Now sponsored by [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]

Continuation of the post at Abbie Smith's ERV blog (http://scienceblogs.com/erv/)

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]

Postby Michael K Gray » Sun Feb 03, 2013 12:32 am  •  [Post 3641]

somedumbguy wrote:I'd close them up in an iron maiden for a few weeks.

Oh oh.
Perhaps this discussion should be diverted to the music thread before it gets too ugly.

Testing, testing, one two. One two.
Hey! Anyone here from Ulon Baton? Woo!!
User avatar
Michael K Gray
.
.
 
Posts: 2480
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 4:04 am
Location: Adelaide, South Australia

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]

Postby somedumbguy » Sun Feb 03, 2013 12:33 am  •  [Post 3642]

Well I am sure no one wants to see decius go, he is a constant font of insight. and I don't want to put Lsuoma in that spot, and I certainly don't want the pit to be seen as a hate sight, so bye all.
User avatar
somedumbguy
.
.
 
Posts: 379
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2012 2:53 am

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]

Postby jimthepleb » Sun Feb 03, 2013 12:34 am  •  [Post 3643]

nippletwister wrote:
jimthepleb wrote:
somedumbguy wrote:
The truth is that in my several months here, I've never seen one comment from anyone encouraging rape, torture, or death. And the equal truth is that all I've heard about from Atheism+ and Feminism is the reverse: restrictions on speech and behavior and the condoning and encouraging of making society manifestly unfair to many people based on the color of their skin or the speech they make.

You were right.
Until today.
Whilst what you said above was not incitement nor a threat, it most certainly was a general societal suggestion that encouraged rape as a form of punishment.
Way to go dickhead.
I was actually beginning to warm to many of the MRA's here. Andrew is often perceptive and a font of data and others, including you, have impressed me with NOT being the revolting misogynist arseholes others would lead one to believe.
Then you come out with this utter bollocks.
Fuck off and sober up you cunt.


For what it's worth, though I don't identify as such, I've read a good bit of MRA stuff and that kind of shit is very rare, even in the comments. The few who go there get banned on AVFM for that kind of shit.

"We all have bloody thoughts"

I heard that on Deadwood.

Oh christ I agree. Whilst there are some disturbing outliers, as in any nascent movement, within the MRM, on the whole I have been won over by the considered and rational way they deal with the viciousness of the feminists. Which is why it is so disappointing to see someone who usually articulates these ideas so well, screwing himself with two or three poorly written polemics i suspect he will regret in the morning.
...and more personally the wanker just made me feel i need to moralfag for arseholes like Marcotte and Watson. :evil:
Anyway I'm going to follow Andrew's advice and step away from the keyboard for tonight. I have other crap going on that may be causing me to behave intemperately. SDG might I gently suggest you do the same?
"Indolent hand wringers" Richard Dworkins describing the baboons. http://support.operationsmile.org/goto/reneehendricks
User avatar
jimthepleb
.
.
 
Posts: 706
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2012 1:54 pm
Location: you kay?

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]

Postby decius » Sun Feb 03, 2013 12:36 am  •  [Post 3644]

Somedumbguy, what about we all agree to remove those posts and you refrain from posting in anger in the future?
User avatar
decius
.
.
 
Posts: 1265
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 2:08 am

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]

Postby Michael K Gray » Sun Feb 03, 2013 12:37 am  •  [Post 3645]

somedumbguy wrote:Taslima is a doctor who in 2013 spouts off that men can't be raped.

She has somehow reached her current age without the realisation that there exist these "penal" institutions that we call "gaols", "prisons", or even "jails", where males being raped is at least an hourly occurrence.
Precious flower. It must be all butterflies, flowers, perfume & candy to be that naïve!
User avatar
Michael K Gray
.
.
 
Posts: 2480
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 4:04 am
Location: Adelaide, South Australia

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]

Postby somedumbguy » Sun Feb 03, 2013 12:38 am  •  [Post 3646]

Steersman wrote: (elided inner quotes to satisfy some piece of software)
That some people might well deserve to die, I can see some justification for. After all, Western society seems to have at least largely condoned that sentence, with more than a little justification, on Bin Laden and various Islamists. And maybe from some perspectives there might well be some who deserve to be raped – Catholic priest pedophiles, or most pedophiles, for examples – or to be tortured.

However to even suggest that that might apply in any particular case, particularly the latter two – you ok with that comment suggesting that Watson should be so targetted? – seems a rather slippery slope, that things can very quickly get out of hand when one lays about with gay abandon that two-edged sword.

Which, I think, relates to the general question of the harassment that Watson and company have been subjected to and which I referred to in an earlier comment. Seems to me that there is the rather problematic phenomenon whereby the epithets are chasing themselves in some cycle of escalation in which those voicing them try to outdo previous ones in terms of nastiness and venom. All good fun – until someone loses an eye.

Reminds me of having seen a documentary on the Green River Killer, in which the killer, Gary Ridgway, said something to the effect that he thought that he was doing society a favour by killing the prostitutes who were his primary targets. In which case one might reasonably question whether he was entirely culpable for those crimes, or whether some part of the blame might not be laid at the feet of society in general.


All I will say since I am leaving, but found this post, is that as the Deadwood quote goes, "We all have bloody thoughts". I think the mistake is to demand people suppress all acknowledgement of that or demand instabans, permabans, talibans for expressing out of frustration those bloody thoughts.

Huge difference between thinking hell, I would gladly torture that SOB that did X, versus voting time and again, against the death penalty and for strong rape laws.

HTH
User avatar
somedumbguy
.
.
 
Posts: 379
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2012 2:53 am

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]

Postby surreptitious57 » Sun Feb 03, 2013 12:42 am  •  [Post 3647]

Lsuoma wrote:
The Slyme Pit : where everyone gets the ban hammer

They should be optional as I do like them so why not have them as a smiley instead
That way they will not be messing up my nice clean posts man : I am serious now
Too much clutter and one can get distracted from what someone has to actually say
A MIND IS LIKE A PARACHUTE : IT DOES NOT WORK UNLESS IT IS OPEN
surreptitious57
.
.
 
Posts: 122
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2012 11:07 pm

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]my liver[/spoiler]

Postby Michael K Gray » Sun Feb 03, 2013 12:46 am  •  [Post 3648]

masakari2012 wrote:I read through that JREF forum every couple of weeks to see what's going on. They had a few good points, which I took away from there. But the Pit is far superior.

Quite.
One gets the feeling that they are continually applying the brakes on what they really want to say, in order to appear to be "true" skeptics to lurkers.
It is as much a form of self-censorship as the A-pussers exercise.
It is "skeptically correct" language, applied to a tedious extent.

I find that there is only so much of JREF sooper-careful oh-so-skeptical language that I can stomach at one sitting.
Whilst I find it marginally more digestible than the A✞ ipecac, it is not by very much.

This place seems to be the only place on the interwebs where one can cogently state one's mind, and expect to be rationally understood.
User avatar
Michael K Gray
.
.
 
Posts: 2480
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 4:04 am
Location: Adelaide, South Australia

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]

Postby jimthepleb » Sun Feb 03, 2013 12:47 am  •  [Post 3649]

somedumbguy wrote:
nippletwister wrote:
jimthepleb wrote:
somedumbguy wrote:
The truth is that in my several months here, I've never seen one comment from anyone encouraging rape, torture, or death. And the equal truth is that all I've heard about from Atheism+ and Feminism is the reverse: restrictions on speech and behavior and the condoning and encouraging of making society manifestly unfair to many people based on the color of their skin or the speech they make.

You were right.
Until today.
Whilst what you said above was not incitement nor a threat, it most certainly was a general societal suggestion that encouraged rape as a form of punishment.
Way to go dickhead.
I was actually beginning to warm to many of the MRA's here. Andrew is often perceptive and a font of data and others, including you, have impressed me with NOT being the revolting misogynist arseholes others would lead one to believe.
Then you come out with this utter bollocks.
Fuck off and sober up you cunt.


For what it's worth, though I don't identify as such, I've read a good bit of MRA stuff and that kind of shit is very rare, even in the comments. The few who go there get banned on AVFM for that kind of shit.

"We all have bloody thoughts"

I heard that on Deadwood.


I like that Deadwood quote.

Re: jimthepleb, it's like most stuff. Since I am not Paul Elam, and I am not Dean Esmay and I am not Warren Farrell, and I am not Glenn Sacks, then poor old jim the pleb's problem whereby up until tonight he was almost leaning towards MRAs but now after he perceives a stupid statement he thinks I made well it discredits all of them including Andrew --

Well come on, that says more about jimthepleb than it does about Mens Rights.

I still think of myself as a feminist regardless of all the shit that Marcotte and so many other feminists spew. Their stupid idiocy says nothing about whether women and men should be treated equally.

So poor jim the pleb.


Ah fuck you, you self-righteous prig. You have merely chilled my continuing exploration of a subject that is new to me. I did not dismiss anyone, even you, for your idiotic, semi-literate ramblings. You're too pissed to read with any comprehension or write with any coherence.
'Poor jimthepleb' ...pity from a condescending twat like you is worthless.

What i actually said was: 'Fuck off and sober up.'
"Indolent hand wringers" Richard Dworkins describing the baboons. http://support.operationsmile.org/goto/reneehendricks
User avatar
jimthepleb
.
.
 
Posts: 706
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2012 1:54 pm
Location: you kay?

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]

Postby John Greg » Sun Feb 03, 2013 12:52 am  •  [Post 3650]

somedumbguy said (viewtopic.php?p=59276#p59276):

You're right Lsuoma, that statement should be condemned and you are right to do so.


Hey, somedumbguy, thanks for that. You were making me nervous. My faith is, tentatively, restored.

decius said (viewtopic.php?p=59285#p59285):

So, until this is resolved in some way, I will have to abstain from further posting.


Fuckin hell, another Aunt Liz! Did you miss the retraction? Or have you no empathy, understanding, or awareness that we are all fallible; we all make mistakes; we all say things we do not truly intend and wish we had never said?

decius, if, as it seems, you have helped to drive someone from this forum simply because of your fucking prudish holier-than-thou self-assumed inerrantcy, just fuck off; dry up.
Skepticism is empathy, atheism is social justice, and Thunderdome is unmoderated. Ya gotta problem with that? --- Gumby
John Greg
.
.
 
Posts: 1581
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 10:05 pm
Location: New Westminster, BC, Canada

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]

Postby Lsuoma » Sun Feb 03, 2013 12:54 am  •  [Post 3651]

Michael K Gray wrote:
somedumbguy wrote:I'd close them up in an iron maiden for a few weeks.

Oh oh.
Perhaps this discussion should be diverted to the music thread before it gets too ugly.

Testing, testing, one two. One two.
Hey! Anyone here from Ulon Baton? Woo!!

Oh, FFS, no Eddie, PLEASE!!!
Call me old-fashioned, but I like a dump to be as memorable as it is devastating.
User avatar
Lsuoma
Fascist Tit
 
Posts: 4404
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 7:58 pm
Location: Pacific NW

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]

Postby Metalogic42 » Sun Feb 03, 2013 12:57 am  •  [Post 3652]

Lsuoma wrote:
Michael K Gray wrote:
somedumbguy wrote:I'd close them up in an iron maiden for a few weeks.

Oh oh.
Perhaps this discussion should be diverted to the music thread before it gets too ugly.

Testing, testing, one two. One two.
Hey! Anyone here from Ulon Baton? Woo!!

Oh, FFS, no Eddie, PLEASE!!!


Image


:popcorn:
Skepticism is more important than Atheism. Atheism protects you from false gods, but skepticism inoculates you against all forms of bullshit. http://skeptischism.com/skepticismfirst/
User avatar
Metalogic42
.
.
 
