(no subject)
I've made many abstract statements in the past about why I oppose soft sciences, particularly feminism's evil bizarro double, radical feminism. I think I can finally end that string of posts with this one, because as luck would have it I have stumbled upon an absolutely picture perfect example of what's wrong with radfems.
In the recent drama within the atheist movement dubbed "Elevatorgate", Richard Dawkins was revealed to be a villainous figure when he belittled the problems faced by Rebecca Watson, citing other problems as being much greater. The fallacy here is that the presence of greater problems does not mean that smaller problems can be treated as though they were non-existent. This is something conservatives often do: "How come we're worried about equal rights when the economy's doing so poorly?" It's a rhetorical question, really, but the answer is quite different from what those conservatives expect: Because justice demands that we do our best to solve all of the problems, not just the big ones. There will always be big problems, and if we let the little problems linger until all the big ones are solved, the end result will be that we've held on to solvable problems for far longer than we needed to.
One would think that someone who was on the side of feminism in Elevatorgate would not fall into the same fallacy that Dawkins and the conservatives have. But as hypocrisy is such a hallmark of radical belief, it does not particularly surprise me to see a radical feminist acting as though any problems that are lesser than those faced by women are not problems at all. The particular subject here even goes a step farther, acting as though even when non-women face the same problems women do, it is somehow not an issue.
It begins with a post* on Pharyngula wherein PZ Myers notes that the gaming community has a considerable segment of sexists jerks much like what has been seen in the atheist community. Some gamers take issue with this, as there is already a considerable stigma against gamers and the last thing they need is for a few vocal sexists getting all the attention and dragging the reputation of the community down further. Now, I'm in favor of pointing out evil wherever it lurks, but I'd not be so keen on replying to the gamers like Ms Daisy Cutter did:
"Oh, bullshit. I'm tired of self-pitying white geek men trotting out this nonsense when they're called on their privilege. Wake me up when gamers are discriminated against in the job or housing market, at higher risk of rape and other forms of violence than other people, and railed against in American pulpits."
Now, if you're a gamer and have been paying attention to gamers' place in society, you can probably cite at least one example of each of those points. Silent Service certainly can. Here's his response:
"Exactly right Ms. Daisy Cutter. Nobody ever tried to kick my ass for being a nerd or a geek nor did anybody ever try to force me to do something sexual in the locker room just to prove that they’re more man than I am… oh wait.
I can see the point of getting pissy about yet another self-pitying white geek because there’s always some idiot with white privilege claiming discrimination but be honest; you do not know what somebody else has been through. People can be cruel, bigotry is bigotry, and men can be raped. Guess which guys are most likely to suffer that indignity? Skinny little geeks (color don’t matter much here). Your little spat is just about as useful as the one some people use to claim that the gays have tried to co-opt Dr. King’s legacy. So tell me, how do you feel about a bisexual male atheist that happens to be white, is from a protestant family, and served in the military? Is any of the crap I went through just bullshit from another privileged white male in America?
I wish everybody in the secular movement would get off their fucking high horse and quit trying to prove that they were discriminated against more than anybody else. Bigotry is bigotry and abuse is abuse. It is all wrong. I know full fucking well that I can hide in the white protestant privileged world by just shutting my mouth and playing along at their game; I don’t want to and that does not mean that somebody has not been discriminated against or treated like shit when somebody finds out who or what they are and what they like to do. Isn’t equality about everybody being treated as an equal; for being judged on the quality of their actions, not for hiding who they are so that they can be one of the white protestant privileged men or kissing up so they can fit in with the hip crowd? What do you want people to do, get back in the closet and shut up? No way. Geek, nerd, or gay; it doesn’t matter. We are tired of living in the closet and acting in the appropriate manner to make our family and friends happy. I sure as hell am not going to shut up to make some martyr on the internet happy about how they are the most persecuted minority on Earth.
We are all equal or none of us are equal."
I really didn't think anyone could argue against that when I first read it, but lo and behold, Ms Daisy Cutter jumps back into it:
"Shorter Silent Service: 'What about the menz?!'
I find it really rich that such geeks complain bitterly about the abuse they endured in high school - as if they're the only ones who did - then blithely either dish it out to actual oppressed groups or ignore/justify it when they see their fellow geeks doing the same."
The hypocrisy really hurts. She's mad that Silent Service is acting like geek men are the only ones who have problems. But that's not what he said, he said that geek men *also* have problems, which is different. MDC gives herself the authority to determine which groups are "actually" oppressed, and lashes out at anyone outside those groups who comes forward with stories of abuse. In doing so, she is the one speaking as if her group is the only one enduring abuse--the very thing she accuses Silent Service of doing.
It's really worse than that though. In this specific case, Silent Service endured the horrible injustice of rape(or at least came very close to it; his post is somewhat vague). And yet, MDC still insists that his problems are not really problems. It's a bizarre role reversal: The feminist telling the man that rape is not a problem. MDC has made the argument that rape is okay as long as the victim has a penis. Congratulations: I hate you.
*This one, but I'd not recommend reading through all 600+ comments: http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2011/07/it_could_be_worse_part_ii.php
In the recent drama within the atheist movement dubbed "Elevatorgate", Richard Dawkins was revealed to be a villainous figure when he belittled the problems faced by Rebecca Watson, citing other problems as being much greater. The fallacy here is that the presence of greater problems does not mean that smaller problems can be treated as though they were non-existent. This is something conservatives often do: "How come we're worried about equal rights when the economy's doing so poorly?" It's a rhetorical question, really, but the answer is quite different from what those conservatives expect: Because justice demands that we do our best to solve all of the problems, not just the big ones. There will always be big problems, and if we let the little problems linger until all the big ones are solved, the end result will be that we've held on to solvable problems for far longer than we needed to.
One would think that someone who was on the side of feminism in Elevatorgate would not fall into the same fallacy that Dawkins and the conservatives have. But as hypocrisy is such a hallmark of radical belief, it does not particularly surprise me to see a radical feminist acting as though any problems that are lesser than those faced by women are not problems at all. The particular subject here even goes a step farther, acting as though even when non-women face the same problems women do, it is somehow not an issue.
It begins with a post* on Pharyngula wherein PZ Myers notes that the gaming community has a considerable segment of sexists jerks much like what has been seen in the atheist community. Some gamers take issue with this, as there is already a considerable stigma against gamers and the last thing they need is for a few vocal sexists getting all the attention and dragging the reputation of the community down further. Now, I'm in favor of pointing out evil wherever it lurks, but I'd not be so keen on replying to the gamers like Ms Daisy Cutter did:
"Oh, bullshit. I'm tired of self-pitying white geek men trotting out this nonsense when they're called on their privilege. Wake me up when gamers are discriminated against in the job or housing market, at higher risk of rape and other forms of violence than other people, and railed against in American pulpits."
Now, if you're a gamer and have been paying attention to gamers' place in society, you can probably cite at least one example of each of those points. Silent Service certainly can. Here's his response:
"Exactly right Ms. Daisy Cutter. Nobody ever tried to kick my ass for being a nerd or a geek nor did anybody ever try to force me to do something sexual in the locker room just to prove that they’re more man than I am… oh wait.
I can see the point of getting pissy about yet another self-pitying white geek because there’s always some idiot with white privilege claiming discrimination but be honest; you do not know what somebody else has been through. People can be cruel, bigotry is bigotry, and men can be raped. Guess which guys are most likely to suffer that indignity? Skinny little geeks (color don’t matter much here). Your little spat is just about as useful as the one some people use to claim that the gays have tried to co-opt Dr. King’s legacy. So tell me, how do you feel about a bisexual male atheist that happens to be white, is from a protestant family, and served in the military? Is any of the crap I went through just bullshit from another privileged white male in America?
I wish everybody in the secular movement would get off their fucking high horse and quit trying to prove that they were discriminated against more than anybody else. Bigotry is bigotry and abuse is abuse. It is all wrong. I know full fucking well that I can hide in the white protestant privileged world by just shutting my mouth and playing along at their game; I don’t want to and that does not mean that somebody has not been discriminated against or treated like shit when somebody finds out who or what they are and what they like to do. Isn’t equality about everybody being treated as an equal; for being judged on the quality of their actions, not for hiding who they are so that they can be one of the white protestant privileged men or kissing up so they can fit in with the hip crowd? What do you want people to do, get back in the closet and shut up? No way. Geek, nerd, or gay; it doesn’t matter. We are tired of living in the closet and acting in the appropriate manner to make our family and friends happy. I sure as hell am not going to shut up to make some martyr on the internet happy about how they are the most persecuted minority on Earth.
We are all equal or none of us are equal."
I really didn't think anyone could argue against that when I first read it, but lo and behold, Ms Daisy Cutter jumps back into it:
"Shorter Silent Service: 'What about the menz?!'
I find it really rich that such geeks complain bitterly about the abuse they endured in high school - as if they're the only ones who did - then blithely either dish it out to actual oppressed groups or ignore/justify it when they see their fellow geeks doing the same."
The hypocrisy really hurts. She's mad that Silent Service is acting like geek men are the only ones who have problems. But that's not what he said, he said that geek men *also* have problems, which is different. MDC gives herself the authority to determine which groups are "actually" oppressed, and lashes out at anyone outside those groups who comes forward with stories of abuse. In doing so, she is the one speaking as if her group is the only one enduring abuse--the very thing she accuses Silent Service of doing.
It's really worse than that though. In this specific case, Silent Service endured the horrible injustice of rape(or at least came very close to it; his post is somewhat vague). And yet, MDC still insists that his problems are not really problems. It's a bizarre role reversal: The feminist telling the man that rape is not a problem. MDC has made the argument that rape is okay as long as the victim has a penis. Congratulations: I hate you.
*This one, but I'd not recommend reading through all 600+ comments: http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2011/07/it_could_be_worse_part_ii.php