Periodic Table of Swearing

[Mykeru]

(A very nice, detailed and full of win post snipped for brevity)

The baboons would call that "woman hating", I guess. The PUAs would chide me for passing up an opportunity to get some. The Buddha would say the cause of pain is desire and I would say there aren't enough hours in the day to do what I want to do and put up with that.

And I would say that you did the right thing, and showed her that her actions and decisions have consequences, and that trying to change someone is not the path to a healthy relationship.

I would also say that the rest of your post was awesome, and mirrors my own opinions :clap:

I would say that a lot coming out of the MRM can be boiled down to self-agency. Not living your life for anyone else and that goes for women.

Mostly because women will hate you for it no matter what you do.

It works like this: A total loser is a guy who has spent his life trying to make women happy so he can have what he thinks is a normal relationship. You do that, however, and this describes me in my 20s, you end up spending so much time doing that, that you don't do anything else that's interesting. You aren't bringing anything to the table save good intentions. The guy who can honestly take it or leave it, is the one out doing interesting things that are praiseworthy and get noticed.

So the guy who has been trying to please, as if that would be rewarded in and of itself, isn't going to be rewarded for it.

I've been having an interesting experience with how that works with some women. My sister is staying with me temporarily (oh, God, please. Give this woman a job and she will grow the economy in shoe sales alone) while she looks for work in this area. The first thing she did is show up and dictate. However, as she's my sister and I have the dirt on her from way back, that's not been as effective as she thinks. I mean, the dumbest things become an issue. She has allergies the way Rebecca Watson has Prosopagnosia. So the first complaint was the Lysol wipes I keep on the kitchen counter because I was born to spill. Once she hid those, of course, the second complain was the spilled stuff on the counters. We have been having a silent little cold war over the way the toilet paper roll hangs. Nothing is said, but she''ll change it to roll under and I'll switch it to roll over and so it goes.

Of course, one of the defining characteristics of my sister -- loud and demonstrative -- is her inability to shut up. So the last few days I've been working on videos with her a few feet from me. I'm trying to concentrate while, I swear to Christ, she watches "Twilight: Full Moon", and really, she's not 12 years old.

Now, she was disparaging the whole YouTube thing because, well, I'm her younger brother and that goes with the territory, until I put one up the other day. "Hey, you know that video I put up ten minutes ago? Well, 150 views..." refresh, "Oh, I mean 167.." And up and up and comments and likes and referrals and shit.

Then she was impressed.

Which is bizarre because in her own unintentional way, which often requires me to "listen" to her as I go get a cup of coffee, then emerge from the kitchen and announce "Oh, what? Sorry, didn't hear a thing you said", she's demanding attention enough that I and nearly prevented from doing what I do. However, it's the end result, in other people's attention, that she finds noteworthy.

It's fucked, basically.

[Mykeru]

and that trying to change someone is not the path to a healthy relationship.

You know, thinking about it, I don't know what the biological imperative is here, but "changing the guy" seems to be socially conditioned. The Sex and the City standard that a guy meets the base criteria of being tall, professional, good looking, a sexual dynamo, etc, which just gets him in the door, but they have to stand back like a sculptor pondering marble and figure out exactly where he needs tweaking. If you look in pop culture, this idea that you don't just get a guy off the rack, that you have to tailor him, is so well established, taken as the way a woman acts in a relationship, that it isn't questioned and is the cause of so much reciprocal misery.

[Guest]

and that trying to change someone is not the path to a healthy relationship.

You know, thinking about it, I don't know what the biological imperative is here, but "changing the guy" seems to be socially conditioned. The Sex and the City standard that a guy meets the base criteria of being tall, professional, good looking, a sexual dynamo, etc, which just gets him in the door, but they have to stand back like a sculptor pondering marble and figure out exactly where he needs tweaking. If you look in pop culture, this idea that you don't just get a guy off the rack, that you have to tailor him, is so well established, taken as the way a woman acts in a relationship, that it isn't questioned and is the cause of so much reciprocal misery.

It's also the traditional definition of objectification - i.e. transforming the other person into a "thing" completely subject to the will of the individual (i.e. the subject) who alone possesses agency. The man becomes object to the subject - in this instance the woman. [I'm using the traditional definition in the sense of the definition in classic Western philosophy - extrapolating out from my basic knowledge of Schopenhauer, for whom the subject-object relationship was key to understanding all interactions between individuals and their environment; I assume the feminist definition derives from this or a similar source]

But then taking the traditional, complicated, philosophical view of things tends not to be welcome to most people who throw around "objectification" on the basis of "I once read a blog that said..."

[decius]

Me thinks we need a Sanct Beccy mock-up.

How about as Pontius Pilate instead?

I would go for a martyrdom scene.

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

Me thinks we need a Sanct Beccy mock-up.

How about as Pontius Pilate instead?

I would go for a martyrdom scene.

I'd go for Saruman...

[Parge]

[
It isn't. Especially since before that she states:

Yes, an unwanted pregnancy has many commonalities with rape.

Which isn't the same train of thought.

ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME??! Stephanie Zvan- ARE YOU EVEN HUMAN? Go back to the fucking home planet we don't play like that here ya loon. Unless the pregnancy comes directly as a result of rape you are talking out of your ass AGAIN. Do yourself a favor and only speak while standing on your head at least then we will know from the beginning where your thoughts are coming from.

Trigger Warning

If I may be so bold... If you strip away all of the emotional hyperbole related to the arguement - rape, sex, assault, pregnancy, abortion, motherhood, soverignty of the ladybits - and get down to brass tacks, I think you can find commonality. An unwanted pregnancy is very much like a rape, but more specifically when the pregnancy is carried to term. In both cases, you have a person forcing their way into your vagina against your wishes. Granted, it's from the other end...

I'm definitely going to hell.

[Altair]

and that trying to change someone is not the path to a healthy relationship.

You know, thinking about it, I don't know what the biological imperative is here, but "changing the guy" seems to be socially conditioned. The Sex and the City standard that a guy meets the base criteria of being tall, professional, good looking, a sexual dynamo, etc, which just gets him in the door, but they have to stand back like a sculptor pondering marble and figure out exactly where he needs tweaking. If you look in pop culture, this idea that you don't just get a guy off the rack, that you have to tailor him, is so well established, taken as the way a woman acts in a relationship, that it isn't questioned and is the cause of so much reciprocal misery.

It could be based on the concept of hypergamy, but I think most of it is socially conditioned, as you say. Since it is socially accepted and sometimes expected, the women who want to do that are given free rein to indulge in their desires.
I think it's also related to the way TV shows and advertisement portray men as unable to live on their own, destroying their house and living in filth whenever the woman in their lives goes away, reinforcing the vision of men as needing to be taught or improved.

I was thinking about this recently when I read the sci-fi short story "Okanoggan Falls" by Carolyn Ives Gilman, that portrays an alien race where the males are changed by the touch of the right female into being what that female most wants them to be. It contains this beautiful quote (Captain Groton is the alien guy, bolding mine).

Captain Groton hesitated, then with great restraint
took her hands chastely in his. “Susan,” he said, “There is something I need to explain, or I would be
deceiving you.” He drew a breath to steady himself as she watched, puzzled at his self-consciousness. He
went on, “It is not an accident, this shape I have assumed. On my planet, when a woman chooses a man,
he becomes what she most wishes him to be. It is the function of the chameleon trait. We would have
died out long ago without it.” He gave a slight smile. “I suppose nature realized that men can never be
what women really want until they are created by women."

That ruined the story for me, since it shows the way men and women are perceived in relationships in the real world, and strengthens that "a woman must change her man and her man must do whatever she says" idea.

