The social norm is constructed: not naturally occurring but created by the society in which it is found.
Hence there are no actions which in themselves are inherently #abnormal or universally condemned by all societies at all times. Deviance is thus situational and contextual.
Rough contact and impact peak around the age of seven. This is gradually replaced by peer monitoring in the years that follow.
Isabelle Clair: "Adolescence is a very normative age. At middle school, "there's a very tough relationship to what's the right thing to do".
Margot Déage: "Physical violence is much more prevalent in elementary/primary school, then decreases in middle school, and progressively through high school."
Margot Déage: "A girl who does not belong to a boy or a man can fall into the category of whore at any time, whatever her clothes or sexual practices."
Margot Déage: "Being in a position to say who’s a whore and who’s a good girl is a power in itself within the girls’ group, a power that is strongly mobilised by certain girls. The ones who can fall, in general, are the hardest on the matter."
"If a young woman does not follow the social injunction to have feelings in a sexual relationship, she knows that she risks being called to order, being punished. Or to feel shame or guilt. This burden of the social norm is primarily internalised."
"There is, in all circles, the threatening 'spectre of the faggot'. The determination to appear as 'a man, a real man' and secure one's masculinity, while escaping suspicion of homosexuality, which is considered demeaning and dangerous. Some gay boys from privileged backgrounds have told me that they were in a relationship with a girl at school to give the impression, to cover their tracks."
"If a young woman does not follow the social injunction to have feelings in a sexual relationship, she knows that she risks being called to order, being punished. Or to feel shame or guilt. This burden of the social norm is primarily internalised."
"There is, in all circles, the threatening 'spectre of the faggot'. The determination to appear as 'a man, a real man' and secure one's masculinity, while escaping suspicion of homosexuality, which is considered demeaning and dangerous. Some gay boys from privileged backgrounds have told me that they were in a relationship with a girl at school to give the impression, to cover their tracks."
Yep. But, even though I didn’t suggest it, I didn’t explicitly say that it didn’t mean global blocklists. So I clarified it, and added a footnote with more detial.
As Instance-level federation decisions reflect norms, policies, interpretations, and (sometimes) strategy discusses, opinions differ on the definition of “bad actor.” So the best approach is probably going to present the admin of a new instance with a range of recommendations to choose between based on their preference. Software platforms should provide an initial vetted list (along with enough information for a new admin to do something sensible), and hosting companies and third-party recommenders should also be able provide alternatives.
Robert Reich discusses how Fairbanks disease, which affects bone growth and has caused him to be very short, has affected his life. The genetic odds of passing on the condition to children are slim, so he married and has had sons who turned out normal.
Then he writes,
"But what’s 'normal' anyway? And why is normal so important?"
#KingRichardsFaire is the largest #renfaire in New England, and its owner, #DickShapiro, extracts a reported $400k/day - a sum that is only possible thanks to systematic and illegal worker misclassification, which lets him pay performers sub-minimum wages and deny them benefits:
If you'd like an essay-formatted version of this thread to read or share, here's a link on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:
Creative workers are part of a class of workers who suffer from #VocationalAwe, the sense that because your job is satisfying and/or worthy, you don't deserve to get paid for it:
Nobel laureate James Buchanan is the intellectual linchpin of the Koch-funded attack on democratic institutions.
If the Tennessee-born economist James McGill Buchanan were alive today, it would suit him just fine that most well-informed journalists, liberal politicians, and even many economics students have little understanding of his work.
The reason? Duke historian Nancy MacLean contends that his philosophy is so stark that even young libertarian acolytes are only introduced to it after they have accepted the relatively sunny perspective of Ayn Rand. (Yes, you read that correctly).
If Americans really knew what Buchanan thought and promoted, and how destructively his vision is manifesting under their noses, it would dawn on them how close the country is to a transformation most would not even want to imagine, much less accept.
Buchanan’s view of human nature was distinctly dismal. Adam Smith saw human beings as self-interested and hungry for personal power and material comfort, but he also acknowledged social instincts like compassion and fairness.
Buchanan, in contrast, insisted that people were primarily driven by venal self-interest.
Crediting people with altruism or a desire to serve others was “romantic” fantasy: politicians and government workers were out for themselves, and so, for that matter, were teachers, doctors, and civil rights activists. They wanted to control others and wrest away their resources: “Each person seeks mastery over a world of slaves,” he wrote in his 1975 book, The Limits of Liberty.
The people who needed protection were property owners, and their rights could only be secured though constitutional limits to prevent the majority of voters from encroaching on them, an idea Buchanan lays out in works like Property as a Guarantor of Liberty (1993).
Buchanan saw society as a cutthroat realm of makers (entrepreneurs) constantly under siege by takers (everybody else).
His own language was often more stark, warning the alleged “prey” of “parasites” and “predators” out to fleece them. https://www.ineteconomics.org/perspectives/blog/meet-the-economist-behind-the-one-percents-stealth-takeover-of-america
Donald Trump’s presidency has raised a question that many of us never thought we’d be asking: Is our democracy in danger?
Harvard professors Steven #Levitsky and Daniel #Ziblatt have spent more than twenty years studying the breakdown of democracies in Europe and Latin America, and they believe the answer is YES.
Democracy no longer ends with a bang—in a revolution or military coup—but with a whimper: the slow, steady #weakening of critical institutions, such as the #judiciary and the #press, and the gradual erosion of long-standing political #norms.
The good news is that there are several exit ramps on the road to #authoritarianism.
The bad news is that, by electing Trump, we have already passed the first one.
Drawing on decades of research and a wide range of historical and global examples, from 1930s Europe to contemporary #Hungary, #Turkey, and #Venezuela, to the American South during #Jim#Crow, Levitsky and Ziblatt show how democracies die—and how ours can be saved.
The #UAW are on #strike against the #BigThree#automakers. #Biden should be roaring his full-throated support for the strike. Doing so would be both just and shrewd. But instead, the #WhiteHouse is waffling...and if recent history is any indication, they might actually come out against the strike.
--
If you'd like an essay-formatted version of this thread to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:
Biden is already partway there. He rejected the Clinton/Obama position that workers would have to vote for Democrats because "we are your only choice." Maybe he did that out of personal conviction, but it's also no longer politically possible for Democrats to turn out worker votes while screwing over workers.
'Divide and conquer' is a ubiquitus meme in Western intellectual-history; Prize individualism and suspect collectivism. So terms for 'working together' might be praise or condemnation.
Anything that can't go on forever will eventually stop. 40 years of declining worker power shattered the American Dream (TM), producing multiple generations whose children fared worse than their parents, cratering faith in institutions and hope for a better future.
--
If you'd like an essay-formatted version of this thread to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:
Larry @lessig once laid out a theory of change that holds that our society is governed by four forces: #law (what's legal), #norms (what's socially acceptable), #markets (what's profitable) and #code (what's technologically possible):
These four forces interact. When queer relationships were normalized, it made it easier to legalize them, too - and then the businesses that #MarriageEquality became both a force for more normalization and legal defense.
25/
Steps towards a safer fediverse (DRAFT) (privacy.thenexus.today)
cross-posted from: lemmy.blahaj.zone/post/7992691...