• 420blazeit69 [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    6 months ago

    This is what she was going for: https://www.texastribune.org/2010/04/27/rick-perry-shoots-coyote/

    But she missed the mark a little, so now even her supporters are going fidel-wut. Had she just included the part about shooting the goat it probably would have played well to her base. If she said the dog was sick it probably would have been fine. If it was someone else’s dog attacking her, maybe. If she made the exact same comment 10 years ago or 10 years from now maybe it comes off differently, too.

    I’m saying that while this seems obvious in hindsight, the line between acceptable and unacceptable violence is shifting and not always easy to place. It’s all aesthetics anyway, so why not pick a more sober approach to violence that anticipates these issues?

    • macerated_baby_presidents [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      Oh gotcha. I do think there’s something different between making overtures at violence and actually doing some yourself (even if it’s only symbolic). Rare to see real blowback just for rhetoric. And the left is actually somewhat cautious about real violence - for instance most serious discussion of “adventurism”.