Atheism Plus/Free Thought Blogs (FTB)

[theprestige]

Myriad, the point is that it is terminology used by racists as a dog whistle. One should be aware of the connotations of one's language.

I thought the whole logic of the "dog whistle" conspiracy theory was that the language in question doesn't have the negative connotations--that one can use it in public discourse with no one being the wiser.

The only people who are supposed to be able to hear and decode the signals are a hypothetical group of people who are specially tuned to a frequency nobody else knows about, and who are holding a code-book nobody else has ever seen.

In reality, the only people who can reliably hear and decode dog-whistles, are the people who are quick to accuse others of using them.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

I thought the whole logic of the "dog whistle" conspiracy theory was that the language in question doesn't have the negative connotations--that one can use it in public discourse with no one being the wiser.

The only people who are supposed to be able to hear and decode the signals are a hypothetical group of people who are specially tuned to a frequency nobody else knows about, and who are holding a code-book nobody else has ever seen.

In reality, the only people who can reliably hear and decode dog-whistles, are the people who are quick to accuse others of using them.

Exactly.

 

[AlBell]

TRIGGER WARNING!!!!!

I'd like to send you $100,000. Please PM me your address.

Proving that trigger warnings too often precede nonsense. Thanks.

 

[UnrepentantSinner]

It's first world privilege. It completely ignores posters from third world countries like Uganda, Bangladesh and Australia.

You're saing they need to check their privilage and stop Americansplaining?

@UnrepentantSinner,

I see you were able to understand my point easily. A small part of recursive prophet's language came off as racist. My goal is to get him and others to think about the meaning of their language, not to poison the well.

Then what was up with the coy disengenuousness in asking leading questions about his choice of vernacular rather than just coming out an making a thinly veiled accusation of racism? And I don't buy your BS. Your goal was not to foster discussion or introspection, but to set a "gotcha" trap as Myriad pointed out and it might have worked in the A+ Socialjusticetopia, but it's not going to work here where people actually think critically and don't succumb to groupthink or Jedi mind tricks.

 

[UnrepentantSinner]

I thought the whole logic of the "dog whistle" conspiracy theory was that the language in question doesn't have the negative connotations--that one can use it in public discourse with no one being the wiser.

The only people who are supposed to be able to hear and decode the signals are a hypothetical group of people who are specially tuned to a frequency nobody else knows about, and who are holding a code-book nobody else has ever seen.

In reality, the only people who can reliably hear and decode dog-whistles, are the people who are quick to accuse others of using them.

You need to check your Homo {sapiens} privilage or quit Presbycusisplaining.

 

[theprestige]

You mean TV Tropes?

Now that should come with a warning tag!

 

[AlBell]

The poster doth protest too much, methinks.

Speaking to someone who doesn't appear racist by someone who does appear so.

 

[Daald]

Well, when you think about it, "Atheism+" really means, "Skeptic, except for atheism and a long list of other things that should just be accepted without argument."

I mean, you can take a skeptical approach to atheism if you want, but why bother? It's a pretty short chain of reasoning, and the conclusion is pretty clear, long-established, and widely accepted among skeptics.

To atheism, the skeptics at A+ want to add a whole list of other issues, which they have determined are as beyond rational debate, as atheism.

I think the choice of the plus though adds certain connotations. (Yeah I feel like I am doing that whole stupid street thug thing BTW, in my circles in NY street thung means just that. Has no racial connotation. Some people do add the racial component but it was well explained with your dog whistle fallacy.) In my mind it conveys the "I am better than the average" If the terminology was was something like "Atheism-" where minus stood for the lack of non critical thinkers. Maybe even something like "Atheism&" where the ampersand stands for "and". I don't know, just poor marketing choice I think.

 

[qwints]

Then what was up with the coy disengenuousness in asking leading questions about his choice of vernacular rather than just coming out an making a thinly veiled accusation of racism?