Posts: 1252
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2012 12:56 pm

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]

Postby Michael K Gray » Sun Feb 03, 2013 12:57 am  •  [Post 3653]

AndrewV69 wrote:Well you are probably familiar with the concept of not shouting fire in a crowded theatre...

User avatar
Michael K Gray
.
.
 
Posts: 2480
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 4:04 am
Location: Adelaide, South Australia

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]

Postby jimthepleb » Sun Feb 03, 2013 12:58 am  •  [Post 3654]

I'll leave this for the capricious one:
"Indolent hand wringers" Richard Dworkins describing the baboons. http://support.operationsmile.org/goto/reneehendricks
User avatar
jimthepleb
.
.
 
Posts: 706
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2012 1:54 pm
Location: you kay?

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]

Postby Steersman » Sun Feb 03, 2013 12:58 am  •  [Post 3655]

somedumbguy wrote:
Steersman wrote: (elided inner quotes to satisfy some piece of software)
That some people might well deserve to die, I can see some justification for. After all, Western society seems to have at least largely condoned that sentence, with more than a little justification, on Bin Laden and various Islamists. And maybe from some perspectives there might well be some who deserve to be raped – Catholic priest pedophiles, or most pedophiles, for examples – or to be tortured.

However to even suggest that that might apply in any particular case, particularly the latter two – you ok with that comment suggesting that Watson should be so targetted? – seems a rather slippery slope, that things can very quickly get out of hand when one lays about with gay abandon that two-edged sword.

Which, I think, relates to the general question of the harassment that Watson and company have been subjected to and which I referred to in an earlier comment. Seems to me that there is the rather problematic phenomenon whereby the epithets are chasing themselves in some cycle of escalation in which those voicing them try to outdo previous ones in terms of nastiness and venom. All good fun – until someone loses an eye.

Reminds me of having seen a documentary on the Green River Killer, in which the killer, Gary Ridgway, said something to the effect that he thought that he was doing society a favour by killing the prostitutes who were his primary targets. In which case one might reasonably question whether he was entirely culpable for those crimes, or whether some part of the blame might not be laid at the feet of society in general.


All I will say since I am leaving, but found this post, is that as the Deadwood quote goes, "We all have bloody thoughts". I think the mistake is to demand people suppress all acknowledgement of that or demand instabans, permabans, talibans for expressing out of frustration those bloody thoughts.

Huge difference between thinking hell, I would gladly torture that SOB that did X, versus voting time and again, against the death penalty and for strong rape laws.

HTH

While I sympathize, methinks the problem, at least in part, is that “the thought is party to the deed”. One thing to entertain the thought – rather problematic when that shades into setting up house-keeping with it. Although one might argue – as you may have suggested – that there is only some relatively small degree of difference between what passes for justice in Western societies, at least in some cases, and that in some Islamic ones ….
User avatar
Steersman
.
.
 
Posts: 3798
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 10:58 pm

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]

Postby Lsuoma » Sun Feb 03, 2013 12:59 am  •  [Post 3656]

I thought that at some time I would need to post something like this, but it has been longer than I expected.

There are a few things that will get you permanently banned as soon as I find out, with no appeal:

1. Being Mabus posting a la Mabus.
2. Posting child pornography.
3. Posting spam or warez or malware or links to same.
4. Posting if you have already been permanently banned for any reason.

Other things that MAY get you banned, but where the ban may be negotiable, or, if already imposed may be reversed, are:

1. Posting stuff that I am advised will possibly lead to personal legal liability for me. On of my (seven!) sisters-in-law is a criminal trial attorney whom I have consulted WRT the Pit, and will continue so to do. Her decision, as my attorney, informs my decision in every case of potential legal liability. I may or may not decide to discuss specifics in public (i.e. on the Pit), but I will post announcements if possible.
2. Boring my fucking arse off. It's a big arse, so this is not instantaneous. But once it hits the floor, it needs a lot of re-hoisting.
3. Posting stuff that you have been explicitly asked/told not to. I MAY listen to communications here, but I may choose not to respond. If I tell you not to post stuff, the minimum reason is that I don't want you to. In such a situation the following applies:

a) Is your name Lsuoma Californensis? If not, fuck off.
b) If so, are you the Lsuoma Californensis that owns this board? If not, fuck off.

