RE: Misogyny and BDSM

RE: Misogyny and BDSM (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion

Message

Icarys -> RE: Misogyny and BDSM (1/3/2010 6:30:06 PM)
quote: Everyone here is either a) a pompous ass, b) an ignorant ass Can I pick both of those?

Icarys -> RE: Misogyny and BDSM (1/3/2010 6:31:21 PM)
quote: I was not referring to you, unless of course, the shoe fits. It does..Iggy it is!

Elisabella -> RE: Misogyny and BDSM (1/3/2010 6:41:49 PM)
Psychonaut, I think this will go much better if you were to clarify two things: 1. What standard of universal ethics do you feel applies to this situation? 2. How do you feel Aynne is violating this standard of ethics, using specific examples? Because all I'm hearing now is "If you took a college philosophy class you'd know" or "Read Kant" and that's a cop-out. I'm not going to do your research for you - if you're as good a writer as you claim to be you'll be able to explain these things in the context of this discussion. You can't just say "no you're wrong" to everyone without explaining why. And for the record while I did take a potshot at Aynne for the smoking weed thing, I really have no problem with it, or with a woman using all of her skills to succeed. Because it's not just a gender thing - I'm a woman and I have no flirting skills whatsoever. When I used to go to parties a lot people would always tell me they thought I was a snob or a stuck up bitch until they got to know me and realized I'm just really shy and reserved. Obviously not on the internet LOL but in person I am. So what Aynne does isn't just based in gender, it's based in her personality and social skills, and while those talents come across in a feminine way, they're the same talents male salesmen use. Singling out a woman for doing what most salespeople do, because she does it in a feminine way rather than a masculine way, is IMO a double standard.

Icarys -> RE: Misogyny and BDSM (1/3/2010 6:50:55 PM)
quote: I'm a woman and I have no flirting skills whatsoever. The way those eyes are looking at me..I say different.[sm=waiting.gif] (Mood music maestro)http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ckhFerSmYRg Wanna dance?

Icarys -> RE: Misogyny and BDSM (1/3/2010 6:54:15 PM)
quote: When you act like this, when you wrap yourself in this pathetic cloak of superiority on the basis of no more than when you first signed up on this forum, you do not inspire me to impress you, or befriend you, or even treat you with respect. See now..That's why I think you guys would make beautiful babies together. Say your sorry Psycho..Give her a hug and maybe some chocolate. Work it out man.

Icarys -> RE: Misogyny and BDSM (1/3/2010 6:55:48 PM)
It's gettin late and I'm gettin punchy..night lol.

sexyred1 -> RE: Misogyny and BDSM (1/3/2010 6:56:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Psychonaut23 quote: ORIGINAL: sexyred1 From what I can see, none of us are impressed in the least; but it is always amusing to see the newbies dig a hole for themselves and get bitch slapped by their betters.. Although in Psycho boy's case, the hole is more like a chasm that can never fill his empty hole. It is statement like these that lead me to the conclusion that the majority of people involved in this conversation are deluded hypocrites and pompous asses on a level I could never hope to achieve. Especially statements like "dig a hole for themselves" and "their betters." You are not my betters. You're just people. That's all. You are not better or worse than me, just different. When you act like this, when you wrap yourself in this pathetic cloak of superiority on the basis of no more than when you first signed up on this forum, you do not inspire me to impress you, or befriend you, or even treat you with respect. I don't care how big of a hole I am in relative to you, because you have already demonstrated to me that you aren't the sort of person whose admiration I want, need or desire. Instead what you tell me is that you are a deeply pathetic and sorry individual whose only merit is the ability to take pride in things that are of no particular value or accomplishment. My betters indeed. [sm=boohoo.gif] Quit your whining, bitch.

blacksword404 -> RE: Misogyny and BDSM (1/3/2010 7:39:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Psychonaut23 I mean seriously. You CLEARLY have never studied ethics in any sort of formal way. I have. I know more than you do. Some would say studying anything formally precludes you from knowing anything. It's not always what you know. It's how you apply what you know.

