Search options (Page 51 of 152)

That would certainly be the end of the Romance genre!  It would also be the end of most human courtship, since most signalling is non-verbal, and much of it is begun by the woman, with glances, closeness, and touches.  I don't think even the Puritans attempted to enforce 'yes means yes'--though, according to David Hackett in Albion's Seed, it was the Quakers who were really strait-laced.  On the other hand, those societies had clear limits, based on formal courtship and marriage--unambiguous gates that we have abandoned.

Those rules worked, being suited to both human nature and to the society they had.  What rules are proven to work in the society we've become in the last two generations?  We're in the midst of a massive experiment with our society, with the routes of retreat apparently cut off.  How many people will you condemn for trying to find their way in the absence of proven and universally accepted rules?

I guess we're in the blast crater?

Virtue is a skill.  Some of us have more talent than others, but we all need to learn, and that means learning from others.  We don't have time to make all the mistakes ourselves, and the desire to make every possible moral mistake in order to learn for ourselves is ... ghastly.  And that assumes that we would each recognize our own mistakes--which is doubtful.

Civilization is not passed in the genes.  It took ten thousand years to build, and we are always in danger of losing it.  Look around the world.

I forgot to note that I did the first two chapters of Matthew's book, and the first two of Randy's Cartel's Revenge.  Since I'm up to date with CJD, I'll see next what I skipped in Phyries.

Dill, you do realize that you're defending the use of a word by Charles, don't you?

Is that 'live up to' or 'live down to'?

'Pussy' is mildly offensive.  'tw*t' is patently offensive.  That's a term from US jurisprudence, BTW.

Does it enhance the discourse, or just make you feel better to say 'tw*t'?  Does it make you feel better for saying it?

Airport taxis are a classic ripoff.  Maybe you could get a cheaper ride on a hotel 'limo' and rake a taxi from there?

.

At least in the US they tend to cluster around the hospitals.

I don't agree with all of Charles's conclusions, and he certainly has a way of being abrasive with them.  But it is a mistake to regard someone you think mistaken as an imbecile or idiot.  Disagree with Charles if you wish or must; I often do.  But he has shown me that he can handle sophisticated ideas.  I urge you to respect his gifts, even when you believe he misuses them.

We live in an age of what Berkeley Breathed (Bloom County) years ago labelled 'offensensitivity'.  Indeed, offensensitivity is considered a virtue by those who trumpet microaggressions and attribute any disagreement to bias.  This is a recipe for chain-reaction conflict.

There comes a time to say 'I disagree, but we're not going to convince each other,' to admit that no matter how wrong someone's opinions, that someone has a right to them.  Anything else perpetuates and amplifies the conflict.

(To have the right to do a thing is not the same as being right in doing it, as Chesterton pointed out.)

The alternatives to civility in online forums are flamewar and contempt.  I learned this back in the early 1980's, when usenet spread across the world, and offer that experience to you.

I pronounce it 'demi-tasse' (final 'e' silent).

In the spirit of reviews, may I suggest 'slunk out'?