This (sargon of akkad) is a very unappealing character, and even if I agreed with him I would feel inclined to disagree based only upon his smug ass demeanour lol (hes a tool hehe)
[QUOTE=Tobylol;50015719]This (sargon of akkad) is a very unappealing character, and even if I agreed with him I would feel inclined to disagree based only upon his smug ass demeanour lol (hes a tool hehe)[/QUOTE]
I put this guy in the same vein as the Amazing Atheist and Thunderf00t (when he talks about feminism/social justice anyway). Even if you agree with them, their smug as hell demeanor would make you stay away.
[QUOTE=Tobylol;50015719]This (sargon of akkad) is a very unappealing character, and even if I agreed with him I would feel inclined to disagree based only upon his smug ass demeanour lol (hes a tool hehe)[/QUOTE]
You should try attacking arguments rather than just attacking character, because you're really just presenting yourself as the one with an "unappealing" "smug ass demeanour".
[QUOTE=Tobylol;50015719](hes a tool hehe)[/QUOTE]
I mean this is 11 year old grade posting.
[QUOTE=Thlis;50016125]You should try attacking arguments rather than just attacking character, because you're really just presenting yourself as the one with an "unappealing" "smug ass demeanour".
I mean this is 11 year old grade posting.[/QUOTE]
he honestly does sound like a tool when he takes every word literally and spends a minute to nitpick each line of the speech in the most condescending tone
[QUOTE=Thlis;50016125]You should try attacking arguments rather than just attacking character, because you're really just presenting yourself as the one with an "unappealing" "smug ass demeanour".
I mean this is [B]11 year old grade posting.[/B][/QUOTE]
pretty rich of you to say that then resort to name calling lol
[QUOTE=Tobylol;50015719]This (sargon of akkad) is a very unappealing character, and even if I agreed with him I would feel inclined to disagree based only upon his smug ass demeanour lol (hes a tool hehe)[/QUOTE]
PC culture has a name for this: Tone Policing.
[QUOTE=Tobylol;50015719]This (sargon of akkad) is a very unappealing character, and even if I agreed with him I would feel inclined to disagree based only upon his smug ass demeanour lol (hes a tool hehe)[/QUOTE]
You're going to take opposing stance to something because a person making that argument is acting smug?
Well I've just read some posts in SH and now I'm against equal rights then.
Why would you even admit to be following this kind of logic? I mean, I'm really baffled. So what if KKK had a great speaker you'd sign in?
[QUOTE=Silly Sil;50017049]You're going to take opposing stance to something because a person making that argument is acting smug?
Well I've just read some posts in SH and now I'm against equal rights then.
Why would you even admit to be following this kind of logic? I mean, I'm really baffled. So what if KKK had a great speaker you'd sign in?[/QUOTE]
You could present the most sane, logical and great argument ever, but if you support it like a complete ego filled tool, people will be inclined to ignore you. For a good reason too. A good idea means nothing if people behind it are absolute pricks. If you're going to talk like you're the center of everything, I don't really wanna hear whatever you wanna say.
[QUOTE=Thlis;50016125]You should try attacking arguments rather than just attacking character, because you're really just presenting yourself as the one with an "unappealing" "smug ass demeanour".
I mean this is 11 year old grade posting.[/QUOTE]
It's very hard to listen to people and take them seriously when they talk to you like you're an idiot while they're the mega-genius. This isn't "tone-policing" it's human interaction 101.
[QUOTE=Chaplin;50016157]pretty rich of you to say that then resort to name calling lol[/QUOTE]
"(hes a tool hehe)" seems pretty immature, to me. I don't understand why Thlis is getting hate for pointing out that he did sound pretty smug calling him smug and didn't exactly point out anything in the video. He wasn't attacking Tobylol, he was calling him out for an immature post.
sargon is a smug asshole, but I think he tends make good points in between his snark
[QUOTE=axelord157;50017152]It's very hard to listen to people and take them seriously when they talk to you like you're an idiot while they're the mega-genius. This isn't "tone-policing" it's human interaction 101.[/QUOTE]
Exactly. Act like a smug cunt, get treated like a smug cunt - By being ignored.
