so this is what getting strawmanned by a High-Status Ingroup Person feels like
there goes my productivity for the rest of the week
I was even using the goddamn content warnings
and what happened to the idea that the truthfulness of even uncomfortable ideas may be dispassionately evaluated? or does it not apply when the uncomfortable idea is ~triggering~ to a High-Status Ingroup Person? but wouldn’t that mean that we’re censoring the possible truth of “sometimes nastiness may be the most effective way of achieving some goals, even when accounting for side effects” for the sake of ~political correctness~?
if this is some kind of a deliberately ironic slytherin trick to punish me for expressing ideas one finds possibly indirectly harmful, then I must congratulate on the cleverness; but if it isn’t, I’d like to note that claiming that I’m a threat to people’s physical safety is nasty and exactly the same thing High-Status Ingrop Person was supposedly against when I said it might’ve been utilitarianly positive in the Bailey affair
2 weeks ago · tagged #discourse cw #uncharitable cw #meanness cw · 19 notes · .permalink
philippesaner liked this
malpollyon liked this
princess-stargirl liked this
not-a-lizard liked this
keepsakewhales liked this
neurocybernetics liked this
veronicastraszh reblogged this from socialjusticemunchkin
speakertoyesterday liked this
lowgravitaswarningsignal liked this
jbeshir liked this
nostalgebraist liked this
illidanstr liked this
shieldfoss reblogged this from socialjusticemunchkin and added:Yup, it is an unpleasant adrenaline rush unlike many others. It was something similar in a different subculture that...
jbeshir said: I think they’re inclined to read the worst into such things, having had bad experiences that make it important to them that a repeat experience/the same experience happening to others is clearly and solidly rejected.
I think you’re okay and still a pretty high status ingroup person yourself.
funereal-disease liked this