|
Tiggum posted:Isn't "TERF" a derogatory term? yes, for terrible people.
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 09:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 22:52 |
|
|
grate deceiver posted:Wait, so what's the deal with Steven Pinker? I mainly know him from that book about the decline of violence and some talks about the origins of language. Is he into some Not really, he's just not very liked by social scientists or humanities people.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 09:08
|
|
poo poo or something?
|
Skippy McPants posted:I mean, would you prefer calling them just plain old bigots? I think they use a different term like "gender realists" or something similar.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 09:27
|
|
|
El Estrago Bonito posted:I think they use a different term like "gender realists" or something similar. Okay, but I'm really not too concerned about offending lovely bigots by refusing to refer to them by whatever dissembling bullshit they've decided to label themselves with.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 09:36
|
|
|
Skippy McPants posted:Okay, but I'm really not too concerned about offending lovely bigots by refusing to refer to them by whatever dissembling bullshit they've decided to label themselves with. Yeah no, I think people intentionally use TERF because it pisses them off and that's a good/fun thing to do.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 10:34
|
|
|
http://antwonomous.deviantart.com/gallery/56998802/The-Red-Pill
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 10:35
|
|
|
Josef bugman posted:Not really, he's just not very liked by social scientists or humanities people. I see that you're an idiot. Pinker's whole persona is presenting himself as the image of what being a real scientist is like, to go where the data leads without a care for what the politically correct Cultural Marxists of the horrible leftist pits that we know as the social sciences think. But alas, he's wrong about even what the "hard sciences" have to say, and is a big fan of one of the shittiest sciences; evo-psych. He's one of the morons who convinced all the idiot nerds that there is a nature-nurture dichotomy, and sold them all on an absolutely stupid strawman. But if you want to justify your sexism or whatever, he's the man to go to. Merdifex has a new favorite as of 10:41 on Jan 4, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 10:36
|
|
|
Skippy McPants posted:Okay, but I'm really not too concerned about offending lovely bigots by refusing to refer to them by whatever dissembling bullshit they've decided to label themselves with. El Estrago Bonito posted:I think they use a different term like "gender realists" or something similar. El Estrago Bonito posted:I think people intentionally use TERF because it pisses them off I wasn't saying "let's not call them TERFs" I was questioning shelley's statement that they don't have a different term for themselves.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 10:49
|
|
|
https://mobile.twitter.com/alicemazzy/status/683972608027660288 Another installment of Rev & friends. Dirty commies criticizing Paul Graham's randian ideology.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 13:12
|
|
|
TERFs usually call themselves "Gender-Critical Feminists" or similar, the idea being that only sex is real and gender is an invention of the patriarchy. Of course, at the same time, the patriarchal delineation of gender is absolute and binary and must be policed rigorously. It's like fish denying the existence of water, you know? I dunno why they dislike "Trans-Exclusive Radical Feminist"- it's simply descriptive. I suspect it's more that they know it's a term which is tarnished in the public eye and getting upset makes them the victims rather than the people they work to help victimize.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 13:25
|
|
|
So what's a TWERF, I've heard that one too I think?
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 14:10
|
|
|
Parallel Paraplegic posted:So what's a TWERF, I've heard that one too I think? You mean SWERF? Sex work exclusive instead, generally involves attacking sex workers as either willing traitors to women or as dupes too dumb to understand that they're being exploited. Often the same people, generally lacking in empathy. As a general rule if you're attacking people who are among the most victimized and dehumanized groups in society (seriously, look at how profoundly callous people are to crimes against trans people and sex workers) you're probably a poo poo feminist.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 14:20
|
|
|
Pope Guilty posted:You mean SWERF? Sex work exclusive instead, generally involves attacking sex workers as either willing traitors to women or as dupes too dumb to understand that they're being exploited. Often the same people, generally lacking in empathy. As a general rule if you're attacking people who are among the most victimized and dehumanized groups in society (seriously, look at how profoundly callous people are to crimes against trans people and sex workers) you're probably a poo poo feminist. No I've definitely heard people talk about "TERFS and TW[E]RFS", don't remember if the second one actually had the E or not but I add it when I pronounce it in my head. I'll ask the person I heard it from later I guess 
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 14:49
|
|
|
Parallel Paraplegic posted:No I've definitely heard people talk about "TERFS and TW[E]RFS", don't remember if the second one actually had the E or not but I add it when I pronounce it in my head. I'll ask the person I heard it from later I guess Apparently TWERF is specifically Trans Woman Exclusionary Feminist. Some TERFs "support" trans men because they see them as trying to rig a system that isn't in their favor. Of course they still don't recognize them, but they're less of shitheads towards trans men.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 15:34
|
|
|
IME most TERFs don't give a poo poo about transmen one way or the other because what they're really upset about is evil men infiltrating holy womanhood.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 15:36
|
|
|
djw175 posted:Apparently TWERF is specifically Trans Woman Exclusionary Feminist. Some TERFs "support" trans men because they see them as trying to rig a system that isn't in their favor. Of course they still don't recognize them, but they're less of shitheads towards trans men. Ahh gotcha, thanks!
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 16:01
|
|
|
Merdifex posted:I see that you're an idiot. Pinker's whole persona is presenting himself as the image of what being a real scientist is like, to go where the data leads without a care for what the politically correct Cultural Marxists of the horrible leftist pits that we know as the social sciences think. Numerical Anxiety posted:You know how every now and again there's work in done in the humanities by someone who thinks that quantum this-and-that or some biological mechanism is a really great concept for understanding whatever it is they are working on, despite only a cursory, misleading understanding of the science? The end result is usually insulting mush? Tesseraction posted:I've always gotten the impression that Pinker is a man respected due to his position and not based on the validity of his views. But even from that position, I have to acknowledge, he is extremely smart and thorough and definitely one of the leading figures in his field. I think you should read his stuff, basically any of it will do, and understand that he is presenting one point of view, and that there is at least one other viewpoint, also with extremely smart and thorough people. I guess a bunch of people will tell you his book just on language, The Language Instinct (and partially The Stuff of Thought), is a good book. I am, as I said, in the other camp, but it's definitely an interesting presentation of that side. If you go for his later, biotruths-fetish stuff, you'll quickly run into stuff that even laymen will be skeptical about - for example, in the Blank Slate, he explains that women differ from men in that men prefer abstract and concrete things more than women. Like, okay? So men just like stuff, and women don't, but prefer antimatter?.. He's trying to make the old point that women care about people and relationships more, but that is basically too silly a point to make for an evolutionary psychologist, who talks about men thinking about status and hierarchy and sex and so on all the time. Cingulate has a new favorite as of 16:34 on Jan 4, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 16:15
|
|
|
Merdifex posted:https://mobile.twitter.com/alicemazzy/status/683972608027660288 The key to understanding Rev is that he has more or less the same moral compass as everyone else, except for the fact that he places "left-wing person makes a normative statement" as the most evil act one can possibly commit. So you get "well Vox Day is a shithead, but the progs are going around expressing normative opinions in Hugo Award-winning novels, so he's pretty justified"
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 16:32
|
|
|
Cingulate posted:This, although Pinker is much too smart to use the concept "Cultural Marxism". One day before class I was doing idle chitchat with the students about Pinker for whatever reason and I asked a really sedate student who I knew was a linguistics major what she thought and she just looked right at me and said, "He's a psychologist. He doesn't know poo poo." That's as close to a qualified professional opinion on Pinker as I have ever heard.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 16:57
|
|
|
Pope Guilty posted:TERFs usually call themselves "Gender-Critical Feminists" or similar, the idea being that only sex is real and gender is an invention of the patriarchy. Of course, at the same time, the patriarchal delineation of gender is absolute and binary and must be policed rigorously. It's like fish denying the existence of water, you know? I always had the impression that they started off using "TERF," but then that became an object of scorn and ridicule, so they dropped it and came up with a new, connotation-free term. Much like the constant changing of words for people with mental retardation.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 17:06
|
|
|
The Vosgian Beast posted:The key to understanding Rev is that he has more or less the same moral compass as everyone else, except for the fact that he places "left-wing person makes a normative statement" as the most evil act one can possibly commit. Also for someone who complains about prog puritanical moralism, he uses the word "evil" more than any person I've ever met, including ultra-conservative Catholics and Evangelicals.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 17:07
|
|
|
Andrew Gelman discusses Pinker's political writings sometimes and it's I think a nice nuanced introduction into being critical of Pinker's post-linguistic stuff. http://andrewgelman.com/2012/12/19/...ly-to-be-valid/ http://andrewgelman.com/2007/08/07/what_is_a_taboo/ http://andrewgelman.com/2012/12/21/kahan-on-pinker-on-politics/ http://andrewgelman.com/2012/12/22/more-pinker-pinker-pinker/ Jack Gladney posted:One day before class I was doing idle chitchat with the students about Pinker for whatever reason and I asked a really sedate student who I knew was a linguistics major what she thought and she just looked right at me and said, "He's a psychologist. He doesn't know poo poo." That's as close to a qualified professional opinion on Pinker as I have ever heard. And then, I hate Pinker (and have done my part to counter those of his claims I dislike), but I have to acknowledge, while I think he is wrong, he is not trivially wrong to the degree that I could easily dismiss it. Now think about why you're so quick to dismiss one of the most eminent scholars on cognitive linguistics and the acquisition and evolution of language in his work on cognitive linguistics and the acquisition and evolution of language based on what some linguist you know said? I've been paid to, and done my best, try and disprove Pinker for the last 5 years or so and I'm not so quick.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 17:08
|
|
|
shelley posted:Come to think of it, there's more crossover between TERFs and Dark Enlightenment people than I thought: both imagine a perfect world where they call the shots and get to remake society so everyone will march to their tune. Not that I'm a fan of either of them, but this is a general enough critique that you could accuse anyone with political views of it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 17:11
|
|
|
Oligopsony posted:Not that I'm a fan of either of them, but this is a general enough critique that you could accuse anyone with political views of it. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 17:12
|
|
|
No, because nobody actually does imagine anything as silly as a "perfect world," just world that are better from their perspective. "They want to create a perfect world" is the same kind of all-purpose strawman that you can apply to anyone with an explicit ideology as "they're crazy fanatics" or "they're a religion!" See also from our friend Scott. (Unless you're saying that kind of dumb thing was Berlin's bag, which it pretty much was.)
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 17:19
|
|
|
Oligopsony posted:No, because nobody actually does imagine anything as silly as a "perfect world," just world that are better from their perspective. "They want to create a perfect world" is the same kind of all-purpose strawman that you can apply to anyone with an explicit ideology as "they're crazy fanatics" or "they're a religion!" See also from our friend Scott. And how does the capital of Germany figure into this? unless you're referring to Sir Isaiah Berlin somehow If you were indeed responding to me: I had read you as implying idealism and utopianism actually was the core of any political ideology and wanted to point to one example for a more pessimistic strain of thought.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 17:24
|
|
|
Cingulate posted:This, although Pinker is much too smart to use the concept "Cultural Marxism". Maybe I should have been more exact - when he tries to be interdisciplinary, he never really bothers to consider the frame and the modes of questioning native to the fields he's reaching out to. See his baptizing Hume, Kant, and Spinoza as neuroscientists avant la lettre, which seems to be really only founded on "they were kinda interested in consciousness and stuff" rather than any real consideration of their work - what one gets is parody at best. Philosophy was just a stepping stone on the way to the real stuff, which is conveniently what Pinker happens to do. But on "gently caress Steven Pinker," I think that this editorial really takes the cake. Bioethics is bad, and the delays that it imposes on medical research are responsible for murdering your grandmother. Medical research is an unalloyed good, and we will not hear of your trifling complaints that it may or may not be intimately bound up with a for-profit medical industry that certainly has never shown itself willing to indulge in shady behavior to turn a quick buck. You could contend that I'm in bad faith, going after articles in non-scholarly publications rather than his proper work, but if he wants to present himself as a "public intellectual," it seems to me fair game.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 17:55
|
|
|
Numerical Anxiety posted:Maybe I should have been more exact - when he tries to be interdisciplinary, he never really bothers to consider the frame and the modes of questioning native to the fields he's reaching out to. See his baptizing Hume, Kant, and Spinoza as neuroscientists avant la lettre, which seems to be really only founded on "they were kinda interested in consciousness and stuff" rather than any real consideration of their work - what one gets is parody at best. Philosophy was just a stepping stone on the way to the real stuff, which is conveniently what Pinker happens to do. Edit: I agree Pinker's position in that debate is dumb, but the other guy is worse. Numerical Anxiety posted:You could contend that I'm in bad faith, going after articles in non-scholarly publications rather than his proper work I mean, I've only skimmed over this one, but it gives the impression that stem cell research is held back by pinko commie bleeding hearts, and not by the right. Like, he possibly has a bit of a point that a proper humanist understanding of ethics might obsess less over animal research and more about human cancer than what's currently going on amongst the vast vague cloud of liberal discourse, but between abortion and stem cell research, it seems it's pretty clearly conservative and reactionary bioethics that's the main problem.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 18:17
|
|
|
The Vosgian Beast posted:Steven Pinker convinced a generation of dumb nerds that the blank slate is a Marxist thing rather than a founding principle of liberal capitalism, so why not make Rawls a Marxist? This pisses me off so much, but I once had a friend say Pinker was a Sociologist like myself so I don't think his fans are that well read
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 18:33
|
|
|
Pope Guilty posted:IME most TERFs don't give a poo poo about transmen one way or the other because what they're really upset about is evil men infiltrating holy womanhood. You can find a few here and there who like to rail against the quislings who betray their womanhood and join the oppressors' side, but yeah, mostly it's transmisogyny all day every day
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 19:30
|
|
|
Merdifex posted:https://mobile.twitter.com/alicemazzy/status/683972608027660288 This is about Paul Graham's latest essay, on why inequality is the greatest thing ever, which even Hacker News wasn't convinced by. I would give it months rather than years before PG goes full Scott Adams.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 22:51
|
|
|
divabot posted:This is about Paul Graham's latest essay, on why inequality is the greatest thing ever, which even Hacker News wasn't convinced by. I would give it months rather than years before PG goes full Scott Adams. It would be really easy to dismiss it as dumb, but that might involve getting dangerously close to being a left-wing person making a normative statement, and at that point you might as well start eating kittens alive.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2016 23:26
|
|
|
Oligopsony posted:No, because nobody actually does imagine anything as silly as a "perfect world," just world that are better from their perspective. "They want to create a perfect world" is the same kind of all-purpose strawman that you can apply to anyone with an explicit ideology as "they're crazy fanatics" or "they're a religion!" See also from our friend Scott. My bad, I didn't really have the right words to say what I meant. I was going for "both these groups imagine remaking the whole world, not just their country or ingroup, to their liking". Edit: Forgot the point of this post. Anyway, I know it's a super bland criticism. I think these groups may have other commonalities, but this was the only one I could pick out. shelley has a new favorite as of 00:56 on Jan 5, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 00:49
|
|
|
divabot posted:This is about Paul Graham's latest essay, on why inequality is the greatest thing ever, which even Hacker News wasn't convinced by. I would give it months rather than years before PG goes full Scott Adams. If you haven't read Holly's essay on Paul Graham (which is what they're complaining about), I recommend it. https://medium.com/@girlziplocked/paul-graham-is-still-asking-to-be-eaten-5f021c0c0650#.bjrt5td9w
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 03:47
|
|
|
Scott writes what from anyone else would be a call for more compassion and understanding of the plight of others not like oneself. From Scott, of course, you can guess the final boss of the piece: That darn Tumblr SJW hate machine!
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 10:09
|
|
|
On the other hand, Wesley is making GBS threads himself over Star Wars.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 13:11
|
|
|
quote:you get a society obsessed with systematically and viciously punishing the competent long, long before you get equal outcomes https://mobile.twitter.com/alicemazzy/status/683989692342206464
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 14:05
|
|
|
That's just the logical consequence of capitalist philosophy. If you start with the notion of desert, that is what you'll logically end up with. Everyone else is just deluding themselves. Socialism now 
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 14:17
|
|
|
divabot posted:Scott writes what from anyone else would be a call for more compassion and understanding of the plight of others not like oneself. From Scott, of course, you can guess the final boss of the piece: That darn Tumblr SJW hate machine! Wow you weren't lying. That took a sharp turn into stupidville. Merdifex posted:On the other hand, Wesley is making GBS threads himself over Star Wars. I've come to realize this doesn't matter, because no force on earth will cause Scott and friends to demote him from his position as the cuddly reasonable reacto if they haven't at this point.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 14:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 22:52 |
|
|
divabot posted:Scott writes what from anyone else would be a call for more compassion and understanding of the plight of others not like oneself. From Scott, of course, you can guess the final boss of the piece: That darn Tumblr SJW hate machine! I took that as an aside, not as a final boss, and outside of the context of Scott's other posts (which I won't try to white knight) it seems pretty reasonable.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 15:59
|
|