Fat Girl, Watching
I mention it because one of the defenses of his insensitivity (to put it mildly) was that his argument was logically sound. And that’s a point that gets brought up an awful lot in discussions of social justice and in general when someone is called out for doing something harmful. It’s especially a point brought up from men against women, usually as a way of gas-lighting us and saying, “You’re too emotional to get this, let me logic at you in a manly fashion.” It’s sexist, it’s dismissive, and it focuses on one aspect of a situation to the exclusion of all else.
As I said on Twitter in my original thoughts about Dawkins’ asshattery:
Read MoreThis is the kind of argument I see quite a lot from those who tend to hold a lot of privilege & experiential ignorance of the topic at hand. Honestly…it makes me think of that scene in the RDJ/Jude Law Sherlock Holmes. Holmes is holding something in his hand, the end of which is mere inches from Watson’s face. Watson: “Get that thing out of my face.” Holmes replies, “It’s not in your face, it’s in my hand.” That’s what these logical men are like. That’s their argument. TECHNICALLY, they’re right. But the practical application & observation of the situation shows that one can be correct but still wrong. In this situation, the argument can (& has been, repeatedly) made that Dawkins wasn’t minimizing when he was making the comparison. TECHNICALLY, he wasn’t. But functionally, he was. Just like the thing TECHNICALLY was in Holmes’ hand but FUNCTIONALLY was in Watson’s face.
I’m noticing a lot of problematic things sewn into the story of Oklahoma — things I didn’t notice as a 19-year-old religious conservative — and it’s incredibly frustrating.
The main story is how an abusive man terrorizes a woman, and an entire community treats him like the proverbial missing stair.
(If you’re unfamiliar with Cliff Pervocracy’s missing stair analogy and don’t want to click the link above, he basically outlines that often communities gloss over abusers in their midst the way that someone who lives in a house with a missing stair just becomes accustomed to skipping that step rather than fixing it.)
Read More
Rape culture affects everyone, but we don’t have to have all the conversations about all the things any time we want to talk about one of them.
Read More
As a series: unfailingly win (though grantedly annoying at times, mostly because I can’t stand male ego and super angst displayed in some of the characters).
As a movie by M. Night Shyamalan: unfailingly…well, fail.
Read More I mention it because one of the defenses of his insensitivity (to put it mildly) was that his argument was logically sound. And that’s a point that gets brought up an awful lot in discussions of social justice and in general when someone is called out for doing something harmful. It’s especially a point brought up from men against women, usually as a way of gas-lighting us and saying, “You’re too emotional to get this, let me logic at you in a manly fashion.” It’s sexist, it’s dismissive, and it focuses on one aspect of a situation to the exclusion of all else.
As I said on Twitter in my original thoughts about Dawkins’ asshattery:
Read MoreThis is the kind of argument I see quite a lot from those who tend to hold a lot of privilege & experiential ignorance of the topic at hand. Honestly…it makes me think of that scene in the RDJ/Jude Law Sherlock Holmes. Holmes is holding something in his hand, the end of which is mere inches from Watson’s face. Watson: “Get that thing out of my face.” Holmes replies, “It’s not in your face, it’s in my hand.” That’s what these logical men are like. That’s their argument. TECHNICALLY, they’re right. But the practical application & observation of the situation shows that one can be correct but still wrong. In this situation, the argument can (& has been, repeatedly) made that Dawkins wasn’t minimizing when he was making the comparison. TECHNICALLY, he wasn’t. But functionally, he was. Just like the thing TECHNICALLY was in Holmes’ hand but FUNCTIONALLY was in Watson’s face.
I’m noticing a lot of problematic things sewn into the story of Oklahoma — things I didn’t notice as a 19-year-old religious conservative — and it’s incredibly frustrating.
The main story is how an abusive man terrorizes a woman, and an entire community treats him like the proverbial missing stair.
(If you’re unfamiliar with Cliff Pervocracy’s missing stair analogy and don’t want to click the link above, he basically outlines that often communities gloss over abusers in their midst the way that someone who lives in a house with a missing stair just becomes accustomed to skipping that step rather than fixing it.)
Read More Rape culture affects everyone, but we don’t have to have all the conversations about all the things any time we want to talk about one of them.
Read More As a series: unfailingly win (though grantedly annoying at times, mostly because I can’t stand male ego and super angst displayed in some of the characters).
As a movie by M. Night Shyamalan: unfailingly…well, fail.
Read More