They thought they could get away with it

By -
I recently posted about a "typo" in the Guardian that referred to Richard Dawkins as "Richard Dorkins".

While I did not receive a response from my inquiry, it seems the folks at the Guardian realized that they couldn't get away with their obvious veiled hatred towards Dawkins.

They already fixed it.

But we'll never forget this dark day in the atheist community. The day that started one of the most intense "gates" ever:

Dorkinsgate







Edited to add: The Daily Mail managed to cover this same story without calling Dawkins a dork.

Comments

  1. MadScutterSeptember 18, 2011 at 10:10 PM

    Way to go dear! Can't let those writing peoples think that we'll let them get away with their stupid wordses!

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Why I always believe rape victims

By -
Image
On October 31st, 1997, I was raped. I cannot prove it. I cannot provide physical evidence that it happened. I apologize to the internet jury that the only thing I have to offer is my story, which is linked at the end of this blog. When a woman comes forward accusing someone of raping them, I assume they are telling the truth. Getting hard data reports of rape is difficult, given that roughly 70%  of rapes go unreported , but for the 30% of men and women who have the strength to go through the ordeal of reporting their assault, it's estimated 2-10% are false claims . In this scenario, if there are 1000 rapes, and only 30% are reported, 6-30 of those claims might be false. If there are 1000 rapes, and 100% are reported, 0.6-3  of those claims might be false.  So yes, false claims happen. And the people who have done this has made it possible to accuse every. single. woman. who comes forward with a rape allegation of being a liar. Interestingly enough, this doesn't seem to be
Read more

I apologize for not intentionally startling you, cranky lady

By -
Image
Having spent the last several months going on not too infrequent bike rides, I've developed the ability to predict whether it's necessary to alert someone walking in front of me that I'm going to be passing on their left. It is definitely common courtesy, but in my experience, mostly unnecessary. If you're walking ahead of me, I'm going to have plenty of time to observe your walking "style" and decide whether you might need a little heads up that I'm going to ride by. If you're doing a great job of walking in a straight line and staying on the right-side of the path (super proud of you, btw), I typically decide that I can trust you not wander into oncoming traffic without looking first. I have found that I am more likely to startle you by ringing my bell than by riding past you, and that unpleasantness usually seems wholly unnecessary. However, if you're a wanderer or part of a larger group of walkers, I'm definitely ringing my bell, even t
Read more

There was a good bit of hair pulling too

By -
The Christian Post thinks that a single sentence spoken by Dawkins at the Reason Rally has put the atheist movement in a "pickle". "Mock them, ridicule them in public." This is what Dawkins said in reference to religious people. This article decided that it means that Dawkins wants us all to turn into bullies. I have 3 points: 1. The Reason Rally was 9 hours long. I vaguely remember Dawkins saying something like this. It is hardly what I took away from the event. 2. Christians, this is the cool thing about being a freethinker. Yes, Dawkins is highly regarded in our community. No, we don't defer to him when determining how to live our lives and treat other people. We do not blindly do what the "higher-ups" suggest, and nor do they expect us to. I know this can be confusing, since you're used to having no say in how you live your life, but I can guarantee you that throngs of atheists are not going to swarm the streets ridiculing you. 3. A
Read more