Take the feminist quiz

Remove all ads!

I agree with both this post and and your statement on gender made earlier. Still, I use the term 'equality' for reasons of clarity, as the re - definition, though necessary, would derail any discussion. The word 'equality' is comparable to 'good'/'evil': certain philosophical stances discourage the usage of it, yet, establishing a common linguistic/conceptual ground is essential for a successful communication with those who do not share one's beliefs.

On a side note, any cultural (as opposed to natural) concept is a man - made sentiment; such is the way society functions.

As an ethical naturalist, yet again I agree. One can fight the oppression or submit to it, but the rights will be gone anyway, as retaliating will be outlawed.

On the contrary, I would call such a 'brave new world' a dystopia, not only quite boring, but depriving one of individuality. In any case, good Sir, I have read your posts with pleasure. Also, I adore the Latin sentence: so true.

To anyone interested in further discussion on gender: what are your opinions on the 'other', not biologically determined gender models, id est, the undifferentiated and androgyne?

 

I believe analyzing, discussing, and redefining everything that we know is the only way to better our understanding of the moral cosmos that we've created. I think of it as a science; science is man's best guess, we go by that and assume it is true until our next best guess comes along. Constantly changing, shifting, improving upon; Philosophy, Morality... these should be the same way. But I'm derailing now...

I agree with you completely; equality has almost become a synonym for fairly. Equality is good, inequality is evil. Which leads to the purport of equality being simply 'good' in the eyes of many. I do often get carried away on my philosophical rants; so I shall leave the definition of equality alone.

Ahh, but the line between cultural and natural are often very blurred. Is sex always natural? Is it natural only when it leads to childbirth? Is urinating in private natural or is it a cultural conditioning? What exactly is a man - made sentiment? Is pain a man - made sentiment?

This is why law exists to protect the rights of the individual, not to enforce a moral standard. Which has been widely muddled in recent years... but derailing again! So I'll just say that I'm glad we have a similar mindset!

(On a little off-topic tidbit, I almost always wear shorts. I've been working a small construction project on my home lately and so I put on some carpenter's jeans and a black beanie and someone told me "Wow, you look weird! Or rather, you look normal, and that's weird!" I would miss my individuality!) I quite enjoyed reading your posts as well, madame. Ah, hah; you must mean "I think therefore I am... depressed." So true indeed. ~.^ I took four years of Latin, though sadly most of what I remember now is the historical portion of the class (which is what interested me most). Writing a woman a love letter in Latin is the most I've ever written in the dead language. Thinking about it, that is pretty sad! Still, I suppose it paid off; if only for using obscure Latin quotes (or being able to understand them)!

I believe that regardless of how a person is born, they can either be very feminine or very masculine (as seen in the existence of sex changes). The same holds true for a hypothetical androgynous human. Our parts don't determine who we are as much as our mannerisms.

I could most likely rant at you for pages on Philosophy and Morality alone; though perhaps a topic on feminism isn't the place. I'm afraid that I have to get working before the sun rises, and I've already spent too much time replying here~apologies for not expanding on your question. I will leave you with a transcendental thought holding overarching value, belied by an underlying genius: Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur!

 

Well not all online quizzes are accurate

I don't believe in legislating or radically changing our government, I do believe in sexual liberation, am pro choice and believe in contraception. How it came up with me being a typical American Democrat has me laughing. While I'm sure my views may be extreme to a liberal, I don't consider them extreme so I'll give the quiz a point there.

 

I think the failure of the quiz is that it assumes that everyone taking the quiz is a feminist. There appears to be no way, regardless of how you answer the questions, to not be labelled as some type of feminist.

 

It is blurred indeed, yet still, some questions can be answered, a limes, even if a subjective one, can be determined. What kind of pain do you mean? Pain as in 'The Sorrows of Young Werther, or the normal, regular kind? Well, they say culture an sich can be a source of discomfort .

That is a mindset I share, not surprisingly. Still, the attribution of masculinity/femininity is blurred as well. The culture clashes through history provide us with numerous examples of different gender models. Would a Germanic woman be attractive to a Roman man? Would a Greek man appear attractive to a Celtic woman? Et caetera...

'Tis so, indeed 'tis so. Have a great day at work, good Sir. By the way, a love letter in Latin? 'Naso magister erat', eh?

 

They have Inalienable Rights, which are "self-evident."

Yes, there isn't much in the way of "fair and equal treatment," just the illusion of it. But it is a nice illusion.

Anyone who has worked in business knows that all too well. When someone, or an enity, comes along with more power and wealth, you are pretty much screwed.

I'm not sure what you mean by Skill. Most think of equality, or equal, as treatment under the law. I hope you are not suggesting that people with more "skill" should have more rights. But I don't think that is what you are saying. But I fail to see what the concept of skill has to do with your tirade.

We have neither - fairness nor real equality. The idea was that if you treat people equally under the law, that everyone would have the oppurtunity to rise to their potential. The Founders were hoping to escape the old aristocracy. If you were born to a particular, lower station in life, regardless of your potential, you were screwed. The results were quite promising for a while, but now it is meeting with limited success. The end result is yet to play itself out. We will see.

Yes, these were, in part, the princples of the Enlightenment. But "the light" is much dimmer now.

But we are really beating about the bush here. We should cut to the chase:

Have at it.

That we have this, is a profoundly moral statement about who we believe we are:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Declaration_of_Independence

And it has worked pretty well for the most part. Recently, we are seeing a reverse in what has been the steady progression of human rights and I'm not optimistic.

