• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Atheism Plus/Free Thought Blogs (FTB)

Status
Not open for further replies.
s novella with a later comment:

Steve Novella has always seem to be level-headed in his comments. He is not always right on SGU, especially in my field of expertise, but always has a rational for his comments.

However, lately, he has delved in controversial issues by responding to PZM and now supporting HH and Shermer. The A+, FTB and SC crowds do not seem to take any prisoners. I wonder how long this can last.
 
So I am not the only one who finds Novella's comments strange in light of the fact that one of his co-hosts on SGU is arguably the single most divisive figure in the entire skeptic community, who seems to be habitually ignoring his good advice? That seems to be the elephant in the room that no one on that thread is mentioning, while they praise Novella for his attempts at bridging the divide.

Makes me glad I never tuned into SGU even once.

i agree. and it has been discussed in this thread before. it seems to me novella is trying very hard at avoiding the issue of rebecca watson,s rather extreme views and style.

i think it would be a good opportunity for the show to face this head on, from a constructive starting point. see if they can discuss their obvious differences of opinion in a rational way.

lxxx
 
Steve Novella has always seem to be level-headed in his comments. He is not always right on SGU, especially in my field of expertise, but always has a rational for his comments.

However, lately, he has delved in controversial issues by responding to PZM and now supporting HH and Shermer. The A+, FTB and SC crowds do not seem to take any prisoners. I wonder how long this can last.

he is very calm and tries to be balanced imo.

i, for one, am glad he has "delved" into defending himself and the skeptical movement. i agree, sooner or later, he will be targetted again.

his relationship with rebecca could be a chance to build bridges, if that is possible. sgu could embrace this division and end all the ********, one way or another.

lxxx
 
i agree. and it has been discussed in this thread before. it seems to me novella is trying very hard at avoiding the issue of rebecca watson,s rather extreme views and style.

i think it would be a good opportunity for the show to face this head on, from a constructive starting point. see if they can discuss their obvious differences of opinion in a rational way.

I listen to SGU. For the last 6 months, RW has either been away and they had to bring a "rogue" member, or she has not been active on the shows, never participating in interviews. Sometimes, she hardly say anything, except maybe a couple of snarky comments. It is obvious that her interest in the show is waning. I would not be surprised if she quits all together.
 
So I am not the only one who finds Novella's comments strange in light of the fact that one of his co-hosts on SGU is arguably the single most divisive figure in the entire skeptic community, who seems to be habitually ignoring his good advice? That seems to be the elephant in the room that no one on that thread is mentioning, while they praise Novella for his attempts at bridging the divide.

Makes me glad I never tuned into SGU even once.

Well, I notice that TAM 2013 features this:

Two live tapings of Skeptics Guide to the Universe, featuring Dr. Steve Novella, Jay Novella, Bob Novella, and Evan Bernstein.
 
I listen to SGU. For the last 6 months, RW has either been away and they had to bring a "rogue" member, or she has not been active on the shows, never participating in interviews. Sometimes, she hardly say anything, except maybe a couple of snarky comments. It is obvious that her interest in the show is waning. I would not be surprised if she quits all together.

i had noticed that she never participates in interviews and wondered why. i dont know if she would quit though?

she always descibes sgu in interviews as "my show".

lxxx
 
The original picture uses rape as a permission slip from being unfaithful and disproportionately irresponsible.

If by original picture you mean the one on the left, the one that says:

'My rapist doesn't know he's a rapist. You taught him it wasn't his fault, I drank too much, flirted and my shorts. Too short. I was asking for it. He left me in a parking garage staircase. My (ex) boyfriend spit in my face, he called me a slut, he called me a whore. I deserved it. My friends gave me dirty looks. They called me trash, not realizing it could have been them. This culture, my culture, your culture, told them, told me, this is my fault. And I suffered. But my rapist doesn't know I'm a rapist.'

It reads to me like she is saying she was out with a guy she didn't plan on having sex with and was raped, (i.e. taken against her expressed wishes) and other people thought the fact she was drunk, flirted, and had short shorts somehow excused the guy.

I suspect she probably hung out with the wrong kind of people, the two boys sound like a rapist and a jackass, she doesn't have very nice friends either.

That's hell and gone from someone who goes out, gets drunk with a guy, encourages and then consents to the sex, then wakes up and regrets the whole thing, and blames him for having sex when they were both drunk and thinks he's a rapist.

She may have used poor judgement, she may have gone out drinking and ended up alone with this guy she flirted with, but the scenario she describes suggests she means against her will at the time as that's what being left in the parking garage staircase implies. Seriously, what kind of guy would have sex with her there and not give her a ride home/walk with her? It suggests she was lured there and something awful was part of the agenda, especially the fact she told her 'friends' and (ex) boyfriend about the crime.

She wasn't married to this clown, that's hardly unfaithful, and some girls like to flirt and show off, call them teases if you wish, but that's no license to rape them either, nor assume she was 'unfaithful' if she was raped, else why would she have even told him?

From the scenario she describes she's definitely a victim deserving of the benefit of the doubt, and mocking her is despicable in my view. However at the same time she may very well be a victim of those who're trying to conflate the second scenario with the first as it causes many to think girls and women are being encouraged to make accusations on that basis. In this case it seems to me the scenario she describes and the context of the encounter and the aftermath suggests a friendly girl who was abused not just by the rapist, but by her 'friends' and the creep she called an (ex) boyfriend.

That's probably what she's angry about, and why she's marching, to change that attitude, the one of her social group, and what it seems to me you are assuming.

Parking garage dude. Anything is possible, but with no further information one thing is quite a bit more probable.
 
Last edited:
i agree. and it has been discussed in this thread before. it seems to me novella is trying very hard at avoiding the issue of rebecca watson,s rather extreme views and style.

i think it would be a good opportunity for the show to face this head on, from a constructive starting point. see if they can discuss their obvious differences of opinion in a rational way.

lxxx

I predict, I predict...Watson would see this as a direct attack on her and react badly.
 
If by original picture you mean the one on the left, the one that says:

'My rapist doesn't know he's a rapist. You taught him it wasn't his fault, I drank too much, flirted and my shorts. Too short. I was asking for it. He left me in a parking garage staircase. My (ex) boyfriend spit in my face, he called me a slut, he called me a whore. I deserved it. My friends gave me dirty looks. They called me trash, not realizing it could have been them. This culture, my culture, your culture, told them, told me, this is my fault. And I suffered. But my rapist doesn't know he's a rapist.'

It reads to me like she is saying she was out with a guy she didn't plan on having sex with and was raped, (i.e. taken against her expressed wishes) and other people thought the fact she was drunk, flirted, and had short shorts somehow excused the guy.

I suspect she probably hung out with the wrong kind of people, the two boys sound like a rapist and a jackass, she doesn't have very nice friends either.

That's hell and gone from someone who goes out, gets drunk with a guy, encourages and then consents to the sex, then wakes up and regrets the whole thing, and blames him for having sex when they were both drunk and thinks he's a rapist.

She may have used poor judgement, she may have gone out drinking and ended up alone with this guy she flirted with, but the scenario she describes suggests she means against her will at the time as that's what being left in the parking garage staircase implies. Seriously, what kind of guy would have sex with her there and not give her a ride home/walk with her? It suggests she was lured there and something awful was part of the agenda, especially the fact she told her 'friends' and (ex) boyfriend about the crime.

She wasn't married to this clown, that's hardly unfaithful, and some girls like to flirt and show off, call them teases if you wish, but that's no license to rape them either, nor assume she was 'unfaithful' if she was raped, else why would she have even told him?

From the scenario she describes she's definitely a victim deserving of the benefit of the doubt, and mocking her is despicable in my view. However at the same time she may very well be a victim of those who're trying to conflate the second scenario with the first as it causes many to think girls and women are being encouraged to make accusations on that basis. In this case it seems to me the scenario she describes and the context of the encounter and the aftermath suggests a friendly girl who was abused not just by the rapist, but by her 'friends' and the creep she called an (ex) boyfriend.

That's probably what she's angry about, and why she's marching, to change that attitude, the one of her social group, and what it seems to me you are assuming.

Parking garage dude. Anything is possible, but with no further information one thing is quite a bit more probable.


I just noticed I failed to correctly 'transcribe' her sign, and made the ridiculous mistake of having it say she didn't know she was a rapist, when in fact she meant him, of course. Corrected in bold above.
 
Well, I notice that TAM 2013 features this:

Two live tapings of Skeptics Guide to the Universe, featuring Dr. Steve Novella, Jay Novella, Bob Novella, and Evan Bernstein.

It was the same last year. George Hrab sat in on one of the sessions and was a lot better than RW would likely have been.

I agree that probably her days on the SGU are numbered. She probably thinks she's outgrown them.
 
Well, I notice that TAM 2013 features this:

Two live tapings of Skeptics Guide to the Universe, featuring Dr. Steve Novella, Jay Novella, Bob Novella, and Evan Bernstein.
Wish to hell Perry were on that list.

 
Update on Samsa, ceepolk delivered this stunning rebuttal:

How is this something other than sophistry?

And that is decidedly *not* an invitation to sophistrysplain me

in the least

actually how has this been anything other than 'splaining and debate club abstraction?

First of all, how does "sophistrysplain" even fit in with their definition of what 'splaining is? Is she just saying "don't try to deny the accusation I am throwing at you"?

Secondly, they seem to have an irrational fear of "debate clubs", which they label any disagreement with party policy as.

And the thread has been locked for a week, which is not as bad as I would have thought.
 
Well, we knew it was just a question of time TB, and tonight the Samsa saga ended. I doubt they will bring it back, and think today's exchanges are really worth reading. The link below is to quint's last reply there and before Setar returns. Fortunately quint can still continue this discussion here, and I for one am looking forward to reading his interpretation of what went down there today.

http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=70973&sid=2016728812cb69dae52d40c0c98a68f7#p70973
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom