(1) It was so PC, really - this simultaneous smug assertion of a right 
(of those one supports) to go on the attack, combined with a screeching
whininess if those attacked offered even the slightest effort to resist. 
Fights are a lot easier to win, if the one attacked isn't allowed to
fight back or even walk away, aren't they?

The real question is not why so many were willing to make this
manipulative demand. It's why so many of us were stupid enough to let
people like this make the rules unilaterally for us, for so many years.
Why were we so weak as to agree to such an uneven set of rules?

(If the search engine dropped you off here, you can click here to go to the beginning of the 
story).