Talk:Double standard/Archives/2014
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
This Article Is Pointless
This article is pointless and beyond offering a dictionary definition of the term and an explanation of the logic of double standards, simply becomes an opportunity for political arguments in one direction or the other. Most introductory sociology textbooks will give a definition of the double standard as it applies to women's and men's sexual freedom, but that will be the extent of it. A quick review of "racial double standard" on the web suggests that all arguments saying it exists come from conservative perspectives. However, one could endlessly list examples of double standards that exist in any given society, from both ends of the political spectrum, for gender, race/ethnicity, for age, for social class. That suggests to me that there is really no point to most of this article beyond defining the term. I recommend leaving the definition and limiting to one or two standard examples. --Deborah G (talk) 21:29, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
- I completely agree with this. The article should only describe the general concept of what a double standard is, and not engage in any discussion of any contentious subjects. The examples should be extremely limited and should just help readers understand the concept of a double standard itself. Torc2 (talk) 22:07, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
- I agree, though I think the article could become of some use if it could point readers to discussion of the principals behind the concept of double standards. E.g. one needs a broader understanding of the principals involved than is given by the article, to see why it is not considered an application of a double standard to have rules for children which are not applied to adults; as it stands, the article implies that preventing children from driving cars, say, involves a reprehensible double standard. To put it another way, as Anatole France said, 'In its majestic equality, the law forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal loaves of bread.' The philosophical problem of double standards is nothing like as simple as the article suggests. Dayvey (talk) 12:54, 16 November 2014 (UTC)