Atheism and Feminism (or, Watson v. Dawkins)

Atheism, secularism & freethought etc.

Moderators: Blip, DarthHelmet86

Re: Atheism and Feminism (or, Watson v. Dawkins)

#7501  Postby Thommo » Dec 23, 2013 9:32 am

I'm just... That is... Well, I don't quite understand...

How does comparing Rebecca Watson to a perfect God address the question of maybe dropping your own speculation that "Reginald" doesn't object to being publicly shamed and criticised? How does informing us that you agree that Rebecca Watson isn't the only person in all of history to ever say a single thing that is deemed wise (a rather extreme position) demonstrating a lack of bias or anything else?

I'm bemused.

Let's talk empathy, simple question:-

Do you think most people would like to be dubbed with a particular name in derogatory fashion and publicly criticised for taking their time considering whether or not they are willing to have sex? Put yourself in their place, do you think it is pleasant to have people laughing at you for being careful?

If "no", can you therefore see your way to admitting that what Watson did - trying to make money by inflicting this unpleasantness on someone - is something that is easily criticised?
User avatar
Thommo
 
Posts: 26670

Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Atheism and Feminism (or, Watson v. Dawkins)

#7502  Postby Thommo » Dec 23, 2013 9:36 am

Unrelatedly, although I get the insulting image Watson intended, the name Reginald continually evokes an image of this guy to me, which is somewhat amusing:-



:lol:
User avatar
Thommo
 
Posts: 26670

Print view this post

Re: Atheism and Feminism (or, Watson v. Dawkins)

#7503  Postby stijndeloose » Dec 23, 2013 9:46 am

Thommo wrote:How does comparing Rebecca Watson to a perfect God address the question of maybe dropping your own speculation that "Reginald" doesn't object to being publicly shamed and criticised?


I don't know how that is even relevant. It doesn't change anything about the vileness and hypocrisy of Watson's behaviour.
Image
Fallible wrote:Don't bacon picnic.
User avatar
stijndeloose
Banned User
 
Name: Stdlnjo
Posts: 18554
Age: 40
Male

Belgium (be)
Print view this post

Re: Atheism and Feminism (or, Watson v. Dawkins)

#7504  Postby surreptitious57 » Dec 23, 2013 11:06 am

Thommo wrote:
Do you think most people would like to be dubbed with a particular name in derogatory fashion and publicly criticised
for taking their time considering whether or not they are willing to have sex ? Put yourself in their place do you think
is pleasant to have people laughing at you for being careful ?

If no can you therefore see your way to admitting that what Watson did - trying to make money by inflicting this
unpleasantness on someone - is something that is easily criticised ?

No to the first question
No to the second question
No to the third question
Yes to the fourth question

The third and fourth questions have already been answered by me
which you would know if you actually took the time to read my posts
A MIND IS LIKE A PARACHUTE : IT DOES NOT WORK UNLESS IT IS OPEN
surreptitious57
 
Posts: 10074

Print view this post

Re: Atheism and Feminism (or, Watson v. Dawkins)

#7505  Postby Thommo » Dec 23, 2013 11:26 am

I'd go back and look, but given there are four answers to three questions only matched by enumeration it's rather hard to get your meaning when you say you've answered the third and fourth I'm afraid.

I've read your posts over the last few pages a number of times trying to get your point and I honestly can't. Even where there was apparently a single right-or-wrong answer I just haven't a clue what you imagine it to be, though I admit to some curiosity.
User avatar
Thommo
 
Posts: 26670

Print view this post

Re: Atheism and Feminism (or, Watson v. Dawkins)

#7506  Postby Briton » Dec 23, 2013 11:44 am

Thommo wrote:Unrelatedly, although I get the insulting image Watson intended, the name Reginald continually evokes an image of this guy to me, which is somewhat amusing:-


Reginald Molehusband comes to mind for me. Particularly as someone said 'come on Reginald...' earlier in this thread.
User avatar
Briton
 
Posts: 4000

Country: UK
European Union (eur)
Print view this post

Re: Atheism and Feminism (or, Watson v. Dawkins)

#7507  Postby Scarlett » Dec 23, 2013 1:28 pm

Thommo wrote:I'd go back and look, but given there are four answers to three questions only matched by enumeration it's rather hard to get your meaning when you say you've answered the third and fourth I'm afraid.

I've read your posts over the last few pages a number of times trying to get your point and I honestly can't. Even where there was apparently a single right-or-wrong answer I just haven't a clue what you imagine it to be, though I admit to some curiosity.


