"Happy holidays" is bullshit Christian normativity.

[Psyche]

Member of the majority: You shouldn't feel that way. Your feelings are illegitimate.

They are illegitimate. I don't care if you can construe it as an action of the majority. If you are wrong, you are wrong.

If you want anyone with sense to take your objections seriously, you have to convincingly explain why your being offended is

justified

. Simply being offended or feeling passionate about it is not enough.

I have no idea how your positions feels, because I am not ever subjected to it, but I still feel comfortable telling you to get over it. I don't mean to be offensive!

Please, don't make assumptions about the sort of experiences people you do not know have. It's a really dickish thing to do.

[Psyche]

If you choose to feel offended

Oh.

People may not choose to feel offended, but they

can

be mistaken.

[Tamuz]

You can certainly conclude that their reason to be offended isn't valid, but that is your conclusion and it is, of course, informed by your perspective.

But to assert that someone chooses to be offended is the same as asserting that people are angry; if my response to every female in this thread was "WELL I CAN SEE IT'S YOUR TIME OF THE MONTH", it would be the same thing. It is a rhetorical tactic to discredit a victim.

[Tamuz]

If you are wrong, you are wrong.

Oh.

[Psyche]

You can certainly conclude that their reason to be offended isn't valid, but that is your conclusion and it is, of course, informed by your perspective.

Great.

But to assert that someone chooses to be offended is the same as asserting that people are angry; if my response to every female in this thread was "WELL I CAN SEE IT'S YOUR TIME OF THE MONTH", it would be the same thing. It is a rhetorical tactic to discredit a victim.

No, it's a rhetorical tactic to discredit whomever you want. Your example's power comes not from the fact that anger is identified, but from the implication that the anger's source is not legitimate.

Whether the source is legit is in fact the point that tsq is failing to convincingly argue.

[Psyche]

If you are wrong, you are wrong.

Oh.

Identifying rhetorical devices is surely easier to do than actually addressing an argument, but it's not as effective at actually changing minds.

[Tamuz]

Can you quote me your argument against Shea's points, Psyche?

Edit: as far as I can tell your points here are.. well actually, this puts it nicely;



minus the lizard. Unless you're Hunter S. Thompson reborn.

[Psyche]

When you say happy holidays, what you are actually saying is "I think everyone should be celebrating Christmas right now, and I will make you celebrate it with me with a thinly veiled code word for Christmas."

the problem with shea's post is the fact that this is innaccurate

[Psyche]

Tamuz, drawing a poor and unflattering analogy is also different from and less effective than actually addressing an argument.

[Tamuz]

If you are wrong, you are wrong.

Oh.

Identifying rhetorical devices is surely easier to do than actually addressing an argument, but it's not as effective at actually changing minds.

Your argument here is "you're wrong cause you're wrong". I'm not sure what more to do with that than express that it is a tautological statement.

pedit. OK, so your argument is Shea is wrong because he is wrong. Come on dude, be intellectually honest.

[Tamuz]

Tamuz, drawing a poor and unflattering analogy is also different from and less effective than actually addressing an argument.

Quote your arguments. All I've read from you is:
1. "Shea is wrong because he's wrong."
2. "Shea doesn't know my life and my struggles, how dare he say something!"

[Psyche]

If you are wrong, you are wrong.

Oh.

Identifying rhetorical devices is surely easier to do than actually addressing an argument, but it's not as effective at actually changing minds.

Your argument here is "you're wrong cause you're wrong". I'm not sure what more to do with that than express that it is a tautological statement.

pedit. OK, so your argument is Shea is wrong because he is wrong. Come on dude, be intellectually honest.

I really thought a linguist wouldn't be so inclined to equivocation.

[Psyche]

Tamuz, drawing a poor and unflattering analogy is also different from and less effective than actually addressing an argument.

Quote your arguments. All I've read from you is:
1. "Shea is wrong because he's wrong."
2. "Shea doesn't know my life and my struggles, how dare he say something!"

That means you aren't reading.

[Tamuz]

Quote.

Also, ad hom!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
or is that scotsmanlike?

[Psyche]

My argument is dispersed over 10 posts.

[Tamuz]

the problem with shea's post is the fact that this is innaccurate

If you are wrong, you are wrong.

I mean I honestly don't see what isn't tautological about these statements. There is no explanation of how 'you' is wrong, just that you is and the reinforcement that 'you' is wrong. On the first one, again, no explanation, just the assertion of truth the word 'fact' makes and the continued assertion of falsehood that inaccurate makes. Neither statement explains anything other than a reflexive truth.

pedit. Psyche, please be intellectually honest.

[Ranmaru]

I'm catholic, rarely go to church, don't care, so don't really think about much religion. I'm still "whoa... I dunno bro" about it, but when it comes to this, I just say 'happy holidays' back when it's said to me without thinking about it. I go "Oh yeah it applies to everything so whatever" but didn't think of the timing of it.

Maybe we could just stop wishing happy holidays unless we know the person and truely want to wish them 'happy holidays', instead of trying to guess what holiday a person is celebrating or just saying 'happy holidays' around a time that is obviously just one or two holidays. (Even if it's a holiday I don't care about, or don't agree with, I'd still only wish you happy holidays so you can enjoy it, that's all that frickin matters)

[Psyche]

Let's make it thorough.

