/lit/ - Literature

tl;dr

Actually if you read her comments and follow up article she's a little more level-headed than most people in her camp. Willing to at least listen to the other side.

I think fair enough it is mean to mock someone if they are dyslexic or having learning difficulties. But then on anonymous boards it is difficult to know that.

Our culture has "evolved" to the point that we all sit around bickering about who has more "privilege" than others, and I think it's absolutely hilarious.

Come, come nuclear bombs. There's nothing left that's fit for humans.

regardless of "privilege," correcting grammar on the internet is really annoying and makes you look worse than whoever made the mistake

>>3562690
Holy fucking shit, this is worse than an article about "Non-ADHD privilege" I read a while back.

As somebody with ADHD, that article was so painful to read. It's a common problem with social justice - In the quest to be "accepting," you start to baby people. So when I read this, I basically read "You have to accept everything, because the poor babies might get sad." Same thing with the ADHD article - "If you yell at somebody for not focusing, the poor baby might get sad."

It's patronizing and horrible.

>>3562740
http://www.tnellen.com/cybereng/harrison.html

I remember I was taking part in a course (against my will, government sent me on it) and we had to do some brainstorming as part of the project. However, I got scolded by the person running the course for using the term brainstorm as it is apparently offensive towards people with mental difficulties. Instead we should use the term mindmap.

What irritated me about this is that this isn't actually a legitimate complaint from mentally handicapped individuals. Rather people being so afraid of offending someone that they becoming ultra-aware of any words or phrases that could be deemed offensive to other groups. They never consult or ask the groups but assume the term is offensive because they don't want it to occur and then cause a row.

If someone disabled told me he didn't want to be called disabled then fine, I will do what he says. Same with black people not wanting to be called black, gay people called gay etc. Yet what bugs me about this privilege movement is that it is the so called 'privileged' group speaking on the behalf of minorities on what is best for them. Instead of viewing disabled people or transgendered people as individuals they just view them solely by their minority status.

>>3562690
>copy & paste article into Word
>2067 words
>mfw
Some people are so hungry for attention. How narcissistic do you have to be to write 2000 words on something so retarded? I mean, by this point, I don't see how you even hide it from yourself...

>>3562740
Painful to read because you couldn't stay focused?

This is so fucking stupid. Why do we have to equate inadequacy or deficit to MUH PRIVILEGE?

Jesus Christ, what kind of privilege DOESN'T exist? The most ridiculous one I've heard so far is thin privilege, though.

>>3562776
Raw jeans privilege.

It's like she doesn't even understand that there's a difference between internet speak and publishing-standard parlance.

For you, /lit/.

>>3562763
This is my favorite short story.

>>3562772
Nah. Those pills really do work.

I wish I could put the first time I took them into words. It was almost magical.

dis sum real bullshit

Literacy, privilege and the law have been entangled since laws existed. I don't understand if the argument here is that illiterate people (whose numbers by some estimates include at least 14% of America's population) shouldn't have access to basic rights. It's obviously silly when the author talks about "ability to send an e-mail," but it's a serious issue that deserves more than base /pol/emics

>>3562823
The problem with tumblrprivilegefaggotniggotry is that these people believe that the solution lies in inhibiting those who are able, not helping those who are unable.

>>3562835
>The problem with tumblrprivilegefaggotniggotry is that these people believe that the solution lies in inhibiting those who are able, not helping those who are unable.
Someone needs to look into the social aspects of disability and impairments.

>>3562839
But that's exactly what they're preaching. What the hell do you think >>3562763 is about?

>>3562823
One has to try very hard to be illiterate in America.

Call me a tumblrfag but its true--literacy is often a product (and source of) privilege. This doesn't make literacy bad, anymore than wealth or power is bad. But we need to acknowledge the benefits our literacy has brought us and how privileged we are to even be literate in the first place.

>>3562847
>http://www.tnellen.com/cybereng/harrison.html
It's not about what I'm talking about at all. If I didn't know better, I might even assume that story was written by George or Hazel for the amount of decent thought put into it.

So, Anon, are you disabled?

>>3562867
What were you implying?

Reminder that Beethoven was a rapist
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Susan_McClary#The_Beethoven_and_rape_controversy

>>3562871
I'll talk you through it, by example. Are you disabled?

This isn't exactly a trick, it's just a way undergrads are taught this thing in things like medicine courses.

>>3562879

No I am not disabled.

>>3562863
Privilege is a self-destructive way of thinking about it. The term intrinsically evokes semantics of envy. We need to think in terms of how we can help those who need aid, not in chastising those who have ability. In Tumblr terms, this notion is used as an excuse to rid oneself of all accountability. Thin prilevege is an example of this.

>>3562875
I always thought Beethoven's music was pretty feminine.

>>3562875
Jesus. I met that cunt a few years ago. What an awful asshole she was—and an unmusical one at that.

>>3562879
No, you pedantic wretch, what were you implying by saying >Someone needs to look into the social aspects of disability and impairments.

