|
Post by HMARK Center on Apr 17, 2021 6:56:40 GMT -5
Holy @#$% I have no patience for "I don't know what this is about and I won't watch the video but here's my take anyway". If you're doing that, @#$%ing stop, you are contributing literally nothing to this thread.The video has a middle section that goes over her past "sins", both real and exaggerated, because some stalker weirdo put together a whole freaking dossier about her dating back to the early 2000s so they could have fuel to "cancel" her at some point. The main point of the video is to trace why there's this phenomenon of an online community of marginalized people so ready to devour its own, how the nature of social media plays into that, and I'm sorry, the section in there entitled "The Beast" is one of the most potent overviews of the topic I've yet seen presented online. Note: I hate the term "cancel culture", the way it's typically deployed. It's most often used by rich, powerful people as a way of deflecting legitimate criticism when they display breathtaking ignorance or bigotry, when in reality all that happens to them is they deal with some Twitter backlash that some poor, beleaguered publicist handles for them, and they go on making tons of money and are completely sheltered from any consequences of what they've done. Oh, a publishing company decided to delay your book and move it to a smaller subsidiary arm before printing it? Poor you! However, as the video talks about near the beginning, the real origins of the term involve, most typically, someone "canceling" someone from their own community or an adjacent one. Initially meant to just be a personal statement the equivalent of "I'm done with this person", it has metastasized into some people living for the opportunity to drum others off social media and the public eye, including/ especially people who are in almost every conceivable way their allies, in the form of a mob that takes active, public delight in harassment and threats. And unlike the really rich and powerful celebrities who can let a PR person handle it all? People like Ellis, Contrapoints, and others have to handle all their own stuff, because, like the video states, "I drive a Honda Civic"; there's no buffer between them and the mountains of abuse. It's fine to critique people in the public eye, it's fine to ask those with platforms to use them responsibly, but none of the shit outlined here is fine. A parade of white people saying "listen to people of color!", as if PoC are a monolith with uniform opinions, isn't helping, but at least those people mostly weren't encouraging her to commit suicide. Oh, almost forgot: some of the abuse she got was stuff meant to make her relive her own sexual assault and the mental health issues that stemmed from that! Somehow, that's "accountability"! Wheeeeeee! This all just goes to show you that Doug Walker is smarter than all of us. He gets in trouble, what does he do, absolutely f***ing nothing. Years later people are more pissed about his Wall review than anything in that document. Makes you think. (Not really) The video actually (indirectly) talks about this; not Walker himself, but people like him. The key is that the people who get targeted are people capable of feeling shame. After all: why target the shameless? By definition, you cannot shame them, so what good is it to go after them? They won't respond, they won't change, they might actively feed off your criticisms, etc., they'll just keep on doing whatever they're doing. It makes a person feel powerless: the high and mighty get to be complete garbage in public, get to even flaunt the law, and face no consequences or repercussions. But an ally of yours that fails to live up to what are typically unreasonable standards (e.g. "you worded that incorrectly", "here's something you did fifteen years ago", "I know what you REALLY are!")