Periodic Table of Swearing

[mikelf]

Um, why do people assume something bad happened to a person as a child to bring them to the philosophy they have now? I'm on board with polyamorous relationships simply because I have loved more than one person at one time. Pretty simple and it doesn't necessarily mean something bad happened to you as a kid. Weird, that mindset.

Being polyamorous is one thing. Being willing to casually end a friendship in order to pursue a piece of ass is something different altogether. Maybe the latter isn't a sign of a sociopath. But, it sure seems to indicate someone who doesn't put a lot of value on relationships that don't involve sex.

[soldierwhy]

This was posted by global moderator Xantë, who apparently can be referred to as xe (or as xie or as ze or as zie) at time t1, as she at time t2, and as they at time t3. This gets so complicated that I prefer not to refer to xir/zir/her at all.

I'd never seen that xe, ze shit before it appeared on their boards (and hir, which phonetically makes not one fucking iota of a difference!).

On the other hand it does remind me of this:

[youtube]L1K8d9qXGnI[/youtube]

[Jan Steen]

I see that Xantë has substantially rewritten the post that I just quoted. Suffice it to say that it hasn't become any more coherent.

She also added this subtle warning to another poster on the thread:

Still wearing the mod hat: to irkthepurists, if your continuing presence in this thread will be to make jokes at the expense of other people who don’t fit the gender binary, I must confess I won’t be terribly unhappy about giving you an official warning. Gallows humour with a chaser of cis privilege is not exactly helpful here: you’ve had your fun, now please engage seriously or get outta da thread.

Of course, irkthepurists was not doing what Xantë accuses this commenter of. irkthepurists was just mildly sceptical about this xe/xie/ze/zie business.

[welch]

*notices all the horrific human suffering in the world*
*chooses to donate to a middle class american woman who doesn't want to dip into her savings*

That's a false equivalency.

"chooses to donate to poor white person"

"I'm black"

"donates to them"

"I'm starving in a third world country"

"Shit. Okay, I'll donate to you"

"I've had a leg blown off by a land mine"

"Sigh...okay..."

"I've had my whole body blown off, I'm just a head."

"NOW CUT THAT OUT"

Donating, or not donating doesn't make you any better or worse of a person. But the idea that because there's someone who's got it worse makes it bad to donate to someone like greta is just silly. There's no moral superiority or inferiority created by (not) donating. You just do what you feel is right and move on.

Also, if you think a month's wages for anyone but say, Romney, is going to pay for cancer surgery, you're an optimist at best.

[Jan Steen]

This was posted by global moderator Xantë, who apparently can be referred to as xe (or as xie or as ze or as zie) at time t1, as she at time t2, and as they at time t3. This gets so complicated that I prefer not to refer to xir/zir/her at all.

I'd never seen that xe, ze shit before it appeared on their boards (and hir, which phonetically makes not one fucking iota of a difference!).

On the other hand it does remind me of this:

[youtube]L1K8d9qXGnI[/youtube]

Don't mention ze war.

[welch]

I'll still attempt to not aggravate Greta while she's dealing with this

Ugh, I guess I won't either. She's a fucking idiot and so are all of her followers but I don't actually want to stress out someone going into surgery.

I wouldn't go out of my way to piss her off but going off what I know about Greta's personality she'll use this illness as a stick to beat people with: "How dare you disagree with me I have cancer!" etc. etc. Followed by multiple commentators: "OMG you are sick, how dare you tell Greta to pipe down!? Don't you know she's ILL WITH CANCER!!??" And if that becomes the case she can frig off.

She can do that all she likes, I'll call her a manipulating cunt if she does. Everyone, *everyone* has something fucked up in their world. If they don't, then I am genuinely envious of, and happy for that person.

I'll happily play "nobody knows the trouble i've seen" against anyone if they want, and come out, if not ahead, well. But it's all bullshit to even start. I do use it to trapdoor people sometimes when they do the "YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT IT'S LIKE SO SHUT UP" game. As it turns out, there's damned little I don't know what it's like, and I'm real happy for that ignorance.

But yeah. I feel bad for greta, but she tries that "I have cancer, your argument is invalid" shit, I'll happily call her out on it. not that she'll ever listen to me, because I WAS RUDE ONCE ON ANOTHER FORUM. Whatever.

[ReneeHendricks]

Um, why do people assume something bad happened to a person as a child to bring them to the philosophy they have now? I'm on board with polyamorous relationships simply because I have loved more than one person at one time. Pretty simple and it doesn't necessarily mean something bad happened to you as a kid. Weird, that mindset.

Being polyamorous is one thing. Being willing to casually end a friendship in order to pursue a piece of ass is something different altogether. Maybe the latter isn't a sign of a sociopath. But, it sure seems to indicate someone who doesn't put a lot of value on relationships that don't involve sex.

Hmm. Perhaps. I've never been in the position to end a friendship in the pursuit of ass so I have no basis to build upon. Still, I do quite often see people put out there that something "bad" must have happened as a child for people to have a different mindset than others. Bugs the shit out of me.

[welch]

Looking back over some of the comments, including mine, I can see how some people, especially the thin-skinned, might see people being mean to poor Greta.

My point to recount my own troubles isn't because I'm due any sympathy but because, (bitch, please) everyone has them. I think life can have a fair amount of joy, but really, what defines existence is pain, shit happening and really, that's about as good as it gets.

People pointing out that maybe one shouldn't quit their day job and follow their passion when it provides no safety net isn't being mean, it's being a realist.

Sure, no one wants to deal with the negative, and it's the rare person who thinks their own personal finances are fun to deal with, like playing Monopoly, but sitting down with your letter opener and a calculator and figuring out how the fuck you're going to get out of this next hole is what adults do.

It's one of the reasons why I don't own my own business. I know that self-insurance in the US is shit, obamacare or no. In france, different story. It's not a decision I want to make, but it's the one I have to make, and so I made it and move on.

[soldierwhy]

Don't mention ze war.

