Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

[fascination]

Welch made some great points above but I just wanted to point out one thing, Louis. Watson claimed to have a rare disorder called prosopagnosia. It is a type of face blindness. She had never mentioned this before but only mentioned this after Elevatorgate when pressed about certain details and asked to identify the man from a picture of the bar that night...

Minor point of order - Becky had actually mentioned her face-blindness thing prior to the Elevatorgate event: http://skepchick.org/2007/05/waste-time ... r-science/

Not that it makes me any less suspicious of Becky's EG narrative. However, the facts - as far as we can find them - need to be clear.

Thank you for the link. Rayshul corrected me up thread. I was going to search on Skepchick later in the day for the previous mention of face blindness but now you've saved me the time! :)

>Go into Slymepit
>See a woman has made an error in her reasoning based on lack of facts
>Smiling, I oppress her by pointing out the fact she was missing
>Because atheism is more of a guy thing
>Look of horror comes over woman's face as I exercise my entitlement of telling her where she went wrong
>She begins to tremble
>Tears well up in her eyes
>I can tell she is paralysed by fear at the oppression she is receiving
>All is lost to her now
>Male Slymepitters begin to cheer and clap
>Sacha, Skep Tickle and Rayshul begin to shriek and cry
>I feel my erect penis bump against my laptop
>'Th-thank you,' the woman finally says, from behind a mask of tears. 'I -I needed the link...but you've saved me the time...thank you.'
>I lean towards my monitor, a devious, patriarchal smile spreading across my face.
>And I tell her, 'It was my privilege.'

That was pretty good! But now you've scare off Louis!

[fascination]

Damn. I meant to type "scared off Louis".

[fascination]

A woman has made an error? Why do you hate women so much.

It's almost as misogynistic as using "Cunt" as your username! :)

[Mykeru]

Tidies and Fuglemen, I give you:

The Mildew Pit!

Does Opie Benson ever get tired of losing?

[sacha]

I'm a US American, is there any hope for me?

nope

[LMU]

Actually given how vague wind's initial accusations were, is it possible that they were serious when they said they were just guessing about the secret forum? Nobody believed Richard Feynman either.

It's out now. Wind suspected for a while that there was a secret forum. Her suspicions were confirmed when she got a PM from a friend who didn't realise she didn't have access to the secret space. The PM was something like "People are gossiping about you in this thread, you might want to look."

Thanks I missed it!

Also Zenspace, you mentioned a letter to the pit, perhaps you were referring to this: http://rationalugandan.wordpress.com/20 ... slime-pit/

It you want stuff about the start of the pit then this is good: http://freethoughtkampala.wordpress.com ... vatorgate/

and don't forget the phawrongula wiki.

[Apples]

Over at Atheism + Stochastic Terrorism, Kbonn offers one of the more accurate summaries of the situation in the "Are our Moderators Fascist Twats?" thread:

1) Some people treated wind pretty badly. Change the subject matter, and the players involved, and the mods wouldn't or shouldn't have allowed it to continue, nevermind participate in it. Flewellyn also lied, but partly to try to get wind to divulge how she came by the information, when lying didn't work, he tried to guilt it out of her. Ceepolk basically gaslighted wind for the same reason(telling her who her friends are or aren't, claiming posters on JREF were her enemies or something?). I haven't seen any real response to the others who have raised this issue(though maybe I missed it?). Submor was the only one who tried to get wind to explain why it was bothering her, and get some meaningful discussion out of it. If the players in this had been different it would not have been tolerated by the mods. Submor just posted that long time members shouldn't(and won't) be treated differently, I agree. I get that people are worried about what information might be divulged. But Wind didn't do anything wrong, she received information. Wind has no responsibility to report anything to anyone, she didn't deserve the treatment she got.

2) I think a private/secret forum is fine for support purposes, but if is has non mods, it shouldn't be used to discuss other forum users (RE: moderation). There has to be some accountability to how people are handled. The mods are public, and we have spaces to take issues regarding mods. If there is a secret forum who membership is secret (but includes the mods), and they discuss users other than themselves and how users should be handled, that is a big problem. If certain longtime members get to discuss other users with mods, and potentially how they are handled or how much slack is given to new people/not the in group, then we basically have secret mods. Any discussion of users regarding potential moderation should be private and between mods only, or public if it includes more than just mods. I don't think that is too much to ask for. I am not suggesting that this happens, so this point is purely hypothetical, though I think some people here might be worried that it isn't.

Anyways, hopefully this is productive and things can move forward. I likely won't be back on until tomorrow, so take care until then and have a good afternoon/evening/morning/whatever.

But then global moderator Ceepolk helpfully sets the record straight:

oh this is complete crap, kbonn, and you are full of it. Completely full of it. this crap is mass media "journalism."

and information you are not privy to is none of your fucking business.

quit trolling.

Not to cyber-diagnose or anything, but anyone who voluntarily hangs out near Ceepolk is a masochist of the highest order.

http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic ... start=1625

[KiwiInOz]

[spoiler]

It's certainly not on the basis of the standard way we agree upon the meaning of words, namely to use the meaning that is present in dictionaries.
For example the commonly agreed meaning of 'cunt' not a sexist epithet - certainly not in the UK and UK influenced territories (Ireland, Australia NZ etc).



Are you suggesting that we simply accept the US meaning?
On what basis should we do that?

[/spoiler]
I have a HUGE problem with this lexical warfare strategy from the FtB crowd.
If this is the case then were Franc to have said: 'If i were a woman i would kick OB in the 'fanny'' would that be ok then, as a kick in the arse is less problematic than one in the vagoo? 'cos here in Britain at least the word means exactly that (vagina not arse)..... two nations separated by a common language and all that

Same, same. It cracks me up when I hear USAnians say that they are rooting for a team. In NZ and Australia (and possibly the UK) rooting refers to the act of sexual congress, otherwise known as fucking.

Much hilarity.

[jimthepleb]

My case of Greta has paid off.

One point i will pile on is the accusation that tfoot is a sexist. Making that claim unarmed Louis demonstrates you have bought into and are perpetuating the narrative. That really is a case of put up or shut up. Actually put up or fucking withdraw it.

Who else is a sexist by horde common wisdom? Shermer? Dawkins? Harris? Shit isn't it funny, those are the same names who think FFtb are full of shit. Just coincidence.

All of the "big names" are not with them (with the exception of Myers). Jillete isn't , the horsemen aren't (Dawkins, Harris, no one knows about Dennet) , none of the popular You Tube Atheists are (DPR Jones, Thunderf00t, etc),Shermer isn't (Mr Deity stood in support of Shermer), Ayaan Hirsi Ali isnt, Randi isnt , etc. The list of people that FTB hasn't attacked and pissed off in the Atheist and Skeptic community is very small now. What would concern me if I were FTB is the amount of minorities and women who were on the other side of the rift. That is who they are supposed to be reaching out to, yes? For example, Why do I know of more black women on our side of the rift? Heck, not even mentioning commentators there are several well known POC that are women that don't agree with the FTB party line. I can think of these women off the top of my head: Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Bridgitt Gaudett, Heather Henderson. I noticed that none of these women are speaking at WIS 2.

Socially engineering a ghetto.
Much like A+ with abuse victims.
Let's assume for a moment that they succeed in bringing a large quotient of PoC, women and the differently-abled (shit this pc bollocks is exhausting.) Their new demographic will find themselves in a community that is largely derided by the larger AS community and once more marginalised.
How will this be a 'success'?

[Steersman]

Tidies and Fuglemen, I give you:

The Mildew Pit!

Does Opie Benson ever get tired of losing?

Probably. That might be part of the reason she tends to use “parallel logic” and engage in innuendo and yellow journalism – like asserting that Shermer said “exactly that” in referring to her “misquote” of him saying “it’s a guy thing”.

[ThreeFlangedJavis]

When used as insults terms like "bitch" and "twat" and "cunt" are inseparable from sexism. They are unambiguous negative referents to feminine/female as negative. Incidentally, "prick" and "cock" are inseparable from sexism too for the identical reasons. In all cases that is an act of sexism. There's a contextual difference which I'll get to later, but there's no difference inherent in the actual words in terms of sexism. They are reductive, they reduce a person to some perceived negative quality to do with their sex. That's sexism. Like the words "nigger" or "paki" used as insults are an unambiguous negative referent to race, and perceived negative qualities to do with race, are racist. Same mechanism.

This wasn't a response to me, but I have something quick to say about it anyway. If "cunt" is sexist because it reduces a person to some perceived negative quality to do with their sex, what about "asshole"? That reduces a person to some perceived negative quality to do with their GI tract, doesn't it?

Last time I checked both traditional sexes of human, and all trans*/intersex people too, almost exclusively possess arseholes. I'm struggling to think of any case I've heard of where someone doesn't. It's not a negative referent SPECIFIC to a person's sex. It's simply a negative referent. Insults are ALL negative referents of some kind or another. Those that refer to sex, race, sexuality, etc have "splash damage" (don't know where that term came from, but I like it) of one kind or another. They insult the person BECAUSE of their sex. I.e. they are saying you are bad because you are this sex or like this sex and this sex is bad. That's the nature of a sexist insult.

I should be clear about one thing, this isn't a complex or massive issue, it's not really that debatable as far as I can tell from my limited reading. It's also not that damning. One point I am trying to drive home is that I think everyone, me very VERY much included is "trivially sexist" or "trivially racist" or whatever. We inherit sexist (etc) ideas from the culture around us and parrot them unthinkingly. We also don't know if we're doing something sexist a lot of the time because we simply have never had to consider it from that angle. This applies to everyone, men women etc etc etc. It's a cultural universal not a woe is me or a condemnation. It's not a moral failing or cause to wear a hair shirt, it just is. Like I said, the trick is to realise it just is and try not to do it. Are you going to fuck up? Sure! I do it all the time! No big deal, raise a hand (like Toby Flood did after kicking straight into touch from a kick off at Welford Road this weekend) and say "my bad". What the fuck is the big deal with that?

It's very debatable. Cunt is only 'necessarily sexist' if you define it that way. Who says it is an insult based on it's gender specificity? That's just one point of view. It's an insult because it refers to part of the human sewage system which emits a lot of yucky fluids, and as Vicky says, it's a sharp sounding word. You could argue that people who see it as sexist are projecting their own bigotry onto other people. I sure there are bigoted origins for many words. The origins are mostly buried in the past, why dig them up and create offense where none would otherwise exist, unless it's to create offense to bolster the politics?

[sacha]

Kudos to Lewis for engaging in discussion.

You have the oddest definition for that word ever.

The fact that I'm not interested in the "conversations" with Louis, makes the ability to catch up here, quite easy right now. I can just scroll on by page after page

cheers for that

[Zenspace]

Actually given how vague wind's initial accusations were, is it possible that they were serious when they said they were just guessing about the secret forum? Nobody believed Richard Feynman either.

It's out now. Wind suspected for a while that there was a secret forum. Her suspicions were confirmed when she got a PM from a friend who didn't realise she didn't have access to the secret space. The PM was something like "People are gossiping about you in this thread, you might want to look."

Thanks I missed it!

Also Zenspace, you mentioned a letter to the pit, perhaps you were referring to this: http://rationalugandan.wordpress.com/20 ... slime-pit/

It you want stuff about the start of the pit then this is good: http://freethoughtkampala.wordpress.com ... vatorgate/

and don't forget the phawrongula wiki.

LMU - Thanks. Skep tickle provided the rationalugandan link already (now bookmarked for future reference), but the other two are new to me. I'll check them out, too.

[welch]

[spoiler]

...demolished.

Again, thanks for posting a link to a specific event, I prefer to discuss things like this than talk about generalities.

Don't think I said demolished as it happens. Think I said "mostly dealt with". Looks like *I'm* going to have to do all the work myself doesn't it? Fuck a doodle doo.

Somehow I was expecting a longer response.

[/spoiler]I think Louis might get on well with Steerzo...

You might well have a point there, Limphoma, other than the one at the top of your head.

But I sort of doubt it considering my repeated defense of the argument that Shermer's statement - "it's more of a guy thing" - is not at all sexist in response to Brayton's post pontificating from the pulpit on the question of "Shermer and the myth of feminist persecution". When credible pollsters like the Pew Forum note that the ratio of men to women who identify as atheists is 64% to 36% one might reasonably argue that "it's more of a guy thing" is more a statement of fact than anything approaching sexism.

That's how it read to me, that Shermer was making an observation of current reality. he never said nor implied that women aren't capable on any level of speaking at conferences, or that they'd be bad at it.

[cunt]

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... -each-one/

That thread took a turn for the awesome. I think noelplum99's biggest fan turned up after the banning and seriously brought the pain. They really have no idea what to do when somebody gives no fucks.

[Turglemeister]

We had a similar situation when JV put Melody's details on the 'pit.

Just a small correction: Amy's details, not Melody's.

/Reminds me of an old Alexei Sayle clip on the young ones.

"You've got your Garibaldi, you've got your Bourbon and you've got the Peak Freans Sotski assortment."

[nippletwister]

Evening all,

Well I hope this is the right place to put this (i.e. the continuation of the last thread), I assume it is, if the mods tell me different, I have to take my beatings I guess.

I confess I have not read the six pages (so far) of this thread, but I've caught up with the last few of the last one, nice lot of responses. Oh wait, no. Most of them were horseshit. You can have your hate fest all you like, you can play "punch the pharyngulite" all you want, actually you're just giving me the impression that more of you are bitter muppets than I thought. Sorry, but that's the truth. Want me to pretend otherwise?

I haven't flounced, it was nearly 1 am, I went to bed. I didn't post (most of) today because I was BUSY, shock horror (and Tigers beat Toulouse, so I'm also drunk, hurrah!). If all the majority of you are looking for is an "enemy", a scapegoat on whom you can vent your anti-PZ etc wahwahs, great. Rather proves that you're no different from the people you criticise for doing similar things to you, doesn't it?

Oh and Badger, learn to read you simple minded fuck. I never asked for THE argument to Rule Them All, I asked for AN argument for ANYTHING. Wildly different. Do I need to explain that to you as well? Anything other than "waaaah PZ." If all you've got is "PeeZus is creating a cult of personality" and similar, fine. If that's all you are "disagreeing" about, great, that's sated my curiosity, I'm genuinely pleased to know that. Thanks. Not sarcasm, you've answered what I came to find out.

If you want to have a grown up discussion about things without treating me like I am somehow the All FtB Representative then wonderful, if not, then why criticise those people for doing exactly what you are doing? I'm not doing it. Deal with ME. The fact that some people "over there" do it and some people "over here" do it is the boring bit. There's a couple of you (and I've bookmarked a couple of posts) that have tried to make arguments and great, I'll get to those when I can. Apologies for not being able to dedicate my life to a timescale that suits you. That WAS sarcasm.

Toodle pip.

Louis

I realize you had a bit of a pile on Louis, but most of it was not exactly hostile. There were quite a few concerns presented to you, and explanations of why people actually care about honesty, and you responded to pretty much fuck all. Also, you made no attempt to bring up any other subjects, yet made many complaints to others about that.

I did notice that you flatly refused to honestly look at any criticisms of PZ or other bloggers, or even admit that criticizing a popular person who lies a lot might be a valid thing to do, which is pretty much why this place exists- as a counter to what has become a popular but fact-free media narrative. If not for all the drama and dishonesty, the Pit wouldn't even be here. You seem to have trouble grasping that, and prefer to pretend that we're just obsessed teenagers or something, not adults responding to actual issues, such as being lied about regularly by people who influence a movement we care about.

I myself explained to you that my concerns, and the reasons for criticizing PZ to such a degree(AND SEVERAL OTHERS, NOT JUST PZ, I REPEAT) are that a small group of very vocal people are more or less controlling the conference scene, trying to deny jobs and opportunities to those they don't like, and make a constant practice of publicly slandering people. Uneducated and half-educated activists are trying to force their personal interpretations of feminism and social justice as a prerequisite to being in the secularist movement, and outright demonizing any who disagree.

I gave you examples, and there are more all the time. We are likened to mass murderers by PZ, and a large commentariat agrees almost completely. Ophelia Benson tries to equate criticism of her actions and beliefs to terrorism and having acid thrown in her face, and gets cheered on. These are influential people who presume to lead....maybe you can understand why other rational thinkers might take issue?

