First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  Next  Last
All Inclusive semi-meta discussion thread in an attempt to have safer discussion of Nerdom
5318 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M
Offline
Posted 18 days ago
"I feel like there aren't a lot of spaces where anime-lovers that come from marginalized groups can feel safe. This site is very white male focused and not because people of color or women don't watch anime, but because just like everything else white men are the focus everywhere.

I want this thread to be a safe space, and allies are welcome. I've made this forum, not as a way to be divisive, but to simply give opportunities for minorities to talk freely about their fears and hopes without having to worry about being branded as whiny or militant which is something that often happens when non-allies and/or members of the majority are present in discussions such as these.

If you want the opportunity to vent, share, or simply to connect with others like you without judgment or fear getting in the way, come here. "


The above is an excerpt by user BellaDonna girl in another thread that most of us have probably seen. The subject of said thread was to "facilitate discussion" as long as you did not have any converse about discussing the thread (metacommentary) or question the ethics of the thread.

The post is obviously less than welcoming to "non-allies or the majority" (a.k.a. white people as a whole, and minorities who didn't agree) which is a little ironic because the user also claims they were attempting to refrain from being "divisive", I digress though.

The point of this thread is to "facilitate conversations AND discuss the meta conversations involved with the above excerpt as well as it's applications to crunchyroll, for example:

Is a safe space a necessary thing on crunchyroll or anywhere for that matter?

What exactly does a safe space mean?

Are safe spaces inherently racist for assuming minorities need a place to be coddle/treated gently when "non allies" and the "majority" do not?

The above excerpt pretty blatantly discourages white males from participation, is discouraging races/genders from engaging allowed now? If so how do you feel about it?

If it is not, why was the above excerpt allowed to remain active? And how do you feel about it?

Because this thread functions in a similar capactiy (facilitating conversation) here are a few more subjects I am interested in discussing if anyone else is:

Is there a political bias from the moderators on crunchyroll?

If not why were select "meta" comments deleted despite many having a respectful and peaceful tone as well as equal (if not more) relevance to OP's topic than some that still remain up.

How does the political bias affect your experience and are you willing to continue despite it?

Why are the mods so slow and preferential on elaborating/responding to topics. (from personal experience I have had 2 occasions where a mod said they would PM me or get back to me with an answer to a question but did not or replied to separate later questions without ever addressing my questions)

and because this thread also "facilitates conversation":


What is your favorite anime? How are you feeling today? How are you getting by in these hard times?

Side note: If you are from an indigenous Eskimo tribe, I would ask that you please do not participate. I do not have anything against you in any way, but we are allowed to discourage certain races from conversing now and I wanted to give it a shot.
Banned
6934 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
In a basket of de...
Offline
Posted 18 days ago
In before the lock!
5318 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M
Offline
Posted 18 days ago

Xxanthar wrote:

In before the lock!


I can see why it would be locked, but logically, why would it be locked?

The topic "facilitates conversation" in a broader (yet narrow enough to have a topic) sense.

It does not include any personal attacks on any users.

There are no harmful or inappropriate links.

And unlike the original thread, it doesn't make any silly accusations or discourage any demographic (except for those pesky indigenous Eskimos) from giving their input.

But if the mods can't separate their personal opinion from clear site rules that is fine too, I am done with it anyways. Will very likely be cancelling my subscription before I go to sleep tonight.
Banned
6934 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
In a basket of de...
Offline
Posted 18 days ago

Punk_Mela wrote:


Xxanthar wrote:

In before the lock!


I can see why it would be locked, but logically, why would it be locked?

The topic "facilitates conversation" in a broader (yet narrow enough to have a topic) sense.

It does not include any personal attacks on any users.

There are no harmful or inappropriate links.

And unlike the original thread, it doesn't make any silly accusations or discourage any demographic (except for those pesky indigenous Eskimos) from giving their input.

But if the mods can't separate their personal opinion from clear site rules that is fine too, I am done with it anyways. Will very likely be cancelling my subscription before I go to sleep tonight.


Several other alternate "safe space" threads have met the same fate.
9752 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / F / Johnstown, PA, USA
Online
Posted 18 days ago
Well, this will be interesting. I have my suspicions regarding the fate of this thread, and they're likely the same thoughts you have.
1330 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / F / North
Offline
Posted 18 days ago




5318 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M
Offline
Posted 18 days ago

starshots wrote:







There were a lot of questions.

