|
It seems that the much maligned SJW and associated groups including but not limited to otherkin are evidence of privilege theory becoming more widespread, which should be celebrated. I'm reminded of studies I've seen that have shown that while we bemoan poor spelling and text speak online, the number of people writing on a day-to-day basis has gone up considerably with the advent of the Internet. I agree with an above poster that it is not the theory itself that is the issue, it's a shallow understanding of it. I'd see the rise of some people using the vocabulary of leftists to bully others not as a condemnation of leftists but a side effect/growing pain of the concepts entering the collective consciousness.
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2014 20:50
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 11, 2024 21:07 |
|
|
Slobjob Zizek posted:I think our ability to disseminate information cheaply has outpaced the general level of critical thinking in our society. Many of my friends are run of the mill democrats who are not activists or particularly politically aware. They are not familiar with privilege theory or any other radical leftist concepts except in the most vague sense (or to laugh about tumblrcon). However, I've noticed a shift in behavior. Just as recently as a few years ago I could hear my friends dropping "human being" and "slut" left and right, but now among the same individuals those words are never uttered. I think the work of leftists has an important effect even on those who will never be more than dimly aware of their work. They are, in effect, shifting the Overton window, at least for those who would call themselves "moderate democrats" or apolitical (but leaning left).
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2014 21:43
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:There is a negative aspect to it as well, however. For example, there's a number of people saying that if you're a man, you should avoid walking directly behind women or close to women so that you don't intimidate them. The issue is that all these things are an evolving process and many things that seem weird now are there to address a previous issue. Regarding men walking behind women - it's that men sometimes walk right behind women for the purpose of intimidating them. When confronted, they would say "I didn't know what I was doing was scary!" (the cousin of "Can't you take a joke?") Being able to separate the genuinely clueless from the malicious is doable on a case-by-case basis but to save time, some have issued the blanket "Don't walk right behind a woman," as a way to try to stop these people who are trying to lawyer their way out of the consequences of knowingly acting in bad faith. Like the privilege theory discussed previously it is often applied in a shallow manner not entirely in keeping with its original purpose.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2014 23:02
|
|
|
Basically "tone argument" is a form of concern trolling when it's used to tell ignored people to shut up and play nice. But if it's not concern trolling it shouldn't be dismissed out of hand. In other words, it's important to pay attention to who is mentioning tone and why, just like it makes a difference if (for example) someone brings up men whose sexual assault by women is not taken seriously whether or not the person bringing it up is in fact invested in the well-being of victims of sexual assault or are only pretending to care in order to try to diminish the voices of female victims of sexual assault. I would love the phrase "concern trolling" to enter academia.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 4, 2014 19:48
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:Basically, it's not really possible to refute a concern trolling accusation, because it's entirely intention-based. Acting in bad faith is a concept that is discussed in court. Concern trolling is just one form of being a bad faith actor. I agree it's difficult to refute such an accusation online, but in a real-world context (especially politics) a person's (politician or pundit's) background can usually give you a very good idea as to whether or not the person truly cares about (topic du jour).
|
|
#
¿
Dec 4, 2014 21:29
|
|
|
I have to admit I have been conflicted about the best way to approach one recent web-based attempt at activism. In the wake of the Garner and Brown grand jury decisions, the twitter hashtag #CrimingWhileWhite has been trending. In the hashtag, white people describe committing small crimes and being let off easy by police in order to highlight the difference in treatment that they receive versus what black people discriminate. However, the general consensus is that this hashtag is counterproductive.Kara Brown posted:Who is this helping? How is this helping? These are questions that all allies should be asking themselves. Because really, what are black people supposed to do with these stories? They don't really make us feel better. They don't embolden us with knowledge or tactics that we can use to fight the system. And they simply confirm what we already know: white privilege is loving amazing. I live in Texas. I know some dyed in the wool conservatives or "moderates" or "libertarians" in the flesh. People who do not have any minorities in their social circle. People are discussing the #CrimingWhileWhite hashtag in their mostly white social media networks. Kara Brown writes "Who is this helping? How is this helping? These are questions that all allies should be asking themselves." Presumably the people using the hashtag are outraged by the recent decisions and are trying to help the black community by trying to show their mostly white social circles the discrepancies that exist. I know people who have never heard of privilege theory and probably wouldn't get it or accept it, but they can understand what is illustrated by #CrimingWhileWhite. At the same time, many voices are speaking out, saying this is not helpful and is taking the focus away from where it belongs, once again making white people the stars of the show. I see what they are saying and I agree that in the activism milleau it is a distraction from what's important. But I also think that it's going to send the message somewhere where it wouldn't ordinarily have gone. So now I see that there's activism for activists and activism for people who don't realize it's activism. Surely there's a way to make the two be friends.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 5, 2014 22:25
