this post was submitted on 29 Apr 2025
607 points (94.7% liked)
Curated Tumblr
4955 readers
754 users here now
For preserving the least toxic and most culturally relevant Tumblr heritage posts.
The best transcribed post each week will be pinned and receive a random bitmap of a trophy superimposed with the author's username and a personalized message. Here are some OCR tools to assist you in your endeavors:
-
FOSS Android Recs per u/m_f@discuss.online: 1 , 2
Don't be mean. I promise to do my best to judge that fairly.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I think both is problematic.
If you know that dipshit is not meant in a harmful way by the other person, then why do you care being called it?
Same on the other side, if you know the other person wouldn't like to be called dipshit, why would you call them that?
I really think they both have problems that they need to address within themselves.
This is just victim blaming. Replace "dipshit" with a slur. This is literally you arguing the paradox of tolerance. The post isn't saying to ascribe malice. If someone calls me something I don't like, I ask them not to. I'm not saying they did something wrong. I'm asking politely for them to respect a boundary. If they continue to do it intentionally, they're an asshole. Your boundary can't be "I'm allowed to call you whatever I want." That's intolerant, and there is no reason we should be forced to tolerate the intolerant.
Unless you are a serious believer in the paradox of tolerance, and that you must tolerate everyone regardless of how they treat you in return, there is no way you can actually believe your own argument.
You make an interesting point about intent, but I think the missing part is trust. If I trust a person's intent, then their actions matter less in terms of a reason for feeling hurt. But, how many people does a typical person trust that way? Even so, after being confronted with the unintended consequences of their actions, they should realign their actions with their intent in the face of that new information.
That’s not how it works at all.
The person being addressed has an issue and reasonably has requested an accommodation that costs nothing.
The other person says nah, can’t be bothered, I don’t care how you feel. Suck it.
These are not the same thing.
Edit: words.
It doesn't cost nothing though.
If a person habitually calls everyone "dipshit", they need to pay close attention every time they speak with that person, making sure to think about every word coming out of their mouth and making sure none of these is "dipshit".
Just try speaking to someone and never using "the" ever, it's incredibly hard. If you're used to speaking in a certain way, it's very hard to change and takes a lot of mental work. And it's ok if it's one word with one person... but what if everyone decides a word or multiple words isn't fine to them? It gets harder and harder.
This is not a complete non-issue like it's being treated.
Actually I think the more people "banning" the word (so to speak), the easier it is to change your patterns.
Take the N word, many many white people around the 25-40yo range used to let it fly, mostly in an eminem type sense rather than a racist (ykwim) sense, and those people have almost all changed by now to not say it anymore because nobody is cool with it.
Meanwhile, my dad, my grandma, and one trans person I know, are the only three people who have ever said "stop calling me dude." I say it every 3rd sentence to literally everyone, including my mom who I am not calling a "male human" when I say "dude," I legitimately cannot stop saying it, especially since I only have to do it when talking to those three specific people, and I disagree with my dad that "it's disrespectful," and I disagree that it is a gendered term (in this context, it can be, like "how you guys doing" is different from "this is the guy's bathroom" and anyone denying this is purposefully obtuse.)
I have no scientific basis for this of course but that's my theory anyway.
Definitely.
I just thought it important with my comment to counteract the sentiment of "fuck what the person that is wrong feels". That is exactly what is causing the resistance most of the time. Yes, sure, they shouldn't be saying "dipshit" to that other person. But telling them it's no problem when they themselves know that it's a huge problem for them is just antagonizing them, effectively.
Sure, but then there's a difference between dipshit and dude, if we drop this false equivalency. At that point, where the word is innocuous and not intended to offend, it is sort of unreasonable to ask the person to change their entire speech pattern simply because you're unreasonably offended by the word. It'd be like being offended by someone calling you "yo" when asking something like "Hey yo you have the time," it's unlikely that person will be willing or able to acquiesce your request to stop calling them "yo" and only call them by their proper name or gender, I'm simply going to say "yo" again in 5min regardless of if either of us want me to or not. Actually I'm entirely likely to say "yo dude" at the beginning of every sentence lmao.
That's why I wrote my initial comment.
They both need to acknowledge that they're unreasonable. Dropping the metaphor.
It's completely understandable that one person has trauma regarding gender and thus unreasonably feels offended by an innocuous word like "dude". And thus, if you respect that person, it's totally reasonable to try to accommodate them and not use "dude" when possible.
At the same time, the person requesting it needs to be aware that their request is unreasonable in the way that you just described, and thus it'd be reasonable for them to say "please don't say dude to me, but if you can't, it's not that bad because I know this is my issue to be so offended by an innocuous word".
Honestly though that just shakes out to "I still say it every 5 seconds, and for the first few times I follow it up with 'shit, sorry' but then I forget that too next time we chill."
It's literally so bad that the best answer is actually "we just don't talk then." And that's fine, tbh. I'm too ADHD for relationships that require that.
Yep, totally understandable from my side :)
"It'll be hard but I'll try."
A lot of people have a hard time admitting they're wrong or don't know.
As I've already said multiple times, that is the reasonable approach. For some reason everyone thinks I'm for the continuing of people being called dipshit in this situation.
Not wanting people to do things to you is not wrong. I don't want people to defecate on me, even in an affectionate or accidental way, even though it's not harmful. Is that wrong?
I don't want you to walk next to me on the street. The view of you pisses me off.
Is that wrong? Or am I allowed to tell you where you shall walk?
If the person truly doesn't mean no offense with "dipshit" but you still take offense from it, that's what I'm talking about.
Same as walking on the street, if you don't want to see the person, just don't go on the street close to them. If you don't want to hear something they're saying then don't speak to them, avoid them.
I already said that if someone doesn't want to be called dipshit, then there's no reason to keep calling them that.
It feels like your looking for a way to be offended. If someone told me they don't want me to walk next to them, I wouldn't walk next to them because we should be allowed to control a space around ourselves. If someone said they don't like looking at me, that's solved by them not looking at me.
Reasonably remove yourself from a situation if you can. Don't harass people. Treat people how they want to be treated. Work together to solve problems. This is stuff children learn, it's not hard. Because the problem with your logic is that you can say "I'm allowed to invade your personal space. It's on you to leave."
But, because you want to feel offended, you will likely say "Oh, what if my personal space is five miles around me what then?!?" to which I would roll my eyes, say ok, and let you enjoy your zero friends.
That's exactly what I'm saying here. The one that doesn't want to be called dipshit should remove themselves from the situation where they're called dipshit, i.e. cut the person out of their lives.
I'm not offended, I'm just saying that policing someone else's speech is the same as asking them to leave your general vicinity, i.e. not particularly reasonable.
It isn't wrong to police certain speech, unless you think it's okay to threaten harm to people. We put limits on what is allowable, regardless of what you think. We judge people for what they say. All you're arguing is that the person calling people Dipshit should be allowed to call people Dipshit... And they are? There are no laws about calling people Dipshit or anything. Hell, you can yell slurs at people in most places. That doesn't make it right. It doesn't make them not a horrible person.
You keep looking worse for wanting to call people anything you want without being judged. Do you get that yet?
Of course it is okay to threaten harm to people. "Policing speech" is exactly that, "threatening harm to people". If you police someone's speech, the implied threat is something like "if you don't change your speech, I'm going to make your life harder/remove certain benefits from you/reduce your social status", all of which is "harm".
Okay, enjoy your zero friends.
Yikes
Yes. One has a problem of being called dipshit...the other is one.
Studies show self esteem is more impacted by the values a person grew up with than their own values. That means most of the time, developing or changing your own values doesn't increase self esteem. You need to be respected in a way that makes sense in the culture you grew up with. Some people can overcome their birth culture, but not many.