Philosophy Discussion Forums

Renee wrote: Funny guy! (Or Gel.) *(etc.)

I personally would like to find that out for two reasons: 1. Whether to know if to fall in love with or simply to ignore another person's wildness... 2. General orientation. I like to know which way is "up", like astronauts to whom "up" and "down" is a disturbing concept, since for them this lacks. To me, another person can't be genderless. It is a bit, but not overly, unsettling, to speak to an obvious human but not know his or her gander or goose.

But I am just as happy to stay genderless, and move about among other gender-lesses in the population here. As long as every value-based characteristic remains universally applicable to each of us here, I'm happy.

1. Maybe this should be in another thread, but... will only a bit male/female be so important in falling in love? So, are you saying that all you look are minds and gender? No age? I mean, he can be 80 and you 20. No body? He can be in a wheelchair. Etc. Well, what you say is not very common, but then... why is so important the gender?
2. I think that you should work on that, really, I think we get used to see people using culture, in some countries it's anoying, and it's more than evident that there is a lot of prejudice in gender all the time. Anyway, I think it's clear enough who is a man and who is a woman here.

TSBU wrote: 1. Maybe this should be in another thread, but... will only a bit male/female be so important in falling in love? So, are you saying that all you look are minds and gender? No age? I mean, he can be 80 and you 20. No body? He can be in a wheelchair. Etc. Well, what you say is not very common, but then... why is so important the gender?
2. I think that you should work on that, really, I think we get used to see people using culture, in some countries it's anoying, and it's more than evident that there is a lot of prejudice in gender all the time. Anyway, I think it's clear enough who is a man and who is a woman here.

This should be in the "Introduction" section. My reactions with emotions are a bit erratic, and falling in love, as complex a mechanism as it is, is a highly volatile expression for me. Sorry, I can not be a lifetime companion. But I do get intense feelings of attraction. Then I fall out of love. Age does not matter, gender, does, smarts do, and looks, big time. If body can't be observed, I can fall in love with a mind.

Second point, yes, I agree. Women's ideas get automatically discounted in European-based cultures. I don't know other cultures. Men's ideas get immediate acceptance and validity, even when disagreed with, or strongly disagreed with.

I wholeheartedly agree that a philosophy phorum should have genderless participants. This is a meeting place for ideas, more than any other meeting place. Let's not taint it with unclean thoughts of sex, and with dirty, disgusting feelings like purest, amorous love.

You say you can tell gender. I can't. I can't even tell the colour of hair, or height from here.

All I know is that Greta is a female. She is a nurturer, a mender. She is great at, and motivated to, smoothing over ruffled feathers. She is an accommodator, not an eliminator.

Everyone else, to be honest, I take as male on face value, until proven otherwise, but that's just my personal prejudice. It is prejudice, and I won't make any defensive bones about it.

Renee wrote:

TSBU wrote: 1. Maybe this should be in another thread, but... will only a bit male/female be so important in falling in love? So, are you saying that all you look are minds and gender? No age? I mean, he can be 80 and you 20. No body? He can be in a wheelchair. Etc. Well, what you say is not very common, but then... why is so important the gender?
2. I think that you should work on that, really, I think we get used to see people using culture, in some countries it's anoying, and it's more than evident that there is a lot of prejudice in gender all the time. Anyway, I think it's clear enough who is a man and who is a woman here.

This should be in the "Introduction" section. My reactions with emotions are a bit erratic, and falling in love, as complex a mechanism as it is, is a highly volatile expression for me. Sorry, I can not be a lifetime companion. But I do get intense feelings of attraction. Then I fall out of love. Age does not matter, gender, does, smarts do, and looks, big time. If body can't be observed, I can fall in love with a mind.

Second point, yes, I agree. Women's ideas get automatically discounted in European-based cultures. I don't know other cultures. Men's ideas get immediate acceptance and validity, even when disagreed with, or strongly disagreed with.

