New how?

After, will you tell me your point?

LOL. — Mongrel

Are you laughing because I'm a male? Look who's sexist now.

Your point is..?

We can change our sex really and therefore gender, physically by taking the right hormones, having the genitals and other physical features modified. What the transsexual desires can become literally the way they are, they are not limited to subjective desire.. — Cavacava

You can replace cock and balls with a hooha? TIL, maybe.

I wasn't talking about flawed appeals to popularity or authority. Whether all or even any women think someone is sexist is not the measure of they are. That's a question of their comments and behaviour itself. — TheWillowOfDarkness

Then why did you bring up the issue of "two prominent female posters" claiming Agustino is a sexist? :|

Consensus isn't relevant to reasoning about an issue like this. — TheWillowOfDarkness

Surely consensus plays some part, as if no one claims Agustino's a sexist, then he's probably not, no?

What's sexist isn't defined by who thinks it's sexist, but by whether it is, you know, sexist. — TheWillowOfDarkness

But we are the ones who define what is sexist or not........

Not every female thinks Agustino's a sexist. So far, only the post-modernist, radical feminists seem to think he is. Poor consensus.

Also, I suggest everyone flag John Harris' most recent post in this thread. I already quoted it and sent it to a mod, but perhaps we need more consensus?

If you're prepared to be bothered by comments on a message board dedicated to philosophy, you may want to rethink how dedicated to philosophy you are. Philosophy forces us to confront thoughts that make us uncomfortable in order to help us grow and develop as human beings. Augustino's writings were polemic and provocative to the extreme, but surely you've encountered far worse in the philosophy books you've read. Nothing Augustino wrote in his poetical style is sexist simply because you deem it so. Censorship is only ever detrimental to the quality of discussion generated. When you decide what people can and cannot say in situations as blurred as this, you're damaging the ability of people to discuss philosophy amongst themselves here. If you wish to only participate in social situations where you won't encounter anything you disagree with, there's plenty of other corners of the Internet to seek refuge in. Just don't drag this place down to that level based on neo-cultural Marxist/postmodernist/third wave feminist ideology. — Dogar

I'd be on board with slander guidelines, as I think they'd help this forum be more amiable and friendly.

I don't think it's constructive for one member to accuse another of being this or that without properly defending their assertion. There's been a lot of, "you're a sexist", and not a lot of, "here's why." This is supposed to be a forum where extensive discussion flourishes, not a place where discussion gets replaced by insults.

I might add that if a poster takes issue with another on the grounds of apparent sexism or racism, then that's where the block/ignore function comes into effective play. Unless it's clear and obvious that a poster is a troll, is a sexist, is a racist, is a Nazi, etc., then I think the offended member ought to keep it to him or herself. Personally speaking, I don't have anyone blocked or ignored, but there are a few posters on here that I don't like and so don't read anything they write anymore. Although I'm guilty of not living up to this, I think it's better to say nothing instead of accusing someone of being such and such - even if you think it's true. Again, unless it's obvious, members can always message a moderator to get them to look at something.

Indeed, but there was not a racial element to the ancients' slavery. — Jake Tarragon

Debatable. Different sorts of people were judged to be more or less fitting for certain work based upon their background. Just as black Africans were thought to be good laborers by American plantation owners, so did many of the ancient societies. I mean, just look at Egypt's history if you want to see some real class stratification based on what we now call racial stratification.

I have a lot of respect for the writer Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie. She is famous for her TED Talk "The Danger of a Single Story." She's done a lot to show young people that it's unhelpful to only portray stories of privileged people. She's written several novels based on her childhood in Nigeria. — Amy

I like Adichie as well, but it's worth noting that unless there are writers being nurtured in minority communities or lesser known cultures, it's difficult to read literature about those people if nobody, or hardly anybody, is writing about it! When a Adichie or Hosseini comes along, though, certainly their contributions to world literature are worthy of admiration, :)

Better be worried then, Beebs.

I find it very strange that some here expect Agustino to accept a pretty serious accusation against his character without a fight. And if this "discussion" boils down to people merely having to apologize for offending others, then I think Mongrel ought to apologize to Agustino for claiming that he's a sexist and misogynist when it's not conclusive that he is one and isn't, apparently, the real reason contrition is desired.

Can't be sexist if there are only genders,

You can look at his posting history by going to his profile. — Mongrel

He posts too much for me to do that without losing my mind, :(

Oh yes, my butt is red. — Agustino

Wow, are you making fun of American Indians? You goddamned racist.

