Author Topic: "Trigger" words  (Read 13591 times)

sol

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8475
  • Age: 42
  • Location: Pacific Northwest
Re: "Trigger" words
« Reply #150 on: May 17, 2019, 07:55:39 PM »
I routinely catch shit from a subset of forum members for my word choices.  It's usually the same handful of people, and they know who they are.  It's usually people who I philosophically agree with on the underlying issues, but who either a) find me insufficiently rabid about the issue under consideration, or b) have their feelings hurt by sentiments that they agree with because the sentiment was expressed by a cis white male.

I have, on occasion, even been banned from the forum because something I said that was not objectionable when first posted became objectionable at a later time, for example criticizing US military actions like torture and then being banned for being anti-American when someone reads that post on the 4th of July and applies context that was not in my mind when I wrote it. 

But this is the nature of modern public discourse.  The harm caused by your words or actions is something that only the harmed party can determine, and your intent is irrelevant anymore.  If they feel hurt, then you are guilty of hurting them.  It comes with the territory and probably can't be avoided.  If you're going to make public posts, you're going to piss somebody off.  I'm over it.  I'm still here.


nessness

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 377
Re: "Trigger" words
« Reply #151 on: May 17, 2019, 09:18:46 PM »
Trigger words and snowflakes...

I honestly chuckle at anyone calling us the snowflake generation. It's usually the older folks around me doing the complaining, either about us or the way "things used to be."

I'm a millennial, and of course that means I'm one of the fabled snowflake/participation trophy generation. But I did grow up when making fun of another kid meant you either called him gay, a retard, or a girl. Older people gave off color names to things like Brazil nuts, negotiating prices, and anyone who wore a turban. The thing of it is-yes it was funny, at the time. It's not anymore. It's not funny when priorities shift and horizons expand. I'm glad all that's changed. I'm glad we've moved beyond this kind of language as a society. If I have to be a bit more careful with my word choice, so be it-I consider myself lucky. We still live in a society that is constantly progressing. 50 years ago is not where I want to be.
+1 from a fellow millennial.

And also, I'm not convinced that people really are more easily offended now than they used to. I think minorities, women, gay people, the disabled, etc. have always been hurt by slurs and cruel jokes, they just didn't have the power to speak up about it and now they do, and how is that not a good thing?

(Yes, there are a few people who latch onto every minor microagression, but I think those people are a lot rarer IRL than some internet arguments would lead you to believe).

rocketpj

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 710
Re: "Trigger" words
« Reply #152 on: May 18, 2019, 12:45:06 AM »

I guess I can see why you’d be kinda pissed.

Not pissed.  My blood pressure didn't jump.  I'm just sort of annoyed and feel the obnoxious unintended consequences of political correctness (which is probably a good idea IN THEORY) are not being explored.  And are maybe even being squelched.

Oh, as far as I can tell there is no shortage of people who are somewhat overfocused on any obnoxious unintended consequences of political correctness.  From what I've seen there is a whole television network that spends a lot of time talking about it.

In most of these discussions, and when reading commentary about the concept of 'political correctness' I usually find it informative to substitute 'political correctness' with 'consciously treating people with respect'. 

RetiredAt63

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 10623
  • Location: Eastern Ontario, Canada
Re: "Trigger" words
« Reply #153 on: May 18, 2019, 06:43:08 AM »
Trigger words and snowflakes...

I honestly chuckle at anyone calling us the snowflake generation. It's usually the older folks around me doing the complaining, either about us or the way "things used to be."

I'm a millennial, and of course that means I'm one of the fabled snowflake/participation trophy generation. But I did grow up when making fun of another kid meant you either called him gay, a retard, or a girl. Older people gave off color names to things like Brazil nuts, negotiating prices, and anyone who wore a turban. The thing of it is-yes it was funny, at the time. It's not anymore. It's not funny when priorities shift and horizons expand. I'm glad all that's changed. I'm glad we've moved beyond this kind of language as a society. If I have to be a bit more careful with my word choice, so be it-I consider myself lucky. We still live in a society that is constantly progressing. 50 years ago is not where I want to be.
+1 from a fellow millennial.

And also, I'm not convinced that people really are more easily offended now than they used to. I think minorities, women, gay people, the disabled, etc. have always been hurt by slurs and cruel jokes, they just didn't have the power to speak up about it and now they do, and how is that not a good thing?

(Yes, there are a few people who latch onto every minor microagression, but I think those people are a lot rarer IRL than some internet arguments would lead you to believe).

This.  Sexist jokes can be called out, instead of a woman being told she has no sense of humor because she said a joke was offensive.

It is really interesting reading books that were written decades ago and seeing how attitudes have changed about many things, including use of negative language. 

For a media example, look at "The Parent Trap".  So much smoking in the first one, no smoking in the second one.   

BlueHouse

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2953
  • Location: WDC
Re: "Trigger" words
« Reply #154 on: June 05, 2019, 09:29:21 AM »
I think the term "political correctness" is bullshit in and of itself.  It's the user's way of excusing themselves for saying or doing something that was rude, inconsiderate, or just plain mean.    People who say they hate being politically correct are declaring that they want to behave in a manner that is mostly unacceptable, but they want to cover their own reprehensible behavior by blaming other people for being civilized.

But that's just my opinion. 

Nick_Miller

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 966
Re: "Trigger" words
« Reply #155 on: June 05, 2019, 09:53:20 AM »
I think the term "political correctness" is bullshit in and of itself.  It's the user's way of excusing themselves for saying or doing something that was rude, inconsiderate, or just plain mean.    People who say they hate being politically correct are declaring that they want to behave in a manner that is mostly unacceptable, but they want to cover their own reprehensible behavior by blaming other people for being civilized.

But that's just my opinion.

+1

99 times out of 100, when someone starts a sentence with, "Now I'm not politically correct..." the rest of the sentence is that person being a total jerk.

madgeylou

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2373
Re: "Trigger" words
« Reply #156 on: June 05, 2019, 10:19:29 AM »
Trigger words and snowflakes...

I honestly chuckle at anyone calling us the snowflake generation. It's usually the older folks around me doing the complaining, either about us or the way "things used to be."

I'm a millennial, and of course that means I'm one of the fabled snowflake/participation trophy generation. But I did grow up when making fun of another kid meant you either called him gay, a retard, or a girl. Older people gave off color names to things like Brazil nuts, negotiating prices, and anyone who wore a turban. The thing of it is-yes it was funny, at the time. It's not anymore. It's not funny when priorities shift and horizons expand. I'm glad all that's changed. I'm glad we've moved beyond this kind of language as a society. If I have to be a bit more careful with my word choice, so be it-I consider myself lucky. We still live in a society that is constantly progressing. 50 years ago is not where I want to be.
+1 from a fellow millennial.

And also, I'm not convinced that people really are more easily offended now than they used to. I think minorities, women, gay people, the disabled, etc. have always been hurt by slurs and cruel jokes, they just didn't have the power to speak up about it and now they do, and how is that not a good thing?

(Yes, there are a few people who latch onto every minor microagression, but I think those people are a lot rarer IRL than some internet arguments would lead you to believe).

Exactly. I mean if the more privileged folks on this thread are sick of being told their words are offensive ... imagine how sick marginalized forks are of hearing offensive shit every day of their lives. It seriously stuns me how often grown adults need to be reminded of this, but try putting yourself in the other person's shoes.

Is it more important for each of us to be able to use any word we want, or for some of us to be freed to navigate the world free of constantly having to be reminded of truly horrible shit?

Cool Friend

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 295
Re: "Trigger" words
« Reply #157 on: June 05, 2019, 10:23:13 AM »
Highly encourage reading up on the history of the term. It was never used in earnest until HW Bush inverted its meaning in a speech, whereafter American conservatives proceeded to co-opt it as a smear against a perceived liberal ideology (i.e. strict censorship of undesirable thought and expression) that didn't exist.

Cromacster

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1696
  • Location: Minnesnowta
Re: "Trigger" words
« Reply #158 on: June 05, 2019, 01:48:22 PM »
I think the term "political correctness" is bullshit in and of itself.  It's the user's way of excusing themselves for saying or doing something that was rude, inconsiderate, or just plain mean.    People who say they hate being politically correct are declaring that they want to behave in a manner that is mostly unacceptable, but they want to cover their own reprehensible behavior by blaming other people for being civilized.

But that's just my opinion.

+1

99 times out of 100, when someone starts a sentence with, "Now I'm not politically correct..." the rest of the sentence is that person being a total jerk.

I don't think that's the case.  I find saying/hearing "N" Word offensive, but most would consider it politically correct.

ETA

I also find the word ------ offensive.  But if you are going to use a word own it.
[MOD NOTE:  Or don't.  Thank you.]
 Don't try to hide behind euphemisms and PC bullshit.  I'm looking at you "news" networks!
« Last Edit: June 05, 2019, 02:25:39 PM by FrugalToque »

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 13346
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: "Trigger" words
« Reply #159 on: June 05, 2019, 01:59:19 PM »
Hard disagree with you there.

