Yet another rant.
Not As Bad As.
While I was pondering away on one of my walks one day, I considered the opaque mess that is high school romance. And I considered what I would do if somebody asked me out. Probably run away - but I might also feel guilty that I am letting them down.
"Aha!" thought I. "Is this not similar to what some girls might go through? I can now empathise better with the plight of the womenfolk." (Not really; I wasn't
quite as ridiculous in my speech.)
But then I immediately felt a strong sense of shame, and a compulsion to add - "Not As Bad. My problems are Not As Bad as those girls."
Well,
duh! First of all, they're
actually being asked out and I'm not. Second, blah blah structural oppression and contextual blah.
Yes. I know that. Not on the explicit-thought level, but on the conscious-background level.
And anyway, why does it
matter? It's not like I'm going around and saying "I survived a thought experiment in which I was asked out, therefore sexism isn't really a problem." Why would I feel the need to say that?
After a few moments of pondering, the answer seemed obvious - because of my peers.
There is not a significant difference between "make a speech in your head" and "talk online to people." There's no such thing as interruption, so the minor difference between "headspeech" and "RLspeech" is gone. So it is quite plausible that the same policing tendencies might be present in both.
Why couldn't I say "this is similar to what girls experience" on Reddit without the qualifier of NAB? I can't really imagine how somebody could misinterpret it, but I'd bet a grand someone would. (If I had a grand, which I don't.)
But why is that
necessary? If I have slipped on the ice and fallen on my posterior and hurt myself, I will say "ouch." I will say "we should clear this ice." I will get the salt. I will not say "but of course, this isn't as bad as poor John who sprained his ankle on the ice."
Well, it's necessary because
some people seem to enjoy interpreting men in the worst light that they possibly can.
Since just because you have a point, it doesn't mean you are right.
What?? I kind of get the rest of your post, and I agree; also keep in mind that I was
not responding directly to you. You probably inspired me, that's all.
Yes, this isn't just about social justice. This is a general problem for all groups. But social justice is something I know quite a bit about, and something that is getting general support.
Social justice in general has some bigger flaws than "some feminists are corrupt". Take, for instance, how any CEO/manager/whatsit who criticizes gay marriage gets pressure to resign. Take the mayor who accidentally seemed slightly racist, and subsequently resigned. Take the motte-and-baileys. We have some big problems, and they won't get fixed if criticism is suppressed.
A vote in favor of not-suppressing-criticism, and instead suppressing prejudice!