Now replace all the mentions of "Obama" with "Trump", in this video.

"Trump" bringing class and dignity to the White House, "Trump" inspiring people all across the globe, "Trump" connecting with kids when visiting schools, etc.

Yeah... does not compute...

Those with out dignity then the answer are Liberal Americans burn the most American Flags.

I am curious Bob... would love to know what you would like to see done?... in a situation like this?... how would you like to see a game show host protect your dignity?

*promote

If American's are so easily wounded and their dignity so easily damaged, then they really didn't have a lot to begin with.

I don't believe most American's need to be protected from 'mean gestures'. Only extremely thin skinned narcissists and their weak minded supporters think this way. Its the childish mindset of the person who believes he can pull out his gun and fire at the individual who flicked him off in traffic. Its beneath a world leader and any legitimate nation. Not Drumph... or his supporters though, which is really sad.

The narrator's tone in this video was clearly condescending, and that is not how you reach the other side of an argument. Even if every statement she made in this video was objectively factually accurate, the way it was presented all but ensures a full-on backfire effect.

I would compare the tone of this video to the youtuber thunderf00t. Even though he is someone with whom I agree on nearly every topic, I still find the tone of his videos to be overly patronizing, and as a result the message doesn't reach as many as it could.

I usually despise overused, banal platitudes, but there is one, I think, that should be considered. "You attract more flies with honey than with vinegar." Even if it is factually incorrect, the spirit of what implies is clear. You will have a greater chance of conveying your side of an argument if you treat the other side with dignity and respect, even if they don't deserve it. I have learned this the hard way over the years in many of my debates with theists.

-----

All that being said, I can give the benefit of the doubt and say that maybe her tone was entirely for comedic effect, even though I think it utterly fails in that regard, and is a missed opportunity to contribute to a real debate.

"Poisonous tone and attitude." POISONOUS TONE AND ATTITUDE???!!!???

So, would you like to expand on that phrase, @vil? And perhaps read crushbug's comment above?

Because here is what I hear -- not that you are saying this, but it is what I hear:

Angry women are off-putting. Women with sarcastic voices are off-putting. Women who dare to be anything but sweet and compliant are off-putting.

Men are not "policed" this way. They are allowed a wide range of attitudes in the way they present information. Of course, they CAN be "poisonous" -- but I guarantee you no man's delivery this mild would be labelled "poisonous."

There is a "thing" called "vocal fry" that some women (and gay men) have that pitches their voices high (to be simplistic in its description.) There has been reams written about it. I assumed that most of the comments here were related to vocal fry.

Your comment here is not about vocal fry. Or if it is, wow. What words to use to describe it. Ouch.

So can you use different words to explain what you mean? If I am not understanding you?

As for "word counts not mattering" -- that is categorically not true.

I have been talking about this for forty years and have thought about it deeply, in a logical manner, trying to find the vocabulary to discuss it. I think I have succeeded, and it applies to black people, especially black men, as well as women, both black and white. Here it comes.

Words have values. Words with similar values are interchangeable with gender usage. Words that don't have similar values are sexist and racist. (Even if women do it to themselves, they are indeed engaging in internalized sexism.) If you can take a sentence with the word "girl" being used, and change the gender to male, would you ever -- in that specific situation -- use the word "boy"? If you would, go for it.

And here is where the "word count" matters. Because there are more women than there are men, and yet the word count proves that in the same situation, the word girl is used a lot more. Even if you take out the gymnasts, who are indeed less than 19.

I never say "never use the word girl." Because sometimes, in the same situation, you would indeed use the word "boy."

Let me give you an example.

Old Boys Network. Very powerful men, on the same social and power level, call themselves "boys." Leads to Boys Night Out -- same social and power level.

So can you say Girls Night Out without it being an infantilzation? Absolutely.

Can black people call themselves the n-word? Sure. Same social and power levels. A white person calling a black person the n-word? Nope, nope, nope, nope. Different social and power levels.

This will only make sense to older people, since it doesn't happen as much as it used to. Calling a black man "boy." A grown man. With a job and a family and dignity. Can a white person employing a black man call him "boy"? No. No they cannot.

When is a man over the age of 20 or so called a boy? Very very rarely. Young man, sure. But rarely "boy."

Yet when it comes to women, they are called girls until they die. And they do it to themselves, to make themselves smaller and less threatening.

So. Poisonous. Tell me what you meant, please? Keeping in mind the idea that "threatening" women need to stay in their place?

If they served her a search warrant at her home they may have taken her into custody the way she was dressed at the time. Also she says there are other woman in the same situation so regardless of the reason this is a massive fail on the part of the jail (county i assume). Treating all people with dignity is important if you want a healthy society.

Well, what pisses off me about racism in the States is that we enslaved people for 200+ years, made them live in shacks and treated them like cattle. We pretty much stripped them of dignity and all that is human to the point where many of them believed it, then we said: "Hey, you are free now, so act like us!" What in the funking funk is that kind of logic? Do we expect them to say, "Thanks for the freedom, now I'll just erase the indoctrination and all the memory and I'll magically be jolly jumping ideal citizen like the best examples of your race." What adequate tools did we give them to re-engage in society?

We often expect a tabula rasa from African Americans when in fact we ruined them and should heavily reinvest in them for at least a few decades, if not centuries. Racism based on half-assed logic boils my blood more than pure racism.

