I’d agree that those who are restricting rights have no basis whatsoever to demand or expect civility towards them in return; humans being what we are, that’s a silly thing to expect, and it’s a rather ludicrous demand on the face of it alone. But, I would still say that such incivility doesn’t get a waiver on moral grounds even in the face of severe provocation. I’d say you’re right about the external ones, but there’s also ourselves to consider.
Incivility; rudeness, barbed mockery, insults, aggressive behaviour without actual violence. Acceptable, in this case; perfectly fine and decent, reasonable, without argument against.
For me, there’s no ethical component to rudeness. It’s not pleasant, which means that someone can shun the hell out of you for doing it and consider it not acceptable in their company, but it’s not inherently wrong.
I would agree, but i’d say the wrongness comes from intent to be unpleasant, which I suspect would be the motivation when we’re talking about things like this.
Have you read the Malleus Malificarum? It may not have been doctrine at the time it was written, but it was a reflection of the church’s deep misogyny.
I wish I still had that list of writings of the early church fathers that demonize women, but I burned them when I got married. These writings put Leviticus to shame.
But this is GD, and I can’t back that up, so I’ll retire in silence.