I expressed to you some of my issues with political feminism, and why it is a bad fit in the skeptic and secular movements. This alone explains why I would focus on the words of PZ(and several others, again)....they have been thorough and dishonest promoters of the very ideologies I disagree with. That is NOT an obsession with calling PZ a poopy-head, or any such thing, It is a rational response to aggressive promotion of ideology within a community and the shut-down of debate.

Others also expressed to you why they do what they do....mostly, because honesty matters to them, and whether you realize it or not, some extremely dishonest people are doing their best to gain political power within the movement, with an eye towards slandering and driving out any who expect them to be open to debate. All of this is well documented here at the pit, and new examples crop up almost every single day.

I will note that out of three comments I made to you, you only chose to to respond to the one short comment where I criticized your characterizations of the people here and your reluctance to admit or discuss the idea that many of PZ's supporters are a bit angry and often less than honest. You never once bothered to respond to the real issues I mentioned. Personally, I think it's because you don't even know enough about the issues involved to care, yet you feel free to criticize and belittle those that do. If you can't see why people criticize PZ's (AND OTHERS')constant dishonesty and drama-mongering, especially as it relates to issues of "policing" the atheist, skeptical/secular movements, then you are just plain willfully blind. Several others tried to communicate this to you as well, but all you do is dishonesty characterize that as "WAHHHHH PZ is a poopy head!!!!WAHHHH". You ignore every single issue raised, though they very much affect the greater community, just because it may somehow be related to PZ.

So, since you refuse to actually address any of the significant and real issues raised, out of some pretense of being all high-minded and above all that and shit, is there anything currently involving the atheist/skeptic/secularist movements you're actually interested in? Since you are clearly clueless as to the sources of all the drama going on, maybe you'd like to debunk bigfoot or something?

[AndrewV69]

I think Louis might get on well with Steerzo...

My suspicion is the exact opposite. Too bad he is not here, then we could see for certain.

Louis has dropped some howlers. One particularly egregious one was his response to Thunderfoot. I am still girlishly giggling over that one. Pretty hilarious really. Lous wrote:

The hard on you have for FtB, not so much. So shark jumping and obsessive. Sexist, well I haven't demonstrated it, but I'm sure it will come up somewhere, be patient. Loonbag: the straw men, the focus on the most twisted interpretations of reasonable things, the videos edited out of context to make an almost Michael Moorian (someone I also quite like, although phew do you have to take his work with a bucket of salt sometimes) video about PZ and people. Dude, it's time to get over it.

I'll make one confession, I do feel bad for not having a detailed point by point case prepared for you, genuinely, but since I find it hard to do anything other than laugh at you at the moment, I can't really bring myself to worry about it. Make of that what you will. I'm sure you'll do so whether or not I have a point by point case prepared for you.

Talk about hoisting yourself by your own petard. Oh my. Pardon me for finding this so amusing but the fact of the matter is I am laughing about Louis so hard right now I am having difficulty typing this out.

The best part is, I doubt Louis will ever understand why this is so comical (at least to me).

[Apples]

So, since you refuse to actually address any of the significant and real issues raised, out of some pretense of being all high-minded and above all that and shit, is there anything currently involving the atheist/skeptic/secularist movements you're actually interested in? Since you are clearly clueless as to the sources of all the drama going on, maybe you'd like to debunk bigfoot or something?

Good post, nippletwister, and good points. Seems like Louis should probably stick to bigfoot, given that his peaches froze right up the minute Thunderf00t confronted him.

[KiwiInOz]

I admit, I'm not yet really following Rugby, but if I'd be rooting for the All Blacks I'm a racist now? Oh, fuck off.

Ok. I admit it. I would happily root for the All Blacks.

[KiwiInOz]

One thing I haven't perfected in my new venture into tea is biscuits. How do I pick a good biscuit? I'm a US American, is there any hope for me?

Biscuits have been discussed in some detail on these threads. I suggest you search them for the phrase "Tunnock's Caramel Wafers"

again NOT A BISCUIT...jesus this is the last place i thought i'd have to get all 'language police' on your arses!

I'm rooting for you on this point Jim.

[somedumbguy]

[spoiler]

My case of Greta has paid off.

One point i will pile on is the accusation that tfoot is a sexist. Making that claim unarmed Louis demonstrates you have bought into and are perpetuating the narrative. That really is a case of put up or shut up. Actually put up or fucking withdraw it.

Who else is a sexist by horde common wisdom? Shermer? Dawkins? Harris? Shit isn't it funny, those are the same names who think FFtb are full of shit. Just coincidence.

All of the "big names" are not with them (with the exception of Myers). Jillete isn't , the horsemen aren't (Dawkins, Harris, no one knows about Dennet) , none of the popular You Tube Atheists are (DPR Jones, Thunderf00t, etc),Shermer isn't (Mr Deity stood in support of Shermer), Ayaan Hirsi Ali isnt, Randi isnt , etc. The list of people that FTB hasn't attacked and pissed off in the Atheist and Skeptic community is very small now. What would concern me if I were FTB is the amount of minorities and women who were on the other side of the rift. That is who they are supposed to be reaching out to, yes? For example, Why do I know of more black women on our side of the rift? Heck, not even mentioning commentators there are several well known POC that are women that don't agree with the FTB party line. I can think of these women off the top of my head: Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Bridgitt Gaudett, Heather Henderson. I noticed that none of these women are speaking at WIS 2.

[/spoiler]
Socially engineering a ghetto.
Much like A+ with abuse victims.
Let's assume for a moment that they succeed in bringing a large quotient of PoC, women and the differently-abled (shit this pc bollocks is exhausting.) Their new demographic will find themselves in a community that is largely derided by the larger AS community and once more marginalised.
How will this be a 'success'?

That's a classic problem of the pink ghetto.

They demand safe spaces, they ban everyone that disagrees with them, they smear and slander, and then they complain no one pays attention to them and that they are in a pink ghetto.

See Slate's XX Factor which was once a part of slate, then separate from slate, now part of slate.
Or Salon's Broadsheet.

However, it must be noted that while the pink ghetto seems self-defeating, if you examine the success of the gender studies virus, it actually has been a winning strategy for feminists, in part, because who wants it said of them they did not think women were people, or they were rape apologists, or likely pedophiles.

Rationally, there should be no connection between skepticism and contemporary feminism. That there is is because - RAPE APOLOGIST!

[Gumby]

Ophie lies and smears again:

This is the post that was formerly the doxxing of Jerry Conlon, or at least someone named Jerry Conlon. Ophie tries to spin it that we were setting her up.

http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd24 ... 4634d7.jpg
http://freethoughtblogs.com/butterflies ... ent-426863

I'm told people at the mildew pit are ranting about calling the police on me for "threatening" Jerry Conlon because of this comment

Really? Where's your evidence for that? Oh, right, you have none, you made it all up in order to smear us.

Conlon threatens me with an acid attack, I do not call the police, so the mildew people try to work up a pretext to call the police on me.

Really? Where's your evidence of that? Oh, right, you have none, you made it all up in order to smear us.

There is no depth too low for Ophelia Benson to plumb. If she went to the bottom of Marianas Trench, she'd bring a shovel. Lie and smear, lie and smear. That's all she has.

[somedumbguy]

I was pretty much ignoring Louis Wall of Rationalization, but his attack on Thunderf00t, followed by his complete inability to either acknowledge that his attack was baseless, OR substantially back it up and make his case, pretty much says it all about Louis.

Anyway Louis, thanks for femsplaining.

[Apples]

Sexist, well I haven't demonstrated it, but I'm sure it will come up somewhere, be patient.

:whistle:
http://us.123rf.com/400wm/400/400/dash/ ... -money.jpg

[another lurker]

The word 'cunt' used to scare me. Quite a bit in fact. The sheer power of it, the contempt. I first heard of the word when I was 15, and it filled me with dread. That was one insult I could never use.

Years later, I wound up on IRC and was sharing a chat channel with a feminist Croatian girl. This girl would not take shit from anyone. She also used 'cunt' all the time. Sometimes she would just type 'cunt', for no apparent reason. She robbed the word of its power. And I thank her for that. "Cunt" was no longer a word that could shut me up, and make me feel 'bad'.

And now, many years later, I visit FTB and suddenly 'cunt' has all the power it once had when I was 15. Power that the word does not deserve. Rather than forcing people to alter their language - especially if they still, inwardly, hold misogynist beliefs - doesn't it make more sense for women to take back the word, and rob if of any dreadful, 'sexist' meaning?

I guess what I am trying to say is, if people are using 'so-called' woman-hating words around me, or just plain vulgarity, would it not be wise to say 'hey, you cannot offend me, you do not have that power over me' than to attempt to get them to *insincerely* 'clean up' their language when around me?

Just my two cents, that's all!

[CommanderTuvok]

Well, Ophelia's response to my comment over at SIN really does reveal her double standards and hypocrisy.

Apparently, that post about Jerry Conlon was a "post by a new user". Now, this means Ophelia can't be held responsible, right? Well, wrong actually! For a start, that excuse doesn't seem to be good enough for them if a post from a new user, or troll, appears on a site critical of them. Then, and this is the crucial bit (I also mentioned it in the comment), Ophelia APPROVED the message because she had pre-moderation on at the time, and it then appeared on her blog. She must have seen the comment and accepted it. I don't believe her later comments suggesting she had "part-moderation" on, or summat. Yeah right!

But what about the issue of doxxing. Well, my comment about that Jerry Conlon dox being harassment and a threat is simply me satirising the usual Baboon response to such incidents. If someone "doxxes" one of them, it is a major crime, and that is why I suggested Ophelia could get a knock at the door from the police! I am using their own bullshit to mock them. The fact that they don't recognise this is illustrative of the denial they are in.

[Apples]

And now, many years later, I visit FTB and suddenly 'cunt' has all the power it once had when I was 15. Power that the word does not deserve. Rather than forcing people to alter their language - especially if they still, inwardly, hold misogynist beliefs - doesn't it make more sense for women to take back the word, and rob if of any dreadful, 'sexist' meaning?

I guess what I am trying to say is, if people are using 'so-called' woman-hating words around me, or just plain vulgarity, would it not be wise to say 'hey, you cannot offend me, you do not have that power over me' than to attempt to get them to *insincerely* 'clean up' their language when around me?

Word. :clap:

[VickyCaramel]

The word 'cunt' used to scare me. Quite a bit in fact. The sheer power of it, the contempt. I first heard of the word when I was 15, and it filled me with dread. That was one insult I could never use.

Years later, I wound up on IRC and was sharing a chat channel with a feminist Croatian girl. This girl would not take shit from anyone. She also used 'cunt' all the time. Sometimes she would just type 'cunt', for no apparent reason. She robbed the word of its power. And I thank her for that. "Cunt" was no longer a word that could shut me up, and make me feel 'bad'.

And now, many years later, I visit FTB and suddenly 'cunt' has all the power it once had when I was 15. Power that the word does not deserve. Rather than forcing people to alter their language - especially if they still, inwardly, hold misogynist beliefs - doesn't it make more sense for women to take back the word, and rob if of any dreadful, 'sexist' meaning?

I guess what I am trying to say is, if people are using 'so-called' woman-hating words around me, or just plain vulgarity, would it not be wise to say 'hey, you cannot offend me, you do not have that power over me' than to attempt to get them to *insincerely* 'clean up' their language when around me?

Just my two cents, that's all!

As Stephen Fry once said to Lorraine Kelly while trying to convince her to use swear words, "Go on... have a stab at a cunt". Use it and it will have it's meaning changed, it will lose it's power to shock.

[Dick Strawkins]

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... -each-one/

That thread took a turn for the awesome. I think noelplum99's biggest fan turned up after the banning and seriously brought the pain. They really have no idea what to do when somebody gives no fucks.

What delightful commenters they have over there.

We are supposed to be sending rape threats? :shifty:

How come nobody told me? :(

Wait a second... :shock:

Is there a secret forum here? :shhh:

[Tigzy]

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... -each-one/

That thread took a turn for the awesome. I think noelplum99's biggest fan turned up after the banning and seriously brought the pain. They really have no idea what to do when somebody gives no fucks.

Was that that Stevencarr dude? Funny as fuck. As is the insistence of the Pharygulites that Natalie Reed has been 'silenced', despite her saying that she still plans to write on 'WeHappyTrans'. It's kind of like when they say the haterz forced Jen McCreight out of blogging - despite the inconvenient fact that she last posted on FTB two days ago.

[Dick Strawkins]

Oops forgot the screencap:

http://i.imgur.com/apJv81o.jpg

[Turglemeister]

There were quite a few concerns presented to you, and explanations of why people actually care about honesty, and you responded to pretty much fuck all.

Agreed.

[jimthepleb]

However, it must be noted that while the pink ghetto seems self-defeating, if you examine the success of the gender studies virus, it actually has been a winning strategy for feminists, in part, because who wants it said of them they did not think women were people, or they were rape apologists, or likely pedophiles.

I suspect that will change now, moving into sceptic/atheist territory will prove to be the undoing of any remaining credibility radical feminism had. The clear disparity between what they say and what the statistics say will be exposed and a new generation of men and women are growing up to challenge these preconceived notions.
What is vital is the charging of the barricades of academia, that is where the rot set in.

However in our corner of the world, these people have a death grip on 'the movement'

Do conferences bring in the $$$ for the organisers?

[Gumby]

Well, Ophelia's response to my comment over at SIN really does reveal her double standards and hypocrisy.

Apparently, that post about Jerry Conlon was a "post by a new user". Now, this means Ophelia can't be held responsible, right? Well, wrong actually! For a start, that excuse doesn't seem to be good enough for them if a post from a new user, or troll, appears on a site critical of them. Then, and this is the crucial bit (I also mentioned it in the comment), Ophelia APPROVED the message because she had pre-moderation on at the time, and it then appeared on her blog. She must have seen the comment and accepted it. I don't believe her later comments suggesting she had "part-moderation" on, or summat. Yeah right!

But what about the issue of doxxing. Well, my comment about that Jerry Conlon dox being harassment and a threat is simply me satirising the usual Baboon response to such incidents. If someone "doxxes" one of them, it is a major crime, and that is why I suggested Ophelia could get a knock at the door from the police! I am using their own bullshit to mock them. The fact that they don't recognise this is illustrative of the denial they are in.

Or, it's illustrative of how far they will go to twist the words of those who would disagree with them in order to smear them.

[justinvacula]

http://skepticink.com/justinvacula/2013 ... tachecast/

I was invited to appear as a special guest host for episode 29 of the A-News podcast to discuss updates concerning the vandalized (and restored) Freedom From Religion Foundation’s holiday freethought banner which was placed on Public Square in Wilkes-Barre, the fundraiser launched to help send me to Women in Secularism 2 [and help provide for surgeries to help children with cleft lips and cleft palettes], and more.

http://i.imgur.com/QrYE5hp.jpg
"MustacheCast"

[Lsuoma]

I'm here for my own benefit, to sate my curiosity. I saw some post about acid throwing on the side bar at FtB, clicked out of curiosity, read, posted something sarcastic, read PZ's post, thought to myself "I wonder if the pit people are really gloating away?" so I came for a look.

And were we? Gloating?

[youtube]kjJ1bsnxxhs[/youtube]

[Tigzy]

Oops forgot the screencap:

http://i.imgur.com/apJv81o.jpg

Tony The Queer Shop - or whatever the fuck it is - is to breastbeating, slobbering, overwrought hyperbole what Mr Creasote is to vomit.

[VickyCaramel]

Why fight for a movement rife with people who despise your kind, and who are probably now capering with glee at having silenced one more woman?

Oh yes, I am capering with glee at taking down another woman... that's why I became an atheist in the first place don't cha know.

PeeZee sure has me pegged!

[deanesmay]

Oops forgot the screencap:

http://i.imgur.com/apJv81o.jpg

OK, so, short summary is, anyone who is skeptical or critical of their position is an ORC, ala Lord of the Ring orcs--not, you know, human or anything.

[fascination]

BTW, how have you been feeling, fascination? Morning sickness abating at all?

I have been feeling a little better. Thank you for asking hon! I'll be into my second trimester in a couple of weeks so it should go away soon.

[Gumby]

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... -each-one/

That thread took a turn for the awesome. I think noelplum99's biggest fan turned up after the banning and seriously brought the pain. They really have no idea what to do when somebody gives no fucks.