My own position on this is that if someone has to really change who they are (as opposed to little changes that can be seen as a compromise) in order to be in a relationship with someone else, they are not the right person for each other.

[Lsuoma]

I think this is a valid point, especially in light of all the truly offensive, misogynistic statements some of the far right ultra-conservative Republicans have made recently. There's also a very strong undercurrent of anti-intellectualism in the Republican Party.

The LDS (Mormon) community is not known for promoting post-secondary education or career advancement of its womenfolk. Rather they are expected to be brood mares and homemakers, and to support hubby's education and career. If Romney wins the election, I think I will have to seriously consider leaving the US.

I think Robert Crumb sums it up well:

http://whyevolutionistrue.files.wordpre ... =469&h=480

[Pitchguest]

Something I figured out just a few moments ago, the author of Schrödinger's Rapist, Phaedra Starling, brushing on my Greek history, it strikes me that the namesake is ... deliberate. A brief summary: a woman (Phaedra) is married to a king, who falls in love with another man who doesn't reciprocate and in an act of vengeance falsely accuse the man of raping her whereby the king kills him (in several ways, there are several versions but the outcome is the same in either.) So here we have a woman, Phaedra, passing on advice to women about men approaching them, with a name derived of a woman falsely accusing a man of rape resulting in his demise. Now, I can't help but feel: have we been taken for a mickey?

[ReneeHendricks]

Now, I read the article before it was placed withing this FB area. I chalked it up to a woman who wants to be a famous fashion designer working an angle to get her name out there. And she succeeded fairly well. One Sergio Dominguez decided to go on and on comparing it to "Muslim rape" (I shit you not). So, I put out there a costume I wore about 2-3 years ago:

http://t.co/nDKQhOjD - his response???

I'm sorry, I don't believe you. I'm going to be hyperskeptical on this and say that I need evidence. Several pictures of the costume actually being worn by you will suffice :mrgreen:

Yeah, everyone is going to have to be hyperskeptical on this one and with good reason. My guy had the pix on a hard drive that is fried. So...all I can say is grain of salt, believe if you wish, yadda yadda :)

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

Something I figured out just a few moments ago, the author of Schrödinger's Rapist, Phaedra Starling, brushing on my Greek history, it strikes me that the namesake is ... deliberate. A brief summary: a woman (Phaedra) is married to a king, who falls in love with another man who doesn't reciprocate and in an act of vengeance falsely accuse the man of raping her whereby the king kills him (in several ways, there are several versions but the outcome is the same in either.) So here we have a woman, Phaedra, passing on advice to women about men approaching them, with a name derived of a woman falsely accusing a man of rape resulting in his demise. Now, I can't help but feel: have we been taken for a mickey?

If that whole SR was a POE, I think we've got a keeper. I know they will bend over backward to justify their stance, but the whole "go read the article" stuff, will give years of lulz.

If only...

[ReneeHendricks]

We have been having a silent little cold war over the way the toilet paper roll hangs. Nothing is said, but she''ll change it to roll under and I'll switch it to roll over and so it goes.

*Everyone* knows it should be roll over! Actually, this is kind of funny because I'm the *only* "roll-over" person in this house. Everyone else (my three kids and my guy) place the rolls in the roll-under position. I have to run around fixing them because...well, you know...everyone knows it's roll-over!

[drolrev0]

We have been having a silent little cold war over the way the toilet paper roll hangs. Nothing is said, but she''ll change it to roll under and I'll switch it to roll over and so it goes.

*Everyone* knows it should be roll over! Actually, this is kind of funny because I'm the *only* "roll-over" person in this house. Everyone else (my three kids and my guy) place the rolls in the roll-under position. I have to run around fixing them because...well, you know...everyone knows it's roll-over!

Unless you have cats.

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

We have been having a silent little cold war over the way the toilet paper roll hangs. Nothing is said, but she''ll change it to roll under and I'll switch it to roll over and so it goes.

*Everyone* knows it should be roll over! Actually, this is kind of funny because I'm the *only* "roll-over" person in this house. Everyone else (my three kids and my guy) place the rolls in the roll-under position. I have to run around fixing them because...well, you know...everyone knows it's roll-over!

Roll-over all the way. If ours was roll-under, we'd have knuckles the size of The Hulk's by all the friction against the wall.

[ReneeHendricks]

We have been having a silent little cold war over the way the toilet paper roll hangs. Nothing is said, but she''ll change it to roll under and I'll switch it to roll over and so it goes.

*Everyone* knows it should be roll over! Actually, this is kind of funny because I'm the *only* "roll-over" person in this house. Everyone else (my three kids and my guy) place the rolls in the roll-under position. I have to run around fixing them because...well, you know...everyone knows it's roll-over!

Unless you have cats.

Luckily we do have a cat that doesn't find toilet paper interesting. She's happier with bugs, string, catnip, and the odd piece of tinsel (for that lovely multi-colored and shiny cat shit during the holidays).

[ReneeHendricks]

We have been having a silent little cold war over the way the toilet paper roll hangs. Nothing is said, but she''ll change it to roll under and I'll switch it to roll over and so it goes.

*Everyone* knows it should be roll over! Actually, this is kind of funny because I'm the *only* "roll-over" person in this house. Everyone else (my three kids and my guy) place the rolls in the roll-under position. I have to run around fixing them because...well, you know...everyone knows it's roll-over!

Roll-over all the way. If ours was roll-under, we'd have knuckles the size of The Hulk's by all the friction against the wall.

Another fantastic reason. My reasoning is less physical and more aesthetic. It looks neater to me. The obsessive-compulsive in me approves this message.

[disumbrationist]

We have been having a silent little cold war over the way the toilet paper roll hangs. Nothing is said, but she''ll change it to roll under and I'll switch it to roll over and so it goes.

Problem solved.

Also, your sister needs to be told what in means to be a guest in someone's house. It's kind of odd for you to come here and talk about ZOMG MENS RIGHTS while you let your sister treat you like her cabin boy in your own home.

[Pitchguest]

Something I figured out just a few moments ago, the author of Schrödinger's Rapist, Phaedra Starling, brushing on my Greek history, it strikes me that the namesake is ... deliberate. A brief summary: a woman (Phaedra) is married to a king, who falls in love with another man who doesn't reciprocate and in an act of vengeance falsely accuse the man of raping her whereby the king kills him (in several ways, there are several versions but the outcome is the same in either.) So here we have a woman, Phaedra, passing on advice to women about men approaching them, with a name derived of a woman falsely accusing a man of rape resulting in his demise. Now, I can't help but feel: have we been taken for a mickey?

If that whole SR was a POE, I think we've got a keeper. I know they will bend over backward to justify their stance, but the whole "go read the article" stuff, will give years of lulz.

If only...

It's a scary possibility, innit?

I would go and point it out on FTB where they parrot it constantly, but I'm either put in moderation or banned- and PZ Myers has deemed the word 'Poe' a taboo and an instantly bannable offense over on his blog, so no chance on bringing it up there. Ah well. I guess they'll just have to stick to being pig ignorant. No skin off my teeth.

[acathode]

I just have issues when people use the wrong words.

Who doesn't? Especially when it's words that carry extremely strong connotations that are being flippantly misused. It's frustrating, for so many reasons.

There's the sheer dishonesty, labeling someone as a misogynist for simply disagreeing and disliking them, is more or less outright lying, and it pisses people off a great deal to get falsely accused of being what is in essence the worst scum there is. It's like being labeled a Nazi just because you don't agree with some of Israels current actions...

Then there's the damage they do to the language, by overusing and abusing very powerful terms, they are lessing the meaning of the terms, ultimately destroying it completely. 5 years down the line, what word will Ophelia use to describe real misogyny, ie. honest woman hating, if she ever faces it? No one will care if she yells "MISOGYNY!", because that's just someone disagreeing with her yet again.

