Thanks for the feedback. I encourage you to exercise the creativity muscles and imagine what I could be possibly saying. I feel like we are not making a connection, like the ball is being dropped. I throw you a ball and you don’t catch it, sort of thing. I send you an idea, concept, and you miss the ball and instead say the ball looks ugly. Like ok sure the ball is ugly, or “the words have incel vibes”, but can you please just catch the ball and get what i’m saying? Thanks
Hm… I get what you mean, but that’s because I’m not interested in engaging with the discussion. Mostly I just wanted to give you actual feedback on why you got banned in that case, since you said somewhere else in this thread that you didn’t understand/didn’t get feedback on why.
I wanted to give you this feedback because I too used to struggle with being understood the wrong way. It can be difficult - in my head I know exactly what I want to communicate, yet trying to find the right words to bring it across sometimes just doesn’t work. But the big thing I’ve learned is: the person I’m talking to is not wrong for misunderstanding what I’m saying, especially not if it happens frequently with different people! Instead I have to learn how to properly communicate my thoughts, and part of that is knowing what subjects are appropriate to touch on, and which ones aren’t. And sexual topics are very often inappropriate, so touching on them (even tangentially) can throw a conversation completely off course.
It still feels inappropriate to me to bring up any sexual topics with the image you initially commented on, so I don’t want to engage in the discussion.
… so touching on [sexual topics] (even tangentially) can throw a conversation completely off
This was helpful. I oscilate between speaking my mind freely but also believing I ought to speak strategically. This is one of those times where I just spoke off the cuff. In real-life interactions, being mindful of taboo topics is good. I don’t hold a taboo with those words that I used in a strong manner. I don’t even experience intense emotions very frequently.
Especially when talking in safe spaces for women and minorities, one needs to be mindful of the history of negative experiences of those groups. Women still struggle with unwanted sexualization today, often leading to very negative interpersonal experiences and general disadvantages in their lives. So your response in that thread is being interpreted under that light.
To give a very inappropriate comparison - it’s kinda like being invited over for dinner at a friend’s house, and their whole family is jewish. During dinner they talk about family members they’ve lost in the Holocaust, and you suddenly crack Holocaust jokes. No matter how funny/clever/subversive your humor might be, there is no world in which that’s a good idea!
I don’t like this framing because it presupposes that I’m in the wrong and the crowd is right. I think inversely. The crowd over there were irrational, and I do not care that I was banned. I do not have a presupposition that I’m acting inappropriately nor do I think those people are like witnesses of a bad guest. I think a more apt analogy is talking about atheism at a christian conservative meeting. I think atheism is a rational position, and an expected negative reaction would be simply an irrational emotive response due to the failings and perverse incentives of groupthink and the crowd. That is what happened at that Lemmy group.
I can’t agree with that - the crowd was right in this case. We can stick with your example to discuss why.
If a bunch of christians hold a christian conservative meeting and want to discuss christian topics there, it’s objectively wrong to bring up atheism, unless you’re there to learn about their perspective on it. But as soon as you start to argue or defend a position, you’ve broken the rules of that social space, and excluding you is the correct move.
I made a post trying to articulte what this concept i have is. Perhaps “lust”, “fetish”, or “wordfetish” are subpar words to use. I would find it helpful if you could help describe this phenomena where people not only not care but almost unable to understand meaning of words and instead rely of peripheral cues (such as system 1 thinking) and general surface level impression of how the words sound. That’s what I mean by lust because lust is also “surface level” and related to perception “how the words sound”. – https://lemmy.world/post/35953036
Thanks for the feedback. I encourage you to exercise the creativity muscles and imagine what I could be possibly saying. I feel like we are not making a connection, like the ball is being dropped. I throw you a ball and you don’t catch it, sort of thing. I send you an idea, concept, and you miss the ball and instead say the ball looks ugly. Like ok sure the ball is ugly, or “the words have incel vibes”, but can you please just catch the ball and get what i’m saying? Thanks
Hm… I get what you mean, but that’s because I’m not interested in engaging with the discussion. Mostly I just wanted to give you actual feedback on why you got banned in that case, since you said somewhere else in this thread that you didn’t understand/didn’t get feedback on why.
I wanted to give you this feedback because I too used to struggle with being understood the wrong way. It can be difficult - in my head I know exactly what I want to communicate, yet trying to find the right words to bring it across sometimes just doesn’t work. But the big thing I’ve learned is: the person I’m talking to is not wrong for misunderstanding what I’m saying, especially not if it happens frequently with different people! Instead I have to learn how to properly communicate my thoughts, and part of that is knowing what subjects are appropriate to touch on, and which ones aren’t. And sexual topics are very often inappropriate, so touching on them (even tangentially) can throw a conversation completely off course.
It still feels inappropriate to me to bring up any sexual topics with the image you initially commented on, so I don’t want to engage in the discussion.
This was helpful. I oscilate between speaking my mind freely but also believing I ought to speak strategically. This is one of those times where I just spoke off the cuff. In real-life interactions, being mindful of taboo topics is good. I don’t hold a taboo with those words that I used in a strong manner. I don’t even experience intense emotions very frequently.
Ah, that’s probably where the disconnect is!
Especially when talking in safe spaces for women and minorities, one needs to be mindful of the history of negative experiences of those groups. Women still struggle with unwanted sexualization today, often leading to very negative interpersonal experiences and general disadvantages in their lives. So your response in that thread is being interpreted under that light.
To give a very inappropriate comparison - it’s kinda like being invited over for dinner at a friend’s house, and their whole family is jewish. During dinner they talk about family members they’ve lost in the Holocaust, and you suddenly crack Holocaust jokes. No matter how funny/clever/subversive your humor might be, there is no world in which that’s a good idea!
I don’t like this framing because it presupposes that I’m in the wrong and the crowd is right. I think inversely. The crowd over there were irrational, and I do not care that I was banned. I do not have a presupposition that I’m acting inappropriately nor do I think those people are like witnesses of a bad guest. I think a more apt analogy is talking about atheism at a christian conservative meeting. I think atheism is a rational position, and an expected negative reaction would be simply an irrational emotive response due to the failings and perverse incentives of groupthink and the crowd. That is what happened at that Lemmy group.
I can’t agree with that - the crowd was right in this case. We can stick with your example to discuss why.
If a bunch of christians hold a christian conservative meeting and want to discuss christian topics there, it’s objectively wrong to bring up atheism, unless you’re there to learn about their perspective on it. But as soon as you start to argue or defend a position, you’ve broken the rules of that social space, and excluding you is the correct move.
Yeah ok well let’s agree to disagree. I am not motivated to entertain this conversation. Good game, well played
I made a post trying to articulte what this concept i have is. Perhaps “lust”, “fetish”, or “wordfetish” are subpar words to use. I would find it helpful if you could help describe this phenomena where people not only not care but almost unable to understand meaning of words and instead rely of peripheral cues (such as system 1 thinking) and general surface level impression of how the words sound. That’s what I mean by lust because lust is also “surface level” and related to perception “how the words sound”. – https://lemmy.world/post/35953036