Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

8

zombie_berkman wrote

I mean it more or less boils down to dont be doucher, except its more verbose

-9

nuvpr wrote

I get the "don't be a douche" part, it's the other thought-crime stuff I don't get... Like what is heterosexism and cisgenderism exactly? Is being hetero/cis a crime now? And what kind of content "promotes the patriarchy"? And if white supremacy is banned then why isn't the supremacy of other races banned as well?

Doesn't this count as racism and this count as black supremacy? Look at the sidebar of the latter, "being a douche" doesn't begin to describe that shit. And those are only the forums I could find on the front page where they were featured! Who knows what else resides on this website.

9

red_pepper wrote

Like what is heterosexism and cisgenderism exactly? Is being hetero/cis a crime now

They're forms of bias and discrimination, not just being hetero or cis. Things like misgendering people or not respecting their sexual orientation, that kind of thing.

And what kind of content "promotes the patriarchy"?

Harassing women for nudes, using sexist slurs, posting redpill/incel propaganda, ect.

And if white supremacy is banned then why isn't the supremacy of other races banned as well?

Because we live in a white supremacist society. We punch up, not down.

-6

nuvpr wrote

Most of these sound like pretty obvious stuff, why the buzzwords then?

misgendering people

Agreed but that can be very easily abused, I can change my gender every week while I'm online (it's the internet lol) and get anyone banned if he/she refers to me by last week's pronouns. Not very practical I'd say.

redpill/incel propaganda

I thought we were avoiding buzzwords? Where do you draw the line between "propaganda" and "facts"?

Because we live in a white supremacist society

No, just you. The world is not america and other countries do exist, I'll have you know, see my other reply.

6

Pop wrote

Agreed but that can be very easily abused, I can change my gender every week while I'm online (it's the internet lol) and get anyone banned if he/she refers to me by last week's pronouns. Not very practical I'd say.

It's been super practical on Raddle so far, and not abused

and we have had people genuinely figuring out their gender stuff who have changed their pronouns regularly, without so much as a hint of trouble

f/trans especially is good with it, obviously

Showing a suspicion that it will be abused around trans things generally reflects dodginess from the assumer, not the other way around

and yeah you're full of red flags for dodgy beliefs, its quite interesting that you think of yourself as good at this
I hope you stick around some and figure out more

-3

nuvpr wrote

Nice to know being against racism is a red flag and a dodgy belief. I, too, hope to stick around long enough to know how to be racist proper :)

2

selver wrote (edited )

Agreed but that can be very easily abused, I can change my gender every week while I'm online (it's the internet lol) and get anyone banned if he/she refers to me by last week's pronouns. Not very practical I'd say

Perfect example of the "don't be a douche" rule. If you don't know the person then use gender neutral pronouns, don't assume people's gender. If someone asks you to refer to them differently, don't be a douche about it. It's not difficult. You're being unnecessarily combative & paranoid. No one's going to trap you by switching their pronouns between posts.

No, just you. The world is not america and other countries do exist, I'll have you know, see my other reply.

Where do you live that hasn't been shaped by white supremacy & colonialism?

-2

nuvpr wrote

Perfect example of the "don't be a douche" rule.

Fair enough.

don't assume people's gender

Why not? I mean everybody here's been assuming my nationality and political side ever since I got in, what's stopping them from assuming my gender as well?

Where do you live

So you can make more assumptions? Nah, pass.

hasn't been shaped by white supremacy & colonialism?

Beats me

4

selver wrote (edited )

If you're from one of the countries on that list, and have a genuine concern about non-white racial supremacy and the policies of this site about it, people here would actually take those discussions seriously. People here have had plenty of discussion about Euro-centrism & American-centrism.

But as far as I can tell that's not the case, given your bad-faith shallow opposition to just about everything. You're just using the talking points to be combative about radical leftist politics.

edit: And white supremacy absolutely affects some, or even all, of the countries on that list. Afghanistan, Iran, and Japan in particular, all being victims of the worst of America's racist foreign policy.

-3

nuvpr wrote

But as far as I can tell that's not the case

How would you know? You don't know me, and you don't get to tell me what box I fit in. You don't want users to assume others' genders but would happily assume others' entire existence, amazing... Also since when were certain beliefs exclusive only to certain races or inhabitants of certain countries? Isn't that discrimination based on race, or "racism" as I like to call it?

all being victims of the worst of America's racist foreign policy

As much as I'd love for you to elaborate on this point, that's not what you said. You said "white colonialism and supremacy", and I proved that point is wrong. You don't just change the goalposts.

4

selver wrote (edited )

I said "white supremacy & colonialism", not "white colonialism & supremacy." You even quoted me saying that. Even if I had said the latter, it would clearly mean white colonialism and white supremacy, not white colonialism and supremacy-in-general. So yeah, more bad faith arguing.

I'm not assuming anything based on your race, nation, etc. I'm assuming it based on you being an unrelenting reactionary shithead at every opportunity so far.

1

mofongo wrote

You better drop it, you're crossing into banable territory, specially since this is not the sub for this discussion.

-2

nuvpr wrote

I thought this was "Friday Free Talk"? As in talk about whatever?

Go ahead and tell me what rule I broke then ban me, please.

3

selver wrote (edited )

Just call them faggots and you'd both be even :)

That's insta-ban material but people seem to have decided to be a little more hands-off with new people so far.

4

Tequila_Wolf wrote (edited )

I'd missed that. Have already asked u/ziq to deal with this turd (I've been dealing with a lot today in my afk life).

They didn't do a bad job of seeming like they were in good faith initially despite their shittiness, but that pretty quickly went out the window.

-3

nuvpr wrote

Does it count if they're not gay though? ;)

Feel free to report me by the way, I didn't harass or attack anyone so I don't see how my comment breaks the rules. Also wouldn't that make the original comment I'm replying to "insta-ban material" as well, since it contains a slur?

4

Ant wrote

seems like you're genuinely willing to learn though your current perspective is very different to many of the users on this site

for many of us, political questions are what we focus on in very fundamental ways, because we're politically radical - meaning what we're opposed to the entirety of the current sociopolitical system (in this case for most of us we are opposed to state-capitalism and the various forms of structural advantage given to whole historical groups)

Using perhaps more common words, heterosexism is when people are homophobic or sexist, and cisgenderism is when people are transphobic

Hopefully someone will take the time to explain to you race theory stuff, but in short, any decent race or postcolonial theory that exists now will identify superstructures of society that benefit white people and harm people of colour
Racism here is not interpersonal prejudice but the way that the world advantages whole groups based on racial constructs

Within that, because whites are at the top of the pyramid, racism (as structure, not prejudice) can't actually be done to white people, only to people of colour
People of colour can be racist, but only to other people of colour
This might sound odd, but it's actually sound stuff if you take the time to learn about it

You might want to check out the wiki w/Whiteness_Syllabus and read a couple articles to get started

have written a lot so I will stop here!

-4

nuvpr wrote

You can't be selective with racism, racism is discrimination and mistreatment based on race, and "race" here means any race not "all races except people of a certain skin color"... Sounds to me like your whole perspective is based on racial american politics (white boy bad, black boy good) which I honestly don't care about as I'm not american, and I know for a fact that racism and genocide against white people is a thing and always has been in many parts of the world, just because you're ignorant about it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Personally I have zero tolerance for racism, either open the floodgates for all of it and say it's free speech or ban all of it, no exceptions.

5

Ant wrote

I'm not american and disdain american politics

however I have read a lot of postcolonial theory, race theory, and relevant philosophy of race - enough to tell you with confidence that you have only what could be called a pop-culture white liberal commonsense idea of what racism is rather than an antiracist one

and many of the the users on this site have read similarly
like i said, we build our lives on being good at this

there are quite a lot of resources on the topics on this site if you're interested in looking further

-2

nuvpr wrote

I'm not american and disdain american politics

Good, then don't apply them to me.

you have only what could be called a pop-culture white liberal commonsense idea of what racism is rather than an antiracist one

Oh I'm sorry, didn't know the dictionary definition of racism is merely an "idea" held only by pop-culture white liberals, guess I'm inside the "pop-culture white liberal" box now! I just love it when people paint with wide brushes... Though isn't it kinda weird calling the justification of racism "antiracism"? I think "pop-culture white liberals" call that an "oxymoron".

and many of the the users on this site have read similarly

So I take it I'm not welcome here unless I agree with their personal beliefs right? Isn't that, you know, anti-diversity?

