The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

Old subthreads
Locked
AbsurdWalls
.
.
Posts: 863
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2012 3:50 pm

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5341

Post by AbsurdWalls »

Louis wrote:...
Expand on your "clique" comment a bit for me please. I'm not sure what you mean precisely.
It's the us vs. them idea. If you're willing to generalise, the difference between the two sides on the actual issues is very small. I think that's why PZ felt the need to blow it up. On stuff pertaining to what should happen with the atheism movement, the deep rifts are actually pretty narrow cracks. That can be seen, for example, in how easily some people move from one side to the other (obviously your actual position is always being judged by other people, based on where you post, what words you use, etc).

Beyond the actual relevant issues however, we now have a large amount of animosity between the two factions. This is based on countless real or perceived slights. We're now in a situation where "Everything MY SIDE does or says is completely right, and NOTHING your side ever does or says can be anything other than WRONG!". That attracts a certain kind of commenter, people who like to righteously attack others. I think FTB has a lot of them now. This is the clique factor. Obviously the 'pit is cliquey in its own way.

There are a range of behaviours that then enables by setting up a double-standard. A lot of the moral boundaries that members of the 'pit are accused of crossing have seen the same (usually more) traffic from the other side. I don't think "they did it first!" is a good moral argument, but there is a large amount of the pot calling the kettle black on display. I think most of what is documented here is actually along that line.

VickyCaramel
.
.
Posts: 2034
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2013 10:24 am
Location: Sitting with feet up
Contact:

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5342

Post by VickyCaramel »

Mykeru wrote:
comslave wrote:
Mykeru wrote:
VickyCaramel wrote:
Actually been lurking for a long, long time. Thought I should join the roll call. Numbers matter.
And "taking back" the term "Chill Girl" should annoy them no end. If you can co-opt "sister punisher" too, then you've really got something.
I suddenly had this picture in my head of a buxom female pitter showing with the words "chill girl" emblazened on a slightly too tight white t-shirt. I watch too much porn.
Vicky, there's your cue.
Hold that thought! It shall be done! I shall announce it on Twitter.

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

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5343

Post by Lsuoma »

John Greg wrote:Lsuoma (http://www.slymepit.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... 883#p51883) said:
I have not heard of a single instance of reverse Pitflow, so to speak. (Fucking Pitmagnets, how do they work, eh?).

Can anyone name an example? (colon doesn't count, of course - s/h/it was pure wank from the get go.)
Yes, in a sense. They did not leave here and move to FfTB, but they did leave here in anger and self-expressed disgust: Justi, and one or both of the Ardent Skeptics.
Well, Justi never came here AFAIK - he certainly never posted under his real name. Don't remember the Ardent skeptics.

Louis
.
.
Posts: 39
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2013 12:01 pm

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5344

Post by Louis »

cunt wrote:
<snip>

Obviously though you have some other point to make or you wouldn't be here. Don't keep us guessing. I'm taking your avoidance of the Nerd question as a "yes".
Point? Can't a bloke simply be curious?

And on the Nerd thing: It's not avoidance, I just don't care to play this silly game. Feel free to project all you want though. I'm sure it helps...something.

Apples
.
.
Posts: 2406
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2013 12:39 pm

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5345

Post by Apples »

AbsurdWalls wrote:If you think I'm enjoying this too much, I've given my reason before. The people who run the A+ forum are bullies. The existence of that place hurts the innocent people that sign up. I want it to have a reputation for being the hostile place it is, because at the moment it advertises itself to abuse survivors and it is not suitable for them.
Really good point. In that thread Amadan mildly points out how strange it is to learn that there is a secret sub-forum ... the existence of which is apparently to be kept secret as a condition of participation ... and Flewellyn goes into this surreal dance -- realizing that he's been busted, but that he can't admit it without breaking the secrecy oath!

Then the inquisitorial attempt to get Wind to identify a source. There are a lot of absurdly false accusations of gaslighting at that forum -- but of course Ceepolk, Flewellyn, Laughing Coyote, Grimalkin, et al are textbook gaslighting the hell out of Wind here.

http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic ... start=1425

mordacious1
.
.
Posts: 1061
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:33 pm

PZ and FfTB paranoia

#5346

Post by mordacious1 »

Soooo...PZ is out for a walk. I guess he didn't hear about the car that came up for sale which we chipped in to purchase. It's now sitting at the end of his block.

[spoiler]http://www.instablogsimages.com/images/ ... w_5965.jpg[/spoiler]

Disclaimer: To the dumb-asses at FfTB, NO THIS IS NOT A REAL THREAT! If it were a real situation, I wouldn't tell you, that's why it's merely a joke.

fascination
.
.
Posts: 338
Joined: Mon Nov 12, 2012 3:31 am

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5347

Post by fascination »

codelette wrote:
fascination wrote: Codelette, did you see the video that was posted where DPR Jones finally gives his opinion Watson/Elevatorgate (basically the whole drama for the past year and a half)? DPR had some very interesting comments and they were not flattering to Watson, to say the least.
Nope. Who is DPR Jones? Post a link to the video, please.
A link about DPR Jones (he is well known and very respected in the Atheist community) :
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Dprjones

Video (this is just the short clip with DPR but it's taken from a two hour show):

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

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5348

Post by Cunning Punt »

[spoiler]
Louis wrote:Cunning Punt,

Pharyngula IS intimidating. Deliberately. This is a feature, not a bug. It's not for everyone. Just like I don't necessarily want to post at Place X because their environment doesn't suit me (for example I'd be fucked if there were a no swearing policy. I loves me a swear I do), I don't expect that Pharyngula gets everyone's juices flowing either. Why would I? Different strokes for different folks. It's not wrong to like or dislike the posting environment there, it just is a matter of personal preference.

As for the "you have to dot every i and cross every t" thing, again I disagree. Yes there are intemperate people who will jump on any error, I'm occasionally one of them if I've had a bad day and want to spread the joy around! ;-) But there is more nuance there than you suspect. What there isn't, at this current time (and this has been the case for a while now) is a lot of tolerance for leading people through the basics on certain subjects. It's not about disagreement, it's about having to explain the same damned thing a million times to a large number of rather clueless shitheads. I'm not including you, or specifically anyone, in that category by the way. I'll explain.

We've all dealt with creationists, right? We've all had to give them "science 101 for abominable shitheads", we've all referred them to the Index of Creationist Claims, perhaps by page number. Creationist claims are so familiar as to be painful, there's not a lot of change because they tend to rest on a few foundational misunderstandings or lies about things people commonly misunderstand. I hate to say it, because I am possibly putting myself in the position of Feminism Defender (and I really can't be arsed at the moment), but the social sciences, of which feminism is a part, are also worthy of academic study. There are facts, theories, details that need to be understood. Caricaturing it as random ideology is lazy and untrue.

For the last 2 or 3 years there has been an uptick in certain...let's say...phenomena. The number and unpleasantness of various species of sexists crawling out of the woodwork has increased. Some people, rightly or wrongly, are pissed off about leading every one of those people by the hand through the basics. They long, instead for a space where they can discuss things at a slightly less basic level without hand holding and where they can also discuss things that intersect with those things. It's that simple. A group of perfectly normal human beings wanting a place to converse about stuff that interests them without 99% of the bullshit that that seems to attract.

