It would be a lot easier to stick to the important parts and avoid falling into the trap of misdirection if jackass comments like this were less common:

nostr:nevent1qvzqqqqqqypzpf8wdz99n8y5jwuxg8xxrxr77s4h2446reuaxk72j2saecvxmty9qythwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnswf5k6ctv9ehx2ap0qyt8wumn8ghj7ct8vaezumn0wd68ytnvv9hxgtcqyqfshlsqyztu4ze6rkf2rs0u0gj2w8r9rcvut09hc6nrlv5pw769g7t4ndd

This kind of smoothbrained shit is counterproductive fuel for the dishonest actors on the other side of the argument. They wouldn't be incorrect to point out that these sentiments exist, which is how they legitimize their redirection; but they would be wrong that these sentiments matter to most people on this side. But once the legitimate redirection is achieved nobody cares about the nuance anymore.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

I get where he's coming from but disagree with the "women should or should not" parts, and would rephrase it as "it would be in their best interest to".

But that's not relevant here.

To my point, these women are not the root cause of the deterioration, they are just the unwitting part of the toolkit.