BitcherBats responds to the "Toxic Positivity" thread

Let's also address the absolutely egregious straw man argument that "shortjonsilver" made in the following comment. This was in the original thread about toxic positivity

"These "vents" are just thinly-veiled attempts to justify your misogyny, lazyness, arrogance and reluctance to change to fix your self-imposed problem."

SaIva66 did a pretty good job of responding when he said

"There you go spouting out the same bullshit over and over again. I am not complaining about women. I am just complaining about ignorant, dismissive people like yourself. Your type is the reason why I am posting here. Now quit bullshitting about "inceldom".

He's absolutely correct too. He didn't say a single thing about women in the entire thread, thus, he's being chastised on the basis that his whole argument hinges on hatred of women. This is one of the normal tactics they use to trivialize our entire cause. They make it about women or "getting laid" so that it is easy to dismiss everything else that is said. In this instance, this straw man is even more silly considering that the concept of "toxic positivity" did not originate in anti-heightism circles; It's actually just a general sociological concept to categorize how bad actors will reaffirm the status-quo by silencing marginalized people under a banner of pseudo-positivity. If you listen to the concept of toxic positivity being discussed when dealing with any other issue, you'll get resounding agreement on how dangerous it is in-regard to impeding progress, yet, if you discuss the concept during heightism dialogue, you're automatically an incel misogynist who wishes harm on women. Basically, it's white knighting gone horribly awry. Even though the subject matter does not attack women in any way, it is used to erect a scarecrow to beat down to the potential delight of theoretical damsels in distress.


In the most recent thread, there is also more white knighting talking about how the sub isn't welcoming enough to women. Any man who is being honest with himself would know how ridiculous it would sound for a man to avoid anything in life because he wasn't actively welcomed and coddled into any given group. If he refrained from participating in a group on such grounds, guess what people would say? He's not confident, probably an incel, needs to improve his social skills, needs to man-up, quit worrying about what other people think, is entitled for thinking he needs to be welcomed with open arms, needs to learn to "own a room," and every other platitude that society has to offer. Considering that heightism affects men much more, this whole narrative would be like if a bunch of men who had a scratch on one finger showed-up to a group comprised of people who had both arms amputated and demanded that the double-arm amputees catered to them. Then, the main mod lapped this narrative up and told all of the people with no arms to tone-it-down so that the people with the finger scratches were more comfortable. Then, some of the people with no arms decided that rebelling against people who had 1.5 arms cutoff for the benefit of people with finger scratches was the way to go. The whole situation is beyond ridiculous.


However, the giddy little Garmins of r/short are on close to a decade-long quest to create a welcoming environment to said women, and even though they have a white knight lapdog for a mod now, women still aren't flocking to bask in the welcoming environment. The sub has been engineered to cater to women in every way since Bikerbats took over, yet, they still aren't showing up en masse. Objective thinkers might take this as a sign that short women just flat-out don't want to be associated with short men, but those lemmings at r/short are still trying to act as unpaid bellboys running around trying to create an even more woman-friendly subreddit. It's really sad to see them running around and laying the groundwork for a stampede of women that will not show-up under any circumstances.