Month: June 2013

My letter to CFI re Women In Secularism #wiscfi

Jason Thibeault, , , , 11 Comments

I have sent the following letter to Tom Flynn, who is receiving letters for Center For Inquiry to be shown to the board members when they meet about Ron Lindsay this Friday. It is structured off of a letter that Miriam wrote intending to collect signatures and deliver with multiple names attached. I sponsor her letter in full, but I absolutely had to expand on much of what was said.

To the Board of Directors of the Center for Inquiry:

As an attendee of the recent Women in Secularism conference, I write to register my disappointment and sense of betrayal with regard to Dr. Ron Lindsay’s opening remarks and his subsequent behavior. I support the recent letter written and signed by thirteen of the conference speakers and would like to add my voice to theirs.

Continue reading “My letter to CFI re Women In Secularism #wiscfi” →

My letter to CFI re Women In Secularism #wiscfi
{advertisement}

Splitting the difference between reality and mythology

Jason Thibeault, , , , , , , , , , 37 Comments

Something I’ve noticed very prominently recently in these wars amongst atheists and secularists, wars waged over our daring to suggest that maybe us feminists might also want a say in how women in the community are generally treated, is that every time one particular section of our community dislikes something, they find it sufficient to build up mythologies around it in an attempt to destroy it, rather than challenging the ideas on their merits. This subset of our rationalist community invents things from whole cloth to demonize the people they want out of the movement.

It has happened with Freethought Blogs, Skepchick, Atheism Plus, and just about every person associated with both the ideas of secularism, skepticism or atheism, and the idea that maybe we need to sort our house out if we ever hope to be welcoming to people other than the stock-in-trade of the community, the semi-affluent cis white male. It has happened with me a number of times. It has happened with Ophelia more times than I can count, and Stephanie, and Rebecca Watson, and PZ Myers. To people who disagree with A+, like Natalie Reed. Even to people who had never heard of any of these fights before.

It has happened and will continue to happen to every person who dares to say “I disagree” to any “leader” in this so-called leaderless movement, on any topic approaching social justice. I mean, with that sort of temerity, surely they’re just asking for a river of shit to flow over them, amirite? Surely they’re dishing “it” out, so they can take it (never mind that we’re amplifying “it” by many orders of magnitude)?

And so it goes that an incident in which I was involved tangentially, and briefly, kicking around some anti-feminist goobers on Facebook until their break with reality became blatant and too overwhelming for me to deal with, was morphed by certain elements’ mythologizing into a concerted effort to shut down a forum and silence free speech.

BECAUSE FTBULLIES.

Continue reading “Splitting the difference between reality and mythology” →

Splitting the difference between reality and mythology

Mock The Movie: Atlas Shrugged part 1

Jason Thibeault, , , , , , , 1 Comment

We did it. We went there. This past Wednesday, we girded our loins for battle and took on quite possibly the dullest, most cynical, most breathtakingly stupefyingly successful movie adaptations of Ayn Rand’s oeuvre ever created — by which I mean, it made $4.6 million gross despite a cost of $20 million. And that despite its complete lack of real special effects outside of a magical train, its obvious use of hotel ballrooms and stock footage and public domain music, its series of second-string actors. This was a movie that felt like it was made on the cheap, and it did miserably. But insofar as it was actually made into a movie, it was actually made into a movie, surprising the living fuck outta us all.

But the selfish quarter of our society really loved it, for all the same reasons as they loved the book — its putting unfettered capitalism and self-interest on a pedestal as the only way to create good in this world, its unabashed damning of straw-socialism, and its dystopian message that society would crumble if the number-pushers stopped pushing numbers because everyone below them is just lazy parasites.

You know, FICTION.

Continue reading “Mock The Movie: Atlas Shrugged part 1” →

Mock The Movie: Atlas Shrugged part 1

"Fuck the high road": Jessica Valenti on "don't feed the trolls"

Jason Thibeault, , , , , , 11 Comments

I’ve long advocated that the best way to deal with trolls — though I use this term relatively loosely, I generally mean a slightly broader category of troll than the average internet user who thinks creating sockpuppet accounts to harass and slander individuals is the only thing that actually amounts to trolling (and that it can’t possibly come from people within the movement!) — is to confront them. Take their words and use them against them. Force-feed them with why they’re wrong — even if they won’t accept it, bystanders will.

The only way to change society and push back against the small fringe of vocal misanthropes who manage to amplify their messages artificially, who abuse technology to make their fringe opinions seem far more prolific than they actually are, is to directly challenge their fringe opinions and explain why they’re wrong, hurtful, unworthy of dialog, morally atavistic. And when the messages get too abusive, you stop them from appearing in your well-curated online space in order to limit the amount of damage to passers-by they can do with their “trolling”.

Jessica Valenti apparently agrees.

Don’t feed the trolls: it’s probably the most common refrain in online discussions, especially when dealing with misogynists in feminists conversations. The idea is that the best way to deal with sexists is to starve of them of the attention they’re so clearly desperate for. Besides, we think, why sink to their level?

But the high road is overrated. It requires silence in the face of violent misogyny, and a turn-the-other cheek mentality that society has long demanded of women. A vibrant feminist movement has ensured women don’t take injustices laying down offline—so why would we acquiesce on the Internet?

Continue reading “"Fuck the high road": Jessica Valenti on "don't feed the trolls"” →

"Fuck the high road": Jessica Valenti on "don't feed the trolls"

Fischer: Women earning money is misandry

Jason Thibeault, , , , , , , 12 Comments

You know what’s interesting about the fights we’ve had in the secular community lately? You know, the ones about whether or not women deserve to get belittled and dismissed and dehumanized systematically by members of the community who are apparently still to this day in good community standing with our community’s leaders? They’re only about a step better than the completely backward atavistic views that come from religion. How dare these women make more money than men, emasculating them and undermining God’s great plan for society?

Feeling burned for people holding you to account for your words, Bryan? That passive-aggressive bit at the beginning, it’s telling — the fact that people are excerpting your words, with full context, and are showing you to be a biblically blinkered sexist asshat with those very words, must really chafe you.

I’m sorry, was that not politically correct of me to say?

At least this guy looks like an ass for saying what’s on his mind. Maybe one day the other asses will too.

Fischer: Women earning money is misandry

Strawprivilege

Jason Thibeault, , , , , , , , , , , , 52 Comments

How many times ’round this particular bush must we beat? The latest spate of intentional misunderstandings about what privilege is and is not has spurred me finally to post my thoughts on this matter, though to be quite honest I’ve made a false start at this particular post about a dozen times now.

Privilege as a term used in social justice circles is fairly well understood. In fact, it strays not one whit from the dictionary definition, regardless of which dictionary you use:

noun

  • a special right, advantage, or immunity granted or available only to a particular person or group of people

— Oxford English Dictionary

Definition of PRIVILEGE

: a right or immunity granted as a peculiar benefit, advantage, or favor : prerogative; especially : such a right or immunity attached specifically to a position or an office

– Merriam-Webster (presently 19th most popular word on online lookups!)

And even law dictionaries, referring to specific legal privileges, scan in plain english:

A particular and peculiar benefit or advantage enjoyed by a person, company, or class, beyond the common advantages of other citizens. An exceptional or extraordinary power or exemption. A right, power, franchise, or immunity held by a person or class, against or beyond the course of the law.

– Black’s Law Dictionary

The concept is a solid one in sociological circles, describing existing behaviour. There are books of essays by sociologists, books by sociologists exploring how privilege interacts with viewpoint, and books of theory by sociologists who are cited often in religious discussion — it’s not exactly fringe science, and it’s certainly better supported and better explored than the present state of evolutionary psychology. It involves no just-so stories, it describes reality as observed by impartial observers, and provides an explanatory framework for how these power imbalances aggregate and perpetuate themselves without any necessarily immoral behaviour by any individuals. It is a powerful framework and it is well evidenced by thousands of years of recorded history aggregated across all our cultures.

The objections to the use of the word “privilege” are once again coming from the same quarter of our community that regularly forestalls progress (and, honestly, even discussion) with regard to social justice causes. Once again, a “leader” of our respective movements has spoken up against the terrible feminists who are “silencing dissent” with our horrible bullying tactics like “blocking people on Twitter” or “disagreeing with them on their own blogs” or “asking them to kindly stop actively talking for just long enough to hear someone else’s perspective”. This leader, and the people rising up to support and defend said leader’s words, fight tooth and nail against these feminists. By attempting to poison the well for this concept, by attempting to sap away our ability to use the concept to describe reality as it exists, they are attacking by extension everyone who happens to think that women are in a disadvantaged position in our society as a whole, and therefore by extension every woman, whether they recognize or do not recognize same.

Some of this leader’s defenders are motivated reasoners; some have a skeptical blind spot when it comes to the possibility that our communities could reflect the same background levels of misogyny and bigotry. Some are Men’s Rights Activists, who run around attacking feminists under the guise of working for the same men’s disadvantages which feminism also addresses by undermining patriarchy (while, naturally, largely ignoring men’s disadvantages altogether). Still others are onlookers, fence-sitters, people who don’t care to attempt to sort out the competing claims, people who’d really rather we return to the very serious work of being rude only to Ray Comfort and Sylvia Browne.

You’ll note I haven’t stated exactly whom I’m talking about yet. There’s a reason for that.
Continue reading “Strawprivilege” →

Strawprivilege

New South Wales officially recognizes "Gender X"

Jason Thibeault, , , , , 11 Comments

No longer must you be registered as a man or woman in the registry of births, deaths and marriages in New South Wales. Thanks to the efforts of Norrie, the self-proclaimed “odd bod” who lives as gender-neuter and who underwent sex affirmation surgery, the NSW Court of Appeal officially recognized the existence of intersex and non-binary genders for the first time.

What was at first a small victory for Norrie alone when xe* was issued the first ever official government card marked “gender not specified”, but became a personal heartbreak when the media picked it up and the government reversed its previous decision claiming the card was “issued in error”, has become the law of the land** after its second reversal by the Court of Appeal:

It overturned a ruling that everyone must be registered as a man or a woman with the registry of births, deaths and marriages. Previously this right was restricted to passports.

It is also likely to be drawn upon as a guide for cases interstate.

”This is the first decision that recognises that ‘sex’ is not binary – it is not only ‘male’ or ‘female’ – and that we should have recognition of that in the law and in our legal documents,” said Emily Christie, one of Norrie’s solicitors, from DLA Piper.

The Human Rights Law Centre’s Hugh de Kretser said the court’s decision would be ”persuasive” in legal disputes in other states. ”Agencies, non-government organisations will be looking to apply this more broadly than just in NSW,” he said.

This is fantastic and heartening news. If only all governments, federal and local, would take this as a cue and make this simple, unobtrusive change in their data collection methods. Sex is not binary. Gender is not binary. Treating it as such devalues the lived experience of these people who are not so easily pigeonholed.

Hat tip to Ronja Addams-Moring via Facebook.

* (pronoun preference not specified — I’m making a guess.)

** New South Wales is a state of Australia, and this law does not extend through the whole land. Yet.

New South Wales officially recognizes "Gender X"