What I don’t understand is this. The person owns the bookshop and is complaining about what is on the shelves.
Aren’t they in charge of what they stock?
If they feel so fervently about this why are they stocking (and I assume selling) these books that offend them so much?
If you feel this strongly, empty your shop of all those works that offend you and only stock things that meet you approval and stop your bitching online about something you control…
I guess their response if you said to this to them would be that they actively are trying to do exactly as you suggest, hence the posts and with regard to the list of materials they seem to be sick of seeing, they’d probably say this is what they continue to be offered from publishers when they try to stock their shop making the task difficult.
I don’t think from the posts alone there’s necessarily a logical flaw or hypocrisy to what they’re saying, but certainty an inflated sense of their own idea of what public opinion is and a very distorted understanding of what literature outside of the narrow confines of what they deem acceptable is for and about.
I think they maybe get some sense of how fucked up the sentences their position requires them to write sound when they have to clarify what they mean by recasting the thing they reject as something else that sounds worse, hence “inclusion” becomes “anti-white exclusion” because even they perhaps realised that it’s hard to sound like the good guy preaching against hate and division when you find yourself saying you don’t want any books featuring inclusion.
What I don’t understand is this. The person owns the bookshop and is complaining about what is on the shelves.
Aren’t they in charge of what they stock?
If they feel so fervently about this why are they stocking (and I assume selling) these books that offend them so much?
If you feel this strongly, empty your shop of all those works that offend you and only stock things that meet you approval and stop your bitching online about something you control…
But, if they did that, how could they then show the world how much of a victim they are?
Also, I’m amusing myself by using they/them pronouns for this person because I am 100% certain they’d hate it.
Weaponised pronouns.
Because far-right reactionaries don’t read and they’d go broke overnight.
I guess their response if you said to this to them would be that they actively are trying to do exactly as you suggest, hence the posts and with regard to the list of materials they seem to be sick of seeing, they’d probably say this is what they continue to be offered from publishers when they try to stock their shop making the task difficult.
I don’t think from the posts alone there’s necessarily a logical flaw or hypocrisy to what they’re saying, but certainty an inflated sense of their own idea of what public opinion is and a very distorted understanding of what literature outside of the narrow confines of what they deem acceptable is for and about.
I think they maybe get some sense of how fucked up the sentences their position requires them to write sound when they have to clarify what they mean by recasting the thing they reject as something else that sounds worse, hence “inclusion” becomes “anti-white exclusion” because even they perhaps realised that it’s hard to sound like the good guy preaching against hate and division when you find yourself saying you don’t want any books featuring inclusion.
deleted by creator