Almost three years ago, a feminist activist committed what many not-so-impartial observers apparently see as an unpardonable sin: she was less than polite to a small squad of Men’s Rights activists at a demonstration in Toronto. At least one of these gentlemen caught her outburst on video, and uploaded it to YouTube.
You know the rest: the video went viral, and the activist, a red-headed woman known as Chanty Binx (or “Big Red,” to the douchebag army), found herself suddenly transformed into “The Posterchild of Everything Wrong with Feminism,” as one of her haters put it. Her face has become ubiquitous in antifeminist memes, and she’s endured nearly three years of harassment.
Earlier this month, antifeminist YouTuber Sargon of Akkad — who makes his living pandering to some of the internet’s worst lady haters — posted an animated video by another antifeminist YouTuber in which an angry Islamist and an angry feminist sing a song explaining that they pretty much believe all the same things. (For some reason, this nonsensical theory is something that a lot of antifeminists have convinced themselves is true.)
The angry Islamist in the video is a familiar racist stereotype, complete with “funny” accent. [Correction: He’s evidently supposed to be a parody of this guy, known as Dawah Man, a legitimately terrible person you wouldn’t think atheists would have to strawman in order to criticize..]
The angry feminist, meanwhile, isn’t a generic figure; she’s an especially crude caricature of Binx, spouting nonsense that neither Binx nor any other feminist actually believes: the video ends with her encouraging the Islamist to rape her, because it’s not really rape if a Muslim does it, dontchaknow.
It’s a vicious, hateful little cartoon made worse by the fact that these words are being put in the mouth of a real woman who’s been the target of a vast harassment campaign for years.
Yesterday, Richard Dawkins, apparently seeing this horrendous video as a clever takedown of some brand of feminism that he must think actually exists, shared it with his 1.3 million Twitter followers:
Dawkins, a well-respected scientist-turned-embarrassing-atheist-ideologue, has become notorious for his endless Twitter gaffes. But this is plainly worse than, say, his famously pathetic lament about airport security “dundridges” taking his jar of honey; his Tweet contributed to the demonization of a real woman who’s already the target of harassment and threats.
The awesome Lindy West pointed this out to him in a series of Tweets and linked to one of my posts cataloging some of the abuse Binx got after the video of her went viral.
In a series of eloquent and angry Tweets, she made clear to Dawkins how and why he was misusing his huge platform and contributing to an atmosphere of hate online. Dawkins, alternately indignant and defensive, ultimately took down the offending Tweet, but not before making other Tweets that were nearly as bad. Dawkins can’t even do the right thing without being a dick about it.
Let’s watch Lindy at work:
After what was apparently an unsatisfactory response from Dawkins — I couldn’t find his Tweet, if there was one — West repeated and expanded upon her basic points. [EDIT: The unsastisfactory respose, West tells me, was that Dawkins posted a link to one of the videos of Chanty Binx at the Toronto demonstration.]
Well, that got his attention:
So there you have it: when informed that a tweet of his will almost certainly worsen the vicious harassment faced by a young woman whose only “crime” was being rude to a couple of MRAs in public, Richard Dawkins, a one-time winner of the American Humanist Association’s Humanist of the Year Award, replies by saying that “she deserves nothing more than ridicule.”
West replied:
Dawkins then decided to suggest that perhaps Binx was, you know, crazy:
Dawkins ultimately agreed to take down his Tweet linking to the execrable video. But he offered no apology. And he went on to suggest that just maybe Binx had … threatened herself.
We’ve seen this, er, argument before.
Does Dawkins have any conception of just how much abuse women like Chanty Binx get? If she were sending herself all the threatening and harassing messages she gets, she wouldn’t have time to eat or sleep.
And I wonder if Dawkins thinks she drew the caricature of herself that was used in the video he retweeted.
Thoughtful as ever, Dawkins made sure to remind his 1.3 million followers that Binx still deserved all the mockery they could deliver. Just not the death threats please!
And he begged his readers to think about the real victims here — those people, like him, who might have to curtail their mockery somewhat because their terrible, terrible fans might be inspired to hurt someone.
RIP, Richard Dawkins’ comedy career.
Is Dawkins actually unaware that by punching down at a woman who’s already been the target of a three year harassment campaign he almost certainly is contributing to the threats he claims to deplore? It’s hard for me to believe that he could be so naive. But the alternative explanation — that he knows full well that he’s encouraging the harassers — is even more disquieting.
One good thing has come out of this ugly episode today: The Northeast Conference on Science & Skepticism has un-invited Dawkins from its event this year. A post on the group’s website today explains:
The Northeast Conference on Science & Skepticism has withdrawn its invitation to Richard Dawkins to participate at NECSS 2016. We have taken this action in response to Dr. Dawkins’ approving re-tweet of a highly offensive video.
We believe strongly in freedom of speech and freedom to express unpopular, and even offensive, views. However, unnecessarily divisive, counterproductive, and even hateful speech runs contrary to our mission and the environment we wish to foster at NECSS. The sentiments expressed in the video do not represent the values of NECSS or its sponsoring organizations.
We will issue a full refund to any NECSS attendee who wishes to cancel their registration due to this announcement.
The NECSS Team
Good for them. The atheist movement needs to stand up to the haters and harassers in its midst, including those like Dawkins, who may not directly harass or threaten but who use their huge platforms to amplify and embolden this hatred and harassment.
It would be nice if Dawkins were to actually learn something — a little humanity, a little humility? — from this incident, but when it comes to the subject of feminism Dawkins seems incapable of taking in new information, much less learning anything from it.
EDITED TO ADD: And now, as if to prov what I just said in that previous paragraph, Dawkins is now second-guessing his decision to take down his tweet linking to the video, because GamerGaters are telling him that Chanty and I made up the evidence of the abuse she got.
NOTE: Lindy West has a book coming out soon. Pre-order it below!
CORRECTION: I added a bit noting that the Islamist in the cartoon video is supposed to be a parody of a real person.
EDIT: I added a line about Dawkins tweeting a link to a video of Chanty Binx at the Toronto demonstration.
Thats not what it means at all, its the people on the far left who tolerate anti liberal principles from muslims because of political correctness and cultural sensitivity, things like homophobia, mistreatment of women, antisemitism, being pro sharia executions/amputations etc.
The regressive left will also attack women, non whites and LGBT from muslim backgrounds. Ex muslims and liberal muslims who speak against conservative muslims are attacked by the regressives.
I didn’t mean that the regressive left are pro sharia executions/amputations
Oh god, he’s back.
-1000 for all the flounces and failures to stick to them.
Who else feels like dancing?
http://i.imgur.com/WH2lLrE.gif
no, I said i wasn’t going to post on anymore threads after this one and I haven’t posted on any more threads since I said that
@troll
You have defined “regressive left” as someone who is otherwise liberal, but who accepts homophobia, misogyny, sharia law, and anti-semitism when it’s done by muslims.
You have also accused the regular commenters on this blog of being part of this “regressive left”.
Thus, it should be easy for you to quote and link to such behavior by the regular commenters. Please do that.
This’ll be fun.
@Imaginary Petal
Nice new name!
@Kat
Thank you. 🙂
Re the notion of the so-called “regressive left” – OTD is trying to disguise the stench of their ocean of bile with a tiny grain of very heavily-distorted info; we do have a few appalling (but loud) individuals such as George Galloway, a very nasty specimen who used to call himself left, who reviles actual muslim women (such as Labour candidate Naz Shah) who have the effrontery to question him, and who pretends that the most authoritarian and fundamentalist-leaning imams are the only true representatives of the muslim community because this is what he thinks will garner him most votes.
But OTD of course would like to claim that unless we favour ultra-right violent thugs like Pegida, this must mean we worship travesties like Galloway.
Re the notion of the so-called “regressive left” – OTD is trying to disguise the stench of their ocean of bile with a tiny grain of very heavily-distorted info; we do have a few appalling (but loud) individuals such as George Galloway, a very nasty specimen who used to call himself left, who reviles muslim women (such as Labour candidate Naz Shah) who have the effrontery to question him, and who pretends that the most authoritarian and fundamentalist-leaning imams are the only true representatives of the muslim community because this is what he thinks will garner him most votes.
But OTD of course would like to claim that unless we favour ultra-right violent thugs like Pegida, this must mean we worship travesties like Galloway.
OTD is wrong. More wrong than I have the capacity to express.
Oh, shit – apologies for the double post.
