That's the crux isn't it? Social pressure to conform" is so abstract a thing to criticize.
It's like when retards criticize "violence" or "censorship" while conveniently dropping the "unnecessary" or "unreasonable" qualifiers.
She's using social pressure to try and influence her conformity over somebody elses.
Rules for thee but not for me is pithy and spot on, but it doesn't go far enough. This isn't just a "it's fine when I do it" it's even deeper than "No bad tactics only bad targets"
It goes beyond those to a moral paradigm based on Dominance and humiliation, being Dominant is the only moral rule, and therefore, your enemies bare existence as NOT YOU defines them as non-human.
It's the Jewish worldview of total ownership amplified by replacing a holy book with introspective hedonic soliphism.
It's only agency when you make the correct pre-approved choices. If you don't then it was patriarchal coercion.
Apparently the quantum uncertainty principle applies to freedom too, you can only know if you're woke or if you're free, never both at once.
That's the crux isn't it? Social pressure to conform" is so abstract a thing to criticize.
It's like when retards criticize "violence" or "censorship" while conveniently dropping the "unnecessary" or "unreasonable" qualifiers.
She's using social pressure to try and influence her conformity over somebody elses.
Rules for thee but not for me is pithy and spot on, but it doesn't go far enough. This isn't just a "it's fine when I do it" it's even deeper than "No bad tactics only bad targets"
It goes beyond those to a moral paradigm based on Dominance and humiliation, being Dominant is the only moral rule, and therefore, your enemies bare existence as NOT YOU defines them as non-human.
It's the Jewish worldview of total ownership amplified by replacing a holy book with introspective hedonic soliphism.