tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27939552.post5476235398751975219..comments2023-11-02T07:54:22.317+00:00Comments on Unenlightened Commentary.: The World Cup Is Anti Feminist ApparentlyRosshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02263275229285861236noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27939552.post-66102890775792296812014-06-24T16:22:18.299+01:002014-06-24T16:22:18.299+01:00John- the SWP was, but we couldn't infer from ...John- the SWP was, but we couldn't infer from their behaviour alone that the whole of the radical left was misogynistic, just that the SWP is.Rosshttp://fountain.blogspot.co.uk/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27939552.post-36488883691794607732014-06-24T08:53:58.113+01:002014-06-24T08:53:58.113+01:00when the Socialist Workers Party covered up a seri...<i>when the Socialist Workers Party covered up a series of rape allegations against their senior members did it prove that left wing politics is inherently misogynistic?</i><br /><br />You're not comparing like with like. <br /><br />The other two examples were of individuals who indisputably treated a woman badly. To be equivalent the statement should read "when a senior party figure allegedly raped womenn did it prove ...". This is significant because the second part should now be: did football institutions cover up, did arts institutions cover up, did the SWP cover up. That's a category difference. <br /><br />"Did an individual err" does not prove anything about the institution. "Did the institution err" does.<br /><br />So the SWP was acting in a wholly misogynistic wayJohnMhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05696206173235574775noreply@blogger.com