Search Results: is negative positive

My stepdad is being an idiot AGAIN.. he doesn't like me around him and treats me like dirt. He pretends to be nice and all but uses "positive" words under a negative tone to hide his fueled narcissism. After walking 3 laps around the block for 2.5 hours, I went and threw out the trash without wearing a glove or mask, and I didn't know he or my mom would be downstairs.

My stepdad said to go wash my hands, and I was just going to do it in my room upstairs so I could change my shirt and possibly take a shower. Then he forced me to wash downstairs because he thinks I can't be in my room without washing my hands in the bathroom downstairs. I told him we've been doing this before the coronavirus and it makes no difference. I told him to STOP watching the news and he went mute.

After having some watermelon I watched my brother play, I would say I love you to my stepdad and he got kinda offended, he said what? I feel like my stepdad really, really hates me and is only around because of my mom. He said Im YoUR fAtHeR fIgUrE Im TrYiNg To Be NiCe GeT ThOse NeGatIve ThoUghTs OuT Of YoUR MiNd like he is trying to SHAME ME.

There is literally nothing in the law or constitution that says people can't criticize others' acts. I did just that while I was minding MY OWN business and he literally overbears me and says he doesn't. What is wrong with him 🤦‍♂️ he thinks I get defensive and offended but HE is the one of all that

My stepdad DOES have a history of being a giant CREEP. 10 years ago when I was just a child I was in trouble and he threatened to take away ALL my clothes except my white underwear. Biggest reason why I hate him to this day. There were worse situations but this is the one.

Explain the positive and negatives down below.

My answer to this is obviously yes, but what are your thoughts?

Why I ask this is because I've spent time here trying to dismantle people's focus on labeling others usually based on a single feature without actually knowing who that person actually is.
Example:
People referring to rioters as "Radical Leftists",
Calling a woman a "progressive" because she's sexually promiscuous
You read silly statements like: "Communists are trying to take over America", obviously these people have 0 clue what communism, socialism, and whatever *isms etc actually are and tend to equate all the *isms they disagree with as the same thing.

I personally think it's quite silly to use these labels because no person is defined by a single characteristic.

I will use myself as an example:
>If people *only heard my opinions about money in politics, they will call me a lefty, or progressive.
>If they *only heard my opinions about "LGB" they will also say I'm a lefty, or progressive
>If they *only heard my opinions about "T" and every other alphabet after T: some will say I'm a right-wing intolerant bigot, some will say it's just commonsense.
>If they *only knew *some of my thoughts about Donald Trump, the positive ones perhaps with the negatives hidden, they'll call me a right-winger, possibly alt right if they didn't know what colour I was.
>If they heard *only my opinions on police brutality, they'll call me a radical lefty
>If they heard my opinions about modern art, they'll call me conservative.
>If they knew I was for single payer healthcare system, they'll call me: a socialist, some will say I'm a communist,

So given that I'm all these things at the same time, what am I?
Left or Right
Progressive or Conservative
Socialist, communist or Capitalist

Each person is a mix of things, I believe that if everyone was given the same information, in a concise manner and free from bias, we would find that most people are just reasonable and labels are meaningless and creates division.

"Letter from a Birmingham Jail [King, Jr.]" April 16th 1963
I must make two honest confessions to you, my Christian and Jewish brothers. First, I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a "more convenient season." Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.
I had hoped that the white moderate would understand that law and order exist for the purpose of establishing justice and that when they fail in this purpose they become the dangerously structured dams that block the flow of social progress. I had hoped that the white moderate would understand that the present tension in the South is a necessary phase of the transition from an obnoxious negative peace, in which the Negro passively accepted his unjust plight, to a substantive and positive peace, in which all men will respect the dignity and worth of human personality.

I don't know if maybe I'm just tired or annoyed or angry but it seems to me that white people who only want "blissful" ignorance or who say "Let's not talk about race at all and all the problems related to race will go away" are 10 times more frustrating than all the racists I've met combined.

The reason I ask is because of BLM protesters in the UK who have defaced and demand the removal of statues depicting him.