when is offense justified?: analyzing norms of respect & offensive content
Вставка
- Опубліковано 14 тра 2024
- when does offense become harmful? how can we tell who is justified in feeling offended? the answer can often be unclear. this video focuses mostly on identity-related offenses and discusses Benjamin Eidelson's concept of the etiquette of equality.
✧･ﾟ: ✧･ﾟ: i'd love to hear what you all have to say *:･ﾟ✧*:･ﾟ✧
TIMESTAMPS:
00:00 Lawrence v. Texas
3:21 case #1: facebook has consequences
5:55 harm vs. offense
8:00 case #2: politicians are redditors
11:35 etiquette
15:14 etiquette of equality
16:13 case #3: more than just clothes
18:30 when offense is unjustified (britta & moon boots)
19:12 revisiting Lawrence v. Texas
20:17 respect inflation
24:36 how to proceed?
26:04 biphobia discourse on twitter
28:44 building solidarity
31:42 systemic injustices
EDITOR:
youtube: @pishifat and twitter: / pishifat
★・・・・・★・・・・・★
socials:
,, instagram: @olisunvia
,, tiktok: @olisunvia (never active, just for your interest)
,, spotify: liv sun
FOR BUSINESS INQUIRIES:
olisunvia@gmail.com
★・・・・・★・・・・・★
SOURCES:
Eidelson, Benjamin. "The Etiquette of Equality." 2023. doi-org.myaccess.library.utor....
Mason, Rowena., Weaver, Matthew., & Dyer, Henry. "Biggest Tory donor said looking at Diane Abbott makes you ‘want to hate all black women’." 2024. www.theguardian.com/politics/...
Rustin, Susanna. "Is it right to jail someone for being offensive on Facebook or Twitter?" 2014. www.theguardian.com/law/2014/...
Young, James O. "Profound Offence and Cultural Appropriation." 2008. doi-org./10.1002/9780470694190.ch5.
MUSIC:
Yury Vesnyak - Jazz Waltz 'Charm'
Gennady Lukinykh - Romance
Chopin - Nocturne Op.48 No.1 in C Minor
Shibayan - meu querido
Hamu - Ryuusei o kugutte
onoken - Izayoi INST
Milan Dvořák - Jazz Piano Etude 6
tags: offense, offended, getting offended, political correctness, PC, free speech, freedom of speech, online language, facebook, twitter, tweet, tiktok, internet discourse, social media, community britta, reddit edgelords, dark humor, offensive humor, triggered, etiquette of equality, systemic injustice, politics, cultural appropriation, qipao, cheongsam, aliyahsinterlude moon boots, biphobia, controversial, sjw, internet analysis, video essay, analysis video, philosophy, chronically online, shanspeare, jordan theresa, vox, vice news, cj the x, tiffany ferg, alice cappelle, contrapoints, philosophy tube, madisyn brown, chad chad, sisyphus 55, tara mooknee,
A key fact to consider in any sexual interaction when determining legality is consent. Adults who are gay can consent to sex, however non-human animals and children are considered to not be able to consent because of a lack of understanding and the power disparity between the participating members. This is important for people to understand, since some people seem to truly think pedophilia is simply subjectively bad based on baseless societal norms.
What about polygamy and incest marriages then?
EXACTLY
What does power disparity mean here?
@@someone-jl4sjAdults can consent to a polygamist marriage. Incest between adults is still technically consensual, yes it’s taboo and they shouldn’t have kids, but people will do that regardless of if they have the ability to marry, so yeah it should be legal as well.
@@buffpathfinder3607 That's my position as well (not on polygamy tho) but I don't think that this is going to convince anyone who believes it to be wrong lol.
Btw there are some good arguments against polygamy, that shows that polygamy could be bad for society. I'll suggest you to look at that.
"Telling people to k!ll themselves is just a casual sunday morning activity on twitter" 😭😭
then the 'yipee!' sound effect at the end of that section ahhahahaha
They should just make an emoji and move on 😂
That would change real quickly if we passed a law requiring mandatory jail time for violent threats. In most cases, I think we need to decriminalize, but this is the exception.
@@thrawncaedusl717 snowflake
that's really depressing how common it is to see that online
i watch your videos at 1x speed on my main monitor. this is the highest honour i can award you
i don’t deserve this
@@oliSUNviaNO YOU DO, THIS VIDEO WAS SOO INTERESTING AND REALLY TALKS ABOUT MODERN SOCIETY
THE TERIS GUY????
@@Yuio___ back to back x3 t spin double
i do 4x speed with my phone turned off
21:19 I think a good example of etiquette of equality is how in some places of the world, the word "negro" is seen as offensive, while in others, black is the offensive term, and vice-versa. Here in Brazil, the norm is to say negro, as its perceived by the majority as the "respectable" manner, all the while, there are racial groups who claim the complete opposite, and link the origin of the word negro to "dirty", while black (or preto, in portuguese), as beign associated with good things, like black coffe, or black Friday.
edit: Finished watching the video now, you've talked about it already lol, never misses huh
I'm in Canada and native people tell me much the same thing. They'll call themselves Indian, indigenous, native, or Cree/Blackfoot/their tribe. But it's all the same. That said, there is still a big difference from those words and calling them something historically derogatory like redskin, wagon-burner, or savage. Those words are inherently offensive in intention by the speaker and reception.
I think it's important to keep cultural differences in mind, things like etiquette or gestures can be harmless in one country but be offensive in others the same goes for words especially if it's a different language. 'Negro' may refer to race in English but may be simply an adjective in other languages e.g Spanish
oliSUNvia is friends with Dan schneider btw
In Puerto Rico we called those with darker skins un negro, it means black, like calling an African American black, but when I arrived here in the US mainland I had to switch from saying that to saying Moreno, which is another way of calling people of darker skin apparently? Definitely had to switch my language as to not to offense
The thing really is just cultural differences. In America people got upset with a latin performer for calling herself colored instead of black but in her country they use the word colored and not black... It's all silly goofy imo.
We should only really be offended if people are like in harm lol
But even with black Americans we have the same talk if we prefer African American or black and personally i find the term African American is very specific and doesn't give room for the many different black identities in america it's a whole silly thing.
Personally I try not to offend people intentionally, but I also don't think you can or should always avoid offending others. People will always have different views and opinions, so the best we can do is just try to be respectful and understanding.
Why not let them be offended 😔
oliSUNvia is friends with Dan schneider btw
@@ville__ source?
And what when your lesser good foot gets put forward? Bad day, hangry, not enough R&O?
WE all get angry, emotional and say things we might regret, even intentionally said in these moments.
Good communication is a give and take with feedbacks.
No one is perfect, making mistakes should not be the end of the world.
My shit (& piss [urine, pardon my French] can smell, that's part of life - unintentional and intentional. [Asparagus not Asperger]
But we can talk about it's aroma's and how it made you feel - if that makes you feel better, seen and heard.
And I will try not to shit all over the place with verbal diarrhea.
This type of wording could be found offensive, but it is truthfull and crudely poetic. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, its my art.
And how great thou art.
It is not up to me to decide what others could find offensive, just to express my self; thoughts, feelings, experiences.
And if it is taken as offensive that is on that person to communicate back about.
@@ville__ looked at your channel. your pathetic, i hope you get better.
I wrote a paper on this topic back in my freshman year of college, but basically I said that though it is 100% okay to feel/be offended by things that happen in life, it also needs to be understood that some people will not feel the same about what offended you, regardless of their capability of offering empathy, I argued that its on a spectrum.
But why?
What is the person said something racist that offended that other person, but the person who said it doesn’t understand why it’s offensive.
So if that person feelings valid???!!! Even tho Person A is the one who said the offensive thing to person B
@@lxlx7941 It's obviously not valid in a moral standards since Person B can be affected by Person A's offensive opinion, it's more due to the person A's ignorance on the topic and the lack of understanding of the concept rather than the person's feeling. In that scenario, it's mostly like that person B would use logic to educate Person A until they understand.
what about the people who say they shouldn't have to educate someone on something that they had called out for being offensive? @@twstedcre
"It's on a spectrum" is basically a way to say "Well idk, it's complicated"
@@oceanbach7188 The whole idea of "I don't need to educate you" is a way to deflect the fact that people don't know everything. Sure, you don't need to educate everyone on everything, and you might not want to, but people don't change if they don't know how. If you decide not to educate someone (because they're being dense, you don't feel knowledgable enough, or any other reason) then you can take refuge in ignoring them, which is okay, but saying that you don't need to educate them does give you a sense of moral superiority before you go ahead and ignore them.
Basically, if you don't educate people on why you feel offended (or just explain it) people won't know why you're offended. Educating will not make everyone understand and stop offending you, but it will give them a peek into how you feel and it'll be easier for them to feel empathy, and some may even start taking your side.
