Where are the EXJW Feminist Philosophers?

by Luther bertrand 90 Replies latest watchtower scandals

• 

  bohm

  Bohm: Isn't a person who is "fed up with the modern system of equality" pretty much a bigot by definition?
  LUHE: Does this apply to fed-up women as much as fed-up men?

  As a rule yes, unless the person is objecting to the "modern system of equality" itself being discriminatory.

  And should people lose their jobs because of expressing bigoted opinions?

  This is a non-sequitur, it is just answering my question with an irrelevant question.

  Here is an example:

  "My name is Bob. I am not a racist, I am just fed up with the modern system of equality between the white and the jews..."
• 

  LoveUniHateExams

  As a rule yes, unless the person is objecting to the "modern system of equality" itself being discriminatory - ok, thanks. So, the Catholic woman who follows Deida is a bigot because she prefers Catholic patriarchy over equality?

  This is a non-sequitur - of course it's not. Professor Tim Hunt caused outrage due to his bigoted comments. This outrage only subsided when he resigned.

  Imaginary scenario: woman A is having problems with her boyfriend and moans about it to woman B, in the earshot of man C. Woman A finishes her rant by exclaiming "men!" If man C feels 'othered' by this rant and complains, should woman A lose her job?
• 

  prologos

  Only the "Phil" here, : Equality between the distinct male and female interest and power will always require an interesting balancing. It would be in the mother's interest to have children from selective fathers, that give her offspring the brains of an Einstein and the athletic acumen of a Jesse Owens. A patriarch would be more interested to expand his energies exclusively for his line of genes instead. That explains perhaps Mutti Merkel's desire to expand her family, whether the males in her country like it or not.
• 

  Diogenesister

  he main point I'd like to make is that the women who prefer patriarchal systems, e.g. this follower of Deida, likely lives in the West. In other words, it wasn't the patriarchal system or nothing, she could choose which one best suited her. If it didn't work out, she could always go back to the modern system of equality.

  Agreed..

  Germaine Greer once argued that attempts to outlaw genital mutilation amounted to "an attack on cultural identity" (http://www.theguardian.com/society/2013/apr/21/casualty-was-right-female-genital-mutilation).

  I don't know how to express how miserable this makes me..
• 

  bohm

  LUHE:

  ok, thanks. So, the Catholic woman who follows Deida is a bigot because she prefers Catholic patriarchy over equality?

  If she rejects equality then yes. But it is her right to hold that view and if it only affects how she lives her own life it is of little consequence.

  This is a non-sequitur - of course it's not. Professor Tim Hunt caused outrage due to his bigoted comments. This outrage only subsided when he resigned.

  What happened to Tim Hunt has absolutely nothing to do with a person who is "fed up with the modern system of equality" since this was not what he said.

  Imaginary scenario: woman A is having problems(...)man C feels 'othered' by this rant and complains, should woman A lose her job?

  no. You are just changing the topic and asking a bunch of irrelevant questions about irrelevant events. It feels a bit lazy and disingenuous on your part.

  So let me ask you. When you write:

  But men who are fed up with the modern system of equality are smeared as bigots by feminists/hard Left and still have to face consequences

  You seem to disagree with me that being "fed up with this modern system of equality" is a bigoted stance. But isn't that pretty much what every:

  1) KKK member

  2) neo-nazi

  3) sexist person

  4) islamist

  5) homophobe

  believes? "I don't hate X, i'm just fed up with this modern system of equality, lets return to traditional (pre-modern) values"

  And please do not re-define "modern" to be a "a fringe view held by a minority".
• 

  bohm

  talesin:

  Oops. This:

  “Now seriously,

  This demonstrates a specific technique of being critical and deprecating, then softening the blow with a disclaimer. It's called patronization. (and yes, that is the tone - slightly superior, and passive-aggressive, but I ddn't really mean it .. hahaha)

  We can agree that the joke isn't very good. But reading the interview, do you get the impression that he does not think women should be allowed in the laboratory? He explicitly says the opposite.

  Do you think the way the story was reported on twitter is accurate? (this, btw, was the basis on which he was fired while he was still in his plane)

  Do you think he should have been fired?

  Regarding the 'where there is smoke there is fire' argument, the "smoke" is ONLY an inaccurate retelling of the event (read the tweet by StLouis). What I do not think has happened afterwards is that former student and colleagues have not come out and said good riddance of that old sexist pig
• 

  talesin

  Bohm, I have someone picking me up in a few minutes, so for brevity, I will point-form.

  1. The 'joike' was a passive-aggressive slur, evidenced by the disclaimer, as I explained.

  2. I don't see Twitter as a valid form of journalistic communication.

  3. Academia is full of hypocrisy and politics - as I said, he may be talking out of turn far too much, or has a fat complaint file back at the University.
• 

  bohm

  talesin:

  The 'joike' was a passive-aggressive slur, evidenced by the disclaimer, as I explained.

  Well, I am sorry but my detection for "passive-aggressive slur" is simply not so fine tuned I can detect it based on two words; If I should make such a slur against a person I would need more evidence.

  The joke was made at a lunch and appears to be an off the cuff remark. According to one female audience member the talk was warm and funny, you can hear the recording if you wish.
  

  I don't see Twitter as a valid form of journalistic communication.

  I agree, yet he was fired entirely for an (provable) inaccurate account made on twitter.

  Academia is full of hypocrisy and politics - as I said, he may be talking out of turn far too much, or has a fat complaint file back at the University.

  It also may be the case that he eats babies and the university knows all about it.

  Here is one woman relating her experience working under him:

  http://www.nature.com/news/judge-by-actions-not-words-1.17823?WT.ec_id=NATURE-20150625
  
• 

  LoveUniHateExams

  @Bohm

  You are just changing the topic and asking a bunch of irrelevant questions about irrelevant events. It feels a bit lazy and disingenuous on your part - the definition of non-sequitur is a statement or conclusion that doesn't follow a discussion. My relevant (IMO) questions cannot be dismissed as non-sequitur. They are relevant to our discussion.

  What happened to Tim Hunt has absolutely nothing to do with a person who is "fed up with the modern system of equality" since this was not what he said - how can you be so sure? Perhaps it does.

  You seem to disagree with me that being "fed up with this modern system of equality" is a bigoted stance - it can lead to people saying bigoted things, yes. And this is wrong, IMO.

  Where we differ, I think, is how society should deal with these cases.

  Re my example, I don't believe woman A should lose her job either. A bit of common sense, and explanation or apology plus handshake would've taken care of things. Like it would have done with Prof Hunt. Or, man C could've politely been told to get a life ...
• 

  LoveUniHateExams

  I don't know how to express how miserable this makes me..

  Well, thank you, Diogenesister, for at least having the guts to deal with my point and having decency in giving me a response. No one else did.

  I tried googling for an apology by Germaine Greer after the ridiculous and dangerous things she said: saying that preventing genital mutilation is an attack on cultural identity, and trying to make a moral equivalence between Somali victims of FGM and a female Ohio punk choosing to have a genital piercing. This was from her book 'The Whole Woman' published in 1999, so not long ago. She can't make any excuses, saying she was young and ideological, or stoned out of her mind in the 60s.

  I couldn't find any apology. Perhaps her comments should lead her to resign from academia?