Personally I find the stripping of agency from women to be far more detremental. Obviously women as a whole aren’t culpable. It only speaks to your own biases that that was your assumption.
Two grown men according to your article. Encouraged by the Jim Crow-Era social conduct.
Do not try to stir up some misogynist bullshit here. Do not try to relativize racism here. That shit won’t fly here.
Edit after your edit: I am not making assumptions. You are. There is nothing in the article that says the woman told her husband and brother-in-law to go kill that boy. It is you constructing such a causality out of thin air.
I don’t know her motivation. I do not assume. I just know that two men brutally murdered a child for racist motives and you are trying to make that into women being a systemic problem (because that is what the bear discussion is about. Systemic, socially normalised violence). Wrong turn.
Another edit after your edit: nobody says all men were the same though. You are just trying to imply I would.
I don’t know how clearly I can conditionalize something beyond saying sometimes.
Something you obviously had no issue omitting from your own statement.
Edit to the edit of my edit: the bear narrative does paint all men with a broad brush. Not that I don’t understand it. The implication that women can never be accountable for their actions is exactly how we end up with a patriarchy.
Racists gonna racist. Who cares which junk they have in their pants? What’s next, gonna point out that they wore watches? Watch wearers are horrible people!!1!
Irrelevant info leads to useless patterns. The relevance is that racists are horrible. You don’t need more for that pattern.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emmett_Till
Sometimes women are the bear.
Trying to twist a racist lynch murder of a 14 year old boy into “muh, women bad” is a choice. A disgusting, despicable choice, but a choice.
Who initiated the racist lynch murder? Was it a woman?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sometimes
Personally I find the stripping of agency from women to be far more detremental. Obviously women as a whole aren’t culpable. It only speaks to your own biases that that was your assumption.
Two grown men according to your article. Encouraged by the Jim Crow-Era social conduct.
Do not try to stir up some misogynist bullshit here. Do not try to relativize racism here. That shit won’t fly here.
Edit after your edit: I am not making assumptions. You are. There is nothing in the article that says the woman told her husband and brother-in-law to go kill that boy. It is you constructing such a causality out of thin air.
The violence still came from men. They killed a 14 year old boy. Do you think that’s excusable or what?
Of course not. Do you think her intention was a stern talking to?
The idea of painting all men with this brush is plain mysandry btw.
I don’t know her motivation. I do not assume. I just know that two men brutally murdered a child for racist motives and you are trying to make that into women being a systemic problem (because that is what the bear discussion is about. Systemic, socially normalised violence). Wrong turn.
Another edit after your edit: nobody says all men were the same though. You are just trying to imply I would.
I don’t know how clearly I can conditionalize something beyond saying sometimes.
Something you obviously had no issue omitting from your own statement.
Edit to the edit of my edit: the bear narrative does paint all men with a broad brush. Not that I don’t understand it. The implication that women can never be accountable for their actions is exactly how we end up with a patriarchy.
Edit edit edit edit edit: https://eji.org/news/emmett-till-accuser-admits-she-lied/
Read it for yourself.
Racists gonna racist. Who cares which junk they have in their pants? What’s next, gonna point out that they wore watches? Watch wearers are horrible people!!1!
Irrelevant info leads to useless patterns. The relevance is that racists are horrible. You don’t need more for that pattern.