51–60 of 216 posts
I spent about ten years being an "ally" to feminism, to the LGBT community, to minorities, etc. And then my views drifted ever so slightly from the tried and true party lines. One day I said I thought it was wrong that Brandon Eich was forced out of Mozilla, I said I thought it was wrong the way he was treated. Immediately the decade spent arguing for gay rights and marriage equality disappeared and I became a bigot,…
I spent about ten years being an "ally" to feminism, to the LGBT community, to minorities, etc. And then my views drifted ever so slightly from the tried and true party lines. One day I said I thought it was wrong that Brandon Eich was forced out of Mozilla, I said I thought it was wrong the way he was treated. Immediately the decade spent arguing for gay rights and marriage equality disappeared and I became a bigot,…
Yet it doesn't. It creates fear and reduces communication. The motive for shaming people, for trying to make people feel guilty, is to increase the power of the one who does the shaming. To cement their position in the in-group. Because deep inside they feel weak and powerless.
Whereas truly good people make you feel stronger and they inspire you by their example of virtue.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Often, the bully is someone who gets off on the feeling of power. That's what defines a bully, not that they disagree with you.
I upvoted you. I'm not disagreeing with the OP in regards to the bullies. But you find them everywhere, saying they're the turn off for certain ideas while being on the opposite spectrum of the discussion, which also has bullies, doesnt make much sense. Basically, if what you agree with is decided by who expresses their ideas in a quieter way, you'd probably agree with nothing.
This post, which definitely resonates with me and my experience in Silicon Valley and in Seattle, surrounded by very leftist politics, reminds me a lot of Mencius Moldbug's brilliant piece "Technology, communism and the Brown Scare": http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2013/09/technol...
If anybody can make any actual sense of the point of the article, please say so?
I don't think queer-exclusive spaces should exist, and I'm queer, and extremely left wing. That opinion is unpopular in queer circles. The flak I cop for that is nothing compared to the very real, quantified consequences for women trying to enter tech, or who are already in it. I think we should upvote more articles about that and less articles about this.
I find the internet social justice movement intensely annoying. They are, to be blunt, assholes.
But unfortunately, they're also right more often than not.
And dwelling on how disgustingly annoying the online social justice movement is instead of solving its problems is one facet of geek culture that is just somewhat pathetic.
I spent about ten years being an "ally" to feminism, to the LGBT community, to minorities, etc. And then my views drifted ever so slightly from the tried and true party lines. One day I said I thought it was wrong that Brandon Eich was forced out of Mozilla, I said I thought it was wrong the way he was treated. Immediately the decade spent arguing for gay rights and marriage equality disappeared and I became a bigot,…
“Why did you execute Bogrov?”
“Why? Because of the submarine question,” said Ivanov. “It concerned the problem of tonnage – an old quarrel, the beginnings of which must be familiar to you.
“Bogrov advocated the construction of submarines of large tonnage and a long range of action. The Party is in favour of small submarines with a short range. You can build three times as many small submarines for your money as big ones. Both parties had valid technical arguments. The experts made a big display of technical sketches and algebraic formulae; but the actual problem lay in quite a different sphere. Big submarines mean: a policy of aggression, to further world revolution. Small submarines mean: coastal defense – that is, self-defense and postponement of world revolution. The latter is the point of view of No. 1, and the Party.
“Bogrov had a strong following in the Admiralty and amongst the officers of the old guard. It would not have been enough to put him out of the way; he also had to be discredited. A trial was projected to unmask the partisans of big tonnage as saboteurs and traitors. We had already brought several little engineers to the point of being willing to confess publicly to whatever we liked. But Bogrov wouldn’t play the game. He declaimed up to the very end of big tonnage and world revolution. He was two decades behind the times. He would not understand that the times are against us, that Europe is passing a wave and must wait until we are lifted by the next. In a public trial he would only have created confusion amongst the people. There was no other way possible than to liquidate him administratively.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is one point at which your analogy to pointers breaks down. After having studied pointers, you will never be in a position to disagree. But you could come away from a class on feminism 101 disagreeing with many things.
I've seen plenty of people disagree on whether pointers are a good idea. Even better, should pointers be nullable?
EDIT: addendum. I guess one could imagine a situation where you only needed to have knowledge of feminism 101, but not be required to agree with the arguments. This does not seem to be the case though.
I spent about ten years being an "ally" to feminism, to the LGBT community, to minorities, etc. And then my views drifted ever so slightly from the tried and true party lines. One day I said I thought it was wrong that Brandon Eich was forced out of Mozilla, I said I thought it was wrong the way he was treated. Immediately the decade spent arguing for gay rights and marriage equality disappeared and I became a bigot,…
I feel ya. I'm a staunch gay rights advocate, even fought prop 8, but I still thought Eich was treated unfairly. A man shouldn't lose his job because of his political views, just like he shouldn't lose it for being, say, transgendered. Needless to say, this is a nuanced position, and some people simply don't have the capacity for nuance, sadly.
I spent about ten years being an "ally" to feminism, to the LGBT community, to minorities, etc. And then my views drifted ever so slightly from the tried and true party lines. One day I said I thought it was wrong that Brandon Eich was forced out of Mozilla, I said I thought it was wrong the way he was treated. Immediately the decade spent arguing for gay rights and marriage equality disappeared and I became a bigot,…
Definitely a lot of idealists who could stand to mature some.