So one person on the internet represents an entire group? (Anita, Amazing Atheist)

[DudeistBelieve]

Thought I'd throw this out there to you folks since it's just something I'm pondering for the moment. I was looking through the "Amazing Atheist responds to Anita" thread, and more than once read someone lamenting that such an individual gives Atheists a bad name and what not.

Really?

I mean I know as human beings when we're enrage at an individual we WANT to rain hell fire and brimstone down upon a whole group or movement, but are there seriously a large chunk of ignorant people out there that will sit and think Amazing Atheist is the spokesperson for all Atheists? That the majority of feminists would agree with Anita? That, hell, even the West Boro Baptist church somehow negatively impacts Christianity?

Do people in general not see these folks as anomaly?s with extreme point of views?

 

[Devil's Due]

You're asking people to think rationally and not rush any remarks / insults when it involves a controversial topic?

You must be new here

But I completely agree, I have completely avoided those threads now because it's just bickering about TAA and Anita now, never anything else.

 

[Lionsfan]

How long have you been on the internet man, or just in real life? This is just standard protocol. Whoever has the loudest voice *represents* the majority.

No it doesn't matter that a lot of Texans are quite ordinary, because there's stories of a few being crazy Bible thumpers, ALL Texans are like that.

Just pick any group, and the loudest assholes are the ones everybody thinks of first

 

[Dr. Cakey]

Never quite understood the amount of hate TAA gets. Beyond the fact that he's a person on Youtube who talks at a camera, and I acknowledge the fact that anyone who does that is inherently scum.

Not that I thought his "refutation" was particularly impressive.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Er, yeah, people will always associate groups they aren't part of with unpleasant and vocal members of them.

Yes, not all Atheists are horrible scum the world would be much better without. But the existence of TAA/certain others isn't going to help people retain that mindset, even if most people aren't them.

 

[80sboy]

Oh! Who cares about these two.

They're both wastes of our attention span. Although I at least was able to enjoy some of AA earlier works in reviewing movies where he didn't have to talk about other people.

>>

 

[DudeistBelieve]

You're asking people to think rationally and not rush any remarks / insults when it involves a controversial topic?

You must be new here

But I completely agree, I have completely avoided those threads now because it's just bickering about TAA and Anita now, never anything else.

How long have you been on the internet man, or just in real life? This is just standard protocol. Whoever has the loudest voice *represents* the majority.

No it doesn't matter that a lot of Texans are quite ordinary, because there's stories of a few being crazy Bible thumpers, ALL Texans are like that.

Just pick any group, and the loudest assholes are the ones everybody thinks of first

Ya know, I shouldn't be shocked about some things I come across in life, but occasionally I am stunned.

listened to the radio on the way home. a caller into the savage nation accuse Obama of talking to the enemy when he visited Britain. Eh.

Never quite understood the amount of hate TAA gets. Beyond the fact that he's a person on Youtube who talks at a camera, and I acknowledge the fact that anyone who does that is inherently scum.

Not that I thought his "refutation" was particularly impressive.

He said certain things to a rape victim which, out of sensitivity to the subject matter that was being discussed at the time, I will put under a spoiler tag. You may need to take a shower after reading them:

Spoiler

This to is even... like so what? And I don't mean that to take away from how disgusting that is. He's just another schmuck on the internet running his mouth, somehow he's more noteworthy than the swarms of people that do the same thing on a message board just because he makes videos of it?

I don't know. I'm having a blah moment today, I don't get it. Guy's got his backwards ass opinions on rape, I don't see how any rational human being can look at him and say all atheists are like that.

I suppose the scary thing is I don't like to think of myself as particularly that bright, but if this is how the majority of humans react to shit it really really scares me about this world.

Ah I'm just in a blah mood.

 

[80sboy]

I don't see how any rational human being can look at him and say all atheists are like that.

Well, because it's not just him. There's an ensemble of public and internet figures that have proven to be a bit more douchy than what was once humanly imagined possible.

It's not just that anger fuck alone. But he is propelling that imagine further.

 

[Terramax]

*snip*

It's called 'association'. Yes, many people, when they are given a noun, will have an immediate vision as to what that noun will look or behave like. Whether it be people, or unanimated objects. Tis' the way of the world my friend.

 

[Ratties]

People are morons. How far down the rabbit hole does that stupidity go? Most people are average stupid. They grasp the world around them and can function in society. Every once in awhile they do something unbelievably stupid. The rest are morons, straight up. They can't be bothered to look stuff up. They don't care if the info coming out their mouth is wrong. You quickly place the person in the right category, you move on. Of course writing something like this makes me sound pompous, I expect people to mail me with this response. "Talking about yourself now are you." People being predictable is the reason I drink, lol.

