When people use the term snowflake unironically, just remember they're quoting Fight Club, a satire written by a gay man about how male fragility causes men to destroy themselves, resent society and become radicalized. and that Tyler Durden isnt the hero but a personification of the main character's deep insecurities, and that his snowflake speech is a dig at how fascists use dehumanizing language to breed loyalty from insecure people.
So… you speak about "male fragility" and dehumanising language in the same breath?
@Hyolobrika many cis men's concept of masculinity is bad for their own mental health, and very easily challenged by perceived outside threats. That's all Toxic/Fragile Masculinity means. It's not dehumanizing, it's just what happens when the cis men in your society aren't really taught to cope with their feelings or understand their gender expression, because Feelings Are For Girls -- and that can happen unnoticed by the parents raising him, based on subtle things like media representation
By the same token, calling someone a "snowflake" doesn't make them less human either.
do you think snowflakes are people? they're ice crystals.
You are being very literal. What do you think of calling someone a "pillar of salt" for example?
@Hyolobrika I mean if you derogitorily called all your political enemies Pillars Of Salt, I'd be confused at what you meant but I wouldn't endorse it.
I feel like you're being intentionally obtuse and pretending to not understand how the word "snowflake" is used in bad faith. Or perhaps you've just never seen someone write off anyone whose existence challenges their bigoted ideas with the word "snowflake?"
No. You're the one being obtuse. I understand perfectly well that many people use the word "snowflake" in a derogatory way, but you seem unable (or perhaps unwilling) to understand that "male fragility" can be just as derogatory, whether or or not its meant that way (and I would argue that it was in your case, whether you wanted that to be clearly visible or not).
Ah. It seems that phrase does not mean what I thought it meant.
I thought "a real pillar of salt" meant someone who was loyal. Not sure where I got that idea from.
At any rate, I am sure that there are instances of phrases receding to people that literally refer to things that aren't derogatory. I was even aggressively told that when on r/tumblr I pointed out when someone referred to a man as "beef".
@Hyolobrika would you then argue that it is in Fight Club's case? because all I was doing was recounting the direct textual arguments made by the movie Fight Club -- wherein the protagonist is downtrodden and emotionally immature, and makes a hypermasculine alter ego which can say the things he can't and beat the shit out of people, and who has turned thousands of similarly vulnerable men into a terrorist militia -- which is easy to understand if you're not a toxic ass who identifies with Tyler.
@Hyolobrika the movie's one flaw in comparison to the book is making Tyler too charismatic, such that MRAs and sexists across the globe could easily identify with Tyler. but the book makes it extremely clear that Tyler -- and in general becoming toxically hypermasculine and violent in response to a world you don't feel comfortable in -- is the problem.
I have neither watched nor read Fight Club. Sorry.
@Hyolobrika THEN WHY ARE YOU ARGUING ABOUT IT!!?!?!
I don't need to have watched it to know that what you said was problematic, idiot. The discussion was about your use of the term "fragile masculinity", not Fight Club.
@Hyolobrika but... my usage of Fragile Masculinity is inherently tied to the film fight club! If you don't know fight club, you don't know the context of what I'm saying -- and without context, words are meaningless, language is inherently contextual. So instead you have built a simulacrum of what you *think* my words mean, and you're arguing with that instead.
Some meaning stays constant across contexts. Otherwise how can we know what it means in each context?
@Hyolobrika look my dude, linguistics says that words are meaningless in a vacuum, and only with context do their meanings take form. There's no descriptive agency in English to say what words 'should' mean, all dictionaries are descriptive.
You must know the context in which people are talking, or you have literally no authority to talk on the subject. I even *told* you what the term means in context in my first reply, and you still argue with a meaning of the word you built for yourself.
Jace's personal Mastodon instance