Alright, I clicked the link. And found:
“…
“I personally won’t wear one because if it hurts even a few people’s feelings, then I don’t feel like it’s unifying,” said Phoebe Hopps, founder and president of Women’s March Michigan and organizer of anniversary marches Jan. 21 in Lansing and Marquette.
“I care more about mobilizing people to the polls than wearing one hat one day of the year.” …”
What the fuck is wrong with that sentiment? I have a feeling I’m missing the outrage here, and would need someone like Hannity or Morton Downey Jr. to spell it out for me.
I thought everyone was shaving down there now.
Not that I do, because what’s the point?
Georgia O’keeffe must be rolling over in her grave on this.
Well, how few people “hurt” is the threshold for you to give up on something that you would otherwise do? 10 people on the planet? 5 people? 50 people? You will never, ever, ever, find some subject that doesn’t hurt “a few people’s feelings.” You could say “I like vanilla ice-cream” and if the audience is big enough you will find people with a parent killed in an accident or robbery while going to buy vanilla ice cream, or with a relative that worked for slave wages in a vanilla farm, or who ran an indie ice cream store and had their livelihood destroyed by a big chain. To try to avoid to ever inadvertently hurt anyone is a fool’s errand.
My personal threshold has been demonstrated to be over six billion people but I understand it can vary. It does lead one to wonder how many bothered people Phoebe Hopps ran into before she decided the pussyhats were too offensive. Or perhaps it was just one person who was convincing enough to sway her certainties? I can see how a person arguing from a perceived minority position would be sensitive about losing support.
“I personally won’t wear one because if it hurts even a few people’s feelings, then I don’t feel like it’s unifying,” said Phoebe Hopps.
Just to clarify, do you consider Phoebe Hopps to be a Brietbart, or InfoWars, spokesperson, or are you just tired of talking about the OP?
Let me help. He was saying that for the OP to have, well, any point at all, the OP had to be presuming that Phoebe Hopps’s personal decision was in some way a reflection of liberals as a whole (in a way that my hatred of the ‘Sherlock’ show apparently isn’t). If this sort of assumption is a reasonable assumption to make, it’s similarly reasonable to assume that Brietbart and InfoWars speak for and reflect on you.
Nah, it’s the sheer idiocy of finding a random liberal with a silly opinion and claiming that opinion is a general opinion of liberals.
I should ask you why you want the FBI shut down.
How about gun owners are all antisemetic?
Hey, no fair! I got offended first! 
Death by vanilla. I don’t like the pussy hats, so I won’t be wearing one tomorrow.
Why is it I never see any actual liberals being offended by any of these silly things? It’s always a conservative who’s offended. If liberals are always complaining like conservatives complain they do, shouldn’t I occasionally be seeing a liberal complaining? But I don’t; it’s always a conservative saying he heard some liberals saying something.
Never heard of this alleged complaint and offense.
So Chimera Libby Lib Liberal says: FALSE.
My barometer for all things SJWIsh (the lil’wrekker) says this a bunch of baloney. She said that the hat is ugly and the color is horrible, and she for one would not be wearing it! So there!
You’re always going to have some idiot offended by something. The hats are stupid anyways, so if it gets people to stop wearing them, maybe that’s not a bad thing.
I’m sure you looked lovely in yours.
I’m not seeing what’s offensive about the hats themselves, but “pink pussyhat”, seems like there should be a better name for them.
This is basically true, but what does that have to do with chastising the woman for drawing that line at a place where you wouldn’t? Why does the fact that it’s not possible to never offend or never trigger or never hurt someone’s feelings mean it’s wrong if someone chooses in that instance to change their actions?
I mean, ultimately, it’s not a decision based on a number of people. It’s one based on how important what you are doing is, and how much hurt you are causing. Sure, more people means more hurt, but that’s not the sole criteria.
And, well, we’re human. We’re not consistent. Maybe this one issue you’re more sympathetic to than this other one, so you’re willing to do more for that issue. Maybe the person saying something is someone you care about, or in a group you care about. Or maybe you’re just in a sympathetic mood in general. Heck, maybe you just didn’t want to do it in the first place, and this gives you an excuse.
It seems to me that these types of arguments, while more-or-lesss true, are used more often for two things I disagree with. One is to take “not try” further and just not try not to offend people in general. The fact that you can’t do it perfectly is used as an excuse to never try at all. The other is when someone who does try to a level beyond what you do is painted as doing something wrong.
If this person doesn’t want to wear the pink hat because someone was offended by it, then that’s perfectly fine. They decided to draw the line where they did on this particular issue at this particular time. The pink hat just isn’t important enough to them.
These stories that paint these things as “SJWs run amok, taking over the world” or even “look at how horrible these liberals are!” are just stupid. They are outrage-bait, memes in the classical sense, designed to piss people off enough to spread, getting more clicks.
Their leader is quoted as saying “I personally won’t wear one because if it hurts even a few people’s feelings, then I don’t feel like it’s unifying. I care more about mobilizing people to the polls than wearing one hat one day of the year.” :eek: :mad: Jeeezh! With the far left inflamed with militant and fascist sentiments like that, it’s no wonder Real Americans finally elected a Real Man as President.
Thanks for the link, OP! It’s crap like this campaign against pink pussies that make reactions like Timothy McVeigh’s not entirely unreasonable.
I agree with BigT. There’s nothing objectionable about someone else using a different metric for potentially offensive behavior than I am.
The problem is when everyone is expected to be sensitive to every potential issue using the most easily offended person as a benchmark for what is morally acceptable. I don’t see that happening here.
That’s not helpful, but thanks for trying. The OP’s point was that the left is amazing.
The 2nd post in this thread could be described as an attempted hijack if it wasn’t in the IMHO forum. Is the pink pussyhat offensive, or not? Some people, apparently, think it is. Some people think it’s symbol of solidarity. Some people think, myself included, that it’s a really ugly hat with a really stupid name.
Having said that, I question why the subject of actually wearing ugly, stupid, pink pussyhats shouldn’t be discussed?