Doing an honesty hour, so ask me your questions! No? Oh, ok. Fair enough. Haha.
if ur screwing up ur life cuz u are a perfectionist with major anxiety who procrastinates and spends way too much time on the internet clap ur hands
This is not a positive message. Something I am seeing increasingly frequently is ‘rights movements’. No, let me clarify; rights movements attacking rights movements. Did you know a transgendered person is more likely to be marginalised or ridiculed within an ‘equal rights’ group than in a group of…
Documentation of a white person, unable to discern between true social movement and counter-social movement, getting upset by negativity.
Trivialises issues, criticizes activism, preaches complacency, makes sweeping statements.
Criticism of a white person, dropped out of school at the age of 16, likes to feel important- they aren’t. Please, tell me where I preach complacency and criticise activism. I can’t help but notice you criticise me for my ‘criticism’ instead of doing something about it. This is exactly what I’m talking about; people are more likely to sit there and make shit remarks than actually do good in the world.
Congratulations on being the perfect example for this piece, I hope that makes you feel all important on the inside.
Let me begin by addressing the fallacy which you’re using to the point of excess: that an individual is incapable of multiple tasks or notions at a single time. You seem to be under the impression that, in partaking in a form of activism that you don’t approve of, the person is actively neglecting the gentle benefactions which you, at the end of your diatribe, encourage. This is an absurd notion – it is purely cynical speculation on your behalf. You honestly cannot know how much each person partakes in (beneficial or malevolent) extra-cyber activities.
The implications you make concerning activism are also based on speculation: that a person partakes in rights movements simply for their own selfish satisfaction; that they are taking a standpoint on the issue based on second-hand information; that there is equal inequality in the opposing “right.” Most active in rights movements are hoping for societal change which, without open criticism, denouncement and identification of opposing factors, would not occur. To assume that all or even most participants are motivated by some manner of egotistical reward suggests you’re completely unaware or indifferent to the factors that facilitated the need for the movement.
Unfortunately, you’ve clumsily grouped genuine rights movements with those created to directly counter them (id est, feminism and the contradictory MRM.) And in your attempt to identify “flawed arguments” of rights movements, you’re only iterating very petty and generalised misconceptions about the underlying motivating factors and causes of these movements.
So: because of your inability to identify genuine and counter rights groups, your persistent floccinaucinihilipilification of those involved in them and your inability to comprehend the need for an aggressive response to certain issues, you are detracting from the significance of genuine rights movements and supposing instead a polite “wishing away,” the effectiveness of which is evidenced by some very fantastical group that’s apparently tacitly opposed to the use of social media for societal betterment (and the actions of which are ostensibly impossible for any active participants of a social movement to replicate.)
While I appreciate your diatribe - a good outside perspective is always needed - you are trying a little too hard. I hate the phrase ‘try hard’ but, sweetheart, really. Please put down the thesaurus. A well worded argument isn’t created exclusively of ‘high brow’ vocabulary, it creates a strong, almost overbearing sense of arrogance and exclusivity. Which is exactly what my article opposes. Arrogance and hypocrisy.
There are people this post is aimed at. Some are the people who complain about rights movements, how greedy they are, how they only aim to destroy whatever their unique opposing force is. Some are the ‘true’ activists who seem to exist purely for the betterment of the world.
There are a handful of activists on tumblr, who do their research, who put effort into those issues they care about, who don’t seek out opinions with the intention of tearing them down- but they are far and few between. It is obvious, at least to me, when a social blogger does not take part in the activism they promote.
Promoting a certain type of movement is a good thing- if done positively. No media is bad media, except when that bad media creates an entire subculture hated by the majority. Yes, I am talking about the ‘feminazi’.
I’ve taken a look at your blog, lately is seems to be more nonsense speculation than anything else. Using big words and garden path paragraphs for the sake of self importance. I’m not sure if you still are sixteen, or if you have since aged, but I am almost certain that not too far from now you are going to look at your current behaviour and hide your face in shame. We all have.
So you are not the target of this post. But you criticise my non-criticism, and you speculate my non-speculation. I am a cynic, that at least is true, but I am an optimistic cynic and living proof of my own beliefs. I love to make people happy. I like to make jokes and comfort people and be the ones that they put faith in. However I like to make people happy because when I make people happy it makes me happy. Do you understand? If making someone happy didn’t bring me that emotional boost then I wouldn’t put effort into them. My positivity is purely in self interest.
