this is kinda relating to my major problem with english as a language. because english isn't logically/analyically constructed there is no facsimile of continuity and many words with similar themes/meanings are phonetically very different. arguably, they are so different that allot of objective meaning oriented word families are hidden.
(begining)
'who are society?' expresses one paradigm, emphasis being not on society but 'are'. i'd say 'who is society?' or 'what is society?'
and there, though vague, is a huge difference of paradigm. 'who are (our) society' means that there is a plurality of personhood, and that sample size is relevant because you are deriving straight from sample rather than averaging (logically generalizing, as opposed to anecdotal hyperbole); which you also kinda argue against in this entry as juvenile. the fragmented sense as shown either by adding 'our', or changing 'are' to 'is', can express a more limited and precise meaning.
imho, roughly society's opinion is the modal opinion of one's social environment. the scope of the social environment is unspecified.
society could be your friends, your teacher/family/church, your city, or even the media which attempts to tie empires of many cultures together. put another way, it is the fuzzy-logic form of "man's opinion" and the problem people have with the term often arises with the presumed scope/generality of the group/speaker. young people, especially those in 'playgrounds' may have a very different but equally genuine perception of the limit's of their social interaction. to them society might be hypocritical soccer moms, underpaid and understaffed teachers, and a bunch of peers groups by age more than capacity, culture, or interests.
it is the collective and general response of what you perceive a people are telling you to do. society's dictate is the interpretation of all the most general opinions projected upon you; creating the ethos/role you feel pressured to be. which going back to the playground icon, if you aren't grouped with people of similar convictions, chances are you will be offended by irreverence to your values/premise, even by minority circumstance. especially during a time when identity and role are fluid, and one is really seeking comradery/companionship due to intense hormones.
...
"society is in a rapid rate of moral decay" is dissonance of national identity (law/morality confusion) vs religious.
things like the general 'society tells victims not to be abused, rather bad people not to abuse' can be a genuine perception though tacitly false. the only way i think we can possibly engage with it though is to request further analysis. "how do you know they are bad people, if you aren't told that the behavior is unacceptable? wouldn't they seem to be 'good' people despite their wrongs if the behavior was tolerable?" the value to this approach imho, is that there still may be some people who are brought up in environments where there is a 'hate the sin not the sinner attitude', and if the wrong/harm a person committed was mitigated by greater societal 'conspiracy' the person may need to feel the victimized state to move on beyond it; forsaking that acrid environment.
the comment about necessity of society teaching "don't get raped" is valid, but ironically i think it needs to be taught to women to make sure they are aware the lesson is out there. it is a matter of not teaching a lesson, but most people have the relevant audience in this instance backwards; and most things backwards in general.
but again the issue lies in how vague and open to perception ambiguous words are even with (perhaps sufficient) grammar.
people will abuse 'society' through anecdote the same way many abuse 'they' as a genderless (or bi gender) singular.
...
the way 'don't get raped' is vallid is that it is a double negative. but the oversight is that you don't want a double negative if things are shitty, you want another negative to cancel it out. you want to rebuke it. and if forced to use bad methodology/reasoning you need to make it so your change still subjects the (self) injured to the placebo, even if it does nothing to anyone else.
making people think you are doing something, may have better impact than abusing demographics in profiling to charge innocent people with crimes; which just inters the wrong.
...
most people who are against slut shaming don't even know why they fuck they are shamed most of the time and just project outwards so here is the thing.
being a slut can merely mean a girl is promiscuous and socially this is a mild negative. the hate and rancor comes out not from slutty actions but from cheating, especially cheating and they crying rape to escape responsibility for one's choices.
No comments:
Post a Comment