Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

Old subthreads

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

Postby Skep tickle » Mon Jan 21, 2013 8:19 pm  •  [Post 1201]

Tristan wrote:
welch wrote:...Which is honestly more misogynistic, me calling watson a cunt for her dick move, or Laden trying to convince everyone that women, as a gender, are fundamentally helpless, and cannot, can. not. function without all teh menz protecting their poor helpless selves at all times? I said something rude about one person, Laden is not implying, he is directly saying that women are completely unable to fend for themselves unless men are there to protect and defend them.

HOW THE FUCK IS MY STATMENT MISOGYNISTIC AND HIS SOME FUCKING BASTION OF FEMINISM AND EMPOWERMENT? HOW THE FUCK DOES THAT WORK, BECAUSE I REALLY WANT SOMEONE TO EXPLAIN IT TO ME IN A WAY THAT ISN'T COMPLETE BULLSHIT.

Over and over, PeeZus, Laden, thimbledick and all the rest tell women "no, no, it's not your fault. You're not capable of handling this. You just stay there, and let us men handle the evil world, and well tell you when it's safe", and the worst part, the fucking really vile worst part about it is that Ophelia and Jen and Watson and all the rest line up to fucking thank them for being so fucking enlightened.

Yet, it's people like me, who have spent no small amount of time teaching women that they are *not* helpless, not emotionally, mentally, or physically, that they not only can handle the world, but they *should* handle the world as equals, that they don't need me or anyone else to defend them, because they are all competent fucking adults, able to defend themselves...we are the bad people.

because we said "cunt".

There are a lot of misogynists in the atheist/skeptic movement. The problem is, just like all the right-wingers who get busted sucking strange cock after railing against "teh gai", the true misogynists are the ones painting themselves as the white knights.


No, I'm not going to apologise for not using the spoiler tag in quoting you. That was too fucking magnificent to be hidden.

Hopefully I didn't mess up the quote attributions in cutting this down a bit.

Observation on patronizing comments by Lousy Canuck, posted at http://www.slymepit.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?p=52751#p52751 (see esp the last couple of lines):

Skep tickle wrote:
d4m10n wrote:The folks at FtB might not be too strong on original thinking, but they know a good idea when they see one:
http://freethoughtblogs.com/lousycanuck ... ecularism/


From Jason's post:
I know that every one of the women speaking at Women In Secularism are great thinkers, great speakers, and deserve to be on stage at any convention. The necessity for them to speak is obvious, so giving them a stage is the best way to encourage this.

"Every one of the women speak[ers]....deserve to be on stage at any convention"... I'm sure he meant that well, but it can't literally be true & thus comes across as patronizing, IMO.

"Giving them a stage"... hmm. Presumably inadvertent but still it comes across as reinforcing Teh Patriarchy. ...
Skep tickle
Factotum Zebra
 
Posts: 5357
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2012 1:04 am

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

Postby welch » Mon Jan 21, 2013 8:20 pm  •  [Post 1202]

BAAHAHAHAHAAH...PeeZus tries to burn me, and fails:

http://freethoughtblogs.com/amilliongod ... ment-32266

welch wrote:
PeeZus wrote:And Welch listed one. One, who we kicked out of FtB despite the fact that he was and is a personal friend to some of us. We stuck to our principles. You cannot possibly say we support his actions when we made the most severe possible sanction against him.

You bozos can’t say the same.


Last I checked, the set of “company you keep” would include the set of “personal friend(s)”.

It helps, it really, really helps, if when trying to prove me wrong, you don’t prove my points for me. Perhaps you should wander over to the English Department at UMinn, and see if there’s a student available to intern for you, so that you might be taught some of these basic concepts.
welch
Grumpy, grumpy grape
 
Posts: 9206
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 5:05 am

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

Postby Lsuoma » Mon Jan 21, 2013 8:20 pm  •  [Post 1203]

erikthebasshole wrote:Women turn in to “invisible pixels” when a slymepitter is around. They will attack them, slur them, but they do everything they can to avoid talking directly to them.


Hey SN, Abbie, sacha, Renee, fascination, Vicky, etc., etc. (apologies for not listing everyone, and deliberately ignoring Tammy Strop Teenager): how do you like THEM "invisible pixels", eh?
Lsuoma
Fascist Tit
 
Posts: 8061
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 6:58 pm
Location: Pacific NW

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

Postby Cunning Punt » Mon Jan 21, 2013 8:24 pm  •  [Post 1204]

Metalogic42 wrote:http://freethoughtblogs.com/butterfliesandwheels/2013/01/why-so-fussed/

TLDR: blah blah blah look someone else is being harassed too! Michael Shermer! blah blah blah.

However, she conveniently omits the last section of the article she's talking about:

Mary Beard wrote:I'm outing this because I have a thick skin and, in the end, speculation on the size of my vagina doesn't move me half as much as worrying about the next chapter of my book I'm supposed to write. But then I'm lucky.

That's the last blog I shall write on this, dont worry. But I wanted to have my say.


Michael Shermer please note. Get this kind of shit every day for going on two years and it becomes very tempting to stop appearing in public and contributing to political debate – which is the goal.


What has Michael Shermer got to do with this? How would an awareness of this kind of thing (which I'm sure he already knows goes on) moderate the position he took in his last article?
Cunning Punt
Best Post Evah!!!
Best Post Evah!!!
 
Posts: 1335
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2012 11:50 am

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

Postby welch » Mon Jan 21, 2013 8:25 pm  •  [Post 1205]

Lsuoma wrote:
erikthebasshole wrote:Women turn in to “invisible pixels” when a slymepitter is around. They will attack them, slur them, but they do everything they can to avoid talking directly to them.


Hey SN, Abbie, sacha, Renee, fascination, Vicky, etc., etc. (apologies for not listing everyone, and deliberately ignoring Tammy Strop Teenager): how do you like THEM "invisible pixels", eh?


Here's some shit invisible pixels love: [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]
welch
Grumpy, grumpy grape
 
Posts: 9206
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 5:05 am

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

Postby Metalogic42 » Mon Jan 21, 2013 8:30 pm  •  [Post 1206]

@welch:

You post at 1184 is fucking spectacular. Bravo. And perfectly timed too, because this is also awesome:

[spoiler][youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJKsLSWoFWg[/youtube][/spoiler]

cunning punt wrote:What has Michael Shermer got to do with this? How would an awareness of this kind of thing (which I'm sure he already knows goes on) moderate the position he took in his last article?


Cause he's Michael Shermer. Just like the slymepit is responsible for every instance of harassment or threat, everything is relevant to Michael Shermer now.
Metalogic42
.
.
 
Posts: 1252
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2012 11:56 am

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

Postby Skep tickle » Mon Jan 21, 2013 8:35 pm  •  [Post 1207]

welch wrote:BAAHAHAHAHAAH...PeeZus tries to burn me, and fails:

http://freethoughtblogs.com/amilliongod ... ment-32266

welch wrote:
PeeZus wrote:And Welch listed one. One, who we kicked out of FtB despite the fact that he was and is a personal friend to some of us. We stuck to our principles. You cannot possibly say we support his actions when we made the most severe possible sanction against him.

You bozos can’t say the same.


Last I checked, the set of “company you keep” would include the set of “personal friend(s)”.

It helps, it really, really helps, if when trying to prove me wrong, you don’t prove my points for me. Perhaps you should wander over to the English Department at UMinn, and see if there’s a student available to intern for you, so that you might be taught some of these basic concepts.

