6 ms·

I'm sorry this struck a chord with you and made you feel like you had to declare "not all Americans." That's great that you feel that way and don't associate wi

by legodt 10y ago

I'm sorry this struck a chord with you and made you feel like you had to declare "not all Americans." That's great that you feel that way and don't associate with those aspects of American culture, but your individual actions and feelings do not negate the actions of America as a whole. The individual is nothing and their atonement does not rectify the system they are under. Loop me back when the brock turners and racist cops are behind bars or we don't have an admitted sexual predator and xenophobe leading us. Or even when we have functioning social services or a safety net for anyone but the 1%. I believe you that you the individual are not what I said about America, but America as a whole still has a lot of work to do. And as we live here, we all embody a part of that America that isn't so wholesome and kind, and we always will until it changes.

grzm 10y ago
Why should I do anything? As you say, "the individual is nothing." In all seriousness, by persisting in statements like this you alienate a lot of people who might otherwise sympathize with you on many issues that are important to you. I hate being flip as I am in my first line, but tarring everyone with the same broad brush and saying their individual actions mean nothing if the state isn't perfect is unfair and denigrates anything good people might be doing. That there is still injustice does not mean that people are not working to make things better, both in government and out.
- legodt 10y ago
  Hasn't stopped me or you from doing anything. But being upset about this is like being upset and saying "not all men" or "not all white people." It doesn't matter that you don't associate with the nasty parts of how somebody is describing a unit as one. Of course it's going to be overly simplistic and broad and miss a lot of the details. But complaining that you think it is unfair to do so because you're part of that group and aren't what is being critiqued just makes it sound like you want to ignore the bigger issues to protect your ego because part of you is in the group being discussed. This is about groups of power or privilege, nobody is in danger or under threat because they perpetuate these socially regressive parts of America, so we have to discuss America as its worst elements, even if we ourselves don't think we contribute to them. Which brings us back to the original comment you took objection too. Why do Americans keep voting for a party that is hostile to marginalized groups? Because the America we live in is okay with this. And, as Americans, it is all of our responsibility to at least accept that this is country we currently live under. Agree with it or not, America's culture of racism, misogyny, and profiteering at the expense of others comes from Americans. You might think you're better than that (and you're probably right), but as a whole Americans have decided that their country is not.
  - grzm 10y ago
    makes it sound like you want to ignore the bigger issues to protect your ego because part of you is in the group being discussed. One of the biggest issues I see today is people not recognizing common ground and the importance of working together, and increasing polarization, which is directly why I've engaged with you exactly on these terms. I know people are not going to agree with me on every point, nor can I expect them to do so. Thinking that I can convince people to wholesale change their opinions and values is likewise folly, and I must keep myself open to the opportunity to change my own if I expect others to change theirs. The alternative, to engage in the tyranny of democracy, is something that should be actively worked against, regardless of who is in power. Why do Americans keep voting for a party that is hostile to marginalized groups? Because the America we live in is okay with this. Did you vote in the US presidential election? If not, please imagine yourself to have done so for the sake of argument. Did you agree with every value espoused by one of the candidates? I think it's highly unlikely. For those you did agree with, do they hold the same priority for them as for you? Would they make every decision exactly how you would have them do? I very much doubt that as well. The candidates of the two major parties had record low favorability ratings.