Dumb Political Correctness

Phil Elliott said:
See, I don't view that as arbitrary because that is what The Bible says. I thought you meant it was arbitrary to pick some point in the gestation period and say it's OK to abort before that point.
Click to expand...

I don't think the Bible (Old or New) is nearly so clear on the point as you do. Passages of the Bible can be read to show that life begins before conception, at conception, or at birth (or, more precisely, upon the first breath).

But putting that aside, and assuming that the bible is clear on the point -- choosing to put absolute faith in a book is arbitrary, imo. Yes, I know, it is THE BOOK. But your belief that it is THE BOOK is itself arbitrary. By its very nature, faith is turtles all the way down.
 
What the Bible says doesn't really directly affect things one way or the other to me. The most arbitrary thing going on here is the use of standards such as "independence" that don't apply to other humans.

And to clarify, I don't feel that way about people who say "Merry Christmas", even if they say it to non-Christians. There's nothing wrong with that in a society that is majority Christian.
Click to expand...

I don't think it has anything to do with the beliefs of the society, but that Christmas is the name of the National Holiday (which is just as much a secular Holiday anyway) and saying Merry Christmas is no different than saying Happy New Year, Happy Thanksgiving, Happy Halloween, or anything else.

But I do have a problem with people who get mad about "Happy Holidays". The only explanation for this is a concerted effort to make sure non-Christians aren't included.
Click to expand...

That isn't the only explanation though (and I'm not mad about it, just find it silly).
 
Asians love lighter skin. The lighter the better. Just walk around Manila as a white man sometime you'll instantly know what I mean. Light skin says "money" in Asia.
 
It was funny, a friend of mine posted on facebook sharing an image of one actress at the show wearing a black dress that was pretty much showed everything, with the tagline "nothing says "stop treating me like a sex object" like showing up wearing that!"
 
ProdigalHorn said:
It was funny, a friend of mine posted on facebook sharing an image of one actress at the show wearing a black dress that was pretty much showed everything, with the tagline "nothing says "stop treating me like a sex object" like showing up wearing that!"
Click to expand...

Being "treat(ed) like a sex object" and sexual harassment are synonymous?
 
What I'm trying to get at is the that the statement that PH posted inferred that dressing sexy results in harassment or at the very least harassment is understandable.
 
Like so many things (okay..."as in so many things") we don't have a very developed set of definitions in the sexual harassment world. Probably almost everyone would agree that "dressing sexy" does not justify rape or anything like it. (I would, however, nevertheless advise my daughters not to dress in such a way when going to some large-crowd or uncontrollable situation, or even on a date with a fairly unknown person--and that seems rationally related to minimizing the risk of her being a victim--so there is SOMETHING to it....)

Anyway, anything that is rape, groping, threatening that a job is in danger if sex is not given, deliberate and repeated insulting or belittling--these should never occur no matter how a person dresses. A lot of this category is outright criminal.

On the other hand, a lot of what is also called sexual harassment is more in the nature of commenting that a woman looks sexy or desirable or actions in the nature of a wolf whistle, or misconstruing a professional relationship as a social one by complementing or asking a girl out or sending a gift or whatever, or maybe even just staring at a woman's boobs or whatever, or maybe some guys in the breakroom saying how amazing girl X looks and how they would like to have a piece of her, etc.

In this second category, which ranges from being at least rude or unprofessional and at most to a violation of a civil law, there is no doubt whatsoever that how the woman dresses directly affects and invites this type of difficulty. Pretty much every woman looks in the mirror before she goes out into public. If she chooses to show 80% of her boob, she is intentionally wanting people to look at that and notice. She WANTS the men and the women to talk about her great body when they are hanging around the water cooler.

So, yes, if the new social war is to make women free from the wolf whistle types of harassment or objectification (and I am not positive whether this would be good or not), then the way the actresses portray themselves in public is not consistent with that. So, yes, it is a bit hypocritical.

(Note: I am not sure, but I think women should be able to dress any way they want, but if they dress sexy, they need to have the "balls" to give it right back to the commenters--if they get asked on a date or to dance or whistled at, they need to just laugh and say, "dream on, I'm out of your league," or whatever, and not get all victim-y about it.)
 
VYFan said:
Like so many things (okay..."as in so many things") we don't have a very developed set of definitions in the sexual harassment world. Probably almost everyone would agree that "dressing sexy" does not justify rape or anything like it. (I would, however, nevertheless advise my daughters not to dress in such a way when going to some large-crowd or uncontrollable situation, or even on a date with a fairly unknown person--and that seems rationally related to minimizing the risk of her being a victim--so there is SOMETHING to it....)
Click to expand...

Of course if you bring this up, you're labeled a "victim-blamer."
 
