3 ms·

Well every feminist I've ever gotten into a debate with eventually links to the "geek feminism wiki" as some kind of irrefutable source of proof of misogyny whe

by zxcvcxz 12y ago

Well every feminist I've ever gotten into a debate with eventually links to the "geek feminism wiki" as some kind of irrefutable source of proof of misogyny when in reality anyone and everyone can edit it. This article isn't nearly as bad as the "pro-feminist" stuff I see all the time.

fweespeech 12y ago
I honestly don't see any pro-feminist articles that are as bad as this article with the exception of the Rolling Stone article he mentioned. I've never even heard of the "geek feminism wiki". So I think we have different experiences. But regardless, I'm just pointing out the author's biases since he didn't disclose them. EDIT due to rate limit: > How can you say that? So much of the prose in the article is caveats, disclaimers, and admissions of existence. Indeed, these days one cannot state an opinion with out declaring political ties, gender, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, shoe size and height. If this trend continues, disclaimers will make up 90% of any blogpost. If he had admitted/disclosed the nature of the one source you have mentioned, would your opinion of the article change? [1] Republican Source That isn't a huge change in the article. Its basically three words. > If he had admitted/disclosed the nature of the one source you have mentioned, would your opinion of the article change? I'd have believed some of the claims he made about caring about intellectual honesty. So yes, it would have changed my opinion. Blatant hypocrisy in the very article lambasting "the other side" for engaging in the behavior you are engaging in pretty much places you in category of "Oh, another fundamentally dishonest opinion by a biased source" in my mind.
- classicsnoot 12y ago
  How can you say that? So much of the prose in the article is caveats, disclaimers, and admissions of existence. Indeed, these days one cannot state an opinion with out declaring political ties, gender, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, shoe size and height. If this trend continues, disclaimers will make up 90% of any blogpost. If he had admitted/disclosed the nature of the one source you have mentioned, would your opinion of the article change?
- classicsnoot 12y ago
  So... yes? It is a bit petty to disregard the message because of the garb of the messenger :|

by zxcvcxz 12y ago

fweespeech 12y ago

I honestly don't see any pro-feminist articles that are as bad as this article with the exception of the Rolling Stone article he mentioned. I've never even heard of the "geek feminism wiki". So I think we have different experiences. But regardless, I'm just pointing out the author's biases since he didn't disclose them. EDIT due to rate limit: > How can you say that? So much of the prose in the article is caveats, disclaimers, and admissions of existence. Indeed, these days one cannot state an opinion with out declaring political ties, gender, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, shoe size and height. If this trend continues, disclaimers will make up 90% of any blogpost. If he had admitted/disclosed the nature of the one source you have mentioned, would your opinion of the article change? [1] Republican Source That isn't a huge change in the article. Its basically three words. > If he had admitted/disclosed the nature of the one source you have mentioned, would your opinion of the article change? I'd have believed some of the claims he made about caring about intellectual honesty. So yes, it would have changed my opinion. Blatant hypocrisy in the very article lambasting "the other side" for engaging in the behavior you are engaging in pretty much places you in category of "Oh, another fundamentally dishonest opinion by a biased source" in my mind.

classicsnoot 12y ago
How can you say that? So much of the prose in the article is caveats, disclaimers, and admissions of existence. Indeed, these days one cannot state an opinion with out declaring political ties, gender, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, shoe size and height. If this trend continues, disclaimers will make up 90% of any blogpost. If he had admitted/disclosed the nature of the one source you have mentioned, would your opinion of the article change?
classicsnoot 12y ago
So... yes? It is a bit petty to disregard the message because of the garb of the messenger :|