Bleeding from the Bunghole

[another lurker]

It may only be on iplayer for the next few hours (though the mvgroup will no doubt have it on their torrent server) and you may need be in the UK or use a proxy to watch it, but Iain Stewart's excellent documentary on how Japan's geology has affected its culture is wonderful viewing:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b0 ... Episode_4/

I *love* mvgroup. I downloaded close to 500gbs of educational torrents a few years back, and stopped archiving about halfway through, I was so overwhelmed by all of the material! Also, I totes adore your kitty pix Git - I especially enjoyed the Lynx in a sink, and that Japanese kitty with the cabbage hat!

MVGroup releases are usually on EZTV for those who want a quick way to keep up. I also recommend getting into Bibliotik (closed tracker) if you are looking for textbooks (they picked up where textbooktorrents and Demonoid left off).

I'd say they're doing the lord's work, but you know..

The geology to culture narrative sounds like a Guns Germs and Steel steal. I'll give it a look.

Bibliotik sonds like a bitch to get into. Need an invite, then you gotta upload 100 things that aren't already on the site! There do appear to be other ebook trackers however...

[Steersman]

<snip>
Kind of sucks either way, but what is interesting is that she sort of suggests a real and tangible way that might actually reduce the incidence of rape, at least in the context of drinking. Bit of a step up from Sarah Jones’ rather imperial and totally impractical command to potential rapists to “stop, just stop”, most of whom apparently care dick-all about the law and its rather draconian penalties, much less finger-wagging admonishments. ....

Cry me a river. I came home blind stumbling drunk at 14. My parents realized that I needed to learn about this shit, so they taught me. I learned about gauging when you're starting to get drunk, and all the rest of it. Other people can take the option of "not drinking". Really. Totally an option, and a pretty sensible one.

<snip>
What no one wants to do is actually stand up and say "No, I"m not going to drink your fucking trashcan punch", because that requires ACTUAL backbone, which none of these twits have.

I can sympathize. However, I think you’re judging others by your own experiences and abilities, not to mention those of your parents. Not everyone is as self-aware as you apparently were at that age or able to judge the consequences of their actions.

As they say, good judgement comes from experience, but experience comes from bad judgement. And “bad judgement” covers a very wide spectrum. Not particularly reasonable, I think, to think that everyone’s introductions to that are the same.

[justinvacula]

http://rationallyspeaking.blogspot.ca/2 ... sment.html

Massimo Pigliucci: "Does philosophy have a sexual harassment problem?"


I'm not too impressed with this piece, but it's worth reading and linking here. Massimo isn't utterly convinced that philosophy has a "sexual harassment problem" and questions the assertion.


In the comments, Massimo responds to a question (in arrows):

> As Britney notes there is a lot of discussion about this in the atheism/skeptics community at the moment. ... So I would be interested in hearing your take on that as well. <

I have commented on this: http://goo.gl/niYx15 and I may return to the subject again, though frankly I see many irrational pronouncements concerning misogyny within the skeptic / atheism movement, and I think I’m guaranteed to be misunderstood or worse regardless of what I may write.

also, Massimo says, about a writer claiming philosophy has a "sexual harassment problem,"

...I chided Saul for sloppy reasoning, including using anecdotal evidence to make sweeping claims about an entire field, and non sequitur connecting skewed gender ratios with sexual harassment. That sort of confusion doesn’t help, and indeed provides ammunition to people who don’t want to take the problem seriously.

[JackRayner]

<snip>
Kind of sucks either way, but what is interesting is that she sort of suggests a real and tangible way that might actually reduce the incidence of rape, at least in the context of drinking. Bit of a step up from Sarah Jones’ rather imperial and totally impractical command to potential rapists to “stop, just stop”, most of whom apparently care dick-all about the law and its rather draconian penalties, much less finger-wagging admonishments. ....

Cry me a river. I came home blind stumbling drunk at 14. My parents realized that I needed to learn about this shit, so they taught me. I learned about gauging when you're starting to get drunk, and all the rest of it. Other people can take the option of "not drinking". Really. Totally an option, and a pretty sensible one.

<snip>
What no one wants to do is actually stand up and say "No, I"m not going to drink your fucking trashcan punch", because that requires ACTUAL backbone, which none of these twits have.

I can sympathize. However, I think you’re judging others by your own experiences and abilities, not to mention those of your parents. Not everyone is as self-aware as you apparently were at that age or able to judge the consequences of their actions.

As they say, good judgement comes from experience, but experience comes from bad judgement. And “bad judgement” covers a very wide spectrum. Not particularly reasonable, I think, to think that everyone’s introductions to that are the same.

Meh. I'm perfectly fine with natural selection being in full effect, as cold as it may sound. If your caretakers, peers, and yourself are all dumbasses, and you end up debilitated or dead because of it, maybe it isn't that great of a loss, in the aggregate. We could use less people on this rock anyhow...

[Guest]

Bibliotik sonds like a bitch to get into. Need an invite, then you gotta upload 100 things that aren't already on the site! There do appear to be other ebook trackers however...

Aw shit, I didn't know they'd changed it. I got in early. Don't have any invites left either. Very unfortunate, it's a nice place.

There should be plenty of other sources. The trouble with ebooks is that they're so small they tend to reach critical seed mass very early and then peter out, especially when not bundled.

[Steersman]

<snip>
Yep, that brings to mind:

A shipowner was about to send to sea an emigrant ship. .... What shall we say of him? Surely this, that he was verily guilty of the death of those men. It is admitted that he did sincerely believe in the soundness of his ship; but the sincerity of his conviction can in no way help him, because he had no right to believe on such evidence as was before him. He had acquired his belief not by honestly earning it in patient investigation, but by stifling his doubts. And although in the end he may have felt so sure about it that he could not think otherwise, yet inasmuch as he had knowingly and willingly worked himself into that frame of mind, he must be held responsible for it.
- William K. Clifford, "The Ethics Of Belief", 1874

Indeed. Along the same line, particularly since one good quote deserves another (or two):

William James used to preach the “will to believe”. For my part, I should wish to preach the “will to doubt.” …. What is wanted is not the will to believe, but the wish to find out, which is the exact opposite. [Sceptical Essays; 1928]

The above from Carl Sagan's Broca's Brain. And, more generally:

By necessity, by proclivity - and by delight - we all quote.

[Matt Cavanaugh]

Ophie, in her infinite wisdom says (http://freethoughtblogs.com/butterflies ... ovocation/):

What the hell happened to personal responsibility? Eh? Waah waah waah, they provoked me, make them stop – that’s all we ever hear. Man up, anti-choicers! If someone offers you more wine an abortion clinic to target with violence, you can just say no.

(My emphasis.)

Huh?!?

I expect she was trying for an analogy between Mr Deity's wine comments and some suggestion to the easily led (the religious in general, expect) to go bomb an abortion clinc.

But then we know her strong suit is most definitely not analogies ....

I've yet to read a thing from the woman that makes the slightest bit of sense. All the circuits are fried.

[ERV]

Hey, speaking of people confusing getting drunk/having sex with getting drugged/raeped--

Did I ever tell you all a guy tried to drug-->rape me in college? Sheer fucking luck saved me, that and being an 'experienced' under-age drinker.

Freshman year, went to a party at a frat house, Senior Boy offered to make me a drink. Well White Russians have always been my drink (for a whole two years, at that point), so I demanded one of those. Well I went to the party with a bunch of new friends from St. Louis-- apparently it was harder to drink under-age there or something, so none of them had tried a White Russian before, so I let them try mine (what did I care? not like I paid for the drink or anything). Ended up splitting that one White Russian between like, eight people. Senior Boy was real interested in following me home that night, but again, I was with like eight other people and I wasnt into him, so, I shooed him off.

