Jaclyn Glenn's plan in getting in on the victim game is going apace. Some British Muslim did a response to her. It had a number of the usual apologists tricks, but overall, it was nothing more than an unconvincing plea for the viewer to study Islam. Whatever.
The rhetorical trickery is in her weak attempt to spin it into a threat. At no point does the guy even hint at violence, yet she likens it to a girl sicing her older violent brother on someone who was 'mean' to her (Where have we seen this in real life? Lemme see, feminists and mystery men in elevators comes to mind.).
She claims that she is going to put up a video with death threats. Let's see if there are any credible death threats (y'know where someone actually threatens to kill her.) or her trying to spin wishes for her death or someone pointing out the dangers of offending crazies as death threats. I know where my money is.
An odd thought occurred to me as writing this. If I ever get any traffic the predictive nature of these articles will be ruined because she will add spin to her videos to deny it and those who are predisposed to believer her will not look beyond that.
2014-01-11
The Beginning of a Victim Narrative.
The most redundant atheist Youtuber is now trying to get into the victim game.
On 14-01-10 Jaclyn Glenn posted a video where she draws an insulting picture of Mohammed. Gee, who hasn't done that before? Now all she has to do is wait for the psuedo-death threats to come rolling to to spin the victim narrative for fun and profit. If she's lucky she might even get a real threat. I wonder how long it will be before she starts yammering about the The Patriarchy. Dun dun DUN.
On 14-01-10 Jaclyn Glenn posted a video where she draws an insulting picture of Mohammed. Gee, who hasn't done that before? Now all she has to do is wait for the psuedo-death threats to come rolling to to spin the victim narrative for fun and profit. If she's lucky she might even get a real threat. I wonder how long it will be before she starts yammering about the The Patriarchy. Dun dun DUN.
2014-01-09
Chicks and Charity.
A couple of days ago Heina at 'Skep'chick put up a post regarding how some Christian playing atheist for a year garnered so much more than her favored cause. I'll skip what's wrong with the whole Christian playing atheist thing and explain what is wrong WLP.
First, it's misdirected. Women are already attending and graduating college at higher rates than men.
Second, women already have more dedicated assistance programs for them than men do.
These are more pronounced among blacks and latinos than in the population at large. If your concern is Social Justice (whatever that is), shouldn't your efforts be directed towards those who are the most negatively affected by the prevailing conditions instead of those who happen to share membership with you in a particular interest group?
Third, It's an activist psuedo-charity. Just look at the intro on their front page. The first line states that it is a feminist organization. Further down it says that their curriculum is to "promote critical conciousness about activism and race". Nothing about critical thinking, Nothing about preparing the girls to enter fields that require that icky math. I don't know if they are a 501.3c, but if they are the status should be revoked.
And finally, she wrote "Obviously, fundraising isn’t a zero-sum game." If one is going to use technical terms one should know what they mean. Fund raising is an almost textbook example of a zero-sum game (although I prefer the term constant-sum).
First, it's misdirected. Women are already attending and graduating college at higher rates than men.
Second, women already have more dedicated assistance programs for them than men do.
These are more pronounced among blacks and latinos than in the population at large. If your concern is Social Justice (whatever that is), shouldn't your efforts be directed towards those who are the most negatively affected by the prevailing conditions instead of those who happen to share membership with you in a particular interest group?
Third, It's an activist psuedo-charity. Just look at the intro on their front page. The first line states that it is a feminist organization. Further down it says that their curriculum is to "promote critical conciousness about activism and race". Nothing about critical thinking, Nothing about preparing the girls to enter fields that require that icky math. I don't know if they are a 501.3c, but if they are the status should be revoked.
And finally, she wrote "Obviously, fundraising isn’t a zero-sum game." If one is going to use technical terms one should know what they mean. Fund raising is an almost textbook example of a zero-sum game (although I prefer the term constant-sum).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)