You criticise me, you expect more from me, but you do not expect it from yourself. I admit I am a cynic because I am not a hypocrite. I see my flaws and I admit them willingly. What I ask of the world, is to do the same. If you’re going to be greedy, obnoxious, arrogant; fine. But do not be upset when someone else is greedy, obnoxious or arrogant.
If you can give me proof that the majority of social justice bloggers on this god forsaken website have positive, self sacrificing intention, then I will willingly admit that I am wrong. As it stands, the world is guilty until proven innocent.
Addendum: Your original response brings my race to the forefront, that is an unnecessary detraction from your point and weakens it quite a great deal.
The majority of your reply seems a hodge-podge of self-affirmations and bitter antagonism. Your attempt to slight me based on my usage of the English language just hurt too much. I think we’ve lost the chemistry that we had at the start. I’m so sorry.
post scriptum: your race is incredibly relevant. I’m sure you’re clever enough to understand how race affects opinion and vice versa.
Where did I once say that your argument is irrelevant, let alone in the singular paragraph where I commented on your use of the English language. Saying that race affects opinion is incredibly ignorant. Assuming the white female is always in a better position than the black female.
There are people born into high class families within every race, just as there are people born into poverty within every race. In America, certainly there are probably more white upperclass families than of any other given race but that is not because they are white it is because they are the children of families that where in power before slave labour was abolished in America. That doesn’t limit the chances of another race having any given level of power (the current American president is black, for example), that doesn’t limit the chances of another race losing any given level of power. There are so few “Blueblood” families - in contrast to families who gained their worth through industrial effort these days - that I whole heartedly consider that point of yours to be moot.
The only area I could consider race being an issue is finding an untrained, minimum wage position, where one might encounter racism from managerial staff, in which case you can report it. In saying that though, in my experience, a lot of ‘racism’ in the work force of late is not racism but lazy employees keeping jobs by pulling the race card every other day.
Hello, I’m a twenty year old white girl who lives in Australia, I don’t have a job and I haven’t kept a job for more than three months my whole life. Why? Because I am a slow mover. I cannot work customer service because I cannot pull a line of ten people through a register during rush hour. So I am currently at university, learning and training for a position that will not require food service. How much of that has to do with my race? None.
Your response to my response to your response was ‘this in an uninformed cynical speculation’ and my response to your response to my response to your response was ‘yes, but prove me wrong.’ I’m sorry, but I do not see how that is at all ‘hodge-podge’. I have noticed, though, that you completely ignored the points that I raised.
Wow. You could have saved yourself a lot of typing if you’d just come to the point and said “RACISM DOESN’T EXIST ANYMORE BECAUSE EVERYBODY HAS AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EXCEPT FOR WHITE PEOPLE WHO CAN’T USE THEIR RACE TO GET OUT OF WORK LIKE ALL THOSE RACIALS DO.”
I’m just going to reblog this as a sort of disgraceful memorial called Miserable White Opinion on the Unimportance of Race.
You could have saved a lot of typing had you simply stated (I noticed you dropped that pretentious vernacular) “I INCORRECTLY PARAPHRASE AND MAKE WILD GENERALISATIONS ON THE INTERNET TO FEEL BETTER ABOUT MYSELF.”
I never said everyone has an equal opportunity, nor did I say racism doesn’t exist. I said everyone has an equal chance to be born a certain class. Wealth is not race dependant, opportunity is not race dependant. Yes, a rich person is more likely to remain a rich person than a poor person but who’s to say what race that rich person is. Here you are, drawing negative attention to a post specifically about positivity and hypocrisy, calling me a racist, then saying things like ‘Your opinion doesn’t count because you’re white. White people have a better chance at life because black people are poor.’ Which of us is supposedly racist, again?
I’m just going to reblog this as a sort of disappointing memoire* called “Classic Subject’s Attempt at Discrediting an Opinion Based on Self Importance, Uninformed Assumption and Bigotry.” Here’s a hint: You can’t discredit an opinion.
To the small handful of followers I have here, again I seem to have gotten myself into some long winded discussion slash argument. I am quite good at that, it seems. In the least, I hope that you find the read interesting! I’ll be deleting each previous post from this feed, once I have added onto the argument, so hopefully it is not too spammy for you all.