I Had A Random Thought...

[clyde]

I'm always a little uncomfortable with attraction being taken off the table as inexplicable and unaccountable, because the same arguments are used to defend so many kinds of poisonous hate.

I can see why this would make you uncomfortable. I wouldn't say attraction is inexplicable as much as it's unexplained. As far as accountability goes, I have a hard enough time making myself and others accountable for their actions; the idea of being accountable for thoughts is horrifying. I wonder how the decision to get oneself worked up and angry by dwelling on something that makes them mad fits into this. At what point is it thought and at what point is it action?

[clyde]

The problem is equating those two things in the first place.

Gormongous is equating the non-arguments that hate is inexplicable and that attraction is inexplicable, not equating hate and attraction.

[clyde]

Best forum evar!

[Twig]

Gormongous is equating the non-arguments that hate is inexplicable and that attraction is inexplicable, not equating hate and attraction.

That's not a thing you can avoid. The second you start comparing them at any level, you're comparing them.

 

Also, more on the point, we're talking about physical attraction, and he's bringing up general hate. Attraction is a whole hell of a lot more than just physical attraction. Physical attraction is simply "do you like the way he or she looks". And I'm not saying there can't be some underlying reason why physical attraction for certain characteristics exists, but it's absurd to pretend that we have control over it, and it's even more absurd to pretend that, because assholes exist, we shouldn't acknowledge it on any level.

[Zeusthecat]

As far as accountability goes, I have a hard enough time making myself and others accountable for their actions; the idea of being accountable for thoughts is horrifying.

 

I think it depends on the thought. If I had constant horrible thoughts that, if acted upon, would be considered immoral then I think it would behoove me to evaluate myself to understand why I think those thoughts and how I might stop myself from thinking those thoughts in the future. I figure that any bad thoughts I have are due to a deficiency or error in my thought process anyways so I might as well just hold myself accountable for it, accept that I am flawed, and try to dive in to find the reason and correct it. Usually easier said than done.

[Twig]

I have horrible thoughts all the time that I recognize as horrible, and as a result, over time, the number of times those thoughts occur diminish. U:

 

And then other times I have horrible thoughts intentionally out of spite because someone makes me angry, and I'm perfectly okay with that, because I never act upon those thoughts. U:

 

And then yet other times I do act upon those thoughts and regret it immediately, although this almost never happens anymore. (Acting upon horrible thoughts, I mean. Regretting actions happens all the time.) U:

[brkl]

That's not a thing you can avoid. The second you start comparing them at any level, you're comparing them.

 

Comparing which them? Comparing the argument "hate is inexplicable" with the argument "attraction is inexplicable" is not the same as comparing the concepts of hate and attraction. 

[Twig]

I disagree.

[miffy495]

For me, there is a line between saying that you prefer a certain look (in general, I like the punk look and girls that embrace that have a style that appeals to me) and fetishizing it ("punk girls are sexy"). Certain looks appealing to you is a totally natural thing. In general (and it's always "in general", in case that wasn't obvious enough), for example, humans appear to be inclined to seek out partners that don't look too similar to themselves or family members. This may be biological or social conditioning, but either way, less inbreeding happens and we're better off for it.

 

When these statements get problematic is usually when talking about another race. SecretAsianMan's example about his cousin's wife is a good example of how this works in other countries. In North America, this usually results in things like always seeing the black woman in a movie in some kind of animal print, implying a wildness or similar animalistic quality. Hopefully the problematic racial tones of that are apparent. Similarly, Asian women are often portrayed as either very child-like or very submissive. That's problematic. When people make a blanket statement like "I like Asian women", they're not saying they like their style. That's not possible, because the range of styles is limitless and you can't prefer all of them. You're also not saying you like their features, because Asia is a huge place and across different regions features can vary greatly. What they're saying (again, in general) is that they dig on their culture's popularly conveyed portrayal of that race, which is degrading. That's not to say that is their intention, and maybe they mean something different by it. I assume in most cases that they do, because I like to assume that no one intends to say problematic things. What people need to do though is not just deny that they're saying something problematic, but unpack the statement and maybe uncover what combination of things it is that they're actually attracted to. If it's sharper or rounder facial features, sure, you can have a preference for one over the other (I go for sharper myself), but if it's one race (especially when we're talking about an entire CONTINENT of variations) over another, I don't even really know how to read that ASIDE from as a result of internalization of popular racial portrayals.