Cromacster

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1696
  • Location: Minnesnowta
Re: "Trigger" words
« Reply #160 on: June 06, 2019, 06:29:48 AM »
See I guess the Mod made my point.

They're both the same thing, but one hides behind PC bullshit.

Kris

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4052
Re: "Trigger" words
« Reply #161 on: June 06, 2019, 06:41:16 AM »
See I guess the Mod made my point.

They're both the same thing, but one hides behind PC bullshit.

Or, there’s an alternative take.

You came on here and tossed out an incredibly offensive term, and then tried to spin it as you being some sort of oppressed freedom of speech hero.

Nope.

Malkynn

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 868
Re: "Trigger" words
« Reply #162 on: June 06, 2019, 06:49:17 AM »
See I guess the Mod made my point.

They're both the same thing, but one hides behind PC bullshit.

Or, there’s an alternative take.

You came on here and tossed out an incredibly offensive term, and then tried to spin it as you being some sort of oppressed freedom of speech hero.

Nope.

Yep.

Free speech does not mean consequence-free speech.
This is Pete's forum, this is his house, he can dictate whatever he wants here.

There are PLENTY of forums out there where that speech is openly welcomed, but not here.

Cromacster

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1696
  • Location: Minnesnowta
Re: "Trigger" words
« Reply #163 on: June 06, 2019, 06:53:30 AM »
See I guess the Mod made my point.

They're both the same thing, but one hides behind PC bullshit.

Or, there’s an alternative take.

You came on here and tossed out an incredibly offensive term, and then tried to spin it as you being some sort of oppressed freedom of speech hero.

Nope.

Yes, I purposely used a firestarter to show that hiding behind the PC is a bunch of bullshit because it's really just euphemisms that are replacing terrible words.  The euphimisms are "PC", but they have the same terrible meaning.  Not only that, it allows the person saying "N word" to shed responsibility, as seen anytime this comes up in the news.  I agree, no one should say either word, but if you are going to have a discussion about the word, say the word.  Don't hide behind "n word".

As can be seen by what the mod chose to censor, although this word shows up on 14 other pages on this website.  Get to work mods.

Cromacster

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1696
  • Location: Minnesnowta
Re: "Trigger" words
« Reply #164 on: June 06, 2019, 06:57:32 AM »
See I guess the Mod made my point.

They're both the same thing, but one hides behind PC bullshit.

Or, there’s an alternative take.

You came on here and tossed out an incredibly offensive term, and then tried to spin it as you being some sort of oppressed freedom of speech hero.

Nope.

Yep.

Free speech does not mean consequence-free speech.
This is Pete's forum, this is his house, he can dictate whatever he wants here.

There are PLENTY of forums out there where that speech is openly welcomed, but not here.

Never made a claim to have the right to say whatever I want on here.

Merely making a point that two words or phrases, with the exact same meaning, are tolerated differently.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 13346
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: "Trigger" words
« Reply #165 on: June 06, 2019, 07:12:30 AM »
See I guess the Mod made my point.

They're both the same thing, but one hides behind PC bullshit.

Or, there’s an alternative take.

You came on here and tossed out an incredibly offensive term, and then tried to spin it as you being some sort of oppressed freedom of speech hero.

Nope.

Yep.

Free speech does not mean consequence-free speech.
This is Pete's forum, this is his house, he can dictate whatever he wants here.

There are PLENTY of forums out there where that speech is openly welcomed, but not here.

Never made a claim to have the right to say whatever I want on here.

Merely making a point that two words or phrases, with the exact same meaning, are tolerated differently.

The two words/phrases you pointed out do not have the exact same meaning though.

One is a highly charged racially offensive term, and carries certain connotations that are very strongly context dependent.  One is a descriptor of that word, designed to allow discussion of it without the same connotations, and without giving offense.

It's like the difference between saying "Excuse me please" and "Get the fuck out of the way".  They're used in similar situations, for similar reasons, but are quite different.

My point being, they should be tolerated differently.

Cromacster

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1696
  • Location: Minnesnowta
Re: "Trigger" words
« Reply #166 on: June 06, 2019, 07:21:17 AM »
See I guess the Mod made my point.

They're both the same thing, but one hides behind PC bullshit.

Or, there’s an alternative take.

You came on here and tossed out an incredibly offensive term, and then tried to spin it as you being some sort of oppressed freedom of speech hero.

Nope.

Yep.

Free speech does not mean consequence-free speech.
This is Pete's forum, this is his house, he can dictate whatever he wants here.

There are PLENTY of forums out there where that speech is openly welcomed, but not here.

Never made a claim to have the right to say whatever I want on here.

Merely making a point that two words or phrases, with the exact same meaning, are tolerated differently.

The two words/phrases you pointed out do not have the exact same meaning though.

One is a highly charged racially offensive term, and carries certain connotations that are very strongly context dependent.  One is a descriptor of that word, designed to allow discussion of it without the same connotations, and without giving offense.

It's like the difference between saying "Excuse me please" and "Get the fuck out of the way".  They're used in similar situations, for similar reasons, but are quite different.

My point being, they should be tolerated differently.

You're making good points and the example you used is a good one that makes sense.

I guess my overall point is...if you are going to use a word, own it, and use it.  Similar example is people who use the f*cking **** to censor their own fucking words.  Either type out the word and own it, or don't use it.

Using the word I did was too inflammatory and was the wrong word to use to get my point across.

Dabnasty

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1630
Re: "Trigger" words
« Reply #167 on: June 06, 2019, 07:33:12 AM »
See I guess the Mod made my point.

They're both the same thing, but one hides behind PC bullshit.

Or, there’s an alternative take.

You came on here and tossed out an incredibly offensive term, and then tried to spin it as you being some sort of oppressed freedom of speech hero.

Nope.

Yep.

Free speech does not mean consequence-free speech.
This is Pete's forum, this is his house, he can dictate whatever he wants here.

There are PLENTY of forums out there where that speech is openly welcomed, but not here.

Never made a claim to have the right to say whatever I want on here.

Merely making a point that two words or phrases, with the exact same meaning, are tolerated differently.

The two words/phrases you pointed out do not have the exact same meaning though.

One is a highly charged racially offensive term, and carries certain connotations that are very strongly context dependent.  One is a descriptor of that word, designed to allow discussion of it without the same connotations, and without giving offense.

It's like the difference between saying "Excuse me please" and "Get the fuck out of the way".  They're used in similar situations, for similar reasons, but are quite different.

My point being, they should be tolerated differently.

You're making good points and the example you used is a good one that makes sense.

I guess my overall point is...if you are going to use a word, own it, and use it.  Similar example is people who use the f*cking **** to censor their own fucking words.  Either type out the word and own it, or don't use it.

Using the word I did was too inflammatory and was the wrong word to use to get my point across.

I was honestly having trouble understanding what you were saying from your first comment but I think f*ck is a better example. No point in censoring, we know what you mean.

But with "N word" it's a matter of context in addition to content. If I were to call someone a stupid N word, then ya, that's just as bad as saying the real thing because everyone knows what I mean, but typically the context where someone would say "N word" is when they're recounting an event or describing a situation. I agree that using the full word in those cases should be fine too, but lots of people disagree so I refrain from saying it entirely.

If nothing else the mods may want to avoid it just to keep the site from showing up when someone searches the word.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 13346
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: "Trigger" words
« Reply #168 on: June 06, 2019, 07:48:32 AM »
That explanation makes more sense.

I also kinda agree on censoring fuck, shit, damn, asshole, etc.  These swear words don't carry additional connotations or history . . . they're just bad because someone somewhere decided that they're bad.  For that reason, I agree . . . there's no real difference at all between typing 'f*ck' and 'fuck'.

More charged words I view somewhat differently, for the reasons mentioned.  Even when used in non-racist ways (like asking a racist guy why he called someone an n-word), there's too much baggage and potential to actually cause hurt to someone else associated with them by using them in full.

Cromacster

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1696
  • Location: Minnesnowta
Re: "Trigger" words
« Reply #169 on: June 06, 2019, 09:38:26 AM »
See I guess the Mod made my point.

They're both the same thing, but one hides behind PC bullshit.

Or, there’s an alternative take.

You came on here and tossed out an incredibly offensive term, and then tried to spin it as you being some sort of oppressed freedom of speech hero.

Nope.

Yep.

Free speech does not mean consequence-free speech.
This is Pete's forum, this is his house, he can dictate whatever he wants here.

There are PLENTY of forums out there where that speech is openly welcomed, but not here.

Never made a claim to have the right to say whatever I want on here.

Merely making a point that two words or phrases, with the exact same meaning, are tolerated differently.

The two words/phrases you pointed out do not have the exact same meaning though.

One is a highly charged racially offensive term, and carries certain connotations that are very strongly context dependent.  One is a descriptor of that word, designed to allow discussion of it without the same connotations, and without giving offense.

It's like the difference between saying "Excuse me please" and "Get the fuck out of the way".  They're used in similar situations, for similar reasons, but are quite different.

