Comment by scarface_74
6 days ago
Are you really not capable of knowing what could be considered “lewd” and not go into that territory in polite company?
6 days ago
Are you really not capable of knowing what could be considered “lewd” and not go into that territory in polite company?
> Are you really not capable of knowing what could be considered “lewd” and not go into that territory in polite company?
I’m pretty sure I both am and am aware enough of the line and its ambiguity to weaponise it against someone else if I wanted to. Add to that cultural variance in where the line lies and you effectively wind up censoring cross-gender discussion of gender-relevant topics.
I don’t think Graham is advocating for lewd jokes in the workplace, or suggesting the womens’ rights movements of the 60s were misplaced. He’s arguing against universally institutionalising rules of politeness, and being particularly wary of doing it one way.
> in polite company
Graham is arguing against the expansion of polite company to virtually the entire discussion space. In that, I kind of agree.
> I’m pretty sure I both am and am aware enough of the line and its ambiguity to weaponise it against someone else if I wanted to.
I have been in customer facing roles since mid 2020 as a consultant. There really is no ambiguity. I don’t talk about anything that can hint at going in a sexual direction, or politics or religion. I just don’t get involved with those types of conversation at work.
Occasionally, I do have to talk about politics as it affects business especially since I spent a lot of time working in the Education/State and Local Government space.
> He’s arguing against universally institutionalising rules of politeness, and being particularly wary of doing it one way.
There has always been institutionalization of what one should and shouldn’t talk about in “polite company”. Those norms have changed through the years and rightfully so. Did your parents grow up in the Jim crow south?
> Graham is arguing against the expansion of polite company to virtually the entire discussion space. In that, I kind of agree.
How is that any different than it has always been? I talk differently when I’m with my friends and family in private than I do when I’m in public spaces.
Society would look at me like I was crazy if I did the same amount of “cussing, drinking and telling lies” loudly like I do when I’m at home with my friends playing cards if I did it in public.
We all “code switch” to an extent.
> There really is no ambiguity. I don’t talk about anything that can hint at going in a sexual direction, or politics or religion
One can absolutely impute all kinds of nonsense from inaction as much as action.
I’d also challenge the fact that I don’t need to make lewd jokes as extending to the premise that they need never be made. (Or that our refraining from making them doesn’t cover up something darker.)
> norms have changed through the years and rightfully so. Did your parents grow up in the Jim crow south?
And most of those shifts are reasonable. Some, however, are purely performative. Latinx is a frequent example, though I’ve never met anyone who seriously used it. As a gay non-white man, there is plenty of performative nonsense online that comes from people who I can’t imagine actually have any friends who are in the category they claim to be looking out for. (There are also jokes that, while off colour, speak to something true, even if they’re made at the expense of some of my immutable characteristics.)
1 reply →