/tg/Station 13

Bottom post of the previous page:

viewtopic.php?t=36111

I thought we were done with this arc

dendydoom wrote: ↑Mon May 06, 2024 6:26 pm loneliness is a real issue especially male loneliness and while there are plenty of valid criticisms and discussions to be had here, to turn the needle the other way and posit that being cruel and intolerant toward someone's suffering and experiences is fine on the basis of fighting some invisible caricature of the evil 4chan shitposter does not resolve anything, ostracizes and harms real people in our community and makes me very sad.

I really think that message is lost when the word has been claimed by a group of people that blames all their loneliness on women and uses it as an excuse to hate them.

Especially so when it's filtered to "autist" here, and "autist" is already controversial in itself and made more so by linking that word to it.

nianjiilical wrote: ↑Tue May 07, 2024 4:10 am if every other admin was spontaneously atomized by simultaneous solar flare impacts and someone asked me to moderate polcon id log off

It is an oubliette. And the people who go there are only hurting themselves.

I've never understood the point of political channels other than it being a containment board. No one is going to go "you know what, my perspective has changed on this matter, thank you milf_lover69 for your insightful perspective!"

NecromancerAnne wrote: ↑Tue May 07, 2024 10:33 am

nianjiilical wrote: ↑Tue May 07, 2024 4:10 am if every other admin was spontaneously atomized by simultaneous solar flare impacts and someone asked me to moderate polcon id log off

It is an oubliette. And the people who go there are only hurting themselves.

it feels like twitter but everyone is just left wing instead of right wing

As a funfact, in Polish, autist (autysta) is an offensive term for people on autism spectrum, essentially a slur here. Not sure how that reads in english speaking countries, but here it goes from essentially a slur to family friendly "woke" term: autist (autysta) -> autistic person / is autistic (ma autyzm) -> is on (autism) spectrum (jest na spektrum autyzmu).

ma baker autyzm

context matters. it's worth returning to the dictionary definition somebody would expect with no context, then adding the context, and then asking how it would read or sound to people without.

"involuntarily celibate" describes the 37 year-old woman with a disability who can't get out to meet people, establish relationships, or even functionally participate in the act of physical love let alone live independently.

it describes the 72 year-old widower who might want to have partners and still feel attraction but finds themselves lost in a small crowd of possible lovers and struggles to connect through their grief and inexperience after the better part of a lifetime with one person.

it describes the under- or necessarily over-employed 21 year-old man with body image issues and poor self-esteem, limited socioeconomic security to offer and engage in courtship, living in a scary world that lacks third spaces and opportunities for friendship let alone love - fully-cognizant and sensitive to that for many of the female people he might be attracted to, it's an even scarier world to many of them against a backdrop of being sexualized and infantilized in the culture often in very predatory ways, beset with an entirely separate and terrible set of cues about what it requires to be worthy of attraction, many of which are tied up in the gazes of men who this man sees himself as being irrecoverably unlike in his situation


we could do a similar exercise with "autist, "retard," "sperg," and end up talking about kids who got abused by their families, peers, and teachers, out of frustration, ignorance, and cruelty - as well as a lot of people who might have "passed" due to help, support, and tolerance they don't know that they were so lucky to get

we could talk about "kiwifarms autists" who went and doxxed or trolled some entirely innocent people for the lulz and it'd be unnecessary to call them autists in order to express that we don't approve of that, if we don't, without evoking the connotations and experiences involved with the previous example


it's just worth examining what we intend when we use these terms and narrowing our choices towards the ones that don't make life harder or more hurtful for others, even if only indirectly by strengthening images and stereotypes that lump them in with people whose behavior and attitudes might rightly be condemned.

your intent matters.

Higgin wrote: ↑Tue May 07, 2024 9:23 pm ...lack of third spaces...

This is a huge part of it for a lot of younger folks in the modern day, as well, and there's been an influx of video essays and articles on the matter that I think anyone who sees this post should look into, at least surface-level if not digging deeper into it.

