fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #3906 ]

Hey, here's a fun idea: How about we not police how other people use language?

What?

(nayrt) Uh, no? Because when someone uses a pejorative that's based in the idea that having an active sex life is a dreadful, shameful thing, they should be told not to! Because that's unhealthy!
Similarly, if someone calls someone else a girl, because being a girl is obviously a terrible thing, they should be told not to. If someone calls someone gay, because being gay is obviously a terrible thing, they should be told not to.

Shall I continue?

Okay, look.

I hear you. I understand what you are saying, and I agree that those things are wrong.

BUT. I was sexually abused as a child and I was told I had to feel bad about it, but the truth is, I didn't feel bad about the actual acts. I felt bad because everybody kept telling me I had to feel bad, so I internalized the idea that sex is bad. So I am uncomfortable having a sex drive.

OP is using slut as a pejorative because they're dumbing down how the idea that Tom Hiddleston has supposedly had multiple partners makes them feel. They're saying two things: One, that TH having multiple partners is something they find untrustworthy about him because of what they think it means about his ability to engage with someone on an interpersonal level. Secondly, they're saying they're jealous that TH has supposedly had multiple partners because they find him so completely unattractive that the idea that anyone else could be attracted to him is literally incomprehensible to them. But they also feel unattractive themselves, and so it adds another level of nuance to this conversation.

TL;DR: Your feelings are hurt by seeing slut used in a negative way. For some of us, the idea that your feelings are hurt by it is confusing to us because you seem to think that how you feel about something gives you the right to dictate how we feel about something.

*OP: If I've misinterpreted your secret, I deeply apologize. It is not my place to speak for you. I am merely explaining how it reads to me. I recognize that how it reads to me may not be your intent.

(To be clear: I am not AYRT but I am the anon who posted the original post saying that using "slut" as an insult was bad)

I don't want to come off as overly harsh here, because your reactions and feelings are obviously valid in and of themselves. At the same time, first, I think your reading of OP's secret is incorrect: it reads to me like they're using "slut" quite simply as an insult. Obviously, I could be wrong there, but that's certainly how it reads to me. It doesn't read to me like OP is necessarily coming from the same angle, with the same experiences, as you are.

Second, I think there's a complex relationship here between morality, personal reaction, and use of language. There are all kinds of personal feelings that one can have about sexual promiscuity and sexual behavior. At the same time, I don't think there's anything morally wrong with being sexually active and having multiple partners. But we live in a society that often does morally condemn doing so. And the use of "slut" as an insult - and other features of "slut-shaming" - is a way of using words that enforces that judgment. And so I believe that it is wrong to use "slut" as an insult in that way - certainly, if you're going to use it without any other context or qualifiers as an insult, that's not good.

And, even more importantly and more broadly, setting aside the specific word usage, that cultural attitude which underlies the use of the word "slut" as an insult is something that I believe is wrong and that I disagree with and that I think is necessary to condemn. So it's not just a question of words here; it's a question of societal attitudes and moral views. It seems to me that your personal reaction to this topic is something that's different from the cultural attitude that I'm talking about - and on your reading that OP shares the attitude you do, I can understand where you're coming from with your response. I just don't think that OP actually shares your attitude.

And then, lastly, I think that all of those things are true generally with language - not just in this case. Choosing to use specific words is a conscious decision to act that affects the world, and it's also a reflection of underlying values and norms. And so it doesn't seem to me that a blanket policy against language-policing makes sense. I think it's valid to be critical of specific word choices - more than that, I think it's necessary - and it's not hard to think of cases where word-policing seems obviously correct to me (in the case of slurs, for instance).

So, I guess that's where I'm coming from.

I completely understand where you're coming from, and I appreciate that you took the time to hash this out with me.

And then, lastly, I think that all of those things are true generally with language - not just in this case. Choosing to use specific words is a conscious decision to act that affects the world, and it's also a reflection of underlying values and norms. And so it doesn't seem to me that a blanket policy against language-policing makes sense. I think it's valid to be critical of specific word choices - more than that, I think it's necessary - and it's not hard to think of cases where word-policing seems obviously correct to me (in the case of slurs, for instance).

We're both saying the same thing from the opposite point of view. You're saying "This word makes people feel bad, stop using it entirely" and I'm saying that for many of us, we can understand intellectually that words make you feel bad because you keep telling us. But emotionally you won't tell us why they hurt you or where they hurt you, so when you tell us we can't use them, you deny us a tool we need to use to better understand you.

