Watch out, whitey faggots -- you're next in the SJW crosshairs.

[Metaphor]

Trigger warning: description of unhinged lunacy follows.

In March this year, the National Union of Students held a women's conference and asked the audience to stop applauding speakers, because it 'triggered anxiety' in some people. Instead, they were invited to use 'feminist jazz hands' in place of applause.

The conference also passed a motion demanding that gay white men stop 'acting like' black women, taking the motion's title and inspiration from this piece in TIME. (As an aside, the astonishingly entitled author of the TIME piece even has the fucking cajones to tell gay white men that their loss of straight privilege is their fault, because they could pretend to be straight, but she can't pretend to be white).

Motion 503: Dear White Gay Men: Stop Appropriating Black Women
Submitted by: NUS LGBT Committee
Conference Believes:
1. The appropriation of Black women by white gay men is prevalent within the LGBT scene and community.
2. This may be manifested in the emulation of the mannerisms, language (particularly AAVE- African American Vernacular English) and phrases that can be attributed to Black women. White gay men may often assert that they are “strong black women” or have an “inner black woman”.
3. White gay men are the dominant demographic within the LGBT community, and they benefit from both white privilege and male privilege.
...

Conference Further Believes:
1. This type of appropriation is unacceptable and must be addressed.
2. Low numbers of Black LGBT women delegates attend NUS LGBT conference. This can be attributed to many factors, one of which may be the prevalent appropriation by white gay men, which may mean that delegates do not feel comfortable or safe attending conference.
Conference Resolves:
1. To work to eradicate the appropriation of black women by white gay men.
2. To work in conjunction with NUS LGBT campaign to raise awareness of the issue, to call it out as unacceptable behaviour and, where appropriate, to educate those who perpetuate this behaviour.
...

How nice -- I can be educated on this matter. Who is going to be voted on to the committee that determines whether a mannerism or action belongs to black women and not gay white men? If it can be proven that finger-snaps originated in white drag culture in the 1970s, will black women be forbidden from appropriating gay white male culture?

Am I allowed to say 'really, queen?' to my gay white friends any more, or is this an 'unacceptable behaviour' that will lead to a 're-education'?

Among other gems: cross-dressing is oppressive:

Motion 407: Zero-tolerance for prejudice in our Unions and NUS
Submitted by: Birkbeck Students’ Union
Conference believes:
1. Trans people are routinely pilloried in the media, and in popular culture generally…

Conference Resolves:
1. To issue a statement condemning the use of ‘cross-dressing’ as a mode of fancy dress.
2. To amend the NUS Zero Tolerance Statement policy to cover all NUS events and conferences; and to encourage Unions to ban clubs and societies from holding events which permit or encourage (cisgender) members to use ‘cross-dressing’ as a mode of fancy dress.

 

[repoman]

Actually, shitlord, you are supposed to educate yourself. Because they shouldn't be required to enact the labor of educating you.

 

[bigfield]

U mad, bro?

 

[Metaphor]

U mad, bro?

Who me?

 

[repoman]

Go to 18:27 of the video, funny stuff.

 

[bigfield]

U mad, bro?

Who me?

Why u mad?

Just act straight, and stop listening to Beyoncé.

 

[Metaphor]

Who me?

Why u mad?

Just act straight, and stop listening to Beyoncé.

Were you asking if I was angry, or if I was insane?

 

[bigfield]

Why u mad?

Just act straight, and stop listening to Beyoncé.

Were you asking if I was angry, or if I was insane?

I was inquiring after the intensity of your emotional response with respect to the learned opinions of our good friends in the feminist bloggers community. As is customary among the aforementioned activists, this was intended as self-satisfied taunt rather a thoughtful response.

Your confusion is entirely justified as my comments were nonsensical.

 

[fast]

2. This may be manifested in the emulation of the mannerisms, language (particularly AAVE- African American Vernacular English) and phrases that can be attributed to Black women. White gay men may often assert that they are “strong black women” or have an “inner black woman”.

wtf?

 

[Jarhyn]

Well, if anyone trys to make me stop doing *thing* because it 'belongs' to some arbitrary group and not to a group they have arbitrarily decided cannot be the other group that for whatever reason they think includes me, I will laugh at them and keep doing it. If they try to physically restrain me for it, I pity the fool...

Cultural appropriation is not a thing. People do stuff. If that stuff is useful, productive, and enjoyable and doesn't prevent others from DOING it, then it is something acceptable for any person to do, regardless of arbitrary group labels. Sauce for the goose, sauce for the gander.

 

[ideologyhunter]

I can totally see Richard Simmons doing a Pearl Bailey. Y'all whip dat tushy, darlin!!

 

[ronburgundy]

In case anyone actually needs further evidence of a destructive victimhood culture that breeds close-minded intolerance, this is a glaring example.

It isn't surprising that when you put a bunch of people who define themselves and build their worldview on their victim status and who exist in institutions that reward mere membership in victimized group that they wind of turning on each other in a kind of victim one-upmanship competition to win the award (and compensation) for being the most victimized.

I've seen it many times in academia. Several of my close academic friends who are gay white males have revealed stories about denied status as "under-represented minorities" by bigoted ethnic minority faculty who sought to protect their victimhood turf by claiming that gay white males don't count because the privilege of their biological whiteness and maleness override their "choice" to be gay. Its pervasive enough that these comments were made openly at a faculty meeting and no one else objected to the comment.

 

[laughing dog]

In case anyone actually needs further evidence of a destructive victimhood culture that breeds close-minded intolerance, this is a glaring example.

It isn't surprising that when you put a bunch of people who define themselves and build their worldview on their victim status and who exist in institutions that reward mere membership in victimized group that they wind of turning on each other in a kind of victim one-upmanship competition to win the award (and compensation) for being the most victimized.

I've seen it many times in academia. Several of my close academic friends who are gay white males have revealed stories about denied status as "under-represented minorities" by bigoted ethnic minority faculty who sought to protect their victimhood turf by claiming that gay white males don't count because the privilege of their biological whiteness and maleness override their "choice" to be gay. Its pervasive enough that these comments were made openly at a faculty meeting and no one else objected to the comment.

Your friend are probably just ignoring the relevant SES factors that explain that behavior.

 

[ronburgundy]

In case anyone actually needs further evidence of a destructive victimhood culture that breeds close-minded intolerance, this is a glaring example.

It isn't surprising that when you put a bunch of people who define themselves and build their worldview on their victim status and who exist in institutions that reward mere membership in victimized group that they wind of turning on each other in a kind of victim one-upmanship competition to win the award (and compensation) for being the most victimized.

I've seen it many times in academia. Several of my close academic friends who are gay white males have revealed stories about denied status as "under-represented minorities" by bigoted ethnic minority faculty who sought to protect their victimhood turf by claiming that gay white males don't count because the privilege of their biological whiteness and maleness override their "choice" to be gay. Its pervasive enough that these comments were made openly at a faculty meeting and no one else objected to the comment.

Your friend are probably just ignoring the relevant SES factors that explain that behavior.

No, the bigoted minorities with such views are mostly middle class morons who grew up with more advantages than most white people they call "privileged", and who bought into the pseudo-intellectual drivel often spewed from ideological activists masquerading as academics.

 

[laughing dog]

Your friend are probably just ignoring the relevant SES factors that explain that behavior.

No, the bigoted minorities with such views are mostly middle class morons who grew up with more advantages than most white people they call "privileged", and who bought into the pseudo-intellectual drivel often spewed from ideological activists masquerading as academics.

You mean that bigoted minorities can act just like bigoted "majorities" who buy the pseudo-intellectual drivel
often spewed by the "anything but racism" ideological activists masquerading as academics? Looks like you are conflating race with SES factors.

 

[ronburgundy]

No, the bigoted minorities with such views are mostly middle class morons who grew up with more advantages than most white people they call "privileged", and who bought into the pseudo-intellectual drivel often spewed from ideological activists masquerading as academics.

You mean that bigoted minorities can act just like bigoted "majorities" who buy the pseudo-intellectual drivel
often spewed by the "anything but racism" ideological activists masquerading as academics? Looks like you are conflating race with SES factors.

I am not presuming that race is a direct causal factor at all in their behavior, but SES also have no relation to it. They are just pathetic people who lack the self-awareness and courage to for a real identity and their own purpose, so they define themselves as victims, and use group-level categories to determine victimhood rather than bothering to think about how individuals are variably victimized. Get a bunch of people using various group-level categories to define their victimhood and you'll get pissing contests over who has the most victimized status.
There is no one in academics arguing that racism doesn't exist. Only those who quietly think it isn't the sole explanation for anything that matters. Even this they are rarely say out of fear for their jobs by the frothing victimhood cult that comes up with phrases like "anything but racism" to falsely malign any person that even considers whether any negative outcome for any racial minority was ever due to other factors besides racism.

 

[laughing dog]

You mean that bigoted minorities can act just like bigoted "majorities" who buy the pseudo-intellectual drivel
often spewed by the "anything but racism" ideological activists masquerading as academics? Looks like you are conflating race with SES factors.

I am not presuming that race is a direct causal factor at all in their behavior, but SES also have no relation to it. They are just pathetic people who lack the self-awareness and courage to for a real identity and their own purpose, so they define themselves as victims, and use group-level categories to determine victimhood rather than bothering to think about how individuals are variably victimized. Get a bunch of people using various group-level categories to define their victimhood and you'll get pissing contests over who has the most victimized status.
There is no one in academics arguing that racism doesn't exist. Only those who quietly think it isn't the sole explanation for anything that matters. Even this they are rarely say out of fear for their jobs by the frothing victimhood cult that comes up with phrases like "anything but racism" to falsely malign any person that even considers whether any negative outcome for any racial minority was ever due to other factors besides racism.

I don't see how your response can be taken seriously. There are no double blind peer-reviewed studies to support your claims. I think it is clear you are ignoring the relevant SES factors in order to promote your ideologically dominated views.

 

[krypton iodine sulfur]

Among other gems: cross-dressing is oppressive:

Motion 407: Zero-tolerance for prejudice in our Unions and NUS
Submitted by: Birkbeck Students’ Union
Conference believes:
1. Trans people are routinely pilloried in the media, and in popular culture generally…

Conference Resolves:
1. To issue a statement condemning the use of ‘cross-dressing’ as a mode of fancy dress.
2. To amend the NUS Zero Tolerance Statement policy to cover all NUS events and conferences; and to encourage Unions to ban clubs and societies from holding events which permit or encourage (cisgender) members to use ‘cross-dressing’ as a mode of fancy dress.

It's not really a gem. Cross-dressing as a joke has negative repercussions on transgender and genderqueer people, and people who actually do crossdress for reasons other than personal amusement. I wouldn't call it oppression, but up until recently almost any time behaviour outside gender norms was presented in media or given public attention, it was all one big fucking joke at best. It becomes dehumanizing past a certain point. I often encounter people who are critical of transrights, are stuck on this image of a gorilla of a linebacker throwing on a flower print dress and calling himself a lady.

But, I'm all for the right of that gorilla of a linebacker to do just that if it's what he or she feels good doing. I don't feel oppressed by that. That said, I live in a very liberal part of the world with open and accepting family, so while I do face some measure of disdain and prejudice from others, I've got it cushy more or less. Others still cannot leave their homes as themselves for fear someone will kick the living shit out of them because transition is a slow, awkward process with varied results which leaves many trans people feeling extremely exposed and for good reason. Perpetuating this idea that we're just a joke or a freak show doesn't help, and the type of cross-dressing they seem to be discouraging is the deprecating sort.

So, while I don't think banning cross-dress is the right way forward, I don't think the line of reasoning is all that bad. It's an awkward way to address a very awkward problem, but the basic considerations are understandable.

 

[Derec]

It's not really a gem. Cross-dressing as a joke has negative repercussions on transgender and genderqueer people, and people who actually do crossdress for reasons other than personal amusement. I wouldn't call it oppression, but up until recently almost any time behaviour outside gender norms was presented in media or given public attention, it was all one big fucking joke at best. It becomes dehumanizing past a certain point. I often encounter people who are critical of transrights, are stuck on this image of a gorilla of a linebacker throwing on a flower print dress and calling himself a lady.

Would you say the same about any sort of dressing-up for fun? A few years ago there was this silly campaign at a college called "We are a culture not a costume" which was rightly ridiculed.
So what's the solution to spare fragile fee-fees of the easily offended? Ban Halloween?

 

[Metaphor]

It's not really a gem. Cross-dressing as a joke has negative repercussions on transgender and genderqueer people,

You've asked all of them, have you?

and people who actually do crossdress for reasons other than personal amusement. I wouldn't call it oppression, but up until recently almost any time behaviour outside gender norms was presented in media or given public attention, it was all one big fucking joke at best. It becomes dehumanizing past a certain point. I often encounter people who are critical of transrights, are stuck on this image of a gorilla of a linebacker throwing on a flower print dress and calling himself a lady.

Do you really think anyone came to be critical of transrights because they don't like the aesthetic of a large man in a flower print dress?

But, I'm all for the right of that gorilla of a linebacker to do just that if it's what he or she feels good doing. I don't feel oppressed by that. That said, I live in a very liberal part of the world with open and accepting family, so while I do face some measure of disdain and prejudice from others, I've got it cushy more or less. Others still cannot leave their homes as themselves for fear someone will kick the living shit out of them because transition is a slow, awkward process with varied results which leaves many trans people feeling extremely exposed and for good reason. Perpetuating this idea that we're just a joke or a freak show doesn't help, and the type of cross-dressing they seem to be discouraging is the deprecating sort.

What makes you think the alternative is better? Banning cross-dressing for people who are not trans sends the message that there is something harmful about cross-dressing. But of course, cross-dressing hurts nobody, and it's nobody's fucking business.

So, while I don't think banning cross-dress is the right way forward, I don't think the line of reasoning is all that bad. It's an awkward way to address a very awkward problem, but the basic considerations are understandable.

Abridging people's rights to dress how they want because other people's feelings might be hurt is never understandable.

It is literally the same impulse that drives the religious police to punish women who they deem to be dressed immodestly.