social credibility

The fantastical epistemology of mansplaining

I recently made a post addressed to the men’s rights activists/meninists and to the liberal feminists/trans-activists/genderists who often respond to my posts or PM me with their angry disagreement. I don’t mind when people disagree and explain their viewpoints, but usually that’s not the case. I get called a feminazi, a man-hater, a TERF, a transphobe, whatever. That’s not an argument. But when people actually want to disagree with me, sometimes, instead of presenting their argument, they question the sources of information on which I have relied before forming my opinion. These are two real comments I received, word for word, from two different men on the same post:

@sadtransgirl, a member of the trans-activist camp wrote: “You found fact, journals, and science you can use to push your agenda. You’re basically complaining they’re not respecting your confirmation bias.On top of this, we have to also remember that most social science papers are fully wrong. First off, roughly 80-90% of them are not sourced or sourced improperly. Second, the peer-review process at most of the journals is non-existent if it’s really there at all. Science publications are different from social sciences. An audit of all social science papers was conducted a couple years ago in which they threw out roughly 70% of papers published because they found they were not sourced or improperly sourced, unreplicable, or a myriad of other reasons. Most papers you’re probably citing can realistically be dismissed. They have to be dismissed on a case by case basis but the sad truth is that most social science papers are complete and utter lies.”

@stalin-kitten-ifunny, an self-proclaimed anti-SJW who hates feminism and seems to despise trans-activism and fake genders as well, wrote: “Anecdotes aren’t evidence.”

Let that sink in for a moment. I said my opinions were based on a combination of lived experience as a woman, and also on books/articles/journals written by experts in their field, and which contain a mixture of anecdotal stories and statistical research. After explaining that, I get a message from one man (who claims, not very convincingly, that he’s a woman “on the inside”) telling me that all of social science is not credible and I literally can’t believe any information that doesn’t come from the hard sciences (basically, STEM fields.) This argument is based on a combination of total lies, misunderstanding of statistics and lack of reading comprehension, by the way (but I will explain that in another post).The hard sciences do not study issues like domestic violence, rape, gender-based violence or oppression; that’s not what they’re for. They provide the raw mathematics on which statistics are based, but you will never find a mathematics/physicals/chemistry etc. paper on these issues, because that’s not what they’re for. Therefore, there is no credible information in the entire academic world on sex and gender-based issues. Just a black hole, no real knowledge whatsoever.

So, maybe I should just rely on my personal experience and the experiences of my female friends and family. Nope! Another man messages me to tell me that my lived experienced is invalid because “anecdotes aren’t evidence.” (Actually, evidence is just based on many anecdotes in aggregate, but okay then.)

So, just to recap: social sciences and books written by experts who have interviewed thousands of woman and conducted studies are not evidence and my own personal experiences are also not evidence. This leaves only one viable source for credible information, which is knowledge imparted by God, otherwise known as “It just feels true.” The arguments my MRA and trans-activist opponents provide here are based on knowledge imparted by God, which you can trust because they are men, and they say so. As a woman, I have no direct access to God’s infinite wisdom except through the opinions of men on the internet, so I will have to trust their divine inspiration, since it is unsullied by unscientic “anecdotes” or untrustworthy “social science.”

This is not a call out post for the anon I just got, I just want to say: I love Call Me by Your Name, but what I’m not going to do is spend all year defending it against bullshit accusations and presumptive opinions by people who are either ignorant. I’m just not going to do it. Especially considering the fact that it requires me to dredge up a lot of uncomfortable experiences with real abuse. So people who think they’re gaining some sort of credibility or social justice integrity by dragging a movie through the mud online can fuck all the way off with their false equivalencies and illogical nonsense.

