Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
0 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,913 Year: 4,170/9,624 Month: 1,041/974 Week: 368/286 Day: 11/13 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Anyone ever heard of Rebecca Watson?
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2325 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 56 of 86 (678390)
11-07-2012 2:14 PM
Reply to: Message 52 by Stile
11-07-2012 1:33 PM


Re: My Take
Stile writes:
Rebecca obviously took offense to the statement; therefore, he was wrong. Maybe it was a mistake, an accident... maybe he was trying to get a rise... it doesn't matter, it's wrong simply because it wasn't appreciated by Rebecca.
Wait...What? Since when is the fact that the receiving party is offended by something the sending party said any indication of whether or not the sending party is wrong. Are you wrong when Christians get offended if you tell them you do not believe in god? Really?
Women can stand up for themselves, can't they? They're strong and independant, aren't they? They have the ability to utter the words: "Sorry, no, not interested, please leave me alone", don't they?
At least, the women I'm around do.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by Stile, posted 11-07-2012 1:33 PM Stile has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 57 by Rahvin, posted 11-07-2012 2:26 PM Huntard has replied
 Message 61 by Stile, posted 11-07-2012 2:39 PM Huntard has replied
 Message 64 by subbie, posted 11-07-2012 6:31 PM Huntard has not replied

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2325 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 59 of 86 (678395)
11-07-2012 2:35 PM
Reply to: Message 57 by Rahvin
11-07-2012 2:26 PM


Re: My Take
Rahvin writes:
But it's understandable that a woman, alone in an enclosed space with a much larger man, might feel intimidated and uncomfortable.
Yes, but htis isn't the man's fault, now is t. Not that you're saying it is.
He doesn't even need to say anything necessarily. Hell, I'm 6'6" and I know that some people, particularly women, display uncomfortable body language just from my presence when alone with me in an elevator.
And when I think of how I'd feel with an 8' tall man in an elevator with me, I don't entirely blame them for a little discomfort.
No, but the man, shouldn't be blamed for that uncomfortability either.
Nobody is suggesting that Ms. Watson could not just decline the invitation. Her point as I understand it was that men are not always conscious of how threatening they can be unintentionally, and that this can lead them to make matters even more uncomfortable when they, say, invite the lone woman to another enclosed space with the man who already makes her feel mildly uncomfortable.
The elevator guy probably didn't think he was doing anything wrong, why paint him as some evil dick. Decline his offer, tell him he made you feel uncomfortable, and then you'll know if he's a dick or not. Either he'll appologize and show that he really didn't mean any harm, or to make you feel unconfortable, or he'll be a dick a bout it. I don't see what all the fuss is about here.
Then again, I do think people in general are far too emotional, and maybe that's my problem.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by Rahvin, posted 11-07-2012 2:26 PM Rahvin has not replied

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2325 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 62 of 86 (678401)
11-07-2012 2:52 PM
Reply to: Message 61 by Stile
11-07-2012 2:39 PM


Re: My Take
Stile writes:
According to my personal system of morality.
And... I also think it's better than yours
I'm offended by that, and so you are wrong, and your morality isn't better than mine.
Yes.
If I go and tell Christians that I do not believe in god, and they get offended... then what I did was wrong.
Basically, all I've done is gone out and made some people feel bad.
How is that a "good thing"? Or even a "neutral thing"?
Don't you agree that I should have just stayed home instead? At least then no one would have gotten hurt at all.
Perhaps you're thinking of a more specific situation? Feel free to clarify your example and we can discuss (but perhaps it would be better to take the conversation over to here: Morality without god )
Wait... In a conversation, you are wrong to tell your conversation partner that you do not belive in god, if this offends them? I'm sorry, could you walk me through your logic here? We could go over to the other thread, if you think it more aproptiate.
Yes, yes, yes.
How does any of that make it "a good thing" if Rebecca hurt elevator-guy?
It doesn't. which was my point. She overreacted, in my oppinion. But, again, I think people overreact all the time.
I agree that it can make it justified or maybe the least-bad-thing she could do in the situation. But the fact remains that she said something that hurt elevator-guy. That fact makes that specific thing "bad." I even explained at the bottom of the post that I fully agree that Rebecca was "less-bad" than elevator-guy (does he have a name?).
I don't. I think he was less bad. And what matters here is intent. As far as I can tell, elevator dude didn't mean to cause her discomfort, nor scare her. Where as she said some pretty nasty things about him.
I fully admit that my system of morality takes a bit of a paradigm-shift. But it also has some very large advantages like providing a clear and objective look at the situation so that everyone can agree on what was good and what was bad... the subjective factor for this classification is completely removed. That is, if we agree that "bad things" are those that people do not want to have happen to them, and "good things" are those that people do want to happen to them... it is then objective that elevator guy's proposition was a bad thing. It's also objective that Rebecca's response was bad.
The problem however is that perhaps elevator guy thought that his proposition was a good thing. Since we can't read minds, we can never know what other people truly think and therefore can never be sure of what we say to them will "offend" them. Are we then bad or wrong for saying somthing that "offends" other people? Did we have the intent to hurt them? I say, that if we did not, then no, it was not a bad or wrong thing to do.
However, the fact that elevator guy could have avoided the situation (he started it) and Rebecca could not avoid the situation (she didn't start it) mean's the responsibility is more on elevator guy's shoulders.
Right. So, according to you, avoiding every and all situation is prudent? Because, well, you'll never know when you'll be wrong or bad by saying something someone might possibly take offence to, and well, you really wouldn't want that, right?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by Stile, posted 11-07-2012 2:39 PM Stile has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 63 by Stile, posted 11-07-2012 3:46 PM Huntard has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024