Not long ago a shrill bitter woman published an op-ed decrying the contemporary propencity of men in their late twentys to delay marriage and career advancement. Many outlets of the old media recognized the inflamitory nature of her insult and decided to piggyback on its ratings generation powers by printing articles like this. (freedom hating British!)
Most responce to the author has been either an attempt to counter the assumptions in the article or to simply disagree with the author or the traditional notions of success. My contention is that her position is immoral.
This is best explained from a Kantian perspective; Hymowitz is treating all western males as means to an end rather than ends in themselves. To use the language of feminism, she is objectifying men. Or to describe my own moral outrage; Hymowitz has no right to declare that I be of use to her.
Most responce to the author has been either an attempt to counter the assumptions in the article or to simply disagree with the author or the traditional notions of success. My contention is that her position is immoral.
This is best explained from a Kantian perspective; Hymowitz is treating all western males as means to an end rather than ends in themselves. To use the language of feminism, she is objectifying men. Or to describe my own moral outrage; Hymowitz has no right to declare that I be of use to her.
No comments:
Post a Comment