Gerty's Thinky Thunksblog

Welcome to my first post! So, to get right down to it:

— In my experience, human beings consistently have a persistently strong urge to dismiss and reject any facts too unpleasant for them to accept.

I have also consistently observed that most humans persistently dismiss and strongly reject the idea that they would ever do any such thing.

inorite? How meta.

— What? Someone close to me has abused you? And I enabled them by doing nothing but deny/excuse/justify/blame you? That is Just. Not. Possible. (even though it happened and I'm doing those things right now) You must have confused the person who assaulted you 9 times with the lights on with some other person not close to me. (cos that happens all the time, except No It Doesn't) What do you mean, my suspension of disbelief? I'm only interested in your abuse as means to demonstrate my Good Personhood™ (I care so much but only about my own innocence) and being an INNOCENT bystander (totally complicit enabler) are we clear that I don't/won't believe you good kthxbye. —

Any of that sound familiar?

In my opinion, that wilful persistent la-la-la-i-can't-hear-yoo-no-matter-what discomfort-fact dismissal is one of the ugliest human-rights-abusive human traits of all time & I hate it.

Yes, issues I haz.

Tangent time.

One popular way I've seen that vile behavioural trait play out is in “shooting the messenger”. And I noticed today that aside from some significant nuances, “messenger shooting” and “victim blaming” are exactly the same thing, except in how inflammatory they are.

In the “shooting the messenger” expression, every unfavourable nuance and judgement is legitimately imposed against the wrongdoer (shooter), and the one wronged (messenger) gets a nuance-neutral term. Inflammatoriness is (mostly) absent.

Whereas in the “victim blaming” expression, every unfavourable inflammatory nuance and judgement is illegitimately imposed against the one wronged (victim), and the wrongdoer (blamer) gets a much less inflammatory term. Nevertheless, the entire expression is highly inflammatory.

I strongly dislike the second one. A lot. But at least now I know why. :)

Notice the different ways you respond to the terms “sexual assault victims” vs “sexual assault whistleblowers”. Which feels more comfortable?

—

_____________ Fankyoo for reading! <3

You can discuss this and any of my other posts, and find more of my extra diverse thinky thunks over on my Mastodon.

See you there! [insert happy wave emoticon here]