Ten oz

I think all that would happen is a revision of the initial stereotype. The though would become all Nepalese people of standard health without disability can claim Everest. The mention of the quadriplegic being viewed as a formality. Stereotypes are deeply ingrained things and aren't easily shaken off by pesky things like evidence and facts. +1, You did a much better job than I did in response.

Like wise one doesn't need to be Ethiopian to be an elite runner. The generalization paints with too broad a brush and isn't as good at determining things about individuals as it seems. For example many people have speculated that Jamaicans are such good sprinters because of their genetics. The ACTN3 gene has even been identified. All humans have it though the difference is possible in mutation: People of African decent generally have the lowest incidence. What does that really tells, lowest is none and highest isn't all. Which is to say a there are portions of every population which could have the same genetic potential for fast twitch performance. I my opinion when a large enough participation pool is applied the advantages even out. Soccer/Futbal is the most popular sport on earth and has the most number of people training and competing in it. In international play whites, blacks, Latinos, etc play side by side. In 2014 it was the German team with won the world's cup. In past year Spain, Italy, Brazil, Argentina, and etc have all won. No race appears to have genetic dominance in Futbal and in my opinion that is because everyone plays so we get the best of the best from all groups and at the most elite levels all groups are evenly matched basically. In smaller more niche sports with regional popularity we end up with more regional ethnic dominance. Is that because those specific races are the best genetically or is it that the best athletes in those regional hyper focus on that regional sport? If Usain Bolt were from Germany rather than Jamaica he probably would have played Futbal and today would hold zero world sprinting records.

There is genetic diversity even within immediate family members. All Ethiopian's are not long distance runners nor are all born with a higher than average potential to be. One shouldn't treat such things as absolutes because they are not.

I don't agree with this. Some of the most broadly accepted stereotypes have nothing to do with hatred. I think stereotypes centered around hatred are the easiest to identify and knock down. Most people are sensible enough not to repeat hate speech. I have never had a person say to my face that black people are criminals but I have had countless people tell me black people are all great athletes. People aren't shy when the associated stereotype is seemingly positive.

I wasn't implying you were defending Barr's comments. I was just trying to bring it back to the topic.

I voluntarily do outreach for my company (something I recently started doing). We have some scholarships and promotional things we do generally with community colleges. Our target demo is sophomores trying to figure what to do next. We try to cover every demographic. One group we hadn't reached, did not have in our program, were Asians. I was invited to a meeting where the diversity with our program was being discussed. When the topic of Asian outreach came up it was noted that the lack of Asians in our program was due to the lack of Asians at Community Colleges (I am heavily abbreviating what was a long meeting). Being from the San Francisco Bay Area I knew that San Fran City College had 20k students and nearly 40% of them were Asian. When I brought it up everyone was very skeptical of my numbers. After the meeting I had several side conversations and emails exchanges with people and it took a couple weeks to convince everyone I wasn't just making the numbers up. Eventually everyone got it and we sent people there. The stereotype is that all Asian students have incredible grades, great SAT scores, attend the best Universities, and have college all figured out. Everyone honestly/innocently assumed Asians didn't need us and simply had not bothered to run the numbers as we all are just volunteers and are not professional recruiters. The result of people believing the stereotype was that students who did not meet the stereotype were being discriminated against. Not on purpose or because of hatred but out of ignorance. That is how stereotypes work. It leads people to draw inaccurate conclusions. On the surface nothing about saying about saying all Asians go the Ivy League schools seems bad and yet it is. That is just one story, one experience, but I've had thousands in my life. Enough that I have learned that hatred is not key. Hatred doesn't even matter. I never said no one should ever use vulgarity. Rather I am just saying we should identify vulgarity as such. I also mentioned as a kid I was very vulgar. I am not a kid anymore though. I am an adult and understand the way I behave impacts the lives of people around. Which brings us back to Rosanne Barr's comments. Barr is the face of a successful hit show. Her momentary lapse in judgement didn't only cost Barr her job but the whole cast and writers their jobs too. It was very selfish of her.

ABC makes money via advertising. How much money should ABC lose because Barr felt like twitting nonsense?

Intention is not relevant. I don't believe Rosanne Barr intentionally meant to be racist. Rather she was just being loud and outspoken, per her style, and wasn't careful enough about who she might offend.

And standards. I would not be friends with someone who used the N word.

This is only true if the two friends share this perspective and I personally have experienced it most often where that was not the case and offense was caused.

