Women in Secularism in the Times »« The police officer didn’t laugh

Tweeters can’t stop us

Still working hard to build ties with the secular community…or something…

gremlin

Matt Penfold @mattpenfold_uk 1h

@secularcouncil Of the 7 “issues” on your website only one is not about the US. Does only the US matter ? And do you know what global means?

Secular Council @SecularCouncil

We think we know what global means, : Our resource breadth. You’re right, though; our home base and starting focus is the US.

Ophelia Benson @OpheliaBenson

Your what? What does “resource breadth” mean? A Global Council is one that acts globally.

Secular Council @SecularCouncil

And we will, my dear , we will! The Tweeters can’t stop us.

So much for the beloved “secular community” eh – if we ask our “thought leaders” questions, they will blow us off as mere pesky Tweeters.

Comments

  1. mudpuddles says

    (I’m assuming it was a guy; I don’t imagine a woman would refer to another woman as “my dear”.. but I could be wrong).

  2. Menyambal says

    They assume that people asking questions are trying to stop them? And that stopping them is a bad thing?

  3. says

    It’s so nice to see that they have such professionals behind their Twitter account that they don’t seem to know that “my dear”ing someone who is asking you questions you can’t satisfactorily answer is classic chauvinistic patronizing. Or perhaps they do know and feel entitled to behave that way.

    Why does no one get on the case of groups like these about “alienating” their “allies”? Because we’re not supposed to have a choice about whether to support them?

  4. UnknownEric the Apostate says

    When you’re as geniusy as they are, you don’t need to have things like good public relations sense, or basic human empathy, or actual intelligent opinions…

  5. says

    Seriously, what other direction could such a self-important, privileged and decidedly bombastic idea like a “Global Secular Council” possibly go? It puts me in mind of the popular kids in grade school putting together a club for the sole purpose of being able to exclude folks from it.

  6. UnknownEric the Apostate says

    Why does no one get on the case of groups like these about “alienating” their “allies”? Because we’re not supposed to have a choice about whether to support them?

    Well, from arguing with a number of skeptoatheist “leaders,” I’ve come to the conclusion that they mean WE shouldn’t alienate THEM, and not the other way around.

  7. A. Noyd says

    UnknownEric (#11)

    I’ve come to the conclusion that they mean WE shouldn’t alienate THEM, and not the other way around.

    Just like we shouldn’t judge them for the color of their skin (ie. choosing to make an all white “global” organization). Because judging them for that is racism, or something.

  8. Sili says

    They’re a small group still. I assume they all have to do double duty in the organisation.

    Dawkins has obviously been put in charge of tweeting.

  9. tonyinbatavia says

    Tweeters cannot stop them?! What the everloving fuck?! Why would Tweeters possibly want to stop them? Your critiques have all about getting the them to start acting globally. It was the entire point of the critique that very tweet, to get them to start!

    Holy shit, they’re dense. And defensive. And smug assclowns.

    And don’t get me started on the whole “my dear” thing. Condescending dipwads.

  10. quixote says

    Somehow this reminds me of a poster I saw during a recent image search. (h ttp://images.sodahead.com/polls/001656005/2053356020_blackwater_answer_1_xlarge.jpeg) It shows a massive Blackwater-type goon yelling. The caption is “I’m sorry. I can’t hear you over the sound of how awesome I am.”

  11. tiko says

    I’m assuming the conversation at dinner went something like this.

    “So lets vote.Do we go with plan A ,which is just us guys and a few more white chums and hope nobody notices how ridiculous global sounds,or plan B, where we contact secular groups from across the world and ask if they would like to nominate someone to join the group thus insuring that the word global actually has some meaning to us.”

    “Right,Plan A it is then.”

  12. aziraphale says

    I think “my dear” is more than just patronizing. In Victorian melodrama it’s how the villain (twirling his mustachios) addresses the heroine who has just fallen into his clutches.

  13. Al Dente says

    The thought leaders don’t appear to have put much thought into what the name of their clique implies.

  14. suttkus says

    Look, it’s not their fault that Ms. Benson refuses to be thought-led. People who refuse to be thought-led are not part of their global.

  15. says

    I have just received this message via the Interuniverse Multinet. I thought I might share it with you all.


    “We at the Multiverse Association of Secular Timewarps, Universes, R-Branes, Anteaters, Topologies and Electromagnets laugh at your puny little Global Council. How dare you complain we are not diverse enough? By what right does your stinky little species claim it should have been consulted before we had the magnanimity to found this august body? You don’t hear the green space-dogs from Alpha Centauri complaining – they know their place. Our great leaders of intergalactic thought, with brains that have evolved over thousands of billions of years, have more neurons in their heads than you have fundamental particles in the silly piece of dust you call your galaxy. You will not stop our noble mission by constantly winging about us on your primitive Twittery thing. So go away you idiotic little ignoramuses with your uncouth symmetrical bodies, ridiculous stikky-out noses and scabby skin or we shall taunt you even more.”

  16. says

    Thank you for sharing that Bernard. I’m impressed and envious that you’re connected to the Interuniverse Multinet. I’m despondent now – the Interuniverse Multinet has snubbed me!

  17. Matt Penfold says

    They keep going on about how they are going to bring in more people, although they are short on specifics, but refuse to answer why they launched before they had a more diversity in place.

    They claim it is not incompetence, so that would suggest it was a deliberate policy.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>