Periodic Table of Swearing

[CommanderTuvok]

Another "Nazi" reference. I thought Baboons were totes againstz thatz.

John Morales Nazi.jpg

(9.49 KiB) Downloaded 350 times

[Za-zen]

I believe we have to protect babyspice amy from being offended, so being a positive action type of activist, i propose we pressure con organisers to not let Amy in, that way she can never ever be subjected by vicous t-shirt type assaults again. Con organisers really have ti take ownership of this and act in amy's best interests, or else they don't care, and by letting her in are proving they hate her.

[ccdimage]

I have some sympathy for the sentiments of Josh Slocum on Cara Santa Maria. I saw her a wee while back on TYT (it is a long video so I think it is better to watch it on youtube).
Her sing-song voice reminds me of girls we used to call dizzy. I am a superficial ass so when I hear voices like that I think giggly cloths horse air head. Then I heard her liberals are X conservatives are Y bullshit (KC Cole did a good job of calling that bullshit out in the video) and I thought yep we are done here. It was partly this video that made me think the TYT channel is not really worth watching.
TLDW:"So like liberals are like really great, and um um tehehe, um like conservatives, have like a different brain, and that is so totally real." Cara Santa Maria on tyt

[Dilurk]

Feminists launch expansionary power grabs in the Atheist and Gaming communities

...

I couldn't watch it after the first couple of minutes. It came across like a 911 truther.
There may be a few decent points there but I don't have the energy to sieve them out.

A 911 Truther? That's unfortunate, but I guess we'll agree to disagree. I quite enjoyed the video 8-).

I love the smell of tu quoque in the morning.

[Guest]

After the original movie has been posted here, and after watching the 2008 version, Die Welle is far superior in many ways, and shows even more consistently what is going on over at FTB (not all of them bloggers, mind you).

I agree. It's a great movie and shows much more clearly than the original TV movie, why people might get caught up in a totalitarian movement.
You can still find a subtitled version on Stagevu
In his famous speech about censorship Hitchens made the point that there is value in allowing dissenting voices to be heard even if they are completely in the wrong, for the simple reason that in so doing you give yourself the opportunity to think why they are wrong. It allows you to deduce your own argument from first principles rather than accepting an official correct line.

[Notung]

‘Atheism Plus’: I’m Sceptical

Please keep the comments nice. No 'Girlyban. Enjoy.', if you know what I mean.

[franc]

After the original movie has been posted here, and after watching the 2008 version, Die Welle is far superior in many ways, and shows even more consistently what is going on over at FTB (not all of them bloggers, mind you).

I agree. It's a great movie and shows much more clearly than the original TV movie, why people might get caught up in a totalitarian movement.[/i]line.

Far more interesting for understanding baboondynamics is this -

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0250258/

[Dick Strawkins]

I have some sympathy for the sentiments of Josh Slocum on Cara Santa Maria. I saw her a wee while back on TYT (it is a long video so I think it is better to watch it on youtube).
Her sing-song voice reminds me of girls we used to call dizzy. I am a superficial ass so when I hear voices like that I think giggly cloths horse air head. Then I heard her liberals are X conservatives are Y bullshit (KC Cole did a good job of calling that bullshit out in the video) and I thought yep we are done here. It was partly this video that made me think the TYT channel is not really worth watching.
TLDW:"So like liberals are like really great, and um um tehehe, um like conservatives, have like a different brain, and that is so totally real." Cara Santa Maria on tyt

As far as I can see Josh Slocum wasn't criticizing anything she said, just the 'feminine' way she presented herself.

[James Onen]

It is way too long and it is too hysterical. If you are going to do a video and know sceptics are going to watch it eventually at least get the details and facts right. Some examples. "Woman's name I don't remember" Don't telephone game what was said. Rebecca Watson did not claim she was nearly raped she said she was made to feel uncomfortable. I feel it is important that we not let others frame the points for us. It was never about the elevator incident per se it was about her claiming a position for all women and labelling anyone who disagreed with her a misogynist. I will not let the horde or MRAs frame this. He is also wrong about female gamers not contributing back by writing games Still there were some good points made in this too long of a mess video. How does that T shirt go exactly? "I'm not a skepchick I am a skeptic" something like that. I agree with his point that many seem to not be properly sceptical of claims about sexism.

I must disagree about it sounding hysterical. Throughout the video the commentator remains calm and measured - even admitting when he is speculating on some issues, or that it is conjecture. Personally, I thought he offered a useful perspective on several precedents that we've seen happening within the atheist community ever since Elevatorgate. He also touches on aspects of sexual dynamics within groups, which the likes of Typhonblue have elaborated upon (in videos that have been posted elsewhere in this thread). He talks about how this is happening in the online atheist, and also gaming, community. Many might be tempted to view the current tensions in the gender politics within atheist community in isolation - but its actually a part of something 'bigger'. 'Bigger' not in a conspiratorial sense, but 'bigger' simply in terms of what is to be generally expected within group dynamics once certain conditions have been met, and gender politics (driven by our natural instincts) runs its natural course.

The atheist and gaming communities are some of the areas where these tensions are currently running at fever pitch - but not only that, it is where there is formidable resistance by those who can actually see what is going on, see it for what it is, and are not going to take it lying down. Perhaps it is because the internet is where this turf war is going on that such resistance is viable, and also highly visible. The anonymity and pseudonymity the internet accords its inhabitants seems to reduce people's inhibitions and thus people tend to be more vocal about their views (especially when those views are not PC), which may be why the co-option into feminism isn't going as smoothly as it has in other spheres of discourse. The YouTuber who made this video seems to think its already a lost cause though; he seems to see the co-option as an inevitability. For now I'm reluctant to accept that view wholesale.