But if you were looking for a reply, there are no stupid questions. Only stupid answers... And memes.

But really the point was more or less to point out the hypocrisy of the mods before I leave... that and to "facilitate discussion" about what is actually a stupid thread that was allowed to remain because of the moderators personal beliefs.
69881 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / Oklahoma
Offline
Posted 18 days ago , edited 17 days ago
I'm not sure how someone feels "unsafe" on an internet forum of all places. It sounds like a shallow attempt (per the norm) to exclude people based on identity traits and not their character.

It's disingenuous and strikes me as openly hostile. If you wouldn't accept a white's only lounge you shouldn't accept the inverse. I think both are terrible ideas, and it's unfortunate that I have to go back and edit this because someone will actually think I condone such a thing - I condone neither.

The fall back argument for this will be "privilege" accusations for which they will lecture you on with supposed evidence they've been taught in various social "science" classes, editorials, and the like.

What they forget is that social sciences is not a science (it's humanities) and is open to a vast range of interpretation - many of which are politically loaded. As such it should be no shock when the concept of privilege gets questioned and outright disregarded when critically examined. Equally, many a publishing in the social "sciences" are entertaining in how bad they are.

But when pressed with this you will typically be accused of being ignorant for not accepting their premise as fact. It's really no different than a man and their holy book saying the evidence is presented inside.

tldr; Idealogues are bad and should feel bad.
Emtro 
1541 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 18 days ago
What is your favorite anime?
Naruto

How are you feeling today?
Oppressed

How are you getting by in these hard times?
Staying inside as much as possible while George Soros is paying leftwing nuts to destroy our cities.
5318 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M
Offline
Posted 18 days ago , edited 18 days ago

zinjashike wrote:

I'm not sure how someone feels "unsafe" on an internet forum of all places. It sounds like a shallow attempt (per the norm) to exclude people based on identity traits and not their character.

It's disingenuous and strikes me as openly hostile. If you wouldn't accept a white's only lounge you shouldn't accept the inverse.

The fall back argument for this will be "privilege" accusations for which they will lecture you on with supposed evidence they've been taught in various social "science" classes, editorials, and the like.

What they forget is that social sciences is not a science (it's humanities) and is open to a vast range of interpretation - many of which are politically loaded. As such it should be no shock when the concept of privilege gets questioned and outright disregarded when critically examined. Equally, many a publishing in the social "sciences" are entertaining in how bad they are.

But when pressed with this you will typically be accused of being ignorant for not accepting their premise as fact. It's really no different than a man and their holy book saying the evidence is presented inside.

tldr; Idealogues are bad and should feel bad.


On that topic, it has always amused me the lack of scientific evidence people are able to produce when asked to confirm things like "privilege", it's doubly silly when you now bring that in to the context of the United States which is some 3500 miles long, if you think the guy in Seattle lives in a culture even remotely similar to the guy living in the Oklahoma pan handle, much less the girl living in Norfolk, you are in for a shocker. You can't apply whatever "privileges" or "marginalizations" to all these completely different groups. It's absurd, for the most part I think safe spaces are a ridiculous notion, especially when applied to an online community. Block a user or turn it off, problem solved.
11 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 18 days ago , edited 17 days ago
Safe spaces are necessary because when conversation is met with voluminous dissent by a vast majority and not allowed to progress in any new way publicly, the viewpoints therein are ever more ignored.

Safe spaces are needed not because they need "coddling," but because they need somewhere to relax that doesn't put them on-edge because someone decides to be overly vulgar, intentionally antagonizing (as yourself), or directly threatening. Empathy 101: Not everyone has the same views of the world as you, nor do they perceive and react to stimuli the same way. So your "get over it" advice in the other thread does not work.
http://greatergood.berkeley.edu/topic/empathy/definition

Yours is a majority viewpoint, unfortunately, so asking you to be courteous and respect the intent of a thread is in no way silencing your opinion. We hear it loud and clear. EVERYWHERE. How does being treated as an other make you feel? Deserted? Betrayed? Angry? Annoyed? Now take that feeling, apply an exponential growth to it over a timespan of years, and see what you're left with. Compare that to the posts you're insistent upon tracking down and replying to.