Was that that Stevencarr dude? Funny as fuck. As is the insistence of the Pharygulites that Natalie Reed has been 'silenced', despite her saying that she still plans to write on 'WeHappyTrans'. It's kind of like when they say the haterz forced Jen McCreight out of blogging - despite the inconvenient fact that she last posted on FTB two days ago.

They always mock their opponents with their ridiculous "FREEZE PEACH" meme when they censor people they don't like, but when someone they like leaves the fold it's "OMG SHE'S BEEN SILENCED!!!!11!~!!"

Fuck every one of those hypocrites.

[Lsuoma]

The word "douchebag" doesn't seem, to me, to meet your criteria for harsh, sharp words, but it is an effective insult.

Nobody cares if somebody calls them a douchebag.

Unless they're a real douchebag...

[AndrewV69]

If Oolon were a moderately better writer, he'd be louis.

LOL. Spot on.

I disagree. I am under the impression that Oolon is sincerely muddled and incapable of helping himself out of the logjams his stunted thought processes lead him into.

Remember when he wanted to know how come, seeing as we used "sexist" words no one had called Crom a nigger?

I could be wrong, but my sense was that it was a genuine question and that he really was flummoxed.

[cunt]

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... -each-one/

That thread took a turn for the awesome. I think noelplum99's biggest fan turned up after the banning and seriously brought the pain. They really have no idea what to do when somebody gives no fucks.

Was that that Stevencarr dude? Funny as fuck. As is the insistence of the Pharygulites that Natalie Reed has been 'silenced', despite her saying that she still plans to write on 'WeHappyTrans'. It's kind of like when they say the haterz forced Jen McCreight out of blogging - despite the inconvenient fact that she last posted on FTB two days ago.

She's been silenced by the hate! Update your bookmarks.

[somedumbguy]

However, it must be noted that while the pink ghetto seems self-defeating, if you examine the success of the gender studies virus, it actually has been a winning strategy for feminists, in part, because who wants it said of them they did not think women were people, or they were rape apologists, or likely pedophiles.

I suspect that will change now, moving into sceptic/atheist territory will prove to be the undoing of any remaining credibility radical feminism had. The clear disparity between what they say and what the statistics say will be exposed and a new generation of men and women are growing up to challenge these preconceived notions.
What is vital is the charging of the barricades of academia, that is where the rot set in.

However in our corner of the world, these people have a death grip on 'the movement'

Do conferences bring in the $$$ for the organisers?

This leads to a question I have about Academia. When and how does Academia take responsibility for policing its own?

Within a department, faculty will be hired and fired and in extreme cases, even tenure won't protect the truly horrendous. But what is the process in Academia that keeps a metaphysics department from forming, or a school of alchemy, or that eventually decides that it's time to defund the college of phrenology? There seems to be little reward and no ethical obligation for professors or deans to police the school outside their departments, ...

[Dick Strawkins]

If Oolon were a moderately better writer, he'd be louis.

LOL. Spot on.

I disagree. I am under the impression that Oolon is sincerely muddled and incapable of helping himself out of the logjams his stunted thought processes lead him into.

Remember when he wanted to know how come, seeing as we used "sexist" words no one had called Crom a nigger?

I could be wrong, but my sense was that it was a genuine question and that he really was flummoxed.

Yes, but Louis is basically saying the same thing.
Both of them claim that calling someone a 'cunt' is the exact equivalent to calling a black person a 'nigger'.

[bhoytony]

We had a similar situation when JV put Melody's details on the 'pit.

Just a small correction: Amy's details, not Melody's.

/Reminds me of an old Alexei Sayle clip on the young ones.

"You've got your Garibaldi, you've got your Bourbon and you've got the Peak Freans Sotski assortment."

Sotski assortment? What kind of revolutionary biscuit is that? TROTSKY assortment FFS!

[Steersman]

[spoiler]I see Phil is lying low after inviting his friend to look down upon us from on high and deliver his wisdom on tablets of stone that we may gaze on them in awe.[/spoiler]Is Phil on another two-glasses-of-Baileys bender or is he just embarassed?

:lol: :rimshot:

[AbsurdWalls]

This leads to a question I have about Academia. When and how does Academia take responsibility for policing its own?

Within a department, faculty will be hired and fired and in extreme cases, even tenure won't protect the truly horrendous. But what is the process in Academia that keeps a metaphysics department from forming, or a school of alchemy, or that eventually decides that it's time to defund the college of phrenology? There seems to be little reward and no ethical obligation for professors or deans to police the school outside their departments, ...

The same process that stops a worker at the biscuit factory opening up a production line to make cakes? :think: I'm confused by your question.

[cunt]

The word "douchebag" doesn't seem, to me, to meet your criteria for harsh, sharp words, but it is an effective insult.

Nobody cares if somebody calls them a douchebag.

Unless they're a real douchebag...

You'll get over it eventually.

[Turglemeister]

We had a similar situation when JV put Melody's details on the 'pit.

Just a small correction: Amy's details, not Melody's.

/Reminds me of an old Alexei Sayle clip on the young ones.

"You've got your Garibaldi, you've got your Bourbon and you've got the Peak Freans Sotski assortment."

Sotski assortment? What kind of revolutionary biscuit is that? TROTSKY assortment FFS!

Sorry-I always make a mess of biscuit talk when drunk.

[somedumbguy]

This leads to a question I have about Academia. When and how does Academia take responsibility for policing its own?

Within a department, faculty will be hired and fired and in extreme cases, even tenure won't protect the truly horrendous. But what is the process in Academia that keeps a metaphysics department from forming, or a school of alchemy, or that eventually decides that it's time to defund the college of phrenology? There seems to be little reward and no ethical obligation for professors or deans to police the school outside their departments, ...

