A fine example of progressive double standard

This specimen comes from Slate, an all-around-awful publication where Yglesiastical pontification is outdone by the techno-utopian duo of Oremus & Manjoo, but where the pinnacle of stupidity is the XX-Factor section.

There recently was a controversy involving a (female, black) scientist at the Scientific American website, who maintains a blog called “The Urban Scientist”. An editor at another website asked her to contribute to his site as well, which she declined to do.

To which the editor replied: “Because we don’t pay for blog entries? Are you an urban scientist or an urban whore?”

At the risk of using a fattist word, Slate’s Amanda Hess weighed in: SEXIST! And because that wasn’t enough, RACIST!

Basis for crying about racism? “Urban”. When I think “urban”, I think of white bobo gentrifiers and their trendy boutiques, but apparently that means something else in the American context, according to which it refers to blacks. So the editor was being racist for calling her “urban”, even though that is the name of her blog. As for “whore”, okay, I get the idea behind his use of the word – his belief that she was refusing for lack of payment – but if anything I’m wary of people asking others to write for free (viz. Arianna Huffington).

From the Slate text:

It was a racist, sexist comment—and a telling example of how one very minor cog in the science industry chooses to leverage his tiny bit of power to impede progress. Lee responded to the editor appropriately—“Did YOU JUST CALL ME A WHORE?”—and wrote a thoughtful and funny post about the incident at The Urban Scientist, including screen captures of the full email exchange. Then, Scientific American quietly deleted Lee’s post without informing her. In doing so, it turned one editor’s horrible comment into a much bigger problem for the fields of journalism and science.

Never mind the all-caps response (I doubt anyone barely aware of netiquette would approve of that, but I’m prepared to let that pass). And Scientific American later restored the post. Anyway, the editor at the other publication was fired, but that was just the beginning of the controversy according to Ms. Hess, who considered that SciAm’s response was “troubling”, and that “Scientific American launched into defense mode, lending its considerable resources to the wrong side of this debate”. The SciAm editor in chief (also a woman) said the post was inappropriate for where it was posted and that it could not be factually verified.

Every day Scientific American waits, it further aligns itself with racism and sexism, and against the people like Lee who are committed to outing and discussing those things. It also calls into question Scientific American’s journalistic integrity and its understanding of facts.

Yet I know places beyond the broken horizon that would, had the positions been reversed (i.e. that the editor at the other publication had lashed out at the scientist in a blog post of his own), have been the first to clamor: “Take it down!” “Take it down!” “Make him take it down!” with little regard for his freedom of expression. What he said was disgusting and unprofessional (but not racist), but I am wary of the progressive tendency to find suppression in all places unacceptable except for when the time comes to suppress something of which they disapprove.

You do realize he called this woman a whore, right? Grow up dude. And get a little class while you are at it.

Incidentally, I wasted my time reading almost that whole thing to see how stupid it was going to be. Though your intro paragraph was so biased and leading, I shouldn’t have bothered. If you are going to pretend to be fair and balanced in your head, you may want to start with your words first. That first paragraph proves your bias as a loon. Keep that in mind pre-next rant.

Ya loon.

Yeah, I don’t read threads like this unless someone pays me…

You keep using term, but I don’t think it means what you think it means.

There’s only one standard here. It’s called decency. You may not recognize it, but that doesn’t mean there is another one.

(i.e. that the editor at the other publication had lashed out at the scientist in a blog post of his own), have been the first to clamor: “Take it down!” “Take it down!” “Make him take it down!” with little regard for his freedom of expression.

Only in your imagination. As a matter of fact, ripples from this incident led to a poorly considered blog post by Andrew Maynard. A lot of people rightly called him an idiot, but nobody asked him to take down what he’d posted. Sound familiar?

This is not the hill you want to die on. Why try to parse the intent of a complete jerk?

What exactly is the double standard here?

What’s wrong with Slate now? Their various “Gabfest” podcasts are universally good (the sports, culture and politics ones at least). Admittedly, I don’t read the actual site much.

But these constant internet slap fights between the feminists and MRA goons are starting to remind me strongly of high school. Why don’t you guys hug it out and let it go?

Consider that it’s Vetarnias. Calling black women urban whores is probably just fine in his book. After all they aren’t white French-speakers.

Hey guys, here is a story where some guy whose politics i agrees with acts like a complete ass and his company semi backs him up, but it is a double standard because if he was a liberal, other liberals would probably have been supporting him. I’m not going to back this claim up at all (although i could no doubt find an example where someone acts poorly and is a member of any desired group) and am just going to leave it at this.