|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 08/12/2012 : 21:27:35 [Permalink]
|
Well, it appears that Thunderf00t's recent activities have prompted not one but at least two people to basically say, "Fuck the Skeptic/Atheist Movements." If the Movements are going to include a lot of people who think that social-justice issues like sexism and racism shouldn't be a major focus (and they should be, since so many myths about those issues abound, even within the Movements), then the Movements aren't worth their efforts.
Ophelia Benson, for one (see first comment at the first link), is not going to let "the privilege gang having atheism though." And I think that's really the best idea (as opposed to starting a new movement for much the same goals).
Kil, you and I have generally agreed that there shouldn't be ideological "litmus tests" for inclusion in the Skeptical Movement (at least), in which we shouldn't just exclude someone from participation if they just have non-normative ideas about religion or what-have-you. But I think that "being a complete asshole" should get one shunned from our groups. If one of our goals is inclusivity, then keeping the excluders (sexists, racists, cis-genderists, etc.) out needs to be a priority.
Nobody is so good at skepticism or atheism that we need to keep them in the Movements at all costs. And I would say that those who are sexists, racists or whatever aren't all that great at skepticism, anyway. At least not skepticism as applied to issues of ethics or morality.
Thunderf00t has demonstrated himself to be someone who nobody should look up to as a role model. Just like with other famous people, one huge scandal of his own making has the potential to effectively erase all the good he might have done previously, simply because the bad behavior is so fantastically bad. I mean, if he ever decided to register on SFN, I'd have to think long and hard about banning him immediately as a matter of principle. We pride ourselves on giving newcomers more than enough rope with which to hang themselves, but I think Thunderf00t has already done so at other venues (including his own blogs). Would we really feel the need to provide someone like him another thousand chances to show what a horribly unethical hypocrite he is?
In other, happier, news, I need to catch up on the "Speaking Out" series. Since the last installment, speaking out against hatred directed at women are:- Matt Dillahunty, President of the Atheist Community of Austin and host of The Atheist Experience,
- Jim Underdown, Executive Director of the Center for Inquiry Los Angeles,
- Michael Payton, National Director for the Centre for Inquiry, Canada,
- Michael Nugent, chair of Atheist Ireland,
- Dan Barker, co-president of the Freedom from Religion Foundation and co-host of Freethought Radio (and ex-minister),
- Carlos Alfredo Diaz, President of Atheist Alliance International, and
- Todd Stiefel, President and Founder of The Stiefel Freethought Foundation.
|
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
 |
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 08/12/2012 : 23:51:48 [Permalink]
|
To tell you the truth, until this whole thing happened, I never really gave Thunderf00t much thought. I still don't give much of a crap about him. Atheist activism was never my main cause, and that's where he dwells. I didn't care about his videos. I already know that I'm an atheist, and why.
But let me ask you this. If he did register here, like, oh... like we allow a holocaust denier to do, and we confronted his bullshit, what's the difference? If he believes things that are demonstrably false, why ban him before we ban him? |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 08/13/2012 : 00:21:39 [Permalink]
|
I'm glad any final decision would not be mine to make.
But it seems to me, his hypothetical presence here should be tolerated until he breaks SFN's rules. This is not a personal blog. We allow all the freedom that we can. We generally give people all the rope they want to hang themselves with.
We do indeed allow other people who are quite disagreeable to post, until such time as they violate our terms of service. One thing for sure, it would be crystal clear from the get-go that Thunderf00t's sexism and violations of privacy made him a pariah here from the start, assuming he were allowed to post. There are many pointed questions that Thunderf00t would be asked. I doubt he would enjoy his sojourn here. |
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
|
|
|
On fire for Christ
SFN Regular
Norway
1273 Posts |
Posted - 08/13/2012 : 02:13:49 [Permalink]
|
| so did she apologize for lying about him yet? |
 |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
 Posted - 08/13/2012 : 13:33:23 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by On fire for Christ
so did she apologize for lying about him yet? |
Do you have evidence that she lied about him? |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 08/13/2012 : 14:00:30 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Kil
To tell you the truth, until this whole thing happened, I never really gave Thunderf00t much thought. I still don't give much of a crap about him. Atheist activism was never my main cause, and that's where he dwells. I didn't care about his videos. I already know that I'm an atheist, and why. |
Well, no. Thunderf00t's "Why People Laugh at Creationists" series was widely lauded among skeptics. His atheist stuff came later.| But let me ask you this. If he did register here, like, oh... like we allow a holocaust denier to do, and we confronted his bullshit, what's the difference? If he believes things that are demonstrably false, why ban him before we ban him? |
Because most of the deniers we get here aren't already famous. We don't know if they're going to participate in an interesting discussion or even listen to reason. Thunderf00t's got a long and public history which must be factored into the equation over whether or not we tolerate his mere presence.
Take a more extreme example: if Fred Phelps registered here, I'd bounce him in a heartbeat. What could he possibly say on our forums that would compel us to provide him another virtual soap-box? Anything but, "I've seen the error of my ways," and there would be no benefit for us to let him use SFN to continue to spread his toxic ideas.
Thunderf00t is certainly no Fred Phelps, but that's why I'm only leaning towards pre-emptive booting. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 08/13/2012 : 15:23:52 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by On fire for Christ
so did she apologize for lying about him yet?
|
Did who apologize to whom for lying about what?
