Periodic Table of Swearing

[Lsuoma]

Ed Clint?
I assumed that this was an attempt at puerile humour:
ED CLINT
Looks almost exactly like "VAGINA"

“Luck! Sounds almost exactly like ‘fu-..”

[sacha]

Well, since this seems to be the fashion page,

I work with animals. I'm covered in fur, dirt, mud, drool, sometimes poo, occasionally vomit, most of the day. so yeah, I'm a no-makeup, jeans and tee shirt girl... but I look fucking hot in jeans and a tee shirt.

And another - er - wimmin - womyn - hell, what is the singular of "wimminz", anyway? - is hereby checking in, with a first post to the undead thread, though I've posted elsewhere in the new Pit in the last few days. Hi guys.

Re the fashion statements issue: I live on an acreage in southern BC, which involves much gardening and dealing with chicken poop. When chasing bears off my back porch or bathing a chicken, I prefer the simple, timeless elegance of jeans and t-shirt, accessorized with gumboots, work-gloves, and floppy wide-brimmed hat. When shopping in town, we tell the menz from the wimminz by checking out the beardz. Those of the menz are (generally) longer.

Happy to be here. :)

[Michael K Gray]

Ed Clint?
I assumed that this was an attempt at puerile humour:
ED CLINT
Looks almost exactly like "VAGINA"

“Luck! Sounds almost exactly like ‘fu-..”

I love the smell of BlackAdder in the morning.

[franc]

As a gentle detour, a stunningly concise guide to marketing and manipulation.

“People will do anything for those who encourage their dreams, justify their failures, allay their fears, confirm their suspicions, and help them throw rocks at their enemies.”

I don't know the source of the quote. Worth more than a thousand seminars and explains the appeal of the more popular "isms" doing the rounds.

https://sifudw.wordpress.com/2010/12/13 ... t-enemies/

[franc]

[quote="Dilurk"]Some of us older types (I include Jean here) have been trying to cling to the old equal but different use of the term feminist, but it sure isn't working out too well. Oh well.[quote]

Maybe it's time to let go eh? I've let go of "atheist".

[AndrewV69]

One Rape, Please (to Go)
I Paid a Male Whore to Rape Me Because I Wanted To

Original article posted on jezebel - they weenied and purged it from their site.

I remember reading it. I did not "get" it then and I still do not "get" it. I understand humans on a theoretical level only.

Animals I understand by instinct. Humans, not so much.

[franc]

One Rape, Please (to Go)
I Paid a Male Whore to Rape Me Because I Wanted To

I remember reading it. I did not "get" it then and I still do not "get" it. I understand humans on a theoretical level only.

I don't get it either. What confuses me even more is that I have known quite a number of chicks that actually do have these kinds of things in their "turn ons" list. Where I get really, really confused, and this is only my subjective and narrow experience, is that most of them have been on some kind of identity politic trip as well, and just as likely to have thrown red paint at porn stores at "reclaim the night" marches in the '80s and '90s.

[rayshul]

Holy shit, I was just reading FTBlahgs, clicked a link, and somehow wound up on FTBlogs. It took me to the comments to realise it wasn't the parody site.

[sacha]

Dilurk: "FFS yes you and I were alive during the burn the bra era of feminism."

I was as well, just a bit younger than you two.

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

They are the "lipstick" feminists, and extremely intimidated by those of us that don't have any use for accoutrements. I can be ready to go out in a half hour, shower included. These women need hours. I can understand a bit more time for some major event, but just to go out to dinner?

DownThunder/DT: "It is the worship of the feminine, present anywhere, anywhen, any culture. It is a warped hyper-philogyny, a belief where feminine is beyond reproach, fallibility, accountability, or even facts or reasoning and explanation - a flawed position."
"There is also the question as to why sycophants latch onto certain kinds of women, those who display helplessness, distress, a never ending list of demands for appeasement, general mental immaturity.

The question is why do men put up with it? The type of men I'm attracted to, are those that would never.

I don't understand the draw, it has to be more than pussy, these are women that the men marry. Then they really have to put up with it, and they are not even getting laid. I am always amazed at just how many men resign themselves to a life with a demanding bitch, who constantly emasculate them. It is the majority of relationship dynamics. I have no patience for either of them.

DownThunder/DT: Then, why the same males will deny and ignore other women do not fit that pattern, ie "gender traitors".

That is not my experience at all. I've never been denied or ignored by men. When I was younger, I was always been the "only girl" who was permitted to spend time with the guys, they could be themselves around me, they didn't need to watch what they said and did all the fucking time, and I constantly heard the call of the Gender Traitor: "Sacha, you are the perfect woman" "I wish there were more like you" "blah blah blah" ... pathetic. I would tell them that if they did not put up with the behaviour, the women would stop, but they would always end up dating the complete opposite of me, and let the women lead them around on a chain. It is bizarre. It's as if they just begged me to take the piss when their chick was not around.

Those were friends, my lovers were (and are) nothing like that.

Yes, I was the stereo-typical Gender Traitor when I was younger. Yes, I got off on the power of men loving my personality, and women despising me. I was nothing but a cliché.

Now that I'm older, all my close friends are still men, but they either have never been one to tolerate that behaviour, or they did at one time, and they are older and wiser now.

I haven't the patience to deal with anything else.

I've had one or two women friends over the years, and I have acquaintances that are women who are towards my end of the spectrum, who I do like, but in small doses...

Then again I can only handle small doses of almost all humans.

[justinvacula]

From http://freethoughtblogs.com/butterflies ... 11/simoti/,

I particularly detest all this “loser” talk. It’s so high-school-bully. It’s so conformist. It’s so low.

Only if Ophelia would not engage in that name-calling herself. After all, she's happy to call me an asshole, a dishonest hack, a lair, disgraceful, etc.
http://i.imgur.com/vWZVj.jpg

(also

but nevermind that, it's parallel logic...no matter how much Ophelia wants to deny using that term.

[sacha]

Andrew V69: "I understand humans on a theoretical level only."

Then you understand more than I

[franc]

The question is why do men put up with it? The type of men I'm attracted to, are those that would never.
[...]
Now that I'm older, all my close friends are still men, but they either have never been one to tolerate that behaviour, or they did at one time, and they are older and wiser now.

Testosterone is a demon. You she critters have no idea. Young guys really do think with their dicks. It is a beast that is never satisfied. Hence the ease with which some women can lead men around by their balls eh PZ?

What I love about growing old disgracefully is that you finally master the beast and you use it as you see fit. The best bit is allowing some pretty young airhead to lead you on, let her foster the belief that she has you, then telling her to "get fucked" just as whatever it is she needs is within her grasp. As the credit card ads go - priceless. "Honey, I can rent someone like you whenever I please..."

[sacha]

Franc:
Testosterone is a demon. You she critters have no idea. Young guys really do think with their dicks...

You forget how well I know you.

So, why didn't you put up with it? It certainly was not from a lack of testostorone, Franc.

The men I have dated were not lacking in testostorone either. It's something else.

Confidence. They knew that they did not have to put up with it, and they got far more pussy than the men who were willing to "sell out".

[DownThunder]

Dilurk: "FFS yes you and I were alive during the burn the bra era of feminism."

I was as well, just a bit younger than you two.

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

They are the "lipstick" feminists, and extremely intimidated by those of us that don't have any use for accoutrements. I can be ready to go out in a half hour, shower included. These women need hours. I can understand a bit more time for some major event, but just to go out to dinner?

DownThunder/DT: "It is the worship of the feminine, present anywhere, anywhen, any culture. It is a warped hyper-philogyny, a belief where feminine is beyond reproach, fallibility, accountability, or even facts or reasoning and explanation - a flawed position."
"There is also the question as to why sycophants latch onto certain kinds of women, those who display helplessness, distress, a never ending list of demands for appeasement, general mental immaturity.

The question is why do men put up with it? The type of men I'm attracted to, are those that would never.

I don't understand the draw, it has to be more than pussy, these are women that the men marry. Then they really have to put up with it, and they are not even getting laid. I am always amazed at just how many men resign themselves to a life with a demanding bitch, who constantly emasculate them. It is the majority of relationship dynamics. I have no patience for either of them.

DownThunder/DT: Then, why the same males will deny and ignore other women do not fit that pattern, ie "gender traitors".

That is not my experience at all. I've never been denied or ignored by men. When I was younger, I was always been the "only girl" who was permitted to spend time with the guys, they could be themselves around me, they didn't need to watch what they said and did all the fucking time, and I constantly heard the call of the Gender Traitor: "Sacha, you are the perfect woman" "I wish there were more like you" "blah blah blah" ... pathetic. I would tell them that if they did not put up with the behaviour, the women would stop, but they would always end up dating the complete opposite of me, and let the women lead them around on a chain. It is bizarre. It's as if they just begged me to take the piss when their chick was not around.

Those were friends, my lovers were (and are) nothing like that.

Yes, I was the stereo-typical Gender Traitor when I was younger. Yes, I got off on the power of men loving my personality, and women despising me. I was nothing but a cliché.

Now that I'm older, all my close friends are still men, but they either have never been one to tolerate that behaviour, or they did at one time, and they are older and wiser now.

I haven't the patience to deal with anything else.

I've had one or two women friends over the years, and I have acquaintances that are women who are towards my end of the spectrum, who I do like, but in small doses...

Then again I can only handle small doses of almost all humans.

My comment was vague, Ill try to elaborate. I think there is a sliding scale of standards - if you take a paternalistic fftblogger who displays an extreme form of sycophancy, then they have a narrow ideal of the feminine, and even a average woman may not meet the standard. The denial I was speaking of was the "listen to women" rhetoric and its related variants. Clearly there have been women that havent been listened to, where others have.

My use of the term gender traitor is a bit tounge in cheek, set against the backdrop of the insane gender dynamic that is promoted by members of the Church of the Fainting Couch. I dont think most people would describe you as a gender traitor, or anyone, since most people would have no idea of what the term is, nor would reasonable people use the term gender traitor (or "sister punisher" or other euphemisms), with all its disturbing supremacist undertones.

The question as to why men would behave like this? I agree with Franc that young men are plagued with hormones, are driven by emotional impulses, are still bound by tedious social dynamics etc, however this complete enrapture in feminine ideals is something I have seen 30+ / middle aged men develop. There must be some psychological factor, not simply physiological. One explanation I have encountered is that it is a form of escapism from reality, it is a fantasy in reality, but is still a mystery to me.

[franc]

Franc:
Testosterone is a demon. You she critters have no idea. Young guys really do think with their dicks...

You forget how well I know you.

So, why didn't you put up with it? It certainly was not from a lack of testostorone, Franc.

I shed my shame like a lizard shed's it's skin. It's a biological function, like hunger. Hungry? Get a burger? Horny? {fill in the blank}

Commitment is about respect, not biology. That is perhaps the most important lesson omitted from sex ed. programs.

[rayshul bugger]

Quick link to Dr Tara on the attraction to emotionally abusive partners. I'd think it's equally true the other way, women who look for bad boys, etc.

http://shrink4men.wordpress.com/2009/02 ... ive-women/

[masakari2012]

The Humanist Hour #75: America’s War on Sex
Skip to 36:25 of the podcast...
http://podcast.thehumanist.org/2012/07/ ... t/#respond

[astrokid.nj]

Second wavers burned their boob burqas, third wavers whine about men being rapists

But thats not all second wavers did. I know you had socialist feminism which primarily identified capitalism as the source of problems, and you had liberal feminism which wanted to address issues in-place in small ways, but you also had the radical feminists who identified men as the source their problems, and came up with the theory of 'oppressive-to-women-only patriarchy' which has stayed as the dominant ideology of the times. We have the second-wavers to thank for that. Even Steven Pinker has to preface his writings with a 'yes I believe women have been oppressed by men for millenia' for certain reasons, as James Onen mentioned earlier. Leaving the open-haters like Dworkin and Solanas aside, even mainstreamers like Gloria Steinem, Robin Morgan wrote utterly hateful stuff. On the basis of which all kinds of shit policies such as women in Affirmative Action (benign compared to other stuff) are being forced down our throats. In addition to being massive victimhood'ers, they didnt care for the male-situation. How did the gender role for males look like? This article by a young non-feminist is a good start.

So what was going on with men during this revolution. Were they lounging in their libraries and dens, smoking pipes and drinking bourbon, enjoying secret stashes of scantily clad women? Yes! And also, running the world! But really, the answer to this is that the overwhelming majority were not.
Before the early 1900's, premarital sex was pretty scandalous so the only way to have sex was to pay for it and risk your junk, or get married. Being married had a lot of other advantages besides. You gained a partner that was as invested in your well-being as you were. You gained the comforts of a family and a home. You gained connections within your community. So most people got married.
Imagine you're a man in the US in the time prior to women's right activism. It wasn't until the mid 1800's that men who didn't own property could vote. So, unless you had a good job or a rich family, you also had no say in your representation. You were legally and socially responsible for your wife, meaning that if your wife committed a crime, you were considered responsible. This included paying of debts accrued without your knowledge. Contrary to popular belief most places had domestic violence laws, and beating your wife was discouraged. On the other hand, if your wife physically abused you, you had no recourse but to hit her back. If you were handicapped in someway, or simply to nice to hit back, too bad for you.
You were required by law to support your family. The only birth control at the time was unreliable and discouraged so if everyone was healthy, the babies just kept coming. Unless your wife took care of that somehow. More babies meant more work for you which meant no chance to see your wife kids. Staying at home wasn't even a option. You were lucky if you say your kids an hour a day, unless you were a farmer.
If you were working outside the home and poor there was a good chance what you did was pretty dangerous, like factories or mines. Or during war you were required to join the military.
So where we the men's rights activist in all this upheaval? Well, with a few exceptions, there just weren't any. While things were changing for women, things were not changing as quickly for men. In fact, men deviating from the norm of being the sole financial provider were dismissed, mocked, and ostracized.
The fact of the matter is that men had it pretty shitty too, and it was, and still is ignored. The gender binary screwed absolutely everyone in one way or another.
Did women have it worse than men? I don't know but when I contrast not having the right to vote, with the legal responsibility to fight and die for a cause I don't understand or support...women come out better. Safer.

false analogy. Again, at one time there is no way in hell women were allowed to become medical doctors, early feminism was just about asking for a chance to do so, and to do so without ribald comments. That's all. I agree with you that asking for anything more is offensive to those of us who have worked our socks off developing a career, and then seeing us being insulted by being called gender traitors and the like.

I wish you would tell the whole story about why you were not allowed to become medical doctors. You were not allowed to work in the coal mines as well. Lets not forget that. Just as you as not allowed to be in the Infantry today (Do you consider that a grave injustice?). You lacked the right because you lacked corresponding responsibilities and capabilities (back in the early 1900's doctors needed to horse-ride good distances to reach patients at all kinds of unearthly hours. Were women game for that?). And its not that ONLY men decided on that. As in most social arrangements, women were willing participants. I suspect a reading of Angry Harry will do interested folks some good.
Did Women Really Want To Go Out To Work?

[ERV]

From http://freethoughtblogs.com/butterflies ... 11/simoti/,

I particularly detest all this “loser” talk. It’s so high-school-bully. It’s so conformist. It’s so low.

Im not surprised a loser is mad people are using the word 'loser'. Some people are losers.

My cousin grew up in the lap of luxury. Could have done anything with his life. He chose to do a ton of drugs, have a whole bunch of still-born babies with equally drug addicted women, have no education, go to prison over and over, moved from one person to the next leeching off of them so he wouldnt have to work. Hes a loser.

The FfTBullies have premium educations, middle-->upper class, a few of them *choose* not to work, but they all certainly enough disposable income to have computers and constant internet access (and iPhones, and iPads). They have all the opportunity in the world to do something productive with their lives, skills as writers and a means to disseminate knowledge, education to those who *arent* so lucky. What are they doing? Bitching on blogs. Outing some kid for (maybe?) making a website that pokes fun at them. Twitter bombing. Like I told Ed Clints rat-- Losers who manufacture drama to inject some semblance of emotion into their loser lives for distractions so they dont have to come to terms with the fact they are losers.

*Losers*

[Toiletman]

The question is why do men put up with it? The type of men I'm attracted to, are those that would never.
[...]
Now that I'm older, all my close friends are still men, but they either have never been one to tolerate that behaviour, or they did at one time, and they are older and wiser now.

Testosterone is a demon. You she critters have no idea. Young guys really do think with their dicks. It is a beast that is never satisfied. Hence the ease with which some women can lead men around by their balls eh PZ?

What I love about growing old disgracefully is that you finally master the beast and you use it as you see fit. The best bit is allowing some pretty young airhead to lead you on, let her foster the belief that she has you, then telling her to "get fucked" just as whatever it is she needs is within her grasp. As the credit card ads go - priceless. "Honey, I can rent someone like you whenever I please..."

Please tell me how that works. I am asexual and already tried testosterone supplements (i mean real ones prescribed by a doctor)and never had these feelings. I think it would be interesting to have them atleast once in my life.

[AndrewV69]

http://freethoughtblogs.com/butterflies ... ment-31501

Ophelia Benson says:
November 16, 2011 at 3:07 pm

Abbie’s apparently now blocked me at Facebook; I can’t see her comments any more. I’m told she is also calling me fucking nuts there…after blocking me so that I can’t see or respond. How brave.

:o

[franc]

Please tell me how that works. I am asexual and already tried testosterone supplements (i mean real ones prescribed by a doctor)and never had these feelings. I think it would be interesting to have them atleast once in my life.

I really have no idea, I'm not a doctor or neurochemist. Do you have functional testicles? That's not an insult, a genuine question and assumes you are likewise asking a serious question. Testosterone does all sorts of shit to the body - but I'm talking about teenage boys when they have a sac full and really need to unload it somewhere. Reason and considerateness tend to be the first things jettisoned. There are all sorts of other neuro-payloads associated with having a good spray - endorphin rush and whatnot. I really don't know how to explain what is essentially a subjective and very low-level mammalian male experience. Care to elaborate your question?

[Guest]

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

That's what I get for posting without reading the link properly. Lesson learned, and head duly hung in shame (for all of three seconds, but still!).

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

Well, Justi seems to have a beef with me on Twitter, so if I wrote anything that could do him wrong or misrepresent him, consider this my public apology.

[James Onen]

http://www.freethoughtblahgs.com/

The funniest thing I've read this year. I literally had tears in my eyes from laughing.

[franc]

http://www.freethoughtblahgs.com/

The funniest thing I've read this year. I literally had tears in my eyes from laughing.

Whoever did this needs a medal. I thought it was one page, but there's actual content getting updated -

http://www.freethoughtblahgs.com/femago ... omment-454

[Michael K Gray]

I would suggest acknowledging the abuse Watson has received and agreeing no one deserves this.

But, you surely see, I have yet be presented with any credible evidence that RW has garnered any sort of 'abuse'.
Nary a skerrick.
And this goes to the nub of my grievance.
Are you able to forward this 'evidence' please?
Oh, and in case you wish to present as 'evidence', her 'opinion(s)'[1], Rebecca Watson has a solid track-record of dissembling, speaking untruths, actively avoiding forensic enquiries, and plain 'making shit up' to suit her short term agendum.

I ask you, in all seriousity, that to have uttered such a definite suggestion, that you quite simply MUST possess evidence of this abuse.
Might I request that present the most damning in this forum, please?
For I know of none.

Or, failing that, those who agreed with this suggestion (Phil G, for one) is able to proffer evidence of the worst abuse that RW has so apparently undeservedly suffered?
(Not just her demonstratedly unreliable 'word' for such abuse)

Perhaps The Beccastein can answer my enquiry?

I thank you in advance.
__________________
[1] Plural; in as far as she is able to hold one concrete opinion from one minute to the next in the face of robust inquisition.

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

I would suggest acknowledging the abuse Watson has received and agreeing no one deserves this.

But, you surely see, I have yet be presented with any credible evidence that RW has garnered any sort of 'abuse'.
Nary a skerrick.
And this goes to the nub of my grievance.
Are you able to forward this 'evidence' please?
Oh, and in case you wish to present as 'evidence', her 'opinion(s)'[1], Rebecca Watson has a solid track-record of dissembling, speaking untruths, actively avoiding forensic enquiries, and plain 'making shit up' to suit her short term agendum.

I ask you, in all seriousity, that to have uttered such a definite suggestion, that you quite simply MUST possess evidence of this abuse.
Might I request that present the most damning in this forum, please?
For I know of none.

Or, failing that, those who agreed with this suggestion (Phil G, for one) is able to proffer evidence of the worst abuse that RW has so apparently undeservedly suffered?
(Not just her demonstratedly unreliable 'word' for such abuse)

Perhaps The Beccastein can answer my enquiry?

I thank you in advance.
__________________
[1] Plural; in as far as she is able to hold one concrete opinion from one minute to the next in the face of robust inquisition.

MKG: I took Dilurk's assesment as being about verbal (written) abuse that may have gone beyond what Watson deserved. I have been guilty of such in the early days of EGate. Weird enough, I feel I've matured a bit since then, and I don't see the point of freely insulting people I don't agree with anymore. Not to say I frown upon those who do, mind you. Feel free to insult at will. :) (hey, I did that smiley thing again!)

[Michael K Gray]

MKG: I took Dilurk's assesment as being about verbal (written) abuse that may have gone beyond what Watson deserved.

Example, please?

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

MKG: I took Dilurk's assesment as being about verbal (written) abuse that may have gone beyond what Watson deserved.

Example, please?

All I have now is Phawrongula's screencap of my entry on the Pharyngula wiki.

http://images.wikia.com/phawrongula/ima ... z_wiki.jpg

I may have been quite a bit OTT, I now think...

[Dilurk]

Yay for the Slimepit.

Also:

I think Jean Kazez's latest post is very topical. http://kazez.blogspot.ca/2012/07/what-is-feminism.html

A feminist is someone who insists on the word "women" instead of "girls", or tries to outlaw innocent fun like calling people "bitches" or "pussies". A feminist (in the negative sense) is constantly making a mountain out of a molehill. A feminist is against sex, or something, so allying yourself with feminism is unsexy.

Read the entire thing... I think she has hit the hammer with the nail.

I think her kids have grown up in a world where they come in with the basic view that women and men are pretty equal. I think that's a good thing. Feminism is getting eaten up by wider things like humanism, where you can recognise the rights of women *and* the rights of men. I don't think it's because it's not cool, it's because feminism (at least the second wave kind) has evolved to a kind of mainstream norm-ness. In almost all areas the fight's been won, huzzar. I think when it does come down to serious issues people frame often them as human rights issues now (abortion, women's healthcare, etc).

Yes, I agree.

Also I think there's an awareness now that feminism hasn't been great to young men, really - while it's been all women can do anything! it hasn't really also pushed the idea that men can do anything! too.

Well again, I'd say not all feminism has been great to young men but the initial idea of the movement was good and badly needed. As you say, I think it is time to let go and look at human beings not as female unit or male unit. I think it is still important to keep in mind that the religious right don't see it that way and that is where humanism+atheism+old style feminism can form alliances. One just has to look at the legislation limiting a woman's right to abortion being passed in the USA to see this war.

Re: the movie, I reckon if her kids identify with the main character it's because she has pressures put on her by her parents - not necessarily what those pressures are. The How To Train Your Dragon movie had a protagonist being pressured to be all HARDCORE like his daddy (although the entire society was pretty hardcore) and if it wasn't for the society surrounds, that *could* be a feminist story too - about a boy deciding against following the push to be a warrior and instead taking up being a dragon whisperer.

Good observation. More importantly one about breaking old stereotypes of gender eh?

[Michael K Gray]

MKG: I took Dilurk's assesment as being about verbal (written) abuse that may have gone beyond what Watson deserved.

Example, please?

All I have now is Phawrongula's screencap of my entry on the Pharyngula wiki.

http://images.wikia.com/phawrongula/ima ... z_wiki.jpg

I may have been quite a bit OTT, I now think...

Thank you sir.
Guilty as charged, and I hereby withdraw my previous skepticism over such accusations, M'Lud.
In my opinion, RW has been undeservedly defamed.

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

MKG:

In my opinion, RW has been undeservedly defamed.

Yes, and it's a move I regret having done. I don't know RW personaly, and I was wrong in judging her only by what I read on the internet. I was fuelled by anger, exasperation, and lulz. Well, mostly lulz, I'll admit.

Anyway, I spent this morning reading the FTBlaghs site, and re-considered my "immature" comment. It is excellent parody, up to the comments themselves.

[Za-zen]

Some nice new comments on the parody

http://www.freethoughtblahgs.com/skepti ... omment-192

http://www.freethoughtblahgs.com/femago ... omment-457

[Darren]

The only thing missing on that parody blog is the circle-jerk link-fest to each others articles.

[franc]

Some nice new comments on the parody

Comment feed even works -

http://www.freethoughtblahgs.com/skepti ... ents/feed/

[Dilurk]

Second wavers burned their boob burqas, third wavers whine about men being rapists

But thats not all second wavers did. I know you had socialist feminism which primarily identified capitalism as the source of problems, and you had liberal feminism which wanted to address issues in-place in small ways, but you also had the radical feminists who identified men as the source their problems, and came up with the theory of 'oppressive-to-women-only patriarchy' which has stayed as the dominant ideology of the times. We have the second-wavers to thank for that. Even Steven Pinker has to preface his writings with a 'yes I believe women have been oppressed by men for millenia' for certain reasons, as James Onen mentioned earlier. Leaving the open-haters like Dworkin and Solanas aside, even mainstreamers like Gloria Steinem, Robin Morgan wrote utterly

Yes, absolutely vile stuff.

hateful stuff. On the basis of which all kinds of shit policies such as women in Affirmative Action (benign compared to other stuff) are being forced down our

Stop right there. Affirmative action was and is a horrible idea. Do not tar everyone with the same brush please.

"You atheists eat babies" "You atheists have no moral compass"

Careful not to over generalise labels or misrepresent positions.

throats. In addition to being massive victimhood'ers, they didnt care for the male-situation. How did the gender role for males look like? This article by a young non-feminist is a good start.

So what was going on with men during this revolution. Were they lounging in their libraries and dens, smoking pipes and drinking bourbon, enjoying secret stashes of scantily clad women? Yes! And also, running the world! But really, the answer to this is that the overwhelming majority were not.
Before the early 1900's, premarital sex was pretty scandalous so the only way to have sex was to pay for it and risk your junk, or get married. Being married had a lot of other advantages besides. You gained a partner that was as invested in your well-being as you were. You gained the comforts of a family and a home. You gained connections within your community. So most people got married.
Imagine you're a man in the US in the time prior to women's right activism. It wasn't until the mid 1800's that men who didn't own property could vote. So, unless you had a good job or a rich family, you also had no say in your representation. You were legally and socially responsible for your wife, meaning that if your wife committed a crime, you were considered responsible. This included paying of debts accrued without your knowledge. Contrary to popular belief most places had domestic violence laws, and beating your wife was discouraged. On the other hand, if your wife physically abused you, you had no recourse but to hit her back. If you were handicapped in someway, or simply to nice to hit back, too bad for you.
You were required by law to support your family. The only birth control at the time was unreliable and discouraged so if everyone was healthy, the babies just kept coming. Unless your wife took care of that somehow. More babies meant more work for you which meant no chance to see your wife kids. Staying at home wasn't even a option. You were lucky if you say your kids an hour a day, unless you were a farmer.
If you were working outside the home and poor there was a good chance what you did was pretty dangerous, like factories or mines. Or during war you were required to join the military.

Indeed, I was actually well aware of all this. Just keep in mind early feminism helped break some of the sexual stereotyping that men were suffering from as well. "Trousers on women!? Scandalous!" Of course, it took two world wars to help this process.

So where we the men's rights activist in all this upheaval? Well, with a few exceptions, there just weren't any. While things were changing for women, things were not changing as quickly for men. In fact, men deviating from the norm of being the sole financial provider were dismissed, mocked, and ostracized.

YES! But women going out to work ? Horrors! In the end it helped men

The fact of the matter is that men had it pretty shitty too, and it was, and still is ignored. The gender binary screwed absolutely everyone in one way or another.

The gender binary screws everyone over still to this day. No argument there.

Did women have it worse than men? I don't know but when I contrast not having the right to vote, with the legal responsibility to fight and die for a cause I don't understand or support...women come out better. Safer.

Just think, women in Israel now have a legal responsibility to fight and die for a cause too. I think we can both agree that war is stupid in either case.

false analogy. Again, at one time there is no way in hell women were allowed to become medical doctors, early feminism was just about asking for a chance to do so, and to do so without ribald comments. That's all. I agree with you that asking for anything more is offensive to those of us who have worked our socks off developing a career, and then seeing us being insulted by being called gender traitors and the like.

I wish you would tell the whole story about why you were not allowed to become medical doctors. You were not allowed to work in the coal mines as well.
Lets not forget that. Just as you as not allowed to be in the Infantry today (Do you consider that a grave injustice?). You lacked the right because you lacked

As I have said before, what bits you do or do not do have should not be the primary criteria for doing any job. I imagine there are some women who could work in the coal mines, why they would want to is beyond me. I imagine there are men who cannot work in a coal mine even today. Would you agree to that?

corresponding responsibilities and capabilities (back in the early 1900's doctors needed to horse-ride good distances to reach patients at all kinds of unearthly hours. Were women game for that?). And its not that ONLY men decided on that. As in most social arrangements, women were willing participants. I suspect a reading of Angry Harry will do interested folks some good.

