Periodic Table of Swearing

#1201

Dilurk wrote:I would suggest acknowledging the abuse Watson has received and agreeing no one deserves this

Ever heard of "self-fulfilling prophecy"? I'm sure if you burrowed deep enough into Fred Phelps psyche, you would also find "undeserved abuse". But I don't see anybody lining up suggesting he deserves sympathy. Watson is self-made. The "abuse" is the fruit of her own labour. Leave this "forgiveness" trip to the xtians - they're the experts. *None* of this would be happening if Watson wasn't such a selfish, narcissistic, borderline psychopathic pig. This is self-actuated karma. She deserves zero pity. No one did this to her - she did it to herself.

#1202

I'm not really sur RW deserves all the flak she had. To me, she's not even relevant to what we are talking about anymore. Sure, she had her part, but as someone I consider in many ways as a nobody (I'm also a Nobody, nothing wrong with that), she doesn't even get a transponder number on my radar.

The FC5 (6) OTOH, are worthy of my interest. If Laden is back on FTB comes the end of summer, I shall be very disapointed (Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg).

#1203

I would suggest reading http://www.skepticalscience.com/docs/De ... ndbook.pdf I intend to re-read it myself. This goes along with the reframing the horde is doing of the narrative. They are repeating the same story each time and carefully eliding anything that contradicts or shows their hero in a bad light.

I know I am not perfect and I make mistakes. I will own up to my mistakes if they are pointed out. Still, there are always going to be differences of opinion and like Stef McGraw, it would be nice if we could all just move on eh?

#1204

At the very least, it's clear that Watson has personal integrity issues, as her conduct on the JREF forums (sockpuppetry and banning people she didn't like when accidentally given admin privileges) and the more recent episode with Coffee Loving Skeptic illustrates. Why anyone gives her the time of day is quite beyond me, when this is the kind of person whose statements I'd never take at face value unless there was corroborating evidence.

It does make me wonder why she's held in such apparent esteem by Myers et al. It's not as if she's particularly charismatic: her voice has that practised, droning 'world-wearyness' usually deployed by disaffected college sixth-formers in order to demonstrate what they hope will come across as a jaded maturity beyond their years. Course, it never works, and they only ever sound like disaffected college sixth-formers. I guess it explains why many people mistakely think Rebecca Watson must be fairly young, though.

#1205

Kidos to whoever made the fftb parody. Truth is stranger than fiction.

#1206

Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:I'm not really sur RW deserves all the flak she had. To me, she's not even relevant to what we are talking about anymore. Sure, she

I heartily agree, but as @franc has been fond of pointing out, it is not the slimepitters that keep bringing her up, it's the FC5 (6) that do. As far as I am concerned she never deserved the nasty emails she got. However, I have not seen the evidence from her documenting that most of the nasty emails came from atheists. From what I saw she would also consider any emails from Stef McGraw as being evidence of a nasty email from an atheist.

The FC5 (6) OTOH, are worthy of my interest. If Laden is back on FTB comes the end of summer, I shall be very disapointed (Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg).

No, we have all moved on from the sexism argument except in the FC5(6)'s eyes, apparently we are all sexist misogynists, which I personally find very funny as I was a second wave feminist and have known sexism. The issue is cyberbullying folks, piling on to silence opponents, selective editing, banning, kicking bloggers out to silence. Not all feminists are cookie cutter FC5(6) feminists nor are all FTB cyberbullies.

#1207

Tigzy wrote:At the very least, it's clear that Watson has personal integrity issues, as her conduct on the JREF forums (sockpuppetry and banning people she didn't like when accidentally given admin privileges) and the more recent episode with Coffee Loving Skeptic illustrates. Why anyone gives her the time of day is quite beyond me, when this is the kind of person whose statements I'd never take at face value unless there was corroborating evidence.

Well, I talk to my daughter on a regular basis and she is about the same age (slightly younger) than Watson. Of course I have sometimes talked to my daughters friends of about her age but I know my daughter best. I guess using a sample size of one (my own daughter) Watson did seem to me to be much younger than my own daughter, in the way she talked and the way she writes.

It does make me wonder why she's held in such apparent esteem by Myers et al. It's not as if she's particularly charismatic: her voice has that practised, droning 'world-wearyness' usually deployed by disaffected college sixth-formers in order to demonstrate what they hope will come across as a jaded maturity beyond their years. Course, it never works, and they only ever sound like disaffected college sixth-formers. I guess it explains why many people mistakely think Rebecca Watson must be fairly young, though.

This confuses me as well, I am somewhat older than PZ (and SN for that matter). I know he means well, I can see the passion and I understand it. It is the same passion I still hold for wanting to fight injustice. Watson, Ahlquist, Maria none of them should have received the abuse they did. I don't understand why PZ is so blind to the harm he himself is causing.

