Ana Kasparian of the Young Turks weighed in on That Evil Shirt, and she got everything wrong: she ranted about feminist extremists, and how you’d have to be really weak to give up on science because of one shirt — it was an embarrassing exhibition of non sequiturs. I was disgusted, and would have let it go, but a youtube commenter (!) named florzinnha3 did an excellent job answering it, so I thought I’d just steal her comment and post it here.
Oh Ana, sometimes you are so disappointing.
If a woman says it doesn’t offend her people say “see? It’s not sexist!”.
If a woman says it offends her then she’s admitting she’s “weak”.
No-win.
It’s a ridiculous simplification to think a woman would say “a shirt kept me from my life’s dream of being an engineer!!” .
Literally no woman would say this. No woman.
That is a ridiculous strawman.
That shirt is a representation of the “boys club” environment of the STEM fields.
A “boys club” systematically and by definition keeps women out. This is done by both large and overt attacks, as well as subtle even unintentional actions. This is simple sociology.The STEM fields are dominated by men, with few women. Which is why that sexist shirt resonated with a lot of women because it is a clear example of the little things that tell women, each day, in STEM and other male-dominated fields, “this is a boys’ club, you’re not welcome”.
It’s not rocket science, Ana.
I do have to add one more thing: these idiots raving about “feminist extremists — they’ve gone too far!” Let me ask you: what did people do in response to Taylor’s shirt?
Did they riot in the streets?
Did they demand that he be fired?
Did someone shoot him?
Did swarms of people send him messages telling him he should die, he should be raped?
No, they did none of those things. They complained. They spoke out and said the shirt was tasteless and disrespectful to the women on the team and in the audience. That’s all. They just spoke up, nothing more.
But apparently that’s just too much radicalism. The only thing less anyone could do is sit silent…but I guess that’s what’s wanted of women.
It really reminds me of all those complaints about “radical” and “militant” atheists whose most terrible act was writing a book or giving a speech.
You read youtube comments?
Leaving science because of a shirt? Must be a powerful shirt because it went back in time to discourage all of the “fake feminist” would be scientists.
I must protest on behalf of all The old Codgers who agreed with the complaints about the shirt, we do not want to be identified with the nti-feminist lobby.
I normally really like TYT, which makes this even more painful to watch. I kinda expected this from Cenk: he normally plays the “clueless dood” whenever issues like this come up. But I share the above commenter’s disappointment in Ana.
Aha! I see what we’re doing wrong!
These are the valid expressions of freeze peach, and they should be respected and heeded!
Complaining on the Internet on the other hand is just censorship.
I vote we send ESA threats that we’ll blow up their next rocket unless they strap this guy, shirt an’ all, on top.
Until some folks understand that just words that don’t contain death threats or rape threat equals only loud, and not militant, the militant misogynists get what they want. They, the militant misogynists, need to be shown to be shown to be nothing but a juvenile playground bully, and epsilon male flinging poo and screams at those who stand up to them, and trying to take out their frustrations on those they see below them in the playground hierarchy.
Which, of course, has nothing to do with attitudes of real adults who see all humans as equals.
Somehow “this shirt represents the systematic problems that exclude women from STEM fields” equals “One shirt made women quit science”. And as someone said in comment elsewhere, whenever something happens people always say “it’s just ONE thing”, as if all the things before never happened or do not add together. “One thing” becomes “many individual events connected by sexism” very quickly if actually analyzed.
On facet that appears in our back safety training at work, is that most back injuries have no one root cause. They the accumulation of many small injuries and strains that weaken the system to the point where something that was routine causes failure.
That is exactly what those arguing that a simple shirt doesn’t mean anything. Those small slights and microaggressions add up to somebody saying “no, I don’t want to continue to cope with that shit”. What liars and bullshitters they are.
No, they are just another tick in the failure chart.
It’s like that creationist insistence that any ONE thing that doesn’t result in a fully-formed mammalian eye means that everything falls apart. Sort of gives the lie to how much these people value critical thinking.
Now it’s Old Codgers. What happened to 12 year old boys?
Equal opportunity stereotyping? How about Old Women?
I haven’t seen that yet, don’t they get a place on your spit list?
Well, if you want to keep denying that institutional sexism exists and that women can be trusted to know sexism when we see it, you have to do some amazing mental gymnastics.
Nerd @ 8
One and one and one and one = one.
Right?
ludicrous,
Do you even know how old that shtick is getting?
I was reminded of you the other day. My son was told to stop touching things with his hands. So, he put his hands in his pockets and began to put his lips on items in the store instead.
That’s an improvement from when he used to put found on the ground gum in his mouth a couple years ago.
You know, just like an adult would do according to you.
Your ‘nym is chosen for your trolling fuckwittery. Silence will make you sound infinitely smarter than your posts. Why not try that option?
Jackie
ludicrous is on schedule.
The moon is waning, less than half-full.
Time to complain about ageism.
Right, the smalls ones eventually equal the big one.
*I think I need a grog after that sentence*
Christ, what an asshole. (That goes for Ana Kasparian as well as ludicrous)
Slightly OT, but I’ve always gotten a little twitchy about people calling themselves the Young Turks, being as the original Young Turks were (among many other things, I know, but this is the real standout one in my books) the principal architects of the Armenian Genocide, and I don’t really hold with idolizing those evil fuckers.
I don’t understand why this isn’t equivalent to yelling fire in a crowd when there is no fire. This isn’t just expressing a counter opinion in a scientific debate. First, there is no scientific debate. The connection between autism and vaccines is clearly a lie. Promoting this falsehood endangers the lives and well-being of others, both those who refuse to vaccinate and those who have to live with them. Free speech has its limits, and endangering others should be one of them.
Also, isn’t there some connection between Wakefield and a group of lawyers who paid for his bogus research?
This kind of thing is what ultimately made me stop giving TYT my money every month. Ana is usually hit or miss, but “Grandma Cenk” got really fucking old. You can somehow manage to be progressive on all these things but when feminist issues and some race issues come up suddenly you sound like an asshole and deflect criticism by saying you’re “old school”.
I think when Cenk said he thought it was okay that someday his daughter would be plied with alcohol by men trying to have sex with her was where I hit my limit.
Same reason I have been actively avoiding David Pakman’s coverage of Gamer Gate. I have sneaking suspicion that he might be one of those “This side has done nothing but harass women out of the industry but…something something SJWs”.
Sigh.
#8 Nerd. Agree with your analysis. To use a cliche, I liken the situation to: “Straw: meet [camel’s] back.”
Er.. Grandpa* Cenk, rather
Jesus Fuck. No one on earth who understands what the terms “derivative” and “integral” mean has any excuse for pretending not to understand what the term “microagression” means.
What the fuck does this even mean, and is it actually well-founded or related to a view of sex and/or gender among humans we want to be promoting?
Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World, which had a rigid caste system.
Apologies…my comment was in the wrong thread.
Also, primate anthropology, where often the alpha male leads the troop, and an epsilon male would be a male without intimidating powers to other males, and has to try to intimate the females of the troop to maintain any self worth. Sound suspiciously like the Slymepit™.
Actually I’d have had no problem if some people demanded he be fired. In several more liberal states this would have been deemed de facto sexual harassment, and if not fired, he certainly would have been officially reprimanded and put on the one-more-strike-and-you’re out probation. In this instance I think people could have also legitimately asked for his boss to be fired, or at the very least for some higher-up of whichever higher-up SANCTIONED him appearing in front of the press in that cheesy PUS piece-of-orlon-shit should have inaugurated a shit-storm. It was unprofessional to the Nth degree, both for Taylor and those who didn’t stop him, and it reflects poorly on the organization as a whole, an international black eye. There would be nothing extremist whatsoever about suggesting they can the clueless buffoon, same as if he’d worn an NRA t-shirt with Obama in the crosshairs, or one with Mexicans in sombreros sneaking through a hole in a fence, or one with Asians in thick eyeglasses with chopsticks and a slogan of “Astrophycis is velly velly intellesting!” I agree with the rest of your examples, but there’s plenty of reasonable logical sensible support underlying the concept that the dude should pay a professional price for this damage to his organization and this insult to the taxpayers who fund it.
TYT has a reputation of getting it wrong on feminist issues, IMO. I kind of gave up watching them much for that reason. I couldn’t take the hypocrisy when they’d then rail against Republicans for all their anti-woman policies.
Nerd
We understand where the term originates, but that same ranking of peoples worth is also used by PUA’s to describe “lesser males”. Isn’t it really saying that you are subordinate, therefore you are wrong, so shaddup?
Yeah, this.
The implicit genetic determinism is kinda icky too.
Well, it is also saying you think you are superior, but you aren’t with your attitude toward women and “others”. You have another way to get this concept across?
“Don’t be such a dawkins.”
I’ve always been fond of “Dawksbro” for such a type. Perhaps a bit trite now.
This is actually the exact reason I never got into The Young Turks: it’s always been characterized by exactly this kind of blithe Liberal sexism, much like Bill Maher’s various projects. So, not surprised, but disappointed.
Welp, I’m going to use that defense in my crusade against all you global warming believers. Driving one car won’t cause global warming, so it’s all false. One coal burning plant won’t cause global warming! That’s just ridiculous. So there you go. Global warming=false. Thanks Ana!
Did swarms of people send him messages telling him he should die, he should be raped?
No, they did none of those things. They complained. They spoke out and said the shirt was tasteless and disrespectful to the women on the team and in the audience. That’s all. They just spoke up, nothing more.
Of course those that complained were deluged with suggestions to die or that they should be raped… but oh, those weren’t militants or extremists, those are just trolls. Nothing to think about.
Complete blockquote failure… I suck. That’s what happens when you pluralize blockquote.
Welp, I’m going to use that defense in my crusade against all you global warming believers. Driving one car won’t cause global warming, so it’s all false. One coal burning plant won’t cause global warming! That’s just ridiculous. So there you go. Global warming=false. Thanks Ana!
Of course those that complained were deluged with suggestions to die or that they should be raped… but oh, those weren’t militants or extremists, those are just trolls. Nothing to think about.
Yup. That sounds like this newfangled ‘radical feminism’ so many people coughcoughdawkinscoughcough keep whining about.
The really just want feminists to sit down and shut up.
So sorry you poor beleaguered men. That’s not going to happen (and I’m not actually sorry).
Ana Kasparian has a B.A. in Journalism. I’m sure that gives her tremendous insight into what it takes to be a woman working in the STEM fields.
K. R. Syncanna @7:
Those brave supporters of the status quo never seen that though (or they pretend not to). It’s just like discussions on racism. Defenders of The Quo seem to perceive racism as isolated, individual acts of bigotry, rather than a metric fuckton of individual acts that are inter-connected & exist within a society that is built on white supremacy.
Well, everyone who wondered how long before Dawkwit chimed in gets a prize: he couldn’t resist, of course.
http://www.donotlink.com/cijs
Also, literally no one gets lung cancer from smoking one cigarette. Also, there are people who are life-long heavy smokers who don’t get lung cancer. Clearly, if you get lung cancer you’re just weak.*
*Only that with sexism it’s not your decision ever to smoke. You get those cigarettes shoved into your mouth, but unless they also set you on fire you must not complain.
Got one guy on my twitter feed asserting that not only was the shirt not offensive, but that there are no barriers to women in science. I mentioned a few of them (including the false perception that women find math harder than men) which he then handwaved away saying that he’s never seen that (quelle surprise) and that he knows women and none of them have ever told him they were discouraged. Because with attitudes like that of course he is the person they’re going to confide in about all the tiny little barriers that add up to a fairly big hill to climb that dudes like him get a tunnel straight through. Not.
Douchebag.
Quit making shit up. No primatologist has ever used the phrase ‘epsilon male’ (nor referred to themself as a ‘primate anthropologist’).
bit slow
ChasCPeterson@42 – and yet, oddly enough, all anthropologists are primates.
Reckon the “outrage mongering” by those offended by this T-shirt is doing far more to discourage women from the STEM fields than the T-shirt itself.
Citation needed.
“Citation needed.”
Yes. I’d like to see the citation for the ‘data’ used to determine a T-shirt reminds women not to enter the STEM fields.
David Stachon wrote:
Only insofar as women might’ve been ignorant of the existence of this type of thing in that field prior to this (as unlikely as that may be), and are now aware of it. Even if you wish it were otherwise, the blame doesn’t move to the feminists as a result of this – if the shirt hadn’t been worn, this “outrage mongering” would not exist.
We all know you are trolling David Stachon, but here is your citation on stereotype threat. http://www.apa.org/research/action/stereotype.aspx
Yeah, I reckon the guy apologizing totally made everyone think he doesn’t believe it matters if they’re treated like real people. The overall effect most people will experience is going to be carefully choreographed to exclude that part of the story. It will be as if it never happened, like magic. Instead, most of them will actually experience the ludicrous things which happen inside the confines of your own head, David Stachon. Obviously.
Wait, no — you were talking about what the T-shirt itself did. (Not a T-shirt, technically.) Yeah, totally, I reckon this is the right time to claim that “T-shirts aren’t sexist to people; people are sexist to people.”
Sorry, you’re making a claim. Back it up.
But just to show you aren’t paying attention (further links in some of the articles):
Link1
Link2
Link3
Link4
So yes, there is systematic sexism in the STEM fields. Something I have know for 40+ years.
Here’s another citation that is specific to stereotype threat and women in STEM. http://www.npr.org/2012/07/12/156664337/stereotype-threat-why-women-quit-science-jobs
that’s actually not a bad analogy, as long as you switch to second-hand-smoke: being around one guy smoking one cigarette one time isn’t gonna give you lung cancer; but working for years in an office in which most of the folks smoke is certainly gonna skyrocket your chances of getting it.
“oh yes, there is systematic sexism in the STEM fields. Something I have know for 40+ years.”
Well, maybe. But that’s not the issue is it.
The issue is whether or not this man making a choice of wearing a shirt with cartoon women in various states of dress is contributing in a negative way to that ‘systematic sexism’.
In the same way you don’t have a citation for that, you are making a guess.
You folks are doing a nice job of arguing against a point I’m not making.
First, I didn’t claim that sexism is or is not a problem in the STEM fields.
You are making the claim that this man wearing that T shirt is somehow contributing to it. What evidence do you have of that? …just that you’re ‘offended’?
” if the shirt hadn’t been worn, this “outrage mongering” would not exist.”
Totally. You’d be amazed though, people aren’t crazy about being told what they can and cannot wear.
Nice and vague. It’s not objectifying women; they are in “various states of dress.”* That way, you can pretend not to see the evidence right in front of you, because you’re not describing in any detail the conditions as they actually are. On that shaky ground, of course the evidence isn’t enough to make a determination. Things aren’t that simple. Why think they are? Because you think you can just ignore it? Because there is no fact of the matter, thus you also have no facts about “outrage mongering”? Because you haven’t thought through this at all, but feel like making some incoherent noises anyway?
*Oh, and by the way, let’s not forget that they’re cartoons, as if that somehow meant they aren’t representations of women, who happen to be actual things in the real world. What a stupid fucker you must be to think that’s relevant. But really, I bet you’re a fucker who thinks somebody else might buy this bullshit (not you, because you know it’s bullshit) — stupidly, I guess, considering how transparently bullshitty it is.
Therefore, it’s not a problem? Because they don’t want to be told they’re wrong?
Also, “can” doesn’t mean “should.” A quick demonstration: you can keep bullshitting, but you shouldn’t. Does I mean that I will stop you from doing so, that there’ll be grave consequences for you if you keep blathering, or anything of the sort? No, it doesn’t.
If you agree that sexism is a problem, you have no argument. So I presume you think there is no sexism.
Ever taken any sexual harassment training for your job? I have. The shirt is obviously offensive, and any claim of sexual harassment based on the shirt must be accepted and dealt with. YOUR opinion is not needed, required, or meaningful.
Sexual harassment training for the workplace. Period, end of story. Again, your opinion is irrelevant.
“Sexual harassment training for the workplace.”
Sure I have. Do you feel the shirt pornographic? From what I saw, it looked pretty tame. Do you feel he should be arrested on grounds of harassment?
“Again, your opinion is irrelevant.”
Yet relevant enough for you to reply.
“What a stupid fucker you must be to think that’s relevant.”
Yeah, Imagine the nerve I have of objectively pointing out facts and trying to take those into consdiration. Of course those aren’t relevant.
…and, insulting me too. Looks like you’re ‘offended’ again. Default setting?
Utter bullshit. Nobody is trying to police what people can wear. It is commonly accepted that if you want to be a professional, you must dress appropriately. Wearing this shirt was a stupendous lapse of judgement on Matt Taylors part, and reflected poorly on the ESA. How do you think the other 1999 scientists that worked on this felt about the triumph of their mission being completely overshadowed by one clueless dude in a bad shirt?
Who said pornographic, liar and bullshitter. Something doesn’t have to be pornographic for it to be OFFENSIVE. And that is decided by the harassee, not the harasser or you.
Because of SIWOTI, and that is you. You are wrong, and evidence yourself, with third party evidence, otherwise….
We are waiting for you to provide YOUR evidence.
“stupendous lapse of judgement on Matt Taylors part”
Well, he’s extremely brilliant, and often that’s coupled with eccentricity. Did you see his tattoos? (wow!)
He’s just not a cardboard cut out Ken doll corporate stereotype.
The shirt, if on its own, would mean nothing – but it is yet ANOTHER reminder on top of a SHITTON OF EVIDENCE that was presented here in this thread that STEM fields are treated like a boy’s club, no girls allowed. To think otherwise is naive and unscientific.
Here’s a fact: it’s representing women. What medium did the artist use to do that? Not relevant. If you admit it serves no purpose in your argument and will leave it out, just like the rest of your fallacies and irrelevancies, then you’re left with nothing. At that point, it does take some kind of nerve to say that you’ve still got something.
How do you know that? Where is your scientific study? You obviously can’t make any reasonable inferences without those. </psuedoskeptical-bullshitter-mode>
I am not impressed by tattoos or shirts that advertise “I am a skeevy pig.”. How do you think the other 1999 scientists that worked on this felt about the triumph of their mission being completely overshadowed by one clueless dude in a bad shirt?
Which has nothing to do with his ill-thought-out choice of overshirt (his ESA polo shirt was underneath), and the fact that if only one woman finds it offensive in the work place, and that was his workplace that day, and he was representing the ESA on their dime, there is absolutely no doubt the shirt was offensive, and would be found so upon any formal proceedings.
This wasn’t worn at a resort where nude bathing is permissable. Why are you ignoring that fact. It is called “context”. In the context of a workplace, and as a spokesman for the ESA, it was inappropriate.
Shorter David Strachon: The dude was obercool wearing that shirt and you’re all fanatics for thinking otherwise. It isn’t objectifying women too much, certainly not the women in STEM who have had to deal with the sexism David kinda-sorta maybe admits might be in STEM.
Incidentally, David, it isn’t a t-shirt. It has a collar, something lacking in t-shirts.
David Stachon @61
There’s an easy way to keep from being insulted here. Don’t be a fucking asshole who supports sexism and you won’t be called a fucking asshole who supports sexism. Even a fucking asshole who supports sexism should be able to figure that one out, given enough clues.
David Stachon wrote:
So, I’ve been wondering this for a while: do you think that adding the words, “objectively”, “rationally”, etc., somehow confer some sort of magical power to what you’re saying? Is there some force within the universe that reaches out through space and time and solidifies whatever you say into unbreakable fact?
Getting upset at being insulted seems like an emotional response to me. Did the objective fact that Nerd pointed out touch a nerve? If you’re offended by the insults that clearly must mean that you’re wrong, or that perhaps it’s your natural state. I can never tell which it’s supposed to be.
A single brick does not make a wall. An insignificant obstacle on its own. You can even demonstrate this by picking it up and waving it around. However a wall made of thousands of bricks is harder to pass through. And if it falls on you it can make you feel quite flat.
Ten thousand microagressions add up to quite a heavy brake on womens’ progress in STEM.
David Stanchon
Still waiting for a citation to support your oh so rational opinion that our criticism of butt-ugly skeevy shirt is discouraging women from STEM. If there is any outrage mongering going on, it’s all this whingeing coming from you gormless assholes. I challenge every one of you to get your own shirt, and wear it in to work to test your hypothesis.
Cross posted from The Apology thread:
From, About Money, A guide to business casual:
Bolding my emphasis. So, argue in context, or don’t argue.
Citation, heck, I’d just like to see an explanation of the logic behind that statement. I suspect it consists entirely of “NO U!”
I have to imagine it, because you haven’t actually done it.
Boris Johnson, the mayor of London, has written an opinion piece about the case in today’s Daily Telegraph.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/space/11234620/Dr-Matt-Taylors-shirt-made-me-cry-too-with-rage-at-his-abusers.html
For those too lazy to read it, here is an excerpt from the end of the article:
“What are we all – a bunch of Islamist maniacs who think any representation of the human form is an offence against God? This is the 21st century, for goodness’ sake. And if you ask yourself why so few have come to the defence of the scientist, the answer is that no one dares.
No one wants to take on the rage of the web – by which people use social media to externalise their own resentments and anxieties, often anonymously and with far more vehemence than they really intend. No one wants to dissent – and no wonder our politics sometimes feels so sterilised and homogenised.
There must be room in our world for eccentricity, even if it offends the prudes, and room for the vague other-worldliness that often goes with genius. Dr Taylor deserves the applause of our country, and those who bash him should hang their own heads and apologise.”
I fully agree.
I would also add, this episode is not about sexism, it is about cultural differences between Europeans and Americans. Many of my academic colleagues from Western Europe were often shocked by prudishness and apparent absence of sense of humour in US academia about some topics. And these are usually the topics that are far more problematic in US A than in Western European societies.
Nope, it is about appropriate attire in the workplace, and that doesn’t differ that much. Why are you taking your argument outside of the workplace and television?
Because you don’t have an argument for workplace ethics and sexual harassment guidelines in the workplace.
Cultural differences my ass.
Signed,
a fellow European
Oh PLEASE.
Nobody but me, the brave and daring mayor of a major world city can brave the slings and arrows of people complaining on the internet!
What a complete wanker.
“Nope, it is about appropriate attire in the workplace, and that doesn’t differ that much. ”
Oh yes it does. Especially in academia. Please check your facts (or make your observations) in Europe. In that respect, Europe is much more free than the land of the free.
No, the answer is simple. The scientist was WRONG. Any intelligent non-idiotlogical person knows that.
Because women have all the power and the patriarchy does not exist, right buddy?
Political correctness has run amok, hasn’t it?
You, poor, poor thing. How hard it must for you.
Here, for the pain:
http://www.quickmeme.com/img/5a/5a1338989372ac4ae03d51fb741e67aeb2e1e73fc483e1a62ef681f22281a5d8.jpg
“No, the answer is simple. The scientist was WRONG. Any intelligent non-idiotlogical person knows that.”
Yes, of course, and the definition of “any intelligent non-ideological person” is “somebody who thinks the same way I do”. How convenient.
No, it is anybody who can look at the evidence in context, and come to the proper conclusion not based in personal problems, like an animosity to “feminism”.
Show us that the shirt was appropriate for the workplace by citing third party evidence.
“Your evidenceless opinion is dismissed without evidence”. Christopher Hitchens, et al., dating way back.
“No, it is anybody who can look at the evidence in context, and come to the proper conclusion not based in personal problems, like an animosity to “feminism”.”
Check European discussions on the same subject. Are you suggesting most of us Europeans are incapable of these things?
“Show us that the shirt was appropriate for the workplace by citing third party evidence.”
You are welcome to visit any physics/astrophysics/computer science university department in western Europe and check. It is you who are making assumptions about the rest of the world based on what is acceptable in your country.
Oh do fuck off cupcake. Sexism has nothing to do with prudishness, and decent people don’t find it amusing.
David Stachon @60
Wait, you have taken sexual harassment training at work and yet you think people get arrested for breaking workplace policies? I feel like you’re being dishonest as all hell.
Check facts? (“My” facts?) You think you’ve done something resembling that?
It’s a good time to quote David Dunning, from a recent article:
Even if it is completely acceptable in Europe, this does NOT mean it is free from sexism. You’re going to have to link to something substantial if you want anyone here to believe you that this is no big deal to Europe. Even then, it doesn’t matter since opinions can be wrong regarding fact, even if it is widespread.
Assertion without evidence, dismissed. Cupcake, either cite third party evidence, or shut the fuck up. You have trashed you own word by not providing links when required.
Are you really that stupid?
I think he’s a tacky goober. OH NO TEH WEB RAEG
Axial,
As a fellow European, and certainly not a prude, I can tell you you are full of shit. This shirt is sexist, barely appropriate for a bachelor party, let alone for a work environment.
Since I don’t work in academia, a cannot confirm your claim that this is not an uncommon clothing choice in academic environments in Europe, but the only thing you prove with that is that we have a serious sexism issue in academia, that needs to be fixed fast.
“Oh do fuck off cupcake. Sexism has nothing to do with prudishness, and decent people don’t find it amusing.”
Well I think that shirt has nothing to do with sexism – it is your opinion against mine here.
The shirt was designed by a female friend, and given to Matt Taylor as a gift. The characters and style are based on 1960s French sci-fi comic “Barbarella” which, ironically, anticipated sexual revolution and emancipation of women.
And if you think it is only women who are objectified, and men are not, I dare you to watch the “Twilight” movies.
It does not matter than a female friend designed it -female assigned people can be sexist, hate to break it to you but people act against their interests all the time (see US midterms for evidence).
And nobody made the argument that because women are objectified, men are not. The issue is impact and scale.
And I still wonder what kind of complete goober feels compelled to actually wear pinup art on his body. It just reeks of the most shallow and unimaginative desire to be “edgy”. Pair that with his comments about the mission being “sexy, but not easy”, and you have about the farthest thing from the “vague other-worldliness that often goes with genius” that I can imagine.
Yet just moment ago, this was about opposing sets of facts. I’m not sure how I missed such an event. Maybe I just dozed off for a second because of how boring your trolling is. In any case, it’s remarkable how quickly these things change.
I thought academia was all tweed and corduroy and the like. If it really is like a huge frat party at the workplace, then I guess I’m glad I opted out of it.
Where the fuck do you think this is utterly about sexism? My #75 provided third party evidence as to what is inappropriate for the WORKPLACE. Note the bolding that shows the shirt is utterly and totally inappropriate.
So, show me third party evidence (your word alone is subjected to extreme skepticism) that the shirt was appropriate for the workplace at that time and place. Since MT was on ESA pay and territory at the time.
Oh goodie, it’s Non Sequitur Sunday again.
axial
Why does this matter?
Why does this matter?
Why does this matter?
Why does this matter?
Ah yes, men being objectified in a movie versus women being objectified in a profession setting. Let’s play the false equivalence game…
zenlike,
Well, as an European academic, I can tell you that in European academia, we do not use the term “appropriate” so righteously like or fellow Americans. And yes, some of our colleagues do dress like they are on a perennial bachelor party. We do not care – what we care is their academic excellence. Sexism is not about what shirt you wear and what other people think it means, but how you actually treat actual people of a given gender around you. I haven’t heard any complaints about Matt Taylor with respect to that, have you?
“I can tell you you are full of shit. ”
Well in European academia we certainly do not use this kind of language. You are welcome to, however, if you think it helps to get your point get across.
I believe it was actually David Stachon who for some reason thought he was bringing the facts. It’s okay if you’re confused, the sexism defenders do tend to blur together.
No link, your assertion is dismissed as fuckwittery. Until your take your argument outside of your own opinions, it will not fly.
That is your problem.
“I thought academia was all tweed and corduroy and the like.”
Which just proves you don’t know what you are talking about.
You are not citing shit about European dress codes, Axial, so stop wasting our time. Also, you are not god of what is sexist – micro-aggressions count, asshole.
Oh, and fuckwit, MT worked for the ESA. That is not an academic appointment.
So I guess Europe really is just like America then. You can engage in all manner of disrespectful behavior towards whole classes of people, but potty language is a terrible sin. And here I was thinking they were actually more enlightened.
It does.
“No link, your assertion is dismissed as fuckwittery.”
What kind of link would you like? I am not aware of ANY written dress code for my workplace (a UK university). That is the point. You want links to things that don’t exist.
Oh ffs, did this axial idiot really just try to prove we are prudes who simultaneously objectify men because Twilight? Rly? That doesn’t even make sense.
Until you take your argument outside of your lone opinion, it is dismissed as fuckwittery. What is your real problem? All the dress codes refute your sorry ass? That is my guess….
“You are not citing shit about European dress codes, Axial, so stop wasting our time. Also, you are not god of what is sexist – micro-aggressions count, asshole.”
Yes I can see you are a kind of person whose time would be spent productively if only I did not waste it :)
Apparently it still falls under the category of places where the Übermenschen congregate to make great things are therefore aren’t subject to the terrible low business of having to be diplomatic towards commoners*.
* mostly women
OK guys, I put a link to mayor of London’s article in the hope that PZ will see it. I plan to waste no more time discussing things with cavemen.
You are wasting your time here, as you haven’t made one third party citation to support your sorry and well refuted claims.
Now, where the fuck is your third party evidence??????
You are assuming I would not spend time productively based on your own feelings on the subject, nothing else suggests otherwise. I love how you didn’t respond to me at all until I called you an asshole, that was actually a quick experiment of mine. So perhaps my time was not wasted.
ESA is not academia, it’s an an intergovernmental organization. Most members are EU states but Sweden, Switzerland and Israel are also member states of the ESA.
I’m sure PZ gets enough glib male whinging in his inbox every day, he doesn’t need any more.
Even if it ESA WERE purely academia, just because a lot of people in academia are cool with sexist micro-aggressions, according to axial, doesn’t mean they are not sexist.
And seriously, why not link it here? Don’t expect PZ to sift through the bullshit in his mailbox just for you, precious axial.
No, I meant axial, who said they know some manner of facts about European academia. A few anecdotes and personal inclinations, more likely, but don’t let that stand in our way. Presumably, European academics can’t be wrong, while we mere mortals in the (American?) intertubes can, so axial wants to share the good news with us. (How axial got here, I don’t know. Magic, I’ll guess, because I’m a stupid fucking American.) So, if we don’t have it in us to be just like them, we might at least be cautious about forming judgments of such fine specimens of humanity. They behave differently, you see, therefore: it’s no biggie. Eminently reasonable, isn’t it?
But suddenly, we’re just throwing opinions at each other, like monkeys with poop. That’s kind of confusing to me. So now I ask myself, “what would European academics do?”
Until you provide one link to support you, you don’t know what you are talking about. Gotccha.
Here is the last link you will get from me ;)
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/matt-taylor-rosetta-project-scientist
Shop at Spencer’s Gifts, apparently.
EDIT: Uh, uh, I mean, receive lovingly handcrafted items from their cool female friends that look like stuff from Spencer’s.
You posted something completely irrelevant, axial. Shit you don’t know how to science and comprehend, and fuck it sounds like Europe has as many shitty academic types as America according to you anyhow. Congrats.
The Mayor of Londons opinion is linked at comment #77. I really don’t care to read any more idiots blathering on with their own very special theories of sexism, Matt Taylor has already admitted the shirt was a mistake and apologized. He surely doesn’t need a bunch of gobshites to defend his stupid shirt.
“You posted something completely irrelevant, axial.”
Yeah, sure. I posted to a link to an action by good people that aims to alleviate a bit of damage that shrills like you have caused to a man 1000x better than all of you here together. Sure it is irrelevant.
axial
Well, you don’t care, and obviously you don’t give a shit about what other people think.
Euh, it very well can be.
Strange, you hear a lot of complaints here, which you glibly dismiss. You won’t hear complaints IRL because every woman around you probably knows by know that you are clueless when it comes to issue like this.
Ah, tone trolling. Because it doesn’t matter what you say, only how you say it. Brilliant.
Do they use this kind of language in academia?
I did not even see him link that, it got lost in the drivel. But it’s bullshit article anyway, why am I not surprised?
axial
Apparently critiquing someone until this person voluntarily apologises is ‘causing damage’. You are a joke axial, a very unfunny one.
Nice non-sequitur liar and bullshitter. Stil waiting for your third party evidence that the shirt was appropriate for workplace attire by the ESA. Until that is presented, your words are transferred to to dumpster.
DAMAGE? People told him it was a poor choice and that is it. THAT IS NOT BULLYING.
axial
I’m really, really disappointed with the Übermenschen of today.
(But I suppose Einstein was probably a huge sexist too.)
I was going to mention that that shit looks an awful like what I’ve seen dudes wearing (here in the US, believe it or not) in all sorts of situations that don’t call to mind “the vague other-worldliness that often goes with genius,” whatever the fuck that’s supposed to mean. But perhaps I was hallucinating at all those bars, strip clubs, frat parties, and so on. In fact, I almost certainly was, but I had thought the part about their clothing was at least fairly veridical. Could I have accidentally crossed the Atlantic in my stupor and ended up in faculty tea at Oxford? Who really knows for sure? And isn’t that just, like, your opinion, man?
this is waay late but WTH
PSA
Doing this
<blockquote>paste copied text here</blockquote>
Results in this
It makes comments with quotes easier to read.
The content is still up to you.
Damn. So much I wanted to comment on, but this thread is huge. I read the whole thing, but there’s a few things I want to say, first…
———————————————-
On The Young Turks… goddamnit. I was really hoping they were turning around because of how great they’ve been on GamerGate. But clearly they haven’t learned shit. I’m glad I haven’t given them my money, but now I’ll be unsubscribing from their newsfeeds. I really, really hoped they were getting better.
Obviously not.
———————————————-
On “primate anthropology”. You may have never heard anyone call themselves a “primate anthropologist” because it’s a bit old hat, now. We just call it “primatology” and we call the people who study it “primatologists”. Primatology is part of what I’m studying as an Anthropology student, and Nerd is actually right that we have used Greek letters as labels for primate society. You really won’t see or hear it outside of peer-reviewed articles actually discussing primate society, but terms like “alpha”, “beta”, and yes, even “epsilon” are used. Their use is somewhat of a minor controversy among primatologists and anthropologists, and it’s actually going out of favor. But they are (or at least were) used.
———————————————-
So apparently axial is a “UK academic” at a “UK university”?
Would I be reaching if I said I had a wild drunken idea that axial is Richard Dawkins?
Okay… I’m just joking… maybe…
———————————————-
Finally… Nerd… I miss your “floosh”. Bring back the floosh…
If you’re inclined to, that is. Don’t feel pressured. You don’t have to…
Heh…
Not happening. PZ complained, and I shut the fuck up and listened.
Wow. I completely missed that. I’m really sorry. Won’t bring it up again.
Thanks.
‘floosh’ was OK but it was time to go.
Nate if that is you in your gravatar, you are a cutey.
Nerd if that is you … *hugs*
*hugs* accepted. Been long tiring week.
@chigau… oh… um… thanks! Miri’s amazing camera and photography skills help… heh… :D
@Nerd… I know about those. Hope things end up coming out okay for you.
Tethys @111
Well, if only we were “European Academics” I’m sure it would make total sense. “European Academics” is apparently another dimension where bullshit false equivalence is held up as rationality and dressing like a tacky beach bum is the norm. Also, there is no sexism in “European Academics”, absolutely none. It is truly a magical land.
HappyNat @145:
Yes, a magical land where anybody who might complain is simply a prudish puritan.
K.R. Syncanna (#95)
Well, men are so seldom sexually objectified that most guys don’t know what that would even mean. Which is probably why so many of the shirt-defending dumbasses who keep trying to hypothetically gender-swap this situation end up talking about a woman wearing clothes that reveal her own body.
axial wrote:
Then I dare you to go to work wearing a bondage suit some day. I’m sure someone will be quick to disabuse you of that particular idea. Americans may be overly prudish, but that doesn’t mean anything goes for Europeans.
Actually, it’s about ethics in video game journalism, axial.
Radioactive Elephant
There are no complains in magical European Academia! Everything is appropriate, in fact they don’t even have a word for appropriate, things just “are” and they are glorious. If only us prudes in the rest of the world could see the light. Then everything would be fine.
Hooray, an Anthropology Student is here to clear things up for us plebes.
FFS. Terms like ‘alpha’ and ‘beta’ to designate relative status in hierarchical animal societies are by no means limited to studies of primates, being most famously used in reference to wolves.
But go ahead. Link me to just one peer-reviewed article actually discussing primate society that uses the phrase “epsilon male”. One.
What the actual fuck? Where the hell did this come from? Because I decided to weigh in on something that I actually have a tiny bit of knowledge about because I’m actually studying it? Seriously?
Did I condescend? Did I suggest that everyone else was stupid or something? I call myself a student in order to note that I’m not an expert yet… I’m still one a’ them “plebes”, thanks.
As for that citation you want… fine. I’ll go look. I’ll let you know if or when I find something. I’ve seen “alpha”, “beta”, etc used sparingly, and like I said, the terms are controversial and falling out of favor, at least in primatology. And I’m also fully aware that they’re used for multiple non-human animal societies, including wolves. But since the subject was in relation to primatology, that’s what I stuck with,
But sure. Go ahead and assume I’m holding myself above others, because that’s clearly what I did, there.
Seriously… what the fuck?
Sven
Just because you have an archaic hate on for Nerd, doesn’t mean you need to drag it in here.
Thunderdome exists.
Have a nice day.
Sven, try a definition, which applied to “W”.
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=epsilon%20male
I even found a link via google scholar that showed the anothropological use behind a paywall.
http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-4613-4187-1_6#page-1
Actually, I did make that term up. As a deliberate insult to those thinking they are alpha males with their attitudes. To let them know their attitudes drops their status.
And your real problem is?
I doubt axial is from the UK. “an European” is the sort of mistake we non-native speakers make.
@axial #110
So, I went and had a look for dress codes at a couple of universities in the UK. I didn’t find any explicit dress codes (I didn’t look very hard), but I did find these:
The University of London Dignity at Work policy:
The shirt could reasonably be argued to create a humiliating or offensive working environment. The University of Oxford harassment policy is even more explicit:
(Emphasis mine) Again, you could reasonably argue that the shirt has sexually suggestive or otherwise offensive images on it. So, I’d argue that an explicit dress code isn’t needed, and that this shirt would be found to be inappropriate under these policies. I don’t know what the ESA harassment policy is (I couldn’t find it), but assuming it is similar then yes, the shirt was inappropriate.
Hey, axial, here are a few things that make you sound like a complete arrogant twit (and, incidentially, American, because it’s one particular kind of bullshit that I’m used from ignorant Americans)
-assume you’Re the only “European” here
-talk about “Europe” as if it were one country with one culture, from Norway to Greece, from Portugal to Russia. Really, no significant cultural differences here.
-assume that nobody has ever been to “European Academia”, which is again one monolith from the Latin department in Lisboa to the Microbiology department of Hamburg and the Law faculty in Warszwa
As somebody who is kind of in “European academia”: that shirt is fucking sexist, and if one of my profs or instructors wore it, it would make me feel very uncomfortable and demeaned. Kind of textbook example of microagression and hostile environment.
I don’t work in European academia but I’m a Londoner (for whom Boris Johnson an embarrassment, so citing the opinions of that particular arse is not persuasive), I work for a major British company with a pretty open dress code and I’m really not a prude: pace Axial, if one of my team-members had worn the shirt in question they would, at the very least, be taken aside for a quiet word about their conduct and the idea of indirect discrimination in the course they have just taken. I would not exile Matt Taylor to the wilderness, yea unto the seventh generation, as Axial seems to think I would; I would just remind him of his responsibilities as a representative of the organisation.
