Saturday, January 12, 2013

SkepChick bully

Will R says, essentially, "Hey guys, FreeThoughtBlogs people aren't bullies!"

Essentially calling someone a bully when you haven't truly been bullied like Will has cheapens the word.

It ends with this
So how about you stop acting like high school students and start acting like the rational adults you claim to be? Get on with the engagement of ideas and the critical thinking and enough with the personal attacks.
Makes sense.

So why do people think SkepChick and FreeThoughtBlogs are bullies?

As quickly as possible:
  1. The Dawkins boycott nonsense
  2. The "I'm unsafe at your conference" messaging
  3. Getting lumped in with "rape threats" years after the fact
    • In an article for Slate magazine, the tag line reads:
      "I spoke out about sexual harassment among atheists and scientists. Then came the rape threats."
      The only identified male in the article wrote the following:
      "If I run into Rebecca Watson in an elevator at #TAM9 next week I'm totally copping a feel"
      Sexist joke? Sure. Only named subject about an article about 'rape threats'?  Perhaps a bit too much.
  4. Organized movements for removal of people they don't like from positions of authority
    • The Justin Vacula petition
    • What he did do that was shady - posted an address on an online forum. However public it might have been already, it's a lame thing to do.
    • What they'll tell you he did - wrote some article for a men's rights organization that they claim is an identified "hate group" - which is really a legally meaningless term.
  5. Goading people into responding, and then labeling the lot of them rapists
    • First step is tweeting: 
      If you have sex w/ someone who is drunk, they are unable to consent & that is rape. 
      Apparently to be a "SkepChick" is to believe that everybody is stone cold sober when they make the next generation.
      Second step? Bundling up all the responses and creating an article titled:
      "Twitter Users Sad To Hear They May Be Rapists"
       Yeah. Very classy.
  6. Vacuous reviews of things you fail to identify as feminist issues
    • In a repost of Shermer covering an article about voice tones affect our choices, Ophelia comments as such:
      Do you see what I’m getting at, Dr Shermer? I’m sure you do, now that I’ve pointed it out. But do you see its relevance to you, yourself? That I’m not so confident about. Probably because I’m a woman, and I have a higherpitched voice.
      The blog citing the article is a bunch of bullshit half-hearted dialogue mixed in with us-vs-them identity politics. (e.g. "Oh, nice research there Shermer. Now do you realize how hard it is to be me?!?!?") 
  7.  Comparisons to Nazism and mass murders
    @DaylightAtheism 3 Jan         
    But there's no reason to blame this on sexism, amirite fellas? 
    Title of the article is "Nazi Past, Female Phobia Afflict Vienna Philharmonic" - apparently those that manage an old boys club with ties to fascism are just the same sorts of people that ask girls out on elevators or manage skeptics conferences.

    Then there is PZ's comparison to the Montreal massacre. How could this comparison be defended?
So, does this qualify as bullying?
Here we have a group of people, hell bent on the destruction of the personal and professional lives of people that disagree with them.

It's almost like labeling people misogynists when they don't actually hate women cheapens the word.

Choose one - you can either be called fat and gay on a school playground, or you can be called a massacre-supporting misogynist on a professor's public blog read by thousands of "adults".

What will it be?

What qualifies as bullying?

No comments:

Post a Comment