babyhueypnewton posted:

as if cursing and talking like a moron are more radical than actual scientific vocabulary.

welcome to the rhizzone party

getfiscal posted:

Goethestein posted:

lol that subreddit has 10% of the followers of r/mylittlepony

lol islam has more followers in the fleshscape than atheism, atheism must be bad

wasted posted:

safe space is the epicenter for triggers.

forgot about 'trigger words' thats a good one

Keven posted:

itsd cockney rhyming slang

lol

EmanuelaOrlandi posted:

what exactly do trigger words trigger? offense? panic attacks?

http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Trigger_warning

There is no consensus on the 'best' way to word a trigger warning so that it accurately describes the potentially-triggering content without becoming a trigger itself. The phrase "trigger warning" may itself be triggering to some trauma survivors. People can also be triggered by warnings that include too much detail. Warnings with very general language, such as "Warning for a graphic depiction of sexual violence" or "Content Warning: disordered eating" are less likely to trigger readers than warnings that include specific details about the triggering content.

of course the article itself has a trigger warning lol

EmanuelaOrlandi posted:

yeah of course they are and of course triggers are a real thing but i assumed we were talking about in the context of like weird online discussion where people are 'triggered' bc of how hard their life living at their parents house till 28 and working hardtime not bc they were victims of sexual violence (in which case triggers / safe spaces are very real and shouldnt be made fun of)

So we’re basically reducing a legitimate and nuanced concept down to it’s basest elements in order to hand-wave away the whole thing.

Kinda like what BHPN was saying trots do with “Stalinism”

EmanuelaOrlandi posted:

uh... "triggers" were originally conceived to be about violent crime / rape victims having trouble viewing stuff that depicted violence, sexual violence etc... thats definitely real except in massive goonworld, which is wherey ou live so it makes sense iguess.

yes but in a political context, the "triggering" of anti-feminist concepts and terminology which is considered oppressive is sectarianism on steroids. anyone with real political experience knows that the most advanced classes (the working class, the lumpenproletariat, the transient and reserve army laborers) are not the most progressive classes (on issues of sexuality, feminism, etc) and triggering and many of the concepts I mentioned in reality lead to either an extreme fascist censoring of thought, an alienated oppression olympics, a movementism in which "privilege" is the criterion for leadership over skill, experience, or courage, or a liberal alliance with the forces of imperialism.

marxism is the philosophy of action, and seeing these concepts which I at one time accepted in action has made me question their theoretical skeleton, and I've found very little there.

EmanuelaOrlandi posted:

uh... "triggers" were originally conceived to be about violent crime / rape victims having trouble viewing stuff that depicted violence, sexual violence etc... thats definitely real except in massive goonworld, which is wherey ou live so it makes sense iguess.

i mean, it's common social courtesy not to bombard people with graphic images, videos and sounds. i don't go around showing my grandmother violent images, and it's not because she survived 3 wars (because that's everyone older than 70 in serbia and 2 for anyone younger). many people have perfectly natural reactions of disgust and revulsion to such graphic media, but nobody is forcing anyone to read websites. i don't believe in free will, but still there's a minimum level of responsibility we should be able to expect from the hypothetical person that includes avoiding "triggering" topics on discussion boards.

EmanuelaOrlandi posted:

who gives a shit about a 'political context' when we're talking about not doing things that make rape victims have violent flashbacks?

but this is just self-righteous anger substituted for analysis. people say the same thing about communism and 'apologia for murder'. defenders of the soviet union against NAZI germany have been accused of being rape apologists. it may very well be that safe spaces are the minimum for an ethical system, but it's not obvious at all and I long ago stopped accepting the liberal system of ethics as given.

jools posted:

I have no idea, but it sounds like a degenerated version of purging and democratic centralism, with liberal ethics substituting marxist theory of praxis.

babyhueypnewton posted:

people say the same thing about communism and 'apologia for murder'. defenders of the soviet union against NAZI germany have been accused of being rape apologists.

'Does Djilas, who is himself a writer, not know what human suffering and the human heart are? Can't he understand it if a soldier who has crossed thousands of kilometers through blood and fire and death has fun with a woman or takes some trifle?'

-

babyhueypnewton posted:

EmanuelaOrlandi posted:

who gives a shit about a 'political context' when we're talking about not doing things that make rape victims have violent flashbacks?

but this is just self-righteous anger substituted for analysis.

i am tired of all these rape survivors with their self-righteous anger trying to stymie up my fuckin Marxisms, so usually i just throw out a paragraph at lacan at them to make them shut up