[sudo-discuss] cuddling it

Wed May 8 11:15:14 PDT 2013

I like the quote, "Be the change you want to be in the world." Id like the
world to acknowledge the past, but not dwell on it. Instead I prefer the
investment of current energy into shaping future energies which will also
be shaping future energies.

So I like the idea of not replacing anything, but insteading creating
something new and allowing (not "persuading") people to adopt/add to
something new...

Alcides Gutierrez
http://e64.us
On May 8, 2013 10:59 AM, "Eddan Katz" <eddan at clear.net> wrote:

> Rachel,
>
> I partially agree with the special status of the identified targets of
> slurs for self-determination about how the socially acceptable language
> evolves. But there's still a trump card aspect to it that doesn't sit right
> with me.
>
> The slutwalk you described, which I had admittedly never heard of, doesn't
> seem to be the same as walking in someone else's shoes by the way, or
> sensual clothes for that matter. Walking around with just about anything
> written on your forehead has a high likelihood of being humiliating - with
> that word being slut removing any doubts of misinterpretation.
>
> I worked at the Museum of Tolerance (http://www.museumoftolerance.com/)
> in Los Angeles during high school and during vacations in college,
> sometimes giving tours. There's a "Whisper Gallery" in the bottom floor
> exhibit that they take school kids through especially. It's a darkened
> hallway about 50 feet long with speakers hidden in the walls all around.
> They're all set on loop and to go off with all these horrible racist,
> sexist, etc. insults at you as you walk through. Unfortunately, my
> impression of what the junior high kids got out of it, in particular, is
> the delight at having learned some new words they had never heard before.
>
> A couple of examples that come to mind to challenge the Re-Appropriation
> trump card rules you described below. Granted, they are both examples of
> extraordinary artists piercing through dominant culture in provocative
> ways. John Lennon co-wrote "Woman is the Nigger of the World" with Yoko Ono
> (http://www.songmeanings.net/m/songs/view/3458764513820543055/), neither
> of whom were black. And from the other perspective of the provocative
> tightrope on black racist reappropration, I think Dave Chappelle's public
> struggle is another important example to consider. (
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dave_Chappelle)
>
> My suggestion for a Sudo-Libs kind of thing, by the way, is intended to
> help try to toe the line between making the point about the harmful impact
> of biased language and the particular sensitivity of entrenched
> discrimination through semi-(blind)-randomness, with an ability to have
> some prior control over the context.
>
>
> sent from eddan.com
>
> On May 8, 2013, at 10:03 AM, rachel lyra hospodar <rachelyra at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> On May 7, 2013 11:15 AM, "Anthony Di Franco" <di.franco at gmail.com> wrote:
> > There's something to be said for being able to challenge the mainstream
> connotations words have and the implicit assumptions they throw over
> everyday discourse. Does Heeb Magazine have a place on sudo room's shelves?
>
> Sure, right next to Bitch Magazine. But woe be unto you if you think that
> makes 'heeb' or 'bitch' appropriate descriptors for anyone, or that they
> can be used by you in casual conversation.
>
> You are basically bringing up the practice of reclaiming language, a
> process where members of oppressed groups take words that are/have been
> used pejoratively towards them, and defiantly use the language for
> themselves.  I did some quick google searching around this issue and would
> like to share two links that seemed most helpful here.
>
> http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reappropriation
>
>
> http://www.womanist-musings.com/2011/11/reclaiming-language-and-who-gets-to-say.html?m=1
>
> Basically, any white folks wanting to REclaim language around the
> african-american experience, can't. Boo hoo. It's because that language is
> already CLAIMED by white folks, for its pejorative purpose. If you don't
> like that, well, sit on it. Meditate on our white supremacist culture and
> cry big salty tears. Whatever. Similarly, if you want to help women at
> large reclaim some kinda nasty word, but you are a man, too bad for you.
> There is no way for you to use those words without reinforcing their
> negative meanings.  Unless & until a woman invites you, eg, to go on a
> Slutwalk. Then you can write the word 'slut' on yourself & walk down the
> street amongst a group doing the same thing.
>
> R.
