I’m vehemently against many working definitions of “apologist” and can I just say it cuts down my good opportunities for display names, like a bastard
-
Show this thread
-
“Unapologetic” implies someone who isn’t me might see legitimate grounds to apologize where I didn’t, which makes them feel validated in dismissing me as uniquely an outlier, so I reject it out of hand That genre, you know
2 replies 0 retweets 5 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @chrysopoetics
Yeah but like in the sense of my display name, one could be an unapologetic apologist, because "apology" has totally changed meaning (I know you know this, just can't sleep and am rambling)
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @BootlegGirl @chrysopoetics
Like a Christian apologist is also likely to be described as "unapologetic about his faith"
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @BootlegGirl
Oh, for sure But, like, someone stanning Peter Parker would usually not have any environmental prompts leading them to self-ID as unapologetic /or/ to call their stanning apologia, yeah?
1 reply 1 retweet 2 likes -
Replying to @chrysopoetics
Probably not, at least not in most social circles I certainly take "apologist" in the present dialect to mean "defending something unpopular"
3 replies 1 retweet 4 likes -
Replying to @BootlegGirl
I want to say that what I’m used to the implications being insofar as they’re different is “apologist” for “unpopular or demeaned, but it is assumed a reasonable observer would be on board with someone coming to their defense” versus “unapologetic” is for reprehensible things
2 replies 1 retweet 1 like -
Replying to @chrysopoetics @BootlegGirl
Oh I don't see that at all, the word "apologist" is extremely loaded It's almost but not quite to the point where you're saying an "apologist" is a fundamentally bad, dishonest person (the Christian "apologists" are basically trying to reclaim the term)
2 replies 1 retweet 2 likes -
Like people who hate on Christian "apologists" and "apologetics" directly say this Being an "apologist" is bad because it involves starting out committed to defending something you're emotionally attached to, that you take on faith You're not honestly looking for the truth
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Being an "apologist" for something connotes that you have an actual conflict of interest -- you're a paid advocate for an unpopular pariah, you're a PR flack or a lawyer -- or else that you're an unreasoning emotional zealot, you're a stan
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
Like, as an example, feminist activism uses the term "apologist" so often in connection with the term "rape" that "rape apologist" might as well be one word And it doesn't usually mean someone who is explicitly verbally saying "I think sexual assault is okay"
-
-
It means someone whose professed values, like most respectable people's, say that rape is awful but either foolishly or deceptively refuses to recognize that they're defending a rapist even when we can all see that's what they're doing
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.