Red Mosquito

harmless wrote:Burt, spare me your credentials. Your disabled brother and pro-freedom liberal credentials give you no fucking right to belittle my (or his, or anyone's) opinions.

He's not belittling you; he's disagreeing with you. He, in fact, has every right to do so and you have every right to:

harmless wrote:Fuck you, and you know what, fuck anyone who agrees with you.

...that.

harmless wrote:Who's on this cunt's side here? You are not my friend.

That will include me, I suppose.

At least Burt isn't rude, humourless and seemingly incapable of civil discussion.

Birds in Hell wrote:

harmless wrote:Burt, spare me your credentials. Your disabled brother and pro-freedom liberal credentials give you no fucking right to belittle my (or his, or anyone's) opinions.

He's not belittling you; he's disagreeing with you. He, in fact, has every right to do so and you have every right to:

harmless wrote:Fuck you, and you know what, fuck anyone who agrees with you.

...that.

harmless wrote:Who's on this cunt's side here? You are not my friend.

That will include me, I suppose.

At least Burt isn't rude, humourless and seemingly incapable of civil discussion.

Not rude? When was he ever 'not rude' to me? When was he ever respectful about my point of view and experience? Fuck off, and take your 'humour' with you.

'Civil discussion'. Hahaha.

So, I'm I allowed to still be a Redskins fan? Or do I have to stop liking them now?

I think 90% of the issue here is less to do with the ideas you want to talk about, harm, and more to do with the heatedly manic way you try to defend them.


I personally, have a hard time understanding how it makes sense to you to lash out at another person's dismissiveness...

you have no fucking right to belittle my (or his, or anyone's) opinions.

...and then turn around and be exactly that dismissive of someone else's opinions.

Fuck you, and you know what, fuck anyone who agrees with you.

Because that reads, to me, like you're invoking a privilege...implicitly behaving as though you have every right to tell them to fuck off, while they should maintain an air of respect and reflectiveness in response to your posts.

Likewise, it makes no sense to me to express frustration about having your words dismissed out of hand...

I was told that my entire system and basis for defending the cause...was 'a bunch of bullshit'.

...and then wonder why it's even worth talking to someone who doesn't already agree with you.

If you can't acknowledge you have systemic advantages over Asian people on one level and Native Americans on another, why are we even discussing this?

I can't figure how you think it's going to encourage people to consider your side of things, when you mock what you assume they are thinking on one hand...

OMG the harmless account is so misguided and wrong about everything, in spite of his best efforts. Bless him, he'll never quite 'get it'.

...and then imply to someone else that they are "misguided and wrong," and "don't quite 'get it'."

Your privilege is showing when you laugh my perspective off

You see, none of this has to do with your IDEAS or ARGUMENTS. Heck, with a little less heated and angsty discussion, we might even get to where we could discuss them.

Listen to my fucking ideas. Do not police my tone. I don't give a shit whether you're at the point to discuss my thoughts. Get there, or don't, no skin off my nose whatsoever.

You're acting like I've been speaking out of anger the entire fucking time. I haven't. Read the content of my words and get off telling me how I should or should not deliver them to make them more easily palatable to a thread full of people.

Oppression is not an academic subject for me. If it is for you, that's fucking great. Have a civilised discussion with someone more like you, someone who is not experiencing similar oppressions on a daily basis.

harmless wrote:Listen to my fucking ideas. Do not police my tone.

Do you feel, when you engage in online discussion about important topics, that your receptiveness is influenced by the tone or attitude that accompanies it? Or would you say that this never happens?

I don't give a shit whether you're at the point to discuss my thoughts.

When you visit the debate forum and take the time to create a post, what are your hoped for results of said post?

You're acting like I've been speaking out of anger the entire fucking time. I haven't

At what point did you start becoming angry, and how would you define the cause of that anger? Humor me, and assume that it's not as clear from an outsider's perspective as it might be from your own.

Read the content of my words and get off telling me how I should or should not deliver them to make them more easily palatable to a thread full of people.

When someone states a personal opinion, or makes a suggestion based on their recognizably singular perception, do you feel that they are inherently "telling you what to do?"

Oppression is not an academic subject for me.

What do you feel oppression looks like in a message board setting? How does it play out? Since this is a writing-based method of communication, what TYPE of writing or phrasing indicates oppression or dismissiveness, to you? I'm honestly curious.

new Harmless:old Harmless::Harry Limb:Harry Lime

Tone-policing. Concern trolling. The erasure of the whole *concept* of oppression in order to reach some conversational vacuum in which no one gets upset. Respectability politics and assimilation to majority expectations. These are all micro-aggressions. They're a daily occurrence whenever my status as a disabled person (who has experienced systemic oppression in real life, so understands it from a certain point of view) is made a factor in a discussion. So I get angry. And then THAT anger is used against me; my anger, at the fact that ideas about the common experiences between oppressions are always dismissed in certain conversational spaces, is treated as directly equivalent to the annoyance somebody feels by being told I won't be mocked and told my ideas are 'a bunch of bullshit'. I simply can't win. I say the same things over again, and over again but they are wrong by default because of the agreed criteria by which something is deemed 'right' (this criteria includes the 'fact' that 'irrational', 'overly-emotional' arguments, which come from daily experience of oppression rather than cold data, are always wrong). So if you're genuinely interested, look those rhetorical tools up, and how they play out to oppress a wide range of different people, even online. Because this conversation is not just about Pearl Jam, or anything else unimportant, in which case there would be no reason to be angry. It is about things which are pertinent and relevant to the way I live my life every day. Things which make me angry and depressed 100% of the time.

If you can't accept that the life-long prejudice, discrimination and aggro received by disabled people puts them at a different societal level of oppression to you and your bad day, and that your able-bodied 'well, shit happens' philosophy is not a direct equivalent, we can't even discuss this.

this is the best outcome of password-sharing on RM to date

There it is again. HAHA SATIRE!

ok, you've had your fun, jorge. we get it; april fool's.

Read this.

"Those outraged by Park’s call to cancel a show over an out-of-context joke amplified the hashtag and made it go viral.

But Park told Kang that she never wanted the show canceled, and that, in fact, she is a fan. “Instead,” writes Kang, “she saw the hashtag as a way to critique white liberals who use forms of racial humor to mock more blatant forms of racism.”

http://www.salon.com/2014/04/03/cancelc ... evolution/

I want you to know that none of this is about the fact that any of you have upset me personally. I don't give a shit about me personally. My self-esteem is no worse because of this than it was when I got up this morning. Which was rock-bottom to begin with. I am merely pissed off that these dissenting voices do not get heard, because they have to compete with a vast audience of white-majority people defending 'free speech' NOT for everyone, as they say they are (not everyone gets free speech, even in a free speech society, anyone noticed?), but for celebrities that get it wrong. This is related to what disabled people experience in society, when abled people want to be able to make satire about us. I am upset that this opinion has been completely rubbished, but I'll live on, I always do, I'm totally used to it. This is not me 'choosing to take on' some mantel of oppression because I feel sorry for myself. If you have so little respect for my opinions and my anger as to dismiss them as that, we never understood each other, even in my best moods.

Ok Harmless.

This may just be a pet peeve of mine, but we are still misusing the term free speech. No one's free speech was violated here; as far as I know, there's been no edict or proposal that either Colbert or Suey Park shut down their means of expression. What we're doing is confusing 'freedom of speech' with 'freedom from criticism.' Both Colbert and Park were defended, criticized and insulted for their stances, but none of them have been forced to silence themselves.

Very few people actually understand what freedom of speech really means.