Fast forward a month or two, friends at a party at the same frat house. Senior Boy was really drunk, and real interested in whether I drank that White Russian from TWO MONTHS AGO. My face: :| Kept him talking-- Drunk Senior Boy admitted to drugging me and couldnt figure out why it didnt work.

Horrified, I knew there was nothing I could do, at that point, so for the next few weeks I just convinced Senior Boy that I was a witch who talked to ghosts and had demons assigned to me by The Goddess who protected me from harm. Senior Boy left me the fuck alone for the rest of the year. :D

Incidentally, this incident is one reason why I did very little partying in college, and why I do very little drinking now.

[welch]

<snip>
Kind of sucks either way, but what is interesting is that she sort of suggests a real and tangible way that might actually reduce the incidence of rape, at least in the context of drinking. Bit of a step up from Sarah Jones’ rather imperial and totally impractical command to potential rapists to “stop, just stop”, most of whom apparently care dick-all about the law and its rather draconian penalties, much less finger-wagging admonishments. ....

Cry me a river. I came home blind stumbling drunk at 14. My parents realized that I needed to learn about this shit, so they taught me. I learned about gauging when you're starting to get drunk, and all the rest of it. Other people can take the option of "not drinking". Really. Totally an option, and a pretty sensible one.

<snip>
What no one wants to do is actually stand up and say "No, I"m not going to drink your fucking trashcan punch", because that requires ACTUAL backbone, which none of these twits have.

I can sympathize. However, I think you’re judging others by your own experiences and abilities, not to mention those of your parents. Not everyone is as self-aware as you apparently were at that age or able to judge the consequences of their actions.

As they say, good judgement comes from experience, but experience comes from bad judgement. And “bad judgement” covers a very wide spectrum. Not particularly reasonable, I think, to think that everyone’s introductions to that are the same.

But by the same token, why are people who don't have to fall off a cliff elebenty times before they learn to watch where they are going bad? That's the other side. If you did learn to pull your head out of your ass at a young age, or ever really, regardless of reason, you're some kind of bad person for pointing out that it is in fact possible to not be fucking stupid year after year, or that a little thinking can avoid problems.

I'm sorry she went through some bad experiences, but me not giving her "I COULDN'T STOP DRINKING" excuse some great elevated status doesn't mean I think rape is okay. It means i'm not particularly sympathetic to people who give alcohol and social pressure magical properties. I will ABSOLUTELY cop to that. Yes, it is a bit of a pain in the ass to not drink when everyone else is. but even outside of my parents, it never seemed like a good idea to be high or drunk in a strange situation. However, growing up in Miami instead of east fuckolio in Farmville does tend to show one why this is a good thing.

Rape and being stupid about drinking are two different issues, even though they can intersect.

[Steersman]

<snip>
As they say, good judgement comes from experience, but experience comes from bad judgement. And “bad judgement” covers a very wide spectrum. Not particularly reasonable, I think, to think that everyone’s introductions to that are the same.

Meh. I'm perfectly fine with natural selection being in full effect, as cold as it may sound. If your caretakers, peers, and yourself are all dumbasses, and you end up debilitated or dead because of it, maybe it isn't that great of a loss, in the aggregate. We could use less people on this rock anyhow...

That’s a little harsh. And, I think, decidedly short-sighted. There are, no doubt, congenitally stupid people for whom no amount of experience is going to be sufficient to educate them – in which case having them remove themselves from society if not the gene pool is probably the optimal solution.

However, speaking as someone who has periodically come close to “winning” a Darwin Award – something I think more than a few here have indicated they have done likewise, I think it is important to realize that, as someone famous said, “we hang together or we hang alone”. That, to a large degree, we have an obligation to “have each other’s backs”. While there is obviously a limit to that, I would draw the line in a very different location from where you apparently do.

[ja2038]

Hey, speaking of people confusing getting drunk/having sex with getting drugged/raeped--

Did I ever tell you all a guy tried to drug-->rape me in college? Sheer fucking luck saved me, that and being an 'experienced' under-age drinker.

We should not be zero tolerancing/Child Protective Servicing parents that provide a reasonable booze experience to their young/growing kids.

Part of Passover is allowing your kids to inadvertently get drunk.... After a hot summer day, it's okay to give your kid a couple of sips of your beer. At the party, it's okay to give your kids a white russion, black russian, screwdriver or whatever. (Do people still drink screwdrivers?)

That way in college, booze ain't some horrible taboo fuck my parents thing that the kids know absolutely nothing about.

[clownshoe]

That Knobend Mason is back on his hobby horse complete with dick carrier esque invoking of good and evil, and the fight for our souls

Wanker.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... paul-mason

The only comment so far cuts his argument down:
Aduin - 19 August 2013
Just in the last 10 minutes I found the following in my timeline:
- San Francisco free speech lawyer commenting on a case.
- Report on privacy lawsuit from another US lawyer.
- Link to interesting interview from Washington-based NGO dedicated to civil liberties.
- Link to Internet traffic study from a Finnish lawyer.
- Link to sustainable development report from top Australian academic.
- Report on IPv6 adoption from the Internet Society.
I don't know how you define "actual insight", but the above is extremely relevant to my work, all from highly relevant and reputable people.
You get the timeline you deserve. :rimshot:

[welch]

Hey, speaking of people confusing getting drunk/having sex with getting drugged/raeped--

Did I ever tell you all a guy tried to drug-->rape me in college? Sheer fucking luck saved me, that and being an 'experienced' under-age drinker.

We should not be zero tolerancing/Child Protective Servicing parents that provide a reasonable booze experience to their young/growing kids.

Part of Passover is allowing your kids to inadvertently get drunk.... After a hot summer day, it's okay to give your kid a couple of sips of your beer. At the party, it's okay to give your kids a white russion, black russian, screwdriver or whatever. (Do people still drink screwdrivers?)

That way in college, booze ain't some horrible taboo fuck my parents thing that the kids know absolutely nothing about.

now you're just being sensible

[Steersman]

Hey, speaking of people confusing getting drunk/having sex with getting drugged/raeped--

Did I ever tell you all a guy tried to drug-->rape me in college? Sheer fucking luck saved me, that and being an 'experienced' under-age drinker.
<snip>
Incidentally, this incident is one reason why I did very little partying in college, and why I do very little drinking now.

Christ. I remember reading an article in an actual newspaper [the printed variety :shock: ] of a bunch of Hell’s Angels types who had been charged with possessing or attempting to sell some “date-rape” drugs [Rohypnol, I think], and had been horrified at the thought that there was a market for such. Unfortunately there is a non-trivial percentage of the population – “more of a guy thing”, I think – who are simply sociopaths and psychopaths. Not at all an easy thing to deal with or avoid – frequently a question of luck as in your case.

[katamari Damassi]

Figures cobweb cunt would be upset about cuteness. The miserable harridan seems to take no joy from anything. Well, with the exception of making everyone as pathetic and as empty as her.

I'm going to have that embroidered on a pillow.

[bovarchist]

Hey, speaking of people confusing getting drunk/having sex with getting drugged/raped--


Fast forward a month or two, friends at a party at the same frat house. Senior Boy was really drunk, and real interested in whether I drank that White Russian from TWO MONTHS AGO. My face: :| Kept him talking-- Drunk Senior Boy admitted to drugging me and couldn't figure out why it didn't work.

That's what happens when you buy your rapedrugs from the back of Penthouse.

[deLurch]

Fast forward a month or two, friends at a party at the same frat house. Senior Boy was really drunk, and real interested in whether I drank that White Russian from TWO MONTHS AGO. My face: :| Kept him talking-- Drunk Senior Boy admitted to drugging me and couldnt figure out why it didnt work.

Creepy as fuck. So this guy literally had no self awareness as to how wrong that was. 7 billion people on this planet, there are bound to be more than a few losers. But just about finished with college and he had yet to develop any sense of morals or ethics? Did he say what he put in it?

