The Intolerant Left
One standard will do
The political left is regarded as the purveyors of social justice and equality, yet they run into rampant hypocrisy when trying to apply standards for some and not for others. Usually, we are pressured into having only one view point as dissent is suppressed out of fear of being called a racist or sexist. Take any issue frequently promulgated by the left, let's try domestic violence. Forget how there are numerous studies of how women are, in reality, not the blameless victims we are taught to believe they are the vast majority of the time. The real problem is all the legislation that is trying to be enacted to combat these aggressive men from innocent women. Right out of the gate they lost me as their language is tailored to one specific gender as opposed to applying equally to everyone. How can I support legislation of this kind that is tailored specifically for one group? It's like it would be so offensive to just include everyone. Plus, this is on top of the ingrained misconception that men are almost always the culprits.
Bigger victim mentality
It starts as a choice between either applying something equally for everyone or not. This is where the multiple levels of hypocrisy from the left come in. They can't just strive for equal protection under the law. They push for the idea that everyone is equal, yet women are more affected so they need special treatment. Even if women hypothetically were the victims 99% of the time, there is no way you can just have anything specifically for one gender as there will always be a percentage of people that are equally affected yet don't fit the societal narrative of who the victim is. Therefore, to be neutral and equal under the law, gender needs to be left out of the equation. The hypocrisy continues if you try to take their same logic of who is a bigger victim and apply it to a situation where men are more negatively affected. Not a chance will they consider any special legislation that factors in the needs of a gender more unless it's women.
Equal, but not really
I don't want to take away too much from the problems that exist that are already widely publicized, I just want to shed more light on the other side of the coin that is either dismissed or silenced. Another example is with sexual assaults and rapes. Without even bringing the data into this, we are already only taught to focus and believe one possibility, that is men are the aggressors and women are the victims. There are many male victims out there without a voice in this area because of those societal pressures I previously mentioned. Even if it was just one man that was a victim, to only bombard us with how women are the focus and women need more protection is outlandishly offensively. If the conversation was changed to at least include men more often as victims of violence, false rape claims, and other similar crimes, then there wouldn't be a major problem. But apparently the mere idea of inclusion and equality as a concept in this situation is unfathomable and either denounced or not taken seriously.
Prioritizing who over what
In addition to gender, these same public policy double standards are often also seen with legislation involving race. Hate crime and other discrimination laws that are not written with total equality across the board. More examples and details can be further expanded on at another time, but my point has been made clear. And it's not solely the political left that is guilty of this, but they are surely major proponents of this type of behavior. A major reason they cite for rationalizing this hypocrisy invariably comes back to the bigger victim aspect I touched on earlier. A derivative of the word "oppression" is bound to come up shortly thereafter. Nothing is acceptable or just to have different legal standards in modern society. To not even consider anything beyond the substantially faded prototypical dynamics of oppression and power is abhorrent. The movement progressing toward true equality should not about which group is louder to control the entire conversation, it must be about the individuals on a case by case basis that starts out looking at what happened and not who it happened to.
Do you agree or disagree?
© 2014 ActuallyBrilliant