goldenecitrone
post tenebras lux
A fitting obituary to the thread.
Urban v's the Commentariat
- Thread starter Belushi
- Start date
A fitting obituary to the thread.
cesare
shady's dreams ♥
Sign back in as Cornetto if you're really daz power. Get a password reminder
fogbat
The Talibum
To me, too.
yeah I cant remember the frigging e mail and I had this account linked to my work e mail, I only really read bits now and again. I have this saved to my lap top and can't be arsed changing it all.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
Wouldn't you need to start a new thread to fit it all in?
fogbat
The Talibum
Yes please.
cesare
shady's dreams ♥
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
Plus zopiclone leaves your mouth the next day tasting like you're sucking a copper coin.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
Dale is firky, you knob.
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
his sins aside, he'd have pressed more buttons. This was actually her. And I feel bad for her cos I have an eternally bleeding heart- its not the way she argued as much as she didn't get that this isn't twitter. And wouldn't. Given some perusal of the site and the discoursive nature of bbs she might have been able to mount a blistering argument but what happened was just...fucking shit.
I was particularly annoyed when she recounted her experiences as a dusky hued female and followed it up with a pre-emption at how that post would be taken. People here show the minutea of their fucking lives, I do and so do others. The twittersumption that we'd dismiss her experiences, that we'd not know of or experienced similar. Cos what? all white males? ffs
co-op
But....but cLoWnFiSh....
geminisnake
a complex mass of conflicting ideas
You've probably gone now anyway.
TopCat
Putin fanboy
I could just say maladjusted malicious cunt who takes no responsibility for the evil shit he causes? Who also balances on the edge of a precipice of his own making?
TopCat
Putin fanboy
Much much worse than this, it truly is possible.
TopCat
Putin fanboy
Come back Sam Ambreen , there is much to discuss....
SpackleFrog
Smash showy bell-bottom pants and sporty haircuts
He hasn't got a job though, and he can't afford a plane ticket.
SpackleFrog
Smash showy bell-bottom pants and sporty haircuts
As inarticulate and lazy?
SpackleFrog
Smash showy bell-bottom pants and sporty haircuts
Yeah, that is annoying. We will though, and you'll either have to follow us or sulk.
SpackleFrog
Smash showy bell-bottom pants and sporty haircuts
whoah whoah whoah...lady impersonator?
Also, DAMN being busy when all the fun happened! Why do you all have so much free time during the day?
SpackleFrog
Smash showy bell-bottom pants and sporty haircuts
We work.
Brainaddict
slight system overdrive
I don't think anyone comes out of this looking good to be honest. I don't think either side put forward arguments well or in a way that was likely to function as good communication with the other side.
In case Sam comes back, here's an answer that might be a bit more readable than the aggression she encountered. I've actually liked the intersectionalist theories I've read and I suspect some people on here have as well. A big problem with the twittersectionalists people have here is they somehow manage to downplay class constantly (and this point was put to you a bit but quite aggressively). I don't think intersectionalist theory has to be used in that way. And you, Sam, if you ever look back in here, seem to have joined a blogosphere/twittersphere group that probably doesn't want to think about class for a reason: that they are the beneficiaries in that game. You yourself may not be and I'm happy to take your word for that. But you've become part of a little internet scene and there are reasons people here have a problem with that scene. I couldn't necessarily say those people are on the wrong side of the capital-labour divide, but as high-end waged workers they may be in an incredibly comfortable position - and I have been told off recently for 'wrong' views on intersectionalism by a black woman who's parents have a small property empire (true story). I didn't think much of her position I can tell you. I think what she was doing was divisive but did it really *matter* to her as much as to someone who really needs political struggle to have a decent standard of living? I'm sure you are different from some of the other participants in that scene, but you could think a bit more about what you've become part of - why it is that class is not discussed much.
We're (nearly) all being fucked, Sam. Some to differing degrees and in differing ways, but we *are* all being fucked and that is why class arguments matter. That doesn't mean race, gender etc issues should be ignored or that class trumps all. But it's pretty fucking important and this is not reflected much in the twittersphere you are part of.
And the second major point. I don't mind certain statements that could come out of privilege theory. There are people here who are hardline against it but I can see some reason for it. But again where it has led lately in the groups you have been frequenting is deeply problematic. I would have no issue with the statements "White people should listen more to the experiences of black people" or "men should listen more to women." They are general statements that confront some power dynamics in our society. However to move from that to say that, say, a white person should always bow to the opinion of a black person on race issues, or that someone with a certain skin colour does not have a right to an opinion on certain issues, is a brutal and nasty leap of logic. It also does not chime with people's experience, since I'm sure white people here have met black people who say 'I don't think racism is an issue - black people should stop moaning about it' or women who are anti-feminist. But there is more to it than that. The leap from a general statement about power dynamics (as above) to saying that each individual takes on their oppressed-race or oppressed-gender role when they speak on those issues is actually quite horrendous. It is not much better than race essentialism or gender essentialism. It has progressed from those to a 'race experience' essentialism or a 'gender experience' essentialism that ignores the wildly differing experiences people might have, the wildly differing reactions they might have, and ignores all the ways in which people who are oppressed might become complicit in their oppression (perhaps for reasonable, perhaps for selfish reasons) and all the ways in which one can learn to empathise across oppressed groups. It also assumes that you can *spot* the forms of oppression a person is subject to, or even that you can ask them what their oppressions are and get a full answer (you can't).