It isn't women who are claiming offensive over what Samantha Bee said but rather it is right leaning males. Many insulting things are said about any number of people a lot the time. This has gained traction in conservative circles seemingly as a means to say #ustoo in the wake of Barr being called out for her nonsense. It is disingenuous. Let's not forget Ivanka's own father has publicly reduced her worth to sexuality numerous times going so far as to saying he'd be dating her if they weren't related. I'll use women as a comparison because I think it is the easiest example we all have the ability to identify in culture because we all have women in our lives. Prostitution is often called the oldest profession. Women have dealt with Misogyny for millennia. Even seemingly successful women today are being exploited on the casting couches by people like Weinstein. In popular media nearly all women are forced to do obligatory nude scenes films, have their legs out while reading the news on FoxNews, talk about who they are wearing on the red carpet (as if all women care about that), and etc, etc, etc. Some women embrace being the subjugation and lean into it. Some women own pornography studios, are madams at brothels, create stripper pole based workouts, and etc, etc. Sure, some women claim to enjoy being strippers but we all understand it isn't ideal. I believe everyone knows what it is about. People don't argue that within the female community prostitution or etc is viewed as a good thing. Rather it is understood to be an unfortunately byproduct of the way women are treated and valued by society. The overwhelming majority of the real women in our lives (mothers, sisters, wives, etc) are not accurately represented in popular media. Same goes for the N-word. Samuel L. Jackson may have embraced the vulgarity and hyperbole associated with the popular black male image for the sake of a career but it is just an abstraction. Just as women still consume media full of scantily clad women understanding that it is what women in media must do so to do black people attend comedy shows and concerts understand the performers are performing as society demands. Some black people do use the n-word just as some women are gold diggers. There are unfortunately people in this world who do unfortunate things. However in the case of black people the causal use and acceptance of the N-word is greatly exaggerated by popular media. Within black communities hearing young kids use the n-word is cringe worthy just as among women seeing young girls over sexualized is cringe worthy. Some chauvinists think it natural. That women just like showing skin and being seen. Similarly many black project on the the black community behaviors and attitudes which do not actually reflect the daily reality. and there is plenty of evidence for confirmation bias on all sides. A chauvinist has no trouble finding women who are playing the part.

Black communities are not singular anymore than White ones are. What it means to be White or Black in Salt Lake City is different than what it means to be White or Black in NYC. What are the historical examples of this? I am not familiar with Chuck Berry, Motown Artists, Gospel Artists, or etc using the N-word. You are right that black music has a storied history but you are greatly mistaken if you think the N-word's use is part of that. As for the intragroup thing you referenced did civil rights leaders like Martin Luther King use the N-Word? Absolutely, similarly females in media are normally thin, have long hair, wear short skirts, and etc. Just as nearly all gay men in media are fashion minded and flamboyant. In popular media minority groups are forced to be stereotypical. Robert Townsend film "Hollywood Shuffle" was a satire addressing this very issue. An N-word is basically forced to be an N-word if they want to make it. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0093200/ And yet we all have heard the N-word on TV millions of times. Who is using it and how determines the level of umbrage. Personally I am always annoyed when I hear the N-word but do understand they is a distinction between a Rapper or comedian using it to self Identify vs a White Supremacist using it categorize others. Make no mistake I think using the C-word is in poor taste too even when used by a female. Apologizes have been issued. That said there are degrees. Walking up to a person who happens to be Jewish and calling them stupid for no reason is bad. Walking up to the same person and performing a Nazi salute is worse. What Barr did was worse.

I already address the difference. Replace using the N-word with using Cocaine. Not everyone who uses Cocaine is a drug addict. Some people just experiment or use it sparingly on special occasions. Ultimately using cocaine is never good. There are ways to use it worse than others but it is never good. Perhaps you have friends who have tried cocaine. You probably don't disown them for it yet you do understand it is not a good thing. True. The caveat in this case however it that those complaining about it don't actually mind the use of the word itself. Had Stormy Daniels been called the C-word those defending Ivanka wouldn't care. The issue is purely a bit of political whataboutism. In Barr's case it is different. Whether Barr called Susan Rice (Democrat) or Condi Rice (Republican) an "Ape" people would have viewed it as racially incendiary. What Barr said and not who she said it about is what has people upset.

No more or less acceptable than any other curse word. Also kids often have very foul mouths. I used the F-word in nearly every sentence I spoke as a kid. It is silly and immature. What kids do is hardly where one should set the bar for adult behavior.

Within the black community there are numerous organizations that advocate against the use of the N-word within the black community. None of my friends would greet me with the N-word. To be honest I find it silly, or perhaps worse, that you two actually believe this is done causally within civil communities. Perhaps in the media but in my experience it isn't the sort of language used in civil conversation; people know better than to use that type of language around their parent and grandparents. More like forced into black culture. From Christianity to the use of the N-word there are a lot of things within the black community which were forced upon blacks. I am not merely referencing slavery either. Negro was still used on birth certificate and other official forms through the 1960's. Today when popular artists like Drake or Jay Z use the N-Word who exactly are they appealing to, who buys their products? This is a majority white country. White consume the majority of all media. One can not be a top selling popular artist without white fans.

