Read on Twitter
So I wanna talk about a thing that inevitably happens during any discourse 
, why its dangerous, and what you can do to make yourself cognizant to it.
Specifically, I wanna talk about reframing and omission, and the damage that can do in a conversation.
Let's get into it.
, why its dangerous, and what you can do to make yourself cognizant to it.Specifically, I wanna talk about reframing and omission, and the damage that can do in a conversation.
Let's get into it.
So if you've watched any discourse, you know this flow:
X critique of a thing is raised.
It is picked up by popular support and reduced to a simpler form Y by a lot of folks, which often isn't a perfect critique that's a lot easier to condemn.
Everyone fixates on Y and ignores X.
X critique of a thing is raised.
It is picked up by popular support and reduced to a simpler form Y by a lot of folks, which often isn't a perfect critique that's a lot easier to condemn.
Everyone fixates on Y and ignores X.
This is where the reframing comes in. Generally, it falls into 2 categories:
1) Intentionally fixating on the simplified critique in order to ignore addressing the full harm of the initial critique. This often comes in the form of an apology from the creator going...
1) Intentionally fixating on the simplified critique in order to ignore addressing the full harm of the initial critique. This often comes in the form of an apology from the creator going...
"I'm sorry for doing Y," so it looks like they're apologizing when they're ignoring the problem.
2) Calling out the flaws and harm done by Y (which is important), but never actually condemning X. This creates a take that in a vacuum is good but harmful in context.
2) Calling out the flaws and harm done by Y (which is important), but never actually condemning X. This creates a take that in a vacuum is good but harmful in context.
The common thread in both of these is omission. By omitting the nuance of the original critique, you re-characterize the problem as something lesser or more exaggerated than it was. Re-framing the narrative through omission allows you to control the conversation and dictate...
the response. It's also VERY deniable as an approach. If someone says something that's technically correct its a lot harder to say "yeah but this still fucking sucks in context," when a lot of the time it really does. And that's very important to be aware of.
Let me be explicit: reframing a critique in such a way as to dismiss or mitigate the harm done by the critiqued thing IS FUCKING GARBAGE. Not only does it diminish the work of folks raising personal concerns, it also undermines efforts to bring about meaningful change.
So what can you do as a reader?
If you see a thread talking about a discourse, any discourse, you should be immediately asking: what is missing from this thread?
And I mean that even for my threads. As you're reading this and any of my writing, ask: What did Ammourazz omit?
If you see a thread talking about a discourse, any discourse, you should be immediately asking: what is missing from this thread?
And I mean that even for my threads. As you're reading this and any of my writing, ask: What did Ammourazz omit?
And then, if you want to engage with takes meaningfully, seek out that omitted information. Consider the harm that might be done by presenting this information sans context. I know Twitter isn't the best platform for this, but if we want to make conversations in this space better
then we all need to put in the work to not just engage uncritically with complex topics.
This was prompted by a thread that's going around right now that I don't want to engage with directly. It raises some decent points about the value of having a big name streamer...
This was prompted by a thread that's going around right now that I don't want to engage with directly. It raises some decent points about the value of having a big name streamer...
brought onto your show, and also shares a lot of my beliefs that folks can play identities that aren't there's in specific contexts. However, it omits the harm caused by the racial stereotypes in the discourse, and conflates various PoC together in a disingenuous way.
So, when you read a thread like that, that brings in nuance by erasing core parts of the issue, you need to be vigilant. Think about how it may be harmful to some folks reading it, or how the reframing can diminish impact or further efforts to bring about change.
That's all.
That's all.
