RL Anger

[Arkandel]

Since this is a gaming forum I hope you don't mind if I frame the same thing in slightly different terms to perhaps better portray where I'm getting at, @Apos.

Let's say you were treated horribly by staff at a MU*. You came here and made a post about it, to which I responded "oh, that sucks. Yeah, that happens and it shouldn't. At least on the game I play I haven't noticed it happening, and if it did I'd have said something and done what I could to fix it - or walked away".

To begin with this is not in any way a dismissal if I immediately acknowledge such things do happen, they are undeserved, wrong, and should stop. It's a fact there are places where staff is made of terrible and possibly mentally unstable people.

Now... your concern still makes me think - and isn't that the point of raising it in the first place? To make people question what they think they know? So I start wondering that perhaps even on the game I happen to be playing bad things also happen that have escaped my notice; so I ask if you could tell me what I should be watching for. What forms does abuse take? How is it perpetuated, what would be a good way for me to be involved in actively trying to make it happen less?

And in response you tell me I'm part of the problem. Any argument, question or statement I make that doesn't agree 100% with exactly what you think I should be saying results in a condemnation (or a lol-downvote) on general principle.

Obviously such things won't make me care less. No matter what anyone says on either side (?) of this matter I won't suddenly go 'hey, people who have been treated like shit by staff are treating me like I'm the enemy so I'll side with the abusers', since that'd be dumb. But it does make me want to participate in the conversation less - who wants to be painted in such a light? - and it doesn't accomplish what I came to the thread asking for in the first place; information, insights and honest dialogue.

</endExample>

[Coin]

@Arkandel said in RL Anger:

Since this is a gaming forum I hope you don't mind if I frame the same thing in slightly different terms to perhaps better portray where I'm getting at, @Apos.

Let's say you were treated horribly by staff at a MU*. You came here and made a post about it, to which I responded "oh, that sucks. Yeah, that happens and it shouldn't. At least on the game I play I haven't noticed it happening, and if it did I'd have said something and done what I could to fix it - or walked away".

To begin with this is not in any way a dismissal if I immediately acknowledge such things do happen, they are undeserved, wrong, and should stop. It's a fact there are places where staff is made of terrible and possibly mentally unstable people.

Now... your concern still makes me think - and isn't that the point of raising it in the first place? To make people question what they think they know? So I start wondering that perhaps even on the game I happen to be playing bad things also happen that have escaped my notice; so I ask if you could tell me what I should be watching for. What forms does abuse take? How is it perpetuated, what would be a good way for me to be involved in actively trying to make it happen less?

And in response you tell me I'm part of the problem. Any argument, question or statement I make that doesn't agree 100% with exactly what you think I should be saying results in a condemnation (or a lol-downvote) on general principle.

Obviously such things won't make me care less. No matter what anyone says on either side (?) of this matter I won't suddenly go 'hey, people who have been treated like shit by staff are treating me like I'm the enemy so I'll side with the abusers', since that'd be dumb. But it does make me want to participate in the conversation less - who wants to be painted in such a light? - and it doesn't accomplish what I came to the thread asking for in the first place; information, insights and honest dialogue.

</endExample>

Except the example is by and large inapplicable, because of scope and, more readily, because it lacks the systemic backdrop that the topic at hand does.

This isn't just "Male Gamers Treat Female Gamers Badly" and thinking it is, is missing the forest for the trees.

This is "Yet Another Instance of the Male Population in the World Being Shitty to the Female Population of the World, as Represented and Exemplified within Gaming".

You can't distill that into something as niche as your example, especially because your example lacks the social bias of privilege that one group has over the other. You're stripping that aspect from the conversation with your example and thus making your example moot.

[Misadventure]

This post is deleted!

[Coin]

@Misadventure said in RL Anger:

Saying it is dismissive, hurtful, or anything where you assign a motive, without asking the intent? That is bullshit. You don't get to say what someone else feels. And doing so is distracting. Derailing. Not helpful.

What? saying something is dismissive and hurtful is perfectly within the purview of this sort of conversation. Intent doesn't preclude dismissiveness or hurtfulness. What are you even talking about? Since when are intent and result inexorably matched? I call bullshit. Plenty of things are intended in ways that do not actually match said intention, and being called on it is pretty much the only way that perception can be changed so that those things can be viewd in the light of the results they attain rather than their intent.

Seriously, what?

[Coin]

DOUBLEPOST.

P.S. Are you saying that #notallmen isnt' the sort of thing that is distracting and derails a conversation regarding this topic? Because I'm pretty sure that's exactly what it is and what it does.

[Roz]

@Coin said in RL Anger:

@Misadventure said in RL Anger:

Saying it is dismissive, hurtful, or anything where you assign a motive, without asking the intent? That is bullshit. You don't get to say what someone else feels. And doing so is distracting. Derailing. Not helpful.

What? saying something is dismissive and hurtful is perfectly within the purview of this sort of conversation. Intent doesn't preclude dismissiveness or hurtfulness. What are you even talking about? Since when are intent and result inexorably matched? I call bullshit. Plenty of things are intended in ways that do not actually match said intention, and being called on it is pretty much the only way that perception can be changed so that those things can be viewd in the light of the results they attain rather than their intent.

Seriously, what?

Agree whole-heartedly. It's in fact important to tell people when their response is being dismissive or hurtful especially if that's not their intent. Saying that "you don't get to say what someone else feels" is in fact relevant for the opposite of what you're saying: you don't get to say what someone else feels, so you can't tell people not to feel dismissed or hurt by someone else's words. Saying that someone's words are dismissive or hurtful isn't ascribing a motive to them, because people can be dismissive and/or hurtful all the time by accident.

What would be assigning a motive would be to say "you're dismissing me because you're a sexist asshole and want to silence women."

[silentsophia]

I honestly get tired of dudes constantly rebutting 'but not ALL of us do this to women!' the split second anything related to misogyny comes up. I'm sure not all dudes do, but that doesn't mean your first reaction should be to try to dismiss or mitigate an experience. It's distracting and marginalizing. And it makes the conversation about the dude, not the person being discriminated against.

I had done my part and extra for a project in our AutoCAD class, but the guy who never turned up asked to put his name on my part. I told him no. Suddenly, I'm a bitch for taking credit for my work. But if I don't speak up, slackerdude does nothing and gets a grade as good as mine. I hate that shit. It's not fair. Yet, he had no problem with the guys not having him on their work. I was just expected to share by default. How is that fair? I mean, I normally love sharing but my work is my work. I spent time, energy and effort on that project. He did not.

I think @Ninjakitten is really right.

http://www.dieselsweeties.com/ics/21/

[Arkandel]

@Coin said in RL Anger:

DOUBLEPOST.

P.S. Are you saying that #notallmen isnt' the sort of thing that is distracting and derails a conversation regarding this topic? Because I'm pretty sure that's exactly what it is and what it does.

Well, if you are pretty sure then I guess that's the end of the debate.

[Sunny]

If it was a true desire for understanding and education folks would be doing their research rather than trying to convince us that it's more important to make men feel better about the conversation than it is to actually have the conversation. Fuck you.

[Kanye Qwest]

Shhh, @silentsophia , you're going to make them feel attacked. Then they won't feel like this is a safe place for them, they won't feel like they have the trust they need to participate in this discussion about things that have no relevance for them.

I mean, it's online. If they feel harassed, they can always choose not to engage. Not the most attractive prospect, but one is always free to walk away.

Pick your battles, right?

@Arkandel said in RL Anger:

@Coin said in RL Anger:

DOUBLEPOST.

P.S. Are you saying that #notallmen isnt' the sort of thing that is distracting and derails a conversation regarding this topic? Because I'm pretty sure that's exactly what it is and what it does.

Well, if you are pretty sure then I guess that's the end of the debate.

Never has the need for a gormless smile emoji rolling back and forth in hilarity been felt more keenly.

[Ganymede]

@Coin said in RL Anger:

You can't distill that into something as niche as your example, especially because your example lacks the social bias of privilege that one group has over the other. You're stripping that aspect from the conversation with your example and thus making your example moot.

"Moot" isn't the word your looking for here; "inapplicable" or "not analogous" are better choices.

Still, @Arkandel has a point, and it is this: it is difficult to motivate someone to engage in a serious conversation or discussion by using pejoratives or put-downs.

I think we have thoroughly discussed why "Not All Men" and "All Lives Matter" are offensive to marginalized groups.

So, back to trying to come up with solutions: how do we try and address what appears to be an ingrained mentality in our community?

---

@Thenomain

There are times when it makes more sense to back away from a conversation with one person to have a more productive one with another.

It seemed clear to me that you and @Lithium were missing one another in the night.

[Vorpal]

@Kanye-Qwest said in RL Anger:

You're going to make them feel attacked. Then they won't feel like this is a safe place for them, they won't feel like they have the trust they need to participate in this discussion about things that have no relevance for them.

This goes a long way towards illustrating my earlier point concerning the barbed words and underlying hostility. I guess that winning hearts and minds is no longer an important part of conveying a message or supporting an important cause anymore.

Well, that was that. I'm stepping out so that you may be able to form the echo chamber you so seem to desire.

[Coin]

@Arkandel said in RL Anger:

@Coin said in RL Anger:

DOUBLEPOST.

P.S. Are you saying that #notallmen isnt' the sort of thing that is distracting and derails a conversation regarding this topic? Because I'm pretty sure that's exactly what it is and what it does.

Well, if you are pretty sure then I guess that's the end of the debate.

You're absolutely right. I'm sorry I was vague.

I'm downright fucking positive.

/debate

[Arkandel]

@Ganymede said in RL Anger:

@Coin said in RL Anger:

You can't distill that into something as niche as your example, especially because your example lacks the social bias of privilege that one group has over the other. You're stripping that aspect from the conversation with your example and thus making your example moot.

"Moot" isn't the word your looking for here; "inapplicable" or "not analogous" are better choices.

Still, @Arkandel has a point, and it is this: it is difficult to motivate someone to engage in a serious conversation or discussion by using pejoratives or put-downs.

I think we have thoroughly discussed why "Not All Men" and "All Lives Matter" are offensive to marginalized groups.

So, back to trying to come up with solutions: how do we try and address what appears to be an ingrained mentality in our community?

Pejoratives or put-downs?

It ranges from circle-jerking mockery ('shhh...'), implications of outright participation in abuse for asking questions ('do your research!') , aphorisms instead of arguments ('I'm pretty sure you are wrong') to this:

Fuck you.

That's a level of conversation I don't intend to participate in. I'm out.

[Coin]

@Ganymede said in RL Anger:

@Coin said in RL Anger:

You can't distill that into something as niche as your example, especially because your example lacks the social bias of privilege that one group has over the other. You're stripping that aspect from the conversation with your example and thus making your example moot.

"Moot" isn't the word your looking for here; "inapplicable" or "not analogous" are better choices.

I was going for "having little or no practical relevance". But sure, your suggestions are more applicable.

[Ganymede]

@Arkandel said in RL Anger:

Pejoratives or put-downs?

If I have to explain every ironic comment I make in each of my posts, I'm going to go gray in the hair before we get anywhere.

I suppose I could have said "hate-spewing psycho-fuck," but that would get me no further rhetorically.

[deadculture]

Well, that ended in an interesting way.

[Kanye Qwest]

A of all, there is no bringing the men complaining in this thread around. There were pages of attempts, and I have been watching this breakdown in fascination. It's like sociology bingo.

There is no B of all.

@deadculture said in RL Anger:

Well, that ended in an interesting way.

Oh sweetie, it's not actually over. Good try, though! Quick, tell us about how much better your friends are than someone who supports Black Lives Matter.

[Coin]

TOPIC CHANGE

People who "were all Paris", but aren't Ecuador (just to pick one instance of each out of random). I hate this facebook trend, and some of my good friends do it and I know they're doing it from a place of empathy but it still chafes.

[Ganymede]

@Kanye-Qwest said in RL Anger:

A of all, there is no bringing the men complaining in this thread around. There were pages of attempts, and I have been watching this breakdown in fascination. It's like sociology bingo.

Unsurprisingly, there has been staggeringly little change in the status quo since 1995.