Can we just stop using hindsight bias?

[Bob The Badger]

I was reading the Twitter/X thread and the making of likes private.

@Carl Sagan said it was a good thing because it stopped people digging up old quotes.

@ariotofmyown didn't like it because the visibility held people accountable.

And I'm paraphrasing both, so feel free to correct me if I misunderstood you two..

I tend to agree with both.

I think if you got made up in blackface last year, then you need to be held accountable because you know it's not acceptable. And you're being a massive dick at best and racist at worst.

But people really do change for the better.

Not always, and maybe not even frequently, but many do.

And usually through education and discourse, not online humiliation and having their job taken away from them.

But just as importantly, times change.

As such, I think if you did it 30 years ago and it's not a pattern of behaviour, then we need to let that sh!t go and not ruin people's careers and even lives.

Because regardless of whether we now know it's a bad thing, we didn't then. Or at least, most people weren't aware.

It depends on intent, context, situation, and timing rather than some binary right/wrong outlook.

I follow David Baddiel fairly closely and just bought his new book. He doesn't strike me as racist, just the opposite. Yet we all know what he and Skinner did with a pineapple.

I, along with most viewers, thought it was hysterical.

Now I'd be horrified. 

We evolve.

But as we evolve, we absolutely suck at remembering what we used to be like.

So we employ hindsight bias to say we'd never have had slaves (yes, you probably would, if you could have afforded to), never have mocked gay kids at school (you almost certainly did if you're over the age of 40) and never have laughed at The Fawlty Towers 'don't mentioned the war' sketch - pfft, it was genius.

I can guarantee there is stuff we do now that future generations will be appalled at.

Maybe it's treating prisoners like animals, or maybe it's having full-contact sports or eating cabbages; I have no idea.

Because if I did have any idea, we'd probably all have changed, and we'd be laughing at those cabbage-eating morons, or having them fired from their jobs.

<rant over>

 

[Anag Ram]

13 minutes ago, Bob The Badger said:

I was reading the Twitter/X thread and the making of likes private.

@Carl Sagan said it was a good thing because it stopped people digging up old quotes.

@ariotofmyown didn't like it because the visibility held people accountable.

And I'm paraphrasing both, so feel free to correct me if I misunderstood you two..

I tend to agree with both.

I think if you got made up in blackface last year, then you need to be held accountable because you know it's not acceptable. And you're being a massive dick at best and racist at worst.

But people really do change for the better.

Not always, and maybe not even frequently, but many do.

And usually through education and discourse, not online humiliation and having their job taken away from them.

But just as importantly, times change.

As such, I think if you did it 30 years ago and it's not a pattern of behaviour, then we need to let that sh!t go and not ruin people's careers and even lives.

Because regardless of whether we now know it's a bad thing, we didn't then. Or at least, most people weren't aware.

It depends on intent, context, situation, and timing rather than some binary right/wrong outlook.

I follow David Baddiel fairly closely and just bought his new book. He doesn't strike me as racist, just the opposite. Yet we all know what he and Skinner did with a pineapple.

I, along with most viewers, thought it was hysterical.

Now I'd be horrified. 

We evolve.

But as we evolve, we absolutely suck at remembering what we used to be like.

So we employ hindsight bias to say we'd never have had slaves (yes, you probably would, if you could have afforded to), never have mocked gay kids at school (you almost certainly did if you're over the age of 40) and never have laughed at The Fawlty Towers 'don't mentioned the war' sketch - pfft, it was genius.

I can guarantee there is stuff we do now that future generations will be appalled at.

Maybe it's treating prisoners like animals, or maybe it's having full-contact sports or eating cabbages; I have no idea.

Because if I did have any idea, we'd probably all have changed, and we'd be laughing at those cabbage-eating morons, or having them fired from their jobs.

<rant over>

 

I like to think of myself as fairly level headed now but when I was a young lad I lived in a small rural village in which homophobia was rife, racism was rife and sexism was rife.

In order to ‘fit in’ I was part of that.

How many of us grew up with jokes that started There was an Englishman, an Irishman and a Scotsman?

Back then we thought it was hilarious.

It wasn’t until I actually met people from other cultures that I began to develop my world view.

That doesn’t mean I wasn’t a nob before then. That was ignorance. The cure is education and that should be how we counter it throughout life.

[ariotofmyown]

25 minutes ago, Bob The Badger said:

I think if you got made up in blackface last year, then you need to be held accountable because you know it's not acceptable. And you're being a massive dick at best and racist at worst.

I just reread my comments and agree with this.

That was the crux of my point really. The "offence archeology" was a candidate saying we should have appeased Hitler and not fought in the 2nd World War. From two years ago.

I think these recent comments should be challenged and debated in the context of an election.

Maybe likes and tweets could disappear over time so people are allowed the space to change. But this doesn't happen when people have said or done someone ill advised in person, when perhaps they had even less time to consider their thoughts.

[BaaLocks]

The issue is when someone digs up the quote / video and then decides to be judge and jury on whether it was ill intended or not. Take the Jason Lee / David Baddiel one, he was asked to comment and made it clear he no longer thinks that behaviour is appropriate. That doesn't mean it is the end of the matter but it is the first point, the first point is not someone saying "look at how racist David Baddiel is".

Fortunately, the old 'I wasn't being racist, some of my best mates are black' argument no longer stands and the ultimate arbitor is the recipient of the statement. You may not think you are being sexist telling a girl she has a nice bum, but if she thinks you are then you are. That is the premise of institutional racism, it is so prevalent that even those who deliver it are not aware (same at the point of growing up in a rural village).

I sometimes wonder though, why some people have so much energy to fight things that really shouldn't affect them - there is a video online of a trans person getting upset because people aren't using their preferred pronouns. The comments are littered with "but they were born a certain gender therefore that is how they will be referred to". First point, who are you to be the judge and two, would it absolutely kill you to show a bit of compassion and address someone in the way it feels best to them to be addressed? Why the need to impose your belief systems as if they are sacracant?

Final challenge on all of this is the legal system - if what the person did was illegal at the time it was done then you should bring it up (Saville etc) irrespective. Historic sex offences may be historic but they are still sex offences. I know we all know this but sometimes there are more nuanced cases (e.g. Steven Lawrence's murderers) that are not so clear cut.

[MaltRam]

....although....and I'd get cancelled if I was a public figure...

Blackface as a pre-war mechanism for preventing black actors from getting involved in theatre was clearly discriminatory and wrong, coming from a place of disrespect and probably even hate.

Someone wearing any form of makeup, for any reason, is probably just fine though, so long as we all just agree that it's probably not intended as an insult to anyone....and even if it is, probably best to move on without getting irate about it.

Like this idea I've seen floated that only gay actors should play gay roles. Pretending to be someone else is literally the point. Doesn't imply disrespect if a gay white man plays a straight black woman on stage or film, or down the pub for a fancy dress do.

Edited July 23 by MaltRam

[Stive Pesley]

26 minutes ago, BaaLocks said:

The issue is when someone digs up the quote / video and then decides to be judge and jury on whether it was ill intended or not. Take the Jason Lee / David Baddiel one, he was asked to comment and made it clear he no longer thinks that behaviour is appropriate. That doesn't mean it is the end of the matter but it is the first point, the first point is not someone saying "look at how racist David Baddiel is".

Fortunately, the old 'I wasn't being racist, some of my best mates are black' argument no longer stands and the ultimate arbitor is the recipient of the statement. You may not think you are being sexist telling a girl she has a nice bum, but if she thinks you are then you are. That is the premise of institutional racism, it is so prevalent that even those who deliver it are not aware (same at the point of growing up in a rural village).

What I find interesting are the two approaches to "offence archaeology"

You mention Baddiel - holding his hands up and admitting that he now realises it was wrong. There are numerous famous people who have taken that same approach. The most perfect and succinct example being from the late Beastie Boy MCA, when asked about the sexist lyrics on the first LP being at odds with their later championing of women's rights -  he apologised and said "I'd rather be called a hypocrite than be the same guy forever"

Nobody who apologises and take the time to show that they have grown as a person should ever have to worry about being "cancelled"

The other approach is the more problematic one - where someone immediately gets defensive and starts to simply attack the idea of being attacked for something they said or did a long time ago. As if it shouldn't be allowed to question a person's past actions

If you're doing that instead of apologising and owning your  mistakes then it very much suggests that you are still the same person - you just don't want to admit it

 

[Bob The Badger]

1 hour ago, Anag Ram said:

I like to think of myself as fairly level headed now but when I was a young lad I lived in a small rural village in which homophobia was rife, racism was rife and sexism was rife.

