Dropbox Paper which was written by https://twitter.com/rsm who still does not have rainbow hair
##OMG OMG OMG!!!
#THIS IS POST #500 !!! 
4 Likes
I’m gonna just throw this one in here:
Her’s is attention-seeking at all cost. Substitute arsehole if you will. Everyone has one of those.
1 Like
As opposed to those other quiet, demure and modest performers like Ozzy, Lady GaGa and Kanye? 
She’s a rock star. Attention seeking at all cost is practically part of the job description.
Edit: Apparently a contender for post 500. Mah nippuls asplode with delight.
10 Likes
