When being "too good" becomes a problem: positive discrimination for vegetarians and the LGBTQ+ comm

Seeing Serena Williams get disqualified really got me thinking about this. I guess we all have this weird urge to put people on pedestals and turn them into icons.

Most of us were totally idolizing Serena... then it hit us a few days later that having a disability doesn't make someone a literal superhero who’s incapable of lying or faking things, or somehow just more emotionally advanced than the rest of us.

We’re all pretty quick to slap positive labels on people based on just one thing about them. Like, if you hear someone is gay, you probably just assume they’re this super open-minded liberal type. Just look at George W. Bush—he definitely wasn't exactly pushing liberal agendas.🙄

I once got into it on a forum with this guy who was a hardcore vegetarian Buddhist, but he was talking total nonsense about people from other faiths. Did his diet actually make him a better human being? Probably not.🤷

Have you guys ever fallen for that "positive discrimination" trap and ended up feeling let down later?

Hell yes! I used to have this friend in a wheelchair—disabled, obviously—but man, what a wicked little creature she was... a total nightmare! And she’d say the most vile things about other people with disabilities. We didn't stay friends for long. Honestly, it was such a disappointment.

Haha... I wouldn't say that happened to me in quite that exact way (in terms of idealizing a specific group), but I suppose I did try my best to avoid any preconceived stereotypes about a certain crowd, only to run right into someone who was basically a walking stereotype.

It doesn't necessarily mean they are a bad person, but I guess it’s just a bit frustrating when it feels like all my efforts to be politically correct were completely undermined :-)))

It’s funny, isn't it? I’ve noticed this pattern quite frequently lately. If someone happens to be dealing with an illness, they are suddenly granted this automatic pass to be seen as brave, wise, or some kind of intellectual giant. But the moment I suggest otherwise, I’m treated like a complete outcast. It seems to be a bit of a trend these days. Personally, I don't believe in idealizing people just because they are fighting something like cancer; having a medical struggle doesn't inherently make someone a better person. Honestly, it’s a little frustrating to watch. What, am I supposed to go out and seek a diagnosis just to be taken seriously? 🤷

Oh, I just remembered something! Before I ever started hanging out on internet forums, I used to assume that people who listen to metal or alternative music were, on average, more intelligent, more liberal, and generally more open-minded. Then I actually started using the web and realized I was completely mistaken.

I rarely feel pity for people. I used to be much more empathetic back in the day, but things have changed.

Everyone has their ups and downs. Good people have flaws, and flawed people have redeeming qualities. Eventually, that initial spark of fascination just hits a plateau, and there isn't much you can do about it. 🙂 My struggle is trying to find someone truly fascinating—someone I can latch onto and get excited about—just to see if that feeling can last, but it usually doesn't. It always snaps back to reality. I'm acutely aware that everyone carries their own baggage, their own mess, and their own limitations, no matter how "perfect" or interesting they might seem on the surface.

That’s my philosophy, even when it comes to those "special interest" groups. At the end of the day, we're all just human beings, and there's nothing inherently extraordinary about any specific label. In the best-case scenario, I just stay quiet and uninterested; in the worst, I simply get up and leave because I refuse to deal with being mocked for my honesty. I don't go around pitying people for things like a death in the family, a serious illness, a divorce, or their sexual orientation. Of course, I offer a certain level of sympathy for difficult situations, but it's very superficial—just enough to ensure my unfiltered thoughts don't immediately crush the person who actually needs help while they're getting back on their feet. It's basic social etiquette, really.

It’s honestly discouraging how many people perceive this mindset as cold, heartless, or inhumane, when in reality, it's just normal. We are all more or less a mess, yet we try to be good people at the same time. Life throws curveballs at everyone, and nobody is truly unique in their struggles. If I'm being blunt, we're all essentially the same brand of messed up—whether you want to call us "trash" or "flowers," depending on your preference. 😁

Hmm... I’ve honestly never been one to buy into that whole "politician" stereotype by default. In fact, my gut feeling is usually the exact opposite. Now, don't get me wrong—I'm certainly not trying to give a free pass to 99% of the people running for office, but... I just don't know...
Charles Manson? Seung-Hui Cho? Frances Farmer?🙈 No, obviously not.🤷

Anthony Taylor393 said:Seeing Serena Williams get disqualified really got me thinking about this. I guess we all have this weird urge to put people on pedestals and turn them into icons.

