4 Comments

When "nuance" is the narcissism of small differences

Expand full comment

Thanks for writing this, Eva. My mental shorthand for this is "the voice of reason". It is usually a man who arrives at a debate involving women's issues, who hasn't done any of the reading or research, and immediately positions himself as The Voice of Reason on it all.

Of course there are also those who have done quite a bit of the reading and research (koff koff Jesse Singal koff koff) who pull this move. In that case I feel like: well, okay, we just honestly disagree. But it's still annoying that they call their stance "nuanced" rather than "nope I just don't like what feminists have to say about this". The latter would be so much more honest and less self-regarding. I don't try to pretend I'm more "nuanced" than Jesse Singal, like I've got a higher score on some scale of merit than he does: I just don't agree with him and am willing to leave it at that.

Expand full comment

Aargh the old "nuance" trick. Thanks for tackling it. Whenever someone pulls out a... "It's more nuanced than that..." I brace myself for incoming blowhardiness. Pet peeve!

Expand full comment

I like this, like most of what you write! It's very timely for me since I'm being reprimanded in a thread for giving a more Radical Feminist opinion (than what is scarily liberal to me), and told I shouldn't be speaking for all women. Never said I was.

Expand full comment