Addendum: this has been a busy night, and I hope that nobody (in alphabetic order Decius, Somedumbguy)will leave the Pit permanently because of it. Tomorrow is a Latter Day.
Call me old-fashioned, but I like a dump to be as memorable as it is devastating.
User avatar
Lsuoma
Fascist Tit
 
Posts: 4404
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 7:58 pm
Location: Pacific NW

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]

Postby Metalogic42 » Sun Feb 03, 2013 1:05 am  •  [Post 3657]

Lsuoma wrote:3. Posting stuff that you have been explicitly asked/told not to. I MAY listen to communications here, but I may choose not to respond. If I tell you not to post stuff, the minimum reason is that I don't want you to.


You were kidding about Eddie, right?
Skepticism is more important than Atheism. Atheism protects you from false gods, but skepticism inoculates you against all forms of bullshit. http://skeptischism.com/skepticismfirst/
User avatar
Metalogic42
.
.
 
Posts: 1252
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2012 12:56 pm

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]my bank manager[/spoiler]

Postby Michael K Gray » Sun Feb 03, 2013 1:06 am  •  [Post 3658]

Lsuoma, I have a few more sheckels that I wish to shove up your in-box.
Will your original PayPal ID still work?
User avatar
Michael K Gray
.
.
 
Posts: 2480
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 4:04 am
Location: Adelaide, South Australia

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]

Postby sKepptiksowat » Sun Feb 03, 2013 1:07 am  •  [Post 3659]

:popcorn:
Sincerity makes the very least person to be of more value than the most talented hypocrite.
User avatar
sKepptiksowat
.
.
 
Posts: 77
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:50 pm

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]

Postby Lsuoma » Sun Feb 03, 2013 1:07 am  •  [Post 3660]

Metalogic42 wrote:
Lsuoma wrote:3. Posting stuff that you have been explicitly asked/told not to. I MAY listen to communications here, but I may choose not to respond. If I tell you not to post stuff, the minimum reason is that I don't want you to.


You were kidding about Eddie, right?

"From ze day he was born,
He was trouble.
He was ze thorn
In his mutter's side."
Call me old-fashioned, but I like a dump to be as memorable as it is devastating.
User avatar
Lsuoma
Fascist Tit
 
Posts: 4404
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 7:58 pm
Location: Pacific NW

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]my bank manager[/spoiler]

Postby Lsuoma » Sun Feb 03, 2013 1:08 am  •  [Post 3661]

Michael K Gray wrote:Lsuoma, I have a few more sheckels that I wish to shove up your in-box.
Will your original PayPal ID still work?

Thanks. Yes.
Call me old-fashioned, but I like a dump to be as memorable as it is devastating.
User avatar
Lsuoma
Fascist Tit
 
Posts: 4404
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 7:58 pm
Location: Pacific NW

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]

Postby rocko2466 » Sun Feb 03, 2013 1:08 am  •  [Post 3662]

Lsuoma wrote: Tomorrow is a Latter Day.


I loved the shit out of that album. Still to see the show!
User avatar
rocko2466
.
.
 
Posts: 707
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2013 10:56 pm

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]

Postby AndrewV69 » Sun Feb 03, 2013 1:09 am  •  [Post 3663]

And now, something completely different:
(so you think you have issues?)