:this:
User avatar
Scarlett
 
Posts: 16046

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Atheism and Feminism (or, Watson v. Dawkins)

#7508  Postby Scarlett » Dec 23, 2013 1:32 pm

There are always quite a few 'guests' perusing this thread :tinfoil:

:shifty:
User avatar
Scarlett
 
Posts: 16046

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Atheism and Feminism (or, Watson v. Dawkins)

#7509  Postby Thommo » Dec 23, 2013 1:42 pm

Briton wrote:
Thommo wrote:Unrelatedly, although I get the insulting image Watson intended, the name Reginald continually evokes an image of this guy to me, which is somewhat amusing:-


Reginald Molehusband comes to mind for me. Particularly as someone said 'come on Reginald...' earlier in this thread.


I had to google that one! :cheers:
User avatar
Thommo
 
Posts: 26670

Print view this post

Re: Atheism and Feminism (or, Watson v. Dawkins)

#7510  Postby Briton » Dec 23, 2013 2:22 pm

Thommo wrote:
Briton wrote:
Thommo wrote:Unrelatedly, although I get the insulting image Watson intended, the name Reginald continually evokes an image of this guy to me, which is somewhat amusing:-


Reginald Molehusband comes to mind for me. Particularly as someone said 'come on Reginald...' earlier in this thread.


I had to google that one! :cheers:


You have to be of a certain age (and British) to remember Reginald. Even today when parking, I think, not too close, far enough forward... :)
User avatar
Briton
 
Posts: 4000

Country: UK
European Union (eur)
Print view this post

Re: Atheism and Feminism (or, Watson v. Dawkins)

#7511  Postby Imagination Theory » Dec 24, 2013 1:47 am

I just don't get this. There are world leaders, religious leaders, law makers, policy makers, people who influence law and policy,TV, movies, ads, commercials, music, etc., including in the West, who say women shouldn't go to school, there is no such thing as rape or there is such a thing as legitimate rape, women shouldn't be able to get divorced or have birth control or abortion, women are sluts and whores and on and on, yet none of them gets 376 fucking pages, that is three hundred and seventy six pages. Is it because she is a feminist and you think she is being a hypocrite?

Are you seriously telling me you would posts pages and pages more about a gay lady who is pro LGBT's rights, who did stand up and said "hetero sex is disgusting" then you would Uganda's new anti gay law? That you would post more about a black rights activist who did stand up and talked about crackers and used white stereotypes then you would someone who wanted apartheid again? You think hypocrisy is the worst thing ever? Or why oh why do you guys post more about RW and A+ then you do about real injustice that happens to real people.

Ask yourself, why. Don't you wonder yourselves? Because it is kinda fucked up. RW maybe humiliated one person but just think of one country and just sexism, ignore the rest of the world and racism and homophobia and the like. Think the Congo where women are gang raped and raped more then they aren't. You aren't posting threads angry about the war lords and rapists and the West supporting those war lords. Why? I'm not saying you shouldn't post here, I'm asking why is RW worth all these 376 pages to you, and not saying else? Is it really the hypocrisy?
Я пью за разоренный дом,
За злую жизнь мою,
За одиночество вдвоем,
И за тебя я пью, -
За ложь меня предавших губ,
За мертвый холод глаз,
За то, что мир жесток и груб,
За то, что Бог не спас.


Андре́евна

אני מתגעגע הביתה
User avatar
Imagination Theory
 
Posts: 5981

Botswana (bw)
Print view this post

Re: Atheism and Feminism (or, Watson v. Dawkins)

#7512  Postby scott1328 » Dec 24, 2013 2:30 am

Imagination Theory wrote:I just don't get this. There are world leaders, religious leaders, law makers, policy makers, people who influence law and policy,TV, movies, ads, commercials, music, etc., including in the West, who say women shouldn't go to school, there is no such thing as rape or there is such a thing as legitimate rape, women shouldn't be able to get divorced or have birth control or abortion, women are sluts and whores and on and on, yet none of them gets 376 fucking pages, that is three hundred and seventy six pages. Is it because she is a feminist and you think she is being a hypocrite?

Are you seriously telling me you would posts pages and pages more about a gay lady who is pro LGBT's rights, who did stand up and said "hetero sex is disgusting" then you would Uganda's new anti gay law? That you would post more about a black rights activist who did stand up and talked about crackers and used white stereotypes then you would someone who wanted apartheid again? You think hypocrisy is the worst thing ever? Or why oh why do you guys post more about RW and A+ then you do about real injustice that happens to real people.

Ask yourself, why. Don't you wonder yourselves? Because it is kinda fucked up. RW maybe humiliated one person but just think of one country and just sexism, ignore the rest of the world and racism and homophobia and the like. Think the Congo where women are gang raped and raped more then they aren't. You aren't posting threads angry about the war lords and rapists and the West supporting those war lords. Why? I'm not saying you shouldn't post here, I'm asking why is RW worth all these 376 pages to you, and not saying else? Is it really the hypocrisy?


