found online by Raymond
From tengrain at Mock Paper Scissors:
I’m sure everyone already sees this is a variation of the scold that women have faced since forever: by wearing X you deserve to have Y happen. Skirt, blouse, bikini, burka, it doesn’t matter, because ever since Eve, these knuckle-draggers have no control over their actions when they see temptation. We can now add men in tutus to that list.
Odd how sex and violence intersect in the minds of conservatives, innit?
My wife teaches communications at the college here. One of the aspects of communications is how one represents or communicates nonverbally of who he is through how he dresses. In a professional environment, one would wear a dress shirt, slacks, and perhaps a tie. One would not wear shorts and flip flops typically. However, if one were to wear a suit and tie to the beach, he would likely be looked at with bemused smirks. When one is in Rome…
Tengrain is annoyed at the evil conservatives for scorning leftists for what they consider to be inappropriate dress in given situations. The truth of the matter is that this is not simply a phenomenon that causes consternation on one side of the political spectrum and not the other.
Indeed if one were to wear a “Make America Great Again” hat to a DNC rally, one could reasonably expect that the crowd may not be altogether warm and welcoming. (For the record I do NOT own such a hat and do not want one… ever.)
If I were to wear a “choose life” T-shirt to a Planned Parenthood fundraiser, I bet I would probably be encouraged to leave very quickly.
If I were to wear my NRA jacket to a Brady Campaign speech, I bet any violence that ensued would be directed towards me.
So you see, reasonable people understand that by that same measure, if a guy wears a tutu into a cowboy bar in Wyoming, he is likely not going to fit in and be shooting whiskey and playing billiards with the guys there.
When people dress or act in a matter to draw attention towards themselves by not going with the norm for the location or situation, then they should reasonably expect that they are going to be noticed and perhaps not welcomed. Why that surprises or annoys Tengrain or anyone else for that matter, regardless of political persuasion or agenda-driven ideology, says more about them than it does about those that are “discriminating”, in my opinion.
It sounds like just one more issue of “victim mentality” that is often propagated from the Left.
Victim mentality? What victim mentality? It was a post lambasting a tirade to blame others for their own awkward/uncomfortable feelings. The fellow is, for some reason, uncomfortable with gay people. So because he’s got an icky feeling, it’s ok for a gay person to get slugged in the face for being, apparently, obviously gay. Breastfeeding women give this person a squishy feeling, so the breastfeeding woman needs to accomodate his sensative feelings first and her hungry child second.
The three scenerios you provide are pretty good examples of things people do to antagonize and troll those organizations or people, so I do not know how that compares to a homosexual person getting punched for going into a bar. Being gay isn’t default antagonism of non-gays. A woman feeding her child is pretty far from antagonism.
The fellow in the blog post was whining about and justifying violence against people who were doing acceptable, legal things. A dude walks into an establishment you’re in wearing a tutu? A mother at church is trying to nourish her child while she’s nourishing her spirit? The only thing a person’s discomfort justifies in such situations is a shift in your gaze.
“You Will Get Punched and Others Have Rights Too” Such a nonsensical article title.
If you want to go around making people uncomfortable, you’ve got the problem, not the rest of us. Right. Even if racism or bigotry is their willfully CHOSEN source of discomfort. Whatever happened to personal responsibility? I’d understand if the offender was REALLY making someone uncomfortable, by standing on their foot or getting into their face. But that would be provocation. For many conservatives, someone simply being different is seen as provocation.
It all starts with Mike Enzi who has enraged the BLT&GQ…(No disparaging bigotry or hate here, nosiree) He should have known better…(It’s the victim’s fault) And spare me the tirade about Matthew Shepherd. ..(He was gay so he had it coming) We are a culturally heterogeneous nation with diverse cultural norms.(But you damn well better conform to conservative norms, lest they be “offended”.)
It’s one thing to say if someone wanders in a high crime area he can expect to be a crime victim, because there are criminals, ya know? If you wear a provocative message that “offends” a group you choose to be among, one may expect to come to regret it. However, if a gay or black wanders into the wrong town he could also become a crime victim, because conservative white norms were “offended” and they were angered by his presence. That’s it. Boo hoo. Poor wittow sensitive rednecks. Bigotry is ignorance wrapped in hate. And that justifies criminal assault for many of them.
This is the point.
Just to clarify, since one always needs to do so in certain venues these days, I absolutely do not condone “punching anyone in the face” or any other sort of violence simply because someone is different. That should have gone without saying, but again… these days…
Thank you for the clarification.
“When people dress or act in a matter to draw attention towards themselves by not going with the norm for the location or situation, then they should reasonably expect that they are going to be noticed and perhaps not welcomed.”
You don’t condone the violence, just the act of blaming the victim.
“You don’t condone the violence, just the act of blaming the victim.”
Now wait a minute Trey! You said this wasn’t about victims, remember? “What victim mentality?” Right? Are we trying to have this both ways, sir?
And again to clarify, as this seems to be a constant endeavor when dealing with some individuals, I also do not necessarily blame the “victim”. If said victim is trying to be intentionally provocative, then I suppose some of the blame should indeed lie with him. If the victim, through non-intentional ignorance, is being culturally insensitive, then this sounds like a good teachable moment for both parties involved.
Regardless, even if a person is intentionally being rude or intentionally provocative, I think that person should still be dealt with as much respect as is possible. I know that I often fall short of this Christian ideal of loving one’s neighbors and enemies, but I still think it is a worthy goal to have. Don’t you think so too, sir?
Thank you, T.Paine.
I really do not know what you are trying to say. Is this some sort of attempt at a gotcha? My original response to you was fairly straight forward.
You brought Victim Mentality into it as if it had anything to do with the actual articles referenced in this post. You mentioned Victim Mentality and I asked ‘What Victim Mentality?’ then elaborated on what the article was actually about. Because by bringing victim mentality into the conversation, it came off to me as if you hadn’t read the article.
Then you posted another comment clarifying that you don’t condone the violent actions referenced in the article. I responded to your clarification. I quoted a selection from your original comment that would lead a reasonable person to think you agreed with the original article’s theme. “They asked for it.” That’s blaming the victim. This second response does not invalidate my first response to you.
So I addressed two things in two comments responding to you. You got me! Apparently that’s having it both ways.
“Regardless, even if a person is intentionally being rude or intentionally provocative, I think that person should still be dealt with as much respect as is possible. I know that I often fall short of this Christian ideal of loving one’s neighbors and enemies, but I still think it is a worthy goal to have. Don’t you think so too, sir?”
I wholeheartedly agree. Unfortunately this comment thread is in relation to an article about how it’s ok to see red if you see a man wearing a tutu and how it’s the woman’s fault that the author feels squeamish when they see her feeding her kid. Pretty much the opposite of that Christian ideal many of us strive for.