has reached the end-of-life and is now read-only. Please see the EOL announcement for details

it's 2021 but apparently some people are still out of the loop so

do not use the term "fren"

here's a good place to start on why

it's a nazi/alt-right dogwhistle and i don't wanna see it. do not use it in any context. don't just stop using it around me but continue using it around others. just don't use it at all. if you hear someone else say it tell them to stop too. if they refuse to stop even after you have informed them then that should be raising some serious red flags

i am going to be implementing a block on sight no questions asked policy going forward

"mean angry non-fren SJWs telling me i can't use the word fren anymore because they hate fun but my best friend himmlerfan1488 says it's okay and i should say it more"

... basically don't be like that
hope this helps

@haskal Why do the Nazis have to keep ruining perfectly good words. Who let them have access to a dictionary.

@KamareDrache @haskal I'll have you know ethno-nationalism is the bedrock of diversity and is highly inclusive. Everyone can have an ethnostate, even the jews have an ethnostate now. Fighting against ethno-nationalism is imperialist, colonialist, and invasive of these distinct cultures.

@haskal thanks for letting me know! I picked it up from local antifa nerds, had no idea there was a Bad Internet Place associated.

@haskal thanks for providing info, I wasn't able to get a source on why this was suddenly considered a dogwhistle and initially thought it was some kind of fakeout or prank gone out of control

Fuck nazis either way

@haskal nazis ruined pepe, and now this too? :blobsad: feels bad man

@haskal oh shit, I didn't know about this. Thanks for posting! (Not that it's part of my vocabulary anyway but... ffs Nazis ruin absolutely everything. I'm not online enough to keep up with whatever new fad they're co-opting/creating for their own crappy means.)

Thanks again! Sorry for being a random.

@haskal did they originate the shortening, or are they one of many unrelated groups who picked it up?

nazis trying to make inoffensive words offensive so people look ridiculous calling them out and/or so blanket bans catch random innocent people is /exactly their tactic/ and I refuse to play their game by their rules

@lioness @haskal i agree there. it's probably a bad idea to abandon words or symbols claimed by fascists if they haven't been involved in massive harm done to minorities. i'd never try to argue for the reclaiming of the svastika or other nazi symbolism because that has been historically involved in much material harm (although "degenerate" is being reclaimed i guess)

but not saying "fren" because of one subreddit? not a good tactic. would indeed be playing by their rules.

@lioness @haskal i am honestly not trying to be controversial or edgy and am willing to hear any criticism on this and possibly change my mind if there are reasons to. but this mindset just seems so harmful to me right now that i have to voice my disagreement

@categorille @lioness @haskal see, I was thinking the same thing, but I would've said it with more profanity.
@categorille @lioness @haskal yes this is p much what i was trying to get across by trying to provide a framework for understanding and analysis of the context something is placed in
@categorille @haskal @lioness your example of swastika, and also some slurs, are good examples of instances where it is fair to assume the worst context - in that case it is also the most obvious context (unless you are looking at like, tibetan art or someone affected reclaiming) because of how widespread the phenomena were and how much they saturated culture

your reasoning makes sense to me at least :)
@categorille @lioness @haskal Only a biggot would be against ethno-states. Ethno-states foster diversity and true inclusion. It is imperialist and colonialist to want to do away with them. Even the jews have an ethno-state now. Let them and other groups have their culture untainted by Mcdonald's demand that you hate their ethnocentric nature so they can move in and ruin their culture too.
@categorille @haskal @lioness Whatever you do, don't think about it. That could be dangerous! Just call it bait and move on.
@Nudhul @haskal well the whole point of a dog whistle is that only dogs can hear them

@haskal we should stop letting them co-opt words, don’t give them the power they want. censorship is not good.


"The nature of modern communication systems is that anything can be said, any context is equivalent to any other context, so that things can be placed in many different contexts at the same time, like photography. But there's something profoundly compromising about that situation. Of course, it allows for a liberty of action and consciousness that people have never had before. But it means that you can't keep original or profound meanings intact because inevitably they're disappointed, adulterated, transformed, and transmuted. So, when you launch an idea for a fantasy or a theme or an image to the world, it has this tremendous career that you can't possibly control or limit. You want to share things with other people, but on the other hand you don't want to just feed the machine that needs millions of fantasies and objects and products and opinions to be fed into it every day in order to keep on going. And that's perhaps a reason one is tempted to be silent sometimes."

Susan Sontag, interview in Rolling Stone, 1979.

@rats just fyi i'm not reading this essay which is presumably to justify why you will continue using the term "fren" despite my warning

feel free. note last sentence of my original post

@haskal not everything is conflict

i've never said it and don't plan to

this quote was about things exist in many contexts, uncontrollably, especially in cybernetic communication - i thought it would be informative

your stance that everything should be assumed to always be in the worst context it's ever existed in feels equivalent to why you didn't read what i said (totally fine) but assumed the worst about it (why?)
@rats @haskal what does this even mean

i read the whole thing but i'm still not sure
@io @haskal it's sort of updating the idea of the benjamin essay 'art in the age of mechanical reproduction' to a proto-internet age: attempts to nail down or preserve the context of a specific work is futile because anything extant now is able to be easily placed in any possible context - eg, cutesy word can be placed in /pol/ radical political context

my hope was trying to convey that analysis of context is important for all communication and cant be assumed (eg, assuming that when a normal cutesy word that existed before is said now, it is always going to be in the /pol/ context - it should instead come out of a larger holistic view)
@io @haskal oh i see people have already presented this argument in a more eloquent way than i am and it had no affect so i'll just leave you alone

heres something to read if you like reading

@haskal Why tf do n@zis keep ruining perfectly good words ffs... Idk i'm not sure if avoiding words is the right strategy, it's like when they tried to make "milk" racist, i really don't think that blindly avoiding words is useful... What we need is resemantization of problematic words (don't get me wrong, some words are unreclaimable), but words like "based" used to be used in alt-right context and now have taken another meaning. "queer" is also a very good example of reclaiming. it must be a sad lonely existence living a life devoid of frens, but do you need to be a huge whiny faggot online?

Sign in to participate in the conversation

the mastodon instance at is retired

see the end-of-life plan for details: