Periodic Table of Swearing

Old subthreads
Tony Parsehole
.
.
Posts: 6658
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 8:16 am
Location: Middlesbrough

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34741

Post by Tony Parsehole »

It's a bit restricting when you're trying to moralise using all caps, 140 characters and beginning every tweet with "Y U NO".
What a weird limitation to impose on oneself.

Barael
.
.
Posts: 258
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2012 1:49 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34742

Post by Barael »

I didn't get the impression from Reap's video that he's pointing to actual out sexism/misogyny behaviour by PZ but rather PZ making sexist/misogynist jokes and since according to the FTB playbook they basically amount to the same thing, well...

Outwest
.
.
Posts: 448
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2012 9:01 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34743

Post by Outwest »

Mykeru and Y_U_NO_SKEPTIC in a twitter war. Hilarious! Mykeru with his patented snark. LOL!

Mykeru
.
.
Posts: 4758
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 6:52 am

Regarding sexy talk and P.Z. Meyer's hypocrisy:

#34744

Post by Mykeru »

If your ordinary run-of-the-mill friend came up to you and said "I'm tired, I was up all night fucking this chick's brains out" you would think little of it. He's lying, or over-sharing but, basically, you think "good for you dude".

All things being equal (like allowing for the tendency for holders of the position to be elderly) if the Pope came up to you and said "I'm tired, I gave a speech on the evils of using contraception and premarital sex and affirmed the sanctity of monastic vows and then I was up all night fucking this chicks brains out so hard I broke the condom" you you might look at it differently and in a way that has fucking nothing to do with your views of premarital sex, contraception or celibacy.

Any questions? D4m10n?

Cunning Punt
.
.
Posts: 1335
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2012 10:50 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34745

Post by Cunning Punt »

Pinker wrote:I'd already screencapped a few of Tony's brilliant moments. I'm glad i checked that far into the comments:

The Slymepit is Lex Luthor to FreeThoughtBlogs Superman! 8-)
You treat people inhumanly, you dirtbag piece of shit!

http://i.imgur.com/EhjM0.jpg
Wasn't he the fellow who was until recently the 2012 recipient of the coronal mass erections? What happened? Did he stop receiving them?

Outwest
.
.
Posts: 448
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2012 9:01 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34746

Post by Outwest »

Barael wrote:I didn't get the impression from Reap's video that he's pointing to actual out sexism/misogyny behaviour by PZ but rather PZ making sexist/misogynist jokes and since according to the FTB playbook they basically amount to the same thing, well...
That's the way I saw it. When you start tossing fecal matter at others, don't be surprised to get a little on yourself. PZ and the ilk over at FTB are always pointing out others "inappropriate" behavior, but fail to see their own when it is pointed out to them.

Walter Ego
.
.
Posts: 536
Joined: Mon Nov 12, 2012 3:51 pm
Location: North Carolina

DOC DROP ME, PLEASE!

#34747

Post by Walter Ego »

My latest video wherein I bitch about doc dropping among other things.

Reap's podcast. He mentions moi at about the 1:21 mark.

http://www.reapsowradio.com/?p=31283

[youtube]_pBeR-570HA[/youtube]

d4m10n
.
.
Posts: 1526
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 5:17 am
Location: OKC
Contact:

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34748

Post by d4m10n »

Mykeru wrote:Any questions? D4m10n?
I'll bite. When did PZ say it's not ok to joke about sex in public?

welch
.
.
Posts: 9208
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:05 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34749

Post by welch »

Of course, were we to apply PeeZus' own standards to things, i.e. if someone has ever had a personal issue with anyone, their criticism of that person is invalid, then all criticism Benson makes of Shermer is invalid, for she has a personal problem with him: http://freethoughtblogs.com/butterflies ... -to-avoid/

If she didn't think he was guility of the accusations made in her post, SURELY she would have said so. She's quite willing to defend people on her blog. Therefore, we can see, she has a personal issue with him, and so, all her criticism of him is invalidated by this.

Oh, and a nice sidenote:

A discussion by the FTB'ers (including Al at the time), on things like...speaker/audience power imbalance: http://freethoughtblogs.com/lousycanuck ... ript-pt-2/

Becky's closing statement, in light of how she's treated audience members, is most interesting. But it's funny how PeeZus, who has repeatedly denied any EXISTENCE of a speaker/audience imbalance when it suits him, suddenly isn't so definitive now.

Skep tickle
.
.
Posts: 5357
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2012 12:04 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34750

Post by Skep tickle »

chillyp wrote:Is there a Program Guide for the the Conference RW gave her EP speech at? I hunted around the skepticon.org website but could not find a PDF. I would hope the Conference Guide would contain the title of her talk. If it was titled simply "A Skeptics (sic) Guide to Ev. Psych." that would sink the claim that her talk was merely about Media Distortions of Ev. Psych.

I watched Watson's entire talk, and it seemed to me to be a polemic against Evolutionary Psychology in general.
She addresses your question about the program at the very start of the talk, 1:07-1:15, saying that the title of her talk wasn't in the program because she hadn't told anyone what it was.

The title is on the first slide, 1:17-1:23 ("How Girls Evolved to Shop and other ways to insult women with 'science') while she is saying "I'm going to talk about the scientific 'fact' that girls evolved to shop" (vocal tones indicating sarcasm about that last phrase).

ThreeFlangedJavis
.
.
Posts: 2181
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:13 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34751

Post by ThreeFlangedJavis »

Trophy:
Exactly. By just presenting the harrassments, it's possible to evade legitimate criticism. That's also one reason I think it's good to condemn shitty harrassments when criticising. Of course probably that won't make much of a difference anyways.
Abuse is the background noise of the internet. Standard practice is to ignore it and get on with doing whatever you are trying to achieve. All the big players know that and respond with ridicule, when they could be bothered, otherwise they'd get nothing done. Why must anyone expend energy responding to what any adult understands to be irrelevant noise? The FTB/Skepchick focus on the nutters is not a convenient distraction, it's a central plank of their strategy. If they had any real arguments they'd be too busy making them to bother about the peanut gallery.

Dick Strawkins
.
.
Posts: 5859
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:34 pm

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34752

Post by Dick Strawkins »

Skep tickle wrote:
chillyp wrote:Is there a Program Guide for the the Conference RW gave her EP speech at? I hunted around the skepticon.org website but could not find a PDF. I would hope the Conference Guide would contain the title of her talk. If it was titled simply "A Skeptics (sic) Guide to Ev. Psych." that would sink the claim that her talk was merely about Media Distortions of Ev. Psych.

I watched Watson's entire talk, and it seemed to me to be a polemic against Evolutionary Psychology in general.
She addresses your question about the program at the very start of the talk, 1:07-1:15, saying that the title of her talk wasn't in the program because she hadn't told anyone what it was.

The title is on the first slide, 1:17-1:23 ("How Girls Evolved to Shop and other ways to insult women with 'science') while she is saying "I'm going to talk about the scientific 'fact' that girls evolved to shop" (vocal tones indicating sarcasm about that last phrase).
The talk seems to be the same as the one she gave in the International Congress of Skeptics in Berlin.
She gave an interview about it to some Swedish skepchick and Svan transcribed it, deperate to spin in to mean something other than Rebeccas words say.
http://freethoughtblogs.com/almostdiamo ... #more-4094

John Greg
That's All Folks
That's All Folks
Posts: 2669
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 8:05 pm
Location: New Westminster, BC, Canada

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34753

Post by John Greg »

This latest fuck up of Laden, threatening to ban someone, then noticing he's not in one of his own controlled environments, is fucking hilarious. I swear, Laden has some real brain power issues; bag-o-hammers time.

And he apologises for it! HAHAHAHAHAHA

Dick Strawkins
.
.
Posts: 5859
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:34 pm

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34754

Post by Dick Strawkins »

d4m10n wrote:
Mykeru wrote:Any questions? D4m10n?
I'll bite. When did PZ say it's not ok to joke about sex in public?
Nobody here mentioned sex jokes being off limits.
The question is how PZ reconciles his own actions at Skepticon3, with his recent words about zero tolerence of behavior that people might feel is akin to harrassment.
What’s wanted is a recognition of the fact that no one has the right to harass others at a public meeting, and that the meeting organizers have a zero tolerance policy towards sexual harassment, to discourage harassment before it happens.
Why is this so hard to understand?


http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... aming-101/

box brain

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34755

Post by box brain »

JackRayner wrote:
It doesn't make them Ok, but it also doesn't make them "sexism/misogyny", or a cause for serious concern. Anyone approaching the internet with an overly sensitive attitude should refrain from doing anything that will leave them open to public criticism, whether it is legitimate or just trolling. Bottom line! Anyone with an overly sensitive attitude, but who also spews nonsense that offends the most internet frequenting/internet savvy people? Ha. Hahaha!

[No necessarily directed at Trophy, unless Trophy holds this view]To anyone that would reply to this with "Oh, but person X committed suicide because of internet trolling!", I have this much to say: People are stupid. People have committed suicide over things as stupid as hearing their favorite T.V. show is being cancelled. "But it was a kid/teenager!", you say? Kids and teenagers are stupider. [/Not necessarily directed at Trophy, unless Trophy holds this view]
You are seriously bringing up victim blaming? That uncivilized backlash and hate mail isn't a cause for concern? You sound like a child.

The rise of the 4chan generation is pretty pathetic. Basically a place for immature boys to amplify each others idiocy. While acknowledging this type of culture exists and taking steps to prevent being the focus of its idiocy is important, I wouldn't say that such culture isn't a cause for concern. Internet bullying is a serious problem.

John Greg
That's All Folks
That's All Folks
Posts: 2669
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 8:05 pm
Location: New Westminster, BC, Canada

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34756

Post by John Greg »

You are seriously bringing up victim blaming?
Where, specifically, is the victim blaming? I see dismissiveness, and rationalisation, but I missed the victim blaming. Where is it?

John Brown
.
.
Posts: 311
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2012 9:17 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34757

Post by John Brown »

Que FTB post blaming us for the school shooting in Connecticut in 3,2,1...

Outwest
.
.
Posts: 448
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2012 9:01 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34758

Post by Outwest »

John Brown wrote:Que FTB post blaming us for the school shooting in Connecticut in 3,2,1...
They havent already done that? I'm surprised. We're the "haters", in the atheist/skeptic community. I'm sure #Ophie will find a way to spin it our way.

Outwest
.
.
Posts: 448
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2012 9:01 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34759

Post by Outwest »

Two slymepitters, an organization run by Cult Leader Abbie Smith,... that'll be the start of #Ophies post

box brain

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34760

Post by box brain »

John Greg wrote:
You are seriously bringing up victim blaming?
Where, specifically, is the victim blaming? I see dismissiveness, and rationalisation, but I missed the victim blaming. Where is it?

Did he not say that those who commit suicide due to internet trolling are stupid? His entire argument is that internet trolling is "of no concern." I think those who have been the target of FTB/Atheism+ attacks would argue otherwise.

DataNotDogma
.
.
Posts: 27
Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2012 6:58 pm

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34761

Post by DataNotDogma »

John Brown wrote:Que FTB post blaming us for the school shooting in Connecticut in 3,2,1...

I am new here and all, but I'm pretty sure the posts at FTB will be about those wingnut fundies that hate abortion or something. I mean to say they very well make a point or two but will go off on whatever target or political group they are after atm. Or not. I hope not.

katamari Damassi
.
.
Posts: 5429
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 10:32 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34762

Post by katamari Damassi »

John Greg wrote:
You are seriously bringing up victim blaming?
Where, specifically, is the victim blaming? I see dismissiveness, and rationalisation, but I missed the victim blaming. Where is it?
Suicide is a tricky subject for me because I'm an absolutist when it comes to personal autonomy. If someone wants to kill themselves for whatever reason then I think they should be allowed to, whether that reason is a crippling injury, or depression, or whatever.

Al Stefanelli
.
.
Posts: 781
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 3:55 am
Location: Peachtree City, GA
Contact:

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34763

Post by Al Stefanelli »

real horrorshow wrote:
John Brown wrote:New proposed rules for Atheism Plus: Dissent anywhere else will get you banned!

"If you post on this forum and an external forum, crossover must be open and respectful on both sides. Don't post on one forum while covertly reporting your progress on the other. Don't use one forum to evade the rules of the other."

http://www.freezepage.com/1355484766NSDFCWQZJI
They really do want to be the cop in everyone's head don't they?
Atheism+ - The gift that keeps on giving

http://www.wcoa.info/toxic.jpg

welch
.
.
Posts: 9208
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:05 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34764

Post by welch »

box brain wrote:
JackRayner wrote:
It doesn't make them Ok, but it also doesn't make them "sexism/misogyny", or a cause for serious concern. Anyone approaching the internet with an overly sensitive attitude should refrain from doing anything that will leave them open to public criticism, whether it is legitimate or just trolling. Bottom line! Anyone with an overly sensitive attitude, but who also spews nonsense that offends the most internet frequenting/internet savvy people? Ha. Hahaha!

[No necessarily directed at Trophy, unless Trophy holds this view]To anyone that would reply to this with "Oh, but person X committed suicide because of internet trolling!", I have this much to say: People are stupid. People have committed suicide over things as stupid as hearing their favorite T.V. show is being cancelled. "But it was a kid/teenager!", you say? Kids and teenagers are stupider. [/Not necessarily directed at Trophy, unless Trophy holds this view]
You are seriously bringing up victim blaming? That uncivilized backlash and hate mail isn't a cause for concern? You sound like a child.
Given how you are amplifying this to a ridiculous degree, I'd say if anyone is behaving as a child would, it is you. This kind of thing has existed, literally, as long as humans. The internet amplifies the reach, but it doesn't create shit. Instead of writing "mary is a slut" or "billy is a fag" on bathroom stall walls, they write it on facebook walls. It is not new, and nothing is served by pretending it is. As well, no, hate mail in and of itself is not a cause for concern. It's often a source of comedy mind you, but if you're going to get seriously upset because people you've NEVER MET are saying mean things about you, then I wonder how you survived the third grade. People saying mean shit is a cause for concern? My ass it is. What do I care if people say mean things about me? can it hurt me? No. Can it break my leg or pick my pocket? No. People want to talk shit about me, let them. I give shit, I take shit, seems to work out.

*threats* are a different matter, and i have had those, and I have dealt with them, swiftly and decisively, (i.e. not by whining on the internet), and the problem went away. Funny how solving your problems does more than complaining about them.
box brain wrote:The rise of the 4chan generation is pretty pathetic. Basically a place for immature boys to amplify each others idiocy. While acknowledging this type of culture exists and taking steps to prevent being the focus of its idiocy is important, I wouldn't say that such culture isn't a cause for concern. Internet bullying is a serious problem.
Sexist much? Nice assumption of gender there, sparky. If you think boys are meaner than girls, you clearly were raised in a box. I divide internet bullying into two parts: when kids are the targets, I think we should handle that differently than adults. Emotional maturity levels, self-esteem issues and that are much more of a concern for minors, and I do think that bullying should be taken seriously in those cases.

But, if you're a grown-assed adult and your biggest fucking problem is hate mail? Can I fucking have YOUR life? Mine sucks in comparison.

Jonathan
.
.
Posts: 681
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2012 11:59 pm

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34765

Post by Jonathan »

John Brown wrote:Que FTB post blaming us for the school shooting in Connecticut in 3,2,1...
No, even they wouldn't do that. Or at least I hope not. After something like this for anyone to use it to forward their own agenda is contemptible, especially within hours of the incident taking place!

box brain

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34766

Post by box brain »

welch wrote:
Given how you are amplifying this to a ridiculous degree, I'd say if anyone is behaving as a child would, it is you. This kind of thing has existed, literally, as long as humans. The internet amplifies the reach, but it doesn't create shit. Instead of writing "mary is a slut" or "billy is a fag" on bathroom stall walls, they write it on facebook walls. It is not new, and nothing is served by pretending it is. As well, no, hate mail in and of itself is not a cause for concern. It's often a source of comedy mind you, but if you're going to get seriously upset because people you've NEVER MET are saying mean things about you, then I wonder how you survived the third grade. People saying mean shit is a cause for concern? My ass it is. What do I care if people say mean things about me? can it hurt me? No. Can it break my leg or pick my pocket? No. People want to talk shit about me, let them. I give shit, I take shit, seems to work out.

*threats* are a different matter, and i have had those, and I have dealt with them, swiftly and decisively, (i.e. not by whining on the internet), and the problem went away. Funny how solving your problems does more than complaining about them.
box brain wrote:The rise of the 4chan generation is pretty pathetic. Basically a place for immature boys to amplify each others idiocy. While acknowledging this type of culture exists and taking steps to prevent being the focus of its idiocy is important, I wouldn't say that such culture isn't a cause for concern. Internet bullying is a serious problem.
Sexist much? Nice assumption of gender there, sparky. If you think boys are meaner than girls, you clearly were raised in a box. I divide internet bullying into two parts: when kids are the targets, I think we should handle that differently than adults. Emotional maturity levels, self-esteem issues and that are much more of a concern for minors, and I do think that bullying should be taken seriously in those cases.

