Xsplat is one my favourite posters in the manosphere. I often find his writings insightful, thought-provoking and sometimes inspiring.
A comment I made on his article entitled “If she claims she’s ever been slipped a roofie, she has BPD and is lying.“, in which he references a Roosh V forum posting (which I admittedly mistook for a different article, since I was somewhat hastily scanning the post on the tube – my bad), provoked an interesting debate, whereby Xsplat posits that it isn’t necessary to qualify a generalisation when talking directly to men.
In fact, he then went to make a post out of his reply to my comment here – “You don’t have to preface every generalization with “mostly”, when talking to men.“.
Since I was mentioned in person, I thought I’d expand upon my original point, and in the spirit of inspiring debate post it here too.
Although I already replied to your comment on the original post, since you mention me specifically in this one I figured I’d use the opportunity to expand my point.
First, I agree entirely that when dealing with reasonable people the qualifier on a generalisation should not be required. And indeed, as you say, many of the people who read this blog should be credited with that level of intelligence.
However, I also believe that any reasonable, intelligent man would have already come to the conclusions of your other post without requiring any additional evidence. I know that personally I have been rolling my eyes at such claims for many years, long before I even knew the manosphere existed.
If we, as manosphere writers, only wish to appeal to those readers who have sufficient levels of intelligence and are already inclined towards our way of thinking, are we not guilty of preaching to choir?
I don’t know if that is in fact your target audience – it might be. Myself, I hope that my writing reaches some other people who are perhaps sat on the fence, who are still in possession of a measure of blue pill thinking. For those people, seeing what appears to be a sweeping generalisation will cause them to reject out of hand what otherwise they may have been led to believe, by simple dint of indicating that a generalisation was being made.
As you say, although it should not be necessary, unfortunately for those people who have lived their lives under a cloud of blue pill thinking, political correctness, and NAWALT, I believe it is.
As I wrote out this comment, it caused me to reflect upon why I find it necessary to qualify my statements to the degree I do. I find myself many times a day, whilst interacting with various of my friends, all of whom have varying levels of exposure to the red pill, attempting to persuade them to my way of thinking. I arrive at the conclusions that I reach due to a logical thought process, whereby I feel that the opinion I hold can be irrefutably and objectively held up to scrutiny, and as such enjoy attempting to bring others round to my way of thinking.
Ultimately, I like to share knowledge with those people who matter to me, so I want to bring as many people as I can along on this ride with me. If that means watering down my language a little to make my opinions more palatable, giving them time to sink in and be mulled over before being rejected out of hand, then so be it.