deLurch wrote:
Their approach is not the one I would take. I understand people making different tactical decisions, but I personally would think that there would be a huge advantage in targeting arguments that your average Joe or Jane would accept.
His shocktop approach is not that different from feminist PR campaigns such as "Kill All Men." Yes, you will get attention. But you have immediately disgusted and turned off 95% of the population even before they get to the point of even considering any of your other positions. I guess if your premise is that any attention is better than none, so be it. But unless you have a good healthy middle ground group not associated with them espousing arguments that are more accessible, the shock approach may be wasted.
This was almost the exact argument for making the Pit a "kinder gentler place" .
perhaps commenters here may want to read the very end of the Slimepit (with an i) and the beginning of the Slymepit (with a y), This one.
One may want to pay close attention to how Franc was perceived by many Pitters (it was not pretty), how many wanted him to "tone it down considerably" and just how many apologised to him once it became clear that his blog posts were not anywhere near the level of hyperbole written specifically for shock value that they had previously thought.
Many from the original Slimepit felt as though no one "on the fence" would ever align themselves, or even have a casual connection to the pit unless it changed dramatically in order to cater to the "average Joe or Jane", and that we would hurt, rather than help the sceptic/atheist communities if the status quo was continued.
I'm quite sure I do not have to articulate what side I have always been on.
What a difference a year makes in the state of affairs here.
The only issue I have with Elam's article is that it was an amateur attempt at shock value in order to make a point. He could have written a very powerful piece, but it fell short. I have absolutely no problem at all with using the subject matter he chose.
When certain feminists groups say "Kill All Men", It is not said for shock value, they
mean it. There is nothing linear between that and the AVfM article in question.
As for the analogy between the radfems' stance on the obliteration of the males in our species, and the article from AVfM that caused the most outrage, the post in regards to juries and rape convictions, (While I do not completely agree with the position Elam took in that article, I
do understand where he is coming from, I understand quite well, actually) it is
nowhere near advocating for an entire gender to be annihilated (perhaps a small percentage kept alive and used as slaves) simply because they have a different set of chromosomes. The radfems actually believe that human males are an inferior gender.
I've never seen anything remotely similar at AVfM (excluding the comments, which do not necessarily represent the site at all)
