Philosophy Now Forum

It can also be argued that trying to control other people's behavior is bad for one's health. The word "controloholic" should be introduced to signal that trying to restrict other people's desires is futile and therefore stressful and unhealthy.

Good afternoon Mr. Butlin,

I am sure that you have must seen the film series "Umbrella, charm and hat" with a pair of detectives, one of them a certain Miss Peel, the other one a man.
The man does not control the woman and he seems to rather enjoy her independence.
Don´t you think that they promote a sort of ideal that we could follow ?
No one is humiliated, although no one controls anyone.

If you asked men around you: Do you prefer a woman who submits to you ? I am sure that the majority would say: no !
They would be afraid of feeling bored with such a woman.
Men like challenges. A woman can be a nice challenge to a man.

Regards from

Little Ghost

Good morning Mr. Dusek, Mr. Typist, and Mrs. Artistic,

Sorry for long absence -- I am afraid I have been detained again under the Mental Health Act, and am only now able to access the Internet because I was accused of being a paedophile at my first looney bin (by a fellow lady patient) and was therefore moved to another looney bin which has an all-male ward. The first bin was in Chichester, which forbade internet access; but the second bin in Brighton allows it. I am absolutely outraged to be detained once again -- my lady psychiatrist Dr. Rae has acted like an hysterical bitch to my perfectly reasonable behaviour -- and I am determined to soldier on regardless.

I am at the end of my 20 minutes assigned time slot now, so I will return at the next available, and reply to your comments.

Chemically castrated zombie signing off for now.

___________________________________

http://sites.google.com/site/duncanbutl ... activities

I think that Duncan should have a male, rather than a female, psychiatrist in view of his patriarchal political and social ideas.

The British title of the series I meant was "The Avengers", the agents´ names: John Steed and Emma Peel.
I found out in the Wikipedia.

Mr. Steed does not seem to suffer from Miss Peel´s independence. He does not try to control her with his eye-brows either.
He likes her as she is.
But you do not have to resemble him, Mr. Butlin.

You are correct, Duncan does not have to resemble him. Unless of course he wants to stay out of the mental ward. That is how much control we are under by society. We can't even speak what is on our minds for fear of chemical castration and/or a lengthy prison sentence.

Maybe Tom is right. Duncan could use some male logic/understanding right about now. Why can't that be a legitimate request? Isn't it legitimate in a court of law to choose the people you want to be a jury for your trial?

AS,

I would guess that he can ask to be referred to another clinician but I doubt gender would affect the outcome, as how would DB respond to a male who still disagreed with him?

Whilst I understand your sympathy I think we need to remember that we have no idea what the situation is?

Only DB's words and given that its not that easy to be sectioned, not least because they are full, I'm not sure about your assertion that, "We can't even speak what is on our minds for fear of chemical castration and/or a lengthy prison sentence." is true, nor that it applies in DB's case.

Hi Arising,

A:I would guess that he can ask to be referred to another clinician but I doubt gender would affect the outcome, as how would DB respond to a male who still disagreed with him?

AS: It's not the outcome that matters as much as the idea of allowing Duncan (the accused) a fair "trail" by his peers. The way to ensure this is to allow Duncan (the accused) to pick his own clinician. I am not concerned so much with whether or not a male would disagree as much as I am concerned that (the accused) would feel as if justice was not served. This I think falls under basic human rights, as anyone of us could be faced with the insanity of our societies rigidly trend changing beliefs as any time(meaning when we get a belief it is usually rigidly enforced until the trend changes yet again and we forget about what was important about the first belief.) To give Duncan a male clinician in order for him to feel as if he is being treated as a humanely as possible is paramount to a healthy society.

A:Whilst I understand your sympathy I think we need to remember that we have no idea what the situation is?

AS: Right, which is why we have to believe he is innocent until found guilty by a jury of his peers. It is the humane thing to do.

A:Only DB's words and given that its not that easy to be sectioned, not least because they are full, I'm not sure about your assertion that, "We can't even speak what is on our minds for fear of chemical castration and/or a lengthy prison sentence." is true, nor that it applies in DB's case.

AS: LOL....well that goes for you and me both...I am not sure my assertion is true either, however, I don't want my assertion to ever turn into the "justice" by which society is ruled, which is why I think it is important for us to believe a person is innocent until found guilty by a fair trial.

