While I fundamentally disagree with his analysis, I am interpreting his intentions charitably, and I would like to ask him two questions.
Justin asks why some feminists receive what he calls “nasty pushback” while others don’t, and he concludes that it is because of the way that they present themselves on the Internet. He says of this “nasty pushback”:
“It’s not to say the nasty pushback is morally justified, but it’s just to state a fact; it’s just to state how the internet “is.” It’s not to justify the behavior.”
Justin, here’s my first question for you. Can you go a step further than that, and say that at least some of “the nasty pushback” is morally unjustified, and can you give some examples of morally unjustified nasty pushback?
Justin then concludes with his “Feminists’ million dollar question”.
“So the million dollar question once again is this: “Why is it that some feminists experience negative feedback on the internet while others do not?””
Justin, here is my second question for you. Do you think that we can more usefully ask that question in the active tense rather than the passive tense, and how would you answer this actively framed version of it:
Why is it that some people on the Internet direct “criticism and hate” and “nasty pushback” at some feminists, while others do not?
Note that this question is not about what these people believe they are responding to, but about why some respond with “criticism and hate” and “nasty pushback” while others do not.