In order to ‘fit in’ I was part of that.

How many of us grew up with jokes that started There was an Englishman, an Irishman and a Scotsman?

Back then we thought it was hilarious.

It wasn’t until I actually met people from other cultures that I began to develop my world view.

That doesn’t mean I wasn’t a nob before then. That was ignorance. The cure is education and that should be how we counter it throughout life.

Yep, 100%. 

I can remember about 25 years ago reading that there is no words in the Chinese language (Cantonese probably, not sure) that requires the speaker to form the R sound we make in words like fried. That as such, that part of their brain gets allocated for other purposes after a very early age. It's simply inaccessible.

in my own ignorance (and youth) I thought it was they who were being ignorant and lazy saying flied rice. 

I felt so embarrassed and almost ashamed at my earlier, usually drunken self for laughing at their 'stupidity'.

Ya know, because my Chinese is only imperfect because of a very feint Derbyshire accent. 

Of course, you have to want to be informed and educated and many don't. But that's another matter. 
 

 

[Bob The Badger]

58 minutes ago, BaaLocks said:

The issue is when someone digs up the quote / video and then decides to be judge and jury on whether it was ill intended or not. Take the Jason Lee / David Baddiel one, he was asked to comment and made it clear he no longer thinks that behaviour is appropriate. That doesn't mean it is the end of the matter but it is the first point, the first point is not someone saying "look at how racist David Baddiel is".

Fortunately, the old 'I wasn't being racist, some of my best mates are black' argument no longer stands and the ultimate arbitor is the recipient of the statement. You may not think you are being sexist telling a girl she has a nice bum, but if she thinks you are then you are. That is the premise of institutional racism, it is so prevalent that even those who deliver it are not aware (same at the point of growing up in a rural village).

I sometimes wonder though, why some people have so much energy to fight things that really shouldn't affect them - there is a video online of a trans person getting upset because people aren't using their preferred pronouns. The comments are littered with "but they were born a certain gender therefore that is how they will be referred to". First point, who are you to be the judge and two, would it absolutely kill you to show a bit of compassion and address someone in the way it feels best to them to be addressed? Why the need to impose your belief systems as if they are sacracant?

Final challenge on all of this is the legal system - if what the person did was illegal at the time it was done then you should bring it up (Saville etc) irrespective. Historic sex offences may be historic but they are still sex offences. I know we all know this but sometimes there are more nuanced cases (e.g. Steven Lawrence's murderers) that are not so clear cut.

I don't think the Jimmy Saville case is in anyway comparable to people making comments. 

Even taking historical context to an extreme you've got to go back a long way to find a time where grooming minors for sex was acceptable. Although I know there perhaps was a time. 

Would anybody defend what he did? Or that he didn't know it was wrong?

I run group training every two weeks and one of the people taking it uses the pronoun of they. I have exactly 62 years of conditioning that 'they' is a 'she' and the amount of mental energy I expend trying not to say 'she' is exhausting. 

Im sure they'd understand there was no malicious intent if I did slip. But when we take offence it is always a choice. If we choose not to, we remove the power from the idiot trying to seize it. Or we don't make somebody feel bad for making a human mistake. 

I'm sure I'm rambling now but I'm literally typing whilst rambling. Or rather, walking the dogs. 

[BaaLocks]

1 hour ago, Bob The Badger said:

I don't think the Jimmy Saville case is in anyway comparable to people making comments. 

Which is why I suggested things that were illegal at the time should not be inside this discussion

[Bob The Badger]

2 hours ago, MaltRam said:

....although....and I'd get cancelled if I was a public figure...

Blackface as a pre-war mechanism for preventing black actors from getting involved in theatre was clearly discriminatory and wrong, coming from a place of disrespect and probably even hate.

Someone wearing any form of makeup, for any reason, is probably just fine though, so long as we all just agree that it's probably not intended as an insult to anyone....and even if it is, probably best to move on without getting irate about it.

