Snowflake Language Police Want You To Stop Using The "C" Word

a reply to: DBCowboy

Somehow, we evolved into a society where other peoples opinions of us matter.

That is the fatal flaw in this whole argument

People do care. All people - you more than most

a reply to: Spiramirabilis

This is in reference to a physical place. An offshoot of their emotional fragility, a safe place where they can hide from all their fictional oppressors. They can have their safe spaces when whites get them too. This isn't about safe spaces as much as it is about special privilege.

I haven't seen anyone on my side of the debate in this thread demanding any type of physical safe space. It's ironic that progressives would so ignorantly and obliviously champion what is in essence mimicking equal but separate policies.

Another group of people has now made it safe to say whatever they want - however they want - whenever they want - by doing some good old fashioned whining and bullying people into a kind of submissive and defensive position. They did this together as a group - and so, this is where we are

No one made anything safe, it already was safe. A group of people simply exercised their freedom of speech.

a reply to: TheLaughingGod

This is in reference to a physical place. An offshoot of their emotional fragility, a safe place where they can hide from all their fictional oppressors. They can have their safe spaces when whites get them too. This isn't about safe spaces as much as it is about special privilege.

Why does this bother you? Interesting you should mention special privilege

I haven't seen anyone on my side of the debate in this thread demanding any type of physical safe space. It's ironic that progressives would so ignorantly and obliviously champion what is in essence mimicking equal but separate policies.

Funny that you should be up in arms about people wanting a place where they can go to discuss whatever they want to discuss - without being called on it - while openly declaring you have a side. And your side shall not be denied?

Tell me - what is it your side does want?

ETA: I knew you would stick with the literal - but your safe space is obvious. Even if it's not obvious to you

a reply to: Spiramirabilis

Try arguing for safe spaces for white people and look at the reaction you will garner. It's just another form of discrimination, as if affirmative action wasn't enough now these people want places where white people or men won't be allowed. All in the guise of social justice. You think it will stop at safe spaces? These people will keep demanding more and more privilege.

Don't be obtuse, we're talking about people siding on this issue.. people that agree with me find the idea of not using "the c word" crazy. It's a symptom of political correctness gone wild. Again, be more obtuse. We don't want anything for ourselves, we're complaining about people that want everything for themselves simply because of their "oppressed" status. Separate but equal.

Yeah, well, your asininity is obvious to me, even if it's not obvious to you.

a reply to: TheLaughingGod

Don't be obtuse

Did you read the piece linked in the OP? Here it is - in case you want to be fully informed

Someone wrote an opinion - about how we choose to use language. About how words contribute to our views of each other

It's not about safe spaces, its not even about controlling language - nobody was trying to force this on anyone. The OP is the one insisting that people who think out loud are somehow trying to control him

...people that agree with me find the idea of not using "the c word" crazy. It's a symptom of political correctness gone wild. Again, be more obtuse. We don't want anything for ourselves, we're complaining about people that want everything for themselves simply because of their "oppressed" status. Separate but equal.

Are you that afraid of what she wrote?

Who is it that's really complaining the loudest about what we're all free to talk about? Who is it that's desperately trying to make it OK to never question anything - not even language? A certain part of society is trying to create a safe space for themselves - where nothing they say is ever wrong, where nobody can have a dissenting view - where it's OK to ridicule and bully people into silence

Yeah, well, your asininity is obvious to me, even if it's not obvious to you.

Thank you - for an intelligent and polite discussion

:-)

a reply to: Spiramirabilis

She's not being a profound free thinker here, she's just jumping on the newspeak bandwagon. Let's not say this because it might offend people, let's not say that, let's not use this word.. it's all about people being offended, it's all about their fragility and their thin skin, and guess what offends these people? People that don't agree with their ideology. And guess what the latest crop wants to do about it? That's right, limit free speech, as if they weren't already the way they attack people that want to speak at their universities.

If you want to pretend that this idiot is some kind of thought provoking intellectual then go ahead. But in reality she's just a product of her Marxist education, utterly predictable and trite. A drone, not a free thinker.

a reply to: TheLaughingGod

So she's not entitled to question a word?

Does this idea threaten you in any way? Who is the real snowflake here?

What is your solution to this problem?

a reply to: Spiramirabilis

Of course she can, but we're entitled to point out to her how stupid it is.

This situation specifically doesn't, but the ideology behind it is destructive and dangerous enough.

There is no problem, and that's the problem.. these people keep inventing problems to support their narrative of oppression. There's oppression alright, but it's not coming from the white man and he receives no privilege because of it. Minority groups aren't specifically targeted, we all are. The system of the global elite doesn't play favourites, we're all chattel in their eyes.

They're talking about completely trivial or even made up issues while the oligarchy advances their agenda.

a reply to: TheLaughingGod

...these people keep inventing problems to support their narrative of oppression. There's oppression alright, but it's not coming from the white man and he receives no privilege because of it. Minority groups aren't specifically targeted, we all are. The system of the global elite doesn't play favourites, we're all chattel in their eyes.

She just doesn't think crazy is a nice word. I don't think she held a gun to anybody's head...

But - if you want to play the chattel card, you go right ahead snowflake

:-)

Of course she can, but we're entitled to point out to her how stupid it is.

That is the name of this game. Pointing out how stupid we all are. Simple

a reply to: TheLaughingGod

She's not being a profound free thinker here

I agree but that's an opinion, like her blog post... opinion. She gets to have it as we get to have ours.

she's just jumping on the newspeak bandwagon.

Like SJW, PC, Libtard and trigger?

and guess what offends these people? People that don't agree with their ideology.

Like her ideology offends you.

a reply to: Winstonian

you completely missed her point. Was that on purpose ?

a reply to: syrinx high priest

Tell me more. Did I miss something? The basic premise of her article is that using the term "crazy" is offensive, and that people need to stop using it.

a reply to: Winstonian

yes, you missed 99% of it.

the basic premise of this obscure bloggers (who obviously has not authority to tell anyone what to say ) article is that the term crazy trivializes mental illness and that it contributes to a negative stigma and that it would be better to use the word that is more accurate

she is suggesting replacing crazy with awful ridiculous or ignorant or whatever term is more accurate

you pushed the offensive narrative

why ?

"Snowflake" being defined as someone who doesn't like the words that someone else chooses (or doesn't choose) to use.

A="wrong words used"

B="wrong words used"

A=B

a reply to: Kali74

It doesn't offend me. There's a difference between being offended and having an issue with the logic or the consistency of an idea. The former is often an emotional knee-jerk reaction. I guess you could say it offends me in a certain sense, but not in the overly emotional way of young liberals, I'm not out there petitioning to limit free speech.

a reply to: Spiramirabilis

No, but her friends want to limit free speech.

It's true though, democracy is a dog and pony show and this is a fact.

By the way.. your idea of a safe space is certainly liberal, if we were to go by your definition we could apply it to so many groups it loses all meaning. Besides, none of these "groups" bans the presence of people that aren't members of their particular group.

a reply to: TheLaughingGod

...if we were to go by your definition we could apply it to so many groups it loses all meaning.

Duh

:-)

a reply to: Spiramirabilis

Good, you agree that you are wrong then.

a reply to: TheLaughingGod

Good, you agree that you are wrong then.

No. I'm just pointing out that which you keep missing

:-)

I'll be damned if these SJW's start pushing this victim narrative on mentally ill people now too.

This is coming from someone that isn't even mentally ill, is she really "suffering" from ADHD? Sounds like she just wanted to join the victim club.

"Ableist", "lookist".. yeah, this isn't a slippery slope or anything. If they're really going to be consequential about this they'll have to painstakingly analyse people's lives and tally some kind of score. Good luck trying to fit luck into that equation.

a reply to: Spiramirabilis

Not missing anything, but thanks for playing. Your point has been invalidated.