Then there's the insult to the people in the world who actually faces real misogyny, real stalkers, real sexism, and real harassments. Claiming that you're the victim of misogyny and sexism because people use the word "cunt" is a insult to the people who've faced real misogyny and sexism. Trying to claim that you are a stalker victim because someone reads your twitter, facebook and blog is a insult to the people who've gotten their lives ruined by real stalkers... and so on.

I see many parallels to the way Ophelia and the FC use "misogyny", with the way "racism" has been used in the last 10-20 years in Swedish politics. Basically, any public discussion about immigration is impossible here, because people will scream "RACISM!!" on top of their lungs before the discussion even starts, and any attempt by people not in favor of current immigration policies to still continue the debate is simply meet with more "RACISMS!!!!!" accusation.
Obviously, while there undoubtedly exist some genuine racists among the people who disagree with current policy, the vast majority are not actual racists, but instead people who, for example, just question the economic feasibility for a country of our size to accept a huge number of illiterate, uneducated immigrants. It's an argument you'd think you'd be able to put forth, but no, if you do, you're a racist, because you speak like them, and uses the same kind of arguments as they do! (notice the circular reasoning?)

Getting labeled a racist, when you clearly aren't, is frustrating, and it pisses people off, A LOT. After a while though, people stop caring, and the word "racist" loses it's meaning. When it's flippantly thrown around and everyone who disagrees just the slightest is a racist, it just becomes a bad joke. The only ones who will actually care, is the people who still are shouting "RACIST!!", who just can't understand why it's not having the same effect as it used to have.

The rather unsettling side effect of this though, has been that real racism now is more ok. It's a lot easier to find people these days talking openly about "sand niggers", "MENA-scum", "rape settlers", and so on, and there's a lot more of people doing it too. It seems that as racism lose it's meaning, people feel more free to show and engage in real, actual racism, and more and more people see this open racism, and think it's ok, and joins in.

[Mykeru]

and that trying to change someone is not the path to a healthy relationship.

You know, thinking about it, I don't know what the biological imperative is here, but "changing the guy" seems to be socially conditioned. The Sex and the City standard that a guy meets the base criteria of being tall, professional, good looking, a sexual dynamo, etc, which just gets him in the door, but they have to stand back like a sculptor pondering marble and figure out exactly where he needs tweaking. If you look in pop culture, this idea that you don't just get a guy off the rack, that you have to tailor him, is so well established, taken as the way a woman acts in a relationship, that it isn't questioned and is the cause of so much reciprocal misery.

It's also the traditional definition of objectification - i.e. transforming the other person into a "thing" completely subject to the will of the individual (i.e. the subject) who alone possesses agency. The man becomes object to the subject - in this instance the woman. [I'm using the traditional definition in the sense of the definition in classic Western philosophy - extrapolating out from my basic knowledge of Schopenhauer, for whom the subject-object relationship was key to understanding all interactions between individuals and their environment; I assume the feminist definition derives from this or a similar source]

But then taking the traditional, complicated, philosophical view of things tends not to be welcome to most people who throw around "objectification" on the basis of "I once read a blog that said..."

That's very true, which is why pomo-babble is so amusing. As "objectification" is never what women describe what some do (and even those that don't, flack) it's literally meaningless.

I've been watching some videos posted by GenuineWitty about the weird turn Occupy Vancouver (home of our hero, Sasha-Wiley Knox*)has taken. In one instance a guy is publicly called out for alleged harassment. The speaker is protected by black-garbed women using black flags on closet poles (convenient) exactly as riot police use batons.

[youtube]ZIk7zwGdPSM[/youtube]

Observations:

1. The stream of buzzwords coming out of that doughy white boy's mouth is impressive "duckspeak" quacking

2. Try to figure out the "subject-object" relationship in that cluster fuck.

3. This is what FTB and Atheism Plus aspires to be if they can ever put down the Cheetos and pry their fat asses away from the computer. Seriously, what does 'Becca want done with trolls aside from sending out the "cyber police" if not the SWAT team?


*Sasha Knox is a porn star. My apologies. To Sasha Knox.

[Mykeru]

We have been having a silent little cold war over the way the toilet paper roll hangs. Nothing is said, but she''ll change it to roll under and I'll switch it to roll over and so it goes.

Problem solved.

Also, your sister needs to be told what in means to be a guest in someone's house. It's kind of odd for you to come here and talk about ZOMG MENS RIGHTS while you let your sister treat you like her cabin boy in your own home.

Y'All:

1. So, all I wrote, all you people got out of it is a discussion on which way the ass-wipe hangs? Fuck you people.

Disumbrationist:

2. Guests are guests. Relatives are relatives. Across the board, my relatives get away with far more crap than any guest does. Forum asshats get away with nothing: Go fuck yourself, cupcake.

[Lsuoma]

We have been having a silent little cold war over the way the toilet paper roll hangs. Nothing is said, but she''ll change it to roll under and I'll switch it to roll over and so it goes.

*Everyone* knows it should be roll over! Actually, this is kind of funny because I'm the *only* "roll-over" person in this house. Everyone else (my three kids and my guy) place the rolls in the roll-under position. I have to run around fixing them because...well, you know...everyone knows it's roll-over!

Oh, for Peezus sake!!!

It's UNDER: then you can use your forearm as a brake and tear off a predetermined number of sheets without the whole fucking thing unrolling.

Plus, as someone has observed, cats...

[Mykeru]

It's UNDER: then you can use your forearm as a brake and tear off a predetermined number of sheets without the whole fucking thing unrolling.

You fucking mook: You tear off sheets with a flick of the wrist. Who the hell taught you to wipe your ass?

[ReneeHendricks]

Barf. McCreight and Watson get their stupid names in print ... again: http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/fea ... vk.twitter

[Lsuoma]

Just took a ride in the elevator down to the ground floor (fuck this US "first floor" shit) to get a coffee, and in our building we have these teeny tiny teevees that give news updates, golf scores, etc. Plus ads, of course. It struck me that one I see VERY frequently is for "Divorce Lawyers for Men", which I think says a lot. It to me sends the implicit message that a divorce lawyer, unless otherwise qualified, is to fuck the men over, and help the woman get as much as they possibly can, rather than to get an amicable and equitable settlement. And that is so common a trope that it must, I'm certain, be correct. A friend of mine is going through a divorce in NY state (no non-fault divorces available, thanks to Jurassic legislation), and his wife and her attorney are really reaming him. It's been going on for seven years now, and the only time it went quiet was when he was unemployed - no money to take, I guess - but as soon as he gets a job she's back there demanding her handout.

BTW: you know the most expensive Barbie available? Divorce Barbie - it comes with Ken's car, Ken's condo, Ken's boat, etc., etc...

[JackRayner]

and that trying to change someone is not the path to a healthy relationship.

You know, thinking about it, I don't know what the biological imperative is here, but "changing the guy" seems to be socially conditioned. The Sex and the City standard that a guy meets the base criteria of being tall, professional, good looking, a sexual dynamo, etc, which just gets him in the door, but they have to stand back like a sculptor pondering marble and figure out exactly where he needs tweaking. If you look in pop culture, this idea that you don't just get a guy off the rack, that you have to tailor him, is so well established, taken as the way a woman acts in a relationship, that it isn't questioned and is the cause of so much reciprocal misery.

I don't feel much of an urge to back this up [more than I will] at the moment, but I find that idea highly doubtful. I think "female hypoagency" explains this behavior much better than the typical "social conditioning" view [the more I learn about people, the less that "nurture" seems valid]. Female hypoagency in short: People, to include women themselves, don't see women as agents [See: "Sexual division of labor" for clues on why this might be]. Therefore, it is imperative that women continuously nag agents to 1] check that they are still acting on their behalf, and 2] to actually act on their behalf.

