Coito ergo sum wrote:PsychoSerenity wrote:No it doesn't, - I can also not give a fuck that Thunderf00t got himself banned from blog that I don't read, and think that his making a video about it is just as self-obsessed and irrelevant as some of the stuff Skepchick keeps going on about. I really don't think this is going to shatter the core of scepticism.PsychoSerenity wrote:I'm not saying I don't give a fuck about the thread, I'm saying I don't give a fuck about the argument between Thunderf00t, Myers and Skepchick. This thread is about you declaring an internet argument to be a "War Within Skepticism" that is somehow important enough that everyone who considers themselves a sceptic must be on one side or another. Most people in this thread seem to be saying they think you're wrong and that they don't think it's that big a deal.
However, if one "doesn't give a fuck" about the issue, then by definition almost one doesn't think the problem identified by the Skepchicks and Myers is a big problem at all. That is precisely what Thunderf00t argued. So, in a very real sense, not giving a fuck is siding with Thunderf00t on that issue.
If you do think the problem identified by Skepchicks and Myers is, indeed, a serious issue in need of a remedy, then, again, you have picked a side.
Right? Or, is there a third option that I'm missing?
To clarify further, I'm also not saying that I don't give a fuck about the issue (sexual harassment and what is acceptable behaviour at conferences etc.), I'm saying I don't give a fuck about the argument between Thunderf00t, Myers and Skepchick, and I don't think it's anywhere close to a "civil war".
Coito ergo sum wrote:Where I see the serious importance, though, is in the fact that prominent and influential skeptics, relatively speaking, are having an impact, and the ridiculous views of the Skepchicks, white knighted by folks like PZ Myers, and their myriad followers, are starting to take hold as almost the prevailing view of things. This is why we're seeing Skepchick-esque "policies" being adopted by conferences and conventions. That's what caused Thunderf00t to comment, really. The PoLOLicy (as he put it) adopted by a convention to "remedy" the supposed sexual harassment "problem."
If the Skepchicks start saying what we can and can't do at a Ratz meet, then I might pick a side.