>
> >
> > On May 7, 2013 10:30 AM, "Anca Mosoiu" <anca at techliminal.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> +1, and Amen!
> >>
> >> Anca.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 10:26 AM, Alcides Gutierrez <
> alcides888 at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> If I may chime in, I think it would be awesome just to coin our own
> phrases and not try to replace anything. Instead of characterizing any
> current or past lingo, we could just go ahead and move on... NEW LINGO!
> >>>
> >>> I think this would lessen the chances of political/cultural/social
> frustrations due to sensitive associations and differing perspectives of
> describing whatever random related concepts.
> >>>
> >>> So, if we actually are interested in creating a new positive lingo, we
> can just submit positive words and tech words into a bucket and creatively
> combine them to attach to whatever cool concept. (BEAUTIFUL CODE! = GREAT
> DISCUSSION!)
> >>>
> >>> So, is there going to be a lingo raffle party!?!?!?! That sounds kinda
> fun to me!!! What if it was a raffle / poetry / public reading party????
> I'm sure there would be great code there!
> >>>
> >>> Alcides Gutierrez
> >>> http://e64.us
> >>>
> >>> On May 6, 2013 2:01 PM, "Max B" <maxb.personal at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> +1
> >>>>
> >>>> Thank you for that.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On 05/06/2013 01:40 PM, hep wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> it is really sad that this list is literally turning into a game of
> oppression bingo. i will make this brief.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 1. using terms like "civilization" to refer to a class of dominant
> majority with a huge history of colonialistic oppression, at the expense of
> any class who has experiences colonialistic oppression is pretty offensive.
> if you want to qualify this as "what they wrongly refer to themselves as"
> then use quotes and indicate as such. ie "Doesn't the so-self-called
> 'civilized' psyche secretly crave the things it sets itself apart from and
> gives up and projects on its image of the noble savage though?" it would be
> better however to reword this overall to say something like "Doesn't the
> privileged majority psyche secretly crave the things it sets itself apart
> from and gives up and projects on its image of the oppressed culture
> though?"
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 2. using tropes like "noble savage" is ok as long as everyone
> involves understand that you are referring to the named trope and not using
> that term as an offensive term. this can be solved by referencing the trope
> at hand. ie http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Noble_savage
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 3. some people are still going to be offended by this term, because
> it is still hugely offensive to native peoples even as it is used as a
> handy moniker to call out offensive behavior by the privileged majority.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 4. using the term noble savage in reference to african americans is
> doubly offensive, even if it fits the point you are trying to make fyi. if
> you MUST use tropes to refer to POC, make sure you are using the correct
> one that examines the colonial aspects of the behavior being discussed.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 5. when someone is offended by your choice in language, the correct
> thing to do is not double down and try to explain that you weren't being
> offensive. the correct thing to do is to say something like "i am sorry my
> language choice offended you. what i was trying to say was___". do not
> attempt to use dictionary.com, etymology, wikipedia usage, etc to try and
> prove that you weren't being offensive. offense is not in the eye of the
> person who offended, it is in the eye of that person offended. so just
> accept that you behaved offensively even as you did not intend to and move
> on. trying to explain to the world at large how you totally weren't
> offensive citing media to try and "prove" it just makes you more offensive,
> and it is incredibly disrespectful to the person you are communicating with
> who likely doesn't give a shit what you were actually trying to say at this
> point, and did not sign on for a weeks long multiple page scroll email
> battle/war of attention attrition. accept, move on. don't become a cliche.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 6. free speech is not a get out of jail free card. you have the
> right to say anything you want. and we all have the right to think of you
> as an asshole for saying it. if someone says "don't say that" they aren't
> depriving you of your right to free speech, they are trying to save you
> from losing friends and allies in your community. "congress shall make no
> law abridging free speech." there is nothing in there that says someone HAS
> to remain your friend after you were unintentionally a racist asshole.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 7. most people who fight oppression in their communities do not want
> to argue about it in their hobbies. respect that. just because you have the
> time and inclination to have a long-winded email argument does not mean
> that you are not also being totally offensive by assuming the other person
> wants/needs/is going to engage in it. often times i see people "win"
> arguments on email lists only because they were the more persistant
> asshole, not because they are right. and be aware that that is totally
> obvious to people not involved but still reading.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 8. a point to everyone: native american peoples are not dead. there
> are still many thriving native cultures, and people need to understand that
> when they refer to native things or topics they are talking not just about
> past people that were wiped out, but also active real working native
> peoples still here. the bay area is full of native people who are active in
> their tribal affiliations, who work to promote native rights, and who are
> invested in the topics of native americans. when you frame out things like
> that there is a "civlized" society, and native societies (implying not
> civilized) many of those people are GOING to be super offended. Like when
> native people try to call out white people on wearing headdresses as
> culturally appropriative, and white people rebut with "YOU ARE ON THE
> INTERNET. THAT WAS INVENTED BY US MAYBE YOU SHOULDN'T USE THAT". fucked up.
