What stage is Elliot Hulse at?

[Forestluv]

2 hours ago, intrastellar said:

 

@Serotoninluv Also in reality it's not always so straight forward to determine the degree of development of an idea - they don't just come with coloured lables ready to be ordered in a hierarchy. 

Well sure, at times there are nuances. Yet when one reaches a certain level of development and fluency it becomes pretty obvious. For example, a fluent native English speaker can easily recognize someone learning English. A University Calculus professor can easily identify a student learning algebra. And a person centered in Yellow can easily identify someone learning blue or orange. For example, a solid Yellow stage thinker could easily see someone who is limited to binary thinking and lacks an understanding of relativism. It’s quite obvious. 

[Emerald]

2 hours ago, intrastellar said:

@Emerald To make this clear again: I never said that women shouldn't have a right to vote. I didn't even question it. Actually I said the opposite a few comments below and I didn't mean to suggest otherwise or cause anyone here to feel threatened. 

And still I see some value in Elliots perspective to be open minded about it. I understand that regarding this topic you have more skin in the game as a woman than he or I as men but that doesn't mean only women can talk about it or can add value to the conversation. If you don't see any value there thats your thing but if you're not willing or able to have a respectful eye-to-eye conversation then it's better we have no conversation.

I know exactly what you said. And that's why I responded the way that I did. My entire argument is not that you think women shouldn't have the right to vote but that you're foolish for playing devil's advocate with something on a public forum that contributes to the already popular trend of 'playing devil's advocate with women's rights.' And this dialogue creates a dangerous gray area in the social and political discourse that can and often does have a real impact on people's lives.

And then, I was also criticizing you for thinking that you're truly capable of being open-minded with this topic when you have no skin in the game. So, all this questioning only amounts to mental masturbation and armchair philosophy for you, and can actually have real consequences for women's lives.

And the thing you said in the last paragraph is as laughable as suggesting that the sheep and the wolves should have an open civil dialogue and negotiation about the merits of allowing the wolves unfettered access to the sheep pen... and just having a respectful eye-to-eye conversation and negotiation about it. Because those with differing opinions should be able to engage in civil dialogue in the marketplace of free ideas... right? And the best ideas will win out anyway... right? 

I mean, it doesn't mean that the men can't have some valuable input about what rights would be wise to strip away from women... right? 

Edited July 7, 2019 by Emerald