the point was that i think my statement provided should be reasonable in use regardless of frequency of its relevance to your perception of what is the norm. i state this generally due to my opinions being shut down for not being another person’s personal experience.
as i’ve stated, my perspective has been potently reinforced over the course of the whole of my life, regardless of whether your personal experience matches. i think arguing past that is equally arguing from personal experience on any side, but arguing that i cannot make my concerns known or relevant is unreasonable to me.
i also personally believe the denial and ignorance of this topic is responsible for the growing of environments that inevitably leads to bad actors being more encouraged and aggressive in their actions and opinions. that “fire hose” is a lot larger than it should be, because there is denial that ANY bad actors exist within the space on the other side. i’ve also personally been aggrieved by the ‘water pouring’ from the “left.”
to remove myself from that analogy, and make a blatant statement. the experiences that i’ve had on the side of the political spectrum that i consider myself to be on has allowed itself to become inclusive of very harmful and evil actors that have affected me personally, as well as others i personally know.
i’ve also seen bad actors (or ignorant moderates) on the other side of the spectrum be enflamed or more radical by this.
both the social issues that are ignored due to this issue, as well as the pushback from any aggrieved parties are extremely relevant to the topic of this thread.
i’m tired of being dismissed as if my opinion is wrong or irrelevant just because certain people hate the concept it might be relevant to, and don’t want it taking the “energy” away from the “important issues.” i consider that statement as intentionally attempting to dismiss a relevant point purely to avoid possibly acknowledging the topic it is built around, even at the cost of making things worse for everyone involved.
that’s fine if you disagree on the importance of the issues i’m presenting, but i believe they are important and disagree with you that they aren’t.
but i believe they are important and disagree with you that they aren’t.
I’m not disagreeing that your grievances are real or important. I did not say it takes energy away from important issues either. I acknowledged multiple times that everything you said is logically sound.
I just wish you’ll take note of this exchange as one more data point evidencing that maybe it’s not your beliefs that might attract negative responses.
EDIT: I think this is a good moment to short-circuit our conversation, as I feel we’ve just repeated ourselves at least once. As a final word, I also invite you to meditate on why your positioning has attracted pushback while oneofthemladygoats articulated something you resonate with and at the same time managed to have a different perspective on this “both sides” picture. Surely there’s something to learn from them if not from our discussion.
i mean, my whole concern wouldn’t be a concern if responses were like oneofthemladygoats even half of the time the issue was broached. this is the legitimate most accepting or positive response i’ve had to my concerns that i’ve ever experienced. online or in person.
i would say i’ve not stated any opinions that should even be controversial. asking purely for the recognition of bad actors and the harm they might bring, rather than refusal to address or accept anything that can imply that bad actors even can exist around the community.
my issue has never been people disagreeing with my points on the topic, but the adamant refusal to even recognize that certain situations exist, and likely contribute to the personal experience of people who end up feeling hopeless or angry. i think this feeds into situations like op’s article when it occurs to less reasonable or more violent individuals. maybe if someone recognized their issues and tried to understand their perspective, they could have been derailed from whatever echo-chamber they may have been trapped in. this would also help combat the intentionally polarizing articles made to ensure cohesion is never found, because anger gets more clicks. remembering that experience and personal truths exist on different societal and cultural scales. we’re interacting from a very messy starting point.
perhaps we are just going in circles, but i hope to see more positive change in the future. i do think dialogue in some corners have become less aggressive, and this thread has been a good example. if some of the more emotionally unstable people have the ability to communicate their grievances and understand the perspectives they are unaligned with, maybe we can avoid more of these trends. recognizing and stopping the support for bad actors in the community might just help.
i’ll meditate on this, but i implore the same in your direction.
Cheers to more understanding and less aggression in all spaces. I’m sorry for coming across as dismissive, I guess everyone has their things to be adamant about. In the social spaces I’m most often, my guard is up against people who weaponize the imperfection of social movements.
i get that. i think there’s a highly abstracted, or high-dimensional complication to discussing social issues (or anything else) which has never been properly addressed. people are bad at visualizing the scale of variation of experiences and interpretations that exist. even communicating basic information is difficult, with vastly varying interpretation of words/phrases, to differences in local social ecosystems/experienced environments. it is enough to make properly conveying or interpreting information increasingly difficult with the scale and diversity of environments that exist. now that we’re all connected, it’s a lot all at once.
i often end up overly defensive as well due to a history of rather aggressive dismissal or denial of some notable traumas in my life. to the degree of being harassed and insulted in a way i think most would have difficulty not internalizing. my main issue is that people generally suck at communicating and understanding each-other, and the fact that we can’t even communicate about that without being polarized and shut down.
i think fixing that would end better for everyone, regardless of personal history.
the point was that i think my statement provided should be reasonable in use regardless of frequency of its relevance to your perception of what is the norm. i state this generally due to my opinions being shut down for not being another person’s personal experience.
as i’ve stated, my perspective has been potently reinforced over the course of the whole of my life, regardless of whether your personal experience matches. i think arguing past that is equally arguing from personal experience on any side, but arguing that i cannot make my concerns known or relevant is unreasonable to me.
i also personally believe the denial and ignorance of this topic is responsible for the growing of environments that inevitably leads to bad actors being more encouraged and aggressive in their actions and opinions. that “fire hose” is a lot larger than it should be, because there is denial that ANY bad actors exist within the space on the other side. i’ve also personally been aggrieved by the ‘water pouring’ from the “left.” to remove myself from that analogy, and make a blatant statement. the experiences that i’ve had on the side of the political spectrum that i consider myself to be on has allowed itself to become inclusive of very harmful and evil actors that have affected me personally, as well as others i personally know. i’ve also seen bad actors (or ignorant moderates) on the other side of the spectrum be enflamed or more radical by this.
both the social issues that are ignored due to this issue, as well as the pushback from any aggrieved parties are extremely relevant to the topic of this thread.
i’m tired of being dismissed as if my opinion is wrong or irrelevant just because certain people hate the concept it might be relevant to, and don’t want it taking the “energy” away from the “important issues.” i consider that statement as intentionally attempting to dismiss a relevant point purely to avoid possibly acknowledging the topic it is built around, even at the cost of making things worse for everyone involved.
that’s fine if you disagree on the importance of the issues i’m presenting, but i believe they are important and disagree with you that they aren’t.
I’m not disagreeing that your grievances are real or important. I did not say it takes energy away from important issues either. I acknowledged multiple times that everything you said is logically sound.
I just wish you’ll take note of this exchange as one more data point evidencing that maybe it’s not your beliefs that might attract negative responses.
EDIT: I think this is a good moment to short-circuit our conversation, as I feel we’ve just repeated ourselves at least once. As a final word, I also invite you to meditate on why your positioning has attracted pushback while oneofthemladygoats articulated something you resonate with and at the same time managed to have a different perspective on this “both sides” picture. Surely there’s something to learn from them if not from our discussion.
i mean, my whole concern wouldn’t be a concern if responses were like oneofthemladygoats even half of the time the issue was broached. this is the legitimate most accepting or positive response i’ve had to my concerns that i’ve ever experienced. online or in person.
i would say i’ve not stated any opinions that should even be controversial. asking purely for the recognition of bad actors and the harm they might bring, rather than refusal to address or accept anything that can imply that bad actors even can exist around the community.
my issue has never been people disagreeing with my points on the topic, but the adamant refusal to even recognize that certain situations exist, and likely contribute to the personal experience of people who end up feeling hopeless or angry. i think this feeds into situations like op’s article when it occurs to less reasonable or more violent individuals. maybe if someone recognized their issues and tried to understand their perspective, they could have been derailed from whatever echo-chamber they may have been trapped in. this would also help combat the intentionally polarizing articles made to ensure cohesion is never found, because anger gets more clicks. remembering that experience and personal truths exist on different societal and cultural scales. we’re interacting from a very messy starting point.
perhaps we are just going in circles, but i hope to see more positive change in the future. i do think dialogue in some corners have become less aggressive, and this thread has been a good example. if some of the more emotionally unstable people have the ability to communicate their grievances and understand the perspectives they are unaligned with, maybe we can avoid more of these trends. recognizing and stopping the support for bad actors in the community might just help.
i’ll meditate on this, but i implore the same in your direction.
Cheers to more understanding and less aggression in all spaces. I’m sorry for coming across as dismissive, I guess everyone has their things to be adamant about. In the social spaces I’m most often, my guard is up against people who weaponize the imperfection of social movements.
i get that. i think there’s a highly abstracted, or high-dimensional complication to discussing social issues (or anything else) which has never been properly addressed. people are bad at visualizing the scale of variation of experiences and interpretations that exist. even communicating basic information is difficult, with vastly varying interpretation of words/phrases, to differences in local social ecosystems/experienced environments. it is enough to make properly conveying or interpreting information increasingly difficult with the scale and diversity of environments that exist. now that we’re all connected, it’s a lot all at once.
i often end up overly defensive as well due to a history of rather aggressive dismissal or denial of some notable traumas in my life. to the degree of being harassed and insulted in a way i think most would have difficulty not internalizing. my main issue is that people generally suck at communicating and understanding each-other, and the fact that we can’t even communicate about that without being polarized and shut down.
i think fixing that would end better for everyone, regardless of personal history.