Turned out to be a nice impromptu picture.
Talk about “still life” pictures.
Turned out to be a nice impromptu picture.
Talk about “still life” pictures.
Please see the comment left by Seth Andrews of The Thinking Atheist on the video below.
Seth wrote a response to a good many people who have unsubscribed to his channel as a response to this video. I honestly believe that Seth is surprised, in the way that a Christian might be surprised to get pushback on what to them is perfectly normal. I hope to help clarify why some people might respond to the video in the way that they did.
First, I can understand why Seth would be annoyed. By unsubbing, it harms him financially. That’s a real-world consequence. The second is that he is the interviewer, not the guest. It’s not rational to unsub because of one interview. A whole series of interviews that promote non-rational ideologies might make for a different case. It is a mistake to assume that one interview represents the endorsement of a point
On the other hand, subs are legitimate feedback, as is unsubbing. This, I imagine is no different than ratings on radio. This is the world of politics. I can also see that Seth’s attitude toward commenting is rather paternal “I’m doing this for the good of the community,” which is also Steve Shive’s attitude. My thoughts are that “the community” might need my additional input, but not the removal of someone else’s. Mute them for yourself, but not for others. They’re adults, and it’s up to them to decide what to read or not, and how to handle it or not. I can see why, upon Seth’s announcement of a paternal approach to moderation why some might unsubscribe, their needs and desires are different than what Seth offers. I think that’s perfectly fair.
Added to that, based on this interview, one gets the sense that Seth has merely glossed on the subject of Feminism, and has not taken the time to dive into the very few arguments for and against. One need not be a university educated theologian to find the flaws of theism, and the disconnects with reality. One need not know all of the historical details and minutiae of thousands of writers lives to look at the basic ideas promoted by Feminism. Many people believe that Feminism is about “women’s rights” in the way that many people believe that being a Christian means “being a good neighbour.” They believe that the label represents good intentions. One can be a good person without the belief “a god exists,” and one can treat people impartially and fairly without the belief that “women are oppressed.”
Seth says “I don’t allow them to define Feminism for me.” This is exactly the same argument of “Well, MY god is…” Stop arguing about the definition of a word, throw it away, and think about the concrete claims, it’s presuppositions, and their relationship to the physical world. Further, Seth misrepresents the non-Feminist point of view in the same kind of ways that Christians misrepresent Atheist. “White men are oppressed” is as valid a representation of the non-Feminist position as is “Atheism means believing there is no god” is an accurate representation of the Atheist position. These claims start with the presupposition that “the other side” is the inverse of their own position.
Do you think the label matters? Yes, they do, and they should be discarded, until people can think past them. We don’t care about what people think, we care about what they do. We also acknowledge that ideas inform action. It is the framework of ideas that inform behaviours, and the derived actions that count, not a putative and brief descriptive overview of what the ideas represent.
It is as eye-rollingly frustrating to those of us who have thought the issues though to hear what is essentially the arguments of “cultural Feminism” as it is to you, Seth, to hear the same bland arguments made by “cultural Christianity.”
I think that we all share the same general goal of “making a better world.” I claim that if this to be achieved, that it will be done purely on a behavioural level, on a daily basis, and it starts with the concrete thinking of whether promoted beliefs match reality and are intentionally followed up with real actions, by real people who have considered the real consequences for other real people in the real world. To the degree that we endorse poorly considered messages, we are throwing sand in society’s gears and work against our own best intentions.
Kudos to Dr. Everett Piper, President of Oklahoma Wesleyan University who wrote
At OKWU, we teach you to be selfless rather than self-centered. We are more interested in you practicing personal forgiveness than political revenge. We want you to model interpersonal reconciliation rather than foment personal conflict. We believe the content of your character is more important than the color of your skin. We don’t believe that you have been victimized every time you feel guilty and we don’t issue “trigger warnings” before altar calls.
Oklahoma Wesleyan is not a “safe place”, but rather, a place to learn: to learn that life isn’t about you, but about others; that the bad feeling you have while listening to a sermon is called guilt; that the way to address it is to repent of everything that’s wrong with you rather than blame others for everything that’s wrong with them. This is a place where you will quickly learn that you need to grow up.
This is not a day care. This is a university.
I’ll be watching with great interest to learn whether the university professors will finally have the courage to tell their students to act like adults, now that someone has led by example. Then again, who knows, maybe the the university presidents themselves need to hear this message.
Can we say men’s rights success? It is starting small, but it is starting. Excellent. Thanks to Tarn for bringing this to my attention, and to Toy Soldiers for bringing it to Tarn’s.
The United Kingdom has a sordid history of failing to acknowledge and address sexual violence against men and boys. Many cases of sexual violence against males are not prosecuted under the rape statutes, including offenses against boys. Women cannot face rape charges under UK law. The National Rape Crisis Network excludes organizations at assist male victims. All those things works against efforts to help abused men and boys.
However, the UK government recently decided to grant money to the Male Rape Support Fund:
Male victims of rape are to be supported with a new £600,000 government fund.
Twelve charities to be given money from the new Male Rape Support Fund were announced earlier by Victims Minister Mike Penning.
He said nationally about 75,000 men were victims of sexual assault in 2012-13, but few went to the police for help because the crime was “taboo”.
The fund will support the…
View original post 381 more words
I don’t know if Angela is a psychopath or not. I have read that psychopaths are very skilled at charming people. I found myself liking this person immediately. Then when I learned of some of the acts that she’d perpetrated, I was horrified–yet, I still like her. I think that it may be because she’s well-spoken, seemingly educated, intelligent and self-responsible.
I observed her body language very carefully, allowing my mind to register the series of clusters of micro-movements. While she appears to be sincere, I do intuit a deception, one which I cannot discern.
Should the universe be turned upside down and I, transformed into a macabre something that I’m not, and were I caught, I would hope to be as straightforward and not whimpering excuses as so many do, but taking responsibility for my actions as she has.
Then again, I’m far more intent in making sure that I never find myself in a position where committing such atrocities so much as approaches a possibility.
This was a remarkable interview–and I’m glad to say that we’ll never meet.
So here I am on twitter. I can’t actually speak to an individual that doesn’t follow me, but I can follow people. I’m interested in a limited number of topics. I follow a few people, Daniel Dennett, Steve Pinker, some men’s rights activists that I respect, you know, those that I actually know and/or whose thoughts I respect. Suddenly, this twitter timeline is full of f*cking cute cats, and infinite re-tweets of people who I don’t know, about whose opinion I couldn’t care less, and whose content is a complete waste of my time.
Here’s what I want:
I want to follow the latest whatever from those that I follow, and to communicate with them. I don’t want cats, f*cking cute or otherwise, strangers, or this maddening, drink-from-the-firehose deluge of irrelevancy.
I imagined that twitter was a kind of very short blog posting: thoughtful, pertinent pointers to relevant material. One person I follow sends about 25 cryptic tweets with shortened URLs per day. Another lady’s tweet stream seems to consist mostly of retweets that are as relevant as a birth control ad on a casket.
At the moment, I wish I were a hammer and twitter, a nail.
Am I just in the wrong department? I’m looking for tools, not lingerie.
I’ve finally dragged my ass one more step out of social media Luddism and got a twitter account. This amazing invention, it seems does not allow you to respond to people unless they follow you. Social, neh? So, I get to follow 140 character expletives of people whose long and thoughtful articles, videos, podcasts are interesting. Should they post something to which I want to reply to, they’ll never get it, because they don’t “follow” me.
I now understand why people spend such energy into begging for people to follow them: without it, one is shouting into a desolate wasteland. Listen to me! Follow me! How f*cking narcissistic.
Isn’t there a “Hi, let’s talk” symbol?
WTF use is twitter? At the moment, I think it is as twice as stupid an idea as I did when it was first created.
Anyhow, should anyone have any interest on “following” me on twitter (doesn’t that sound like an invitation to stalk?) you can do it here:
And yes, it has made me cranky.
The men’s rights movement extends to Italy. Nice. The author reflects many of my thoughts, and has introduced me to a new concept: Gender Mainstreaming. Imagine, a 30 year old UN program, and I’ve never heard of it. I have now, and I’ll have to dig into it.
it came to my notice that recently you had a speech at the UN, under the flag of UN Women, to call men and boys to support women.
It might be a surprise for you but we, men, already do it, and have done it for a long, long time. Of course, few of us are mighty as Harry Potter, and we can’t fix everything, actually we have issues in fixing our own issues. We are just human, as strange as it may seem to some people.
At first glance, I wondered: “Is she presenting a new movie?” Then I realized you were just appointed as a “goodwill ambassador” by UN. What a great achievement for such a young woman. Did you take the fast lane? However, I understand you are used to red carpets.
Beside you, the comforting presence of Ban Ki Moon, chair of UN, whose profession is to justify the…
View original post 1,303 more words
This is a useful little tid-bit of info, courtesy of Princeton University.
Know not only the theory, but it’s origins my friends.