One phenomenon I'm particularly interested is when criticism of an idea feels like a personal attack.
politico.com/story/2019/02/…
1- an adjective applying to an action/idea/utterance (that's racist)
2- an adjective applying to a person (he's racist)
3- a noun for a kind of person (he's a racist)
![](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EAvp0PGU8AArFkw.png)
"Your comment demonstrates ignorance of the literature on gender."
"Well you are a privileged mansplaining shit."
* they should be punished for their speech
* they shouldn't have a job
* they deserve to suffer
* they are a transphobe
* not worth taking seriously
* doing great harm
* bad scholarship
As re white fragility, that these kinds of critiques are heard as those kind is a serious challenge to important discourse.
1- an adjective applying to an action/idea/utterance (that's transphobic)
2- an adjective applying to a person (he's transphobic)
3- a noun for a kind of person (he's a transphobe)
![](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EAvp20zU4AApDoO.png)
![](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EAvp21sUIAAVxqT.png)
![](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EAvqJwuU8AEUB-f.jpg)
Fortunately we are philosophers, so if that gives us any expertise in anything, it’s in respecting subtle distinctions!