Possibly true, but that doesn’t make it any less ableist (not that you’re saying it does). I anything, it makes it more ableist. If it’s just bait then the goal is purely to offend disabled people.
I don’t think they are saying it for any sort of ableist reason, they are just making fun of Discourse. For example, you sometimes see radlibs say “actually some disabled people had no choice but to keep slaves” and things like that. The point is to make fun of tokenizing lib idpol rhetoric.
Even if it is, you are giving pretty uncharitable reading… Your post reads more like defending disabled people owning slaves than any abelism from RGB(which I don’t think is your point). Given how much defense of gig industries I have seen on the basis of “helping the disabled” I wouldn’t be surprised if there is some discourse that is unironic in “well they needed slaves”.
Also I have seen tons of discourse on “disability isn’t an excuse for racism and general assholery they are just racists assholes” (including on hexbear)
Well, here’s what happened. I clicked rhe wrong reply box. I was defending your position here. This was meant as a reply to dustcommie. I’ll repost in the right place, lemme know when you’ve read this so I csn delete after
My interpretation is that it’s a sarcastic attempt to liken the two following ideas.
A person with Tourette’s isn’t saying slurs because they’re racist (which is correct).
A person can’t be held accountable for owning slaves because they needed help due to a disability (this is absurd).
The implication that those are at all similar seems very ableist to me. Of course, it’s possible I’ve misinterpreted it, which is the problem with this kind of “hot take” Twitter bait method of communication.
Also, does BRG use they/them? I wasn’t aware. If so I should edit my other comment.
No, I don’t know what BRG uses, I was using they/them to be gender neutral (no pronouns in bio either).
If that’s the comparison, then yeah that’s ableist, but I think it’s hard to tell in part due to the sheer absurdity and also the fact that the “disabled slaver” thing is a meme like I said before. You might be right though.
also the fact that the “disabled slaver” thing is a meme like I said before.
Oh, I didn’t realize this. Still, I don’t see how bringing it up in this context (the tweet is definitely about the BAFTA awards, based on their timeline) can not be ableist, unless it was responding to some specific racist point someone else made and there’s no indication of that that I can see.
Yeah, i’ve been following the discourse during a slow day. its rough. usually i think he has alright takes but this whole ordeal has really shown a bad side of him
You just got a comm ban and had comments removed for ableism in the previous thread about this subject (the BAFTA incident). I’m not going to discuss it with you here. If you actually want your question answered, I clarified to purpleworm in this thread.
No, you were banned from the comm due primarily to your intense hostility to me after I clearly explained to you why and how you were being ableist and offensive to people like me, who have Tourette’s syndrome. Rather than respect my points about the condition, you proceeded to hurl the same hateful comments that I have faced in my life many times before.
Your fellow comrades have been patient, fair, and respectful towards you, but here you are, still picking fights and stirring shit up almost a day later.
You have made it very clear that you have no intention of learning even a single thing about the topics you are ignorant about. Instead, you would rather insult and belittle the people here who have given you every opportunity to be better than you have been. You have zero respect or regard for good-faith discussion. I am beyond done wasting time with your ableism.
Never before have I seen someone so intensely hostile to a person that already agrees with every one of their arguments. It’s pathetic, and you really need to take some time to reevaluate why you treat others like this.
being banned for calling dipshits on this site cracker over them calling Black people gusanos
Banned CyborgMarx [any, any] from the community Pop Culture
reason: You have consistantly misrepresented Tourette’s in this thread, and seem uninterested in listening to comrades who have the condtion when they explain how it functions to you. Take a day off please.
The modlog explains why you were banned.
Edit: I agree with you that the slur causes real harm and the “gusano” comparison is distasteful. You are still wrong about Tourette’s. Your comment about it being possible it was “medically induced racism” are still ableist.
Edit 2: changed the quote above to the actual phrasing of your comment. I don’t mean to misrepresent what you said.
It’s almost like that mod is a liar and doesn’t know how to read or understand basic concepts like intent =/= impact, and seemingly doesn’t give a shit about other users calling Black people gusanos
I agree with you that the slur causes real harm and the “gusano” comparison is distasteful
“distasteful” is that what you call it, cool
You are still wrong about Tourette’s. Your comment about it being possible it was “medically induced racism” are still ableist.
Again with the bullshit lies, I did not claim Tourette’s is medically induced racism, that makes no sense, as I pointed out in that thread 99% of people suffering from Tourettes do not unconsciously scream slurs at Black people
I was talking about an individual’s specific condition, which apparently induced him to be racist, RACISM THE VERB, not simply the mindset you dense crackers, his intent is irrelevant; what matters is the harm he perpetrated and how that harm was mitigated (or in this case, not mitigated) in the aftermath
Internal mindset of a disabled individual suffering embarrassment: less relevant, though open to sypmaphty
Actions unconsciously taken by said individual that seriously harm Black people attending: Far more relevant and crucially in need of centering in light the horrendeous handling by the event planners
Intent =/= Impact, this is some real basic baby leftist shit and it’s genuinely embarrassing how many of you can’t figure this out
I call it distasteful because it was ambiguous and clarified in later comments (it was just about standpoint epistemology being wrong, not meaning to equate the black people who are upset to gusanos). That ambiguousness of course does harm PoC who had to read the comment (presumably including you) and that is wrong and should be avoided.
as I pointed out in that thread 99% of people suffering from Tourettes do not unconsciously scream slurs at Black people
You’re just wrong. Some other people who suffer from the type and severity that this man suffered from would obviously do this. This is why you’re facing so much backlash, you are just wrong about the disability issues which are involved, and you seem to be insisting again that there is something specially racist about this man that makes him different from other people with tourette’s and that’s why he’s saying slurs.
I was talking about an individual’s specific condition, which apprreoanlty induced him to be racist, RACISM THE VERB, not simply the mindset you dense crackers, his intent is irrelevant; what matters is the harm he perpetrated and how that harm was mitigated (or in this case, not mitigated) in the aftermath
This, however, is a better explanation of your point and thank you for giving it. I agree with you that regardless of his intent, which was clearly and obviously not racist, his actions still caused harm to the black people on the receiving end.
I agree with the rest of your comment, but as true as it is that for proper accountability in this situation we need to correctly identify the issues of racism involved, it’s equally true that we need to correctly identify the issues of disability involved.
it was just about standpoint epistemology being wrong, not meaning to equate the black people who are upset to gusanos). That ambiguousness of course does harm PoC who had to read the comment (presumably including you).
The invocation of standpoint epistemology was inappropriate from the start considering the comment he responded to, pushing it into comparisons with gusanos was just him showing his ass and making his contempt for Black people upset over this explicit
You’re just wrong. Some other people who suffer from the type and severity that this man suffered from would obviously do this.
Where did I claim otherwise, this is utterly irrelevant to any of my points, again intent doesn’t matter, the harm inflicted does, me pointing out most sufferers of Tourettes don’t scream slurs at Black people was just me dealing with a bullshit tangential accusation that claimed I believed something I didn’t, because you dense crackers don’t know how interpret something so easily interpretable as “medically induced racism” because you and that little racist now comparing upset Black people to Jevohah Witnesses, think racism is simply a mindset and not predominantly A VERB, like some CNN libs
This, however, is a better explanation of your point and thank you for giving it. I agree with you that regardless of his intent, which was clearly and obviously not racist, his actions still caused harm to the black people on the receiving end.
Oh thanks, what a compliment, so glad I got the seal of approval after you trashed me and everyone else upset over this bullshit in the rest of the thread
Edit: The whites having a timeout huddle under me is really funny
I didn’t mean to condescend to you and I’m sorry if I did. I don’t think I’m going to be able to reply to you further in this discussion without hurting you and myself more. This is a difficult and traumatic topic for everyone involved and I don’t want to keep triggering those issues for both you and myself when I don’t feel we’re going to resolve this with this conversation.
No one called you a Gusano. I implied that black people are not inherently correct about everything because they are black. This was perfectly demonstrated by people claiming that they understand Tourette’s in one comment and then saying that John Davidson is a racist in another because he didn’t call white presenters crackers.
Am I obligated to Listen To Jehovah’s Witness Voices? They have the same stance on medical science.
