you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]GenderbenderShe/her/hers 2 insightful - 6 fun2 insightful - 5 fun3 insightful - 6 fun -  (2 children)

I also said #NotAllWomen.

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 9 insightful - 2 fun9 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

So two useless platitudes instead of one. Good stuff.

[–]adungitit 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Right, you've made one statement that is actually supported by reality (the idea that women do not engage in widespread abuse of men, and never have, a simple fact that should be obvious to anyone with eyes and a brain, let alone even a cursory understanding of social issues and history), and followed it up with a statement that relies of denying widespread systemic human rights' abuses that women have been fighting against for centuries because not every single man in existence is beating his wife. When one side is disadvantaged by the other and vice versa isn't the case, and you're expending disproportionate effort and publicity on overblowing the non-existent issues of the disadvantaged side in a faulty attempt to make them seem equally pressing and problematic, that is not "being unbiased". Making things up and showing bias against one side in order to make both sides look equally bad despite this not being the case is not "equality" - that's the golden mean fallacy.

Serious question: do you even know why statements like #NotAllMen and #AllLivesMatter are so popular with misogynists and racists?