The Refuge of the Toads

[Lsuoma]

4. Kirbmarc - while I really love his contributions here on the slymepit, I'm afraid his interview style doesn't do him justice. He sounded like he was trying to be very careful over what he said, with the result that he came across a little hesitant and it took much longer than was necessary to communicate the point. And that camera angle did, unfortunately make him look like a dwarf.

What if he's dwarfkin? Eh?

Didn't he just have a stroke?

[Sunder]

No regrets seeing Deadpool yesterday. I will watch the interview soon though. I understand Sargy's chat and comments were a mixed bag though. And someone wore an actual fedora on camera?

[Shatterface]

4. Kirbmarc - while I really love his contributions here on the slymepit, I'm afraid his interview style doesn't do him justice. He sounded like he was trying to be very careful over what he said, with the result that he came across a little hesitant and it took much longer than was necessary to communicate the point. And that camera angle did, unfortunately make him look like a dwarf.

Who says Pitters aren't high-brow?

[jimthepleb]

People who use first names as insults are a proper bunch of Charlies, Herberts the lot of them real Silly Billys and a bunch of Dicks. Gordon Bennet that's a shitty thing to do.

[Kirbmarc]

People who use first names as insults are a proper bunch of Charlies, Herberts the lot of them real Silly Billys and a bunch of Dicks. Gordon Bennet that's a shitty thing to do.

They're proper Berks.

[free thoughtpolice]

huh.JPG

If anyone can feel me in on what the fuck this is suppose to mean I would be grateful.

She called you a backward central asian country. :rimshot:

[Lsuoma]

People who use first names as insults are a proper bunch of Charlies, Herberts the lot of them real Silly Billys and a bunch of Dicks. Gordon Bennet that's a shitty thing to do.

They're proper Berks.

[youtube]pZ9vrrvgHK8[/youtube]

[VickyCaramel]

People who use first names as insults are a proper bunch of Charlies, Herberts the lot of them real Silly Billys and a bunch of Dicks. Gordon Bennet that's a shitty thing to do.

They're proper Berks.

Thats rhyming slang. Berkshire Hunt.

http://wordwenches.typepad.com/.a/6a00d ... 970d-800wi

[Sunder]

Rhyming slang is nifty, especially when the terms also have their own layer of meaning such as "trouble and strife."

[jimthepleb]

James Blunt recently offered Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt his position in the rhyming slang dictionary.

[VickyCaramel]

James Blunt recently offered Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt his position in the rhyming slang dictionary.

Say what you will about Jeremy.... James Blunt deserves it more.

[MarcusAu]

Well you are not Pete Tong

[rayshul]

Thanks and sorry again for the silence - I spent the last hour and a bit on and off mute because of the gamers behind me. Probably nto going to an internet cafe again to do this. LOL

What about a livestream this week? At a more er appropriate time for those in Oceania?

[Tigzy]

Rhyming slang is nifty, especially when the terms also have their own layer of meaning such as "trouble and strife."

[youtube]73d6h_go7QI[/youtube]

[Kristine]

https://www.facebook.com/heinousheina/p ... nref=story
http://i.imgur.com/q18HGbL.png

Heina, you human dump truck, when you tell someone to Google something, they'll Google it.

He "blames" his own penchant for controversy, hate from his tribe (including feminists), and a decent gesture that cheered him. Take your pick. Maybe you could let us know your reasons for stovepiping it into "He sez it was feminists whut dunnit".

Well, this is my introduction to this Heina character, and holy shit. I really cannot believe the utter selfishness, the sickening narcissistic glee, of this discussion thread! ("Hopefully he won't return to Twitter." "Forever." Hey honeys, give it time - Dawkins is mortal and then your little hearts can rejoice.)

But what really gets me is, if anyone is a bunch of "fanbois" it is this dissterhood. Really. It seems they cannot live one day without thinking about someone that they hate, particularly Dawkins, and snorting their hatred like proper cocaine. Instead of ignoring his tweets and moving on, they revolve around Dawkins like comets. They remind me of Williams Dembski and his merry band of self-styled not-creationists ("ID is not creationism, we're not YEC, blah blah blah"), gleefully proclaiming their anti-Dawkinsian Dawkinsianism. A fine lot SJWs are to criticize anyone for "worshipping" Dawkins (or Harris, or Shermer, etc.) when they obsess over Dawkins like a bunch of fundies seeing the Devil everywhere, because they find the Devil more interesting. Well, it's no surprise to me that they apparently envy Dawkins while pulling down his statue over and over again.

Quote-mining Dawkins and repeating each other just as ID advocates do, spinning their own little creation myths like spider webs, then complaining when they get caught in them (just like Behe did about Kitzmiller) - SJWs are the post-Kitzmiller creationists. I was wrong about "sudden emergence" replacing intelligent design. SJW emergence has eclipsed intelligent design! (Sadly, it exhibits even less intelligence - at least ID misused statistics.)

I'm just waiting for this ever dwindling gaggle to finally renounce the theory of evolution itself, because it's triggering, competitive, carnivorous, unfair, structure-appropriating (cobbling) and a narrative that cannot be disrupted. And then their hypocrisy will reach its climax in either a bang (them turning on each other like the we're-saving-the-world peaceniks they are) or a whimper (having babies, focusing suddenly on vegan meals and leaf-based diapers, and arguing with the neighbors over whether or not their tufts of orange rocket plants flanking their driveway are a symbol of military aggression).

[Bhurzum]

What about a livestream this week? At a more er appropriate time for those in Oceania?

I'd love to see/hear more 'Pitzien goodness.

I could probably join in (audio only) although I'll need to bone up on the whole Google hangout thing.

[MarcusAu]

I think comihc is organising a Skype call.

Also for anyone thinking about further discussions and out reach - Robert Darby (based in Australia for you Southern Hemi people) sometimes interviews / talks with people on his podcast: The Dumbed Down Atheist

Recently he spoke with Dragonbeard (Canada time zone) - who has his own podcast - Apostasy now
http://apostasynow.net/category/apostasy-now-podcast/

Where he regularly speaks with people one-one-one.

Both are already familiar with FTB / Skepchicks / etc.

[Tigzy]

dissterhood.

http://i.imgur.com/M0RrwI4.jpg

[some guy]

Just spent 2 hours watching the Sargon 'Pit thing. Amazed it kept (sorta) my interest for the whole thing. The Pit reps did a great job.

[youtube]O6MgnlUbRZI[/youtube]

BTW, For the last few years "Brive" has always been pronounced "BrEYEve" in my mind. So quit trying to erase my "in-my-head" lived experience by forcing me to conform to your cis-het-male patriarchal pronunciation rules.

[comhcinc]

Happy Valentine's Day. Is that a thing that people do? I don't know I never celebrated it. Anyway. Some updates.


Congrats to the people who deserve them to the rest fuck off. You know who you are unless you don't.

Yes I am working on a podcast. It's (actually 2-3 different ones) have been in the planning stages for a while and I am close to launching. I need to get my kickstarter video made and posted so I can raise the 20,000 need to fund this project (not really but I am having to figure out some equipment and hosting issues).


Yes I am attempting to organize either a hangout or skype thing for us. This is just for us to hang out and be able to see/hear people. It's not going to be made a public thing.

From the responses so far I am shooting for Saturday February 20th. The weekend seems to work for most people. Time of day is also something we need to hammer out. I am on Eastern time (GMT - 5). I need to know what is best for everyone.

Equipment is easy, and don't spend a lot of money on it. I'd recommend a dynamic mic because you don't have to sweat the room and background noise as much. THere's some nice USB ones that aren't expensive. Also, don't obsess about editing, unless there's actual real problems. Yes, people have verbal tics, but the amount of actual caring on those is small.

My personal favorite podcast software is Hindenberg's, because it's written by radio people, so the emphasis is on getting it done and published, not endless editing twaddle.http://hindenburg.com/products/hindenburg-journalist

it's not free or nearly free, but it is quite good. For storage...unless you start getting really popular, Google Drive/Dropbox/onedrive works. If you get past that, S3 is pretty cheap.

I am not planning on spending a lot of money but I will be getting some decent equipment. Dynamic mics are okay but I prefer a condenser with a tight cardioid pattern. I am thinking about the Shure MV5 Digital Condenser Microphone. It's got decent reviews and it's from Shure so you know it's well made. I actually own a pretty decent mic already but it was packed up by the wife and no matter how much I ask I doubt I am getting it back anytime soon.

I love to edit. It's part of the reason I want to do this. Thanks for the link to that software. First I have seen it and looks pretty good. Like that it links up with soundcloud out of the box.

I need to get a domain and I am going to set up a simple wordpress page for the podcast(s) and I am going to go with soundcloud to actually host the audio. Their pro unlimited is about 130 a year which is a decent price and allows me to be able to do long form shows and not worry about hitting a hard limit.

Still need to get a good skype recording program.

[HoneyWagon]

Following the idea a few pages back that Ricky Gervais should take over Dawkins' twitter feed I hereby propose that we should co-opt one of Ricky's frequently used phrases and that SJWs should henceforth be called Social Justice Whiney cunts.

The term was WATB (Whiney Ass Titty Baby) back in my day.

[comhcinc]

Thanks and sorry again for the silence - I spent the last hour and a bit on and off mute because of the gamers behind me. Probably nto going to an internet cafe again to do this. LOL

What about a livestream this week? At a more er appropriate time for those in Oceania?

Looking at next weekend on Saturday. Everyone needs to give me a good idea about what time is good.

Pm me any details.

[Bhurzum]

Looking at next weekend on Saturday. Everyone needs to give me a good idea about what time is good.

Just to confirm, this will be on Skype and not G+?

[comhcinc]

Looking at next weekend on Saturday. Everyone needs to give me a good idea about what time is good.

Just to confirm, this will be on Skype and not G+?

Skype seems the better platform but it can be a hangout if people just want it to be. If a hangout it will not be public.

[Brive1987]

BTW, For the last few years "Brive" has always been pronounced "BrEYEve" in my mind. So quit trying to erase my "in-my-head" lived experience by forcing me to conform to your cis-het-male patriarchal pronunciation rules.

Maybe this would help: Bri(v)e

http://i.imgur.com/BstB73u.jpg

Maybe not.

[d4m10n]

Creamy and smooth.

[KiwiInOz]

I have never heard that before. Is it from the Eminem song?

Who the fuck uses a common first name as an insult?

Wallies.

Joey's

Jessies.

[HoneyWagon]

BTW, For the last few years "Brive" has always been pronounced "BrEYEve" in my mind. So quit trying to erase my "in-my-head" lived experience by forcing me to conform to your cis-het-male patriarchal pronunciation rules.

Maybe this would help: Bri(v)e

http://i.imgur.com/BstB73u.jpg

Maybe not.

I am impressed..I actually correctly pronounced your name in my head all this time.

[KiwiInOz]

Thanks and sorry again for the silence - I spent the last hour and a bit on and off mute because of the gamers behind me. Probably nto going to an internet cafe again to do this. LOL

What about a livestream this week? At a more er appropriate time for those in Oceania?

You should have told them to shut up because you were talking to Sargon. They would have fallen at your feet in worship.

[Brive1987]

So "founder" past status and current C-suite positions?
Ed still has his owners financial interest?

http://i.imgur.com/kI2bhZA.jpg

And of course the thetans and volcanos will only become apparent after you commit to the sales pitch.

[Brive1987]

BTW, For the last few years "Brive" has always been pronounced "BrEYEve" in my mind. So quit trying to erase my "in-my-head" lived experience by forcing me to conform to your cis-het-male patriarchal pronunciation rules.

Maybe this would help: Bri(v)e

[im.g]http://i.imgur.com/BstB73u.jpg[/img]

Maybe not.

I am impressed..I actually correctly pronounced your name in my head all this time.

Who knows? Another time, another place ..... ;)

[The Yeti]

I meant to say the name of the poster is a bit suspect. I sometimes wonder if there are any genuine posters at FTB.

I can't believe what you are implying here. Dr. Richard Cervantes Carrier PhD is an accomplished historian whovexvels at textual analysis and determining the meaning of ancient writings. He also moderates every single comment on his blog. It is simply inconceivable that he would approve comments frpm people that are trolling him with deliberately obvious names. I am sure that the commenter's name is just a coincidence, as well as the comment on his previous post by "Lamar Latrell".

All of his previous comments from people with the same names as Revenge of the Nerds characters, Baywatch characters, rappers, and professional wrestlers are all just a coincidence too.

[Really?]

So "founder" past status and current C-suite positions?
Ed still has his owners financial interest?

http://i.imgur.com/kI2bhZA.jpg

And of course the thetans and volcanos will only become apparent after you commit to the sales pitch.

I love how Peez is trying to make FTB go legit. Here's the first retweet from that new @MediaFtB account:

Can we all hope that Peez is taking the "Media" part to heart and we'll soon have a Young Turks-style show starring Nerd, Gilliel and HJ Hornbeck? Ogvorbis can do the children's show.

[blitzem]

Wallies.

Joey's

Jessies.

Gordons.

[free thoughtpolice]

So "founder" past status and current C-suite positions?
Ed still has his owners financial interest?

http://i.imgur.com/kI2bhZA.jpg

And of course the thetans and volcanos will only become apparent after you commit to the sales pitch.

Wow a CEO and a CFO!
I can just picture Ed signing Alex Mc Gabriel's 75 cent monthly paycheck.

[Brive1987]

Creamy and smooth.

With a tart, slightly disconcerting after taste.

[Brive1987]

So "founder" past status and current C-suite positions?
Ed still has his owners financial interest?

[i.mg]http://i.imgur.com/kI2bhZA.jpg[/img]

And of course the thetans and volcanos will only become apparent after you commit to the sales pitch.

Wow a CEO and a CFO!
I can just picture Ed signing Alex Mc Gabriel's 75 cent monthly paycheck.

And getting the tax bracket wrong.

[ffs]

[ffs]

Also -

alive
brive
chive
drive
strive
thrive

fuck ur 'breev' bullpucky!

[Guest_0048cc29]

I find most of Beyonce's music (most new music) unlistenable, I am an old fart, old white fart.

But wrt the question of Beyonce's blackness, I was under the impression she had been discussed and criticized for years by the black community over how she was brought up as well as how she represents the black community and how she represents women and feminism and how manufactured her street persona is given her upper middle class upbringing.

So given that, I think SNL is off the mark to criticize "White America" for not understanding Beyonce is Black. Seems much of Black America
has wondered that itself.

But just as few considered her a feminist until she declared it, then well fuck yeah Beyonce is the Super Feminist we've all aspired to be, now with this album, perhaps the argument over how street Beyonce is is settled.

I am always glad to listen to PZ Myers on which authentic ethnic voices we should be listening to.

huffingtonpost.com/2014/05/09/beyonce-anti-feminist_n_5295891.html

Feminist Activist Says Beyonce Is Partly 'Anti-Feminist' And 'Terrorist'

Famed feminist, author and social activist Dr. bell hooks has some qualms about Beyonce and the feminist perspective she projects.

The topic of Beyonce arose in relation to her recent Time 100 magazine cover, for which she posed in her underwear, garnering criticism at the time of the issue's release.

“Let’s take the image of this super rich, very powerful black female, and let’s use it in the service of imperialist, white supremacist, capitalist patriarchy, because she probably had very little control over that cover, that image," hooks said.

I’ve really been challenging people to think about, would we be at all interested in Beyonce if she wasn’t so rich? Because I don’t think you can separate her class power and the wealth, from people’s fascination with her. That here is a young, black woman who is so incredibly wealthy, and wealthy is what so many young people fantasize, dream about, sexualize, eroticize. One could argue, even more than her body, it’s what that body stands for -- the body of desire fulfilled, that is wealth, fame, celebrity, all the things that so many people in our culture are lusting for, wanting. If Beyonce was a homeless woman who looked the same way, or a poor, down-and-out woman who looked the same way, would people be enchanted by her?

I see a part of Beyonce that is, in fact, anti-feminist, that is assaulting, that is a terrorist ... especially in terms of the impact on young girls. I actually feel like the major assault on feminism in our society has come from visual media and from television and from videos. Just think, where do we even know, as of late, of any powerful man of any color that has come out with some tirade against feminism? The tirades against feminism occur so much in the image-making business, and what we see.

Others have challenged the idea of Beyonce as a feminist champion before. One of the most heated discussion arose after her performance beside husband Jay Z at the 2014 Grammy Awards. The singer received backlash over Jay's lyrics in her song "Drunk In Love" which reference a disturbing domestic abuse incident between Ike and Tina Turner in the biopic "What's Love Got To Do With It."

cocoamamas.com/2013/12/18/why-my-daughter-will-not-be-listening-to-beyonce-or-why-im-going-to-need-the-new-generation-of-black-feminists-who-are-riding-hard-for-beyonce-to-have-several-seats/

Why My Daughter Will Not Be Listening to “Beyonce.” Or Why I’m Going To Need the New Generation of Black Feminists Who Are Riding Hard for “Beyonce” to Have Several Seats
by Dr. Mama Esq. on December 18, 2013

But in case you’re wondering, I am a black feminist. A young, married, heterosexual, highly- and elitely-educated, black, middle-class mother feminist. I own all of that. Please do not get that twisted as you read what comes next.

