Ya... long time coming, but as opportunity allows a good 'blogging pace for now, let's run with it.
Here's an Open Thread for all of you. This is for folks that just want to keep in contact, or ask about anything from the Nuba Mountains to the Euro Crisis and beyond; pretty much wide open. Even partisan politics are ok, but do recall the basic rule for commenting here: Play Nice.
As always, thanks to All for coming here.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Have you read "The Misandry Bubble"?
http://www.singularity2050.com/2010/01/the-misandry-bubble.html
I think TFH is missing the bigger picture of how much money there could be in Men's Liberation. It's not so much a misandry bubble as a women's chauvanism bubble, blowing up at the middle stage of the normal men > women > children resource transfer of human societies.
I'm passingly familiar with it... not recently enough to argue points, but...
...I remembered Grim (someone I respect!) and Cassandra (someone I read and generally appreciate) having taken a whack at some of the issues with that article. Sure enough, Cassandra did a very thorough job of taking it down. So yeah, a lot of missing the picture going on there in a bad way.
To your specific item of note, I'd just observe that social perturbations happening in relatively short time frames are usually self-correcting. Unless the mechanism disturbed is replaced by another system either superior or enforced on the society, things usually swing back before more than a couple of generations pass... demographic forces are often more powerful than States and Dogma. (cf. Spengler on world population trends... doom and then a reordering). So treating the current perturbation as a blip in the long-term trend is probably reasonable... stating a single social cause probably isn't, IMO. Your mileage may vary.
Hope that helps.
Thorough takedown?
Um, no. Her first section is just cherry-picking a couple of examples of Roissy/CH's blatantly deliberate and obvious satirical trolling, then claiming without any meaningful substantiation that they're accurately representatory of the whole, and therefore validate her essentially argumentum ad hominem.
Reading further, the rest of her "takedown" appears to be just more of the same: pick a couple of most egregious examples, then try to pretend without presenting any serious substantiation whatsoever that they're (A) categorically representatory of + (B) critically necessary to (C) TFH's general thesis which = (D) he's wrong.
That's barely high-school level yellow journolism sophistry, Doug-o; "I leave it to the reader to evaluate the objectivity and credibility of 'sources' like that."
Assisted recursive petard-hoisting aside, though. . .sempai, I am disappoint. If you really want other people to keep it nice, you shouldn't be provocatively insulting their intelligence so.
If you want to continue, we can do so after you admit that you grossly overpraised Cassandra's blather, but otherwise there's no point.
Nor, apparently, should I plan to visit you after all, as you seem to have lost more than enough respect for my wits to no longer merit my company. Even if they're among my oldest and best friends, I prefer to avoid people who so disrespect me.
OK, for old time's sake, I'll just ask...
...what's the real problem?
It sure isn't anything about either The Futurist's or Villainous's 'blogging.
[sigh]
No, Doug. The disrespect you've displayed for my intelligence and integrity really is the real problem.
And when you choose to double down on that with a nasty little insinuation about psychological transference issues on my part, it just goes to further prove I'm right about being better off without you in my life.
So all my best to you and yours, and goodbye, Doug.
Post a Comment