Thread by @Katja_Thieme

Excellent point.

IDW folk circulate shoddy sets of ideas and push them as much as they can in all ephemeral media formats--podcasts, youtube lectures, tweets, chats, memes.

These ideas get taken up in stunted format. IDW-developed terms travel widely without being well defined.

https://twitter.com/LitAnscombe/status/1294344042403176450

These terms weren't well-defined to begin with, but as tweets get deleted, links become disabled, and video archives disappear, it becomes impossible to trace when & where a term's definition received the most sustained attention, or when relations between terms were made clear.

Many adopt those terms--because the terms speak to their perception and, more importantly, the terms carry a sting in a favoured direction--but when questions are raised, there's not a place (or, not anymore) where adherents and skeptics can check & negotiate their understanding.

It's a slippery way of getting out of accountability.

"I'm just right! This *is* cancel culture/grievance studies/a secular religion/biology denial/compelled speech. If you disagree, you're proving my own point!"

Or, alternatively (though this response has dipped a bit out of favour with the dramatic fall of #JordanPeterson):

"I don't think you really understand this term, not until you've watched the thousand hours of youtube/podcast material where it's explained."