Good posts there. But aren't you violating your own advice not to engage them on their turf? (Presumably to correct what they attributed to you, but still.)

I'm getting a little confused about the invisible pixels thing. I thought that referred to

[spoiler]your dick
:rimshot:[/spoiler]
Skep tickle
Factotum Zebra
 
Posts: 5357
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2012 1:04 am

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

Postby Pitchguest » Mon Jan 21, 2013 8:35 pm  •  [Post 1208]

Holy shit.

julian wrote:
All she said was “guys don’t do that” (which looked to me like a reasonable, positive, gentle piece of advice.) Anyone who is prompted by that innocuous little statement to run off and join Paul Elam’s “He-man Woman Haters Club” has some issues to begin with, don’t you think?


I think that’s two different problems.

You have how dismissive Watson and others have been to concerns about some feminist positions, you have how uncharitable many of us have been and you have the frequent insistence that everyone should regard themselves as feminist. (which goes back to ignoring the many legitimate some people may have)

That as been very alienating towards people. It’s pushed them away from skepchick, away from some of the blogs at FtB and away from the frontline fights.


Did julian take the red pill?
Pitchguest
.
.
 
Posts: 3676
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 4:44 pm

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

Postby justinvacula » Mon Jan 21, 2013 8:37 pm  •  [Post 1209]

New from 'Lousy Canuck'

Update 3: Wow. In less than 24 hours, you folks made my goal. In the intervening hours while I was indisposed with my day job, you’ve donated a grand total of $1002. Which means I am, absolutely, positively, without a doubt…
going to Women In Secualarism 2!
Thank you. All of you. This is incredible.
I have to go talk to Amy now and ask her how best to handle the overflow. I’ll hang onto the money til I get my own flights and tickets sorted out, but then I’ll plow every cent of the overflow into making sure someone else gets to go too.


Cool. Hopefully we can meet there and have a recorded discussion.
justinvacula
.
.
 
Posts: 1748
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 1:48 pm
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

Postby ReneeHendricks » Mon Jan 21, 2013 8:47 pm  •  [Post 1210]

Lsuoma wrote:
erikthebasshole wrote:Women turn in to “invisible pixels” when a slymepitter is around. They will attack them, slur them, but they do everything they can to avoid talking directly to them.


Hey SN, Abbie, sacha, Renee, fascination, Vicky, etc., etc. (apologies for not listing everyone, and deliberately ignoring Tammy Strop Teenager): how do you like THEM "invisible pixels", eh?


LOL! Where was this said??
ReneeHendricks
.
.
 
Posts: 2244
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 10:48 am
Location: Kent, WA

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

Postby welch » Mon Jan 21, 2013 8:48 pm  •  [Post 1211]

Skep tickle wrote:
welch wrote:BAAHAHAHAHAAH...PeeZus tries to burn me, and fails:

http://freethoughtblogs.com/amilliongod ... ment-32266

welch wrote:
PeeZus wrote:And Welch listed one. One, who we kicked out of FtB despite the fact that he was and is a personal friend to some of us. We stuck to our principles. You cannot possibly say we support his actions when we made the most severe possible sanction against him.

You bozos can’t say the same.


Last I checked, the set of “company you keep” would include the set of “personal friend(s)”.

It helps, it really, really helps, if when trying to prove me wrong, you don’t prove my points for me. Perhaps you should wander over to the English Department at UMinn, and see if there’s a student available to intern for you, so that you might be taught some of these basic concepts.

Good posts there. But aren't you violating your own advice not to engage them on their turf? (Presumably to correct what they attributed to you, but still.)

I'm getting a little confused about the invisible pixels thing. I thought that referred to

[spoiler]your dick
:rimshot:[/spoiler]



aviwhateverthe fuck seems to not be engaging in mass banning. So for now, in specific instances, I'll comment if I think there's a point. it's also a test of a sort. Do they live up to their own standards. Thus far, few have. If that specific site continues to play by its own rules, good for him, he's an exception to the FTB rule, and should be commended for it.

Also, like most things, it's more of a guideline than a law.
welch
Grumpy, grumpy grape
 
Posts: 9206
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 5:05 am

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

Postby welch » Mon Jan 21, 2013 8:49 pm  •  [Post 1212]

justinvacula wrote:New from 'Lousy Canuck'

Update 3: Wow. In less than 24 hours, you folks made my goal. In the intervening hours while I was indisposed with my day job, you’ve donated a grand total of $1002. Which means I am, absolutely, positively, without a doubt…
going to Women In Secualarism 2!
Thank you. All of you. This is incredible.
I have to go talk to Amy now and ask her how best to handle the overflow. I’ll hang onto the money til I get my own flights and tickets sorted out, but then I’ll plow every cent of the overflow into making sure someone else gets to go too.


Cool. Hopefully we can meet there and have a recorded discussion.



Don't hold your breath.
welch
Grumpy, grumpy grape
 
Posts: 9206
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 5:05 am

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

Postby Cunning Punt » Mon Jan 21, 2013 8:54 pm  •  [Post 1213]

[ img ]

Who's next, Eric Clapton?
Cunning Punt
Best Post Evah!!!
Best Post Evah!!!
 
Posts: 1335
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2012 11:50 am

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

Postby Lsuoma » Mon Jan 21, 2013 9:03 pm  •  [Post 1214]

ReneeHendricks wrote:
Lsuoma wrote:
erikthebasshole wrote:Women turn in to “invisible pixels” when a slymepitter is around. They will attack them, slur them, but they do everything they can to avoid talking directly to them.


Hey SN, Abbie, sacha, Renee, fascination, Vicky, etc., etc. (apologies for not listing everyone, and deliberately ignoring Tammy Strop Teenager): how do you like THEM "invisible pixels", eh?


LOL! Where was this said??

I picked it up from welch's post here: viewtopic.php?f=31&t=237&start=1125#p53528

Don't have the original URL, so I assume that welch is not making a dishonest post.
Lsuoma
Fascist Tit
 
Posts: 8061
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 6:58 pm
Location: Pacific NW

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

Postby Zenspace » Mon Jan 21, 2013 9:07 pm  •  [Post 1215]

Skep tickle wrote:
rocko2466 wrote:As requested by MetaLogic. Another dramatic reading.
This time of a comment on A+ by Flewellyn.

Feedback and requests appreciated. This took a fuckload more time than I anticipated.

[youtube]fgNH6GT6auo[/youtube]

Well done!


Really well done. Wow, worlds better than the previous. No critiques at all. Well acted out - caught the drama perfectly in fact, excellent sound effects and soundtrack. Not even a nit picky nit on this one!
Zenspace
.
.
 
Posts: 923
Joined: Sun Dec 23, 2012 12:13 pm

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

Postby Pitchguest » Mon Jan 21, 2013 9:14 pm  •  [Post 1216]

I wrote on this avicenna's blog, probably the only blog left where I'm not banned,

[spoiler]
Pitchguest wrote:
All she said was “guys don’t do that” (which looked to me like a reasonable, positive, gentle piece of advice.) Anyone who is prompted by that innocuous little statement to run off and join Paul Elam’s “He-man Woman Haters Club” has some issues to begin with, don’t you think?


