Dawkins and criticism.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
17-12-2014, 03:59 PM
RE: Dawkins and criticism.
I think some of this has to do with the new feminism movement which I have to agree is not really moving in a positive direction. I think one of the problems the new feminism movement got itself into was to start labeling anyone and everyone who didn't take their side or agree with them as anti-feminist or misogynist. As soon as anyone starts throwing labels around broad groups of people without any thought, they end up discrediting themselves.

I tend to agree that Dawkins was likely misunderstood, although as others have pointed out, twitter is a very poor choice of outlet for complex and sensitive topics. Of course, that is not to say we shouldn't have meaningful discussions about those topics.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-12-2014, 04:05 PM
RE: Dawkins and criticism.
(17-12-2014 03:52 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(17-12-2014 03:34 PM)undergroundp Wrote:  When has Dawkins been anti-feminist?

Somewhere around the time, he posted tweets trivializing sexual harassment, and date rape, which begun around the time of the whole Dear Muslima spew.

He had something to say about that.

How is that anti-feminist?

Also, rape doesn't only have to do with women.

And it didn't begin because of the Dear Muslima issue.

Many verses are like silver threads
tied on the chimes of the stars-
if you pull them,
a silver peal makes the horizon vibrate.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-12-2014, 05:12 PM
RE: Dawkins and criticism.
(17-12-2014 01:39 PM)undergroundp Wrote:  Wow. Worst thread subject ever.

It's been a while since this "issue" was last brought up and it's been bothering me a bit so here it goes.

What do you think about all the criticism on Richard Dawkins' comments on issues such as feminism, Islam and abortion?

I feel like I'm the only one who seems to get his points. Why do people, even atheists, get so butthurt about such things? One thing I always liked about Dawkins is that he speaks his mind. Why should he censor himself just because people consider him influential?
It's quite hypocritical to attack him for being a misogynistic, heartless asshole because of a couple of tweets when it's glaringly obvious that he is not.

Why would a person here in the forum talking this way be excused, while Dawkins is harshly criticized (even though everyone knows what he means but he just doesn't word it properly) just because he's influential?

I can't help but cringe at all the "I like Dawkins, but", "Good scientist, but an asshole" and "He used to be my idol, I'm so disappointed". At the end of the day, no one should be idolized and no one should be looking for "the perfect atheist" to look up to.

And all that aside, I didn't consider any of his comments misogynistic, insensitive or uninformed. Badly worded? Sure (let us not forget that most of those comments were on twitter, which has a word limit). Enough to make him a despicable person? Not even close.

I'm not trying to say he's the perfect human being, but jeez, the reactions are ridiculous.

You are not alone. Much of the criticism is misguided.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-12-2014, 06:12 PM
RE: Dawkins and criticism.
I can't help but notice that its always Twitter posts (by anyone) that seem to cause the most outrage/controversy... Now, I don't use Twitter at all, but I know it has a word limit.

I think this is the reason for it... a poster is forced to get their point across as efficiently as possible, which can make it appear very blunt.

It seems to happen a hell of a lot with Twitter... And it never seems to be Facebook or blog posts that make headlines. The result is that the poster then has to elaborate at a later date, in order to clarify the meaning/tone of the post in question.

If Twitter extended its character limit, or better yet, removed it all together, I'm willing to bet this would happen a lot less often.

Shit, piss, fuck, cunt, cocksucker, motherfucker, tits... - George Carlin.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-12-2014, 06:18 PM
RE: Dawkins and criticism.
(17-12-2014 06:12 PM)Sam Wrote:  I can't help but notice that its always Twitter posts (by anyone) that seem to cause the most outrage/controversy... Now, I don't use Twitter at all, but I know it has a word limit.

I think this is the reason for it... a poster is forced to get their point across as efficiently as possible, which can make it appear very blunt.

It seems to happen a hell of a lot with Twitter... And it never seems to be Facebook or blog posts that make headlines. The result is that the poster then has to elaborate at a later date, in order to clarify the meaning/tone of the post in question.

If Twitter extended its character limit, or better yet, removed it all together, I'm willing to bet this would happen a lot less often.

I think they like the controversy it does create.

I stopped using twitter long ago.


[Image: mrhanky.jpg]

Wind's in the east, a mist coming in
Like something is brewing and about to begin
Can't put my finger on what lies in store
but I feel what's to happen has happened before...


Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-12-2014, 06:25 PM
RE: Dawkins and criticism.
(17-12-2014 06:18 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  
(17-12-2014 06:12 PM)Sam Wrote:  I can't help but notice that its always Twitter posts (by anyone) that seem to cause the most outrage/controversy... Now, I don't use Twitter at all, but I know it has a word limit.

I think this is the reason for it... a poster is forced to get their point across as efficiently as possible, which can make it appear very blunt.

It seems to happen a hell of a lot with Twitter... And it never seems to be Facebook or blog posts that make headlines. The result is that the poster then has to elaborate at a later date, in order to clarify the meaning/tone of the post in question.

If Twitter extended its character limit, or better yet, removed it all together, I'm willing to bet this would happen a lot less often.

I think they like the controversy it does create.

I stopped using twitter long ago.

The likes of Richard Dawkins should probably avoid using Twitter for anything other than linking to his own website/blogs... 100 or so characters isn't nearly enough to get across anyone's opinion on sensitive issues.

Shit, piss, fuck, cunt, cocksucker, motherfucker, tits... - George Carlin.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Yesterday, 07:22 AM
RE: Dawkins and criticism.
(17-12-2014 04:05 PM)undergroundp Wrote:  
(17-12-2014 03:52 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  Somewhere around the time, he posted tweets trivializing sexual harassment, and date rape, which begun around the time of the whole Dear Muslima spew.

He had something to say about that.

" If we wish to insist (in the face of judicial practice everywhere) that all examples of a sexual crime are exactly equally bad, perhaps we need to look more carefully at exactly who is belittling what." - Dawkins

Yep, he goes on to erect a strawman, of these imaginary opponents who believe all sex crimes are equally bad, that someone groping you is on par with the New Delhi rape case.

He's clueless.

He wanted to trivialize complaints about sexual harassment, that such woman should stop whining, comparing such complaints to being groped by the water cooler. He can try and dress it up, but this is how his comments would be reasonably understand. He was irritated that female atheists activist would complain about such things, take issue with such things, hog up his spotlight to address their concerns, and this was led to his twitter tirade against them.

Quote:How is that anti-feminist?

I don't know, by downplaying sexual harassment, trivializing it, because far worse shit happens.

Quote:And it didn't begin because of the Dear Muslima issue.

Maybe not, perhaps my timeline was slightly off.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Yesterday, 03:53 PM
RE: Dawkins and criticism.
(Yesterday 07:22 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(17-12-2014 04:05 PM)undergroundp Wrote:  He had something to say about that.

" If we wish to insist (in the face of judicial practice everywhere) that all examples of a sexual crime are exactly equally bad, perhaps we need to look more carefully at exactly who is belittling what." - Dawkins

Yep, he goes on to erect a strawman, of these imaginary opponents who believe all sex crimes are equally bad, that someone groping you is on par with the New Delhi rape case.

He's clueless.

He wanted to trivialize complaints about sexual harassment, that such woman should stop whining, comparing such complaints to being groped by the water cooler. He can try and dress it up, but this is how his comments would be reasonably understand. He was irritated that female atheists activist would complain about such things, take issue with such things, hog up his spotlight to address their concerns, and this was led to his twitter tirade against them.

Quote:How is that anti-feminist?

I don't know, by downplaying sexual harassment, trivializing it, because far worse shit happens.

Quote:And it didn't begin because of the Dear Muslima issue.

Maybe not, perhaps my timeline was slightly off.

It would be nice if you looked up what actually happened.

As I mentioned before, the whole issue was something I cannot mention because of forum rules.

As for him being "irritated that female atheist activists would complain" about sexual harassment, all he did was be ironic to a woman who claimed that a guy who told her he was interested in her and asked her to have coffee with him was "objectifying" her. I would have said worse if I was him. And he even apologized for that.

Many verses are like silver threads
tied on the chimes of the stars-
if you pull them,
a silver peal makes the horizon vibrate.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Yesterday, 04:22 PM
RE: Dawkins and criticism.
(Yesterday 07:22 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(17-12-2014 04:05 PM)undergroundp Wrote:  He had something to say about that.

" If we wish to insist (in the face of judicial practice everywhere) that all examples of a sexual crime are exactly equally bad, perhaps we need to look more carefully at exactly who is belittling what." - Dawkins

Yep, he goes on to erect a strawman, of these imaginary opponents who believe all sex crimes are equally bad, that someone groping you is on par with the New Delhi rape case.

He's clueless.

He wanted to trivialize complaints about sexual harassment, that such woman should stop whining, comparing such complaints to being groped by the water cooler. He can try and dress it up, but this is how his comments would be reasonably understand. He was irritated that female atheists activist would complain about such things, take issue with such things, hog up his spotlight to address their concerns, and this was led to his twitter tirade against them.

Quote:How is that anti-feminist?

I don't know, by downplaying sexual harassment, trivializing it, because far worse shit happens.

Quote:And it didn't begin because of the Dear Muslima issue.

Maybe not, perhaps my timeline was slightly off.

Asking someone to have coffee with you is sexual harassment? Who knew? Blink
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Yesterday, 06:22 PM
RE: Dawkins and criticism.
I think it is more along the lines of his fans really.

People flock to whatever cool kid on the block, influential and big name they can find when it comes to things of their interests. So, basically what we have here is probably more along the lines of the people who have clung to him as fans because of the books he has written before and the work he does, they see the criticism of him and they take it as a somewhat personal attack against them.

It is like when someone criticizes your most favorite show in the world and you feel like the attack on it is an attack on you just because you love it so much. As much as we do not like that way of thinking, we all do it to some degree. It is just some sort of weird human nature to take attacks on that which we value personally.

It could be this case, or at least be influenced by it to some degree. Either way, it is probably something to do with the fact that people get upset that they are criticizing someone they like and don't like the verbal attack on them, so they get upset.

Also, this probably has something to do with why Christians think they are being persecuted against to some degree. Because their "hero" is being criticized[/align].

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: