5 ms·

I think the parent is suggesting they should be paid more.

graderjs 4y ago
Hmm, maybe. But I'm sure there's current of attitude, that some people have, where people think, any payment in exchange for narrative from the classes of the "downtrodden" is simply exploitation but I think that is both a disempowering perpetuation of an incorrect stereotype that tries to rob people of agency, plus a tactic of the upper classes to keep people down. But then again even giving voice to class itself may be an incorrect stereotype that's disempowering. Uuhh...It's difficult to find the right language but I think we should just see people as people. And that's what I'm really speaking to here even if I'm not replying to the intention of the parent comment, it doesn't matter: what I'm saying is still valuable and important.
- socialismisok 4y ago
  It's a fine line. It depends a lot on who is producing the content and why. What's their objective. There's definitely folks who will create films and documentaries to exploit the subject, and folks who do it to highlight the subject. No silver bullet, unfortunately.
  - graderjs 4y ago
    Yeah, but what I'm saying is still valuable and important: I mean, who are we to judge? We don't know it's exploitation. From the outside it's pretty hard to see that, the people involved have to decide for themselves. And if they have decided we have to respect that, I think. Unless you see the full picture, how it's all made, all the connections between the people: as an audience member, consuming the content, I mean, you can't tell, no way. Maybe even being an audience member is exploitative...anyway. So I think you got to err on the side of caution as an outsider who has no idea, and just like not try to impose, and not call for any sort of curtailing of such content under the moral panic that "it's exploitative", which may just a NIMBY sort of way of silencing them "for their own good."

Hmm, maybe. But I'm sure there's current of attitude, that some people have, where people think, any payment in exchange for narrative from the classes of the "downtrodden" is simply exploitation but I think that is both a disempowering perpetuation of an incorrect stereotype that tries to rob people of agency, plus a tactic of the upper classes to keep people down. But then again even giving voice to class itself may be an incorrect stereotype that's disempowering. Uuhh...It's difficult to find the right language but I think we should just see people as people. And that's what I'm really speaking to here even if I'm not replying to the intention of the parent comment, it doesn't matter: what I'm saying is still valuable and important.

socialismisok 4y ago
It's a fine line. It depends a lot on who is producing the content and why. What's their objective. There's definitely folks who will create films and documentaries to exploit the subject, and folks who do it to highlight the subject. No silver bullet, unfortunately.
- graderjs 4y ago
  Yeah, but what I'm saying is still valuable and important: I mean, who are we to judge? We don't know it's exploitation. From the outside it's pretty hard to see that, the people involved have to decide for themselves. And if they have decided we have to respect that, I think. Unless you see the full picture, how it's all made, all the connections between the people: as an audience member, consuming the content, I mean, you can't tell, no way. Maybe even being an audience member is exploitative...anyway. So I think you got to err on the side of caution as an outsider who has no idea, and just like not try to impose, and not call for any sort of curtailing of such content under the moral panic that "it's exploitative", which may just a NIMBY sort of way of silencing them "for their own good."