Fat shaming

[d4m10n]

It's good stuff, amirite?

John Greg says:

There are many, many people at the Pit who are vehemently opposed to fat shaming, and to any and all critical comments and/or insults based on unalterable body characteristics.

I'm buying that for a second, but I'm totally open to correction on this point.

:popcorn:

[d4m10n]

*not buying

[John Greg]

What? You want percentages now?

By the way, what's wrong with your blog? When I click on the heading image for your page, or any links to it, I get the following message:

No Results Found

The page you requested could not be found. Try refining your search, or use the navigation above to locate the post.

[d4m10n]

I've been told the SkepticInk site is migrating to a new host. Ungh.

You want percentages now?

Hey, you made the affirmative claim about "many people at the Pit who are vehemently opposed to fat shaming" I'm just giving you a change to show me that they really exist.

[John Greg]

Well, I guess that's up to them, isn't it.

Come forth all ye anti-fat shamers; come forth.

Or don't. Your call.

d4m10n, I, for one, am anti-fat shaming, and to a slightly lesser degree I also do not favour shoops/cartoons for which the specific and only focus of humour or intent is to make hostile fun of some unalterable (and, presumably unfavourable) characteristic of an individual. But, speaking only for myself, there is a hell of a lot of grey area there, such as with political satire cartoons that focus strongly on one or more highly recognizable, but usually unalterable, physical characterstic of their target to make the satire stronger.

Nonetheless, whatever my personal views on fat-shaming, etc., I am not in a position to tell anyone here whether or not they may do so. This is not my blog / Website / BBS / etc.

[Gumby]

Your trolling is getting even more blatant, Damion. How many threads are you going to start to show how superior you feel you are to everybody here? Fuck off, douchebag.

[Lsuoma]

I'm more of a douche shamer. Daydays, you're a fucking wanky troll douche just whoring for hits.

[another lurker]

I am anti-fat shaming, in general.

But if the person is an obnoxious douchebag, then hell yes, I will mock their weight. Fuck 'em.

[windy]

I'm opposed to fat shaming, except for jokes about Damion's mom.

btw - you know you can set up polls here?

[Skep tickle]

Where does commenting on someone's "man-boobs" fall on the "fat-shaming" scale, d4m10n?

[Badger3k]

Where does commenting on someone's "man-boobs" fall on the "fat-shaming" scale, d4m10n?

But he meant it as a joke, not as a comment on his weight. Duh. Can't you tell the difference? /satire (?)

[Matt Cavanaugh]

The bigger the cushion, the sweeter the pushin', you know what I mean.

Now fuck off, numb-nuts.

[Lsuoma]

The bigger the cushion, the sweeter the pushin', you know what I mean.

Now fuck off, numb-nuts.

It takes a big hammer screwdriver to drive in a big nail...

[John Greg]

Well, naive as it may have been, I've been trying to conduct a legitimate, honest, and accurate discussion with Damion over this doolally fat-shaming obsession of his. And every time I post something, every fucking time, he sidesteps my points; misrepresents my statements; invents stuff out of whole cloth; reshapes my and his own earlier claims, shifts the fucking goal posts....

Ya, well, I have just about lost energy for it. He really is fucking deceitful and mendacious and does not know how to debate in good faith. He's fucking deranged, deluded, and primo-perfect FfTB material. I know, I know, I've even said so myself ... I really should know better. You simply cannot carry on a good-faith discussion with toads like this. Like Welch says regarding FfTB people, he will simply not respond in good faith; it matters not what you say, when the argument goes against him, he will reinvent, reshape, etc. Sky is blue; no it's not, it's green; yes you're right, it's green; no it's not, it's blue.

Damion, your behaviour is exemplary of a troll and an FfTB baboon. You start posts here, and then avoid them; you misrepresent what people post to you; you lie; you shift goal posts; you change your own claims. Just fuck off, man, just fuck off. I'm done with you.

