Meeting People (1 Viewer)

[David Kronenbourg]

youse all coming to the christmas party?

 

[washingcattle]

Sorry, I assumed you were just trolling. For a more detailed re


What a lovely story about a thing that never happened and a conversation that is representative of nothing and no-one.

Ha, really ? I've had that exact conversation with men I've worked with many times over the years.

"Shouldn't you recycle that, you know the planet is totally fucked, I read about it in every newspaper there is ?"

"Nah, fuck it, why bother, I don't read that shite, it's all a load of bollox why depress your self ?"

"...Eh"

"Exactly"

Throws plastic bottle out the window and drives away.

the guardian is a major paper, it has a large readership, and the readership isn't static. also most articles get seen through sharing on the internet now anyway. i've never bought a copy of the guardian in my life. anyone could see this article shared or trending on facebook.

the point about who this kind of thing reaches has already been covered a few times: continued discussions push the issue forward into public consciousness and through social transmission of ideas attitudes gradually change.

i don't see where the confusion is.

i don't think there's any numbing effect on anyone who's actually open to engaging with it. those that can't grasp the point will eventually come round to it when it's no longer socially acceptable to be such a dick about it.

Just because I don't agree with you doesn't mean I'm confused or don't understand the concept. I think the problem here is that you're giving men a lot of credit that I am not. I grew up with and worked with the exact type of men that should be reading articles or having discussions about subjects like this and never will because they can remain wilfully ignorant and somewhat insular. I think both of you should go take a minimum wage job in some factory somewhere for a few weeks and get back to me once you try to transmit some ideas to your coworkers.

Just because I have issues with the messenger doesn't mean I have any issue with the message. Maybe I'm just not used to what passes for content in newspapers now. This is another example of how the internet has changed the media. For me articles like this are akin to stand up comedy routines. Articles that deal with gender being one thing which is rather quickly turning from being about issues such as wage gap, violence and inequality and towards "aren't men creepy" it's not long before the Guardian will be running "Why are men so hairy?" and "Don't you hate it when guys smell ?" and that is a problem.

I'm not saying that these kinds of things have no right to exist but as Jon Stewart pointed out the difference between his show and Bill O Reilly's was that his show went out between a cartoon and a puppet show and O Reilly's went out on a news network. This is the same issue for me. I don't think this kind of thing reaches the right audience, I do think it's detrimental for newspapers to run glib comment as much as they do, but, this is the internet. It's become a case of quantity over quality.


In fact to prove my point look at the fucking length of this post.

 

[washingcattle]

Google

Holy fucking jesus christ.

I quit.

The internet is just too fucking ridiculous.

I no longer take anything the Guardian says seriously. It's basically buzzfeed.

 

[7 - No tomorrow]

I quit.

Promise?

 

[washingcattle]

Promise?

Never!!!!

 

[washingcattle]

Anyway why would you want that ? Sure I'm only keeping things lively. You'd all be agreeing with each other and high fiving if I wasn't here to call you all cunts.

 

[washingcattle]

Or moaning about your first world problems.

 

[Lili Marlene]

Since you don't believe things filter through society in any way how do you suggest we help people who have terrible, harmful viewpoints washingcattle? Are you calling for more direct action? Revolution? Or do you think we should just give up?

 

[Lili Marlene]

Sorry, help is probably the wrong word there. Replace it with "talk to".

Obviously racists weren't 'helped' into being non-racists, their viewpoint was just changed.

 

[nooleen]

Anyway why would you want that ? Sure I'm only keeping things lively. You'd all be agreeing with each other and high fiving if I wasn't here to call you all cunts.

sure we only post this shit to annoy you

 

[washingcattle]

Since you don't believe things filter through society in any way how do you suggest we help people who have terrible, harmful viewpoints washingcattle? Are you calling for more direct action? Revolution? Or do you think we should just give up?

I never fucking said that. I absolutely never said I don't believe things filter through society. What I said was that while things do filter through society there are parts of society that are extremely resistant to change and extremely insular and that by continually preaching to the choir it may have a detrimental effect in the long term.

Sorry, help is probably the wrong word there. Replace it with "talk to".

Obviously racists weren't 'helped' into being non-racists, their viewpoint was just changed.

Let's take american racism for example. There's still a massive problem with racism in the deep south and a billion New Yorker think pieces aren't going to change that because there's a resentment of the messenger and the message. It becomes almost a point of pride to ignore pressure to change.

That's the point. The more glib articles like this show up the more entrenched people become in the belief that

"That rags just a load of bra burners and fags"

And so then the question is who does an article like that really reach? The choir, and after a while what happens if even the fucking choir ceases to care?

That's what i'm saying that's what i've been saying.

