Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

Don't know if that works, but still. Thanks Pit!

https://soundcloud.com/phil-giordana-fcd

Fucking A1 Phil. You have made us sound epic and dignified, all in one. I'm sensing a Pyt Opera coming next.

Come over to the Pyt side - we have Phil's music and piranha cartoons.

:dance:

Phil, that was awesome. I'm thinking soundtrack to a dramatic Rocko video. :clap:

Ok, let's be fair now.

First, thanks a lot to all ya people for the kind words on the music.

Second, this is actually a 6 years old soundtrack I wrote for a movie about WW II that was cancelled a few weeks before production. I thought the dramatic side of the track would fit the Pit. I have 3 or 4 more from this same movie, if you guys and gals are interested. As mentioned previously, I am not a member of any copyright society, and since these tracks have never been published, you can use them for videos and podcasts. Just credit me. (careful with "Armistice, though, it's the basis for a new Fairyland song, so it might get published)

Here they are, PM me if you want the files...

https://soundcloud.com/phil-giordana-fc ... t-probably

[AndrewV69]

Aneris, IIRC.

You know pitters get banned on site right?

As far as I can tell they are not the same person.

Although she did say "I shit you not" in response to Submariner asking if she was Owlmirror.

Are you really that stupid?

You two going to get a room or do I get to watch?

:popcorn:

[lonesagi]

Don't know if that works, but still. Thanks Pit!

https://soundcloud.com/phil-giordana-fcd

Fucking A1 Phil. You have made us sound epic and dignified, all in one. I'm sensing a Pyt Opera coming next.

Come over to the Pyt side - we have Phil's music and piranha cartoons.

:dance:

Phil, that was awesome. I'm thinking soundtrack to a dramatic Rocko video. :clap:

Ok, let's be fair now.

First, thanks a lot to all ya people for the kind words on the music.

Second, this is actually a 6 years old soundtrack I wrote for a movie about WW II that was cancelled a few weeks before production. I thought the dramatic side of the track would fit the Pit. I have 3 or 4 more from this same movie, if you guys and gals are interested. As mentioned previously, I am not a member of any copyright society, and since these tracks have never been published, you can use them for videos and podcasts. Just credit me. (careful with "Armistice, though, it's the basis for a new Fairyland song, so it might get published)

Here they are, PM me if you want the files...

https://soundcloud.com/phil-giordana-fc ... t-probably

Good stuff Phil. I'm listening now, thank you.

[JackSkeptic]

Aneris, IIRC.

You know pitters get banned on site right?

As far as I can tell they are not the same person.

Although she did say "I shit you not" in response to Submariner asking if she was Owlmirror.

Are you really that stupid?

You two going to get a room or do I get to watch?

:popcorn:

You pay for a room you get to do both.

[KiwiInOz]

Are you really that stupid?

You two going to get a room or do I get to watch?

:popcorn:

You pay for a room you get to do both.

Works for me. Can I interest you in pay per view and profit share, Jack?

[JackSkeptic]

Are you really that stupid?

You two going to get a room or do I get to watch?

:popcorn:

You pay for a room you get to do both.

Works for me. Can I interest you in pay per view and profit share, Jack?

Sounds good to me. We can have some of Phil's misogynist music playing to set the tone.

[KiwiInOz]

Works for me. Can I interest you in pay per view and profit share, Jack?

Sounds good to me. We can have some of Phil's misogynist music playing to set the tone.

I wonder if he could playYou can leave your (racist) hat on by Joe <redacted sexist word>er?

[mordacious1]

Does this look tasty to anyone:

[trigger warning]

http://www.freewebs.com/sugartopaz/apps ... oid=404550

Note: This should only be seen AT HOME.

[JackSkeptic]

Does this look tasty to anyone:

[trigger warning]

http://www.freewebs.com/sugartopaz/apps ... oid=404550

Note: This should only be seen AT HOME.

I feel sick. The cake looks tasty though.

[lonesagi]

Does this look tasty to anyone:

[trigger warning]

http://www.freewebs.com/sugartopaz/apps ... oid=404550

Note: This should only be seen AT HOME.

I feel sick. The cake looks tasty though.

The cake is a lie.

[JackSkeptic]

Michael Nugent posted this http://www.michaelnugent.com/2013/03/06 ... in-vacula/




' #5 #10 Kevin, #7 Pitchguest and #9 Tina,

It was Justin, not me, who introduced the idea of evaluating the moral justification of what Justin, not me, described as the nasty pushback against some feminists on the Internet. He originally said “It’s not to say the nasty pushback is morally justified.”

I found it encouraging that he was saying this, and I wanted to clarify if he could go a step further and say that at least some of the nasty pushback was morally unjustified, and could he give some examples.

Justin replied that some of the nasty pushback was indeed morally unjustified, and said it was difficult to draw a line in terms of examples. I gave him some examples, and he said it was too daunting to reply to them all, which I agree is a fair point.

So I have now said that I am not asking him to respond to my examples, but to give me some examples of his own, in order to illustrate an assertion that he himself made, so that I can understand what he means by that assertion.'



So if that is correct JV dropped himself in it by not defining terms first, in my opinion, and putting himself in the position of the person required to hold the burden of proof. Anyway it is an encouraging post, we will see what comes of it. It will could possibly avoid the very sticky discussion on morality. I suspect Nugent has realised he really does not want to go there, we will see.

