That part makes enough sense to me on its own, but what do they mean by not caring about “fellow Muslims”, and what connection are they trying to make between those ideas? It’s clear enough that it’s some racist bullshit, but I’m trying to figure out what it’s supposed to mean to other liberals, and it still just sounds like stringing words together. Maybe I’m expecting too much from liberals but I figured there would be something specific that prompted this.
I seriously can’t understand what the quoted tweet is supposed to mean. It seems like they’re just randomly mashing ideas together? I tried to read the article, but the tweet was deleted, and the account you can see in the screenshot is a content firehose, so I couldn’t find what this is about. Are they actually trying to apply the “Trump would kill n+1 Gazans” argument as a way to shame muslims, and then pinning that on homophobia based on nothing? Even for racist scratched liberals, this seems like incoherent nonsense. Am I missing something, or are they already panicking that badly
I’m glad Mr. Sanders understands that getting on a bus is like voting. You absolutely need to get on the bus that’s doing a little less genocide. If you get turned around, you can always tell which bus that is because it’s the one with Dick Cheney on it.
If you’re trying to flip it instead of pick it up, you only have to lift half the weight, so maybe a strong one could, if the forks could handle all the weight being on the end. Sawed off forklift maybe?
If you take the test after seeing this post, that was a reaction. It’s too late for you, regardless of the result.
TRUMP kevlar ear covers now available folks, I wear them, they’re the best. People said I shouldn’t wear these, they showed me a diagram of a plane with all these red dots on it, and they told me I couldn’t put armor where the dots are, can you believe that? They said you can’t put armor on the red dots because people might get offended. Well folks I don’t care what they say I’m putting the armor where the bullets go.
Yeah, I think this is a topic that has room for and is worth a lot of discussion. With this issue, what someone means by ‘using guilt’ can be anything from explaining the consequences of someone’s actions and letting them draw their own conclusions, to ‘bringing down a mountain of Divine Shame’. And sometime people will argue those back and forth as if they’re talking about the same thing.
I wanted to defend the post as having a good point, while definitely having to be incomplete to fit into a short tumblr post. I was glad to be a part of expanding on it in this thread.
I think the emphasis on “keep it in proportion” is trying to acknowledge that there’s a deeper discussion to be had there without getting too sidetracked from the main point of the post. To get in to that discussion, I would say that shame is not a tool to be used, but effectively handling a situation where a child has caused significant harm (maybe not swearing, but something more serious) is going to involve some amount of guilt or shame.
Sometimes children misbehave because they have to, but often it’s because they don’t understand why what they did is wrong, or that there’s a better way to act. If someone can explain these things, a small, appropriate amount of guilt can make the lesson much more memorable.
This takes a lot of skill, and understanding of the situation the kid is in, how they are feeling, and how they are reacting. Many people don’t follow this, and they can cause more harm doing it badly. But trying to educate someone after they’ve done something wrong while avoiding causing them any guilt at all is not going to be very effective. And reserving shame or guilt only for people you’ve declared to be lost causes is not a healthy approach.
I think that’s my mistake. I had assumed they understood that tool was only for white people to lecture other white people into voting for genocide. I shouldn’t be surprised when some of them actually use it to feel morally superior to people who are directly affected.