Don’t get me wrong, it’s a good comic, but it’s awfully angry.
15 Likes
A lot of parallels to the grammar snob thread…
1 Like
This.
On the one hand, most people aren’t badass SJW activist types, and are just trying to get through their day. So, when talking to random people about hot-button issues, explain things as calmly and smoothly as possible, and try not to use jargon and tropes that they won’t understand. Don’t go right for the confrontation, or assume they’re on the other side just because they’re not on your side.
On the other hand, I’m not running for Senate, I’m not on trial, I’m not a CNN host, and probably neither are you. I don’t have to have every conversation with everyone in a manner of coached neutrality. If things get a little heated, or a little snarky, or whatever, so be it, it doesn’t invalidate the argument.
Just my two cents.
5 Likes
Umma go ahead and respond to the method of delivery rather than the content:
Like most social-issue “explainer” comics, this doesn’t belong in the Scott McCloud “Understanding Comics” format. It’s really a text essay, and the only way it uses the particular qualities of the medium is a problematic one: comics are fluid about who, if anyone, is saying the words, which here becomes the lube for a barrage of straw-man arguments.
The strength of comics is their ability to be pithy, self-aware, subjective and ambiguous, but this is wordy, earnest and authoritative. It feels like a serious essay asking to be excused from any serious discussion.
It’s also more than a little patronising, especially as it doesn’t feel like it’s done out of a particular love for the medium. It’s hard not to infer that the author had to do this because anyone who doesn’t already agree with them is on the level of a Sesame Street viewer. (Albeit that this is an understandable reaction to some of the things that some adults need explained to them).
And fwiw, it’s less accessible. Even for sighted people, a short essay would be easier to read in more situations.
(I don’t disagree that “calm down, dear” is a dick move btw. I wouldn’t have much problem with this if it had been a short written piece)
What you say is definitely applicable to mass demonstrations, which are intended to convince outsiders that there’s popular support for a non-mainstream position. It’s frustrating when the violent anarkiddies, the People’s Hero™ cosplayers, the idiots with their generic puppets, the annoying drummers, the Free Mumia and “support Hamas” crowd, the drugged-out hippie wannabes and fauxstafarians, and the other assorted fantasists and chaos addicts with no real investment in the core issue show up to play into the media’s narrative (“sure, it was a lot of people, but look at these weird clowns”) and alienate people. It needlessly undermines serious issues again and again.
With a few exceptions, the organisers of left-wing demos for the past 25 years seem to have abandoned the concepts of march and message discipline in favour of “everyone’s welcome and every voice deserves to be heard, because rage against the machine, ma-a-a-n.” The organisers of demos really do need to learn about tone policing when it comes to their events and those who participate.
5 Likes
You might not agree with the medium, but the content is spot on.
I don’t find the arguments to be straw men, because I’ve encountered literally all of these arguments.
5 Likes
Yet racist white guys can dress in Colonial Era cosplay, and the media totally takes them seriously.
4 Likes
Correct, because venerating the Revolutionary era is part of a patriotic narrative that’s acceptable to the mainstream media. Take the same dude with a spittle-flecked beard ranting and raving on camera, remove the tricorn hat and breeches and put him in a Che Guevara costume and see how he’s presented on TV (the actual rhetoric often being beside the point for the media).
If someone is acting (formally or informally) as a public spokesperson for a cause, self-policing and self-awareness of tone in the context of the medium is very important. Unfortunately, a lot of progressives seem to be totally clueless about that and more interested in indulging and acting out their personal fantasies and psychodramas.
Emotion and logic are often mutually exclusive and until you remove the emotion you can’t even tell if there’s a real issue to be discussed. Many of the people this cartoon are about do not have the tiniest shred of logic and therefore, no case to be made.
Hey, calm down and maybe we can talk about this.
7 Likes
Emotions are valid or not depending on how they match up with truth, not depending on whether they’re displayed. If someone’s emotions are not in balance with the importance of the issue, those emotions are Invalid. If someone’s emotions are contrary to the purpose of them displaying them, they are invalid. If someone’s emotions are unwarranted, they are invalid. All of those things are possible, and they happen. Not all emotions are valid, especially when you’re discussing rational topics. Rationality can account for emotion. Emotion can’t do shit for rationality.
From the BBS FAQ:
-
Be cool…
-
Constructive criticism is welcome. Hostile, whining hand-wringers will be eaten.
Is this tone policing, or an attempt at creating an environment for civil discourse?
18 Likes
There are a lot of different types of intersex that aren’t hermaphrodism. It is a technical term and is not biased or prejudiced unless it is used that way intentionally. Clear? Good.
1 Like
It depends on the smell test.
1 Like
I like this thread better than the post that led to it. Primarily for the reasons that @bobtato listed, admittedly, but also because effective group action usually requires effective communication, and effective communication relies heavily on strategic use of language and tactical use of tone.
5 Likes
Not really. At least, it isn’t on this list.
1 Like
Your argument speaks for itself but it doesn’t say what you think it says.
I think you should always hear someone out, emotions and all, to get your bearings to where they are, who they are, what they are. But since my emotions (just a valid as your emotions) on any subject at all won’t precisely track your emotions, and the English language – at least – is pretty addled when it comes to expressing emotions, if you want to get down to brass tacks at talk about doing x or y or z to fix the problem, I – at least – need to downshift to discussions where emotions take a back seat to what you want to do about it.
2 Likes
So in your world the Tea Party are progressives? Please clarify this for me.
I believe this has been the status quo for the vast majority of human history, and is still in too many countries and cultures.
But I don’t believe it’s the status quo here or many other countries. It’s certainly a minority opinion held by fringe conservatives, but I feel lucky that it’s no longer the status quo.
