Skepchick issue notice to Richard Dawkins

There has been an appalling amount of nonsense spewing out of the Center for Inquiry (CFI)/ Committee For Skeptical Inquiry (CSI) since some inner turmoil saw the less than amicable departure of founder Paul Kurtz.

The full story will probably never be public knowledge, but the popular reasoning seems to focus on Kurtz’s known attitudes of accommodationism as regards to religion clashing with those of successor Ronald A. Lindsay1 – who, allegedly, has definite anti-theistic attitudes and fondness for superficial irrelevancies such as the Blasphemy Challenge2.

The problem with this “official” version is that it doesn’t really have any reflection in reality. Ever since this changing of the guard, CFI / CSI have been churning out a pretty steady stream of accommodationist nonsense, far in excess of anything that preceded it. Perhaps the pinnacle of this idiocy was from CSI fellow Gollum and his now incurably pathogenic don’t be a dick sermon-on-the-mount3, but it is far from the only example. Other notable outbursts include one from Michael De Dora on the CFI site itself – (more…)

What is lost in all the noise surrounding the Watson circus is that none of this is really an argument of girls versus boys. Some of the most vociferous and irrational voices in the Watsonista apologist camp are male1, and conversely, some of the most coherent critics are female (and they are legion).

Similarly, claiming it’s all about misogyny is also a red herring – it’s merely a convenient window for the misandrist blog industry to go into opportunist overdrive (it’s bigger than crassmass), and those that disagree with this point are politely asked to refer to their dictionaries (hint ladies: it has something to do with the word “hatred” which is not the same thing as “faux pas”).

No, what the issues ultimately boil down to are ones that are a girls only affair – the continued argument between gender and equity (or liberal) feminism, and Elevator Guy is just the meat in the sandwich. This subtlety is lost on Watsonistas – I have yet to see even one that acknowledges the dichotomy, or even understands what it is. Around the film that forms near the bottom of the barrel attacking women that dare criticise Watson is gibberish like this –

inside the mind of a gender traitor (more…)

Transcript of the Rebecca Watson talk at the CFI Leadership Conference 2011

.


[…] But in this case, what we’re talking about is the difference between sexual interest, sexual attraction, versus sexual objectification.  Objectification has a few things about it that separate it from interest.  For instance, focusing on the physical aspects of a person; ignoring their individuality, and their stated desires (for instance, my desire to go to sleep, my desire to not be hit on, which is all I had been talking about all day); and also a disinterest in how your actions will impact the “object” in question. And that’s a really serious point, that I think you all should consider, especially if you want to encourage more women to join your groups. (more…)

We are Watsonista. You will be assimilated.

I should know better than to have optimism. There was a brief window, that spanned the transition from the last millenium to our new one, where I entertained the foolish hope that perhaps we had actually left the politics of division behind us as a relic of a stupider age. Haha. Do I have egg on my face or what?

Yes I was premature in my hopes, and had suspended my Cynical reason. As Sidney J. Harris once timelessly quipped –

A cynic is not merely one who reads bitter lessons from the past, he is one who is prematurely disappointed in the future.

True, he was referring to small “c” cynics, but it’s nevertheless a sensible attitude to have. Overestimating your fellow (wo)man rarely ends in anything other than tears.

Fairly early in the piece1 I was noting the eerie parallels between the Watson circus, it’s distinctly neo-puritan overtones, and various fundamentalist ideologies. Specifically, it’s self-hating flagellant mindset, paranoid persecution and martyr fantasy (a la islamism) and delight in scapegoating and denunciation. I was far from alone in these observations. (more…)

The more you keep rummaging around in this moral panic morass that the Gruesome Twosome tag-team of Becky Watson and The Naked Emperor have drowned us in, the more you come to realise that you are not even getting close to hitting the bottom of the barrel as far as sheer human decrepitude goes.

Myers, to some extent, can perhaps be excused for being a patsy, a dupe, a shmuck, a conscious man / toilet slave, a naive simpleton, or perhaps even having Stockholm Syndrome from a lifetime of being cuckolded and forced to eat doo-doo. (more…)

The Naked Emperor according to B. Bunny –

The Skepchick Posse

The dust may be settling, opinion may be indicating less than overwhelming support (especially from women, ouch!), Watson may be in her new cave, with her new hairdo1, licking her wounds – if the new heights (or lows) of derisive, malicious sourness in her new “dating advice” video are any indicator – and at this point, I think there is only one unanswered question yet to be settled –

Was PZ Myers the elevator guy?

It was a question posed in jest in several places, even here, and it is one of those rare, ridiculous ideas that stops seeming so outrageous the more you think about it. It would certainly not even come close to being weirdest thing that reality has ever thrown at us, and there has to be some other kind motivator for The Naked Emperor’s kowtowing other than just raw stupidity. Because, even at this point, most of us still don’t want to believe he is a stupid guy. Amusing distraction no2?

But back to the matter at hand – the sheer pants shitting terror that the Skepchick posse appear to be able to evoke at will in those that they deign to frown upon. Is it at all in proportion to reality? It’s high time we had a look. (more…)

Yeesh. This one landed in my spam bin – it would be nice to think it was because Akismet is hyper-intelligent enough to detect substance free nonsense, but I am not that optimistic. It is however the first false positive I’ve found. Quantum sardonics again.

Suffice it to say, it took a while to pick my jaw up off the ground. It’s the sort of thing you want to dismiss as a troll, but to my eye, looking at the pointers, logs and links, it’s the real thing. And that is what is so disturbing. I wanted to reply in the comment thread, but for space considerations it’s here. In any case, it really does need to be filed in its own compartment so it’s not lost in the other noise. It’s just too staggering, in an abandon-all-hope kind of way. Here we go –

PZ Myers Says:
July 24, 2011 at 9:36 pm e

I read the blog post in question. I also read this one. Recall that my criticism was this: (more…)

Rebecca Watson: unleashing her inner Goebbels (Wikimedia Commons)

Karl Popper, one of the grandfathers of the philosophy of science, popularised the concept of falsifiability to define the inherent testability and, by extention, validity of any scientific hypothesis.

Umberto Eco extends this philosophical approach into the realms of human communications in his 1976 work A Theory of Semiotics

Semiotics is in principle the discipline studying everything which can be used in order to lie. If something cannot be used to tell a lie, conversely it cannot be used to tell the truth: it cannot in fact be used “to tell” at all.

In other words, as far as language, information and communication goes, there is no such thing as “neutrality”1. There is only true or false. It is not possible for true to ever be false, but false more often than not attempts to masquerade as true – whether it’s conscious deception or the full blown cognitive disorder of the true-believer, the falsehood remains false and even the worst perpetrator, deep down inside, has the knowledge that it is false. Those that choose to disturb the voice of the conscience inside the minds of those that wish to believe falsehoods to be true run the risk of unleashing quite a demonic level of hostility. And we’ve rather had our noses rubbed in all of that lately…

So when Rebecca Watson, Greta Christina and cohorts utilise language and communications to create reality distortions, deceptions and manipulations on such a grand scale that it would make Joseph Goebbels blush, it is positively an invitation, and duty, to expand our own vernacular in countermeasure. Sophist waffle needs to be defined before it can be apprehended, and without definition, it is all the more easy for these stage magician tricks to ensnare the unwary. So for the sake of extending our language in this semantic arms race, here are a few new terms for the self-defense arsenal0.

Ad himinem (more…)

Fantastic rant via The Fat Atheist / The Amazing Atheist

.

Reiterates many of my points, just without my token efforts at self-restraint. Yes it is puritanism. Yes it is quasi-religious. Yes it is deranged dogmatism. Yes PZ Myers is pwned. Yes, yes, yes. ::applause::

A note for the ladies – (more…)