Wow, the things I have been missing. All that hateful email I’ve been getting over the years? Turns out that was the upper echelon of the scum. Put up a few videos, and you discover the youtube commentariat:
To use my “freedom of speech” (which PZ Meyers HATES more than the KKK hates black people):
EAT MY WHITE, STRAIGHT, CIS, NON-FEMINIST MALE COCK, BITCH! OR I WILL RAPE YOU!
C=======================3
I’m still kind of marveling at the sudden surge to the bottom of the canyons of dimbuggery I’m seeing.
And to think, there are actually some people who think “rape culture” has gotten out of hand.
You hate his freedom of speech so much you posted his comment on your blog. Dastardly.
GROUPTHINK! SILENCING DISSENT! FREEEEEEEEEEE SPEEEEEEEEEEEECH!
On the plus side, rape culture is getting more egalitarian. It’s progress, of a sort.
The ASCII dick is a nice touch.
“CIS”? Seems an oddly gender-informed self-description for a bigot?
hoo yeah, how about some warning before the descent next time?
that first one was a doozy.
This is an “I get email” post. Isn’t that warning enough?
Funny how freedom of speech to such scum means freedom from being criticized for their speech.
I don’t understand. What’s PZ Meyers’ hate of “freedom of speech” got to do with you?
He forgot to bless you.
I have to assume that the people sending these emails are adults (well, by the chronological definition, anyway). Why do they come across sounding as if their inner 13-year-old rebellious adolescent has been given free reign?
C’mon, people. If you have an argument, make it. Support it with evidence, or reasoning, or something. This is just sad.
He does realise you’re not a woman, right?
(Yes, yes, I know. Rape has nothing to do with sex or sexual identity.)
hoggle, hoggle, hoggle
Well, at least no one will ever accuse this guy of being witty or intelligent.
If someone is to eat this gentleman’s cock, the first question is how should the cock be cooked. I’d suggest butterflying and deepfat frying it, but PZ shouldn’t be eating fried foods. Perhaps it could be smoked and then braised with sauerkraut.
Why is it that they can never spell PZ’s surname correctly?
Maybe he’s Russian.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commonwealth_of_Independent_States
That’s the best I can do. How do you even make fun of something this vapid?
Sex and rape as dominance. Straight men can get blow-jobs and fuck other men, because they’re still doing the manly part. Only the fucked one becomes gay
Syntax Error.
Of course, that mesage was posted in the name of reason, rationalism and free thinking. That being the case, we don’t need the religious anymore.
or anything but white, straight, cis, and male. He was quite clear that he is not one of those dirty folks outside of the most privileged class.
Hey shit-head, you forgot to mention that your cock is also quite wealthy.
Because they’re maladroit clods? Just spitballing here.
Ahhh, the YouTube commenters. I think they bounce right from AOL comments to YouTube, and I swear their average age is 14. Wait, that might be IQ I’m thinking of.
Because trying to teach people basic personal space etiquette is such a horrible thing, as is denying the FTB stationery to Time Cube-F00t who has plenty of YouTube stationery already. Because free speech means being able to force people to be associated with you against their wishes.
“Tis, #16
I am now forced to make the obligatory reference to some fava beans and a nice chianti.
Seriously though, turning it into a kebab might work.
Grimalkin @5 – I didn’t get that until you explained. Thank you!
nohoval @6 – Exactly what I thought.
My first thought was, “Oh, that must be my cousin, Mark.” It certainly sounds like the vitriol he sends me* but he would never understand “cis”.
“C=======================3”
…could be the interpretation of the Franc Hoggles out there world view of things. In reality, it may be something more like this:
C=3
I’d prefer to have it thinly sliced and simmered in a beef and chicken broth spiced with cilantro, green onions, garlic, ginger and a generous dash or 3 of Chinese 5-spice.
Stays firm, but succulent and slightly sticky.
*I was going to go into the deep pervy minds of my stalking male relatives but decided not to.
Carry on as you will.
Ok, I give. I googled CIS but didn’t find anything I’d consider pertinent. What do it mean?
@31 – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cisgender
Audley – Today you gave me three really deep belly laughs (on different threads and in different blogs) so I have to thank you. You’re on a roll!
Yeah, Audley’s right about this clown. I am reminded of my favorite quote from TIME BANDITS:
“…so mercifully free from the ravages of intelligence.”
Looks rather spindly to me. The phrase “his noodly appendage” comes to mind.
It’s not generally considered a compliment in this context.
‘Tis Himself — Well, if PZ is following the Caldwell Esselstyn diet, he shouldn’t be eating meat in any form. Perhaps we should just throw the guy’s cock to the hogs and let them eat it.
The twelfth vote:
Why is it that they can never spell PZ’s surname correctly?
Just a wild guess…stupidity?
Anyway, this type isn’t going to succumb to the demands of spelling-nazis.
@quentinlong, 34:
Interesting observation. It seems to me the ones who claim to be crtics of the FtB “hive mind” are the ones who are actually free from thought; as PZ’s captured quote so aptly demonstrates.
My concern is that this bozo isn’t getting treatment, (& i don’t mean what he challenged PZ to do).
I guess i’m also concerned about a society that spawns this kind of creep, because PZ has indicated the nutjob wasn’t alone in producing this kind of insanity.
I was under the impression that the agreed upon ASCII for penis was 8==D. Then what do I know, I don’t comment on YouTube. (Though the commenters on the QI and Jeeves and Wooster videos seem quite civilized)
@robro, 37:
…oh yeah. Good catch!
At least this person seems to have something in common with the creationist trolls who have posted here as well. And I have yet to find out who this mythical PZ Meyers is.
The ASCII penis works better with a lower-case “c”.
c==3
This emailer’s ASCII penis would look better with a little c-ring of decaying porcupine needles on it.
@Utakata, 28:
Edit: Thanks hyperdeath. I sit corrected, it’s now:
c=3
Ogvorbus at 12
“Why do they come across sounding as if their inner 13-year-old rebellious adolescent has been given free reign?”
What with our enlightenment of the past few years about the only group we have left to piss on openly are the 13 year olds. I guess they haven’t yet organized a lobby big enough to piss back.
I hear the teens in your neighborhood are organizing a consciousness raising for you. I expect they will be more gentle with you than you are with them.
That’s why they invented Unicode:
ḉ≠=3
I suggest consulting an expert (sort of): Armin Meiwes.
ludicrous,
Pretty sure that women are openly pissed on quite often. As well as LGBT people, minorities, neuroatypical people, disabled people… ect. My consciousness has been raised over the past couple of years (since I discovered Pharyngula), but it is stupid to suggest we, as a society*, are post-bigotry.
*this blog has an international readership. I assume you are talking about the US, but just keep that in mind.
ludicrous, what the Grothe are you talking about?
This would be one of those times when I think that “care in the community” isn’t the best idea ever. I don’t even find this offensive, just sad.
Quentinlong;
Time Bandits FTW!
Yeah, sure. We’re oppressing the 13-year-olds.
@16 ‘Tis:
Why you should spiral-cut your wiener.
(Measures ASCII art…)
Yeah, I’m not sure the prep is gonna be much of an issue, heart condition or no…
I mean, as pointed out upthread, it looks like pretty diet-friendly fare on this screen, anyway.
Oh, but is our deft raconteur also offering to throw in his testicles for PZ’s nosh?
(/If so, I guess just as a matter of completeness, we could look up the calories in the standard prairie oyster presentation, then multiply by .003 or somethin’…)
Show me what passes for fury among your misbegotten kind.
I’ve used it before, but it’s so relevant.
Woo at 48
The ‘we’ I was referring to are typical ftb folks. I am quite aware that the groups you cite are being murdered hourly on this planet.
Aside from that, what do you think of the habit of using children as examples of behavior that you don’t like for the purposes of invidious comparison.
We don’t do it to women anymore, nor people of color, or the obese, or mentally challenges or or ….many groups. Why is it still ok generally to use children in this way? Is it fair? Usually we don’t do it in front of them, but some do.
ludicrous … are you fucking serious?
I’m guessing this guys a poet right? His subtle yet elegant wielding of the English language is both moving and inspiring whilst simultaneously displaying fragile beauty and breathless lucidity. Round of applause from me. I think we have a new Keats in the making.
At least ask Louis C.K. before you go to town on this jerk’s cock:
http://youtu.be/sLNQxlQZfv4
Nice sales pitch for his own kind, I guess. Anyone persuaded to join?
Teenagers make us uncomfortable. Take any group of adults you choose and just say ‘teenagers’..you will always get an uncomfortable laugh.
I am not qualified to explain why this is, but I will anyway. I think it is because they challenge us in ways we do not like to be challenged. And also for many of us those were quite challenging years which we do not recall well but inside maintain some of the feelings, especially the humiliations.
My other argument is that it is too easy to use them as our example, it allows us to express disdain without really spelling out exactly what it is that we object to. In this way avoid possible challenge.
So, how long do we think until someone pokes in with the “Huh huh, just a joke, you got all worked up, I got you all huh huh” bit?
But… Youtube is the real atheist community.
No, no, that’s wrong. The new excuse is “HA HA I TROLLED U. U MAD BRO?”
Get with the times.
Sadly, that commenter is one of the smart, open minded ones by YouTube commenter standards.
I’m not entirely joking here.
That might be because children are, actually, you know, children. People whose brains are not yet fully developed, whose learning processes are still incomplete and such. The difference is that children have a valid excuse for being assholes sometimes.
Yes, we’ve noticed that.
@31 Larry… “Cis” is the opposite of “trans” as in cisgendered (like most folks) vs. transgendered (like me).
Cis, like trans, is from Latin.
Trans means “across”, cis means “on this side”.
I suppose that the more popular a site is, the lower the average commentator’s intelligence. Either that, or all the kitten videos are turning the commenters’ brains into tapioca.
I agree with what I perceive Beatrice to be saying with hir #51. That is, it is a non-issue. Are you attempting to troll*, or are you genuinely this thick?
*pathetically if you are
Not trolling. I made some careless remarks the other day and got identified as trolling. How long does it take before my comments can be taken at face value? I often make unwelcome comments but I think that is not always a bad thing on a FTB. I don’t buy the circle jerk accusation I have seen tossed around but I have to keep my mind open on that.
As I was implying fairly loudly I thought. Teenagers are not welcome here at least if one judges by the lack of couresy.
I want teenagers to be here and so do you.
ludicrous: Teenagers have posted here, do post here, are well-treated, and have been educated here out of such insanities as libertarianism (eg Walton).
Once again, as usual, you are WRONG and you are TROLLING — and not in a particularly clever way.
ludicrous @60- Teenagers challenge us? What? Have you no experience with teenagers?
I do. Teenagers are woefully inexperienced. I was woefully inexperienced as a teenager. I was a step mom to two teenagers, and they were ridiculously naive. I loved them deeply but they thought they were invincible and thought they knew everything. Hardly challenging, just inexperienced. It was my job (with their mother as lead, of course) to set boundaries.
They didn’t know enough of the real world to “challenge” me. They fought me, yes, but never challenged me.
Obviously, I’m having a hard time figuring out how teenagers could challenge me. Are you talking about mentally challenging or worldview challenging or what? They challenge boundaries and think everything they do is new but… okay, now I’m at a loss.
Yeah, there is such a culture of oppression here against teenagers. *snicker*
Such poise.
Such eloquence.
Such logic.
Such flair.
Verily, are we not all in awe of this rhetorical titan?
*/snark*
It is all there – the mispelling of PZ’s name*, the liberal use of ALL CAPS, the ridiculous comparison of PZ’s eminently reasonable feminist position to the violent bigotry of *insert repellant historical or contemporary extremist group*, the use of a gendered slur, the rape threat – it is the entire misogynist bingo card in two sentences.
nohoval @ 6;
I noticed that too. Most likely he read it in a conversation between those better informed than himself, and simply threw it in without really grasping its meaning.
Either that, or he is fully aware of what it means, and is just one of those nauseating cretins who wilfully spews bigoted rubbish that he doesn’t actually believe because he is suffering from the sad delusion that doing so is somehow humourous – a delusion most likely linked to his inexplicable belief that he himself is generally funny. A common affliction among trolls, or so I hear…
——————————————————–
* To all trolls; its Myers people – Myers. Is it really that hard?
Tone troll is still tone trolling. Reminder on PZ’s standards and practices, so shut the fuck up about our tone/language. It isn’t your blog. Apologize to PZ for your attempt to usurp his authority tone troll. This is why you get into trouble. Check the masthead before you tell us what we should be doing…
Lots of insults coming my way. But no one addresses my suggestion that it is not a good idea to casually use young people as a stand-ins, stereotypes, in ways that insults their intelligence and behavior.
Some have responded that raising children is a difficult undertaking, but that is no reason to gratuitously use them as objects of derison.
Yeah, so many YouTube comments can be absolutely nasty. Ugh. There are good YouTube comments, but I’ve mostly seen them on Let’s Play videos.
Also, this is pretty bad timing for age-related insults on this end. My grandmother has been complaining to my mother and me that, basically, everyone my age (I’m 24) is stupid and immoral because we don’t care about the exact same things her generation cared about (she’s 84) and she only hears and sees the most vocal people, many of whom aren’t my age, though you wouldn’t know it from listening to her. She’s fond of saying everything (she says it’s everything) is going in a downward direction because of young people and/or technology.
I have to say that I really appreciate being able to come here with people who don’t try to punish others for being young and where age doesn’t seem to come up very often.
I want three things:
1) The freedom to express any thought.*
2) The freedom for any individual to investigate and express their thoughts described in 1).
3) The social facilities to enable 1) and 2).
I wonder if some people realise that sexism, racism etc run contrary to those desires.
Louis
* Freedom to express any thought =/= freedom from criticism =/= providing platform.
Oh and eat this person’s cock? And what, pray tell, will I eat afterwards, I fear it may provide poor and small sustenance.
Louis
Ludicrous:
As a teen myself:
Tone doesn’t matter. If you’ll keep with your so-called “courtesy”, do it somewhere else.
Age-related insults; I’m certainly opposed to them (c.f. weakswimmer); although this place certainly gives young people the respect we deserve, insinuating someone is young when they’re obviously trolling/being stupid does not do a service to young people, and, in some respects, may be an unfounded assumption.
Uh, I would agree with that as a general guideline, but I don’t think it’s what happened here.
Ogvorbis was specifically talking about “the people sending these emails” and such an individual’s own “inner 13-year-old rebellious adolescent”.
Some people were mature enough at age 13 not to do this. But the person who wrote this comment? Was probably very immature at age 13 and evidently still is.
Last comment today. If you google “childism” you might find a nymag article from January. Apparently a psychoanalyst had just recently discovered the prejudice against children and written a book.
Here is a bit of it: (and so long for now)
“childism, the widespread but unfounded belief in the inferiority of children. Or so contends the late psychoanalyst and scholar Elisabeth Young-Bruehl in a new book. American politics are blindly and destructively childist, as are the most attentive of parents, argues Young-Bruehl in Childism: Confronting Prejudice Against Children, going on to insist that fighting childism is as important as fighting racism or homophobia. Allowed to flourish, she writes, childism not only denies the humanity of individual kids; it damages generations, who internalize the dislike directed at them from the grown-ups who run their lives.”
I’m broadly sympathetic to ludicrous’ complaint, here. Haven’t been a teenager myself in some (mumble) decades, but most of the stupider people I know are my age.
Oh, also, most of the biggest fucking bigots, too, and, by my estimate, the people most likely to have written that charming missive, up there…
Seriously. Fucking (mumble) year-olds… You can tell ’em, but you can’t tell ’em much. Really might as well mince the lot of us for soylent green, on average, as let us live on, cluttering up the planet with our addled, useless, aging brains…
Now teenagers? Sure, there’s some hammerheads. Hormones, what can ya do. But then again, there’s some pretty damned bright ones out there. Some of the smarter people I know, I suspect.
Ixchel ॐ:
Basically agreed; I don’t really see much direct age putdowns here.
Sniping away at people’s immaturity is fine though (the two are not directly equal). That’s probably what og was trying to get at.
Sounds to me like a bad case of projection by someone who desperately yearns to eat cock, but is too chicken to follow through on those yearnings.
For those who suggested cooking a cock: you wouldn’t like it. Too much connective tissue. If cooked at all, it would have to be cooked like tripe, slowly simmered all day long before it reaches a state of basic edibility.
Worry not, P-zed: your correspondent has revealed more about himself than he realized.
Again, it’s not evidenced that that’s what’s happening here.
Pointing out that 13 year olds generally tend, more than adults generally, to have a penchant for drawing penises as “humor” is not a claim about the inferiority of children.
Ah. So mebbe this is like a slow-cooker dish, then? Idea being to cook until all that connective tissue is falling to bits, like you do for stew cuts?
(/Perfect. I’ve some lovely panang-type recipes spring to mind. And they’re mostly pretty heart-friendly.)
RFW, this is still a homophobic insult. Please don’t do this.
I see a fine example of free screech.
FREE SCREECH!!! ZOMG YES!
Thanks Lofty, totally stealing that.
Oh, PZ….You need you a youtube filter.
The Herp-Derp Extension
Ixchel at 87
Thanks for calling attention to this widespread habit. Cleaning out homophobia from all the attitudinal cracks and crevices is no doubt a multi generational process. There is so much of it in all the isms yet to be cleared.
Many times there is a subtle feel that something is ‘off’ but we let it pass. But if you had called that out 10 even 5 years ago you might have been jumped on as a tone troll.
We have been learning how to stop banging on groups for some years now, I hope it won’t take so long for our children.
@PZ
I wonder if you have ever read youtube comments before this. There is a reason youtube commenters have the reputation as one of the stupidest commenters around. ^_^
As a movement to promote critical thought Skepticism is a dismal failure.
Which is of course why TF polled them!
PZ’s refusal to treat this topic fairly is quite disconcerting. I’m no fan of Thunderfoot’s, but even I have to admit that PZ’s behavior here has been quite abysmal.
Posts like this one are a good example – highlighting the dregs of the emails he gets, and then pretending that they’re representative of the larger population. It makes for a good “we were right” circle-jerk, but it doesn’t really lend itself to constructive discussion.
Then again, we all know what happened when someone tried to start a constructive discussion here – he got banned. :(
derekneal @ #95
Citation. Fucking. Needed.
Oh shut the fuck up
HE DID NOT GET BANNED
GODDAMN IT YOU FUCKING STUPID GODDAMN SHEEP!
So the idiot manchildren that make up Skepticism want to move the world forward to reason? How? They’re struggling with fucking 16th century concepts of humanism!
Take a look at the comments on TF’s video in which he whinges about PZ and try to say that again honestly. Unless of course, the conclusion we should make is that only dwellers of the dregs of humanity watch TF’s videos and comment approvingly.
I think they assume it is “Meyers” because it sounds jewish.
“some fava beans and a nice chianti.”
Speaking of dietary habits, the writer of the learned letter reminds me of the Monthy Python sketch with the contest for “England’s worst family”
What topic? We have treated a whole lot of topics. Including why TF was wrong and properly fired.
Ah slimepitter doing its typical abject stupidity. Nobody was banned for trying to discuss misogyny and sexism. Someone was fired for being stupid, doubling down stoopidily when they should have looked at the evidence, and didn’t do so, and behaving like an adolescent at an adult outing, thing bad behavior makes one a true adult. So, show me where TF is in the dungeon, or apologize to this blog for utter and total fuckwittery.
@ 96 –
What would you like a citation of? The fact that he was kicked off FTB? Or the fact that his message was constructive?
And in general, I like how the immediate response to my post is more of the ridiculous incivility that Thunderfoot’s supporters (and Thunderfoot himself) have been accused of. (Quite unfairly, by my judgment, from my seat on the sidelines.)
Stop baiting.
Oh, and TF sycophants, why don’t you ever show real evidence that codes of conduct/sexual harassment policies aren’t needed, and not having one works better for women than having one. Oh, that’s right, all you have is your poor pee-pee being shriveled by someone telling you to mature and behave like an adult…
You said banned.
He was fired from blogging at FtB, a paid gig.
Banned means not being allowed to comment on a blog. He can comment here; ergo he is not banned.
Are you open to the possibility that it was not constructive?
Here is one of Thunderfoot’s supporters threatening to commit rape.
Has anyone on our side threatened Thunderfoot with rape?
Has anyone on our side threatened you with rape?
We are not talking about mere incivility.
@ 99 –
Have you tried to read the comments here? I hate to say it, and it’s not usually the case, but recently it’s actually gotten worse than the youtube comments! I can barely believe what some posters I’d previously respected are saying, or the ridiculously uncivil manner in which they’re behaving.
And then there’s the fact that PZ’s behavior has been little better, which is the biggest disappointment of all. He’s a person I’d greatly respected, and it really upsets me to see him use such blatantly misleading tactics, and refuse so stubbornly to give a fair treatment to the arguments at hand.
For example, saying “Some people do disagree with you, and here’s a sample” is a not a claim that a YouTube polls determine reality. That’s just silly. And saying “the amount of attention given to the sexual harassment issue is not proportional to the actual size of the problem” is not a suggestion that sexual harassment isn’t a problem, or shouldn’t be resolved. Both characterizations are ridiculous, as are most of the others.
What does it take to get a forum of athiests to behave like adults? Apparently a lot more than I thought.
The Aristocrats!?
@105 –
Unimportant semantics, as far as I’m concerned. But OK, whatever, sure. Fired, not banned. Please feel free to gloat in your victory.
Thank you I believe I shall
Are you giving the same policing to TF’s fanbois? Or the people talking about rape, cunts, bitches etc?
derekneal @ #102
You claimed someone attempted to start a constructive discussion here, and got banned. I asked you to provide a citation (or some other evidence) to support your claim.
Now, since you’re clearly talking about Thunderfoot, a couple of things:
1. Thunderf00t didn’t get banned, he was fired (as you acknowledge @ #102)
2. As Ed Brayton (you know, the guy who owns this network) stated, Thunderf00t’s firing had little to do with what he chose to blog about. The problem was how he went about doing it. Specifically, his writing was shitty, and he was either unable to express his points clearly, or attempted to deflect criticism by crying “Strawman!” EVERY. SINGLE. FUCKING. TIME.
See Brayton’s explanation for firing Thunderf00t here: https://proxy.freethought.online/dispatches/2012/07/01/major-changes-at-freethought-blogs/
3. If you think that Thundef00t’s message was constructive, I have to ask if you actually tried reading his screeds. Because they were awfully written and horribly formatted, which made it incredibly difficult to understand
If you haven’t read his screeds, they are still available at http://www.freethoughtblogs.com/thunderf00t
It’s nice how you manage to feel superior to everyone.
How dare you even compare the kind of “arguments” put forth in youtube comments with comments here? Most of the youtube comments are composed of nothing more than sexist insults or even rape threats. How dare you call people here uncivil, in comparison to that?
@ 111 –
I’m not policing anyone. I’m saying people here can’t claim the moral high ground when they’re not behaving any better.
The main anti-yoot feeling I’ve noted in Pharyngula has come from the foolish pit dweller who suggested that child welfare officials should pay me a visit because I wrote that Pharyngula has been fantastic for my twin 16 year old DemonSpawns. It’s taught them to ask for citations, identify logical fallacies (amusing to annoying when used in arguments with parents…), to play bingo with the utterances of creationists, teenage sexist assholes, and assorted teabaggers, and a variety of other wonderful things.
The main problem that young people have, at least in America, is that they are so seldom taught to think clearly or behave themselves responsibly. Too many parents allow their kids to be taught social skills by other kids with the exact same degree of maturation. This is, to put it mildly, not a good thing, and leads to a fondness for ASCII peens and stupid rape threats. ( Plus most kids are scoured by silly and destructive religious teachings, which does not generally help.)
Er, semantics?
Fired : can’t make posts on this network, can comment as much as he wants
Banned : can’t comment
You’re right. Totally no difference at all.
@ 112 –
1) already discussed, completely irrelevent distinction, but whatever.
2) Yes, I read the explanation. Doesn’t change anything. Also, he was strawmanned, as discussed above.
3) I read Thunderfoot’s posts after the entire event had gone down, and found nothing firing-worthy in their content.
derekneal
Gosh. You sure crushed ixchel with that comment.
@ 116 –
I find your insistence on repeatedly pointing out the difference (which is largely irrelevent for our purposes here, since there is no misunderstanding and everyone agrees upon what happened) more than a little strange. I’ve already acknowledged the point – do you have any arguments that actually address the validity of mine? If so, I would love to hear them.
“Both sides are equally wrong”.
Gotta love that one. Especially when we are being compared to filth that uses fucking rape threats!
@ 120 –
I’m not suggesting both sides of this issue are equally wrong. PZ and Ed Brayton are more in the wrong, because their behavior has been worse than Thunderfoot’s.
As far as commenting quality goes, though, yes, both sides suck pretty hard.
Aaaaaaaaaaaaand sorry for the obligatory borkquote.
Well then I guess they seriously committed an error by not consulting you right!?
“Banned” connotes a particular meaning, does it not? You are familiar with how it is used on blogs and forums, aren’t you?
Using the word to mean something else is misleading, isn’t it? Since its connotation is not the connotation of firing, it’s misleading to use the way you used it.
Let’s say I worked at Bob’s Restaurant last week but I got fired. Of course, this just means I can’t show up and try to work there, can’t enter “employees only” areas, and won’t keep on getting paid. I can still go to Bob’s Restaurant as a customer, and buy food there.
If I was banned from Bob’s, that would strongly imply I’m not allowed to step foot inside Bob’s even as a customer, wouldn’t it.
Do you see why what you said was misleading at best?
+++++
Again, are you open to the possibility that Thunderfoot’s message was not constructive?
derekneal,
You acknowledged shit. You said it was unimportant semantics and the same thing to you. And it’s apparently a pretty important point for TF’s white knights such as yourself, since each one of you brings it up.
Glad to know that Me shitting on your carpet is better than you kicking me out because of that.
Ah, but we are behaving better, because we aren’t threatening anyone with rape.
@ 126 –
I acknowledged there was a difference, and also said it was unimportant. That is not a contradiction. I once again repeat my request for an argument that actually adresses the content of my posts.
@ 125 –
Sure, I’m open to that possibility. In what way do you feel Thunderfoot’s post was not presented constructively? Any particular lines you felt were inflammatory / disrespectful / etc?
And I was talking about commenters, not PZ and Thunderfoot. As you must have noticed from my mention of rape threats. Unless TF has been indulging in those too, it was pretty clear I was talking about his audience.
I repeat, there is no fucking comparison between language here and fucking RAPE THREATS and rampant sexism you get in his comment sections.
derekneal @ #117:
The fact that you think the difference is irrelevant is rather telling. Thunderfoot is still able to post here if he so wishes, the only difference is that he no longer can do so by using this network as a platform. The fact that you choose to equate firing with banning suggests you are not approaching this discussion honestly.
The explanation is a direct contradiction to your suggestion that he was fired for attempting “to start a constructive discussion” (your quote from post #92). Thunderfoot wasn’t fired for attempting to start a constructive discussion. Furthermore, the fact that he was strawmanned suggests (as I mentioned above) that he couldn’t express his points clearly enough, which provides further evidence that his blog-writing skills were lacking.
The fact that you found nothing “firing-worthy” means little, particularly when you don’t specify what criteria you used to determine this.
Ahem. Who said this?
Google says you’re the first person in the history of the internet to say that phrase.
So, what was the quote that you’re paraphrasing?
@ 128 –
Have you read the first 50 or so comments here? How many have been dick-eating related?
No, actually you didn’t acknowledge the difference. Saying “it’s just semantics” isn’t acknowledging the difference.
Besides, it’s important because if you say that he was banned, you are lying. You are implying that the poor thing isn’t allowed to come here and make comments or defend himself from terrible attacks from FTBlogers. (Thankfully, he’s got his shining knights to defend his honor.)
Yes, he said things which were blatantly not true. Absurd strawmen. You don’t like strawmen, right? Well, how did you not notice this:
By not showing he knows what true evidence that is needed to back up his attitude is. Name, that women would prefer to go to a con without a harassment policy compared to one with a harassment policy. Namely, get his OPINION out and listen to the evidence…
derekneal,
And write the name of the person you are addressing or quote them, I’m sick of scrolling back to see to what post you are referring to.
@ 132 –
“I believe that this is a prima facie case for what I have been trying to tell deaf ears on freethoughtblogs for the past week.”
@ 131 –
I’ve tried to respond to this a couple of times, but there’s just so little meaningful content that it’s hard.
1) No one disagrees on what happens, and I’ve already agreed to use your terminology since it’s apparently a big deal to you. Continuing to beat the horse to death just makes it appear that you have no actual, content-related arguments to present.
2) Um. Ok. I’ll change the phrasing to “trying to carry on a constructive discussion” instead of “trying to start a constructive discussion.” I still don’t think the distinction is very important, but I’ll agree to the wording change if you do for some reason. The main point – that Thunderfoot was treated unfairly given the reasonable way in which his points were made – still stands.
3) Sure, I agree with your statement – but you haven’t actually made a point unless you can answer my earlier call to explain why what he said merited the response he got.
What behavior, specifically, from each person, are you talking about? To be clear, I’m asking you what you think Thunderf00t did wrong, what you think PZ did wrong, what you think Ed did wrong, and WHY you consider the behavior of the latter two individuals to be worse?
Who the fuck set you up as the person making that judgement. Your name isn’t on the masthead. Your name isn’t on the owner’s list. Your name appears nowhere…Get the point. Your OPINION isn’t worth the electrons you used to post it. The only opinions that counted were the blog owners. And they were of one voice, “He’s fired”.
Well there’s an interesting word. It equates telling someone to eat a dick with saying you shouldn’t tell someone to eat a dick, since both of those comments are “dick-eating related”.
+++++
How many have been threats of rape? If the answer is zero, then we are behaving better than Youtube commenters.
How many of those dick-eating-related comments were telling someone to eat a dick? If the answer is zero, then we are behaving better than Youtube commenters.
derekneal @133
Did you fail to notice that the emailer demanded that PZ eat his dick? The comments were totally appropriate. Nobody is threatening to actually slice off his dick and eat it.
Completely different from threatening rape.
Duh.
There’s an extra to in my #137. I hope someone takes it and gives it a better future than the train wreck that this thread is becoming.
Your buddy Thunderfoot wrote poorly, failed to give evidence for his claims, and ignored reasoned, evidenced, polite rebuttals to his arguments. And the other side are “more in the wrong”? You’re quite obviously a Thunderfool syncophant troll following in the footsteps of your hero.
@ 140 –
Yes, I agree. I am expressing my opinion. I’m not sure how that is supposed to count against me, exactly.
derekneal, slow down. You are now responding to comment 140, when there is something important back at 135 which you haven’t responded to.
Easy fix then, start your own blogsite get him to write for you and don’t fire/ban him. The owner here can and did make his own decision, seems reasonable. I too thought the examples and arguments he put forward unfortunately weak. Perhaps he does better with another audience?
Maybe his definition of ‘straight’ is a newer, more modern definition which includes ‘open to experimentation’ if he’s ordering a male university prof to perform fellatio on him or face the punishment of buggery. After deciphering the puerile rhetoric, it seems to me this is more of a BDSM Craigslist ad for the ‘Men For Men’ section. One at a time emails to men in straight marriages certainly doesn’t seem a very effective strategy for the kind of action he seems to be seeking.
@mcCzlhu
….
what
Well, ’round these parts, if you present an hypotheosis that is contrarian, y’all should back it up with facts. Citations. Evidence.
You claim that Thunderfoot did nothing wrong and was banned. That is your antithesis. The current thesis is that Thunderfoot wrote poorly, failed to support his hypotheoses, and used the ‘strawman’ cry to avoid actually dealing with an antithesis. So, if you want your antithesis to merge in to the thesis to become the new thesis, you need to support your ideas.
An opinion is not support.
Og:
I see what you’re getting at; and you performed admirably. I guess I didn’t quite read for comprehension there.
@ 135 –
Excellent. So to be completely clear, you believe the section that you quoted is sufficiently horrifying that it merits firing, correct?
@ 144 –
I’ve already mentioned that I’m not a huge fan of Thunderfoot. I think his videos are boring for the most part. But I also don’t think he behaved as poorly as the FTB administrators have. Have you read his actual posts? I’m just curious, because I can’t find in them what I’m constantly being told is there.
includes sexually abusing other men as a form of dominance, like the meaning of straightness has always included.
These “takes one to know one” comments are homophobic. I am sick of this shit.
Yeah, you’ve said this more than enough times. Now perhaps you’ll move on to explaining why others should agree with you? Otherwise there’s no purpose in you continuing to be here. The validity of your opinion doesn’t increase with its repetition.
All on its own? No. What is your reading comprehension problem? I was responding to you saying this:
You claimed he was behaving constructively. You asked for evidence to the contrary. I presented that evidence. And now you want to turn around and suggest I was claiming that that one piece was sufficient reason for firing? No, I did not say that.
Please admit your error.
And then tell me if you agree Thunderfoot was not behaving constructively.
Seriously, what does “CIS” stand for?
joed
so absurd to live in a world in which ‘ASCII penis’ is a thing.
Seriously.
C’est l’absurde!
@Chas
I’m waiting for a ASCII Vulva now
@ 155 –
I don’t believe I have a reading comprehension problem, nor do I see any error that needs admitting. I asked you in what way he wasn’t behaving constructively. You highlighted a very small part of a largely constructively-worded article, one which was admittedly a little emotional, and provided basically nothing else. I wanted to know if it was your opinion that what you had highlighted was so bad it merited firing, because if not, I wasn’t sure what your point was in highlighting it.
I’ll agree with you that it could have been better phrased. But, f Ed Brayton had written that, should he have been fired? Should PZ be fired for cherry-picking the worst of the emails he recieves and pretending that they’re representative, or for any of the other mischaracterizations (such as the YouTube poll thing, or the suggestion that TFoot said that the only sexual harassment that should be acted on is that which could be reported to the FBI)? If we’re being honest with ourselves, which behavior is worse – being genuinely emotional but still trying to carry on a meaningful conversation, or being deliberately misleading?
I understand now. derekneal isn’t a Thunderfoot lickspittle, he’s just imitating one to confuse us. He thinks Thunderfoot is an eloquent, thoughtful writer but he just can’t find any of TF’s FtB pearls of wisdom right now. And PZ posting a rape threat from a genuine Thunderfoot toady is far worse than TF dismissing women’s genuine concerns about sexual harassment.
Thanks for explaining all that, derekneal. Your unevidenced opinion will be given all the consideration it so obviously deserves.
Chas:
I think it is called Rule 43? 34? 42?
Damn. What is the rule?
Anyway, not sure if this is an embodiment of it, but it definitely may be a derivative corollary.
Sorry, your poor behavior second guessing those with the authority doesn’t show your judgement in good light. Until you apologize to them for your presumptuous and over the top OPINIONS, about that which you have no say over. Everything you say is questionable until you do so.
Second hit on a google for -cis. Really, not hard.
Still no citations from the fuckwit. What is it about TF apologizers, their over the top attitude that they make decisions, not those responsible, and the utter lack of evidence they present? Must be liberturds, the only group that arrogant and ignorant.
Your reading comprehension problem is in suggesting that I claimed “the section that you quoted is sufficiently horrifying that it merits firing”.
I did not.
That is your error, which needs admitting.
That’s right, I’m providing you one bite at a time, because I think you can’t handle more.
You have not demonstrated that you can handle more: you still have not answered whether you believe Thunderfoot was behaving constructively in that quote. Also, I would like to know if you recognize that Thunderfoot was strawmanning PZ in that quote.
My point was that it was a strawman and it was not constructive. I brought this up because you claimed he was being constructive, and because you claimed that Thunderfoot had been strawmanned.
My point is that someone was wrong on the internet. Can you appreciate that?
No, this is a copout. That’s not what I said.
One bite at a time. Admit your errors.
@ 161 –
I have given several specific examples of behaviors of the FTB administrators that I thought were inappropriate, and asked for specific counter-examples in return. I have gotten a lot of posts like yours in return – sarcastic and insulting, but making little to no effort to address my points. For someone who once idolized this community, this is very disheartening to me.
@ 163 –
Perhaps there’s another way you could phrase that, because as it is, I’m not sure what point you’re trying to make. Yes, I have formed my own opinions. Yes, the point of my posting is to express those opinions. Yes, they are different from yours, and evidently than those of the authorities.
advorbis at 121
“Stating that a child’s mind is immature does not insult a child, does not imply lack of intelligence, or inferiority. It does say that they process information differently. And it can change a great deal for an individual child within six months. Some do this. I really do not think I did.”
This very frustrating. I do not know how or why nearly every response was to a point I did not make. I must repeat, did not make.
I have no argument that children are not different from adults in many ways. Less informed, less learned in the cultures ways etc.
I was not complaining about describing them as immature they are, perhaps rebellious, sometimes they are.
My complaint was and is about gratuitously USING THEM (pardon the caps)as exemplars of behavior we do not like.
So somebody does something you don’t like why not just say why you don’t like it? Why drag children into it?
@32 and @157
Thank you.
Of course, as in ancient Rome;
trans-alpine and cis-alpine Gaul.
this “cis” is a newish term?
@derekneal
Since you claim to have read TF’s posts and found nothing to give you pause – an indication of privilege and/or being part of the fucking problem – how about the posts clearly pointing out all the shit TF was doing wrong?
Did you read the posts by Greta Christina or TheCrommunist, to name just two? Basically a lot of the regular bloggers here tried to explain to TF that what he was doing – spewing misogynistic crap – was unacceptable, but he ignored everybody and continued with his hateful idiocy. He was given chance after chance, and he missed every opportunity to make things better.
So, what do YOU want? An apology to TF because he said hateful crap and was fired for it? Not going to happen, nor should it.
Unless you have something more constructive to add than WAHH TF! go away, because we have had this discussion like a million times already.
Also, your insistence on defending TF already tells us what sort of person you are.
For a thirteen year old to act, respond, think and act as a thirteen year old (or ten through fifteen, inclusive, years old) is acceptable behaviour. For an adult to act as a thirteen year old on his or her worst day is an example of an adult acting in an immature way.
Or, maybe you are correct and I am a child abuser. Or you could read what I actually wrote. Your choice.
“Why drag children into it?”
Yes, please, WON’T SOMEBODY THINK OF THE CHILDREN?!!!!
@ludicrous
Would you stop it already?Comparing someone who behaves childishly with a child is factually correct, and it does not disrespect the children in any way.
I don’t think there’s an organized attempt to rob kids of their rights or their humanity, so I don’t understand why you think they are being insulted.
Compare telling someone he behaves like a child with saying someone drives like a woman. Hint: the first one is ok, the second is NOT.
Why don’t racist idiots konw that free speech does not cover Youtube comments? LOL!
Racist/sexist/homophobic comments can be reported as hate speech and removed. Someone needs to educate bigots about the reach of the First Amendment.
And rereading my #172, I need to stop.
I am sick.
I go on the fire list tomorrow.
I am heavily medicated.
And my thinking is unclear.
Sorry for my #172. It was childish behaviour for me to lash out like that.
derekneal #167
Actually you’ve given no, as in zero, example of behaviors that you thought were inappropriate other than the banning, later emended to firing, of TF. You did make one comment that showed me what you were giving. In your post #145 you said:
My response was that we’ll give your unevidenced opinion all the consideration it deserves. Now if you want to show where you did actually give evidence then we’ll pay attention to it.
Hint: Saying “PZ and Brayton were big meanies to Thunderfool” is not evidence.
Are you saying there is no other way for you to characterize this persons rediculous behavior except by making a comparison to a typical thirteen year old?
I am sure you have other options. My question is why among your options do you (and many others) choose children. I am not accusing you of child abuse I am noting a culture wide habit that I think is not good for us or for children.
Now you’re being dishonest. You’ve given NO examples of behavior you think is inappropriate other than Thunderf00t’s dismissal, and you’ve provided absolutely nothing that should lead anyone who doesn’t already agree with you to the conclusion that Thunderf00t’s dismissal was inappropriate. Instead you’ve asked repeatedly that others provide you with reasons why Thunderf00t should have been dismissed, which nobody is obligated to provide you with. You don’t just blurt out your opinion and then, when asked WHY anyone should agree with you, request that others show your opinion to be false. Nevertheless, people HAVE responded with examples of Thunderf00t’s atrocious fucking writing and inability to attack the actual positions of those who disagree with him, and instead of responding to these examples you’ve attempted to build a strawman of your very own by dishonestly claiming that those providing the examples believe that these examples, isolated from any other context, are sufficient grounds for Thunderf00t’s dismissal. When called on that you’ve simply denied that you made any error at all, when it is plainly evident that YOU DID. You haven’t provided anything other than your opinion, repeatedly and without support.
So I’ll ask again: what, specifically, do you think each of the parties involved, INCLUDING Thunderf00t, has done wrong? Why do you believe that PZ and Ed are more in the wrong than Thunderf00t?
Shut-up with your OT trolling ludicrous, the adults are busy talking here and we don’t care to spend any time on your immature nonsense.
