@Ganymede said in Real World Peeves, Disgruntlement, and Irks.:
As for far-left extremists, they aren't the ones holding up "ARBEIT MACHT FREI" signs at protests.
Not any more. Let's not pretend that far-left extremists haven't done some godawful things in the past, though.
@Ganymede said in Real World Peeves, Disgruntlement, and Irks.:
Why should I be concerned that a bunch of idiots are misusing a term when I decide to use such term in an accurate, acceptable way?
That's not how language works. If the idiots are loud enough, influential enough, or simply large enough their meaning overtakes that which is 'accurate'. Republican already doesn't mean what it originally meant.
He/Him
@Ganymede said in Real World Peeves, Disgruntlement, and Irks.:
So long as we understand what normal people consider to be an acceptable definition, why does it matter that unreasonable people will attempt to subvert its meaning?
It's important to acknowledge that certain terms can be poisoned by their use as dogwhistles. Yes, people can innocently describe someone as sleepy-eyed or well-spoken or whatever, but I will not assume a person who says such things isn't being racist without evidence, nor ask anyone to assume the same of me. If I do not want to be lumped in with those people, then I have a responsibility to not adopt their language; a much greater responsibility than my audience has to guess at my intent.
@GreenFlashlight It's also important to remember that terminology always has, and always will, mean different things to different groups. It's especially prevalent in academia, run-of-the-mill terms mean very specific things in very specific circumstances. So there never has been a one-size-fits-all definition for many terms.
Jesus Christ, lady. It's past midnight. I have work in the morning. I have an MBA interview in the afternoon. Listening to your non-stop, ten minute long incoherent screaming rant echo off of several blocks of rowhomes and into all three levels of my house is not something I have time for.
Shut. the. Fuck. Up.
@Admiral said in Real World Peeves, Disgruntlement, and Irks.:
There is such a thing as too far left, I found out today. I got banned from r/AgainstHateSubreddits for suggesting that all catholics aren't hatemongers. Not fighting. Not screaming. Just not moving lock-step with folks on the very, very fringe of the left. Those folks are... everything the right accuses them of. They've gone off the deep end. Witch hunts. Which is ironic, I know. Considering catholics are their target now.
So there is such a thing as too much 'SJWing' and 'White Knighting'.
What you’re referring to is something I’d call “purity politics”, and I don’t think it indicates the person is too far left so much as that they’re just a bully who also happens to be left-wing.
This happens in any movement/community of any kind as soon as it starts to gain some traction. For example, above someone gave the example of gatekeeping within the Star Wars fandom. Other examples I’ve witnessed:
You aren’t a real vegan if you’re [eating palm oil / in it for selfish reasons / a pet owner / letting your cat outdoors / pro-capitalism / pro-Israel / pro-choice because abortion is murder / a sex-positive feminist because that still exploits women’s bodies / anti-vax because that kills children / pro-vax because that contains animal products]
You aren’t a real feminist if you’re [sex positive / sex negative / gender essentialist / gender performativist / anti-hijab / pro-hijab / radical / not radical / not vegan / pro-capitalist #girlboss / demonising gender roles / supporting gender roles]
When people follow purity politics, one strike on any count is enough to discredit an entire person of their value system, leaving many feeling politically homeless due to a lack of support from any camp. E.g., I don’t think being a liberal who’s OK with capitalism makes you right-wing. That’s nonsense. Even though I, myself, am anti-capitalist.
I could be a little shit and call this mentality “class reductionist” as many POC have been criticising lately, and therefore decry the people doing this as not left-wing enough for me either. It’s a two-way street. But I don’t believe in gatekeeping, bullying and purity politics, which has nothing to do with being left-wing, it just has to do with having your head up your arse.
“The left” is a pretty broad umbrella and people have different views. According to the political compass I’m extremely left-wing but I like to think I don’t engage in this behaviour. It also puts me right next to Noam Chomsky, whom I personally dislike and disagree with on many issues. I don’t think that invalidates his position on the spectrum, nor mine.
So, tl;dr, don’t take it to heart.
Also, the right-wing does purity politics too, and I find theirs a lot scarier. Nazi Germany had it really down to pat, and the modern right loves to call people cucks and degenerates — a term which basically means “race traitor”.
It's still rather odd to me that anyone can fit neatly on any kind of left-right line, even when you add the other two dimensions. People are complicated, beliefs even more so.
And I think this is getting sufficiently political that it should move into that section of the forum.
@insomniac7809 said in Real World Peeves, Disgruntlement, and Irks.:
I think that, for all the fine lines we might want to put around what is or isn't "white knighting," it's gone the same way as "virtue signaling" and "SJW" in that it's now just a way for the Tyches of the world to attack anyone left of Mussolini as fake.
While it can be argued about how beneficial it is for language and society to have sarcastic terminology. I think both white knight and SJW originated as sarcastic terms on the internet. There hasn't been a popular non-ironic usage to undermine, they've almost always been used as a way to attack people of whom you disapprove.
@Tinuviel said in Real World Peeves, Disgruntlement, and Irks.:
That's not how language works. If the idiots are loud enough, influential enough, or simply large enough their meaning overtakes that which is 'accurate'. Republican already doesn't mean what it originally meant.
I understand this, but that reinforces my belief that we should continue to use the word accurately rather than avoid it and explain why and how we are using it each time, as necessary until the idiots either stop using the term incorrectly or the term's meaning reverts back to its intended definition.
@GreenFlashlight said in Real World Peeves, Disgruntlement, and Irks.:
It's important to acknowledge that certain terms can be poisoned by their use as dogwhistles. Yes, people can innocently describe someone as sleepy-eyed or well-spoken or whatever, but I will not assume a person who says such things isn't being racist without evidence, nor ask anyone to assume the same of me.
I understand this as well --
If I do not want to be lumped in with those people, then I have a responsibility to not adopt their language; a much greater responsibility than my audience has to guess at my intent.
-- and I understand this too. But I suppose if I had a point, it would be that I see nothing wrong with using words that aren't known dog-whistles and pushing back against an extremist's attempt to subvert that word's meaning. Terms like "white-knighting" and "virtue signaling" are as easily applied to actions on the political right as the left, if not more so.
“It is better to live doing the things that you like. It is foolish to live within this dream of a world seeing unpleasantness and doing only things that you do not like.” -- Yamamoto Tsunetomo.
@Ganymede Virtue signaling has prior academic usage, it just wasn't really anywhere near common parlance. I do get what folks are getting at re: 'white knight' and 'sjw' having snarky origins, but... <handwaggle> ...not enough fucks left to give to worry about it either way.
I had my MBA interview today. That meant I had to put on a blazer and makeup for the first time in two months. And wore a bra and real pants for several hours.
I was physically uncomfortable and looked all tarted up. And at some point they're going to expect me to go back to doing this shit for 9+ hours a day, every day? Whose fucking idea was this? I do not approve.
https://whatiswrongwith.me/Mia
There were never any good old days. They are today. They are tomorrow. It's a stupid thing we say, cursing tomorrow with sorrow. -- Gogol Bordello
@Aria said in Real World Peeves, Disgruntlement, and Irks.:
I was physically uncomfortable and looked all tarted up.
Sounds like marriage to me.
My really petty peeve today is people overcomplicating good, simple recipes that have been perfect for generations.
Not in a way that adds a fun, interesting twist to it — I love a good fusion — but in a way that just makes it worse. Silly pretentious stuff that feels like someone thought having a longer list of ingredients or adding more steps is the same as making something better.
I'm talking about stuff like pea guacamole, carrot hummus, or the latest nonsense I've seen, using bicarbonate soda to strip the skin off of beans and then scooping them out of the pot at a gentle simmer instead of cooking/enjoying them as they are. Just stop. Why? Why?
(Quarantine has me on a crazy foodie kick.)
@Kestrel said in Real World Peeves, Disgruntlement, and Irks.:
I'm talking about stuff like pea guacamole, carrot hummus, or the latest nonsense I've seen, using bicarbonate soda to strip the skin off of beans and then scooping them out of the pot at a gentle simmer instead of cooking/enjoying them as they are. Just stop. Why? Why?
Maybe they just have a lot of time on their hands?
A nice thing about cooking is that once you develop a good feel for the basic process and the way flavors work, you can use most recipes as a source of inspiration rather then something you're bound by. Use their good ideas and toss away the bad ones.
What is obvious to you may not be obvious to me and vice versa.
People that are more bored than you are.
I would guess it might be a texture thing. That can get super weird from time to time.
I saw someone peel mushrooms before. Ridiculous. The dirt cooks off.
The road to hell is paved with adverbs.
@nyctophiliac said in Real World Peeves, Disgruntlement, and Irks.:
I saw someone peel mushrooms before. Ridiculous. The dirt cooks off.
MSB needs a sad react.
The best way to peel mushrooms is to peel the outer layer and then the inner and finally throw all of it in the garbage where it belongs.
@Kestrel I remove the skins from chickpeas when I am making hummus because the skins ruin the texture. Does that count as peeling beans?
@Ganymede Virtue signaling has prior academic usage, it just wasn't really anywhere near common parlance. I do get what folks are getting at re: 'white knight' and 'sjw' having snarky origins, but... <handwaggle> ...not enough fucks left to give to worry about it either way.