[SecretAsianMan]

Boy this got really complicated.  Lets see if I can do this without a million quote blocks.

 

As far as what's appropriate and what's not, I don't think there's ever going to be a clear, universal answer to that (at least until humanity becomes a hive mind and we all share the same thought).  Appropriateness is determined by an individual (or group of usually like minded individuals), which is further determined by background, mindset, beliefs, etc.  There are times I wonder if my handle is inappropriate, despite the fact that I am Asian and I came up with the name myself.  Who am I to say what is and isn't offensive to someone?  Personally, it takes a lot to offend me but that's just me.

 

To the point about physical attraction versus emotions, I agree that they are separate, or rather that they should be.  But human beings aren't purely rational creatures so they're going to get mixed up.  Maybe not hate in everyone's case, but there are certainly people who aren't going to be able to separate physical and emotional attraction.

 

In the thought department, I tend to draw the line at action.  I've met plenty of people in my life I didn't like (not because of race or anything, they were just asshats).  I've thought about punching them.  A lot.  I've never punched a person in my life, at least not in a violent manner.  I've had other thoughts that I'm certain some people wouldn't like.  And I know those thoughts for what they are.  But I've never acted on them because I recognize what the consequences of those actions would be.  Are they immoral thoughts?  Maybe, it depends on your morals.  Do I think they're immoral?  Perhaps a few, but that's why I don't act on them.  I don't being a good person means you can never think bad things.  Just don't do them.

[Twig]

For me, there is a line between saying that you prefer a certain look (in general, I like the punk look and girls that embrace that have a style that appeals to me) and fetishizing it ("punk girls are sexy").

Explain to me the logical difference between those two statements. Because I'm pretty sure the meaning behind them is identical. Like, what the hell does "fetishizing" mean? That you associate sex with it? Are you saying that you don't care what the person you're having sex with looks like, but you prefer to look at women who embrace the punk aesthetic?

 

There's no "line", from where I'm standing. It's all the same thing. You just seem to have an issue with how people phrase it. (Which is ironic because all that was originally said was "their girls are cute", which could mean any number of things, sexual or otherwise, on the surface, despite everyone knowing that it really meant he finds them physically attractive. Which is generally sexual in nature, because that's what that MEANS.)

 

to sum: this is fucking dumb and we should all just never talk again because anything we say could be misconstrued as racist, misogynistic, or any other form of bigotry

 

What they're saying (again, in general) is that they dig on their culture's popularly conveyed portrayal of that race, which is degrading.

No, I'm saying very specifically that I like the way Asian women look. (This includes Asian American, which I thought all of us knew.)

 

to sum: this is fucking dumb and we should all just never talk again because anything we say could be misconstrued as racist, misogynistic, or any other form of bigotry

[Gormongous]

this is fucking dumb and we should all just never talk again because anything we say could be misconstrued as racist, misogynistic, or any other form of bigotry

 

If you really think that it's too much work to have to think about what you say in order to not hurt someone... I don't know, I don't have anything to follow that clause, except things that are unkind.

 

This isn't a hardship, man. If someone says, "Hey, you said something offensive," you just say, "Okay," and don't say it again. You don't even have to agree, just be more careful, because you've offended them, whether you meant it or not, and that's bad.

[SecretAsianMan]

If you really think that it's too much work to have to think about what you say in order to not hurt someone... I don't know, I don't have anything to follow that clause, except things that are unkind.

 

This isn't a hardship, man. If someone says, "Hey, you said something offensive," you just say, "Okay," and don't say it again. You don't even have to agree, just be more careful, because you've offended them, whether you meant it or not, and that's bad.

