Okay, I’m back at the Corner. Why you might be wondering.
It’s Mr. Reasonable’s thoughts about women of all things.
Now, Smears, as far back as I can remember, has always expressed the ideological prejudices of those on the left end of the political spectrum. In regard to the role of government and race and law and order and most everything else that comes up “on the news” he usually swings from the left side of the plate on the Society, Government, and Economics board.
But it has always struck me that his attitudes toward women were rather, say, reactionary?
Or is it just the “ho” here?
There are women who are not whores. Does he separate them out and embrace the standard liberal agenda here in regard to, say, feminism and women’s rights?
What’s this thing of his with the “ho”?
I’m just curious.
Look at his signature:
[b]You see…a pimp’s love is very different from that of a square.
Dating a stripper is like eating a noisy bag of chips in church. Everyone looks at you in disgust, but deep down they want some too.[/b]
Women who do “sex work”. He seems preoccupied with them. And with pimps especially.
Now, of course, his reaction to them [and to this post] will be deeply rooted in dasein. And I, myself, being fractured and fragmented in regard to all “conflicting goods”, am not able to pass judgment on anyone’s attitude about women. I don’t believe that there is an objective morality here – the politically correct frame of mind – because I don’t believe there is a moral/political font that establishes one.
Well, “here and now” anyway.
I’m just curious about it is all.