Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Juana Go?

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 ... 256
1
Roger, they are so far away from identical, they're not even on the same planet.

IT'S DIFFERENT WHEN WE DO IT.
Last time: any criticisms I have made have been directed at institutions. The one and only personal comment I have made was directed at someone I think that we both, all other differences aside, can agree is an asshole.
Quote
Quote
I wasn't going to post this one, because the dude is, hmm, a little angrier than I think is possibly constructive and perhaps a little dismissive of cishets, but I think it's pretty apt, since this is now about cis-ness: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zr1KOGQh5Lg

No longer interested.  Like I said, FTS, YOYO.
I don't even know what that acronym means, but okay.

Quote
Quote
FTR, I don't find cishets/straight people annoying until they prove to be annoying as individual people. I also think you're conflating anger at the system and with the institutions with anger at individuals. The only time I'm angry with an individual - and I don't think I'm unique - is when that person behaves as part of the system.

Yeah, well, I find YOU annoying as an individual.  You said something offensive as hell, and you think it's just dandy because YOUR PRECIOUS SELF said it, so it's not the same as EVERY SINGLE BIGOTED COMMENT EVER MADE.
No, my comment was directed at ONE shit head who was acting in a manner typical of white cishet male privilege (WCHMP) as an institution. You continue to conflate criticism of the institution of WCHMP with criticism of the individual.

Quote
Quote
We had this debate and I'm not interested in rehashing it.

That's good, because we're not going to.  I think we're done here.
Mkay.

I need to go do homework, so any replies after this will have to wait until, like, tomorrow afternoon.

2
Sure! I was trying to get that part out before someone jumped on it before I could properly respond.

You and I have never had an argument, Johnny, nor has there been MIND LAZOR/etc. comments, lol. My response should have been edited better, because like 24 responses (and one car trip) were had between the time I started and the time I clicked post.

3
No, I'm not implying that.

4
What I want to know is -- again, as a spectator here -- at what point does one's privilege mark them for expanded scrutiny and skepticism when they renounce their entitlement to that privilege in favor of expanding the privilege to the status of a universal right for everyone? Is it when they have something to gain, personally, if the cause wins (other than the comforting knowledge that the cause won, that is)? If that's it, then why is it a problem if they do gain something if the cause wins? Is the cause mutually exclusive with every other kind of benefit to every other kind of person? At that point, is there perhaps a hint of entitlement associated with the cause itself, where a victory might not be considered "complete" if it becomes pinned to advancing some "lesser" goals for "lesser" people?
It's not an issue of special scrutiny. It's an issue of people not acting like cookie seekers*

*The cookie seeking behavior when a privileged person acts like the fact that they do not actively want to hurt/kill/oppress a group means they are ~brave~ and ~special~ instead of decent human beings. White people don't get cookies for being brave enough to think that PoC shouldn't have to deal with an inherently racist police and justice system. Cishets don't get cookies for thinking that queers deserve equal protection under the law, including access to domestic violence and homeless shelters. Sometimes - a lot of the time, even, depending on the issue - privileged people do act like that. It's very LOOK AT ME! LOOK HOW I'M DIFFERENT!



I feel like this thread should be re-named Summer of Feminism 2.0 or something.

5
Listen to the rest of the video, Johnny. There's a reason he says what he says - responding with butthurt to underprivileged groups' anger at privileged groups is indicative of a person who doesn't understand their privilege. THE WHOLE REST OF THE SOCIETY is built to cater to the privileged, and whining because the underprivileged said "ugh, white/straight/whatever people" is making the issue about THEM instead of the system that causes an entire group to feel unsafe.


I have to say, I would feel bad if I thought this were motivated by anything other than Roger's butthurt, because a) if it weren't, you probably would have taken exception to the REST of the comment and b) it wasn't even directed at him. That smells like left over butthurt to me.


Vex, I wasn't accusing Roger/other known allies of cookie seeking. No one on this board has, to my knowledge, been a cookie seeker, because I think PD does a fairly good job at biped-ery. It's a lot of the rest of the world who does the cookie seeking behavior. And yes, actually, the way Roger responds to vocal anger at cishets as an institution is with anger/butthurt. Cishets as an institution kill a hell of a lot of queers every year and "ugh, cishets" (or similar sentiments directed at the institution) is really, really microscopic potatoes in comparison.

edited while answering more of Vex

6
Um, it matters because actual bigots are bad people? Like I said, I don't hate people based on their intersections (race, gender, class, etc.). If I hate them, it's on their individual merits.

