Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

Old subthreads
Locked
Altair
.
.
Posts: 800
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 6:44 am

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

#1141

Post by Altair »

fascination wrote:
Skep tickle wrote: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.
Are you thinking about names yet? If it's a boy, I want him to be named "Slyme Pete". Can you make that happen?

LMU
.
.
Posts: 617
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2012 7:40 am

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

#1142

Post by LMU »

welch wrote:
Lsuoma wrote:[spoiler]
VickyCaramel wrote:
PeeZee wrote: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?[/spoiler]
If a guy pegs a girl, isn't that just plain old fucking?

now *I'M* confused.
He was referring to when a girl pegs a guy ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pegging_%2 ... ractice%29 )

nippletwister
.
.
Posts: 425
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2012 6:17 pm
Location: California
Contact:

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

#1143

Post by nippletwister »

Louis wrote:
Tfoot wrote:Hi Louis,
Please do be a sport and tell me why Im a
-'in Tfoot's case a shark jumping obsessive sexist loonbag"

I'm pretty sure the facts are against you on this one, but I'm all ears as to why I'm a 'shark jumping obsessive sexist loonbag'.
No worries, sport.

Your arguments on FtB against their very simple brand of feminism were sexist. I can go back and dig through tonne of drivel if I want to, but why bother? Shark jumping: Dude, you used to be so cool! Okay, okay, forgive me I couldn't resist that one. I was, and still am, a big fan of your science videos. You do stellar work, no fooling, I really think that.

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.

You know, I tried assuming you were an honest sort.

For the record, I had never watched a single whole Thunderfoot video until he joined FTB. I was vaguely familiar with his name. I think I may have watched a couple of minutes of one of his videos on evolution a couple of years ago. I had, however, been reading most of the FTB blogs since they got together, and most of them longer, separately.

However, I did watch his videos after he joined, and watched the responses from other FTB blogs and Watson and some others.
If you couldn't see the blatant media manipulation going on there, you either only ever listen to one side of things and make thoughtless judgments, or you have some other extreme bias, or you're a shit-eating moron who can't bear being wrong.

Or you could just back up your own bullshit, something I've haven't seen at FTB for a long time, which is why I only read there for lulz anymore.

ReneeHendricks
.
.
Posts: 2244
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 9:48 am
Location: Kent, WA
Contact:

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

#1144

Post by ReneeHendricks »

Well, I sucked it up and just did my tasteless joke vid:

[youtube]pjnKL0fEUrI[/youtube]

Though, everyone else here is giving better ones :D

LMU
.
.
Posts: 617
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2012 7:40 am

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

#1145

Post by LMU »

Lsuoma wrote:
SenorBeagle wrote:[spoiler]
Lsuoma wrote:Oh, and whoever it was, thanks for the recco for Iron Sky. I've fired up my seedbox and I'm torrenting it now.
Good fillum. A film with moon Nazis can never be bad. Also, Udo Kier.

Also, also, Julia Dietze. Scherwing.[/spoiler]
Moon Nazis? Anyone else here a fan of the Laundry stories of Charles Stross (yes, I know it's not the moon, but non-terrestrial Nazis should all be lumped together until there's a reason not to.
Charles Stross fan here. Anyone curious can read a novella from the Laundry series here: http://www.goldengryphon.com/Stross-Concrete.html

somedumbguy
.
.
Posts: 379
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2012 12:53 am

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

#1146

Post by somedumbguy »

Via FTB'er Mano Singham:

http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colber ... n-lawsuits

(still no cure for peezus)

Metalogic42
.
.
Posts: 1252
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2012 10:56 am

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

#1147

Post by Metalogic42 »

@rocko2466: I just sent you some more. But do the screencap a few posts up first, that shit is hilarious.

Apples
.
.
Posts: 2406
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2013 12:39 pm

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

#1148

Post by Apples »

LMU wrote:He was referring to when a girl pegs a guy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pegging_%2 ... ractice%29)
Wikipedia comes through in the clutch. And you've gotta love the tasteful diagram with the "four-strap harness."

another lurker
.
.
Posts: 4740
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2012 6:39 pm

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

#1149

Post by another lurker »

TheMan wrote:
VickyCaramel wrote:
another lurker wrote: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.

Yes..and once that happens we'll need to find another word that has shock value as a replacement.
I nominate this word: Atheism+

CommanderTuvok
.
.
Posts: 3744
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 1:18 pm

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

#1150

Post by CommanderTuvok »

Another example of the bubble that the Baboons inhabit.

http://i.imgur.com/EKc1y2a.jpg

Now, you will notice that there is a sort of veiled threat in there. Perhaps there is an "Adam Lanza" type loner amongst the Baboons who will snap and retaliate because we, the Slyme Pit, have the audacity to call their bullshit bullshit.

But you'll also notice the delusion that Ophelia is gaining lots and lots of supporters. Really? Ophelia has done her best to alienate people with her stupid behaviour and callous witch-hunts over the past year. There are no stats suggesting Ophelia's support is growing, but there is plenty of evidence of people flouncing over at FfTB, and joining their comrade-in-arms at the Slyme Pit. As someone pointed out the other day, NOBODY goes the other way. Not even Justicar, who despite getting a small infection of Baboonitis, spends most of his time sticking the boot into them.

They are seriously deluded. Perhaps it will take another hostile reception at TAM to show them how the wider community really views Ophelia and her ilk.

ERV
Arnie Loves Me!
Arnie Loves Me!
Posts: 1556
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 4:57 pm

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

#1151

Post by ERV »

deanesmay wrote: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.
... Really?

No one has mentioned the new guys BEAUTIFUL ANGELIC HAIR OH MY GOD SO PRETTY YOU LOOK LIKE DAVID GILMOUR WHY DO SO MANY GUYS HERE HAVE LONG PRETTY HAIR?

Altair
.
.
Posts: 800
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 6:44 am

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

#1152

Post by Altair »

CommanderTuvok wrote:Another example of the bubble that the Baboons inhabit.

[spoiler]http://i.imgur.com/EKc1y2a.jpg[/spoiler]

Now, you will notice that there is a sort of veiled threat in there. Perhaps there is an "Adam Lanza" type loner amongst the Baboons who will snap and retaliate because we, the Slyme Pit, have the audacity to call their bullshit bullshit.
That sounds very close to the definition of stochastic terrorism, which apparently is something that the pit does. Or the anti-A+. Or Justin.
I'm not really sure who "these people" refers to.
It's another case of it's bad when they do it, but good if one of us does it.

5
Ophelia Benson

January 19, 2013 at 6:10 pm (UTC -8)

Josh sent me this link, which is very relevant. It’s what these people do – stochastic terrorism.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/01/1 ... e-shooters

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

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

#1153

Post by Skep tickle »

Apples wrote:oops -

this is PZ's post.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... heartsick/
At least one person commented earlier on the comments RW made at the end of her post and the question(s) jpeoples asked. But here's another thing - it's an example of them disagreeing. PZ backs off from his endorsement of these organizations, but can he really afford to follow RW down the path of "the organizations are all rotten, it's only a few individuals we/I can count on"? Saying that seems like it'd only accelerate the decline in speaking engagements. And RW seems to be putting the bar pretty high - she doesn't want to associate with an organization that keeps those she feels aren't pure enough on staff, or are named after someone she hates (thus, no matter what approach Dawkins' Foundation might take, it'll apparently never be enough for her). Bolding below is all added by me.

I've quoted PZ's post (not 'capped It) here, with what appears to be an addendum. I did not include all the italics & links:
PZ wrote:I am constantly dunned by email and tweets from the haters and sick scumbags, and I read stuff by my colleagues who get far worse, and at times it is just too depressing and dismal — there really are reactionary fanatics within atheism who refuse to recognize the responsibility to work towards equality. And I just want to give up.

But then…perspective. Step away from the smears and assaults and slime and look at the movement as a whole: look at the leading organizations of the godless. You know what you’ll see? None of them support these loons. They’re all progressive and committed to improving the diversity of the atheist community and broadening our engagement with the greater culture.

Really. Look at American Atheists, the American Humanist Association, the Center for Inquiry, Atheist Alliance International and Atheist Alliance America, the Secular Coalition, the Secular Student Alliance, and the Richard Dawkins Foundation. They are not supporting these petty, resentful snipers; they are working towards a future in which those goons are irrelevant.

That’s reassuring. There are loud, obsessive, creepy people who should not be ignored, but it’s always a good idea to step back and look at the bigger picture, and see that their skirmishing is born of desperation — they’re the past, they’re the failures, they’re the ones who have no productive role to play.
_______________________________________________________

Rebecca Watson has a different perspective. She’s less sanguine about organizations (and particularly the RDF), and I’m not going to argue with someone who has been the target of so much hatred, some of it inspired by Richard Dawkins’ remarks. I will agree entirely that any virtue in these organizations rest on the efforts of individuals who have struggled hard to bring inherently conservative institutions towards a more just perspective, and we cannot rest — we all have to keep fighting that fight.
From the linked article on Skepchick from Jan 20th:
Rebecca Watson wrote:...Unfortunately, his links only go to the main websites of those organizations and not to any evidence that those groups are doing anything that would make irrelevant those who harass many of us every day. ...

...For the most part, these organizations work on their causes while pointedly avoiding what they see as a divisive quagmire. Is that a bad thing? Not necessarily, no. For years, I defended the JREF’s pointed disinterest in atheist topics because while I do think atheism is the natural outcome of skepticism and that the two are ultimately inextricably linked, I understand that there’s a benefit to an organization focusing resources on a particular goal while also appealing to a larger audience. But it would be silly to then congratulate the JREF on working toward some atheist or secular goal, just as it’s silly to congratulate these organizations that are not focused on fighting for women.

And then there’s the Richard Dawkins Foundation. Over on PZ’s post, I commented:
I guess if you’ve never been called a “feminazi” by Paula Kirby or had your inbox explode with rape threats thanks to Richard Dawkins, RDF wouldn’t look out of place on that list.
PZ replied:
I know that Dawkins’ comments have led to some very ugly results, and that Kirby just completely lost the plot, but considering that the RDF confines itself mostly to science education, I don’t think that organization as a whole is the ‘enemy’.
I could not disagree more, obviously. When discussing whether or not an organization supports “petty, resentful snipers,” it’s worth asking whether it keeps any on staff or whether the organization is named after one. Richard Dawkins’ comments have been the very definition of petty and resentful, including those he has continued posting on Twitter. Whether he’s retweeting victim blaming trash or coming up with his very own passive aggressive ways to denigrate a free vaccine program because Skepchick runs it, he has not only failed to stop the torrent of abuse aimed at me and other women in this movement but he has actively participated in it himself. And Paula Kirby of RDFUK has spent months defending her point that those of us asking for atheist conferences to be safer spaces for women are literally like Nazis and the Stasi.

Regardless of what RDF does for science (and I’m not sure what that is, exactly, though I do know that they donate substantial amounts of money to other organizations that actually do things), they are not to be counted among organizations that discourage harassment of women.

So while PZ finds optimism in the work these organizations do, I, for the most part, do not. I see anti-feminists who think those organizations stand for them. (Hell, I’ve seen misogynists cite feminist and Freedom from Religion Foundation co-founder Annie Laurie Gaylor as an inspiration.) I don’t think these people are stupid (though yes, many are – just look at the people populating my Twitter @ replies) – I think that secular organizations aren’t being loud enough in their support of women. I think often these organizations are being dragged kicking and screaming into the 21st Century by a few progressive employees who want to do good at the risk of being seen as radical troublemakers.

And that’s where I find my inspiration: not in the large organizations but in the individuals who are strong enough to stand up for what’s right despite the endless hateful shit thrown their way. People like Ophelia Benson, Stephanie Zvan, Greta Christina, and Melody Hensley. People like Surly Amy and all the other Skepchick Network contributors. People like Amanda Marcotte...

Lsuoma
Fascist Tit
Posts: 11692
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 5:58 pm
Location: Punggye-ri

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

#1154

Post by Lsuoma »

LMU wrote:
Lsuoma wrote:
SenorBeagle wrote:[spoiler]
Lsuoma wrote:Oh, and whoever it was, thanks for the recco for Iron Sky. I've fired up my seedbox and I'm torrenting it now.
Good fillum. A film with moon Nazis can never be bad. Also, Udo Kier.

Also, also, Julia Dietze. Scherwing.[/spoiler]
Moon Nazis? Anyone else here a fan of the Laundry stories of Charles Stross (yes, I know it's not the moon, but non-terrestrial Nazis should all be lumped together until there's a reason not to.
Charles Stross fan here. Anyone curious can read a novella from the Laundry series here: http://www.goldengryphon.com/Stross-Concrete.html
Down On The Farm and Overtime are also available online for free.

ConcentratedH2O, OM
.
.
Posts: 6555
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2012 8:51 pm

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

#1155

Post by ConcentratedH2O, OM »

Lsuoma wrote: Back in 1997 the Paris police called a garage that specialized in British Leyland cars: they wanted to know how to get an engine out of a 1961 Princess.
Shit, yea. I've never heard that one. In fact, I think the worst one I've heard about that incident was your basic "What was the last thing that went through Diana's mind before she died...?".

Git
.
.
Posts: 1271
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:31 pm
Location: Engerland

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

#1156

Post by Git »

jimthepleb wrote:
Turglemeister wrote:
jimthepleb wrote:
Tkmlac wrote: 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?
McVities Rich Tea
That is all
(well at a push u could go Digestive or Hobnob (oooer missus) but they don't really count)
I would like to add Jaffa Cakes :D
NOT A BISCUIT :naughty:
Plain Chocolate Digestives. Or nothing.

another lurker
.
.
Posts: 4740
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2012 6:39 pm

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

#1157

Post by another lurker »

welch wrote:
another lurker wrote: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!

If someone can completely alter your mental and emotional state by the mere utterance of a word, they own you.

Maybe, and this is crazy, but maybe one should be more discriminating in who one gives such control to.
Well, I was being a tad hyperbolic with the FTB example. But the truth is, I really really wanted to give them the benefit of the doubt. They are 'smarter' and 'more learned' than me, after all. Right? So I stopped using 'bitch' and 'cunt' - mostly.

Most of all though, the BIGGEST effect it had on me was that I policed my behaviour on FTB forums and then said whatever the fuck else I wanted to elsewhere. Which just proves the point that if you are going to police language, you will not actually effect any *real* change - you will just force people to put on an insincere act to please you (which is a point that has been made here before, many times, alerady.)

The thing is, I have spent years talking like a sailor. And I was willing to listen to FTB, and give their ideas a chance. I wanted to learn from them, to re-examine all of my preconceived notions about feminism. They had a willing ally, and they tone-policed me outta there! So now I am here, re-examining everything all over again:P

nippletwister
.
.
Posts: 425
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2012 6:17 pm
Location: California
Contact:

Re: W.C.O.A

#1158

Post by nippletwister »

sKepptiksowat wrote:White Cock Of Asia?

http://img15.imageshack.us/img15/3897/w ... sehoro.jpg

Hey, I don't wanna sound like a queer or anything, but that's pretty sweet cock you got there!

