Periodic Table of Swearing

Guest · #721

But the funniest thing I saw was a new name coined for FfTBs... Closedthoughtblogs

I like Coffee-with-Claire's "FreeNOTblogs".

#722

Skeeve wrote:Comments?

[Editorial]Atheism, Feminism and Ego

Loved that summary. I don't know how big their traffic is, but I hope it gets bigger.

#723

Notung wrote:I'm sorry, but this thread is commonly referred to as the "slimepit". Please start rabidly attacking and insulting each other. We have a reputation to uphold, and this discussion is far too rational.

Agreed. Maybe we could put our own spin on it... like after calling someone a fuckwit, we can point them to the wiki (a la 101) then tell them to shove a hedgehog in their earhole.

#724

JAB wrote:
Skeeve wrote:Comments?

[Editorial]Atheism, Feminism and Ego

Loved that summary. I don't know how big their traffic is, but I hope it gets bigger.

Just went back to look again... I didn't notice before that you penned that, Skeeve. Well done.

#725

JAB wrote:
JAB wrote:
Skeeve wrote:Comments?

[Editorial]Atheism, Feminism and Ego

Loved that summary. I don't know how big their traffic is, but I hope it gets bigger.
Just went back to look again... I didn't notice before that you penned that, Skeeve. Well done.

Well, we're a small site, but I felt the need to voice an opinion from the "little guys". And thanks.

#726

Sorry, I thought I made clear that my primary issue was with her message. I said Paula Kirby was wrong, and you assumed it was because I found fault with her word usage. I did go on to explain why I don't think she did herself any good by her word choice, but the bigger issue I saw was of her telling women to shut up about making things that aren't that bad better by not being lazy and forging their own way without being victims. I think I understand what her Intended message was,but I think it was poorly communicated.

Ok, I take your 1st point

I thought her message was clear and note that lots of people understood it very clearly and agreed with it. Nobody is obliged to make life comfortable for anyone else. If you are going to cause a ruckus and indulge in 'collective action', then you'd better be able to provide some good evidence that it's worth anyone else's time and effort before calling them names for not allowing you to dominate the agenda. Show me evidence that there is a problem with sexism in the atheist/skeptic community (that doesn't involve youtube trolls) that actually blocks the participation of self-respecting adult women and I'll lend my voice.

#727

Person X is WRONG!!!

NO.

NO ME GUSTA.

If I said "6 + 8 = 5927495", THAT would be wrong.

If I said "The capitol of Canada is Frankfurt", THAT would be wrong.

"I disagree with Rebecca Watson" is not WRONG.

"Rebecca Watson has valid points" is not WRONG.

"I think exaggerating cases of 'sexual harassment' or 'threats' makes things more difficult for people who are genuinely sexually harassed or threatened" is not WRONG.

"Every incident, however minor, needs to be reported" is not WRONG.

"I think Kirby using a -azi reference was off color" is not WRONG.

"I think Kirby using a -azi reference was apt" is not WRONG.

Fucking OPINIONS are not RIGHT or WRONG. We DISAGREE.

All I have wanted from DAY ONE is the right to DISAGREE.

#728

This is the key part of Paula Kirby's piece for me. The bit that's being overlooked in all the nazi, stasi palaver.

Similarly, I spent 7 of the last 10 years organizing events for business people... Over and over again, I tried â€“ how I tried! â€“ to findwomen speakers.... other delegates, both male and female, would tell me they'd like to hear from more women speakers.... And we didn't just invite: weencouraged, we offered support, we offered coaching, we changed the format of events to make them feel less daunting:we went out of our way, event after event after event, to encourage women to take a more prominent part. And almost always to no avail. There were two or three who were already happy to do it anyway and didn't need our encouragement... Try as we might, try as I might, most women we approached simply refused to even consider it, saying "Oh no, I couldn't possibly.

I don't know why women are less willing to be conference speakers than men. Perhaps women are generally less confident. Probably there are social/historical reasons for that. Those social/historical issues need to be overcome, because otherwise we are going to waste a lot of talent. However, this is a problem for the whole of society. It has taken generations to get this far. It will take generations more. It is not a problem that the tiny atheist/sceptic 'movement' can do more than dent. Nor should it try.

We can give women the same opportunities as men to be heard. We can do what Paula did and offer extra help and encouragement. But once we've made clear the door is open, it is up to women to walk through it. We can't tip the whole 'movement' on it's side and hope they fall in! What we have in common is a wish to see a rational/sceptical/godless point of view promoted. If we divert all our efforts to promoting feminism - as the FC5 seem to want - we'll have nothing left to devote to our original, our real goal. And even if we wanted to do it, and tried, we'd fail.

The FC5's efforts to impose a feminist first agenda on the whole 'movement' is doomed. But look at the damned mess it's making in it's death throes! I'm reminded of the cartoon that was doing the rounds a while back:

"It's time to make more room for women in scepticism. By forcing other people out!" When you go so far beyond Paula's efforts to get women, any women, oh shit even one more bloody woman, onto the platform! You know what you get? Rebecca Watson is what you get.

