Free Solo and Terra Incognita

While the past of course has an enormous influence on the happenings of today, she displays an obsession with where people come from and thus what sort of identity any given individual is allowed to have. It is almost as full of bullshit as any racist ranting about inherent racial differences

Ryan M Moore wrote:
My judgement has nothing to do with how she looks, rather that the content which she deems important to share consists mainly of herself.

Almost by definition, anyone with an autobiographical or opinion blog is vain enough to think what they have to say is important

Ryan M Moore wrote: My judgement has nothing to do with how she looks, rather that the content which she deems important to share consists mainly of herself.

And how is this different from 99% of other Instagram users? 

I think the terribly sloppy writing style is strategic. If it was a sound article, none of us would have read it. Since it's all sensationalized, we're all yammering about it. She got the attention she wanted, so she won. It's a page right out of Alex Jones, or Tomi Lauren. She trollin'.

Now, buy some of her merchandise.

Please don't dox this person, and/or go through her personal online stuff. Let's talk about the writing itself. Complaining about selfies on Instagram is kinda weak.

Edit: here's the same strategy in action:
"Ann Coulter Claims Newly Elected Democrats All ‘Hate White Men,’ Are Jews, Muslims, ‘College Queers’ and ‘Black Church Ladies’"

Lena chita wrote:

And how is this different from 99% of other Instagram users? 

It’s not, I also don’t believe that 99% of instagram readers essays are worth the time to read. I also don’t give equal negative weight to a photo of someone doing something in their Instagram to a selfie... it’s normal to want to invite people to see and appreciate something you’ve done that you’re proud of or think is pretty cool. It’s weird to want random strangers to like you for just being you. The narcissism is high. 

Long Ranger wrote: I think the terribly sloppy writing style is strategic. If it was a sound article, none of us would have read it. Since it's all sensationalized, we're all yammering about it. She got the attention she wanted, so she won. It's a page right out of Alex Jones, or Tomi Lauren. She trollin'.

Now, buy some of her merchandise.

Please don't dox this person, and/or go through her personal online stuff. Let's talk about the writing itself. Complaining about selfies on Instagram is kinda weak.

The point I was making is that, based on her Instagram it appears to me that what drives her above all is wanting the attention. Therefore I assume that her blog would be an extension of that motivation as opposed to a search for the truth. 

Also not doxing her, she puts who she is out there on her own, quite proudly.

Taking a pragmatic view on ethics and moral responsibility, it is morally irresponsible to tell Honnold to stop free soloing.

Alex Honnold donates 1/3 of his income to charity. This means that him making the most money that he possibly can is a very good thing for the world. It is actually ethically irresponsible to ask Honnold to stop free soloing when it garners such huge media attention and thus makes him more money which he then is able to donate more to charity.

Anyone else have thoughts on this?

trice Rice

Yeah that reminded me something along that line of thinking, that I learned in an environmental conservation class a few years ago. Our teacher led a debate as to whether more positive change could be affected by 1) working within existing institutions (say an environmentalist steering the reins of an oil company, or a government agency tasked with regulating it), or 2) by the usual protests, lobbying, and yes even typing angry blog posts from the outside looking in.

I think many of us came away with the idea it's better to rise to positions of power within existing institutions to make a difference. I don't want to pile on the blog author, but seems some of her unrest could be resolved by action. I (volunteer) tutored disadvantaged/homeless kids for a few years and found it very rewarding. Would like to do that again. We're all trying to make things better and as others have mentioned the hate is not needed.

Anonymous wrote: 
It's the hate that bothers me. 

Ain't nothing to do with haters but ignore 'em.

Long Ranger wrote: I think the terribly sloppy writing style is strategic. If it was a sound article, none of us would have read it. Since it's all sensationalized, we're all yammering about it. She got the attention she wanted, so she won. It's a page right out of Alex Jones, or Tomi Lauren. She trollin'.

Now, buy some of her merchandise.

Please don't dox this person, and/or go through her personal online stuff. Let's talk about the writing itself. Complaining about selfies on Instagram is kinda weak.

Yeah, I'm getting echoes of a thread from several years ago which quickly went from people validly complaining about a woman who was painting graffiti in national parks to some horribly sexist and vitriolic character attacks on her looks and gender.  We can focus on the fact that Moynihan is a mediocre writer who pretty much embodies every characteristic that right wingers like to stereotype progressive feminists with. Don't have to get into her social media presence or post photos here.

trice Rice wrote: Taking a pragmatic view on ethics and moral responsibility, it is morally irresponsible to tell Honnold to stop free soloing.

Alex Honnold donates 1/3 of his income to charity. This means that him making the most money that he possibly can is a very good thing for the world. It is actually ethically irresponsible to ask Honnold to stop free soloing when it garners such huge media attention and thus makes him more money which he then is able to donate more to charity.

Anyone else have thoughts on this?

I think this idea is somewhat problematic. In Free Solo, Honnold says he makes about as much as an OK dentist. He could be that dentist, start up a charity, and do exactly the same goodwill he's doing know, except he'd probably also be doing it anonymously. And also serving others in a not-so-selfish way.

I'm always late to the party...

Long Ranger wrote:

I think this idea is somewhat problematic. In Free Solo, Honnold says he makes about as much as an OK dentist. He could be that dentist, start up a charity, and do exactly the same goodwill he's doing know, except he'd probably also be doing it anonymously. And also serving others in a not-so-selfish way.

I am basically making an effective altruism argument. I think that after the success of 'Free solo' Honnold will likely make much more than a moderately successful dentist. Effective altruism basically boils down to doing the thing that you are best at so that you can make the most money and donate it. This maximizes your utility to the world. It seems Honnold is doing this to a certain extent.

Another example would be someone who has the skills and ability to be a powerful CEO or a wall street elite. It is actually bad for the world for that person to volunteer at a soup kitchen. They could spend those 4 hours that they were volunteering making money and donate that money to have a much bigger impact.

Obviously life is about balance and its not feasible for someone to literally spend all of their time attempting to maximize their utility to the world, but it is an interesting perspective. Also you could argue that honnold by climbing all day every day is maximizing his utility to the world by getting better and soloing crazier shit and thus making more money.

trice Rice wrote: I am basically making an effective altruism argument. I think that after the success of 'Free solo' Honnold will likely make much more than a moderately successful dentist. Effective altruism basically boils down to doing the thing that you are best at so that you can make the most money and donate it. This maximizes your utility to the world. It seems Honnold is doing this to a certain extent.

Another example would be someone who has the skills and ability to be a powerful CEO or a wall street elite. It is actually bad for the world for that person to volunteer at a soup kitchen. They could spend those 4 hours that they were volunteering making money and donate that money to have a much bigger impact.

Obviously life is about balance and its not feasible for someone to literally spend all of their time attempting to maximize their utility to the world, but it is an interesting perspective. Also you could argue that honnold by climbing all day every day is maximizing his utility to the world by getting better and soloing crazier shit and thus making more money.

I guess then, take Bill Gates as an example. Was all his anti-trust business tactics worth the goodwill he does now? How do you measure that? Do the business (and individuals that make up that business) he ruined not count in the total?

I don't know if Alex Honnold is making a big difference in the world. I think it's a plus he's donating to charity, but I wouldn't call it completely altruistic. I think the argument is used far too much to justify the past actions of an individual. Mr. Gore and his private jet-setting around is justified by his climate change awareness, for example (which he touches upon in his Inconvenient Truth film). I'm a talk the talk, walk the walk kinda guy, myself.  

I get that effective altruism is super mainstream right now, as the latest popcorn flicks staring colorful comic book characters are using it as a plot device. I'm not sure if I'm on board.

Ends and means

bkozak wrote:

There was another deleted picture that said "douchebag" instead of eco-jock.  And calling Tommy Caldwell, Jimmy Chin, and Mikey Schaefer "fuccbois"?  What a class act this woman is.  

Wow that's pretty cool, I was called a"fuccbois!"  Pretty sure that is a first!  You know what they say "there is no such thing as bad publicity"   

Edit to add:  I hope next time Erin walks past me at Planet Granite in Portland she introduces herself.  You'd think with all she has to say she'd actually say it directly to me.

Mikey Schaefer wrote:

Wow that's pretty cool, I was called a"fuccbois!"  Pretty sure that is a first!  You know what they say "there is no such thing as bad publicity"   

Edit to add:  I hope next time Erin walks past me at Planet Granite in Portland she introduces herself.  You'd think with all she has to say she'd actually say it directly to me.

She'll probably lambast you for naming your FA "Father Time" instead of "Mother Time", because patriarchy.

It's Father Time and Mother Nature.

I didn't want to co-opt the name of the route next door, Mother Earth.

Mikey Schaefer wrote:

Wow that's pretty cool, I was called a"fuccbois!"  Pretty sure that is a first!  You know what they say "there is no such thing as bad publicity"   

Edit to add:  I hope next time Erin walks past me at Planet Granite in Portland she introduces herself.  You'd think with all she has to say she'd actually say it directly to me.

I saw that version of her edited magazine cover and I'm pretty sure she had your name spelled wrong so maybe she will still overlook you. 

Still, you might want to consider a new type of belay glasses.

Mikey Schaefer wrote:
Edit to add:  I hope next time Erin walks past me at Planet Granite in Portland she introduces herself.  You'd think with all she has to say she'd actually say it directly to me.

Haha, you know that's not how this works!  There's probably 4 or 5 people on this forum that would actually address concerns in person with someone.

It's the climbing community, baby!  Non-confrontational (except online) and passive aggressive til they die!

#megaproud!