All iteration of the N-word are inappropriate. Sometimes the context is meant as a racial slur and other times as a familiar term or whatever but it is always improper. Many curse words are commonly used in private settings but that doesn't mean they are okay broadly. I am disappointed every time I hear someone used any iteration of the N-word. It might not always be racist but it is always offensive in my opinion. Only ignorant people use it loosely far as I am concerned.

Good point. I watch a fair share of international films and have noticed it used to describe both male and females. Here is the U.S. my experience is that one would call a female the C-word or B-word to describe them as corrupt, having low integrity, selfish, or pushy. For men calling them an A**hole or D word conveys the same thing.

Right, this conversation reminds me a bit of ones where conservative white males argue that if African American Rappers can use the N-word than white males should be able to as well. It is entirely structured around formalities and ignores the known tropes and histories.

Surely you understand that calling a black person an Ape is a well used racial slur and offends ALL black people. While the C word is gender specific, male equivalent being A**hole, Bee herself is of the same gender. So the context is different. As for the Muslim Brotherhood part that was a specific signal to right wing conservatives. Here is the U.S. it was conservative media outlets that touted the evils of the the Muslim Brotherhood post Arab Spring as a way to imply Obama had some secret pro Muslim agenda. Al Qaeda, ISIS, Hamas, and etc are all more well known extremist groups responsible for more violence and not directly associated with wild right wing conspiracies about the First Black President. Barr mentioned the Muslim Brotherhood specifically as a shot out to those conservatives who bought into the birther movement, secret Muslim stuff, and etc.

Calling a specific individual person a name is different than demagoguing a group of people. Barr reference the Muslim brotherhood and Planet of the Apes purposefulve to draw a negative association to demographics of people. Bee pointedly attacked/criticized a singular person. The 2 situations are not the same. He may as well have been. The point being made when accusing Obama of being Muslim was that Obama wasn't white. To those who cared about such distinction it was heard loud and clear.

There is not enough evidence to draw any conclusions from. How likely or unlikely something is to happen doesn't prove it has happened. It just means that it is possible and no one here is agruing that alien life isn't possible.

What you are suggesting isn't supported by anything other than your own thoughts on the matter. Evidence is where this thread sit deadlocked. There is no evidence to support any of your speculations. What's possible in theory and what exists in reality are not equals.

Can you speak to the consciousness within anyone or anything outside of your own?

Yes, various states have their own versions of a Right to Try law. Different states have their own various Abortion, Marijuana, Death Penalty, Gun, gambling, Alcohol use, and etc, etc, etc, laws. To varying degrees lack of a clear federal policies in nearly all case greatly impacts those State laws and individuals exploiting them. Marijuana might be legal in CO but federal law prevents companies in CO access to banking because banks are federally insurances and monitored. Lack financing or ability to sell or contract services across State lines greatly restricts Marijuana operators abilities to run a business. Meanwhile if we look at something like Guns local laws appear to be futile. Washington DC may have strong Gun laws but they are undercut by the fact people can take a 5 min drive into VA, buy whatever they want, and then just drive back. You referenced that the pool was low from 2010-present and then reference provisions in the new law. I feel this blurs the lines a bit. The Law Congress passed on May 22nd 2018 wasn't in place in 2010. The numbers you listed reflect how it was and not how it will be. The new law specifically "limits the liability of drug sponsors, manufacturers, prescribers, or dispensers that provide or decline to provide an eligible investigational drug to an eligible patient". Is limiting the liability of manufacturers, doctors, and so on a good idea? Do you feel your numbers imply access was too limited or that it was where it should be? One only needs to look at the Opioid epidemic, 19,000 deaths from prescription opoiods in 2016, to see a clear example of where the discretion of manufacturers, prescribers, dispensers, and etc contributed to a massive problem. The public health community has dropped the ball before. The U.S. is already awash in prescription drugs. In 2017 Pharmaceutical companies spent $280 million dollars lobbying the Govt. https://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/indusclient.php?id=h04&year=2017 If a company starts with 100 drugs at Phase 1 on average 70 make it to Phase 2. Of the 70 only 13 will end up at Phase 4 approved (percentages listed in previously provided FDA link). This new law will enable companies to sell up to all 70 that go to Phase 2 despite knowing that the overwhelming majority of them do not work. How would it hurt a company in the short term to push selling every drug they have at Phase 2?