Bleeding from the Bunghole

[Tribble]

Hate is such a strong feeling. I don't hate her, I detest her. She's a self-absorbed whiny woman-child.
She's the complete opposite example of whatever she claims feminism achieves (daddy has to fight her battles, bf has to force her our of the interwebs, the world scares her and school's too hard....yawn).

I've heard this a lot, but I don't know the details. What exactly is it that daddy for her when it comes to battles?

[codelette]

Hate is such a strong feeling. I don't hate her, I detest her. She's a self-absorbed whiny woman-child.
She's the complete opposite example of whatever she claims feminism achieves (daddy has to fight her battles, bf has to force her our of the interwebs, the world scares her and school's too hard....yawn).

I've heard this a lot, but I don't know the details. What exactly is it that daddy for her when it comes to battles?

http://greylining.com/2012/09/15/dear-daddy-mccreight/

[BarnOwl]

According to Forbes:

Enrollment by Race/Ethnicity
American Indian or Alaskan native 6.78%
Asian/Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander 2.64%
Black or African American 1.45%
Hispanic/Latino 2.17%
White 69.72%
Two or More Races 7.09%
Race/Ethnicity Unknown 1.66%

Non-Resident Alien 8.49%
Non-Resident Aliens include Canadians and Europeans along with non-White students, like Chinese, Koreans, etc. so it's hard to know what the actual demographics are. Still, it's mostly white.


What I find amazing is how fucking small and limited it is: Student Population: 1,932; Undergraduate Population: 1,932. I've never been to a University that small in my life, even the community colleges I've gone to have been far, far larger.

For its size and location, UMM's demographics aren't surprising. But to boast about it as some sort of shining example of diversity in higher education seems misinformed or dishonest. The diversity of the community, the faculty, and the grad students and postdocs are also important ... I took all that for granted before I went to grad school in a very homogeneous community. Have tried very hard not to make that mistake again.

[Tribble]

Hate is such a strong feeling. I don't hate her, I detest her. She's a self-absorbed whiny woman-child.
She's the complete opposite example of whatever she claims feminism achieves (daddy has to fight her battles, bf has to force her our of the interwebs, the world scares her and school's too hard....yawn).

I've heard this a lot, but I don't know the details. What exactly is it that daddy for her when it comes to battles?

http://greylining.com/2012/09/15/dear-daddy-mccreight/

Wow. I really missed a lot on my A/S break.

[16bitheretic]

I get that pitters (and also FTbers and A+ers) generally like arguing against people rather than ideas. Mocking and criticizing the ideas is often just a way of mocking and criticizing the people behind them. But occasionally you'll get an idea expressed by an A+er or whatever that is actually somewhat reasonable and then it might be time to check your own tribalist instincts (not directing this at anyone in particular). Otherwise, next you know one of them will say "the holocaust sucked" and and you'll wind up arguing that it wasn't so bad just to disagree.

I hope that my posting doesn't come across as me simply criticizing groups like A+theism simply out of spite and attacking everything wholecloth just because. In general the ideas A+theism claims to be for I agree with. I am in opposition to racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia and any other prejudices that aren't rooted in actions or ideas, but on inherent characteristics. In society as a whole I'm quite annoyed that issues of severe importance like climate change have become a "liberal vs conservative" tit-for-tat where support or dismissal are not based on actual facts, but what team you root for. I've even explicitly stated before that I don't agree with every poster or everything posted on this forum, but I participate here because all ideas are open for debate, nothing is taboo and the only memoryholes come with content that is basically illegal.

When I criticize A+theism, I'm going by their record of behavior, and what I see is them wearing the armor of protecting marginalized people like transgendered folks or homosexuals, but in reality doing virtually nothing useful at all to help them and instead trying to latch those groups' societal oppressions as oppression points of their own by proxy. I may not be very old or experienced, but I have been reading and observing various liberal-leaning activist circles long enough to tell when a group or movement is effective at making change even on a small scale, or when a group is like A+theism, where it's all handicapped vitriolic barking with no momentum for any positive change in anything relevant.

[Skep tickle]

I always got the sheltered vibe from her. She seems to speak first and think afterwards, like no one is really going to think about what she's saying. And that whole homeless guy masturbating being a crime against her :roll:
I actually had a homeless woman try to take food from me once when I was around thirteen or something. It was annoying, but I made a far less deal about it.

What?

One day in 10/2012, McCreight tweeted:

Apparently my day is going to start by walking by a homeless man masturbating in public #ugh

See Gumby's post here, w/ 2 other tweets of hers as responses started coming in:
viewtopic.php?p=18555#p18555

[Tribble]

According to Forbes:

Enrollment by Race/Ethnicity
American Indian or Alaskan native 6.78%
Asian/Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander 2.64%
Black or African American 1.45%
Hispanic/Latino 2.17%
White 69.72%
Two or More Races 7.09%
Race/Ethnicity Unknown 1.66%

Non-Resident Alien 8.49%
Non-Resident Aliens include Canadians and Europeans along with non-White students, like Chinese, Koreans, etc. so it's hard to know what the actual demographics are. Still, it's mostly white.


What I find amazing is how fucking small and limited it is: Student Population: 1,932; Undergraduate Population: 1,932. I've never been to a University that small in my life, even the community colleges I've gone to have been far, far larger.

For its size and location, UMM's demographics aren't surprising. But to boast about it as some sort of shining example of diversity in higher education seems misinformed or dishonest. The diversity of the community, the faculty, and the grad students and postdocs are also important ... I took all that for granted before I went to grad school in a very homogeneous community. Have tried very hard not to make that mistake again.

Yeah, I know it's Minnesota. And your points are all valid. I'm just amazed (like you) at this whole 'rainbow coalition' crap he thinks he's seeing. Because what I saw was nothing special.

[Karmakin]

I get that pitters (and also FTbers and A+ers) generally like arguing against people rather than ideas. Mocking and criticizing the ideas is often just a way of mocking and criticizing the people behind them. But occasionally you'll get an idea expressed by an A+er or whatever that is actually somewhat reasonable and then it might be time to check your own tribalist instincts (not directing this at anyone in particular). Otherwise, next you know one of them will say "the holocaust sucked" and and you'll wind up arguing that it wasn't so bad just to disagree.

I hope that my posting doesn't come across as me simply criticizing groups like A+theism simply out of spite and attacking everything wholecloth just because. In general the ideas A+theism claims to be for I agree with. I am in opposition to racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia and any other prejudices that aren't rooted in actions or ideas, but on inherent characteristics. In society as a whole I'm quite annoyed that issues of severe importance like climate change have become a "liberal vs conservative" tit-for-tat where support or dismissal are not based on actual facts, but what team you root for. I've even explicitly stated before that I don't agree with every poster or everything posted on this forum, but I participate here because all ideas are open for debate, nothing is taboo and the only memoryholes come with content that is basically illegal.

When I criticize A+theism, I'm going by their record of behavior, and what I see is them wearing the armor of protecting marginalized people like transgendered folks or homosexuals, but in reality doing virtually nothing useful at all to help them and instead trying to latch those groups' societal oppressions as oppression points of their own by proxy. I may not be very old or experienced, but I have been reading and observing various liberal-leaning activist circles long enough to tell when a group or movement is effective at making change even on a small scale, or when a group is like A+theism, where it's all handicapped vitriolic barking with no momentum for any positive change in anything relevant.

Just to add on to that, I consider myself more to the left than a lot of the SJW's, if you're going to put it on a strict left/right spectrum. Very little substance actually comes out of the SJW movement as a whole. Their whole gameplan, if you take their goals at their word consist of the following:

1. Smash the Patriarchy
2. ....
3. Love and Peace for all!

Of course, there's actually little reason to take their goals at their word. But still. There's very little actual substance there. There's always a little bit...depending on the issue someone might have a bit of a clue what they're talking about, but generally speaking, they're so lost in this overarching ideology that there's simply no substance to what they're doing.

And that leads to the final problem with the SJW movement (like it or not, the A+ thing is part of a larger, ugly, whole) is the intellectual authoritarianism of it all. I'm glad to see people start to clue in, like JT seems to be, but the idea that we can't disagree on particulars even if we agree on the overall direction is entirely toxic, and has no place in any sort of movement work. Whenever you see "Get Educated" or "101" or "I already refuted that" or things like that, this is what you're seeing. What they're saying is the gospel, and it just goes.

That's what needs to be pushed back against most of all, and it's starting to happen more and more. I'm glad to see it. On the other hand, take a guy like Ally Fogg who agrees with them on a lot, but thinks that there's a lot of different voices with something worthwhile to add, and it's a whole lot more productive and constructive.

[AnonymousCowherd]

There is obviously a middle ground between the utopian ideal and the way things are now. I think it's a fairly obvious point that moves in the direction of an ideal are positive even if it's an ideal that can never be truly reached. And victim blaming takes us in the opposite direction. I agree with ceepolk on that, although I'm pretty sure she has a very different threshold for what constitutes "victim blaming" than I do.

Yeah, I actually agree with the goals of a lot of the A+ people, but they are so contemptuous I would never want to be associated with them. It's similar to the Dave Mathews Band. I love some of their music, but their fans are fucking annoying and I don't want anyone to think I'm one of them.

Also, shouldn't it be "survivor blaming"? How dare you call survivors "victims"! /s

Just saying, as A+ ers and FTB ers do, that you are in favour of an issue doesn't mean that you "own" it, or that everything you say about it is right. In the end, the posturing, and the game playing get so bad that the SJW supposedly in favour of X ends up being, in effect, against any meaningful action in favour of X and may even make X worse. That's what we are seeing with the "don't report rape" advice from them.

At some point the statement of political ideals, and of political actions, become one, and that defines the group. The ideal may go on its merry way completely oblivious.

[JackRayner]

Hi everybody! I've been really busy over the last few days, switching jobs and all that (yay), so I haven't had too much time to chime in so I might be behind the curve here. But here's my take on the JT thing.

To the newbies here, way back when I was on the other side. Pre-A+. (A+ was a massive red flag/warning klaxon/sirens going off). When the whole harassment policy thing flared up, one of the things that came up was that JT was a very touchy-feely person. Something that would obviously violate a lot of reasonable, sensible anti-harassment policies. But the big players, his friends, made excuses for it.

What's clear in retrospect, is that it's not that the behavior is wrong. It's that the identity is wrong. Actually it's not so much in retrospect, as I made the argument at the time that a sensible anti-harassment policy needs to outlay the behaviors that it says are wrong and to enforce them fairly and equally across the board. A lot of push-back against that sensible idea. JT had the right tribal identity, so his behavior was acceptable.

Then, he was pushed a bit away from the tribe. So everything became fair game. What was previously acceptable suddenly became unacceptable.

Ethics based upon identity are not ethics at all.

To start, I think ethics are very much based on identity. For example, I am an artist/designer, and in my field there are certain ethical standards that don't apply to all other fields. For example, Let's say a client has hired me to make a design for them, and midway through they go "Oh, and I want this to be colors A, B, and C." Knowing a bit of color theory , if I know those colors will clash/make things unreadable/whatever, then ethically I should do my best to make them aware of these things, whether they heed the advice or choose to ignore it in the end [though some of us* are so adamant about not executing on bad design choices by customers that we'll refuse to do the work/break contracts over them].

In some other fields? You have things like "The customer is always right", isn't that right?

To conclude, you're forgetting that IOWWDI ["It's Okay When We Do It"] is always in effect with these morons.

*I've done it. There've been production/design choices my customers that are so bad that I've argued over them and told the customers to find another artist if they really want it done.

[AnonymousCowherd]

Re Fogg. He's better than some, for sure. But after his "criminal generation" post about boomers, I can't trust a word he says if he is going to be as cavalier with data as he was there. I know he was being deliberately provocative, but he defended his wonky interpretation of the crime and prison stats in the comments - despite the people whom he quoted in the piece, and who had collected the data, specifically stating his version was wrong.

Could do better.

[goddamn 'nym]

I don't hate McCreight, as a matter of fact I don't hate any of them. They are vile and loathsome, but I don't hate them.

I do. I can honestly say I hate Rebecca Watson. In second place would be Greta Christina followed by PZ Myers (although, they probably tie for second place really). I hate them because they're despicable people that use their own insecurities to be truly awful to other people.

Fuck them.

I don't think skepticism and hate go very well together. Maybe you have stared into the abyss for too long?

[gargamel]

There is obviously a middle ground between the utopian ideal and the way things are now. I think it's a fairly obvious point that moves in the direction of an ideal are positive even if it's an ideal that can never be truly reached. And victim blaming takes us in the opposite direction. I agree with ceepolk on that, although I'm pretty sure she has a very different threshold for what constitutes "victim blaming" than I do.

Yeah, I actually agree with the goals of a lot of the A+ people, but they are so contemptuous I would never want to be associated with them. It's similar to the Dave Mathews Band. I love some of their music, but their fans are fucking annoying and I don't want anyone to think I'm one of them.

Also, shouldn't it be "survivor blaming"? How dare you call survivors "victims"! /s

Just saying, as A+ ers and FTB ers do, that you are in favour of an issue doesn't mean that you "own" it, or that everything you say about it is right. In the end, the posturing, and the game playing get so bad that the SJW supposedly in favour of X ends up being, in effect, against any meaningful action in favour of X and may even make X worse. That's what we are seeing with the "don't report rape" advice from them.

At some point the statement of political ideals, and of political actions, become one, and that defines the group. The ideal may go on its merry way completely oblivious.

Oh I don't disagree. It's frustrating that dissent is either met with complete derision and hyperbole or charges that you're not listening to the other party. As if reading what they write or listening to what they say and coming to a different conclusion constitutes bad faith or prejudice. I was religious as a kid, and the way they treat people reminds me of the church gossipers.

[gargamel]

I don't think skepticism and hate go very well together. Maybe you have stared into the abyss for too long?

Any why is that?

[free thoughtpolice]

Re Fogg. He's better than some, for sure. But after his "criminal generation" post about boomers, I can't trust a word he says if he is going to be as cavalier with data as he was there. I know he was being deliberately provocative, but he defended his wonky interpretation of the crime and prison stats in the comments - despite the people whom he quoted in the piece, and who had collected the data, specifically stating his version was wrong.

Could do better.

I sent a comment in, clearly joking about how the advent of feminism was to blame for "the criminality of the baby boomers".
Fogg allowed the message to stay for a few hours with the reply "Obvious troll is obvious", then memoryholed it.
In spite of my pointing out that he had violated his own commenting policies by making sweeping generalizations about baby boomers without solid facts and making a nasty remark about them not being missed when they are gone, he decided not to ban himself!

[JackRayner]

Therefore I try to reject those Ideas that belittle the human experience.

LOLz! I think you should define what you mean by that, because in many ways, I believe humanity, and this "intelligence" we've ended up with, is a bad joke. We are very much "special", but I don't see how our experience has any value, other than when viewed through the lens of self-centered human subjectivity.

[Gumby]

I always got the sheltered vibe from her. She seems to speak first and think afterwards, like no one is really going to think about what she's saying. And that whole homeless guy masturbating being a crime against her :roll:
I actually had a homeless woman try to take food from me once when I was around thirteen or something. It was annoying, but I made a far less deal about it.

What?

Starts here:
viewtopic.php?p=18555#p18555

[Gumby]

I always got the sheltered vibe from her. She seems to speak first and think afterwards, like no one is really going to think about what she's saying. And that whole homeless guy masturbating being a crime against her :roll:
I actually had a homeless woman try to take food from me once when I was around thirteen or something. It was annoying, but I made a far less deal about it.

What?

One day in 10/2012, McCreight tweeted:

Apparently my day is going to start by walking by a homeless man masturbating in public #ugh

See Gumby's post here, w/ 2 other tweets of hers as responses started coming in:
viewtopic.php?p=18555#p18555

Ah, ninja'd again! Thanks.

[welch]

And related to our conversation, I ran into this nasty thing on FB today:
Sex-op woman River Song barred from female toilet
http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/n ... -1-3058053

So many women have popped into the men's room at bars, that I just don't care which gender is using which bathroom anymore so long as they are not cutting in line.

From what I've seen over the years, it's expected. Women using the stalls in the men's room barely raises an eyebrow anymore.

[JackRayner]

Twenty-odd years old and never learned to ride a bike? WTF!!! Did daddy's fucking chauffeurs drive her everywhere?

Mccreight reminds me of my sister. Irritating sure, but I can't bring myself to hate her. Come on guys...

Hate is such a strong feeling. I don't hate her, I detest her. She's a self-absorbed whiny woman-child.
She's the complete opposite example of whatever she claims feminism achieves (daddy has to fight her battles, bf has to force her our of the interwebs, the world scares her and school's too hard....yawn).

Don't hate her either. I think she's a dumbass who has stepped into perfectly visible, knee-high piles of shit often enough to have learned better by now. Worse is that she also smears this shit onto others. This fact makes her unlikable, in addition to her being a dumbass.

If any of you want to give her a pass because of her big, silly smile, be my guest. Just don't be surprised when others aren't as inclined to do so...

[welch]

The neighborhood I live in is adjacent to what is apparently one of the worst, in terms of crime, neighborhoods (zip codes) in Phoenix, and I yet I suspect that a naked woman walking down the street in that neighborhood would quickly be helped and aided by the vast majority of the residents there, including most of the men.

Emphasis mine.

I suspect you're right, but remember that people like PZ and Ceepolk spread their narratives by ascribing the worst traits of humanity to basically all of society (except, of course, those people who swear allegiance to the narrative). After all, if it's not described as a huge pervasive problem, then there's no need for the SJWs to swoop in and save the day. It's a perfect example of religious thinking. "Satan is everywhere and we must be vigilant lest we fall prey to the devil's schemes". When amplified to paranoid and ridiculous proportions, Satan justifies Jesus, and misogyny justifies Peezus.

I can provide some anecdata on that. As a student, I lived in a part of town that was just on the edge of what the cops had more or less formally declared was a "no go" area for them. Disputes tended to get settled "locally".

For a year or two, the schizophrenic girl who lived nearby, would do exactlly what Ceepolk wishes to do - she'd walk buck nekkid down the street, off her meds, but on something much worse. She was young, very attractive, completely incapable of defending herself and she walked down a street with a fair proportion of young, dissolute, downright dodgy males. These stormtroopers for rape culture ( and their rape enabling chill girls) took it in turns to put a blanket around her, walk her back to her place, talk her down, make some calls etc. She was "one of ours" as the local bad boys said, and if anyone had touched her they would have kicked the shit out of him, or her.

