Fair Cop dropping hints on Twitter

[teawamutu]

About something big about to happen to a red organisation beginning with 'S' that they won't like.

V unfair to vaguetweet IMO - anyone else seen it?

Well, in fact in Buddhist teaching contradictions can be accepted as perfectly valid, because the teaching depends on the circumstances - the basic premise is that 'it depends'. I sometimes think that the whole of Buddhist thought can be boiled down to 'it depends' .

I remember years ago the Independent asked a lot of their writers what their most hated book was. Half of them said The Bible (how edgy! Or at least it would be if you were the only one to give that answer) and most of the others said Lord of the Rings.

Oh gosh. Can't people get themselves some actual proper books to hate? Also, I'm fairly sure that in order to hate a book properly, you probably ought to have read it...

Errol, I don't disagree. It's certainly been very leveraged in all sorts of ways to very negative effect and no, I can't think of another single book that has (but, to be fair, it's not really a single book, it's a collection, and not all of the individual books are as useful for the purposes of oppression. Some of them even help to fight it, which is why it causes quite do much dispute!)

Scrimp, well, yes, Muslim belief is that it's a progressive revelation thing and that Islam is the culmination of what had gone before, but then so does Christianity and the poor bloody Jews are trying to hold on to their sense of identity while other people crib from their ancient history.

Personally, having read both the Hebrew and Christian scriptures, and the Quran, I think Islam's claims to be a natural follow on are deeply unconvincing, and I do think the Quran has only slightly more credibility than The Book of Mormon. But I can also see the perspective of Judaism that gets a bit ticked off with Christianity interpreting the Hebrew scriptures to fit the New Testament beliefs.

Basically, my own view now is that over reliance on supposed written revelation from the divine is one of the most damaging aspects of the natural sense of spirituality that many (but not all) humans possess.

Also, I'm fairly sure that in order to hate a book properly, you probably ought to have read it...
I'd take a bet those who said Lord of the Rings have never atrmoted to read the Silmarillon .

I hate Lord of The Rings. A rare case for me of the films being WAY better than the books. Elvish is beautiful, and I'm glad it exists, but if I ever have to read the books again, it might tip me over the edge.

One of the words in my previous post was supposed to be 'attempted'.

Ooh, love a discussion about books, philosophy and bible stories!

How about American Psycho for a book to hate? The long rambling descriptions of tedious shit interspersed with extremely graphic descriptions of women being tortured and murdered.

The film made me laugh (even if i had to hide behind a cushion for most of it) but the book makes me feel physically sick. I think I get the point the author was trying to make but it was still the grimmest thing I've ever read.

(Checks the fair cop Twitter again in faint hope of an update!)

How about American Psycho for a book to hate?
It sounds like a contender for a book that would be hated by many who read it - but, probably relatively few choose to do so and afaik it's not been particularly influential.

@BiologyNotBigotry has nailed it. I'd bet good money that the Sunday Times will have good news on the fight for our rights and Fair Cop were asked to comment. Interesting that Standing for Women also seem to think that good news is on the horizon.

over reliance on supposed written revelation from the divine is one of the most damaging aspects of the natural sense of spirituality that many (but not all) humans possess.

Yes, I think I'm with you there. There seems to be an inherent difficulty in confusing the map with the territory. I often think language really causes as many problems as it solves. Which brings us back to TWAW - language becoming uncoupled from the things it was invented to describe.

@ErrolTheDragon very good point, most people have more sense than me in choosing their books, to be fair!

American Psycho made me physically ill, yes. I didn't even realise it was supposed to be a 'comic' work - that showed up a bit in the parts of the film that I'd seen, actual jokes. But I couldn't even finish the book, the graphic descriptions were just far too much.

I might nominate Lord of the Flies, although it was an enjoyable read, I think it's gravely misrepresented humanity, especially after reading this recent article:

hotair.com/archives/john-s-2/2020/05/09/real-life-lord-flies-story-different-book/

And maybe even 1984, which was supposed to be a warning but seems to have been seized upon as a great idea and some kind of operating manual, by some people.

Actually excited for my 5am toddler wake up call tomorrow 🤞

On the topic of Buddhism (which I admit I know very little about), it's been a while since I read Sex and Power by Rita Banerji, but it didn't paint the Buddha and Buddhism in a good light.

There is an excerpt here. It's the fourth image -
sexandpower.wordpress.com/excerpt/

I would have to look at the original sources for her work to see how they compared with other historical narratives.

Basically, my own view now is that over reliance on supposed written revelation from the divine is one of the most damaging aspects of the natural sense of spirituality that many (but not all) humans possess.

I wholeheartedly agree.

Thanks, Nonny. Yes, comparing them to mildew isn't the loveliest way to talk about women, is it?

Much Buddhism needs to be considered in relationship to the Hindu culture that was contemporary at that time - the fundamental differences between the two religions relate to the existence of a soul, for example, which Hinduism posits and Buddhism explicitly denies. So in some ways it's defined by how it deviated from the existing religion/culture - I suppose that echoes the Abrahamic religions, too, as Floral noted in the Judaism/Christianity/Islam succession.

I know next to nothing about Hinduism, unfortunately! How were/are women represented in that? Would be interesting to find out.

It would be interesting to see

Varies, says wiki.

'Hinduism, states Bryant, has the strongest presence of the divine feminine among major world religions, from ancient times to the present.[14] The goddess is viewed as central in Shakti and Saiva Hindu traditions.[15][16] Matriarchal theology is quite prevalent in Sanskritic traditions and village Hinduism relating to the worship of Shakti, and there are numerous Hindu communities that are matriarchal.[13]'

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_Hinduism

And, if I can drag it towards a topic that is relevant to contemporary issues, the problem is when the authority of such texts and those who wield them, is said to come from an Almighty being who is not immediately accessible to everyone.

The benefit of having a written law system in a society that has arisen through material evidence and consensus is that it is much less amenable to the kinds of abuses that are so connected to religion.

That's why the best legal position for religion/metaphysical beliefs or the rejection thereof is simple liberty to believe as one wishes, and have the law focused on material realities.

Well, that's one of the things I most like in Buddhist teachings, really. There is no divine being; the ultimate authority is within every person. One is encouraged to ask questions, test things out, try it and see.

'Don't go by reports, by legends, by traditions, by scripture, by logical conjecture, by inference, by analogies, by agreement through pondering views, by probability, or by the thought, "This contemplative is our teacher." - Kalama Sutta

I suppose the underlying issue one has to contend with is power; where it resides, who has it and who wishes to keep it.

Humanist here dragging convo away from religion.

I am hoping that it will be something Ive wanted for a while -clamp down on anyone paid for by the government telling lies abut what the law actually is. All contracts awarded and public sector/bodies have to say what the law actually is and not what they would like it to be. If any publications are produced that for example leave out sex as a protected characteristic they would have to be reissued at issuer expense including sex correctly as a characteristic. Stonewall would hate that.

Mumfun, indeed.

@ScrimpshawTheSecond

Well, that's one of the things I most like in Buddhist teachings, really. There is no divine being; the ultimate authority is within every person. One is encouraged to ask questions, test things out, try it and see.

'Don't go by reports, by legends, by traditions, by scripture, by logical conjecture, by inference, by analogies, by agreement through pondering views, by probability, or by the thought, "This contemplative is our teacher." - Kalama Sutta

I suppose the underlying issue one has to contend with is power; where it resides, who has it and who wishes to keep it.

Tony Benn is ringing in my ears.

What power do you have; where did you get it; in whose interests do you exercise it; to whom are you accountable; and, how can we get rid of you?

This thread is great

This thread is great. I have no inside knowledge of what makes a thread trend, but it seems to be a volume of posts. Some of the parking threads do seem to be in trending because of the sheer volume of (often place marking) posters, not because of the quality of the thread... so can I offer a place-marking bump for you?
I would like to support you clever people. I just listened to the Emma Barnett (15/7) interview with two supporters of GRA reform who said the GRA proposals changed nothing, it was status quo, but also that the reform was essential and the phobes were preventing it..