[HN Gopher] Knitters got knotted in a purity spiral (2020)
___________________________________________________________________
Knitters got knotted in a purity spiral (2020)
Author : Tomte
Score : 155 points
Date : 2022-05-09 15:18 UTC (7 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (unherd.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (unherd.com)
| solarmist wrote:
| This is a fantastic article on why we're facing so many social
| issues lately. Very insightful.
| bally0241 wrote:
| [deleted]
| bally0241 wrote:
| bambataa wrote:
| I have a theory that many of these ludicrous spirals are caused
| by self-proclaimed "allies" taking on the mantle of others'
| oppression and calling out behaviour that is actually fine.
|
| The original blog post behind this case (where the woman wrote
| about how foreign India seemed but how excited she was to visit)
| is a perfect example.
|
| The people calling out her "colonialist" references to Mars claim
| to be speaking on behalf of their friends. Then you have actual
| Indian people coming along later, wondering what the fuss was
| about and welcoming the author to India.
|
| My theory probably doesn't stand up to any scrutiny but it useful
| to ask "is anywhere here actually saying that they're personally
| offended?".
| jrm4 wrote:
| Black person here, and yes, this is a pretty good way to look
| at it. I think perhaps you can see two extremes, the
| theoretical annoyed white person who just wants things to not
| be complicated at all, and the going too far naive liberal who
| wants to call out everything.
|
| And the answer is always "It's never an easy answer. You have
| to do your homework. And it might change, and it might get
| uncomfortable. Too bad."
| RangerScience wrote:
| I notice a big difference between how social workers and social
| "warriors" talk.
|
| So far, universally, the people "on the ground", doing the
| work, are very nice to talk to. Informative, understanding,
| firm, kind.
| dmurray wrote:
| Social workers help people based on their need. Social
| warriors help people based on their identity. It's not
| surprising the two work in different ways.
| swearwolf wrote:
| There's a lot of discourse going around these days about white
| people. Not much of it is positive. It's understandable; just
| about every person of color has at least one story in which a
| white person made them feel terrible because of their race,
| whether intentionally or not. There's a lot of pent up anger,
| and it's socially acceptable to vent that anger now, so people
| do. As a result, there are a lot of well meaning white people
| who are receiving the message that they, and people who look
| like them, are making the lives of people of color hard. Some
| people react to that by getting angry, others react by looking
| for opportunities to prove they aren't that kind of white
| person. When they see an interaction like this one, they feel
| compelled to act, and they do. Sometimes way out of proportion
| to the inciting incident. Other well meaning and anxious people
| react positively to the callout, which reinforces the
| perception that this is the right thing to do. The person who
| committed the offense often tries to clarify their position,
| which presents more opportunities to call them out. In
| situations like this, even apologies are often criticized. Each
| time this process unfolds, the line of acceptable behavior
| creeps ever backwards, and increasingly benign actions and
| statements end up on the other side of it.
| quadrifoliate wrote:
| > The people calling out her "colonialist" references to Mars
| claim to be speaking on behalf of their friends. Then you have
| actual Indian people coming along later, wondering what the
| fuss was about and welcoming the author to India.
|
| Eh. Actual Indian person here. I think it's pretty stupid to
| comparing a flight to India to "going to Mars". You have Pizza
| Hut, Subway, and KFC in India, for crying out loud.
|
| In normal times, the person saying things like this would have
| been chided by a few of their friends. Now they are viciously
| attacked by the whole of the Internet - which is the real
| problem.
| motohagiography wrote:
| After reading the comments in the previous thread, I thought
| about what has changed in the two years since. My impression is
| that kind of escalating purity ratchet peaked in the fall and
| early part of this year, or at least it hit a ratchet point where
| the next lift is going to be exponentially harder than the
| previous ones because there is real popular reaction and revolt
| against it.
|
| Personally I have become much less agreeable, and as a result,
| people in my own networks who might have participated in the
| ratcheting don't do it when I am around, because the purity
| ratcheting was essentially a way to abuse and exploit peoples
| agreeableness. Given it was such a tiny minority to begin with,
| if only a small fraction of the majority become disagreeable, it
| can halt the spiral of hysteria it requires.