As she said herself: "In the land of the nerds, the double X chromosome is queen!" Poor, guilt-ridden, liberal, white males like PeeZus and Thibeault never had a chance. Never mind that on her best day Watson is a second-rate regurgitator of old ideas. Never mind that she is plainly a bloody awful human being. She's a skepchick. That's what matters. The cheesecake calendar/bordello party angle gave it a frisson no doubt. The White Knights have their Lady to champion. They can purge their guilt in the way chivalrous crusaders did in the past: By starting a big, costly, messy war that can't be won. Silly buggers!

Guest · #729

The FreeNOT bullies cannot distinguish their opinion from fact.

#730

Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote: I also want to say I love Masakari's avatar. Anyone with a Mech as an avatar can't be a bad person.

Masakari is the Inner Sphere name for the Clan mech, "Warhawk", the same mech that's my avatar.

#731

ERV wrote:NO.

[...]

We DISAGREE.

All I have wanted from DAY ONE is the right to DISAGREE.

You're ri... I agree!

#732

justinvacula wrote:It is, though, pretty interesting that Ophelia continues to express so much dissatisfaction with my podcast that mentioned her e-mails she considered to be reason enough to back out of TAM (see above), but didn't want to have a discussion during the podcast or appear on a future show even though she was invited. Fun stuff.

Don't worry about it. Ophelia is not interested in the truth or the facts. She is a nasty individual who hides behind lies, strawmen and the Baboon bullies that inhabit her blog. Let her fester away...

#733

Notung[/quote] I think everyone here would agree with you. Chris Hallquist looks like a good guy, as does Justin Griffith and I don't have any problem with Cristina Rad or AronRa (I must admit I'm not that familiar with them though). There are probably a few others that also don't seem to warrant the criticism that FTB has overall.[/quote]

I agree. And personally, my dispute is not with them, although I wish Cristina Rad could wake up and see what's going on around her. Just because people get harassed doesn't mean there needs to be a harassment policy, or that "women" should be chastising "men" as a gender. What should happen is for the laws which already exist to protect people from harassment in the US to get exercised.
http://www.skepticalabyss.com/?p=61

Harassment can happen anywhere. Yet, I still haven't seen actual evidence that harassment or abuse did happen at TAM, except for hearsay from hysterical Skepchick/FfTB sycophants (some of who may be the baboons on sock accounts).

#734

I love the fact that PZ wrote to ThunderF00t saying:

"If you see something you don't like, rip into it. That goes for everybody here. Except me. I'm perfect, don't you dare say otherwise."

Now, why do I get the feeling that last sentance WAS NOT sarcastic, a joke, or anything like that. But was, in fact, dead serious!

PZ simply comes across as a complete and total wanker. Also, has anyone else noticed that his voice has become even more winier.

#735

I've only heard of elevator guy and camera-on-a-telescoping-pole guy.

I've been curious about these other "incidents" some keep referring to.

#736

Skeeve wrote:I've been curious about these other "incidents" some keep referring to.

Apparently, somebody (who will rename anonymous) shook the hand of a woman without asking for permission. ;)

Guest · #737

Skeeve wrote:I've only heard of elevator guy and camera-on-a-telescoping-pole guy.

I've been curious about these other "incidents" some keep referring to.

Elevator guy wasn't at TAM.

#738

These are the only two instances that I've heard of any at freethought/skeptic/atheist conference

#739

Guest wrote:The FreeNOT bullies cannot distinguish their opinion from fact.

Why don't you delurk like I finally decided to do :) The waters fine and it is free of porcupines!

rayshul blargh · #740

I'm a bit late to Caede's post, and I'm pretty much on board with Dilurk's opinions. But I feel I need to say that Dawkins' comment on the issue was pretty spot on and in line with my thoughts on the matter, and I'm neither old, white or male. I really have a huge issue with people blaming someone's race or gender for views that disagree with their personal views, which to me feels like what you've done there. I don't see it as much different from realising that someone *is* the "right-gender-for-the-situation" and then blaming them for being a gender traitor.

Sure, I can see that arguments may come with a cultural bias, but that doesn't mean that it's not, well, er, better form, to look at the argument rather than speculating on the background of the person. (I remember that when people started saying Dawkins had never been the victim of sexual harrassment, it was veeeery quickly pointed out that he had been.) And the "old white guy" thing just feels cheap to me.

But maybe I'm just parroting misogynist thought. EHEHEHEHHEEH.

OH NOES IM SHITTING ON PEOPLES WORDS OMFG

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

IVE BECOME ONE OF THEMMMMM

COUGH SORRY

I also believe - but might be wrong - that part of Dawkins comment was also inspired by the fact RW blurted out her screed against Stef and rehashed the elevator incident at a conference which featured women discussing their experiences and knowledge of oppression under Islam - but it was the fucking elevator that seemed to get masses of attention. The contrast and complaint had a context.

I'm commenting here without looking back on any of the old posts/thoughts so this could all be misremembered baloney. If it is, sorry folks.

rayshul garg · #741

...and I think that ties into the ongoing issue on tying REALLY ACTUALLY INDESCRIBABLY HORRIBLE SHIT to people getting annoyed at conferences and saying These Things Are Alike.

