I really applaud your bravery and positive attitude, it is truly inspiring- I don't know that I can match your level of eloquence and thoughtfulness, but I will do my best to make some kind of effort:
It isn't about the individual who is being subjected to said insults, it's about how it represents and reinforces the systematic inequality that are already in place; one many of us want to fight.
This is your key. In my humble opinion, the truth and real thesis of this whole topic lies in that one sentence. If we want to effectively remove societal oppression, we need to identify our target and it is NOT people, it is language. The key thing to remember is that most people using this language and contributing to the oppression have no idea that they are doing that and many share your feelings on equality and oppression.
The problem with addressing this in online or real-life communities is that often times people are lumped into a villainous role with their language, and no one likes to be vilified. This happens most frequently when the person who addresses the oppressive language is on the opposite side of the debate.This is an unproductive way to broach the subject, as it makes people put up defenses immediately.
The more successful method, in my opinion is to promote accuracy, and being concise. After-all, isn't it more effective to say "Ellen Pao has proven time and time again that she is not the right person to run Reddit. Her lack of communication, empty promises, and apparently callous treatment of employees is pulling Reddit in a direction that I do not agree with." than it is to throw out racial, gendered, or other offensive language? Name-calling doesn't solve anything and adults should know that but by trying to enlighten them on the moral implications of their words when you stand in opposition to their thesis, immediately paints you as someone talking down from a moral high-horse.. Being accurate is inherently more effective to any argument than name-calling and we should be above that regardless of societal oppression.
All that being said, I think the best way to go about all of this is to speak out only when you agree with what you believe the person
is ACTUALLY trying to say; this way you can voice their concerns in a more appropriate and accurate way and your criticisms with their use of oppressive language will not be seen as a way to belittle their argument but rather a genuine concern that they are not addressing the real issues. It is the differences between a teammate trying to make the team more effective VS. an opposing team giving your team criticism.
Just my two cents- I think your cause is worthy and I agree with it, I just think it will get lost in a debate about something else if it is coming from the opposite side of the table in any given situation.
I really applaud your bravery and positive attitude, it is truly inspiring- I don't know that I can match your level of eloquence and thoughtfulness, but I will do my best to make some kind of effort:
This is your key. In my humble opinion, the truth and real thesis of this whole topic lies in that one sentence. If we want to effectively remove societal oppression, we need to identify our target and it is NOT people, it is language. The key thing to remember is that most people using this language and contributing to the oppression have no idea that they are doing that and many share your feelings on equality and oppression.
The problem with addressing this in online or real-life communities is that often times people are lumped into a villainous role with their language, and no one likes to be vilified. This happens most frequently when the person who addresses the oppressive language is on the opposite side of the debate.This is an unproductive way to broach the subject, as it makes people put up defenses immediately.
The more successful method, in my opinion is to promote accuracy, and being concise. After-all, isn't it more effective to say "Ellen Pao has proven time and time again that she is not the right person to run Reddit. Her lack of communication, empty promises, and apparently callous treatment of employees is pulling Reddit in a direction that I do not agree with." than it is to throw out racial, gendered, or other offensive language? Name-calling doesn't solve anything and adults should know that but by trying to enlighten them on the moral implications of their words when you stand in opposition to their thesis, immediately paints you as someone talking down from a moral high-horse.. Being accurate is inherently more effective to any argument than name-calling and we should be above that regardless of societal oppression.
All that being said, I think the best way to go about all of this is to speak out only when you agree with what you believe the person is ACTUALLY trying to say; this way you can voice their concerns in a more appropriate and accurate way and your criticisms with their use of oppressive language will not be seen as a way to belittle their argument but rather a genuine concern that they are not addressing the real issues. It is the differences between a teammate trying to make the team more effective VS. an opposing team giving your team criticism.
Just my two cents- I think your cause is worthy and I agree with it, I just think it will get lost in a debate about something else if it is coming from the opposite side of the table in any given situation.