[QUOTE=Thlis;50016125]You should try attacking arguments rather than just attacking character, because you're really just presenting yourself as the one with an "unappealing" "smug ass demeanour".
I mean this is 11 year old grade posting.[/QUOTE]
Somebody posted a video, people in the thread are talking about how the way the video is presented is annoying and unpleasant to watch. Nobody is saying "this guy is annoying therefore his argument is wrong", they're saying "this guy is annoying therefore his video is not enjoyable to watch". Like, I could make a video giving a flawless argument about income inequality but if every 3 seconds it cut to another video of somebody taking a shit on the camera I still made an atrociously bad video. Criticism of a video's presentation is entirely valid even if the actual content is good.
[QUOTE=Thlis;50016125]
I mean this is 11 year old grade posting.[/QUOTE]
He is a massive tool tho lol.
[QUOTE=Starlight 456;50017160]Exactly. Act like a smug cunt, get treated like a smug cunt - By being ignored.[/QUOTE]
If someone is commenting on an important issue, I don't think it's wise to ignore what they have to say solely on the basis of how they say it.
A lot of smart people are smug, self righteous, condescending pricks. Not listening to what they have to say solely because you find them unpersonable is needlessly limiting yourself.
At the same time, I don't think anyone is obligated to listen to someone who bothers them. I just think it's smart sometimes.
Trudeau is a really low hanging fruit. He's a politician and says whatever he needs to in order to get elected, I very much doubt that the majority of self identifying feminists consider him to be the 'pope of feminism' if they even know who he is (outside of Canada, I mean).
If you want a good target, you're better off attacking Dworkin or Steinem or Valenti or the NOW organisation. You know, the actual feminist talking heads within academia. There's plenty of actual arguments to make against Academic Feminism without being a nit picky asshole. I suppose that doesn't get you as many clicks on YouTube though.
This is why I dislike political pundits.
[editline]28th March 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;50017225]If someone is commenting on an important issue, I don't think it's wise to ignore what they have to say solely on the basis of how they say it.
A lot of smart people are smug, self righteous, condescending pricks. Not listening to what they have to say solely because you find them unpersonable is needlessly limiting yourself.
At the same time, I don't think anyone is obligated to listen to someone who bothers them. I just think it's smart sometimes.[/QUOTE]
An example of this would be Richard Dawkins. Just because Richard Dawkins is self righteous, that doesn't mean you should become an evangelical to spite him.
Yet another example would be enviromentalists. People find environmentalists annoying because they tell you not to do things and are also really self righteous about it, but if you decided to do the opposite of whatever they told you do then you could fuck things up not only for yourself but also the entire world potentially.
Come to think about it a lot of people who are correct about things are also really obnoxious. But then again, many people who are wrong about things are equally obnoxious, like evangelicals.
Only made it 11 minutes in because it's really hard to hear Trudeau pitching low balls to what sounds like an abysmally bored Sargon but his arguments for feminism are bizarre. Essentially for women to prove how independent and powerful they are and for them to pick up their mantle of political agency they have to follow men and rely on men to build the ground work for them so they can join men in the political arena?
[QUOTE=Raidyr;50018897]Only made it 11 minutes in because it's really hard to hear Trudeau pitching low balls to what sounds like an abysmally bored Sargon but his arguments for feminism are bizarre. Essentially for women to prove how independent and powerful they are and for them to pick up their mantle of political agency they have to follow men and rely on men to build the ground work for them so they can join men in the political arena?[/QUOTE]
That's the part that reeeally bothered me. A lot of this stuff reeks of "white man's burden" shit.