|
| What I/many can articulate more simply now that we didn't have
| the words for then is that this is a very old redemption hustle,
| and they're offering a kind of redemption I don't need. Just
| because someone is uncharitable doesn't mean I have to mollify
| them, and demanding a denial or denunciation from me is just
| their way of making a conversation about themselves. It's a
| disease of politeness, and the reason we got here is because we
| forgot sometimes in this world it is appropriate and necessary to
| say, please, _fuck off_ , because we are being taken advantage of
| by people betting very heavily that we won't.
| Uhhrrr wrote:
| This is really nicely put: "purity ratchet", "redemption
| hustle", "disease of politeness".
| hn_throwaway_99 wrote:
| Very much agree. I can think of a number of very specific
| examples in the past year where a lot of middle-of-the-road
| folks just said "Enough is enough - this is bullshit." In
| particular, I think that people are taking a stand against
| being "cancelled" when they are engaging in _good-faith_
| discussion or disagreement, and they are fed up with people
| taking anything that doesn 't 100% comport to their world view
| out of context and _themselves_ using it to make the worst kind
| of bad faith arguments.
| 0des wrote:
| It reminds me a lot in school of a bully who had oppressed
| almost the entire class. He started with the most proximal
| targets, then moved on to others where toward the end of his
| reign he encountered a kid who I can only assume was non-
| perceptive to the situation at hand who in response to be
| harassed at the lunch table for his fruit cup said "no, and
| please go away, I'm eating" and just like that, this bully whom
| had never encountered resistance was speechless. This kid's
| oblivious nature to the social situation broke the bully's
| brain in a form of pattern-interrupt.
|
| The bully wasn't reformed after that, he remained a bully until
| we parted ways years later, however the group was wiser for it,
| and that type of behavior had a very short half life as a
| result. As I get older, this phenomenon is emblematic or
| representative of society. Sometimes culture dictates that
| there are certain things we just won't accept anymore, like
| spousal assault, smoking in the public indoors, and poor
| legislation. Resistance is cumulative.
| MichaelZuo wrote:
| Plus non-linear, with activation energies, sometimes piece
| wise continuous, etc...
| duxup wrote:
| I've wondered the same. I feel like I've seen a subtle but very
| significant change in people's approach.
|
| In the past on some corners of the internet I'd get "down
| voted" (whatever system the locals use, not just reddit) for
| anything that smelled of X, Y, or Z.
|
| That's still the case at times BUT I've seen a lot more folks
| express distaste for that kind of crusade and gotten a lot more
| support from people when inevitably I end up sayng "No that's
| not what i'm saying, I'm tired of having to say that ... we can
| say X and not be Y".
|
| Meanwhile the most egregious examples of the kind of calling
| folks out for their perceived impurity such as "you know you
| don't have to defend X" type comments seem to get a great deal
| less support now, if not outright ridicule.
| 0des wrote:
| Like people who can oppose illegal immigration but not also
| hate those who are seeking to immigrate.
| samhw wrote:
| Yeah, I think I'm the same. For years I kinda awkwardly put
| up with it, semi-understanding the dynamic (revolutional
| paedophagy?), but I've got bored of it over the last couple
| of years. I've seen the same in people I know, and even just
| people I've seen interacting online. Your characterisation of
| "a subtle but very significant change" is apposite, imo.
|
| People are starting - albeit unevenly and at different stages
| and with considerable pushback - to realise that they don't
| owe an account of their morality to any old person on the
| internet, that they can be non-racist and not have to agree
| with (and genuflect to) every other self-styled non-racist
| trying to sell some wacky opinion to them, etc.
|
| And - what makes me most happy of all - they are doing it, at
| least many of them, without falling prey to the "I disagree
| with someone from Not Racist FC so I guess all that's left to
| me is to sign up to Racist FC" non sequitur.
| hitekker wrote:
| The point about the splintering of atheism is well covered in:
| https://slatestarcodex.com/2019/10/30/new-atheism-the-godles...
|
| > Most movement atheists weren't in it for the religion. They
| were in it for the hamartiology. Once they got the message that
| the culture-at-large had settled on a different, better
| hamartiology, there was no psychological impediment to switching
| over. We woke up one morning and the atheist bloggers had all
| quietly became social justice bloggers. Nothing else had changed
| because nothing else had to; the underlying itch being scratched
| was the same. They just had to CTRL+F and replace a couple of
| keywords.
