Periodic Table of Swearing

Old subthreads
CommanderTuvok
.
.
Posts: 3744
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 1:18 pm

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34841

Post by CommanderTuvok »

So, on viewing that hypocritical PZ Youtube clip, we can now class PZ as racist, a potential rapist, a sexist misogynist, and a fucking all round wankstain.

Is there any end to his talents.

Cunning Punt
.
.
Posts: 1335
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2012 10:50 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34842

Post by Cunning Punt »

skepCHUD wrote:It turns out that some of the bright lights like Josh and Caine, Flower of Sickness(Evil?) over at Pharyngula have figured out the gun man's motives: entitlement, masculinity, toxic masculinity, privilege, and misogyny.
MRAs have been mentioned but so far not directly linked to the act.
I'm so glad they've worked it out for us. Where would we be without them!

Lsuoma
Fascist Tit
Posts: 11692
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 5:58 pm
Location: Punggye-ri

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34843

Post by Lsuoma »

Barael wrote:Phil Giordana:

If you/your band happen to come to Finland anytime soon, I will both a) come to your gig, b) buy you a beer (and then some) afterwards.
Phil

Having spent some time in Joensuu, and knowing the price of beer in Finland, I just want to let you know that this is a phenomenally generous offer...

Steersman
.
.
Posts: 10933
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 8:58 pm
Contact:

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34844

Post by Steersman »

So, what’s your take on the causes for that? How many more kids have to be gunned-down in cold blood before you think that there might be some flaw in the system?

Maybe “glorification of violent masculinity” might be a bit of a stretch, but I would say it's in the right ballpark ….

murtzuphlus
.
.
Posts: 120
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2012 9:19 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34845

Post by murtzuphlus »

Steersman wrote: "It's more like a public service, really... helping people think their way through their own logic, hehe."
Yes! :banana-rock: :happy-cheerleadersmileyguy: :happy-wavemulticolor:

But, for the more philosophically inclined, also known as reductio ad absurdum ….
I will probably regret this, but Steerzo, can you please elaborate?

welch
.
.
Posts: 9208
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:05 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34846

Post by welch »

Rystefn wrote:
murtzuphlus wrote:
Rystefn wrote:
What's hard to understand? Do you not know what the word "hypocrisy" means?
I think I do, but who is not (hypocritical)? I would like to meet a person who is able to live up to their expressed standards all the time.
Some people are substantially better at it than others. Some people, when caught in it, admit to what happened and try to be better. Some people are self-righteous, condescending douchnozzles who, in their own minds, can do no wrong.

It's not like we only point out the hypocrisy of the "other side" here. That would be substantially hypocritical. We call that shit out among our own just as quick. If you doubt that, just ask around how people here would respond if I turned up crying about my girlfriend having sex with another man. See? Consistency.
I do not always meet the standards I set for myself. I fail more than I'd like. But every time, I try to learn from that failure and try to do better. If PZ had said, "you know, you're right. Stef has the same right to her feelings as Rebecca does to hers, even if I disagree. Her feelings are exactly as valid for her as Rebecca's are for Rebecca, and I should not have dismissed them, or said she was wrong to have them" I would have had FAR fewer issues with him over that incident. Were Ophelia to be as consistent in correcting her friends as her enemies over gendered profanity, same deal.

But not only are they blatantly hypocritical, they revel in it. I don't expect perfection, I expect honest effort and growth. When one of those fuckwits demonstrates that, I'll respond appropriately.

Rawrsome
.
.
Posts: 54
Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2012 3:22 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34847

Post by Rawrsome »

Steersman wrote:
So, what’s your take on the causes for that? How many more kids have to be gunned-down in cold blood before you think that there might be some flaw in the system?

Maybe “glorification of violent masculinity” might be a bit of a stretch, but I would say it's in the right ballpark ….


What does “glorification of violent masculinity” and shooting children have in common?

Jan Steen
Pit Art Master
Pit Art Master
Posts: 3061
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2012 3:18 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34848

Post by Jan Steen »

At a moment when hardly anything is known about the killer, apart from his name, these SJWs have their diagnosis ready, plastered with all the right labels. This does not only tell us something about the monumental stupidity of these commenters, it also devaluates those labels. When they get applied with such abandon, terms like 'privilege' and 'misogyny' lose all meaning.

somedumbguy
.
.
Posts: 379
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2012 12:53 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34849

Post by somedumbguy »

Are there any lawyers at the Pit?

I am curious about the legality of this program at "Hackbright Academy". http://techcrunch.com/2012/12/09/hackbright-academy/

For $7500, in the heart of San Francisco, for 10 weeks, this company will teach women, and women only, how to be "pro developers". In addition to learning various web development skills, they will be offered various forms of career placement and networking opportunities. They are doing this to counter the rampant sexism and discrimination against women in the IT industry, and the brogrammer culture.

I have a nephew that would benefit from these services. Hell, I would benefit from their services.

Hackbright has done this twice before, and each time, they have gotten good press for themselves (a group of a couple of up and coming developers themselves.) In the link TechCrunch lauds them.

But is it legal?

I would think it's not. Apart from women only gyms, I can't think of any other business that is allowed to discriminate on the basis of sex. And google tells me that women only gyms is controversial too, and has often required legislatures pass special laws allowing them.

There is a current controversy over where wedding photographers can discriminate against gays and refuse to take pictures of gay weddings.

There is the Augusta Golf Club that is males only, and private clubs (as opposed to public accommodations) are allowed in specific circumstances to discriminate against people that would otherwise be in protected classes.

So is Hackbright Academy and their program legal or illegal?

Jason Thibeault discusses it here: http://freethoughtblogs.com/lousycanuck ... ten-weeks/ and of course he thinks it's a great idea, because of course, "It’s for women, to give them a place to learn without stereotype threat or brogrammer culture stifling them."

As expected many of his commenters cannot even begin to see how this is even discriminatory, though some that do, justify it because women are apparently treated so horribly in IT.

sacha
.
.
Posts: 2450
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 9:31 am
Location: Gender Traitors International

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34850

Post by sacha »

d4m10n wrote:
DickStrawkins wrote: Can you imagine what response Shermer would have got if he offered a lousy excuse like that! :shock:
Yeah, that is pretty weak. Still don't think the poker segment was
anything worth kerfuffling over, except maybe to note that sex jokes
should shouldn't be considered verboten at skeptical events directed at
adults.
For fuck's sake, it was not said at the bar, it was not said among friends, it was not said as part of a stand-up routine, where at least one can expect to be embarrassed when the comedian calls you to the stage.

It was said to a stranger in front of an audience who attended to hear a professional talk (was there a charge to attend?)

She was probably nervous anyway, standing up in front of a group of people, and then to be bombarded with sexual references while the audience laughs.
It is something one would do to make another deliberately uncomfortable.

She may have been caught completely off guard, and wished she had said something to even the dynamic. Few people are able to think of a comeback quickly, and few are able to be anything but uncomfortable standing on a platform in front of an audience, even when they have a prepared speech. She looked uncomfortable. It may not have been from the inappropriate sexual attempt-at-humour, it may have been caused by being on stage, it may have been because she did not know what to expect when she was called up, it may have been that she thinks of him as "someone famous", and that made her nervous, regardless, PZ's behaviour was about power.
He wanted to seen as funny, and hip, and appear to be someone who is confident, and he attempted that at her expense.

How do you think he would feel if I were the one in the audience thathe called to the stage, as I can think quickly (at least when it comes to sex) and has no problem or hesitation using sexual language and innuendo, how do you think he would have felt if I turned the tables, had a fast retort about his masculinity to every mention of sex, caught him off-guard, uncomfortable, and without something to say to keep that power, or even keep it even, and then I turned to the audience with a wry smile while they laughed?

He used her to make himself look better, to make the audience laugh, to appear that he can get away with speaking to unknown person like that, because he's "well known" and people pay to see him, plus, since she did not protest, she must have enjoyed it.

what does that sound like?

Had he used self-depreciating sexual humour with her, it would still have been inappropriate, but at least he would have been attempting to make the interaction more equal, there is not such an obvious power grab when one gets the audience to laugh at how inexperienced, awkward, and inept they are. The laugh should beat you, not with you. It levels the playing field a bit, and makes one look more confident. What he said to her while she was on stage, makes is obvious he has self-esteem issues, and is not at all confident around women.

Also shouldn't these SJWs be concerned for his wife. "PZ! How can you disrespect her like that publicly!?"

If he had been in the bar with a group of people he knew well, and said that to a female friend who he knew would not be offended, nor embarrassed in front of the group, and where she had an equal opportunity to take the piss, and turn the tables, fine. (his content and delivery was dreadful, it would have been easy)

He also would not have been a coward in that situation, as he certainly was with the microphone and the podium, when neither she nor anyone else in the room had a platform to stand on, and a mic wired to a speaker.)

If I'm saying the sexual references were inappropriate where, when, and to whom he used them...

murtzuphlus
.
.
Posts: 120
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2012 9:19 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34851

Post by murtzuphlus »

welch wrote: I do not always meet the standards I set for myself. I fail more than I'd like. But every time, I try to learn from that failure and try to do better. If PZ had said, "you know, you're right. Stef has the same right to her feelings as Rebecca does to hers, even if I disagree. Her feelings are exactly as valid for her as Rebecca's are for Rebecca, and I should not have dismissed them, or said she was wrong to have them" I would have had FAR fewer issues with him over that incident. Were Ophelia to be as consistent in correcting her friends as her enemies over gendered profanity, same deal.

But not only are they blatantly hypocritical, they revel in it. I don't expect perfection, I expect honest effort and growth. When one of those fuckwits demonstrates that, I'll respond appropriately.
I am curious as to why you expect "honest effort and growth". This is a political issue, isn't it? They will either fade away or prevail, no?

sacha
.
.
Posts: 2450
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 9:31 am
Location: Gender Traitors International

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34852

Post by sacha »

numerous typos in my last comment. "The laugh should beat you" should have been "The laugh should be at you.

with all the rest, it can be sorted out what I was attempting to say.

papillon
.
.
Posts: 252
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:26 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34853

Post by papillon »

murtzuphlus wrote: No, I think the point I was trying to make was that people say stupid things all the time, and that it doesn't make sense to draw all encompassing conclusions by what people may say just because they have stated an opinion on things (although it is fun). For fuck's sake.
We're not just talking about accepting someones petty foibles here though.
Condemning misogyny (real or imagined) is a huge part of Zac Myers' schtick. He puts himself out there in the public eye as a paragon of feminist etiquette.
If it were Shermer pulling the clumsy innuendos on stage, Myers would have a faux outraged post up within minutes.
If I happened to catch Dawkins prostrate,nose of floor in my local Mosque on a Friday afternoon, damn right I'd call him out on it too.

Waterkant

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34854

Post by Waterkant »

For some reason, I just want to hug them all. And I want to whisper this into their ears: Stop sobbing, cunts.

PS : ( : (: (: (: (: (: (

rayshul
.
.
Posts: 4871
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 2:00 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34855

Post by rayshul »

Steersman wrote:So, what’s your take on the causes for that? How many more kids have to be gunned-down in cold blood before you think that there might be some flaw in the system?

Maybe “glorification of violent masculinity” might be a bit of a stretch, but I would say it's in the right ballpark ….
I don't think people who feel empowered or in control go on shooting rampages. May also be pretty simplisitic to suggest that every incident has a single root cause. I'd probably blame the accessibility of weapons and poor understanding of managing mental health issues, myself.

rayshul
.
.
Posts: 4871
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 2:00 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34856

Post by rayshul »

murtzuphlus wrote:
rayshul wrote: Well, I think we're okay with pretty much anyone throwing the YOU'RE A HYPOCRITE stone. Whether it's FtB or ourselves. If I'm acting hypocritical, I'm sure y'all will shit on me. It's more like a public service, really... helping people think their way through their own logic, hehe.
Rayshul, I certainly don't think you are a hypocrite or are acting like one. Not that it matters to you what I think - just sayin'.
Thank ye. :) I do have standards on several issues and can be quite dogmatic about them but I don't think I'm morally inconsistent.

rayshul
.
.
Posts: 4871
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 2:00 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34857

Post by rayshul »

Lsuoma wrote:
Barael wrote:Phil Giordana:

If you/your band happen to come to Finland anytime soon, I will both a) come to your gig, b) buy you a beer (and then some) afterwards.
Phil

Having spent some time in Joensuu, and knowing the price of beer in Finland, I just want to let you know that this is a phenomenally generous offer...
Fuck me, the price of everything in Scandinavia is fucking ridiculous. I'd love to move to Tromso or somewhere up veeeery north but... fuuhhhk. My little New Zealand dollars wouldn't get me very far.

Mykeru
.
.
Posts: 4758
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 6:52 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34858

Post by Mykeru »

murtzuphlus wrote: No, I think the point I was trying to make was that people say stupid things all the time, and that it doesn't make sense to draw all encompassing conclusions by what people may say just because they have stated an opinion on things (although it is fun). For fuck's sake.
We aren't talking about "saying stupid things".

We are talking about people saying one thing and doing another. Specifically people presenting a moral imperative people to act one way and then writing themselves an exemption.

We are talking at cross purposes because, willfully or otherwise, you remain ignorant of what hypocrisy means.

Steersman
.
.
Posts: 10933
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 8:58 pm
Contact:

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34859

Post by Steersman »

murtzuphlus wrote:
Steersman wrote: "It's more like a public service, really... helping people think their way through their own logic, hehe."
Yes! :banana-rock: :happy-cheerleadersmileyguy: :happy-wavemulticolor:

But, for the more philosophically inclined, also known as reductio ad absurdum ….
I will probably regret this, but Steerzo, can you please elaborate?
Well, mertz-a-flertz, I might suggest that you actually attempt to read the indicated article. But since you seem to want to be spoon-fed, it offers this example:
There is no smallest positive rational number, because if there were, it could be divided by two to get a smaller one.
And since I offered it as an analogy to pointing out the hypocrisy of PZ and company – "helping people think through their own logic" – I might reiterate Mykeru’s cogent and topical example (although Rystefn provided one equally as good):
Someone who isn't gay and doesn't use illegal drugs who condemns homosexuality and drug use may be wrong on those issues, but is not necessarily a hypocrite.

Ted Haggerd, who made a career on publicly condemning homosexuality and drug use while smoking both meth and a male hooker's cock was a big goddamn hypocrite.
Stating a premise - for examples, “there is a smallest rational number, e.g., 51/1829”, “being gay and using illegal drugs is wrong”, “smilies are for reetards” – and then showing a case that contradicts the premise – for examples, the rational number 51/3658, Teg Haggerd using drugs and male prostitutes, Franc using smilies – proves that the claims are absurd on the face of them.

Enlightenment – in the first case (there is no smallest positive rational number) – or hilarity – in the latter two cases – ensues; Q.E.D ….

ReneeHendricks
.
.
Posts: 2244
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 9:48 am
Location: Kent, WA
Contact:

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34860

Post by ReneeHendricks »

somedumbguy wrote:(snipped)...women are apparently treated so horribly in IT.
Wait. We are? Where have I been the past 18 years while all this "horrible" stuff was happening to my gender in IT??

ReneeHendricks
.
.
Posts: 2244
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 9:48 am
Location: Kent, WA
Contact:

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34861

Post by ReneeHendricks »

For clarification, I should point out that in the past (in a magazine article interview), I've stated that it's a male dominated field (IT). But never that I or any other woman I have been acquainted with in the IT field have been treated horribly.

Just thought I should put that out there since FTB asshats tend to take what I say and twist the fuck out of it.

John Brown
.
.
Posts: 311
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2012 9:17 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34862

Post by John Brown »

rayshul wrote:
Steersman wrote:So, what’s your take on the causes for that? How many more kids have to be gunned-down in cold blood before you think that there might be some flaw in the system?

Maybe “glorification of violent masculinity” might be a bit of a stretch, but I would say it's in the right ballpark ….
I don't think people who feel empowered or in control go on shooting rampages. May also be pretty simplisitic to suggest that every incident has a single root cause. I'd probably blame the accessibility of weapons and poor understanding of managing mental health issues, myself.
What the fuck does "glorification of violent masculinity" even mean? Is that like "glorification of heavy metal music?" or, "glorification of violent video games?" or "glorification of pornography?" or "glorification of atheism?" or "glorification of homosexuality?" or "glorification of (insert catchy phrase here because I'm confused like everyone else and want a simple answer that will fit my pre-conceived notions about the world?)"

I mean, come on! The phrase "glorification of violent masculinity" in relation to a school shooting if fucking meaningless. It's jibber-jabber. It's fucking woo. This is complete emotionalism run rampent.

AndrewV69
.
.
Posts: 8146
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 7:52 pm

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34863

Post by AndrewV69 »

Steersman wrote:
AndrewV69 wrote:
Steersman wrote:In passing, you might want to suggest to franc that he should update his signature, specifically the assertion that “smilies are for reetards". Possibly to “smilies are generally for reetards”. Or “only reetards overuse smilies” – although that sort of puts Andrew in the docket. But either of those – or reasonable facsimiles thereof. Or admit that, periodically at least, he acts like a “reetard" himself. Particularly as there seems to be plenty of evidence for the latter case, even apart from his own use of them ….
Sorry Steers :naughty: but I could care less, and I mean that in a good way. I also doubt that Franc really cares that much either.

:moon:
I hardly thought that you would much care about “being in the docket” - I only brought it up as a case-in-point. Although I had thought you might at least raise an eyebrow over franc’s apparent hypocrisy – particularly since the concept seems to be the soup de jour …. People in glass houses and all that ….
Now now Steers... when Franc does it I take it as him having a bit of fun seeing as what is in his sig and all. Kind of hard to miss the humour even for an aspie like me.

But! Somone could ask him! Novel concept I know, but I would imagine he is the expert when the subject is himself.

ConcentratedH2O, OM
.
.
Posts: 6555
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2012 8:51 pm

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34864

Post by ConcentratedH2O, OM »

Is this a stealth attempt by franc to get Ophelia to kick herself in the cunt?

http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASI ... 08/b3ta-21

Al Stefanelli
.
.
Posts: 781
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 3:55 am
Location: Peachtree City, GA
Contact:

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34865

Post by Al Stefanelli »

Steersman wrote:
So, what’s your take on the causes for that? How many more kids have to be gunned-down in cold blood before you think that there might be some flaw in the system?

Maybe “glorification of violent masculinity” might be a bit of a stretch, but I would say it's in the right ballpark ….
Few things, Steers...

First, am I to understand that you agree owning a gun or being in favor of owning firearms somehow correlates to misogyny, military fetishization, toxic levels of entitlement that are bizarrely out of step with reality, etc.? Just clear this up, because Josh, Official Spokes Asshole is pretty much batshit crazy, himself. Or, for that matter, do you believe owning a gun or being in favor of owning firearms to be a form of entitlement and privilege?

Second, when, exactly, did I say there were no flaws in the system? I've spoken out about this many times. It is in my blogs, in my books and in videos I've made, one of which is still up on my YT Channel. I've stated there are problems with the system and that some regulation is not necessarily unconstitutional.

As well...

The issues that should be addressed are complicated, such as the ease of which illegal modifiers can be purchased and most of all, the inadequacy within our society for trained professionals to identify AND sequester for treatment those who exhibit sociopathic and psychotic behavior that could lead to situations like this. However, this can be problematic because it involves where the line is drawn with respect to a person's right to live unmolested because they are eccentric and being taken into custody for being mentally unstable enough to warrant being pegged as a threat to society.

Was the death toll higher in Connecticut because a gun was used and not, say, a knife, like the attacks in China today? Well, yes, that much is obvious. You can kill more people with a gun than a knife, and you can kill demonstrably more people with automatic weapons. You can kill even more people with a car, and even more with high-end explosives, and still even more with an airplane.

Do I have the answer? No, I don't. Obviously, this is a very complicated issue that touches on the right to privacy, the right to own firearms, the right to be free from unlawful search and seizure, and, of course, the right for a parent to expect their children will get through the school day without being murdered.

Point of fact, the shooter was one fucked up individual who had been marked as 'troubled.' So, while situations like the tragedy today should give anyone who favors gun ownership and is a student of critical thought some pause to reflect, reconsider and re-evaluate their positions (whether or not they change their mind is irrelevant), the issue is not with the majority of gun owners who are sane and quite responsible.

Yes, there needs to be viable solutions presented. I totally understand that it might seem logical in these times of extreme emotional duress to call out for guns to be banned for a variety of reasons presented by those who oppose them. Some of those who oppose gun ownership have very good arguments, and they deserve consideration when they are presented in clear, concise and statistical way. If we dismiss their arguments simply because we don't agree, then perhaps we are not being skeptical.

However, the utterly nonsensical and moronic bullshit that is contained in the image I posted is not one of those arguments. It's all kinds of fucked up and exhibits the type of mentality that is typical of extremists of any kind. Batshit crazy.

AndrewV69
.
.
Posts: 8146
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 7:52 pm

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34866

Post by AndrewV69 »

murtzuphlus wrote:
Steersman wrote: Where exactly do you see the inconsistency? Citations needed .... "what can be asserted without proof …."
I am amazed. Are you really pulling a Nerd of Redhead on me?
ROFLMAO! Steers! Humor mutherfuckuer! Do you not grock it!

somedumbguy
.
.
Posts: 379
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2012 12:53 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34867

Post by somedumbguy »

ReneeHendricks wrote:
somedumbguy wrote:(snipped)...women are apparently treated so horribly in IT.
Wait. We are? Where have I been the past 18 years while all this "horrible" stuff was happening to my gender in IT??
Apparently so. It's not my experience either in a couple of decades of software development where I've had many women bosses, women lead programmers, women co-workers, but apparently it is so in all the hot startup towns, and especially in San Francisco and the Bay Area of all places.

So much so that women need the white knights at HackBright to offer their services (for $7,500 per student) exclusively to women. And so much so that journalists at TechCrunch and other SJW think this is a swell idea.

My guess is if we offered those classes only to men, suddenly like a 16 ton weight dropped on their heads, they would figure out this might not be legal.

rayshul
.
.
Posts: 4871
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 2:00 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34868

Post by rayshul »

somedumbguy wrote:Jason Thibeault discusses it here: http://freethoughtblogs.com/lousycanuck ... ten-weeks/ and of course he thinks it's a great idea, because of course, "It’s for women, to give them a place to learn without stereotype threat or brogrammer culture stifling them."

As expected many of his commenters cannot even begin to see how this is even discriminatory, though some that do, justify it because women are apparently treated so horribly in IT.
That's pretty fucked up. I hate these kinds of women-only programmes. And shouldn't they learn with men to teach them how to deal with this whole broculture? You're not going to get women-only companies, for fuck's sake. (That said, and to avoid future accusations of hypocrisy, I am for discrimination when it comes to class/finances - if you make under 50k or so a year, you should get programs and assistance like that to give you more opportunities. But that's kinda where I draw a line. HEH.)

Oddly I've worked in IT for about 14 years and have never encountered brogrammer culture or whatever. IT definitely has its own culture but I've always found it pretty welcoming of everyone... your expertise is valued. (Was just discussing that actually at our work Xmas party.) Of course and I'm saying this a lot lately, YMMV. If you have a fucked up work environment, I think that might be a problem with your company, not the sector in general. Or maybe I'm just completely immune to that kind of thing? I don't know. Maybe I am. Lots of IT women here, I'm sure you can tell me different. That is afterall pure ANECDOTE.

cunt
.
.
Posts: 2768
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2012 8:06 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34869

Post by cunt »

Fuck it. Why the fuck do I know about this school shooting in america? Hey psychos, did you know that you can achieve international fame instantly by gunning down a few dozen innocent children.

BarnOwl
.
.
Posts: 3311
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:18 pm
Location: The wrong trouser of Time

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34870

Post by BarnOwl »

Latest reports indicate that the shooter had an (as yet) unspecified personality disorder.

Also:
The weapons used in Friday’s shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., were legally purchased and registered to Nancy Lanza, the mother of the gunman, Adam Lanza, two law enforcement officials told NBC News.
Under Connecticut law, the shooter was too young to purchase firearms.

Brain Box
.
.
Posts: 53
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2012 9:53 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34871

Post by Brain Box »

I am assuming this means they should of been locked away in a gun safe where he shouldn't of been able to get them?


BarnOwl wrote:Latest reports indicate that the shooter had an (as yet) unspecified personality disorder.

Also:
The weapons used in Friday’s shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., were legally purchased and registered to Nancy Lanza, the mother of the gunman, Adam Lanza, two law enforcement officials told NBC News.
Under Connecticut law, the shooter was too young to purchase firearms.

murtzuphlus
.
.
Posts: 120
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2012 9:19 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34872

Post by murtzuphlus »

Steersman,
Steersman wrote: There is no smallest positive rational number, because if there were, it could be divided by two to get a smaller one.

And since I offered it as an analogy to pointing out the hypocrisy of PZ and company – "helping people think through their own logic" – I might reiterate Mykeru’s cogent and topical example (although Rystefn provided one equally as good):
Someone who isn't gay and doesn't use illegal drugs who condemns homosexuality and drug use may be wrong on those issues, but is not necessarily a hypocrite.

Ted Haggerd, who made a career on publicly condemning homosexuality and drug use while smoking both meth and a male hooker's cock was a big goddamn hypocrite.
Stating a premise - for examples, “there is a smallest rational number, e.g., 51/1829”, “being gay and using illegal drugs is wrong”, “smilies are for reetards” – and then showing a case that contradicts the premise – for examples, the rational number 51/3658, Teg Haggerd using drugs and male prostitutes, Franc using smilies – proves that the claims are absurd on the face of them.

Enlightenment – in the first case (there is no smallest positive rational number) – or hilarity – in the latter two cases – ensues; Q.E.D ….
Thank you for the spoonfeeding, but this is absolute bollocks. Not very nice of you. But then again, perhaps well deserved..

Barael
.
.
Posts: 258
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2012 1:49 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34873

Post by Barael »

Really. The rest of the world is just chafing under the tyranny of not being able to gun down a dozen bystanders at will. It's like we've never heard of proper democracy at all.

rayshul
.
.
Posts: 4871
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 2:00 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34874

Post by rayshul »

Reminds me of Martin Bryant. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Bryant

I've seen very few spree killers who were considered mentally competent before their spree. Well Brenda Ann Spencer I think was the first who became pop-culture famous - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brenda_Ann_Spencer - and while she wasn't diagnosed with any mental issues beforehand, I think in retrospect she was clearly fucked in the head.

BarnOwl
.
.
Posts: 3311
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:18 pm
Location: The wrong trouser of Time

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34875

Post by BarnOwl »

Brain Box wrote:I am assuming this means they should of been locked away in a gun safe where he shouldn't of been able to get them?
Doesn't seem like that strategy would work very well to prevent a 20-year-old with average intelligence from getting their hands on the guns.

As rayshul mentioned earlier in a different context, the Pit is pretty diverse. In case it's not apparent, I'm a melt the guns variety of Merkin.

d4m10n
.
.
Posts: 1526
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 5:17 am
Location: OKC
Contact:

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34876

Post by d4m10n »

sacha wrote:
d4m10n wrote:
Dick Strawkins wrote:
I almpst feel sorry for Peezus with this one.
That video was shot in late 2010. It wasn't until 8 months later at Elevatorgate that he became a lifelong feminist.

Was it sexist behavior?
I was in the live audience during that one, didn't think it was anything other than very mildly transgressive sexual humour. If I recall correctly, PZ also made a point of his vanilla monogamous sex life during the same talk, which made the whole poker hand thing seem like even more of a harmless joke.

However, I also sort of assumed that the 'volunteer' was a plant, one of the sk3 student organisers, perhaps. Cannot now recall why I thought that at the time. May have to go through the old photo albums to figure it out.
It was in poor taste, especially in that venue, him doing a talk at the podium, and with a stranger in the audience. Inappropriate even by my standards, however, That isn't the point. The point is he would be shouting MISOGYNY and furiously writing blog posts and comments if he saw another man do exactly the same thing.
How can you claim to know what he would do?

Has something like this happened before, and PZ laid into someone for joking about sex in a similar context? Or are you just extrapolating from the other SJW's and what they've said on other issues?

Brain Box
.
.
Posts: 53
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2012 9:53 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34877

Post by Brain Box »

Haha well, I didn't make the comment because I support excessive gun rights. I am just curious where series of errors lead to this tragedy. I suppose it is a way for me to deal with such a horrific event.

Two obvious errors have occurred in this case:

1. That a mentally unstable young man didn't receive the mental health treatment he required. This is a common trend with recent mass killings. The Batman theater murderer had obvious signs of mental illness that seem to have not been taken seriously by anyone close to him, and subsequently allowed him to legally purchase several firearms.

2. That he was able to illegally acquire legally purchased firearms. I imagine that most illegally acquired firearms were legally acquired at some point.


BarnOwl wrote:
Brain Box wrote:I am assuming this means they should of been locked away in a gun safe where he shouldn't of been able to get them?
Doesn't seem like that strategy would work very well to prevent a 20-year-old with average intelligence from getting their hands on the guns.

As rayshul mentioned earlier in a different context, the Pit is pretty diverse. In case it's not apparent, I'm a melt the guns variety of Merkin.

Steersman
.
.
Posts: 10933
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 8:58 pm
Contact:

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34878

Post by Steersman »

Al Stefanelli wrote:
Steersman wrote:
So, what’s your take on the causes for that? How many more kids have to be gunned-down in cold blood before you think that there might be some flaw in the system?

Maybe “glorification of violent masculinity” might be a bit of a stretch, but I would say it's in the right ballpark ….
Few things, Steers...

First, am I to understand that you agree owning a gun or being in favor of owning firearms somehow correlates to misogyny, military fetishization, toxic levels of entitlement that are bizarrely out of step with reality, etc.? Just clear this up, because Josh, Official Spokes Asshole is pretty much batshit crazy, himself. Or, for that matter, do you believe owning a gun or being in favor of owning firearms to be a form of entitlement and privilege?

Second, when, exactly, did I say there were no flaws in the system? I've spoken out about this many times. It is in my blogs, in my books and in videos I've made, one of which is still up on my YT Channel. I've stated there are problems with the system and that some regulation is not necessarily unconstitutional.
....

However, the utterly nonsensical and moronic bullshit that is contained in the image I posted is not one of those arguments. It's all kinds of fucked up and exhibits the type of mentality that is typical of extremists of any kind. Batshit crazy.
All good arguments with which I largely sympathize. But asserting that there are some justifications for owning a gun hardly detracts from the assertion that the “glorification of violent masculinity” exists – which I sort of doubt that you would dispute – or that it contributed in some way to today’s incident in Newtown, the recent one in Aurora, or the one 23 years ago in Montreal.

But I find there are some interesting though problematic similarities here with the arguments about feminism, quite succinctly phrased by Steven Pinker in a passage in his The Blank Slate on the topic of gender:
FEMINISM IS OFTEN derided because of the arguments of its lunatic fringe—for example, that all intercourse is rape, that all women should be lesbians, or that only 10 percent of the population should be allowed to be male. Feminists reply that proponents of women's rights do not speak with one voice, and that feminist thought comprises many positions, which have to be evaluated independently. That is completely legitimate, but it cuts both ways. To criticize a particular feminist proposal is not to attack feminism in general.
To criticize a particular aspect or concomitant of gun ownership is not to attack gun ownership in general; the “principle” is just as problematic – and as wrong – in the second case as it is in the first. As with feminism some aspects or quoted statements from that blog post might be, as you say, "batshit crazy" - but all of them?

But if you had handy some links to some of your videos and posts on the topic I’d appreciate them. However, while “haste makes waste”, there comes a time when further yaking about the problem seems more like an exercise in obstructionism ….

d4m10n
.
.
Posts: 1526
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 5:17 am
Location: OKC
Contact:

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34879

Post by d4m10n »

Seems to me that PZ has done and said enough worth criticizing that there is no need to also make things up that he might well do in some possible world and criticize those as well. Why not take him to task for things that he has really done?

Cunning Punt
.
.
Posts: 1335
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2012 10:50 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34880

Post by Cunning Punt »

BarnOwl wrote:
Brain Box wrote:I am assuming this means they should of been locked away in a gun safe where he shouldn't of been able to get them?
Doesn't seem like that strategy would work very well to prevent a 20-year-old with average intelligence from getting their hands on the guns.

As rayshul mentioned earlier in a different context, the Pit is pretty diverse. In case it's not apparent, I'm a melt the guns variety of Merkin.
Well, if the gun safe had a key and the only key was in the possession of the adult who owned it .... not that I am against melting the guns, but the chances of the latter happening in the USA is zero. Lets face it, most people in this country are willing to put up with the occasional gun massacre as the price to pay for the 2nd Amendment (as it's currently interpreted). They just hope it never visits them or anyone near them. And why not? There's >300 million people here, chances are it will be someone else. Ugh, I'm feeling cynical tonight.

franc
.
.
Posts: 2470
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 7:03 pm
Location: Kosmopolites
Contact:

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34881

Post by franc »

AndrewV69 wrote:
Steersman wrote:I hardly thought that you would much care about “being in the docket” - I only brought it up as a case-in-point. Although I had thought you might at least raise an eyebrow over franc’s apparent hypocrisy – particularly since the concept seems to be the soup de jour …. People in glass houses and all that ….
Now now Steers... when Franc does it I take it as him having a bit of fun seeing as what is in his sig and all. Kind of hard to miss the humour even for an aspie like me.
I stick it to smilies the way grumpy old men do. Superfluous nonsense that some can't live without, which I can't do anything about and which I am under no obligation to not occasionally mumble crotchety disdain about. It's also known as "pissing into the wind" - I do it for my own amusement even if I get wet. Funny how Steerscripple has plenty of time to ruminate about the theoretical, but has zero time to fire up google and look stuff up for himself. At least I now fully understand what the jargon term "jaqing off" means. Needs Steerscripple's avatar in the various 'netspeak dictionaries out there.

Barael
.
.
Posts: 258
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2012 1:49 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34882

Post by Barael »

But I can totally stop a military coup if I just have an automatic rifle against a A-10 Thunderbolt.

franc
.
.
Posts: 2470
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 7:03 pm
Location: Kosmopolites
Contact:

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34883

Post by franc »

RationalWiki at it again -

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Talk:Athei ... ting_views
I have now attempted to add the AntiAtheismPlus-reddit as well as a comprehensive list of resources of dissenting views about Atheism Plus. Both were removed by User:EVDebs. In no way do I wish to edit war. I disagree with these removals.

The reason for the removal of the reddit link was listed as:

Dissent is one thing, but Reddit has a nasty tendency to be nothing more than vomit on a web page. Come up with something that's at least civilized.

however, despite my second conciliation, the removal of the second link was given as

Not a fan of that either -- outright lying about the aims of the movement plus links to hatemongers like Franc Hoggle

This is plainly based in personal bias. Resources of dissenting views and outside perceptions of Atheism Plus should most definitely be included, particularly when a bulk of the article in question includes many points of view which question Atheism Plus' legitimacy and value. Removal of resources of dissenting views should not be based on being a "fan" (or not) of any particular site or author, nor should one's opinion of Atheism Plus prevent a dissenting view be linked, especially when presented specifically as such.
Further down, this choice response -
Actually, no, "balance" and "evenly weighted" are anathema here. This is NOT Wikipedia, and no groups have a monopoly on discussion. — Unsigned, by: ORavenhurst / talkDo You Believe That? 16:54, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
Just read that line back to yourself a few times.

Mykeru
.
.
Posts: 4758
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 6:52 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34884

Post by Mykeru »

BarnOwl wrote:Latest reports indicate that the shooter had an (as yet) unspecified personality disorder.

Also:
The weapons used in Friday’s shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., were legally purchased and registered to Nancy Lanza, the mother of the gunman, Adam Lanza, two law enforcement officials told NBC News.
Under Connecticut law, the shooter was too young to purchase firearms.
Well, in the United States, we are so advanced that we have no mental health infrastructure anymore. Reagan dumped people out of halfway houses into the street. And we don't address mental health issues because we figure it's cheaper to let people go until they gain the attention of the criminal justice system.

I'm not even being facetious. We have traded mental institutions for prisons.

Badger3k
.
.
Posts: 3466
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 6:53 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34885

Post by Badger3k »

Cunning Punt wrote:
BarnOwl wrote:
Brain Box wrote:I am assuming this means they should of been locked away in a gun safe where he shouldn't of been able to get them?
Doesn't seem like that strategy would work very well to prevent a 20-year-old with average intelligence from getting their hands on the guns.

