Essay: Debate over land
Ultimately, these defensive tactics to preserve the overlying premise of the social construct led to an even greater controversial debate concerning the administration’s individual identities, status and breadth of contributions as community activists or feminists or male leaders. The greater purpose of the social construct was compromised by an eager defense of the “local male” population with erratic tactics to avoid the stigmatization of this population, as well as the administration’s overemphasis of status and the administration’s individual demand for recognition. Comprehensively, the appalling disregard of the victimized female population was a disastrous result of desperate attempts to recognize each contributing party with a misguided emphasis on the greater philosophy of a community initiative.
Related community debates further describe the chaotic and irrational processes with topics ranging from: contemplative apologies for a lack of appropriate gratitude for the donated site or seemingly “disinterested” attitudes of the participants while female contributor’s offered impressions of emotional abuse from male contributors while concluding with a vague acknowledgement of the psychological treatment and well-being of the victimized female population.