|
|
|
Helsing posted:It sorta sounds like the Ice Bucket Challenge or Movember. It's a form of slacktivism where you're superficially doing something for a good "cause" but mostly you're getting the opportunity to talk about yourself or share info about your banal adventures on social media. I agree that slacktivism is bad if the participant would have done something actually meaningful/helpful but won't because they feel they have already done something, but if someone would otherwise not be discussing the issue at hand at all and now at least they are giving it some thought, that does have some value.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 5, 2014 23:00
|
|
|
I don't even know what the gently caress anyone is arguing for anymore but I'm pretty sure if I heard someone say "gaggle of gooks" in real life I would be kind of shocked unless they were like 60+ years old. poo poo's racist yo.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2014 17:29
|
|
|
Space Whale posted:Gosh it's almost like the idiomatic phrase "gaggle of gooks" is totally distinct from "g__k" in isolation, or something! I know Space Whale is trolling, so this is more addressed to the lurkers who are reading along at home. There's no context in which saying gook is cool. Don't say it.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2014 20:13
|
|
|
Space Whale posted:I don't want to offend people. OTOH I don't want to have someone say "you said the g-word" every time they want to argue against me, or every time something offending someone is said everything be dropped for an interrogation and chewing with permanent sanctioning against the person who said the word. New people you meet IRL won't know you were spouting off racial slurs. Go forth and say loving racial slurs no more you dummy.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2014 20:40
|
|
|
Space Whale posted:As I said to twodot, do you read twitter? I've seen people apologize and get it far worse. On principle reconciliation is something I'd prefer, but if it comes down to "a little more poo poo now and less later, or more over time," I'd rather get it over with. I don't read twitter but I have participated in local activist groups IRL and nobody ever took me aside and was like "You know Jim over there? He said 'gook' five years ago, gently caress that guy!" Maybe you should take a deep breath, push yourself away from the computer, and go meet some folks outside.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2014 21:24
|
|
|
Space Whale posted:If I didn't live in the deep south I'd do that like a year ago bub. I live in Texas, champ. When I was at one of the save texas schools rallies awhile back I met people who had come in from all over the state, even dumb little towns that you wouldn't suspect would have any kind of activist presence. Look and you will find.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2014 21:28
|
|
|
Space Whale posted:So, about that point I was trying to make that people are more motivated to hunt for poo poo to go witch hunting about and draw oh so many conclusions based on someone's willingness to "apologize" to people enforcing the do not say word list? Who exactly is going to be witch-hunting you? People on SA? Probably not since I don't see you posting a shitload in other threads outside of this one. But if it was eating you that much, pay tenbux and get a new account. Are you worried about people on Twitter? Unless you're already internet-famous I doubt anyone even cares about your post history/tweet history whatever. And if you were internet famous then probably enough people would think you had something worthwhile to say and you should probably chill out. Are you worried about people IRL? Pretty sure they're not going to vet your internet history. I'm being serious here when I say I think you need like a 20 min break from this thread to have a beer and think about other stuff.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2014 21:44
|
|
|
Space Whale posted:People get fired for thought crime. There's a getting racists fired tumblr for internet detectives, as a matter of fact. If this worries you, do not post things on the internet with your real name. Do not post enough identifying information about yourself that people could piece poo poo together. (This is actually good advice for everyone.)
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2014 21:52
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Also, shout out to defender of the white race WORST FORUMS GUY who would just love to be participating in this discussion, but unfortunately is on probation so is limited to sending me a PM consisting of the word "human being" repeated 500 times And here I thought I was the only one who got a nice PM from him.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2014 22:31
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 11, 2024 21:07 |
|
|
Job Truniht posted:The premise of offensive language is that someone has to be offended by it. You guys are playing standins for the offended party. That's equally laughable. And no one who has bothered to read it would interpret all of that as otherwise. Nope wrong. Unless you're the kind of person who complains about spics unless you see a Hispanic person in the room. I hope that if I'm not in the room and someone says "all women are lying hos" my male friends tell that person that poo poo ain't cool.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2014 22:42
|
|