7
:lulz: I'm a bigot, huh? Okay. Apparently being vocally angry with the system and side eyeing cookie seekers makes me a bigot.

8
3. I assumed, because you have used cisgendered yourself, in the entitlement and privilege thread, and because I know you get this whole privilege thing, that would be fairly obvious what I meant (specifically, a certain kind of white cishet man, which PD is mostly not populated by,

Did that sound okay to you when you wrote it?

Because it sounds like "There's Blacks and there's niggers".  You could have just said "asshole" and left the CIS thing out of it. 

Or maybe you couldn't.
Oh my god, Roger, no, it's not. Ugh. When I have my actual laptop out, instead of my tablet, I'll respond properly, but good lord, they are totally different. Privilege, dude.

Fuck you, the two situations are IDENTICAL.  So take your "privilege" shut-down comment and shove it up your arse.  The fact that *I* may have privilege you don't have does NOT give *you* an excuse to make bigoted fucking statements.
Roger, they are so far away from identical, they're not even on the same planet.
I wasn't going to post this one, because the dude is, hmm, a little angrier than I think is possibly constructive and perhaps a little dismissive of cishets, but I think it's pretty apt, since this is now about cis-ness: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zr1KOGQh5Lg
FTR, I don't find cishets/straight people annoying until they prove to be annoying as individual people. I also think you're conflating anger at the system and with the institutions with anger at individuals. The only time I'm angry with an individual - and I don't think I'm unique - is when that person behaves as part of the system.


No, I am not wild about certain kinds of people who claim it because they do it as if saying "I'm for equal marriage!" makes them an exceptional person who deserves cookies, instead of a person who meets the basic criteria for a decent human being.

Some people might do it out of principle.  But don't let that stand in the way of your contempt.

Quote
Look, the system destroys the lives of the underprivileged. It oppresses and kills and rapes them. They have every right to resent the system. To penalize the people who vent about those issues is to ignore the fact that the people who benefit from the system (whatever intersection of race, class, gender, etc.) don't face those issues. We've already gone over what those issues are, so I won't beat a dead horse and repeat them, but it is still a fact that a member of privileged group A becoming upset when underprivileged group A complains about them as a group is making the issues about them as a person.

The obvious answer, of course, is to drive away anyone who is interested in helping with passive bigotry, so that you can continue to be the very, very special rebel, tirelessly fighting the powers that be...Solo.  Far more dramatic that way.
We had this debate and I'm not interested in rehashing it.

9
3. I assumed, because you have used cisgendered yourself, in the entitlement and privilege thread, and because I know you get this whole privilege thing, that would be fairly obvious what I meant (specifically, a certain kind of white cishet man, which PD is mostly not populated by,

Did that sound okay to you when you wrote it?

Because it sounds like "There's Blacks and there's niggers".  You could have just said "asshole" and left the CIS thing out of it. 

Or maybe you couldn't.
Oh my god, Roger, no, it's not. Ugh. When I have my actual laptop out, instead of my tablet, I'll respond properly, but good lord, they are totally different. Privilege, dude.

10
2. I feel like we should have a discussion about the minority complaining about the majority. (should I have used it in that instance? No. But I don't begrudge minorities, whatever they are (racial, gender, etc.) the right to complain about the system (of white supremacy/patriarchy/etc.) that oppresses them. They're getting with with rocks and complaining about the institution of whiteness/manhood/etc. is hollering)

I can see now why you hate the word "allies".

It's like a lightbulb went on.

Anyway, you work on minorities getting back at The Man.  Do have fun.  FTS,YOYO.
No, I am not wild about certain kinds of people who claim it because they do it as if saying "I'm for equal marriage!" makes them an exceptional person who deserves cookies, instead of a person who meets the basic criteria for a decent human being.


Look, the system destroys the lives of the underprivileged. It oppresses and kills and rapes them. They have every right to resent the system. To penalize the people who vent about those issues is to ignore the fact that the people who benefit from the system (whatever intersection of race, class, gender, etc.) don't face those issues. We've already gone over what those issues are, so I won't beat a dead horse and repeat them, but it is still a fact that a member of privileged group A becoming upset when underprivileged group A complains about them as a group is making the issues about them as a person.

