It is a common complaint that all people do is whine on the internet. You've seen it with regards to various -isms and the like. The argument goes like this: "making any effort takes too much time and too much effort on those lazy mofos so their just going to whine on the internet."
Except... that is how shit changes, or at least its the first step to change.
One must bare in mind that for starters the people doing the whining might not have any real power to change what has bothered or offended them.
Now, I want to be clear about this 'offense' thing: people do not choose to take offense to things, they simply do. The reason why something is offensive is that it is wrong (or at least it is perceived as wrong by the offended subject). In accordance to basic morality, in whatever your moral or ethical codes are (or even etiquette sometimes) things should not be wrong. Things that are wrong are to be changed. This is why the "You do not have the right to be offended" bandwagon is bullshit. Step one to any social change is for enough people to take offense to something.
Digression over with, this idea about power. You see, if the whiner had any real power to effect change they would effect change (duh). They would not need to vent their point or sob story on the Internet at all. They would start the process of enacting change to right a wrong. If they can't they will whine about it.
A side effect of whining (like on the Internet) funny enough is that someone might hear you. That person who heard you might in fact be in a position to right the wrong, and they agree that the wrong in question is genuinely wrong. If not said person might instead join in on the whining, thus making it louder and in turn increasing the probability of someone hearing it agreeing with it and having the power to right it.
So, in short, whining gets shit done. Now, go on and whine! It is step two of any social change! After all, the elephant in the room has to be identified before it can be eventually thrown out.
Except... that is how shit changes, or at least its the first step to change.
One must bare in mind that for starters the people doing the whining might not have any real power to change what has bothered or offended them.
Now, I want to be clear about this 'offense' thing: people do not choose to take offense to things, they simply do. The reason why something is offensive is that it is wrong (or at least it is perceived as wrong by the offended subject). In accordance to basic morality, in whatever your moral or ethical codes are (or even etiquette sometimes) things should not be wrong. Things that are wrong are to be changed. This is why the "You do not have the right to be offended" bandwagon is bullshit. Step one to any social change is for enough people to take offense to something.
Digression over with, this idea about power. You see, if the whiner had any real power to effect change they would effect change (duh). They would not need to vent their point or sob story on the Internet at all. They would start the process of enacting change to right a wrong. If they can't they will whine about it.
A side effect of whining (like on the Internet) funny enough is that someone might hear you. That person who heard you might in fact be in a position to right the wrong, and they agree that the wrong in question is genuinely wrong. If not said person might instead join in on the whining, thus making it louder and in turn increasing the probability of someone hearing it agreeing with it and having the power to right it.
So, in short, whining gets shit done. Now, go on and whine! It is step two of any social change! After all, the elephant in the room has to be identified before it can be eventually thrown out.
