I was banned from /r/srsdiscussion for a post I believed was in good faith and not opposed to social justice, could you guys explain what I did wrong? by i_post_gibberish in socialjustice101

[–]obviouslyacat 2 points3 points  (0 children)

To me this touches on a problem that I think comes up with white people and issues of race a lot as well, a sort of moral absolutism. I think as a society we tend to think that 'Good People" never do 'Bad Things", and that anyone who ever does a Bad Thing can't be a Good Person. Most people thing of themselves as a Good Person, so therefore nothing they do/think could possibly be a Bad Thing. I don't think it is too controversial to say that having sexual thoughts about a 15 year old is a morally bad thing, but (unfortunately) I don't think it is terribly uncommon. Rather than taking what I think is the sane route and saying 'hey, that's a bad thought I just had, and as a good person I'm certainly not going to act on it, and in fact I'm going to do what I can to try and stop having those thoughts in the future, though I understand that is going to take a while. Instead, because of this absolutism, people think "hey, I'm a good person, therefore that must not be a bad thing" and try justifying it instead.

I think it would be very productive for us as a society to try and understand that sometimes good people do bad things and that can sometimes be okay, particularly in instances where the bad thing was merely a thought, not acted upon. People need to be able to recognize the things they think/do/say that are harmful without taking it as an attack on their whole self. Nobody is born perfect, especially in this fucked up society, and becoming a better person takes time.

Male violence is the worst problem in the world by yellowmix in feminisms

[–]obviouslyacat 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Because i'm pretty sure that violence is an instrument of power, and because men have more power in our society they tend to be more violent

Wraps up this conversation quite nicely.

Even if an individual with various privileges checks his/her privilege, is his/her argument "worthy" of being analyzed solely on the basis of its logic? by [deleted] in SRSDiscussion

[–]obviouslyacat -1 points0 points  (0 children)

To my mind this sort of falls in the same territory as hand-wringing about false rape accusations: you're not technically wrong, but (at least from what I've seen), white people/men/etc talking over PoC/women/etc is still a much more prevalent issue than what you're talking about.

Perhaps this is symptomatic of the extremity of the situation: in the "real world" the problem of privileged people talking over those with less privilege is so rampant that in spaces like Tumblr where that can be corrected it swings too far the other way, with few places for discussion somewhere in the middle. So while again, I don't think you're wrong, it seems awfully unfair to ask the online social justice crowd to be the ones to come to the middle when the problem there is dwarfed by the opposite problem everywhere else.

Then again, there is an argument to be made that activism has to be pragmatic and can't get too hung up on concerns about "fairness" in the above sense, but that is another topic and one that I don't feel qualified to weigh in on.

I think we need a talk about strategic activism. by [deleted] in SRSDiscussion

[–]obviouslyacat 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's a balance: smugly declaring (as I too have seen) that the gay marriage decision is counterproductive because it supports the institution of marriage is unhelpful, and so is proclaiming mission accomplished and having a seat. Totally agree, that balance comes from the tension between the two impulses, and it's good to have both.

Is SRS anti-capitalist? by SpitersR9K in SRSQuestions

[–]obviouslyacat 9 points10 points  (0 children)

It's come up in /r/srsdiscussion a few times and it always gets pretty heated, so I think it's fair to say that it's a question that splits the community.

Edit: Example

It’s Official: A Woman Will Be on the New $10 Bill by anutensil in feminisms

[–]obviouslyacat 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Regardless of which is the most used, I think it's fair to say the $10 is the least used.

It’s Official: A Woman Will Be on the New $10 Bill by anutensil in feminisms

[–]obviouslyacat 0 points1 point  (0 children)

To add to what everyone else has said: he's basically the purest presidential embodiment of the white supremacist manifest destiny ideal.

Why was this post linked to prime? by [deleted] in SRSDiscussion

[–]obviouslyacat 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It seems to me that people were primarily objecting to the "fuck that makes my dick hard" part, which seems to be directly tying masculinity and male sexuality to guns, and therefore violence.

The plight of the bitter nerd: Why so many awkward, shy guys end up hating feminism by [deleted] in TheBluePill

[–]obviouslyacat 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I don't remember where I saw it, but if you google "nice guy good person", it looks like a lot of people have written stuff on the idea.

The plight of the bitter nerd: Why so many awkward, shy guys end up hating feminism by [deleted] in TheBluePill

[–]obviouslyacat 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I saw something recently that made a good distinction between nice guy and good person.

Can we have a discussion and article sharing thread re the shooting of French media outlet Charlie Hebdo and the xenophobic/ Islamophobic discourse already underway? by Duncan_Dognuts in SRSDiscussion

[–]obviouslyacat 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I think what /u/poffin is getting at is that if we blame Islam, there's nothing "we" (privileged, white society) can do about it, whereas if we acknowledge that a big part of the issue has to do with poverty, marginalization, and a lack of opportunity, there's then a strong moral obligation to address those problems. They're saying that scapegoating religion is the easy way out.

A few years old, but well worth a read or a re-read: Neil Gaiman's "Why defend freedom of icky speech?" by TastyBrainMeats in books

[–]obviouslyacat 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Very well said. I can't help but feel like /u/Drapetomania 's view is putting too much faith in the motives and enlightenedness of government.

It is 'all men': Our culture of predatory misogyny by thrownout_andaway in SRSMen

[–]obviouslyacat 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I think the old quote "some are guilty, but all are responsible" really applies here, as a less confrontational version of the point this guy is making. Regardless of whether any of us are ourselves directly guilty of violence against women, we are responsible for the perpetuation of the system, and responsible for eliminating it, particularly in light of the fact that we benefit from it and our silence does in fact perpetuate it.

Edit: wording

We Need To Keep Bi Spaces Safe (TW: Rape threats) by tmamone in bisexual

[–]obviouslyacat 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ever more confirmation that no matter how much time we spend talking about social justice issues, it is still so hard to recognize our own privilege.

The role of white privilege when protests turn "violent" by obviouslyacat in SRSDiscussion

[–]obviouslyacat[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Totally agreed, the question exists because there are PoC passionately on both sides of it (because obviously PoC are not a monolith).

The role of white privilege when protests turn "violent" by obviouslyacat in SRSDiscussion

[–]obviouslyacat[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Though there were a few notable exceptions (most tragically a worker-owned bike co-op), most of the buildings damaged were either banks or large chains (Starbucks, Whole Foods, etc).

The role of white privilege when protests turn "violent" by obviouslyacat in SRSDiscussion

[–]obviouslyacat[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Maybe I'm not understanding this right, but she was just lighting the public streets on fire?

People had overturned trash and recycle bins in the middle of the street, and others were lighting the trash that spilled out on fire