theory of socialization

8

This is worth watching, especially the part where he tells Alex Jones and WikiLeaks to “grow the fuck up.“

All men support and perpetuate sexism and sexist oppression in one form or another … Like women, men have been socialized to passively accept sexist ideology. While they need not blame themselves for accepting sexism, they must assume responsibility for eliminating it.
—  bell hooks, Feminist Theory: From Margin to Center
Our elders have been warning us about this for generations now—they saw the unsustainability of settler society immediately. Societies based on conquest cannot be sustained, so yes, I do think we’re getting closer to that breaking point for sure. We’re running out of time. We’re losing the opportunity to turn this thing around. We don’t have time for this massive slow transformation into something that’s sustainable and alternative. I do feel like I’m getting pushed up against the wall. Maybe my ancestors felt that 200 years ago or 400 years ago. But I don’t think it matters. I think that the impetus to act and to change and to transform, for me, exists whether or not this is the end of the world. If a river is threatened, it’s the end of the world for those fish. It’s been the end of the world for somebody all along. And I think the sadness and the trauma of that is reason enough for me to act.
—  Leanne Simpson, Nishnaabeg writer and theorist

We were keeping our eye on 1984. When the year came and the prophecy didn’t, thoughtful Americans sang softly in praise of themselves. The roots of liberal democracy had held. Wherever else the terror had happened, we, at least, had not been visited by Orwellian nightmares.

But we had forgotten that alongside Orwell’s dark vision, there was another - slightly older, slightly less well known, equally chilling: Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World. Contrary to common belief even among the educated, Huxley and Orwell did not prophesy the same thing. Orwell warns that we will be overcome by an externally imposed oppression. But in Huxley’s vision, no Big Brother is required to deprive people of their autonomy, maturity and history. As he saw it, people will come to love their oppression, to adore the technologies that undo their capacities to think.

What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one. Orwell feared those who would deprive us of information. Huxley feared those who would give us so much that we would be reduced to passivity and egoism. Orwell feared that the truth would be concealed from us. Huxley feared the truth would be drowned in a sea of irrelevance. Orwell feared we would become a captive culture. Huxley feared we would become a trivial culture, preoccupied with some equivalent of the feelies, the orgy porgy, and the centrifugal bumblepuppy. As Huxley remarked in Brave New World Revisited, the civil libertarians and rationalists who are ever on the alert to oppose tyranny “failed to take into account man’s almost infinite appetite for distractions.” In 1984, Orwell added, people are controlled by inflicting pain. In Brave New World, they are controlled by inflicting pleasure. In short, Orwell feared that what we fear will ruin us. Huxley feared that what we desire will ruin us.

This book is about the possibility that Huxley, not Orwell, was right.

  • *racial double standard exists for centuries in the western world, privileging whiteness above all other racial designations in most cases of political/economic/cultural benefits, impacting real power dynamics into the present day*
  • activist: *acknowledges the historical power imbalance and that social circumstances are different across groups on account of this long-standing power imbalance*
  • some reactionary shit: Who is the REAL bigot here??? You're parading a racial double standard against whiteness! Just treat everybody the same exact way like humanity just arrived from a decontextualized vacuum of relative equality! People calling my remarks racist is the real systemic racism here.
Social construction of technology (also referred to as SCOT) is a theory within the field of Science and Technology Studies. Advocates of SCOT—that is, social constructivists—argue that technology does not determine human action, but that rather, human action shapes technology. They also argue that the ways a technology is used cannot be understood without understanding how that technology is embedded in its social context. SCOT is a response to technological determinism and is sometimes known as technological constructivism.
—  Wikipedia
  • right-winger: leftist pinkos just want to redistribute the wealth and expand the size of government!!
  • an actual leftist: actually those are short-term solutions proposed only as long as capitalism is a thing. as long as an elite class hierarchically controls the means of production and sources of wealth, higher taxation on the wealthy and more middleman government programs/regulations will be necessary. in the transition from capitalism to socialism, we do favor large-scale wealth redistribution, but from there we want the entire economic framework changed to one involving democratic job complexes and production for human need rather than for the profit of the elite class; at that point, "big government" for the sake of redistribution and regulation will no longer be necessary because the system as a whole would actually be structured to work for the people rather than just mostly elites, and thus egalitarianism and oversight by the people for the people would be written into the economy's genetic makeup.
  • right-winger: leftist pinkos are always trying to take away our guns!!
  • an actual leftist: actually many of us support the inalienable right of self-defense for the oppressed against their oppressors. guns and gun culture are incredibly dangerous when linked with reactionary ideals, which is why we want cops, violent patriarchs, and fascists disarmed. in imperialist white supremacist heteropatriarchal capitalism, the oppressors should relinquish their guns first.
  • right-winger: leftist pinkos don't want people to keep the product of their labor!!
  • an actual leftist: actually we want a system where people are better able to retain the product of their labor; if you work for a boss in a capitalist firm (i.e. most people) the grand majority of your labor product belongs to the boss and you have no say over what happens with it or with production as a whole.
  • right-winger: leftist pinkos hate freedom!!
  • an actual leftist: actually we want more freedom for the average person, in the sense that we want all people to have influence over and access to the things that involve them and the things they need. flat workplace democracy is more conducive to human freedom than vertical workplace autocracy. reduced working hours that arise from automation and democratic production-for-need are more conducive to human freedom than long hours of exploited labor for the benefit of capitalists.
  • right-winger: .....
  • right-winger: .....
  • right-winger: i'm gonna pretend i didn't hear any of that.
The [socialist] response [to culturalism] was always this: yes there are cultural differences, but underneath those cultural differences are universal aspirations that all human beings have for certain material necessities, for self-determination, for self-realization, and this is why one opposes capitalism wherever it is. Otherwise, why oppose capitalism when it’s imposed on Hindus? Maybe Hindus dig being dominated; maybe it’s in them. Maybe that’s why they have a caste system–the caste system is an internal urge on the part of Hindus to just grin and bear it, to be dominated. Maybe that’s what they like. Maybe Muslim women like being dominated, maybe that’s what they’re into. Why do you impose your notions of feminism on them? And indeed the response to the rise of feminism in post-war India from the right was always to call them ‘Western’. 'These are Western ideas, Western feminists.’ What’s Western about them? 'Indian women don’t think this way. They like their place in society, they accept the Hindu mores.’ The left had a response to this, which is: nonsense! The reason why: wherever there’s oppression there’s resistance. The reason why is that history is the history of class struggle…Why is there resistance? It’s because regardless of whether you’re brown or white, Hindu or Muslim, Christian or not, you have certain aspirations and certain needs. Postcolonial Theory is the first self-proclaimed radical theory to deny it, this universality of needs. Once you deny that, you cannot have a response to Samuel Huntington.  You can concoct one, you can pretend it’s one, but you can’t have it. … What’s the basis for labor solidarity across cultures? What’s the basis for internationalism if it’s not this substratum of common needs and aspirations that people have? It is the bedrock of all progressive politics. And if you, under the banner of rejecting universalism, also reject this universality that binds us, our 'common humanity’, as the left used to say, you won’t have much to stand on when the ultra-nationalists show up at your door…you won’t have much to resist them, not intellectually anyway.
—  Vivek Chibber, “Postcolonial Theory and ‘Really Existing Capitalism'” (around 1:00:00)
I can't get over the symbolism of Alec in white and Magnus in black at the wedding... Like ying & yang, the light and the dark, demons and angels, two polar opposites uniting as one...

Originally posted by shadowhuntersseries

In the shadow world, black symbolizes armor in battle, and white symbolizes mourning…  Magnus was ready to fight for his love that night [“when that love comes back to you, you must do everything in your power to fight for it.” ~Ragnor], and Alec was ready to, essentially, die [what Lydia did “saved my life. So I should go thank her.” ~Alec].  

Oddly enough, Alec is usually the man of war, and Magnus is the man who cannot die…   The subliminal undertones of war and death was fitting for the two of them, but the way the tropes were switched is intriguing.  Even the fact that Alec was the bold one in that moment, and Magnus was the quiet one ready to do what he was told, is another example of their typical roles being swapped.  It kind of exemplifies how their two personalities have meshed, and how they are two sides of the same coin.  In the end, the sad symbolism of the colors they wore that night was washed away with joy…they found each other, and nothing has been the same since.  

And for that, I’m glad.

And another theory about autism.

Listen, so I’ve got a new theory on another factor that could contribute to the reason why autistic people have difficulties with socializing!

Autistic people have a different approach to learning/memorizing new information than most neurotypical people. We tend to be “hands-on”, meaning that no matter what we’re currently learning, we have to do something with it. In order to learn how to tie shoelaces for example, we might need countless repetitions of the actions done by ourselves while other people learn through observation. Other people just watch a few times how someone ties their shoe, they try to imitate the movement they see. But we, in contrast, tend to discover our own way of doing it because we are not good at picking up skills just like that.
If we learn a new information, we have to write/talk with our own words about it or maybe create something else out of it so we can keep it in mind.

When it comes to explaining why people follow social norms in the first place, the theory with the most supporting evidence suggests that norms are internalized by everyone during the process of socialization.
The theory offers plausible explanations for why people follow rules even when they know disobedience would be a wiser decision and many other examples in which following a norm brings more pain than gain.

The thing is, because autistic people learn in different ways, we might not be as good when it comes to learning about social norms as neurotypicals. We may memorize some of them very well (probably as a result of previous punishment because of former disobedience), but we’ll probably always have to put more conscious cognitive effort into this than allistics. At least that’s what I would conclude.

Additionally, we often lack the ability to identify the social cues others send in order to inform us about implicit social norms (and you can bet your ass there are many of those). This could be caused by something completely unrelated, but it could also be the result of a failed learning process as well. What if we struggle with social cues because we just didn’t have the right approach to learning it during the time of our childhood in which we should have done that?

(This would actually be an amazing topic for my bachelor’s degree.)

the idea that progressive advancements in the public conscience are just going to Happen because of the Glorious Liberal Advanced West is just so empathetic and good is such idealist bullshit. like you know why 99% of these sub-saharan African countries are so harsh on LGBT people? let me tell you, it’s not because they’re Savages who need Western Enlightenment. quite the opposite in fact. it’s because the western church-state complex that continues to strangle much of Africa over a century later forced western ideas of morality on the places it colonized. the catholic church and various other christian churches continue to materially support the slaughter of non-cishet people in the African continent.

the Institute for the Science of Sexuality in Berlin was a center for the advancement of LGBT rights in the German Republic for 14 years until the Nazis destroyed it and burned its archives. LGBT people were mobilizing en masse in the 60′s and 70′s and began to make an impact on society, only for the community to be shattered by the AIDS crisis. the governments of the west, especially the reagan administration in the united states, did nothing as drug SGA men and trans women, especially ones who were PoC, were dying fast and horribly. all the while, LGBT people were being treated like pariahs because of the lack of a formal information campaign on how HIV/AIDS works.

this rant has been kind of bitter and rambling and incoherent, but just remember, especially considering the rising neofascist movements around the world, that history doesn’t move in a straight line. progress is not waited for. it is fought for.