Remember back in the 50s when they'd record like Elvis singing YOU AIN'T NOTHIN BUT A HOUND DOG and then they'd turn the record over and reverse it and it was all NYERP NYERP NYERP NYERP NYERP and people were all like, "That is actually the voice of Satan coming from that song."
Remember back in the 50s when they'd record like Elvis singing YOU AIN'T NOTHIN BUT A HOUND DOG and then they'd turn the record over and reverse it and it was all NYERP NYERP NYERP NYERP NYERP and people were all like, "That is actually the voice of Satan coming from that song."
Remember back in the 50s when they'd record like Elvis singing YOU AIN'T NOTHIN BUT A HOUND DOG and then they'd turn the record over and reverse it and it was all NYERP NYERP NYERP NYERP NYERP and people were all like, "That is actually the voice of Satan coming from that song."
You are the end result of a “would you push the button” prompt where the prompt was “you have unlimited godlike powers but you appear to all and sundry to be an impetuous child” – Zero, 2022
Tears for Fillies - Everypony Wants To Rule Equestria
It seems more a way for middle class white heterosexual people to indulge in...
I'm not finding the right word here.
Like, contemporary culture and how minorities....
this flows better in my head.
I think, ideally, those blogs have value in terms of educating people about social issues and recent developments pertaining to those (i.e. "raising awareness") and providing a kind of online safe space for victims of abuse, rape, racially motivated violence and harrassment, and similar traumas.
In practice I think they're also a way for people vent emotionally (like any blog can be), which can include lashing out at things and people that frighten or anger them. This is not necessarily a bad thing but it's an extension of the Internet's provision of a level of anonymity, which lets people express things that they might not have the guts to say IRL. Among other things, this means you're going to get bloggers and commenters who don't really practice what they preach, though obviously this won't be true of all of them.
The blogs are in some respects kind of insular because certain viewpoints are defined as absolutely unacceptable from the get-go. This is normal in all communities, but because one of the aims of the blogs is often to denounce injustices and proclaim allegiance to particular causes, this curious type of one-upmanship emerges where people seem to be trying to prove that they are more aware and more moral than other people, perhaps out of fear of being hated, perhaps out of a perception that they can win respect that way. Part of this seems to be by demonstrating their hatred for covert racists, misogynists, paedophiles and so on. There might also be people who jump on the bandwagon as an excuse to be vicious to other people, which is something I've suspected at times but is definitely not something I can confidently say I've encountered in the context of tumblr specifically.
And I think that insularity can bring with it a greater suspicion of ofter people and a sincere fear of covert racism and such, which obviously does exist at times in the form of prejudices people aren't even aware of. Yelling at such people can be counterproductive. (I remember when we had the "rape culture" Penny Arcade thread in OTC, a bunch of blogger-types discovered it and promptly started telling us what horrible people we all were before even bothering to explain why. IIRC Justice was there for that one. The dumb thing was that OTC actually leans pretty liberal - or did at the time, not sure what it's like now - and a lot of us might well have been sympathetic if we'd had the issue explained to us instead of being immediately denounced for our ignorance. I think this is fairly typical of negative experiences with so-called "social justice" types.)
At the same time, though, I think that there are people who would rather complain about social justice bloggers than to even attempt to educate themselves about what are, regardless of how bloggers might behave, serious problems that do cause a lot of very real pain to very real people.
And, I may be presuming too much but it's my perception that from all sides there's a tendency to forget about, or disregard, the reality that an action witnessed out of context is not necessarily representative of a person's entire personality and that the reason somebody behaves the way they do is not necessarily because they are just a shitty person (I know the goons in the TVT thread would criticize me for calling this the "fundamental attribution error", but that's the term I know for it and it's a handy term). So it's like those guys harrassing Laci Green, because one poor word choice is held up as proof that she's a bad person, as though that somehow invalidates every other thing she has ever said, which is absurd.
And that's what I wanted to say the other day about do these people ever look at themselves and realize the irony (not hipster irony but actual irony). Because whatever might be the most moral thing to do, it can't be sending innocent people death threats and harrassing them off the Internet.
Laci Green, incidentally is a "sex positive" activist and an outspoken participant in social justice projects (and she does term them that). She also blogged prolifically on the subject, which makes the whole thing particularly bizarre to me.
Remember back in the 50s when they'd record like Elvis singing YOU AIN'T NOTHIN BUT A HOUND DOG and then they'd turn the record over and reverse it and it was all NYERP NYERP NYERP NYERP NYERP and people were all like, "That is actually the voice of Satan coming from that song."
You are the end result of a “would you push the button” prompt where the prompt was “you have unlimited godlike powers but you appear to all and sundry to be an impetuous child” – Zero, 2022
Once again, Fouria G has said what I was thinking but articulated it much better than I could.
Bobby, I don't know why, but any time you--and it is literally just you--embed a video, I get this odd little error thing above it that says "plug-in is missing for this content".
It doesn't seem to actually do anything (I can still watch the video), but it's weird.
And I think that insularity can bring with it a greater suspicion of ofter people and a sincere fear of covert racism and such, which obviously does exist at times in the form of prejudices people aren't even aware of. Yelling at such people can be counterproductive. (I remember when we had the "rape culture" Penny Arcade thread in OTC, a bunch of blogger-types discovered it and promptly started telling us what horrible people we all were before even bothering to explain why. IIRC Justice was there for that one. The dumb thing was that OTC actually leans pretty liberal - or did at the time, not sure what it's like now - and a lot of us might well have been sympathetic if we'd had the issue explained to us instead of being immediately denounced for our ignorance. I think this is fairly typical of negative experiences with so-called "social justice" types.)
The one-upmanship is the problem.
I would not care about these people if they just blogged about finding whatever offensive and why. That might even be a good thing, depending.
I care that they lash out at anyone or anything they've labeled "privileged" (which seems to be their buzzword of choice) and then proceed to make horribly insensitive insults and threats at or about that person or group of people.
I posted my own such experience yesterday. The suffering of others is not a valid excuse to inflict suffering on yet other people.
There's also that a lot of these people seem to be incredibly hateful human beings, which runs totally counter to what they're preaching.
You are the end result of a “would you push the button” prompt where the prompt was “you have unlimited godlike powers but you appear to all and sundry to be an impetuous child” – Zero, 2022
Bobby, I don't know why, but any time you--and it is literally just you--embed a video, I get this odd little error thing above it that says "plug-in is missing for this content".
It doesn't seem to actually do anything (I can still watch the video), but it's weird.
It seems to be caused by an <embed> tag. Older versions of Vanilla used to require those for embedding YouTube videos, but now it just seems to add that extra box. *shrug*
As for the quoting thing: it might be worth double-checking the HTML source before you post, and deleting any stray <blockquote rel="Whoever"> tags. Admittedly the quote blocks don't play nice with the WYSIWYG editor...
Bobby, I don't know why, but any time you--and it is literally just you--embed a video, I get this odd little error thing above it that says "plug-in is missing for this content".
It doesn't seem to actually do anything (I can still watch the video), but it's weird.
I would not care about these people if they just blogged about finding whatever offensive and why. That might even be a good thing, depending.
I care that they lash out at anyone or anything they've labeled "privileged" (which seems to be their buzzword of choice) and then proceed to make horribly insensitive insults and threats at or about that person or group of people.
I posted my own such experience yesterday. The suffering of others is not a valid excuse to inflict suffering on yet other people.
There's also that a lot of these people seem to be incredibly hateful human beings, which runs totally counter to what they're preaching.
The one-upmanship is part of the problem, certainly, but I think it's more complicated than that. Other than that, agreed.
I think "privileged" is a term that's often misunderstood, possibly by many of the people who use it. The social justice use of the term appears to be a borrowing from anthropology and critical theory, where it simply denotes a particular type of bias and isn't necessarily an indictment of the person it describes.
Bobby, I don't know why, but any time you--and it is literally just you--embed a video, I get this odd little error thing above it that says "plug-in is missing for this content".
It doesn't seem to actually do anything (I can still watch the video), but it's weird.
It seems to be caused by an <embed> tag. Older versions of Vanilla used to require those for embedding YouTube videos, but now it just seems to add that extra box. *shrug*
I posted the video without the tags and it worked, so I was about to go all "what manner of witchcraft is this?" but then I scrolled up and saw this post.
No it didn't happen that time. I need to listen to BBVD at some point, relatedly.
Also, I don't know, I hear it used as a pejorative a lot (eg. "you privileged Nazi douchebag", as I've been called).
Yeah, to me that's a misuse, as well as being obviously needlessly offensive. I mean, if a person really was a Nazi (obviously you're not one), tacking a "privileged" on there seems kind of pointless. At best it's mixing curse-levels.
It actually strikes me as horribly counter-productive, because to me the term always seemed like a useful way to gently alert people to an oversight caused by a prejudice they might not even be aware of. I mean, I'm aware that this can come off as holier-than-thou or condescending, but I wouldn't be bothered or particularly surprised if somebody else did the same to me, either, because I've inadvertantly said insensitive things plenty of times before; it happens, and it's better to have such a mistake pointed out to you than to keep offending people with it.
I don't understand why you can't just say "hey that thing you said is kind of offensive to [somegroupofpeople]"
Yeah, to me that's a misuse, as well as being obviously needlessly offensive. I mean, if a person really was a Nazi (obviously you're not one), tacking a "privileged" on there seems kind of pointless. At best it's mixing curse-levels.
It's also the kind of insensitive thing that makes me think a lot of these people are hypocrites. I really do not like being compared to Nazis, for several reasons.
Comments
that movie
it looks cool
"I love the Power Glove. It's so bad."
WHO WILL WIN
i get so angry sometimes i just punch plankton --Klinotaxis
Reading Flex Mentallo.
s'pretty good.
I'd hang out with Flex, he seems like a cool dude.
If one that'd make me look bad by comparison.
In practice I think they're also a way for people vent emotionally (like any blog can be), which can include lashing out at things and people that frighten or anger them. This is not necessarily a bad thing but it's an extension of the Internet's provision of a level of anonymity, which lets people express things that they might not have the guts to say IRL. Among other things, this means you're going to get bloggers and commenters who don't really practice what they preach, though obviously this won't be true of all of them.