> (for the ignorant: native people are americans as well and have equal
> rights to share in american culture as any other american. besides which:
> last i checked many native peoples have also contributed to the internet,
> even as there are colonial privileged oppressionistic usages of native
> culture as well, such as apache.) try to keep that in mind as you use terms
> that may evoke native americans, at the risk of being seen as a total
> racist asshole.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> also everything that rachel said.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> -hep
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Sun, May 5, 2013 at 2:10 PM, Anthony Di Franco <
> di.franco at aya.yale.edu> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Rachel, I've had a bit more time to reflect on what you wrote, and
> while I don't have anything to add about the immediate question beyond what
> I said yesterday, I'd like to talk about some of the broader context you
> brought up in your reply and the more general issues involved.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The first thing is that I am primarily viewing what we are trying
> to do as having a discussion, so it seems to me that when there are
> misunderstandings that is exactly when we should be having more discussion
> to clarify what we are trying to say and find out effective ways to say it,
> not less. Meanwhile, you are using the terms of some sort of power struggle
> where I am being attacked and defending myself and allegiances are forming
> and shifting around the patterns of conflict. I do not see a power struggle
> but rather a community trying to communicate and communication depends on
> shared understanding among senders and recipients of symbols and how to use
> them to convey meaning. Where this is not immediately clear, clarifying it
> explicitly seems the most direct way to move towards better mutual
> understanding. I hope this can be reconciled with your own views and I
> welcome further discussion on this.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Within the attacking and defending point of view, I am also
> uncomfortable with some things. To speak of attacking and defending and
> also then to say that the subject of the attack should *stop defending*
> reminds me too much of the revolting cries of "stop resisting" from police
> - I could certainly never meditate on such an ugly phrase and I find the
> suggestion grotesque. It's something I've heard while authoritarian thugs
> victimize people who are not resisting but only perhaps trying to maintain
> their safety and dignity under an uninvited attack, perhaps not even that,
> and one way the phrase is used is as a disingenuous way of framing the
> situation so that later, biased interpretations of what happened will have
> something to latch onto. I am glad we have much less at stake in our
> interactions here than in those situations but I still really don't like to
> see us internalizing that logic in how we handle communications in our
> group.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> There is another aspect of this I am uncomfortable with, which is
> the idea that people should respond to feedback only by silently assenting.
> This reminds me too much of other situations where people, sometimes
> myself, were supposed to be seen and not heard, and it deprives people of
> agency over and responsibility for what they do by expecting them to let
> others determine their behavior unilaterally. I am happy to take feedback
> and, generally, I hope you can trust people to act on feedback
> appropriately rather than trying to short-circuit their agency. The more
> informative feedback is, then, the better, and it should contain
> information people can use themselves to evaluate what they are doing the
> way others do so they can figure out how to accommodate everyone's needs.
> When feedback consist simply of naked statements it is too much like
> trolling in the small or gaslighting in the large, and especially then,
> amounts to an insidious way to deprive people of agency by conditioning
> them to fear unpredictable pain when they exercise agency, and has a
> chilling effect. In general, the idea that certain people are less able
> than others to handle the responsibilities of being human, and so they
> should have their behaviors dictated to them unilaterally by others, is a
> key to justifying many regimes of oppression, especially modern ones, and
> because of that I am very uncomfortable when I see any example of that
> logic being internalized in our group dynamics.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I don't know what passed between you and Eddan involving trump
> cards but if the card game analogy really is apt then it may be a sign of
> trivializing the question of safe space by saying that certain people's
> concerns trump other people's concerns, based not on the concerns
> themselves, but only on who is raising the concerns. Both are important. I
> have heard some justifications for 'trumping' as I understand it that
> remind me of the debate around the Oscar Grant case. There, defenders of
> Mehserle's conduct claimed that police should be the judges of what
> legitimate police use of force is because they have special training and
> experience that give them a uniquely relevant perspective on what violence
> is justified and what demands of compliance they can legitimately make of
> people. Another justification I heard was that police are especially
> vulnerable due to the danger inherent in their duties and so things should
> be biased heavily towards a presumption of legitimacy when they use
> violence or demand compliance. To me both these justifications seem
> problematic because they create a class that can coerce others without
> accountability and can unilaterally force standards of conduct on others. I
> am happy that there is much less at stake among us here than there is in
> cases of police brutality or Oscar Grant's case, and that there is no
> comparison other than this logic being used. But the logic that certain
> people's perspectives are uniquely relevant, or that their vulnerability
> gives them license to force things upon others unilaterally, is still a
> logic I don't think we should internalize among ourselves, because it
> produces unaccountable authoritarianism that can be exploited for
> unintended ends, and does not help with the ostensibly intended ones
> anyway. It results in us 'policing' ourselves in a way much too much like
> the way the cities are policed to the detriment of many people and of
> values we share.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Finally, you mentioned the evening at Marina's apartment and I want
> to clarify my experience of what happened there. My 'aha' moment didn't
> have anything to do with the point you were trying to make - I can't even
> remember exactly what that point was, because it is so strongly
> overshadowed by my memory of how you treated me. You called me out for
> something that had passed between you and me in the middle of a social
> gathering among a mix of friends and strangers, none of whom were involved,
> which immediately put me in a very uncomfortable situation. Then, you
> dismissed my attempts to defer speaking to a more appropriate setting, and
> to open up a dialog with you where I shared my perspective. The only way
> out you gave me was to assent without comment to you. My 'aha' moment was
> when I realized that things between us had degenerated to that point; it
> was when I realized I was mistaken in trying to have a discussion because
> we were interacting like two territorial animals, or like a police
> interrogator and a suspect, and you were simply demanding a display of
> submission or contrition from me before you would let me slink off. While
> it felt degrading, I took the way out you offered to spare myself and the
> others in the room the experience of things continuing. I take the risk of
> sharing this openly with you now because I think we know each other much
> better than we did then and we would never again end up interacting like
> potentially hostile strangers passing in the night, or worse. I think we
> can and should and have been doing better, and overall it's best not to let
> a mistaken assumption about what I was thinking and how I felt influence an
> important discussion about how we treat one another in our community.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I, like you, hope you can appreciate that I am taking the time to
> write this admittedly long-winded reply, not to suck the air out of the
> room, whatever that means, but to contribute to a discussion that moves us
> towards a better shared understanding of how to respect our shared values
> and towards more appreciation of one another's perspectives.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Anthony
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 10:14 AM, rachel lyra hospodar <
> rachelyra at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I am really sad about this whole thread.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Anthony, I think I know you well enough to say that your intent
> here was not to be offensive, but unfortunately... Here we are. I am
> responding to the specific message below because it is the one that made me
> want to unsubscribe from this mailing list and unassociate myself from this
> group. Everything that came after, gah.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Anti-oppression for the priveleged class, ie not being an
> unintentional giant jerkface: if someone points out that you are offending
> or harming them, they are not seeking an explanation, but a change in
> behavior.  Perhaps an apology or acknowledgement, even a query. If someone
> says 'i think your POV is fucked up and harmful' please do not go on to
> elaborate on your POV to them. Even if you think they don't get your
> amazing nuances. Your amazing nuances are not always important, and part of
> 'oppression' is that some peoples' nuances are always shoved in other
> people's faces. Sometimes being a friend means keeping your opinion to your