My point being, they should be tolerated differently.

You're making good points and the example you used is a good one that makes sense.

I guess my overall point is...if you are going to use a word, own it, and use it.  Similar example is people who use the f*cking **** to censor their own fucking words.  Either type out the word and own it, or don't use it.

Using the word I did was too inflammatory and was the wrong word to use to get my point across.

I was honestly having trouble understanding what you were saying from your first comment but I think f*ck is a better example. No point in censoring, we know what you mean.

But with "N word" it's a matter of context in addition to content. If I were to call someone a stupid N word, then ya, that's just as bad as saying the real thing because everyone knows what I mean, but typically the context where someone would say "N word" is when they're recounting an event or describing a situation. I agree that using the full word in those cases should be fine too, but lots of people disagree so I refrain from saying it entirely.

If nothing else the mods may want to avoid it just to keep the site from showing up when someone searches the word.

The main reason for my argument was this comment

I think the term "political correctness" is bullshit in and of itself.  It's the user's way of excusing themselves for saying or doing something that was rude, inconsiderate, or just plain mean.    People who say they hate being politically correct are declaring that they want to behave in a manner that is mostly unacceptable, but they want to cover their own reprehensible behavior by blaming other people for being civilized.

But that's just my opinion. 

I was trying to argue that people hide behind the curtain of being politically correct while still being an asshole.  Or in some cases they use the veil of PC to shirk the responsibility of what they are saying (ie "n word" or F*ck).  Trying to argue the opposite of what BlueHouse stated.

Sorry, I'm not the best at communicating through typing.
« Last Edit: June 06, 2019, 09:40:01 AM by Cromacster »

Villanelle

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2587
Re: "Trigger" words
« Reply #170 on: June 06, 2019, 09:40:05 AM »
I taught conversational English abroad.  One day, we were talking about homophones, and I gave many examples, including band/banned.  The class was not familiar with "banned" so I explained it.  They asked for examples.  I told them that some people wante Harry Potter banned because they were very Christian and objected to the magical concepts.  Trying quickly to come up with another example on the fly, I tossed out Huck Finn.  As soon as the title left my mouth, I knew my mistake and cringed, hoping it wouldn't go exactly where I suspected it would.  A hand came up. "Why is that banned?"  "Because there's some very offensive language in the book.  *please don't ask; please don't ask*  Another hand went up.  "What language specifically?" 

The class was about learning more English, but also about learning about English culture. So I took a breath, and dove in.  I explained this is probably the most offensive word in American English.  I told them that generally, we don't even say it because it's so offensive; we say, "the N word".  I made sure they knew this was a word they should never use, since sometimes they struggle with context.  (Not understanding that when they say someone is "fat", it's offensive and "overweight" is preferred, for example.) Basically, I let them know that this word means so much more than the strict denotation.  Then I explained that it was a horrible term for black/Africans.  And finally, after a very, very deep breath, I said the word. 

I think there is a time and a place, in an academic conversation, where it's accept to say the word.  But that bar is very, very high.  Tossing it out as an example of a "bad" word, seems completely unnecessary, and thus should be avoided.

I get that to some people, they feel the same.  That doesn't mean they are experienced the same bay by the very people most hurt by the words--the ones who deserve the most consideration in that scenario.  There are many words that have the same denotation but that doesn't mean they are equal.  If my doctor told me he was going to examine my tits, that would be appalling.  And so it is with "the N word" vs the actual N word.  Same denotation, very difference connotation.  Both matter very much. 

And again, we circle back to what seems to be the central concern of the threat.  Words may feel okay or the same to you [global "you"].  But once you know that they don't feel okay to others, why use them?  Why is the discomfort of others not worth a simple vocabulary substitution, or a refrain from typing out a word in full, know it may well hurt others? 

Jouer

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 378
Re: "Trigger" words
« Reply #171 on: June 06, 2019, 12:32:50 PM »
By that same token, we should avoid using the words "kill," "murder," "snuff out," etc. in ANY context because someone in the company of our conversation may have been subjected to homicide (or a loved one)?  When my comedian friend gets off stage, I am no longer allowed to say "man you really killed it!" because someone in earshot could be triggered? This is a very slippery slope. Maybe we should all be mute so there is zero probability of unknowingly offending someone with a particular word or its usage?


 Go out there and break a leg.
My apologizes to those of you that have broken a leg.

And this is the problem. You are equating the pain of breaking a leg to the pain of being raped. Which is ludicrous.


Rimu05

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 223
Re: "Trigger" words
« Reply #172 on: June 06, 2019, 03:45:44 PM »
I feel like one of those people who isn't PC but doesn't get the big deal. I told my coworker who was arguing the anti PC nonsense that I simply cannot even find it in me to care. If you want to say you are a carrot, go right ahead! Is it hurting society? Nope. IF Brian wants to be called Brianna, I will 100% do it because does not hurt my life.

Also, I can safely say, that I am ignorant about certain communities. I've been shocked to find out that a word is actually derogatory yet I've been using it willy nilly even though there's a whole history behind it that I may not know.

Also many people ruin words by using them negatively. Words that people had zero issues with before evolve to become offensive because some prick uses it that way. Sometimes, they evolve that way because that's language.

Oh, I did find something PC that annoys me. Cultural appropriation. The dumbest thing ever that has absolutely nothing to do with culture. I should be aplty named racial appropriation especially in the U.S.

In fact, the only time I've seen this as a problem is when Western companies trademark other cultures like Hakuna Matata. Or Louis Vuitton sells Maasai clothing like they designed that shit. I've seen lesos on Gucci runways like how the hell do you get to sell another culture's clothing for $800 when you've stolen the design?

There was a Kenyan youtuber that got a copy right hit for the Kenyan national anthem! This was resolved in the end but it's amazing that because some German (May have been Dutch) company copyrighted their version of the free Kenyan Anthem, this guy got a hit.
« Last Edit: June 06, 2019, 03:53:27 PM by Rimu05 »

madgeylou

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2373
Re: "Trigger" words
« Reply #173 on: June 10, 2019, 01:57:07 PM »
(Not understanding that when they say someone is "fat", it's offensive and "overweight" is preferred, for example.)

I agree with your overall point, but this is outdated. Most of us fat people would rather just be called "fat" because "overweight" is like -- over what weight? I am the weight I am. It sets up a "normal" and a "not normal" and since more than half of the people in the US are fat now, it just doesn't make sense.

Also the word "obese" is offensive to the ears of many fat people as well, because it inaccurately medicalizes body size and weight, when the truth is that the relationship between fatness and health problems is not what most people think it is (ie., there are plenty of healthy fat people and plenty of unhealthy skinny ones).

sol

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8475
  • Age: 42
  • Location: Pacific Northwest
Re: "Trigger" words
« Reply #174 on: June 10, 2019, 02:42:31 PM »
Also the word "obese" is offensive to the ears of many fat people as well, because it inaccurately medicalizes body size and weight, when the truth is that the relationship between fatness and health problems is not what most people think it is (ie., there are plenty of healthy fat people and plenty of unhealthy skinny ones).

While I 100% agree with the underlying point about unnecessary connotations of personal judgment in many of these terms, saying that there are plenty of healthy fat people is kind of like saying there are plenty of healthy smokers.  Yes, that is technically true.  You can be a smoker who smokes one or two sticks a day and is otherwise healthy, but being a smoker of any sort still isn't good for you, in the medical sense of the word.  People who are light smokers tend to become heavy smokers over time, and heavy smokers develop known smoking-related health problems.  Saying that you're a healthy smoker seems contradictory to me, even if you can justify it as technically true today.  It still cuts into your life expectancy, no matter how healthy you think you are.

People are absolutely free to smoke, just like they are absolutely free to be fat.  But I also understand the "medicalized" nature of those descriptors, because both of these issues are being treated like the public health crises they are.  I'm not sure why there is such a strong public push to ignore obesity in America, while we continue to focus on things like smoking, seatbelts, and vaccinations.  Obesity-related health problems are still the 2nd leading cause of preventable death in America, after tobacco, and I think that requires the same sort of large scale government intervention in our food industry that we've previously seen work with the tobacco and auto industries.  This is a systemic problem, nationally, and we should probably stop treating it as a personal failing on the part of individual fat people.


Villanelle

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2587
Re: "Trigger" words
« Reply #175 on: June 10, 2019, 02:50:25 PM »
(Not understanding that when they say someone is "fat", it's offensive and "overweight" is preferred, for example.)

I agree with your overall point, but this is outdated. Most of us fat people would rather just be called "fat" because "overweight" is like -- over what weight? I am the weight I am. It sets up a "normal" and a "not normal" and since more than half of the people in the US are fat now, it just doesn't make sense.

Also the word "obese" is offensive to the ears of many fat people as well, because it inaccurately medicalizes body size and weight, when the truth is that the relationship between fatness and health problems is not what most people think it is (ie., there are plenty of healthy fat people and plenty of unhealthy skinny ones).