As rayshul mentioned earlier in a different context, the Pit is pretty diverse. In case it's not apparent, I'm a melt the guns variety of Merkin.
Well, if the gun safe had a key and the only key was in the possession of the adult who owned it .... not that I am against melting the guns, but the chances of the latter happening in the USA is zero. Lets face it, most people in this country are willing to put up with the occasional gun massacre as the price to pay for the 2nd Amendment (as it's currently interpreted). They just hope it never visits them or anyone near them. And why not? There's >300 million people here, chances are it will be someone else. Ugh, I'm feeling cynical tonight.
Too busy teaching to hear much about this, but from what I understand he killed his mother first, so if she had the key...he had it then. About the only safe way is if it was a combination safe with only her knowing the combination (other than the company that made it, perhaps).

BarnOwl
.
.
Posts: 3311
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:18 pm
Location: The wrong trouser of Time

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34886

Post by BarnOwl »

Warning: sickening and depressing news story about the motivations of the killer-

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18563_162-5 ... -possible/

Mother of the shooter owned the guns, and shooter "sought to kill as many children as possible" - it's going to be a stretch to pin this one on straightforward misogyny and patriarchal oppression, I think. Though I don't possess the special logic skillz of some of the Baboons, so I could be totally wrong about this.
CBS correspondent John Miller reports that Adam had the bigger personality of the two brothers. Ryan, 24, was the quiet one, went to business school and lived in New Jersey. Investigators believe that this shooting was the result of a conflict between he and his mother that was developing for a long time -- killing her and then killing what she loved most -- her students.

Steersman
.
.
Posts: 10933
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 8:58 pm
Contact:

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34887

Post by Steersman »

AndrewV69 wrote:
murtzuphlus wrote:
Steersman wrote: Where exactly do you see the inconsistency? Citations needed .... "what can be asserted without proof …."
I am amazed. Are you really pulling a Nerd of Redhead on me?
ROFLMAO! Steers! Humor mutherfuckuer! Do you not grock it!
If murtzuphlus had included a smiley then I could have seen that as a shot at “Nerd of Redhead” and a chagrined acceptance that Nerd might have had a point in that regard, even if a narrow one. In passing, one might argue the problematic nature of allowing such absurdities as franc’s statement to stand – people with a tendency to let others do their thinking for them frequently follow those others over the same cliff to nobody's benefit.

But the impression I got was that he was implying that since only dickheads like “Nerd of Redhead” asked for evidence then he shouldn’t be obliged to comply either. Which is fine with me – if he wants to be similarly characterized.

peterb
.
.
Posts: 37
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2012 7:33 pm
Location: Aptos, California

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34888

Post by peterb »

somedumbguy wrote:Are there any lawyers at the Pit?

I am curious about the legality of this program at "Hackbright Academy". http://techcrunch.com/2012/12/09/hackbright-academy/

For $7500, in the heart of San Francisco, for 10 weeks, this company will teach women, and women only, how to be "pro developers". In addition to learning various web development skills, they will be offered various forms of career placement and networking opportunities. They are doing this to counter the rampant sexism and discrimination against women in the IT industry, and the brogrammer culture.

But is it legal?



So is Hackbright Academy and their program legal or illegal?
IAAL (even a California lawyer). Yes, it is entirely legal. Not even close. And it should be legal. Private enterprise

Lsuoma
Fascist Tit
Posts: 11692
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 5:58 pm
Location: Punggye-ri

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34889

Post by Lsuoma »

Mykeru wrote:
Well, in the United States, we are so advanced that we have no mental health infrastructure anymore. Reagan dumped people out of halfway houses into the street. And we don't address mental health issues because we figure it's cheaper to let people go until they gain the attention of the criminal justice system.

I'm not even being facetious. We have traded mental institutions for prisons.
Thatch did the same - "care" in the community...

peterb
.
.
Posts: 37
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2012 7:33 pm
Location: Aptos, California

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34890

Post by peterb »

BarnOwl wrote:Latest reports indicate that the shooter had an (as yet) unspecified personality disorder.

Also:
The weapons used in Friday’s shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., were legally purchased and registered to Nancy Lanza, the mother of the gunman, Adam Lanza, two law enforcement officials told NBC News.
Under Connecticut law, the shooter was too young to purchase firearms.

I remember from Criminal law class...what's the best possible evidence that an individual has a mental health issue?? shooting children.

It would be virtually impossible that he *didn't* have a "personality disorder"

somedumbguy
.
.
Posts: 379
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2012 12:53 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34891

Post by somedumbguy »

peterb wrote:
somedumbguy wrote:Are there any lawyers at the Pit?

I am curious about the legality of this program at "Hackbright Academy". http://techcrunch.com/2012/12/09/hackbright-academy/

For $7500, in the heart of San Francisco, for 10 weeks, this company will teach women, and women only, how to be "pro developers". In addition to learning various web development skills, they will be offered various forms of career placement and networking opportunities. They are doing this to counter the rampant sexism and discrimination against women in the IT industry, and the brogrammer culture.

But is it legal?



So is Hackbright Academy and their program legal or illegal?
IAAL (even a California lawyer). Yes, it is entirely legal. Not even close. And it should be legal. Private enterprise
Thank you, with your unverified, totally useless answer that gives no further explanation, I have identified you are in fact a lawyer.

A douchebag and a lawyer, but then I repeat myself.

BarnOwl
.
.
Posts: 3311
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:18 pm
Location: The wrong trouser of Time

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34892

Post by BarnOwl »

Mykeru wrote: Reagan dumped people out of halfway houses into the street. And we don't address mental health issues because we figure it's cheaper to let people go until they gain the attention of the criminal justice system.

I'm not even being facetious. We have traded mental institutions for prisons.
Recently I saw the !968 Exhibit at Oakland Museum with some friends, and of course a section was devoted to the RFK assassination. We were discussing how different things would have been, and would be now, if RFK had not been killed. Likely he would have won the Democratic Party nomination and the presidential election, and one of the (many) probable fallouts of that would have been a much less politically successful Reagan.

rayshul
.
.
Posts: 4871
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 2:00 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34893

Post by rayshul »

somedumbguy wrote:
peterb wrote:IAAL (even a California lawyer). Yes, it is entirely legal. Not even close. And it should be legal. Private enterprise
Thank you, with your unverified, totally useless answer that gives no further explanation, I have identified you are in fact a lawyer.