The lack of third spaces and general communal meeting spaces has relatively stunted the younger generations, both in social and emotional growth, helping to emphasize a sense of fear in "failure" to interact and an inability to find people to connect to in the first place. The internet is both a boon and a curse in this sense; it further isolates by making some feel as if they don't have to try to find people, since they can find their groups online with relative ease and without that failure to connect being so prevalent. On the flip-side, it worsens one's ability to connect in real life because they haven't practiced the necessary social skills experienced the in-person feelings that would gradually build and desensitize them to these encounters.

I think it's truly one of the greatest shames of the modern world that in becoming so much more connected, we've also allowed our facilities to strengthen those connections to falter.

Third spaces do exist!

For example, a board game club in the university. Most of the people there were no longer students when I went.
There are also card game stores, that host magic the gathering games or stuff like warhammer or DnD every week. If you are lucky they can be doing stuff like drafts and you don't even need to bring anything other than the cost of entry!
Stuff like dance classes.
Sport clubs.
Any other kind of club.
Things like that tend to be weekly.

I stopped going to those kinds of spaces because of ss13, but I am happy. If I feel lonely, I can go to those and get some human interaction again.

can i call buddhists autists when they dont get bitches either way

Constellado wrote: ↑Tue May 07, 2024 11:42 pm Third spaces do exist!

[...]

these things do exist - they require resources and a sense of efficacy and possibility that a lot of people lack, especially if they're already prone to marginalization or feel marginal.

the bind is in part that not participating in these sorts of spaces nor developing social capital (relationships and affiliations that provide meaningful support) IRL leaves people with fewer skills and inroads to effectively participating in them in the future.

both thankfully and as dramazing points up damningly, we've got a lot more virtual and mediated third spaces now, safer for many people than the spaces they inhabit or might be taking risks with IRL - like this one! it's just not as easy to move between them if you're all in on one or the other, and more serious people have observed that people participate in fewer of them IRL and less even without the net - that's not just because they're getting the same fellowship online or w/e.

https://youtu.be/VpBOgh2zxtE?si=r38UoB4tZlMGP42C

https://youtu.be/qEJ4hkpQW8E?si=eVDyvdFlPyHwosq1

good listens and watches both if you don't feel like reading Bowling Alone - *edit: I highly recommend the second even if you don't care about goofy social science. It's a TED Talk about the fates of young people in the U.S., somewhat generalizable to young people in other places increasingly looking like neoliberal feudal wastelands, and I know that describes a lot of the people who might read this.

Timonk wrote: ↑Tue May 07, 2024 11:57 pm can i call buddhists autists when they dont get bitches either way

Then how do they make a babby?

Archie700 wrote: ↑Tue May 07, 2024 4:46 am

dendydoom wrote: ↑Mon May 06, 2024 6:26 pm loneliness is a real issue especially male loneliness and while there are plenty of valid criticisms and discussions to be had here, to turn the needle the other way and posit that being cruel and intolerant toward someone's suffering and experiences is fine on the basis of fighting some invisible caricature of the evil 4chan shitposter does not resolve anything, ostracizes and harms real people in our community and makes me very sad.

I really think that message is lost when the word has been claimed by a group of people that blames all their loneliness on women and uses it as an excuse to hate them.

Especially so when it's filtered to "autist" here, and "autist" is already controversial in itself and made more so by linking that word to it.

This is generally the consensus in polcon but every time this is discussed more people get banned by MSO

kayozz wrote: ↑Wed May 08, 2024 3:51 pm

Timonk wrote: ↑Tue May 07, 2024 11:57 pm can i call buddhists autists when they dont get bitches either way

Then how do they make a babby?

they reproduce by buddhing

The Wrench wrote: ↑Wed May 08, 2024 3:51 pm

Archie700 wrote: ↑Tue May 07, 2024 4:46 am

dendydoom wrote: ↑Mon May 06, 2024 6:26 pm [...]

I really think that message is lost when the word has been claimed by a group of people that blames all their loneliness on women and uses it as an excuse to hate them.

Especially so when it's filtered to "autist" here, and "autist" is already controversial in itself and made more so by linking that word to it.

This is generally the consensus in polcon but every time this is discussed more people get banned by MSO

just because some portion of people in a space you don't like claims or identifies itself with a label doesn't give you an out on painting everyone in the space or with those descriptive characteristics with the label as a pejorative.

it doesn't minimize or invalidate the harm and rightful offense people have taken from misogynists running in involuntary celibate and men's rights spaces, or misogynists identifying as involuntary celibates or MRAs, to say that they're misogynists who are also shitting up those spaces for decent people.

they're not structurally connected, as in there is no big tent org coordinating them all in the same directions and dispositions, so you can differentiate and be more sensitive to the decent folks (+more easily condemn the shitheads and change the content of the group identity "involuntary celibate") by calling a misogynist a misogynist here

edit: to put this to another example, maybe a bit more vivid, you don't have to nor should you call or talk about black people you don't like or who have wronged you as [insert your choice of epithet here] - especially not if you're not involved in a black identity where part of your use of the term is a positive reclamation of it with fellow group members. the intent matters.

you don't have to ignore who's in the community and what they're doing to recognize that the community or label doesn't belong to them until it actually does - until then, we should avoid analysis by labels if we don't want collateral damage

Higgin wrote: ↑Wed May 08, 2024 8:19 pm

kayozz wrote: ↑Wed May 08, 2024 3:51 pm

Timonk wrote: ↑Tue May 07, 2024 11:57 pm can i call buddhists autists when they dont get bitches either way

Then how do they make a babby?

they reproduce by buddhing

nah they dhock

Higgin wrote: ↑Wed May 08, 2024 8:49 pm you don't have to ignore who's in the community and what they're doing to recognize that the community or label doesn't belong to them until it actually does - until then, we should avoid analysis by labels if we don't want collateral damage

I just don't get the angle of a term which is itself a shortening used by a semi-organised in-group in the first place that for a decade now has been overwhelmingly used by and for people and communities with a certain attitude being forcibly applied back to everyone who could ever, theoretically, be described by it just so that members of the original in-group can retroactively complain that the very specific complaints directed at a very specific group of people and communities who overwhelmingly refer to themselves by this non-generic term are actually applying to all of these people in the broader "could theoretically be included by the non-shortened term that is almost never used" umbrella too.


edit: oh wait since you're already indulging in ridiculous hyperbole by saying calling people autists is the same as the n-word already let me join in - This logic supposes that one should not in fact call fascists nazis, because not all fascists are nazis even if some are nazis, and actually nazi is a shortening for national socialist, and many socialists believe in nationhood but its unfair to tag them with association with this group that claimed the label for themself.

Not-Dorsidarf wrote: ↑Wed May 08, 2024 9:38 pm edit: oh wait since you're already indulging in ridiculous hyperbole by saying calling people autists is the same as the n-word already let me join in - This logic supposes that one should not in fact call fascists nazis, because not all fascists are nazis even if some are nazis, and actually nazi is a shortening for national socialist, and many socialists believe in nationhood but its unfair to tag them with association with this group that claimed the label for themself.

This but unironically just use words correctly lmao

Higgin wrote: ↑Wed May 08, 2024 8:33 pm

The Wrench wrote: ↑Wed May 08, 2024 3:51 pm

Archie700 wrote: ↑Tue May 07, 2024 4:46 am

dendydoom wrote: ↑Mon May 06, 2024 6:26 pm [...]

I really think that message is lost when the word has been claimed by a group of people that blames all their loneliness on women and uses it as an excuse to hate them.

Especially so when it's filtered to "autist" here, and "autist" is already controversial in itself and made more so by linking that word to it.

