umop_3pisdn
Member
The problem is the risk of antagonizing those that don't understand your point of view. Those individuals believe it's an even playing field.
"If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat."
I dunno, maybe I can explain what I see happening with a different group that is actively oppressed. The Black Lives Matter movement is having a massive problem with how they are characterized in the media. They've lost the public relations battle. Why? Because of their name. Perhaps they should have gone with "Black Lives Matter Too" as the name. The "too" makes the implications much more obvious since it directly suggests that someone is being left out. There'd still be opposition, don't get me wrong. But I think the movement might have had better success in the public relations battlefield by having a name that is still brief, but yet conveys more information and isn't left open to easy exploitation or misinterpretation. At a minimum, it would have made "All Lives Matter Too" not work since that makes absolutely zero sense and would just be confusing.
Anyways, the opposition has brilliantly reframed the argument and are using "All Lives Matter" as a weapon. It's working quite effectively. A lot of people just don't get it. So then you see paragraph after paragraph written on forum posts, blogs, and news articles trying to explain what Black Lives Matter is and why "All Lives Matter" as a movement doesn't make sense.
The problem is that the typical person isn't going to consume all that. They're not going to think about all the context. I know that some of you are thinking that they should, and you're right. But that's not the world we live in. You can't expect the enemy to fight on your terms. You have to fight on theirs. This is something conservatives figured out a long time ago. They're the masters of framing things into something bite-size. If you have to go through lengthy explanations, you've lost the battle.
"Fuck straight people" is an understandable remark made in frustration that doesn't literally mean we think all straight people need to die in a fire or something - but it isn't going to be received well, and that's just the reality of it. Some of you are probably going to double down and say "fuck their feelings" but they're the ones with the power, so...
I do have sympathy for this argument, don't get me wrong, but humming and hawing over politeness/propriety is what people have used to quiet down pesky minorities since forever.
I do think politeness is important, but it's one of the least important important things. So sometimes I feel like rudeness does sort of serve a function, in that it says something along the lines of "it's not about you and your feelings, and if the worst thing you have to say about what I say is that I'm being rude, then you have it pretty good."
If I seem like I have an adversarial tone, that isn't my intention, it's just that this argument is itself adversarial. And I'm not an activist, so it's all well and good for me to just say things like this, but I can't really act like this is a cause I am championing or anything. It just seems ridiculous sometimes when they get their feelings hurt over something like this and we all have to stop and address that 'injustice'. I mean please. And there's something to be said for having a discussion about that.