Skepchick Quickies, 3.22


Jen is a writer and web designer/developer in Columbus, Ohio. She spends too much time on Twitter at @antiheroine.

Related Articles


  1. So you’re saying humans are STEALING the chi from the dolphins? I think that’s proof that the chi exists.

  2. Oh and healthcare reform passed. I’d be happy, except abortion and women’s reproductive rights were, once again, stomped on. Can’t have federal funds support those whores!

    Sorry, I’m bitter, yes. Women were once again used as pawns. Hooray.

  3. RE: Death sentence for sorcery: Is extreme rendition on the table for John Edwards and Sylvia Browne?

  4. @marilove: agreed. Where was the kowtowing to Jehovah’s Witnesses re: blood transfusion? We don’t want that sort of immoral practice being subsidized by the federal government!

    Seriously though, either make it illegal or cover it. This wishy-washy bullshit is ridiculous.

  5. @durnett: “Two wrongs don’t make a right, but two Wrights make an airplane.” ;-)

  6. @mikerattlesnake: BUT! Sexism is almost dead! Certain men don’t see it, so it must be not exist! It’s just not that big a deal anymore! Sexism, what?! Women aren’t having their rights trampled on every day, no way!

    I’m sorry I keep bringing that shit up, and I’m sure you know who I’m referring to, but that kind of shit pisses me off, when every single day, I have to deal with MY rights as a women being used as a “compromise”. Whenever women’s health is used as a “compromise” we lose.

    And it’s only getting worse for us.

    What’s next? Miscarriages are going to be a crime?



  7. Exciting – thanks for spreading the information about Ada Lovelace Day! I just pledged, and now I have an excuse to geek out and research a new female scientist. Fun!

  8. The dolphin story was interesting to me in many ways. The whole idea of tapping into the spiritual energy of dolphins by swimming with them seems akin to New Agers borrowing “primitive” peoples’ religious practices or traveling to Bali (which one study claimed has the happiest people in the world). In all these cases, affluent, Western people have set up an Other that has some resource that they lack and want to appropriate. Feels like 1492 all over again.

    The difference between the cases of the “primitive” people and of the dolphins is that we have made some progress in the past 500 years, so we have some respect for people who we make into Others. But many still tend to view non-human animals as wholly without feelings and preferences.

  9. @marilove: well if I’m thinking of the same poster, you are unfairly misrepresenting his posts in an unrelated venue to the original post. I mean, half of his point was how out of touch with feminist issues he was and he immediately conceded that he was probably wrong. If he doggedly insisted on arguing those points in the manner you describe I’d wholeheartedly agree with you, but as it is I think you need to think a bit more about your battle-picking process. You make yourself a very difficult person to agree with on a pretty regular basis.

    I feel like you carry over the attitude that you would have on an anti-feminist board or conservative website into this venue, but the warrior’s stance is a little less necessary in a community that is idologically and morally in agreement with you on most issues.

  10. Ha! What if the dolphins swim with you?

    Many years ago, there was a dolphin who “adopted” a family in the Florida Keys. She hung around in the sea at their back yard and would happily play with anyone who came into the water. One day, the mother of the family found a scuba diver at her back door. ‘Lady’, says he, ‘Would you tell your dolphin to let me go?’ Evidently, Dolly had found him diving, grabbed him and brought him back to the house, “played” with him in the water for a while, then pushed him up on shore. ‘Look, Mom! A toy!’ Every time he tried to get back into the water and swim away, Dolly thought he wanted to play some more and wouldn’t let him go.

    The dolphin-annoying tourists, however, need to be fed to the sharks.

  11. @mikerattlesnake: Not really. He’s the one that said, pretty clearly, about the “last few bastions of sexism.”

    Last few? Really?

    Sorry, but when someone says that, I know they aren’t paying attention.

    And I’m not misrepresenting him. He has, several times, tried to speak for women, and has used his experiences as a man to speak for them, at the same time trying to silence women by telling them what they say isn’t true, or telling them to lighten up, or telling them that such-and-such isn’t a big deal, why are you worried?

    This is a common theme with him — and a few other men here, as well — and I’m tired of it. I’m tired of the men coming here and silencing us, and telling us how to feel and act when it comes to feminism and sexism. Quite frankly, I’ve almost left several times because of it. Just because someone is a skeptic, or calls themselves a skeptic, does not mean they get sexism or feminism. Remember when someone said that a man should be able to sue a women who gets an abortion against his wishes?! I nearly threw in the towel right then and their. That shit is unacceptable and about as unskeptic as you can get.

    I’ve received half a dozen personal messages on my facebook from fellow women who feel the same way. I’m not alone in this.

  12. @marilove: And I don’t want to start a fight or even a debate right now. I just wanted to bring this up because I am NOT the only woman who has noticed this and I’m starting to get concerned that this is driving women away from this site that is supposed to be for and by women.

  13. Years ago I used to dive in the Red Sea and there was one place where a dugong used to live. If it wanted to, it would come and visit you and play and if it didn’t you would never see it. Pity Dolphins don’t bite.

  14. @marilove: you may be right about the “for and by women part” (though both bits seem to have a little wiggle room), but there’s two halves to the title of this site. While you may, by virtue of your chromosomes*, qualify for the second half, I would argue that if, in the face of statements you disagree with, your only recourse is a choice between histrionic tirades that misrepresent/demonize your opponent or leaving, then you don’t qualify for the first half.

    Does a statement like “men deserve to sue for abortions they didn’t consent to” deserve a quick, forceful, and decisive factual takedown? Hell yes. Does everyone you disagree with agree with the above statement? No. The extrapolation, generalization, and dramatic tone are unnecessary.

    *to avoid above-mentioned misrepresentation and demonization I will clarify that this is pure flippancy on my part and I understand that experiences, struggle, etc. also define the experience of a woman and that the proper chromosomes are NOT necessary.

  15. I mean, the original post in question was a total non-sequitor that essentially blamed a poster here for something he did not advocate nor are there any indications that he would. I don’t argue that you can’t disagree with people, but the amount of effort you go to to call people out on this site is ridiculous.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Back to top button