A few points of conflict with Jackie L's (Eilonnwy) article.

[thesummerqueen]

Good post TSQ, though I think you're dreaming a little if you think the playing field is level.

That Eilonnwy is harassed for bringing up an inequality speaks volumes.

Again, Eil had good points. Great points even - give her what she's due. Somewhere along the way this discussion got slightly out of hand and tempers flared. I have to admit I didn't follow every link to see where it all added up, but I saw enough. I disagree with a few of the accusations she made, but I'm completely outside of all but one of the issues, so what do I know?

I know we're not equal. But I object to making people feel guilty for something they can't help. I'm just pointing out that there's more than one facet to this argument than the two that are being presented: It's folly to think there isn't discrimination and bigotry (some horribly so), and it's also folly to believe that *some* of this "awareness" people are pushing isn't part of another agenda that's equally as discriminatory. There is rarely one solution to any of these sticky issues, but one I see neglected often that should be encouraged in all cases is the ability to shake this shit off. If I let every guy who gave me hell for being a girl bother me, I'd never succeed in anything.

As to our responsibilities, yes, we should help each other out and provide opportunities. But I won't do it at the expense of pride in myself either.

[fr0d0]

Thanks again for a pretty balanced post TSQ. I think it is harassment when like this it's the culmination of frustrations where a person is vilified for going against the populist flow, which in this case I believe to be seriously misguided. Women have consistently defended their position to be shot down by open misogynism cheered on from the side lines. This is in no way showing sensitivity to a minority. Quite the opposite. I can't understand the willingness in championing lack of sensitivity. If you don't get it, why not try a little understanding rather than throwing stones with the mob?

[Tiberius]

If you don't get it, why not try a little understanding rather than throwing stones with the mob?

Maybe because every time we try to understand it (by asking for a better explanation), we get shit in retaliation. Case in point: tav asked you how and where he was oppressing anyone (attempt at understanding - check), and your response was "That you don't know it illustrates the point." It gave no explanation of how and where he was oppressing anyone; it was a snide remark, and a snide remark only.

If you want people to understand, why don't you give them a decent answer when they try to???

[fr0d0]

My point wasn't snideness it was an attempt to make tav think for himself rather than be presented with what he would see as an argument to counter. Fact is it's already been said and ignored before.

[thesummerqueen]

If you don't get it, why not try a little understanding rather than throwing stones with the mob?

Excellent question...and both sides are guilty of it on occasion. Some don't ask, and some don't explain. In the outside world, I've seen people join a 'mob' just because they didn't also want to be attacked. Some did it to be cool. Some did it because they truly believed the position the crowd was taking. And some did it simply for the opportunity to be cruel. On the flip side, the minority group can try to turn elitist and say "even if we explained it to you, you wouldn't get it." None of this is conducive.

It isn't easy to make yourself look at things from another person's perspective, nor do most people realize that no one - NO ONE - thinks the same way they do.

As a side note, and I've stated this to other people, I've noticed that the "mob mentality" that is said to rule on this site is extremely odd: if there is one - because I don't want to be jumped on for saying there is or isn't - it seems to partially be because those with the 'unpopular' position who initially have support suddenly are alone - people who initially agree and might be able to provide a more balanced conversation seem to drop off, whether tired of it or they have real life to tend to, whatever.

[tavarish]

My point wasn't snideness it was an attempt to make tav think for himself rather than be presented with what he would see as an argument to counter. Fact is it's already been said and ignored before.

LOL.

You make a claim about me.

I ask you to explain exactly what you mean.

You say the fact that I'm asking means the claim is true.

Yay for intellectual dishonesty and fallacious banter!




I'd ask you where and how you feel Eilonnwy's being harassed, but I'm pretty sure the answer would be the same vague crap it always is - so I won't bother.

[Tiberius]

My point wasn't snideness it was an attempt to make tav think for himself rather than be presented with what he would see as an argument to counter. Fact is it's already been said and ignored before.

Again, I ask:

If you want people to understand, why don't you give them a decent answer when they try to???

Can't you see the hypocritical nature of your stance here? You want more people to understand, and yet you aren't prepared to help aid that understanding when you accuse someone of something and they ask you to explain.

[thesummerqueen]

My point wasn't snideness it was an attempt to make tav think for himself rather than be presented with what he would see as an argument to counter. Fact is it's already been said and ignored before.

I realize people are already asking you to state your point for other reasons, but I wanted to add here that I'd like you to do so because of this:

At some point over the last year, I heard Phil Plait repeat the idea that even if you cannot convince the person you are arguing with, you have no idea how many people you might "convert" who are listening around you. Of course, he was talking about skeptics trying to bring reason to believers.

Maybe Tav would have disagreed and argued more, maybe he wouldn't (I don't know him yet, though I'd certainly like to), but there's a chance your statement could have provided clarity to the rest of us that hadn't been provided in other posts. This kinda goes along with what I was saying earlier - no one thinks the same way. If you restated the position, who knows which of us might stop and say "...oh!"

[fr0d0]

You make a claim about me.

It's all about you isn't it tav.

To everyone else.. what is this strawman we're building here? The topic of privilege is being pretty thoroughly discussed. That's the subject. Nothing else. Lets not try to derail the topic.

[Tiberius]

There is no strawman; the discussion is still going, but for the moment we are focusing on what you accused tavarish of being, and why you continually refuse to explain what you meant (despite your other claim that you wish people would try to understand more).

No, it isn't all about tav, but some of it certainly is:

fr0d0: "As usual on this subject I find your stance repulsive Tav. You're the oppressive king complaining to the slave that they're not considering your feelings. You need to check your stance and try to approach it in a fair manner. Nothing will come of your bullying tactics other than reproducing the discrimination you are being asked to reign in." (bolding mine for effect)

Your post seemed to be all about tav, and tav has asked you to explain how and where he was oppressing anyone. Here are the posts where he made such a request:

http://atheistforums.org/thread-5129-pos...#pid101180
http://atheistforums.org/thread-5129-pos...#pid101194
http://atheistforums.org/thread-5129-pos...#pid101304