• Psychadelligoat@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
      7·
      4 months ago

      So how about maybe not judging the whole of a thing on those that claim to align with it- yet show no similarities to it.

      Maybe if the people who are pro-equality shouldn’t grasp onto their gendered term so hard. Kinda weird that out of one side of their mouths so many people will say it’s about equality for all but insist we must use the feminine term over the genderless one we already have

      Don’t want to be judged on gender lines? Don’t use gendered terms to describe yourself, simple

      • Wren@lemmy.world
        5·
        4 months ago

        Again, you’re judging the entirety of a thing based on a portion of a thing. This is the same thing as when people call all vegans “obnoxious” when it’s just a portion of them that act this way.

    • frayedpickles@lemmy.cafeEnglish
      5·
      4 months ago

      I won’t get into the rest of the stuff in this thread, but I’ll disagree with your first point.

      Feminism is a word. An English word. And that means it’s definition is driven by common usage not a book. If the common usage shifts to a toxic place, the meaning shifts with it.

      If you disagree I’d love to hear your gymnastics around the word invcel, it’s evolution into incel, and then that further extension to femcel (even though the person who coined invcel was a woman).

        • frayedpickles@lemmy.cafeEnglish
          5·
          4 months ago

          There is no such thing as a static definition. You’re gonna have a real bad time in life communicating with people if you try to make that be your thing.

          However since my whole message was about flexibility of definitions and you called my example whataboutism…I’m thinking you already have challenges communicating with people.