Oh and I'm not with the Horde on everything. No one in the Horde is with the Horde on everything. You might not have seen that, but I have. Quite a bit.
[/spoiler]

Thank you for your words, Louis. I may or may not respond later but I have shit to do right now.

nippletwister
.
.
Posts: 425
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2012 6:17 pm
Location: California
Contact:

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5349

Post by nippletwister »

Gumby wrote:"R Johnson" helpfully teaches us how we pitters arrived at atheism.

http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd24 ... fd5ae0.jpg

The final part, "Never think for a second that they’re actually people who’ve thoughtfully come to atheism. Their atheism is unthinking and religious in nature", destroyed me irony meter.

I love how they just cast these blanket judgments...

Yeah, that's funny...I seem to remember coming to atheism through a ten-year intellectual process, starting in junior high, that changed my life, my philosophies, and even cost me a few friends and relationships with people who just couldn't understand why I cared about the truth instead of social climbing and money. It involved reading many books, including every major religious text, mounds of apologia, philosophy, science, political works, and thoughtful fiction. It involved living life as fully as I could, as trying my damnedest to look at everything as honestly as I could.

On the other hand, it seems to me that most of the Social Justice Warriors came to atheism because they hate god, and have a pathological need to feel independent while pretty much coasting on society and earning very little achievement themselves. God is sexist, religious people are sexist, history is sexist, science is sexist, freedom is sexist, so they create a liberal secular authoritarian religion of victimization that fills their anti-intellectual needs.

I can be an attention whore like anybody else....I blog, I play music, I talk with people.... but these folks' need to have their every emotion validated and respected, and have that need for validation and respect forced on others as a condition of acceptance, is just brain-curdling. Fucking fundamentalists are all the same.

EdgePenguin
.
.
Posts: 145
Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 12:44 am

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5350

Post by EdgePenguin »

Louis wrote:Cunning Punt,

Pharyngula IS intimidating. Deliberately. This is a feature, not a bug. It's not for everyone. Just like I don't necessarily want to post at Place X because their environment doesn't suit me (for example I'd be fucked if there were a no swearing policy. I loves me a swear I do), I don't expect that Pharyngula gets everyone's juices flowing either. Why would I? Different strokes for different folks. It's not wrong to like or dislike the posting environment there, it just is a matter of personal preference.

As for the "you have to dot every i and cross every t" thing, again I disagree. Yes there are intemperate people who will jump on any error, I'm occasionally one of them if I've had a bad day and want to spread the joy around! ;-) But there is more nuance there than you suspect. What there isn't, at this current time (and this has been the case for a while now) is a lot of tolerance for leading people through the basics on certain subjects. It's not about disagreement, it's about having to explain the same damned thing a million times to a large number of rather clueless shitheads. I'm not including you, or specifically anyone, in that category by the way. I'll explain.

We've all dealt with creationists, right? We've all had to give them "science 101 for abominable shitheads", we've all referred them to the Index of Creationist Claims, perhaps by page number. Creationist claims are so familiar as to be painful, there's not a lot of change because they tend to rest on a few foundational misunderstandings or lies about things people commonly misunderstand. I hate to say it, because I am possibly putting myself in the position of Feminism Defender (and I really can't be arsed at the moment), but the social sciences, of which feminism is a part, are also worthy of academic study. There are facts, theories, details that need to be understood. Caricaturing it as random ideology is lazy and untrue.

For the last 2 or 3 years there has been an uptick in certain...let's say...phenomena. The number and unpleasantness of various species of sexists crawling out of the woodwork has increased. Some people, rightly or wrongly, are pissed off about leading every one of those people by the hand through the basics. They long, instead for a space where they can discuss things at a slightly less basic level without hand holding and where they can also discuss things that intersect with those things. It's that simple. A group of perfectly normal human beings wanting a place to converse about stuff that interests them without 99% of the bullshit that that seems to attract.

Oh and I'm not with the Horde on everything. No one in the Horde is with the Horde on everything. You might not have seen that, but I have. Quite a bit.
The notion that people who disagree with the Pharyngula position simply doesn't understand, and needs things 'explaining' to them, is quite shockingly condescending. Perhaps these 'basics' are simply mistaken?

Tony Parsehole
.
.
Posts: 6658
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 8:16 am
Location: Middlesbrough

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5351

Post by Tony Parsehole »

codelette wrote:
And I reaffirm your title. Thanks for the cliffnotes!
Hey, don't be leaving Rayshul out! She Cliffnoted you too.

codelette
.
.
Posts: 788
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2012 12:01 pm

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5352

Post by codelette »

rayshul wrote:
codelette wrote:Godfuckindammit.
I disappear for 2 days and you rapey assholes have like a gazillion pages to go through. Somebody give me the cliffnotes, cause I ain't doing Slymepit 101 to get up to speed.
Current drama:

A+ forum is going balls up as more moderators and members throw their toys out of the pram.
It's a beautiful fucking thing.

OB compares internet haterz to getting acid thrown in her face.
Bloke (occasional pitter) tells her she should get acid thrown in her face, and also recommends a forceful facial.
OB uses this to demonstrate how evil the pit is, despite the fact it has already been established the pit is the root of all evil, also the patriarchy.

The 'pit gets more members who comment that the 'pit is not as evil as it seems from the outside.
Silly people know nothing of our secret backchannel that we just can't stop talking about, where we plot the real evil.
Also, this is where we keep our patriarchy machine.

ERV talks about viruses at FREEOK, and scares the fucking fuck out of me with phrases like killer flu.
You're the bestest lady chill girl ever!

I hope the A+ forum never goes away. Their butthurt over the most trivial shit is an infinite source of lulz.
I'm not surprised with the Pit is getting more members. We all know that all skeptics just wanna rape, pillage and be accompanied by chill girls who will comfort them. BTW, when is our next village-pillaging? I need to go to the backchannel....

Anywho, so Ophelia got offered acid in the face? Like, for real?
That reminds me, I need me some Glycolic Acid for my face.

PS. A big welcome to Vicky's titties! :D

codelette
.
.
Posts: 788
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2012 12:01 pm

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5353

Post by codelette »

Tony Parsehole wrote:
codelette wrote:
And I reaffirm your title. Thanks for the cliffnotes!
Hey, don't be leaving Rayshul out! She Cliffnoted you too.
Just gave her a sis-punisher shout-out. ;)

KarlVonMox
.
.
Posts: 143
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2012 6:44 pm

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5354

Post by KarlVonMox »

Mykeru wrote:
KarlVonMox wrote:
ERV wrote:What is this I dont even

[youtube]4c1ftt-TV6Q[/youtube]
Great talk, even though Im also a grad student in your field I learned something new - that the name "virophage" is highly misleading.
Very nice virus -apologist post. Watched the whole thing and now I'm dehydrated. Also disappointed at Abbie being part of the government plot to deny us the Zombie Apocalypse.