For the record I don't know how to fix all of societies problems and I never claimed to.

 

[7 - No tomorrow]

There's still a massive problem with racism in the deep south and a billion New Yorker think pieces aren't going to change that because there's a resentment of the messenger and the message.

The people in the south mostly deal with southern racism. The SPLC and all those guys.
There's plenty of racism in NYC for NYC writers to be getting on with.
The New Yorker covers neither of it to any great extent at all.

That's the point. The more glib articles like this show up the more entrenched people become in the belief that

"That rags just a load of bra burners and fags"

And so then the question is who does an article like that really reach? The choir, and after a while what happens if even the fucking choir ceases to care?

There are a lot more people out there than just entrenched morons and 'the choir'. When you take away the idiots, there is not just 'the choir' left.
These messages reach some of those people too.
This is how cultural wars are fought, you get your message out any way you can. Plenty of people that are of that mind will agree, and others can be convinced.


I am getting a huge kick out of how much you hate the Guardian.
Great stuff.

 

[hermie]

There are a lot more people out there than just entrenched morons and 'the choir'. When you take away the idiots, there is not just 'the choir' left.
These messages reach some of those people too.
This is how cultural wars are fought, you get your message out any way you can. Plenty of people that are of that mind will agree, and others can be convinced.

But is a goading, bait-piece the best way to win over these occupiers of the middle ground you speak of? That's more the question for me.

 

[Lili Marlene]

To be honest I think the glib article in the Guardian is a perfectly reasonable response to the shallow article in the New York Post.

 

[7 - No tomorrow]

But is a goading, bait-piece the best way to win over these occupiers of the middle ground you speak of? That's more the question for me.

It was all a reaction to the NY Post thing. I wasn't surprised that it had some WTF? in there.


Most places covered it the same way

Meet the Asshole Who Has Bothered "Over 500" Women on the Subway

How to Ignore a Man Who Is Trying to Pick You Up on the Subway

Area Man Offers "Tips" On How To Pickup Women On The Subway: Gothamist

The Mail and NY Post seemed to be of the view that it was a great thing altogether.

Are we back to where we were yesterday?

 

[7 - No tomorrow]

This seems to strike a more conciliatory tone.

Again: asking a stranger for their e-mail address in a non-threatening manner can theoretically be welcomed by the other person and not come across as creepy. But unless you're the kind of person who thinks it's charming to tell women to smile on the street, you probably shouldn't expectpositive results the majority of the time. And turning it into some sort of macho pickup game—and then offering some sort of unified theory of bothering other humans in a public setting, a cramped public setting that is already infuriating enough without the added pressure of chit-chat—is where he really loses us.

It's written by a man that hasn't maybe hasn't had to deal with unwanted attention on his commute.

 

[Lili Marlene]

Are we back to where we were yesterday?

I want to know if anyone has tried out his tips yet. I didn't copy and paste them for nothing!

 

[washingcattle]

The people in the south mostly deal with southern racism. The SPLC and all those guys.
There's plenty of racism in NYC for NYC writers to be getting on with.
The New Yorker covers neither of it to any great extent at all.



There are a lot more people out there than just entrenched morons and 'the choir'. When you take away the idiots, there is not just 'the choir' left.
These messages reach some of those people too.
This is how cultural wars are fought, you get your message out any way you can. Plenty of people that are of that mind will agree, and others can be convinced.


I am getting a huge kick out of how much you hate the Guardian.
Great stuff.

I just picked the new yorker as an example of a left leaning magazine I don't really read it. See this is the problem for me to quote The Wire,

"once you call something a war, then everyone goes around calling themselves soldiers"
That brings up plenty of problems with regard to agenda's manifestos etc versus the idea of an unbiased media. And that's a problem too.

One of the first casualty of that, is art criticism, Like Emily Nussbaum and the likes where their agenda becomes the critique.

Basically everything I wanted to say was covered by Hermie here

But is a goading, bait-piece the best way to win over these occupiers of the middle ground you speak of? That's more the question for me.

To be honest I think the glib article in the Guardian is a perfectly reasonable response to the shallow article in the New York Post.

Don't get me wrong the NY post article is fucked as well, but is this really where we are now ? I mean is this modern journalism ? Is it really just the comments section on youtube ? and Can you really expect to change anyones opinion with this standard of journalism ?

 

[7 - No tomorrow]

I spent some time reading the Missed Connections in a local newspaper while on holiday last weekend at breakfast.

Simultaneously hilarious and terrifying.

 

[washingcattle]

I spent some time reading the Missed Connections in a local newspaper while on holiday last weekend at breakfast.

Simultaneously hilarious and terrifying.

What's a missed connection ?