this is not a point that will translate well into tweets probably, but generally i think people's relationship to the concept of "why" a thing happens - causes - is weirdly fucked in a way that i have trouble concisely pointing to
Conversation
like - you can imagine a big-ass causal network of reasons things happen - X happens because Y, Z, W because Y1, Y2, Z1, Z2, Z3, W1, etc. etc. - and laying out the whole network is costly and confusing so in practice we single a node out somehow and stop there
1
1
40
in public discourse depressingly often people ask "why thing bad?" and traverse the network until they get to "ahh, because outgroup bad," raucous applause from ingroup, but does not go far enough imo - even to the extent that it's true... why outgroup bad???
5
3
68
ex: common tactic in feminist discourse to traverse the network until you get to "because men bad," but... why men bad??? i don't dispute the point, many men are awful in many ways, but haven't you ever gotten curious about why???
4
2
31
it's sorta funny you're doing the same thing in reverse: the "men bad" stuff tends to be venting; while "patriarchy harms men too, by having them suppress their emotions & enforce masculinity and often the hurt they cause comes from that" is actual feminist analysis
2
9
Replying to
there was a tweet the other day that was like “most men would assault you if they could and the rule of law + your male partner defending you is the only reason they don’t” and like, first of all, ofc a tweet like that is coming from some very painful history, but also like...
...where would you put that on the venting-to-analysis spectrum? i don’t think the OP would have considered themselves to be venting
1
6
that kinda stuff feels like it's either someone overdosing on bronze age mindset-like writing or it's a trauma-informed worldview that came to be? or both? it's kinda close to a lot of the evopsych bullshit applied to society stuff; but maybe personal too, and merged?
1
7
Show replies