The "I Didn't Comment in Another Thread" Thread

[trappedslider]

 

[CleverNickName]

 

[Gradine]

That's not empathising with others, though. It's demanding that they empathise with you, without necessarily demonstrating any commitment to reciprocate.

Couple of things;
1) If I face an oppression that most people don't have to deal with and can easily ignore, you're god damn better believe I'm going to insist you empathize with what I'm going through.
2) Human empathy, anti-oppression... these are not transactional, zero-sum issues. You should want me to be able to have the same quality of life as you, and if I don't, and you can have a role, however slight, in fixing that, you should do it. Because they damn sure would do the same for you, every single time. The idea that empathy requires a commitment to reciprocation... that's not actual empathy! It's quid pro quo. If you need something, anything, in return to empathize with somebody... you aren't really empathizing, are you?

 

[CleverNickName]

And it makes the whole thing truly meaningless, because there's pretty much nothing that isn't going to personally impact somebody, somewhere. Which brings us right back around to "everything is political".

I don't even know where to begin with this. I typed stuff, backspaced over it, retyped, backspaced, and then walked away for a bit, only to see that @Gradine had my sentiments covered.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I wonder if Mark Zuckerberg sent Elon Musk a fruit basket for taking the heat off of him.

Remember when Facebook was the worst social media network? Who knew those were the good old days?

 

[Cadence]

< insert something someplace about punching down being meh at best >

 

[MarkB]

Couple of things;
1) If I face an oppression that most people don't have to deal with and can easily ignore, you're god damn better believe I'm going to insist you empathize with what I'm going through.
2) Human empathy, anti-oppression... these are not transactional, zero-sum issues. You should want me to be able to have the same quality of life as you, and if I don't, and you can have a role, however slight, in fixing that, you should do it. Because they damn sure would do the same for you, every single time. The idea that empathy requires a commitment to reciprocation... that's not actual empathy! It's quid pro quo. If you need something, anything, in return to empathize with somebody... you aren't really empathizing, are you?

e: Thanks to the peanut gallery for making my point

You're approaching this from the assumption that the one asking for empathy from the others is oppressed. But it's just as often the other way around - the oppressors demanding that everyone else empathise with them and stop pushing their 'liberal agendas' upon them.

If the thing that someone else is asking you to fix is something you believe isn't broken, do you still maintain that you should do it?

 

[billd91]

You're approaching this from the assumption that the one asking for empathy from the others is oppressed. But it's just as often the other way around - the oppressors demanding that everyone else empathise with them and stop pushing their 'liberal agendas' upon them.

If the thing that someone else is asking you to fix is something you believe isn't broken, do you still maintain that you should do it?

I can empathize with someone finding things difficult or stressful whether their assessment of the situation is right or not or whether or not they're oppressed.
And whether or not something is broken may not be dependent on me correctly assessing it as so. People who benefit from systems of oppression rarely feel the situation is broken... unless they've managed to develop empathy for the people oppressed by those systems.

 

[Gradine]

You're approaching this from the assumption that the one asking for empathy from the others is oppressed. But it's just as often the other way around - the oppressors demanding that everyone else empathise with them and stop pushing their 'liberal agendas' upon them.

If the thing that someone else is asking you to fix is something you believe isn't broken, do you still maintain that you should do it?

Do you need someone to help you tell the difference between worthy causes and actual oppression and grifters and bad actors? It's usually not that difficult to tell the difference. There are exceptions of course, where there are gray areas and serious research is needed; I'm not going to pretend to have all the answers myself. But I'm going to guess you can tell the difference with "Please empathize with me, systemic racism is endemic to the structures of our society and I am directly suffering from it" and "Please empathize with me, they're trying to replace white people". To say that the fact that the latter happens disqualifies the benefits if not outright necessity of the former is throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

 

[Ryujin]

You're approaching this from the assumption that the one asking for empathy from the others is oppressed. But it's just as often the other way around - the oppressors demanding that everyone else empathise with them and stop pushing their 'liberal agendas' upon them.

If the thing that someone else is asking you to fix is something you believe isn't broken, do you still maintain that you should do it?

Damn. I was going to agree with you and then expand, but I was getting too political. Post deleted in favour of simple agreement.