it's not any person's views or words but a general sexual practice. — jamalrob
So your point is that you're offended because a philosopher has negatively judged your sexual practice? And I'm pathetic? — jamalrob
Anyway, I reckon obscenity and disgust are crucial in any comprehensive discussion of sexuality, so I don't see any problem with that language. — jamalrob
Anyway, I reckon obscenity and disgust are crucial in any comprehensive discussion of sexuality, so I don't see any problem with that language. — jamalrob
I would be quite happy to agree with you about that and plead guilty to participation, if only you were as resolute in your criticism of Scrotum's language as you are of mine. His, after all is demonstrably more extreme, and hugely more influential. I say 'sexist', he says 'obscene' and 'disgusting', and you do not seem to think his language needs criticism. — unenlightened
And the problem started with institutions like corporation etc. creating PR departments. Political parties are naturally even more prone to this. And if someone thinks that this is only right-wing biased view (because the thread is about Roger Scruton), just think about the typical event where a muslim liberal or leftist politician criticizes Israel and get the wrath of being an anti-semite. — ssu
Yes, for the sexist impact here is upon the the individual. — TheWillowOfDarkness
The problem isn't a comparison of men and women, it's the devaluing of the personhood of an individual. If one is finding a women (or man) disgusting for not being an an object within one's control, since that is the social relation thewomen (or man) ought to be in, one is engaged in a sexist objectification. The disgust is present at the woman (or man) being a person who is more than one's object.
I've not changed the meaning of anything. All along the problem has been that Scruton is advocating a position we ought be disgusted by women (or men, if applied to them) if they dare be more than an object under our direct control. It's precisely the viewpoint which is the problem.
Disgust with sex isn't the issue here, it's the disgust with women who are more than a body for a husband's dick or hands. The issue I'm talking about here isn't a sexual disfunction. It's one of power in relationships — TheWillowOfDarkness
harm on the basis of sex or to someone of a sex — TheWillowOfDarkness
No doubt it infuriates people who think it's something else, but the point is they have an inadequate view. They are too busy worrying over whether someone said to be sexist, whether they wanted to intentionally use sex to make some kind of exclusion, to recognize sexism is a social relation which. affects individuals. — TheWillowOfDarkness
That's exactly why we attack their ideas. — TheWillowOfDarkness
That people can change and reform is a pretty compelling reason to resist attacking anything but their ideas... — VagabondSpectre
Absolutely. But we shouldn't be apathetic about their words and the effect of their words. — frank
I agree, but quote mining 30 year old literature isn't exactly the front-line of social justice. — VagabondSpectre
They'll just replace the man with an updated model and carry on with more of the same, so the underlying ideas, and their effects, remain undamaged. — VagabondSpectre
That's what I understood to be jamalrob's view. It was sexism and therefore it doesn't qualify as a legitimate stance worthy of engagement. — frank
In fact, I don't think intolerance and general assholedness is ever going to go away. But I do think we should pay attention to the message we broadcast. — frank
What's the effect of doing nothing when a person makes inappropriate remarks? Doesn't that send the message: 'Yes, that's ok. We're fine with that.' Doesn't that have to potential to create complacency? — frank
Characterizing them as mainly sexist might to some degree be true, but it's not going to get us anywhere, and it's not productive to persecute Scruton as an effigy of sexism in general. — VagabondSpectre
but it's the cure to our intolerance. — VagabondSpectre
The deplatform movement is a great example of how we can respond inappropriately; it's might makes right. — VagabondSpectre
If one is simply vexed over the issue of free speech then this story regarding a children's speech pathologist in Texas who was fired because she refused to sign a pledge stating that she would not engage in any economic boycott of Israel should be more alarming. — Maw
Probably not, but I wasn't looking to crucify anyone. We know Scruton is conservative and we know he's made comments about what women should and shouldn't do in bed. Suppose you tell me that you think it's sexist. Instead of telling you that I understand why you would think that, I tell you it's not sexism. There are two reasons I might do that:
1. I'm just really ignorant of the sexism attached to traditional attitudes about the sex act.
2. I am very worried about people over-reacting to every little sign of sexism, racism, religious intolerance, homophobia, etc. so that innocent people are being attacked. IOW, I'm over-reacting to the over-reacting. — frank
Who was inappropriately deplatformed? — frank
Who are the bullied again ? — Amity
While we're completely changing the subject, I would strongly suggest that these are not separate species, the bully and the victim, more of a circle of life — unenlightened
What we don't want is a regress.this is an issue for debate, not for shutting people down. — jamalrob
Not only can we easily get it wrong, but en masse we can't help but leave scorched earth in our wake. — VagabondSpectre
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.