RealFknNito

Make the point that individuals are the ones who are racist, not the demographic. People aren't racist/sexist because they're white/male, so making a claim against white/male people is ineffective. However, individuals who identify as Nazis, are racist, because the group itself is racist.

It leaves less room for "oh they're just racist misandrists targeting us" by reframing what you're saying. The critique isn't the problem but the manner in dispensing it which gives the opposition fuel to "uno reverse" the situation.

She insinuated she hears a lot of white men and made no attempt to specify what kinds of white men, only that she hears them often. Generalizing isn't bad in itself, but targeting characteristics that can't be changed for the sake of a counterpoint, is. Someone can't choose to be a man or white, so rather than allow the opposition to make it about either, reframe it into what it is. Racism, sexism, etc.

It seems pedantic but you don't want to appear to be the enemy they paint you as. You don't want to use the language they'll benefit from, no matter how right you are.

The very beginning. "If white men are so afraid" is the antithesis of her latter point which is "white men aren't afraid" and insinuates they don't stop talking or are generally just more abundant. Even if it's not directly insulting, it's a generalization based on race (and sex) that pushes away people who happen to be white and male but also feel their voice doesn't matter.

I'm just trying to be helpful in pointing out that it's ineffective to become the monster you're fighting. I'd like racism, sexism, all of it to be extinguished and I think things even like the community rule of "only women can post" is severely detrimental to meaningful change. We must choose our responses more carefully so as not to grant the assumption that black and white are opposites no more than men and women are opposites.

There's far too much division online that doesn't exist nearly as much when we step away. We need to be reminded of that more often.

I never meant to imply a pacifist would be required to engage in violence, only that they would have to indirectly support it at the very least, lest their own principles be engulfed by those who would see to their extinction.

When a man makes fun of a woman for something seemingly inherent to a woman, the response isn't to attack all men. That's being sexist to defeat sexism.

When a white person makes fun of a black person for something seemingly inherent to black people, the response shouldn't be to attack all white people. That's being racist to defeat racism.

It is a flawed response as it will always be as equally incorrect as the initial remark. It doesn't fix the thing you take issue with, it just further deepens the line between groups.

When you just throw shit at the wall, you'll hit something eventually

I wish the solution to racism wasn't just racism towards the people doing it. The only way to stop racism is to stop being racist.

Remember everyone, you can just mullvad into a different country while yours passes increasingly facistic laws. Japan is gonna see a lot of traffic.

Nah court jesters were entertaining and a king would regularly execute ones that overstepped their privilege. Trump isn't laughing.

They're ragebaiters and they have a hell of a megaphone.

In theory, of course. Love that.

However, there are people who exist that should be kept out. Known terrorists and criminals should be denied entry, there are severe punishments that if we can't enact we at the very least should prohibit their return. A modern day exile. You can only confirm who a bad person is by confirming who they aren't. You need an ID to let Joshua Hamton, candy store owner, into the country but to also keep out Jeffery Epstein, kid diddler, from returning should he escape. A filter must exist but not one this strict. The only way to remove the filter would be to assimilate under a global legal system which we are centuries from obtaining.

It's a tough go for the people who believe in pacifism or nonviolent change.

Thank you, what would the elevator be in this analogy? Can't think of any elegant, smooth, safe way out of this political cluster fuck.

The Washington establishment is called that precisely because it has been legitimized and established. If you want to delegitimize it, that could serve as the first step to achieve a solution. I'm not saying our views are even contrasting, our methodology is.

Spreading the good word doesn't mean much when there's nothing that follows. No plan, no suggested actions, just small groups struggling to do what they can. All we can presently do is slow the bleeding. Getting tired of bleeding doesn't mean to just stop holding the wound.