Speak True
Nov. 17th, 2007 08:24 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
dreamer_easyAn unpleasant reminder from teh OG today of just how bad most online debate is. Snark replaces insight, jibes replace facts, the "battle of the sexes" replaces feminism, and a general high dudgeon replaces righteousness.
I thought it might be useful to reproduce part of the Introduction to my long-defunct Web site, Kate's Feminism Page, which contains my thoughts on online arguments. In it, I mostly talk about statistics and research, but what I say about insisting on the facts, in your own postings and in everyone else's, applies equally to fannish debate - including exactly what was said and exactly who said it. Fandom is appallingly sloppy about this, from shoving words in opponents' mouths to inventing RTD "quotes" from whole cloth.
Why Kate's Feminism Page?
You have the Internet's many anti-feminists to thank for these pages. It was the debates in alt.feminism, soc.men, and related Usenet newsgroups that prompted me to start my reading and research into domestic violence and rape, and the controversies surrounding those topics.
More specifically, it was the very large amount of mistakes, misquotes, distortions, and outright lies in the anti-feminists' postings which got me looking for the real facts.
A lot of the information I needed was available on the Web - but far more wasn't. It took a lot of spare time to track down all the sources that have gone into my essays on husband battering and date rape research. I don't have any formal qualifications in the social sciences; those essays are purely the result of my reading. And there's always more research to do.
After many years debating, arguing, and debunking lies and myths in Usenet, I decided that it would be a better use of my time to put up a set of Web pages with the facts than to constantly reiterate them on Usenet. Plus Kate Almanac was my way of continuing to have my say, without wading through anti-feminist abuse in the newsgroups.
All of which sounds very negative; but the truth is, it's a very positive thing to learn and broadcast the truth. That's what the Internet should be for, and it's what innumerable feminists are using it for. But the truth is a tricky thing - so I want to give you some advice: about arguing your case, about evaluating information.
Know Your Stuff
James Callaghan put it this way: "A lie can be half-way round the world before the truth has got its boots on." Very many anti-feminists are simply repeating untruths they've heard, without having checked the facts for themselves. The Internet, and especially Usenet, becomes a giant game of "Whispers", as the distortions are repeated and spread over and over.
The media all too often plays the same game. And feminists are far from immune to this blunder. For instance, people online and off are still repeating Naomi Wolf's mistaken assertion that anorexia causes 150,000 deaths in the US each year, even though Wolf has long since admitted her error. Bungles, spread online, can damage feminism's credibility.
So the first piece of advice is: check your facts. Don't assume any statistic or statement is correct, even if it comes from a friendly place, such as another feminist's Web page. Always ask: who says so? What's the source? If a number or claim isn't backed up by a citation - telling you what article or book or whatever it comes from - don't trust it. (Friend or foe, be cautious of people who speak as though they have confidence and authority. Do they? Or do they just sound certain?)
Even if it is backed up with a citation, it's easy to distort someone's research by leaving out important facts. If it doesn't ring true, check for yourself.
Not many people check their information before posting - they often misremember information, exaggerate or distort it, or leave out important information. And a lesson I learned from Usenet is that many folks have no qualms at all about simply lying.
So get your facts straight before posting a message or putting up a Web page. It's worth the extra effort, and a short delay won't matter. Arguments often go on for a long time before someone checks the facts, and discovers the whole discussion has been nonsense.
And don't waste time arguing about "facts" if you're not confident they're genuine. Ask your worthy opponent to back up their claims. And then go and check the evidence for yourself.
Statistics can be confusing and misleading, but don't give up on them - just handle statistics with care. Ask exactly what each number means. Who was surveyed? Were they chosen at random? Who was left out? Exactly what questions were asked? What definitions were used? Who did the survey - do they have a vested interest? Do the results of the survey match the numbers from other surveys - and if they're very different, why?
Different surveys mean very different things. There's a difference between ringing up women at random and asking about domestic violence, and asking women at a shelter. There's a major difference between asking about rapes that happened in the last year, and rapes that happened at any time during a woman's life.
And did the way the survey was conducted affect the results? For instance, the older NCVS surveys might have missed some domestic violence victims, because the interviews were held while husband and wife were in the same room.
If you get something wrong in debate, immediately own up. You gain credibility and you don't waste time.
I thought it might be useful to reproduce part of the Introduction to my long-defunct Web site, Kate's Feminism Page, which contains my thoughts on online arguments. In it, I mostly talk about statistics and research, but what I say about insisting on the facts, in your own postings and in everyone else's, applies equally to fannish debate - including exactly what was said and exactly who said it. Fandom is appallingly sloppy about this, from shoving words in opponents' mouths to inventing RTD "quotes" from whole cloth.
