• memfree@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Article tells women to compromise with Republicans

    But, no, it does not. Verbatim, it says, “This mismatch means that someone will need to compromise.”

    If you were someone like Rush Limbaugh, you would tell the right that this is another example of Bezos using his media spin machine to disenfranchise conservative men, calling them stupid, unsuitable and telling them they have to compromise. Rush would never tell them the piece said no such thing and they’d never read the source to see for themselves.

    FAIR could have written an article that explained that POV as well and described included details left out, but instead chose to rile up the left with half statements the same way the right would do.

    I apologize for being so bothered by this, but I have to deal with relatives who are conservatives as a matter of Faith. Their church friends won’t hear reason so they won’t either UNLESS it is broached in an extremely fair and unbiased manner. Sometimes I can give them a nudge in such a situation, but not the way FAIR is doing here.

    • t3rmit3@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Except that, as this article pointed out, it’s not Republican men who are refusing to date liberal women, so there is only one group whose “compromise” would affect this situation, and it’s the women’s.

      You are trying to make something of the original op-ed not explicitly stating that it’s women who must compromise, and ignoring that in context that is exactly what it is saying. If not, what do you assert the article is proposing? If your answer is, “I don’t know, but since it didn’t explicitly say how I’m going to treat is as inscrutable”, then you’re just caping for the article’s misogynistic and paternalistic insinuations.

      • memfree@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I am very aware of how insincere, petty and close minded the right can be, but your words have taught me that the left can be just as bad. Thank you for the lesson. If you didn’t understand what I said about a Rush-y take, I can’t help and you won’t hear. I remain angry that FAIR has misled y’all into misquoting data, and continue to maintain that we should expect better of them.

        • t3rmit3@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          You’re the one in here misrepresenting the very clear position being advocated by WaPo, so kindly ride your high horse on out.

          Being open minded to harmful ideologies is not a positive thing.

          But I’m sure the other “enlightened centrists” will love to hear all about how you held the line against the totally dishonest Leftist headlines.

          • memfree@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            ?? You are making stuff up and expect us to just go along with your misinterpretation??

            You say, “it’s not Republican men who are refusing to date liberal women.”

            The WaPo piece says, “A 2021 survey of college students found that 71 percent of Democrats would not date someone with opposing views.”

            Notice it does NOT say men or women. It says “Democrats”.

            MY complaint is that FAIR misleads the reader into thinking WaPo said what you are saying. Honest reporting would explain how culture and language may lead the WaPo reader to infer women must change if they seek to marry while also explaining that it is never so stated. Dishonest reporting would argue that the WaPo piece absolutely says conservative men should become Democrats or that women should accept misogyny – but WaPo never said either of those things. Instead it called out for people to open their minds and try to consider how another PoV might see things:

            Unfortunately, Americans have not equipped themselves to discuss, debate and reason across these divides. Americans have increasingly sorted themselves according to ideological orientation. They are working, living and socializing with people who think the same things they do. Particularly on college campuses, a culture of seeking sameness has set up young Americans for disappointment. They expect people to share their own convictions and commitments. But people’s insight and understanding about the world often come from considering alternative perspectives that may at first seem odd or offensive.

            And what do I see in this thread? People who refuse to consider alternate perspectives.

            • t3rmit3@beehaw.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              You say, “it’s not Republican men who are refusing to date liberal women.”

              The WaPo piece says, “A 2021 survey of college students found that 71 percent of Democrats would not date someone with opposing views.”

              Notice it does NOT say men or women. It says “Democrats”.

              If you look just above that, you’ll see that the article is specifically pointing out the imbalance between women and men being along political lines:

              46 percent of White Gen Z women are liberal, compared to only 28 percent of White Gen Z men, more of whom (36 percent) now identify as conservative. Norms around sexuality and gender are diverging, too. Whereas 61 percent of Gen Z women see themselves as feminist, only 43 percent of Gen Z men do.

              Followed by

              This mismatch means that someone will need to compromise. As the researchers Lyman Stone and Brad Wilcox have noted, about 1 in 5 young singles will have little choice but to marry someone outside their ideological tribe.

              Combined with their observation that it is Democrats who will not date non-Democrats, it is they who would have to compromise by the article’s logic.

              Dishonest reporting would argue that the WaPo piece absolutely says conservative men should become Democrats

              Except the article explicitly says the opposite of that:

              about 1 in 5 young singles will have little choice but to marry someone outside their ideological tribe. The other option is that they decline to get married at all

              They explicitly spell out only 2 options: either not marry, or marry across political lines (which the marriages would not BE if the men stopped being conservative, since they’d then both be liberal). It literally does not leave open the possibility of either side changing their political stances.

              Instead it called out for people to open their minds and try to consider how another PoV might see things

              And what do I see in this thread? People who refuse to consider alternate perspectives.

              This is just infantilization of GenZers. What are they (or you) basing the assumption on that GenZers (and I) have not considered the other sides? Just because we don’t reach the same conclusions?

              Sorry friend, but just like you I also have conservative family members (some for religious reasons, some for political ones), and I think that aspect of them makes them pieces of shit (even if I still love them as family) precisely because I know their motivations and their reasons, and those reasons aren’t good enough to excuse their beliefs.

              I have considered alternate perspectives, long and hard. I just don’t agree with your conclusions.

              • memfree@beehaw.org
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                I just don’t agree with your conclusions.

                My conclusion was and is, “we should expect fair.org to be more credible than to make up such misleading click-bait headlines.”

                I’m saddened that you don’t agree.

                • t3rmit3@beehaw.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I’m saddened that you don’t understand why nothing about their headline is misleading.

            • davehtaylor@beehaw.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              I’m going to copy part of a comment of mine from up the thread: We keep hearing “People are so polarized these days! Why can’t they put politics aside and get along?” when the “politics” in question are where one group thinks entire swathes of people shouldn’t be allowed to exist and are working diligently to strip us of our civil and human rights. That’s not a difference of opinion, it’s a difference of morality, and there’s not two sides here to compromise. I’m not going to “consider” that “perspective”