RE: Peanut Gallery Commentary on the Staff Log of Bannings and such like.
July 4, 2016 at 9:50 am
(This post was last modified: July 4, 2016 at 9:52 am by Alex K.)
For what it's worth, I'm with Jormungandr on this one. I don't think a case of superficially unequal treatment cannot automatically be called sexist in any meaningful sense before one considers the circumstances. Once you take into consideration the very different symbolic roles and sexual connotations of male and female breasts, which seem to be largely hard-wired by biology as far as I can tell, a superficially unequal treatment can in principle be less sexist than a completely equal one, because if you start with an uneven playing field, equal treatment does not necessarily mean fair.
Also, said OP struck me as not completely in good faith, but that is a subjective judgement and I don't have mind reading powers. As for the rest of the thread, I stopped following it because it seemed annoying, so I can't say anything about the other accusations that were flung.
But then again, I don't really passionately care about the issue, like, at all
Also, said OP struck me as not completely in good faith, but that is a subjective judgement and I don't have mind reading powers. As for the rest of the thread, I stopped following it because it seemed annoying, so I can't say anything about the other accusations that were flung.
But then again, I don't really passionately care about the issue, like, at all
The fool hath said in his heart, There is a God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.
Psalm 14, KJV revised edition
