The point of that rhetoric often gets misconstrued. It is not to simply say "There are things you are not allowed to speak about unless you are [x]." It is to say that if you are speaking about those issues you must be more careful and try not to talk over people. It is not that your opinion doesn't matter, it's just that if you are discussing these issues with people who are frequently talked over and ignored when it comes to them you should attempt to make sure that doesn't happen. (This is where the much-maligned "check your privilege" phrase comes from.)

Much like how if teachers try to make sure girls talk more than the boys in class, but then discover that they managed to get 50-50 /at best/ even while trying to do that, it often merely evens out the discussion rather than tipping it vastly towards 'the oppressed.'

When people are telling you not to talk about an issue, it is not because they are trying to enforce an absolute rule on you. It is because they feel hurt and feel that you are speaking about things that they experience every day and which you don't in a cavalier manner. Using the concept of it being a 'rule' makes them feel more safe in asking you to not tell them how they should be feeling about their own problems.

Generally, when someone's 'oppression markers' (or whatever you called it?) come into question is not when they have merely made a post on the subject, but rather when they have made a Bad Post. It's all well and good to read things as if they could have come from anyone, but if someone is blatantly ignoring this or that social dynamic and making a high-handed directive-like post, then it /does/ matter where they're coming from.

The fact that you had a very difficult life does not retroactively make it wrong that people were troubled and hurt when you told them how they should be feeling about situations which involved complexities of past experience. I do not want to dismiss your experiences, but I do not think you should use them to dismiss the way you have impacted others.

Also, nice condescending dig at people who aren't dealing with their experiences in the way you personally think is best.

"If you aren't admitted into the conversation, then you can expect to have directives decided from that conversation handed down to you with no questions asked or contentions allowed like you're an inmate getting slop on a dish in a relationship where respect/deference is supposed to go one way only."

You are not beholden to this culture you have so many problems with! You interact with it tangentially through people who are in it and eagle-time. Comparing yourself to a /prison inmate/ is goofy. While it may be worthwhile to think about not totally applying those cultural norms to this forum (many parts of it were adapted to deal with the format of tumblr's community and don't actually make sense on a small forum of friends and friends-of-friends), the way to do this is not through dismissing everyone who finds feelings of safety and value in aspects of this culture.

anyways

(10-20-2014, 12:02 PM)Wheat Wrote: »Your words were in context. You are mad that someone reacted angrily to being put out by your friends and said they hated the experience that that culture, unwilling to allow the slightest bit of leeway to anyone not in da gang, provided.

oh look
context

I wasn't 'mad' at Ix because he said he hated 'the experience,' I was /upset/ because he said "I pretty much hate all of you" and idk, someone you think is alright saying that he hates you kinda strikes an emotional chord? It wasn't about 'my friends,' it was actually just because it personally hurt me a lot.

"Also I guess you believe that there really was only one certain kind of person there."

by 'a certain kind of person' I mean 'someone who looks at the concept of weeks-long games and finds them appealing.' which I guess is actually an extremely broad category, so maybe that was a bad choice of words.

(10-20-2014, 12:02 PM)Wheat Wrote: »First of all, it's not been seen as distressing to anyone outside of this specific subculture, apparently.

So do their feelings not matter, or

(10-20-2014, 12:02 PM)Wheat Wrote: »Second, keep that bolded part in mind when you tell Ed "You know, that pressure you feel about being conscientious about being told what to do by all the people around you? It's probably a mental illness on your part."

Ugh, I /knew/ I should have sent that in pm, but I kept that in the thread because I thought it might help other people.

In case you missed it the first time here's me 'flying my oppression flag' or however you put it by saying I have a mental disorder that makes me feel extreme pressure about being conscientious and not messing up. I didn't say that to Ed to handwave responsibility, as I made clear in my post when I talked about how we should take his feelings into consideration and maybe make some changes to the forum culture. I have actually been talking to Schazer about stuff that is /probably/ along the lines about what Ed wants?

I said that to Ed because the way he was phrasing things reminded me of the way I and others phrase things that are intrusive thoughts and persistent anxieties. It's not about feeling pressure, it's about worrying if you make one mistake people will scream at you and abandon you. The latter strongly resembles things that people with (I reiterate) similar problems to mine say. I have 7 years of experience dealing with upsetting thoughts, and doing stuff that should logically get rid of the fear doesn't really help because that's not how it works. What helps is talking through stuff with others.

Which is, again, not to say we shouldn't take his feelings into consideration when thinking about changes to the forum. All of the users deserve to feel comfortable.

"wouldn't know what red has or has NEVER used."

you've played mafia with her, you've /seen/ her referred to via pronouns.

"I am opposed to genderization and essentialism in general so don't force genderization of my speech. I've been trying to use 'they' for everyone because I can't keep up with everything. I have used 'they' for everyone itt and you aren't complaining about the other people it was used for."

Um, everyone else afaik doesn't have a problems with 'they' pronouns and/or is in this conversation and can advocate for themselves. I told you to stop using 'they' for romy because she /specifically asked me to/. I guess the other part of it was that I assumed that if you were using her as an example in a paragraphs-long segue you'd actually know her well enough to know her problems? My mistake, I guess.

"Because mine is less common and yours is more common [in a tiny corner of the internet]"

added context

"If red is troubled by it red can just say so with a sentence and i'll be accommodating, based on mutual respect for each other."

again, romy asked me to tell you. some people are socially pressured not to speak up for themselves about certain stuff and sometimes always expecting this of them is unfair.
my tone in that part is annoyed because you are using my friend as a pet example while doing a behavior (not caring about her identity) that denotes a lack of respect. (And yes, when it's something people care about, it /is/ a lack of respect. Or at least a prioritizing of your own desire to use genderless language.)