Here’s my problem with the “opposing views” argument.
First is the premise that every opposing view is valid and thus should be entertained. For a movement striving to emancipate minority groups in the society, what exactly would an opposing view be aiming at achieving really? Continuous subjugation, no matter how little, of the group, no matter how carefully worded or articulate it is presented. What would a view opposing emancipation of slaves have been like? Once you begin to imagine that, you begin to understand why feminists expect “yays” and “amens”.
There is a reason why people with opposing views towards feminism, anti-racism, anti-Semitism, movements against child trafficking and child labor, no matter how carefully worded, immediately pay the price for airing their views in ill-concealed laughter, sneers and sometimes violent retorts.
The second is the assumption that every well worded opposing view is aimed at refining the movement and not meant to caricature it. Most times, flawed rhetoric/logic/syllogism is employed in carefully constructed reductio ad absurdums to demean the substance of the movement. I would actually like to hear what a well worded view opposing feminism that should be entertained would sound like.
This is for those “respect my opinion” and “it’s my own perspective” crowd.
By Godswill Vesta