The "privilege" here is "people assume my gender correctly." That's it; I'm not talking about some overall "how bad people have it" thing.
It's not about assuming gender correctly, it's about whether someone wants you to assume gender, and what should be the standard.
It's about both. Not sure how you can proclaim it "isn't about assuming gender correctly"; she essentially made it about that in her tweets where she talks about how.. people assume her gender correctly.
But yes it's more complicated than "assuming gender correctly"; never said it wasn't.
Its not about either.
It's about the vastly disproportionate 'punishment' of targeted harassment by a twitter mob for the 'crime' of speaking an opinion.
The usual suspects want to "its actually about ethics in games journalism" the conversation because they are fucking pieces of shit that get off on that type of behaviour, as anyone who has been unfortunate to get into a 'discussion' with most of them will be able to recall.
What the actual underlying fucking opinion is doesn't actually matter. It's just the casus belli.
Like I said; the cancel culture conversation is separate.
Ignoring that aspect of it, I'm just discussing what Lindsay said and why it might be controversial.
But totally get you are incapable of having conversations like that, so cheers.
that's
literally what the topic is about.
its the people that don't want to address their own shitty behaviour and contributions towards #cancelculture who are attempting to change the narrative to be "cancel culture doesn;t even exit, but IF IT DOES then its only because people deserve it, and I'm not saying I'm cool with harrassment BUT IF I AM its
not really harrassment because I disagree with what they said, and they basically asked for it".
The creator of that videos name is Natalie, not Lindsay btw, unless you're now diverting onto yet another conversation about spillover of targetted harrassment onto people tangentially related to the original target for heresy by association