> damn self.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> This relates to something that eddan has on occasion termed 'the
> trump card'.  We are all individuals, and as such we ultimately need to
> keep our own house in order. The trump card concept relates to safe spaces
> - as safe as eddan might feel in a space, I'm not going to average it
> together with my safety levels to achieve some sort of average safety
> rating. My safety reading of a space will always, for me, trump eddan's,
> and while I am happy if he feels safe it doesn't really matter to my safety
> level.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> The interesting thing about telling most people they are making
> you feel unsafe, or that they are offending you, is that for some reason
> their response is almost never 'gosh, whoops!'. It's more usually like what
> happened here - a bunch of longwinded explanation that completely misses
> the point, and then a perceived ally of the offender jumping in, also
> talking a lot, and sucking all the air out of the room.  People always have
> reasoning for why they did what they did. Requiring offended folks to read
> about your reasoning for why you said what you said misses the point, and
> to me makes this conversation read like you don't care if you were
> offensive.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> It's deja vu to me that you are giving all this definition and
> explanation around the terms you used. It seems identical to our debate
> around the use of 'constable' and it is sad to me to see you take refuge in
> the same pattern of defense. It doesn't matter about the etymological
> history of a phrase. It doesn't. As fun as you may find it to think about,
> the way things are *heard*, by others, NOW, is a trump card for many.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Anthony, I hope you can understand that I have taken the time out
> of my life to write this message in the hopes of helping you to modulate
> your behavior to be less offensive. I am sure you remember the first time I
> engaged with you on this topic, at Marina's house. Perhaps you'll remember
> the aha moment when you *stopped defending* and simply accepted the input,
> thanking me. Perhaps you'll find in that a sort of meditative place of
> return.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Good luck to you all. I enjoy many things about sudo community and
> am sure I will stay connected in many ways.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> R.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On May 3, 2013 3:05 PM, "Anthony Di Franco" <di.franco at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Doesn't the civilized psyche secretly crave the things it sets
> itself apart from and gives up and projects on its image of the noble
> savage though?
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Your description seems more like meditatively flowing through it.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 2:58 PM, netdiva <netdiva at sonic.net>
> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Here I was thinking "killing it" was just another example of
> appropriation of african american vernacular by the mainstream.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On 5/3/2013 2:46 PM, Leonid Kozhukh wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> "killing it" is a recently popular term to denote excellence
> and immense progress. it has a violent, forceful connotation.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> friends in the circus community - through empirical evidence -
> have established a belief that operating at the highest levels of talent
> requires mindfulness, awareness, and calm. thus, a better term, which they
> have started to playfully use, is "cuddling it."
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> thought sudoers would appreciate this.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> cuddling it,
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>>> len
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> founder, ligertail
> >>>>>>>>>> http://ligertail.com
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>>>>>>> sudo-discuss mailing list
> >>>>>>>>>> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
> >>>>>>>>>> http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>>>>>> sudo-discuss mailing list
> >>>>>>>>> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
> >>>>>>>>> http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>>>>> sudo-discuss mailing list
> >>>>>>>> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
> >>>>>>>> http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>>> sudo-discuss mailing list
> >>>>>> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
> >>>>>> http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> hep
> >>>>> hepic photography || www.hepic.net
> >>>>>     dis at gruntle.org || 415 867 9472
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>> sudo-discuss mailing list
> >>>>> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
> >>>>> http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> sudo-discuss mailing list
> >>>> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
> >>>> http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> sudo-discuss mailing list
> >>> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
> >>> http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> -=-=-=-
> >> Anca Mosoiu | Tech Liminal
> >> anca at techliminal.com
> >> M: (510) 220-6660
> >> http://techliminal.com | T: @techliminal | F: facebook.com/techliminal
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> sudo-discuss mailing list
> >> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
> >> http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
> >>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > sudo-discuss mailing list
> > sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
> > http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> sudo-discuss mailing list
> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
> http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sudo-discuss mailing list
> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
> http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://sudoroom.org/pipermail/sudo-discuss/attachments/20130508/93243795/attachment.html>