Atheism Plus/Free Thought Blogs (FTB)

[Axiom_Blade]

If I were on the fence regarding their views, talking to any of the social justice people on Reddit or A+ would shove me off that fence, onto the Anti side, full force. All this talk about "allies" is nonsense. They just want to make people angry.

Making people angry doesn't help.

In college, I knew somebody who was rabidly gender feminist. Like, A+ squared. We got into some pretty heated arguments. She even physically threatened me once. Not convincing.
However, I came to agree with some of her views later, after being presented with good arguments, that were not just angry ranting.

A+ is what you get when people aren't interested in convincing anybody; they just want to feel self-righteous.

 

[Stout]

That definition (Racism = Prejudice + Power) comes out of Critical Race Theory, which has pretty much taken over large swaths of sociology and ethnic relations studies. Everyone with a white skin is both privileged and a racist. Anyone with any other version of skin is a victim, and entitled (in fact, obligated) to be furious about it. There is also the feminist version, in which possession of a penis substitutes for possession of white skin. At the cost of (yet again) appearing to self-promote blatantly, I've recently written about this on Skeptic Ink: http://www.skepticink.com/lateraltruth/2013/03/08/chuck-your-privilege/

A side-note: I've lived quite a bit of my life abroad, in countries with nonwhite majorities, and it's a big, messy world. The sort of analysis found in CRT is outrageously ethnocentric, based on a certain reading of the North American past; and I see the attempt to generalize it to the rest of the world as a kind of postcolonial neocolonialism.

Great article, thanks for that.

I like your skyscraper/collection of buildings analogy as well as the imaginary knapsack statement.

I totally agree, the world is messy and it would do these SJWs a world of good to spend some time in a genuine third world country.

 

[qwints]

http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=4127

Rather than making a few keystrokes and signing up (anonymously) to smack down some of the horrid misogynistic comments and victim blaming prejudice, the A+ "Social Justice in Action" solution is to complain to each of your five good buddies in your safe cubbie hole.

Good point. While those actions aren't exclusive, I neither responded to those comments nor called for others to do so.

What "moral principle"? That people can be manipulated? That's not morality, that's marketing.

Whatever issue is being discussed. As I explained a while ago, I'm a sentimentalist, and I think you come to your ethical beliefs through thinking about your moral intuitions a.k.a your emotional reactions. I don't believe you can logically derive ethics from first principles as someone like Kant believed.

you can appeal to emotions and still make a logical argument. In fact, I think that an argument that appeals on both levels is often the most persuasive argument you can make.

Sure. Both are necessary because they do different things. In a discussion where everyone agrees on the fundamental ethical principles at play (the "goals"), then it's possible to have a discussion that solely involves facts and logical reasoning get somewhere. If not, then emotion comes into play.

you have to constantly be on guard to make sure your emotions dont skew your opinions on the subject at hand imo.

I fundamentally disagree - emotions should determine your value judgments. I do agree, however, that one should be careful to avoid wishful thinking.

If I were on the fence regarding their views, talking to any of the social justice people on Reddit or A+ would shove me off that fence, onto the Anti side, full force.

Radical backlash arguments are poisonous nonsense.

 

[RebeccaBradley]

All wrapped up in a neat package

That thread is - astonishing. And another noob apparently bites the dust. But now I am consumed with curiosity. What does Setar's avatar mean?

 

[Piscivore]

I'm not a gamer, so I'm not familiar with a lot of these issues. However, its pretty easy to see the female character portrayal issue (hell, watch "Wreck It Ralph" and see what they made Jane Lynch look like...).

But how do you have an openly homosexual character in a game, unless its a game with overt sexual content? I guess, in simpler terms, how can you tell Mario and Luigi aren't gay?

http://masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/Steve_Cortez

 

[Axiom_Blade]

Radical backlash arguments are poisonous nonsense.

Because human beings are not automatons, the tone argument is valid. For most people, you can convince them better by speaking clearly and calmly, than by getting in their face and screaming at them. If you have evidence to the contrary, please let me know.

You might not get backlash, but you certainly won't be winning anybody to your side.

 

[Stout]

That thread is - astonishing. And another noob apparently bites the dust. But now I am consumed with curiosity. What does Setar's avatar mean?

Setar's avatar is the genderqueer flag.

 

[qwints]

That thread is - astonishing. And another noob apparently bites the dust. But now I am consumed with curiosity. What does Setar's avatar mean?

Genderqueer^WP

 

[Mr. Scott]

From Ceepolk saying not to address "the religion of brown people" and also saying that she does not believe in Atheism

Yea, that idea of giving brown people a free pass on religion also made my face melt. How do they reconcile that with gay rights? Google image "muslim gay hangings" for an appeal to emotions that will highlight the inconsistency. Even though A+ is apparently without a leader, I think ceepolk is their Darth Vader, and her vendetta against whites makes me wonder if she'd target them for genocide if she had the opportunity. Why someone who's not interested in Atheism is an alpha at Atheism Plus is mysterious to me. Luckily, she appears to be a bit of a shut-in who does little more than poison a few tiny nooks of the Internet.

nook n. A small corner, alcove, or recess, especially one in a large room.

 

[Dani]

I fundamentally disagree - emotions should determine your value judgments. I do agree, however, that one should be careful to avoid wishful thinking.

This is contradictory. If emotions should determine our value judgments, then we should not avoid wishful thinking.

Edit: I got it wrong. I understand what you mean, although I disagree. Myriad explained it better with the "emo a emo" response.

 

[ThatSoundAgain]

Why would such a project need to be in the blockbuster league when it could be done in the independent film class and succeed on the merits that drove the genesis of the project in the first place?

IOW why not give the consumers the opportunity to vote with their dollars as a wake up call to the established industry ?

Some already do that - I can think of two decidedly queer and gender-focused developers offhand, Auntie Pixelante and Christine Love. There are many talented female developers and academics out there, no question.

But those two and others are decidedly indie and don't have the exposure to make a dent in the mainstream. The millions who play only tier-one AAA games like Call Of Duty or Halo, you know the games that are advertised on TV? They'll never know about obscure indie stuff, and that's why it should always be allowed to talk about any problems you see. That way, the big games that actually are progressive could receive the dollar vote you speak of.

Let me just drop a few links to feminist pop-culture critique done right, as I see it. These are sites that calls out sexism with bad examples or shows examples of how it should be done - without masking the fact that the critique is out of a general love of that same pop culture:

Escher girls
Boobs don't work that way
Fat, ugly or slutty
Women fighters in reasonable armor

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

The Hollywood crap came later in his career, after he left the Army. His early recordings were a lot closer to the black music it was derived from, though even that was sanitised to some extent, but it was music that he loved. Get hold of the Sun Sessions, if you haven't already heard them. The unfortunate fact is that American society at the time did not allow for black performers to succeed in the mainstream. Elvis succeeded, initially, because he sounded black but was white.

His credentials were in order. He wasn't just ripping off black music to make a buck, he respected it and loved it deeply.

 

[ThatSoundAgain]

http://masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/Steve_Cortez

Well, "Gay Tony" was the title character of an expansion to one of the Grand Theft Auto games. Red Dead Redemption also had some gay innuendo, but that was more ... heavy handed and stereotyping to my eyes.

just like you can have a movie or novel with gay characters in them without any explicit sex scenes - so can games.

Also, on the topic of Wreck It Ralph and Jane Lynch. I haven't seen the movie, but if I got the right impression it's actually meant to be satirical. If the filmmakers are really going for lampshading the blatant sexualization of female characters, then she looks about right.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Yea, that idea of giving brown people a free pass on religion also made my face melt. How do they reconcile that with gay rights? Google image "muslim gay hangings" for an appeal to emotions that will highlight the inconsistency. Even though A+ is apparently without a leader, I think ceepolk is their Darth Vader, and her vendetta against whites makes me wonder if she'd target them for genocide if she had the opportunity. Why someone who's not interested in Atheism is an alpha at Atheism Plus is mysterious to me. Luckily, she appears to be a bit of a shut-in who does little more than poison a few tiny nooks of the Internet.

This is what happens to leaderless movements. It's similar to the Occupy movement. When you allow any idiot to speak for you, any idiot will.

 

[recursive prophet]

"CRT, along with its feminist and other counterparts, constitute an ideology that erects obstacles between people who might otherwise work together. This ideology assigns collective guilt, with no hope of absolution. It slaps pejorative labels—racist and sexist—on great segments of the population on the grounds of the skin colour and genitals they happened to be born with, and aims to radicalize other segments into a state of perpetual victimhood. It holds cheap the observable progress of the last half-century. As an ideology, it is as racist and sexist as any other we have suffered from in the long, painful history of our species. It is not helping."

Very well put, Rebecca. Not sure what really could help though, tbh. No question certain prejudices are harbored by all of us on some level, and select groups have benefited greatly from the victimhood of others. So strange all the circles. Victims emulating the oppressors, justified by their earlier oppression. The 'he started it' meme engenders tantrums, in a realm where emotion trumps evidence and personal experience substitutes for logic.

Happy Birthday Zoot!

 

[recursive prophet]

All wrapped up in a neat package

That thread is - astonishing. And another noob apparently bites the dust. But now I am consumed with curiosity. What does Setar's avatar mean?

LOL, yeah, a noob who signed on October 4th on a site started in August a little over a month earlier. So I had a good laugh when setar said "you're new here."

This thread really is a prime example of the kind of madness that prevails at A+. Now that Chris has humbly apologized and bowed out they will be charitable towards him and focus their venom on mood2 if she doesn't follow his lead and stfu. I really hope qwint or Apos will try and defend ceepolk and setar's arguments itt. C'mon guys! Lets be havin ya!

 

[H'ethetheth]

That definition (Racism = Prejudice + Power) comes out of Critical Race Theory, which has pretty much taken over large swaths of sociology and ethnic relations studies. Everyone with a white skin is both privileged and a racist. Anyone with any other version of skin is a victim, and entitled (in fact, obligated) to be furious about it. There is also the feminist version, in which possession of a penis substitutes for possession of white skin. At the cost of (yet again) appearing to self-promote blatantly, I've recently written about this on Skeptic Ink: http://www.skepticink.com/lateraltruth/2013/03/08/chuck-your-privilege/

A side-note: I've lived quite a bit of my life abroad, in countries with nonwhite majorities, and it's a big, messy world. The sort of analysis found in CRT is outrageously ethnocentric, based on a certain reading of the North American past; and I see the attempt to generalize it to the rest of the world as a kind of postcolonial neocolonialism.

Nice article.

 

[WillyWonka]

This is what happens to leaderless movements. It's similar to the Occupy movement. When you allow any idiot to speak for you, any idiot will.

And this what happened here in Canada. In my city, the Occupy Movement's most important issue that was discussed was the 9/11 conspiracy. Not much a Canadian issue.

 

[Tsukasa Buddha]

http://masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/Steve_Cortez

That's an example of how not to do it, IMO. The bulk of his character was pretty much him crying about his previous gay marriage and gay gay gay. He was an obvious attempt to placate fans.

 

[bouch]

Well, "Gay Tony" was the title character of an expansion to one of the Grand Theft Auto games. Red Dead Redemption also had some gay innuendo, but that was more ... heavy handed and stereotyping to my eyes.

just like you can have a movie or novel with gay characters in them without any explicit sex scenes - so can games.

Also, on the topic of Wreck It Ralph and Jane Lynch. I haven't seen the movie, but if I got the right impression it's actually meant to be satirical. If the filmmakers are really going for lampshading the blatant sexualization of female characters, then she looks about right.

OK. fair enough. Like I said, I'm not a gamer, so I was unaware that characters had back-stories. (heck, I was unaware that there were recurring characters with names)

And as for Wreck It Ralph, I'll believe satirical. But, that was also kinda my point, there was a pretty strong "stereotype" for them to make a joke out of it.