Marginalized groups can marginalize others. Restated, a group can be persecuted and still behave badly. Few want to admit this fact however; too many paint those groups that are marginalized as perfect angels. Maybe only a fraction of those marginalized behave poorly, but we still tend to think of the marginalized as off limits for criticism. This chills discourse and merely exacerbates the differences between the in group and the out group.

I recognize that some believe that I hold psychopaths off limits from criticism, given that I often show the equivalences between neurotypicals and psychopaths in those areas that are relevant. This is not necessarily true. We psychopaths certainly do our fair share of bad things and any discussion regarding the marginalized status of psychopaths and what is to be done about such must take that into account.

At what point do we refuse to separate the marginalization from the antisocial? Can we not acknowledge that both may be evident? Can we acknowledge that a subset is not the whole? I have preached all along that individuals must be treated as individuals even if caution must be exercised against the group as a whole. A progressive society must allow for the discourse regarding marginalization regardless of whether the part of the whole reflects sinners.

No, I cannot deny the transgressions of many of my brethren. That said, there must be criticism of all for progress to be made. Just as the neurotypical may question my motives and actions at every step, I must question theirs. The gap between us is only made larger if neither group allows for criticism by the other. A psychopath that holds his actions as sacrosanct cannot change and will never be taken seriously by the neurotypical. A neurotypical that shields themselves from their own darkness will never be respected by the psychopath. The differences between us in principle are not that great, but discourse regarding such can only be had if we recognize that nothing is truly sacred, not even the marginalized.