Periodic Table of Swearing

[justinvacula]

In the responses of Surly Amy, it is interesting that she finds no fault with Watson's comments related to TAM and conferences in general. Dr. Hall wore that shirt, I would wager, precisely to take a stand against the nonsense coming from Watson and others...while Amy, according to my knowledge, as this huge TAM supporter she had propper herself up to be, failed to rebuke anything negative about TAM, JREF, or DJ from Benson, Watson, PZ, Svan, Canuck, Greta, etc. Perhaps Amy can show some honest reflection and say something like, "I understand why Dr. Hall wore the shirt and why she was upset." As a skeptic, when one can clearly see an opposition and people wearing tshirts like Dr. Hall, isn't it time to step back and say "Perhaps I did something wrong and perhaps my friends did something wrong." For Amy, though, it seems that she is the victim here who, including her friends, could do nothing wrong.

[BarnOwl]

I'd be willing to discuss T-shirtGate with Surly Amy and any non-frothing baboons in this forum, but I doubt any of them would venture over here publicly. More interesting would be to hear Dr. Hall's version of the TAM events and the T-shirt. For some people, rats' asses given about clothing - what it looks like, whether it's fashionable, how many days it has been worn since last washed, whether items match - equals zero. They just don't care. Not one rat's ass was given that day. Maybe Dr. Hall's luggage was lost and she had just the one shirt. Apparently these possibilities have not occurred to the pearl-clutchers who consider themselves to be rational thinkers. I work with several MDs who almost always wear rumpled hospital scrubs and Crocs, and I doubt that their competence and compassion suffer for it. Maybe Dr. Hall is the scrubs and Crocs variety of physician.

I do a lot of drawing and painting in the context of journaling (never for sale), and I'm also a crafter (for charity, friends, family, myself - again not for sale), so I have some empathy for a person who tries to make a living or even a bit of added income, by selling artwork or crafts (the distinction is blurred and controversial, but that's another can of worms). It has the potential for generating repetitive strain injuries, the hours can be long and tedious if you're in production mode, and rarely does the pay compensate you for hours worked, let alone for the creative intellectual component. I think it's a poor career choice, to be honest. But at least Surly Amy is selling a product that some people seem to enjoy wearing and collecting, and they're willing to hand over cash ... what the fuck do some of these other Famous Skeptics do for a living? PZ is the only one of the FC6 who appears to be gainfully employed in a manner that I can relate to (he has the same job that I do).

And thanks, Lsuoma, for creating a forum where we can continue our discussions and vent without fear of bannination. :mrgreen:

[EveryMan]

Dilurk, I can't say how Amy would be treated (not a mind-reader), but I can point to an earlier episode from the Periodical Table of Swearing where Jen was getting bagged on pretty hard, stepped in to defend herself, and was met with -- surprise, surprise -- polite deference, not only from Abbie herself. I think you'll find that most of this crowd actually longs to talk to "the other side" as actual human beings, but have been frustrated by the apparent pointlessness of trying to do so.

Abbie also said this ...

How to attack every single male in the atheist movement and give yourself a complement at the same time:
"often make unwanted and aggressive sexual advances toward young pretty women and that I should not be alone with them."

So McCreight, Watson, Svan, and Benson should be perfectly fine, then.

So whats the problem?

...which in my 20 years on teh InterW3bZ was the Most. Epic. Dis. I've ever personally witnessed. Especially given the absolutely brilliant trollery given that the baboons were obviously too dumb to understand the corner that they painted themselves into.

As I mentioned in another thread, we seen the world in color. They are still trapped in the black/white world of their own bigotry. It's up to them to abandon their faulty thinking (which they are free to do). Beyond that there is really no hope of rational discourse.

[KiwiInOz]

I have to disagree with you, EveryMan. I see the world in colour.

[tachikoma]

Comment from Sastra on Dr. Hall
http://freethoughtblogs.com/butterflies ... ent-223298

Harriet’s a friend of mine; we always meet up at TAM. Obviously, we had several conversations about the shirt, the original issue, the issue as it evolved, and what the hell her point really was. I’m not sure I’m completely sure I understand.

First of all, she printed the shirt herself (that is, had it done at a website which does such things.) DJ and TAM had nothing to do with it — and she thinks it amusing and ironic that some people evidently think she would or could have been cluelessly mislead into wearing it like a dumb bunny.

Second: she likes the Skepchick website, reads it, and was appalled at the vitriol and online attacks aimed at Rebecca and other women over elevatorgate and pretty much everything else. She does not doubt that women are harassed and discriminated against. She considers herself a feminist.

