Sofia on Nostr: Why do initially positive social movements so often end up turning negative due to ...
Why do initially positive social movements so often end up turning negative due to overcorrections?
Sure, not allowing youth to work at all is better than having 19th century Climbing Boys, but that is not a binary! It's not rocket science to allow people to work while still preserving their rights to do so humanely.
The civil rights movement too, obviously the US is far better in that regard than it was in the mid 20th century, but there are still elements of overcorrection (e.g. "POC-only spaces" that were recently created in a few places).
And of course, there are also the overcorrections in feminism, especially relevant to the elephant in the room here.
Are people at large really just that incapable of comprehending nuance? Do people really tend towards extremes that much?
Sure, not allowing youth to work at all is better than having 19th century Climbing Boys, but that is not a binary! It's not rocket science to allow people to work while still preserving their rights to do so humanely.
The civil rights movement too, obviously the US is far better in that regard than it was in the mid 20th century, but there are still elements of overcorrection (e.g. "POC-only spaces" that were recently created in a few places).
And of course, there are also the overcorrections in feminism, especially relevant to the elephant in the room here.
Are people at large really just that incapable of comprehending nuance? Do people really tend towards extremes that much?