[QUOTE=rndgenerator;50017110]You could present the most sane, logical and great argument ever, but if you support it like a complete ego filled tool, people will be inclined to ignore you. For a good reason too. A good idea means nothing if people behind it are absolute pricks. If you're going to talk like you're the center of everything, I don't really wanna hear whatever you wanna say.[/QUOTE]
You went from "I'll disagree with your position based on your tone" to "I don't want to listen to your arguments because of the way you act about it".
I can understand the latter. You might find someone really unappealing so you don't want to listen to them or be associated with them even if you'd agree with the merit of their argument. No problem. I do that too.
But disagreeing with arguments based on the tone or who the speaker is is really absurd. The content of the argument is independent from the tone and/or from who is presenting the argument.
It's the type of video that will be handy for rallying the warbanner within your own tribe but useless for gaining any converts. Even if you agree that kind of pandering/excessive use of language makes it take much longer till you actually get to the juicy parts.
I would like to see more videos that are actually aimed not at reinforcing already existing viewpoints but aimed at actively converting those that are neutral/feminist.
I certainly don't expect sargon to be the one to do it though.
[QUOTE=Silly Sil;50019725]You went from "I'll disagree with your position based on your tone" to "I don't want to listen to your arguments because of the way you act about it".
I can understand the latter. You might find someone really unappealing so you don't want to listen to them or be associated with them even if you'd agree with the merit of their argument. No problem. I do that to.
But disagreeing with arguments based on the tone or who the speaker is is really absurd. The content of the argument is independent from the tone and/or from who is presenting the argument.[/QUOTE]
I don't disagree with the argument, disagreeing with an argument due to delivery is stupid, BUT if the delivery is shit, I simply do not want to listen to your argument any more. I don't disagree but I simply do not wish to consume any more of content that's delivered in a shitty manner.
That's just me though, life's too short to listen to assholes, no matter how right they are. If you're unable to deliver your point or argument in a normal tone, you should work on that rather than parading as holier than thou.
why is it so hard for people to understand that if somebody acts like a smug cunt people aren't going to go out of their way to listen to what they have to say
[QUOTE=HAKKAR!!!;50020316]why is it so hard for people to understand that if somebody acts like a smug cunt people aren't going to go out of their way to listen to what they have to say[/QUOTE]
But but they present good argument so we must sit through their pompous ego stroking. Obviously we must grace them with our attention because the argument they present might be sane.
[QUOTE=rndgenerator;50020288]I don't disagree with the argument, disagreeing with an argument due to delivery is stupid, BUT if the delivery is shit, I simply do not want to listen to your argument any more. I don't disagree but I simply do not wish to consume any more of content that's delivered in a shitty manner.
That's just me though, life's too short to listen to assholes, no matter how right they are. If you're unable to deliver your point or argument in a normal tone, you should work on that rather than parading as holier than thou.[/QUOTE]
I already said I understand this sentiment so I don't know why you're rephrasing it.
[QUOTE=Silly Sil;50020406]I already said I understand this sentiment so I don't know why you're rephrasing it.[/QUOTE]
[quote]But disagreeing with arguments based on the tone or who the speaker is is really absurd[/quote]
Thought that was directed at me, my bad misunderstood.
[QUOTE=Robman8908;50017154]"(hes a tool hehe)" seems pretty immature, to me. I don't understand why Thlis is getting hate for pointing out that he did sound pretty smug calling him smug and didn't exactly point out anything in the video. He wasn't attacking Tobylol, he was calling him out for an immature post.[/QUOTE]
i'm just saying if you think someone is acting immaturely it doesn't really show that you're against it if you retort by being immature yourself
I think people should listen to what people have to say, whether they're condescending and smug or not, because they could have a sensible idea. It takes no effort to ponder about the idea, decide whether you like it and then dismiss the guy for being condescending and smug
Not exposing yourself to someone because of their tone is limiting
there doesn't have to be a connection between speaker and idea, it's not necessary to dismiss both
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.