Terxpahseyton
Nobody
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2006
- Messages
- 10,759
In the "Open Marriage" thread, as it progressed I sensed an acute desire for another OT brawl over a classic polarizing issues. And as it happens, something came to my mind which I felt should be said and I hope will trigger quote-wars interesting debate.
So let us gather around, dear fellow sharers, warriors and drop-ins, to enjoy a last sight of the reddening evening horizon and a last breath of its soothing goodnight kiss. And be brave and proud, while we stand on deck, as this ship leaves shore to find its inevitable sinking designation.
Ship ahoy!
Here is my starting point:
I think that what get constantly overlooked is how ability correlates to stereotypes.
They are stereotypes, alright. Let's establish right now that they are stereotypes. That actual individuals do not do justice to them.
Yet - any blanket statement is an exaggeration, constitutes an act of narrowing down of reality, of putting things into focus and neglecting other things.
Any gendered thinking will do that and hence any gendered thinking does injustice. Now... Not to say that hence gendered thinking is justified - not - at - all. But... that is how the game works in a society full of anonymity. You stereotype. Not just because it is easy. Not just because it is economical. But because it is the only way.
Now we may endeavor to say - to stereotype by gender is - in fact - not economical – and hence should be foregone for the benefit of other ways to stereo-type. The individual diversity too strongly outweighs gender diversity. Maybe so. At least in some ways, I hazard to say, most likely so, in many others, probably so. But are we truly confident to make that a blanket judgment call across life and employment (except the obvious exceptions of physical labor since that one is ridiculously obvious)? Are we truly confident of the substance of it? I doubt that - most of all - because substance has no place in such discussions, anymore. The call was made by the ideology of equality. Fine. I personally don't actually care. However - people who have to put other people to work will care. And they may perhaps notice divergences which reach a significance which justices gendered stereotyping. And I find it disappointing, if perhaps understandably giving some feelings involved, that this can not be properly discussed.
Though...though... one instance, it actually appears to be ready to be considered. Yeah,.. I hear you. I am this “MRA” type. If not already, than I'll be it in a second. Since I am going to point out that this one instance is cases of women being superior. In my experience evidence for that is not shunned at all. Yeah I get the context. But I want you, who are quick to judge me for it, to get my angle. Which is about wondering why we can't have reasonable discussions. One reason, of course, is that because there are idiots. Another is, that because there are sensitivities. And – which is my point – because under the guise of feminism people are putting forth an agenda of indoctrinated and forbidden ideas – meaning the utter inability to discuss genders, leaving only the zeal to fight gendered thinking (as justified as that may be in many ways, and – as Obama said “let me be clear”.. as it is).
Disclaimer: Most people don't actually fit into any box I just opened up. They are like me. They don't really care and just have some vague fuzzy views. But debates are not shaped by such people.
So let us gather around, dear fellow sharers, warriors and drop-ins, to enjoy a last sight of the reddening evening horizon and a last breath of its soothing goodnight kiss. And be brave and proud, while we stand on deck, as this ship leaves shore to find its inevitable sinking designation.
Ship ahoy!
Here is my starting point:
I think that what get constantly overlooked is how ability correlates to stereotypes.
They are stereotypes, alright. Let's establish right now that they are stereotypes. That actual individuals do not do justice to them.
Yet - any blanket statement is an exaggeration, constitutes an act of narrowing down of reality, of putting things into focus and neglecting other things.
Any gendered thinking will do that and hence any gendered thinking does injustice. Now... Not to say that hence gendered thinking is justified - not - at - all. But... that is how the game works in a society full of anonymity. You stereotype. Not just because it is easy. Not just because it is economical. But because it is the only way.
Now we may endeavor to say - to stereotype by gender is - in fact - not economical – and hence should be foregone for the benefit of other ways to stereo-type. The individual diversity too strongly outweighs gender diversity. Maybe so. At least in some ways, I hazard to say, most likely so, in many others, probably so. But are we truly confident to make that a blanket judgment call across life and employment (except the obvious exceptions of physical labor since that one is ridiculously obvious)? Are we truly confident of the substance of it? I doubt that - most of all - because substance has no place in such discussions, anymore. The call was made by the ideology of equality. Fine. I personally don't actually care. However - people who have to put other people to work will care. And they may perhaps notice divergences which reach a significance which justices gendered stereotyping. And I find it disappointing, if perhaps understandably giving some feelings involved, that this can not be properly discussed.
Though...though... one instance, it actually appears to be ready to be considered. Yeah,.. I hear you. I am this “MRA” type. If not already, than I'll be it in a second. Since I am going to point out that this one instance is cases of women being superior. In my experience evidence for that is not shunned at all. Yeah I get the context. But I want you, who are quick to judge me for it, to get my angle. Which is about wondering why we can't have reasonable discussions. One reason, of course, is that because there are idiots. Another is, that because there are sensitivities. And – which is my point – because under the guise of feminism people are putting forth an agenda of indoctrinated and forbidden ideas – meaning the utter inability to discuss genders, leaving only the zeal to fight gendered thinking (as justified as that may be in many ways, and – as Obama said “let me be clear”.. as it is).
Disclaimer: Most people don't actually fit into any box I just opened up. They are like me. They don't really care and just have some vague fuzzy views. But debates are not shaped by such people.
