And if not, they should be?
Hate crime law could be extended to cover misogyny, misandry, ageism, etc.
- Thread starter cupid_stunt
- Start date
SpookyFrank
A cheap source of teeth for aquarium gravel
Whilst many police actions which really should count as hate crimes presumably aren't recorded as such.
MickiQ
In My Defence I was left Unsupervised
Disagree, the real reason that women have been second class citizens is that human males are bigger and stronger than human females and for most of history and all of pre-history that has been the only thing that really mattered. People being people we've dressed this up under all sorts of guff like it's God's will or women need to be protected (take your pick there are loads of such reasons) because deep down humans don't like to admit we're just an ape with above average smarts and that where sex is concerned instincts will win out every time.
Being such contrary creatures we find no difficulty in reconciling the fact that we might genuinely love someone and yet view them as inferior.
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
christ
A380
How do I change this 'custom title' thing then?
MickiQ
In My Defence I was left Unsupervised
Without sounding pompous (and I have to admit I probably do) ability to do math really only has been useful to everyone for the past what 30-40 years and a few people for maybe 2000-3000?
What do you think maths is?
MickiQ
In My Defence I was left Unsupervised
Fundamentally at it's heart It is a conceptual process devised by humans to understand and explain the physical world around them, I would say it is a language for describing reality rather ideas or emotions
Many practical uses of course
Yes. Many practical uses for rather more than 30 to 40 years.
MickiQ
In My Defence I was left Unsupervised
Yes of course but not for most people, the number of people who needed calculus in Ancient Egypt or Rome was tiny compared to most of the population even in the 19th century and the beginning of the industrial revolution (and well into the 20th) most people just needed a strong back. It's only now with the fact that machines are bigger and stronger still that the majority of the workforce needs to use its noggin rather than its hands that maths (and science as well) is becoming important for everyone, how many job adverts these days don't demand at least GCSE maths?
We've wandered quite a bit off hate crime here.
What do you think maths is?
MickiQ
In My Defence I was left Unsupervised
Why are you repeating your question?
cheesethief
Well-Known Member
Who's "we"?
MickiQ
In My Defence I was left Unsupervised
Humans or probably just human males in the context of this debate
8ball
AV REFUGEES WELCOME
Because you gave an answer and then promptly failed to apply your own answer.
cheesethief
Well-Known Member
Roughly 50% of humans are female, not sure how many of them consider themselves inferior. And gorillas are physically stronger than humans, but I don't consider them a superior species. Strip out the dominance males achieved historically by force and I think you'd find it very hard to justify any argument that men are in any way whatsoever superior to women. Not to mention the fact that we're all individuals with individual strengths & weaknesses, and shouldn't be defined by gender.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
While physical size is no doubt part of the story, it's not the whole story, and certainly not 'the only thing that really mattered'. If it were, you would struggle to explain how physically smaller and weaker female killer whales and bonobos are the leaders in their societies.
mojo pixy
שיר חדש
IMO 'protected characteristics' wrt 'hate crime' need to be things you can't change easily, or at all: ethnicity, sexuality, sex, age, disability. Not religion, which is a choice, and sure as hell not ''lifestyle'' (including gender) which can be adopted and discarded at will. No way should the results of a conscious personal choice or of conditioning by parents be ''protected''.
klang
klang
1 question + 1 question = 2 questions.
dylanredefined
Not a house elf a tiger
I don't really care about hate crimes. If someone commits a crime whatever the motivation I want the police to nick them and they be punished. I don't see why someone having a prejudiced reason who committing a crime gets more punishment as opposed to someone who just attacked someone for some other equally stupid reason.
Because it’s an injury to society not just an individual
I don't really care about hate crimes. If someone commits a crime whatever the motivation I want the police to nick them and they be punished. I don't see why someone having a prejudiced reason who committing a crime gets more punishment as opposed to someone who just attacked someone for some other equally stupid reason.
8ball
AV REFUGEES WELCOME
Is that not the case with a randomly flung fist in the street?
Brainaddict
slight system overdrive
It strikes me that the UK has become a less tolerant place since the passing of laws against hate crime. Not that I think the causation runs in either direction, just wondering whether people can really see a positive outcome from this type of aggressive state intervention in cultural norms. And that's what they are, I think. I agree they shouldn't be norms, but I'm not convinced that law is a good weapon to address cultural problems.
No
MickiQ
In My Defence I was left Unsupervised
I agree absolutely males (humans) have achieved dominance historically over females (and weaker males) via physical force because they're bigger and for most of our history that has been the defining characteristic of social dominance. no-one (least of all I) is claiming that makes them superior, in all the things that make humans the standout species on the planet, women are absolutely as smart and as capable as men and now that brute force is no longer the most important thing we're coming to terms (slowly) with reality. But thousands upon thousands of years of the idea that women are lesser has been ground into human culture and a couple of centuries of progress hasn't got it out and won't for a while longer.
What have gorilla's got to do with this discussion (which has wandered far from the original), yes they're bigger than we are, polar bears are even bigger and stronger, what makes us dominant is our oversized brains and not physical size, human size is/was an advantage only within the context of human society.
MickiQ
In My Defence I was left Unsupervised
OK how about maths is a language that we humans have devised to describe the physical world of science in an attempt to predict outcomes and ensure a desired one. Maths is man made, nothing in nature does it or (bar us) understands it and like all human inventions it's tainted by our biology and our human experiences and not totally at one with nature.
mentalchik
"I say we take off and nuke the site from orbit."
Oh dear...thousands of years of civilisations have come and gone since then......what we are now talking about in terms of patriarchy has bugger all to do with that.....it's about political power, control and money and yes i do think at the bottom of some men's reactions to women striving to break free and demand their own rights and freedoms is hatred and especially fear......as for male dominance with regards to size and strength, even in the animal world it's been shown that contary to the idea that the strongest and biggest are the power wielders it's actually the females that (for the most part) do the choosing.....
thought we'd got past the old, tired arguments about biological reasons to usually justify male dominance
Spymaster
Plastic Paddy
I’d disagree that religion is necessarily a choice given the sanctions sometimes used against those who seek to leave them. Agree with the rest.
Similar threads