This is about Beyonce and “Beyonce.” I’m not even going to talk about whether Beyonce is a feminist. I honestly don’t care. You virtual celebrities of the Twitter and blogosphere can hash all that out with the white feminists that y’all say don’t “get” black feminism.

But Ain’t I a Woman? If we can all agree to that, then let me tell you something.

This is about why I will not ever encourage my black daughter to listen to, emulate, or strive to be the Beyonce on “Beyonce.” “Beyonce” is not the feminist ideal I want pushed on my child.

This is about why I don’t think “Beyonce” should be held up as the feminist role model for ANY black girl.

madamenoire.com/183912/whats-black-enough-for-you/

WHAT’S BLACK ENOUGH FOR YOU?

This is a question that’s been on my mind for a while now, mostly incited by the reactions geared toward Beyonce when she was named PEOPLE’s most beautiful woman earlier this year. The response from a lot of women to her win was essentially that it took her lightening her skin, getting long, silky blonde weave, and perhaps a nose job to be beautiful, followed up with questions of just how black she really is because of those features she was born with, like her skin tone. The backlash is ironic because not long before when Beyonce’s L’Oreal commercial depicting her as a French, Native American, and African American woman came out, a surprising number of people said they had no problem with her identifying as such because of her Creole roots. But when it came to celebrating a black woman being named the most beautiful woman in the world, the claps and cheers were nearly non-existent from the people who aren’t diehard Beehive stans.

It’s totally understandable and justifiable to be sick of seeing light-skinned, long-weaved, Caucasian-featured black women celebrated in the media but the frustration should be taken out on the outlets upholding this standard not the women who can’t help that they embody some of these characteristics naturally (i.e., I’m not talking about the Nicki Minaj and Lil Kims of the world). It certainly didn’t ease the “not like us” sting to have Paula Patton be the only other black woman on PEOPLE’s list but it’s also counterproductive to try to tear her down for having her beauty celebrated.

It’s also unfair to expect everyone to hold up an Afro pick and talk about and be about their blackness all day long.

Do you think it’s wrong to call out some of these women as not being black enough or are the criticisms justifiable?

thestir.cafemom.com/celebrity_moms/133373/beyonce_advertisement_sends_message_that

Beyonce Ad Sends Girls the Message That Being ‘Just Black’ Is Boring

diaryofahollywoodstreetking.com/beyonce-is-not-black-shes-mixed/

Beyonce is currently doing L’Oreal ads for their True Match foundation product, and guess what–Beyonce is reported saying that she is not black rather she is “African American, French and Native Indian.”

dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1358119/Beyonce-Knowles-Why-I-believe-betraying-black-Asian-Women.html

One black friend of mine, who has a 13-year-old daughter, was incandescent this week when she saw the picture of U.S. singer Beyonce at a pre-Grammy awards party.

Her complexion and limbs were translucently pallid, her locks long, straight and blonde.

Now, racial mixing since the days of slavery means ‘black’ Americans come in a whole range of skin hues, but in recent years Beyonce’s tone seems miraculously to be changing from dusky to peachy.

In truth, it is hard now to tell she is the daughter of an African-American father and Creole mother. It was three years ago that L’Oreal was accused of whitening Beyonce’s face in a magazine advert, a charge denied by the company. But now there she is, looking like a willowy Caucasian.

whataboutourdaughters.com/waod/2010/1/29/no-i-am-not-a-beyonce-fan-sasha-fierce-for-me-but-not-for-th.html

No, I am NOT a BEYONCE Fan-"Sasha Fierce for me, but not for thee!"

"If his status ain't hood I ain't checkin for him Betta Be street if he lookin' at me" - Beyonce' & 'em.

Apparently some are SHOCKED that I am not a fan of Beyonce and her drug dealing husband and am NOT delighted that one of the most venerable news organizations left would be doing a feature on her carefully manufactured public persona. My response, Have you read this blog?

The entire Beyonce Knowles CONTRADICTION is foolishness. She's no more empowering Black women than Lil' kim, Trina, or Lil' Wayne although in a pinch, a few of you could make and argument that on the scale of empowering entertainers the latter three are ahead of Beyonce. Sasha Fierce is some FIERCE FOOLISHNESS. -creating a fake personality so you can attempt to hold on to your veneer of respectability while engaging in activity that YOU BELIEVE to be beyond the limits of acceptability is hypocrisy

It looks like Steve Croft will at least touch on the contradiction, and acknowledges that Beyonce / Sasha Fierce ( I can no longer tell the difference[sic]) is a carefully packaged product, but will 60 minutes have a psychologist on hand to explore split personality disorders or explain to us why this woman has been so OPEN about making sure we know that "its not really her" on stage? Can we talk about how she maintains the image of a nice respectable girl from a "good family" [sic] who sings abotu empowerment while glorifying hooking up with a proud drug dealer? Why don't we have a great conversation about WHY Beyonce and her handlers HAD to create Sasha Fierce?

Basically "purporting" that she is so terrified of claiming an overly sexualized image ( She and her parents cultivated)that she has to create a alter ego OR that she is marketing herself in a manner inconsistent with her personal values, but she realizes it makes money so she'll do it any way. Just like Bob and Shelia Johnson producing television, they wouldn't let their own children watch.


If Beyonce was so comfortable doing lap dances and writhing around on the floor in lingerie in front of her parents, then she wouldn't need to create the lunacy that is "Sasha Fierce" Black women, other than Beyonce don't get to create multiple personalities in real life. Let alone, the foolishness of a generation of girls growing up thinking they either have the ability to split their personalities in order to claim their sexuality. No, I don't have a problem with people being sexual beings IN ORDER TO PLEASE THEMSELVES, but not for the purpose of pleasing their Daddy's lust for money, tantalizing record executives, or hiding the fact that your songs are tacky and you threw your record together in two weeks- um no. Corrine Bailey Rae's new album is out now!

And to get the Beyonce' STANS pressure up into to stroke- range, here is a collection of our previous "We Are Not Fans of Beyonce" Post- BRING IT!

Don't forget, I go on blogcation for the month of February - I'll leave instructions on how to cope on Monday :) - ALso blogcation means no comments- so say your peace on existing posts before the 1st.

Dear Jonesboro Dance Team, You Are Not Sluts

Guest Post:After President Obama Closes Guantanamo Bay, Can He Shut Down Gangsta Rap too?

The Beyonce Effect- Another Attack on “Empowerment” Anthems

[Skep tickle]

So "founder" past status and current C-suite positions?
Ed still has his owners financial interest?

http://i.imgur.com/kI2bhZA.jpg

And of course the thetans and volcanos will only become apparent after you commit to the sales pitch.

Wow a CEO and a CFO!
I can just picture Ed signing Alex Mc Gabriel's 75 cent monthly paycheck.

Note the URL for the page that announces how anti-dogma they are (*snort*), & who their principals are (Steers-style-underline & bolding added here):

_http://freethoughtblogs.com/advertise-on-freethoughtblogs/

[Guest_0048cc29]

Oh, that was way longer than I had thought.

Sorry about that.

[ffs]

Oh, that was way longer than I had thought.

Sorry about that.

Guest_0048cc29, meet Steersman

Steersman, do not use this as an excuse

[Brive1987]

Did anyone figure out the passive BS behind Novella republishing his 2010 concern troll article? An article seemingly tasked with commemorating the (allegedly) NECSS-directed Aktion against Dawkins.

It seems completely at odds with the previous job at hand.

His all new (2010) mantra, post disinvitation is:

That is why I am not advocating for any particular balance. I don’t pretend to have the one true balance or compromise. I am advocating for tolerance and open discussion, and also just recognition that there are legitimate concerns on both sides and perhaps we can discuss it with each other without puffing our chests quite so much.

And

[the SGU] reserve our personal attacks not for the average believer, but for the promoters – those who are engaging in the public conversation and have made themselves fair game. They have no expectation of courtesy, and there the demands of public debate and exchange of ideas outweigh those of courtesy. With an individual “rank-and-file” believer, the balance is different

.


So personal attacks are fine for public promoters of bullshit. :think:

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

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

[Brive1987]

Also -

alive
brive
chive
drive
strive
thrive

fuck ur 'breev' bullpucky!

I see what you did there. Quelle horreur.

[deLurch]

Oh, that was way longer than I had thought.
Sorry about that.

Get a login account. It will be easier on everyone.

[Guest_0048cc29]

Did anyone figure out the passive BS behind Novella republishing his 2010 concern troll article? An article seemingly tasked with commemorating the (allegedly) NECSS-directed Aktion against Dawkins.

It seems completely at odds with the previous job at hand.

His all new (2010) mantra, post disinvitation is:

That is why I am not advocating for any particular balance. I don’t pretend to have the one true balance or compromise. I am advocating for tolerance and open discussion, and also just recognition that there are legitimate concerns on both sides and perhaps we can discuss it with each other without puffing our chests quite so much.

And

[the SGU] reserve our personal attacks not for the average believer, but for the promoters – those who are engaging in the public conversation and have made themselves fair game. They have no expectation of courtesy, and there the demands of public debate and exchange of ideas outweigh those of courtesy. With an individual “rank-and-file” believer, the balance is different

.


So personal attacks are fine for public promoters of bullshit. :think:

i.imgur.com/wUvGXTk.jpg

i.imgur.com/EqYqvBH.jpg

That was exactly my interpretation of it, that he was trying to claim Big Red is not a public figure, but I think that ship sailed when Big Red went to a public demonstration on a public street shouted down everyone else speaking in public to demand they listen to her public oratory and did all of this in the face of camera phones clearly videoing her in public view.

And that's not even counting how her activities were reported on MRA and Feminist blogs and at the Huffington Post and discussed at reddit and in the comments at the Federalist and the Kings County Register/Advertiser and Gameranx and the Binghamton University Pipe Dream posted in knowyourmemem and actually interviewed in Cassie Jaye's documentary.

Maybe Novella agrees members of Westboro Baptist Church are not public figures either.

[gurugeorge]

Enjoyed the Sargon livestream, nice to hear voices. Some ramblings arising therefrom:-

I thought it was quite appropriate for Sargon to draw Gamergate parallels. It seems that you guys and gamers have been two examples of somewhat successful major resistance to the SJW Zombie Apocalypse, so it's instructive to note similar patterns.

I think Rubin's recent interview with Sargon sort of nailed it when they spoke about classical liberalism. All the people on the anti-SJW side of the fence have different political views ranging from Right to Left, but we all seem to share the core liberal values.

It's worth just trying to get that into focus. I think it's encapsulated by the legal version of liberal values which is "innocent until proven guilty". Basically, I think despite differences in prescriptive politics, we all probably share the notion that human beings should be free to go about their business until and unless they can DEMONSTRABLY and FALSIFIABLY be shown to have done, be doing, or be likely to do harm (and by "falsifiable", I'm pointing to the idea that it ought to be possible in principle to defend against the charge of harm and show that harm hasn't, isn't or isn't likely to be done). Pretty much all the core liberal values - right to life, free speech, property, assembly, etc., etc. - flow cleanly and logically from that seed idea.

I think the difference between Right-wing view that's still liberal (libertarianism, some on the Right like Milo, Douglas Murray, etc.) and a Left-wing view that's still liberal (you guys, Sargon, Sam Harris, etc.) is around what constitutes "harm". Left-liberals (what I think of as Progressivism in the best sense) want to take a more nuanced and refined approach to "harm", tend to be more attuned to how technology opens up new ways in which harm can be done - and also want to push towards a society that has more than just this bare free structure, i.e. a political structure that does more than just maintain this foundation, but also does positive things to help people.

Right-liberals on the other hand, are more concerned with maintaining social stability, with retaining the values of traditional social structures (because we don't necessarily yet know enough to mess overmuch with social structures yet), with not unwittingly throwing babies out with bathwaters, and generally want to keep politics restricted to maintaining this rights basis as strongly as possible, and not building too much positive political superstructure on top of it.

And that's actually a viable, rational discussion to be had between two poles of the core idea of liberalism - simply conservative and progressive wings.

And BOTH of these are in opposition to any kind of IDEOLOGICAL politics. All ideological politics seems to have the same basic mind-virus structure: the memetic clusters involved hike on social shaming by first getting a kind of plausible "hook". This is the Motte of the Motte & Bailey idea) that a liberal-minded person is likely to agree with, and maybe even find interesting to contemplate. e.g. the Marxian idea isn't just obvious nonsense out of the gate - there's some plausibility to the analysis of society in terms of social relations in relation to the means of production. The notion of the Patriarchy isn't entirely nonsensical either, there's a kind of a ghost of an idea there - and tantalizing thoughts about our deep past, psychosocial history, etc. Even looking at some of the further Right ideas (which aren't going to be tempting to Left liberals, but might be tempting to those on the Right), looking at questions of human biodiversity isn't prima facie something that should be ruled out of court. The importance of nature over nurture, genetics, population as destiny, cultural identity and dignity, these are also interesting ideas that have grains of truth to them.

But what happens with ideologies is that they use these initial plausible "hooks" to draw people in, and then once you're in the cult's 50 acre manor house out in the country (so to speak) the "Bailey" is revealed, and it's usually some theory that has the basic structure of:-

1) Source of "power"
2) Oppressor/oppressed groups defined by their closeness to or distance from that source of "power"
3) Human behaviour defined wholly by membership of oppressor/oppressed group.

And the trick is, while the Motte is about something that's maybe initially plausible, the Bailey is all about a theory that's circular and defined internally. Just like if you look at a dictionary, one word is defined in terms of other words, which are in turn defined in terms of other words, so with an ideology (and also as with a "religion of the Book") all the words drawn from common language with plausible "Motte" senses get defined within the theory, with only very sketchy reference to the world outside the special lexicon/book/theory.

And while the Motte has a strong emotional positive or negative feeling tone attached to a specific, falsifiable thing (like harm, equality before the law, rape, harassment, etc.), the Bailey term keeps the emotional feeling tone, but ditches the specificity and falsifiability. And that's how you get the situation with liberals proper initially virtue signalling agreement - they naturally don't want to be seen to be agreeing with something that's in a clear Motte sense morally wrong, or disagreeing with something that's in a clear Motte sense morally right; but unbeknownst to them, by virtue-signalling agreement with the SJW terms of debate, they're inadvertently bolstering the broadened, Bailey definition of the term, not the Motte term that they think they're aligning with by virtue-signalling.

And that's how the mind-virus gets a wedge into public discourse, by normalizing broadened, theory-laden definitions of emotionally positively/negatively valued terms.

I think that's the key difference between Progressive (Left-liberal) and Regressive (ideological liberal) - it's when the sense of being guided by reality is lost and replaced by the sense of being guided by the Book; when the sense of FALSIFIABILITY AS CORE is lost and one enters a kafkaesque dream world, almost like confabulation, or an LSD trip where one thing morphs into another and anything becomes anything.

And this is quite a "deliberate" aspect of the mind-virus: it means that the terms of discourse in the Bailey sense are so wide that eventually anybody can be accused of anything. It becomes a divisive tool (entrenching a sense of "us" vs. "them", leading to eventual elimination of "them", with the bad memetic replicator triumphant in the population), rather than something in search of a common ground with other human beings, under the aegis of a core, shared liberal idea (as outlined above), like Progressivism proper.

Now because most people are well-meaning, under normal circumstances this doesn't matter too much. But all it takes is some people who genuinely have ill intent to push the narrative along the trippy, kafkaesque line, for the situation to get worse and worse, until eventually even good people who were formerly involved (e.g. cf. the recent Peter Tatchell thing) get "purged" - so all you have left is the cunts, and eventually the biggest cunt rises to the top.

[comhcinc]

I pooped my pants once.

[welch]

So "founder" past status and current C-suite positions?
Ed still has his owners financial interest?

http://i.imgur.com/kI2bhZA.jpg

And of course the thetans and volcanos will only become apparent after you commit to the sales pitch.

I love how Peez is trying to make FTB go legit. Here's the first retweet from that new @MediaFtB account:

Can we all hope that Peez is taking the "Media" part to heart and we'll soon have a Young Turks-style show starring Nerd, Gilliel and HJ Hornbeck? Ogvorbis can do the children's show.

At least Oggie drives slow in the school zones.

[Service Dog]

Brive = Pit MVP.
Before Sargon's livecast, I was concerned that feminism would be allowed to wriggle off the hook via the 'no true feminist' dodge. I expected Kirbmarc to assert that only absurd SJW feminists are beyond the pale-- while endorsing the sentimental ideal of a One Of The Good Ones feminist, who embraces only the most noble aspects of feminism; eschewing the ideology's shitshows. This indeed occurred in the livestream. The fact that Christina Hoff Sommers exists doesn't exonerate any-other feminists.

Of course we agree to disagree, but I wanted to point out that what I was arguing for is a way to avoid the SJW trap "You're not a feminist then you're a misogynist" by asking people to be clear about what "feminist" means.

SJWs love to mud the waters, to say that "feminism is just equal rights" and then make people look bad when they criticize SJW feminism. Most "normal" people think that feminism is just equal rights. This is a very useful weapon for the SJWs, since they can claim that if you're an anti-SJW you're a regressive thinker who wants women to be barefoot and pregnant.