[0] If you want to say something about Americans, it's that they didn't really like whoever was going to be elected. Assuming they subscribe to everything represented by their elected officials, even if they did vote for them, does them a disservice. [0]: http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/americans-distaste-for-both-trump-and-clinton-is-record-breaking/ http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/americans-distaste-for-b... People may share some of your values, values that are important to you. They may prioritize them different than you do, and some of their values that you do not share may be prioritized above them. I would want to work with all of the people that agree with me on a particular one. If I chose language that continues to alienate people, it will do little to nothing to help us find the common ground and work towards common goals. If I keep all of my values bundled together, I'm very unlikely to make progress on any of them. I need to be able to talk about them individually, just as I am here, discussing my views on getting people to work together, with you. I'm separating this from the rest of my individual values (even though I'd like to think they're related, I know human psychology well enough to know that they are not at all likely to be internally consistent across them all), of which I'm sure we share at least a few. Arguing that you should accept this one because you and I share these others actively works against the point I'm trying to make, which is why I strive to avoid including any particular issue in my discussion. I want things to change, and the thing I want to change the most is the idea that people can't work together even if they don't agree on every issue. I don't see how we can make progress on any issue any other civil way. I'm frustrated in that I haven't been able to phrase my comments in a more amiable manner, and I fear I've let things go further than I'd otherwise like. For this I apologize, and will finish with this thread. I wish you the best and hope you have a productive day.
- rabbyte 10y ago
  > you alienate a lot of people who might otherwise sympathize with you shading the truth might win people over but only those who are willing to turn their minds off because they were offended, only those more interested in changes that will let them go back to sitting right in their feelings. you'll see this most evidently on the web where a person feels there's work to be done only so long as they feel they need to correct someone, as soon as everyone feels the record has been set straight it goes right back to the kind of complacency that generates the kinds of statements you dislike so much. the same people who talk about "bleeding heart" "libtards" hung up on their feelings are the same emotionally inept lot that don't see how their own feelings for a flag gets in the way of truth; that a nation is not a monolith, that we are both wonderful and terrible, and that no change can come from a state of denial. "We're broken" is the same as "We're not perfect" but denial clings to the phrasing that lets us believe perfection is within reach.
tomp 10y ago
Why do you post such non-substantiated arguments on HN? His "admission" of sexual assault was in fact alpha-male-y locker room talk, and he's married to a foreigner, so your accusation of "xenophobia" sounds a bit hollow...
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- legodt 10y ago
  I'm going to give to the benefit of the doubt and not assume you are intentionally being misogynistic, so here's some light reading to help clear up why what you said perpetuates rape culture and isn't okay. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/oct/11/locker-room-talk-not-harmless-rape-culture-trump https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/oct/11/locker... http://www.teenvogue.com/story/donald-trump-locker-room-talk-rape-culture http://www.teenvogue.com/story/donald-trump-locker-room-talk... http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2016/10/13/what-did-donald-trump-reveal-about-progress-for-women/progress-would-be-accepting-that-trumps-locker-room-talk-illustrates-rape-culture http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2016/10/13/what-did-don...? https://www.theodysseyonline.com/perpetuating-rape-culture-not-locker-room-talk https://www.theodysseyonline.com/perpetuating-rape-culture-n...
  - tomp 10y ago
    I disagree. I stand firmly on the side of freedom of speech and judging people on their actions, not words. If anything, equating words with rape is what normalizes and trivializes rape! Edit: also, this moralizing that locker room talk perpetuates "rape culture" (I even dispute its existence in the West!) sounds eerily similar to the "shooting games encourage crime" panic we had a few years ago. Unless you have data to back it up, I dismiss this whole argument as made-up.
    - legodt 10y ago
      If you actually read those articles and still believe that, I want you to know that I legitimately find you frightening. This is about a person in a position of authority making a statement that normalizes sexual assault. This isn't video games. There are real victims and a culture that perpetuates this. He didn't grope somebody personally and get away with it, he did it in real life and bragged about it. I don't know how to break this down any further and that you tried to flip this into me normalizing rape culture is disgusting. Maybe you need to learn what rape culture is? Maybe it's time to stop pretending that anti-feminism isn't misogynistic. I hope I'm never near you in the real world because your words indicate a lack of care about actions to my body. I'm out.

