Awooest Mawr @mawr@awoo.space

@IrisKalmia What I _am_ saying is that people who try to understand the narratives of others are doing important work to bridge the gaps between divergent narratives, and that work should not be dismissed as a whole simply because it involves engaging with things our narratives inform us to define as "problematic."

Consensus is built from conversation, and conversation requires both give and take.

@IrisKalmia Everything I've ever read about The Satanic Bible before and since has only focused on the negative aspects of that book, but that fucking text changed my life.

It didn't make me a satanist, but it did change my view of the movement and the people involved because I could understand a bit more of their narrative-- the way they understand themselves and the world around them.

Now, I'm not saying Nazis are people we should build compassion with by any means.

@IrisKalmia I got three pages in, and I was hooked. The Satanic Bible is a text about self-acceptance and the true meaning of loving one's self. It's not presented in that context, of course-- but that's what I took away from it. The message it spoke to me was clear and deeply needed in my life at that time. It was:

"You are a human being. You are flawed. You have thoughts you don't like to admit to having, and that's OK. You are beautiful and worthy of love just as you are."

@IrisKalmia I have a story that doesn't correlate to Mein Kampf but it does provide some context here for why I take the position I take.

When I was in high school, I chose to read The Satanic Bible. I did this intentionally as a way to make the devout Christians who ran my school as uncomfortable as I could; to give them a taste of their own medicine. I knew I'd be reading a bunch of BS and that it'd be an unpleasant read because of what I'd learned about Satanism from Christians.

@IrisKalmia You are allowed to feel the way you feel, and nothing anyone says will change that. Your feelings are yours and are not subject to mine or anyone's opinions.

If someone is seriously demanding that you read Mein Kampf, you might ask yourself what the consequences are for choosing not to. If it's just that they won't consider your argument until you do, is it really so important that they agree with you here? There can be other battles, you needn't die on that hill.

@IrisKalmia Everything you think you know is a narrative. Same as me, same as anyone else. You can't know their narrative any more than I can know yours. We establish a connection and understanding through conversation- learning where our narratives differ.

Assumption is the basis upon which conversation breaks down and arguments start. By starting out with the assumption that your opposition are the enemy, they become your enemy almost every time. It's a foregone conclusion.

@IrisKalmia Personally, I've never read Mien Kampf and I don't know who might praise it or for what reasons so I won't pass judgement for that in isolation. There are many things one can appreciate about even entirely problematic things. A good example of this would be the impeccable design of the Nazi uniforms-- something that's generally universally agreed upon.

That doesn't make those who appreciate the design Nazis(, though it totally does if they wear them).

@IrisKalmia I think what they're saying in that statement is essentially "this problematic element is not indicative of the overall message of this media."

To make that statement verbatim in response to your pointing out a problematic element would not end the argument, however. The suggestion instead is made that you consume the media to gain a more complete understanding of that which you're passing judgement on as a whole.

@IrisKalmia In other words, you have to accept that it's okay for others to not feel the same way you do about things. That conversation frequently isn't won in a single example. It takes a while for the things you mention to sink in, and eventually the logic prevails.

If you push on it, it only turns progress against you-- and hurts both you and your conversational partner in the process.

@IrisKalmia It's easy from your perspective because you're used to recognizing problematic elements in things you enjoy and accepting that as part of your reality. That is a rare trait in our society, and one that is only adopted by those who recognize its importance.

Trying to get people to recognize those elements and accept them as problematic takes finesse and care in conversation because it's an uncomfortable topic. Applying more force only stiffens their resolve to defend.

@IrisKalmia Shitting all over the things people like puts them on the defensive. Turning their defensive responses back against them as evidence of poor character puts them in a position they cannot walk away from without damaging their relationship with you, unless they hang their head in shame and admit you are 100% correct and they were 100% wrong.

That's you demanding submission from those you're talking to. That's not a conversation, that's an ultimatum in disguise.

@IrisKalmia It is possible to appreciate things that are problematic; speaking positively about problematic things does not immediately mean you are a problematic individual.

Making that leap of assumption and leveling accusations does far more harm than speaking positively about problematic media in my honest opinion.