An owl's eye view of forests and trees
Consent. We all know what it means, right? Such a simple concept. Seems like only common courtesy, really. Yet it seems to confuse so many. Especially in men’s encounters with women.
Harvey Weinstein. Charlie Rose. Roy Moore. Donald Trump.
Right now, their deeds spill from the lips of reporters. Their names splash across our webpages. Because of certain behavior hinging on consent. Actually, the behavior hinges on many factors. But consent is one of the big ones.
Trump’s “Pocahontas” bit while honoring Navajo code talkers wasn’t the end of the world. But it still signals a big problem. Let me tell you why.
Sometimes I feel like I spend a lot of time yelling, “Look behind the curtain.” But a republic needs informed citizens, fully aware of what levers the wizard is frantically pulling while hoping we distractedly keep our eyes on the big floating head of Oz.
Let’s face it. Manipulation is a big part of what politicians do. Let’s take a look at two of the ways they do it: reframing and figleaves.
Modesty covering comes up in the darnedest of places. Even political speeches. Who would have thought it? It certainly took me a while to notice.
It is all part of the mechanics of political manipulation. Let’s face it. Manipulation is a big part of what politicians do. Being aware of the mechanics gives you better tools to assess what a politician is really saying. Maybe you will still buy what is being sold, but at least it will be with eyes wide open. (It’s sort of like dealing with used car salespeople. And I bet you’ve heard that one before.)
With that in mind, I thought I would introduce you to reframing and figleaves, along with a micro-analysis of their application. No. You did not just make a wrong turn into an art blog. And you will not need a magnifying glass and tweezers. You’ll see.
© 2023 Strigiforms
Theme by Anders Noren — Up ↑