Actually, it's Buxtebuddha since he just trolled me out of nowhere again. Maybe if he said something intelligent along with that trolling, but that's beyond his faculties. — John Harris

Rofl. Right on queue, you fucking madman, >:O

I think both y'all needa calm down. The only person that needs to be shut down on this forum is Thanatos Harris Sand.

Heister Eggcart can confirm - Kierkegaard was not a Christian mystic.

Fiction or nonfiction?

Are you talking about eligibility to vote? Lincoln was elected in 1860 if that helps you. Might want to read a history of your own country... I'm just sayin' — Mongrel

All men were not equal or equally free at that point, so I don't know what you're saying.

Indeed, quite radical. I like that. — BlueBanana

Quite brainless and stupid, actually, which I don't like.

I was shocked that he suggested that Germans were weak for not committing suicide instead of going into the military, :-}

I was quoting the Gettysburg Address, Popeye. — Mongrel

I know. When that was written men only included white landowners, lol.

That's cool. You shouldn't have a problem with the removal of the statue, then. — Mongrel

It's there so it stays. There's no good reason to remove it.

"...our forefathers founded upon this continent a new nation conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal." — Mongrel

When this was written men only included white landowners.

Lee put himself on the wrong side of history. — Mongrel

I don't feel the need to judge his moral fiber. He's merely on one side of history, and that's all.

The Lost Cause myth based on the work of historian'David Blight writes in his 2001 book Race and Reunion, — Cavacava

I'm not a fan of Blight. He has always ignored the fundamental problems that emancipating the slaves all in one fell swoop had on Southern society, and would have had if it was done before any Civil war, as if freedom from being labeled a "slave" made every African American life infinitely better, more economically secure, and more socially accepted. If there is a myth to be understood here it is the abolition of slavery changed very little for African Americans. They worked the same fields as before, for the same plantation owners as before, lived in the same, shoddy housing as before, and made so little money that moving on and out of their situation remained as unlikely as when they were slaves making no money at all. Blight also conveniently ignores the immediate need for labor in the postwar Southern economy which had lost significant numbers of male laborers, was in widespread bankruptcy, and didn't have the capital to function as Northern agribusiness did.

buzzfeed — Cavacava

:’(

The forced separation of families was tragic. You can't white wash the calamity of slavery with false truths, that was tried and it failed. — Cavacava

I don't disagree that it was tragic, nor am I white-washing (how potentially racist of you, lol) the issue.

It's just one and it's in your posts, where I looked for an argument but I found none. If you want me, I can quote them. — Πετροκότσυφας

And take my posts out of context? No, I think not. I don't think you have anything productive to say, so I'm unsure why you're even responding to me.

This is an example of how it works, actually. Agustino is sexist. If he had his way, people like me would be disenfranchised and peripheralized. The people who moderate this forum know that, but they don't care. Every time I see his posts, it just sinks in deeper and deeper with me: the moderators of this forum are just as sexist as he is. They have to be. Why else would they leave his nasty comments up? — Mongrel

I don't recall ever reading anything blatantly sexist from Agustino. And most of the mods dislike Agustino I think, so I'm unsure why you think they're on his side?

Same thing with the statue of Lee. The message it sends to both whites and blacks is counter to what We the People have declared we are and will be. — Mongrel

So what We the People stand for is tearing down things that we are offended by and don't like. mmk. Reminds me of ISIS, actually...

Assertions are not arguments. — Πετροκότσυφας

Indeed. So where are your arguments?

The Civil War — Cavacava

Hey, you got the right war this morning!

Robert E Lee who is often thought of as a brilliant tactician made one significant tactical error, he joined the wrong side. — Cavacava

Tactical or moral error?

It was that the Rebel soldiers were fighting for their home, and not an economic system which relied on slavery...the "Lost Cause", which is still bandied about) — Cavacava

It's true that Confederates fought for their homes. There's nothing mythical about it.

Lee's character is part of the historic myth. — Cavacava

This supposed myth would be a false attribution, which wouldn't represent the man himself.

He was a slave owner — Cavacava

As were half of the founding fathers. Are you going to say that they were rebels against the British Empire and fought for the wrong side, hmm?

wrote the following is from a letter (which is ofter misquoted) he wrote in 1856. — Cavacava

If you say that the following letter is misquoted and you don't even bother to cite where you get the "properly" quoted letter from it's hard for me to take you seriously.

So slavery was bad for white people and good for black people, — Cavacava

Aaaaaaaaaaand he didn't say that at all. Taken out of context, firstly, he nevertheless writes that for both the whites and the blacks, slavery is evil. Being a greater evil for either of them doesn't make it good. Also, he, in the quote you provide, explicitely suggests that it will be abolished. And if you read more of Lee, you would find that he is in favor of the abolition of slavery, but only in the right way. What that right way looks like? Certainly not what many in the North wanted, which would have solved nothing and only spiraled the Southern economy into shambles.

The following from the Atlantic Magizine June 4th, 2017. — Cavacava

A magazine, >:O

And of course it tiredly brings up familial separation as the only dig on Lee's character, without even discussing why families were often separated in the first place.

It is hardly a wonder that cities such as Charlottesville do not wish to be associated with Robert E Lee, his statue or anything else that has to do with him. — Cavacava

Sure, if people aren't properly educating themselves and take the truth to come from magazines.

I've recently read this book, which has been a great read. It certainly puts the Southern dilemma into a cogent perspective. http://www.ugapress.org/index.php/books/pharsalia

She did address your points. — Πετροκότσυφας

No, she didn't.

It boils down to her opinion that the war was over slavery and someone who consciously and willingly fought for the south — Πετροκότσυφας

Yes, an opinion, which she hasn't backed up.

that is to say, unlike a German soldier who was forced to fight for his nazi regime and was too weak to commit suicide — Πετροκότσυφας

What the fuck??

You just disagree with her, but you haven't provided any more evidence as to why she's wrong than she's provided evidence as to why she's right. You just stated your different opinions and then started fooling around with each other. — Πετροκότσυφας

No, sorry, I've provided an argument which she hasn't addressed point by point.

Um... I guess partly because I'm having difficulty believing you really don't see that a statue to Lee is offensive.

But if you aren't just kidding around... that's helpful to me. I've been seeing a lot of sexism lately. Maybe the people doing it really don't understand why it's offensive and ugly. I guess that's possible. — Mongrel

Still not addressing my points.

I'm going to bed, perhaps in the morning you'll be less in shock and more able to have an argument with me, (Y)

I'm pretty familiar with the topic. The war was over slavery. — Mongrel

Get more familiar.

Lee knew exactly what he was doing. If you want to honor him, build a statue for him in your backyard. Try concrete and beer bottles. That would be attractive. — Mongrel

You're not addressing my post at all, why?

He fought for slavery. — Mongrel

As I told Cavacacvaca, it's not that simple. Not every Confederate soldier fought for slavery, just as not every German soldier during WWII fought for the extermination of 6+million Jews. If you disagree, and do think that the German soldiers were all Nazis, were all racists and Aryan supremacists, and were fighting for genocide, explain yourself.

Even if you're black, your point doesn't really address my argument I don't think. I'm not denying that people will be offended by something, I'm denying whether there ought to be feelings of offense in the first place. With regard to a statue of Robert E. Lee, I don't think someone should fall into a deep depression. And if you'd tear down the memorial I linked, then everything should be torn down because there will always be someone that will find x, y, z thing offensive. But, I don't think that's reasonable, which is why tearing down statues merely because someone is offended is silly. The root of the offense is what is most important.

Yea. Have you ever been to Arlington Cemetery? I think that was his land prior to the war. — Mongrel

Yes I have, twice. Both times were humbling experiences.

But why do you ask? If we're tearing down a statue of Robert E. Lee for foolishly being considered a symbol of slavery, oppression, and hate, then perhaps we should tear this down, too?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confederate_Memorial_(Arlington_National_Cemetery)

Germany does not allow statues of Hitler. They think it will not help them heal. — Cavacava

You need to prove to me that Hitler is a comparable example with regard to Lee. Please do so.

Also, a statue of Robert E. Lee being thought of as a hate symbol only shows the ignorance and stupidity of the people seeking "healing". The inflated race issues in the US have nothing to do with a statue of Robert E. Lee, but with the ingrained, willful ignorance of those who do not understand history or how history unfolds by the day.

My beef is what it represents. — Mongrel

And I suppose my beef would be with racists who have attempted to make an idol out of a man who didn't share the same views. I also have beef with those who think that a statue of him means that Lee was in fact on the same level as the fat racist bums thinking he's on their side.