Is it possible to have an honest opinion?

[furtech]

Via a twit from doronjosama, I got to see this train wreck.

In this age of near-total-accessibility, is it possible to have honest opinions anymore?

When a celebrity goes on national television (news, the daily show, whatever) and expresses a controversial opinion, they pretty much get what they deserve, whether or not they are "right". That's the nature of opinions-- there will always be those who disagree. If you offer your opinion to the world then the world has a right to react.

Things get dicier when those opinions are expressed in more specialized venues -- from speeches made to specialized groups all the way down to a personal blog or facebook posting.

Scott Adams is right to take down his post (IMO). He wrote in a reply:

In this case, the content of the piece inspires so much emotion in some readers that they literally can’t understand it. The same would be true if the topic were about gun ownership or a dozen other topics. As emotion increases, reading comprehension decreases.

Once emotion becomes a driving force of a discussion, reason goes out the window. The more emotion, the less reason and vice versa. The marysue link above pretty much bears this out: in her own post and in the ensuing comment-storm, there is little interest in a rational discussion-- just baiting and snarling and screaming.

I'm even more eyebrow-raising at the site that re-posted the Adams entry :

Wow.
Just…wow.
You were a childhood hero of mine dude, and all my respect for you just died.
Not only because you wrote this load of shit, but then you deleted it like a coward when it made people angry.
Well done.

Really? Guy says something you disagree with and suddenly he's a non-person? Geez-- can you imagine having this person as a friend? Talk about high-maintenance. Like having a case of sweaty dynamite as a pal.

You'd think Adams advocated genocide or kicking puppies. What I got out of his original post was two things: first, don't waste your time and energy fighting battles that you have no interest in or which have no resolution. Second, Adams essentially says (and this is what shows me that most of the screaming is from emotional reaction, not reasonable thought): Guys whining over "male rights"? Get over yourselves. Life's not fair.

Adams -did- use bad analogies (bad=inflammatory). And he isn't a great communicator-- but that's kind of what he is (a admitted nerd). But, if you put his blog post in word balloons and had Dilbert saying them, most of these people would be laughing.

Personally, I -like- interesting people who share their opinions and thoughts. This gives me insight into their creative processes and I like that. I may disagree, or over time I may decide that I -don't- want to know more and stop following them-- but I would hate that they stop expressing themselves*. I consider them sharing their thoughts a privilege and something valuable. It would be bad if reactions like the one Adams received to cause them to self-censor or withdraw entirely. Who wants a world of carbon-copy, politically correct people?




*The same doesn't go for the thoughts and opinions of stupid people (though "stupid" is a subjective measure): the net makes it possible for anyone-- however idiotic-- to show their true selves to the world.

Comments

[okojosan.livejournal.com]

What I got out of it is that Scott Adams thinks adult women are on par with retarded people and children. Nice. In view of that, I agree with the person who lost all respect for him.

Most of what he said was ridiculous. Men need rights because women get served first at the table! Men need rights because their suicide rate is higher! He's coming from a place of privilege. Yeah, I get what he's doing- he's telling men to get over it. I can't help but feel, though, that he really believes these things are an issue. And then he stops any possible dialogue because you know, those women are so irrational and emotional, they can't discuss anything logically.

He wasn't anyone I was interested in, so I'm not emotionally invested in what he wrote. But his piece aligns in my head with the way women are treated on the internet in general.

[octantis.livejournal.com]

Ugh. That article is written really, really badly. You think he was basically back-handedly grousing about "men's rights" under the guise of claiming men should avoid the conflict because they can't win? And trying to passively-aggressively marginalize women?

[furtech.livejournal.com]

First, I went back and read the comments on his blog (from the deleted post). Apparently Adams -does- like to shake-the-beehive. It's entirely possible he knew exactly what he was doing when he used brats and the mentally handicapped as analogies.

The reason he took down the post may have ulterior reasons, but on the face of it I still agree: his comments were directed to a specific audience and when it went semi-viral, that post lost its context:

[Writing is always aimed at a particular audience. I wrote the deleted post for a unique audience of regular readers who have a keen understanding of what I do here. When the audience changed, the writing no longer fit. It's really just that simple. New readers were getting worked up over something the regulars understand didn't actually exist. -- Scott]

I am wondering if you read his entire post...as far as I can tell, he described what "Men's Rights" are about, then told that group to, "Get over it, you bunch of pussies." I'm pretty sure that his post wasn't supportive of the Men's Rights agenda. Bad analogies, yes-- possibly intentially provocative-- but not pro-Men's Rights.

I'm not sure what your link means. I guess there are men who disparage women gamers...but I was under the impression that a woman who walks into a comic or games shop or a convention was treated like a goddess...?

[octantis.livejournal.com]

It's kind of an either/or thing, from what I've observed. Either she's worshipped or she's met with hostility. In both cases it'll be assumed she's less skilled until she proves herself.

[lironess.livejournal.com]

I have walked into comic and game shops. I am pretty much ignored...and I am not bad looking either...maybe they can sense that I am just looking because I look at everything, I do not head for any certain section.

[okojosan.livejournal.com]

I am wondering if you read his entire post...'

Yes, yes I did. As I said so: Yeah, I get what he's doing- he's telling men to get over it. But I don't think he would write those things in the first place if he didn't agree with them. He didn't come across as disagreeing with men's rights. If he'd started out by saying "Men's Rights Activists, get over it." and then said what he said, maybe there wouldn't be such a furor.

I was under the impression that a woman who walks into a comic or games shop or a convention was treated like a goddess

Because that's better? Why can't women just be treated like human beings?

[furtech.livejournal.com]

Actually...I think you're right. And reading the comments and Adam's replies to those comments, I think you're right even more.

Because that's better? Why can't women just be treated like human beings?

Hey, c'mon! I/we are geeks. If were weren't, we wouldn't be hanging around in comic shops. Most of us are nearly autistic compared to "average" people. That we don't start dooling and touching those women is something of a triumph.

[okojosan.livejournal.com]

I have to admit I did learn one thing- I never knew women were served first in restaurants! Is this true? I've never noticed, but then the places I usually eat are on-par with Denny's and then I think the server just slings the food at everyone at the same time.

LOL, you're making geek woman sound like a bunch of Lennies.

[furtech.livejournal.com]

At any decent restaurant, yeah. Women get menus first, food first. Also done by age: oldest first. At at Denny's, you're lucky if the server gets the food on the table.

Some ethnic restaurants don't follow this, though. And in certain more chauvinistic countries, men are served first. I still remember an incident in Japan, at a brunch buffet. There was an American couple and a Japanese couple: the American man got up and got all of the food for both of them; the Japanese woman did the same. I was fascinated.

Okay, I may lose my geek license over this: what is a Lenny?!?

[okojosan.livejournal.com]

Oh, hm! I'll have to pay more attention next time I go to a nice restaurant. And we do eat at a lot of ethnic restaurants (pho, Indian, Mexican) as opposed to places like the Stinking Rose.

Your brunch story is fascinating! I think I'd prefer to get my own food though. One thing I DID notice when I was a kid is that my dad would order for all of us in nice restaurants. We told him what we wanted and then he would tell the waiter. After a while it struck me as bizarre, and he doesn't do it anymore.

As for Lennie: from Of Mice and Men! :D

[desertcoyote.livejournal.com]

Daaaang... I wanna know where these places are that I can go to be treated like a goddess! /\_/\.... I've been hanging around comic shops throughout my life and have attended sci-fi/fantasy/whatever conventions and have never encountered anything vaguely worship-like for simply being female. I feel left out now. :D (Of course, people sometimes notice me for being an artist, but that's a separate issue.) As an anonymous female, I'm mostly just ignored like everyone else, or rarely I do meet Mr. Smarmy Misogynist guy. The most striking example being the guy in Colorado... I'll never forget walking up to this cool-looking shop with Lord of The Rings standees at the doorway and all kinds of swords and medieval-looking armor inside. An employee (owner?) was standing at the doorway smoking and I asked him what was in the shop. He basically shooed me away with "these are men's toys, you wouldn't be interested." My jaw would've dropped to the floor if it was physically able to do so.

[desertcoyote.livejournal.com]

Agreed.