Unfortunately you're making a version of the tone argument here. It is not acceptable to tell people 'you cannot be angry or react in anger, in order for someone to listen to you, you must be polite and kind at all tims'. The "WHY SHOULD I EVER DO ANYTHING FOR YOU PEOPLE EVER AGAIN IF YOU'RE UNGRATEFUL" argument is annoying as well. I addreessed that above, I am certain.
You are approaching, still, from a position of privilege and you need to examine that. The "WHAT KIND OF ASSHOLE" is quite the remarkable strawman as well and frankly I'm surprised to see you using that. You protest abut having the best of intentions and passive-aggressively imply that people in marginalized groups are being ingrates when the good intentions of the privileged fall flat.
In saying 'it is your anger that is the problem/you are buring the brudges/you are unkind and aggressive and we only have the best of intentions' you are blaming the victim,, and I'm quite angry to see this argument being put forth.
Go to D4D. Read that page. I do't think you did, because if you had you wouldn't be posting a comment with yet another version of the tone argument and with a stereotypical condemnation of my iritation. Where did I condemn the person with the chicken as a horrible clumsy ass? Nowhere. Don't bother with your straw men here; they are flammable and I have matches.
It is unacceptable to put the onus entirely on the marginalized group because all that does is perpetuate the cycle of ever-moving goalposts. I am either "too angry" (as you seem to be implying I am here) or "not angry enough and so obviously not that invested". There is no way to win. Turning the other cheek does not work. And even if I do address an issue politely, chances are I'm going to be accused of all manner of specious nonsense. Having an agenda/being a liar/being oversensitive.
People in marginalized positions are held to much more stringent standards than people in privileged ones, and you have internalized that mindset and are perpetuating a harmful pattern of behaviour here. Does it make you a bad person? No, it does not; I used to do it too. Then I realized I was being grossly unfair, because I was not cutting marginalized people the same slack I am cut. Privileged people can be angry and rude and threatening and abusive, and that is considered an acceptable reaction to a polite approach of 'hey, this is flawed and problematic'.
Which is, incidentally, how I approach tings. You seem to e implying that I'm a ragewad. his isn't so.
I just grew very tired of being abused by people.
Good intentions are meaningless. That was addressed in last year's RaceFail AND this one.
If you are honestly coming into my space and telling me that I am a bad perosn for being angry about being treated as less-than...I'm really not sure what to say. I'm very angry and very hurt by this, because it seems to me that you're viewing me as an uppity, ungrateful fucking little bitch the same way as so very MANY other people do when I show the slightest bit of displeasure.
You are telling an abuse survivor to shut up and deal with it, whether you realize it or not.
I'm not seeing where you got from 'sometimes people fuck up and the best thing to do is apologize' to this claim that marginalized people who get irritated are being unfair, demanding, selfish and ungrateful.
Good intentions are meaningless. Yes, that's not fair, but neither is my being assumed to be an inferior human being. You have perpetuated harmful rhetoric here, and you have in essence told me that I cannot be angry if I ever hope to be treated with consideration.
I know very well that you're going to go and run with the 'well if a privileged person keeps getting attacked (note this accusation of violence) by minorities don't they have a right to be as angry as a minority who's angry at privileged people?' Perhaps, but they should know that by expressing their anger viciously they are perpetuating an ages-old harmful cycle of behaviour.
I am not going to protect you from other commenters here; you have put forth an argument that reveals you really don't give a damn about social justice. You are in essence telling PoC, transfolks, LGBTTQI folks, and disabled folks that we should be nice or we don't deserve to be heard. That our anger is not fair. That we must be docile or we have no right to be heard.
You are perpetuating abuse, Kathy.
I wash my hands of this. You should have known better. I'm very angry with you right now.
AndI'd advise you to never ever appropriate aboriginals' stuff again. Not around me. Not around someone whose fucking best friend in Canada is Métis and who had to see him get called a liar and a sponge and a drunk by the same folks who wanted to cash in on his heritage.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
Re: I want to share...
Date: 2010-07-22 05:47 pm (UTC)You are approaching, still, from a position of privilege and you need to examine that. The "WHAT KIND OF ASSHOLE" is quite the remarkable strawman as well and frankly I'm surprised to see you using that. You protest abut having the best of intentions and passive-aggressively imply that people in marginalized groups are being ingrates when the good intentions of the privileged fall flat.
In saying 'it is your anger that is the problem/you are buring the brudges/you are unkind and aggressive and we only have the best of intentions' you are blaming the victim,, and I'm quite angry to see this argument being put forth.
Go to D4D. Read that page. I do't think you did, because if you had you wouldn't be posting a comment with yet another version of the tone argument and with a stereotypical condemnation of my iritation. Where did I condemn the person with the chicken as a horrible clumsy ass? Nowhere. Don't bother with your straw men here; they are flammable and I have matches.
It is unacceptable to put the onus entirely on the marginalized group because all that does is perpetuate the cycle of ever-moving goalposts. I am either "too angry" (as you seem to be implying I am here) or "not angry enough and so obviously not that invested". There is no way to win. Turning the other cheek does not work. And even if I do address an issue politely, chances are I'm going to be accused of all manner of specious nonsense. Having an agenda/being a liar/being oversensitive.
People in marginalized positions are held to much more stringent standards than people in privileged ones, and you have internalized that mindset and are perpetuating a harmful pattern of behaviour here. Does it make you a bad person? No, it does not; I used to do it too. Then I realized I was being grossly unfair, because I was not cutting marginalized people the same slack I am cut. Privileged people can be angry and rude and threatening and abusive, and that is considered an acceptable reaction to a polite approach of 'hey, this is flawed and problematic'.
Which is, incidentally, how I approach tings. You seem to e implying that I'm a ragewad. his isn't so.
I just grew very tired of being abused by people.
Good intentions are meaningless. That was addressed in last year's RaceFail AND this one.
If you are honestly coming into my space and telling me that I am a bad perosn for being angry about being treated as less-than...I'm really not sure what to say. I'm very angry and very hurt by this, because it seems to me that you're viewing me as an uppity, ungrateful fucking little bitch the same way as so very MANY other people do when I show the slightest bit of displeasure.
You are telling an abuse survivor to shut up and deal with it, whether you realize it or not.
I'm not seeing where you got from 'sometimes people fuck up and the best thing to do is apologize' to this claim that marginalized people who get irritated are being unfair, demanding, selfish and ungrateful.
Good intentions are meaningless. Yes, that's not fair, but neither is my being assumed to be an inferior human being. You have perpetuated harmful rhetoric here, and you have in essence told me that I cannot be angry if I ever hope to be treated with consideration.
I know very well that you're going to go and run with the 'well if a privileged person keeps getting attacked (note this accusation of violence) by minorities don't they have a right to be as angry as a minority who's angry at privileged people?' Perhaps, but they should know that by expressing their anger viciously they are perpetuating an ages-old harmful cycle of behaviour.
I am not going to protect you from other commenters here; you have put forth an argument that reveals you really don't give a damn about social justice. You are in essence telling PoC, transfolks, LGBTTQI folks, and disabled folks that we should be nice or we don't deserve to be heard. That our anger is not fair. That we must be docile or we have no right to be heard.
You are perpetuating abuse, Kathy.
I wash my hands of this. You should have known better. I'm very angry with you right now.
AndI'd advise you to never ever appropriate aboriginals' stuff again. Not around me. Not around someone whose fucking best friend in Canada is Métis and who had to see him get called a liar and a sponge and a drunk by the same folks who wanted to cash in on his heritage.