Meanwhile, I think you should be charitable about his views on the specifics of Elevatorgate. He wasn't trying to 'frame the points'. Remember, it was Watson and her defenders who turned the ordeal from a minor discomfort to a Schrodinger's Rapist scenario, and that's the narrative the FTB-Skepchick axis have been pushing for months. And he was just providing it as a backdrop for the larger point he wanted to make, so to me it doesn't matter that he described the ordeal in the same manner that it has been alleged by its promoters to have occurred. If he was trying to 'frame' anything at all, it is how that particular episode (Elevatorgate - regardless of whose narrative we're going by) fits into the bigger picture of how feminists are trying to co-opt the atheist community - something not too many of us here disagree with, as far as I'm aware.

[James Onen]

No james there cannot be disagreement on such basic issues. You're just posing questions aren't you?! The answers have already been decided, if you don't get that you don't belong in this movement, were going forward to a world where our leaders leap over LGBT rainbows on their unicorns, where our sisters dine on pink marshmallows in the meadows of the great mother, and amy doesn't have to cry anymore.

Waaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!! You're just attacking me because I'm an African!! Racist!!!

(Been saving the race card for a rainy day :lol: )

[AndrewV69]

Meanwhile, I think you should be charitable about his views on the specifics of Elevatorgate. He wasn't trying to 'frame the points'. Remember, it was Watson and her defenders who turned the ordeal from a minor discomfort to a Schrodinger's Rapist scenario

I was never entirely unsympathetic to the idea of the Schrodinger's Rapist bit, and I likened it to riding a bicycle and being awarded a "door prize", with the experience tending to leave you a bit wary of repeating the experience.

One night in Washing DC many years ago, I went into aggressive attack mode (like my mama bear incident) when surrounded by a group of young black men. I only stood down when I saw the hurt expression on a couple of their faces, and realized they just wanted to see what I was looking at.

(Sorry guys, a lot of the people who have enthusiastically tried to kill me in my past have been black).

So, I believe I can understand why some women would be wary of all men in general based on a previous experience.

However, I do take the point that this was fear mongering and there was a remarkable lack of balance. Here we go, take a look at this, it is and it is not a parody:

[youtube]QWN_cOWds5k[/youtube]

[BarnOwl]

‘Atheism Plus’: I’m Sceptical

Please keep the comments nice. No 'Girlyban. Enjoy.', if you know what I mean.

I can respond in more detail at your blog, Notung, and I'm in agreement with most of your points (at home on lunch break currently, prior to a long afternoon teaching in anatomy lab). For now I'll address your "Why not Social Justice+?" point briefly: the bottom line is that Jen et al. do not have a track record or name recognition in social justice organizations, that I'm aware of, and thus don't have even the level of influence and invitation that they do in the atheists/skeptics/freethought sphere.

Speaking from personal experience (so this will be US-biased), there are any number of social justice organizations in which one can participate at international, national, and local levels. Amnesty International has always been a big one for me (and one that carried over to my three years in the UK of course), Clear Water Action, Professional Association of Therapeutic Horsemanship, local environmental and disability rights/access advocates, child advocates/court-appointed volunteers, community gardens organizations, etc. just to name a few.

I don't doubt that Atheists+ will succeed in its own way ... I just don't think that social justice activism is genuinely their main focus. If it was, I think they'd have to accept the need to step off the collective podium for awhile, and acknowledge that expertise in really getting things done exists at a number of levels elsewhere. For example, instead of their frustration and finger-pointing over the failed Aan petition, they could have partnered with AI in the first place. AI has a track record of addressing human rights abuses in Indonesia.

OK that wasn't so brief. I gotta eat lunch now.

[AndrewV69]

About Cara Santa Maria and Josh.

Cara Santa Maria was displaying what some call IOIs (indicators of Interest). Just look at any of her other videos, similar mannerisms are there, but not at the same level of intensity.

Sorry guys, but she really was telling someone there that she wanted to fuck his/her brains out.

It is pretty clear to me that Josh picked up on that, and it was the display of a female in heat that really bothered him, and he was unable to properly articulate it, possibly because he was not consious about exactly what was disturbing him about it plus, for all I know a component could have been fustration about a sexual competition that he knows he can not win.


BTW, there is a segment of society that tends to speaks the way that Cara Santa Maria does, male and female, and vocal fry is part of that package of mannerisms.

http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2 ... speec.html

[Notung]

For now I'll address your "Why not Social Justice+?" point briefly: the bottom line is that Jen et al. do not have a track record or name recognition in social justice organizations, that I'm aware of, and thus don't have even the level of influence and invitation that they do in the atheists/skeptics/freethought sphere.

Yep, I think that answers it pretty well. In the blog post it's a rhetorical question, but I had a similar explanation in mind.

[Dilurk]

It is way too long and it is too hysterical. If you are going to do a video and know sceptics are going to watch it eventually at
least get the details and facts right. Some examples. "Woman's name I don't remember" Don't telephone game what was said. Rebecca Watson did not claim she was nearly raped she said she was made to feel uncomfortable. I feel it is important that we not let others frame the points for us. It was never about the elevator incident per se it was about her claiming a position for all women and labelling anyone who disagreed with her a misogynist. I will not let the horde or MRAs frame this. He is also wrong about female gamers not contributing back by writing games Still there were some good points made in this too long of a mess video. How does that T shirt go exactly? "I'm not a skepchick I am a skeptic" something like that. I agree with his point that many seem to not be properly sceptical of claims about sexism.

I must disagree about it sounding hysterical. Throughout the video the commentator remains calm and measured - even

[youtube]maLIXQLxvvA[/youtube]

Yes, very calm and measured. But still hysterical.

admitting when he is speculating on some issues, or that it is conjecture. Personally, I thought he offered a useful perspective

Then why did he not refer to the original video RW did? She mentioned the story in passing about some guy getting on the elevator with her. She never said this guy tried to rape her. Your commentator is not a sceptic.

on several precedents that we've seen happening within the atheist community ever since Elevatorgate. He also touches on aspects of sexual dynamics within groups, which the likes of Typhonblue have elaborated upon (in videos that have been posted elsewhere in this thread). He talks about how this is happening in the online atheist, and also gaming, community. Many might

That's fine but he could have said it without the cheesy "Reds under the bed" Octopus. He could have got the facts right. He could have summed it up in far fewer sentences.

be tempted to view the current tensions in the gender politics within atheist community in isolation - but its actually a part of something 'bigger'. 'Bigger' not in a conspiratorial sense, but 'bigger' simply in terms of what is to be generally expected within group dynamics once certain conditions have been met, and gender politics (driven by our natural instincts) runs its natural course.

The atheist and gaming communities are some of the areas where these tensions are currently running at fever pitch - but not only that, it is where there is formidable resistance by those who can actually see what is going on, see it for what it is, and

Where is your evidence for this? Is it anything like the evidence for the tensions of sexism given for it in the atheist community?

are not going to take it lying down. Perhaps it is because the internet is where this turf war is going on that such resistance is viable, and also highly visible. The anonymity and pseudonymity the internet accords its inhabitants seems to reduce people's
inhibitions and thus people tend to be more vocal about their views (especially when those views are not PC), which may be

Nothing wrong with that.

why the co-option into feminism isn't going as smoothly as it has in other spheres of discourse. The YouTuber who made this video seems to think its already a lost cause though; he seems to see the co-option as an inevitability. For now I'm reluctant to accept that view wholesale.

Certainly I have said it before and I will say it over and over again. Feminism has already been co-opted by many people to mean something other than just respecting each other as human beings. This is why some of us have given up and identify as humanists now. When you say feminism I have to ask which brand of feminism?. Recognizing that woman are human beings too is all I request. If you recognize that, then you too are a feminist.

Meanwhile, I think you should be charitable about his views on the specifics of Elevatorgate. He wasn't trying to 'frame the points'. Remember, it was Watson and her defenders who turned the ordeal from a minor discomfort to a Schrodinger's Rapist scenario, and that's the narrative the FTB-Skepchick axis have been pushing for months. And he was just providing it as a backdrop for the larger point he wanted to make, so to me it doesn't matter that he described the ordeal in the same manner that it has been alleged by its promoters to have occurred. If he was trying to 'frame' anything at all, it is how that particular episode (Elevatorgate - regardless of whose narrative we're going by) fits into the bigger picture of how feminists are trying to co-opt the atheist community - something not too many of us here disagree with, as far as I'm aware.

It was a propaganda piece. One propaganda piece framed by Watson and others is bad enough. I don't want to watch another propaganda piece. I want the facts.

[Dick Strawkins]

....
I don't doubt that Atheists+ will succeed in its own way ... I just don't think that social justice activism is genuinely their main focus. If it was, I think they'd have to accept the need to step off the collective podium for awhile, and acknowledge that expertise in really getting things done exists at a number of levels elsewhere. For example, instead of their frustration and finger-pointing over the failed Aan petition, they could have partnered with AI in the first place. AI has a track record of addressing human rights abuses in Indonesia.

OK that wasn't so brief. I gotta eat lunch now.

Is Jen McCreight targeting society in general or just the atheist community with her objectives?

Atheists plus we care about social justice,
Atheists plus we support women’s rights,
Atheists plus we protest racism,
Atheists plus we fight homophobia and transphobia,
Atheists plus we use critical thinking and skepticism.

I, and probably a lot of others who have been called 'misogynistic rape culture apologists', could easily sign up to everything on that list.
But I am not sufficiently compliant with their other requirements (agreement that FTB/Skepchicks are 100% correct and their opponents are 100% wrong) and so I would be one of the 'bad' people to be cast out.

So how do they extend it beyond their own corner of the atheist ecosystem?
Bringing in theistic feminists, LBGT activists and anti-racists and trying to get them to become atheists?
Good luck to her if she succeeds in that.
I can't see it any differently than a formalization of the current situation, where FTB/Skepchicks snipe away at supposed failings of the atheist community in the same way the Discovery Institute snipes at evolutionary science.

[Dilurk]

‘Atheism Plus’: I’m Sceptical

Please keep the comments nice. No 'Girlyban. Enjoy.', if you know what I mean.

Good post Notung. You nailed it I think.

[sacha]

And they are also derisive of those cool males who are breezily and easily comfortable with, nay: crave the company of these Amazons.

(Hullo, Sassscha!)

hello, gorgeous. *hair toss* *wink*

[sacha]

I have some sympathy for the sentiments of Josh Slocum on Cara Santa Maria. I saw her a wee while back on TYT (it is a long video so I think it is better to watch it on youtube).
Her sing-song voice reminds me of girls we used to call dizzy. I am a superficial ass so when I hear voices like that I think giggly cloths horse air head. Then I heard her liberals are X conservatives are Y bullshit (KC Cole did a good job of calling that bullshit out in the video) and I thought yep we are done here. It was partly this video that made me think the TYT channel is not really worth watching.
TLDW:"So like liberals are like really great, and um um tehehe, um like conservatives, have like a different brain, and that is so totally real." Cara Santa Maria on tyt

ugh, that voice inflection makes me want to punch something. Almost as bad as a woman with a toddler voice.

The rest of her seems quite nice. She's attractive and science educated. The feminine-flirty way she carries herself does not bother me at all, just that voice.

[astrokid.nj]

James, you really need to recognize that women are human beings too. If you do that, you are a feminist too. In the past, the humanity of women was not recognized. You remember all those pictures of how slaves..black slaves in recent memory and white slaves in the arab times in distant memory etc etc.. were physically tortured and killed. Yeah.. visualize that.
Otherwise you will anger our resident Toxic Granny.

[Tigzy]

I am curious to see how she will modify her appearance over time in order to blend in with her new hierarchy

She will probably do it via the craftily sneaky, and scientific, expedient of "aging".
Bansome approves of this sly technique by which to "fit in".
As does the amazing 39 yr old baby Scurvy Aimless.

Seriously?? Surly Amy is 39? Is there any evidence for that? Cos I'm having a lot of trouble believing that someone with the life experience of a 39 year old would bleat and cry so piteously at a t-shirt with some words on it she didn't like, and 'fake' surly-ramics(tm) jewellery.

[sacha]

I have some sympathy for the sentiments of Josh Slocum on Cara Santa Maria. I saw her a wee while back on TYT (it is a long video so I think it is better to watch it on youtube).
Her sing-song voice reminds me of girls we used to call dizzy. I am a superficial ass so when I hear voices like that I think giggly cloths horse air head. Then I heard her liberals are X conservatives are Y bullshit (KC Cole did a good job of calling that bullshit out in the video) and I thought yep we are done here. It was partly this video that made me think the TYT channel is not really worth watching.
TLDW:"So like liberals are like really great, and um um tehehe, um like conservatives, have like a different brain, and that is so totally real." Cara Santa Maria on tyt

ugh, that voice inflection makes me want to punch something. Almost as bad as a woman with a toddler voice.

The rest of her seems quite nice. She's attractive and science educated. The feminine-flirty way she carries herself does not bother me at all, just that voice.

I'm half asleep, I should watch more than 60 seconds to form the opinion of "The rest of her seems quite nice." I'll do that when I return in a few hours.

[Tigzy]

I noticed there was yet another dig at Michael Shermer from Spokesgay. Promoting the FfTB narrative that blacklisted Shermer is a sex-crazed, perverted, misogynist bully.

And yet, Queen Bee's rampaging at conferences never gets a mention.

Shermer's mooted ability with women is probably what promoted many no-doubt virginal pharyngulite males* to make a sin of his success and a virtue of their own wallfloweriness.

I'm reminded of that anquished quote from 'The 40 Year Old Virgin': "I love women! I respect women! I respect them so much I never go near them!"

*Though in the case of Joshgay, I'm guessing he's not getting as much guy action as he wants.

[JackRayner]

Great piece of misogyny in evidence on the Pharyngula comment section.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... n-atheism/

Josh Slocum, (Josh Official SpokesGay) decides to tell women how they can and cannot behave.

Why do I have the feeling that anyone here making the same kind of disparaging comments based on appearance would be held up as Exhibit A in the great misogyny trial.

http://imgur.com/UpcV7.jpg

Ho-Lee fuck! "'Feminine' is an artificial construct enforced by patriarchy."

Really? That's the type of feminist this person subscribes to? That's pretty scary, when feminist dogma trumps science in a supposed skeptic's mind. I guess all of the science showing the brain difference's between (cis, lol) males and (cis, lol) females is just more wimmin oppressing, normative propaganda! :|

[Dilurk]

James, you really need to recognize that women are human beings too. If you do that, you are a feminist too. In the past, the humanity of women was not recognized. You remember all those pictures of how slaves..black slaves in recent memory and white slaves in the arab times in distant memory etc etc.. were physically tortured and killed. Yeah.. visualize that.
Otherwise you will anger our resident Toxic Granny.

Careful! The artful counter attacker!

[cunt]

If, in 5 years time it exists as something other than a brief cringe as somebody finds a hideous pendant under the couch, i'd call that a success for A+.

The problem with marrying social justice and atheism is not in its marketing. Its that the atheism part has so little to say on the other issues. Here's how it can be useful:

1. Identifying who you're opponents are. - They're probably the religious right.
2. Whats the answer? Secularism for countries that don't have it, making sure secularism is enforced in the US.
3. How can you help the cause? Donate your time and money to the real existing ones that focus on that issue.

Well that took 2 minutes, I guess the rest of the day can be devoted to slapping each other on the back for being pure of spirit.

Assuming they're planning on holding meetings in the real world. If its internet only then they've just invented FTB again, very bad idea.

[AndrewV69]

Ho-Lee fuck! "'Feminine' is an artificial construct enforced by patriarchy."

Really? That's the type of feminist this person subscribes to? That's pretty scary, when feminist dogma trumps science in a supposed skeptic's mind. I guess all of the science showing the brain difference's between (cis, lol) males and (cis, lol) females is just more wimmin oppressing, normative propaganda! :|

Haha.

Patriarchy is the answer in that when you have a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

Spokegay "knows" he can not compete with a girly girl for a heterosexual guy for one thing. At the visceral, the reptile brain is rampart and sex is the answer no matter the question, even unasked.

Like I said earlier, I think Spokesgay was probably disturbed at seeing a female in heat, and had a problem articulating why he found it so disturbing. It was at such a fundemental level, he could not even hear what was being said.

[Tigzy]

I was just browsing through the Urban Dictionary and found some things that amused me.

social justice warrior

A pejorative term for an individual who repeatedly and vehemently engages in arguments on social justice on the Internet, often in a shallow or not well-thought-out way, for the purpose of raising their own personal reputation. A social justice warrior, or SJW, does not necessarily strongly believe all that they say, or even care about the groups they are fighting on behalf of. They typically repeat points from whoever is the most popular blogger or commenter of the moment, hoping that they will "get SJ points" and become popular in return. They are very sure to adopt stances that are "correct" in their social circle.

The SJW's favorite activity of all is to dogpile.... [..] They do not have relevant favorite real-world places, because SJWs are primarily civil rights activists only online.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.p ... %20warrior

Many amongst the baboon commentariat remind me Private Eye's Lefty lampoon, Dave Spart: http://www.broowaha.com/articles/11149/ ... rt-speaks-

The right wing press have utterly, totally and predictably unleashed a barrage of sickening hypocrisy and deliberate smears against the activities of a totally peaceful group of anarchists i.e. myself and my colleagues, who demonstrated in non-threatening balaclavas, due to the cold weather, and carried heavy walking sticks to negotiate the cobbled streets. Ahem, eh, we were merely asserting our rights to forcibly occupy the citadels of capitalism and oppression, such as the Ritz, Fortnum and Freemasons and Ann Summers, the unacceptable face of the sexual and industrial complex, who objectify women as mere sexual chattels and thereby make themselves a legitimate target for peaceful acts of, eh, rioting and arson. Small wonder the fascist police blatantly did nothing to obstruct us in the smashing up of the hated cash point machines of global capitalism and the spray painting of the Nazi lions in Trafalgar Square, and thereby deliberately making us look bad, which is not surprising, given that many of the so-called anarchists were probably undercover police officers…, such as Steve, who I've never liked and did not want to join our collective in the first place.

Not that you'd get your average Spartist baboon out into the fresh air to protest; much more important to continue your activism on, er, twitter.

[JAB]

I've been away a week, so I've had a lot of reading to do to catch up. Most of my responses to things have already been said, but here are a few more responses:

1. Someone thought spokesgay was insane... a personality disorder is not the same as insane.

2. Since I disagreed with PZ for using TF's real name, I'm going to disagree with Justin giving Amy's address. The same thing could have been accomplished by giving part of the address (say the street number without the street, and the last half of the zip), without attracting idiots who think it was doc dropping.

3. Did Jen actually say they were "winning"? I went and checked... yes, she does and she even bolded the text. I would have thought Charlie Sheen would have finished off the self declaration of "winning" last year.

[youtube]pipTwjwrQYQ[/youtube]

[James Onen]

James, you really need to recognize that women are human beings too. If you do that, you are a feminist too. In the past, the humanity of women was not recognized. You remember all those pictures of how slaves..black slaves in recent memory and white slaves in the arab times in distant memory etc etc.. were physically tortured and killed. Yeah.. visualize that.
Otherwise you will anger our resident Toxic Granny.

Noted ;)

[Dilurk]

Anti-feminism is the radical notion that women are adults ~ GirlWritesWhat

At least I'm an adult, pity you aren't an adult too.

[The Pelagic Argosy]

*Though in the case of Joshgay, I'm guessing he's not getting as much guy action as he wants.

I have to say, as a gay man, this was my immediate thought. I am making the assumption that the Josh The Gay Spoke is reasonably young, and if that is the case he should spend more time in gay bars and clubs and less time on the fucking internet. If you are young and gay the you should not spend any more time than is necessary to organize your next fuck (or to download some decent porn). If he is a sad old gay cunt who can no longer be arsed then he has no right being a "spokesgay".

[Darren]

I always thought that Slocum and Spokesgay were different people. They're both rude, gay and called Josh, but I think Slocum is slightly more civilised than Spokesgay.

I might be wrong. Hopefully they're the same person (fewer is better!)

Well there is at least one thread on butterflies and wheels where Josh Slocum says something along the lines of "as I said to X earlier in this thread" and the comment to X came from Josh SpokesGay (there was no other Josh Slocum comment earlier).

My Google-Fu is working today:

On this thread, comments #22 and #88:

Which is exhibit number 1,666,000,347 of the problem itself. Shit or get off the pot, Gamasutra. Hyper-skepticism and “tone” concerns for the lose.

Thank you, Ernest, for a full-throated throw-down.

1. As I said above, I very much appreciate Ernest’s no-bullshit direct challenge. Thank you.

[Notung]

re: Spokesgay. I'm convinced.

[Dilurk]

I've been away a week, so I've had a lot of reading to do to catch up. Most of my responses to things have already been said, but here are a few more responses:

1. Someone thought spokesgay was insane... a personality disorder is not the same as insane.

PZs favourite game is to call people he wants to shut down insane. Like Blu, franc, sascha.

"X is exhibiting clear indicators of suffering from Y"Edit
Another extremely common dismissal/denunciation rooted in FFTB amateur psychiatry. The implication is that the critic is mentally unstable and suffering from neurological disorder, because any sane person will always agree with established FFTB orthodoxy. Thumbnail diagnoses are routine. They are based on such concrete evidence as "X is probably schizophrenic" because someone once saw X smoking a cigarette. This variant of The Courtier's Reply is particularly useful for evasive tactics, because, apparently, FFTB have the entire DSM-IV manual at their disposal.

From http://phawrongula.wikia.com/wiki/The_C ... %27s_Reply

(Hey, thanks franc for the wiki)

2. Since I disagreed with PZ for using TF's real name, I'm going to disagree with Justin giving Amy's address. The same thing could have been accomplished by giving part of the address (say the street number without the street, and the last half of the zip), without attracting idiots who think it was doc dropping.

Hey! Stop with the dog piling!

3. Did Jen actually say they were "winning"? I went and checked... yes, she does and she even bolded the text. I would have thought Charlie Sheen would have finished off the self declaration of "winning" last year.

I thought it was a typo for 'whining' myself.

[Dilurk]

You heard it here first folks! http://richarddawkins.net/articles/6468 ... rd-dawkins

He's been interviewed on Playboy. Where is the fainting couch!

[The Pelagic Argosy]

Shit or get off the pot

Good point, Gay Spoke. How about you shit or get of the pot? Get your cock out for the lads.

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

Anti-feminism is the radical notion that women are adults ~ GirlWritesWhat

At least I'm an adult, pity you aren't an adult too.

Err... What now?

[DW Adams]

Great piece of misogyny in evidence on the Pharyngula comment section.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... n-atheism/

Josh Slocum, (Josh Official SpokesGay) decides to tell women how they can and cannot behave.

Why do I have the feeling that anyone here making the same kind of disparaging comments based on appearance would be held up as Exhibit A in the great misogyny trial.

http://imgur.com/UpcV7.jpg

This is what I was referring to back at http://www.slymepit.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... 7500#p8885

I just didn't have time for the screencaps.

He's damn sure not my spokesgay.

[Dilurk]

That isn't satire because it has nothing to do
with what I stand for. And the scatological part, where they had somebody
throwing shit, which stuck to my forehead that's not even funny.
I don't understand why they couldn't go straight to the atheists fighting
each other, which has a certain amount of truth in it. It reminded me of
the bit from Monty Python's Life of Brian with the Judean People's Front
and the People's Front of Judea.

Do you suppose is is obliquely referring to the fftb vs. everyone else?

It's a good article BTW.

[John Greg]

Dilurk at http://www.slymepit.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... 7700#p9091 , said:

PZs favourite game is to call people he wants to shut down insane. Like Blu, franc, sascha.

And me. PeeZus called me brain damaged, mentally deficient, in need of serious mental therapy, and more. For teh win!

[CommanderTuvok]

Do you suppose is is obliquely referring to the fftb vs. everyone else?

Yes, but I take away the impression that the schism is nothing that bothers him too much. He's above it all.

[Notung]

Do you suppose is is obliquely referring to the fftb vs. everyone else?

Yep, I can't think of anything else he could have meant. He probably had attacks on Paula Kirby and Sam Harris in mind, methinks!

[CommanderTuvok]

3. Did Jen actually say they were "winning"? I went and checked... yes, she does and she even bolded the text. I would have thought Charlie Sheen would have finished off the self declaration of "winning" last year.

"Winning" in the respect that the wider A/S movement made their feelings towards the Baboons felt at TAM2012. It was not particulary positive! Even after bullying and harassing people for the past 12 months, the voices opposing them are numerous and increasingly loud.

[Guest]

Richard Carrier, gargling the FTB Flavor-Aid, in The New Atheism +:

There is a new atheism brewing, and it’s the rift we need, to cut free the dead weight so we can kick the C.H.U.D.’s [i.e., "Cannibalistic Humanoid Underground Dwellers"] back into the sewers and finally disown them, once and for all. I was already mulling a way to do this back in June when discussion in the comments on my post On Sexual Harassment generated an idea to start a blog series building a system of shared values that separates the light side of the force from the dark side within the atheism movement, so we could start marginalizing the evil in our midst, and grooming the next generation more consistently and clearly into a system of more enlightened humanist values....

Then I read Lousy Canuck’s account of the whole abuse of Surly Amy at TAM and elsewhere, which enraged me (I had previously only known parts of that story). It shows the dregs will now publicly mock humanist values, and abusively disregard the happiness of their own people. Well, that starts drawing the battle lines pretty clearly then....

Then Jen McCreight said it for me, more eloquently and clearly than I could have.... I am fully on board. I will provide any intellectual artillery they need to expand this cause and make it successful....

We believe in being reasonable. This means, first, that we believe in being logical and rational in forming beliefs and opinions. Which means anyone who makes a fallacious argument and, when shown that they have, does not admit it, is not one of us, and is to be marginalized and kicked out, as not part of our movement, and not anyone we any longer wish to deal with....

Indeed, as the Surly Amy story shows, there are clearly many of us who disregard the happiness of others just to hurt them, mocking or insulting (or even threatening) them merely to please one’s own vanity or self-righteousness, in complete disregard of the pointless misery it causes another human being. That is fucking evil. And if you are complicit in that, or don’t even see what’s wrong with it, or worse, plan to engage in Christian-style apologetics for it, defending it with the same bullshit fallacies and tactics the Christians use to defend their own immorality or that of their fictional god, then I don’t want anything to do with you. You are despicable. You are an awful person. You disgust me. You are not my people.

Even the most rudimentary application of The Golden Rule would have caused any of the people who treated Amy as they did, or Rebecca Watson, or any of the many women and men who have been targeted by this shit, to stop themselves well beforehand. “Wait. Would I want people to treat me this way?” No, you fucking wouldn’t. So alas, you are a hypocrite....

And so I am declaring here and now, that anyone who acts like this, is not one of us, and is to be marginalized and kicked out, as not part of our movement, and not anyone we any longer wish to deal with. In fact it is especially important on this point that we prove that these vile pissants are a minority in our movement, by making sure our condemnation of them is vocalized and our numbers seen. We must downvote their bullshit, call it out in comments, blog our outrage....

I call everyone now to pick sides (not in comments here, but publicly, via Facebook or other social media): are you with us, or with them; are you now a part of the Atheism+ movement, or are you going to stick with Atheism Less?

Then at least we’ll know who to work with. And who to avoid.

Wow.

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

3. Did Jen actually say they were "winning"? I went and checked... yes, she does and she even bolded the text. I would have thought Charlie Sheen would have finished off the self declaration of "winning" last year.

"Winning" in the respect that the wider A/S movement made their feelings towards the Baboons felt at TAM2012. It was not particulary positive! Even after bullying and harassing people for the past 12 months, the voices opposing them are numerous and increasingly loud.

US centric again. No TAM planned around my parts. They really should have noticed they are alienating a large part of the "community" with their shennanigans. But hey, instant revenue is better than long time planning, right?

[DW Adams]

Wowbagger is a special kinda special

http://atheiststoday.com/images/wowbagger_twit.jpg

[Za-zen]

Atheism+ is a joke. Look the atheist movement has to be about convincing people there chosen deity doesn't exist, it really is that simple. Put anything else on top and you're exluding potential people from the group. How the fuck is that atheism?! It isn't, yes it really is that simple.

Picture this, newly deconverted atheist finds atheism+ where he is told that atheism isn't just rejection of gods, it is in fact about removing patriachy from society. Newly realised atheist suffers a head fuck and wombles back to church, maybe remaining an atheist, but deciding to keep his mouth shut.

Josh is the picture boy for atheism+, where in fact his atheism is irrelevant, he's a socio politico peon who has studied hard all the terminology required and can reguritate it at will. Programable idiot. That's what atheism+ is. Josh. How fucking nuts is that. It's a comedy.

[cunt]

When they say "neurotypical". That means people without diagnosable mental disorders, right.

[SteveW68]

Do you suppose is is obliquely referring to the fftb vs. everyone else?

Yep, I can't think of anything else he could have meant. He probably had attacks on Paula Kirby and Sam Harris in mind, methinks!

Most definitely given that Paula is quite a senior staff member of RDFRS.

[Gumby]

Richard Carrier, gargling the FTB Flavor-Aid, in The New Atheism +:

There is a new atheism brewing, and it’s the rift we need, to cut free the dead weight so we can kick the C.H.U.D.’s [i.e., "Cannibalistic Humanoid Underground Dwellers"] back into the sewers and finally disown them, once and for all. I was already mulling a way to do this back in June when discussion in the comments on my post On Sexual Harassment generated an idea to start a blog series building a system of shared values that separates the light side of the force from the dark side within the atheism movement, so we could start marginalizing the evil in our midst, and grooming the next generation more consistently and clearly into a system of more enlightened humanist values....

Then I read Lousy Canuck’s account of the whole abuse of Surly Amy at TAM and elsewhere, which enraged me (I had previously only known parts of that story). It shows the dregs will now publicly mock humanist values, and abusively disregard the happiness of their own people. Well, that starts drawing the battle lines pretty clearly then....

Then Jen McCreight said it for me, more eloquently and clearly than I could have.... I am fully on board. I will provide any intellectual artillery they need to expand this cause and make it successful....

We believe in being reasonable. This means, first, that we believe in being logical and rational in forming beliefs and opinions. Which means anyone who makes a fallacious argument and, when shown that they have, does not admit it, is not one of us, and is to be marginalized and kicked out, as not part of our movement, and not anyone we any longer wish to deal with....

Indeed, as the Surly Amy story shows, there are clearly many of us who disregard the happiness of others just to hurt them, mocking or insulting (or even threatening) them merely to please one’s own vanity or self-righteousness, in complete disregard of the pointless misery it causes another human being. That is fucking evil. And if you are complicit in that, or don’t even see what’s wrong with it, or worse, plan to engage in Christian-style apologetics for it, defending it with the same bullshit fallacies and tactics the Christians use to defend their own immorality or that of their fictional god, then I don’t want anything to do with you. You are despicable. You are an awful person. You disgust me. You are not my people.

Even the most rudimentary application of The Golden Rule would have caused any of the people who treated Amy as they did, or Rebecca Watson, or any of the many women and men who have been targeted by this shit, to stop themselves well beforehand. “Wait. Would I want people to treat me this way?” No, you fucking wouldn’t. So alas, you are a hypocrite....

And so I am declaring here and now, that anyone who acts like this, is not one of us, and is to be marginalized and kicked out, as not part of our movement, and not anyone we any longer wish to deal with. In fact it is especially important on this point that we prove that these vile pissants are a minority in our movement, by making sure our condemnation of them is vocalized and our numbers seen. We must downvote their bullshit, call it out in comments, blog our outrage....

I call everyone now to pick sides (not in comments here, but publicly, via Facebook or other social media): are you with us, or with them; are you now a part of the Atheism+ movement, or are you going to stick with Atheism Less?

Then at least we’ll know who to work with. And who to avoid.

Wow.

Wow indeed. This gets more and more over-the-top by the day.

This part stuck out for me:

Which means anyone who makes a fallacious argument and, when shown that they have, does not admit it, is not one of us, and is to be marginalized and kicked out, as not part of our movement, and not anyone we any longer wish to deal with....

And of course, the high priests and priestesses of the Church of Atheism+ get to arbitrarily decide what is "fallacious" and what isn't.

It amazes me how these people don't see what they're creating here. Ours is the one True Truth, and anyone who doesn't see everything our way will be excommunicated and shunned.

These morons are giving complete validation to every dimwitted theist who smugly said that atheism is a religion.

[Notung]

Lost a lot of respect for Carrier. Not because he disagrees, but ... did you READ that?! His anti-harassment policy post was A LOT better. Oh dear.

By the way, thanks for the comment on my blog Abbie!

[Tigzy]

Probably a little too large to be posted here, so I put it on the Baboonaplaza: Jason Thimbledoo and the Menkh Sandwich Affair!

[lonesagi]

I really have to wonder if any of the A+ crowd know what a Venn diagram is.

[SteveW68]

"I can't be the only feminist atheist who thinks that branding different types of atheism according to how feminist they are is fucked up?"

[Za-zen]

Wow gumby, carriers post is, well, wow. Is this new rule, decided by a self appointed rule maker, because he's the intellectual arty of atheifemism (anyone get a chuckle at the smug pratt from that?) retroactive, because if it is, well they will have a membership of 0.

[Notung]

Which means anyone who makes a fallacious argument and, when shown that they have, does not admit it, is not one of us, and is to be marginalized and kicked out, as not part of our movement, and not anyone we any longer wish to deal with....

Of course, his argument that you have to either join Atheism+ or be avoided is fallacious. There's a spectrum of views, and different reasons for not joining. Does he really want to shun Natalie Reed, Hayley Stevens and Libby Anne? They've all disagreed with A+. I doubt it.

So, by his own rules, the fact that he made a fallacious argument means that he should be 'marginalised and kicked out'. Nice knowing you, Richard.

[Tigzy]

Richard Carrier, gargling the FTB Flavor-Aid, in The New Atheism +:

There is a new atheism brewing, and it’s the rift we need, to cut free the dead weight so we can kick the C.H.U.D.’s [i.e., "Cannibalistic Humanoid Underground Dwellers"] back into the sewers and finally disown them, once and for all. I was already mulling a way to do this back in June when discussion in the comments on my post On Sexual Harassment generated an idea to start a blog series building a system of shared values that separates the light side of the force from the dark side within the atheism movement...

http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/ ... 243878.jpg

[KarlVonMox]

Richard Carrier, gargling the FTB Flavor-Aid, in The New Atheism +:

There is a new atheism brewing, and it’s the rift we need, to cut free the dead weight so we can kick the C.H.U.D.’s [i.e., "Cannibalistic Humanoid Underground Dwellers"] back into the sewers and finally disown them, once and for all. I was already mulling a way to do this back in June when discussion in the comments on my post On Sexual Harassment generated an idea to start a blog series building a system of shared values that separates the light side of the force from the dark side within the atheism movement, so we could start marginalizing the evil in our midst, and grooming the next generation more consistently and clearly into a system of more enlightened humanist values....

Then I read Lousy Canuck’s account of the whole abuse of Surly Amy at TAM and elsewhere, which enraged me (I had previously only known parts of that story). It shows the dregs will now publicly mock humanist values, and abusively disregard the happiness of their own people. Well, that starts drawing the battle lines pretty clearly then....

Then Jen McCreight said it for me, more eloquently and clearly than I could have.... I am fully on board. I will provide any intellectual artillery they need to expand this cause and make it successful....

We believe in being reasonable. This means, first, that we believe in being logical and rational in forming beliefs and opinions. Which means anyone who makes a fallacious argument and, when shown that they have, does not admit it, is not one of us, and is to be marginalized and kicked out, as not part of our movement, and not anyone we any longer wish to deal with....

Indeed, as the Surly Amy story shows, there are clearly many of us who disregard the happiness of others just to hurt them, mocking or insulting (or even threatening) them merely to please one’s own vanity or self-righteousness, in complete disregard of the pointless misery it causes another human being. That is fucking evil. And if you are complicit in that, or don’t even see what’s wrong with it, or worse, plan to engage in Christian-style apologetics for it, defending it with the same bullshit fallacies and tactics the Christians use to defend their own immorality or that of their fictional god, then I don’t want anything to do with you. You are despicable. You are an awful person. You disgust me. You are not my people.

Even the most rudimentary application of The Golden Rule would have caused any of the people who treated Amy as they did, or Rebecca Watson, or any of the many women and men who have been targeted by this shit, to stop themselves well beforehand. “Wait. Would I want people to treat me this way?” No, you fucking wouldn’t. So alas, you are a hypocrite....

And so I am declaring here and now, that anyone who acts like this, is not one of us, and is to be marginalized and kicked out, as not part of our movement, and not anyone we any longer wish to deal with. In fact it is especially important on this point that we prove that these vile pissants are a minority in our movement, by making sure our condemnation of them is vocalized and our numbers seen. We must downvote their bullshit, call it out in comments, blog our outrage....

I call everyone now to pick sides (not in comments here, but publicly, via Facebook or other social media): are you with us, or with them; are you now a part of the Atheism+ movement, or are you going to stick with Atheism Less?

Then at least we’ll know who to work with. And who to avoid.

Wow.

Wow indeed. Yet more repetition of the Big Lie, as CommanderTuvok has put it - that anyone that thinks Rebecca Watson or Surly Amy are being oversensitive attention seekers, or criticizes their conduct in any way MUST be one who "publicly mocks humanist values" and "disregards the happiness of their own people", woman haters, anti-LGBT rights, etc. There was a post on Bad Astronomy today by Phil Plait in the same vain. Simply an excuse to paint any dissenters who don't buy into even a small part of their narrative with a broad brush and promptly toss them aside.

I cant help but laugh at the colossal hypocrisy that keeps coming up, because when Carrier says that there are those "disregarding the happiness of their own people" its a claim that can be made against anyone who has been publicly mocked, insulted, and demonized by the FTBloggers when showing respectful disagreeing on issues, even those that don't have to do with their bizzare feminism, such as what happened with "dictionary atheism". Really, their concern for the happiness of others only extends to those with huge egos who whine loud enough and they happen to like.

Its purely a shallow mechanism to enforce their own collective way of thinking. And you know what? Its effective. Those outsiders who dont know the lousy track record of these FfTBloggers will happily swallow this, simply because it sounds good. Its much better to argue with them when specific incidents happen, such as the t-shirt incident, when its harder for them to use it as a defense.

[CommanderTuvok]

I can't wait to see the Atheism+ idea fall arse over tits.

Pretentious wankstains.