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

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

#1159

Post by Steersman »

Apples wrote:oops -

this is PZ's post.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... heartsick/
Thanks.

Pitchguest
.
.
Posts: 4024
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 3:44 pm

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

#1160

Post by Pitchguest »

another lurker wrote: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!
Don't you mean, just [your] two cunts? :rimshot:

Lsuoma
Fascist Tit
Posts: 11692
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 5:58 pm
Location: Punggye-ri

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

#1161

Post by Lsuoma »

ConcentratedH2O, OM wrote:
Lsuoma wrote: Back in 1997 the Paris police called a garage that specialized in British Leyland cars: they wanted to know how to get an engine out of a 1961 Princess.
Shit, yea. I've never heard that one. In fact, I think the worst one I've heard about that incident was your basic "What was the last thing that went through Diana's mind before she died...?".
I see that one as a rehashing of "What's the last thing to go through a fly's mind when it hits your windscreen? Its arsehole."

I also heard another Diana one, likely derived from the old chestnut that Justi told:

Q. How do you get a princess pregnant?
A. Wank off on the engine block, and let the driver do the rest.

Michael K Gray
.
.
Posts: 2480
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 2:04 am
Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Contact:

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

#1162

Post by Michael K Gray »

Turglemeister wrote:...the Peak Freans Sotski assortment."
Trotsky assortment!
To the re-education camp, komrade.

Apples
.
.
Posts: 2406
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2013 12:39 pm

water water everywhere and not a drop to drink

#1163

Post by Apples »

Skep tickle wrote:And RW seems to be putting the bar pretty high - she doesn't want to associate with an organization that keeps those she feels aren't pure enough on staff, or are named after someone she hates (thus, no matter what approach Dawkins' Foundation might take, it'll apparently never be enough for her).
Yep - if PZ lets Rebecca and co. poison every well in town ... freethought's gonna become thirsty work.

Notung
.
.
Posts: 644
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

#1164

Post by Notung »

I notice that that StevenCarr fellow is amusingly now in the 'Dungeon'. He's a fairly frequent atheist commenter - I remember a few years ago he was my only atheist ally on a (now-defunct) UK Christian forum.

somedumbguy
.
.
Posts: 379
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2012 12:53 am

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

#1165

Post by somedumbguy »

http://www.attendly.com/how-one-woman-d ... onference/

Woman expends a great deal of time and effort -- begs, cajoles, wheedles, other women, one on one to speak at tech conference. After all of this effort, manages to get 50/50 split.
“The easiest way I saw for getting more women on stage at the actual event was to get as many women to submit speaking proposals as possible.”
It turns out that this is actually really difficult. Women are notably less likely to sing their own praises (http://www.shirky.com/weblog/2010/01/a- ... out-women/) , or to see themselves as worthy applicants for speaking positions at conferences (http://radar.oreilly.com/2011/03/would- ... feren.html). Of course, this backs up the reasoning that not enough women apply–but it doesn’t excuse the resulting gender-biased speaker line-ups.
Courtney begged, pleaded and cajoled women she knew and respected to submit applications. She went out of her way to track them down and speak with them individually about their topics of expertise and why they would be appropriate for her conference. Even with all of this effort, she still received more applications from men than from women, though only marginally (8 women and 10 men applied).
So is it entrenched sexism? Or maybe speaking at conferences is a guy thing?

Or Benson-forfend, maybe a bit of both?

Pitchguest
.
.
Posts: 4024
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 3:44 pm

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

#1166

Post by Pitchguest »

welch wrote:
Lsuoma wrote:
VickyCaramel wrote:
PeeZee wrote: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?
If a guy pegs a girl, isn't that just plain old fucking?

now *I'M* confused.
No, no. PZ is the sub. Duh! :roll:

He's always the sub.

another lurker
.
.
Posts: 4740
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2012 6:39 pm

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

#1167

Post by another lurker »

CommanderTuvok wrote:Another example of the bubble that the Baboons inhabit.

http://i.imgur.com/EKc1y2a.jpg

Now, you will notice that there is a sort of veiled threat in there. Perhaps there is an "Adam Lanza" type loner amongst the Baboons who will snap and retaliate because we, the Slyme Pit, have the audacity to call their bullshit bullshit.

But you'll also notice the delusion that Ophelia is gaining lots and lots of supporters. Really? Ophelia has done her best to alienate people with her stupid behaviour and callous witch-hunts over the past year. There are no stats suggesting Ophelia's support is growing, but there is plenty of evidence of people flouncing over at FfTB, and joining their comrade-in-arms at the Slyme Pit. As someone pointed out the other day, NOBODY goes the other way. Not even Justicar, who despite getting a small infection of Baboonitis, spends most of his time sticking the boot into them.

They are seriously deluded. Perhaps it will take another hostile reception at TAM to show them how the wider community really views Ophelia and her ilk.

When I was reading FTblogs quite heavily this fall I noticed that B&W was one of the quieter blogs. Comments never really went over 10 (and were often even less than that) - whereas on Pharyngula most blog posts would have 30+ comments.

Guest

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

#1168

Post by Guest »

Apparently not all threats are equal.



Surprise, surprise, no rebuke from Ophelia.

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

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

#1169

Post by ThreeFlangedJavis »

Good thinking there, Nerd.
http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... ent-541932
Nerd wrote:"I always thought the Slymepitters used Alfred E. Neuman as their mascot…".
How about it? A grinning Alf leaning up against a giant WCoA.

Notung
.
.
Posts: 644
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

#1170

Post by Notung »

Just discovered this: it has probably appeared here already, but:



It's Ana Kasparian's admirable and thoughtful reply to Thunderf00t's video.

Compare this to Myers:
PZ wrote:While we’re on the subject of how the wimminz ought to behave, I should mention the F00t’s new video, titled, “Do Hot Girls Have All the Advantages?” Yep, it’s about how women have an edge by just being pretty.
Let that sink in for a bit.
Such a stark difference - and the latter (& ilk) wonder why they come under criticism!

Gumby
Pit Art Master
Pit Art Master
Posts: 5543
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:40 am

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

#1171

Post by Gumby »

another lurker wrote: When I was reading FTblogs quite heavily this fall I noticed that B&W was one of the quieter blogs. Comments never really went over 10 (and were often even less than that) - whereas on Pharyngula most blog posts would have 30+ comments.
Back before PZ went totally insane, his post on SciBlogs would routinely (not always) generate hundreds of comments. A few in the low thousands (not counting his "lounge" threads). Their numbers (and ad revenue) are dropping like rocks.

Gumby
Pit Art Master
Pit Art Master
Posts: 5543
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:40 am

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

#1172

Post by Gumby »

ThreeFlangedJavis wrote:Good thinking there, Nerd.
http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... ent-541932
Nerd wrote:"I always thought the Slymepitters used Alfred E. Neuman as their mascot…".
How about it? A grinning Alf leaning up against a giant WCoA.
The copyright issue kills that idea, but I like it.

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

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

#1173

Post by welch »

CommanderTuvok wrote:Another example of the bubble that the Baboons inhabit.

http://i.imgur.com/EKc1y2a.jpg

Now, you will notice that there is a sort of veiled threat in there. Perhaps there is an "Adam Lanza" type loner amongst the Baboons who will snap and retaliate because we, the Slyme Pit, have the audacity to call their bullshit bullshit.

