Periodic Table of Swearing

#421

Za-zen wrote:Benson was specifically asked to condemn laden on the thread that justin nuked....... Her hypocracy was pointed out to her, and if i recall it was said to her that she wouldn't blog about it, guess what blackhole benson disregards, justin shouldn't have nuked that thread.

But when benson gets her funny email, its all fucking hell breaking loose at fftb. Fucking greta in tears, myers calling for bodygaurds lol, the nuttyness was ratcheted up to ten! Demands to know what TAM were going to do about it! Fucking nutters, and all their cultlings flooding the blogs in horror that batshitcrazybenson had got "death threats". And these people don't get that they are being manipulated?! Myers et al are laughing their asses off at just how fucking dumb their asskissers are, a lottle army of echo to point at whoever they want to levy power over.

I can understand how someone who only gets one side of a story fed to them would be inclined to go along with whatever the FC5 say is the "Truth" of a matter, but FFS the hypocritical way they have responded to this whole Laden thing is so obviously apparent I just can't understand how their defenders can convince themselves that their in the right (on at least this issue). Abbie was practically declared a danger to society for less than the crap Laden is being allowed to get away with. The guy actually threatened physical harm on someone, and then practically dehumanized him by sniping how he doesn't deserve to breath the same oxygen as other people. I mean, come on, what else do they need to happen to see through the BS?

#422

It's so fucking ridiculous. On Twitter, or in blogs, the idiot #FTBullies Horde defend their bullying by saying it's not bullying, and many of them say that to characterize their behavior as bullying tivializes of all the real bullying going on in the world today. To that, I say that getting hysterical over a complete non-event in an elevator, or shrieking that an email from a supporter giving advice on how to be safe at a con is a threat, or trying to impose iron-fisted lists that govern every aspect of human interaction at cons, trivializes all the real abuses and subjugation of women going on in the world today.

tl;dr - "Dear Muslima..."

#423

Saint N. wrote:
Za-zen wrote:Benson was specifically asked to condemn laden on the thread that justin nuked....... Her hypocracy was pointed out to her, and if i recall it was said to her that she wouldn't blog about it, guess what blackhole benson disregards, justin shouldn't have nuked that thread.

But when benson gets her funny email, its all fucking hell breaking loose at fftb. Fucking greta in tears, myers calling for bodygaurds lol, the nuttyness was ratcheted up to ten! Demands to know what TAM were going to do about it! Fucking nutters, and all their cultlings flooding the blogs in horror that batshitcrazybenson had got "death threats". And these people don't get that they are being manipulated?! Myers et al are laughing their asses off at just how fucking dumb their asskissers are, a lottle army of echo to point at whoever they want to levy power over.
I can understand how someone who only gets one side of a story fed to them would be inclined to go along with whatever the FC5 say is the "Truth" of a matter, but FFS the hypocritical way they have responded to this whole Laden thing is so obviously apparent I just can't understand how their defenders can convince themselves that their in the right (on at least this issue). Abbie was practically declared a danger to society for less than the crap Laden is being allowed to get away with. The guy actually threatened physical harm on someone, and then practically dehumanized him by sniping how he doesn't deserve to breath the same oxygen as other people. I mean, come on, what else do they need to happen to see through the BS?

Funny thing is, most of Pharyngula's regular commenters (and probably many of the bloggers as well) have long loathed Laden, and know full well what a POS he is. Now they're in a position where they have to swallow the fact that the powers that be at FtB think he's just swell, at least as an ally of convenience. The cognitive dissonance combined with the need to keep toeing the line and clamp their hands over their mouths to keep from yelling "are you fucking crazy?" at PZ and Brayton must be killing them :lol:

#424

Apologies if this has already been mentioned, but Dawkins gave Paula Kirby some solid support today on Twitter:

I strongly agree that http://tinyurl.com/3ooxc6d is "A fantastic essay by Paula Kirby on how religions keep women down."

Interesting that Paula's essay (on how religion fucks women over) is over a year old, and that Dawkins would give it props now. Maybe he's letting her know he's been noticing her anti-FTBullies activism.

#425

Hey yo.

Much prefer this long thread action.
I love Dawkins more and more. Problem?

#426

Should we assume Dawkins is now doing this face?

https://p.twimg.com/AqnsomQCMAE_xtf.jpg

Trolololol, indeed!

#427

I think "Problem?" needs to become the next "You mad, Bro." So spread the meme far and wide fellow denizens.

#428

I totally agree, cause i was just thinking that.

"problem?"

It's an instant fucking hit. Absolute classic from the man

#429

http://gumbercules.com/rdp.jpg

Guest · #430

Just noticed the following - number of twitter followers for each:

Richard Dawkins - 397,019
PZ Myers - 106,757
Greg Laden - 3,165
Ophelia Benson - 1,756
Stephanie Zvan - 1,102

:D :lol: :D :lol: :D

#431

http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/ ... 318990.jpg

#432

Have a go yourself http://memegenerator.net/Rd-Problem

#433

How about this one?

http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/ ... 319275.jpg

#434

Guest wrote:Just noticed the following - number of twitter followers for each:

Richard Dawkins - 397,019
PZ Myers - 106,757
Greg Laden - 3,165
Ophelia Benson - 1,756
Stephanie Zvan - 1,102

:D :lol: :D :lol: :D

For the sake of completeness

Maria Maltseva (Bluharmony) - 2118
skepchick - 0 "How many idiots are following me today? Ha!!!!!"
Rebecca Watson - 24,351
Paula Kirby - 916

Hrmm @PaulaSKirby could use more followers

#435

http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/ ... 319494.jpg

#436

You know the whole thing about t ryan, they accused him of creating drama to get bog hit from association with self declared celebrity atheists.

Well that was the mistake dawkins made, he created twatson. She is utterly talentless, utterly clueless other than she is good at spotting an oppurtunity for self promotion, dawkins handed that to her, and credit where credit is due, she has squeezed every drop of dollar and attention out of it she can.

#437

http://skepdirt.wordpress.com/2012/07/1 ... t-all-wet/

Commenter barael adds this:

According to legend, Jason Thibeaultâ€™s writing has the power to make mortal men involuntarily check if their own scrotum is still intact.

#438

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nationa ... -1.1112218

Copsâ€™ â€˜Hug thugâ€™ dilemma: Hugging strangers is strange, but not illegal

Missouri police say they have identified a 'serial hugger' who has been terrorizing dozens of women in the St. Louis area for months, but aren't sure if he should face criminal charges.

#439

The Elevator gate memes are buying into their narrative. Don't do that! How about some "Bad form" buttons, SN could run them off if she was watching. Or "Bad form Rebecca, Bad form"

#440

Twatson would love To annoy dawkins enough that there was a twitter or blog tustle, she has nothing in her tool bag other than division and drama. Plus shes a nobody, and getting dawkins attention makes her a somebody and theirs residual gains from that. Like your average stripper doing a kiss and tell on a sports star.

#441

Good to see you back, Munkhaus.

I have especially enjoyed the last couple of hours, with Dawkins pwing the Baboons without even putting in any effort. I love it.

#442

Dilurk wrote:The Elevator gate memes are buying into their narrative. Don't do that! How about some "Bad form" buttons, SN could run them off if she was watching. Or "Bad form Rebecca, Bad form"

True, but Elevatorgate was the one thing Dawkins actually commented on during this year-long mess that I'm aware of ("Dear Muslima...") Sorry, it's the caption the naturally came to mind for me. Plus, those people know the opposition's argument full well, they just don't care and will continue to build their army of angry rape apologist MRA / gender traitor strawmen no matter what anyone who opposes the FTB/Skepchick cult says anyway. These liars will always twist what people who don't buy into their bullshit say. Always. They're so dug into their nonsense now that they have no other choice.

They're just like creationists, who are so vested in AnswersInGenesis-type nonsense that it literally impossible for them to stop lying Stopping the lies would be admitting being wrong. After all the smackdowns PZ has put on Ken Ham for his shitty lie-filled defenses of creationism, it sure is ironic to see PZ and the other "feminists" argue in the exact same way. Somewhere, Ken Ham is smiling.

#443

Did anyone see the Peezus reply to Dawkins?

