Tomi Lahren is all wet

She visited Minneapolis, went to a restaurant with her mother, and someone threw the contents of a glass of water at her. It’s the kinder, gentler version of Nazi-punching. And now I’m all confused.

Does Tomi Lahren deserve public scorn and opprobrium? Yes. She’s a horrible person profiting off the dissemination of hate and ignorance. I can’t get worked up about somebody dousing her with water…but at the same time, it would also be legit to arrest and fine the water flinger for assault (likewise, the guy who punched Richard Spencer did commit a crime). You take action, you take responsibility for the action.

But also, I recognize my own inconsistency. It’s one thing for someone to punch Richard Spencer, a male Nazi, but I’d be extremely uncomfortable if someone were to punch Tomi Lahren, his female equivalent. Part of it is the unfounded expectation that a man is supposed to be able to defend himself, while a woman is not. Part of it is the optics: it looks bad for anti-Nazis to be punching down on women (but that it’s even “punching down” to hit a woman is problematic). If you watch the video at the link, you’ll also hear someone shouting misogynistic slurs at Lahren — I don’t want that guy on my side, either.

In my perfect world, people who preach hate wouldn’t have a platform or an audience because no one would want to listen to them, and they’d wither away into irrelevance. In this far from perfect world, we have to struggle with appropriate responses to destructive ideas that rise to popularity in imperfect ways.

Motivation for vegetarians

All right, jokers, first I was horrified, and then as I read that read sidebar, I realized this had to be a joke. I’m in Minnesota, though, home of spam, so it was reasonable to think this kind of processed meat product was a possibility.

It’s a relief to realize this is fake, but it really is a good photoshop job, and I had to wonder if maybe there was a grain of truth here, so I had to google “boned rolled pig” and … DEAR GOD, NO. THE REALITY IS FAR WORSE.

Do not read anything below the fold, if you fear the horrors that will haunt your dreams.

[Read more…]

How not to respond to complaints about handsy guests at a con

It’s like a master class in stuffing your foot down your throat. I’m kind of impressed at how badly FanX/ComicCon screwed up.

So an author, Shannon Hale, wrote to con organizers to complain about how a regular guest was a little too touchy, making women attendees a bit uncomfortable. Look at how the organizer, Bryan Brandenburg, responded:

Maybe it is best that you sit this one out and then wait to hear how it went. I don’t think there is anything we can say to convince you to come and quite frankly I’m not willing to try. I know in my heart that we take this seriously and I don’t think you get it. I have four daughters and I’ve been sensitive to these issues for decades, long before it became trendy with #metoo.

First thing he does is basically say, “Yeah, lady, it’s your problem, not ours, and we aren’t interested in trying to deal with it.” Second thing: the “I have daughters” defense. So if you didn’t have any female offspring, you wouldn’t be interested in protecting women’s rights? And then, diminishing #metoo as “trendy”.

That is one messy paragraph, a regular pigs’ wallow of oblivious splatter. If you’re a conference organizer, you ought to print it out, have it framed on your wall, and consult it any time you get a complaint as what you ought to never, ever do. It’s just perfect example of insensitivity.

But Brandenburg is not done! He then posted Hale’s complaint with her email address on Twitter.

Argh, argh, argh. Would you feel comfortable reporting misbehavior to this guy? He just blew up the whole con’s credibility.

But wait! We haven’t even gotten to the target of the complaint yet. The complaint was about an author, Richard Paul Evans, who got a little too chummy with attendees.

She wrote that Evans “touched me several times and went so far as to kiss my cheek. I had never met him before. … but he made me very uncomfortable and even said, ‘You’re so pretty’ after he touched me, as though he couldn’t help himself.”

Brace yourself for another exercise in podiatric autophagy.

On Monday, Evans wrote that her complaint was not true. This false reporting makes me sound creepy, he said. I told her she was pretty, kindly, as I said, ‘You’re pretty, that’s not going to hurt sales.’ I was trying to make her feel good. Again, I was congratulating her and I was in public. I have a witness to the event. I also remember her coming back with one of my books to get it autographed.

Uh, you just confirmed her account, Mr Evans. You were condescending and told a writer that her appearance, not her writing, was her advantage. And you’re not even aware of how patronizing you sound.

Guest speakers are bowing out right and left from the con right now. It looks like the wrong people are leaving, though — like maybe the organizers need to find a different line of work.

A martyr for Shermer

There was a small contretemps at Santa Barbara Community College a while ago. Michael Shermer was invited to speak, and a few people objected publicly. They pointed out his unsavory history! They dared to use their free speech to express a strong dislike for Michael Shermer! As an ardent advocate of liberty and freedom, Shermer could do but one thing: he blustered and threatened to sue the campus newspaper and various individuals unless they shut up. Fortunately, he chickened out when his lawyer informed him how much it was going to cost — or perhaps when it sunk in how much dirty laundry a lawsuit was going to uncover.

Now for the twist. Shermer’s most vociferous defender on campus was a philosophy instructor named Mark McIntire.

McIntire’s contract was not renewed this year — he’s out of a job.

So he’s set up a GoFundMe site to “defray his legal expenses incurred defending Dr. Michael Shermer”, which is a rather curious statement. What legal expenses? He doesn’t say. He was a guy firing off angry letters to the editor of the campus newspaper. I don’t think that costs money. Also, I think Shermer is well-off enough that he doesn’t need randos incurring undefined legal expenses defending him so they can ask for donations. I suspect this is dishonest: he also recently announced that he’s signed up with FIRE’s litigation project. He’s not raising money to defend himself, but rather, to go on the offensive and sue SBCC.

Also curious is that he lists a bunch of reasons why he was fired: he was accused of using “politically charged” topics in his classes, the chairman doesn’t like his facebook postings, and that he was accused of not understanding basic philosophical concepts. What he does not do is include the contents of his actual termination letter, which I can guarantee you doesn’t say any of those things. College administrators usually know how to cover their asses better than that. He goes further and claims that:

I will argue, in any future venue, that my removal is because I publicly oppose the ‘Social Justice Warriors’ who have seized control of Santa Barbara City College of late.

The real reason I will never be rehired is that I was the sole faculty voice expressing the cause of marginalized religious, conservatives, libertarians, homeschoolers, and/or Trump voters on staff, faculty, and student population. That is unacceptable on the SBCC campus today. Therefore, these are violations of my First and Fourteenth Amendments protections, attempting to silence and remove me from the SBCC campus forever.

You know, I really don’t believe that there is one word in the official correspondence from campus administrators that said any of that, which means his hypothetical lawsuit is going to have a tough time making a case. Also, I’m sorry to say, he was temporary, adjunct faculty, and those positions have limited support and are prone to termination on a whim. Without supporting McIntire personally — I think he’s a bit of a jerk — I do think the adjunctification of academia is disastrous, inhumane, and a disgrace to the system, and that every worker deserves better protections against frivolous dismissal.

I am also amused, though, that the body of Shermer defenders aligns so well with Trump supporters. If he was the “sole faculty voice” supporting assholes like himself (which I don’t believe for a minute — there are multiple regressive voices everywhere), then SBCC has just become a much more pleasant, rational, and collegial place.

If you want further entertainment, read the update, a letter of support from Michael Shermer. Once again, his defense against accusations is that he was never investigated by the police — exactly. He was never questioned by the police because conference organizers closed ranks and never forwarded any complaints to legal authorities. He was astoundingly privileged and sheltered when preying on women, and now he thinks that means he never did anything wrong.

Good news from our little home on the prairie

Go say hello to Rob Denton — he writes at the group blog, The Molecular Ecologist, and he’s got a very nice post up about species differentiation rates varying with locomotion mode. Basically, terrestrial organisms form more species than aquatic or flying organisms, because they face more geographic barriers.

No, he’s not joining freethoughtblogs. It’s even better: he’s joining the University of Minnesota, Morris biology faculty, so he’s going to be hanging around here in the upper midwest for a while. See? That job search I was part of around Christmas of this year had a successful outcome.

Also, the two job searches I chaired last month also were extremely successful, and we snared a couple of phenomenal colleagues who will also be starting here in the fall…but I’ll say no more until they’re actually here. Boy, this place is going to have a lot of new faces and some big changes this year!

Get out of my head, Eiynah!

Over at Nice Mangos, she posts about her perspective on movement atheism.

It’s quite depressing that movement Atheism has turned into such a joke. I valued it so much once.

This unraveling of the movement and it’s leaders has been tough to come to terms with. Especially for those of us who have already done this bit before…wrestled our beliefs, questioned respected leaders, lost community for it, and so on.

I had noticed a troubling turn 2-3 years ago. The questions in my mind became harder and harder to ignore when Rubin arrived on scene. He really brought the hypocrisies to the surface.

My personal, recent last straw was the treatment of the Krauss thing generally among movement leaders….and the Ezra Klein/Harris convo, the utterly obvious flaws in thinking. That was really it for me. No looking back and hoping former heroes come to their senses.

OK, that’s eerie — it’s the same scene, only about 5 years later, with different players. I noticed the “troubling turn” about 8 years ago, as more and more atheists began to rally around two themes: the Glorious Leaders who were fonts of inarguable Reason & Logic, and a definition of atheism that exempted them from all social responsibility or ethical obligation. The other big difference was that unlike Eiynah, I resisted criticizing with the excuses of #NotAllAtheists and they’ll outgrow the regressive social tendencies if we just keep trying. I was wrong. And it is quite depressing.

At least I can really love this portrayal of the shambles movement atheism is in right now.

Where’s all the energy of atheism going? Right into the pockets of those jokers, many of whom are openly anti-atheist.