Again, you presume too much that I was not aware of the history.

Did Women Really Want To Go Out To Work?

I have run into women that are content to be lazy, I imagine there are men like that as well, the idle rich.

The key thing to remember is we should not be guilty of male human unit female human unit thinking, but working together as humans.

[Za-zen]

Lol

http://www.freethoughtblahgs.com/femago ... omment-460

Captainjustin says:
July 17, 2012 at 10:56 am
Greg, bestest buddy in the whole world, maybe you could send him an email telling him we think he’s wrong, we all know how good you are at persuasion.

Not on topic: peezus i love you, please don’t take away my toys i promise to be a good boy from now on, please? Pretty please with heroin on top?

[Dilurk]

The only thing missing on that parody blog is the circle-jerk link-fest to each others articles.

From the comments:

Blunderf00t is behaving like a rapist. I think he must have a secret sex slave tied up in his basement. We should really make sure we investigate him. He is obviously a psychopath and I should know cause I got a B in Psych 101.

Good thing I had already drunk my orange juice. Buying a new laptop would have been a serious PITA.

[BarnOwl]

Stephanie updates her post:

Update: I’m told that Ed Clint is denying that he’s responsible for this site, though he doesn’t seem to be doing so publicly. PZ is taking Ed’s word for it. I am not, but I’m fine with PZ or anyone else making that decision for themselves. That’s a risk I take in using protected sources. I know who they are and what they’ve seen, but you don’t. All you have is the knowledge that I knew this was coming:

But not really.

[rayshul hmm]

Also I think there's an awareness now that feminism hasn't been great to young men, really - while it's been all women can do anything! it hasn't really also pushed the idea that men can do anything! too.

Well again, I'd say not all feminism has been great to young men but the initial idea of the movement was good and badly needed. As you say, I think it is time to let go and look at human beings not as female unit or male unit. I think it is still important to keep in mind that the religious right don't see it that way and that is where humanism+atheism+old style feminism can form alliances. One just has to look at the legislation limiting a woman's right to abortion being passed in the USA to see this war.

Agree that feminism was great, don't get me wrong. I'm the child of a pair of second wave feminists (with degrees in women's studies). & I definitely see alliances in women's health issues, which is really one of the last really fucked up things in the West.

That said I see merit in framing the abortion argument not as a women's rights issue (women vs men, hands of our bodies) but as a humanist issue (what rights should a human have over their body, can a stranger claim the right to use your biological functions, etc). I just had a baby and I swear, if squirting a small screaming human out your genitals in front of a dozen people was a sentence for murder, I'm preeeetty sure that it would violate a number of human rights treaties for being absolute fucking torture.

[ERV]

Stephanie updates her post:

All you have is the knowledge that I knew this was coming:

But not really.

Hiding in the bushes, waiting for some guy to walk by to attack him... sounds pretty stalkerish to me.

Or, considering Eds vs Svans age, pedobearish...

[Dilurk]

Also I think there's an awareness now that feminism hasn't been great to young men, really - while it's been all women can do anything! it hasn't really also pushed the idea that men can do anything! too.

Well again, I'd say not all feminism has been great to young men but the initial idea of the movement was good and badly needed. As you say, I think it is time to let go and look at human beings not as female unit or male unit. I think it is still important to keep in mind that the religious right don't see it that way and that is where humanism+atheism+old style feminism can form alliances. One just has to look at the legislation limiting a woman's right to abortion being passed in the USA to see this war.

Agree that feminism was great, don't get me wrong. I'm the child of a pair of second wave feminists (with degrees in women's studies). & I definitely see alliances in women's health issues, which is really one of the last really fucked up things in the West.

I didn't get the feeling that you were against feminism as it was meant to be.

Feminism is the radical notion that women are people.

Which naturally evolves us to "Once we agree that women are people, how can we do the best for people in general?"

That said I see merit in framing the abortion argument not as a women's rights issue (women vs men, hands of our bodies) but as a humanist issue (what rights should a human have over their body, can a stranger claim the right to use your biological functions, etc). I just had a baby and I swear, if squirting a small screaming human out your genitals in front of a dozen people was a sentence for murder, I'm preeeetty sure that it would violate a number of human rights treaties for being absolute fucking torture.

And there we end up agreeing.

[Dilurk]

Stephanie updates her post:

Update: I’m told that Ed Clint is denying that he’s responsible for this site, though he doesn’t seem to be doing so publicly. PZ is taking Ed’s word for it. I am not, but I’m fine with PZ or anyone else making that decision for themselves. That’s a risk I take in using protected sources. I know who they are and what they’ve seen, but you don’t. All you have is the knowledge that I knew this was coming:

But not really.

Guilty until proven innocent! Get someone to phone Ed Clint's boss stat! Ed Clint has obviously gone off the deep end and become a psychotic threat to society.

