#has accepted and catered to aggressive dogs competing

[twobigears]

waking up to Facebook drama over the agility judge who was attacked by a dog in the ring over the weekend, and just….fuckin yikes.

#simultaneously horrified and yet unsurprised #that something like this finally happened #what also fucking irritates me in the FB comments #is all the people wanting to blame a medical issue #or training methods #which while potentially POTENTIALLY PARTIALLY valid #is still digging their heads in the sand and ignoring the very uncomfortable truth #the agility community for years #nigh on decades #has accepted and catered to aggressive dogs competing #coddled dogs who will not reliably stay with their handler while off-leash IN AN OFF LEASH SPORT #and when you say anything against it #you’re shot down #and now here we are #that poor judge #also i do feel bad for that dog’s handler #because apparently she was a Novice A handler with her first agility dog #which is just another horrible indicator of our community failed her #to allow things to get to this point #/end tag novel #things that grind my gears

[hotelconcierge]

THE SOUND OF MANY ONE HANDS CLAPPING

All of the blind men trying to describe the alt-right elephant seem to agree that anti-political-correctness is part of the picture. Maybe anti-PC isn’t the most important issue to any one alt-righter, but it’s the stance that is most widespread among them, sensitive but not specific. Okay. Why?

Movie reviewer/philosophizer “Film Crit Hulk” weighs in with “P.C. Culture Vs. The Big Joke - A tale of dissent in five acts”:

I'm sitting here at point of paralysis, trying to casually explain the rise of internet trolls, 4chan, hardcore gamer culture, lulz, twitter-eggs, gamergate, pepe the frog, the alt-right, the rich asshole and how they came all crashing together in spectacular ugliness...for the purposes of this conversation just know that all display a combo of 1) being virulently anti-PC. 2) being the kinds of people who have really sad, internal existences and internet they can be anonymous and escape into. And 3) a core philosophy that sees the value of what I will call "the big joke."

That is to say that the world itself is a joke.

I feel bad for mocking a lawful good superhero, but the above paragraph is the sickly sentimentality of someone who has fed on his own vomited platitudes for too long. If I ever reach “the point of paralysis” while explaining “lulz” or “twitter-eggs,” euthanize me.

There's a reason The Dark Knight's Joker struck such a cord with this populace and it wasn't just his good performance, it was his mantra: "Why so serious?" It was his ability to reign terror and tear apart hypocrisy. It was the sense power that comes with having such a freeing attitude toward the cares of society. The pure, bleak joy of nihilistic glee.

There isn't a side. There isn't a belief. The only goal is to burn down your side. After all, "Some men just want to watch the world burn."

Comparisons between children’s fantasy and adult reality tend toward the inane, but there’s a particular irony here: back in ‘08, when The Dark Knight came out, every dinner party worth schmoozing agreed that the pyromaniacs in question were supposed to represent Al Qaeda. And when someone pointed this out, the accepted reply was to say something about how, well, it’s more complicated than that, you see, back in the ‘80s everyone was doing a lot of cocaine and tweaking pretty hard about the Soviet Union, and well, maybe we funded some terrorists here and there, mistakes were made, that’s all I’m saying. It’s a little naive for Christopher Nolan to act like they’re just bad.

Now the analogy has switched teams and it didn’t get any less idiotic. I too have observed that some individuals are psychopaths who care about nothing except mashing the dopamine button. I have never observed a group of such people, in fact I’m not sure it’s possible, shit would go Reservoir Dogs before you could say “defect in the prisoner’s dilemma.” What makes fascism terrifying is that most fascists are not psychopaths. Nurses get Milgram’d on the daily, told to hurt people via IV pokes and pulled bandages, often doing this when patients are demented or delirious or otherwise screaming No No No. And yet nurses are some of the most compassionate people in existence. How do they stay sane? Any violation of another requires the same mentality: this is for the greater good. Repeated like a mantra, whether you’re building a utopia or feeding the kids or preparing to shoot up a school: this is for the greater good. It’s comforting to believe that the bad guys are motivated by “nihilistic glee” because that means you aren’t one of them. “If anything, my problem is...I care too much,” you say, between sobs, as you bring your boot down on the curb.

Political correctness is defined as, "the avoidance, often considered as taken to extremes, of forms of expression or action that are perceived to exclude, marginalize, or insult groups of people who are socially disadvantaged or discriminated against.

For the moment, I hope you can get past any associations you might have and understand that the intent behind being politically correct is clear: empathy with marginalized groups.

We're supposedly having a debate between PC and Anti-PC culture, but we can't have a debate unless we're really talking about what we're really talking about...We have get away from so much of the false equivalency that surrounds this conversation...we can't miss the only two sides that matter:

Victim and victimizer.

Here’s the thing: no.

Film Crit Hulk’s argument has such polished stupidity that it reflects a shining truth: the switch from “being politically correct” to “PC culture.” This is the sleight of hand common to all defenses of political correctness. Being politically correct is something you do. PC culture is something you do to others.

Two case studies, and hold off on your value judgments:

1. Milo Yiannopoulos mocks and misgenders a transgender student.

2. Harvard rescinds 10 admission offers to students who posted offensive memes. (Incidentally—check out the cover photo of the linked articles.)

Intentionally misgendering someone is an aggressive act. This is true even if transgenderism is attention whoring or special snowflakism or whatever—misgendering violates the Zeroth Commandment of “Thou shalt call others by their chosen name.” You can argue that misgendering is justified, that it’s impractical to cater to every pronoun, that you shouldn’t encourage a society-wide “mental illness”—we can duke that out elsewhere—but don’t pretend it isn’t an act of aggression.

Contrast with the Harvard story: posting offensive memes in a private group chat is not an act of aggression. It may suggest poor character, it certainly suggests weak judgment, and Harvard has the right to kick ‘em out, but don’t pretend the dichotomy is between victim and victimizer when there was no victim.

Discussions of political correctness go nowhere because one team is hurt by the first example and retaliates with the second, the other is hurt by the second and retaliates with the first, and the internet makes private public so it’s impossible to tell the difference.

Film Crit Hulk spends the rest of his 8000 word essay on variations of:

So I'll ask again: why am I doing all this? Why write about movies and politics? Yes, it's because I give a shit. It's because I feel insanely lucky and want to express endless gratitude. I do not consider it heroic or anything more self-serving than the simple idea that it is important. It's because I feel compelled and passionate about it.

Because I don't think the world is a joke.

It's the only one we got and I'm trying to run around with 60 million other Americans and try to hold it together with duct tape. You can demonize this. You can demonize me. I don't care.

I don’t think you should stunt like Jesus on the cross when your grand insight is "them motherfuckers be crazy." But sure, I’m willing to buy that Hulk believes his own gospel. What he doesn’t get is that he holds the majority opinion. The Panopticon gives out mad brownie points for calling out -isms, even private victimless -isms; why wouldn’t it, you’re giving it that much more power over what used to be privacy. And maybe that’s fine, maybe if you’ve got nothing to hide you’ve got nothing to fear, but don’t say I didn’t warn you: "When a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure." If society subsidizes political correctness, then some virtuous people will be PC but so will any competent sociopath. And no matter how noble the intentions behind a policy, when sociopaths exploit that policy, exploit it to shame and punish people who haven’t done anything wrong—well, you’ve got to admit that’s kind of funny.

Choose:

THE GENDER NULLARY

HYPOCRISY’S BAD, BUT YOU’RE WORSE