Letters to the Editor
healthyskeptic
Published Letters: 671 Editor's Choice: 14
-
Greenwald, glad you posted.
[Read the article: Misadventures in logical reasoning -- and lessons learned from the Spitzer scandal]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"I actually thought twice about posting this before I did just in order to avoid another war in my comment section. These sorts of issues really generate a lot of intensity. But there are just so many aspects of the moral preening relating to the Spitzer story that are driving me insane that I just couldn't keep them pent up any longer.
I am really astonished -- though I know I shouldn't be -- by how much people enjoy expressing moral outrage over the sexual lives of other people.
-- GlennGreenwald "
I'm glad you posted your article. Yes, many of us are equally bored by it all. Just remember we're all slightly more evolved apes. Deeply instinctual and not terribly rational most of the time.
An explanation for anyone interested:
Yes there are philosophical questions about prostitution. And fast food work for that matter. But the reason we get so excited about sex is the same reason as Chimps and Bonobos do. Our brains are continually fascinated by the subject and nothing except perhaps existential violence, makes us more emotional.
Sex and morality are closely linked in tribal social species. Sex is the bedrock for social interaction. Sex with territorial aquisition and food are the basis of life and morality in social species. Who is mating with whom, and for what reason, effects everyone's common genetic heritage in small groups of primates. Chimps and Bonobos spend a great deal of their mental processing dedicated to sex. Chimps continually worry over the power dynamics and genetic implications of sex, while Bonobos' every dispute and alliance revolves around sex.
Our society further increases the obsession by reinforcing sexual desire constantly while also repressing it rather schizophrenically.
-
sex shops
[Read the article: Misadventures in logical reasoning -- and lessons learned from the Spitzer scandal]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"It was distasteful to walk around cities like Amsterdam and Zurich and suddenly run into a sex shop in the middle of town.
-- James Karkoski "
Every city and town already has many sex shops. What do you think all those massage parlors are? Most small towns have a strip club somewhere close, where there is also prostitution going on. Those places do actually deal in human trafficking, disease, money laundering, and so on. they have no say in choosing clients, and the overall situation probably encourages worse behavior among all parties.
I'd feel much better about seeing a clean, regulated, sex shop; with tax paying, registered workers who have a clean bill of health, and get full benefits and protection under the law, who could then better choose clients and so on.
Then law enforcement could really crack down human trafficking and other serious criminal problems, in part paid for by a sex worker tax.
btw, for anyone who think a legalization advocate must also be a customer, personally I've never been to a "professional." It doesn't really appeal to me, I'm married, and when I was single never had trouble. But, rationally, the health and moral benefits to legalization seem totally clear.
-
What a silly article.
[Read the article: I don't believe in atheists]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]First of all, "New Atheist" is a silly term. While Hedges may be understandably alarmed after meeting them personally, and have a financial interest in exploiting them to alarm us for a book deal, they hardly constitute a phenomenon worth capitalization. If Hedges wishes to avoid any influence from them whatsoever, I have a simple tip for him: Don't attend a conference to debate them.
Like Hedges, these guys are rather bellicose about marketing their beliefs. They're in the business of popularizing faux convictions nobody really believes in, does anything about, or keeps for long. They're the mental equivalent of chewing gum.
They're minor celebrities having no significant power or influence in the world. They don't have churches or followers in any formal sense beyond a small transient fan base. They may beleive society is moving forward, or backwards, but their contribution either way is negligible.
Hitchens is an alcoholic. Dawkins has become a demagogue and isn't doing much science these days, which greatly lessens his stature. Sam Harris is pundit roughly equivalent to Chris Hedges in importance and relevance, i.e. little to none at all.
Most atheists, like myself, don't associate with their bellicosity. We get along with and respect believers and non-believers alike based on their character and actions. Not espoused ideologies, which are almost always both greatly exaggerated and inconsistent.
Who cares.
-
Traister's mirror
[Read the article: Mirror, mirror on the Wall]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Question: Why should Traister feel the need to praise this highly accomplished woman (far more than Traister) and then immediately infantalize her by demeaning her decision as internalized victimization and other such pop-psychology blather.
Answer: it's how Traister makes a living.
If my wife cheated, sure I'd be pretty PO'ed and hurt. Serially, and with prostitutes? Even more so. But I'd absolutely stand by her if her career and possibly freedom were threatened by various outside interests seeking to exploit it. No question.
Those who lust for vengeance and scorched earth ultimatums tend to be lousy people and really lousy partners. People who can't maintain perspective tend to go from one explosively failed relationship to another.