4 ms·

The appearance of the "reply" link on the thread page is delayed, but you can reply immediately if you visit the comment page (by clicking the "link" link above

by aaronem 13y ago

The appearance of the "reply" link on the thread page is delayed, but you can reply immediately if you visit the comment page (by clicking the "link" link above the comment body), where the "reply" link always appears immediately. I think you're still missing the point I am making, which is that it seems both simpler and more effective, not to target "cultures", but rather to target violence. Your anti-transphobes and your anti-homophobes and your anti-misogynists aren't working at cross purposes, exactly, but they are by default in silos, which is what necessitates the whole concept of "intersectionality" -- something which doesn't go nearly far enough, in my opinion, in that it still refuses to look outside the narrow categories of "vulnerable minorities" on whose behalf it is regarded as worthwhile to expend effort, but at least it's a start.

Jtsummers 13y ago
Re replying: True, and I should have mentioned it, but I think most people don't know about it (evidenced by even older HN members still side-replying to messages far down a thread). Re main topic: I'm trying to state my position and view more clearly. I'll either edit this later or post another reply. Short version: In my view violence is a product of the cultures it occurs in (or cultural boundaries).
- aaronem 13y ago
  Not to preëmpt your longer formulation, but just as culture can engender violence, successful violence reinforces the culture which engendered it. Interrupting the cycle at the point of culture strikes me as a long and subtle process by comparison with interrupting it at the point of violence; after all, once people realize something won't produce the result they desire, they won't bother to waste their effort doing it.
  - Jtsummers 13y ago
    Well, it's a really long rambling mess. So I'll pose this question instead. I type my long replies in emacs so I'll keep tinkering with what's probably best used as a blog post (if only I blogged) or essay than an HN post. How do we interrupt the violence if we don't try to change the cultures that the violence comes from? EDIT: BTW, I really do think we agree on the end goal, it's just the way to it that we differ. I understand my view and will continue to try and get it down to less than 20 pages (exaggeration, though I've likely deleted about 10 pages of material so far in restating it over and over again), I just don't understand yours yet. And since I'm the one that's not understanding, I'd rather get your view first, I might find that my long-winded reply is unnecessary.
    - aaronem 13y ago
      (I also write long replies in Emacs, and use the "It's All Text" extension for Firefox to integrate Emacs more directly into that workflow. If you use Firefox but don't use It's All Text, you might want to give it a look; if you don't use Firefox, I'm sure other browsers have something similar.) > How do we interrupt the violence if we don't try to change the cultures that the violence comes from? Outlaw the violence, and make it stick, by passing laws which motivate those with the power to curtail such violence to act in a fashion which does so. Consider, as a somewhat caricatured example, a state law under which school officials, specifically including principals, who are demonstrably aware of bullying among the students for whom they are responsible, but who do not act effectively to curtail it, can be considered accessory after the fact to assault and battery, or to some similar violent crime whose definition is more closely satisfied by the events over which they have so blithely presided. Consider the effect such a law is likely to have after the first two or three school principals are convicted of violating it, and imprisoned accordingly -- as Voltaire put it, pour encourager les autres, and encourager les autres it would! Sufficiently encouraged, they will find a way to solve the problem. Consider further the effect on federal law it is likely to have when it's not just a single state which passes and enforces this sort of law, but five, or ten, or twenty -- it worked for marijuana legalization; why not for this purpose as well? And consider how well it might work if, in the fullness of time, parents of bullies are themselves implicated in similar fashion -- granted that schools stand in loco parentis, and no progressive is going to want to roll that back save a few homeschoolers who inhabit the wild-eyed radical leftward fringe of the movement, but a certain judicious revitalization of the concept that parents are responsible for their children's behavior seems like something which would have a salutary effect in this case. Culture change is almost of necessity a generational process; legislation is not, especially when you can trivially tar opponents of legislation like this as enablers of bullies and bullies themselves -- tactics which, while perhaps slanderous and certainly unsavory, are well within the progressive playbook, and far from the only pages of that playbook which could be deployed in favor of an effort like the one I describe. I'm a theorist and a (sloppy) rhetorician, not an activist. I wouldn't know where to begin putting together a campaign actually to enact such legislation. But I don't see where the idea is intrinsically flawed, and while it lacks the theoretical elegance of extirpating the problem from the roots on up, it most certainly offers the prospect of saving a lot of kids from a lot of beatings, and I think much more quickly and comprehensively, too.

