Nerds. Nerds EVERYWHERE...

[cunt]

Hey Phil, how's things going with your dads bakery anyway? Did you put a couple of computers in?

My father decided to rent the walls to a guy who already has another bakery across town. They're renovating right now and should open just before summer.

Rent the walls?

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

Hey Phil, how's things going with your dads bakery anyway? Did you put a couple of computers in?

My father decided to rent the walls to a guy who already has another bakery across town. They're renovating right now and should open just before summer.

Rent the walls?

Yeah, I'm not quite sure what the English term is. He owns the location, but rents it to some third party for exploitation. In French we say "louer les murs", i.e, rent the walls.

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

Maybe the term I'm looking for is "lease".

[cunt]

Yeah. That sounds like the situation.

[Matt Cavanaugh]

A lot about American culture is puritanical. But it's not residual from the original Puritans, rather the wave of religious fervor that swept the nation in the 1820's -1840s. Then came the Temperance movement, which was largely a response to the endemic alcoholism among the urban poor, but also was a clash between WASPs and immigrants, primarily Irish and Germans, the latter being not only booze enthusiasts but free thinkers. Two of the complaints the stodgy, protestant owners of the National League (baseball) had with their upstart rival, the American Association, was: 1) they played on Sundays; 2) they served beer at the park.

Temperance was a powerful cultural force, (the first SJWs?) and succeeded in making nearly all alcohol illegal in the US from 1919-1933. Twenty years of prohibition asphyxiated the social, communal drinking culture. In its place grew a furtive, clandestine, sinful approach to drinking.

I'd say Mother Against Drunk Driving (MADD) had an effect, too, in the 1980s. They successfully raised the drinking ages from 18 to 19, then 20, then 21. So, instead of easing into drinking, teenagers are held back, then typically go bonkers when they come of age. (MADD's efforts, btw, had a negligible effect on drunk driving rates, as most drunk drivers are 40 year old functional alkies.)

[debaser71]

When a renter rents out it's called a sublet.

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

When a renter rents out it's called a sublet.

My father's the owner, not a renter subletting. I will go with "commercial lease", if it makes any sense.

Temperance was a powerful cultural force, (the first SJWs?)

SJWs are not powerful. Just very loud and obnoxious. At least the ones on the internet.

[welch]

Look, (for simplicity's sake, I lump europe in to one thing), the "European Method" as I call it is one not only of not elevating alcohol to some oooooh, cooooool thing, but also one of training. Kids are not told alcohol is bad or whatever that gives it some AWESOME POWER. It is simply a thing you drink sometimes. With meals, when having fun with your friends/family. It is a part of things, but no more or less important than say, dessert, (if we are talking about meals.) So it's de-elevated.

As well, the gradual introduction of kids to alcohol, i.e. sips of wine/beer graduating to a glass at dinner and so on helps teach kids about drinking. What it tastes like, what it feels like, all of that. Kids are taught, as they grow up, how to drink responsibly. So when they go out on their own, to college, their first real job, whatever, they have some kind of background. The have at least a basic working knowledge of How Alcohol Works.

Now the american method:

0-21 - NONONONONONONEVERNEVERNONONO

21 - HERE YOU GO KIDS, PARTY THE FUCK ON.

The only thing that amazes me is that MORE people don't die from drinking in this country. Jesus fucking christ, it's like we created the perfect system to encourage binge drinking and drunken idiots.

This is what happens when you let puritans run things.

In many US states, children are in fact allowed to drink alcohol with the permission of their parents. They just can't buy it. And restaurants are also allowed to serve alcohol to teenagers IF the parent is present. But I bet most resturants would be too scared of losing their liquor licenses to allow that.

I would actually want to see proof of that. I don't say that often, but in this case, it is so at odds with public policy that it broaches extraordinary claim territory.

[Dick Strawkins]

A lot about American culture is puritanical. But it's not residual from the original Puritans, rather the wave of religious fervor that swept the nation in the 1820's -1840s. Then came the Temperance movement, which was largely a response to the endemic alcoholism among the urban poor, but also was a clash between WASPs and immigrants, primarily Irish and Germans, the latter being not only booze enthusiasts but free thinkers. Two of the complaints the stodgy, protestant owners of the National League (baseball) had with their upstart rival, the American Association, was: 1) they played on Sundays; 2) they served beer at the park.

Temperance was a powerful cultural force, (the first SJWs?) and succeeded in making nearly all alcohol illegal in the US from 1919-1933. Twenty years of prohibition asphyxiated the social, communal drinking culture. In its place grew a furtive, clandestine, sinful approach to drinking.

I'd say Mother Against Drunk Driving (MADD) had an effect, too, in the 1980s. They successfully raised the drinking ages from 18 to 19, then 20, then 21. So, instead of easing into drinking, teenagers are held back, then typically go bonkers when they come of age. (MADD's efforts, btw, had a negligible effect on drunk driving rates, as most drunk drivers are 40 year old functional alkies.)

The early feminist/suffragette movement was closely aligned to the religious temperance movement. In the US prohibition - the result of the 18th amendment to the US constitution - came into effect at almost the same time as women's right to vote was granted (the result of the 19th amendment) - both occurring in 1920.




http://9f1780.medialib.glogster.com/med ... vement.jpg

[welch]

Look, (for simplicity's sake, I lump europe in to one thing), the "European Method" as I call it is one not only of not elevating alcohol to some oooooh, cooooool thing, but also one of training. Kids are not told alcohol is bad or whatever that gives it some AWESOME POWER. It is simply a thing you drink sometimes. With meals, when having fun with your friends/family. It is a part of things, but no more or less important than say, dessert, (if we are talking about meals.) So it's de-elevated.

As well, the gradual introduction of kids to alcohol, i.e. sips of wine/beer graduating to a glass at dinner and so on helps teach kids about drinking. What it tastes like, what it feels like, all of that. Kids are taught, as they grow up, how to drink responsibly. So when they go out on their own, to college, their first real job, whatever, they have some kind of background. The have at least a basic working knowledge of How Alcohol Works.

Now the american method:

0-21 - NONONONONONONEVERNEVERNONONO

21 - HERE YOU GO KIDS, PARTY THE FUCK ON.

