thompsonx
Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006 Status: offline
|
ORIGINAL: ManOeuvre ThompsonX, Thanks for replying to the OP's opening salvo with an attempt to address the merit or lack thereof of his argument. What you see as an attempt others might view as a success. I think it is worth it to consider whether or not the RM's assertion is true. Why? I think your analysis of the OP's relation to the citation is a touch too personal. Personal problems ought be directed to the chaplain and not me. I don't know the OP, but I wouldn't guess from his post that he is seeking victim status for himself. I would,did and do. It looks like he is trying to foster some discussion as to whether this is the case, From where I sit he looks to be a drama mama with discussion not remotely attached to his agenda. why is the is the case, It is not. whether it is a good or a bad thing, etc. It seems to me that there is some asymmetry in the way this concern is treated, and that asymmetry is demonstrated in this forum. Opinions vary Can you imagine if Staleek's and Sloguy's boring insults and insinuations, Dizzy's condescending dismissal, HoneyBears' mind-reading and WM's little photo-barb (none of which I can express any sort of value judgement upon) were directed at someone who was believed to be anything other than a straight, white male? That is the point isn't it? Can you predict the indignation, righteous or otherwise that would follow? What is your point? It seems to me that the decrease in social capital one tends to experience for being belligerent is lessened, regardless of the merits of the argument, when the belligerence is directed at a straight, white male. Why would you think such an absurd thought? The OP contends, as a proxy to the argument in the Irish Times, that heterosexual caucasian males are in the unique position of possessing no victim card in the victimhood-obsessed culture that seems especially prevalent in the education systems in western Europe, north America, Oz and NZ. Those with a victim card are victims. Those without a victim card are not victims. How is it that this simple truth evades you? He adds in his opening post that this phenomenon manifests itself egregiously in that freedom of expression, which some people regard as a basic right, Realy???which people regard freedom of expression as a basic right? Do they regard it as a basic right for themselves or for everyone? is not evenly enjoyed by members of a society because the victim card may be redeemed to arbitrarily end a discussion. The use of the victim card is hardly arbitrary. I think his argument boils down to some animals are more equal than others. His arguement has yet to be expressed. Do you agree or disagree? I agree that there those with a victim card and there are those without a victim card.
< Message edited by thompsonx -- 6/29/2016 11:10:18 AM >
|