Wherever I wander I wonder whether I’ll ever find a place to call home…
Hey, thanks stranger!
Side note, I’ve always been curious whether “simping” is short for “simpering” or “sympathizing.” I’ve seen it used either way, I think.
Like, when it’s used as an insult to people who are overly obsequious towards another, I could see it meaning “simpering.”
But when it’s used as a noun to refer to someone who supports something detestable, I could see it meaning “sympathizer,” and then subsequently being converted to verb form by nature of internet slang…
My high points are when my cat does something particularly cute, when I remember a bash command without needing to look it up, or when some jerk in a book I’m reading finally gets their comeuppance.
I have very little joy for comparison to steal. It’s just kind of disorienting to realize that someone can live like that. Like, wanting something that involves human connection (whether sexual or otherwise), and actually getting it. And not being judged for having those needs, let alone announcing them.
Something about it doesn’t compute. It just kinda breaks my brain a little. Can’t wrap my mind around what that would be like.
Didn’t you hear? The age of consent has been raised to 52.
If you’re attracted to a woman in her forties, believe it or not, nonce.
Of course you don’t, because it’s an assumption and a generalisation that you’re hinging your entire tirade upon
It’s neither of those things. It’s an observation and personal experience.
And I didn’t say “I don’t know how else to explain it” like you tried insinuating by butchering it out of context. I said IF you don’t see the connection, THEN I don’t know how else to explain it. That’s a completely different statement. The shortcoming is yours, not mine.
You literally brought up the strawman yourself when you said “but what if they were black or hispanic or trans” as if those people are all incapable of forming social connections that would put them in contact with their own version of Kevin
More butchering of my statements, and you accuse me of strawmanning?!?
I’m telling you, the average “kevin with a truck” in smalltown, usa is going to have some exclusionary biases like racism and homophobia. You don’t have to believe me, you can say “nuh uh, doubt.” But twisting my words into something I didn’t say is fucked up.
Want to know if your argument is ever making a generalisation in bad faith?
I also never said that everyone who drives a truck is a fascist. I only said that a lot of them are,
Replace “drives a truck” and “fascist” with anything you like. Then read your own words again.
That’s literally not what a generalization is. I made it explicitly clear that what I’m doing is not generalizing. I clearly acknowledged that it’s not some sweeping blanket statement.
What I did was state a trend. Trends and generalizations are not the same thing.
Not even a little bit, but you’re gaslighting me now so I’m done with you.
For clarity, if you want me to pass your purity test by telling you that Xenophobia makes about as much sense as stapling your genitals to a 2x4 and swinging said 2x4 at a hornet’s nest, since we’re ALL GOD DAMN HUMAN BEINGS THAT DESERVE RESPECT AND HELP WHEN NEEDED EVEN IF THEY ARE SHITTY.
Wow, crystal clear logic you’ve got there. You struggle to even formulate a basic argument and yet you have the gall to accuse me of purity testing?
If you don’t see how xenophobia connects to the exclusion of outsiders in smalltown, usa, then it’s honestly hopeless to try explaining to you.
Why would your first assumption be that I’m excluding everybody that doesn’t fit into the niche?
I’m not assuming that about you. I’m telling you that this kind of thing happens. And you continue to act like it doesn’t by pretending it’s so audacious of me to point it out.
So you’re assuming that I’m saying people that can’t pay through any means don’t deserve help? You REALLY think that about a stranger you know nothing about.
Have you heard of the concept of goodwill? Of helping someone out for the entirely selfish reason of ‘helping people feels good and it makes me feel good’?
That’s not AT ALL what I’m saying, and you’re twisting my words around on their head so hard that I almost think it has to be disingenuous.
Literally my whole point is that those people DO deserve help, but that in this system where people depend on the goodwill of others, some people will be excluded because in many cases people’s goodwill is either lacking, incomplete, or exclusionary.
The examples you list have no bearing on it because I’m NOT SAYING that nobody has goodwill or does things for altruistic reasons. What I’m saying is that relying on that alone as a society to get everyone the help that they need IS NOT ENOUGH, because too many people LACK THAT GOODWILL.
If you think those rescue efforts have nearly as much support and funding as they need, then you must not have ever been involved in anything of the kind, because almost always they have to do more with less. They could certainly always use more volunteers, more donations, but as I stated before THIS ALONE WILL NEVER BE ENOUGH, because GOODWILL IS NOT AS COMMON AS YOU PRESUME.
All of those efforts would be much better served by state-sponsored IGOs and NGOs that can do high-level coordination and collect and distribute the vast resources needed to bring these rescue efforts and reconstruction projects to completion. And instead of relying SOLELY on volunteers and hoping enough people care enough to make those sacrifices, instead there should be government-sponsored workforces whose entire jobs, training, and expertise revolves around providing the necessary labor. Because even though volunteering is great, it’s simply NOT ENOUGH.
How much clearer can I make that for you?
Why is everyone relying so hard on using specific counterexamples as a counterargument?
Counterexamples only refute absolute statements. If I said “no one with a disability can find the help they need in this kind of system,” then sure, listing a few people with disabilities who do find the help they need would be enough to refute that statement.
But that’s not what I’m saying. What I’m saying is “not everyone (including, but not limited to people with disabilities) can find the help they need in this kind of system.”
It’s a completely different statement, because it’s not an absolute. I’m not saying that no exceptions exist. I’m saying that exceptions do exist to the opposite statement, i.e. “everyone (including people with disabilities) can find the help they beed in this kind of system.” Which, by the way, is an absolute statement.
So in fact I’m the one arguing against an absolute, and people try refuting me as if I’m stating an absolute when I’m not.
And unless anyone wants to argue that every single person in this system is able to find the help they need when they need it, then there’s really no way to argue against my point, because my entire point is simply that that’s not true. There are people who get left out, and any attempt to claim otherwise is erasure.
You’re missing the part where these “neighbors who help when needed” tend to exclude anyone they don’t view as worthy of their help, and that can come loaded with as many biases as people have
Relying on that as a society excludes people. That’s what my entire point has been about. It’s great that your neighbor finds the help that he needs, but that doesn’t mean everyone does. And acting like naming one example, or even several examples, contradicts the statement that there are people who get left out, is erasure.
It’s like pointing to an example of a rich Black man and saying “See, Black people don’t struggle with poverty”
Yeah, I wish blue state governors had the balls to call up their own Guard to defend against those incursions. Because that’s what they are: incursions.
Okay well what about when they ask that person later if they’ll help move Tony’s fridge? Like this un-negotiated yet obligatory repayment. If you say “sorry, I can’t” then they’ll immediately lose respect for you, and probably tell everyone they know not to help you in the future. Even if you explain that you have a condition that prevents you, if that condition isn’t visible to them they’ll think you’re just selfish and making excuses.
Also, are you willing to guarantee that Kevin and Tony aren’t racist or homophobic? Are you willing to guarantee they would help move a sofa for someone who’s gay or black? This is about more than just disabilities.
This is about “good ole boy” culture and relying on the benevolence and altruism of people who likely as not only care about helping people they view as a part of their in-group. And if you think that’s not a real problem in america, then you must not live here because it’s literally all over the place here.
My point is that we shouldn’t be glorifying a society that relies on the goodwill of neighbors helping neighbors instead of funding structured social support programs that help everyone, including marginalized and disadvantaged people, to receive the help that they need.
It’s not just about whether a person can help about and whether that makes them nice and good.
It’s more about, there are people who get left out of society and they would struggle to find the help we need if we leave it entirely up to the good will of people helping their neighbors.
There needs to be more structured support, like taxpayer-funded programs designed to help everyone to receive the support they need, including (and especially) the people who are the most disadvantaged.
Helping your neighbor is good and shouldn’t go away. But we shouldn’t rely on that as a society to help the people who need it most. And we certainly shouldn’t glorify a society that does depend on that, instead of funding structured social support programs that make a point not to leave anyone out who needs help.
Show me one part of humanity’s development that did not involve social connection. You, as a human being are part of an unbroken chain of social connections spanning back so far that there isn’t even a word for how many generations it is.
Are you suggesting that makes it okay to forget about outsiders? Because if that’s what you believe, then I challenge you to explain what makes xenophobia wrong without contradicting that sentiment that you’re relying on so heavily.