The only thing that amazes me is that MORE people don't die from drinking in this country. Jesus fucking christ, it's like we created the perfect system to encourage binge drinking and drunken idiots.

This is what happens when you let puritans run things.

In many US states, children are in fact allowed to drink alcohol with the permission of their parents. They just can't buy it. And restaurants are also allowed to serve alcohol to teenagers IF the parent is present. But I bet most resturants would be too scared of losing their liquor licenses to allow that.

http://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/re ... alties.htm

It's common knowledge that the legal drinking age in the United States is 21 and that all states make it illegal to sell alcohol to anyone who is underage. However, state prohibitions against underage drinking extend further than merely the sale of alcohol. All states also make it a crime to supply an underage person with alcohol even when there is no money involved.

Supplying. All states prohibit providing alcohol to underage people. Regardless of whether a person sells it, gives it, provides it, or supplies it, the laws punish such activity as a crime. Even though the language that state laws use differs, all states prohibit anyone from knowingly supplying any underage person with alcoholic beverages

Acts. A wide range of actions constitute “supplying” alcohol to an underage person. For example, allowing an underage person to be in a home where there is alcohol and not restricting access to it, placing an alcoholic beverage near an underage person with the intent to allow that person to drink, and buying alcohol and placing it in the underage person's vehicle all qualify as “supplying” alcohol to minors. You don't have to specifically hand over the alcohol or give it directly to the underage person to be convicted of supplying alcohol to a minor.
Intent. While knowingly supplying a minor with alcohol does not have to involve money or overtly giving the alcohol to the underage person, the law does require that the accused knowingly provides the alcohol. This means that the accused intended to give the alcohol, or intended that his or her actions result in the underage person acquiring alcohol. Courts have held, for example, that you cannot be convicted of supplying alcohol to a minor if you are simply indifferent to an underage person drinking. Similarly, if you are a property owner and you grant your permission to have a party on that property knowing that underage people may be there, that is not enough to show that you intended to provide underage people with alcohol.

License not required. The laws prohibiting supplying alcohol to minors apply to everyone, not just establishments that serve or sell alcohol. Courts have broadly applied these laws to include any act of providing alcohol to underage people, even when the person supplying the alcohol is another underage person.

Exceptions. Supplying liquor to an underage person is allowed in some states in some situations. Some states have laws that allow parents or legal guardians to supply an underage person with alcohol in a home environment, as well as make exceptions if the alcohol is provided in a religious or medicinal situation. These laws may also allow an underage person to acquire, purchase, or procure alcohol. However, such home use or procurement must be supervised or performed in the presence of, and with the permission of, a parent, guardian, or (in a few states) someone acting in loco parentis.

I'd still want to see the actual statues before I trusted that.

[Linus]

http://i1089.photobucket.com/albums/i34 ... e923b1.jpg

[dogen]

I'd still want to see the actual statues before I trusted that.

http://historyandhumanities.files.wordp ... david1.jpg

[DaveDodo007]

:dance: My uni had nine bars on the campus alone. :dance:

Thirteen on campus at mine, five of those in the Students Union building. I think there may be more now.

Fuck me, was that the brewers uni. :)

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

[youtube]S_xH7noaqTA[/youtube]

[DaveDodo007]

Thirteen on campus at mine, five of those in the Students Union building. I think there may be more now.

Only one, student-tended, place of drinking at my local arts and literature university. Last time I went, pastis was at 1 euro/glass. Nothing says get plastered instead of studying like such an offer.

Typical artsy muso types, the stem fields are were the real liver damage is done* hard science, hard liquor, hard asses.

* Not to be confused with SJW drinking at home to escape their sad pathetic excuse for existenced.

[Lsuoma]

My home state of Michigan has one of the most notorious party schools... Michigan State. There are two alcohol related deaths per year at this Uni

Seriously? At least two people died during freshers week where I went.

:dance: My uni had nine bars on the campus alone. :dance:

And at the Union in Bristol we had the Long Bar. So called because it was the longest bar in Britain.

[Mykeru]

A lot about American culture is puritanical. But it's not residual from the original Puritans, rather the wave of religious fervor that swept the nation in the 1820's -1840s. Then came the Temperance movement, which was largely a response to the endemic alcoholism among the urban poor, but also was a clash between WASPs and immigrants, primarily Irish and Germans, the latter being not only booze enthusiasts but free thinkers. Two of the complaints the stodgy, protestant owners of the National League (baseball) had with their upstart rival, the American Association, was: 1) they played on Sundays; 2) they served beer at the park.

Temperance was a powerful cultural force, (the first SJWs?) and succeeded in making nearly all alcohol illegal in the US from 1919-1933. Twenty years of prohibition asphyxiated the social, communal drinking culture. In its place grew a furtive, clandestine, sinful approach to drinking.

I'd say Mother Against Drunk Driving (MADD) had an effect, too, in the 1980s. They successfully raised the drinking ages from 18 to 19, then 20, then 21. So, instead of easing into drinking, teenagers are held back, then typically go bonkers when they come of age. (MADD's efforts, btw, had a negligible effect on drunk driving rates, as most drunk drivers are 40 year old functional alkies.)

The early feminist/suffragette movement was closely aligned to the religious temperance movement. In the US prohibition - the result of the 18th amendment to the US constitution - came into effect at almost the same time as women's right to vote was granted (the result of the 19th amendment) - both occurring in 1920.

fuglychicks.jpg

One other thing Prohibition accomplished was destroying the all-male saloon culture. Back in the day no respectable woman would be caught dead in a Saloon, so they were male enclaves with just enough hookers to keep it interesting. Come prohibition, women are not only hanging out in Speakeasies and attention whoring, but some of them like Lois Long made a career out of writing about getting drunk for The New Yorker.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... ckhawk.jpg

"S'up, you fucking pansies"

[Sulman]

Look, (for simplicity's sake, I lump europe in to one thing), the "European Method" as I call it is one not only of not elevating alcohol to some oooooh, cooooool thing, but also one of training. Kids are not told alcohol is bad or whatever that gives it some AWESOME POWER. It is simply a thing you drink sometimes. With meals, when having fun with your friends/family. It is a part of things, but no more or less important than say, dessert, (if we are talking about meals.) So it's de-elevated.

