Don't you see how people might get mad?
Don't you see how people might get mad?
"Please don't pick the most provocative thing in an article or post to complain about in the thread. Find something interesting to respond to instead."
This particular story emphasizes "woman" partly because that's a key part of the story (it was unusual, against societal roles of the time), and partly because telling these stories now is corrective in multiple ways.
(And maybe also in the headline because that will get more eyeballs on the story, because people want those previously neglected stories, and that inspiration.)
I'm also sick of the stories of forgotten, now resurrected women who were, let's face it, minor players.
However, Gellhorn showed a lot of guts doing what she did. I admire that, too.
"I am a valuable contributor, sharing insights and questions; you are a shameless troll, spewing drivel and aggression."
And its cousins:
"Me? How can you moderate me? This is bias and censorship of the worst order."
and
"Ok, I may have overstepped a little, but the other started it with their obvious abuse. Am I not supposed to defend myself? You obviously must agree with them."
In the case of divisive topics "I" becomes "we", a.k.a. "my side", but the dynamic is basically the same.
All this is human nature so it's kind of hard to do anything about.
These Astounding Relics From the Omaha Beach Battle Tell The Story of D-Day 80 Years Later https://www.smithsonianmag.com/blogs/national-museum-america... - May 21, 2024
How a World War II Escape Map Found a Second Use as a Ladies Garment https://www.smithsonianmag.com/blogs/air-space-museum/2024/0... - June 5, 2024