Responded at length there. My tl;dr version is: I think dichroic's framing is problematically privilege-centered, and thus misrepresenting the situation of "dogpiles". You have to have a lot of privilege to start off with for the outrage to be contagion-based and not inherent.
I will also note that I was very close to just passing this by as yet another microaggression that I didn't have the spoons to respond to. I didn't. But I responded because, well, the onus is always on us.
There's no question that I am blinded by my own privilege, much as I try to avoid that. I appreciate your comments.
There is inherent outrage. There are dogpiles that needed to be piled. I just think there are also people who take advantage of those to fan flames, create drama and spread contagion as well. The main point I was trying to make is that it can be hard to form my own opinions, based on my best judgement, whatever facts I can glean, and what I hear from those I trust. (FWIW, you both (sartorias and shweta_narayan) are among that category.)
back to your actual point...shweta_narayanAugust 5 2011, 20:24:58 UTC
...I do totally agree that there's a problem with being outraged because the people in our social group are saying we should be, as opposed to because we've thought about the situation and are actually in fact outraged, rather than feeling-for-social-cohesion.
And your larger point that there's a problem with being anything because the people in our social group are saying we should be.
I'm really not trying to derail from that, it's just, gah, knotty problems :/
Re: back to your actual point...dichroicAugust 5 2011, 20:30:53 UTC
Yeah. I'm not trying to come down on outrage at all; as I said (or maybe tried to say) I appreciate having my attention called to all the things I *need* to be outraged by on the cases where I'm too clueless to try to figure them out for myself. Righteous outrage is a powerful force for good.
(on second thought, I need to copy and post this on my own thread too.)
Re: back to your actual point...shweta_narayanAugust 5 2011, 20:32:48 UTC
Yeah.
I just think the problem is that the way in which you've laid out the situation (not highlighting pre-existing micro and macro aggressions) and certain terms your using are very similar to phrasings that have been used to silence minorities.
And therefore, despite your intent, your phrasing is having some of that effect.
I will also note that I was very close to just passing this by as yet another microaggression that I didn't have the spoons to respond to. I didn't. But I responded because, well, the onus is always on us.
Reply
There is inherent outrage. There are dogpiles that needed to be piled. I just think there are also people who take advantage of those to fan flames, create drama and spread contagion as well. The main point I was trying to make is that it can be hard to form my own opinions, based on my best judgement, whatever facts I can glean, and what I hear from those I trust. (FWIW, you both (sartorias and shweta_narayan) are among that category.)
Reply
But I think the way you're framing it (and phrasing it) is playing into bigger problems, which are, well, problems.
Reply
And your larger point that there's a problem with being anything because the people in our social group are saying we should be.
I'm really not trying to derail from that, it's just, gah, knotty problems :/
Reply
(on second thought, I need to copy and post this on my own thread too.)
Reply
I just think the problem is that the way in which you've laid out the situation (not highlighting pre-existing micro and macro aggressions) and certain terms your using are very similar to phrasings that have been used to silence minorities.
And therefore, despite your intent, your phrasing is having some of that effect.
Reply
Dammit.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment