Quote:
Originally Posted by CliffFletcher
Now who's identifying a position someone doesn't hold?
|
In the one case we have commentary on a public message whose ambiguous content could be taken in several ways, none of which I can directly ask the author about. That's why I use words like "if" and "seems to be the case." when I discuss my opinion of what I perceive to be his meaning; you'll further note I make a direct counter-statement which bears upon the content I perceive, and not any motivations or ideological framework beyond that.
In your post, you impute several paragraphs of beliefs to me that you could actually just directly ask if I hold or not. Instead you go off on a rant about liberal values vs "feminist" dogma. Do you see the difference? I can assert that most women were treated as a kind of property without believing the patriarchy is alive, well, and must be overthrown by any means necessary. That is nuanced belief rather than groupthink, which I would hope - as someone who purports to be
against identity politics - you would appreciate.
You are an articulate and thoughtful poster, and you're not necessarily aware of the habit of assuming everyone who disagrees with you must be an illiberal of some type, but - you do. It detracts from your message, as every debate is transformed into another opportunity in The Struggle against Evil and Ignorance. Indeed, that is one of the qualities I find suspect about the cheerleaders for any philosophy, from Marxism to feminism to libertarianism: not everything fits on the back of one's favorite hobby-horse.