I remember way back when I was fascinated by the Bacteriopage T-4, which looks like a demented little lunar lander. Not just because of it's aesthetics, but the question of instrumentalism...If you think of an atom you probably get a completely functional but inaccurate image of a planetary model, or maybe some fuzzy valence shell stuff. We do that all the time.

The problem is when we start thinking of our representation as the thing itself.
[spoiler]http://living-in-washingtondc.com/image ... -small.jpg[/spoiler]

Washington DC really isn't laid out like this.

As a visual person I was intrigued by the representations vs. what it "actually" looked like.

Was it actually this regular?
[spoiler]http://www.bacteriophagetherapy.info/EC ... -Solo1.jpg[/spoiler]

Or was it a sloppy little thing like this:
[spoiler]http://www.dform.com/projects/t4/gif/t4.gif[/spoiler]

And then better imagining:
[spoiler]http://www.zyvexlabs.com/EIPBNuG/EIPBN% ... /05Ion.jpg[/spoiler]

Maybe you have to be obsessed with "what things really are like" as I am, but it struck me that the purely schematic representations made us miss something or forced the territory to look like the map.

Just one of my little obsessions. Edward Tufte would be proud.
Perhaps you missed what I meant - when she mentioned the "virophages" in that pond in antartica I had to go look up what they were, since that name literally means "eater of viruses" just like "bacteriophage" means "eater of bacteria". In the case of the T4 phage the name is good since its a virus that infects bacteria and lyses them, literally forming plaques on a plate of cells that look like the bacteria is being eaten by something.

These "virophages" dont seem to be actually infecting other viruses, rather, they infect a host that is already infected with another virus whose machinery they also need to propagate. Quite different. When I learned about Hepatidis D it was the same concept, since Hep D cant infect by itself - it needs Hep B to be around as well. Since I'm a Bacteriologist (NOT a virologist) maybe there is something I'm missing here, but as it stands the name seems misleading.

Like you, I think those pictures of the T4 Phage are freaking awesome. Might I suggest this for you:
http://www.giantmicrobes.com/us/products/T4.html

I also don't want to hijack this thread with a discussion about viruses, as much as ERV and others might love it - the appearance of Louis here is quite interesting by itself.
Last edited by Lsuoma on Sat Jan 19, 2013 2:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Karl von Moxxed up the sperler tags.

codelette
.
.
Posts: 788
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2012 12:01 pm

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5355

Post by codelette »

fascination wrote:
codelette wrote:
fascination wrote: Codelette, did you see the video that was posted where DPR Jones finally gives his opinion Watson/Elevatorgate (basically the whole drama for the past year and a half)? DPR had some very interesting comments and they were not flattering to Watson, to say the least.
Nope. Who is DPR Jones? Post a link to the video, please.
A link about DPR Jones (he is well known and very respected in the Atheist community) :
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Dprjones

Video (this is just the short clip with DPR but it's taken from a two hour show):
Will save it for later. Thanks!

justinvacula
.
.
Posts: 1832
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 12:48 pm
Location: Pennsylvania
Contact:

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5356

Post by justinvacula »


http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd24 ... fd5ae0.jpg

The final part, "Never think for a second that they’re actually people who’ve thoughtfully come to atheism. Their atheism is unthinking and religious in nature", destroyed me irony meter.
Sounds like a fundamentalist Christian :)

AbsurdWalls
.
.
Posts: 863
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2012 3:50 pm

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5357

Post by AbsurdWalls »

Apples wrote:
AbsurdWalls wrote:If you think I'm enjoying this too much, I've given my reason before. The people who run the A+ forum are bullies. The existence of that place hurts the innocent people that sign up. I want it to have a reputation for being the hostile place it is, because at the moment it advertises itself to abuse survivors and it is not suitable for them.
Really good point. In that thread Amadan mildly points out how strange it is to learn that there is a secret sub-forum ... the existence of which is apparently to be kept secret as a condition of participation ... and Flewellyn goes into this surreal dance -- realizing that he's been busted, but that he can't admit it without breaking the secrecy oath!

Then the inquisitorial attempt to get Wind to identify a source. There are a lot of absurdly false accusations of gaslighting at that forum -- but of course Ceepolk, Flewellyn, Laughing Coyote, Grimalkin, et al are textbook gaslighting the hell out of Wind here.

http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic ... start=1425
My understanding is that the A+ forum mods and admins are just a bunch of FTBers who decided to set it up? It seems like they have taken complete control of A+, not surprising seeing as nobody else appears to want it. Would Jen have been happy with a secret sub-forum? Would she have been happy with insulting and shunning the people who tried to set up a non-safe space forum for discussing A+ issues (because that's what happened)?

fascination
.
.
Posts: 338
Joined: Mon Nov 12, 2012 3:31 am

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5358

Post by fascination »

Sorry Walter, I didn't see that you had already posted the video before I did.
Anyway Codelette, DPR Jones is a Lawyer and I believe he has some sort of science degree also. He is a really popular You Tube Atheist and he is on the Magic Sandwich Show.

KarlVonMox
.
.
Posts: 143
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2012 6:44 pm

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5359

Post by KarlVonMox »

Bah, looks like something screwed up with the formatting above. My apologies!

another lurker
.
.
Posts: 4740
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2012 6:39 pm

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5360

Post by another lurker »

Louis wrote:Cunning Punt,

Pharyngula IS intimidating. Deliberately. This is a feature, not a bug. It's not for everyone. Just like I don't necessarily want to post at Place X because their environment doesn't suit me (for example I'd be fucked if there were a no swearing policy. I loves me a swear I do), I don't expect that Pharyngula gets everyone's juices flowing either. Why would I? Different strokes for different folks. It's not wrong to like or dislike the posting environment there, it just is a matter of personal preference.

As for the "you have to dot every i and cross every t" thing, again I disagree. Yes there are intemperate people who will jump on any error, I'm occasionally one of them if I've had a bad day and want to spread the joy around! ;-) But there is more nuance there than you suspect. What there isn't, at this current time (and this has been the case for a while now) is a lot of tolerance for leading people through the basics on certain subjects. It's not about disagreement, it's about having to explain the same damned thing a million times to a large number of rather clueless shitheads. I'm not including you, or specifically anyone, in that category by the way. I'll explain.

We've all dealt with creationists, right? We've all had to give them "science 101 for abominable shitheads", we've all referred them to the Index of Creationist Claims, perhaps by page number. Creationist claims are so familiar as to be painful, there's not a lot of change because they tend to rest on a few foundational misunderstandings or lies about things people commonly misunderstand. I hate to say it, because I am possibly putting myself in the position of Feminism Defender (and I really can't be arsed at the moment), but the social sciences, of which feminism is a part, are also worthy of academic study. There are facts, theories, details that need to be understood. Caricaturing it as random ideology is lazy and untrue.

For the last 2 or 3 years there has been an uptick in certain...let's say...phenomena. The number and unpleasantness of various species of sexists crawling out of the woodwork has increased. Some people, rightly or wrongly, are pissed off about leading every one of those people by the hand through the basics. They long, instead for a space where they can discuss things at a slightly less basic level without hand holding and where they can also discuss things that intersect with those things. It's that simple. A group of perfectly normal human beings wanting a place to converse about stuff that interests them without 99% of the bullshit that that seems to attract.

Oh and I'm not with the Horde on everything. No one in the Horde is with the Horde on everything. You might not have seen that, but I have. Quite a bit.

I have seen them jump on unquestionable allies who have had the temerity to be shocked or stunned at something sexist that has happened in the world. And they say 'you are shocked, you fucking moron, you cannot be shocked or stunned, you should go read Feminism 101 you stupid piece of shit'.

THAT is what I have a problem with. A noobie can be a 100% ally, but if they do not express their allie-ness in precisely the proper way, they get shit on for not reading minds, or something.

Notung
.
.
Posts: 644
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 2:49 am

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5361

Post by Notung »

EdgePenguin wrote:The notion that people who disagree with the Pharyngula position simply doesn't understand, and needs things 'explaining' to them, is quite shockingly condescending. Perhaps these 'basics' are simply mistaken?
Exactly. It's a really closed-minded way of looking at things. Similar to the 'education' part of the A+ forum (now called 'information and answers').

justinvacula
.
.
Posts: 1832
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 12:48 pm
Location: Pennsylvania
Contact:

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5362

Post by justinvacula »

EllenBeth Wachs comments on my blog concerning the fundraiser to send me to Women in Secularism 2:

http://skepticink.com/justinvacula/2013 ... -772779310

http://i.imgur.com/q4x7KXD.jpg

Tigzy
Pit Art Master
Pit Art Master
Posts: 6789
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 6:53 am

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5363

Post by Tigzy »

EdgePenguin wrote: The notion that people who disagree with the Pharyngula position simply doesn't understand, and needs things 'explaining' to them, is quite shockingly condescending. Perhaps these 'basics' are simply mistaken?
The thing is, when some of these basics include an unapologetic acceptance of reification fallacies - such as treating concepts like the patriarchy and rape-culture as distinct, concrete and quantifiable entities - then this is something which does not gel well on a blog which goes under the banner of freethought.

This is not to suggest that things like the patriarcy/rape-culture do not exist. They may well do. However, our present understanding of these concepts does not offer enough evidence that these things inarguably exist. Yet the prevailing culture at Pharyngula et al, is that they do, without question.

(indebted to Steersman, BTW, for putting me onto this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reification_%28fallacy%29)

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

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5364

Post by d4m10n »

justinvacula wrote:Here it is...the first ever, shall we say, initiative to send Slymepitters to atheist/skeptic conferences! Thanks to help (and the idea) from Damion Reinhardt, a fundraiser has been launched to help send me to Women in Secularism 2.

Donors who reach certain levels will receive certain goods including twitter shoutouts, facebook mentions, signed conference swag, exclusive Karla Porter handcrafted necklaces, exclusive interviews with me, and your conference-appropriate t-shirt of choice for me to wear on conference days.

20 percent of donations to this initiative will be sent to Operation Smile in honor of The Slymepit and Renee Hendricks.

Please share this initiative through blogs, websites, social media, etc. to help make this happen!

Youtube:

[youtube]Ek9i7GEsjeU[/youtube]

Direct links to the fundraiser's page:

http://www.rockethub.com/projects/13633 ... cularism-2

http://www.tinyurl.com/FundJustin

Blog post on this:

http://skepticink.com/justinvacula/2013 ... ularism-2/

Help make this happen...and thanks in advance for donations/shares/mirrors/promotion :)

I'll also start a new thread in addition to this post.
Part of my rationale is written up here:
http://skepticink.com/backgroundprobabi ... ecularism/

The other part is this: The campaign of personalised vilification run against Justin was deplorable, and this is one small way that we can work together to push back.

I'm going to donate as soon as I get back home.

debaser71
.
.
Posts: 841
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2012 10:03 am

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5365

Post by debaser71 »

But calling people rape enablers, mysoginists, or child molesters is hunk dory. Got it. Thanks.

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

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5366

Post by Jan Steen »

AbsurdWalls wrote:
Apples wrote:Pretty good little shitstorm over at the A+ biased moderators thread -- Julian prolonging his flounce and Wind exposing Flewellen's Lance Armstrongish unwillingness to admit to the forum's cliquey backchannel secret/private threads and chats.

Flewellen: "Seriously, if people here wanted a space to talk privately without having to be scrutinized by the likes of the Slymepit, what would be the harm? Really?"

http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic ... start=1350
[spoiler]Shit's blowin' up:
julian wrote: I remember it being something like a nomination process. Someone mentions your name, they see if you've done or said anything problematic. If no one complains, you're added and can view it.

It's (from what remember) nothing sinister. Just a place where people batted around silliness and occasionally something important about their lives they'd rather be kept secret.
Flewellyn wrote:We had something like that for awhile, took it down because it wasn't deemed necessary anymore. We might establish it again if members feel the need.

Do you remember one of the other things being a rule about "Don't divulge details, or even the existence"? Because you just violated that trust.
[/spoiler]
That thread is fascinating; it's like a pocket-size parody version of the quarrels in the Communist Party in the Soviet Union in the 1920s. There is the sinister external threat (The Slymepit/the fascists); secrecy; intrigues; ruthless people trying to bully others into submission; sly manipulators; blind followers; naive people in search of truth and justice (they always lose); open dissenters (who get themselves banned/executed), and, in the background, the Holy Party (A+/CP).

History repeats itself as a shoddy slapstick in A+theism.

VickyCaramel
.
.
Posts: 2034
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2013 10:24 am
Location: Sitting with feet up
Contact:

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5367

Post by VickyCaramel »

justinvacula wrote:EllenBeth Wachs comments on my blog concerning the fundraiser to send me to Women in Secularism 2:

http://skepticink.com/justinvacula/2013 ... -772779310

http://i.imgur.com/q4x7KXD.jpg
You called it as I see it!

By any definition... some of them at least have become professional victims.

another lurker
.
.
Posts: 4740
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2012 6:39 pm

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5368

Post by another lurker »

To clarify, they don't seem to like people who support them, but who may be new to the movement, or just plain naive. Naivete is a sin. They are too 'busy' and 'important' to waste time on supporters who have not spent 4+ years talking about rape culture. And they often get really angry at these people for what, I think, is a minor issue. If you are going to kick noobies out of the movement for being naive, then guess what, your movement isn't gonna grow, its going to shrink, because your 'standards' are too damn high. And it becomes nothing but one giant circle jerk for the super-special-in-crowd.

Louis
.
.
Posts: 39
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2013 12:01 pm

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5369

Post by Louis »

Metalogic42 wrote:
Louis wrote:Metalogic42: Hi! Cheers for the welcome. No punching bag? But how will I get my Victim Points? {Sigh} I guess I'll have to settle for conversation. I'll refrain from calling you any kind of annoyed anal ape until so proven to my satisfaction. Fair? ;-)

As for the other FTB posters coming here, why would they? What they, we, see isn't massively inspiring. I'm not trolling you guys, hell, why would I bother? I think I would be out-trolled in a second anyway. That's actually a compliment btw! I just like to test out my own preconceptions. Maybe I'm feeling silly this evening. No idea. Let's see how it turns out.
What many FTB commentors see is often completely made up. Case in point, the recent acid-throwing brouhaha. You can't believe anything PZ or OB say about us, because they hate us collectively. For them, it's not about what each individual person here is saying, it's what the slymepit as a concept is saying. Except, the slymepit doesn't say anything. Only its members do.