 

[DudeistBelieve]

MOST groups are judged by the most vocal or visible members of their group.

Looks at all the fools who go 'MURICA! when one person in the US does somem stupid. Everyone who thinks Muslims are all terrorists. And then the athiest and feminist relations you pointed out in your OP.

It is in our nature to categorize. When what we are exposed to are vocal idiots representing something, we tend to put everything related to the vocal idiots into the same category.

well yeah, but aren't we also self-aware that we do that? Or is that a rare character trait to have?

 

[Belaam]

Confirmation bias is a well documented tendency for your brain to remember information it already agrees with more readily than information that it disagrees with.

Therefore, if you think Christians are a bunch of wackos, you are more likely to remember crazy reality tv Christians or the Westboro group than the more sane Christians in your life.

Generally, your best odds for overcoming confirmation bias are to either be aware of it and make a conscious desire to be aware, or to just be spammed with evidence contradictory to your beliefs.

If you are a Feminist who thinks Anita is an idiot, or an Atheist who thinks the Amazing Atheist is an idiot, it is a valid concern to worry that they are each giving people who dislike Feminists/Atheists more fuel for their fire.

Personally, I consider myself a Feminist and an Atheist, but whereas Anita does not seem to present a bias against atheists and the AA does seem to present a bias against feminists, I tend to side with her. Plus, the AA is often a bit of a tool.

 

[Yopaz]

This to is even... like so what? And I don't mean that to take away from how disgusting that is. He's just another schmuck on the internet running his mouth, somehow he's more noteworthy than the swarms of people that do the same thing on a message board just because he makes videos of it?

I don't know. I'm having a blah moment today, I don't get it. Guy's got his backwards ass opinions on rape, I don't see how any rational human being can look at him and say all atheists are like that.

I suppose the scary thing is I don't like to think of myself as particularly that bright, but if this is how the majority of humans react to shit it really really scares me about this world.

Ah I'm just in a blah mood.

Has anyone looked at him and said "all atheists are like that"? I see people holding up Sarkeesian as the Ultimate Feminist all the time, but I didn't think that anyone actually takes TAA seriously as a representation of the atheist community. He's practically a religious zealot.

I just ignore TAA, the same way I ignore the crazy people on the subway who rant to themselves. He jumped the shark ages ago and he's not worthy of attention.

Yeah, I agree with this.

Saying he's giving all Atheists a bad names isn't the same as saying that all Atheists are like him, quite the opposite in fact. Honestly, I'm not on either Anita or his side. Both are on their own extreme side of the spectre, but if I had to choose to team up with one of them I know which one it wouldn't be.

 

[RyQ_TMC]

MOST groups are judged by the most vocal or visible members of their group.

Looks at all the fools who go 'MURICA! when one person in the US does somem stupid. Everyone who thinks Muslims are all terrorists. And then the athiest and feminist relations you pointed out in your OP.

It is in our nature to categorize. When what we are exposed to are vocal idiots representing something, we tend to put everything related to the vocal idiots into the same category.

well yeah, but aren't we also self-aware that we do that? Or is that a rare character trait to have?

I think it's working on such a base level that even if you are self-aware of that in many situations, on a day-to-day basis you still categorize like hell. I often catch myself doing that - even though I'm fully aware of how it works and I make a point of never generalizing into broad categories. Truth is, when you know only one thing about a person, your mind gives you a "backstory" right away. And, until you get to know that person better, you will have certain expectations even if you're aware you're not being rational in that.

Things like religious views (and I'm including atheism in that group) have a different problem too. Most people aren't particularly vocal about their personal beliefs, and it just happens that those who wear their beliefs like a badge tend to also be extreme about them.

In high-profile cases like the one you mentioned (TAA/Anita) it's probably also that an extreme example makes it easy to dismiss an entire case. One bad apple makes for an easy strawman, so most people opposing a given view will happily find an extremist and stereotype the whole other side as the same.

 

[Not Matt]

as an atheist who stand for equality. i feel i can say no. these people do not reprisent us, they are hated in our community too.

Anita is annoying, delusional and is more about creating controversies than actually making a stand for feminism. sad thing is that i could actually have liked her if it weren't for the fact that her well of information is a septic tank. Anita can be summed up with the term "platitude"[footnote]Bullshit dressed up as fact[/footnote]

and the atheist is an incompetent dick with less originality to him than the freaking star wars franchise. the reason you can still see his face is because his head is so far up his ass that it sticks out on top again.