Comic Discussion > QUESTIONABLE CONTENT
WCDT Strips 3506 to 3510 (19 June to 23 June 2017)
JoeCovenant:
--- Quote from: emsilly on 22 Jun 2017, 08:45 ---
--- Quote from: JoeCovenant on 22 Jun 2017, 04:37 ---I gotta say, I get a bit WTF when these sort of debates arise. The worse one I think was the whole safety pin fiasco when people were actively attacking people with the pin on show on social media as *not doing enough*... failing to notice (or even concede) that doing SOMETHING is better than doing nothing, that a show of support lets the people affected know they are NOT as isolated as they may think.
Slightly related to this... I just get miffed at the militancy of certain sections who attack all and sundry if they do not walk the same path as those same militants...
Use that same debate for religion and I think we all know where that leads.
In essence... if someone is supporting your cause, don't be a dick and rat on them for not supporting your cause *enough*, because all that will do is turn them away from you. Maybe better aim your anger at those who are actively, openly and joyfully attacking you?
...just a thought.
--- End quote ---
I think you're misunderstanding the motivation here in a very critical way. You frame the issue as though it were about ideological purity, akin to how communists split infinitely over tiny details of doctrine. That isn't what it's about at all. It's about disappointment. It is disappointing to find that people don't support your rights as much as you'd believed or hoped. You might think that it's a minor point, but for those who are affected it isn't. Having someone you trusted or admired - or having a community you're part of - turn out to not being as supportive and accepting of you as you thought is a very unsettling experience. It hammers home that even amongst people who are ostensibly accepting that you are still somehow different, something other, rather than just another person. These experiences erode trust, and push people back towards communities of people who share their differences, where they know that they won't be made to feel weird or odd or strange.
It's not about ideological purity, it's about exclusion.
--- End quote ---
Sorry - That's not what I said at all.
Unless I'm reading you incorrectly?
I get the whole "I'm a person" stance. Who could deny that every single one of us is a "person" (Well... I'm sure some morons try to do so.)
But if we are "all people" then why are there such things as Pride marches? Or Black Lives Matter demos, etc etc?
Those things are put in place by people who are LGBT(x) and 'Not White'...
They are making their own distinctions as to what 'kind' of person they are.
And more power to them!
The irony is (and the crux of my miff-ness) is that it those same distinctions which lead to others 'not' part of those distinctions being lambasted for (it seems) DARING to stand up and say.
"Yeah! I agree! You guys are every bit a person as everyone else!"
And then they get slapped down for (it seems) doing exactly that.
Like - "How dare you support me for my gay/black/muslim-ness! I'm a PERSON! Why don't you just support me for that!"
When... you know... we ARE! But we're supporting you against those who DON'T, by referring to you in very same sphere which you define yourself as being a part of... whilst still being a person!
In what way is that 'not' being supportive?
(Other than it would be hard to fit on a placard or a snappy eye-catching social media posting)
(N.B: All *you*s are generic. Not aimed at 'You' ! :) )
Case:
Joe, I think the point is less about your support, which I'm sure is appreciated, than about the hurt of seeing that a meta-discussion about the permissibility of public debate of your group's fuckability is not only allowed, but that it (maybe out of misguided reaction to recent developments by otherwise totally decent people, maybe due to WhatTheFuckDoIknow) is turning into something that superficially reads close to some kind of "Whut? So I have to boink *that kind of people* now to prove I've not a monster? What is liberalism turning into?" meta-debate without any apparent regard as to how that may make "that kind of people" feel.
The worst comments you & I have to fear regarding our fuckability are stupid listicles about 'being too old for cargoshorts' (Ha! HA! I SAY!) or slightly embarrassing articles a la "Dadbod - Hot or Not?". The attempted suicide rate amongst *trans people is at 41% last I checked - the US Department of Defence starts freaking out when the respective rate goes over 5% 23.8 per 100,000 soldiers for combat vets. Just being *trans is infinitely more dangerous than participating in the Battle of the Somme.
We can't apply here the yardstick we're used to is what I'm trying to say.
