This week's top woke fauxgressive idiot

[ideologyhunter]

This whole discussion is anti-freedom. The Constitution gives me the right to wear mittens. I am proud of my mitten heritage, I taught my son to wear mittens, and we are both proud NMA members. You can have my mittens when you pry them off my cold, stiff fingers. But since I'm proud to bear my mittens, my fingers will NEVER be cold and stiff.

 

[Metaphor]

You said that you feel an urge to defend right people's ability to wear mittens - as if that was under attack by anyone.

What I said was:
I don't believe wearing mittens on a cold day is 'white privilege'. I also don't want to dismantle the ability for white people to wear mittens on cold days. Your mileage may vary.

I was pointing out the problems with the language CRT believers use when they say 'dismantle white privilege' and making fun of the ideas of the person documented in the OP.

That shows either of two things: either you suffer from paranoia, or you tried to smear you opponents by inserting claims you knew to be false, which is a case of arguing in bad faith.

Either what you just wrote is a false dichotomy or it isn't.

You seemed to imply that you're aware the threat isn't real, which leaves only the second option. Which one is it though?

It was a mockery of the language and rhetoric used by CRT true believers.

 

[laughing dog]

What I said was:
I don't believe wearing mittens on a cold day is 'white privilege'.

Neither did the woman in the OP. She was pointing out that Mr. Sanders got a pass looking scruffy at an important state event - something she thinks a woman or a black person would be criticized for. IMO, from what I have seen, that is true for women - they are judged rather harshly for their attire at such events. But what she ignored is that Mr. Sanders always dresses scruffily.

 

[Metaphor]

What I said was:
I don't believe wearing mittens on a cold day is 'white privilege'.

Neither did the woman in the OP.

Yes, she did call it white privilege. That was her entire article.

Not so sweet? The blindness I see, of so many (Bernie included), to the privileges Bernie represents. I don’t know many poor, or working class, or female, or struggling-to-be-taken-seriously folk who would show up at the inauguration of our 46th president dressed like Bernie. Unless those same folk had privilege. Which they don’t.

She was pointing out that Mr. Sanders got a pass looking scruffy at an important state event - something she thinks a woman or a black person would be criticized for.

Bernie Sanders did not get a 'pass' because he has 'white privilege'. He got a 'pass' because he didn't look fucking 'scruffy' for fuck's sake. He looked like an ordinary fucking human being wearing appropriate fucking attire for a cold fucking day.

But, let's say that I have appallingly low aesthetic standards and most people did, in fact, think he looked 'scruffy'. I still don't believe the second part. I do not believe that women or black people would not have been 'given a pass' for looking 'scruffy' in the same way Bernie did. In fact, if somebody did dare to try to say something, people would probably try to cancel them.

IMO, from what I have seen, that is true for women - they are judged rather harshly for their attire at such events. But what she ignored is that Mr. Sanders always dresses scruffily.

That would be 'evidence', from her perspective, that Bernie is swimming in white privilege - he gets to be scruffy all the time!

Except of course - and I can't believe I am fucking defending how Bernie Sanders dresses himself - a quick google image search of Bernie shows him in standard suit and tie in most images.

I'm having flashbacks to Obama working in his 'shirt sleeves':
https://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/obamas-oval-office/12/

 

[Jokodo]

What I said was:
I don't believe wearing mittens on a cold day is 'white privilege'. I also don't want to dismantle the ability for white people to wear mittens on cold days. Your mileage may vary.

I was pointing out the problems with the language CRT believers use when they say 'dismantle white privilege' and making fun of the ideas of the person documented in the OP.



Either what you just wrote is a false dichotomy or it isn't.

You seemed to imply that you're aware the threat isn't real, which leaves only the second option. Which one is it though?

It was a mockery of the language and rhetoric used by CRT true believers.

Mockery is taking someone's actual words and meanings and transferring them to a context that makes them sound absurd. Putting words in someone's mouth is a whole other thing.