🎓 Doc Freemo 🇳🇱 @freemo@qoto.org

> _“As to #intent, no one can see into someone else's thoughts to know for sure.”_

Sure. That's why we have the [Principle of #Charity](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_charity) (ie, when in doubt, assume the best intentions in others).

Also, notice that the exact same proposition (“no one can see into someone else's thoughts to know for sure”) would exonerate _me_ from any accusation of #bigotry or lack of sensitivity, since I can't possibly know for sure what other people think, how they will interpret what I say, or how they will feel.

Thus (again): #context, and #PrincipleOfCharity.

5/5

I tag a lot in my toots as a way for my future self to find ideas or conversations. In that context, the fact that I tagged that specific word (too) is meaningless (and I bet @Pat _knew_ that).

4/5

The fact that I did read #MeinKampf is utterly irrelevant here. Anyone can read [my post about it](https://blog.tripu.info/mein-kampf/).

I think dropping in that bare fact like that in our conversation is rather dishonest.

[I did read #TheCommunistManifesto](https://www.goodreads.com/review/show/1912006087), too. Guess what? I completely disagree with _both_ authors!

Ditto about my previous disagreements with @Pat regarding other topics.

3/5

It's amazing I have to remind anyone in 2022, but **linking to, fav'ing/boosting, or following, something or someone, does _not_ imply complete endorsement of every aspect of that thing or that person**. (Sometimes we even share or highlight precisely for the _opposite_ reason.)

I linked to two videos because I saw something useful in them, in the context of the broader discussion (the #JoeRogan controversy). And no, what I saw useful was not gratuitously chaining utterances of a certain word (that's stupid per se), but:

* that one video showcased that the reaction to Rogan was inconsistent with previous reactions to other public figures committing the same “sin”; and
* that the other video showed that Rogan's views on politics, race, gender, inequality, etc are actually very different from what his critics are saying.

2/5

@freemo @Sphinx @trinsec

@Pat and I seem to have basic disagreements about rules of engagement, acceptable speech, and logical reasoning, which we aren't going to solve. We are not going to convince each other. Definitely not when one side is literally blocked by the other. (I absolutely respect his decision to block me.)

For passers-by, and because I keep on feeling implicitly accused of bigotry, lack of sensitivity, or worse: **context and intent matters**. I insist on this because that basic rule keeps resurfacing in the discussion (🧵):

1/5

@freemo @tripu @Sphinx @trinsec

If you haven't seen the video, now I understand why we're in different places on this. He posted three toots, as I remember, replying to his own original toot, so that each one appeared in the local timeline. The last one (which is the first that someone sees as they read the timeline, was that horrible video, without much (or any) context, as I remember. And, as I said, he used the word as a tag.

In any case, we've got an asshole disrupting this conversation, so...

You understand my position.

@Pat
I cant view the videos here in egypt so i cant comment on if the context ia acceptable.

I can say that in any direct communication with you id avoid the use of the word in any context simply as a sign of respect i can not promise to do so in a general or public context. I feel saying "the n-word" rather than the actual word is an unhealthy approach to the problem. Respect comes from intent, not the mere utterance of a word. Not only do i find it acceptable to use the word in a context such as that, i find it preferable.

I think we need to fight against a society where we attack people without awareness of the context and using the word in a descriptive way is perfectly fine and outside of conversations directly between us i will have no problem using ot descriptively as i have in the past.

@tripu @Sphinx @trinsec

@freemo @tripu @Sphinx @trinsec

I didn't say "every situation", I said in "nearly" every context. That quote you gave could have been, "Shaniqua was called <the n-word> by a racist today which is uncalled for. We can't accept that language. I strongly condemn the use of that word."

The only time I think it could be used is to explain it to someone who has never heard the word before, if someone asks what "the n-word" is. And then it should be done in a non-public setting.

In any case, that's not even what he did. He used it as a tag for God's sake, and posted a video with people saying it over and over again without context. And he did it just to get a reaction to the use of the word.

And I'd prefer if you don't use that word again either, even in a quote.