1 SRS Debate Method EXPOSED

karmasutur3 · 2012-02-15T23:16:47+00:00

I feel awful when I read things like this.

The main reason is because she/he is discussing how they have hashed out 'facts' in "safe spaces" before hand, and made their choices based on that.

Which is saying that they choose the information they are going to believe in , in a place where everyone agrees with their philosophies and methods, and then once they have all agreed (their desires and motives of course all being in alignment) they then go out into the world.

Where they use the most deceitful tactics available, without taking anyone else's research, ideas or input into account.

It's become a (bad) religion. We believe in [X], therefore you're wrong, and therefore all bets are off, and hurting you is totally ok because you are the 'outgroup' .

There is a reason scientific research is peer reviewed. We're all human. It's all about learning from the dialogue between us and people who are different than us.

This type of methodology in the feminist sphere is put forth because of a supposed oppression, but in the end, no matter the original purpose, it ends up making sure that no opposing viewpoint can be heard.

This is one of the fundamental failings of the feminist movement. It's one of the reasons it's caused such harm.

Because if you give a group power, and it's exclusive power, any possibility to abuse such power without outside checks is almost always exploited, man, or woman or otherwise.

ignatiusloyola · 2012-02-15T19:34:30+00:00

Links to SRS are not valid submissions on r/MR. I do suggest using one of the many Anti-SRS subreddits that are out there. Antibigotry and AntiSRS are two prominent ones.

levelate · 2012-02-15T19:43:58+00:00

i hope luciansolaris doesn't mind me taking the liberty of copy/posting the comment

The point of any debate is never to convince the person you are debating. If they are debating it, they are probably set in their ways. Every once in a while you tear them down so thoroughly that you get the freak heel face turn, but it's rare. The point of a debate is to win over the onlookers. Thing is, humans don't really hear the arguments and weigh them; whether we like it or not we care far more about things like the presentation of the arguments and a sense of momentum in a debate. It's not enough to tear apart the arguments, you also have to discredit the person presenting them, lest they trot out more and more arguments and cause a stalemate.

One of the most important strategies in these sorts of arguments is escalation of attack. Audiences will identify clear winners not as the person who keeps making counter-claims, but as the person who gets the other side so riled up they cease arguing properly. Were it so easy that all our opponents get wound up by merely presenting facts. While it's important to present those facts, so you are educating the audience, in order to make the audience want to learn your side at all, you have to embarrass your opponent and discredit his arguments completely.

In the groups that I frequent outside of these safe spaces, I am known as a dirty debater. I insult my opponents, use emotional arguments designed to sting, and occasionally arrange tag-team tactics to make it look like the board has turned against the other debater. I do not play fair because I never enter into an honest debate with creationists, homeopaths, etc, where what he is saying even matters. It's never about the arguments; the facts were hashed out in safe spaces between folks like us long beforehand, or in studies and scientific consensus. It's about taking those facts, wading out into the big bad internet, and hurting somebody with them until they lose all their support.

(I don't debate feminism this way, though, because I can't really think rationally when presenting with misogyny. It's helpful to nobody to just start screaming.)

I'm the kind of person whose idea of victory is getting the creationist or homeopath that I'm debating to either flip out and write a "meltdown post", or post a video in youtube where they break down into tears. It's kind of a dick move, but after they are thoroughly discredited the conversation turns to education about these sorts of things. If I don't do this, the argument goes nowhere and we both get discredited. It's the only way I'm aware of to argue on the internet and get results; people will flat-out fail to see the arguments at all unless one side blows up.

The same happens in politics. Politicians will continue to get support no matter what their policies are... right up until they throw a fit. The fastest way for a politician to lose support is to have a meltdown, which is why it doesn't tend to happen anymore; politicians go to classes and receive a lot of training so they can keep a straight face while other people have a meltdown. It's why we barely care about the answers at political debates and just look for which questions threw them for a loop, where they stuttered and staggered. It's basic human instinct to look for those sorts of things in prospective leaders and discard them where it pops up.

If people were awesome enough that just presenting facts were enough to sway them, none of this stuff would be an issue in the first place.

luciansolaris · 2012-02-15T21:45:20+00:00

LoL teh SRS trollz are mad and are downvoting.

^_^

superiority · 2012-02-15T23:29:05+00:00

Feminism is based on dogma, just like creationism, yet people like this guy would rather compare those who question the tenets of feminism to creationists--that always irks me. At least he admits he can't argue in favor of feminism rationally though, which just further supports the idea that feminism is more like a religion.

superiority · 2012-02-16T02:33:55+00:00

Photobucket whyyyyyyyyy.

At least 90% of the time pictures on Photobucket just fail to load for me.

eskachig · 2012-02-16T00:46:51+00:00

I have to say I'm pretty impressed, really. That's some serious douchebaggery to be airing out into open air.

DroppaMaPants · 2012-02-16T00:46:55+00:00

Oh yes, I avoid SRS. Anyone who posts anything remotely sane there gets a nice condescending label next to their name then downvoted to oblivion.

I cannot psychoanalyze the motives of the people there - I'm not sure why they are so irrational and hate filled - but they are.

aetheralloy · 2012-02-15T19:16:22+00:00

Thanks, but we are really trying not to have many /SRS threads here.

Something like that is perfect for /R/ANTISRS

Chamoflage · 2012-02-16T09:27:53+00:00

Am I the only one who would not be terribly likely to side with someone just because they made the opposition cry? I mean, really.

house_of_amon · 2012-02-16T08:53:06+00:00

Of course these tactics are essential if you hash out your argument in a "safe space". A safe space is just a place where you never find out if you're wrong. Its a black hole of groupthink. It would be wrong to say that groupthink doesn't occur in other subs too, but I can't think of any other ones that really enforce it.

luciansolaris · 2012-02-16T05:02:54+00:00

Alex Jones?....

2012-02-16T04:38:28+00:00

The funny thing is, this is exactly what happened to terroja.

HITLARIOUS · 2012-02-16T11:50:46+00:00

Any debate in which the use of dirty rhetoric is necessary, isn't a debate you stand to gain from.

themountaingoat · 2012-02-17T05:14:33+00:00

I love how the poster says that the way to win an argument is to make the other side lose their cool and then says that they lose your cool immediately when debating "misogyny", so according to their own standards they have lost. What is SRS other than a whole bunch of people screaming?

Baadasssss · 2012-02-15T20:13:06+00:00

I love the title of this, with "exposed" all in caps. It's like those National Enquirer or whatever headlines where it's like "Rob Schneider and Bigfoot's SECRET AFFAIR". I love the sensationalism, love it!

AntiBigots · 2012-02-15T19:56:04+00:00

[permanently deleted]

Title	1 SRS Debate Method EXPOSED
Author	luciansolaris
Upvotes	20
Comments	52
Date	February 15, 2012 7:11 PM UTC (14 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/pr2ch/1_srs_debate_method_exposed/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/1-srs-debate-method-exposed.1027600 https://theredarchive.com/post/1027600

Comments