Atheism Plus/Free Thought Blogs (FTB)

[Mr. Scott]

It boggles the mind that someone like Dr Hall can be accused of not being a feminist.

Some interesting comments, plus some from RW making it all about her, as usual.

The Skepchicks are hurt that she didn't join them, so they are indulging in infantile attacks. It's pure, primitive, cave-person Head of the Mountain bickering. Grade school clique tactics in adults. Shameful.

 

[Myriad]

This is typically a cheesy implication that someone is narcissistic. Harriet was responding to her attackers and critics. Word choices are limited when discussing such a subject. Have you any data on how typical this statistic is in similar contexts?

The Skepchicks are hurt that she didn't join them, so they are indulging in infantile attacks. It's pure, primitive, cave-person Head of the Mountain bickering. Grade school clique tactics in adults. Shameful.

Tsig was quoting (and apparently also describing) Watson's comment in the comment thread, not Dr. Hall's post.

Respectfully,
Myriad

 

[Mr. Scott]

Tsig was quoting (and apparently also describing) Watson's comment in the comment thread, not Dr. Hall's post.

Respectfully,
Myriad

Sorry. Will correct it if you don't mind.

 

[Professor Yaffle]

It's simple. When Harriet Hall encountered resistance, misogyny and bigotry she confronted it head on and forced the mainstream to acknowledge her ability and zeal.

To the A-Plus crowd it seems that the taking of any actual action to counter prejudice is a betrayal because by actually tackling oppression head on you're minimizing the argument that you shouldn't have to.

An example I see frequently in reference to "rape culture" is when somebody suggests that you don't walk home alone, avoid deserted areas, don't get too drunk and be aware of your surroundings at all times. This is met with howls of indignation because women "shouldn't have to" go out of their way to be safe.

I agree. They shouldn't have to. But they do have to.

Feminists who insist they be accepted through the force of their own will and ability cause all sorts of problems for the shouldn't have to types who hide on their Social Justice message boards complaining about how unfair it all is.

I'd say the precautions suggested against stranger rape are way over the top and misdirected considering its a rare form of rape compared to acquaintance rape. People are always telling you not to walk home alone late at night - advice I routinely ignore. But rarely will you be advised on more frequent dangers such as "don't let a friend/acquaintance into your house when you are alone". In fact it could very well be the friend who escorts you to make sure you don't walk home alone that is the person who assaults you.

I choose to ignore any advice that is not based on the actual risks (as opposed to perceived risks) and also ignore anything that I think unduly restricts my freedom to live my life as I see fit.

 

[Myriad]

So the fact that they have to is a bad thing. What's wrong with saying that it is, in fact, a bad thing?

No one has said that there's anything wrong with saying it's a bad thing.

But taking precautions is still a good idea. And saying so is NOT a bad thing. Saying that saying so IS a bad thing, is a bad thing.

----------

Having your house burglarized is a bad thing.

Having to lock your door to prevent your house from being burglarized is a bad thing.

Reminding your neighbor to remember to lock their door when they leave is NOT a bad thing.

Ostracizing your neighbor for "supporting burglary culture" and "blaming victims" because they reminded you to lock your door IS a bad thing.

Does that make it clearer?

Respectfully,
Myriad

 

[Kochanski]

So the fact that they have to is a bad thing. What's wrong with saying that it is, in fact, a bad thing?

There is nothing wrong with saying it is a bad thing, however, your safety is your own concern and you have to take a certain amount of responsibility to ensure your own safety.

Rape is not the only thing that can happen to you when you are out and about in the world and taking precautions to ensure your own safety when you are an adult is your responsibility whether you are female or male. The world is a dangerous place and no matter what you do there will always be danger and not acknowledging this is irresponsible.

 

[Nihilus]

So the fact that they have to is a bad thing. What's wrong with saying that it is, in fact, a bad thing?

While we're at it, then, we can exhaustively go through every possible bad thing and reaffirm it as such:

Walking down dark alleys at 3am.
Cartwheeling across a freeway.
Unprotected sex with someone you've just met who seems sweet.
Hugging a tiger.

If we treat reality as some conspiratorial oppressive entity that's trying to push us down, we can say that we should be able to do all these happy things without horrific consequence and it's hurtful to have to be reminded that we can't when someone points out the facts.

 

[Myriad]

Sorry. Will correct it if you don't mind.

No problem. The post confused me at first too.

 

[Nihilus]

The world is a dangerous place and no matter what you do there will always be danger and not acknowledging this is irresponsible.

Precisely.

You know what else sucks? Death.

And telling someone with a potentially fatal illness to have it checked out by a doctor isn't enabling "death culture".

 

[Joe Random]

Precisely.

You know what else sucks? Death.

And telling someone with a potentially fatal illness to have it checked out by a doctor isn't enabling "death culture".

Now you're just necrosplaining.

 

[zooterkin]

Sorry. Will correct it if you don't mind.

Ok, but now you've attributed my words to tsig.

 

[Nihilus]

Now you're just necrosplaining.

It's not my fault. All these recent movies glorifying zombieism have skewed my sensitivities.

 

[WillyWonka]

It's not my fault. All these recent movies glorifying zombieism have skewed my sensitivities.

Zombisplaining perhaps?

 

[theprestige]

I think most of the animosity isn't about telling people to take precautions before the fact, but rather telling people what precautions they should have taken after the fact.

Me? I'm a white male. I have the privilege of reading "area woman got raped after neglecting some basic and obvious precautions against rape", and thinking to myself, "well, that was kinda stupid of her".

But me rolling up to her and saying, "you know, you could probably have prevented your rape if you'd simply done what any sensible, responsible person should do", would be extremely dickish and unhelpful.

I think the real problem is that any discussion of precautions is "after the fact" of some rapes, and the SJWs therefore insist that all such discussions are dickish and unhelpful. The entire topic of taking precautions should be off the table, say the SJWs. Because it can be construed as blaming some victim, somewhere, it should be interpreted as blaming all victims, everywhere.

 

[tsig]

Ok, but now you've attributed my words to tsig.

I'm smelling a conspiracy of privilege here, I'm not sure who's conspiring to do what but I'm sure It's nefarious and aimed directly at me since no one else is worth talking about and they should be happy that I noticed them enough to tell them they're beneath my notice./parody/

 

[tsig]

No problem. The post confused me at first too.

Sorry all for the confusion, using italics to set off quotes isn't as clear as I thought.

 

[Nihilus]

I have the privilege of reading "area woman got raped after neglecting some basic and obvious precautions against rape", and thinking to myself, "well, that was kinda stupid of her".

See, that has nothing to do with gender "privilege" and everything to do with either knowledge of your surroundings or general cautioned decision-making.

Not to mention that I don't know anyone who would immediately jump to "that was kinda stupid of her" (that actually sounds like you're subversively strawmanning from the inside).

The entire topic of taking precautions should be off the table, say the SJWs. Because it can be construed as blaming some victim, somewhere, it should be interpreted as blaming all victims, everywhere.

My particular pet peeve is the conflation of events even slightly related to a rape that also are carte-blanched because, presumably, having suffered a horrible thing exempts one from other things.

This is the particular examples I tend to see (the original is on the left and the 'translation' on the right which I had never seen up until now while looking for the original shot, although it does cover some of the basic points I planned on addressing): http://melvin-udall.livejournal.com/1272935.html

 

[Professor Yaffle]

This is the particular examples I tend to see (the original is on the left and the 'translation' on the right which I had never seen up until now while looking for the original shot, although it does cover some of the basic points I planned on addressing): http://melvin-udall.livejournal.com/1272935.html

Seriously??? Cos all rapes are just women who change their mind the day after?

*shakes head sadly...

 

[Nihilus]

Seriously??? Cos all rapes are just women who change their mind the day after?

*shakes head sadly...

Man, you're good at strawmanning!

Yes, I verbatim said all rapes are "just women who change their mind the day after".

While the response image from the link above goes into injecting some unknowable elements to the story, one thing is clear:

The lady in question admits to being in (presumably) a monogamous relationship and then goes out, admits to flirting freely while being excessively drunk...and we're supposed to find the ex-boyfriend at fault for being upset at the infidelity of his ex-girlfriend because he didn't excuse it due to the bad event that happened to her. And her friends who, you know, might value consensual faithfulness in a relationship are really just insensitive losers for taking her to task on being publicly irresponsible and insulting.

 

[Professor Yaffle]

The response to a woman who claims she was raped (and omg doesn't write every little detail onto her sign) is basically "I think you're lying and even if you weren't you are really dumb for trusting some random guy not to rape you when you got the chance". And that's a link you post as if it is representative of your views?