If FTB commentors would actually come here more often, and be uninspired by what each individual (as opposed to the nonexistent collective) is saying, that's fine. For a good example of what I mean, check one of my posts from earlier today, where I quoted several FTB comments individually, and responded to each. Does PZ ever quote slymepit comments like this? No, he just vaguely alludes to something the ephemeral slymepit collective said.
Again, I'm not responsible for PZ, FTB commenters, or for you. It might shock you that I don't base any of my opinion of slymepitters on what PZ or anyone allied says, I base it on what I see of the few slympitters that have come to Pharyngula. In other words, my opinion of them, thus far, has been low, this is a place that houses them. That's all I know. Does that mean ZOMG ALL SLYMEPITTERS ARE DAMNED BY ASSOCIATION? Nope, well not to me. As I said, PZ and others are free to set their own limits.

But this is again drifting rapidly into "PZ has done X. You must condemn X or defend PZ" territory. Doesn't seem very...what's the word...nuanced to me. PZ's a human being, I'd put money on him doing a huge number of fucking dumb things in his life. Haven't you? So? The quality of the arguments he makes about certain subjects, and how well they mesh with the data I have been exposed to, are why I agree with him about those subjects. Period. You can claim it's anything else all you want. Won't make it true. If I had to worship everyone I agreed with about some topic I'd either have to agree with no one or spend my entire life propitiating a plethora of demiurges.
Metalogic42 wrote:
The PZ deleting tactics, not sure what you're referring to, so whether it's okay or not I can't say, but it strikes me that this is one of those free speech areas that might be worth chatting about. It's probably the least likely to inflame the passions! I hope! ;-)
Well, it's not even about the deleting per se. Rather, it's that he never engages with criticism, anywhere. If he was prone to come here and address criticisms, then his strict moderation on his own blog would be fine. That's not how one does proper skepticism.
Really? So you are the arbiter of what is proper scepticism? Crikey! Pleased to meet you! PZ can argue with who he wants, how he wants, it just doesn't bother me. There are finite hours in the day, why he chooses to respond to this critic rather than that critic (and he does, just go and look at the posts about any number of religious fruitcakes he makes to take one example) is his business. Your complaint is "Waaaaah he won't address me, I'm important too". Great. So what? He's free to run his blog his way, it doesn't impinge on your ability to rebut his arguments. Nothing he does is stopping you arguing with him. He might not reply, he might not want you to do it on his blog if you've been a pain in the arse (his definition not anyone else's), but really, are you truly complaining that someone cannot decide how they are going to spend their own time? Have you any idea of the number of people that must berate that poor sod on a daily basis? Comment moderation? Fuck if it was my blog and I had to manage it, you'd see worse! Hell, the man has a public email address, write a decent rebuttal of what he has said that you disagree with, mention that you'll publish it and any response, and then publish it on your own website. If you make a quality argument and he doesn't reply, well there you go, either he can't because you've outfoxed him, or he can't because he hasn't the time, or he can't because he didn't see it or something. Why get so bent out of shape over one guy? Seriously, when I first "met" him we were just two people battering creationists for fun and profit on Talk Origins. His blogging efforts and notoriety are due to his efforts. Want to present a dissenting voice? Who's stopping you? Not me. Not PZ. Get out there. Speak freely and loudly. More power to you!

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

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5370

Post by Mykeru »

KarlVonMox wrote:Bah, looks like something screwed up with the formatting above. My apologies!
No problem, happens to the best of us..

[spoiler]http://ctboom.com/wp-content/uploads/noob.jpg
And learn to use the spoiler tag[/spoiler]

Za-zen
.
.
Posts: 2683
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:39 am

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5371

Post by Za-zen »

Good to see one of the horde ( who shares the central ideologies espoused by pzblog ). I'm not engaging you in debate directly as of yet, because i don't want to pile on and have you swamped. Hopefully you'll continue to engage, and the best way to do it is pull someone on something they say that you disagree with, that way the debate will arise naturally, then i can pile on your horde ass.....

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

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5372

Post by Mykeru »

VickyCaramel wrote:
justinvacula wrote:EllenBeth Wachs comments on my blog concerning the fundraiser to send me to Women in Secularism 2:

http://skepticink.com/justinvacula/2013 ... -772779310

http://i.imgur.com/q4x7KXD.jpg
You called it as I see it!

By any definition... some of them at least have become professional victims.
That's what it's all about: Access.

I don't think people get it. They think they own the community and they will dole out access as they see fit.

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

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5373

Post by Badger3k »

another lurker wrote:http://freethoughtblogs.com/butterflies ... pologizes/

Screencap for those who cannot bear to visit the blog:

conlon apologizes.gif
Wow. My irony meter exploded at her last line: "I would like to see everyone stop fostering the hatred and rage. However, I don't for a second think that will happen."

She left off "...because I don't intend to stop."

fascination
.
.
Posts: 338
Joined: Mon Nov 12, 2012 3:31 am

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5374

Post by fascination »

justinvacula wrote:EllenBeth Wachs comments on my blog concerning the fundraiser to send me to Women in Secularism 2:

http://skepticink.com/justinvacula/2013 ... -772779310

http://i.imgur.com/q4x7KXD.jpg
So Ophelia Benson will never get to go to a conference where Shermer is speaking or attending since she called him a "jackass" , right? I mean, if we are going by EllenBeth's silly standards of what an "attack" are.

Metalogic42
.
.
Posts: 1252
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2012 10:56 am

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5375

Post by Metalogic42 »

@Louis:

I'm a bit busy at the moment, but I have a lot to say about that. Check back later for a response (just wanted to get this in cause this place moves really quickly).

Phil_Giordana_FCD
That's All Folks
That's All Folks
Posts: 11875
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 10:56 pm
Location: Nice, France
Contact:

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5376

Post by Phil_Giordana_FCD »

d4m10n wrote:
Part of my rationale is written up here:
http://skepticink.com/backgroundprobabi ... ecularism/

The other part is this: The campaign of personalised vilification run against Justin was deplorable, and this is one small way that we can work together to push back.

I'm going to donate as soon as I get back home.
I won't donate jack shit because we have barely enough money to feed ourselves here. But I will try and help in some other way...

ThreeFlangedJavis
.
.
Posts: 2181
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:13 am

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5377

Post by ThreeFlangedJavis »

Louis, are you honestly unaware of the extent of the comment deletion tactics in use at FTB? Perhaps that's another reason for reason for reading more at the Pit, so you actually get a picture of what PZ et. al. are not allowing you to see and how they use their moderating to control the narrative. You might also get to see the extent to which PZ makes up stuff about people like Reap Paden. You might find this boring, but it goes to the heart of PZ's honesty.

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

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5378

Post by Lsuoma »

Louis wrote:Hi Metalogic42 and Phil,

So if I do come over here and post (which I am exceptionally sure will not get me banned from anywhere on FTB) how long before I'm just the punching bag held responsible for All The Evils (Real and Perceived) Of FTB et al? This all seems a little...unnecessary to me. Granted I'm far from polite about this place and its posters (perhaps wrongly in some instances I admit in advance) because the posters from here I've encountered, admittedly all at Pharyngula (really the only place I bother to post on the web now, due to time constraints etc) haven't really impressed me. Sorry. Hey, I'm sure I won't impress you either! Big whoop.

This isn't about sides, I couldn't give less of a shit about all that, it's about reality. I could bang on about whys and wherefores and whatnot but why bother? What do I need to talk to you about here? What is there to talk about?

And yes, your newest member, albeit until I get bored which could be quite rapidly, is the Louis from Pharyngula that Metalogic42 quoted. I seriously doubt anyone has a real problem with that. Maybe I'm wrong about that too. So what's it to be?

Louis
People get pissed off with behaviours here, not identities. If the baboolies were to come here and not be baboollies, then nobody would give them a hard time. In fact, I venture to suggest that the applause would be loud, prolonged and quite widely distributed...

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

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5379

Post by Lsuoma »

VickyCaramel wrote:
http://www.picpaste.com/extpics/tits-niuKWP8C.jpg
There ya go!
Oh man, and I just fired the yoghurt rifle this morning...

Za-zen
.
.
Posts: 2683
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:39 am

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5380

Post by Za-zen »

Lets establish something before we go any further, ellenbeth is either whackjob deranged, completely disingenuous, or thick as fuck. I really haven't drwan my coclusion yet, but i'm leaning towards a mix of all three.

Louis
.
.
Posts: 39
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2013 12:01 pm

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5381

Post by Louis »

AbsurdWalls wrote:
Louis wrote:...
Expand on your "clique" comment a bit for me please. I'm not sure what you mean precisely.
It's the us vs. them idea. (1)If you're willing to generalise, the difference between the two sides on the actual issues is very small. I think that's why PZ felt the need to blow it up. On stuff pertaining to what should happen with the atheism movement, the deep rifts are actually pretty narrow cracks. That can be seen, for example, in how easily some people move from one side to the other (obviously your actual position is always being judged by other people, based on where you post, what words you use, etc).

Beyond the actual relevant issues however, we now have a large amount of animosity between the two factions. This is based on countless real or perceived slights. (2)We're now in a situation where "Everything MY SIDE does or says is completely right, and NOTHING your side ever does or says can be anything other than WRONG!". That attracts a certain kind of commenter, people who like to righteously attack others. I think FTB has a lot of them now. This is the clique factor. Obviously the 'pit is cliquey in its own way.

There are a range of behaviours that then enables by setting up a double-standard. A lot of the moral boundaries that members of the 'pit are accused of crossing have seen the same (usually more) traffic from the other side. I don't think "they did it first!" is a good moral argument, but there is a large amount of the pot calling the kettle black on display. I think most of what is documented here is actually along that line.
Bolded numbers are mine.

Two key bits here for me:

1) Erm, no. I don't think there are small differences. Or rather, yes SOME of the differences are small, but SOME of them are very very big. The knife up the arse stuff, porcupines (although fuck me I did use the meme on occasion. Mea maxima culpa), doxxing people, the wiki thing with Phil (and yes, others), rape "jokes" (come the fuck on, this stuff is not a joke), harassment of people in real life and on line, endless streams of sexist/misogynist shite, none of this stuff is acceptable. It's all fucking daft. You want to engage in my side/their side, go right ahead. Leave me the fuck out of it. BTW you do realise that calling a sexist a sexist or a liar a liar or whatever isn't in that list. Guess why? Because not only do I think it's appropriate I think it's COMPULSORY. The less we tolerate that shite, the sooner it vanishes into the noise.

2) Everything my side does is right? Look above! No, everything my "side" (who they? Ed.) does is not right. But guess what, if I have to pick a "side" like we're playing fucking middle school second team soccer, I'm picking the side which doesn't think dehumanisation of women is okay. Hell, if that pisses off a few apologists and people who will slice any "nuance" (strange how that nuance never flows the other way isn't it?) them's the breaks.

But then I don't have to pick a fucking side. This is not a team game. This is about reality. It's about data, and science, and reason. It's about the ethics of the Enlightenment. Can I demonstrate my claims or not, can I support my arguments or not, can I act in such a way as to avoid the maximum amount of damage to others for the minimum inconvenience, can I recognise the value of the person in front of me irrespective of their social status, are their arguments good etc? It's not hard!

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

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5382

Post by Lsuoma »

VickyCaramel wrote:
cunt wrote:
VickyCaramel wrote: http://www.picpaste.com/extpics/tits-niuKWP8C.jpg
There ya go!
These are very nice and I have duly rated the cleavage as top-notch. I will need to see the underside of the breasts and a glimpse of the nipples before letting go of our top-secret pass. At the moment, you are a very impressive candidate. PM me.
I'm sure if you hunt around on the web, you will be able to find what you seek.

Luckily, nobody can stay mad at my bewbage for long. Seems I have already upset PZ and destroyed a lap top, so I think i had better draw a beaded line under this.
But I think they'd look very nice with a pearl necklace.

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

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5383

Post by Gumby »

nippletwister wrote: Yeah, that's funny...I seem to remember coming to atheism through a ten-year intellectual process, starting in junior high, that changed my life, my philosophies, and even cost me a few friends and relationships with people who just couldn't understand why I cared about the truth instead of social climbing and money. It involved reading many books, including every major religious text, mounds of apologia, philosophy, science, political works, and thoughtful fiction. It involved living life as fully as I could, as trying my damnedest to look at everything as honestly as I could.

On the other hand, it seems to me that most of the Social Justice Warriors came to atheism because they hate god, and have a pathological need to feel independent while pretty much coasting on society and earning very little achievement themselves. God is sexist, religious people are sexist, history is sexist, science is sexist, freedom is sexist, so they create a liberal secular authoritarian religion of victimization that fills their anti-intellectual needs.

I can be an attention whore like anybody else....I blog, I play music, I talk with people.... but these folks' need to have their every emotion validated and respected, and have that need for validation and respect forced on others as a condition of acceptance, is just brain-curdling. Fucking fundamentalists are all the same.

My journey to atheism was shorter than yours, about 2 years, and also less studied than you indicate yours was. Mine was more based on extensive conversations with both devout Christian believers and seasoned apostates. It was not an easy ride for me. One does not give up a lifetime of cultural conditioning easily. And I really resent anyone, especially those condescending Pharyngula pricks, informing me that I did not put any thought or effort into my decision to become an atheist. That "Libertarian freedom WOLVERINES!!!" shit reminds me of the Christians that tell me I became an atheist just because I wanted the "freedom to sin". Um, no, it's vastly more complicated than that for everyone, and I mean everyone.

I always got a good chuckle when witnessing devout Xian fundies on forums damning each other to hell because the other guy wasn't the "right" kind of Christian. Now we have atheists doing the same thing to other atheists, and it sickens me.

