I almost seriously blogged about this

I almost seriously blogged about this Onion-esque story about Michele Bachmann:

Dr. Stephen Hawking’s recent statement that the black holes he famously described do not actually exist underscores “the danger inherent in listening to scientists,” Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minnesota) said today.

Rep. Bachmann unleashed a blistering attack on Dr. Hawking, who earlier referred to his mistake on black holes as his “biggest blunder.”

“Actually, Dr. Hawking, our biggest blunder as a society was ever listening to people like you,” said Rep. Bachmann. “If black holes don’t exist, then other things you scientists have been trying to foist on us probably don’t either, like climate change and evolution.”

Rep. Bachmann added that all the students who were forced to learn about black holes in college should now sue Dr. Hawking for a full refund. “Fortunately for me, I did not take any science classes in college,” she said.

Bachmann’s anti-Hawking comments seemed to be gaining traction on Capitol Hill, as seen from the statement by Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas), Chairman of the House Science Committee, who said, “Going forward, members of the House Science Committee will do our best to avoid listening to scientists.”

Given all the bat-shit crazy things Bachmann has said in her life, this is perfectly plausible. It wasn’t until it was pointed out to me that the author of the article, Andy Borowitz, is a comedian that I realize this was made-up. This is an indictment of a few things. Most obviously, it’s an indictment of my familiarity with Borowitz. It’s also an indictment of the career Bachmann has led, not that this is the worst thing she has ever uttered, whether fictionally or not. (The worst was when she continued the lie about vaccines and autism.) But perhaps most of all this is an indictment of the New Yorker. The reason I posted this on other social media sites first is that I saw the source was what I thought was a serious outlet. I maybe expect some tongue-in-cheek articles if I’m looking at an “Odd News” section of some site, but I don’t expect to see work from The Onion when I’m not actually on The Onion. Why does everyone want to follow CNN’s lead of making shit up?

Poe’s Law in action

The punching makes me think this is fake. The rest? Entirely plausible.

Poe’s Law meme-ified

Okay, okay, this is the final thought on the topic

I know I recently said this was my final thought on the silly sort of sexism that Suzanne Franks and co promote, but I just can’t resist two more things.

First, I think most people know about Poe’s Law.

Similar to Murphy’s Law, Poe’s Law concerns internet debates, particularly regarding religion or politics.

“Without a winking smiley or other blatant display of humor, it is impossible to create a parody of Fundamentalism that SOMEONE won’t mistake for the real thing.”

In other words, no matter how bizarre, outrageous, or just plain idiotic a parody of a Fundamentalist may seem, there will always be someone who cannot tell that it is a parody, having seen similar REAL ideas from real religious/political Fundamentalists.

I want to extend this law to deep-end, crazy feminism. This isn’t just the regular ol’ feminism that’s all about equality and all that good jazz. I mean the real crazy stuff. I’m talking about the sort of stuff that makes for terrible sitcom caricatures of the average feminist. Some of this stuff is so far out there, it must be fake. It just must. So just as when someone declares Poe’s Law on a possible fundie, I shall henceforth declare Hawkins’ Law on fundie feminism. There’s just no way to tell if these people really believe the sort of junk they crap all over the Internet or if they’re just trolling for their own laughs.

Second, I am having a ball* reading the freak outs of one feminist.** To watch all the false bravado fall into ruins is hilarious.

*Was that sexist? Probably.

**Remember Hawkins’ Law. It’s entirely possible everyone has been duped given the high caricature toxicity.

Update: Apparently Franks is freaking out too because I won’t participate in her Internet fantasy and call her by her play name. Not as entertaining as the other caricature’s meltdown, but vaguely interesting.

Okay, okay, this is the final thought on the topic

I know I recently said this was my final thought on the silly sort of sexism that Suzanne Franks and co promote, but I just can’t resist two more things.

First, I think most people know about Poe’s Law.

Similar to Murphy’s Law, Poe’s Law concerns internet debates, particularly regarding religion or politics.

“Without a winking smiley or other blatant display of humor, it is impossible to create a parody of Fundamentalism that SOMEONE won’t mistake for the real thing.”

In other words, no matter how bizarre, outrageous, or just plain idiotic a parody of a Fundamentalist may seem, there will always be someone who cannot tell that it is a parody, having seen similar REAL ideas from real religious/political Fundamentalists.

I want to extend this law to deep-end, crazy feminism. This isn’t just the regular ol’ feminism that’s all about equality and all that good jazz. I mean the real crazy stuff. I’m talking about the sort of stuff that makes for terrible sitcom caricatures of the average feminist. Some of this stuff is so far out there, it must be fake. It just must. So just as when someone declares Poe’s Law on a possible fundie, I shall henceforth declare Hawkins’ Law on fundie feminism. There’s just no way to tell if these people really believe the sort of junk they crap all over the Internet or if they’re just trolling for their own laughs.

Second, I am having a ball* reading the freak outs of one feminist.** To watch all the false bravado fall into ruins is hilarious.

*Was that sexist? Probably.

**Remember Hawkins’ Law. It’s entirely possible everyone has been duped given the high caricature toxicity.

Update: Apparently Franks is freaking out too because I won’t participate in her Internet fantasy and call her by her play name. Not as entertaining as the other caricature’s meltdown, but vaguely interesting.