"ethics" #gamergate alt-right anti-Semitism antifeminism empathy deficit entitled babies kitties literal nazis pledge drive richard dawkins sarkeesian! trump

Pledge Drive Update: A THANKS as big as the Ritz!

Seriously. thank you!

The Fourth Quarter 2016 “We’ve Got a Bigger Problem Now” pledge drive is entering the home stretch, and I just wanted to update you all on the progress.

First of all, THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU to everyone who has donated! Some of you really came through in a big way; I’m humbled and deeply appreciative!

antifeminism atheism minus harassment Islamophobia misogyny richard dawkins

Richard Dawkins, Lindy West, and the Cartoon Video of Great Hatefulness

Is Richard Dawkins using his bully pulpit to bully feminists?
Is Richard Dawkins using his bully pulpit to bully feminists?

Almost three years ago, a feminist activist committed what many not-so-impartial observers apparently see as an unpardonable sin: she was less than polite to a small squad of Men’s Rights activists at a demonstration in Toronto. At least one of these gentlemen caught her outburst on video, and uploaded it to YouTube.

a voice for men antifeminism atheism minus entitled babies imaginary backwards land imaginary oppression misogyny MRA oppressed men paul elam richard dawkins schadenfreude

Men's Rights activists outraged that Richard Dawkins has never heard of them

The Men's Rights Movement: To silly even for Richard Dawkins?
The Men’s Rights Movement: To silly even for Richard Dawkins?

Richard Dawkins, I think it’s fair to say, is a bit of a dick. Though he’s an expert popularizer of science he seems to be a bit of a blithering idiot on every other topic he tries to address; his broadsides on religion are patronizing and profoundly ignorant, and his forays into gender politics are even more cringey.

He puts his foot in his mouth so often on Twitter that it’s sometimes difficult to tell the difference between his real account and this absurdist parody.

atheism minus attention seeking bad boys misogyny richard dawkins

Richard Dawkins, gangsta?

Apparently Ricky Dawkins is now taking cues from Ricky Rozay.

Ricky D’s comments in the video come from an event he did with Stephen Law during Oxford Think Week in February 2013. (In case you’re wondering, the relevant segment starts at about 1:11:00 into the full video, which you can find at that link. Yes, he really does say the B word. And gets a lot of applause for it.)

Even more alarming than the b-word is his contention that science-based medicine is in the business of killing people. Though I don’t think that’s quite what he meant to say.

EDIT: I guess he does say “cure” people, though the way he says it somehow sounds remarkably similar to “kill.”  In my defense I’m old and have wax in my ears.

(This is possibly old news to some people, but it’s new to me!)

H/T:  r/againstmensrights

atheism minus patronizing as heck pedophiles oh sorry ephebophiles playing the victim richard dawkins

Richard Dawkins opens mouth, inserts foot, mumbles something about "mild pedophilia" again

A young Richard Dawkins contemplates the beauty of the universe.
A young Richard Dawkins contemplates the beauty of the universe.

Apparently Richard Dawkins was worried that people might have forgotten what an asshat he is. So, helpful fellow that he is, he decided to give us all a demonstration of why he’s one of the atheist movement’s biggest liabilities, a “humanist” who has trouble remembering to act human.

Earlier today Dawkins decided, for some reason, that he needed to remind the people of the world of a fairly basic point of logic, and so he took to Twitter and thumbed out this little thought:

 Richard Dawkins @RichardDawkins  ·  5h  X is bad. Y is worse. If you think that's an endorsement of X, go away and don't come back until you've learned how to think logically.

However petulantly phrased this is, the basic logic is sound: If I say that Hitler was worse than Stalin, I’m not endorsing either Hitler or Stalin. Unless I add “and Stalin was totally awesome and I endorse him” at the end.

The trouble is that Dawkins didn’t stop with this one tweet. He decided to illustrate his point with some examples. Some really terrible examples.

    Richard Dawkins ‏@RichardDawkins 5h      Mild pedophilia is bad. Violent pedophilia is worse. If you think that's an endorsement of mild pedophilia, go away and learn how to think.     Details         Reply         189 Retweet         287 Favorite  Richard DawkinsVerified account ‏@RichardDawkins  Date rape is bad. Stranger rape at knifepoint is worse. If you think that's an endorsement of date rape, go away and learn how to think.Yep, that’s right. He decided to do what comedians call a “callback” to some terrible comments he made last year about what he perversely described as “mild pedophilia.” And then he added asshattery to asshattery by suggesting a similar distinction between “date rape” and “stranger rape.”

Anyone seeing these comments as insensitive twaddle designed to minimize both “mild” pedophilia and date rape has good reason to do so. As you may recall, in the earlier controversy about so-called “mild” pedophilia, Dawkins told an interviewer for the Times magazine that

I look back a few decades to my childhood and see things like caning, like mild pedophilia, and can’t find it in me to condemn it by the same standards as I or anyone would today.

He went on to tell the interviewer that when he was a child one of his school masters had “pulled me on his knee and put his hand inside my shorts.” But, he added, he didn’t think that this sort of “mild touching up” had done him, or any of the classmates also victimized by the teacher, any “lasting harm.”

Huh. If Dawkins says that a teacher groping him was no big deal, I guess this kind of “mild” abuse shouldn’t be a big deal for anyone else, either, huh?

I’m pretty sure there’s some sort of logical fallacy here.

Given his history of minimizing these “mild” sexual crimes, it’s not a surprise that his crass tweets today inspired a bit of a twitterstorm.

Dawkins has responded with his typical petulance, and has stubbornly defended his comments as an exercise in pure logic that his critics are too irrational to understand.

If you take a few moments to go through his timeline you’ll find many more tweets and retweets reiterating this “argument.” Dawkins is not the sort of person to admit to mistakes. Indeed, he so regularly puts his foot in his mouth it’s hard not to conclude that he must like the taste of shoe leather.

But these recurring controversies can’t be doing much for his reputation. Indeed, they seem to cause more and more people to wonder why anyone takes Dawkins seriously on any subject other than biology. Even his critics on Twitter are growing a bit weary.

Seems like it. I’m beginning to wonder why any atheists — at least those who are not also asshats — continue to think of Dawkins as an ally of any kind.

Click my kitty to see the smash hit new blog!
Click my kitty to see the smash hit new blog!


%d bloggers like this: