If we require all members of marginalized groups to be calm when discussing their oppression, we will never make real progress.
-
Show this thread
-
As members of majority groups, we have the responsibility to figure out what they’re trying to tell us with their anger, so we can work on it. It’s hard to do. But it’s important. Sadly I didn’t see any of that last night.
4 replies 1 retweet 28 likesShow this thread -
I’m very disappointed. I really thought we were better at this. But oh well - it’s a new day! We can try again.
2 replies 0 retweets 9 likesShow this thread -
Here’s my original tweet, which I deleted in favor of this thread.pic.twitter.com/EGWK0wOlyt
25 replies 3 retweets 24 likesShow this thread -
I’m still angry. Let’s be clear about that. The name is still exclusionary (and as majority group members, you don’t get to argue with that).
40 replies 0 retweets 26 likesShow this thread -
Things that are completely irrelevant here include: * whether you personally thought of it * whether it personally bothers you * whether it personally bothers women who are involved in the concept
14 replies 1 retweet 28 likesShow this thread -
When someone from a marginalized group tells you something is problematic, and is having a negative impact, you don’t fucking argue that the impact is too small to be relevant. (Which is what all of the above are saying.) You just don’t. Unless you’re an asshole.
68 replies 27 retweets 86 likesShow this thread -
Y’all can fight this out amongst yourselves now. I’ve given you a valuable piece of information. The quality of the character of the community will determine what happens now. Based on responses so far, my money is on “nothing.” I’d love to be wrong.
22 replies 1 retweet 21 likesShow this thread -
Also I’m amused at the number of “YOU ARE HURTING ME BY IMPLYING IT’S PORN” responses. Textbook gaslighting, fellas. That might have worked on me 10 years ago, but I’ve made a lot of progress since then. You, apparently, not so much.
65 replies 1 retweet 40 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @sarahmei
Interesting. It never dawned on me as such before. I’ve heard double d’s as reference to breast size but never ddd. (Although I’m aware that ddd and even eee and hhh exists). I have no doubt that it MIGHT have been a wink wink nod nod name. But it was unnecessary to begin with.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
It was a long treatise on Object Oriented Design but treated as something new and novel for marketing purposes. So not only was the name offensive, it was also unnecessary.
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.