So there's this strange notion out there these days, that you are not allowed to have an opinion unless you are part of the group. Which is to say that unless you clearly share the experience with someone, the best thing for you to do is to remain silent. I have to ask: How is this helpful?

_{jeffshore.com}

Silence, you male

It's not that there's no merit to the notions that plenty of times people talk about things they don't understand at all. We see this not only in public discourse, but more so in politics, where ignorance on topics of science seems to take center stage, but this phenomenon has become a gag tool, a way to just make sure nobody expresses counterpoints.

The idea for example, that because I'm a white male, I'm not allowed to have opinions about anything not pertaining white males is ridiculous by its own, but it also means that the people who have a vested interest in moving the conversation forward, in reaching equality are truly not interested in progress, only vilifying others.

Now, does this mean all opinions are good? Of course not, but if there's not even an attempt to listen to the other side, the "battle" so to speak is already lost.

Identity Politics

To me what is really exacerbating the problem is the recent thickening of identity politics. The idea that individualism is less important than collectivism, and the monolith must be defined before and above one's own merits.

Why should X be respected? Oh, simply because X belongs to group Y. But X is insufferable.... It doesn't matter, X is from group Y.

I get the intentions, I do. But these blanket statement, these protective mantles are not helping anybody here. All they seem to be effective at is creating more divide and eliminating individual merits, which to me are more important in real life.

Maybe that's the cost of social media, of a life that is lived considerably online.... Or maybe we've not began to see the full cost of our current social trend, and have just began to detect icebergs.

MenO