As well, the gradual introduction of kids to alcohol, i.e. sips of wine/beer graduating to a glass at dinner and so on helps teach kids about drinking. What it tastes like, what it feels like, all of that. Kids are taught, as they grow up, how to drink responsibly. So when they go out on their own, to college, their first real job, whatever, they have some kind of background. The have at least a basic working knowledge of How Alcohol Works.

Now the american method:

0-21 - NONONONONONONEVERNEVERNONONO

21 - HERE YOU GO KIDS, PARTY THE FUCK ON.

The only thing that amazes me is that MORE people don't die from drinking in this country. Jesus fucking christ, it's like we created the perfect system to encourage binge drinking and drunken idiots.

This is what happens when you let puritans run things.

In many US states, children are in fact allowed to drink alcohol with the permission of their parents. They just can't buy it. And restaurants are also allowed to serve alcohol to teenagers IF the parent is present. But I bet most resturants would be too scared of losing their liquor licenses to allow that.

I would actually want to see proof of that. I don't say that often, but in this case, it is so at odds with public policy that it broaches extraordinary claim territory.

In France (I lived there for a while when I was a child) it's not unusual for children to be given small quantities of wine at the table with adults, to get them accustomed to the lifestyle. It's very different to just about anywhere.

I think in England particularly there's such a long history of working hard and boozing hard that cafe culture from across the water was never really going to be a thing. My dad always joked that the perception of well mannered Brits was just a cover for the extraordinarily cuntish behaviour that follows later...

Paris seemed to have a good incentive to not binge drink - It's phenominally expensive :o

[Lsuoma]

In France (I lived there for a while when I was a child) it's not unusual for children to be given small quantities of wine at the table with adults, to get them accustomed to the lifestyle. It's very different to just about anywhere.

It's exactly the same in Portugal.

[Dick Strawkins]

Here's one for the MRA's out there:

According to Russell Glasser:

MRA’s are approximately:

92% male
87% white
35% aged 17-20 (estimated overall median age 20)
70% no religion

http://freethoughtblogs.com/axp/2014/05 ... ous-nones/

Does this sound correct to those who have more knowledge of the MRA online world than I do?

I very rarely venture into the 'manosphere' but when I have done I didn't notice it to be particularly atheistic.

And are MRAs generally so young?

Glasser gets his information from Svan...
http://freethoughtblogs.com/almostdiamo ... -atheists/

...who in turn gets it from a self selected survey done on reddit

I can't see the original survey or results but there is a comment thread on reddit about it:

http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comm ... ts/cgopt0i

I guess it might be valid for the reddit group from whom it solicited answers, but for MRA's in general (which is how Glasser and Svan chose to extrapolate it to apply to) I don't see how you can use this (possibly trolled) survey to draw any conclusions.

[Reap]

A lot about American culture is puritanical. But it's not residual from the original Puritans, rather the wave of religious fervor that swept the nation in the 1820's -1840s. Then came the Temperance movement, which was largely a response to the endemic alcoholism among the urban poor, but also was a clash between WASPs and immigrants, primarily Irish and Germans, the latter being not only booze enthusiasts but free thinkers. Two of the complaints the stodgy, protestant owners of the National League (baseball) had with their upstart rival, the American Association, was: 1) they played on Sundays; 2) they served beer at the park.

Temperance was a powerful cultural force, (the first SJWs?) and succeeded in making nearly all alcohol illegal in the US from 1919-1933. Twenty years of prohibition asphyxiated the social, communal drinking culture. In its place grew a furtive, clandestine, sinful approach to drinking.

I'd say Mother Against Drunk Driving (MADD) had an effect, too, in the 1980s. They successfully raised the drinking ages from 18 to 19, then 20, then 21. So, instead of easing into drinking, teenagers are held back, then typically go bonkers when they come of age. (MADD's efforts, btw, had a negligible effect on drunk driving rates, as most drunk drivers are 40 year old functional alkies.)

The early feminist/suffragette movement was closely aligned to the religious temperance movement. In the US prohibition - the result of the 18th amendment to the US constitution - came into effect at almost the same time as women's right to vote was granted (the result of the 19th amendment) - both occurring in 1920.




http://9f1780.medialib.glogster.com/med ... vement.jpg

Just so you know that pic was a parody. Back then they had a sense of humor I guess

[Dick Strawkins]

A lot about American culture is puritanical. But it's not residual from the original Puritans, rather the wave of religious fervor that swept the nation in the 1820's -1840s. Then came the Temperance movement, which was largely a response to the endemic alcoholism among the urban poor, but also was a clash between WASPs and immigrants, primarily Irish and Germans, the latter being not only booze enthusiasts but free thinkers. Two of the complaints the stodgy, protestant owners of the National League (baseball) had with their upstart rival, the American Association, was: 1) they played on Sundays; 2) they served beer at the park.

Temperance was a powerful cultural force, (the first SJWs?) and succeeded in making nearly all alcohol illegal in the US from 1919-1933. Twenty years of prohibition asphyxiated the social, communal drinking culture. In its place grew a furtive, clandestine, sinful approach to drinking.

I'd say Mother Against Drunk Driving (MADD) had an effect, too, in the 1980s. They successfully raised the drinking ages from 18 to 19, then 20, then 21. So, instead of easing into drinking, teenagers are held back, then typically go bonkers when they come of age. (MADD's efforts, btw, had a negligible effect on drunk driving rates, as most drunk drivers are 40 year old functional alkies.)

The early feminist/suffragette movement was closely aligned to the religious temperance movement. In the US prohibition - the result of the 18th amendment to the US constitution - came into effect at almost the same time as women's right to vote was granted (the result of the 19th amendment) - both occurring in 1920.




http://9f1780.medialib.glogster.com/med ... vement.jpg

Just so you know that pic was a parody. Back then they had a sense of humor I guess

The picture may be a spoof (it looks too funny to be a serious picture) but the slogan is a real song title from the temperance movement.

http://memory.loc.gov/music/sm/sm1874/0 ... 23/001.gif

[JacquesCuze]

Here's one for the MRA's out there:

According to Russell Glasser:

MRA’s are approximately:

92% male
87% white
35% aged 17-20 (estimated overall median age 20)
70% no religion

http://freethoughtblogs.com/axp/2014/05 ... ous-nones/

Does this sound correct to those who have more knowledge of the MRA online world than I do?

I very rarely venture into the 'manosphere' but when I have done I didn't notice it to be particularly atheistic.

And are MRAs generally so young?

Glasser gets his information from Svan...
http://freethoughtblogs.com/almostdiamo ... -atheists/

...who in turn gets it from a self selected survey done on reddit

I can't see the original survey or results but there is a comment thread on reddit about it:

http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comm ... ts/cgopt0i

I guess it might be valid for the reddit group from whom it solicited answers, but for MRA's in general (which is how Glasser and Svan chose to extrapolate it to apply to) I don't see how you can use this (possibly trolled) survey to draw any conclusions.

Glaser is an idiot.

It's a survey of redditors that subscribe to /r/mensrights. It's young because redditors are young.

It was also hit very hard by a reddit trolls and bot, and even Zvan acknowledges that /r/mr folks say that specifically. Zvan just lies and pretends that she can unbot the trolls work. But even the reddit group /r/againstmensrights laughed at how borked the survey is and how it doesn't reflect past surveys.

I am sure /r/mensrights IS young, and to the extend most people hit by most mens rights issues these days are in college or fathers, then yeah, I bet mens rightsers tend to be younger in general.

Past surveys though showed the /r/mensrights group to be more diverse in terms of LGBT membership then reddit as a whole. I am not sure how it stacked up in terms of racial or ethnic characteristics.

Marcotte/Zvan used that survey to create some theory about something:

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/04/15/c ... thout-god/

I take Zvan at her word she is an analyst. I can't say she is particularly astute and she is certainly not honest.

[cunt]

I think you should be asking yourself what, if anything, that reddit forum being predominantly white male and atheist would change about the arguments. I personally think the arguments are not that good, but they'd still be not that good if a black female transvestite audience was making them.

Anyway, this is all just an excuse to post a music vid.
[youtube]BR4yQFZK9YM[/youtube]

[JacquesCuze]

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/2168 ... eliver.php

http://i.imgur.com/SRX3nPq.jpg

The Washington State Office of the Attorney General announced yesterday that it has filed what it believes to be America's first consumer protection lawsuit involving crowdfunding -- specifically, a Kickstarter campaign for a game.

The suit alleges that Edward J. Polchlepek III (aka Ed Nash) and his company, Altius Management, failed to make good on a successful Kickstarter campaign for Asylum Playing Cards.

The project beat its original $15,000 goal to raise $25,146 by the time it ended in October 2012. The Attorney General's office alleges Polchlepek and Altius collected the money and neglected to deliver either the cards or the various backer rewards. Some of those backers live in the state of Washington, which allows the state's legal team to get involved.

"Consumers need to be aware that crowdfunding is not without risk,” stated Washington State Attorney General Bob Ferguson in a press release announcing the lawsuit. “This lawsuit sends a clear message to people seeking the public’s money: Washington state will not tolerate crowdfunding theft. The Attorney General’s Office will hold those accountable who don’t play by the rules."

If you're curious, you can read the full text of the complaint on Scribd.

The outcome of this case could have significant ramifications for Kickstarter's popularity as a funding platform for game development. When contacted for comment by a Geekwire reporter, a Kickstarter representative issued the following statement:

"Tens of thousands of incredible projects have been brought to life through Kickstarter. We want every backer to have an amazing experience, and we’re frustrated when they don’t. We hope this process brings resolution and clarity to the backers of this project.

Images of the complaint are here:


The complaint mainly seems to be about their

+ failure to deliver
+ failure to refund

Often times I gather, when one State AG goes after someone, State AGs from other states pick up the trend and go after the same sorts of creeps in their own state. And by creep I am referring to Anita Sarkeesian.

[JacquesCuze]

I think you should be asking yourself what, if anything, that reddit forum being predominantly white male and atheist would change about the arguments. I personally think the arguments are not that good, but they'd still be not that good if a black female transvestite audience was making them.

Anyway, this is all just an excuse to post a music vid.
[youtube]BR4yQFZK9YM[/youtube]

I suspect mens rights reddit is predominantly white male and a significant amount are atheist. That's what past surveys have shown.

Are they that young? Do they lack that many LGBT members or POC? Probably not though. That's what past surveys have shown.

And that reddit aside since the survey is about reddit members, why shouldn't we thus assume that reddit survey can be projected onto all MRAs? I've certainly never seen older men in large numbers claim to be MRAs, and never women, and never gay men!

And more importantly, why should Zvan restrict herself to surveys that were not trolled? Why shouldn't Marcotte and others at FTB propagate and misinterpret and misrepresent these sorts of analysis. Aren't they entitled to their free speech? Why should MRAs and other skeptics who claim to support free speech oppress them so!?

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

Was the MRM ever a prominent player in the A/S community before EG? Because it seems those schadenfreude have given them more exposure than expected/deserved. Own goal, shot in the foot, arrow to the knee...?

[James Caruthers]

Here's one for the MRA's out there:

According to Russell Glasser:

MRA’s are approximately:

92% male
87% white
35% aged 17-20 (estimated overall median age 20)
70% no religion

http://freethoughtblogs.com/axp/2014/05 ... ous-nones/

Does this sound correct to those who have more knowledge of the MRA online world than I do?

I very rarely venture into the 'manosphere' but when I have done I didn't notice it to be particularly atheistic.

And are MRAs generally so young?

Glasser gets his information from Svan...
http://freethoughtblogs.com/almostdiamo ... -atheists/

...who in turn gets it from a self selected survey done on reddit

I can't see the original survey or results but there is a comment thread on reddit about it:

http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comm ... ts/cgopt0i

I guess it might be valid for the reddit group from whom it solicited answers, but for MRA's in general (which is how Glasser and Svan chose to extrapolate it to apply to) I don't see how you can use this (possibly trolled) survey to draw any conclusions.