A half century after the United States was established, Alexis de Tocqueville saw the majority's tyranny over political and social minorities as "a constant threat" to American democracy in his pre–Civil War travels. While visiting the state of Pennsylvania, when he asked why no free blacks had come to vote in a local election he was observing, he was told that "while free blacks had the legal right to vote, they feared the consequences of exercising it." Thus, he wrote, "the majority not only makes the laws, but can break them as well."



The British political philosopher John Stuart Mill took [Individual Rights vs. Majority Tyranny] further. In his essay On Liberty he wrote, "The only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community against his will is to prevent harm to others." Mill's "no harm principle" aims to prevent government from becoming a vehicle for the "tyranny of the majority," which he viewed as not just a political but also a social tyranny that stifled minority voices and imposed a regimentation of thought and values.

http://democracyweb.org/node/36

Although those are political quotes, I feel they are appropriate for moderated social settings as well.

Remember, it takes more strength and stamina to help those weaker or more disadvantaged than you than it does to fight them.

Please continue to grow, learn, love,
and most importantly...
Watch some anime.
22653 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 18 days ago , edited 17 days ago
Well, it's good to see someone took a mature step in the right direction by attempting to move the discussion from the other thread. Hard to say whether others will follow suit though.

'Safe spaces' made by people to avoid hostile environments are perfectly normal. I personally prefer my spaces in solitude, but some prefer to be surrounded by the like minded. I would say my therapy appointments take place in what is reminiscent of a 'safe space'--as therapists are often trained to create that environment. At first, my boyfriend actually felt going to therapy was excluding him. He was very confused why I would need a therapist to confide in instead of him. However, my personal issues were getting offloaded on him when they became too overwhelming. I needed the advice of someone who is aware of my set of challenges to help me...well, help myself.

I do not delude myself that making that space for myself was slightly divisive at the time--but I had weighed the benefit to be worth its cost. Both of us are enjoying a less strenuous and healthier relationship.

I do not find the concept today of 'safe spaces' to be particularly with that goal in mind. 'Safe spaces' that are created with an 'us vs them' mentality originate from tribalism roots in human nature, rather than honestly seeking people of similar experiences. If it were genuine, one would announce such a place as welcome to people who have experienced isolation, condemnation, loss, unfair treatment etc. rather than simply using lazy, divisive and tactless language to express it as a place where only certain people's experiences are legitimate or worthwhile and the rest are merely appointed to supporting roles.

The sooner people can learn to understand the hardships and experiences we share in common, the easier it will be for everyone to come together and create those healthy environments.

Keep in mind, people don't pick out friends and confide in others who they feel uncomfortable with. That doesn't mean people can't pick up bad advice, shitty behavior, and a poor attitude from their chosen circles. That also doesn't mean they can't pick up good behaviors or attitudes as well.

The burden of making those 'safe spaces' is not upon others (a university classroom is not intended to be 'safe space' from controversial ideas, for example)--nor should people go out of their way to inflict intentional harm and ridicule against other people attempting to mind their own business (one would think that be obvious, but it isn't).

I'm certain many here are thinking, but the internet is no place for a safe space--and yet many of you have facebook friends you picked out, sites you visit because you enjoy them, discord/skype groups you feel comfortable with--perhaps people you block or dismiss because you deemed them toxic to life.

People aren't going to make good decisions, choose the right friends, or the right environments--but why the fuck should I care what people choose to do with themselves as long as it doesn't involve me? Should I give a fuck about people that circle jerk each other off? Should I give a fuck for the people that shelter their mind from ideas different from their own?

It's not my intelligence being diminished. Do what you want, and try to do it responsibly. I am free to judge you from a distance.

5318 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M
Offline
Posted 18 days ago

AirAKose wrote:

Safe spaces are necessary because when conversation is met with voluminous dissent by a vast majority and not allowed to progress in any new way publicly, the viewpoints therein are ever more ignored.

Safe spaces are needed not because they need "coddling," but because they need somewhere to relax that doesn't put them on-edge because someone decides to be overly vulgar, intentionally antagonizing (as yourself), or directly threatening. Empathy 101: Not everyone has the same views of the world as you, nor do they perceive and react to stimuli the same way. So your "get over it" advice in the other thread does not work.
http://greatergood.berkeley.edu/topic/empathy/definition

Yours is a majority viewpoint, unfortunately, so asking you to be courteous and respect the intent of a thread is in no way silencing your opinion. We hear it loud and clear. EVERYWHERE. How does being treated as an other make you feel? Deserted? Betrayed? Angry? Annoyed? Now take that feeling, apply an exponential growth to it over a timespan of years, and see what you're left with. Compare that to the posts you're insistent upon tracking down and replying to.


A half century after the United States was established, Alexis de Tocqueville saw the majority's tyranny over political and social minorities as "a constant threat" to American democracy in his pre–Civil War travels. While visiting the state of Pennsylvania, when he asked why no free blacks had come to vote in a local election he was observing, he was told that "while free blacks had the legal right to vote, they feared the consequences of exercising it." Thus, he wrote, "the majority not only makes the laws, but can break them as well."



The British political philosopher John Stuart Mill took [Individual Rights vs. Majority Tyranny] further. In his essay On Liberty he wrote, "The only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community against his will is to prevent harm to others." Mill's "no harm principle" aims to prevent government from becoming a vehicle for the "tyranny of the majority," which he viewed as not just a political but also a social tyranny that stifled minority voices and imposed a regimentation of thought and values.

http://democracyweb.org/node/36

Although those are political quotes, I feel they are appropriate for moderated social settings as well.

Remember, it takes more strength and stamina to help those weaker or more disadvantaged than you than it does to fight them.

Please continue to grow, learn, love,
and most importantly...
Watch some anime.


I am glad you mentioned a lot of this stuff. But most importantly the over arcing concepts. I think it equates well to my problems with safe spaces. You are making a lot of wild accusations and assumptions as to my purpose of opening this conversation by calling me "intentionally antagonistic", yet you ignore the obvious fact that this is not my original post, this thread is the result of a different but respectful opinion being silenced multiple times, and you assume they were irrelevant or rude. Not even the mod who deleted my original posts could truthfully claim they were antagonizing or rude.

I dislike safe spaces because they don't work to open understanding and grow intellectually, they are echo chambers which ironically silence opinions or concept that are different or do not align with their values. How can you possibly grow or overcome an obstacle if you actively shun anything related to it (assuming different opinions are indeed obstacles) and if you are not growing and bettering yourself you are in all likelihood involved in some form of coddling.

And the purpose of this thread may antagonize you (in which case just don't click on it) but antagonizing you is not it's purpose. The purpose is to point out the hypocrisy of moderation on crunchyroll. The OP of the excerpt in my first post is clearly in violation of crunchyroll rules, yet it is those who pointed this out who were silenced or on the receiving end of moderation. The purpose is also to facilitate conversation (just like the last one) making clear that the inquiries as to the ethics of the topic were not derailment and welcome in this thread, seeing how many people brought up concerns over them but were silenced depending (apparently) on which side of the debate they agreed with.

5318 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M
Offline
Posted 18 days ago

Emtro wrote:

What is your favorite anime?
Naruto

How are you feeling today?
Oppressed

How are you getting by in these hard times?
Staying inside as much as possible while George Soros is paying leftwing nuts to destroy our cities.


I like Naruto but rarely see it quoted as a favorite, why do you like it?

Why are you feeling oppressed?

And take heart, George Soros is paying left wing nuts to destroy cities, but it is mostly left wing nut cities they are destroying.
Emtro 
1541 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 18 days ago

Punk_Mela wrote:


Emtro wrote:

What is your favorite anime?
Naruto

How are you feeling today?
Oppressed

How are you getting by in these hard times?
Staying inside as much as possible while George Soros is paying leftwing nuts to destroy our cities.


I like Naruto but rarely see it quoted as a favorite, why do you like it?

Why are you feeling oppressed?

And take heart, George Soros is paying left wing nuts to destroy cities, but it is mostly left wing nut cities they are destroying.


Naruto, if you watch it from the start, is a very inspirational story about relating to your fellow man. It has all the things the greatest anime have, tear-jerkers, comedy, magic, fight scenes, and it even has competitions like sports anime. It has everything and is all centered around a hero who overcame his own incredible internal struggles to still be the "good guy". Oh, and it doesn't skirt around topics with PC crap.

How can you not feel oppressed when your existence is being attacked from all sides at all times?

That was true for a while but alas the left-wing nuts in Dallas and Austin are causing havoc and they haven't been shot. That makes me sad, they should be shot... Just because they dominated the local governments doesn't mean they should be allowed to wreak havoc in our business centers.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.