“To many conservatives, trigger warnings are a symptom of a world gone mad: a fragilizing ritual meant to insulate the delicate worldview of a weak-minded generation.”
Conservatives routinely get upset about the presence of gay people in media, among many other things. Is that somehow in a different category?
(This is in reply to the article linked by the author of the study in that Twitter thread)
I think the overall concern is that people in general seem all too willing to ignore reality. I can't really speak for any particular group in US ( or even in the old country ), because I am sufficiently weird that I do not really fit anywhere. Yay me.
That said, trigger warning is already a trigger word and may need to replaced with something else to avoid emotional reaction ( although I admit I do not have a good replacement off the top of my head ).
Some of the other posters mentioned movie ratings I almost chuckled a little, because I imagined a future, where I send an email in corporate settings with various tags to allow other people to ignore it in time and corporate code of conduct, where you agree to always read some upsetting tags..but I digress.
<< Is that somehow in a different category?
<< Conservatives routinely get upset about the presence of gay people in media, among many other things.
Please correct if I am wrong ( I have done my best to limit my news intake lately ), but conservatives being angry over gays does not ring true to my ears. If I understand current zeitgeist correctly, it is, currently, about a 'conveyor belt upon which progressives plan to place their children'(paraphrasing certain host). The difference is notable. Is it possible you are using old caricature for specific effect?
And this kinda brings me to the other point. Lately, it seems, it is not conservatives are not the ones calling for boycots, bans, deplatforming and demonetization. It is actually their opponents, which, in itself, is already interesting.
> That said, trigger warning is already a trigger word and may need to replaced with something else to avoid emotional reaction ( although I admit I do not have a good replacement off the top of my head ).
"Content warning" is fairly well-accepted (and broader, in that it makes more sense to use it to describe things that people simply _do not want to see_; see discussion of NSFL elsewhere.
The point I was probably trying to make is that I suspect that the author of this study and the accompanying article probably has a particular political axe to grind. That's mostly just conjecture, though.
Moral panics are nothing new, and (self-)censorship is nothing new either.
I think it's naive to think that conservatives have "gotten over" gay marriage, or gay rights more broadly, especially given how recent progress has been in those areas, and how much opposition remains to things like trans rights. I personally have a number of queer friends who are estranged from their families because they're queer, and those families usually aren't particularly progressive, as far as I know.
Yes they're never going to stop trying to restrict and rollback the rights of minorities, they have a lot of money and power they're willing to deploy to this end. Maintaining these rights will always be a constant struggle.
> or gay rights more broadly, especially given how recent progress has been in those areas, and how much opposition remains to things like trans rights.
Why are people still conflating homosexuality with transgender? They're completely different issues.
Look at social networks like Reddit, Tumblr or pre-Musk Twitter and notice what kind of speech they ban. For example, are you more likely to gét banned for saying “white people should die”, or “black people should die”?
"because I am sufficiently weird that I do not really fit anywhere"
Do you want to fit somewhere but haven't yet found a place to fit, or do you not care about fitting anywhere? If it's the latter you may have a social-variant blindspot (halfway down this reddit post: https://www.reddit.com/r/Enneagram/comments/kx0wfa/russ_huds... ). If it's the former you're probably just looking in the wrong places, or aren't engaging enough with the right people to find their similarities to you (or find out if they know of someone else similar to you).
"where I send an email in corporate settings with various tags to allow other people to ignore it in time and corporate code of conduct"
My employer uses a system called "Bucketlist" for kudos or something of the sort. I don't really know because the moment I saw it I created a filter that autodeletes every single email with that word in it. I can handle being reminded of death, but I don't want it popping into my work inbox.
"Please correct if I am wrong ( I have done my best to limit my news intake lately ), but conservatives being angry over gays does not ring true to my ears."
But, as you indicate, conflation of lesbians, gays, bisexuals, transgender, transsexual, and a variety of other groups make it difficult at times to figure out what people are actually in favor of or opposed to.
"Lately, it seems, it is not conservatives are not the ones calling for boycots, bans, deplatforming and demonetization. It is actually their opponents, which, in itself, is already interesting."
It's all sides. If you're noticing one side and not the other it's because of the bias of the media you're consuming. Examples:
<<"because I am sufficiently weird that I do not really fit anywhere"
>
Do you want to fit somewhere but haven't yet found a place to fit, or do you not care about fitting anywhere?
Seems somewhat personal, but I will respond. Neither. I see myself as an outsider, which allows for a very different set of perspectives. For better or worse, I like the fact that I do not belong everywhere equally.
<< But, as you indicate, conflation of lesbians, gays, bisexuals, transgender, transsexual, and a variety of other groups make it difficult at times to figure out what people are actually in favor of or opposed to.
I did not directly say that, but that is a good catch.
<<The Log Cabin Republicans
I will admit that this portion of history was news to me so I appreciate you sharing it ( this is why I like HN; you get to learn things ). It is a genuinely sad story to me ( and were I in their place, I would be livid ).
That said, Republicans have learned some lessons it seems ( creations of GAG - https://www.gaysagainstgroomers.com/about; expanding into black and latino communities ).
<< It's all sides. If you're noticing one side and not the other it's because of the bias of the media you're consuming.
