Post Ad4sEKC2lAPwzpWE52 by herrmannpierre@mastodon.world
 (DIR) More posts by herrmannpierre@mastodon.world
 (DIR) Post #Ad4iwZFJ9lUoshVHgO by malteengeler@legal.social
       2023-12-22T17:56:49Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       "Protection for vulnerable groups online, like children and women."When did we become so fine with seeing women as "more vulnerable"? Women aren't "more vulnerable". They are hurt more, yes. But that's not the same as being vulnerable. This language simply makes the actors of violation invisible: men.
       
 (DIR) Post #Ad4sEKC2lAPwzpWE52 by herrmannpierre@mastodon.world
       2023-12-22T19:40:59Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @malteengeler For women it es appealing to be seen as "more vulnerable" in terms of needing protection, for men it is appealing to see women as "more vulnerable" in opposite to seeing themselves as "stronger". And don't even dare to say kids aren't more vulnerable. They clearly have to wear helmets outside a car and sit in special seats in a car.
       
 (DIR) Post #Ad4y1NrCQTR2JsyvKa by bleistifterin@fnordon.de
       2023-12-22T20:45:54Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @malteengeler das Problem ist: Synonymitis."vulnerable/verletzlich" ist nicht dasselbe wie "at risk/gefährdet". Wird aber so verwendet. Mit dem von Dir benannten Ergebnis