The authoritarian tone of younger progressives
No, this is not a thread knocking millennials, nor is it a right-wing troll thread.
Is anyone else turned off by the dictatorial tone many young progressives assume when discussing things? This comes up a lot in online activism, a la, "We need to talk about ... " or "Why X is not ok ... " or "You must do X ....:
I find it more and more of a turn off, although I (mostly) agree with whatever is proposed. But, like a lot of people, I resist proselytization and the condescending "I know better than you" tone is too much.
|by Anonymous||reply 115||Last Wednesday at 12:15 PM|
I don’t like the use of “problematic “ —it sounds so judgmental and threatening as if anyone deemed so should be wiped out. Sometimes they are, too. Flinging accusations and tarnishing reputations are hobbies for the keyboard activist. The language and behavior of call out culture reminds me of plotlines in distopian novels.
|by Anonymous||reply 1||Last Saturday at 6:14 AM|
in Edmonton thread they were referred to as "wokescolds"!
|by Anonymous||reply 2||Last Saturday at 6:17 AM|
This thread is cancelled.
|by Anonymous||reply 4||Last Saturday at 6:18 AM|
Isn't Wokescold one of those quaint villages in the Cottswolds?
|by Anonymous||reply 5||Last Saturday at 6:30 AM|
Estate village to the House of Buttafuoco.
|by Anonymous||reply 6||Last Saturday at 6:41 AM|
[quote]But, like a lot of people, I resist proselytization
Oh no, not me. I like it.
If you pay those fellas enough, they’ll do anything.
|by Anonymous||reply 7||Last Saturday at 6:44 AM|
One thing I noticed recently is that back in the 70s, for those old enough to remember, it was the left that was arguing for things like free speech while the right held power and denied it. Now we've come full circle and the right is defending free speech while the left are the ones trying to deny it.
|by Anonymous||reply 8||Last Saturday at 6:50 AM|
These lecturing headlines have become de rigueur in mainstream media, and it's an incredible turn-off. Don't tell me what to do, just give me the fucking news.
|by Anonymous||reply 9||Last Saturday at 6:56 AM|
Best practice is to ignore any media personality with this look:
|by Anonymous||reply 10||Last Saturday at 6:58 AM|
Everyday Feminism epitomizes this tone:
5 Common Behaviors Cis Men May Not Realize Are Abusive (And How to Stop Them)
Women DJs Provide Us With Great Music — We Need to Make Sure Clubs Treat Them Fairly.
First It Was All About Diversity, Then Inclusion. Here’s Why Neither Of Those Are Enough
5 Things I Learned About Holding A Predominantly White And Cisgender Feminist Space: If your feminist space is predominantly white and cisgender, chances are that it’s got a lot of messy unchecked dynamics at play.
|by Anonymous||reply 11||Last Saturday at 7:03 AM|
Transgender People Are Not Included In Mainstream History. Here Are 5 Ways For Anyone to Combat Trans Erasure Everyday.
|by Anonymous||reply 12||Last Saturday at 7:07 AM|
5 Things You Need To Know About Asian Fetishization & White Supremacy
|by Anonymous||reply 13||Last Saturday at 7:07 AM|
Militant vs. intellectual. "Militant" is about eradicating an enemy. Intellectualism is about attempting to understand something for the sake of understanding it. So many areas that used to be zones of open thought and dialogue have now become battlefields of verbal war between opposing enemies.
