It is literally impossible to make a case against any kind of group behaviour without generalising. So when you respond to social commentary with "you're generalising", you are not sending me breaking news. I know I am generalising.

I'm doing it because the behaviour in question is widespread enough to merit generalisation. Because enough people are engaging in that behaviour for it to be a problem worth talking about.

The usual caveats obviously apply. Of course there are exceptions. Goes without saying.

Generalisation isn't always a bad thing. In fact, we have evolved to generalise. We jump in fright in response to sudden movement in our vicinity because our brain generalises such activity as dangerous.

When early humans were wandering the wilderness, often, sudden movements were actually dangerous. And the impulse has remained in circulation because it is still useful.

A false positive is a small price to pay in exchange for the ability to flee danger at a moment's notice.

Similarly, a few exceptions are a small price to pay in exchange for the ability to draw attention to a greater social ill.

Keep this in mind the next time you are tempted to say #NotAllMen or #NotAllScienceStudents. Instead, try to understand the point being made and empathise.

@vimoh
Humanoid Robots WILL be built. When they are, they will have to be FIRST programmed with Asimov's Four Laws of Robotics:
1) No Robot shall ever harm any human being or, by inaction, allow a human being to come to harm
2) A Robot must obey orders given by humans, EXCEPT where the orders conflict with the First Law
3) A Robot must protect itself at all times, EXCEPT where it conflicts with the First and Second Laws

rest in next post - even Mastodon's extra letters falls short!!