Page 3 of 27 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 397

Thread: Things the Right get right

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    14,720

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Benny B View Post
    hmmm, not too up on this issue but... why do I get the feeling that this is less about 'hysterical feminists', and more about MRAs insisting that male circumcision is 'just as bad' as FGM and getting the kicking they deserve?
    No, it's not about comparing "which is worse"*. There are feminists who insist, point blank, that any opposition to male circumcision is effectively an endorsement for FGM. It's like saying that anyone who campaigns against knife crime is happy about people getting shot.

    And I should like to think we can have a level of intelligent conversation here where it is not automatically assumed that any anti-circ men are automatically "MRAs", for heaven's sake.

    *leaving aside the fact that there are many kinds of FGM, one of which is exactly analogous to standard male circumcision
    Doin' the Lambeth Warp New: DISSENSUS - THE NOVEL - PM me your email address and I'll add you

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Brighton & Hove
    Posts
    343

    Default

    I know this isn't university, but I feel a citation is called for here.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    14,720

    Default

    I'll have a look when I get home and post it here, if I remember. But I'm not, you know, inventing this stuff.
    Doin' the Lambeth Warp New: DISSENSUS - THE NOVEL - PM me your email address and I'll add you

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    7,952

    Default

    @Tea - If I've missed your point, it's only because it's not very clear what your point actually IS amidst all the rhetoric.

    If you're (all of a sudden) interested in the concrete consequences of people's actions, then you should be looking at the damaging consequences of the actions of those who ride roughshod over the rights of others (eg looking at the consequences of someone like Lionel Shriver being allowed to spout right-wing rubbish in the name of freedom of speech - given that big name authors' opinions do have clout), rather than being obsessed with a few silly stories about accusations of cultural appropriation that have been, well, silly.

    I would understand your being so angry at the "social media echo chamber" people if they were somehow having some real effect on you, but they're not. Why do they matter so much to you, other than as people to work out your anger upon? Attacking them won't make the world better either.

    Hysterical irreason - I haven't heard of any of these. But you're sounding like you're very confused as to the direction/s in which discrimination has operated throughout history, and how this has been totally driven by 'hysterical irreason'. It's like laying the onus upon the (very recent) pushback to discrimination to be totally levelheaded/rational, whilst the original centuries of discrimination were crazed, paranoid, hysterical lunacy. 'Slightly' unfair and victim blaming in the main, don't you think?

    Moral relativism - Here you have a point (which I recognised with my initial reply to the thread). As I said, many prominent left-wing parties have regrettable judgment internationally, in their rush to support regimes that either (i) declare themselves socialist, but couldn't be less so/are not any longer or (ii) are simply anti-American. The unfortunate fact is that most governments are pretty abhorrent, and the ones that aren't are generally snuffed out pretty quickly by one of the Big Three - and any decent left internationalist policy would speak plainly about this.

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    14,720

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by comelately View Post
    Absolving some people of responsibility because 'what do you expect?' and treating others as completely free & responsible moral agents is pretty much involved in any kind of moral system. Not sure where relativism comes into it; it does feel like a snarl word here and little else.
    I'd have thought this was a screamingly obvious case of moral relativism, i.e. the relative moral severity of a crime - in this case rape - is is dependent on the native culture of the perpetrator.

    But I'm actually pretty ambivalent about this particular instance. I mean, I genuinely can't decide whether it's an egregious example of the racism of low expectations, or a courageously honest admission that the culture in large parts of the Muslim world is wildly misogynistic in ways that most Europeans can't understand. (That said, I probably wouldn't be too chuffed if I were a Swedish rape victim seeing my attacker get a lighter sentence because he was born in Kabul rather than Stockholm.)
    Doin' the Lambeth Warp New: DISSENSUS - THE NOVEL - PM me your email address and I'll add you

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    7,952

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Tea View Post
    There are feminists who insist, point blank, that any opposition to male circumcision is effectively an endorsement for FGM. It's like saying that anyone who campaigns against knife crime is happy about people getting shot.
    Is your point that....what is your point? That someone who identified as a feminist once said something ridiculous? Also, what about hearing about all the crazy things men have said about FGM - could you compile some of those, cos I bet the list is longer?