Like this idea I've seen floated that only gay actors should play gay roles. Pretending to be someone else is literally the point. Doesn't imply disrespect if a gay white man plays a straight black woman on stage or film, or down the pub for a fancy dress do.

I'd not have been cancelled if I'd been famous,

But only because I'd have died of a drug overdose years before it could have happened.

 

 

 

 

[Animal is a Ram]

1 hour ago, Bob The Badger said:

Yep, 100%. 

I can remember about 25 years ago reading that there is no words in the Chinese language (Cantonese probably, not sure) that requires the speaker to form the R sound we make in words like fried. That as such, that part of their brain gets allocated for other purposes after a very early age. It's simply inaccessible.

in my own ignorance (and youth) I thought it was they who were being ignorant and lazy saying flied rice. 

I felt so embarrassed and almost ashamed at my earlier, usually drunken self for laughing at their 'stupidity'.

Ya know, because my Chinese is only imperfect because of a very feint Derbyshire accent. 

Of course, you have to want to be informed and educated and many don't. But that's another matter. 
 

 

As someone who's learning Canto (of a fashion), my partner and a lot of her family speak it, this is indeed correct. There are trailing /r/ sounds (often romanicised as -aa, or sometimes -ar - haa/har = prawn) but no leading /r/, as you say fried, so often substituted with either an L or a W sound.

Canto is tough because tone changes a word's meaning - I can imagine some natural speakers would have a field day with my butchered attempts in much the same way

[Cisse]

3 hours ago, Anag Ram said:

I like to think of myself as fairly level headed now but when I was a young lad I lived in a small rural village in which homophobia was rife, racism was rife and sexism was rife.

In order to ‘fit in’ I was part of that.

How many of us grew up with jokes that started There was an Englishman, an Irishman and a Scotsman?

Back then we thought it was hilarious.

It wasn’t until I actually met people from other cultures that I began to develop my world view.

That doesn’t mean I wasn’t a nob before then. That was ignorance. The cure is education and that should be how we counter it throughout life.

I grew up in the biggest city in Finland and it was exactly like that here too except in here we told the jokes with Finns, Swedes and Norwegian. But I still believe those jokes were and are hilarious. And what makes them even more fun that the Swedes tell those same jokes and we are the butt end of the joke there.

Nowadays all jokes are seen as something to feel offended by. I feel it is a disgrace if we can't laugh for ourselves. I'm a short fat Finn and I think it gives plenty of to make jokes about. Most jokes are not malicious. We all should laugh more and get offended less.

Meeting people is a great education and i have learned a lot but I'm still a nob.

[Archied]

4 hours ago, BaaLocks said:

The issue is when someone digs up the quote / video and then decides to be judge and jury on whether it was ill intended or not. Take the Jason Lee / David Baddiel one, he was asked to comment and made it clear he no longer thinks that behaviour is appropriate. That doesn't mean it is the end of the matter but it is the first point, the first point is not someone saying "look at how racist David Baddiel is".

Fortunately, the old 'I wasn't being racist, some of my best mates are black' argument no longer stands and the ultimate arbitor is the recipient of the statement. You may not think you are being sexist telling a girl she has a nice bum, but if she thinks you are then you are. That is the premise of institutional racism, it is so prevalent that even those who deliver it are not aware (same at the point of growing up in a rural village).

I sometimes wonder though, why some people have so much energy to fight things that really shouldn't affect them - there is a video online of a trans person getting upset because people aren't using their preferred pronouns. The comments are littered with "but they were born a certain gender therefore that is how they will be referred to". First point, who are you to be the judge and two, would it absolutely kill you to show a bit of compassion and address someone in the way it feels best to them to be addressed? Why the need to impose your belief systems as if they are sacracant?

Final challenge on all of this is the legal system - if what the person did was illegal at the time it was done then you should bring it up (Saville etc) irrespective. Historic sex offences may be historic but they are still sex offences. I know we all know this but sometimes there are more nuanced cases (e.g. Steven Lawrence's murderers) that are not so clear cut.

