Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

Antarchtic wrote

Won't someone think of the neurotypical cishet majority for once? /j

If someone's anarchism doesn't have room for me or anyone else outside the status quo, then I'm definitely not going to go around advocating for it. I don't tend to make friends with people who think I'm weird and want me to be more "normal", and I don't know why I'd trust someone like that to come anywhere near my affinity group.

8

MHC wrote

"Normal" is a setting on a washing machine!

2

rattledlove1139 wrote

I think agree just one little piece sort of rub wrong way

When I’m told (…) to make myself more legible to “normal” people, it enrages me.

I just hope not how react always because i have trouble understand and not only one. And i want try be in and support things, not "normal" person on outside. Think more value in make space for questions and simple language

3

anarresinfoshop wrote

You should never undercut your own critique or insights, in order to pursue mass appeal. There lies the path to marginalization, normalization, and irrelevance.

However, on the other hand, it often behooves a speaker to know their audience. When I am speaking to people, I try to have a clear goal of what I am trying to communicate, and what consequence or result I would like to see take place from communicating with that audience. Some people need to hear one thing at one moment from one person, and another thing from another moment and another person. Being mindful that this is the way people communicate, people can learn to walk together through the philosophy of everyday life, by thinking about what is useful to communicate at a particular time and place. This kind of emotional strategy is a major part of what it means to do anarchy with others, in my opinion.

As a related note, I find that the more meaningful changes, in personal life and in the broader evolutionary/social sense, tend to come when people break down their preconceptions about who or what is normal. That is, it tends to be more fruitful to find ways of transgressing and transforming the categories and norms that make up everyday life, than it is to find a little tiny group of outcasts and stick close to only each other. The latter just kind of reproduces subculturalization, which is again a path to normalization, marginalization, a dead end, etc. So, in the former case, it really tends to be more interesting, in my opinion, to seek out connections and interactions with people you wouldn't normally expect to be interested in these things, and see what of the anarchic feast they find most intriguing to begin to taste. Then, just, you know, keep feeding them.

But, this is really a matter of personal preference on a certain level. I enjoy talking with all sorts of people, "normal" and not.

2