Forum menu
On the back of this thread I’ve done a little reading and can see how it could be conveyed negatively. Oddly I think I have exclusively used it in the way Yeti has to describe a collective of likeminded folk, always in a positive manner about people I like, respect and have an affinity with. “I have found my tribe” etc.
Sounds like I might need to find a new shorthand to describe to same sentiment. Suggestions?
‘that PC ATTITUDE is why Greggs are destroying their company selling vegan sausage rolls THAT NO-ONE WANTS’
*points* Haaaaa-ha -
Greggs’ vegan sausage roll drives bumper 58% rise in profits
Bakery chain hails 'best sales growth yet' following popularity of meat-free snack amid Brexit fears
- https://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/greggs-profits-vegan-sausage-rolls-rise-growth-a9027356.html
Sounds like I might need to find a new shorthand to describe to same sentiment. Suggestions?
Clan? Family?
Should the Dirty Kanza change its name? Kanza means Kaw Nation so it's basically called the Dirty Kaw Nation.
As the Washington Redskins are changing their name, it's time Glasgow Celtic did likewise. I don't think there are any Celts in the team these days.
I grew up being called a ****ing paddy, as a result I get tetchy when people use paddy to describe the Irish.
It doesn't take a genius to understand that certain words in certain contexts can cause offence. There may be no intent, but it always makes sense to check if you are in doubt.
Should the Dirty Kanza change its name? Kanza means Kaw Nation so it’s basically called the Dirty Kaw Nation.
Pay a bit more attention, looks like that is already happening, in part because the original organiser got fired for some questionable opinions.
Pay a bit more attention
Wow, sorry I posted. I missed that thread and did have a quick google and didn't see anything about it altering its name.
finbar
MemberThere’s a discussion with some more enlightened comments here:
https://theradavist.com/2020/07/yeti-drops-the-use-of-tribe-from-their-marketing/
Gammons on this thread, I wouldn’t bother reading it, it’ll just get you fuming even more.
I’m assuming that you don’t see the irony of what you just wrote? I’ll give you a clue - you seem to suggest support for Yeti’s move, then you go and use a pejorative term to stereotype a group of people; these things cut both ways.
The problem people don’t seem to see here is that there is a stifling of debate with the sudden desire to be overly sensitive to whatever minority group shouts the loudest. Not good.
JP
jj,
I'm assuming you don't see the irony of what you just wrote?
You accuse people of stifling the debate when what they are actually doing is raising issues that begin a debate about something that has been stifled for centuries.
For a century American sports teams and organisations have appropriated Naive American names and employed terms deemed derogatory by Native Americans, without permission or consideration.All the while Indigenous peoples concerns have been ignored. but those addressing it now are somehow stifling the debate?
Has it occurred to you that you may be a member of an over sensitive minority group yourself? Namely that of the Purple Faced Snowflakes (Gammom is so last year)
And what is not good about listening to the concerns of those who have been oppressed for generations pray tell?
I’m assuming that you don’t see the irony of what you just wrote? I’ll give you a clue – you seem to suggest support for Yeti’s move, then you go and use a pejorative term to stereotype a group of people; these things cut both ways.
Good point. I never thought of that when gammons, after several years of relishing using the term 'snowflake', turned out to be similarly sensitive about a few things...
there is a stifling of debate
There is?!?
The problem people don’t seem to see here is that there is a stifling of debate with the sudden desire to be overly sensitive to whatever minority group shouts the loudest. Not good
You're literally contributing on a thread specifically created to discuss the very debate you say has been stifled.
One thing the world is not lacking in at the moment is "debate". Every bit of news is now surrounded by debate, social media is 90% debate and 10% cats, every ill informed bozo on the planet has an opinion and is more than happy to share it.
JJP - where is this haven from debate you seem to have found?
There’s a very good profit to be made from claiming that ‘debate can’t happen because leftist gulag’.
1. Create Youtube clickbait. ie ‘Joe Rogan cancelled by cancel culture’
2. Profit via ad revenue and Patreon
3. Rub hands in glee that you and thousands of channels like yours ensure that the Overton window is getting smashed and ‘debate’ now consists of a wretched insult match between hordes of angry simpletons who can’t and won’t fact-check, can’t and won’t debate with each other. ‘Smash the left’. ‘Smash the right’.
‘Soyboy libcuck Commie femtard‘
‘Fascist Nazi Rapist racist’
^ ‘Debate’
Yep, I’d say it’s ‘stifled’. Spend 30 mins in any popular social-media comment-stream should quickly disabuse you of any notions to the contrary. STW is a rare gem where debate can sometimes happen, largely thanks to mods? Ironic?
I’m an old grump who very well remembers the beginnings of the internet’s ‘anti-Marxist’ wars. Was living in the US at the time. The birth of popular Internet-fora coincided with/was accelerated by the events of 9/11. The libertarian/RW tabloid tone was set from the start by initial talk radio format/styles and the more popular ‘boards’ such as Free Republic set the tone and it stuck. Many of those ‘libertarian’ boards (ironically) wielded the ‘banhammer’ with a Soviet-style efficiency to maintain the far-right ideological purity to the ‘discussion’
‘freedom/patriarchs/white Americans vs commies/feminists/terrorists/dark-skinned invaders/baby-killers ‘
Since the explosion of social-media they no longer ‘owned’ the platform, TOS meant had to change tack and so they went with ‘victimhood/freedom of speech’ narrative, but to push exactly the same theme, ie:
‘freedom/patriarchs/white Americans vs commies/feminists/terrorists/dark-skinned invaders/baby-killers ‘
They (far right) had a massive head-start in the debate-wrecking ‘meme-wars’, ably-assisted by right-leaning ‘anarchists’ (most often misanthropic yet highly-motivated trolls from the sewers of the interwebs)
For some balance - there ARE actual hardline communists and/or LW radicals out there, but not remotely in the same ballpark or numbers as the ‘opposition’ who are in actual power. In fact anŷ (social justice) protester is instantly cast as ‘the enemy/terrorist/rioter’. We’re now living in a tabloidesque false-narrative which began manufacture since 9/11 by ideologues and bad faith actors who exploited (and continue to exploit) the internet for influence and profit.