I wholeheartedly agree that a philosophy phorum should have genderless participants. This is a meeting place for ideas, more than any other meeting place. Let's not taint it with unclean thoughts of sex, and with dirty, disgusting feelings like purest, amorous love.

You say you can tell gender. I can't. I can't even tell the colour of hair, or height from here.

All I know is that Greta is a female. She is a nurturer, a mender. She is great at, and motivated to, smoothing over ruffled feathers. She is an accommodator, not an eliminator.

Everyone else, to be honest, I take as male on face value, until proven otherwise, but that's just my personal prejudice. It is prejudice, and I won't make any defensive bones about it.

I completely disagree that women's ideas get discounted in Europe, some very skilled female professors get a lot of respect in my country.

And why would dirty thoughts arise knowing gender? Like that happens to everyone, it isn't 4chan here.

-- Updated November 1st, 2016, 8:33 am to add the following --

Burning ghost wrote:Roel -

Judgement is judgement. Negative judgememt is subjective. I act and speak differently depending on who I am speaking too even if I believe otherwise.

If I speak to a woman about feminism I unwillingly assume they will staunchly defend more radical feminist views I consider proposterous. I do think it is helpful in certain situations to know what gender say what on subjects about gender. I do believe that when I talk to someone deeply about a subject my opinions of who they are what they do where they live fall away and the discussion becomes more pure.

As an example. I have a certain opinion of you from your posts. They are not unfounded but may very well be very wrong. I make assumptions about you because of where you live and the subjects of your posts. I label you as possessing certain biases of opinion due to this information and I then reverse this bias back upon myself and wonder what it is that draws me to look at you as I do.

Btw I am male 38 and English. My age is probably the most significant piece of information. In regards to this topic my gender is the most important. I say this because we live in patriarchal societies and so my opinion (relative position) is one of greater freedom than that of women, in a generalised way.

Anonymity is a subject that interests me. I do question in the modern age of communication what right I have to say what I want anomynously. If I am defending white supremists, have a strong opinion about muslims, regard abortion as a crime etc,., do I still have the right to defend some politically extreme position from a secure position of anonymity? Do people not have some right to know who I am in public and directly question my views rather than being held at a distance through eletronic messages? If I am actively trying to bring people to my way of thinking and cause social movements to change government then the government can intervene yet the individual cannot see who they are talking to.

I don't think there is any easy answer to this. Freedom of speech can be good and bad.

I don't know what opinions you have on me, I 'm a very open minded person, so I'll also makd topics about controversial subjects, doesn't mean that I agree with them, but to fight problems like pedophilia and racism, it's better to look with an open mind at the subject and try to find reasonable and good solutions for everyone, not just a particular group, be it the victim or perpetrator.

Renee wrote: Women's ideas get automatically discounted in European-based cultures. I don't know other cultures. Men's ideas get immediate acceptance and validity, even when disagreed with, or strongly disagreed with.

In my experience, every place is sexist, and... Europe is big XD. But this is nothing compared with arabic cultures, anyway in all cases, this are just generalizations, there are every kind of people everwhere.

Renee wrote: I wholeheartedly agree that a philosophy phorum should have genderless participants. This is a meeting place for ideas, more than any other meeting place. Let's not taint it with unclean thoughts of sex, and with dirty, disgusting feelings like purest, amorous love.

I don't find sex unclean, and I don't find what you call "purest amoruous love" dirty or unclean. I don't like places for... that kind of relations alone. But, yes, this is for ideas, that's why genders are useless, and maybe even bad, in my opinion, this thred is an enormous proof about why.

Renee wrote: You say you can tell gender. I can't. I can't even tell the colour of hair, or height from here.

If he has a male name, he is a male. If he has a male photo in his profile, he is a male. The same for women. That's enough for nearly all the forum. If not, they usually have say it.

I won't post anymore in this post, my ideas are clear enough, and I think other people thoughts too.

Roel -

I simply stating we all hold preconceived ideas and that we all make assumptions about people regardless of how openminded we think we are. I think you'd be hard pressed to find someone who says they are closeminded and deeply prejudice.