    "courageously honest admission that the culture in large parts of the Muslim world is wildly misogynistic in ways that most Europeans can't understand" - yep, in Europe men willingly gave women all the rights they now enjoy, of course. Saying that Europeans can't understand wild misogyny is silly.
    http://www.theatlantic.com/internati...r-hate/256362/ this is interesting, as attempts to historicise always are

    it's also important to be clear that even the EU thinks that 'Violence against women is “an extensive human rights abuse” across Europe' https://www.theguardian.com/news/dat...l-sexual-abuse
    Last edited by baboon2004; 19-09-2016 at 05:37 PM.

  7. The Following User Says Thank You to baboon2004 For This Useful Post:


  8. #37
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Brighton & Hove
    Posts
    343

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Tea View Post
    I'd have thought this was a screamingly obvious case of moral relativism, i.e. the relative moral severity of a crime - in this case rape - is is dependent on the native culture of the perpetrator.

    But I'm actually pretty ambivalent about this particular instance. I mean, I genuinely can't decide whether it's an egregious example of the racism of low expectations, or a courageously honest admission that the culture in large parts of the Muslim world is wildly misogynistic in ways that most Europeans can't understand. (That said, I probably wouldn't be too chuffed if I were a Swedish rape victim seeing my attacker get a lighter sentence because he was born in Kabul rather than Stockholm.)
    1. You listed this under 'hysterical irreason', rather than moral relativism (Not that it was either). Kinda speaks to my point about snarl words.

    2. You might want to pick an example that you actually want to stand behind firmly, unless your intention is to just get as much Breitbart schtick in as possible.

    3. Yeah, your reading of her statement as inherently relativistic is fundamentally misguided. There is nothing in her statement which doesn't align with general notions of mitigation within our own western culture. Not relativism.
    Last edited by comelately; 19-09-2016 at 05:28 PM.

  9. #38
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    7,952

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by martin View Post
    Totally spot on. And after witnessing the crywank carnival that was the day after Brexit, I am totally done with the left. Well, until Bob Crow Brigade returns to give anyone who says "We need to talk about..." a good kicking.
    Crywanking is not an exclusively left-wing sport...one prominent figure on the left has been kicked daily since June 23 for NOT caring enough about Brexit...what's his name again...

  10. #39
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    14,720

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by comelately View Post
    I know this isn't university, but I feel a citation is called for here.
    https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...-muslim-jewish

    Women's rights groups and social policy makers also condemned the decision, but for the reason that it would have the effect of putting male and female circumcision on the same footing, when they were "in no way comparable", said Katrin Altpeter, social minister in the state of Baden-Württemberg.
    They might have a quarter of a point if FGM wasn't already illegal in Germany, but it is, and has been for decades. People have been sent to jail for it, which is more than be said for the UK, AFAIK.

    Quote Originally Posted by baboon2004 View Post
    Is your point that....what is your point? That someone who identified as a feminist once said something ridiculous?
    It's not just "someone" though, is it, it's people speaking on behalf of pressure groups. And it's a fairly widespread feminist position.
    Last edited by Mr. Tea; 19-09-2016 at 06:47 PM.
    Doin' the Lambeth Warp New: DISSENSUS - THE NOVEL - PM me your email address and I'll add you

  11. #40
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    14,720

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by comelately View Post
    1. You listed this under 'hysterical irreason', rather than moral relativism (Not that it was either). Kinda speaks to my point about snarl words.
    They're hardly mutually exclusive.

    Quote Originally Posted by comelately View Post
    2. You might want to pick an example that you actually want to stand behind firmly, unless your intention is to just get as much Breitbart schtick in as possible.
    Lol, whatever. 'Breitbart'? I feel it's only a matter of time before I'm 'basically Hitler'.

    Quote Originally Posted by comelately View Post
    Not relativism.
    It's a fucking textbook example, what's wrong with you?
    Doin' the Lambeth Warp New: DISSENSUS - THE NOVEL - PM me your email address and I'll add you

  12. #41
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Brighton & Hove
    Posts
    343

    Default

    Despite all the accusations of postmodernism, 'relativism' and the like - Leo Strauss came before Derrida, and they're really not that different in many ways. It's just that the right hide their post-truth machinations in estoteria and nuance, whereas the left do frequently, it seems to me at least, appear to be more vulgar in their attempts to undercut objective notions of truth.
    Last edited by comelately; 19-09-2016 at 06:52 PM.

