|
I think we got a generation where being "edgy" was equated with being conservative. Just being bigoted was drilled into everyone's head as being "subversive" and counterculture until totally unsurprisingly people took the message, dropped the very thin level of "ironic" that shielded 'comedy" and just said "no, that is pretty much right". Like years and years of "blacks steal stuff! just kidding guys, the joke is that I'm not racist" just turned into the message of "black people steal stuff" mixed with "also THEY don't let you say that, so fight back". To a lot of people.
|
#
¿
Dec 19, 2016 17:32
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 13, 2024 23:03 |
|
|
falcon2424 posted:
Somethingawful is such a weird example to use though. It's toned down in the last few years but somethingawful was all about bigotry said 'ironically" for a long long time, Like it wasn't censored, it was encouraged to say that stuff, but you had to promise you didn't mean it.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 19, 2016 20:01
|
|
|
Jeffrey of YOSPOS posted:In a universe where the far right were actually dominant on the internet, this story would be about how it took facebook a few days to ban feminists from your group. You are not describing a dominant group. A voice can be dominant without being the most numerically represented voice. In fact that is pretty much "white dudes: the summary"
|
|
#
¿
Dec 19, 2016 20:25
|
|
|
Jeffrey of YOSPOS posted:One group makes the rules and decides who is allowed to post. Another registers, antagonizes the group for a few days before being banned. No one could reasonably cite the presence of trolls on stormfront as evidence that leftists dominate online, it's the same here. If trolls were decimating the ability of stormfront to hold and conduct conversations to the point even the people trying to run stormfront could not stop them then yeah, absolutely, that totally would be dominance. And is absolutely a thing that happens to tons of minority groups, even when they run the website.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 19, 2016 20:46
|
|
|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:This is the crux of it, really. The truth is that center-left liberalism is by far the dominant social viewpoint on the internet, much like everywhere else. Far-right hysteria feels dominant because it's antagonistic to the norm. If the far right were really so dominant, we wouldn't bother talking about it, it would be normal. I honestly think that for a lot of people the actual opinion they hold is something like "you know, white people actually are superior to black people if you got right down to it, but it's rude to say that" and similar far right stuff but with modulation through "but don't be mean about it". Or people that see equality as a luxury thing, like if we have the time and money we should let people have rights but if there is budget cuts only the straight white whatever men REALLY have inalienable rights and just are nice enough to give them to others when they can or whatever. I think lots and lots and lots of people have very bigoted core worldviews but are well meaning and nicer about it than nazis.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 19, 2016 23:10
|
|
|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:Sure, and I'd go so far as to say that's my majority experience of the american south, and a minority experience of northeastern cities. Not so much on the west coast except Arizona and northern california. But I think urbanization has been slowly chipping away at that mentality as far as the prevailing american narrative goes. It's an easy position to hold when you live in the boonies or a gated community, it's much harder when you actually have neighbors and co-workers and people you see on the subway every day that aren't white or straight. I think the south is certainly where you'd go to find it expressed really loudly and directly, but I do think that is the dominant narrative in US culture. I think it's baked into the default worldview people are raised in. I'm sure I'm not immune either. It's very deep in american culture and even the english language. Like even talking about "race" at all is only done through the lens of the race classification systems that white supremacists made up. Talking about gender is only done from the perspective of the western gender dichotomy even if you are talking about stuff outside of it, etc, etc.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 19, 2016 23:46
|
|
|
Pharohman777 posted:One of the things I have seen in a community that is half alt-right/half-exiled progressive is that the constant calls for ideological purity and hatred of the Cis White Male as well as differing levels of value that people place racism/sexism issues on creates a lot of exiles in the progressive community. People who suddenly lost a lot of friends because of their view on allowing Milo Yiannopolus to speak, or other thorny issues radical progressives scream about. The tension between the rule of law/freedom of speech/how harmful speech is/presumption of innocence and progressive ideology is also a thing that gets people tossed out of progressive circles. I think that is the thing though, the social norm, conversations on line can go really far right without much real complaint until really really far extremes, but if anyone ventures beyond the very very shallowest steps towards the left you immediately get this sort of crybaby "if you think about it most racism is against whites and everyone hates men! I am disengaging in this conversation". Like what is "radicals" is basically anything one inch left of the center while the right gets to go 90% of the way to literal nazis before typical internet conversations start to say "woah, whats this".
