ayrt the way theyre (wreckandrule) saying it is kinda :/, but asides from minor scoliosis i'm abled and know plenty about disability. i have a family member who basically cant use the right side of the body and has cancer, so I know a lot of info.
I think op is just really frustrated at being denied that they are disabled by ablebodied assholes and didn't want to deal with someone saying they're faking when that's how being denied feels.
some people need to make their opinions known about everything, loudly, and being told their thoughts aren't actually useful right now is the worst possible thing and the worst oppression of all
i hate the fucking exclusion of the particular understanding of social justice issues tumblr seems to have (and which applies in this thread). it feels VERY american to me. in other parts of the world, normative values are far more in the direction of having open & deliberative discussions which include everyone and everyone's opinion on the issue. but there's a certain aggressiveness in eg sentences like "only lbgt people are allowed to weigh in on same-sex marriage" and everything like that, which is SO exclusionary and SO debilitating for an honest and open policy-oriented discussion; because the world is wider than your in-group, and in a society there are other opinions that need to be heard to reach a conclusion everyone is comfortable with.
but the american understanding of democracy is very warped in this sense, and very majority-driven instead of the deliberation-driven concepts of traditional European parliamentary democracies, that i do understand WHY this aggressive gatekeeping exists... it just feels so odd to me as European, and so very exclusionary.
I totally agree with you and as someone from the US I try not to be so western-centric, but the disability thread OP is from Germany according to their posts in the thread.
ah, indeed they are. this kind of exclusionary discourse is numerous in my native country's sj discourse on tumblr too, so i assume that when these tumblr teens grow up, they'll bring their exclusionary understanding of sj to their activism in Europe too. ah well, good old ~americanization~ is everywhere i guess.
i think it's a little patronizing to call this "americanization". i'd 100% agree that social justice is a very western concept, and there is a lot of widespread assumption in conversations about healthcare and politics that everybody is referring to the american versions of those.
i can see the parallels between sj and american politics, but i don't feel like that's the reason for the spread of the toxic social justice stuff? i think it's much more a symptom of peer pressure and social group gatekeeping that happens in everyone's teen years. it's no surprise that most people latching onto the militant sj stuff are in their teens - it's almost like the new punk/goth/counterculture scene. a lot of these sj kids are ones who spent their early school years struggling to make friends or even had bully problems. then you enter your teens and suddenly hormones are everywhere and you start trying to figure your identity, and you realize maybe some of your alienation is because your gender/sexuality/physical or mental health don't line up with the status quo. and because of that, you now have the power to exclude the people you felt snubbed/hurt you? fuck yeah! fuck them!
obviously that path isn't true for everyone, and i'm not trying to paint some social justice issues as teenage phases... i just look at it and realize i would absolutely have gone down the same path too had i been born a decade later, as a kid who had a really hard time making friends and turned to the internet instead. and i didn't even grow up in america.
i think the tumblr brand of sjws are entirely americanized on account of the fact that they always try to push american dynamics and politics on the rest of the world. i'm not trying to be patronizing when i say that, i'm really not. what i find patronizing and infuriating is when tumblr sjws contradict people from other countries who try to explain the differences (ie in regards to racism) in their own countries only to be me with "actually you ignorant bitch this is how it is here so this is how it is everywhere" essentially when that's not the case at all. maybe saying it's americanized isn't the right way to explain it, but these teenagers do have a very narrow view of the world and don't consider that things are very different in other western countries. different conversations need to be had about problems in other countries instead. i'm absolutely not saying only american teenagers are doing this, though - i'm well aware that teenagers everywhere are doing it, but they're the same re: thinking american issues are relevant in every other country too. very often they don't actually educate themselves about what's going on in their own countries before they start spouting americanized discourse that they've read on tumblr before.
i never said they were us-centric. i said i was sick of this kind of american exclusionary discourse. i even put in a sentence about how i understand that this kind of thinking developed in the usa according to its political system. (though you COULD criticize me for being overly institutional here)
oreo cookies are us-american, as in: the adjective which i used in my post; but eating them isn't an act of us-centrism.
