Wednesday, 2 October 2013

Thunderf00t vs grammar - Part 8

Our hero seems to be under the impression that at some point he's given some helpful advice, because next he says this:
Sadly, this advice will almost probably be entirely disregarded by almost everyone. Because you see, most people who want a relationship with someone are driven almost exclusively by emotion. And those tend to be far more influential factors than such reasoned arguments.
This makes no sense on a grammatical level. "Almost probably"? What does "those" refer to? Where are the "such reasoned arguments"? Phil, I can't rebut what I can't understa - wait, I see what you're doing. Clever.
Be aware that people communicate not just by words, but also by the inflection in their voices. 
The inflection Thunderf00t is using at this point is known in acting circles as "Can you dial the condescension back a bit because nobody talks like that?"
People communicate through body language, and in this case I'm gonna include what you wear in that.People who wear suits are communicating something about themselves. People who spend a lot of time grooming are telling you something about themselves. 
Please don't say "grooming", it makes this too easy.
And I do not need to tell the ladies the bloody obvious:
Then WHY, for the LOVE OF ALL THAT IS JESUS, did you make this video?
Your choice of clothing is a statement about yourself. And whilst most date rapes seem to be crimes of opportunity, there are still nonetheless actions that you control exclusively. 
Sound the not victim-blaming siren. Again.
For example, if you dress and act erotically, if you put on the body language of foreplay, the strong eye contact, the tactile touching... If you telegraph such information, but actually have no interest in such things, you are increasing the chances that someone will misread the signs, as interest, or sexual initiation and so on.
And so what, Thunderf00t? 
 
People are allowed to flirt. Even when they have no intention of sleeping with you, the ladies are perfectly entitled to wear clothes that turn you on and make eye contact. It may be kind of a douchebag move to flirt with a guy and make him think you're interested and then walk away - but it's not illegal and it certainly in no way excuses any non-consensual actions on your part.

If you think you might have "misread the signs" you need to clarify what those signs meant - if anything, if there even were any signs - BEFORE you go and accidentally rape somebody.

It's not hard. As you pointed out earlier - "Women do have minds!" And they also (usually) have the powers of hearing and speech. So if in doubt, ASK. And then LISTEN.


And under no circumstances ever say "I thought she was asking for it." Even, as you've done here, by paraphrasing.

You fucking bellend.

Excuse me, I became irate. 
 
But he's not done with this. In case we needed another analogy - and when do we not need analogies? - Thunderf00t has come up with a peach:
In non-body language terms, it's the equivalent of saying you'll buy someone dinner at a very nice, very expensive restaurant, and then when the bill comes saying: "Well I didn't actually mean that. I just enjoyed seeing the gratitude in your eyes when you thought I thought you were special enough to take you to this really nice restaurant."
But for the record, how would that make you feel if it happened to you?"
...

There are no words for this.

18 comments:

A Hermit said...

I can't thank you enough for this. I couldn't stomach watching another ignorant Thunderfart rant but I know that some ignorant blowhard will inevitably point to it to support some dimwitted argument about rape and now I can just send them here.

Sorry about all the ignorant blowhards you're about to meet...

Unknown said...

He really seems to be completely incapable of comprehending consent...

Also holy crap, what an entitled little fuck. his argument here is basically 'you can't let me down. if you act even remotely in a way I can interpret in my favor, I can do how I want'

Seriously, how is that last excerpt anything other than 'you aren't allowed to make me feel bad'

Clearly he thinks that feeling bad is a far greater crime than rape...

What a total ass.

Erik Bray said...

I'm increasingly under the impression that thunderf00t has, in fact, raped. And these contortions are all his attempts to rationalize this fact away. 'Course that's just a hypothesis, and also requires considering that he may in fact have had sex with someone ever which I don't want to consider so I'm just going to leave that there.

Ophelia Benson said...

Yes thank you for doing this. I watched a few minutes of it the day it came out and just could not take any more than that.

Maude L. said...

The correct analogy:

It's like someone thinking that you will invite them at an expansive restaurant based on your body language and then not following through the person's fabulations. Which, of course, entitles them to take your money. ("you put your hand in your pocket! That was sooo misleading!").



Anne Hunter said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anne Hunter said...

Erik Bray, I think you may be right. thunderf00t is capable of focused, clear communication - he used to make decent science videos - but when it comes to the topic of rape and consent, he strings together a series non sequiturs. His level of irrational defensiveness is remarkable. I think there's a good probability that he's had personal experience with the topic. Either he's a date-rapist, or someone very close to him is.

Erik Bray said...

Or he's a victim and is in massive denial. Either way I almost feel bad speculating along those lines 'cause it's not funny. It's just that, as you wrote, it comes off as a lot of desperation and flailing to point fingers at rape victims over rapists.

Erik Bray said...

Of course the difference could also be accounted for by the fact that when it comes to science he has some idea what he's talking about, so of course he communicates on the subject with greater clarity. Whereas in this topic he has no idea what he's talking about--it's pure uninformed bloviating a la Rush Limbaugh or Sarah Palin. So of course it comes out as gibberish (and hilariously undeserved smugness and certainty about his beliefs).

noelplum99 said...

The inflection Thunderf00t is using at this point is known in acting circles as "Can you dial the condescension back a bit because nobody talks like that?"

Hehe, very good.

"And I do not need to tell the ladies the bloody obvious"

Maybe it is just me but, accent aside, I couldn't help but get hints of northern club circuit host.

Joshua White said...

What is the rape in his dinner analogy? What is she about to do in response to the douchey move to pretend to give a dinner? He is not finished here.

He should at least have the guts to go all the way with it. But he can't because to make the analogy work the person who had to pay for the meal would have to beat up the person faking buying the meal at the least.

Does the faked meal purchase warrant assault? No. Would some in our culture assault over it? Probably and they would deserve to be charged for such and we should condemn violent responses for such. There should be no moral responsibility on the part of the fake dinner buyer for any resulting assault.

Neither does any amount of flirting and skimpy clothing create any moral responsibility on the part of the women. Women could be walking around naked and that would put no moral responsibility on them for a rape. It takes a decision to force sex on someone. That is where the responsibility lies.

*And just for the dense ones, no that does not mean that we don't actually suggest that women don't walk around naked or even take precautions in the society that we do have. this is about moral priorities and changing cultural attitudes. I choose as a man to put the priority on policing our behavior and telling men not to rape. I choose to talk about what rape is and what consent is. the raping is overwhelmingly on the part of men so I prioritize rationally to reduce suffering.

Nebojsa Cinger said...

Ok, I've read/heard enough.

Tfoot has some good points in his video which could have been boiled down to a few minutes, and you got some great rebuttals for him here, but man, this whole thing is blown way out of proportion.

Enough ad hominems and strawmans on both ends of the spectrum to make me wanna go back debating religion in youtube comments.

Props to Tfoot for weighing in on the subject matter, and props to you for taking the time to take his argument apart - which I'm sure he could do to you again and so on and so forth. Get in a live debate and duke it out. This whole youtube reply vs blog post vs comment is ridiculous.

The reason I say this is that, Youtube videos are meant for a wider audience, and they're hardly sufficient for a full on intellectual debate. Without the back and forth of a live debate there is too much room for these fallacious arguments.

All that said, I'm still a subscriber of both of you. Not agreeing with someone a few times is hardly a reason to unsubscribe. You shouldn't shut yourself into your own little bubble just hearing your echo. Leave the door open for other ideas.

Cheers! (I realize my comment is all over the place but I wanted to say a lot but quick, I apologize)
Nick

liquidcow said...

@Erik Bray - I wouldn't necessarily conclude that he has committed or been accused of rape himself; I think he is simply very ignorant on the subject and thinks he's a lot smarter on this topic than he is. The way he talks on the subject is very similar to the things I've heard from guys, usually young, who have no direct experience of the issue and are talking purely theoretically - which is the problem here, a lot of aspects of rape or attempted rape are very difficult or impossible to describe to people, and/or very difficult to predict until you're actually in the situation. Given that the best example he's been able to give so far is 'I face a mountain lion once', I'm willing to bet he is entirely talking from a position of no experience, and thinks that because he sees himself as a smart and rational guy, he's able to tackle the incredibly thorny topic or rape.

liquidcow said...

@Joshua White - I find the dinner analogy utterly vile as it seems that 'paying the bill' is a metaphor for 'having sex', in other words something that the woman 'owes' the man because she's led him to expect something and he has given her something for which he is entitled to 'payment'. This is the line of thinking of some date-rapists, that they were 'owed something' at the end of the date.

ThinkingSpeck said...

OK, minor nitpicks from a linguist.

"Almost probably" is a mis-speaking of "most probably" - this sort of thing is so common that it's usually not even regarded as an error in spoken language.

"Those" is an implied cataphoric reference to "factors" - that much is fairly clear in context, although it's terrible use of language. The "factors" here appear to be tf00t's "reasoned arguments", and people's emotions.

The "reasoned arguments" are what tf00t thinks he is giving in his video. I think he's sincere about that, though the argument-by-confusion thing maps rather well to his default assumption that his critics just can't deal with rigorous academic argument. Alas.

Anyway, nitpicks aside, damn good work - thank you for taking the time to wade through this bullshit and deal with it, so I don't have to.

William Greeson said...

Damnit, this is it, this is the part whee logic breaks down.

He literally goes "this is how you don't get raped" and follows it up with "but you want to get in a relationship, so you may want to look compelling which will make you get raped, while it's all your fault".

Jesus.

William Greeson said...

Damnit, this is it, this is the part whee logic breaks down.

He literally goes "this is how you don't get raped" and follows it up with "but you want to get in a relationship, so you may want to look compelling which will make you get raped, while it's all your fault".

Jesus.

Corseted Pirate said...

I know I am extremely late to this argument. I did not see the Tfoot video, I unsubscribed to him years ago. I just find it odd that no one else has mentioned eye contact us not always flirting. In fact my parents(who grew up in the 50s and 60s in the U.S.) raised me to make eye contact. When in a conversation with someone, eye contact shows a) you are listening to what they say, or b) their reaction to what you say matters to you. That is how I was raised.

For the last couple of years guys have been misinterpreting my eye contact. It's really been ticking me off. How do you see someone facial expression during conversation to interpret what they mean, if you don't look at them!