I'm fat too, and the actual conversation with them was much more nuanced.  "I've started walking with my friend Yoshiko every morning.  She is very fat.  We walk in the park."   I am pretty sure that most people, especially most older people for whom, in the US at least "fat" is still pejorative) wouldn't like to be referred to like that.  This was a different lesson than the fateful banned/band.

We actually had a whole conversation about shifting social norms, including how "retarded" used to be perfectly acceptable and now it isn't. And that "fat" used to very offensive and now that's changing, but right now we are in an transitional situation where some still find it offensive, and others may prefer it.   Explaining all that in what was already going to be a very long post seemed overkill, so I self-edited.  :lol

They also found that sort of thing fascinating.  According to them, there isn't a concept similar to political correctness in Japan, and their minds were also blown at the concept of cultural appropriation.  They wanted to dress me in a kimono (one of the students did wedding kimono dressing as her retirement side-hustle).  I was thrilled to have them do it as I'd only ever worn a yukata (casual summer kimono, basically), but I brought up the concept of cultural appropriation as part of the discussion.  It was a tough one as the word "appropriate" was new and somewhat advanced for most of them, but they clearly gave zero fucks about anyone wearing traditional Japanese clothing, even if it wasn't being worn properly (an kimono "jacket" with jeans, or even an obi as a table runner).  To them, if someone thought a Japanese item was pretty, they felt proud, regardless of use. I even asked if they would find it offensive or uncomfortable if I wore a kimono as a Halloween costume (as opposed to perhaps a wedding or something where it was clearly meant to be dress clothes, like it is for the Japanese).  Still didn't care.   That said, I'm back in the US and probably unlikely to wear anything Japanese in most situations because someone (likely someone not Japanese!) would feel the need to hurl the "appropriation" label at me. 

madgeylou

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2373
Re: "Trigger" words
« Reply #176 on: June 10, 2019, 03:07:11 PM »
Also the word "obese" is offensive to the ears of many fat people as well, because it inaccurately medicalizes body size and weight, when the truth is that the relationship between fatness and health problems is not what most people think it is (ie., there are plenty of healthy fat people and plenty of unhealthy skinny ones).

While I 100% agree with the underlying point about unnecessary connotations of personal judgment in many of these terms, saying that there are plenty of healthy fat people is kind of like saying there are plenty of healthy smokers.  Yes, that is technically true.  You can be a smoker who smokes one or two sticks a day and is otherwise healthy, but being a smoker of any sort still isn't good for you, in the medical sense of the word.  People who are light smokers tend to become heavy smokers over time, and heavy smokers develop known smoking-related health problems.  Saying that you're a healthy smoker seems contradictory to me, even if you can justify it as technically true today.  It still cuts into your life expectancy, no matter how healthy you think you are.

People are absolutely free to smoke, just like they are absolutely free to be fat.  But I also understand the "medicalized" nature of those descriptors, because both of these issues are being treated like the public health crises they are.  I'm not sure why there is such a strong public push to ignore obesity in America, while we continue to focus on things like smoking, seatbelts, and vaccinations.  Obesity-related health problems are still the 2nd leading cause of preventable death in America, after tobacco, and I think that requires the same sort of large scale government intervention in our food industry that we've previously seen work with the tobacco and auto industries.  This is a systemic problem, nationally, and we should probably stop treating it as a personal failing on the part of individual fat people.

There are a lot of assumptions and inaccuracies in your post. Even the lens through which you are viewing this is exclusionary to fat people trying to live in the world in the bodies we have today. I encourage you to check out the research around Health at Every Size and upgrade your thinking.

I'm fat too, and the actual conversation with them was much more nuanced.  "I've started walking with my friend Yoshiko every morning.  She is very fat.  We walk in the park."   I am pretty sure that most people, especially most older people for whom, in the US at least "fat" is still pejorative) wouldn't like to be referred to like that.  This was a different lesson than the fateful banned/band.

We actually had a whole conversation about shifting social norms, including how "retarded" used to be perfectly acceptable and now it isn't. And that "fat" used to very offensive and now that's changing, but right now we are in an transitional situation where some still find it offensive, and others may prefer it.   Explaining all that in what was already going to be a very long post seemed overkill, so I self-edited.  :lol

They also found that sort of thing fascinating.  According to them, there isn't a concept similar to political correctness in Japan, and their minds were also blown at the concept of cultural appropriation.  They wanted to dress me in a kimono (one of the students did wedding kimono dressing as her retirement side-hustle).  I was thrilled to have them do it as I'd only ever worn a yukata (casual summer kimono, basically), but I brought up the concept of cultural appropriation as part of the discussion.  It was a tough one as the word "appropriate" was new and somewhat advanced for most of them, but they clearly gave zero fucks about anyone wearing traditional Japanese clothing, even if it wasn't being worn properly (an kimono "jacket" with jeans, or even an obi as a table runner).  To them, if someone thought a Japanese item was pretty, they felt proud, regardless of use. I even asked if they would find it offensive or uncomfortable if I wore a kimono as a Halloween costume (as opposed to perhaps a wedding or something where it was clearly meant to be dress clothes, like it is for the Japanese).  Still didn't care.   That said, I'm back in the US and probably unlikely to wear anything Japanese in most situations because someone (likely someone not Japanese!) would feel the need to hurl the "appropriation" label at me. 

Super-interesting post, Villanelle. There's so much nuance to these ideas, especially across cultures. I wonder if cultural appropriation really only becomes an issue in a heterogenous culture like the US, and not so much in a homogenous one in Japan. Like part of the problem with something like a white girl wearing a Native-style headdress to Coachella is that her people have kicked the shit out of Native people for centuries in every possible way ... and now one of their last surviving symbols is being treated like it's nothing more than a cute kind of hat. That kind of history and context makes all the difference with cultural appropriation.

sol

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8475
  • Age: 42
  • Location: Pacific Northwest
Re: "Trigger" words
« Reply #177 on: June 10, 2019, 03:35:26 PM »
There are a lot of assumptions and inaccuracies in your post

Can you spell them out for me?  I understand that there are various contributors to a person't overall health, and you can still have great flexibility and balance and be a two-pack-a-day smoker, but that doesn't mean you're healthy.  Smoking, like obesity, cuts into your cardiovascular performance if nothing else.  Also like smoking (and sun exposure and alcohol consumption), obesity is definitely associated with an increased risk of certain types of cancers. 

Quote
Even the lens through which you are viewing this is exclusionary to fat people trying to live in the world in the bodies we have today.

I think of myself as the exact opposite of exclusionary in this case.  I explicitly mentioned in that post my desire to remove the personal judgments that have historically accompanied fatness, because most people are not fat as an isolated consequence of their own decisions.  There are larger problems afoot here, and they need addressing at a level far above the individual's choices that doctors have typically prescribed for controlling weight.  We could stop farm subsidies for red meat, for example, since they're a known carcinogen and generally terrible for you, and Uncle Sam probably shouldn't be making it as cheap as possible to get heart disease.

Lots of American are fat.  I get that, and each and every one of them deserves to be happy in their own way.  But I don't think we're doing ourselves any favors if we pretend that being very overweight is just as healthy as being less overweight.  People who have trouble fitting into passenger cars or office chairs are suffering through very real negative consequences of their weight, before we even get to their struggles with carrying groceries or playing with their kids.  I'm not excluding anyone, I'm arguing for national policy changes to lower obesity rates so that future generations will be better off than my generation.  You can still choose to be any size, I just think we should find a way to make it a choice, rather than something that is forced on people by government-subsidized lifestyle manipulation.

How many people have I triggered with this post?

Personally, I think it's only a matter of time before someone invents a birth control styled hormone treatment that anyone can take that interrupts the body's nutrient cycling and fat storage mechanisms, and we'll all be able to eat whatever garbage we want and independently choose what shape we want to be.  But not in time to help millions of Americans who will otherwise succumb to obesity-related health problems before it becomes widely available.

« Last Edit: June 10, 2019, 03:38:17 PM by sol »

madgeylou

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2373
Re: "Trigger" words
« Reply #178 on: June 10, 2019, 03:42:41 PM »
See, and I think we should be making bigger chairs and airplane seats and training medical professionals to treat fat people with respect, rather than asking them to do something with a 95-98% failure rate (lose weight).

If you want to educate yourself on this, all you need to do is google "fatphobia" and "health at every size" -- there are many resources out there that I don't care to rehash here.

I will say that the most recent research is showing that fatphobic medical providers are AT LEAST as much of a health risk to fat people as fat itself.
« Last Edit: June 10, 2019, 03:47:10 PM by madgeylou »

Villanelle

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2587
Re: "Trigger" words
« Reply #179 on: June 10, 2019, 03:51:25 PM »
Also the word "obese" is offensive to the ears of many fat people as well, because it inaccurately medicalizes body size and weight, when the truth is that the relationship between fatness and health problems is not what most people think it is (ie., there are plenty of healthy fat people and plenty of unhealthy skinny ones).

While I 100% agree with the underlying point about unnecessary connotations of personal judgment in many of these terms, saying that there are plenty of healthy fat people is kind of like saying there are plenty of healthy smokers.  Yes, that is technically true.  You can be a smoker who smokes one or two sticks a day and is otherwise healthy, but being a smoker of any sort still isn't good for you, in the medical sense of the word.  People who are light smokers tend to become heavy smokers over time, and heavy smokers develop known smoking-related health problems.  Saying that you're a healthy smoker seems contradictory to me, even if you can justify it as technically true today.  It still cuts into your life expectancy, no matter how healthy you think you are.

People are absolutely free to smoke, just like they are absolutely free to be fat.  But I also understand the "medicalized" nature of those descriptors, because both of these issues are being treated like the public health crises they are.  I'm not sure why there is such a strong public push to ignore obesity in America, while we continue to focus on things like smoking, seatbelts, and vaccinations.  Obesity-related health problems are still the 2nd leading cause of preventable death in America, after tobacco, and I think that requires the same sort of large scale government intervention in our food industry that we've previously seen work with the tobacco and auto industries.  This is a systemic problem, nationally, and we should probably stop treating it as a personal failing on the part of individual fat people.

There are a lot of assumptions and inaccuracies in your post. Even the lens through which you are viewing this is exclusionary to fat people trying to live in the world in the bodies we have today. I encourage you to check out the research around Health at Every Size and upgrade your thinking.

I'm fat too, and the actual conversation with them was much more nuanced.  "I've started walking with my friend Yoshiko every morning.  She is very fat.  We walk in the park."   I am pretty sure that most people, especially most older people for whom, in the US at least "fat" is still pejorative) wouldn't like to be referred to like that.  This was a different lesson than the fateful banned/band.

We actually had a whole conversation about shifting social norms, including how "retarded" used to be perfectly acceptable and now it isn't. And that "fat" used to very offensive and now that's changing, but right now we are in an transitional situation where some still find it offensive, and others may prefer it.   Explaining all that in what was already going to be a very long post seemed overkill, so I self-edited.  :lol

They also found that sort of thing fascinating.  According to them, there isn't a concept similar to political correctness in Japan, and their minds were also blown at the concept of cultural appropriation.  They wanted to dress me in a kimono (one of the students did wedding kimono dressing as her retirement side-hustle).  I was thrilled to have them do it as I'd only ever worn a yukata (casual summer kimono, basically), but I brought up the concept of cultural appropriation as part of the discussion.  It was a tough one as the word "appropriate" was new and somewhat advanced for most of them, but they clearly gave zero fucks about anyone wearing traditional Japanese clothing, even if it wasn't being worn properly (an kimono "jacket" with jeans, or even an obi as a table runner).  To them, if someone thought a Japanese item was pretty, they felt proud, regardless of use. I even asked if they would find it offensive or uncomfortable if I wore a kimono as a Halloween costume (as opposed to perhaps a wedding or something where it was clearly meant to be dress clothes, like it is for the Japanese).  Still didn't care.   That said, I'm back in the US and probably unlikely to wear anything Japanese in most situations because someone (likely someone not Japanese!) would feel the need to hurl the "appropriation" label at me. 

Super-interesting post, Villanelle. There's so much nuance to these ideas, especially across cultures. I wonder if cultural appropriation really only becomes an issue in a heterogenous culture like the US, and not so much in a homogenous one in Japan. Like part of the problem with something like a white girl wearing a Native-style headdress to Coachella is that her people have kicked the shit out of Native people for centuries in every possible way ... and now one of their last surviving symbols is being treated like it's nothing more than a cute kind of hat. That kind of history and context makes all the difference with cultural appropriation.

That could be.  There's also the fact that the items we were discussing weren't sacred.  Wearing hapi coat with jeans and a tee isn't quite comparable to wearing a rosary as a necklace.  That hapi coat, or the obi I have draped over my dining table, was never sacred. It was always "just" clothing, albeit traditional and culture-specific clothing, so maybe it's easier to see it used as something else than it wold be if it were a sacred item or an item that had to be earned in its original cultural context? 

Some of this stuff we couldn't discuss in class because it got to be too nuanced for the language level (although many of them had wonderful English!), and sometimes I also got uncomfortable being the only voice of America to them, so I tried to keep things general.  I didn't want to tell them how I felt about Social Security or abortion or Trump (The class the day after the election when my students were in tears was not the most fun for me! Oh, and trying to explain the electoral college and why we have it, when I'd very happily see it gone, was also a nice little challenge!), because I worried them might think that was how Americans felt.  So I walked a fine line (and surely didn't always get it right) between sharing my opinions something but also trying to keep it general so as not to present only one side. 

As an aside, conversational English is the only job I've ever had that I probably loved.  Some days were awkward and some days I failed to explain a concept and floundered a bit, but most days it was fucking magic.  And it's also the only job where I never felt imposter syndrome.  I was *great* at that job!

madgeylou

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2373
Re: "Trigger" words
« Reply #180 on: June 10, 2019, 04:05:16 PM »
Super-interesting post, Villanelle. There's so much nuance to these ideas, especially across cultures. I wonder if cultural appropriation really only becomes an issue in a heterogenous culture like the US, and not so much in a homogenous one in Japan. Like part of the problem with something like a white girl wearing a Native-style headdress to Coachella is that her people have kicked the shit out of Native people for centuries in every possible way ... and now one of their last surviving symbols is being treated like it's nothing more than a cute kind of hat. That kind of history and context makes all the difference with cultural appropriation.

That could be.  There's also the fact that the items we were discussing weren't sacred.  Wearing hapi coat with jeans and a tee isn't quite comparable to wearing a rosary as a necklace.  That hapi coat, or the obi I have draped over my dining table, was never sacred. It was always "just" clothing, albeit traditional and culture-specific clothing, so maybe it's easier to see it used as something else than it wold be if it were a sacred item or an item that had to be earned in its original cultural context? 

Some of this stuff we couldn't discuss in class because it got to be too nuanced for the language level (although many of them had wonderful English!), and sometimes I also got uncomfortable being the only voice of America to them, so I tried to keep things general.  I didn't want to tell them how I felt about Social Security or abortion or Trump (The class the day after the election when my students were in tears was not the most fun for me! Oh, and trying to explain the electoral college and why we have it, when I'd very happily see it gone, was also a nice little challenge!), because I worried them might think that was how Americans felt.  So I walked a fine line (and surely didn't always get it right) between sharing my opinions something but also trying to keep it general so as not to present only one side. 

As an aside, conversational English is the only job I've ever had that I probably loved.  Some days were awkward and some days I failed to explain a concept and floundered a bit, but most days it was fucking magic.  And it's also the only job where I never felt imposter syndrome.  I was *great* at that job!

I can see where that would be really fun and also occasionally terrifying (like the day after the 2016 election). My absolute favorite times at work are with my colleagues from other parts of the world, sharing idioms and bad words!

Cultural appropriation is not something that every single person will see the same way -- like when I told my husband I was going to stop saying "spirit animal" we disagreed about whether saying that is offensive/appropriative or not. My take is that if someone from the group who came up with a concept or article of clothing or whatever says "Please stop doing this, it is hurtful to me," then I'm gonna stop. I'm gonna err on the side of not being a dick. There are always other ways to get the point across.

But it really does come down to whether you are punching up in terms of power/hierarchy, or punching down. As former "white trash," it irritates me to no end to see rich educated people throwing "white trash" parties. Meanwhile I love guillotine memes and making fun of rich white dudes unreservedly. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Laserjet3051

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 688
  • Age: 91
Re: "Trigger" words
« Reply #181 on: June 10, 2019, 04:23:35 PM »
There are a lot of assumptions and inaccuracies in your post

Can you spell them out for me?  I understand that there are various contributors to a person't overall health, and you can still have great flexibility and balance and be a two-pack-a-day smoker, but that doesn't mean you're healthy.  Smoking, like obesity, cuts into your cardiovascular performance if nothing else.  Also like smoking (and sun exposure and alcohol consumption), obesity is definitely associated with an increased risk of certain types of cancers. 

Quote
Even the lens through which you are viewing this is exclusionary to fat people trying to live in the world in the bodies we have today.

I think of myself as the exact opposite of exclusionary in this case.  I explicitly mentioned in that post my desire to remove the personal judgments that have historically accompanied fatness, because most people are not fat as an isolated consequence of their own decisions.  There are larger problems afoot here, and they need addressing at a level far above the individual's choices that doctors have typically prescribed for controlling weight.  We could stop farm subsidies for red meat, for example, since they're a known carcinogen and generally terrible for you, and Uncle Sam probably shouldn't be making it as cheap as possible to get heart disease.

Lots of American are fat.  I get that, and each and every one of them deserves to be happy in their own way.  But I don't think we're doing ourselves any favors if we pretend that being very overweight is just as healthy as being less overweight.  People who have trouble fitting into passenger cars or office chairs are suffering through very real negative consequences of their weight, before we even get to their struggles with carrying groceries or playing with their kids.  I'm not excluding anyone, I'm arguing for national policy changes to lower obesity rates so that future generations will be better off than my generation.  You can still choose to be any size, I just think we should find a way to make it a choice, rather than something that is forced on people by government-subsidized lifestyle manipulation.