Asking someone why they chose a particular phrasing is not a leading question. A leading question is one that suggests its own answer. I was asking because I thought the language sounded off, and I wanted to hear why he chose it. More broadly the goal was to get people to think about their language use. I believe recursive prophet when he says he doesn't believe in the biological reality of race.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Asking someone why they chose a particular phrasing is not a leading question. A leading question is one that suggests its own answer. I was asking because I thought the language sounded off, and I wanted to hear why he chose it. More broadly the goal was to get people to think about their language use. I believe recursive prophet when he says he doesn't believe in the biological reality of race.

Of course. You want skeptics to think about their language use so you can check it against your sooper sekrit PC code book to look for violations.

 

[bedlin88]

Even if you accept that the term street thug is racially charged what you perceived it to be could be wildly different if you were in New York as opposed to say Los Angeles. If the term means different things to different people based on region alone its hard to say it is really racially charged. Its more that you may be ascribing your own preconceived notion to the term.

 

[Mr. Scott]

@qwints So I'm curious, you say the the term "Street Thugs" is racially charged, and has been for a generation. So exactly which race is it charged against?

Quints has telegraphed that she feels street thugs are only African-American. She has hallucinated a dog whistle. The statement she attacked was that A+ people acted in a way that was similar to street thugs. White street thugs exist. In fact, street thugs exist in all races. There are even street thug ladyboys. It's about a way people bully each other. If you hear a racist dog whistle in that, your delusion of racism has already been primed into your mind, not the mind of the person who sees the similarity between A+ and street thug behavior.

 

[damoe]

I invite you to google "street thug" and count the blatantly racist things you see...

I googled "street thug" and here is what I saw in the first page:

Rush Limbaugh calling Obama a street thug. Now this is undoubtedly a racist dog whistle as that is a big part of Rush's act.

I also saw an NPR article entitled "Putin Biography Chronicles Rise Of A 'Street Thug'" There is no way this is a racist dog whistle, but I invite someone to attempt to show otherwise.

The question I have (and others have raised before) for qwints is why you assumed the bad faith of Rush in recursive prophet's use of street thug instead of the good faith of the NPR usage?

I think most observers of A+/SJW see this as a common rhetorical device used in those communities to stop honest debate and criticism.

 

[recursive prophet]

Yowsers. Am working on a text wall but just had to express kudos on the last few posts above. Both insightful and succinct, the latter of which always escapes me. Scott and Damoe really nailed it.

eta-NPR is on as it always is when I'm awake, and I've never once listened to Rush. Quotes are more than enough. But somehow I suspect qwints knew that all along, don't you?

 

[Axiom_Blade]

I was asking because I thought the language sounded off, and I wanted to hear why he chose it.

Why did it sound "off"? Isn't that a form of tone trolling?

More broadly the goal was to get people to think about their language use.

But the result just happened to be a red herring.

 

[Rrose Selavy]

Quote:
More broadly the goal was to get people to think about their language use.

Ahh... you're here to educate us. Thanks.
You know, I've sometimes seen when someone chips into an A+ thread with a different viewpoint they're sometimes condescendingly told " Are you here to learn or not?"


-

 

[Axiom_Blade]

Ahh... you're here to educate us. Thanks.
You know, I've sometimes seen when someone chips into an A+ thread with a different viewpoint they're sometimes condescendingly told " Are you here to learn or not?"

I was under the impression that social justice took a lot of time, effort, and money. It's good to know that all you have to do is create a web forum and be rude to people.

 

[qwints]

I was under the impression that social justice took a lot of time, effort, and money. It's good to know that all you have to do is create a web forum and be rude to people.

Trying to make society more just does require enormous amounts of collective effort. One very small part of that effort can be creating a web forum. I'd rank posting on the forum somewhat below writing to my representatives in terms of efficacy.

 

[RandFan]

Trying to make society more just does require enormous amounts of collective effort. One very small part of that effort can be creating a web forum. I'd rank posting on the forum somewhat below writing to my representatives in terms of efficacy.

I agree. that said, Would you not agree that some web sites are better than others at propagating truth? If so, do you think that prior restraint and rudeness are a good way to foster social progress?

 

[tsig]

Okay! Here we go! I got the pitchforks, who's got the torches?? I'm never late to a good necktie party!

Ah, crap, I thought I was still on A+...

It seems to be evolving toward a circular firing squad.