I know we don’t even have a word for “inappropriate” in Europeanish but none of the academics I know are otherworldly and I’m pretty sure they would react in the same way is me (and they all work in STEM subjects).
yeah, but the REALLY important thing is… is he 1000x better than YOU?
how do you know?
show your work.
oh hell, I can’t even maintain this. you’re a fuckwit, looking for a hero to worship, and projecting your failings onto everyone in hopes that your newfound hero will like you for being a toady.
it’s pathetic.
Oh yes, I agree. It’s just ridiculous to me though that when we say “this happens to women” people think we are saying “men have perfect existences”, we are actually just prioritizing our focus on those that are primarily, and overwhelming, affected by an issue – such as objectification. But others see that as “you’re ignoring menz!” and it’s stupid.
axial, #77
As a non-European, are women underrepresented or marginalized in STEM fields in Europe?
^ Eh, poor sentence structure, but you get the point…
Saad, in my limited experience yes, significantly so, except in Biology, where they are well represented.
I am an academic in a STEM field. I work with other academics from around the world – Japan, Russia, Australia, the UK, Italy … etc. etc. since I am an officer in an international consortium. In fact, I will be presenting at a conference in the UK in a couple of week. I even hang out with my colleagues after the meetings. I can’t think of a single one of them who would willingly be caught dead in that shirt. Not even when pub crawling at night in London.
And strangely enough, the stories female academics tell are pretty much the same all over the place.
(BTW – What it is with this pervasive inability to tell a collared button down shirt from a T-shirt ? Does being a T-shirt somehow magically make it better?)
But of course. T-shirts are cool, edgy and informal, like the casual objectification of women in the work place and in internationally broadcast scientific events, and there can never be anything wrong with them, particularly if they involve boobs, because boobs are also cool.
Since we have had so many dumbshits come here to mansplain to the feminists on how this isn’t sexist, Americans are prudes (!?), how can we menz know what sexism is without a standardized global definition, PC run amok!…. I offer this lovely story about a man who gets it. The world needs more men like Karl Stefanovic. TV host wore same suit for one year, nobody noticed.
K.R. Syncanna (#159)
Yeah, I think it comes down to denial over the very idea that different groups are disproportionately targeted by discrimination. Which you’d think would be completely uncontroversial given the definition of discrimination. But such is the power of privilege.
~*~*~*~*~*~
pHred (#163)
I’ll bet you that rather than examining the situation for themselves (such as actually looking at the garment in question) and coming to their own conclusions, a lot of pro-shirt assholes are reacting to some anti-feminist agitator’s recounting of the fiasco and that agitator got sloppy and called it a T-shirt. Or if they did take a peek, they were primed by the agitators and didn’t look hard enough to correct the narrative.
Also, let me say a few words about “prudes” and the “representation of the human form”
Today I spent the day at the spa with my husband, which means that I got to see many naked people. I swear I’ve seen more penises and outer labia and breasts today than most people see in a year and some people see in their entire lives. So it’s clearly not naked human bodies that offend me. Only, when I think about it, nobody would ever put that fine collection of boobs and genitalia I saw today on a shirt: Not the dicks of 70 something year old men, not the boobs of obese 30 something women, not a picture of all of us sitting next to each other in the sauna.
So, if this is just about the “representation of the human form”, how come that the only kind of human for that usually gets represented is busty white women with waistlines that hardly leave room for inner organs who look like they are sexually available for straight men?
ChasCPeterson @150,
Hyperskepitcal much or just trying to shift the burden of proof? In addition to the citation of the esteemed Urban Dictionary provided above, here are two additional third-party citations. The first from an academic source and the second from a pop culture source. Now the ball is in your court.
http://www.librarything.com/work/14875716
http://brony.squares.im/sam2895/info/
Okay Internet, here’s what I think upon reflection of this, because I know everyone cares:
> Yes, there is sexism in the STEM fields,
> Yes, women can be objectified,
> I’m reluctant to conclude that the artwork on this shirt has, or will have anything to do with this problem
(this is an opinion, as is the opposing opinion)
> PZ raises a great point. Feminists are not cutting people’s heads off or looting in protest, they’re blogging and tweeting about it. This is as equally as benign as the shirt itself.
Now please, let’s move on.
Holy shit! They landed a probe on a comet. It’s still awesome to think about.
No, it is an uninformed and ill-thought out opinion, that negates your first two points (the equivalent of “I’m not a racist, but *racist statement*). That you don’t see that, is why you aren’t seen as having any cogency on this subject.
“No, it is an uninformed and ill-thought out opinion, that negates your first two points (the equivalent of “I’m not a racist, but *racist statement*). That you don’t see that, is why you aren’t seen as having any cogency on this subject.”
My position on the shirt, in other words in “agnostic”. In other words, I don’t ‘know’ either way if it’s harmful or not. This is the intellectually honest position to take.
You’re saying I should conclude the shirt is harmful to women in order to be cogent? Please, explain.
Easy peasy. See #75 above. Evidently you have comprehension problems. The shirt is clearly inappropriate for the workplace, much less television. If you think you have a point, and your opinion is valid and supported by evidence (mine is), YOU supply third party evidence to show it IS appropriate for the workplace and television.
David Stachon
Here is an article containing several links to the opinions of several prominent women scientists. Spoiler alert: they all disagree with you. Your opinion is merely confirmation bias, because you personally have never been subject to casual everyday sexism. http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy/2014/11/17/casual_sexism_when_a_shirt_is_more_than_a_shirt.html
“The shirt is clearly inappropriate for the workplace, much less television”
I’m not arguing whether or not it’s inappropriate attire for the workplace. I’ll even concede that.
I’m saying it’s impossible to conclude whether the artwork on the shirt will have detrimental effect on equality.
Concluding the attire is inappropriate for workplace, therefore it’s exacerbating inequality is a non-sequitur. Sorry.
Why is the shirt inappropriate for the workplace?
David, #169
What do you mean “WILL have anything to do with this problem”? It is a symptom OF the problem. It already HAS to do with the problem. The shirt didn’t create the problem. It sure as hell does a part to perpetuate it though.
The shirt is not benign. It was worn by a male scientist representing a very important scientific breakthrough to the world. Attire and presentation make points in such things, especially in a field with a sexism problem where women are having a hard time being fairly represented and treated. If the vice president was seen wearing a tie with those exact images on it during a State of the Union address, would that be benign?
It is awesome to think about. I go back and look at those pictures daily because it’s so amazing to think about.
I can also think other thoughts though.
“Why is the shirt inappropriate for the workplace?”
Because some people don’t like to see cartoon women on shirts.
Do you mean like this?
Stop being a dishonest ass and answer the question.
Prima facie evidence, if even ONE woman objects and finds it offensive. See Tethys #173. Checkmate.
Nope, because it shouldn’t have been worn in the first place for work. You obviously don’t want to understand sexual harassment and microaggressions women face in the workplace. That make you unevidenced opinion dismissible. You want to be heard, supply evidence via links to back up your claim, or shut the fuck because you know you can’t back up your claims.
You are being disingenuous. We all agree that the science is awesome, but the sexism as exemplified by the shirt is non-awesome and needs to be called out and dealt with. Please go read my link before arguing this further.
A conclusion like that would be a fact about something in the outside world, not your personal psychological state as an opinion would be.
Your reluctance to make such a conclusion is an inclination you have, another kind of internal psychological state. That’s my understanding of the English word “reluctant” and its grammatical function here — assuming the point of these words is to communicate some definite idea to other people. I suppose you could be doing a kind of visual art, using shapes that just happen to look like letters, but that doesn’t seem to be your intention. If this shit gets any more absurd, I’ll have to reconsider that possibility.
Your parenthetical claim about the statement above it (that it is an opinion) is presumably either true or false, not subject to yet another of your useless opinions of it. I take it that’s the point of asserting it. One way or another, if you’re not going to say incoherent things all day long, you’ll need to say something that can be interpreted as true or false. If it’s opinions all the way down, you may as well be a solipsist and shut up, because there is no one to listen to a solipsist. Whatever you option you choose, sophistry like that will not get you very far here.
David Stachon
Doing this
<blockquote>paste copied text here</blockquote>
Results in this
It makes comments with quotes easier to read.
(The content of your comments will not be improved.
Disingenous asshat of the moment, you seem to be getting a lot of emphasis on the “cartoon” element of “cartoon women”. Why the fuck do you think that makes things better? Please, explain. Show your work instead of snidely spouting the same fucking non-argument.
David Stachon needs to go read Stephanie Zvan’s take on “just a shirt” right fucking now.
I’d like to thank Tethys. She made great points, was persuasive, and polite. I’ve actually changed my tune on this. I agree now that the shirt sucked, and was not doing any favours for equal opportunity improvements in general, and specifically to STEM fields.
Saad made good points too. Thanks.
The rest you, in general your posture, tone and choice of words are not doing this cause any favours.
*Sigh*
Please look up information on “tone policing” and why it is problematic.
* Sigh *
Maybe look up information on manners, marketing, generally being courteous and learn why they are effective.
Another evidenceless assertion, like your previous mistake, so it is dismissed without evidence.
Show us with third party evidence, or don’t make such tone trolling claims.
Why is it is hard for you to understand evidence opinions count more than simple BS opinions?
David Stachon (#185)
As if you’d even know what the “cause” is, you pompous sack of shit. It’s not about stamping out sexism by winning over vulcan-humping assholes who believe they’re exceptionally reasonable thinkers even though they’re ignorant, illogical, tender-egoed bigots with delusions of their own importance. It’s not in our interests to propitiate oppressors. If you’re here in our space spewing lies and fallacies, people are going to correct you—however they please—for the sake of protecting our space. But no one gives a fuck about bringing you, personally, to see the light. You’re not some sort of gift to feminism; you’re a liability. And that’s on you to fix, not us.
Yep, it’S not like we have ever witnessed that somebody politely asking somebody to stop doing something resulted in years of hate, rape and death threats.
Oh if we were only polite, the oppression would have ended in 1843!
Just ask Oliver Twist, if you ask politely people will be kind…
It’s nice that, moments after joining our cause, you already know how we’re doing it all wrong. I like it: straight to business. None of that “sorry I was being a total ass a minute ago” stuff, or even explaining what you do now understand that you didn’t before. No, you’ve got more important work to do: correcting us about our supposedly terrible mistakes. I’m not sure what tone has to do with it, because somehow you managed to join the cause anyway. Or so you say. But your concern is noted.
Please, present the 3rd party peer reviewed literature that I conclude that this hard for me to understand. Has there been a study to confirm this? This is your BS opinion.
David Stachon
What do you want here?
Why do you think we want you here?
I’m here because I really enjoy much of what PZ writes, and I’m always interested in hearing other points of view.
Is this wrong and offensive in some way?
David Stachon
Ah. I see.
Somehow I got the impression that you are here to school us on the CorrectWayToBehave.
David Stachon
Only that you haven’t shown much interest others’ point of view but a lot of interest is telling others how they should behave.
But let’s play this game. Can you please:
-Formulate a complaint about that shirt in a polite way that communicates that this shirt was highly inappropriate for the workplace and is contributing to an overall hostile environement for women in STEM.
-Tell us if you actually think that the reaction to your complaint would have been some universal polite “oh noes, my bad!”?
David, #185
Then why have things like sexism and homophobia been so suffocatingly effective? They’re definitely not based on manners and courteousness.
Yeah, that’s the magic bullet isn’t it. No, I couldn’t do that.
Saad, #197
That’s a good point. I remember Dawkins, Tyson, Harris and co. talking about this with regards to religion…
…and, they decided that approaching it from all fronts (i.e. everything from outright mockery (like Dawkins does), or being very understanding and courteous (like Eugenie Scott and Bill Nye do)) is the best way to go about it.
Point taken.
@ David Stachon
You drop in here from out of the blue telling us to “move on” on since you’d finally arrived to dispense your ignorant opinion on it and you think you’re going to educate others on manners?
See, this is why people were contemptuous of you. We’ve been around here a long time, you see and dudebros like you are a dime a dozen. Barf up your completely unexamined preconceptions and kneejerk reactions about whatever issue is at hand expecting to be treated as if you’ve just made a useful contribution to the conversation. Then you act all wounded when people who have actually studied the subject observe that you don’t know what you’re talking about. Then, when someone tries to engage with you and asks you a simple question, well…would ya look at that?! You’re completely at a loss. Because you didn’t even fucking think about it before you weighed in; you just assumed you knew all you needed to know and that everything you already assumed was correct. And nobody other than you was surprised.
No, it is your BS response to being criticized. Evidence is your friend. All you had to do, was to show that the shirt was appropriate for the workplace, but you had to take it outside of yourself to legitimate third parties. You never even tried. Whereas I showed with third party evidence that the shirt was inappropriate for the workplace.
The same is true of your tone trolling. Take it outside of yourself, to legitimate third party experts, who understand vigorous dialog and debate.
Why is it so hard for you to supply evidence?
My interest in this was genuine, and my willingness to hear your point of view was genuine as well. I have a lot of respect for PZ (and the Bad Astronomer) which is what lead me here.
No. Not wounded. More perplexed.
Yes. That’s what people do on the internet. Christ, look at any comment section on climate science. I totally understand the temptation to call someone who says “Al Gore blah blah carbon taxes scam” etc. a fucking idiot; however, it likely doesn’t accomplish anything or help change any minds.
Now, in terms of being able to convince someone to change their minds, or learn more on the subject:
For me, and likely many others, being called a fucking idiot (etc.) is not as compelling as being confronted with sound arguments (or even questions) delivered with emotional detachment.
Generalize or jump to assumptions much?
I’m not a dudebros. I didn’t know what that was so had to look it up, but yeah …I’m not that at least by the definitions I read.
David,
The understanding and courteous approach is for when you’re teaching someone something or helping someone with good intentions figure something out that they’re having trouble understanding.
People who belittle women, mansplain, and exhibit other sexist behaviors did not arrive at their opinions by mistake that need to be politely corrected. Their intentions are malicious to begin with.
I’m not so sure Saad.
Just as example from the comments above:
I find it hard to believe that Ana has any inclination to belittle women, man-splain, or be in the least bit malicious.
Yet, that’s the vitriol she receives. Thinking about the various tactics that could be employed to correct her, I’m of the opinion that a well reasoned and well presented argument will go much further than calling her an asshole. No, I have no evidence of this other than common sense, but I’d happily change my mind with convincing evidence to the contrary.
David, #205
She clearly does have an inclination to belittle women. It sounds very malicious too. Listen to her at 1:58 into the video. Does that sound like she’s simply mistaken but means well? I really don’t think so.
She also expresses her frustration that this is a scientist who helped get to a comet and we’re having a discussion about his cartoon shirt.
I don’t see how someone can mistakenly hold such incredibly naive beliefs. She cannot possibly think the feminist position on this is that “the shirt will keep me from going into science”. This is the position she is trying to pin on us. These are old tactics meant to distract attention away from the issue and silence people about a topic very much worth talking about.
Yes unfortunately, this is what she mistakenly thinks the feminist position is. And to compound it, that’s what many of her listeners think that her position is. (she argues against a straw-man)
I think this is why PZ was so disappointed with her.
I hope she reads the Bad Astronomer’s article in Slate about it. It’s ultimately what helped me unpack this.
David Stachon
Oh you think you’ve said something original that hasn’t been refuted a million times? You think there haven’t been a million dudes before you strolling through here saying exactly the same shit you have been? You’re wrong. People saying what you’re saying are a dime a dozen. I’m not generalizing or jumping to assumptions. I’m reading what you’ve posted and comparing it to what I’ve seen in the past. A million times.
No shit it is. I said it is. In the same paragraph where I said assholes like you are a dime a dozen. That means that what you’re doing happens a lot. That doesn’t mean I have to pretend you expressed a coherent or justifiable position.
Bullshit. Pure, unmitigated male Bos taurus excrement. A million clueless shitheads have gone before you and claimed the same thing but in the experience of pretty much everyone here, it never does any good. Being polite Doesn’t. Fucking. Work. It just makes you easier to ignore. We see it all the damn time. Someone like you saunters in, cries a fucking river about how terribly meaaaannnnn everyone is and then refuses to engage with a damn thing anyone says, (except extremely selectively) regardless of how “emotionally detached” their delivery is.
There are tons of people around here who credit the aggressive culture here for opening their eyes. We also have tons of lurkers who occasionally de-lurk to tell us how much they appreciate the lack of tolerance for bullshit like yours. Their ability to feel like they have a safe corner of the internet that will be mostly free of the bigotry they endure elsewhere is metric shit-tons more important than your ego.
And fuck you sideways into the sea for thinking you have the right to insist that anyone be emotionally detached about a subject they have every right to be angry about. You don’t get to dictate people’s emotions to them. You don’t get to demand that they stifle them lest you take your ball and go home. You don’t get to demand that people who have endured lifetimes of oppression tiptoe around your feelings when they talk about it. If people being justifiably angry over something is a deal breaker for you, you’re not fucking wanted. You’re not an asset, you’re a liability.
#208. Think I’ll call you Ms Pleasant, or maybe Ms Toxic Stereotype.
“Being polite Doesn’t. Fucking. Work.”
Well, Gandhi made a pretty good go of it.
David fucking dudebro Stachon,
If you don’t like being called a fucking dudebro then there’s a simple fix. Stop sounding exactly like a fucking dudebro and you won’t be called one. If you don’t like the language used on this blog then fucking leave. Nobody is holding a pistol to your head and telling you to keep posting your fucking dudebro bigotry.
I watched you play dudebro JAQ-off on Butterflies & Wheels and you’re playing a similar game here. You’re trivializing the sexism, the microaggressions, and the fucking dudebro misogyny that we see you fucking dudebro toss around every fucking day. As you’ve been told, dudebros like you are a dime a dozen.
By the way, could you do us a minor favor? Could you fuck off? Thank you in advance.
David Stachon @ 209
You’re adorable. I’m pretty sure it was Gandhi’s refusal to cooperate with Britain that worked and not his politeness. Moron.
I stand corrected. Thanks you so much!
Your foul demeanour will work wonders towards improving equality, and be an asset towards achieving success in your careers.
Go get ’em tiger!
Stachon out.
@David Stachon
You, basically: “If you don’t kiss my ass, it’ll be your fault if you never get equality.”
↑ This? ↑ Doesn’t fucking work. You cannot simultaneously expect deference from someone and accept them as an equal. The problem isn’t our failure to appease you. The problem is your failure to give up your entitlement to being appeased.
David Stachon
Why?
Nope, if they want to get a point across, they try “this is what I think, and this [link to evidence] backs it up” You can’t do that.
Nope, another unevidenced assertion, so it is dismissed.
We know better. Politeness is interpreted as acceptance, or at least interest. Your cockamamie idea about the shirt deserved none of that. It only deserved ridicule when you couldn’t back up your opinion.
Sorry, you have it backwards. In science, you are wrong until you evidence yourself right. And you never do that. So, what you say is properly ignored as BS. Don’t like it? YOU try a different tack.
Nope, it was the implicit threat of open rebellion that got their attention. You don’t understand history either.
While you meant it as a snide statement, given your pitiful beliefs, it is never the less true. Getting in the face of dudebros helps those on the fence who might also speak up, to speak up. You get everything backwards, because you real goal is to maintain the status quo, and not have to change.
A tankard of grog says he can’t stick the flounce….
Also, I hate it so much when assholes come here and try to tell us how “people are going to do [X], but it’s counterproductive if you react by doing [Y]” when they’re the ones being called out for doing [X]. A lot of people try this, and it’s incredibly dishonest. If they can pretend to examine such a dynamic from the outside, then they have no excuse for doing [X] in the first place. And it gets even more absurd when they don’t even bother to use passive voice or set themselves up as a third party but directly talk about how ineffective [Y] is at convincing them not to do [X].
xxyy{X}[Y](xy)
Y?
@ David Stachon
Nothing that is contingent upon kissing your ass would be equality. This is such a beautiful illustration of your entitlement and how blinded you are by it. You actually think you can threaten someone with continued oppression lest they lick your boots and still be perceived as wanting equality.
Being polite just means that people will continue to do the shit they are doing because obviously they can still get away with it, after all you haven’t snapped yet. Often times it’s only when you finally go “fuck oooooooooooofffffff” that people might realise that you are actually angry for a goddamn fucking reason. Yes, like with children….
As for emotional detachment, what i hear when those words come up is “i don’t want to deal with your emotions, let’s just focus on mine”, because whitout fail, the arsehole saying the words is being emotional. Like you, David, in this threat, demanding emotional detachment while making nothing but emotional appeals. It is infuriating to see people pretending that it’s only “the others” who are emotional, not them, oh no, not them, their tantrums and emotional appeals are not emotions, they are….wisdom and shit…
Coming somewhere spouting uninformed bullshit without knowing the first about a topic = “that’s just how the internet works”
Being told that in this little corner of the internet that shit doesn’t fly = “you’re meeeeeeeeeen”
Also, I don’t notice that people on the more polite FtB blogs are actually getting different responses, greta Christina is quick to inform people that she doesn’t tolerate our potty-mouth language and usually people behave according to her rules. Yet we still get the same bullshit over there, it’s not like folks are flocking there telling her how they are now totally staunch feminists because Greta explained things politely.
Speaking of other FtB blogs, Ally Fogg, as much as he claims to be hands off, would have banned many of us long ago and look at his commentariat. He’s got his own personal outpost of The Slymepit. Same with Nugent’s blog. Same with Coyne’s blog. Etc.
David, #207
It’s not a mistake. There isn’t even an ounce of nuance and subtlety in how people have reacted to the shirt for her to confuse the argument with something completely different. Strawmaning like this is an old and deliberate tactic people use against feminists.
Politeness is reserved for academic debates or discussions in which nobody’s actual real life is being trampled on by either side. When one side is out to hurt and hinder people’s personal lives, politeness is the wrong way to go. It’s exactly what they want from you actually: they want you to be put in your lower place in society and being polite gives them exactly that.
What the hell is it with these hypertoned fuckwits? It’s like they’ve never experienced life as a human.
A little anecdote to put face to my point:
I was having a bad day. I don’t remember why, but the depth of my foulness is crystal clear in my memory. We’d just finshed rehearsal, and ears ringing, we trudged out of the basement. Everyone but the drummer and me settled onto the couches and prepared their recreational poisons of choice, bog-standard behaviour, and given how often we gigged, probably the whole point of that evening’s exercises.
As I grabbed my bike helmet and gathered my gear to go the drummer said “it’s starting to rain, throw your stuff in the back of my truck and I’ll give you a ride home.”
“No thanks, I’m good.” By this point I’d been cycle commuting for a decade or so, and had been using exercise to aliviate stress for far longer.
“Come on, it’s no problem.”
“That’s kind of you, but I’d rather ride.”
“It’s not out of my way, you know. Let me get your guitar.”
“Look, I appreciate it, but I want to ride.”
“Come on man, let me give you a ride.”
At that point I could take no more. I pushed him up against the wall and yelled:
“Look you fuck, I don’t want a fucking ride!”
From behind me a shocked voice called my name, snapping my back to a broader reality.
“Listen to me when I fucking talk.” I said, in a slightly calmer tone and I left.
Guess what? I never had to repeat myself again.
If politeness works, great. Fortunately, when it doesn’t we have something to fall back on. And anyone who gets lost along the way because a bit of passion and bad language shuts down their ability to hear, well, they won’t be missed.
*PLUG ALERT*
Regarding shirtgate, in case you guys forgotten it already, I discovered a really stupid cartoon on Tickled about it:
I thought I would try my hand at this comic game (matt taylor / commet landing)
The cartoon was so annoyingly stupid that I fired up on MS Paint and Photofiltre and made a better version of it:
Shirtgate – The actual discussion
I apologize for this shameless plugging and near-spamming, but my cartoon is currently losing the like-war… :-(