Athol can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the reason she asked people not to use reaction images, wasn't because of images themselves, but because she finds that type of communication demeaning. I think there's also something about reaction images in general being over the top, so they might be interpreted as worse than they are. That part is just my inference, though. I think that referencing the reaction image will have a similar effect, so if you're trying to be respectful, my guess is that responding with just references to reaction images is missing the mark. Again, please correct me if I'm wrong or missed something.
So, to add some specificity here: The problem is not "liking Jewish things". I'm not even completely sure what that means. The problem is repeating the anti-semitic canard that Jewish people control the media as fact. Even when it was pointed out to you that that idea is anti-semitic canard that has been used even very recently to justify violence against Jewish people, you doubled down on it by saying that it wasn't really that bad a thing to think. So we're at an impasse. The other problem is not thinking that AIDS is a horrible disease. It is, and far too many people have died from it. The problem is treating people who are HIV+ as sub-human or somehow fundamentally unclean, acting cruelly towards them, associating their condition with moral failings, and/or using them as some sort of weird morality story.
im sorry. like i really genuinely dont think that youre stupid as well. i didnt really have the energy to get into your post and i actively still dont, but i do want to try and make it clear that i was pretty sure what you were saying was overexaggerated and contrived to be bait, thus my very stupid response. of course i hadnt thought that perhaps a reference to a reaction image would be upsetting to you (i was wrong. im really sorry) and instead of thinking about what i was doing i just. posted that. that SAID. the "cure" for serophobia (not AIDS phobia. youre alowed to be afraid of the disease itself) isnt sleeping around with a bunch of people and cheating on your husband, miraculously. the cure is not wishing death via AIDS on other human beings and treating AIDS & HIV psitive ppl like humans, and not comparing the sexual habits of HIV positive gay men to the bonobo's sexual habits. thats horrifically dehumanizing.
I think a thing worth disambiguating is this: Not serophobia: only administering first aid to anyone if you have appropriate personal protective equipment safer sex practices running screaming from tattoo parlors that don't maintain spectacular levels of cleanliness Serophobia: blaming people with HIV or AIDS as having done it to themselves treating the disease as a moral failing talking about them as a lower class of people
I'm going to wiggle a particularly offending post now. With y'alls permission, I'm also going to replace quotes of the particularly offending parts with [reference to wiggled post] to avoid confusion.
I felt that we were finally getting somewhere and it's all gone. This is what pisses me off the most. I was being good and you remove it so people think I'm an unrepentant asshole.
if people think you're an unrepentant asshole it's because you keep unrepentantly saying assholish things it's not because a mod wiggled a post of you saying an assholish thing it's normal to have lapses in progress. it's not all entirely gone. people should be able to call you out for saying inflammatory things without being nervous that you might just decide "fuck it, I was being good and now it's all gone." why are you trying to "be good" in the first place? what's the goal? your reaction makes me curious
I'd rather the post be made available. It was really long and I was agreeing with the people I was responding to but the whole thing was written off as gaslighting.
Honestly at this point I would just leave it there, maybe edit it under a spoiler. I know I'll get confused
I think we're definitely getting somewhere, and I don't think you're an asshole, or unrepentant. It's hard work, but you're powering through it. Little steps, that's the key. Look at your post itself - it was pretty great. The mod action worried you as to how people might see you - but you kept precisely to that point, and didn't run ahead with it. That's excellent - holding a boundary, stating your issue, *and holding there* for others to respond. More of this, please :)
The only second piece of advice I'd add is hackneyed, but I think it makes sense: I think you'll do well if you try to stick to I-statements, as they're known. That is to say, try to avoid stating other people's motivations - talk about their actual words, and what you think or feel about them. So as a hypothetical example, instead of saying 'they want to make me go away', you limit that to the things you can actually know for sure: 'they said <thing>, and that makes me feel unwelcome here'. The idea being that even though their motivation may seem obvious and beyond doubt to you, it's actually really easy to misread people, especially when you have different communication styles - and not even realize you can be wrong about it. By putting a big thick wall in your speech between what you think and what they want, it makes you always stop and check, and it makes it easier to hold your boundaries, even strong ones, because they're all about you, not them. And by only making I-statements, nobody can dispute your own experience. I think this would help a lot, and reduce the conflict you experience.
Interesting. I got yelled at because I had used "I" too much and they said I was obviously self-centered.
I think I just wanna take a step back and make a thing clear: I have a lot of objections to some of Athol's behavior. But. We have that thing on signup: "There is nothing anybody can do or say or be that will make it okay to treat them like trash. This includes treating other people like trash." There are not exceptions. If you think Athol is transphobic, fine! You're allowed to think that. If you are angry and want to say that you are angry, that's okay! If you're hurt, and want to say that you're hurt, that's also okay! We do draw a line around sufficiently-inflammatory remarks, sometimes, but even if we decide such things need to go to the Pear Wiggler, that doesn't mean you're a bad person, it means that we're concerned about threads turning into garbage fires. But it's still not going to be okay to treat her like trash. It is still important that you remember that she's an actual person, who has feelings, and who experiences pain. And you might say "well, a lot of that pain is a pretty direct result of her choices", and maybe it is, but you still ought to be treating her with basic respect. For instance, the conversation about her response to the reaction image? That's the kind of thing I want to see here. That's what this place is supposed to be like. Even in the middle of an angry argument with someone that a lot of people are really upset with, people are trying hard to respect her stated boundary, because nothing anybody can do or say makes it okay to treat them like trash. And if she finds the pictures upsetting, and they make it harder for her to engage, then yes, the pictures should stop. Keep on keeping on. Thank you.
Finally. This whole thread has been about not treating me like a human being and I'm happy that something got through to you. Could some of the other suggestions I've asked for be discussed as well?
It's counter-intuitive, I know. It certainly feels self-centred at first glance, I I I, me me me. But when untangling conflict-y things, it's a fantastic tool, because it puts you slap bang in the middle of your sovereign domain where you have absolute authority to speak. People might disagree that you should feel a certain way, and possibly even call you out on it - but nobody gets to disagree that you do feel that way, or call you dishonest/etc about it. Nobody owns your thoughts, and you don't own anyone else's - good fences make good neighbors, as it were. You still get to talk about other people, you just keep it pinned to what you see from your own perspective, instead of straying into speaking for them. Anyway, keep it up :)
To clarify: Nothing "got through to me" here, this is what I've believed and how I've been acting all along. This is not new. And we are treating you like a human being. A human being who is frequently cruel to other people, in particular. You're still being cartoonishly horrible to people. Maybe try to change that, and start acknowledging anything anyone says, instead of acting like you're the victim and everyone's being unfair to you?
i've seen a ton of people treating you like a human being i've seen people treating you like a human being who is incorrect but i've seen you being treated like a human being and i've seen people with far more patience than i go even further above and beyond, despite your not listening to them
And... we're going to have to work on you listening to me. Not doing that is the biggest thing that makes me feel like trash.
people are listening to you. They don't like what you say - because it's frequently harmful and cruel - and react accordingly. That's not the same as 'not listening to you'. It's the opposite of it, in fact.