? They care, because they want to be an ally. They can be shamed. And the ability to shame someone is a source of power to some people who feel like they're incapable of wielding power in the real world. And power corrupts. The video also addresses the fact that there is such a thing as good faith criticism, but the good faith criticism gets just a bit drowned out when you're literally DM'd a constant barrage of thousands of death threats and people sending pictures of razor blades, bleach, and dead bodies and telling you to kill yourself. When there's no PR firm, no media handler, no millions of dollars to fall back on, it all goes directly to you. Oh, and look what's happening now! Since YouTuber Jenny Nicholson is friends with Ellis, now people in this mob are crafting fake tweets, attributing them to Nicholson, and arranging a mob to go after her. It's exactly what they did to Ellis: she defended a friend of hers (Contrapoints) who had to withstand a withering online attack that left her nearly falling back into addictions that had come close to ruining her life before, so the army got their ammo together and waited for a moment to try and tear her apart for daring to say anything in support of her friend. Now they're going to do that to Nicholson and possibly SarahZ (another YouTuber), for the crime of being friendly with someone they've decided they don't like. Huh, well, look at that: funny how the targets are all women, whether cis or trans. Funny, wonder why. But here's the shittiest part of all: you know who's actually whipping some of these crowds up? Trolls from the typical boards and websites that are constantly on the hunt for "SJW scalps", or whatever they call it now. They'll make fake accounts, pretend to be trans, a PoC, etc., but by the time you out them as a fraud the powder keg has already gone off, and they get what they wanted. I know I'm going on a lot about this, but a big part of my job is observing socio-political stuff in the online realm, and this shit is dangerous. Beyond that, they know what they're doing: they want a community of marginalized people to eat its own, because it does their work for them. Congratulations, you've tried to ruin the life of some of your biggest online advocates, who are working to be an ally in a space crawling with actual bigots who would love nothing more than to have you do their dirty work for them. Ok, that's enough ranting. TL;DR - No more "I don't know what's happening, I'm not watching the video, but here's a take on the situation, anyway" posts. You literally sound like the people going after Ellis who then say "I haven't seen the movie she's talking about...", and it adds nothing.
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Hamilton on Apr 17, 2021 8:13:41 GMT -5
Bullshit.
|
|
|
Post by EvenBaldobombHasAJob on Apr 17, 2021 9:28:49 GMT -5
This all just goes to show you that Doug Walker is smarter than all of us. He gets in trouble, what does he do, absolutely f***ing nothing. Years later people are more pissed about his Wall review than anything in that document. Makes you think. (Not really) Oh, people haven't forgotten #ChangeTheChannel. The Honey ad memes and the Wall stuff are infamous, but he and Channel Awesome still seem to be "cast out" from the major geek circles for the time being. plus at the time, Doug's refusal to say anything or do anything whatsoever about the situation is one of the biggest reasons people turned against him.
|
|
|
Post by Clash, Never a Meter Maid on Apr 17, 2021 10:20:47 GMT -5
Oh, people haven't forgotten #ChangeTheChannel. The Honey ad memes and the Wall stuff are infamous, but he and Channel Awesome still seem to be "cast out" from the major geek circles for the time being. plus at the time, Doug's refusal to say anything or do anything whatsoever about the situation is one of the biggest reasons people turned against him. And to be honest, I am honestly curious about how he feels about the controversies around him. I'm not simping for Doug or even especially looking to shame him more, I just really wanna know how he feels about what came out in the document, or how people took his Pink Floyd video.
|
|
the2ndevil
Grimlock
Super Seducer Survivor
Where Is Your Santa, Now?
Posts: 13,629
|
Post by the2ndevil on Apr 17, 2021 10:23:08 GMT -5
Really powerful and a little uncomfortable at times. Particularly one section about something awful she went through.
|
|
|
Post by Clash, Never a Meter Maid on Apr 17, 2021 10:34:14 GMT -5
Holy @#$% I have no patience for "I don't know what this is about and I won't watch the video but here's my take anyway". If you're doing that, @#$%ing stop, you are contributing literally nothing to this thread.The video has a middle section that goes over her past "sins", both real and exaggerated, because some stalker weirdo put together a whole freaking dossier about her dating back to the early 2000s so they could have fuel to "cancel" her at some point. The main point of the video is to trace why there's this phenomenon of an online community of marginalized people so ready to devour its own, how the nature of social media plays into that, and I'm sorry, the section in there entitled "The Beast" is one of the most potent overviews of the topic I've yet seen presented online. Note: I hate the term "cancel culture", the way it's typically deployed. It's most often used by rich, powerful people as a way of deflecting legitimate criticism when they display breathtaking ignorance or bigotry, when in reality all that happens to them is they deal with some Twitter backlash that some poor, beleaguered publicist handles for them, and they go on making tons of money and are completely sheltered from any consequences of what they've done. Oh, a publishing company decided to delay your book and move it to a smaller subsidiary arm before printing it? Poor you! However, as the video talks about near the beginning, the real origins of the term involve, most typically, someone "canceling" someone from their own community or an adjacent one. Initially meant to just be a personal statement the equivalent of "I'm done with this person", it has metastasized into some people living for the opportunity to drum others off social media and the public eye, including/ especially people who are in almost every conceivable way their allies, in the form of a mob that takes active, public delight in harassment and threats. And unlike the really rich and powerful celebrities who can let a PR person handle it all? People like Ellis, Contrapoints, and others have to handle all their own stuff, because, like the video states, "I drive a Honda Civic"; there's no buffer between them and the mountains of abuse. It's fine to critique people in the public eye, it's fine to ask those with platforms to use them responsibly, but none of the shit outlined here is fine. A parade of white people saying "listen to people of color!", as if PoC are a monolith with uniform opinions, isn't helping, but at least those people mostly weren't encouraging her to commit suicide. Oh, almost forgot: some of the abuse she got was stuff meant to make her relive her own sexual assault and the mental health issues that stemmed from that! Somehow, that's "accountability"! Wheeeeeee! This all just goes to show you that Doug Walker is smarter than all of us. He gets in trouble, what does he do, absolutely f***ing nothing. Years later people are more pissed about his Wall review than anything in that document. Makes you think. (Not really) The video actually (indirectly) talks about this; not Walker himself, but people like him. The key is that the people who get targeted are people capable of feeling shame. After all: why target the shameless? By definition, you cannot shame them, so what good is it to go after them? They won't respond, they won't change, they might actively feed off your criticisms, etc., they'll just keep on doing whatever they're doing. It makes a person feel powerless: the high and mighty get to be complete garbage in public, get to even flaunt the law, and face no consequences or repercussions. But an ally of yours that fails to live up to what are typically unreasonable standards (e.g. "you worded that incorrectly", "here's something you did fifteen years ago", "I know what you REALLY are!")? They care, because they want to be an ally. They can be shamed. And the ability to shame someone is a source of power to some people who feel like they're incapable of wielding power in the real world. And power corrupts. The video also addresses the fact that there is such a thing as good faith criticism, but the good faith criticism gets just a bit drowned out when you're literally DM'd a constant barrage of thousands of death threats and people sending pictures of razor blades, bleach, and dead bodies and telling you to kill yourself. When there's no PR firm, no media handler, no millions of dollars to fall back on, it all goes directly to you. Oh, and look what's happening now! Since YouTuber Jenny Nicholson is friends with Ellis, now people in this mob are crafting fake tweets, attributing them to Nicholson, and arranging a mob to go after her. It's exactly what they did to Ellis: she defended a friend of hers (Contrapoints) who had to withstand a withering online attack that left her nearly falling back into addictions that had come close to ruining her life before, so the army got their ammo together and waited for a moment to try and tear her apart for daring to say anything in support of her friend. Now they're going to do that to Nicholson and possibly SarahZ (another YouTuber), for the crime of being friendly with someone they've decided they don't like. Huh, well, look at that: funny how the targets are all women, whether cis or trans. Funny, wonder why. But here's the shittiest part of all: you know who's actually whipping some of these crowds up? Trolls from the typical boards and websites that are constantly on the hunt for "SJW scalps", or whatever they call it now. They'll make fake accounts, pretend to be trans, a PoC, etc., but by the time you out them as a fraud the powder keg has already gone off, and they get what they wanted. I know I'm going on a lot about this, but a big part of my job is observing socio-political stuff in the online realm, and this shit is dangerous. Beyond that, they know what they're doing: they want a community of marginalized people to eat its own, because it does their work for them. Congratulations, you've tried to ruin the life of some of your biggest online advocates, who are working to be an ally in a space crawling with actual bigots who would love nothing more than to have you do their dirty work for them. Ok, that's enough ranting. TL;DR - No more "I don't know what's happening, I'm not watching the video, but here's a take on the situation, anyway" posts. You literally sound like the people going after Ellis who then say "I haven't seen the movie she's talking about...", and it adds nothing. Yeah, there are definitely some clear inequities regarding how Ellis and a number of her friends have been targeted. Those are definitely things that should be cracked down on. I think what some other people in the thread were expressing was more a lack of urge to wade through all of that drama with such a long video. She definitely has reasons for how she feels in the editorial, and I'm not excusing the attitude of "it's so lengthy and rambling that it can't possibly have any validation." That's where it becomes a case of "you can't truly knock it until you've tried it." But it's a lot to take in and it does discuss some heavy and potentially traumatic subject matter, and so I woulldn't blame someone for not wanting to go down that kind of rabbit hole.
