By all appearances you are being a hypocrite. So far you haven't offered anything that indicates an effort to rise above you new cultural hypocrisy you have adopted, but your words and posting habits show the symptoms of reinforcing it and then turning a blind eye toward your actions.
I've already offered some specific examples of things I've learned to recognize and change, and in fact it was in a response to you (post #441 in this thread). Could you go into more detail about the specific belief you feel I am endorsing but not acting upon?
you ... never seem to understand points other people make ...
Many times in the past, when this charge has been leveled at me, it was based on the assumption that if I understood a point, I would acknowledge its validity. I reject that assumption. So, I'm just curious: how would you tell the difference between the two, that is, between my misunderstanding a point and my understanding yet rejecting of a point? Why do you infer the former and not the latter has occurred?
Now, in this particular case, you might be referring to some point(s) I genuinely did not understand. Feel free to present them again. However, don't be surprised if I say I understand, and reject, that point.
You speak about how women are treated, and what is fair for women, yet if someone else speaks about how women are treated from another perspective you dismiss their words because they are not women and have not walked in their shoes (even if the poster is a woman).
If you mean that I dismiss the perspective that woman and men need to treated differently because some religious doctrine so indicates, you are absolutely correct. Perspectives can be inherently unjust (that is, have unjust principles built into them). I don't think it's the least bit hypocritical to point that out, and I don't think pointing it out indicates any lack of understanding.
Also, I didn't bring up the feelings and experiences in the first place, that was silesian in post #426, in response to "Sexism will either be misogynistic or misandristic, simply because if there is no inferiority, there is no need to segregate.", a sentence that says
nothing at all about how people feel. He brought into the discussion to notion of seeing hatred (a condition I had never said must apply, and actively argued against). My response was that silesian didn't appreciate the overall experience, and by focusing on hatred held by a person, he was missing the point. You are correct that I am not short, old, rich, fat, or female; I don't pretend to say exactly what their experiences are. I do have sufficient understanding to say that silesian has no reason to discount the accounts of people who relay their experiences.
I agree this is a different thing from telling someone how they feel or should feel about the unjust experience. For example, I have not once told PearlWatson that I rejected her depictions of her own feelings or opinions. However, and you may have not realized this, some people don't mind being treated unfairly, and indeed may have been taught from birth that the unfair treatment is appropriate. In the days of slavery, some slaves were content in their slavery. Some women are content in being treated with contempt, even finding some noble purpose in it. That does not make the unfair treatment just or fair. I wouldn't think of telling any woman that she feels oppressed or experiences some reaction to her oppression; the oppression remains, nonetheless.
If you don't get how you are being a hypocrite
I genuinely don't. Based on your description, you seem to think that I have been telling people how they feel or should feel (I may have misunderstood that point, but it is an honest evaluation of your complaint). If I have understood you correctly, I challenge you to present an example of that. If I misunderstood what my claimed hypocrisy is concerning, please try again.
I've tried to give you the benefit of the doubt, but I'm about done with that.
As you wish.
