Sensitivity Writers. AKA: avoiding cultural appropriate in writing

[doctorbadwolf]

The Education Chair of my writing group set up a "diversity workshop" to teach us straight white males how to write with "compassion" when we include diverse characters.

I took a stand on our Facebook page, telling the group I was not going to seek approval from a censorship committee to write what I want to write.

Ultimately, I resigned the group and joined another group led by a writer who believes as I do that writers can't worry about people who go out of their way to be offended by a work of art.

Ah yes, the horrible censorship of asking someone to give a damn about other people.

 

[Calithorne]

Ah yes, the horrible censorship of asking someone to give a damn about other people.

It's not my job as a writer to give a damn about offending people.

Much of the greatest pieces of literature are very offensive, on purpose.

For example, Mark Twain went out of his way to offend his fellow Southerners in his books.

My father, who is a devout Catholic, would be very offended by many aspects of my story.

If I'm willing to offend him, I'm not going to worry about offending people I don't know.

I note that a person who demands we don't culturally appropriate from other cultures, however, is going out of his way to be offended.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

It's not my job as a writer to give a damn about offending people.

Much of the greatest pieces of literature are very offensive, on purpose.

For example, Mark Twain went out of his way to offend his fellow Southerners in his books.

My father, who is a devout Catholic, would be very offended by many aspects of my story.

If I'm willing to offend him, I'm not going to worry about offending people I don't know.

I note that a person who demands we don't culturally appropriate from other cultures, however, is going out of his way to be offended.

Only person here getting bent outta shape is you, bud.

 

[Sacrosanct]

That is simply false.
.

No it’s not. It’s pretty well established. I mean, I get why you’d say it’s false, because your argument and position depend on it being false. But it’s not. You’re unwilling to confront your biases and privileges, so you’re taking a position that all those things that prove your position incorrect just don’t exist. Hate to break itmto you, but they do, and it’s pretty well settled. Might as well be arguing that climate change isn’t real, because that’s the level of data you’re arguing against.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Being inconsiderate and rude is definitely a virtue, you guys.

 

[Calithorne]

Being inconsiderate and rude is definitely a virtue, you guys.

Tell that to Mark Twain bud, or just about any great writer who challenged people's assumptions about the world.

 

[Calithorne]

I've heard of people going out of their way to be offended by a fraternity that had a party where people wore sombreros.

I would like to remind people that if that is your worst problem you're dealing with, then you have no real problems.

Some people are hungry every day for instance, or don't have a home to live in, or clean water to drink.

Those are real problems.

 

[Mercurius]

I'm guessing that some here wouldn't take too kindly to Dave Chappelle's latest Netflix special.

 

[Mercurius]

I wonder if there's a bit of a real-world version of D&D's alignments going on in this thread.

The "Lawful Good" people abide by such concepts as cultural appropriation - to them they are the letter of the law, and the way towards being kinder and helping others.

The "Chaotic Good" people dislike such rules and regulations, and prefer a more free-wheeling approach to kindness and community.

The "Neutral Good" people try to find a balance. The see the usefulness of the rules and concepts, but also the limitations.

The problem is that the LG people think anyone who disagree is either Chaotic Neutral (anarchic, bad faith actors) or Chaotic Evil (down-right awful). The CG people think the LG people are controlling LN folks, or even domineering an authoritarian LE folks. Both confuse the NG people for being the other extreme.

My guess is that there aren't any true Evil folks in this thread.

And then there are the true Neutrals, who see any and all perspectives as just thought bubbles arising and falling, all of them illusory. To them such squabbles are laughable, just tiny mental farts in an infinite cosmos that transcends such notions as chaos and order.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Tell that to Mark Twain bud, or just about any great writer who challenged people's assumptions about the world.

Oh my dude, you’re a delight.

You know there’s a difference between challenging people and being offensive because enough just don’t care how your work affects people, right?

What Twain did could not be further to the opposite end from what Sacrosanct is trying to avoid doing.

Twain considered the impact of every written word, and chose what to say based on a desire to challenge his neighbors to be better people by examining their own BS notions.

You’re advocating not giving a damn, and just writing what you feel like writing. Literally the direct opposite.

“Write for yourself” is self-indulgent nonsense, that Twain would despise with vociferous and eloquent spite.

It is the very height of comedic absurdity that you would come into this thread, performative indignation on your sleeve, to pronounce to the gathered participants your anecdote of the time you rallied against the terrible oppression of being invited to learn about the perspective that perhaps artists should have compassion of all things. All while behaving as though you were providing a novel perspective or argument, no less!

To simultaneously thread-crap, rail against “seeking offense”, and dive headlong into the thread for seemingly the sole purpose of being offended that anyone expects anything of other people, behaviorally, is genuinely the funniest thing I’ve witnessed in days.