You attack a man, that’s bad. You attack a woman, that’s bad.
Women are routinely singled out for violence because they tend to be smaller and less intimidating.
The Groypers targeted her because she was a woman. JD Vance and his ilk don’t consider professional women legitimate. And quite a few of her male colleagues share that view.
So while picking a fight with a man invokes the angry of all his friends, Groypers feel confident they can single out a woman because her fellows have already left her isolated.
Original comment: hitting a man is as bad as hitting a woman.
Latest comment: proof by contradiction that hitting a woman is not worse than hitting a man if you’re not justifying hitting a man.
To me, “hitting a man is as bad as hitting a woman” and “hitting a woman is not worse than hitting a man” are equal statements. How is that moving the goalpost?
“Hitting a woman is worse than hitting a man” is just sexism.
By saying that it’s worse to hit a woman, you are being sexist. You also implied that violence against men, which disproportionately outnumbers violence against women, doesn’t matter. Saying that it’s bad doesn’t matter when you are creating a sexist double standard.
Why would it make it worse.
You attack a man, that’s bad. You attack a woman, that’s bad.
Baing a man doesn’t justify you being hit.
Women are routinely singled out for violence because they tend to be smaller and less intimidating.
The Groypers targeted her because she was a woman. JD Vance and his ilk don’t consider professional women legitimate. And quite a few of her male colleagues share that view.
So while picking a fight with a man invokes the angry of all his friends, Groypers feel confident they can single out a woman because her fellows have already left her isolated.
That’s what’s fucked about this situation.
Show me where I said being a man justifies you being hit?
You won’t, I didn’t say that. I said it’s wrong. I said it’s worse for a man to hit a women. Take your bullshit somewhere else.
Well, if hitting a woman is worse than hitting a man, then it must mean that hitting a man is not as bad.
So I can just hit men and say “at least I didn’t hit a woman”. That’s justifying hitting a man for just being a man.
Why don’t you mount those goalposts on a Bugatti, it’ll make it easier for you. Until then, you do you.
Original comment: hitting a man is as bad as hitting a woman.
Latest comment: proof by contradiction that hitting a woman is not worse than hitting a man if you’re not justifying hitting a man.
To me, “hitting a man is as bad as hitting a woman” and “hitting a woman is not worse than hitting a man” are equal statements. How is that moving the goalpost?
“Hitting a woman is worse than hitting a man” is just sexism.
By saying that it’s worse to hit a woman, you are being sexist. You also implied that violence against men, which disproportionately outnumbers violence against women, doesn’t matter. Saying that it’s bad doesn’t matter when you are creating a sexist double standard.
Where did I say it didn’t matter? You need some help with reading comprehension. Go read my comment again.