I took a linguistics class where the professor was always going on about prescriptive grammar.

>>3562885
You must know much about Beethoven or music.

>>3562884

>We need to think in terms of how we can help those who need aid

No, we need to think about why these people are in need of aid to begin with and why our society privileges group X over group Y.

Its not about chastisement. Some people will NEVER be literate. How do we go about making a society which is all-inclusive? Eliminating size-*ism*?

>>3562900
Well, yes. We need to deduce the reasons behind demographic inequality, and then assess what we should do. It's not always a case of giving them more money, or providing more funding for education. Admittedly, it's a tough one, and it sometimes is tempting to let people be. Perhaps, at times, that's the best thing to do. However, if someone overtly requests help, you should give it.

>>3562900
Are you fat?

>>3562882
But are there things you can't do? For example, are you able to breath underwater like a fish? Or fly like a bird? Even if we're not being fantastical, are you able to run a mile in under 4 minutes or bench more than twice your weight at your current fitness? Or could you perform open heart surgery or choreograph Swan Lake? Even if you can do some of those things, if you couldn't wouldn't that be a disability? If these aren't disabilities, why aren't they disabilities do you think?

Privilege isn't real, my social psychology professor told me so. He used to be a Black Panther.

>>3562914
Yes, I can't put up with stuoid posts. Is that a disability?

>>3562879
ADHD. Technically, yes.

Why?

>>3562932
Of course, it isn't.

>>3562931
You tell me.

>>3562934
>Irigaray

>>3562896
But nothing about women.

No, I think its Irigaray's influence, but I always think of things that start going against the status quo as fairly feminine. So him being on the cusp of classical and romantic is probably why.

>>3562928
That's quite an interesting one. What does ADHD prevent you from doing, and why is that a problem?

>>3562914

Yes, there are many things I cannot do, and I cannot say why they are not considered disabilities other than the certain viewpoint of our societies--what people should be able to do vs. the genuine diversity of people. This is pretty fascinating, thanks for your insight.

>>3562905

Or take the initiative in making our society a better one for ALL people, where people don't need to ask for "help" to get by.

>>3562914
They are not disabilities because those things do not fall into the range of normal human ability.

For example, one of my friends cannot see. He is disabled because seeing is within the range of normal human ability.

"Normal," of course, being defined as "A genetic ability posses by over 50% of the population." Not that it needs to be an ability, so physical appearance does not count.

>>3562690
My name is Chandra, and I am a recovering grammar snob.

There was a time that it gave me a blush of pride

>There was a time that it gave me

>There was a time that it

>A time that it

>that

I stopped reading

>>3562910

No I'm not "fat". But if I was would that make me any less of a human? Any less beautiful, intelligent, interesting?

>>3562964
Less physically attractive to most people. Yes.

>>3562964
Depends on personal taste. This is where we get into fetishes.

>>3562946
"Attention deficit-hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a mental disorder[1] and neurobehavioral disorder[2] characterized by either significant difficulties of inattention or hyperactivity and impulsiveness or a combination of the two"

It is a problem because I cannot focus when I would like too, leaving me unable to do work effectively. This effect can be negated with pills.

>>3562958
Sounds like you need to recover, grammar snob.
Check your literacy privile- jesus I feel retarded just by posting this ironically. This is a whole new level for me.

>>3562690

HOW DARE PEOPLE KNOW HOW TO PROPERLY USE THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE?

CHECK YOUR PRIVILEGE, ANGLOPHONE SCUM.

>>3562950
No problem. First here's a clip with ol Judith Butler that looks into the rest of the post quite well: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k0HZaPkF6qE

And I would add disability is often contrasted with the idea of an impairment, the manifestation in reality of whatever causes the disability. So not everyone has the body of a ballerina, some are phobic of blood so becoming a surgeon is made at least more difficult and so on. A disability exists when impairments prevent you from fulfilling society's expectations. The thing above about everyone being brought down to be equal is silly because of this: if there's full wheelchair access for example, being wheelchair bound is no longer a disability in that sense. There is a secondary issue, that of disability being a label (comparable in some ways to things like nigger, a good example is Ian Dury's song I'm Spasticus which is in some ways an attempt to reclaim negative language about disabilities, and many disabled people use the term disabled with pride), though that's a whole other issue.

I don't want to get into a debate about whether privilege theory is sound or not and to what degree.

But as a non-native english speaker I have to say that being corrected on the internet served to improve both my grammar and syntax considerably.

I think that especially in this case this behaviour is counter-productive. Not correcting someone doesn't in any way whatsoever create equality. In fact it perpetuates inequality as neither the person that writes properly will suddenly become illiterate nor is the person that doesn't going to become literate on its own.

This is just pretending the problem isn't there in hopes that it will get bored and leave. It won't and correcting bad grammar is a service to society and the individual you are correcting.

Unless he is using the other guy's bad grammar as an excuse to not touch the substance of his arguments.
That's a reprehensible crime and he should be cricified for pepetrating it.

>>3563017
>pepetrating

>>3563026
>perpetrating - Fix'd

also

>crucified - Fix'd.

But typos are typos though.

>>3563043
>implying I should listen to your pleb-tier defences

>>3563052
>Defences

Your attempts to entrap me in your not-so-elaborate ruse are transparent.

>>3562971
I find these kind of things quite interesting, because they're more about what medical science can do. So you feel it is a problem with regards to something like your "standard of living", your inability to focus you find stops you achieving a certain standard. 100 years ago, it would just be a shame, you'd be a nuisance and nothing could really be done, but it wasn't a disability as such (for whatever reason, mostly to do with the view of the thing), but you most likely would not have achieved an equivalent standard of living as now on meds all other things being equal. This has a parallel in the whole replacement limb, Deus Ex style augmentation: if society were different, perhaps there is a way someone with ADHD can achieve as high a standard of living as anyone else with or without medical intervention; if society were different, wheelchair users wouldn't be disabled (same standard of living as walking people), but could we forget that when Deus Ex-style limb replacement becomes possible? Is that right? I find the second thought somewhat uncomfortable.

>>3563061
>mfw I still managed to confound you, for I am actually a Britfag

Check my 'c'.

>>3562957
>They are not disabilities because those things do not fall into the range of normal human ability.
Think how many sit ups a "normal human being" can do. If someone can do only up to one less than whatever number you've pulled out you anus, are they disabled?

>>3562964
>I'm not "fat". But if I was would that make me any less of a human? Any less beautiful, intelligent, interesting?

It would make you less beautiful, yes. As for intelligence, you obviously can't figure out how to stop shoving too much food into your gaping maw, so that doesn't speak very well to your brainpower.

>>3563101
What if he's a very intelligent yet semi-nihilist and hedonistic person that doesn't care about dying at 30 from a heartattack, and only wants to live his life eating delicious food, knowing full well of the repercussions?

>>3563101
What if someone has Prader-Willi?

>>3563107
>and hedonistic person
Tell him Epicurus was right. Some bread and water is a grand meal. A small portion of cheese makes it a feast.

>>3563115
>Not following the teachings of glorious Aristippus.

Food and sex are the only things worth living life for.

Not, really, but you get my point

>>3563112
>Prader-Willi
>People with this condition are obese, have reduced muscle tone and mental ability, and have sex glands that produce little or no hormones.

>reduced...mental ability

Even worse than if they didn't have it, in terms of intelligence.

>>3563127
>and have sex glands that produce little or no hormones

Wouldn't it be positively glorious if the opposite was the case?

other than the fact that the article has that one social justice buzzword that sends 4chan into a frenzy everytime they spot it, i mostly agree with it. people who are obsessed with spelling and grammar to the extent that they complain to shopkeeps and write whiny letters to newspapers about it need to get a life.

>>3563139
>people who are obsessed with spelling and grammar to the extent that they complain to shopkeeps and write whiny letters to newspapers about it need to get a life.

I'm ambivalent. Part of me likes that they're keeping the standards up, and not letting them fall into Idiocracy-level dismay.

Part of me agrees with you that they're annoying losers who obviously don't have boyfriends/girlfriends.

>>3563121
>Why do you mention to me pleasure? It is the good of man that I am searching for, not that of his belly - the belly of cattle and wild beasts is more roomy!
>"You" are misrepresenting what I say," you retort; "for I admit that no man can live pleasantly without at the same time living virtuously as well, and this is patently impossible for dumb beasts and for those who measure their good by mere food. Distinctly, I say, and openly I testify that the life that I denominate pleasant is impossible without the addition of virtue." Yet who does not know that those who are most apt to be filled with your sort of pleasure are all the greatest fools, and that wickedness abounds in enjoyments, and that the mind itself supplies many kinds of pleasure that are vicious? Foremost are haughtiness, a too high opinion of one's self and a puffed-up superiority to others, a blind and unthinking devotion to one's own interests, dissolute luxury, extravagant joy springing from very small and childish causes, and, besides a biting tongue and the arrogance that takes pleasure in insults, sloth, and the degeneracy of a sluggish mind that falls asleep over itself. All these things Virtue tosses aside, and she plucks the ear, and appraises pleasures before she permits them, and those that she approves she sets no great store by or even just permits them, and it is not her use of them, but her temperance that gives her joy. Since, however, temperance reduces our pleasures, injury results to your highest good. You embrace pleasure, I enchain her; you enjoy pleasure, I use it; you think it the highest good, I do not think it even a good; you do everything for the sake of pleasure, I, nothing.
Seneca, On the Happy Life

>>3562900

>How do we go about making a society which is all-inclusive?

you cant, theres always gona be one extra measure.

>>3563070
I look forward to an augmentation-filled future. I actually couldn't stop thinking of Deus Ex when I got on the pills. I had thought they would be a crutch that I hated, but they were so much better than that.