[AndrewV69]

Are you really that stupid?

You two going to get a room or do I get to watch?

:popcorn:

You pay for a room you get to do both.

Works for me. Can I interest you in pay per view and profit share, Jack?

Sounds good to me. We can have some of Phil's misogynist music playing to set the tone.

*gleep* actually, I am a bit of a prude ... was just joking ... never expected to get called on it ... erm

[JackSkeptic]

Too late, pants down!!!!!

[AndrewV69]

Too late, pants down!!!!!

Where in the name of fuck is Ophelia when you need her!

[lonesagi]

Michael Nugent posted this http://www.michaelnugent.com/2013/03/06 ... in-vacula/




' #5 #10 Kevin, #7 Pitchguest and #9 Tina,

It was Justin, not me, who introduced the idea of evaluating the moral justification of what Justin, not me, described as the nasty pushback against some feminists on the Internet. He originally said “It’s not to say the nasty pushback is morally justified.”

I found it encouraging that he was saying this, and I wanted to clarify if he could go a step further and say that at least some of the nasty pushback was morally unjustified, and could he give some examples.

Justin replied that some of the nasty pushback was indeed morally unjustified, and said it was difficult to draw a line in terms of examples. I gave him some examples, and he said it was too daunting to reply to them all, which I agree is a fair point.

So I have now said that I am not asking him to respond to my examples, but to give me some examples of his own, in order to illustrate an assertion that he himself made, so that I can understand what he means by that assertion.'



So if that is correct JV dropped himself in it by not defining terms first, in my opinion, and putting himself in the position of the person required to hold the burden of proof. Anyway it is an encouraging post, we will see what comes of it. It will could possibly avoid the very sticky discussion on morality. I suspect Nugent has realised he really does not want to go there, we will see.

I'm curious to see the response he crafts for Justicar's questions over here.

Also, Steersman is still going strong over there. He's nothing if not thorough. He's like the Anti-Nerd-of-Redhead; he'll provide you with citations whether you want them or not. Go Steers!

[JackSkeptic]

Michael Nugent posted this http://www.michaelnugent.com/2013/03/06 ... in-vacula/




' #5 #10 Kevin, #7 Pitchguest and #9 Tina,

It was Justin, not me, who introduced the idea of evaluating the moral justification of what Justin, not me, described as the nasty pushback against some feminists on the Internet. He originally said “It’s not to say the nasty pushback is morally justified.”

I found it encouraging that he was saying this, and I wanted to clarify if he could go a step further and say that at least some of the nasty pushback was morally unjustified, and could he give some examples.

Justin replied that some of the nasty pushback was indeed morally unjustified, and said it was difficult to draw a line in terms of examples. I gave him some examples, and he said it was too daunting to reply to them all, which I agree is a fair point.

So I have now said that I am not asking him to respond to my examples, but to give me some examples of his own, in order to illustrate an assertion that he himself made, so that I can understand what he means by that assertion.'



So if that is correct JV dropped himself in it by not defining terms first, in my opinion, and putting himself in the position of the person required to hold the burden of proof. Anyway it is an encouraging post, we will see what comes of it. It will could possibly avoid the very sticky discussion on morality. I suspect Nugent has realised he really does not want to go there, we will see.

I'm curious to see the response he crafts for Justicar's questions over here.

Also, Steersman is still going strong over there. He's nothing if not thorough. He's like the Anti-Nerd-of-Redhead; he'll provide you with citations whether you want them or not. Go Steers!

Yes there's been great comments over there, not least by Steersman.

Nugent may be able to sidestep Justicars questions now but we will see. I had always assumed that the question of morality was from Nugent (as it was he that did the post and posed the questions that he did) which I felt was his biggest mistake. If it was not then it changes the whole thing, for me anyway. Of course I don't know the full background of it. Also the way Nugent failed to link, put quotes out of proper source and context and poisoned the well still stands. If he wishes to put that behind him then fine, he should be allowed to. I'm not sure he fully grasped what he was dealing with but now he does. It was not about a few blowhards saying bad things about women as he was probably led to believe.

[Dick Strawkins]

As agreed upon, here is my public apology to EllenBeth Wachs:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i5GgrxqYirw

The agreement was made here:

http://www.michaelnugent.com/2013/03/03 ... ent-196237

Good on you. In the same vein, it seems Ellenbeth has been dealing with a nasty Nazi-themed twitter troll (scroll to the end of the post) and asks:
http://mycatsaremygods.com/2013/03/04/m ... /#comments

As the person behind these tweets is clearly a fan of the slymepit, will members of the slymepit please step forward to openly denounce these?

Yes, I think we can concur that what the troll is doing is completely unacceptable, fuck s/h/it.

I left a message here on the slymepit last week denouncing those particular tweets.

http://i.imgur.com/BTZRO3F.jpg

It's clearly a troll - their previous tweets seem to show them using various epithets and profanities to troll different people.
I don't think you can say it's a fan of the slymepit - it has a long history of trolling other people and Ellenbeth's general reaction to confrontation probably sets her up as the ideal kind of victim. All it would take is a quick viewing of her previous tweets to find things from the slympepit that she had raged about.
The question I have to ask is why someone like that is able to keep their twitter account?
You would think that if ever there was a suitable case for a blockbot to target then it would be a trolling harrasser like 'Himmlers Ghost'.
When I posted about Himmlers Ghost last week he/she wasn't on the blockbot list.
Is he/she on it now?

