SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
I came across this piece on Scott Adam's blog and found it quite interesting. Thought others here might find it interesting too:
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/133406477506/global-gender-war#_=_
So if you are wondering how men become cold-blooded killers, it isn't religion that is doing it. If you put me in that situation, I can say with confidence I would sign up for suicide bomb duty. And I'm not even a believer. Men like hugging better than they like killing. But if you take away my access to hugging, I will probably start killing, just to feel something. I'm designed that way. I'm a normal boy. And I make no apology for it.
Now consider the controversy over the Syrian immigrants. The photos show mostly men of fighting age. No one cares about adult men, so a 1% chance of a hidden terrorist in the group – who might someday kill women and children – is unacceptable. I have twice blogged on the idea of siphoning out the women and small kids from the Caliphate and leaving millions of innocent adult men to suffer and die. I don't recall anyone complaining about leaving millions of innocent adult males to horrible suffering. In this country, any solution to a problem that involves killing millions of adult men is automatically on the table.
If you kill infidels, you will be rewarded with virgins in heaven. But if you kill your own leaders today – the ones holding the leash on your balls – you can have access to women tomorrow. And tomorrow is sooner.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday November 22 2015, @06:42PM
No, but usually there's at least something there, like a bullet traveling towards someone. But there is no such thing in this case. It's the individuals who choose to react to their situations in certain ways.
Are you trying to disagree? An individual who reacts in a certain way is just like a bullet traveling towards someone when it comes to cause and effect.
It depends on what kind of definition of "cause" you're using, however. Usually it implies blame, especially in situations like this. I take objection to that.
I don't especially since I think blaming someone doesn't make the situation any better.
I am placing the blame where it belongs.
Ok, let's move on to that then. I don't buy that either. We already know that a large majority of young males that find interacting and having relationships with young females to be very important - frequently the most important thing that they should be doing. I don't see why they should be expected to behave nicely when the society is rigged so that the available population of females is kept artificially low. That creates a lot of stress and artificially high pressure to find such interactions and relationships.
It's a bit like expecting young adults to behave when there are no adult role models to guide them by.
(Score: 2) by Anal Pumpernickel on Sunday November 22 2015, @07:30PM
Are you trying to disagree? An individual who reacts in a certain way is just like a bullet traveling towards someone when it comes to cause and effect.
You choose how you react to the situation. All I care about is the blame aspect, not this exceedingly broad definition of cause and effect.
I don't especially since I think blaming someone doesn't make the situation any better.
Maybe it doesn't make the situation better, but if you want to punish/rehabilitate someone, you know where to start. If these people take harmful actions, then it is them you must focus on.
We already know that a large majority of young males that find interacting and having relationships with young females to be very important - frequently the most important thing that they should be doing.
You're not entitled to a relationship; it requires the consent of all involved. Can't find a relationship? Too bad.
Again, if there is no consent in the relationship (as if often the case in these countries), the problem lies elsewhere. The problem is not people who merely engage in polygamy and similar types of relationships, since they have that right. I am speaking in general about these types of relationships.
I don't see why they should be expected to behave nicely when the society is rigged so that the available population of females is kept artificially low. That creates a lot of stress and artificially high pressure to find such interactions and relationships.
That depends on how society is "rigged". Is it "rigged" in the sense that these types of relationships are merely allowed (I wouldn't say that that's rigged.), or "rigged" in the system that women have virtually no rights and the ones at the top can forcefully have as many as they please?
Neither justifies acting in a barbaric manner, though the latter would indicate that there exists a serious problem that needs to be solved that has little to do with the polygamy itself.
It's a bit like expecting young adults to behave when there are no adult role models to guide them by.
Yet I would blame them if they didn't. They're still responsible for their own actions.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday November 22 2015, @09:26PM
You choose how you react to the situation. All I care about is the blame aspect, not this exceedingly broad definition of cause and effect.
What's exceedingly broad about it? It's just cause and effect.
That depends on how society is "rigged". Is it "rigged" in the sense that these types of relationships are merely allowed (I wouldn't say that that's rigged.), or "rigged" in the system that women have virtually no rights and the ones at the top can forcefully have as many as they please?
Neither justifies acting in a barbaric manner, though the latter would indicate that there exists a serious problem that needs to be solved that has little to do with the polygamy itself.
This isn't about justification. It's about systems that may encourage bad/barbaric behavior. You can blame the bad actors, but a system with the wrong incentives can exhibit this sort of problem till the heat death of the universe no matter who or how often you blame.
(Score: 2) by Anal Pumpernickel on Sunday November 22 2015, @10:22PM
It's just cause and effect.
It's not very useful to me here because I am talking about blame and personal responsibility.
but a system with the wrong incentives
The wrong incentives being... what? People being allowed to engage in consensual relationships with multiple partners? There's no way to solve that 'problem' unless you are a fan of oppression. The relationships themselves do no harm, so there's no justifiable cause to limit them. We just need to deal with thugs when they rear their ugly heads.
But if you're merely talking about what we can expect when such relationships occur, then that is less of an issue. Still, this sort of thing is typically used to try to justify unjust laws.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday November 22 2015, @11:22PM
It's not very useful to me here because I am talking about blame and personal responsibility.
And I am speaking of cause and effect. It bugs me when people can dismiss interminable problems that affect innocent people, such as terrorist attacks or collateral damage or institutional law breaking (such as unconstitutional asset forfeiture) from the US War on Drugs on the basis that it is a personal responsibility thing for which some people remain forever irresponsible and we don't need to care, no matter how much harm is done.
(Score: 2) by Anal Pumpernickel on Sunday November 22 2015, @11:57PM
institutional law breaking (such as unconstitutional asset forfeiture) from the US War on Drugs
In those cases, government thugs are at fault for enforcing and creating those laws and policies. The individual is at fault for not following those unjust laws, but I think they are good for not doing so. The government thugs are doing the real harm. Everyone is at fault for their own actions, but not everyone's actions are harmful.