View Single Post
Old 10-25-2013, 10:37 PM
kdt26417's Avatar
kdt26417 kdt26417 is offline
Official Greeter
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Yelm, Washington
Posts: 9,436

"I love clothes, but when I don't feel like wearing them it annoys me when others are so wrapped in their own delusions of self-hatred that they try to *force* me to live and think as they do."
Are you perhaps referring to the fact that you're in the Navy (as per your intro thread), and the Navy forces you to clothe yourself? I know in the past you have expressed objections to hair-cutting, and God knows the Navy makes you cut your hair (and shave). Is all this a sign of some kind of institution-wide delusions of self-hatred on the Navy's part? or, are you just trying to point out the nation-wide delusions of self-hatred that lurk behind public nudity being illegal in the United States?

So, people who are forced to wear clothes (such as by laws in the United States) are still doing okay as long as they've dispensed with concepts such as shame, modesty, and dignity? No statements here, just questions being asked for clarification.

What about people who wear clothes for any reason (not necessarily because they're forced to, maybe because it's cold out, or even because they like dressing up)? Is it possible that they, too, might have dispensed with concepts shuch as shame, modesty, and dignity? or does their voluntary wearing of clothes prove that they're carrying unnecessary/illogical baggage around?

You're pointing out that you don't get sexual stimulation from women wearing sparse amounts of clothes. I think I get that.

Now if I have judged you in some way, then I apologize. I am certainly willing to ask, listen, and learn to the best of my ability. And, I ask for the same kind of courtesy in return.

So, going back to the one earlier post, I'm speculating that I may have identified where I made a wrong turn?

You said,
"On the subject of 'morality:' I don't believe in 'universal morality', because every one likes and dislikes different things. To try *force everyone everywhere* into *living how you want* is pure arrogance. *But* everyone *does* have some 'basic form' of 'respect,' like 'Don't touch me unless I say you can or *I will hurt you!*'"
So one post later, I replied,
When you speak of morality, I wonder if you aren't mostly speaking of "sexual morality." After all, can't we argue that there's a "moral rule" against running out and randomly killing people? That's a different kind of moral issue.
"Don't touch me unless I say you can or *I will hurt you!*"
To which I remarked:
Yikes, I hope that doesn't apply to if I accidentally bump into someone --

Well, I guess you could say I made light of your "don't touch me unless I say you can or *I will hurt you*" statement, and maybe I came across as making fun of you. I guess you could fairly say that I "corrupted the meaning of what you were trying to say." So, I will ask your pardon for not taking it very seriously and not addressing it directly on its intended merits.

To at least lend the statement the seriousness it deserves, I'll just say that I interpreted it as a symbolic description of how one appropriately defends oneself against rape and other inappropriate sexual advances. Yes, I feel that I understand the meaning, but in all honesty I have to confess that I am skeptical about its effectiveness, and about its universal applicability.

First of all, if some guy is serious about raping a woman, he has advantages such as greater size and strength and probably a weapon he carries. In a "lesser situation" where some guy is trying to "trick" a girl or women into letting him have his way, he has the advantage of soothing words and approaches. Finally, I see the possibility of a man's touch being innocent or accidental, and then the threatening posturing against him is inappropriate.

These are my objections to that type of defense as I understand it. So, no more joking around, at least I am seriously stating whatever position and understanding I have. If in your opinion I am out of line and in need of correction, you are certainly privileged to state that correction and I will try to give it a fair listen.

As for my remarks about "universal morality" in the sense of, "Don't we all agree that it's not okay to just going around killing people," I wasn't joking at all, just trying to add a point of perspective and perhaps clarify (not assert) whether you were talking about a "type of morality." I didn't at all mean to corrupt your meaning, I only wanted to add my own query and perspective to the matter.

Can't we agree that the "universal" ideas about sex and attire are more open to question than "universal" ideas about refraining from violence? That's all I was trying to get at.

Now, if there are other areas where I turned wrong in the post in question, I don't think I comprehend what they are, or how I screwed them up. But I hope it's not lost on you that I am trying my best to make things right. No, I don't understand everything; that is a fact. Even stuff that maybe seems patently clear to the whole world, doesn't necessarily penetrate my thick skull. (You can say that I'm now making fun of myself, but my intent is quite serious.)

So maybe it doesn't seem like I'm trying to ask, listen, and learn, but for all I can tell, I am trying to do exactly those things. I think my real weakness is that I often take an attitude of levity about something when no such attitude will be appreciated (and perhaps won't even be understood). I definitely never intended to give anyone a "bad time," let alone screw up their important message. I guess you'll just have to decide whether you're inclined to believe me when I say that.

On the other hand, I hope that we are at least going to be able to agree to disagree about some things without feeling attacked by one another. I'm a little concerned that maybe that's what's happened in this case. No, I really can't just agree with you on every point you're trying to make. I have my own mind and experiences to draw from when forming my opinions, and sometimes my honest opinion has to unfortunately "appear to undermine" someone else's opinion. I feel that we need to be able to discuss our varying perspectives about things without turning it into a confrontation.

That's all I can tell you at this time and in this post. I hope it does not offend you. I'm really trying to not be offensive.
Love means never having to say, "Put down that meat cleaver!"
Reply With Quote