I'm not sure what the criteria was for being "one of us", or if it would have made a difference if she wasn't. Funnily enough, she actually recovered and her folks came and got her and her life improved. They came from just about most expensive area in the city, and were a bit horrified at where she was living.

Well that's the inconvenient bit isn't it? That the same species that will shoot you for a nickel, or because it's a day that ends in Y will take it upon itself to make sure that someone who needs help is always treated kindly. It isn't some nice, neat consistent thing wherein bad people are always bad and have a nice sign above their heads indicating that and good people are always good and have halos.

It's a fucking muddled mess wherein you never goddamned know, not for sure. I worked with a dude in the Air Force, who was a decent guy. At least we all thought that. We got along with him, he was a good dude as a boss, a bit country, but that's okay, just meant we hated his taste in music.

About the time i'm getting ready to out-process, he gets arrested. Seems he'd been fucking his daughter since she was 12, and she was now 18, and pregnant, (GUESS WHO FROM) and he tried to bribe her with a car to keep quiet about it. She chose not to, and the last time I saw him, he was in cuffs being escorted around by the SPs.

If you'd have asked any of us, we'd have NEVER guessed that. Humans are a fucked up species, and that, more than anything, is what makes the ceepolks crazy, because they can't deal with that.

[AndrewV69]

Just to add on to that, I consider myself more to the left than a lot of the SJW's, if you're going to put it on a strict left/right spectrum.

Having seen your comments elsewhere I would have to say that is true as far as I can tell.

Very little substance actually comes out of the SJW movement as a whole. Their whole gameplan, if you take their goals at their word consist of the following:

1. Smash the Patriarchy
2. ....
3. Love and Peace for all!

Of course, there's actually little reason to take their goals at their word. But still. There's very little actual substance there. There's always a little bit...depending on the issue someone might have a bit of a clue what they're talking about, but generally speaking, they're so lost in this overarching ideology that there's simply no substance to what they're doing.

I would say barring a couple of exceptions that for the most part they are "parrots" in the sense they need for someone to tell them what to say.

And that leads to the final problem with the SJW movement (like it or not, the A+ thing is part of a larger, ugly, whole) is the intellectual authoritarianism of it all. I'm glad to see people start to clue in, like JT seems to be, but the idea that we can't disagree on particulars even if we agree on the overall direction is entirely toxic, and has no place in any sort of movement work. Whenever you see "Get Educated" or "101" or "I already refuted that" or things like that, this is what you're seeing. What they're saying is the gospel, and it just goes.

That's what needs to be pushed back against most of all, and it's starting to happen more and more. I'm glad to see it. On the other hand, take a guy like Ally Fogg who agrees with them on a lot, but thinks that there's a lot of different voices with something worthwhile to add, and it's a whole lot more productive and constructive.

I rarely feel the need to add a comment over at Fogg because by the time I get there most people have said it already. For a j.random.example:

http://freethoughtblogs.com/hetpat/2013 ... mment-7748

84
karmakin

August 8, 2013 at 12:06 am (UTC 0)

@B-Lar 8 Sorry about the delay, posted then went off to work, just got home.

When I talk about Macro-Culture, I’m talking about the discussion that things usually take where we talk about society as being one big whole unit. This is generally the track that things do take when it comes to these sorts of discussions, and I don’t think it’s accurate or helpful. This is as compared to a Micro-Culture, where we might be talking about the culture of an online web forum, a workplace, a city or even a part of a city, and so on.

The culture of different micro-cultures are often entirely different from one another. As an example, people often have wildly different experiences with street harassment, as it seems to be much more commonplace in some areas than another. Finding out WHY these differences exist may be a big step in fixing them. We can’t see the trees for the forest, to spin a phrase.

The reason why this is a problem and it escalates the culture wars, is that it’s a form of denying people’s own personal emotions and lived experiences.

(underline mine)

Indeed. And the usual suspects tend to ignore that especially when people try to explain something about themselves within that context. I am sure everyone can come up with their own example of how it is used vilify someone and club them with "privilege" instead of using it as a teachable moment.

*shrug*

Whatever man. Fuck (Die Antwoord).

[JackRayner]

Twenty-odd years old and never learned to ride a bike? WTF!!! Did daddy's fucking chauffeurs drive her everywhere?

Mccreight reminds me of my sister. Irritating sure, but I can't bring myself to hate her. Come on guys...

Jen is just lving up to an old feminist line - "a woman needs a man like a horse needs a bicycle".

Or something like that.

:lol:

[CommanderTuvok]

Yeah, I actually agree with the goals of a lot of the A+ people, but they are so contemptuous I would never want to be associated with them. It's similar to the Dave Mathews Band. I love some of their music, but their fans are fucking annoying and I don't want anyone to think I'm one of them.

Yeah, they want to be the new Deadheads, but without the marijuana.

[AndrewV69]

Re Fogg. He's better than some, for sure. But after his "criminal generation" post about boomers, I can't trust a word he says if he is going to be as cavalier with data as he was there. I know he was being deliberately provocative, but he defended his wonky interpretation of the crime and prison stats in the comments - despite the people whom he quoted in the piece, and who had collected the data, specifically stating his version was wrong.

Could do better.

*shrug*

I took that one with a grain of salt. I do take your meaning but I saw him with his tongue firmly within his cheek the whole time, even if there was an element behind it where he does in reality despise the boomers.

Lots of people do despise the boomers overall, if only for the fact that so many of them even when they dimly perceive it, could not care less and in fact give it not more than a moment's thought.

My generation has a lot to answer for, but are never going to is what it looks like. We will see though.

[CommanderTuvok]

I do HATE many of the prime Baboons. My patience for them went years ago.

I HATE bullies, and I especially HATE bullies with privilege and power (like having a blog with readership, influence in a community, etc.) who pretend they are victims. That is why I especially HATE PZ, Greta, Ophelia, Rebecca and Stephalump, although Ophelia, Greta and Stephalump's following is not that big, and appears to be fading.

Fuck 'em. Deepen the rifts. Destroy their reputations. Ruin them.

[Brive1987]

Also, ever notice how "intent isn't magic" actually means "intent doesn't matter at all"?

Nailed it.

It really is all about how they can get their hate on when it comes to their real or even PERCEIVED ideological (or racial, sexual, class)enemies and still feel good about themselves afterwards.

Unless the "intent" is justice against Shermer. Then the intent is magic enough to transcend the means and any collateral damage.

[Brive1987]

Nothing wrong with A+

Atheism leads to humanism leads to rejecting those values that demean what it means to be human leads to 'social justice'.

Beyond this broad construct though the realised ideology of A+ and, dear god, the people and sanctimonious bullshit, well that's a different matter.

For SOME people it does. For others, it does not. The entire "Atheism leads to <ideals "I" find good> thing is projection. In and of itself, Atheism leads to not believing in deities. It doesn't even lead to not believing in the supernatural.

If people were to stop trying to make Atheism the gateway to whatever beliefs they, as Atheists, find "good", they'd probably be a lot less annoyed by the "bad" Atheists.

I couldn't have qualified my original post any more than I did and yet stil .... :o Fr the record I agree completely.

[goddamn 'nym]

I don't think skepticism and hate go very well together. Maybe you have stared into the abyss for too long?

Any why is that?

Cause you want to weigh their arguments on their merits and not have intensive feelings distort your perception?

[Brive1987]

Therefore I try to reject those Ideas that belittle the human experience.

LOLz! I think you should define what you mean by that, because in many ways, I believe humanity, and this "intelligence" we've ended up with, is a bad joke. We are very much "special", but I don't see how our experience has any value, other than when viewed through the lens of self-centered human subjectivity.

Ha! "self-centered human subjectivity" is all we got.

I trust though that objectively (to us at least) our potential to do and experience 'Great things', appreciate abstract concepts, apply reason and science to understand the universe, listen to Pink Floyd etc is a uniquely 'human' experience worth investing in. And concepts that encourage hate dehumanising forces are anathema to that goal.

[Tribble]

[

In some other fields? You have things like "The customer is always right", isn't that right?

Not with me there wasn't. It was "I'm right and if you want some other way, there are plenty of stupid, ignorant and dirt-bag accountants who'll be more than happy to do what you want and let you hang for it when the IRS comes calling."

[JackRayner]

In some other fields? You have things like "The customer is always right", isn't that right?

Not with me there wasn't. It was "I'm right and if you want some other way, there are plenty of stupid, ignorant and dirt-bag accountants who'll be more than happy to do what you want and let you hang for it when the IRS comes calling."

I added "some" for such cases. :p

[Aneris]

Caine gives an instruction manual on how to Consent to Sex. Is there anyone on the planet who wants to be nice person and reads this like "oh wow, Thanks to Caine, now I can safely interact with women without accidentially raping them". Those SJW don't even notice how they look exactly like a mixture between Hardcore Bible Believer who want to regulate other people's sex lives and some kind of Totalitarian State Officer that sets up manuals detailling exactly how people should behave.

Speaking of consent…

CCC (Crystal Clear Consent)

First of all: Understanding that if you go forward with initiating sexual activity not knowing if consent exists, you may or may not be raping someone, but you have proved beyond a shadow of doubt that you are **willing** to rape someone. Black areas make you a rapist, grey areas make you willing to rape.

Making absolutely sure that consent is obtained and mutually agreed on. This does not include trying for consent when a person is not in condition to grant consent.

No doubts as to whether consent was obtained.

No guesses as to whether consent was obtained.

No assumptions as to whether consent was obtained.

No doubt as to whether any partner was capable of giving consent at the time.

Crystal Clear Consent Practices:

Understanding that consent may be withdrawn, by any involved party, at any time. Initial consent does not mean you get to carry on if consent has been withdrawn. In other words, people are allowed to change their mind at any point.

If you have not had sex with a given person before, non-verbal consent is nearly always insufficient to be Crystal Clear Consent. Consent that is not communicated is not CCC.

If your partner is communicating something, do not assume that it has nothing to do with consent.

If you initiate or offer and are declined in the context of a specifically romantic, sexual, or flirtations setting, do not initiate or offer again until either:

1. the other party has taken a turn initiating/offering and been declined by you.

2. the other party has taken a turn initiating/offering, was accepted by you, but after the activity lapsed you wish to restart.

3. it is an entirely new romantic, sexual, or flirtatious setting.

4. An amount of time has passed that is inverse to the number of times they have accepted your offer before. While it may be acceptable in a relationship to initiate again after, say, one day [ or whatever the negotiated norm in said relationship ] it’s not acceptable to ask someone again if you’ve just met them.
If you initiate or offer and are declined in a context that is not specifically romantic, sexual, or flirtatious, do not initiate or offer again. Seriously.

5. If you’re beginning a new relationship or going for a casual hookup, enthusiasm is key! Your new partner should be enthusiastically and happily involved with you. If no enthusiasm is present, it’s best to go for more communication and put off sex for a while.

6. A person who wants consensual sex doesn’t want to commit or experience rape, and a person who rapes does. Whether a given rapist wants their victim(s) drugged, unconscious, frightened, intimidated, trapped, manipulated or tricked, or just pestered until they give in, the rapist wants the end result to be that a rape happens. That includes being forced to penetrate someone else.

7. Contrary to what is often thought, consent is not difficult. If you still aren’t clear at this point, read this:
http://freethoughtblogs.com/almostdiamo ... t-is-hard/ and this: http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/02/06/i ... t-of-life/

[Ä uest]

Paul Elam,

Who was recently thrilled to announce his interviews with ABC 20/20, Newsweek and the Daily Beast has come back from his interview in New York with 20/20 not so thrilled that they read pieces at AVFM and *mistook* obvious satire for hate speech and support of rape.

http://www.avoiceformen.com/misandry/ba ... -new-york/

[youtube]J6_1Pw1xm9U[/youtube]

[JackRayner]

Therefore I try to reject those Ideas that belittle the human experience.

LOLz! I think you should define what you mean by that, because in many ways, I believe humanity, and this "intelligence" we've ended up with, is a bad joke. We are very much "special", but I don't see how our experience has any value, other than when viewed through the lens of self-centered human subjectivity.

Ha! "self-centered human subjectivity" is all we got.

I trust though that objectively (to us at least) our potential to do and experience 'Great things', appreciate abstract concepts, apply reason and science to understand the universe, listen to Pink Floyd etc is a uniquely 'human' experience worth investing in. And concepts that encourage hate dehumanising forces are anathema to that goal.

That our experience is different, you could call that "objective". That it's "worth investing in", even from the point of view of humans, I would have say not so much.

