|
Elisabella -> RE: what is TPE 24/7? (10/6/2009 8:22:41 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Darcyandthedark
I will ask you these.
Do you advocate the death penelty? Or prison? Are you vegetarian or an ethical meat eater? Are you a slave? Ever killed an animal - an insect ? Never seen children pull the wings off a cranefly? Chase pigeons?
Yes, yes, no, no, no, yes, no, yes. Not sure what that has to do with the things I listed, ie stealing, rape, or torturing animals for fun (chasing isn't torture, killing insects isn't fun, if it is done for amusement then it's a problem).
quote:
quote:
The niche that believes Marilyn Manson was responsible for Columbine, the niche that considers teaching evolution an abomination, the niche that frowns on gay couples kissing, the niche that thinks children should marry and have sex when they're barely pubescent. Those things aren't common sense, they're only common belief in certain circles.
The 'niches' that advocated slavery and the right for women not to vote? Ah but its all belief that is based on common sense.
Allegedly.
Based on common sense, overturned by the evolution of common sense. The 'common' part of common sense implies that it changes with the times, with the current sense of what's common.
Toss Daddysprop's guardian in Afghanistan and common sense would say he's fine. Point is he's here, not there.
quote:
quote:
I didn't ask if you cared or not, I asked if you think what he's doing is ethical or unethical. I would think some guy robbing a bank in San Diego is unethical, doesn't mean I give a shit about it.
I find it neither ethical nor unethical whether I give a fuck or not. Only people who believe they can play god or want some sort of role in her situation place their ethics on it.
I think that's ridiculous to be honest. You're saying you can't have an ethical viewpoint about something unless it's something you want to involve yourself directly with? Would you say that stabbing someone to death to take his shoes is neither ethical nor unethical, or is it just this particular situation you think ethics don't apply to?
quote:
It all comes down to the same thing in the end. I get people want to punish him, rather than save her. That was my point. I often find that people who are the biggest advocates of self responsibility are the people who fight the hardest to take freedom to be responsible away from others.
Oh, completely the opposite. I want to give him the freedom to be responsible for his actions. In a court of law.
quote:
Just like everyone else who thinks what is right for her. He is just one of a bunch of you who thinks you know you have the right way. I just find the irony intriguing.
I don't know her well enough to know what the right way for her is. Hell, maybe being physically abused is the right way for her, though I highly, highly doubt that. But whether or not it is the right way doesn't mean it's not abusive.
quote:
quote:
You're doing a lot of arguing with me, but unless you can actually come out and say "I think that what he's doing is okay" it really seems as though you're just disagreeing based on a vague sense of principle that doesn't really apply in this case.
I don't do arguing, I do discussion. People only argue when they are blinded by their own sense of superiority. So if all you want to do is argue, then I am done with you.
I meant arguing in the sense of putting forth argument. Debating, giving opposing viewpoints. Not in the sense of being nasty to each other.
quote:
I wouldn't even bother with people like you whom feel some sense of justice needs to be accomplished.
And what is it exactly that you have against justice?
quote:
The only reason I have tried to discuss within this thread is the ridiculous thought that people have a right to interfere in lives for their own greater good. That people like His.girl., IM, porceline, beth and countless others are at risk of losing our lives and the way we live, as well as the people we are enslaved, to because of other peoples principles.
If someone else on this board posted that they had a life similar to Daddysprop's, I'd question their sanity. In her case I don't have to. The question's been resolved by a court of law and both she and her guardian accept the outcome of their decision. She has no problem saying she's legally incompetent, the only issue is whether her guardian is abusive toward her or not.
I really think you're just seeing this as a BDSM issue when in reality it's more complex than that. She can't consent, legally, and it's more than just a legal matter. Do you think someone with severe emotional disturbance to that extent can consent to slavery? Don't you think that she's at a disadvantage?
I can understand your motivations in thinking that questioning her ability to consent would lead to questioning any extreme slave's ability to consent, but I do think it affects your position. I'm pretty much standing at a disinterested angle - I don't know any DV victims, or any emotionally unstable people or anyone in a similar position to her, nor am I in one myself, so I don't really have any personal interest that would affect my judgement of her situation. I don't get off on controlling people and saying "no you can't do that because I don't want you to." I genuinely think he is in the wrong here. I think he's a predator. And I wonder if you would be able to see the same if it weren't for the fear that him being labeled a predator might adversely affect your own relationship.
|
|
|
|
