My thoughts is that it’s a simple situation really. If they’re harassing or assaulting people, the women will call the cops or something, simple situation and get the guy arrested. If he’s not doing anything, it’s nothing harmful. Apparently that’s not a solid enough answer. What should I have said?

  • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Depends how likely an actual productive conversation was. It’s not an invalid question without context. With the typical coconuts, yeah maybe just embarrass them.

    • grue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 months ago

      It’s not an invalid question without context.

      On the contrary: it is more than famous enough as a right-wing “gotcha” question that’s very fair to assume it’s invalid by default. Positive context would be necessary to justify treating it as genuine.

    • otp@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      typical coconut

      …? Brown on the outside, white on the inside? Like a white-washed Indian person?

          • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            Uhh, yeah, it actually doesn’t explain as well as I had hoped. The bit about “you exist in the context of all in which you live and what came before you” took on a life of it’s own, and it’s associated with the idea that context is important. Maybe I’m in a small meme bubble, though. I probably won’t make that reference again.

            • otp@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              3 months ago

              Haha, thank you for the explanation. Yeah, I’d heard of the clip, but never heard of that usage of coconuts.

              I’m also probably older than the average memer, lol