• Olivia wrote a new post, Factually Accurate Mockery, on the site Skepchick 5 years, 10 months ago

    A few nights ago I was chilling with my friends and my boyfriend, eating dinner and talking about nothing in particular. I live with a pile of atheist/feminist/heathen types who are all very much on the same page […]

    • I agree with what you are saying, but I will agrue that there is no reason that emotional speech need not be careful or specific.

      And that guy you linked to, I don’t know how people who are so wrong about almost everything could possibly believe they are absolutely right about it all. It must be hard to live in their world.

    • Generic mockery is pleasurable and funny, but as you say, potentially damaging. I think one should be allowed to indulge occasionally, but if it becomes the rule rather than an exception, it goes from “obvious joke, not an attempt to argue” to “that’s all you’ve got, inaccurate mockery”.

      I think it’s important to also note how this ties in with the science behind the decision of a place like popular science to dissalow comments. The comments colour the readers impression of a text, and many rational, deliberating, careful bloggers who argue specifics and make sure to use sources allow a fairly high ratio of generic mockery in the comments. I think it’d be hard to rein that in by moderation by the author, but to the keep the impact of the actual work I think it’d be wise to work to instill a culture that minimizes the casual, generic “that’s just like _them_” type comments.

    • I think the difficulty is when people stop realizing the joke is a joke. Besides, every MRA site has some stuff that simply invites ridicule. (In simple terms, like, maybe once or twice every 50 megabytes, they might have a point, but then they’re all hurf durf FEMINISM!!!1!1one and lose said point.)

      And of course, the internet makes people immediately lose their sense of humor without a winking smiley after it. 😉 Even if people get Poe’s law all wrong.

    • Broad acrimony online is probably a reaction to the “equal sides” nonsense that the MSM puts out. The snark may be closer to the truth, but it’s still not always accurate.

    • When we’re having a serious discussion (not emotional rants), my partner and I do this to each other, challenging each other’s generalisations. I think this works best when it’s between people who can trust each other and are arguing in good faith.