In European classical antiquity, democracy was recognized as a familiar phase of cyclical political development, fundamentally decadent in nature, and preliminary to a slide into tyranny. Today this classical understanding is thoroughly lost, and replaced by a global democratic ideology, entirely lacking in critical self-reflection, that is asserted not as a credible social-scientific thesis, or even as a spontaneous popular aspiration, but rather as a religious creed.
—  Nick Land, from ‘Dark Enlightenment’ 

A love letter to Interstellar

I’m still catatonic with this film… Not only the time journey science is extremely well structured and reasoned (based on new studies of Kip Thorne on black holes, relativity and time travel), and the breathtaking visuals (mesmerizing and realistic cinematography and visual effects), the credible technology (robots with intriguing mechanics, plausible and contagious personalities), social problems of a credible future (debris storms of air pollution, resistant pest, lack of jobs, an ever decreasing food supply, natural and financial resources), the evoking soundtrack by Hans Zimmer (sometimes a ghostly cosmic cathedral, sometimes deep feelings), the great direction and cast (everyone is incredible in this motion picture, with special emphasis on Matthew McConaughey, Anne Hathaway and Jessica Chastain), and the movie still manages to be, above all, a study of the human spirit (love, compassion, faith, hope and survival) and its reaction to the most extreme moments, bringing us tears several times… This is the most mature work of Mr. Christopher Nolan, a modern classic on par with 2001: a Space Odyssey, by Mr. Kubrick… Mr. Nolan, you bastard, you did it…

The NAACP Satement on Rachel Dolezal

Baltimore, MD – For 106 years, the National  Association for the Advancement of Colored People has held a long and proud tradition of receiving support from people of all faiths, races, colors and creeds. NAACP Spokane Washington Branch President Rachel Dolezal is enduring a legal issue with her family, and we respect her privacy in this matter. One’s racial identity is not a qualifying criteria or disqualifying standard for NAACP leadership.  The NAACP Alaska-Oregon-Washington State Conference stands behind Ms. Dolezal’s advocacy record.  In every corner of this country, the NAACP remains committed to securing political, educational, and economic justice for all people, and we encourage Americans of all stripes to become members and serve as leaders in our organization.

Hate language sent through mail and social media along with credible threats continue to be a serious issue for our units in the Pacific Northwest and across the nation. We take all threats seriously  and encourage the FBI and the Department of Justice to fully investigate each occurrence.

anonymous asked:

It's not the Green's job to call people out. Why do you actually give a fuck that they didn't?!?!?

I’m going to make this abundantly clear: I don’t want The Green Brothers to simply “Call Shane Dawson Out”. I want them to announce their discontinued partnership with him in any and all forms. I want to see them state that they are working as hard as possible to make sure he and other offensive youtubers are not part of Vidcon, their social circle, or any other interactions they have. And if that means destroying Shane Dawson’s career, I am more than fine with that. In fact, I would want that.

If the Green bros want to pretend everything is ok, or that it isnt their concern, or that they have no control over it, then they are lying so fucking hard. 

If John or Hank Green fail to make any such announcements I want to see to it that they lose all credibility as socially conscious, forward thinking, helpers of the world, or whatever they want to call themselves. (I know this has been an ongoing cause for the past couple years and I admit to viewing it quietly until more recently, but that obviously isn’t the case anymore.) 

We don’t need people who jump on slavery after it is illegal or only being against police brutality when its a victim who has the perfect image to white people. If they really think they’re contributing to any cause or commentary then I want to see them taking a stand against topics that aren’t so “safe” for their very ambiguous image of social justice.

And to answer your question, I give a fuck about this because the Green Brothers meant a lot to my teen years and I am very VERY aware of the impact they have on an audience, almost regardless of age. And the fact that they are gaining more popularity and more power terrifies me if they’re going to continue to be quiet individuals. I’d give a fuck about this even if it weren’t the damn green brothers.

Im sorry but people need to stop saying they are professional makeup artists when they have no formal training or experience. There are so many people who are claiming to be professionals now based on posting a photo of their lipstick to Instagram. It makes me so mad because i am a professional makeup artist. I work my ass off doing 20 girls makeup in 4 hours before a wedding. I put in so much time and effort into my job. And some people don’t understand the difference between professional makeup artist and makeup hobbyist. The makeup scene is getting bigger now with instgram and youtube, and that’s nice, but stop claiming to be a professional. It makes it hard for people who actually do this for a living to seem credible on social media.