Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

You Sexist You!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by Darth Executor View Post
    Einstein didn't have an exemplary family life, I can see why someone would leave it off his obituary.
    True, he had affairs from time to time, but obituaries generally neglect the unpleasant aspects and focus heavily on the positive aspects.
    Learn to do right; seek justice. Defend the oppressed. Take up the cause of the fatherless; plead the case of the widow.--Isaiah 1:17

    I don't think that all forms o[f] slavery are inherently immoral.--seer

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by fm93 View Post
      The point, as the article I specifically linked to explains, is that you know an obituary of a famous male scientist like Einstein wouldn't have a section devoted to exemplifying his family life. His career achievements would stand on their own. Whereas a female scientist's obituary was written by someone who apparently decided that the family life section needed to be there. That's an unequal standard. Either the female scientist's career achievements can also stand on their own, or obituaries of male scientists should also remind the public that men can have exemplary family lives.
      Did Einstein have a family life and want to be remembered for his family life as much as his career life? Besides, you seem to forget that Einstein died 60 years ago while Yvonne Brill died 2 years ago. Did the thought ever enter your head that the obituary for a person that died 60 years ago might sound differently than one that died in recent times? Did the thought also enter your head that maybe she wants to be remembered for her family life as well as her career and thus why it was included too? Of course you didn't because you're obsessed with seeing sexism behind every tree and prefer to hijack somebodies heartfelt words into your crusade.
      "The man from the yacht thought he was the first to find England; I thought I was the first to find Europe. I did try to found a heresy of my own; and when I had put the last touches to it, I discovered that it was orthodoxy."
      GK Chesterton; Orthodoxy

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by lilpixieofterror View Post
        Did Einstein have a family life and want to be remembered for his family life as much as his career life? Besides, you seem to forget that Einstein died 60 years ago while Yvonne Brill died 2 years ago. Did the thought ever enter your head that the obituary for a person that died 60 years ago might sound differently than one that died in recent times? Did the thought also enter your head that maybe she wants to be remembered for her family life as well as her career and thus why it was included too? Of course you didn't because you're obsessed with seeing sexism behind every tree and prefer to hijack somebodies heartfelt words into your crusade.
        Wow.

        Einstein merely constituted a hypothetical example. It needn't be him in particular. The point is that it's highly unlikely an obituary writer would ever think it necessary to include that sort of reference to someone's domestic life at all, especially not in the very opening of the obituary, if that someone was primarily known for being a prominent male scientist. The way that obit is written, one would think that Yvonne Brill was primarily a homemaker who just happened to do science in her spare time. And again, you know an obituary for a prominent male scientist, even one who said he wanted to also be remembered for his family life, would virtually never be written in that way (aka a manner that made his scientific career seem like an afterthought despite the fact that that's what he was primarily known for).

        *I* am not obsessed with this. But if anything, it seems that you may almost be obsessed with trying to not see certain problematic standards even when they do clearly exist.
        Learn to do right; seek justice. Defend the oppressed. Take up the cause of the fatherless; plead the case of the widow.--Isaiah 1:17

        I don't think that all forms o[f] slavery are inherently immoral.--seer

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by fm93 View Post
          Okay. This sentiment I can agree with. I suppose it could be conveyed in terms like "persistent non-physical behavior towards a non-consenting woman is just as inexcusable as physically raping her." But for the sake of consistency, then, should people condone Dr. Craig's usage of phrases like "divine rape" in his debates and articles?
          well not quite. It is not the same as physical rape so to claim it is "just as inexcusable" is more exaggeration.

          People (men and women) like to think they are attractive. They will dress nice and women will wear makeup etc, in order to be perceived as attractive. So people do want others to notice them and to look at them. Looking at the opposite (or same) sex without "consent" is not a problem, it is actually what most people want, as long as they are perceived as being looked at because they are attractive and not because of some deformity or handicap.

          Where it gets out of hand is if someone uses non-physical means to intimidate someone else. Such as outright glaring at them to make them feel uncomfortable. Or making sexual innuendos or comments that are meant to intimidate. That, as someone else said, is sexual harassment. It is not rape. Not even close.

          So call it "intimidation" or "sexual harassment" if that is what is happening. Not "rape" or "persistent non-physical behavior towards a non-consenting woman is just as inexcusable as physically raping her."

          To do otherwise would be the same as saying calling someone names is just as inexcusable as beating someone into a pulp.

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by fm93 View Post
            Okay. This sentiment I can agree with. I suppose it could be conveyed in terms like "persistent non-physical behavior towards a non-consenting woman is just as inexcusable as physically raping her." But for the sake of consistency, then, should people condone Dr. Craig's usage of phrases like "divine rape" in his debates and articles?
            Oh I forgot to answer your last question. I don't know what the context of Craig's usage of the term is. can you give me more information?

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by fm93 View Post
              True, he had affairs from time to time, but obituaries generally neglect the unpleasant aspects and focus heavily on the positive aspects.
              Since my mom just recently passed, I've read quite a few obituaries for some odd reason. I think I only saw ONE that even mentioned a career, and that was in passing at the end for a woman that died in her 40's.
              That's what
              - She

              Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
              - Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)

              I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
              Stephen R. Donaldson

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
                Since my mom just recently passed, I've read quite a few obituaries for some odd reason. I think I only saw ONE that even mentioned a career, and that was in passing at the end for a woman that died in her 40's.
                Correct, in the past few years we buried a number of loved ones. Not once was their career mentioned.
                Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

                https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

                Comment


                • #53
                  Letting women into lifeboats first ahead of men is benevolent sexism. This heinous discrimination in the form of a social convention should be immediately ceased and replaced with free-for-all.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
                    Since my mom just recently passed, I've read quite a few obituaries for some odd reason. I think I only saw ONE that even mentioned a career, and that was in passing at the end for a woman that died in her 40's.
                    Right, obituaries don't always mention careers, but if a particularly famous person passed away, they would generally first mention what that person was famous for doing/saying. Look at this obituary of the late Leonard Nimoy, for instance. It didn't make his role as Spock seem like an afterthought. To the contrary, it was front-and-center. Yet this prominent female scientist who passed away received an obituary that made her scientific endeavors seem like a footnote.
                    Learn to do right; seek justice. Defend the oppressed. Take up the cause of the fatherless; plead the case of the widow.--Isaiah 1:17

                    I don't think that all forms o[f] slavery are inherently immoral.--seer

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by fm93 View Post
                      Right, obituaries don't always mention careers, but if a particularly famous person passed away, they would generally first mention what that person was famous for doing/saying. Look at this obituary of the late Leonard Nimoy, for instance. It didn't make his role as Spock seem like an afterthought. To the contrary, it was front-and-center. Yet this prominent female scientist who passed away received an obituary that made her scientific endeavors seem like a footnote.
                      They don't even mention his fantastic performance as Xehanort!

                      Unless they somehow finished recording for Kingdom Hearts 3 he won't be finishing up the story either.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by fm93 View Post
                        Right, obituaries don't always mention careers, but if a particularly famous person passed away, they would generally first mention what that person was famous for doing/saying. Look at this obituary of the late Leonard Nimoy, for instance. It didn't make his role as Spock seem like an afterthought. To the contrary, it was front-and-center. Yet this prominent female scientist who passed away received an obituary that made her scientific endeavors seem like a footnote.
                        Like this one?

                        http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/31/sc...ies-at-88.html
                        That's what
                        - She

                        Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
                        - Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)

                        I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
                        Stephen R. Donaldson

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
                          That's the same article. The Times changed it after they received criticism for the opening. It originally opened with this:

                          She made a mean beef stroganoff, followed her husband from job to job, and took eight years off from work to raise three children. “The world’s best mom,” her son Matthew said.

                          But Yvonne Brill, who died on Wednesday at 88 in Princeton, N.J., was also a brilliant rocket scientist, who in the early 1970s invented a propulsion system to help keep communications satellites from slipping out of their orbits.


                          It was her work in science that made her famous enough to warrant that obituary in the Times in the first place; consequently, it seems odd that they would say she was "also" a rocket scientist while first emphasizing her family life.
                          Learn to do right; seek justice. Defend the oppressed. Take up the cause of the fatherless; plead the case of the widow.--Isaiah 1:17

                          I don't think that all forms o[f] slavery are inherently immoral.--seer

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Oops, missed this earlier.

                            Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                            well not quite. It is not the same as physical rape so to claim it is "just as inexcusable" is more exaggeration.
                            I think this has become an issue of semantics. I always thought the context of Matthew 5 was that the Pharisees thought they could still be righteous if they merely fantasized about committing adultery instead of actually doing it, and Jesus corrected them by saying that they were not. This same principle applies here.

                            People (men and women) like to think they are attractive. They will dress nice and women will wear makeup etc, in order to be perceived as attractive. So people do want others to notice them and to look at them. Looking at the opposite (or same) sex without "consent" is not a problem, it is actually what most people want, as long as they are perceived as being looked at because they are attractive and not because of some deformity or handicap.

                            Where it gets out of hand is if someone uses non-physical means to intimidate someone else. Such as outright glaring at them to make them feel uncomfortable. Or making sexual innuendos or comments that are meant to intimidate. That, as someone else said, is sexual harassment. It is not rape. Not even close.

                            So call it "intimidation" or "sexual harassment" if that is what is happening. Not "rape" or "persistent non-physical behavior towards a non-consenting woman is just as inexcusable as physically raping her."
                            And I agree with all this. But I know some young men who swear that they would never actually rape a woman, but they do engage in intimidation and sexual harassment towards women when those women clearly don't want it. And it seems that a fair point to make to them would be "Even though you aren't actually raping anyone, acting in such ways towards women does not make you any more righteous."


                            Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                            Oh I forgot to answer your last question. I don't know what the context of Craig's usage of the term is. can you give me more information?
                            In this article about universalism and particularism, Craig writes:

                            Those of us who have unbelieving family and friends no doubt often feel that if they will not freely give their lives to Christ, it would be worth it if God would simply overpower their wills and save them in spite of themselves; do doubt, too, we feel that if we had not freely yielded our lives to God, then we wish that God would have overpowered our wills and saved us anyway. But as strong as such feelings are, they do not change the fact that such an action on God's part amounts to salvation by divine rape. For God to subvert the will of someone who chooses to reject His grace would be to violate their personhood, and that God necessarily will not do.


                            I also believe I've heard him use that phrase in his public debates before, although I'm not sure in which ones.
                            Learn to do right; seek justice. Defend the oppressed. Take up the cause of the fatherless; plead the case of the widow.--Isaiah 1:17

                            I don't think that all forms o[f] slavery are inherently immoral.--seer

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by fm93 View Post
                              I think this has become an issue of semantics.
                              No, it's merely one in a long series of victimhood ploys.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by fm93 View Post
                                That's the same article. The Times changed it after they received criticism for the opening. It originally opened with this:

                                She made a mean beef stroganoff, followed her husband from job to job, and took eight years off from work to raise three children. “The world’s best mom,” her son Matthew said.

                                But Yvonne Brill, who died on Wednesday at 88 in Princeton, N.J., was also a brilliant rocket scientist, who in the early 1970s invented a propulsion system to help keep communications satellites from slipping out of their orbits.


                                It was her work in science that made her famous enough to warrant that obituary in the Times in the first place; consequently, it seems odd that they would say she was "also" a rocket scientist while first emphasizing her family life.
                                This is quoted from my Mother's Obit:

                                0a19acc7-dbb8-4788-a732-ce7af8d3f98d.jpgx.jpg

                                If it could be said of any person that they lived life well, it could be said of 'Grandma Bea.' Loved by all, she always had a kind thought and a gentle touch- you never left her home hungry or without an encouraging word. A woman of genuine grace, who will be deeply missed.

                                What more can be said, or needs to be said...
                                Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

                                https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by Cow Poke, Today, 04:42 PM
                                3 responses
                                14 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by Cow Poke, Yesterday, 02:40 PM
                                22 responses
                                110 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Gondwanaland  
                                Started by NorrinRadd, Yesterday, 01:16 PM
                                17 responses
                                141 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post seanD
                                by seanD
                                 
                                Started by Cow Poke, Yesterday, 11:32 AM
                                16 responses
                                93 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Cow Poke  
                                Started by Cow Poke, Yesterday, 10:50 AM
                                27 responses
                                144 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Thoughtful Monk  
                                Working...
                                X