tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8307443698760610672.post3044461169619841776..comments2011-07-07T02:22:54.414-04:00Comments on Oot and Aboot with Some Canadian Skeptic: Why we FightSteve Thomshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02476998204367715504noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8307443698760610672.post-40616762259925844272011-07-07T02:22:54.414-04:002011-07-07T02:22:54.414-04:00Dunno. I've seen this sort of stum & drang...Dunno. I've seen this sort of stum & drang play itself out too many times and it just makes me sleepy. No, I haven't read/seen Rebecca's talk but I got the basic gist of it and it seems like a no-brainer unless you're a twenty-something entitled suburban white boy (been there, done that) or (apparently) Richard Dawkins.<br /><br />I haven't read his reply either but I'm not sure what the hell he felt he could constructively add to the conversation. That he's managed to dump a tanker of jet fuel on an unnecessary bonfire is a testament to his humanity, fallibility, and utter tone-deafness in certain areas (his response to the closure of the RD.net forums being a delicious example.) I'm not going to hate on him or chuck "Greatest Show on Earth" & "Ancestor's Tale" into the fireplace and cry myself to sleep on my gigantic pillow but I'm sure as hell not going to defend his witless ass.<br /><br />I survived the dawn of Political Correctness and sociopathic campus speech codes; we are so far away from that atmosphere that anyone who uses those two words outside of a historical context is in all likelihood just holding up a cardboard shield for their bigotry.<br /><br />And while I typically tune out the whole gender/feminism palaver, what I came away with is that women have very different perceptions of events than men do. And when a smart, articulate woman politely and concisely explains why she feels threatened by behavior that a twenty-something suburban white boy (or Richard Dawkins) may consider perfectly innocuous, it's time to shut the fuck up and really listen to what she is saying.<br /><br />Part of being a good humanist is being able to empathize with others and try to put yourself in their shoes, to entertain the notion that the other person may actually have a legitimate point before dismissing it. From personal experience, that's not something that twenty-something entitled suburban white boys are very good at. If they're lucky, they may catch a clue at some point. Dawkins is old enough that he should know better; maybe he didn't get the memo.<br /><br />This whole avoidable dustup hasn't put me off the athe-skepti-humanist "movement" any more than usual. It's the typical and unfortunate internecine bloviating and spleen-venting that periodically wracks the community; it doesn't make me upset as much as it makes me sleepy. It's far easier to puff up with outrage than shrug it off and actually <b>do something concrete or meaningful</b>.<br /><br />You want to attract more of a certain group to athe-skepti-humanism? Find a way they can participate in a meaningful and enjoyable way that appeals to them and support their efforts or, at the very least, get out of their damn way. Far harder said than done, but probably more effective & useful than saying we need more members of group <i>X</i> for the sake of the appearance of diversity.apthorpehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17152709906985093221noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8307443698760610672.post-32328266183962921652011-07-06T14:08:41.306-04:002011-07-06T14:08:41.306-04:00Why, exactly, are "Don't be a Dick" ...Why, exactly, are "Don't be a Dick" and "Don't be a Creep" controversial?<br /><br />If someone's reaction to Phil Plait saying "don't be a dick", or Rebecca Watson saying "don't be a creep", is to get defensive or dismissive, maybe that someone needs to put a little more rational thought into their social interactions. These are pretty axiomatic principles of social discourse, after all!Jameshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05833355144832388008noreply@blogger.com