Debate a patriarchy supporter/ anti feminist.

But you oppose it. So you hate people telling you what you can and can't do by severely restricting your freedoms.

But you want to tell others what they can and can't do by severely restricting their freedoms.

If you were a fetus would you want to be aborted?

It's not empathy it's just dumb abstract nonsense. If you were a woman you'd be a completely different person with a completely different experience. You might even agree with me!

Liberals always use these hyper rationalistix thought experiments to justify their worldview but it just removes them further and further from reality. "If I was a tapeworm I wouldn't want to be taken out of my home and killed that's evil!"

If you are a liberal then no.

If you are a real Conservative then yes. I have given a number of reasons as to why.

It's not about what I personally want, it's about what rights other people should have.

And, yes, if I were a fetus I would want my mother to have the right to abort me if she didn't want to be pregnant. I'd had this conversation many times before and have applied it to even more relatable situations than abortion. It's a topic for another time, and I don't want to derail the convseration with that.

It's not a "thought experiment". It's how empathy ****** works. The fact that you struggle to see this shows that you are just lacking in that department. I don't even have to think 'what if I were a woman?' to not want what you're proposing. I, as a man, wouldn't want women deciding for me what hobbies I can have, what ambitions I can have, what jobs I can have, etc. I don't want that imposed on myself, so I am not going to want that imposed on women either.

I'm fine with government restricting my freedom if it's for a cause or reason I agree. Im not fine if I don't. Simple.

Also this lmao

Pmsl. Ok lol, well if I was a woman I would 100% support my policies lmao.

No it's just liberal nonsense masquerading as morality, as per the above fetus shallowvale happily getting dissected for the greater good...

If you were a fetus would you want to be aborted?

It's not empathy it's just dumb abstract nonsense. If you were a woman you'd be a completely different person with a completely different experience. You might even agree with me!

Liberals always use these hyper rationalistix thought experiments to justify their worldview but it just removes them further and further from reality. "If I was a tapeworm I wouldn't want to be taken out of my home and killed that's evil!"

@TCA2b

So you oppose govt restricting your freedom when you don't agree with it. But you want to restrict others' freedoms when they don't agree with it?

Well put; also, stealing that meme.

Good for you, and as I said if this if this is the lifestyle you want then there's nothing wrong with that. What would be wrong would be to impose that lifestyle on others. You don't want the lifestyle imposed on yourself, as a man, and clearly don't care about the opinions of women you'd be imposing this lifestyle on either.

What do you think empathy means, if not the ability to understand and relate to the feeling of others and realise that not everyone wants the same thing you want? How far down the rabbit hole do you have to be if you think that empathising and trying to relate to the feelings of others is "liberal nonsense"? It's one of the most fundamental social skills that anyone should have.

I'd care about the opinions of the women that agree with me lol. What makes you think you're justified to impose liberal democracy on people? Did they consent to live under a liberal democracy? Maybe they'd prefer living under mine, particularly if they happened to be fetuses

Empathy should not be about you literally becoming that person or thing in a thought experiment to justify your political beliefs.

Empathy should be about trying to understand things from the person's perspective but also from an objective understanding of reality that takes things into perspective and seeks to find solutions not virtue signal.

You're being quite the hypocrite.

Would someone else be justified in prohibiting you from working in certain professions? And if not, why not? Why is it okay for you to mandate what jobs others should or shouldn't have but not for others to decide the same about you?

So? To be a hypocrite is to be human.

Maybe. Depends if I found their argument convincing or not.

What lifestyle am I imposing on you?

Yes it should. Putting yourself in the shoes of other people is the most crucial part of being able to relate and empathise with them. It's exactly the way you can "understand things from the person's perspective". Not doing that, and solely focusing on your own mindset and perspective, is the direct opposite of empathy.

As for "objective understanding of reality", PMSL. You've demonstrated numerous times in the past, not even just this thread, that you don't care for objective reality, evidenced based reasoning, etc. We've covered this topic together before, your entire worldview pretty much comes from an ancient book which has no basis in reality.

So if someone is imposing severe restrictions on you, you need to find their argument convincing, but if you are imposing severe restrictions on others they don't need to find your argument convincing? 🙄

So if someone is imposing severe restrictions on you, you need to find their argument convincing, but if you are imposing severe restrictions on others they don't need to find your argument convincing? 🙄

You aren't imposing a "lifestyle" on me. (What I am seeking to "impose" on others isn't a "lifestyle" but a functional, normal, healthy way of life that was the norm for millennia) But you are essentialy imposing a society on me which I do not agree with.

That's literally not what I said.

Then you've obviously not been paying attention because I'm not a bible literalist.

No, in order to impose severe restrictions on people you need to have the power and means to do so for a start.

Notice I was not convinced by lockdown but yet had to suck it up anyway? I don't remember being consulted...

Again this is how politics works. There are winners and losers.

So you have no problem with lockdown then because those in power enforced it? Your argument has absolutely no consistency at all.

You may think it's functional, normal and healthy, etc, but that doesn't stop it from being a lifestyle. You want to impose marriage, childbirth and childcaring onto people, together with limiting where they can work and for how long they can work. In other words, what type of life they can have (their lifestyle).

I, on the other hand, am not imposing a lifestyle onto you or anyone else. I'm not telling you what sort of marriage you should have, whether you should have children or not, what job you should have, etc. More importantly, I'm not imposing on you standards that I wouldn't hold for either myself or anyone else.

It's exactly what you said. "Empathy should not be about you literally becoming that person". Yes, yes it should. That's what 'putting yourself in other people's shoes' means.

I never said you were. You don't have to be a biblical literalist to have a worldview which isn't based in reality. You may not take the bible literally, but your belief in God still forms the basis of your entire worldview. Yet you talk about "objective understanding of reality"?

Except for over a millennia it was exactly that.

Sure, you're a liberal. But in any case even if I thought that was a good set of values to hold ,(I don't ) I think it's still ultimately weak and is going to get taken over by a stronger more robust ideology/worldview.

I disagree with your view of empathy - if you want to discuss this further set up a new thread and @me cos it's going to derail this thread even more that it is already...

I believe you can't even begin to have an objective sense if reality or morality without a "God" or some dirt of independent firm of reference point correct. If you think you can, please show me.