The idea of "natural rights" has taken us very far in realizing true human potential. However, life has hardly ever been "fair." It should be. It should be a goal. But people get exploited, fleeced, abused, all the time. There are a fortunate few who are "coddled." We tend to "coddle" our children a bit, but it's a pretty tough world for most people. Nevertheless, the idea of "natural rights" is far better than the alternative.

 

Endowed upon us by our government; in an extreme hypothetical, if a hyper-advanced hostile extraterrestrial force invaded Earth, whatever rights we have endowed upon ourselves would be gone. If the aliens declare that every single right we have given ourselves is now to be the opposite; if they enforced it, that would be the way of life. All I meant was that humans have no innate rights; though I can't tell if your comment was in sarcasm or not.

Definitely not! I'm not suggesting a caste system whatsoever. I'm saying that it baffles me how people in our society can claim they have been treated unfairly when they get passed up for a promotion because another worker has better skills than they do. A difference in credentials, i.e. skills, is not being treated unfairly or unequally under the law. This is what some people have taken "fair and equal treatment" too. That they should be treated the same as everyone else no matter what.

 

Well, I don't think that's something the Founders thought much about. Aliens, no matter how hyper-advanced, might believe in natural rights just as we do. I get the impression that you believe all these notions are human contructs, but it is really a matter of our natural state, which is towards liberty. That is why many of us would rather chose death than live without rights. This is a natural human impluse for the most part; it is innate.

Don't worry, I didn't think that.

I think that is because most see themselves in the best possible light, and are not always able to see themselves as others do. Plus, as you point out, things are not often very fair, so someone with the better skills may be passed up for political, or personal reasons.

But I think you are pointing to something cruial, which is that most people are unreasonable in many instances. They say "it's not fair," but they really mean, "I don't like it."

Also, please don't think I'm being sarcastic, Rahkir, I'm not. I have nothing but respect for you and your comments. What you are saying to us makes good sense to me. I just think it's not "fairness" that those people want. What they want is something different.

 

Hmmm, that is an intriguing and fresh take on it. A human's natural, innate, impulse is to live with rights. Hmmm, that is true for a lot of people. However, when your rights are taken away, i.e. slavery, I think the innate human reflex is to survive and be liberated. Even when we have no rights, when all our rights are taken away, we don't throw ourselves to the dogs and die without liberty; we live, survive, cling to the hope of a better future. That is why I think innately, humans, as primates, as animals, have no rights.

This is very true; as I pointed out earlier people don't take kindly to impediments of their potential. I agree, many people who cry for equality, for their god given right as humans, don't want fairness; they want something better than what they have. Which is why I think we need fairness under the law; not equality of every being.

Sorry ^^ sometimes it's hard to read sarcasm in text. I agree with what you're saying, as well. The respect is mutual.

 

I believe that hope is an important part of freedom; that we can find a way to preserve our rights because it is how things should be - it is the natural order. But if it is an entity (like your aliens) that is hostile to freedom, then we have to sacifice for the freedom we say we revere. I am a lover of Peace, but I would rather die fighting as a free man, than live as a slave. "In peace nothing more beomes a man than modest stillness and humility," as Shakespeare wrote, "But when the blast of war blows in our ears...."

Peace, Rahkir.

 

That is an American concept. And even so, those 'rights' are continually impinged upon. The only 'rights' you have are those that you are strong enough to take and hold, or are wily enough to negotiate.

 

You got that right, Mordea.

 

So at what point do you retaliate with violence? Would you shoot at police officers because they have come imprison you for smoking pot? Can you defend yourself against the theft of the fruits of your labour by government agencies (ie. income taxation)? If you claimed a bare patch of land in the desert, how would you prevent it being occupied by a State?

Don't get me wrong, I think that: "I am a lover of Peace, but I would rather die fighting as a free man, than live as a slave." is a noble sentiment, but it is impossible to live by. I honestly don't think there is a government on earth which completely respects the individual's human rights and civil liberties. And that's hardly a surprise, since they are established to farm human resources. The best you can do is play the system, and try to maneuver yourself into a position where you can pull the strings.

 

Mordea, the practice of civilization is one of giving up some of your 'absolue human rights and civil liberties' for the greater good, a greater good that you can then partake in. After all, my human rights and civil liberties, by your defition, may well include getting behind the wheel of a car drunk and playing Desruction Derby, but society as a whole deems that too harmful, and you're likely glad it does.

My point is, if you want to live 'completely freely', be prepared to do it in complete isolation and wilderness. Short of that, you have to make some sacrifices to your own liberties in order to accomodate others' liberties.

 

LOL. Are you a member of the Tau Empire?

Why?

 

That was a sensible post, NOG.

 

I don't smoke pot. But you try to make it legal if that's what you want to do. There are always political solutions if both sides are willing and I am a strong believer in reasoned solutions over bullets. I have a contract with my government and my society - it's the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Yes, it is infringed upon.

We have people here who are all worried about some 70 year old woman getting a check-up on Medicare, while our government has built the largest, most complex, police state, spying, "national security" machine in history. And it can turn it on its citizens anytime it wants. They have private armies running all over the place; they hold people without due process of law; have cell phone providers tapping phone calls, they can check whatever people are reading, posting on the internet and petty police officials can come and violate anyone's property rights for no good reason. The Founders would have a seizure if they saw what's going here today.

But I'll be honest, for all your talk about "grabbing the AK-47" whenever something happens you don't like - I don't see you running out the door with it. Violence is always the solution of absolute, last resort for reasoning people and I suspect that as one, you know that.

 

Dude, you were the one who said:

not me.

 

Nothing quite like taking my comments out of context, is there?

There is a vast difference between having your "rights infringed upon" and being ENSLAVED by an alien race.

 

Chandos, it's a slippery slope