Sometimes, there are no words.

_dahne_ writes a screed about how being "PC" has gone too far.

I don't even know what to say about this, other than someone needs to have their privilege checked. Badly. (Except, of course, that "Privilege, like 'troll' or 'fail' can now mean whatever we want it to mean, so my little statement there is apparently OPPRESHUN of her truth. Or something.)

I count sexism, ablism, heterocentrism, and I'm pretty sure racism in this one sentence alone:

The male side of fandom runs around calling each other niggerfaggots while the female side has earnest ten-page debates on whether calling something crazy is ablist.

(Emphasis hers)

Because the boys doing that is totes okay, y'all, and the girls should be doing the same thing. And men never, ever talk about whether what they're saying is hurtful to other people or not, 'cause that's girly stuff. (Hey, wankaboys, come and sit in the invisible corner with us bisexuals, English majors, and ampersands.)

And then there's this:

Like the idea of "tone argument." At its core, this makes sense; it's meant to address the idea that abused classes of people shouldn't have to be deferential to their abusers in order to be listened to.

In practice, what it means is, "I'm allowed to be an asshole as long as I'm really, really sure I'm right."

I just...I can't. I mean, the tools of the master will never tear down the master's house, but come on. By refusing to accept the tenets of the tone argument, we're bullying the people in power?

Whut?

And both examples are from the first seven paragraphs of her little screed. There's also kind of a priceless gem in there about Fandom_Wank being a "prime vector" for "too much" political correctness.

And I think the worst bit is (as far as I could tell before the comments were pushing me to the ragey point) she's not getting any disagreement.

I would love to be able to write a thoughtful rebuttal that might be as widespread in fandom as this one's (apparently) getting, but I'm afraid my brain keeps hanging up on What Is This I Don't Even.

ETA:

t_boy found swordygardner's response which is a breath of fresh air in amongst all that fail. ETA 2: In fact, pretty much all of page 2 of the comments (which is about the point she turned off anon commenting, I'll bet you), is pretty awesome.

(Read comments) - (Post a new comment)

spawn_of_kong
2011-01-22 11:49 am UTC (link)

people shouldn't be so sensitive to being told off.

I find this statement problematic -- what about those people who can't control their sensitivity? To them such a statement is like telling someone with untreated AD/HD that they just need to pay more attention, or that someone with untreated depression should just stop feeling sad.

Granted, this doesn't excuse such people from being jerks in response. My point is more that sensitivity and emotions/emotional regulation are more complex than you seem to give them credit for.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

snarkhunter
2011-01-22 06:39 pm UTC (link)

Yeeeeah...

I kind of feel that way about a phrase I have a love/hate relationship with: "put on your big girl panties and [take action here]."

The correct response when righteously called out for douchebaggery is always to evaluate your words/actions, apologize, and shut the fuck up when you've been stupid. And that requires maturity, humility, and often an ability to let someone else have the last word.

And maybe I'm being a bit...hyperbolic? in saying that I feel like there's coded ableism in that kind of comment. But to me, there's an implication of, "If you can't accept it without feeling hurt, then you're just not enough of a grown-up/strong enough/stable enough to be having conversations on the internet." And if your particular mental illness tends to manifest itself as intense self-loathing for even small mistakes, it can be devastating. And, sure, that's the person's own problem, but on some level I see some use of those phrases as a dismissiveness that faintly reminds me of the argument over trigger warnings.

I AM NOT SAYING THAT PEOPLE SHOULD NOT BE CALLED OUT. I just want to reiterate that. It's very important that we be called on our mistakes so that we can learn to be better. And the person who is called out IS responsible for his or her behavior. Feeling hurt does not mean that it is ever appropriate to post a whiny flounce about how meeeeeeeeeeeaaaan everyone is or how [non-privileged group] should just be *nicer*. But phrases like 'put on your big girl panties and deal with it' or 'don't be so sensitive' are a little bit dismissive of whatever emotions the person might be feeling. (Of course, those phrases aren't usually tossed at someone who has not displayed the whiny flounce, so those who are sensible enough to apologize for being hurtful and then keep their mouths shut are generally not in danger of having whatever feelings they may have directly dismissed.)

::shrug:: I don't know. I don't want to be all "white women's tears" or anything, and again, I don't think this means that people shouldn't be called out or that the tone argument is flawed. I am just expanding on your point about the complexity of emotional response, I guess?

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	sistercoyote 2011-01-22 09:58 pm UTC (link)
	I hate "big girl panties" because I am an adult woman, not a child, and I really, really feel like that phrase infantalizes the person (almost always a woman) it's directed at. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	snarkhunter 2011-01-23 12:35 am UTC (link)
	True, but I always assumed that was deliberately ironic. The infantilizing element combined with it actually meaning "grow the fuck up" was the part I always found funny. YMMV, obviously. (Reply to this)(Parent)

sandglass
2011-01-23 11:42 pm UTC (link)

I way regret saying that people should be less sensitive. I'm one of those people who takes even mild criticism really hard, and it took me a long time to be able to take "What you said is *ist" criticisms the way I say they should. I definitely think minorities having the right to get angry and rude is of utmost importance, but I definitely also shouldn't prescribe how people should react emotionally. I'm really sorry for that.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	spawn_of_kong 2011-01-24 03:09 am UTC (link)
	By having the right to be rude, I'm assuming you mean "the dominant society gets away with being rude to minorities, so why shouldn't minorities be rude back?" If so, then yes, I agree. I'm sure you'd agree with me, however, that in in an ideal world, people just plain shouldn't be rude to each other. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

sandglass
2011-01-24 03:53 am UTC (link)

Perhaps rude is the wrong word, but I mean what people complain about with the tone argument. The tone argument should never be used and a minority person's tone or rudeness should never be used against them, their argument, or the cause of equality.

People shouldn't be rude, but sometimes it's necessary, or not necessary, but healing in a way? You're definitely right, if the majority gets to be rude and oppressive, the minority should be able to scream at them.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

	sandglass 2011-01-22 06:49 pm UTC (link)
	Ah, good point. My bad. I definitely am against holding people to rigorously control their emotional responses. People should better control their actions and remember that when they are told off, it's likely not personal and won't be held against them, etc etc. Remember perspective and all that. (Reply to this)(Parent)

(Read comments) -