= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
TheOtherDave comments on Rationality Outreach: A Parable - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (122)
Gay groups in fact agonize over this all the time, or at least did twenty years ago, and the same divisions between what are sometimes called "nukers" and "appeasers" come up again and again and again.
I suspect the same is true of feminist groups, or at least was at one time.
I suspect it's a universal pattern among activist groups, along with the use of words with high emotional indexes ("nuke," "appease," "servile," "ruling," "bend over backwards," "corrupt," "groveling," etc.) when talking about it.
Yeah, it's a very common pattern. It reminds me:
I'm twelve, reading Signs on the couch.
Me: "Mom, why's it called 'Feminisms at a Millenium'? Isn't it supposed to be 'feminism'?"
Mom: "Sweetie, feminists argue a lot. They don't all agree on what feminism is."
Me: "Humph. They're being dumb."
(chuckle)
In my youth, the joke was "The only thing two Jews can agree on is what a third should donate to the Temple." (Which is, admittedly, one of those things you can only get away with saying about your own tribe.)