One of the problems with the etiquette of equlity is that not everyone is equally aware of encoded signals of offence. IT's one thing to expect someone who is aware of these rules to follow them, but I don't think it's necessarily fair to blame someone who isn't aware of a rule for not following it.
I know that in most legal contexts, ignorance is not a valid defense, but there is a large gulf between what is legal and what is ethical.
As a person with autism I wish more people talked about that, I've been socially punished so much in my life for not knowing about social rules and unspoken agreements and cues. People just assume that I'm being deliberately malicious and feel justified in absolutely demolishing me. I'm sure more autistic folks understand this...
One question I have is, what if I don't want to follow one specific groups etiquette of equality? And would rather follow my own? E.g. i am African and have a certain etiquette and don't want to follow the westerns etiquette? (just an example don't hyper fixate on it)
I think the natural result is that I cannot be part of that community, unless they change their views to be compatible with mine
@@misterwachulochulo5262 We judge people and expect them to act within the boundries of "norms" we are taught from our birth, that is why people react harshly to missing social cues and similar things. Very few will expect to deal with a person with autism, without prior knowledge, on a daily basis and adjust their behaviours accordingly, you are being treated like everyone else, from my experience (a very small ammount) autism is not something you can see at a glance, so if there is no prior knowledge about your condition how are people to know that you are not just being rude?
Unfortunately there is no good way out of this situation, and you'll most likely suffer much more when interacting with people who don't know, since you will either be treated as every other person and held to the same standards, or have to signal somehow about your condition, best in no uncertain terms and hope that people will understand, but it will still be most likely humiliating for you.
@@Clb9000 Well... yes, kind of... this is generally how societies are created and why we have different nations and cultures, people who have similar ideas and world views group together to defend those ideas and worldviews.
This is also why most cultural tensions arise, for example the whole situation in western europe, imigration and rise of nationalism, imigrants group together and want to have their own culture with social and cultural norms, but those norms are often in conflict with what is understood as a social and cultural norms by the original people of the region plus there is a feeling of invasion of foreign (most often described as barbaric) culture, "they come to our country, our home and want to change our culture?". The forced diversity policies only heat up the discussion since it's not felt as "give them a chance" but as "they invade us and take away everything we build".
Cultures can coexist, and have coexisted for thousands of years, but they never comingled to the extent and with a speed as it is now, look at china, they have diverse cultures in one giant totalitarian empire, yet they do not have artificial ghettos, the cultures are in a gradient smoothly changing from one to another in very small steps, since the mixing happened over many generations.
So in short, if you want to live in a different culture than your own (even in a broad spectrum like african or european), you either have to change your views to the culture that you want to join, or at least adapt to living in a said set of rules (many asian imigrants do that, they live in small tightly knited groups but try to raise their kids in dual culture, so their grandkids can fully fit in a society they joined), or be ostricised from the said culture and live there while not fitting in and possibly breaking some laws. The situation is no different than when european empieres invaded Africa and colonised it while forcing their own culture there, and people will fight against such an "invasion", and there is no "it's only right that it happens the other way now", two wrongs don't make right.
@@84elmer This is interesting. I am reminded of how it is very common for some groups to signal their identities now. Like how many lgbt folks will wear pins, etc of their respective identity flag, or will have name tags or pins with their pronouns.
Maybe one approach to understanding which culture or group one is in, is with obvious signals?
Since etiquette of equality is partly based on which discourses one is involved in, and which group one is presently surrounded by, then it might be beneficial to signal one's identities (and thus one's etiquette values) to all around you. In which case, there would no longer be a benefit of doubt from ignorance and harmful attacks due to ignorance, as one could easily look into and understand which signals are represented.
Of course, this idea has many flaws:
1. It doesnt address changing social norms which can be hard to track.
2. Signifying one's identity relations could potentially attract unwanted attention
3. Putting oneself into a box could be seen as unsavory to many folks (one argument is that pronoun pins has the potential to alienate agender folks)
4. The social implications of one signal can be interpreted differently in distinct social groups (like the american flag example), which would necessitate increasing amounts of specification in a signifier; therefore, adding to the level of complexity of this signifier culture.
5. it would be easier for others to try to pander to a specific person/persons by reading their signifiers
6. people might easier form negative connotations with specific groups by the actions of one individual because their obvious signifiers will be readily available to everyone
7. one could fake being a part of a group by simply wearing a signifier
8. some identities are private and one may not be comfortable with everyone outside of their close-knit communities to know (like in the case where one isnt out, or fears being outed)
9. one could abuse a signifier to do something untoward
10. and i'm sure there're others.
tl;dr, maybe we could all wear pins signifying the respective identities/values that we want known?
16:12
As a Chinese American myself, I never really felt offended by other people (or rather white Americans) wearing traditional Chinese clothing. But, this is not really to say that other people can't feel offended about this but rather its an argument for a generational difference (in specifically asians but also in general) to this subject. While you grew up being embarrassed about your culture, I grew up being proud and never really embarrassed about my culture. I ate Chinese lunch every day through 12th grade without a hitch. The more complexion related (squinty eyes) comments never really mattered to me either because at the end of the day I never was treated as lesser. To me, it was taken to the same offense as when other people joke about short people.
During the first grade, I remember being excited about dawning silk Chinese traditional clothing to go to school, and my mom gave presentation on Chinese culture. Most if not everyone there thought it was either cool or at the very least sort of interesting. So my default perspective was never to see it as white people "colonizing" the Asian aesthetic.
More broadly, most people today are exposed to more Asians in media. Kpop and anime are basically mainstream, and therefore I live in a time where this problem holds less power.
All of these examples are really to show I and many younger Asians don't really feel this problem. Such differences shouldn't really invalidate the experiences of those who are older than me, but it does provide a confusing delemna to those who are not Asian: is it offensive or not.
A second, more important point is that a lot of these culture appropriation examples hinge on clothing, or whatever item being part of culture, which is true. But to what extent is clothing or items just another part of "an aesthetic" (which I think is possibly an argument you covered in your Asian self-fetishization video). So to what extend does the appreciation of culture does someone need to have to use an item/ wearing a piece of clothing beyond "it seems cool"?
anyways this is an awfully lengthy comment for just a subpoint you are trying to make. But yeah
My favorite Disney princess is even Chinese and we were costumes in 3rd grade when we're told to roleplay Disney movies and me and my mom had squinty eyes too
As a non-American (Indian myself), I find the argument against "just for aesthetics" to be weak, particularly when considering the pervasive influence of Western culture worldwide. It seems that non-Western cultures often take a backseat, with little offense taken when Asians enjoy Western stuff like suits or jeans casually(for obvious reasons) but, when it comes to other cultures, there's a tendency to politicise and magnify their presence, hindering their integration into other dominated spaces. She was correct about the desperation of people from other nations to see their culture recognised and integrated, but she missed the point that it's not just about seeking validation from the white majority. It's also about gaining acknowledgment and representation in a world heavily influenced by American and Anglo cultures. The idea that this dominant culture recognizing and integrating our own validates our existence is crucial to many people because they see it as a sign that our culture just doesn't exist in the vacuum of our group, but it also leaks out and can or does have influence.
@@observer5615 I think that this is a great point. Forgive me if I misunderstand your point, but I think we agree on the fact that less offense should be taken to other cultures incorporating our cultures even if it is without said cultural context. I'm guessing you would support things like the Japanese and Korean models where they have successfully exported things like their food, music, and fashion while our countries (China and India) tend to be lacking in that sort of cultural soft power department.
@@derekwang2215 yep that is my point even with the flawed way Japanese and Korean soft power has integrated in America has given them some form of nuance to work with while Indian and Chinese counterparts has to deal with western race and ethnic relations from the scratch and also we do see there's much more appreciation and celebration of those culture from white Americans that lacks quite a lot with other ethnicities and when it comes down to actual nationals it kinda just becomes exhausting and boring to do this basics form of cultural integration to westerners and there's some form of envy here too like they(Korean and Japanese) never get framed in this wierd narrative that you see China and India gets which just comes from a gross lack of any kinda of positive representation
@@observer5615 wait lowkey Olivia's east asian self-fetishization video kinda touches on this a lil. I think in China's specific case is that their government seems to self-sabotage their own soft power stuff in which the attempt to censor their own work abroad has made Chinese works seem inauthentic. As for the Indian case, I do not know enough about it to talk about it.
The answer is when I say so
So true
Yes king
technically this is all philosophy in a nutshell
"whos to say whats right and wrong?" me. im to say.
😂
The use of the little wooden tabs and pieces of paper is SUCH a smart engagement with your videos. It honestly engaged me so much straight off the bat
i think it wasnt her video with the wooden tabs rather the guy who posted that paper made some videos to go with it but I could have interpreted her use of "source" wrong. however, regardless of whose idea to make the wooden tabs thing was, she still put it in her video so still props are due!
When it comes to the barista example, I typically am very honest to strangers. If im asked how im doing I give them a real answer. While it is unusual, I haven’t ever had any issues from doing this. I think a lot of people actually appreciate the honesty, it shows there’s a real person behind the counter.
oliSUNvia is friends with Dan schneider btw
@@ville__ ?? im sorry?
@@geetikajain6110just a bot farming engagement
Yeah, tbh when I ask people how they were I've gotten honest responses more than positive ones, so I didn't relate to the barista example at all.
@@jkdebate2665 Well, you are in the minority. The social norm is to deliberately obfuscate your true feelings to provide the expected response of "I'm good!" to offer the linguistic lubrication to segue into the true motivation of the conversation. I know, it's really stupid- but this is what we've been conditioned to emulate. It's the main reason why I hate small talk; Like, bro, just spare me the pretense and tell me what you want, lmfao.
I'm definitely a hardcore "free speech is free speech" kind of guy but the analogy about how I'd teach my son to ignore the teasing but also teach my daughter not to tease opened my eyes to some of the counterpoints. I still believe that our right to free speech is paramount, of course, but there is some social responsibility on the offender to try to not be offensive otherwise theres going to be social consequences. Said offences can be inflated some times, and I dont love that the offended can be the judge, jury, and executioner, but the fact remains that its not socially "correct" behavior and thus will be punished.
Tl;dr: theres a spot in the middle between hardcore free speech protection and social outrage that I realized because of this video. Thanks!
"your right to swing your fist ends where my nose begins"
'social outrage' is not the opposite of free speech, and the only people who want you to think so are trying to foster a victim complex in you.
@@anope9053
Tldr freedom of speech is not freedom from consequences
@@Jankyito it's freedom from judicial consequences.
@@user-mn8lz7gf6d I agree, op was talking about social consequences tho
Okay, but a world where strangers greeted eachother with
'I acknowledge your dignity as a fellow human being!' would actually kinda slap though 😂
In my country, one of the most common greetings between friends is (translated) 'Hey wanker!'
The contrast between that and 'I acknowledge your dignity as a fellow human being', has made me drop dead in laughter.
@@nickklavdianos5136 hehehehe, okay, I NEED to visit your country at least once in my life 🤣
@@louis-marieokolo41 well, I'm sure Greece will welcome you
@@nickklavdianos5136 😜
@@nickklavdianos5136that kind of phrase is honestly just the sarcastic version 😂
I think the part on Twitter peeps becoming too focused making sure we speak in "progressive" ways over actual on the ground work is SUPER important. I follow Monique Melton (a black woman activist, educator, life coach, make up artist) on insta and something she said that blew my mind was that focusing too much on correcting white people is still white centering. To me, being white, I felt like calling out other white people was the most important thing for white people to do. I felt like it was what I heard people talking about the most. It really made me rethink how I was doing this work. and made me realize that most of my energy should go towards one of those direct actions, like reparations, protests, mutual aid, and divesting from exploitative businesses. Not to say we shouldn't call people in still, but we should be mindful of much energy is going towards people who have already stated they aren't changing their minds.
Yeah, for sure. I'm a member of a different minority group, but something that I think is true for anyone in any minority group is that we benefit 100% more from tangible improvements to the material conditions of our lives than we do from any amount of dunking that has been performed on the people who hate us. If I get harassed while I'm trying to buy groceries and can't because of some asshole, ruining that asshole's reputation and credibility doesn't change that I still don't have food on my table.
@@morguenmorguen6862 .."tangible improvements to the material conditions of our lives..." This really stuck out to me. I'll remember this!
This is what happrns if you refuse to read marx. Some kind of woke scold power tripping white people who never even thought about material conditions.
The most important thing to do as a white person is to exist, not to call out others. That's not your life mission
@@hits_different to exist? I'm not sure what you mean
I think we would all be a lot of more civil if instead we stopped assuming what everyone means with our preconceived notions, expect the best and in case of doubt, ask them, if they meant to offend, they will likely double down, if not, they will gladly clarify you missunderstood, people are afraid of being wrong and recognizing they exaggerated
Exactly. Too often we project all of our past interactions onto people we are interacting with in the present, which leads to assume intent when have no reason to. That is an unfair burden to place on other people as they shouldn't be held responsible for things that other people have done.
I also agree that it's best to give the benefit of the doubt first. The way I approach it is based on this famous phrase "hope for the best but prepare for the worst". I assume good faith on other people's part, but am ready if they end up showing evidence that they are not acting in good faith.
Also, if I want people to assume the best about my intentions, then I need to do the same.
That’s not always possible!! Sometimes a celebrity offended you
this is the most real comment.. although of course this doesn't account for statements that are CLEARLY offensive like the american politician and JAKE who were mentioned in the video.
That is overall a good idea but ignores a fundamental problem: if you're part of marginalized group, you will be exposed to hundreds of people who say things ranging from impolite to insanely offensive, and it's exhausting having to clarify with each and every one, especially when clarifying puts you at risk of being hate crimed.
Even if I don't get offended most of the time, and I don't because you get to have a very thick skin when you're openly trans for any length of time, offence is not the point, it's just annoying to deal with, and I frankly don't feel like explaining for the 30th time that day that asking about someone's genitals or calling me 'a trans' is, you know, not cool. Thus, I just avoid or ignore those people.
And I certainly don't blame anyone who just defaults assumes malice and has a less than understanding response.
this is unfortunately NOT happenjng on twitter
I think most of the time when the word “offended” is used, it’s to liberal causes, when conservatives are offended, it’s suddenly not being offended but rather it becomes an attack against free speech, suddenly it’s against the law and social norms.
For example conservative and lgbt individuals, conservatives are not offended it’s just unnatural.
This video is especially helpful during this time, when pro Palestine protest are labeled as anti s€mitic, a Palestinian flag is seen as a thr€at, the kuffiyah is seen as a t€rrorist symbol, a slogan to end an injustice is seen as a g€nocidal. And why is that (aside from how profitable fear mongering is)? it’s cuz ppl are offended by their mere presence, ppl were k!lled, sh0t and paralyzed as a consequence of that weaponized “offended” attitudes.
Okay English isn’t my first language, so I might severely be misunderstanding your last sentence, but are you saying that the people in Palestine are being k!lled because people saw their existence as offensive?
well as u brought about pro Palestinian, i have seen the same attitude towards people who support isreal also i haven't seen people being offended by the people who support Palestine yup there would be people who will act that way if they have different opinion and different side and not being heard at all but pro palestinain people most of the time don't even know the history about it i know you are gonna say it's not the time to know history because of the genocide and we should show humanity but why i think this point is wrong is because people in isreal are also dying so if we should be empathetic towards their people too but people who support palestine aren't even ready to hear ur argument you say something and they will call you anti palestine lol i definitely not support genocide and my heart aches every time i think about it but tbh it's not a time to think being sympathetic but rather systematic i think hamas and isreal government both are being harmful and we should protest in the where hamas and isreal government can't hide their faces (and pardon my English it's not my first language)
@@yourlocaltoad5102no I think op is talking about protesters that sometimes get repressed violently. Even though I haven't heard a case where this has resulted in death so there might be an exaggeration
@@yourlocaltoad5102 of course. It’s called longterm ethnic cleansing of an unwanted indigenous population.
@@bonjour7209 Israeli snipers used to target children and the disabled during the March of Return. That you don’t know that is a comment in itself.
26:45 I think this more about the stereotype or bias against bi people, saying that they always should ‘pick a side’ or they ‘aren’t really gay’ etc.
edit: yep
Agreed, I think part of it is also on how it could be read as feeding into the stereotype/misconception that bi people pick and choose their partners based on gender and can simply decide to switch as is convenient to them.
they definitely "aren't really gay" at least like 90% of the time lmfao
@@snail_chan1119 explain some more?
@@snail_chan1119another stereotype
@@snail_chan1119Thanks for proving our point. Bi people are queer, just like everyone else.
Grow up soon 😂
theres no objective rules really but youll also have to deal with the consequences, we all live in this world together.
@@sheeshnotniceI agree 100% with everything you said. It is very clear that people will have different responses to someone feeling offended based on what identity characteristics that person has. It also can vary based on the cultural norms where you live. Conservatives who live in a more liberal state are more likely to be dismissed when they feel offended about something, and liberals who live in a more conservative state are more likely to have their feelings dismissed. Texans aren't gonna resonate with the things that liberals find offensive, and Californians aren't gonna resonate with the things that conservatives find offensive (this ks obviously an oversimplified generalization, but my point still stands).
A useful mental exercise we all would do well to engage in is this: if you are trying to interpret if someone is being offensive or not, or if you're trying to determine if a person who feels offended is justified in their offense, ask yourself if your initial reaction would be different if the person was a different race, biological sex, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, level of wealth, etc. If our reaction would be different, then our initial reaction is probably wrong.
