NSFW as a concept implies capitalist oppression. Discuss.

Follow

But seriously: "NSFW" as a category so remarkably means specifically "no nudity". It means now that 'work' is tied to a very specific morality stance, one that a lot of communities don't actually hold.

The dissonance is really weird. It plays into a really Christian mindset about business, and it underscores how capital and religion are intertwined.

Additionally, I think this normalizes violence in the workplace: like most places sex is censored more than violence, it does so.

At this point, what does healthy culture look like? What _are_ the reasonable lines to draw?

So much of feminist and justice culture is a reaction as well, not actually building a vision of justice.

Even to be successful in business, a lot of seemingly socially liberal people end up building onto a system that is very controlling in a Christian frame of morality.

It's a lot easier to shift your worldview than the world. So a lot of business owners lose sight of their openness and values as they get successful. Nevermind being surrounded by yes men.

@aredridel I think I could be convinced of your argument... especially when you also consider the whole Dress Code nonsense that so many organizations implicitly or explicitly enforce. It too stems from puritanical and/or patriarchal notions of beauty and gender.

@quephird YES.

Actually, fuck me, that's astute. "Business professional" and "business casual" have the same "wink wink you know what I mean" cultural relativism as NSFW.

@aredridel It's hard to draw the line between reaction and not-reaction. Culture always breeds from its context, I'd say nothing can really be genuinely new, and well, this is the context we got, this is the material we're working with.

@Stoori Yeah but it could be a BIT less obvious and a bit more imaginative sometimes :P

Seriously. "ban porn" "no nudity without consent" leads some pretty bad places. But these are takes that have been had many many times.

@aredridel
Capitalism and Calvinism have been closely linked since the 1700s. Look into the rise of the Scottish tobacco lords, Rev John Witherspoon, and the life of Adam Smith, as starting points, if you haven't already.

@aredridel you're a historian? I get excited when I meet another historian!

@FASA_Andrew_1879 As much as an obsessive and critical reader of social history can be without it being a specific field of study, quite.

@aredridel And an unschooler! We unschooled all three of our children - the youngest is 19 now - after middle child went into first grade and the school turned out to be a Very Bad Idea.

@FASA_Andrew_1879 Oh wow, nice!

It was such a good upbringing. Wasn't perfect for all of my peers, but a great number of us really did exceptionally because of it.

@aredridel One size doesn't fit all, but we realized that we couldn't possibly do a worse job than the public school system where we were living, and we might do better. Getting involved in a secular unschooling group turned out to be an excellent decision, did wonders for socialization for our Asperger's youngest.

@FASA_Andrew_1879 Oh GOSH yes. Pretty sure there's nothing better than a band of misfits for people who socialize weirdly.

@aredridel I feel it's the same thing that (in theory, not rly practice) positions people as getting more 'conservative' and abandoning revolutionary views/analysis as they become more invested in the system and the status quo (ie "get older"), and now have things to lose if that status quo should fail.

Even if what they have is debt, sadness, and the merest scraps - they have the 'appearance' of things, and therefor must change their views to accommodate... and so the cycle goes on :blobcat:

@BunnyHearted Actually, funny thing, people seem to settle into their political views in their 20s and stay. Turns out "you'll be more conservative when you're older" is a thing boomers think that isn't actually true. But if we look at older people, it would seem it ...

@aredridel
And I suspect the 20s thing is because this is usually when our social circles stop changing.
@BunnyHearted

@SaboTabby @aredridel I think this is often the case, but I do want to offer a little resistance to it since I think it's important to keep in mind that anyone has room to grow and change at any age. Tons of people come out/transition much later than their 20s, and we're (ideally) doing all we can to support them, talk about their experiences, and resist "too late" narratives there, yeah?

I feel we must do the same about political views. Ime the idea that people can't change serves capitalism.

@BunnyHearted @SaboTabby oh indeed. And this is a mistake people make all the time, confusing the group tendency to change or not for the individual's willingness or ability.

(This is the actual flaw behind "yes all men")

@BunnyHearted
Right. I'm not suggesting people don't change. Just that change usually comes from interaction with different individuals and communities and those different interactions tend to happen less often as we age. Generally speaking of course. At 18 I was a Christo-facist. 30-31 is when I became a full blown anarchist. 2016 election was my full conversion from progressive toying with anarchism to anarchist.
@aredridel,

@SaboTabby @aredridel yah! Similar story here. Went from being a discount nihlist teenager to "centrist" libertarian in most of my 20s, and didn't get my shit together until my late 20s really. You're right in that a lot of what I needed to spark a change was interacting with different people (who weren't tech bros, lol), but I just like making that more of a call to reach out to present-day dumbasses when possible (and safe), instead of leaving them to fester.

@BunnyHearted
Agreed. But gotta know when to cut bait and let them fester too. For your own mental health.
@aredridel

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Anarchism Space

A mastodon instance for anarchists and libertarian socialists.