**for people who fling the word around, it certainly applies to them too.** (trigger warning: mentions of rape.) - an example of this is men feeling entitled to make awful jokes and then getting offended when there is pushback. an example is the [K.A.M trend.](https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theatlantic.com/amp/article/359493/) while i personally don't see the humour in this, i understand it comes from a place of frustration and is not intended as a legitimate idea. even if it was, it would not be feasible. of all the responses, men decided to create R.A.W. (r*pe all women.) given the statistics and lived experiences this is a viabme threat and an incredibly horrific response that reflects the issue that created K.A.M in the first place. - furthermore, people getting legitimately upset about pronouns is an example of [who the real snowflakes are.](https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.albanystudentpress.online/amp/republicans-are-the-real-snowflakes) something like pronouns, which are taught at an incredibly young age and used by all in almost every encounter with another person, elicits such a venomous response. being hurt at being misgendered is valid, the actual snowflake behaviour is denying grammar just to spite an innocent person and hurt them. disrespecting people just because you are too lazy to respect them is what i would call a snowflake. - finally, the backlash against representation in media from this demographic exemplifies the extent of their snowflake tendencies. they operate under the assumption that any representation is pandering, that lived experience doesn't matter because existing as a minority pales in comparison to someone pretending they have since "talent" means pretending rather than drawing on experience to create a performance. they use children as an excuse to justify their homophobia and hypersexualisation of the LGBT community. if being a snowflake is getting upset over people being different, then hating seeing other people getting their much overdue screentime because you cannot handle seeing anyone who isn't exactly like you feels like the pinnacle of snowflake culture to me.

**Perhaps we should try and move away from this name altogether, but the Right has definitely done a lot to deserve it.** - A ‘snowflake’ is [defined as](https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/snowflake) ‘an insulting way of referring to someone who is considered by some people to be too easily upset and offended’ (CED) This term is usually thrown at young liberals by people on the right, especially at people who protest speakers. - While I object to the way the right use this term, I would hesitate to throw it back at them, as it seems to be based on the premise that being offended is in itself inherently bad, or that feelings do not matter. While free speech is extremely important and necessarily causes offense sometimes, it does not follow that the way people feel is of no relevance. We need to listen to people who are offended by ideas and expressing genuine pain to properly appreciate their experience and point of view. - Furthermore, people who protest speakers shouldn’t be seen as halting discourse, or at least not in such black and white terms. Yes, allowing people to speak should be allowed in most cases, but people who protest speakers attending spaces very much form an active part of the conversation, just by doing so. - That being said, you could definitely turn the term ‘snowflake’ on those that throw it around so easily. The venomous, hate-filled tone often used by the right suggests that they have absolutely no willingness to engage with liberals. You could say that Breitbart's Milo Yiannopoulos was ‘easily upset’ when he told a protestor, [‘F*** your feelings’] (https://www.theguardian.com/science/2016/nov/28/snowflake-insult-disdain-young-people) I’m conflicted about whether I think using the term 'snowflake' is helpful. Either way, it is ridiculous for the Right to think that they are somehow better at civil discourse while attacking liberals with venom and derision.