Yeah, when I read your further comments in that thread I understood you were only making a point about standpoint epistemology (if an identity made someone correct on a subject, we would have to listen to gusanos). I understand why the way it was phrased might hurt someone, though. And that hurt does harm black people, just as disabled people are harmed by some of the discourse on this subject.
This was perfectly demonstrated by people claiming that they understand Tourette’s in one comment and then say that John Davidson is a racist in another because he didn’t call white presenters crackers.
This along with the comment that mentioned “medically induced racism” were the actual reason for the comm ban.
I can understand the first comment being ambiguous enough to cause confusion, but the second makes it explicit. People came in in bad faith, refusing to even entertain the notion that they could possibly be wrong. Why am I obligated to be comradely to people who literally do not believe in medical science about disabilities? Why should I trust my disabled family members’ well-being to anyone who ignores medical science when it annoys them?
People came in in bad faith, refusing to even entertain the notion that they could possibly be wrong. Why am I obligated to be comradely to people who literally do not believe in medical science about disabilities?
I agree with you. People did come in in bad faith and with zero understanding of the disability. However, that bad faith came from the very real harm they suffered due to the issues of race involved. That’s why I think it’s more productive to be comradely here, so we can avoid unintentionally inflicting further racial trauma on people AND so that we can maybe work through these issues in productive ways. I think your anger and frustration here is totally fair, and I share it. But the anger and frustration of other people in the conversation is real and valid too.
On some level I agree. Just like John Davidson’s immediate reaction being to say that he’s not racist is a response to the trauma that being hospitalized for his disability has caused him. But at some point I have to believe my lying eyes and see that there’s about an 80% overlap between people who say that educating them about Tourette’s is racist and people who do not believe that Tourette’s is real. Due to my identity, nothing I say can possibly get across. So do I wait for black disabled people to try to have that conversation? There’s already been one disabled black girl harassed off social media for explaining that coprolalia is real and John Davidson is not a racist for his outburst.
So I’m going to do the only thing I can, which is defend disabled people and not budge an inch. I’m not going to be abusive, but I refuse to back down because the person I’m talking to has a different identity, unless we’re going to start applying that to the disabled.
No, it’s just ableism.
Even if it’s ableist bait, this is bait.
Possibly true, but that doesn’t make it any less ableist (not that you’re saying it does). I anything, it makes it more ableist. If it’s just bait then the goal is purely to offend disabled people.
I don’t think they are saying it for any sort of ableist reason, they are just making fun of Discourse. For example, you sometimes see radlibs say “actually some disabled people had no choice but to keep slaves” and things like that. The point is to make fun of tokenizing lib idpol rhetoric.
At least, I’m pretty sure . . .
Sadly, I think this in reference to the recent BAFTA incident.
Even if it is, you are giving pretty uncharitable reading… Your post reads more like defending disabled people owning slaves than any abelism from RGB(which I don’t think is your point). Given how much defense of gig industries I have seen on the basis of “helping the disabled” I wouldn’t be surprised if there is some discourse that is unironic in “well they needed slaves”.
Also I have seen tons of discourse on “disability isn’t an excuse for racism and general assholery they are just racists assholes” (including on hexbear)
I don’t see what else it could be. I had a quick look at their profile, they’ve been posting/RTing a lot about it.
Perhaps. I’m open to being wrong about this if there’s something else they have said that gives this more context.
Yes, of course that’s not my point. Nothing excuses owning another human being. I expanded on my interpretation here.
I think you would have to intentionally misinterpret what was said to get that take given the context of the thread it was posted in
You mean to interpret my point as “actually disabled people should be allowed to own slaves”? I agree that it’s an absurd interpretation.
However, in defense of dustcommie, dustcommie’s comment does acknowledge that (with “which I don’t think is your point”).
Well, here’s what happened. I clicked rhe wrong reply box. I was defending your position here. This was meant as a reply to dustcommie. I’ll repost in the right place, lemme know when you’ve read this so I csn delete after
deleted by creator
Can you say more to connect these two ideas? What do you think they are actually trying to say?
My interpretation is that it’s a sarcastic attempt to liken the two following ideas.
