4 ms·

CoCs themselves, and the wider identity politics culture war, are also extremely Ameri-centric. > the implication that harrasment is somehow ok against people

CoCs themselves, and the wider identity politics culture war, are also extremely Ameri-centric. > the implication that harrasment is somehow ok against people who are not members of the protected class? There is a subset (I like to think that they're the fringe, but have no numbers to back that up) of those who engage in identity politics who do believe that bigotry does not apply when the target is the dominant demographic.

blueflow 5y ago
Somehow these people also tend to be the ones who have their pronouns in their twitter bio. Am i the only one noticing that correlation?
- type0 5y ago
  it is the depiction of in-group https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ingroups_and_outgroups https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ingroups_and_outgroups Modern tribalism at it's finest
roenxi 5y ago
> CoCs themselves, and the wider identity politics culture war, are also extremely Ameri-centric. An idea can be both a good one and political. And indeed a good idea while Ameri-centric. The risk is that this might be a status play by authoritarians, who very rarely have good ideas and typically do a lot of damage once they get in to power. I suspect actual minorities & protected classes are more worried about authoritarians than racist jokes. If they aren't they should be.
lsiebert 5y ago
I've never seen anybody suggest that you can't be bigoted against a dominant group. I have seen it suggested that specific terms like racism and sexism are not generic terms that apply to any sort of discrimination along racial, ethnic or in the case of sexism along gender lines, but apply specifically to actions that maintain or reinforce the power of dominant groups and existing privileges and positions that advantage them, and that trying to expand those terms to describe all discrimination serves to obfuscate and minimize the existing structural and institutional power disparities. Or to analogize, if my boss hates me, that's probably a big problem for me and my work. If alternatively hate my boss, that's not really a problem in the same way for my boss. I can't fire them, or decide what projects they can work on. They aren't the reverse of each other, because the power dynamic isn't the same.
- Fellshard 5y ago
  It is part of the basic definitions of the Critical Theory worldview, and the underlying Marxist ideas behind it. (Yes, I know invoking those will cause people to presume I'm just parroting talking points, but I am being very precise.) The gist of the idea is that the oppressed ('minority group') do not need to be bound by the laws that shackle them, created by the oppressors ('dominant group') solely to preserve their own power. Defying the oppressors and violating existing institutions and laws is a baseline understanding of those who fully adopt this worldview. It may be largely a fringe for now, but in America, it's being pushed steadily along the axes of both race and gender first, and other secondary traits following behind.
  - lsiebert 5y ago
    Wow are you barking up the wrong tree in describing me. This is some strange strawman version of what some left wing people believe, not a description of my philosophy. Did you read this on Brietbart, or in The National Review, or what?
    - Fellshard 5y ago
      I was not attempting to describe you, and I apologize if that's what I communicated. My response was intended to be to your opening comment: I've never seen anybody suggest that you can't be bigoted against a dominant group. I am pointing out that that /is/ a current and growing worldview among many, even if you have not yet seen it yourself. Your views are your own, and I have relatively little insight into it from your post. I would point out that it is the logical extension of what you stated in the first post in this subthread, carried to its extremes. If you don't believe those extremes should hold, I would ask you to consider: what is the limiting factor for you? Where is the line drawn? How far is too far?
      - lsiebert 5y ago
        I appreciate the clarification. I don't however agree with you that that's the logical extension of what I stated. Can you explain? I don't feel it particularly relevant to take an idea and carry it to an extreme to judge it's usefulness either. Perhaps you might instead address what I said initially on it's own terms.
Chris2048 5y ago
> who do believe that bigotry does not apply when the target is the dominant demographic I said something similar about this here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28664520 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28664520 Then I literally had a troll stalk me for it, claiming I was racist. When I asked why: "There’s no arguing with racist pieces of shit such as yourself" so, while what you say is true, careful pointing that out.

blueflow 5y ago

Somehow these people also tend to be the ones who have their pronouns in their twitter bio. Am i the only one noticing that correlation?

type0 5y ago
it is the depiction of in-group https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ingroups_and_outgroups https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ingroups_and_outgroups Modern tribalism at it's finest

roenxi 5y ago

> CoCs themselves, and the wider identity politics culture war, are also extremely Ameri-centric. An idea can be both a good one and political. And indeed a good idea while Ameri-centric. The risk is that this might be a status play by authoritarians, who very rarely have good ideas and typically do a lot of damage once they get in to power. I suspect actual minorities & protected classes are more worried about authoritarians than racist jokes. If they aren't they should be.

lsiebert 5y ago

I've never seen anybody suggest that you can't be bigoted against a dominant group. I have seen it suggested that specific terms like racism and sexism are not generic terms that apply to any sort of discrimination along racial, ethnic or in the case of sexism along gender lines, but apply specifically to actions that maintain or reinforce the power of dominant groups and existing privileges and positions that advantage them, and that trying to expand those terms to describe all discrimination serves to obfuscate and minimize the existing structural and institutional power disparities. Or to analogize, if my boss hates me, that's probably a big problem for me and my work. If alternatively hate my boss, that's not really a problem in the same way for my boss. I can't fire them, or decide what projects they can work on. They aren't the reverse of each other, because the power dynamic isn't the same.

Fellshard 5y ago
It is part of the basic definitions of the Critical Theory worldview, and the underlying Marxist ideas behind it. (Yes, I know invoking those will cause people to presume I'm just parroting talking points, but I am being very precise.) The gist of the idea is that the oppressed ('minority group') do not need to be bound by the laws that shackle them, created by the oppressors ('dominant group') solely to preserve their own power. Defying the oppressors and violating existing institutions and laws is a baseline understanding of those who fully adopt this worldview. It may be largely a fringe for now, but in America, it's being pushed steadily along the axes of both race and gender first, and other secondary traits following behind.
- lsiebert 5y ago
  Wow are you barking up the wrong tree in describing me. This is some strange strawman version of what some left wing people believe, not a description of my philosophy. Did you read this on Brietbart, or in The National Review, or what?
  - Fellshard 5y ago
    I was not attempting to describe you, and I apologize if that's what I communicated. My response was intended to be to your opening comment: I've never seen anybody suggest that you can't be bigoted against a dominant group. I am pointing out that that /is/ a current and growing worldview among many, even if you have not yet seen it yourself. Your views are your own, and I have relatively little insight into it from your post. I would point out that it is the logical extension of what you stated in the first post in this subthread, carried to its extremes. If you don't believe those extremes should hold, I would ask you to consider: what is the limiting factor for you? Where is the line drawn? How far is too far?
    - lsiebert 5y ago
      I appreciate the clarification. I don't however agree with you that that's the logical extension of what I stated. Can you explain? I don't feel it particularly relevant to take an idea and carry it to an extreme to judge it's usefulness either. Perhaps you might instead address what I said initially on it's own terms.

Chris2048 5y ago

> who do believe that bigotry does not apply when the target is the dominant demographic I said something similar about this here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28664520 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28664520 Then I literally had a troll stalk me for it, claiming I was racist. When I asked why: "There’s no arguing with racist pieces of shit such as yourself" so, while what you say is true, careful pointing that out.