>>we have to "disclaimer" the fuck out of our
>>thoughts/opinions. the natural aversion to being accused of
>>having certain thoughts kicks in way too much regarding
>>sensitive topics
>>
>>(this has nothing to do with Cosby/the allegations, btw)
>>
>>
>>(yes, I'm aware of what I just did there. eat da poo poo)
>
>It is inconvenient, yes. But a few moments taken to really
>consider how your queries impact the other side of the
>conversation, especially when that side has been impacted by
>the effects of racism or sexism, or whatever ism is present,
>is a small price to pay for dialog IMO.
>
>lfresh posted about Daniel Handler's racist remarks recently
>with the refrain "This is why we're tired."
>
>People who have been in the trenches on this issue and others
>do get tired in hearing the same old lines that could easily
>be addressed if the person bothered to listen to what's being
>said (instead of waiting for the first opportunity to
>critique) and/or do some reading up on it online.
>
>It's even worse when these lines come across without beginning
>to address what's been said by the other side. It becomes
>tiring, and all too easy to resort to pointing what has gone
>without disclaimer. If nothing else it highlights to how
>unfair and powerless it is to be on the wrong side of a
>situation, which doesn't begin to help someone appreciate what
>it feels like to be at the mercy of structural racism and/or
>sexism and/or bigotry that stems from sexuality.
>
>Free and frank dialog shouldn't come at the expense of empathy
>and consideration, which includes thinking before opening your
>mouth. This is something that governs enough of our everyday
>actions to the point that I think it's not too much to ask
>that it covers more sensitive topics as well. We don't just
>blurt out to someone why they don't exercise more if they
>appear fat to us, or why they don't just cut back on their
>frivolous expenditure if they appear to be hard up for cash.
>Treading on the grounds of rape/sexual assault should come
>with even more sensitivity as far as I'm concerned, and if
>that means that we (read: men) collectively have to take a
>moment of introspection before voicing scepticism, I don't
>think that's such an injustice in the face of what we've
>allowed women to suffer since the dawn of our existence on
>this earth.
>

And they continue to be oblivious to how they sound
By the third post they are kiiiind of taking more care
But only after they admitted not liking being bludgeoned by rjcc
And again and again they remind me of racists being willfully ignorant still thinking hey they want to wait until the ferguson trial
Um there likely won't be one
Oh well then *shrug* "healthy skepticism"
That's not what you're doing
~~~~
When you are born, you cry, and the world rejoices. Live so that when you die, you rejoice, and the world cries.
~~~~
You cannot hate people for their own good.