Sand wrote: » I'm not making a fuss - I'm testifying as to how these people are ruining the world by killing hope, human kindness and rational and reasonable exchanges of views. You don't see the 1984 style newspeak tones? Trying to control thinking by controlling language? People react negatively to anyone trying to control their language for political purposes because they know that its rooted in an attempt to control them. You mean the female colleague who made it for him should have pulled him aside? That colleague? The guy drew his references for what was acceptable from himself, his colleagues and his experiences. The guy just landed a probe on a comet travelling at near unimaginable speeds. He could have shown up wearing a bin bag and still have been acclaimed as a king. The SJW reaction was the same sort of bitter jealous nomark bullying that was evidenced by the joyless people who tormented the Sean O’ Brien for daring to have fun and dance. I guess that fat guy should have known though right? It was his fault he was bullied because he ought to have known the reaction to him dancing was for people to point and laugh. One of his colleagues should have pulled him aside. What did he think was going to happen?
AnGaelach wrote: » And it's not everyone getting an apple that bothers me, what bothers me is that it's an absolute farcical portrayal of "fairness".
Sand wrote: » A piece of your soul didn't die when you saw the Oxford University ze/he/she rubbish? Or the witch-hunt of Matt Taylor? How about the grim realisation that Bahar Mustafa chief troll/first world problems/diversity officer/racist of Goldsmiths University is an actual person and not a satirical character? Bahar of course picking up the torch dropped by transracial pioneers like Rachel Dolezal. Or the people like Cora Gales/Trigglypuff who spend their lives harrassing equally sad people like Milo Yiannopoulos and in the process humiliate themselves.
Widdershins wrote: » With regards to the 'Ze' stuff. I agree that it's controlling, but it's also time wasting. Is this really the most productive use of time and energy for feminists?
Count Dooku wrote: » Correct, mission of alt rights is to bring balance back to this world ruined by SJWs Since elites incorporated SJWs, alt rights become the main anti-establishment opposition, which wasn’t afraid to challenge mess created by SJW together with political establishment, such as uncontrolled immigration, replacing equality by privileges for minorities, failed attempts to impose political correctness, etc. Because Newton's third law requires every force be accompanied by counterforce, alt rights just become such counterforce. Like car requires engine and breaks, this world needs an opposition to out of touch with reality SJWs
oscarBravo wrote: » If you don't think "you've got a box like everyone else does, now shut up already" is an equally farcical portrayal of "fairness", then I don't know what else to say. If you think those things have "destroyed the world", you're paying far too much attention to them. It's not. Happily, it's not - by an enormously wide margin - the most important issue for most feminists. In fact, it seems the only people to whom it's important is people who are delighted to talk about it instead of the issues that actually are important to most feminists.
marienbad wrote: » Come on ! These people both from the right and the left are not ruining the world . Lets maintain some sense of proportion . I would be much more worried by the likes of HRC,Trump,Putin ,Assad , Global Corporations etc - people with real and immediate power than this lot squabbling on the internet .
And no I don't see echoes of 1984 in the use of 'ze' - language changes, adapts all the time - if there is a place for an expression it will survive , if not it won't .
The fact that the t shirt was made by a female colleague is just an irrelevance . I don't care about the t-shirt either way , but the fact that a huge scientific achievement was overshadowed by this triviality tells you all you need to know .
I happened just by chance to see the press conference in the company of a fairly large group of people of both sexes and all ages and everyone was gobsmacked at it . Please don't say you didn't at least raise an eyebrow .
I wasn't aware of the O'Brien video until you mentioned it , I agree with you utterly cruel and appalling .
oscarBravo wrote: » If you don't think "you've got a box like everyone else does, now shut up already" is an equally farcical portrayal of "fairness", then I don't know what else to say.
osmiumartist wrote: » I never said he was insulting me. You seem to think he was. I am not and have never claimed to be "alt-right".
Professor Moriarty wrote: » This from an article about the teeshirt in the Guardian: "Everything that followed was utterly predictable, but not especially edifying. The story went through the five cycles of internet rage: initial amusement; astonishment; outrage; backlash to the outrage; humiliated apology." Pretty much sums it up.
Sand wrote: » You're playing both sides there. Everyone is more concerned with real and immediate problems. That is why the ze/she/he thing is soul crushing, not grand like you claimed it was just a post ago. In this very post you go on to claim 'these people' and their concerns trump a guy who accomplished something that will be remembered in the history of human space exploration. Well, you'll equally not be aware of another Orwell criticism: 'The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them.' Yes, it highlights the nomark nature of the SJWs who tormented him. Get a sense of proportion. Guy accomplishes historical feat, wears a shirt. Apply some perspective. Of course, I was hugely impressed by the feat accomplished. People lose their minds about a footballer putting a ball into a net from 30 yards. He managed it from millions of kilometers. Well, he had it coming, didn't he?
Widdershins wrote: » This bit: I especially understand the frustration felt by female scientists who feel marginalised enough in their profession without high-profile men wearing shirts featuring half-naked women Can someone explain to me why the female scientists would feel that way?
marienbad wrote: » And as for the t shirt - let me ask you a question - your son is going for a interview with Price Waterhouse and he comes down wearing that t-shirt . What do you do ? Do you say ' I have a pair of fake tits upstairs that match your ensemble , let me get them for you ' or do you say '' if you want the job lose the shirt '' . A bit of common sense would have not gone amiss - the guy was announcing an achievement that millions of taxpayers had paid for and he comes out looking like Jack Black ! It is not just political correctness it is plain common sense.
Professor Moriarty wrote: » I'm not a woman so I'm going to try this on for size (so to speak): I especially understand the frustration felt by male scientists who feel marginalised enough in their profession without high-profile women wearing shirts featuring half-naked men. I think if that was my persistent experience, I'd get a little pissed off.
Professor Moriarty wrote: » I think if that was my persistent experience, I'd get a little pissed off.
AnGaelach wrote: » I feel marginalised whenever a male actor has his shirt off in a movie. It must be why I didn't become an actor myself. We should ban women watching movies wear men are shirtless, unless they have the body of Ricky Gervais.
marienbad wrote: » Soul crushing ? soul crushing ? really , you really do need to broaden your horizons
And as for the t shirt - let me ask you a question - your son is going for a interview with Price Waterhouse and he comes down wearing that t-shirt . What do you do ? Do you say ' I have a pair of fake tits upstairs that match your ensemble , let me get them for you ' or do you say '' if you want the job lose the shirt '' .
A bit of common sense would have not gone amiss - the guy was announcing an achievement that millions of taxpayers had paid for and he comes out looking like Jack Black ! It is not just political correctness it is plain common sense.
Widdershins wrote: » But he's already well and truly proven himself by the time he came out into a tv interview wearing a racy shirt. He can afford to and is entitled to just wear something he thinks is fun, and casual, and not worry like he might when he was starting out because he wasn't well known and had few ways to make a good impression. The lad going for an interview is making his first impressions and has a long way to go before proving himself..he doesn't want his clothes to be too loud or unusual.
marienbad wrote: » Yeah I understand he thought it was fun . I personally had no problem with it , I have seen far worse . But as Professor Moriarty has pointed out below it was as obvious as the nose on his face where this was going to go . And the agency the space guy works for was also trying to make a good impression to the taxpayers that fund them . So what a we talking about a brilliant scientific achievement or a t-shirt . PR 101 - never distract from the main message . Or maybe on second thoughts it was a brilliant PR coup - how do we stick in the public consciousness ?? I know lets wear a nudie t-shirt
Sand wrote: » I am not the one getting bothered by a shirt. You're trying to pretend you're being reasonable, but that's all it is. A pretence. Matt Taylor wasn't doing an interview for your approval. He just accomplished something great in the human exploration of space. He could wear whatever he liked. The guy who owns PWC can show up to work in shorts and flip flops if he likes. You know why? Because he's not doing an interview either. Common sense? Like the Ze/He/She common sense? The man displayed some individuality and a piece of himself whilst marking his achievement. And SJWs - who claim to be all for individuality and being yourself - lynched him for it because they are false. Same way those nomark bullies targeted Sean O'Brien for being himself. Your advice in both cases is to keep your head down and don't draw attention to yourself. Tell me, does the victim blaming extend to women who wear short skirts?
AnGaelach wrote: » Do you think on NASA's casual Fridays, they wear clothes with scantily clad women on it?
Widdershins wrote: » If he knew where it was going to go and everyone else around him knew, or just should've known, the problem is big enough for even a preeminent scientist to worry about it, to worry that his funding might even be questioned or threatened. It's not a few petty oddballs.
AnGaelach wrote: » I think you should go back to my first reply to you about that picture, I specifically spoke about resources...
marienbad wrote: » don't know what you are saying here .
marienbad wrote: » Yeah I understand he thought it was fun . I personally had no problem with it , I have seen far worse . But as Professor Moriarty has pointed out below it was as obvious as the nose on his face where this was going to go .
Widdershins wrote: » The type of people-presumably they would identify as feminists-who would hector the scientist about his shirt, are not unusual people on the fringes of feminism. If it should have been obvious what reaction there'd be to his shirt. I still honestly don't understand why colleagues wearing shirts with images of half-naked women while they are away from work, make other women feel marginalised.
Professor Moriarty wrote: » Dunno to be honest. Maybe you missed the bit about 'feeling marginalised'. That would piss me off it was a persistent experience.
marienbad wrote: » Widdershins , are you seriously telling you didn't raise an eyebrow when you saw the shirt ?
oscarBravo wrote: » ...and that's where you missed the point. It's not about resources. It's a metaphor. I bet if you thought really really hard about it, you'd be able to figure out what the actual point of the metaphor is. But that wouldn't do, would it?
