Honestly I just cannot today with old folks who are convinced that they shit roses because they were around in the 80s, and that therefore all of their opinions are the default correct opinion - or really that anyone gives a flying fuck WHAT their opinions are.

It's always couched in a tone of "Well you're not being open or accepting to my ideas, and I've *been around for a long time*" but in a way that totally escapes self reflection or growth, now or over the past 40 years. Have you considered that it's just not the venue for you to Sea Lion in demanding that everyone spend time and energy debunking your frankly odious bullshit? It's just an awful compilation of things that really get under my skin.


First, the just utter lack of awareness of context. This sometimes is a fairly harmless lack of netiquette that's honestly kinda charming in small doses. You all know the sorts of people I'm talking about, who sign off on every post/comment like it's the 90s. But often times, I find that this is a thin veneer of charm over some deep DEEP feelings of entitlement that pretty quickly shine through when even slightly scrutinized. I'm talking folks who are not only unaware of the culture of the space they're in, but who are abjectly uninterested in expending the slightest bit of effort to learn about it. This is a character trait that I find tends to carry over into life beyond the internet.

Which segues into two other things. First: Do these folks kramer into other earmarked spaces demanding that their voice be heard in all places at all times? My experience tells me... yes, yes they do. Sometimes it's just not the venue for you to have your say, context matters! We must always strive to understand the problematic factors of speech. "Problematic" isn't just euphemism for "bad", though often times when problematic speech is pointed out, it's because there IS something potentially at issue when problematized, it's just the idea that who the speaker is and the situation in which the speech is made are integral parts of understanding both the message being spoken AND more importantly the *Effect* that message has. In practice, that means that if someone points out "hey, this isn't the context for this message" or "hey, this isn't really appropriate" it's on you to stop and consider that! Sometimes that person isn't correct, sometimes (particularly in discourse with fascists) their entire objective is to derail you, so take that skeptically - but you should take everything serious skeptically anyways! It's not even a matter of being "tone deaf", which tends to be a minimizing term/idea, tone can cause real damage and *willful deafness* more so. It's these folks who just utterly refuse to even try when they're ostensibly supposed to be advocating for minorities that frustrate me.

Second: Doubling down. Hooooo boy, this is ENDEMIC to certain kinds of non-profit space, particularly ye olde minority advocacy groups. Honest attempts to call in (instead of just calling out) are met with downright hostility, perceived as an attack no matter how gently put. Instantly, the rhetorical big guns come out, suddenly whatever Sea Lion  one sided "discussion" was happening is a "sacred issue" of free speech, mangled beyond all recognition. Without delay, a process of credentialing occurs - long lists of who was where and when, all prioritizing the oldest of credentials as a naked appeal to authority. Terms like "respect" begin getting bandied around, in ways that distort them beyond recognition. "I was doing 'this work' back in the 70s-80s" and so on. How DARE you DISRESPECT such a long and storied elder!

This, to me, reveals what the real nerve that's being touched is in this demographic, the real entitlement: it's not to a particular cultural slice of time, or to unlimited access to listeners (even ones who are not interested, helloooo consent), it's an attachment to the identity of being cutting edge. This is a pet theory of mine. There are folks who, through the work of years and bonds gained through shared adversity, have developed a self image of themselves as the cutting edge of advocacy, of gender/sexual politics, or of queer theory. And that was an earned badge of honor, no one contests that! The problem that I bump up against constantly is that while some folks take that as a rallying call, to center that identity in their lives by constantly devouring new information, learning, embracing new developments in the movement.  That doesn't seem to be true for everyone.

Think about what queer theory and politic looked like even 15 years ago, never mind 40! Reminder: IN 1980 JUDITH BUTLER HADN'T PUBLISHED ANYTHING ON GENDER AND SEXUALITY, and those materials are widely considered the jumping off point for Queer Theory, just the very start!Now, consider the conclusion "I am the cutting edge", place that as one core and longstanding piece of your self-identity, and then consider what the world looks like working backwards from that position. People pointing out that your ideas are outdated and calling you to update suddenly looks like an attack! It challenges the core conclusion you started with, and if that conclusion is important to you suddenly the doubling down makes sense, is less baffling. Now you're being defensive in this situation because you're effectively perceiving an attack against you and are responding in kind, without necessarily being able to frame it as such. The sense of CERTAINTY is undermined, and that's terrifying.

This is something to be tackled with compassion and I really try, but it's SO frustrating and takes up so much energy for no reason. There are people who say all kinds of boneheaded things in all kinds of inappropriate contexts, but clearly make at least SOME effort to interact but some folks who just do NOT and will not bother. This compounds with the problems I wrote about earlier, because outdated stale ideas about gender and sexuality tend to come packaged with outdated and stale ideas about DISCOURSE in general which strips away tools that could be used to lift each other up compassionately.

 Like look I get it, some of these things are new and rough ideas. No one has real and universal answers for how anything works, it's an uncertain world and even if that's scary we have to deal with it. I live for a in depth and frank conversation about the utility of limited venues, of "Safe spaces" and how they can be applied usefully or be less useful in some situations, of labeling and language and gatekeeping and psychology, whatever. I'm also struggling to learn and better grasp these ideas myself and to live them holistically, and that's a part of it for me. HOWEVER I'm increasingly on board with my kin out here who just don't have juice for those nuanced conversations with people who aren't in that same struggle. It's not a matter of "catching up" as if there's a linear timeline, we're all in the struggle in different ways but if I can't even see you moving in the same direction, sometimes I'm just... over it.