dude, i don't particularly care if you're not comfortable with disabled people being able to afford food or lgbt people being able to marry who they love
where did i even imply i wasn't cool with that? i am considered incredibly radical in my native country. i think the bureaucratic hurdles for disability benefits are about, hm, 100% too high in every Western state. i think as long as marriage exists, it should be open to all (though marriage itself is a concept one needs to talk about abolishing). i'd love to abolish the current merit-based economic system if i could; it is dehumanizing and horrible and makes about 100000 problems in the whole society.
however, i'm also of the firm belief that in the political process (and social justice activism is ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS!!!! a political process) all voices need to be heard, even those that may be ignorant and egocentric. they are part of the society as well. a policy may be what you prefer normatively, but if a majority of the nation is against it, how will you get it through parliament? if i were hungary's majority party (with, say, 51% of seats) and whipped an open borders policy through parliament against the explicit wish of my voters and against the opposition, that's normatively the right thing. but society will be ENRAGED. the policy will most probably not go through because too many people are against. in the policy-making process, people did not listen to each other enough. that's why people need to talk about it with each other; the deliberative process might even convince previously ignorant/egocentric people of your normative ideals. (hopefully.) and such talks must, by nature, be open to all. minority clauses are very good and very helpful in modern democracies, but excluding people from deliberative processes?
The saddest thing is, this attitude got started because people tried to have open and deliberative discussions, only to have asshats push their way in, derail, and try to explain why people were wrong for being upset about a thing.
(For instance, and this one has actually happened to me on many occasions: the man that intrudes in a conversation between women about sexism not to contribute or converse, but to lecture on why sexism doesn't actually exist, feminism is bad, and how they should really consider the men's perspective.)
There are valid reasons to not want to talk to someone outside of a specific group -- sometimes you just want to have a conversation with someone that doesn't require you to explain the simplest aspects because your conversation partner hasn't experienced it first-hand and doesn't know better -- but it gets so tiring to see it become the default attitude.
i don't necessarily disagree with you, but if you don't want to discuss something with members of a certain group, don't post it publicly where many members of said group(s) can see it and respond freely
saying 'X KEEP OUT!!!' just makes you look petulant
why would abled people need to have any opinion on disability benefits?? tf Like the person in the thread who worked in the field. They might not be disabled, but they could have a potentially useful perspective.
What I dislike about attitudes like this is that it makes everyone give a laundry list of their "qualifications" when they post. Maybe I would like to keep my mental illnesses to myself and not parade them around whenever I feel I want to talk to someone. If someone is being an ass, that is one thing. Making everyone have to qualify to post with one criteria or another is something differnt.
I understand that sometimes you just need to talk to people that get your situation in a way that people who aren't living it probably can't, but I'm also so, so tired of this "you must be this oppressed to have a valid opinion" attitude.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
anonrisingcocomod) wrote in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
anonrising2016-02-14 12:33 am
(frozen comment) Re: http://www1.flightrising.com/forums/gend/1754612
(Anonymous) 2016-02-15 05:50 pm (UTC)(link)(frozen comment) Re: http://www1.flightrising.com/forums/gend/1754612
(Anonymous) 2016-02-15 05:56 pm (UTC)(link)Eh, they have a bit of a point tbh, but the way they're stating it doesn't give me much hope that they actually know much about the subject lol
(frozen comment) Re: http://www1.flightrising.com/forums/gend/1754612
(Anonymous) 2016-02-15 05:58 pm (UTC)(link)(frozen comment) Re: http://www1.flightrising.com/forums/gend/1754612
(Anonymous) 2016-02-15 06:17 pm (UTC)(link)(frozen comment) Re: http://www1.flightrising.com/forums/gend/1754612
(Anonymous) 2016-02-15 06:00 pm (UTC)(link)(frozen comment) Re: http://www1.flightrising.com/forums/gend/1754612
(Anonymous) 2016-02-15 06:57 pm (UTC)(link)i hate the fucking exclusion of the particular understanding of social justice issues tumblr seems to have (and which applies in this thread). it feels VERY american to me. in other parts of the world, normative values are far more in the direction of having open & deliberative discussions which include everyone and everyone's opinion on the issue. but there's a certain aggressiveness in eg sentences like "only lbgt people are allowed to weigh in on same-sex marriage" and everything like that, which is SO exclusionary and SO debilitating for an honest and open policy-oriented discussion; because the world is wider than your in-group, and in a society there are other opinions that need to be heard to reach a conclusion everyone is comfortable with.
but the american understanding of democracy is very warped in this sense, and very majority-driven instead of the deliberation-driven concepts of traditional European parliamentary democracies, that i do understand WHY this aggressive gatekeeping exists... it just feels so odd to me as European, and so very exclusionary.
(frozen comment) Re: http://www1.flightrising.com/forums/gend/1754612
(Anonymous) 2016-02-15 07:00 pm (UTC)(link)(frozen comment) Re: http://www1.flightrising.com/forums/gend/1754612
(Anonymous) 2016-02-15 07:10 pm (UTC)(link)ah, indeed they are. this kind of exclusionary discourse is numerous in my native country's sj discourse on tumblr too, so i assume that when these tumblr teens grow up, they'll bring their exclusionary understanding of sj to their activism in Europe too. ah well, good old ~americanization~ is everywhere i guess.
(frozen comment) Re: http://www1.flightrising.com/forums/gend/1754612
(Anonymous) 2016-02-15 07:51 pm (UTC)(link)i think it's a little patronizing to call this "americanization". i'd 100% agree that social justice is a very western concept, and there is a lot of widespread assumption in conversations about healthcare and politics that everybody is referring to the american versions of those.
i can see the parallels between sj and american politics, but i don't feel like that's the reason for the spread of the toxic social justice stuff? i think it's much more a symptom of peer pressure and social group gatekeeping that happens in everyone's teen years. it's no surprise that most people latching onto the militant sj stuff are in their teens - it's almost like the new punk/goth/counterculture scene. a lot of these sj kids are ones who spent their early school years struggling to make friends or even had bully problems. then you enter your teens and suddenly hormones are everywhere and you start trying to figure your identity, and you realize maybe some of your alienation is because your gender/sexuality/physical or mental health don't line up with the status quo. and because of that, you now have the power to exclude the people you felt snubbed/hurt you? fuck yeah! fuck them!
obviously that path isn't true for everyone, and i'm not trying to paint some social justice issues as teenage phases... i just look at it and realize i would absolutely have gone down the same path too had i been born a decade later, as a kid who had a really hard time making friends and turned to the internet instead. and i didn't even grow up in america.
(frozen comment) Re: http://www1.flightrising.com/forums/gend/1754612
(Anonymous) 2016-02-15 08:10 pm (UTC)(link)(frozen comment) Re: http://www1.flightrising.com/forums/gend/1754612
(Anonymous) 2016-02-15 08:13 pm (UTC)(link)(frozen comment) Re: http://www1.flightrising.com/forums/gend/1754612
(Anonymous) 2016-02-15 08:15 pm (UTC)(link)please tell me you're not one of the morons who thinks racism is over in europe
(frozen comment) Re: http://www1.flightrising.com/forums/gend/1754612
(Anonymous) - 2016-02-15 20:18 (UTC) - Expand(frozen comment) Re: http://www1.flightrising.com/forums/gend/1754612
(Anonymous) - 2016-02-15 20:24 (UTC) - Expand(frozen comment) Re: http://www1.flightrising.com/forums/gend/1754612
(Anonymous) - 2016-02-15 20:19 (UTC) - Expand(frozen comment) Re: http://www1.flightrising.com/forums/gend/1754612
(Anonymous) - 2016-02-15 20:20 (UTC) - Expand(frozen comment) Re: http://www1.flightrising.com/forums/gend/1754612
(Anonymous) - 2016-02-15 20:24 (UTC) - Expand(frozen comment) Re: http://www1.flightrising.com/forums/gend/1754612
(Anonymous) - 2016-02-15 20:39 (UTC) - Expand(frozen comment) Re: http://www1.flightrising.com/forums/gend/1754612
(Anonymous) - 2016-02-15 20:26 (UTC) - Expand(frozen comment) Re: http://www1.flightrising.com/forums/gend/1754612
(Anonymous) 2016-02-15 07:27 pm (UTC)(link)who's UScentric now asshole
(frozen comment) Re: http://www1.flightrising.com/forums/gend/1754612
(Anonymous) 2016-02-15 07:32 pm (UTC)(link)(frozen comment) Re: http://www1.flightrising.com/forums/gend/1754612
(Anonymous) 2016-02-15 07:55 pm (UTC)(link)oreo cookies are us-american, as in: the adjective which i used in my post; but eating them isn't an act of us-centrism.
