{"id":28451,"date":"2014-10-30T08:10:31","date_gmt":"2014-10-30T12:10:31","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/quotulatiousness.ca\/blog\/?p=28451"},"modified":"2014-10-30T08:10:31","modified_gmt":"2014-10-30T12:10:31","slug":"words-mean-exactly-what-we-want-them-to-mean-except-when-we-dont","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/quotulatiousness.ca\/blog\/2014\/10\/30\/words-mean-exactly-what-we-want-them-to-mean-except-when-we-dont\/","title":{"rendered":"Words mean exactly what we want them to mean, except when we don’t"},"content":{"rendered":"

In a post from earlier this year, Scott Alexander<\/a> discusses a common example of what has been described as a “motte-and-bailey” argument:<\/p>\n

I recently learned there is a term for the thing social justice does. But first, a png from racism school dot tumblr dot com.<\/p>\n

\"Check<\/p>\n

So, it turns out that privilege gets used perfectly reasonably. All it means is that you\u2019re interjecting yourself into other people\u2019s conversations and demanding their pain be about you. I think I speak for all straight white men when I say that sounds really bad and if I was doing it I\u2019m sorry and will try to avoid ever doing it again. Problem solved, right? Can\u2019t believe that took us however many centuries to sort out.<\/p>\n

A sinking feeling tells me it probably isn\u2019t that easy.<\/p>\n

In the comments section of the last disaster of a social justice post on my blog, someone started talking about how much they hated the term \u201cmansplaining\u201d, and someone else popped in to — ironically — explain what \u201cmansplaining\u201d was and why it was a valuable concept that couldn\u2019t be dismissed so easily. Their explanation was lucid and reasonable. At this point I jumped in and commented:<\/p>\n