Comments on: Weak Men Are Superweapons

By: Princess_Stargirl

Princess_Stargirl — Sun, 31 Aug 2014 02:27:21 +0000

I also find this deeply upsetting. While I am of the view that usually you can get away with standing up for yourself in this case the best option is likley to delete the emails.

The only good thing is that anyone who uploads an article like that has openly flagged themselves as dangerous. Avoiding such people, both personally and professionally, seems critical to me. Thankfully they have helped us out by being open about their views.

Of course I do not suggest avoiding all feminists. But anyone willing to send out unfair an dinsulting articles is not safe to be around (if this can be avoided). Being willing to sned such an article when they should know it will hurt people like you is very strong evidence they lack empathy for people like you. This is a bad sign.

On the other hand we should both be cautious on where we draw the line that an article is suffiently “insulting and unfair.”

Report comment

By: Weekend Links, 17/08/14: Caricatures + complexity

Weekend Links, 17/08/14: Caricatures + complexity — Sun, 17 Aug 2014 10:09:48 +0000

[…] “Weak Men Are Superweapons” by Scott S […]

Report comment

By: Thisisalongname

Thisisalongname — Sun, 03 Aug 2014 02:44:37 +0000

A very nice and well thought out article. Explains why I, even though I’m more libertarian than republican, feel the need to defend Fox news or actively avoid youtube videos with “So and So CRUSH [Fox News Person]” even though I tend to disagree with much of what that anchor believes. I hate when someone points out something said by Fox that I also disagree with, but uses a view I also disagree with as evidence of why Fox is wrong. Now if I say I disagree it looks like I’m just defending Fox instead of having my own personal beliefs. Its also impressive what we will let those on “our side” say and do while we actively lash out at the slightest misstep of the opposite view.

Report comment

By: Politics is hard mode | nothing is mere

Politics is hard mode | nothing is mere — Mon, 21 Jul 2014 00:22:16 +0000

[…] be dialogue-killing to attack big groups (even when the attack is accurate) in another blog post, Weak Men Are Superweapons. And Eliezer expands on his view of partisanship in follow-up posts like The Robbers Cave […]

Report comment

By: Cards Against Humanity against humanity | nothing is mere

Cards Against Humanity against humanity | nothing is mere — Mon, 23 Jun 2014 05:38:09 +0000

[…] are some real-life straw feminists out there—straw men are very often weak men—but off-the-cuff rhetoric isn’t necessarily a good indicator of that, and it’s the […]

Report comment

By: Anon

Anon — Fri, 20 Jun 2014 20:44:02 +0000

I think HF may (unintentionally) be trying to defend against something similar to the Weak Man Superweapon here. After all, even if providing self-defense training increases the utility of women who are trained it has a spill-over effect of discrediting those who aren’t trained. Someone can easily blame a Hypothetical Victim by claiming that if they really wanted to be safe they would have gotten training. Thus, HF has to defend HV by arguing against training even if the obvious utility of such an argument is negative.

Report comment

By: Lance Wisely

Lance Wisely — Fri, 13 Jun 2014 17:05:18 +0000

My response is a blog post. Talking about problems is not a superweapon.

Report comment

By: fogbanking | Apologetic, Association, “Weak Men”, Fnords

fogbanking | Apologetic, Association, “Weak Men”, Fnords — Wed, 04 Jun 2014 14:05:17 +0000

[…] of the whole group (a tactic that is called the “weak man” in a recent-ish SlateStarCodex article- requesting a more interesting name, though). These tactics are prevalent in Creationist […]

Report comment

By: John Casey

John Casey — Sat, 31 May 2014 01:37:49 +0000

“In Cowpox of Doubt, I mention the inoculation effect. When people see a terrible argument for an idea get defeated, they are more likely to doubt the idea later on, even if much better arguments show up.”

There’s a name for this sorry move, it’s the fallacy fallacy–the fallacy of thinking a fallacious argument for a view means the view is false. Not to be confused with the fallacy fallacy fallacy: that’s the fallacy of thinking pointing out fallacies is fallacious.

We have more on the weak man (which I think is appropriately named by my collaborator, btw), the straw man, and the hollow man, over at our place. Perhaps you’ll enjoy.

Report comment

By: Benjels

Benjels — Fri, 30 May 2014 20:26:42 +0000

It seems the weak man superweapon has found a special purpose this week. Activists from around the country, from feminists to gun rights advocates have invoked the name of Elliot Rodger. Frustrating.

http://www.upworthy.com/in-the-last-33-years-70-of-the-71-mass-murderers-in-the-us-all-had-1-thing-in-common

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2014/05/28/memo-to-gun-control-advocates-even-elliot-rodger-believed-guns-would-have/

Report comment