:naughty:Charles MacGruder wrote:The Steersman "nigger" conversation is such an easily ignorable mind virus, a conversation few here really want to be infected with. But look, now I've done it. I won't do it again. But here we are.
The flaws of human nature standing in the way of utopia.
It makes me long for the days of hammers and screwdrivers.John Greg wrote:Anyone who at this late date gets sucked into to the chthonic void of hell that is the Steers/nigger rhetorical black hole should be sentenced to a 100 comment "conversation" about reality with Latsot. It's endless, circular, and it matters not a whit, not a solitary, microscopic whit what you say: Steersmachine don't hear.
Well, good for you; you're not as narrow-minded and pig-headed as I've thought.CaptainFluffyBunny wrote:Well, FFS. Pop into the pit on my phone, and not logged in, so no Steersman block. And this little turd on the screen.Steersman wrote:I would be interested to know if either you or she had actually read, with any comprehension at all, the article titled "The semantics of slurs: A refutation of coreferentialism" And likewise about the Chris Rock - a black guy, I might note (again) - YouTube videos I've linked to several times.CaptainFluffyBunny wrote:Or simply run his arguments around your favorite POC. I showed one of Steersman's rants to my niece, a young lady that is undeniably African-American. She was not impressed. It really is a WTF moment when you read some of his justifications out loud to someone that is actually affected by the word.
Okay, Steersman, I did read this little screed. ....
True. But in 1900 the famous British scientist William Thompson (Lord Kelvin) "famously proclaimed that physics was over, except for two small clouds on the horizon" - which turned out to be quantum mechanics, and relativity. And there is no end of similar howlers from equally prestigious scientists over the years.CaptainFluffyBunny wrote:First, let me point out I can pull out that I can find some climatologists that dispute global warming. ...
So you're saying that only if you're a member of a group can you insult members of the group with that type of epithet? Looks kind of racist or sexist to me. Reminds me that Josh - the Official Spokesgay - called another gay guy an "uncle Mary", which I thought kind of cool - two insults for the price of one. But I assume it was intended to suggest that the other fellow wasn't really being a team player. Now one might question whether the team is always on the right side of history, but assuming they are then it seems reasonable to throw a stone or two at those letting down the side. Which those outside that group might also reasonably do as well.CaptainFluffyBunny wrote:Second, while the author fairly convincingly makes the case (although so many typos in a paper set off alarm bells) that using the term "nigger" does not necessarily refer to all blacks, but a subset of blacks that fail to behave lawfully or morally, he uses this word AS USED BY OTHER BLACK PEOPLE. Nowhere does he say or imply that it is okay, not racist, or acceptable for YOU to use the word. ....
You've now joined the FreeThought police? I'll use it - and related terms - where and when I think them appropriate: Michael Brown? - stupid ass nigger. The hasidic (?) jews who couldn't turn off the fucking stove because of it being a day of no work and which led to the death of some kids? - stupid ass kikes. D.G. Grothe joking about a rather brutal gang rape of Sacha (?) Pixlee? - stupid ass faggot. Stephanie Zvan refusing to engage with criticism of her SJWarriorism & feminism? - stupid ass cunt. [Did I miss anyone? Next time ....]CaptainFluffyBunny wrote:TL:DR Don't ever use the word "nigger" unless you are a black person.
:lol: So sticking your head in the sand, or some other place where the sun don't shine, means that everyone else doesn't see what you don't want to see? How old did you say you were?CaptainFluffyBunny wrote:Also, unless someone quotes your follow-up equivocations, I ain't gonna see it.
It's kind of irresistible at times, kind of like picking at itchy scabs...CaptainFluffyBunny wrote:Yeah, and the worst thing is, I knew it and did it anyway. Double derp with derp sauce. I had read Croom, though, and I hate to see pitsters, even Steers, go full Carrier. Mea culpa.John Greg wrote:Anyone who at this late date gets sucked into to the chthonic void of hell that is the Steers/nigger rhetorical black hole should be sentenced to a 100 comment "conversation" about reality with Latsot. It's endless, circular, and it matters not a whit, not a solitary, microscopic whit what you say: Steersmachine don't hear.
I'm just cranky and sad that I didn't get Jadestalked. Although that sounds bad...
http://i.imgur.com/yF5Bt7i.pngBillie from Ockham wrote:Oh, I'm done with kittens. It's now baby pandas. And I'm not killing them, either. I'm making them wish for death.feathers wrote:Oh great, we're in the nigger discussion again. Soon wotsisname will have to start killng kitties again.
http://conservationbiology.uw.edu/resea ... elephants/Brive1987 wrote:Put another way. After 6 years Hensley is barely keeping a sad series of self perpetuating meetup going. She should have been in a position where she had hired her own part time event coord while she chaired a committee structure and sat on peer organisation DC chapter councils or boards
Instead she turned DC into a feminist backwater personal sandpit
There is a reason she hasn't been poached after all these years ....
And you really see this difference when you compare the politics of anti-SJW with the politics of SJW.Kirbmarc wrote:Some of them may not realize it, but their theories are basically thinly-veiled attempts to justify the censorship of opinions they don't like.You idiot. Of course it does harm. It tells people that, if you belong to a category of people we don't want to offend, or claim to speak on behalf of a category of people we don't want to offend, then you have a veto over anything we might want to say or do.
Meanwhile, Ally Fogg is insisting to other categories of people that they don't get to be offended no matter what people say or do to them, and when the double standard is pointed out in the comments, blithely admits "I’m not that interested in equality".
The difference between SJWs and their critics is all about the authoritarianism.
http://s2.quickmeme.com/img/c0/c03e3f88 ... 84593a.jpgDick Strawkins wrote: As for steersman claiming that Jadehawk might have had a point about the slymepit posting some questionable stuff, I think his opinion on the matter would have carried a little more weight if he himself had not been the one who wrote the comments that were held up as exhibit A in condemning the slymepit.
:lol: :lol: :lol: :clap:fuzzy wrote:http://i.imgur.com/yF5Bt7i.pngBillie from Ockham wrote:Oh, I'm done with kittens. It's now baby pandas. And I'm not killing them, either. I'm making them wish for death.feathers wrote:Oh great, we're in the nigger discussion again. Soon wotsisname will have to start killng kitties again.
Do the SJWs know about facts of the matter? Of course not, since they exist in their own self-styled “safe spaces†where it's discouraged to allow people to see the evidence for themselves, trigger warnings, don't go there it's evil, don't go there or we ban you et cetera. What they see is a distorted or perverted version, or the facts are indeed concealed. For example, here is the often linked to RationalWiki article about Elevatorgate. Guess which part is missing. Amazingly, the very thing that set off the real Elevatorgate of all things is omitted. There's nothing of Rebecca Watson's Rape Culture nuke out of nowhere towards members in the audience (speficially Stef McGraw). Besides, I petitioned them to correct the article a week ago, but nothing happened. I'll wait a few more days, then will change the article myself.AronRa wrote:[12m34] in the mindset of religious extremists, whether you believe it matters more than whether it is true. Creationism is a form of religious extremism and it is critical to the fundamentalist that studends believe in the sacred fables and not understand or even know about the actual facts of the matter, which cannot be evaluated honestly but instead must be distorted, or perverted, or concealed.
[…]
[13m59s] So we’re dealing with the position that is neither honesty, credibility nor accountability, where the ends justify the means and where it doesn’t matter what the facts are – because it doesn’t matter what the truth is. All that matters is whether they can make people believe a required conclusion with no demonstrable truth in it.
[talks about pre-school kids, how to build faith]
[Homeschooling to...] keep them away from “the world†and all its evil influences. They actually talk like that. There are the things of the world and all that is bad. And they are not of the world and need to keep themselves separate and stay out of it, live in a bubble of dream-like nonsense, like strawberry fields, where nothing is real.
Nerd culture is big industry now. They have to build hype somehow. Simply putting out a good product and selling it with word of mouth and positive press is sooo 1980s.debaser71 wrote:You know when I was a kid I'd go to my local Comic Book Convention at some cruddy Holiday Inn. There were no people dressed up in bikini's pretending to be super heroes. It was just a place to go to buy comics that were hard to find in the local stores. These days CONS are big parties with serious political overtones. Do people still buy and sell comic books at comic book conventions? I feel like this trend of CONS is going to end soon. YMMV.
At least it wasn't the trampoline gang this time.Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:My 2009 drummer got assaulted at his place yesterday, along with his singer, by 3 masked guys. Beaten with a gun's cross while being threatened to have his tongue cut off. Turns out the former flat tenant was a drug dealer as well as a peddler in stolen cars. Police advice: don't go back to the flat, like, ever. 24 sutures to the face.
2015 is a fucking charming year, isn't it?
James Caruthers wrote:Nerd culture is big industry now. They have to build hype somehow. Simply putting out a good product and selling it with word of mouth and positive press is sooo 1980s.debaser71 wrote:You know when I was a kid I'd go to my local Comic Book Convention at some cruddy Holiday Inn. There were no people dressed up in bikini's pretending to be super heroes. It was just a place to go to buy comics that were hard to find in the local stores. These days CONS are big parties with serious political overtones. Do people still buy and sell comic books at comic book conventions? I feel like this trend of CONS is going to end soon. YMMV.
fuzzy wrote:http://i.imgur.com/yF5Bt7i.pngBillie from Ockham wrote:Oh, I'm done with kittens. It's now baby pandas. And I'm not killing them, either. I'm making them wish for death.feathers wrote:Oh great, we're in the nigger discussion again. Soon wotsisname will have to start killng kitties again.
Was I the only one to read this as Social Justice Euthanist friends?Aneris wrote:
.... This passage reminded me of our Social Justice Enthusiast friends from the other side of the aisle.
snip
I noticed.rayshul wrote:Honey Badgers just pulled over 10k pretty much in a day.
The point is the Mirror article. Aunty Sarah is aiming to be the first polyamorous elected person.comhcinc wrote:what is your point?
1234 wrote:The point is the Mirror article. Aunty Sarah is aiming to be the first polyamorous elected person.comhcinc wrote:what is your point?
He/ she is a lib dem - they are very unpopular.
There is friction between the trans and the TERFs :
I'm kinda rooting for AuntySarah - he/she seems like a nice person, but also its peak SJW to deny sex differences. Not keen on his vehement science denialism.
Jon Gaunt is a right wing shock jock, bit of a twat.
It's come up several times.AndrewV69 wrote:I noticed.rayshul wrote:Honey Badgers just pulled over 10k pretty much in a day.
I also wonder if they explored the Canadian Human Rights Commission angle. My understanding is you really do not want them after you at all.
WTF am I doing here?Steersman wrote: Well, good for you; you're not as narrow-minded and pig-headed as I've thought.
True. But in 1900 the famous British scientist William Thompson (Lord Kelvin) "famously proclaimed that physics was over, except for two small clouds on the horizon" - which turned out to be quantum mechanics, and relativity. And there is no end of similar howlers from equally prestigious scientists over the years.CaptainFluffyBunny wrote:First, let me point out I can pull out that I can find some climatologists that dispute global warming. ...
So you're saying that only if you're a member of a group can you insult members of the group with that type of epithet? Looks kind of racist or sexist to me. Reminds me that Josh - the Official Spokesgay - called another gay guy an "uncle Mary", which I thought kind of cool - two insults for the price of one. But I assume it was intended to suggest that the other fellow wasn't really being a team player. Now one might question whether the team is always on the right side of history, but assuming they are then it seems reasonable to throw a stone or two at those letting down the side. Which those outside that group might also reasonably do as well.CaptainFluffyBunny wrote:Second, while the author fairly convincingly makes the case (although so many typos in a paper set off alarm bells) that using the term "nigger" does not necessarily refer to all blacks, but a subset of blacks that fail to behave lawfully or morally, he uses this word AS USED BY OTHER BLACK PEOPLE. Nowhere does he say or imply that it is okay, not racist, or acceptable for YOU to use the word. ....
You've now joined the FreeThought police? I'll use it - and related terms - where and when I think them appropriate: Michael Brown? - stupid ass nigger. The hasidic (?) jews who couldn't turn off the fucking stove because of it being a day of no work and which led to the death of some kids? - stupid ass kikes. D.G. Grothe joking about a rather brutal gang rape of Sacha (?) Pixlee? - stupid ass faggot. Stephanie Zvan refusing to engage with criticism of her SJWarriorism & feminism? - stupid ass cunt. [Did I miss anyone? Next time ....]CaptainFluffyBunny wrote:TL:DR Don't ever use the word "nigger" unless you are a black person.
The point is, again, that no group is without its problematic subgroups which the "supergroup" is going to be most cognizant of, and who will use such epithets to apply moral sanctions of one form or another. Rather clueless, and not particularly credible, for the larger society to refrain from using those words for the same purposes.
:lol: So sticking your head in the sand, or some other place where the sun don't shine, means that everyone else doesn't see what you don't want to see? How old did you say you were?CaptainFluffyBunny wrote:Also, unless someone quotes your follow-up equivocations, I ain't gonna see it.
Sometimes I worry about people like us (and concH20).John Greg wrote:Kiwi, no, I briefly saw Euthanasiast, before I auto-corrected.
Except he/she isn't. Dod you even read that story before you posted it?1234 wrote:The point is the Mirror article. Aunty Sarah is aiming to be the first polyamorous elected person.comhcinc wrote:what is your point?
comhcinc wrote:1234 wrote:The point is the Mirror article. Aunty Sarah is aiming to be the first polyamorous elected person.comhcinc wrote:what is your point?