But, if you're a grown-assed adult and your biggest fucking problem is hate mail? Can I fucking have YOUR life? Mine sucks in comparison.
Because something has existed in one form or another for time eternal doesn't mean that it isn't of concern or that we shouldn't take steps to discourage such behavior. I know you can think of many such behaviors off the top of your head. Just as school bullying should be discouraged so should internet bullying/trolling. With every passing year our internet personas are becoming more important for our social and professional lives, again, as the witch-hunts towards certain individuals in the skeptic community has shown. Taking a stand against hateful behavior, be it internet "trolling" or threats, is important. To do otherwise is basically to encourage an atmosphere of juvenile bullying and popularity contests *cough* PZ Myers and Watson *cough* which is damaging to rational/skeptical discourse.

John Greg
That's All Folks
That's All Folks
Posts: 2669
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 8:05 pm
Location: New Westminster, BC, Canada

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34767

Post by John Greg »

In rebut to: http://www.slymepit.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... 750#p36689
Did he not say that those who commit suicide due to internet trolling are stupid?
No, not precisely that. He said that people commit suicide for a lot of stupid reasons. And they do. Sure, we can sympathise, and in each individual instance try to determine if the preceding supposed causal was in fact blameworthy, or if the suicide was a ridiculous over-reaction. Each instance must stand on its own merits.
His entire argument is that internet trolling is "of no concern."
That is something of a simplification and misrepresentation of the argument. I think.
I think those who have been the target of FTB/Atheism+ attacks would argue otherwise.
Sure, but that is not trolling.

John Brown
.
.
Posts: 311
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2012 9:17 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34768

Post by John Brown »

Jonathan wrote:
John Brown wrote:Que FTB post blaming us for the school shooting in Connecticut in 3,2,1...
No, even they wouldn't do that. Or at least I hope not. After something like this for anyone to use it to forward their own agenda is contemptible, especially within hours of the incident taking place!
LOL. You must be avoiding Twitter. *EVERYONE* is using this to forward their agenda right now.

Jonathan
.
.
Posts: 681
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2012 11:59 pm

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34769

Post by Jonathan »

John Brown wrote:
Jonathan wrote:
John Brown wrote:Que FTB post blaming us for the school shooting in Connecticut in 3,2,1...
No, even they wouldn't do that. Or at least I hope not. After something like this for anyone to use it to forward their own agenda is contemptible, especially within hours of the incident taking place!
LOL. You must be avoiding Twitter. *EVERYONE* is using this to forward their agenda right now.
One of the many reasons I don't use Twitter!

box brain

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34770

Post by box brain »

John Greg wrote:In rebut to: http://www.slymepit.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... 750#p36689
Did he not say that those who commit suicide due to internet trolling are stupid?
No, not precisely that. He said that people commit suicide for a lot of stupid reasons. And they do. Sure, we can sympathise, and in each individual instance try to determine if the preceding supposed causal was in fact blameworthy, or if the suicide was a ridiculous over-reaction. Each instance must stand on its own merits.
His entire argument is that internet trolling is "of no concern."
That is something of a simplification and misrepresentation of the argument. I think.
I think those who have been the target of FTB/Atheism+ attacks would argue otherwise.
Sure, but that is not trolling.
I think you are splitting hairs here a little. He didn't say that some suicides were stupid, he said that those trolled into suicide were stupid (i.e. that all those who commit suicide due to trolling are stupid).

His argument was contradictory. First he said that the behavior was not "OK" but in the same sentence says that it is of "no concern," and then ends with those who commit suicide due to trolling are "stupid." At all levels I'd say his argument is pretty immature and not well thought out. Children are much more sensitive to bullying, in real life or otherwise, than adults. Those who are targeted for being different, internet bullying can be the straw to break the camel's back. Hateful behavior on the internet should never be tolerated when targeting youth.

I agree that adults on the other hand should be able to withstand attacks better, but I still don't see such attacks as par for the course. Simply put I think anyone who feels the need to send hateful emails to someone over a topic of a little importance as video games is displaying symptoms of a psychological problem. Of course when I say hateful I am not talking about strongly worded emails rejecting ones argument, but emails full of vindictive and threats. I think most would feel such behavior is of concern, unless they are an anti-social nitwit.

d4m10n
.
.
Posts: 1526
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 5:17 am
Location: OKC
Contact:

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34771

Post by d4m10n »

Dick Strawkins wrote:
d4m10n wrote:
Mykeru wrote:Any questions? D4m10n?
I'll bite. When did PZ say it's not ok to joke about sex in public?
Nobody here mentioned sex jokes being off limits.
The question is how PZ reconciles his own actions at Skepticon3, with his recent words about zero tolerence of behavior that people might feel is akin to harrassment.
What’s wanted is a recognition of the fact that no one has the right to harass others at a public meeting, and that the meeting organizers have a zero tolerance policy towards sexual harassment, to discourage harassment before it happens.

Why is this so hard to understand?


http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... aming-101/
I suppose that schtick looked sort of looked and sounded like harassment, but it still strikes me as a bit of a stretch to call it that. If PZ was serious about the hotel keys and the sex, instead of obviously joking, then probably it would have been harassment. If Daniel Tosh had been serious about...never mind.

I tend to subscribe to the "intent is magic" school in such cases. If one means to proposition someone for sex (especially someone unable to easily flee the scene) that is very different than if one means only to jest about doing so.

Maybe PZ has roundly condemned someone for cracking lewd. If so, I'd love to read about it and call him out. Until then, though, I really don't see the problem here.

real horrorshow
.
.
Posts: 1505
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2012 9:59 am
Location: In a band of brigands.

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34772

Post by real horrorshow »

Tony Parsehole wrote:It's a bit restricting when you're trying to moralise using all caps, 140 characters and beginning every tweet with "Y U NO".
What a weird limitation to impose on oneself.
S/h/it's posted a lot of good stuff in the past. As someone else said, the Y NO U meme works well on Twitter. Everything gets tired though. Really the 'you're not helping' thing is pretty pitiful. Nothing could help with Laden. He's all suck and no blow. An intellectual black hole. He makes the world a worse place simply by existing and he's irredeemable. The only way to get a positive contribution from the man would be to suffocate him and harvest his organs.

Scented Nectar
.
.
Posts: 4969
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2012 4:45 am
Contact:

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34773

Post by Scented Nectar »

Dumbfucks Peezy and Ophie, are all over Justin V's statement regarding atheism and needlepoint.

Justin (and Michael Shermer the other day) were merely stating some factual conclusions. That is not the same as giving a reason for it. That is also not the same as saying it's a good or bad thing that this fact is so.

PZ suggests woman are 'pushed' into needlepoint, and for some reason he's mad at Justin for this. He acts as though Justin promotes that suggested reason as being a good thing, whereas Justin never even denied that that might be a reason. It didn't come up.

It happens to be facts that 1. more women are religious than men, and 2. more men are intellectually *active* than women in the atheist communities (NOT more intellectual - big difference), and 3. more women do needlepoint than do men.

PZ has come up with a premise for why that is, saying that women are pushed into it. Maybe that's true or maybe that's not to some extent or another. That's not what Justin was commenting on. He was just mentioning that those are facts.

However, Justin did something extra that was quite egalitarian minded. He looked and saw that there was equality of opportunity. In other words, no one was telling the women not to be active within atheism, and no one was telling men they are not allowed to do needlepoint. That, to me, indicates that it's individual choice after that. You should always have equality of opportunity, but should never force an equality of outcome. Let people make up their own minds.

So, if the feminist bloggers want to get angry and do something, don't shoot the messengers. Go be active recruiting and deconverting the women who are religious. Promote needlecrafts among men. Or, just let people choose for themselves. Sure gender roles still exist somewhat in western countries, but everyone knows you don't have to follow them. We've come that far, baby!

Mykeru
.
.
Posts: 4758
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 6:52 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34774

Post by Mykeru »

John Brown wrote:
Jonathan wrote:
John Brown wrote:Que FTB post blaming us for the school shooting in Connecticut in 3,2,1...
No, even they wouldn't do that. Or at least I hope not. After something like this for anyone to use it to forward their own agenda is contemptible, especially within hours of the incident taking place!
LOL. You must be avoiding Twitter. *EVERYONE* is using this to forward their agenda right now.
Yes, the internet, where you can be defending Michael Shermer one day, and thinking he's not a very good libertarian the next. ...


:popcorn:

Tigzy
Pit Art Master
Pit Art Master
Posts: 6789
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 6:53 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34775

Post by Tigzy »

d4m10n wrote: I suppose that schtick looked sort of looked and sounded like harassment, but it still strikes me as a bit of a stretch to call it that. If PZ was serious about the hotel keys and the sex, instead of obviously joking, then probably it would have been harassment. If Daniel Tosh had been serious about...never mind.

I tend to subscribe to the "intent is magic" school in such cases. If one means to proposition someone for sex (especially someone unable to easily flee the scene) that is very different than if one means only to jest about doing so.

Maybe PZ has roundly condemned someone for cracking lewd. If so, I'd love to read about it and call him out. Until then, though, I really don't see the problem here.
But isn't one of Peezee's major concerns is that, as a feminist who subscribes to the notion of male privilege, there should be a particular onus on men to make an extra effort in checking such privilege, and that guys should not work on the assumption that a woman (they were otherwise unacquainted with) would necessarily welcome a sexualised discourse, even if the intent on the part of the guy was wholly innocent?

Because if this is the case, then he clearly did not practice what he preaches up on that stage (unless, of course, he had spoken with the woman before, and let her know the route the conversation was likely to take).

sacha
.
.
Posts: 2450
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 9:31 am
Location: Gender Traitors International

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34776

Post by sacha »

Altair wrote:
Mykeru wrote:
sacha wrote:
only if there is a crowd watching
Randomly selected, or should it be unwashed neckbeards and chicks with day-glo hair?
Do members of the pit get front row seats?
yes, you are already on the guest list.

Scented Nectar
.
.
Posts: 4969
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2012 4:45 am
Contact:

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34777

Post by Scented Nectar »

d4m10n wrote:I suppose that schtick looked sort of looked and sounded like harassment, but it still strikes me as a bit of a stretch to call it that. If PZ was serious about the hotel keys and the sex, instead of obviously joking, then probably it would have been harassment. If Daniel Tosh had been serious about...never mind.

I tend to subscribe to the "intent is magic" school in such cases. If one means to proposition someone for sex (especially someone unable to easily flee the scene) that is very different than if one means only to jest about doing so.

Maybe PZ has roundly condemned someone for cracking lewd. If so, I'd love to read about it and call him out. Until then, though, I really don't see the problem here.
I agree that it was not harassment. It was awkward and maybe tacky, but not harassment.

What's funny though, is that by their new harassment policies they were all promoting recently, that would have counted as "uninvited sexual talk". So, it's against their own promoted policies, which I find kind of funny. :lol:

John Brown
.
.
Posts: 311
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2012 9:17 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34778

Post by John Brown »

Mykeru wrote:
Yes, the internet, where you can be defending Michael Shermer one day, and thinking he's not a very good libertarian the next. ...
I told him on Twitter to "hand in his skeptic card."

sacha
.
.
Posts: 2450
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 9:31 am
Location: Gender Traitors International

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34779

Post by sacha »

d4m10n wrote:
Dick Strawkins wrote:
I almpst feel sorry for Peezus with this one.
That video was shot in late 2010. It wasn't until 8 months later at Elevatorgate that he became a lifelong feminist.

Was it sexist behavior?
I was in the live audience during that one, didn't think it was anything other than very mildly transgressive sexual humour. If I recall correctly, PZ also made a point of his vanilla monogamous sex life during the same talk, which made the whole poker hand thing seem like even more of a harmless joke.

