3 ms·

This is how I see it: claiming that A can "dehumanize" B implies that A is over B somehow. I find your statement and the like elsewhere in this discussion ("Wo

• knowtheory 15y ago
  /me grins. You're backing yourself into a corner rhetorically here. I'm not (just) white knighting here to defend all the poor helpless ladies. I am actually offended and disheartened by the comments. The things that Sqoot said makes me not want to be part of the community they belong to. Secondly, the ladies have been more than capable of communicating that they felt this was demeaning. This isn't smoke without fire. Here's the thing. Sqoot are obviously dumb kids, because the ad for the event was clearly written in dumb-kid-speak. I have hope that they do grow and learn from this experience, and they better understand that they should be more mindful not to be jerks to others. What I genuinely can't abide (either rhetorically or ethically) are the mealy-mouthed defenses of Sqoot's writing. What they did was not okay, there's really no justification of it. And to their credit they have tried to apologize. I'm still not convinced that they have (yet) internalized why everyone is upset at them, and I think that's why the controversy has continued. But the fact that you are willing to accuse others of being more demeaning than Sqoot simply because they are explaining their grievances is mega-weak. I hope you too grow and at some point come regret the defense of Sqoot's behavior you have offered here.
  • deleted 15y ago
    [deleted]