Wednesday, June 17, 2009

On the Count of Three, Everyone Pretend to Take PZ Myers Seriously


Myers predictably rides to defense of outed blogger with a pure work of fiction

Posting on Pharyngula yesterday, a friend -- or at least acquaintance -- Robert Peter John Day, PZ Myers, finally weighs in on his outing as Canadian Cynic.

He doesn't like it.

In fact, Myers attempts to portray Day as merely the victim of reactionary right-wingers, who have exposed his identity because they can't handle his ideas.

Unfortunately for Dr Myers, few things could possibly be further from the truth.

The litany of Day's offenses and abuses against his detractors has been sung long and loud.

Myers cannot honestly pretend that this is simply a matter of "pseudonymous blogger annoys right-winger who can't cope, right-winger lashes out by revealing the name behind the pseudonym". No, In fact, the matter is very different.

Rather it's a matter of pseudonymous blogger attacks detractor in some of the most pernicious and vicious manners imaginable, and is eventually stripped of the anonymity -- or pseudonymity -- behind which they cowered while doing so.

That is the true story of Robert Peter John Day. That is the true story of Canadian Cynic.

One has to wonder how precisely to judge Myers' sentiments. One has to wonder whether his decision to sweep Day's disgusting acts under the rug represents a tacit acknowledgement of them, and a deep discomfort with them, or if his willingness to publicly pretend as if these things never happened is actually a de facto expression of condonation.

One would hope for the former, but cannot ignore the possibility of the latter.

Beyond that, one has to recognize what Myer's insistence that Day will not change his behaviour really says about Mr Day.

Once upon a time, it was possible that Canadian Cynic was simply a character -- a charade played out for the sake of stirring up controversy and outrage in the interest of advancing Mr Day's blogging career.

One could at least accept then that perhaps some of the most outrageous of Day's acts didn't genuinely reflect his true personality.

Myers' insistence that Mr Day will not change his behaviour is actually an admission that Mr Day is as terrible a person in real life as he was when he cowered behind the anonymity of his online character.

It's also incredibly amusing that Mr Day actually failed to live up to the moral lesson that Myers attempts to apply to Wendy Sullivan: "If you know that something is wrong, since you admit to avoiding doing it, and if you know that there is no point to it other than to try to hurt someone personally and materially, there is a simple rule to follow: don't do it."

Mt Day, on many occasions, pretended that he wanted to avoid doing some of the things that he did. In his mind, he knew all along that the only purpose in doing those things was to hurt someone personally and materially.

And what was it that Mr Day did?

He did it.

"If you do it anyway, that just means you're a self-confessed douchebag."

Unless, of course, you're a good friend and atheist bossom-buddy of Dr Myers. In that case you're somehow morally exempt to the extent to which your misdeeds will not even merit acknowledgment.

Perhaps that's the nice thing about living in the bubble that Myers has been living in through his blog. While every so often some Humanist organization comes out of the woodworks to give you a meaningless shiny bauble, you can keep company with some of the most despicable individuals imaginable, and the same groups that honour you will roll out the red carpet for them, and pretend for two seconds that they aren't lionizing a vile twit.

Then again, perhaps all one needs to do is consider the source of this condemnation, and maybe spare a little chuckle.

Myers insists that those who outed Cynic are "not geniuses". But it was PZ Myers himself who lost to creationist Kirk Durston in Edmonton. Durston is far from a genius, but at least understood the topic of debate that Myers' hosts were charging spectators money to see.

So maybe taking PZ Myers seriously isn't the wisest decision.

2 comments:

JA Goneaux said...

I must have missed the use of "douchbaggery" in the Oxford Debates...

I'm an agnostic, so these guys should be my homies, but I'm afraid that all they do is make me want to take a shower.

Patrick Ross said...

You should talk to Victor about this. He, too, is an atheist. He, too, detests fundamentalist atheism.

Post a Comment

Post your comments, and join the discussion!

Be aware that spam posts and purile nonsense will not be tolerated, although purility within constructive commentary is encouraged.

Also, all comments made by Kevron are deleted without being read.