#1208

franc wrote:
Dilurk wrote:I would suggest acknowledging the abuse Watson has received and agreeing no one deserves this
Ever heard of "self-fulfilling prophecy"? I'm sure if you burrowed deep enough into Fred Phelps psyche, you would also find "undeserved abuse". But I don't see anybody lining up suggesting he deserves sympathy. Watson is self-made. The "abuse" is the fruit of her own labour. Leave this "forgiveness" trip to the xtians - they're the experts. *None* of this would be happening if Watson wasn't such a selfish, narcissistic, borderline psychopathic pig. This is self-actuated karma. She deserves zero pity. No one did this to her - she did it to herself.

No disagreement at all there, we have been agreeing all along on that. I know you have received nasty emails, you know I have mentioned receiving nasty emails. We both did something about it and moved on. Alhquist did something about her nasty emails. However, I am talking about the political strategry of reframing/framing the narrative, which I admit I am not at all an expert in. As far as I can understand reading the debunking handbook and framing strategies, we have to acknowledge the harm but make sure the other story gets out there and is repeated. Also, if we have to dress ourselves in suit and ties to get the message across, that's what we have to do.

#1209

Wait a sec: you acutally said "no" to Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg.

No friends!

#1210

Dilurk wrote:
Tigzy wrote:At the very least, it's clear that Watson has personal integrity issues, as her conduct on the JREF forums (sockpuppetry and banning people she didn't like when accidentally given admin privileges) and the more recent episode with Coffee Loving Skeptic illustrates. Why anyone gives her the time of day is quite beyond me, when this is the kind of person whose statements I'd never take at face value unless there was corroborating evidence.
Well, I talk to my daughter on a regular basis and she is about the same age (slightly younger) than Watson. Of course I have sometimes talked to my daughters friends of about her age but I know my daughter best. I guess using a sample size of one (my own daughter) Watson did seem to me to be much younger than my own daughter, in the way she talked and the way she writes.

It does make me wonder why she's held in such apparent esteem by Myers et al. It's not as if she's particularly charismatic: her voice has that practised, droning 'world-wearyness' usually deployed by disaffected college sixth-formers in order to demonstrate what they hope will come across as a jaded maturity beyond their years. Course, it never works, and they only ever sound like disaffected college sixth-formers. I guess it explains why many people mistakely think Rebecca Watson must be fairly young, though.
This confuses me as well, I am somewhat older than PZ (and SN for that matter). I know he means well, I can see the passion and I understand it. It is the same passion I still hold for wanting to fight injustice. Watson, Ahlquist, Maria none of them should have received the abuse they did. I don't understand why PZ is so blind to the harm he himself is causing.

Hmmm. You know, despite all snarks to the contrary, I've never seen any evidence that the Myers/Watson relationship is anything other than a platonic good-natured friendship. However, to me, the incident with Coffee Loving Skeptic did give the impression that Myers was far too eager to give Watson the benefit of the (meagre) doubt. Given that I'm not the only one who's noted that RW comes across as being a lot less mature than her years, I do wonder if Myers sees something typical of his students in her, and may unwittingly feel more protective of her than circumstances should ordinarily warrant.

Which isn't a bad thing, by any means. However, if Myers subscribes to the skeptical premise that a truth becomes no less truthful just because you don't like it, then it does come across as very hypocritical that he doesn't appear to accept challenges to Watson's (evidentially doubtful) integrity.

#1211

Parody Site

http://www.freethoughtblahgs.com/

I blame the lack of coffee, and the fact that I followed this link http://t.co/41WpH8lc for my belated realization of where I actually was.
As I am completely embarrassed to relate how long it took my cognition to become aware that this is a parody site, I decline to share it.

#1212

ERV wrote:... So why is Chris Stedman a 'fairy' for working with theists for like, BUILDING HOUSES and OPERATING FOOD PANTRY

Good question, but there's probably a good explanation because LOOK! OVER THERE! MISOGYNY!

And from Gay's speech, "you sometimes need to keep your butt to the wall and your arms crossed over your chest"? But it's no use reporting illegal activity to the authorities if you're not "powerful enough"? How is this not completely fucked up advice to "women in science"?

#1213

AndrewV69 wrote:Parody Site

http://www.freethoughtblahgs.com/

I blame the lack of coffee, and the fact that I followed this link http://t.co/41WpH8lc for my belated realization of where I actually was.
As I am completely embarrassed to relate how long it took my cognition to become aware that this is a parody site, I decline to share it.

