3 ms·
>No, it doesn't. Yes, it does. >why not take issue with that too? The problem is not that it doesn't highlight the oppression of men, but that it implies tha
by nawitus 13y ago
>No, it doesn't.
Yes, it does.
>why not take issue with that too?
The problem is not that it doesn't highlight the oppression of men, but that it implies that men were not oppressed.
- tptacek 13y agoRepeating the same false argument won't make it true, but aside from that: what is your point? Were you conscripted? Were you "oppressed" as a man? Are women not oppressed? What are you actually trying to say here? A middle-schooler knows that the world is full of oppressed people, and that no one group has an exclusive license to the title of "oppressed". What's the goal of trying to deflect attention from this example of repression? Are you sure this was a smart argument to make? A reasonable person might attribute unfortunate subtext to it.