(frozen comment) Re: http://www1.flightrising.com/forums/gend/1754612
(Anonymous) 2016-02-15 07:29 pm (UTC)(link)dude, i don't particularly care if you're not comfortable with disabled people being able to afford food or lgbt people being able to marry who they love
that's the only humane conclusion
(frozen comment) +1
(Anonymous) 2016-02-15 07:31 pm (UTC)(link)(frozen comment) Re: http://www1.flightrising.com/forums/gend/1754612
(Anonymous) 2016-02-15 08:06 pm (UTC)(link)where did i even imply i wasn't cool with that? i am considered incredibly radical in my native country. i think the bureaucratic hurdles for disability benefits are about, hm, 100% too high in every Western state. i think as long as marriage exists, it should be open to all (though marriage itself is a concept one needs to talk about abolishing). i'd love to abolish the current merit-based economic system if i could; it is dehumanizing and horrible and makes about 100000 problems in the whole society.
however, i'm also of the firm belief that in the political process (and social justice activism is ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS!!!! a political process) all voices need to be heard, even those that may be ignorant and egocentric. they are part of the society as well. a policy may be what you prefer normatively, but if a majority of the nation is against it, how will you get it through parliament? if i were hungary's majority party (with, say, 51% of seats) and whipped an open borders policy through parliament against the explicit wish of my voters and against the opposition, that's normatively the right thing. but society will be ENRAGED. the policy will most probably not go through because too many people are against. in the policy-making process, people did not listen to each other enough. that's why people need to talk about it with each other; the deliberative process might even convince previously ignorant/egocentric people of your normative ideals. (hopefully.) and such talks must, by nature, be open to all. minority clauses are very good and very helpful in modern democracies, but excluding people from deliberative processes?
totally not my jam.
(frozen comment) Re: http://www1.flightrising.com/forums/gend/1754612
(Anonymous) 2016-02-15 08:13 pm (UTC)(link)seriously, you're talking in circles here and making some assumptions about the majority opinion that are questionable if not demonstrably false
(frozen comment) Re: http://www1.flightrising.com/forums/gend/1754612
(Anonymous) 2016-02-15 08:24 pm (UTC)(link)(frozen comment) Re: http://www1.flightrising.com/forums/gend/1754612
(Anonymous) 2016-02-15 07:30 pm (UTC)(link)(For instance, and this one has actually happened to me on many occasions: the man that intrudes in a conversation between women about sexism not to contribute or converse, but to lecture on why sexism doesn't actually exist, feminism is bad, and how they should really consider the men's perspective.)
There are valid reasons to not want to talk to someone outside of a specific group -- sometimes you just want to have a conversation with someone that doesn't require you to explain the simplest aspects because your conversation partner hasn't experienced it first-hand and doesn't know better -- but it gets so tiring to see it become the default attitude.
(frozen comment) Re: http://www1.flightrising.com/forums/gend/1754612
(Anonymous) 2016-02-15 07:32 pm (UTC)(link)saying 'X KEEP OUT!!!' just makes you look petulant
(frozen comment) +1
(Anonymous) 2016-02-15 08:01 pm (UTC)(link)(frozen comment) Re: http://www1.flightrising.com/forums/gend/1754612
(Anonymous) 2016-02-15 07:05 pm (UTC)(link)Like the person in the thread who worked in the field. They might not be disabled, but they could have a potentially useful perspective.
What I dislike about attitudes like this is that it makes everyone give a laundry list of their "qualifications" when they post. Maybe I would like to keep my mental illnesses to myself and not parade them around whenever I feel I want to talk to someone. If someone is being an ass, that is one thing. Making everyone have to qualify to post with one criteria or another is something differnt.
(frozen comment) +1
(Anonymous) 2016-02-15 07:18 pm (UTC)(link)