Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It

[Scented Nectar]

Yep - buying fucking hideous shoes is an "accomplishment" worthy of a blogpost for FTBers like Svan. But don't you fucking dare say that women have a disproportionate interest in shoes, you misogynists.

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

http://freethoughtblogs.com/almostdiamo ... -all-mine/
http://www.freezepage.com/1363477664KSUWFCJUHX

What is it with FfTBers and their love of fugly shoes? Is it just an accidental correlation, or something connected with them being rather stupid feminist deepity spouters with fugly personalities?

[AnonymousCowherd]

Also... if the idea is to outlaw knives in public to prevent mugging, why not go one step further and outlaw lighters and matches to prevent arson? Why not outlaw shoelaces to prevent strangulations (people can wear velcro shoes after all)?

Mugging is already illegal, Cunt. Some people ignore it. What makes you think the people who ignore mugging laws will obey the knife laws anyways?

What makes you think that no-one who would have carried a knife if they were legal will stop doing so if they are illegal?

But even if some people do so, will that reduce knife attacks - evidence?

The only way to test it is to "suck it and see". Debating the usefullness or otherwise of such a ban is just rhetoric if there is no hard data to go on, nor even an agreed framework for measuring the things being argued about. Fine for politicians, not so much for "skeptics".

[Apples]

Ophelia's "no-drama" post has, at this point, attracted more comments (46) than her previous eight posts combined.

[Scented Nectar]

Trigger Warning! This information might change the way you thought about the world, the internet and humanity.

• Remove all fluids from your reach.
• Do not drink or eat
• Put things that could break away
• Inform people around you that you will be okay, no matter what happens next.
• Remove animals from the room as to not upset them too much.
• Place a mattress or cushion next to your chair.
• Don't even hover over the link: while at work, during the night hours, when you are pregnant, when you are afraid of risking damage to brain or technical equipment.
• Click at your own Risk.

Ok, Ready? Here it comes. /// LINK ///

Hahahahahahaahahahahhaahahahahahahahahahhaahahahahahah !!!!!!!!!!

[AnonymousCowherd]

Trigger warning. Biting satire as approved by Ophelia Benson.

http://humesrazor.blogspot.no/

Yeah I believe this is the stooge - Bjarte Foshag or whatever - who brags that he donates money to her whenever she bleats about criticism. She promotes him like crazy. What a talentless fuck.

I knew xkcd - and you, sir, are no xkcd!

[Scented Nectar]

Here's a video from TheTruePooka, if you click on the "watch on youtube" button you can read PZ's contributions to the comment section.

[youtube]3atyt_oGvmw[/youtube]

http://www.youtube.com/all_comments?v=3atyt_oGvmw

http://www.scentednectar.com/slimepit/0 ... s-haha.png

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

[AnonymousCowherd]

Here's a video from TheTruePooka, if you click on the "watch on youtube" button you can read PZ's contributions to the comment section.

3atyt_oGvmw

http://www.youtube.com/all_comments?v=3atyt_oGvmw

http://www.scentednectar.com/slimepit/0 ... s-haha.png

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

PZ is taking a pasting in there. "It's all lies! Lies, I tell you!" "All your comments were worthless!" He's really winning hearts and minds among the 'tubers. Ha ha ha.

[decius]

What kind of fucked up place in his head did he get that from? Feminism = socialism? WTF? Equality = communism? Again, WTF?

I can agree that each person is ultimately responsible for how they live their lives - their 'lot in life" is stretching it, but "no extenuating circumstances"? Seriously, project much - has he been that blind to all the arguments here dealing with things like that? Don't answer that, I know it already. "Any attempt by the downtrodden to speak"....like those poor downtrodden upper/middle class white people, like PZ, Greta, Jen, Watson, etc, etc, etc? Those downtrodden?

Wow. All I can say is that boy is a classic case of projection, and deeply fucked up in the head. What a tool.

First of all, our member Erik (he is a new addition to the 'pit, after all) seems to make the similar mistake that Republicans make and that is misinterpret socialism as a force for ill. I've considered myself a socialist for a few years now (since I was 18, I turn 25 this year), and it is not the kind of socialism (the abomination) wrought by Stalin or Hitler. I believe the people should have the power, where the means of production is provided by a willing state to help the people prosper. Stalin, Hitler, Mao, Pol Pot, they all appropriated socialism for their own selfish needs, and once the state was established, the will of the people was eradicated to form a totalitarian government. That is not socialism by any definition of the word and it was not the socialism Marx dreamed of.

Communism equally should not be misunderstood as a force of evil, even though it uses a more violent approach. The Bolsheviks during the Russian Revolution (Stalin among them) were communists in their own right and indeed when they overthrew the Tzar autocracy, they used communism as it was written. But afterwards, Stalin wished for a socialist government, and in so doing perverted both the communist and socialist ideals.

So I would advice Erik to not make such bold claims, especially since I definitely wouldn't consider feminism equal to socialism.

Finally, Erik, we are NOT anti-feminists. Many of our members here are feminists. They are just not espousing the kind of feminism you adhere to. It's in the tagline, however parodial of the original quote there is a truth at the end of the sentence, "Espousing the radical notion that women are people AND adults."

Erik is mangling something I have argued before on Neurologica. Namely, the feminists responsible of the attempted hijacking of the movement are leftist authoritarians, whose methods are indistinguishable from their socialist predecessors'. Someone else then jumped it and refined it more eloquently than I ever could and therefore I'm not going to rehash it here.

However, I must disagree with you, Pitch. Communism and socialism weren't appropriated and perverted by Stalin and other dictators you mentioned.
They are utopian systems doomed to instant failure in the absence of central tyrannical control by a ruling oligarchy, as indeed prescribed by the doctrines of Marx and Lenin themselves (single-party rule and dictatorship of the proletariat). Marxism is in stated direct opposition to all major liberal principles as well.

If you wish to make a case for social democracy, then you must also recognise that its relationship with the core tenets of socialism are tenuous at best.

I challenge you to provide a single example of "non-perverted" socialism in history. For, if such thing could exist, we would have seen it by now.

[Guest]

why isn't everyone concerned about benson's blatant and continuous stalking of mayhew?

http://i.imgur.com/ib7ZvQb.jpg[/ig]

i have heard it is always very serious business

https://twitter.com/OpheliaBenson/statu ... 9232742401

http://i.imgur.com/fd3tcWh.jpg

[Scented Nectar]

Here's a video from TheTruePooka, if you click on the "watch on youtube" button you can read PZ's contributions to the comment section.

3atyt_oGvmw

http://www.youtube.com/all_comments?v=3atyt_oGvmw

http://www.scentednectar.com/slimepit/0 ... s-haha.png

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

PZ is taking a pasting in there. "It's all lies! Lies, I tell you!" "All your comments were worthless!" He's really winning hearts and minds among the 'tubers. Ha ha ha.

I'm surprised that he lasted all of 11 comments so far. He usually just does a single shit 'n run at comment places that have any opposition to him.

[Apples]

Mayhew: Ophelia and Svan's blogs are mediocre.

Ophie: *writes blog post, shows up on Mayhew's fb* Why are you obsessed with me?! What is your problem?

EllenBeth: What she said! Harasser.

Mayhew: Go home, pineapple.

Ophie: waaaaaaaah!!! *#&!!! blog post blog post blog post blog post !!!111!!!

Miranda Hale: Wow - Ophie really freaked out there, huh?

Mayhew: Pretty much

Ophie: **vanity search vanity search** &*$$#!@@@ Stalkers! **twitter twitter** **blog post**Mayhew Mayhew Mayhew**

Onlookers: Um ... what are you doing?

Mayhew: She's doing it again.

Ophie: Why is Sara Mayhew always RAGING ABOUT ME FOR NO REASON?

http://media.steampowered.com/steamcomm ... 5_full.jpg

[decius]

With regard to the standard apology for pre-Stalin era communism, the facts surrounding the Red Terror speak for themselves.

The stated purpose of the Red Terror was to eliminate counter-revolutionaries who belonged to former "ruling classes". Martin Latsis, chief of the Ukrainian Cheka, explained in the newspaper Red Terror:

Do not look in the file of incriminating evidence to see whether or not the accused rose up against the Soviets with arms or words. Ask him instead to which class he belongs, what is his background, his education, his profession. These are the questions that will determine the fate of the accused. That is the meaning and essence of the Red Terror.[7]
Vladimir Lenin, writing in Pravda, criticised Latsis for this comment, saying that he had gone to "absurd lengths" and that "He wanted to say that Red terror meant the forcible suppression of exploiters who attempted to restore their rule".[8]

Grigory Zinoviev declared in mid-September 1918: "To overcome of our enemies we must have our own socialist militarism. We must carry along with us 90 million out of the 100 million of Soviet Russia's population. As for the rest, we have nothing to say to them. They must be annihilated."[9]

[edit]History

Repression in the Soviet Union
General
Political repression • Economic repression • Ideological repression
Political repression
Red Terror • Collectivization • Great Purge • Population transfer • Gulag • Holodomor • Political abuse of psychiatry
Ideological repression
Religion • Suppressed research • Censorship • Censorship of images
v t e
The campaign of mass repressions was officially initiated as retribution for the assassination of Petrograd Cheka leader Moisei Uritsky by Leonid Kannegisser, and attempted assassination of Lenin by Fanni Kaplan on August 30, 1918. While recovering from his wounds, Lenin instructed: "It is necessary - secretly and urgently to prepare the terror" [10] Even before the assassinations, Lenin was sending telegrams "to introduce mass terror" in Nizhny Novgorod in response to a suspected civilian uprising there, and "crush" landowners in Penza who protested, sometimes violently, to requisition of their grain by military detachments:[2]

"Comrades! The kulak uprising in your five districts must be crushed without pity ... You must make example of these people. (1) Hang (I mean hang publicly, so that people see it) at least 100 kulaks, rich bastards, and known bloodsuckers. (2) Publish their names. (3) Seize all their grain. (4) Single out the hostages per my instructions in yesterday's telegram. Do all this so that for miles around people see it all, understand it, tremble, and tell themselves that we are killing the bloodthirsty kulaks and that we will continue to do so ... Yours, Lenin. P.S. Find tougher people."
Five hundred "representatives of overthrown classes" were executed immediately by the Bolshevik communist government after the assassination of Uritsky.[3]

The first official announcement of Red Terror, published in Izvestiya, "Appeal to the Working Class" on September 3, 1918 called for the workers to "crush the hydra of counterrevolution with massive terror! ... anyone who dares to spread the slightest rumor against the Soviet regime will be arrested immediately and sent to concentration camp".[2] . That was followed by the decree "On Red Terror", issued September 5, 1918 by the Cheka. On 15 October, checkist Gleb Bokiy, summing up the officially ended Red Terror, reported that in Petrograd 800 alleged enemies had been shot and another 6,229 imprisoned.[10] Casualties in the first two months were between 10,000 and 15,000 based on lists of summarily executed people published in newspaper Cheka Weekly and other official press.

About the Red Terror

Declaration of Sovnarkom

5 September 1918

The Council of the People's Commissars after listening to the statement of the chairman of the All-Russian Extraordinary Commission in the fight with the counter-revolution, profiteering and corruption about the activity of the commission finds

that in the current situation securing the rear is the direct necessity,

that for empowering the All-Russian Extraordinary Commission in the fight with the counter-revolution, profiteering and corruption and making it more methodical it is necessary to direct there possibly bigger number of the responsible party comrades,

that it is necessary to secure the Soviet Republic from the class enemies by way of isolating them in concentration camps,

that all people are to be executed by fire squad who are connected with the White Guard organizations, conspiracies and mutinies,

that it is necessary to publicize the names of the executed as well as the reasons of applying to them that measure.

Signed: People's Commissar of Justice D.Kursky

People's Commissars of Interior G.Petrovsky

Director in Affairs of the Council of People's Commissars Vl.Bonch-Bruyevich

SU, #19, department 1, art.710, 04.09.1918[11][12][13]
As the civil war progressed, significant numbers of prisoners, suspects and hostages were executed on the basis of their belonging to the "possessing classes" and such numbers are recorded in cities occupied by the Bolsheviks:

In Kharkov there were between 2,000 and 3,000 executions in February–June 1919, and another 1,000-2,000 when the town was taken again in December of that year; in Rostov-on-Don, approximately 1,000 in January 1920; in Odessa, 2,200 in May–August 1919, then 1,500-3,000 between February 1920 and February 1921; in Kiev, at least 3,000 in February–August 1919; in Ekaterinodar, at least 3,000 between August 1920 and February 1921; In Armavir, a small town in Kuban, between 2,000 and 3,000 in August–October 1920. The list could go on and on.[14]

In the Crimea, Béla Kun, with Vladimir Lenin's approval,[15] had 50,000 White prisoners of war and civilians summarily executed via shooting or hanging after the defeat of general Pyotr Nikolayevich Wrangel at the end of 1920. They had been promised amnesty if they would surrender.[16] This is considered one of the largest massacres in the Civil War.[17]

On 16 March 1919, all military detachments of the Cheka were combined in a single body, the Troops for the Internal Defense of the Republic, which numbered 200,000 in 1921. These troops policed labor camps, ran the Gulag system, conducted requisitions of food, put down peasant rebellions, riots by workers, and mutinies in the Red Army, which was plagued by desertions [2]

One of the main organizers of the Red Terror for the Bolshevik government was 2nd Grade Army Commissar Yan Karlovich Berzin (1889–1938), whose real name was Kyuzis Peteris. He took part in the October Revolution and afterwards worked in the central apparatus of the Cheka.[4] During the Red Terror, Berzin initiated the system of taking and shooting hostages[4] to stop desertions and other "acts of disloyalty and sabotage". Chief of a special department of the Latvian Red Army (later the 15th Army), Berzin played a part in the suppression of the Russian sailors' mutiny at Kronstadt in March 1921.[4] He particularly distinguished himself in the course of the pursuit, capture, and killing of captured sailors.[4]

[edit]Repressions


"Bolshevik freedom" – Polish propaganda poster with nude caricature of Leon Trotsky from the Polish-Soviet War
[edit]Peasants
The Internal Troops of Cheka and the Red Army practised the terror tactics of taking and executing numerous hostages, often in connection with desertions of forcefully mobilized peasants. It is believed that more than 3 million deserters escaped from the Red Army in 1919 and 1920. Around 500,000 deserters were arrested in 1919 and close to 800,000 in 1920 by Cheka troops and special divisions created to combat desertions.[2] Thousands of deserters were killed, and their families were often taken hostage. According to Lenin's instructions,

After the expiration of the seven-day deadline for deserters to turn themselves in, punishment must be increased for these incorrigible traitors to the cause of the people. Families and anyone found to be assisting them in any way whatsoever are to be considered as hostages and treated accordingly.[2]
In September 1918, in only twelve provinces of Russia, 48,735 deserters and 7,325 bandits were arrested, 1,826 were killed and 2,230 were executed. A typical report from a Cheka department stated:

Yaroslavl Province, 23 June 1919. The uprising of deserters in the Petropavlovskaya volost has been put down. The families of the deserters have been taken as hostages. When we started to shoot one person from each family, the Greens began to come out of the woods and surrender. Thirty-four deserters were shot as an example.[2]
During the suppression of the Tambov Rebellion, estimates suggest that around 100,000 peasant rebels and their families were imprisoned or deported and perhaps 15,000 executed.[18]

This campaign marked the beginning of the Gulag, and some scholars have estimated that 70,000 were imprisoned by September 1921 (this number excludes those in several camps in regions that were in revolt, such as Tambov). Conditions in these camps led to high mortality rates, and there were "repeated massacres." The Cheka at the Kholmogory camp adopted the practice of drowning bound prisoners in the nearby Dvina river.[19] Occasionally, entire prisons were “emptied” of inmates via mass shootings prior to abandoning a town to White forces.[20][21]

[edit]Industrial workers
On 16 March 1919, Cheka stormed the Putilov factory. More than 900 workers who went to a strike were arrested, of whom more than 200 were executed without trial during the next few days. Numerous strikes took place in the spring of 1919 in cities of Tula, Orel, Tver, Ivanovo and Astrakhan. The starving workers sought to obtain food rations matching those of Red Army soldiers. They also demanded the elimination of privileges for Bolsheviks, freedom of press, and free elections. All strikes were mercilessly suppressed by Cheka using arrests and executions.[22]

In the city of Astrakhan, the strikers and Red Army soldiers who joined them were loaded onto barges and then thrown by the hundreds into the Volga with stones around their necks. Between 2,000 and 4,000 were shot or drowned from 12 to 14 of March 1919. In addition, the repression also claimed the lives of some 600 to 1,000 bourgeoisie. Recently published archival documents indicate this was the largest massacre of workers by the Bolsheviks before the suppression of the Kronstadt rebellion.[23]

However, strikes continued. Lenin was concerned about the tense situation regarding workers in the Ural region. On 29 January 1920, he sent a telegram to Vladimir Smirnov stating "I am surprised that you are taking the matter so lightly, and are not immediately executing large numbers of strikers for the crime of sabotage".[24]

[edit]Atrocities



Excavation of a mass grave outside the headquarters of the Kharkov Cheka
At these times, there were numerous reports that Cheka interrogators utilized torture methods which were, according to Orlando Figes, "matched only by the Spanish Inquisition."[25] At Odessa the Cheka tied White officers to planks and slowly fed them into furnaces or tanks of boiling water; In Kharkiv, scalpings and hand-flayings were commonplace: the skin was peeled off victims' hands to produce "gloves"; The Voronezh Cheka rolled naked people around in barrels studded internally with nails; victims were crucified or stoned to death at Dnipropetrovsk; the Cheka at Kremenchuk impaled members of the clergy and buried alive rebelling peasants; in Orel, water was poured on naked prisoners bound in the winter streets until they became living ice statues; in Kiev, Chinese Cheka detachments placed rats in iron tubes sealed at one end with wire netting and the other placed against the body of a prisoner, with the tubes being heated until the rats gnawed through the victim's body in an effort to escape.[26]

Executions took place in prison cellars or courtyards, or occasionally on the outskirts of town, during the Red Terror and Russian civil war. After the condemned were stripped of their clothing and other belongings, which were shared among the Cheka executioners, they were either machine-gunned in batches or dispatched individually with a revolver. Those killed in prison were usually shot in the back of the neck as they entered the execution cellar, which became littered with corpses and soaked with blood. Victims killed outside the town were conveyed by lorry, bound and gagged, to their place of execution, where they sometimes were made to dig their own graves.[27]

According to Edvard Radzinsky, "it became a common practice to take a husband hostage and wait for his wife to come and purchase his life with her body".[3] During Decossackization, there were massacres, according to historian Robert Gellately, "on an unheard of scale." The Pyatigorsk Cheka organized a "day of Red Terror" to execute 300 people in one day, and took quotas from each part of town. According to the Chekist Karl Lander, the Cheka in Kislovodsk, "for lack of a better idea," killed all the patients in the hospital. In October 1920 alone more than 6,000 people were executed. Gellately adds that Communist leaders "sought to justify their ethnic-based massacres by incorporating them into the rubric of the 'class struggle'".[28]

Members of the clergy were subjected to particularly brutal abuse. According to documents cited by the late Alexander Yakovlev, then head of the Presidential Committee for the Rehabilitation of Victims of Political Repression, priests, monks and nuns were crucified, thrown into cauldrons of boiling tar, scalped, strangled, given Communion with melted lead and drowned in holes in the ice.[29] An estimated 3,000 were put to death in 1918 alone.[29]

Estimates for the total number of people killed in the Red Terror range from 50,000[30] to over a million.[31][

32]

[codelette]

Every gun in that picture is illegal in New York. And if that is an AK-47, they're banned iirc in all the US. All Kalashnikov's are (although people who had them had them grandfathered in)

Even that .22 Ruger (if that's what it is) is illegal in NY. This is a gun children use in rifle club or at summer camp.

Hand guns are illegal in NY. (You need a special license).

Are Kalashnikovs still illegal? I though that prohibition ended when the assault weapons ban expired.

Yeah I think you are correct. Here in NY they are still banned. An across the board ban.

In NY (and I imagine everywhere else) the gun laws vary depending on what county you are in. But NY State (the whole state) recently passed stricter laws, hence why the .22 Ruger (with it's 10 round magazine...all of two inches long) is now banned.

AK-47s are not illegal in all of the US.
In TN only fully-auto weapons are illegal -unless grandfathered in-.
The other day, I took one of my coworkers to the range to try his AK. We were not allowed because of the type of ammo. We tried his Hi-Point 9mm carbine instead.

[BarnOwl]

Ophelia's "no-drama" post has, at this point, attracted more comments (46) than her previous eight posts combined.

They're really butt-hurt about TAM over there.

Susan March 16, 2013 at 2:00 pm (UTC -7) Link to this comment

With this woman as a guest at TAM, I can’t believe any feminist who is aware of this could possibly want to go. This woman is … what can I say? I can’t say crazy or nuts in the non-clinical sense (though I am mentally ill myself), so what word is correct? She’s obsessed to the point of an extremely unhealthy mental state. And just plain nasty. I wouldn’t want to get within a mile of her, or any conference where she is an invited speaker.

Danger! Danger! :roll:

[BarnOwl]

diversity in Californa

Curious, what's so wrong with California?

erm ... California has Hollywood and a poor track record in Governors. Not to mention it is broke. And the bat shit crazy are running the major Uni.

I say this because the University of California last time I checked has:

a Vice Chancellor for Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion.

In addition it has:

<snip>

Many of the "Diversity Dean" and similar administrative positions are mandated by federal and state governments in the US, and by accrediting agencies for colleges/universities or licensing agencies for professional schools. A university can be put on probation, and ultimately lose accreditation, if there are insufficient mechanisms and administrators in place to deal with diversity in recruitment and hiring, EEOC and ADA compliance, accusations of harassment or bias, perceived manifestations of harassment or bias, etc.

[windy]

Erik is mangling something I have argued before on Neurologica. Namely, the feminists responsible of the attempted hijacking of the movement are leftist authoritarians, whose methods are indistinguishable from their socialist predecessors'. Someone else then jumped it and refined it more eloquently than I ever could and therefore I'm not going to rehash it here.

No, erik is suffering from the delusion that everyone arguing against them must be a libertarian or a right wing conservative. That's different from noting the similarities between their behavior and that of leftist authoritarians.

However, I must disagree with you, Pitch. Communism and socialism weren't appropriated and perverted by Stalin and other dictators you mentioned.
They are utopian systems doomed to instant failure in the absence of central tyrannical control by a ruling oligarchy, as indeed prescribed by the doctrines of Marx and Lenin themselves (single-party rule and dictatorship of the proletariat). Marxism is in stated direct opposition to all major liberal principles as well.

If you wish to make a case for social democracy, then you must also recognise that its relationship with the core tenets of socialism are tenuous at best.

I agree that social democracy is a better description for any benevolent effects of socialism (and the communists can hate the social democratic "class traitors" as much as they hate the right) But many criticizing the FTB identify as socialists, so let's not fall into their "frame" of defining the schism along political lines.

[LMU]

why isn't everyone concerned about benson's blatant and continuous stalking of mayhew?

http://i.imgur.com/ib7ZvQb.jpg[/ig]

i have heard it is always very serious business

https://twitter.com/OpheliaBenson/statu ... 9232742401

http://i.imgur.com/fd3tcWh.jpg

I think Mayhew is one of my favorite new people.

Also: Welcome to the 'pit, Christo and any other newcomers!

As for the question "Have any people gone from the 'pit over to A+?" Oolon might count (he did post here before he ever posted there IIRC), and I think Damion still posts a little at both places (though he was being given a temp ban over there last I saw), but those seem like technicalities rather than a changing of views.

[tina]

Erik is mangling something I have argued before on Neurologica. Namely, the feminists responsible of the attempted hijacking of the movement are leftist authoritarians, whose methods are indistinguishable from their socialist predecessors'. Someone else then jumped it and refined it more eloquently than I ever could and therefore I'm not going to rehash it here.

No, erik is suffering from the delusion that everyone arguing against them must be a libertarian or a right wing conservative. That's different from noting the similarities between their behavior and that of leftist authoritarians.

However, I must disagree with you, Pitch. Communism and socialism weren't appropriated and perverted by Stalin and other dictators you mentioned.
They are utopian systems doomed to instant failure in the absence of central tyrannical control by a ruling oligarchy, as indeed prescribed by the doctrines of Marx and Lenin themselves (single-party rule and dictatorship of the proletariat). Marxism is in stated direct opposition to all major liberal principles as well.

If you wish to make a case for social democracy, then you must also recognise that its relationship with the core tenets of socialism are tenuous at best.

I agree that social democracy is a better description for any benevolent effects of socialism (and the communists can hate the social democratic "class traitors" as much as they hate the right) But many criticizing the FTB identify as socialists, so let's not fall into their "frame" of defining the schism along political lines.

I think Marx viewed communism as the inevitable outcome of historical forces, the trajectory of which trundles through capitalism and out the other side of chaos to enlightened proletarian order. That last move is the dreamer in him I think.

His 'The German Ideology' written in 1845 but not publgished till 1932 is an interesting read in this regard.

http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/wo ... -ideology/

[tina]

His 'The German Ideology' written in 1845 but not publgished till 1932 is an interesting read in this regard.

http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/wo ... -ideology/

Maybe this version cuts some of the philosophical crap....dunno.

http://cwanderson.org/wp-content/upload ... eology.pdf

[decius]

That last move is the dreamer in him I think.

Worse than that - his "classless society" requires denial of human nature and outstanding naivete. However, I'm not fully convinced that he didn't realise the necessity of an enforcing tyrannical power for his utopia to work, particularly in the transitional stage.

Also, he was famously vague and not very self-consistent. I don't think it very useful to look at and interpret his doctrines as opposed to analyse their effects in history.

[Pitchguest]

You know that guy 'Tis Himself on FtB who apparently plagiarized every piece of clever writing he could find and pass it off as his own?

Strange gods before me said he's picked a new "nym" for himself: Ulysses. He's been posting on mostly Ophelia's blog since then.

[Lurkion]

How I picture the opinion some of Euro/Aussie 'Pit have of us on this side of the oceans:

http://i1322.photobucket.com/albums/u58 ... e31a14.jpg

What? I'm an Aussie. We're not stupid enough to think you have blades when you have access to bullets.

#pleasecomebackgumby

[tina]

Worse than that - his "classless society" requires denial of human nature and outstanding naivete.

Exactly.

However, I'm not fully convinced that he didn't realise the necessity of an enforcing tyrannical power for his utopia to work, particularly in the transitional stage. Also, he was famously vague and not very self-consistent. I don't think it very useful to look at and interpret his doctrines as opposed to analyse their effects in history.

Me neither, but I think the doctrines have to be at least understood prior to such analysis.

[LMU]

Here's a video from TheTruePooka, if you click on the "watch on youtube" button you can read PZ's contributions to the comment section.

3atyt_oGvmw

http://www.youtube.com/all_comments?v=3atyt_oGvmw

http://www.scentednectar.com/slimepit/0 ... s-haha.png

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

PZ is taking a pasting in there. "It's all lies! Lies, I tell you!" "All your comments were worthless!" He's really winning hearts and minds among the 'tubers. Ha ha ha.

I liked this quote from there:

I have been blocked by atheist and theist alike, admittedly it's the theist who overwhelmingly commands the blocking statistic.
Both have rationalized it by saying that it's their channel or their site and claim the ethic to do so.
If you expand it, that principle is as viable for the leader of a country, or state, or town, or clan, or tribe, who act to curtail the privilege of free speech in order to manage THEIR domain.
If we support free speech in our countries, it begins with ourselves.

People replied to this and correctly pointed out that banning someone from a blog or channel doesn't silence them because they can go elsewhere, but I think that misses the point that if we are trying to improve things, then we should make a point to be better than we have to be. If we think it is wrong for religions to try to silence dissenting atheists, then it's important that we, as atheists, make a point of not trying to silence those who dissent from us. It's not a matter of what is legally enforceable, after all there are countries that don't have free speech at all, but what our ideals and values are and what we're working towards.

Also I think the focus on the person speaking misses half of the issue. As the Hitchens pointed out, freedom of speech isn't just the right for someone to speak, but also the right of others to listen. Yes if someone really wants to speak, then banning them doesn't stop them, because they can go eslewhere, but the people who were listening to them might never find them again, the interrupted thread of discussion might never be recovered, whatever points they could have made are lost. As someone who mostly lurks, this second half of the issue is far more important to me personally.

[decius]

Me neither, but I think the doctrines have to be at least understood prior to such analysis.

Agreed, it's just me who can't be arsed, having ODed during my time as a resident of the dissolving DDR. I'm still in love with the aesthetics, though.

You probably dug up one of the best sources, because Engels was much more willing to provide detailed practical instructions.

[TheMan]

My weirdest US experiences would be: the mailman refusing to give me my mail because I had a metal shirt (Deicide, Legion album cover) and "Jesus loves me", being held at knifepoint by some crazy dude outside a gas station because I wanted to use the phone booth and so did he, and witnessing my host's wife going to wednesday bingo at her local mega-church. Oh, also the time that same wife threw away my Lovecraft books collection because it was "evil, rubish, satanist crap".

Also, being screwed over by an Italian restaurant owner who would pay me US$ 1,90/hour to do the dishes (I stayed at that job for all of 2 days).

Anyway, the above exemples are here to highlight some trend in mainstream America as perceived by not just a few secular foreigners: the stronghold of religion. Which is what brought me to the internet Atheist community in the first place. If I disdained Americans or thought they were all brainwashed, gun-totting maniacs, I wouldn't be here, or on any other Atheist blogs.

I've met lots of Yanks and I've liked them all...except one. *

Back in 1993....Sydney, it was a dark and stormy lunch hour. I was working in the city and took lunch at the local Food Hall in China town. For some reason it was packed that day. I paid for my Pad Thai and wondered around the tables, arranged in long rows, looking for a seat. I found one. You'd think we were the only honkies in a sea of Asian faces but the seat I found was opposite the other white dude. I politely squeezed in between a couple of Asian dudes and got stuck into lunch. He seemed like a giant, broad shouldered and easily the tallest in the hall the way his head towered above the rest, even mine. He had a mountain of food and from the look of it he went for the "all you can eat for $5.50" buffet. The way he demolished the plate was impressive. I only got four prawns today so I buried one under a pile of Thai noodles to save till last.

I noticed he gave up on the chop sticks. You can shovel fried rice quicker with a table spoon and the last mouthful he lifted the plate to his face. The Chinese do that too, usually from a bowl but heh!.

He stood up...geeze he was huge, easily 6 foot 9 and his Asian neighbours froze in mid-chew at the sight. He leaned forward resting on his arms. Hello, he's going to ask me something.

"Well thanks for the chit-chat.... maaaayte" It was more a yell, in a southern drawl with an mangled Aussie twist at the end.

I looked behind me in case I was mistaken...nope: deffo directed at me. He looked cross. I just popped the last prawn in my mouth.

" no worries" I said feeling like I murdered his dog, broken some social norm and snubbed him off. Fuck him I thought...stupid yank.

* ( oh and the couple I met in the Rail station in Florence who wanted to play me $5 US dollars in cash (waving the note in my face) if I would let them ahead of the ticket queue because they were 5 minutes behind their planned schedule in their itinerary (waving movement plan in my face)..."we only have two weeks Annual Leave you know!")

[windy]

Hi christo,
In case you haven't seen it, the JREF forum thread on A+ has some good observations on your treatment over there.
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php? ... 1&page=133

IMO A+ is a good thing for the skeptical community as it presents a first hand look at the kind of thinking that goes on in SJW circles. As a for instance, take yesterday's pile on christo thread where one poster decries the use of the word "crackhead" as being racist ( apparently most crack users are black, who knew ? ) with nary another poster questioning that analysis.

Then we have Setar getting all bent out of shape over being misgendered expecting everybody to know what his avatar is and actually read his sig line. Setar, you know, that guy who calls himself lordsetar on twitter. For some strange reason Pearl Jam's Jeremy pops into my head whenever I see lordsetar. King Jeremy the wicked...ruled his world...........

Speaking of setar he also goes on about newcomers to an exiting community and how those new comers should bend to the will of the existing culture. I wonder what his views on immigration, assimilation and multiculturalism are ?

Then we have the "we're not calling you a racist, just saying your words are racist" which eerily echoes the Christian love the sinner but hate the sin schitck along with a healthy dose of "we're not trying to hurt you, we're trying to help you".

I would also add that using terms like "racist dogwhistling" implies racist intent.

LOL, yeah, a noob who signed on October 4th on a site started in August a little over a month earlier. So I had a good laugh when setar said "you're new here."

:lol:

[Lsuoma]

Trigger warning. Biting satire as approved by Ophelia Benson.

http://humesrazor.blogspot.no/

Is that supposed to be funny? Most boring cartoon ever.

[Wonderist]

Hilarious. I just read PZ Myers' newest about Wikipedia and he praises an effort called "Feminists Engage Wikipedia" to which he says,

Note that this is a positive effort. No one is proposing to go in and destroy the patriarchal power structure of wikipedia or anything like that — they are simply trying to get more individuals from wider backgrounds to add topics of interest. All good, right? Exactly in the collaborative spirit of wikipedia?

"Feminists" Engage Wikipedia, not Women Engage Wikipedia?

Ah, so what kind of feminists are they talking about, the type I used to be (more of a humanist who carried the label because I thought feminism simply meant equality for women) or the type PZ pals around with who are fact-deniers, victimization masochists, gender stereotypers and political bullies with a myopic and skewed view of the world? I think if PZ is getting behind this I already know which type of feminist is on board and this isn't really about getting women in general to equal footing, but about a few noisy blogosphere radicals who align with the radfem culture to spread their message via brute force.

So what does the actual campaign page say?

Hello Friends!

I am really excited to tell you about a project I am working on called Feminists Engage Wikipedia, where folks around the country sign into Wikipedia, edit certain entries and add new ones to counteract the very white straight cis dude nature of the site.

According to PZ Myers, he's been a feminist since he was 15 years old. (Yeah, which is why he used such words like 'twat' and such phrases as 'science works, bitches' like any good feminist would, the fucking liar.) Did he learn how to read during that time or did he just stick to feminist literature?

White cis hetero nature of Wikipedia? can they prove this? Does this group of feminists have solid data showing that the people who edit Wiki are cis white hetero males? Seems to me that when it comes to Wiki editing:

1) we don't or can't know the actual gender ratio of the editors since it's self reported and allows for some degree of anonymity (many women, myself included, don't disclose our gender very much online). It's also impossible, even via IP trace from the Wiki servers, to know if 11.111.111.11 in Town X is cisgnder, transgender, transexual, hermaphrodite, genderqueer etc, etc., unless ISPs have snuck in chromosone and gender expression values into the numbers of our IP addresses, which I highly doubt (paging Alex Jones!)

2) We don't or can't know the ethnicity of the editors involved, especially on a site that garners that much traffic from a worldwide audience and again, allows for anonymity. The English speaking world which would edit English versions of Wiki tend to include mostly European and North American societies which have quite a good deal of racial and ethnic diversity. If your sole data is IP addresses or self-reported, you can't sufficiently make any determination of melanin levels in the skin of the editors.

3) We don't know the sexual preferences of the editors. We can maybe assume that in an open forum for editing available to everyone with an internet connection that on average heterosexuals editing Wiki pages will be around 90-95% since that's the rate of humans in general who are hetero, but we can't know that for sure when it comes to Wiki stats because once again, the self reported data Wiki collects and IP addresses os users don't include a sexual history.

This is a joke. While the average woman in some states of the US is seeing legislative efforts to restrict their reproductive rights happen this very week, these fools all rally behind an effort which claims women are being oppressed by an open forum for information that any woman at any time of the day or night is free to make changes to if they so desire. They're just using this claim of oppression to further their own political agendas. I'd be really interested to see what the edits they make to Wiki pages is, and what will happen when the people who aren't buying into radfem ideaology change the entries back. We're sure to see alot of moaning and complaining and victimization grandstanding, that's for sure.

Reposting some comments I made elsewhere:

Wikipedia doesn't take kindly to edit wars. Rather than simply countering their revisions, better would be to contact the regular editors and point out the biased edits (refer to the Neutral Point of View guideline (NPOV)). The regular editors will wake up and take action. But if you just go about undoing edits, they will think you are part of the problem, not helping. You can use the articles' Talk pages to make these notes and observations. If you want the most credibility, sign in or sign up for a user name if you don't already have one.
...
Wow, this is such a *huge* mistake by the radfems. Wikipedia is permanent, far more permanent than a blog comment section or even a forum. This is permanent history of radfemist bias being written ... by the radfems themselves! Talk about backfiring! Sheesh, this truly is the beginning of the end for radfem dogmatism.
...
FSM, this is even better than the Michael Nugent turn-around! There is going to be a Wikipedia-wide turn-around correcting for radfem bias. This is going to be a serious 'mainstream' event for dissenters of radfemism, if they take the high-road and focus on evidence and reason.
...
Wow, the more I think about this, the more ridiculous I realize it is. They complain about the 'white male' bias, but they *completely* friggin forget that they are only talking about *en.wikipedia.org*, the English version. There are versions in every modern language. I would guess that the versions in Japanese, Chinese, Portugese (e.g. Brazil), and African languages would be surprised to learn about their 'white male' nature. Fucking lol!

[Wonderist]

Hey, leave us Canadians alone! We're nothing but awesome, flannel wearing, lumber jacking, syrup making, hockey playing, igloo living, snow shoeing, beaver lovers, EH ;)

It's not all awesome. Finding outdoor space to build one's igloo on is getting expensive. Luckily the heated building I'm living in has a balcony, otherwise, where would I build my igloo and sleep at night?

I was skiing to work today and thinking about all the homeless folks who don't have *have* an igloo to sleep in, eh?

[Wonderist]

Ophelia's "no-drama" post has, at this point, attracted more comments (46) than her previous eight posts combined.

There's a serious problem with dramaism in the atheist/skeptic community.

[AndrewV69]

There you go. For future anti-American (sic) rhetoric, lonesagi will be our lightning rod.

:D

That will not work. lonesagi is too cute. It would be like kicking a puppy or a kitten.

[welch]

Yep - buying fucking hideous shoes is an "accomplishment" worthy of a blogpost for FTBers like Svan. But don't you fucking dare say that women have a disproportionate interest in shoes, you misogynists.

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

http://freethoughtblogs.com/almostdiamo ... -all-mine/
http://www.freezepage.com/1363477664KSUWFCJUHX

The new tires I bought today are better looking than those shoes. Ugh.

Uh oh. Someone wants their shoes back...

https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/imag ... _Xi5zaRYKA

When have you ever seen zvain where she isn't dressed like granny. I mean, I know a lot of people who are into crafts and making their own clothes, but they don't all dress like an overly uptight 80-year old from 1835. For an atheist, she sure does act like she's Amish.

[Percentage]

I think it's important to remember that the "straight" in "straight white male", as used by the SJWs, is more just a rhetorical device than anything else. Unless sex or race, sexuality is a continuum and so "straightness" is hard to define; a lot of men are at least a little bit gay. But of course, the "straight" modifier still has to be included because the gays are a Designated Oppressed Group in SJW theism.

To use an obvious example, people like Christopher Hitchens will be inevitably be included in atheism's "straight white male problem", despite the fact that Hitchens was apparently bisexual.

[Lsuoma]

When have you ever seen zvain where she isn't dressed like granny. I mean, I know a lot of people who are into crafts and making their own clothes, but they don't all dress like an overly uptight 80-year old from 1835. For an atheist, she sure does act like she's Amish.

Well, let's face it, she's not going to be able to get away with teh sexeh get-ups like Sara Mayhew's, is she?

[welch]

Hilarious. I just read PZ Myers' newest about Wikipedia and he praises an effort called "Feminists Engage Wikipedia" to which he says,

Note that this is a positive effort. No one is proposing to go in and destroy the patriarchal power structure of wikipedia or anything like that — they are simply trying to get more individuals from wider backgrounds to add topics of interest. All good, right? Exactly in the collaborative spirit of wikipedia?

"Feminists" Engage Wikipedia, not Women Engage Wikipedia?

Ah, so what kind of feminists are they talking about, the type I used to be (more of a humanist who carried the label because I thought feminism simply meant equality for women) or the type PZ pals around with who are fact-deniers, victimization masochists, gender stereotypers and political bullies with a myopic and skewed view of the world? I think if PZ is getting behind this I already know which type of feminist is on board and this isn't really about getting women in general to equal footing, but about a few noisy blogosphere radicals who align with the radfem culture to spread their message via brute force.

So what does the actual campaign page say?

Hello Friends!

I am really excited to tell you about a project I am working on called Feminists Engage Wikipedia, where folks around the country sign into Wikipedia, edit certain entries and add new ones to counteract the very white straight cis dude nature of the site.

According to PZ Myers, he's been a feminist since he was 15 years old. (Yeah, which is why he used such words like 'twat' and such phrases as 'science works, bitches' like any good feminist would, the fucking liar.) Did he learn how to read during that time or did he just stick to feminist literature?

White cis hetero nature of Wikipedia? can they prove this? Does this group of feminists have solid data showing that the people who edit Wiki are cis white hetero males? Seems to me that when it comes to Wiki editing:

1) we don't or can't know the actual gender ratio of the editors since it's self reported and allows for some degree of anonymity (many women, myself included, don't disclose our gender very much online). It's also impossible, even via IP trace from the Wiki servers, to know if 11.111.111.11 in Town X is cisgnder, transgender, transexual, hermaphrodite, genderqueer etc, etc., unless ISPs have snuck in chromosone and gender expression values into the numbers of our IP addresses, which I highly doubt (paging Alex Jones!)

2) We don't or can't know the ethnicity of the editors involved, especially on a site that garners that much traffic from a worldwide audience and again, allows for anonymity. The English speaking world which would edit English versions of Wiki tend to include mostly European and North American societies which have quite a good deal of racial and ethnic diversity. If your sole data is IP addresses or self-reported, you can't sufficiently make any determination of melanin levels in the skin of the editors.

3) We don't know the sexual preferences of the editors. We can maybe assume that in an open forum for editing available to everyone with an internet connection that on average heterosexuals editing Wiki pages will be around 90-95% since that's the rate of humans in general who are hetero, but we can't know that for sure when it comes to Wiki stats because once again, the self reported data Wiki collects and IP addresses os users don't include a sexual history.

This is a joke. While the average woman in some states of the US is seeing legislative efforts to restrict their reproductive rights happen this very week, these fools all rally behind an effort which claims women are being oppressed by an open forum for information that any woman at any time of the day or night is free to make changes to if they so desire. They're just using this claim of oppression to further their own political agendas. I'd be really interested to see what the edits they make to Wiki pages is, and what will happen when the people who aren't buying into radfem ideaology change the entries back. We're sure to see alot of moaning and complaining and victimization grandstanding, that's for sure.

A) it's classic slactivism. If one feels that there's a problem with the makeup of Wikipedia editors, encourage more people to participate, and the problem solves itself. But, this way, they can say they are DOING SOMETHING without having to do fuck all anything. Prediction: they will pick a handful of articles to edit. They will do so in a way completely contrary to wikipedia policy, which will lead us to the second goal of this...

B) as you said, this will create a torrent of victim points. When they makes bitty edits,(because they aren't going to follow Wikipedia policy, deliberately), they can them scream that everyone changing their edits are misogynistic transphobes, and that the Wikipedia policies are themselves misogynistic, transphobic, and encourage rape culture.

This isn't an attempt to increase participation in Wikipedia. It's an attention getting device to gin up hitcounts, speaking gigs, and article-writing money.

[Dilurk]

...Not even going to bother trying to catch up on 30 or so pages, so I will assume the usual suspects are engaging in the usual batshittery....

Mmmm, not exactly.

Say, Al? What are your thoughts on the right to bear cutlery?

[Runs]

[youtube]9VDvgL58h_Y[/youtube]

[AndrewV69]

Many of the "Diversity Dean" and similar administrative positions are mandated by federal and state governments in the US, and by accrediting agencies for colleges/universities or licensing agencies for professional schools. A university can be put on probation, and ultimately lose accreditation, if there are insufficient mechanisms and administrators in place to deal with diversity in recruitment and hiring, EEOC and ADA compliance, accusations of harassment or bias, perceived manifestations of harassment or bias, etc.

So moving to the US from Canada or vise versa is just jumping from one frying pan to another.

[Wonderist]

Here's a video from TheTruePooka, if you click on the "watch on youtube" button you can read PZ's contributions to the comment section.

3atyt_oGvmw

http://www.youtube.com/all_comments?v=3atyt_oGvmw

http://www.scentednectar.com/slimepit/0 ... s-haha.png

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

PZ is taking a pasting in there. "It's all lies! Lies, I tell you!" "All your comments were worthless!" He's really winning hearts and minds among the 'tubers. Ha ha ha.

I'm surprised that he lasted all of 11 comments so far. He usually just does a single shit 'n run at comment places that have any opposition to him.

Great job in the comments, SN.

This is the beginning of the end for these dogmatists. As soon as they actually start to respond on neutral/open forums, their dogma gets the spotlight shone on it, and they can do nothing to respond reasonably. They are getting desperate now. Keep calling their bullshit, demanding evidence. Everytime anyone does that and they *can't* show evidence, it becomes more and more clear to onlookers what the real situation is.

This same dynamic happened once theists started to engage with skeptics/atheists online years ago. Now the engagement has finally died off because obviously they have *nothing*. The 'beginning of the end' for theism was a few years ago.

Same here. Now that they are actually responding (e.g. on Nugent's blog), it's the beginning of the end. They can't hide away in their censor zones anymore because the situation is being discussed outside of those zones (i.e. here and in other blogs/fora). It's having an effect, and they are feeling it, and they are getting desperate. Note the several comments on that vid basically saying, "PZ, you've lost all credibility." He has, he knows it, he's desperate, he ventures outside his realm, spotlight, he withers away. Keep it up, I say!

[Wonderist]

A) it's classic slactivism. If one feels that there's a problem with the makeup of Wikipedia editors, encourage more people to participate, and the problem solves itself. But, this way, they can say they are DOING SOMETHING without having to do fuck all anything. Prediction: they will pick a handful of articles to edit. They will do so in a way completely contrary to wikipedia policy, which will lead us to the second goal of this...

B) as you said, this will create a torrent of victim points. When they makes bitty edits,(because they aren't going to follow Wikipedia policy, deliberately), they can them scream that everyone changing their edits are misogynistic transphobes, and that the Wikipedia policies are themselves misogynistic, transphobic, and encourage rape culture.

This isn't an attempt to increase participation in Wikipedia. It's an attention getting device to gin up hitcounts, speaking gigs, and article-writing money.

And. It's going to backfire on them in a huge way if they actually try to follow through on it. Regardless of any ephemeral victim points-winning, there will be a permanent history of their dogmatism. Evidence beats dogma, every time.

[16bitheretic]

What is it with FTB and Fluevogs lately? Their shoes typically look like stuff for cosplay if you ask me. Specifically steampunk style or maybe sci-fi western.

[justinvacula]

Skeptech -- an upcoming conference including PZ Myers, JT Eberhard, Jen McCreight, Greta Christina, and Stephanie Zvan -- has quite the poorly written and repetitive unneeded harassment policy. 'Interesting' pieces are bolded:

http://www.skep-tech.com/harassment-policy/

SkepTech is dedicated to providing a harassment-free conference experience for everyone, regardless of sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, disability, physical appearance, body size, race, or religion. We do not tolerate harassment of conference participants in any form. Sexual language and imagery is not appropriate for any conference venue, including talks. Conference participants violating these rules may be sanctioned or expelled from the conference without a refund at the discretion of the conference organizers.

Harassment includes offensive verbal comments related to sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, disability, physical appearance, body size, race, or religion, sexual images in public spaces, deliberate intimidation, stalking, following, harassing photography or recording, sustained disruption of talks or other events, inappropriate physical contact, and unwelcome sexual attention. Participants asked to stop any harassing behavior are expected to comply immediately.

Exhibitors in the expo hall, sponsor or vendor booths, or similar activities are also subject to the anti-harassment policy.

If a participant engages in harassing behavior, the conference organizers may take any action they deem appropriate, including warning the offender or expulsion from the conference with no refund. If you are being harassed, notice that someone else is being harassed, or have any other concerns, please contact a member of conference staff immediately. Conference staff can be identified by badges with the word “STAFF” and a blue stripe on them.

Conference staff will be happy to help participants contact hotel/venue security or local law enforcement, provide escorts, or otherwise assist those experiencing harassment to feel safe for the duration of the conference. We value your attendance.

At this point in time please send all questions and concerns to admin@skeptech.com

Local Resources:

Minneapolis police department

911 (emergency) and 612-692-TIPS [8477] (anonymous tip line)

http://www.minneapolismn.gov/police/index.htm

Local sexual assault hotline: the Aurora Center at UMN
http://www1.umn.edu/aurora/

Medical: U of MN Fairview Medical Center
http://www.uofmmedicalcenter.org/contact/index.htm
emergencies should use 911

Local Taxi Service: http://www.yellowcabmn.com/ (612-788-8888)

We expect participants to follow these rules at all conference venues and conference-related social events.

I sent some questions to the person who drafted the conference policy. I found this contact info after messaging other organizers:

Why does the conference have a harassment policy?
Why is the harassment policy lengthy?
What is an example of an offensive verbal comment about religion?
What is unwelcome sexual attention?
Why is a sexual assault hotline included in the harassment policy?
Why are numbers for police, 911, and a medical center included?
Why is the Aurora Center included?
What do administrators think of some of the following tidbits from the Aurora Center website? Is there agreement about these terms and statistics? ("95% of domestic violence is perpetrated by men and 90 - 95% of victims are women," "violent masculinity," "While most men don’t rape, 98 - 99% of rape is committed by men"

Some interesting pieces of information and outright bogus claims from the Sexual Assault Center website:

Students, faculty, staff, and other stakeholders help us challenge the institutions, practices and policies, and systems that promote sexism, racism, heterosexism, classism, ageism, religious oppression, and the oppression of people with disabilities which are among the root causes of violence.

Alcohol complicates sexual activity. Expectations, assumptions, as well as interpretations can be greatly altered because alcohol impairs decision-making. By law and University policy, a person who is incapacitated is unable to give consent. Regardless of who was drinking or how much was consumed, the responsibility for any sexual assault falls on the shoulders of the person who chooses to assault.

Readers will notice that the female pronoun “she” is used to refer to the survivor of violence in the following pages. This usage is reflective of statistics and our practice which have shown that on a
college campus, the survivors of sexual assault, relationship violence and stalking are overwhelmingly female. We have therefore chosen to avoid the cumbersome use of he/she, him/her, and his/hers. This does not mean that males are not victimized by these crimes, they are, but not in nearly the numbers that females are.

94% of Men DO NOT commit sexual assault

Be conscious of funding sexism. Magazines such as Maxim, FHM, Stuff, and Playboy, as well as some videos, music, and TV programs portray women in a sexually degrading or violent manner. This includes sexism both against females (stereotyping women as sex objects) and males (stereotyping men as sex fiends and hypermasculine).

[welch]

Skeptech -- an upcoming conference including PZ Myers, JT Eberhard, Jen McCreight, Greta Christina, and Stephanie Zvan -- has quite the poorly written and repetitive unneeded harassment policy. 'Interesting' pieces are bolded:

Meh. They're creating their safe space where no offensive word, action, nor deed shall occur, and they can bag on their enemies at will. More power to them.

I'm unsure why you felt a need to create drama between you and them, but you seem to like doing that.

[justinvacula]

Freezepage of Skeptech's harassment policy:
http://new.freezepage.com/1363539337DKWUPTWIZO

[Garlic]

A) it's classic slactivism. If one feels that there's a problem with the makeup of Wikipedia editors, encourage more people to participate, and the problem solves itself.

Well, that's exactly what they are doing.

B) as you said, this will create a torrent of victim points. When they makes bitty edits,(because they aren't going to follow Wikipedia policy, deliberately), they can them scream that everyone changing their edits are misogynistic transphobes, and that the Wikipedia policies are themselves misogynistic, transphobic, and encourage rape culture.

This isn't an attempt to increase participation in Wikipedia. It's an attention getting device to gin up hitcounts, speaking gigs, and article-writing money.

Precrime has called, they'd like to look at your CV. ;)

[debaser71]

I'm gonna laugh when their conference draws a crowd of zero.

[Submariner]

I'm gonna laugh when their conference draws a crowd of zero.

Yeah, Justin. This thing looks like a couple hundred people at most, let them have their non-fun.

[EdwardGemmer]

Steubenville teens convicted of rape and sentenced to juvenile prison. Will register as sex offenders for rest of lives.

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/highschool ... nM-;_ylv=3

[welch]

When have you ever seen zvain where she isn't dressed like granny. I mean, I know a lot of people who are into crafts and making their own clothes, but they don't all dress like an overly uptight 80-year old from 1835. For an atheist, she sure does act like she's Amish.

Well, let's face it, she's not going to be able to get away with teh sexeh get-ups like Sara Mayhew's, is she?

Which gives you one of the core problems they have with Sara, Miranda, Abbie, Mallorie, etc.: Nothing pisses them off more than a woman who is smart and not-drab.

It's really the ultimate sin.

[ERV]

I'm gonna laugh when their conference draws a crowd of zero.

Yeah, Justin. This thing looks like a couple hundred people at most, let them have their non-fun.

This is a conference put on by students-- I wouldnt blame them at all for inviting local people (Myers, Zvan), though it would have been nice if they expanded the 'local talent' circle who do things more relevant to their proposed conference theme (Myers and Zvan + technology is not a connection I make).

The others dont make any sense at all. They should just call it 'Skepticon North'.

[welch]

A) it's classic slactivism. If one feels that there's a problem with the makeup of Wikipedia editors, encourage more people to participate, and the problem solves itself.

Well, that's exactly what they are doing.

No, they aren't. They are calling for a highly specific form of engagement from a highly specific group of people. They are calling for a course of action that if followed unquestioningly, is going to cause actual real problems with Wikipedia, which has enough accuracy issues as it is. There is a world of difference between increasing wikipedia participation by everyone and what they are calling for.

B) as you said, this will create a torrent of victim points. When they makes bitty edits,(because they aren't going to follow Wikipedia policy, deliberately), they can them scream that everyone changing their edits are misogynistic transphobes, and that the Wikipedia policies are themselves misogynistic, transphobic, and encourage rape culture.

This isn't an attempt to increase participation in Wikipedia. It's an attention getting device to gin up hitcounts, speaking gigs, and article-writing money.

Precrime has called, they'd like to look at your CV. ;)

I can show you over a decade of experience and data on this kind of behavior in many arenas. Somehow, I doubt you'll want to do the work.

[debaser71]

"94% of Men DO NOT commit sexual assault"

Don't think of a black cat!

Assuming the stat to be correct (just assuming) the way to phrase such a thing is "94% of men are good people" or other such positivism. That is unless you are trying to reinforce the idea that men commit sexual assualt.

[debaser71]

"This is a conference put on by students"

-ahhh then I won't laugh. I'll just feel sorry for the students.

[Apples]

Freezepage of Skeptech's harassment policy:
http://new.freezepage.com/1363539337DKWUPTWIZO

Pick your battles, dude.

[Richard Dworkins]

Be conscious of funding sexism. Magazines such as Maxim, FHM, Stuff, and Playboy, as well as some videos, music, and TV programs portray women in a sexually degrading or violent manner. This includes sexism both against females (stereotyping women as sex objects) and males (stereotyping men as sex fiends and hypermasculine).

My lovely wife brings home chin wag rags which she purloins from her workmates all the time (so we may laugh). Where is the warnings that such magazines from Vogue to Heat perpetuate a stereotype of women being facile gossiping bitches that delight in others tragedy and in tearing down females because of their appearance, that make them sound like sex-obsessed neurotics and portray men being invisible unless they are hypermasculine well groomed bank accounts from which you can withdraw semen if you use their "20 ways..." guides?

Where is the crticisms of vile shows like "The Swan" and "Top Model" or the cacophonic whining of generations of female miserablists complaining about their love lives?

Oh right... It's only sexist when men do it.

Actually, speaking of my glorious lady, she pointed out something to me last night. She said, and I am paraphrasing, that the reason that social studies folk make "technical" terms out of commonly understood words like "misogyny" is because without such far reaching elaborate and nebulous accusatory language, they have nothing to offer as a discipline.

[TheMudbrooker]

Harassment includes....sustained disruption of talks or other events

I can't help but wonder how exactly "sustained disruption" will be defined. Given the history of the panelists I'd wager asking an uncomfortable question at the Q&A session and then having the gall to follow it up will be grounds for getting your ass bounced. With no refund.

[Gefan]

...It reminds me of when tinpot Socialists point out the paradises of countries such as Cuba. But nobody ever risks their life on a boat trying to get there, however, they do risk their lives trying to get to the capitalist countries. It is a damning fact.

I agree that it is, but I would add a small caveat. Namely, the increasing number of residents of capitalist countries who travel to Cuba for affordable, quality medical care. The number of Europeans going exceeds the number of Americans last time I checked but you have to figure in the (absurd) US travel ban on going to Cuba. The Europeans, who have secure access to basic care, seem to go largely out of convenience and to throw in a neat Caribbean vacation. The Americans who go tend to be a different story.
The leading "push" factor in us leaving the US has been the utterly venal, corrupt, and inefficient medical system. This has now priced itself out of the range of an ever-increasing number of Americans and, finally realizing this might present it with a problem (for the industry of course, not the peasantry) it responded by having Obama ram through a "reform" which forces the peasants to fork over their dwindling incomes. If either of us had contracted, say, cancer here I would have seriously considered flying to Cuba for treatment through a third country (the Cuban embassy in Mexico City is practiced and discrete in such matters). For those in such a scenario the Cubans don't stamp American passports so that the patient and their loved ones aren't immediately arrested and thrown into a rape camp the moment they return to the US.
Capitalism, a system by which I have done better than could reasonably have been expected, is better attuned to human nature than all its rivals to date and has subsequently outlasted them. It's fatal flaw (as pointed out by MKG much earlier) that it requires infinite exponential growth within a finite resource base. This is now coming to light, and thus capitalism's demise is within sight. However, since it's most of the way to mutating into a neo-feudal, corporate authoritarian nightmare we shouldn't romanticize it or its passing over much.

[CommanderTuvok]

Re: PZ on YouTube.

Yet again, it becomes clear that the notion the FTB/Skepchick/A+ agenda having traction in the wider atheist/skeptic community is just a complete myth. Get them out of their comfort zones and their own blogs, where they can memory hole and ban all dissent and opposition opinion, and they flounder like a koala bear in a vat of maple syrup.

In neutral forums, you get a true indicator of the loathing and dismissal of the Baboons from the wider community.

[JackSkeptic]

Re: PZ on YouTube.

Yet again, it becomes clear that the notion the FTB/Skepchick/A+ agenda having traction in the wider atheist/skeptic community is just a complete myth. Get them out of their comfort zones and their own blogs, where they can memory hole and ban all dissent and opposition opinion, and they flounder like a koala bear in a vat of maple syrup.

In neutral forums, you get a true indicator of the loathing and dismissal of the Baboons from the wider community.

Yep, which is why they label ALL detractors as 'Slympiters'. It is the same tactic used when Creationists call Evolutionary Biology 'Darwinisn' to try and give the impression it is a small vocal minority supporting it.

[Struth]

Hey Welch,

Did you hear Grüber and MG Siegler's recent show?

They talked Samsung and Google's sexism:
- one google exec called touching phones "emasculating"
- at the Galaxy S4 launch they apparently portrayed women as very stereotypical. It was apparently insulting.

«aside»
I recall you saying MG was a new media d-bag .... does that mean you think he's a twat?
Grüber often quotes lots of text and writes short pieces on Daring Fireball. So, he's a bit like Ophelia Benson, except he's extremely insightful and intelligent.