Skip to main content

View Diary: Wrangler Bar in Denver: "You must have your appearance matching your ID" (27 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  It is all about appearances. "Appearances are (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Horace Boothroyd III

    deceiving" but it's all those who have to rely on their superficial optics have to go by.
    As I keep trying to point out, the problem lies in the perceiver, not the perceived. Just as a color bling person can't see red or green or yellow, people restricted to perceiving appearances don't "get" function or connection. They only see what people look like. What people do escapes them because action is not visible. Perhaps it's a matter of being unable to perceive change or difference or motion. Perhaps it's a matter of brains only recording static images -- like the difference between a still camera and a movie camera.
    Perhaps the people who are face blind, a rather recently discovered condition, don't see faces because expressions are constantly changing and, as when film is fast forwarded, the image vanishes when it moves.
    The problem may not be in the eye of the beholder, but it is certainly in the brain of the beholder. But, the brain does not recognize it's own deficits. "If I can't see you, it's your fault."

    Can you correct color blindness by nattering at the person with that particular disability? There are actually some conditions that cannot be changed.
    Why is it that the disabled often seem to have little sympathy for other people's disabilities?

    •  It's two-factor authentication done poorly (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Horace Boothroyd III

      It's not just about "appearances".  If it were, then they wouldn't need your ID.  They'd just look at you and decide if you were "cool" enough to come in (and|or white enough, straight enough, etc.).  The yokels at the Wrangler Bar would probably do just that if they had their druthers, but they don't.  Bars have to authenticate because they serve a controlled substance.  

      Comparing your driver's license to your image is a lousy form of two factor authentication -- something you have (the ID) with something you are (the appearance), validated by some goob.  The authentication needs to get better, pure and simple.  Unfortunately, that's been a really hard problem to solve, especially if you don't want nasty side effects like loss of privacy.  

      •  Trying to control what people ingest, (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Horace Boothroyd III

        inhale, imbibe or inject into their own bodies is not, IMHO, a proper governmental function. It is an expression of a punitive attitude which looks upon the state as a reinforcement when religious persuasion doesn't work.
        From the moralist's perspective, the separation of church and state was/is to be a one-sided arrangement. The state is to let the church do its thing, but the church is free to requisition the state as needed. It is a perspective that conforms to the underlying conviction that man is sinful and the church and state together are to make him good. That this attitude violates the principle of probity underlying the Constitution does not register with people who don't know what probity means. Besides, believing that men are sinful gives the "saved" an excuse for exercising dominion over the rest.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site