That site is a fuckin hoot! :lol: I like the fact that it's parodying the commentariat too:

Josh,.Unofficial.SpokesGoy says:
July 16, 2012 at 4:00 am

You donâ€™t get it so hard that it would be a total waste of time trying to explain anything to you. So instead, piss off, which I think you might understand.

:lol:

#1214

windy wrote:
ERV wrote:... So why is Chris Stedman a 'fairy' for working with theists for like, BUILDING HOUSES and OPERATING FOOD PANTRY
Good question, but there's probably a good explanation because LOOK! OVER THERE! MISOGYNY!

And from Gay's speech, "you sometimes need to keep your butt to the wall and your arms crossed over your chest"? But it's no use reporting illegal activity to the authorities if you're not "powerful enough"? How is this not completely fucked up advice to "women in science"?

How is it not fucked up in general?

"Other women, you are in danger! And Im going to do nothing about it because Im more worried about my job than doing the right thing and protecting other people! Arent I a good role model?"

This is how kids got raped at Penn State for decades-- people cared more about their jobs and their prestige than STOPPING RAPE.

Let me just clearly state that while I havent been harassed (sexual or otherwise) in science, if I ever am, I will be reporting it immediately to HR/conference organizers/whatever.

#1215

Someone help me out here. I don't know Ophelia Benson's style, and can't tell what she is actually saying here:

Ophelia Benson says:
July 16, 2012 at 6:24 am

The pit people want it on the record that they say the claim in # 17 is false. Let the record so show.

This, after stating she doesn't want the pit mentioned again (see above posts with quotes), was posted this morning after someone quoted ERV's 'women in science' reply to Pamela Gay's talk.(see above somewhere as well).

I can't tell if she's seriously posting it as a notice, or if she's trying to disprove the "nobody is trashing Ms Gay at the pit"...? Because it's obvious at the time of the first accusation, ERV hadn't posted her opinion of that one particular part of Gay's speech. And it's a personal observation that ERV was making, not a "sliming" of Gay.

I'm beginning to see how Benson's reputation might possibly be deserved if this is her normal M.O..

#1216

Franc, you do realise you act like a htmlnazi at times?

:)

#1217

Skeeve, Ophelia is a known liar, and so when one of her posters puts up a lie, she is blind to it. Move on, folks...

#1218

Skeeve wrote:Someone help me out here. I don't know Ophelia Benson's style, and can't tell what she is actually saying here:

Ophelia Benson says:
July 16, 2012 at 6:24 am

The pit people want it on the record that they say the claim in # 17 is false. Let the record so show.

I know you people realise this is a genetic fallacy, it just staggers me that anyone could claim to be a freethinker and be susceptible to this. Personally, unless Ophelia is participating in cyber bullying I would ignore her blog. She is obviously not willing to see all sides and that makes her dogmatic.

This, after stating she doesn't want the pit mentioned again (see above posts with quotes), was posted this morning after someone quoted ERV's 'women in science' reply to Pamela Gay's talk.(see above somewhere as well).

I can't tell if she's seriously posting it as a notice, or if she's trying to disprove the "nobody is trashing Ms Gay at the pit"...? Because it's obvious at the time of the first accusation, ERV hadn't posted her opinion of that one particular part of Gay's speech. And it's a personal observation that ERV was making, not a "sliming" of Gay.

I'm beginning to see how Benson's reputation might possibly be deserved if this is her normal M.O..

It's pointless to discuss her at all really, unless she is participating in cyber bullying herself.

#1219

AndrewV69 wrote:Parody Site

http://www.freethoughtblahgs.com/

I blame the lack of coffee, and the fact that I followed this link http://t.co/41WpH8lc for my belated realization of where I actually was.
As I am completely embarrassed to relate how long it took my cognition to become aware that this is a parody site, I decline to share it.

Oh well done! Satire is sometimes what it takes to get a point across, it made me laugh.

#1220

We need to take care of our slimepit guys http://www.x-entertainment.com/articles/0731/index.html

#1221

I posted this earlier, even though I knew it would never see the light of day.
http://www.scentednectar.com/slimepit/0001.png

After posting this (despite its unlikeliness of ever seeing daylight), I saw a bit of discussion here about what she said about sexism in science, and some opinions counter to what Gay said, but sliming? As in something bad, like being mean or some sorts of assholes to Gay in any way? Nope. Not here anywhere, even when there's disagreement. It's the arguments that are argued against, with counterarguments, not slurs or slime or slwhatever.

#1222

Gnumann, quisling of the MRA nation at Pharyngula
16 July 2012 at 2:09 am

>>>>>Who is Sara Mayhew<<<<<<

Someone who defended Grothe on (I think) the first Grothe thread. Didnâ€™t last very long when she couldnâ€™t back up her assertations in any way. Iâ€™m not going back to see who said what though.

The little fucking liar. Now, if I remember, Sara responded to a lie made about her on Butterlies and Wheels. When she attempted to address that lie, she was mansplained and told to STFU, and that she was "too young" to understand.

I'm not surprised Gnumann doesn't want to go back to see what she and the FTBullies said, because it would be rather uncomfortable for him.

Fucking tosser.

#1223

Dilurk wrote:This confuses me as well, I am somewhat older than PZ (and SN for that matter). I know he means well, I can see the passion and I understand it. It is the same passion I still hold for wanting to fight injustice.

You strike me as generally astute, but WHAT? Are you really assuming that Myers et al. care about what's wrong or right? If anything, the FC5(6) + Watson and her yap yaps are textbook examples of amorality. Their absence of empathic connection to the world outside their own reality bubble borders on solipsism. You are way too generous in your cutting of slack. It's almost like thinking rabid dogs can be made less rabid with some compassion. There comes a time when you just have to be realistic and accept that these are broken units - there is nothing good to be found here. Yes, move along is fine, we all should, but no - there is no forgiveness. The abuses have well and truly exceeded any reasonable bounds for forgiveness.

#1224

Dilurk wrote:
AndrewV69 wrote:Parody Site

http://www.freethoughtblahgs.com/

I blame the lack of coffee, and the fact that I followed this link http://t.co/41WpH8lc for my belated realization of where I actually was.
As I am completely embarrassed to relate how long it took my cognition to become aware that this is a parody site, I decline to share it.
Oh well done! Satire is sometimes what it takes to get a point across, it made me laugh.

I think the reaction from the FTBers will be interesting, should they get wind of it. I've always felt you can infer much from a person's character in how they respond to a satire of themselves.

#1225

Scented Nectar, good luck with getting that post onto Butterlies and Squeals!

:lol:

#1226

CommanderTuvok wrote:Scented Nectar, good luck with getting that post onto Butterlies and Squeals!

:lol:

Luck? I think it would take nothing short of a miracle! It might even cause people to question their atheism. :D

#1227

TedDahlberg wrote:My first post on this forum. W00t.

Regarding this:

Git wrote: I may have linked to Normblog before, but he's the typical reaction from a non-USian (http://normblog.typepad.com/normblog/20 ... hands.html)

Having recently returned from two academic conferences at both of which participants seemed able to conduct themselves towards one another in a straightforward and unstressful way, I am surprised to learn that from now on academic theologians attending conferences in Sweden will be obliged to seek formal permission before talking directly to one another. The Director of Theology Sweden explains:

As the resident Swede I would just like to say that not all of us are insane. In fact I could go so far as to say that most of us are reasonably sane, depending on how you define the term. We do have our share of nuttery like this, of course, but it is by no means as widespread as one might get the impression of. I can't think of anyone I know or work with who would not splutter with incomprehension if they learned of this story.

He's taking the piss, old chap. It didn't really happen in Sweden.

#1228

franc wrote:
Dilurk wrote:This confuses me as well, I am somewhat older than PZ (and SN for that matter). I know he means well, I can see the passion and I understand it. It is the same passion I still hold for wanting to fight injustice.
You strike me as generally astute, but WHAT? Are you really assuming that Myers et al. care about what's wrong or right? If anything, the FC5(6) + Watson and her yap yaps are textbook examples of amorality. Their absence of empathic connection to the world outside their own reality bubble borders on

I can't help it, I'm Canadian! *cry* I try to think the best of people. I just don't understand why these people cannot see their own faces in the mirror you held up.

solipsism. You are way too generous in your cutting of slack. It's almost like thinking rabid dogs can be made less rabid with some compassion. There comes a time when you just have to be realistic and accept that these are broken units - there is nothing good to be found here. Yes, move along is fine, we all should, but no - there is no forgiveness. The abuses have well and truly exceeded any reasonable bounds for forgiveness.

Yes, move on. I cannot and will not forget the cyberbullying, they have a lot to apologise for.

#1229

ERV wrote:
And from Gay's speech, "you sometimes need to keep your butt to the wall and your arms crossed over your chest"? But it's no use reporting illegal activity to the authorities if you're not "powerful enough"? How is this not completely fucked up advice to "women in science"?
How is it not fucked up in general?

"Other women, you are in danger! And Im going to do nothing about it because Im more worried about my job than doing the right thing and protecting other people! Arent I a good role model?"

This is how kids got raped at Penn State for decades-- people cared more about their jobs and their prestige than STOPPING RAPE.

Let me just clearly state that while I havent been harassed (sexual or otherwise) in science, if I ever am, I will be reporting it immediately to HR/conference organizers/whatever.

