this post was submitted on 05 Aug 2024
1 points (100.0% liked)

Facepalm

639 readers
1 users here now

Anything that makes you apply your hand to your face.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] set_secret@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The irony here is palpable: the author demands respect for the victims of historical atrocities while using language that inadvertently excludes and marginalises. Phrases like "the worst that man can do to their fellow man" and "the best that man has to offer" are not only outdated but also insensitive, as they ignore the gender inclusivity that should be a part of any respectful discourse. Furthermore, referring to the dead collectively as "men" fails to recognise the countless women and children who also suffered and perished. This linguistic insensitivity, while perhaps unintentional, detracts from the powerful message of the rant and reveals a blind spot in the call for inclusive and universal empathy.

[–] skye@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago
  1. "Man" in certain contexts is shorthand for "Human" or "Humankind". Imagine how tedious it would be to write a sentence where everytime you wanted to use this shorthand, you'd instead "Men, Women and Children".
  2. OP even said "Men, women and children died because of who they were", so your point of "referring to the dead collectively as men" makes no sense.
  3. 99.9% of people reading OP's comment wouldn't have even begun thinking about this.

Overall, I think it's more insensitive to read a comment like OP's, and instead of taking the right point home and moving along, you decide to nitpick in an attempt at some sort of "Gotcha", which couldn't have been done more wrongly and with such confidence (or arrogance?)