I must admit I did laugh out load when someone on that thread mentioned 'ze final solution'. That is a troll win if ever I saw one.

[soldierwhy]

Don't mention ze war.

I must admit I did laugh out load when someone on that thread mentioned 'ze final solution'. That is a troll win if ever I saw one.

Laugh out load? WTF Freud. Loud, obviously.

[welch]

Looking back over some of the comments, including mine, I can see how some people, especially the thin-skinned, might see people being mean to poor Greta.

My point to recount my own troubles isn't because I'm due any sympathy but because, (bitch, please) everyone has them. I think life can have a fair amount of joy, but really, what defines existence is pain, shit happening and really, that's about as good as it gets.

People pointing out that maybe one shouldn't quit their day job and follow their passion when it provides no safety net isn't being mean, it's being a realist.

Sure, no one wants to deal with the negative, and it's the rare person who thinks their own personal finances are fun to deal with, like playing Monopoly, but sitting down with your letter opener and a calculator and figuring out how the fuck you're going to get out of this next hole is what adults do.

The thing is, she should absolutely follow her passion. Freelancing isn't all getting up at 10 in the morning, having a wank and pissing off to Starbucks with your macbook. It's a serious decision that needs to be prepared for and you need to expect the unexpected. Part of that preparation is making sure you can make it in that crucial first few months no matter what. What if her first few clients happened to be douchebags, what if they argued about the work, or refused to honour the contract. What if she has to take someone to court for payment. Would she be e-begging if that sort of shit happened?

Fucking hell. I figured this out at half the age of Greta.

Freelancing is hard. It's a lot of marketing, a lot of accounting. That's why I don't, and to be blunt, I know my shit, and in my world, I'm known as someone who knows their shit. I have, in my own profane way, helped actually change shit some of you use, hopefully for the better.

I could easily start my own gig. But fuck me that's a lot of work I HATE TO DO, and so I don't do it, because I recognize that I'd fail at the business part of the business. Someone ever wants to partner with me on it, I'll rethink that. maybe. But yeah, I know my limitations and how hard that shit can be. I think Greta, unsurprisingly, didn't think about the shit end of the stick enough.

[welch]

Well, turns out I won't be able to donate after all. Bank account is on 'low', royalties won't arrive before february 2013, and Ali is still waiting for her new job's paycheck(2 weeks overdue). Not that I wouldn't donate if I could.

So you would donate if you could. Why? Greta's problem isn't that she doesn't have medical insurance or anything like that it's that she's been irresponsible and failed to set aside a months wages or two in a special account before going freelance.

For the reason I stated in the rest of my comment, that it might show Greta that her perceived "enemies" are not exactly the arseholes they've been painted to be.

They've already been doing that over at FfTB. Benson and Zvan started trashing their "enemies" that donated and left good wishes.

Benson and Zvan would slap a cup of juice out of a small child's hand on a hot day. They're detestable shits, so I'm unsurprised. It's why I rarely engage with them, and always on my terms.

[Jan Steen]

Don't mention ze war.

I must admit I did laugh out load when someone on that thread mentioned 'ze final solution'. That is a troll win if ever I saw one.

Yes, after maiforpeace mentioned the final solution (to the pronoun problem) herself. Own goal.

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

20 000th poster has to sexually objectify stephanie Zvan

Peezus Christ

Motherfucker! This one is yours, I'll get the next. (had a friend wanting to see V for Vendetta in English, couldn't stop him. I'll have his head!)

[welch]

Probably shouldn't have but I put my 2 cents up on OB blog: http://freethoughtblogs.com/butterflies ... ent-314873

I'm sure the responses will be typical.

"The pro-misogyny (yes, misogyny) crowd..."

Oh, FUCK OFF Ophelia.

:D I was correct. I figured Stephi-pookins would chime in right away. And she did. True to form.

She's got her face buried in the prune's poon anyway, they're probably typing on the same keyboard.

(yeah, I created that image. Fuck you, that's why.)

[welch]

I didn't see that anyone's posted this yet, but I guess you can all stop bombarding PayPal now that Greta's mortgage "and other expenses" are covered for a few carefree months:

The fundraiser has been a thumping success. It has exceeded all my expectations. I will be able to comfortably cover my mortgage and other expenses for a few months, while I recover my health and get my writing and speaking career revved up again afterwards. No further donations or spreading of the word are necessary: I’ve actually gotten somewhat more than I really need, and I’m seriously contemplating donating the overflow — probably to the Light the Night Walk or to Camp Quest. (I feel okay about asking my readers for financial help, but I feel weird taking more than I really need.)

http://freethoughtblogs.com/greta/2012/ ... nd-thanks/

I'd say "you're welcome" but i'm still banned, because I was mean to someone who is not greta.

the irony, she makes me smile.

[Rystefn]

Um, why do people assume something bad happened to a person as a child to bring them to the philosophy they have now? I'm on board with polyamorous relationships simply because I have loved more than one person at one time. Pretty simple and it doesn't necessarily mean something bad happened to you as a kid. Weird, that mindset.

Being polyamorous is one thing. Being willing to casually end a friendship in order to pursue a piece of ass is something different altogether. Maybe the latter isn't a sign of a sociopath. But, it sure seems to indicate someone who doesn't put a lot of value on relationships that don't involve sex.

I didn't end the friendship, the person who can't handle it did. If the price of your friendship is me enforcing agreements between you and your girlfriend, you can fuck right off, it ain't worth it.

[Lsuoma]

Of course, irkthepurists was not doing what Xantë accuses this commenter of. irkthepurists was just mildly sceptical about this xe/xie/ze/zie business.

Irk the Purists:

[youtube]1kaOGsC1S1s[/youtube]

[franc]

youtube - hqEAzROCK6E

I'm certain it was a Derek and Clive ditty that went:

"Ivvvvvvvvvvve got....
Cancer of the arsehole

That's what I was looking for - part of a larger skit. Starts just after 3 min -

[youtube]-u0JZVb_7To[/youtube]

[Munkhaus]

So yes, that does mean that I do not care how close we are, it will not stop me from sleeping with your girlfriend.

No. What bothers me is you telling me that my friendships, and indeed all relationships, lack intimacy because I refuse to follow rules I had no say in making and because I'm self-aware enough to know that there's a big universe of shit I haven't experienced, and much of it could draw me away in a heartbeat.

Yeah, cos you're a maverick... playing by your own rules. Perhaps the word "sociopathic" was a bit strong, but then... you'd sleep with your best friend's missus without a second thought because... you're a maverick! Intimacy is generally incompatible with 'not giving a shit about people'. Just a heads up there, Wildcard.

Fuck you. If you tell me there's nothing that could make you walk away from everything you know and love without even stopping to tell someone what's going on first, then I'll call you either a liar or a coward.
Most of all, though, what bothers me is that you're making me reference Dr. Fucking Who. Here's an extreme example to illustrate my point: One-time offer, you have five seconds to decide: do you get in the TARDIS?

Oh dear. Doctor Effing Who as an argument? You nob. How about a less extreme example to illustrate my point:
Not fucking your brother's wife? [Solipsist arsehole. :roll: ]
Oh, my mistake; those are just "rules" that the Man hath forced upon us.

Um, why do people assume something bad happened to a person as a child to bring them to the philosophy they have now? I'm on board with polyamorous relationships simply because I have loved more than one person at one time. Pretty simple and it doesn't necessarily mean something bad happened to you as a kid. Weird, that mindset.

[/quote]
Perhaps, as you say:"My father was a religious asshole. He physically abused me as a child" doesn't necessarily mean that it's as 'pretty simple' as it appears.

Seriously though... if you're nobbing around online telling people that bumming is for amateurs and that you don't give a shit about anyone no matter how "close" if you want to shag their girlfriend: you're a very troubled individual.
*posted from my armchair*
{I'm crying as I write this}

[CommanderTuvok]

I also spotted the similarity of their "ze" and "zir" usage with comedic German stereotypes! Reminds me of this:

[youtube]7xnNhzgcWTk[/youtube]

[AndrewV69]

Although interestingly I notice that Man Boobz is talking about a “manosphere civil war coming on” apparently caused by too many women – GWW, BluHarmony (I think), TyphonBlue, etc. – posting on AVfM. One would think that PZ would be overjoyed that AVfM is “listening to the women”. But maybe some indication that AVfM is attempting to distance themselves from the more extreme elements ….

In any event, there are a lot of situations that justify the rage that some men are experiencing.

Yes, quite agree. Even though many of the comments over on AVfM seem perilously close to being off the wall and over the edge many others seem to manifest some serious and justifiable exasperation if not rage over some inequities in the system, many predicated on “virulent feminism” – a term, I might add, that Ophelia considers tantamount to misogyny. Not part of the solution and all that ….

Manboobz is a joke IMO. The only thing he has going for him, based on a couple of experiences over at his site is that many of the people who comment there are not as rabid as the baboons et. al.

I do not currently see the extreme MGTOW catching on in a big way myself, as far as I can know it takes a lot of misandry to break the basic biological programming that males have towards sex and reproduction.

Which is not to say I have not personally seen more than just a couple of examples. I have, but they are more in the vein of "I decline to participate" variety.

Like one of my nephews (140 IQ), or a neighbour who has been building a house by himself (two years so far, and it looks like he will be finished next year). And I have met a few more who have gone "underground" in that they work for cash when they do work, like another neighbour who has a house, but no car and grows his own veggies.

I could go on but you get the drift, all of these men have to varying degrees have in effect dropped out, they are not fully participating in society in general, and worse from the government point of view, they pay minimal taxes if at all. I talk to some of them when I am at one of the local watering holes, and the impression I get is that far from giving off a "bitter looser" vibe, they appear to be pretty content.

Incidentally, this is how I found the "manosphere" two years ago. It was not because these guys are aware of it and told me, but because I went in search of answers. Quite frankly if what I have seen is applicable, then the manosphere is only the tip of the iceberg, and represent only a small fraction of what is going on, and I do not see this turning around any time soon:

http://theredpillroom.blogspot.ca/2012/ ... e-man.html

Thanks to FTBYAM and its clones, adherents, and attitudes, I and thousands of boys like me were institutionally bullied by feminists throughout our childhoods. Our schools and our teachers were working with the intention of removing the dangerous "masculine" characteristics that might interfere in the feminist paradigm -- say, like getting married and wanting your wife to stay at home with the kids, or pursuing a "typical" and "traditional" male career path that might block some enterprising young woman from having that job. FTBYAM epitomized feminism's subtextual message to men: YOU ARE USELESS AND EVIL AND IN OUR WAY.

It should be clear that the current social order is in transition:
http://www.menznet.org/2012/10/marriage ... years.html

I have a hypothesis. It is that marriage is in steep decline because there is no longer any logical reason for a man to choose marriage over and above a civil relationship in the developed world, at least one that stands up to any particular scrutiny. I'd be happy to be proven wrong. Without that reason, a girls dream of a white wedding will, eventually, remain just that - a dream. It will likely die out as a reality. You might think this a good or bad thing, certainly certain feminist groups will think this is great since marriage by them is seen as servitude to men.

A perspective, from someone who sees where this may be heading:
http://socialpathology.blogspot.ca/2012 ... ction.html

The manosphere rightly criticises women for their diminishing femininity, but what the manosphere does not do so well is criticise the increasing infantisation of men. When Roosh and his followers point out that quality women are only to be found outside the U.S. he is giving the masculine version of the modern feminist lament that there are no good men at home. What many manosphere commentators fail to recognise is that the nice computer nerd is the male equivalent of the nice fat chick. The manosphere demands thinness but criticises women for wanting its feminine equivalent. Mote, beam, eye. It's all a bit of hypocrisy.

Calls to take away the rights of women are really nothing more than an affirmative action program for weak and beta men. Desirable men don't have a problem getting married.

