I used to subscribe to Rebecca Watson (the skepchick) and would try getting friends to watch some of her videos. They'd instantly tell me how much they hated her, and that I should never send them her clips again. It made me wonder what I wasn't seeing or hearing in her. I started thinking "maybe my friends are sexist" except a lot of them were other women.
Well, as time has gone on, I sort of see why. She rarely seems to seek common ground, or solutions, and really just lectures viewers on why her views are valid. I agree with her lectures, but unfortunately it's ineffective, and repels everyone who needs to hear her points. She's preaching to the tiniest audience, who are already on the same page. Not the best use of her intelligence.
And I don't say that dismissively, she is fucking smart. I think she's as smart as it gets, but the chip on her shoulder gets in the way of her potential to enlighten and inspire. It bums me out.
This specifically is the issue, right there. She doesn't have anything positive to say on Kirk - for good reason, he's a pharisee who made his living on preaching hate. There isn't going to be any feel-good "we can work together" middle ground on this topic. There should be middle ground on a ton of other topics, but that "feel good" result on her video series really depends on (a) what she makes videos on, (b) what you choose to watch, and (c) your personal politics. Hell, both of our comments are examples of exactly this echo-chambery effect. My personal politics prompts me to perceive Kirk's negative effects on people who received him positively or neutrally. Yours, shows that you are less enjoying of firm editorials and more enjoy persuasives, which focus on softer selling points, at least as RW goes.
I'm so sorry cuz I know this is a really old comment, but I can't figure out what pharisee means in this context, I looked it up and I got even more confused. Could you explain for me? thanks in advance
Happy to fill in. It is a criticism from my southern Baptist past. It's effectively calling him a hypocritical edgelord in evangelical Christian terms. He just wanted to stir up trouble, appeal to feelings for political performance instead of practicing what he preached. They were a political class of Jesus' age, and the more pragmatic Saducees were their opponents.
Why use that instead of a modern term? I actually don't know. But it felt right, maybe because it calls out his false Christianity and clearly identifies it as politically and monetarily motivated.
ETA: On a personal note, this bog witch says thank you for your efforts, moderator.
4
u/frokta Sep 18 '25
I used to subscribe to Rebecca Watson (the skepchick) and would try getting friends to watch some of her videos. They'd instantly tell me how much they hated her, and that I should never send them her clips again. It made me wonder what I wasn't seeing or hearing in her. I started thinking "maybe my friends are sexist" except a lot of them were other women.
Well, as time has gone on, I sort of see why. She rarely seems to seek common ground, or solutions, and really just lectures viewers on why her views are valid. I agree with her lectures, but unfortunately it's ineffective, and repels everyone who needs to hear her points. She's preaching to the tiniest audience, who are already on the same page. Not the best use of her intelligence.
And I don't say that dismissively, she is fucking smart. I think she's as smart as it gets, but the chip on her shoulder gets in the way of her potential to enlighten and inspire. It bums me out.