And I use "normal" in scare quotes, because, according to whom, exactly, capitalism? Society? Yourself? Some of the "weirdest" people I've met in my life where also some of the nicest and actually helped me out. People you'd peg as "normal"? Well I've had my fair share of shit with them. I'm not about to put up with some reddit lord trying to score points with cool kid podcasters by throwing people who feed the homeless under the bus, fuck you very much.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Carl@hexbear.net 49 points 4 days ago (5 children)

"be normal" has always been a pretty shit phrase, IMO it should be replaced with "be social". The point allegedly is about not alienating people from the movement, and I think putting the sentiment on a social/antisocial axis is much more useful of a framing and doesn't smack of discrimination.

[–] Blakey@hexbear.net 32 points 4 days ago

IMO it should be replaced with "be social"

That's a beautiful way of thinking about this, thanks! I'm a total loner and weirdo. I don't need to work on being less weird because being weird is cool and fun and simply who I am as a human. I do however need to work on being more social!

[–] KuroXppi@hexbear.net 22 points 4 days ago

screm-cool

Be rootin'

Be tootin'

But most of all, be kind

[–] Commie_Chameleon@hexbear.net 22 points 4 days ago

I like this a lot, gonna try to absorb it into my lexicon. Wanting to teach baby chameleon less ableist language and having alternatives instead of just cutting out words and phrases entirely is much easier.

[–] Salah@hexbear.net 14 points 3 days ago

“Be nomal” is such a bad PR phrase because it can mean anything and everyone just defines it in the way that’s convenient for them. It is kind of funny (and sad) that it took off so well. “Be social” is way better!

[–] blobjim@hexbear.net 6 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

sure but it's also about being social in a way that brings people into the socialist sphere instead of turning them off of it. The point of "be normal" is to not alienate people by acting in ways most people can't tolerate. Which is just equivalent to wrecking. Which yes does mean suppressing neuroticism about certain things. People aren't going to trust a socialist organization if it's a madhouse and a bunch of polycules that only attracts people who can't "be normal" in other places.

[–] Carl@hexbear.net 21 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I think the criticism is that "be normal" almost always manifests as tailism and scolding. "Oh, you think we shouldn't tell misogynistic jokes? Why can't you be normal!" The social/antisocial axis as I imagine it would put "be understanding that not everybody is as familiar with feminist theory as you" as social, and would put both "excessively scold every baby leftist" AND "let people who do reactionary shit keep doing it without pushback" firmly in the "antisocial" pile.

Most frequently when I see complaints about socialist orgs not being normal it's from a chud who saw a non natural hair color. We shouldn't take those critiques seriously, because they're not being made in good faith.

[–] blobjim@hexbear.net 1 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Absolutely. It's really about being friendly and not being a wrecker. Bringing people in instead of dividing or excluding people.