But you'll also notice the delusion that Ophelia is gaining lots and lots of supporters. Really? Ophelia has done her best to alienate people with her stupid behaviour and callous witch-hunts over the past year. There are no stats suggesting Ophelia's support is growing, but there is plenty of evidence of people flouncing over at FfTB, and joining their comrade-in-arms at the Slyme Pit. As someone pointed out the other day, NOBODY goes the other way. Not even Justicar, who despite getting a small infection of Baboonitis, spends most of his time sticking the boot into them.

They are seriously deluded. Perhaps it will take another hostile reception at TAM to show them how the wider community really views Ophelia and her ilk.
I like the barely-veiled threat. "Nice thing you got going on there. Be a shame if you pissed the wrong person off and they busted a cap in yo' ass."

Git
.
.
Posts: 1271
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:31 pm
Location: Engerland

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

#1174

Post by Git »

Lsuoma wrote:
ConcentratedH2O, OM wrote:
Lsuoma wrote: Back in 1997 the Paris police called a garage that specialized in British Leyland cars: they wanted to know how to get an engine out of a 1961 Princess.
Shit, yea. I've never heard that one. In fact, I think the worst one I've heard about that incident was your basic "What was the last thing that went through Diana's mind before she died...?".
I see that one as a rehashing of "What's the last thing to go through a fly's mind when it hits your windscreen? Its arsehole."

I also heard another Diana one, likely derived from the old chestnut that Justi told:

Q. How do you get a princess pregnant?
A. Wank off on the engine block, and let the driver do the rest.
Q. What's the difference between Princess Diana and a Coffee Filter?
A. A Coffee Filter gets tucked in a funnel.

:dance:

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

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

#1175

Post by Steersman »

BannedAid wrote:
I'm going to ask you all a question now, a very simple one. Here is Michael Shermer (someone I admire and enjoy the works of very much) saying something that caused consternation:

“It’s who wants to stand up and talk about it, go on shows about it, go to conferences and speak about it, who’s intellectually active about it, you know, it’s more of a guy thing”

Do any of you think that statement is sexist?

How about this:

“It’s who wants to stand up and talk about it, go on shows about it, go to conferences and speak about it, who’s intellectually active about it, you know, it’s more of a white thing”

Do any of you think that is statement racist?
When I first saw Shermer's quote in context, I thought it was terribly, awkwardly worded. He didn't actually say anything sexist -- he just made an observation on our culture -- but "intellectually active" is too easily misunderstood by the inattentive or the disingenuous.
The thing is that what Shermer said was this:
It’s who wants to stand up and talk about it, go on shows about it, go to conferences and speak about it, who’s intellectually active about it; you know, it’s more of a guy thing
And from the context it is clear that Shermer’s “it” is atheism. Specifically, this is the question that was asked (from the YouTube video that he references):
Atheist groups always consist of a bunch of (mostly old) men. You are very nice middle-aged men, but you are mostly men. In atheism we don’t have a rule that makes a woman worth only 50% as much as a man and we don’t make women stay silent and only ask their husband’s questions. We in atheism supposedly treat women as equals. So why isn’t the gender split closer to 50/50 as it should be?
Decidedly disingenuous, if not actually libelous, for Benson to suggest that Shermer was arguing that “intellectually active” referred to all “thinky work”. And that is where Louis’ question is equally disingenuous if not actually fraudulent. He has conveniently ignored the fact that the question in play is based on the supposed disparity between men and women in atheism – for which there is some quite credible statistical evidence to justify interpreting Shermer’s statement as one of fact – and not a disparity between whites and blacks in atheism.

And even if the topic had been so modified – “why isn’t the race split closer to 72-13?” – the appropriateness or accuracy of the hypothetical answer – “atheism, it’s more of a white thing” – would hinge on how much evidence there was for variations “substantially” different from that ratio. And, interestingly, the Pew Forum states that “fully eight-in-ten atheists and agnostics (82%) are white, 3% are black, 6% are Hispanic …” so that one might argue that the disparity between the actual and the expected isn’t as great as with gender: comparing “outlier” populations is likely to be more problematic because of extraneous variations.

Gumby
Pit Art Master
Pit Art Master
Posts: 5543
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:40 am

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

#1176

Post by Gumby »

Man, they can do nothing but bitch and moan about us lately. They're positively fucking obsessed with us. Josh has even taken to hysterically sobbing that we've "ruined the last two years". If we weren't scoring huge hits off them on a regular basis, they wouldn't even mention the Pit.

Party on, Slymepit!

http://candidchatter.files.wordpress.co ... =550&h=365

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

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

#1177

Post by Mykeru »

ERV wrote:
deanesmay wrote: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.
... Really?

No one has mentioned the new guys BEAUTIFUL ANGELIC HAIR OH MY GOD SO PRETTY YOU LOOK LIKE DAVID GILMOUR WHY DO SO MANY GUYS HERE HAVE LONG PRETTY HAIR?
Used to:

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8503/8395 ... 4dea_o.jpg

Altair
.
.
Posts: 800
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 6:44 am

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

#1178

Post by Altair »

Sara Mayhew's tweet, courtesy of Za-zen
Dibujo.PNG
(9.64 KiB) Downloaded 191 times
I wonder who she's referring to in that tweet :angelic-green:

Here's a clickable link in case you want to bid for Harriet Hall's beautiful knit afghan: http://t.co/T9fkdbGo

CommanderTuvok
.
.
Posts: 3744
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 1:18 pm

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

#1179

Post by CommanderTuvok »

http://i.imgur.com/R58uc2Q.jpg

As we all know Rebecca is sooooo much of an arbitrator of werdz one can use, is she aware that S.E. SMITH at DISBALEDFEMENISTS.COM declares "moron" to be an ableist slur! http://disabledfeminists.com/2010/01/01 ... ile-moron/

http://i.imgur.com/rlR49bM.jpg

Rebecca Watson - CHECK YOUR PRIVILEGE!

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

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

#1180

Post by Skep tickle »

Altair wrote:Sara Mayhew's tweet, courtesy of Za-zen
Dibujo.PNG
I wonder who she's referring to in that tweet :angelic-green:

Here's a clickable link in case you want to bid for Harriet Hall's beautiful knit afghan: http://t.co/T9fkdbGo
Okay, now that is lovely*

(*I meant the afghan, but you could also read it as referring to Mayhew's tweet) :D

Altair
.
.
Posts: 800
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 6:44 am

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

#1181

Post by Altair »

CommanderTuvok wrote:http://i.imgur.com/R58uc2Q.jpg

As we all know Rebecca is sooooo much of an arbitrator of werdz one can use, is she aware that S.E. SMITH at DISBALEDFEMENISTS.COM declares "moron" to be an ableist slur! http://disabledfeminists.com/2010/01/01 ... ile-moron/

http://i.imgur.com/rlR49bM.jpg

Rebecca Watson - CHECK YOUR PRIVILEGE!
Stupid is ableist too, according to http://broadenme.tumblr.com/post/642718 ... ed-ableist

Rebecca, Y U SO ABLEIST?

ConcentratedH2O, OM
.
.
Posts: 6555
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2012 8:51 pm

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

#1182

Post by ConcentratedH2O, OM »

There's a new cliche appearing in Meyers's safe space, "The Lounge". A commentor will declare that (s)he is going to "pouncehug" somebody.

As a fictitious example:
Carpetmuncher, Overlord of darkness and lesbotics says
*Pouncehugs Lithiumaddict, Harlot of elven madness and uberdyke queen of feminism*
Now, a "pouncehug" means to jump upon an unsuspecting person and hug them. How the fuck does this gang of freaks rationalize that this is okay, alongside their well known, and well laughed-at, hatred of unwanted physical contact? Perhaps we can expect to see pouncehugs incorporated into conference rules: "2) Please respect that we all have our own definitions of 'personal space', and that some people find intra-species contact to be a triggering event. Exception: pouncehugs, because LOL'.

Truly, a bunch of cunts they is.

Lsuoma
Fascist Tit
Posts: 11692
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 5:58 pm
Location: Punggye-ri

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

#1183

Post by Lsuoma »

Q: What do you call an Indian lesbian?
A: Minjeeta.

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

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

#1184

Post by welch »

another lurker wrote:
welch wrote:
another lurker wrote: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!

If someone can completely alter your mental and emotional state by the mere utterance of a word, they own you.

Maybe, and this is crazy, but maybe one should be more discriminating in who one gives such control to.
Well, I was being a tad hyperbolic with the FTB example. But the truth is, I really really wanted to give them the benefit of the doubt. They are 'smarter' and 'more learned' than me, after all. Right? So I stopped using 'bitch' and 'cunt' - mostly.

Most of all though, the BIGGEST effect it had on me was that I policed my behaviour on FTB forums and then said whatever the fuck else I wanted to elsewhere. Which just proves the point that if you are going to police language, you will not actually effect any *real* change - you will just force people to put on an insincere act to please you (which is a point that has been made here before, many times, alerady.)

The thing is, I have spent years talking like a sailor. And I was willing to listen to FTB, and give their ideas a chance. I wanted to learn from them, to re-examine all of my preconceived notions about feminism. They had a willing ally, and they tone-policed me outta there! So now I am here, re-examining everything all over again:P
Carlin had a great saying about this, the point of which people like PeeZus and the rest miss:

"There is nothing wrong with the word "nigger" in and of itself. It's the racist asshole using it you should worry about"

When the video of Watson's dick move against Stef McGraw came out, PeeZus literally said that Watson had been perfectly respectful because she had not used bad language, nor raised her voice, so there was no harm. (shit like that is why I think Louis is a fundamentally dishonest little fuckstick, with being the fastest sperm his only genuine achievement to date)

Let me show you a small bit of legalese:
Any male person who, in public or private, commits, or is a party to the commission of, or procures, or attempts to procure the commission by any male person of, any act of gross indecency with an other male person, shall be guilty of a misdemeanour, and being convicted thereof, shall be liable at the discretion of the Court to be imprisoned for any term not exceeding two years, with or without hard labour.
Very polite in tone, and language. That is the paragraph used to convict Alan Turing, forcing him to be chemically castrated, worsening his depression, and likely causing his suicide.

Yet, if we apply the standards PeeZus uses to defend Watson, because the language is neither profane, nor "yelling", it, and the people who wrote that law were harmless.

Another one:
Under suitable direction, the Jews should be brought to the East in the course of the Final Solution, for use as labour. In large labour gangs, with the sexes separated, the Jews capable of work will be transported to those areas and set to road-building, in the course of which, without doubt, a large part of them ("ein Großteil") will fall away through natural losses. The surviving remnant, surely those with the greatest powers of resistance, will be given special treatment, since, if freed, they would constitute the germinal cell for the re-creation of Jewry.
That's an excerpt from Reinhard Heydrich's speech at the Wannsee Conference in 1942. The holocaust started there, with those words. If there's a more obscene bit of writing, I'd be almost afraid to read it, yet, by the standards PeeZus used to defend Watson, it, and the people behind it were harmless.

That is the real danger of obsessing about words. They are so paranoid about "cunt" and "bitch" and all the rest that they are terribly opened to being manipulated by people who are really quite obscene, but use the proper language and bow at the right times.

Which is honestly more misogynistic, me calling watson a cunt for her dick move, or Laden trying to convince everyone that women, as a gender, are fundamentally helpless, and cannot, can. not. function without all teh menz protecting their poor helpless selves at all times? I said something rude about one person, Laden is not implying, he is directly saying that women are completely unable to fend for themselves unless men are there to protect and defend them.

HOW THE FUCK IS MY STATMENT MISOGYNISTIC AND HIS SOME FUCKING BASTION OF FEMINISM AND EMPOWERMENT? HOW THE FUCK DOES THAT WORK, BECAUSE I REALLY WANT SOMEONE TO EXPLAIN IT TO ME IN A WAY THAT ISN'T COMPLETE BULLSHIT.

Over and over, PeeZus, Laden, thimbledick and all the rest tell women "no, no, it's not your fault. You're not capable of handling this. You just stay there, and let us men handle the evil world, and well tell you when it's safe", and the worst part, the fucking really vile worst part about it is that Ophelia and Jen and Watson and all the rest line up to fucking thank them for being so fucking enlightened.

Yet, it's people like me, who have spent no small amount of time teaching women that they are *not* helpless, not emotionally, mentally, or physically, that they not only can handle the world, but they *should* handle the world as equals, that they don't need me or anyone else to defend them, because they are all competent fucking adults, able to defend themselves...we are the bad people.





because we said "cunt".







There are a lot of misogynists in the atheist/skeptic movement. The problem is, just like all the right-wingers who get busted sucking strange cock after railing against "teh gai", the true misogynists are the ones painting themselves as the white knights.

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

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

#1185

Post by Skep tickle »

CommanderTuvok wrote:http://i.imgur.com/R58uc2Q.jpg

As we all know Rebecca is sooooo much of an arbitrator of werdz one can use, is she aware that S.E. SMITH at DISBALEDFEMENISTS.COM declares "moron" to be an ableist slur! http://disabledfeminists.com/2010/01/01 ... ile-moron/

http://i.imgur.com/rlR49bM.jpg

Rebecca Watson - CHECK YOUR PRIVILEGE!
http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... heartsick/
Hahahahaha. Several other people follow cult-leader RW & call gingerbaker a moron, then cult-leader PZ follows suit (sorry if someone else already posted this, better twice than never hey):

http://i.imgur.com/HmNONe6.png

By comment #68 I don't see anyone reminding them that "moron" is an ableist word and shaming them for using it...will keep reading.

:popcorn:

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

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

#1186

Post by welch »

Guest wrote:Apparently not all threats are equal.



Surprise, surprise, no rebuke from Ophelia.
Well duh, of course it's okay if the threat is from the "proper" people.

Pitchguest
.
.
Posts: 4024
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 3:44 pm

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

#1187

Post by Pitchguest »

So I just looked over Rebecca's comments on PZ's blog from this:

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... heartsick/

Don't click it if you don't have AdBlock installed. I'll quote the relevant comments here anyway.

Rebecca starts out with this inane comment:
I guess if you’ve never been called a “feminazi” by Paula Kirby or had your inbox explode with rape threats thanks to Richard Dawkins, RDF wouldn’t look out of place on that list.
Which gives us the impression that Richard Dawkins himself is responsible for her inbox exploding (there's a joke in there somewhere) with rape threats. Which spurs this comment from gingerbaker, rightfully mocking the shit out it:
OMG – Richard Dawkins is responsible for the rape threats in your inbox?

This is how he responds to demands for a boycott of his books, speaking engagements, a call for the end of his career in atheism? What a self-righteous hypocritical nasty piece of work he is!
Cue the regular Pharyngula commenters piling on and assuming just how terrible this person must be and where their allegiances lie. ("Allegiances" here is used loosely - we are, after all, not a clique or a cult or a "team" [that one's for you, Louis])

They make unsavoury comment upon unsavoury comment, but don't take a single moment to examine the person's sentiment - which is sound. Dawkins should take the blame for the threats that end up in her inbox? I think the lady doth protest too much. Then again, the regular Pharyngula commenters have shown they're not much for reasonable discussion. But then again, that's the name of the game, isn't it, Louis? :dance:

Rebecca responds with this
#18: Apparently you’re too stupid to understand, so I’ll type slowly: his comments, which spurred the torrent of abuse I’ve received, came before I wrote a blog post on why I won’t be buying his books anymore. In fact, one could say that one was the cause of the other! If one weren’t a moron.
And this is where Watson makes a grave mistake. For years now, lobbyists have attempted to connect games, movies, and music to violence but in each and every attempt, they've failed to find a common denominator. That is because studies show that none of them are responsible. None of them are the "cause." Was Doom the cause for the Columbine massacre because the perpetrators liked playing Doom and said it would be like playing Doom? Was WoW the cause for the Utoya massacre because the perpetrator played it?

You can use all kinds of excuses, but in the end, the ones responsible are the perpetrators themselves.

I mean, it's ridiculous. They even tried to get Catcher in the Rye banned from the bookshelves after Lennon was shot, because the killer thought he was Holden Caulfield. Seriously. How many years had the Catcher in the Rye been available in the bookstores before Lennon was murdered? If it really were so dangerous, wouldn't it have caused a mass outbreak of murders similar to the ones of Lennon, or at least a plethora of murderers who said they were inspired by it?

However, even then -- even if such a scenario would occur -- it wouldn't support the assertion that the book was responsible, that the book was the cause, because in the end, who pulled the trigger? He did. (Or in my imaginary scenario, they did.) Which means he (or they) was (or were), ultimately, responsible. Anyway, I'm getting off track.

Watson is using a logical fallacy. There is no connection to the rape threats she's allegedly gotten and Dawkins. None. Nil. To even imply it is dishonest and the way it looks, she's once again using her status as a professional victim to rag on Dawkins and the RDF. Why? Presumably because she's bored. Presumably because the money is waning. Because because she thinks she can coax another response from Dawkins, soliciting another year and a half of talks at conferences about how oppressed she is, giggling while she does it, as usual; laughing all the way to the bank.

16bitheretic
.
.
Posts: 448
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2012 7:00 pm

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

#1188

Post by 16bitheretic »

Skep tickle wrote:[
Hahahahaha. Several other people follow cult-leader RW & call gingerbaker a moron, then cult-leader PZ follows suit
http://www.freeimagehosting.net/newuploads/i3r41.jpg

BannedAid
.
.
Posts: 81
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2013 9:03 pm

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

#1189

Post by BannedAid »

Steersman wrote:
...

And even if the topic had been so modified – “why isn’t the race split closer to 72-13?” – the appropriateness or accuracy of the hypothetical answer – “atheism, it’s more of a white thing” – would hinge on how much evidence there was for variations “substantially” different from that ratio. And, interestingly, the Pew Forum states that “fully eight-in-ten atheists and agnostics (82%) are white, 3% are black, 6% are Hispanic …” so that one might argue that the disparity between the actual and the expected isn’t as great as with gender: comparing “outlier” populations is likely to be more problematic because of extraneous variations.
Now that you mention it, I think if I heard "it's more of a white thing" in that context I'd assume he was insulting atheists, not black people. Like, "look at these atheists, what a bunch of uptight white guys."

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

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

#1190

Post by Mykeru »

Skep tickle wrote:[spoiler]
CommanderTuvok wrote:http://i.imgur.com/R58uc2Q.jpg

As we all know Rebecca is sooooo much of an arbitrator of werdz one can use, is she aware that S.E. SMITH at DISBALEDFEMENISTS.COM declares "moron" to be an ableist slur! http://disabledfeminists.com/2010/01/01 ... ile-moron/

http://i.imgur.com/rlR49bM.jpg

Rebecca Watson - CHECK YOUR PRIVILEGE!
http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... heartsick/
Hahahahaha. Several other people follow cult-leader RW & call gingerbaker a moron, then cult-leader PZ follows suit (sorry if someone else already posted this, better twice than never hey):[/spoiler]
http://i.imgur.com/HmNONe6.png

By comment #68 I don't see anyone reminding them that "moron" is an ableist word and shaming them for using it...will keep reading.

:popcorn:
In Peezus' defense, this situation is like black and gay people owning slurs. He can use the term "moron" by virtue of being one himself.

Perhaps even their king.

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

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

#1191

Post by welch »

Pitchguest wrote:Watson is using a logical fallacy. There is no connection to the rape threats she's allegedly gotten and Dawkins. None. Nil. To even imply it is dishonest and the way it looks, she's once again using her status as a professional victim to rag on Dawkins and the RDF. Why? Presumably because she's bored. Presumably because the money is waning. Because because she thinks she can coax another response from Dawkins, soliciting another year and a half of talks at conferences about how oppressed she is, giggling while she does it, as usual; laughing all the way to the bank.
you assume she might care the least for logic. This is yet another example of her New Media Douchebaggery. It's emotional manipulation backed by the confidence that no one on "her" side will actually examine her claims, because should they, she simply tags them as victim blamers/slut shamers/slymepitters/hyperskeptics, and they are wrong for any form of doubt of anything she says.

Fuck, PeeZus justified her Galileo mistake.

This is nothing more than twisting people up for hitcounts and speaker fees.

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

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

#1192

Post by Skep tickle »

From same comment thread at PZ's:
lanclotgobbo in #78 wrote:The day we start criticising Dawkins, or any other exemplar, is the day we must decide whether we support The Peoples’ Front of Judea or The Judean Peoples’ Front. Surely we ought to remember who our opponents really are (hint: they wear funny clothes, strange hats, and not only talk to their gods but claim to hear answers) rather than splitting hairs about doctrine. Too many useful movements have ended in such schisms: please, lets not have atheism be just one more in that sorry list.
You can imagine how well that went over.
erikthebassist in #104 wrote:I think I can win the JREF’s million dollar challenge. All I have to do is put a slymepitter on stage and get them talking about feminism. I should be able to accurately predict the drivel they will spew 99% of the time.

Really GingerBaker? Do you have to be so damned predictable? I mean, you attack Rebecca, then when she responds, your next comment is to PZ, about her, talking as if she’s not part of the thread.

Why does this happen every time? Women turn in to “invisible pixels” when a slymepitter is around. They will attack them, slur them, but they do everything they can to avoid talking directly to them.
Bolding by me. Laughing by me, too. I have no idea WTF erikthebassist means by this but he's talking out his ass. :lol:

16bitheretic
.
.
Posts: 448
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2012 7:00 pm

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

#1193

Post by 16bitheretic »

Reading backwards to catch up, LOL @ Orwellia Benson's hive worker ants threatening to kneecap people. Really, just LOL.

Tristan
.
.
Posts: 83
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 8:29 pm

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

#1194

Post by Tristan »

welch wrote:
another lurker wrote:
welch wrote:
another lurker wrote: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!

If someone can completely alter your mental and emotional state by the mere utterance of a word, they own you.

Maybe, and this is crazy, but maybe one should be more discriminating in who one gives such control to.
Well, I was being a tad hyperbolic with the FTB example. But the truth is, I really really wanted to give them the benefit of the doubt. They are 'smarter' and 'more learned' than me, after all. Right? So I stopped using 'bitch' and 'cunt' - mostly.

Most of all though, the BIGGEST effect it had on me was that I policed my behaviour on FTB forums and then said whatever the fuck else I wanted to elsewhere. Which just proves the point that if you are going to police language, you will not actually effect any *real* change - you will just force people to put on an insincere act to please you (which is a point that has been made here before, many times, alerady.)

The thing is, I have spent years talking like a sailor. And I was willing to listen to FTB, and give their ideas a chance. I wanted to learn from them, to re-examine all of my preconceived notions about feminism. They had a willing ally, and they tone-policed me outta there! So now I am here, re-examining everything all over again:P
Carlin had a great saying about this, the point of which people like PeeZus and the rest miss:

"There is nothing wrong with the word "nigger" in and of itself. It's the racist asshole using it you should worry about"

When the video of Watson's dick move against Stef McGraw came out, PeeZus literally said that Watson had been perfectly respectful because she had not used bad language, nor raised her voice, so there was no harm. (shit like that is why I think Louis is a fundamentally dishonest little fuckstick, with being the fastest sperm his only genuine achievement to date)

Let me show you a small bit of legalese:
Any male person who, in public or private, commits, or is a party to the commission of, or procures, or attempts to procure the commission by any male person of, any act of gross indecency with an other male person, shall be guilty of a misdemeanour, and being convicted thereof, shall be liable at the discretion of the Court to be imprisoned for any term not exceeding two years, with or without hard labour.
Very polite in tone, and language. That is the paragraph used to convict Alan Turing, forcing him to be chemically castrated, worsening his depression, and likely causing his suicide.

Yet, if we apply the standards PeeZus uses to defend Watson, because the language is neither profane, nor "yelling", it, and the people who wrote that law were harmless.

Another one:
Under suitable direction, the Jews should be brought to the East in the course of the Final Solution, for use as labour. In large labour gangs, with the sexes separated, the Jews capable of work will be transported to those areas and set to road-building, in the course of which, without doubt, a large part of them ("ein Großteil") will fall away through natural losses. The surviving remnant, surely those with the greatest powers of resistance, will be given special treatment, since, if freed, they would constitute the germinal cell for the re-creation of Jewry.
That's an excerpt from Reinhard Heydrich's speech at the Wannsee Conference in 1942. The holocaust started there, with those words. If there's a more obscene bit of writing, I'd be almost afraid to read it, yet, by the standards PeeZus used to defend Watson, it, and the people behind it were harmless.

That is the real danger of obsessing about words. They are so paranoid about "cunt" and "bitch" and all the rest that they are terribly opened to being manipulated by people who are really quite obscene, but use the proper language and bow at the right times.

Which is honestly more misogynistic, me calling watson a cunt for her dick move, or Laden trying to convince everyone that women, as a gender, are fundamentally helpless, and cannot, can. not. function without all teh menz protecting their poor helpless selves at all times? I said something rude about one person, Laden is not implying, he is directly saying that women are completely unable to fend for themselves unless men are there to protect and defend them.

HOW THE FUCK IS MY STATMENT MISOGYNISTIC AND HIS SOME FUCKING BASTION OF FEMINISM AND EMPOWERMENT? HOW THE FUCK DOES THAT WORK, BECAUSE I REALLY WANT SOMEONE TO EXPLAIN IT TO ME IN A WAY THAT ISN'T COMPLETE BULLSHIT.

Over and over, PeeZus, Laden, thimbledick and all the rest tell women "no, no, it's not your fault. You're not capable of handling this. You just stay there, and let us men handle the evil world, and well tell you when it's safe", and the worst part, the fucking really vile worst part about it is that Ophelia and Jen and Watson and all the rest line up to fucking thank them for being so fucking enlightened.

Yet, it's people like me, who have spent no small amount of time teaching women that they are *not* helpless, not emotionally, mentally, or physically, that they not only can handle the world, but they *should* handle the world as equals, that they don't need me or anyone else to defend them, because they are all competent fucking adults, able to defend themselves...we are the bad people.





because we said "cunt".







There are a lot of misogynists in the atheist/skeptic movement. The problem is, just like all the right-wingers who get busted sucking strange cock after railing against "teh gai", the true misogynists are the ones painting themselves as the white knights.
No, I'm not going to apologise for not using the spoiler tag in quoting you. That was too fucking magnificent to be hidden.

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

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

#1195

Post by welch »

Skep tickle wrote:From same comment thread at PZ's:
lanclotgobbo in #78 wrote:The day we start criticising Dawkins, or any other exemplar, is the day we must decide whether we support The Peoples’ Front of Judea or The Judean Peoples’ Front. Surely we ought to remember who our opponents really are (hint: they wear funny clothes, strange hats, and not only talk to their gods but claim to hear answers) rather than splitting hairs about doctrine. Too many useful movements have ended in such schisms: please, lets not have atheism be just one more in that sorry list.
You can imagine how well that went over.
erikthebassist in #104 wrote:I think I can win the JREF’s million dollar challenge. All I have to do is put a slymepitter on stage and get them talking about feminism. I should be able to accurately predict the drivel they will spew 99% of the time.

Really GingerBaker? Do you have to be so damned predictable? I mean, you attack Rebecca, then when she responds, your next comment is to PZ, about her, talking as if she’s not part of the thread.

Why does this happen every time? Women turn in to “invisible pixels” when a slymepitter is around. They will attack them, slur them, but they do everything they can to avoid talking directly to them.
Bolding by me. Laughing by me, too. I have no idea WTF erikthebassist means by this but he's talking out his ass. :lol:

Man. I guess when I was volunteering time with the roller derby team to help them clean their new sport floor on saturday, I sat there in the sun talking to...no one?

I seriously wonder if they even read what they write themselves.

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

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

#1196

Post by Skep tickle »

welch wrote:
Pitchguest wrote:Watson is using a logical fallacy. There is no connection to the rape threats she's allegedly gotten and Dawkins. None. Nil. To even imply it is dishonest and the way it looks, she's once again using her status as a professional victim to rag on Dawkins and the RDF. Why? Presumably because she's bored. Presumably because the money is waning. Because because she thinks she can coax another response from Dawkins, soliciting another year and a half of talks at conferences about how oppressed she is, giggling while she does it, as usual; laughing all the way to the bank.
you assume she might care the least for logic. This is yet another example of her New Media Douchebaggery. It's emotional manipulation backed by the confidence that no one on "her" side will actually examine her claims, because should they, she simply tags them as victim blamers/slut shamers/slymepitters/hyperskeptics, and they are wrong for any form of doubt of anything she says.

Fuck, PeeZus justified her Galileo mistake.

This is nothing more than twisting people up for hitcounts and speaker fees.
I'd think generating a disagreement between them would be better theatre for the paying audience than having PZ capitulate his position so readily.

(But then it's clear I wouldn't be good at putting NMD effectively into play.)

another lurker
.
.
Posts: 4740
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2012 6:39 pm

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

#1197

Post by another lurker »

welch wrote:[spoiler]
another lurker wrote:
welch wrote:
another lurker wrote: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!

If someone can completely alter your mental and emotional state by the mere utterance of a word, they own you.

Maybe, and this is crazy, but maybe one should be more discriminating in who one gives such control to.
Well, I was being a tad hyperbolic with the FTB example. But the truth is, I really really wanted to give them the benefit of the doubt. They are 'smarter' and 'more learned' than me, after all. Right? So I stopped using 'bitch' and 'cunt' - mostly.

Most of all though, the BIGGEST effect it had on me was that I policed my behaviour on FTB forums and then said whatever the fuck else I wanted to elsewhere. Which just proves the point that if you are going to police language, you will not actually effect any *real* change - you will just force people to put on an insincere act to please you (which is a point that has been made here before, many times, alerady.)

The thing is, I have spent years talking like a sailor. And I was willing to listen to FTB, and give their ideas a chance. I wanted to learn from them, to re-examine all of my preconceived notions about feminism. They had a willing ally, and they tone-policed me outta there! So now I am here, re-examining everything all over again:P
Carlin had a great saying about this, the point of which people like PeeZus and the rest miss:

"There is nothing wrong with the word "nigger" in and of itself. It's the racist asshole using it you should worry about"

When the video of Watson's dick move against Stef McGraw came out, PeeZus literally said that Watson had been perfectly respectful because she had not used bad language, nor raised her voice, so there was no harm. (shit like that is why I think Louis is a fundamentally dishonest little fuckstick, with being the fastest sperm his only genuine achievement to date)

Let me show you a small bit of legalese:
Any male person who, in public or private, commits, or is a party to the commission of, or procures, or attempts to procure the commission by any male person of, any act of gross indecency with an other male person, shall be guilty of a misdemeanour, and being convicted thereof, shall be liable at the discretion of the Court to be imprisoned for any term not exceeding two years, with or without hard labour.
Very polite in tone, and language. That is the paragraph used to convict Alan Turing, forcing him to be chemically castrated, worsening his depression, and likely causing his suicide.

Yet, if we apply the standards PeeZus uses to defend Watson, because the language is neither profane, nor "yelling", it, and the people who wrote that law were harmless.

Another one:
Under suitable direction, the Jews should be brought to the East in the course of the Final Solution, for use as labour. In large labour gangs, with the sexes separated, the Jews capable of work will be transported to those areas and set to road-building, in the course of which, without doubt, a large part of them ("ein Großteil") will fall away through natural losses. The surviving remnant, surely those with the greatest powers of resistance, will be given special treatment, since, if freed, they would constitute the germinal cell for the re-creation of Jewry.
That's an excerpt from Reinhard Heydrich's speech at the Wannsee Conference in 1942. The holocaust started there, with those words. If there's a more obscene bit of writing, I'd be almost afraid to read it, yet, by the standards PeeZus used to defend Watson, it, and the people behind it were harmless.

That is the real danger of obsessing about words. They are so paranoid about "cunt" and "bitch" and all the rest that they are terribly opened to being manipulated by people who are really quite obscene, but use the proper language and bow at the right times.

Which is honestly more misogynistic, me calling watson a cunt for her dick move, or Laden trying to convince everyone that women, as a gender, are fundamentally helpless, and cannot, can. not. function without all teh menz protecting their poor helpless selves at all times? I said something rude about one person, Laden is not implying, he is directly saying that women are completely unable to fend for themselves unless men are there to protect and defend them.

HOW THE FUCK IS MY STATMENT MISOGYNISTIC AND HIS SOME FUCKING BASTION OF FEMINISM AND EMPOWERMENT? HOW THE FUCK DOES THAT WORK, BECAUSE I REALLY WANT SOMEONE TO EXPLAIN IT TO ME IN A WAY THAT ISN'T COMPLETE BULLSHIT.

Over and over, PeeZus, Laden, thimbledick and all the rest tell women "no, no, it's not your fault. You're not capable of handling this. You just stay there, and let us men handle the evil world, and well tell you when it's safe", and the worst part, the fucking really vile worst part about it is that Ophelia and Jen and Watson and all the rest line up to fucking thank them for being so fucking enlightened.

Yet, it's people like me, who have spent no small amount of time teaching women that they are *not* helpless, not emotionally, mentally, or physically, that they not only can handle the world, but they *should* handle the world as equals, that they don't need me or anyone else to defend them, because they are all competent fucking adults, able to defend themselves...we are the bad people.[/spoiler]




because we said "cunt".







There are a lot of misogynists in the atheist/skeptic movement. The problem is, just like all the right-wingers who get busted sucking strange cock after railing against "teh gai", the true misogynists are the ones painting themselves as the white knights.

Spot on. I ran into a similar situation years ago when I was playing Everquest. I met this guy in game who was a total sociopath. I mean this quite literally. He had no regard for anyone but himself and everyone existed to please him. He would feel 'victimized' if fellow players did not hand everything over to him and obey his every word. Yet he abused everyone in his life pretty much non-stop. He stole his ex-wife's inheritance (he lied about it, said that SHE stole HIS money). He portrayed her as a slut and sent nudie pix of her to like, everyone he could. He diddled his 15 year old step daughter...

He abused the Everquest game servers so badly that when he was banned the GM's announced it server-wide. He has gone from game to game hacking and cheating and he sees this as a wonderful sign of what a badass he is. He has stolen thousands of dollars from people stupid enough to join his guilds. The list goes on and on...any woman that is stupid enough to send him nudie pics gets those pics shared with the entire internet, and he laughs about it.

When I finally ditched him b/c I was tired of all the abuse, he went around to all my friends and said that *I* was a psychopath who stole from him etc etc.

Anyways, to make a long story short, HE ADMONISHED ME B/C I HAD A POTTY MOUTH. Yep, I was the bad guy b/c I said fuck fuck fuck when I was irritated. However, purposely griefing, abusing and outright STEALING is ok, as long as you don't swear :P


P.S. This discussion reminds me of a quote by Bertrand Russell:
The consequence has been to make sexual morality even more difficult than it was made by St. Paul. Not only is sexual intercourse only legitimate within marriage, but even between husband and wife it becomes a sin unless it is hoped that it will lead to pregnancy. The desire for legitimate offspring is, in fact, according to the Catholic Church, the only motive which can justify sexual intercourse. But this motive always justifies it, no matter what cruelty may accompany it. If the wife hates sexual intercourse, if she is likely to die of another pregnancy, if the child is likely to be diseased or insane, if there is not enough money to prevent the utmost extreme of misery, that does not prevent the man from being justified in insisting on his conjugal rights, provided only that he hopes to beget a child. (M.M.p52/3)
http://www.reocities.com/Athens/Oracle/ ... _sex-m.htm

Sex for fun = a sin
Sex for procreation when that pregnancy will kill your wife = acceptable

Notung
.
.
Posts: 644
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 2:49 am

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

#1198

Post by Notung »

I know how much you lot like 'Freeze Peach', so here's the first part of my defence of 'freeze peach':

http://skepticink.com/notung/2013/01/22 ... m-part-12/

Sulaco
.
.
Posts: 158
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 1:54 am

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

#1199

Post by Sulaco »

Gumby wrote:Man, they can do nothing but bitch and moan about us lately. They're positively fucking obsessed with us. Josh has even taken to hysterically sobbing that we've "ruined the last two years". If we weren't scoring huge hits off them on a regular basis, they wouldn't even mention the Pit.

Party on, Slymepit!
[youtube]av8NTy5WkFc[/youtube]

BannedAid
.
.
Posts: 81
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2013 9:03 pm

Re: Slyme Pit Orgy, Sponsored by Vicky's Bewbs

#1200

Post by BannedAid »

PZ Myers wrote:But then…perspective. Step away from the smears and assaults and slime and look at the movement as a whole: look at the leading organizations of the godless. You know what you’ll see? None of them support these loons. They’re all progressive and committed to improving the diversity of the atheist community and broadening our engagement with the greater culture.

Really. Look at American Atheists, the American Humanist Association, the Center for Inquiry, Atheist Alliance International and Atheist Alliance America, the Secular Coalition, the Secular Student Alliance, and the Richard Dawkins Foundation. They are not supporting these petty, resentful snipers; they are working towards a future in which those goons are irrelevant.
Interesting that PZ stops short of saying any of those organizations support him. I wonder how many of those organizations would go on record as supporting, in the interest of "improving the diversity of the atheist community and broadening our engagement with the greater culture," some of PZ's favorite tactics:

-censoring/editing dissenting opinions
-encouraging pile-ons of personal attacks against newcomers
-dismissing non-scientific contributions to atheism
-responding to sincere apologies with "fuck 'em to the ground." (rape threat, btw, using his rules. presumably gelato guy didn't want to be fucked into the ground).
etc...

But, yeah, PZ, they're on your side. Your critics are all just going to shut up. Any day now.

Locked