The Escapist

aldreaiskillionfalan:

jumpingjacktrash:
jumpingjacktrash:
when people say “don’t fight hate with hate” we don’t mean don’t fight, we mean fight hate with other things.
btw there have been some reblogs wondering “other things like what?” so here are some things besides hate that you can fight hate with
humor
lawyers
love
art
truth
boycotts
votes
science
parody
the cold shoulder
sassy selfies
education
deadpan requests for clarification
surreally off topic reaction gifs
“ok”
This is a good list of strategies, and people should definitely feel free to pursue any of them that work and that they’re capable of doing with the resources they have, but jsyk people in a position or power will often interpret a lot of these as hate, or fire, anyway. Boycotts and marches and political attacks? Too militant. Deadpan responses or the cold shoulder? Rude and unhelpful. Giving a full explanation of what’s fucked up about the hate? Also rude, apparently–I’ve literally seen people on this site write full multi-paragraph explanations of what an OP did wrong with tons of added info, and get told that there’s no need to bite OP’s head off, and they should just educate them instead.
When people say “don’t fight hate with hate” it’s not, generally speaking, about what the marginalized person is doing. It’s about the fact that many people in positions of power and privilege find any disagreement with their worldview threatening and anything that forces them to confront the reality of systems of oppression unnecessarily shaming or guilt-tripping or aggressive, especially when the criticism is coming froma member of a group that’s already been stereotyped as overly loud, angry, and aggressive (black women, for example).
None of these “alterate strategies” are bad, but they’re also not all that alternate. If someone really wants to not listen, they will find a way to tell you you’re fighting hate with hate, and all the sassy selfies in the world won’t make a dent in the harm they’re doing.