For some reason, many people hear about deconstruction and they acquire only a few particular targets: traditional marriage, dead white male books, or whatever. And all that is fine... but there is so much more fun to be had now. Yes, marriage was just a social construct. But 1/— cdotpratt (@cdotpratt1) December 28, 2018
...so are the days of the week and the weekend and months. Let’s shake things up! Why are we dating things from the time of Jesus? Start over at year zero. We’re deconstructionists. Let’s enjoy this. Deconstruction &traditionalism thread — 2/ ...— cdotpratt (@cdotpratt1) December 28, 2018
There are silly ways we could play around — switching which side of the road we drive on. But let’s be honest, there are very controversial ways! If marriage is a social construct, the age of consent is absolutely a social construct. In most of Mexico it’s 12. Is that bad? 3/...— cdotpratt (@cdotpratt1) December 28, 2018
...who is to say, right? We’re deconstructionists. We can change the rules of the NFL so that it’s inclusive of women. Keep reading. Let’s have a random computer algorithm redraw the national boundaries around the world. Those are constructs! 4/...— cdotpratt (@cdotpratt1) December 28, 2018
Democracy certainly is a social construct. We should play around and try lots of different forms like anarchy capitalism and strict patriarchal Catholic imperium and everything in between. And it’s a social construct that men ask women out & not vice versa. Let’s reverse that! 5/— cdotpratt (@cdotpratt1) December 28, 2018
Obviously “education” is a social construct. Even the disciplines are constructs. Property ownership is a construct. Voting age is a construct. Anti-cousin marriage taboos, the movie rating system—all constructs. I know you all know all of this — 6/— cdotpratt (@cdotpratt1) December 28, 2018
Legalize prostitution and drugs. Make pornography and coffee illegal. We are masters of the universe and everything is arbitrarily arranged! Why are we so conservative in our deconstruction? The Constitution, the Bible, The Odyssey — all constructs. Let’s revise. 7/— cdotpratt (@cdotpratt1) December 28, 2018
Is hitting children acceptable? Who is to say? The DSM-V is a construct, and we should play around and revise all of its arbitrary distinctions. Again, why are we so conservative? Is usury acceptable or not? Construct. Why should pop songs be 3 minutes? Why not 30 seconds? 8/— cdotpratt (@cdotpratt1) December 28, 2018
Dismantle all standardized testing, right? And it’s not fair that some universities are prestigious and others aren’t. Admissions should be by lottery cuz no person is better than any other. Political correctness and “hate speech” rules are constructs! Point is... 9/— cdotpratt (@cdotpratt1) December 28, 2018
...once you start dismantling traditions, it’s a race to absolute zero. There’s no solid metaphysical basis for retaining any of our cherished taboos now. Back to age of consent: we say 18. Mexico says 12. There is no way of settling this. some secular pope makes judgment call. +— cdotpratt (@cdotpratt1) December 28, 2018
Until we arrive at total anarchy. Which seems to be the direction we’re headed. Against all of this—against this acid that eats away at all value, we have traditional values, which are said to be permanent and stable. And which “worked”—not perfectly, but reliably, for millennia.— cdotpratt (@cdotpratt1) December 28, 2018
What honestly surprises me is the way that so many people genuinely cannot play this narrative out in their heads. They go, “yeah, we normalized usury and revised the Latin mass and legalized gay marriage and so on and so on, but don’t think we’ll ever lower age of consent...”— cdotpratt (@cdotpratt1) December 28, 2018
And they go, “...and legalizing gay marriage isn’t even comparable to making the week 10 days long.” But of course it is. And when they go, “Yeah but legalizing SSM is *good*,” — it’s not that I think it’s bad. It’s that there is no basis for saying whether it’s good or bad.— cdotpratt (@cdotpratt1) December 28, 2018
It’s just an arbitrary whim. Like everything is now. And they counter, “well, ‘twas ever so—traditional marriage was also just arbitrary.” And this is the part I’m not sure about. Maybe they’re right. Or maybe certain traditional “conventions” actually reflected some realities?— cdotpratt (@cdotpratt1) December 28, 2018
Think of it like a golf swing: should we teach children that the golf swing is an arbitrary motion? Merely a construct? I mean, look at gym Furyk. Try it one-handed, kid. Who are we to say? We’re deconstructionists. We don’t want to oppress you with traditionalism.— cdotpratt (@cdotpratt1) December 28, 2018
But the golf swing achieves a particular end—and many of its standard forms are thought to beat achieve that end. Should it be illegal to do it wrong? Probably not. But should we clearly instruct children in what grip and motions generally work best? So is a golf swing...— cdotpratt (@cdotpratt1) December 28, 2018
“a social convention” or not? Possibly not. Possibly it is a reflection of our physiology and of physical reality. How much more, then, might marriage or taboos on sex or age of consent laws be not arbitrary, but aligned to certain really-existing unavoidable realities?— cdotpratt (@cdotpratt1) December 28, 2018
Does deconstruction have limits? Well, the classic/traditional golf swing might not work best for a severely mutilated person... or on the moon? —and so if the body itself can be deconstructed, or laws of nature, then maybe deconstruction has no limits.— cdotpratt (@cdotpratt1) December 28, 2018
But it’s also possible that the combo of our bodies, our brains, natural reality itself, hormones, etc. — that this adds up to a set of constraints. And that something like traditional marriage might even be the “best form” for managing these realities.— cdotpratt (@cdotpratt1) December 28, 2018
—and marriage is, again, merely an early indicator of how deconstruction will operate. Why should the week have seven days? Is that arbitrary? Or maybe our physiology and our minds need a weekend every 7 days or so? Maybe there would be consequences for screwing up the calendar?— cdotpratt (@cdotpratt1) December 28, 2018
What a lot of words to just say "Restore the patriarchy to save your civilisation."— Claire Khaw (@Theocracy4all) December 28, 2018
I'm an academic, Claire. I can't say that!— cdotpratt (@cdotpratt1) December 28, 2018
You could ask the following questions:— Claire Khaw (@Theocracy4all) December 28, 2018
1) Is marriage is the indispensable ingredient of patriarchy?
2) Is the West now a matriarchy?
3) Do all civilisations rise in patriarchy and decline in matriarchy?
4) Is matriarchy a society that tolerates a culture of fornication?
Claire!! -- you can't use words like "fornication" in academic circles. Please say "liberated consensual sex." 🤪— cdotpratt (@cdotpratt1) December 28, 2018
5) Is a patriarchy a society that prioritises the preferences of married fathers?— Claire Khaw (@Theocracy4all) December 28, 2018
6) Is a matriarchy a society that prioritises the preferences of unmarried mothers who are invariably the bad parents of their often variously fathered illegitimate offspring?
7) Are the problems of the West really problems of character, parenting and its egregiously low standards of sexual morality (which is in fact dysgenic) as well as the failure of its religion and political system which no one will acknowledge?— Claire Khaw (@Theocracy4all) December 28, 2018
8) Is it true that Western men are afraid of Western women withholding sex from them or divorcing them under the rules of no fault divorce, so much so that they are in fact too afraid to criticise feminism even as they see it destroying the civilisation their ancestors created?— Claire Khaw (@Theocracy4all) December 28, 2018
(but while I *personally* disavow, and can't safely RT, I would love to see you do some interviews with some basic/progressive academics)— cdotpratt (@cdotpratt1) December 28, 2018
Can you find any who would be prepared to appear on my channel?— Claire Khaw (@Theocracy4all) December 28, 2018
No, I don't think I can. I'm afraid to ask some of them cuz they might report me to the ADL just for proposing it. Others wouldn't dare, because they know (deep down) that they have no idea what basis they have for their own claims. Others aren't smart enough. Etc. But I'll look-— cdotpratt (@cdotpratt1) December 28, 2018
How about asking in academic circles if restoring is the patriarchy is the only way to save Western civilisation?— Claire Khaw (@Theocracy4all) December 28, 2018
Academics are 100% certain that patriarchy is the enemy. So you'd have to first show them that their classification of good & evil, justice & injustice, have been either wrong or totally arbitrary... all that, just to get them to consider it. Right now, they're not considering.— cdotpratt (@cdotpratt1) December 28, 2018
They seem to equate patriarchy with domestic violence and wife-beating. Let us assume that if most women are married then they would be more likely to be beaten by their husbands than anyone else. However, would they prefer to be raped by marauding soldiers/invaders instead?— Claire Khaw (@Theocracy4all) December 28, 2018
Here's a common style of argument: "What, you reject basic LGBT civil rights legislation? And now feminism? Then do you also reject anti-slavery? Should there be inquisitions again?"— cdotpratt (@cdotpratt1) December 28, 2018
I am getting more serious about the Bible. The breastplate of Christ. Eventually progressives will of course categorize it as hate speech, but... I think it provides cover for a generation or two.— cdotpratt (@cdotpratt1) December 28, 2018
You are going back to something that has already failed, I am afraid.— Claire Khaw (@Theocracy4all) December 28, 2018
i think we're in far enough that the only way out is through... meaning acceleration, basically. Get to the end, then we can start again. Or at least, that's the only contribution I can make in academia. To try to show people how hollow their assumptions are, as Socrates did.— cdotpratt (@cdotpratt1) December 28, 2018
If we have offspring, surely it is our duty to make the period of transition as smooth and bloodless as possible? This we can do by pointing to the problem and proposing the solution. https://t.co/hqBLWTbJJ0 is an example of a solution.— Claire Khaw (@Theocracy4all) December 28, 2018
Even if the most we can do is say "I told you so" when the balloon goes up, we can at least truthfully say that we did tell them so thereby retaining some moral authority. If we only stood idly by and said nothing, we will have no moral authority at all and be rightly ignored.— Claire Khaw (@Theocracy4all) December 28, 2018
No comments:
Post a Comment