This is generally the consensus in polcon but every time this is discussed more people get banned by MSO

just because some portion of people in a space you don't like claims or identifies itself with a label doesn't give you an out on painting everyone in the space or with those descriptive characteristics with the label as a pejorative.

it doesn't minimize or invalidate the harm and rightful offense people have taken from misogynists running in involuntary celibate and men's rights spaces, or misogynists identifying as involuntary celibates or MRAs, to say that they're misogynists who are also shitting up those spaces for decent people.

they're not structurally connected, as in there is no big tent org coordinating them all in the same directions and dispositions, so you can differentiate and be more sensitive to the decent folks (+more easily condemn the shitheads and change the content of the group identity "involuntary celibate") by calling a misogynist a misogynist here

edit: to put this to another example, maybe a bit more vivid, you don't have to nor should you call or talk about black people you don't like or who have wronged you as [insert your choice of epithet here] - especially not if you're not involved in a black identity where part of your use of the term is a positive reclamation of it with fellow group members. the intent matters.

Except the word was very rarely use to describe single, lonely people in the first place. You call them single, lonely people, not something so clunky as "involuntary celibate".
The word only started to gain traction after the word was claimed by misogynists, and communities had already been overwhelmed by these people.

Not-Dorsidarf wrote: ↑Wed May 08, 2024 9:38 pm This logic supposes that one should not in fact call fascists nazis, because not all fascists are nazis even if some are nazis, and actually nazi is a shortening for national socialist, and many socialists believe in nationhood but its unfair to tag them with association with this group that claimed the label for themself.

That sounds about right

Not-Dorsidarf wrote: ↑Wed May 08, 2024 9:38 pm

Higgin wrote: ↑Wed May 08, 2024 8:49 pm

I just don't get the angle of a term which is itself a shortening used by a semi-organised in-group in the first place that for a decade now has been overwhelmingly used by and for people and communities with a certain attitude being forcibly applied back to everyone who could ever, theoretically, be described by it just so that members of the original in-group can retroactively complain that the very specific complaints directed at a very specific group of people and communities who overwhelmingly refer to themselves by this non-generic term are actually applying to all of these people in the broader "could theoretically be included by the non-shortened term that is almost never used" umbrella too.

i write too damn much so I don't blame you for not reading it all

you start without the context, then add the context - you are correct in your description

the problem is that the category is not fixed, it's a contested site within

one that, from my initial read back through the convo leading to the ban/mute, I gather MSO has a history of actively contesting - against misogyny and entitlement to women's lives

out of respect to that and the umbrella you're describing, i'm saying we shouldn't use the term as a pejorative - that's why the third person i described under that "umbrella" was much closer to a real profile of somebody who might have been in and find positive community in those spaces

when they are positive

edit: oh wait since you're already indulging in ridiculous hyperbole by saying calling people autists is the same as the n-word already let me join in - This logic supposes that one should not in fact call fascists nazis, because not all fascists are nazis even if some are nazis, and actually nazi is a shortening for national socialist, and many socialists believe in nationhood but its unfair to tag them with association with this group that claimed the label for themself.

I call fascists fascists and Nazis Nazis because the content of those categories is much more unequivocally the sort I have moral disagreements with.

I think nationalism is generally a harmful force that reflects categories that limit the due consideration and respect of outgroup members as human beings first.

I think a briefest study of "national socialism" as practiced in fascist Italy or Nazi Germany finds it incompatible with the larger category and body of thought to which "socialism," if you read it back, fairly applies - but that's a good example of a contested site where a lot of people will still toss out the trope "uhhh but the Nazis were socialists" - a lot more authentically "socialist" states and parties also have detestable policies and beliefs, but the Nazis have a lot more prominence and emotional currency to the audiences where that trope gets used.

I used the example about racial slurs because it's vivid, not hyperbolic - and for people on the other side of racial categorization, insert any minority, it's also much harder to contest the meaning and status of their identity in the eyes of outgroup members than the one we're talking about here. The rule still applies.

RedBaronFlyer wrote: ↑Tue May 07, 2024 10:56 am I've never understood the point of political channels other than it being a containment board.

seems like you do understand the point?

im hoping like our other discussions on social issues in the club we're able to make it to page 10 and start a new age of enlightenment where we like invent the steam engine and stop torturing people for copernicanism and cool stuff like that

I take tolerance for left handed people at this point.

