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.
He ignored both my challenges. What a surprise.
thread still going?!
@Scented Fucking Hard Chairs
in your dreams.
@Scildfreja
well i’m flattered that you think i had an era and honestly i was waiting for your response to my post.
false.this word was invented by a liberal muslim activist (Maajid Nawaz) to describe “well-meaning liberals and ideologically driven leftists that ignorantly pandered to Islamists and helped Islamist ideology to gain acceptance” and later he elaborated on the meaning of the term saying that it describes “a section of the left that has an inherent hesitation to challenge some of the bigotry that can occur within minority communities for the sake of political correctness, for the sake of tolerating what they believe is other cultures and respecting different lifestyles”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regressive_left
and no he is not an islamophobe (also i hate this word, i mean it when it is used to show anti-muslim bigotry) since he is both muslim and liberal and also rigorously tries to distinguish between islam and islamism, he is labeled both by far right as “islamist infiltrator” and by regressive left as”islamophobe”or”and neoconservative” which is ridiculous.
btw as there are some who use words inappropriately and conservatives are happy to bash any liberal with this.
but just because there are some who use words like “racist” or or “regressive left” wrongly does not invalidate the original usage.
so when a leftist says “sharia court is not barbaric but just different”
we can see a clear example of regressive left.
also far right is tough on minorities and foreigners(in the west), Regressive left gives a them pass in cases that normally it would criticize harshly(maybe because they are oppressed?!)
so when used correctly regressive left means those part of the left that favor tolerating and excusing the intolerant in the name of diversity and tolerance.
this is just outright betrayal of liberal and progressive values.
and this definition is not an imaginary one, i can give multiple examples such as
Reza Aslan:”Islam doesn’t promote violence or peace. Islam is just a religion, and like every religion in the world, it depends on what you bring to it. If you’re a violent person, your Islam, your Judaism, your Christianity, your Hinduism, is going to be violent.”
famous “religion has nothing to do with bad things” bullshit, and this is a very odd “accident” that Jainism followers are significantly non violent and peaceful.
Ben Affleck Commenting on criticism of islamism(not even islam and not muslims):”its gross and racist”
yeah criticism of one interpretation of islam is racist!
Jeremy Corbyn Commenting on isis :”Yes they are brutal, yes some of what they have done is quite appalling, likewise what the Americans did in Fallujah and other places is appalling.”
drawing comparision between US actions in iraq and ISIS! a real WTF.
GEORGE GALLOWAY:”These airplanes on 9-11 may have seemed to have come out of a clear blue sky but, in fact, these monstrous mosquitoes flew out of a swamp of bitterness and hatred and anger which exists in the Muslim world (because of) the injustice of western policy”
yeah, warriors of justice and defender of muslim world that enslave and terrorise other muslims as well.
glenn greenwald commenting on charlie hebdo:”So it’s the opposite of surprising to see large numbers of westerners celebrating anti-Muslim cartoons ”
seriously?!insulting muhammad is “anti muslim”?!
This thread is only still going because you just necro’d it, sweetie.
So based on everything arash just said, I’d say that yes, the term ‘regressive left’ is a term used to silence and degrade. Thanks for proving that point, I guess, arash?
Notice how these people who tolerate bigotry when it comes from muslims are NEVER EVER NAMED. They’re just “out there, somewhere”.
In fact, people like arash tango will take a quote from Corbyn where he specifically says Daesh are “brutal” and calls their acts “appalling”, as an example of “making excuses”.
Words. They mean things.
http://media.giphy.com/media/SriJPYsPgvpNm/giphy.gif
This applies to both of the stratigraphic-layers-in-question.
I don’t give a damn about “correct usage”, I give a damn about actual usage. As actually used, the term “regressive left” is a minimization and refutation tactic, a thought-terminating code-word for “this person is not worth listening to.”
The only people I’ve seen speak up about the “regressive left” are people who think that progressive ideals are bad, who use “political correctness” as an insult, and who consider the Muslim faith inherently and especially flawed regardless of the behaviour of individual practitioners. Until I see evidence to the contrary I will continue to interpret “regressive left” as a code-word for “progressive left”, because that’s the direction that the evidence currently points to.
Petal brings up an excellent point as well; please answer that before considering a reply to mine. Their point is better than mine.
“Regressive left” = “Cucks” = “Cultural Marxists” = “SJWs” = “Liberals” = “Socialists” = “Communists” = “Anybody and everybody to the left of Hitler.” Maybe right-wingers have such trouble with the concept of words meaning things because every word they use means the exact same thing. It’s gotta get confusing after a while.
(Did anybody actually read Ringworm’s wall of text? I sure as fuck didn’t.)
I gave you an example earlier up the thread, the politician Denis MacShane
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
Some other examples Reza Aslan , Cenk Uygur, Glenn Greenwald, CJ Werleman
I just love that he can’t even wait half an hour before switching socks to agree with himself.
@Petal;
The only evidence I’ve seen for “regressive leftists” goes a bit like
A: “Islamists are terrible!” / “ISIS is barbaric!” / negative-comment-about-Islam
B: “That’s a billion people you’re generalizing over” / “You ever seen what they did at Guantanamo?” / comment-to-distinguish-complications
A: “Stop defending them!”
Or some variant of the above. Evidence as given by arash above conforms to this pattern.
this is my only name on here. I am not arash. I didn’t even post a comment agreeing with arash or even read that big long message. i was was responding to imaginary petal
I’ve noticed that Tango Rash has conspicuously ignored my mention of feminists universally supporting Malala Yousafzai.
Thank you for the link, @OTP. It helps to distinguish what you’re talking about. I actually quite like Cenk Uygur.
Note that in the article, though, no one talks about the “regressive left”. Cenk Uygur doesn’t use the word either.
When a progressive talks about being too “politically correct”, they don’t use that term. They use terms that are specific to the situation, and they (generally) avoid making blanket, generalizing statements. They talk about community cultures and social pressures, and about the need to stand up for what’s right.
When a conservative talks about being too “politically correct”, they use terms like “regressive left” and … well, and the lovely list that SHFC provides above. They use it to stomp on the whole concept of tolerance and pretty much any progressive ideals. They use it to try to argue that progressive concepts and ideals have failed.
The use of the term “regressive left” is an excellent indicator of someones’ position on the progressive/conservative spectrum.
So, OTD is not Arash, he’s just constantly monitoring the thread for signs of life. That’s so much better!
the left wing Rotherham town council were also part of the regressive left for covering up the child sex abuse going in the town by Pakistani men.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-28951612
Yes I agree, the progressives don’t use the term.But its not just conservatives who use the term, moderate left wingers too. I’d class Maajid Nawaz as a moderate left winger.
And they both have the same general typing style, don’t know how to use the shift key, forget spaces after punctuation, drop paragraph breaks in seemingly random places, post during the same short window, claimed to be PoC after being called white, are prone to teal deers and – uniquely – link dumps, are Islamophobic sealions, are pushing the same new right-wing buzzword…
They’re either sockpuppets or long-lost identical twin brothers.
Any liberals other than the guy who invented the term? Otherwise it’s a conservative term.
Not that it matters, mind you. My opinion on the term isn’t formed by a message board discussion. It’s formed by the broad scale use in the culture, as it should be. “Regressive left” belongs alongside “cuckservative” and “leftoid” and “Cultural Marxists” and “SJW” as an insult, an empty shell of a word, hollowed out by the people who use it.
sorry i missed it, do you remember what page it was on?
Dave Rubin, Bill Maher, Richard Dawkins.
Lol.
Okay.
Milo Yiannopolous’s buddy Dave Rubin, Bill Maher the anti-vaxxer, and Richard “Dear Muslima” Dawkins.
I think we’re done here.
Like I said: Anybody and everybody to the left of Hitler.
M,
You are always right.
You are the best GLaDOS <3
Yep.
Helpful Hint:
If you have a controversial position, don’t use Rubin, Maher, and Dawkins as your token liberals.
It will not get you taken very seriously.
At all.
It’s especially unwise to use Dawkins as your token liberal support in the comments of an article where-in Dawkins’ latest foot in mouth episode of purposeful and willful ‘obliviousness’ happens to be featured.