However, I also sort of assumed that the 'volunteer' was a plant, one of the sk3 student organisers, perhaps. Cannot now recall why I thought that at the time. May have to go through the old photo albums to figure it out.
It was in poor taste, especially in that venue, him doing a talk at the podium, and with a stranger in the audience. Inappropriate even by my standards, however, That isn't the point. The point is he would be shouting MISOGYNY and furiously writing blog posts and comments if he saw another man do exactly the same thing.

rayshul
.
.
Posts: 4871
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 2:00 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34780

Post by rayshul »

sacha wrote:
rayshul wrote:SJW women I've noticed get mighty out of shape when you discover that in their view you do more "man things"... so are therefore in their heads a better feminist than them. It's a bit fucken mental.
A lot of their aggression has to do with an enormous amount of insecurity.
What I've found is that they don't have a point in their brains between I have a problem and I'm a victim and will never be able to change it. Instead of having that point that is like, Well I'm going to go and fix it. I had one of those escalating conversations with two women who hadn't changed their name when they married, and their husbands and them were always getting "prejudice" about it. I'm like, well, either you have to get over it and stop whining and tell people to fuck off, or you should just change your fucking name. My mother didn't change hers in the 70s and she never had a whine about it. You're not radical in fucking 2010, feminist sweetheart.
justinvacula wrote:Re:H2O

I am not backing down from my comment or excusing it away because it was posted on my phone. I think it's silly that a quick comment like that would warrant blog posts.
I think it's a special form of madness to bitch about that. Like, who in fuck cares. The only reason we shit on PZ et al for similar is because they're being repeatedly hypocritical. Ughhh.
welch wrote:wonder how'd they feel about a prospective or current employer reading their output on A+ and not hiring/firing them over it. Same principle, right?
I don't think many are career minded. Or want jobs tbh. Too much patriarchy and shit anyway.

That THIS CUNT GETTIN EATIN video was sent to me by a buddy because she saw it and immediately thought of the way I talk. XD.

murtzuphlus
.
.
Posts: 120
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2012 9:19 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34781

Post by murtzuphlus »

rayshul wrote:I think it's a special form of madness to bitch about that. Like, who in fuck cares. The only reason we shit on PZ et al for similar is because they're being repeatedly hypocritical. Ughhh.
I am not sure I understand that. Does it matter less when one of our "own" says something stupid?

Rystefn
.
.
Posts: 635
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2012 10:03 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34782

Post by Rystefn »

sacha wrote:
Altair wrote:
sacha wrote:
only if there is a crowd watching
Do members of the pit get front row seats?
yes, you are already on the guest list.
Due to illness, I will be unable to attend the performance at this time. If recordings will be made available, I would like to request one.

welch
.
.
Posts: 9208
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:05 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34783

Post by welch »

box brain wrote:
welch wrote:
Given how you are amplifying this to a ridiculous degree, I'd say if anyone is behaving as a child would, it is you. This kind of thing has existed, literally, as long as humans. The internet amplifies the reach, but it doesn't create shit. Instead of writing "mary is a slut" or "billy is a fag" on bathroom stall walls, they write it on facebook walls. It is not new, and nothing is served by pretending it is. As well, no, hate mail in and of itself is not a cause for concern. It's often a source of comedy mind you, but if you're going to get seriously upset because people you've NEVER MET are saying mean things about you, then I wonder how you survived the third grade. People saying mean shit is a cause for concern? My ass it is. What do I care if people say mean things about me? can it hurt me? No. Can it break my leg or pick my pocket? No. People want to talk shit about me, let them. I give shit, I take shit, seems to work out.

*threats* are a different matter, and i have had those, and I have dealt with them, swiftly and decisively, (i.e. not by whining on the internet), and the problem went away. Funny how solving your problems does more than complaining about them.
box brain wrote:The rise of the 4chan generation is pretty pathetic. Basically a place for immature boys to amplify each others idiocy. While acknowledging this type of culture exists and taking steps to prevent being the focus of its idiocy is important, I wouldn't say that such culture isn't a cause for concern. Internet bullying is a serious problem.
Sexist much? Nice assumption of gender there, sparky. If you think boys are meaner than girls, you clearly were raised in a box. I divide internet bullying into two parts: when kids are the targets, I think we should handle that differently than adults. Emotional maturity levels, self-esteem issues and that are much more of a concern for minors, and I do think that bullying should be taken seriously in those cases.

But, if you're a grown-assed adult and your biggest fucking problem is hate mail? Can I fucking have YOUR life? Mine sucks in comparison.
Because something has existed in one form or another for time eternal doesn't mean that it isn't of concern or that we shouldn't take steps to discourage such behavior. I know you can think of many such behaviors off the top of your head. Just as school bullying should be discouraged so should internet bullying/trolling. With every passing year our internet personas are becoming more important for our social and professional lives, again, as the witch-hunts towards certain individuals in the skeptic community has shown. Taking a stand against hateful behavior, be it internet "trolling" or threats, is important. To do otherwise is basically to encourage an atmosphere of juvenile bullying and popularity contests *cough* PZ Myers and Watson *cough* which is damaging to rational/skeptical discourse.
well, pick one. Do you want to spend time getting people to stop being people, ergo, mean, or do you want to stop rewarding people for being morons. The former is impossible, the latter attainable, but that means that when a local group is thinking about spending gobs of money to fly one of these tits in, ask them why they aren't using local talent. When you see people flipping out about stupid crap, don't get into shitfests on their blogs, but point out why what they're doing is bad on more neutral ground and link people to it. Ed CLint's response to Becky is a great example of this. You won't win over the loyalists, but vast majority might appreciate it.

Scented Nectar
.
.
Posts: 4969
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2012 4:45 am
Contact:

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34784

Post by Scented Nectar »

Rystefn wrote:
sacha wrote:
Altair wrote:Do members of the pit get front row seats?
yes, you are already on the guest list.
Due to illness, I will be unable to attend the performance at this time. If recordings will be made available, I would like to request one.
I can make it to the event, but I'd like a private booth to view the show from, in case, well, in case of, um. Never mind why, you perverts!