How many people have I triggered with this post?

Personally, I think it's only a matter of time before someone invents a birth control styled hormone treatment that anyone can take that interrupts the body's nutrient cycling and fat storage mechanisms, and we'll all be able to eat whatever garbage we want and independently choose what shape we want to be.  But not in time to help millions of Americans who will otherwise succumb to obesity-related health problems before it becomes widely available.

As someone actively working in adipose homeostasis R&D, I too, would be very interested in learning about the positive health benefits of obesity, including morbid obesity. Pubmed references (PMID) should suffice. Thank you in advance.

sol

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8475
  • Age: 42
  • Location: Pacific Northwest
Re: "Trigger" words
« Reply #182 on: June 10, 2019, 04:24:42 PM »
See, and I think we should be making bigger chairs and airplane seats

I don't think that's ever going to work.  There will always be 0.01% outliers.  We don't make all of our highway signs visible to people with 20/400 vision.  Honda can't profitably make a motorcycle for passengers that are seven feet tall.  We don't exterminate honeybees just because some people are allergic.  At some point, society deliberately inconveniences some people for the benefit of everyone else.  I'm all for making reasonable accommodations, but there is always going to be someone who feels they weren't accommodated enough.  Much like my stance on unintentionally offending forum users with trigger words, I've made my peace with it.  You can only do your best, and then accept whatever criticism comes your way. 

training medical professionals to treat fat people with respect, rather than asking them to do something with a 95-98% failure rate (lose weight).

Yes, we're agreeing on this point though I'm not sure you see that yet.  Doctors telling people to lose wait is about as effective as doctors telling people to stop smoking or wear their seat belt.  These are not issues that can be solved by telling people to make better choices, and the whole presumption that an individual's choices are responsible for their weight looks pretty misguided because it seems inherently pejorative.  The problem lies with an entire national infrastructure that supports specific harmful habits, and you can't blame individual people for living in that environment. 

That doesn't mean it's perfectly fine to continue smoking, and I don't support building specific smoking sections to accommodate those people.  I agree that doctors aren't helping by telling people to quit.  That is a far cry from accepting smokers as normal and healthy individuals. 

Quote
If you want to educate yourself on this, all you need to do is google "fatphobia" and "health at every size"

I'll do that.  If you also want to educated yourself, all you need to do is google "obesity related cancers" for the NIH/CDC perspective on that one particular health risk of obesity.  They seem to think that it's harder to be healthy at every size.

madgeylou

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2373
Re: "Trigger" words
« Reply #183 on: June 10, 2019, 04:48:48 PM »
See, and I think we should be making bigger chairs and airplane seats

I don't think that's ever going to work.  There will always be 0.01% outliers.

What about 30-70% of the US population? In what world does that mean "outlier"?

And @Laserjet3051 feel free to do your own research on this. If you are not going to do that, then it's clear to me that you aren't interested in actually learning anything, just beating fat people over the head with how gross and close to death we are.

markbike528CBX

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1017
  • Location: the Everbrown part of the Evergreen State (WA)
Re: "Trigger" words
« Reply #184 on: June 10, 2019, 06:53:24 PM »
What about 30-70% of the US population? In what world does that mean "outlier"?

And Laserjet3051 feel free to do your own research on this. If you are not going to do that, then it's clear to me that you aren't interested in actually learning anything, just beating fat people over the head with how gross and close to death we are.

madgeylou, it was clear that Laserjet3051 was asking for you to support your positions that:
 1)there is a "healthy fat" and that
 2) fatphobic medical advisors are a risk to others.

See, and I think we should be making bigger chairs and airplane seats and training medical professionals to treat fat people with respect, rather than asking them to do something with a 95-98% failure rate (lose weight).

If you want to educate yourself on this, all you need to do is google "fatphobia" and "health at every size" -- there are many resources out there that I don't care to rehash here.

I will say that the most recent research is showing that fatphobic medical providers are AT LEAST as much of a health risk to fat people as fat itself.
.
While I agree that a little sensitivity is needed for medical/ patient interactions, it is all a lone medical provider can do with respect to a single patient.  Sol's point that it is far too easy to get fat in America, just like it used to be far too easy(and expected) to become a smoker 40-50 years ago.
30-70% of the US population indicates a system problem, not a problem solvable by individuals.

Disclosure: 40lbs over my actuarily ideal weight.  My wife and I have a $800 bet on a 15% weight loss. Even with that on the line 3 months in, and we haven't lost anything.

EvenSteven

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 158
  • Location: St. Louis
Re: "Trigger" words
« Reply #185 on: June 10, 2019, 07:38:41 PM »
There are a lot of assumptions and inaccuracies in your post

Can you spell them out for me?  I understand that there are various contributors to a person't overall health, and you can still have great flexibility and balance and be a two-pack-a-day smoker, but that doesn't mean you're healthy.  Smoking, like obesity, cuts into your cardiovascular performance if nothing else.  Also like smoking (and sun exposure and alcohol consumption), obesity is definitely associated with an increased risk of certain types of cancers. 

Quote
Even the lens through which you are viewing this is exclusionary to fat people trying to live in the world in the bodies we have today.

I think of myself as the exact opposite of exclusionary in this case.  I explicitly mentioned in that post my desire to remove the personal judgments that have historically accompanied fatness, because most people are not fat as an isolated consequence of their own decisions.  There are larger problems afoot here, and they need addressing at a level far above the individual's choices that doctors have typically prescribed for controlling weight.  We could stop farm subsidies for red meat, for example, since they're a known carcinogen and generally terrible for you, and Uncle Sam probably shouldn't be making it as cheap as possible to get heart disease.

Lots of American are fat.  I get that, and each and every one of them deserves to be happy in their own way.  But I don't think we're doing ourselves any favors if we pretend that being very overweight is just as healthy as being less overweight.  People who have trouble fitting into passenger cars or office chairs are suffering through very real negative consequences of their weight, before we even get to their struggles with carrying groceries or playing with their kids.  I'm not excluding anyone, I'm arguing for national policy changes to lower obesity rates so that future generations will be better off than my generation.  You can still choose to be any size, I just think we should find a way to make it a choice, rather than something that is forced on people by government-subsidized lifestyle manipulation.

How many people have I triggered with this post?

Personally, I think it's only a matter of time before someone invents a birth control styled hormone treatment that anyone can take that interrupts the body's nutrient cycling and fat storage mechanisms, and we'll all be able to eat whatever garbage we want and independently choose what shape we want to be.  But not in time to help millions of Americans who will otherwise succumb to obesity-related health problems before it becomes widely available.

As someone actively working in adipose homeostasis R&D, I too, would be very interested in learning about the positive health benefits of obesity, including morbid obesity. Pubmed references (PMID) should suffice. Thank you in advance.

Seems like this would be a good paper for discussion:

https://nutritionj.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1475-2891-10-9

Any constructive thoughts or criticisms?

Poundwise

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1435
Re: "Trigger" words
« Reply #186 on: June 10, 2019, 08:50:14 PM »
Instead of "politically correct" I prefer the term "polite".

expatartist

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1696
  • Location: The Big Lychee
Re: "Trigger" words
« Reply #187 on: June 11, 2019, 12:59:27 AM »
Cultural appropriation's been mentioned several times re disparity in reaction between Asians in Asia vs Asian-American communities, when seeing images of white people wearing traditional Asian clothing as costumes. As with most situations on this thread it comes down to context and hierarchies. Ie where are you and your culture located in the hierarchy of where you live?

I'm caucasian-american, have lived in various countries in Asia for 16 years and am not claiming to be a spokesperson. Most countries in Asia are racially (though not culturally) homogenous compared to the US. There have been few mainstream representations of Asian culture in the west aside from Suzy Wong tropes and Hollywood stereotypes. When westerners are seen showing these costumes in a positive way in Asia, it's viewed as a compliment to Asian cultures.

In the west how these costumes are viewed depends on many things including how you've been raised and your cultural/racial background. Cultural identity is complicated, can be layered, languages and multiple identities can exist simultaneously. But this is rarely understood by the dominant culture. Asian-Americans have had to deal with all sorts of BS and stereotypes and challenges to their cultures from white Americans which most Asians in Asia do not. The relationship between say the cheongsam and oneself when you've had to deal with the flattening of who you are as a person into a costume, into a limited sometimes fetishized stereotype by mainstream US culture, is completely different. So naturally it pisses a woman of Asian heritage off when she sees a white woman who wears these costumes which are frequently sexualized by the Suzy Wong or Geisha trope. If you're white and wearing a costume you're sexualized as much as you want to be. It's optional. You control the narrative. If you're Asian it's often imposed on you.

