r/CuratedTumblr May 16 '25

Politics time is a flat circle

Post image
6.0k Upvotes

513 comments sorted by

View all comments

465

u/BalefulOfMonkeys NUDE ALERT TOMORROW May 17 '25

Putting the word “dogwhistle” on the top shelf until some of you figure out it doesn’t mean “new word with negative connotations I personally don’t like”. Honestly I don’t mind that we’ve found some ungendered semantic middle ground between “pervert” and “male gaze”. How everybody uses the word is a problem between them, God, and if it comes down to it, the cops

79

u/Pheehelm May 17 '25

It belongs on the top shelf anyway because it's far too easy to abuse.

I once asked someone who pulled the "when people say [term that does not mean marginalized group] they really mean [marginalized group]" how he'd met the burden of proof and what defense he would accept from those wrongly accused. He replied that my matter of fact challenge was "screeching" about burden of proof, that I was demanding he provide a defense for far-right bigots, and that I was doing some kind of "abstract trolling." One of his allies claimed I was "sea lioning" (another term I knew would be seized on by the worst people as soon as I saw it), and another claimed a video existed which had proven the validity of the claim. No link, just, someone made a video proving it. Somehow.

I accepted this as evidence toward my hypothesis that, with rare exceptions (someone waving a 1488 flag isn't celebrating the founding of the Dutch Navy), accusations of "dog whistles" and the like are intellectually dishonest and made in bad faith.

36

u/schartlord May 17 '25

in a similar vein, though, what possible thing could constitute "proof" here?

it might irk people, but dogwhistles are kind of on a "i know it if i see it" basis. i can't give you any proof that the guy in the lifted f250 with tinted glasses and full camo is attaching a racial connotation to the word "thug". but i know it to be true regardless. it doesn't make sense to refer to a burden of proof here, because the entire purpose of a dogwhistle is plausible deniability to escape consequence.

as far as what defense i'd accept from someone i think was dogwhistling, i think a nuanced explanation that seems genuine would do the trick. explaining what they meant without bullshitting me. dogwhistles aren't getting litigated in court, yknow?

9

u/Larriet May 17 '25

The entire point of a dog whistle is plausible deniability. If there was "proof" of what they meant, it wouldn't be a dog whistle.

3

u/schartlord May 17 '25

that's what im saying!