| a_t48 wrote:
| Isn't the real problem the whole dogpiling issue and not the
| actual viewpoints themselves? At the root of the spiral, the
| suggestion wasn't so bad ("Hey, that's a bit insensitive, you
| should consider your language"), but it didn't need to be
| repeated to her hundreds of times by the all of twitter, et al.
| Most people with any viewpoint are going to react negatively to
| hundreds or thousands of people telling them they are in the
| wrong. Unfortunately while it's reasonable for each individual
| feeling this way to comment, the effect is much larger than I
| would bet any of the commenters intended. It would be interesting
| to track down some of the first commenters and ask them how many
| people telling the woman she was in the wrong there should be -
| maybe I'm wrong and they believe it should be "as many as
| possible". Regardless, sometimes the internet is way too
| connected.
| jrm4 wrote:
| Yup. _Especially_ when (as it happens in these spaces) the loud
| people aren 't the actual subjects of discussion, so you get
| this weird lack of skin-in-the-game.
|
| I cannot emphasize enough the harm that can come from this and
| how easily it is exploited.
| escapedmoose wrote:
| Absolutely. In a more private setting, the reminder could be
| received with much more grace.
| fatbird wrote:
| I frequently see articles like this discussing these community
| explosions as self-evidently harmful patterns of behaviour. I've
| never seen an article like this as a discussion of a certain
| amount of necessary pain, confusion, and difficulty while things
| get worked out. It seems obvious to me that untangling systemic
| problems and their legacies will always involve some clashing.
| Sooner started, sooner done.
| [deleted]
| Ambolia wrote:
| If you run an anti-harassment office and you get rid of
| harassment, you are out of a job and out of power. If you keep
| finding more and more harassment, you are set for life. Plus if
| you try to tone it down there's 50 juniors behind you with
| dubious degrees that will gladly denounce you for being too old
| fashioned and take your juicy position for themselves.
|
| I don't think getting more middle-managers will ever get this
| issues any better because it's in their interests to increase
| their power as much as possible, not solve anything.
| robertlagrant wrote:
| They look a lot as though they're profiting from re-entangling
| as much as possible. This isn't automatically equivalent to
| reconciliation or equality, and it often looks like the
| complete opposite.
| fatbird wrote:
| Agreed, but these are communities of interest, without
| governance of any kind. There's no one to police bad
| behaviour, to refocus on constructive efforts, to maintain an
| agenda or to call timeouts when it gets overheated.
|
| Given that, what's the alternative to a messy communal brawl
| that hopefully doesn't destroy the community? The author of
| the essay speaks about the ratchet dynamics as if it's
| obviously to be avoided; an alternative read is that his take
| is descriptive of what's actually the way that these things
| get worked out, sometimes for the better, sometimes not.
| jimbokun wrote:
| What are examples of things like this working out for the
| better?
| fatbird wrote:
| The various "racefail" episodes over the last decade in
| science fiction, for one. They were definitely as
| acrimonious and sprawling as the knitting blowup, but
| after several of them, they've settled down, no one's
| been cancelled, and the community seems healthier for it.
|
| As the article's author notes, the knitting community has
| mostly healed as well. My wife is a knitter so I've
| followed it more closely than others. Some prominent
| voices aren't so much anymore; others are more prominent.
| As the author notes, Nathan Taylor came back and made
| more money than before, covering his losses and then
| some.
|
| Contrast that to the "new athiest" collapse that led to
| two distinct communities. Whether that's for better or
| worse probably depends on perspective. It only seems bad
| if you feel a need for there to be a monolithic
| community. I think the split (which I also witnessed at
| the time) really did reveal a deep schism in the
| community, so I'm not sure it isn't better to be two
| factions divided.
| rendall wrote:
| No. It's nothing of the kind.
|
| At best, it's racists projecting their discomfort onto other
| people, making others responsible for their own guilt. But more
| likely, it's sadistic bullies. A sadistic bully cannot say
| "Destroying a life gets me excited!" but they _can_ say "I
| fight for social justice!"
| TimTheTinker wrote:
| > a bidding war for morality turned into a proxy war for power.
|
| What a packed and insightful statement. I'll be turning that over
| in my mind for some time.