One thing that puzzles me a little, is that she says:

Some of you have to have power to stop discrimination and harassment. It pisses me off to know that as strong as I am, I know Iâ€™m not powerful enough to name names and be confident that Iâ€™ll still have a career.

Then adds:

At my university, Iâ€™ve heard tenured faculty laugh that there is a policy not to hire women into tenure track physics positions. They do this in front of the junior faculty. Iâ€™ve heard people joke that the reason Iâ€™m in a research center rather than in Physics is because I have boobs.

Okay here are the physics faculty of Southern Illinois University Edwardsville. These are - presumably - the men Pamela Gay is too afraid to name as misogynists lest her career be ruined. It took me about 2 minutes work on the Web to track them down, as Gay must have known it would. The onus is now on them to prove their innocence - isn't it?

#1230

Maybe a bit too radfem for SN but Twisty had an interesting post: http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/201 ... en-thread/
http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/wp- ... rgirls.jpg Is that PZ in the first photo? Oh wait, no beard.

#1231

Go figure, linky was deleted on me. Use these http://cdn.slacktory.com/wp-content/upl ... ctate.jpeg
and http://cdn.slacktory.com/wp-content/upl ... space.jpeg

The point remains the same, if you really want to be helpful you can please listen to the wimminz ffs.

#1232

Dilurk wrote:Maybe a bit too radfem for SN but Twisty had an interesting post: http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/201 ... en-thread/

Actually, I think that guy who said not to worry about makeup or clothes, that you're beautiful without those, was saying something I thought feminists are supposed to be for: not needing to do the expected gender-based preening for sexual attractiveness. Yet they get mad and tell him that he's trying to tell them what to do. If a woman had written it, she'd have been queen of the day, carried around town on a throne made of praises.

Not surprising. I've seen feminists similarily try to defend the social pressure to wear boobie burqas (bras), and getting mad at those who say not to feel pressured by society into wearing them.

As for makeup and clothes worn to impress, to each their own, but I have to say: In hetero situations, for most women, it's easy to get sex without any need for decorative lures. Excuse the generalization, but men really do say "yes" waaaay easier than women do. Men have a harder time finding women to have sex with, than women do finding men to have sex with.

A few months before EGate last year, Jen McWrong freaked at some other conference over two things, one of which led to some woman sob sob sobbing away, in the washroom, living up to the stereotype of oversensitive weeper over spilt milk. 1) Someone speaking said the clinical sounding "female" when they thought he should say "woman", and 2) someone did a well known experiment which always has the same outcome: The audience is asked to raise their hands if they would (not for real though) accept a million dollar bet that they could find someone of the opposite sex to have sex with before the day is over. It is not allowed to offer that person part of the million. Almost all the hands raised are female. That's because both men and women know full well how much easier it is for a woman to find sex.

Anyways, after Jen freaked out about it over an article or two, Dawkins said a phrase regarding the drama that made me laugh. It's very suitable for these sorts of dramas. He called the outrage "hysterical twaddle" on an article on his site. This was before EGate, so he's been speaking out against this stuff since before the EG explosion. "Hysterical" fits perfectly, as they are living up to weak/over-reactive stereotypes, embarrassingly setting women's true equality back many years in my view.

#1233

franc wrote:I have complete disinterest in whether chicks want to get shot at or not, nor any inclination to stop them if they do, but this is peripherally interesting -
...
This sound familiar? The unrepresentative drone of a loudmouth special interest minority with no idea or contact with reality -

Franc, You need to be sent to the reeducation gulag. Here..start with this book.
Excerpt: 'Man Down' by Dan Abrams

In his new book "Man Down," Dan Abrams gives "Proof Beyond a Reasonable Doubt That Women Are Better Cops, Drivers, Gamblers, Spies, World Leaders, Beer Tasters, Hedge Fund Managers, and Just About Everything Else".

Greg "My female brain has been poisoned by testosterone" Laden (or is it Greg "I want to be a woman" Laden) has to up the ante to be able to compete with this mangina.

#1234

Ah - looks like FreethoughtBLAHgs has been caught by FTB. http://freethoughtblogs.com/almostdiamo ... -ed-clint/

Bless Steph, she's trying so hard to be reasonable about it.

#1235

Scented Nectar wrote:
Dilurk wrote:Maybe a bit too radfem for SN but Twisty had an interesting post: http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/201 ... en-thread/
Actually, I think that guy who said not to worry about makeup or clothes, that you're beautiful without those, was saying something I thought feminists are supposed to be for: not needing to do the expected gender-based preening for sexual attractiveness. Yet they get mad and tell him that he's trying to tell them what to do. If a woman had written it, she'd have been queen of the day, carried around town on a throne made of praises.

That was actually my first thought as well as I don't always agree with Twisty. Still what I thought the photos were interesting for is the way PZ whinges on and on about "LISTEN TO THE WOMEN" then goes and cyberbullies women anyway. I. just. don't. get. it. At all.

Not surprising. I've seen feminists similarily try to defend the social pressure to wear boobie burqas (bras), and getting mad at those who say not to feel pressured by society into wearing them.

FFS yes you and I were alive during the burn the bra era of feminism. Did you look at Twisty's second article on that page?

Discrimination Korner: Cover your boobs whether you have them or not

Twisty has some things right IMO and somel things wrong, Though I think she lays it on too thick with the 'I blame the patriarchy', she certainly isn't as insane as some radfems I have seen.

As for makeup and clothes worn to impress, to each their own, but I have to say: In hetero situations, for most women, it's easy to get sex without any need for decorative lures. Excuse the generalization, but men really do say "yes" waaaay easier than women do. Men have a harder time finding women to have sex with, than women do finding men to have sex with.

I dress like a female geek, if you promise not to further delurk me, I'll send a link. I don't need the drama from PZ, Laden etc. at all.

A few months before EGate last year, Jen McWrong freaked at some other conference over two things, one of which led to some woman sob sob sobbing away, in the washroom, living up to the stereotype of oversensitive weeper over spilt milk. 1) Someone speaking said the clinical sounding "female" when they thought he should say "woman", and 2) someone did a well known experiment which always has the same outcome: The audience is asked to raise their hands if they would (not for real though) accept a million dollar bet that they could find someone of the opposite sex to have sex with before the day is over. It is not allowed to offer that person part of the million. Almost all the hands raised are female. That's because both men and women know full well how much easier it is for a woman to find sex.

Anyways, after Jen freaked out about it over an article or two, Dawkins said a phrase regarding the drama that made me laugh. It's very suitable for these sorts of dramas. He called the outrage "hysterical twaddle" on an article on his site. This was before EGate, so he's been speaking out against this stuff since before the EG explosion. "Hysterical" fits perfectly, as they are living up to weak/over-reactive stereotypes, embarrassingly setting women's true equality back many years in my view.

Yes 'Hysterical' is a good word for it.

#1236

Dilurk:

This confuses me as well, I am somewhat older than PZ (and SN for that matter). I know he means well, I can see the passion and I understand it. It is the same passion I still hold for wanting to fight injustice. Watson, Ahlquist, Maria none of them should have received the abuse they did. I don't understand why PZ is so blind to the harm he himself is causing.

I hate to say this because it seems spiteful and dogmatic, but go what PZ displays is not passion. It's unpleasantness and dishonesty. Look up Anthony Navarro on the Phawrongula wiki, or see the reminder I posted in Baboollie Chat (Saltydroid and the....). That saga encapsulates PZs sliminess and lack of integrity perfectly. When Hoggle was regularly indicting him on Greylining I tried hard to give PZ the benefit of the doubt, but he'd always do something to substantiate the charges.

This raises the question of what it actually means to move on from here. If the FC5 retain some influence, will they change their style, will they refrain from being as dogmatic on the next overblown issue? I'd like to see wider awareness of what they are about and I'd like to see them marginalised. I'd like to see a situation where their "everyone is stupid but us" attitude becomes the exception and we no longer need to pay attention to their rantings.

#1237

Wow, Freethoughtblogs doesn't like FreethoughtBLAHgs. Big surprise. I'm guessing it's the same reason a pretentious 80's hair metal band might not like This is Spinal Tap.

#1238

And now Myers has chimed in on FreethoughtBLAHgs: http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... king-hard/

Hmmm. PZ is distinctly unimpressed, though the bewilderment of the commentariat is a fine sight to behold. It's as if they can't see anything about FTB deserving of any satire.

Guess they thought they were beyond parody too. :lol:

#1239

Tigzy wrote:And now Myers has chimed in on FreethoughtBLAHgs: http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... king-hard/

Hmmm. PZ is distinctly unimpressed, though the bewilderment of the commentariat is a fine sight to behold. It's as if they can't see anything about FTB deserving of any satire.

Guess they thought they were beyond parody too. :lol:

If one cannot take the utter piss out of oneself then a) one is a sanctimonious git, and b) one should not take the piss out of other people.

Needless to say, the FC5 are definitely sanctimonious gits.

#1240

Considering how frequently FfTBers 'out' the wrong person-- Why are they saying 'Ed Clint' made the site? I have no idea who did, and I dont see any identifiers on the site myself, and Ed hasnt said anything on his Facebook about this... sooo... Is 'Ed Clint' the new 'Victor Ivanoff'?

