The Summer 2017 WHTM pledge drive is on! Donate generously to enable our continuing coverage of whiny baby-men! Thanks!
By David Futrelle
A tragic day for whiny baby-men — the BBC just announced that the next Doctor Who will be a lady. Naturally, these sensitive souls took at once to Twitter to make their displeasure known. And to make jokes about Doctor Who turning into Nurse Who amirite fellas high five!
Here are some of the best of the worst Tweets I’ve seen so far. I can’t decide which are my favorites — the ones lamenting the loss of a crucial male “role model” or those suggesting that a female Doctor Who makes as much sense as a male Mary Poppins (which would be perfectly fine to me, by the way).
https://twitter.com/thomasdeeacon/status/886723202168344576
I'm actually quite shocked at the decision to cast a woman the should call it Nurse who now lol 😂😂
— Rhys (@rhysjordanstew1) July 16, 2017
https://twitter.com/Gapehorner/status/886609824242438144
https://twitter.com/DelDiablo007/status/886613308639514624
https://twitter.com/DelDiablo007/status/886629727745826816
"Doctor Who" what's the deal? Pushing the "gender fluidity" narrative now? Remember when entertainment wasn't social engineering propaganda
— Dan (@NotoriousDano) July 16, 2017
https://twitter.com/Amen1924/status/886681803167236099
https://twitter.com/spcwriter/status/886664276877991936
https://twitter.com/Erin_Danielle77/status/886639647387942912
The BBC have literally just ruined all the heritage and history of Doctor Who making the new Doctor a woman
— Aydin Osman (@Aydin_Osman96) July 16, 2017
Doctor Who officially ruined. Time Lords being women not an issue, 50 years of tradition out the window is. What next 007 being Janette Bond pic.twitter.com/Hj3buVMx8s
— Ewan McColl (@TheMcColl) July 16, 2017
https://twitter.com/hucksworld/status/886682969833865217
https://twitter.com/williamparslow/status/886700469648842752
https://twitter.com/GreavesyX/status/886613123666513920
#DoctorWho So patronising to women to be chosen due to political correctness. No room for merit and talent if PC comes first.
— Holomatrix (@Holomatrices) July 16, 2017
https://twitter.com/BasedKielbasa/status/886647001885978625
https://twitter.com/MJDebio93/status/886691678647705600
https://twitter.com/racerdog45/status/886677551770476545
Women have their own heroes like RIpley, Buffy and Wonder Woman, there is no need to take away role models for men #notmydoctor
— P. J. Lowry (@PJ_Lowry) July 16, 2017
https://twitter.com/thomasoldham/status/886712069021683712
https://twitter.com/Keef44002574/status/886700034934362112
https://twitter.com/Electromoth/status/886674967106125824
I remember when Ripley, Leia, Buffy, Xena et al. trailblazed great women characters. But now, feminism seems pleased with mere pandering.
— Bradley Yellop (@bazz83) July 16, 2017
https://twitter.com/winklewilly89/status/886689221418856448
https://twitter.com/revjackashcraft/status/886693656647913473
https://twitter.com/__AlexN_/status/886631666915172352
https://twitter.com/Blackbirds1632/status/886655183224229890
#doctorwho The regressive left are going crazy over the choice, next they will want a transgender to take the role as the Doctor.
— Rust (@Rust_NoMask) July 16, 2017
https://twitter.com/amusedphysicist/status/886655148235161600
No, I don’t understand what that last one means either.
DES, I’ve never met a fan from any fandom as off-putting as you’re being right now.
Ah cool. That’s actually perfect timing; I like to have some good reading material as the nights draw in. I’m really looking forward to your book arriving; not just saying that because you’re a Mammotheer, the subject matter is right up my street.
And thanks for that link. 🙂
Ah, oh dear. It seems as if the fan fever has struck. People get very passionate about their hobbies, and their beliefs about those hobbies, and I really don’t know why.
I care for you all, regardless of your opinions on space cowboys, dragon mothers, sparkly vampires or shooty men in tin cans.
You defended the position I think is right in a way I’m really jealous of, @WWTH, and I’m equally jealous of your complete apology and decision to retreat and reflect, @GussieJives. Self correction is incredibly hard, and you’re showing a lot of integrity by putting on the brakes. Good job, both of you. You too, @Nick, if that’s why you’ve fallen quiet!
There’s a strong urge to think of the “average person” as a dummy. They like shallow things, they have simple motivations, they aren’t complex. This is a fundamental error, and should be avoided. Of course, this urge is also inherent to how our brains work, so we can’t help but feel it.
(There’s also the problem of rationalization, which generates needless complexity over simple motivations, which sort of works in the opposite direction.)
I have a feeling that these two issues – fundamental attribution error and faulty rationalization – are the major sources of the Dunning-Kruger effect. Just a suspicion, though! And, well, I mean, that’s sort of like saying “the major sources of rain are oceans and sunlight”. A very water-is-wet statement. Nothin’ like the blatantly obvious to start off your afternoon!
