This is at least the second time you've posted against "diversity" being shoved down our throats and I honestly don't get what you mean by that. In the CBC post you basically said something like: you want the CBC to reflect the broad communities of Canada but you don't want diverse parallel monocultures emphasized. Instead you want the CBC to bring us together as they used to. In this post you point out how universal truths are being overlooked in favour of shame, guilt and baggage. (Yes, I mean the next sentence to be funny) I think we went to very different "Sunday" schools - I first learned about guilt, shame and baggage from "church"... or my parents, take your pick. Honestly though, I'm struggling with what you're getting at.
If I had to guess I'd say our current narrative about life isn't speaking to you, or rather it's talking too many languages at once. You recall with some fondness (as do I) a world that had a consistent and monolithic but somewhat fictional narrative. At some point (the 60's-70's?) cracks appeared in that narrative and those of us in "diverse parallel monocultures" realized we weren't being reflected, appreciated or valued in that simple monolithic narrative and so we began to create our own. Fast-forward a few decades and now everything looks kinda cracked. Holes have appeared in some places where there used to be solid ground. Even nomenclature has become unwieldy. I can't tell you how much I hate using the term 2SLGBTQIA+ or any variant thereof. I mean, it's insanely verbose and useless because it includes everything, and I live in that "community." In fact, it's so broad that it defeats the purpose of community.
So here's the rub: it's not about you. Sit back and enjoy the show, eat some popcorn, comment on the goings on with some tea (you may not get that reference without RuPaul), but relax.
Basically the world is going through an upheaval, like when the writers of a popular show all get fired and the next crew is brought in. The new writers in this case being "diverse monocultures" and the internet which, yes, includes AI and all those algorithms. You don't like the new writers or how they ruined your favourite show. There may be some small instances where a letter writing campaign will revive a beloved character that's been cancelled, or refute a plot point that's been being espoused. (The Scots aren't meaner than the Vikings, or the Germans, for instance, and everything is relative. There are at least as many lovely Scots and Scottish things as there are scary or tragic or even just average ones.) Overall though the show must go on and it's taking a new twist.
I think the really important questions to ask are not how does the new marketing sound, but what of the underlying fundamentals of the show? Have they got a new funding scheme that's fundamentally altered who the show is aimed at (i.e. will AI take enough jobs that it harms the viability of your family)? Is the marketer trying to distract you from focusing on bigger issues (i.e. are we being prompted to circle the wagons, if so, why)? Has the show itself run its course (i.e. will climate crisis make everything moot)?
Okay, the analogy has gotten away from me but...
If you really want to stop diverse monocultures you either have to do away with or fundamentally restructure the internet. We are living in UseNet writ large. (yeah, I'm OLD)
If you really want to bring Canada together you need to recontextualize the national fable to include all or most of those monocultures. I wish you luck. No, seriously, I hope you do it.
If you want some peace though, just sit back. Mostly it's marketing, poorly written copy. Like when someone doesn't have a handle on the product yet and is trying too hard.
If you're worried about some of it being more, then I would fight those issues, but I suspect you need to build coalitions to fight them as they're broad and systemic.
OK... I've taken another pass at this in my most recent post. And I've tried to explain why I am in a unique position with my work to have a front-row view of what's happening behind the scenes if I can mix that metaphor.
I think that was more succinct, but I do think there are a bunch of pieces to this. There may simply not be a solution, unfortunately. At least not in this moment.
So, for identity politics, especially the queer/transgender stuff, we're in a really liminal space right now. The possibilities haven't yet coalesced on a new "masculine(s)" or it's opposite(s). I feel like we're headed towards a colour wheel or set of sliding scales of some sort but that will make everything so much more complicated to parse socially. We'll need AI to sort it on a daily basis! I only partially kid.