#1241

ERV wrote:Considering how frequently FfTBers 'out' the wrong person-- Why are they saying 'Ed Clint' made the site? I have no idea who did, and I dont see any identifiers on the site myself, and Ed hasnt said anything on his Facebook about this... sooo... Is 'Ed Clint' the new 'Victor Ivanoff'?

I am such a coward, but after I watch their witch hunting I just don't want to delurk any further. Those people are insane.

#1242

Tigzy wrote:And now Myers has chimed in on FreethoughtBLAHgs: http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... king-hard/

Hmmm. PZ is distinctly unimpressed, though the bewilderment of the commentariat is a fine sight to behold. It's as if they can't see anything about FTB deserving of any satire.

Guess they thought they were beyond parody too. :lol:

Uh oh for Steph... she finds it funny and PZ doesn't. How long before she's kicked out of FfTBs?

(wanna bet no one from FfTBs sees this as parody?)

#1243

I decide to get into the spirit of things:

http://www.freethoughtblahgs.com/blogho ... omment-342

I would like to bring to your attention the latest outrage by the PUA community where guess what?

The fucking MRAs are justifying RAPE CULTURE by saying WOMEN ARE ASKING FOR IT!!!!

Those fucking fuckers are fucking asking to be fucking fucked by a fucking Porcupine!!!

Call the POLICE RIGHT NOW!!!!

More Women Have Rape Fantasies Than Previously Thought

March 28, 2011 by Heartiste

https://heartiste.wordpress.com/2011/03 ... y-thought/

#1244

Love this comment:

http://gumbercules.com/Image1.jpg

Perhaps they DO recognize themselves in this parody?

#1245

Parody site gave me chuckles. I'd actually buy that person the first round.
Ripple chuckles in the FfTB counter posts:

Alyson Miers says: "What is that I donâ€™t even."

Almost an exact replica of one of the comments on the parody. Huge laughs all round. Thanks whomever!

{also, has Benson seen that poster of her and the vagina yet? She might actually explode}

#1246

JAB wrote:
Tigzy wrote:And now Myers has chimed in on FreethoughtBLAHgs: http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... king-hard/

Hmmm. PZ is distinctly unimpressed, though the bewilderment of the commentariat is a fine sight to behold. It's as if they can't see anything about FTB deserving of any satire.

Guess they thought they were beyond parody too. :lol:
Uh oh for Steph... she finds it funny and PZ doesn't. How long before she's kicked out of FfTBs?

Her writing has to become very bad first.

(wanna bet no one from FfTBs sees this as parody?)

#1247

The responses on FfTB are nothing short of priceless. Woo_Monster actually seems to think it's there to make the Slimepit look bad. :lol:

These people have no self-awareness whatsoever.

#1248

Massimo Pigliucci decided to chime in...

http://rationallyspeaking.blogspot.ca/2 ... -wars.html

#1249

Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:Massimo Pigliucci decided to chime in...

http://rationallyspeaking.blogspot.ca/2 ... -wars.html

It's a nice post overall.

First off, and this should be obvious, â€œwomenâ€ are not a monolithic category who see everything the same way. What may constitute borderline sexual harassment for one woman may be interpreted as innocuous or even welcome flirting by another. (I hope itâ€™s clear that Iâ€™m talking about actual borderline cases, not instances of men brazenly groping women in public, or making threats of rape via Twitter.)

That is what I and many other women have been saying, I am glad he said it.

So, where do we go from here? Here are three conceptually simple, yet Iâ€™m sure extremely difficult in practice, action items. First, letâ€™s tone down the self-righteousness, on both sides. It just doesnâ€™t help. Second, organizers of all future CON(s), you need to take the issue seriously, develop and clearly enunciate your policies, and be ready to deal with the consequences in a firm, if courteous and hopefully constructive, manner. Lastly, the A-S community needs to take the first step toward solving any problem: admit that there is one. Pretty straightforward, no?

Actually I agree for the most part with this. Even if you state clearly "We have no jurisdiction outside of the convention area itself, that is the job of .... " and make it clear anything else should be put in writing. Otherwise we get the horror show of people claiming I thought it had been reported etc.

But again, it has gone beyond any perceived problem of atheist/sceptic misogyny problem to a cyberbullying problem. Phoning bosses etc. is beyond the pale. That is not acceptable.

#1250

Dilurk wrote:FFS yes you and I were alive during the burn the bra era of feminism. Did you look at Twisty's second article on that page?
Twisty has some things right IMO and somel things wrong, Though I think she lays it on too thick with the 'I blame the patriarchy', she certainly isn't as insane as some radfems I have seen.

