I'm disappointed with the letter in the OP, but IME Irene's posts wherever I've read them (Discourse and GitHub) have been measured, diplomatic, friendly, patient, etc. I think this is just bigotry. It's an attempt to dismiss the letter by painting her as the sole author and ridiculing her identity categories.
Pointing out mental illness in place of actually evaluating and criticizing an argument or behavior on its own terms is prejudicial, ad hominem, etc. Sometimes, it might even be bigoted.
mentally ill ≠ incapable of reason
mentally ill ≠ unworthy of consideration
mentally ill ≠ wrong
Regardless of all that, singling out one person associated with a document you don't like and pointing at their microblogging bio is a lazy, crappy way to argue. And it's likely to direct harassment at that person.
Yes, and? Is there something I'm missing or is this just arrant bigotry?
I'm disappointed with the letter in the OP, but IME Irene's posts wherever I've read them (Discourse and GitHub) have been measured, diplomatic, friendly, patient, etc. I think this is just bigotry. It's an attempt to dismiss the letter by painting her as the sole author and ridiculing her identity categories.
Dawg, it's a "plural system".
If pointing out blatant mental illness is "bigotry" and nothing else to you, you're brainwashed.
Pointing out mental illness in place of actually evaluating and criticizing an argument or behavior on its own terms is prejudicial, ad hominem, etc. Sometimes, it might even be bigoted.
mentally ill ≠ incapable of reason
mentally ill ≠ unworthy of consideration
mentally ill ≠ wrong
Regardless of all that, singling out one person associated with a document you don't like and pointing at their microblogging bio is a lazy, crappy way to argue. And it's likely to direct harassment at that person.
4 replies →