In another of your posts you reminisced about your violent childhood. What I got from that was you were learning boundaries of the old social paradigm, I learned them by being "bullied" too. Strange skinny brainy gay kid from a weird religion moves from the big city to a tiny country farm? Bullied. Same kid moves from a tiny country farm to a huge metropolis in another country with a completely different racial and socio-economic mix? Bullied. But I learned where the edges of society (at the time) were pretty fast. I had to. I also learned there were multiple venues and levels and types of society you could go to. In some ways that violence was a more honest and immediate expression of the limits of the toleration you could expect from your peers. In most ways though, it just hurt. I still reflexively shy away from some topics, but often I then march right back in too. I'm scrappier than I look.
I do think businesses and people in general are trying to "get it right," not understanding that there ISN'T a right. It's a conversation, or more properly a dialectic. In a third post you mention that we're willing to give up freedoms for bureaucracy but you neglect to mention that for individuals to function well in a bureaucracy they must be both educated and engaged. The society we have created is neither well educated (and by "educated" I don't mean "has a certificate". I mean, "has really done their own research") nor engaged (and by "engaged" I don't mean, "uses the latest apps." I mean, "invented their own app, or did it from scratch.") We've done it to ourselves and allowed marketing and markets, which dumb things down to smaller simpler choices BY DESIGN, to dictate what we can have. The world IS a big scary violent place and most of us choose to live in the "safer" more protected version of it and raise our kids there. I can't blame anyone, wars, climate crisis, disinformation campaigns, fascism. Fascism is appealing because it's easy. Horrible, but simple. Most people can't do nuance worth shit. (I hope you see what I did there).
Anyway, I do see what you mean, but I fear you are looking to stop the oncoming train. I would urge you instead to jump out of the way for now. Then go find who set it going on the tracks in the first place and have words.
Thank-you for this. As in all conflict, we need to talk openly with a focus on hearing, clarifying, understanding and respecting (loving). We need to ignore the sensationalized talking points. As much as it hurts the political agenda we need to remember the truth part of truth and reconciliation.
This is at least the second time you've posted against "diversity" being shoved down our throats and I honestly don't get what you mean by that. In the CBC post you basically said something like: you want the CBC to reflect the broad communities of Canada but you don't want diverse parallel monocultures emphasized. Instead you want the CBC to bring us together as they used to. In this post you point out how universal truths are being overlooked in favour of shame, guilt and baggage. (Yes, I mean the next sentence to be funny) I think we went to very different "Sunday" schools - I first learned about guilt, shame and baggage from "church"... or my parents, take your pick. Honestly though, I'm struggling with what you're getting at.
If I had to guess I'd say our current narrative about life isn't speaking to you, or rather it's talking too many languages at once. You recall with some fondness (as do I) a world that had a consistent and monolithic but somewhat fictional narrative. At some point (the 60's-70's?) cracks appeared in that narrative and those of us in "diverse parallel monocultures" realized we weren't being reflected, appreciated or valued in that simple monolithic narrative and so we began to create our own. Fast-forward a few decades and now everything looks kinda cracked. Holes have appeared in some places where there used to be solid ground. Even nomenclature has become unwieldy. I can't tell you how much I hate using the term 2SLGBTQIA+ or any variant thereof. I mean, it's insanely verbose and useless because it includes everything, and I live in that "community." In fact, it's so broad that it defeats the purpose of community.
So here's the rub: it's not about you. Sit back and enjoy the show, eat some popcorn, comment on the goings on with some tea (you may not get that reference without RuPaul), but relax.
Basically the world is going through an upheaval, like when the writers of a popular show all get fired and the next crew is brought in. The new writers in this case being "diverse monocultures" and the internet which, yes, includes AI and all those algorithms. You don't like the new writers or how they ruined your favourite show. There may be some small instances where a letter writing campaign will revive a beloved character that's been cancelled, or refute a plot point that's been being espoused. (The Scots aren't meaner than the Vikings, or the Germans, for instance, and everything is relative. There are at least as many lovely Scots and Scottish things as there are scary or tragic or even just average ones.) Overall though the show must go on and it's taking a new twist.
