The 4 Freedoms Library

It takes a nation to protect the nation

Power is not uni-directional, but forms a more complex structure than a straight line.  Femen make use of their assets and the tittilation of the media to draw attention to issues affecting women.  Roman feminists thanked Femen for drawing attention to sexism in Italy.  At first when I heard of Femen, I thought "they need to take their fight to islam, but they probaby won't".  The very next interview I heard with them, they said that that was near the top of their list, but that it is going to be very dangerous.

If you don't watch Russia Today, then you will have missed them.  And if they can get me jumping out of my seat and shouting "go, girls", then I think the rest of you will appreciate their efforts too.

I love this image on their home page: http://femen.org/

Here are images from many of their other confrontations. 

http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=femen&hl=en&client=opera&a...

Our history in the west could have been so different in the past 30 years if we'd had these kinds of feminists, instead of Germaine Greer and Maryam Namazie.  Our feminists were in fact the direct ideological descendants of the suffragettes, who were only interested in the vote for middle class (property-owning women) rather than democracy and universal suffrage (and a host of other issues affecting women). 

 

Tags: Articles, Collected, Femen, feminism, zwomen

Views: 13261

Replies to This Discussion

Dearest Alan,

thank you for your help. Indeed, Tranfers were Trans sexuals, and not payments. Sorry for forcing to you translate my English: and thank you again for your effort :-)

Well: about your points, I did not know Joe's situation, and now I know.

Anyway: I am not anti Homo sexuals, I do anyway agree with the opinion by A. Lowen about Homo sexuality. It is not a natural condition but a condition caused by the way parents treated their son/daughter, when he/she was around 3 to 6 years old.

I say not that hetero sexual relations are perfect: quite at the opposite, I think that most of called Love relations are (still) very problematic indeed,

and this (again) come from the false/wrong Education (or Example) that parents gave to their children (sons or daughters).

Pornography, as I said, and I do repeat it, not only belittles women, but it does belittle men as well, not to mention how does it belittle girls, boys, and children.

As I said, step nr. 1 is Self criticism, which is, knowing one own's personal history: I am sure that everyone of us has many/several wounds to heal, and the fact that one refuses Self criticism but doesn't mind to criticize others (Arabo islamic burkers, in this case), makes me think/believe that one's opinion (about Arabo islamic burkers, for instance) is not trustable enough.

Sadism and Masochism is the way Homo sexuals express their mutual Love?! Well, here again, I would rely (and trust) A. Lowen's scientific work(s). In my opinion, Violence is and remains Violence: I was rather wishing that homo sexual Love was not about Violence, that it was about Love. But now I do not know anymore: maybe Joe might explain me better what does - to him - Homo sexuality mean.

Many thanks for your comments to everyone of you, and I wish you a beautiful and enjoyable starry night.

Alan Lake said:

This is a very interesting discussion, and I'm trying to follow it.  I hope I don't seem a bit dim, but I'm not quite sure what the opposing factions are. ...

What,..... could someone explain this one.

Indo said

Anyway: I am not anti Homo sexuals, I do anyway agree with the opinion by A. Lowen about Homo sexuality. It is not a natural condition but a condition caused by the way parents treated their son/daughter, when he/she was around 3 to 6 years old...

I say.

I have a gay step son. He was brought up the same way as his brothers and his sisters. But to be honest, we all knew he was gay from an early age. He just is gay. To say he was either conditioned or has a condition is just a bit wide of the mark.

Thank you Joe for your explaination.

About point 5), you must (if you like) read the work of Lowen and Miller, and I aldready said why are they scientifically (and humanly!) to be approved: THEY fight in favour of the weakests. And this has nothing to do with Racism or Phobias or Anti: their work(s) can be useful for/to EVERYONE of us. None excluded, everyone included.

About Femens, I understand what you want to say/mean: if their way to expose the problem is the only possible within the context they find themselves in, well, I was ignoring how bad that context was! Most probably decent clothing would be totally ignored, which is very sad: 

but the tactic of Aggressiveness, we know it in the West, eventually brings not true happiness. Eventually women find themselves to play a constant aggressive role, which finally causes nothing but stress (because, as any other Being, women need tenderness and to be tender as well).

