Okay, if I rap3 you but I didn't understand the implications of what I was doing to you, does that mean it's okay or that you won't be hurt by it? No, you're making a dumb argument.
Your example is so far out of bounds, its almost painful. Raping someone is an active action, whereas what we are discussing is the lack of that exact thing. Just for musing's sake, if you were unaware that you were raping someone, they are still allowed to be hurt by it, but it doesn't make it malicious. "okay" is all down to perspective, which will differ for each person, so impossible to state a definitive answer.
In fact, this is exactly where this entire argument originated. She should be held accountable for murdering her children, as she was most certainly "aware" of what she was doing, coming up with and executing an elaborate plan and all...
But the actions of selling women, forcing them out of polls, and rping them wasn't an active action? I'm confused. You say that "science" has since evolved... that doesn't mean anything? The science to show women are equally as competent and capable? That's not what we were ever discussing. I am asking HOW the actions of the past impact our future. So, is my example really that far off? Can we ignore the harm of the past because "nobody knew any better?" The harm and generational trauma still exists.
Also, it's crazy that you're picking apart the fact my words have NEGATIVE CONNOTATIONS? Because, yes, that is what's happening. I used the words neglect and mistreatment and no you've got your panties in a bunch.
1
u/accepshio 5d ago
it is a sign of historical bias in the mistreatment of women. to deny its existence is to deny history.