Maybe it would be simpler to make a rule that people with power and people without power should enjoy the same protections, but I fail to see the equity part.
Uh, why shouldn’t people with power and people without have the same protections? It’s no more legal to steal from or to punch a powerful person than a powerless one.
And also, group membership is a crude proxy for actual power, which varies by individual, so basing protection it will nearly always be unjust.
Sort of like Anatole France?
“The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal loaves of bread”.
Perhaps the reason you don’t see the irony is because you are in the power class, not the powerless one?
Yes, but more like if the law were to make homeless shelters available to rich and poor alike. The equity comes in naturally because the rich are unlikely to use them, unless to flee domestic violence or something.
If you’re talking about the topic of this thread, then I’m not in the ‘power class’.
I’ve never seen a tart dressed in a kilt. It’s always those little paper cups.
I find it rather akin to the argument against the death penalty; you don’t teach that killing is wrong by killing people. You don’t teach that stereotyping is wrong by stereotyping people. Live up to your own ideals. Be the change you want to see in the world.
You don’t teach that victim-shaming is wrong by shaming a victim.
I assume that “dressed like a tart” was meant ironically; an illustration of victim-shaming.
I assume it was too, but my point still stands.
Yes it does. Erect. Like it’s got a stick.
Even if, hypothetically, objectification of men didn’t do any harm to men, there would still be a reason to apply the same rules as to women. If we allow objectification of men, then there are some posters who would point to that as justification for their objectification of women. And I, for one, don’t want to give those jerks any justification. Enforcing the rule with regards to men makes it easier to enforce it with regards to women.
(and, again, in case anyone’s forgotten, the rules as they currently stand do allow a certain level of objectification for actors, models, and other celebrities for whom appearance is relevant (of any gender), so the Harrison Ford thread that prompted this one is OK)
Ah yes, the “if we give the jerks what they want, they will stop being jerks” gambit, famously successful throughout all of history.
…I’m suggesting not giving the jerks what they want.