Letters to the Editor
Reality-based Liberal
Published Letters: 774 Editor's Choice: 100
-
Don't Drink the Kool-Aid Folks
[Read the article: McCain, Obama spar over war in Iraq ]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Tim Russert is a pus bag, but I found this question useful (If you left Iraq, would you reserve the right to invade again if it went to hell?).
Both Clinton and Obama said yes. So as a Democratic voter, I have two candidates who accept Bush's right to invade preemptively, without congressional or UN approval -- they just wouldn't have done it back then.
So here McCain is right. I hate McCain -- he's a dangerous warmonger. But if you accept the bullshit premise of "al Qaida in Iraq" -- WHICH OBAMA DOES -- and you accept our right to invade if our "strategic interests are at risk" -- WHICH OBAMA DOES -- then where is McCain wrong? You can't apply different standards to the candidates -- especially within the same argument.
I'll vote for Obama -- he's better than McCain by a long shot. But I'm not drinking any Kool Aid. If Obama means what he says, and is not just playing imperialist to get into office (which I concede -- and hope -- he might be), then he will bring limited change.
Don't bash McCain for asserting a right to stay in Iraq for 100 years if you aren't willing to make your own candidate better when it comes to asserting the US right to do whatever it pleases to enforce its strategic interests -- whatever that means. If you want to take on McCain as a war monger, then work to make your own candidate feel the pressure too. After all, Obama's going to clean up the floor with McCain in November and will be the next president.
-
Nice to see the Right eat their own
[Read the article: Interview with Bill Donohue: Catholic League denounces McCain]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Sadly, I don't see Russert asking McCain to denounce Hagee on his show.
-
There is a difference....
[Read the article: The double standard of student-teacher sex]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]...between equal treatment under the law, and concluding that men and women are the same.
Men are biologically programmed to desire women who can reproduce, and have no biological programming to respect equity in a relationship. So while men who prey on younger women or children are probably weak -- unable to subject their biological impulses to socialization -- they are not necessarily pathological in a biological sense (I'm not talking about forcible rape here).
Women, on the other hand, are biologically programmed to seek out men who are likely to contribute useful genes and be able to give offspring an advantage.
This is not to say that men who want women they can control are mature (they probably aren't), but it is not proof of biological pathology. While women who resist biology to find a safe person who has no ability to provide for offspring are probably more pathological in a strictly biological sense.
Here I am not talking about right and wrong. Biology is not a good directive in a civilized or enlightened society (it leads to violence and socially pathological behavior, like statutory rape). I only raise this as a question of biological norms.
Old male lions, apes, and any number of social animals shag the young. What separates us is not our biology, but our socialization -- what makes us human. So in this respect, the scientific observations are not a surprise.
And our socialization is still closer to biology than we would like. The disparity between the impact of women committing statutory rape and men committing the same is good evidence. Even within the social realm, a boy that has sex with an adult woman is not likely to suffer much, and in fact would generally be considered a stud. While women are still stigmatized for sex with biologically unfit men (like old predators or other "losers," which will unfavorably brand a female in our social environment).
Our social shortcomings go well beyond sex. For example, the U.S. can commit immoral acts in excess of its "enemies" (we torture and invade more populations than Iran or Venezuela, though those countries are regarded as more abhorrent than our own, even among Democrats). This clearly shows a tribal identity that most "civilized" people would deny is still in play.
-
Re Ellyllon & AKA Smith
[Read the article: The double standard of student-teacher sex]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Ellyllon
There is very little social stigma for a boy that has sex with an older woman. I'm not defending that imbalance, but it is hard to deny that there will be less guilt in our macho environment for a boy that is a victim of statutory rape than for a girl. If you disagree, you have never been a teenage boy. I admit, I don't know what it is like to be a girl, but I am assuming that the messages I get from women is accurate, that females have a disproportionate amount of guilt put upon them for sexual activity.
AKA Smith
I am not defending biology as a rule for what is right, but it is naive to claim that males and females are not subject to biological forces that have guided mammals for eons. You see biology reflected in our socialization. Do you think that we decided to mimic the animal world? I'd say that we have rationalized it.
My message is a feminist one: biology has subjugated female humans by making them physically weaker and ultimately responsible for progeny (men can more easily abandon responsibilities). This makes women more valuable than men in a civilized society (men are responsible for violence, war and all the other useless vestiges of biology). This is not to say that there isn't a biological advantage to socialization (that too is part of biology, and your point is well taken than men who partner have a biological advantage). I am simply saying that men are biologically programmed to reproduce and therefore seek partners with maximum reproductive abilities, which can produce socially abhorrent results.
-
Sorry, mixed up posters
[Read the article: The double standard of student-teacher sex]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I was responding to melthough and AKA Smith, and melthough was the one that raised the idea of males seeking pairing.