Friday, April 18, 2008

WWWtW-Watch #11: Bwaaa-ha-ha-ha!


Dedicated to the proposition that it can happen here.


I only wish that I had read this WWWtW post, entitled Art Imitates Death, before its author discovered that its basis was a “hoax.” Hoax is not even the word for it—it’s a joke. I will not recapitulate the basis of this WWWWtW offering here, since it is ugly in the extreme. I wish only to point out that the simple biological and physiological implausibility of the story having been true should have tipped off any but the most credulous of bumpkins that the thing was a total fabrication. Read it -- it'll blow your mind.

So why was it believed? It was believed because the kind of self-righteous, finger-pointing and prurient hatred that fuels WWWtW can have no existence, no raison d’être, unless the hate-ful can be found and made the object of scorn. It was believed because the author wanted, nay, needed to believe it.

And these are the type of people to whom we entrust the education of our children

But, at the same time, what better case could one make against the wisdom of accrediting home schooling than this post?

23 comments:

Civis said...

Now, who is it that is rushing to judgment? In the words of the immortal blues song, "before you accuse me, take a look at yourself."

You are the doppelganger of the religious right. Your raging agaist WWWtW and all the books against the Da Vinci Code are the same song, just with different lyrics. Look at how silly the people you criticize are. Don't be like them.

You have a good bullshit detector, you just need to point it at yourself from time to time.

The reason why a lot of people believed this story is that THOSE WHO ARE INFORMED have seen that there is nothing too weird for the pro-aborts.

Civis said...

When I read the story, I thought "weird" then went on and finished my Cheerios.

Rodak said...

I report; you decide.

Don't be like them.

The difference between them and me, Civis, is that they have an agenda. If they were given the power, they would make everybody think exactly as they believe everybody should think. I, on the other hand, am for freedom of thought and expression. They are a danger to others, and to our whole way of life. I am dangerous only to myself.

Civis said...

You don't see it as an agenda, but you have one. This is where your bullshit detector really breaks down.

Rodak said...

My only agenda is to allow the U.S. Constitution to work effectively, as it has been since the inception, with the historically remarkable result of a continuous government for 232 years. I don't need to coerce the legal behavior of any other citizen in order to "do" that. (Actually, I'm doing nothing--it "does" itself.)
If you think I have some agenda beyond that, let's hear about it:

Civis said...

You've already heard about it. See our discussion of public orthodoxy.

Rodak said...

Again, the difference between them and me is that they would shut me up, if they could. They shut me up at their site, and they would shut down this blog if it came to their attention (while they were also burning half of my library), if they could.
I, on the other hand, far from trying to shut them down, am sending as many people as I can to their site, so that those I send can see what these people are up to.
Eteranl vigilance, Civis; it's the price of liberty.

Rodak said...

You've already heard about it. See our discussion of public orthodoxy.

I have no orthodoxy that I'm trying to make public. In fact, I am maintaining that any such thing is unconstitutional.
And, in this debate over WWWtW, I'm not being "relativist." I'm referring directly to the very objective positive law of the Constitution.

Civis said...

You would shut them up if you could. There is your public orthodoxy. You have a whole host of things you would shut them up about. Take a look at all the "Thou shalt nots" you have in the previously referenced discussion.

"I have no orthodoxy that I'm trying to make public."

You're begging the question.

"In fact, I am maintaining that any such thing is unconstitutional."

Except for yours of course.

Look, I know you won't admit it. I'm not going to argue it again. You can have the last word. I stand on my previous statements.

Rodak said...

You would shut them up if you could.

No, I wouldn't. I am confident that the more people hear what they have to say, and give some thought, the more the WWWtW crew will be exposed as the crypto-fascists that they are. As I said, I send people there.
My "agenda" is simply to oppose their ideas, not to try to prevent them from expressing those ideas.

Rodak said...

Except for yours of course.

You keep talking about "yours" but you never spell out what you think it is. "Mine" is simply the First Amendment to the Constitution. It isn't "mine"--it's the law of the land. The WWWtW authors would--so they say--subvert it, in order to establish their public orthodoxy.

Civis said...

"You keep talking about "yours" but you never spell out what you think it is."

see my comment at 4/18/08 10:03 AM [BTW this is where you usually pitch a fit and get nasty because you have to repeat yourself ;)--dang and this is me having to repeat myself on repeating myself--damn, you would be near beside yourself right about now].

Hope you can take a little ribbing.

Rodak said...

Just restate it. There may be somebody reading this who hasn't seen our discussion of public orthodoxy. This isn't email, you know.

Kyle R. Cupp said...

Despite my dislike of the "pro-abortion" label for those who argue for the existence of abortion rights, I do believe that there are people in our culture depraved enough to attempt a biologically-workable art project of this sort, and it wouldn't surprise me in the least if it were tolerated or even promoted.

Rodak said...

Kyle--
The point is that, as described, it's not a "biologically workable" project. What was described could not have been "accomplished" in the time period it was supposed to have been done in, regardless of the depravity level of the "artist."

Rodak said...

This comment, posted at WWWtW, gives another reason why the story was unbelievable on the face of it:

"She is lying about the method used. I went to a feminist blog and they said it was nearly impossible for her to survive using an herbal method as often as she claimed. It is a form of Russian roulette, and with no medical consultation before, during, or after, it would have an exponentially higher chance of killing her compared to the embryo, assuming she told the truth about the attempts to get pregnant."

Posted by Step2 | April 18, 2008 5:39 PM

Rodak said...

My essential point in writing on this prank is that it was believed by people who desperately wanted to believe it. They have their reasons, I guess.
In that people did believe it, they played right into the "artist's" hand, and validated her point--sick as it is.

Flumenanimus said...

Just give it up man.

Rodak said...

Just give it up man.

No can do, pal.

Anthony said...

Most modern art is crap. I have a cousin that actually makes a living as a modern artist (and has done so for about 40 years) and he seems to think most of it is crap.

http://www.yaledailynews.com/articles/view/24579

The whole thing is just weird and a pathetic cry of this young lady for attention. Even though I discussed it on my blog, I will discuss it mno longer, as the more attention she gets the annoying she will get.

The best thing you can do with someone like this is ignore them -- they go away eventually.

Flumenanimus said...

Never let reason or common sense get in the way of a good rant.

Rodak said...

The best thing you can do with someone like this is ignore them -- they go away eventually.

Yes, Anthony, I agree with that, 100%.

Rodak said...

Never let reason or common sense get in the way of a good rant.

I would maintain that reason and common sense is exactly what I applied to the nonsense post at WWWtW. And Anthony is quite correct when he says above that the best thing would have been to ignore this story from the git-go.
There were never any sound grounds to take it seriously.