Why Kate's Feminism Page?
You have the Internet's many anti-feminists to thank for these pages. It was the debates in alt.feminism, soc.men, and related Usenet newsgroups that prompted me to start my reading and research into domestic violence and rape, and the controversies surrounding those topics.
More specifically, it was the very large amount of mistakes, misquotes, distortions, and outright lies in the anti-feminists' postings which got me looking for the real facts.
A lot of the information I needed was available on the Web - but far more wasn't. It took a lot of spare time to track down all the sources that have gone into my essays on husband battering and date rape research. I don't have any formal qualifications in the social sciences; those essays are purely the result of my reading. And there's always more research to do.
After many years debating, arguing, and debunking lies and myths in Usenet, I decided that it would be a better use of my time to put up a set of Web pages with the facts than to constantly reiterate them on Usenet. Plus Kate Almanac was my way of continuing to have my say, without wading through anti-feminist abuse in the newsgroups.
All of which sounds very negative; but the truth is, it's a very positive thing to learn and broadcast the truth. That's what the Internet should be for, and it's what innumerable feminists are using it for. But the truth is a tricky thing - so I want to give you some advice: about arguing your case, about evaluating information.
Know Your Stuff
James Callaghan put it this way: "A lie can be half-way round the world before the truth has got its boots on." Very many anti-feminists are simply repeating untruths they've heard, without having checked the facts for themselves. The Internet, and especially Usenet, becomes a giant game of "Whispers", as the distortions are repeated and spread over and over.
The media all too often plays the same game. And feminists are far from immune to this blunder. For instance, people online and off are still repeating Naomi Wolf's mistaken assertion that anorexia causes 150,000 deaths in the US each year, even though Wolf has long since admitted her error. Bungles, spread online, can damage feminism's credibility.
So the first piece of advice is: check your facts. Don't assume any statistic or statement is correct, even if it comes from a friendly place, such as another feminist's Web page. Always ask: who says so? What's the source? If a number or claim isn't backed up by a citation - telling you what article or book or whatever it comes from - don't trust it. (Friend or foe, be cautious of people who speak as though they have confidence and authority. Do they? Or do they just sound certain?)
Even if it is backed up with a citation, it's easy to distort someone's research by leaving out important facts. If it doesn't ring true, check for yourself.
Not many people check their information before posting - they often misremember information, exaggerate or distort it, or leave out important information. And a lesson I learned from Usenet is that many folks have no qualms at all about simply lying.
So get your facts straight before posting a message or putting up a Web page. It's worth the extra effort, and a short delay won't matter. Arguments often go on for a long time before someone checks the facts, and discovers the whole discussion has been nonsense.
And don't waste time arguing about "facts" if you're not confident they're genuine. Ask your worthy opponent to back up their claims. And then go and check the evidence for yourself.
Statistics can be confusing and misleading, but don't give up on them - just handle statistics with care. Ask exactly what each number means. Who was surveyed? Were they chosen at random? Who was left out? Exactly what questions were asked? What definitions were used? Who did the survey - do they have a vested interest? Do the results of the survey match the numbers from other surveys - and if they're very different, why?
Different surveys mean very different things. There's a difference between ringing up women at random and asking about domestic violence, and asking women at a shelter. There's a major difference between asking about rapes that happened in the last year, and rapes that happened at any time during a woman's life.
And did the way the survey was conducted affect the results? For instance, the older NCVS surveys might have missed some domestic violence victims, because the interviews were held while husband and wife were in the same room.
If you get something wrong in debate, immediately own up. You gain credibility and you don't waste time.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
TRU QUOATES
Date: 2007-11-17 03:29 pm (UTC)"I hate kittens" - Teh Moff, Feb. 2007
"I ship Doctor/TARDIS like all smart ppls should." - DT, Yesterday.
Re: TRU QUOATES
Date: 2007-11-17 07:03 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-11-17 07:35 pm (UTC)On the other hand, it taught me -- eventually -- that most people argue on the internet NOT to prove anything (and certainly not to learn anything), but rather because they want to channel their hate and their inner asshat.
I do however often wish that we could assign some consequence to spreading lies -- but then, the last 7 years would have gone quite a bit differently, wouldn't they?
no subject
Date: 2007-11-17 11:21 pm (UTC)In the meantime, here's a macro you may find useful for dropping into fannish discussions.