@ ludicrous
Ok, show me a study that demonstrates such a comparison is harmful to children. I really don’t understand your fixation on this. We compare behaviour like that to a child’s to make a point, to emphasize that this is the behaviour of a man who refuses to grow up, and act in a mature way.
It’s not damaging to kids because they will eventually outgrow this, it’s part of their growing up. I am not aware of any negative connotations associated with children, but there are like a million put downs associated with being a woman, or a POC, or anyone who deviates from the white, male straight “norm”.
Fixed that for you loser. Your OPINION is irrelevant, as I pointed out repeatedly. Where the fuck do you get the idea your OPINION means anything, not only us, but the powers that be, after your presumptuous and egotistically supplied inane and fuckwitted OPINION was demolished as idiocy on your part?
@90-
This is beautiful and I love you for introducing me to it. I have a really bad habit of always reading comments on everything, and that tends to have really bad results when youtube is concerned…
In response to the whole teenager discussion- I appreciate that teenagers are welcomed here and all, but I have to say that following that up with mentions of how our brains are underdeveloped does not really reflect that well.
It actually really does. It may be biologically accurate, but it’s still very grating to hear, and almost always brought up in order to dismiss viewpoints with a handwave instead of actually addressing them, which is especially grating and applicable to teenagers/children involved in skepticism.
More importantly though, there’s really no reason to bring it up unless you’re going to use it for handwaving; “Well it’s okay that they’re an asshole, they’re a child” (and it’s not- what brings you out of assholery is being told that there’s not an excuse for treating people certain ways, not waiting for the brain fairy to grant you empathy at age 25 while blaming your shortcomings on your brain’s developmental state) and “Well they’re wrong because they aren’t developed enough to know better” (ignoring that reasoning skills can be taught to children and are lacked by many adults to whom they never were).
But if you’re not.. what’s the point? Judge arguments/attitudes/appended-ASCII-dicks/etc. on their individual merit. Either they’re rational and well-reasoned and asshole-free or they’re not. No reason to tack on a ‘..and that’s likely because they are over/under age 25 and have/have not reached full brain development’ at the end.
Not that I’m defending Ludicrous, or faulting anyone for assuming that ASCII-dick-man is a 13 year old. I understand the terror you feel at the idea that that might be someone with a spouse, children, and the ability to vote, and I share it. This is just a bit of a hair trigger topic for me.
Also, as a much-less-serious aside, being told my brain is underdeveloped is just real damn weird. Again, I don’t doubt that it’s true, but it’s a bit like being told that I’m in the matrix or something, if that makes any sense. (Of course, I also have issues with paranoia and not trusting my own thoughts, so ‘underdeveloped brain’ is more fuel for that pre-existing state than anything)
Tone trolls are tone trolling tonight. I’ll make better use of my comments than them…
@ Ing #159
Here: (i) or (())
You can thank google images for that.
ludicrous might be trolling. My sense it no, but I could be wrong. Nevertheless,
this really is gratuitous.
Does anyone read what I fucking write? Ever? I wrote:
Did I assume that the writer of the email was 13? Did I write that?
I did? Fuck it. I should listen to myself and get the fuck out ofhere.
Seriously though people: why are we not discussing ASCII Vulvas now?
Also; just pointing out that along with not agreeing with ludicrous, I specifically don’t agree that children are oppressed in any of the same ways or degrees that women/LGBT people/racial minorities/etc. are, the main difference being that child-‘oppression’ is at least an oppression that you grow out of.
Though it is interesting to note that child-‘oppression’ can make certain real oppressions worse. Being told that you don’t know your sexuality(or gender identity) because you’re too young (and your brain isn’t developed), anyone?
@Grimalkin
You know what’s worse than acknoweldging that kids have a still developing brain? Not acknowledging it and expecting them to behave like miniature adults, and getting frustrated with them when they don’t and punishing them for it. A consequence of admitting kids are not adults yet is that, when guilty of crimes, they are not tried as adults, because many times, they are unable to realize the consequences of their own actions.
And telling a kid that he/she needs to wait a a little longer to properly understand something is not hurtful, especially since most of us take the time to explain things at the child’s level, so that he/she may understand.
Last, Ogvorbis clarified what he meant at #121:
Nobody is saying the person who sent this email is a child. It can be said he acted immaturely, in the manner of a 13 year old – that what immature means, it’s an implicit comparison to a child!. If we knew for a fact this was a kid’s doing, we would make allowances for that, and use it as a teachable moment. But it’s very likely this is the work of an adult who thinks it’s fun to threaten other people with rape.
@185- Sorry, I apparently misread you on that point. My main point still stands, though.
@Grimalkin
Oh, for the love of ceiling cat! What is your point?
Grimalkin:
Well, you said this better than I could. Bah.
FluffyTheTerrible:
Totally nominating you for an OM next month.
And your nym is awesome!
Erin
Fluffy @ 180
” I am not aware of any negative connotations associated with children, but there are like a million put downs associated with being a woman, or a POC, or anyone who deviates from the white, male straight “norm”.”
All of my comments and the responses to them have been about “negative connotations associated with children…” yet you are not aware of any. What we have here is a failure to communicate, I don’t understand what you are saying.
Yes “…a million put downs associated with being a woman, or a POC…” The put downs of children are the water we swim in and so we don’t notice.
I am quite sure that children notice when they are children but most is forgotten, except for the most egregious, when we escape childhood and move into adulthood where we again unthinkingly visit the humiliations we hated on the next generation.
It appears that the “I’m not a fan of Thunderfoot, I just play one on the internet” troll has decided to retreat under his bridge.
@ ibelieveindog
You’re too kind, but I don’t believe I’ve said anything that praiseworthy. I do agree about the nym, and if you want to have more fun, you could totally read the corresponding TvTropes entry:FluffyTheTerrible
You want to talk about rape culture. Here’s a site I had the misfortune to come upon (don’t ask how).
http://www.ultimatesurrender.com/site/us/rules.jsp
Basically, it’s nude female-female wrestling, with different points awards for maneuvers such as (following is censored for decency): B—– fondling, P—- fingering (no insertion), P—- fingering (insertion), P— licking, B—- smothering, Face sitting, Kissing (tongue in mouth penetration).
This is rape as a competition. Get me a bucket, I’m gonna fro up.
I’ll agree to this, and of course I do disagree that minors should be tried as adults and such, because the formative years are the still-fucking-up-and-being-told-you’re-wrong years. But it doesn’t have to be the dichotomy of no accountability and fully accountable as adults. We still punish children who do wrong, and that’s what i’m advocating for- Not a knee-jerk ‘You think/did this because you’re immature, but that’s okay because you’re young’ (along with the idea that things only stop being okay when you’re older and still immature). And of course, I know that this is not exactly what was said here, but it is the underlying implication under the argument. It’s not a matter of treating all children like adults- it’s a matter of treating individuals at such.
When they’re very young? Perhaps. But if someone told me now “You can’t understand this topic, you’re not old enough” or tried to assume my level of comprehension and teach at it, I’d be very insulted. Imagine if someone pulled Jessica Ahlquist aside so that they could explain ‘at her level’ the establishment clause, or that she couldn’t properly understand what she was fighting for yet as she wasn’t old enough. After all, most young people don’t understand or get involved in politics. Would you really not see how that’s hurtful and harmful?
I realize that I am getting quite defensive here. I do need to respond to this (and then I will try to stick the flounce for the third time).
I know the humiliations visited on me by the previous generation. I know the what I hated about my childhood. What I feared. What still scares the shit out of me. And I will not do that.
Children are sovereign human beings. Their modes of communication are very different. I do not treat children as adults. Nor do I condescend. Yes, different language is required. Different modes of discourse. I am a professional communicator — a cultural interpreter. And I can assure you that I am well aware of the brilliance, and limitations, of the minds of children. I deal with these humans at work as I help them to understand a piece of history, to grok the reality of the past, to stimulate curiousity in something that is foreign to most adults my age.
I have two children. Now grown. They are not the same people they were at five. Or ten. Or fifteen. Or any age in between. But they are people.
I recognize immature behaviour in adults. In children, it is usually not immature as it is appropriate for the age.
Yes, I could have called the email writer an asshole. Except that brings a different connotation. Many of the insults that I could have used would, to me, have been partially accurate. When I stated that I think this is an adult who has loosed onto the public the worst behaviour that I could have conceived as an immature, not fully grown, not fully developed child.
@ludicrous
I’ve reread your posts and I’ve found no evidence of this unspeakable harm associated with saying kids are immature. You provide nothing of substance besides that book mentioned at #81.
What is this harm you speak of? And how do we revisit it as adults? I really don’t understand what you’re getting at.
Do you have any experience of working with kids or teenagers? I am a teacher and if I did not make daily allowances for the fact that they are immature and can’t process things at an adult level, I would be extremely cruel to them. It’s a lot worse trying to treat them as adults when they can’t keep up mentally yet. I am patient, and address them on a level they can understand, and wait for them to catch up…by growing up. It’s also wonderful to observe a person developing in front of your eyes, and what a difference 2 years of high school can make.
So unless you show me some evidence that kids are terribly traumatized by us acknowledging their temporary limitations, and helping them gradually overcome them, you can’t expect me to believe that calling someone immature is on the same level – or in the same galaxy – as the hate speech addressed to women, the LGTB community, PoC and everyone else who is “different” as in not white, not male.
Consciousness raising. I really don’t like to draw parallels to actual oppression, but I find it important to bring up when ideas make people feel alienated for who they are, and I would hope you would too.
Install this browser extension to translate all YouTube comments back into their native language.
It’ll help.
Still standing by my #80 as regards the specific comment what started this discussion.
Did anyone say that “kids are terribly traumatized by us acknowledging their temporary limitations, and helping them gradually overcome them”?
Oggie,
If it is any consolation, I understood your meaning quite clearly as saying that the behaviors that are normal to hormonal teenagers are undesirable in an adult.
I suspect that ludicrous is just another slimetroll who is here to be a harasshole. Every post ze makes is OT, and consists of whining about perceived mistreatment.
@ grimalkin
Who said anything about a dichotomy? I’ve never said that children should’t be held accountable, I was simply discussing ludicrous’ claims that we shouldn’t conflate immature behaviour with kids’ behaviour.
And I think very few people let kids off the hook for their mistakes on account of their immaturity. I have a feeling, partially based on Ogvorbis’ post at #198 that most of the times it’s the opposite situation, where adults punish kids as if they were dealing with other adults, not someone who does not yet operate as the same level as them.
And please, don’t tell me what the underlying implications of things discussed here are: those may be the implications for you, but they are definitely not the ones for me.
When exactly did I say it’s ok to condescend to teenagers? Although sometimes it’s a very good thing to remind them they don’t hold the secrets of the universe. Some teenagers have a tendency to -incorrectly – assume they know everything and try to act accordingly, especially in class. A gentle or more forceful rhetorical nudge brings them back to Earth and reminds them they need to learn stuff, and they still have a lot of road ahead before they can at least reach the levels of their teachers, for instance.
I also find your referencing politics a bit of a non sequitur. There are many reasons teenagers don’t get involved in politics, but I don’t think the main reason is that someone condescended to them and spooked them out of it.
I, for one, am always grateful when someone raises my Consciousness.
@grimalkin
Once again, I am a teacher and work with children on a daily basis. There are many things that upset them, and many things vary, depending on the age of the kids, but I have yet to encounter a kid or a teenager who gets upset if he/she is told they still have to learn and grow up a little.
Now, this is just my personal observation, and the plural of anecdote is not data, but I brought it up because I don’t understand who these people who might feel alienated actually are.
Consciousness raising is all well and good, if the topic is meritorious. So far, this conversation has reminded of people clamoring for Men’s Rights, because OMG oppressed.
So please, what is the insult here? Where is the damage? I really don’t understand.
‘Tis:
This isn’t Fear Factor.
It’s scarier.
Thank you Ogvorbis, whether or not you agree, for acknowledging the point I tried to make about the USE of children in making negative comparisons.
Fluffy, I have nothing to say about how you relate to the young, I only assume the best from what you say. If I could just narrow this down to the very common habit of using the immature as invidious comparisons. Look at all the words we use to denote young but are also used commonly as pejoratives ; infantile, immature, adolescent, childish, babyish, juvenile, puerile, etc.
I am sure, from what you say that you show them respect, and I’ll bet that you don’t use some of the words above to them or in front of them. Yet they are commonly used derisively.
Yes part of growing up is being treated as less than in all sorts of ways… I’m about out of gas.
I appreciate the attention some of you paid to this, I might have made my point more clearly and perhaps more generously.
Hmm. She’s a little off today. She usually makes me laugh at least 5 times a day.
@ludicrous
Those words you quoted – infantile, immature, adolescent, childish, babyish, juvenile, puerile – don’t have only negative connotations. When used in connections to kids or adults, it’s an indication to them they have to do something to correct whatever behaviour is inappropriate. I have no problem using such terms, because they don’t criticize anyone for WHO they are, but for WHAT they are doing, something which can be easily remedied.
So it’s rather jarring that you’re complaining about such words, on a thread commenting an email chock full of really offensive terms.
Calling someone juvenile means their behaviour does not match their chronological age and the level of maturity they should have attained. It criticizes a behaviour. Calling someone a cunt, as many TF fans are wont to do, is insulting someone for WHO they are.
No one is insulting kids for being kids, and it’s very disingenuous of you to imply that.
I also don’t need your assumptions that my treatment of kids is a good one. I have my own conscience, and compassion and empathy for that, and I really don’t want the approval of Ludicrous, who, true to his name, thinks kids are the latest oppressed minority, on par with every other truly oppressed category.
@Ing, starstuff: maybe this? {(°)}
There’s no vagina, but meh, the most important part is there :)
Except your point was nothing more than more tone trolling, tone troll. Therefore, it was ignored, as all tone trolling should be.
{(i)}
My own attempt. I like it.
And while we’re at it:
( . )( . )
That’s it, I’m taking my fluffiness to bed. Maybe both ludicrous and grimalkin stick to the flounce and don’t irritate anyone else with their complaints, not to mention derails.
Grimalkin is a teenager; Grimalkin is saying some of the ways teenagers are being talked about here is alienating.
thunk is a teenager; thunk is saying Grimalkin has said it well — and thunk is saying this even while agreeing with me that what Ogvorbis said was not really a problem.
Except Grimalkin said “I specifically don’t agree that children are oppressed in any of the same ways or degrees that women/LGBT people/racial minorities/etc. are”.
Point of order:
Grimalkin didn’t flounce.
A little more intellectual honesty here would be grand.
Well the post I replied to was in response to me, so forgive me for not assuming it addressed Ludicrous. As for the dichotomy, I assumed you were bringing one up when you represented my position as being that children should be treated 100% as small adults, as opposed to not being treated 100% as immature.
You might not have intended them; that doesn’t mean they won’t be perceived though. This is the point of my consciousness raising, to let you know how you come off to the group that you’re talking about.
With punishments, perhaps, but again my main issue is with the stereotypes regarding what is acceptable behavior for people based on their age.
Exactly? Never, I don’t believe, but throughout this discussion ‘child’ has seemed to mean anyone under 18, and you mentioned highschool students, so I assumed.
Also, you make a point of mentioning ‘some’ teenagers, and that’s my point. It’s not something that can be blanket-applied to the entire group, and that is what I have a problem with (and it is usually done via “They all have underdeveloped brains”). As for the gentle nudges to remind them that they are not at the level of their teachers; This is again is an issue of whether or not you apply it universally to all teenagers (and teachers). This is what I really take issue with, and why I brought up initially that such comments are especially grating to skeptically inclined teenagers and children, because very often the argument is that our brains are not developed enough and therefor we aren’t at the level of the adults, and that’s why we don’t believe in god or homeopathy or Autism-inducing-vaccines, or what have you. And it’s usually topped off with a good ‘nudge’ to bring us ‘back to earth’.
And of course, I know that this is in no way what you were doing. But it is my reason for stepping into the discussion and pointing out the issues with it.
On politics, I never said that children were spooked out of politics by misjudgements of their level of intelligence, at all. I gave an example where a perfectly capable young woman could be hurtfully affected by an assumption (that she does not understand what she is talking about) based on a very broad and mostly true stereotype (that young people do not get involved in or understand politics), in order to illustrate how it could be hurtful. That is all.
Fluffy, sorry about this was awkward thought to correct it but didnn’t: I also don’t need your assumptions
I think that calling a young person’s behavior ‘juvenile’ is demeaning them for who they are. That is who they are, juveniles.
When you say what they did was juvenile, that shames them just for being what they are.
I think it is much better to call the undesired behavior by it’s own name what ever that behavior was.
I don’t deny that racism and misogyny are very serious but they are now getting a lot of attention and I don’t have much useful to add except to applaud things like Pamela’s speech yesterday.
As far as I can tell young people don’t really have a lobby, at least not one that takes their point of view. Yes, we adults believe we know what’s best for them, but men knew what was best for women, whites knew what was best for POC. I think the voice of the young is not much heard and I think their understanding that they are likely to be ridiculed or dismissed by our paternalism keeps them out of our hearing.
ludicrous:
You’ve met Thunk now, I see (and xe is treated quite respectfully).
Care to withdraw this statement?
~~
After catching up on this thread, I don’t understand either. I completely ‘got’ what Ogvorbis was talking about.
I fail to see how
‘teens are immature humans who will mature as time progresses’
=
‘oppression of teens’.
Yeah, I tend to type in a very long-winded way, and am trying to break my habit of rapid-fire F5ing discussions, so I’d hope that a short pause wouldn’t be construed as a flounce…
And I have to agree, sadly. I can understand that ludicrous’s conflating child-‘oppression’ to real oppression is really damned obnoxious, but at the same time it’d be nice to have a legitimate concern received as more than a parallel to “WHAT ABOUT THE MENZ?” and complaining and derails.
And for the record, I really don’t find much issue with what Ogvorbis said. If anything, my reason for bringing this up is kind of like the herstory/history thing. I don’t believe that it’s an issue when you look at etymology and such, and I don’t think that even those who use the phrase see it as even close to on par as real gendered language and insults are. At the same time though, it serves the purpose of pointing out ‘hey, sometimes things like this are said without us realizing the consequences’ and making people more aware of the way they’re perceived, and I find that to be legitimate.
Grimalkin:
Gah, you say things much better than I do…
But seriously, it is annoying when adults keep claiming “We’re older/work with/have kids” and therefore pontificate to our detriment or ignore our ideas.
That is an altogether too common derailing tactic.
It is, and that’s my main issue with it.
Also, I really find the ‘we work with kids’ argument kind of funny. Gynecologists aren’t free of sexism, psychologists and doctors of ableism, etc. and teachers don’t get to be free of weird attitudes by children. Hell, due to the increased exposure to children they tend to be the worse offenders. And of course, they’re not going to hear that from children, because that’s a good way to get on the bad side of someone in power over you.
Fluffy @ 173
“Compare telling someone he behaves like a child with saying someone drives like a woman. Hint: the first one is ok, the second is NOT.”
IMO neither is OK.
Nerd @ 212
Um, what? Is “tone troll” becoming the new “ad hominem”? As in, the thing you whip out whenever you feel like it, whether or not it is remotely applicable to the discussion at hand?
“Group X faces oppression at the hands of society. Language that reinforces said oppression should be considered harmful.”
There are legitimate criticisms to be made of how this statement applies to children, but labeling it “tone trolling” is not one of them.
Grimalkin @220
“And I have to agree, sadly. I can understand that ludicrous’s conflating child-’oppression’ to real oppression is really damned obnoxious,…”
I note your quotation marks but I still want to say I think all oppressions are real, just different in kind and severity.
I think comparing oppressions is not necessary and distracts from both.
Fluffy @ 210
“Ludicrous, who, true to his name, thinks kids are the latest oppressed minority, on par with every other truly oppressed category.”
You made that (on par) up. Why did you to that?
ludicrous
<blockquote>paste the words here</blockquote>
not difficult
the “children” can manage it, why can’t you?
You do have a point with this, and I’m definitely against playing the Oppression Olympics. At the same time, there are different levels of oppression and if you aren’t careful and compare oppressions of different levels, it can be incredibly insulting to those who are definitely more oppressed. For a more agreed-upon example, Atheists are indeed an oppressed minority. That said, while I don’t think anyone here would say that Atheists aren’t a minority, there are definitely issues with, for instance, implying that you can relate to the oppression faced by women, LGBT folks, and minority races. For that reason, it can indeed be necessary to compare the levels of oppressions, at least when the levels are very different.
Dear Muslima
There are no “levels”.
Grimalkin #228:
WA HAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHA HA HAHAHAHA HA HA HAHAHA HA HA HA…
…wait, are you being serious?
ludicrous #223:
How nice to know that you think children are as capable as adults. That’s not going to cause any problems at all.
(also, excuse the comment before; I misread Grimalkin’s post partly due to having my font scaling set too low and partly due to dirty glasses)
Grimalkin @228
” At the same time, there are different levels of oppression and if you aren’t careful and compare oppressions of different levels, it can be incredibly insulting to those who are definitely more oppressed. ”
Agreed, that’s why I am careful not to do any comparing, nevertheless a few comments assummed that I did. (Including yourself where you said I ‘conflated’ child oppression with ‘real oppressions” I don’t think you can find that I did that.
Having said that, I don’t think we know how serious the oppression of children may be because we don’t know what not-oppressed might look like, and the children are not in a position to know, let alone tell us.
I think a case could be made, tho I did not intend to here, that the oppression of children (OP for short) may be the template for all the other isms. What does the child experience? That there is inequality big time, that power rules, has privileges, and sets the standards, does all the framing, requires submission to arbitrary rules. In other words the child in nearly all cases must first learn to conform and eventually to learn to make his subjugation his own. The adultism or OP becomes internalized, just as the other isms often are. The child believes in his own subjugation until a certain age and we know when that is, that’s when adults get really upset. It upsets the status quo that they have depended on. I think you see a similar upset when women and POC demand their rights. When children grow up they accomplish more or less their own liberation but the oppression template, the framing is still there ready to be recalled and used on anyone who has less power.
The memory of the comfort of submission to and acceptance of the higher power of their caretakers also sets people up to try to recreate that security by constructing new powerful protectors, the gods. Eventually many are able to discard those gods, but the desire to look up to someone or something remains. So we create little gods, heroes, stars, champions of one sort or another. But eventually those little gods become unsatisfying because they are only human and can’t show us the perfection we crave so we go thru the withdrawal again and again. (the latest event perhaps for skeptics being Dawkins mistakes)
The issue is power, its manifestations are everywhere. Ie, not a few commenters imagine themselves to be in charge of this blog. Frustrated they never got to be hall monitors I guess. This desire to control, or frustration over lack of it is manifest by men in trying to control women. Control freaks all, just a different focus.
Gotta admit: the Comic Sans gives the glans a more appealing shape than would Arial or Times New Roman. (Um… Comic Glans?)
In my opinion, yes it is tone trolling. And all ludicrous has done is tone trolled during his idiocy here. Until it stops trying to tell us what think and how to talk, I’m consigning it to the to that label and treating with the proper disrespect. Talk about immature behavior on ludicrous’ part.
I suspect what ludicrous is asking boils down to:
Why is saying “You’re acting childish” acceptable while “You’re acting retarded” isn’t?
Am I way off base here?
Simple, childish can be cured my maturing, even if one is already an adult. Mental retardation is not curable. A world of difference. My two cents.
Kids are supposed to grow up.
Anri:
Mental retardation is a permanent medical condition. “Childish” is not. “Retarded” is used as a slur and causes deep anguish and justifies dehumanizing behavior. “Childish” is used to describe a state of being we all must pass through and are expected to pass out of.
To describe something as childish is to liken it to something an adult can grasp, because we have all been children. It’s a common experience. To describe something as “retarded” is to take a medical condition that the vast majority of adults do not understand, that very few people using that slur have ever experienced, and use it as an insult.
You and I both know what it’s like to be children and behave in a childish manner. We can describe ourselves, at various points in our lives, as behaving childishly. It is not–or, at least, should not be–a permanent state. With time and effort, a mentally able adult can cease childishness.
If all it took was time and effort to end mental retardation, a lot of people who are truly dehumanized in a way few can grasp and a lot of families out there suffering and fearing for their children’s futures would get down on their knees and weep with joy.
Also, “childish” as an insult means that you are behaving in an age-/developmental stage-inappropriate way. Children are *supposed* to act like children. It describes adults (presuming they are neurotypical, etc. etc.) and adolescents who are capable of behaving with greater control but *choose* to behave as children.
Crossposted from The Endless Thread (in regard to douchebaggers’ rape fetish)
I have found possibly the only appropriate context for rape jokes: This very “creative” version of Genesis:
http://www.fakebible.com/genesis-19.html
— — — — — — — —
Gen19:1 This is the story of Sodom. It’s like Krypton, but with more anal. And it proves gays are evil, assuming they’re also raving sex maniacs.
Gen19:1 That evening, Lot was sitting in the center of the city when in walked God’s angels– his luscious, sensuous, six-pack-abs angels.
Gen19:2 Lot: “Lords, my home is a rape-free zone, I mean, a great place for footsore travelers to get their feet washed. Consensually.”
Gen19:2-3 The coy angels at first said they’d sleep outside, but Lot knew they couldn’t resist his yeast-free, hypoallergenic bread.
Gen19:4 But after dinner, everyone in Sodom, even the GIRLS and WOMEN in some translations, formed a rape mob around Lot’s house.
Gen19:5 Mob, to Lot: “BRING OUT THOSE GLOWY CUM-DRIZZLING MAN-SLUTS SO WE CAN ASSRAPE ASSRAPE ASSRAPE LOL”
Gen19:6-7 Lot emerged, locking the door behind him. “Friends, these ‘sex-crazed mob Saturdays’ really hurt tourism.”
Gen19:8 “Leave my guests alone. Look, I’ve got two virgin daughters. They’re hot and kind of slutty. Rape THEM instead.”
Gen19:9 Mob: “You judgmental foreigner! Just to punish you, we have to TOP what we’re doing to these guys! I call dibs on his eyesockets!”
Gen19:10-11 The angels opened the door, yanked Lot back, and blinded the mob. Mobs become harmless if you add the element of blind panic.
Somehow I doubt PZ would oppose your right to say such things. He probably just thinks you’re an asshat for saying it.
Ari at 236
Spot on thank you.
I am amazed at the attitude that seems to prevail here that because children are not fully mature human beings they do not deserve respect for their feelings. “They will grow out of it” in some years so no problem.
It is true that they for the most part will forget about being treated as less than when young. That amnesia is dramatized over and over.
I can’t believe this hasn’t been posted yet:
https://xkcd.com/481/
I missed the bit where anyone suggested that children’s feelings should not be respected.
We should be a little kinder perhaps towards some of their opinions, as they have not yet had the experience to distinguish between good and bad ones. Without actually pretending that a bad opinion is a good one.
I know a doctor (ER I think) who after years of experience at interacting with people with brain damage found she could cope a lot better with teenagers by responding to them in similar ways. Not because they are stupid or bad or anything like that, but because developmentally there’s a lot going on in their brains physically at the time and, you know, the beta version’s always going to have some glitches. Gradually, as they grow older most of them mature, the ability to self control increases.
“Hey guys, look how silly the extremists are of people I disagree with seem!”
It’s the scientific way.
simonbrown
?
@simonbrown:
I’m still a bit hopeful that after ludicrous stops commenting someone might address what Grimalkin said about feeling welcome:
«In response to the whole teenager discussion- I appreciate that teenagers are welcomed here and all, but I have to say that following that up with mentions of how our brains are underdeveloped does not really reflect that well.
It actually really does. It may be biologically accurate, but it’s still very grating to hear, and almost always brought up in order to dismiss viewpoints with a handwave instead of actually addressing them, which is especially grating and applicable to teenagers/children involved in skepticism.
More importantly though, there’s really no reason to bring it up unless you’re going to use it for handwaving; “Well it’s okay that they’re an asshole, they’re a child” (and it’s not- what brings you out of assholery is being told that there’s not an excuse for treating people certain ways, not waiting for the brain fairy to grant you empathy at age 25 while blaming your shortcomings on your brain’s developmental state) and “Well they’re wrong because they aren’t developed enough to know better” (ignoring that reasoning skills can be taught to children and are lacked by many adults to whom they never were).
But if you’re not.. what’s the point? Judge arguments/attitudes/appended-ASCII-dicks/etc. on their individual merit. Either they’re rational and well-reasoned and asshole-free or they’re not. No reason to tack on a ‘..and that’s likely because they are over/under age 25 and have/have not reached full brain development’ at the end.»
LOL “childism.” Child = unfinished brain development = not the best judgment, which is why they don’t have the same legal standing as adults. Plus the cultural issues Mattir mentions above.
Usually the only people who think “childism” is a problem at all, let alone a problem on a par with homophobia or racism, are the breed of “hip mama” who thinks that her little darlings are being “oppressed” if they’re not allowed to stand on a restaurant table and scream. Or pedophiles who think that 6-year-olds should be able to provide legal consent.
Also, on the internet, the most pressing problem of “ageism” isn’t that middle-aged and older people are discriminated against in the job market. It’s that 13-year-olds have to jump through an additional hoop in order to look at porn.
Ing:
OMG YOU CHILDIST. You’re going to make Ludicrous go off and clutch his blankie and cry for his mama.
/skips the derekneal bullshit
Well, I will. Grimalkin, I agree with you that that’s grating to hear. I am actually still of an age for it to be applicable, though I forget that sometimes :) I’ve seen it used to excuse some bullshit behavior on the part of my cousin, and to predict/preemptively excuse some bullshit behavior for my brother. (My family’s response to this is also, ahem, gendered. And therefore even more fucking infuriating.) It can come across as very annoying and invalidating – especially when it’s applied dismissively. On the other hand, it’s true? I just don’t know how to apply the information without frustrating/negative outcomes.
I guess you can make the age ≠ intellectual and emotional maturity and discuss someone’s need to grow up referencing maturity. Though there is at least some correlation.
That’s more than I can.
For reasons beyond my ken the keyboard intermittently throws in random characters – or even more annoyingly activates the useless shortcut keys that I rarely need, much more rarely use, and can’t even reconfigure to something sensible.
We could be really nasty about this too:
“You’re very immature for your age.”
My first thought is that this gets the point across but if it’s said to, say, a 15 year old, it could also broadcast to other 15 year old readers that we like them better than this particular individual.
Well, that’s just my first thought. I don’t really know how a teenage reader who we’d like to welcome would be likely to interpret it.
A lot of point-missing going on here.
Acting immaturely is not synonymous with acting like a 13-year old, because not all 13-year olds behave that way. If you want to avoid being imprecise in your invective, avoid the latter.
And let me add a personal note. I’m in the process of raising a child, and I have good reason to avoid that kind of imprecision, because she is the most likely collateral target. Thanks for bringing this to my attention.
You have a talent that few of can ever hope to emulate.
@ #256:
You seem to have chosen a nym that is offensive round this part.
If you aren’t trolling, change it please.
If you are trolling, a bit more substance please – incoherent one-liners makes bad chewtoys.
Xe is trolling. Xe has been told to get a new nym before. Xe should get a new nym now or fuck off.
Well … it’s nice to see acknowledgement that not everyone with a penis is a man. I mean, he wouldn’t have specified “” unless he recognized some other type.
There are SO many levels of wrong in the original post; but I am puzzled that no-one has yet mentioned one of the more glaring redundancies/oxymorons.
emailer sez: “Eat my . . . cock . . . or I will rape you.”
Um.
Forcing someone to perform oral sex on you with threats of violence IS rape.
I know it is a small point, a point, though, not nearly as small as the point on the emailer’s head.
Please cite where I, or any other commenters other than you, have stated this or asserted this.
The other thing you need to show is that children regularly post here. They don’t. There are a few teenagers floating around, but this is an adult blog and it shows. Most of us treat known teenagers with dignity. We don’t need to tone down our language for a stray child finding this blog.
But he specified “cis” before that, so “male cock” is kind of redundant.
ASCII vulva… how convenient that this topic has recently come up on PET: Haley’s Comet suggested ({o}). I think this lacks the important part as of comment 211, though.
So full of win!
Also full of win!
My I recommend this wonderful browser extension:
“Herp-Derp for YouTube
I loathe YouTube comments. Here’s a simple browser extension to convert them to ‘herp derp’. If you insist on reading the original (which is highly discouraged), click the comment.”
http://www.tannr.com/herp-derp-youtube-comments/
Just means that ({i}) is the better choice.
Hmmm.
Does ({å}) work?
This is the thing I’m talking about. I know that you find this to be kind, but when you put in the effort to form opinions based on trial and error and research and debate, when you make the point of revisiting your beliefs after humbling yourself enough to say ‘perhaps it’s worth legitimately considering other viewpoints that I don’t agree with’, and when you make an honest-to-god attempt at altering the thoughts and beliefs you were raised with in order to achieve the closest to perfect truth that you can, something that many people do not even attempt in their entire lives, only to be told that you do not have the ability to distinguish the legitimacy of your opinions based solely on the fact that you can’t have possibly lived long enough, when it’s entirely acceptable for someone who never bothered to confront their foolish believes once in their lives to back those claims up with “I’m old enough to have made up my mind”, it is really fucking infuriating.
Seriously, “your brain is not developed enough to understand this concept/distinguish between good and bad opinions/etc”?
That is the reasoning behind
“I don’t need to question creationism, because I’m older than you”
“You aren’t an Atheist, it’s a phase”
“You aren’t a Feminist, it’s a phase”
“You’re not gay, it’s a phase”
“You can’t know you’re gay because you don’t have enough experience”
“You can’t be transgender, it’s a phase”
“Children can’t be LGBT”
“Why should we allow children to be transgender?”
And at least for me, because I don’t know if the other younger people who post here have experienced similar situations, all of that shit is what comes to mind when the excuses about minors’ abilities to reason based on whatever is brought up. And as I know that this tends to be a group of people that takes efforts to speak clearly in order to not imply things that they do not intend to, I didn’t feel it to be too out of line to point out ‘hey, maybe this isn’t as non-insulting as you think it is, and it’s worth thinking about’.
That is the point I’m trying to make here. Not that minors should be tried as adults because I think they pop out of the womb identical, not that calling Dick-Man immature is equal to the slurs faced by women, LGBT people, and minorities, not that I’m a milquetoast mommy that thinks spankings are oppression or a fucking pedophile that wants an excuse to fuck a goddamned six year old, but that I am an actual member of the group that is being discussed, and I have actual opinions on whether or not certain ideas are hurtful towards that group.
/long, winding rant
(On an aside, to clarify what I meant about levels of oppression; I definitely do not mean levels of legitimacy, a-la Dawkin’s Dear Muslima letter. But along that line of thought, I think we can all agree that you do face worse oppression being a woman in certain cultures (the middle east) as opposed to in the west, and while it’s wrong to take the Dawkins route and say “therefor, shut up because someone else has it worse than you”, we should also respect that it would be very fucked up for me to imply to a woman who faces the oppression of middle eastern countries that I know exactly what she goes through. I was trying to convey this to Ludicrous, that even if you deal with a certain kind of oppression, people are well within their rights to be angry if you claim to go through the struggles they do.)
This had me giggling madly at work on a fairly crappy day. TY.
ludicrous successfully derailed this entire discussion.
I hear you, Grimalkin. I’m in my early twenties now, but started participating in message boards and blog threads as a teenager, so I know how infuriating it can be when everyone is aware of your young age. I particularly remember a Catholic in an atheist-friendly forum I used to participate in who was very fond of bringing up my age as a way to shut me up and discredit my arguments, instead of engaging what I was actually saying. Frustrating as hell, and not at all fair.
Thanks Nightjar,
You have described an example of what I call ‘adultism’ or playing the adultist card. The idea that adults are by definition more informed, more logical, more important, less emotional, less impetuous, less, wait for it, “rebellious” etc etc name all the biases against the young.
The interesting thing to me is that this catholic experienced it himself when young and no doubt also hated it, yet behaves as if he has no recollection of it.
That to me makes adultism different from all the other isms, we all get to know it first hand. So we all really do know about it at some level. That catholic had to know about it but was willing to use it against you.
Obviously everyone who has objected to this thread has experienced it. Why are they so angry?
Impressive …
More imaginary ‘isms from a tone troll. Not impressive.
Marilove:
This.
Nerd:
This too.
Maybe this cartoon should have addressed, ahem, “adultism.”
I guess it is a better example than the one that started this whole mess and with which I don’t really have a problem with. For the record, I agree with what ixchel said about it.
Hm, I think a big part of the reason why people do it is precisely because they remember their youth. While it is true that some teenagers/young adults are more mature than some adults, I think it’s safe to say that every adult is more mature than their teenager self was. People grow up. People realise that they weren’t as mature and as right about stuff in general as they thought they were at that age. And because they are now better at X than then they were back then, they assume they are better at X than every single teenager they come across. Which is sometimes, but not always, true.
Oh, FFS. It’s not anger, it’s disagreement and annoyance at the derail. Along with some suspicion that you may be trolling.
Holy fucking hell, Ms. Daisy, that comic is a riot.
And now I feel a deep desire to deny my meat privilege….
Derailing and Trolling
If I were to go on a believers blog where the topic running was about christian discipline of children and I commented that spanking was harmful to children, I would likely be accused of derailing and suspected of being a troll.
The fear of trolling and derailing is very strong here. In the long run you end up repeating the same sentiments to each other over and over. Different opinions are discouraged and then eliminated entirely. This is so like the faithful.
@ludicrous
Aww, attention seeking troll is disappointed.
We don’t fear derailing; happens all the time. Purposeful derailing like your pointless and inane fuckwittery is discouraged though. And you never had a solid point. Just tone trolling and “be nice” despite your name not being on the masthead. Apologize to PZ for pretending this is your blog. It isn’t. Why don’t you start your own? Oh, maybe you have, but nobody wants to play by your rules…
Nerd,
I don’t think PZ needs your sucking up.
Maybe, maybe not. So what?
I’m aware some people have the annoying habit of accusing those they disagree with of trolling for no good reason, sometimes dishonestly. I’m not convinced that’s what happened here. I’m also not accusing you of trolling (I don’t know), just trying to answer your “Why are they so angry?” question. *shrug*
Nope. If we were afraid of trolling, we wouldn’t happily feed trolls until they either explode or start making sense.
Depends on the derail. I‘m not particularly bothered by this one (and I think making sure teenagers like Grimalkin feel welcome here is important, so it’s a worthwhile topic), but then again I’m rarely bothered by derails (except the really despicable ones) and I almost never complain. But that’s not the case for everyone.
Oh, echo chamber, is it? Keep that up and I may just take back the part about not accusing you of trolling.
Who’s sucking up? I’m stating facts. This isn’t your blog, and you have no say in the tone we use at PZ’s blog. That you fallaciously think you do is what you need to apologize for. You need to acknowledge that to yourself, moreso than to PZ, so you stop making the same mistake.
While on apologies, you should apolgize to Ogvorbis for upsetting him when he appropriately responded to a very juvenile post (the ASCII penis). While you may not have approved of what Ogvorbis said, it was an accurate description of the mental state of the poster who put up the ASCII penis. Again, unless you apolgize for mistakes, you won’t learn from them. And you have a lot of learning to do.
ludicrous:
Would you please read my original comment, way up at the top, and explain to me how my carefully phrased comment
is an attempt to silence teenagers or children on this thread. Gendered insults, homophobic insults, racist insults, ableist insults and, yes, ageist insults are very effective silencing mechanisms. The example Nightjar used is a very good example of using ageism to silence someone. Please point out where my comment was silencing.
Ogvorbis at 283,
Thanks for responding again, it helps me to clarify the point I am trying to make,
First, I cannot and did not speak to your intent and it is a bit strawmannish of you to imply that I did. I had no thought whatever that you might be “..attempt(ing) to silence teenagers or children on this thread”
I think I later on said something to the effect that using a negative stereotype of children as an exemplar in criticizing someone’s behavior would tend to discourage the young in participating.
If you were 13 how would you feel about seeing this adult habit displayed here. Would it make you feel welcome and encourage you to comment? Granted the habit of using the young as examples this way is so very common that most kids probably ignore it most of the time. But it is and I say this advisedly a sign of a general adult lack of respect for children.
Think back a few years when women were commonly used in this way. Old womanish , emotional female, she must be on her period, hysterical, woman driver, etc, etc. I will confess way back then(im pretty old) I didn’t even think about it. Farther back POC were commonly used to insult someone.
I see a number of comments defending the habit because some children actually are rebellious. Yes some women are poor drivers(as are some men obviously) but we no longer remark ‘woman driver’ when we see a bad move on the road. And we do not do that because is would be unfair to women to do so. In the same way I think it is unfair to young people to use them as examples of rebellion.
There is another aspect of this that has to do with the way we think. That is that I think it is important to notice when we are generalizing and when we are stereotyping. We must generalize, we can’t think without it, but we can think without stereotyping. Stereotyping is lazier and it often carries with it some unacknowledged negative feelings. We carry a load of feeling memories from our struggles in growing up, most of it unawares day to day. But all latent feelings seek expression in one way or another and the way we think about children is related to do what it was like for us.
Yawn, over concern about something that doesn’t happen from a tone troll. What else is new and also as irrelevant?