Zones of Whataboutery
It frustrates me to watch debates that descend into whataboutery. And if images speak louder than words, I hope the one above manages to drown out a bunch of pointless arguments.
Whataboutery is a tactic used by people who know exactly what they're doing – intentionally distorting the public's perception of reality. As a bystander in these debates, it's important to understand that two seemingly contradictory statements can be true, if you differentiate between a subject's average and its extremes.
A few examples:
On average, is Political Party A more racist than Political Party B? Yes.
Is it possible for some politicians from Party B to be more racist than the average politician from Party A? Also, yes.
On average, are women better than men at some things? Yes.
Is it possible for some men to be better than the average woman at those things? Also, yes.
On average, are the graduates of University A more successful than the graduates of University B? Yes.
Is it possible for some graduates of University B to be more successful than the average graduate of University A? Also, yes.
You get the picture (pun intended).