What's next? The determination that pedophilia and bestiality are just fine and dandy? "If it feels good, do it" is the new moral standard.
Any objections to the new ethos make one a bigot. Sit down, and shut up!
Related reading: Three High School Girls File Discrimination Complaint Over Dominating Transgender Athletes (dated June 19, 2019). These three girls refused to sit down and shut up. Good for them!
Maximum Liberty among consenting adults should be the permanent ethos.
ReplyDeleteAmen!
DeleteUntil those nasty conflicts of interest come into play.
DeleteNasty conflicts are inherent in the human condition and our interactions with one another. Often, competing interests are mutually-exclusive and cannot be resolved. Healthy societies achieve some kind of balance, toleration and accommodation. Extremists on the fringes are trying to shred our social fabric, and I fear they are succeeding.
DeleteI caught this podcast. It's Brendan O'Neill talking with the professor who was hounded out of Evergreen College by dictatorial lefwing radicals.
ReplyDeleteBoth men are liberals, and they deplore such idiocy.
https://www.spiked-online.com/podcast-episode/we-need-a-rational-left/
Excellent talk. Thanks for the link.
DeleteI've seen other dems on Fox saying the same thing. One was talking to Tucker.
DeleteThe Democratic party isn't homogeneous, Ed.
DeleteJust ask Joe Biden.
Democrat/Republican has nothing to do with their conversation (O'Neill is a Brit), and while both men engage in productive discourse with intellectually honest conservatives, they bristle and playing the role of "token lefty coming over to the conservative side."
DeletePartisan politics has poisoned everything.
Liberty is good. The problem with libertarians is that they don't know where to draw the line on deviant behavior--it's all good. Well, no it isn't ... but don't take my word for it. Ask any citizen of Rome. Oh, wait ... never mind.
ReplyDeleteSure they do...consent, assault, theft, etc. It's simpler than most make it out to be.
DeleteIn your simplistic view.
DeleteSpeaking of simplistic, Rome collapsed because the provinces could no longer supply the city with sufficient luxuries.
DeleteNot because of debauchery.
There were several reasons for the demise of Rome. (1) Overspending and oppressive taxation and inflation created a wide gap between the rich and the poor ... like now in the US, for example, under Democratic leadership. Problems with barbarians further disrupted the economy, interfered with trade, and prompted a decline of commercial and agricultural production. (2) It didn’t help that government was thoroughly corrupt and incompetent ... like now in the US. Roman officials forced non-Romans to sell their children into slavery (some of it involving sex slavery) in exchange for food staples. (3) Rome lost its traditional values, including civic virtue, where every citizen had a duty to serve the state, where society expected every citizen to do their part ... like now in the US where most citizens shirk their basic responsibilities. When these virtues were gone, when overtaken by immoral behavior, there were no voices to reproach people back from the brink of their own destruction. Concurrently, other than mercenary barbarians (who had become Rome’s main source of soldiery), there were also no one to safeguard Rome. Pathetic ruination, IMO. Today, the US is on that same pathway. Social immorality is part of it and if there were a poster-boy, ducky would probably qualify.
DeleteIn your simplistic view.
DeleteI'm not burdened in having to twist reason to shoehorn it into hypocritical ideological and partisan dogma. So, yeah...simplistic, but rational.
Check your privilege, AoW! In the Intersectional Olympics only underprivileged voice matter!
ReplyDeleteProfessor Jordan Peterson channels Pink Floyd:
ReplyDeleteHey, Teachers! Leave them kids alone!
An identity — a role — is not merely what you think you are, moment to moment, or year by year, but, as the Encyclopedia Britannica has it (specifically within its sociology section),
“a comprehensive pattern of behavior that is socially recognized, providing a means of identifying and placing an individual in society,” also serving “as a strategy for coping with recurrent situations and dealing with the roles of others.”
The continually expanded plethora of “identities” recently constructed and provided with legal status thus consist of empty terms which
(1) do not provide those who claim them with any real social role or direction;
(2) confuse all who must deal with the narcissism of the claimant, as the only rule that can exist in the absence of painstakingly, voluntarily and mutually negotiated social role is “it’s morally wrong to say or do anything that hurts my feelings”;
(3) risks generating psychological chaos among the vast majority of individuals exposed to the doctrines that insist that identity is essentially fluid and self-generating..."
It's pretty clear: Psychologically damaged people seek positions that enable them to infect others with their pathologies.
ReplyDeleteLucky Ducky, you don't live in an actual police state.
ReplyDeleteGo live in Syria for a year and then get back to me.
Besides, nowhere in what I said did I make a claim that everything is alright. I was merely making a philosophical point.
For the love of God put your outrage hammer away and just engage in the discussion.
Did the Duck get deleted?
DeleteEd,
DeleteI didn't, but perhaps another team member did.
No, Ducky didn't get deleted.
DeleteHe's just too tired to argue with those who think they are the sole arbiters of just who is psychologically damaged (are homophobes?).
Too tired to ask Kid to once again post the source of the BS he posts.
And too tired to debate the relative merits of economic policy with a true believer.
I'm just thrilled that the new casino that opened nearby didn't turn my neighborhood into a parking lot.
Ducky,
DeleteI'm sorry to hear about the casino. One more blot on the moral landscape. Our governments are turning this nation into a toilet. Government has become a giant mafia monopolizing the vice rackets.
Casinos, now drugs. Next up, government legalizing prostitution (and, of course, profiting from it.)
Heh....loving the ironic use of 'outrage hammer'......
DeleteAs well as the absurd comparison between a country that can't find it's own ass....with one where domestic State surveillance is through the roof.
DeleteDuck, not my fault you live under a rock in a cave !
DeleteI read a recent article that noted public schools in California are teaching K grase that there are an infinite # of genders. Main point, up through to 10 year old's were to be taught that pedophilia was simply a form of sexual orientation. That bit has been [temporarily] removed.
ReplyDeleteOther than that up to 10 yr olds are being taught that safe sex is sodomy, oral sex, instructed about condom use, and Fisting. Imagine your 10 yr old daughter coming home with questions about how some boy should be allowed to shove is whole hand up there.
California needs to go. And anywhere else pushing this crap.
Do Kindergartners understand "infinity"? Primary grades are taught pedophilia?
DeleteYou're blowing smoke as usual. Can you point to documentation?
Here is one anecdote from Ontario.
DeleteWritten by Jordan Peterson, so that allows the intellectually-constipated left to brainlessly reject it without even engaging.
Interesting case and only partially recounted by Peterson who uses the case primarily to get on his favorite hobby horse.
DeleteThe lesson was introduced to attempt to address the bullying of a child in class who was manifesting gender aphasia. Was it done in a ham handed fashion? I would say yes based on the reporting but the whole story is considerably more complex than your latest gadfly, Peterson, let's on.
At any rate, it has nothing to do with the BS Kid is pushing.
Ducky, don't you think teaching the Golden Rule, with stories would go a long way? Do you think teaching children to be polite and treat others with respect should be the norm?
DeleteDenying basic biological science and human nature is not the answer.
When I was in school, kids who got caught picking on others were punished.
I would agree that there might have been a better way to manage this issue with young children rather than introducing concepts they are too young to understand. Adults don't understand it that well.
Delete
Delete“there is no such thing as girls and boys” and “girls are not real and boys are not real”
are not concepts. They are un-scientific absurdities, and the idiot teacher should be fired for teaching such balderdash to 6-year-olds.
For that age level, a talk starting out with "We are not all the same..." and "its OK to be different..." would go a long way.
For crying out loud, didn't any of these unimaginative indoctrinators ever watch Mr. Rogers?
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
DeleteDuck, I never allow myself to be tasked by cretins such as yourself. Have you ever heard of an "Internet search engine" If not, you can do a search on it.
DeleteIf you still need help, send me a check in advance for tutoring. $100 will get you an hour.
Here's what I found.
DeleteDoesn't give me too much help finding a sane news source pushing your tripe.
Kid,
DeleteLOL! Reasonable price for tutoring!
Snopes?
DeleteAOW- I am reasonable if nothing else.
DeleteED, Snopes ! LOL !
Another refutation
Delete"The law requires that the sex education lessons, which typically total between 10 and 13 hours, be given to students beginning in the 7th grade and taught once in middle school and once in high school. Districts can choose to teach sex education in lower grades but the state does not require that any sex education be taught before the 7th grade."
Must have missed the requirement that 10 year olds are taught fisting. You aren't blowing smoke, are you?
Wrap yourself in little blankie Duck and stay happy. lol
DeleteWe used to live in a society where those parties were excluded from those conversations. That we have recently begun to hear those voices represents an advance, I would argue.
ReplyDeleteWhy?
DeleteBecause we should endlessly argue as to whether or not rape is a "good" thing. We're no longer allowed to simply roll our eyes or laugh at the suggestion...
DeleteGood example. Consider how rape was treated today with how it was in the 19th century, or during biblical times. It looks to me as if it's been taken more seriously since we started listening to feminists.
DeleteSo you're saying, we need to listen to more rapist voices. Give Harvey Weinstein a platform!
DeleteNAMBLA needs a publicity campaign!
DeleteWeinstein's platform is well established. It's his victims who've been silenced until recently.
DeleteReally? Name a single public advocate for rape. Just one will do.
DeleteNow name a ingle campus WITHOUT a "rape culture, take back the night" program. You can't. There aren't any with said "deficiency".
DeleteSo, which side is being"silenced"?
DeleteAs for the past, name a rape advocate today that isn't an imam. A rape advocate in America's history (since 1776)?
DeleteFJ,
Deletename a rape advocate today that isn't an imam
Good point!
Do the non-muslim Americans who are actual rapists count? What about rapists who used legal devices to silence their victims? What about those rapists' legal advocates?
DeleteAnyway, your "good point" answers arguments I never made. My claim is that the Old Testament trivialised (compared to contemporary values) rape, not that it advocated for it.
It's very easy to find people who have recently claimed in public that eg. rape within marriage can't happen. On the other hand, I think it's hard to find campusses that took rape culture seriously back in the '70s and '80s.
Criminalized behaviour is advocacy/encouragement for rape? Who knew? And rape defendant's "advocates" advocated for the rape and not innocence/ leniency for defendants? Who knew? I thought they sought to prove that the rapist wasn't their client, or that the victim was a willful participant, NOT raped.
DeleteWho's advocating for more of the "act"? Nobody. It's advocates, if there ever were any, have been successfully "silenced". And if anyone were to advocate FOR more rape, they'd likely be severely censured, censored and likely institutionalized.
Rapists ARE excluded from the conversation. Let's keep it that way.
DeleteNo they're not, and no they haven't been. You don't exclude rapists by allowing the powerful and those who occupy positions of moral authority to dominated it.
DeleteAnd drawing up NDA's and bullying women into signing them is not the same thing as pleading innocence.
Now you're arguing that Wealth and Power corrupt the legal system, not that advocates for rape have voices. That's true for ALL censured human activities, NOT just "rape". Such is the "opportunity price" for allowing the "potential for mercy" to supercede the rule of "law", for Christianity to surpass Judaism.
DeleteOtherwise you'd allow "Judge Dredd" to be judge, jury AND executioner.
DeleteActually I'm arguing that excluding the voices listed in the original article does nothing to silence advocates for crimes such as rape (nor rapists' advocates, if you want to bother with that distinction); on the contrary, while the conversation (or "lectures") are reserved for establishment voices, should we be surprised that long-standing corruptions are preserved?
DeleteI have great respect and awe the power of mercy; you know that I am not an authoritarian, right?
And isn't THAT the precisely the problem? That a tiny minority (of formerly male Trans) have now hijacked the de facto voice of the "Establishment" (law/Title IX) and now seek to Lord over the greater majority by re-silencing the voices of the women who only recently, under Title IX, began to have a voice and for whom the law was intended?
DeleteShould we be surprised that the "will to power" will always corrupt the established order? Does that mean we should let it, even encourage it (You GO, T-girl!)?
The New Janissaries of the former Ottoman Empire have once again seized control of the sultanate...
F' "their" voice!
I don't think that trans voices should hijack the conversation, and nor have they. They should be part of the conversation, which they historically have not been.
DeleteI'm glad that you welcome the recent recognition of female voices, and it must be obvious that I am not in favour of re-silencing them.
I can't help feeling that you're only so keen to drain the bath-water for the opportunity to dispose of your most despised babies along with it.
They haven't hijacked Title IX?
DeleteSo let's get the Pro Rape argument going now.
Voices NEED to be heard! ;)
after all (insert rape justification here... okay if it serves a "higher cause")... King relieved the crushing stress of daily death threats and the insatiable demands of the civil rights movement with women and liquor. To his credit, King was the first to admit he was far from perfect as America’s “moral leader”
DeleteAt least King was no "hypocrite".