@opposablethumbs
Right, Galloway exists. What Maher, Harris and other islamophobes do is wrongly attribute the views of Galloway to progressives in general. I’m sure there are more people who agree with Galloway somewhere, but I can’t name a single one.
@ OTD
I only Mammoth when I’m meant to be working and as I’ve just received a call that’s ruined my Sunday I instantly checked in here first (it’s like a conditioned reflex now!)
Let me explain why I was initially happy to engage with you, but no longer.
I don’t have a problem with responding to genuine questions, I don’t even mind when they’re part of a “JAQ” tactic. I don’t expect to change your mind but I think it’s very important that anyone just reading doesn’t go away thinking you may have a point.
It’s a common tactic of British fascists to play up the “The Establishment is picking on us!” card. We saw that after Nick Griffin’s hilariously disastrous appearance on “”Question Time”. I didn’t want anyone going away with the impression that Tommy Robinson is some some sort of martyr who is being harassed for his political views. People on here are so nice that, even though they’d vehemently oppose his stance, they would feel it was unjust if that was the case.
However I think it’s been well established that he’s been treated no differently to anyone else in our criminal justice system. It’s also worth remembering his offences are common criminality; it’s not like he got banged up for revolutionary activities.
But I won’t engage with you any further because it’s clear that you’re not asking in good faith; and let me tell you how I know that.
I set a little test for you and you failed it.
It’s actually an old counter intelligence trick. Had you have actually been reading my replies, rather than just using them as a springboard for your next post trying to imply Robinson is some type of martyr, I would have definitely known it. 😉
So, fun though this has been, I hope now that everyone is clear that there’s no substance to your implications, and the mere fact Robinson is a racist thug as well as a petty fraudster isn’t being held against him by the authorities.
Now I have to go read back through your replies, Alan!
Alan,
Would it ruin things to reveal what the trap was? I read your posts but I skipped OTD’s teal deers.
Honestly I find it rather hard to get worked up about someone being imprisoned for a crime they committed.
I’m mostly going by what’s been described in this comment thread because I’m not big on watching youtube videos. If he signed off on a document he knew to be false then he’s guilty of fraud. The bank actually is potentially a victim here; in general I would expect that if they knew the true information they’ve have charged a higher interest rate. Even if they’d have refused the loan outright, that would have been because it was riskier than they found acceptable and they merely happened to get lucky in this case.
Ten months for using false documents does not in any way surprise me or seem high. The UK has a legitimate interest in punishing people for using false documents overseas because it can undermine trust in legitimate documents issued by the UK.
If someone is released from prison on conditions and breaks those conditions they go back to prison. I do not see anything even slightly odd about that.
Prison selection is fairly arbitrary; obviously if a prison can confine high-risk prisoners it can also confine low-risk prisoners, so it’s not actually unusual to have a mix in highly secure prisons. An eight-day confinement would be hell on scheduling, so they probably just picked whichever prison was most administratively convenient. Solitary confinement is at the discretion of prison administrators; it is widely used as punishment in some prisons, which is a subject of heavy criticism. In a maximum security prison, I imagine people only get put in solitary for their safety if there’s a reason to think they’re specifically at risk or everyone would be in solitary the entire time. Generally it’s for people who have angered a gang or committed a crime even murderers think is horrific (generally involving children).
Sweet fancy Moses.
I gave up on this thread for a bit, back during the Arashozoic Era, ’cause i felt like it wasn’t productive. Now I come back and we have apparently hit an A/OTD Boundary (with one intrusion, probably mass bioturbation). Was there a mass extinction event and I missed it?
@OTD, “regressive left” is a code-word used by conservatives, along with “cuckservative” or plain old “cuck” (both of these latter words are just plain grody in my opinion).
Liberals have a habit of making new words to define things (I think) – words like Intersectionality, for example. It makes being a progressive sort of jargon’ey, and can be a barrier to entry. The words themselves tend to have stable definitions, though.
Conservatives enjoy taking those words and twisting them against liberals, often with a twist – “regressive left” is just conservatives saying “You’re not really being progressive, ha-ha!” There are two parts to this that I find notable.
First – they often use these words without really understanding them. This leads to hilarity.
Second – they often do this while simultaneously denigrating the concepts that the word stands for. The use of “regressive left” is to insult the concepts of progressiveness as well as to say “you aren’t even being progressive, either, you’re just like me!”