|
|
|
Post by HMARK Center on Apr 17, 2021 10:52:43 GMT -5
Oh, I get that; what I have issue with is not watching the video but having a “stance” on the current situation. If someone just doesn’t want to watch or can’t be bothered to get caught up in the drama, that’s fine, and it’s fine to say that.
That said, I do believe this is a more important issue than it might first appear on the surface, as it speaks to how the very construction of a platform like Twitter warps our larger discourse in the first place, and then the phenomenon of instigating situations like this in marginalized communities and causing them to be hurt or weakened in the process. But if someone just can’t deal with a 100 minute video to dive into the whole thing, that’s a fair prerogative.
|
|
|
Post by carp (SPC, Itoh Respect Army) on Apr 17, 2021 12:31:06 GMT -5
But an ally of yours that fails to live up to what are typically unreasonable standards (e.g. "you worded that incorrectly", "here's something you did fifteen years ago", "I know what you REALLY are!")? They care, because they want to be an ally. They can be shamed. If I'd stayed in academia, my big pop-psych book that was gonna make me a billion dollars was gonna be called something like "Why I Love Hypocrisy and You Should Too." Because there's all sorts of work, some of which I was starting to get into, on the ways that trying to make sure everyone has Pure Intentions is counterproductive and leads to harm. Because if someone is going around talking about how you shouldn't do bad things, that encourages future good behavior in the people around them AND IN THEMSELVES... even if they don't mean it. Because if vocally taking a moral stand mostly just leaves you open to attack if you fail to live up to your own stated values, then everyone's just going to learn it's not worth it to ever say clearly that they think something is right or wrong. This is the kind of thinking that leads to, like, the South Park guys, where the smart thing is just to sit off to the side and talk about why everyone who believes anything is wrong and an asshole. Or, even worse, a debate-club-trained pundit who's learned to always cagily talk AROUND what they actually think, while constantly talking at length about why other people are wrong. It is absolutely. ASTOUNDING. Once you sit back and really notice how toxic norms within progressive communities are just plain ol' sexism (and racism, but mostly sexism). This absolutely isn't unique about progressive communities, of course. But wow. (this is absolutely related to what I said above, because the stereotype is that women SHOULD care and be moral... so it's worse and more notable when they aren't.) It's not well-formulated in my head, but another thing that occurred to me is the way *coolness* is related to this specific kind of thing. I read a thing a little while ago about how young, cis wlw were, more and more, refusing to identify as "lesbians," and instead choosing "queer" or some other label. And in interviews, the reasons they gave fell into two boxes: "Everyone will think I'm a TERF if I say I'm a lesbian," and "Well, 'lesbian' just makes me sound old and humorless and uncool." And it very strongly occurs to me these two things are connected in lots of people's heads. Lots of young people, of any era, just can't tell the difference between "passe" and "harmfully regressive." Plllllenty of people who want to TAKE DOWN Ellis have big oomph to their emotions from just "f*** you, millennial, go talk about your girlbosses and your doggos somewhere else, this is our time now." They see her as someone *old people* like.
|
|
|
Post by Clash, Never a Meter Maid on Apr 17, 2021 13:33:46 GMT -5
But an ally of yours that fails to live up to what are typically unreasonable standards (e.g. "you worded that incorrectly", "here's something you did fifteen years ago", "I know what you REALLY are!")? They care, because they want to be an ally. They can be shamed. If I'd stayed in academia, my big pop-psych book that was gonna make me a billion dollars was gonna be called something like "Why I Love Hypocrisy and You Should Too." Because there's all sorts of work, some of which I was starting to get into, on the ways that trying to make sure everyone has Pure Intentions is counterproductive and leads to harm. Because if someone is going around talking about how you shouldn't do bad things, that encourages future good behavior in the people around them AND IN THEMSELVES... even if they don't mean it. Because if vocally taking a moral stand mostly just leaves you open to attack if you fail to live up to your own stated values, then everyone's just going to learn it's not worth it to ever say clearly that they think something is right or wrong. This is the kind of thinking that leads to, like, the South Park guys, where the smart thing is just to sit off to the side and talk about why everyone who believes anything is wrong and an asshole. Or, even worse, a debate-club-trained pundit who's learned to always cagily talk AROUND what they actually think, while constantly talking at length about why other people are wrong. It is absolutely. ASTOUNDING. Once you sit back and really notice how toxic norms within progressive communities are just plain ol' sexism (and racism, but mostly sexism). This absolutely isn't unique about progressive communities, of course. But wow. (this is absolutely related to what I said above, because the stereotype is that women SHOULD care and be moral... so it's worse and more notable when they aren't.) It's not well-formulated in my head, but another thing that occurred to me is the way *coolness* is related to this specific kind of thing. I read a thing a little while ago about how young, cis wlw were, more and more, refusing to identify as "lesbians," and instead choosing "queer" or some other label. And in interviews, the reasons they gave fell into two boxes: "Everyone will think I'm a TERF if I say I'm a lesbian," and "Well, 'lesbian' just makes me sound old and humorless and uncool." And it very strongly occurs to me these two things are connected in lots of people's heads. Lots of young people, of any era, just can't tell the difference between "passe" and "harmfully regressive." Plllllenty of people who want to TAKE DOWN Ellis have big oomph to their emotions from just "f*** you, millennial, go talk about your girlbosses and your doggos somewhere else, this is our time now." They see her as someone *old people* like. That's always been the danger; wanting to stay ahead of the curve and considering one's self open-minded, but falling back into those old divisive methods and attacking others. At that point, it becomes a little less dependent on the era and more on one's personality coming into play. For some reason, it seems like those people are the future oldsters who start to really hate the next gen. If they don't let go of that toxicity, then they find themselves getting passed by among other people in their generation who don't want to deal with their negative crap. Years later, wham, they wake up and find that *they've* become the cranky old fogey. It's a deadly cycle. In otherwords, the key to bridging those generational gaps is for everyone to let go of their egos, calm down a bit, and try to discuss these differences at a more civil table.
|
|
|
Post by EvenBaldobombHasAJob on Apr 17, 2021 14:05:44 GMT -5
Finn McKenty posted this video a few weeks back and while its obviously not the only thing he talks about, a lot of it fits really well into the discussion here. definitely worth a watch
Warning: some language, trauma, some pretty dark subject matter in general
|
|
|
Post by Cyno on Apr 17, 2021 14:09:55 GMT -5
100% this. Always be self-aware about joining a mob mentality. Even the smartest of us can end up becoming someone else's useful idiot and end up doing more harm than good for a cause they support. These trolls are the online equivalent of agents provocateur and they have too good a track record of being successful.
|
|
|
Post by Zaq "That Guy" Buzzkill on Apr 17, 2021 14:12:54 GMT -5
Less serious note, I made a gif of one moment in the video that I plan to get a lot of mileage out of:
|
|
|
Post by EvenBaldobombHasAJob on Apr 17, 2021 14:14:47 GMT -5
Less serious note, I made a gif of one moment in the video that I plan to get a lot of mileage out of: The Snoop Dogg candle is what puts it right over the top.
|
|
Dr. T is an alien
Patti Mayonnaise
Knows when to hold them, knows when to fold them
I've been found out!
Posts: 31,359
|
Post by Dr. T is an alien on Apr 17, 2021 14:36:56 GMT -5
For those curious. This is the tweet: ........................................... I don’t get it. Where’s the racism, allegedly?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 17, 2021 14:39:34 GMT -5
I know we just had a post, but... Can we cast off the people who work on and still appear in Doug Walker's videos for being his personal butt sniffers?
|
|
|
Post by Cyno on Apr 17, 2021 14:45:21 GMT -5
For those curious. This is the tweet: ........................................... I don’t get it. Where’s the racism, allegedly? The only thing wrong with that tweet is not pointing out that Avatar TLA is itself inspired by and derivative of a lot of anime. Then again, it's Twitter, so there's only so much you can say with 200 characters, and anything can be taken out of context and weaponized against you.
|
|
|
Post by HMARK Center on Apr 17, 2021 15:15:34 GMT -5
But an ally of yours that fails to live up to what are typically unreasonable standards (e.g. "you worded that incorrectly", "here's something you did fifteen years ago", "I know what you REALLY are!")? They care, because they want to be an ally. They can be shamed. If I'd stayed in academia, my big pop-psych book that was gonna make me a billion dollars was gonna be called something like "Why I Love Hypocrisy and You Should Too." Because there's all sorts of work, some of which I was starting to get into, on the ways that trying to make sure everyone has Pure Intentions is counterproductive and leads to harm. Because if someone is going around talking about how you shouldn't do bad things, that encourages future good behavior in the people around them AND IN THEMSELVES... even if they don't mean it. Because if vocally taking a moral stand mostly just leaves you open to attack if you fail to live up to your own stated values, then everyone's just going to learn it's not worth it to ever say clearly that they think something is right or wrong. This is the kind of thinking that leads to, like, the South Park guys, where the smart thing is just to sit off to the side and talk about why everyone who believes anything is wrong and an asshole. Or, even worse, a debate-club-trained pundit who's learned to always cagily talk AROUND what they actually think, while constantly talking at length about why other people are wrong. It is absolutely. ASTOUNDING. Once you sit back and really notice how toxic norms within progressive communities are just plain ol' sexism (and racism, but mostly sexism). This absolutely isn't unique about progressive communities, of course. But wow. (this is absolutely related to what I said above, because the stereotype is that women SHOULD care and be moral... so it's worse and more notable when they aren't.) It's not well-formulated in my head, but another thing that occurred to me is the way *coolness* is related to this specific kind of thing. I read a thing a little while ago about how young, cis wlw were, more and more, refusing to identify as "lesbians," and instead choosing "queer" or some other label. And in interviews, the reasons they gave fell into two boxes: "Everyone will think I'm a TERF if I say I'm a lesbian," and "Well, 'lesbian' just makes me sound old and humorless and uncool." And it very strongly occurs to me these two things are connected in lots of people's heads. Lots of young people, of any era, just can't tell the difference between "passe" and "harmfully regressive." Plllllenty of people who want to TAKE DOWN Ellis have big oomph to their emotions from just "f*** you, millennial, go talk about your girlbosses and your doggos somewhere else, this is our time now." They see her as someone *old people* like. On the first point, I think it's just kind of natural: nobody, not a single person out there, lives up to their own ideals 100% of the time. We're all susceptible to moments of weakness, to moments of irrationality or heightened emotion, to displays of ignorance that might be completely unintended or benign in intention but could still hurt others, anyway. That said, like Ellis said in the video I get how people who are part of marginalized groups can lose their patience with that; I fully believe it's important to give people who deal with microaggressions (and macroaggressions!) so regularly space to vent and voice the frustration that has to bring, and I imagine that frustration can be magnified when someone who's a nominal ally does or says something that hits the wrong way. Totally get that, and just as allies need to be given space to screw up and improve without facing harassment and being ostracized, people in the community need to be given room to voice their