Jump to content

Raiders DE Carl Nassib announces he's gay


RaidersAreOne

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, Adrenaline_Flux said:

self-reflection on why you feel a compulsion to argue that a phrase is "not inherently bad" when we seem to agree that it is regressive and passive marginalization 

I have reflected on that. I think society as whole is to sensitive, tbh. Thats why I love the word ignorant. Because you can tell someone they are being literally ignorant to the definition of a word and watch the paradox of them trying to grasp a simple reality. Its funny. 

As for me, I never (I dont think) said the phrase 'I dont care' and I will be more cognizant of my personal phraseology in the future. In the mean time, I will continue to base my assumptions of peoples messages based on their intent. IE - I will try to decipher if they are using phrases to marginalize or if they are using the technically correct words to convey a thought. 

Edited by Matts4313
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, GSUeagles14 said:

If I have a few gay friends and a few gay family members. I can tell you for 100% certainty that they take no offense to “I don’t care”. I’m sure there’s people that might, and and I would use whatever language they’d prefer. 
 

you know what doesn’t help, accusing people blindly of not caring. There’s no one right answer. Someone suggested saying “im cool with that”, as I said I find that more offense and I’m sure we would find one person that would agree. Does that mean we never use “im cool with that” even if some others find it most supportive?

At this point, this argument has become about semantics, but because I'm a word nerd, I'm gonna argue this point, purely to talk about the semantics of it.

The reason there's a big push back to "I don't care" or other variants is probably not as much passive marginalization as it the context.  When it's a thread about the first active player coming out, and people come in, to repeatedly assess how much they don't care, the context of that phrase sets off alarm bells.  It's like every time I hear someone start with "I'm not racist, but..." they're about to say something racist.  The more common variant people often actually say is "And you know I don't care about what color someone is, but.."  And that's because people with bigoted views are rarely open about those views, because they know society is against them.  Instead, those get hidden behind phrases like that.

I mean, when I see that phrase, my first assumption is that it's someone just hiding behind that common phrasing, because 99% of the time, that's what that language refers to.

From everything else you've said, it seems like in your case it was totally innocent, but I think that's why people are quick to respond negatively to that language.

5 minutes ago, Matts4313 said:

I dont think at face value the phrase is incorrect at all. I think that the impact due to misinterpretation and misuse could be used negatively. Much like the word ignorant, retarded, *****, etc. There are literal meanings to those words that are not negative inherently. Then there is societal interpretations that have made those words negative based on context. 

Ignorant means lacking knowledge.

Retarded means stunted or slowed.

***** refers to a preggo pupper. 

Societal interpretations are ever fluid. Black => African American => Black. The accepted lexicon keeps changing, but the meaning of the words does not. I am simply stating that "I do not care" is a technically correct phrase that people used in a correct method, though for societal impact the phraseology should be changed.  

As I sort of touched on above, this isn't really sound logic about language, because that's not how language works.  So many words have literal meanings that are archaic, and yes, they change, but they aren't that fluid.

Retarded has been a word that refers to mentally disabled people for decades and decades.  Almost certainly longer than you've been alive.  With the b word, even longer.  The African-American/black thing is mostly a media invention that never had much life outside of demographic statistics.

And if you used any of those words, in any context, almost, the assumed meaning is going to be those negative associations.  And I doubt very seriously you'd be shocked in a real life conversation that someone took that meaning from them if you used them.

Language is fluid, but it's not that fluid, and we rely on societal contextual meanings, for some words, more often than the literal meaning.  A good example being the word ironic.  It was used so often to mean something completely different than its actual meaning for years, and the colloquial definition was just recently added.

But if I try to use the word for its original definition, people would probably be confused.  If I get mad that they interpreted the colloquial meaning instead of the literal, then I'm really just being a ****.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, pwny said:

Or: hear me out. Instead of saying things that could offend someone and then changing it later, we could just not use the passively dismissive language and avoid the whole thing altogether. 

 

I'n gonna rehighlight malf's post so it doesn't get missed

This is literally all we're asking. It doesn't need to be this whole stupid argument. Just follow what the recommendations for allyship are and stop trying to tell everyone that because the people you know allow you to use a phrase that's widely recommended to not be used that it is okay to use everywhere.

I hear what you’re saying but you don’t seem to be returning the favor. People aren’t robots, one set of recommendations will undoubtedly differ from another. People’s personal preferences will be a wide range. How do we know which is right. I know you said I’m dismissing thousands, but you realize that’s an incredibly small percentage of the gay community, right? 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Matts4313 said:

I have reflected on that. I think society as whole is to sensitive, tbh. Thats why I love the word ignorant. Because you can tell someone they are being literally ignorant to the definition of a word and watch the paradox of them trying to grasp a simple reality. Its funny. 

As for me, I never (I dont think) said the phrase 'I dont care' and I will be more cognizant of my personal phraseology in the future. In the mean time, I will continue to base my assumptions of peoples messages based on their intent. IE - I will try to decipher if they are using phrases to marginalize or if they are using the technically correct words to convey a thought. 

Have you ever considered that there may be a reason why marginalized people are "too sensitive" or why non-marginalized people are "too sensitive" when it comes to their support of marginalized people?

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Matts4313 said:

Im not arguing. I am sorry if it comes off that way. I am literally agreeing with you and giving my opinion as to why some people default to that language. My stance is simply is "the phrase its self is not inherently bad, but due to societal interpretations, its not the best way to express acceptance". 

 

Im having a conversation on language. Its not specifically about orientation, though in this thread, it is applicable. Im not sure what or how I would self reflect on the definition of words, especially as I am stating that they have power that is ever changing in different social circles and at different time periods. 

We literally know all of this. It's literally been said since the first time it got brought up back 20 pages, and every step of the way we keep affirming the notion that regressive may not be the intent. Nobody has been called a bigot over this, nobody has been banned over it or been given a warning. They've just been asked to learn. We don't need a whole bunch of white knighting about how they're not intending to be harmful because literally no one is saying they are intending to. 

 

Remember when you got really mad at me because I made a joke about some stuff you were going through? I never intended to be hurtful or cause harm, but the joke went too far and you got hurt. I could have sat there and told you "well it's a joke. And the definition of a joke is to be funny and not to be harmful, and I make jokes that are much worse than that with @Glenall the time and he never got offended." But what did I do instead? I apologized, explained my intent wasn't to be harmful and then promised to not make even a tiny joke about that topic again. You didn't need @Adrenaline_Flux to defend why I made the joke and how I actually care about people and explain to you that I didn't mean any harm because he's said jokes that are similar and he wasn't intending to be a jerk, you just needed me to acknowledge you and how it hurt you (empathy) and commit to not doing it again (equity). That's all we're asking here. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Adrenaline_Flux said:

Have you ever considered that there may be a reason why marginalized people are "too sensitive" or why non-marginalized people are "too sensitive" when it comes to their support of marginalized people?

I said society, not 'marginalized people', when I referred to being too sensitive. Dont spin this into a conversation that is not what I am saying, please. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, GSUeagles14 said:

I hear what you’re saying but you don’t seem to be returning the favor. People aren’t robots, one set of recommendations will undoubtedly differ from another. People’s personal preferences will be a wide range. How do we know which is right. I know you said I’m dismissing thousands, but you realize that’s an incredibly small percentage of the gay community, right? 

All the research and literature says not to say it. you can either accept that or keep digging your heels in. But what are you doing, really? Why is it so important to you to be able to say "I don't care" even though every source you can find on how to react specifically says not to say things that minimize the importance of it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Matts4313 said:

I said society, not 'marginalized people', when I referred to being too sensitive. Dont spin this into a conversation that is not what I am saying, please. 

He literally mentioned both marginalized and non-marginalized… So like.. the whole of society. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Adrenaline_Flux said:

as a member of the LGBTQIA+ community, I take offense to it and I know many others who would too because it's passive marginalization 

I think I’ve been clear that I meant no offense and would use whatever phrase you’d like. But I have at least two gay friends that I will never tell about this debate as they’d be upset it was such a discussion. Which is exactly the problem I’ve been talking about for the last 10 pages.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Matts4313 said:

Non-marginalized people talking about marginalized was his full sentence. 

Yes. Because you said you reflected on your compulsion to argue about a phrase regarding its use towards marginalized people. Ergo, your answer reflects that you believe society is sensitive regarding the topic of phrases related to marginalized people. Ergo, a response to that answer would reflect both aspects of how marginalized people view it, as well as the non-marginalized people who take up allyship over that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, GSUeagles14 said:

I think I’ve been clear that I meant no offense and would use whatever phrase you’d like. But I have at least two gay friends that I will never tell about this debate as they’d be upset it was such a discussion. Which is exactly the problem I’ve been talking about for the last 10 pages.

I actually did ask my gay sister-in-law about it because I wanted to make sure I wasn't making her uncomfortable and she gave me the are you serious look and appropriately said "I don't care which phrase you do" with a smirk. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

English is a frustrating language.

I don't care means "I don't have a preference".

It also means contempt/lack of empathy in certain context. (I don't care that *insert bad thing that happened to you*)

It also means general to extreme indifference and/or apathy.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, MWil23 said:

English is a frustrating language.

I don't care means "I don't have a preference".

It also means contempt/lack of empathy in certain context. (I don't care that *insert bad thing that happened to you*)

It also means general to extreme indifference and/or apathy.

It's more frustrating when everything you say gets put under a microscope and people try to tell you what you meant when you said it. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...