3 ms·

“Neanderthal” seems to be a bit of an exaggeration there, don’t you think? That seems to be applying the worst possible lens to what the author stated, and fran

“Neanderthal” seems to be a bit of an exaggeration there, don’t you think? That seems to be applying the worst possible lens to what the author stated, and frankly I don’t think the text supports it.

scrozier 4y ago
I suppose so. Sometimes we use colorful language to make a point. I think the text absolutely supports the idea that the author feels it is their place to educate others in what they (the author) have determined is the correct moral stance. Frankly, it makes my blood boil (metaphorically, of course), and I'm on the author's side, politically speaking.
- drewbug01 4y ago
  Don’t get me wrong, I appreciate colorful language. Frankly, I wish we used more of it. I do disagree with the point you were trying to make, though. The author described themselves as a “custodian of culture” in several instances where such an informal position might legitimately arise. If we take that at face value (it’s certainly hard to refute, in any case), then the technique they describe doesn’t seem to be as harsh to me as your colorful language implies. I mean - the scenario wherein someone appoints themselves a culturally custodian when they really aren’t would be pretty different. And annoying. But that’s a lot to read into the article (in my opinion).
  - scrozier 4y ago
    What would make someone an “official” custodian of culture, rather than a self-appointed one? And did the author say that they had that imprimatur?
  - scrozier 4y ago
    The author didn’t exactly say they were such a “custodian of culture.” They said one will find themselves there. I reread the article, and stand by my opinion. The whole article seems to me a rationalization for cutting off conversation because they (the author) don’t want to practice listening or empathy. They say in very simple words that their technique is “a conversation ender.” We may have a difference in personality. I consider myself pretty thoughtful. And sometimes I have a difference of opinion with someone. If they choose to use a “technique” on me that is “a conversation ender,” I will not like it. By extension, I wouldn’t use that technique on someone else. Feels an awful lot like bullying to me.

scrozier 4y ago

I suppose so. Sometimes we use colorful language to make a point. I think the text absolutely supports the idea that the author feels it is their place to educate others in what they (the author) have determined is the correct moral stance. Frankly, it makes my blood boil (metaphorically, of course), and I'm on the author's side, politically speaking.

drewbug01 4y ago
Don’t get me wrong, I appreciate colorful language. Frankly, I wish we used more of it. I do disagree with the point you were trying to make, though. The author described themselves as a “custodian of culture” in several instances where such an informal position might legitimately arise. If we take that at face value (it’s certainly hard to refute, in any case), then the technique they describe doesn’t seem to be as harsh to me as your colorful language implies. I mean - the scenario wherein someone appoints themselves a culturally custodian when they really aren’t would be pretty different. And annoying. But that’s a lot to read into the article (in my opinion).
- scrozier 4y ago
  What would make someone an “official” custodian of culture, rather than a self-appointed one? And did the author say that they had that imprimatur?
- scrozier 4y ago
  The author didn’t exactly say they were such a “custodian of culture.” They said one will find themselves there. I reread the article, and stand by my opinion. The whole article seems to me a rationalization for cutting off conversation because they (the author) don’t want to practice listening or empathy. They say in very simple words that their technique is “a conversation ender.” We may have a difference in personality. I consider myself pretty thoughtful. And sometimes I have a difference of opinion with someone. If they choose to use a “technique” on me that is “a conversation ender,” I will not like it. By extension, I wouldn’t use that technique on someone else. Feels an awful lot like bullying to me.