That’s such a baseless tone policing fallacy. Give me a break.
There are countless causes in the world which strictly advocate for one thing. Whether it be for cancer research, or AIDS research, or homelessness prevention, or whatever else. No one ever responds to “donate to prevent breast cancer” with “donate to prevent all cancer!!”
I’m sorry, but saying “black lives matter too” wouldn’t solve anything here. You have to be a fucking piece of human garbage to assume that saying “black lives matter” somehow implies “other lives don’t”
Live in whatever bubble you want, in the real world most people don’t pay attention to minutia.
They see: “Black Lives Matter” and someone responds with “All Lives Matter”. They know only the words. They think “well of course all lives matter”. End of story. Your donation example doesn’t work for a ton of reasons.
It’s not baseless, it’s an example of what people bitch about when they say they’re sick of “political correctness.” White privilege has the same exact problem. People like Newt Fucking Gingrich even agree white privilege is real, but the wording of it is instantly aggressive and/or demeaning to the people they’re trying to reach.
It’s just another example of “don’t protest that way”. Tone policing and then blaming it on the victims when the privileged fall for stupid propaganda.
No, it’s not. But I know there is no way you will change your mind so fine. I think using “blaming it on the victims when the privileged fall” pretty much demonstrates what I, and I think maybe ShivaX are trying to say.
“Black lives matter too” doesnt solve anything. No matter the exact phrasing, it is still subject to reflexive undermining with “all lives matter” or “blue lives matter (too/more)”, or some other construction.
While tone and phrasing do matter, the idea that it’s all that matters on this obviously charged topic is ridiculous on its face.
I remember as a child they ran a piece on some prime time news show about missing children. This was before the Amber Alert system. They showed how much coverage cute blonde girls got, on a national level, to help recover them compared to the other missing children, often of minority status. You want to guess which one gets more coverage?
The lives of all children matter, but as you can see in this very thread, some people have to be reminded that the lives of the ones that were not in beauty pageants geared up to become the next supermodel, they still matter.
It’s tone deaf to respond to Black Lives Matter with All Lives Matter. In many cases, it’s also racist. You can tell by how they say it which can often be an attempt shout-out someone talking about Black Lives Matter.
Do you also think that Save the Children also made a mistake, because they didn’t add “too”?
And they’ve been around nearly a hundred years. BLM is not even four years old. Why do you suppose everyone has suddenly become so interested in syntax?
“Save the Children” sounds pretty much all inclusive to me. Nothing in that name seems to exclude children of any group.
I don’t want to get into a BLM good/bad thing. I just think the automatically linking the ALM phrase to racism is unnecessary and accomplishes nothing.
Uh, yeah. But what about all the adults that need to be saved?
And if someone kept piping up about all the extra attention that needy children get compared to elderly people like him, wouldn’t you start to suspect that maybe he doesn’t like kids very much?
Every cause draws attention to one particular group in need, whether that’s pets, women with breast cancer, or hungry children. It’s the nature of activism.
And the language and symbols are always exclusive. When you wear a pink ribbon, you’re not supporting everyone with a terminal illness. If you criticized Susan Komen For the Cure because they don’t try to cure ALS, you would be rightly considered an insensitive ass.
But BLM, uniquely, is criticized for taking the same approach.
I love how people are like “but they didn’t brand the movement perfectly, so what did they think was going to happen?!”
An organization arguing for the same things (not being targeted by militarized police on the basis of race, let’s say) called “Jesus Loves Guns And Freedom #AMERICA” would suddenly find itself opposed by people with serious economic anxieties about the conflation of Christianity, guns, and the Constitution.
