Read on Twitter
Today in Discourse, "Firing bad people doesn't fix them—it just makes them double down."
Sure.
But there's a disconnect here. These people shouldn't be fired to fix them. Stop focusing on fixing these people. These people should be fired to take away their power to hurt people.
Sure.
But there's a disconnect here. These people shouldn't be fired to fix them. Stop focusing on fixing these people. These people should be fired to take away their power to hurt people.
Worrying about whether or not a given punitive action will rehabilitate the perpetrator STILL FOCUSES ON THE PERPETRATOR. There's nothing magical about assholes that makes them deserving of rehabilitation. That's on them to decide. Focus on victims, past and future.
Is there nuance to be had here?
Absolutely.
Do I think bigots' families deserve to starve and go homeless? Absolutely not.
But I do believe active bigots need to be away from positions that empower them to hurt marginalized people.
Absolutely.
Do I think bigots' families deserve to starve and go homeless? Absolutely not.
But I do believe active bigots need to be away from positions that empower them to hurt marginalized people.
Is anyone saying, "This $12 an hour worker who glues windows into a Honda's doors needs to lose her job because she thinks trans women are actually men?"
No.
If she deserves action, it's not for an opinion—it's because she hurt someone. But it's never that worker.
No.
If she deserves action, it's not for an opinion—it's because she hurt someone. But it's never that worker.
The current discourse I'm seeing isn't about someone who just had a Wrongthink opinion. It was an active member of a conservative policy think tank. She's actively hurting people. So framing it as "she just has a Wrongthink opinion" is a hella disingenuous framing.
And if she was a $12 an hour plant worker, we wouldn't hear about it. What we hear about, what people defend, is people in positions of comfort and power. And the way we hear it, those people are for some mysterious reason entitled to comfort and power.
And I'm gonna go all "class reductionist" here, but do you want to know what solves this issue?
Separate livelihood from labor.
If a person's needs are met without being tied to their labor value, then instantly we lose that bullshit "but they'll starve" argument.
Separate livelihood from labor.
If a person's needs are met without being tied to their labor value, then instantly we lose that bullshit "but they'll starve" argument.
"Will (policy) fix (bigotry) overnight?!"
Of fucking course it won't. We need cultural change to fix these things.
But while we're working 90 hours a week, hoping like hell some internet mob doesn't try to get us fired, we don't have much time to deal with culture, do we?
Of fucking course it won't. We need cultural change to fix these things.
But while we're working 90 hours a week, hoping like hell some internet mob doesn't try to get us fired, we don't have much time to deal with culture, do we?
A related take I've seen is, "If we get (bigot, abuser) fired, then that sets a precedent where women and minorities can be brigaded and fired!"
Um motherfucking newsflash. Nobody needs that precedent. As someone who has been fired because of brigading, I've gotta say, bullshit.
Um motherfucking newsflash. Nobody needs that precedent. As someone who has been fired because of brigading, I've gotta say, bullshit.
It's some Protestant-ass logic to think that if we want someone fired for hurting marginalized people, that we're actually doing it for the bigot's own good.