The blogs are in some respects kind of insular because certain viewpoints are defined as absolutely unacceptable from the get-go. This is normal in all communities, but because one of the aims of the blogs is often to denounce injustices and proclaim allegiance to particular causes, this curious type of one-upmanship emerges where people seem to be trying to prove that they are more aware and more moral than other people, perhaps out of fear of being hated, perhaps out of a perception that they can win respect that way. Part of this seems to be by demonstrating their hatred for covert racists, misogynists, paedophiles and so on. There might also be people who jump on the bandwagon as an excuse to be vicious to other people, which is something I've suspected at times but is definitely not something I can confidently say I've encountered in the context of tumblr specifically.
And I think that insularity can bring with it a greater suspicion of ofter people and a sincere fear of covert racism and such, which obviously does exist at times in the form of prejudices people aren't even aware of. Yelling at such people can be counterproductive. (I remember when we had the "rape culture" Penny Arcade thread in OTC, a bunch of blogger-types discovered it and promptly started telling us what horrible people we all were before even bothering to explain why. IIRC Justice was there for that one. The dumb thing was that OTC actually leans pretty liberal - or did at the time, not sure what it's like now - and a lot of us might well have been sympathetic if we'd had the issue explained to us instead of being immediately denounced for our ignorance. I think this is fairly typical of negative experiences with so-called "social justice" types.)
At the same time, though, I think that there are people who would rather complain about social justice bloggers than to even attempt to educate themselves about what are, regardless of how bloggers might behave, serious problems that do cause a lot of very real pain to very real people.
And, I may be presuming too much but it's my perception that from all sides there's a tendency to forget about, or disregard, the reality that an action witnessed out of context is not necessarily representative of a person's entire personality and that the reason somebody behaves the way they do is not necessarily because they are just a shitty person (I know the goons in the TVT thread would criticize me for calling this the "fundamental attribution error", but that's the term I know for it and it's a handy term). So it's like those guys harrassing Laci Green, because one poor word choice is held up as proof that she's a bad person, as though that somehow invalidates every other thing she has ever said, which is absurd.
And that's what I wanted to say the other day about do these people ever look at themselves and realize the irony (not hipster irony but actual irony). Because whatever might be the most moral thing to do, it can't be sending innocent people death threats and harrassing them off the Internet.
Laci Green, incidentally is a "sex positive" activist and an outspoken participant in social justice projects (and she does term them that). She also blogged prolifically on the subject, which makes the whole thing particularly bizarre to me.
I also thought it wasn't half-bad, but then I was a kid at the time.
Bobby, I don't know why, but any time you--and it is literally just you--embed a video, I get this odd little error thing above it that says "plug-in is missing for this content".
It doesn't seem to actually do anything (I can still watch the video), but it's weird.
The one-upmanship is the problem.
I would not care about these people if they just blogged about finding whatever offensive and why. That might even be a good thing, depending.
I care that they lash out at anyone or anything they've labeled "privileged" (which seems to be their buzzword of choice) and then proceed to make horribly insensitive insults and threats at or about that person or group of people.
I posted my own such experience yesterday. The suffering of others is not a valid excuse to inflict suffering on yet other people.
There's also that a lot of these people seem to be incredibly hateful human beings, which runs totally counter to what they're preaching.
I wish I could play this.
Also: random thunder.
Not even YOU at home!
If there is one thing I am good at, it is making overly-lengthy posts stating what was so obvious that nobody felt the need to put it into words. Huh. Does it happen if I do this?
The one-upmanship is part of the problem, certainly, but I think it's more complicated than that. Other than that, agreed.
I think "privileged" is a term that's often misunderstood, possibly by many of the people who use it. The social justice use of the term appears to be a borrowing from anthropology and critical theory, where it simply denotes a particular type of bias and isn't necessarily an indictment of the person it describes.
And by that I mean you smell nice.
No it didn't happen that time. I need to listen to BBVD at some point, relatedly.
Also, I don't know, I hear it used as a pejorative a lot (eg. "you privileged Nazi douchebag", as I've been called).
In other news, my spelling is degrading. I can't spell either "pejorative" or "privileged" right anymore.
Yeah, to me that's a misuse, as well as being obviously needlessly offensive. I mean, if a person really was a Nazi (obviously you're not one), tacking a "privileged" on there seems kind of pointless. At best it's mixing curse-levels.
It actually strikes me as horribly counter-productive, because to me the term always seemed like a useful way to gently alert people to an oversight caused by a prejudice they might not even be aware of. I mean, I'm aware that this can come off as holier-than-thou or condescending, but I wouldn't be bothered or particularly surprised if somebody else did the same to me, either, because I've inadvertantly said insensitive things plenty of times before; it happens, and it's better to have such a mistake pointed out to you than to keep offending people with it.
I don't understand why you can't just say "hey that thing you said is kind of offensive to [somegroupofpeople]"
It's also the kind of insensitive thing that makes me think a lot of these people are hypocrites. I really do not like being compared to Nazis, for several reasons.