See but then that illustrates my point perfectly, at what point does it become “too specific” for a generalization? I’d argue you just found the line, while all of these statements are accurate:
No it’s not bad to assume that, because some people are extremely dangerous. There’s a medical term for what’s going on, prophylactic.
No it’s not bad to assume that, because some men are extremely dangerous. There’s a medical term for what’s going on, prophylactic.
No it’s not bad to assume that, because some black men are extremely dangerous. There’s a medical term for what’s going on, prophylactic.
The more specific you get the more fucked up it is.
Just as, I’ve been cheated on by three different women and raped by two other different women, so
A) should that make me distrustful of all women? Would it be acceptable for me to hate women now because of those things?
B) which would you say is less of a prejudice sentence, given my personal lived experience:
No it’s not bad to assume that, because some women are extremely dangerous. There’s a medical term for what’s going on, prophylactic.
No it’s not bad to assume that, because some people are extremely dangerous. There’s a medical term for what’s going on, prophylactic.
So, even having been literally raped twice by two different women, were I to actually hate women for it would I be celebrated as a strong independent man or would I be castigated as an incel? Should I start treating every woman as a cheater and a rapist, or should I continue to recognize that individuals are different than each other despite shared genetic characteristics?
Furthermore while we have now gone from the racist trope of the ne**o rape beast (real racist trope that was used for decades, look it up) to now all men are rape beasts, and that technically is progress, is that enough progress? Is that really good? I’m gonna be honest, I think you deserve to be seen as an individual, whether you think you deserve it or not.
You have a right to your own personal assessment of risk. You are entitled to your truth, in that you have experienced women being predators.
The statement that some men are dangerous, is from the women’s assessment of risk, and the truth that they have experienced men being predators.
It’s not about should. If you were suspicious of women, that would be valid. You don’t seem to be accusing any and every women of having ill intentions. The statement that some men are dangerous is also not an accusation against any and every man.
All these comments saying “not all men” are just unhappy that they don’t have control over other people’s perspective. Like it’s not occuring to them that other people can be wrong, and they can just be good intentionally despite that.
The more specific you get, the less it’s a generalization and just prejudice.
If you want to be a clown about it, how about I make a change
See but then that illustrates my point perfectly, at what point does it become “too specific” for a generalization? I’d argue you just found the line, while all of these statements are accurate:
The more specific you get the more fucked up it is.
Just as, I’ve been cheated on by three different women and raped by two other different women, so
A) should that make me distrustful of all women? Would it be acceptable for me to hate women now because of those things?
B) which would you say is less of a prejudice sentence, given my personal lived experience:
So, even having been literally raped twice by two different women, were I to actually hate women for it would I be celebrated as a strong independent man or would I be castigated as an incel? Should I start treating every woman as a cheater and a rapist, or should I continue to recognize that individuals are different than each other despite shared genetic characteristics?
Furthermore while we have now gone from the racist trope of the ne**o rape beast (real racist trope that was used for decades, look it up) to now all men are rape beasts, and that technically is progress, is that enough progress? Is that really good? I’m gonna be honest, I think you deserve to be seen as an individual, whether you think you deserve it or not.
You have a right to your own personal assessment of risk. You are entitled to your truth, in that you have experienced women being predators.
The statement that some men are dangerous, is from the women’s assessment of risk, and the truth that they have experienced men being predators.
It’s not about should. If you were suspicious of women, that would be valid. You don’t seem to be accusing any and every women of having ill intentions. The statement that some men are dangerous is also not an accusation against any and every man.
All these comments saying “not all men” are just unhappy that they don’t have control over other people’s perspective. Like it’s not occuring to them that other people can be wrong, and they can just be good intentionally despite that.
Oh word cool, so it’s ok to be prejudice and assume the worst out of a group as long as the group you hate has done anything wrong to you, got it.