Comment

Absolutely not true. The critique is based on adding a racial connotation to gender oppression, which is completely orthogonal to it.

To be even more frank, saying that women and minorities need safe spaces because white men historically oppressed them is complete bonkers. Women need safe spaces because men historically oppressed them, and that is true all around the world, in almost all communities.

I literally took your words literally, as I quoted and addressed the very sentence you wrote. You decided to add white to a sentence that didn’t need it. It’s already the second comment where you refuse to elaborate and instead you indulge in meta-conversation. So for the sake of clarity, discard everything I have said so far, and allow me to simply ask what did you mean with that sentence?

source

Sort:hotnew top

spankmonkey@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

Women need safe spaces because men historically oppressed them, and that is true all around the world, in almost all communities.

You decided to add white to a sentence that didn’t need it.

Are you implying that minorities aren’t oppressed and don’t need safe spaces? Because it seems like your questions are focused entirely on why I included both women and minorities in the same sentence, which I assert is true in the vast majority of the world where English (the language we are speaking) is the primary language for the country. Heck, it is also true for most European countries where English isn’t the primary language.

Women need safe spaces because men historically oppressed them, and that is true all around the world, in almost all communities.

If you want any statement to be true for literally the entire world, then your expectations are unreasonable.

source
- loudwhisper@infosec.pub ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
  
  Are you implying that minorities aren’t oppressed and don’t need safe spaces?
  
  What? My only qualm is that you added white to a sentence about gender oppression. Of course minorities are oppressed and need safe spaces.
  
  which I assert is true in the vast majority of the world where English (the language we are speaking) is the primary language for the country
  
  What has the language we are speaking (which is not even my language) to do with what is “historically” true or not? Is this just a classic example of US exceptionalism or what?
  
  Including both in the same sentence is because of the common shared group of oppressors, white men.
  
  Minorities are also oppressed by way more demographics than white men.
  
  If you want any statement to be true for literally the entire world, then your expectations are unreasonable.
  
  Saying that men oppressed women is a much, much, much more accurate statement, for example. There are always exceptions, but we are talking about different things.
  
  source
  - spankmonkey@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
    
    My only qualm is that you added white to a sentence about gender oppression.
    
    Goddess you know what I meant to write, guess asking me to explain was a waste of time!
    
    source
    loudwhisper@infosec.pub ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
    You meant to write what you wrote, I assumed…?
    
    But I see we are going in circles. So far you are leaning on “that’s the common oppressor” which sounds silly to me if I am being honest. But anyway, whatever. I stand by the fact that your original statement is either extremely US-centric (and frankly a bit racist from multiple points of view) or just generally incorrect. Don’t need to convince you or change your mind. So have a good day/evening/whatever.
    
    source
    -> View More Comments