by aaronem 13y ago

Jtsummers 13y ago

Re replying: True, and I should have mentioned it, but I think most people don't know about it (evidenced by even older HN members still side-replying to messages far down a thread). Re main topic: I'm trying to state my position and view more clearly. I'll either edit this later or post another reply. Short version: In my view violence is a product of the cultures it occurs in (or cultural boundaries).

aaronem 13y ago
Not to preëmpt your longer formulation, but just as culture can engender violence, successful violence reinforces the culture which engendered it. Interrupting the cycle at the point of culture strikes me as a long and subtle process by comparison with interrupting it at the point of violence; after all, once people realize something won't produce the result they desire, they won't bother to waste their effort doing it.
- Jtsummers 13y ago
  Well, it's a really long rambling mess. So I'll pose this question instead. I type my long replies in emacs so I'll keep tinkering with what's probably best used as a blog post (if only I blogged) or essay than an HN post. How do we interrupt the violence if we don't try to change the cultures that the violence comes from? EDIT: BTW, I really do think we agree on the end goal, it's just the way to it that we differ. I understand my view and will continue to try and get it down to less than 20 pages (exaggeration, though I've likely deleted about 10 pages of material so far in restating it over and over again), I just don't understand yours yet. And since I'm the one that's not understanding, I'd rather get your view first, I might find that my long-winded reply is unnecessary.
  - aaronem 13y ago
    (I also write long replies in Emacs, and use the "It's All Text" extension for Firefox to integrate Emacs more directly into that workflow. If you use Firefox but don't use It's All Text, you might want to give it a look; if you don't use Firefox, I'm sure other browsers have something similar.) > How do we interrupt the violence if we don't try to change the cultures that the violence comes from? Outlaw the violence, and make it stick, by passing laws which motivate those with the power to curtail such violence to act in a fashion which does so. Consider, as a somewhat caricatured example, a state law under which school officials, specifically including principals, who are demonstrably aware of bullying among the students for whom they are responsible, but who do not act effectively to curtail it, can be considered accessory after the fact to assault and battery, or to some similar violent crime whose definition is more closely satisfied by the events over which they have so blithely presided. Consider the effect such a law is likely to have after the first two or three school principals are convicted of violating it, and imprisoned accordingly -- as Voltaire put it, pour encourager les autres, and encourager les autres it would! Sufficiently encouraged, they will find a way to solve the problem. Consider further the effect on federal law it is likely to have when it's not just a single state which passes and enforces this sort of law, but five, or ten, or twenty -- it worked for marijuana legalization; why not for this purpose as well? And consider how well it might work if, in the fullness of time, parents of bullies are themselves implicated in similar fashion -- granted that schools stand in loco parentis, and no progressive is going to want to roll that back save a few homeschoolers who inhabit the wild-eyed radical leftward fringe of the movement, but a certain judicious revitalization of the concept that parents are responsible for their children's behavior seems like something which would have a salutary effect in this case. Culture change is almost of necessity a generational process; legislation is not, especially when you can trivially tar opponents of legislation like this as enablers of bullies and bullies themselves -- tactics which, while perhaps slanderous and certainly unsavory, are well within the progressive playbook, and far from the only pages of that playbook which could be deployed in favor of an effort like the one I describe. I'm a theorist and a (sloppy) rhetorician, not an activist. I wouldn't know where to begin putting together a campaign actually to enact such legislation. But I don't see where the idea is intrinsically flawed, and while it lacks the theoretical elegance of extirpating the problem from the roots on up, it most certainly offers the prospect of saving a lot of kids from a lot of beatings, and I think much more quickly and comprehensively, too.