Wooly Bumblebee had this great blog about a post of Benson's: http://www.isgodasquirrel.blogspot.ca/2 ... atory.html

Quoting from it...

She compared the horrific gang rape of Natasha Smith in Cairo to sexism. Sexism? This is not sexism, this is gang rape. This was a horrific and life-altering event for Natasha that she will most likely never forget.I can't even begin to imagine what she went through.

To equate Natasha Smith's experience to sexism is not only demeaning to her, but to all women who have been raped. It is an insult to minimize rape with a word like sexism. There is no comparison of what Natasha Smith went through to someone being harassed at a conference. And any to attempt to place the two on the same level is disgusting.

#742

Shotgun tactics:

Guest wrote:The FreeNOT bullies cannot distinguish their opinion from fact.

I favour - retaining the original initials - FuckThoughtBlogs

CommanderTuvok wrote: PZ simply comes across as a complete and total wanker. Also, has anyone else noticed that his voice has become even more winier.

The phrase I think you're searching for is "pussy whipped".

Guest wrote:Elevator guy wasn't at TAM.

Oh? How do you know? What do you know? Confessss!

#743

Saw this on Twitter

https://p.twimg.com/AxubMR0CQAAG83u.jpg

#744

Jean Kazez puts Opheliar Benson to rights on Twitter:

https://twitter.com/JeanKazez/status/223928344339681282

Guest · #745

Guest wrote:Elevator guy wasn't at TAM.

Oh? How do you know? What do you know? Confessss![/quote]

Because it happened in Dublin, Ireland, maybe?

#746

Caede wrote:Sat Jul 14, 2012 2:22 am: I felt it was a vendetta with the sheer amount of work Hoggle was putting into his blogging and commenting/posting tracing every word and phrase that PZ and others were saying.

Sat Jul 14, 2012 3:29 am: I don't question the hard work he's done in collecting and collating the data, I just have the perception that someone is obsessed with ruining PZ and others. I've stated I could be wrong.

That you are even willing to entertain the notion of error is the same as tattooing "I am not a baboon" on your forehead. Thank you. Refreshing. There are several points and quotes I need to raise, as I have before -

Some people wet their pants when they hear Derek and Clive and proclaim "genius!" Others frown down their noses and call them juvenile. The former are usually smarter than the latter.
Jefferson regarding xtians: â€œRidicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions." I extend Jefferson's assertion in that I am unable to distinguish between religion and the shallow personality cults of FfTB/Skepchick - they are the same derangements as far as I am concerned.
Sloterdijk on frauds: "How much truth is contained in something can be best determined by making it thoroughly laughable and then watching to see how much joking around it can take. For truth is a matter that can withstand mockery, that is freshened by any ironic gesture directed at it. Whatever cannot withstand satire is false."
I have at no point made the claim of being a serious commentator like Gurdur, Kazez, Blackford et al
I have repeatedly pointed out I am the court jester - black humour is often, as implied above, the most effective way to unmask charlatans. Always, there was method to the madness

You are throwing around words like "vendetta" and "obsession" and implying that I nitpick trivial transgression. That makes me wonder how much of my writing you have actually attentively read. Were I a small "c" cynic, I would assume you were basing your assumptions on the digest of what I say offered by FfTB. You want obsession? At one point they had something like 20 individual concurrent blogs pouring manure over poor old franc. Some would be hurt by that - I consider it an achievement. I don't think anyone has ever been subjected to such a concerted thrust of hatred by the baboons. That in itself should tell you maybe I was doing something right.

None of what I have "obsessed" about in my "vendetta" is trivia. Not one thing. If you are to read even one item of mine with actual attention, it should be the following, as everything I have ever said in one way or another leads back to this post -

http://greylining.com/2011/07/12/skepch ... olitanism/

It is pointed out beyond any doubt that FfTB is antithetical to Freethought. But on a deeper and more disturbing level, they are also antithetical to the concept of cosmopolitanism. They may crap on about egalitarianism and equality, but deep down, both of those concepts if applied without safety nets represent their deepest nightmares. The baboons are a complete inverse - what they actually want is a new caste system, with themselves perched at the top of the tree. Actual freedom where individuals interact freely terrifies them - because they are intellectual and social cripples; they are simply incapable of operating as individuals without crutches. They are invertibrate hive creatures terrified of autonomous bipeds with spines.

I have no wish to dissect what else I have said or spoonfeed you examples and handhold you through their meanings. I do however have a request of you - provide me with examples of "trivia" that do not fit with the bigger picture I have painstakingly assembled.

As for "bias" - to be "unbiased" necessitates not having any baseline, empirically derived concepts of "right" and "wrong". So I agree, yes, I am biased. Despicably so.

#747

Please help Ricky Gervais

itsajokecunt.jpg: (43.08 KiB) Downloaded 312 times

2.jpg: (44.41 KiB) Downloaded 308 times

#748

Guest wrote:
Guest wrote:Elevator guy wasn't at TAM.
Oh? How do you know? What do you know? Confessss!

I was at home.

#749

safewords.jpg: (33.95 KiB) Downloaded 294 times

I see that O'feelia has determined the words "babe" and "tits" are not misogynistc. I'm sure she will not have any issues with anyone else using those words either.

Horace aka net nanny · #750

Hey Franc,

be reasonable, they are the freethought blogs, not the freespeach blogs.

#751

Skeeve wrote:I've only heard of elevator guy and camera-on-a-telescoping-pole guy.

I've been curious about these other "incidents" some keep referring to.

There's been three instances of harassment at "TAM" that I've heard of, and I say "TAM" because two of them occurred outside of the actual TAM conference in the nearby Del Mar Bar. There were two cases during TAM 2009, one being the drunk neck-licking guy and then the Ashley Miller gatecrasher guy. Then during the last TAM, there was the "upskirt" guy that didn't take any upskirt pictures, Dr Buzzo or w/e his name is, who wouldn't leave that gender-fluid person alone.

The Dr Buzzo and neck-licking incidents both occured in the Del Mar Bar and the Ashley Miller guy wasn't even a conference attendee.

These examples are touted as justification for anti-harassment policies at skeptic/atheist cons yet every incident either occurred outside the con or the person doing it wasn't an attendee. So the pro-policy people are really doing nothing to fix an already miniscule problem (yes, 3 incidents, over three years and thousands of people is minuscule). They're stomping their feet and trying to make atheist/skeptic conferences conform to their whim. And they wonder why there's such a blowback?

#752

It's a joke, cunt!

#753

StueNever wrote:Then during the last TAM, there was the "upskirt" guy that didn't take any upskirt pictures

Yup, not only do the FTBullies seem to consistently accidentally forget to mention that the TAM security people determined at the time that the guy was entirely innocent, but it happens that you, yes, you, justice-loving slimepitter, can also show his complete innocence. How, I hear you cry? Why, easy!
Just look at the Amazon product reviews for the monopod in question:
http://www.amazon.com/XShot-Camera-Exte ... roduct_top
See how the reviews explicitly say that there is no ability to remotely trigger the camera, and that one has to use a timer instead? So, completely impossible to use for nefarious purposes! (And, by the way, you can see from the pictures that the device has a carrying strap, which is attached to the end that doesn't have the camera. Therefore, if one uses the strap, as would seem natural, the camera-end would end up dangling down.)

So, has that stopped the FTBullies? Of course not. Last I saw, they were flirting with defamation lawsuits by declaring that he is still guilty because he must have wanted to take upskirt photos, or something.

#754

Some tweets before sleep:

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

Enjoy...and thanks for the continued discussion here.

#755

[youtube]jv6mEv_rDdE[/youtube]

#756

There was a time, about two years ago, when I would have thought someone like Matt Dilahunty could have been able to at least see the points Thunderf00t was making (even if he disagreed). But that Matt seems to be long gone:

This Matt Dilahunty won't even take a stand against the documented bully, Laden:

Hitchens was only partly right, Ideology Poisons Everything. It's a shame because the nonprophets podcast used to actually be fairly decent in the pre-FtB days.

Guest · #757

http://theskeptics.bandcamp.com/

#758

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

#759

Rohan (one of the authors of the paper) has posted this on Jerry's blo...website, for those interested in Dawkins Barb fish. Gorgeous little creature:

Rohan Pethiyagoda
Posted July 13, 2012 at 4:06 pm | Permalink
As lead author of this paper, few quick points. We made the gender feminine for reasons of euphony, the -ia termination of the genus would thus rhyme with most Latinised feminine specific names, which usually end with -a. But of course RD deserves to be ribbed about this regardless. Also, these fishes will carry the common name â€œDawkins Barbsâ€. Finally, they are actually quite different to Tiger Barbs (the paper discusses this; it is open access and can be downloaded from:

http://www.pfeil-verlag.de/04biol/pdf/ief23_1_12.pdf).

Finally, anyone who would like to have a copyright-free high-resolution photo of Dawkinsia singhala, a Dawkins Barb endemic to Sri Lanka, is welcome to download this from my DropBox using the following link:

https://dl.dropbox.com/u/18794412/Dawki ... %20M2.tiff

As you will see, adult Dawkins Barbs do not resemble Tiger Barbs at all, and males have the trailing filaments from their dorsal fin, a prominent secondary sexual character that is, to my mind anyway, a way nicer example of the peacockâ€™s tail than the peacockâ€™s tail, if you know what I mean

#760

one of the reasons that it seems so many guests are lurking, is that one can be logged in, and at the bottom of this thread, show up as a guest. I am a guest right now, and I don't log out, so I am always a guest, but when I post, I'm sacha.

Did someone mention angry sex? I love angry sex. There is nothing better for an argument with one's lover.

The baboons are incapable of having angry sex, because they would ask "is this okay?" before every move.

StueNever: "There's been three instances of harassment at "TAM" that I've heard of, and I say "TAM" because two of them occurred outside of the actual TAM conference in the nearby Del Mar Bar. There were two cases during TAM 2009, one being the drunk neck-licking guy and then the Ashley Miller gatecrasher guy. Then during the last TAM, there was the "upskirt" guy that didn't take any upskirt pictures, Dr Buzzo or w/e his name is, who wouldn't leave that gender-fluid person alone."

Not one of those "instances of harassment" were reported to any member of the JREF, not in person, not in writing, and not anonymously in the exit letter. not one was reported and that is exactly what DJ Grothe said.

Monopod guy was simply clueless about how to talk to women, or anyone he has never met previously. He never made any sexual references, from what the women said after months and months of being silent (completely forgetting) about it, his biggest crime was not reading the cues that he was annoying, from the women he was talking to, and I'm not even convinced they gave him any clues. Why? because I cannot tell you just how often I've seen women in the US absolutely unable to tell a man that they are not interested in listening to what he has to say, and that they would prefer it if he were to go away. They sit there, suffering in silence, smiling politely, and act as though they are interested in his monologue. It infuriates me.
If they are unwilling to speak up in order to take care of themselves, and not have to waste their time listening to someone they don't want to listen to, then they fucking deserve to have to sit there and be miserable. (I am NOT speaking of anything sexual, just some clueless guy chatting them up.)

Clearly I'm very direct and very blunt, and I am quite capable of taking care of myself in social situations. I'm no victim, no one needs to rescue me from a conversation. I'll only be polite and cushion your ego once while still being perfectly clear, (unless one has an obvious disability which causes them to fail to understand social guidelines). There are plenty of ways to get the point across to the person who is talking to you, without being as unambiguous as I would be, but also without the speaker having to be a fucking mind reader. I can make a list, if you want.

So here is the (extremely plausible) scenario that came to mind when I read everything that was said about monopod guy, (and everything that monopod guy himself wrote publicly) about the "incident":

It's during TAM. We have a guy who has no experience conversing with anyone but his just-as-clueless mates, women make him a bit nervous, so he is probably trying too hard to sound interesting. He is completely inept socially. He is carrying this camera on a monopod because he has realised that by being an "official photographer", people treat him a bit nicer. Perhaps they would like to see the photos he has taken, perhaps they would like him to take a certain shot, maybe they want to be in his photos. It gives him a little bit of respect, that he does not usually get. (Yes, this was rather obvious from reading all of his comments). So here he is at a big important conference, and he is an important part of preserving, and documenting the moment. He is chatting with some very nice women, The two women listen, smile and nod, while looking around for an "out". He takes their smiling and nodding to be a clear sign that they are interested in what he has to say, so he continues to talk. Eventually they go their separate ways. End of story.

No, of course not. Months and months later, coincidentally when this whole ridiculous propaganda of rampant misogyny in the sceptic community was being peddled, the JREF was suddenly ground zero. They had to be, as they are the largest and most respected organization in scepticism. The leaders and members are educated, affluent, white, male, misogynists, and rape apologists, and the JREF is a boys club who are using their clout and privilege to keep women subservient, and to sexually harass and objectify women who they consider less intelligent, while covering it all up and patting each other on the back for their expertise in keeping their little secret. (and I'm not sure where we Gender Traitors fit in, perhaps we have Stockholm Syndrome or something)
Exaggeration? I've seen the baboons say every single thing I just wrote. I simply put all of the accusations in one paragraph.

So they proclaim the JREF to be this organised gang of misogynists, but there is not a single report of a woman claiming to be treated improperly at TAM.

back to the women who were smiling and nodding to monopod guy, they are annoyed, they can't accept the fact that they could have taken control for themselves by speaking up, and walking away, so instead they talk to each other and blame monopod guy. He was creepy, after all, and what was he doing with that camera on a stick? Someone creepy like that should not be permitted to have a camera...

Still nothing was said to anyone who could have done something about it, until the next day when one of the women told another women that the guy was creepy, and he could use his monopod to take photos up women's skirts! He was carrying the camera that way!

The woman they told, went to DJ Grothe with the story, said he creeped out some women. Nothing first hand, no proof, no witnesses, not even the same fucking day.
So DJ asked the original two women if they saw him attempting to take "upskirt" photos, and they said no, DJ asked if he had harassed them, or done anything inappropriate, they said no, he was just socially inept. So DJ asked if they want to file a report, they said no, and so he told them he would keep an eye on him. That's it! What else should DJ Grothe have done??

Not a word about harassment, not a word about anything sexual, not a word until the next day, and then they did not even tell anyone from the JREF, and no one filed a report, or made a formal complaint.
Easily forgotten non-incident, as far as I am concerned, and indeed DJ did not think of it when asked if there had been any sexual harassment allegations or reports. Why would he think of monopod man? The question was about sexual harassment!

When instances of misogyny at TAM were asked for as proof of TAM being unsafe, DJ said there were no allegations or reports, and suddenly one of the two women came forward to tell the story of the "creepy" guy with the camera on a stick, and like magic his behaviour changed from socially inept to sexually creepy, and DJ knew about it.

So it was asked why it was never reported, and people like Stefunny and O'Feelia started shouting about how difficult it is for women to come forward, how unwelcoming the JREF would be to a woman who wanted to report an incident, and then the final silencing technique of those who politely ask for proof misogyny, being accused of blaming the victim.

side note:
Apparently monopod man offered to have someone look through all of the photos he had taken, so he could prove that he did nothing wrong, while still at the conference, and of course there was not a single photo that was inappropriate.
The poor guy was so bullied and harassed and threatened over this, he cancelled his trip to TAM this year, and lost money by doing so. He was frightened, and he had a perfectly good reason to be, unlike the two women he spoke to at TAM the year prior.

#761

Sacha, that was masterly done! Maybe a few links to monopod guy and the complainers would make it even better, but from what I've read at other venues, you summed it up like a boss.

#762

I've watched dillahunty go south to the point now where he is absolutely partisan, he's become all buddy buddy with watson/myers et al and thats where he stands. Yeah see the logical fallacy? He doesn't.

#763

cheers, Phil

I did remember that I should include some evidence for my assertions, but my comment just sort of poured out, and I did not want to pause in order to go looking, as I did not think I'd ever get it back. I'll have a look tomorrow and make a post, post.

Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:Sacha, that was masterly done! Maybe a few links to monopod guy and the complainers would make it even better, but from what I've read at other venues, you summed it up like a boss.

Guest · #764

Lsuoma wrote:One thing I have consistently noticed, though, is that there are almost always twice as many guests browsing as registered users. That may be bots, of course, but I'm certainly wondering who the lurkers are...

I'm one of those consistent lurkers. Sympathetic to the Slime Pit, but with nothing substantial to add to the discussion. Was never a fan of PZ Myers. Probably because I was still religious when I first discovered his writing, I think he practiced the McCarthyism tactic against theistic viewpoints then as much as he pillories everyone not 100% on board with the radfems now. It wasn't until I read John Loftus's Why I Became An Atheist that I became an atheist. With people like PZ, I don't think I was convinced, because it was a lot of scorn and condescension. Without much understanding, or reasoning as to why the religious worldview was faulty. With Loftus's book, it was a stake through the heart of Christianity, every doctrine thoroughly understood and refuted. So much that I was a Christian when I began, and an atheist when I put it down.

So naturally, I kept up with Loftus's blog, since his writings were the gateway to a whole nother view of the world for me. That included the move to freethought blogs. And the saga of how he exited freethought blogs, where I saw how authoritarian, divisive, dogmatic and generally detrimental to the aims of the skeptical movement PZ and crew were. That became more clear seeing how certain commenters were treated and silenced, the heavy handed responses to anyone who strayed even minutely from the program, the whole Thunderfoot entry and booting, and a hundred other things.

So I lurk now, because I find it interesting to keep tabs on how this whole thing progresses. Its also refreshing, because I think most of what is discussed here tends to be more sensible than a place like freethoughtblogs. More colorful, and fun too.

Wharrgarbl · #765

I'm not a fan of throwing around terms like misogyny for mere disagreement, but there certainly are valid uses for the term. Misogyny exists, even if term is abyssmally devalued in its usefulness by the FC6. Now, these people (and/xor their commentariat) more often that not claim that Misandry doesn't exist - neither as a proper word (the dictionary defense! As if something that is not in a dictionary doesn't in fact exist. One wonders how we come up with names for things in the first place) nor as a thing. But what better word is (or isn't) there to describe a statement like that?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v5uvPhZ29fs#t=36m48s

It's beginning a bit bit earlier to provide some context, but the interesting quote is this:

Greg Laden: The human brain is a female brain that has been damaged by testosterone

There is so much wrong with that... Female brains vs. Human brains.. With the implication that male brains (those still get to be human, right?) are probably more damaged than those less afflicted with testosterone disease. I can't find the wording and the probable mindset behind it anything but dehumanizing, misogynistic and misandrist at the same time.

He's such a tit.

#766

sacha wrote:So DJ asked the original two women if they saw him attempting to take "upskirt" photos, and they said no, DJ asked if he had harassed them, or done anything inappropriate, they said no, he was just socially inept. So DJ asked if they want to file a report, they said no, and so he told them he would keep an eye on him. That's it! What else should DJ Grothe have done??

Considering this all happened outside the actual con in the Del Mar Lounge and outside the "jurisdiction" of TAM, it seems like DJ went beyond the call of duty when dealing with this issue. So kudos to him, trying to make everyone comfortable and happy outside the con.

All anyone can do is report the harassment to the powers that be (in this case the hotel security), because the TAM code of conduct no longer applies in the bar and TAM management can't personally kick people out because that would be grounds for suing JREF. Of course, that's only if serious harassment or sexual harassment occurs, which by any legal standard in the case of Dr Buzzo, it didn't.

#767

The latest instalment of the Ardent Atheist podcast is a hoot.

http://newdissidentradio.com/archives/a ... 071112.mp3

#768

Lasens is officially a woomeister.

So the human brain's default condition is "female" please define what this default "female condition" is you factlessfuckmonger. Someone call somebody who knows about this shit, say sam harris to tear this woomongers radfeminist brain that has been polluted with male hormone to pieces.

My intrpretatin of Laden: im a closet transexual.

