WHITE PEOPLE!!!!

"SnapUndersteer, Italian Spiderman" (dasborgen)
11/01/2015 at 17:41 • Filed to: None

DISCUSSION (27)

gmporschenut also a fan of hondas > SnapUndersteer, Italian Spiderman
11/01/2015 at 18:04

nfl needs to start do more research into preventing concussions.

Milky > SnapUndersteer, Italian Spiderman
11/01/2015 at 18:07

Kinja'd!!!

SnapUndersteer, Italian Spiderman > gmporschenut also a fan of hondas
11/01/2015 at 18:09

I’m guessing you’re talking about Lockett? Damn, that’s scary still... No word yet on how he’s doing AFAIK

SVTyler > SnapUndersteer, Italian Spiderman
11/01/2015 at 18:10

You’re just jealous of our sweet moves:

Kinja'd!!!

gmporschenut also a fan of hondas > SnapUndersteer, Italian Spiderman
11/01/2015 at 18:16

It was more of general comment on how the NFL wants to downplay concussions and while focusing on “real” issues like a wife-beater or their own lack of traceability of equipment.

Xyl0c41n3 > gmporschenut also a fan of hondas
11/01/2015 at 18:26

“Real” issues like wife beater? Because domestic violence isn’t a real issue? Do you realize how often DV occurs among NFL players and how often the league sweeps it under the rug? It’s a pretty fucking serious issue.

You know it *is* possible to turn your attention to the seriousness of one issue while *also* still turning your attention to and giving a fuck about another equally serious issue. But just because the league still isn’t doing enough in the concussion prevention arena doesn’t mean delegitimizing the seriousness of DV is ok. Hey guess what? The NFL is treating DV even less seriously than they’re treating concussions. Maybe we should try holding them accountable for BOTH.

Supreme Chancellor and Glorious Leader SaveTheIntegras > Xyl0c41n3
11/01/2015 at 18:37

You gotta chill...

Patrick Nichols > Xyl0c41n3
11/01/2015 at 18:52

Personally I took the “real” issue comment as another shot at the NFL for how fake they’ve been when trying to “address” the issue. I think they’ve used the public PR battle against DV to cover up a lot while not actually really addressing DV.

Xyl0c41n3 > Supreme Chancellor and Glorious Leader SaveTheIntegras
11/01/2015 at 18:57

Kinja'd!!!

Oh, I’ve “gotta chill,” do I?

Right. Because sexism and racism directly affect you, so I should definitely give your opinion more credence than my own, right? Yeah, I don’t think so.

Since both of those issues have and continue to directly affect my life and the life of people I care about, I will most definitely not “chill.”

Do my constant words annoy/upset/piss you off? Good. Maybe think about why they do. Maybe think about the issues I’m bringing up. Maybe do something to change the status quo instead of offering an insulting “you gotta chill.”

Or, just keep bitching because you're being slightly inconvenienced by the mention of issues that don't negatively affect you.

Supreme Chancellor and Glorious Leader SaveTheIntegras > Xyl0c41n3
11/01/2015 at 19:01

Yeah you honestly do...everything I’ve ever seen you comment on you come off as if you have a bone to pick with the poster. I’m not even getting into the issues of violence and the NFl..I’m talking about your tone of comments.

Xyl0c41n3 > Supreme Chancellor and Glorious Leader SaveTheIntegras
11/01/2015 at 19:16

You don’t like my tone?

What... Is it not ladylike enough for you?

Kinja'd!!!

Supreme Chancellor and Glorious Leader SaveTheIntegras > Xyl0c41n3
11/01/2015 at 19:17

I’m not expecting you to be ladylike or man like or human like...just not asshole like. I see though you’ve missed the entire point of any conversation with you so goodnight.

Xyl0c41n3 > Patrick Nichols
11/01/2015 at 19:18

I would definitely agree with that. If I misread OP’s original intention by putting scare quotes around “real,” then I apologize.

Their lip service to both issues is truly abominable.

gmporschenut also a fan of hondas > Xyl0c41n3
11/01/2015 at 19:19

Kinja'd!!!

Didn’t mean to imply domestic violence is bs. Meant the kangaroo court tactic Goodell uses on issues to drive attention away from things. “we’re going to ignore the tape that millions are talking about and even hire a PI to verify we didn’t.”

Biased Plies > Xyl0c41n3
11/01/2015 at 19:28

Maybe don’t assume these issues don’t affect the person you are addressing just because they’ve told you to ‘chill’. Maybe evaluate why someone tells you to ‘chill’ instead of assuming they are trying to downplay the issues you are bringing up. Maybe you should do something to change the status quo rather than just bitching about issues here where there is such little difference to make.

I’m sorry these issues affect you and I do what I can to combat them when I see instances of such disparagement but the kind of bones you pick and the method in which you go about it here is often belittling and condescending to those you address, even and perhaps especially when they are not directly talking about the issues you try to address.

Xyl0c41n3 > Supreme Chancellor and Glorious Leader SaveTheIntegras
11/01/2015 at 19:28

Actually, the only missing any points is you. My slightly hyperbolic replies to you have been an illustration in how you’re attempting to tone police.

See the section entitled “Civility” in this wiki on Tone Policing, copied below: ( http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Tone_argu…

“One way in which the tone argument frequently manifests itself is as a call for civility. A way to gauge whether a request for civility is sincere or not is to ask whether the person asking for civility has more power along whatever axes are contextually relevant (see Intersectionality) than the person being called “incivil”, less power, or equal power. Often, people who have the privilege of being listened to and taken seriously level accusations of “incivility” as a silencing tactic, and label as “incivil” any speech or behavior that questions their privilege.”

Or this excerpt:

( https://angerisjustified.wordpress.com/tag/tone-polic…

“The reason for this is simple. Tone policing, simply put, is the dismissal of a person’s argument (generally a less-privileged person in social justice discourse) because of their tone, which may be perceived by the bigoted more-privileged person as ‘too personal,’ ‘too emotional’ or ‘too angry.’ Meanwhile, the oversensitivity argument basically amounts to the bigoted more-privileged person telling the less-privileged person to suck it up and deal with the abuse the kyriarchy deals out. Put together, these things add up to a massive display of double standards. ‘I shouldn’t have to deal with your [justified] anger/pain, but you should just sit back and take my [unjustified] bigotry.’”

Thank you for wishing me a good night. Likewise, I hope you have a good night as well.

Xyl0c41n3 > Biased Plies
11/01/2015 at 19:30

I’ll just copy what I replied to another commenter:

Actually, the only missing any points is you. My slightly hyperbolic replies to you have been an illustration in how you’re attempting to tone police.

See the section entitled “Civility” in this wiki on Tone Policing, copied below: ( http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Tone_argu…

Or this excerpt:

( https://angerisjustified.wordpress.com/tag/tone-polic…

Xyl0c41n3 > gmporschenut also a fan of hondas
11/01/2015 at 19:34

Yeah. I misread the original intention behind the scare quotes. I apologize. And I couldn’t agree more about Goodell.

Semi-related aside: have you seen the previews for an upcoming Will Smith movie (the name escapes me) that’s supposed to be about the neurologist who first discovered the pattern of traumatic brain injuries in NFL players and how the NFL tried to silence him? I haven’t seen anyone talking about it at all. And I only saw the trailer once (when I went to go see The Martian). Just wondering if anyone has heard about it/has thoughts/is planning on seeing it.

Biased Plies > Xyl0c41n3
11/01/2015 at 19:40

I don’t appreciate the dismissive reply nor the accusations therein. I am supportive of your general stance of the issues you wish to bring up. I do not support the way you go about doing so, that was the point of my reply and that of SaveTheIntegras2.0 as I understood his comment.

Biased Plies > Xyl0c41n3
11/01/2015 at 19:43

I saw that trailer as well, also while going to see The Martian. I’ve also noticed that being the only place I’ve seen it. Tinfoil-hat-theory here but I wonder if the NFL is dampening its promotion at all. I might go to see it.

Xyl0c41n3 > Biased Plies
11/01/2015 at 19:49

Do you not see how it’s problematic for you to say you support what I’m talking about but not the way in which I choose I talk about it? That’s tone policing, Kenny. It’s classic tone policing.

But also notice you and I are still having a discussion (the productivity of which may or may not be successful) while the same is not happening with Save the Integras. His comment tonight is not the first such I’ve received from him, hence my quick and decisive response in exactly the manner I responded.

If you really do understand the issues I rally for, perhaps maybe give me the same benefit of the doubt you so readily gave him. That, at the very least, seems fair, does it not?

Xyl0c41n3 > Biased Plies
11/01/2015 at 19:51

If you’re wearing a tin foil hat, then I’m right there with you because that was one of my first thoughts when I saw the trailer as well. How is it that a movie starring one of the biggest names in Hollywood, who draws huge crowds even for lackluster films, is not getting more play? Seems pretty strange.

Biased Plies > Xyl0c41n3
11/01/2015 at 22:42

Conversely, do you not see that being condescending in your approach can make it easy for people to be dismissive of the issues you wish to bring up? Do you not see that such negativity can actually be counterproductive for said issues as a result. Can you not see that I therefore cannot be blindly supportive support of the way you choose to talk about these issues.

I understand the term tone policing , using a person’s chosen method to be dismissive of a given argument, but I think you using that term too broadly to justify a derogatory and belittling attitude. You are allowed to express emotion but I think that too often you take it too far. I am a strong advocate of treating people the way you want to be treated and believe it is essential to productive discussion.

Xyl0c41n3 > Biased Plies
11/01/2015 at 22:44

You're obviously not a strong advocate of listening to yourself. But ok. Whatever bud.

Biased Plies > Xyl0c41n3
11/01/2015 at 23:01

Disagreeing with you and taking issue with a part of your approach is not condescending, nor dismissive or trivializing to your cause. Taking it as such is, frankly, a bit ignorant.

I’m sorry that you will be offended by my saying so.

I’ve done what I can to explain my position. You don’t have necessarily have to agree with it but I hope you can try to understand what I’ve tried to get across at some point. Good night.

Xyl0c41n3 > Biased Plies
11/01/2015 at 23:12

I’m not offended at all. I’m amused, frankly. Your argument is essentially, “I agree, feminists have some valid arguments. And I agree that tone policing is bullshit, but have you ever thought about the tone you choose to use when engaging with people? Btw, this isn’t me tone policing you, it’s me being very rational and calm while you’re sitting over there getting offended and being ignorant.”

If you don’t see the hugely hilarious irony in your arguments thus far, I can’t help you.

And that’s because I never even pointed out how much bullshit your lovely “not all men” assertion was earlier in thread when you said, “...I do what I can to combat them when I see instances of such disparagement...”

You’re over there hoping I’ve understood the points you’re trying to make. I’m over here hoping for the exact same thing, except, unlike you, I know for certain that you haven’t heard me at all. You’re too busy patting yourself on the back for being such a good ally. Such a good, calm, rational ally.

Have a great evening. (Very sincerely. I hold no ill will towards you).

Biased Plies > Xyl0c41n3
11/01/2015 at 23:44

I said nothing of the ‘not all men’ sort. That statement meant that I address these issues when I see them in public and in private. I have stepped between men and women being physically and verbally abusive to eachother. Don’t lump me in with that ‘not all men’ BS.

I can see why you think this is ironic but merely addressing your tone does not mean I am tone policing you. Like I said above, I think you use that term too broadly to get away with your attitude around here (see Rule #1).

That last paragraph is a perfect example. Condescendingly dismissing what I’ve said by assuming I don’t understand what you’re trying to get across. Unlike you however, I get no self-righteous satisfaction out of arguing these issues; I don’t enjoy this like you seem to. In fact, it’s mentally taxing trying not to offend you while getting a point across.

I’m trying to help you be a better/more effective advocate for the issues you champion because you have a better understanding of them as you may have more personal experience with them. A calmer, more rational approach is more effective because you aren’t immediately turning people against you with a grating attitude. Sorry that you can’t see that.