Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: MortMan

It almost appears that you disagree with my assessment that the guy is a twit for holding the view in question because other people hold such views?

please note that I’m not saying that you hold said views


44 posted on 12/20/2017 10:54:51 AM PST by Rurudyne (Standup Philosopher)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies ]


To: Rurudyne

No, I disagree that he is a twit for applying the societal rules as currently defined and concluding they would be classified as sex assault perpetrators.

Under societal rules as currently defined (no matter how outrageous they are), he is arguably correct in his conclusion.

The problem is that societal rules are currently defined in a manner that is stupidly outrageous.

And thank you for avoiding any ad hominem attacks in your post, FRiend. Merry Christmas to you and yours!


45 posted on 12/20/2017 10:59:55 AM PST by MortMan (Irony is the opposite of wrinkly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies ]

To: Rurudyne

One more note - He is a sociology professor, whose job is to teach how to interpret societal rules and apply them. I think he has done this - perhaps over zealously - but in a manner that is probably justified due to the outrageous “rules” currently embraced by society.


46 posted on 12/20/2017 11:01:29 AM PST by MortMan (Irony is the opposite of wrinkly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson