The recent comments by skeptibunkies on places like JREF over disingenuous concerns about the use of words like "shaman," the misrepresentation of Native culture appropriations by New Agers, calling kids mentally ill, and oh, so much more, reminded me of this article I wrote in 2006, published on American Chronicle.
Noun 1. high dudgeon - a feeling of intense indignation (now used only in the phrase `in high dudgeon')
dudgeon
indignation, outrage - a feeling of righteous anger
The Free Dictionary
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/high%20dudgeon
The Usual Purple Tinged Hyperbole About UFOs
R. Lee
September 10, 2006
Wandering through the kingdom of anti-UFOism on the internet, I recently came across a few sites with the same message; so-called ‘name calling’ is just as bad as using racial slurs. Labeling the anti-UFOists, skeptics and or debunkers as any of the following: skeptoid, skepti-bunkie, Skepti-bunkie, New Thug, etc. is on the same level as being called any of the heinous names for an ethnic, cultural or racial group. (Also, using such labels as say, New Thugs or skeptibunkies, supports their opinion that the “name caller” is emotionally and psychologically deficient in some way.) The obvious -- that these offended complainers use terms like woo, kook, lunatics, true believers, ‘bleevers, etc. -- well, no need to point that out, so I won’t.
What does need to be pointed out is that this belief that being labeled just what one is, based on observation of their behavior (er, if you’re bashing ufos and ufo experiencers/witnesses/researchers, doesn’t that make you a debunker/skeptic/thug? Answer: yes, yes it does) is hardly “name calling.” A note to the thin skinned: ‘Skepti-bunkie’ is nowhere near the level of being called a f****** moronic idiot or other foul names. Neither is it anywhere close to being called a racist name. What those who are complaining about such silliness need to get is that it is completely disingenuous to pretend one is affronted by these labels, that they are on a par with victims of racial and ethnic slurs. That pompous opinion doesn’t set well with me; being pc has nothing to do with it. It’s insulting and it’s a lie to suggest that being called a ‘skeptibunkie’ is the same as being called an ugly name for someone’s race or ethnicity.
This pretense of being offended by, say, being referred to as a “skeptibunkie” or some other label is just another tactic used by anti-UFOists. Meanwhile, those of us who’ve experienced UFOs in various ways are called mentally ill, intellectually challenged, spiritually needy, liars, drunks, drug users, attention getters, drama queens, and more. Those all are worse than being called a thug, skeptibunkie, or Pelicanist. (Pelicanist is a term coined by UFO researcher Jerome Clark.) Let’s see: mentally ill drug user who’s a liar, or skeptical thug? Hmm, I’ll take ‘skeptical thug’ for eight hundred Alex.
The anti-UFO activists can be offended all he or she likes, sniff and sneer at being mocked, take offense at being called a New Thug, even though that is the behavior so often being exhibited these days (golly gee, what else do you call demands for the cultural cleansing of UFOlogy by non-UFOists?) But they do not get to be so damn arrogant and full of their own importance regarding their Crusade to Rid the World of Woo. (And UFOs -- anything outside of the most hard core nuts and bolts theories -- are considered woo to the skeptibunkie.) It is not honest or accurate for them to align themselves with those that are victims of bigotry, prejudice and hateful epithets. They’re not that important, and neither is their cause.
1 comment:
Hmm ... the 'mentally ill' tag always seems to raise heads above the parapet. Fair enough, to use it as an insult is out of order. However, mental illness comes in a range of forms from outright schizophrenia down to depression. I can speak from experience and say that when I am in a certain state of consciousness I am more prone to misinterpreting what I see. On occasions I've even hallucinated. The difference is that I understand what I've experienced and not everybody else does the same.
Back to the point and ad hominem attacks are just a diversion and a side show. The real issue is the hunt for evidence.
Keep up the blogging. As much as I rarely agree with what you write it provides interesting thought.
Post a Comment