In example, a component of progressive thought is ‘political correctness’ – which all boils down to trying to respect and understand viewpoints outside of your own. It’s not about accepting terrible things, but opponents to progressiveness have pretty much vilified the concept of not being a dick to people who think differently, to the point where no one can even talk about being polite to someone with a different viewpoint without the conservatives throwing the word around.
The tl;dr: The term “regressive left” is an empty code word for “progressive left” designed to insult, obscure and minimize. Nothing more.
http://stream1.gifsoup.com/view5/2433766/obama-s-swagger-o.gif
@ WWTH
As I am in awe of your troll-sniffing abilities I’m happy to share.
It’s an old trick of dropping an “irresistible temptation” in someone’s way. You can then monitor comms to see if someone picks up on it (it’s how you detect moles).
In this case I was relying on most trolls inability to resist a “gotcha”.
There was an obvious one in one of the linked articles (it was the first line of the article). Nothing that undermined the points under discussion; it was peripheral to all that, but had OTD really been interested in the answers as he claimed, he would have been bound to bring it up.
He seems very interested in the answers in so far as they allow him to keep talking about his favourite hobby-horse racist.
@OTD, can you at least confirm that there was no government conspiracy to bury/punish this guy? Alan has been very generous and very thorough in debunking this allusion of yours. The rational thing to do here is to confirm it and adjust your perceptions.
I’ve been reading through old posts and threads from before my time when I get bored or can’t sleep. OTD is so much like MRAL it’s hilarious. Except I don’t think he has the staying power. Now, I’m not saying they’re the same person. MRAL was definitely USian and OTD pretty clearly is British. But he’s following the same patterns, just cycling through faster. MRAL started off trollish. Then he seemed to be about to have an epiphany. He started to be reasonable and seemed to want to be friends with the regular commenters. People gave him a chance.
Then he reverted back to troll form again. Eventually he must have had a meltdown and got banned. I haven’t stumbled across that thread yet so I don’t know what happened. This is the stage OTD is in. He’s let down the people who tried to give him a chance. He’s acting offended that people are treating him like the troll he is. He’ll either flounce or say something to get himself banned pretty soon.
Will he enter the next MRAL stage? He made a bunch of socks. One sock, Steele even stuck around for a year before being caught. Steele had a couple of socks of his own. A sock had socks. Sockception! It’ll be interesting to see if OTD tries anything like this. He’ll pretty much have to if he’s going to post here anymore. He agreed to stop talking about MRAs. He agreed to stop talking about Muslims. He said he’d only post in this one single thread from now on. He’s really backed himself into a corner here. But like MRAL, he seems to be addicted to coming here and getting his ass handed to him. I’m not sure he’ll able to quit us.
I accept that the prison sentences were normal. Those were just his convictions though, he was also arrested plenty of times without being convicted.
from Jamie Bartlett in the telegraph http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/12140524/What-happens-if-you-express-a-negative-view-of-Islam-Ask-Tommy-Robinson.html
“Nevertheless, Tommy is convinced that from the moment he got involved with the EDL he was subjected to a non-stop campaign by the police to use every power they had to harass, disrupt, and, ultimately, recruit him. Prima facie it looks that way. He has been arrested and acquitted an incredible number of times; bail hearings were set at intentionally awkward times; bail conditions were sometimes highly dubious.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mEI0TKkX9_o
Here two undercover cops pretending to be left wing activists assault him and his cousin while they were surrounded by police during their charity walk. It was because they were expecting them to retaliate so they could have an excuse to arrest them for assault and stop his charity walk. When they didn’t attack back the police arrested them anyway for nothing. the charge of “obstructing police” It was a senior police officer who arrested him, an Inspector and you can see from the video that she was told to do that by someone even higher up who was communicating to her through her ear piece.
Wrong, it has bugger all to do with that.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regressive_left
This is what I mean when I use the term and how I have seen the term used.
I wasn’t thinking about Galloway but I agree that he is a regressive, an extreme one. The more common type of regressive are the left wingers who are against the things I mentioned. Homophobia, antisemitism, mistreatment of women, and other bad stuff. But don’t want to talk about Muslims doing those things and also don’t want other people to talk about it either.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11059643/Denis-MacShane-I-was-too-much-of-a-liberal-leftie-and-should-have-done-more-to-investigate-child-abuse.html