I prefer to write from a personal, "I" statement place. I shy away from extrapolating into more political discourse, not because I don't enjoy it or find it necessary, but because ... it is so informed by my personal experience that if I am challenged in a political way I *feel* it as a personal challenge, even though intellectually I know the person isn't necessarily attacking me personally. Or maybe they are.
I had some thoughts last for a post that tread into the muddy waters of neurodiversity and acceptance, neuroplasticity and change and success... and my thoughts were primarily generalized and I think they would be provocative in some way.
Not that I have a huge readership, there are "those people" who come out of the woodwork, finding these posts through twitter, or a google search, and decide to pseudononymously (sp? thank you CBC's Q for the concept) dive in with all their assumptions, and the I feel compelled to pick at the "knots".
There is a definite risk/challenge in speaking out politically, speaking "for" a movement, heck -- having an opinion!
So I tend to choose speaking for myself only. I will choose exploring the grey things instead of being forceful about things I don't always feel confident I have any authority to speak about anyway.
But I will say -- the personal and political are intertwined. It's not arguable as far as I'm concerned. It's why it gets so heated. It's why there aren't clear answers.
And it's why I'm actually committing a political act by using "I" statements and sharing my personal experience.