4 ms·

It means that, despite being the one with the brain that processes human emotion and social cues radically less efficiently than other people, I'm the one who,

by rosser 8y ago

It means that, despite being the one with the brain that processes human emotion and social cues radically less efficiently than other people, I'm the one who, e.g., has to explain to the "emotionally competent" not to rageface at me for not understanding (or, more likely, even perceiving) the cues they probably aren't even aware they're emitting. Yeah, that's pure "SJW". (Flagged for that, btw. Never in the history of online discourse has that term served as anything but an attempt to shut people up. Throwing it around un-ironically is prima facie bad-faith discourse.) How about, "It's fucking hard to have a brain that the overwhelming majority of people fail utterly to understand, recognize, or allow for in their behavior; who, more often than not, act like I'm the one malingering, or attention-seeking, or whatever; and that it is the utter antithesis of 'self-indulgence' to be piqued by that." If you saw "crying victim" in my comment, you must have been looking for it, because I'm damned sure there wasn't any when I wrote it. I was offering a token voice of solidarity to someone who thinks it's bullshit that he should have to justify how his own hearing works to people. Because it is.

1996 8y ago
I am sorry if you took that as directed to your comment. The remark was more general, and directed at the overall response to the topic. However, your comment stood out by the use of the word "emotional labour". Whether you like it or not, some words are associated with concepts. It is like using some shibboleth, or lingo words. For you, "SJW" evokes "an attempt to shut people up" or "bad-faith discourse". For me, "emotional labour" evokes something more political, which I often see derided here. So it stands out quite a lot when it's not the case. It's even quite the opposite: everyone seem support something in some specific case that apply to them (Asperger, Autism) while they strongly oppose that when it doesn't apply to them. I call this a fine veneer of introspection, because I fear it translates to an impossibility of analyzing other people concerns when they are deemed not directly applicable. A less benevolent interpretation would be calling that egotism.
- bravura 8y ago
  I am sorry if you took that as directed to your comment. You literally replied to their comment. For you, "SJW" evokes "an attempt to shut people up" or "bad-faith discourse". It's name-calling, so yeah. For me, "emotional labour" evokes something more political, which I often see derided here. So I see what you're saying, because a lot of people use this term in political ways. But I think politics aside, it's a pretty important psychological and cultural concept. I don't know if there's a better term for it that doesn't feel politically coded. Do you have a better suggestion? Maybe read over my thoughts and let me know what you think. Basically, there are many things people do to keep society polite and orderly. In most cases, for most people, being polite is just a normal part of doing business with the world. But just imagine---for the sake of argument---that you have an obvious physical deformity, and strangers constantly stop and make you feel weird in a way that is not really socially acceptable. Yet you are expected constantly to maintain the social order and respond to these gawking and obtrusive strangers in a polite way. Wouldn't that be a little exhausting? Particularly if you were having a shitty day, and weren't feeling particularly polite? This is the phenomenon people are talking about when they use the term "emotional labor". It means that people are being shitty to you, but they don't understand that, so for that reason it would be impolite for you to point out they're being shitty to you, so you just eat shit and move on with your life. We could call this "politeness", but that terms elides the nuance that sometimes it is really emotionally exhausting to be polite and maintain social order all the time.
  - 1996 8y ago
    I replied to that comment because stood out the most, due to this choice of words. Regarding the concept of "emotional labour" you define, I am neutral. I am not saying it does not exist - I just believe it is a common human experience, even if it may hit some people more often than others. I just have a problem with what I perceive to be either A) an inability to feel a similar level empathy toward people who have different problems or B) hypocrisy. Seriously, imagine the same article towards another similar issue, and think about the conditional probability of finding the same supportive comment.
    - rosser 8y ago
tbrownaw 8y ago
> Yeah, that's pure "SJW". (Flagged for that, btw. Never in the history of online discourse has that term served as anything but an attempt to shut people up. Throwing it around un-ironically is prima facie bad-faith discourse.) Do try to be more careful about speaking in absolutes. They have this annoying habit of not actually being true.
- klodolph 8y ago
  > Do try to be more careful about speaking in absolutes. The phrase “prima facie” means “at first glance”. It emphasizes that the judgment is not absolute, but merely gives a strong impression.
  - rosser 8y ago
    And the "never in the history of online discourse" bit was hyperbole. But I'm not surprised if that was missed, all things considered.

by rosser 8y ago

1996 8y ago

I am sorry if you took that as directed to your comment. The remark was more general, and directed at the overall response to the topic. However, your comment stood out by the use of the word "emotional labour". Whether you like it or not, some words are associated with concepts. It is like using some shibboleth, or lingo words. For you, "SJW" evokes "an attempt to shut people up" or "bad-faith discourse". For me, "emotional labour" evokes something more political, which I often see derided here. So it stands out quite a lot when it's not the case. It's even quite the opposite: everyone seem support something in some specific case that apply to them (Asperger, Autism) while they strongly oppose that when it doesn't apply to them. I call this a fine veneer of introspection, because I fear it translates to an impossibility of analyzing other people concerns when they are deemed not directly applicable. A less benevolent interpretation would be calling that egotism.

bravura 8y ago
I am sorry if you took that as directed to your comment. You literally replied to their comment. For you, "SJW" evokes "an attempt to shut people up" or "bad-faith discourse". It's name-calling, so yeah. For me, "emotional labour" evokes something more political, which I often see derided here. So I see what you're saying, because a lot of people use this term in political ways. But I think politics aside, it's a pretty important psychological and cultural concept. I don't know if there's a better term for it that doesn't feel politically coded. Do you have a better suggestion? Maybe read over my thoughts and let me know what you think. Basically, there are many things people do to keep society polite and orderly. In most cases, for most people, being polite is just a normal part of doing business with the world. But just imagine---for the sake of argument---that you have an obvious physical deformity, and strangers constantly stop and make you feel weird in a way that is not really socially acceptable. Yet you are expected constantly to maintain the social order and respond to these gawking and obtrusive strangers in a polite way. Wouldn't that be a little exhausting? Particularly if you were having a shitty day, and weren't feeling particularly polite? This is the phenomenon people are talking about when they use the term "emotional labor". It means that people are being shitty to you, but they don't understand that, so for that reason it would be impolite for you to point out they're being shitty to you, so you just eat shit and move on with your life. We could call this "politeness", but that terms elides the nuance that sometimes it is really emotionally exhausting to be polite and maintain social order all the time.
- 1996 8y ago
  I replied to that comment because stood out the most, due to this choice of words. Regarding the concept of "emotional labour" you define, I am neutral. I am not saying it does not exist - I just believe it is a common human experience, even if it may hit some people more often than others. I just have a problem with what I perceive to be either A) an inability to feel a similar level empathy toward people who have different problems or B) hypocrisy. Seriously, imagine the same article towards another similar issue, and think about the conditional probability of finding the same supportive comment.
  - rosser 8y ago

tbrownaw 8y ago

> Yeah, that's pure "SJW". (Flagged for that, btw. Never in the history of online discourse has that term served as anything but an attempt to shut people up. Throwing it around un-ironically is prima facie bad-faith discourse.) Do try to be more careful about speaking in absolutes. They have this annoying habit of not actually being true.

klodolph 8y ago
> Do try to be more careful about speaking in absolutes. The phrase “prima facie” means “at first glance”. It emphasizes that the judgment is not absolute, but merely gives a strong impression.
- rosser 8y ago
  And the "never in the history of online discourse" bit was hyperbole. But I'm not surprised if that was missed, all things considered.