The potential for the current trends to have ugly repercussions is there. This is what concerns me. People tend to forget that what we call rights are actually privileges, and just as they are granted, they can also be taken away.

Anyway, that is enough fear mongering from me for now. YMMV.

[mikelf]

Being polyamorous is one thing. Being willing to casually end a friendship in order to pursue a piece of ass is something different altogether. Maybe the latter isn't a sign of a sociopath. But, it sure seems to indicate someone who doesn't put a lot of value on relationships that don't involve sex.

I didn't end the friendship, the person who can't handle it did. If the price of your friendship is me enforcing agreements between you and your girlfriend, you can fuck right off, it ain't worth it.

I'm confused. Are you trying to prove or disprove my point? If it is the former, then all I can say is "Well done!"

[AndrewV69]

Being polyamorous is one thing. Being willing to casually end a friendship in order to pursue a piece of ass is something different altogether. Maybe the latter isn't a sign of a sociopath. But, it sure seems to indicate someone who doesn't put a lot of value on relationships that don't involve sex.

I didn't end the friendship, the person who can't handle it did. If the price of your friendship is me enforcing agreements between you and your girlfriend, you can fuck right off, it ain't worth it.

I'm confused. Are you trying to prove or disprove my point? If it is the former, then all I can say is "Well done!"

Does it matter?

As far as I am concerned, if Rystefn continues to give fair warning to others who may have different expectations then he is doing the right thing.

He knows by now (or should anyway), that there may be consequences, and so as long as everyone is informed ahead of time, then we can say thay they have made an informed choice.

That is good enough for me. Usually in life we get the exam first and the lesson after. So fair warning in advance is a pretty good deal from that point of view.

[ConcentratedH2O, OM]

If you use "they/their" when a person has specifically told you the pronouns they want, choosing to use "they/their" anyway is disrespectful. I am not a they, I am a ze.

http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic ... =25#p35336

[youtube]oJy6DSSBx1o[/youtube]

[Mykeru]

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8468/8104 ... 3958_z.jpg

[ConcentratedH2O, OM]

Those that don't speak the language being discussed will have very little to add to those discussions (without Englishsplaining all over everything, that is).

Oh, fuck off you cock.

http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic ... =25#p35282

[Rystefn]

Yeah, cos you're a maverick... playing by your own rules. Perhaps the word "sociopathic" was a bit strong, but then... you'd sleep with your best friend's missus without a second thought because... you're a maverick! Intimacy is generally incompatible with 'not giving a shit about people'. Just a heads up there, Wildcard.

Fuck you. Maverick was a thief, you piece of shit. You want to all your girlfriend a piece of property, you've got no one to blame but yourself if she winds in my bed when I treat her like a person instead. But hey, what the fuck do I know? I'm just a damaged person who was mistreated as a child, right? Also, you want to go look up the work "intimate," you seem to be laboring under a false impression of what it means.

Fuck you. If you tell me there's nothing that could make you walk away from everything you know and love without even stopping to tell someone what's going on first, then I'll call you either a liar or a coward.
Most of all, though, what bothers me is that you're making me reference Dr. Fucking Who. Here's an extreme example to illustrate my point: One-time offer, you have five seconds to decide: do you get in the TARDIS?

Oh dear. Doctor Effing Who as an argument? You nob. How about a less extreme example to illustrate my point:
Not fucking your brother's wife? [Solipsist arsehole. :roll: ]
Oh, my mistake; those are just "rules" that the Man hath forced upon us.

Non sequitur much? What the fuck has banging my brother's wife have to do with me wandering off with no warning?

Seriously though... if you're nobbing around online telling people that bumming is for amateurs and that you don't give a shit about anyone no matter how "close" if you want to shag their girlfriend: you're a very troubled individual.
*posted from my armchair*
{I'm crying as I write this}

Let me see if I can spell it out in simple terms so your infantile little peabrain can understand: If I don't bother to enforce "thou shalt not fuck other people" on my own girlfriend, why in Hell would you think I'd enforce it on yours? How the fuck can that fall on me? In what universe can that become my responsibility? Who died and made me the motherfucking relationship police? I sure as fuck never signed up for that job. If I wanted to go about enforcing rules on other people's sex lives, I'd be a Republican.

What I'm seeing behind the bile you're spewing here is the idea that sex is something I do to your girlfriend. It ain't like that. It's something the two of us do together. If she agreed not to fuck other people, and then comes to me, that's her breaking a promise. Not me. I didn't promise not to fuck your girlfriend, and I'm not going to. If she wants to sleep with me, and I want to sleep with her, why the fuck should I care about your opinion on the matter?

If you and your girlfriend make some sort of agreement, that's between you and her. Your relationship. Not mine. None of my fucking concern. If you want to invite me into your sex life, you go right ahead. Shit, if you want to invite me into your sex life as an enforcer of rules, go for it. I can get into the D/s stuff with the right people. If you get off on me cracking the whip over your girlfriend and denying her sex, who the fuck am I to judge, right? Where I draw the line, though, is you demanding that I join in your kink, and I draw it many long miles before the place where you get any fucking say in who I do or do not have sex with. Sorry, buddy, but that's not my brand of kink.

[Mykeru]

Yeah, cos you're a maverick... playing by your own rules. Perhaps the word "sociopathic" was a bit strong, but then... you'd sleep with your best friend's missus without a second thought because... you're a maverick! Intimacy is generally incompatible with 'not giving a shit about people'. Just a heads up there, Wildcard.

Fuck you. Maverick was a thief, you piece of shit. You want to all your girlfriend a piece of property, you've got no one to blame but yourself if she winds in my bed when I treat her like a person instead. But hey, what the fuck do I know? I'm just a damaged person who was mistreated as a child, right? Also, you want to go look up the work "intimate," you seem to be laboring under a false impression of what it means.

