
The Real Reason We Need to Stop Trying to Protect Everyone’s Feelings - walterbell
http://observer.com/2015/09/the-real-reason-we-need-to-stop-trying-to-protect-everyones-feelings/
======
norea-armozel
I have some problems with the author's argument. The supposed SJW types (I'm
one of them) aren't calling for bans on books. The only people that come close
to that are outright Stalinists. I'm talking folks like Jason Unruhe (Maoist
Rebel News). The rest of the supposed SJWs are just people pointing out tired
old tropes (examples: The magic negro or the tragic transgender person) and
maybe it's time to retire them for some more realistic depictions of
minorities. Criticizing your favorite book isn't even close to a university
book ban. I just wish people would stop conflating the two, it's wrong to do
so.

~~~
13thLetter
The problem is not with someone criticizing a trope.

The problem is: what happens when the trope is criticized, and the response is
"thanks for your input but it's not changing." That's when the mobs and
hashtags and internet shaming campaigns come out. That's when news media takes
it upon itself to carry out boycott campaigns. That's when employers are
contacted and people get fired or are forced to make groveling public
apologies.

If you see hostile reactions to mere criticism, it's because nowadays
criticism is often a prequel to aggression.

~~~
norea-armozel
"That's when the mobs and hashtags and internet shaming campaigns come out."

Let me stop you right there. Hashtags on Twitter or some other social media
aren't harassment. I wish everyone would stop with comparing the two. Avoiding
bans, blocks by users, and doxing are harassment.
#IhateFallOut4AndTomHowardSmellsLikeOldSocks _is not_ harassment. It's
jeering. Deal with it.

"That's when news media takes it upon itself to carry out boycott campaigns."

Last time I checked boycotts are 100% legal unless we're talking about
competing companies creating them. Then that's not just harassment, that's
violating the basic principle of market structure.

"That's when employers are contacted and people get fired or are forced to
make groveling public apologies."

How does boycotting and hashtagging become harassment? I really hate it when
people conflate things here. Care to explain yourself? Because I see far too
much dishonest language in your approach to this subject.

Also, what the heck does this have to do with trigger warnings in college
courses and censorship? I don't see any connection. I see people trying to
dodge dog whistles here (i.e. cultural marxism, cryptofascism, and the like).

~~~
13thLetter
You skipped over the bit where people are fired or forced to make groveling
public apologies.

~~~
norea-armozel
[Citation needed]

------
saym
I like and agree with the author's message. I would appreciate if we as a
society accepted the notion:

"...we have the ability to decide not to be offended."

My next question is, how do we address the blasphemous things people say in
our everyday political discussion? How does society correctly stifle the
pundits that shout the xenophobic soundbites?

What do we change so that speech that offends for the sole purpose of
offending falls on deaf ears?

~~~
crazy_geek
"Simple", the thing to change is: we stop giving them (the pundits and the
person saying it) attention; since that's what they're after.

Either that, or just get over the fact that people will say things you don't
like, think is blasphemous (to whatever your God is), annoys you, etc.

Somewhere along the line people stopped teaching: sticks and stones may break
my bones but words will never hurt me.