All by design...
|by Anonymous||reply 14||Last Saturday at 7:07 AM|
R11 Nice finds! are these real or just your own parody? Either way, nailed it.
|by Anonymous||reply 15||Last Saturday at 7:08 AM|
They are all from Everyday Feminism r15. But a ton of other publications (as well as Woke Twitter and similar platforms) use the same formula
|by Anonymous||reply 16||Last Saturday at 7:09 AM|
I was appalled at by the threat that AOC made that she was keeping a list of names of people who didn't vote the way she wanted. That's the ultimate in authoritarianism.
|by Anonymous||reply 18||Last Saturday at 7:13 AM|
R18 It's healthy to have open dialogue in the party not obedience.
|by Anonymous||reply 19||Last Saturday at 7:15 AM|
No University should EVER be a thought "safe space". It should be, intellectually speaking, a free and wild space where every thought, every idea, every ideology can be dissected and debated on its merits by various fields of perspective and based on accumulated knowledge and research, as well as fresh, new perspectives.
|by Anonymous||reply 20||Last Saturday at 7:17 AM|
R20 "...fields [of study, perspective from such study]..."
|by Anonymous||reply 21||Last Saturday at 7:18 AM|
“Can we stop [fill in the blank with anything you disagree with] ?”
|by Anonymous||reply 22||Last Saturday at 7:18 AM|
R22 Translation: "YOU will stop or else..."
|by Anonymous||reply 23||Last Saturday at 7:20 AM|
I must be a real bitch because any time I feel condescended to I have a tone that emerges that shuts it down instantly. I treat everyone with respect and kindness but the second I feel Im not getting that back I turn into a cunt. My best friend calls it my "Linda Blair" mode!
|by Anonymous||reply 24||Last Saturday at 7:23 AM|
I imagine Victorians were equally offended by those new fangled Edwardians, if it's any consolation the same thing will happen to your much despised young people of today.
|by Anonymous||reply 25||Last Saturday at 7:27 AM|
Looking back at what radical leftists sounded like in the 1960s, I really don't see a difference OP
I suspect that the Founding Fathers also had an authoritarian tone.
It's what young people who are convinced of the rightness of their cause sound like in any generation.
|by Anonymous||reply 26||Last Saturday at 7:28 AM|
[quote]I was appalled at by the threat that AOC made that she was keeping a list of names of people who didn't vote the way she wanted. That's the ultimate in authoritarianism
The John Birch Society used to do this is the early 80s, then the Jews took it up when they started to get in a position to push their agendas. In each case it is funny because the John Birchers were anti-communist and were using this communist tactic, and then the Jews picked it up even though they had been punished by the John Birchers in the 50s after being accused of using this same technique.
Now, AOC and her friends have picked up the ball.
Orwell warned of this basically leftist tactic (used against independent leftists, mostly) in the late 40s
|by Anonymous||reply 27||Last Saturday at 7:28 AM|
I am 35, r25, and I see this tone from people in their 30s.
|by Anonymous||reply 28||Last Saturday at 7:29 AM|
[quote] the Jews took it up when they started to get in a position to push their agendas
Again--these fuckers did not tell me about this.
It's like the Homosexual Agenda
I had zero input, have no idea where I can find it, and don't even benefit from it.
|by Anonymous||reply 29||Last Saturday at 7:31 AM|
R24 I refuse to get worked into a hyperventilation over whether or not hoop earring use by non Latinas is "literally violence". I'm always tempted to show the wokescolds (ooh, perfect!) what "literally violence" actually is but there is still enough self-discipline in me to restrain. Meanwhile, gays are being stoned to death for being gay in Brunei. But we have so, much energy and time for this decadent jackass-ery.
R25 Some of us are actually age-ed Millennials who are racking our brains over what the hell happened to American culture in one decade. It's like I'm part of "The Greatest Generation", I feel so far removed in worldview from these lockstep jackboots.
|by Anonymous||reply 30||Last Saturday at 7:32 AM|
There was a great article in the NYT the other day about how "The Democrats on Twitter bear little resemblance to Democrats in real life"
I think a lot of you are getting bent out of shape by a minority of loud voices who realize that outrageous = Twitter Famous
|by Anonymous||reply 31||Last Saturday at 7:39 AM|
R31 aren't the Democrats "in real life" trying to pass a bill that will allow men unfettered access to female spaces? That's outrageous.
|by Anonymous||reply 33||Last Saturday at 7:43 AM|
R19, making threats isn't opening a dialog it's a DEMAND for obedience.
