(04-17-2022, 01:08 AM)epronovost Wrote: I don't think that, in this specific case, there is any debate on the anti-humanist and anti-democratic nature of that man's opinion. He himself, would almost certainly claim that he does not support women's equality which is inherently anti-humanist and anti-democratic since one of the cornerstone of democracy is equality amongst citizens and anti-humanist since humanism defends the equal rights of humans. Feminism is, after all, just an offshoot of humanism. That man's misogyny is not in question; only a fool would pretend it is. That there are a million shades of grey doesn't mean we can't collectively make the difference between light and darkness. A fear of setting any demarcation point and thus condemning people unjustly is perfectly reasonable, but it should not, in my opinion, paralyze us to a point when even blatant displays of anti-humanist, anti-democratic or other forms of hateful ideals are expressed and take root fail to meet an answer. That's basically falling into relativism which can be very dangerous.
I do not claim that physical violence against misogynists is a good thing though. It's sometime a necessary thing, but it should not be encouraged or legalized. If the man got punched, it certainly is wrong, but I certainly am not sad about it. I think it's fairly amusing, but it's certainly wrong and illegal and should remain so. I am being mean-spirited in this instance. That's how I feel about it; not how it should be. There is a key difference between the two. I don't think my raw feelings should be law or even taken as moral advices. But, morality, even my own sense of morality and code of ethics, or the law don't affect how I feel about things.
Again I appreciate your straightforward answer but it is 180 degrees different from your last answer:
Quote:To make a long story short: yes. People with anti-democratic and anti-humanist ideals like this man for example should be confronted and stopped as early as possible else the freedom of society at large is threatened or even spoiled by them. That's because of man like him that women were oppressed for centuries and still don't enjoy all the privileges and rights their society has to offer in places like Alabama and much of the US.
The question is not "Was this asshole's opinion anti-humanist and anti-democratic?" It is "what is the moral and ethical thing to be done about it when such anti-humanist and anti-democratic expression is encountered irl?"
It is exactly your feelings ("how I feel about it") and belief about legality ("how it should be") I wanted differentiated, and my understanding now is it is indeed something (physical violence against misogynist public speech) you do not want legalized. My confusion stems from what exactly you were calling "vapid" and "morally bankrupt." I could be wrong but my thought is you yourself, if present at the rally where this a-hole was holding his stupid sign, would adopt exactly the same reaction Airportkid and I would, which would be something like either ignoring or verbal confrontation, but something quite less than physically assault.