Yeah, I've seen this before. It's bullshit. The survey isn't accurate.

Just think about it anyway. Think about how many christians and conservatives would call themselves MRA or identify with the MRAs on specific issues. It's like saying that 92% of liberals are white men. I can tell without looking that it's not true, because the goals of liberals and the goals of, say, black people or women intersect frequently. But how many black people or women are you going to find on Reddit in general? Yeah. You'd have better luck coordinating an MRA poll through YouTube, but that would take work. You'd have to message like 20 of the biggest MRA names, have them spread the survey to their audiences, wait a month for all the late-comers to vote. Maybe use an IP recognition system so each person only gets one vote, and make sure the MRAs themselves are willing to take the survey seriously, and watch out for feminists or trolls trying to use bots to skew results. It would take actual work.

When I google it, the only people taking the self-selected Reddit poll (Reddit does not account for anything close to 100% of MRAs, btw) seriously are Zvan and her friends. Because they are morons. Ignoring the bot, Reddit has a huge atheist population and everyone knows this. So you're not going to get the christians, conservatives, antifeminist women, antifeminist black men, etc who would all probably (when you look at their beliefs and values) be considered MRAs for the purposes of polling.

Something else that makes things more complicated is that MRA is a label, and some people who have MRA values or beliefs will choose not to use that label because they prefer to avoid labels or think a different label (PuA, MGTOW, nonfeminist, antifeminist) describes them better.

Of course, I wouldn't personally give a shit if all MRAs were men, or all feminists were women, since it doesn't have any bearing on whether or not they're right. It's an adhom. But someone like Zvan is desperate to prove that MRAs are more white cishet than the FTB audience (they're not) because she is bigoted and sexist. In her mind, the more white cishet males like something, but more evil and bad it is.

[James Caruthers]

Was the MRM ever a prominent player in the A/S community before EG? Because it seems those schadenfreude have given them more exposure than expected/deserved. Own goal, shot in the foot, arrow to the knee...?

Nah. I think ElevatorGate kick-started this whole atheist MRA thing in a big way. Because you trace back the values of the emerging A+ and Watsonites and suddenly you realize the problem is their kind of feminism, and some people responded by listening to the MRAs, because what the MRAs were saying was reasonable by comparison.

Suddenly, guys like Noel Plum and Thunderfoot had something in common with the MRAs.

I do kind of wonder if Amazing Atheist wasn't an MRA or at least antifeminist before this, because he made videos ragging on feminists way before it was cool. But then, he is the perfect fantasy MRA in the mind of Steffie Zvan. He is what she imagines all MRAs are. :lol:

[Walter Ego]

I want to thank everyone who has sent in a contribution to buy my bus ticket to Morris where I’m going to... talk reasonably with PZ in a sincere effort to make him see the error of his ways...]
Here are my expenses.
$200 bus fare
$100 hemorrhoid suppositories
$200 food and lodging.
$400 bail (if needed)
------
$900 total
-300 received so far
------
$600 still needed

Can I ask you privileged people to give up one night of drunken pub crawling or one day's nose candy to help with this worthy cause?

I've received another 2100 since my last post bringing to total to $200 ($700 short of what's needed). I wont mention any names but thanks for your help.

[James Caruthers]

https://shine.yahoo.com/healthy-living/ ... 54683.html

The lulz train continues as social justice warriorism spreads to more and more universities.

[real horrorshow]

https://shine.yahoo.com/healthy-living/ ... 54683.html

The lulz train continues as social justice warriorism spreads to more and more universities.

One response:

“Recognizing the fact that white men benefit from the kinds of racist and sexist structures on which American society is built isn’t meant to diminish his accomplishments. It’s meant to remind us that white men don’t have an inherent predilection for success — the odds have just been stacked in their favor.”

Yeah, and who stacked 'em? You can't have it both ways. If white men have managed to arrange the world in their own favour, isn't that proof that they do have "an inherent predilection for success"?

It's nicely ironic that Fortgang is of Jewish ancestry. Let's try the substitution test:

Jews don’t have an inherent predilection for success — the odds have just been stacked in their favor.

Oh dear, I think we have to call that a fail.

Oh dear

[debaser71]

Was the MRM ever a prominent player in the A/S community before EG? Because it seems those schadenfreude have given them more exposure than expected/deserved. Own goal, shot in the foot, arrow to the knee...?

Nah. I think ElevatorGate kick-started this whole atheist MRA thing in a big way. Because you trace back the values of the emerging A+ and Watsonites and suddenly you realize the problem is their kind of feminism, and some people responded by listening to the MRAs, because what the MRAs were saying was reasonable by comparison.

Suddenly, guys like Noel Plum and Thunderfoot had something in common with the MRAs.

I do kind of wonder if Amazing Atheist wasn't an MRA or at least antifeminist before this, because he made videos ragging on feminists way before it was cool. But then, he is the perfect fantasy MRA in the mind of Steffie Zvan. He is what she imagines all MRAs are. :lol:

There was one guy on IIDB (internet infidels...if you don't know about it...well you missed a lot) who's thing was railing against feminism, especially in Sweden. He was routinely mocked and made fun of. No one took him seriously. But from the few things I recall, he was right and practically everyone else on that forum had been a dipshit in their wrongness. I can't recall his tag atm...maybe 4 hours from now it'll pop into my head.

Aside from that, as far as I could tell, anyone talking bad about feminism or positively about men's rights was basically tarred and feathered as a right wing Rush Limbo fatass asshole or something in the A/S community.

[acathode]

Wait, FTBers take a freaking web-poll as some sort of statistical facts? How utterly fucking stupid are these people?!

Shouldn't basic knowledge about statistics, and esp. sampling, be pretty much mandatory to learn if you call yourself a skeptic? Gee, poll a subforum of web-forum that is where younger, white, decently educated men are overrepresented, and what a surprise - it turns out that the subforum is also dominated by young white men who don't believe in God (like many other young, white, well-educated men)!
Surely, that must mean that whatever subject/culture the subforum is about is also dominated by young white men... right?
and this guy sits as a host on a freaking atheist/skeptic TV-show... :suimouth:

FFS, they themselves have wrecked web-polls just for the fun of it, even if they completely failed absolute basic statistics, shouldn't they at least have learned something from that?!