6

DaisyDisaster wrote

What would be anti-diversity is letting bigots air their opinions, that's why we're strict. Such a tolerance for bullshit would signal to POC, trans people, women, ect that they are unsafe here and that we have no regard for their voices. We'd rather they feel safe than someone get to freely spout bigoted, wrong beliefs.

-4

nuvpr wrote

diversity is okay as long as it's selective diversity of a certain defined selection of beliefs

And here we go again!

If I told you I was part of these groups and your beliefs (regardless of what they are, or whether they're affecting me or not) make me feel unsafe, would you ban yourself? What about if I was not part of these groups? Will you do as I say but only if I'm a certain race/gender/sexuality/etc?

4

DaisyDisaster wrote

These things aren't determined just by individuals. There are people of color out there who have internalized racism and would disagree with me, however, I'm not basing my suspicion of absolute freeze peach on what one individual says or feels, but what a group of people generally experience and feel. And yes, I have been corrected by white people speaking out against racism when I find their arguments are sound. The same for cis people and men.

You aren't as rational as you seem to believe.

4

Ant wrote

Good, then don't apply them to me.

haven't been

dictionary definition of racism

a racist world will produce that kind of dictionary definition
literally a whole world of antiracist academic, radical, and social work on race is more than enough to challenge dictionaries that pretend to be apolitical by just reproducing the disadvantaging structures of society

2

mofongo wrote

Dictionary definitions are hardly the minimum needed to claim knowledge on a topic, specially such a complex topic like racism.

-2

nuvpr wrote

Explain to me what part of "discrimination based on race" is complex. No really.

3

DaisyDisaster wrote

You've literally been ignoring everything people here have said to you haven't you? They've told you we consider racism more complex than a dictionary definition. You're gonna have a bad time here if you keep ignoring our arguments and putting your fingers in your ears.

-4

nuvpr wrote

I think I got it now, you and a bunch of others decided not to follow the dictionary definition for "racism" and to follow instead the dictionary definition of "selective racism", but for the word "racism". Understood...

2

DaisyDisaster wrote

Nice strawman there, but no one is talking about the dictionary but you.

-2

nuvpr wrote

Well hey feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but that's how I see it. Sorry I'm the only one in the club who doesn't want to arbitrarily define terms whenever I please.

4

DaisyDisaster wrote

Yeah, that's the problem, you aren't open to correction. Your immediate reaction to us was defensive, not curious. You didn't ask us how we came to that conclusion, you just reacted.

I see your game and I'm not playing it.

1

Dumai wrote

you ever consider that maybe language has certain uses not catalogued by the dictionary

ever think that maybe using a word a certain way in one ideological context doesn't negate its uses in other contexts

3

Ant wrote

Oh, and genocide of white people does exist, but not by people of colour, not since the invention of race at least

I totally missed that part of your comment the first time :/

-4

nuvpr wrote

genocide of white people does exist, but not by people of colour

So what do you call what's been happening in south africa this year, what with the mass killing and torture of white farmers by black locals?

5

Tequila_Wolf moderator wrote (edited )

Since I might as well start preparing an answer in general for this, I'll respond here.

White genocide myths perpetuate as part of white supremacist narratives everywhere in the world whenever white racists feel like they're losing their advantage. This is a phenomenon worth learning about on its own, and you'll find a lot of articles on Raddle around these topics, probably in f/Africa, f/Whiteness, and maybe also f/Antifa, f/FascismRising and other places.

This was actually posted on Raddle today - an article on probably the most reputable (though liberal) newspaper in South Africa:

White genocide: How the big lie spread to the US and beyond

Aside from that, Statistics Surrounding South Africa’s Farm Murder Rate Are More Political Than Accurate

Users here have suggested you do some reading, it might be worthwhile for you to do so. There's only so much that they can say before it makes sense just for you to go to the source.

Just a heads up, you are skirting the ToS and exhibiting troll-like behaviour, so consider this a warning. "Free Talk" doesn't mean free to break the w/Terms_Of_Service.

4

selver wrote (edited )

God damn, randoms coming here and holding up our "Death to Whiteness" forum and asking if it's racism is hilarious to me. Surely, this must be racism!

-5

nuvpr wrote

Randoms do that to /r/the_donald too, surely that also must be racism.

3

ziq wrote

It means don't attack people for being different than you.

2

zombie_berkman wrote (edited )

Brah im a cishwt white male but I dont do shit like calling cis or het "normal" or promoting altright views, or other dumbshit like white liberal feminism