Third: she applauded Pamela Gay’s talk and (iirc) was part of the standing ovation.

So wtf?

The commenters above who suggested that she is making a point that women should aim to eliminate bias by refusing to be minimized into a “woman skeptic” category are correct. Harriet is old school, and she suggested that it’s possibly a generational thing. She doesn’t object to the Skepchicks, mind you. She’s not against them. She was very careful to make sure the back of her shirt had a small “s” on skepchicks.

I told her I was afraid this fine distinction would be lost.

My understanding is that she was defending TAM — and responding directly to something Rebecca Watson apparently wrote a day or so before the conference: “I do not feel safe or welcome at TAM” — the implication being that women in general should not feel safe or welcome at TAM. She thinks that’s nonsense.

I didn’t ask her why she wore the shirt all 3 days, but my guess is that it’s because of the fury it caused on the internet (which she has been following because, unlike me, she had access to a computer over the weekend): in the face of what she feels is unfair criticism, she doubles down. Harriet is feisty. She’s “ornery and crabby and disobliging and (she) bite(s.)”

It can be an admirable characteristic in a woman. Sometimes.

Frankly, I didn’t feel sure enough of my ground to spend a lot of time arguing with her. I told her I thought she misunderstood the nuances of the situation: she told me she had on the contrary taken a fair amount of time to read from many sources and understood it all very well, thank you. Harriet feels no animosity towards Ophelia Benson, and was not targeting her. The t-shirt was meant to convey a strong pr-feminism message and was intended to provoke debate among feminists. A friendly debate.

Sastra appears to support Watson and Benson (which is disappointing to me), but last year she thanked Paula Kirby for her "thoughtful comment." Hmm.

[EveryMan]

Has it occurred to anyone else that we may becoming the bullies we are attacking? Maybe we are as bad to pile on and all laugh at Amy for freaking out over a T-shirt? What would you guys do if Surly Amy somehow chose to post on here to defend her side? Would you be willing to give her a listen?

I'm not saying criticism isn't necessary, but there comes a point where the point has been made and there is nothing more useful to be said.

A. I find this hugely entertaining. Many of us have to deal with people like this in our day jobs and venting here provides us a safe and much-needed outlet.

B. Conferences are for adults and if they aren't mature enough to engage in social situations as adults, they need to stay the fuck home.

Congrats, Dilurk. You've irritated me enough to reply to myself.

I'm a fan of root cause analysis. Aka, getting to the bottom of things. The brass tacks. Where the rubber meets the road, and all that.

To that effect, there are really only two options to explain Amy's behavior. Being...

1) She is a cynical manipulator that doesn't actually believe what she is saying (for whatever reason).

2) She is a phobic/hysteric with some sort of generalized anxiety disorder.

Either way, the correct course of action is either confronting her about her irrational behavior in a reasonable manner or ignoring her. We are the former. The rest of the planet is the latter. The unambiguously wrong thing to do would be to either enable or viciously attack her. Which would be the FT6 or trolls, respectively.

[justinvacula]

At least Opehlia has no interest whatsoever in a prolonged discussion with dissenters on a turf that is not her own. Following her complaints about my podcast in which she claimed I told lies about her, did not care about truth, etc (because I didn't spend time reading all of her nonthreat emails), I invited her on my podcast multiple times to have discussion with Karla Porter and I. She wanted nothing to do with that. I also asked her why she didn't call in, as anyone was invited to do so and she was aware of the show. Her response? I don't want anything to do with your poxy show. Funny...for one who feels so besmirched, she doesn't want a chance to have a forum to voice her opinion and rectify...and then she goes around complaining on her Facebook page.

[justinvacula]

Comment from Sastra on Dr. Hall
http://freethoughtblogs.com/butterflies ... ent-223298

Par for the course, of course. Zvan, Canuck, Watson, PZ, Ophlia, and Greta, in many cases, jump to conclusions about matters without being charitable, getting the missing information, and find malice in people that fits with their pre-established conclusions.

[EveryMan]

I have to disagree with you, EveryMan. I see the world in colour.

I bet you do!

http://dancedevivre.files.wordpress.com ... _pipe1.jpg

[sacha]

equality.jpg

(39.37 KiB) Downloaded 364 times

[KiwiInOz]

I have to disagree with you, EveryMan. I see the world in colour.

I bet you do!

Hey! I resemble that remark.

And the munchies are a killer.

[KiwiInOz]

I would add a third possible root cause, EveryMan.

She could well be a insecure person who has received validation and approbation for her victimhood. It would follow, then, that she now believes in her victimhood.

Or, less charitably, she is a drama queen loving the attention.

[Saint N.]

Wow, this place is moving along so smoothly now it's becoming hard to keep up in one sitting (that's a good thing in my book).

Something that jumped out at me about the unwanted hugging incident earlier:

However, the security consultants made it clear that any unwanted touching is considered assault and they considered me a victim and would investigate the incident fully. Now, honestly “assault” seems like a strong word for what happened, but it’s clear that they are taking it seriously. They have been going over security footage and have inquired about witnesses. They made it clear they’re going to try to identify the man involved.

If anything, they are going a bit overboard. Their treatment of me has been disrespectful, but saying that, they are clearly taking reports, even minor ones, very seriously and following up and investigating. They also have made it clear that I did nothing wrong and was right in reporting it. They never made me feel like I was being blamed for the harassment.

It’s the stressful way they dealt with me that I’m still pretty upset with, not the handling of the case.

I'm sorry, I really don't get it. TAM/JREF took an incident of possible harassment seriously, investigated what happened, followed up on the incident with you, and they are still treating you "disrespectfully"? They said that you were in the right for reporting harassment, and that made you feel like you were being blamed for the harassment? I'm asking all of this in the hope that my eyes had just glazed over as I was catching up on all the comments (which is a very strong possibility), and this was a witty parody poking fun at the t-shirt nonsense. Otherwise, why would anyone be upset about an organization handling a case properly? What's stressful about people taking your words seriously? Isn't that what they wanted as a matter of policy?

[tachikoma]

One thing I still don't understand is the "color/gender blind" phrase Surly Amy used to described the t-shirt. Huh? Was she just randomly throwing "social justice" buzzwords around?

[DownThunder]

Wow, this place is moving along so smoothly now it's becoming hard to keep up in one sitting (that's a good thing in my book).

Something that jumped out at me about the unwanted hugging incident earlier:

However, the security consultants made it clear that any unwanted touching is considered assault and they considered me a victim and would investigate the incident fully. Now, honestly “assault” seems like a strong word for what happened, but it’s clear that they are taking it seriously. They have been going over security footage and have inquired about witnesses. They made it clear they’re going to try to identify the man involved.

If anything, they are going a bit overboard. Their treatment of me has been disrespectful, but saying that, they are clearly taking reports, even minor ones, very seriously and following up and investigating. They also have made it clear that I did nothing wrong and was right in reporting it. They never made me feel like I was being blamed for the harassment.

It’s the stressful way they dealt with me that I’m still pretty upset with, not the handling of the case.

I'm sorry, I really don't get it. TAM/JREF took an incident of possible harassment seriously, investigated what happened, followed up on the incident with you, and they are still treating you "disrespectfully"? They said that you were in the right for reporting harassment, and that made you feel like you were being blamed for the harassment? I'm asking all of this in the hope that my eyes had just glazed over as I was catching up on all the comments (which is a very strong possibility), and this was a witty parody poking fun at the t-shirt nonsense. Otherwise, why would anyone be upset about an organization handling a case properly? What's stressful about people taking your words seriously? Isn't that what they wanted as a matter of policy?

I dont think theres even an endgame to this madness. The demands will never be satiated, they will keep coming.

[real horrorshow]

At the risk of putting a crimp in the party. We cannot afford to assume FfTB and the FC5 are done yet. I tend to be a bit Van Helsing about it and never assume a monster is finally and permanently dead.

Also, if the beast is slain we have a much longer and tougher job in waiting, which is to make a contribution to advancing sceptical thought. We have the "Freethought, Atheism, Skepticism and Science" bit of the forums, I'd love to see that expand. Bring your links!

[Saint N.]

I dont think theres even an endgame to this madness. The demands will never be satiated, they will keep coming.

That's exactly what is so baffling about their behavior. They don't seem to have a goal or objective or anything. Is it power and influence in the atheist community they want? If that's true than why are they digging themselves further into a hole with their silly antics even now that the tide seems to be turning against them? Isn't this going to diminish their power and influence (if that's what their after)? Maybe I'm giving them too much credit and they really have no clue what they're doing. Just flinging shit aimlessly at the walls of would-be threats and heretics.

[rayshul]

Holy shit you guys have been busy.

And really, I want to reiterate something...

This:
https://p.twimg.com/AxpvJEsCMAEvwdx.jpg

Is not equal to this:
http://www.atheistunderworld.com/wp-con ... ture-1.png
(mailed to her HOUSE)

Did you just Dear Muslima this???

AHAHAHHHAHAHAH

[franc]

At the risk of putting a crimp in the party. We cannot afford to assume FfTB and the FC5 are done yet. I tend to be a bit Van Helsing about it and never assume a monster is finally and permanently dead.

No. Indeed. And it is erroneous to assume that -

• They even started this nonsense
• That this is even a gender issue
• That it has anything even remotely to do with social justice

This is the cult of the temple of the loser. It's congregation are people that are failures on an individual level and are little more than the urinal mints in life's toilet. They naturally resent this, so when an opportunity arises that empowers them, they seize it and mount pogroms of infinite vengeance at what they believe to be an eternity of injustice. This has manifested in many flavours - they are not the first, nor will they be the last. Look at Louis Farrakhan and Nation of Islam as an example. The hard civil rights yards have already been gained - they exploit the hard work of others in excercises that are little more than petty spite to justify and perpetuate themselves. Or islamists given undeserved credibility, and supposed authenticity as representative of all muslims, by European humanists/liberals that their tantrums about cartoons are a genuine human rights issue.

There is no shortage of similar stupidities given some kind of -ism suffix or another, but really, they are just losers with an axe to grind. Even if FfTB is stopped dead, some new idiocy will arise to replace it. It's a never ending cycle.

That's exactly what is so baffling about their behavior. They don't seem to have a goal or objective or anything. Is it power and influence in the atheist community they want?

The process of whining and scapegoating is what they want. The stage and the microphone. The last thing they want is a result, because at that point they will have to shut up and it's game over. Ask what did the Inquisition want? Not to eliminate witchcraft. That would eliminate themselves too. To repeat for the umpteenth time - this is a business model. It is not a finite project with a goal or a deadline.

[sacha]

I dont think theres even an endgame to this madness. The demands will never be satiated, they will keep coming.

of course, the demands will only become more and more bizarre, and they will only become more and more cult-like. All one can do is satirise, parody, and ridicule.

At the risk of putting a crimp in the party. We cannot afford to assume FfTB and the FC5 are done yet.

They are not even close to "done" yet...

...Also, if the beast is slain we have a much longer and tougher job in waiting, which is to make a contribution to advancing sceptical thought. We have the "Freethought, Atheism, Skepticism and Science" bit of the forums, I'd love to see that expand. Bring your links!

We can do that at the same time (and have been).

[rayshul]

I can't believe the FtB are standing behind the horrible-harrassment story.

Surely they should be blaming themselves for whipping Surly up so that she'd enter TAM being particularly susceptible to "perceived insults". This is what happens when you create a giant drama. You wind up fucking up your friends by making them even more sensitive.

On the upside, am currently watching a show on TV where they're looking for volunteer firefighters where they're specifically targeting stay at home mums (and stay at home dads) to become firefighters, and ensuring there's childcare, etc for them. Cool, hey.

...Is anyone else uncomfortable about the money we're generating for them by continuing this drama? On one hand I'm like, WHY SO STUPID SRSLY, but on the other I'm like, man, we're bankrolling their expensive ass holidays.

[sacha]

I know this has been said here before, but it deserves a repeat:

the backfire effect

The "backfire effect" is a term coined by Brendan Nyhan and Jason Reifler to describe how some individuals when confronted with evidence that conflicts with their beliefs come to hold their original position even more strongly.

http://www.skepdic.com/backfireeffect.html

[masakari2012]

I'm glad that FfTB is standing behind that story. It exposes their stupidity to more atheists/skeptics who were undecided about them, even some who were followers.
"The opportunity to secure ourselves against defeat lies in our own hands, but the opportunity of defeating the enemy is provided by the enemy himself."

And now we have more allies against the dogma.
"On intersecting ground, if you establish alliances you are safe, if you lose alliances you are in peril."

I'm in a Sun Tzu mood tonight :)

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

A happy two weeks, it's been, and so nice that Abbie is now safe from what is said on the thread. Cheers, Lsuoma.

Phil does not get a post number?
Poor Phil...

It's between 52 and 61.

As of now, I have exactly FCD posts.

[sacha]

...Is anyone else uncomfortable about the money we're generating for them by continuing this drama?

I've been wanting to mention, when someone who is well known here screencaps or quotes a comment, I've been trying to refrain from clicking the link (unless there is a good reason to do so). I don't know how many of you do the same.
In most circumstances, I want to see the evidence for myself, but in this case, I don't want to give them extra income if there is no reason to. I also know that we are sceptics, and seeing the evidence for ourselves is paramount, so although I cannot encourage others to take any post at face value, I am confident that if someone who we all know, has edited, or created the quote themselves, it will be mere minutes before they are found out.

Of course if the commenter is new, or there is any question of them being untrustworthy, or if someone here accuses that person of embellishing, altering, or writing the comment themselves, that is a different matter entirely.

The reason I have not mentioned this previously, is that I am vacillating between thinking this is an appropriate thing to do under the circumstances, and feeling that as a sceptic, this is a grave mistake.

other perspectives welcome, clearly I am not exactly comfortable with either solution.

[franc]

...Is anyone else uncomfortable about the money we're generating for them by continuing this drama?

I've been wanting to mention, when someone who is well known here screencaps or quotes a comment, I've been trying to refrain from clicking the link (unless there is a good reason to do so). I don't know how many of you do the same.

I only ever visit the baboons as an absolute last resort. You can always mirror articles at either -

http://pastehtml.com/
http://webcitation.org/archive

Former has a widget for browser toolbars, but has the downside of being spam blockaed at some places or triggering article self-destructs at others (like wikia). The latter is more formal, cleaner, but more than just a single click.

Added bonus is that doing mirrors will just plain give the baboons the shits.

[Za-zen]

After following the crazy since egate (i mostly lurked, it took the madness of egate to get me involved in the blogshit) and then witnessing the purges, deletions, edits, misrepresentations, strawmanning, and downright lies perpetuated by fftb, and which they increasingly did blatantly because they grew confindent in the their extremism, i decided enough was enough.

I formed the opinion that they are in fact politico wingnuts, i still hold this assessment as true, but i have no drawn further conclusions, that whilst yes i do believe that they are wingnuts, i also believe that they are in the business of manufaturing drama for their own ends, what ends you ask? Blog hits, plain and simple, and the fame/infamy that comes with it, think ann coulter, does she actually believe the crap she spouts, i think she does, i also think she ratchets up the crazy to sell her books. She knows her target audience, and she knows what they want to hear.

So in conclusion i'm close to ditching ftb all together, out of the principle that i don't want to help feed the crazy, the paradox with this is i'm in the trap of thinking that they are a problem that needs to be highlighted and recorded in order to stop their crazy gaining traction.

[TedDahlberg]

This was not the only incident that happened to me at TAM where people were targeting me with personalized items meant to mock or diminish my presence

This is the sloppy language of the fanatic at work. How could someone's presence be diminished, I wonder? I assume she means 'influence'. In which case - of course. In fact, one stated goal of JREF is to diminish the influence of the irrational, so TAM seems to be a resounding success, at least on one front.

Perhaps the dread personalised items were composed of some form of exotic matter possessing negative mass? And were personalised in such a way as to literally diminish a specific person's mass/presence in our universe.

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

I go there whenever it's linked here, to see for myself. I don't mind them getting bucks for my hit-counts. Those are not MY bucks, after all. It might give them some form of "credibility by number of readers", but any sane person reading their content will probably rethink of this "credibility" stuff.

Also, I do it for the Lulz!

[Guest]

One thing I still don't understand is the "color/gender blind" phrase Surly Amy used to described the t-shirt. Huh? Was she just randomly throwing "social justice" buzzwords around?

Too some extent she's right. "Colour/gender blindness" is relatively old fashioned today and does have its roots in old school feminism. The idea being exactly what you see on Dr Hall's shirt. The ideal society of that philosophy would have people not seeing a "woman sceptic" or an "African-American president" or whatever, but rather "just a sceptic" or "just a president". That the person happens to be a women/man, white/non-white, fat/thin, gay/straight, whatever, would play no role in how society would operate.

Much of the recent social justice movement has moved away from that philosophy, and instead thinks that these kinds of differences should be celebrated. I think this is largely due to how people define themselves. Many now choose to identify themselves by labels. Their identify depends on their chosen labels, so an attack on the label is seen as a personal attack.

[rayshul]

I'm not down with the whole copying across entire posts - even if it shits 'em off. I mean, they wrote the shit, if I want to read it I should go there and look at it on their site, even if they wanna call me a gender traitor.

In retrospect I shouldn't really think like that, it's not like they're an evil business or anything, they're just internet assholes. Phil's probably right there - I'm worried that money/attention in their minds will make them believe they have credibility, but I don't think that's so much of an issue anymore since t-shirtgate. :roll:

[real horrorshow]

...Is anyone else uncomfortable about the money we're generating for them by continuing this drama? On one hand I'm like, WHY SO STUPID SRSLY, but on the other I'm like, man, we're bankrolling their expensive ass holidays.

Nothing will put a dent in their ad revenue faster than their decline into absurdity and irrelevance. A few clicks to speed that on it's way is nothing in the wider scheme. Maybe someone could Laden their sponsors - only joking.

[rayshul]

I think I'm relatively gender and colour blind - Elevatorgate is virtually the only thing that's made me scream FUCK I HAVE A VAGINA AND TODAY I WILL USE IT TO MAKE THE POINT THAT I IN NO WAY RESEMBLE YOU - and always liked that as an idea. Definitely dislike this new fangled label shit.

I'm like, old school n' shit.

[rayshul]

...Is anyone else uncomfortable about the money we're generating for them by continuing this drama? On one hand I'm like, WHY SO STUPID SRSLY, but on the other I'm like, man, we're bankrolling their expensive ass holidays.

Nothing will put a dent in their ad revenue faster than their decline into absurdity and irrelevance. A few clicks to speed that on it's way is nothing in the wider scheme. Maybe someone could Laden their sponsors - only joking.

Gosh every time someone mentions Laden I get creeped out.

I'd like their ad revenue to increase for the sort of skeptical thought that got them fans in the first place!

Although I'm definitely questioning why I read PZ in the first place. :/

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

I'm naturally tanned (got me controlled by the cops a few times, no problems, I'm polite). I also appear to be jaundiced on my avatar. This can only mean 3 things:

1)I may have Asian ancestors (or Ligurians)

2)My liver might need a checkup

3)My monitor might need a checkup

None of these characteristics define me as a person, however.

[windy]

Hell, what I wouldn't give for Ophelia herself to pop in here and ask me, "Okay, you claim to be a feminist--what's your beef with me?" and have a for realsies conversation about the matter in a place where her ban stick can't be thrown down the instant the conversation stops going her way.

She commented briefly on one of the earlier ERV megathreads. There was an attempt at a conversation, but I guess that visit didn't provide enough 'quotable material' to satisfy her expectations.

[franc]

http://i.imgur.com/IFK38.jpg

[real horrorshow]

2)My liver might need a checkup

You French and your crise de foie eh! ;)

[Gumby]

I'm naturally tanned (got me controlled by the cops a few times, no problems, I'm polite). I also appear to be jaundiced on my avatar. This can only mean 3 things:

1)I may have Asian ancestors (or Ligurians)

2)My liver might need a checkup

3)My monitor might need a checkup

None of these characteristics define me as a person, however.

Jaundice? Liver? Shouldn't you be more worried about the kitten growing out of your shoulder?

[sacha]

FUCK I HAVE A VAGINA AND TODAY I WILL USE IT TO MAKE THE POINT THAT I IN NO WAY RESEMBLE YOU...

hahaha! Indeed that is precisely how I feel.

[sacha]

Nothing will put a dent in their ad revenue faster than their decline into absurdity and irrelevance. A few clicks to speed that on it's way is nothing in the wider scheme...

sorted.

cheers

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

I'm naturally tanned (got me controlled by the cops a few times, no problems, I'm polite). I also appear to be jaundiced on my avatar. This can only mean 3 things:

1)I may have Asian ancestors (or Ligurians)

2)My liver might need a checkup

3)My monitor might need a checkup

None of these characteristics define me as a person, however.

Jaundice? Liver? Shouldn't you be more worried about the kitten growing out of your shoulder?

You may have a point there. But she's not infering on my everyday life that much (says the guy with a scratched face, scratched hands, scratched ankles...) She's just tunning up my Wolverine capabilities...

[Dilurk]

What would you guys do if Surly Amy somehow chose to post on here to defend her side? Would you be willing to give her a listen?

What is the purpose of this question? I would hope that you know the answer to that - but in case you for some reason don't

franc you know I had a purpose in asking and you know it was a rhetorical question.

, you need a refresher. Identity here tends to be irrelevant - you only get judged on what you say. I'd love to see her come here and explain her self - but the chances of anything she says not being sophist gibberish are nil. Therefore, she would likely get her feelings hurt. And that would be somehow our fault? You do realise what apologetics are don't you? It's not limited to xtianity.

There. Perfect. That is what I wanted to see someone say.

[Dilurk]

Hell, what I wouldn't give for Ophelia herself to pop in here and ask me, "Okay, you claim to be a feminist--what's your beef with me?" and have a for realsies conversation about the matter in a place where her ban stick can't be thrown down the instant the conversation stops going her way.

She commented briefly on one of the earlier ERV megathreads. There was an attempt at a conversation, but I guess that visit didn't provide enough 'quotable material' to satisfy her expectations.

