> people Graham agrees with are encouraged to weaponize their victimization, while people he disagrees with are denied.
Where do you get that from the original post? I am not seeing it.
People Graham agrees with who are encouraged to weaponize their victimization: those supposedly accused of "heresy" for their "x-ist" utterances.
People Graham disagrees with who are denied: those who speak out about "x-ist" utterances, whom he characterizes as "heretic hunters".
I think it's the part where a promotion of weaponization is claimed. I'm not seeing that either.
Is it weaponization of victimhood to disagree, and warn others of the hallmarks of a problematic position?
I don't think anyone was confused about who the 'us' and 'them' are. Every group casts a shadow, so it's hard to talk about a 'they' without there being an 'us'.
The weaponized victimhood is used browbeat critics and to ensure that whatever "x-ist" phenomenon someone may be speaking out persists unchallenged. "Xs are the real x-ists, and truth-telling heretics are the heros".
> People Graham agrees with who are encouraged to weaponize their victimization
Just not seeing what you are seeing. Thank you though.
Re:Heresy
by FerociousTimes on Sunday April 10, 2022 @07:27PM
(#30982807)
Do you mean "victimization" or "victimhood"?
The degrees are more a matter of perspective than fact, though.
Christians consider Satanists the intolerant ones and vice-versa. Both can be claimed to be voluntary association, but if one isn't a choice, then neither is the other.
It's just plain old tribalist hypocrisy: people Graham agrees with are encouraged to weaponize their victimization, while people he disagrees with are denied. First-degree intolerance (including but not limited to "x-ism") is acceptable in any amount, second-degree intolerance (intolerance of intolerance) is verboten.