this gets pointed out over and over again, and has for years now, and yet, people still bounce back.

same goes for "not all men".

somehow, it's always white men who do this shit. <- example of metonymy in practice

It's also offensive as heck -- there's a large percentage of white people and men alike, who map to the abstracted example. Just like a lot of politicians, lobbyists, etc. in DC map to "Washington."

Again, i'm talking about language here.

I wonder sometimes when white people, or men, who do this sort of thing (and who aren't just trolling or being toxic on purpose), understand any of this.

One possibility: when otherwise sort-of-well-intentioned people say "not me!", they look at "white people" or "men" as a form of synecdoche, with them as the "target".

As in:

"A figure of speech in which a part is used for the whole or the whole for a part, the special for the general or the general for the special, as in ten sail for ten ships or a Croesus for a rich man."

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/synecdoche

Nobody thinks you're Captain America here, honest. :p

@shoutcacophony I think the "whatever reason" is important

I think many of these white people are capable of criticizing "Windows users" or "corporations" while understanding they don't literally mean ALL Windows users, etc.

It's not so much about understanding literary devices as just getting the fuck over yourself

@nev oh, absolutely. like i said at the start, "it's pretty obvious what this is, in terms of privilege (or should be imo)"

but people are, well, That Way.

I'm doing this thing here.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b0Ti-gkJiXc

if they're just not willing to do any fucking thing, then for sure.

i also agree that they're capable in general of lifting what amounts to a very small pebble in relation to a huge mountain of systemic oppression, but here we are

@nev especially if they're allistic (which is a whole other conversation)