That scene with all of the whiteknight proxies tearing up John the Other's posters, while Creepy Bitter Grrl stood back and supervised; Anita Sarkeesian complaining about "misogyny" in videogames, getting $150,000+, and instead of using it to have a game developed to her liking, funneling it into another video series that does nothing but complain some more; Sulky Amy doc-dropping @ElevatorGate by way of an anonymous proxy; Women, with gender studies/social "science" degrees who shout "DISCRIMINATION, SEXISM!" in regards to the lack of women in STEM fields, while they themselves are not willing to do the work; any women who barge into male dominated spaces and, instead of joining in, demand that the environment be changed to their liking [do "atheist/skeptic conference policies" ring a bell?]...

These, and many more examples, are all manifestations of female hypoagency. Luckily for women though, when it comes to relationships, hypergamy is made extremely easy. ;) [Not to say that trading up will ever get the nagging to stop though...]

[Lsuoma]

It's UNDER: then you can use your forearm as a brake and tear off a predetermined number of sheets without the whole fucking thing unrolling.

You fucking mook: You tear off sheets with a flick of the wrist. Who the hell taught you to wipe your ass?

That's all fun and games until you get one of those non-perforated rolls, eh?

[ReneeHendricks]

Y'All:

1. So, all I wrote, all you people got out of it is a discussion on which way the ass-wipe hangs? Fuck you people.

I actually got a lot more out of it. I'm just being a silly little shit today :D You can throw noodles at me now :)

[Mykeru]

Barf. McCreight and Watson get their stupid names in print ... again: http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/fea ... vk.twitter

Such introspection has triggered no small amount of debate in the atheist movement internationally, a lot of it focused on the issue of gender. Last August, a new online forum, Atheism Plus, or A+, was launched by Jen McCreight, a Seattle-based blogger and secularist. Backed by a number of prominent women atheists, it seeks “a new wave of atheism” aimed at “promoting social justice” and “working against bigotry, hatred and discrimination”.

Her biggest concern is what she sees as deep-rooted misogyny in the atheist community. Whenever she speaks in a light-hearted way about sexual issues, she says she receives obscene propositions, while posts about feminism are usually met with abuse.

Likening atheism to a “boys’ club”, she wrote to fellow secularists: “I don’t feel safe as a woman in this community – and I feel less safe than I do as a woman in science, or a woman in gaming, or hell, as a woman walking down the f***ing sidewalk.”

And so, the scamming tools and neurotics continue to hold the atheist community hostage until they are given what they want, even if they have no fucking clue what that is, and the media continues to talk about "prominent women atheists" when they mean "some D-list bloggers".

[welch]

I just noticed that Dr. Harriet Hall and Surly Amy are both at CSICon.

Will there be another T-shirt incident?

Also, I believe that I won a bet that I had with a friend ....

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... 25/my-day/

Are you fucking kidding me?!? What a whiny little cunt PeeZus is.

I dunno, insecure attention-whoring like that is pretty impressive. I love how he's so worried about light posting. How does that ego even fit on the plane?

[Skeptic_Duh]

Hello all!

Thought I would throw my lot in with you fine folk and burn in the wraith of the FtB/Skepchick fires.

Long time skeptic (30+ years), hung out at the JREF for a while, RL issues made me pull back a bit.

The whole elevator gate thing sort of pulled me back in, just sitting back watching the various players gobble gobble about it.

Nothing to really say about it - since better people than I have said it - however, my own thought about two of the players:

"I don't think she is lying, but..." I found it convenient that Watson got hit on in an elevator, at a conference, after discussing in great lengths that it happens, and after dissing Kirby (who said it didn't happen to her) that it does! I also notice that she seems to have forgotten the other complaints about the whole thing (McGraw, etc...) in her latest slate article. Guess she has to make a living somehow...

I have notice she seems to talk it more and more, even at certain "keynote" speeches. Even at the paranormal roadtrip in Cleveland, she brought it up (sexism). (cop was there - we all wondered why, was confirmed by Watson that he was there to protect her because there was a hater that lived in the area, and she needed protection).

PZ Myers - where to start with this guy? I use to read his blog, not now. deep end he has gone. One comment that I found hilarious was about Paul Ryan and his lack of a degree pass a BS. Myers said he wasn't qualified with just that to give lessons on economics, that BS just means your a beginner in higher learning or something, therefore, shouldn't be listened to. (glances at Watsons degree, shakes head on support for her "science" and speeches)

The others - really don't know them to well - don't read them, don't talk to them, but they do come across like lying assholes.

Keep up the great work - plenty of people on your side - just don't want to get splashed by the shit from the shitters.

[ReneeHendricks]

I knew it. I knew I should have just kept my mouth shut. I put out a tweet regarding a video I saw on "Republican Rape Panels" and it's met with "I wonder how the MRAs & Republicans would get along (hint:swimmingly)" - https://twitter.com/benfromcanada/statu ... 6270507008. My response? "Yeah...not going down that route today :)".

Apparently, that's just not good enough (you know, to say as politely as possible that I really don't want to discuss a subject I don't know a whole lot about and that I have friends who are MRAs) for this guy. He pushes further: "you actually (sort of) defend MRAs? Why?" - realize that I really hadn't defended shit. I simply opted to not go down that route.

So, I gave a more definitive answer as my 1st reply obviously wasn't enough: "Because I have a few friends who are MRAs and I'm still learning more about it. So, I don't have a decided opinion on them." And this is true. I've only just recently begun to read up on the MRM and MRAs. Still, this isn't good enough. He *has* to give me his dumbass opinion. As if this is suddenly going to sway me. As if I'm going to say "gee, you are so right, oh wise one". His reply? "how much learning do you need? They're transparently sexist idiots who need to lie to have a case".

Tell me, why the fuck am I following such a fucking jackass? Clearly I need to remedy this.

Ok, back to other stuff. I just thought I'd put this out there. 'Cuz I like to bitch and such.

[Mykeru]

It's UNDER: then you can use your forearm as a brake and tear off a predetermined number of sheets without the whole fucking thing unrolling.

You fucking mook: You tear off sheets with a flick of the wrist. Who the hell taught you to wipe your ass?

That's all fun and games until you get one of those non-perforated rolls, eh?

Your concern is duly noted, ass-heretic.

I don't feel much of an urge to back this up [more than I will] at the moment, but I find that idea highly doubtful. I think "female hypoagency" explains this behavior much better than the typical "social conditioning" view [the more I learn about people, the less that "nurture" seems valid]. Female hypoagency in short: People, to include women themselves, don't see women as agents [See: "Sexual division of labor" for clues on why this might be]. Therefore, it is imperative that women continuously nag agents to 1] check that they are still acting on their behalf, and 2] to actually act on their behalf.

Or, we can consider it temporary agency they take on themselves in the sphere of that relationship to maintain an agent to act on their behalf outside the relationship.

I liken it to training a pitbull to jus' wuv you, and bite everyone else.

Ever been with a girl who liked to liked to mouth off (agent) , and then when someone reacts badly, suddenly its your problem (hypoagent)? I have, and back then, that, as well as being an ass to servers, was a ticket to "no-call" land.

I actually got a lot more out of it. I'm just being a silly little shit today

http://images4.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb2 ... Squint.jpg

[welch]

We have been having a silent little cold war over the way the toilet paper roll hangs. Nothing is said, but she''ll change it to roll under and I'll switch it to roll over and so it goes.

*Everyone* knows it should be roll over! Actually, this is kind of funny because I'm the *only* "roll-over" person in this house. Everyone else (my three kids and my guy) place the rolls in the roll-under position. I have to run around fixing them because...well, you know...everyone knows it's roll-over!

