Two Cents

    Two Cents –

  • On Toxic Masculinity

    Post by Skyler J. Collins (Editor).

    Feminists have a communications problem when it comes to concerns about “toxic masculinity”. Let me demonstrate this with the following: incompetent women make very poor drivers. Alright then, how did you read that? Did you read 1) “all women are incompetent and make for very poor drivers” or 2) “only women who are incompetent make for very poor drivers”? If you read it as 2) then you took your time and considered what was being said. Congratulations! If you read it like 1), then you made quick assumptions looking for someone to feel outrage toward. Reading as 2) probably also had you consider whether or not incompetent men made for very poor drivers, as well, and such would be a rational inference. Reading as 1) gave you bad feelings toward the person saying it, wondering strongly about how long they’ve been a misogynist. Now, do you understand why the phrase “toxic masculinity” is not being received very well? If you need me to mansplain it further for you, I will. And that’s today’s two cents.

  • On Freedom

    Post by Skyler J. Collins (Editor).

    Here’s a memetastic peeve of mine:  the bumper stickers and signs that say “Freedom is not free.” Talk about an equivocation. What is being implied by this statement is support for the armed forces and law enforcement. Little thought seems to be given in what this support entails, forcing other people to part with their hard-earned money to pay for these misidentified “services”. I suppose it could be argued that there is no equivocation if what is meant with this phrase is something along the lines of “It costs your freedom to protect your freedom.” In which case, keep your protection to yourself, nobody asked you. And that’s today’s two cents.

  • On Entitlements

    Post by Skyler J. Collins (Editor).

    An entitlement in the context of government is a promise of something, be it a good, a service, or money. Because government only has resources it has first taken from other people, the fulfillment of entitlements requires future takings. If those who call themselves “government” are unable to prove a right to that which they take from others, they are simply robbers engaged in extortion. It then follows that entitlements necessarily violate the liberties of other people. To demand more entitlements from government is to demand that liberties be violated. Entitlements are thus antithetical to liberty. You must prioritize one over the other not only for yourself, but for your neighbors as well. “If I don’t choose entitlements, then they will” does not justify or excuse what amounts to unethical behavior. Do you believe that you have the right to violate other people’s liberty? Do you?! If so, what class of human being does that put you in, hero or villain? And that’s today’s two cents.

  • On Yoga Pants

    Post by Skyler J. Collins (Editor).

    Paradoxically, at a time when #metoo started and continues, yoga pants are becoming more and more common as daily attire worn by attractive women. I am in no way complaining, quite the contrary, I welcome this evolution in fashion. It seems this trend started before #metoo, actually. I don’t know for certain, but isn’t this trend evidence that woman feel safer than they used to? Yoga pants are practically a color skin on a naked body, yet women everywhere are wearing them out and about, and quite comfortably so. This seems like progress to me. What do you think? And that’s today’s two cents.

  • On Income Inequality III

    Post by Skyler J. Collins (Editor).

    I am not totally opposed to the ideal of economic egalitarianism. I don’t want poverty to exist, and I do want those with means to bring about its eradication in an ethical, efficient, and lasting way. Where many (most?) egalitarians error is their mistaken belief that government force is one of the ways, or even the best way, to make that happen. It’s not. Government force can only flatten wealth distribution downward, and less wealth overall cannot bring people out of poverty. On the contrary, private property and free markets, ie. capitalism, have shown theoretically and in practice to do exactly what economic egalitarians desire to achieve and is actually possible among real human beings. There is no better alternative, truly. And that’s today’s two cents.

  • On Voluntaryists IV

    Post by Skyler J. Collins (Editor).

    One notable difference between voluntaryists and coercivists are the former’s insistence on tackling issues from their root, largely dug deep in a coercive foundation. Coercivists prefer to hack away at the branches with nary a concern for those whose lives and liberties they may be violating. Drug addiction is a problem of traumatic childhoods and broken social bonds. You can either examine and deal with the root, or throw guns and prisons at the branches in a futile attempt at solving the problem. Likewise for “illegal” immigration, human trafficking, terrorists, business cycles, and every other socio-economic problem that stems from utilizing coercion. Voluntaryists know better, if only the world would listen. And that’s today’s two cents.

More from “Two Cents”