[DownThunder]

Where are jewish people on the SJW scale of privilege? From opinions that I have seen, most SJW would side with palestinians in a middle east debate, however, for the most part SJW don't seem to touch it.

[rayshul]

Dawkins posted this. Relevant: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ali-a-riz ... 15218.html

[Southern]

I've found the most pointless perhaps POE on Twatter:

Ah, RobotAnna. I was doing a little research about the time of the start of Shit Reddit Says in conjunction with the timing of Elevatorgate, looking to see if that cultural influence had a bit to do with how Rebecca Watson started behaving. RobotAnna comes up prominately in the SRS story. Let's just say she has a lot of hate for her former self. Think A+ on steroids.

Oh, I finally remembered why "Anna the Robot" was ringing a familiar bell:

[youtube]zf2wbRWb9xI[/youtube]

Rest assured, she's (?) a parody.

[Parody Accountant]

I want to thank everyone who has sent in a contribution to buy my bus ticket to Morris where I’m going to... talk reasonably with PZ in a sincere effort to make him see the error of his ways...]
Here are my expenses.
$200 bus fare
$100 hemorrhoid suppositories
$200 food and lodging.
$400 bail (if needed)
------
$900 total
-300 received so far
------
$600 still needed

Can I ask you privileged people to give up one night of drunken pub crawling or one day's nose candy to help with this worthy cause?

I've received another 2100 since my last post bringing to total to $200 ($700 short of what's needed). I wont mention any names but thanks for your help.

Is there an option to pay you not to travel? Like, I want to buy you food and all. Or booze and drugs. Or mental health counseling (no shame there). Or Perhaps a math tutor (yes, you should feel shame here).

[JacquesCuze]

Where are jewish people on the SJW scale of privilege? From opinions that I have seen, most SJW would side with palestinians in a middle east debate, however, for the most part SJW don't seem to touch it.

http://i.imgur.com/2BSXLcN.jpg

You can decide for yourself if this chart is parody or not. When I've seen it it's usually seemed fairly sincere and serious, but not always.

It might be a hoax.

[Badger3k]

What strikes me is that, from memory, the info given on that MRA bit seems to fit the average reader of FTB pretty well.

[real horrorshow]

Where are jewish people on the SJW scale of privilege? From opinions that I have seen, most SJW would side with palestinians in a middle east debate, however, for the most part SJW don't seem to touch it.

Well, what Jacques posted. Also, yes, on the basis of the SJW knee-jerk of 'anything the US government supports is bad, therefore it's opponents are good'. they're probably pro-Palestinian. However, most of the real bottom-feeders of the SJ World, like the ones of which the 'Pit takes most notice, have a tremendously hard time giving a shit about anything that doesn't affect them personally. Hence the unforgivable power of Dawkin's 'Dear Muslima' to Beckybooze.

I used Jews as an example in my 'substitution test' because of Fortgang's ancestry and because Jews are both an acknowledged 'oppressed minority' and also accused by racists/anti-semites of having stacked the odds in their favour. As others have pointed out, if you substitute 'white male' for some other minority (and globally white people are a minority) the appalling bias and bigotry of the SJWs becomes more clear.

[another lurker]

@Rayshul

the line is from the 2 Live Crew masterpiece 'Hey, we want some pussy'


[youtube]E9sTv-g4-5w[/youtube]

[JacquesCuze]

I posted a semi-polite note on Glaser's blog informing him he was personally an epic fail by mistaking a web poll about redditors for accurate information about mras and then discussing why, it was in moderation for several hours but now I can't see it and it looks as though he just deleted it, without updating his post to note his mistake.

Glaser also wrote this

If you’ve been listening to The Non-Prophets in the past year (and if not, why not??) then you already know that we are no fans of the so called “Men’s Rights” movement. Occasionally the MRA movement might support a worthwhile principle purely by accident, but in practice it is primarily a movement which is to gender as White Pride groups are to race. The civil rights activist organization Southern Poverty Law Center classifies several MRA sites as hate groups.

But that's another old canard, what the SPLC says is this:
http://www.splcenter.org/blog/2012/05/1 ... activists/

It should be mentioned that the SPLC did not label MRAs as members of a hate movement; nor did our article claim that the grievances they air on their websites – false rape accusations, ruinous divorce settlements and the like – are all without merit. But we did call out specific examples of misogyny and the threat, overt or implicit, of violence.

Beats me why so FTBers so easily and willingly spread misinformation and lies. Surely makes me want to believe skeptics and atheists at other times.

[DaveDodo007]

Here's one for the MRA's out there:

According to Russell Glasser:

MRA’s are approximately:

92% male
87% white
35% aged 17-20 (estimated overall median age 20)
70% no religion

http://freethoughtblogs.com/axp/2014/05 ... ous-nones/

Does this sound correct to those who have more knowledge of the MRA online world than I do?

I very rarely venture into the 'manosphere' but when I have done I didn't notice it to be particularly atheistic.

And are MRAs generally so young?

Glasser gets his information from Svan...
http://freethoughtblogs.com/almostdiamo ... -atheists/

...who in turn gets it from a self selected survey done on reddit

I can't see the original survey or results but there is a comment thread on reddit about it:

http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comm ... ts/cgopt0i

I guess it might be valid for the reddit group from whom it solicited answers, but for MRA's in general (which is how Glasser and Svan chose to extrapolate it to apply to) I don't see how you can use this (possibly trolled) survey to draw any conclusions.

OK I'll bite. Feel free to tell me why I should take anything the lying delusional ideological twats say seriously. Please show me were they have let science and evidence be the judge of some disputed facts. Feel free to show me were free discussion was allowed to take place what ever the outcome. show me were even the smallest of opposition is given a voice without them getting both barrels of feminism/SJW buckshot. I will throw my support behind right wing religious freaks before I have anything to do with ideologues and anti free speech retarded fuckwits. Feminism and SJW is at a basic level just about being horrified that some male somewhere on the planet was for a moment enjoying himself for a short while. Feminism is an evil shit ideology and SJW is an evil shit ideology and if you haven't figured this out by now you are a retard.

