Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Hi , intolerance exists in so many ways , but i cant help but wander why are some generally excepted.

First of all we have racial , this is the most strict and understandable ( with blacks been slaves within recent centuries )
Gender , not as strict , but still people behave to not get sued.

Then we have countries . The hate , intolerance of other country where we are free to bash , insult , make fun of all we want.
without any sort of consequences , why is like this?

Is this where the direction is going now? all the people that are racist but couldnt express it now find a new outlet to spread their hate?

I find your question on intolerance intolerant.

Some people are brought up being racist and it sticks with them for the rest of there life. I cant stand racism and people who know me are never racist around me as they know il go nuts on them.

Gender: Im not realy sure what your getting at about gender.

Countries: A little competition never hurt anyone But I do find it very very irritating when 7-10 year old little Americans say stuff like "Everyone in The UK is gay" and "America won world war two cause we nuked Japan". The amount of ignorance little kids on Xbox live is amazing.

Tolerance isn't about just mindlessly accepting the different. It's simply about knowing when to hold you tongue, and live and let live.

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:Tolerance isn't about just mindlessly accepting the different. It's simply about knowing when to hold you tongue, and live and let live.

Hmm am i perhaps using the wrong word? ( what would be better to describe it? )

Wanna know if your using the right word? Pick from the list

Most of them are gak, but a quick google search I found these:

impatience with annoyances; "his intolerance of interruptions"
unwillingness to recognize and respect differences in opinions or beliefs
wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

Intolerance: Love's Struggle Through the Ages, a silent film directed by D. W. Griffith in 1916, is considered one of the great masterpieces of ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intolerance_(film)

the state of being intolerant; An intolerant word or action; extreme sensitivity to a food or drug; allergy
en.wiktionary.org/wiki/intolerance

intolerant - unwilling to tolerate difference of opinion
intolerant - illiberal: narrow-minded about cherished opinions
wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

intolerantly - in a narrow-minded manner; "his illiberally biased way of thinking"
wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

Intolerant is a Filipino thrash/metalcore band from Manila, Philippines. Formed by the members of two genre-defining bands, Intolerant's music is ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intolerant

intolerant - Unable or indisposed to tolerate, endure or bear; Not tolerant; close-minded about new or different ideas. ...
en.wiktionary.org/wiki/intolerant

allergy or sensitivity to a food, drug, or other substance.
www.uchospitals.edu/online-library/content=P00372

an attitude of not accepting or respecting different opinions, practices, or people.
www.creativephotography.org/education/educatorsGuides/reframe/glossary.html

the inability of a tree species to survive in the shade of other trees. See "shade tolerance."
www.sfrc.ufl.edu/Extension/ssfor11.htm

inability of the body to tolerate the adverse side effects of a drug.
www.sfaf.org/custom/glossary.aspx

A set of complaints experienced by a patient which does not fit a true allergy. A true allergy involves activation of the immune system. Thus, nausea is not an allergy but an intolerance to a substance.
www.gastromd.com/definitionsi.html

was a colossal undertaking filled with monumental sets, lavish period costumes, and more than 3,000 extras. The film consisted of four distinct but parallel stories that demonstrated mankind's intolerance during four different ages in world history. ...
india.smashits.com/wikipedia/Intolerance_(movie)

Ignorne links at the bottom of each definition.

Maybe its because those damn Frenchies keep opening their mouths!

JEB_Stuart wrote:Maybe its because those damn Frenchies keep opening their mouths!

....... >.> whyyyyyy pourquoi???

Its all about the haggis.

Lord-Loss mayhaps you should quit listening to 7-10 kids or, er any age. With the exception of Genghis Connie who was of course brilliant, you're talking to kids who are busy watching Spongebob Squarepants for crying out loud.

Luna: I think that the source of this idea that it's okay to bash other countries is nationalism. We're still working to come out of the hyper-nationalist 19th and 20th centuries. The idea that one's nation is superior to the other countries of the world is a pretty deeply rooted one.

Basically, it stems from the time of Imperialism, when the countries in Europe starting carving up the world into their colonies. These nations felt they were superior (they felt they needed to enlighten and uplift other nations, it's very disgusting to modern sensibilities). Meanwhile, as the colonial powers were distracted by wars, the subjugated peoples wanted to prove that, in fact, they were NOT inferior to the colonial powers. In some countries, such as Canada, who gained our freedom through bureaucracy, this manifested into a general feeling that we're pretty awesome. In other places, especially those who gained their freedom through fighting, this manifested as knowledge of superiority, mixed in with a distrust of outsiders.

This is going to keep on happening for a long time, until global unification ideas can take hold. We're seeing great steps in this direction (the UN, the European Union forming) but there's a long way to go.

Frazzled wrote:Its all about the haggis.

Lord-Loss mayhaps you should quit listening to 7-10 kids or, er any age. With the exception of Genghis Connie who was of course brilliant, you're talking to kids who are busy watching Spongebob Squarepants for crying out loud.

I try not too, but when your in a online game and they hear my accent, it takes them 5-10 seconds to be racist about the UK, while I have to finish the guy Im killing and mute them.

Lord-Loss wrote:"America won world war two cause we nuked Japan"

Didn't we?

I mean, we ended the war in that fashion. Victoriously.

Victoriously killing alot of innocent people.

But Im not going to get into a heated discussion about it, thats not what this threads about.

Lord-Loss wrote:Victoriously killing alot of innocent people.

Not even getting into the moral implications of that statement, killing innocent people has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not it ended the war.

Seems like a waste of human life. Did those people deserve to die?

Lord-Loss wrote:Victoriously killing alot of innocent people.

But Im not going to get into a heated discussion about it, thats not what this threads about.

The morality of war was different even then. We're all used to an idea of Great Powers fighting minor powers, not great powers fighting each other. Decisions were made then that we would not make now, due to pressures we don't feel now. There was not a single major participant in that war, not one, that didn't commit at least some actions that would today be labeled atrocities. That's not even addressing the utilitarian argument over how many would have died during an invasion, or even due to starvation/disease/bombing while waiting for the invasion.

Now, if you want to get into an interesting moral debate you start asking question about the validity/necessity of unconditional surrender.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Lord-Loss wrote:Seems like a waste of human life. Did those people deserve to die?

Does anybody deserve to die?

Orkeosaurus wrote:

Lord-Loss wrote:"America won world war two cause we nuked Japan"

Didn't we?

I mean, we ended the war in that fashion. Victoriously.

Russia won WW2. If Uncle Joe hadn't used up millions of his own people to soak up Nazi bullets, the entirety of Europe, including the UK, would have fallen to the 3rd Reich. USA would not have had the ability to wage a war on both oceans.

Only a monster like Stalin beat a monster like Hitler. That's what broke the back of the axis, the Nazi war on the Eastern Front.

Body count.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties

MeanGreenStompa wrote:

Orkeosaurus wrote:

Lord-Loss wrote:"America won world war two cause we nuked Japan"

Didn't we?

I mean, we ended the war in that fashion. Victoriously.

Russia won WW2. If Uncle Joe hadn't used up millions of his own people to soak up Nazi bullets, the entirety of Europe, including the UK, would have fallen to the 3rd Reich. USA would not have had the ability to wage a war on both oceans.

Only a monster like Stalin beat a monster like Hitler. That's what broke the back of the axis, the Nazi war on the Eastern Front.

Body count.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties

The Soviet contribution to the European theater is one of the most overlooked aspects of WWII in the US.

Of course, we were talking about the Pacific Theater, where the US did the bulk of the operations.

I was using it as an example of how much racism one could encounter on Xbox live.

Once I heard "Russia werent even in WW2 cigarette!"
A comment based of ignorance like the one concerning America and Japan.

Most don't even know who Uncle Joe is.

Polonius wrote:The Soviet contribution to the European theater is one of the most overlooked aspects of WWII in the US.

I wonder why.

Same with Italy really. People tend to forget the war being fought there.

BrookM wrote:Same with Italy really. People tend to forget the war being fought there.

My great-grandfather never forgave the Italians after the World Wars. 'Dirty traitors' he called them, and I think he could have justified that in years gone by, but the same can't be said for the present.

They're as dirty as they have ever been at present imo. Wherever there's an italian there's a fix.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silvio_Berlusconi#Controversies ...that much smoke without fire?

Lord-Loss wrote:...when 7-10 year old little Americans say stuff like "Everyone in The UK is gay".

Are you saying that isn't true? I have it on quite good authority that it is.

And I've seen dozens of books on the Eastern Front of the european theater, so that is hardly a dirty secret. Feel free to peruse this website you may have heard of: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page

Absolutely Uncle Joe was critical in the war effort in Europe, and even played a part in the surrender of Japan. He was also absolutely a monster.

And here is how much guilt I feel over dropping Fat Man and Little Boy: ZERO. Is it a shame? Yes. Did we kill plenty of civilians (I find the term innocent pointless in a debate about war on a scale the likes of which no one in this thread can even comprehend)? Yes. Is that regrettable? Yes. Did my grandfathers have to fight on the Japanese mainland against a fierce and dedicated foe after a brutal campaign in Europe? No. Anyone so inclined may also use the above website to peruse the war crimes committed during WWII. My country certainly committed it's fair share (as did all of the Allies), which is shameful. But the crimes committed by the Axis countries (and to a lesser extent Russia in the aftermath of Germany's downfall) were so far beyond that, that if any country did actually deserve the nuke (and none did), it was Germany and Japan.

The modern guilt trip

dienekes96 wrote:

Lord-Loss wrote:...when 7-10 year old little Americans say stuff like "Everyone in The UK is gay".

Are you saying that isn't true? I have it on quite good authority that it is.

You better be joking

dienekes96 wrote:

Lord-Loss wrote:...when 7-10 year old little Americans say stuff like "Everyone in The UK is gay".

Are you saying that isn't true? I have it on quite good authority that it is.

I lost you after that part.

Are the limeys illiterate as well as gay, whatwhat? My text was clearly presented and readable.

I recommend you try again. After you finish the bonesmuggling, my good man.

Lord-Loss, I was planning to edit my post to state that I wish America had saved Fat Man for the Fey Empire! Too late.

DAMMIT!!! YOU RUINED THE JOKE .

dienekes96 wrote:

Lord-Loss wrote:...when 7-10 year old little Americans say stuff like "Everyone in The UK is gay".

Are you saying that isn't true? I have it on quite good authority that it is.

*Blank stare* then *Dot dot dot, adjust monocle*