For people who are “enraged” by misrepresentations and elisions, it’s curious that you should ignore the entire context of the furore regarding Elevatorgate and just sum it up with four innocuous words. You and I both know (or actually I’m not sure you do now) that it wasn’t just about those four words, and I believe I told you this back on YouTube. It was a couple of weeks more until the shit hit the fan and most of the shit-stirring came from the community you endorse, what’s now called Freethought Blogs. PZ Myers, Stephanie Zvan, Ophelia Benson and so on at the forefront to make it more than an innocuous event, with four innocuous words, that was harmless and not a big deal at all — even according to Watson herself.

However, because some people took offense to Watson’s use of “sexualising” in her video and yes, the offer for coffee, Watson also decided to stir the pot. Because drama and blog hits go well together, don’tcha know. This is well documented and the documentation can be found exactly where I told you to look the last time. That is, unless you still reject evidence given to you and think it’s some kind of propaganda – or perhaps you’re afraid that you’re so weakwilled, you’ll suddenly transform yourself into a misogynist upon viewing its vile contents, and that to get rid of it you’ll have to subject yourself to some hideous form of therapy. Like that scene in Clockwork Orange.

Anyway, it’s amusing that the commenters here eagerly make empty assertions about members of the Slymepit allegedly making a wide berth around women (despite the fact that many on the ‘pit are married to women, women they care for and many of the members on the ‘pit are women [Or pardon, should that be 'chillgirls' or 'sister punishers'? 'Gender traitors'? I'm not privy to the preferred nomenclature].)

The Slymepit is, of course, not the misogynist, sexist, racist, callously murderous and acid-slinging haven many members here are keen to assume. It’s nothing like it at all.

There is the occasional swearword bandied about (although I’m told that swearwords are not exactly foreign here, either – especially not the word ‘fuck’) and maybe a bit of gender-neutral slurs (since they’re not used to slander anyone because of their gender) but other than that, our views of social justice, women’s rights are similar to yours. Not exactly the same, obviously. We kind of want women to be treated as adults and equals and not the professional, helpless victims that many of you infer they should be.

Indeed, I thought I knew the depths of censorship and political correctness by the news networks, but I was wrong. The regulars at FTB have taught me that the depths of censorship and political correctness knows no bounds.
[/spoiler]

link: http://freethoughtblogs.com/amilliongod ... ment-32317

(blockquote fail, so remember everything past "don't you think?" is me.)
Pitchguest
.
.
 
Posts: 3676
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 4:44 pm

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

Postby acathode » Mon Jan 21, 2013 9:18 pm  •  [Post 1217]

Apples wrote:As aware as I am of PZ's cavernous deficits (several porcupines could fit with room left over for a WCoA or two), I'm still amazed at his strategic blunders. He's all about engaging the "trolls" -- which works if you can ban them. Then, even if they're smarter than you, you can ban them quick and let your fuckwit-bots continue to fap and shadow-box for a few dozen or hundred more comments. With the 'Pit, however, he mentions it on a fucking daily basis -- but he has no ability to influence or suppress anything about this place, and he never offers a shred of evidence for his claims about what goes on here. Why the fuck does he think this weird little single-thread forum with no moderation (thank you Lsuoma, and ERV) has 500 registered members and includes at least two former fucking FTB bloggers??!! Every time he talks about the incredible vileness (uh ... citation needed) of this place, he inspires a few more fence-sitters to check it out. And when they notice that he has ... um ... slightly ... lied about the people and the content here, whereas 'Pitters can cite every fucking freethoughtblog felony, chapter-and-verse, and give people links to confirm the details for themselves ... how does he think this is going to turn out? Moron.
Maybe because he have very little interest in the fence-sitters, and instead primarily is focusing on the "true believers"?

After this 1+ year of demagoguing and burning burning bridges, it's doubtful there are even that many fence-sitters left for him to convince, what he have left primarily is the small clique of loyal acolytes and true believers who won't ever bother checking any facts for themselves. That it makes him look like a moron to anyone who bothers to check facts isn't an issue any longer, it becomes more important to rile his flock up against the vile and dangerous Enemy.

It really do remind a bit of a small cult. That the cult leader looks like a lunatic to the outside world isn't that much of an issue for him, as long as the actual cult members keep their critical faculties turned off and gobble up everything he says and does. For the cult leader, keeping that power and blind trust over the already convinced is more important than to get any new members, and few things makes groups unite under a "great leader" than a threat from the outside.
Concoct a vile and powerful Satan looking to destroy your group, and the members will not only unite under you, but become even more ready to eat your bullshit, and even more hostile towards any outside influence. It's the perfect tool for any demagogue to solidify their power and influence.

So expect Myers and the rest to keep ramping it up, their lies will only get more and more outrageous and their narrative will only get more and more shameless. 2013 will be a great year for lulz and drama...

Also, another thing you'll have to consider is that Myers most likely considers anyone who's still sitting on the fence as a misogynistic slimepitter anyway, after all, his side is the good guys, it's the side that considers women to be human beings, and the other side is the evil guys, the side that considers women to be fuck toys. Obviously, anyone who have problem choosing between the good guys and the evil guys, must themselves be evil.

ps. Love the dramatic reading of the A+ drama! Very well made, both the actual reading and the music/effects!
acathode
.
.
 
Posts: 888
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2012 7:46 am

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

Postby Pitchguest » Mon Jan 21, 2013 9:18 pm  •  [Post 1218]

rocko2466 wrote:As requested by MetaLogic. Another dramatic reading.
This time of a comment on A+ by Flewellyn.

Feedback and requests appreciated. This took a fuckload more time than I anticipated.

[youtube]fgNH6GT6auo[/youtube]


Hahahahahahahahaha

Be honest, rocko, in how many takes did you bust up laughing? :lol:
Pitchguest
.
.
 
Posts: 3676
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 4:44 pm

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

Postby ConcentratedH2O, OM » Mon Jan 21, 2013 9:34 pm  •  [Post 1219]

Lsuoma wrote:Q: What do you call an Indian lesbian?
A: Minjeeta.


I literally HAHAOL'ed.

Minjeeta.
ConcentratedH2O, OM
.
.
 
Posts: 5272
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2012 9:51 pm

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

Postby BarnOwl » Mon Jan 21, 2013 9:35 pm  •  [Post 1220]

Cunning Punt wrote:Who's next, Eric Clapton?


On Freethought Blogs
At PZ's place
Dread banhammer.
Disagreement?
No more comments!
You've been dungeoned.
BarnOwl
.
.
 
Posts: 3242
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 5:18 pm
Location: The wrong trouser of Time

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

Postby Skep tickle » Mon Jan 21, 2013 9:37 pm  •  [Post 1221]

Lsuoma wrote:
ReneeHendricks wrote:
Lsuoma wrote:
erikthebasshole wrote:Women turn in to “invisible pixels” when a slymepitter is around. They will attack them, slur them, but they do everything they can to avoid talking directly to them.


Hey SN, Abbie, sacha, Renee, fascination, Vicky, etc., etc. (apologies for not listing everyone, and deliberately ignoring Tammy Strop Teenager): how do you like THEM "invisible pixels", eh?


LOL! Where was this said??

I picked it up from welch's post here: viewtopic.php?f=31&t=237&start=1125#p53528

Don't have the original URL, so I assume that welch is not making a dishonest post.


It's from the comments here (TW link is to Pharyngula):
http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2013/01/20/relief-for-the-heartsick/
Skep tickle
Factotum Zebra
 
Posts: 5357
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2012 1:04 am

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

Postby Reap » Mon Jan 21, 2013 9:47 pm  •  [Post 1222]

Louis wrote:Sorry for the delay, work was required to assuage my guilt. So now to 2).

