3 ms·

> Yeah, tech went mainstream and blockbuster movies are made out of cult classic books. That's one of the points in the post, those things used to be signals of

> Yeah, tech went mainstream and blockbuster movies are made out of cult classic books. That's one of the points in the post, those things used to be signals of particular kind of person but are no longer. They were more than signals, they were the culture that reflected the values we identified with: the wonder of discovery, the beauty of places that didn't exist, the value of smarts and imagination. Those values are nerd values and are also mainstream values. It is a point of agreement for which we can all start to talk. I think most nerds I know define nerdom by what they like and the acceptance of obsessive liking of an idea, not by any other "kind of person". > I see the author's point in the way people with more social power than myself ask for my conformity, to their benefit and my cost. It's framed so politely, everything is these days, but sometimes I don't want to adopt another persons standards. That's usually fair. But what happens when what people are pointing out is that your standards are unjust and are harming them? It is one thing for people asking you to, say, dress in a suit and a tie (an arbitrary imposed standard that really couldn't matter less unless you want to impress the people who like suits). It is another when the standard they are asking you to adopt is "don't grope us, don't assault us, don't insult us, don't provide cover or plausible deniability to those who willfully grope us or assault us or insult us.". Taken to the hyperbolic extreme, if someone imposes on me from the outside the standard that I should not kill people (assuming it weren't already within my own personal standards), it is still an imposition, but one they are within their rights to make. Social justice advocates really are as transparent as the name: they advocate for (social) justice. If your standards are unconventional but just, go ahead: you can be into D&D and feminist, you can be a furry and feminist, you can be an otaku and feminist[1], you can be into BSDM and feminist, you can be as weird as you wish to be and still treat people well even if awkwardly. You don't even need to be an advocate for gender equality, just do a good faith attempt at not perpetrating or upholding injustice. But if your standards are unjust or they facilitate injustice, why wouldn't people be allowed to point that out to you and request that you change them? Keep in mind that often, nerd feminists are not insiders encroaching into the outsider's safe space, but outsiders within a larger group of outsiders, trying to avoid being harmed by manipulative people skilled in the culture of the larger outsider group. They are often those of us, that we are allowing to be bullied, by others "like us". And, do people do unjust oppressive things in the name of justice and anti-oppression? Sure. Mob-mentality online shamming campaigns often are such injustice, at least when focused on individuals who are not powerful public figures (be it DongleGate or GamerGate, and I think there is still one of those that is far far worse). We should mention and call this out as well, but that doesn't mean that the points about there being injustice in nerd culture (as in pretty much any culture) are invalid. [1] Do I even need to mention you can be a brony and feminist? ;)

forgottenpass 12y ago
And, do people do unjust oppressive things in the name of justice and anti-oppression? Sure. So you're obviously aware why conversations about where the line between activism and asshole-ness is always turns to shit. You'll understand why I'm gonna bail on this conversation.
- pseudoplatypus 12y ago
  Ok, I don't need you to or expect you to reply. Just, consider this if you wish: when you are told that people are harmed by things other people in your community do, or things you might be doing without thinking, is it not worthwhile to listen? Take this whole discussion, for example. My takeaways are that: 1) There is a group/generation/subset within nerd culture that has had "social norms" and "proper conduct" used as a weapon against them, in order to attack them over what they feel is unintentional social clumsiness or voluntary disregard of norms they don't agree with, without intent of harming anyone. I tend to trust what people tell me, so I now believe this is a significant grievance for a number of people. It was never quite as large a part of my own experience with nerdyness, but I acknowledge it has been for others. 2) Public shamming is an effective tactic (in pointing people to the existence of a problem), but also a terribly aggressive one towards the person being named. Specially if they are only been picked as an example of what is considered bad only because of how common the behavior is and the toll it exerts on people in aggregate, not just that particular instance. This is, by the way, a point I have seen made before, within activist communities. I'd still argue naming and shamming is a valid response in cases of obvious ill intent or physical harm (e.g. rape), but not for all types of "inappropriate behavior" (in which I am including unintentional or miss-measured psychological harm). Could you, reciprocally, consider giving some though as to whether some of the things people label as unwelcoming, harmful or oppressive within a subset of nerd culture might be real grievances as well? How about considering whether the people exposing these grievances really come from outside the community, or from within? Or whether or not, if the grievances are real, they are right to demand that the culture addresses them? And, while I stand by the point you quoted, I'd still wager more oppressive things happen in the name of "this is how we always have acted" and "you are not really part of this group", than in the name of anti-oppression.

forgottenpass 12y ago

And, do people do unjust oppressive things in the name of justice and anti-oppression? Sure. So you're obviously aware why conversations about where the line between activism and asshole-ness is always turns to shit. You'll understand why I'm gonna bail on this conversation.

pseudoplatypus 12y ago
Ok, I don't need you to or expect you to reply. Just, consider this if you wish: when you are told that people are harmed by things other people in your community do, or things you might be doing without thinking, is it not worthwhile to listen? Take this whole discussion, for example. My takeaways are that: 1) There is a group/generation/subset within nerd culture that has had "social norms" and "proper conduct" used as a weapon against them, in order to attack them over what they feel is unintentional social clumsiness or voluntary disregard of norms they don't agree with, without intent of harming anyone. I tend to trust what people tell me, so I now believe this is a significant grievance for a number of people. It was never quite as large a part of my own experience with nerdyness, but I acknowledge it has been for others. 2) Public shamming is an effective tactic (in pointing people to the existence of a problem), but also a terribly aggressive one towards the person being named. Specially if they are only been picked as an example of what is considered bad only because of how common the behavior is and the toll it exerts on people in aggregate, not just that particular instance. This is, by the way, a point I have seen made before, within activist communities. I'd still argue naming and shamming is a valid response in cases of obvious ill intent or physical harm (e.g. rape), but not for all types of "inappropriate behavior" (in which I am including unintentional or miss-measured psychological harm). Could you, reciprocally, consider giving some though as to whether some of the things people label as unwelcoming, harmful or oppressive within a subset of nerd culture might be real grievances as well? How about considering whether the people exposing these grievances really come from outside the community, or from within? Or whether or not, if the grievances are real, they are right to demand that the culture addresses them? And, while I stand by the point you quoted, I'd still wager more oppressive things happen in the name of "this is how we always have acted" and "you are not really part of this group", than in the name of anti-oppression.