He/ she is a lib dem - they are very unpopular.
There is friction between the trans and the TERFs :
I'm kinda rooting for AuntySarah - he/she seems like a nice person, but also its peak SJW to deny sex differences. Not keen on his vehement science denialism.
Jon Gaunt is a right wing shock jock, bit of a twat.
..............and your point?
Curtains are twitching in a small town where an unusual trio have become unlikely minor celebrities in the General Election.
At first glance there’s nothing peculiar about the three women in bright yellow out on the campaign trail.
But the Lib Dem threesome are more than just canvassing buddies and they’re aiming to make a bit of political history into the bargain.
Parliamentary candidate Zoe O’Connell, 37, is bidding to be Britain’s first polyamorous MP – which means she lives in a three-way lesbian Ârelationship with her two canvassers Sarah Brown, 41, and Sylvia Knight, 39.
And if that seems to be as far fetched as a Tory manifesto, then consider this: Zoe and Sarah used to be MEN. And Sarah and Sylvia were once a straight married couple before her sex change.
So it’s no wonder the trio – nicknamed “the leaflet delivery cult†by locals – have got tongues wagging in their constituency in the run-up to polling day.
But that doesn’t bother Westminster hopeful Zoe. In fact the complex personal life and happiness of her and her lovers is at the forefront of her campaign.
http://i1.mirror.co.uk/incoming/article ... onnell.jpg
http://img.prntscr.com/img?url=http://i ... bk2yg1.pngbhoytony wrote:Dod you even read that story before you posted it?
Your opinion is just as wrong as Steersman's argument for why "nigger" can be used by whites and not be racist.James Caruthers wrote:Aeon Flux probably had as many misses as hits, but it was daring and new and the hits were some of the best work done in the genre to date.
I will accept no disagreement unless you can somehow work the word "nigger" in there.
http://files.sharenator.com/77320.jpgJames Caruthers wrote:Aeon Flux probably had as many misses as hits, but it was daring and new and the hits were some of the best work done in the genre to date.
I will accept no disagreement unless you can somehow work the word "nigger" in there.
omg ignored!Kirbmarc wrote:Your opinion is just as wrong as Steersman's argument for why "nigger" can be used by whites and not be racist.James Caruthers wrote:Aeon Flux probably had as many misses as hits, but it was daring and new and the hits were some of the best work done in the genre to date.
I will accept no disagreement unless you can somehow work the word "nigger" in there.
(I've never seen Aeon Flux. I just felt challenged and couldn't resist. :mrgreen: )
So am I. What is your fucking point?1234 wrote:
They are like Richard Carrier. Seems to be the new big thing in identity politics!
http://www.snickers.com/Resources/image ... ickers.jpgcomhcinc wrote:So am I. What is your fucking point?1234 wrote:
They are like Richard Carrier. Seems to be the new big thing in identity politics!
comhcinc wrote:So am I. What is your fucking point?1234 wrote:
They are like Richard Carrier. Seems to be the new big thing in identity politics!
DW Adams wrote:comhcinc wrote:So am I. What is your fucking point?1234 wrote:
They are like Richard Carrier. Seems to be the new big thing in identity politics!
http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9 ... MIIzy0LJa-
I think the film was way better than the cartoon series. If it had any flaw, it was only the absence of Walter Koenig in a supporting role, though some might not find Mr Koenig germane to this discussion.James Caruthers wrote:Aeon Flux probably had as many misses as hits, but it was daring and new and the hits were some of the best work done in the genre to date.
I will accept no disagreement unless you can somehow work the word "nigger" in there.
Hey, if I wanted to have someone tell me I'm to be worried about,I'd leave the Pit and go talk to my wife.KiwiInOz wrote:Sometimes I worry about people like us (and concH20).John Greg wrote:Kiwi, no, I briefly saw Euthanasiast, before I auto-corrected.
:shifty:
The film is horrible and totally unlike the cartoon.twocunts wrote:I think the film was way better than the cartoon series. If it had any flaw, it was only the absence of Walter Koenig in a supporting role, though some might not find Mr Koenig germane to this discussion.James Caruthers wrote:Aeon Flux probably had as many misses as hits, but it was daring and new and the hits were some of the best work done in the genre to date.
I will accept no disagreement unless you can somehow work the word "nigger" in there.
(Sorry to be so contrived)
(I've also never seen anything except the film which I thought was quite poor)
Sounds to me like both sides of this discussion are retarded.comhcinc wrote:So on twitter #feministareugly has cause a bunch of people to post pictures of women and say "oh yeah?"
It's awesome.
My impression was that FTB regulars, PZ Myers and Ophelia Benson were ignorant about “Ogvorbis II — the Babysitter†part and for some reason always assumed the controversy was about “Ogvorbis I — the Boyscoutâ€. In reality, at least for me, it was not even about that the second one, but about the community reaction to the Babysitter part. Later, it seemed to have dawned on them, and then there was some mild acknowledgement that it indeed happened, but then — curiously — they demanded to be compassionate with him. He was a decent guy, it was claimed, and they could see from the internet that he would never do anything like it again, and as such nobody must be warned or anything done about it, and of course no need for introspection why this time a confessed rapist before their very eyes gets love and hugs...but everyone else (with no such bizarre situation) is rape apologist.Kirbmarc wrote:Careful there, I used the same argument and Tony! The Queer Shoop called me a "fucknugget"."Is there even the slightest evidence of any pharyngula regular either admitting rape or supporting an admitted rapist?"
Well PZ, Ashley Miller and Jadehawk?
Is there?
Ogvorbis is totally just a brainwashed victim and there can be no discussion about his degree of responsibility, what he could do to set things right instead of receiving pounce hugs, and whether it isn't just a tad hypocritical to accuse others of supporting rapists when they merely support the idea of "innocent until proven guilty" and of a legal standard decided upon by the legal system and not by bloggers, while you actually supported a self-confessed rapist in your midst.
That's like totally ablist of you or something.James Caruthers wrote:Sounds to me like both sides of this discussion are retarded.comhcinc wrote:So on twitter #feministareugly has cause a bunch of people to post pictures of women and say "oh yeah?"
It's awesome.
Aneris wrote:
That's all nice and interesting (and truly bizarre), but I still don't get why the US secular movement altogether is that obtuse and obviously fact-challenged. How can people be that idiotic? How can “skeptics†be such obtuse, thinking-impaired nitwits? I've now checked it over and over again, made a transcript, checked the contexts, and there is no room for interpretation or spinning dancers or other such nonsense. /rant
I think that may be part of it. Another part is that there are a lot of posers. People that don't care so much about the movement as much as they just want to be apart of something. That is why petty shit becomes so important. They don't care if they damage the movement because they will just move on to something else.Tribble wrote:Aneris wrote:
That's all nice and interesting (and truly bizarre), but I still don't get why the US secular movement altogether is that obtuse and obviously fact-challenged. How can people be that idiotic? How can “skeptics†be such obtuse, thinking-impaired nitwits? I've now checked it over and over again, made a transcript, checked the contexts, and there is no room for interpretation or spinning dancers or other such nonsense. /rant
Let me just sum it up for you. America is profoundly anti-intellectual and has been this way for most of US history. The reasons are complex, part religious, part the demographics of the original settlers, some other reasons.
But, that's our bottom-line. And becoming secular doesn't change that. Becoming an atheist doesn't change that. This is deeply ingrained culture.
That's true for the feminist/SJ side as well as the Atheist/Skeptic side. Their concern, more often than not is VERY shallow.comhcinc wrote:I think that may be part of it. Another part is that there are a lot of posers. People that don't care so much about the movement as much as they just want to be apart of something. That is why petty shit becomes so important. They don't care if they damage the movement because they will just move on to something else.Tribble wrote:Aneris wrote:
That's all nice and interesting (and truly bizarre), but I still don't get why the US secular movement altogether is that obtuse and obviously fact-challenged. How can people be that idiotic? How can “skeptics†be such obtuse, thinking-impaired nitwits? I've now checked it over and over again, made a transcript, checked the contexts, and there is no room for interpretation or spinning dancers or other such nonsense. /rant
Let me just sum it up for you. America is profoundly anti-intellectual and has been this way for most of US history. The reasons are complex, part religious, part the demographics of the original settlers, some other reasons.
But, that's our bottom-line. And becoming secular doesn't change that. Becoming an atheist doesn't change that. This is deeply ingrained culture.
No but to pretend that they are not a part of it is wrong.Easy J wrote:The FTB/Skepchick crowd aren't "the US secular community".
And who is doing that?comhcinc wrote:No but to pretend that they are not a part of it is wrong.Easy J wrote:The FTB/Skepchick crowd aren't "the US secular community".
Easy J wrote:And who is doing that?comhcinc wrote:No but to pretend that they are not a part of it is wrong.Easy J wrote:The FTB/Skepchick crowd aren't "the US secular community".
