Eventually, because this guy felt unsafe multiple members of the rest of the camp put their hands up as feeling unsafe. I call it liberal mind virus because of the “safety” focus. A normal person would see small challenges and discomforts as part and parcel of daily life, and they certainly wouldn’t have safety concerns as grown up (mostly) men from a small girl. Everything was also taken out of context too - they all knew her and had camped together for 10+ years. It was basically a group-think public lynching based on some false sense of morality.
> they certainly wouldn’t have safety concerns as grown up (mostly) men from a small girl
Why? I can see the idea of “he can (probably) overpower her”, but is that the only valid metric for safety? I think a lot of reasonable people would say no. What you actually do about that is perhaps more up in the air - sometimes it is saying “you just gotta deal with it”, like you said, but that is a lot worse of an answer when it comes to personal dynamics and consent
> I call it liberal mind virus because of the “safety” focus
> … group-think public lynching based on some false sense of morality
I also promise you these are not exclusive or exceptional traits among liberals. It’s extremely easy for me to frame the (imho unreasonable) actions of some conservatives I know with that exact same language - do they have a “mind virus”? I think it’s important to take them seriously rather than dismiss them like that, as tempting as it might be
By all means I don’t know the situation and don’t want to interrogate you, but please reflect on: is it really the fault of hyper-liberal partisan groupthink, or was it a case of humans being messy and messily using the language they have to paper over it, or was it a case where “normal” people across the spectrum might agree upon a little reflection even if you still think it’s wrong?
I think you might receive less blowback and better conversation by avoiding vague, incendiary, hyper-partisan language