That’s my ramble! As for the CYOA books, I grew up on those things. Got eaten by a Grue plenty of times. 10/10 would read again. Interestingly, I have been considering making one as a study aide for middle schoolers – I suspect that CYOA pattern books for studying could create a lot more interest and engagement. Just a thought though, no prototypes yet. Parents here, is that something you think would be good?
Oh, yes, and a timely addition:
Some specific errors that are often made in assessment of others are:
– Assuming generalization of a statement of undefined cardinality,
– Assuming specialization of a statement of undefined cardinality,
– Failure to apply the principle of charity, and (less frequently)
– Failure to apply the principle of parsimony.
an example of this being “Person X has made a statement about Y, therefore the statement of Person X applies to all Y”, or if you like headache-letters,
?(X -> Y) -> ∀(X -> Y)
This is an error of scope. Very common when emotions are high. I suspect that threat assessment leads one to the most negative conclusion without careful thought and a rigorous dedication to formality. No evidence on that though, just a guess.
@DES
The 1st reference to Whedon in this thread was @NNN quoting someone saying Whedon fans don’t appreciate real art. @WWTH responded by saying that it’s bullshit to assume that people who like a certain thing must be artistically and critically ignorant. She did not, however, attack people for not liking Whedon’s work, but why let reading comprehension get in the way of a good meltdown. Anyway, she then pointed out the irony of male allies in a thread about misogynist pop culture snobs splaining pop culture snobbishly to a mostly femme audience. At which point you, to use your turn of phrase, ‘flew off the handle’ cos you assumed WWTH was specifically calling you a raging misogynist (not exactly disproving the non accusation there, slick). Which makes this:
piece of self contradictory, enraged owngoaling:
deliciously pathetic…
Some advice? @Gussie had the right idea
http://i2.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/380/079/bc9.gif
Did someone just seriously call Firefly terrible, without even bothering to offer any actual critique of it?
http://i.imgur.com/TLiTGAt.gif
(Not that I’m actually looking to read some treatise on how/why Firefly is bad, but if you’re going to insult everyone who likes it and imply that they’re emotionally unstable you can at least support your case a little.)
DES,
You really need to read for comprehension. I was not saying that only reason not to like Joss Whedon’s shows was to be a hipster. I was saying that it’s trendy to rag on the fans of them and fans of GoT.
It was Nick who brought up Whedon in the first. It wasn’t even a part of the conversation until that click baity attack on why it “sucks to be a Joss Whedon fan.”
I think people here who’ve known me for awhile can back me up on this, I might explain why it is that I like or don’t something, but I don’t ever try to force people to like things I like.
If you have a negative interaction with every single Whedon fan, well, the common denominator is you. I’ve been a fan for twenty years and I didn’t even know until three or four years ago that we were supposedly such horrible people. All of the fans I’ve met have been pretty cool! It’s almost like when you insult people in a frothing rage, they don’t respond favorably.
The stereotypical fanatical Whedonite is almost starting to sound like an urban myth to me. I mean, I’m sure they exist. As I said, every fandom has assholes that ruin it for everyone else and give others a bad impression. But I hear way more people talking about how horrible Whedon fans are than I actually ever encounter. I don’t think I’ve even encountered one. It’s always on the internet too. I’ve been friends with lots of people who aren’t Buffy or Firefly fans out in “meat space” and not one of them ever talked about getting a hard time for that. It reminds me of all the internet misogynists who insist that feminists yell at men for holding the door for them. Or all the conservatives who insist that they saw Vietnam war protesters spit on veterans. Whatever kernal of truth there is there has been blown way out of proportion I think.
You mean like edutainment? I’ve read edutainment CYOA books before. They have potential but edutainment novels as a whole are a tough row to hoe and can come across as cheesy even to kids.
Or were you thinking of something else?
Man, I lurved me some CYOA books growing up. My stepdad used to gently rib me on reading them, but considering how much I read in general there was no worry about me not being interested in “real” books.
Also, is it bad that I’m excited about Idris Elba as the Gunslinger simply because I’m excited to watch him in just about anything? I’d watch him read the phone book. (Especially if he took his clothing off while doing so.)
I discovered Buffy a good 10 years after it ended, and I loved it! But I lost interest around season 5, although I may go back to it. There are a lot of very-long-running shows that I get to 4-5 seasons and then I’m kind of saturated with it.
I don’t think it suddenly got bad or anything, just that I had hit my saturation level.
I tried to watch Firefly but for some reason it just didn’t grab me, and that could be due to anything from having my period that day to being distracted by the cat to who knows?
I never tuned in to Dollhouse but I may give it a shot someday.
I mean there are so many factors that go into whether I’m going to get into a show or book or what-have-you besides just it being a really great piece of work. I have to have the time. I have to feel like investing my attention in it. I have to have access to it. Etc.
And yet, I really can’t say anyone has ever given me a hard time about not being the “right” kind of Buffy fan, or not liking the Whedonverse the “right” way.
I used to frequent the AV Club a lot but my participation there has dropped off a lot in recent years. You do get quite a lot of snobbery there from TWD comics-vs-show fans, and GoT books-vs-show fans, but it was also balanced out fairly well by people who just liked the shows for pure entertainment reasons.
@Katz, not at all as edutainment. Less to inject some learnin’ into entertainment, more to inject some engagement into learnin’. Like, here’s a booklet with a short exam about history. Each question is multiple choice, but instead of just moving to the next question, you follow the answer you picked to a section of the study guide that the choice takes you. It would then suggest possible ways you might be wrong instead of just saying “you’re wrong” if that were the case, and would then lead you into further details about that general point. A CYOA meant to let you delve into a topic in a more natural way instead of the material being a rote, passive experience.
I’ve toyed with the idea, but have never put together any prototypes or models. Do you think it’s a worthwhile idea?
@WWTH:
Hell, not even just the “but door holding!!!” misogynists, but all of them in general. I see so many people on the internet shouting about how terrible SJWs are, and even when they provide some evidence (which usually amounts to “look at this Tweet!!!”) they make a hilariously large jump from “one SJW said something bad/mean” to their predetermined conclusion “this means all SJWs are bad/mean!”
Well, that seems to be a whole lot of shit-flinging at WWTH for absolutely no reason.
Goddamn, like what ya like and let people like what they like. Sheesh.
Maybe! It definitely has more potential than going the other direction. But it might be simpler to just make an app or a game in that case.
While we’re kind of on the topic of acting like an ass, I’d like to offer an apology to Kupo regarding that gluten discussion from a couple of weeks ago.
I thought about it for awhile and realized I was being too defensive and not listening. Then you weren’t around a few days so I forgot about it until this thread reminded me of the conversation. So, I’m sorry I was a butthead.
@Scildfreja
So, like a guided wiki/tvtropes dive? But specifically about a particular school subject. Yeah, I woulda fuckin loved that during school. And I imagine the format would allow for more and more specific information be included in the reading. Maybe there’s a reason it just wouldn’t work, but it sounds fantastic to me ?
Thanks for the feedback guys! Yeah, I was considering it as more of an app or website as well, specifically as a Moodle plug-in if you know what that is. But I really do think it could be a better way of engaging with a topic than having a chapter of text shoved under someones’ nose. Learning-as-exploration instead of learning-as-pedagogy. Perhaps I will put something together after all!
@Scildfreja:
I’m reminded of when I found out, back in the late 80s, that there were apparently two Star Trek clubs in Toronto because the people running the two clubs had irreconcilable differences over something I don’t even remember.
It was then that I realized that the less important something was in the grand scheme of things, the more vehemently some people would fight over it. (Several years later I would find out this was known as Sayre’s Law.) I think a lot of it boils down to personal identity; if it really doesn’t matter one way or the other, and it was purely a personal choice, then an attack on something is much easier to see as an attack on you for liking it.
I think that would work really well! I’ve seen online quizzes along those lines, where it’ll ask “What did this dinosaur eat?” or whatever and if you answer wrong, it takes you to a page with additional information about teeth and habitat and so on, and then you get another chance to answer the question.
It’s certainly a better method than quizzes that just mark you right or wrong, because those give you no incentive to actually look at what the correct answer was and why you were wrong.
@Jenora – I always liked that particular law, as it seems so apt. I remember it being “That’s why academia is so vicious – the stakes are so low”.
@Scildfreja – I honestly really like that idea, particularly as the parent of a child who learns much more easily by doing rather than just passively reading.
That sounds like an excellent idea and something I’d love to support, if you need subject matter expertise.
A little bit of good news which honestly kind of surprised me because I never thought even this much would ever happen:
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/jul/18/new-measures-announced-to-crack-down-on-sexist-adverts
🙂
@dreemr:
The other political insight I had back in University, between my time in the student Engineering Society and SF club politics, was basically ‘There are people who spend their lives searching for a small enough pond that they can be a big fish in it.’
(These two aren’t entirely unrelated, admittedly, given that fandom or academic politics can be very small ponds.)
It’s one of those things that almost everybody has to some extent: we all want to think we matter. But some people take it to an extent where it distorts their lives and the lives of everybody they interact with.
To paraphrase something Scildfreja said earlier, ‘normal’ psychology can still have some rather spectacular failure modes.
@wwth
Thank you. Apology accepted.
@Scild
That sounds awesome! I say go for it!
Edit: actually it reminds me a little of interviewcake.com which I love because it offers you hints if you get stuck that do a really good job of helping you understand the problem. It also links you to definitionsee of terms if needed.
http://i.imgur.com/cSG2Nra.jpg