I wrote another paragraph then erased it since this video says it all really: "What Kind of Asian are You? (or, Where are You REALLY From?!)" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DWynJkN5HbQ
« Last Edit: June 11, 2019, 01:28:57 AM by expatartist »

ender

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4689
Re: "Trigger" words
« Reply #188 on: June 11, 2019, 06:31:29 AM »
Exactly. I mean if the more privileged folks on this thread are sick of being told their words are offensive ... imagine how sick marginalized forks are of hearing offensive shit every day of their lives. It seriously stuns me how often grown adults need to be reminded of this, but try putting yourself in the other person's shoes.

Is it more important for each of us to be able to use any word we want, or for some of us to be freed to navigate the world free of constantly having to be reminded of truly horrible shit?

I think the term "political correctness" is bullshit in and of itself.  It's the user's way of excusing themselves for saying or doing something that was rude, inconsiderate, or just plain mean.    People who say they hate being politically correct are declaring that they want to behave in a manner that is mostly unacceptable, but they want to cover their own reprehensible behavior by blaming other people for being civilized.

But that's just my opinion.

I'll take this a bit further as imo, "political correctness" is almost always used as a bludgeon for "I should be able to keep using my privilege and asserting dominance of my whiteness and/or maleness" rather than anything else.

It is very, very rarely used in any other fashion. People complaining about political correctness are almost always either white or men, often both. That won't be 100% universally true but if you start paying attention to this type of issue you will find a big imbalance in who complains about political correctness and race/gender.

Poundwise

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1435
Re: "Trigger" words
« Reply #189 on: June 11, 2019, 06:54:42 AM »
Sometimes I wonder if there is something in some people's brain structures that makes it almost painful to change their way of speech.

For  instance, if you're used to using the word "retard" for humor, and you're looking forward to the response you get, and then you remember that you were told that it's rude and can hurt people's feelings, you feel a surge of resentment because now you must find another word.  What can be done to reduce this negative surge?

Adam Zapple

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 390
Re: "Trigger" words
« Reply #190 on: June 11, 2019, 09:15:05 AM »
Social pressure to conform to the social contract becomes obnoxious when it is applied unevenly and in favor of one interest group over another.

I wholeheartedly agree with this view, but I don't know if I'm convinced that it is being applied unevenly. This thread has examples of phrases that both sides of the spectrum object to: "Happy Holidays", "Easter worshippers", "Double-blind study", "Smear the Queer".

Humans are prone to confirmation bias. We're more likely to look for evidence that confirms our initial hypothesis ("Liberals are snowflakes!" "Conservatives are the real snowflakes!"), and less likely to recognize or look for evidence that would disprove that hypothesis.

It's very possible that this is lopsided, I would say probably, but it's difficult to any one of us to independently assess that.

There is an interest group that has made it their mission to seek out anyone who has ever made an offensive comment at any point in their lives and destroy their careers or livelihoods.  I don't see Christian groups destroying careers or publicly humiliating people for saying "Happy Holidays." At least not in any impactful way. 

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 13346
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: "Trigger" words
« Reply #191 on: June 11, 2019, 09:22:33 AM »
Social pressure to conform to the social contract becomes obnoxious when it is applied unevenly and in favor of one interest group over another.

I wholeheartedly agree with this view, but I don't know if I'm convinced that it is being applied unevenly. This thread has examples of phrases that both sides of the spectrum object to: "Happy Holidays", "Easter worshippers", "Double-blind study", "Smear the Queer".

Humans are prone to confirmation bias. We're more likely to look for evidence that confirms our initial hypothesis ("Liberals are snowflakes!" "Conservatives are the real snowflakes!"), and less likely to recognize or look for evidence that would disprove that hypothesis.

It's very possible that this is lopsided, I would say probably, but it's difficult to any one of us to independently assess that.

There is an interest group that has made it their mission to seek out anyone who has ever made an offensive comment at any point in their lives and destroy their careers or livelihoods.  I don't see Christian groups destroying careers or publicly humiliating people for saying "Happy Holidays." At least not in any impactful way.


https://rewire.news/article/2019/01/02/employees-can-be-fired-for-being-lgbtq-in-26-states-will-the-supreme-court-make-that-even-worse/

Public humiliation . . . check.  Destroying careers . . . check.  Impactful . . . check.  Religious (typically Christian) motivation . . . check.

madgeylou

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2373
Re: "Trigger" words
« Reply #192 on: June 11, 2019, 09:22:52 AM »
While I agree that a little sensitivity is needed for medical/ patient interactions, it is all a lone medical provider can do with respect to a single patient.  Sol's point that it is far too easy to get fat in America, just like it used to be far too easy(and expected) to become a smoker 40-50 years ago.
30-70% of the US population indicates a system problem, not a problem solvable by individuals.

Disclosure: 40lbs over my actuarily ideal weight.  My wife and I have a $800 bet on a 15% weight loss. Even with that on the line 3 months in, and we haven't lost anything.

So maybe you see the madness in doctors focusing on weight loss as the solution to all of a fat person's health problems, when 95+% of people who attempt intentional weight loss do not succeed.

If the folks on this thread clinging to their outdated fatphobic notions would actually read anything about Health at Every Size you would see that it's not about encouraging every person to get as fat as they can. It's about encouraging fat people alive right now focus on creating healthy, self-supporting habits rather than beating us up for not being able to shift the number on the scale. It's about treating fat people with respect, as though we are actually human beings, no matter how healthy or not healthy we are.

It's also about decoupling health from weight. Fat people who exercise and eat fresh foods have better health outcomes than skinny people who don't. But this is not what fat folks are told. We are told that it's impossible to increase our health outside of losing weight and this is demonstrably untrue (as anyone who has started an exercise regime and felt better / had better energy / needed less medication but didn't lose weight can tell you).

I agree that the environment plays a huge role, and of course that needs to be addressed. But I don't know how we help a 50-year-old fat woman today, who has health problems but can't get any doctors to listen to her or treat her seriously, by changing the food environment for the future. I don't know how we get phytoestrogens out of the environment.

But I DO know that woman deserves to be treated with respect by her doctor and by the culture. She doesn't deserve to have bruises from seats that are smaller than the average American, nor to be treated like a pariah when she steps onto a plane, nor to be hired less often and paid less money than a straight-sized person.

Folks who are like "omg but it's so unhealllllllthy" would do well to remember that LOTS of people are unhealthy, for a lot of reasons, and that none of us is going to stay healthy forever. Even the idea of "what is healthy" changes over time and across cultures, just like "what is beautiful." Health is a social construct that at this point leaves fat people out by design, and that's both factually inaccurate, and unfair.

I'm not interested in debating any of this with any of y'all. Do your research and make your own decisions. Just realize that fat bias is just like gender bias and racial bias in that no one thinks they have it and yet the research shows that just about everyone does -- and those biases color everything, from the people we choose to associate with to the way scientific studies are done. Here's the Harvard Implicit Bias test about weight: take it and see for yourself.

sol

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8475
  • Age: 42
  • Location: Pacific Northwest
Re: "Trigger" words
« Reply #193 on: June 11, 2019, 09:33:13 AM »
"political correctness" is almost always used as a bludgeon for "I should be able to keep using my privilege and asserting dominance of my whiteness and/or maleness" rather than anything else.

It is very, very rarely used in any other fashion.

In this thread it has very much been used in the exact opposite fashion.  Non-white and/or non-male persons in this thread have used this opportunity to insult and berate white males for being white males, on the assumption that they must be non-PC agents of the patriarchy with nefarious intent, by virtue of their born identity.

But it comes with the territory.  I didn't choose to be born a white male.  I have devoted much of my life to advancing and uplifting historically oppressed minority groups, and yet I am still openly attacked for being sexist and/or racist (and now fatphobic).  To some people on the fringes of this debate, it doesn't really matter what you do or what you believe, it only matters how you were born.  If that's not the definition of bigotry then I don't know what is.

Political correctness is a complicated topic, constantly evolving as society embraces new norms.  Part of that evolution, though, has been historically oppressed groups abandoning Dr. King's vision of judging a person based on the content of their character.  These days, identity matters just as much philosophy.  See, for example, the "punching up" vs "punching down" discussion above about how the history of oppression should be the defining characteristic of what is acceptable behavior.  In this version of liberal equality, Mother Theresa would be absolutely eviscerated for helping poor brown people because she was born a rich white European.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 13346
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: "Trigger" words
« Reply #194 on: June 11, 2019, 09:51:12 AM »
"political correctness" is almost always used as a bludgeon for "I should be able to keep using my privilege and asserting dominance of my whiteness and/or maleness" rather than anything else.

It is very, very rarely used in any other fashion.

In this thread it has very much been used in the exact opposite fashion.  Non-white and/or non-male persons in this thread have used this opportunity to insult and berate white males for being white males, on the assumption that they must be non-PC agents of the patriarchy with nefarious intent, by virtue of their born identity.

But it comes with the territory.  I didn't choose to be born a white male.  I have devoted much of my life to advancing and uplifting historically oppressed minority groups, and yet I am still openly attacked for being sexist and/or racist (and now fatphobic).  To some people on the fringes of this debate, it doesn't really matter what you do or what you believe, it only matters how you were born.  If that's not the definition of bigotry then I don't know what is.

