“Expecting marginalized peoples to disregard their own emotions to calmly educate you is the epitome of entitlement.”
Let’s examine this statement. Now, as I have expressed previously, emotions are real but not always appropriate – so I would not be in favor of disregarding emotion. Disregarding emotion is the opposite of figuring out whether one’s emotions are congruent with reality, or whether one is having an immature emotional reaction due to possessing an unrealistic worldview. In particular, considering the use of emotion in propaganda, it is wise to examine whether or not an appropriate emotional reaction to some atrocity may be a tool in the hands of someone who is lying to you for their own purposes. There are a great many examples, of late, particularly driven by the media, of using utter lies to get people into an emotional firestorm over something that would be utterly horrifying… except that it never actually happened. (Examples are left to the reader’s experience. If you’ve been paying attention, you will be able to think of quite a few.)
There is enough evil in the world that one would think that lies and fictions wouldn’t be needed; unfortunately making things up and ignoring actual marginalized people who have been denied justice seems to be the modus operandi of a significant segment of society.
Let us also take a look at “marginalized” – of course, who exactly is the marginalized group is not stated, because this is a piece of emotional language meant to shame rather than an intelligent part of mature discourse. In fact, considering the sentence as a whole, the entire thing is an attack on mature, fact-based discourse, but more on that later. Because this is SJW boilerplate, one can be assured that the “marginalized” groups in question consist of wealthy white UMC women, gay “marriage” activists with legal teams at their disposal, etc. rather than actual marginalized people, like girls in Afghanistan, Coptic Christians in the Middle East, or homosexuals in Saudi Arabia. Actual marginalized groups do not need to rely on solely emotional appeals, because the facts are on their side in sufficient weight to elicit an appropriate amount of sympathy from people who are not parochial nincompoops and/or sociopathic monsters. Actual marginalized people are excused for having emotional outbursts to being attacked with acid, barred entirely from society on pain of death, etc. However, spokesmen for these groups also use calm education, when useless pampered progs aren’t getting them
banned disinvited from making presentations at institutions of higher learning, that is.
Actual marginalized people seize every opportunity to tell their stories in as educational a manner as possible (with varying levels of calmness, I’m sure) because marginalized people DON’T GET THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK VERY OFTEN! If you have people representing your “marginalized” group routinely getting television and newspaper time, classes in institutions of higher learning, and entire movies made about them, to the point where you don’t feel it necessary to educate others at every opportunity, you are not actually part of a marginalized group. How often do we get to see uneducated, disfigured Muslim girls telling how they were prevented from going to school, abused, and treated like cattle by an actual oppressive culture? How often do gay rights activists picket the White House demanding sanctions against countries where being openly homosexual is a death sentence? When was the last time a non-uber-conservative outlet mentioned religious persecution against ancient Christian sects in the Middle East?
If someone says anything to the effect of “I disdain educating you about the marginalization of X people,” that in and of itself is enough evidence to conclude that the people in question are not actually marginalized.
It is, in fact, an expression of privilege. “I don’t have to talk to you, you ignorant, uneducated peon” is not the attitude of a victim (or advocate) desperately hoping to reveal their plight to the world so that someone will only do something to alleviate their distress. It is the statement of the privileged, who are quite secure in their intellectual superiority and ability to use social power to shut down anyone who dares to contradict their proclamations.
What is an expression of entitlement? A call for reasoned discourse, in which rational men dispute facts, ideas, philosophies, as equals? Or a squealing, whining temper tantrum similar to the ones delivered every day to harried mothers shopping with pint-sized toddling tyrants?
I WANT, GIMME, are these not the entitled cries of the emotionally immature children in stores weeping when they don’t get a treat or a toy they desire? Their emotions are certainly very real, and unilaterally imposed on everyone in earshot to boot. But imposing one’s emotions on someone else is itself a form of entitlement, because in essence this statement implies that only one person’s emotions are valuable. The Designated Victim Group’s emotions are privileged above the emotions of anyone else; belong to one of society’s Designated Punching Bag groups (for example, straight white male) and your emotions simultaneously don’t matter and your suffering is well-deserved because of something someone else allegedly did, possibly before you were even born.
This excusing of destructive temper tantrums, seen so clearly in the responses to the Ferguson riots, are a despicable belittling of “marginalized” groups. Patronizing and infantlizing, such statements as “expecting calm discourse is an entitlement mentality” puts the one who says it both on an assumed moral high ground, and reduces the “marginalized people” to the status of children, denying them equality in the realm of reason and maturity.
No one expects an abused child to recount their abuse calmly. But screaming tantrums over fairy-dream baubles? No wonder SJWs dodge the expectation of reasonable conversation. So much easier to say “Check your privilege!” and assume a position of social and moral superiority, in which any questioning is considered abuse! I believe I have heard of this tactic being tried before – oh, yes, on Twitter, the SJWs have taken to calling any questioning at all “sea lioning” – as if asking questions were some kind of harassment.
Well, I suppose in all fairness, it’s not like they have anything other than their own emotions to point to, since the facts are so firmly against them! What else can they do, but try to shut people up? Listen and believe!