6 ms·
Well said. These parts are striking to me: > In an era of weaponized sensitivity, participation in public discourse is growing so perilous, so fraught with the
by dj-wonk 10y ago
Well said. These parts are striking to me:
> In an era of weaponized sensitivity, participation in public discourse is growing so perilous, so fraught with the danger of being caught out for using the wrong word or failing to uphold the latest orthodoxy in relation to disability, sexual orientation, economic class, race or ethnicity, that many are apt to bow out. Perhaps intimidating their elders into silence is the intention of the identity-politics cabal — and maybe my generation should retreat to our living rooms and let the young people tear one another apart over who seemed to imply that Asians are good at math.
> But do we really want every intellectual conversation to be scrupulously cleansed of any whiff of controversy?
- RileyKyeden 10y agoThe reactionaries on the side I lean to have mostly settled down, but the reactionaries to the reactionaries are still primed to explode. One can't even gently suggest that a person's words, probably said with good intentions, support an -ism or -phobia without getting a tirade about censorship in response, and an accusation of being a "social justice warrior."
- hyperdunc 10y agoSuch tirades are a necessary correction to the insanity that "social justice" has become. Once the influence of these so -called warriors declines then hopefully the discourse will settle down.
- RileyKyeden 10y agoOn my side, it calmed down because people criticized call-out culture.[1] How does one criticize reflexive fury toward social justice activism without being lumped in with the "warriors"? [1] For example: http://everydayfeminism.com/2016/05/call-out-accountability/ http://everydayfeminism.com/2016/05/call-out-accountability/
- hyperdunc 10y agoWe can remind people that there are "sides within sides" and that we should allow people's positions to change.
- rhapsodic 10y ago> Such tirades are a necessary correction to the insanity that "social justice" has become. Once the influence of these so -called warriors declines then hopefully the discourse will settle down. Well put. I think the only thing that will curb their ambitions to become the thought/speech/culture dictators of the world will to use all of their own tactics against them, in spades. They might not be so eager to destroy the lives and careers of others if it incurs the risk of having their own lives and careers destroyed.
- int_19h 10y agoThing is, accusation of some -ism or -phobia can easily blow up. You may not have that intention in mind, but in the age of social media, such things can be very hard to contain, especially once the Internet mob forms. And consequences can be pretty severe (say, losing one's job). So, while any particular interaction might not involve this directly, it's always something that's part of the picture.
- maxerickson 10y agoIt's kind of ironic to write participation in public discourse is growing so perilous in one of the most prominent papers on the planet. She apparently does not feel particularly stifled.
- reitanqild 10y agoOr she chose to speak up anyway, knowing full well how this might backfire but still choosing to do the right thing?
- maxerickson 10y agoThat's perfectly in keeping with my second sentence. Someone who felt stifled would not choose to face the potential backfire.