[AndrewV69]

Re Fogg. He's better than some, for sure. But after his "criminal generation" post about boomers, I can't trust a word he says if he is going to be as cavalier with data as he was there. I know he was being deliberately provocative, but he defended his wonky interpretation of the crime and prison stats in the comments - despite the people whom he quoted in the piece, and who had collected the data, specifically stating his version was wrong.

Could do better.

I sent a comment in, clearly joking about how the advent of feminism was to blame for "the criminality of the baby boomers".
Fogg allowed the message to stay for a few hours with the reply "Obvious troll is obvious", then memoryholed it.
In spite of my pointing out that he had violated his own commenting policies by making sweeping generalizations about baby boomers without solid facts and making a nasty remark about them not being missed when they are gone, he decided not to ban himself!

Hahahaha.

I believe he went and deleted several comments by Carnation via the edit function around that time or subsequently.

[16bitheretic]

Caine gives an instruction manual on how to Consent to Sex. Is there anyone on the planet who wants to be nice person and reads this like "oh wow, Thanks to Caine, now I can safely interact with women without accidentially raping them". Those SJW don't even notice how they look exactly like a mixture between Hardcore Bible Believer who want to regulate other people's sex lives and some kind of Totalitarian State Officer that sets up manuals detailling exactly how people should behave.

Speaking of consent…

CCC (Crystal Clear Consent)

First of all: Understanding that if you go forward with initiating sexual activity not knowing if consent exists, you may or may not be raping someone, but you have proved beyond a shadow of doubt that you are **willing** to rape someone. Black areas make you a rapist, grey areas make you willing to rape.

Making absolutely sure that consent is obtained and mutually agreed on. This does not include trying for consent when a person is not in condition to grant consent.

No doubts as to whether consent was obtained.

No guesses as to whether consent was obtained.

No assumptions as to whether consent was obtained.

No doubt as to whether any partner was capable of giving consent at the time.

Crystal Clear Consent Practices:

Understanding that consent may be withdrawn, by any involved party, at any time. Initial consent does not mean you get to carry on if consent has been withdrawn. In other words, people are allowed to change their mind at any point.

If you have not had sex with a given person before, non-verbal consent is nearly always insufficient to be Crystal Clear Consent. Consent that is not communicated is not CCC.

If your partner is communicating something, do not assume that it has nothing to do with consent.

If you initiate or offer and are declined in the context of a specifically romantic, sexual, or flirtations setting, do not initiate or offer again until either:

1. the other party has taken a turn initiating/offering and been declined by you.

2. the other party has taken a turn initiating/offering, was accepted by you, but after the activity lapsed you wish to restart.

3. it is an entirely new romantic, sexual, or flirtatious setting.

4. An amount of time has passed that is inverse to the number of times they have accepted your offer before. While it may be acceptable in a relationship to initiate again after, say, one day [ or whatever the negotiated norm in said relationship ] it’s not acceptable to ask someone again if you’ve just met them.
If you initiate or offer and are declined in a context that is not specifically romantic, sexual, or flirtatious, do not initiate or offer again. Seriously.

5. If you’re beginning a new relationship or going for a casual hookup, enthusiasm is key! Your new partner should be enthusiastically and happily involved with you. If no enthusiasm is present, it’s best to go for more communication and put off sex for a while.

6. A person who wants consensual sex doesn’t want to commit or experience rape, and a person who rapes does. Whether a given rapist wants their victim(s) drugged, unconscious, frightened, intimidated, trapped, manipulated or tricked, or just pestered until they give in, the rapist wants the end result to be that a rape happens. That includes being forced to penetrate someone else.

7. Contrary to what is often thought, consent is not difficult. If you still aren’t clear at this point, read this:
http://freethoughtblogs.com/almostdiamo ... t-is-hard/ and this: http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/02/06/i ... t-of-life/

They should have just posted this:

http://i1322.photobucket.com/albums/u58 ... 2a5625.jpg

[justinvacula]

Join Karla Porter and I tonight with special guest David Tamayo of Hispanic American Freethinkers - HAFree for this week's episode of Brave Hero Radio. Listen live, consider calling, and chat live for tonight's 8PM Eastern show.

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/bravehero/ ... vid-tamayo

Chat's open now!

http://i.imgur.com/9mTuHml.jpg

[Brive1987]

JackR -

That your experiences are unique at the micro level - granted.

That there is a macro human experience, unique relative to our relationships with other species/objects - obvious.

That this experience is founded on god - ridiculous.

That we shouldn't invest in enriching broader human society - unfathomable.

That this is best done via concepts like A+ and Radfem - scary.

[Skep tickle]

Caine gives an instruction manual on how to Consent to Sex. Is there anyone on the planet who wants to be nice person and reads this like "oh wow, Thanks to Caine, now I can safely interact with women without accidentially raping them". Those SJW don't even notice how they look exactly like a mixture between Hardcore Bible Believer who want to regulate other people's sex lives and some kind of Totalitarian State Officer that sets up manuals detailling exactly how people should behave.

Speaking of consent…

CCC (Crystal Clear Consent)

First of all: Understanding that if you go forward with initiating sexual activity not knowing if consent exists, you may or may not be raping someone, but you have proved beyond a shadow of doubt that you are **willing** to rape someone. Black areas make you a rapist, grey areas make you willing to rape.

...

:naughty: :naughty: :naughty:

Colorism - shame, shame, shame, Caine!

[katamari Damassi]

Ceepolk was a gem. With her ban-happy outlook on moderation she is almost entirely responsible for the low population of the A+ forum. Not only that but she's provided us all with so many chuckles over the last year and I will genuinely miss reading her fucked-up, psychotic, retarded comments.

*raises glass*

TO CEEPOLK! WHOEVER YOU ARE!

*sip*

Wait...wasn't there a rumor going around saying that one of the mods was a Poe? What if she was it? :o </tinfoil-hat>

Or what if Ceepolk is actually Gumby, Aneris, or John Greg? Or all of them!
I have a line of tin foil fedoras coming on the market soon- you heard it here first!

what happened is Ceepolk gone? Did she flounce? Spontaneously combust?

[Parody Accountant]

Join Karla Porter and I tonight with special guest David Tamayo of Hispanic American Freethinkers - HAFree for this week's episode of Brave Hero Radio. Listen live, consider calling, and chat live for tonight's 8PM Eastern show.

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/bravehero/ ... vid-tamayo

Chat's open now!

http://i.imgur.com/9mTuHml.jpg

SLYMECHAT!!!!

http://i.imgur.com/jJCaHd9.png

[gargamel]

what happened is Ceepolk gone? Did she flounce? Spontaneously combust?

Well, I will point out that I started posting here after ceepolk disappeared. Can't say anything more. . .

[AndrewV69]

Caine gives an instruction manual on how to Consent to Sex. Is there anyone on the planet who wants to be nice person and reads this like "oh wow, Thanks to Caine, now I can safely interact with women without accidentially raping them".

Pretty funny stuff if you ask me. If someone wants to follow what she says well, that is their problem. Not mine.

Those SJW don't even notice how they look exactly like a mixture between Hardcore Bible Believer who want to regulate other people's sex lives and some kind of Totalitarian State Officer that sets up manuals detailling exactly how people should behave.

Western religions I notice seem to be very interested in controlling their subjects sexuality up to and including forbidding it entirely. I see it as a means of control myself. Better still if you can make the rules so restrictive, that inevitably you will get a number of people breaking them.

You can then threaten, exhort, coerce manipulate and blackmail these people to your heart's content.

[LurkerPerson]

I refuse to believe that Ceepolk could find something like Arrested Development amusing and not full of triggering priviledged patriarchal "jokes".

[Parody Accountant]

what happened is Ceepolk gone? Did she flounce? Spontaneously combust?

Well, I will point out that I started posting here after ceepolk disappeared. Can't say anything more. . .

DUN DUN DUN.

http://mywhatblog.files.wordpress.com/2 ... sphone.jpg

...WHO WAS PHONE?

(triggerspoiler: ceepolk was phone)

[AndrewV69]

Paul Elam,

Who was recently thrilled to announce his interviews with ABC 20/20, Newsweek and the Daily Beast has come back from his interview in New York with 20/20 not so thrilled that they read pieces at AVFM and *mistook* obvious satire for hate speech and support of rape.

http://www.avoiceformen.com/misandry/ba ... -new-york/

J6_1Pw1xm9U /youtube

I got the impression that he expected it. For example:

The interview itself was, how do I put this, every bit as skewed as I expected. I spoke first with ABCs Elizabeth Vargas, a seasoned, tough, no nonsense anchor that managed to conjure up a fair amount of nonsense for the interview nonetheless.

She did pretty much as I expected. She dwelled, obsessively so, on cherry picked bits of my most provocative writing, insisting that it was not satire (by her own edict I suppose), even as I informed her repeatedly that it was satire, and pointed to the fact that I had also said that in the articles. Those few examples were all she wanted to talk about, which I know surprises you to no end.

When we did discuss the issues faced by men and boys, she either dismissed them as trivial or acted like I was crazy for having brought them up in the first place.

She just kept insisting that I was promoting or inciting violence, that I hated women and supported rape.

[gargamel]

what happened is Ceepolk gone? Did she flounce? Spontaneously combust?

Well, I will point out that I started posting here after ceepolk disappeared. Can't say anything more. . .

DUN DUN DUN.

http://mywhatblog.files.wordpress.com/2 ... sphone.jpg

...WHO WAS PHONE?

(triggerspoiler: ceepolk was phone)

totally kidding. I didn't even know who ceepolk was until I start lurking here a couple weeks ago.

[JackRayner]

Caine gives an instruction manual on how to Consent to Sex. Is there anyone on the planet who wants to be nice person and reads this like "oh wow, Thanks to Caine, now I can safely interact with women without accidentially raping them". Those SJW don't even notice how they look exactly like a mixture between Hardcore Bible Believer who want to regulate other people's sex lives and some kind of Totalitarian State Officer that sets up manuals detailling exactly how people should behave.

Speaking of consent…

[snippedy, snip-snip!]
6. A person who wants consensual sex doesn’t want to commit or experience rape, and a person who rapes does. Whether a given rapist wants their victim(s) drugged, unconscious, frightened, intimidated, trapped, manipulated or tricked, or just pestered until they give in, the rapist wants the end result to be that a rape happens. That includes being forced to penetrate someone else.]

While I'm sure that "accidental rape" is possible, why is it that, when Feminists and SJW's bring up the term, what I imagine is that they're accusing someone of not being able to read minds? It's like that story that was brought up recently, of the chick that was "held down and fucked", and she went along with it, but it's somehow "rape", even though she did not remove consent or even attempt to? How do you willingly end up inside someone's room, at least partially naked, with their penis inside of you, not object to any of it, and then conclude "rape"? To me, this sounds like a case of a woman objectifying herself. That's retarded.

On #6 on this list....that's a bunch of ambiguous sounding bullshit. The most I've seen lumped together in a while. Have I been raped if I agree to fuck my partner out of fear of losing her, or of just losing her goodwill towards me for that day because she wants to fuck and I'm not entirely in the mood? I'm pretty certain the source of that "fright" is important.

Intimidation of...what? Of them being unhappy with you? Of them dumping you?...or intimidation of harm? Not all are alike, and definitely not in the eyes of the law. "If we don't have sex I'm dumping you" and "If we don't have sex I'm slitting your throat open" are—how do I put this?—Very different.

And what does "trapped" mean? As in kidnapped and put into shackles and fucked against your will? Or "trapped" as in "I feel trapped, because if I don't fuck my lousy-in-bed-boyfriend and he dumps me, I'm gonna have to move back in with the parents"?

And what about "manipulated"? Have I been raped if started dating and having sex with a chick that told me she single & childless, and later find out she's married and has 3 kids? Or has a chick been raped if she fucked a dude she met on an online dating site where he claimed he was looking to settle down, but then doesn't call her back again? ["Tricked" could apply the same...]

And the last one "pestered until you give in". Is it rape if, after the husband's advances are turned down everyday for a week, the husband complains at length about it on the 8th day, the wife agrees, and then gives in to his advances on the 9th day? No blackmail, no threats of violence, no actual violence. Just "Can we please fuck?" until they agree? Pfffffft! No. Sorry crazy Feminists and SJW's. Go fuck yourselves...

[Ä uest]

Paul Elam,

Who was recently thrilled to announce his interviews with ABC 20/20, Newsweek and the Daily Beast has come back from his interview in New York with 20/20 not so thrilled that they read pieces at AVFM and *mistook* obvious satire for hate speech and support of rape.

http://www.avoiceformen.com/misandry/ba ... -new-york/

J6_1Pw1xm9U /youtube

I got the impression that he expected it. For example:

The interview itself was, how do I put this, every bit as skewed as I expected. I spoke first with ABCs Elizabeth Vargas, a seasoned, tough, no nonsense anchor that managed to conjure up a fair amount of nonsense for the interview nonetheless.

She did pretty much as I expected. She dwelled, obsessively so, on cherry picked bits of my most provocative writing, insisting that it was not satire (by her own edict I suppose), even as I informed her repeatedly that it was satire, and pointed to the fact that I had also said that in the articles. Those few examples were all she wanted to talk about, which I know surprises you to no end.

When we did discuss the issues faced by men and boys, she either dismissed them as trivial or acted like I was crazy for having brought them up in the first place.

She just kept insisting that I was promoting or inciting violence, that I hated women and supported rape.

"They did what I expected/hatchet job" is a bit of a pattern for AVFM interviews.

He didn't seem to express those misgivings last week:
He seemed to think it was a pretty big deal.

http://www.avoiceformen.com/a-voice-for ... nt-page-1/

Hello everyone. I just wanted to give you a brief update on some significant events and to make an appeal to all MHRAs internationally. In a few hours I am boarding a plane for New York to tape a segment of ABC News 20/20. Word has it that the episode should air within a couple of weeks. Also, and about the same time, a very lengthy feature article on the MHRM and AVFM will be in Newsweek Magazine and their online publication The Daily Beast.

What this means is that over the next few weeks that tens of millions of people who have never been exposed to AVFM or the MHRM will hear about us. We are making preparations for that behind the scenes as I write this.

Full disclosure: I did expect this:

In other news, Paul Elam will be interviewed by ABC 20/20, Newsweek and The Daily Beast.
http://www.avoiceformen.com/a-voice-for ... -the-world

I anticipate this will set back men's rights by at least a decade.

I guess we'll have to wait for the interview to come out to know what really happens.

[JackRayner]

JackR -

That your experiences are unique at the micro level - granted.

That there is a macro human experience, unique relative to our relationships with other species/objects - obvious.

That this experience is founded on god - ridiculous.

That we shouldn't invest in enriching broader human society - unfathomable.

That this is best done via concepts like A+ and Radfem - scary.

I'm not the one applying shoulds or should nots. I was pointing out that the belief that these things are worth "investing" in isn't objectively agreed upon.

[another lurker]

Mykeru has hinted that he had infiltrated A+

If he was ceepolk that would be hilarious, but probably too good to be true:P

[VickyCaramel]

I don't hate McCreight, as a matter of fact I don't hate any of them. They are vile and loathsome, but I don't hate them.

I do. I can honestly say I hate Rebecca Watson. In second place would be Greta Christina followed by PZ Myers (although, they probably tie for second place really). I hate them because they're despicable people that use their own insecurities to be truly awful to other people.

Fuck them.

Really? I don't pay attention all the time, but during my forays into this I have never seen Greta initiate anything, and her support for the others has been minimal. While for me, Ophelia Benson is completely despicable and too stupid to be able to hide it. If Carrier is their intellectual artillery, she is the sap who digs the latrines.

And as Kitty Genovese has been mentioned, this case has often prompted people to say, "all that is needed for evil to prevail is for good men to stand by and do nothing". Which is why I am so disappointed with Aron Ra.

[Bourne Skeptic]

Well, I will point out that I started posting here after ceepolk disappeared. Can't say anything more. . .

DUN DUN DUN.

http://mywhatblog.files.wordpress.com/2 ... sphone.jpg

...WHO WAS PHONE?

(triggerspoiler: ceepolk was phone)

totally kidding. I didn't even know who ceepolk was until I start lurking here a couple weeks ago.

Is not knowing who Ceepolk is a privilege?

[justinvacula]

Hmmm

http://i.imgur.com/wAIA14X.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/HhMb1lu.jpg

[Parody Accountant]

Hmmm

http://i.imgur.com/wAIA14X.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/HhMb1lu.jpg

But seriously...

WHO WAS PHONE, FOXNEWS?

goodnight I'm obviously drunk

[DownThunder]

goodnight I'm obviously drunk

Make sure you don't accidentally somebody. Make sure you are familiar with your Clarity Of Consent Keywords.

[AndrewV69]

In other news, Paul Elam will be interviewed by ABC 20/20, Newsweek and The Daily Beast.
http://www.avoiceformen.com/a-voice-for ... -the-world

I anticipate this will set back men's rights by at least a decade.

I guess we'll have to wait for the interview to come out to know what really happens.

So that was you? Just register man. I would find it a PITA to enter the "are you a human or a bot" captcha thingiee whatever every time I want to make a comment.

Anyway, I believe I am currently of the opinion that it does not matter one way or the other as far as the people on the ground are concerned because they are already voting with their feet so as to speak.

The elites (people for who $100 million is chump change) are largely insulated and till the current climate affects them, not much in the way is going to change as far as the laws are concerned.

It is the "chattering class" that have issues with the whole disruption to the narrative that MRAs present to their world view, and who are going to really start shrieking when their "inferiors" (that is me and you and everyone else, excluding our brave SJWs) ignore them and/or start talking back.

Expect some fun times ahead as the societal changes occur in response to the efforts of the usual suspects in unexpected but predictable ways. I certainly expect to be entertained for the foreseeable future.

But I doubt that many share my sense of humour.

[Verklagekasper]

Caine gives an instruction manual on how to Consent to Sex. Is there anyone on the planet who wants to be nice person and reads this like "oh wow, Thanks to Caine, now I can safely interact with women without accidentially raping them".

Well, perhaps I'd ask Caine if he/she/it ever got laid. Next I'd ask why it thinks other peoples' sex lives is any of its business. Well no, I wouldn't ask because I don't give a flying banta-poodoo what these jerks think. Possibly I'd suggest them to move to Teheran where all the naughty amusements these neurotics obsess over are forbidden.

[KiwiInOz]

what happened is Ceepolk gone? Did she flounce? Spontaneously combust?

Well, I will point out that I started posting here after ceepolk disappeared. Can't say anything more. . .

Where did you bury her; and what did you do to the girl smurf?