[James Caruthers]

What strikes me is that, from memory, the info given on that MRA bit seems to fit the average reader of FTB pretty well.

YEP :cdc:

Ironic that the MRA community probably has more non-whites by percentage than FTB.

My TL: DR post on the ethnic makeup of MRAs and problems of collecting data is in quotes for your convenience. Skip it if you wish.

In fact, when you factor in the black community and how black men were using MRA talking points within their communities well before Men's Rights took off online (I'm talking late eighties into nineties), I'm fairly confident the ethnic profile of MRAs or people with MRA values would shock Zvan, Glasser et al. The backlash to feminism has been building since the '70s, and it isn't all butthurt, socially conservative Pat Robertsons. But there haven't been good studies done because feminists want to in equal parts ignore and ridicule MRAs. So they'll cite a (biased, untrue) internet poll that allows them to mock MRAs, but have no interest in knowing what the real ethnic makeup is.

I suspect women are the majority of feminists, and white women the majority of those, but I would not assume such a thing is true. For example, it seems men are the majority of FTB visitors, probably because men are greatly over-represented within atheism and on internet discussion boards. You have to go beyond the internet and your subset of atheists if you want meaningful statistics on the makeup of an ideological movement. Not every guy who is fed up with the dating scene or who was boned by child custody laws is going to go online and become an MRA, and not every woman who is called a chill girl gender traitor for disagreeing with a feminist is going to become the next GirlWritesWhat. The question of where an "MRA" begins and ends is also nebulous. I suppose we can go by self-identification, but that excludes the nonfeminists, antifeminists, MGTOW and traditionalists who all would vote "MRA" if it were a matter of passing bills or making changes in law. So they are effectively MRA even if they choose to not use that word.

Just as a liberal man who votes in favor of feminist laws is essentially a feminist by his actions.

I think the question of the ethnic makeup of MRAs is an interesting one. I would be very interesting in knowing the answer to this. However, to get anything like an accurate percentage would require a massive online and offline organizing campaign, with multiple checks and balances to ensure people are counted. When you say "are you a feminist," people instantly know exactly what you mean, and what some common values might be to all feminists. When you ask an average person "are you an MRA," a lot of them won't know what the fuck you are talking about. A traditionalist or MGTOW might say no, and the assumption by the pollers is that this person is a feminist or would never support MRAs, which is of course silly.

[justinvacula]

Goat heads on statues, in good time

Posted by Damion Reinhardt on May 2, 2014

http://www.skepticink.com/backgroundpro ... good-time/



Clearly, it's heads on goats time :)

[James Caruthers]

DaveDodo, you actually summed up WHY ElevatorGate sparked off this sympathy move towards MRAs and away from Feminsim in the A/S community. When one side is constantly lying and distorting, the other side doesn't have to be perfect or even right a lot of the time. By virtue of not being crazy pathological liars, the MRM was able to draw in a ton of sympathy and support. Atheists got disgusted with the Mean Girls Clique and threw their support behind the people mocking them.

Sort of like how Al Sharpton convinces liberals to become nonpartisan or moderate, after seeing the way he slobbers Obama cock and defends the most heinous shit, just because a liberal is doing it.

[justinvacula]

People express different views during 'Circle the Square with Prayer' in W-B

http://citizensvoice.com/news/people-ex ... -1.1678915

Now with 42 comments!

This is quite the 'gem'

God answers all prayers. Just sometimes he says "no."

[SoylentAtheist]

That's a common theory on how it began,

And I can assure you that if the US had early cut off hours, our young adult population would react in the same way. Get smashed early so that they can last the night. Flasks & sneaking booze would probably become a much bigger thing.

but opening hours have been greatly relaxed for many years now. There was a hope that this would introduce a 'cafe culture' a fantasy of how French or Italian people are supposed to drink - slowly over a long period. However most of Britain doesn't really have the climate for that.

For how many years? A culture like that isn't going to change over night. The ones that started off that way, will tend to continue that way. And the ones walking into the scene might relax, but they will tend to follow what everyone else is doing.

[SoylentAtheist]

Dependent on the city a lot of campus bars in the UK struggle, especially since the NUS became more fractious.

In Southampton the city started undercutting the student bars about ten years ago, so they get most of the business. It has not been great for parts of town, though. Living in America now it surprises me how much of a taboo booze is. Sure, people drink, but there's an attitude towards alcohol I'd describe as tinged with puritanism. It's certainly not as relaxed as home.

Most Americans have to drive to the bars & back. That kind of puts a throttle on how much we drink. A DUI (or OVI) is .08 BAC in most states, which is rather low.

There are some parties where you might drink heavily & crash the night at someone's house. But for the most part, people are going to keep it moderate unless they have a designated driver.

[ConcentratedH2O, OM]

http://i.imgur.com/J7WZufh.png
:D :) :) :D

http://i.imgur.com/wp8HM1v.png
:lol: :D :lol: :lol: :lol: :clap: :clap: :) :D :D :lol: :lol: :lol: :clap: :clap: :lol: :lol: :lol:

[ConcentratedH2O, OM]

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... /#comments

[SoylentAtheist]

I've found the most pointless perhaps POE on Twatter:

Ah, RobotAnna. I was doing a little research about the time of the start of Shit Reddit Says in conjunction with the timing of Elevatorgate, looking to see if that cultural influence had a bit to do with how Rebecca Watson started behaving. RobotAnna comes up prominately in the SRS story. Let's just say she has a lot of hate for her former self. Think A+ on steroids.

Oh, I finally remembered why "Anna the Robot" was ringing a familiar bell:

[youtube]zf2wbRWb9xI[/youtube]

Rest assured, she's (?) a parody.

trans. And If you say parody, then I would have to say parody to the extent the person doesn't know where the parody ends and the real person begins.

[ConcentratedH2O, OM]

Is there an option to pay you not to travel? Like, I want to buy you food and all. Or booze and drugs. Or mental health counseling (no shame there). Or Perhaps a math tutor (yes, you should feel shame here).

When Walter appears here, I always feel like I'm sat in a bar and some guy dressed in short-shorts and a shirt made out of plastic beads has just walked in and started taking a dump in the corner of the room, while shouting "fuck you" over his shoulder at 'someone', and occasionally attempting to chew through his own elbow joint.

[welch]

Here's one for the MRA's out there:

According to Russell Glasser:

MRA’s are approximately:

92% male
87% white
35% aged 17-20 (estimated overall median age 20)
70% no religion

http://freethoughtblogs.com/axp/2014/05 ... ous-nones/

Does this sound correct to those who have more knowledge of the MRA online world than I do?

I very rarely venture into the 'manosphere' but when I have done I didn't notice it to be particularly atheistic.

And are MRAs generally so young?

Glasser gets his information from Svan...
http://freethoughtblogs.com/almostdiamo ... -atheists/

...who in turn gets it from a self selected survey done on reddit

I can't see the original survey or results but there is a comment thread on reddit about it:

http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comm ... ts/cgopt0i

I guess it might be valid for the reddit group from whom it solicited answers, but for MRA's in general (which is how Glasser and Svan chose to extrapolate it to apply to) I don't see how you can use this (possibly trolled) survey to draw any conclusions.

Glaser is an idiot.

It's a survey of redditors that subscribe to /r/mensrights. It's young because redditors are young.

It was also hit very hard by a reddit trolls and bot, and even Zvan acknowledges that /r/mr folks say that specifically. Zvan just lies and pretends that she can unbot the trolls work. But even the reddit group /r/againstmensrights laughed at how borked the survey is and how it doesn't reflect past surveys.

I am sure /r/mensrights IS young, and to the extend most people hit by most mens rights issues these days are in college or fathers, then yeah, I bet mens rightsers tend to be younger in general.

Past surveys though showed the /r/mensrights group to be more diverse in terms of LGBT membership then reddit as a whole. I am not sure how it stacked up in terms of racial or ethnic characteristics.

Marcotte/Zvan used that survey to create some theory about something:

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/04/15/c ... thout-god/

I take Zvan at her word she is an analyst. I can't say she is particularly astute and she is certainly not honest.

I'm always torn. I mean, I expect them to do this, right? because it's what they do.

But for a group of people who get the fucking vapors about bad surveys and polls, and to then just accept a really shitty one because it tells them what they want to hear?

Really?

[welch]

I think you should be asking yourself what, if anything, that reddit forum being predominantly white male and atheist would change about the arguments. I personally think the arguments are not that good, but they'd still be not that good if a black female transvestite audience was making them.

Anyway, this is all just an excuse to post a music vid.
[youtube]BR4yQFZK9YM[/youtube]

well, they're not talking about their arguments. They're using the results of the poll sans any rational analysis to prove their points.

[welch]

I posted a semi-polite note on Glaser's blog informing him he was personally an epic fail by mistaking a web poll about redditors for accurate information about mras and then discussing why, it was in moderation for several hours but now I can't see it and it looks as though he just deleted it, without updating his post to note his mistake.

Glaser also wrote this

If you’ve been listening to The Non-Prophets in the past year (and if not, why not??) then you already know that we are no fans of the so called “Men’s Rights” movement. Occasionally the MRA movement might support a worthwhile principle purely by accident, but in practice it is primarily a movement which is to gender as White Pride groups are to race. The civil rights activist organization Southern Poverty Law Center classifies several MRA sites as hate groups.

But that's another old canard, what the SPLC says is this:
http://www.splcenter.org/blog/2012/05/1 ... activists/

It should be mentioned that the SPLC did not label MRAs as members of a hate movement; nor did our article claim that the grievances they air on their websites – false rape accusations, ruinous divorce settlements and the like – are all without merit. But we did call out specific examples of misogyny and the threat, overt or implicit, of violence.

Beats me why so FTBers so easily and willingly spread misinformation and lies. Surely makes me want to believe skeptics and atheists at other times.

Because they make the very concept of disagreeing with them the mark of a dangerous and hateful person.

Saves them a lot of time.

[welch]

I posted a semi-polite note on Glaser's blog informing him he was personally an epic fail by mistaking a web poll about redditors for accurate information about mras and then discussing why, it was in moderation for several hours but now I can't see it and it looks as though he just deleted it, without updating his post to note his mistake.

Glaser also wrote this

If you’ve been listening to The Non-Prophets in the past year (and if not, why not??) then you already know that we are no fans of the so called “Men’s Rights” movement. Occasionally the MRA movement might support a worthwhile principle purely by accident, but in practice it is primarily a movement which is to gender as White Pride groups are to race. The civil rights activist organization Southern Poverty Law Center classifies several MRA sites as hate groups.

But that's another old canard, what the SPLC says is this:
http://www.splcenter.org/blog/2012/05/1 ... activists/

It should be mentioned that the SPLC did not label MRAs as members of a hate movement; nor did our article claim that the grievances they air on their websites – false rape accusations, ruinous divorce settlements and the like – are all without merit. But we did call out specific examples of misogyny and the threat, overt or implicit, of violence.

Beats me why so FTBers so easily and willingly spread misinformation and lies. Surely makes me want to believe skeptics and atheists at other times.

Because they make the very concept of disagreeing with them the mark of a dangerous and hateful person.

Saves them a lot of time.

[Really?]

Here's the first comment on the thread:

Alverant
2 May 2014 at 10:20 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
I liked the Sunday Funnies posts until she stopped them. I’m not sure why though. I read that post about Weinstein being called an Atheist. I’m not sure if I’d call it a defamation, but in light of how Atheists are perceived in this country and the intent Fox News had in calling him an Atheist then I would say it was meant to be a defamation.

I wasn’t a regular reader or commentor on her blog so I’m not sure what exactly drove her away. But I will say that maybe we as a group here on FTB shouldn’t be so harsh in our criticisms of each other and be nicer to each other even if we disagree.

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand here's the third comment on the post, only eight minutes later:

http://i.imgur.com/J7WZufh.png

An FTB commenter implores FTB allies to treat other atheists with more respect, and PZ shits in his or her face. Awesome.

[Badger3k]

But....PZ....you are in the forefront of objecting to criticism of your positions and views. Does this mean you will let people who object or have something critical to say about your pet ideologies/etc post on your blog and express their criticism?