Samantha

Unseen wrote:
As soon as you mentioned “ideal,” you revealed that you were not actually talking about facts

Yes, but an “ideal state” is a factual state, that has certain factual qualities (ideal qualities).

Moral realism is not simple and does not get defined.  I think morality has a number of factual aspects, as far as it refers to fact…[Read more]

Unseen wrote:
How do you define moral relativism? If morals are not relative, then they are absolute which means factual.

Yes – what exactly is moral relativism?  Is it the moral philosophy that nothing is better than anything else?  I don’t believe anyone lives like that.  Everyone has values by which to evaluate their own behaviour and ot…[Read more]

Unseen wrote:
Yeah, like people who own parrots. Abnormal.

True – “abnormal” is not necessarily the exact opposite of “normal”.

Unseen wrote:
You treat “normal” as if normality is a fact and not a judgment or standard.

“Normal” can mean, neutrally, “most of the time” or “usually”.  In that sense, paedophiles are a small minority and therefore abnormal.

_Robert_ wrote:
Of course, mental illness can change your personality.

It can make someone do unusual things, but the way they do them will be in keeping with their personality.

Paedophilia is an illness because it’s so maladaptive for all concerned.  It’s pathological: it causes harm over the long term.

I’m sure that paedos flock to the…[Read more]

_Robert_ wrote:
Nah. It’s often considered more violent act of someone who is mentally ill than a normal act of sexual preference.

Mental illness doesn’t change someone’s basic personality: it couldn’t turn someone into a paedo.  It’s an act of sexual preference, but not a “normal” one.

If there are tons of deep fake kiddie porn pictures out th…[Read more]

Unseen wrote:
Donna Summer’s biggest hit was probably I Feel Love, which had an early electronic music background supplied by Giorgio Moroder.

It was recently voted “top electronic single” in a poll, I can’t remember the magazine that ran it.

I really like this version of Chaka Khan’s “Ain’t nobody” by Jasmine Thompson.

Unseen wrote:
Marriage vows make marriage a transaction. Marriage is a legal contract, and no matter what the spoken vows are, only the legalese automatically attached to or implied by them are binding and enforceable.

As I said, I think every close relationship has both transactional and generous interactions.

Unseen wrote:
Simon Paynton wrote:

In this context, it’s “appropriate”. What I mean is, it’s expected, it works best, and nobody will mind.

Unseen wrote:
Expected (by whom?) works best (for everyone?) nobody will mind (nobody?)

The context is close relationships, and the appropriateness of generosity therein.  In close relationships, we tend…[Read more]

Simon Paynton wrote:
In some circumstances it’s appropriate.

Unseen wrote:
“Appropriate” is a silly putty word you use when you want to say nothing at all.

In this context, it’s “appropriate”.  What I mean is, it’s expected, it works best, and nobody will mind.

How many women today are looking for a man who is well-read, who is intell…

[Read more]

TheEncogitationer wrote:
It could equally be an exchqnge of other values, such as courtesy or division of labor in a household, exchange of favors, etc.

Yes, but if there’s an attitude of “if I do A for you, you’ll do B for me”, or vice versa, that’s not generous and freely given.  In some circumstances it’s appropriate.  If someone is b…[Read more]

TheEncogitationer wrote:
As with so many others, you use the word “traansactional” as if it is a bad thing.

What would be the opposite of “transactional”? One party giving all to the other party with nothing in return?

Surely a close relationship is the place for generosity rather than cynical bargaining.  Some things are sacred or priceles…[Read more]

Unseen wrote:
No, the problem women have nowadays is that men are walking away from female reproductive abilities. We men are putting a negative value on having children. So are women, for that matter, until it’s too late for them to find a mate and bear a child.

I’m laying out the fundamental background game plan for the sex differences that w…[Read more]

Unseen wrote:
I have never thought about the low value of my sperm.

The sperm are plentiful and cheap, yet reproduction is of the highest value.  Females produce a few costly eggs (because they take a lot of growing into a baby).  The reproductive dynamic is different for each sex.  This gives rise to the social differences we se…[Read more]

Unseen wrote:
Do you think there’s something unnatural or sinister about these gender divides? Does Vonnegut’s Handicapper General need to step in.

Or maybe, just maybe, we should cherish that women are women and men are men in ways that go fairly deep?

The sex differences aren’t so much “men enjoy things, women enjoy people”, than the deep soc…[Read more]

Unseen wrote:
That’s the feminist parody of the relation between the sexes.

It’s the basic social game plan of patriarchy.

Just because something is “natural” – i.e., it exists in nature – doesn’t mean it is good.

The alternative to hierarchies of any kind is egalitarianism.