Political correctness is a complicated topic, constantly evolving as society embraces new norms.  Part of that evolution, though, has been historically oppressed groups abandoning Dr. King's vision of judging a person based on the content of their character.  These days, identity matters just as much philosophy.  See, for example, the "punching up" vs "punching down" discussion above about how the history of oppression should be the defining characteristic of what is acceptable behavior.  In this version of liberal equality, Mother Theresa would be absolutely eviscerated for helping poor brown people because she was born a rich white European.

But Mother Theresa is not eviscerated for helping poor brown people even though she was born a rich white European.  In fact, she's generally revered as being a pretty good person.  Therefore your theory doesn't appear to fit the facts.

The argument about punching up/down is one of context, not identity.  A history of oppression can easily cause a different context, which actually changes the meaning of words.

Let me give you an example:

"Hand me that shovel, boy" has a very different meaning if an older white guy says it to a black man than if an older white guy says it to a white man.  Even though they're the same words.  Context matters because of history, and in this case history dictates that race does matter to establish context.

I think that Dr. King would be upset in the former but not upset the latter example given, because he knew very well that judging a man based on his actions means taking those actions in context.  This doesn't really mean that you're being discriminated against for being born white . . . it means that you being white is sometimes part of the historical context in how your actions will be perceived.

EvenSteven

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 158
  • Location: St. Louis
Re: "Trigger" words
« Reply #195 on: June 11, 2019, 09:53:38 AM »
"political correctness" is almost always used as a bludgeon for "I should be able to keep using my privilege and asserting dominance of my whiteness and/or maleness" rather than anything else.

It is very, very rarely used in any other fashion.

In this thread it has very much been used in the exact opposite fashion.  Non-white and/or non-male persons in this thread have used this opportunity to insult and berate white males for being white males, on the assumption that they must be non-PC agents of the patriarchy with nefarious intent, by virtue of their born identity.

But it comes with the territory.  I didn't choose to be born a white male.  I have devoted much of my life to advancing and uplifting historically oppressed minority groups, and yet I am still openly attacked for being sexist and/or racist (and now fatphobic).  To some people on the fringes of this debate, it doesn't really matter what you do or what you believe, it only matters how you were born.  If that's not the definition of bigotry then I don't know what is.

Political correctness is a complicated topic, constantly evolving as society embraces new norms.  Part of that evolution, though, has been historically oppressed groups abandoning Dr. King's vision of judging a person based on the content of their character.  These days, identity matters just as much philosophy.  See, for example, the "punching up" vs "punching down" discussion above about how the history of oppression should be the defining characteristic of what is acceptable behavior.  In this version of liberal equality, Mother Theresa would be absolutely eviscerated for helping poor brown people because she was born a rich white European.

+1. I think it is vitally important that we recognize the real victims of oppression in the US today. White males in general, and Sol in particular.

madgeylou

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2373
Re: "Trigger" words
« Reply #196 on: June 11, 2019, 09:59:22 AM »
In this thread it has very much been used in the exact opposite fashion.  Non-white and/or non-male persons in this thread have used this opportunity to insult and berate white males for being white males, on the assumption that they must be non-PC agents of the patriarchy with nefarious intent, by virtue of their born identity.

But it comes with the territory.  I didn't choose to be born a white male.  I have devoted much of my life to advancing and uplifting historically oppressed minority groups, and yet I am still openly attacked for being sexist and/or racist (and now fatphobic).  To some people on the fringes of this debate, it doesn't really matter what you do or what you believe, it only matters how you were born.  If that's not the definition of bigotry then I don't know what is.

I honestly can't remember how many times I've explained this to you specifically, but you don't seem to want to get it. Intent doesn't matter! There are lots of totally nice white people who would never ever consider themselves racist who do racist shit every day (I include myself in this). Totally nice men (yourself included) who act in sexist ways. Totally lovely skinny people who have fat friends and treat them in a fatphobic way without even realizing. The intent doesn't matter.

In fact the entire problem with these kinds of biases is that they are UNCONSCIOUS. That means we aren't aware of them unless we make a heroic effort to listen to people suffering the effects of those biases, who see them much more clearly than those who don't.

One more thing -- you keep equating calling out racism / sexism / fatphobia as an "attack." It's not an attack. It's an attempt to help you grow beyond the shitty attitudes of our culture that you and every single person in this culture have internalized to whatever extent. We all have unconscious bias, and the only way that we are able to make them conscious and thus grow past them. That means listening and embracing a little humility.

The more privilege each of us has, the harder we have to work to get beyond this stuff. Sort of the flip side of the way that folks with less privilege have to be twice as good to get ahead.

None of this is an attack. I get heated, sure, because I'm human and I'm upset about how so many people I care about are being fucked over by people with privilege refusing to take it on. But saying "what you said was fatphobic" doesn't mean "you are a terrible person." It means "what you said is fatphobic, and if you are more interested in learning about that and possibly dismantling it than you are defending what a great person you are who couldn't possibly have any blind spots anywhere, well here are some resources to check into."

Dabnasty

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1630
Re: "Trigger" words
« Reply #197 on: June 11, 2019, 10:01:02 AM »
"political correctness" is almost always used as a bludgeon for "I should be able to keep using my privilege and asserting dominance of my whiteness and/or maleness" rather than anything else.

It is very, very rarely used in any other fashion.

In this thread it has very much been used in the exact opposite fashion.  Non-white and/or non-male persons in this thread have used this opportunity to insult and berate white males for being white males, on the assumption that they must be non-PC agents of the patriarchy with nefarious intent, by virtue of their born identity.

But it comes with the territory.  I didn't choose to be born a white male.  I have devoted much of my life to advancing and uplifting historically oppressed minority groups, and yet I am still openly attacked for being sexist and/or racist (and now fatphobic).  To some people on the fringes of this debate, it doesn't really matter what you do or what you believe, it only matters how you were born.  If that's not the definition of bigotry then I don't know what is.

Political correctness is a complicated topic, constantly evolving as society embraces new norms.  Part of that evolution, though, has been historically oppressed groups abandoning Dr. King's vision of judging a person based on the content of their character.  These days, identity matters just as much philosophy.  See, for example, the "punching up" vs "punching down" discussion above about how the history of oppression should be the defining characteristic of what is acceptable behavior.  In this version of liberal equality, Mother Theresa would be absolutely eviscerated for helping poor brown people because she was born a rich white European.

But Mother Theresa is not eviscerated for helping poor brown people even though she was born a rich white European.  In fact, she's generally revered as being a pretty good person.  Therefore your theory doesn't appear to fit the facts.

The argument about punching up/down is one of context, not identity.  A history of oppression can easily cause a different context, which actually changes the meaning of words.

Let me give you an example:

"Hand me that shovel, boy" has a very different meaning if an older white guy says it to a black man than if an older white guy says it to a white man.  Even though they're the same words.  Context matters because of history, and in this case history dictates that race does matter to establish context.

I think that Dr. King would be upset in the former but not upset the latter example given, because he knew very well that judging a man based on his actions means taking those actions in context.  This doesn't really mean that you're being discriminated against for being born white . . . it means that you being white is sometimes part of the historical context in how your actions will be perceived.

I agree with your example that one case is ok but the other is not but I don't think it illustrates punching up vs down. Instead it shows that one case is a punch due to context and the other isn't a punch at all*. This is different than saying negative stereotypes about white males are ok.

*at least not with regards to race/gender, it may still be demeaning

iris lily

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3188
Re: "Trigger" words
« Reply #198 on: June 11, 2019, 10:07:00 AM »
Instead of "politically correct" I prefer the term "polite".
That is a good thought.

Dabnasty

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1630
Re: "Trigger" words
« Reply #199 on: June 11, 2019, 10:22:44 AM »
While I agree that a little sensitivity is needed for medical/ patient interactions, it is all a lone medical provider can do with respect to a single patient.  Sol's point that it is far too easy to get fat in America, just like it used to be far too easy(and expected) to become a smoker 40-50 years ago.
30-70% of the US population indicates a system problem, not a problem solvable by individuals.

Disclosure: 40lbs over my actuarily ideal weight.  My wife and I have a $800 bet on a 15% weight loss. Even with that on the line 3 months in, and we haven't lost anything.

So maybe you see the madness in doctors focusing on weight loss as the solution to all of a fat person's health problems, when 95+% of people who attempt intentional weight loss do not succeed.

Do you have sources to support this? In searching I've seen it repeated a number of times, but without citation. I did find this:

https://www.nytimes.com/1999/05/25/health/95-regain-lost-weight-or-do-they.html

It suggests that the 5% number comes from a clinical study of 100 people in 1959. I'm not suggesting that this is proof that it's not 5%, I'm only asking if there is further evidence to support this number.

Here's an update on the National Weight Control Registry mentioned in that article.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24355667

« Last Edit: June 11, 2019, 10:26:53 AM by Dabnasty »