I no longer discuss anything related to gender, relationships, or personal life dynamics with anyone outside of my bubble. I would enjoy the conversation, learning about another's ideas and understanding although despite assurances of maturity and openness conversation ends due to their inflammatory pronouncements.
I do not believe ideas and ideals can be discussed with the general public.
> I do not believe ideas and ideals can be discussed with the general public.
Although most cultures have always had at least some small set of "taboos" for which this was true, I believe that we're in times where that set is especially large, or at least it is for the above groups of people.
Over here in Europe, we have these discussions all the time. They do get opinionated, of course. But it's not yet taboo.
There are other anecdotes of course but this is one example that even the best intentions the accuser is never told their position is untenable.
Which is the case here? Who knows? The description of events as written works just as well for both.
Right now there is a wave of people that are upset over "violent language" (https://hopeandsafety.org/learn-more/violent-language/) If push comes to shove.. they'd lose their marbles over that.
There's absolutely nothing on that page to indicate they're upset about violent language
> If push comes to shove.. they'd lose their marbles over that.
There's even less indication of that.
If the goal is for fewer people to overreact, why are we inventing boogeymen to overreact about?
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11714189/Latest-phr... (DailyMail.. yuck yes)
https://www.fastcompany.com/90865534/its-time-stop-using-vio...
https://elizabethgrim.com/adopting-inclusive-and-non-violent...
> The guide is for those who would like to replace mostly violently framed idioms with more positive and inclusive language
Clearly this is a dog whistle and they're coming for me and my guns(-related words)
Your question is phrased in such a way that I honestly can't figure out how to answer it, but non-derogatory and non-slur based does not mean non-offensive and never has. As I previously mentioned people are plenty creative at hiding insults in "respectful" words.
See also: the many nuances of "bless your heart"
When it comes to my professional work - if apologizes are not accepted I will not work at the company. If there are words that I cannot say - I request a list. Thankfully my current company is great.
I've had one organization call the "confederate flag" a form of racism. (For those who haven't been in the US South for a long time, those who display it aren't racist, but many are)
Claiming it's not is not the hill I'd choose to die on. Modern display of what most call the "confederate flag" (it isn't) rose to prominence in response to the civil rights movement. It was a perfect example of hiding behind the thinnest veneer of legitimacy while attacking someone.
I don't doubt that many in the modern day display it out of ignorance, not understanding what it actually is and how it became a symbol of their culture, but it's definitely something HR shouldn't allow in the workplace.
Me either, also I'm for banning all flags in the workplace.
But people who vastly generalize large swaths of the population in a negative light in an inaccurate manner is as bad.
> Modern display of what most call the "confederate flag" (it isn't) rose to prominence in response to the civil rights movement.
Growing up in the south the flag is used as an regional identification and lifestyle pride. (Mostly that you're a redneck, rebelious, you're going to own a pickup truck, like the idea of hardwork/farming, country music, etc). Making a claim that a race hate group has taken over the flag is pretty laughable. (About as much as the ok hand symbol being a "white nationalist flagging signal")
My concern with your statement is that you're making claims here and I'm not seeing a lot of evidence from a sociological point of view to back them up.
> many in the modern day display it out of ignorance,
Ask them why they choose to display it, and what it means to them. You made a judgement call to say what it is and that they're ignorant for doing so.
I'm sure plenty of people believe this and it's why they choose to display it. It remains true it's display dramatically increased in response to the civil rights movement. It also remains true that the symbol they have chosen as a symbol of their "regional identification and lifestyle pride" is directly lifted from a group that fought a war of rebellion in order to continue their traditions of racism and slavery. That's a simple historical fact. The flag wasn't "taken over" by a race hate group. It was CREATED by a race hate group. Some may wish to take it back and use it for non-hateful purposes, but that's not an easy thing to do, and they have yet to succeed in divorcing it from it's original meaning.
I mean, it is literally the flag the South flew when they seceded from the Union in the name of white supremacy. The Southern states were very clear in their secession documents, as was Confederate Vice President Alexander Stephens when he said of the Confederate government "its foundations are laid, its corner-stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery subordination to the superior race is his natural and normal condition."
This isn't laughable, this is plain history. Southern culture is white supremacy, end stop. And I say this as a born and bred white Texan - that flag is a disgrace, and what it represents is a disgrace.
Knew plenty of kickers with oversized pickups and 4H stickers that didn't need to fly Dixie.
Everybody who flies that flag knows what they're doing.
Where are you? In the US, most of us still have these conversations about gender, relationships, and life dynamics all the time. (If anything, this is arguably 70%+ of everything we talk about, among friends and acquaintances in the community).
> although despite assurances of maturity and openness conversation ends due to their inflammatory pronouncements.
Is there a common thread here? Can you imagine what might prompt such a response?
> It’s a very different story if you try talking to people in their 20’s or younger.
Is it? We're old enough that half of us have kids, and some of us have teenaged kids (13-19yrs old), and they also have friends and such. It doesn't seem that different to me. (They're less willing to tolerate arbitrary BS, but otherwise, don't seem wildly different than we were at those ages)
Why would professors have "views" all that different from home? Professors are regular people too.
(Two of us in our friend group / community, are literally employed college professors, others are elementary teachers, software developers, IT folks, one designer, one electrical engineer, two in marketing, one who is in HR, one is a city bus driver, one who works in an automotive parts plant, one is a nurse, etc)
You guys like, have friends, right? Like, people who you see semi-regularly and are from your community, but who aren't necessarily from your employer or in your career / direct field-of-work? Friends that aren't also LinkedIn contacts?
...but they all skew more liberal than those who have master's degrees, who in skew more liberal than those with honors degrees - and so forth until you get to those who are barely educated. This trend persists even when the individuals involved are not in academia.
Same, but like, how do you talk about any of that stuff, without also touching on "gender, relationships, and life dynamics".
Like, I have no idea how a group of friends would talk about, say "that cool new Spider-Man movie" without also talking about gender / race / life dynamics / etc. Those topics are so fundamental, they're a part of almost everything.
What tends to prompt such responses in my experience is saying anything along the lines of "In my experience, I've noticed there is a tendency for (insert gender) to..."
Actually, in hindsight, the inflammatory responses mostly only happen when the inserted gender is women.
In these situations my default is to just observe as dispassionately as possible. If I'm in a cheeky mood maybe I'll troll a bit or try to find a humorous way to point out how the shoe could be on the other foot. And sometimes, although very rarely, the mood is just right that I feel safe enough to be earnest.
If I got all up in arms every time someone says something misogynistic or misandrist, I think I would end up being a very lonely person. I've seen a lot of these people. They either end up brainwashed on one end of the gender war spectrum (and usually just so angry and spiteful -- this is the polarized archetype), or get cast out of all possible ingroups if they make the mistake of attempting to be too consistent with their criticism (nerdy and socially unaware archetype).
99% of the time something is described as woman-hating, which is what that word means, it's nothing of the sort. But feminist extremists react so extraordinarily over the top, and our culture unfortunately forbids firing people for this type of OTT reaction, that everyone else lives in fear of triggering them.
So help everyone out here. Next time you think you've heard something "blatantly misogynist", stay out of it. Let people talk.
On the contrary, I love having these discussions.
Same, although my lawyer insists not to have them anymore when drinking.
It's also pointless to discuss them. People say all sorts of things, but then act completely differently!