I agree in general. This is also why I qualified my statement with lately. Between BLM/WFH phenomena/movements ( last 2 years ) the majority of the recent effort does not seem to be on the republican side ( statement, which your links actually support ). Anecdotally, even I am aware of crazy religious group trying to ban Quake ( but that is ancient history by internet standards ):D
"Seems somewhat personal, but I will respond. Neither. I see myself as an outsider, which allows for a very different set of perspectives. For better or worse, I like the fact that I do not belong everywhere equally."
For what it's worth this is a particularly common worldview for a particular couple of personality/motivational types (of which I, and many other people in places such as HN, happen to be a member of one).
<< What I did see however lately was generic threat for LGBTQ community supporters that went something along the lines of 'cut it out or your pronouns will be was/were'. That is new ( and funny )[1].
edit: change 'for' to 'from'. I also think was able to track the potential origin of the source meme ( see comments section ).
Man, you are very optimistic about human nature to apply this specifically “to them” when honestly it feels like a general human impulse regardless of political ideology. I see Schadenfreude and death threats by all stripes… (although I suppose only ideological groups that highly arm themselves are likely to successfully act on such threats?)
Most people only extend empathy to their in-group. The left just has a different in-group.
Your comment weirdly supports this reading. To me it reads as an attack on conservatives. Ending your comment with “…worth empathy to them.” implies conservatives are the out-group to you. Sounds to me like you don’t think this out-group (conservatives) deserve your empathy either!
I might be misreading your intent, but as it stands it’s pretty ironic!
> Most people only extend empathy to their in-group. The left just has a different in-group.
Depends on how you define in-group I guess? Most of my leftist friends are straight and white, yet all of them support LGBT rights as human rights, went to Black Lives Matter protests, etc. Yet similar straight, white conservative former friends of mine do not extend empathy to the black american experience, or will outright say homophobic things.
Considering a tenant of leftism is tolerance regardless of identity I basically have to hard disagree with a blanket "the left just has a different in-group." A core tenant of leftist ideology is universal empathy, as a basis for support for universal human rights, equity, etc.
I don't count authoritarians masquerading as leftists, such as tankies ("Marxist Leninists" my foot) or the hilarious new "MAGA Communists" in this.
It’s up to your leftist friends to define their in-group. Not me! Sounds like the in group is queer people, BLM people and so on.
> A core tenant of leftist ideology is universal empathy, as a basis for support for universal human rights, equity, etc.
There’s lots of people the modern “woke” left in the USA doesn’t seem to care about: poor people, people with low IQ, white people in conservative areas, people who live in non-western aligned countries, homeless people, men who have male specific problems, and so on.
For example, a white male friend of mine is utterly crippled by trauma from his absentee dad. He doesn’t feel like anyone in his broader community cares about him and his problems at all.
For a group that talks a lot about compassion, I’m frequently disappointed by how little love I actually see coming from the modern left.
This comment is extremely vague and overly feels-based and anecdotal.
> [the left] doesn’t seem to care about: [long list of random things]
Based on what? This sounds like you didn't even check, didn't ask, probably weren't even going to look.
> For example, a white male friend of mine is utterly crippled by trauma from his absentee dad. He doesn’t feel like anyone in his broader community cares about him and his problems at all.
Could be worse, could be that your parents kick you out and your broader community actively wants to make you illegal.
The left, on the other hand, wants affordable healthcare, which includes coverage for mental illness and access to therapy.
Your friend's feelings of alienation is a small part of a much larger social problem the left cares deeply about.
For everything else, it sounds like maybe you expected """the woke left""" to show up randomly and magically solve all your friend's problems? They don't run society, they're not in charge, they're barely holding off their own problems. Mutual aid networks are a lot of work, especially when you're not bankrolled by billionaires.
When I said "most of my leftist friends are straight and white," what made you think our "in group" (i don't know what definition of this word you're using) is queer people?
> BLM people
What is a "BLM person" and why do when I say "most of my leftist friends are straight and white" made you think we're whatever a BLM person is?
> There’s lots of people the modern “woke” left in the USA doesn’t seem to care about
Who? And what does "woke" mean?
> poor people,
I don't know what "woke" means but I know what leftism mean. Are you arguing that the anticapitalists don't care about poor people, lol? That the accessibility activists don't care about disabled people? That we don't care about poor people because... they're white?
Hold on, that we don't care about homeless people??? what??? Where are you getting this lmao. And by men with specific male problems are you perhaps referring to transgender men facing state-sponsored prejudice and having their rights legislated against? Or gay men getting shot in nightclubs? Did you mean something else?
> white male friend of mine is utterly crippled by trauma from his absentee dad. He doesn’t feel like anyone in his broader community cares about him and his problems at all.
I'm sorry about your friend, that sucks. I just don't really understand what that has to do with anything.
> For a group that talks a lot about compassion, I’m frequently disappointed by how little love I actually see coming from the modern left.
I'm disappointed too. Who are you talking to? Do you come in accusing people of being SJWs and "woke" and then get treated like a reactionary, or are you coming in good faith or in need?
I have empathy for most people, I am still able to criticize people though. Having empathy for someone does not mean their actions are immune from all comment.
Conservatives routinely get upset about the presence of gay people in media, among many other things. Is that somehow in a different category?
(This is in reply to the article linked by the author of the study in that Twitter thread)