emotions. Still, the point stands: people need space to screw up, and room to grow from it...and then room to screw up again, because screwing up again is inevitable when you're brought up in and live in a world that's been built with so many structures of inequality (e.g. racism in housing policies, sexism in hiring practices, etc.). Obviously there can be exceptions for people for whom "screwing up" means "directly and willfully harming others"; I'm not exactly eager to see, say, the wrestling community welcome back David Starr or Joey Ryan, for example, though even in their cases I wouldn't tolerate anyone going out of their way to harass those guys, since harassment sucks. But I think even the most critical reading of things Ellis has tweeted/said/done won't come close to seeing things at that level; at worst you see someone who made some poorly thought out jokes when she was younger and starting out as an internet personality, has clearly grown and matured, but who might still say something that you might find off-putting without likely meaning to, e.g. using Turk the gorilla as an example of a trans-coded Disney character; I think it's clear Ellis wouldn't want to associate "trans woman" with "gorilla", so ascribing intent like that would be pretty off-base. And unfortunately, yeah: if you keep telling an ally that any amount of growth or couched language or attempts to be respectful aren't good enough, that any infraction no matter how small is justification for "you should put up with all those death threats and harassment of you and your friends", then it can't come as a shock when the ally gives up or gets cynical. And in social politics, allies are a desperate necessity; compromise, toleration of those who aren't as aware as you might be on issues, it's of critical importance. Again, that doesn't mean having to tolerate those who are genuinely hateful or who knowingly cause others harm, but prioritizing purity over alliances is a surefire way for a movement to fail. On the second point...I do think we're at the point where the Millenial/Zoomer (or iGen?) divide is going to become more pronounced, and it might be time to really start considering the significance of that.
|
|
|
Post by Clash, Never a Meter Maid on Apr 17, 2021 15:42:44 GMT -5
On the second point...I do think we're at the point where the Millenial/Zoomer (or iGen?) divide is going to become more pronounced, and it might be time to really start considering the significance of that. Eh, are you sure about that? From what I've seen, a lot of millennials and Gen Z'ers feel almost unified in how separate they are from Gen-X. And I hope we are not using that person on Twitter who put that comprehensive anti-Lindsay list as an example of a "typical Zoomer". That's not a generational thing. That's an individual being petty and kind of obsessive. Those kinds of folk have been around sadly since the Stone Ages. I'm sure way before the dawn of time, Grog didn't like how Krug made the cave tribe chief look in the ancient drawings and talked behind Krug's back. When I was talking about "future old fogeys" earlier, that's the kind of younger person I was referring to.
|
|
|
Post by HMARK Center on Apr 17, 2021 18:32:57 GMT -5
On the second point...I do think we're at the point where the Millenial/Zoomer (or iGen?) divide is going to become more pronounced, and it might be time to really start considering the significance of that. Eh, are you sure about that? From what I've seen, a lot of millennials and Gen Z'ers feel almost unified in how separate they are from Gen-X. And I hope we are not using that person on Twitter who put that comprehensive anti-Lindsay list as an example of a "typical Zoomer". That's not a generational thing. That's an individual being petty and kind of obsessive. Those kinds of folk have been around sadly since the Stone Ages. I'm sure way before the dawn of time, Grog didn't like how Krug made the cave tribe chief look in the ancient drawings and talked behind Krug's back. When I was talking about "future old fogeys" earlier, that's the kind of younger person I was referring to. Millenials and Z'ers definitely have a lot in common, namely in how financially screwed over we've been, but I should have specified I mean kind of in terms of how we navigate the online world, what qualifies as "very online" between the two generations, how Millenials are kind of the last cohort to have any considerable upbringing that wasn't fully online, etc. and how that might impact how we approach just dealing with one another in a setting like Twitter as Z'ers now start moving toward adulthood.
|
|
|
Post by Cyno on Apr 17, 2021 19:02:49 GMT -5
Z'ers make fun of our fashion and side parts.
|
|