The same process that stops a worker at the biscuit factory opening up a production line to make cakes? :think: I'm confused by your question.

I think it makes as much sense for a University to teach Phrenology Theory as it does for them to teach Patriarchy Theory. Is there a QA function in Academia? How does it work? Why isn't it working?

[Steersman]

[spoiler]

...
I think Louis might get on well with Steerzo...

You might well have a point there, Limphoma, other than the one at the top of your head.

But I sort of doubt it considering my repeated defense of the argument that Shermer's statement - "it's more of a guy thing" - is not at all sexist in response to Brayton's post pontificating from the pulpit on the question of "Shermer and the myth of feminist persecution". When credible pollsters like the Pew Forum note that the ratio of men to women who identify as atheists is 64% to 36% one might reasonably argue that "it's more of a guy thing" is more a statement of fact than anything approaching sexism.

[/spoiler]
That's how it read to me, that Shermer was making an observation of current reality. he never said nor implied that women aren't capable on any level of speaking at conferences, or that they'd be bad at it.

Exactly. Although I think that raises the question about the problem of induction and the related issue of circumstantial evidence. Different courts – as with the O.J. Simpson criminal and civil trials – and different individuals have different criteria and preconceptions that make some conclusions more probable than others. For instance, while Brayton did try to make a stab in that thread at being equitable by questioning Benson’s egregious if not actually libelous accusations against Shermer, he still seems prepared to let the ends – ending sexism – dictate the means – engaging in witch-hunts:

Here’s where I would quibble with Ophelia’s representation of what Shermer said. I think the focus should have been kept on his claim that men are just more “intellectually active” rather than equating that to “women don’t do thinky.” A distinction can be made between women having the ability to think and women being interested in taking a public stand on atheism or secularism. But here’s the thing: What he said is still incredibly sexist and dumb even without that paraphrase, whether fair or not.

While it is of course great that he isn’t totally buying all of the schlock that Benson is peddling, to allow an “unfair” characterization to stand as the basis for subsequent witch-hunts has to qualify as one of the more egregious attempts at rationalization that I have ever seen. As I subsequently argued, I hoped that Brayton would “do more than just quibble with Ophelia’s [mis]-representation of what Shermer said as it was the rather odious snowball that started the avalanche of vituperation that has landed on Shermer’s head.”

[Lsuoma]

We had a similar situation when JV put Melody's details on the 'pit.

Just a small correction: Amy's details, not Melody's.

/Reminds me of an old Alexei Sayle clip on the young ones.

"You've got your Garibaldi, you've got your Bourbon and you've got the Peak Freans Sotski assortment."

Trotsky. You missed the political aspect of the joke.

[Turglemeister]

uh-oh :oops:

[bhoytony]

/Reminds me of an old Alexei Sayle clip on the young ones.

"You've got your Garibaldi, you've got your Bourbon and you've got the Peak Freans Sotski assortment."

Sotski assortment? What kind of revolutionary biscuit is that? TROTSKY assortment FFS!

Sorry-I always make a mess of biscuit talk when drunk.

The first rule of Biscuit Club is we don't talk about Biscuit Club when we're drunk.

[Lsuoma]

Why fight for a movement rife with people who despise your kind, and who are probably now capering with glee at having silenced one more woman?

Oh yes, I am capering with glee at taking down another woman... that's why I became an atheist in the first place don't cha know.

PeeZee sure has me pegged!

Ever thought of pegging him?

[Turglemeister]

/Reminds me of an old Alexei Sayle clip on the young ones.

"You've got your Garibaldi, you've got your Bourbon and you've got the Peak Freans Sotski assortment."

Sotski assortment? What kind of revolutionary biscuit is that? TROTSKY assortment FFS!

Sorry-I always make a mess of biscuit talk when drunk.

The first rule of Biscuit Club is we don't talk about Biscuit Club when we're drunk.

I'll get my coat.... :arrow:

[Karmakin]

However, it must be noted that while the pink ghetto seems self-defeating, if you examine the success of the gender studies virus, it actually has been a winning strategy for feminists, in part, because who wants it said of them they did not think women were people, or they were rape apologists, or likely pedophiles.

I suspect that will change now, moving into sceptic/atheist territory will prove to be the undoing of any remaining credibility radical feminism had. The clear disparity between what they say and what the statistics say will be exposed and a new generation of men and women are growing up to challenge these preconceived notions.
What is vital is the charging of the barricades of academia, that is where the rot set in.

However in our corner of the world, these people have a death grip on 'the movement'

Do conferences bring in the $$$ for the organisers?

This leads to a question I have about Academia. When and how does Academia take responsibility for policing its own?

Within a department, faculty will be hired and fired and in extreme cases, even tenure won't protect the truly horrendous. But what is the process in Academia that keeps a metaphysics department from forming, or a school of alchemy, or that eventually decides that it's time to defund the college of phrenology? There seems to be little reward and no ethical obligation for professors or deans to police the school outside their departments, ...

I have a really bad bias against academia. And to be honest, it really has nothing at all to do with Feminism or any sort of Gender politics. In fact, I have had that bias well in place for years.

It actually has to do with Economics.

Quite frankly, Economics 101 is horrible. I'd say, and I'm being honest...no hyperbole here...that it's one of the worst things on the face of the planet. It results in more pain and suffering than pretty much anything else I can think of. (Economics 102..that is Macroeconomics, isn't nearly as bad except for when it's based on 101)

I see Feminism 101 along the same lines. Overly simplistic models that often have no basis in reality especially in a quickly changing world.

So no, I really don't expect academia to police their own here.