Update 0.1.1.4

I thought it might matter to you if you sounded like an idiot, but whatever floats your boat, mate.

Have you ever heard of sarcasm?

Of course I have. But saying something sarcastically doesn’t make it less of an attack, and is just as representative of a lack of respect for whatever’s being attacked as something said non-sarcastically does.

I think it’s just about the more extreme ones who take everything a little too seriously

That’s a subjective assessment. While I do acknowledge that there is a minority of feminists who “take things too far”, the Third Wave has largely rendered them a fringe group on the edges of the ideology. People like that are commonly referred to as “radical feminists” or “radfems”, and the majority of people who align with mainstream feminist ideology consider them to be extremists. This is often becasue their views are harmful, cultivating undue disdain for marginalised groups. This does not make their opinions not worth listening to, as they can be used to facilitate a discussion of how to handle hatred, amongst other things. The post I responded to said “feminist”, not “radical feminist”, thus it was targetting all feminists and was an undeserved generalisation. This subjective assessment of “taking things too far” is, in addition, often used by anti-feminists to shout down those who bring up legitimate problems or make legitimate points, and as an excuse not to think over certain questions that may be inconvenient but may lift some small prejudice and thus have an overall positive effect.

Jokes like the one I responded to often, whether the creator intends it or not, inaccurately associate all of feminism with the few extremists that exist, resulting in undeserved and inaccurate negative opinions on and resistance to feminist ideals which often advance equality, not just for women, but for men and other genders as well, and in cases of intersectionality, advance racial or ethnic equality. Advancement of equality leads to a more evolved, civilised society, and undue, increased resisatnce to ideals that result in positive change hold that advancement back and thus prolong injustice and pain unnecessarily. Obviously, one joke isn’t going to singlehandedly halt a movement. But it’s when jokes like these, and sometimes serious opinions like these, pile up and create undue hostility that social evolution and advancement becomes endangered. Addressing one relieves some of the tension and makes the movement more palatable to the average member of society. This is why I’m bothered. This is why I’m putting in so much effort to explain this. It’s becasue I want to address inequality and do my part to make society fairer. And that’s unnecessarily difficult when the public’s perception of the movement is twisted due to inaccurate opinions and unfounded claims. Then we’re all worse off.

TLDR: Original joke didn’t specify the extremist feminists. Lack of specification resulted in attack on all of feminism, which cultivates undue resistance to positive social change and prolongs inequality. All opinions are worth listening to if only for discussion value. Small atttacks build up over time to create heavy resistance which makes achieving equality more difficult, and opposing inaccurate generalisations about feminism can help alleviate this somewhat.

jesus that’s some large text

Haha yeah, thank god for TLDRs, right?

that is one large fucking tldr.

Yeah but comparatively though

good point

1 Like

???

2 Likes

That’s the TLDR. Everything after that is the post being shortened. I thought that was supposed to go at the beginning?

This thread is about the update. If you are going to continue discussing your post, perhaps make a thread in off topic.

7 Likes

Eh no, that one usually goes at the end? I always saw the TLDR go at the end of the entire wall of text.

Ah. I’ll fix it, but I’ve made my point anyway and I feel like it might be a good idea to stop discussing this or else Caboose might get mad

Caboose doesn’t get mad, that’s madmijk’s job.