Dr. Isis was wronged, and improperly attacked on the internet for the situation.
She’s working to deal with whether to continue to write, and in what form . . .
I offered some information (links added here):
Lessons from my much more political years, and graduate study in rhetoric.
1. You know you’ve got a movement when opposition forms against you. That’s irritating, but it’s better than not having opposition, which means you’re failing to get your point across, most often.
2. Clear communication, especially writing, gets a response — sometimes not the response you expected or wanted, but a response. With practice, you can hone your message.
Used to be a couple of posters available to rhetoric students, both attributed to Plutarch’s Lives, a comparison of the Greek, Demosthenes, with the Roman, Cicero. The first, talking about the later man, said, “When Cicero spoke, the people said how well he spoke.”
The second said, “When Demosthenes spoke, the people cried, ‘Let us march!'”
Which man was the more effective orator, or rhetorician?
Effective writing makes people angry. That’s what it should do.
From 1945 on, countless scientists wrote about “potential harms to wildlife” from chemicals put on crops, and used for other purposes.
[In 1962] Rachel Carson wrote about chemicals, naming names — especially DDT — and described little robins writhing and twitching in their death throes. She’s credited with starting a movement. But before that, the chemical industry teamed up to run a $500,000 public relations campaign (in 1962!), claiming Carson was hysterical, unqualified, and wrong, perhaps a communist, but not anyone you’d want your children to be around. She calmly asked scientists to review her notes and find errors. They found none.
Tone? Truth comes in many tones. The wise seek it even if they don’t like the tone it takes at the moment.
How about your experience?