|
|
#
¿
Dec 20, 2016 00:57
|
|
|
Sulphuric rear end in a top hat posted:Lot's of "white people are the problem" up in here. I think that the left should double down on this rhetoric since it is working so well for them. To quote myself from like ten posts ago: I think that is the thing though, the social norm, conversations on line can go really far right without much real complaint until really really far extremes, but if anyone ventures beyond the very very shallowest steps towards the left you immediately get this sort of crybaby "if you think about it most racism is against whites and everyone hates men! I am disengaging in this conversation".
|
|
#
¿
Dec 20, 2016 13:12
|
|
|
LinYutang posted:Also, liberal tactics of maintaining orthodoxies with shaming or social exclusion will really only work among their in-groups, like in academia or their internet subcultures; a certain small number of people will feel good about it, since adopting a self-effacing bias can promote feelings of collective identification. But the far right can't be silenced or intimidated by liberals weaponizing moral shame against them. That is bullshit though. Lots of social norms that used to be universal are universally mocked now.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 21, 2016 01:55
|
|
|
Kilano posted:It's because the right has a safe space for white nationalism and bigotry. We push them into seeking out these places where they are accepted and feel welcome. All the news and social media they consume into adulthood reinforce these beliefs. The flip side of this is that you can't actually win here because they ALWAYS have this option, and they can just keep raising the demands more and more no matter what. Which is a thing that happens in a lot of online communities, constant threats where that particular side is constantly deciding to define what can or can't be said before they declare their white rights whatever and derail whatever conversation was supposed to happen.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 21, 2016 02:04
|
|
|
Kilano posted:I think if you can stop even a minority of these people from becoming "alt right", it's worth not making comments like this That is pretty much the reason the alt right dominates so much of the internet. The constant threat that if everyone doesn't use their terms that they will run off and heil hitler or whatever.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 21, 2016 04:33
|
|
|
OneEightHundred posted:This thread got started in the first place because the alt-right is apparently overrunning discussion venues, that's kind of the opposite of running off at the first sign of trouble. Run off with the conversation, not physically run away. The guy threatening that if he saw jokes he's teen become a nazi. Owlofcreamcheese fucked around with this message at 13:10 on Dec 21, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Dec 21, 2016 13:06
|
|
|
I am feeling really surprised the concept of "they just need to get laid to be more leftist" is getting traction in this thread. It seems like such a school yard insult type of logic. The whole thing of calling people virgins is weird, it's such a teenage type of concept. No significant population of adults in america are virgins. Quick search of the internet says 1.2% of men and .2% of women never have sex. I honestly can't believe this thread is giving the amount of credence it is to the idea "bro just needs to get his dick wet to embrace more marxist ideas of wealth distribution and more social equality of minority groups". It feels like logic on the level of calling people "cucks".
|
|
#
¿
Dec 30, 2016 17:05
|
|
|
Tesseraction posted:Good thing no-one was saying this then. Do you have any actual data saying right wing people are "unpopular at school"? That doesn't even sound right. When I think stereotype of far right/bigots in highschool I think either white trash hayseeds who have a ton of stereotypes about their sex lives but none of them involve not getting any, or I think of the bullies beating up the nerds or the popular kids themselves who have a good reason they would be deeply invested in the status quo of the american hierarchy since they are the ones reaping the benefits of it. Where is the idea that the far right was the kids that were unpopular in school are coming from?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 30, 2016 17:30
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:You are looking at it from a wrong angle. It's just such a weird link to draw. There is no actual data showing it and it doesn't even match up with common stereotypes.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 30, 2016 19:49
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:Yeah, its kind of really silly to pretend social isolation doesn't create radicals. I mean, you'd have to think arab people have secret Terror Genes to believe it applicable in one extreme situation to arabs but not applicable in a way less extreme situation to white guys. But it's also silly to think social isolation is the only cause of radicalization. Make someone live in a society that is terrible for them and you'll end up with people that want to smash that society. But on the flips side if you make a society cater to one type of person they will also radicalize if they see that as threatened. It's not the 'losers' of society that are becoming alt-right, it's the dominant people (white men) that are. Owlofcreamcheese fucked around with this message at 20:59 on Dec 30, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Dec 30, 2016 20:57
|
|
|
Kilano posted:isn't it primarily lower income under educated white men that are radicalizing? You don't lose male/white privilege by being poor. You actually tend to lean on it even harder as it helps you get the job over the other guy (other girl). Lots of low paying jobs are the ones the most open about a white guy being the premium model for the job. They are the people that least would want an even playing field.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 30, 2016 21:05
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:You also don't gain class/wealth privilege purely by being white or male. You might have advantages over someone poor and black that you don't see, and someone who is upper class and female may have advantages over you that you see in the wrong way. That's where intersectionality comes in. Also privilege isn't really even supposed to be a dollar value thing. If you are poor the advantages you get outside of terms of money are the big ones. anyway.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 30, 2016 21:31
|
|
|
It's funny because people were fine for decades when you called certain groups underprivilaged, but the second you said the exact same thing but changed the locus people started flipping out.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 1, 2017 04:20
|
|
|
Honestly it's fun to act like it's a bunch of poor innocents that just are innocently misunderstanding the idea of privilege because of the word. But I am 100% sure if someone in 1970 had called it "squigglysquink" or whatever you'd both have that thing people do with gender science where they dismiss it with "now they are making up words! see how fake this is!". But also you'd just see that people pretty much like their privileged position so don't want to discuss it, and deliberately "misunderstand" it. It's not some recent usage that is "poisoning" it, it's that people with it don't actually really want it to go away and wish people would stop mentioning it at all.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 1, 2017 17:03
|
|
|
Rakosi posted:This is actually probably true for all sciences, not just gender science. Gender science is pretty privileged compared to the history of gawking that other fields of study and discourse has had to put up with over the centuries. Is it any more intolerable in this case? I have never heard anyone say a quasar is fake because it has a fake name. I have seen a million posts on the internet claiming various expressions of gender or sexuality are fake because they used "made up" names.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 1, 2017 17:50
|
|
|
silence_kit posted:The reason why the word privilege was coined was either 1) because people thought that it would be rude or politically incorrect to refer to some groups of people as disadvantaged (it could kind of make it sound like they have personal issues or something) or 2) to place blame on rich/white/male/etc people for being born that way. It's not really a word with deep meaning--it is just a marketing term, IMO. Privilege is being so supper upset a label dare get applied to your groups and having your solution be that a even more negative label gets applied to the other groups.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 2, 2017 00:04
|
|
|
Okay, but if you find labels antagonizing why specifically should your group get to avoid them and it should fall on the other groups to have them? If you find it harmful or upsetting to have labels why should you get to be the only group that is free of them? Like that is one of the basic cores of 'privilege", the idea that one group is the normal default and everyone else is the deviant. That there are girl's bikes and bikes.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 2, 2017 00:13
|
|
|
silence_kit posted:When I say that the term is antagonizing, I'm not saying that you should never use the term. Maybe your goal is to be antagonizing and to shame people into being better behaved, to vote certain ways, and donate to or participate in certain causes. Okay, so labels are antagonizing and used to shame but your suggestion is we should then NOT use the label on white people and only use it for black people? Come on.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 2, 2017 01:54
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 13, 2024 23:03 |
|
|
silence_kit posted:? I'm not sure where you are getting this from. I never said that black people are privileged relative to white people. You said that labels make you feel bad and attacked, and your solution is that instead of the labels being used on you we should use labels on the other groups that aren't you to say the exact same thing. "labels are for other people, I'm just normal" is a huge element privilege.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 2, 2017 02:02
|
|