this post was submitted on 29 Nov 2023
161 points (89.7% liked)
Asklemmy
43945 readers
634 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
So, the sleigh driver who wastaking his family for an hour-long ride was training the animal? It was also used to make recalcitrant or reluctant work animals perform better while working. You could call that training, I suppose, but it's a bit of a stretch. It also wasn't uncommon for race horses to be whipped to make them go faster. I don't know if it still is, it's been far too long since I bothered to check anything horse race related. But cracking the whip was used for a very long time to get animals to work. Also people, which is the problem.
Whatever the context, you're comparing people to animals or slaves. Which is better?
I was talking about history, backed by common knowledge which can be easily corroborated, and not very much my opinion about those acts, except the last sentence.
Also, people are animals. Perhaps you could use that as a reason to treat animals better instead of as an excuse to treat people worse.
You're fucking with me, right?
Sure I am. It's not like the first child abuse case in America wasn't fought using an animal cruelty law...
What, and I cannot stress this enough, the fuck are you talking about? What does that have to do with anything even remotely related to this conversation?
Well, this all started when you displayed ignorance about animals, which I tried to correct. Then I just followed along with your meanderings. Now l, if you want to back up and explain how I'm wrong about whips being cracked at animals (and people) in the context of getting them to perform work instead of solely to train them, hence the term "cracking the whip" being a euphemism for getting back to work and not solely getting back to training, please do.
If you'd rather ignore the original conversation and instead talk about your reply, please inform me how my pointing out your ignorance of animal husbandry has any bearing on me comparing people to slaves, or how that would be out of context when discussing the phrase "cracking the whip."
No seriously, you're fucking with me, right?
The original conversation was about how it's offensive to compare employees to animals or slaves, so the metaphor is offensive either way, because those are the two situations where one might "crack the whip" as a means of motivation.
Nothing I said touched on its offensiveness or lack thereof, merely the inaccuracies of your statements about the historical context. Of course, in your mind, that equates to me approving of or ignoring it.
Got it, you just wanted to be right about something so you tried to change ths subject to something irrelevant you could nitpick.
I wasn't making statements about the historical context, I said that the historical context doesn't matter because it's offensive either way. I was literally saying I don't care about whatever you want to talk about. So forgive me for misunderstanding your point.