That's why my last statement was feeling based: You don't get to dictate how I feel. I don't get to dictate how you feel. And frankly, until and unless OP decides to join us for this conversation, we're not actually going to know how they feel.

I guess what I'd say is that words necessarily have some kind of existence that is distinct from the particular private feelings of a given individual.

So I can't tell you how to emotionally react to the concept of sexual promiscuity (nor would I be interested in doing so). But I do think we can reasonably talk about how we use specific words, and whether it's appropriate to use specific words in specific ways. And talking about how we use words isn't the same as talking about who is allowed to feel what.

I agree with you, but you're not explaining yourselves well.

You're saying this word is bad and going to the extra mile to say that people who use the word are bad. A lot of the people using the bad words aren't bad in and of themselves, they're exploring boundaries. They're testing limits.

When you tell them (us) that they (we) can't use words because "they're bad" but you don't explain WHY they're bad, it makes us want to say them more because you're hurting our feelings, and we want to hurt you back.

So the dichotomy here is that you think by removing the word from existence entirely, you can remove the pain it has caused for centuries or millennia or whatever in the past. But that's unrealistic because the word exists in and of itself and meaning can be personal. When you tell us we're bad for using it, but you can't explain why, we begin to tell ourselves that we are bad. Because you won't let us explain that it's more complicated than a simple good/bad split.

Language is inherently manipulative. It's actually heartbreaking. It's why we parrot the phrase "no excuses, just apologize." Or, "sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me." Literally every person on Earth knows that isn't true because someone has used words to hurt them. But they tell people: "Hey, this hurts me!" and because of how we're socialized culturally we say: "That's fucking idiotic. It's a word. How can it hurt you?"

First: I think a lot of the lack of explanation is just that people assume a level of familiarity with the underlying discourse, arguments, meaning, concepts, etc. And I don't think that's incorrect, as much as it can be frustrating. I don't think it's practicable to have the complete, down-to-the-bedrock conversation about the whole structure and worldview every time you want to talk about these things. And so people for the sake of convenience use shortcuts. So for instance I tend of assume that most people on fandomsecrets have at least some base-line level of familiarity with the concept of slut-shaming and the underlying reasons why someone might object to it. Maybe that's an unfair assumption to make, I don't know. But I think it's inevitable and inescapable in any conversation.

Second: I think that there are two different senses in which we are talking about a word being "bad" and it's important to keep both of them in mind. There's the concept of personal pain, and hurt, and offense. And that's important and I don't want to diminish that. But there's also the idea of the effect of words - not just in terms of personal impact, but in the way that we understand and act in the world.

So the argument would be that the use of the word "slut" entrenches certain ideas about sexual behavior and morality, and that those ideas and conceptual structures are actively harmful in a practical sense, over and above the emotional reaction that people have to the words, or to the underlying topic of sexual behavior in society.

(no subject)

sadiesockmonkey - 2017-09-14 00:40 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2017-09-14 01:04 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

sadiesockmonkey - 2017-09-14 01:11 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2017-09-14 02:04 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2017-09-14 11:23 (UTC) - Expand

NAYRT

When you tell them (us) that they (we) can't use words because "they're bad" but you don't explain WHY they're bad, it makes us want to say them more because you're hurting our feelings, and we want to hurt you back.

First of all, the person (and many people throughout discussion of this and other words) have said WHY this word is bad. You can feel however you want about sexual promiscuity, but slut is a judgment based word basically saying that unless people are pure, they are to be looked down upon. And even the appearance of seeming like you might enjoy sex is enough to look down upon someone and declare them and their opinions unworthy. This is why it is a "bad" word to most people.

And that attitude you have is very immature. "Someone says something I don't like so I'm going to go out of my way to hurt them more!" How about no. Someone saying that "slut" is a bad word to use isn't attacking you personally. They are attacking the history and (often) disgusting and degrading use of that word. They are asking you not to use it. Someone is not making any kind of attack on you personally or your views by asking you not to use that word, and turning it into a personal attack and choosing to double down on the offensive behavior is not a good response at all.

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2017-09-14 02:04 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2017-09-14 03:09 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2017-09-14 06:57 (UTC) - Expand

DA

(Anonymous) - 2017-09-14 02:49 (UTC) - Expand

Re: DA

sadiesockmonkey - 2017-09-14 03:04 (UTC) - Expand

Re: DA

(Anonymous) - 2017-09-14 03:46 (UTC) - Expand

Re: DA

sadiesockmonkey - 2017-09-14 04:06 (UTC) - Expand

Re: DA

(Anonymous) - 2017-09-14 05:06 (UTC) - Expand

Re: DA

sadiesockmonkey - 2017-09-14 05:22 (UTC) - Expand

Perfect comment is perfect. Thank you. I know I wouldn't have been able to put together a reply that was nearly so articulate or sensitive to the feelings of the user you replied to. :)

More love for this comment. Couldn't agree more.

WTF? No. OP used a shitty insult based on a false concept. Calling Tom Hiddleston a slut is slut-shaming, just as it would be if OP had called a female celeb a slut. And we who live in the present day and aren't assholes are down on slut-shaming. It's pretty simple.

You are not listening to me.

You are talking over me.

What I've said calls your world view into question and makes you uncomfortable because you would rather pretend that the world is black and white. It is not.

For all of these reasons, I am ending the conversation here. I said what I meant quite clearly and you don't have the know-how to engage with me respectfully, so we are done.

Dude. Dude. I can't be talking over you, this is my first comment in this section.

What I've said calls your world view into question

Um. What? All you said was that you felt AYRT was trying to tell the OP how to use the word slut. And they were, in so far as they were saying, don't use it as a pejorative because that's shitty. Which is an extremely reasonable thing to say to someone who said something slut-shamey.

"What I've said calls your world view into question and makes you uncomfortable because you would rather pretend that the world is black and white. It is not."

Uhhh, aren't you telling this person what they think and feel here? Which you seem to have a problem with when you feel it's been done to you?

So you do understand what I'm saying, you're just mad that I'm shifting the paradigm.

That's exactly what I'm doing. When I'm using "you're" I mean it in a general sense to apply to everyone who thinks in a black-and-white dichotomy.

This makes you angry because as a reader, you read it, you internalize it, and you think I'm calling you, specifically, names.

And yet, when you then do the same thing to me, you tell me I'm not allowed to be upset about it.

We have to destroy the idea that language is something that's done to us rather than something we are actively using. I get why people find me confusing and upsetting and why they shout at me. It's because they think I'm condescending and that I think I'm better than them, and they get defensive.

That's not how I see myself. I'm not asking you to agree with me, I am asking you to understand me. But because I make statements that I intend to have interpreted by the person to whom I am speaking as questions, and because the person to whom I am speaking interprets them as statements about who they are as people and how it impacts their self-worth, they want to hurt me.

And yet, when I put it as plainly as: "You're hurting my feelings. You're telling me I'm not allowed to be upset about the fact that you're hurting my feelings, and I get so frustrated about not being understood, I lash out and get angry and want to hurt you back.

When I do that? You tell me I'm manipulative and "twisting your words" and "not understanding you."

DA
No you just have a chip on your shoulder and are flipping out at people telling OP not to use a slur out of your personal issues.

I'm sorry you feel that way. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2017-09-14 08:41 (UTC) - Expand

You have personal issues with this subject, and it's pretty clear that those issues are heavily distorting how you view this entire topic of discussion.

Plus the whole, "You accidentally hurt my feelings so I'm going to deliberately lash out and try to hurt you more!" Are you five? Because if you're not five, grow up.

DA, honest to god nothing you are saying makes sense throughout this thread, it's like you're speaking a different language from the rest of us. I truly have no idea what point you're trying to make here. OP was simply trying to remove the stigmatizing and loaded language behind "slut" and say it's not a bad thing to have sexual experience, or several partners. I have literally no idea how someone could object to that.

honest to god nothing you are saying makes sense throughout this thread, it's like you're speaking a different language from the rest of us. I truly have no idea what point you're trying to make here.

I'm so relieved that you said this. I wasn't sure if maybe it was just me.

Is it THAT hard just to say, "Oh sorry, I phrased that badly, what I REALLY meant was..."? You know you can't gaslight us into thinking this is where you were all along when your original comment (and all the subsequent batshit ones) is still right there, right?

Dude, no one is trying to hurt you, or tell you you're "not allowed" to be upset. I never told you any of that stuff (maybe you're conflating me with a few other anons, though).

You do seem to be trying to tell other people what's going on in their minds though with all the "you understand," "you're mad," and "you read it, you internalize it, and you think I'm calling you, specifically, names." Unless everyone's supposed to interpret those statements as questions?

Hey, here's a fun idea, maybe don't police other people's right to dislike insults?