(Does it show that the lab is shut for the day because of the snow {pa-fucking-thetic} and so I am stuck at home doing paperwork and trying like a motherfucker to procrastinate the day away and not do it? Don't worry, I'll do my work, I just thought a little fun with coffee might amuse me. Is that really such a sin?)

a) Poor presentation of pitter posters:

I can understand that if the Pitter Posters on Pharyngula (try saying that 3 times fast after 20 pints) are a self selecting bunch of arseholes, or if PZ and his Wicked Ways are making them look like arseholes when they are really paragons of virtue and wonder, then sure, GIGO (garbage in, garbage out). I'm not sure that I know if either is the case, or if something else is the case. I'm here aren't I? Believe it or not I'm willing to be convinced of a wide variety of things. I will confess that the majority of my...."welcome"....has been disappointingly dull, mostly pointless, and exactly what I would have expected if PZ's characterisation was correct. You might not like that, but hey, it's MY lived experience! ;-) (I did like that joke by the way! Who made it? I hope it was you, I laughed.)

Sorry, sorry, I'll be serious.

I'm here for my own benefit, to sate my curiosity. I saw some post about acid throwing on the side bar at FtB, clicked out of curiosity, read, posted something sarcastic, read PZ's post, thought to myself "I wonder if the pit people are really gloating away?" so I came for a look. I then went back to Pharyngula and posted some rambling comment, which I think I'll stand by for now, and deliberated about creating an account here under my real ID (can't be bothered with sock puppets) and see if my initial impressions were correct. So far....hmmm....they seem to be somewhat correct in some cases, not so much in others. Pretty much what any sensible person would have guessed, right?

As for which 'pitters I have a low opinion of, which a higher opinion of, and the same question as applied to Pharynguloids, I won't say. Not because I'm afraid to, or above that, but because I think it is irrelevant and childish. I can do irrelevant and childish if I want to, but I don't want to. Is that really such a crime? Oh and I have fuck all clue about Renee or probably most of the gripes. Not because I'm some hideous blinkered fool, but simply because I don't have unlimited time/effort to expend on following every tiny thing in what I see (perhaps wrongly, perhaps rightly) as tiresome interblog drama. So I skip 90% of it. I am, however, exceedingly keen and willing to look at evidence. As opposed to being exceedingly NOT keen and willing to be vilified for not immediately sharing your party line upon entry...wait, isn't that another criticism you chaps and chappesses have of FtB? Oooops! Physicians heal thyselves it seems!

I'd rather find out if this claim that 'pitters are horrendously caricatured by PZ et al is true for myself, best way to do that? Jump in and see. It might amaze you to know that, yes, whilst I am an Evil Horde Member Pharynguloid Wicked Person and All Round Bad Egg, and yes, whilst I like plenty of the posters that most upset many of you, I'm okay with deciding things for myself thanks. I haven't posted on Pharyngula about my Sooper Sekrit Mission To Convert Teh Heathens because that's not what this is, I'm satisfying my curiosity whether anyone wants to believe that or not. When that's done, we'll see. I might post again, I might not. It's not that big a deal to me. Sorry if that offends you for some reason. It's not that big a deal to me that some benighted fools like soccer not rugby or that they go to church. I really don't care. I do care if they tell me I should like soccer or die, or I should obey the strictures of their church in my private life. They're free to criticise me for being ignorant of the beautiful game (I am) or that I am, by their standards, a terrible wicked heathen (I am), that's the joy of free speech, they get to disagree with me and I with them.

Should I bold that last bit? I'm pretty sure, based on a number of posts from a variety of people that that point escapes a lot of folk here. Hell it escapes a lot of folk everywhere! It used to escape me until I had it beaten into me with a clue by four.

b) ZOMG evil slymepitter and misrepresentations on FtB/wherever as being THE issue/muzzling of dissenting opinion/critique:

Since this seems closely tied to what ThreeFlangedJavis is talking about, I'll skip it for now and deal with it in that post.

c) PZ banning folks quickly/pre-emptively:

I don't have a blog and probably never will have one. I've helped moderate the odd message board in the dim and distant past, but work etc. Yadda yadda yadda. So my views on how to manage a million+ hits a whenever blog are probably not very insightful. Would I manage Pharyngula the same as PZ? Well *I* am not PZ, so trivially and obviously probably not. Do I like his particular policies? I think he's reasonably lenient in places, strict in others, to be frank it doesn't bother me. It doesn't affect me much because I'm unlikely to go on a racist/sexist/homophobic/trolling/creationist/whatever rant, i.e. I am unlikely to do the things he typically bans people for. But that's hardly the controversial bit now is it?

Do I support his blanket 'pitter ban? Yes, in the sense that it is his blog and he can do what the fuck he likes. No, in the sense that it probably wouldn't be how I would handle it, but then I don't know how I'd handle it, I've never been there. I don't look at a blog like someone's living room, or a wide open field where anyone can do whatever, I look at a blog rather like a pub. PZ is the landlord of the Pharyngula Tentacles (can't be Arms can it?). He gets to run his pub his way. If the majority of his punters were Manchester United fans (and remember I know nothing about soccer, so I am picking two teams with a local derby at random) and the majority of the Manchester City fans who came in were bothersome, or excited the more....intemperate....Manchester United fans who were regulars in the pub, I might ban openly obvious Man City fans. Just for some peace and fucking quiet and not having my pub bust up every two minutes. I sympathise with PZ a bit because he doesn't have a team of helpers to clean the shite of the ceiling in his blog, he's got a job, a family, a side-effort as a prominent public speaker etc, managing the blog is an added (voluntary) burden. I'm not worried about him managing it his way, posting what interests him (some of which intersects with what interests me) and going about his day.

Now PZ is not stopping anyone drinking in other pubs, he's not banning people from alcohol, he's not saying that other landlords and landladies cannot have Manchester City only pubs, or pubs where the fans mix or pubs dedicated to advanced lesbian basket weaving. He makes the rules for his pub.

"But aaaaaaahhhhhh!" I hear you cry, "The Pharyngula Tentacles is a BIG pub, and PZ an influential landlord in the town, and I don't like Manchester United or their brand of football. I want to have my brand of football represented, and when PZ throws his weight around other pubs start putting in No Man City policies.", fair enough. What's stopping you set up your own pub? Or one of the deliberate fan clash pubs? PZ didn't parachute into the Pope of Atheism chair or something. He's not the fucking pope of atheism for starters, there isn't one. He can't stop you doing anything. He has precisely zero power outside of Pharyngula to stop you saying exactly what you want.

Anyone in any prominent position is going to get critics. Are you really saying that every critic is worth engaging with the same degree of intellectual effort? REALLY? I think we all know that's just not true. I don't need homoeopaths at chemistry conferences with me. It might make them feel all warm and cuddly and included and isn't that special, but what they do is effectively raise the noise to signal ratio in the bad way. So applications from homoeopaths to speak at chemistry conferences will get (politely) refused. Homoeopathy is well refuted dreck. Utter bullshit. Why treat it any differently? So if I was to set up a blog (unlikely) about chemistry and homoeopath commenters came along and started berating me for not dealing with their criticisms, I'd say "Damn right. Homoeopathy is well refuted dreck, if you don't know that by now it's not my problem.". If I was feeling kind I might engage a few and provide them with the basic tenets of a chemistry lesson or explain a dose response curve to them. Not ALL critics are worthy of attention.

Now SOME critics ARE worthy of attention, and you all obviously feel you fall into this latter category. Fine and dandy, I'm genuinely pleased you do feel that way, I genuinely hope it's the case. That way I get to deal with a GENUINE controversy and not the endless playground politicking that I think I've made clear bores me fucking stiff. So, to pick an antique chemistry controversy, if we were talking, 60 or 70 years ago, about non-classical carbocations and someone came up with some data, and somebody else had some other data, that would be an interesting and genuine controversy, until the data fell one way or 'tother and the matter was settled.

Pick another example, to do with evolutionary biology, the relative importances of selection and drift in the fixing of a specific phenotype within a population, this would not be an issue settled by getting some creationists in. Evolutionary biologists need only apply.

Be aware that creationists think their criticisms are valuable and worth listening to. I'm not saying yours aren't, but that even as sceptics we have to be aware of our own biases. I'm here challenging mine to some small degree, even though in days gone by I might have had much more sympathy with you than with the Pharynguloids. I changed my mind though. Why? It might be because I am {insert some wickedness here} or because they introduced me to writers etc that made a compelling case or because of something else. But change my mind I did.

Annnd this is getting close to ThreeFlangedJavis' point and b) so I'll halt THIS teal deer in its tracks and start on that one.


You know it was interesting to read and learn about how you don't really care about what anyone else is concerned about. To you it's all crying and petty complaining. I would assume this is a result of your conceit which you seem to consider your best trait, that's what makes you so humble right?

Your rationalization of PZ and his banning is interesting also. You are correct he can ban whomever he wants, it is his blog. When someone who claims to be a skeptic and champion of a new, better world where people are treated equally marks a forum of over 500 as unworthy of any consideration, there is a problem. You seem to think you are a smart fella, why can't you get that? Not only that but he attacks individuals based on hearsay and gossip. His attacks are character assassinations. He is childish, unreasonable, and unfair. Who is he to judge people and publicly declare them socially unacceptable types? You mentioned how many readers PZ has. How many of those people are going to take PZ at his word? How is it okay that I have to defend myself from accusations and claims PZ has made about my character when he doesn't even know me and has never once shown any interest in dialogue with any of the people he has attacked? After attacking these people he then bans them if they try to defend themselves, followed by more shit talking and libel.

Now people who don't know any better will read PZ's blog and learn what a terrible person I am. Then when/if they hear my name in the future they will think "Oh yea that guy I heard about him, he is a racist."
This isn't just one instance it has happened over and over. At this point I know good and well PZ is a liar from the shit he has said about me. What are the odds this is the first time? I wouldn't be surprised if PZ has been guilty of bullshit for years. Some people would absolutely agree based on their own personal interactions. But nevermind that shit Louis that is just your good buddy PZ being his jovial self. You defend him by acting as if no one gives any weight to his words. Sure I can say whatever I want on my own blog or in public area not controlled by PZ. Why should I have to defend myself against his accusations? What if the shit he says starts to cause me trouble in real life? What if a couple people in my local atheist group read PZ's shit blog and take what he says as fact? You ever had your character tarnished unfairly Louis? No? Well learn how to have empathy or shut up. Or is the answer yes? Didn't have a problem with it then huh? Made you feel okay did it? Well I don't like it and I won't sit and allow it to go on. If PZ wasn't being such a lazy, lying, one-sided dick he would have less trouble with his comment section. Too bad he couldn't find anyone to help him moderate it (control freak?) I could go on but I have wasted just enough time to make my points I think

This crap you have posted above has just enough truth to give an impression of validity until you scratch the surface then all the puss comes running out. I'm going to assume for a minute you really are as smart as you think Louis. That would mean you are nothing more than a deceptive prick. I don't know which should shame you more, the way you present your side with no indication that you have one bit of and idea as to what the fuck you are talking about (see disconnect) or the level of self righteousness you wrap all your rhetoric in. You used to be like us but you are now learned and wiser than we. Give me a break. Whether it is a game or just plain stupidity I would suggest you stop for the sake of your dignity. Why trash it over a bunch of people you don't give a fuck about? Or you could just go on about your way ignoring me. I really don't give a shit, I have little use for deceptive individuals anyway.
Reap
.
.
 
Posts: 630
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2012 11:27 pm
Location: Reno Nevada

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

Postby ReneeHendricks » Mon Jan 21, 2013 9:52 pm  •  [Post 1223]

This whole "women turn in to 'invisible pixels'" thing is actually cracking me up. Time and again, as soon as *I* say something, I'm banned/blocked/ignored simply because I'm a Slymepit participant.
ReneeHendricks
.
.
 
Posts: 2244
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 10:48 am
Location: Kent, WA

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

Postby Mykeru » Mon Jan 21, 2013 9:55 pm  •  [Post 1224]

Reap wrote:Now people who don't know any better will read PZ's blog and learn what a terrible person I am.


No, what's really an outrage is how those goons keep giving you credit for half the shit I pull.
Mykeru
.
.
 
Posts: 4758
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 7:52 am

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

Postby Mykeru » Mon Jan 21, 2013 9:56 pm  •  [Post 1225]

ReneeHendricks wrote:This whole "women turn in to 'invisible pixels'" thing is actually cracking me up. Time and again, as soon as *I* say something, I'm banned/blocked/ignored simply because I'm a Slymepit participant.


It's for your own good Renee. Those totally non-sexist patriarchy fighters are just saving you from yourself.
Mykeru
.
.
 
Posts: 4758
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 7:52 am

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

Postby ReneeHendricks » Mon Jan 21, 2013 9:59 pm  •  [Post 1226]

Mykeru wrote:
ReneeHendricks wrote:This whole "women turn in to 'invisible pixels'" thing is actually cracking me up. Time and again, as soon as *I* say something, I'm banned/blocked/ignored simply because I'm a Slymepit participant.


It's for your own good Renee. Those totally non-sexist patriarchy fighters are just saving you from yourself.


Ahh. And here I thought it was because they simply like to hear themselves talk and pat each other on the back. Silly me.
ReneeHendricks
.
.
 
Posts: 2244
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 10:48 am
Location: Kent, WA

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

Postby Michael J » Mon Jan 21, 2013 10:01 pm  •  [Post 1227]

Metalogic42 wrote:
Louis wrote:When used as insults terms like "bitch" and "twat" and "cunt" are inseparable from sexism. They are unambiguous negative referents to feminine/female as negative. Incidentally, "prick" and "cock" are inseparable from sexism too for the identical reasons. In all cases that is an act of sexism. There's a contextual difference which I'll get to later, but there's no difference inherent in the actual words in terms of sexism. They are reductive, they reduce a person to some perceived negative quality to do with their sex. That's sexism. Like the words "nigger" or "paki" used as insults are an unambiguous negative referent to race, and perceived negative qualities to do with race, are racist. Same mechanism.


This wasn't a response to me, but I have something quick to say about it anyway. If "cunt" is sexist because it reduces a person to some perceived negative quality to do with their sex, what about "asshole"? That reduces a person to some perceived negative quality to do with their GI tract, doesn't it?

------
@rocko: That dramatic reading was great!


What is hard for me is that in Australia cunt can be a term of affection as in "How 'r' ya goin' you old cunt"
Michael J
.
.
 
Posts: 909
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2012 10:42 pm
Location: Australia

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

Postby d4m10n » Mon Jan 21, 2013 10:03 pm  •  [Post 1228]

Louis,

I've got a question for you, or rather sort of a challenge.

1) Go back to Pharyngula and pick out a handful of substantive characterisations of what SlimePitters are and/or what they do.

2) Come back here and post them, with links.

3) Prove at least half of them to be reasonably accurate, using evidence from within the forum itself.

Good luck! If you win, I'll buy you lunch.
d4m10n
.
.
 
Posts: 1220
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 6:17 am
Location: OKC

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

Postby Skep tickle » Mon Jan 21, 2013 10:13 pm  •  [Post 1229]

Michael J wrote:
Metalogic42 wrote:
Louis wrote:When used as insults terms like "bitch" and "twat" and "cunt" are inseparable from sexism. ...


What is hard for me is that in Australia cunt can be a term of affection as in "How 'r' ya goin' you old cunt"

No, you are wrong. It is a horribly sexist term. Therefore it could never, ever be a term of affection.
[/FtB-Skepchick-A+ word police]
Skep tickle
Factotum Zebra
 
Posts: 5357
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2012 1:04 am

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

Postby Skep tickle » Mon Jan 21, 2013 10:14 pm  •  [Post 1230]

(sorry, minor quote fail)
Skep tickle
Factotum Zebra
 
Posts: 5357
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2012 1:04 am

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

Postby rocko2466 » Mon Jan 21, 2013 10:27 pm  •  [Post 1231]

Pitchguest wrote:
rocko2466 wrote:As requested by MetaLogic. Another dramatic reading.
This time of a comment on A+ by Flewellyn.

Feedback and requests appreciated. This took a fuckload more time than I anticipated.

[youtube]fgNH6GT6auo[/youtube]


Hahahahahahahahaha

Be honest, rocko, in how many takes did you bust up laughing? :lol:


None at all. This is serious business.
rocko2466
.
.
 
Posts: 707
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2013 9:56 pm

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

Postby pandora » Mon Jan 21, 2013 10:28 pm  •  [Post 1232]

Skep tickle wrote:
Michael J wrote:
Metalogic42 wrote:
Louis wrote:When used as insults terms like "bitch" and "twat" and "cunt" are inseparable from sexism. ...


What is hard for me is that in Australia cunt can be a term of affection as in "How 'r' ya goin' you old cunt"

No, you are wrong. It is a horribly sexist term. Therefore it could never, ever be a term of affection.
[/FtB-Skepchick-A+ word police]



Haha. I have to agree with Metalogic though. It's EXTREME USA PRIVILEGE to think cunt is a gendered insult of the worst kind. Well A+/FTB needs to check their privilege, because in the colonies cunt is a regular, multi-purpose word. No-one thinks of it in gendered terms. You can use it as an affectionate term, you can use it as an ironic insult, as a regular insult... never is anyone thinking about women at the time and that includes when women use it. "Shit cunt" is a good insult too.
pandora
.
.
 
Posts: 18
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2012 5:45 am

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

Postby rayshul » Mon Jan 21, 2013 10:33 pm  •  [Post 1233]

I've always liked fuck cunt. Although that's often within content, as said in the phrase, "What the fucking shit fuck cunt."
rayshul
.
.
 
Posts: 4145
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 3:00 am

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

Postby rayshul » Mon Jan 21, 2013 10:40 pm  •  [Post 1234]

I'm always think the people who try to control language or force the idea that it means something specific are ... this kinda guy.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/artic ... d=10860708
rayshul
.
.
 
Posts: 4145
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 3:00 am

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

Postby rayshul » Mon Jan 21, 2013 10:54 pm  •  [Post 1235]

I love it when people shit on Setar.

recursive prophet wrote: I do feel for Sun Princess

Setar wrote: um. can we please refer to people by the names they post as, not names they haven't given themselves? it's kind of disrespectful to assign someone a nickname all on your own.

not to mention, 'princess' is infantilizing as fuck, it's generally used to dismiss women's concerns. and that's getting a massive side-eye from me =/

recursive prophet wrote: My sincere apology to Sun Countess. I may even have made that same mistake before, but assure you it is owing to an aging mind and definitely not intended as an insult. It won't happen again.

Setar, do you realize you often have the least charitable view possible wrt the intentions of others? I think your assertion here about my attempting to infantilize Sun is the very kind of absurd, unwarranted supposition that causes this site to be mocked at so many other atheist and skeptic forums. You really should think about that and stop nitpicking the words of others.
rayshul
.
.
 
Posts: 4145
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 3:00 am

Re: W.C.O.A

Postby Gefan » Mon Jan 21, 2013 11:07 pm  •  [Post 1236]

sKepptiksowat wrote:White Cock Of Asia?

[ img ]


Shouldn't it be smaller?
Gefan
.
.
 
Posts: 2088
Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2012 3:55 pm
Location: In a handbasket, apparently.

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

Postby Gefan » Mon Jan 21, 2013 11:11 pm  •  [Post 1237]

John Greg wrote:
If Oolon were a moderately better writer, he'd be louis.


LOL. Spot on.


Possibly thanks to Oolon, I always hear Louis' posts in an English accent.
Gefan
.
.
 
Posts: 2088
Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2012 3:55 pm
Location: In a handbasket, apparently.

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

Postby Lost Moose » Mon Jan 21, 2013 11:25 pm  •  [Post 1238]

BarnOwl wrote:
Cunning Punt wrote:Who's next, Eric Clapton?

On Freethought Blogs
At PZ's place
Dread banhammer.
Disagreement?
No more comments!
You've been dungeoned.

HaHa, Oh wow, the original bridge (or whatever it is) works as well.

I'll wait in this place
where the sun never shines;
Wait in this place
where the shadows run from themselves.
:music-rockon:
Lost Moose
.
.
 
Posts: 45
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2012 7:26 pm

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

Postby HoneyWagon » Tue Jan 22, 2013 12:24 am  •  [Post 1239]

OMG, this is rich.

Apparently, WISCON is either run by misogynists or the patriarchy is preventing baby-sitting at this con.
Of all conferences, I would have thought THIS one would have childcare.

I guess they don't give a fuck about moms or something.

[ img ]

Who is Melody expecting a grant from?????
HoneyWagon
.
.
 
Posts: 589
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 11:35 am

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

Postby clownshoe » Tue Jan 22, 2013 12:34 am  •  [Post 1240]

Skep tickle wrote:
Michael J wrote:
Metalogic42 wrote:
Louis wrote:When used as insults terms like "bitch" and "twat" and "cunt" are inseparable from sexism. ...


What is hard for me is that in Australia cunt can be a term of affection as in "How 'r' ya goin' you old cunt"

No, you are wrong. It is a horribly sexist term. Therefore it could never, ever be a term of affection.
[/FtB-Skepchick-A+ word police]


You're a good cunt.
clownshoe
.
.
 
Posts: 200
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 6:57 pm

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

Postby Michael K Gray » Tue Jan 22, 2013 12:36 am  •  [Post 1241]

HoneyWagon wrote:OMG, this is rich.

Apparently, WISCON is either run by misogynists or the patriarchy is preventing baby-sitting at this con.
Of all conferences, I would have thought THIS one would have childcare.

I guess they don't give a fuck about moms or something.

http://i.imgur.com/nDLJo0k.png

Who is Melody expecting a grant from?????

The Richard Dawkins Foundation, of course!

Fuckin' hypo-fuckin-crites beyond kompare. Spit.
Michael K Gray
.
.
 
Posts: 2480
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 3:04 am
Location: Adelaide, South Australia

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

Postby Skep tickle » Tue Jan 22, 2013 12:44 am  •  [Post 1242]

Welch & Pitchguest each mentioned Avicenna (within the past page). I'd seen that name but didn't go looking. Male, I think. Went looking, now see some stuff there that looks interesting, notably:

(a) his controversial stance last fall on Home Births (in a post titled "It's Not Feminism Just Because It Claims to Empower Women") in which he/she was called a misogynist here (links to his FtB blog) by a commenter who did not then get banned (as he/she commented later in the thread), and

(b) his more recent blog post "You are Judged by the Company You Keep" here (links to his FtB blog), mentioned by Welch w/in past day here (and about which Justicar made a video). Avicenna says this in his opening post (I think there's a word missing from the first sentence here, probably "keep"):
...You are always judged by the company you keep and I have slowly come to notice that the company that many naysayers against Free Thought Blogs and the like are not acceptable. The argument one individual from the slymepit made was “free speech”, well we have free speech here.

Watch this. I think Atheism Plus is heavily mishandled and it’s pure utilisation of safe zones makes debate and discourse impossible. In addition it takes a very very protectionist attitude to both culture and a purely western attitude towards feminism which is simply not universal or applicable in every situation. However due to the lack of any actual method of discourse there is no way to create active change through it. It is unfortunately a pure academic form of feminism and is unsuitable for punching out gender discrepancies in third world nations. It’s participants have little actual experience in field work and from experience are unwilling to defer to anyone who is outside the sphere of their security nor were they willing to grasp that principles are great if you can afford to have them. I have even spoken out explicitly against their cultural/race aspect of their movement because a lot of it tries to paint culture with a big fuck off brush rather than realising individual nuance.

Oh look! It’s a stance I have stated before I moved here. At no point was I ever hassled by the “FTBullies”. In fact my interviewer was Stephanie Zvan and when I specifically mentioned my apprehension with Atheism Plus we discussed precisely the above statement.

Oh look it’s genuine criticism of the movement. I have also disagreed with people like Taslima on Prostitution and Ian Cromwell on race. But the thing is through it all we have been specific about what we dislike about the other’s work. We haven’t stooped to personal attacks (Although I did offer to have a “shout racial slurs at each other till we both lose” contest with Ian),

I am not part of A+, but neither am I in the camp of the Slymepit because of the company they keep.

Seems like a relatively frank evaluation of Atheism Plus forum. Great.

But other than Richard Carrier's blinders-on view of it, I'm not aware of any of the FtB bloggers appearing to claim or stand up for the Atheism Plus forum. The absence of vocal support for it has actually been pretty noticeable.

Jen might have spawned it, but she shoved it out to the doorstep and locked the door as soon as it was born. I've seen something like 4 posts from Greta at the A+ forum (she started the Justin Vacula petition thread in the forum, and some other thread about cooking, not sure what else). I haven't noticed posts from any other FtB bloggers there.

So, yay for free speech, but it's also not clear that they necessarily disagree with Avicenna; they just wouldn't say it out loud.

For bonus points, Avicenna could try giving his frank assessment of a couple of things at FtB, starting perhaps with PZ's commentariat. Just to test how free the speech is, in the company he keeps.
Skep tickle
Factotum Zebra
 
Posts: 5357
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2012 1:04 am

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

Postby clownshoe » Tue Jan 22, 2013 12:55 am  •  [Post 1243]

Skep tickle wrote:I haven't noticed posts from any other FtB bloggers there.


No, but would the A+ graphic on PZ's blog that links to http://outcampaign.org/ count as support?
clownshoe
.
.
 
Posts: 200
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 6:57 pm

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

Postby comslave » Tue Jan 22, 2013 1:09 am  •  [Post 1244]

somedumbguy wrote:Pharyngula is literally filled with tentacle rape.


Why yes, I'll have some.
[ img ]
comslave
.
.
 
Posts: 389
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2012 1:30 am

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

Postby comslave » Tue Jan 22, 2013 1:11 am  •  [Post 1245]

HoneyWagon wrote:OMG, this is rich.

Apparently, WISCON is either run by misogynists or the patriarchy is preventing baby-sitting at this con.
Of all conferences, I would have thought THIS one would have childcare.

I guess they don't give a fuck about moms or something.

[ img ]

Who is Melody expecting a grant from?????



Did she ask for one? Does Dawkins even know about this conference?
comslave
.
.
 
Posts: 389
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2012 1:30 am

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

Postby comslave » Tue Jan 22, 2013 1:13 am  •  [Post 1246]

Cunning Punt wrote:[ img ]

Who's next, Eric Clapton?



"banhammer hard"= being blocked on one of the fastest dying blogs on the internet. :lol: :lol: :lol:
comslave
.
.
 
Posts: 389
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2012 1:30 am

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

Postby Jimmy Russel » Tue Jan 22, 2013 1:40 am  •  [Post 1247]

comslave wrote:being blocked on one of the fastest dying blogs on the internet. :lol: :lol: :lol:


I know this is probably somewhat hyperbole, but is there any metrics to show this? It would be interesting and gratifying to know that place isn't the giant fort it appears to be.
Jimmy Russel
.
.
 
Posts: 22
Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2012 6:51 pm

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

Postby Phil_Giordana_FCD » Tue Jan 22, 2013 1:41 am  •  [Post 1248]

bhoytony wrote:I see Phil is lying low after inviting his friend to look down upon us from on high and deliver his wisdom on tablets of stone that we may gaze on them in awe.
Is Phil on another two-glasses-of-Baileys bender or is he just embarassed?


Neither embarassed nor drunk (I've stopped drinking again. It's an on-and-off thing).

I'm still catching up on a shitload of pages I've missed these last couple of days. I am not going to engage Louis on any of these subject, since we agreed to disagree quite some time ago, and I have nothing really new to contribute.

I have to admit that, knowing Louis as a friend I read those exchanges between Louis and the Pitters in a different light than usual, being (most probably unconsciously) more charitable with regard to his posts than I would otherwise be. In other words, I am biased. It doesn't mean I don't think some of the things Louis says are ignorant, bloody stupid, or just plain full of shit, but I prefer to read the interactions he has with other Pitters. No need for me to cluster the talk anymore than it already is.

So you guys can think all you want about Louis' character in light of his excursion here, but I will stand by what I previously said about him. I don't know, maybe you should have known him for as long as I have (since 2008 AE's AtBC) to get where he's coming from. What some of you might consider pompousness and smug patronizing, I've seen from being on his side of the argument, and it never bothered me at the time. It was efficient against IDists and creationists, and most of all it was entertaining and funny. I still read him like that, even on those issues where we strongly disagree. And I guess maybe that's what's going on with him WRT Myers.

Now, to be frank, nothing he says could sway my opinion of Myers and the most obnoxious commenters at Pharyngula. But to be franker, this is not exactly why I was hoping he'd come here in the first place.

Anyway, lot's of catch-up to do now...
Phil_Giordana_FCD
.
.
 
Posts: 10843
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 11:56 pm
Location: Nice, France

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

Postby VickyCaramel » Tue Jan 22, 2013 1:42 am  •  [Post 1249]

Lsuoma wrote:
erikthebasshole wrote:Women turn in to “invisible pixels” when a slymepitter is around. They will attack them, slur them, but they do everything they can to avoid talking directly to them.


Hey SN, Abbie, sacha, Renee, fascination, Vicky, etc., etc. (apologies for not listing everyone, and deliberately ignoring Tammy Strop Teenager): how do you like THEM "invisible pixels", eh?


invisible.jpg
(31.42 KiB) Downloaded 189 times


Boo!
VickyCaramel
.
.
 
Posts: 1305
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2013 11:24 am

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

Postby Reap » Tue Jan 22, 2013 1:54 am  •  [Post 1250]

Skep tickle wrote:
welch wrote:BAAHAHAHAHAAH...PeeZus tries to burn me, and fails:

http://freethoughtblogs.com/amilliongod ... ment-32266

welch wrote:
PeeZus wrote:And Welch listed one. One, who we kicked out of FtB despite the fact that he was and is a personal friend to some of us. We stuck to our principles. You cannot possibly say we support his actions when we made the most severe possible sanction against him.

You bozos can’t say the same.


Last I checked, the set of “company you keep” would include the set of “personal friend(s)”.

It helps, it really, really helps, if when trying to prove me wrong, you don’t prove my points for me. Perhaps you should wander over to the English Department at UMinn, and see if there’s a student available to intern for you, so that you might be taught some of these basic concepts.

Good posts there. But aren't you violating your own advice not to engage them on their turf? (Presumably to correct what they attributed to you, but still.)

I'm getting a little confused about the invisible pixels thing. I thought that referred to

[spoiler]your dick
:rimshot:[/spoiler]




yea Welch aren't you going against the .....nevermind I'm glad you are. On another note- Skep tickle check ur messages when you have a free moment will ya?
Reap
.
.
 
Posts: 630
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2012 11:27 pm
Location: Reno Nevada

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

Postby rayshul » Tue Jan 22, 2013 2:04 am  •  [Post 1251]

Jimmy Russel wrote:
comslave wrote:being blocked on one of the fastest dying blogs on the internet. :lol: :lol: :lol:


I know this is probably somewhat hyperbole, but is there any metrics to show this? It would be interesting and gratifying to know that place isn't the giant fort it appears to be.


People have pulled various stats for it - the only I know how to get would be on alexa.com although that's for all of FtB.
rayshul
.
.
 
Posts: 4145
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 3:00 am

Atheism (less) Child Care

Postby Michael K Gray » Tue Jan 22, 2013 2:05 am  •  [Post 1252]

This revelation that the Women in Skepticism conference is NOT going to have child-care facilities has blown my lid!
I mean, WTF?
Is it an oversight?
Was it planned this way?
Are the organisers selfish lamebrains?
Did they spend money on airfares and speaker's fees in lieu of even basic child-care?
I am truly staggered and stunned that self-professed feminists neglect this vital detail!

They have the audacity to slander Richard Dawkins, (neglecting the fact that he was the first to offer and fund child-care at secular meetings, before that poisonous parasite Beccy-boo-boos (spit) "came up" with the notion and claimed that he did it because of her, the lying cunt).

"We haven't got a grant yet" is the excuse of a clueless sociopath.

Again: WTF?
Michael K Gray
.
.
 
Posts: 2480
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 3:04 am
Location: Adelaide, South Australia

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

Postby rayshul » Tue Jan 22, 2013 2:10 am  •  [Post 1253]

I'm going to just sit and see how long it takes for Amy to start selling child-care ceramics in the shape of little babies to fund things.
rayshul
.
.
 
Posts: 4145
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 3:00 am

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

Postby Reap » Tue Jan 22, 2013 2:22 am  •  [Post 1254]

Gefan wrote:
John Greg wrote:
If Oolon were a moderately better writer, he'd be louis.


LOL. Spot on.


Possibly thanks to Oolon, I always hear Louis' posts in an English accent.


Fuckin aye to that
Reap
.
.
 
Posts: 630
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2012 11:27 pm
Location: Reno Nevada

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

Postby Michael K Gray » Tue Jan 22, 2013 2:24 am  •  [Post 1255]

rayshul wrote:I'm going to just sit and see how long it takes for Amy to start selling child-care ceramics in the shape of little babies to fund things.

Too late.
Etsy already have a range.
I bought this one a few years ago:
FÅ“tus in a jar necklace.
[ img ]
Michael K Gray
.
.
 
Posts: 2480
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 3:04 am
Location: Adelaide, South Australia

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

Postby Reap » Tue Jan 22, 2013 2:25 am  •  [Post 1256]

Mykeru wrote:
Reap wrote:Now people who don't know any better will read PZ's blog and learn what a terrible person I am.


No, what's really an outrage is how those goons keep giving you credit for half the shit I pull.

You don't take that as a compliment?? You owe me a podcast btw...what are ya, chicken?
Reap
.
.
 
Posts: 630
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2012 11:27 pm
Location: Reno Nevada

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

Postby cunt » Tue Jan 22, 2013 2:37 am  •  [Post 1257]

$210 to attend, an optional $85 dinner afterwards, and they're sitting on their hands waiting for someone (presumably RDF) to give them a grant.

Great stuff.
cunt
TheMudbrooker's Bitch
 
Posts: 2768
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2012 9:06 am

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

Postby Phil_Giordana_FCD » Tue Jan 22, 2013 2:40 am  •  [Post 1258]

ConcentratedH2O, OM wrote:
Lsuoma wrote:Back in 1997 the Paris police called a garage that specialized in British Leyland cars: they wanted to know how to get an engine out of a 1961 Princess.


Shit, yea. I've never heard that one. In fact, I think the worst one I've heard about that incident was your basic "What was the last thing that went through Diana's mind before she died...?".


What are the similarities between Lady Diana's car and a police car? In both of them, a drunk guy is driving, and there's an arab and a prostitute in the back. (now, that one is tasteless, racist and sexist. It's been going around in France since a couple weeks after the accident. I don't condone, just trying to stay in the spirit)

And a rape joke for future quotemining:

Best pickup line ever: -"here, does this rag smell of chloroform?"

Now, I'll get my coat...
Phil_Giordana_FCD
.
.
 
Posts: 10843
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 11:56 pm
Location: Nice, France

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

Postby Michael K Gray » Tue Jan 22, 2013 2:53 am  •  [Post 1259]

cunt wrote:$210 to attend, an optional $85 dinner afterwards, and they're sitting on their hands waiting for someone (presumably RDF) to give them a grant.
Great stuff.

I was joking about RDF giving them a grant for child-care.
Going by past performance, the "waiting for a grant" is a post hoc fabrication.
"Oh fark! You know what we liek totally forgot?"
"No."
"Farking CHILD CARE! The Slymepit will tear us to shreds if they catch wind of this!"
"I know. We'll say we are 'waiting' for funding or a grant or something, and that will provide plausible deniability for our Feminist Balls-up."
Michael K Gray
.
.
 
Posts: 2480
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 3:04 am
Location: Adelaide, South Australia

Re: Atheism (less) Child Care

Postby Notung » Tue Jan 22, 2013 3:01 am  •  [Post 1260]

Michael K Gray wrote:This revelation that the Women in Skepticism conference is NOT going to have child-care facilities has blown my lid!


My lid has been blown too. It really is beyond parody, isn't it?
Notung
.
.
 
Posts: 616
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:49 am

PreviousNext

Return to Past Misdeeds

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest