The John Terry Moral Reasoning Thread

[Flex]

Please don't confuse this issue with some borish, male chauvanistic mentality. This isn't about Jocks locker room antics or Frat House unity (trying to think of what a US comparison to Lad Culture would be).

I'm trying to be super polite, but to be totally blunt I actually think it has a lot do with chauvinism. Sorry!

This is where you still don't get the point.

Please explain it to me! So far all I've heard is "it's about loyalty/honor" without any attempt to unpack any of the concepts behind a phrase like that. What does it mean to frame loyalty or honor in these kinds of terms? What does it say about how we view our roles in society? I'd love you to explore some of these issues and give me your take. If we have these certain obligations to our friends, why do we have them? Why is the onus on one friend to behave in a certain way and not the other? Why is one friend's reaction to the behavior of two other consenting adults justified while the two adults behavior is in the wrong (certainly, for cheating on his wife Terry's behavior is in the wrong! But we haven't talked a whole lot about that in this thread, most of our discussion is on how he wronged an ex-boyfriend of the woman he's sleeping with).

To be totally frank, I'm not sure how you get to believing that Terry had some kind of moral obligation to Bridge without accepting that Bridge has some sort of legitimate claim to be concerned over who his ex-girlfriend is sleeping with. I'd love it if you took me through the steps explaining how you can get that moral obligation in some other fashion. I'm actually, quite literally, begging you to do it!

An analogy: In an organization I associate with, we have a former chair of the organization who is - quite frankly - pretty old and cranky. She's not in a leadership role with this organization anymore but still likes to be treated as if she's a major mover and shaker, even though she isn't! To appease her, this entails giving courtesy calls when decisions are made, meetings are announced, etc. and just generally treating her with a certain (un)due deference. Is anyone obligated to treat her this way? No. It's actually rather silly. Do we out of a sense of good social grace? Sure. Do I blame anyone who doesn't oblige her false sense of entitlement? Of course not! They do nothing wrong by not accommodating this person's false sense of power over others. I don't think that means the people that don't give her a deference that her role doesn't truly entail are in any way slighting her or abusing her! I see this situation with Terry and Bridge as similar.

[101Walterton]

Please don't confuse this issue with some borish, male chauvanistic mentality. This isn't about Jocks locker room antics or Frat House unity (trying to think of what a US comparison to Lad Culture would be).

I'm trying to be super polite, but to be totally blunt I actually think it has a lot do with chauvinism. Sorry!

This is where you still don't get the point.

Please explain it to me! So far all I've heard is "it's about loyalty/honor" without any attempt to unpack any of the concepts behind a phrase like that. What does it mean to frame loyalty or honor in these kinds of terms? What does it say about how we view our roles in society? I'd love you to explore some of these issues and give me your take. If we have these certain obligations to our friends, why do we have them? Why is the onus on one friend to behave in a certain way and not the other? Why is one friend's reaction to the behavior of two other consenting adults justified while the two adults behavior is in the wrong (certainly, for cheating on his wife Terry's behavior is in the wrong! But we haven't talked a whole lot about that in this thread, most of our discussion is on how he wronged an ex-boyfriend of the woman he's sleeping with).

To be totally frank, I'm not sure how you get to believing that Terry had some kind of moral obligation to Bridge without accepting that Bridge has some sort of legitimate claim to be concerned over who his ex-girlfriend is sleeping with. I'd love it if you took me through the steps explaining how you can get that moral obligation in some other fashion. I'm actually, quite literally, begging you to do it!

An analogy: In an organization I associate with, we have a former chair of the organization who is - quite frankly - pretty old and cranky. She's not in a leadership role with this organization anymore but still likes to be treated as if she's a major mover and shaker, even though she isn't! To appease her, this entails giving courtesy calls when decisions are made, meetings are announced, etc. and just generally treating her with a certain (un)due deference. Is anyone obligated to treat her this way? No. It's actually rather silly. Do we out of a sense of good social grace? Sure. Do I blame anyone who doesn't oblige her false sense of entitlement? Of course not! They do nothing wrong by not accommodating this person's false sense of power over others. I don't think that means the people that don't give her a deference that her role doesn't truly entail are in any way slighting her or abusing her! I see this situation with Terry and Bridge as similar.

You and I clearly have a different view of friendship and how you should treat your friends.you can write this off as chauvansim, laddish culture, boys together or whatever you want to call it but do you not think the public outrage by young and old, male and female across the social divide tends to suggest you have underestimated a little.

[101Walterton]

Flex, if a friend came up to you and told you about a great job they had seen advertised and had applied for would you consider OK to seek out the job and apply yourself without talking to your friend first ?

Do you think it is wrong / chauvanistic or objectification of women to ask a father for permission to marry his daughter ?

[Flex]

You and I clearly have a different view of friendship and how you should treat your friends.you can write this off as chauvansim, laddish culture, boys together or whatever you want to call it but do you not think the public outrage by young and old, male and female across the social divide tends to suggest you have underestimated a little.

I'll reiterate my request: if I don't understand, please explain it to me.

As for the uniformity of response, I tend to think that patriarchal attitudes are omnipresent in a lot of cultures! Just look at the staggering statistics for the number of people across age groups, genders, income levels, etc. who tend to blame rape victims for being raped (spoiler alert: a lot of people blame the victim for rape, both in the United States and Britain). So, I don't know if having a general public consensus means there's no way it can't be chauvinistic or patriarchal or whatever else!

Again, tho, what have I "underestimated" and can you elaborate on these points?

Once again, thanks in advance! Cheers!

[Flex]

Flex, if a friend came up to you and told you about a great job they had seen advertised and had applied for would you consider OK to seek out the job and apply yourself without talking to your friend first ?

I don't see how these are analogous, could you explain? I think the more analogous situation would be if a friend had applied for a job, was rejected by the company and then I applied for the job and was hired. And I don't think it would be a slight against my friend at all for accepting that job!

EDIT: I'm also a little uncomfortable equating someone's relationship to a job one applies for!

Do you think it is wrong / chauvanistic or objectification of women to ask a father for permission to marry his daughter ?

I actually do think this tradition is tantamount to treating women as property (in this case, the property of the father to be parceled off to some young fellow). Since there are still traditionalists out there, it might be good social graces to ask anyways but I'd hope that the young fellow and lady get married regardless of what the father thinks!

[101Walterton]

You and I clearly have a different view of friendship and how you should treat your friends.you can write this off as chauvansim, laddish culture, boys together or whatever you want to call it but do you not think the public outrage by young and old, male and female across the social divide tends to suggest you have underestimated a little.

I'll reiterate my request: if I don't understand, please explain it to me.

As for the uniformity of response, I tend to think that patriarchal attitudes are omnipresent in a lot of cultures! Just look at the staggering statistics for the number of people across age groups, genders, income levels, etc. who tend to blame rape victims for being raped (spoiler alert: a lot of people blame the victim for rape, both in the United States and Britain). So, I don't know if having a general public consensus means there's no way it can't be chauvinistic or patriarchal or whatever else!

Again, tho, what have I "underestimated" and can you elaborate on these points?

Once again, thanks in advance! Cheers!

Either you are suggesting the public outrage is mass chauvansim, laddish culture, boys together behaviour or you have underestimated the minority you are in.

[Flex]

Either you are suggesting the public outrage is mass chauvansim, laddish culture, boys together behaviour or you have underestimated the minority you are in.

I'm pretty sure that, at least among the peers you use as a baseline reference, I would not be in the majority. I hope that helps clarify things!

[101Walterton]

Flex, if a friend came up to you and told you about a great job they had seen advertised and had applied for would you consider OK to seek out the job and apply yourself without talking to your friend first ?

I don't see how these are analogous, could you explain? I think the more analogous situation would be if a friend had applied for a job, was rejected by the company and then I applied for the job and was hired. And I don't think it would be a slight against my friend at all for accepting that job!

EDIT: I'm also a little uncomfortable equating someone's relationship to a job one applies for!

Do you think it is wrong / chauvanistic or objectification of women to ask a father for permission to marry his daughter ?

I actually do think this tradition is tantamount to treating women as property (in this case, the property of the father to be parceled off to some young fellow). Since there are still traditionalists out there, it might be good social graces to ask anyways but I'd hope that the young fellow and lady get married regardless of what the father thinks!

I am not saying either are analogous I'm just trying to gauge where you are coming from and your answers help.

[Flex]

I am not saying either are analogous I'm just trying to gauge where you are coming from and your answers help.

I guess turnabout is fair play, right? How would you answer those questions?

EDIT: I'd also be thrilled if you were willing to share what insights you gleamed from my responses. I'm genuinely curious and feel it would be fair since I've been pretty forthright in explaining what I've taken away from your responses!

[101Walterton]

Either you are suggesting the public outrage is mass chauvansim, laddish culture, boys together behaviour or you have underestimated the minority you are in.

I'm pretty sure that, at least among the peers you use as a baseline reference, I would not be in the majority. I hope that helps clarify things!

I'm leaving it here. I see your underlying tone 'the peers I use a bassline' and your laddish culture comments from your backroom experts. Very easy to write it off that way but very wide of the mark.

[Flex]

Either you are suggesting the public outrage is mass chauvansim, laddish culture, boys together behaviour or you have underestimated the minority you are in.

I'm pretty sure that, at least among the peers you use as a baseline reference, I would not be in the majority. I hope that helps clarify things!

I'm leaving it here. I see your underlying tone 'the peers I use a bassline' and your laddish culture comments from your backroom experts. Very easy to write it off that way but very wide of the mark.

So... you're not going to explain any of your positions? That's too bad, I was looking forward to learning about how and why other people frame these issues the way they do. Regardless, thank you for your responses!

[eumaas]

'the peers I use a bassline'

[matedog]

I would get pretty upset if a friend got with a serious ex. In fact a friend of mine was very chatty with an ex of mine and I got sort of upset about it. This isn't the case for all exes or friends though.

[Flex]

I would get pretty upset if a friend got with a serious ex. In fact a friend of mine was very chatty with an ex of mine and I got sort of upset about it. This isn't the case for all exes or friends though.

Says the man behind the Marlene numbering system.

[Dr. Medulla]

I would get pretty upset if a friend got with a serious ex. In fact a friend of mine was very chatty with an ex of mine and I got sort of upset about it. This isn't the case for all exes or friends though.

And are you still upset about this or was it just an immediate emotional response that passed after sober thought?