Maybe you are right: associating a pro human Rights of women's message to most favourite images of feminine Nudity (or hard Nudity), might encourage consumers (of such a Nudity) to start respecting human Rights of women. Seems an oxymoron to me but, you are right, consumers (see above) would not even keep an eye and/or an ear to the message of a decently dressed woman/female/Feminist. What a problem!

Well: good and beautiful night to everyone.

Joe said:

I'm glad you find this interesting, but I'm sorry to have been so unclear and to have led to such confusion.  This subject has gone way off-topic (but then a discussion about what freedom means may be something we should be having, given the nature of this site).

I can't comment on what Indo believes in general.  I am only rejecting individual statements and arguments she uses, because I don't accept the premises of most of what she says, and I am fearful of where the conclusions take us (the timescale of those conclusions is not necessarily in my lifetime).

I'll answer your points to hopefully clarify my position.

1. I cannot say if Indo is pro-gay or not.  ...

The fascist/authoritarian loves to cite "nature" as a guide.  And this returns completely to my point about the bias in "scientists".  Zoologists for almost the entire 19th and 20th century could not bring themselves to even publish their observations.  Homosexual behaviour has been observed across many species.  But the "unbiased scientists" refused to publish their observations.

That is why I reject the appeal to the authority of "scientist".  It is an argument by authority.  And it is part of the authoritian/fascist mindset.

There is no gay or straight, but authoritarians make it so.  In a free society, people would not care if the person they loved was male or female, and neither would anyone else.  

The inferior social status of women is intimately related to the maintenance of gender difference, and the enforcement of heterosexuality is also a part of this.  Homosexuality arises in those people who cannot make themselves fit into the enforcement, no matter how hard they try.

I have many brothers and sisters (older and younger).  None of them are gay. My parents were far too busy trying to feed us to treat us any differently.  Equally, there are identical twins, where sometimes both are gay, sometimes only one is gay.  I dare say Indo feels relieved now that she has some personal details of mine.  Like a horoscope believer, she'll be able to fit the details into her theory.  Which is exactly Popper's point about psychoanalysis not being a science - no matter what counter-vailing evidence is provided, the theory will adapt to subsume it.  Falsifiability is not the be all and end all when it comes to understanding what science is, but it's a good first step.

The true question to my mind is: why are there (virtually) no bisexuals?  (The answer is: there are, but they hide as either heterosexual or homosexual). 

Indoeuropean said:

Anyway: I am not anti Homo sexuals, I do anyway agree with the opinion by A. Lowen about Homo sexuality. It is not a natural condition but a condition caused by the way parents treated their son/daughter, when he/she was around 3 to 6 years old.

Hello dearest Paul,

I do not believe in the uniformity of Education. I do believe that every child has a different experience during his/her time in the womb, and during his/her childhood.

The presence of further brothers/sisters might totally change the experience of the firstborn, as well as those who were born later might find a totally different (psychological, not only matterial) athmosphere, than the athmosphere found by the firstborn.

These first (appearently unimportant, but profoundly important for the baby's psychological experience/developement) points do have an impact on the kid, and notably, on the kids.

I wonder what do your step children think about their parents, and what kind of experience did they have with their parents: when it comes to them as a couple, when it comes to her as a/the mother, when t comes to him as a/the father. And which was THEIR PERSONAL life's experience against their brothers/sisters.

I think that everyone of us can (and must!) develop a better awareness about his/her own personal history: this helps us to understand ... ourselves ... better, and consequently, to understand others better.

I wish you and your loved ones a starry night.

paul collings said:

What,..... could someone explain this one.

Indo said

Anyway: I am not anti Homo sexuals, I do anyway agree with the opinion by A. Lowen about Homo sexuality. It is not a natural condition but a condition caused by the way parents treated their son/daughter, when he/she was around 3 to 6 years old...

I say.

I have a gay step son. He was brought up the same way as his brothers and his sisters. But to be honest, we all knew he was gay from an early age. He just is gay. To say he was either conditioned or has a condition is just a bit wide of the mark.

Hello Joe.

In my opinion the work of the scientists I cited is very valuable, and it has to do with a world that children and people cannot expose as good as other kind of scientists can do, when it comes to their mathematical matterial touchable findings.

Humans are not objects, that is very important to be pointed out, and the works of above mentioned scientists help US to aknowledge this.