I am religiously atheist and culturally jewish. I don't believe in god above, and I certainly don't believe in your little baby jesus. Furthermore, as someone who vividly remembers getting the crap kicked out of him in middle school for being the only jewish kid in the class, I can personally tell anyone who wants to say "it's just being nice! there's nothing wrong with it! it's just PC bullshit." that otherization and the attempted normalization of one religious ideology has real world consequences for real people. It's not just you being nice, it's you actively participating in a system of control that is hurtful and offensive.

red herring
see my iso

When you say happy holidays, what you are actually saying is "I think everyone should be celebrating Christmas right now, and I will make you celebrate it with me with a thinly veiled code word for Christmas."

not an accurate account of the literal meaning, utterance meaning, or impact of the phrase "Happy Holidays". Why? Because the literal meaning of happy holidays is not "celebrate christmas". When I and others say it, I do not mean, "Celebrate Christmas" or, more importantly, think that you should, When I and others say it, I do not cause you to celebrate christmas with me.

This is true for two reasons. First, when you wish me happy holidays, you are only demonstrating your ignorance of the fact that the "Holiday" I am supposed to be celebrating ended roughly 2 weeks ago. If someone were to wish you happy holidays on January 9th you would look at them a little funny and wonder what they were talking about. I don't have to do that, because I know what you're actually talking about. You're talking about Christmas. Stop with the patronizing, faux-inclusive bullshit.

Ignorance about another culture != "I think everyone should be celebrating Christmas right now, and I will make you celebrate it with me with a thinly veiled code word for Christmas."

And, no. I'm talking about the many holidays I sincerely believe are happening around Christmas.

The other reason it is true is because Hanukkah is not an important holiday. Like, at all. It is minor as all hell. In terms of important holidays Hanukkah is about as important as boxing day is. To Americans. It just happens to be almost exclusively the only Jewish holiday that Christians know about. It's almost as if this is because they trot it out to act like their Christmas celebrations are somehow secular. They sing 6 Christmas carols and 1 Hanukkah song at the kids "Holiday concert" and they go home in their nice little subaru foresters marveling at how cosmopolitan they all are.

Ignorance about another culture != "I think everyone should be celebrating Christmas right now, and I will make you celebrate it with me with a thinly veiled code word for Christmas."

Because the instances of ignorance described here has nothing to do with the Christian normativity thesis as described by TSQ, they have no bearing on the question of whether "Happy Holidays" in fact advances this thesis.

Since these are the only reasons brought up for tsq's argument, but they do not actually support it, tsq's position is unjustified and his state of offension lacks legitimacy.

This post argues more effectively that Christians are ignorant about Hannukah than anything about Christian normativity.

[Psyche]

I mean I honestly don't see what isn't tautological about these statements. There is no explanation of how 'you' is wrong, just that you is and the reinforcement that 'you' is wrong. On the first one, again, no explanation, just the assertion of truth the word 'fact' makes and the continued assertion of falsehood that inaccurate makes. Neither statement explains anything other than a reflexive truth.

Somehow I don't think my argument consists of those two sentences you cherrypicked from the many others I've made ITT. Both, in fact, signified much more in context.

[Tamuz]

I wasn't picking those statements to show you have no point. I was pointing that out as self-encompassed tautological statements. You moaned on for 5 posts like they had value and refused to quote your point. When asked to quote, you still don't.

Basically Psyche you shot smoke, got called on it and then whined like a baby for a while. I'm kinda disappointed in you for pulling this after how you've treated other's arguments in racism/religion threads

[Tamuz]

not an accurate account of the literal meaning, utterance meaning, or impact of the phrase "Happy Holidays"

You're better than this. You know that the literal meaning of phrases is not the whole meaning of phrases. As to the "impact of the phrase"... Who are you to tell TSQ how it impacts him? Are you saying he's lying about his own feelings?

And overall, you miss out. Shea isn't saying that HH/MC DEMANDS you celebrate Christmas and such, the issue is that it is expected that EVERYONE knows and that society operates on a schedule that operates around this spectacle that we call Christmas.

[Ranmaru]

I think the problem with 'Happy Holidays' is that we have to guess what holiday the person is celebrating because it isn't specific, and if we guess wrong (especially if we don't know them all) we can come off as ignorant or have some hidden intent. Again, why not just 'not' wish a greeting unless:

1. You know the person
2. You truly wish to say "Happy whatever it is you are doing now" (especially if they told you they were going to celebrate it)

Otherwise it'll sound fake/robotic because it is over done. Like saying "I love you" over and over again until it's cheapened

.

[Brandi]

The only time I heard Happy Holidays so far is from the cashiers at the grocery store. They always say it every single time and have been saying it since before Thanksgiving. Are they required to say it or something? I've never worked as a store clerk so I wouldn't know what is mandatory or not.

[Ranmaru]

Probably. The last time I heard "Happy Holidays" was from a clerk from the college book store, just last week.

[Tamuz]

When I worked retail I was required to ask you about wearing some sexy ass fragrances. P sure corporate would have a cow if you said anything 'religious'.