The problem with the sentimental ideal-- is that such a feminist would literally be an MRA... such as Cassie Jaye. (And that doesn't fit with the misguided belief that MRAs are the equal&opposite equivalent of radfems.) But it was Damion who most shit the bed on this front-- by asserting his drinking-buddy Aron Ra was reasonable about feminism. Also Dillahunty got off easy.

I'm sure that some MRAs genuinely believe in gender equality. The problem is that many of the public figures associated with MRAs frankly don't. You can't believe in gender equality and then say (for example) that the duty of people in a jury trial in cases of rape is to always acquit (like Paul Elam has done in the past).

The duty of jurors is evaluate evidence critically, not to believe the everyone in a society is part of a conspiracy to convict men and thus decide to pick a side from the start.Opportunistic DAs like Mike Nifong exist, but so do people who are clearly guilty of rape.

Elam's article is the equivalent and opposite of the "listen and believe" meme of the radfems. Believing in patriarchy or in misandric conspiracies is equally bad. There is no conspiracy, just a matter of bad behavior and stupid assumptions. Substituting a stupid assumption with another stupid assumption is a feature of identity politics. It goes against equality and critical thinking.

If Elam wanted to address the problem of emotional manipulation, of cultural trends, he should have warned jurors in cases of rape not to listen to the media because the media have a radfem bias (which is arguably true), to stick to the evidence presented and judge things without letting their emotions and assumptions hamper their critical thinking, and to remember that the accused is always to be presumed innocent before their guilt is proven beyond any reasonable doubt.

But this isn't what Elam wrote. He wrote that society is so rotten that the entire legal system is biased against men and actively subverts evidence so that they can never be trusted, so you have a moral duty to vote not guilty in every trial. This is pretty insane. Liars like Jackie of the University of Virginia have been found out by law enforcement. The man that Mattress Girl accused of rape wasn't convicted. The system is flawed but there's no widespread conspiracy which creates false evidence in every case of rape. False rape accusations exist but not everyone who is accused of rape is no innocent.

Elam is a "mainstream" MRA. He's no random idiot like David Aurini or RooshV. You can't say he's "no true MRA". When I say that MRAs are as bad the radfems I'm talking about identity politics and conspiracy theories like those you see in Elam's writing.

I'm sure that there are many MRAs who aren't conspiracy theorists and who dislike identity theories. I'm also pretty sure that there are many feminists (not just Christina Hoff Summers and Cathy Young) who aren't conspiracy theorists and dislike identity theories. Maybe it's time to leave the "gender wars" behind and focus on matters like critical thinking, correcting your assumptions with evidence, not trusting emotional outrages, and struggling for human rights, not men's right or women's rights.

I liked what you said in the livestream. Sargon gave feminism more of a pass than you did. In the past, my concern has been that you see your own moderate dissent as inherently superior to more extreme dissent. But moderation isn't automatically better. In the face of something patently abhorrent, appeasement or splitting-the-difference isn't better than an extreme rejection of the abhorrent. I don't see it as a clear positive sign-- that you survived longer than most commenting in SJW spaces, without being banned. At what cost? Did you take refuge in mealy-mouthed conceptual compromises, rather than calling a spade a spade? That may have strategic value... but it risks making you a quisling against truth. I'm more attached to grasping the truth, than dancing around it in hopes of political advantage.

My own opinion on Elam's essay-- more-supportive than anyone you're likely to meet. I am no Elam fanboy-- AVFM approached me to write for them & my personal unease with Elam was the main reason my initial 'yes' quickly faded into a 'no'. but...

I side with Jury Nullification advocacy groups, in general, whether they are opposed to Drug War laws, Mandatory Minimum sentencing, or what-ever. I think this man is a model citizen: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/26/nyreg ... .html?_r=0 I do not accept that jurors are mere 'finders of fact' in regard to whether the person on trial is guilty within the law: jurors should be empowered to find the trial itself too flawed to play role within it. And a groundswell of such dissent is an established, legitimate route to reform: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury_nullification

Another precedent: In the late 1970's & early 80's, the us govt's agent-provocateur infiltration of citizens' anti-war and pro-black activism was exposed (the COINTELPRO program). As a result, domestic-terrorism charges were =categorically= dropped against the Weather Underground bombers and Black Panthers, regardless of the individual merits of each case. The system admitted that it was tainted against an entire section of the political spectrum.... a demographic group. In the Mattress Girl case, the accused guy's Title IX suit contends that males categorically were not afforded equal protection under Columbia University's sexual assault policies: which seems quite possible to me. Paul Elam is hardly a bigot for exposing the criminal justice system as bigoted against men & boys, & saying he refuses to legitimize the corrupt system by blindly participating.

But is Elam right? Does the system discriminate against men? I think the evidence is clear it does. One specific example would be the Jodi Arias trial-- in which expert feminist witness & domestic violence author Alice LaViolette was introduced as highly influential on the entire field of working with The State in prosecuting domestic violence for 30 years. But, in the Arias case, LaViolette's testimony wasn't being used to prosecute a man (as usual). This time it was being used to exonerate Jodi Arias's brutal murder of her ex-boyfriend, smear the murder victim as an abuser... LaViolette was even exposed as smuggling secret messages out of jail with Arias-- to tamper with witnesses and evidence. Her credibility couldn't withstand a zealous prosecutor, the one time she wasn't on the prosecutor's side. An indictment of the system built on her guidance.

I do understand you are advocating for everyone being treated as individuals. When I said a good feminist would have to be an MRA, I wasn't saying the only 2 choices are bad feminist vs. MRA/good-feminist. The third & best option is to treat everyone as equal individuals. But, if one goes down the identity politics path of feminism-- the only honest endpoint is the feminist becoming an MRA. Because feminism establishes so many criteria for judging society... wage gap, genital mutilation, reproductive freedom, right to vote, zero tolerance of domestic violence & rape-- which if honestly applied to both sexes... end up proving males are actually more disadvantaged than females. Nothing wrong with not measuring by those criteria at-all & treating everyone as equal individuals. But if one goes down the feminist route-- the only honest thing to do is admit when the results contradict expectations.

[Guestus Aurelius]

Yes, gurugeorge, there's always a kernel of truth, isn't there?

[Really?]

NECSS statement on Dawkins:

http://necss.org/2016/02/14/statement-f ... committee/

We wish to apologize to Professor Dawkins for our handling of his disinvitation to NECSS 2016. Our actions were not professional, and we should have contacted him directly to express our concerns before acting unilaterally. We have sent Professor Dawkins a private communication expressing this as well. This apology also extends to all NECSS speakers, our attendees, and to the broader skeptical movement.

We wish to use this incident as an opportunity to have a frank and open discussion of the deeper issues implicated here, which are causing conflict both within the skeptical community and within society as a whole. NECSS 2016 will therefore feature a panel discussion addressing these topics. There is room for a range of reasonable opinions on these issues and our conversation will reflect that diversity. We have asked Professor Dawkins to participate in this discussion at NECSS 2016 in addition to his prior scheduled talk, and we hope he will accept our invitation.

This statement and our discussions with Professor Dawkins were initiated prior to learning of his recent illness. All of NECSS wishes Professor Dawkins a speedy and full recovery.

The NECSS Executive Committee

[Guest_0048cc29]

reason.com/blog/2016/02/11/justice-sotomayor-says-there-is-a-place

Justice Sotomayor Says 'There Is a Place, I Think, for Jury Nullification'
The former 2nd Circuit judge suggests that court was wrong to categorically reject a jury's right to acquit a guilty defendant

This week Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor had some kind words for jury nullification, which empowers jurors to judge the law as well as the facts of a case and may involve disregarding the law when the law is unjust. During a discussion about juries at NYU Law School on Monday, Sotomayor, who used to serve on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit, was asked about a 1997 decision in which that court "categorically reject[ed]" nullification. "As we govern in the system, and watching it, I'm not so sure that's right," she said, according to Law360. "There is a place, I think, for jury nullification—finding the balance in that and the role judges should play."...

[youtube]c2iEDhThQ_U[/youtube]

[Jan Steen]

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

[Ape+lust]

I need to get a domain and I am going to set up a simple wordpress page for the podcast(s) and I am going to go with soundcloud to actually host the audio. Their pro unlimited is about 130 a year which is a decent price and allows me to be able to do long form shows and not worry about hitting a hard limit.

If you don't know, there's been talk in the past few days about Soundcloud's uncertain future:

https://www.google.com/search?num=20&sa ... soundcloud

[gurugeorge]

Yes, gurugeorge, there's always a kernel of truth, isn't there?

Or, even if not a kernel of truth, at least something worth thinking about, worth contemplating, and maybe worth trying to refine philosophically, or knock up into a more scientific, falsifiable hypothesis.

But they never get to that stage, they just declare the topic done and dusted at some arbitrary point, and confabulate from there.

But that reveals the insectile, mindless nature of the bad replicator - it was never actually interested in the topic at hand, only in gathering converts, in replicating, in having everyone with the same rationalization engine installed in their necktop app.

[comhcinc]

NECSS statement on Dawkins:

http://necss.org/2016/02/14/statement-f ... committee/

We wish to apologize to Professor Dawkins for our handling of his disinvitation to NECSS 2016. Our actions were not professional, and we should have contacted him directly to express our concerns before acting unilaterally. We have sent Professor Dawkins a private communication expressing this as well. This apology also extends to all NECSS speakers, our attendees, and to the broader skeptical movement.

We wish to use this incident as an opportunity to have a frank and open discussion of the deeper issues implicated here, which are causing conflict both within the skeptical community and within society as a whole. NECSS 2016 will therefore feature a panel discussion addressing these topics. There is room for a range of reasonable opinions on these issues and our conversation will reflect that diversity. We have asked Professor Dawkins to participate in this discussion at NECSS 2016 in addition to his prior scheduled talk, and we hope he will accept our invitation.

This statement and our discussions with Professor Dawkins were initiated prior to learning of his recent illness. All of NECSS wishes Professor Dawkins a speedy and full recovery.

The NECSS Executive Committee

So does this

We wish to use this incident as an opportunity to have a frank and open discussion of the deeper issues implicated here, which are causing conflict both within the skeptical community and within society as a whole.

mean they are going to address the fact that they are a bunch of assholes and they need to cut that shit out?

[Really?]

So does this

We wish to use this incident as an opportunity to have a frank and open discussion of the deeper issues implicated here, which are causing conflict both within the skeptical community and within society as a whole.

mean they are going to address the fact that they are a bunch of assholes and they need to cut that shit out?

No. It means that NECSS will feature a panel with PZ, Rebecca Watson, Stephoknee Zvan, Oolon and Richard Dawkins to discuss how Richard Dawkins has caused a rift in the skeptical community and within society as a whole.

[comhcinc]

I need to get a domain and I am going to set up a simple wordpress page for the podcast(s) and I am going to go with soundcloud to actually host the audio. Their pro unlimited is about 130 a year which is a decent price and allows me to be able to do long form shows and not worry about hitting a hard limit.

If you don't know, there's been talk in the past few days about Soundcloud's uncertain future:

https://www.google.com/search?num=20&sa ... soundcloud

I seen that. They lost about 70 million over 2014-2015 and then just raised 77 million so I don't think they are going anywhere. They might get bought out but I don't think it will affect what I want to use it for.

I have looked into other solutions and they cost a good bit more in actual cost and time setting stuff up. I am not looking to make more in fact unless I am just begged (this isn't a set up to be begged) I plan on eating all the cost myself forever. I need a hobby and I want to do this.