Yeah, I spent a lot of time absorbing as many posts here, at FtB, and other blogs caught in the cross-fire before getting into the fray. I still think there's a bit of conflation going on between:Rum wrote:The way of the internet it seems Mai. One sees this sort of thing happening a lot. One of the culprits in my view is the sheer volume of words, so that it is impossible for most people to really get a hold of an issue by reading back through the relevant messages/posts/blogs etc. It tends to result in people either going with gut reaction or taking sides out of loyalty. And so the thing spirals.maiforpeace wrote:I would simply like to see Pappa like to see my friend take responsibility for his actions without deflecting them with worse examples of PZ, and I'd like for my friends to do the same. I hold them to the standard they demand from others and in that department they failed pretty miserably I'm afraid.
And frankly, I am pretty disgusted with how much everyone is still crucifying PZ. That says much more about their own character than any dirty details about PZ's shortcomings. What do you think about the way he was bullied out of here? That was fucking deplorable, pitiful and shameful for me - they are friends claiming to want to engage in rational dialogue and didn't think for a moment about how they represented others in that light? I don't want any association that brand of hatefulness and derision. And I actually considered that we could show him a better way. So much for that fantasy.
It is particularly sad in this instance because although there may be differences in approach, method, goals and o on, we all in this debacle have far more in common than not.
> criticizing someone based on their emotional reaction and initial response to a situation
and
> criticizing someone based on their continued response, after being offered the opportunity to engage in civil (if irreverent) discussion
I agree, the tone got pretty nasty on both sides. IMO, though, more people should have accounted for that fact before making their next response. When someone is fuming at the gills towards me, it helps to second-guess their motives. There is something that is upsetting them, and it probably isn't what they've directly communicated.
When we get mad, our communication skills fall to shit. I say enough dumb shit and do enough dumb shit in anger that I CAN'T hold similar reactions against anyone else. When someone throws a hostile, deliberate attack at me, my initial reaction is to throw it back in their face. When people got defensive about the rape joke, it wasn't because they were trying to defend the rape joke; it was to defend their own character and reflect the attitude of the "attackers."
As others have noted, the problem wasn't with the reaction, it was with the escalation. Even though people here started to cool their jets and request civil discourse; Even though Pappa apologized; Even though people here began showing agreement with many of the critiques, it was already too late. The moment people got up in arms, there was NOTHING anyone here could do to respond in any constructive way, as far as the other side was concerned.
Calm, level-headed requests to discuss specific questions without a hint of hostility were branded as hate speech. People actually spent time outlining, writing, editing... thoroughly considering venomous, hurtful, and derisive responses to a gaffe; an honest mistake that was acknowledged.
Forget about the fact that everyone initially got up in arms. The fact is, the side righteously demanding compassion (I say this with absolutely no irony) was completely ignoring every attempt to meet the demand.