  13. #42
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Sevilla
    Posts
    3,474

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Tea View Post
    https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...-muslim-jewish



    They might have a quarter of a point if FGM wasn't already illegal in Germany, but it is, and has been for decades. People have been sent to jail for it, which is more than be said for the UK, AFAIK.



    It's not just "someone" though, is it, it's people speaking on behalf of pressure groups. And it's a fairly widespread feminist position.

    sorry but which part of that article supports your "there are feminists who insist, point blank, that any opposition to male circumcision is effectively an endorsement for FGM", thus proving that its a "fairly widespread feminist position"? You're being reductive.

    When it comes to feminists criticising 'intactivists', its usually stuff like this they've got a problem with, which is why I mentioned MRAs.

    http://www.theestablishment.co/2016/...cision-debate/

  14. #43
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Brighton & Hove
    Posts
    343

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Tea View Post
    It's a fucking textbook example, what's wrong with you?
    How strange, I thought you were ambivalent about it.

    A morally relativistic point of view would be to say that if a rape was to take place in a culture where rape is not considered morally wrong, then it would be essentially incoherent for someone outside that culture to state that it was morally wrong. Or to put it formally;

    a) There was a rape within 'Culture A'
    b) rape is not considered to be morally wrong in 'Culture A'

    ergo:
    c) the rape was not morally wrong

    That isn't what she was saying. She was stating, implicitly, that the cultural background of the perpetrator has *some bearing* in determining their precise level of culpability. I do understand that this may seem nuanced, but it at no point is making the claim that the culture of the perp cannot be said to be morally inferior; indeed, as you suggest yourself, the opposite position may easily be inferred from the suggestion that Swedish culture produces more fully free moral agents than Islamic cultures.

    So not relativist, or hysterical, or irrational. You may disagree, but at some point the challenge is going be to actually provide some kind of objective foundation for your morals. Because noone else has managed it yet. Just saying.
    Last edited by comelately; 19-09-2016 at 08:20 PM.

  15. #44
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Brighton & Hove
    Posts
    343

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Benny B View Post
    sorry but which part of that article supports your "there are feminists who insist, point blank, that any opposition to male circumcision is effectively an endorsement for FGM", thus proving that its a "fairly widespread feminist position"? You're being reductive.
    This. If you're going to say 'point blank', then you pretty much have to deliver the quote verbatim not find it vaguely implied by one person.
    Last edited by comelately; 19-09-2016 at 08:17 PM.

  16. #45
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    7,952

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Tea View Post
    It's not just "someone" though, is it, it's people speaking on behalf of pressure groups. And it's a fairly widespread feminist position.
    I didn't know who it was, cos afai could see, you hadn't linked to any evidence at the point at which I wrote that. So, women's rights groups and social policy makers, it was, says the article.

    So it's a widespread position among feminists think that "any opposition to male circumcision is effectively an endorsement for FGM"? I think you'll need to back that one up with some evidence. Edit: I see someone beat me to that punch

    And the person who's actually quoted in that article you linked to isn't identified as a feminist, but rather as a social policy maker, who happens to be a woman. So, is this a widespread social policy maker position as well?

    To be honest, at this point, you look like you're fishing around for things to be outraged by, in precisely the same manner as you're criticising others (the 'social media echo chamber' people etc) for doing. Which links back to the original speech from Lionel Shriver, cos that was her schtick -the awful infringements upon her liberty that don't even exist, as she's free to write what she damn well pleases, and does so, no matter how offensive others find it.

    And in the process of hunting out these outrages, you and she are totally misrepresenting the power balance in the actual world, presenting people from groups that have historically been discriminated against (non-white people, women), and continue to be the subject of mass discrimination, as the 'true' aggressors to be held to account.
    Last edited by baboon2004; 19-09-2016 at 08:38 PM.

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •