3 ms·

Murder and theft are treated as obviously bad, in any context, by U.S. society at large. Getting murdered? That's bad no matter who it was. Getting robbed? That

Murder and theft are treated as obviously bad, in any context, by U.S. society at large. Getting murdered? That's bad no matter who it was. Getting robbed? That's bad no matter who it was. Getting raped? * Well that sucks, but it was just a one off event. * Oh you're a guy that's been raped, what are you some kind of pussy? * Are you sure you're just not making rape claims for attention? * Let's just probe you a bit more for evidence that we'll lock away and probably won't even use to help prosecute the criminal who did this to you. Theft and murder also don't usually have undertones (or rather really overt tones) of homophobia and toxic masculinity. The manner and context in which these jokes/hyperbole are delivered can be the difference between being topically hyperbolic and just outright revealing how ignorant of a person you are. To use your murder joke analogy, there's a difference between "You're gonna get slaughtered this game" versues "I'm gonna lynch you this round", to a presumably black competitor. It's not the fact the action is being used in a joking, hyperbolic manner. It really is about the context and manner you deliver the joke. You can in that process play to darker aspects of our society's status quo. The author of the article gives explicit examples of this and pretty much spells it out.

monetus 8y ago
I think the way you rephrase the murder reference illustrates pretty well how the expectations people have control their vocabulary. Expectations are transient and certainly not universal. Brandon's expectations about the way people perceive his dialogue were not universally correct. The condemnatory part of the article, in my mind, is that he tried to change the employee's reaction rather than his definition of insensitivity. I don't think those norms within dialogue can be wholly avoided though, sadly. As far as I can tell, our id penalizes effemince in men. Ps: your bulletins seem more like venting frustration than anything else. Hope you're doing alright.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- kadendogthing 8y ago
  >your bulletins seem more like venting frustration than anything else. Not sure why it would read that way, those are common talking points/situations in American society.
  - rectang 8y ago
    As someone who seems to be roughly aligned with your positions and who admires your incisive analysis, I nevertheless find that your posts tend to be strident and that they send threads spiraling into flame wars. I wish that you could find ways to engage which are more in line with the HN guidelines. Many of us with strong opinions, including myself, have had posts flagged and received constructive feedback from dang, just like you under your old identity. I think about those guidelines and dang's feedback a lot when composing posts.
    - kadendogthing 8y ago
      >have had posts flagged and received constructive feedback from dang I don't consider it constructive at all. In fact it's often just been used to stop a conversation with no clear purpose or direction. It's been pretty vague, with really whimsical throwbacks to the guidelines that he's never been able to elucidate on which part I'm violating. >I nevertheless find that your posts tend to be strident They're blunt when I know people are not commenting in good faith or they've made no effort to actually educate themselves about a subject (the former and latter are often intertwined). I will not be changing my tone on such posts. >I wish that you could find ways to engage which are more in line with the HN guidelines. Which guidelines? So far as I've seen it's only based on which opinions are popular and are worded in a faux-intellectual manner and then you can basically get away with anything. I had the CEO of Bitlocker basically tell me I was worth less than his dog (because his dog does not have the ability to criticize him) and lo and behold guess which one of us got dang's attention. There are countless examples of this pattern that do not involve me, but other users on this site. I don't say anything I wouldn't say to anyone's face on here, so I'm certainly not going to be try to be even more academically-cutesy on the internet than I am even in person. A yesteryear account actually had my name and company information on it. Too bad that my place of employment started getting harassed by hard right-wingers for my comments on here (the only place any alias of mine has has had personal information on it has been this site). But the point is I am being honest, topical, and forthright so any any claims that I'm causing threads to spiral into flame wars seem a bit over the top.

monetus 8y ago

I think the way you rephrase the murder reference illustrates pretty well how the expectations people have control their vocabulary. Expectations are transient and certainly not universal. Brandon's expectations about the way people perceive his dialogue were not universally correct. The condemnatory part of the article, in my mind, is that he tried to change the employee's reaction rather than his definition of insensitivity. I don't think those norms within dialogue can be wholly avoided though, sadly. As far as I can tell, our id penalizes effemince in men. Ps: your bulletins seem more like venting frustration than anything else. Hope you're doing alright.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
kadendogthing 8y ago
>your bulletins seem more like venting frustration than anything else. Not sure why it would read that way, those are common talking points/situations in American society.
- rectang 8y ago
  As someone who seems to be roughly aligned with your positions and who admires your incisive analysis, I nevertheless find that your posts tend to be strident and that they send threads spiraling into flame wars. I wish that you could find ways to engage which are more in line with the HN guidelines. Many of us with strong opinions, including myself, have had posts flagged and received constructive feedback from dang, just like you under your old identity. I think about those guidelines and dang's feedback a lot when composing posts.
  - kadendogthing 8y ago
    >have had posts flagged and received constructive feedback from dang I don't consider it constructive at all. In fact it's often just been used to stop a conversation with no clear purpose or direction. It's been pretty vague, with really whimsical throwbacks to the guidelines that he's never been able to elucidate on which part I'm violating. >I nevertheless find that your posts tend to be strident They're blunt when I know people are not commenting in good faith or they've made no effort to actually educate themselves about a subject (the former and latter are often intertwined). I will not be changing my tone on such posts. >I wish that you could find ways to engage which are more in line with the HN guidelines. Which guidelines? So far as I've seen it's only based on which opinions are popular and are worded in a faux-intellectual manner and then you can basically get away with anything. I had the CEO of Bitlocker basically tell me I was worth less than his dog (because his dog does not have the ability to criticize him) and lo and behold guess which one of us got dang's attention. There are countless examples of this pattern that do not involve me, but other users on this site. I don't say anything I wouldn't say to anyone's face on here, so I'm certainly not going to be try to be even more academically-cutesy on the internet than I am even in person. A yesteryear account actually had my name and company information on it. Too bad that my place of employment started getting harassed by hard right-wingers for my comments on here (the only place any alias of mine has has had personal information on it has been this site). But the point is I am being honest, topical, and forthright so any any claims that I'm causing threads to spiral into flame wars seem a bit over the top.