Opinion of clarence

[Gustaf]

I disagree with a lot of his opinions, but I can understand where they come from given his experiences and background. And given that I can't really find them repulsive. He seems to be a reasonably tolerant person doing his best to engage in civil discourse and he provides a different perspective than many others on here.

[Gustaf]

I disagree with a lot of his opinions, but I can understand where they come from given his experiences and background. And given that I can't really find them repulsive. He seems to be a reasonably tolerant person doing his best to engage in civil discourse and he provides a different perspective than many others on here.

You know, I really have a feeling you wouldn't be feeling that way if I said some of the things he did...

Such as?

You're way more aggressive than he is towards those who disagree with you. And your inability to grasp others' perspectives on most issues is often quite mind-boggling.

[Gustaf]

I disagree with a lot of his opinions, but I can understand where they come from given his experiences and background. And given that I can't really find them repulsive. He seems to be a reasonably tolerant person doing his best to engage in civil discourse and he provides a different perspective than many others on here.

You know, I really have a feeling you wouldn't be feeling that way if I said some of the things he did...

Such as?

You're way more aggressive than he is towards those who disagree with you. And your inability to grasp others' perspectives on most issues is often quite mind-boggling.

I'm thinking of the things he's said about women. If I was ever posting stuff that misogynistic  you'd be calling for my banning.

I don't call for bans of people just because they disagree with me.

What has he said about women that is so misogynistic? Showing desire for women is not misogynistic, for the record. You still seem to be under the misconception that I'm some kind of prude when it comes to that, but disliking sexual abuse and exploitation of poor women is not the same as disliking, you know, normal sexual relationships.

[Gustaf]

I disagree with a lot of his opinions, but I can understand where they come from given his experiences and background. And given that I can't really find them repulsive. He seems to be a reasonably tolerant person doing his best to engage in civil discourse and he provides a different perspective than many others on here.

You know, I really have a feeling you wouldn't be feeling that way if I said some of the things he did...

Such as?

You're way more aggressive than he is towards those who disagree with you. And your inability to grasp others' perspectives on most issues is often quite mind-boggling.

I'm thinking of the things he's said about women. If I was ever posting stuff that misogynistic  you'd be calling for my banning.

I don't call for bans of people just because they disagree with me.

What has he said about women that is so misogynistic? Showing desire for women is not misogynistic, for the record. You still seem to be under the misconception that I'm some kind of prude when it comes to that, but disliking sexual abuse and exploitation of poor women is not the same as disliking, you know, normal sexual relationships.

If you're a mod, you can read his deleted posts, right? Also I think he defended Herman Cain during that whole thing, and not with a "it's probably made up" but with "Well she was probably asking for it anyway" type of stuff.

And if that's the case then why are you so after me when I've never engaged in sexual abuse or exploited poor women?

I don't think I'm "after you." But you're always going on about how awesome prostitution is and I find that rather disgusting.

Please provide specific examples if you have any. When it comes to Cain, do you mean that he posted something like this (?):

 

Maybe if an actual one would come out instead of a lying attention whore bought off by Romney's camp.

Because I'd be inclined to agree that seems a bit misogynistic, yes.

I'm not going to go through Clarence's posting history over this. It isn't that easy to do either. Besides, when it comes to cultural attitudes I have more sympathy for someone who comes from another generation. People who were brought up on sexism have more of an excuse than people who weren't.

[Gustaf]

I'm not going to go through Clarence's posting history over this. It isn't that easy to do either. Besides, when it comes to cultural attitudes I have more sympathy for someone who comes from another generation. People who were brought up on sexism have more of an excuse than people who weren't.

I think this is important to realize, and it's why I'm comfortable saying that I think contextually Clarence is actually a very admirably inquisitive and open-minded person. For his age it's really great how much he's willing to learn, even if that is considerably less than it could or should be for somebody of BRTD's generation or mine (I'm a bit younger than him, so I'm not sure if we'd be considered the same generation or not at this point). Of course that doesn't mean that the content of Clarence's posts, much of which genuinely is problematic to a greater or lesser degree, should be above criticism, but it means that Clarence as a person is, I think, worthy of our respect.

I always distinguish between judging a system, ideology, time and so on (which I think is not only justified but a moral duty) and judging individuals within that system.

That's an old beef between me and BRTD though. He always supported shooting people who are wrong (unless they're cool, of course).

[Gustaf]

1. No, I know it's not the same. Thinking it is legal is perfectly valid, whereas thinking it's awesome is pretty stupid. Surely, you're not pretending that you haven't expressed the latter on here?

2. So, I take it you have not a single example to back up your claim. Cool story, bro.

3. I'm not a moral relativist, which should be obvious from my last post, had you understood it. Having a higher level of understanding is not the same as tolerating anything either. Is this an act or are you really intellectually incapable of grasping nuances? You seem to think that I must either want to kill everyone who disagrees with me or be fine with all types of opinions. But that's not true.

But, yeah, I do think that someone who's family was killed by an Israeli drone attack doesn't automatically become a bad person because they say they hate Jews - they're obviously emotionally affected. When Lief says he supports killing civilian Jews, for example, he does not have any such excuse and that thus makes him a worse person. I wouldn't have thought this to be a very hard concept to understand.

That doesn't mean that I'm fine with or condone various views. I don't think it's ok to want to kill all Jews, regardless of your experience. Then again, I haven't seen anything out of Clarence that approaches that level. It's difficult for all of us to break out of the thought patterns we are taught when growing up and recognizing that forms the basis of tolerance.