Beamer wrote on Oct 14, 2017, 15:12:
Blue wrote on Oct 14, 2017, 12:47:
Choobeastia wrote on Oct 13, 2017, 21:27:
Why would anyone against online harassment be on Twitter in the first place?
That's a very victim blaming sentiment.
Why would someone afraid of heights ride a roller coaster.
Oops, there I go blaming the victim again.
Roller coasters have one purpose. Twitter ostensibly has one other than harassing people. Or arguing with people. Or debating.
I don't think it's very good at that purpose anymore. I don't think it's good for communication, or ever was, nor for brand building. It's really only good for throwing mud. There remains a few people for whom it serves a professional or personal purpose, but man, let it go. Other social media lets that happen better. Yeah, you can reach a wider audience on Twitter, but it's no longer the audience looking for what you want. Twitter let that boat sale.
So I don't think your comparison is 100% perfect, but each day it gets closer to that.
It really is an imperfect comparison.
Your comparison would work wonderfully if normally roller coasters were comfy sofas, but someone figured out how to throw them through an intense ride. The sitter simply wants to sit, and be comfy, but some asshole comes along and sends them on a heart stopping ride involving tons of heights and drops. They didn't WANT that. They had no way of stopping the person, but they thought, "hey, this isn't likely to happen. Millions of people sit on sofas and don't go on those crazy rides."
Let's go to someone else. Home invasions. There are, according to google-fu, 125.82 million homes in the US. There are approximately 1 million home invasions in the US every year. That means each home has approximately a .79% chance of being invaded. Of course, some areas will be much higher than that, and some areas much lower. Now, if someone kicks in a door, burglarizes a house, and murders the people living there, do we blame the home invader, or did the people not have enough locks? Should they have set up something physical to block the doors, or windows every night? Does who we blame change if their socioeconomic status forced them to live in a better area, or worse area?
All of this is moot, really. The real point is that even if we do not agree, it costs nothing to be understanding of a group choosing to stand up against bullies. At the same time, we only diminish ourselves by demeaning them.