A Dose of (Godwin-style) Stupid v.59

It happens every day. In fact, it is pretty hard to avoid it. There are some things that can only be understood with a slap on the forehead. Things so mind-boggling that one wonders how humans managed to evolve thumbs while being this mentally inept. Case in point:

The Withered, Cunty Heart of Darkness. Or, Roissy does feminism.

I am not a big fan of criticism wrapped in hyperbole. While it is often obvious when a person is exaggerating for effect, hyperbole makes it easy for people to dismiss the criticism as pure inanity. This is how Manboobz treats Heartiste’s post about feminism. Since Manboobz has a terrible habit of posting comments out of context, I first read Heartiste’s post.

It is indeed hyperbolic and deliberately hostile towards feminists, although in context it comes across more like one of Bill Maher’s anti-religion or anti-conservative rants. And like Maher’s rant, couched in the offensive language are valid points.

For instance, many feminists try to work around obvious contradictions like opposing social beauty standards while wearing make-up by saying, as Jessica Valenti did, “I like to wear makeup. I just realize that I’m only wearing it because society tells me I’ll look ugly without it.” This is a person who wants people to believe she is an independent fighter of “The Patriarchy” and totally capable of resisting its pull to conformity, yet she is utterly powerless when it comes to wearing make-up. She can fight against wearing a dress to prove she is female, but that mascara brush is just too strong.

It is a moronic argument, or as Heartiste wrote: 

Valenti’s “I just realize that I’m only wearing [makeup] because society tells me I’ll look ugly without it” is the dog-eared “deus ex societas” card that feminists always pull when they have run out of credible explanations for female behavior and are forced to confront the reality of innate sex differences. To demonstrate the bankruptcy of that card, try to imagine a man saying “I just realize that I’m only trying to get girls into bed because society tells me I’ll be depressed if I stay celibate.” Ridiculous on its face, yet that is exactly the level of intellectual feminist thought.

Granted, calling feminists “lantern-jawed fuzzfaced quasi-dykes,” “femcunts,” or “raspy-throated, dusty-muffed sisters-in-arms” will not engender much support, although I do wonder if these were some of Ryan Reynolds leftover insults from Blade Trinity.

I believe civility is the better way to go, if only because civility frustrates people like Manboobz.

As usual, Manboobz only listed the insults out of context and failed to address any of Heartiste’s actual points. And to demonstrate his intellectual dishonesty, he read this comment by Heartiste:

My opinion of cultural trends now underway?: Thanks to technology, diversity and cognitive stratification, America is entering the period of The Great Culling, a process which will create not only new classes, but even new races, broadly a snarky Eloi and a medicated Morlock, and slowly, as the government cheese runs out, the losers in this culling will begin to procreate less and less, until they are discarded by the invisible crotch of evolution as failed human experiments unable to adapt to the new reality. (Note that some of the losers include childless spinsters of the high IQ elite.) The wildcard is genetic engineering, something nerds love to trumpet to assuage their feelings of hopelessness, but I doubt it will emerge in time to make a difference.

And wrote this in response:

Having dispensed with feminism, Roissy goes on to wax pompous about the future of the whole human race. Naturally, he thinks like a PUA version of Hitler.

He now just lost the argument. See, there is this law called Godwin’s Law that states, “As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1.” In an impressive feat of stupidity, Manboobz broke Godwin’s Law without even talking to anyone. What makes his Hitler comparison truly moronic is that Heartiste is actually criticizing social engineering.

I would never deny anyone their right to make a complete jackass out of themselves (as Manboobz seems intent on doing). However, if a person wants to do that, they can make themselves look as stupid and dishonest as they want without comparing people they hate to Hilter. I would say that Manboobz knows better, but he does not.

Advertisements

22 thoughts on “A Dose of (Godwin-style) Stupid v.59

  1. “And now he just lost the argument. See, there is this law called Godwin’s Law that states, “As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1.”

    Nonsense, TS. While this particular comparison to Hitler by Manboobz was not justified by that specific quote from Roissy, many PUAs really DO have an undeniable Nazi-style bent to them. Comparisons to Hitler may be absurd the majority of the time, but in the case of gamer/paleo/racist cult types, it is a 100% valid comparison.

  2. You are quite correct in your assessment of Futrelle. He loves to take antagonistic quotes that many (including non-feminists) may find offensive out of their context and misrepresent them in a way to make the author look ridiculous. The way to get around this is as you suggest, don’t use hyperbole, sarcasm, or make intentionally inflamatory remarks. Futrelle cannot deal with an honest, intellectual argument so he will make ad hominem attacks on those he can misrepresent.

    On my blog I frequently make statements and arguments that feminists disagree with vehemently. But to my recollection, Futrelle has only lampooned one of my articles, though I know he is aware of more. I also post at AVfM and I know he reads that site. The one article he chose was one concerning the Rebecca Watson nice guy in the elevator incident in which I was intentionally rude and crude and utterly sarcastic. I gave him plenty of ammunition with which he did very little to discredit me. As for most of my writing, I avoid such writing and use a more intellectual approach. That leaves only my arguments open to attack and Futrelle is incapable of honest debate. I suppose that now I will have to go read Roissy’s article.

    TDOM

  3. Uh, so you don’t think that any actual Nazi-like movement or Hitler-like person could possibly exist in the world? OK.

  4. Uh, so you don’t think that any actual Nazi-like movement or Hitler-like person could possibly exist in the world? OK.

    Forweg, the point of Godwin’s Law is that people should not compare those they disagree with to Nazis or Hitler because it will lessen the impact of a fair comparison. Last time I checked, no PUA rounded up anyone, handed out state-sanctioned propaganda, or murdered millions of people. So the comparison is false. It is just meant to make an vicious attack on someone.

    As for your comment itself, of course there are likely people who exist in the world. However, that has nothing to do with the statement in question.

  5. “Forweg, the point of Godwin’s Law is that people should not compare those they disagree with to Nazis or Hitler because it will lessen the impact of a fair comparison.”

    They should not do so frivolously or without good reason. But if the shoe fits…

    “Last time I checked, no PUA rounded up anyone, handed out state-sanctioned propaganda, or murdered millions of people.”

    That’s addressing something totally different. This statement would only be valid if someone described PUAs’ actual actions as being just as bad or evil as Nazis. You’re talking about degree with this statement. I’m talking about ideological similarity.

    “So the comparison is false. It is just meant to make an vicious attack on someone.”

    No, it is false only when it is… false. If someone persistently boasts about the superiority of the “white race”, talks about the desire to become a “superman” and create a superior type of human, lambasts the right of the disabled and less fortunate to merely exist, links to websites with explicitly Nazi-inspired teachings, and attempts to sell their own ranting manifesto in book form… I am in the right to compare that person to Hitler on an ideological level and in relation to their personality.

  6. If someone persistently boasts about the superiority of the “white race”, talks about the desire to become a “superman” and create a superior type of human, lambasts the right of the disabled and less fortunate to merely exist, links to websites with explicitly Nazi-inspired teachings, and attempts to sell their own ranting manifesto in book form… I am in the right to compare that person to Hitler on an ideological level and in relation to their personality.

    Yes. However, that is not what Heartiste wrote, or anywhere it, so the comparison is false. The comparison was made by Manboobz solely for effect, and it is pretty insidious thing to do. Do not get me wrong. I understand the point you are making in regards to someone holding stringent views. The problem is that the comparison is so egregious that unless the two groups literally share similar views, it loses its power.

  7. Well, I think we have a bit of a misunderstanding on our hands. As i said above, it was (unsurprisingly) idiotic for Manboobz to label Roissy as “like Hitler” for that specific quote. No dispute there.

    Your blanket implication in the article that anyone who compares anyone else to Nazis or Hitler “loses the argument” is false. Regardless if you think the Godwin’s Law thing is funny or cute, it is wrong. There are rare cases where a comparison to Nazis or Hitler is validated.

    Capiche?

  8. Your blanket implication in the article that anyone who compares anyone else to Nazis or Hitler “loses the argument” is false.

    Except that is not what I wrote. I wrote, “And now he just lost the argument.” That says nothing about anyone or everyone, just the one person who made the comparison. Please read more carefully next time.

  9. Stoner, I find the best way to deal with people taking your comments out of context is to not give them anything to work with. Also, I do not think Manboobz “wins” at anything because he engages in the same behavior they criticize others for.

  10. yeah, I’m not as “careful” with my words as you are…

    I say things that some people will “get” or find funny but others will find odd, questionable or rude…..

    I find myself having to explain myself over and over…..

  11. SWB: In order to clear up any potential for misunderstanding I just want to point out that me pointing out Lady Raine’s problems with anti-semitic statements in no way should be read as a defense for Roissy/Heartiste.

  12. I will defend Roissy/Heartiste:

    When he’s right, he’s right, and he’s often right esp when it comes to advice concerning women or some of his criticisms of feminism. He also writes well. However, he IS an ass.
    As for Lady Raine, you don’t want to make her angry at you.
    Futrelle can be funny at times, but he’s a one-sided propogandist who plays a bit dirty and of the three people in this post I mentioned, I like him the least.

  13. Pingback: ….more interesting articles…. « stonerwithaboner

  14. I’ve noticed Manboobz is well obsessed with articles about false rape etc. These are the few that he actually makes any sort of comprehensible arguments, but then rape or a rub and tug is probably the only way he has ever had actual physical contact with a woman (Do NOT accuse anyone of being a rapist unless you have proof – TS) , assuming he’s straight of course, which I’m really not sure about.

  15. Pingback: Top Posts of 2012 | Toy Soldiers

  16. Sir, let me tell you something: Every time after I read something that Chateau fucking Heartiste wrote, I can’t go to sleep without holding a weapon. Even a rock, or a really sharp compass, or a butter knife. It quells that flaming oil slick in the soul, that frustrated urge to put the world to rights.

    David Futrelle is a decent person. He is sensible and funny, and he doesn’t have to trudge through Roissy’s endless screed of hatred looking for an “actual point”. None of you people deserve that. He doesn’t care what you have to say, and neither do I, because when you lace your arguments with words like “cunty” and “invisible crotch of evolution”, they are is official garbage. Feminists could be six hundred kilos apiece, grunt like apes and have jaws like lanterns, and I’d still like them better, because none of them ever told me to “stop flinging tampons around” two comments in.

    So you don’t want Heartiste to be compared to Hitler? Fine with me. Personally, I think he’s more of a Goebbels-smarmy, odious, has a weird relationship with women, but we don’t need to worry about him.

    You know what the weird thing is? I’m a feminist, and I support men’s rights! If I were a little older, I would be out there with any of your brethren who would care to join me, helping build safe spaces for male victims of domestic violence and organising rehab for the perpetrators. I would be pounding the streets with you, looking out for the homeless. But you won’t join me, because I’m a feminist, and apparently the only things I care about are banning certain words for some reason, dyeing my armpit hair, and complaining about “cisgender heteroromantic heteronormative privilege” on Tumblr.

    You MRAs have become everything you said feminism was-whiny, self-obsessed, self-important windbags who only care about the issues that affect you personally. Since I’m supposed to be grossly fat, I guess i should make use of these imaginary bingo wings and flap them in sour schauenfraude.

    Good day, sir.

  17. David Futrelle is a decent person.

    Perhaps. However, his behavior is far from that of a decent person. It is crass, dishonest, insulting, and bigoted. Futrelle behaves as badly or worse than the people he “criticizes.”

    Feminists could be six hundred kilos apiece, grunt like apes and have jaws like lanterns, and I’d still like them better, because none of them ever told me to “stop flinging tampons around” two comments in.

    I could say the same in regards to men’s rights activists. As bad as some of them behave, I prefer them over feminists as they have rarely attacked me for speaking about sexual violence against males or just being male.

    But you won’t join me, because I’m a feminist, and apparently the only things I care about are banning certain words for some reason, dyeing my armpit hair, and complaining about “cisgender heteroromantic heteronormative privilege” on Tumblr.

    If that is the perception you think people have of feminists, you should ask why. What makes people think that feminists are about banning certain words, dying their armpit hair (that is a new one), and complaining about various types of “privilege” on Tumblr? Is it not based on what feminists actually do?

    You MRAs

    I am not a men’s rights activist.

    have become everything you said feminism was-whiny, self-obsessed, self-important windbags who only care about the issues that affect you personally.

    Perhaps they have. Yet they lack the social support to make that as pressing an issue as it is for feminists. When men’s rights activists complain, people make fun of them. When feminists complain, they get on the Colbert Report.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s