I judge you, and everyone else here, by the posts they make and how they present their questions and I make ethical judgements about the delicacy used on sensitive subjects.

I am sure people here judge me too. I have had harsh words from people here because they just want someone to agree with them and take any line of questioning as a hostile act ... and I have acted in the same way many times too.

Renee wrote: Let's not taint {discussions with hifolutin' ideas} with unclean thoughts of sex, and with dirty, disgusting feelings like purest, amorous love.

I meant the above in jest. Much like a blood-and-thunder prophet in the Dark Ages may have spoken of love and sex. I meant to be funny.

I can see now how un-funny that was. Thanks for the helpful criticism.

Renee wrote:

Renee wrote: Let's not taint {discussions with hifolutin' ideas} with unclean thoughts of sex, and with dirty, disgusting feelings like purest, amorous love.

I meant the above in jest. Much like a blood-and-thunder prophet in the Dark Ages may have spoken of love and sex. I meant to be funny.

I can see now how un-funny that was. Thanks for the helpful criticism.

I see where you are coming from, this is a disadvantage of online textual-based communication. Maybe adding a smilie at the end makes clear that it's sarcasm.

Renee wrote:

Renee wrote: Let's not taint {discussions with hifolutin' ideas} with unclean thoughts of sex, and with dirty, disgusting feelings like purest, amorous love.

I meant the above in jest. Much like a blood-and-thunder prophet in the Dark Ages may have spoken of love and sex. I meant to be funny.

I can see now how un-funny that was. Thanks for the helpful criticism.

As you've probably seen, I'm not very good at English, that's why I didn't catch the joke, I take it literal XD: I thought "Oh... another person thinking that sex is ugly, whatever".

Anyway, love and sex are something that cause a lot of anguish in many hearts, it's probably one of the most common suicide causes. There are too many jokes about that XD (at least in my country), and it's one of the most complex subjects to talk about, and, in most of cases, the final answer is "we are different", so every person must think about their head alone if they want to get deep and I usually don't like to talk about it.

It is common for folks to use their personal experience as part of their "evidence" when making arguments. How much credence should you give to a man's opinion (based on their experience) on women's topics? Everyone deserves an opinion, but not all opinions should be given equal weight.

LuckyR wrote:It is common for folks to use their personal experience as part of their "evidence" when making arguments. How much credence should you give to a man's opinion (based on their experience) on women's topics? Everyone deserves an opinion, but not all opinions should be given equal weight.

In discussions about pregnancy, I value a women's opinion higher as that of a man, in discussioms about being a father, I value a man's opinion higher as that of a woman, as in these cases only they know what it is like to be so.

Roel wrote:

LuckyR wrote:It is common for folks to use their personal experience as part of their "evidence" when making arguments. How much credence should you give to a man's opinion (based on their experience) on women's topics? Everyone deserves an opinion, but not all opinions should be given equal weight.

In discussions about pregnancy, I value a women's opinion higher as that of a man, in discussioms about being a father, I value a man's opinion higher as that of a woman, as in these cases only they know what it is like to be so.

Exactly my point. Do you value the opinion of a white billionaire, son of a multimillionaire as pertains to the plight of common folk, the minority experience, the immigrant experience etc?

LuckyR wrote:

Roel wrote: (Nested quote removed.)


In discussions about pregnancy, I value a women's opinion higher as that of a man, in discussioms about being a father, I value a man's opinion higher as that of a woman, as in these cases only they know what it is like to be so.

Exactly my point. Do you value the opinion of a white billionaire, son of a multimillionaire as pertains to the plight of common folk, the minority experience, the immigrant experience etc?

Are you talking about Trump? I disagree with his stance on women, all Mexicans being rapists etc. But I think that among immigrants there can be culturally related problems like the minor position of girls in muslim families imported.

Roel wrote:

LuckyR wrote: (Nested quote removed.)


