|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
 Posted - 02/23/2013 : 15:50:05 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Kil
Oh bullshit. That is factually untrue. Or only trivially true to make your point. Your choice. |
The "trivially true" thing was my whole point, dammit. She's shifting the fucking burden of proof. That's it. One small example among many of how Harriet Hall is making use of poor arguments, and you've focused on it for what reason? Even if I agreed with you on that single point, it wouldn't erase all the other nonsense Hall is pulling, and wouldn't change my conclusions about how bad an example she's currently setting.| Now she's an asshole that we don't need. |
Yes, as a social movement, we really shouldn't have assholes in the lead. Do you really think it should be otherwise?| But everything is black and white... |
Bullshit. There's been a ton of nuance in the arguments I've made. Thanks for the dismissal. |
- 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 - 02/23/2013 : 15:53:45 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Kil
Am I suppose to hang on Benson's every word now? Do you? |
Don't you dare accuse me of hero worship.| Obviously you are of the same opinion. |
I didn't say anything about whether I still think highly of Hall's pioneering on behalf of women. I posted Benson's comment because it's an example of how Hall's behavior is affecting others. So, not so "obvious."I don't care whether you agreed with Benson's statement or not, that wasn't the point. |
- 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 - 02/23/2013 : 15:59:50 [Permalink]
|
Dave:
The "trivially true" thing was my whole point, dammit. |
No. Your point is to burrow in on some trivial thing, to make a point which probably isn’t true, in order to dismiss what she was getting at.
|
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 - 02/23/2013 : 16:00:06 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Kil
Humbert:
It's also notable to point out that Hall did nothing to dissuade anyone from coming to the conclusion the statement was an indirect dig at the Skepchicks while she was wearing it. |
She has never denied that her T-shirt was in answer to Rebbeca's refusal to come to TAM. In fact, she came right out and said it. |
That misses the point of what H. was saying. He was surprised that Hall couldn't see that the back of the shirt could easily be misconstrued as being a dig, which is what she is denying. And what she and has always denied:The commenters above who suggested that she is making a point that women should aim to eliminate bias by refusing to be minimized into a “woman skeptic” category are correct. Harriet is old school, and she suggested that it’s possibly a generational thing. She doesn’t object to the Skepchicks, mind you. She’s not against them. She was very careful to make sure the back of her shirt had a small “s” on skepchicks.
I told her I was afraid this fine distinction would be lost. And it was.
Fine. I'll accept Hall's explanations, tortured as they are. It still doesn't mitigate the fact that she acted badly, and continues to do so. |
- 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 - 02/23/2013 : 16:01:34 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Kil
Dave:
The "trivially true" thing was my whole point, dammit. |
No. Your point is to burrow in on some trivial thing, to make a point which probably isn’t true, in order to dismiss what she was getting at.
|
What she was getting at is irrelevant to my argument. |
- 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 - 02/23/2013 : 16:04:12 [Permalink]
|
| I have to get to the Valley. But really, Hall said she is open to correction and instead was roundly attacked. That was her point. This isn't about how she should have done her own research. It was about how other people behaved. She never once said that she might not be mistaken. Or that the burden of proof was on others. Only that she was attacked and no one offered anything productive. |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 02/23/2013 : 16:15:03 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Kil
She has never denied that her T-shirt was in answer to Rebbeca's refusal to come to TAM. In fact, she came right out and said it.
|
So in order to take a swipe at Rebecca, Harriet wore a shirt which also indirectly insulted Amy, even if initially it was unintentional. However, even after it was explained to Harriet that Amy was widely considered to be the target of her remarks (and was facing considerable hostility as a result), Harriet made no effort change her message. So she knew it gave people a wrong impression and did nothing at the time to dispel it. |
"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 |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 02/23/2013 : 16:16:44 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Kil
I have to get to the Valley. But really, Hall said she is open to correction and instead was roundly attacked. |
No, that's not what happened.| That was her point. This isn't about how she should have done her own research. |
Her point wasn't about that, mine was.| It was about how other people behaved. |
Yes, that wasn't my point at all.| She never once said that she might not be mistaken. |
I never accused her of saying that, I accused her of acting like that.| Or that the burden of proof was on others. |
Not in so many words:Instead of attacking me as totally clueless, a charitable reader might have gently corrected me by providing quantitative evidence that the majority of people in the LGBT community do not find the word offensive (so far, no one has provided such evidence). When shown quantitative evidence, I would gladly have changed the word “most” to “many” or “some” or even “a few,” depending on the actual numbers, and we would all have learned something. So she didn't know the actual numbers, she made an assertion anyway, and won't support her statement without someone else going and getting the numbers for her. She has shifted the burden of proof onto her critics.| Only that she was attacked an no one offered anything productive. |
No, she said quite a bit more than that. Her point was about how badly other people have behaved. My point was about her shifting the burden of proof in the middle of making her point. Two different arguments, Kil. Stop acting as if my point is an attempt to criticize her point. It never has been. |
- 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 - 02/23/2013 : 16:20:18 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by H. Humbert
So in order to take a swipe at Rebecca, Harriet wore a shirt which also indirectly insulted Amy, even if initially it was unintentional. However, even after it was explained to Harriet that Amy was widely considered to be the target of her remarks (and was facing considerable hostility as a result), Harriet made no effort change her message. So she knew it gave people a wrong impression and did nothing at the time to dispel it. |
Read Sastra's comments from last July (there's more than one). |
- 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 - 02/23/2013 : 16:27:55 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by H. Humbert
Originally posted by Kil
She has never denied that her T-shirt was in answer to Rebbeca's refusal to come to TAM. In fact, she came right out and said it.