In addition, we have to develop discourse among ourselves collectively and we are all participants in that. Most of us have had quite enough of being told to shut up by those in power, or being ignored because we don't matter. Having our allies telling us to shut up because of our skin colour is not going to create a struggle we can be part of. Being told to be a bit quieter so others can speak - that I can deal with - being told my opinion on anti-racist struggles doesn't matter if I try to put myself on the lines in that struggle? That doesn't work for me, and nor will it work for millions of other people who you are potentially putting off political action with this line of logic.
Hope that helps. Really.
Last edited:
Brainaddict
slight system overdrive
And if it's any comfort Sam, butchersapron is like that with me too and lots of other people.
And for others on this thread, I feel his aggressive attitude mode of argument often shades into bullying, have said as much here, and wish people would call him out on it here more. He is one of the reasons I post on the politics forums much less than I used to.
Some people here let him get on with it because he *is* politically knowledgeable and because when he can be arsed he can put forward a good political argument. Unfortunately he prefers aggressive obscurantism as his mode of communication and I wish people woudn't cheer him on when he does it. I know he will have been in groups where people address how we communicate and how that can exclude people, so these points will have been raised with him by others I'm sure - so there's no excuse, he just decided years ago to communicate like an arse. I don't find it acceptable even if lots of people on here do.
And for others on this thread, I feel his aggressive attitude mode of argument often shades into bullying, have said as much here, and wish people would call him out on it here more. He is one of the reasons I post on the politics forums much less than I used to.
Some people here let him get on with it because he *is* politically knowledgeable and because when he can be arsed he can put forward a good political argument. Unfortunately he prefers aggressive obscurantism as his mode of communication and I wish people woudn't cheer him on when he does it. I know he will have been in groups where people address how we communicate and how that can exclude people, so these points will have been raised with him by others I'm sure - so there's no excuse, he just decided years ago to communicate like an arse. I don't find it acceptable even if lots of people on here do.
SpineyNorman
Inappropriate content removed
Yep. and the student ones, in my experience, appear to think that ageist abuse leveled against anyone over about 30 is perfectly acceptable, if not to be encouraged. Usually the same (always white) people who think referring to white people as crackers (I had to ask what that one meant) and honkies.
I don't think anyone's really offended or threatened by this nonsense, its not as if middle aged white people are gonna become an oppressed group anytime soon and apart from anything else it usually comes from people for whom left politics is all about proving how much more wadical they are than everyone else, never got beyond the 'I won't eat my greens mum' stage of rebellion, and are impossible to take seriously. but its fucking annoying and, as the most vocal and visible part of the student left, can give the impression that serious progressives are like that too.
A couple of them called me a wacist for telling a fart joke the other day lol
rekil
to menny cranks
.
Steven Wells invented the word "saddo", according to David Quantick's obituary. Not a lot of people know that. #Boringface
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Quantick has left the building!?
co-op
But....but cLoWnFiSh....
Good post imo but I get nervous about statements like this one. As soon as you generalise into "men should listen more to women" you're on the road to intersectionalist top trumps. There are men out there who need to listen less, and women who need to listen more and there's every shade in between. I had a housemate years ago who was convinced he was Mr Anti-Sexist but who I thought was just hen-pecked - he always gave more credence to what a woman thought than what he felt/believed/thought himself and it meant he ended up surrounded by bossy pissed off women who made his life hell and who probably needed to do a bit of listening to him.
And saying that doesn't deny that women are oppressed in ways that men aren't or aren't (as a group) oppressed more, but for me, their primary oppression will be their lesser access to power (economic and thus political) within a hierarchical system. But obviously individual women within that system can exert all sorts of power if they happen to be lucky enough to get access to the higher levels. Flatten that hierarchy and all groups who have been excluded from access to resources automatically gain greater relative respect and parity. The more you flatten, the greater the parity. I mean even in the post-war social democratic era, which was hardly a full-on revolutionary redistribution of power, there was a flattening of inequality and very spontaneously all sorts of marginalised groups began to demand political rights commensurate with their new economic ones. Gay rights, womens rights, civil rights of all kinds were not being handed down from above by the state-municipal socialism of the old Labour Party they were being demanded from below.
I have no problem with terms like "patriachy" (if I understand it right, and I'm never too sure about this kind of word) but - to me - it seems obvious that "men" as a group don't greatly benefit from patriarchy. Yes they gain certain sorts of autonomy - eg sexual - which are denied to women, but in return they are denied the right to whole areas of emotional life and are expected to constantly compete with each other in self-denying, life-shrinking machismo (I coach young men football and see this all the time). They also get sent to Afghanistan and Iraq or whatever to kill each other - yes for economic reasons (it's a job) but underwritten by the need to prove something to themselves about their own masculinity.
rekil
to menny cranks
That's how it reads doesn't it. Quantick's obituary of Swells obv.
Similar threads