The implication that those are at all similar seems very ableist to me. Of course, it’s possible I’ve misinterpreted it, which is the problem with this kind of “hot take” Twitter bait method of communication.
Also, does BRG use they/them? I wasn’t aware. If so I should edit my other comment.
No, I don’t know what BRG uses, I was using they/them to be gender neutral (no pronouns in bio either).
If that’s the comparison, then yeah that’s ableist, but I think it’s hard to tell in part due to the sheer absurdity and also the fact that the “disabled slaver” thing is a meme like I said before. You might be right though.
Oh, I didn’t realize this. Still, I don’t see how bringing it up in this context (the tweet is definitely about the BAFTA awards, based on their timeline) can not be ableist, unless it was responding to some specific racist point someone else made and there’s no indication of that that I can see.
Yeah I’m in agreement with you, my disagreement was with you telling calfpupa it wasn’t bait. You’re all good.
Yeah, i’ve been following the discourse during a slow day. its rough. usually i think he has alright takes but this whole ordeal has really shown a bad side of him
Oh god, of course this isn’t his first post about this.
I’ve been avoiding this discourse on Twitter because… well, the obvious reasons.
How is it ableism?
You just got a comm ban and had comments removed for ableism in the previous thread about this subject (the BAFTA incident). I’m not going to discuss it with you here. If you actually want your question answered, I clarified to purpleworm in this thread.
Yeah being banned for calling dipshits on this site cracker over them calling Black people gusanos makes me ableist, great fuckin take
No, you were banned from the comm due primarily to your intense hostility to me after I clearly explained to you why and how you were being ableist and offensive to people like me, who have Tourette’s syndrome. Rather than respect my points about the condition, you proceeded to hurl the same hateful comments that I have faced in my life many times before.
Your fellow comrades have been patient, fair, and respectful towards you, but here you are, still picking fights and stirring shit up almost a day later.
Tell me again how I need to sit down and have things explained to me, tell me again
Hateful comments like ‘racism is bad no matter the intent’
You have made it very clear that you have no intention of learning even a single thing about the topics you are ignorant about. Instead, you would rather insult and belittle the people here who have given you every opportunity to be better than you have been. You have zero respect or regard for good-faith discussion. I am beyond done wasting time with your ableism.
Never before have I seen someone so intensely hostile to a person that already agrees with every one of their arguments. It’s pathetic, and you really need to take some time to reevaluate why you treat others like this.
Continue ignoring all my points and calling me uppity, do it again
Disengage. If you want me to address your points, go back and read the multitude of my comments where I have already done so.
deleted by creator
The modlog explains why you were banned.
Edit: I agree with you that the slur causes real harm and the “gusano” comparison is distasteful. You are still wrong about Tourette’s. Your comment about it being possible it was “medically induced racism” are still ableist.
Edit 2: changed the quote above to the actual phrasing of your comment. I don’t mean to misrepresent what you said.
It’s almost like that mod is a liar and doesn’t know how to read or understand basic concepts like intent =/= impact, and seemingly doesn’t give a shit about other users calling Black people gusanos
Please see my edit. Sorry, I think I edited while you were replying.
“distasteful” is that what you call it, cool
Again with the bullshit lies, I did not claim Tourette’s is medically induced racism, that makes no sense, as I pointed out in that thread 99% of people suffering from Tourettes do not unconsciously scream slurs at Black people
I was talking about an individual’s specific condition, which apparently induced him to be racist, RACISM THE VERB, not simply the mindset you dense crackers, his intent is irrelevant; what matters is the harm he perpetrated and how that harm was mitigated (or in this case, not mitigated) in the aftermath
Internal mindset of a disabled individual suffering embarrassment: less relevant, though open to sypmaphty
Actions unconsciously taken by said individual that seriously harm Black people attending: Far more relevant and crucially in need of centering in light the horrendeous handling by the event planners
Intent =/= Impact, this is some real basic baby leftist shit and it’s genuinely embarrassing how many of you can’t figure this out
I call it distasteful because it was ambiguous and clarified in later comments (it was just about standpoint epistemology being wrong, not meaning to equate the black people who are upset to gusanos). That ambiguousness of course does harm PoC who had to read the comment (presumably including you) and that is wrong and should be avoided.
You’re just wrong. Some other people who suffer from the type and severity that this man suffered from would obviously do this. This is why you’re facing so much backlash, you are just wrong about the disability issues which are involved, and you seem to be insisting again that there is something specially racist about this man that makes him different from other people with tourette’s and that’s why he’s saying slurs.
This, however, is a better explanation of your point and thank you for giving it. I agree with you that regardless of his intent, which was clearly and obviously not racist, his actions still caused harm to the black people on the receiving end.
I agree with the rest of your comment, but as true as it is that for proper accountability in this situation we need to correctly identify the issues of racism involved, it’s equally true that we need to correctly identify the issues of disability involved.
The invocation of standpoint epistemology was inappropriate from the start considering the comment he responded to, pushing it into comparisons with gusanos was just him showing his ass and making his contempt for Black people upset over this explicit
Where did I claim otherwise, this is utterly irrelevant to any of my points, again intent doesn’t matter, the harm inflicted does, me pointing out most sufferers of Tourettes don’t scream slurs at Black people was just me dealing with a bullshit tangential accusation that claimed I believed something I didn’t, because you dense crackers don’t know how interpret something so easily interpretable as “medically induced racism” because you and that little racist now comparing upset Black people to Jevohah Witnesses, think racism is simply a mindset and not predominantly A VERB, like some CNN libs
Oh thanks, what a compliment, so glad I got the seal of approval after you trashed me and everyone else upset over this bullshit in the rest of the thread
Edit: The whites having a timeout huddle under me is really funny
I didn’t mean to condescend to you and I’m sorry if I did. I don’t think I’m going to be able to reply to you further in this discussion without hurting you and myself more. This is a difficult and traumatic topic for everyone involved and I don’t want to keep triggering those issues for both you and myself when I don’t feel we’re going to resolve this with this conversation.
No one called you a Gusano. I implied that black people are not inherently correct about everything because they are black. This was perfectly demonstrated by people claiming that they understand Tourette’s in one comment and then saying that John Davidson is a racist in another because he didn’t call white presenters crackers.
Am I obligated to Listen To Jehovah’s Witness Voices? They have the same stance on medical science.
Yeah, when I read your further comments in that thread I understood you were only making a point about standpoint epistemology (if an identity made someone correct on a subject, we would have to listen to gusanos). I understand why the way it was phrased might hurt someone, though. And that hurt does harm black people, just as disabled people are harmed by some of the discourse on this subject.
This along with the comment that mentioned “medically induced racism” were the actual reason for the comm ban.
I can understand the first comment being ambiguous enough to cause confusion, but the second makes it explicit. People came in in bad faith, refusing to even entertain the notion that they could possibly be wrong. Why am I obligated to be comradely to people who literally do not believe in medical science about disabilities? Why should I trust my disabled family members’ well-being to anyone who ignores medical science when it annoys them?
I agree with you. People did come in in bad faith and with zero understanding of the disability. However, that bad faith came from the very real harm they suffered due to the issues of race involved. That’s why I think it’s more productive to be comradely here, so we can avoid unintentionally inflicting further racial trauma on people AND so that we can maybe work through these issues in productive ways. I think your anger and frustration here is totally fair, and I share it. But the anger and frustration of other people in the conversation is real and valid too.
On some level I agree. Just like John Davidson’s immediate reaction being to say that he’s not racist is a response to the trauma that being hospitalized for his disability has caused him. But at some point I have to believe my lying eyes and see that there’s about an 80% overlap between people who say that educating them about Tourette’s is racist and people who do not believe that Tourette’s is real. Due to my identity, nothing I say can possibly get across. So do I wait for black disabled people to try to have that conversation? There’s already been one disabled black girl harassed off social media for explaining that coprolalia is real and John Davidson is not a racist for his outburst.
So I’m going to do the only thing I can, which is defend disabled people and not budge an inch. I’m not going to be abusive, but I refuse to back down because the person I’m talking to has a different identity, unless we’re going to start applying that to the disabled.