My last post was poorly thought out. A fully inclusive group can never exist unless it is extremely general, such as the group containing all humans. Human is not a social group though, it’s a collective noun. In order to be welcoming to some, any social group has to bar others.

This conflict, lurking in my subconscious, was brought to the fore by news of Ravelry, a knitting social website that for some reason was taken over by Trump supporters, in particular white supremacy advocates. Why would that happen? Have Facebook and Reddit become both vigilant about banning hate speak and effective in doing so, to the extent that the haters have to appropriate existing outlets that are less scrutinized?

I’ll guess No. Perceived virtue is not triumphing over real greed in the corporate world.

Whatever the reason, the knitters decided Enough, already! with the hater postings and not only banned them, but done so successfully enough to make the news and the late night talk show rounds. Based on my previous post, I should feel this is unfair for those who were banned, but I realize that I was wrong about that. Knitters have a right to keep Ravelry for knitting.

The High Sierras Back Country Hiking group can’t include the wheelchair-bound. The Ban Biocides in Groceries PAC can’t admit the glyphosate spokesperson. The Game Developers Meetup won’t get much done if a Luddite is contributing to their discussion.

My late father had something to say about this, mostly when I was complaining about a rule or punishment: Life is not fair.

Making life fairer is a worthy goal. Making life fair is impossible.