 

I think there has to be more to it than that though.  Without the proper understanding, you're bound to repeat the same mistake.  Maybe you won't say the exact same words but something with the same meaning or possibly even worse.  If it were as simple as just saying it was offensive, then no one could say anything ever.

[Twig]

The problem with that is I don't consider this offensive in the slightest, and I completely disagree with anyone who does. And nothing I've read here has changed my mind at all. So, no, it's not that simple. It's like I have to walk on eggshells because even the most innocent thing can be found offensive by somebody. It's not about "thinking about what I say". It's about saying something that ISN'T offensive, and yet offending someone, because they're overly sensitive about it. Which is what I think is happening here.

 

Like if I seriously went by what anyone had found offensive throughout the world, I could almost say nothing at all other than pure observational facts.

[Gormongous]

The problem with that is I don't consider this offensive in the slightest, and I completely disagree with anyone who does. And nothing I've read here has changed my mind at all. So, no, it's not that simple. It's like I have to walk on eggshells because even the most innocent thing can be found offensive by somebody. It's not about "thinking about what I say". It's about saying something that ISN'T offensive, and yet offending someone, because they're overly sensitive about it. Which is what I think is happening here.

 

Like if I seriously went by what anyone had found offensive throughout the world, I could almost say nothing at all other than pure observational facts.

 

I think the reasons you've been given for why "Asian women are cute" could be offensive are fairly straightforward. You don't seem to agree with them, which is okay, but you don't get to call a hypothetical someone "overly sensitive" because they get offended for reasons you don't agree with. That's cruel and also bullshit.

 

And seriously, stop with the slippery-slope, camel-in-the-tent fallacies. I'm not asking you to stop talking or to never offend anyone. I'm just saying that referring to an entire race's women as cute, as if millions upon millions of women are all functionally the same to you, is a little creepy. If you really can't understand that, then I don't know what else to say.

[miffy495]

I'm just saying that referring to an entire race's women as cute, as if millions upon millions of women are all functionally the same to you, is a little creepy. If you really can't understand that, then I don't know what else to say.

 

I tried typing like three different responses here, but then this one showed up and I think we're good.

[Twig]

But that's not what ANYONE means when they say that. Ever. I've never met anyone before in my life who has meant that and I've never meant anyone before in my life, until this thread, who THOUGHT it meant that. It's absurd.

 

The statement as you've interpreted is, of course, awful. And I never once goddamn disagreed with that, and you can't find a single place in this thread or anywhere across my entire existence where I did. That's not the issue. The issue is interpreting it that way in the first place. It's a gross misinterpretation, driven by I don't know what.

[Gormongous]

But that's not what ANYONE means when they say that. Ever. I've never met anyone before in my life who has meant that and I've never meant anyone before in my life, until this thread, who THOUGHT it meant that. It's absurd.

 

Yeah, and I can use "lame" and "gay" in a pejorative sense, never meaning them to be offensive to the disabled and queer, but actually they are anyway, so I don't. It's something we all have to deal with.

[miffy495]

Whether you mean it or not, it's what you're doing. While unconscious, the cultural implications of that are damaging. Words mean things, so think about them. You're not a horrible person for mistakenly saying something that contributes to a bad thing. I do it all the time too. I may however start to think less of you if you insist on doing it after having the problem pointed out to you and defend this by saying ridiculous oversimplifications like "If I stop saying problematic things, I may as well never talk again!". That is needlessly reductive and makes it look like you aren't interested in having a serious conversation.

 

EDIT: and then the post below showed up and proved that the last sentence is true. Disappointing.

[Twig]

Wow that's such a completely different kind of thing so I'm glad that we're comparing them.

 

Guess this is over, isn't it? Dinner time.

 

miffy: If you want to think less of me, that sucks. I disagree that it's a mistake to say "Asian women are cute", and so I guess you will continue to think less of me. And, yes, it is reductive. I was sort of joking and trying to add some levity. But, yes, I'm tired of this conversation now. I tried the serious conversation angle, and all I got was, "I like" versus "I think it's sexy" AND "It's creepy because it could be interpreted in a creepy way". Neither of those work for me. Dunno what to tell you other than that. EDIT: I don't mean to say that I'm unwilling to continue this conversation. Just that, right now, nothing's happening. The same things are being repeated, and neither side is making progress. So, I'm tired of it, and am taking a break!

