Imagine if you will that someone believes that they are a bottle of ketchup.
They wear red clothing and a white hat, and go about their lives honestly believing that they are a bottle of ketchup. Honestly, unless they are a friend or a family member this belief doesn't matter to you. They are welcome to their delusion.
Now imagine that you are sitting in a mall minding your own business eating french fries
And our ketchup person sees you, and freaks out, as you are eating...... that's right his brother! So he goes and gets a friendly cop and finds out to his shock and dismay that eating ketchup is not a crime!
Well.... he's going to change that, so he petitions his congressman, writes bills, lobbies his poor little ass off, and creates the first ever "anti ketchup eating law!" It is now a crime to eat ketchup. He celebrates with a big pizza with white sauce, but over there, they are eating RED SAUCE ON THEIR PIZZA! Well, he knows what he has to do...... this is completely unacceptable, so....
____________________________________________________________________________________________
It is important that when we create laws, especially ones that limit others actions that we base them in solid reality. That claims are backed by actual evidence, not emotional response. This analogy applies to so much in our society such as the teaching of creationism in our classrooms, or the anti-street harassment laws, or anti porn laws, or. well I could go on.
What prompted me to share this is the recent outcry against the British MP Philip Davies, #letthemeatcake who had the audacity to state that women are incarcerated less often then men for the same crime and in the same circumstances BBC coverage of the issue. I don't want to spoil the surprise, but he might be right.... Yet they are calling for his job!
What Girls & Guys Said
Opinion
3Opinion
There is a petition calling for Philip Davies, MP for Shipley, to be recognised as a leading MP for fairness & justice. As a tireless campaigner for genuine and useful equality, his record shows that he fights against both misogyny and misandry and is one of the rare politicians to represent everybody in his constituency regardless of ideological bias and hate thrown at him for exposing the truth about issues.
As Philip Davies is able and willing to acknowledge the existence of sexism and discrimination in British society and to explain whether it is misogyny or misandry, we believe that he is consequently able to defend and stand up for all males, as well as care for children and women. All MPs are required to act in the best interests of their constituents, but many harbour misandric attitudes making them incapable of doing so. He is singularly noted as an exception in the current Parliament.
We therefore urge Mr. Davies to look for a long and successful career and urge Theresa May, his Party Leader and Prime Minister, to promote Philip Davies to high office.
There are petitions and campaigns to censor or even ban this man for revealing the truth about sexual discrimination. You are asked to sign the petition to show your support for him and for the right to expose the truth. Please then spread the message about this petition.
I am not allowed to post a link on this comment but if you go to antimisandry. com and search on Philip Davies, you will be led to a link to the petition.
I am not a British citizen, and I only use him as one example of this concept that peoples feelings are more important then the facts.
Since Philip was a spokesperson for an organisation called Citizens Against Political Correctness (now defunct, regrettably), he is a good choice of example! The attacks on him - attempts to silence an elected politician who reveals government data - are increasing so your supporting words for him are welcome. (He does not represent me and I am not a member of his Party.)
Thank you. I am just so sick of people legislating delusion. I'd like this Analogy to catch on.
i'm sorry i consider myself a pretty intelligent person. a degree in writing, love reading and writing
but your analogy of ketchup seems incongruous to the issue of a penal system not penalizing one gender the way they do the other gender for a similar crime
trying to understand this and maybe you can clarify
analogy: person believes they are ketchup and as such he wants laws in place that make it illegal for people to "eat him" or his brethren
Reality: Philip Davies is arguing that women who commit the same infraction be penalized the same as men and vice versa
No, the other line was added by the editorial staff, the article was supposed to be a critique of feminist lobbying. He took the macro and concentrated on the micro. I apologize for the conclusion, the individual case of the MP was just another example of taking emotional response and calling for his resignation, though he did nothing but point out a series of facts.
AHHHHH... as the blind man said as he peed into the wind. It's all coming back to me now
thanks for clarifying
Any time.
i dont understand, so is this for or against?
It's against people basing legislation on delusion. It's a critique of feminist lobbying.
Oh i see, i will read this over until i fully understand :)
Share the first opinion in your gender
and earn 1 more Xper point!