privilege as a meme

at least when the state says you don't get to do something they can back it up w/ violence, criminal system, etc. what are you going to do if i tone police you? tweet angry things at me?

Want to see more posts tagged #tone policing?

mordy does what he wants you guys, you can't stop him

Decide you aren't worth arguing with? xxp

mordy just blew my mind

i... i had never thought about it like that

ppl "get to" do what they want tbh. this "u don't get to..." thing is tilting at windmills

― Mordy , Tuesday, August 20, 2013 11:57 PM (Yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

it's not an argument from threat, legal or physical or rhetorical or otherwise, it's an argument from an ethics that rests on history: an oppressor class's definition of the oppressed class's experience can never be the truest definition of that experience. it's only one that serves the oppressing class's interests, which can't be aligned with the reality of the people being pressured by the weight of a culture aligned against them.

here "you don't get to xyz" means you have no standing to do what you're doing, not "i will break your face with my state violence."

i'm pretty sure it is just whinging signifying nothing

YOU DON'T GET TO TELL ME WHAT I FEEL

There's an assumed shared discourse in a lot of these conversations.

Approaching the discourse like its absurd on its face without making any good faith effort to understand the obvious relevant context is sort of silly.

But have you heard of the Internet, your capital letters will fit in well here

I read once that typing in all caps is like shouting on the internet, and that it's impolite.

"you don't get to" as an quick but flawed shorthand for calling out logical fallacy, false authority, & other flaws in argument. it's an idiomatic expression and thinking it has anything to do with free will is fucking dim thinking indeed

We also have a thread called I'M DRUNK if that helps.

here "you don't get to xyz" means you have no standing to do what you're doing, not "i will break your face with my state violence."

― there are more than 3.5 HOOS per steen (BIG HOOS aka the steendriver), Tuesday, August 20, 2013 8:47 PM Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

well i think you're ignoring the powers granted to the tone police under subsection six of the patriot act, article twenty two.

The tone police, they live inside of my head.
The tone police, they come to me in my bed.

it's not an argument from threat, legal or physical or rhetorical or otherwise, it's an argument from an ethics that rests on history: an oppressor class's definition of the oppressed class's experience can never be the truest definition of that experience. it's only one that serves the oppressing class's interests, which can't be aligned with the reality of the people being pressured by the weight of a culture aligned against them.

^

did you see when that fake tumblr vegan socialist had a "first time frank and I had sex" pic and it was an actual p in v pic

i did not

but lol at 'in v pic'

p in v pic is a pvmic

boo yah

Yeah I was scrolling past at work at the end of the day and hopefully the cleaning crew didn't see when I went past that, sheesh

shouldn't we be willing to ask ourselves if anger is our best response?

Sure, but as with the pronoun trouble a sentence or so back, we should be willing to ask ourselves, but you don't get to ask me* and therein lies the game. Like, there is a difference between recognising that something (such as 'rage is not the best educator of your allies') is true, and thinking "I should say that, then". Unfortunately the internet was built on the latter impulse.

*I am straight white male, anybody gets to ask me anything

yeah

arguing politely and reasonably is also a learned strategy - and one where the end goal is not to learn something new or even "win" the argument: it's to retain the moral high ground. i see people - usually those in positions of power, arguing the lol liberal case for the status quo - deploy a kind of pig-headed "reasonableness" all the time, using pedantry and this weird kind of faux-logic that refuses to take into account real-world complexities or nuances, all the while maintaining a politely superior tone and refusing to understand the basic ideas that the other person is trying to communicate. and then claiming the moral high ground when the other person gets frustrated - and then in subsequent arguments when the other person starts off rudely because they already know arguing won't be constructive, dismissing the entire argument based on that

manners have pretty much always been a form of social identification and exclusion - being mannerly was the mark of gentlemen and a means of middle class self-elevation above the mob. not that i personally want to go out of my way to not get along with people - usually, lol - but that instinct has been taught me since childhood and isn't necessarily innate

whenever somebody addresses the way a person expresses themselves, whether that be grammar pedantry or complaints about tone, they are - deliberately - refusing to acknowledge the content of what's being said. the cheapest kind of power game tbh.

yeah but deep down everybody knows that they're right if only everyone else would shut up and listen and writing yourself blank cheques wrt how you address or engage others in any contentious topic with this in mind...idk.

kind of pig-headed "reasonableness" all the time, using pedantry and this weird kind of faux-logic that refuses to take into account real-world complexities or nuances, all the while maintaining a politely superior tone

--lex pretend

In a nutshell here for sure! Implicit assumption of logical correctness or objectivity. And the sort of passive voice - it also reminds me a bit of people who criticize protestors and say "they'd be better off going through the proper channels" like some sort of deference is in order

yeah but deep down /everybody knows/ that /they're right/ if only /everyone else would shut up and listen/ and writing yourself blank cheques wrt how you address or engage others in any contentious topic with this in mind...idk.
--dmacation problem (darraghmac)

But I don't know that I'm right!

welcome to ilx and god help u

i've been thinking about that today. we need to distinguish between topics where it's possible to be right or wrong - general knowledge or trivia, i guess - and topics where there is a more or less correct answer - stuff where you can draw on evidence but not perhaps ever reach a definitive conclusion, like "what is the best way for a government to fulfil every child's educational potential?" - that isn't purely opinion, but it isn't a question of only one correct answer either - and then topics which are at bottom matters of pure opinion - "people should have equal opportunities from birth" or "it is wrong to discriminate against people based on innate characteristics".

that last group of topics falls under ethics rather than knowledge. i can't prove to somebody who disagrees with me that i'm right because in the end it's a matter of world-view. for me, that means that i might want to win people over to my own world-view and i might want to use whatever approach seems most likely to succeed, but i also might decide some people will never share my opinions and if the opposition is strong enough then fuck them, they're the enemy, all i care about now is tactics

whenever somebody addresses the way a person expresses themselves, whether that be grammar pedantry or complaints about tone, they are - deliberately - refusing to acknowledge the content of what's being said. the cheapest kind of power game tbh.

― beans on toast and ghosts (Noodle Vague), Wednesday, August 21, 2013 9:40 AM (28 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

er i meant to add truth bomb

*carves "not necessarily" into nv's forehead*

the word bomb is certainly relevant.

Now more than ever, a failure to live down to darragh's view of humanity should not be seen as, well, a failure.

I mean, I'm sure he's a nice chap, but you'll want someone for the other shoulder, you know?

Proooobably not Ronan.

I thought you had recused yourself

I'm so glad this thread pops up every once in a while in case I don't want to understand whatever the fuck is happening on ilx.

i have ilm for that

andrew doesn't deign to tone police irish ppl on ilm that i'd noticed, so it can't be that

póg mo tone

http://aseasonedplateofmurder.tumblr.com/post/42333304654/tw-misogyny-possible-rape-it-really-bothers-me

can we stop linking the troll tumblr now

seriously

concur

póg mo tone

― Francois Toofo (seandalai),

a++++

http://straightvoices.tumblr.com/

straight voices on gay rights

no matter what anyone says, straight people's opinions do matter. in fact they can be more effective in fighting bigotry because they're not emotionally biased. this is a safe space for straight allies of gay, lesbian, bi and transgendered people. we also post things from gay people supporting straight people and valuing them for the contributions they make to ending hate.

we only accept genuine submissions not things making fun of straight people!

no matter what anyone says, straight people's opinions do matter. in fact they can be more effective in fighting bigotry because they're not emotionally biased.

just off to the "copy and paste something 100 times over" thread