Most of us were totally idolizing Serena... then it hit us a few days later that having a disability doesn't make someone a literal superhero who’s incapable of lying or faking things, or somehow just more emotionally advanced than the rest of us.

We’re all pretty quick to slap positive labels on people based on just one thing about them. Like, if you hear someone is gay, you probably just assume they’re this super open-minded liberal type. Just look at George W. Bush—he definitely wasn't exactly pushing liberal agendas.🙄

I once got into it on a forum with this guy who was a hardcore vegetarian Buddhist, but he was talking total nonsense about people from other faiths. Did his diet actually make him a better human being? Probably not.🤷

Have you guys ever fallen for that "positive discrimination" trap and ended up feeling let down later?

Oh, more than once! 😁

We are all prone to our own biases, whether they are negative or positive.

Every group contains all sorts of different individuals, and we shouldn't assume everyone will possess the specific qualities we expect just because they belong to a certain demographic. For instance, people who identify as religious should ideally follow the core moral tenets of their faith, which would make them people of excellent character. In reality, however, you will find all kinds of people among those who call themselves religious: some can be malicious, envious, or even criminals. It sounds absurd, but it happens quite often. Ultimately, someone identifying with a specific group doesn't necessarily say anything about who they are as an individual or what their true character might be.

It’s not about feeling sorry for anyone; it’s just that when you’re staring down a sick or disabled person on one side and a healthy individual on the other, most people are going to instinctively side with the first person without a second thought—completely ignoring the fact that they could easily be a total fraud or just putting on an act for sympathy.

I honestly think there's some kind of moral cleansing happening here.
Having actually been in the shoes of the "other" person myself, I realized how incredibly difficult it is for people to separate a physical handicap—whether it's an illness or a disability—from the actual person and just see them as a human being.

The truth is, I just wasn't starting from a level playing field.

Anthony Taylor393 said:Seeing Serena Williams get disqualified really got me thinking about this. I guess we all have this weird urge to put people on pedestals and turn them into icons.

Most of us were totally idolizing Serena... then it hit us a few days later that having a disability doesn't make someone a literal superhero who’s incapable of lying or faking things, or somehow just more emotionally advanced than the rest of us.

We’re all pretty quick to slap positive labels on people based on just one thing about them. Like, if you hear someone is gay, you probably just assume they’re this super open-minded liberal type. Just look at George W. Bush—he definitely wasn't exactly pushing liberal agendas.🙄

I once got into it on a forum with this guy who was a hardcore vegetarian Buddhist, but he was talking total nonsense about people from other faiths. Did his diet actually make him a better human being? Probably not.🤷

Have you guys ever fallen for that "positive discrimination" trap and ended up feeling let down later?

A long time ago.
And I wouldn't say I was disappointed so much as I was caught off guard.

Disappointment usually stems from unmet expectations, whereas surprise hits when you stumble upon something you were certain couldn't exist in that particular space.

It taught me a hard truth: no one walking this earth is immune to malice. It doesn't matter if you're a Buddhist, someone living with a disability, a skater, a short guy, a metalhead, or what your background might be... nobody is exempt.

In the United States, there’s actually a form of affirmative action in place to support Black students by guaranteeing them specific university quotas, which reminds me a little bit of how some certain veteran-affiliated programs worked back in the States last year where kids from those families were pretty much guaranteed a spot at college.

Apemant said:Are you absolutely certain about that? 😍

I am. Are you suggesting there’s a subset of people—vegetarians, the LGBTQ+ community, or people with disabilities, for instance—who are somehow genetically incapable of being malicious or spiteful?

Quincy:

No, but what exactly do you mean by "malice"? Are you referring to "spite"—that specific impulse where you wish something bad would happen to someone simply because they stepped on your toes?