Fuck you. If you tell me there's nothing that could make you walk away from everything you know and love without even stopping to tell someone what's going on first, then I'll call you either a liar or a coward.
Most of all, though, what bothers me is that you're making me reference Dr. Fucking Who. Here's an extreme example to illustrate my point: One-time offer, you have five seconds to decide: do you get in the TARDIS?

Oh dear. Doctor Effing Who as an argument? You nob. How about a less extreme example to illustrate my point:
Not fucking your brother's wife? [Solipsist arsehole. :roll: ]
Oh, my mistake; those are just "rules" that the Man hath forced upon us.

Non sequitur much? What the fuck has banging my brother's wife have to do with me wandering off with no warning?

Seriously though... if you're nobbing around online telling people that bumming is for amateurs and that you don't give a shit about anyone no matter how "close" if you want to shag their girlfriend: you're a very troubled individual.
*posted from my armchair*
{I'm crying as I write this}

Let me see if I can spell it out in simple terms so your infantile little peabrain can understand: If I don't bother to enforce "thou shalt not fuck other people" on my own girlfriend, why in Hell would you think I'd enforce it on yours? How the fuck can that fall on me? In what universe can that become my responsibility? Who died and made me the motherfucking relationship police? I sure as fuck never signed up for that job. If I wanted to go about enforcing rules on other people's sex lives, I'd be a Republican.

What I'm seeing behind the bile you're spewing here is the idea that sex is something I do to your girlfriend. It ain't like that. It's something the two of us do together. If she agreed not to fuck other people, and then comes to me, that's her breaking a promise. Not me. I didn't promise not to fuck your girlfriend, and I'm not going to. If she wants to sleep with me, and I want to sleep with her, why the fuck should I care about your opinion on the matter?

If you and your girlfriend make some sort of agreement, that's between you and her. Your relationship. Not mine. None of my fucking concern. If you want to invite me into your sex life, you go right ahead. Shit, if you want to invite me into your sex life as an enforcer of rules, go for it. I can get into the D/s stuff with the right people. If you get off on me cracking the whip over your girlfriend and denying her sex, who the fuck am I to judge, right? Where I draw the line, though, is you demanding that I join in your kink, and I draw it many long miles before the place where you get any fucking say in who I do or do not have sex with. Sorry, buddy, but that's not my brand of kink.

I hope I am not derailing this discussion by pointing out that I did all your women including your moms, banged your best friends right up the pooper and fingered your dog, who kept panting and backing up.

Carry on.

[Rystefn]

I hope I am not derailing this discussion by pointing out that I did all your women including your moms, banged your best friends right up the pooper and fingered your dog, who kept panting and backing up.

Carry on.

Dude... if you did my mom, you should go get yourself tested. Just a heads-up.

[JackRayner]

Concerning the whining about Rystefn & Renee's [and mine?] chosen MOs, All I'll add [Rystefn and Renee can take care of themselves, and I can't speak for them anyhow] is that those new to this topic should be aware that there are slight, subtle differences in the grays that you are observing, and they require a little extra attention. Moralizing and/or emotional reactions will simply not do. ;)


Carry on. :popcorn:

[gooby]

I do not currently see the extreme MGTOW catching on in a big way myself, as far as I can know it takes a lot of misandry to break the basic biological programming that males have towards sex and reproduction.

The potential for the current trends to have ugly repercussions is there.

Well if you want to talk about "ugly repercussions", consider the likely results of continuously growing the first world population into the 21st century.

There are already too many damn people.

[gooby]

People point out that Japan's population is shrinking for demographic reasons as if this were bad in the scheme of things.

But in fact it's fewer first worlders using up finite resources.

Plus, it's Japan.

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

Monogamous, wank a lot, never used a sock, but if I did I'd call her Shirley.

Off to bed.

[Munkhaus]

Fuck you. Maverick was a thief, you piece of shit.

Are we talking Top Gun or Rockford Files?

You want to all your girlfriend a piece of property, you've got no one to blame but yourself if she winds in my bed

I think this comment speaks for itself, so to speak.

Also, you want to go look up the work "intimate," you seem to be laboring under a false impression of what it means.

Might it mean the ability to form close relationships with humans... perhaps even thinking about their feelings as you "fuck their girlfriends" oh Rose-be-quiffed Studmeister-general?

Non sequitur much? What the fuck has banging my brother's wife have to do with me wandering off with no warning?

I was merely pointing out the absurdity of this:

So yes, that does mean that I do not care how close we are, it will not stop me from sleeping with your girlfriend.

Unless you are now retracting that statement, it could be assumed that you would enter into a physical relationship, however brief, with the partner of a close friend/family member/DAD! ... you're a fucking Jolene! I'm beggin of ya Mr Rystefn, please don't shag my bird! Just because you can! You irresistible old crusty you!
What a toss.

TL;DR: Weirdo with deep issues posing as modern-relationship groundbreaker. In serious leather. In serious chains. Mudclub!

Take luck!

[Al Stefanelli]

Today's Tunage of Lulz...

[youtube]0UUbz9di3UQ[/youtube]

Lyrics

Caught a ride into south dakota
With two girls in a light blue desoto
One's name was jane, the other was plain
But they both had racing motors
Next I caught a ride with a gamblers wife, she had a brand new lay down rambler
She parked t'other side of town
She layed the rambler down
She said she could dig if I'd knew her

Doing my best to get back to you
Ain't nothing I'd rather do
Look for me sunday, gonna be there honey
Something special just for you
Special just for you
Made a truck stop, toothpick and water
Got a ride from a fruit pickers daughter
Drove her through the night, let the fruit just rot.
Said all I could eat for a quarter

Next,I hopped a train with a hobo woman
Said she's from Texas too
The way that she did, what she did, when she did what she did to me
Made me think of you
Yuh, Honey made me think of you

Doing my best to get back to you
Ain't nothing I'd rather do
Look for me sunday, gonna be there honey
Something special just for you
Special just for you

Yeh honey something special just for you

[CommanderTuvok]

:popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn:

[JackRayner]

This should be an ongoing series. Next, I want to see a creationist being asked about evolution, or a Scientologist being asked about psychiatry. :D

http://storify.com/ElevatorGATE/convers ... surlyamy-1

http://i183.photobucket.com/albums/x17/ ... dieAmy.png

[Al Stefanelli]

This should be an ongoing series. Next, I want to see a creationist being asked about evolution, or a Scientologist being asked about psychiatry. :D

http://storify.com/ElevatorGATE/convers ... surlyamy-1

http://i183.photobucket.com/albums/x17/ ... dieAmy.png

I have an entire chapter of my first book that is pretty solid on this subject. And I'm not even an expert. Go figure...

[AndrewV69]

I do not currently see the extreme MGTOW catching on in a big way myself, as far as I can know it takes a lot of misandry to break the basic biological programming that males have towards sex and reproduction.

The potential for the current trends to have ugly repercussions is there.

Well if you want to talk about "ugly repercussions", consider the likely results of continuously growing the first world population into the 21st century.

There are already too many damn people.

The way to cure the issue of too many people is to educate the women and not the men. Nature will do the rest. The more educated a woman is, the less likely she will have children. This is true no matter what part of the world you apply it to.

If all else fails, in certain places, the Taliban will shoot her with a similar net result.

[Git]

Ah yes, I see now. Evolutionary psychology is crap but making cheap ceramic tat to hang out the necks of losers* is sciency.

Got it.

I feel enlightened now.



Incidentally, that's something else I've noticed about most of the baboons and the aplusers - they're mostly humanities wankers** and dumb as a sack of hammers. Case in point: Ms Watson.

* My sole piece of neck jewelry is a rather serious and expensive Cthulhu head. Ia! Ia!
** Yes, I'm quite fundamentally rutherfordian in that regard.

[AndrewV69]

This should be an ongoing series. Next, I want to see a creationist being asked about evolution, or a Scientologist being asked about psychiatry. :D

http://storify.com/ElevatorGATE/convers ... surlyamy-1

http://i183.photobucket.com/albums/x17/ ... dieAmy.png

I have an entire chapter of my first book that is pretty solid on this subject. And I'm not even an expert. Go figure...

And it is a good thing that certain people do not believe in it. Bonus points is that these people are less likely to breed. They are in effect, improving the gene pool.

This is one area where I am in favour of ignorance over education. Net benefit for society overall.

[Brain Box]

Evolutionary psychology is coming up since a prominent EP made a comment on Facebook regarding the lack of attractive women at a recent neuroscience conference, and the blogs are now atitter.

[Git]

Evolutionary psychology is coming up since a prominent EP made a comment on Facebook regarding the lack of attractive women at a recent neuroscience conference, and the blogs are now atitter.

I bet you there's fuck-all attractive men at those gigs either.

[ReneeHendricks]

Um, why do people assume something bad happened to a person as a child to bring them to the philosophy they have now? I'm on board with polyamorous relationships simply because I have loved more than one person at one time. Pretty simple and it doesn't necessarily mean something bad happened to you as a kid. Weird, that mindset.

Perhaps, as you say:"My father was a religious asshole. He physically abused me as a child" doesn't necessarily mean that it's as 'pretty simple' as it appears.

And, unless you've got a degree in psychology you can flash about and you can show a correlation between what I went through as a kid to how it has caused me to be the sort who can love more than one person at a time, I believe STFU is a bit appropriate here :)

For the record, I happen to know exactly what the outcome of that childhood experience is - it ain't lovin' more than one, I can tell you that :)

[ReneeHendricks]

Concerning the whining about Rystefn & Renee's [and mine?] chosen MOs, All I'll add [Rystefn and Renee can take care of themselves, and I can't speak for them anyhow] is that those new to this topic should be aware that there are slight, subtle differences in the grays that you are observing, and they require a little extra attention. Moralizing and/or emotional reactions will simply not do. ;)


Carry on. :popcorn:

I'm still going through the forum. Did you finish your popcorn? :D

[JackRayner]

Evolutionary psychology is coming up since a prominent EP made a comment on Facebook regarding the lack of attractive women at a recent neuroscience conference, and the blogs are now atitter.

Any idea who it was? I don't know any personally, but I'd like to go see. If they're socially aware enough, and tell the whiners to go fuck themselves, I'd like to see it.

[JackRayner]

Concerning the whining about Rystefn & Renee's [and mine?] chosen MOs, All I'll add [Rystefn and Renee can take care of themselves, and I can't speak for them anyhow] is that those new to this topic should be aware that there are slight, subtle differences in the grays that you are observing, and they require a little extra attention. Moralizing and/or emotional reactions will simply not do. ;)


Carry on. :popcorn:

I'm still going through the forum. Did you finish your popcorn? :D

Haha. Yeah, but I've got a little more laid out and reading to be popped for later.

[Brain Box]

Evolutionary psychology is coming up since a prominent EP made a comment on Facebook regarding the lack of attractive women at a recent neuroscience conference, and the blogs are now atitter.

Any idea who it was? I don't know any personally, but I'd like to go see. If they're socially aware enough, and tell the whiners to go fuck themselves, I'd like to see it.

Here's one blogger particularly upset about it.

http://m.jezebel.com/5952624/university ... ent-sexier

I can understand the anger behind the comment, however the thought police calling for his firing, expulsion from SfN, etc. is even worse.

[AndrewV69]

Evolutionary psychology is coming up since a prominent EP made a comment on Facebook regarding the lack of attractive women at a recent neuroscience conference, and the blogs are now atitter.

*evil cackle*

In other news here in Kanukistan, the true North Strong and Free (and Caring possessing Delicate Feefees), on the telly was some breathless burble about PMS being a myth.

*ahem*

Ahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha! Bwaahahahahahahahaha! Ahahahahahahahahahhahahahaha!


Some times, the things I learn have me chortling the whole day long.

[ReneeHendricks]

Evolutionary psychology is coming up since a prominent EP made a comment on Facebook regarding the lack of attractive women at a recent neuroscience conference, and the blogs are now atitter.

*evil cackle*

In other news here in Kanukistan, the true North Strong and Free (and Caring possessing Delicate Feefees), on the telly was some breathless burble about PMS being a myth.

*ahem*

Ahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha! Bwaahahahahahahahaha! Ahahahahahahahahahhahahahaha!


Some times, the things I learn have me chortling the whole day long.

Seriously???? Hang around my mother and my sister and you'll become a true fucking believer in PMS (skipped me, thankfully). I don't even want to be within miles of those women when nature decides to drop an aunt on them.

[JackRayner]

Evolutionary psychology is coming up since a prominent EP made a comment on Facebook regarding the lack of attractive women at a recent neuroscience conference, and the blogs are now atitter.

Any idea who it was? I don't know any personally, but I'd like to go see. If they're socially aware enough, and tell the whiners to go fuck themselves, I'd like to see it.

Here's one blogger particularly upset about it.

http://m.jezebel.com/5952624/university ... ent-sexier

I can understand the anger behind the comment, however the thought police calling for his firing, expulsion from SfN, etc. is even worse.

oh

hey

jezebel

Why am I not surprised? :roll: Here's what he said, by the way:

My impression of the Conference of the Society for Neuroscience in New Orleans. There are thousands of people at the conference and an unusually high concentration of unattractive women. The super model types are completely absent. What is going on? Are unattractive women particularly attracted to neuroscience? Are beautiful women particularly uninterested in the brain? No offense to anyone..

The Jezebel author's response?

Women: also people! Just like men, but with different genitals! And women who are neurobiologists probably have literally tens of thousands of priorities in their lives that outrank "appealing to Professor Dario Maestripieri's boner." Or anyone's boner, really!

Uhhhh....wut? What part of what he said is claiming women aren't people? Or that female neurobiologists have to appeal to his "boner"? Eh. Who knows. Maybe I'm just being far too charitable to what he wrote. But...wait. Here's a self-proclaimed feminist also calling rubbish on the article. Crazy world out there. Hope the commenter doesn't get dog piled on too badly. I remember having a Gawker account, and the people there were either a sneeze away from being full on baboons, or already as bad....

[AndrewV69]

Evolutionary psychology is coming up since a prominent EP made a comment on Facebook regarding the lack of attractive women at a recent neuroscience conference, and the blogs are now atitter.

Any idea who it was? I don't know any personally, but I'd like to go see. If they're socially aware enough, and tell the whiners to go fuck themselves, I'd like to see it.

Here's one blogger particularly upset about it.

http://m.jezebel.com/5952624/university ... ent-sexier

I can understand the anger behind the comment, however the thought police calling for his firing, expulsion from SfN, etc. is even worse.

I was in stiches reading what she had to say.

To me, the only appropriate response that is equal to her level of displayed intellect is to tell her to "turn on the washing machine, set it to spin cycle and go sit on it"

YMMV.

[Rystefn]

Fuck you. Maverick was a thief, you piece of shit.

Are we talking Top Gun or Rockford Files?

Are you being a smartass or a dumbass?

Also, you want to go look up the work "intimate," you seem to be laboring under a false impression of what it means.

Might it mean the ability to form close relationships with humans... perhaps even thinking about their feelings as you "fuck their girlfriends" oh Rose-be-quiffed Studmeister-general?

Only the first part.

Non sequitur much? What the fuck has banging my brother's wife have to do with me wandering off with no warning?

I was merely pointing out the absurdity of this:

So yes, that does mean that I do not care how close we are, it will not stop me from sleeping with your girlfriend.

Unless you are now retracting that statement, it could be assumed that you would enter into a physical relationship, however brief, with the partner of a close friend/family member/DAD! ... you're a fucking Jolene! I'm beggin of ya Mr Rystefn, please don't shag my bird! Just because you can! You irresistible old crusty you!
What a toss.

Then why did you quote something completely unrelated to it? Are you daft?

TL;DR: Weirdo with deep issues posing as modern-relationship groundbreaker. In serious leather. In serious chains. Mudclub!

Take luck!

Holy shit, you're an idiot. You know what the difference between me and most of the human race throughout most of history is? I'm not pretending I won't fuck your girlfriend. I never claimed to be breaking new ground here, I'm just admitting to what pretty much everyone else is lying to you about.

You know, I've been wondering what your issue is for a while now. You seem to be taking all this a bit personally. Now I'm wondering if that's because it isn't hypothetical. Do I know you? Did I actually fuck your girlfriend at some point? If so, all I have to say is, fucking get over it.

[gooby]

I do not currently see the extreme MGTOW catching on in a big way myself, as far as I can know it takes a lot of misandry to break the basic biological programming that males have towards sex and reproduction.

The potential for the current trends to have ugly repercussions is there.

Well if you want to talk about "ugly repercussions", consider the likely results of continuously growing the first world population into the 21st century.

There are already too many damn people.

The way to cure the issue of too many people is to educate the women and not the men. Nature will do the rest. The more educated a woman is, the less likely she will have children.

Generally speaking, the result is fewer children, but using more resources.

Admittedly, I use a shitton more resources than most large families in Bangladesh. For instance.

Ah yes, I see now. Evolutionary psychology is crap but making cheap ceramic tat to hang out the necks of losers* is sciency.

Well yeah, EP is mostly crap ... not for the reasons given (DASS SEXISS; DASS RAYCISS), but for others:

http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info ... io.1001109

EP has proposed that the mind consists of evolved cognitive modules, a perspective referred to as the massive modularity hypothesis [61],[62]. Massive modularity is a somewhat idiosyncratic interpretation of Fodor's [63] original concept of modularity. Essentially, Fodor suggested that what he called input systems (such as those involved in auditory and visual perception, but also in language) were modular, i.e., operating in relative isolation from each other. Information from these modular systems would be passed on to central systems (involved in problem solving or thought) that themselves were thought not to be modular. EP has extended modularity to involve the whole mind/brain.

