|
|
|
|
|
|
by meowface
2135 days ago
|
|
|
>I always find these sorts of discussions sorely lacking an understanding of The Tolerance Paradox. I can't possibly speak for Popper, but I suspect that he'd disapprove of intolerance from any group towards any other group. Let's not tolerate threats or double standards of any kind, whether it's a man defending that he said "kill all women" sarcastically or a woman defending that she said "kill all men" sarcastically. One can acknowledge that a man saying it should be taken more seriously (for a variety of reasons) while also acknowledging that the acceptance of generalized vitriol towards groups based on at-birth traits shouldn't have directional weighting. This is a blind spot and form of implicit bias I find many well-meaning progressives fall into. Also, although it doesn't necessarily apply here (since most would agree talking about killing groups of people shouldn't be tolerated), I almost always find that people who bring up Popper's paradox of tolerance tend to wield it like a cudgel to draw arbitrary and absolute lines as they see fit. |
|
|
I think it's also worth mentioning that you are very correct in a need for subtlety -- "kill all women" isn't something you're going to see very often any more. Rather, we get some nonsense about the moral arc of the universe and another endless discussion while people continue to be harmed. I knew (happily past tense) a couple guys who just couldn't kick their absolute vitriol for seeing women thrive while they were struggling. It's super nasty and, in my experience, a way more dangerous thing than someone going off about killing women verbatim.
Thanks for pointing out the blind spot though! I've found that way of thinking about morality to be really positive and forgiving -- to view something as a correctable omission rather than a character flaw.