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

I'm not anti fat-shaming. Neither am I pro fat-shaming. I guess I just don't care. Some of my best friends are fat, y'know?

[windy]

Saw this on Sara Mayhew's FB page. Deplorable fat-shaming, fun satire, or what? Anyone? Damion? Bueller?

http://i.imgur.com/xzNBhax.jpg

[d4m10n]

Where does commenting on someone's "man-boobs" fall on the "fat-shaming" scale, d4m10n?

What are you talking about?

[d4m10n]

Well, naive as it may have been, I've been trying to conduct a legitimate, honest, and accurate discussion with Damion over this doolally fat-shaming obsession of his...


He's fucking deranged, deluded, and primo-perfect FfTB material.

HAHAHAHAHA.

When in doubt, resort to insults. It's the SLYMEPIT way.

[d4m10n]

Saw this on Sara Mayhew's FB page. Deplorable fat-shaming, fun satire, or what? Anyone? Damion? Bueller?

Looks like they are trying to satirize fairly similar fat-positive imagery.

[Skep tickle]

For when you next swing by:

viewtopic.php?p=92611#p92611

Re: Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It

Postby d4m10n » Fri May 24, 2013 8:40 am • [Post 24487]

I hereby denounce the hate directed at Clarence's man boobs. Flaunt what God gave you, Clarence.

[Skep tickle]

Did you have a problem with fat-shaming 8.5 months ago? If so, you gave a good impression of someone who thought it was pointless but okay.

From February 5, 2013 (bolding added):

viewtopic.php?p=60607#p60607

Post by d4m10n » Tue Feb 05, 2013 10:48 am • [Post 4874]

He seemed to be under the delusion that if we we're all polite and nice it would make the slightest difference to their narrative. If they manage to pick up Shermer on a tiny point and twist it beyond recognition then us 'being nice' will make no difference at all.

There are also many attacks on FtB's/A+'s position going on, not just here of course. This is one approach, there are others and they ARE being done. No need to fix something that's not broke.

I think the argument isn't that it would change the baboons' behavior at all, I agree with you that it wouldn't, but that our tone is driving potential allies and posters away from us. Imagine a higher profile skeptic or atheist or just one who takes themselves more seriously than we do, they don't really want to be associated with a forum that would post an animation of a dog humping a cow and call it the Svan-Laden sex tape. They would be embarrassed to be associated even if they thought it was funny and agreed with most points made. (/quote)(sic except with square brackets in the original)

The argument is simple: Making fun of someone for being fat or ugly or even resembling a penis isn't an effective argument. It might well be entertaining, and it definitely helps with in-group identification, but it certainly doesn't create the impression that the person being mocked is wrong about anything.

If you want to persuade people that the SJW-types are wrong about something, you have to make an argument about their beliefs and methods, not their appearance. If you just want to have fun at their expense, it doesn't much matter either way. I suppose it's largely a matter of personal priorities.

viewtopic.php?p=60968#p60968

Re: Crass Free Forum

Post by d4m10n » Tue Feb 05, 2013 6:17 pm • [Post 11]

To take seriously the thought that a bit of crude humor will put off huge numbers of people and drive them to the loving arms of ideologues, is more than a bit paternalistic. They can only keep a hold of those who are already perpetually aggrieved and they know it, that's why being perpetually aggrieved is so constantly reinforced among them, no matter what we do or don't do. Those who laugh and mock are their greatest enemies, not their weakest, and they know it. Refusing to mock these clowns, universally taking the high road, IMO, would do more damage than good. It would give seeming legitimacy to even the weakest of their claims of hatred and victimization.

To be clear, I wasn't arguing against crude humor or sweary language. I've nothing at all against sophomoric artwork in and of itself. I'm also not arguing for any more rules in the Pit, in fact, I went publicly on record in favor of the current rules just two days ago.

All that I've been arguing is that given a choice between making fun of someone because they are fat/old/unattractive and making fun of that same person because they are dead wrong about something of substance (or else flamingly hypocritical by their own standards) it seems to me that the latter course is far more likely to persuade the persuadable. I'd like to encourage people to take that latter course when they feel that they have a choice between the two. That is all.

Mykeru says the "best approach is just hit these bastards head on" and I completely agree. The occasional danish joke may be irresistible (and worth a chortle) but that's not what's going to win the day. Calling them out on their words and actions will.

Back to your regularly scheduled side-thread.

p.s. shit, piss, fuck, cunt, cocksucker, motherfucker, and tits.

I am one of the people who has on occasion expressed discomfort at some others some times making fun here of people's appearances, and I've tried not to do it (though I can't swear some personal comment might not have slipped out at some point, in frustration).

I always try to be respectful IRL, including when I work with patients who have some feature that might get made fun of in some parts of society (grade schools, comedians). That's including, and especially, when I'm seeing such a body unclothed, including for example today and many days in my work.

IMO "shaming" goes beyond appearance to function; I think we should aim to maintain people's dignity and independence, and the fact that that doesn't happen becomes apparent when I see a person trying to maneuver on & off furniture that wasn't designed for someone with a body like theirs.

But I get to decide, and I am responsible for, these 2 things at the Slymepit and almost every other site online:
(a) whether I spend time here, and
(b) what I post.

I am not responsible for policing the site (and neither are you).

Besides which the rules (which you said above, in 2/2013, you were not arguing for more of & you had just gone on record as agreeing with) make no restriction on vocabulary or content (unless illegal).

I'm not responsible for policing other people's behavior (and neither are you).

You can certainly weigh in if you object to something, should you so choose, but expect to be criticized if you don't stick around to participate in the subsequent discussion, and/or try to use shame rather than well-founded argument to convince people to change their behavior.

[windy]

Saw this on Sara Mayhew's FB page. Deplorable fat-shaming, fun satire, or what? Anyone? Damion? Bueller?

Looks like they are trying to satirize fairly similar fat-positive imagery.

"Satirizing fat-positive imagery", hmm, sounds like it could be fat-shaming. Do you condemn it?

[Dick Strawkins]

Perhaps if Damion is swinging by again, and just after after he apologizes for fat-shaming Clarence, he can address one issue that seems to be of joint relevance to both the slymepit and his own Skeptical Ink network.
That is, his own action regarding Justin Vacula's expulsion from Skeptical Ink.

Damion was not a commenting here at the time of Justin's expulsion and he doesn't seem to have posted about it on his own blog.
Have I missed something here?

Damion was, if I'm recalling correctly, the person who first encouraged Vacula to attend the Women in Secularism 2 conference - calling for donations for a travel fund for Justin.
At the time it was not exactly clear what the benefits would be of Vacula attending that particular meeting. Vacula was perhaps overly concentrating on his twitter kerfuffle with Ophelia at the time, was still pretty chummy with AVFM, and was painted as some kind of anti-feminist demon by the FTB commentariat.
The whole idea of sending him to WISC2 seemed at the time to be purely provocative - a real life trolling against Ophelia, Melody and friends.

In the end the conference worked out fine - Karla accompanied Justin and kept him out of harms reach and we all discovered that Justin has a special talent for lightning fast live conference texting.

Because of this positive outcome some of us suggested to Justin that he attend a further conference on the same subject - albeit one that had most speakers picked for their experience and abilities rather than being friends and ideological shipmates of Melody Hensley.

Again, Justin's behavior at the conference was exemplary. And yet while Justin was away the Skeptic Ink hierarchy decided that his attendence at these conferences was contrary to the expected behavior of a Skeptic Ink blogger, the locks to his blog were quietly changed and a knife carefully chosen for insertion into Justins back.

Now, considering that Damion was the originator of the idea of sending Justin to these types of conferences, what should we expect Damion to have done in such circumstance?

Perhaps I've missed it but Damion doesn't deem the expulsion of Justin to have been worthy of a blog post at the time.

Maybe Damion would like to explain his reasoning for both encouraging Justin to attend Melodies conference, and then his subsequent silence when such activities were judged sufficiently terrible to have Justin expelled without warning?

Damion, we know you want it known that you are no friend of the slymepit community.
Fair enough, shout it from the rooftops.
We're not overly worried.
We've seen how you treat your friends.

[John Greg]

Damion's deceit is legion.

In that endless thread over at his blog, I stated in several places and several times that, in general, I did not support fat or body shaming, that I specifically thought some of the shoops were tasteless, unnecessary, and not funny, that in all cases, the shoops etc., should be taken on a case-by-case basis, that he had abjectly failed t prove that any of the shoops had caused any real harm, and so on and so forth. His eventual reply:

Seems like you are determined to discount any possibility that your side of the rift might be causing real harm by mocking your designated enemies for characteristics which are not easily changed nor relevant to any argument. Such an unbending unwillingness to reflect upon the possibility that your own side gets it wrong reminds me of the fundamentalists of my youth, not to mention FtB.

Fuck me, he is so special. Saint Damion a Sanctified Prefect of Outstandingly Ostentatious Flawlessness, indeed.

On one comment I pointed out how severe a problem he has with false dilemmas and black and white / us or them thinking, and his reply is pretty funny. He says:

I'm quite happy to think in shades of grey, but you've yet to make an affirmative case that any given example of fat shaming (I've referred to quite a few in the OP) does more good than harm.

In other words, it's either wholly bad, or wholly good. No grey areas, no nuance, no layers of possible variance, but Damion is "quite happy to think in shades of grey".

In conjunction with my critiques of black and white thinking, I posted various lists of what I felt were important criteria to look at before making a value judgement of any one of the shoops. These included taking each shoop one at a time and trying to determine content, context, the roles/actions taken by the subject, the intent of the shoop (if known), and other factors. Damion's overall response to my pointing out those actions against black and white thinking on several occasions:

All you've said by way of justification is that you feel safe completely discounting selected people from your moral calculus, which is possibly the best example of black and white thinking (outside of the Pit itself) that I've seen in a long while.

Fuckkee mee, he really is LousyCanuck, La-den, and Lord Peezus all kind of squished up into a sour cabbage roll of perfect self imagery. Like I said, Saint Damion a Sanctified Prefect of Outstandingly Ostentatious Flawlessness.

[Dick Strawkins]

Damion's deceit is legion.

In that endless thread over at his blog, I stated in several places and several times that, in general, I did not support fat or body shaming, that I specifically thought some of the shoops were tasteless, unnecessary, and not funny, that in all cases, the shoops etc., should be taken on a case-by-case basis, that he had abjectly failed t prove that any of the shoops had caused any real harm, and so on and so forth. His eventual reply:

Seems like you are determined to discount any possibility that your side of the rift might be causing real harm by mocking your designated enemies for characteristics which are not easily changed nor relevant to any argument. Such an unbending unwillingness to reflect upon the possibility that your own side gets it wrong reminds me of the fundamentalists of my youth, not to mention FtB.

Fuck me, he is so special. Saint Damion a Sanctified Prefect of Outstandingly Ostentatious Flawlessness, indeed.

On one comment I pointed out how severe a problem he has with false dilemmas and black and white / us or them thinking, and his reply is pretty funny. He says:

I'm quite happy to think in shades of grey, but you've yet to make an affirmative case that any given example of fat shaming (I've referred to quite a few in the OP) does more good than harm.

In other words, it's either wholly bad, or wholly good. No grey areas, no nuance, no layers of possible variance, but Damion is "quite happy to think in shades of grey".

In conjunction with my critiques of black and white thinking, I posted various lists of what I felt were important criteria to look at before making a value judgement of any one of the shoops. These included taking each shoop one at a time and trying to determine content, context, the roles/actions taken by the subject, the intent of the shoop (if known), and other factors. Damion's overall response to my pointing out those actions against black and white thinking on several occasions:

All you've said by way of justification is that you feel safe completely discounting selected people from your moral calculus, which is possibly the best example of black and white thinking (outside of the Pit itself) that I've seen in a long while.

Fuckkee mee, he really is LousyCanuck, La-den, and Lord Peezus all kind of squished up into a sour cabbage roll of perfect self imagery. Like I said, Saint Damion a Sanctified Prefect of Outstandingly Ostentatious Flawlessness.

He illustrated his story with a picture that I had done of Svan.
I hadn't done it to mock her weight - it was a very quick joke based on the nickname 'inzvanity' that used the famous 'Oh the humanity' image.
That said, I did realize later that it might be taken, by someone who is very literal minded, to mean a joke purely based on her weight - which was certainly not my intent when I did it.
If you make as many photoshop jokes as I do you are bound to get one wrong now and then - and having an ambiguously interpretable joke like that one is something I have made an effort to avoid in my subsequent photoshops.

The really sad part is that there are some genuinely unambiguous fat shaming pictures and jokes posted on the slymepit. Not too many, luckily, but certainly some that can have no intent other than to point the finger and laugh at the 'fatty'. And yet Damion avoided these to focus on my picture.
And why?
Might it have something to do with the fact that after he started this current fat shaming crusade against the pit I tweeted a link to his own comments, fat shaming Clarence.
In other words he avoided using real examples of fat shaming in order to attempt some kind of petty vindictive revenge at me for revealing his hypocrisy.
Once a fundie...

[John Greg]

I am not convinced that all of those "fat people" images that Damion linked to on Zvan's blog are, in fact, intended to "fat shame" people. And, as I say, Damion has signally failed to prove they do so.

Yes, they use images of fat people in an attempt to ridicule Zvan, but I am not convinced that the image says "Zvan, you are a bad person because you are fat, and therefore I am going to try and make you feel ashamed of yourself because you are fat".

I think, rather, they are saying "Zvan you are a shitty person because you lie, distort, misrepresent, and cast your angry evil eye on anything you dislike or do not understand in an attempt to demonize it, and so, because it is easy to do, and because you are somewhat on the porrtly side, I am going to use fat people images to create a satire of you and your various and nasty carryings on".

Yes, I know that might be specious, but that's how, in part at least, I rationalize it.

I'd be glad if someone, other than Prince Damion, of course, could explain to me why I am wrong in that supposition.

[John Greg]

"Once a fundie..."

Indeed. I pointed that out a couple of times on Damion's blog. As I said, you can take the theism out of the fundy, but you cannot take the fundy ways, i.e., black and white thinking, myopia, ideological dogmatism, with us or against us thinking, etc., away at the same time.

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

[youtube]6y_d-T-oeFI[/youtube]

Not helping, I know. Not trying to, either...

[TedDahlberg]

Hey, I'm fat. Know what I'm ashamed of? Damion thinking he's helping "fat people".

I've once had someone in a job interview outright tell me that I was too fat for the (crappy desk-bound) job. That was a bit infuriating. Jokes on the Internet? Doesn't even register, unless they're funny, in which case great!

And as John Greg and others have said, I don't appreciate "you're a bad person because you're fat" as an argument. But that's very different from "you're a bad person so I'm going to caricature you, including your appearance".

[windy]

You ain't down with us no more! You ain't fat!

[youtube]t2mU6USTBRE[/youtube]

(happy birthday, Al!)

[windy]

The really sad part is that there are some genuinely unambiguous fat shaming pictures and jokes posted on the slymepit. Not too many, luckily, but certainly some that can have no intent other than to point the finger and laugh at the 'fatty'. And yet Damion avoided these to focus on my picture.
And why?
Might it have something to do with the fact that after he started this current fat shaming crusade against the pit I tweeted a link to his own comments, fat shaming Clarence.
In other words he avoided using real examples of fat shaming in order to attempt some kind of petty vindictive revenge at me for revealing his hypocrisy.
Once a fundie...

Is it possible you're taking this a bit too personally... maybe he picked it because it was the first pitshop on Zvan's page, or the only one "clean" enough for the hallowed halls of SkepticInk (you should be flattered! :D ) Who knows? It's more significant that he didn't bother to acknowledge the error once you pointed it out.

And correct me if I'm wrong, but it looks like he hasn't acknowledged any of the responses against fat-shaming in this thread. So what was the point of asking?

I would also be interested in Damion's explanation for the treatment of Justin that you pointed out above.

[Skep tickle]

<snip> Once a fundie...

"Once a fundie..."

Indeed. I pointed that out a couple of times on Damion's blog. As I said, you can take the theism out of the fundy, but you cannot take the fundy ways, i.e., black and white thinking, myopia, ideological dogmatism, with us or against us thinking, etc., away at the same time.

Hey, hey, hey now. This is fundie shaming, and it's uncalled-for. A person can't help the religious culture he or she was born into and raised in, nor the effect of early influences on his/her cognitive development & brain patterning. Accusing an atheist still thinking like a fundie cuts right to the heart of that person's deconversion story and stamps a big question mark on it, not to mention poisoning the well on all of their future attempts to make a rational argument or even a salient point. I won't stand for it!

Fundie-shaming is way worse than commenting on a person's weight or body habitus, IMO. One's weight and body mass index are objectively quantifiable, can change (up or down) over time, and have nothing to do with the quality of their argumentation, or their "skeptic cred". Presumably references to weight or body type should be recognizable early on as moot - just a window dressing that has no bearing on almost any argument.

[Dick Strawkins]

<snip> Once a fundie...

"Once a fundie..."

Indeed. I pointed that out a couple of times on Damion's blog. As I said, you can take the theism out of the fundy, but you cannot take the fundy ways, i.e., black and white thinking, myopia, ideological dogmatism, with us or against us thinking, etc., away at the same time.

Hey, hey, hey now. This is fundie shaming, and it's uncalled-for. A person can't help the religious culture he or she was born into and raised in, nor the effect of early influences on his/her cognitive development & brain patterning. Accusing an atheist still thinking like a fundie cuts right to the heart of that person's deconversion story and stamps a big question mark on it, not to mention poisoning the well on all of their future attempts to make a rational argument or even a salient point. I won't stand for it!

How is it shaming?
Isn't is simply an observation that the style of argumentation (constant goalpost shifting, refusal to acknowledge nuance, black and white thinking, judgemental moralizing etc) is pretty much the same as what we have come to expect from fundamentalists who argue against evolution or homosexuality?
Where it could be criticized is in applying it to all former fundies - and I will withdraw that implication now. I don't think it is inevitable that all former fundies will resort to this type of argument (and indeed you don't need to be a former fundie to behave this way, just look at oolon.)
But, it is my experience that a disproportionate number of atheists who come from fundamentalist religious backgrounds tend to fall into this pattern of thinking.
Perhaps there is a hypothesis here that could be tested in some way.

On the broader point of whether it makes it impossible to treat anything he says seriously, I disagree. Even the most fundamentalist fundie deserves their arguments to be taken seriously - they are not wrong on everything and if the evidence is in their favor in any particular dispute then so be it.
Am I calling Damion a bad skeptic? Well, in this instance yes I am. But nobody is a perfect skeptic and having biases and cognitive errors pointed out to you can, if you are willing to learn, only serve to make you a better skeptic.

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

I have a feeling Skep tickle was being a bit sarcastic, there...

[Skep tickle]

;)

[John Greg]

Bravo.

[Dick Strawkins]

Perhaps Damion should call Saul?

[youtube]3F2oO98C6Nw[/youtube]