Reap
.
.
Posts: 630
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2012 10:27 pm
Location: Reno Nevada
Contact:

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5384

Post by Reap »

Let this be a lesson to anyone who was thinking about considering PZ a role model and/or following his example
http://reapsowradio.com/graphics/pz_myers_liar.png

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

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5385

Post by Lsuoma »

Cunning Punt wrote: Thank you for your words, Louis. I may or may not respond later but I have shit to do right now.
Greta?

Louis
.
.
Posts: 39
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2013 12:01 pm

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5386

Post by Louis »

EdgePenguin wrote:
<snip>

The notion that people who disagree with the Pharyngula position simply doesn't understand, and needs things 'explaining' to them, is quite shockingly condescending. Perhaps these 'basics' are simply mistaken?
1) Didn't say that. Sorry. Those people DO exist, they are a SUBSET of people who disagree with...wait...the Pharyngula Position? What is this? Where did I sign up? Hmmm I didn't. It doesn't exist. Oh wait it's a straw man of your own concoction. Well done.

2) Perhaps those basics ARE mistaken indeed. I'm a physical scientist, not a social scientist. It's not my area of expertise, but I've read the odd book or two. I don't even dream of pretending to be an expert in all areas at once. Very far from it. I don't doubt that there are physicists and economists and political scientists and engineers here who could educate me to the nth degree about any topic within those disciplines. Perfectly happy to admit my vast ocean of ignorance. But let me float this to you, on Pharyngula there are quite a few social scientists, relevant experts in the relevant subject matter, isn't it shockingly condescending to dismiss educated expert opinion because it doesn't agree with your preconceptions? I know it was when I did it. And I was wrong.Happy to be so, it's how I learn.

fascination
.
.
Posts: 338
Joined: Mon Nov 12, 2012 3:31 am

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5387

Post by fascination »

Louis, I don't think anyone here think that dehumanization of woman is okay. I am a woman myself and we have a lot of women posters here. Do you have the impression that most of us hold this view?
I have been treated much worse by the FTB/Skepchick side than the Slymepit. I have not seen any real misogynists here. As a rape survivor and a survivor of serious domestic violence, I know true misogyny. Off color jokes are not misogyny IMO.

Phil_Giordana_FCD
That's All Folks
That's All Folks
Posts: 11875
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 10:56 pm
Location: Nice, France
Contact:

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5388

Post by Phil_Giordana_FCD »

Louis wrote:

I'm picking the side which doesn't think dehumanisation of women is okay
Errr, that was, how to say, more than awkward. Nobody here thinks dehumanising women is okay. I know you don't pick sides, but honestly, who are these people who actually dehumanise women? Are they posting here? I don't get this.

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

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5389

Post by Badger3k »

fascination wrote:
justinvacula wrote:EllenBeth Wachs comments on my blog concerning the fundraiser to send me to Women in Secularism 2:

http://skepticink.com/justinvacula/2013 ... -772779310

http://i.imgur.com/q4x7KXD.jpg
So Ophelia Benson will never get to go to a conference where Shermer is speaking or attending since she called him a "jackass" , right? I mean, if we are going by EllenBeth's silly standards of what an "attack" are.

Well, to be fair, if Wachs held herself to the same standard, she might never leave the house. :rimshot:

Za-zen
.
.
Posts: 2683
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:39 am

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5390

Post by Za-zen »

Okay i'll pick the most pertinent point Louis. This is not a division between those who dehumanise women, and those who don't.

justinvacula
.
.
Posts: 1832
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 12:48 pm
Location: Pennsylvania
Contact:

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5391

Post by justinvacula »

Ophelia Benson
January 19, 2013 at 8:42 am

(emphasis mine) - imgur is down
About my controversial remarks in “From hacking to acid throwing.” I didn’t set out to say that. I heard about the acid attack on the BBC early in the morning, so I found the BBC story for ur-B&W News and then decided to post about it – because throwing acid is extra special cruel and horrible, and it’s usually done to women, and why the hell would anyone do that to someone in the Bolshoi. For several reasons, in other words, none of them anything to do with me or my haters. But then while doing that I found the BBC’s follow-up story about the deep rifts in the Bolshoi; that sounded like deep rifts throughout history – you know, Stalinists v Trotskyists, New Left v Old Left, New Left v Women’s Liberation, SCLC v SNCC – and our local deep rifts. I’m interested in that stuff. I spent most of my 20s reading about Stalinists v Trotskyists.

Then at the end I was struck by the bit about Facebook hacking, and the jump from that to acid throwing.

That’s all there is to it. I was struck by it.

But there is a background idea here, yes. It is that what the people engaged in this endless non-stop hate campaign are doing is dangerous. Not figuratively dangerous but literally dangerous. Yes, I am in fact afraid that they are going to get each other so worked up about us that one day someone will do something violent. Yes, that’s what I think. I think they’re playing with fire, and that we’re the ones who will be burned by the fire. I think it’s reckless and irresponsible to work up systematic hatred in this way. I think most of them are intelligent enough to realize that.

A couple of them turned up here to tell us that the people at the mildew pit are all very against this acid threat business. Apparently we’re supposed to be impressed. I’m not the least bit impressed. The acid threat is the direct result of their incitement.

Louis
.
.
Posts: 39
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2013 12:01 pm

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5392

Post by Louis »

debaser71 wrote:But calling people rape enablers, mysoginists, or child molesters is hunk dory. Got it. Thanks.
If that's directed at me I'm pretty sure I never said anything like calling people child molesters is hunky dory without evidence. It's abuse, certainly. Don't know about rape enabler either. Not seen that one. I am mere mortal man after all, can't see everything. (Do I need to point out the irony of a poster on a forum where people uncritically post "hey it's just a joke" as some kind of defence for anything taking obvious offence at derogatory words? Heyyyyy it's just a joke, man. By your own petard be hung)

However, if someone lies, I see no problem pointing that out. I see no problem calling them a liar if they persist. If someone makes a fairly obvious bit of rape apologetics in their argument, I see no problem pointing that out. I see no problem calling them a rape apologist if they persist. And so on and so forth.

Perhaps this will help you. I'm a sexist. I'm a racist. I'm a homophobe. I'm a...well you get the picture. I've grown up in a society where all these ideas are common, some of them have seeped in. Now am I a racist to the extent that Hitler (GODWIN!) was one? I think no. This isn't self flagellation, I'm not the worst of all possible people, I'm just a fallible human being. I've done dumb things, I've been overtly sexist or silly or whatever, argued my case, was right, was wrong, got up, dusted myself off and moved on. I'm not holier than thou I'm just as shitty as the next shitty person. The trick is to try not to be. And dear FSM do I fail!

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

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5393

Post by somedumbguy »

Can I pick the side that doesn't dehumanize people? Because fuck Louis, that's why.

Phil_Giordana_FCD
That's All Folks
That's All Folks
Posts: 11875
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 10:56 pm
Location: Nice, France
Contact:

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5394

Post by Phil_Giordana_FCD »

somedumbguy wrote:Can I pick the side that doesn't dehumanize people? Because fuck Louis, that's why.
Louis didn't say we were that side. Hence my question above.

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

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5395

Post by Badger3k »

Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:
Louis wrote:

I'm picking the side which doesn't think dehumanisation of women is okay
Errr, that was, how to say, more than awkward. Nobody here thinks dehumanising women is okay. I know you don't pick sides, but honestly, who are these people who actually dehumanise women? Are they posting here? I don't get this.
You got to remember that the definition of dehumanizing women changes to whatever PZ et al say it is. Merely being a member of this forum, or saying certain words (assuming you aren't on the same side, then it's ok) means you dehumanize women. It's a lot easier to say that the "other side" supports dehumanizing women, or doesn't support "humanizing women" (I guess - definitely weird since I've yet to meet anyone who thinks women aren't humans, or people. Second class people, perhaps, with the worst of some of the fundies and radicals, but still people) than it is actually pointing out the real disagreements. Seems to be a classic trick in propaganda techniques that some of them have been working hard on.

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

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5396

Post by AndrewV69 »

fascination wrote:Louis, you wouldn't be a "lone voice" as much as you might think. There is quite a bit of disagreement here on the Pit. Steersman does it all of the time :) .
You name it Steerman disagrees with it. The only guy I know of to be banned for life from AVfM. I heart that guy so much you have no idea.

AbsurdWalls
.
.
Posts: 863
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2012 3:50 pm

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5397

Post by AbsurdWalls »

Louis wrote:
AbsurdWalls wrote:
Louis wrote:...
Expand on your "clique" comment a bit for me please. I'm not sure what you mean precisely.
It's the us vs. them idea. (1)If you're willing to generalise, the difference between the two sides on the actual issues is very small. I think that's why PZ felt the need to blow it up. On stuff pertaining to what should happen with the atheism movement, the deep rifts are actually pretty narrow cracks. That can be seen, for example, in how easily some people move from one side to the other (obviously your actual position is always being judged by other people, based on where you post, what words you use, etc).

Beyond the actual relevant issues however, we now have a large amount of animosity between the two factions. This is based on countless real or perceived slights. (2)We're now in a situation where "Everything MY SIDE does or says is completely right, and NOTHING your side ever does or says can be anything other than WRONG!". That attracts a certain kind of commenter, people who like to righteously attack others. I think FTB has a lot of them now. This is the clique factor. Obviously the 'pit is cliquey in its own way.

There are a range of behaviours that then enables by setting up a double-standard. A lot of the moral boundaries that members of the 'pit are accused of crossing have seen the same (usually more) traffic from the other side. I don't think "they did it first!" is a good moral argument, but there is a large amount of the pot calling the kettle black on display. I think most of what is documented here is actually along that line.
Bolded numbers are mine.

Two key bits here for me:
Sorry, I think there has been a real failure in my attempt to communicate my point of view to you.
Louis wrote: 1) Erm, no. I don't think there are small differences. Or rather, yes SOME of the differences are small, but SOME of them are very very big. The knife up the arse stuff, porcupines (although fuck me I did use the meme on occasion. Mea maxima culpa), doxxing people, the wiki thing with Phil (and yes, others), rape "jokes" (come the fuck on, this stuff is not a joke), harassment of people in real life and on line, endless streams of sexist/misogynist shite, none of this stuff is acceptable. It's all fucking daft...
The initial differences on matters of substance (i.e. non-daft ones) are relatively small. That's my point. Is it okay to ask a girl back for coffee in an elevator? Are harassment rules necessary at a conference? What should they be? Are women or minorities under-represented in the atheism movement? If so, relative to what? What's the best course of action?

These are not issues that should inspire deep rifts, they are manifestly simple problems that can be discussed reasonably. The other stuff you're talking about is what happens after battle lines are drawn.
Louis wrote:2) Everything my side does is right? Look above! No, everything my "side" (who they? Ed.) does is not right. But guess what, if I have to pick a "side" like we're playing fucking middle school second team soccer, I'm picking the side which doesn't think dehumanisation of women is okay. Hell, if that pisses off a few apologists and people who will slice any "nuance" (strange how that nuance never flows the other way isn't it?) them's the breaks.

But then I don't have to pick a fucking side. This is not a team game. This is about reality. It's about data, and science, and reason. It's about the ethics of the Enlightenment. Can I demonstrate my claims or not, can I support my arguments or not, can I act in such a way as to avoid the maximum amount of damage to others for the minimum inconvenience, can I recognise the value of the person in front of me irrespective of their social status, are their arguments good etc? It's not hard!
That is my point. The problem is that this has become an issue that a lot of people are seeing as two sides like I describe. I agree with you, I prefer not to be on a side. I choose to discuss things here because this is a place where not picking a side is an accepted position.

Phil_Giordana_FCD
That's All Folks
That's All Folks
Posts: 11875
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 10:56 pm
Location: Nice, France
Contact:

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5398

Post by Phil_Giordana_FCD »

Badger3k wrote:
Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:
Louis wrote:

I'm picking the side which doesn't think dehumanisation of women is okay
Errr, that was, how to say, more than awkward. Nobody here thinks dehumanising women is okay. I know you don't pick sides, but honestly, who are these people who actually dehumanise women? Are they posting here? I don't get this.
You got to remember that the definition of dehumanizing women changes to whatever PZ et al say it is. Merely being a member of this forum, or saying certain words (assuming you aren't on the same side, then it's ok) means you dehumanize women. It's a lot easier to say that the "other side" supports dehumanizing women, or doesn't support "humanizing women" (I guess - definitely weird since I've yet to meet anyone who thinks women aren't humans, or people. Second class people, perhaps, with the worst of some of the fundies and radicals, but still people) than it is actually pointing out the real disagreements. Seems to be a classic trick in propaganda techniques that some of them have been working hard on.
Badger, you and I have been alongside Louis long enough to know a bit better, haven't we? YMMV, of course.

codelette
.
.
Posts: 788
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2012 12:01 pm

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5399

Post by codelette »

Going to that Women in Secusomething conference seems like a waste of time/money, Justin. They will not let you go past the hotel doors.

AbsurdWalls
.
.
Posts: 863
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2012 3:50 pm

Re: The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

#5400

Post by AbsurdWalls »

Louis wrote:
debaser71 wrote:But calling people rape enablers, mysoginists, or child molesters is hunk dory. Got it. Thanks.
If that's directed at me I'm pretty sure I never said anything like calling people child molesters is hunky dory without evidence. It's abuse, certainly. Don't know about rape enabler either. Not seen that one. I am mere mortal man after all, can't see everything. (Do I need to point out the irony of a poster on a forum where people uncritically post "hey it's just a joke" as some kind of defence for anything taking obvious offence at derogatory words? Heyyyyy it's just a joke, man. By your own petard be hung)...
To get this straight, you defend yourself (correctly) from any insinuation that you would use the insults debaser17 has listed, by saying you merely share a platform with those people. Fine. Then you claim that debaser17 sharing a platform with people who say "hey, it's just a joke" means his complaint is ironic?

You can't have it both ways.

Locked