In my country we now have stalking laws. According to wikipedia the definition of stalking is:

Stalking can be defined as the willful and repeated following, watching, and / or harassing of another person. Most of the time, the purpose of stalking is to attempt to force a relationship with someone who is unwilling or otherwise unavailable. Unlike other crimes, which usually involve one act, stalking is a series of actions that occur over a period of time. Although stalking is illegal, the actions that contribute to stalking are usually legal, such as gathering information, calling someone on the phone, sending gifts, emailing or instant messaging. Such actions by themselves are not usually abusive, but can become abusive when frequently repeated over time.

According to the law, one can be jailed for something that resembles the above , whether or not they actually intended to hurt anyone. I am not saying the law is wrong I am just saying that is it so vague as to be on the border of right and wrong, therefore allowing anyone to use the law to their benefit. This can be done unintentionally or maliciously. Imagine if the woman/patient in the mental ward, who accused Duncan of pedophilia, had a mental illness which caused her to imagine men who looked like Duncan were pedophiles. Would her accusations be the truth just because Duncan was under suspicion for being insane? Duncan (the accused) might have another mental illness which has nothing to do with pedophilia.)

Let's suppose Duncan had a mental illness that caused him to set up circumstances in which he would be sanctioned against his will. All he would have to do is hint to the fact that he was a pedophile and everyone would be suspicious and thus those fears would be all that was needed to sanction Duncan. Duncan would delight in being the martyr because this was his goal in the first place. His mental illness was not that he wanted to harm anyone but that he enjoyed the martyrdom of being a spectacle or that he enjoyed making a point about how ludicrous humanity is.

I don't know all of Duncan's reasons...I will never know. But I think it's fun thinking of all the scenarios and how it applies to our knowledge of ourselves and our humanity. Duncan sets up great scenario's with his imagination. He doesn't allow us to have all the information (not that we ever could) but this teaches us so much about what type of person we are. It's sort of like the Dracula thread in the book section....the teacher asked the student to write/think as if you are coming from Dracula's point of view. It is the same thing I wanted to happen in the "atheists guide to God" thread. I wanted atheists to write/think as if they were theists. I thought/think it would be interesting is all.

How would DB think that "justice" was served if a male clinician found in favour of what he disagreed with?

I think you have a 'cute' yank attitude to DB and do not bother to listen to what he would implement if he had the chance. His ideas would have you shutting your mouth about anything that males disagreed with, not least, you having ideas.
He's been found 'guilty', its why he's in a mental institution?

What are you talking about? Moral behaviour is the acceptance that there is a 'society' that has 'moral' rules?
You are imagining this. Why do you think the mental health service professionals would take any note of a mental patient accusing another mental patient of something?
I think as a women you need to think about a world where DB gets his way.
I think you need to stop thinking in Hollywood terms and understand what DB is proposing. Plus, I think your 'fun' is misdirected.

p.s.
Apologies AS,
Upon reflection I hear a 'harshness' of tone in my words that is misdirected.
a_uk

Hi Arising,

You call that harsh!? Ha! Actually, I have been out of town for a couple days...tried to reply before I left but didn't have the time. I am trying very hard to understand the position you are coming from...it is miles away from how I think.....so it is taking every ounce of my being to relate.

A: How would DB think that "justice" was served if a male clinician found in favour of what he disagreed with?

AS: My concern is not what Duncan thinks, my concern is, If we are going to have laws to protect the public then how can we implement them in the most beneficial way while also doing the least amount of damage to our freedom. I am not privilege of knowing all the facts of Duncan's case. I only know what he tells us. I have no 'feelings' involved with this particular case, as he is not harassing me. I am trying to look at the facts I know and act as if I am an impartial observer. In order to do this I have to look at justice from all angles, including: if I were imprisoned, rightly or wrongly, If I were the victim, how society would be harmed either way, if there is chance for rehabilitation (and if so would rehabilitation (teaching society to conform) be beneficial or would it just bury the larger problem.)

A:I think you have a 'cute' yank attitude to DB and do not bother to listen to what he would implement if he had the chance.

AS:LOL You wanna hear something really frightening about my "cute" yank attitude? Yanks even think it's 'cute'! How's that for scary?

I do listen to DB. But what you are forgetting is that everyman wished to implement his ideals onto women...that is what mankind does. Women are so used to it we don't even fight it anymore. We just say, 'whatever' and go about our business. I don't have time to think about the "self absorbed male" I am not interested in Duncan's prejudice/sexist ways. To me that's old hat...what interests me is that someone can be jailed for being prejudice. If one of us is jailed for daring to speak the truth about our prejudice then all of us should be jailed. We are such hypocrites to jail "a thought." Jail an illegal action if you must...but to jail a thought? That is wrong...because that is me...that is you...that is everyone...we are all just "thoughts."

