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?
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.
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.
spankmonkey@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
The whole critique is based on a malicious reading leading to inferring meaning that isn’t there instead of taking the words literally.
loudwhisper@infosec.pub 3 weeks ago
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?
spankmonkey@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
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.
If you want any statement to be true for literally the entire world, then your expectations are unreasonable.
loudwhisper@infosec.pub 3 weeks ago
What? My only qualm is that you added white to a sentence about gender oppression. Of course minorities are oppressed and need safe spaces.
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?
Minorities are also oppressed by way more demographics than white men.
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.