I think the really important questions to ask are not how does the new marketing sound, but what of the underlying fundamentals of the show? Have they got a new funding scheme that's fundamentally altered who the show is aimed at (i.e. will AI take enough jobs that it harms the viability of your family)? Is the marketer trying to distract you from focusing on bigger issues (i.e. are we being prompted to circle the wagons, if so, why)? Has the show itself run its course (i.e. will climate crisis make everything moot)?
Okay, the analogy has gotten away from me but...
If you really want to stop diverse monocultures you either have to do away with or fundamentally restructure the internet. We are living in UseNet writ large. (yeah, I'm OLD)
If you really want to bring Canada together you need to recontextualize the national fable to include all or most of those monocultures. I wish you luck. No, seriously, I hope you do it.
If you want some peace though, just sit back. Mostly it's marketing, poorly written copy. Like when someone doesn't have a handle on the product yet and is trying too hard.
If you're worried about some of it being more, then I would fight those issues, but I suspect you need to build coalitions to fight them as they're broad and systemic.
OK... I've taken another pass at this in my most recent post. And I've tried to explain why I am in a unique position with my work to have a front-row view of what's happening behind the scenes if I can mix that metaphor.
Hey John,
I think that was more succinct, but I do think there are a bunch of pieces to this. There may simply not be a solution, unfortunately. At least not in this moment.
So, for identity politics, especially the queer/transgender stuff, we're in a really liminal space right now. The possibilities haven't yet coalesced on a new "masculine(s)" or it's opposite(s). I feel like we're headed towards a colour wheel or set of sliding scales of some sort but that will make everything so much more complicated to parse socially. We'll need AI to sort it on a daily basis! I only partially kid.
In another of your posts you reminisced about your violent childhood. What I got from that was you were learning boundaries of the old social paradigm, I learned them by being "bullied" too. Strange skinny brainy gay kid from a weird religion moves from the big city to a tiny country farm? Bullied. Same kid moves from a tiny country farm to a huge metropolis in another country with a completely different racial and socio-economic mix? Bullied. But I learned where the edges of society (at the time) were pretty fast. I had to. I also learned there were multiple venues and levels and types of society you could go to. In some ways that violence was a more honest and immediate expression of the limits of the toleration you could expect from your peers. In most ways though, it just hurt. I still reflexively shy away from some topics, but often I then march right back in too. I'm scrappier than I look.
I do think businesses and people in general are trying to "get it right," not understanding that there ISN'T a right. It's a conversation, or more properly a dialectic. In a third post you mention that we're willing to give up freedoms for bureaucracy but you neglect to mention that for individuals to function well in a bureaucracy they must be both educated and engaged. The society we have created is neither well educated (and by "educated" I don't mean "has a certificate". I mean, "has really done their own research") nor engaged (and by "engaged" I don't mean, "uses the latest apps." I mean, "invented their own app, or did it from scratch.") We've done it to ourselves and allowed marketing and markets, which dumb things down to smaller simpler choices BY DESIGN, to dictate what we can have. The world IS a big scary violent place and most of us choose to live in the "safer" more protected version of it and raise our kids there. I can't blame anyone, wars, climate crisis, disinformation campaigns, fascism. Fascism is appealing because it's easy. Horrible, but simple. Most people can't do nuance worth shit. (I hope you see what I did there).
Anyway, I do see what you mean, but I fear you are looking to stop the oncoming train. I would urge you instead to jump out of the way for now. Then go find who set it going on the tracks in the first place and have words.
Thanks for reading... and writing!
Thank-you for this. As in all conflict, we need to talk openly with a focus on hearing, clarifying, understanding and respecting (loving). We need to ignore the sensationalized talking points. As much as it hurts the political agenda we need to remember the truth part of truth and reconciliation.