Exactly my point. Do you value the opinion of a white billionaire, son of a multimillionaire as pertains to the plight of common folk, the minority experience, the immigrant experience etc?

Are you talking about Trump? I disagree with his stance on women, all Mexicans being rapists etc. But I think that among immigrants there can be culturally related problems like the minor position of girls in muslim families imported.

With who? Oh, I have heard of the guy... I hadn't really thought of that myself, but since you brought it up, I guess the shoe fits.

LuckyR wrote:It is common for folks to use their personal experience as part of their "evidence" when making arguments. How much credence should you give to a man's opinion (based on their experience) on women's topics? Everyone deserves an opinion, but not all opinions should be given equal weight.

Opinions should not be given equal weight... slippery slope. I can devalue your opinion on this (not that I'd want to), if I accept that opinions are not given equal weight. I can assign more weight to my (hypothetical) opinion than to yours.

With this proposal you open a can of worms on a slippery slope. Because this opinion of yours is not expert-based; so the weight in my (possible) opinion that opposes yours has the same weight behind it as yours. We are both opinion-generators, that's our expertise; and as such, neither of us has more "expertness" by difference of background or experience, than the other. So if I wanted to oppose your opinion, that is, "not all opinions have the same weight", then all of a sudden all opinions have the same weight.

But if all opinions have the same weight, then your opinion of "not all the same weight" applies again... this is an infinitely flip-flopping logical switch, and that's what I meant by "opening a can of worms on a slippery slope".

Of course qualifying it that expert's opinions are more valuable, and added that having the direct, immediate experience of an opinion-generating event, should give the experiencer a higher "expert" status than to a non-experiencer. I admit this, but what about two experiencers of the same background with different opinions? If you give them equal weight, and their opinions still differ, then what? For instance, one multimillionaire's son wants to raise the taxes of the poor and decrease the taxes of the rich, and another multimillionaire's son wants to increase the taxes of the rich and decrease the taxes of the poor... which opinion must be given more weight, considering the sources they have come from?

On a more humorous note: I doubt most women would want to have the same weight behind their opinions as I have. I hit 195 lbs on the bathroom scale. That is approx. 87-88 Kg for our metric-minded friends here on the forums.

Roel wrote: In discussions about pregnancy, I value a women's opinion higher as that of a man, in discussioms about being a father, I value a man's opinion higher as that of a woman, as in these cases only they know what it is like to be so.

See below

LuckyR wrote: Exactly my point. Do you value the opinion of a white billionaire, son of a multimillionaire as pertains to the plight of common folk, the minority experience, the immigrant experience etc?

LuckyR and Roel: This makes good sense, of course, but only to a point. I had a friend who was a bachelor, and a virgin at 50, and he was and had been a successful marriage counselor for decades. Also, my father was a father, and yet he did not have the insight into being a father and how it affected others which a teacher of mine gained in five seconds flat meeting him. Or... or take Friedrich Engels, a leading social anthropologist of his time; he knew more about primitive societies, the problems they faced, the nature of their love life, the way they waged war, than the citizens of these primitive societies, despite not living in a so-called primitive society.

-- Updated November 8th, 2016, 6:58 am to add the following --

TSBU wrote: Anyway, love and sex are something that cause a lot of anguish in many hearts, it's probably one of the most common suicide causes. There are too many jokes about that XD (at least in my country), and it's one of the most complex subjects to talk about, and, in most of cases, the final answer is "we are different"... .

You're right. We are all different. That's why most of us commit suicide or have suicidal ideation when our heart breaks over a lost love. Vive la differance.

I am jesting of course, again. I'll never forget this scene from "Life of Brian" where Brian gives a speech from his window to the multitude, and he says, "you don't have to follow me," and the multitude says in unison, "yes, we don't have to follow you", and Brian says, "we must all think for ourselves", and they say in unison, "we must all think for ourselves", and Brian says, "we are all different", and the multitude says, "we are all different," and in the ensuing short pause a single, squeaky voice pipes up, barely audible, "I'm not".