Scented Nectar
.
.
Posts: 4969
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2012 4:45 am
Contact:

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34785

Post by Scented Nectar »

I wrote: "3. more women do needlepoint than do men", which could be seen two ways, so I should clarify.

I AM NOT comparing the numbers of women doing needlepoint, to the number of women doing men.

I AM comparing the numbers of women doing needlepoint, to the numbers of men doing needlepoint.

Just in case anyone was confused.

rayshul
.
.
Posts: 4871
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 2:00 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34786

Post by rayshul »

murtzuphlus wrote:
rayshul wrote:I think it's a special form of madness to bitch about that. Like, who in fuck cares. The only reason we shit on PZ et al for similar is because they're being repeatedly hypocritical. Ughhh.
I am not sure I understand that. Does it matter less when one of our "own" says something stupid?
ARGH.

Picking apart what people say like that? Fuck! This is how SJW act. This is the problem. Where they will pick on every motherfucking thing. And it's fucking stupid. This isn't saying something stupid. Saying something stupid would be to say, I don't know, do a speech about evo-psych being woo. This is just a random off the cuff comment and It Means Nothing.

Now I always assumed that the snickering at the FtB was because they'd take a ridiculous moral position and then two seconds later shit on it - so they'd say DONT USE GENDERED SLURS YOU BUNCH OF DICKS. That's fucking hilarious. If they didn't take that position, I wouldn't give a fucking shit what they said.

rayshul
.
.
Posts: 4871
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 2:00 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34787

Post by rayshul »

Do you think Justin thinks only women can do needlework? GENUINELY?

Or do you think it's a fucking whatever remark that means fuck all?

Or was he in a quick phone conversation LAYING DOWN HIS ENTIRE PHILOSOPHY AND VIEWS ON WOMEN!??!??!

AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

DO NOT BECOME LIKE THEM. THAT WAY LIES FUCKING MADNESS.

masakari2012
.
.
Posts: 334
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 12:14 pm

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34788

Post by masakari2012 »

womanticore ‏@fairyocarina
Toronto friends, please read this and help. MRA's have literally destroyed people's lives. http://toronto.livejournal.com/10032697.html

Justin Templer ‏@justintempler
@fairyocarina exposing the hypocrisy of Toronto's feminists http://www.avoiceformen.com/misandry/bi ... auves-net/ …

womanticore
‏@fairyocarina .@justintempler I will throw you off a cliff, you sociopathic piece of shit.


welch
.
.
Posts: 9208
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:05 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34789

Post by welch »

sacha wrote:
Altair wrote:
Mykeru wrote:
Randomly selected, or should it be unwashed neckbeards and chicks with day-glo hair?
Do members of the pit get front row seats?
yes, you are already on the guest list.
w00t. Melissa and I may take notes. Never know when you can pick up a useful pointer or two.

welch
.
.
Posts: 9208
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:05 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34790

Post by welch »

sacha wrote:
d4m10n wrote:
Dick Strawkins wrote:
I almpst feel sorry for Peezus with this one.
That video was shot in late 2010. It wasn't until 8 months later at Elevatorgate that he became a lifelong feminist.

Was it sexist behavior?
I was in the live audience during that one, didn't think it was anything other than very mildly transgressive sexual humour. If I recall correctly, PZ also made a point of his vanilla monogamous sex life during the same talk, which made the whole poker hand thing seem like even more of a harmless joke.

However, I also sort of assumed that the 'volunteer' was a plant, one of the sk3 student organisers, perhaps. Cannot now recall why I thought that at the time. May have to go through the old photo albums to figure it out.
It was in poor taste, especially in that venue, him doing a talk at the podium, and with a stranger in the audience. Inappropriate even by my standards, however, That isn't the point. The point is he would be shouting MISOGYNY and furiously writing blog posts and comments if he saw another man do exactly the same thing.
Exactly. By normal standards, the entire thing is meh. But, by PeeZus' This Is What A Proper Feminist Does standards, that was simply unacceptable. Once again showing he has the ethical consistency of souring milk, only without the pleasant smell.

welch
.
.
Posts: 9208
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:05 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34791

Post by welch »

rayshul wrote:Do you think Justin thinks only women can do needlework? GENUINELY?

Or do you think it's a fucking whatever remark that means fuck all?

Or was he in a quick phone conversation LAYING DOWN HIS ENTIRE PHILOSOPHY AND VIEWS ON WOMEN!??!??!

AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

DO NOT BECOME LIKE THEM. THAT WAY LIES FUCKING MADNESS.
yep. "That thing you said could be taken a number of ways, and I'm kind of unsure. How did YOU mean it?" works. It's non-threatening, not attacking, and shows you haven't decided what they meant and are now making them justify it. It's showing you see a number of fairly equal possibilities, and rather than assuming, you'd like them to help you understand their statement(s) better.

Not the most complicated concept.

murtzuphlus
.
.
Posts: 120
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2012 9:19 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34792

Post by murtzuphlus »

rayshul wrote:ARGH.

Picking apart what people say like that? Fuck! This is how SJW act. This is the problem. Where they will pick on every motherfucking thing. And it's fucking stupid. This isn't saying something stupid. Saying something stupid would be to say, I don't know, do a speech about evo-psych being woo. This is just a random off the cuff comment and It Means Nothing.

Now I always assumed that the snickering at the FtB was because they'd take a ridiculous moral position and then two seconds later shit on it - so they'd say DONT USE GENDERED SLURS YOU BUNCH OF DICKS. That's fucking hilarious. If they didn't take that position, I wouldn't give a fucking shit what they said.
I don't think I was quote mining (sorry if that's not what you meant, but that's how I read it). If you are going to dedicate a website to dissecting what a different group of people are saying (which I think is fun and all that) then every motherfucking thing is going to get picked at. Is this controversial?

