Tone policing in online health advocacy: if tone of voice is more important to you than knowledge-based content, have a word with yourself. Fact-based confidence isn't rudeness, refusing to listen when totally under-informed, is. These aren't two equally valid 'sides'.
My patience is running out with the false equivalence of 'both sides are mud slinging'. It's not mud slinging when a knowledgeable party insists on sticking to facts. It's not mud slinging when they keep pointing out the difference between fact and fiction.
There's far too much emotional hyperbole in some advocacy, far too much wishful thinking, and false hope. We need pragmatists like @velogubbed to keep us grounded. We need people with lived experience and courage to speak truth to power. So what if a tweet isn't perfectly polite?
I'm not sure how that would invalidate the content, the substance of what we do need to know and base our advocacy on. Gutted but not surprised that the overall fact-free spirit of society permeates advocacy, too. Because celebrity X says something, it must be true.
Tone policing is ridiculous and petty as well as lopsided. It is a detractor from all that matters. Stripping advocacy from historical context, for example, is unforgivable. Emptying it of politics, unforgivable. But oh, let's all be sweetness and light and gloss over the mess.