A:His ideas would have you shutting your mouth about anything that males disagreed with, not least, you having ideas.

AS: If he can't share a thought aloud...then how can society prove him wrong?

A:He's been found 'guilty', its why he's in a mental institution?

AS: Ok...you know better how your system works. Is it possible to be sanctioned for having an opinion there or does there have to be more evidence that physical harm will be done or a harmful action will be taken? Here, someone can't be put in jail (for long)for just having a sexist 'thought' they actually have to have physical proof that that person is dangerous.
Hearsay is not proof enough to convict anyone...at least not in theory. I am just going off of what I know about Duncan...do you have any more evidence than I do?

What are you talking about? Moral behaviour is the acceptance that there is a 'society' that has 'moral' rules?

AS: Huh?

A:You are imagining this. Why do you think the mental health service professionals would take any note of a mental patient accusing another mental patient of something?

AS: Yes, I am imagining this. Do you have proof that they did take that into account? This is the problem with allowing ourselves to trust authorities without challenging them from time to time. People have a tendency to make up their own rules as they go along, Duncan is not the only one ya know.

A:I think as a women you need to think about a world where DB gets his way.

AS: I think as a man you need to think about a world where women are aware of a world full of DB's and that it comes as no shock. This is where your "cute" male attitude comes in...but you are not alone....even Kierkegaard showed his cute male attitude. I think it is ingrained in all ya'alls DNA...Even my sons think they know women (and the world for that matter) better than we know ourselves... and thus...know how to change the world to protect women.

AS,

The thing is we do not have the facts, only DBs, as such impartial is not possible, although thank for explaining why and I understand your concern about such things as injustice, harm and rehabilitation.
I'd not be surprised given some of the yank males I've met.
The problem for me with these thoughts is that it does not appear to be the case, as why you can now 'go about your business' is exactly because men and women opposed ideas such as DBS, as before 'you' weren't fighting it at all, this is a recent 'invention', i.e. men who do not wish to "implement his ideals onto women".
They generally can't, at least not over here, they have to act. But I agree that DB has a real problem as he's fallen into one of the 'catches' in our 'mental health' system, i.e. he got referred because of a refusal to obey a legal requirement, i.e to withdraw the threat of violence to his ex. Now getting referred by the criminal law courts for a mental problem is a problem over here, as it puts you in the criminally insane bracket and as such under more stringent conditions, so I don't envy the 'chemical cosh' treatment DB must have suffered.
He's not in there for voicing his thoughts is my guess, but for repeatedly voicing them to those who've requested him not to.
If that was the case a large chunk of interweeb users would be inside. My guess would be harrassment of people and they have complained. Or that he's not been keeping to his agreed medication regime when on the outside.

In general you actually have to do something physical to be sectioned and this has led to problems as we shut down our mental institutions a while back(not a bad thing) but did not fund the "care in the community" part as promised(a bad thing), still it lead to the joke name "scare in the community" to describe our newest residents, what's really bad is that now the ones who know they need treatment also know that the only way to get it is to behave in a more and more violent manner as its the only way they'll get it(a truly bad thing for all concerned).
Most of the males of England would be in prison if this was the case.
All I understand about DB is that he's not coped well with his sexual life experiences, is probably what my generation would consider an 'eccentric' Englishman and is mentally unwell because he knows how to stay out but keeps refusing too? A definition of mental ill-health if I've ever heard it. But since he also appears to be educated and intelligent I take his proposals seriously and whilst I agree that there are problems for what it is to be a male in current 'western' society, the solutions he suggests I oppose.
So I think his argument for a 'Mens Studies' is unassailable given there is such a subject as "Womens Studies"(do you think they study how they've had this "Womens Studies" implemented upon them?). Which is why I've always thought "Womens Studies" is a farce subject, but if its there then DB should be allowed his "Mens Studies", which will be another farce. So I oppose both as over here the taxpayer should not be paying for either.
DB knows what he has to do to stay out of the 'system', I know this because he went 'sane' enough to get himself out. As such his putting himself back is a sign of 'mental illness' in my book.

All I have is DB's word that this is what happened, balanced against the idea that our mental health system is not privatised and as such most are fairly professional and inspected reasonably often.

This reminds me of a story a long while back, which basically said that some states in America allow people to be sectioned by their spouses testimony, 'arrested' by private mental institution staff and sectioned into private mental institutions, with costs paid by the 'patients' own medical insurance

If this is the case then I'm shocked you give DB the time of day, a women thing I suppose? But you mistake why I oppose the views of the DBs of the world, its self-preservation as I would not wish to do time for battering the man who beat my daughter, sister, mother or any loved female in my life, because it was his legal right. Especially since if it was his legal right then I'm likely to get double-pain inside for being a 'pussy'.

Still, I think you have been correct in pricking my male pomposity about what 'you should be aware of...'.

Hi Arising,

A:The problem for me with these thoughts is that it does not appear to be the case, as why you can now 'go about your business' is exactly because men and women opposed ideas such as DBS, as before 'you' weren't fighting it at all, this is a recent 'invention', i.e. men who do not wish to "implement his ideals onto women".

AS:It's not just men who wish to "implement his ideals onto women" it is also women who wish to implement her ideals on woman. Hence, the creation of militant feminists. I know my theory of how equal rights cam about is not a popular one. But I am merely making a suggestion so I don't really see a need for alarm...lol. I think the militant feminist of the past were important to today's cause, however I don't think they could have done a thing for woman's cause without the demure women they influenced. Certainly, few men back in the day were not prepared to hear such logic from a woman... "Equality for women?!? Preposterous! As if woman are capable of being a person independent of a male!" With this attitude do you think it would have even been possible for a "battle axe" feminist to do anything? Much less get a say in their lives? NO. These militant feminist needed the help from the sweetest, prettiest and desirable ladies that grabbed the attention and delight of men in order to "Trojan Horse" their ideas in. This could never have been done with force back in the day...it simply wasn't possible...hell, it's not even possible today! It was sweet manipulation that turned the hearts and heads of man...not war. IMO, Duncan types are responsible for getting the whole movement started in the first place. And they continue to to stand as a beacon for all that needs to be changed in society. Duncan, imo, is the poster boy for feminism.

Duncan intrigues me because he is honest and forthright about his sexist and violent ideas of this war between the sexes that doesn't mean I would ever have a romantic relationship with him as I believe him to be unkind. Duncan is much different from satyr who conceals his opinion behind a computer screen while admitting he puts on an act for society to attract women. Satyr is the type of man who is dangerous IMO. A woman never knows this type until it is too late and he beats her. He is dishonest to his core. He is not even honorable to his own ideals. Duncan, OTOH, tells a woman exactly what he is about so that she may be warned in advance. It is easy to spot a Duncan. Now granted, a woman would have to be stupid to get involved with him romantically, either that or she has some sort of mental illness herself. But society can see a clear cut case in favor of equal rights for women when they can "see" Duncan's unstable and illogical behavior.

Anyway, the real truth of the matter, is Duncan does not have a woman to abuse...because his woman left him...(almost killed him for her freedom) which is proof right there that women are capable of seeking and desiring their freedom at any cost..just like a man.
You are right to say it is all about self preservation. I too, would do time for battering a man who battered a woman (or man) I loved. However...again...Duncan doesn't have a woman to abuse. He is the poster boy for the validity of feminism. I can see him standing in a straight jacket wearing a pin promoting patriarchy, with women around him, snubbing him in disgust...clearly turned off... with the caption that read "Do you want to be like this man?!" Let's face it, sex sells. If women are turned off by something..that something will become extinct.

How so? Duncan is obviously seriously mentally ill - which most men are not.

Hi Francesca,



F:How so? Duncan is obviously seriously mentally ill - which most men are not.

AS: Yes, our society says Duncan is "seriously mentally ill" However, it was just a short time ago that our society turned a blind eye to Duncan "types." Men like Duncan were not considered "mentally ill" in the past, hell they are not considered 'mentally ill" in other countries today. In some countries Duncan would be well within his right as a husband to have total control over his wife. He would not be placed in a mental institution at all.

Since patriarchy goes against our basis for human rights, we could label it a type of mental illness. Since, most people do not want to be considered 'mentally ill' they would shy away from any activity that was perceived as such in order to appear sane.

I believe that if we labeled a patriarch, such as Duncan, mentally ill and then started a campaign which used Duncan as the poster boy for mental illness/patriarchy, it would make a serious dent in patriarchy because you would make patriarchy comparable to a mental illness. It is in this respect that I think Duncan helps the feminist cause.

I must warn you though....this is also propaganda and I would not encourage the use of these tactics to make a point. As a woman I would much rather use sex...lol...but then again...that's just me....honest to a fault like ol' Duncan.

(I do hope sex is never seen as a mental illness! I would have to volunteer to be the poster girl! Lock me up and throw away the key!)