#769

A few points on my first post:
1] Thank to Lsuoma for investing the enormous ongoing effort into this worthwhile enterprise. You will get 72 raisins in Atheist Heaven.
2] I shall 'dip my toes into this small pond to 'test the waters, as it were, and on that note:
3] Cunt
4] I hesitated to register, for many practical reasons, not least the potential legal minefield involved in agreeing to the terms that imply liability for potential whimsical retroactive changes to the policy and in pursuance of such, I consulted an (internationally renowned) barrister mate of mine, with whom I went through college, and took his outburst of pissing his pants in guffawing laughter as a legal opinion that such clauses would be invalid in any court of law, including PZ's inquisition. (I didn't expect that!)
5] I am glad to see that the common zeitgeist is firmly turning full circle to agree with my consistent opinion from the very start:
That anti-harassment policies are worse than none at all.
6] I am genuinely very busy, (not in the Greta sense), as it is the end of financial year here in Oz, and I have been dragged out of retirement to act as managing director for 3 companies++. I expect to be relieved of this tedious task in about a month or more, after which time I may 'get back into the saddle'.
7] There is no 7.
8] Greg Laden is not a nice person
9] Ophelia Benson is going around the twist
10] Thanks again to the host of this blo... (sorry Jerry: forum)
11] If any of you expect me to show any restraint in robustly using mere words such as CUNT, etc., I am outta here faster than a rat up an aqueduct.
Words are not magic. Adults understand this, kiddies don't.

#770

Michael K Gray wrote:A few points on my first post:
1] Thank to Lsuoma for investing the enormous ongoing effort into this worthwhile enterprise. You will get 72 raisins in Atheist Heaven.
2] I shall 'dip my toes into this small pond to 'test the waters, as it were, and on that note:
3] Cunt
4] I hesitated to register, for many practical reasons, not least the potential legal minefield involved in agreeing to the terms that imply liability for potential whimsical retroactive changes to the policy and in pursuance of such, I consulted an (internationally renowned) barrister mate of mine, with whom I went through college, and took his outburst of pissing his pants in guffawing laughter as a legal opinion that such clauses would be invalid in any court of law, including PZ's inquisition. (I didn't expect that!)
5] I am glad to see that the common zeitgeist is firmly turning full circle to agree with my consistent opinion from the very start:
That anti-harassment policies are worse than none at all.
6] I am genuinely very busy, (not in the Greta sense), as it is the end of financial year here in Oz, and I have been dragged out of retirement to act as managing director for 3 companies++. I expect to be relieved of this tedious task in about a month or more, after which time I may 'get back into the saddle'.
7] There is no 7.
8] Greg Laden is not a nice person
9] Ophelia Benson is going around the twist
10] Thanks again to the host of this blo... (sorry Jerry: forum)
11] If any of you expect me to show any restraint in robustly using mere words such as CUNT, etc., I am outta here faster than a rat up an aqueduct.
Words are not magic. Adults understand this, kiddies don't.

Hi MKG, you just made my day! Very nice to see you here!

#771

Great, MKG is here. All we need now is John C.Welch to sign up (plus a bit more dustbubble input) and the forum is perfect.

#772

Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote: Hi MKG, you just made my day!

I do wish that I had that power.
Alas, your day is provided courtesy of a happy combination of the planet's polar rotation, coupled with the 8 minute 19 second old radiation that emerged from a distant nuclear reactor.
It's like being told that Santa is really your mother's lover trying to curry favour with her by pretending to care about her offspring.
Ah! I love the smell of an atheist outlook in a cold and unforgiving universe.

#773

bhoytony wrote:Great, MKG is here. All we need now is John C.Welch to sign up (plus a bit more dustbubble input) and the forum is perfect.

"Perfect"?
Not until Beelzebub himself turns up!
Mwoo-har-har!!!
[FX: Distant Thunder]
(And no, I don't mean Justican't)

#774

Caede wrote:
ThreeFlangedJavis wrote:Paula Kirby has an opinion. She expressed it, only recently, despite being dissed by an arrogant Watson a year ago. She made a minor error in using 2 words, the use of which she carefully expalined, and has been remorselessly trashed ever since. How is she wrong? Does using 2 words make her message wrong?
Carefully explaining why she used 2 particular words doesn't excuse what she said, if you believe it is an error. Saying "I'm not calling you a nazi... but you're a nazi" is... well, yeah. Remorselessly trashed? It looks like she's had waves of support and waves of backlash. What was she expecting, equating a large number of people with murderous totalitarian governments? Did she want a giant hug, a round of applause and no one to argue with her? Isn't the point that we should be able to argue, and if someone calls me a Nazi I should be able to respond? I don't see Paula Kirby as being bullied, any more than she was bullying those she targeted. ...which is to say, not at all.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b010t5wh

The series which explores the 20th century through the diaries and correspondence of real people, returns with "The Iron Curtain" by Nell Leyshon. The drama is inspired by the diaries of Paula Kirby, who went to teach English in East Germany in the 1980s, and her correspondence with paediatric surgeon Knut LÃ¶ffler.

Fresh out of university, 21 year old Paula Kirby settles into her new home and job, teaching English at the University in Dresden but finds herself attracted to one of her students, a Dr Knut LÃ¶ffler.

That to me excuses her use of the term femistasi, she has had first hand experience of it.

Godwin himself said the use of the term nazi did not Godwin an argument, it is only the overuse of the term when it begins to be used as an insult out of frustration. http://www.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/legends/godwin/

I still agree with you, I wish she hadn't but then again it does not matter, critics would have found some other reason to ignore it.

On the other hand, I find it interesting that the overall argument of Paula Kirby's paper has (IMO) withstood the ridicule heaped upon it. As franc mentioned, the truth of a good argument can withstand ridicule. Second guessing Kirby, maybe she was being very deliberate here.

#775

Dilurk wrote:On the other hand, I find it interesting that the overall argument of Paula Kirby's paper has (IMO) withstood the ridicule heaped upon it. As franc mentioned, the truth of a good argument can withstand ridicule. Second guessing Kirby, maybe she was being very deliberate here.

I think she was. So was I when I drew parallels with the baboons and the Stasi, and Mao's and Stalin's secret police and party loyalists. It is dangerous making these comparisons - but they do need to be made as they are entirely valid and I have provided detailed comparisons of their behaviour to confirm it. Unlike Benson's theatrical hyperbole comparing TAM to the Nazis and the KKK - her idea of tragedy and catastrophe would be the local organic cafe being unable to make a soy milk latte. This is the most offensive thing about these pudgy pink supremacists - none of them have any idea of simple things like hunger, cold or sick children that can't get medicine, let alone actual political persecution, gulags and summary executions for not taking your hat off for the visiting official. And they bitch and moan about drunken propositions and inappropriate language as though the world is in peril because of them. Fuck them. Cunts.

Thankfully, I have no direct exposure myself to such evil (yes, I use that word deliberately too), being the first non-refugee in 4 generations of my family - but the detailed family history I have available of living relatives experiences (not to mention the body count of the dead and missing, never found) in both China and the former Soviet Union lets me say with a high degree of confidence that the baboons exhibit ALL of the noxious characteristics of those regimes, even if they are only in a larval stage of it. Given absolute power and freedom from accountability, I also have no doubt that they would devolve into the same actual monstrosity in an instant given the chance.

Kirby's comparisons are 100% valid. Unpalatable to a pudgy pink readership perhaps, but nonetheless valid.

#776

Michael K Gray wrote:
Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote: Hi MKG, you just made my day!
I do wish that I had that power.
Alas, your day is provided courtesy of a happy combination of the planet's polar rotation, coupled with the 8 minute 19 second old radiation that emerged from a distant nuclear reactor.
It's like being told that Santa is really your mother's lover trying to curry favour with her by pretending to care about her offspring.
Ah! I love the smell of an atheist outlook in a cold and unforgiving universe.

ok then. Your post awoke in me a feeling of happiness and joy at seeing you so cogently posting on this here forum. I don't think the experience can be repeated or even falsified, so I'll just stick to the more amenable "Hey MKG, nice to see you here!"

Satisfied, you pedant dooflebag you?

:) (I know you hate smileys, that's why)

#777

Also, have I forgotten to point out that I'm the Peanut Gallery guy in all this? With the exception of a few music-related forums, I am always the peanut gallery guy. Just wanted to make this clear. I try to be funny, even if I moslty fail. Humour is the best therapy for me, so sorry to impose it on you other posters here...

#778

In my not so humble opinion, the poster choosing to label his-self as 'franc' has been unfairly maligned to an alarming extent, from all sides.
Not just 'both' sides, but ALL sides.
As he,and others, have hinted: those tossers who are shocked by the vibrations that emanate from from electronic or mechanical reproductions of the vocal vibrations (of this duo) impinging upon their eardrums, being converted by their brains into speech, are quite simply seeking reasons to justify their own intrinsic anger.
Anger against some-thing-or-other.
Anger in favour of their personal power. (As many famous historical examples are wont to illustrate.)
Anger in favour of rousing a rabble in order to capture income, much as Tyrants across the ages have harnessed plebÃ¦ian anger to acquire mammon.
Anger in favour of the cryptic typhos by which to bury one's foul-ups.[1]

But: Their anger is not franc's fault, nor responsibility. It is internally generated, but publicly distributed, as 'twer from an infant, or a semi-sentient being sans agency.
That he may have goaded these nominal adults into behave in an infantile fashion is entirely THEIR choice.
"Trigger" is perhaps too much of an exaggeration, but it will suffice for the interim.

franc is not a monster â€” he is a mirror.
An honest mirror.

Here endeth the lesson, you cunts.
______________________
[1] Was it JG, or JCW, who stated somewhere (possibly on Sgt Justin's blog) that on many an occasion , they couldn't understand a blind word that I typed? As 'twer a transient stroke had hit them?
I agree. Only franc 'gets it', I fear.

#779

Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:Satisfied, you pedant dooflebag you?

Yes. 99.99% satisfied, thank you sir.

#780

Michael K Gray wrote:franc is not a monster â€” he is a mirror.

Reminds me of a funny song.