Mr. Deez said:
Of course if you bring this up, you're labeled a "victim-blamer."
Click to expand...
I would rather say that it is “victim prevention.” As I said, with respect to the hardest core types of mistreatment of women such as sexual assault, I look at it as a father of daughters. Post-event, I would never say or imply that it was her fault, nor reduce any culpability of the criminal. Pre-event, I would advise that if you go into X situation dressed in Y getup, you are increasing the odds of a bad result.

For what I’m calling wolf whistle types of things, I would do a little of both. For example, if my grown daughter complained that guys at the resort pool whistled at her as she went by in her thong bikini, I would probably say she needs to toughen up or just not wear that bikini in public. I don’t call it victim blaming because I don’t see it as much of a victim.

I wouldn’t be past confronting the guys in the hot tub myself if they were obnoxious, but that would be regular chivalry and an effort to make her feel more comfortable and protected on an ongoing basis, not because something awful had happened.
 
VYFan said:
I would rather say that it is “victim prevention.” As I said, with respect to the hardest core types of mistreatment of women such as sexual assault, I look at it as a father of daughters. Post-event, I would never say or imply that it was her fault, nor reduce any culpability of the criminal. Pre-event, I would advise that if you go into X situation dressed in Y getup, you are increasing the odds of a bad result.

For what I’m calling wolf whistle types of things, I would do a little of both. For example, if my grown daughter complained that guys at the resort pool whistled at her as she went by in her thong bikini, I would probably say she needs to toughen up or just not wear that bikini in public. I don’t call it victim blaming because I don’t see it as much of a victim.

I wouldn’t be past confronting the guys in the hot tub myself if they were obnoxious, but that would be regular chivalry and an effort to make her feel more comfortable and protected on an ongoing basis, not because something awful had happened.
Click to expand...

Don't get the wrong idea. I completely agree. However, in the current political climate, saying or suggesting that a woman should show any degree of judgment in what they wear or how they act is viewed as victim-blaming. It's viewed as a "she was asking for it" type of criticism of the victim. I don't think that's right, but that's reality in the current climate. And of course, talk if chivalry would be attacked as "perpetuating the patriarchy."

Of course, all you have to do to turn this on its head is change the ethnicity or religion of the attacker to an Arabic or Islamic man. I see that over here routinely. German women are encouraged to wear clothes that do not "tempt" Muslim men and to stay out of their areas. Gotta love intersectionality.
 
Last edited:
Mr. Deez said:
Of course, all you have to do to turn this on its head is change the ethnicity or religion of the attacker to an Arabic or Islamic man. I see that over here routinely. German women are encouraged to wear clothes that do not "tempt" Muslim men and to stay out of their areas. Gotta love intersectionality.
Click to expand...

Sometimes I wonder if that's a sign of something. I remember reading some model (I think Chrissie Tiegen or someone) who was going through airport security and some man asked her for her phone number. She proceeded to tweet about how she felt like she was being attacked, and hunted, and unsafe, and all that fun stuff.

I'm starting to wonder whether in SOME cases (not all), the feeling of safety has been so watered down, that in this country it has little or no connection with actual, physical safety. So when we talk about "safety measures" in this country (i.e. don't walk down a dark alley in a bad neighborhood half-naked), we focus on the idea that the "threat" is probably guys whistling, making comments, following, and maybe even grabbing something. And the response is "why should we cater to that? They don't have the right, and I shouldn't have to change the way I dress just because some guys are perverts. Patriarchy!!"

The stakes in Germany have clearly become a lot more severe than that. All of a sudden, when it's about actual, physical safety, those precautions start to seem a lot more rational.
 
This was funny given the direction the conversation has gone. I have witnessed #MeToo confessions from women that seemed to simply be flirting or a proposition, not harassment.

 
Last edited:
ProdigalHorn said:
Sometimes I wonder if that's a sign of something. I remember reading some model (I think Chrissie Tiegen or someone) who was going through airport security and some man asked her for her phone number. She proceeded to tweet about how she felt like she was being attacked, and hunted, and unsafe, and all that fun stuff.

I'm starting to wonder whether in SOME cases (not all), the feeling of safety has been so watered down, that in this country it has little or no connection with actual, physical safety. So when we talk about "safety measures" in this country (i.e. don't walk down a dark alley in a bad neighborhood half-naked), we focus on the idea that the "threat" is probably guys whistling, making comments, following, and maybe even grabbing something. And the response is "why should we cater to that? They don't have the right, and I shouldn't have to change the way I dress just because some guys are perverts. Patriarchy!!"

The stakes in Germany have clearly become a lot more severe than that. All of a sudden, when it's about actual, physical safety, those precautions start to seem a lot more rational.
Click to expand...

You're giving the feminist Left way too much credit and assigning them far better intentions than they deserve.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Recent Threads

Back
Top