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 08/13/2012 : 15:49:59 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
Originally posted by Kil
To tell you the truth, until this whole thing happened, I never really gave Thunderf00t much thought. I still don't give much of a crap about him. Atheist activism was never my main cause, and that's where he dwells. I didn't care about his videos. I already know that I'm an atheist, and why. |
Well, no. Thunderf00t's "Why People Laugh at Creationists" series was widely lauded among skeptics. His atheist stuff came later. |
Well you know me. I am subscribed to "Why Evolution is True" and the NCSE and other channels that don't have such hostile titles.
 |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 08/13/2012 : 19:25:56 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by H. Humbert
Originally posted by On fire for Christ
so did she apologize for lying about him yet?
|
Did who apologize to whom for lying about what? |
Natalie Reed:...I was asked by someone what my opinion on Thunderf00t’s expulsion [from FtB] was, and I replied with my assessment that the issue wasn’t so much the content of his posts (as ugly and inflammatory as they may have been), but his extremely unprofessional conduct behind the scenes, which was creating a situation that was severely inhibiting our ability to operate as a cohesive, functional network. There was just really no real option.
Thunderf00t saw the tweet, and responded with accusations that I was a liar. Which still doesn’t really make much sense to me, because unless he believed I was deliberately misrepresenting my own perceptions and opinion, there’s no way my subjective interpretation of his behaviour as unprofessional, and my perceptions of what PZ and Ed’s motives were, could be a lie. He could disagree with me, sure. He could hold a different opinion. He could think my interpretation was grossly inaccurate. All of that is fine, and to be honest, what I’d expect (people rarely believe of themselves that they’re acting like assholes). But the accusation that I was lying was just weird.
This led to something really creepy and scary when Thunderf00t began threatening to publish the confidential contents of FTB’s private listserv, to “prove” that I’d been “lying” about his behaviour. When I reminded him of the ethical problems with this, and hinted at the real danger it poses to me, he laughed and suggested that his treatment by PZ and FTB as a whole justified any actions he wanted to take... |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 08/16/2012 : 23:56:14 [Permalink]
|
Absolutely horrific news: Surly Amy continues to be the target of harassment and worse. The stuff I'd written about that was going on at TAM 2012 was only the surface. I didn't know that one of her own grant recipients wanted nothing to do with her. And I didn't know about most of the post-TAM activity against her.
It's disgusting. And since much of it is from people who are claiming that Surly Amy (a TAM sponsor for years) wants to "destroy TAM," it's not a matter of "atheist activism" but instead is nothing less than Movement Skeptic vs. Movement Skeptic, for no other apparent reason than that one particular Movement Skeptic wants to see an end to the harassment of women within the Skeptical Movement.
Over in that hugely important Natalie Reed thread, commenter "Doubtthat" wrote about atheism:"Atheism" is really only meaningful in contrast to the social dominance of religion. This is why all other forms of non-belief–as in tooth fairies, Norse Gods, and unicorns–are nothing.
Atheism isn't an end, in itself, and it has no value beyond the social, economic, and political gains that can be made by abandoning primitive, irrational belief systems. If we're going to keep the primitive, irrational, regressive beliefs but just get rid of the dude in the sky, I see no real value to the "movement" either. I can't help but conclude that the above applies equally well to the Skeptic Movement. Many skeptics, after all, like to see themselves in the role of "protecting consumers" when they speak out against homeopathy or magnetic bracelets, and they like to see themselves as defenders of the First Amendment when they combat creationist curricula tampering.
But those are no less "social justice" issues than sexism or racism. The ideas that people should be armed with knowledge to protect themselves from fraud or that the government should protect people against would-be theocrats are moral issues that have exactly as much to do with academic skepticism as the ideas that brown people shouldn't be discriminated against or that women shouldn't be forced to just learn to cope with the sexism that is endemic to society.
Skepticism without a social, economic or political goal is pointless intellectualism. And if you're going to support some such goals, why not others? |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
On fire for Christ
SFN Regular
Norway
1273 Posts |
Posted - 08/17/2012 : 01:06:08 [Permalink]
|
Rebecca Watson accused him of sending her some abusive emails, publicly on twitter, he produced his version of the emails, which were reasonable, and she failed to show any proof that he said what she accused him of.
EDIT: Oh that was a different guy. And I think she made a sarcastic apology maybe. |
|
| Edited by - On fire for Christ on 08/17/2012 01:43:24 |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 08/17/2012 : 06:12:24 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by On fire for Christ
Rebecca Watson accused him of sending her some abusive emails, publicly on twitter, he produced his version of the emails, which were reasonable, and she failed to show any proof that he said what she accused him of.
EDIT: Oh that was a different guy. And I think she made a sarcastic apology maybe. |
You're thinking of Tony Ryan. Watson tweeted that he'd called her a cunt in an email. She later corrected her mistake, in that Ryan called her a feminazi in one of his blog posts, and it was someone else who called her a cunt. Oops, she misremembered who used which gendered slur against her and where, and she corrected her mistake in another tweet. A mistake (especially an admitted and corrected mistake, regardless any sarcasm) is not a lie. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 08/17/2012 : 08:46:35 [Permalink]
|
Surly Amy has plenty of support within the skeptical community. I support her. There are some assholes in both the skeptical and atheist communities.
Why is it so important what one commenter says? I mention that because I have seen comments in some atheist bloggers threads that say that the skeptical community has nothing to offer.
Both are wrong. |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Rebecca Watson Not Appearing at TAM