[Wonderist]

If anyone's still awake, Stacy has just stepped into it. Yes, she has stepped into the elevator. The one that leads dowwn dowwwn dowwwwwn, way down, into the fathomless rabbit hole: http://www.michaelnugent.com/2013/03/06 ... ent-196416

I'm too tired to keep going. Could use some backup on that page.

[Wonderist]

Is that which is justified, justified because it's moral, or moral because it's justified? You have to be pious don't you Michael? Because piety is beloved of the gods. Piety and slightly burned chips. And feminism. Don't diss feminism. Feminism is beloved too, like apple piety with double cream served by a virgin. Don't diss God, his noodlyness will be cross. Nor feminism, it is so written. You must obey. All the feminists are at the pit and we eat the pieties with our all powerful, all knowing vaginas. The rest is just dogmatism. That's just a light mid morning snack to us with a nice glass of hemlock.

Bloody loved that comment, tina. Didn't want to appear a sycophant on Nugent's blog, but I can sycophanize (?) all I want here. Loved it!

[AndrewV69]

I give an example of witch burning:

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... nt-page-1/

AndrewV69 March 6, 2013 at 8:01 am

Steersman, #566 “far too much tendency and evidence of throwing the baby out with the bathwater for my tastes.”

I would not exactly call it that but no doubt we could find examples if we looked hard enough.

What I see actually, are those who would deem themselves as the moral arbiters engaging in some pretty “indecent” behaviour, the least of it being holding other to standards of “decency” that they exempt themselves from.

I will proffer a current example, for instance even as I type this, “those people” are yet again preparing to burn yet another witch at the stake.

In this case a certain Owlglass:
http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... nt-page-1/

You are invited to come to your own conclusions.

[Za-zen]

Michael Nugent posted this http://www.michaelnugent.com/2013/03/06 ... in-vacula/




' #5 #10 Kevin, #7 Pitchguest and #9 Tina,

It was Justin, not me, who introduced the idea of evaluating the moral justification of what Justin, not me, described as the nasty pushback against some feminists on the Internet. He originally said “It’s not to say the nasty pushback is morally justified.”

I found it encouraging that he was saying this, and I wanted to clarify if he could go a step further and say that at least some of the nasty pushback was morally unjustified, and could he give some examples.

Justin replied that some of the nasty pushback was indeed morally unjustified, and said it was difficult to draw a line in terms of examples. I gave him some examples, and he said it was too daunting to reply to them all, which I agree is a fair point.

So I have now said that I am not asking him to respond to my examples, but to give me some examples of his own, in order to illustrate an assertion that he himself made, so that I can understand what he means by that assertion.'



So if that is correct JV dropped himself in it by not defining terms first, in my opinion, and putting himself in the position of the person required to hold the burden of proof. Anyway it is an encouraging post, we will see what comes of it. It will could possibly avoid the very sticky discussion on morality. I suspect Nugent has realised he really does not want to go there, we will see.

I'm curious to see the response he crafts for Justicar's questions over here.

Also, Steersman is still going strong over there. He's nothing if not thorough. He's like the Anti-Nerd-of-Redhead; he'll provide you with citations whether you want them or not. Go Steers!

Yes there's been great comments over there, not least by Steersman.

Nugent may be able to sidestep Justicars questions now but we will see. I had always assumed that the question of morality was from Nugent (as it was he that did the post and posed the questions that he did) which I felt was his biggest mistake. If it was not then it changes the whole thing, for me anyway. Of course I don't know the full background of it. Also the way Nugent failed to link, put quotes out of proper source and context and poisoned the well still stands. If he wishes to put that behind him then fine, he should be allowed to. I'm not sure he fully grasped what he was dealing with but now he does. It was not about a few blowhards saying bad things about women as he was probably led to believe.

It was Kim Repere, who picked up on that, after i requested definition of terms from Michael for the third time. They are both wholly correct, and it is for Justin to answer just what the fuck he means by that term. Nonetheless it is being used by Michael as a get out of jail free card now that his blatant attempt to skip definitions and jump straight to moralising about how the pyt is indeed a den of immorality, has blew up in his face.

[Za-zen]

Shit i should have added "blew up in his face like an incompetent irish car bomb"

[Dick Strawkins]

Shit i should have added "blew up in his face like an incompetent irish car bomb"

As advertised for sale on Nugent's old blog.

http://i.imgur.com/kdYj4wE.jpg

[Za-zen]

Shit i should have added "blew up in his face like an incompetent irish car bomb"

As advertised for sale on Nugent's old blog.

http://i.imgur.com/kdYj4wE.jpg

Bingo. But that is just a bit of innofensive humour, and in no way could be a barrier to the victims of IRA violence engaging with the message of Atheist Ireland. Whereas Using the word "cunt" will alienate half the population and ensure that they keep believing in their fantasy lover.

[JackSkeptic]

Michael Nugent posted this http://www.michaelnugent.com/2013/03/06 ... in-vacula/




' #5 #10 Kevin, #7 Pitchguest and #9 Tina,

It was Justin, not me, who introduced the idea of evaluating the moral justification of what Justin, not me, described as the nasty pushback against some feminists on the Internet. He originally said “It’s not to say the nasty pushback is morally justified.”