Psychological Violence: does it exist, in your opinion, or not? Well, scientists such as Lowen and Miller expose the Reality of such a Violence, and help fighting against such Abuses. (Mobbing, by the way, is a psychological Abuse and it is psychological Violence).

The fact that I know about your sexual orientation, only helps me to understand a bit better why were you so fanatic about Homo sexuality (and Pornography?): without such an information I was really wondering why did you go almost mad when I was citing Lowen's work, or Miller's one, about difficult childhood's experiences and their effects.

You ask why Bi sexuality is virtually unexistant? I rather ask you: where is it supposed to be virtually or not, unexistant? I lately told you that Trans sexuals are very much appreciated here, in Europa, and from the VIPs' class: they make a lot of money. Their clients are rich and successful (?) people, who have a regular family, but who appearently like to enjoy the company of a male who behave like a woman, wear women's (or bitches'?) clothes, but has a whole dick within his legs and appearently know, how to satisfy his partner (being himself a male, he appearently knows better what does a man, sexually, like).

In my opinion, Love is Love, and Sexuality is Sexuality. The best is, when Love and Sexuality match: the question is, when and/or how often this happens? I agree: this is both a hetero and a homo problem. And a bi ("sexual") problem. Most often people do not know anymore what to try, in order to find the Joy that they cannot find (very philosophical search indeed), and they try anything that the Market offers (and the Market today offers very much!).

Finally: they did not find (they never found/find) the Joy they are seeking and they were meant to find. Maybe (or most probably) because the Joy is not there, where they believed to find it (Sex without Love, or Sex with not enough Love)?

I don't know: the only thing I know, is that EVERYONE should have a more honest look into his/her personal history, and within himself/herself.

Love, Light and Beauty, to you and to everyone.


Joe said:

The fascist/authoritarian loves to cite "nature" as a guide.  And this returns completely to my point about the bias in "scientists".  Zoologists for almost the entire 19th and 20th century could not bring themselves to even publish their observations.  Homosexual behaviour has been observed across many species.  But the "unbiased scientists" refused to publish their observations.

That is why I reject the appeal to the authority of "scientist".  It is an argument by authority.  And it is part of the authoritian/fascist mindset.

There is no gay or straight, but authoritarians make it so.  In a free society, people would not care if the person they loved was male or female, and neither would anyone else.  

The inferior social status of women is intimately related to the maintenance of gender difference, and the enforcement of heterosexuality is also a part of this.  Homosexuality arises in those people who cannot make themselves fit into the enforcement, no matter how hard they try.

I have many brothers and sisters (older and younger).  None of them are gay. My parents were far too busy trying to feed us to treat us any differently.  Equally, there are identical twins, where sometimes both are gay, sometimes only one is gay.  I dare say Indo feels relieved now that she has some personal details of mine.  Like a horoscope believer, she'll be able to fit the details into her theory.  Which is exactly Popper's point about psychoanalysis not being a science - no matter what counter-vailing evidence is provided, the theory will adapt to subsume it.  Falsifiability is not the be all and end all when it comes to understanding what science is, but it's a good first step.

The true question to my mind is: why are there (virtually) no bisexuals?  (The answer is: there are, but they hide as either heterosexual or homosexual).

Let's just leave it at this point, as the subject is back on topic.  Sado-masochism is a small part of pornography, and is not particularly germane to the project of Femen.  Homosexuality is also not particularly germane to the project of Femen.  

This debate has given us some to-and-fro about what we think about freedom, power and human dignity.  And as such was probably a worthwhile debate for 4F (despite Alan's confusion :-)  )

There is much in Marxism that is wrong.  But even a broken clock is right twice a day.  And sometimes Marx does hit on profound truths.  And his remark about making history is one such profound truth.  

I doubt Femen would expect themselves to have been the subject of such a vigorous debate on a site like this.  Let us hope that they too start to target islam, as they said they would.  Some of my very pessimistic friends in the CJM think that European civilisation is going to be saved by warriors from eastern Europe.  Femen is a glimpse of that possibility.

Peace and good mental health :)

Indoeuropean said:

About Femens, I understand what you want to say/mean: if their way to expose the problem is the only possible within the context they find themselves in, well, I was ignoring how bad that context was! Most probably decent clothing would be totally ignored, which is very sad: 

but the tactic of Aggressiveness, we know it in the West, eventually brings not true happiness. Eventually women find themselves to play a constant aggressive role, which finally causes nothing but stress (because, as any other Being, women need tenderness and to be tender as well).

Maybe you are right: associating a pro human Rights of women's message to most favourite images of feminine Nudity (or hard Nudity), might encourage consumers (of such a Nudity) to start respecting human Rights of women. Seems an oxymoron to me but, you are right, consumers (see above) would not even keep an eye and/or an ear to the message of a decently dressed woman/female/Feminist. What a problem!

Dearest Indo,

I'm afraid that here you are committing the fallacy of Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc (PHEPH), in your reply to Paul's point.

Paul asked you to explain why, if being Gay is not an innate state but a conditioned state, then how come a child brought up in the same way as others (i.e. his step son) could turn out Gay?  I think someone else asked you the same question about twins, where the point is even more telling.

Your reply was to say that there are all kinds of subtle differences which could be used to explain why the resultant Gayness occurred.

Actually, this is even worse than PHEPH!  In PHEPH a set of pre-existing conditions is found and then presumed to be the cause.  In this case dear Indo, you have not even stated what the pre-existing conditions were!  (i.e. stated what differences were in the twins environment, or what differences were in Paul's step son's environment, in order to cause the Gayness).  So that's 2 logical sins in your one assertion :-)

This kind of irrational deduction is a characteristic of Bad Science, so I hope you can see why Joe was making complaints about some of the science going on in this subject area.  He pointed out that some of these assertions are examples of a 2nd fallacy, Argumentum ad Verecundiam, or Argument from Authority or Respect.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________

I think I'm finally beginning to understand what the disagreement between you two is (sorry Joe for re-opening this can of worms).

  1. Cause
    I suspect that Indo, without wishing to state it explicitly, believes that homosexuality is an 'unnatural' condition, and it would not arise in a perfect world where we all have a perfect childhood and parents.
    And Joe believes that being homosexual is a totally natural condition, which a person is mostly born with anyway, and that therefore any attempt to find (pejorative) causal factors is not only bad science, but also downright insulting.
  2. Response
    Even though Indo may be inclined to believe that homosexuality is unnatural, she still believes it should have full protection of the law and Gays should suffer no discrimination. 
    Joe however, thinks that, even believing that homosexuality is unnatural, is a danger to Gays themselves (even if they are protected by law), because that belief itself could lead to negative consequences for Gays in society. Therefore, Indos statement about Gays not being under any legal threat is scant consolation to him. 

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

Love and light, from Alan

P.S. Who would have thought that all this discussion would have come from a (rather beautiful) woman's breasts?

P.P.S.  This has been a useful discussion, because I think that without realising it, Indo has defended a position similar to Melanie Philips, and we all need to prepare to better demolish Melanie Philips's position.  And the latter is important for the CJ movement, because Gays, like Jews, are one of the first lines in the battle to preserve equal human rights from the onslaught of Islam.

Indoeuropean said:

Hello dearest Paul,

I do not believe in the uniformity of Education. I do believe that every child has a different experience during his/her time in the womb, and during his/her childhood.

The presence of further brothers/sisters might totally change the experience of the firstborn, as well as those who were born later might find a totally different (psychological, not only matterial) athmosphere, than the athmosphere found by the firstborn.

These first (appearently unimportant, but profoundly important for the baby's psychological experience/developement) points do have an impact on the kid, and notably, on the kids.

I wonder what do your step children think about their parents, and what kind of experience did they have with their parents: when it comes to them as a couple, when it comes to her as a/the mother, when t comes to him as a/the father. And which was THEIR PERSONAL life's experience against their brothers/sisters.

I think that everyone of us can (and must!) develop a better awareness about his/her own personal history: this helps us to understand ... ourselves ... better, and consequently, to understand others better.

I wish you and your loved ones a starry night.

Dearest Joe,

there are still several things we have to discuss about, and by the way the concept of Freedom is basically included in every philosophical economical political mouvement: Capitalism is for the Freedom of capitalists; Collectivism is for the Freedom of workers.

Not to forget that there are NATURAL limitation to our Freedom(s), and that a very common principle for every legal System (at least any System coming from the people and not from any "divine" revelation) is that one's Freedom must have limits, not only because there are other people/beings around any one of us, but even because the two pushes (Expanding/Freedom and Restricting/Limits) are fundamental for our lives [one sees it within the context of children's Rearing - and children is us -, and within any chemical/scientific context.

Since we introduced the discussion about Science, and Chemistry is undoubtely Science - I think you do agree -, one has - I have - to point out that since most ancient times there are two kinds of chemical processes: the outer, matterial one, and the inner, psychological one. That the two are, eventually somehow tied, this belong to the concept of the Body-Mind Unity. The Body influences the Mind, and the Mind influences the Body.

Now: by Mind and Body, not everything gets explained. There are actually more than two levels, and I guess that Thoughts, Feelings/Emotions, and Phisicity already is a preciser explaination of the Unity].

Therefore: what does Freedom means, and/or what's Freedom, the discussion is still open.

---

About Femen: maybe I got (bad) influenced by the fact that the pictures you forwarded here remembered me of a woman nick named Cicciolina, here few pictures of her http://www.google.it/search?hl=it&q=cicciolina&rlz=1I7SKPB_... 

I must also ask you whether you understand Cyrillic and or Ukranian, since I can't get more information about the Mouvement, most of the news are in Ukranian (or Russian?!) only. Can you tell me better what do the banners of these women say? Thank you.

From a picture that I found (Twitter?) I think that they fight against ugliest richest (Russian - or generally - white men) that exploit them sexually [note: Russian and/or similar women are considered among the most beautiful women on Earth.

And as I said in a previous comment, Ukraina and Moldova are known as the poorest countries within Europe, where (beautiful) women get exploited and TRAFFICKED all around the (Western, or even Middle Eastern - !!! -) world.

Here a picture that denounce these Exploitation:

Here a picture of Femen where not only the most beautiful women (or still girls?) take part to the protest, but even the most normal:

I'd like to understand why do you appreciate this Mouvement so much, and I am much more interested in knowing better about Ukranian (or Russian) context: you said that we (Europe or USA?) need such a Mouvement. Look, I HAVE NO DOUBTS that Ukranian/Russian context, and ours are almost two dfferent planets. One (you) cannot think or say that there is like here and or the other way 'round.

Therefore the Mouvement needed there and here, s a discussion which is still open.

Go and come back later. Bye.

Joe said:

Let's just leave it at this point, as the subject is back on topic.  Sado-masochism is a small part of pornography, and is not particularly germane to the project of Femen.  Homosexuality is also not particularly germane to the project of Femen.  

This debate has given us some to-and-fro about what we think about freedom, power and human dignity.  And as such was probably a worthwhile debate for 4F (despite Alan's confusion :-)  )

There is much in Marxism that is wrong.  But even a broken clock is right twice a day.  And sometimes Marx does hit on profound truths.  And his remark about making history is one such profound truth.  

I doubt Femen would expect themselves to have been the subject of such a vigorous debate on a site like this.  Let us hope that they too start to target islam, as they said they would.  Some of my very pessimistic friends in the CJM think that European civilisation is going to be saved by warriors from eastern Europe.  Femen is a glimpse of that possibility.

Peace and good mental health :)

@Joe: you hope Ukranians or Russians to be against Islam? Remember that most Arab men are Islamic, and that several of these Arabs are rich (see: very rich).

According to what I know, East European women DO LIKE Richness very much. And they DO LIKE Arabs very much as well, which often happen to be Islamics.

Different Mentality, different life's condition, different choices. (Clearer: most of East European women come from poor and - sentimentally - cold contextes, and look for so called matterial Happiness.

They do find Richness and even hot partners within the Arab - oft Islamic - community. I could blame them, as much as I could understand them.

Obviously enough, they might find that not everything - with an Arabo islamic man - is so good as they firstly thought, BUT they definitely still find NO Happiness enough in their own countries.

In the West - Western Europe - they do find success: most often within the prostitution Market. Some client will eventually wish and marry them. And this happens. We could open here a discussion about the ongoing of those couples (...).]

I find Arabo islamicity wrong for several reasons, but if you ask me to fight against it only, blindly accepting and following anything which comes from any Non arabo islamic "Culture", well, you got the wrong one.

I keep FREE critical thinking/reasoning about/against anything, anyone, any Culture/Civilization. [Pornography, "Extimacy", children Sexuality, Pedophilia, sexual Exploitation, Exploitation as a whole, and so on, are unacceptable to me, UNDEPENDANTLY from where do they come from.

Be it the Far East, the East, the Middle East, the West, the Far West. From males, females, youngsters, oldies, whites, blacks, riches, poors, theists, atheists, heterosexuals, homosexuals, bisexuals, people living in chastity, and so on.]

---

By the way, you mentionen Eastern European saviours:

do you know that this part of Europe is severely afflicted by harsh social differences, that it is afflicted by harsh poverty (Femen org was born to fight against the effects of such a poverty), and that there is an enormous problem with the Mafia?

Which means, very well organised and VERY RICH (in other words: economically very powerful) groups, which will be a major problem to challenge?

WE (from the Western Europe) should rather help Eastern Europeans to GET OUT from their miserable condition: not expecting the opposite to happen.

Stronger people CAN HELP (and must help) weaker people: for the strongests waiting the weakests to help them, this is very shameful (from the strongests). [This same principle applies to every subject we approached/faced up to now.]

---

Did you talk about Power? Well, Power alone is destructive: a bomb is powerful as well.

Power must be tied to, and preceded by, Love and tied to/preceded by Light. That's the principle I try to adopt while pondering another's point of view, a situation, an action to be taken.

---

Best quality day to you and to everyone (me included).

Thank you dearest Alan for your reply.

Now, all in all I'd say: NO, I don't believe in Genetics, which means, I do not believe that one is genetically homo, or bi, or superior or inferior, I do not believe in Race and Racism, which means, I believe not that the behaviour of one is determined by his/her cells,

which should be (according to Geneticism - let's call it this way -) completely dissociate from education, prenatal experience, in other words, from Mind and/or Mentality.

 I do believe (and I talk out of personal experience) that brothers and sisters ARE NOT grown up in the same way: every child is treated in slightly or massively different manner: this produces different effects (on one child or the other).

I do think that Sexuality can be directed to different object, above all when it is not "sexualized": children, for instance, do feel that their genitalias produce some kind of feeling, enjoyment. And they are on the way to understand "what is this". This is a game to them, and it is not to be considered a mature fertile Sexuality, as the adult one.

Most Pedophiles though, commit the "sin" to think that children "Sexuality" is the same as adult one. I don't know what do homo sexuals, or bi sexuals think.

About Homo sexuality, I think not that it is natural, WHEN IT COMES TO ADULTHOOD. I don't even think that animals (if one really wants to believe that humans are animals/beasts, undependantly of the fact that animals are animals, and humans are humans, otherwise there won't be any status' difference between them) are homo sexual only.

Most of the time, if this happens, they are bi sexual: which means, they act their "feeling in the genitalias" against anything which is "touchable". I refuse to believe that it is a natural HUMAN way to behave. An animal or bestial way, might be indeed. Sorry if I believe that humans are a bit more than mere animals/beasts.

You (two) told me about the twins: what does it mean? Do twins behave the same way, have the same thoughts, and get treated the same way? Do they choose the same partner, the same job, whatever?

No, they are two different HUMAN BEINGS, with two different lives, undependantly on the fact that they were in the womb at the same time. Outside it, they weren't anymore.

The question is, what does a homo sexual think of the other sex/gender? I think that ... by thinking/reasoning ... one understand the human ground(s) for his/her Homo sexuality.

Of course, if one doesn't think/reason, everythis is "natural" (in other words: mindless?). I think that good parents can rear healthier children,

though I do believe in the DIFFICULT human condition, which often makes so, that parents can't be as good as they wish, (in case they wish. There are also parents that do not care at all about their parenthood. They make kids, like animals do, dot. I think this comes from Ignorance only. It's not a fault per se, but it does cause problems to the kids,

who, as HUMAN BEINGS, need more than animals/beasts need).

Sorry, I really must go now. I'll be back later. Good and beautiful day.

Alan Lake said:

Dearest Indo,

I'm afraid that here you are committing the fallacy of Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc (PHEPH), in your reply to Paul's point.

Paul asked you to explain why, if being Gay is not an innate state but a conditioned state, then how come a child brought up in the same way as others (i.e. his step son) could turn out Gay?  I think someone else asked you the same question about twins, where the point is even more telling.

Your reply was to say that there are all kinds of subtle differences which could be used to explain why the resultant Gayness occurred.