Ever hear of the "Dear Muslima" letter?
User avatar
scott1328
 
Name: Some call me... Tim
Posts: 8628
Male

United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Atheism and Feminism (or, Watson v. Dawkins)

#7513  Postby Spinozasgalt » Dec 24, 2013 4:02 am

Similarly, IT, why do you continue to post here? There are plenty of people suffering greater injustices to whom you could devote a defence, but you choose to do it here for Watson (and in circumstances for which it's hard to see why it's called).
When the straight and narrow gets a little too straight, roll up the joint.
Or don't. Just follow your arrow wherever it points.

Kacey Musgraves
User avatar
Spinozasgalt
RS Donator
 
Name: Jennifer
Posts: 18385
Age: 33
Male

Country: Australia
Australia (au)
Print view this post

Re: Atheism and Feminism (or, Watson v. Dawkins)

#7514  Postby Thommo » Dec 24, 2013 4:42 am

Imagination Theory wrote:I just don't get this. There are world leaders, religious leaders, law makers, policy makers, people who influence law and policy,TV, movies, ads, commercials, music, etc., including in the West, who say women shouldn't go to school, there is no such thing as rape or there is such a thing as legitimate rape, women shouldn't be able to get divorced or have birth control or abortion, women are sluts and whores and on and on, yet none of them gets 376 fucking pages, that is three hundred and seventy six pages. Is it because she is a feminist and you think she is being a hypocrite?

Are you seriously telling me you would posts pages and pages more about a gay lady who is pro LGBT's rights, who did stand up and said "hetero sex is disgusting" then you would Uganda's new anti gay law? That you would post more about a black rights activist who did stand up and talked about crackers and used white stereotypes then you would someone who wanted apartheid again? You think hypocrisy is the worst thing ever? Or why oh why do you guys post more about RW and A+ then you do about real injustice that happens to real people.

Ask yourself, why. Don't you wonder yourselves? Because it is kinda fucked up. RW maybe humiliated one person but just think of one country and just sexism, ignore the rest of the world and racism and homophobia and the like. Think the Congo where women are gang raped and raped more then they aren't. You aren't posting threads angry about the war lords and rapists and the West supporting those war lords. Why? I'm not saying you shouldn't post here, I'm asking why is RW worth all these 376 pages to you, and not saying else? Is it really the hypocrisy?


It's the celebrity of celebrity. My opinions about Watson aren't strong, yet here I am being told I shouldn't be talking about her, here I am being told I should just let Surreptitious's inventions and your own speculations stand and walk away.

Why do more people (by a country mile) watch shows like Big Brother or Strictly Come Dancing than Prime Minister's Questions? Why do more votes get cast in the final for Sports Personality of the year than in most elections? Why do we have a thread that is thirty-fucking-five thousand posts long arguing about whether the bible is based on a real person or persons (a question which can be answered in the single word "probably")?

The answer is because people (including you, while asking this question) don't apportion their time based on importance. Most long threads persist because people keep posting in them. As soon as one "side" retires such threads inevitably die, but as long as there are people defending what is perceived as indefensible that thread just keeps chugging along.
User avatar
Thommo
 
Posts: 26670

Print view this post

Re: Atheism and Feminism (or, Watson v. Dawkins)

#7515  Postby Nicko » Dec 24, 2013 5:04 am

Imagination Theory wrote:I just don't get this. There are world leaders, religious leaders, law makers, policy makers, people who influence law and policy,TV, movies, ads, commercials, music, etc., including in the West, who say women shouldn't go to school, there is no such thing as rape or there is such a thing as legitimate rape, women shouldn't be able to get divorced or have birth control or abortion, women are sluts and whores and on and on, yet none of them gets 376 fucking pages, that is three hundred and seventy six pages.


None of them needs 376 pages.

Just to take one example: the "legitimate rape" thing.

That comes from a comment by Todd Akin, a former US politician. "Former" because his "legitimate rape" howler pretty much cost him the election he was projected to win.

When this issue was discussed here, the conversation basically went:

    OP: "Hey, look at this moron! He thinks women can't get pregnant from rape! What a dickhead!"

    Everyone else: "Holy fuck! I can't believe that fuckwit is allowed out of the house unsupervised, let alone run for public office!"

There was a bit of scope for discussion around the "Republican Bubble" phenomenon when it became clear that Akin might not be the only member of his party to believe this - just the only one stupid enough to say it outside certain circles - but that only went as far as to have everyone who commented call that stupid as well.

In short, a stupid person said something stupid, almost everyone - even people who were going to vote for him - said it was stupid and then he went away. Hey, if you think some aspect of that incident was not adequately explored in the thread, resurrect it.

In Watson's case, she didn't go away. Rather, she kept on saying stupid shit. Built a career on stupid shit in fact, and people keep defending her.

As Thommo just pointed out, discussions continue until the discussion stops. What's hard to understand about this?
"Democracy is asset insurance for the rich. Stop skimping on the payments."

-- Mark Blyth
User avatar
Nicko
 
Name: Nick Williams
Posts: 8638
Age: 43
Male

Country: Australia
Australia (au)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Atheism and Feminism (or, Watson v. Dawkins)

#7516  Postby stijndeloose » Dec 24, 2013 5:41 am

scott1328 wrote:Ever hear of the "Dear Muslima" letter?


Was thinking the same thing!
Image
Fallible wrote:Don't bacon picnic.
User avatar
stijndeloose
Banned User
 
Name: Stdlnjo
Posts: 18554
Age: 40
Male

Belgium (be)
Print view this post

Re: Atheism and Feminism (or, Watson v. Dawkins)

#7517  Postby Imagination Theory » Dec 24, 2013 5:52 am

stijndeloose wrote:
scott1328 wrote:Ever hear of the "Dear Muslima" letter?


Was thinking the same thing!


Actually some people in this very thread said Dawkins, was in the right about that letter. I'm NOT saying that. I'm asking you why it seems like you, as in some of the posters here, post more on the unimportant stuff, less harmful stuff. I'm not saying you shouldn't, or you can't do both. Of course you can, I'm not that stupid or even a remotely saying you guys don't care about sexism or homophobia or anything that hurts people. I'm asking why RW doing stand up gets more posts then something that actually hurts people.

Why, is my question. Sorry for the misunderstanding. I'll ask again, why do you post more about A+ and RW then things that are actually killing and harming people. I'm not saying you shouldn't. I'm just really confused. I used to fall under the spectrum, and I don't get this.
Я пью за разоренный дом,
За злую жизнь мою,
За одиночество вдвоем,
И за тебя я пью, -
За ложь меня предавших губ,
За мертвый холод глаз,
За то, что мир жесток и груб,
За то, что Бог не спас.


Андре́евна

אני מתגעגע הביתה
User avatar
Imagination Theory
 
Posts: 5981

Botswana (bw)
Print view this post

Re: Atheism and Feminism (or, Watson v. Dawkins)

#7518  Postby Imagination Theory » Dec 24, 2013 5:59 am

Now I'm really frustrated. :waah: I'm not trying to criticize anyone or anything like that. I'm honestly just puzzled. Is it because of the hypocrisy or...why? I don't know if I'm making sense I don't all the time, now I'm really stressed out. I know it's not your fault, my communication sucks. Sorry. :oops: I was for sure not trying to do a dear muslima. I feel all panicky because you think I think that and I do NOT.
Я пью за разоренный дом,
За злую жизнь мою,
За одиночество вдвоем,
И за тебя я пью, -
За ложь меня предавших губ,
За мертвый холод глаз,
За то, что мир жесток и груб,
За то, что Бог не спас.


Андре́евна

אני מתגעגע הביתה
User avatar
Imagination Theory
 
Posts: 5981

Botswana (bw)
Print view this post

Re: Atheism and Feminism (or, Watson v. Dawkins)

#7519  Postby Thommo » Dec 24, 2013 6:05 am

If my post is adding to that feeling, please just ignore it. I was just passing my insomnia time chewing the fat and none of what I wrote was important. You're a lovely person and it's simply not worth worrying about what I wrote (if indeed it is contributing), I'd hate to contribute to your stress.
User avatar
Thommo
 
Posts: 26670

Print view this post

Re: Atheism and Feminism (or, Watson v. Dawkins)

#7520  Postby Imagination Theory » Dec 24, 2013 6:07 am

Being nice stresses me out. :lol: Thank you though. I didn't read everything. I think I need to go to bed. Which know sounds really mean since you can't sleep. Sorry.

And it's not you. I''m stressed out that I can't get across what I mean.
Я пью за разоренный дом,
За злую жизнь мою,
За одиночество вдвоем,
И за тебя я пью, -
За ложь меня предавших губ,
За мертвый холод глаз,
За то, что мир жесток и груб,
За то, что Бог не спас.


Андре́евна

אני מתגעגע הביתה
User avatar
Imagination Theory
 
Posts: 5981

Botswana (bw)
Print view this post

PreviousNext

Return to Nontheism

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 2 guests