That (serves a higher cause) must be why Bill Clinton always gets a pass from the feminist Left.
Delete...seems that the Left is their worst enemy when it comes to "believing the women".
DeleteShrug
DeleteI'm claiming that, arguably as a result of listening more to women and feminists, rape is being gradually taken more seriously. Your historic examples of sexual abuse that were trivialised at the time, would not be trivialised today: ie they fit my claim. You're clever enough to notice this by yourself, so wth are you doing??!
I agree, we did not always listen to women. But I disagree that we now need to listen more to transexuals. Some voices are simply "perverse" and the "perversity" needs to be contained so that it influences LESS people. Changing sex isn't like changing clothes. It has serious and often debilitating side effects.
Delete"contained"
DeleteMeditate on what is meant by this word. Do you mean, this group should be hidden? Unrepresented in the public square? Disenfranchised? Exposed to discrimination and abuse?
The relationship between listening and influence which you implicitly assert would make an interesting debate, unfortunately you've wasted too much time moving your goal-posts around.
Here's a good read by Andrew Sullivan
ReplyDeleteI think it’s time to shuck off this narrative (of oppression), because it is a crude simplification of the gay experience, because it is profoundly out of date, and because it focuses us on other people we cannot always change while ignoring things closer to home that we can.
For many, I hope, that will mean just getting on with our lives, without our sexual orientation getting in the way.
http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/06/andrew-sullivan-the-next-step-for-gay-pride.html
Getting our society to toleration took a lot of work, but we have arrived.
ReplyDeleteforcing people to parrot politburo-approved credos from the Little Red Book is a bridge too far.
Millennials are becoming less tolerant of LGBTQ, and are already less tolerant than older age groups
The highly-politicized Religious Right of the 80's onward did great damage to Christianity.
The LGBTQ preachers should learn a lesson.
The Constitution bans bigotry and homophobia and prescribes safe spaces for pedophiles? Who knew?
ReplyDelete... for there is nothing so fragile as the gay ego...
ReplyDeleteI grew up in California and went to college in New York. New Yorkers were somewhat frightening to me... they were so brash and quick to speak their minds and tell you what they thought. And if you looked up on the streets of Manhattan and/or slowed your pace, they cursed and ridiculed you mercilessly, for being a "tourist". There was even a song that encapsulated the New York culture... it was the most anti-fragile on the planet. Those who mastered it became the most successful on earth (ie - DJ Trump). When did it all go out of "style"?
ReplyDeleteDo you remember how awkward you felt, finding your place in Jr. High? It's something few "homeschoolers" ever really conquer, and is the best recommendation I can make for "public schools". Cuz if you can learn to navigate 7th grade, it's on the New York! ;)
DeleteRemember Alexander Tyler's circle.
ReplyDeleteWe're in the decline phase of his chart.
Hitory proves that nothing lasts forever. It's just our time to disintegrate that's all.
Who knos wha will cme to take our place? Something, but will it be better or worse? Nobody knows.
billions of ants competing to eat a rotten log
DeleteEvery great and powerful nation state has enjoyed it's time at the apex of influence and power, only to recede and ultimately fade away into a shell of its former greatness.
ReplyDeleteWhy should we believe the USA is able or capable of defying that which no other nation state in the history of the world has been able to do.
We are in descent mode and the brake linings are not in good shape.
Switzerland has had a good run and is still going strong. They have always minded their own business. Probably a lesson in there somewhere...
DeleteI would never define Switzerland as a "great and powerful nation state."
DeleteIf you're a happy Swiss living a good and prosperous life in a well-run nation, "great and powerful nation state" doesn't matter.
DeleteSadly we're far from a Switzerland. The Swiss have ALWAYS been more, dare I say, more rational than Amsricans in a lot of ways.
DeleteViva la diference!
ReplyDeleteMine says to see the possibility of Christ in every human being. Christ is not in every human being.
ReplyDeleteBut each is redeemable.
A bridge too far, IMO: Libraries' drag queen hours.
ReplyDeleteAt the least, public libraries have prominent displays about the LGBTQ lifestyle -- and in the children's sections. Grrrrr!
For that last link, I hope they're considering not allowing female-to-male transgenders to be entered in male events, just like how the commenters are saying male-to-female transgenders shouldn't be entered in female events.
ReplyDelete