I haven't read much of her, but I have chalked her up to be more radfem than other type of feminist.

I think most feminists have forgotten that bra-ridding was once an issue. (âŠ™)(âŠ™) <-- braless internet boobs! hide eyes! :D

I dress like a female geek, if you promise not to further delurk me, I'll send a link. I don't need the drama from PZ, Laden etc. at all.

Heheh, I'm not exactly into fashion myself. My style is pretty much behind the times, standard factory worker style. I'd feel quite silly dressing any fancier than that.

Yes 'Hysterical' is a good word for it.

They're really attached to their victimhood and the sympathy it gets them. They end up hyperboling things into outraged hysterics every time.

#1251

Scented Nectar wrote:
Dilurk wrote:FFS yes you and I were alive during the burn the bra era of feminism. Did you look at Twisty's second article on that page?
Twisty has some things right IMO and somel things wrong, Though I think she lays it on too thick with the 'I blame the patriarchy', she certainly isn't as insane as some radfems I have seen.
I haven't read much of her, but I have chalked her up to be more radfem than other type of feminist.

Well, she is as radfem as I can take and sometimes she does have a good point. Definitely not as crazy as some.

I think most feminists have forgotten that bra-ridding was once an issue. (âŠ™)(âŠ™) <-- braless internet boobs! hide eyes! :D

I remember! I think some of their heads would explode if we let them know a female going topless isn't that big a deal here in Ontario. ; - )

I dress like a female geek, if you promise not to further delurk me, I'll send a link. I don't need the drama from PZ, Laden etc. at all.
Heheh, I'm not exactly into fashion myself. My style is pretty much behind the times, standard factory worker style. I'd feel quite silly dressing any fancier than that.

Yes 'Hysterical' is a good word for it.
They're really attached to their victimhood and the sympathy it gets them. They end up hyperboling things into outraged hysterics every time.

Pisses me off it does

#1252

What's with all the wimminz posting here? I'm at a loss about our writings...

(Meaning I really enjoy the Female perspective on this mess...)

#1253

Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:What's with all the wimminz posting here? I'm at a loss about our writings...

(Meaning I really enjoy the Female perspective on this mess...)

You guys listen.

#1254

One of the posters at Stefunny's asks whether the FreethoughtBLAHgs site is designed to poke fun at them or the Slimepit.

:lol:

#1255

Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:What's with all the wimminz posting here? I'm at a loss about our writings...

(Meaning I really enjoy the Female perspective on this mess...)

I don't understand it either. They say it's the most toxic environment ever here for women. Yet my two X's are undamaged by all the slimy misosoupiginisticness that's supposed to be here. I mean, I haven't been raped, or even harassed, here in the Slimepit yet, WTF is that about!?! Am I in the wrong place?

#1256

I'm just going to stop reading fftb. They are either generating these bs controversies for blog hits or they are genuinely idealogical woo peddlers, or a combination of both. No matter i'm pretty much done reading their crap, from bloggers and their idiotic fan club commentary. Example below is lykeX on axp who doesn't get to pass his own first step. Not that he would ever fucking see that. Absolutely fucking clueless and blinded by bullshit.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/axp/2012/07 ... ment-63963

#1257

That "harassment" story from TAM has gone quiet very quickly.

;)

#1258

I remember! I think some of their heads would explode if we let them know a female going topless isn't that big a deal here in Ontario. ; - )

Yep, it's wonderfully legal here, even though hardly anyone does it yet (mostly just at parades and protests these days). Marc Emery helped get that law fixed. He's the same guy that did most of the fight to get rid of our theocratic Sunday no-shopping laws. And he's fought a huge fight to get pot legalized but is currently in a US jail (for another year and a half left, I think) after being extradited for simply shipping seeds to the US (something that would only bring a small fine here in Canada). He's done some amazing things to fix 3 laws I've always felt strongly against (toplessness only allowed for men, theocratic no Sunday shopping allowed laws, and anti-pot laws).

Never on a Sunday: The History of Ontario's Ban on Sunday Shopping
[youtube]3BVZGdJL7Bg[/youtube]

#1259

disumbrationist wrote:Wow, Freethoughtblogs doesn't like FreethoughtBLAHgs. Big surprise. I'm guessing it's the same reason a pretentious 80's hair metal band might not like This is Spinal Tap.

Beccy's ego goes all the way up to 11.

#1260

CommanderTuvok wrote:That "harassment" story from TAM has gone quiet very quickly.

;)

I think when it came out that she was running away just in case a) harassment might happen, and b) she figured she wouldn't know what to do about it if it does, they must have realized that even the FC5 can't make that one come out sounding very victimy. Except maybe the person being a victim of their own mental health. :)