Fuck, I wish. My wife thinks it should just live on the counter, fuck the "roll" stuff.

[Mykeru]

Long time skeptic (30+ years), hung out at the JREF for a while, RL issues made me pull back a bit.

The whole elevator gate thing sort of pulled me back in

Yup, know how that feels. Was away from it all for a couple years. When Elevatorgate happened I was in the woods somewhere (literally) and only found out about it, FTB, Atheism Plus and all that crap a couple weeks prior to my first video. Then I devoured everything.

Greets.

[Mykeru]

I knew it. I knew I should have just kept my mouth shut. I put out a tweet regarding a video I saw on "Republican Rape Panels" and it's met with "I wonder how the MRAs & Republicans would get along (hint:swimmingly)" - https://twitter.com/benfromcanada/statu ... 6270507008. My response? "Yeah...not going down that route today :)".

Apparently, that's just not good enough (you know, to say as politely as possible that I really don't want to discuss a subject I don't know a whole lot about and that I have friends who are MRAs) for this guy. He pushes further: "you actually (sort of) defend MRAs? Why?" - realize that I really hadn't defended shit. I simply opted to not go down that route.

So, I gave a more definitive answer as my 1st reply obviously wasn't enough: "Because I have a few friends who are MRAs and I'm still learning more about it. So, I don't have a decided opinion on them." And this is true. I've only just recently begun to read up on the MRM and MRAs. Still, this isn't good enough. He *has* to give me his dumbass opinion. As if this is suddenly going to sway me. As if I'm going to say "gee, you are so right, oh wise one". His reply? "how much learning do you need? They're transparently sexist idiots who need to lie to have a case".

Tell me, why the fuck am I following such a fucking jackass? Clearly I need to remedy this.

Ok, back to other stuff. I just thought I'd put this out there. 'Cuz I like to bitch and such.

Yeah,

MRA = Conservative. That's what Ophelia Benson meant comparing me to Bill O'Reilly.

Because their harshest critics couldn't come from the atheist and skeptical community or be left wing, right?

What a fucking dumb-shit. Even she can't believe that.

[ReneeHendricks]

I knew it. I knew I should have just kept my mouth shut. I put out a tweet regarding a video I saw on "Republican Rape Panels" and it's met with "I wonder how the MRAs & Republicans would get along (hint:swimmingly)" - https://twitter.com/benfromcanada/statu ... 6270507008. My response? "Yeah...not going down that route today :)".

Apparently, that's just not good enough (you know, to say as politely as possible that I really don't want to discuss a subject I don't know a whole lot about and that I have friends who are MRAs) for this guy. He pushes further: "you actually (sort of) defend MRAs? Why?" - realize that I really hadn't defended shit. I simply opted to not go down that route.

So, I gave a more definitive answer as my 1st reply obviously wasn't enough: "Because I have a few friends who are MRAs and I'm still learning more about it. So, I don't have a decided opinion on them." And this is true. I've only just recently begun to read up on the MRM and MRAs. Still, this isn't good enough. He *has* to give me his dumbass opinion. As if this is suddenly going to sway me. As if I'm going to say "gee, you are so right, oh wise one". His reply? "how much learning do you need? They're transparently sexist idiots who need to lie to have a case".

Tell me, why the fuck am I following such a fucking jackass? Clearly I need to remedy this.

Ok, back to other stuff. I just thought I'd put this out there. 'Cuz I like to bitch and such.

Yeah,

MRA = Conservative. That's what Ophelia Benson meant comparing me to Bill O'Reilly.

Because their harshest critics couldn't come from the atheist and skeptical community or be left wing, right?

What a fucking dumb-shit. Even she can't believe that.

Fucking irritating, the lot of them. His latest is even more condescending: "You're smart, you'll see it pretty quickly". Gee thanks, asshat.

[Mykeru]

I knew it. I knew I should have just kept my mouth shut. I put out a tweet regarding a video I saw on "Republican Rape Panels" and it's met with "I wonder how the MRAs & Republicans would get along (hint:swimmingly)" - https://twitter.com/benfromcanada/statu ... 6270507008. My response? "Yeah...not going down that route today :)".

Apparently, that's just not good enough (you know, to say as politely as possible that I really don't want to discuss a subject I don't know a whole lot about and that I have friends who are MRAs) for this guy. He pushes further: "you actually (sort of) defend MRAs? Why?" - realize that I really hadn't defended shit. I simply opted to not go down that route.

So, I gave a more definitive answer as my 1st reply obviously wasn't enough: "Because I have a few friends who are MRAs and I'm still learning more about it. So, I don't have a decided opinion on them." And this is true. I've only just recently begun to read up on the MRM and MRAs. Still, this isn't good enough. He *has* to give me his dumbass opinion. As if this is suddenly going to sway me. As if I'm going to say "gee, you are so right, oh wise one". His reply? "how much learning do you need? They're transparently sexist idiots who need to lie to have a case".

Tell me, why the fuck am I following such a fucking jackass? Clearly I need to remedy this.

Ok, back to other stuff. I just thought I'd put this out there. 'Cuz I like to bitch and such.

Yeah,

MRA = Conservative. That's what Ophelia Benson meant comparing me to Bill O'Reilly.

Because their harshest critics couldn't come from the atheist and skeptical community or be left wing, right?

What a fucking dumb-shit. Even she can't believe that.

Fucking irritating, the lot of them. His latest is even more condescending: "You're smart, you'll see it pretty quickly". Gee thanks, asshat.

I hate that condescending "you just don't get it" crap.

What worries me, is the "Wolf Blitzer Effect", which I named for the smart looking anchor. Some people fall for it. In fact, Wolf went on Celebrity Jeopardy and got his ass handed to him. Wolf reads teleprompters and has producers talk in his ear for a living.

How anyone can fall for "well, if you do some research, you'll see I'm right" argument is beyond me.

[JackRayner]

I don't feel much of an urge to back this up [more than I will] at the moment, but I find that idea highly doubtful. I think "female hypoagency" explains this behavior much better than the typical "social conditioning" view [the more I learn about people, the less that "nurture" seems valid]. Female hypoagency in short: People, to include women themselves, don't see women as agents [See: "Sexual division of labor" for clues on why this might be]. Therefore, it is imperative that women continuously nag agents to 1] check that they are still acting on their behalf, and 2] to actually act on their behalf.

Or, we can consider it temporary agency they take on themselves in the sphere of that relationship to maintain an agent to act on their behalf outside the relationship.

I liken it to training a pitbull to jus' wuv you, and bite everyone else.

Ever been with a girl who liked to liked to mouth off (agent) , and then when someone reacts badly, suddenly its your problem (hypoagent)? I have, and back then, that, as well as being an ass to servers, was a ticket to "no-call" land.

Of course, there is agency in speaking up, but it is the "hypo" to acting's "hyper". You know.....that whole "action's speak louder than worlds" something-or-other.

[Rystefn]

and that trying to change someone is not the path to a healthy relationship.

You know, thinking about it, I don't know what the biological imperative is here, but "changing the guy" seems to be socially conditioned. The Sex and the City standard that a guy meets the base criteria of being tall, professional, good looking, a sexual dynamo, etc, which just gets him in the door, but they have to stand back like a sculptor pondering marble and figure out exactly where he needs tweaking. If you look in pop culture, this idea that you don't just get a guy off the rack, that you have to tailor him, is so well established, taken as the way a woman acts in a relationship, that it isn't questioned and is the cause of so much reciprocal misery.

A man marries a woman hoping she'll never change. A woman marries a man hoping to change everything about him.

Clearly, there are exceptions, but that's the broad-strokes socially-sanctioned concept of what a marriage is supposed to look like. How fucked up is it that this is what most of our culture sees as the blueprint for a successful marriage? Must be the patriarchy.

[Mykeru]

Interesting comment in that Irish Atheism piece among all the blather:

techspeakieran

See, this is why the right-wingers rule the world: while all the left-wingers are on here splitting hairs about what atheism is (and isn't, and what it might be, etc.), the right-wing hawks are out there running things and letting their god decide such stuff for them. [takes tongue out of cheek]

In one of his few genuine insights, Brendan Behan said the first item on the agenda at any left-wing meeting is the split.

Is it just coincidence that it seems to also be the first item on the agenda at any atheist meeting?

Yup. One thing that appalls me about some folks on the left is the cowardice. Rather than fight the common enemy of right-wing morons, they would rather stay in-house and shit where we sleep.

Thanks, Plussers!

[Mykeru]

Must be the patriarchy.

Of course, The Patriarchyâ„¢ explains everything. Plus, it stays crispy in milk and keeps your dishes virtually spotless.

[Al Stefanelli]

I knew it. I knew I should have just kept my mouth shut. I put out a tweet regarding a video I saw on "Republican Rape Panels" and it's met with "I wonder how the MRAs & Republicans would get along (hint:swimmingly)" - https://twitter.com/benfromcanada/statu ... 6270507008. My response? "Yeah...not going down that route today :)".

Apparently, that's just not good enough (you know, to say as politely as possible that I really don't want to discuss a subject I don't know a whole lot about and that I have friends who are MRAs) for this guy. He pushes further: "you actually (sort of) defend MRAs? Why?" - realize that I really hadn't defended shit. I simply opted to not go down that route.

So, I gave a more definitive answer as my 1st reply obviously wasn't enough: "Because I have a few friends who are MRAs and I'm still learning more about it. So, I don't have a decided opinion on them." And this is true. I've only just recently begun to read up on the MRM and MRAs. Still, this isn't good enough. He *has* to give me his dumbass opinion. As if this is suddenly going to sway me. As if I'm going to say "gee, you are so right, oh wise one". His reply? "how much learning do you need? They're transparently sexist idiots who need to lie to have a case".

Tell me, why the fuck am I following such a fucking jackass? Clearly I need to remedy this.

Ok, back to other stuff. I just thought I'd put this out there. 'Cuz I like to bitch and such.

I just sent a reply to one his tweets. I think your tag was still in it.

[Al Stefanelli]

I just have issues when people use the wrong words.

Who doesn't? Especially when it's words that carry extremely strong connotations that are being flippantly misused. It's frustrating, for so many reasons.

There's the sheer dishonesty, labeling someone as a misogynist for simply disagreeing and disliking them, is more or less outright lying, and it pisses people off a great deal to get falsely accused of being what is in essence the worst scum there is. It's like being labeled a Nazi just because you don't agree with some of Israels current actions...

Then there's the damage they do to the language, by overusing and abusing very powerful terms, they are lessing the meaning of the terms, ultimately destroying it completely. 5 years down the line, what word will Ophelia use to describe real misogyny, ie. honest woman hating, if she ever faces it? No one will care if she yells "MISOGYNY!", because that's just someone disagreeing with her yet again.

Then there's the insult to the people in the world who actually faces real misogyny, real stalkers, real sexism, and real harassments. Claiming that you're the victim of misogyny and sexism because people use the word "cunt" is a insult to the people who've faced real misogyny and sexism. Trying to claim that you are a stalker victim because someone reads your twitter, facebook and blog is a insult to the people who've gotten their lives ruined by real stalkers... and so on.

I see many parallels to the way Ophelia and the FC use "misogyny", with the way "racism" has been used in the last 10-20 years in Swedish politics. Basically, any public discussion about immigration is impossible here, because people will scream "RACISM!!" on top of their lungs before the discussion even starts, and any attempt by people not in favor of current immigration policies to still continue the debate is simply meet with more "RACISMS!!!!!" accusation.
Obviously, while there undoubtedly exist some genuine racists among the people who disagree with current policy, the vast majority are not actual racists, but instead people who, for example, just question the economic feasibility for a country of our size to accept a huge number of illiterate, uneducated immigrants. It's an argument you'd think you'd be able to put forth, but no, if you do, you're a racist, because you speak like them, and uses the same kind of arguments as they do! (notice the circular reasoning?)

Getting labeled a racist, when you clearly aren't, is frustrating, and it pisses people off, A LOT. After a while though, people stop caring, and the word "racist" loses it's meaning. When it's flippantly thrown around and everyone who disagrees just the slightest is a racist, it just becomes a bad joke. The only ones who will actually care, is the people who still are shouting "RACIST!!", who just can't understand why it's not having the same effect as it used to have.

The rather unsettling side effect of this though, has been that real racism now is more ok. It's a lot easier to find people these days talking openly about "sand niggers", "MENA-scum", "rape settlers", and so on, and there's a lot more of people doing it too. It seems that as racism lose it's meaning, people feel more free to show and engage in real, actual racism, and more and more people see this open racism, and think it's ok, and joins in.

Yep, lots of truth, there.

[JackRayner]

Yeah,

MRA = Conservative. That's what Ophelia Benson meant comparing me to Bill O'Reilly.

Because their harshest critics couldn't come from the atheist and skeptical community or be left wing, right?

What a fucking dumb-shit. Even she can't believe that.

While I don't think of myself as a "liberal" [Even though I'm apparently more left leaning than Obama. lol, wut?], I couldn't pass for a conservative if I tried.

But, hey! The feminist say that the MRM's ultimate goal is for women to all get locked inside of sandwich factories while kept pregnant and barefoot, so it must be true. A feminist would never lie! :roll:

[Altair]

I knew it. I knew I should have just kept my mouth shut. I put out a tweet regarding a video I saw on "Republican Rape Panels" and it's met with "I wonder how the MRAs & Republicans would get along (hint:swimmingly)" - https://twitter.com/benfromcanada/statu ... 6270507008. My response? "Yeah...not going down that route today :)".

Tell me, why the fuck am I following such a fucking jackass? Clearly I need to remedy this.
Ok, back to other stuff. I just thought I'd put this out there. 'Cuz I like to bitch and such.

This BenFromCanada guy is a total moron, he's the guy who posted this in the past

http://imageshack.us/a/img87/3047/tempes.th.png

and retweeted this amazing displays of wisdom

http://imageshack.us/a/img141/6045/temp2q.th.png

I think he was actually trying to pull a white-knight on you, rescuing you from the clutches of teh evil MRAz and showing you teh AWESOME good guys like him, after which you would be eternally grateful and reward him with cookies, sammiches and other kinds of stuff.
He just didn't know he was going after a woman who won't fall for those cheap tricks.

[ReneeHendricks]

I knew it. I knew I should have just kept my mouth shut. I put out a tweet regarding a video I saw on "Republican Rape Panels" and it's met with "I wonder how the MRAs & Republicans would get along (hint:swimmingly)" - https://twitter.com/benfromcanada/statu ... 6270507008. My response? "Yeah...not going down that route today :)".

Apparently, that's just not good enough (you know, to say as politely as possible that I really don't want to discuss a subject I don't know a whole lot about and that I have friends who are MRAs) for this guy. He pushes further: "you actually (sort of) defend MRAs? Why?" - realize that I really hadn't defended shit. I simply opted to not go down that route.

So, I gave a more definitive answer as my 1st reply obviously wasn't enough: "Because I have a few friends who are MRAs and I'm still learning more about it. So, I don't have a decided opinion on them." And this is true. I've only just recently begun to read up on the MRM and MRAs. Still, this isn't good enough. He *has* to give me his dumbass opinion. As if this is suddenly going to sway me. As if I'm going to say "gee, you are so right, oh wise one". His reply? "how much learning do you need? They're transparently sexist idiots who need to lie to have a case".

Tell me, why the fuck am I following such a fucking jackass? Clearly I need to remedy this.

Ok, back to other stuff. I just thought I'd put this out there. 'Cuz I like to bitch and such.

I just sent a reply to one his tweets. I think your tag was still in it.

Saw it and replied. It did sound *exactly* like a fundie woo-flinger hanging out in your local grocery store. I really don't know enough about MRAs or the MRM to make a definitive stance either way.

Anyway, add in the backhanded compliment and I'm really not pleased at the moment.

[ReneeHendricks]

I knew it. I knew I should have just kept my mouth shut. I put out a tweet regarding a video I saw on "Republican Rape Panels" and it's met with "I wonder how the MRAs & Republicans would get along (hint:swimmingly)" - https://twitter.com/benfromcanada/statu ... 6270507008. My response? "Yeah...not going down that route today :)".

Tell me, why the fuck am I following such a fucking jackass? Clearly I need to remedy this.
Ok, back to other stuff. I just thought I'd put this out there. 'Cuz I like to bitch and such.

This BenFromCanada guy is a total moron, he's the guy who posted this in the past

http://imageshack.us/a/img87/3047/tempes.th.png

and retweeted this amazing displays of wisdom

http://imageshack.us/a/img141/6045/temp2q.th.png

I think he was actually trying to pull a white-knight on you, rescuing you from the clutches of teh evil MRAz and showing you teh AWESOME good guys like him, after which you would be eternally grateful and reward him with cookies, sammiches and other kinds of stuff.
He just didn't know he was going after a woman who won't fall for those cheap tricks.

Repeatedly banging my head on my desk here. I haven't been watching his posts much lately. If I recall correctly, he and I got into a debate not too long ago and I wasn't pleased with him then (it might have been regarding stats on who gets custody of kids etal). Well, he did *nothing* but piss me off with a backhanded compliment. Clearly he thinks I'm an idiot.

[JAB]

Fucking irritating, the lot of them. His latest is even more condescending: "You're smart, you'll see it pretty quickly". Gee thanks, asshat.

I think an answer to that would be "Yeah, but you won't because you made your mind up on hearing only a little info from only one side"

[JackRayner]

This BenFromCanada guy is a total moron, he's the guy who posted this in the past

http://imageshack.us/a/img87/3047/tempes.th.png

and retweeted this amazing displays of wisdom

http://imageshack.us/a/img141/6045/temp2q.th.png

I think he was actually trying to pull a white-knight on you, rescuing you from the clutches of teh evil MRAz and showing you teh AWESOME good guys like him, after which you would be eternally grateful and reward him with cookies, sammiches and other kinds of stuff.
He just didn't know he was going after a woman who won't fall for those cheap tricks.

Wow. An asshole saying that people he doesn't understand deserve physical harm...and he's supposed to be one of the good guys? Okay.

And that "Yasmin Sadie" person is a feminist cunt whom Wooly and I got into a spat with a little while ago. I'm not sure why she addressed me initially [might be my twatter bio, I think I state it there], but it was a "discussion" about my belief that feminism is not about equality. I brought up selective service, she claimed the lack of a draft made it inconsequential, and then when I spelled out all of the things that can happen to a male if he doesn't sign up for it, she called me a woman hater and blocked me. This is the abridged version, of course. I also let her know the pay gap and 1-in-4 rape figure were myths, and included sources that she hastily dismissed. These "spats" are common, and all you have to do is frequent the comments section of a few MRA youtubers to see how typical "arguments" from feminists are...

[Tigzy]

Fuckin stupid fuckin Benson is being stupid again: http://freethoughtblogs.com/butterflies ... ent-320111

Ophelia Benson says:
October 25, 2012 at 12:30 pm

@ 93 – no, you’re wrong. Disproportionate obsessive hatred of a woman can be misogyny, or be a marker of misogyny.

I’ve put you in moderation; your comments don’t appear unless I approve them. Yes there’s a particular reason.

Hatred - disproportionate and obsessive or otherwise - of Islam can be a marker of racism.

You've been criticising Islam a lot recently, haven't you Prune.

Underline mine. I'd be very curious to know how one would come to such a conclusion. (note: you said "can", not "is", so I might just be nitpicking.)

Racists have been known to attack Islam on the basis of it being a 'foreign, alien and very non-white' religion . One need only Google 'muslamic ray-guns', or watch that episode of...was it Kilroy or Jeremy Kyle? Ah, whodafuc knows - where Omar Bakri, aka the Tottenham Ayatollah, was put up for public roasting, and certain of the roasters were quick in demanding that he 'get back into the corner shop'. (Note for non-UKers: there's a racist meme that people of Pakistani origin tend to run corner shops, and though Omar Bakri is actually of Syrian descent...well, you know what racists can be like. Re, Bernard Manning: 'There were this Paki come over from India...' Yes, he really said that.) However, having an antipathy to Islam, even a strong one, does not necessarily make one a racist. Despite what many amongst the more vociferous baboons might say.

Just as being against Islam can be a marker of racism, but not necessarily so, then so can a strong dislike of a particular woman be a marker of misogyny - but again, not necessarily so. Perhaps more to the point, a person can strongly dislike a Jewish person, and though it might be a sign of anti-semitism - once more, they just might not like that particular person.

Basically, Ophelia was either being completely disingenuous or a total dumbass in insinuating that 'can' is tantamount to 'is'. Playing by her form of parallel logic, I just might as well hint that Prune is a racist on the basis of the large number of anti-islam posts she's made recently. Protest not Prune, because 'Disproportionate hatred of Islam can be racist in nature, or a marker of racism.'

In a nutshell, she's playing a game of 'Schroedinger's misogynist'.

[Altair]

And that "Yasmin Sadie" person is a feminist cunt whom Wooly and I got into a spat with a little while ago. I'm not sure why she addressed me initially [might be my twatter bio, I think I state it there], but it was a "discussion" about my belief that feminism is not about equality. I brought up selective service, she claimed the lack of a draft made it inconsequential, and then when I spelled out all of the things that can happen to a male if he doesn't sign up for it, she called me a woman hater and blocked me. This is the abridged version, of course. I also let her know the pay gap and 1-in-4 rape figure were myths, and included sources that she hastily dismissed. These "spats" are common, and all you have to do is frequent the comments section of a few MRA youtubers to see how typical "arguments" from feminists are...

In Colombia men have to serve in the military for a year after graduating from high school, and if you don't you get in all sorts of legal trouble, and can even be forcefully recruited. Of course, no feminist has ever campaigned to have women included in the service, I wonder why they dismiss this obvious example of inequality :roll:

[ReneeHendricks]

I also let her know the pay gap and 1-in-4 rape figure were myths...

*That*! That right there. Even *I* know that the "1-in-4" refers to sexual assault. But many uber fems take this stat and run with it as a "rape stat". Grrrrrr. Drives me almost as batty as the misunderstanding of the word "misogynist".

[AndrewV69]

The rather unsettling side effect of this though, has been that real racism now is more ok. It's a lot easier to find people these days talking openly about "sand niggers", "MENA-scum", "rape settlers", and so on, and there's a lot more of people doing it too. It seems that as racism lose it's meaning, people feel more free to show and engage in real, actual racism, and more and more people see this open racism, and think it's ok, and joins in.

Personally, and based on real life experiences the word misogyny no longer has any effect on me. The last straw in this case, was a woman who used the term to define anyone who held a different viewpoint from her on anything. I kid you not. Basically, because she has a vagina any disagreement was simply hatred of all women.

Same with rape. I no longer automatically believe any woman who says she was raped. I do not know how widespread my attitude is. However, to my mind this is more likely to have some very unfortunate repercussions down the road If it becomes so.

I am thinking about the AVFM posts on jury nullification in all cases of a man accused of rape. I have not got to that point... yet. But I can see where it might take society as a whole if an ex-feminist like myself can be influenced this way.

[Mykeru]

I just have issues when people use the wrong words.

Who doesn't? Especially when it's words that carry extremely strong connotations that are being flippantly misused. It's frustrating, for so many reasons.

There's the sheer dishonesty, labeling someone as a misogynist for simply disagreeing and disliking them, is more or less outright lying, and it pisses people off a great deal to get falsely accused of being what is in essence the worst scum there is. It's like being labeled a Nazi just because you don't agree with some of Israels current actions...

Then there's the damage they do to the language, by overusing and abusing very powerful terms, they are lessing the meaning of the terms, ultimately destroying it completely. 5 years down the line, what word will Ophelia use to describe real misogyny, ie. honest woman hating, if she ever faces it? No one will care if she yells "MISOGYNY!", because that's just someone disagreeing with her yet again.

Then there's the insult to the people in the world who actually faces real misogyny, real stalkers, real sexism, and real harassments. Claiming that you're the victim of misogyny and sexism because people use the word "cunt" is a insult to the people who've faced real misogyny and sexism. Trying to claim that you are a stalker victim because someone reads your twitter, facebook and blog is a insult to the people who've gotten their lives ruined by real stalkers... and so on.

I see many parallels to the way Ophelia and the FC use "misogyny", with the way "racism" has been used in the last 10-20 years in Swedish politics. Basically, any public discussion about immigration is impossible here, because people will scream "RACISM!!" on top of their lungs before the discussion even starts, and any attempt by people not in favor of current immigration policies to still continue the debate is simply meet with more "RACISMS!!!!!" accusation.
Obviously, while there undoubtedly exist some genuine racists among the people who disagree with current policy, the vast majority are not actual racists, but instead people who, for example, just question the economic feasibility for a country of our size to accept a huge number of illiterate, uneducated immigrants. It's an argument you'd think you'd be able to put forth, but no, if you do, you're a racist, because you speak like them, and uses the same kind of arguments as they do! (notice the circular reasoning?)

Getting labeled a racist, when you clearly aren't, is frustrating, and it pisses people off, A LOT. After a while though, people stop caring, and the word "racist" loses it's meaning. When it's flippantly thrown around and everyone who disagrees just the slightest is a racist, it just becomes a bad joke. The only ones who will actually care, is the people who still are shouting "RACIST!!", who just can't understand why it's not having the same effect as it used to have.

The rather unsettling side effect of this though, has been that real racism now is more ok. It's a lot easier to find people these days talking openly about "sand niggers", "MENA-scum", "rape settlers", and so on, and there's a lot more of people doing it too. It seems that as racism lose it's meaning, people feel more free to show and engage in real, actual racism, and more and more people see this open racism, and think it's ok, and joins in.

Yep, lots of truth, there.

The use of those terms, applied improperly, is just a short cut for the intellectually lazy, who are too busy working up their latest woo to actually argue a point.

Racist and misogynist are about the worst things you can call anyone. When you see a real example of a racist in the wild, the best you can say about them is they have a number of lazy, unexplored assumptions. At worst they are simply mentally ill. I mean that seriously, anyone who walks around with supremacist ideas, or hating and fearing people for something as unsubstantial in humans as "race" has got to be pretty mental.

Same goes for "misogyny". Someone who pathologically hates women as a group has got something seriously wrong with them.

The overuse of that term, when Rebecca Watson and Ophelia Benson deploy that term it evinces either 1. Not understanding what it means or 2. Just being a mean-spirited little shit. However, when Jen McCreight uses it it's because I honestly think she's an idiot.

The worst thing about flinging the word misogynist around is it leads credence to those people who claim that women are petty, emotive, and incapable of rational thought. You know, actual misogynists.

And the MRM=conservatism ruse? Horseshit. Conservatives like the status quo. That's why they are conservatives. Maybe you can find some outlier MRAs, but mostly the people I interact with - John the Other and the like -- want actual equity, rather than equality when convenient, not to put words in his mouth.

That MRAs want to go back in any sense and keep women barefoot and pregnant while making sammiches, is the sort of ludicrous horseshit that people who have already defined their enemy, so they don't have to know about it, do. Like McCarthyism.

[Dave]

I just noticed that Dr. Harriet Hall and Surly Amy are both at CSICon.

Will there be another T-shirt incident?

Also, I believe that I won a bet that I had with a friend ....

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... 25/my-day/

Are you fucking kidding me?!? What a whiny little cunt PeeZus is.

I dunno, insecure attention-whoring like that is pretty impressive. I love how he's so worried about light posting. How does that ego even fit on the plane?

Nahh. Thats not a big ego. Ive worked on Wall, I know big egos, I can respect a big ego. This is pathetic, a needy, whiny narcissistic cry for affirmation. "Please please please tell me youll miss me when my posting is light. I need you tell me how great I am."

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

1. So, all I wrote, all you people got out of it is a discussion on which way the ass-wipe hangs? Fuck you people.

When one hunts for lulz, one goes for the jugular! (Nothing against you Mykeru, it just seemed like a funny subject to extrapolate on, and so I did).

[Altair]

Same goes for "misogyny". Someone who pathologically hates women as a group has got something seriously wrong with them.

The overuse of that term, when Rebecca Watson and Ophelia Benson deploy that term it evinces either 1. Not understanding what it means or 2. Just being a mean-spirited little shit. However, when Jen McCreight uses it it's because I honestly think she's an idiot.

They tend to forget the whole "as a group" part. So if someone dislikes or even hates one particular woman this gets translated as misogyny, so that person can be tarred as a hater and dismissed, instead of addressing the situation as enmity between two specific people.

About RW and OB, I would go with option 2. They use it because the little shits have seen that many people rally to their defense every time they yell that word. I imagine that that number of people will gradually diminish after they have worn them out by calling everything and anything "misogyny".

[Mykeru]

I just noticed that Dr. Harriet Hall and Surly Amy are both at CSICon.

Will there be another T-shirt incident?

Also, I believe that I won a bet that I had with a friend ....

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... 25/my-day/

Are you fucking kidding me?!? What a whiny little cunt PeeZus is.

I dunno, insecure attention-whoring like that is pretty impressive. I love how he's so worried about light posting. How does that ego even fit on the plane?

Nahh. Thats not a big ego. Ive worked on Wall, I know big egos, I can respect a big ego. This is pathetic, a needy, whiny narcissistic cry for affirmation. "Please please please tell me youll miss me when my posting is light. I need you tell me how great I am."

Allow me to translate from The Peezus:

Pay attention to me:

I've got a job. A cushy academic white-collar job. Feel my pain.

Then I have to do what everyone else trying to cram their ass on an airplane is trying to do. Then we will overlook the wonder that is air travel and complain about that.

I might be bored by having to wait. Entertain me, life, dammit.

Some people are still dumb enough to listen to what I have to say. I hate it. And I will hate it even more when they wise up.

People may not understand the brilliance that is me.

I will be tired. Put me down and read me a story.

Blah-blah-blah, me-me-me. I made a doody.

[Mykeru]

1. So, all I wrote, all you people got out of it is a discussion on which way the ass-wipe hangs? Fuck you people.

When one hunts for lulz, one goes for the jugular! (Nothing against you Mykeru, it just seemed like a funny subject to extrapolate on, and so I did).

http://claudioulpiano.org.br.s87743.gri ... uvall2.jpg

"Lulz"

P.S. http://cat-bounce.com/