There is no such thing as "just trying to be funny", and it is not our job to coddle you while you figure that out. Give me a fucking break with that pity party nonsense. We're being murdered daily and you're worried about shit like this.But if everyone piled on me, called me an awful person, got me fired, and generally tried to hurt me in whatever legal way they could, I don't know that I'd have learned anything. I'd be out of a job and miserable - who would I blame, myself, or them?
You. See the thing is this doesn't actually happen. You know what does happen, though, is that people in minority groups like this are assaulted and harassed constantly every day because someone thinks these jokes are funny but totally aren't racist/sexist guys, tells their friends (some of which might not actually have such "pure" intentions), makes the idea of othering and mockery on arbitrary criteria acceptable for the sake of a cheap laugh.
Woah woah woah, deep cleansing breaths, friend. you've misinterpreted the quote you've used. When he says He's saying, in his theoretical situation "I just got fired for saying x in a context where i hoped to please people. This confused me, and as a result instead of having the desired reaction of regret and positive change, I would be radicalized into becoming angry and whatever subconscious bigotry i did have would become conscious and more fervent as I blamed x minority for my problems." The worrying part about this interaction is that you've just done exactly what he was positing. Not everyone who makes a racist joke is exclusively a racist bigot. There are all sorts of things that people say and do because of the innate human desire to be accepted by the group. This doesn't make these actions okay, but it does make explaining to that person why that action is not okay a reasonable first step. If there is evidence of systematic bigotry by that person, then that's a different story, but you've got to see that pattern of behaviour before you can make that judgement. Like, when someone calls me "a transgendered", or "born a x", it's like, well, that's not strictly accurate, and you take an opportunity to educate in a neutral or positive setting. Or if someone says "I have a tranny friend", it's like, "i don't have a problem with that term, but you gotta know that there are a lot of people who have some serious issues with that term and you gotta be careful with a loaded gun like that in the future". It's always best, when faced with a morally ambiguous comment, to first assume the best intentions of people, not just on the internet, but in real life as well. For one, not everything comes across properly in text without context and for two sometimes have legitimately no idea that something is offensive (this is far more common than you'd believe). Getting angry on the internet is even more useless than it is in real life. real social change is the kind of work that requires the channelling of frustration and anger, and the tempering of expectations with time. You can spend your life angry and vitriolic, or you can put that energy into affecting useful positive change in your environment.I'd be out of a job and miserable - who would I blame, myself, or them?
Thanks. As I recently said to someone, I'm not perfect, but I try to be better. I've found that my life, online and offline, has been made easier by attempting to understand people and their reasons. It turns out, people usually have reasons, consciously or (more often) not, for doing the things they do. I'm a proud member of generation "why".
>He's saying, in his theoretical situation "I just got fired for saying x in a context where i hoped to please people. This confused me, and as a result instead of having the desired reaction of regret and positive change, I would be radicalized into becoming angry and whatever subconscious bigotry i did have would become conscious and more fervent as I blamed x minority for my problems." Thank you. That's exactly what I was trying to say. No one has an obligation to educate anyone else, and anger is absolutely a justifiable response, but I think one of those is going to be more effective at changing attitudes (of course, they both work).
Intent doesn't really... matter, is my point. You are still furthering the idea that hey, its ok to make fun of these people, which can fuel others' bigorty inadvertently, and that's not okay. I don't care how well you mean. I'm not saying you're a racist bigot or sexist or whatever for making a rude joke. You're not really helping, either, however, and the onus is not on me to be able to discern between your ignorance and malice so your feelings don't get hurt. To put that above the well-being and lives of legitimately oppressed groups is the worrying part. I don't care how mean those darn SJW types are. e. but yeah i'll take a chill pill and peace right out like i had been. no idea why i decided to post again, no one likes what i got to say
She's saying there's no shortage of excuses to be mad at what people do accidentally and that when you do, all you're doing is increasing the general level of hatred. If you actually want things to change, you have to be conscious of intent. A person who unthinkingly makes a racist joke is going to be doubly vigilant to never make another racist joke. A person who knowingly, willingly makes a racist joke needs to know it's not okay to do that around you. Both people will have their behavior shaped but the approach taken must be directly opposite in either case.Intent doesn't really... matter, is my point. You are still furthering the idea that hey, its ok to make fun of these people, which can fuel others' bigorty inadvertently, and that's not okay. I don't care how well you mean.
Well, i guess the question comes down to whether or not you feel like human interaction is designed to increase understanding, or to serve you and your personal needs. If I pull someone aside and say "hey, they joke you made is not okay for x reason", then I'm not furthering the idea that these jokes are okay. And that's the situation that both I, and the person you were originally replying to, are describing as an alternative to getting mad and making a scene about it. Even calmly bringing it up at the time, in front of others, is fine as long as you are not demonizing, or talking down to the person. Just make it clear that it's not cool. ^ you know, KB summarized this much better than I did, so just read his comment in the stead of this section. I would argue that, as a human being interacting with other human beings, that that IS your job - to discern meaning in conversation. The point of language is to be understood, and the point of conversation is to ensure proper understanding between others as we share ideas and experiences. To argue that it is not your "job", or that the "onus is not on you" is just shifting the blame. That's like a carpentry teacher saying "well it's not MY problem that you don't understand how to build cabinets". No, the onus is on both people, at an academic level. The teacher must do all they can to be understood, and the student must be willing to work with the teacher until they understand. Does this occur as often as it should? no, because some teachers don't care enough, some students don't care enough, and sometimes neither have the time because of standardized testing. However, you are emotionally invested, and you have the ability to MAKE time. if a student is willing, then there's nothing you can't teach them - and most students are willing.the onus is not on me to be able to discern between that and malice
The unfortunate complicated truth, is that there is. One person's ignorance is another person's violent repression. Here, I see someone confessing for past transgressions, and contemplating how to best bring people to understanding. It would be easy if your genuine right to be upset measured even with the motive of his insult, but it's not always the case. How you move people from harmful ignorance to real understanding is worth worrying about IMHO.There is no such thing as "just trying to be funny"