Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Umbran" data-source="post: 9583263" data-attributes="member: 177">Deciding that it is due to &quot;problems with emotional regulation&quot; is a judgement.&nbsp; One bordering on &quot;you have a mental health issue&quot;.&nbsp; That's not okay.With respect, people fling out the accusation of there being this unspecified group of folks who, supposedly generally &quot;can't handle differing viewpoints&quot;, without showing evidence.&nbsp; The way I see this used, it looks more like, &quot;I have a specific, somewhat distasteful viewpoint or approach to discussion, and people won't allow me to harangue them, so I accuse them of having a flaw in their character,&quot; which is Internet Dysfunction 101, honestly.&quot;I don't want to talk to you (generic, not Belen, personally) about this book you love,&quot; is not a sign that the person &quot;can't handle differing viewpoints&quot;.&nbsp; Doubly so if you happen to be kind of a jerk about your discussion. If you have been browbeating folks, and they disengage and block you, that's not that they can't handle a differing viewpoint.But, the viewpoint is generally expressed through events in the narrative.&nbsp; How often are folks rejecting an alternate viewpoint that isn't represented through some problematic pieces in the story?Like, if the viewpoint is sexist/misogynistic, that's probably going to show in some bad things happening to women in the book, right? But, even if it isn't so strong as that, let's look at an example.&nbsp; Let's talk Heinlein.&nbsp; In many of his books, he creates beautiful, powerful, beyond competent women, and then says that all these women really want is to get married and have babies, or serve a grumpy old author's self-insertion character.It certainly is a different perspective, but how much of old white guy saying what women want do women really need?&nbsp; Is it that they can't handle the different perspective, or that the perspective is kinda sexist, lame, shallow, and self-serving on the author's part?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Umbran, post: 9583263, member: 177"] Deciding that it is due to "problems with emotional regulation" [I]is a judgement[/I]. One bordering on "you have a mental health issue". That's not okay. With respect, people fling out the accusation of there being this unspecified group of folks who, supposedly generally "can't handle differing viewpoints", without showing evidence. The way I see this used, it looks more like, "I have a [I]specific[/I], somewhat distasteful viewpoint or approach to discussion, and people won't allow me to harangue them, so I accuse them of having a flaw in their character," which is Internet Dysfunction 101, honestly. "I don't want to talk to [I]you[/I] (generic, not Belen, personally) about this book you love," is not a sign that the person "can't handle differing viewpoints". Doubly so if you happen to be kind of a jerk about your discussion. If you have been browbeating folks, and they disengage and block you, that's not that they can't handle a differing viewpoint. But, the viewpoint is generally expressed through events in the narrative. How often are folks rejecting an alternate viewpoint that [I]isn't[/I] represented through some problematic pieces in the story? Like, if the viewpoint is sexist/misogynistic, that's probably going to show in some bad things happening to women in the book, right? But, even if it isn't so strong as that, let's look at an example. Let's talk Heinlein. In many of his books, he creates beautiful, powerful, beyond competent women, and then says that all these women really want is to get married and have babies, or serve a grumpy old author's self-insertion character. It certainly is a different perspective, but how much of old white guy saying what women want do women really need? Is it that they can't handle the different perspective, or that the perspective is kinda sexist, lame, shallow, and self-serving on the author's part? [/QUOTE]

Verification