The thesis of massive modularity is not supported by the neuroscientific evidence [64]–[67]. Firstly, comparative psychology presents an unassailable case for the existence of domain-general mechanisms. The processes of associative learning are widespread in animals and have general properties that allow animals to learn about the causal relationships among a wide variety of events [68],[69]. For instance, a simple learning theory rule, known as the Rescorla–Wagner rule [70], has proved extraordinarily useful in explaining the results of hundreds of experiments in diverse animals, including foraging in honeybees, avoidance conditioning in goldfish, and inferential reasoning in humans.

Secondly, there is broad involvement of diverse neural structures in many psychological processes, and there is feedback even to the most basic perceptual processing. For instance, the hominid brain has not only witnessed a proportional expansion of the neocortex, but the neocortex has become intricately interconnected and has evolved projections into the medulla and spinal cord [71]. This has allowed humans to learn intricate routines of movement and complex manual tasks, because the Fodorian executive part of the brain can directly monitor the fingers and the feet [71]. The same projections allow exhibit fine control of the tongue, vocal chords, and breathing, without which humans probably could not have learned to speak [71]. After evaluating the evidence and consistent with Fodor's original proposals, Bolhuis and Macphail [64] suggested that there is no evidence for modularity in central systems such as those involved in learning and memory. With regard to cognitive mechanisms, more often than not, data from animal experiments is consistent with a general-process account rather than an interpretation involving adaptively specialized cognitive modules [64],[65],[67],[72].

A large part of EP's emphasis on massive modularity drew from artificial intelligence (AI) research. While the great lesson from AI research of the 1970s was that domain specificity was critical to intelligent behaviour, the lesson of the new millennium is that intelligent agents (such as driverless robotic cars) require integration and decision-making across domains, regularly utilize general-process tools such as Bayesian analysis, stochastic modelling, and optimization, and are responsive to a variety of environmental cues [73]. However, while AI research has shifted away from an emphasis on domain specificity, some evolutionary psychologists continue to argue that selection would have favoured predominantly domain-specific mechanisms (e.g., [74]). In contrast, others have started to present the case for domain-general evolved psychological mechanisms (e.g., [75],[76]), and evidence from developmental psychology suggests that domain-general learning mechanisms frequently build on knowledge acquired through domain-specific perceptual processes and core cognition [44]. Both domain-specific and domain-general mechanisms are compatible with evolutionary theory, and their relative importance in human information processing will only be revealed through careful experimentation, leading to a greater understanding of how the brain works [44].

I agree that evolution didn't plan for 21st century and holding together a planetary civilization; that the ape has lost the extra hair and not much else—that's damn clear—and on a few other overall points but most particular claims made by EP are probably crap.

[franc]

I didn't see that anyone's posted this yet, but I guess you can all stop bombarding PayPal now that Greta's mortgage "and other expenses" are covered for a few carefree months:

The fundraiser has been a thumping success. It has exceeded all my expectations. I will be able to comfortably cover my mortgage and other expenses for a few months, while I recover my health and get my writing and speaking career revved up again afterwards. No further donations or spreading of the word are necessary: I’ve actually gotten somewhat more than I really need, and I’m seriously contemplating donating the overflow — probably to the Light the Night Walk or to Camp Quest. (I feel okay about asking my readers for financial help, but I feel weird taking more than I really need.)

http://freethoughtblogs.com/greta/2012/ ... nd-thanks/

I think Greta Christina has just defined for us what "privilege" actually means.

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

[AndrewV69]

You know, I've been wondering what your issue is for a while now. You seem to be taking all this a bit personally. Now I'm wondering if that's because it isn't hypothetical. Do I know you? Did I actually fuck your girlfriend at some point? If so, all I have to say is, fucking get over it.

Mind you, these were 3rd world countries. Not that it does not happen in 1st world countries, just appears to happen less frequently but the incidents I was aware of usually ended like this:

Kill the girl, then the guy and/or himself. Thinking about it, I really can not recall any incident where the girl was either not killed or injured from a beating as a result.

I wonder if there is a paper/survey on this? Anyone have sources they can suggest?

[AndrewV69]

I agree that evolution didn't plan for 21st century and holding together a planetary civilization; that the ape has lost the extra hair and not much else—that's damn clear—and on a few other overall points but most particular claims made by EP are probably crap.

Jury is still out about EP my man, and we are no where close to have much more than the faintest idea of what is actually going on as far as the brain is concerned.

If it turns out we were barking up the wrong tree because we did not understand what we were looking at in the first place no one should be surprised.

If it looks like I am agreeing with you, that is because I am, but only partially. There is something there with EP, but again, this is early days.

Quick question, what is the general consensus of Freud's psychoanalytic theories currently?

[Rystefn]

Mind you, these were 3rd world countries. Not that it does not happen in 1st world countries, just appears to happen less frequently but the incidents I was aware of usually ended like this:

Kill the girl, then the guy and/or himself. Thinking about it, I really can not recall any incident where the girl was either not killed or injured from a beating as a result.

I wonder if there is a paper/survey on this? Anyone have sources they can suggest?

I got no papers, but I've never personally seen it happen (less common here in the first world, I expect). Never seen anyone I've been with physically harmed because of our actions together, either. I guess I'm lucky that way... also, I don't generally consort with the type of person who thinks physical violence is the proper solution to all of life's little annoyances.

[Couch]

two legs good; three legs bad

Steers, I think that's good; a keeper.

... there's a poster here (I forget his name, sorry) who has Laden's 'get off the rag' comment in his sig....

That's me! That's me! Look ma, Im famouses now.

:clap:

Cough.

Don't know who did it first. It certainly wasn't my idea, in that someone suggested it as a poignant sig, I didn't have one, so I went and made me one.

It still floors me, mainly Svan's apologist: 'He couldn't have really meant she's totally on her rag as she's just had a baby and probably hasn't got her period back yet.' Fucken hell.