They are cowards.Why post somewhere where you actually have to gasp argue your side and produce evidence? And as franc and others have pointed out, no one gets hammered with the same point over and over again followed by an offer of bestiality, or an outright ban. That must be so disconcerting to them. The slimepit that they have been demonising as full of evil people you must not ever listen to being willing to listen to the other side.

[franc]

There. Perfect. That is what I wanted to see someone say.

As mentioned somewhere above, even a creature as vile as Benson gets the opportunity to speak their piece here without trigger happy Pavlovian auto-responses. The bottom line is no one really cares - nothing stopping them commenting anonymously - but they won't even do that. They know they will be judged by their substance, not their identity, so whether they speak as who they are or behind a nom de guerre, the response they receive will be the same.

[franc]

Justicar is no doubt lurking, and throwing peanuts at his screen becase he wants to join the fun, but ego is a bitch. Come on in justi the waters fine! Or do we all have to send you love letters?

Maybe it's just me, but the atmosphere is far less poisonous with the absence. Have some kind of hate screed from him in my mailbox I have not had the stomach or inclination to look at. I'm also kinda liking not having to scroll past 50 screens of screaming toddler to get to relevant comments.

[Dilurk]

I think I'm relatively gender and colour blind - Elevatorgate is virtually the only thing that's made me scream FUCK I HAVE A VAGINA AND TODAY I WILL USE IT TO MAKE THE POINT THAT I IN NO WAY RESEMBLE YOU - and always liked that as an idea. Definitely dislike this new fangled label shit.

And there are women getting FGM in western society (And yes, male circumcision is just as stupid - Hitchens) but someone has to make a big fuss about some clumsy drunk in an elevator. "Dear Muslima" indeed.

I'm like, old school n' shit.

I'm seriously old school, being color and gender blind. (color, Latin, masculine noun of the 3rd declension. Is that old school enough for you?)

[BarnOwl]

Nothing is actively stopping the FTBers from commenting here, but they would have to leave their weapons of bullying and troop pile-on at the door. No bannination, no editing, no disappearing of comments. So it's not going to happen.

IANA psychiatrist, but much of what the FC5 and their supporters write reminds me of splitting, not in the schizophrenic sense, but rather in the "thinking only in extremes" sense. Therefore, all of us slimepitters are misogynists, gender traitors, etc. and nothing we say or do can be good or positive. If you disagree with them, then you're entirely evil. Completely, irredeemably bad. The splitting fits with narcissistic and borderline personality disorders too.

I'm leaning towards being done with FTB and their commentariat. I'm a skeptic and like to read things for myself (plus some of the idiocy is a hoot), but most of their rhetoric becomes more difficult to fathom each day.

[rayshul]

I am too sleepy and it's too late for me to go into it ... HAHA no that wasn't an impression...

But... I'm wondering if this new idea of everyone being special and diverse and triggery is the result of getting rid of the colour/gender blind stuff.

[rayshul]

Like, it's not feminism that's the problem - it's this new social idea of difference that's sort of all over the place now. I've seen people bitch about trigger warnings on tumblr in other places I visit while I'm not slimeing it up, and similar kind of stuff and speech patters. And amongst publishing and writing groups it's very much exclude X and endorse Y, etc. It's a funny way of thinking about the world, where you have to protect everyone.

Er, I'm talking garbage at this point aren't I? Eghrgh, I'll go to sleep. :( :cry:

[CommanderTuvok]

Every day that passes, Dawkins' "Dear Muslima" comment seems increasingly accurate and prophetic.

I was listening to a recent FfRF podcast and an interview with a Nigerian secularist/atheist trying to tackle superstitious nonsense involving witchcraft, etc. This led him to a night in the cells (well, it was one cell shared by about 50 people and 2 buckets). Add to this the recent incarceration of people who even hint at challenging Allah's existence, and it puts crying over an innocuous T-shirt into perspective.

I know there are atheists/skeptics all over the world who are in the closet, who surf the web using proxies and filters because they are frightened about getting caught by authorities. I imagine they often look towards Western atheist/skeptic leaders to information, guidance and inspiration. I really wonder what they make of Watson, PZ, et al. :roll:

[AndrewV69]

In other news "The Soundbyte of one hand clapping" seems to have a thing about PUAs:

Do I detect envy?

http://www.freethoughtblahgs.com/skepti ... omment-216

There also may be some PUA predators who look at a conference, discover there is a published harassment policy, and don’t go to the conference.

http://www.freethoughtblahgs.com/skepti ... omment-216

It also protects the conference. If a PUA is ejected for predatory behaviour and there is no published harassment policy, said PUA could sue for breech of contract

[JAB]

I often follow the links to FfTBs. (It's a sacrifice, but I do it so you don't have to.) I use adblock plus, so they don't get any ad revenue from me.

It's curious that I think I've seen more than one blogger over there say they don't want to come over here even to read and verify because they don't want to give us the hits. Huh? I suppose I should turn off ABP here to make sure there aren't ads, but I did once and didn't see any. I don't think they'd be making any of us money by looking. I hope our host isn't being charged extra for the bandwidth if they started checking up their misconceptions.

[Lsuoma]

It's curious that I think I've seen more than one blogger over there say they don't want to come over here even to read and verify because they don't want to give us the hits. Huh? I suppose I should turn off ABP here to make sure there aren't ads, but I did once and didn't see any. I don't think they'd be making any of us money by looking. I hope our host isn't being charged extra for the bandwidth if they started checking up their misconceptions.

No ads, unlimited bandwidth - fill yer boots!

[Parge]

This is the cult of the temple of the loser. It's congregation are people that are failures on an individual level and are little more than the urinal mints in life's toilet. They naturally resent this, so when an opportunity arises that empowers them, they seize it and mount pogroms of infinite vengeance at what they believe to be an eternity of injustice.

Crystalline insight.

If anyone is interested to see one of these creatures in real life, just visit any strata council meeting or housing co-op AGM. Witness impotent little proles clinging to the meagre scraps of power their institutions hand them and how they readily abuse it to the detriment of everyone else present. And they're angry. They're steeped in that anger that can only come with the revelation of a world teeming with invented injustice.

[Lsuoma]

This is the cult of the temple of the loser. It's congregation are people that are failures on an individual level and are little more than the urinal mints in life's toilet. They naturally resent this, so when an opportunity arises that empowers them, they seize it and mount pogroms of infinite vengeance at what they believe to be an eternity of injustice.

Crystalline insight.

If anyone is interested to see one of these creatures in real life, just visit any strata council meeting or housing co-op AGM. Witness impotent little proles clinging to the meagre scraps of power their institutions hand them and how they readily abuse it to the detriment of everyone else present. And they're angry. They're steeped in that anger that can only come with the revelation of a world teeming with invented injustice.

And if you want to see what happens when people of this caliber gain real power, look at Soviet Russia...

[Caede]

One thing I still don't understand is the "color/gender blind" phrase Surly Amy used to described the t-shirt. Huh? Was she just randomly throwing "social justice" buzzwords around?

It was a WHITE shirt, duh.

[BarnOwl]

Thank you note from Wooly Bumblebee to the FTBers.

BWAHAHAAHAHAAHA!!

[Badger3k]

One thing I still don't understand is the "color/gender blind" phrase Surly Amy used to described the t-shirt. Huh? Was she just randomly throwing "social justice" buzzwords around?

Too some extent she's right. "Colour/gender blindness" is relatively old fashioned today and does have its roots in old school feminism. The idea being exactly what you see on Dr Hall's shirt. The ideal society of that philosophy would have people not seeing a "woman sceptic" or an "African-American president" or whatever, but rather "just a sceptic" or "just a president". That the person happens to be a women/man, white/non-white, fat/thin, gay/straight, whatever, would play no role in how society would operate.

Much of the recent social justice movement has moved away from that philosophy, and instead thinks that these kinds of differences should be celebrated. I think this is largely due to how people define themselves. Many now choose to identify themselves by labels. Their identify depends on their chosen labels, so an attack on the label is seen as a personal attack.

Good point, but I think it might also have to do with the lack of ability. If you lack something, make fun of it. When you define yourself by what you are (woman, skepchick, african-american, eskimo, etc) you specifically do not point out your ability - you point out some facet of you that is (probably and usually) beyond your control. This has an effect of chilling speech about you - as anything that is said can be taken as sexist, racist, etc. You know "I'm a woman skeptic, and since you disagree with me it must be because you hate women".

To me it's much better to look at what a person does with what they have, rather than what they are and ignore the rest. I brought it up before, but Colbert is right with "I don't see color", and neither should we.

pre-post edit: Barnowl, I liked that post too. I copied the image to my drive for later use too.

[justinvacula]

Rebecca Watson received a message titled "Is Rebecca becoming a liability to the show [SGU]" from a man saying that her discussion of sexism creates a divisive nature and is a waste of resources. She considered this to be "hate mail."

http://i.imgur.com/XMHM6.jpg

leads to...

http://i.imgur.com/UD5Ml.png