7 ms·

fad-interpretations of what is taboo and scandalous I hope there isn't a time in the future when people see the current wave of anti-racism, anti-slavery, and

fad-interpretations of what is taboo and scandalous I hope there isn't a time in the future when people see the current wave of anti-racism, anti-slavery, and anti-misogyny as just a silly fad we had in the early 21st century. Although, I guess the people would have said the same about nudity in the mid-1800s...

Xelbair 4y ago
Unless those things go so far that they turn full circle, because it's easy to stop fighting for equality and go for revenge.
- watwut 4y ago
  Good half of people who complain about modern sensitivity are in it for inequality and for revenge. You see that in a way they are perfectly fine with old sensitivity. As long as censorship and exclusion are done the way they have been done in past, they support it.
monero-xmr 4y ago
It’s not that those feelings are wrong, it’s when you decide to alter artistic work based on the current vogue. It’s when you cross the line into censorship.
WastingMyTime89 4y ago
You will not get an interesting conversation on these topics on an American discussion board. These topics are a minefield. Plenty of the things which are pushed unconditionally in the US right now should be debatable and debated. Some concepts like cultural appropriation look clearly dubious to my French self. The issue is that having a debate has become impossible. In some circles, you will be quartered for daring to express that there exists differences between men and women which might not be socially constructed.
- DeathArrow 4y ago
  > You will not get an interesting conversation on these topics on an American discussion board. These topics are a minefield. That's a problem. Why have people become so afraid to speak their minds? We live in a democracy or not?
  - Moissanite 4y ago
    > We live in a democracy or not? Not really, no. Setting aside pedantry about the US being a republic and not a pure democracy, the fact is that wealthy elites decide election outcomes now. You ended up with Trump because elites in Russia wanted him elected more than elites in the US wanted Clinton. You got rid of him because elites in the US had woken up to the fact that they weren't the only player in that game anymore. Culture wars are a proxy battlefield in much the same way that Ukraine is.
    - DeathArrow 4y ago
      By we, I didn't specify US citizens, but the collective western world. The situation isn't much different in EU. Sadly, we can't wait for the train to stop at next station and get out, because it's the only train we have.
    - kome 4y ago
      > "You ended up with Trump because elites in Russia wanted him elected more than elites in the US wanted Clinton" This is so detached from reality, that is not even trying to understand why trump happened and why it may happens again.
      - Moissanite 4y ago
        I should really have said "elites, including those in antagonistic countries like Russia". My main point was more about the elites than where they are from.
      - Moissanite 4y ago
        Do you believe the appeal of Trump to disaffected Americans would be enough to win him the election, if big business (Koch et al) turned against the Republican party? Genuine question, because I feel like that is where the lever really is.
Ygg2 4y ago
So anti-racist you add racially segregated spaces. But in opposite directions.
josefx 4y ago
> current wave of anti-racism, anti-slavery Reducing racism is great, but censoring existing works because they contain the n-word just seems stupid.
throwawaylinux 4y ago
I wonder if the enlightened future-people will consider the institutional exclusion of asian people from higher education on the basis that there are too many others of the same race in colleges, to be pro-racism or anti-racism.
- DeathArrow 4y ago
  > pro-racism or anti-racism Or good racism.
- cbzoiav 4y ago
  White men applying for software and management jobs could make the same point. Positive discrimination almost always results in someone else facing negative discrimination because of the same attribute. It can also lead to further problems. Is it still racist to point out the [race/gender/religion/etc.] [students/employees/etc.] on average aren't as good now they actually aren't due to [employment/selection] bias?
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
meindnoch 4y ago
"I hope there isn't a time in the future when people see the current wave of anti-alcoholism as just a silly fad we had in the early 20th century." - someone in 1930
- brodo 4y ago
  Plus prohibition was very much framed as a women’s rights issue.
DeathArrow 4y ago
History comes in circles and tends to repeat itself.
0xbadc0de5 4y ago
The problem is that nowadays very often the people pushing the "we just want to reduce obvious bad thing X" narrative are using it as a Trojan horse to smuggle in a plethora of other terrible ideas. We don't need to rewrite history or vandalize prior art to create a better future.
helloplanets 4y ago
I think this is a bit too much of a strawman for an argument that's in line with what's actually discussed in the linked article. Especially when talking about a guy who directed Schindler's List. > Spielberg was also asked about the controversial re-editing of Roald Dahl’s work which has included changing words like “fat” to “enormous” and “ugly and beastly” to just “beastly”. > Initially he joked that “Nobody should ever attempt to take the chocolate out of Willy Wonka! Ever!” before adding “For me, it is sacrosanct. It’s our history, it’s our cultural heritage. I do not believe in censorship in that way.” Roald Rahdl books were a big part of what I remember reading as a child. The words "fat" and "ugly" are absolutely grotesque, but also part of the palette he used to draw his worlds as he wanted people to see them. I think parents have the responsibility to have a proper conversation about the questions their children might have about the some of stuff those books bring up, or make the decision to not read them until the child is of a certain age. At least from my point of view, the central question would be that what is the proper age that a child is old enough to know about the existence of the words "fat" and "ugly".
- boppo1 4y ago
  'Fat' and 'ugly' are not grotesque words, they are unkind. If you want grotesque, look up 'hassan's rumpus room' from Naked Lunch. Should be around page 60 or so.
- notjulianjaynes 4y ago
  Grotesque is an ugly word and more enormous than it needs to be at that.
- circlefavshape 4y ago
  Do you think that a child won't know that "enormous" means "fat"? Or that "beastly" just means "ugly"?
  - helloplanets 4y ago
    Probably does. Although the words are definitely not equivalent. I'm not advocating any sort of age limit on Roald Dahl books, pretty much the opposite.
hnthrowaway6543 4y ago
I'd like to think society will be less racist, misogynist and such in the future. But there will be scrutiny of the specific actions taken, because frankly, a lot of "anti-racist" behavior has been upper-middle class white people doing easy, performative things to make themselves feel good and to promote themselves as an ally. It hasn't even been 5 years, and already the 2020 "fight racism by renaming your master branch to main" movement feels like a tone-deaf embarrassment.
- john_the_writer 4y ago
  POC only spaces, vs other Non-POC spaces. POC residence, vs Non-POC residence. I can see how these would be considered a silly part of the current anti-racist movement. Thank god they weren't in place when I went to school. My kids wouldn't be here.
- oneeyedpigeon 4y ago
  Did anyone ever make a claim that master —> main was going to have a significant, direct impact on the fight against racism? Obviously, it's a step, but it seemed like an entirely positive thing to me (shorter, more semantic) with essentially zero downside.
  - suslik 4y ago
    > Obviously, it's a step Not sure if it is at all obvious.
  - veeti 4y ago
    If only there was no downside, but you can't change 15+ years of convention and not break something in the process. For example, I've had Homebrew upgrade fail because someone thought the "master" branch must not only be renamed but also permanently eradicated from a cask repo, Yocto had the same issue [1], etc. [1] https://github.com/ostreedev/ostree/issues/2360 https://github.com/ostreedev/ostree/issues/2360
    - bombcar 4y ago
notjulianjaynes 4y ago
I think the risk is more that the people will read Dahl or watch Spielberg and think that the cultural sensitivities from the 1960s-1980s we're exactly like those during the 2020s.
- john_the_writer 4y ago
  Like when all the books say we raised the chocolate ration.. “It appeared that there had even been demonstrations to thank Big Brother for raising the chocolate ration to twenty grams a week. And only yesterday […] it had been announced that the ration was to be reduced to twenty grams a week. Was it possible that they could swallow that, after only twenty-four hours?"
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
lelanthran 4y ago
> I hope there isn't a time in the future when people see the current wave of anti-racism, anti-slavery, and anti-misogyny as just a silly fad we had in the early 21st century. Maybe not, but there'll definitely be a time in the future when the current puritanical wave will be seen as a fad, an embarrassment in human history. "You mean people actually self-censored in case they were punished for thoughtcrime?" "Yes, grandson."
IMTDb 4y ago
"I hope there isn't a time in the future when people see the current wave of anti-nude displays as just a silly fad we had in the early 17th century" Proceeds to destroy hundreds of paintings by adding poorly drawn fig leaves and to censor masterpieces over tiny penises. It is a fad; people will come to their senses and recognise the value of the original work; while accepting the fact that they were produced in a time where these behaviours were considered as acceptable but it's no longer the case.
stcroixx 4y ago
If there's anything to be sure of, it's that this is bound to happen. The core ideas will always have staying power, but the current implementations are already seen as a silly by large swaths of us who don't disagree with the core ideas. I suspect the future will judge social mores from this time period much more harshly than a silly fad though.
kbelder 4y ago
Honestly, I think anti-racism, anti-slavery, and anti-misogyny was more of a 20th century movement. What's happening now is not so noble.
mecha_ghidorah 4y ago
> see the current wave of anti-racism, anti-slavery, and anti-misogyny as just a silly fad So... I certainly hope that being genuinely anti those things doesn't turn out to be a fad, those things are all bad things and should be opposed. Having said that I do hope that some of the ways people are choosing to be "anti" these things goes the way of the dodo because I believe they are ineffective and dumb. As an example trying to get rid of the word "master" in tech... it's use in tech is in no way an endorsement of slavery. The suggestion it is racist to use this term is especially silly to me, because slavery has been practiced by all sorts of cultures for human history and because slavery is still a thing that is going on in the world (just look at that new stadium in the UAE). Being anti slavery is fantastic. We can do that by boycotting companies that turn a blind eye to forced labour and by pressuring our governments to sanction countries that ignore it within their borders. The same applies to being anti-racist or anti-misogynist or whatever. There are concrete actions that can be taken that will make a difference, but going back through old art and censoring certain words for fear that they get uttered as if this were Harry Potter and these words were Voldemort is just fucking silly.

Xelbair 4y ago

Unless those things go so far that they turn full circle, because it's easy to stop fighting for equality and go for revenge.

watwut 4y ago
Good half of people who complain about modern sensitivity are in it for inequality and for revenge. You see that in a way they are perfectly fine with old sensitivity. As long as censorship and exclusion are done the way they have been done in past, they support it.

monero-xmr 4y ago

It’s not that those feelings are wrong, it’s when you decide to alter artistic work based on the current vogue. It’s when you cross the line into censorship.

WastingMyTime89 4y ago

You will not get an interesting conversation on these topics on an American discussion board. These topics are a minefield. Plenty of the things which are pushed unconditionally in the US right now should be debatable and debated. Some concepts like cultural appropriation look clearly dubious to my French self. The issue is that having a debate has become impossible. In some circles, you will be quartered for daring to express that there exists differences between men and women which might not be socially constructed.

DeathArrow 4y ago
> You will not get an interesting conversation on these topics on an American discussion board. These topics are a minefield. That's a problem. Why have people become so afraid to speak their minds? We live in a democracy or not?
- Moissanite 4y ago
  > We live in a democracy or not? Not really, no. Setting aside pedantry about the US being a republic and not a pure democracy, the fact is that wealthy elites decide election outcomes now. You ended up with Trump because elites in Russia wanted him elected more than elites in the US wanted Clinton. You got rid of him because elites in the US had woken up to the fact that they weren't the only player in that game anymore. Culture wars are a proxy battlefield in much the same way that Ukraine is.
  - DeathArrow 4y ago
    By we, I didn't specify US citizens, but the collective western world. The situation isn't much different in EU. Sadly, we can't wait for the train to stop at next station and get out, because it's the only train we have.
  - kome 4y ago
    > "You ended up with Trump because elites in Russia wanted him elected more than elites in the US wanted Clinton" This is so detached from reality, that is not even trying to understand why trump happened and why it may happens again.
    - Moissanite 4y ago
      I should really have said "elites, including those in antagonistic countries like Russia". My main point was more about the elites than where they are from.
    - Moissanite 4y ago
      Do you believe the appeal of Trump to disaffected Americans would be enough to win him the election, if big business (Koch et al) turned against the Republican party? Genuine question, because I feel like that is where the lever really is.

Ygg2 4y ago

So anti-racist you add racially segregated spaces. But in opposite directions.

josefx 4y ago

> current wave of anti-racism, anti-slavery Reducing racism is great, but censoring existing works because they contain the n-word just seems stupid.

throwawaylinux 4y ago

I wonder if the enlightened future-people will consider the institutional exclusion of asian people from higher education on the basis that there are too many others of the same race in colleges, to be pro-racism or anti-racism.

DeathArrow 4y ago
> pro-racism or anti-racism Or good racism.
cbzoiav 4y ago
White men applying for software and management jobs could make the same point. Positive discrimination almost always results in someone else facing negative discrimination because of the same attribute. It can also lead to further problems. Is it still racist to point out the [race/gender/religion/etc.] [students/employees/etc.] on average aren't as good now they actually aren't due to [employment/selection] bias?

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

meindnoch 4y ago

"I hope there isn't a time in the future when people see the current wave of anti-alcoholism as just a silly fad we had in the early 20th century." - someone in 1930

brodo 4y ago
Plus prohibition was very much framed as a women’s rights issue.

DeathArrow 4y ago

History comes in circles and tends to repeat itself.

0xbadc0de5 4y ago

The problem is that nowadays very often the people pushing the "we just want to reduce obvious bad thing X" narrative are using it as a Trojan horse to smuggle in a plethora of other terrible ideas. We don't need to rewrite history or vandalize prior art to create a better future.

helloplanets 4y ago

I think this is a bit too much of a strawman for an argument that's in line with what's actually discussed in the linked article. Especially when talking about a guy who directed Schindler's List. > Spielberg was also asked about the controversial re-editing of Roald Dahl’s work which has included changing words like “fat” to “enormous” and “ugly and beastly” to just “beastly”. > Initially he joked that “Nobody should ever attempt to take the chocolate out of Willy Wonka! Ever!” before adding “For me, it is sacrosanct. It’s our history, it’s our cultural heritage. I do not believe in censorship in that way.” Roald Rahdl books were a big part of what I remember reading as a child. The words "fat" and "ugly" are absolutely grotesque, but also part of the palette he used to draw his worlds as he wanted people to see them. I think parents have the responsibility to have a proper conversation about the questions their children might have about the some of stuff those books bring up, or make the decision to not read them until the child is of a certain age. At least from my point of view, the central question would be that what is the proper age that a child is old enough to know about the existence of the words "fat" and "ugly".

boppo1 4y ago
'Fat' and 'ugly' are not grotesque words, they are unkind. If you want grotesque, look up 'hassan's rumpus room' from Naked Lunch. Should be around page 60 or so.
notjulianjaynes 4y ago
Grotesque is an ugly word and more enormous than it needs to be at that.
circlefavshape 4y ago
Do you think that a child won't know that "enormous" means "fat"? Or that "beastly" just means "ugly"?
- helloplanets 4y ago
  Probably does. Although the words are definitely not equivalent. I'm not advocating any sort of age limit on Roald Dahl books, pretty much the opposite.

hnthrowaway6543 4y ago

I'd like to think society will be less racist, misogynist and such in the future. But there will be scrutiny of the specific actions taken, because frankly, a lot of "anti-racist" behavior has been upper-middle class white people doing easy, performative things to make themselves feel good and to promote themselves as an ally. It hasn't even been 5 years, and already the 2020 "fight racism by renaming your master branch to main" movement feels like a tone-deaf embarrassment.

john_the_writer 4y ago
POC only spaces, vs other Non-POC spaces. POC residence, vs Non-POC residence. I can see how these would be considered a silly part of the current anti-racist movement. Thank god they weren't in place when I went to school. My kids wouldn't be here.
oneeyedpigeon 4y ago
Did anyone ever make a claim that master —> main was going to have a significant, direct impact on the fight against racism? Obviously, it's a step, but it seemed like an entirely positive thing to me (shorter, more semantic) with essentially zero downside.
- suslik 4y ago
  > Obviously, it's a step Not sure if it is at all obvious.
- veeti 4y ago
  If only there was no downside, but you can't change 15+ years of convention and not break something in the process. For example, I've had Homebrew upgrade fail because someone thought the "master" branch must not only be renamed but also permanently eradicated from a cask repo, Yocto had the same issue [1], etc. [1] https://github.com/ostreedev/ostree/issues/2360 https://github.com/ostreedev/ostree/issues/2360
  - bombcar 4y ago

notjulianjaynes 4y ago

I think the risk is more that the people will read Dahl or watch Spielberg and think that the cultural sensitivities from the 1960s-1980s we're exactly like those during the 2020s.

john_the_writer 4y ago
Like when all the books say we raised the chocolate ration.. “It appeared that there had even been demonstrations to thank Big Brother for raising the chocolate ration to twenty grams a week. And only yesterday […] it had been announced that the ration was to be reduced to twenty grams a week. Was it possible that they could swallow that, after only twenty-four hours?"
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

lelanthran 4y ago

> I hope there isn't a time in the future when people see the current wave of anti-racism, anti-slavery, and anti-misogyny as just a silly fad we had in the early 21st century. Maybe not, but there'll definitely be a time in the future when the current puritanical wave will be seen as a fad, an embarrassment in human history. "You mean people actually self-censored in case they were punished for thoughtcrime?" "Yes, grandson."

IMTDb 4y ago

"I hope there isn't a time in the future when people see the current wave of anti-nude displays as just a silly fad we had in the early 17th century" Proceeds to destroy hundreds of paintings by adding poorly drawn fig leaves and to censor masterpieces over tiny penises. It is a fad; people will come to their senses and recognise the value of the original work; while accepting the fact that they were produced in a time where these behaviours were considered as acceptable but it's no longer the case.

stcroixx 4y ago

If there's anything to be sure of, it's that this is bound to happen. The core ideas will always have staying power, but the current implementations are already seen as a silly by large swaths of us who don't disagree with the core ideas. I suspect the future will judge social mores from this time period much more harshly than a silly fad though.

kbelder 4y ago

Honestly, I think anti-racism, anti-slavery, and anti-misogyny was more of a 20th century movement. What's happening now is not so noble.

mecha_ghidorah 4y ago

> see the current wave of anti-racism, anti-slavery, and anti-misogyny as just a silly fad So... I certainly hope that being genuinely anti those things doesn't turn out to be a fad, those things are all bad things and should be opposed. Having said that I do hope that some of the ways people are choosing to be "anti" these things goes the way of the dodo because I believe they are ineffective and dumb. As an example trying to get rid of the word "master" in tech... it's use in tech is in no way an endorsement of slavery. The suggestion it is racist to use this term is especially silly to me, because slavery has been practiced by all sorts of cultures for human history and because slavery is still a thing that is going on in the world (just look at that new stadium in the UAE). Being anti slavery is fantastic. We can do that by boycotting companies that turn a blind eye to forced labour and by pressuring our governments to sanction countries that ignore it within their borders. The same applies to being anti-racist or anti-misogynist or whatever. There are concrete actions that can be taken that will make a difference, but going back through old art and censoring certain words for fear that they get uttered as if this were Harry Potter and these words were Voldemort is just fucking silly.