That's true, but that's the end goal. Right now, there are a lot of people who disagree with that, and not only do they vote but they also have an influence upon society. We need to persuade them. Right now, they think of things in terms of social stratification, and so we have to play in that ballpark, because they refuse to play in ours. We have lots of anti-discrimination laws, and that's good. I think any worthwhile civilization should have those, without exception. But there is still the cultural and social battle to be had, a battle of ideas.We shouldn't care what race or gender or sexual orientation someone is, we should only care whether or not they need our help.
Who exactly are you talking about anyway? Who thinks of things in terms of social stratification? Because intersectional feminists are a pretty tiny portion of the population and aren't really even remotely what I'd call mainstream.We need to persuade them. Right now, they think of things in terms of social stratification, and so we have to play in that ballpark, because they refuse to play in ours.
Why? This is a terrible strategy in my eyes. Letting your opponents dominate the conversation without ever challenging your narrative doesn't get you anywhere.
The mainstream. The people who, if they don't dominate the conversation at least in the beginning, just leave and strengthen their own beliefs while they do it. They already understand the world in X way. We want to replace it with Y way. Before we get to do that, we have to convince them to doubt that X way is the best way. Only when we've done that do we have room at all to start talking about Y way.Who exactly are you talking about anyway?