[Gumby]

Ophie, in her infinite wisdom says (http://freethoughtblogs.com/butterflies ... ovocation/):

What the hell happened to personal responsibility? Eh? Waah waah waah, they provoked me, make them stop – that’s all we ever hear. Man up, anti-choicers! If someone offers you more wine an abortion clinic to target with violence, you can just say no.

(My emphasis.)

Huh?!?

Significant understanding shoots pineapples with a machine gun.

(Above from a nonsense sentence generator site that isn't Butterflies and Wheels.)

[Gumby]

Significant understanding shoots pineapples with a machine gun.

Actually since Ophelia is Teh Pineapple, that sentence makes absolute sense. Significant understanding has indeed seemed to take a machine gun to Ophelia.

[16bitheretic]

Hey, speaking of people confusing getting drunk/having sex with getting drugged/raeped--

Did I ever tell you all a guy tried to drug-->rape me in college? Sheer fucking luck saved me, that and being an 'experienced' under-age drinker.
<snip>
Incidentally, this incident is one reason why I did very little partying in college, and why I do very little drinking now.

Christ. I remember reading an article in an actual newspaper [the printed variety :shock: ] of a bunch of Hell’s Angels types who had been charged with possessing or attempting to sell some “date-rape” drugs [Rohypnol, I think], and had been horrified at the thought that there was a market for such. Unfortunately there is a non-trivial percentage of the population – “more of a guy thing”, I think – who are simply sociopaths and psychopaths. Not at all an easy thing to deal with or avoid – frequently a question of luck as in your case.

I remember having it symbolically drilled into my brain by my mom that you always watch if someone makes you a drink and you never leave your glass unattended. If you do leave your glass somewhere out of sight you never drink from it again after that.

But of course, we all know she was totally pre-emptively victim-blaming me, amirite

[Git]

After a hot summer day, it's okay to give your kid a couple of sips of your beer. At the party, it's okay to give your kids a white russion, black russian, screwdriver or whatever. (Do people still drink screwdrivers?)

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_BOuVlMc09SU/S ... d+tool.jpg

They tend to be used to hammer in nails in these parts though.

http://www.picturesof.net/_images_300/a ... 607018.jpg

[bhoytony]

The Greyhound option won't be a viable one because I would have to take off work Thursday, Friday, and Monday [the bus trip is 1 day, 30 minutes to Madison and 1 day 15 hours on the return trip]. I would also have to arrive late on Tuesday. I'm able to take one day off -- from my personal time off -- to attend the convention, but I can't take three days off and arrive late on another.

Hang out at your local airport and offer people gas money to fly you in their Cessna to your destination.

I've done this kind of hitchhiking before.

Don't forget to carry a copy of the Koran under your arm if you try this.

[Pitchguest]

Ophie, in her infinite wisdom says (http://freethoughtblogs.com/butterflies ... ovocation/):

What the hell happened to personal responsibility? Eh? Waah waah waah, they provoked me, make them stop – that’s all we ever hear. Man up, anti-choicers! If someone offers you more wine an abortion clinic to target with violence, you can just say no.

(My emphasis.)

Huh?!?

Have you tried switching her off and then back on again?

Hahahahaha, you bastard! :lol:

[Rope apologist]

Hey, speaking of people confusing getting drunk/having sex with getting drugged/raeped--

Did I ever tell you all a guy tried to drug-->rape me in college? Sheer fucking luck saved me, that and being an 'experienced' under-age drinker.
<snip>
Incidentally, this incident is one reason why I did very little partying in college, and why I do very little drinking now.

Christ. I remember reading an article in an actual newspaper [the printed variety :shock: ] of a bunch of Hell’s Angels types who had been charged with possessing or attempting to sell some “date-rape” drugs [Rohypnol, I think], and had been horrified at the thought that there was a market for such. Unfortunately there is a non-trivial percentage of the population – “more of a guy thing”, I think – who are simply sociopaths and psychopaths. Not at all an easy thing to deal with or avoid – frequently a question of luck as in your case.

I remember having it symbolically drilled into my brain by my mom that you always watch if someone makes you a drink and you never leave your glass unattended. If you do leave your glass somewhere out of sight you never drink from it again after that.

But of course, we all know she was totally pre-emptively victim-blaming me, amirite

My mom just told my sisters that they had to drink any alcohol given to them by a man, and that they had no responsibility for what happened. And to believe any accusation of rape whatsoever.

No wait, it wasn't my mom, it was a bunch of fucking morons.

[katamari Damassi]

This is the kind of comment that Peezus still gives a pass:

http://i.imgur.com/V11um5z.jpg

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... ent-673657

That whole line of argumentation is sickening. PZ was the first to lay it down and the peanut gallery are just regurgitating it. Your belief in the "rape culture" needs to be a pair of thick blinders before you can say in honesty that some missed sales and fewer fucks are the only result of a major rape allegation.

Even more appalling was PZs insistence HE wouldn't care if people accused him, he'd just grin and bear it because the consequences would be so tame and it was enough he knew it was a lie (feeding into the idea that if Shermer used lawyers to defend himself, it would be a sign of guilt).

But don't you dare suggest that the consequences are even slightly more serious in a comment, that's blasphemy and will get you banned.

On the whole consequences of false accusation thing, this is somewhat related. I was talking to an ex of mine who was telling me that he had not too long ago received a cryptic message from an ex of his whom he hadn't heard from in quite some time. The message was: "Hi, just wanted you to know that I was acquitted of all charges. The papers aren't covering this, so I'm letting my friends know." My ex had no idea what the guy was talking about so he contacted him and asked for clarification. This guy who is a practicing physician was arrested for possession and production and intent to distribute child pornography. The story goes that a few of years ago he was a paying member of a legit porn site that was of the "barely legal" genre-young looking people who the website assures are actually 18 or above. The website was up and going for years before city cops decided it was kiddie porn. Out of tens of thousands of subscribers they picked a handful to arrest and this guy was among them. They confiscated his computer and found nothing incriminating on the hard drive. Never the less he was put in jail until someone came to bail him out, then under court order he had to live with his parents and have no computer until after his trial. This took a year and a half to get sorted. Two of the three charges were dropped and he was acquitted of the last remaining charge. While his arrest the previous year made the front page of the newspaper, there was no follow up about the acquittal. When he googles his name he gets hits to the old news stories about his arrests and his name turns up in blogs from angry former patients along the lines of "This pervert looked at my daughter's diaper rash!" His career is basically over at this point. He is suing the police department but i have no idea how effective that will be.

[katamari Damassi]

Hey, speaking of people confusing getting drunk/having sex with getting drugged/raeped--

Did I ever tell you all a guy tried to drug-->rape me in college? Sheer fucking luck saved me, that and being an 'experienced' under-age drinker.

We should not be zero tolerancing/Child Protective Servicing parents that provide a reasonable booze experience to their young/growing kids.

Part of Passover is allowing your kids to inadvertently get drunk.... After a hot summer day, it's okay to give your kid a couple of sips of your beer. At the party, it's okay to give your kids a white russion, black russian, screwdriver or whatever. (Do people still drink screwdrivers?)

That way in college, booze ain't some horrible taboo fuck my parents thing that the kids know absolutely nothing about.

When I was a kid my parents let us drink beer and wine. I didn't like wine but did like beer-and they drank cheap shit. When I was a teen, alcohol didn't have the forbidden fruit allure it had with my friends and though I drank with them I never got falling down drunk, or passed out. I rarely had hangovers the next day, because I drank just enough to sustain a buzz and never bought into dares to chug or that "don't be a pussy" peer pressure bullshit.

[Pitchguest]

Hey, speaking of people confusing getting drunk/having sex with getting drugged/raeped--

Did I ever tell you all a guy tried to drug-->rape me in college? Sheer fucking luck saved me, that and being an 'experienced' under-age drinker.

