Why did you phrase it as "disliked speech" here?
-
-
Replying to @zero132132
Hmm? Because that it why they attacked her. They disliked her speech.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
I don't know what anyone said, but I suspect that if they found a discussion boring, they wouldn't start punching.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @zero132132
No, they didn't find it boring. They object to the fact that this type of feminist rejects trans women as women & oppose recognition as such
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
So why not go with "dehumanizing"? This isn't a response that anyone should accept, but it isn't quite 'disliked' if we're being real.
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @zero132132 @HPluckrose
I don't agree with their args, but wd disagree w idea that they're "dehumanizing." They claim TW are men. Last I checked, men are humans
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @SelinaDavis73 @HPluckrose
Maybe 'invalidating' would be better? Was trying to refer to how they probably felt about it beyond just 'dislike,' not expressing support.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @zero132132 @HPluckrose
I think main point is, you can't go around attacking ppl for saying things you don't like. Even if you take comments as a personal insult
1 reply 0 retweets 6 likes -
Example: a group of MRAs may make all sorts of inflammatory comments abt women being histrionic, lacking logical reasoning skills, etc.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
I'd find that obnoxious, terrible, & likely quite insulting. But that wouldn't give me license to physically attack them.
2 replies 0 retweets 5 likes
No. I'd want to respond, myself. But even if I didn't, they must be able to discuss these ideas.
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.