[simonrobb]

Galileo maybe isn't the best example, since his reputation seems to (as I understand it) be massively overblown in an enduring myth.

But I think the question you're asking is: am I critical of him because it's fashionable today to push feminism with blinkers on? And would I still do so in 50 years, if today he sparked a mens' rights revolution?

Let's not assign this guy mythical status preemptively. There have always been loud points of view; some of them haven't held up with time, others have. We usually forget the ones that haven't, unless they managed to really hurt people along the way. To put it another way, just because you take a loud contrary position on a political or social issue, doesn't mean you're right.

I actually do applaud him for standing up for something, but my admiration only goes that far. You can present your point of view while trying to minimize the collateral damage. You can also be aware of your own fallibility.

If Galileo burst into Catholic prayer to proclaim the church was wrong and he was right, yeah, I'd call him a bit of a dick. What does he hope to achieve, by choosing the forum that is most disrespectful of others?

[jbob2000]

Considering the prevalence of the church and its properties at the time, there really was no “correct” forum for Galileo to promote his findings - everywhere is disrespectful! He was pushed out of every forum he went to.

This guy has the same problem - you will always just tell him he’s in the wrong place.

[simonrobb]

Well no. You're assuming a lot about me. I've expressed an opinion on exactly one place which I think is wrong.

You're probably right Galileo didn't have a platform, but you're the one drawing that comparison, not me. Do you really think he has the same problem, in the age of the Internet? In another comment below I've suggested other, more respectful, platforms: "Blogs/journals/conferences not specifically for supporting women/editorials/radio shows/record a podcast. Write a manifesto for crying out loud."