[rayshul oh dear]

Are we going to have to go all I'M SPARTACUS on FTBlahgs?

[ERV]

Are we going to have to go all I'M SPARTACUS on FTBlahgs?

Probably. Though for all we know, thats what Ed did. Hes not exactly 'fighting' this, more annoyed/confused. Im probably more pissed off than he is.

[Dilurk]

Are we going to have to go all I'M SPARTACUS on FTBlahgs?

Probably. Though for all we know, thats what Ed did. Hes not exactly 'fighting' this, more annoyed/confused. Im probably more pissed off than he is.

I'd love to see just one of these clowns served with a restraining order or something.

[Za-zen]

Shavan has been looking into crystal balls, and talking to fortune tellers again. With their information she is able to conclusively tell the world who the potential threats to her world bubble are.

[LMU]

FTBlahgs is hysterical. Have any of you tried getting "banned" by FU Taylor and co, or having your comments "edited"? For example:

"[Short argument that emoticons are not harrassment]... I'm getting banned aren't I?" -Pitter

"Banned!" -FU Taylor

[Dilurk]

FTBlahgs is hysterical. Have any of you tried getting "banned" by FU Taylor and co, or having your comments "edited"? For example:

"[Short argument that emoticons are not harrassment]... I'm getting banned aren't I?" -Pitter

"Banned!" -FU Taylor

Wht? N n hs bn dsvld yt?

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

FTBlahgs is hysterical. Have any of you tried getting "banned" by FU Taylor and co, or having your comments "edited"? For example:

"[Short argument that emoticons are not harrassment]... I'm getting banned aren't I?" -Pitter

"Banned!" -FU Taylor

Wht? N n hs bn dsvld yt?

T sbtl thnk....

[Scented Nectar]

Wht? N n hs bn dsvld yt?

xcs m, y mssd n "m" n "dsmvld". :)

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

Wht? N n hs bn dsvld yt?

xcs m, y mssd n "m" n "dsmvld". :)

"Y" is a vowel (well, in my country at least).

:D

[Dilurk]

Wht? N n hs bn dsvld yt?

xcs m, y mssd n "m" n "dsmvld". :)

m bd! : - )

[LMU]

Dilurk: Exactly! Maybe someone could politely argue that "=D" doesn't necessarily represent a phallus.

I especially liked the Strangula reply to Blunderf00t. "One word into the post, and he’s already wrong. You never start a sentence with a preposition, you insufferable pisspot." :lol:

[Lsuoma]

Wht? N n hs bn dsvld yt?

xcs m, y mssd n "m" n "dsmvld". :)

nd w!

[Caede]

Man, too much to respond to, too little time.

- Franc, I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt and re-reading through your blog. You destroyed my productivity yesterday because I had to stop and watch "Beyond the Darkness", which I'm amazed I had never heard of until I saw your mention of it. If I spot something I feel is trivial, I'll bring it to your attention, but I'm willing to concede 1) our views of trivial are probably different and 2) the largest majority of the content is not trivial. You've done a very thorough job of documentation, and your writing about cosmopolite culture is intriguing. I don't know if I fully agree with your taste in music.

- Jean Kaez is making a lot of sense.

- Calling out Ed Clint is bullshit, whether or not he made it. If it turns out not to be him, someone is going to be owed some serious apologies for harassment. If it turns out to be him, who cares? It's a parody. Laugh, or roll your eyes in indifference. We've already had the requisite quotes trotted out about how a person handles satire/parody of themselves being a very good indication of that persons character. If your knee-jerk reaction to an internet parody is to try to vilify the person who made it... you're doing it wrong.

- I have learned about more new (to me) skeptic writers in the last few days than I had in years prior. My RSS feed is bursting, and I'm glad.

- Stephen Novella, who I respect a great deal, has a post-TAM blog post where he very briefly touches on the recent schisms over harassment and misogyny. He doesn't really make a strong statement (he's basically fence-sitting, which I'm somewhat glad about), but worth taking a second to read. http://theness.com/neurologicablog/inde ... -movement/

[Caede]

Oh, and whoever did put up freethoughtblahgs should consider some Google adsense units or something. I imagine they're getting more traffic than they might have expected, and NFS charges based on bandwidth usage.

[franc]

You destroyed my productivity yesterday because I had to stop and watch "Beyond the Darkness", which I'm amazed I had never heard of until I saw your mention of it.

They don't make 'em like that anymore - Buio Omega, Joe D'Amato's magnum opus. Euro-splatter / exploitation elevated to high art, a genre killed by the advent of the VCR. Would have been marvellous to live in Italy or Spain at the time and see this kind of stuff come out on the big screen. Culture forever lost, never to be seen again.

Yes, it is a vile piece of film - but you have to admit, it is done with style and an artisan's love.

[Scented Nectar]

Phil, I was taught that it's a 'sometimes' vowel. Depends on it's usage. Like in "yellow", it acts as a consonant, but in "by", it acts as a vowel. That's my story and I'm sticking to it! :)

Lsuoma, how'd that 'w' get away?