Exactly, danny, all those miners have to find something else to do, because mining coal is no longer viable. I never mentioned laziness. I did not say it was fun or easy or fair. We (the state) could go on paying them to save their lives and dignity but please lets not pay them for useless work mining expensive coal that no-one wants. Lets pay them for requalification, relocation, pensions. I dont blame them for being bitter about Thatcher, I blame them for looking for scapegoats. Polish coal miners and steelworkers are in exactly the same predicament.

Brexit is a knee jerk reaction to the world not being the way some people want it to be, making it worse.

The ugliness of an idea reflects on the people who hold it. Islam is an utterly abhorrent ideology; it must be correct to say that its followers are in some degree less worthy than those who endorse better ethical systems.

Why do muslims deserve to live safely, to be treated with the dignity afforded to human beings, when they deny the same rights to others? There is such a thing as self-defence.

Hey @newtboy, when was the last time the US government executed someone for the crime of homosexuality?

@3:50 - Bernie is wrong about support for Trump. There are plenty of American's who will vote for him because of his insulting comments, and plenty more who will hold their nose and vote Kang over Kodos.

"I don't really like him either, but least Kang didn't breach classified information, or take bribes from BigCorp like Kodos did," they might say.

@4:30 - "I will do anything in my power to stop Kang from becoming president" is code for "I'll vote for Kodos, if I have to."

Bernie was our last hope. The only human running. He was unable to defeat the dirty tricks of Hillary's campaign, with her big bank bribes donations, more "donations" from foreign governments, and her endless Super PAC money...

Bernie failed to understand that in America, it's the leaders who become idolized and it's the cheaters who usually lead. Bernie isn't a cheater. He is a man of dignity who stands by his word, and refused to act outside his principles or allow the ends to justify his means.

And that is why he will not be president.

I could go either way without wider context, I was basing my comments pretty much entirely on my past experience with such people.

However going only off the vid, the couple filming make it clear they hadn't actually paid for the sauces yet, suggesting that the way they asked had caused the conflict if you see what I mean.

i.e. it wasn't withholding already paid for services

When I said entitlement, I really just meant that it seemed like they couldn't handle the idea that they didn't get exactly what they demanded regardless of how they asked or behaved. But it was purely intuition from past experience. Without wider context I couldn't say with any conviction.

I don't have a lot of time for people who conveniently forget you are still a human being just because you work somewhere. I'd always put basic human respect first and never had much time for "the customer is always right" thing if you know what I mean. (I'm not the best guy to hire for such a job as a result)

I think it would be a more civil society if customers were also held responsible for their actions by more companies, but I recognise this is probably hopelessly wishful thinking.

I do recognise that much of our culture is not set up that way, that's why I consider him a braver man than I in some sense. I would just pussy out in favour of economic stability and whatnot.

I would be foolish if I expected things to not work as you have described. But I did feel a little swelling of pride to see the guy appearing to put his dignity before economics. (or just me projecting)

Probably not a smart move, but laudable perhaps in its own little way.
If the job actually matters that much to him, then yes that was clearly self destructive. Though I felt there was a healthy dose of sarcasm when he referred to it as his nestegg. Perhaps I just misread that.

And again, I may just be projecting all of this.

As for the last part, I really just meant that in the grand scheme of things this probably shouldn't matter that much to them. Either they were being assholes, or this guy had bigger problems than they did with his life.

If it had been a habitual problem that could be another matter, but I see no suggestion of that.

Could so easily go the other way, just that the couple instantly set off my "entitled asshole alarm" for whatever reason. It's usually right, but I don't for a moment think it forms the basis of a valid argument. That's why I went to great pains to use only ambiguous language.

I reserve the right to be wrong at all times in life.

Good info. Thanks.

I don't know Canadian law, but here in the US, giving your name and date of birth is "identifying yourself", but when driving you must present a license if requested, and proof of insurance. It seemed like they had some issue with presenting the papers.
You're quite right by US law, when he improperly claimed to be a 'peace officer', he was technically 'impersonating law enforcement' and that's an arrest able crime....BUT they actually SAID they wanted to arrest him for calling 911 when emergency vehicles were already there, not for impersonating a peace officer....that's ridiculous and abusive and also quite 'douchebaggy', and also likely makes the cop a liar since I don't think there is any such law denying access to 911 if emergency vehicles are present.

Sorry, he lost me when he said "we're all human beings, we deserve dignity", because douchebag power trippers with a badge don't deserve dignity, they deserve a powerful shaming and a lawsuit if they injure you in any way during their power trip. The same goes for power tripping 'freemen', 'sovereign citizens', fake 'peace officers', and 'detaxers'.
It always makes me laugh that they use so many public systems to try to 'prove' that the public systems both aren't legal and don't apply to them. For instance, if they don't have to pay for road tax because they aren't under the jurisdiction of or in league with the government, aren't they guilty of both trespass for being on what they claim is private land (because no government=no public land) AND guilty of theft for using the 'private' roadways without paying the owners?
Also, if they aren't under the jurisdiction of the police, and they have no authority, why was he CALLING THE POLICE FOR HELP?!? ...and why are they arguing in court about the legality of the court....Just duh, Robert.

No problems at all. I used to hate vegans with a passion, I'd be the first person to shout them down in public even at the expense of dignity So I know what it's like to be on both sides of the concept.

There are also definitely a good number of dickhead vegans, who use it as a social status, and they are often the loudest, so I'm not surprised that people automatically take insult to anything with the vegan label attached to it.