Atheism Plus/Free Thought Blogs (FTB)

Status
Not open for further replies.
http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyng...to-go-in-there/comment-page-1/#comment-594730

Is it just me or is this essentially saying that something offensive is not offensive if you know the person saying it and their intent? How often do they bother on his blog to actually check with the author of something they don't agree with to see if they're actually being sarcastic or lampooning something rather than just calling them MRA/misogynist?

Maybe it is just me but I always thought if your joke can't stand on its own...if you have to explain why it isn't racist or sexist...then it probably is racist or sexist.
 
Diogenes said:
http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyng...to-go-in-there/comment-page-1/#comment-594730

Is it just me or is this essentially saying that something offensive is not offensive if you know the person saying it and their intent? How often do they bother on his blog to actually check with the author of something they don't agree with to see if they're actually being sarcastic or lampooning something rather than just calling them MRA/misogynist?

Maybe it is just me but I always thought if your joke can't stand on its own...if you have to explain why it isn't racist or sexist...then it probably is racist or sexist.
Click to expand...

I'd say that there's a case to be made for humourous satire not being the same as the thing that it's satirising, although where the line is is highly subjective. However, that defence certainly doen't jibe with the A+ mantra of "intent is not magic". Either intent counts or it doesn't.
 
adamwho said:
You are surprised that a bunch of yes-men are not calling out their leader? Are you sure that you are an Aplusser?
Click to expand...

Well it took about 90 comments before someone called them out on the Michelle Bachmann hotdog jokes.

The Central Scrutinizer said:
I hope you meant to say "differently abled". Hater.

Stop fatsplaining.
Click to expand...

How do you know he isn't transabled or transfat huh ****-lord?

ETA: Huh, the term I jokingly used isn't censored by the autocensor.
 
Last edited:
Squeegee Beckenheim said:
I'd say that there's a case to be made for humourous satire not being the same as the thing that it's satirising, although where the line is is highly subjective. However, that defence certainly doen't jibe with the A+ mantra of "intent is not magic". Either intent counts or it doesn't.
Click to expand...

I agree, though it is clear in all that, at least to me, that PZ is saying Christians are both racist xenophobes and Nazis at the same time (with his Cabaret song post). That appears to have had been his intent and is consistent with how he likes to post. Way back when I started reading his stuff I found it kinda funny but when that's a single note...ad hominem attacks on his own blog where public shaming is practiced...and a fully-grown adult it stinks of irrational fanaticism that is no better than the "atheists are going to burn in hell" kind of rhetoric from the Baptists that I knew once upon a by.

Even as satire, though, I don't see how that could completely obviate its offensive quality. Isn't the "humor" dependent on its inherent offense? Would it be different if it was a dumb blonde joke used in a satirical context to cast all of Christianity as misogynists?
 
kmortis said:
So, would that mean that those of us who acknowledge our fatness are cisfat?

I'm so confused...
Click to expand...

I wouldn't think so since "transfat" people are thin people who identify as fat people. Like how "transabled" is a normal person who identifies as someone with a disability, or "transethnic" is someone coming up with a term that allows them to get away with cultural appropriation while decrying the cultural appropriation of others.

Also, I don't think "transfat" is an actual thing.
 
Wildy said:
I wouldn't think so since "transfat" people are thin people who identify as fat people. Like how "transabled" is a normal person who identifies as someone with a disability, or "transethnic" is someone coming up with a term that allows them to get away with cultural appropriation while decrying the cultural appropriation of others.

Also, I don't think "transfat" is an actual thing.
Click to expand...

But, if cisgendered is someone who doesn't identify with the gender opposite their biology; wouldn't cisfat be a fat person who identifies as fat?

And stop problemsplaing...?

I'm never going to get the hang of this, am I?
 
Diogenes said:
Even as satire, though, I don't see how that could completely obviate its offensive quality. Isn't the "humor" dependent on its inherent offense? Would it be different if it was a dumb blonde joke used in a satirical context to cast all of Christianity as misogynists?
Click to expand...

Agreed. Using such a slur even in that context is problematic, especially when it's done by a white person like PZ. The critique is not that PZ is endorsing the slur, but that his use of the slur - even in criticizing it - is harmful.
 
kmortis said:
But, if cisgendered is someone who doesn't identify with the gender opposite their biology; wouldn't cisfat be a fat person who identifies as fat?
Click to expand...

Now that I think about it I think you might be right there.

And stop problemsplaing...?
Click to expand...

I don't know what problemsplaing is.

I'm never going to get the hang of this, am I?
Click to expand...

I suggest reading r/TumblrInAction to see some parody of this stuff. Also they have a discussion about transfat people.
 
At some point we are in danger of becoming what we criticize. A+ aside, there exists sincere researchers, clinicians and scientists in general who deal with sexual orientation and sexual identity. No one is demanding that anyone adopt the esoteric language typical for those who are actually in the field. But that some have adopted the vernacular isn't cause to start screaming PC. These are real words with real function and utility to those in the field.

I don't think we help our case by attacking real words used by real researchers, clinicians, therapists and scientists in general. I'm not talking "mansplaning" or anything like that. I'm talking about cisgendered. Personally I'm not offended but I think we do ourselves a disservice by belittling the adopted terms of those in the field of gender studies.
 
Last edited:
RandFan said:
At some point we are in danger of becoming what we criticize. A+ aside, there exists sincere researchers, clinicians and scientists in general who deal with sexual orientation and sexual identity. No one is demanding that anyone adopt the esoteric language typical for those who are actually in the field. But that some have adopted the vernacular isn't cause to start screaming PC. These are real words with real function and utility to those in the field.

I don't think we help our case by attacking real words used by real researchers, clinicians, therapists and scientists in general. I'm not talking "mansplaning" or anything like that. I'm talking about cisgendered. Personally I'm not offended but I think we do ourselves a disservice by belittling the adopted terms of those in the field of gender studies.
Click to expand...

I'm not belittling the terms. I'm belittling the ninnies at A+ who use them as a club to beat their intellectual foes on the heads. I'm ridiculing those who have co-opted the terms for some ego trip.
 
kmortis said:
I'm not belittling the terms. I'm belittling the ninnies at A+ who use them as a club to beat their intellectual foes on the heads. I'm ridiculing those who have co-opted the terms for some ego trip.
Click to expand...
Thanks. Fair enough.
 
RandFan said:
At some point we are in danger of becoming what we criticize. A+ aside, there exists sincere researchers, clinicians and scientists in general who deal with sexual orientation and sexual identity. No one is demanding that anyone adopt the esoteric language typical for those who are actually in the field. But that some have adopted the vernacular isn't cause to start screaming PC. These are real words with real function and utility to those in the field.

I don't think we help our case by attacking real words used by real researchers, clinicians, therapists and scientists in general. I'm not talking "mansplaning" or anything like that. I'm talking about cisgendered. Personally I'm not offended but I think we do ourselves a disservice by belittling the adopted terms of those in the field of gender studies.
Click to expand...

Absolutely. Cisgendered is a perfectly valid and useful term in many contexts. Hell, I can imagine situations where the "sociological definition" of racism could be useful. The problem isn't "SJ words", it's the blunt and (dare I say it) problematic ways they've co-opted words from their intended use.
 
theprestige said:
Iain Banks has a novel which features a solipsist gang. Or guerrilla army. Or something like that. Anyway, their leader's authority is based on the general conviction that he is currently the strongest fragment of the gang's collective personality. He occasionally has to fight off coup attempts from gang members who believe their own will is stronger. His (their?) motivation for helping the protagonist is the conviction that she represents some as-yet unresolved psychological conflict, and aiding her on her quest will ultimately improve them all.
Click to expand...


I think you will find that it was written by Iain M Banks, not Iain Banks...

:p
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom