[ SECRET POST #3969 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #3969 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.
[Vampire Princess Miyu]


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.
[Disgaea/Soul Nomad]


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.












Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 18 secrets from Secret Submission Post #568.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

Re: Pet Peeves

[soldatsasha]

See and for me that sort of... negative grouping thing is a huge pet peeve. I think it's an incredibly harmful way of speaking about people and trying to spread ideas. When I was big into the social activism scene years ago, we would never have used language like that because it's so fucking damaging. I seriously don't know how the fuck we went from "shit guys we can't use words like crazy because that hurts people" to "white ladies are a walking dumpster fire let's talk about that" in ten fucking years.

When you talk about "men" (or "white people" or any other huge group) you're also talking about minorities. When you say things like your example, you're saying the gay black guy struggling with an eating disorder is also trash. You're saying migrant farm-worker wage-slaves are trash. And so on. You're saying the woman who lives in constant pain with crippling medical debt is garbage just because she's white.

You can't turn around and hide behind "it's just hyperbole!" No it's fucking not. It's not just hyperbole when literally every system of our society is built around pretending these people don't exist. It's not hyperbole to the millions of disenfranchised and hurting people you just said were worthless garbage, just because they ticked some other checkbox on your list of people it's okay to talk shit about.

Re: Pet Peeves

[(Anonymous)]

So, first, the post that we're talking about doesn't contain the word "worthless". Two, I think the argument is broadly true that - setting aside the specific word "garbage" or "trash" - men qua men have those qualities and are affected by patriarchy in those ways, regardless of any other way in which they are oppressed. I certainly don't think that means that they should all be dismissed and are worthless as human beings, and I certainly don't think that's what people mean to say with that.

So I mean let's be specific here about what we're talking about, which it seems to me is this: does the "garbage"/"trash" language carry an unavoidable implication of worthlessness? Or is it a reasonable form of hyperbole to say "trash" and mean "deeply flawed"?

Re: Pet Peeves

[(Anonymous)]

Let’s look at it this another way: how does language like this help dismantle the partiarchy or whatever long term? And what impact does this have on more serious conversations down the line?

Re: Pet Peeves

[soldatsasha]

Trash is literally stuff that has no worth. That's what that word means. So yeah, when you call someone trash you're saying they're worthless. You're saying that person is equivalent to a thing that needs to be thrown away.

I think that's an innately harmful sentiment, even if the intentions behind it are good.

I don't have a problem with people talking about men or white people or Americans or whatever other privileged group as if they're a monolith. It's kind of inevitable, and mostly good, because it challenges minorities within that privileged group to examine their own thoughts and behaviors.

I do have a problem with language that assumes someone is automatically bad just because they fit into whatever privileged group. I don't think it's okay to call people names or insult them for things they can't change about themselves. And I definitely don't think it's okay to use language that reinforces negative self-worth. (Especially since the first and most important battle we fight in activism is convincing minority people that they DO have worth and their voices and lives have value.)

Re: Pet Peeves

[(Anonymous)]

This is well said.

I mean, I have times where I honestly feel like the only non-sexist straight man I've ever had any acquaintance with is my father (and that's because he's literally the biggest and most well-read feminist I've ever met). And I get angry - like really fucking pissed off - and want to make generalizations about straight men. Like one of the anons above says, sometimes it genuinely feels deserved.

But then I think about how incensed I am by the left's tendency to generalize about white women and white feminists (of which I am both), and I use that to remind myself that it's probably every bit as annoying to straight men when I generalize about them in negative ways. So I really try not to.