[Gormongous]

 

The statement as you've interpreted is, of course, awful. And I never once goddamn disagreed with that, and you can't find a single place in this thread or anywhere across my entire existence where I did. That's not the issue. The issue is interpreting it that way in the first place. It's a gross misinterpretation, driven by I don't know what.

 

I think this is where we are going to disagree. In my mind, the audience gets to interpret the meaning of what's being said. The speaker may have some kind of intent, which hopefully he or she will convey, but he or she doesn't get final say on that. Otherwise we get situations where I can call black people racial slurs and, since I don't mean to offend them, I just like how the words sound, they aren't allowed to get offended. That's patently absurd, I think you would agree.

 

Basically, if anyone tells me that anything I say offends them, I say okay, then I ask why, so I can understand and change my behavior. How would it be more fair for me to tell someone to not be offended and to privilege my interpretation over theirs?

 

 

EDIT: Better yet, imagine that you have a traumatic association with a word or phrase, whether or not it's connected to centuries of ongoing sexual or racial oppression. I use it while talking, but when you ask me to stop, I tell you to focus on how I mean the word or phrase instead. I refuse to stop using the word or phrase. Do you see what I mean by cruel and also bullshit? Unintentional, but still.

[Twig]

Fine one more thing, then.

 

The "why" was already answered, and that's where the disagreement is strongest. I will inevitably avoid saying anything involving the word "Asian" on these forums (referring to SecretAsianMan as SAM, obviously), after this conversation, because now I'm too afraid to accidentally offend again. But I think it's fucking stupid and unhealthy and I hate myself for it. But it's going to happen.

 

Also.

 

 

In my mind, the audience gets to interpret the meaning of what's being said.

That's where my jokey slippery slope becomes reality, and that's not something I can stand behind, ever. There are obvious exceptions, like racial slurs, which you mentioned. But this is something entirely different from that. It's a statement that was never intended to be racially charged in the first place. Slurs have history. Often they were created with the specific INTENTION of being demeaning.

 

Intent is very important. I've said that before on these forums, and people have disagreed with me. I will say it again, and people will disagree with me. Now I'll add something: including historical intent. Because that also encompasses innocent usage of slurs and their ilk, racial or otherwise.

 

BOOM. Now I am winner. I am doing the winner dance.

 

(But I really am hungry and am now going to get food. I may never return. EVER.)

[Gormongous]

Then, like I thought, we're going to have to agree to disagree. For me, the road to hell (and to being inadvertently racist or sexist) is paved with good intentions.

 

Go get some food, dude!

[SecretAsianMan]

Fine one more thing, then.

 

The "why" was already answered, and that's where the disagreement is strongest. I will inevitably avoid saying anything involving the word "Asian" on these forums (referring to SecretAsianMan as SAM, obviously), after this conversation, because now I'm too afraid to accidentally offend again. But I think it's fucking stupid and unhealthy and I hate myself for it. But it's going to happen.

 

I really hope you're kidding here.  If you're not PLEASE don't do it on my account.  If you want to call me SAM because it's easier (which many people do) that's fine, but don't do it because you're afraid of upsetting me or someone else (unless they actually are upset by the name SecretAsianMan in which case it's my problem and not yours).  Like I said before, it takes a lot to offend me and nothing that's been said so far I have found offensive.

 

I'll say one more thing and then leave you alone.  I agree with you that intent is important.  And I totally believe you have no malicious intent.  But intent and outcome don't always match.  The intent of the song "Yankee Doodle" was to insult the American colonials, but now it's considered a patriotic song.  I believe your intent was not to make a statement that could upset someone, but that doesn't mean it couldn't.  I think you realize this though so I'm not going to keep repeating this arguement.

[Twig]

Yes I was joking. I've called you SAM before because it's easier. Not about the rest, though!