by legodt 10y ago

grzm 10y ago

Why should I do anything? As you say, "the individual is nothing." In all seriousness, by persisting in statements like this you alienate a lot of people who might otherwise sympathize with you on many issues that are important to you. I hate being flip as I am in my first line, but tarring everyone with the same broad brush and saying their individual actions mean nothing if the state isn't perfect is unfair and denigrates anything good people might be doing. That there is still injustice does not mean that people are not working to make things better, both in government and out.

legodt 10y ago
Hasn't stopped me or you from doing anything. But being upset about this is like being upset and saying "not all men" or "not all white people." It doesn't matter that you don't associate with the nasty parts of how somebody is describing a unit as one. Of course it's going to be overly simplistic and broad and miss a lot of the details. But complaining that you think it is unfair to do so because you're part of that group and aren't what is being critiqued just makes it sound like you want to ignore the bigger issues to protect your ego because part of you is in the group being discussed. This is about groups of power or privilege, nobody is in danger or under threat because they perpetuate these socially regressive parts of America, so we have to discuss America as its worst elements, even if we ourselves don't think we contribute to them. Which brings us back to the original comment you took objection too. Why do Americans keep voting for a party that is hostile to marginalized groups? Because the America we live in is okay with this. And, as Americans, it is all of our responsibility to at least accept that this is country we currently live under. Agree with it or not, America's culture of racism, misogyny, and profiteering at the expense of others comes from Americans. You might think you're better than that (and you're probably right), but as a whole Americans have decided that their country is not.
- grzm 10y ago
  makes it sound like you want to ignore the bigger issues to protect your ego because part of you is in the group being discussed. One of the biggest issues I see today is people not recognizing common ground and the importance of working together, and increasing polarization, which is directly why I've engaged with you exactly on these terms. I know people are not going to agree with me on every point, nor can I expect them to do so. Thinking that I can convince people to wholesale change their opinions and values is likewise folly, and I must keep myself open to the opportunity to change my own if I expect others to change theirs. The alternative, to engage in the tyranny of democracy, is something that should be actively worked against, regardless of who is in power. Why do Americans keep voting for a party that is hostile to marginalized groups? Because the America we live in is okay with this. Did you vote in the US presidential election? If not, please imagine yourself to have done so for the sake of argument. Did you agree with every value espoused by one of the candidates? I think it's highly unlikely. For those you did agree with, do they hold the same priority for them as for you? Would they make every decision exactly how you would have them do? I very much doubt that as well. The candidates of the two major parties had record low favorability ratings.[0] If you want to say something about Americans, it's that they didn't really like whoever was going to be elected. Assuming they subscribe to everything represented by their elected officials, even if they did vote for them, does them a disservice. [0]: http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/americans-distaste-for-both-trump-and-clinton-is-record-breaking/ http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/americans-distaste-for-b... People may share some of your values, values that are important to you. They may prioritize them different than you do, and some of their values that you do not share may be prioritized above them. I would want to work with all of the people that agree with me on a particular one. If I chose language that continues to alienate people, it will do little to nothing to help us find the common ground and work towards common goals. If I keep all of my values bundled together, I'm very unlikely to make progress on any of them. I need to be able to talk about them individually, just as I am here, discussing my views on getting people to work together, with you. I'm separating this from the rest of my individual values (even though I'd like to think they're related, I know human psychology well enough to know that they are not at all likely to be internally consistent across them all), of which I'm sure we share at least a few. Arguing that you should accept this one because you and I share these others actively works against the point I'm trying to make, which is why I strive to avoid including any particular issue in my discussion. I want things to change, and the thing I want to change the most is the idea that people can't work together even if they don't agree on every issue. I don't see how we can make progress on any issue any other civil way. I'm frustrated in that I haven't been able to phrase my comments in a more amiable manner, and I fear I've let things go further than I'd otherwise like. For this I apologize, and will finish with this thread. I wish you the best and hope you have a productive day.
rabbyte 10y ago
> you alienate a lot of people who might otherwise sympathize with you shading the truth might win people over but only those who are willing to turn their minds off because they were offended, only those more interested in changes that will let them go back to sitting right in their feelings. you'll see this most evidently on the web where a person feels there's work to be done only so long as they feel they need to correct someone, as soon as everyone feels the record has been set straight it goes right back to the kind of complacency that generates the kinds of statements you dislike so much. the same people who talk about "bleeding heart" "libtards" hung up on their feelings are the same emotionally inept lot that don't see how their own feelings for a flag gets in the way of truth; that a nation is not a monolith, that we are both wonderful and terrible, and that no change can come from a state of denial. "We're broken" is the same as "We're not perfect" but denial clings to the phrasing that lets us believe perfection is within reach.

tomp 10y ago

Why do you post such non-substantiated arguments on HN? His "admission" of sexual assault was in fact alpha-male-y locker room talk, and he's married to a foreigner, so your accusation of "xenophobia" sounds a bit hollow...

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
legodt 10y ago
I'm going to give to the benefit of the doubt and not assume you are intentionally being misogynistic, so here's some light reading to help clear up why what you said perpetuates rape culture and isn't okay. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/oct/11/locker-room-talk-not-harmless-rape-culture-trump https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/oct/11/locker... http://www.teenvogue.com/story/donald-trump-locker-room-talk-rape-culture http://www.teenvogue.com/story/donald-trump-locker-room-talk... http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2016/10/13/what-did-donald-trump-reveal-about-progress-for-women/progress-would-be-accepting-that-trumps-locker-room-talk-illustrates-rape-culture http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2016/10/13/what-did-don...? https://www.theodysseyonline.com/perpetuating-rape-culture-not-locker-room-talk https://www.theodysseyonline.com/perpetuating-rape-culture-n...
- tomp 10y ago
  I disagree. I stand firmly on the side of freedom of speech and judging people on their actions, not words. If anything, equating words with rape is what normalizes and trivializes rape! Edit: also, this moralizing that locker room talk perpetuates "rape culture" (I even dispute its existence in the West!) sounds eerily similar to the "shooting games encourage crime" panic we had a few years ago. Unless you have data to back it up, I dismiss this whole argument as made-up.
  - legodt 10y ago
    If you actually read those articles and still believe that, I want you to know that I legitimately find you frightening. This is about a person in a position of authority making a statement that normalizes sexual assault. This isn't video games. There are real victims and a culture that perpetuates this. He didn't grope somebody personally and get away with it, he did it in real life and bragged about it. I don't know how to break this down any further and that you tried to flip this into me normalizing rape culture is disgusting. Maybe you need to learn what rape culture is? Maybe it's time to stop pretending that anti-feminism isn't misogynistic. I hope I'm never near you in the real world because your words indicate a lack of care about actions to my body. I'm out.