A douchebag and a lawyer, but then I repeat myself.
Peter gave an explanation - it's a private enterprise and therefore you can discriminate over who you do courses for. (Or did I miss something?) I hate to use the term slippery slope but does that then mean that if you are a private enterprise you can discriminate over who you sell to/allow in your shop/etc though? Where is the line drawn (legally)? Genuine question because I don't see much difference in someone offering services to a particular clientel and someone not letting certain people into their shop.

somedumbguy
.
.
Posts: 379
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2012 12:53 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34894

Post by somedumbguy »

rayshul wrote:
somedumbguy wrote:
peterb wrote:IAAL (even a California lawyer). Yes, it is entirely legal. Not even close. And it should be legal. Private enterprise
Thank you, with your unverified, totally useless answer that gives no further explanation, I have identified you are in fact a lawyer.

A douchebag and a lawyer, but then I repeat myself.
Peter gave an explanation - it's a private enterprise and therefore you can discriminate over who you do courses for. (Or did I miss something?) I hate to use the term slippery slope but does that then mean that if you are a private enterprise you can discriminate over who you sell to/allow in your shop/etc though? Where is the line drawn (legally)? Genuine question because I don't see much difference in someone offering services to a particular clientel and someone not letting certain people into their shop.
Saying it's private enterprise is clearly not an explanation. It is not sufficient, witness any public accommodation, witness hotels that cannot discriminate against men or women, black or white, witness taxi cabs, etc., private enterprises all of them.

It was an unhelpful and clearly so comment to make. If lawyer Peter wanted to be helpful he might clarify WHY certain businesses, this one in particular are allowed to discriminate against one sex.

So far Lawyer Peter seems to be damage, I think I will route around him.

somedumbguy
.
.
Posts: 379
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2012 12:53 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34895

Post by somedumbguy »

I introduced the question and gave a far better explanation that Lawyer Peter did.
But is it legal?

I would think it's not. Apart from women only gyms, I can't think of any other business that is allowed to discriminate on the basis of sex. And google tells me that women only gyms is controversial too, and has often required legislatures pass special laws allowing them.

There is a current controversy over where wedding photographers can discriminate against gays and refuse to take pictures of gay weddings.

There is the Augusta Golf Club that is males only, and private clubs (as opposed to public accommodations) are allowed in specific circumstances to discriminate against people that would otherwise be in protected classes.

So is Hackbright Academy and their program legal or illegal?

Jason Thibeault discusses it here: http://freethoughtblogs.com/lousycanuck ... ten-weeks/ and of course he thinks it's a great idea, because of course, "It’s for women, to give them a place to learn without stereotype threat or brogrammer culture stifling them."
Peter, the lawyer, gave a terribly unhelpful, vacuous, arrogant, insulting answer.

Typical lawyer jerk.

rayshul
.
.
Posts: 4871
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 2:00 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34896

Post by rayshul »

somedumbguy wrote:Saying it's private enterprise is clearly not an explanation. It is not sufficient, witness any public accommodation, witness hotels that cannot discriminate against men or women, black or white, witness taxi cabs, etc., private enterprises all of them.

It was an unhelpful and clearly so comment to make. If lawyer Peter wanted to be helpful he might clarify WHY certain businesses, this one in particular are allowed to discriminate against one sex.

So far Lawyer Peter seems to be damage, I think I will route around him.
Why not just ask for clarification?

John Brown
.
.
Posts: 311
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2012 9:17 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34897

Post by John Brown »

somedumbguy wrote:I introduced the question and gave a far better explanation that Lawyer Peter did.
But is it legal?

I would think it's not. Apart from women only gyms, I can't think of any other business that is allowed to discriminate on the basis of sex. And google tells me that women only gyms is controversial too, and has often required legislatures pass special laws allowing them.

There is a current controversy over where wedding photographers can discriminate against gays and refuse to take pictures of gay weddings.

There is the Augusta Golf Club that is males only, and private clubs (as opposed to public accommodations) are allowed in specific circumstances to discriminate against people that would otherwise be in protected classes.

So is Hackbright Academy and their program legal or illegal?

Jason Thibeault discusses it here: http://freethoughtblogs.com/lousycanuck ... ten-weeks/ and of course he thinks it's a great idea, because of course, "It’s for women, to give them a place to learn without stereotype threat or brogrammer culture stifling them."
Peter, the lawyer, gave a terribly unhelpful, vacuous, arrogant, insulting answer.

Typical lawyer jerk.
Dude, I think you're abusing the English language a bit.

Gumby
Pit Art Master
Pit Art Master
Posts: 5543
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:40 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34898

Post by Gumby »

somedumbguy wrote:I introduced the question and gave a far better explanation that Lawyer Peter did.
But is it legal?

I would think it's not. Apart from women only gyms, I can't think of any other business that is allowed to discriminate on the basis of sex. And google tells me that women only gyms is controversial too, and has often required legislatures pass special laws allowing them.

There is a current controversy over where wedding photographers can discriminate against gays and refuse to take pictures of gay weddings.

There is the Augusta Golf Club that is males only, and private clubs (as opposed to public accommodations) are allowed in specific circumstances to discriminate against people that would otherwise be in protected classes.

So is Hackbright Academy and their program legal or illegal?

Jason Thibeault discusses it here: http://freethoughtblogs.com/lousycanuck ... ten-weeks/ and of course he thinks it's a great idea, because of course, "It’s for women, to give them a place to learn without stereotype threat or brogrammer culture stifling them."
Peter, the lawyer, gave a terribly unhelpful, vacuous, arrogant, insulting answer.

Typical lawyer jerk.
You are completely hyperventilating. Settle down, Francis. FFS.

Mykeru
.
.
Posts: 4758
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 6:52 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34899

Post by Mykeru »

Gumby wrote:
You are completely hyperventilating. Settle down, Francis. FFS.
Obviously they have a history and, unless I am wrong on getting my s/h/it straight, it's man-love gone bad.

Mykeru
.
.
Posts: 4758
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 6:52 am

Re: Hitch

#34900

Post by Mykeru »

sacha wrote:
oh how I miss you...
hitch shave.jpg
*swoon*
The Hitch...

Does this mean I don't have to be careful of my carbs?

Locked