Freshman year, went to a party at a frat house, Senior Boy offered to make me a drink. Well White Russians have always been my drink (for a whole two years, at that point), so I demanded one of those. Well I went to the party with a bunch of new friends from St. Louis-- apparently it was harder to drink under-age there or something, so none of them had tried a White Russian before, so I let them try mine (what did I care? not like I paid for the drink or anything). Ended up splitting that one White Russian between like, eight people. Senior Boy was real interested in following me home that night, but again, I was with like eight other people and I wasnt into him, so, I shooed him off.

Fast forward a month or two, friends at a party at the same frat house. Senior Boy was really drunk, and real interested in whether I drank that White Russian from TWO MONTHS AGO. My face: :| Kept him talking-- Drunk Senior Boy admitted to drugging me and couldnt figure out why it didnt work.

Horrified, I knew there was nothing I could do, at that point, so for the next few weeks I just convinced Senior Boy that I was a witch who talked to ghosts and had demons assigned to me by The Goddess who protected me from harm. Senior Boy left me the fuck alone for the rest of the year. :D

Incidentally, this incident is one reason why I did very little partying in college, and why I do very little drinking now.

If only you had known better. You could've made a whole career from that!

Instead you became an HIV researcher. :snooty: For shame, Abbie. For shame.

[Steersman]

<snip>
Christ. I remember reading an article in an actual newspaper [the printed variety :shock: ] of a bunch of Hell’s Angels types who had been charged with possessing or attempting to sell some “date-rape” drugs [Rohypnol, I think], and had been horrified at the thought that there was a market for such. Unfortunately there is a non-trivial percentage of the population – “more of a guy thing”, I think – who are simply sociopaths and psychopaths. Not at all an easy thing to deal with or avoid – frequently a question of luck as in your case.

I remember having it symbolically drilled into my brain by my mom that you always watch if someone makes you a drink and you never leave your glass unattended. If you do leave your glass somewhere out of sight you never drink from it again after that.

But of course, we all know she was totally pre-emptively victim-blaming me, amirite

Those different perspectives on “victim-blaming” are indeed a puzzle, like two completely different langauges or “incommensurable” concepts. You might “enjoy” reading several of the comments over on Sarah Jones’ site which question my analogous argument that people do have some responsibility to lock their homes and that that argument does not constitute “victim blaming”.

Although in passing, I think you’ve indicated that you’re probably 20 years younger than Zvan which probably speaks to the different threats that parents have to warn their kids about. Although Zvan's parents apparently dropped the ball in not warning her of those of her time. But both cases are probably a reflection of the “arms race” between predators and prey that, unfortunately, plays out in human societies as well as in “nature, red in tooth and claw”.

[Steersman]

Figures cobweb cunt would be upset about cuteness. The miserable harridan seems to take no joy from anything. Well, with the exception of making everyone as pathetic and as empty as her.

I'm going to have that embroidered on a pillow.

Well, I think that epithet qualifies as a cheap shot - particularly if people don't have the balls to call her that to her face. Personally, I would go with something that has a little more substance and isn't quite as petty. Like her tweet “connecting the word ‘feminism’ with the word ‘virulent’ is misogyny.” Or the longer but equally damning "the tendency of the political Left to subjugate the rational assessment of truth-claims to the demands of a variety of pre-existing political and moral frameworks".

[Rystefn]

It literally is a law that says "you know what we mean" anytime you want clarification. That's why we need lawyers and precedent and all that inconvenient shit. Because if one's life was really run on what people think they want, they'd be more ratfucked than they dreamed possible.

So... if you were writing the clarification, it would take you 350 pages? Is that what you're saying? That there's no way to express laws except in massive tomes or half a sentence that says pretty much nothing, and there's nothing in between? Because I'm calling bullshit on that. There's pretty much 350 pages in between, in fact. The fact that we have all this case-law and precedent stuff tells us the 350+ page tomes of "clarification" aren't working so great anyway, doesn't it? Either the law is clear and doesn't need interpretation, or the interpretation is the law and we don't need massive tomes.

I answered this. To date, a reasonable guess is that trying to define SOX into something specific and reliable has taken probably ten times that number of pages, and still failed.

You don't get it, nor, do I think you want to. The law has to be precise. You can't just say "killing people is illegal". You have to define that shit so that someone who kills someone in self-defense isn't given the same treatment as Ted Bundy. You then have to define self-defense so that it can't be used to whack your neighbor because his dog pooped in your yard. You seem to not only be happily and nigh-completely ignorant of what you're talking about, but defensively so, and you refuse to acknowledge that your "just keep it simple" doesn't work in Law any more than it does in Engineering. Precision is not something you can get in a fucking paragraph of one-syllable words. You think an arch is simple? Look at how many pages are involved in building one correctly so it supports its own weight, the other weight it has to carry and does so for more than a month. I know in your world all problems can be solved with a 1cm square bit of duct tape and a spoon, but in the really real world, that kind of half-assing causes far more, FAR more problems than it solves.

Lsuoma and I and many more live the results of when you try. Six words dude. Six words that created, literally, thousands of pages of documentation and none of it, none of it is authoritative beyond the walls of the building it lives in.

But do go on and tell me how I'm wrong, and how this isn't what's really happening. While you're at it, tell me what you do for a living that gives you this awesome knowledge base, because right now I'm seeing "I don't understand it, but I know I don't like it, and therefore it's bullshit."

Do you know what a false dichotomy is? Because that's what you're doing. The options are not "either half a sentence that tells you nothing useful or a ten thousand page document that's functionally useless." Get off the "this is how it is" bullshit, and listen to what I'm actually saying: It should not be either of those things. Let me say that again, since you seem to be unable to comprehend what I'm saying: IT SHOULD NOT BE EITHER OF THOSE THINGS. And yet somehow, you're bitching at me for being wrong while at the same time complaining about it being both. In what universe does that make sense? The law should be exactly as long as it needs to be for clarity.

I like your example about killing people, actually. That's something that gets relatively complex, because we make a difference between killing on purpose and killing on accident, and we care about why you did what you did, and we care about how it happened. How long is the law on murder/manslaughter where you live? Is it thousands of pages, different in every building, and still unclear? I haven't looked it up, because I don't live there, have no intention of ever going back there, and so it doesn't impact me in the slightest, but I'll put a thousand dollars on the answer being no.

I also like you pointing out arches. It reinforces exactly what I said before about tech-related laws needing the most detail. However, how much of that needs to be there if you're writing the standards to be read by a professional builder? Still a fair bit, you are setting the standard of compliance here, but less than you'd need in an instruction manual for someone who never build anything more complex than a lego car. The law needs to be clear to the people it affects. If a legal dispute comes up, you bring some experts into the courtroom to explain if things were up to snuff or not, and why. Wait... don't we do that already anyway? It turns out we do. So any extra detail is redundant.

Now, would you like to argue against what I'm actually saying, or would you prefer to carry on attacking your men of straw? While you're at it, kindly answer the question I asked, not the one you'd like pretend I asked: They law as written does not and never has existed. If you were writing a law to do what that law is intended to do, clearly and setting one standard for all, and not worrying about lawyers weaseling around because experts will be brought into the courtroom to explain exactly what is meant in cases where specialized knowledge is required, how much space would it take? If the law superfluous, causes more/worse problems than it solves, or is otherwise unnecessary, then the answer is zero. Otherwise, go ahead and tack on a page or so to create a clause where it's revisited periodically for updates, because we all know that technology marches on.

[Cunning Punt]

...Or the longer but equally damning "the tendency of the political Left to subjugate the rational assessment of truth-claims to the demands of a variety of pre-existing political and moral frameworks".

I think "cobweb cunt" rolls off the tongue better though.

[AndrewV69]

Horrified, I knew there was nothing I could do, at that point, so for the next few weeks I just convinced Senior Boy that I was a witch who talked to ghosts and had demons assigned to me by The Goddess who protected me from harm. Senior Boy left me the fuck alone for the rest of the year. :D

I get the impression that there is at least one of these types of person in any sufficiently large enough group. Did you keep track about what happened with him eventually?

Incidentally, this incident is one reason why I did very little partying in college, and why I do very little drinking now.

I was taught to drink myself. Wine was a normal part of family Sunday meals (after around age seven) you were allowed a glass, and as you got older you could have more if you wanted it.

Looking back, I can see that it was a very effective means of teaching someone to drink responsibly, because you were shamed for allowing yourself to get tipsy, never mind drunk.

[Parody Accountant]

Do you know what a false dichotomy is? Because that's what you're doing. The options are not "either half a sentence that tells you nothing useful or a ten thousand page document that's functionally useless." Get off the "this is how it is" bullshit, and listen to what I'm actually saying: It should not be either of those things. Let me say that again, since you seem to be unable to comprehend what I'm saying: IT SHOULD NOT BE EITHER OF THOSE THINGS. And yet somehow, you're bitching at me for being wrong while at the same time complaining about it being both. In what universe does that make sense? The law should be exactly as long as it needs to be for clarity.

I like your example about killing people, actually. That's something that gets relatively complex, because we make a difference between killing on purpose and killing on accident, and we care about why you did what you did, and we care about how it happened. How long is the law on murder/manslaughter where you live? Is it thousands of pages, different in every building, and still unclear? I haven't looked it up, because I don't live there, have no intention of ever going back there, and so it doesn't impact me in the slightest, but I'll put a thousand dollars on the answer being no.

I also like you pointing out arches. It reinforces exactly what I said before about tech-related laws needing the most detail. However, how much of that needs to be there if you're writing the standards to be read by a professional builder? Still a fair bit, you are setting the standard of compliance here, but less than you'd need in an instruction manual for someone who never build anything more complex than a lego car. The law needs to be clear to the people it affects. If a legal dispute comes up, you bring some experts into the courtroom to explain if things were up to snuff or not, and why. Wait... don't we do that already anyway? It turns out we do. So any extra detail is redundant.

Now, would you like to argue against what I'm actually saying, or would you prefer to carry on attacking your men of straw? While you're at it, kindly answer the question I asked, not the one you'd like pretend I asked: They law as written does not and never has existed. If you were writing a law to do what that law is intended to do, clearly and setting one standard for all, and not worrying about lawyers weaseling around because experts will be brought into the courtroom to explain exactly what is meant in cases where specialized knowledge is required, how much space would it take? If the law superfluous, causes more/worse problems than it solves, or is otherwise unnecessary, then the answer is zero. Otherwise, go ahead and tack on a page or so to create a clause where it's revisited periodically for updates, because we all know that technology marches on.

I think you need to relax. Have a drink or two.

http://i.imgur.com/FfrlMF7.png

[Rystefn]

But do go on and tell me how I'm wrong, and how this isn't what's really happening. While you're at it, tell me what you do for a living that gives you this awesome knowledge base, because right now I'm seeing "I don't understand it, but I know I don't like it, and therefore it's bullshit."

Call my cynical, but I expect some variant of "Careers are for chumps, man! I spit in the face of society's expectations and live free of your conformist shackles."

Nah. You get this:
[youtube]_hKspgG8sxE[/youtube]

[Rystefn]

Call my cynical, but I expect some variant of "Careers are for chumps, man! I spit in the face of society's expectations and live free of your conformist shackles."

"...and oh, yeah, I'm gonna fuck your girlfriend."

With a screwdriver

If she's into it, who am I to judge?

[JackRayner]

<snip>
As they say, good judgement comes from experience, but experience comes from bad judgement. And “bad judgement” covers a very wide spectrum. Not particularly reasonable, I think, to think that everyone’s introductions to that are the same.

Meh. I'm perfectly fine with natural selection being in full effect, as cold as it may sound. If your caretakers, peers, and yourself are all dumbasses, and you end up debilitated or dead because of it, maybe it isn't that great of a loss, in the aggregate. We could use less people on this rock anyhow...

That’s a little harsh. And, I think, decidedly short-sighted. There are, no doubt, congenitally stupid people for whom no amount of experience is going to be sufficient to educate them – in which case having them remove themselves from society if not the gene pool is probably the optimal solution.

However, speaking as someone who has periodically come close to “winning” a Darwin Award – something I think more than a few here have indicated they have done likewise, I think it is important to realize that, as someone famous said, “we hang together or we hang alone”. That, to a large degree, we have an obligation to “have each other’s backs”. While there is obviously a limit to that, I would draw the line in a very different location from where you apparently do.

No thanks. Being emotionally invested in the outcome of individuals who are both stupid, and who display an inability to take accountability for their own actions, would eventually get to me to a place where I give even less of a fuck, just out of numbness.

Call me ableist [LOLz], but incurable idiots repel me, and Zeus knows I try. I fucking try...

[SPACKlick]

...Or the longer but equally damning "the tendency of the political Left to subjugate the rational assessment of truth-claims to the demands of a variety of pre-existing political and moral frameworks".

I think "cobweb cunt" rolls off the tongue better though.

If she ever gets on there she damn well better roll off, I'd rather lick a blue waffle.

[Steersman]

<snip>
I can sympathize. However, I think you’re judging others by your own experiences and abilities, not to mention those of your parents. Not everyone is as self-aware as you apparently were at that age or able to judge the consequences of their actions.

As they say, good judgement comes from experience, but experience comes from bad judgement. And “bad judgement” covers a very wide spectrum. Not particularly reasonable, I think, to think that everyone’s introductions to that are the same.

But by the same token, why are people who don't have to fall off a cliff elebenty times before they learn to watch where they are going bad? That's the other side. If you did learn to pull your head out of your ass at a young age, or ever really, regardless of reason, you're some kind of bad person for pointing out that it is in fact possible to not be fucking stupid year after year, or that a little thinking can avoid problems.

I still think you’re judging her by your experiences, not hers. While I don’t know all of the details of the “conversations” you two have had, and I’ll concede that she might be acting a little self-indulgent – “[Welch is] … just one more person who doesn’t want me to talk about me …” – I think you’re completely missing the boat in not considering that her experience on drinking – at 15 one might emphasize – might have been more along the line of “Oooh, getting tipsy! Isn’t this fun!” instead of “Christ! Losing control! Bogies at 12 o’clock high! Evasive actions!” that you apparently think every 15 year old should have in those circumstances.

Rather unreasonable to think that she should have known about threats and consequences of actions that neither she nor, apparently, her parents had any inkling of. People, particularly adolescents or young adults, learn from experience, the worst consequences of which they are lucky – as with Abbie – or unlucky – as with Stephanie – to evade or not. Or they learn them from their parents – as with 16bitheretic – who may have learned them in more painful ways. But still unreasonable, I think, to judge people without considering the circumstances they were in at the time they made their choices or acted the way they did.

I'm sorry she went through some bad experiences, but me not giving her "I COULDN'T STOP DRINKING" excuse some great elevated status doesn't mean I think rape is okay. It means i'm not particularly sympathetic to people who give alcohol and social pressure magical properties.

Again, I don't know the specifics of whatever it is you might be referring to there. However, that quote of her that I provided above really doesn't look like much of any "I COULDN'T STOP DRINKING" excuse. At most a "How can I be faulted for not knowing something I had no way of knowing?" "excuse". Which seems to be a reasonable response to some MRA-type accusations, and not any insistence that "alcohol and social pressure [has] magical properties". Maybe you're reading more into her position and statements than is justified.

[Rystefn]

Hang on, says tonight's SIWOTI warrior. Are you saying that Stephanie Zvan "was raped/taken advantage of when she was a teen"? Has she claimed this? If not, could you retract it, as it's a ridiculous game to play. I don't know, just never heard this before, and if it's been posted here by some Guest to discredit the Pit, could it piss off?

Svan has said as much on many occasions. From the details she's put out there, though, it comes off as a case of teenagers getting drunk and fooling around and Svan deciding years later that even though they were both the same amount of drunk and the same amount of enthusiastic at the time, he was a predator who brutally raped her and she was a poor victim who couldn't consent. At least, that's how it looks to me based on what I've seen her write about it, anyway. Obviously, my knowledge of the incident is far from complete.

Well naturally. You were drunk at the time.

Hey, now! That's... ok, so it's entirely true. Unless you're trying to imply I was the other drunken teenager in that story, in which case, I'm about 30 years too young. Also, I've slept with some people I wouldn't brag about, but even I have standards, and Svan don't qualify.

[AndrewV69]

Hey, speaking of people confusing getting drunk/having sex with getting drugged/raeped--

Did I ever tell you all a guy tried to drug-->rape me in college? Sheer fucking luck saved me, that and being an 'experienced' under-age drinker.
<snip>
Incidentally, this incident is one reason why I did very little partying in college, and why I do very little drinking now.

Christ. I remember reading an article in an actual newspaper [the printed variety :shock: ] of a bunch of Hell’s Angels types who had been charged with possessing or attempting to sell some “date-rape” drugs [Rohypnol, I think], and had been horrified at the thought that there was a market for such. Unfortunately there is a non-trivial percentage of the population – “more of a guy thing”, I think – who are simply sociopaths and psychopaths. Not at all an easy thing to deal with or avoid – frequently a question of luck as in your case.

Was it GHB?

$48M date rape chemical bust
http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Crime/2012/ ... 70396.html

The only problem with this type of reporting is that GHB is a "club drug". It can be used as a rape drug but all of the people I know who took it regularly were (a). Strippers and (b). took it when they went to clubs. They also liked to take "E" which was also pretty popular.

A lot of what you read in the newspapers is complete and utter rubbish Steers.

[Steersman]

<snip>
That’s a little harsh. And, I think, decidedly short-sighted. There are, no doubt, congenitally stupid people for whom no amount of experience is going to be sufficient to educate them – in which case having them remove themselves from society if not the gene pool is probably the optimal solution.

However, speaking as someone who has periodically come close to “winning” a Darwin Award – something I think more than a few here have indicated they have done likewise, I think it is important to realize that, as someone famous said, “we hang together or we hang alone”. That, to a large degree, we have an obligation to “have each other’s backs”. While there is obviously a limit to that, I would draw the line in a very different location from where you apparently do.

No thanks. Being emotionally invested in the outcome of individuals who are both stupid, and who display an inability to take accountability for their own actions, would eventually get to me to a place where I give even less of a fuck, just out of numbness.
Call me ableist [LOLz], but incurable idiots repel me, and Zeus knows I try. I fucking try...

I'm not talking about "incurable idiots" - I very explicitly excluded those, although one might wonder how you would determine if they qualified as such. I'm talking about those who are "curable". Rather important, I think, to differentiate between those two classes, particularly in light of the phrase "some of us all of the time, all of us some of the time".

[Ä uest]

However, that quote of her that I provided above really doesn't look like much of any "I COULDN'T STOP DRINKING" excuse. At most a "How can I be faulted for not knowing something I had no way of knowing?" "excuse". Which seems to be a reasonable response to some MRA-type accusations

Well, because she was 15, and the behavior was illegal for her, and the reason why it is illegal, alcoholism, drunk driving, overdosing, makes her vulnerable to rape and other things, is well known and certainly not a secret.

There have only been a zillion afterschool specials on this.

So Stephanie, I aimed a gun at my face and shot it, because other people told me it would help me lighten my load. How can I be faulted for not knowing something I had no way of knowing?

This doesn't excuse rape.
It also doesn't excuse willful stupidity.

[Steersman]

Hey, speaking of people confusing getting drunk/having sex with getting drugged/raeped--

Did I ever tell you all a guy tried to drug-->rape me in college? Sheer fucking luck saved me, that and being an 'experienced' under-age drinker.
<snip>
Incidentally, this incident is one reason why I did very little partying in college, and why I do very little drinking now.

Christ. I remember reading an article in an actual newspaper [the printed variety :shock: ] of a bunch of Hell’s Angels types who had been charged with possessing or attempting to sell some “date-rape” drugs [Rohypnol, I think], and had been horrified at the thought that there was a market for such. Unfortunately there is a non-trivial percentage of the population – “more of a guy thing”, I think – who are simply sociopaths and psychopaths. Not at all an easy thing to deal with or avoid – frequently a question of luck as in your case.

Was it GHB?

$48M date rape chemical bust
http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Crime/2012/ ... 70396.html

Might have been as the story rings a bit of a bell and it wasn't that long ago.

The only problem with this type of reporting is that GHB is a "club drug". It can be used as a rape drug but all of the people I know who took it regularly were (a). Strippers and (b). took it when they went to clubs. They also liked to take "E" which was also pretty popular.

Yes, I see from the Wikipedia article that it, and Rohypnol, have a range of effects so one has to gauge intent to really judge. Although Abbie's tale suggests that the range on intent covers some rather odious characters.

A lot of what you read in the newspapers is complete and utter rubbish Steers.

True enough. "Reefer Madness!" and the like. Sensationalism to sell newspapers. I should probably be a little more cautious about leaping to conclusions - give me another 100 years or so and I should have that down pat ... ;)

[katamari Damassi]

Hey, speaking of people confusing getting drunk/having sex with getting drugged/raeped--

Did I ever tell you all a guy tried to drug-->rape me in college? Sheer fucking luck saved me, that and being an 'experienced' under-age drinker.
<snip>
Incidentally, this incident is one reason why I did very little partying in college, and why I do very little drinking now.

Christ. I remember reading an article in an actual newspaper [the printed variety :shock: ] of a bunch of Hell’s Angels types who had been charged with possessing or attempting to sell some “date-rape” drugs [Rohypnol, I think], and had been horrified at the thought that there was a market for such. Unfortunately there is a non-trivial percentage of the population – “more of a guy thing”, I think – who are simply sociopaths and psychopaths. Not at all an easy thing to deal with or avoid – frequently a question of luck as in your case.

Was it GHB?

$48M date rape chemical bust
http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Crime/2012/ ... 70396.html

The only problem with this type of reporting is that GHB is a "club drug". It can be used as a rape drug but all of the people I know who took it regularly were (a). Strippers and (b). took it when they went to clubs. They also liked to take "E" which was also pretty popular.

A lot of what you read in the newspapers is complete and utter rubbish Steers.

GHB was also for a time popular with bodybuilders as a supposed growth hormone releaser.

[Rystefn]

Do you know what a false dichotomy is? Because that's what you're doing. The options are not "either half a sentence that tells you nothing useful or a ten thousand page document that's functionally useless." Get off the "this is how it is" bullshit, and listen to what I'm actually saying: It should not be either of those things. Let me say that again, since you seem to be unable to comprehend what I'm saying: IT SHOULD NOT BE EITHER OF THOSE THINGS. And yet somehow, you're bitching at me for being wrong while at the same time complaining about it being both. In what universe does that make sense? The law should be exactly as long as it needs to be for clarity.

I like your example about killing people, actually. That's something that gets relatively complex, because we make a difference between killing on purpose and killing on accident, and we care about why you did what you did, and we care about how it happened. How long is the law on murder/manslaughter where you live? Is it thousands of pages, different in every building, and still unclear? I haven't looked it up, because I don't live there, have no intention of ever going back there, and so it doesn't impact me in the slightest, but I'll put a thousand dollars on the answer being no.

I also like you pointing out arches. It reinforces exactly what I said before about tech-related laws needing the most detail. However, how much of that needs to be there if you're writing the standards to be read by a professional builder? Still a fair bit, you are setting the standard of compliance here, but less than you'd need in an instruction manual for someone who never build anything more complex than a lego car. The law needs to be clear to the people it affects. If a legal dispute comes up, you bring some experts into the courtroom to explain if things were up to snuff or not, and why. Wait... don't we do that already anyway? It turns out we do. So any extra detail is redundant.

Now, would you like to argue against what I'm actually saying, or would you prefer to carry on attacking your men of straw? While you're at it, kindly answer the question I asked, not the one you'd like pretend I asked: They law as written does not and never has existed. If you were writing a law to do what that law is intended to do, clearly and setting one standard for all, and not worrying about lawyers weaseling around because experts will be brought into the courtroom to explain exactly what is meant in cases where specialized knowledge is required, how much space would it take? If the law superfluous, causes more/worse problems than it solves, or is otherwise unnecessary, then the answer is zero. Otherwise, go ahead and tack on a page or so to create a clause where it's revisited periodically for updates, because we all know that technology marches on.

I think you need to relax. Have a drink or two.

http://i.imgur.com/FfrlMF7.png

Yeah, tone of voice doesn't carry over the internet for shit. I'm aware that a lot of what I post comes across as angry ranting. It's been that way for many years, so I'm used to people responding to it as if it is. I assure you that it isn't. If it helps, imagine all of it as though I'm kicking back on the beach with a mojito and laughing while I have I the discussion with a bunch of likewise laughing and kicking back on the beach folks. Sometimes I am.

Also, that slices both ways. I pretty much assume that I'm not seriously upsetting people unless they straight out tell me I am, so if I'm actually making you (general you, not specific you) angry or something, I'm probably completely unaware.

[Cunning Punt]

...Or the longer but equally damning "the tendency of the political Left to subjugate the rational assessment of truth-claims to the demands of a variety of pre-existing political and moral frameworks".

I think "cobweb cunt" rolls off the tongue better though.

If she ever gets on there she damn well better roll off, I'd rather lick a blue waffle.

I didn't mean literally! :puke-huge:

[Steersman]

<snip>However, that quote of her that I provided above really doesn't look like much of any "I COULDN'T STOP DRINKING" excuse. At most a "How can I be faulted for not knowing something I had no way of knowing?" "excuse". Which seems to be a reasonable response to some MRA-type accusations

Well, because she was 15, and the behavior was illegal for her, and the reason why it is illegal, alcoholism, drunk driving, overdosing, makes her vulnerable to rape and other things, is well known and certainly not a secret.

There have only been a zillion afterschool specials on this.

There have been. But twenty or thirty years ago?

So Stephanie, I aimed a gun at my face and shot it, because other people told me it would help me lighten my load. How can I be faulted for not knowing something I had no way of knowing?

I'm sure there's a logical fallacy to cover that. Or maybe just "hyperskepticism". Or maybe "silliness". It would be rather strange, being charitable, to argue that someone not realizing that shooting oneself in the face was likely to be "career limiting" was in any way analogous to someone not realizing - particularly at the age of 15 twenty or thirty years ago - that drinking with strangers was not particularly wise, particularly for young women.

This doesn't excuse rape.
It also doesn't excuse willful stupidity.

Again, the stupidity of shooting oneself in the face is hardly analogous to the "stupidity" of drinking with people one hardly knows: the consequences of the former tend to be uniformly fatal and manifestly so even to the most clueless, those of the latter hardly ever, even if they can be somewhat painful. Actually, I think it's kind of a stupid analogy - you might want to check the link.

[Parody Accountant]

I think you need to relax. Have a drink or two.

http://i.imgur.com/FfrlMF7.png

Yeah, tone of voice doesn't carry over the internet for shit. I'm aware that a lot of what I post comes across as angry ranting. It's been that way for many years, so I'm used to people responding to it as if it is. I assure you that it isn't. If it helps, imagine all of it as though I'm kicking back on the beach with a mojito and laughing while I have I the discussion with a bunch of likewise laughing and kicking back on the beach folks. Sometimes I am.

Also, that slices both ways. I pretty much assume that I'm not seriously upsetting people unless they straight out tell me I am, so if I'm actually making you (general you, not specific you) angry or something, I'm probably completely unaware.

It's very weird that you'd respond by letting me know that *you* weren't actually being mean. Are you that self-obsessed to miss it when people are actively making fun of you?

[Rystefn]

I think you need to relax. Have a drink or two.

http://i.imgur.com/FfrlMF7.png

Yeah, tone of voice doesn't carry over the internet for shit. I'm aware that a lot of what I post comes across as angry ranting. It's been that way for many years, so I'm used to people responding to it as if it is. I assure you that it isn't. If it helps, imagine all of it as though I'm kicking back on the beach with a mojito and laughing while I have I the discussion with a bunch of likewise laughing and kicking back on the beach folks. Sometimes I am.

Also, that slices both ways. I pretty much assume that I'm not seriously upsetting people unless they straight out tell me I am, so if I'm actually making you (general you, not specific you) angry or something, I'm probably completely unaware.

It's very weird that you'd respond by letting me know that *you* weren't actually being mean. Are you that self-obsessed to miss it when people are actively making fun of you?

No, it just doesn't bother me. It's a pretty hypocrite I'd be to get upset over people making fun of me. Fuck, I've probably said worse shit about me on this forum than any of you assholes. However, the comment "you need to relax," comes up often enough that I think it's a good idea to periodically respond.

[Dave]

<snip>
I can sympathize. However, I think you’re judging others by your own experiences and abilities, not to mention those of your parents. Not everyone is as self-aware as you apparently were at that age or able to judge the consequences of their actions.

As they say, good judgement comes from experience, but experience comes from bad judgement. And “bad judgement” covers a very wide spectrum. Not particularly reasonable, I think, to think that everyone’s introductions to that are the same.

But by the same token, why are people who don't have to fall off a cliff elebenty times before they learn to watch where they are going bad? That's the other side. If you did learn to pull your head out of your ass at a young age, or ever really, regardless of reason, you're some kind of bad person for pointing out that it is in fact possible to not be fucking stupid year after year, or that a little thinking can avoid problems.

I still think you’re judging her by your experiences, not hers. While I don’t know all of the details of the “conversations” you two have had, and I’ll concede that she might be acting a little self-indulgent – “[Welch is] … just one more person who doesn’t want me to talk about me …” – I think you’re completely missing the boat in not considering that her experience on drinking – at 15 one might emphasize – might have been more along the line of “Oooh, getting tipsy! Isn’t this fun!” instead of “Christ! Losing control! Bogies at 12 o’clock high! Evasive actions!” that you apparently think every 15 year old should have in those circumstances.

I can totally understand not knowing how your body reacts to large quantities of alcohol at 15, particularly if you grew up in 'Murrica! where many parents are not as sensible as Welch's were. (On the other hand, by 30, you should either have that shit down cold or not drink.) But if she gets the benefit of the doubt on the inexperience of youth, why doesnt her counterparty? Why is he assumed to have malicious intent in pouring her a strong drink? Why isnt is simply assumed that a teen boy doesnt have great experience as a bartender? That was certainly the case when it happened to me -- I got overserved** when I was 16, a buddy of mine thought, "Dave is a tough guy, bet he likes a strong drink" and poured me a scotch and soda that was 80% scotch in a 16 oz glass. Perhaps there are other elements of the story that havent been shared here that explain this, but it seems to me that if we are excuse her inexperience, we should also excuse that of the others in the story. But from what I can see, she knows she got drunk, ended up in bed with the boy who was pouring drinks and assumes this was part of his nefarious plan all along.

** The one time in my life where that term is appropriate. There have been others where I overindulged, but that was the one time where I was overserved.

[Apples]

However, if a challenger to McEwan were to ever appear it promises an interesting variation on the original Thunderdome from Mad Max.
Instead of "two men enter one man leaves" - one RadFem tries to enter, becomes hopelessly stuck in the cage door, and everyone just goes home.

I LOLed.

[TheMudbrooker]

<snip>However, that quote of her that I provided above really doesn't look like much of any "I COULDN'T STOP DRINKING" excuse. At most a "How can I be faulted for not knowing something I had no way of knowing?" "excuse". Which seems to be a reasonable response to some MRA-type accusations

Well, because she was 15, and the behavior was illegal for her, and the reason why it is illegal, alcoholism, drunk driving, overdosing, makes her vulnerable to rape and other things, is well known and certainly not a secret.

There have only been a zillion afterschool specials on this.

There have been. But twenty or thirty years ago?

Twenty or thirty years ago? Try over a century. The was a great moral panic around 1910 over young girls being plied with drugs and liquor and lured into going for a ride in one of them newfangled horseless carriages only to find themselves sold into white slavery. The result was the passage of the Mann Act.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mann_Act

[AndrewV69]

...Or the longer but equally damning "the tendency of the political Left to subjugate the rational assessment of truth-claims to the demands of a variety of pre-existing political and moral frameworks".

I think "cobweb cunt" rolls off the tongue better though.

If she ever gets on there she damn well better roll off, I'd rather lick a blue waffle.

Speaking of which (NSFW!!!! I really mean it) and h/t Judgy Bitch:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BSDj8CrCEAAUhR0.jpg

[mordacious1]

<snip snippity snip snip>

A lot of what you read in the newspapers is complete and utter rubbish Steers.

True enough. "Reefer Madness!" and the like. Sensationalism to sell newspapers. I should probably be a little more cautious about leaping to conclusions - give me another 100 years or so and I should have that down pat ... ;)

As long as Pat's not the type to call the police, you should be fine.

[AndrewV69]

No, it just doesn't bother me. It's a pretty hypocrite I'd be to get upset over people making fun of me. Fuck, I've probably said worse shit about me on this forum than any of you assholes. However, the comment "you need to relax," comes up often enough that I think it's a good idea to periodically respond.

To this day it really has not sunk in to me that some(/many/most?) people are affected by a negative reaction from some relative stranger. I know theoretically that they are and do, but it falls into one of those things I do not "get".

[Steersman]

<snip snippity snip snip>

A lot of what you read in the newspapers is complete and utter rubbish Steers.

True enough. "Reefer Madness!" and the like. Sensationalism to sell newspapers. I should probably be a little more cautious about leaping to conclusions - give me another 100 years or so and I should have that down pat ... ;)

As long as Pat's not the type to call the police, you should be fine.

:) :rimshot:

[Pitchguest]

I think you need to relax. Have a drink or two.

http://i.imgur.com/FfrlMF7.png

Ahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

I saw the nail and the board just now! Fucking LOL! :lol: :lol: :lol:

[Ä uest]

<snip>However, that quote of her that I provided above really doesn't look like much of any "I COULDN'T STOP DRINKING" excuse. At most a "How can I be faulted for not knowing something I had no way of knowing?" "excuse". Which seems to be a reasonable response to some MRA-type accusations

Well, because she was 15, and the behavior was illegal for her, and the reason why it is illegal, alcoholism, drunk driving, overdosing, makes her vulnerable to rape and other things, is well known and certainly not a secret.

There have only been a zillion afterschool specials on this.

There have been. But twenty or thirty years ago?

So Stephanie, I aimed a gun at my face and shot it, because other people told me it would help me lighten my load. How can I be faulted for not knowing something I had no way of knowing?

I'm sure there's a logical fallacy to cover that. Or maybe just "hyperskepticism". Or maybe "silliness". It would be rather strange, being charitable, to argue that someone not realizing that shooting oneself in the face was likely to be "career limiting" was in any way analogous to someone not realizing - particularly at the age of 15 twenty or thirty years ago - that drinking with strangers was not particularly wise, particularly for young women.

This doesn't excuse rape.
It also doesn't excuse willful stupidity.

Again, the stupidity of shooting oneself in the face is hardly analogous to the "stupidity" of drinking with people one hardly knows: the consequences of the former tend to be uniformly fatal and manifestly so even to the most clueless, those of the latter hardly ever, even if they can be somewhat painful. Actually, I think it's kind of a stupid analogy - you might want to check the link.

Juding by her pictures, I'm almost certainly older than Zvan, and I remember getting anti-alcohol, anti-drug messages in elementary school in the 60s.

Alcohol and alcoholism, drugs, and drunk driving have been around for quite sometime.

We may not expect 15 year olds to be adults, but there are tons of behaviors we do expect them to know not to do, regardless of how rare the consequences are and how beneficial the payoffs can be.

Staying out all night long, drinking alcohol, gambling, smoking, shop-lifting, hitch-hiking, driving, ditching school, dating much older people,

You may not like my gun analogy but the point holds, Stephanie and 99% of all 15 year olds, even back in the sixties know that alcohol abuse is dangerous -- the "How can I be faulted for not knowing something I had no way of knowing?" excuse just can't hold up rationally.

[Gah, you can actually google when she was born, fucking mylife.com privacy invasion, how does it work. So I can guarantee you that by the time she was 15, MADD and DARE were in operation, and the ABC After School Special had been on the air for 13 years, and Woodstock was in the past. Her community was certainly getting anti-drug and anti-alcohol messages.]

[youtube]os8TT7HYF9g[/youtube]

[windy]

Just a counterpoint to all the people who learned to drink responsibly at home. Where I grew up, binge drinking was the norm (mostly learnt by trial and error). Even so, I never experienced it as someone trying to "coerce" or trick me into getting too drunk in order take advantage of it (unless the advantage-taking was mutual!) I don't get blackouts, so that may have contributed to it as well.

(Of course there was an awareness of the possibility of sexual assault, but I don't remember there being a lot of fear about it - I remember more cautionary tales about people passing out and freezing to death in the snow!)

I'll admit that it's easier to get more drunk than intended when someone keeps "plying" you with drinks, even if the drinking is ultimately your choice. This one time, I went ice-fishing close to a village where I was doing fieldwork as an undergrad. I got to talking to a guy and his mother who were also out fishing, and they invited me to their place for dinner. During the dinner, the mom kept mixing me stronger and stronger drinks, asking if I was single, and hinting at what a good catch the son was. Finally I decided that things were getting a bit too weird, mumbled some thanks and managed to stagger out of there. I was worried that if I stayed, I'd wake up engaged or something :D

[Steersman]

<snip>
Well, because she was 15, and the behavior was illegal for her, and the reason why it is illegal, alcoholism, drunk driving, overdosing, makes her vulnerable to rape and other things, is well known and certainly not a secret.

There have only been a zillion afterschool specials on this.

There have been. But twenty or thirty years ago?

Twenty or thirty years ago? Try over a century. The was a great moral panic around 1910 over young girls being plied with drugs and liquor and lured into going for a ride in one of them newfangled horseless carriages only to find themselves sold into white slavery. The result was the passage of the Mann Act.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mann_Act

Interesting how those "moral panics" can be like brush fires or economic bubbles like the Tulip Mania of 1637 - some credible underlying motivating factor that takes over the popular imagination for a while and then burns out, leaving various bits and pieces of ash strewn about.

Although I still wonder how much effect any of them might have had on any given family or person. Still entirely possible that Zvan's family weren't at all influenced by any of those events or similar ones. Might need to get Richard - "tour de force" - Carrier to haul out the big guns of Bayesian statistics to evaluate that possibility.