PZ Myers â€@pzmyers

Yes, it's called consent. RT @sciencecomic @RichardDawkins How heartwarming is Skepchick invitation "HUG ME at TAM"

#444

Gumby wrote:
Dilurk wrote:The Elevator gate memes are buying into their narrative. Don't do that! How about some "Bad form" buttons, SN could run them off if she was watching. Or "Bad form Rebecca, Bad form"
True, but Elevatorgate was the one thing Dawkins actually commented on during this year-long mess that I'm aware of ("Dear Muslima...") Sorry, it's the caption the naturally came to mind for me. Plus, those people know the opposition's argument full well, they just don't care and will continue to build their army of angry rape apologist MRA / gender traitor strawmen no matter what anyone who opposes the FTB/Skepchick cult says anyway. These liars will always twist what people who don't buy into their bullshit say. Always. They're so dug into their nonsense now that they have no other choice.

I agree, they do. But it is not them we should be talking to. They are willfully ignoring evidence, just like the creationists! So I know Dawkin's didn't say it, but gosh a nice photo of someone with the caption "Bad form Rebecca bad form" Just might get the fence sitters asking questions. "bad form ? huh? what?" THat's the sort of thing we need. Any good ideas?

They're just like creationists, who are so vested in AnswersInGenesis-type nonsense that it literally impossible for them to stop lying Stopping the lies would be admitting being wrong. After all the smackdowns PZ has put on Ken Ham for his shitty lie-filled defenses of creationism, it sure is ironic to see PZ and the other "feminists" argue in the exact same way. Somewhere, Ken Ham is smiling.

Yes, there is no point arguing with these people, they have set up a narrative, they are doing apologetics just like I have seen apologists arguing about christianity, only it is {b]their[/b] cult they are doing the apologetics for, a form of presuppositional apologetics only for their cult.

So how about it?

Sister Chromatid · #445

Thunderfoot "twittered" about Dawkin's post too.

Randi gave his "consent" a couple of weeks ago in his letter inviting everyone to Tam:

"See you in less than two weeks! And don't forget that I'm very huggable!

- Randi"

#446

Sister Chromatid wrote:

Thunderfoot "twittered" about Dawkin's post too.

Not quiet as subtle, heh.

#447

Here at TAM. :) Saw Randi. Sucks you can only get free wifi near the registration desk.

Sister Chromatid · #448

Not quiet as subtle, heh.

He's a "shitty" writer I hear-- Why, that's the reason they say he got kicked off of FTB.

Guest · #449

Saw Randi.

He's given his full consent to be hugged-- so feel free to hug away.

#450

Dilurk wrote:
Gumby wrote:
Dilurk wrote:The Elevator gate memes are buying into their narrative. Don't do that! How about some "Bad form" buttons, SN could run them off if she was watching. Or "Bad form Rebecca, Bad form"
True, but Elevatorgate was the one thing Dawkins actually commented on during this year-long mess that I'm aware of ("Dear Muslima...") Sorry, it's the caption the naturally came to mind for me. Plus, those people know the opposition's argument full well, they just don't care and will continue to build their army of angry rape apologist MRA / gender traitor strawmen no matter what anyone who opposes the FTB/Skepchick cult says anyway. These liars will always twist what people who don't buy into their bullshit say. Always. They're so dug into their nonsense now that they have no other choice.
I agree, they do. But it is not them we should be talking to. They are willfully ignoring evidence, just like the creationists! So I know Dawkin's didn't say it, but gosh a nice photo of someone with the caption "Bad form Rebecca bad form" Just might get the fence sitters asking questions. "bad form ? huh? what?" THat's the sort of thing we need. Any good ideas?
They're just like creationists, who are so vested in AnswersInGenesis-type nonsense that it literally impossible for them to stop lying Stopping the lies would be admitting being wrong. After all the smackdowns PZ has put on Ken Ham for his shitty lie-filled defenses of creationism, it sure is ironic to see PZ and the other "feminists" argue in the exact same way. Somewhere, Ken Ham is smiling.
Yes, there is no point arguing with these people, they have set up a narrative, they are doing apologetics just like I have seen apologists arguing about christianity, only it is {b]their[/b] cult they are doing the apologetics for, a form of presuppositional apologetics only for their cult.

So how about it?

You're absolutely right. Arguing directly with them accomplishes nothing. Dawkins, followed by PZ, has stated that he will no longer debate creationists. Of course, that's because debate is absolutely fruitless when your counterpart is employing a mixture of logical fallacies, outright lies, strawmen and a heaping dose of Gish Gallop. And the creationist always goes back to his followers and smugly proclaims that he "won" the debate, no matter how badly he got his arguments trounced. The same thing is happening with the dissembling FTB baboon cult.

I spent a good three years debating creationists online in various discussion forums before I finally decided that it just wasn't worth the time. So, I switched tactics. I would still respond to creationist tripe when I saw it, but instead of getting into a protracted and useless back-and-forth I would just create separate posts (not quoting the creationist) where I simply corrected the creationist manglings of evolutionary and other sciences, and debunked creationist propositions put forth. Those posts weren't for the creationists, although they took it as such. Instead, they were for people who might be wondering whether creationism or evolution is true, and just happened to come across forums I posted on. Instead of debating creationist fools directly, I put out the correct information for whoever wants to read it in the future. Put it out there, let the jury decide.

I'm not saying direct confrontation with the baboons should be avoided at all costs, hell no. It's not only necessary to call out outright lies, it's fun! Ha ha. But I think that the best thing to do is simply concentrate on the goal of simply laying out the facts for all to see, calmly and rationally. On those creationist threads I referred to, the Christian young earth creationists always looked like howling nutjobs compared to the rational intelligent people who avoided getting sucked into idiotic "debates" and simply stuck to relating the facts. Half the battle in situations like this is maintaining calm while your counterpart loses his. As screechy, utterly hysterical, dogmatic and reactionary as the baboons act, that shouldn't be too tough. I can't tell you how many times in evo/creo debates where a lurker has appeared and said something to the effect of "Well, I haven't formed an opinion on which side is right yet, but I like the way you guys are putting your arguments out. Those Christians are acting like idiots!" Ding! Battle half won already.

I can only speak for myself but from now on I'm going to consider the FTB'ers as nothing more than creationist fundies, because that's what they are. And part of doing that involves not getting sucked into their narrative, like I did with that Dawkins meme pic I posted. So thanks for reminding me of that.

#451

Dilurk wrote:I can tell you from personal experience the nutcases on the Internet these days have left me very skittish when I was first on the Internet things were not near this bad as far as cyber bullying and personal stalking Ya I have had the 3am prank calls and finally had someone stalk me and my family years ago As I said I try to be more low key now

At the risk of being accused of tooting my own horn, I was warning of this within the godless community since well before I even knew what Skepchick was. F'rinstance, who remembers TamTamPamela? -

http://greylining.com/2011/03/21/mom-i-poed-my-pants/

What the baboons are proving is the central point of the theist critics of godlessness - that (baboon style populist) atheism really is a moral vacuum. PZ "Naked Emperor" Myers is god's gift to the loopy xtian right.

#452

franc wrote:
Dilurk wrote:F'rinstance, who remembers TamTamPamela? -

I neglected to mention TamTampamela was a fucking highschool chick. A teenager - a child as far as I am concerned. This is a forgotten episode - but as shameful as anything I have ever seen from the godless "community".

#453

franc wrote:
Dilurk wrote:I can tell you from personal experience the nutcases on the Internet these days have left me very skittish when I was first on the Internet things were not near this bad as far as cyber bullying and personal stalking Ya I have had the 3am prank calls and finally had someone stalk me and my family years ago As I said I try to be more low key now
At the risk of being accused of tooting my own horn, I was warning of this within the godless community since well before I even knew what Skepchick was. F'rinstance, who remembers TamTamPamela? -

She got bullied off after trolling atheists. I remember her story well. You can toot your own horn on this one, and since I learned my lesson the hard way, I am being reasonably careful this time. I don't suppose I will be receiving 3am prank calls from Abbie or Lsuoma.

http://greylining.com/2011/03/21/mom-i-poed-my-pants/

What the baboons are proving is the central point of the theist critics of godlessness - that (baboon style populist) atheism really is a moral vacuum. PZ "Naked Emperor" Myers is god's gift to the loopy xtian right.

Well, PZ has claimed that there is more to being an atheist than not believing in god. He insisted you had to be a sceptical thinker in order to be an atheist. Of course, a sceptical thinker that thinks like he does.

#454

They have become such a parody of themselves, so very removed from reality, at this point all we need to do is sit back and watch... But it is just so much more fun to speed things along a bit.

Regarding OB deleting a comment that asks about her allowing Laden to continue to comment on her blog, it seems as though they honestly believe no one will catch their hypocrisy and double standards.
It's well beyond Dunning-Kruger.
How can OB believe that by deleting a comment, it will be gone forever, after we have exhaustively documented, and taken screen shots of everything before it is deleted? Are they honestly able to continue to believe that it is just a handful of people from ERV that have issues with them?
It's just bizarre.
Look at the ridiculous comments Becci and the skepchicks (and their groupies) tweeted in response to Dawkins today. How in the world can they believe he is against vaccination, or believe that those that read their tweets will believe that?
My respect for RD went up even more today. Just a reference to their idiocy, once in a blue moon, by a well respected and quite famous member of the Sceptic community makes an enormous difference. I wonder if Paula Kirby is a good friend of his, and that was a way to show his support, since she is their target of choice right now.
It would be nice if more high profile scientists and or sceptics were willing to do the same as Dawkins. I would never expect them to associate with us, and post here, but what is with the silence?
The baboons' leaders are PZ, Becci, and a bunch of basically unknown bloggers. Becci could have been shunned so easily, long ago. PZ now has a dreadful reputation in the real sceptic community, so he has no power to silence, or mock anyone who is respected. After the baboons' reaction to Dawkins the first time, (Dawkins certainly needs no one running to his aid) but before they attacked DJ Grothe and the JREF, I can see where someone who does not follow it as closely as most of us do, could see the behaviour as confined to their little echo chamber, but once they attacked the JREF and therefore James Randi, Speaking out against them should have been ubiquitous. They attacked James Randi for fuck's sake!
How did they get away with that? There wouldn't be an organised and vast sceptic community without Randi. He is scepticism. James Randi is one of the loveliest people I have ever met. He considers all the sceptics his friends. He is gracious, humble, generous, and fun. Everyone should have pointed and laughed when the baboons had the audacity (and stupidity) to go after Randi. Those who were not willing to speak up, defend, and stand by Randi, will forever be cowards as far as I'm concerned...

Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:Just a quick comment to say I'm still lurking, and enjoying my time a lot. The FC5 (6) have dug a grave so deep it's impossible for them to go back. And the beautiful part is we have all the evidence needed, thanks to Franc's wiki, among other sources. This wiki needs to be complemented with as many sources as possible so it can never be ignored.

#455

Dawkins is making himself extremely clear. Those are not hints. His delivery is pure UK (yes, I know he grew up in South Africa, but he went to university in England).

Za-zen wrote:Dawkins in my estimation would love to tell these twits to grow up, but he's looking at a big picture, i think he's just dropping hints as to where he stands, Paula kirby is taking a lot of flak, and she needs the big guns of the rational movement to let her know she isn't alone against the cultists.

By the way Dawkins very recently used "baboon" to describe creationists.

#456

sacha wrote:Dawkins is making himself extremely clear. Those are not hints. His delivery is pure UK (yes, I know he grew up in South Africa, but he went to university in England).

I got that too. Dry sense of humour He is poking serious fun at the baboons, the best part is, most of them don't grok that he is.

#457

For those at TAM:
http://skeptools.wordpress.com/2012/06/ ... eting-tam/

Stretchycheese wrote:Here at TAM. :) Saw Randi. Sucks you can only get free wifi near the registration desk.

#458

sacha wrote:Are they honestly able to continue to believe that it is just a handful of people from ERV that have issues with them?

Yes, because as long as they believe that they can safely keep up their delusion amongst themselves. Kinda like how some theists pretend that deep down all atheists really know that there is a god. Different bullshit, same logic.

sacha wrote:PZ now has a dreadful reputation in the real sceptic community, so he has no power to silence, or mock anyone who is respected.

Its noteworthy that he never went after Dawkins for the whole "Dear Muslima" comment like he went after others for less. Hell, he went after DJ, who simply said that FtB and Skepchick are overstating harassment incidences. Dawkins did more than that in his two comment last summer, he pretty much told them they're all being stupid and need to stop their whining. PZ knows where he stands outside of his little insulated area in the blogosphere, and doesn't pick fights with people whose real-life influence is bigger than his.

sacha wrote:How in the world can they believe he is against vaccination, or believe that those that read their tweets will believe that?

Watson left a brief twitter comment asking (i'm paraphrasing here) "Is Dawkins making fun of Skepchick's anti-vaccination campaign?" I wanted to shout, "No, you idiot! He's making fun of you!"

#459

http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/ ... 334545.jpg

#460

And like that, the lulz are back in full force. :lol:

#461

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/ ... 21w78.html - hurt feelings or dead. Hmm. Must be a misogynist.

#462

Dawkins is a great troll.

Greg Laden is too, but he does it joylessly. Pity.

#463

There is some serious troll on troll action going on in that laden thread. :evil:

Sister Chromatid · #464

From #Tam2012

Best T-shirt ever! "I'm a skeptic, not a 'skepchick' not a woman skeptic' just a skeptic"

(And check out the top comment on http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/swi ... pitch.html )

Sister Chromatid · #465

Emily is concerned:

#466

That didn't take long. The @Skepchick_Anon twitter account has been suspended.

#467

Sister Chromatid wrote:Emily is concerned:

I always smirk when people refer to it as a harassment policy.

#468

Sexism and Atheism, the Rebecca Watson and PZ Myers conundrum:

This is yet another non-issue, Ms. Watson. You and Myers have taken something that is small, and incredibly easy to deal with and inflated it with importance, just as you did with the elevator issue. I am not writing this to insult you. I am writing this because I hope that some part of you legitimately understands that what is happening here is pointless, and having the atheist community focus on this is a waste of time.

https://lucien0maverick.wordpress.com/2 ... conundrum/

#469

More on Coffeegate:

I've found some more information on the ridiculous shitstorm that has been raging for well over a year now and I'd like to add some views of my own

This article shows Elevatorgate in better light and this article sums up what is happening to Paula Kirby right now.

I've read a heck of a lot about this and I've come to the conclusion that the likes of Rebecca Watson and PZ are indeed wrong about not only their conclusions of the events but also in their approach to discussing it. What worries me even more is that, in disagreeing with them, I could get the same treatment as others have - but thankfully Tea Fuelled Madness is far too under the radar.

But still.

Really?

Is this who the sceptical community really are?

http://teafueledmadness.blogspot.com/20 ... egate.html

Now above the radar :twisted:

Guest · #470

Reading up on all the Dawkins trolling I missed while being gainfully employed. I love Dawkins so much. The fuckers at Pharyngula almost made me quit everything to do with the skeptic movement out of disgust, but then I sat down and I reread some of Dawkins work (we read him at our wedding) and I was like... no. These people are temporary. This guy's legacy and amazing work is going to be forever.

ALSO HE'S TOTALLY BADASS.

Have to say I'm loving all the links to stuff that people are providing, nothing makes me happier than people calling out the Baboons and their little cult. :D

Sister Chromatid · #471

Link from #TAM2012

(Doug Stanhope defends Daniel Tosh-- discusses TAM)

rayshul rayshul · #472

...Erg, I accidentally guested. :/

But the other thing I wanted to say is that I don't understand what they WANT from this magical harrassment policy. How does it make people feel safer? I mean it's fucking paperwork. People know already that assholes get kicked out when they behave like assholes. So like what the fuck is this going to change?

I just can't think of a reason why this would be beneficial in any way.

Guest · #473

The anti-harassment policy DJ made last year http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/jre ... ments.html didn't keep HIM from being harassed by the freethought bullies. In fact, it seems like it made the bullies feel more entitled to dictate what he should do this year! I'm glad they've decided to give a cold shoulder to the bullies. If someone thinks regular laws aren't enough to protect them at events, then they probably shouldn't go to an event.

Even with a harassment policy, Thunderfoot still bit a woman's leg-- ha! and none of the minor, unsubstantiated bits of harassment they were able to find, embellish, and exclaim over could have been prevented by an anti-harassment policy. None. Zero. And if what we heard are their very best examples of harassment (and I'm sure it is)-- then skeptics conventions are very, very safe indeed. As Thunderfoot says, anti-harassment policies just make organizations sound liable for things they cannot control or enforce. I don't think TAM wants to be associated with the Skepchicks much anymore. It's easier to be boycotted by the freethought bullies than it is to tell them that you don't want them there. By the way, I think the real reason that Rebecca isn't going to TAM is because they didn't pay her way-- the way they do for speakers-- like Miranda Celeste Hale. I think some skeptic events are going to go out of their way to invite enemies of the skepchicks/ftbullies just so that self-righteous, shit stirring, hypocrisy filled group doesn't show up. Invite Abbie to speak and keep the bullies away!

Guest · #474

#475

I can only wish event organizers would just stop inviting FTB/Skepchick speakers at all. Would make the events more interesting. I almost went to Cologne, but refrained when I saw the speakers' list.

Unrelated: I'd love to know what those precious flowers imagine a Metal Festival is like. All those hairy, bearded guys running around completely drunk... and yet, Metal Festivals are among the safest events, due in no small proportion to the fact that the majority of metal-heads would fall like a ton of bricks on anyone who would dare harrass or threaten somebody (male, female, transgender, etc...) in the blink of an eye.

#476

rayshul rayshul wrote:...Erg, I accidentally guested. :/

This is good. Shows paranoid narcissists like Zwan that there are no guard dogs, machine gun turrets or inner party censors toiling day and night.

But the other thing I wanted to say is that I don't understand what they WANT from this magical harrassment policy. How does it make people feel safer? I mean it's fucking paperwork. People know already that assholes get kicked out when they behave like assholes. So like what the fuck is this going to change?

I just can't think of a reason why this would be beneficial in any way.

You misunderstand them. They don't want anything real from this. All they want is to find some new trivial detail to whine about and howl at how downtrodden they are. Flagellants. Jacobins. This is a slave revolt - they have no real goals other than to point at those they perceive responsible for their worthlessness and yell "evil!". The key force at play is resentment, followed by eternal revenge for an eternity of imaginary suffering. This is a business model - not progressive change. You could concede each and every idiotic demand they have today, unconditionally, and they would be back tomorrow with a fresh list. There will never be satisfaction - to allow that to happen would mean the FfTB misandry gravy train would dry up.

#477

sacha wrote:Are they honestly able to continue to believe that it is just a handful of people from ERV that have issues with them?

Absolutely. I had one baboon tell me authoritatively on Twitter that the only people who are complaining are the Slymepit, Paula Kirby and Jeremy Stangroom. Unreal.

rayshul ararar · #478

franc wrote: You misunderstand them. They don't want anything real from this. All they want is to find some new trivial detail to whine about and howl at how downtrodden they are. Flagellants. Jacobins. This is a slave revolt - they have no real goals other than to point at those they perceive responsible for their worthlessness and yell "evil!". The key force at play is resentment, followed by eternal revenge for an eternity of imaginary suffering. This is a business model - not progressive change. You could concede each and every idiotic demand they have today, unconditionally, and they would be back tomorrow with a fresh list. There will never be satisfaction - to allow that to happen would mean the FfTB misandry gravy train would dry up.

Oh I'm pretty sure the little blogger boys are all fucking high on their white knighting trip and twatson is loving the blog hits and feeling like the Queen of THE OPPRESSED but I actulaly think there are some genuine posters amongst the mix of monkeyfucks who GENUINELY SEEM TO FEEL SAFE IF SOMEONE WRITES SOME SHIT ON A PIECE OF PAPER FOR THEM. They've been led to believe that ONLY THIS FUCKING PAPER CAN SAVE THEM FROM RAPE. Like only if someone does this shit and puts it down will they be PROTECTED, at least that's what i've seen from the threads. I mean surely they understand this is either stupid or symbolic and either way its fucking moronic.

rayshul bugger · #479

Bugger, I hope that comment hasn't generated a wave of posts about how signing a piece of paper freed slaves or resulted in peaceful treaties or a million other things that involve paper but are Not Like This.

rayshul reconsiders · #480

Sorry for the triple post. I'm now looking up how anti harrassment policies work because I'm still struggling to grasp what's going on here. So I'm just thinking my way through it out loud (or out internet loud).

Most of the things I've read are about how policies work within organisations, or for employers - they give people grounds to sue, or to question what they see is an unfair dismissal. Right? But that's not going to work within a conference where you can just kick people out if they do something wrong, and that seems to be exactly what happens at these events anyway. (If they are reported.) No one is going to sue the conference owners (you'd hope) and the end result would be exactly the same if there was a specific policy or not.

So it has to be symbolic, I figure, and that these people who need this harrassment policy so badly want it because they've been scared into believing that this is what they have to have, and this is the only way people are going to listen to people who have been harrassed (and really, specifically, they mean women who've been harrassed). They want confirmation that they're going to be listened to if a problem comes up, and they've latched onto this as the only way that's going to happen. Which isn't true, but it seems like that's the thinking behind this. And so everytime they hear someone say, "We don't need this policy" or "We already HAVE a method of dealing with situations" or "It's legally not a good idea" they hear "We don't care if you have a problem."

And that's where all these wild ideas and viewpoints are coming from.

Am I right, is this what's going on?