[josteink]

> Maybe because they finally realized that ignoring the unignorable is a losing strategy?

Maybe I’m just dumb, but I don’t fully understand this comment.

What is unignorable? Politics? I can ignore it just fine when I consider it not an appropriate subject. And a losing strategy? For what?

Why does every arena have to be about picking a fight, rather than finding common ground? Why try to increase the divide in our society?

I just don’t get this mentality.

[JoshTriplett]

> What is unignorable? Politics? I can ignore it just fine when I consider it not an appropriate subject.

It's easier to ignore something that largely ignores you. It becomes impossible to ignore something when half the people in it consider your existence an affront to their sensibilities, and those people are inexplicably being listened to.

> Why does every arena have to be about picking a fight, rather than finding common ground?

There exists no common ground when people think other people shouldn't exist. If all those people stop having any influence on the world, perhaps the rest can successfully seek common ground and have reasonable policy discussions.

[TylerE]

Not picking a fight isn't the same as pretending something doesn't exist.