The more you make radical ideas "palatable," consumable to the mainstream and status quo, the less it's going to be about movement or revolution and the more it's going to be about stasis and staying-the-same-tion.
We have a right to be Malcom X angry and radical. It may not be a sustainable way to be so wrapped up in the pain of the world, but we(some of us) need to let off steam--consider it as a safety valve/slow release of anger, catharsis, rather than a passive-aggressive, submerged activism.
Concerning all this, about the Ban Bossy campaign, which is about striking using the word "bossy" (especially in relation to females taking leadership and authority) in order to enact gender parity (I think?)...I don't feel particularly angry about the campaign or anything. But in discussion with my rad woc solidarity friend Dana, we discussed a Facebook thread amongst our friends.
In response to Dana's posting of local black Feminist and new Stranger WOC (Represent!) Danielle Henderson's thoughts here...some of our friends disagreed with Henderson, more in favor of the Ban Bossy method (So I gathered from a cursory glance at the posts).
In response to the Friends' response to Danielle's response to Ban Bossy.... I personally think that to protect all potentially assertive women from pain (or criticism!) through thought and word policing may not be building in them the character and "fuck you" attitude that comes with having been roughed up, bullied, as well as the empathy and compassion from being in a marginalized position.
In other words, if the system is corrupt, rather than say "hey let's not talk about its corruption by protecting the vulnerable (delicate, floral? Hmm) women" I say, let's muck things up, fuck things up, and riff/revolution/jam til the system gets better.
And that's just my personal opinion/perspective/method. Thoughts?