@@sheeshnotnice I think social media is largely a dumpster-fire because quite a lot of people are really quite bad at communicating without non-verbals. Maybe everyone, I don't know. But plain text statements are entirely at the mercy of the state-of-mind and mood of the reader. Emojis are actually super helpful in this regard, but even then not everyone interprets them the same.
Real leftists believe political rights should be expanded to the economic realm. If you believe a private company can fire you if 10% of the biggest wimps get offended then you're not a real leftist ie a shitlib.
All you can do is complain and hang out with other ppl.
I'm glad you made the distinction right from the beginning between "offense" and "harm". I feel like many people forget to do that.
I think there’s a big difference between doing something others happen to find offensive for other reasons and doing something with the intent to offend. For instance I think there’s a difference between someone getting offended because the food they gave you made you sick and someone getting offended because you called them a derogatory name because the former could be done as a way to inform the other person that you can’t eat that type of food with the offense being an undesirable side effect while in the latter case offending the person would probably be intentional.
Also speaking of how the word choices we use can make a difference I think marginalized group language, such as “Female Marginalization,” “LGBTQ+ Marginalization,” “Black Marginalization,” etc might be better than privileged group language such as, “White Privilege,” “Male Privilege,” “Straight Privilege,” etc. One reason I say this is that I find that hearing about about the problems another faces tends to make me feel more empathetic than if someone tries to list off advantages I have as the latter comes off more as someone assuming they understand my circumstances better than I do. As an Autistic White Male I think privilege group language can come off as implying that White People, Men, People not in the LGBTQ+ community etc can’t be members of marginalized groups for other reasons more than marginalized group language meaning that the former might be more alienating to groups like Poor White People, Autistic White Men, Black Men, and White Women than the latter. I think privileged group language might also make groups like poor white people, black men, or white women more likely to become conservative than marginalized group language even after the initial political leaning of a poor white person, a black man, or a white woman are accounted for.
Your point about using marginalization language instead of privilege language makes a lot of sense. If we are so concerned about centering ourselves around white narratives and how that negatively affects marginalized people, it stands to reason that reversing our language to center on the people being marginalized will help us focus on what really matters: the people who are hurt.
Why are white people held to a higher standard well asians too but mostly white people why do white people as a group get the most hate but do the most for other groups and help develop other places that are undeveloped
White people are(maybe starting to not be as much anymore) the least racist group of people
And if you are white and your racist you will lose pretty much everything specially if you work in the media there's alot more consequences for white racists then for racists of other groups
Like alot of the sports you have black people openly saying racist things and not many see it as bad instead people usually do the opposite and see it as good maybe even celebrate their "bravery"
We have laws in place that give an advantage to black people or minorities but a disadvantage to white people and usually asians to but some how we have a system that systematically racist against black people
When those laws literally show the exact opposite
Anyone who grew up in a mixed school knows white people being racist is not the problem
in fact it doesn't make sense that there aren't more white racists
You can't say the same things other can without worrying about people calling you names and making you out to be evil
You can't speak on certain things because your white and if you do your words will be ignored or demonized
People can call you colonizer and somehow people dont see that as racist even tho I'm being call a colonizer because of the color of my skin(more evidence that you can be openly racist to white people because apparently..
you can't be racist to white people...lmao)
Since there are quotes and things like that put in place you know as a white person you are not the favored one but people call you privileged
You know as a white person you are less likely to be picked for a job because you are white
You are less likely to get support from both the average person and the government because you are white
White people actually get more time for the same crime
Like when someone that is white attacks someone of A different race it will be considered a hate crime most of the time
But someone of A different race attacks someone White most of the time it will not be considered a hate crime
And it looks like black people get more time because they are more likely to be repeat offenders not because of some bias
And if you say these are in place because of the past then why are Asians effected close to the same way white people are
Asian didnt have help or support in the past so why are they also negatively affected by affirmative action and quotas
How come these social and systemic disadvantages apply to both whites and asians
Because it's not about past racism or past injustice or past anything so what is it about
movements aren't about justice or equality or any of that and that's not hard to see just like most of the things I said aren't hard to see stop listening to these liars
I got to stop
and I know yall probably wont get it and some will just call me names like usual
But if you actually want to stand up for what is right
And if your actually brave and not acting by just following the next popular social justice movement
You would say something about this and that would be real bravery because you will be called racist and other names and you will be demonized but those would be demons trying to demonize you because you would know they are standing for something fake or are just filled with hate and you stand with and for something real and you would make a real change you would get those that feel and see the same things to also speak up and they will stand behind you for you helped them get up to stand
That's a pretty interesting take on this, I hadn't really thought of that at all. I think "X privilege" expressions does serve the purpose of defining what inequality and privilege is, because saying "white privilege" doesn't mean a person's life is good because they are white, it means that their life wasn't made harder by not being white, and that's a thing it's important to be aware of. However it does have the unfortunate consequence of being a bit hard to receive for the first time. It's not a very good way of rallying on your side someone who's hesitating between all the different sides of a debate. For those who already have preconceived notions about "wokism" for instance, hearing someone call them privileged will get them on the defensive instantly.
On the other hand, it does serve as a reinforcement to the idea that marginalized groups are tired of accommodating others while fighting for their equality. This language that comes off much more strongly is a way to demonstrate that tiredness, that lassitude, that refusal to manage other's feelings to get what you deserve.
Using privileged vs marginalized group language is kindaa similar to the example OP brought up about the teacher not sure whether to say "persons capable of pregnancy" or "women" in the class discussion about abortion. The problems you detect here are not about offending someone hurt by a particular issue, but rather related to offending someone NOT hurt by a particular issue while trying to convince them about the realities of that particular issue. It's the problem of how to "productively" persuade people not on your side, who make jumps in logic like we all do, to come closer. (Jump in logic: factually, ___ privilege doesn't mean the things you say could be implied, but people just inevitably feel that way sometimes when being presented with these topics.) We must mind the feelings of the person we are trying to convince in order not to trigger a defense mechanism that shuts them off from change.
I don't think you were saying to completely get rid of it, but totally abandoning privileged group language is:
1) like the other reply said, somewhat coddling and centering the feelings of those not hurt by the particular issue at hand instead of remedying the injustices faced by those hurt by the issue at hand. It would be kinda ridiculous to center those people's feelings ALL the time, even though it may be productive in some scenarios (one-on-one discussions with people not familiar with these kinds of discussions, or people who are really prone to jumps like that). Baby steps are necessary at certain points but we gotta move on at some point---hard to do that on the internet, though, obviously you can't direct it to people at a certain point or another.
2) less realistic. "Marginalized" can produce an image of general society floating in one "normal" bubble over here, while another group is pushed to the side. "Privileged" points out the reality that this is a hierarchical situation---and in ?some?all?idk? cases, a zero-sum situation. It's not "normal people and disadvantaged Group", it's "one Group is above another Group, even though these Groups are arbitrary". This is linked to my other reply.
TLDR: I think both word choices are necessary, but in different situations. Sometimes it's worthwhile to avoid the possibility of cognitive dissonance between "I have many harsh struggles" and "I have intrinsic privileges" being resolved in the wrong direction, but realities of a hierarchical society must be faced.
@@NoiseDay I wouldn't say privileged group language about centering White people. It's about orienting White people within this hierarchical society. Making sure they remember they are part of all this. One of my professors had an assignment where students discuss how race has impacted their life, and White students always struggle to answer the question every year, because they perceive themselves as lacking a race. The dominant group sees themselves as normal and not as its own distinct group, while the other groups are distinct groups, but "race" is not real scientifically---racial groups are defined in relation to each other. I think it's important for people to acknowledge the reality of their position within a hierarchical societal system; however, some people may need to be slowly introduced to this concept later in their journey of learning about a social issue.
Thank god you're back I needed this😔
Edit: all my critical thinking is done rooted on your videos, one more of them and I won't have a mind of my own. Excellent closing of this topic btw!
When we needed her most, she returned!
You going to try surviving off Royal Farms next?
" for example the shift from from saying slaves to enslaved persons is impactful because
there is tons of research backing how the structure of language affects how we think about people so instead of making
enslavement Define the whole person we use language to represent the state of enslavement as separate from the person"
yes... and i would add more importantly... "enslaved person" is simply more accurate. it incorporates the power dynamic. it forces the audience to think "by who".
"a slave" can be too simply ignored as a position, a 'job', a status.
Worth mention on the etiquette section, things like holding the door, saying thank you, and other things like that are actually extremely distinct from societal etiquette things like the asking how someone's doing without a desire to receive an actual answer. When something on etiquette is treated as consistently understood, while having directly contradictory meanings involved, it is important to understand that no, it's not actually consistently understood by everyone. Thank yous, and holding the door do not have directly contradictory meanings that a person has to assess when determining how they respond, and therefore are much more reliably recognizable, more broadly, as consistently understood.
Neurotypicals/normies would mostly rather make judgements and believe they know what the person meant and proceed as such than have to think about all the possibilities. And are often not interested in even thinking about how the system works they are participating in. As a male who is ADHD, and logic driven I have 3 advantages here. 1, I analyse everything and am good at it, 2, I'm basically half normie and half autistic so I can really understand both sides, 3, Because of this, I am aware basically every single time someone is being unclear in communication or obfuscating their position and have done that myself.
Not sharing feelings or any kind of non verbal cues can be considered this btw. Just as autists processing struggles with non verbal and hidden communication, many sensitive sensing and feeling based people have processing struggles with pure information with no non verbals, they are trying to work out your hidden meaning too.
I prefer the more neurodivergent way of communicating myself, but I can do both when needed, and if I'm present I can understand both, although physical and emotional communication takes more effort and focus
"Sympathetic and critical" This deserves it's own book. I'm still not sure if it's possible, but it sounds really good.
This video could also be titled "why Neurotypicals do and say that"
Some of these social norms are just plain confusing and what's more if you were never taught the secret code to the language you're doomed to be blamed for their misunderstanding of you.
As an autistic adult with Tourettes too often these "norms" are Masks, they are lies we tell each other to be cordial... So basically everyone is lieing all the time and we're all supposed to just pick up on the etiquette and cues
Forget meeting people halfway -nope, in this date in time the individualism is too fierce.
Agreed. You can be straightforward without being offensive, I just don't understand how so many people seem to be unable to grasp that.
YES! As an autistic person I straight up thought how are you was literal until a few years ago when I'd lost a bunch of friends and my mother explained it to me. It was awful.
To be fair there’s not really a secret code some people just want to assume a lot of things. Neurotypicals are confused about other neurotypicals but just get around it by assuming other things too, it’s confusing 💀. It is especially so in the media than in real life
I agree that we would all profit from loosening up of social norms of politeness. It would be helpful in refocusing on the important ones, that honestly express care and respect for others like holding the door, saying please and thank you, etc.
However, we need to make small talk more genuine. Like, we could make sure to be open to an honest response when asking "how are you?". It's normal to not want to actually hear all about someone's day if you're making small talk, but other conversation starters are fun too, like "whatcha doing rn?" Or "so what's your fav color?". In the same line of thinking, you can answer a "how are you?" more genuinely without offering details, like "my god it's been a long day" or "real excited to go home lol", and move the conversation in a direction that doesn't involve one venting to the other. Small talk *can* be a nice whatever thing if we all relax a bit and stay open minded to the other's reactions.
yes, you get it!
In regards to the biphobic comment yeah it's great the person defended bi people against more explicit biphobia in the comments however their initial comment was still biphobic just more subversive.
I was just re-listening to Kat Blaque's old podcast eps (highly recommend) where she has a discussion with Lindsay Ellis who even though she's a bi women said bi ppl have "straight passing privilege" and this led to multiple eps where bi people of different backgrounds called in to discuss the issue.
And in the episode with mostly cis bi women, non binary ppl, etc they discussed a lot of the biphobic microgression of ppl thinking that in the end bisexuals will choose "cishet" partners either to date or to marry because that's "easier" or more socially acceptable bc it's "straight passing" or it's a "straight relationship". It's this idea bisexuals betray or leave the gay community for the privilege of looking straight in order to face less oppression.
Lol the reason I use a lot of quotations is because as a lot of the callers unpacked and discussed is that what gets labeled as "straight, straight passing, or having privilege" is not the bisexuality but is attributed more to things like being gender conforming, being lighter skinned in a colorist society where darker skinned people with marginalized genders get coded as masculine and not gender conforming, etc.
Like for example in my experience as a bi person I was in times square with a friend who's not gender conforming and is an ace lesbian (lol this is a summary they go by a lot of things as do I. Fuck gender labels and boundaries). And this guy came up to us and called my friend a slur in their face but left me alone even though i have many queer labels (bi, demi, non binary, some other kind of gender thing etc). We definitely could've been a lesbian couple walking together but the reason he didn't code me as lgbt+ or queer and harass me as well is because I look like a very gender conforming femme person and look like someone's cishet female friend even though that's not how I identify. I don't look visibly stereotypically gay or queer.
Even as a queer black person I haven't experienced that much queer oppression related to my appearance however non queer cishet black women get coded as gay or queer all the time and get harassed if they look less gender conforming but also because they're black. But even if they were gender conforming black women still get attacked and seen as masculine due to racism.
Also going back to marriage and this idea that bisexuals can choose to escape oppression by choosing to marry a cishet person is also wrong bc as many bisexual women especially some of the callers in the podcast pointed out, bisexual women experience higher rates of DV than cishet women. Bisexual ppl of marginalized genders have described their experiences of being abused by both male and female partners and not feeling safe to seek help in both straight and gay communities. From straight ppl it's the fear of coming out if one has not and just in general the abuse ppl experience at the hands of cishet men. Like one of the callers said "the gay community labels privilege as like oh you get to be with your partner in public and get to hold their hand but like how is that partner treating them at home?" Being closeted is not a privilege. We wouldn’t say a closeted gay man who married a woman is privileged or is choosing to abandon the gay community we call that a tragedy. So why is it different for bisexuals in the same position just because they can be sexually attracted to their partner?
And then from gay ppl in general in society we don't take abuse from women seriously regardless of gender but especially so with biphobia in the community if a bi person is being abused by a woman. But also, if i had a dollar for everytime I've seen a comment about how bi women can't come crying to the gay community if they're abused by cishet men because they told you so... I have no response to that other than in a community with rampant biphobia and constant dismissals of their concerns because the concerns of "more real gay ppl" are elevated above their own bc they're seen as having "privilege" why would any bi person feel safe.
Also I want to highlight this isn't just bigotry bisexuals experience. Asexuals (especially demisexuals and other ppl on the spectrum like cishet ace ppl etc) and nonbinary people that don't look gender non conforming (that's a stereotype you don't have to look visibly gender non conforming to be nonbinary) get labeled as having "straight privilege too" for basically the same bigoted arguments that ppl make against bisexuals. Like literally this is like my 5th time this week dealing with bigoted comments about all of these communities I'm apart of getting labeled as "straight" and not facing "real oppression" like homosexuals do. 😅
Lol this response is already long enough without getting more into gay and queer history but I will say historically cis homosexuals especially white ones have always created a hierarchy within the community no different than cisheteronormative society with same structural bigotry (racism, bioessentialism, gender conformity, etc) based on who is "straight" and who isn’t
And to tie this all back to the point of the video about what is serious offense or not, it really takes an in-depth understanding and education on what is actual oppression in society and listening to people in communities who normally don't get a platform and their concerns aren't taken seriously. Which i'mma be honest as a bipoc person who hangs out in a lot of bipoc marginalized spaces a lot of ppl don't do that because they don't think about constantly unpacking their bigotry or even thinking or outright refusing to listen to more marginalized voices
No offense but Olivia (i do like her work and her videos) didn't even look into or ask why the ppl called four biphobic or researched why because if she did she'd learn about everything i just explained in this long thread because bisexuals especially the ones on twitter talk about this ALL the time and cite sources and research but no one ever listens or takes their concerns seriously. Instead she did what ppl typically do which is side with a gender conforming light skinned homosexual bc their "concerns" are always automatically treated with more respect bc that's the typical face of what is considered a gay person who's oppressed. Even though often "concerns or complaints" that are seen as valid by these people is just a front for bigotry. Lol don't even get me started on lesbian bar discourse and predominantly cis white lesbians being "concerned about men in spaces" is often masking racism, biphobia, and transphobia. Kat blaque also did a video on this if people want to hear a bit more.
But like personally let's be honest, how many of y'all listen to a marginalized gender and sexuality bipoc (especially black) person on a regular basis in regards to learning about oppression and liberation?
But anyway my last point is that ppl need to remember the actual factors that contribute to an oppressive structural hierarchy in society and who actually has power and a voice because of that. Because often people with privilege won't use outright slurs and explicit bigotry to oppress people. It can be as subversive as saying they have "fears and concerns" about something or a group of people and bc of their privilege and everyone's ingrained bigotry that we've had instilled in us since birth that concern is treated as valid and more important even though it's rooted in bigotry and it's even harder to spot if it's coming from another marginalized person who experiences oppression but that doesn't excuse the bigotry
Also side note ppl need to remember how social media really reduces our capacity to speak fluidly about topics and that reduction contributes the spread of bigotry, disinformation and misinformation. It's easy to make one off bigoted comments and have ppl believe them because it doesn't take much to tap into our bigoted beliefs.
However to unpack all of this and explain it, it takes a lot of time, effort, words and resources something that's not accommodating to social media. It's just there for our bite-sized dopamine fixed. So ppl responding to biphobia only have the space to say "hey it's biphobic" and most ppl like Olivia did are going to be like umm no it isn't bc you don't have the ability to explain how it is and even if you try to no one is going to take the time to read your entire thread to educate them. Like took forever to write this comment that no one will probably read and I still left so much out but I did so because 1. I don't feel like working and 2. Because need to know this shit or else no one will ever learn and stop making bigoted comments
And even when you do explain they'll be like well they didn't say all that i think you're interpreting too much and like I said earlier systemic bigotry is more subversive than it is explicit
Do u think its fair to women for closeted gay men to date and marry them? What about respect for women?
Ohhh, after reading @alaskarose4478 's response I understand where Olivia comes from in defending four's tweet!
The feeling I get when looking at the response to the main comment is that @alaskarose4478 is deliberately refusing to understand that when the main comment states that "We wouldn’t say a closeted gay man who married a woman is privileged or is choosing to abandon the gay community we call that a tragedy" that the tragedy described is due to the suffering of both the apparently straight woman and gay man. And it is that same feeling that lets a person so poorly understand another person's interpretation of a statement and even poorly substantiate yourself when justifying your own interpretation of that statement.
In reality they simply didn't understand that because the comment is about queer experiences only the gay man is explicitly mentioned even if the tragedy comes from the suffering of both parties. In a similar way, four's tweet doesn't explicitly say that it is an expression of the biphobia that four struggles with even though that is apparently clear to read to people who understand four's experience.
I feel like I interpreted the tweet as a slightly clunky way of saying that the bi bf had gave the uncomfortable impression that they at least subconsciously didn't see the relationship lasting because they showed that they were hoping for a type of relationship four couldn't provide.
however I accept that there's also context I might have been missing and that I may have misinterpreted the tweet
Thank you for taking the time to write this. I think Olivia’s video, while helpful in many ways, wasn’t clear (or fair, really) in explaining what marginalized people really go through and how privilege works.
I'm bi (or at least biromantic and slightly bisexual) too I read your whole comment thanks for taking the time to write all that. I have concerns as do you about how short form a lot of social media is, though I also have ADHD (and I'm autistic) and chronic illness (physical and mental) so I often find it hard to focus on longer posts. I find dating really hard and worry a lot about if I met someone who initially seems nice and then they turn out to be an abuser... will prob end up being single the rest of my life tbh and I know that doesn't have to mean being horribly lonely but it's hard not to worry about it meaning I will be rly lonely and I feel for other people in that situation too. Tbh I feel quite depressed rn and don't wanna end up talking about that instead of the points u were making cuz my head's not in a good place, I maybe should have liked your comment instead of posting a reply IDK... but I feel for you and other members of queer, GNC, BIPOC and other marginalised groups... I was involved with a woman for a while who's ex was horribly abusive and she was bi too... wish I could have done more to help but at least as far as I know she's still out there and doing ok. Also yeah I thought you meant it's sad for both the gay man and the woman he marries.
I watch your videos because you never fail to challenge me and make me think. Thank you. Please continue to put out such measured and respectful essays.
I mean, when you have friends or family who are being deliberately starved to death by a genocidal government, politeness and etiquette can go piss off.
Anger is understandable and some ppl don’t deserve politeness and etiquette because they themselves don’t act like this towards other. But by still showing politeness and etiquette towards them despite the deep anger within us that they caused, we are being a good example of how they should be. We are staying true to our values. Also it’s easier to find common ground with etiquette and politeness, it’s easier to get what you want when you make the other party feel “their worth”.
@@AdvancedmonkeNo movement of liberation has gone anywhere without strategic violence.
Peaceful protest is a form of propaganda to keep people disarmed and distracted. If it that method alone actually worked then our world already be better from the decades of work advocates have put into peaceful protests. Peaceful methods only work if those in power care enough to make them effective.
Yes peaceful methods should be step one, but after some time of the powers that be showing no signs on improving anything, uprisings are the only way to make change.
Even Martin Luther King understood and acknowledged the validity of riots before he passed, “Urban riots must now be recognized as durable social phenomena. They may be deplored, but they are there and should be understood. Urban riots are a special form of violence. They are not insurrections. The rioters are not seeking to seize territory or to attain control of institutions. They are mainly intended to shock the white community. They are a distorted form of social protest. The looting which is their principal feature serves many functions. It enables the most enraged and deprived Negro to take hold of consumer goods with the ease the white man does by using his purse. Often the Negro does not even want what he takes; he wants the experience of taking.”
@@Advancedmonkethe issue with demanding politeness from victims is that the bullies have essentially expressed their desire to be treated as superior. However, dehumanization itself has not allowed the victim to be respected as a human being. Thus, it is not a bad thing to be angry and forgo the “respectability” framework that perpetrators want to use to frame victims as unreasonable
Exactly
And despite all that, they (mostly) truly remained polite imo.
Sometimes aggressors only respond to other aggressors
i feel so honored to see this the second you post it
i didnt fully understand every concept because i didnt have the captions on and some videos like this are harder for me to prosses as a younger person, but this is so helpful to truly understanding how things become and are considered offensive. sociolinguistic factors (im bringing that up with my friends if this topic ever comes up) are something i didnt ever consider but knew in the back of my mind. im going to watch this again another day to grasp any concepts i missed but this is one of the most interesting videos i have seen.
Its crazy how you perfectly voiced opinions and thoughts that I’ve held but in much better language and Clarity than I could never provide.
You're one of the few UA-camrs similar to my age that I can watch without feeling like I'm wasting my time.
Your content is very well thought out and produced, thanks for putting your thoughts out there.
You have returned - especially at the time that I was studying those topics for my upcoming article omgggg
Thank you for articulating this. I think this is one of those rare pieces that really can serve to elevate the quality discourse and communication online and IRL. Honestly, they should be showing this stuff in schools.
Your videos are so interesting. Stimulating but calming at the same time. I appreciate all the work you do!!
This was an interesting discussion, and I think you played the balance of the two perspectives to this issue really well. Thank you for the great content (:
Thank you for the amount of work you put in your videos 🙏🏽
this is the first video of urs that ive clicked on and wow... you are one of the best video essayists ive ever had the pleasure of listening to. specifically pertaining to this video, the way you are able to use evidence is perfect and I thank you for your contributions to the commentary space.
I disagree big time with the qipao dress discussion. As an (admittedly very out of touch) ethnic Chinese, I get the bitterness of "why is my culture now a cool thing when I got bullied for it as a kid?" but acceptance has start from somewhere. Also I remember that qipao prom dress issue from when I saw it on a Philip DeFranco video, iirc she did her research on how to wear it properly.
I grew up on my mom's side of the family, (thank God for that as my father's side are the "we've never been on China but we're a 1000% Chinese" types) my grandpa was a Chinese immigrant who sought to assimilate and didn't teach his kids about Chinese culture much, so even if I'm 75% Chinese I do not speak a lick of it and would probably do much worse than qipao prom dress girl lol
Especially with the part where you basically said "they just wore it because they think it's pretty"... Again I'm admittedly very out of touch but I don't think there's any reason for foreigners to not wear a qipao. It's not a ceremonial dress or anything, it's just a dress from a certain country. If anything that line of thought makes the qipao seem more exotic than it actually is. I'm from the Philippines and if girls wanna wear a _baro't saya_ they're more than welcome to, tho it's used as formal wear so using it for anything else would look odd.
Also I'm very in favor of free speech, for the reason that I wanna use words that nowadays has to be censored or else I get shadowbanned. I like watching videos about true crime and stuff and not being able to use certain words is really annoying. I'm not American so I'd rather not say anything about offensiveness or whatever coz I see it as an American issue, but when your issues affect my non-American self I feel like I have to speak up. A few years back a boyband called SB19 made a tweet that's now notorious to net-savvy locals, "Hello Negros!" and they got flak from Americans. Why did they make that tweet anyway? They greeted a _Province_ called Negros Occidental, known locally as Negros. (There's also another province called Negros Oriental, they're halves of a whole called Negros island) Backstory is that when Spanish ships reached the island they found a tribe there called Aeta and named it after them. The Aeta are an aboriginal tribe with African-like features, black skin and kinky/curly hair. But keep in mind they're not actually Africans... I have to say this as I've seen Black Americans make videos about them calling them "black people in Asia?!" and stuff.
Holy crap I got sidetracked. Anyway, idk where I'm going with my comment so I'll just leave my halfbaked thoughts about this video here.
Dang, SB19 was just greeting the people of a certain area (awfully named area, especially when you factor in the history of why it was even named that). Glad it's been cleared up.
