higu:
i mean it’s like, yeah when you take a concept that clearly puts one group in a position of power over the other out of that context of a power relationship, of course it seems “fair” or “unbiased”.
but you know… context… it matters… a lot…
but anything that happens between genders would then be able to be labeled as misogynistic, ignoring the root causes of things. If you say, “The context of friend zoning is misogynistic because we live in a misogynistic world” I would say, “duh.” If you say, “We live in a misogynistic world, so friend zoning, which wouldn’t be misogynistic in a non-misogynistic world, is inherently misogynistic,” that seems false.
What I am saying is that “misogyny and friend zoning is misogynistic” makes sense, but saying “misogyny and friend zoning is misogynistic, hence friend zoning is misogynistic” does not make sense logically.
From a pure logic perspective:
(X and Y implies Y) makes sense
(X and Y implies Y), hence (X implies Y) does not make sense.
-
higu reblogged this from adaptable and added:
oh i think i can get behind this because i think we are sort of arguing different things and i am sleepy.
-
adaptable reblogged this from higu and added:
happens between genders would then be able to be labeled as misogynistic, ignoring
-
higu posted this