Not that I'm even remotely close to any approximation of expertise, or have been authorized by the resident *trans community to speak for them, but that'd disappoint me a widdly bit, too. Doesn't take anything away from your argument, which I'm sure is appreciated in the spirit it was offered.
(My *entire pocketload of ill-fitting smallchange*)
Edit: Superficial attempts at restoring legibility and coherence of thought ...
wlewisiii:
This conversation, along with the strip the other day regarding How her mind works, shows that really Brun and Clinton have a better chance of working as a pair than the alternative of Brin & Elliot. It's also interesting how they're carefully looking for common ground. Like the other couple this week (that I am NOT going to go in depth on) it feels real to me and both my life experience as well as that of others I have know.
JoeCovenant:
--- Quote from: Case on 23 Jun 2017, 03:31 ---Joe, I think the point is less about your support, which I'm sure is appreciated, than about the hurt of seeing that a meta-discussion about the permissibility of public debate of your group's fuckability is not only allowed, but that it (maybe out of misguided reaction to recent developments by otherwise totally decent people, maybe due to WhatTheFuckDoIknow) is turning into something that superficially reads close to some kind of "Whut? So I have to boink *that kind of people* now to prove I've not a monster? What is liberalism turning into?" meta-debate without any apparent regard as to how that may make "that kind of people" feel.
The worst comments you & I have to fear regarding our fuckability are stupid listicles about 'being too old for cargoshorts' (Ha! HA! I SAY!) or slightly embarrassing articles a la "Dadbod - Hot or Not?". The attempted suicide rate amongst *trans people is at 41% last I checked - the US Department of Defence starts freaking out when the respective rate goes over 5% 23.8 per 100,000 soldiers for combat vets. Just being *trans is infinitely more dangerous than participating in the Battle of the Somme.
We can't apply here the yardstick we're used to is what I'm trying to say.
Not that I'm even remotely close to any approximation of expertise, or have been authorized by the resident *trans community to speak for them, but that'd disappoint me a widdly bit, too. Doesn't take anything away from your argument, which I'm sure is appreciated in the spirit it was offered.
(My *entire pocketload of ill-fitting smallchange*)
Edit: Superficial attempts at restoring legibility and coherence of thought ...
--- End quote ---
Yup. I Get it. Totally. Utterly.
But, (had to be one, huh? :) ) all I was talking about was I see the apparent "ranting-at-people-showing-support-for-DARING-to-show-support", all the time.
And I suppose all I'm trying to point out that such misplaced anger does a lot more harm to whatever cause said support is being shown for.
(Cos it takes a big person to constantly see themselves being hauled over the coals in that way to NOT say "Fine, I just won't bother then!")
There's a whole massive debate to be had regarding such things and the dynamics of those kinds of 'discussion', but I doubt this thread is the place for it and, in a similar vein to "us white dudes" trying to discuss racism and the minefield that can be, so straight people find the same sorts of artillery lying in wait if they try to discuss of this nature.
(Even writing such a thing as the above can see responses of "Awh are you all butthurt 'cos you're being treated unfairly? WELCOME TO OUR WORLD!" Which... frankly, are so beyond ironic they are baffling to me... To really try and put across the way the dynamics of these discussions work (or don't) would go on for many many pages...)
I guess it's the fact that it's generally what would be classed as *friendly fire*... throwing bullets at someone who is on your side that I just cannot understand. Yes, it may be because I'm looking at it from a purely logical POV, and I'm not the one who has had to live my life putting up with the 'you are lesser than us' status foisted up others by idiots and bigots... But I can't understand those reaction to people trying to help.
Case:
--- Quote from: JoeCovenant on 23 Jun 2017, 04:19 ---There's a whole massive debate to be had regarding such things and the dynamics of those kinds of 'discussion', but I doubt this thread is the place for it and, in a similar vein to "us white dudes" trying to discuss racism and the minefield that can be, so straight people find the same sorts of artillery lying in wait if they try to discuss of this nature.
--- End quote ---
FWIW, we're trying to have exactly that debate over in DISCUSS - spread out over several threads, actually, mostly the "Callout Culture"-thread. Yeah, tends to be ... delicate, but I feel everybody is bringing their A-game so far.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version