Renee wrote:

LuckyR wrote:It is common for folks to use their personal experience as part of their "evidence" when making arguments. How much credence should you give to a man's opinion (based on their experience) on women's topics? Everyone deserves an opinion, but not all opinions should be given equal weight.

Opinions should not be given equal weight... slippery slope. I can devalue your opinion on this (not that I'd want to), if I accept that opinions are not given equal weight. I can assign more weight to my (hypothetical) opinion than to yours.

With this proposal you open a can of worms on a slippery slope. Because this opinion of yours is not expert-based; so the weight in my (possible) opinion that opposes yours has the same weight behind it as yours. We are both opinion-generators, that's our expertise; and as such, neither of us has more "expertness" by difference of background or experience, than the other. So if I wanted to oppose your opinion, that is, "not all opinions have the same weight", then all of a sudden all opinions have the same weight.

But if all opinions have the same weight, then your opinion of "not all the same weight" applies again... this is an infinitely flip-flopping logical switch, and that's what I meant by "opening a can of worms on a slippery slope".

Of course qualifying it that expert's opinions are more valuable, and added that having the direct, immediate experience of an opinion-generating event, should give the experiencer a higher "expert" status than to a non-experiencer. I admit this, but what about two experiencers of the same background with different opinions? If you give them equal weight, and their opinions still differ, then what? For instance, one multimillionaire's son wants to raise the taxes of the poor and decrease the taxes of the rich, and another multimillionaire's son wants to increase the taxes of the rich and decrease the taxes of the poor... which opinion must be given more weight, considering the sources they have come from?

On a more humorous note: I doubt most women would want to have the same weight behind their opinions as I have. I hit 195 lbs on the bathroom scale. That is approx. 87-88 Kg for our metric-minded friends here on the forums.

Roel wrote: In discussions about pregnancy, I value a women's opinion higher as that of a man, in discussioms about being a father, I value a man's opinion higher as that of a woman, as in these cases only they know what it is like to be so.

See below

LuckyR wrote: Exactly my point. Do you value the opinion of a white billionaire, son of a multimillionaire as pertains to the plight of common folk, the minority experience, the immigrant experience etc?

LuckyR and Roel: This makes good sense, of course, but only to a point. I had a friend who was a bachelor, and a virgin at 50, and he was and had been a successful marriage counselor for decades. Also, my father was a father, and yet he did not have the insight into being a father and how it affected others which a teacher of mine gained in five seconds flat meeting him. Or... or take Friedrich Engels, a leading social anthropologist of his time; he knew more about primitive societies, the problems they faced, the nature of their love life, the way they waged war, than the citizens of these primitive societies, despite not living in a so-called primitive society.

-- Updated November 8th, 2016, 6:58 am to add the following --

TSBU wrote: Anyway, love and sex are something that cause a lot of anguish in many hearts, it's probably one of the most common suicide causes. There are too many jokes about that XD (at least in my country), and it's one of the most complex subjects to talk about, and, in most of cases, the final answer is "we are different"... .

You're right. We are all different. That's why most of us commit suicide or have suicidal ideation when our heart breaks over a lost love. Vive la differance.

I am jesting of course, again. I'll never forget this scene from "Life of Brian" where Brian gives a speech from his window to the multitude, and he says, "you don't have to follow me," and the multitude says in unison, "yes, we don't have to follow you", and Brian says, "we must all think for ourselves", and they say in unison, "we must all think for ourselves", and Brian says, "we are all different", and the multitude says, "we are all different," and in the ensuing short pause a single, squeaky voice pipes up, barely audible, "I'm not".

Thanks for your extensive reply Renee.

Yes, I think I get why this is: an outsider can get a better general overview of a situation than a participant.

Say a boss is forced to fire his worker because of outside circumstances. The worker might be convinced that it's all the fault of the boss, while an outsider might see that the boss was subject to certain circumstances and it was outside of his possibilities to keep the worker.

However, when talking about what working feels like, how it is experienced, only the worker will really know.