3 ms·
Your post doesn't contain an argument regarding my claim that beauty is to a substantial degree a life-style choice. The style of your post is typical for whit
by mafribe 12y ago
Your post doesn't contain an argument regarding my claim that beauty is to a substantial degree a life-style choice.
The style of your post is typical for white-knights who, in my considerable experience, reflexively hit-out against any man who doesn't defer to the feminist/misandric party-line that woman must not be held responsible, that women have only rights, no responsibilities. The great Africa-American philosopher and gender-researcher Christopher Julius has pithily summarised the underlying motivation for this disposition.
- mercurial 12y ago> Your post doesn't contain an argument regarding my claim that beauty is to a substantial degree a life-style choice. I'm not debating this point because it is completely irrelevant. Your argument boils down to "if a woman is attractive, it's perfectly legitimate for her to suffer from discrimination, because she is privileged". There is a word for that, it's "misogyny" (as if your "white knight" dig wasn't sufficient). Women have the right to makeup and skirts, and they have the right to not have strangers grab their hand and put it on their dick. Of course, you're free to disagree with this statement, and you'll find a number of countries, particularly in the Middle-East, agreeing with your views, but that's not what I consider a part of modern western values.