We’ve already covered the concept of malice in a previous thread.
My view is this: if we look at it as a spectrum—malicious, more spiteful, and then the absolute superlative of "evil"—😁 I’d say "malice" is relatively benign. It’s those small, petty slights, the subtle jabs, the constant undermining, or just throwing a little shade to get a reaction. There’s an element of mischief to it; it’s why we describe a toddler as being "malicious" rather than calling them "pure evil."
🤷

Spite, on the other hand, sits somewhere in the middle. It’s schadenfreude—finding a bit of joy in someone else's misfortune—or actively wishing for someone to fail. Sometimes it involves light manipulation, like spreading rumors or stirring up drama between friends. But when we talk about an "evil person," we’re talking about a total commitment—someone who invests their full energy and will into doing harm. 🤷

slypuma17 said:I am. Are you suggesting there’s a subset of people—vegetarians, the LGBTQ+ community, or people with disabilities, for instance—who are somehow genetically incapable of being malicious or spiteful?

Quincy:

No, but what exactly do you mean by "malice"? Are you referring to "spite"—that specific impulse where you wish something bad would happen to someone simply because they stepped on your toes?

We’ve already covered the concept of malice in a previous thread.
My view is this: if we look at it as a spectrum—malicious, more spiteful, and then the absolute superlative of "evil"—😁 I’d say "malice" is relatively benign. It’s those small, petty slights, the subtle jabs, the constant undermining, or just throwing a little shade to get a reaction. There’s an element of mischief to it; it’s why we describe a toddler as being "malicious" rather than calling them "pure evil."
🤷

Spite, on the other hand, sits somewhere in the middle. It’s schadenfreude—finding a bit of joy in someone else's misfortune—or actively wishing for someone to fail. Sometimes it involves light manipulation, like spreading rumors or stirring up drama between friends. But when we talk about an "evil person," we’re talking about a total commitment—someone who invests their full energy and will into doing harm. 🤷

I suppose children can actually be quite a bit more "wicked" than adults sometimes. 👎

shadowtrucker18 said:It’s funny, isn't it? I’ve noticed this pattern quite frequently lately. If someone happens to be dealing with an illness, they are suddenly granted this automatic pass to be seen as brave, wise, or some kind of intellectual giant. But the moment I suggest otherwise, I’m treated like a complete outcast. It seems to be a bit of a trend these days. Personally, I don't believe in idealizing people just because they are fighting something like cancer; having a medical struggle doesn't inherently make someone a better person. Honestly, it’s a little frustrating to watch. What, am I supposed to go out and seek a diagnosis just to be taken seriously? 🤷

Not necessarily—you just have to become addicted to something first, and then deal with the withdrawal. Honestly, the worst part is when people glorify someone who "heroically" conquered heroin, quit smoking, or stopped killing people. If they hadn't gotten themselves into that mess in the first place, they wouldn't have to quit. 🙄

As for this whole "positive discrimination" thing... there are definitely people who exploit being different. Like one TV host put it—we straight guys don't parade around with our own flags like gay people do.

A good person is a good person, regardless of skin color, nationality, physical ability, or especially religion. Same goes for bad people.

And yeah, I fell right into the positive discrimination trap myself. Mostly, I've just been disappointed by all these "spiritual" types.

feralhound55 said:Not necessarily—you just have to become addicted to something first, and then deal with the withdrawal. Honestly, the worst part is when people glorify someone who "heroically" conquered heroin, quit smoking, or stopped killing people. If they hadn't gotten themselves into that mess in the first place, they wouldn't have to quit. 🙄

As for this whole "positive discrimination" thing... there are definitely people who exploit being different. Like one TV host put it—we straight guys don't parade around with our own flags like gay people do.

A good person is a good person, regardless of skin color, nationality, physical ability, or especially religion. Same goes for bad people.

And yeah, I fell right into the positive discrimination trap myself. Mostly, I've just been disappointed by all these "spiritual" types.

I don't believe that, specifically, gay people are somehow superior to us heterosexuals—but I feel like I've heard that "we don't march" argument a hundred times already, and it’s quite frustrating because I think it's fundamentally flawed.

We certainly march.

Don't we hold hands, kiss, or maybe even be a little affectionate in public sometimes? Isn't that essentially a parade? Though, I suppose if you ask gay people, they can't really do that without police protection.

I find myself agreeing with Ryan Wood98 on this one; it really is a completely different matter altogether.

mistybison said:Oh, more than once! 😁

We are all prone to our own biases, whether they are negative or positive.

Every group contains all sorts of different individuals, and we shouldn't assume everyone will possess the specific qualities we expect just because they belong to a certain demographic. For instance, people who identify as religious should ideally follow the core moral tenets of their faith, which would make them people of excellent character. In reality, however, you will find all kinds of people among those who call themselves religious: some can be malicious, envious, or even criminals. It sounds absurd, but it happens quite often. Ultimately, someone identifying with a specific group doesn't necessarily say anything about who they are as an individual or what their true character might be.

😕

😁

feralhound55 said:Not necessarily—you just have to become addicted to something first, and then deal with the withdrawal. Honestly, the worst part is when people glorify someone who "heroically" conquered heroin, quit smoking, or stopped killing people. If they hadn't gotten themselves into that mess in the first place, they wouldn't have to quit. 🙄

As for this whole "positive discrimination" thing... there are definitely people who exploit being different. Like one TV host put it—we straight guys don't parade around with our own flags like gay people do.

A good person is a good person, regardless of skin color, nationality, physical ability, or especially religion. Same goes for bad people.

And yeah, I fell right into the positive discrimination trap myself. Mostly, I've just been disappointed by all these "spiritual" types.

I have to say, I agree with you one hundred percent. It’s always the same pattern with these types. The guy spends twenty years absolutely wrecking everything in his path, leaving nothing but a trail of destruction behind him, and then—out of nowhere—he suddenly finds himself at a Chase branch, completely reformed. Suddenly, he’s making little pottery figurines or singing in some local church choir, and everyone starts acting like he’s some kind of saint. It’s almost funny how people immediately start marveling at where he supposedly found the strength to overcome all the evil in the world, as if that chaos wasn't entirely his own doing.
Honestly, it’s kind of ridiculous. There are plenty of other people out there who didn't exactly spend their time searching for some grand, cosmic purpose; they just took a job in construction, bought a house in the suburbs, raised two kids, and made sure the bills were paid on time. They didn't spend their entire lives lost in some heroin-induced haze, so I suppose it’s no wonder nobody is throwing them a parade or treating them like heroes.

Jacob Wood9 said:I have to say, I agree with you one hundred percent. It’s always the same pattern with these types. The guy spends twenty years absolutely wrecking everything in his path, leaving nothing but a trail of destruction behind him, and then—out of nowhere—he suddenly finds himself at a Chase branch, completely reformed. Suddenly, he’s making little pottery figurines or singing in some local church choir, and everyone starts acting like he’s some kind of saint. It’s almost funny how people immediately start marveling at where he supposedly found the strength to overcome all the evil in the world, as if that chaos wasn't entirely his own doing.
Honestly, it’s kind of ridiculous. There are plenty of other people out there who didn't exactly spend their time searching for some grand, cosmic purpose; they just took a job in construction, bought a house in the suburbs, raised two kids, and made sure the bills were paid on time. They didn't spend their entire lives lost in some heroin-induced haze, so I suppose it’s no wonder nobody is throwing them a parade or treating them like heroes.

...and meanwhile, they’re busy lecturing everyone else, insisting that if you light up just one joint, you’ll inevitably end up shooting up in an alleyway. 🙄

Jacob Wood9 said:I have to say, I agree with you one hundred percent. It’s always the same pattern with these types. The guy spends twenty years absolutely wrecking everything in his path, leaving nothing but a trail of destruction behind him, and then—out of nowhere—he suddenly finds himself at a Chase branch, completely reformed. Suddenly, he’s making little pottery figurines or singing in some local church choir, and everyone starts acting like he’s some kind of saint. It’s almost funny how people immediately start marveling at where he supposedly found the strength to overcome all the evil in the world, as if that chaos wasn't entirely his own doing.
Honestly, it’s kind of ridiculous. There are plenty of other people out there who didn't exactly spend their time searching for some grand, cosmic purpose; they just took a job in construction, bought a house in the suburbs, raised two kids, and made sure the bills were paid on time. They didn't spend their entire lives lost in some heroin-induced haze, so I suppose it’s no wonder nobody is throwing them a parade or treating them like heroes.

Let’s not generalize about everyone who recovers. You seem to be picking the most extreme case possible. 🙂

Besides, people automatically look up to you just because you have two kids, even if you haven't actually earned any respect. 😁 You reproduced. So fucking what? Should we give a standing ovation to amoebas too?

Hehe, looking at it this way, it seems I don't agree with your comment, yet I find myself agreeing. 🙂