“You’ve misread what I said. That women are based solely on appearances is the result of social deterioration, led by the countercultural movement.”
But they aren’t based solely on appearance. That’s what I’m saying. Appearance is actually less important than in past generations.
“I understand that it’s a fair number of words for you but try to keep up, as I was quite clear in what I said. There will be more words now, as I have to be even more specific to get across to you.”
Sarcasm and condescention. I’ve done it myself.
“I am in no way opposed to women going after whatever they choose and believe that outright barring women from any field is regressive.”
Cool. Because that’s the way it used to be, but it’s getting better.
“Progressive values reformed labor rights”
True. Thank heavens.
“(those rights did not need to exist before industrialization by the way; industrialization/modernization was unprecedented in human rights abuses and fractured the old social structure), which culminated in counterculture.”
Hmmm. Pre-modernization? When most people didn’t have much in the way of rights at all, labor or otherwise. Or more recently, when children mined coal, workers were routinely killed or injured on the job, etc.?
“As it is cultural ideology, counterculture seeks to ‘liberate’ women from all social roles, which it deems as evil”
All social roles are evil? This seems a bit much. You’re fighting an enemy much smaller and weaker than you imagine.
“but those social roles were in-part protective.”
In part, sure. Keeping women safely ensconced at home was protective but also infantilizing and limiting.
“You say that women should be judged to the same standards of men.”
When it comes to careers and personal freedom, everybody should be judged the same. That doesn’t seem so terrible.
“That’s what society has been aggressively pushing since your generation. What is the result of that? By putting all women to entirely male standards”
What are entirely male standards?
“they are exposed to more abuse, harsh treatment, and discrimination.”
Define. Allowing them out in public does expose them to mistreatment, but that’s a risk they are willing to take. As for discrimination, I don’t know what you’re going on about. They face far less discrimination than in the past, as I’ve discussed. If you want to go further back, they used to be property, that will go over poorly.
“Why? Because the old social order is gone, people presume that everyone can be treated to the same aggressive standard, because they are all equal. This exposes more vulnerable people to the abuse that they would have been protected from under a traditional society.”
Again, the social order has changed. The traditional order protected women from some abuse while also inflicting other kinds.
“Physical, emotional, and sexual abuse were rampant pre-21st century […] treating women as inferior beings […] was the norm.” You are basing this on the 20th century, which was after industrialized society and counterculture.”
Yeah, I kind of am. If you want to go back pre-Industrial Revolution, that’s not going to fly. People are healthier, longer-lived, and more free.
“What about before the 19th century? Does your knowledge extend beyond that? Did you ask your great-grandfather what life was like back then? What were the statistics of abuse? What qualified as abuse? You don’t know, hence the vague qualifiers.”
I assumed that going back to pre-20th century living was off the table. Is that your goal?
“You are presuming that the current abuse of women is a logical progression of the past, and that liberal counterculture has been reversing these trends. Nope, abuse of women and rape cases have exploded since counterculture. It was conservative, but largely harmonious before then.”
Harmonious for straight white Christian men. Sort of. But not much fun for anybody else.
“Liberal ideology twists a narrative so that its own faults are projected on the past — it is culturally progressive; it is morally superior, therefore it must be better than whatever existed before.”
Conservative ideology is culturally regressive, is morally superior, and therefore the past is worse than whatever existed before. That push and pull is the essence of human societies. Without “liberals” we become stuck in the past. Without conservative, we charge too recklessly into the future. It is ever thus. Both have a role.
“So liberals presume. How do I know this? Because your opinions are copy-paste social engineering that I’ve encountered countless times before you. Socially engineered people are very predictable, and repeat slogans in lieu of independent thought.”
These are my primary complaints about conservatives. They always say the same damn things. No matter how many easily observable counterexamples I provide they never change their opinions. Instead, they repeat slogans in lieu ofindependent thought.
“Consider this: if liberal counterculture improved upon the past, then why does the past need to be censored, demonized? If counterculture improved society then demonization is unnecessary — people would just see how reality is better now.”
The “demonization” isn’t changing the past. It’s pointing out the ways in which the past doesn’t live up to the current standard.
Personally, I think applying modern standards to the past can go too far, with which you probably agree. Someone tried to tell me George Washington was more evil than Donald Trump because he owned slaves. That’s idiotic: owning slaves was not a big deal at the time. Maybe people then should have seen it was evil, but there was a lot of cultural, racial, and religious context that can’t be overlooked. Besides, if slavery were legal, there’s a 99.999% chance Trump would own some people. It’s who he is and has proudly been.
“Phrases like “manosphere” are vague pop culture references which are a symptom of the overall social decay.”
I agree, pop culture reference can be too glib and uninformative, but it has ever been thus. But I don’t see society decay as monolithic. We have a more equitable nation, crime has been dropping steadily for decades, technology has improved lives…
However.
Even with lower crime rates, we’re still the developed world’s most violent culture. I see considerable social decay in the last decade: conservatives are lashing out against social progress, crime is ticking upward, Donald Trump has followed on the salted ground laid out by Newt Gingrich to make politics nearly impossible, crass, coarse, and devoid of substance. Technology has also enabled the cesspool of social media, and who knows if AI will be a boon or wipe us out?
On the upside for conservatives, the far right is exponentially stronger than ever. A combination of politeness and limited communication kept the fringe in check — loud and aggressive conservatives were frowned on and ostracized. Fox News, Andrew Tate, the Proud Boys, etc., would not have been tolerated by left or right.
“Hyper-focusing on such trends loses the bigger picture. You cannot intelligently talk about social issues using such terms.”
Shorthand is the norm.
“The rules of intersex interaction were men are superior and will do as they please, women will stay quiet.” Words spoken by someone who knows absolutely nothing of the world prior to his birth. Being a respectful gentleman was purely a choice that could be abandoned at any moment” Nope, men who abused women underwent capital punishment, their fingers were cut off, outcast. You have no knowledge of history. People from the old world, before the liberal regime, understood things better. All of the greatest philosophers preceded the 20th century. Tell me, if you are more enlightened than these thinkers, then why is your knowledge so limited?”
This is where I realized why I was so confused — you’re seriously propsing we go back to a pre-20th century world? That’s craziness and there’s nothing to be said.
I recommend you start all your comments with, “By the way, when I say past, I mean a pre-industrial past when men who abused women underwent capital punishment, their fingers were cut off, outcast.” Except there must be a handful of people out there who might agree no opinion is unique.