Fun thought experiment - think of random stuff you do with your non-dominant hand.

We play a lot of card games at work, and my friends pointed a very perculiar quirk I have. Despite being steadfastly right-hand dominant, I shuffle, deal and hold cards left-handed. I don't even know where I picked up this specific opposite-handedness just for playing cards.

Timberpoes wrote: ↑Thu May 09, 2024 4:27 pm Fun thought experiment - think of random stuff you do with your non-dominant hand.

We play a lot of card games at work, and my friends pointed a very perculiar quirk I have. Despite being steadfastly right-hand dominant, I shuffle, deal and hold cards left-handed. I don't even know where I picked up this specific opposite-handedness just for playing cards.

do you typically use your right to lay them down? that'd be my guess - requires less dexterity to hold them at least, or leaves your right hand free for drinking/eating if you're comfortable enough

I smoke on my left hand most of the time

I insult people on SS13 left handed while I click to make horizontal with the right

i'd rather always have the fork in my right so despite being righty the knife goes in the left

Lefty smoker as well— right hand needs the dexterity to do whatever, left hand just needs to hold it.

PapaMichael wrote: ↑Thu May 09, 2024 7:18 pm i'd rather always have the fork in my right so despite being righty the knife goes in the left

Same, the swapping never felt normal

Higgin wrote: ↑Thu May 09, 2024 5:07 pm

Timberpoes wrote: ↑Thu May 09, 2024 4:27 pm Fun thought experiment - think of random stuff you do with your non-dominant hand.

We play a lot of card games at work, and my friends pointed a very perculiar quirk I have. Despite being steadfastly right-hand dominant, I shuffle, deal and hold cards left-handed. I don't even know where I picked up this specific opposite-handedness just for playing cards.

do you typically use your right to lay them down? that'd be my guess - requires less dexterity to hold them at least, or leaves your right hand free for drinking/eating if you're comfortable enough

I smoke on my left hand most of the time

Left to lay them down too. I don't even consciously think about it.

britgrenadier1 wrote: ↑Thu May 09, 2024 9:48 pm

PapaMichael wrote: ↑Thu May 09, 2024 7:18 pm i'd rather always have the fork in my right so despite being righty the knife goes in the left

Same, the swapping never felt normal

Just press X.

So I guess we're just letting anyone post in the appeal whenever they want to now, huh?

What the hell is even going on with this appeal at this point? Will it forever be stuck in Limbo?

Imitates-The-Lizards wrote: ↑Wed May 15, 2024 10:39 am So I guess we're just letting anyone post in the appeal whenever they want to now, huh?

there's a button by the side of every post which notifies moderators about it, which you can use on posts that you think break forum rules and which is usually somewhat more effective than being snarky in an unrelated thread and because it's not publicy visible it also makes you look less stupid when the expected moderator action is in fact taken

Jacquerel wrote: ↑Wed May 15, 2024 11:33 am

Imitates-The-Lizards wrote: ↑Wed May 15, 2024 10:39 am So I guess we're just letting anyone post in the appeal whenever they want to now, huh?

there's a button by the side of every post which notifies moderators about it, which you can use on posts that you think break forum rules and which is usually somewhat more effective than being snarky in an unrelated thread and because it's not publicy visible it also makes you look less stupid when the expected moderator action is in fact taken

Yeah you're right.

I was unnecessarily snarky.

My bad Jacquerel. That second poster just really annoyed me with their attitude.

AsbestosSniffer wrote: ↑Wed May 15, 2024 11:02 am What the hell is even going on with this appeal at this point? Will it forever be stuck in Limbo?

At this point, theoretically, any DJ can take over the appeal

Woah we even got a digg thread about it

People are acting like it's so easy to reclaim "in/cel" from those that took the name for themselves as a way to blame women for their inability to get dates.