|by Anonymous||reply 34||Last Saturday at 7:44 AM|
And? R28 I qualify as an eldergay and I'm much more in tune with modern thinking than the grim 'know your place' philosophy of the posters here. R30 If the subject doesn't make you hyperventilate then why does it concern you so much? The Brunei situation is being addressed with boycotts and anti PR , led by the types you guys here are hating on, certainly the know your place posters here won't lift a finger. It sounds like you are resistant to something you see as lockstep for your own version of lockstep. Times change and that is disturbing, the more staid you are as a person the more disturbing it is.
|by Anonymous||reply 35||Last Saturday at 7:44 AM|
r35, I suspect you're the one who's staid.
|by Anonymous||reply 36||Last Saturday at 7:46 AM|
I agree, r34. I didn't write that facetiously.
|by Anonymous||reply 37||Last Saturday at 7:49 AM|
It's not just progressives. The ignorance and arrogance of youth has never been as palpable as it is these days. They think there's nothing they don't know and can't stand being proven wrong, especially by someone older with infinitely more life experience.
|by Anonymous||reply 38||Last Saturday at 7:49 AM|
Poor R29, are you feeling left out?
Maybe the notifications are going to your spam folder.
|by Anonymous||reply 39||Last Saturday at 7:51 AM|
And yet progressives don't frighten/annoy/disturb me in any way R36.
|by Anonymous||reply 40||Last Saturday at 7:52 AM|
R35 It concerns me when taxpayer money is being used to support universities that are shutting-down free speech, based on oppressive demands by these cultural tyrants.
And stop pretending like this group of cultural bullies are fun. They're not fun, they have zero sense of humor, they can't see even the gallows humor in difficult situations. They're not adding anything organic to art that investigates "the human condition". They're removed from their real emotions and vulnerabilities and can only feel hysteria or indifference. It's bizarre to witness.
|by Anonymous||reply 41||Last Saturday at 7:54 AM|
R41 [group] hysteria or indifference
|by Anonymous||reply 42||Last Saturday at 7:55 AM|
Sorry, r34, it's hard to tell what is sarcasm on here lately.
|by Anonymous||reply 43||Last Saturday at 7:55 AM|
While I cant stand AOC and her constant demands, I can remember being accused of the same intolerant attitude back when so...
What goes around, comes around and back at ya
|by Anonymous||reply 44||Last Saturday at 7:55 AM|
R40 Until you're put on The List and the horde comes for you.
|by Anonymous||reply 45||Last Saturday at 7:56 AM|
Oops, r43 is meant for r37.
|by Anonymous||reply 46||Last Saturday at 7:57 AM|
R29, have you even unpacked your complementary Toaster Oven yet? You know you don't have to spend your recruitment points on them these days.
|by Anonymous||reply 47||Last Saturday at 7:57 AM|
That gallery @ r10 looks like Triggleypuff fertilized xhyrself and spawned a multitude of yammering culture clones.
|by Anonymous||reply 48||Last Saturday at 7:58 AM|
R44 Everyone comparing these fake movements of today to genuine organic movements of even the recent past, don't seem to understand how invested people had to be in those movements, how much of a personal, meaningful connection you had to build to them.
Vietnam protests included Americans of all temperaments who were DRAFTED for a foreign war. Civil Rights movements of the past included many people who had literally out-run lynch gangs or watched their parents be directed to "Blacks Only" water fountains or were dragged out of gay clubs and had fire-hoses turned on them by authorities.
These people had to meet people and talk to them face to face, make brochures by hand, discuss what was in those brochures, actually go to the places where people were meeting and have genuine conversations -- without everyone's face being covered by a handheld hunk of industrial plastic -- to come to agreements and understandings.
Today, some hyper-consuming beauty queen can sit in he parents' expensive home, click a fish pout, throw a sparkle app over it and done: Activism. Time to go get pink highlights.
|by Anonymous||reply 49||Last Saturday at 8:02 AM|
It doesn't bother me as it bothers you R41, to me it is just the young acting as the young always have and annoying those before them. None of the examples you have given about progressives' 'demands' have had any impact on my everyday life . You just sound reactionary, like paranoid R45 who thinks there is a 'list' and a 'horde' .Any point you guys have is lost in the paranoia.
|by Anonymous||reply 50||Last Saturday at 8:03 AM|
Fox News = “Fair and balanced.”
The Clear Skies Bill = Polluters’ Free-for-all
No Child Left Behind = everybody left behind
“This is not a thread knocking millennials, nor is it a right-wing troll thread“ = “This is the millionth right-wing troll thread knocking millennials.”
How is telling women they can’t have abortions not authoritarian? How is bashing gays and not letting them have equal rights and opportunities not authoriatarian? How is outlawing drugs, prostitution or other victimless crimes not authoritarian? How is letting the Roman Catholic Pope dictate 1,000 things you can’t do and declare himself the hand of God because some Bronze Age fraud forged some stone tablets not authoritarian?
How is a police force that searches or guns down people just for being black not authoriatarian?
How is a President who has to enact all of Russia’s initiatives because Vladimir Putin will cut him off, blackmail or kill him not authoritarian?
Why doesn’t OP flood the DL with these “concerns?”
I swear, the right-wing trolls on Datalounge are the wormiest chickenshits and manipulatirs.
They’re always “concerned Democrats.”
|by Anonymous||reply 51||Last Saturday at 8:03 AM|
R49 Meaning, there is no deeply emotional, meaningful connection to the activism or the people impacted by it.
|by Anonymous||reply 52||Last Saturday at 8:04 AM|
Intolerance goes both ways. And I agree, all those articles saying so and so is “problematic”, is uh, problematic and I roll my eyes. Bloggers and journalists need to stop using “problematic” . I sometimes agree with their points, but then they start writing that something is problematic and their cause is lost on me.
|by Anonymous||reply 53||Last Saturday at 8:05 AM|
R51 I bet your brain can expand to fit all of this in there. Want to give it a try? Can't hold those views AND agree that the militant authoritarianism is silencing free speech and organic, human interaction? I don't believe it. I think you can learn to see where the problems are everywhere and not just through the lens of indoctrination.
|by Anonymous||reply 54||Last Saturday at 8:06 AM|
I totally agree with r49
Another difference to my mind is that the activists of the 1960s and 1970s had concrete goals (desegregation; withdrawal from Vietnam; legalization of abortion)
Many activists today have vague, ideological goals: ie, "decolonize" or "anti-racist actions". What do these really mean?
|by Anonymous||reply 55||Last Saturday at 8:07 AM|
R50 AOC, an elected member of Congress, stated she's "keeping a list" on fellow Democrats. Yes, the authoritarian extremism has become legitimized and even empowered as of recently and yes, it does concern me.
|by Anonymous||reply 56||Last Saturday at 8:09 AM|
I totally disagree with R49 You just described how the modern world works, we don't need to post letters anymore, we have email it makes it easier, similarly protesters can use similar advances in technology to protest. It doesn't make it any less valid. In any case a lot of the moaners here would have been moaning about long haired, unwashed hippies protesting Vietnam.
|by Anonymous||reply 57||Last Saturday at 8:09 AM|
Lifelong liberal and supporter of progressive causes, as well as college teacher for 40+ years. But the classroom has become such an impossible place to have challenging and productive conversations that I look forward to retiring at the end of next year ( and I am only 61, though do commit the unpardonable sin of being cis white and gay male). I'm just worn out.
|by Anonymous||reply 58||Last Saturday at 8:10 AM|
They attack and seek to censor and ban people who disagree with them to promote inclusion.
|by Anonymous||reply 59||Last Saturday at 8:12 AM|
R56 Then you must shiver under the bed with your concern.
|by Anonymous||reply 60||Last Saturday at 8:12 AM|
[quote]Some of us are actually age-ed Millennials who are racking our brains over what the hell happened to American culture in one decade.
