The problem I see with modern social justice campaigning is this kind of thinking: "White men are the root of all of society's evils. Inversely, women are not responsible for any evils, they are only the victims of evil. They don't hurt anyone, particularly men. Men hurt women. Women don't hurt men."
But what if this thinking was to be challenged? And then the people saying these things said "Alright, you got me, I'll stop saying this," what concession are they likely to make? At least at first?
Will they cut down on the "Men Are Evil" rhetoric and stop reducing every approach we make and word we say as harassment?
Or will they cut down on the "Women Can Do No Wrong" rhetoric and start going after women like they did us, holding them responsible for "toxic femininity?"
Or... would they do both? Because deep down they really do care about men and they just kinda fudge up their words sometimes?
No picking "Neither." This is a hypothetical scenario where society realizes that being a white man doesn't disqualify you from your concerns mattering.
But what if this thinking was to be challenged? And then the people saying these things said "Alright, you got me, I'll stop saying this," what concession are they likely to make? At least at first?
Will they cut down on the "Men Are Evil" rhetoric and stop reducing every approach we make and word we say as harassment?
Or will they cut down on the "Women Can Do No Wrong" rhetoric and start going after women like they did us, holding them responsible for "toxic femininity?"
Or... would they do both? Because deep down they really do care about men and they just kinda fudge up their words sometimes?
No picking "Neither." This is a hypothetical scenario where society realizes that being a white man doesn't disqualify you from your concerns mattering.