You’re saying I’m focusing too much on the minutiae, but you’re the one that keeps bringing up minutiae of examples and anecdotes as if that changes anything. Ray Charles was a blind Black man, but he was also a successful musician. I don’t think anyone in their right mind would use that to argue that blind black men shouldn’t require additional assistance and accomodations that most don’t.
You know neurodivergent people with this-or-that talent? That’s great for them. BUT NOT EVERYBODY HAS THAT. And you can list as many examples as you want about such-and-such thing a person can do to help out in exchange for someone else’s help, but the more examples you list, the more you marginalize people who either can’t do those things, or can’t find someone who’s willing to help them out in the way that they need in exchange for one of those things that they happen to also be able to do.
Thank you! So many people elsewhere in this comment section don’t seem to understand this.
And yeah, it could be over something so benign as that, or even more benign. But too many people assume that if someone is being ostracized, then they must have done something to deserve it. That’s not always the case though, especially in puritanical smalltown USA.
Some of these towns, if you’re not being ostracized by most of the people there, then something must be wrong with you, because there are places where you’ll be ostracized for not supporting maga or for believing in climate change or empathy.
This is why I’m saying we shouldn’t romanticize that “smalltown vibe,” because there absolutely is a dark side to it. But people are reacting with such hostility. Clearly they haven’t lived in the kind of area I’m talking about…
I didn’t call anyone here a fascist, all I did was point out the uncomfortable parallels with this romanticization of truck culture to certain attitudes in society that enable fascism.
I also never said that everyone who drives a truck is a fascist. I only said that a lot of them are, and that a lot of people in their communities would call them great guys, because they’re willing to help out their neighbors. But a lot of time, their willingness to help ends there. And there’s a dark side to this “good ole boy” attitude where no one cares how you treat outsiders as long as you help out your in-group.
And if you don’t see the connection that this in-group/out-group dichotomy and the “good ole boy” culture that so often accompanies that “truck guy” have with fascism, I don’t know how else to explain it.
But even if I try explaining further you’ll probably just lean harder on strawmen by claiming I said everyone who drives a truck is a fascist, even though I very clearly said that’s not the case…
Oh fuck off. The next time you hear people talk about racism or sexism you should respond the same way you’re doing now and see what that gets you.
Maybe ableism isn’t as “hot” of a topic or whatever, it’s not as sexy to discuss it as other forms of oppression, but if anything that just goes to show the disabled are even more marginalized, since apparently no one has their back and it’s such “attention seeking woe is me bullshit” to critique ableism, according to you.
And don’t pretend you’re not ableist, you literally just stigmatized mental illness, specifically borderline personality disorder, as if people struggling with that don’t already struggle enough with social rejection and low self-esteem. Genuinely, fuck you.
Yes, you’re right about that. And that’s precisely why people who can’t form those connections are at such a disadvantage.
I didn’t say “just being friendly” makes a person a fascist. What I’m saying is that even fascists can “just be friendly” to the people they accept, and they often do. This is part of what allows fascism to perpetuate.
Someone could be casually sexist or viciously racist, but if they’re nice enough to the people in their community, people will say “he’s just a great guy,” because he’s nice to the people who they think matter. They have a word for it. They call them “good ole boys.”
I’m telling you my personal experience from living among these people and yet everyone seems to be in denial that this could be the case. But I bet a large proportion of them know an aunt or an uncle or a family friend who’s a narcissist or a fascist, but other people don’t see through that disguise because they’re nice to the ones who “matter.” I bet most people here have some experience of not being allowed to call those people out because their friends and family will come to the person’s defense and dismiss any criticism.
I’m telling you this happens on a larger scale, and the glorification of these “Kevins” is inextricably tied to it. Maybe not every Kevin with a truck is like that, but I’m telling you a lot of them are.
Also, on a more personal note:
If you want to stay a self imposed outcast
Fuck you for implying this is some sort of choice I’m making. I’ve been coping with ostracization and rejection my whole life, and you want to assume I’m doing it to myself for some inexplicable reason?
That’s a fucking “what was she wearing” moment.
If people can only discuss systemic issues in therapy, then we’re all fucked.
Do you say the same thing to women or people of color when they talk about sexism or racism? Gay or trans people when they talk about homophobia or transphobia?
Why is ableism any different to you?
They’d make up some reason why it was necessary to fulfill prophecy, and voila!