When companies reject racist manuals, they're not taking the position that non-whites are "inferior and in need of protection". They're simply making the ethical choice, to the dismay of the people who enjoy racist sorts of things.
Same goes for the misogynist manuals they're now taking the ethical stance against.
So much for your ad hominem. I'd give Kickstarter kudos, except ethics are what people are supposed to have.
Seduction manuals aren't morally wrong, though, (they may be factually wrong and/or sleazy, but not morally) but racism is.
Think of the difference between a book on the history of racism, with very explicit quotes, long, in dept conversations with racists, scientists and policy makers, the authors own experience in these groups, etc and the latest publication from the KKK.
A seduction guide is the first. "Rapists Quarterly" is the second.
What you think isn't interesting, but I would like to see a comprehensive, well formulated argument as to why you think that; indeed I have commented extensively in this thread to find such an argument, but mostly its that all the other arguments just shame language (rape culture, you have a problem. I will be sincerely please if you could provide a good argument against my position.
Morality is a very complex topic that possibly can't be proven by logic anyway. Why is racism immoral, other than the fact that we, as a society, have decided that it's immoral?
I think seduction manuals are immoral because they essentially treat women like min-maxers do video games--do this, and your chance of success is raised by X%, follow this procedure to succeed, etc. It makes women into vending machines that, if the buttons are properly pressed in the right succession, will theoretically result in a prize--sex--being dispensed. I think that treating people like that is immoral. Can I prove this logically? Can I claim that this is a universal truth? Of course not, but the same is true for every moral stance.
Not facilitating the promotion of sexism and materials that essentially advocates for sexual assault isn't a statement on any gender, but rather the company is not there to support oppression.
Is it misogynist to learn what women like in a partner and attempt to be that? Isn't that making a world more according to women's preferences? How is that "hatred of women"?
If the author is wrong, and you write a better manual, many men struggling with the modern dating world will gladly buy your more effective book. But we aren't arguing fact, are we? We're arguing religion.
Women are, funnily enough, female members of the species homo sapiens and there is a lot of scientific evidence on what they find attractive in a potential mate.
Show me this evidence. If that is really your attitude towards women then it's no wonder you feel the need to read a book like this. Try a little respect for your fellow people, you'll have much more fulfilling experiences with women if you stop believing what science tells you and actually take an interest in the people around you
There's nothing this society hates more than beta males. Your comment confirms it. God forbid a guy ain't a natural with women and needs some advice. He's probably deformed, deranged, and dangerous.
My problem isn't with people needing advice to get laid, god knows I was terrible with women in my youth. What I don't appreciate is guides that focus entirely on how to get women into bed via what is effectively trickery and misogyny. It should be teaching fundamental respect, social awareness, equality, consent, self-appreciation - these are the qualities that will allow you to form lasting connections with people (and not just women). Yeah, these tricks might help you get a drunk girl into bed but she'll probably regret it afterwards and so will you!
Preaching to the wrong crowd. I love science, but I can't stand it when people try to apply 'logic and reeeason' to social concepts like this one. It's pseudoscience at best. We're human, not vulcan, after all...
How about the millions of people who didn't complain? Just because a handful of people who literally spend their entire lives seeking things to be offended by complained about something, doesn't mean their opinion is the majority, or more valid than anyone else's.
The problem I have with attitudes like this is that you're completely disregarding other people's opinions because you're not offended. If you're not part of the group being discriminated against then of course you're not offended - but that doesn't mean that people who do find it sexiest, discriminatory, offensive and oppressive have any less of a valid opinion. In fact I'd argue that it makes their opinion more valid. it's not hard just not to be an arsehole to other people.
No, I am not disregarding their opinions. They are perfectly entitled to their opinions. I am saying their opinions are not objectively correct simply because they are taking the active position of complaining, while people who aren't upset obviously don't make a lot of noise about how indifferent they are.
Also, nobody is being oppressed or discriminated against in this situation.
