Imagine a child in a school playground. This child pinches other children, but she only targets children belonging to a minority group. The pincher is subtle; she does it only when teachers aren't looking.
But other kids see her do it, and following her lead, they join in.
The kids being pinched don't deserve it. They just want to be left alone.
But the pinching child is telling everyone this minority group is dangerous. As evidence, the child shows everyone the scar of an old dog bite.
See, they say. Proof. Dogs bite; these children will too.
So the other kids (many of whom disliked this minority group anyway) are pinching, sometimes escalating to hitting, punching. The minority children, when they point this out, are told "when they go low, we go high" and encouraged to not retaliate. "Just ignore them."
One day the bullied children retaliate. They yell at the pincher to leave them alone. One kicks them very, very hard in the shin.
The pincher bursts into tears, runs to the teacher and shows the bruise.
I'm the victim, they say. Look. This PROVES the minority kids are dangerous.
The other bullies are outraged. All they did was pinch and pinch this group of bullied children. Pinching isn't the same as kicking. No matter how many times they do it.
The poor pincher is right. The minority kids are exactly like the dog that bit her. Justification!
The teacher tries to point out that although kicking is wrong, pinching the children, who are already being bullied because of their minority status by bigots, is worse.
The bullies can't believe their ears.
This is proof the rights of the minority group supercede their own.
They want the teacher to ban the minority group from the playground.
The teacher points out that the playground is public.
But the bullies are furious at this suggestion. The playground is a safe space for us, they say. The minority group is dangerous. They are taking our rights.
The teacher tries to explain that although bad things happen in playgrounds, the minority group aren't specifically to blame.
The bullies don't care. They don't belong, they say.
The first pinching child, meanwhile, tells a moving story about being bitten by a dog.
The pincher points out that dogs are not allowed in the playground for this reason.
If dogs are banned from the playground, they say, why do we allow these specific children to use it when this minority are just as dangerous? Look at the bruise on my shin!
The bullies agree.
The teacher tries to point out the although biting dogs are common, the children from the minority group are not dogs.
Wrong, they say. They ARE dogs pretending to be children so they can come to the playground and bite people.
The teacher tries to point out this is ridiculous.
Meanwhile the minority group is trying to point out that they just want to play in the playground like everyone else.
Everytime they try, the bullies call them dogs, and accuse them of being predatory.
The bullies are secure in the knowledge they are right.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Kolley Kibber

Kolley Kibber Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @camcamdamn

6 Jul
THREAD (1)
17th century England was very familiar with the Black Death; it had been endemic in London for centuries, and regularly erupted with thousands of deaths each year.
In the year 1665, the Great Plague of London began.
Also in 1665, a furious protest document was printed.
(2)
The title:
"THE SHUTTING UP Infected Houses As it is practised in ENGLAND Soberly Debated."
It was basically an anti-lockdown document listing "reasons" why quarantines were unnecessary, even harmful, during this epidemic of Black Death.
Some of them may sound familiar.
(3)
It opens by saying "our breath may be infectious, our words are innocent", and asks that readers "add not sorrow to affliction".
The "First Reason against shutting Men up for the Plague" is simply:
"Were Men (those sociable Creatures) made thus, every Man to live by himself?"
Read 11 tweets
21 Jul 20
Jesus Image
More details. TW: stalking, rape google.com/amp/s/babe.net…
This is the original site:
incels.me
The statement left on the closed page is pretty insane.

This is where they've moved to:
incels.co
Read 7 tweets
25 Feb 20
Remembering the hideous anxiety I had as a young teenager - and watching the way Greta Thunberg is sneered at, bullied and mocked by supposed adults - by YOU, @piersmorgan - reminds me that I wouldn't have lasted two minutes doing what Greta is doing. I'd have committed suicide.
Greta Thunberg has incredible courage to face the shitstorm of bullies she encounters every day. Piers Morgan has relentlessly sneered at her, mocked her, mimicked her - a fully grown adult, on television, online.
I wouldn't have survived what he - he alone - has put her through.
Piers Morgan enjoys ridiculing her. He is loathsome.
Read 5 tweets
25 Feb 20
Weinstein reminds me of "The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde".
Jekyll is a renowned doctor with an excellent moral reputation.
He wants to keep his reputation as a good, decent man, while also engaging in - gasp! - debauchery.
Jekyll wants the best of both worlds.
So...
... Jekyll invents a potion that transforms him into Hyde, an evil and cruel man, thus disguising his identity and allowing him to indulge in his vices. Voila! Jekyll retains the respect and admiration due to a successful, decent man, while also committing horrific acts.
Jekyll's desire and decision to do immoral things means he was never the decent man everyone thought he was. Hyde isn't the mask - Hyde is his true face. The potion is a means of ensuring Jekyll continues enjoying the benefits of being a good man, without being a good man.
Read 5 tweets
5 Feb 20
Brexiters are lying when they claim the EU has deprived them of fishing rights. What actually happened? British fishermen sold their fishing quotas to other EU countries to make quick millions.
Each country is free to share out its fishing national quota, but Britain let fishers sell their quotas abroad. The Dutch ship Cornelis Vrolijk owns 23% of the entire UK quota - which was willingly sold to them by British fishermen, eager for the chance to make a quick buck.
What Brexiters won't say is that 5 UK families own a third of the UK's entire fishing quota (29%):
Lunar (Alexander Buchan + family)
Interfish (Jan Colam + family)
Klondyke (Robert Tait + family)
Andrew Marr International (Andrew Marr + family)
JW Holdings (Sir Ian Wood + family)
Read 8 tweets
4 Feb 20
THREAD: Remember when England's beaches were littered with human shit from the sewage being poured into the sea just off shore, and how the UK councils actually tried to fight the EU in court to keep it that way?
The EU legislation resulted in 95% of British beaches being safe to swim in. Nearly a year ago, in anticipation of Brexit, the UK once again began pumping raw sewage just off shore.
google.com/amp/s/www.chro…
Read 10 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(