Does that makes sense?
Yeah I guess. It's pretty easy to try and apply "most important thing first" type prioritisation to every problem, even though it really isn't applicable in cases where the 'most important thing' will be something that generations are going to pass over the course of doing it.
right so you use a multi-pronged approach. You have to tackle it all.
I had a woman argue with me that animal rights could not be fought nor mattered until people were no longer poor. Now, by that argument (whether or not you care about animal rights) we have to ignore women's issues until all men have everything going good, or elevate all white people before we start considering other ethnic groups.
That's silly.
We can try to fight homelessness, which has seen an increase in men to the point where it went from it being women in the vast majority in the 80s to it being majority men. AND then we can, at the same time, fight domestic violence on a different front.
I feel like there's this perception that we have to ignore what the majority consider less important issue or sweep things under the rug that don't benefit everyone, just to get a few things accomplished. That presumes we would at one point have a society that is without problems in any given area, which is never going to happen.
...LGBTQIA+ movement...
Alright, dumb off-topic question: What does the "I" stand for?
Intersex. There's also sometimes a U and P in there, some people have suggested using entirely different terms that don't require an ever increasing number of letters for what is more a spectrum than anything else. But getting most people to agree on a specific term and adopt it would not be easy.
Author
Topic: Calm and Cool Progressive Discussion Thread (Read 1247233 times)