Elisabella -> RE: Misogyny and BDSM (1/3/2010 8:23:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Psychonaut23 quote: ORIGINAL: Elisabella 1. What standard of universal ethics do you feel applies to this situation? Kant's categorical imperative. Which applies to all possible situations. It is, as far as I know, the only rational universal ethic. quote: 2. How do you feel Aynne is violating this standard of ethics, using specific examples? In a broad sense anyone engaged in any capitalist enterprise at all is violating this standard of ethics, but specific examples would include sleeping with the boss, smoking pot with the lobstermen, and using flirtation and sexuality to increase the likelihood of a sale. I'm especially troubled by the use of flirtation and sexuality to increase the liklihood of a sale, as that is clearly emotionally manipulative. Since Aynne has no intention of consumating any sort of relationship with her customers, her manipulation of their sexual desires is a clear-cut example of treating them as means to her own end (making a sale), and not as ends unto themselves. An ethical salesperson would not attempt to manipulate the emotions of potential customers in any way, and would rely strictly on facts. Which is why an ethical salesperson would fail horribly at the job. quote: And for the record while I did take a potshot at Aynne for the smoking weed thing, I really have no problem with it, or with a woman using all of her skills to succeed. Because it's not just a gender thing - I'm a woman and I have no flirting skills whatsoever. When I used to go to parties a lot people would always tell me they thought I was a snob or a stuck up bitch until they got to know me and realized I'm just really shy and reserved. Obviously not on the internet LOL but in person I am. So what Aynne does isn't just based in gender, it's based in her personality and social skills, and while those talents come across in a feminine way, they're the same talents male salesmen use. Singling out a woman for doing what most salespeople do, because she does it in a feminine way rather than a masculine way, is IMO a double standard. I'm not doing that. If you pay attention, you'll note that I'm actually of the opinion that everyone in sales, male and female, is pretty unethical. Capitalism itself is grossly unethical. I agree that its pragmatically necessary for a salesperson to use all their skills, but at the same times, pragmatic necessity does not provide ethical justification. What Aynne does is no different than a salesman who relies on a winning smile and easy demeanor to make customers feel confident in his trustworthiness. It's exactly the same, but it's unethical. Because the customer is not buying the salesman, he is buying the product. And when the salesmen used personal charisma to emotionally manipulate the customer, they have treated that customer unethically. Well if that's the standard you accept, then I'd say most of your posts on this thread have been unethical. You've consistently made negative value judgements of others when you perceive your argument to be right or superior (mostly saying that others have inferior intelligence) but you don't believe that is the universal standard of ethical behaviour judging by your response to another person who perceived their argument to be superior using the phrase "your betters." And beyond that, the very use of this standard of ethics to criticize Aynne would be unethical because from what I've said in the above paragraph, you feel it's an appropriate measuring stick for the ethics of others but not for yourself. Unless of course you feel that you are acting unethically, and if that's the case I wonder why you'd criticize another person for acting unethically, since you do the same.

Elisabella -> RE: Misogyny and BDSM (1/3/2010 8:25:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Icarys quote: I'm a woman and I have no flirting skills whatsoever. The way those eyes are looking at me..I say different.[sm=waiting.gif] (Mood music maestro)http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ckhFerSmYRg Wanna dance? OMG you just made me blush [sm=hearts.gif] <3 Bowie <3

Roselaure -> RE: Misogyny and BDSM (1/3/2010 8:26:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: blacksword404 Some would say studying anything formally precludes you from knowing anything. It's not always what you know. It's how you apply what you know. Yes. They said that right after a visit to the neurosurgeon who didn't study medicine. Some people are educated fools, that does not mean that education itself is a bad thing.

osf -> RE: Misogyny and BDSM (1/3/2010 8:28:19 PM)
hey!!!!! i'd sleep with aynn, and she wouldn't have to sell me anything i'm a believer in free capitalism and free sex besides she likes my stories

OrionTheWolf -> RE: Misogyny and BDSM (1/3/2010 8:40:37 PM)
Elisabella, he is a follower of Kant, and if you will read Kant, you will better understand his view, and him. I know of very few people that follow Kant, and keep to it past a certain point. Once they actually start apply things to all the maxims they encounter, Kant breaks down and they are constantly having to re-examine things. Believing in one set of principles that governs all morality makes it easier to theorize things, but much more difficult to apply in real life situations. Kant relies on that everyone has an obligation to everyone else, and that everyone should have the same intent and purpose. If any of this deviates from the accept universal truths, then they are by default unethical. One of the most notable arguments is Kant's principle of honesty, when applied in a contractual and non-contractual situation. One incident I recall is about a known murderer coming to your door and asking the where abouts of a friend, and whether you should tell the truth of your friend's where abouts. It really is meta-ethics, and deals more with metaphysical constructs of perfection and utopia, than it does in the application of where, when and what is happening. Someone that is a deep follower of Kant rejects all other notions, and often speaks things as facts, because to them it is facts. Notice his comment about it being as logical as mathematics. There are anomolies even in mathematics, but Kantians do not accept this within the universal ethics system. It is actually a very interesting read, and the conclusions on paper are sound, but when applied to real life events and situations, it breaks down in many areas. My old hard drive that I was storing a lot of my old articles, essays and stories on, crashed or I would send you something that summarizes things for you. When I identify a Kant follower in my ethics class for my profession, I quickly dissuade them from taking the class. It just causes dissention and arguments that have been made many times, with the same results. Instead my students need to focus on the ethics and standards set forth for the profession they are in, and if they decide not to follow them based upon anything else, then they must suffer the consequences of that. Since my profession deals heavily with capitalism, it automatically is in opposition to a philosophy that states that everyone is obligated to everyone else, in every situation. This is why I placed him on hide. I have been there many times, and seen many professors and published writers of philosophy have discussions with a Kantian, and it winds up the same every time. For some reason many of a particular personality trait are very drawn to his philosphy of ethics.

Elisabella -> RE: Misogyny and BDSM (1/3/2010 8:47:51 PM)
Thank you for the clarification Orion, I read the wiki article but to someone unversed in philosophy it seemed to be written in jargon I'm unfamiliar with. I can't imagine that type of ethics having any application in the real world, IMO expecting everyone to have the same motives and ideals is about as likely as expecting everyone to have the same favourite colour. More to the point, I wonder how a D/s relationship would fit into Kantian morality, because by definition the only way for a D/s relationship to work is for two people to have opposite and complementary motives. I imagine that the "ethical" thing to do in your hypothetical would be to tell the murderer where your friend is hiding? If so, I have no problem with being considered unethical to a Kantian.

thornhappy -> RE: Misogyny and BDSM (1/3/2010 8:53:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Psychonaut23 In other words you're bailing on the argument because you can't win, and blaming me for your inability to present a compelling argument. Yes, everyone who stops talking to you is obviously a loser with inadequate intelligence to deal with you. Like I said on another thread, silence does not equal assent on message boards. It can also mean "there's no point in discussing this further" or "you've gone off the deep end now." There's more to life than dealing with your obsession with "winning" arguments on the boards.

Elisabella -> RE: Misogyny and BDSM (1/3/2010 9:04:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Roselaure quote: ORIGINAL: blacksword404 Some would say studying anything formally precludes you from knowing anything. It's not always what you know. It's how you apply what you know. Yes. They said that right after a visit to the neurosurgeon who didn't study medicine. Some people are educated fools, that does not mean that education itself is a bad thing. My thoughts exactly.

Elisabella -> RE: Misogyny and BDSM (1/3/2010 9:19:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Psychonaut23 Two things: 1) You're right, my behavior here and elsewhere is not always ethical. I can be petty and mean, just like everyone else. You'll note however that I don't try to claim I'm justified or in the right when I behave that way, and will readily agree that I'm being an ass. What amuses me is the people who delude themselves into thinking they are not asses simply because they delude themselves into thinking themselves justified. 2) Just because I believe I am smarter and better educated than someone doesn't mean I think I'm better than them. The thing about people is that, from an objective viewpoint, we all have the same value: none. While I might personally value intelligence and a depth of knowledge about philosophy, I don't think for a second it makes me better than anyone else in any sense. Well, in my defense, this entire conversation started when people decided to take offense to an off-the-cuff quip dissing salespeople. I actually didn't start by criticizing Aynne, I started by saying I don't work in sales because I have ethics. And I was condemning the entire profession, not Aynne in particular. I don't think I'm above criticism on my behavior. I'm not a perfectly ethical person, no one who has ever lived can claim that. Not even Jesus can say that. But I don't have to be perfect to point out that other people are being unethical. If you beat your children and Adolph Hitler walks up to you and says "Beating your children is unethical, you are in the wrong" he's right, no matter how many Jews he kills. Well, in my defense, this entire conversation started when people decided to take offense to an off-the-cuff quip dissing salespeople. I actually didn't start by criticizing Aynne, I started by saying I don't work in sales because I have ethics. And I was condemning the entire profession, not Aynne in particular. I don't think I'm above criticism on my behavior. I'm not a perfectly ethical person, no one who has ever lived can claim that. Not even Jesus can say that. But I don't have to be perfect to point out that other people are being unethical. If you beat your children and Adolph Hitler walks up to you and says "Beating your children is unethical, you are in the wrong" he's right, no matter how many Jews he kills. While I do see your point about Hitler, I'd say the difference between you and anyone else on this thread is that to my knowledge you're the only one who says he subscribes to Kantian ethics. You feel that they have universal value, but personally I don't, and I believe Orion doesn't (and he knows far more about it than I do) and it would appear that everyone in the thread who has used phrases like "my personal ethics" also don't. So if you're going to introduce a standard of behaviour to judge us all by, it seems as though you should first and foremost act in a manner above reproach by that standard. While the rest of us might seem 'unethical' by your standard, your behaviour is both unethical and hypocritical. While it is true that by Kantian standards, the behaviour of others is unethical, and it's fair for you to point it out, you can't possibly expect a positive response to your observations when you yourself are failing to uphold the standard you criticize others for not meeting. ETA - and saying things like "I don't work in sales because I have ethics" seems to imply that you are an ethical person, but your forum posts show that you aren't always ethical and you admit it. It would be better to say "I don't work in sales because that is one of the areas in which I choose to be ethical" rather than the blanket statement "I have ethics."

lusciouslips19 -> RE: Misogyny and BDSM (1/3/2010 9:25:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Psychonaut23 quote: ORIGINAL: lusciouslips19 "(used with a singular or plural verb) a system of moral principles: the ethics of a culture. 2. the rules of conduct recognized in respect to a particular class of human actions or a particular group, culture, etc.: medical ethics; Christian ethics. 3. moral principles, as of an individual: His ethics forbade betrayal of a confidence. 4. (usually used with a singular verb) that branch of philosophy dealing with values relating to human conduct, with respect to the rightness and wrongness of certain actions and to the goodness and badness of the motives and ends of such actions. Compare axiological ethics, deontological ethics" These definitions show that there is no universal ethic. Ethic or the Middle English word Ethos refers to society. Since society and cultures are not the same universally ethics change from culture to culture. There is a word for people who attempt to win arguments over philosophy by citing the dictionary. That word is *idiot*. Here is a lengthy explanation of why your argument is stupid. And citing Kant's "theory" and your belief in it makes you right? Get a clue. Also, instead of answering my rational debate with you about the root word of ethics and what ethos means you name call makes you what? You can state your case against why definitions are wrong. But just because you say there is no other ethic than a "universal one", by the definition of the word itself shows you that you are ill informed. And yes, I have taken basic philosophy. Doesnt make you a genius that you cant think for yourself without spouting about some philosopher. Shit, I'm a philosopher too.

osf -> RE: Misogyny and BDSM (1/3/2010 9:28:50 PM)
quote: And citing Kant's "theory" and your belief in it makes you right? if she believes my lies, that makes me right

Elisabella -> RE: Misogyny and BDSM (1/3/2010 9:29:49 PM)
quote: I'm not a perfectly ethical person, no one who has ever lived can claim that. Not even Jesus can say that. Also I'm interested in hearing what you believe Jesus did that was unethical. Feel free to cmail it to me if you think it's too off topic here.

Page: << < prev 32 33 [34] 35 36 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875