Now actual countries have become their playground, complete with lying, narcissistic, (literally!) fluffy-headed and unaccountable human wrecking-balls as heads of state served by a gleefully fact-free electorate who fully believe the ‘memes’ just as they believe/d the tabloid headlines. There has probably never been so much room and free platform for debate, but the narrative is that it’s Orwell’s 1984 and you’re the enemy.
‘Orcs vs Goblins’? Discuss...
You've said a lot there Malvern Rider and its all true.
As for 'Orcs vs Goblins, There's a great IQ2 debate on youtube pitting 1984 against 'Brave New World. Will Self advocates on behalf of Aldous Huxley's novel, pointing out how Orwlel's novel sees ideology as a driving force, where Brave New World cites technological changes as the most influential factor.
24 hour news had been about for a few years before 9/11 but had failed to garner much of an audience. After 9/11 the news cycle never stopped. We became addicted. This primed us quite well for the Social Media age as an Orwellian narrative began to be spun more vigorously than before, methods that had previously been the preserve of the tabloid press became omnipresent within all forms of media, both traditional and social.
Back to the present. As you say, any social justice protester is instantly cast as a Marxist/ terrorist by those on the Right, Whilst it is trus that many on the left advocating for social justice do lean towards Marxism and radicalism, their numbers arent large enough to explain the size of the BLM and other social justice movements.
What we are seeing now is not so much a battle of political ideas, it's more a battle for basic humanity and a proper and unprejudiced observance and application af the law, both in terms of policing and other areas such as land ownership. Consider Mount Rushmore in The Black Hills, that land was stolen from first peoples then returned to them in a treaty signed at the end of the 19th Century, only to be stolen again when gold was found there, new ownersip being asserted with a monstrous piece of graffiti in the shape of the faces of four presidents carved into it's edifice.
Problem is too much debate and not enough genuine discussion.
Not sure about the choice of "dialogue" as the name of the better option - just means two people talking, doesn't it?
That aside, the points here describing debate do underline what's going wrong in the way a lot of things are being talked about and commented on.
That’s a good point Ned Thanks for the clarification and distinction.
I am offended by Yeti, it should be Sasquatch surely?
If BLM are just the latest trendy bandwagon to jump on. If they are so concerned about slavery why are they not protesting about slavery happening today in places like Leicester? The only logical conclusion is that they aren’t interested because it the wrong community being enslaved.
The only logical conclusion
I'll guess at you pretending that is the only logical conclusion.
The only logical conclusion is...
...a lazy cliché which clearly doesn't apply in your example.
Unless you are very hard of thinking.
If these "woke" people are so in tune and not wanting to offend the Native americans surely the only proper thing to do is give the country back to them.
If these “woke” people are so in tune and not wanting to offend the Native americans surely the only proper thing to do is give the country back to them.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but haven't Yeti done this (quite trivial thing) in response to discussions with Native Americans? Not "woke people" generally.
If these “woke” people…
Who?
give the country back to them
Not sure Yeti own ‘the country’… they are making a small easy change. The baffling thing is that so many people seem to care, or are affronted by, or pretend to be affronted, by such a small change. [avoid PinkBike]
I’m with chrismac to whatever percentage his generalisations are true. I have no clue how to verify those percentages.
Maybe you have nearly every supporter (?) of BLM marked as a flakey, privileged, hypocritical/self-interested sap?
Although I strongly disagree that BLM is all simple ‘posturing’, there is I think a GREAT case to be made for it to increase focus on today’s (global and local) slavery. In the case of Leicester’s workers - chrismac do you think that the current focus on BLM has had the effect of highlighting these matters in general where at other times they may have just been buried?
Yes there will be hypocrisy but how you measure it is another thing. If you wish to generalise and slam BLM wholesale (sic, sic, sic!) for ‘hypocrisy‘ because ‘their’ focus/cause has primarily been on police brutality/profiling/racism towards people of African descent and ‘what got us here’ - then that’s your call. If you think it’s all fake posturing and hypocritical then that may say a lot more about you and your projecting views than it does about ‘their’ views/experience. It may not. Only you know that. Anyway here’s a piece that should hit all of your buttons:
(Useful idiot link to dodgy website deleted, with thanks to Kelvin for the heads up)
Again, I find it frustrating. Sort of 50/50 agree/disagree. I’m not on the fence I just think see the generalising is shortsighted, even dishonest. Whether or not it’s helpful to paint the entire of BLM with the ‘just fashionable victimhood’ brush....er..wow?
If these “woke” people are so in tune and not wanting to offend the Native americans surely the only proper thing to do is give the country back to them.
There are people that try to make the BLM movement ‘wider’ in scope, and are slammed for it… often by the same people disingenuously claiming that people who support BLM do so without also being against all sorts of other ingrained and damaging injustices in our societies.
Why has the BLM movement even been mentioned in this thread?
Oh, and don’t post links to that site… it makes you a useful idiot, I’m afraid.