|
So in order to take a swipe at Rebecca, Harriet wore a shirt which also indirectly insulted Amy, even if initially it was unintentional. However, even after it was explained to Harriet that Amy was widely considered to be the target of her remarks (and was facing considerable hostility as a result), Harriet made no effort change her message. So she knew it gave people a wrong impression and did nothing at the time to dispel it.
|
I don't really have time for this. If I were Hall, I would have taken the shirt off in deference to Amy's feelings. But she's one tough cookie. And she probably felt that her point and the freedom to make it trumped Amy's feelings.
Also, you should be made aware that you just moved the goal posts. |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 02/23/2013 : 16:36:05 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
Originally posted by H. Humbert
So in order to take a swipe at Rebecca, Harriet wore a shirt which also indirectly insulted Amy, even if initially it was unintentional. However, even after it was explained to Harriet that Amy was widely considered to be the target of her remarks (and was facing considerable hostility as a result), Harriet made no effort change her message. So she knew it gave people a wrong impression and did nothing at the time to dispel it. |
Read Sastra's comments from last July (there's more than one).
|
Sastra is a friend of mine, by the way. We have dinner together at every TAM. And she has pretty much the same take on this that I do. |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 02/23/2013 : 17:13:22 [Permalink]
|
I guess I was unclear. I'm not suggesting Hall had a moral obligation to protect Amy's feelings. I'm only saying Hall had an obligation to correct the misunderstandings her shirt caused.
Dave, I remember those posts from Sastra, who did what she could to clarify things on Hall's behalf. That's not Harriet taking the time to straighten out the misunderstanding, though, that's Sastra trying to do it for her. I think Hall shirked her obligation on that.
|
"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 |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 02/23/2013 : 18:11:42 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by H. Humbert
I'm not suggesting Hall had a moral obligation to protect Amy's feelings. |
I think that Hall had an obligation to avoid knowingly continuing to cause offense to a TAM sponsor. The conference is a fund-raiser for the JREF. If Hall had a part to play in Roth's decision to quit sponsoring TAM, then Hall is - in part - responsible for whatever decline in funding the JREF is experiencing, if any. So it's possible that in seeking to defend TAM, she actually harmed the whole reason for TAM.
Besides, of course, the fact that she was being an asshole to another human being.| Dave, I remember those posts from Sastra, who did what she could to clarify things on Hall's behalf. That's not Harriet taking the time to straighten out the misunderstanding, though, that's Sastra trying to do it for her. I think Hall shirked her obligation on that. |
I agree. My turn to have been unclear. If Hall's explanation is true, she wasn't "taking a swipe at Rebecca." Hall said the smiley face was to say, "no hard feelings" and Sastra said Hall had no ill-will towards any of the Skepchicks. |
- 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 - 02/23/2013 : 23:20:38 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Kil
If I were Hall, I would have taken the shirt off in deference to Amy's feelings. But she's one tough cookie. And she probably felt that her point and the freedom to make it trumped Amy's feelings. |
So she's an asshole. She was free to make that point in that venue, but she was also free to make it in some other venue. She chose her immediate desires over both diplomacy and another person's feelings.| Also, you should be made aware that you just moved the goal posts. |
This is interesting. How, exactly, did H. move any goalposts? |
- 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 - 02/23/2013 : 23:23:30 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Kil
Sastra is a friend of mine, by the way. We have dinner together at every TAM. |
I know this, by the way.| And she has pretty much the same take on this that I do. |
I haven't seen her comment on Hall's recent behavior. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Rebecca Watson Not Appearing at TAM