11
The asterisk in trans* serves the same purpose it does in a search, because it's a very complicated set of identities - there's an unlimited number of not-cis identities that fall under the label (transssexuals, male-to-female, female-to-male, non-binary, genderqueer, third gender, etc.). You can say "trans*" without excluding anyone.

People who are privileged have a tendency to respond with knee jerk anger-fueled denial when confronted with their own privilege.

Yes.  I have noticed that.

And I thank you for lumping me and every other CIS person in with that, for expressing your contempt of everything we are, simply by virtue of being CIS.

There is zero difference between your comment and some po'bucker going off about "faggots".
FFS, Roger. I apologized for that comment months ago and meant it. I don't have any contempt for people who are cisgender, just because they're cis. It's a thing, just like being trans* is. Nor am I lumping anyone, and my comment is very much different than his. Mine was a comment about a typical reaction in this situation by a non-biped like him, and his was, well, a typical non-biped response.

1.  No, you never actually apologized, IIRC.  You gave reasons why it was okay.  I could be wrong, but that's how I remember it.

2.  You just did it again.  You just fucking did.  So how is the apology that may have happened valid?

3.  You didn't identify him as a non-biped, you identified him as CIS.  Unless that is now a functional definition of a non-biped.
1. I did actually apologize and meant it. Should I go dig up the thread?

2. I feel like we should have a discussion about the minority complaining about the majority. (should I have used it in that instance? No. But I don't begrudge minorities, whatever they are (racial, gender, etc.) the right to complain about the system (of white supremacy/patriarchy/etc.) that oppresses them. They're getting with with rocks and complaining about the institution of whiteness/manhood/etc. is hollering)

3. I assumed, because you have used cisgendered yourself, in the entitlement and privilege thread, and because I know you get this whole privilege thing, that would be fairly obvious what I meant (specifically, a certain kind of white cishet man, which PD is mostly not populated by, VZ/DEC14 aside). My mistake. Next time, I'll be clearer.



interestingly I are doing a vid for my friend's transgender awareness project on being cisgender.

As in non-trans.

As in there being an opposite to gay, being straight.

Didn't I plot a crappy graph about that in one of the threads that kicked this off?

I'm kind of looking forward to  helping her with her project, because she came out as trans* to me recently and i've known her for 10+ years. I'm also considering  helping with a few things that as a cis person I don't have to worry about that a trans person does.
Trans-mission? Me, too. I'm explaining the gender binary and then non-binary identities (such as is possible, lol).

12
Oh boy.

13
People who are privileged have a tendency to respond with knee jerk anger-fueled denial when confronted with their own privilege.

Yes.  I have noticed that.

And I thank you for lumping me and every other CIS person in with that, for expressing your contempt of everything we are, simply by virtue of being CIS.

There is zero difference between your comment and some po'bucker going off about "faggots".
FFS, Roger. I apologized for that comment months ago and meant it. I don't have any contempt for people who are cisgender, just because they're cis. It's a thing, just like being trans* is. Nor am I lumping anyone, and my comment is very much different than his. Mine was a comment about a typical reaction in this situation by a non-biped like him, and his was, well, a typical non-biped response.

14
And for the record you entitled little fuck, you never bothered to give my input more than a passing glance.

Fuck you. Enjoy driving on the roads "YOUR CORPORATION" paid for because you're just another screaming clown.

Ah that's better.


This board's definition of entitlement is pants-on-head retarded. Your whole position that the poor should get some sort of assistance is literally the definition of entitlement...look anywhere that isn't PD for that definition, and you'll see that you're the entitled fuck.

And I will enjoy driving on my company's roads...because so long as my company is profitable enough to maintain those roads, I'll have a motivation to form a voluntary association with them.

Also, fuck you librul joo, imma go fuck mah sister, drink sum beer and watch nascar now, k?
Right on. Continue enjoying the hyper-rich fucking you over, no kiss, no KY.

15
Hell hath no fury like a white cishet man with his feelings hurt. :lulz:

 :kingmeh:

Yes, we CIS types can be like that.  We're so flighty and emotional, you know.
People who are privileged have a tendency to respond with knee jerk anger-fueled denial when confronted with their own privilege. The more privileged they are, the angrier and more virulent the denial, and white cishet men are the tip top of the heirarchy. This is simply my observation based on my reading and discussions. Like, VZ is absolutely typical.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 ... 256