I agree that you have strong opinions. And if I disagree with your opinions, I try not to engage you on LiveJournal. It's 1) your journal and your presentation of thought, which I don't want to accidentally shut down through poor written-word-choice and 2) not the place or method through which I can gain best understanding of those conflicting points of view.
Unrelated to the first paragraph: You should hang out with Quixotic_Goat sometime. He loves having debates about the details and line items included in every topic from international politics to socialized medicine to the tax code.
FWIW, I don't think anyone would shut me down by having a dissenting opinion and presenting it in on an open post. If I don't want opinions, then it's on me to turn off commenting (and, heh, even then some people don't get the hint). If I have issues with word choice, I can put on my big girl pants and point it out without assuming you mean the worst. We're friends. You get that privilege.
But if you exercise your debate muscles some other way, that's cool too.
Here is one of the ways I exercise my brain, even if I don't engage. I really enjoy Jim Hines' posts, and here is a good one regarding why he (as a successful white male) should bother to be outraged about social problems that don't directly affect him: http://jimhines.livejournal.com/724548.html
I don't think there's an issue with the words you're putting OUT there, generally speaking. I think there is sometimes a perception, as in the present case, that the words someone else is using might not be getting IN. You may not actually be too focused on making your own argument to hear what specifically another person is saying, but it might be helpful (not "nice") and conducive to more discussion if you made that clearer. That's not "kumbaya"--that's self-interest. You can't "educate" -- or to be fair, let's say persuade --someone whose role in the exchange is reduced to being explained at
( ... )
Thing the 1st: it's clear from context clues that you know me from elsewhere. I do not associate your handle with someone specific. If I know you elsewhere, who are you?
2: it's clear from context clues that you're talking about a specific interaction. I'm generalizing about a multitude. Can you clarify for me which you mean? And if so, how you feel that I didn't understand what someone else was saying or was only focusing on "explaining at" someone rather than answering their points? I can't really address this comment until we're on the same page. Please be specific.
This is Suzana. Given the same-minute timing I assumed you were writing about the thread on Biz that went south just a little while ago, in which both the behavior you wrote about and the behavior I wrote about were exhibited. I'll be happy to remove this comment from here and post it over there. It's applicable to a genuine and sincere "we," not just you.
With regards to "education," I was talking about specific terms. Specific terms that have specific meanings. And without all being on the same page about those meanings, all we as a community will ever do is talk past one another. As you can see, in that thread, the biggie was "privilege."
I understood very clearly what Summer was saying. I also understood that she was not grasping what I and several other people were saying. Not that she had a different view-- but that she was actually misrepresenting the points we were making. Telling her that was not reducing her to being explained at. It was very factually saying that "until we are talking about the same thing, we'll only ever talk past one another." That, imo, is very different from not understanding her because I was focused on my own points.
The kumbaya thing wasn't about this so much as other interactions, which is why I suspect your comment may be confusing to those on the Biz thread.
It's not always the content or perceived lack of
( ... )
I enjoy reading your opinions and like that you often give links and back up reading, etc. I also have some very strong opinions, though not on all topics... On some topics I'm still trying to figure things out. But anyway, I think that when people want to cling to something, less so an opinion than a world view that they feel is somehow intrinsic to their identity, they take any challenge to that as an attack. How much they can hear or are willing to hear is questionable here, but hopefully you at least introduce ideas, even if they call you angry or imply things about your character. I think when it comes to things like privilege, discussions of race, class, gender, or even the environment, then it does challenge identity. The reasoning runs like "I'm a good person, therefore I would never be thoughtless/unkind/prejudiced..." It's kind of a brain disease, to deny the possibility of learning something/improving, or being kinder because to undertake that would mean admitting there is room for improvement.
I get this too sometimes. Where I'll be in a discussion with someone, and all of a sudden they're like "Wow, what happened?" and I have to explain that I'm just passionate and they shouldn't take it personally. I think maybe that's why I'm slow to open up to people - I make friends slowly, but once I do, I'm generally a friend forever. I want to make sure they can handle me. :-p
And the sad thing is, if you were a man, you wouldn't be getting called out for the anger. There is still this huge expectation for women to be "nice". We can have an opinion, but we should express it softly, and, if possible, defer to the judgement of the men around us. I've never been able to do that.
Comments 17
Unrelated to the first paragraph: You should hang out with Quixotic_Goat sometime. He loves having debates about the details and line items included in every topic from international politics to socialized medicine to the tax code.
Reply
But if you exercise your debate muscles some other way, that's cool too.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
2: it's clear from context clues that you're talking about a specific interaction. I'm generalizing about a multitude. Can you clarify for me which you mean? And if so, how you feel that I didn't understand what someone else was saying or was only focusing on "explaining at" someone rather than answering their points? I can't really address this comment until we're on the same page. Please be specific.
Reply
Reply
With regards to "education," I was talking about specific terms. Specific terms that have specific meanings. And without all being on the same page about those meanings, all we as a community will ever do is talk past one another. As you can see, in that thread, the biggie was "privilege."
I understood very clearly what Summer was saying. I also understood that she was not grasping what I and several other people were saying. Not that she had a different view-- but that she was actually misrepresenting the points we were making. Telling her that was not reducing her to being explained at. It was very factually saying that "until we are talking about the same thing, we'll only ever talk past one another." That, imo, is very different from not understanding her because I was focused on my own points.
The kumbaya thing wasn't about this so much as other interactions, which is why I suspect your comment may be confusing to those on the Biz thread.
It's not always the content or perceived lack of ( ... )
Reply
Reply
This is SO IMPORTANT. Thank you so much for this. I want to plaster it all over the internet.
Reply
And the sad thing is, if you were a man, you wouldn't be getting called out for the anger. There is still this huge expectation for women to be "nice". We can have an opinion, but we should express it softly, and, if possible, defer to the judgement of the men around us. I've never been able to do that.
I say keep on being true to yourself!
Reply
Leave a comment