fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #2584 ]

[ SECRET POST #2584 ]

⌈ Secret Post #2584 ⌋

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

01.

[Danball Senki Wars]

__________________________________________________

02.

[Harry Potter]

__________________________________________________

03.

[Burn Notice]

__________________________________________________

04.

[The Island of Doctor Moreau]

__________________________________________________

05.

[Papers, Please]

__________________________________________________

06.

[Star Trek: The Next Generation]

__________________________________________________

07.

[Pretty Little Liars]

__________________________________________________

08.

[KILL LA KILL]

__________________________________________________

09.

[Labyrinth, The Hobbit]

__________________________________________________

10.

[The Hobbit]

__________________________________________________

11.

[The Hobbit]

__________________________________________________

12.

[The Kiss of the Spider Woman]

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 029 secrets from Secret Submission Post #369.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 1 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

But the answer their is obviously 'you're right it's not all straight people and I shouldn't have said, lets focus on those people who are doing this'. Works everytime, winning hearts and minds, and I have no time for people who complain about tone policing or whatever.

And I've seen the applause thing such a tiny number of times. It's not a real problem, and being outwardly inherently skeptical of all straight supporters isn't okay.

And I've seen the applause thing such a tiny number of times

What magical land do you live in? I've seen the attitude from many people, both in person and online, that they expect gratitude, have a special insight into the oppression suffered and how to overcome it nicely, or deserve benefit of the doubt for simply being so brave as to acknowledge sexism, homophobia, and racism are wrong when they weren't forced to by circumstances of their birth.

The real world.

I don't think it's for nothing that most of the people I've seen making these complaints have invariably belonged to incredibly unhealthy hugbox communities where the only aspect of their identity they have is their sexuality.

If you want to say something about me say it.

What?

What?

Seriously?

You said "the people I've seen making these complaints have invariably belonged to incredibly unhealthy hugbox communities" after anonymously told you that she experienced the very things you're arguing aren't really happening but perpetuated by middleclass people looking to whine about something.

You're basically saying that you think anonymously is exaggerating/lying (or living in a fantasy world, as your previous reply "In the real world" so charmingly implies) and belongs to an unhealthy hugbox community. You're insulting anonymously because her experiences differ from yours and you're asking What? as though she's being the unreasonable one in this discussion.

Have you seen anonymously's posting history. Nothing there to challenge my central thesis, everything to support it.

Hope that helps, god bless.

So you didn't just insult anonymously thoughtlessly, you really do think she's a whiner who lives in a sheltered world/whatever. Is that right?

Then why play dumb after she told you to tell her that to her face? Your previous comments were thinly veiled at best and you obviously meant them exactly as they came across, so why act as though anonymously was projecting? What kind of dick move is that?

Edited (Forgot and changed a few sentences) 2014-01-30 23:32 (UTC)

Re: Feminism MRA and Men

ill_omened - 2014-01-31 00:35 (UTC) - Expand

Well, why can't a cis straight person just look at a post like that and say, "Well, I'm not like this, but I realize a lot of straight cis peopel are so I'll just move on and not attack the poster"? It's easy. If you're that upset about a generalization of a privileged group then you're kind of a big baby, imo.

Anyway, I think you're flat-out wrong. I've seen allies think they deserve a pat on the back time and time again. I think it's pretty natural for people of an oppressed group to be skeptical of people who are part of a group that oppress them even if they have good intentions.

Why can't people just not make vast generalizations to begin with? That would solve the problem neatly.

Why can't people who experience a certain priviledge not demand a minority group without it put their feelings first?

It's not about privileged parties, it happens between underprivileged parties as well. Making vast generalizations about any group of people never goes well no matter who it is.

One underpriviledged party can have a priviledge another does not.

Why can't people just treat people like people and not like two-dimensional members of antagonistic groups?

No, it really wouldn't.

I've seen posts like, "I'm tired of cis straight people that..." qualifying that the post is about cis straight people who do a certain thing, and there are cis straight people that STILL get angry and say they're not all like that.

The example you gave is not a vast generalization. That's fine by me. :)

But what illomened said was "outwardly inherently skeptical of all straight supporters," which is one. Then you said "Well, why can't a cis straight person just look at a post like that and say..." and they can't say that, because the specific example given did include them.

Why should they have to? That specific complaint could be aleviated with incredible ease, by not being dicks.

And I think the way you have framed this is telling.

Into that same old incredibly simplsitic idea that everything should be viewed in terms of the privileged against the unpirvileged. Which simply is never true, nothing ever works quite like that, and it creates an absolutley appaling us vs them mentality.

Yeah, okay, next time I have a professor who generalizes a privileged group I'm part of in order to make a point during a lecture, I am immediately going to go ballistic, assume it's a personal attack on me, and call them a dick.

You know what's also simplistic? Ignoring the fact that there are groups more privileged than others.

I'm not doing that tho.

And talking about it in the context of groups is that exact same issue I'm trying to raise. Everyone is privileged, everyone has areas in which they're not. Ignoring that intersectionality and then attempting to allow 'groups' to control the dialogue in whatever their facet of their identity is not supportable.

But intersectionality exists in groups or categories. People can belong to only a few marginalized groups or many. And I agree with you that people need to acknowledge that these groups interact.

That said, if someone is talking about a specific topic, the most qualified person for dialogue is a person part of the group or groups being discussed. For instance, if someone is talking about transmisogyny faced by PoC, Laverne Cox is more qualified to talk about this than, say, Ellen Degeneres.

I just don't think this is the case.

The best person to diagnose a broken leg is a medical professional, not the person with it.

It generally provides you more insight sure, but that's far from a universal truth, and having seen people lacking the same privilege as me in a few areas - they can be entirely wrong, whilst people without it have been spot on.

I don't disagree that allies/privileged supporters should acknowledge a marginalized person's perspective and let it go if the criticism doesn't apply to them, but in fairness, I've seen members of pretty much every privileged group pull the same "But I'm not like that!" routine. I've even seen people who call out men for doing it proceed to turn around and do the same thing themselves when the topic shifts to, say, religion. It makes me :\

Exactly, and that's something everyone needs to work on because no one is going to belong to every marginalized group.

Absolutely. I guess I just wanted to emphasize that is something that *everyone* needs to work on, and it's not a tendency that's unique to any particular privileged group; it's a human tendency.

The obvious answer is splitting hairs and tone argument?

I don't think your skepticism out-skepticisms fleshy's skepticism, nor they yours, but dang if that ain't a weird argument.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only