Actually, this is even worse than PHEPH!  In PHEPH a set of pre-existing conditions is found and then presumed to be the cause.  In this case dear Indo, you have not even stated what the pre-existing conditions were!  (i.e. stated what differences were in the twins environment, or what differences were in Paul's step son's environment, in order to cause the Gayness).  So that's 2 logical sins in your one assertion :-)

This kind of irrational deduction is a characteristic of Bad Science, so I hope you can see why Joe was making complaints about some of the science going on in this subject area.  He pointed out that some of these assertions are examples of a 2nd fallacy, Argumentum ad Verecundiam, or Argument from Authority or Respect.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________

I think I'm finally beginning to understand what the disagreement between you two is (sorry Joe for re-opening this can of worms).

  1. Cause
    I suspect that Indo, without wishing to state it explicitly, believes that homosexuality is an 'unnatural' condition, and it would not arise in a perfect world where we all have a perfect childhood and parents.
    And Joe believes that being homosexual is a totally natural condition, which a person is mostly born with anyway, and that therefore any attempt to find (pejorative) causal factors is not only bad science, but also downright insulting.
  2. Response
    Even though Indo may be inclined to believe that homosexuality is unnatural, she still believes it should have full protection of the law and Gays should suffer no discrimination. 
    Joe however, thinks that, even believing that homosexuality is unnatural, is a danger to Gays themselves (even if they are protected by law), because that belief itself could lead to negative consequences for Gays in society. Therefore, Indos statement about Gays not being under any legal threat is scant consolation to him. 

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

Love and light, from Alan

P.S. Who would have thought that all this discussion would have come from a (rather beautiful) woman's breasts?

P.P.S.  This has been a useful discussion, because I think that without realising it, Indo has defended a position similar to Melanie Philips, and we all need to prepare to better demolish Melanie Philips's position.  And the latter is important for the CJ movement, because Gays, like Jews, are one of the first lines in the battle to preserve equal human rights from the onslaught of Islam.

Fair enough.

Alan Lake said:

P.P.S.  This has been a useful discussion, because I think that without realising it, Indo has defended a position similar to Melanie Philips, and we all need to prepare to better demolish Melanie Philips's position.  And the latter is important for the CJ movement, because Gays, like Jews, are one of the first lines in the battle to preserve equal human rights from the onslaught of Islam.

RSS

Page Monitor

Just fill in the box below on any 4F page to be notified when it changes.

Privacy & Unsubscribe respected

Muslim Terrorism Count

Thousands of Deadly Islamic Terror Attacks Since 9/11

Mission Overview

Most Western societies are based on Secular Democracy, which itself is based on the concept that the open marketplace of ideas leads to the optimum government. Whilst that model has been very successful, it has defects. The 4 Freedoms address 4 of the principal vulnerabilities, and gives corrections to them. 

At the moment, one of the main actors exploiting these defects, is Islam, so this site pays particular attention to that threat.

Islam, operating at the micro and macro levels, is unstoppable by individuals, hence: "It takes a nation to protect the nation". There is not enough time to fight all its attacks, nor to read them nor even to record them. So the members of 4F try to curate a representative subset of these events.

We need to capture this information before it is removed.  The site already contains sufficient information to cover most issues, but our members add further updates when possible.

We hope that free nations will wake up to stop the threat, and force the separation of (Islamic) Church and State. This will also allow moderate Muslims to escape from their totalitarian political system.

The 4 Freedoms

These 4 freedoms are designed to close 4 vulnerabilities in Secular Democracy, by making them SP or Self-Protecting (see Hobbes's first law of nature). But Democracy also requires - in addition to the standard divisions of Executive, Legislature & Judiciary - a fourth body, Protector of the Open Society (POS), to monitor all its vulnerabilities (see also Popper). 
1. SP Freedom of Speech
Any speech is allowed - except that advocating the end of these freedoms
2. SP Freedom of Election
Any party is allowed - except one advocating the end of these freedoms
3. SP Freedom from Voter Importation
Immigration is allowed - except where that changes the political demography (this is electoral fraud)
4. SP Freedom from Debt
The Central Bank is allowed to create debt - except where that debt burden can pass across a generation (25 years).

An additional Freedom from Religion is deducible if the law is applied equally to everyone:

  • Religious and cultural activities are exempt from legal oversight except where they intrude into the public sphere (Res Publica)"

© 2022   Created by Netcon.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service