Oy. Scott Adams won’t shut up about that execrable “Pegs and Hoies” piece of his that I (and quite a few other people on the internets) wrote about the other day. Naturally, he’s being willfully obtuse about the reaction his piece caused, and blames it all on the “low reading comprehension” of everyone in the world who is not him and/or one of his sycophantic fans. So he’s decided to interview a number of those who wrote about it. (Not including me. Aww, Scott, but we had such good times together!)
So far he’s interviewed Mary Elizabeth Williams of Salon (a great writer and lovely person, by the way) and Irin Carmon of Jezebel. Naturally, the interviewees offer cogent explanations of just what was wrong with his idiotic post, and he responds by completely and utterly missing the point. (Or pretending to; it’s always hard to tell with Scott.)
Scott Adams is so relentlessly irritating – he’s a bit like Eoghan in his stubborn refusal to get the point – that I can’t bring myself to write any more about this idiotic manufactured controversy. So you’ll have to go check out the posts yourself.
EDITED TO ADD: Adams has put up yet another post on the subject, entitled “Maybe it’s me?” in which he decides ” to take a step back and seriously consider the hypothesis that the reason people disagree with me is that I’m an idiot and I don’t realize it.” Scott, your hypothesis is correct.
EDITED TO ADD AGAIN: And … Mr. Adams has now made a personal appearance in the comments below. Be gentle!
Given Adams’ intense narcissism, I can’t help but get the song “Biggest Fan” by the Martini Brothers stuck in my head every time I read any of this posts. Listen a bit, and you’ll see why.
The response interviews are actually kind of interesting from the standpoint of contrasting the eloquent, insightful arguments made by people like Mary Elizabeth Williams and the barely-coherent whines from Scott Adams. It’s like a case study in the do’s and don’ts of how to communicate.
On rape and power, my latest analogy is this:
If rape is about sex just because sexual parts are used, then is the physical abuse of a child with a frying pan or a rolling pin about cooking just because cooking parts are used?
Obviously not. Whatever invalid justifications may be used, we generally understand that beating a child with a rolling pin has nothing to do with cooking, even if one particular instance of abuse occurred after the child ate a cookie before dinner. Likewise, even though sexual parts are used in sexual assault, it does not make sexual assault about sex. I personally define sexual assault as the perpetrator using the sexual parts of either victim or perpetrator to harm, humiliate, intimidate, and/or disregard the victim.
@Alex, as someone who was sexually assaulted (not raped, but assaulted and degraded) I agree with that definition 100%.
And I could concede, I suppose, that for some rapists there is an element of sexual desire. But the decision to rape is born out of a desire to dominate, not to fuck.
Sarahejones – totally. And, as you concede – it’s not a binary so even when there is an element of sexual desire this is not mutually exclusive to the desire to dominate. Doesn’t make it ok…and even if women dress in *provocative* clothes (whatever the hell that means) this doesn’t mean that wanting to dominate them is a natural response.
Agreed. Doesn’t matter what I wear–I am not responsible for your psychopathy.
Oh, cool. So, a homeless person sodomizing another homeless person with an empty bottle because xie wouldn’t share hir drugs — that’s just ‘cuz someone got horny. And when a rapist rapes hir ex after slamming hir head against the floor repeatedly — horny. And when a rapist rapes a prostitute who was gonna have sex with hir anyway — horny.
Jeez, this is much simpler than looking at each situation and determining motivations that fit the facts!
@Sarah,
Me too. Also, I agree with the part about sexual desire.
Scott Adams seems a lot more interested in “winning” the interviews than in actually thinking about the things that are said to him. He’s all rebuttal, no reflection.
@Holly:
And yet he brilliantly succeeds at doing neither. Again, I have to wonder why exactly he would draw all this attention to himself… Has he been caught by his reflection in the water?
@Holly that sounds a lot like certain ppl who troll this blog xD
Those women lost credibility by even engaging this hate monger. How silly.
So, a homeless person sodomizing another homeless person with an empty bottle because xie wouldn’t share hir drugs — that’s just ‘cuz someone got horny.
I once had a very interesting conversation with a gentleman who ran a homeless shelter for women on Skid Row. He said that, for a very long time, one could not get a bank account without a home address – P.O. boxes did not count. However, P.O. boxes worked just fine for the Social Security Administration. The end result was that street people were clued into the fact that, around the 1st and 15th of the month, there would be a lot of people who had just cashed their social security checks.
Some criminals would rob homeless women, and they figured out pretty quickly that a homeless woman who had been robbed would report it; but a homeless woman who had been raped and robbed would not report it. So homeless women were not at risk for being raped out of horniness, it was a brutal act to cover up a robbery.
Fucking depressing.
Fortunately, I think a couple banks changed the rules, so homeless women didn’t have to walk around with so much cash anymore.
Since Adams seems to be so obsessed with winning…maybe it’s actually Charlie Sheen who is sockpuppeting?
That’s a scary thought. I think I’m going to drink my juice and not think about it^.^
@Fuck MRAs:
I’ve seen the same sort of arguments in the Creationism/Evolution debates, how scientists are just giving crazies a podium to pontificate off of by engaging them in debates. The problem is that these things are never about trying to convince the opponent (well, sometimes, but only when there’s hope), they are about highlighting the crazy for everyone else. For the people who never thought to question Scott’s charactorization of this debacle, these engagements are critical.
@Holly who’s Sprite? 😮 (just went by your blog) should I make a card for them too? 😮
Fuck MRAs – Those women lost credibility by even engaging this hate monger. How silly.
Are you sure you’re not a secret MRA, sent here to make us look bad?
@AbominableSnowPickle:
Yeah, you go enjoy your juice. Why not try the cool-aid? I’ll bet denial is fun! >:D
Ami – Sprite is Rowdy (my boyfriend/dragon)’s other girlfriend. She’s not as much of a Fymynyst Wyrryr, but you can certainly make a card if you like.
…Possibly of some sort of giant or giraffe-like creature. (She’s extremely tall and still seems to be amused by “wow, you’re TALL, lady” jokes.)
@Kirby: It’s good juice, Apricot! It would be better with some vodka in it though…that would help me not think about scary Sheen/Adams sockpuppetry. Though I don’t want to think of the condition of the sock that is being used for said puppetry. Oh man, I think I just grossed myself out even more >.< Denial Kool-Aid would be awesome. Or mind-bleach, that would work too^.^
I mean, the juice is apricot…I haven’t started referring to Kirby as Apricot. I hope the grammar police don’t get me…
http://i749.photobucket.com/albums/xx134/ami_angelwings/Magyc%20Cards/MRSSScottAdams.jpg
oh yeah if nebody missed it before.. that be Scott Adams (trollbert)
I have this test for figuring out if an argument is complete bullshit. If you can argue the exact opposite of the point, and come to a similar damning conclusion, then the argument is bullshit. Let’s give it a try, shall we?
By not responding to his invitation to debate, those women lost credibility by refusing to even talk with Scott Adams. How silly.
Yup, bullshit argument. Heads you win, tails I lose. Nice one FMRA!
@AbominableSnowPickle:
Its alright, I don’t mind if you call me Apricot. Also, could you pass some of that mind-bleach over? I really feel bad for that sock now…
Might want to fix the grammar on that one. “it’s” should be “its”.
*passes the giant jug of mind-bleach to Kirby after pouring it over the offending sock puppet*
Here you go! Watch out though, it kinda burns a little.