Lmfao. people who operate like this are so selfish and dividing, and can't they just see it? "my culture" 💀💀
Lol I can't believe I read all of it 😅Your comment perfectly encapsulates the web as a whole LMAO. 😭Wok white/black Americans being whiny and controlling about anything that's even slightly related to the word "black."
@mewmew6158 Negro simply means black in Español. Who are you to say it's badly named?
How come I can't say the word "Negro?"
i'm not a social butterfly by any means, so i'm often behind on social etiquette and what is considered acceptable and why. it also seems difficult for my few friends to talk about said topic while still maintaining social etiquette. thanks for this video. really well worded in helping guide people's thinking (like mine) without pushing any values or agendas onto us.
Really good video, I agreed with lots of things and especially liked how it really was mostly an analysis and was very good at being 'objective'. You also brought up some really interesting talking points I myself have never really thought about although are or at least they seem to be very important. Keep up the good work
Not the jump scare of my actual prof being one of your sources 😭
olivia, seeing ur video in my notif box is like a beacon of light and hope and magic! never stop posting!!
i took a courses under james o young in my first and second years of philosophy (before i failed out) and it's so crazy to me that you're referencing him. i love your videos and your use of his work is super topical. great video.
Finding out you uploaded was the best news of my day☝️😊
Underrated video, the edit is so creative and stunning even though the video is long but the edit quality is at the same great level , and the information u give are interesting, Keep the great job ! love ya ❤
I think its important for offensive standard to be tighter or (more importantly) looser in contexts. For example, if we changed the context of the students discussing the law to the judges themselves deciding the case. In that case the concern raised by the second student could result in the wording of their decision being changed to avoid setting an unintentional precedent. Sometimes difficult discussions need to happen. Setting a cultural standard of shutting down anything that causes offense will result in problems that could have been easily avoided otherwise.
I don't know what magical place you and some commenters seem to live under where 'anything that causes offence' gets shut down, or that there is this social movement to push for that outside of like, Twitter. From where I'm standing, in the vast majority of places, people not only are offensive, but take pride in being so with little to no resistance. In fact, any slight pushback gets met with ridicule and mockery.
@@photografo9240 australia?
You are one of my favorite youtubers, every single one of your videos has changed my point of view in some way. Never stop doing what you do.
Thank you for making this. I really like the visual additions of the printed comments and the student situation. Beautiful work as always
Thanks for the video!! Happy to see you back ❤
I loved this! Diving into the nuances of communication and language is always gets the gears turning in my head. Love the post-original-recording clarifications sprinkled through the video btw! They reflect how the learning process is never a finished work-there’s always more we can go over and flesh out ☺️❤️
I think I want to add something to the discussion, which is how social media platforms directly hinder people's ability to clearly communicate. Things like the twitter character limit (which I think is a major factor in why twitter is so toxic) and the mere nature of comments on UA-cam remove either people's ability to clearly disclose their intention to not offend, or people's willingness to be receptive to said disclosures, which can only aid in the facilitation of being offended and the lack of communication when offense is caused. I even have to recognize that the amount of people willing to read this long comment is gonna be not that big, so yes, communication is hard. Basically what I'm saying is that if you were willing to read this entire paragraph, you are contributing to solving the problem this comment tackled, and you;'re cool for that. Great video as always, love your open-minded approach to these topics.
You genuinely helped me understand that and how social norms and etiquette with no intrinsic value can still be important.
I love this channel so much. The ability to entertain two opinions is so rare nowadays, its refreshing to see people in my age group being able to do so!
I always enjoy your discussions. They create thought, which is sometime uncomfortable, but more welcome for that. In the cases of the jailed facebooker and the politician, one thing you didn't talk about in regards to harm was they both minimized the value of someone's life. I think that is a line crossed that needs to be addressed. Being told that you, or anyone like you, doesn't deserve to be alive is, in my opinion, harm and should be treated as such, even if you assume that the person's followers aren't going to take that as a signal to endanger the life of the person, or person like them.
The problem with considering sociolinguistic qualities as defining offense is that cultural perception is not universal. Depending on someone's personal background or where they may have grown up, they may view what would be seen by some as offensive, in a completely different light. Thus, I do not believe that we can truly state what should, and shouldn't be called out, though we can choose to act in certain ways depending on who we're with, a point that was brought up in the video. As such, using traditional Chinese clothing as an example, I believe that while it wouldn't be offensive for a white woman to wear a cheongsam, she should at least consider refraining from sharing herself wearing it on the internet, out of respect for the people to whom the action would be seen as cultural appropriation as per the garment's sociolinguistic context. Notice how I said 'consider', because ultimately it is up to the individual to make the decision to abide, or not to abide, by any societal standards; the ensuing consequences from one's actions are decided the moment they choose to say or do anything.
your videos are like reading Plato, its so elegantly put together, and well thought out. Thank you!!
This was a lot more nuanced than I expected! Thank you for discussing this in such a nuanced way!
personally I've always offered grace to everyone including myself. If I don't use the right term and someone wants to call me out I honestly don't have a problem with it. and if someone wants to be offensive towards me or others I use my best judgement but mostly ill just decide I don't like them and avoid them. voices online carry such little wight in my opinion, everyone in the comment sections may as well be chat bots. and politicians are often just pandering to their constituents.
SHES BACK!!!
I really really love your content, words alone are not sufficient to show how much your content has opened the view of the world for me, I hope the success and the best for your future
Thank you. Your content inspires new perspective and reinforces others. The analytical approach is a welcome change. So many incomplete things.
from a bi person, our online communities are full of posts hating on bi partners and stuff. it was almost uncanny as a chronically online person to see none of this hate at real-life queer hangouts
Hey Bi person is it ok to say I don’t like some Bi people
@@sithlord5149 as long as you don't hate other bi people because of it hehehe
Structure & production quality of this video is fire, our girly is a certified influencer 👏🏾
great vid as always, thankful for these videos constantly challenging and helping me think through my beliefs and challenge them
Another great video where you really hit the nail on this thing that has bothered me. I've grown up in different cultures where in one I would need to be hyperattentive to my words and potential offences I could make, and in another where being blunt and not being scared of offending people is the norm. I've found that I truly prefer to live in a place where people get offended only when the meaning behind what the other is saying is truly offensive, rather than the place where you need to walk on eggshells to say that you disagree with someone. I definitely prefer it when the discussions I have with people start with an unspoken agreement to try to understand the other person rather than testing them to see if something they said could be interpreted badly.
And, on the flip side, trying to speak and act in a way that's respectful to the other person is simply important when trying to communicate.
the great one has returned!! 🙏🙏
she’s back!!!!
AAAAAH WELCOME BACK!!! missed ur videos so much, but we hope ur feelin real again !! X)
Your videos are always so well researched and presented, great job!
tldr is a great example of what makes communication today is so difficult. Nobody bothers actually reading things for comprehension anymore… They’re reading to react or to respond. The Internet is a very exhausting place
Lol love that I made a typo
Another great video that gets my brain moving, keep it up!
I like the tempo, rythem and humor. I also like the way your brain work! Thank you for this
wow you are such an amazing communicator, these are things that I ponder all the time but can't quite put it in words
I was going to leave a drawn out, long winded comment.
But I’m gonna sit back, watch and listen to this video. Thank you for the education. 🤙🏾
This was a really fucking good video; lots of fantastic concepts to chew on and some really thoughtful reflection.
The other night I went to a drag show at my university (which was amazing) and the different campus orgs that supported the show introduced themselves. One of them was the only queer affirming ministry on campus. The person who spoke (who was amazing) went into depth acknowledging and voicing sadness at the harm others have caused to queer people in the name of the Christian faith. And in the moment, I (as a non-Christian queer person) thought, “why should he feel the need to do that? He shouldn’t have to speak to the harm that other Christians have done.” But this video helped me see why him speaking up about that was so important. A lot of people in the audience had been directly harmed by Christians in the name of the Christian faith, and he needed to explicitly acknowledge that to have any credibility in providing support.
So yeah…thanks for another great video!
You have never had an original thought in your entire life
@@williamwilson2130 Care to explain your thought process behind this comment, williamwilson2130?
@DianaSilva.5 seems like willy or whatever hasn't had an original thought themself, because i see that line used a lot to be generally inflammatory.
I learned quite a few things from your video, and I'm thankful for that. This is the first of your videos that I've seen and I was prepared to argue at the start of it but I'm glad I stayed in my seat as you gave a fair, comprehensive and nuanced treatment of this difficult topic. I understand not being able to arrive at firm prescriptions; we are at the beginning of the exploration and it's too early for anyone to claim they have all of the answers. But dialogue like this is how we eventually achieve that.
Love how much effort and time you put in to the videos ❤.... i mean please and thank you and have a nice day :p
YALL GET UP OLISUNVIA JUST POSTEDDD 🤩
no but fr ive missed you
same here
Glazin
Communication is hard. By interacting with people you always risk offending someone. But the intention of what someone is doing is more important than avoiding that risk. Actions speak louder than word. Take that risk, justify yourself afterwards, make your intentions clear and you are good to go.
The concept of "etiquette of equality" is realy facinating. Never thought of it that way
Thanks for showing it
The examples you describe as bad could also be harassment, intimidation or even threats.
I appreciate your stuff, you Rock
I love your videos soo much. So thought provoking
idk but the notion of "it's okay to just tell people to toughen up" alongside with "you can keep telling people to kill themselves" doesn't sit right with me. i understand the point you're making here, but the fact of the matter is that these words DO affect people, some more than others. the intent of such words doesn't really matter, because when it comes to any kind of abuse, it's always impact over intent. and on the entire topic of what is offensive and what isn't; as a complex childhood trauma survivor who's gone through a lot of verbal abuse, i think there is so much more to the argument than just societal norms and morality. it's also about the person themself, their temper and the like. you can't really tell someone not to be traumatized by something someone has done to them.
the videos intention isn’t to shape your morality or change anyone’s opinion, it’s to concisely understand the meaning behind words and why or how people are to be offended. Whether or not it’s justified is up to your own interpretation. In the video she clearly states she in her own life tries to uphold the etiquette of equality and is as respectful as she can be. Clearly she doesn’t hold the view that it’s justified to tell someone to kill themselves.
If you understand the point of the video then you restating that some words affect people differently would be redundant. Since she goes over this in the video. You aren’t wrong in saying that people shouldn’t tell others to kill themselves at least in my opinion. With that being said do you truly believe that anyone will stop? Or that her comment in this video you pointed out will be used to further justify this behavior? I don’t. Sometimes the best we can do is try to understand our reasons for taking offense and grow to a sense of peace in our identity and traumas. We can’t control whether someone will respect us or how they perceive us so the best we can do is to stop letting them affect us
@@marcosmanzano7190 you’re completely pulling the blame off of the offender here which is going against what she said lol
This is genuinely a really interesting topic an dhas made me think about the true differenc ebetween harm vs offense vs just things i disagree with. thank you for making this video!
Man, this is just an all around good video. I feel like if everyone understood these basic principles that you explain people would get along just a little better xD
but then again, thats humanity for ya
awesome video thank you :)
That part when you describe social norms around dressing for funerals or short social interactions should be seen by people who don't understand what small talk does/how small talk functions.
Good video.
You may want to add a little addendum at 1:10 when you say "Socrates said humans are defined as "featherles bipeds"" the text itself you're citing says it was actually Plato. I believe It's a harmless mistake, but still worth correcting.
Been a while. Cheers for that. Hope your break was productive and or enjoyable.
I was happily surprised by the content of your video. The level of accuracy and attention you give to the complexities and the nuance of etiquette and offense, I think, has the potential of living humanity. I will share.
Congrats on the 1 mill btw
1 million anti free speech wokies
Simply put: the problem is complicated due to the fact that everyone will hold a different standard of what is offensive. This is because there is no clear line between emotional harm and being offended. I find, the easiest way to avoid being offensive is to avoid terminology that is commonly deemed as offensive, or saying things that might, in general, offend people UNLESS you have the time and energy to explain yourself and hear the other person's views
Something that really resonated with me from this video was the feelings of anxiety that can accompany trying to community/coalition/relationship-build in a way that makes space for expression of your authentic beliefs, while not alienating those who seem to hold opposite views (teacher-student example). I really care about making room for others to be able to engage with me, especially about sensitive topics, free from fear of judgement. At the same time, I can really struggle to directly voice my opinion on a given subject if I think that it will put someone else on the defensive- even if their belief makes me feel intense personal discomfort. In the past, I've justified this as pragmatism (ppl are more likely to listen to you if you make them feel safe), but I also have felt that I've compromised my values at times by hedging, remaining silent, or even signaling positive/understanding sentiments towards beliefs that I feel solidly unaligned with, and worry that this may end up stymying progress by robbing the other person the chance to receive (and hopefully be imbued w/ sympathy/empathy for) my unfiltered emotions. At the end of the day, I want to be a good contributor to the project of facilitating cooperation, but like you say, communication do be hard sumtimez :/. Vid is full of great thoughts to chew on, and motivates me to continue to try reflect on, improve & embody my own communication ethic. Great vid & looking forward to the next post :P👍
You're a really excellent video essayer, like you really do seem to touch on bigger matters unlike lots of others who kind of just find something weird or contradictory and make a whole 2 hour essay on it.
I just want to put out there that I have been student 2, in the 3-students-scenario.
I strongly believed what I said and there was no student 3. Student 1, who actually was gay, was super respectful and patient with me, and that forced me to do the same. After the debate we shook hands, agreed to disagree, even though I really debated hard.
This is more than 10 years ago. I still think of that moment. My opinions are a bit more mellow now.
I believe that was a very important moment for me in my journey to learn that gay folks are normal people too. Sounds silly to say that, but I really had to _learn_ that.
Conversations like this are important, and disrupting it by being student 3 is only negative.
What’s interesting to me is I’ve never seen anyone get offended by someone saying “pregnant women” (when referring to pregnant people as a whole) but you know someone’s going to take offense whenever the term”pregnant people” comes up. Which is interesting because 50 years ago no one would care because they would just assume you were just talking about women which is because women are in fact people.
Well nowadays it’s a bit different because the assumption would be that you diminish womanhood by not clarifying they’re women who are pregnant, it goes in hand with calling them uterus-havers or whatever because it ignores the experience that women have gone through and history of being degraded for those organs. All this is connected with “womanhood” and it’s offensive for those mad at the term “people” because that term became used when “woman” became offensive since it doesn’t include trans women-who do not experience “womanhood”. I’m not saying any of them are correct I’m just explaining the background, because inclusivity IS the reason people have refrained from just saying women nowadays..
It's because we've come to a fundamental disagreement about reality. We have a side which ties "woman" to a physical, biological attribute, while the other side is entirely social constructionist.
it's because we've learned and seen that only biological women can get pregnant. that's why everyone assumes "pregnant people" to be about women
I’ve watched a few of your videos before, but this one really made me tap the button. New subscriber👍🙏
I can't stress enough how much I think it is beautiful when a person makes a 30-minute video long to debate a topic, IDGF about the position or the conclusion, I want to see a way of thinking more than a tweet
I think the problem you failed to mention with the last tweet is just that it presents the scenario as if it applies to all bisexuals. It’s “bi guys” as a whole they are talking about, not one or a certain group of them. If someone says something as if it applies to an entire race, for example, then it seems much more clear to people that it can be problematic and harmful. Some people, as shown in some of the tweets in the video, just ignore that for groups they see as benefitting from the system they are personally oppressed under in any way. The comment was just as biphobic as any other sort of race stereotype is racist (excluding certain escalations of course, we are talking the assumptions about favorite foods, athleticism, etc. that in themselves are not going to legitimately put people in much harm).
I think the tweet was not necessarily biphobic itself, but was supposed to be a confession of the poster's own struggle with biphobia. However, because the poster did not make clear that this was their own emotional baggage and not meant to accurately describe bi people it was inevitable that people read it as biphobic (and either promoted their own biphobia or denounced the tweet as biphobic).
Of course this was an interpretation I had after rewatching that part of the video many times because I could not figure out what the poster was trying to convey based on everything they were tweeting until after the first few watch throughs.
@@thebugscome Exactly. I, a trans femme, have personally dated bi men who I suspected would rather be with a cis woman in the long run in order to achieve a traditional standard of "normalcy" - which turned out to be true. I've also dated bi men who truly didn't care either way.
It is definitely a valid concern to point out how some bi people may not desire a life-long relationship with someone perceived as being the opposite gender and cis (as well as a lot of straight people who date trans people, who would probably rather not date them long-term - a concern which I feel more valid to voice as a it pretains to a privileged group) - but this of course shouldn't be used as a form of generalization. It's a problem which exists, but doesn't speak for the entirity of the social group it's about - just like there's, for example, a problem about risky s*xual encounters among gay men (as someone who's been and still is often perceived to be a part of that demographic) which obviously doesn't speak for all of them.
The use of language is rarely well thought out when it comes to things like tweets. While the op clearly may not have meant to generalize bi men as having not worked on their internalized heteronormativity, it certainly could be and was read that way by biphobes. It kind of sucks that changing a few words can totally alter the way your message is recieved.
@@mewmew6158that’s how i understood it too. but to be honest, so much of what’s considered offensive is perception itself. ppl are saying it’s make a safe space for biphobic attitudes in the replies, which is true, but if op himself is fighting against those comments, couldn’t we say that any tweet that actual bigots reply to with bigotry is also bigoted because the bigots interpreted that tweet as such? it feels like it’s unfair to put the bigotry of replies on the responsibility of the op.