My parents visited India a few years ago, they faced that issue when their guide refused to enter a coffee shop, when he explained that it was because he was not allowed to enter because of his caste, they turned back (disgusted)...
[1] https://medium.com/conversations-with-tyler/sujatha-gidla-an...
Edit: Fascinating interview, by the way. Thanks for posting it! Loved this part:
>GIDLA: I will say this: Everybody is dying to know whether I got into university because of reservations. My answer to them is, “Go ahead and die.”
Sure it's soul crushing for those who are oppressed, but the oppressors would probably be well adjusted people in other societies.
Of course, this is all based on personal experience. I wouldn't say this is the general rule.
This is exactly what hate is. And it should be pointed out by everyone. The oppressor only has power if others give it by being complicit.
Any time in history when one group has been oppressed by another, it's been considered normal by majority social standards of the time. When those standards change, discord and sometimes even war is the result.
Is that cognitive dissonance? Almost certainly, but is it hate? I don't think so.
We throw around the word "hate" too much and doing so loses a lot of the nuance bound up in human attitudes.
Now please tell me how opposing the gay marriage is not in any way a sign of hate towards gay people that bars them from certain legal liberties? You could try to sell this point of view as a "kind" point of view, but your conginitively dissonant ignorance still makes you hate people as a result; even if you are not conscious about it.
I think people that oppose gay marriage do so because of hate. But found a neat little loophole out of being called hateful by claiming that they have no problem with gay people.
My reasoning is this: taking any kind of stance on any subject requires some kind of motivation. If you are moved to spend energy on something, you are motivated by some need to do so. If you oppose something that does not directly affect you, the reason is most probably hate.
The belief that others can only oppose groups of people out of "hate" stems from a strong lack of empathy and understanding for people on the other side of the issue.
> If you oppose something that does not directly affect you, the reason is most probably hate.
Either that, or you are serving something percieved as greater than yourself.
On the other hand, accusing the people you oppose of being demonic Satan-spawn looking to corrupt our youth and destroy our lives and country, of being the baby-molesting other that causes nightmares, well, that probably isn't caused by an excess of good feeling.
Hatred at its core is causing others to suffer in service of the things that live in one's head. Emotions can be hateful, so can ideas.
Most everyone understands that people are not their actions. You can believe a behavior is wrong without hating the person behaving in that way.
It's a very simple formulation.
Disagreeing with someone isn’t hate.
When a gay couple gets married on the other side of the country, do you notice? Does your life change? If it's the mere idea of it you're opposed to, then that's bigotry, not some practical concern like a giraffe blocking your view of the screen.
The word 'marriage' doesn't mean in 2018 what in meant in 1918, or even in 1968, or 1993. In large part, that's a good thing (domestic violence is no longer legal spousal rape is no longer legal, married women don't have a kind of legal-child status), but it's also a bad thing (due to no-fault divorce laws, marriage can be terminated by one party at any time; marriage is no longer the cornerstone of a couple's life, but the capstone to their lives; there's no longer social support for a reliable, lifelong marriage).
Many people who oppose legal recognition of homosexual unions as marriages don't have animus against homosexuals, but rather nostalgia for the previous meanings of marriage. They believe that a stronger concept of marriage makes for a stronger society.
Personally, I think we ought to go all the way and abolish the legal concept of marriage entirely: it's a religious state, not a civil one, and thus not the business of the State. But I understand the concerns of those who worry about how a diverse society which has lost all respect for marriage will survive — I just think we're already there, so we might as well be honest about it.
This urge to thrust "hate" on people is dangerous because is dehumanizes them. If someone is hateful, then they are evil, and evil people deserve punishment.
So the thinking goes, but it is regressive thinking.
The disagreement about gay marriage stems for many from religious doctrine and what is traditional social practice, not hate.
Hatred - a "strong dislike" - does not need to be expressed through fiery emotion. A checklist which says "I will not provide service to someone who is {insert protected class}, followed robotically, is still an expression of hatred.
A computer vision system could be used to implement some sorts of racism, so of course the CV system itself could not be said to "hate" the person. Instead, it's an expression of the hatred embedded in the system.
Someone choosing to follow God's law is expressing the hatred embedded in that belief system. That they might "only" be an instrument of that hatred rather than an instigator does not absolve them.
You wrote "Is it really hate though? Or just people accepting certain social standards and living their lives in accordance."
If those social standard are based in hate, then why shouldn't we say those people are being hateful?
Moreover, if many others from the same society hold different beliefs (e.g., there are Christians for and against gay marriage, and for and against slavery, and for and against tattoos, and for and against women speaking in the church, etc.) then why should we excuse those people who choose a specific interpretation which condones and encourages discrimination?
How many times does the story need to play out? Didn't we just see the #metoo thing play out? These women are victims of hate. Same story with LGBT and black.
No one is dehumanizing anyone. The word is about human autonomy and dignity.