People have no idea what "socialism" or "fake news" mean, but no one tells me off for using those terms. But I feel like in this corner of Twitter people are sensitive to feminist terms, to the point they'd rather I not use them b/c they could be misunderstood. Is that accurate?
-
-
Replying to @Kirsten3531
I don't mind you using them and often use them myself, but I can probably explain the dynamic a bit of why people might be a bit sensitive about them if you'd like?
1 reply 0 retweets 8 likes -
-
Replying to @Kirsten3531
First: I don't think "because they might be misunderstood" points at the problem well. I think there are much more specific negative associations people have with the use of feminist terminology.
1 reply 0 retweets 11 likes -
Replying to @GeniesLoki @Kirsten3531
Where the problem is lack of precision, I think it's not that people are worried about misunderstanding so much as that that lack of precision is deliberate. This is what people mean when they say motte and bailey: A narrow defensible usage and a broad implied usage.
2 replies 0 retweets 14 likes -
Replying to @GeniesLoki
Just to make sure I understand - isn't the motte and bailey one where basically no one actually believes the narrow definition? It's *exclusively* used to defend against attacks? Is that what we're referring to here too? Or is that just the archetypal example?
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @Kirsten3531
Hmm. I think in my understanding of it it was the opposite. It's not that nobody believes the narrow definition, it's that virtually everybody does, and the ambiguity between the two is used to defend the broad version by claiming to only need to defend the narrow version.
2 replies 0 retweets 10 likes -
Replying to @GeniesLoki
Oh like everyone agrees with the narrow definition and [Twitter feminists] also agree with the broad one but can't say?
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes
Yeah, that's the idea, and is definitely a thing people worry about. I think the actual problem isn't generally really that so much as an overall erasure of nuance in the details of how it's discussed leading to creating a mentality that probably nobody actually wants, but still
-
-
Replying to @GeniesLoki @Kirsten3531
GL's model is accurate, but I'd add more by looking at the overlap between "this corner" and existing anti-feminist social groups (since GL's arguments *can* also apply to "socialism", etc.), so I'd note the overlaps with libertarian/PUA/other male-dominated communities.
0 replies 0 retweets 1 likeThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.