Steersman
.
.
Posts: 10933
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 8:58 pm
Contact:

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34793

Post by Steersman »

sacha wrote:
JAB wrote:franc, that's two recent posts where it could be argued that you've added a smilie... if we define it as one of those yellow balls with an emotive face. Are you changing your mind about them?
There are a few he likes as long as they are used sparingly, and there is something either dark humoured or sexual about them.

he's quite fond of the Goatse emoticon...

and yes, I thought I'd speak for Franc as if he was unable to read and respond.
In passing, you might want to suggest to franc that he should update his signature, specifically the assertion that “smilies are for reetards". Possibly to “smilies are generally for reetards”. Or “only reetards overuse smilies” – although that sort of puts Andrew in the docket. But either of those – or reasonable facsimiles thereof. Or admit that, periodically at least, he acts like a “reetard" himself. Particularly as there seems to be plenty of evidence for the latter case, even apart from his own use of them ….

Barael
.
.
Posts: 258
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2012 1:49 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34794

Post by Barael »

Justin et al, you might want to check the other sections of the forums before waving your White Dick of WoW around ;) With that said, the propotion of _actual_ hardcore players (which of I'm not no longer one) is probably around 10 to 1 in favor of males even if the overall player distribution is close to 50-50. In fact each of the top guilds (Paragon, Method and Blood Legion) serve as examples that female players can be just as good male one (since they have female players in their "top" roster) but the actual distribution points to the fact that they just aren't as interested in the competitive scene on the whole. This lends credence to Shermer's and Vacula's claim that INTEREST in these things just aren't currently the same and drawing conclusions about either a) capability b) sexism is not only stupid but mendacious.

rayshul
.
.
Posts: 4871
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 2:00 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34795

Post by rayshul »

murtzuphlus wrote:I don't think I was quote mining (sorry if that's not what you meant, but that's how I read it). If you are going to dedicate a website to dissecting what a different group of people are saying (which I think is fun and all that) then every motherfucking thing is going to get picked at. Is this controversial?
No. You aren't quote mining. But you're doing what SJWs do. You're finding a piece of random conversation, and you're using it to suggest that X has taken a particular position and is therefore a bad person and should be called out for it and shamed into saying that they were wrong/apologising.

These things don't matter. No one gives a flying fuck except SJWs who want to police language and all thought so they can remove any chance of someone having a thought they dislike. And that's fucked up. They are the worst human beings for doing that. I despise them but they also scare the fuck out of me.

The reason we dissect the stupidity of FtB is because they are SJWs. They want to police language, and yet they can't even manage to follow their own stupid rules, despite being paragons of virtue or whatever. I'm trying to find an analogy, and this is the best I can do - it's like when a homophobic preacher gets caught out in a gay relationship, or an outspoken racist discovers they have heritage from the racial group they discriminate againt. If they weren't shouting about how much they hated gays or whatever race, no one would give a flying fuck.

Does that make more sense? We're kinda rational. We know that random shit people say doesn't mean they're teh ebil. (Although when it comes to rants about not telling people you have HIV... well YMMV.) But we also think it's fucking funny that people who are so obsessed with SJW shit can't stop themselves from being hypocritical.

And I say we because today I am speaking on behalf of the 'pit. HAHA.

Steersman
.
.
Posts: 10933
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 8:58 pm
Contact:

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34796

Post by Steersman »

welch wrote:
sacha wrote:
Altair wrote: Mykeru said:
Randomly selected, or should it be unwashed neckbeards and chicks with day-glo hair?"

Do members of the pit get front row seats?
yes, you are already on the guest list.
w00t. Melissa and I may take notes. Never know when you can pick up a useful pointer or two.
Exactly. I can see a Mykeru YouTube video in the offing – so to speak. Maybe something along this line:

[youtube]SNjcSF_OKFM[/youtube]

skepCHUD

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34797

Post by skepCHUD »

It turns out that some of the bright lights like Josh and Caine, Flower of Sickness(Evil?) over at Pharyngula have figured out the gun man's motives: entitlement, masculinity, toxic masculinity, privilege, and misogyny.
MRAs have been mentioned but so far not directly linked to the act.

rayshul
.
.
Posts: 4871
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 2:00 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34798

Post by rayshul »

So you have people like McRieght who is "for the underprivileged" but has a fit on the internet about a homeless man jerking off.

You have people like PZ who are perfect feminists who are forever respectful of women who then gets caught out making lewd remarks in a public situation or doing something rabidly anti-feminist, like, you know, having a pink bunny or something.

You have people like RW who supposedly support science but then get discovered they don't understand it or bother to research beyond wikipedia.

You have Ophelia who hates gendered slurs because they're evil, but is just fine with gendered slurs that involve male parts, and ignores when her friends use gendered slurs.

It's fucking ridiculous shit. That's what is funny.

murtzuphlus
.
.
Posts: 120
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2012 9:19 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34799

Post by murtzuphlus »

I have a question. I am one of those who like to read pop-evolution books. I am currently in the middle of Sex at Dawn, and I was wondering if anyone had an opinion as to whether it is crap or something to consider. Someone said earlier that this book is one single counter-argument, and I think I am starting to understand what they meant. But then again, the evidence for the "standard narrative" of sexual selection doesn't sound too convincing either.

katamari Damassi
.
.
Posts: 5429
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 10:32 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#34800

Post by katamari Damassi »

skepCHUD wrote:It turns out that some of the bright lights like Josh and Caine, Flower of Sickness(Evil?) over at Pharyngula have figured out the gun man's motives: entitlement, masculinity, toxic masculinity, privilege, and misogyny.
MRAs have been mentioned but so far not directly linked to the act.
One of the SWJ lessons I learned at Shakesville was to never question the mental wellness of a mass murderer/spree killer, because to do so is to impugn ALL people with mental illness. It was really something to watch them talk around the forbidden elephant in the room. They almost always reach for the misogyny card, as if any sane man could just suddenly snap one day and decide to start killing random people. And it never matters if it is random people and a sexually mixed group of victims, to them it is always misogyny.

Locked