The original tweet is a response to people who are annoyed at being stereotyped. I get it. I have daughters I wish didn’t have to worry about this shit. But I also think we’re not addressing the problem the right way. It’s actually making the problem worse and isolating people enough that they fall to the sway of fascist propaganda.
If you take this same tweet and swap out men with [your minority racial/religious/gender group of your choice] it’ll probably get you banned in most communities here. But it’s about men (generalized) so it is for some reason allowed.
If you take this same tweet and swap out men with [your minority racial/religious/gender group of your choice] it’ll probably get you banned in most communities here. But it’s about men (generalized) so it is for some reason allowed.
“If you take criticism of aggressors and swap it out to criticize their victims instead, it pisses people off.”
No shit, Sherlock! That’s because aggressors are different than victims.
Bad faith is applying the same bad rhetoric/logic to two groups and act like it’s perfectly fine and reasonable in one instance but really awful in the other. Especially if one group is literally a subset of the other. It’s not a “gotcha”, it’s an attempt to make you realize what you’re doing. Prejudice is bad, no exceptions.
You determine if the subject is a victim or the aggressor depending on what narrative you shilling at that time.
TIL that understanding context is “shilling for a narrative.” 🙄
You know what’s really “disingenuous post modern subjectivist bullshit?” Pretending that victims become aggressors just because they act in their own self-defense. And that’s what the “not all men” whiners in this thread are doing.
The original tweet is a response to people who are annoyed at being stereotyped. I get it. I have daughters I wish didn’t have to worry about this shit. But I also think we’re not addressing the problem the right way. It’s actually making the problem worse and isolating people enough that they fall to the sway of fascist propaganda.
If you take this same tweet and swap out men with [your minority racial/religious/gender group of your choice] it’ll probably get you banned in most communities here. But it’s about men (generalized) so it is for some reason allowed.
“If you take criticism of aggressors and swap it out to criticize their victims instead, it pisses people off.”
No shit, Sherlock! That’s because aggressors are different than victims.
Is black man an aggressor or a victim?
Fuck off with your bad-faith ‘gotcha’ question.
Bad faith is applying the same bad rhetoric/logic to two groups and act like it’s perfectly fine and reasonable in one instance but really awful in the other. Especially if one group is literally a subset of the other. It’s not a “gotcha”, it’s an attempt to make you realize what you’re doing. Prejudice is bad, no exceptions.
You arguement has no logical foundation
You determine if the subject is a victim or the aggressor depending on what narrative you shilling at that time.
This is disingenuous post modern subjectivist bullshit
Cheers ;)
TIL that understanding context is “shilling for a narrative.” 🙄
You know what’s really “disingenuous post modern subjectivist bullshit?” Pretending that victims become aggressors just because they act in their own self-defense. And that’s what the “not all men” whiners in this thread are doing.