| random-human wrote:
| Not only is it insightful, but one that can be actively watched
| play out in the US with the 50-ish years morality war turning
| to a war for state voting control and supreme court power to
| overturn Roe. Watch as states try to out do each other within
| their purity spiral. What was once thought to be too extreme
| (no exceptions clauses, even to save the life of the living
| breathing human in front of them or criminal charges if you
| save the persons life anyway) is now a required hard line to
| prove their "moral purity".
| [deleted]
| Blackthorn wrote:
| That's...a pretty strange way of putting what happened to the new
| atheism movement. To the extent that I'm not sure how much I can
| trust their version of events in the knitting world.
| mkr-hn wrote:
| edit: nah
| robertlagrant wrote:
| He didn't tie them together to promote a radio show. That story
| is the show.
| mdoms wrote:
| What? Did you read the article? He doesn't claim this is a new
| phenomenon. To the contrary he uses examples from Salem 1962,
| Robespierre in 1794 and Maoism in the 1960's. He then concludes
| this it's probably a hard-wired human instinct to behave this
| way.
| kleiba wrote:
| Ahhh... I just read the first paragraph. Then I took a deep
| breath. Exhaled. With a little smile on my face.... "Thank God, I
| don't live in North America."
| blibble wrote:
| the floyd tragedy triggered a lot of anti-police protests in
| western Europe, where police brutality is thankfully rare
| duxup wrote:
| Oh I'd be careful.
|
| It's a humanity thing ... not a region.
|
| History is full of "oh those people over there do that thing,
| how silly" and then it happens in their own backyard. We're all
| human.
| skrbjc wrote:
| From the article: "As the summer dragged on, the Nordic wool
| bible Laine magazine was forced to apologise for having too
| many white faces on their pricey knitting retreat. The auto-
| cannibalisation doomsday clock had gone so far that now even
| the instigators were having their privilege severely checked.
| Ysolda Teague, a Scot who had been one of the leading social
| justice knitters, published a lengthy apology on Instagram"
|
| I don't know where you live, but clearly what the article was
| discussing went beyond North America.
| indy wrote:
| Unfortunately, North American culture has a habit of spreading
| throughout the world.
| 0des wrote:
| Why unfortunately? If it spread, that meant people liked and
| sought to emulate it.
| Tade0 wrote:
| That's a very optimistic take.
|
| American culture really caught on only during world war II,
| when people around the world experienced first hand the
| sheer wealth of American soliders.
|
| It works in the context of being a wealthy superpower with
| access to almost limitless energy sources(mainly oil), but
| attempts at emulating it outside of this context look
| silly.
|
| Case in point: new housing in my corner of the world is in
| large part sprawl. People flock to it, because they crave
| the same amazing amount of living space Americans usually
| enjoy.
|
| Problem is, as a percentage of wages, fuel is easily at
| least four times as expensive around here. Also cities
| aren't nearly as car-oriented as in the US.
| car_analogy wrote:
| Or because it was heavily marketed by Hollywood and
| American entertainment. Which I am sure you will claim are
| only popular because they're _just that much better_ than
| local entertainment, and that this has nothing to do with
| how local entertainment has only locals to fund it, while
| American media is effectively globally funded.
| hef19898 wrote:
| Fourtunately, that seems to be less and less the case. Ehich
| just makes those issues, e.g. morality in Instagram knitting,
| all the more obvious.
| burnished wrote:
| You might read more of it. It appears to be discussing a human
| phenomena, not a regional one.
| glorygut123 wrote:
| Unfortunately you'll find these issues across Oceania and
| Europe as well. Germany just appointed their first anti-racism
| commissioner in the last election.
| 0des wrote:
| Germany of today is a byproduct of post-war Germany.
| jasonlotito wrote:
| I can assure you this is 1) not limited to knitters and 2) not
| limited to North Americans.
| 0des wrote:
| Montreal Quebec is looking _tres nerveux_ right now
| Ambolia wrote:
| I think it's probably more about job programs and power grabs
| than about culture. This type of cultural battles let some type
| of people with some types of university degrees to insert
| themselves as middle-managers in spaces that before were managed
| in more organic manners. And their ultimate goal is to maximize
| their power, not to keep any healthy environment in those spaces.
| gotaquestion wrote:
| The entire article is based on online group dynamics over people
| trying to figure out how to come to grips with historically
| ignored problems.
|
| I fail to feel outraged by this process. Is "White Fragility"
| without criticism? Probably not, I think it is a fantastic book,
| but it scares the bejeebers out of some people and we get
| instagram drama and articles like this which I interpret as
| another attempt at purity (trying to outsmart "wokeness").
|
| It is going to take a while for society* to come to grips with
| this new shift, because we're clearly not going back, but it
| definitely is rough around the edges, IMHO, because we haven't
| found the right vocabulary and framing. Unfortunately it is going
| to require people to sit with feeling uneasy, and that is
| something most people cannot tolerate.
| teakettle42 wrote:
| You fail to feel outraged by terrible behavior because it's
| ostensibly in service of your ideological aims.
|
| That says a lot about your ideology's consistency when it comes
| to how we should behave individually, and treat others, now, in
| our present.
| Adraghast wrote:
| White Fragility is an awful book. Even as baby's first guide to
| thinking about how you treat POC, it's a net negative and that
| role would be better filled by something like Ibram Kendi's
| books. Still fluffy and lightweight, but at least not as
| harmfully neurotic.
|
| That being said, you've hit on the actual shortcoming of "woke
| culture" these handwringing articles miss. It's admirable, not
| outrageous, that white people becoming conscious of racism feel
| compelled to do whatever they can about it. But most people (in
| the US at least) are so depoliticized that their ability to
| effect systemic change is virtually nil. The project of
| rebuilding the necessary political capacity is hard, boring
| work and we probably won't live long enough to see its fruits.
| If you want gratification, making some rando on the internet
| bend the knee is much easier.
|
| One definitely gets the impression from critics like the author
| that they're less interested in seeing that energy redirected
| than in it dissipating entirely.
| splitstud wrote:
| Controlling thought by controlling speech is nothing new, and
| it IS a historically ignored problem
| overthemoon wrote:
| I hear what you're saying, and I think it's true that some
| people react with hostility when confronted with some of this
| stuff, but separate from the actual values, this article
| describes a destructive and unproductive social dynamic. I
| think the most interesting bit is that the author describes
| similar cannibalistic dynamics happening in neo-nazi
| subcultures. Whether the values here are worthy is beside the
| point.
|
| Questioning the moral standing of those who would criticize the
| dynamic itself isn't useful or worthwhile. It conflates
| interpersonal confrontation (useful, good, corrective, it's how
| we build each other up) with a zillion passersby hurling
| invective at a guy who, in this case, found it so troubling to
| have a mass of people condemn him on a moral spectrum that is
| very dear to him that he ended up suicidal.
| lliamander wrote:
| > The entire article is based on online group dynamics over
| people trying to figure out how to come to grips with
| historically ignored problems.
|
| You have to ignore quite a lot of history to come to the
| conclusion that these problems were historically ignored.
|
| > I fail to feel outraged by this process.
|
| Maybe if you end up on the receiving end you'll feel
| differently?
|
| > Is "White Fragility" without criticism? Probably not, I think
| it is a fantastic book, but it scares the bejeebers out of some
| people and we get instagram drama and articles like this which
| I interpret as another attempt at purity (trying to outsmart
| "wokeness").
|
| Robin D'Angelo has made some deranged, outlandish assertions,
| and instead of defending them she simply follows up with more
| outlandish assertions. I had the pleasure of having a non-white
| person explain things about "white people" that she'd learned
| from that book that were patently false.
| itronitron wrote:
| >> people trying to figure out how to come to grips with
| historically ignored problems
|
| I very much agree that many people have limited knowledge of
| the history of the last six hundred years, but I believe that
| sharing the cold hard facts from history (that aren't taught in
| schools) has a better chance at opening up a person's viewpoint
| rather than criticizing their behavior.
| jrm4 wrote:
| As a black person, I'll say this new crop of books like White
| Fragility on one hand aren't great, and in the long run some
| will probably seen as outright bad, but I'm still glad they
| exist?
|
| It's kind of an Overton Window thing for me. I'm just very used
| to the 90's, where you couldn't even come close to saying
| anything like this out loud in, e.g. an academic setting
| because you know what you would set off.
|
| I'm glad it's out there to at least be reckoned with as a
| theory.
|
| (Relatedly, this is why I have zero respect for the suggestion
| that a new form of "censorship" is taking place when people
| talk about e.g. "cancel culture" and whatnot. This has _always_
| been around, the only thing that 's new is that it can now come
| from e.g. both the left and the right)
| jimbokun wrote:
| > Unfortunately it is going to require people to sit with
| feeling uneasy
|
| People throw around this phrase, but it always strikes me as
| nonsensical.
|
| There's a lot of stupid opinions that can make people feel
| uneasy, so unease is not some magic barometer of truth.
|
| People are going to feel really uneasy if they are listening to
| you defend your appreciation of child pornography, but that
| doesn't mean you have struck upon some deep uncomfortable
| truth.
| gotaquestion wrote:
| teakettle42 wrote:
| [edit] Discarding the comment, because without the (now-
| flagged) context of the parent, it was unclear and open to
| misinterpretation.
| deadbeeves wrote:
| Stating that it's a comparison (which it's not) or that
| it's frequent does not refute the counter-example. GP's
| contention is "some things people say make others
| uncomfortable, but not because they're true, thus the fact
| that a statement makes people uncomfortable tells you
| nothing about its truth value", and has provided an example
| of such a thing.
| unwind wrote:
| Uh that sounded quite interesting, but it seems to bury the lede
| from the title and go off on side-tracks right away. Didn't
| finish it because I got ultra-distracted by the inline
| recommendations of ... the same article.
|
| It lists:
|
| - BY THE SAME AUTHOR "How knitters got knotted in a purity
| spiral" BY GAVIN HAYNES
|
| - SUGGESTED READING "How knitters got knotted in a purity spiral"
| BY GARETH ROBERTS
|
| - SUGGESTED READING "How knitters got knotted in a purity spiral"
| BY DOUGLAS MURRAY
|
| - SUGGESTED READING "How knitters got knotted in a purity spiral"
| BY ANTONIA SENIOR
|
| - SUGGESTED READING "How knitters got knotted in a purity spiral"
| BY TITANIA MCGRATH
|
| - SUGGESTED READING "How knitters got knotted in a purity spiral"
| BY GILES FRASER
|
| I can't even begin to guess how stuff like that happens, must be
| some epic bug in their CMS, or some weird A/B attempt to ... fool
| people into reading the same article many times? And where does
| it get the author names, one wonders. AI-backed publishing system
| gone crayzay?
| bio_end_io_t wrote:
| For what it's worth, clicking on any of those links brings you
| back to the one by Gavin Haynes.
| Traster wrote:
| This is probably just a for loop where they've called for(it in
| suggestions) print(title) rather than for(it in suggestions)
| print(it.title).
| Taywee wrote:
| Previous discussion:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22240041
| twofornone wrote:
| bglazer wrote:
| You're just arguing that dominant groups should never face
| criticism or contend with outside perspectives?
|
| Also, if an outside group wants to participate in an activity
| then they should do it separately?
| at_a_remove wrote:
| I have been watching, with a mixture of sadness and
| schadenfreude, an online community disintegrate in just this
| manner, since right around the New Aetheism split. Boiling the
| frog is the name of the game.
|
| It plays out so predictably, too. First, they -- we -- came for
| the fundamentalist conservatives, but I was not ... Then it was
| the fiscal conservatives, then the moderates, the liberal guys
| who didn't manage to seem vaguely embarrassed to be heterosexual,
| and so on. They all get together and "discuss" things until
| someone (or more than just one) leaves the site. Throw in a
| unhealthy dose of "dogwhistle" paranoia and "everyone who
| disagrees with me is a goosestepping fascist buying Nazi
| memorabilia on the darkweb" disdain and, well, it's amazing to
| watch.
| dang wrote:
| Discussed at the time:
|
| _How knitters got knotted in a purity spiral_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22240041 - Feb 2020 (235
| comments)
| themaninthedark wrote:
| I can't recall when but I read an article(or post) about how the
| focus of the knitting community was shifting to social justice,
| much to the dismay of some of the participants as all they cared
| about was knitting.
|
| Some of the comments at the time seemed to think the only way to
| save the community would be to reject the values being force onto
| the community, it looks like that did not happen.
|
| I don't think that rejection is necessity for a community to
| survive but there needs to be a way that they can recenter. If
| the community is supposed to be about knitting, than discussions
| about race, sex, etc should not occur.
|
| Perhaps is is enough to identify as a knitter, as opposed to a
| bisexual knitter from SE Asia. All the other stuff is noise in
| the SNR.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-05-09 23:01 UTC)