It’s pretty good show. Most of the discussion involves social media researcher and Fordham professor Alice Marwick and Helen Lewis of the New Statesman. Those of us in the Google+ Hangout pop in briefly with comments and questions.
FWIW, I appear only briefly in the show proper, but I have a somewhat longer (and a bit more coherent) comment in the ten minute “online only” portion that immediately follows the show (and which is also on this video).
It was a somewhat strange, if educational, experience, my first appearance on TV. (The next time I get webcammed into a show, I won’t reflexively look down at the laptop while talking.) It all went by really, really quickly. Weirdly frantic behind the scenes as the producer tried to slot us all in.
The comments on the video on YouTube nicely illustrate the problem we were discussing; that is, they are a rancid pile of misogynistic shitlordery.
My favorite comment is this one from Urhoboman5 about Rebecca Watson:
At 5;30 that chick has a youtube channel. Just type in rebecca feminist and you’ll find it. Interesting how most of her videos are voted down. Sometimes as much as 80% negative because the stuff she says is pure nonsense.
That’s right. He actually thinks that the fact that her videos are targeted by downvote squads proves that she’s wrong to talk about harassment. She’s harassed by dudes who don’t like her talking about harassment so therefore it’s “nonsense” for her to talk about harassment. Brilliant.
I suppose I should note that much of my worldview is informed by my Objectivism; take that as you will.
Ok sure, I’ll just take that as you being a pretentious clown as usual.
Of course you’re a Rand fanboy, Steele. OF COURSE you are. Could you be any more run-of-the-mill?
OK, now I’m starting to think that Steelpole and Ruby are the same person.
(JK, I don’t really, but they should totally date because they would love each other.)
Excuse me, a “fanboy”? I am a Rand acolyte who attempts to play my own small part in continuing her legacy. And though I recognize Rand as a brilliant individual, my loyalty is to her philosophy, not Rand herself. It’s a fine difference, but a distinct one.
Steele’s “everything is misandry” explained: he thinks femininity is worship of men.
Butthorn: we are not surprised.
Excuse me, a “fanboy”? I am a Rand acolyte
I’m just going to leave that there.
“Rand acolyte” HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.
Do you have a little shrine set up and everything, or is it just that Galt is your wank material?
Excuse me, but the only thing missing from this list of synonyms is “fanboy” because it’s too new:
That’s my first broken blockquote btw.
I’m so proud.
I see the sneering Boobzers are out in force. No matter; puerile feminists, philosophical amateurs, and politically correct zealots generally do dislike Rand – they see her as “immoral” or other such nonsense. As one might expect, they generally have not read her works.
Excuse me?!?!1/ I’ve read The Fountainhead. I even liked it at the time.
The weird she-totally-wanted-it-so-it-wasn’t-rape-but-it-was is pretty telling vis-a-vis your views on feminism.
Well, I don’t really see her as “immoral”, more like “ridiculous” and “a dumbass” and yeah I did actually have to read her in college for some Rand scholarship that I applied to. But go on with you fanboy wanking, it’s pretty hilarious!
As one might expect, they generally have not read her works.
I bet they haven’t read “Spreading Misandry,” either. Or “Misandry 2: The Misandering.”
Can you please do a blog post about Rand? Pleeeeeeeeeeze?
Varpole: Excuse me, a “fanboy”? I am a Rand acolyte who attempts to play my own small part in continuing her legacy. And though I recognize Rand as a brilliant individual, my loyalty is to her philosophy, not Rand herself. It’s a fine difference, but a distinct one.
Please elaborate on the brilliance of, “Fuck you Jack, I got mine”, and “Ima gonna take my ball and go home if you don’t give me lots of shit I didn’t earn”.
Seriously, what, apart from those two ideas has Rand got going for her?
And, how does what I discussed above (re money, and the legacy of Rome) say about your fallacious argument that Might Made Right, in re the expansionist nature of Europe (which ignores the effect that disease had on the Americas, which had more people, living better, than Europe did at the point of first contact: try both 1491, and 1493; though I think 1491 to be a better book. You might also try, “Guns, Germs, and Steel” but Jared Diamond, though I disagree with the argument he makes in the preface, the rest of the book is pretty compelling).
I don’t think Rand was immoral, I think she was completely full of shit about a lot of things. Also, I’ve done the reading, but college was a while back, and I’ve since evolved from that particular worldview.
Sorry we shat on your point, though, Steele. We do realize you just wanted an excuse to wank and sneer. Do go ahead anyway.
This is the reason for Artistry for Feminism and Kitten’s existence:
http://artistryforfeminismandkittens.wordpress.com/2012/08/13/a-trolls-catchphrase-inspires-poetry/
Sorry it took so long. I was in a meeting learning how to archive web pages and thwart robots.txt.
p.s. Confession: I LOVED Atlas Shrugged. When I was 13. I grew out of it.
Steelepole’s a Randroid? I don’t believe it!
Wait a second… repetitive… small minded… arrogant… repetitive… self important… overvalues minor corporate position… huffy… repetitive… uses awkward phrasing… fond of introducing irrelevances… passes guesswork off as logic… blusters constantly… repetitive…
On second thoughts, sounds like every other Randroid I’ve ever met.
YOU PUNY-MINDED INSECTS DON’T HAVE THE MIND POWER TO HANDLE MY PURE TRUTH!
Oh yeah, she cheated on her husband, but got angry when her lover cheated on her, not with his wife, but with a third woman; she wrote thousands of pages scorning collective activities, but went on Medicare and Social Security as soon as she needed them; she wrote mash notes to a guy who murdered a young girl, extorted ransom money from her father, and dumped her dismembered body all over town, because she thought he had risen above the law and thus become his own moral source.
We can argue about “immoral,” but she certainly sounds a nasty person.
As one might expect, people who suppose that critics have not read the works they are criticizing would be wrong.
actually, it’s mostly professional philosophers who bag on rand, because her work is incoherent gibberish. do you read any actual philosophy, or just mra blogs?
uh dude, like a lot of teenagers i went through my randroid phase. i grew out of it about the same time i entered college because i realized basing my worldview on a bunch of self-serving one-dimensional caricatures was a stupid thing to do.
that and she’s almost as bad of a writer as you are.
*worships a woman who literally wrote a scene where all the people she disagrees with die a painful death*
*calls other people puerile*
*is mikey varpole, spoiled white baby extroardinaire*
ayn rand would definitely have seen mikey ‘i cant get anything done because waaaaaaah feminsm’ steele as a moocher