The main presupposition of the left is that being nice to women and minorities is going to change them. The specific way that “niceness” is shown is through poetic portrayal. You don’t have to be a poet to do this, and by poetry here I’m referring to a type of fabricating, of fictionalizing, of drawing in beauty where it doesn’t exist. That idea of “superimposition” is the best way to think of it. A beautiful “mental-image” is placed over an ugly reality, for instance in TV shows women are often portrayed as more intelligent than you will find them in real life (this is an example of actual poetry arguably, in contrast with the ordinary poetry that anyone can “write”) and these varying levels of poetry are used as a lens to see flesh and blood women through. So even if they’re saying something not that bright all this different poetry they’ve been filling our heads with all our lives is like the different colors of an otherwise plain, drab coloring book, and our elites are talented at coloring and within the lines, can’t take that from them. This is why phenomenology is important, it teaches you how to re-see things as if for the first time. Anyway, returning to my initial thought- the left believes that this poetry they superimpose is going to permanently change the reality. No, nature exists, it isn’t all nurture. Five generations from now they will still be “coloring in new coloring books” to beautify the reality of people who for all of known history were either servants or savages, if not both. This is the infinity and thus futility of the leftist project.