I found it encouraging that he was saying this, and I wanted to clarify if he could go a step further and say that at least some of the nasty pushback was morally unjustified, and could he give some examples.

Justin replied that some of the nasty pushback was indeed morally unjustified, and said it was difficult to draw a line in terms of examples. I gave him some examples, and he said it was too daunting to reply to them all, which I agree is a fair point.

So I have now said that I am not asking him to respond to my examples, but to give me some examples of his own, in order to illustrate an assertion that he himself made, so that I can understand what he means by that assertion.'



So if that is correct JV dropped himself in it by not defining terms first, in my opinion, and putting himself in the position of the person required to hold the burden of proof. Anyway it is an encouraging post, we will see what comes of it. It will could possibly avoid the very sticky discussion on morality. I suspect Nugent has realised he really does not want to go there, we will see.

I'm curious to see the response he crafts for Justicar's questions over here.

Also, Steersman is still going strong over there. He's nothing if not thorough. He's like the Anti-Nerd-of-Redhead; he'll provide you with citations whether you want them or not. Go Steers!

Yes there's been great comments over there, not least by Steersman.

Nugent may be able to sidestep Justicars questions now but we will see. I had always assumed that the question of morality was from Nugent (as it was he that did the post and posed the questions that he did) which I felt was his biggest mistake. If it was not then it changes the whole thing, for me anyway. Of course I don't know the full background of it. Also the way Nugent failed to link, put quotes out of proper source and context and poisoned the well still stands. If he wishes to put that behind him then fine, he should be allowed to. I'm not sure he fully grasped what he was dealing with but now he does. It was not about a few blowhards saying bad things about women as he was probably led to believe.

It was Kim Repere, who picked up on that, after i requested definition of terms from Michael for the third time. They are both wholly correct, and it is for Justin to answer just what the fuck he means by that term. Nonetheless it is being used by Michael as a get out of jail free card now that his blatant attempt to skip definitions and jump straight to moralising about how the pyt is indeed a den of immorality, has blew up in his face.

While it's a get out of jail free card it should never have got to that in the first place. I just feel Nugent is not someone I would see as a credible agent of any discussion as he should have made terms and definitions clearer at the start. While it was a great exercise in showing FtB up for what they are and valuable for that, the actual points Nugent raised are dead in the water and therefore useless as a method to proceed in my opinion. I am not sure a restart is possible or even desirable given his clear ability to distort evidence as he sees fit. That is never a way to conduct an argument in good faith. I was hoping he was not another Rad Fem trickster but so far he showing every indication that he is.

As I love to say time and again what they believe is up to them, but the way they go about promoting that belief goes against everything I believe in, including rationalism, free and open debate and basic honesty.

Anyway I may be proven wrong and something useful comes out of this.

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

To be honest: Fuck Nugent. He doesn't play fair. Where are my comments?

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

Irland, car bombs, horse-lovers:



"If Sefton was human, he’d constantly fall on his face due to the weight of all his medals. He spent seventeen years in active military service (an impressive career, considering that the average lifespan of a horse is around twenty-five to thirty years). He won prizes in show jumping and point-to-point races. He was one of the horses used in Buckingham Palace’s famed Changing of the Guard. He was the first ever British Horse of the Year, and has a wing named after him in the Royal Veterinary College.

That last accolade may have something to do with the IRA bomb he took in the face . . . and the fact that he survived.

While on their way to Buckingham Palace, Sefton’s formation was hit by a car-mounted nail bomb (a bomb packed with nails, razors, and other sharp objects to cause as much ugly damage as possible). A number of horses and riders were killed on the spot. Compared to Sefton, some would say they had it easy: the poor horse was riddled with thirty-four wounds, each of them likely fatal.

Amazingly, Sefton survived. Even a severed jugular vein couldn’t finish him off. He survived an incredibly difficult surgical operation, and eventually even returned to active service. There, he regularly passed the spot where his life had almost ended, presumably neighing defiance at death whenever he passed."

(entry 7) http://listverse.com/2013/03/01/10-anim ... y-careers/

[Dick Strawkins]

Shit i should have added "blew up in his face like an incompetent irish car bomb"

As advertised for sale on Nugent's old blog.

http://i.imgur.com/kdYj4wE.jpg

Bingo. But that is just a bit of innofensive humour, and in no way could be a barrier to the victims of IRA violence engaging with the message of Atheist Ireland. Whereas Using the word "cunt" will alienate half the population and ensure that they keep believing in their fantasy lover.

To be fair to Nugent (note to Michael Nugent: we actually do try to be fair here! You should try it some time!), if you read about his biography it doesn't seem in keeping with his political stance to be supportive or even joking about IRA violence.

I'm guessing that that webpage with the 'Drink up Bitch' and 'Car Bomber' T-shirts was meant in some sort of ironic joke or critical way - although you cannot get that by just looking at the page on its own.
Just reading the page it seems that he both supported the T-shirt jokes and was advertising where you could buy them!
(he provided links to the companies selling the T-shirts)

[Steersman]

To be honest: Fuck Nugent. He doesn't play fair. Where are my comments?

You could try e-mailing him and asking him that. There's a contact page at the top of the site.

http://www.michaelnugent.com/2013/03/06 ... in-vacula/

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

To be honest: Fuck Nugent. He doesn't play fair. Where are my comments?

You could try e-mailing him and asking him that. There's a contact page at the top of the site.

http://www.michaelnugent.com/2013/03/06 ... in-vacula/

Is it really worth the effort? My comment has been pasted here. If Michael dosn't allow it to go through, it will say more about him than me.

[Steersman]

Michael Nugent posted this http://www.michaelnugent.com/2013/03/06 ... in-vacula/

<snip>
So if that is correct JV dropped himself in it by not defining terms first, in my opinion, and putting himself in the position of the person required to hold the burden of proof. Anyway it is an encouraging post, we will see what comes of it. It will could possibly avoid the very sticky discussion on morality. I suspect Nugent has realised he really does not want to go there, we will see.

I'm curious to see the response he crafts for Justicar's questions over here.

Also, Steersman is still going strong over there. He's nothing if not thorough. He's like the Anti-Nerd-of-Redhead; he'll provide you with citations whether you want them or not. Go Steers!

:lol: Thanks. But might not be a good idea then for me and NoR to ever be in the same room together – flash of light, and a swirl of citations might be all that’s left of us.

But I’m also quite curious about Michael’s pending responses to Justicar’s quite cogent questions – so much so that I thought I’d throw in my own two cents on them.

Also, Andrew had posted something there several days ago and copied it here to which I’ve finally responded there – better late than never ….

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

Welch: fuck you for getting ahead of me in comment counts!

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

Cunts*




*that cunts, right?

[JackSkeptic]

Shit i should have added "blew up in his face like an incompetent irish car bomb"

As advertised for sale on Nugent's old blog.

http://i.imgur.com/kdYj4wE.jpg

Bingo. But that is just a bit of innofensive humour, and in no way could be a barrier to the victims of IRA violence engaging with the message of Atheist Ireland. Whereas Using the word "cunt" will alienate half the population and ensure that they keep believing in their fantasy lover.

To be fair to Nugent (note to Michael Nugent: we actually do try to be fair here! You should try it some time!), if you read about his biography it doesn't seem in keeping with his political stance to be supportive or even joking about IRA violence.

I'm guessing that that webpage with the 'Drink up Bitch' and 'Car Bomber' T-shirts was meant in some sort of ironic joke or critical way - although you cannot get that by just looking at the page on its own.
Just reading the page it seems that he both supported the T-shirt jokes and was advertising where you could buy them!
(he provided links to the companies selling the T-shirts)

If any of the FtB crowd try to get 'right on' with people in Ireland by wearing a T-Shirt like that they may get more than an offer for a cup of coffee. So for any of you reading this please do not wear anything like that. I'm being honest and serious not ironic.

[Steersman]

To be honest: Fuck Nugent. He doesn't play fair. Where are my comments?

You could try e-mailing him and asking him that. There's a contact page at the top of the site.

http://www.michaelnugent.com/2013/03/06 ... in-vacula/

Is it really worth the effort? My comment has been pasted here. If Michael dosn't allow it to go through, it will say more about him than me.

As someone else suggested the other day, he might not be seeing them because the way the filtering software is working ....

Just out of curiousity, had you posted stuff there before?

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

Steers: no, I hadn't. Just sent him a message with the full comment. Let's see how it goes...

[Guest]

I hope this link inspires people to write a blog post.

A while back, on Dec 17, Rebecca Watson made a post about how Twitter users are sad to hear they might be rapists.

What she meant by "sad" was earnest questioning about her Tweets where she claims that if you have sex with a person and you are are drunk then you are a rapist.

In her post she bashes these men because obviously she meant "drunk" in some blatantly obvious sense and these men are just looking for some lee way so that they can fuck women when they are in her words 'blotto'.

This link which shows the actual twitter conversation shows that to be an outrageous fabrication.

Watson was actually having an argument about a scene from the show The Big Bang Theory involved a rape. (You can judge for yourself in the link on the page, hint: it wasn't rape) Watson argued that that scene was a 'coinflip' on the issue of whether it was rape. When someone disagreed Watson then declared that having sex with a drunk person meets the legal requirement for rape.

She then made several more tweets reiterating that point and then made a blog post about the responses she which removed that context.

I don't know of any blog posts which address this which is why I hope this inspires a blog post that spells out what you can see from the Twitter conversation.

I think that this is a smoking gun among perhaps many smoking guns that Watson isn't merely divisive or unconsciously manipulative but someone who clearly and intentionally deceives others.

http://culturecritic9.wordpress.com

[AndrewV69]

If any of the FtB crowd try to get 'right on' with people in Ireland by wearing a T-Shirt like that they may get more than an offer for a cup of coffee. So for any of you reading this please do not wear anything like that. I'm being honest and serious not ironic.

Oh I know you are. I should have mentioned it myself and would have if I had thought it was not a given.

But I guess you are right. If you are an American, it is probably a good thing to make sure that everyone you meet is aware of it, and you have nothing to do with anything.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peace_lines

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

You people asked for it!

[youtube]QI5efNWKgJQ[/youtube]

[JackSkeptic]

If any of the FtB crowd try to get 'right on' with people in Ireland by wearing a T-Shirt like that they may get more than an offer for a cup of coffee. So for any of you reading this please do not wear anything like that. I'm being honest and serious not ironic.

Oh I know you are. I should have mentioned it myself and would have if I had thought it was not a given.

But I guess you are right. If you are an American, it is probably a good thing to make sure that everyone you meet is aware of it, and you have nothing to do with anything.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peace_lines

I assume they are in Dublin (the south) which is probably the safest place to go. Ireland is generally very safe but if anything could cause a 'trigger' it would be a thoughtless T-Shirt. It is the sort of thing silly SJW's might wear.

[AndrewV69]

I ask a few questions.

http://www.michaelnugent.com/2013/03/06 ... ent-196437

AndrewV69 March 6, 2013 at 8:36 am

Stacy #28 “By the way, both the principles seem to have moved on”

That’s nice, admirable even.

Can I infer that you believe the rest of us can do that also? Let bygones be bygones? Can you think of any reason why this can not happen?

(full disclosure. I am a Slymepitter. I am also a MRA)

[JackSkeptic]

If any of the FtB crowd try to get 'right on' with people in Ireland by wearing a T-Shirt like that they may get more than an offer for a cup of coffee. So for any of you reading this please do not wear anything like that. I'm being honest and serious not ironic.

Oh I know you are. I should have mentioned it myself and would have if I had thought it was not a given.

But I guess you are right. If you are an American, it is probably a good thing to make sure that everyone you meet is aware of it, and you have nothing to do with anything.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peace_lines

I assume they are in Dublin (the south) which is probably the safest place to go. Ireland is generally very safe but if anything could cause a 'trigger' it would be a thoughtless T-Shirt. It is the sort of thing silly SJW's might wear.

Just to labour the point car bombs etc are still going on. Here is one from yesterday http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-21651900

[JackSkeptic]

I ask a few questions.

http://www.michaelnugent.com/2013/03/06 ... ent-196437

AndrewV69 March 6, 2013 at 8:36 am

Stacy #28 “By the way, both the principles seem to have moved on”

That’s nice, admirable even.

Can I infer that you believe the rest of us can do that also? Let bygones be bygones? Can you think of any reason why this can not happen?

(full disclosure. I am a Slymepitter. I am also a MRA)

MRA. Flecked cheek responses in 3...2...1....

[Dick Strawkins]

If any of the FtB crowd try to get 'right on' with people in Ireland by wearing a T-Shirt like that they may get more than an offer for a cup of coffee. So for any of you reading this please do not wear anything like that. I'm being honest and serious not ironic.

Oh I know you are. I should have mentioned it myself and would have if I had thought it was not a given.

But I guess you are right. If you are an American, it is probably a good thing to make sure that everyone you meet is aware of it, and you have nothing to do with anything.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peace_lines

I assume they are in Dublin (the south) which is probably the safest place to go. Ireland is generally very safe but if anything could cause a 'trigger' it would be a thoughtless T-Shirt. It is the sort of thing silly SJW's might wear.

Just to labour the point car bombs etc are still going on. Here is one from yesterday http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-21651900

Nugent was involved in an anti-IRA organization - he even chained himself across the doors of Sinn Fein headquarters to protest an IRA attack at one point.
This only goes to show that taking quotes or images out of context is a technique can be used against anyone.

Still, Michael Nugent's technique of trawling through forums and listing the worst out of context and quote-mined expressions has been trumpeted by Peezus and O(phelia) as a great way to draw conclusions about one's opponents.
Nugent has found to his cost that what he has created is a monster with a particular penchant for biting it's creator in the arse.

[AndrewV69]

I ask a few questions.

http://www.michaelnugent.com/2013/03/06 ... ent-196437

AndrewV69 March 6, 2013 at 8:36 am

Stacy #28 “By the way, both the principles seem to have moved on”

That’s nice, admirable even.

Can I infer that you believe the rest of us can do that also? Let bygones be bygones? Can you think of any reason why this can not happen?

(full disclosure. I am a Slymepitter. I am also a MRA)

MRA. Flecked cheek responses in 3...2...1....

She has (as I do, as everyone) every right to know exactly what she is being asked up front and it is a serious question.

You can not expect honesty from people if you are not honest with them. No surprises. No traps. Full disclosure.

[Dick Strawkins]

I hope this link inspires people to write a blog post.

A while back, on Dec 17, Rebecca Watson made a post about how Twitter users are sad to hear they might be rapists.

What she meant by "sad" was earnest questioning about her Tweets where she claims that if you have sex with a person and you are are drunk then you are a rapist.

In her post she bashes these men because obviously she meant "drunk" in some blatantly obvious sense and these men are just looking for some lee way so that they can fuck women when they are in her words 'blotto'.

This link which shows the actual twitter conversation shows that to be an outrageous fabrication.

Watson was actually having an argument about a scene from the show The Big Bang Theory involved a rape. (You can judge for yourself in the link on the page, hint: it wasn't rape) Watson argued that that scene was a 'coinflip' on the issue of whether it was rape. When someone disagreed Watson then declared that having sex with a drunk person meets the legal requirement for rape.

She then made several more tweets reiterating that point and then made a blog post about the responses she which removed that context.

I don't know of any blog posts which address this which is why I hope this inspires a blog post that spells out what you can see from the Twitter conversation.

I think that this is a smoking gun among perhaps many smoking guns that Watson isn't merely divisive or unconsciously manipulative but someone who clearly and intentionally deceives others.

http://culturecritic9.wordpress.com

This was covered here and on various other websites at the time.

You've fallen into the skepchick-22 trap.

Rebecca gets criticism from misogynists who send her rape threats.
You have just criticised Rebecca.
Therefore you are on the side of those who send her rape threats.
Please stop being a rape-threatening misogynist.

It is, basically, a repudiation of the idea of skepticism (basing the level of acceptence of a hypothesis on the available evidence that supports that hypothesis.)

The skepchick/FTB stance is really a political stance.
They are the team of good, and anything unethical they do is excusable because, well, its a time of (culture) war, it's a means to an end, and anyway, the other side are rape-threatening misogynists!

[JackSkeptic]

If any of the FtB crowd try to get 'right on' with people in Ireland by wearing a T-Shirt like that they may get more than an offer for a cup of coffee. So for any of you reading this please do not wear anything like that. I'm being honest and serious not ironic.

Oh I know you are. I should have mentioned it myself and would have if I had thought it was not a given.

But I guess you are right. If you are an American, it is probably a good thing to make sure that everyone you meet is aware of it, and you have nothing to do with anything.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peace_lines

I assume they are in Dublin (the south) which is probably the safest place to go. Ireland is generally very safe but if anything could cause a 'trigger' it would be a thoughtless T-Shirt. It is the sort of thing silly SJW's might wear.

Just to labour the point car bombs etc are still going on. Here is one from yesterday http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-21651900

Nugent was involved in an anti-IRA organization - he even chained himself across the doors of Sinn Fein headquarters to protest an IRA attack at one point.
This only goes to show that taking quotes or images out of context is a technique can be used against anyone.

Still, Michael Nugent's technique of trawling through forums and listing the worst out of context and quote-mined expressions has been trumpeted by Peezus and O(phelia) as a great way to draw conclusions about one's opponents.
Nugent has found to his cost that what he has created is a monster with a particular penchant for biting it's creator in the arse.

My comments were not directed at Nugent at all but at the US SJW's who are known to be very naive in international matters. He will know as well as anyone what is happening in Ireland and how delicate it can get. A lot better than me that's for sure.

I also agree he will have a lot on his plate and having to deal with what are foreign issues and disputes may get to the point he wished he never got involved. The 'C' word is simply not an issue in the UK as it seems to be in the US. We have got past the point where women are treated as special flowers that need protection from the Great Knights. Equality means if a body part can be used as a swear word all body parts can be, no exceptions. No rushing for the smelling salts.

[JackSkeptic]

I ask a few questions.

http://www.michaelnugent.com/2013/03/06 ... ent-196437

AndrewV69 March 6, 2013 at 8:36 am

Stacy #28 “By the way, both the principles seem to have moved on”

That’s nice, admirable even.

Can I infer that you believe the rest of us can do that also? Let bygones be bygones? Can you think of any reason why this can not happen?

(full disclosure. I am a Slymepitter. I am also a MRA)

MRA. Flecked cheek responses in 3...2...1....

She has (as I do, as everyone) every right to know exactly what she is being asked up front and it is a serious question.

You can not expect honesty from people if you are not honest with them. No surprises. No traps. Full disclosure.

Very true and I certainly do not suggest you should not say where you are coming from. I'm not an MRA but I'm mightily sick of them being so badly maligned too and support much of their grievances. I always find it ironic that 'Social Justice' for them excludes 50% of society. How the hell can they rationalise that? Oh I know, blame everything on Men. Easy.

[windy]

Still, Michael Nugent's technique of trawling through forums and listing the worst out of context and quote-mined expressions has been trumpeted by Peezus and O(phelia) as a great way to draw conclusions about one's opponents.

That technique sounds familiar from somewhere...

"Strengthening Public Interest In Science?"
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/inter ... n-science/

[Wonderist]

I'm curious: how much do we know about prison rape? Is it actually as bad as it is made out to be, or is it hyped up, perhaps as a means to help keep people in line?

It's not nearly as bad as people make it out to be. Mostly the police and politicians demonize it to discourage people from trying it. You should try it sometime. No, seriously. As long as you're not allergic to it, or prone to schizophrenia (check your family history if you're worried about it), you should be perfectly fine. There are no actual studies confirming any health risks (that I know of, could be wrong), aside from the schizophrenia thing, and that's apparently rare and needs more research, and some studies (that I've hear of, anyway) that indicate positive benefits. Some people just don't like it, and that's fine. But if you like it, you'll probably *really* like it. I used to do it all the time in Prague.

Oh, prison sex! I thought you meant-- never mind.

[tina]

Is that which is justified, justified because it's moral, or moral because it's justified? You have to be pious don't you Michael? Because piety is beloved of the gods. Piety and slightly burned chips. And feminism. Don't diss feminism. Feminism is beloved too, like apple piety with double cream served by a virgin. Don't diss God, his noodlyness will be cross. Nor feminism, it is so written. You must obey. All the feminists are at the pit and we eat the pieties with our all powerful, all knowing vaginas. The rest is just dogmatism. That's just a light mid morning snack to us with a nice glass of hemlock.

Bloody loved that comment, tina. Didn't want to appear a sycophant on Nugent's blog, but I can sycophanize (?) all I want here. Loved it!

Thanks Wonderist. Euthyphro has to be way up there. For sure one of my favourites.

Now, stop with the ass licking, cunt.
As you were. Fuck Plato!

[Apples]

Is that which is justified, justified because it's moral, or moral because it's justified? You have to be pious don't you Michael? Because piety is beloved of the gods. Piety and slightly burned chips. And feminism. Don't diss feminism. Feminism is beloved too, like apple piety with double cream served by a virgin. Don't diss God, his noodlyness will be cross. Nor feminism, it is so written. You must obey. All the feminists are at the pit and we eat the pieties with our all powerful, all knowing vaginas. The rest is just dogmatism. That's just a light mid morning snack to us with a nice glass of hemlock.

:clap:

[Scented Nectar]

love the music Phil...

Can I suggest as a fun passtime for people on twitter to make Rickrolling FtB a sport?

Try tweets like:

Wow I can't believe what he said about her *link*. #atheismplus #slymepit #unbelievable #feminist

I actually like that idea, but I am a very evil person. Heheh. :lol:

[Apples]

Aneris, IIRC.

You know pitters get banned on site right?

As far as I can tell they are not the same person.

Although she did say "I shit you not" in response to Submariner asking if she was Owlmirror.

Are you really that stupid?

I guess I'm that stupid, having read all her comments and many over at the 'gulag.

viewtopic.php?p=70791#p70791

[JackSkeptic]

love the music Phil...

Can I suggest as a fun passtime for people on twitter to make Rickrolling FtB a sport?

Try tweets like:

Wow I can't believe what he said about her *link*. #atheismplus #slymepit #unbelievable #feminist

I actually like that idea, but I am a very evil person. Heheh. :lol:

I can see Oolons bot list now:

Rickabc, Rickxxx, RickRick, Rickhaha, RickPrick, RickIsADick. RickHatesRick, RickLovesDick, SeeDickWithRick.......

[TedDahlberg]

Don't you go dissin' on no Batman! :naughty:

I grew up on that comic rag. Good times, good times...

Yeah, I like some of that stuff, too, in small doses. It doesn't make the superhero culture as a whole any less ridiculous and typically American, though.

http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb2 ... mnibus.jpg
;)

(To be clear, I don't think you're wrong, it was just the perfect point to post a picture of Captain Britain.)

[JackSkeptic]

Don't you go dissin' on no Batman! :naughty:

I grew up on that comic rag. Good times, good times...

Yeah, I like some of that stuff, too, in small doses. It doesn't make the superhero culture as a whole any less ridiculous and typically American, though.

http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb2 ... mnibus.jpg
;)

(To be clear, I don't think you're wrong, it was just the perfect point to post a picture of Captain Britain.)

I bet he makes a really nice cup of tea in a crisis.

[Apples]

Sally's comment over at Ophie's "They establish a pattern" post:

Given that being a boss or a manager involves exercising power over people in a responsible manner, and bullying involves exercising power over people in a hurtful manner, I wouldn’t be surprised if the majority of truly awful managers are bullies. I mean, on the one hand, there was my old boss who was a little too hands-off. But in that situation, the worst that would happen is that I might find myself confused or without direction, and waiting for him to find the time to review my work with me so I could figure out which way to go.

Contrast to my current boss, who literally screamed at the top of her lungs at me for a solid 30 minutes, in a car, because I made the mistake of interrupting her during Q & A at one of the first public speaking events I did with her. AND she also threatened to fire me because of that. That definitely qualifies as bullying, I would say – the only way I could deal with it was to effectively dissociate – tune her out and pretend to be agreeing with everything she said – basically lie through my teeth and suppress my emotions entirely. Non-bullying bosses do not inspire those kinds of stress responses in their employees, even if they’re not the greatest at managing people.

Sally's right - "bullying involves exercising power over people in a hurtful manner" (though I would also say it must be unjustified/unreasonable - imprisoning a criminal is arguably hurtful to the criminal, after all) - which is why it is transparently absurd to imply that online critics of the baboons, particularly on twitter or open forums like the Pit, are "bullies" -- whereas A+ most definitely qualifies.

And the second paragraph of course resembles the typical experience of a dissenting commenter at Pharyngula.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/butterflies ... a-pattern/
http://www.freezepage.com/1362573505SZCCWZLCGJ

[welch]

Fuck if I care. Ellenbeth is a nasty pain in the ass, why the fuck would I pay any attention to her I don't have to?

Another attempt at herding cats fails... let me rephrase: those who feel like it can go to EB's and reassure her with the bleeding obvious fact that the fucked up troll doesn't represent us.

I'll disown the troll too. Not sure why anyone would even troll her to begin with. She's a perpetual motion machine of crazy, no interaction required.

Maybe. But she does offer some sage advice that might have some general applicability ….

In his video, [Justin] uses screen captures of some of my tweets but fails to give any context to them. It is a very dishonest tactic at worst, but using the principle of charity, it is a disingenuous tactic at best.

How simpy AWFUL that someone does that to her. Justin, didn't you get the memo? It's only okay when they do it. The poor, poor dear.

[Dick Strawkins]

http://i.imgur.com/kx0pE3z.jpg