Certainly the two-headed (or is it -faced ?) monster of hypocrisy is nowhere more evident than in the child-raising dictum of "Do as I say, not as I do."
My oldest kid turns 30 this year and we were talking the other day about parenting (he doesn't plan to have kids, ending his father's family as there are no more relatives with his surname, but somebody had to be the last of our kind eventually).
He mentioned how some of his school friends were damaged emotionally (and physically, which led to emotional scars they still carry today) by their parents and I said "Sorry if we did anything to mess you up. We were winging it." He said "You did fine. No one ever hit us or taught us to be passive aggressive to manipulate people into getting our way, or lied to us to trick us into doing what you wanted. Other than never having playdates (our work shifts got in the way of planning anything with other families and both kids were kinda busy with marching band or play practice, etc, to plan around other kids), you did okay. You always talked to us like we were individuals - 'where should we go on vacation?' or 'your daddy has a trip coming up - do you want to go or stay home with one of your grandmas?' - and you never made us clean our rooms, go to bed at some imaginary magical time, and we were pretty much free agents. That helped us a lot to make decisions for ourselves. If we chose to stay up all night, we suffered for it ourselves in the morning. If we decided to eat the whole package of cookies after you said 'I don't think you should do that,' we learned that lesson on our own."
I felt like a champion among parents because I treated my kids like people.
Then there’s John Mitchell, Nixon’s first Attorney General, who in 1969 famously said, “Watch what we do, not what we say.” And we all know how that turned out.
My partner loves animals more than most people - I am one of the exceptions, although he does take the cat's side in ALL confrontations - but feels that since many animals eat other animals, he is not morally obligated to be different from them. Convenient, in my book, but I do try to get him to taste those amazing vegetarian dishes I make. :)
Speaking of animals, I'd like to defend my input on seeing whales in the Florida ocean -- there was just a very weird sighting of humpbacks off of Ft. Lauderdale Beach. That is in addition to a documented sighting of a Beluga off of San Diego. These are whales that hang out in the ARCTIC!! This is not normal. Okay, I am alone in my excessive amount of awe. LOL!
As a non-vegetarian or vegan --- unless you limit yourself to animal by-products like honey, milk and cheese and eggs or, on the seafood side, bivalves (oysters, clams, cockles, scallops, mussels) and the occasional sea cucumber or sea urchin--- you're likely to run into the issue of sentience, at one level or another. I suppose you could also add some (but apparently not all) insects to the non-sentient mix --- if you want to.
Interesting dichotomy with hypocrisy and morality which you point out, perhaps inadvertently. That is, two things which appear to be paradoxical can both exist within our personal standards. A form of cognitive dissonance. Logically speaking, there is nothing dishonest about condemning an action and also engaging in it. So typically what is off-putting about a hypocrite is our perception. The real offense is in their statements about something, or doing something --- which may make sense or be worthwhile, but which lead us to (erroneously) believe they are practicing what they preach. For example, if you believe it’s important to protect the environment, shouldn’t you be glad the hypocrite is promoting the right values (even if they are being wasteful themselves)? Perhaps more significantly, there is often a profound feeling of anger at being cheated or conned because we consciously or unconsciously issue moral or reputational credits to them, even as we ourselves may feel shame for not following the hypocrite's lead --- until they are unmasked. At which point we can smugly go back to our old ways without guilt.
The antipathy to hypocrites comes largely I believe when they condemn or forbid others to do what they themselves are doing. That's why I've always hoped some enterprising reporter would publish the long, long list of current and former members of Congress and employees and spokespeople for various institutions who have paid for and/or received abortions while passing laws preventing women from receiving medical care.
I was reading an account (can't seem to find it now) from a clinic worker who said many time the women on the picket line would sneak into the back of the clinic and have abortions. Within a few days, the same women would be back outside protesting. To me that is the height of hypocricy.
When I was a kid, abortion was illegal. I have two stores to share about this.
1) A well-off neighbor would ask my mother to look after her kids while she went to the hospital for a few days for a 'dust and clean.' Later, I asked what she meant and my mother said "A D&C - it's an abortion but those are illegal, so rich people go to the doctor and stay in the hospital a few days. The doctor calls it 'therapeutic cell removal' on the chart and no one ever knows the rich have broken the law."
2) A less well off neighbor found herself pregnant and had a back alley abortion because she didn't have a bundle of money to pay for a 'dust and clean' hospital stay and only had the money her boyfriend could scrape up. She came to stay with us for several days because of the resulting pain and infection she got from the unsafe abortion. My mother took her to our doctor and paid for her antibiotics and exam to make sure she wasn't bleeding to death or something (she was okay - the pain was from the infection).
The moral of stories one and two are that word got around (the boyfriend told everyone why he was tapped out), neighbor number one openly criticized neighbor number two: "That girl broke the law and should be arrested. I have a good mind to report her to the police." My mother just smiled and said "If you call the police on neighbor two, I might be tempted to ask the police to check on your doctor and you the next time you ask me to watch your kids when you have a D&C." That shut her up - at least when it came to talking about it to my mother.
Not so much their hypocrisy or "conditional morality" about the so-called sanctity of life for me, as their obvious attempts (and unfortunately, successes in too many states) to essentially impose a belief system which allows for it, on others.
I realize this is meant to show what hypocrites we are, but some of us actually don’t eat animal flesh and would appreciate a poll option.
Fixed!
You are right, Anne. Can't change it now, but you are right.
Certainly the two-headed (or is it -faced ?) monster of hypocrisy is nowhere more evident than in the child-raising dictum of "Do as I say, not as I do."
My oldest kid turns 30 this year and we were talking the other day about parenting (he doesn't plan to have kids, ending his father's family as there are no more relatives with his surname, but somebody had to be the last of our kind eventually).
He mentioned how some of his school friends were damaged emotionally (and physically, which led to emotional scars they still carry today) by their parents and I said "Sorry if we did anything to mess you up. We were winging it." He said "You did fine. No one ever hit us or taught us to be passive aggressive to manipulate people into getting our way, or lied to us to trick us into doing what you wanted. Other than never having playdates (our work shifts got in the way of planning anything with other families and both kids were kinda busy with marching band or play practice, etc, to plan around other kids), you did okay. You always talked to us like we were individuals - 'where should we go on vacation?' or 'your daddy has a trip coming up - do you want to go or stay home with one of your grandmas?' - and you never made us clean our rooms, go to bed at some imaginary magical time, and we were pretty much free agents. That helped us a lot to make decisions for ourselves. If we chose to stay up all night, we suffered for it ourselves in the morning. If we decided to eat the whole package of cookies after you said 'I don't think you should do that,' we learned that lesson on our own."
I felt like a champion among parents because I treated my kids like people.
Then there’s John Mitchell, Nixon’s first Attorney General, who in 1969 famously said, “Watch what we do, not what we say.” And we all know how that turned out.
My partner loves animals more than most people - I am one of the exceptions, although he does take the cat's side in ALL confrontations - but feels that since many animals eat other animals, he is not morally obligated to be different from them. Convenient, in my book, but I do try to get him to taste those amazing vegetarian dishes I make. :)
ETA - boyfriend says no, he is a hypocrite.
Just an FYI - the cat is probably always right.
Speaking of animals, I'd like to defend my input on seeing whales in the Florida ocean -- there was just a very weird sighting of humpbacks off of Ft. Lauderdale Beach. That is in addition to a documented sighting of a Beluga off of San Diego. These are whales that hang out in the ARCTIC!! This is not normal. Okay, I am alone in my excessive amount of awe. LOL!
OMG! That's like seeing polar bears roaming the streets of LA. Scary.
Right? I was absolutely stunned to see a Beluga break the surface, I still can't get over it.
You had a two-headed parrot? Did it talk to each other?
As a non-vegetarian or vegan --- unless you limit yourself to animal by-products like honey, milk and cheese and eggs or, on the seafood side, bivalves (oysters, clams, cockles, scallops, mussels) and the occasional sea cucumber or sea urchin--- you're likely to run into the issue of sentience, at one level or another. I suppose you could also add some (but apparently not all) insects to the non-sentient mix --- if you want to.
Interesting dichotomy with hypocrisy and morality which you point out, perhaps inadvertently. That is, two things which appear to be paradoxical can both exist within our personal standards. A form of cognitive dissonance. Logically speaking, there is nothing dishonest about condemning an action and also engaging in it. So typically what is off-putting about a hypocrite is our perception. The real offense is in their statements about something, or doing something --- which may make sense or be worthwhile, but which lead us to (erroneously) believe they are practicing what they preach. For example, if you believe it’s important to protect the environment, shouldn’t you be glad the hypocrite is promoting the right values (even if they are being wasteful themselves)? Perhaps more significantly, there is often a profound feeling of anger at being cheated or conned because we consciously or unconsciously issue moral or reputational credits to them, even as we ourselves may feel shame for not following the hypocrite's lead --- until they are unmasked. At which point we can smugly go back to our old ways without guilt.
The antipathy to hypocrites comes largely I believe when they condemn or forbid others to do what they themselves are doing. That's why I've always hoped some enterprising reporter would publish the long, long list of current and former members of Congress and employees and spokespeople for various institutions who have paid for and/or received abortions while passing laws preventing women from receiving medical care.
Not just them - their families.
I was reading an account (can't seem to find it now) from a clinic worker who said many time the women on the picket line would sneak into the back of the clinic and have abortions. Within a few days, the same women would be back outside protesting. To me that is the height of hypocricy.
When I was a kid, abortion was illegal. I have two stores to share about this.
1) A well-off neighbor would ask my mother to look after her kids while she went to the hospital for a few days for a 'dust and clean.' Later, I asked what she meant and my mother said "A D&C - it's an abortion but those are illegal, so rich people go to the doctor and stay in the hospital a few days. The doctor calls it 'therapeutic cell removal' on the chart and no one ever knows the rich have broken the law."
2) A less well off neighbor found herself pregnant and had a back alley abortion because she didn't have a bundle of money to pay for a 'dust and clean' hospital stay and only had the money her boyfriend could scrape up. She came to stay with us for several days because of the resulting pain and infection she got from the unsafe abortion. My mother took her to our doctor and paid for her antibiotics and exam to make sure she wasn't bleeding to death or something (she was okay - the pain was from the infection).
The moral of stories one and two are that word got around (the boyfriend told everyone why he was tapped out), neighbor number one openly criticized neighbor number two: "That girl broke the law and should be arrested. I have a good mind to report her to the police." My mother just smiled and said "If you call the police on neighbor two, I might be tempted to ask the police to check on your doctor and you the next time you ask me to watch your kids when you have a D&C." That shut her up - at least when it came to talking about it to my mother.
Not so much their hypocrisy or "conditional morality" about the so-called sanctity of life for me, as their obvious attempts (and unfortunately, successes in too many states) to essentially impose a belief system which allows for it, on others.
Why moral question? Or is the same as ecological/enviromental issue?