Glen writes: < I think they're just defense mechanisms they've learned over years of abuse. >
The defense mechanisms could be more like acquired allergies and do harm. Once one is dealing with reflexive mechanisms, I start to worry that a conversation is not possible. Because they would 1) need to learn to control those mechanisms (and who wants to take the time for them to do that) or 2) claim "You [the man] made me this may, now live with it." (and then adapt to their nutty rules). There seems to be a need for some generosity to help people cope, but it seems plausible to me some people are just too damaged. Does the absence of generosity make one a snowflake? -----Original Message----- From: Friam <[email protected]> On Behalf Of glen Sent: Thursday, March 3, 2022 12:47 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [FRIAM] academic freedom Yeah, that's a good take. It also helps in distinguishing between reflexive defense mechanisms and cryptic character traits. Where me and the biologist who felt shut down disagree is in the interpretation of the non-cis participants word and body language choices. He thinks they're reflections of character traits. I think they're just defense mechanisms they've learned over years of abuse. In the non-binary person's case, they have an entire non-estranged, continually engaged, family that rejects their identity. So their body and word language is probably an example of them saying to the white cis biologists "pull yourselves together and we'll try again later." But I'm willing to be shown wrong if that's the case. On 3/3/22 12:36, Marcus Daniels wrote: > Hmm. Another experience I have had while deconstructing someone with > "charged feelings" is coming to the ought-to-be-obvious recognition that > neither of us care about the other, but nonetheless the counterparty who > feels compelled to share their boring feelings believes it is my job to > patiently listen to them work through their issues (even though they would > never do the same for me). Canceling could just mean "Pull yourself > together and we'll try again next week." > -----Original Message----- > From: Friam <[email protected]> On Behalf Of glen > Sent: Thursday, March 3, 2022 12:28 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [FRIAM] academic freedom > > Ha! No, I was making a point about freedom of speech, in particularly > "academic" speech, and canceling or shutting down others. Sorry if my > anecdote got in the way. I pared it down for you below. > > On 3/3/22 12:16, Marcus Daniels wrote: >> >> Anyway, I guess you were making some point about people getting riled up at >> a pub, and that it being informative somehow. (Or at least entertaining?) > >> On 3/3/22 11:02, glen wrote: >>> >>> Nobody was actively trying to shut anyone down. But the more conservative >>> biologist actively claims the non-binary and queer participants *were* >>> trying to shut down the biologists and had clearly shut down their >>> reasoning. I disagree completely. > -- glen When elephants fight, it is the grass that suffers. .-- .- -. - / .- -.-. - .. --- -. ..--.. / -.-. --- -. .--- ..- --. .- - . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ archives: 5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/ .-- .- -. - / .- -.-. - .. --- -. ..--.. / -.-. --- -. .--- ..- --. .- - . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ archives: 5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
