Politics

10176 readers

28 users here now

In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it's a political happening, you can post it here.

Guidelines for submissions:

Where possible, post the original source of information.
- If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
Social media should be a source of last resort.

These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:

Socialism

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

Pathos v Logos (self.politics)

submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by ConsciousCode to c/politics

4 comments fedilink hide all child comments

How do you argue with someone who's confused a lack of emotional connection to a topic with objectivity and rationality? Say a topic profoundly affects you and those you care about, but not the other person, so you get angry and flustered and they seem to think this means you're less objective as a result and it's an easy win.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] teydam@kbin.social 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

In my view, this is part of what feminism still brings to the table despite what people say and all the arguments inside the topic and outside about the topic. When its only men in there, they speak assertive and with authority, when these powerful spaces allow others in or they barge in, the communication hopefully changes the powerful man's point of view.

I say this because I was just reading this article a bit ago and really kinda makes sense of it. Its good to use hedging language, we just view it as weak. Thats often how science works, you cant always make strong claims unless you have high confidence in your findings and can rule out external factors

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/31/opinion/women-language-work.html

[–] Axolotling 3 points 1 year ago

While I don't disagree with anything you said, I'm not sure how this answers the OP's question. At least without a little bit more elaboration on what assumptions you're making and why you're bringing up feminism specifically in this case.

Just to take a stab here though, I think you bring up feminism because more often than not men will discredit women because "women get emotional". And since the men in this situation aren't crying from whatever casually horrendous shit is being said in the name of "debate", that to them, they think they are just and unbiased and have a more unbiased opiniom than women. Which ignores how men will often react angrily to a woman who buts into their conversation and not even realize that anger is an emotion too.