A review by afreen7
Outraged: Why Everyone Is Shouting and No One Is Talking, by Ashley 'Dotty' Charles
3.0
Wow This is a mess of a book!
I get the original idea that outrage for the sake of outrage and misdirected outrage is a waste of human emotion and energy and all it does is make people lazy when they could be using that effort on things that really matter.
But somewhere along the way between interviewing really terrible people and some cringy metaphors("cancelled like an Amazon Prime subscription on day twenty-nine of the free thirty-day trial.") the author's hot takegetting outraged about people getting outraged knowing it would trigger more outrage Charles loses the plot.
Excessive outrage derails movements by adding too many trains to the track. Black Lives Matter, but wait, polar bear lives also matter, and have you even stopped for a second to consider the real meaning behind Thanksgiving?
I don't see why these are all not important trains. There are other less important topics Charles could've picked here as an example
"The kind that convinces narcissistic do-gooders to film themselves feeding the homeless. Those charitable-on-camera types. The boastfully benevolent who flaunt their humanitarian values, not from a position of altruism but simply to satisfy their self-adulation."
She says it is okay for people to appropriate culture or commit other such acts like Dolezal faking their race cause there's no malevolent intent and then goes on to bash YouTubers who perform charitable acts and then make a video of it (with permission of course)?
"I’d been royally played like a well-tuned guitar at an Ed Sheeran gig."
And enough with the weird metaphors if you want me to take this book seriously
Why report that two thirds of Brits sleep peacefully in their beds when you could spin it to read one in three brits plagued by incurable insomnia?
this is about sensational headlines. I mean whats the logic of this statement? Anyone would be worried if a third of a country's population are insomniacs. It feels like Charles wants to say 'why focus on the percentage of people dying of cancer due to air pollution, we should focus on the percentage of people not dying!
By now I was becoming a bit of an activism purist, which is rich coming from me, someone with little to no protest experience.
Well..another keyboard warrior then.
There's a good sentiment hidden in this book getting lost because the author thought making contradictory and mindless quips was more important.
I get the original idea that outrage for the sake of outrage and misdirected outrage is a waste of human emotion and energy and all it does is make people lazy when they could be using that effort on things that really matter.
But somewhere along the way between interviewing really terrible people and some cringy metaphors("cancelled like an Amazon Prime subscription on day twenty-nine of the free thirty-day trial.") the author's hot take
Excessive outrage derails movements by adding too many trains to the track. Black Lives Matter, but wait, polar bear lives also matter, and have you even stopped for a second to consider the real meaning behind Thanksgiving?
I don't see why these are all not important trains. There are other less important topics Charles could've picked here as an example
"The kind that convinces narcissistic do-gooders to film themselves feeding the homeless. Those charitable-on-camera types. The boastfully benevolent who flaunt their humanitarian values, not from a position of altruism but simply to satisfy their self-adulation."
She says it is okay for people to appropriate culture or commit other such acts like Dolezal faking their race cause there's no malevolent intent and then goes on to bash YouTubers who perform charitable acts and then make a video of it (with permission of course)?
"I’d been royally played like a well-tuned guitar at an Ed Sheeran gig."
And enough with the weird metaphors if you want me to take this book seriously
Why report that two thirds of Brits sleep peacefully in their beds when you could spin it to read one in three brits plagued by incurable insomnia?
this is about sensational headlines. I mean whats the logic of this statement? Anyone would be worried if a third of a country's population are insomniacs. It feels like Charles wants to say 'why focus on the percentage of people dying of cancer due to air pollution, we should focus on the percentage of people not dying!
By now I was becoming a bit of an activism purist, which is rich coming from me, someone with little to no protest experience.
Well..another keyboard warrior then.
There's a good sentiment hidden in this book getting lost because the author thought making contradictory and mindless quips was more important.