Isn't this basically the stranger danger / I really like how you're eating your peas tonight / helicopter parenting just coming home to roost?
|by Anonymous||reply 61||Last Saturday at 8:17 AM|
So AOC really annoys me but I would say four things
1) she's sincere... she may be wrong headed, naive and sometimes heavy handed but she is well motivated
2) she's 25. She doesn't know what she doesn't know.
3) blame the media. She's good for business and they know it on all sides, so as long as she blathers, they'll report it back
4) she may be a flash in the pan. If what I've read is true, she's doing a crap job of being an actual representative for her district (and I admit I have a hard time imagining her knowing how to staff a functional office or being able to take advice on how to staff a functional office.) She may be a one term wonder who gets booted back to obscurity.
|by Anonymous||reply 62||Last Saturday at 8:19 AM|
R57 That's the problem I was trying to point out. Virtual activism is too easy, is given too many social kudos, that people stop looking with discernment at the righteousness, the authenticity of the cause.
Case in point: Cultural appropriation. In my opinion, the dumbest, most anti-human-civilization "cause" I've ever seen and based on pseudo-science assumptions about human motivation, assuming everything MUST be based on some sinister, subconscious motivation. Rather than the more likely reality: If people in one civilization found something beautiful, it's very likely that when people from other civilizations are exposed to it, they might find said things beautiful, too because both civilizations are HUMAN ones and humans respond to and driven by many, shared desires.
R60 No, I just take my responsibility as a fellow torch bearer of a Democratic Republic, seriously. I'd rather not be the one who drops the baton in the marathon if I can help it.
|by Anonymous||reply 63||Last Saturday at 8:20 AM|
And the emphasis on self esteem/everyone gets a trophy in schools, r61.
|by Anonymous||reply 64||Last Saturday at 8:20 AM|
Nag nag nag. Fuck the fuck off!
|by Anonymous||reply 65||Last Saturday at 8:22 AM|
Mostly agree, r62; however, she is 29
|by Anonymous||reply 66||Last Saturday at 8:23 AM|
R56, I'm far more concerned with AOC being called a "Domestic Terrorist" by right-wing media and getting death threats because of it.
|by Anonymous||reply 67||Last Saturday at 8:24 AM|
As soon as I hear someone use the word "problematic " I switch off because they are just using buzzwords like a trend, which kind of undermines many of their passionate arguments. It's as much about their egos as about effecting change.
|by Anonymous||reply 68||Last Saturday at 8:24 AM|
You are looking at it from an old timey viewpoint R63 You see 'effort' as validating the cause but that effort is unnecessary now, that is not the fault of those now in possession of the much easier means to protest . Your torchbearing for the Democrats is admirable but what gives you the right to say yours is the only way of doing it?
|by Anonymous||reply 69||Last Saturday at 8:25 AM|
i feel the same way about 'SJW' R68
|by Anonymous||reply 70||Last Saturday at 8:26 AM|
OP, you need to check yourself. Seriously though these people are just waiting to get punched in the face.
|by Anonymous||reply 71||Last Saturday at 8:30 AM|
AOC is what the govt is supposed to be. One week you're a waitress, you go out and knock on doors, and you make it to Congress. That's how it's supposed to work.
|by Anonymous||reply 72||Last Saturday at 8:31 AM|
R69 It's the lack of organic, invested human connections that's leaving me cold on virtual activism. People are not meeting face to face and having a social interaction not filtered through technology. They are not being forced to sacrifice time and comfort, to build a true understanding the importance of their effort.
When you go out and meet people to discuss these things in person, you're invested, you're using our "live" biological tools of communication to connect and engage. I think that has importance. I think too many people are feeling zero connection to the humanity behind the other party on the screen.
|by Anonymous||reply 73||Last Saturday at 8:31 AM|
R72 So you'd think she'd be sensible and practical, have respect for accomplishments outside of the establishment power structure, rather than be eager to jump on the authoritarian train. She should be the opposite of someone who "keeps lists" of fellow Democrats who simply want to discuss lightly dissenting ideas without being shouted down.
|by Anonymous||reply 74||Last Saturday at 8:33 AM|
Pete Burns warned us all: "I think ill-informed people who rant their views from the rooftops when they don't know the facts are potentially very dangerous because other imbeciles look up to them and rant the same words. If you're going to say something, know what the fuck you're talking about, so you're educating people."
|by Anonymous||reply 75||Last Saturday at 8:37 AM|
Again you're just railing against the passage of time R73. I hear the same arguments about dating and how apps etc have ruined it all, killing face to face meetings etc. We can't uninvent the tech that now is the engine of everyday life, it has changed the landscape, including the issues annoying those on this board. We , as all people seem to, can look back nostalgically and think our way was better, but that has changed forever.
|by Anonymous||reply 76||Last Saturday at 8:40 AM|
It hasn't changed much for the better, r76, if we're honest.
|by Anonymous||reply 77||Last Saturday at 8:44 AM|
R76 You can just go along with everything or take a different path. Just because some product was invented, that doesn't mean people are forced to distance themselves from their humanity to serve mass consumerism trends. Ration it or mix things up. It's not like this is only a very, small part of people's lives and they're still participating in regular social engagement; it IS people's lives, it's exclusively how they're living them.
Tools should serve the artist, not the other way around. That's when it's just idolatry. If you're in service of your phone and it's not in service of you, you don't have a phone, you have a religion.
|by Anonymous||reply 78||Last Saturday at 8:49 AM|
R76 and R78 illustrate the threat of technology in our lives. One wholly, unquestioningly accepting, the other not. Really interesting to watch.
|by Anonymous||reply 79||Last Saturday at 8:52 AM|
Whether life has changed for the better or not is debatable and insoluble. I wouldn't call myself unquestioning R79 but I don't want to waste my time like king Canute against the tide. The tech revolution is the most dramatic that has happened to us in ages, probably since the industrial revolution, we are now bombarded with information, probably too much of it , every aspect of our lives is touched by it and our personal lives and opinions are broadcast in ways they never were . We are clearly struggling to come to terms with all this, but comparing now to times of yore is futile, as is hating on the young, who will probably have to live with the modern world a lot longer than we will and should have a greater say in how it will work.
|by Anonymous||reply 80||Last Saturday at 9:05 AM|
Is technology what explains the trans takeover of every gay org/nonprofit? I still can't figure out how that happened, in such a short time.
|by Anonymous||reply 81||Last Saturday at 9:06 AM|
R51, I agree. Yesterday the president of the US threatened a junior congress woman and urged his followers to harm her.
He did this on social media, on twitter. Today we get a thread about how aggressive the "libs" are on social media,
|by Anonymous||reply 82||Last Saturday at 9:06 AM|
Yes I think it is in part R81 Social media has lifted marginalized groups from invisibility to more prominence
|by Anonymous||reply 83||Last Saturday at 9:12 AM|
It has its importance R84
|by Anonymous||reply 85||Last Saturday at 9:16 AM|
I have never understood the argument presented at r51: basically, OP is complaining about A when he should be complaining about B. How does that even begin to address the concerns the first person has expressed? It's so stupid.
|by Anonymous||reply 86||Last Saturday at 9:37 AM|
Slate does this a lot too
|by Anonymous||reply 87||Last Saturday at 10:18 AM|
R10 All those people need eyeglasses to see.
|by Anonymous||reply 88||Last Saturday at 10:52 AM|
I feel exactly the same way. Many of these people have such an autistic black /white way of looking at the world. Anyone who had spent time in the real world outside a university classroom knows that people and circumstances are really, really fucking complicated. It's become the reverse image of conservatives, the same rigidness but different beliefs . What's really creepy is how these supposed progressives will attack anyone who differs from their beliefs even slightly. It's not enough to mostly agree with them, you have to agree a hundred percent with no caveats and use the exactly correct phrasing or else you are evil incarnate.
|by Anonymous||reply 89||Last Saturday at 11:57 AM|
R89, R58 here: those complications are what we used to try to get students to understand, particularly in humanities classrooms. That is what is in danger of being lost, both by diminishing thr humanities as "impractical" and by the lumpen form of identity politics that pervades academia. I think identity politics and intersectional perspectives are valuable, but not when used to silence questioning and analysis.
|by Anonymous||reply 90||Last Saturday at 1:18 PM|
R51...for most real feminists...not the wokesocold ones on Everyday Feminism but the ones IRL who are risk their lives & livelihoods to truly help women & children...prostitution is NOT a victimless crime.
The left is pushing porn & prostitution...neither of which is good for woman.
I don’t need to debate this with you here & now but that is just one example of how these SJWs & the left ARE NOT PROGRESSIVE & NOT FEMINIST.
|by Anonymous||reply 91||Last Saturday at 1:28 PM|
Last week I got T boned by a pharmacist who ran a red light. Guess what he was doing while he went through a red let? Checking his phone. For God knows what. But distracted driving was not the problem it is now before all of these hand held devices.
Also last week...a 47 yo friend got killed by her 49 yo boyfriend because she wanted to break up with him. All over his FB are photos of the two looking so happy & beautiful. Comments posted about how lucky he is to have her.
I think his ego couldn’t handle it. He had to keep up a front & couldn’t accept her leaving him. It destroyed his image...
|by Anonymous||reply 92||Last Saturday at 1:37 PM|
R90 r 58 Yes, absolutely. Retiring is probably for the best, I can imagine a university must be a fairly stressful environment in today's hyper censorious ,hair trigger culture.
|by Anonymous||reply 93||Last Saturday at 2:07 PM|
I really resent calling them “progressives” or “liberals”. There’s nothing progressive about what they’re doing and to be called liberal, it would insinuate having an open mind and these neo Democrats have no tolerance for any idea that differs with their own.
Let’s call them what they are: fascists. Or wolves in sheeps clothjng.
|by Anonymous||reply 94||Last Saturday at 2:36 PM|
A few months ago Slate ran a piece slamming Quillette. The comments were largely critical (of the piece, and of Slate itself). This one is particularly resonating:
[quote]Sorry, nope. There's a growing trend in liberalism that's increasingly disturbing. Where once the ideology was "let's build a better society through facts, science, education and living to let live," much of it has morphed into "here's what you must believe in, must be outraged about, must think and, most importantly - must not think, or else you're guilty of whatever label we can think up, usually involving an 'ism.'"
[quote]It's thought policing, and the dogma has become theological. It's silencing and shutting down debate, and articles like that that sling mud at any publication brave enough - like Quillette - to call it out for what it is doesn't change the fact that this schism is happening and the people behind it are not all that much more innocent than the people on the other side we correctly deem guilty.
|by Anonymous||reply 96||Last Sunday at 1:47 AM|
Here is what I'm referring to at r55.
A recent contribution from Woke Twitter:
[quote]I hope we all realize that simply "using your privilege" is not a sustainable politic. The end goal is to destroy the system(s) and institutions that facilitate material privilege. Destroying privilege should be the end goal.
This is so far removed from how actual reality works.
|by Anonymous||reply 97||Last Sunday at 5:24 AM|
Here is another one.
The original, rather innocuous tweet:
[quote]Hey, I wrote something! … I’ve been hiring people for 10 years, and I still swear by a simple rule: If someone doesn’t send a thank you email, don’t hire them.
The woke response:
[quote]White people’s fixation on inconsequential social norms is a way to structurally keep out non-white people who lack the cultural capital and privilege to know every one of these inane social rules we’re supposed to perform to be granted the jobs and resources we fucking deserve.
|by Anonymous||reply 98||Last Sunday at 5:32 AM|
I know they would probably want to murder me and dismember me, but I find some of the Russian guys to be quite so damn hot.
|by Anonymous||reply 99||Last Sunday at 5:43 AM|
The "woke response" reported at R98 implies that expression of gratitude is performance, and a white people thing. Seems a little racist.
|by Anonymous||reply 100||Last Sunday at 6:31 AM|
Quite, R100. That response reeks of cultural essentialism.
|by Anonymous||reply 101||Last Sunday at 7:52 AM|
A postmodern critique of identity politics.
|by Anonymous||reply 102||Last Sunday at 9:32 AM|
Is it ok that I dislike both equally, r102?
|by Anonymous||reply 103||Last Sunday at 9:40 AM|
The assumption that people of color somehow don’t have the wherewithal to write a thank you note — and that it’s somehow a “white privilege” thing — is insulting to people of color.
|by Anonymous||reply 104||Last Sunday at 12:38 PM|
The irony is they don’t get that, r104. They just don’t see how being “woke” (god I hate that word) is actually offensive to some groups with its implications.
|by Anonymous||reply 105||Last Sunday at 12:42 PM|
It does bother me. Then I remember that their generation has more to lose.
|by Anonymous||reply 106||Last Sunday at 12:54 PM|
r104 on the original thread, some other people screamed "Ableism!!!" and said "neurodivergent folks might not have the capacity to write a thank you email and you're discriminating against them!!!"
Is this still real life?
|by Anonymous||reply 107||Last Monday at 4:57 AM|
I’m a gay man and was told by a gender non conforming individual in their early 20s that gay men aren’t discriminated against. I said really? Really?
|by Anonymous||reply 108||Last Monday at 5:08 AM|
Here's another tweet that adopts this tone:
[quote]nonbinary people don’t owe you androgyny. trans men don’t owe you masculinity. trans women don’t owe you femininity. gender expectations are arbitrary and trans & nonbinary people don’t have to prove their gender to deserve respect.
|by Anonymous||reply 109||Last Tuesday at 4:57 AM|
Didn't take long for the Twitter brigade to weigh in on Notre Dame.
[quote]I just want to say that I see everyone mourning the Notre Dame and I understand as an appreciator of Medieval and early modern architect and art, but cathedral spaces in Europe are tremendously heavy, filled with a history of violence against European POC.
[quote]Notre Dame is a sacred site & it’s [sic] loss is tragic. But I must ask, why do we not feel the same way about Bears Ears, Grand Escalante, the Grand Canyon, and other Native American legendary monuments? Our gov. is allowing drilling, destroying sacred sites on purpose.
|by Anonymous||reply 110||Last Tuesday at 5:06 AM|
Re: thank you notes for interviews. I actually prefer not to receive them--they feel like an attemp to curry favor or extend the process. I know that's not how they are usually intended, so I obviously don't factor them in, but someone who won't hire someone who doesn't send a bread-and-butter note for what is essentially a business transaction is not someone I would want to work for.
Or, as Miss Davis said about Miss Holm's morning greetings, "Oh, shit-manners," ( or words to that effect).
|by Anonymous||reply 111||Last Tuesday at 5:48 AM|
Another one about Notre Dame
[quote]The right is obsessed with these works of art and architecture (and you can’t force universal meaningfulness beyond this on everyone) as it buttresses ideas about civilizational excellence
|by Anonymous||reply 112||Last Tuesday at 8:53 AM|
“Woke Twitter” Can Be Problematic. Here’s How.
|by Anonymous||reply 113||Last Tuesday at 9:34 AM|
Why your sadness about Notre Dame is problematic
|by Anonymous||reply 114||Last Wednesday at 11:50 AM|
Only Trump is entitled to boss us around!
|by Anonymous||reply 115||Last Wednesday at 12:15 PM|