That’s all good but it cuts both ways , if you are a trans woman why do you need to impose your belief system as if it is sacracant ? Why do you need to force everyone to see you as you see yourself?

this approach has set people at odds with each other , by all means tell people how you like to be addressed and in the main the majority of people will be more than happy to be nice and oblige no matter what they see or feel , force people and it’s a whole different scenario,

extremists on both sides making ordinary peoples lives unpleasant 

sadly we live in a world where women need safe spaces and fair treatment in things like sport so you have no choice but to try to navigate a scenario that can work rather than just bulldoze on groups rights in favour of another ,

lots of people including a very interesting trans woman have pointed out the situation of if you call someone she how can you say she is not allowed in women’s spaces so are starting to fight against forced pronouns,

read transsexual apostate by Debbie Hayton , it’s a very interesting read from someone who transitioned many years ago 

 

Edited July 23 by Archied

[Normanton Lad]

The original poster seems to be suggesting that we shouldn't judge people by their past actions because something that is bad now didn't used to be seen as bad.

I disagree. If it was bad in say 1950 then, in my book,  it is probably bad today. Things that were not bad before are probably not bad now.

Those older people who have become politically correct have been brainwashed or frightened into renouncing their earlier position. I rarely watch TV or mix with younger people (apart from relatives) so I regard myself as almost immune from this conditioning. Most of my views are extremely politically incorrect but I still hold them.

I can't imagine myself in any sort of a social situation with someone who wanted to be addressed by newly invented pronouns, but if that did happen then I would just walk away or use the traditional pronouns. 

[BaaLocks]

21 minutes ago, Archied said:

That’s all good but it cuts both ways , if you are a trans woman why do you need to impose your belief system as if it is sacracant ? Why do you need to force everyone to see you as you see yourself?

this approach has set people at odds with each other , by all means tell people how you like to be addressed and in the main the majority of people will be more than happy to be nice and oblige no matter what they see or feel , force people and it’s a whole different scenario,

extremists on both sides making ordinary peoples lives unpleasant 

 

I just think there's so much more to worry about in the world than pronouns. If someone tells me what pronoun they want to be referred by then I can work with that, it's not challenging any belief system I have. It's just not a hill I feel the need to fight on and it surprises me when others get bent out of shape (no pun intended) over it, that people feel the need to kick and scream over how someone they've never met wants to be addressed.

I guess, in conclusion, maybe many (not saying you as such) could benefit from being a bit more kind and understanding.

BTW - this isn't a trans discussion, not trying to divert the thread, it's just an example in response to your point.

Edited July 23 by BaaLocks

[BaaLocks]

4 minutes ago, Normanton Lad said:

I can't imagine myself in any sort of a social situation with someone who wanted to be addressed by newly invented pronouns, but if that did happen then I would just walk away or use the traditional pronouns. 

OK Mary (I don't know what your real name is, but I've decided to call you Mary, it's a traditional name and that's how I want to address you). 

6 minutes ago, Normanton Lad said:

Most of my views are extremely politically incorrect but I still hold them.

No further questions your honour!

[Stive Pesley]

21 minutes ago, Normanton Lad said:

Things that were not bad before are probably not bad now.

Really?

Slavery for example?

 

[Archied]

19 minutes ago, BaaLocks said:

OK Mary (I don't know what your real name is, but I've decided to call you Mary, it's a traditional name and that's how I want to address you). 

No further questions your honour!

Is Mary a pronoun? Don’t think it is but I’m ok for you to call me whatever you want 🤷🏻‍♂️

[Archied]

33 minutes ago, BaaLocks said:

I just think there's so much more to worry about in the world than pronouns. If someone tells me what pronoun they want to be referred by then I can work with that, it's not challenging any belief system I have. It's just not a hill I feel the need to fight on and it surprises me when others get bent out of shape (no pun intended) over it, that people feel the need to kick and scream over how someone they've never met wants to be addressed.

I guess, in conclusion, maybe many (not saying you as such) could benefit from being a bit more kind and understanding.

BTW - this isn't a trans discussion, not trying to divert the thread, it's just an example in response to your point.

Again you purposely avoid the point , forcing pronouns is a belief system for some and a hill they are very much prepared to die on , you’ve just chosen a side rather than being the live and let live easy goer you are trying to portray 🤷🏻‍♂️

Edited July 23 by Archied

[GboroRam]

Why do some posters insist on turning every thread into the worst element of the politics threads. 

Do we need to start handing out warnings for repeat offenders?