Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 57 (9173 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: Neptune7
Post Volume: Total: 917,596 Year: 4,853/9,624 Month: 201/427 Week: 11/103 Day: 11/0 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The war of atheism
onifre
Member (Idle past 3032 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


(1)
Message 451 of 526 (681332)
11-24-2012 3:19 PM
Reply to: Message 447 by crashfrog
11-24-2012 3:10 PM


Re: Slogans, Privilege and PoCs
No, I don't find it odd - same way I don't find it odd that my entirely reasonable views on women not being raped caused someone to disagree so strongly that they hacked EvC. Same way that I don't find it odd that my entirely reasonable recount of EvC history caused AZPaul to crawl out of the woodwork and insult me over and over again. Same way I don't find it odd that my entirely reasonable comment that the historical Jesus Christ wasn't named Jesus Christ caused PaulK to say I was worse than Buzsaw.
Maybe you're just a cunt?
- Oni

This message is a reply to:
 Message 447 by crashfrog, posted 11-24-2012 3:10 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 454 by crashfrog, posted 11-24-2012 3:35 PM onifre has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1548 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 452 of 526 (681333)
11-24-2012 3:33 PM
Reply to: Message 449 by Straggler
11-24-2012 3:15 PM


Re: Elevator Misogyny
Thoughts are required for prejudice.
No, I disagree in the strongest possible terms. People can be racist or sexist (or any -ist) out of complete thoughtlessness. I think we all understand that, in fact we understand that it's more likely than people acting out of real racial or sexual malice. I think that's your implicit argument, as well (though I could be wrong) - that Elevator Guy was acting out of thoughtlessness, not misogyny.
But I completely agree with that. Regardless, though, his dismissal of Rebecca Watson's stated individual desires and wishes because she was a woman was still sexist.
Dude I've made it abundantly clear that I remain entirely unconvinced that elevator guy was exhibiting "misogynistic thoughts" or being sexist rather than being a bit of a dick.
So you keep saying, but again - who's asking you to be convinced that Elevator Guy "exhibited misogynistic thoughts"? Quote from the post where you were asked to believe that. And how would one "exhibit" a "thought"? I thought you said we had to be able to read minds to see thoughts.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 449 by Straggler, posted 11-24-2012 3:15 PM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 457 by Straggler, posted 11-24-2012 3:47 PM crashfrog has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1548 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 453 of 526 (681334)
11-24-2012 3:34 PM
Reply to: Message 450 by hooah212002
11-24-2012 3:16 PM


Re: Slogans, Privilege and PoCs
I really would lie about witnessing racism in order to win a fake internet argument. The stakes are that high.
Sure, but 500 posts in and you're still arguing with me, long after it's been made clear that you can't make the argument I've told you you'd have to make to convince me I'm wrong.
So there must be some reason you're still here.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 450 by hooah212002, posted 11-24-2012 3:16 PM hooah212002 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 459 by hooah212002, posted 11-24-2012 4:04 PM crashfrog has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1548 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 454 of 526 (681335)
11-24-2012 3:35 PM
Reply to: Message 451 by onifre
11-24-2012 3:19 PM


Re: Slogans, Privilege and PoCs
Maybe you're just a cunt?
Sure, maybe, but you're a cunt, too. Did anybody hack a website you're on because of it?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 451 by onifre, posted 11-24-2012 3:19 PM onifre has not replied

  
Straggler
Member (Idle past 147 days)
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 455 of 526 (681336)
11-24-2012 3:35 PM
Reply to: Message 448 by crashfrog
11-24-2012 3:14 PM


Re: Sexual/Gender Privilege
Crash writes:
I gave a real-world example as well.
You haven't given a real-world example of a woman being sexist that I can find. Can you repeat it if you have or provide one if you haven't?
Straggler writes:
But the a man-hating-boss mistreating male subordinates because of her anti-male prejudice doesn't qualify as sexual discrimination or sexism by the terms of your argument does it?
Crash writes:
Ok, but if she doesn't have sex privilege over the men, how can she sexually discriminate against them? Don't get me wrong - she could certainly discriminate, she's very much in a position to do so. But without sex privilege over someone, how could she discriminate against them on the basis of sex?
And this is why everyone thinks your bonkers. Let me try and explain.
Crash writes:
But without sex privilege over someone, how could she discriminate against them on the basis of sex?
Because she is prejudiced against them on the basis of sex and is using her positional-privilege to act upon her prejudices and mistreat them because they are male.
The basis of the mistreatment is sex. Thus it is sexual discrimination. The fact that the power to enact her prejudiced and discriminatory wishes is derived from a different sort of privilege doesn't change this.
Crash writes:
But without sex privilege over someone, how could she discriminate against them on the basis of sex?
Do you agree that legally what she is doing would qualify as sexual discrimination? Or not?
Edited by Straggler, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 448 by crashfrog, posted 11-24-2012 3:14 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 456 by crashfrog, posted 11-24-2012 3:38 PM Straggler has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1548 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 456 of 526 (681337)
11-24-2012 3:38 PM
Reply to: Message 455 by Straggler
11-24-2012 3:35 PM


Re: Sexual/Gender Privilege
Because she is prejudiced against them on the basis of sex and is using her positional-privilege to act upon her prejudices and mistreat them because they are male.
So then it's discrimination. Simple as that. What makes it discrimination on the basis of privilege that accrues according to sex and therefore sexism? That's what I still don't get.
Do you agree that legally what she is doing would qualify as sexual discrimination?
Well, I don't know. Is she refusing to promote men to the position of Vice-President of Bra and Tampon design?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 455 by Straggler, posted 11-24-2012 3:35 PM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 458 by Straggler, posted 11-24-2012 3:57 PM crashfrog has replied

  
Straggler
Member (Idle past 147 days)
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 457 of 526 (681338)
11-24-2012 3:47 PM
Reply to: Message 452 by crashfrog
11-24-2012 3:33 PM


Re: Elevator Misogyny
Well as I have already said if Rebecca Watson is applying the same definitions and thinking that you are here then I genuinely don't see how you or she can be classifying elevator guy's actions, and the thinking that lay behind these actions, as anything other than misogynistic.
Can you provide an example of a man being sexist that didn't require any misogynistic thought processes (conscious or subconscious) at all?
Crash writes:
Elevator Guy was acting out of thoughtlessness, not misogyny.
Well you have already said you think he was being sexist. Is the elevator incident an example (in your view) of non-misogynistic sexism?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 452 by crashfrog, posted 11-24-2012 3:33 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 460 by crashfrog, posted 11-24-2012 4:09 PM Straggler has replied

  
Straggler
Member (Idle past 147 days)
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 458 of 526 (681339)
11-24-2012 3:57 PM
Reply to: Message 456 by crashfrog
11-24-2012 3:38 PM


Re: Sexual/Gender Privilege
You haven't given a real-world example of a woman being sexist that I can find. Can you repeat it if you have or provide one if you haven't?
Crash writes:
So then it's discrimination.
It's discrimination and mistreatment based on their sex and her prejudice against that sex. This makes it sexual discrimination.
Straggler writes:
Do you agree that legally what she is doing would qualify as sexual discrimination?
Crash writes:
Well, I don't know. Is she refusing to promote men to the position of Vice-President of Bra and Tampon design?
No. And your need to evade the question in that way says a lot.
The a man-hating-boss in question is mistreating male subordinates because of her anti-male prejudice. Giving them the worst shifts, verbally abusing them, publicly demeaning them, making offensive comments about their appearance and sexuality.
Do you agree that legally what she is doing would qualify as sexual discrimination?
Edited by Straggler, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 456 by crashfrog, posted 11-24-2012 3:38 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 461 by crashfrog, posted 11-24-2012 4:10 PM Straggler has replied
 Message 469 by Omnivorous, posted 11-24-2012 6:15 PM Straggler has replied

  
hooah212002
Member (Idle past 882 days)
Posts: 3193
Joined: 08-12-2009


Message 459 of 526 (681340)
11-24-2012 4:04 PM
Reply to: Message 453 by crashfrog
11-24-2012 3:34 PM


Re: Slogans, Privilege and PoCs
Not that I agree that this is a valid for of discussion (where you lay out some arbitrary line or argument that we are then suppsoe to meet or make in order to convince you) could you point to the post in question where you identified the argument required to convince you that you wrong?
Let's forget the fact that I never intended to prove you "wrong", per se. Just to point out that you are using a definition so obscure and far removed from every day normal people usage as to render it meaningless.

