17
submitted by VisualScience

Did you know that feminists are demanding men sit down to pee? Standing up to pee is male privilege, and is unequal.

Did you know that there is a War on Thanksgiving? I didn't, until I read it on conservative blogs/tweets/posts this week.

No soccer mom who casually defines herself as a "feminist" is going to demand men sit down to pee, and no one is going to call Thanksgiving anything but Thanksgiving. Not unless you help normalize those positions by arguing about them as if they're even worthy of acknowledgement or response.

Radical positions need to be ignored or dismissed. Arguing against them amplifies and normalizes them. Now it's being talked about by more people and more media that wants to get you angry. The right-wing media needs to earn their ad dollars too. By arguing AGAINST it, even mentioning it and creating a counter narrative NORMALIZES the position as worthy of debate. Normally these ideas would be relegated to whatever dark basement communists lurk in. (This is why everyone knows who AOC is, the Right is giving her a lot of attention and therefore power.)

There are some specific cases where amplifying is necessary. Where a radical idea has come to fruition, and amplification can stop it. As an example, a boy in Texas was going to be chemically castrated with puberty blockers by his mother. The right broadly publicized this evil and it got the attention of Texas Gov. Greg Abbott who was able to save the boy, and other lawmakers who are now considering creating laws to prevent this type of evil. This works when calling attention to the insanity of actions, and is different than arguing against a radical leftist position.

In the case of purely ideas, ones that haven't fully taken hold yet, you need to laugh at them, dismiss them, and spend not a second more. Don't pretend the radical is arguing in good faith, don't act as if the insane idea is worthy of discussing its merits and nuances. Reject it outright.

"Transgender individuals have a higher rate of suicide...". Don't even bother with that argument. It's a mental illness. Reject it. Don't backtrack. Don't apologize.

The world has changed rapidly in the last 5 years. The left has pushed the Overton window and continues to push it Leftward. Don't stand on the Leftward edge of the window arguing with them about their latest degeneracy. Reject it without explanation or apology. "But shouldn't you respect what a person prefers their pronouns to be called?" No. It's a fucking mental illness. I'm not calling a man a woman. "But {insert group here} have been historically oppressed and deserve special treatment." No, everyone should be treated equally under law. End of story.

Did you know that feminists are demanding men sit down to pee? Standing up to pee is male privilege, and is unequal. Did you know that there is a War on Thanksgiving? I didn't, until I read it on conservative blogs/tweets/posts this week. No soccer mom who casually defines herself as a "feminist" is going to demand men sit down to pee, and no one is going to call Thanksgiving anything but Thanksgiving. Not unless you help normalize those positions by arguing about them as if they're even worthy of acknowledgement or response. Radical positions need to be ignored or dismissed. Arguing against them amplifies and normalizes them. Now it's being talked about by more people and more media that wants to get you angry. The right-wing media needs to earn their ad dollars too. By arguing AGAINST it, even mentioning it and creating a counter narrative NORMALIZES the position as worthy of debate. Normally these ideas would be relegated to whatever dark basement communists lurk in. (This is why everyone knows who AOC is, the Right is giving her a lot of attention and therefore power.) There are some specific cases where amplifying is necessary. Where a radical idea has come to fruition, and amplification can stop it. As an example, a boy in Texas was going to be chemically castrated with puberty blockers by his mother. The right broadly publicized this evil and it got the attention of Texas Gov. Greg Abbott who was able to save the boy, and other lawmakers who are now considering creating laws to prevent this type of evil. This works when calling attention to the insanity of actions, and is different than arguing against a radical leftist position. In the case of purely ideas, ones that haven't fully taken hold yet, you need to laugh at them, dismiss them, and spend not a second more. Don't pretend the radical is arguing in good faith, don't act as if the insane idea is worthy of discussing its merits and nuances. Reject it outright. "Transgender individuals have a higher rate of suicide...". Don't even bother with that argument. It's a mental illness. Reject it. Don't backtrack. Don't apologize. The world has changed rapidly in the last 5 years. The left has pushed the Overton window and continues to push it Leftward. Don't stand on the Leftward edge of the window arguing with them about their latest degeneracy. Reject it without explanation or apology. "But shouldn't you respect what a person prefers their pronouns to be called?" No. It's a fucking mental illness. I'm not calling a man a woman. "But {insert group here} have been historically oppressed and deserve special treatment." No, everyone should be treated equally under law. End of story.
Comments (0)
sorted by: