Ooh! Iris gets schooled!

That pompous ass we’ve been engaging with posted only half of my reply on his blog, and responded to it:

Well, Iris, you’ve shown once again that you don’t understand a reductio. The “absurd” part of the reductio is never CONFLATED with the thing being reduced. The whole point is that the absurd bit IS extreme, and shows the person making the original argument that “You really don’t want to hold that view, because look what it implies.”
And no, I don’t think you’re not getting this because you have a “ladybrain.” I think you’re not getting it because you are not very bright.
And note: the way you redescribe the situation RELIES UPON there being an objective morality that makes consent good and submission bad, so you have actually conceded my whole point.
Now, if you’d like to talk more, you might notice the posts by “Unwisdom” above. He disagrees with me, but understands that I am making a philosophical case for moral realism, and that my case has nothing whatsoever to do with women’s rights or feminism, which are apparently the only things you think about. Disagreeing with what I ACTUALLY said, he has come here and discussed this with me like an adult.
Do come back anytime you’d like to have such a reasoned conversation!

D00d.  You keep using that word “reason.” I do not think it means what you think it means. Seriously, how addled does a mind have to be in order to generate something like this?

And note: the way you redescribe the situation RELIES UPON there being an objective morality that makes consent good and submission bad, so you have actually conceded my whole point.

Um, no.  The patriarchal paradigm of women’s sexual morality commonly defined as “submission to men” is neither objectively good nor bad.  Neither is the consent standard.  The submission paradigm is a moral good from many perspectives:  for example, human populations have exploded under this standard, and there was a time when that fact was a very good thing for our species — in a very real sense, all of us owe our very existence to it.  Some people think that standard is still a good thing for our species and the individuals who comprise it.  I disagree.  The egalitarian consent-based standard, i.e. where women have control of their own reproduction, leads to populations having fewer children.  I think that is a good thing, both for the species as a whole as well as for individual men and (particularly) women who comprise it.  Patriarchal men have disagreed for millennia, and many still do.  But the point is, there is no fucking objective morality that makes the consent or submission standards good or bad. 

Anyway, we have now grown bored with the poor fool’s mansplaining of common rhetorical devices, philosophical wankery, general denseness, dreadful dumbassitude, patronizing paternalism, imperious pomposity and confused conflation of the (justifiably) derisive tone of our argument with its actual content.  Surely there must be something more entertaining on the Internet than this d00d…

Please?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s