"Science is interesting, and if you don't agree you can fuck off." -Dawkins

This message is a reply to:
 Message 453 by crashfrog, posted 11-24-2012 3:34 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 462 by crashfrog, posted 11-24-2012 4:12 PM hooah212002 has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1548 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 460 of 526 (681342)
11-24-2012 4:09 PM
Reply to: Message 457 by Straggler
11-24-2012 3:47 PM


Re: Elevator Misogyny
Well as I have already said if Rebecca Watson is applying the same definitions and thinking that you are here then I genuinely don't see how you or she can be classifying elevator guy's actions, and the thinking that lay behind these actions, as anything other than misogynistic.
We're only trying to convince you that his actions were sexist. If you really can't conceive of any way that they could have been without being misogynistic, and that his thoughts must have been misogynistic if his actions were, then I repeat my claim from before - it sounds like you're doing a pretty good job of convincing yourself that he "exhibited misogynistic thoughts". But again, how you categorize his thoughts are irrelevant to me.
I'm only trying to convince you that he acted without regard to Watson's stated individual feelings and desires, out of privilege that accrued because he was a man and she was a woman. I don't care about any of the other irrelevancies you keep trying to raise.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 457 by Straggler, posted 11-24-2012 3:47 PM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 482 by Straggler, posted 11-25-2012 5:11 AM crashfrog has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1548 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 461 of 526 (681343)
11-24-2012 4:10 PM
Reply to: Message 458 by Straggler
11-24-2012 3:57 PM


Re: Sexual/Gender Privilege
The a man-hating-boss in question is mistreating male subordinates because of her anti-male prejudice.
What "man-hating boss in question" are we talking about, specifically?
Do you agree that legally what she is doing would qualify as sexual discrimination?
I'm not a lawyer. How would I know?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 458 by Straggler, posted 11-24-2012 3:57 PM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 483 by Straggler, posted 11-25-2012 5:21 AM crashfrog has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1548 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 462 of 526 (681344)
11-24-2012 4:12 PM
Reply to: Message 459 by hooah212002
11-24-2012 4:04 PM


Re: Slogans, Privilege and PoCs
Just to point out that you are using a definition so obscure and far removed from every day normal people usage as to render it meaningless.
Right, but my position is that I'm not and you're wrong about that. I've already told you how I evaluate these models and therefore I've told you what it would take to convince me.
What would it take to convince you that you were wrong, that my definition was hardly obscure or far removed from everyday, normal usage?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 459 by hooah212002, posted 11-24-2012 4:04 PM hooah212002 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 463 by hooah212002, posted 11-24-2012 4:15 PM crashfrog has replied
 Message 475 by kjsimons, posted 11-24-2012 9:47 PM crashfrog has replied

  
hooah212002
Member (Idle past 882 days)
Posts: 3193
Joined: 08-12-2009


Message 463 of 526 (681345)
11-24-2012 4:15 PM
Reply to: Message 462 by crashfrog
11-24-2012 4:12 PM


Re: Slogans, Privilege and PoCs
I've already told you how I evaluate these models and therefore I've told you what it would take to convince me.
I just asked you where you did this. What post. Be specific.
What would it take to convince you that you were wrong, that my definition was hardly obscure or far removed from everyday, normal usage?
I guess you would have to change wikipedia and modify google search results. Oh, and change what people actually consider racism.
edit:
Tell you what,. All you have to do in order for me to concede my point is find ONE actual person that agrees with you in full. You'll notice that ALL of your opponents agree in full and we didn't even have to "find" one another. We just agree because we are real people who know what racism is and how the word is used in real life.
Edited by hooah212002, : No reason given.

"Science is interesting, and if you don't agree you can fuck off." -Dawkins

This message is a reply to:
 Message 462 by crashfrog, posted 11-24-2012 4:12 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 464 by crashfrog, posted 11-24-2012 5:07 PM hooah212002 has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1548 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 464 of 526 (681347)
11-24-2012 5:07 PM
Reply to: Message 463 by hooah212002
11-24-2012 4:15 PM


Re: Slogans, Privilege and PoCs
All you have to do in order for me to concede my point is find ONE actual person that agrees with you in full.
If you insist, but I've already found two: Nol A. Cazenave and Darlene Alvarez Maddern, sociologists at the University of Connecticut.
So you're convinced, right?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 463 by hooah212002, posted 11-24-2012 4:15 PM hooah212002 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 465 by hooah212002, posted 11-24-2012 5:25 PM crashfrog has replied

  
hooah212002
Member (Idle past 882 days)
Posts: 3193
Joined: 08-12-2009


Message 465 of 526 (681350)
11-24-2012 5:25 PM
Reply to: Message 464 by crashfrog
11-24-2012 5:07 PM


Re: Slogans, Privilege and PoCs
hooah212002 writes:
crash writes:
I've already told you how I evaluate these models and therefore I've told you what it would take to convince me.
I just asked you where you did this. What post. Be specific.

"Science is interesting, and if you don't agree you can fuck off." -Dawkins

This message is a reply to:
 Message 464 by crashfrog, posted 11-24-2012 5:07 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 466 by crashfrog, posted 11-24-2012 5:40 PM hooah212002 has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024