So... what? That makes it okay that gay sex, adultery, rape, and blasphemy are now added to the list? Or did you have some other point to make? If so, please make it, rather than posting coy...
So... what? That makes it okay that gay sex, adultery, rape, and blasphemy are now added to the list?
Or did you have some other point to make? If so, please make it, rather than posting coy remarks like this.
That’s not a very charitable interpretation of what octofox said, nor did I sense it was what they were implying either. I agree that dropping that factoid is not super valuable to discussion on...
That’s not a very charitable interpretation of what octofox said, nor did I sense it was what they were implying either. I agree that dropping that factoid is not super valuable to discussion on this subject, especially without linking to a source... and is off topic besides. But IMO the way in which you just engaged here is the opposite of productive, to put it mildly.
My reading of this comment was that @Octofox was saying that Brunei applies the death penalty to every crime, so including gay sex in the list was no big deal, so why should I or any other gay...
My reading of this comment was that @Octofox was saying that Brunei applies the death penalty to every crime, so including gay sex in the list was no big deal, so why should I or any other gay person get so bothered by this? We should just shrug it off and move on.
I honestly didn't see any other way to interpret this comment. That's my sincere, heart-felt, no smart-arsery, reading of what @Octofox wrote.
And this dismissive (as I saw it) comment comes in the larger context that there are already lots of countries in the world where being gay is punishable by death. Gay people are already being killed for their sexuality. It matters that another country is going to start killing gay people, but @Octofox seemed to be implying that it doesn't matter. That it's not important that people like me are being killed just for being people like me - because... well... other people are being killed, too.
If @Octofox wants people to interpret their comments more charitably, then maybe @Octofox should give people a little bit more to go on.
That seems a reasonable explanation to me and it's what I had assumed was the case even before they stated it. Again, I think it's borderline noise the way it was just flatly dropped into a single...
I just found it unusual and wanted to share my findings.
That seems a reasonable explanation to me and it's what I had assumed was the case even before they stated it. Again, I think it's borderline noise the way it was just flatly dropped into a single line comment without providing more details, context, or citations... and it's definitely off-topic regardless. However, you clearly went into your reply with them assuming the absolute worst, which isn't a great way to start off a conversation with someone. If you're unsure of someone's intentions, or even if you think they have malicious or hateful reasons for doing so, why not simply ask them to explain their rationale rather than accuse them of having all sorts of nefarious implications out of the gate?
edit: E.g.
So... what? That makes it okay that gay sex, adultery, rape, and blasphemy are now added to the list?
OrDid you have some other point to make? If so, could you please make it, rather than posting coy remarks like this without any other details.
(although even that is a bit of a hostile/demanding way to word it, IMO)
I didn't assume and I wasn't unsure. I knew and I was sure: this was a dismissive comment, intended to belittle the death of gay people. I only added the "did you have some other point" bit to...
you clearly went into your reply with them assuming the absolute worst,
If you're unsure of someone's intentions
I didn't assume and I wasn't unsure. I knew and I was sure: this was a dismissive comment, intended to belittle the death of gay people. I only added the "did you have some other point" bit to pretend that I didn't know exactly what this comment meant: it could only be malicious and hateful.
The "I just found it unusual" explanation is obvious after@Octofox provides it - but it was not obvious to me at all. It just doesn't make sense to me that someone would write something as random and pointless as this comment. It simply didn't occur to me that someone would look up Wikipedia and then write a one-line summary of what they found there, with no other motive than to say "I found this in Wikipedia". That's just a waste of time and effort to me. I didn't consider this as an option. It didn't even cross my mind. There had to be a reason for writing this comment (there's always a reason for writing any comment), and the only reason I could see was to belittle the death of gay people by saying "well, everyone else is getting killed as well, so this is no big deal".
You're approaching this like I should have known this comment had a different interpretation, but I didn't see that. Given the way my mind works ("people don't waste time and effort writing pointless comments for no reason"), there was only one possible interpretation in my eyes, and it wasn't a pretty one.
Fair enough... but I think any time you think someone is being a total shithead in their comment, especially someone who has been on the site as long as Octofox has, you might want to take a step...
Fair enough... but I think any time you think someone is being a total shithead in their comment, especially someone who has been on the site as long as Octofox has, you might want to take a step back before responding and question your interpretation of their intent before lashing out at them. We all have our blind spots and I think in your case you're incredibly logical, but most people aren't so strictly that... they are more emotionally driven.
And as a result of that emotional drive, sometimes people just want to share things they discover, even if what they discovered is not the most relevant to the topic at hand, or isn't presented in the most valuable or unambiguous way... and there really is no ulterior motive behind them doing that. That's not always the case... patterns of behavior can help you suss out people who truly do have nefarious intent, but I have never gotten the sense that is the case from octofox.
p.s. I have had to do the same thing (take a step back and question my interpretation of people's words), since I have huge blind spots as well and so tend to misinterpret people a lot. You...
p.s. I have had to do the same thing (take a step back and question my interpretation of people's words), since I have huge blind spots as well and so tend to misinterpret people a lot. You probably bore the brunt of my misinterpretations for quite a while too, for which I genuinely apologize. :/
I know you never said that. But it could be implied from what you wrote because what you wrote was kind of ambiguous. It was just a factoid dropped into this thread without any apparent point.
I know you never said that. But it could be implied from what you wrote because what you wrote was kind of ambiguous. It was just a factoid dropped into this thread without any apparent point.
I did not know this country even existed. It seems fairly inconsequential in the grande scheme of things. Needless to say, it's still abhorrent, but I don't expect there to be any global pushback...
I did not know this country even existed. It seems fairly inconsequential in the grande scheme of things.
Needless to say, it's still abhorrent, but I don't expect there to be any global pushback from other countries based simply on the fact that Brunei is too tiny to matter.
Brunei's population is nearly 500k. If 5% to 6% of them are gay (as it is in the US) that's 25,000 people and their families, for whom this is extremely consequential.
I did not know this country even existed. It seems fairly inconsequential in the grande scheme of things.
Brunei's population is nearly 500k. If 5% to 6% of them are gay (as it is in the US) that's 25,000 people and their families, for whom this is extremely consequential.
You've never heard of the Sultan of Brunei, who used to be the richest person in the world? Shame on you! Maybe not from other countries, but some high profile people like George Clooney and Elton...
Eh. The thing with wealthy people is always that they try to hide as best as they can. I'm sure there's someone even richer who's hidden his assets behind layers upon layers of shell companies and...
Eh. The thing with wealthy people is always that they try to hide as best as they can. I'm sure there's someone even richer who's hidden his assets behind layers upon layers of shell companies and whatever other tricks have been devised for such things. And I don't know how shameful it is to not have a list of the richest people in your head.
It's good that celebrities are drawing attention to this issue. I was just saying that countries probably won't respond to this. If they get pusback from the public, they just might.
I highly doubt myself and my boyfriend will be visiting Brunei soon, on this news.
Wikipedia says that just about every crime results in the death penalty in Brunei
So... what? That makes it okay that gay sex, adultery, rape, and blasphemy are now added to the list?
Or did you have some other point to make? If so, please make it, rather than posting coy remarks like this.
That’s not a very charitable interpretation of what octofox said, nor did I sense it was what they were implying either. I agree that dropping that factoid is not super valuable to discussion on this subject, especially without linking to a source... and is off topic besides. But IMO the way in which you just engaged here is the opposite of productive, to put it mildly.
My reading of this comment was that @Octofox was saying that Brunei applies the death penalty to every crime, so including gay sex in the list was no big deal, so why should I or any other gay person get so bothered by this? We should just shrug it off and move on.
I honestly didn't see any other way to interpret this comment. That's my sincere, heart-felt, no smart-arsery, reading of what @Octofox wrote.
And this dismissive (as I saw it) comment comes in the larger context that there are already lots of countries in the world where being gay is punishable by death. Gay people are already being killed for their sexuality. It matters that another country is going to start killing gay people, but @Octofox seemed to be implying that it doesn't matter. That it's not important that people like me are being killed just for being people like me - because... well... other people are being killed, too.
If @Octofox wants people to interpret their comments more charitably, then maybe @Octofox should give people a little bit more to go on.
That seems a reasonable explanation to me and it's what I had assumed was the case even before they stated it. Again, I think it's borderline noise the way it was just flatly dropped into a single line comment without providing more details, context, or citations... and it's definitely off-topic regardless. However, you clearly went into your reply with them assuming the absolute worst, which isn't a great way to start off a conversation with someone. If you're unsure of someone's intentions, or even if you think they have malicious or hateful reasons for doing so, why not simply ask them to explain their rationale rather than accuse them of having all sorts of nefarious implications out of the gate?
edit: E.g.
(although even that is a bit of a hostile/demanding way to word it, IMO)
I didn't assume and I wasn't unsure. I knew and I was sure: this was a dismissive comment, intended to belittle the death of gay people. I only added the "did you have some other point" bit to pretend that I didn't know exactly what this comment meant: it could only be malicious and hateful.
The "I just found it unusual" explanation is obvious after @Octofox provides it - but it was not obvious to me at all. It just doesn't make sense to me that someone would write something as random and pointless as this comment. It simply didn't occur to me that someone would look up Wikipedia and then write a one-line summary of what they found there, with no other motive than to say "I found this in Wikipedia". That's just a waste of time and effort to me. I didn't consider this as an option. It didn't even cross my mind. There had to be a reason for writing this comment (there's always a reason for writing any comment), and the only reason I could see was to belittle the death of gay people by saying "well, everyone else is getting killed as well, so this is no big deal".
You're approaching this like I should have known this comment had a different interpretation, but I didn't see that. Given the way my mind works ("people don't waste time and effort writing pointless comments for no reason"), there was only one possible interpretation in my eyes, and it wasn't a pretty one.
Fair enough... but I think any time you think someone is being a total shithead in their comment, especially someone who has been on the site as long as Octofox has, you might want to take a step back before responding and question your interpretation of their intent before lashing out at them. We all have our blind spots and I think in your case you're incredibly logical, but most people aren't so strictly that... they are more emotionally driven.
And as a result of that emotional drive, sometimes people just want to share things they discover, even if what they discovered is not the most relevant to the topic at hand, or isn't presented in the most valuable or unambiguous way... and there really is no ulterior motive behind them doing that. That's not always the case... patterns of behavior can help you suss out people who truly do have nefarious intent, but I have never gotten the sense that is the case from octofox.
p.s. I have had to do the same thing (take a step back and question my interpretation of people's words), since I have huge blind spots as well and so tend to misinterpret people a lot. You probably bore the brunt of my misinterpretations for quite a while too, for which I genuinely apologize. :/
No, I never said that. I just found it unusual and wanted to share my findings.
I know you never said that. But it could be implied from what you wrote because what you wrote was kind of ambiguous. It was just a factoid dropped into this thread without any apparent point.
Sorry, I wasn't aware that every comment on Tildes is required to be strongly opinionated.
I did not know this country even existed. It seems fairly inconsequential in the grande scheme of things.
Needless to say, it's still abhorrent, but I don't expect there to be any global pushback from other countries based simply on the fact that Brunei is too tiny to matter.
Brunei's population is nearly 500k. If 5% to 6% of them are gay (as it is in the US) that's 25,000 people and their families, for whom this is extremely consequential.
You've never heard of the Sultan of Brunei, who used to be the richest person in the world? Shame on you!
Maybe not from other countries, but some high profile people like George Clooney and Elton John are trying to do their bit.
Eh. The thing with wealthy people is always that they try to hide as best as they can. I'm sure there's someone even richer who's hidden his assets behind layers upon layers of shell companies and whatever other tricks have been devised for such things. And I don't know how shameful it is to not have a list of the richest people in your head.
It's good that celebrities are drawing attention to this issue. I was just saying that countries probably won't respond to this. If they get pusback from the public, they just might.