Why, aged 29, I have decided I'll NEVER have sex again
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/artic ... again.html
Lisa Smith, from Buckinghamshire, finds sex 'repellent'
Has had three lovers, and lived with two of them
Wants to find a man with whom she can have a celibate relationship
Will adopt children if she ever decides she wants them


And the followup:

'I'm destined to be a crazy cat lady!' Asexual, 29, who said she'd never have sex again is looking for a man... but admits a celibate relationship is a 'tall order'
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/artic ... order.html
Vegan Lisa, 29, from Buckinghamshire, who doesn't want kids, hopes to find a man who will embrace her asexuality
Says she wants potential partner to accept cuddling as extent of intimacy
If the man of her dreams wanted sex she would say no. 'I'd feel like I was compromising myself and I would detest them for it'
Since writing for the Mail Lisa has heard from other asexuals but also had spiteful comments like: 'You can't get a man and this is how you cover it up'
Disce aut discede
http://noseenohearnospeak.blogspot.ca/

Ick. AndrewV69, proud slimepitter and MRA, with in.malafide in his email address? No. Just no. Fuck off.
- PZ Myers 26 July 2012 at 3:17 pm
User avatar
AndrewV69
.
.
 
Posts: 3952
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 9:52 pm

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]

Postby Brain Box » Sun Feb 03, 2013 1:13 am  •  [Post 3664]

somedumbguy wrote:
nippletwister wrote:
somedumbguy wrote:
16bitheretic wrote:
somedumbguy wrote:That's my free speech talking.


Fair enough, I wasn't saying you shouldn't have a right to say it, I was just pointing out my opinion of such statements. I don't feel that calls for rape or torture have any use beyond just venting of anger or some way of trying to get attention through cheap shock value. I'd certainly never support any real life applications of said wishes, regardless of how much I dislike the person, especially after I've frequently called out and criticized the Catholic Church and the US prison system for their avoidance of responsibility in seemingly systemic problems of unprosecuted rape.


Good thing I don't influence the laws then like Dworkin, MacKinnon, Koss, and Marcotte have.



Somedumbguy:I understand having some rage, dude...but come on, that was shitty wankery. You sound like a cross between a radfem and some of my religious-right-death-penalty-loving relatives. Well, three murders isn't a radfem genocide of all males, but the shittiness is the same. Get help if you're that fucking angry. If we killed every stooge that put forth a harmful idea, we'd have no more new ideas. And you are now in the "harmful ideas" area.


I have to deal with a court system where the norm, the default, the stock policy separates wonderful fathers from their children every day.

Am I angry to what radfems like Dworkin and Mackinnon have done to your courts? You bet. Am I angry as to how Marcotte practices her journalism (that is through terrible lies) you bet.

Am I saying every stooge that puts forth a harmful idea should be killed? Of course not.

Am I arguing that perhaps in some universe they would deserve it.... Hell that's just karma dude.


If you are an example of a "wonderful father" that the court if biased against I would say things are working as intended. You are a baboon, a fool who thinks committing acts of violence against others (i.e. rape) is justifiable since they say things you disagree with. I would say that you must be young and immature but that doesn't excuse the idiocy you have put to text.
Brain Box
.
.
 
Posts: 53
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2012 11:53 am

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]

Postby decius » Sun Feb 03, 2013 1:18 am  •  [Post 3665]

John Greg, like I said I have no wish for SDG to go, but those posts are incompatible both with the fucking law of where I and others live and with shared ethos. So, I was just suggesting to remove them rather than make an idiotic fetish of an abomination sold as free speech.
User avatar
decius
.
.
 
Posts: 1265
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 2:08 am

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]

Postby Lsuoma » Sun Feb 03, 2013 1:22 am  •  [Post 3666]

rocko2466 wrote:
Lsuoma wrote: Tomorrow is a Latter Day.


I loved the shit out of that album. Still to see the show!

Saw it in NYC on opening night, and here in Seattle a couple of weeks ago. It really is a blast.
Call me old-fashioned, but I like a dump to be as memorable as it is devastating.
User avatar
Lsuoma
Fascist Tit
 
Posts: 4404
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 7:58 pm
Location: Pacific NW

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]

Postby rocko2466 » Sun Feb 03, 2013 1:29 am  •  [Post 3667]

Lsuoma wrote:
rocko2466 wrote:
Lsuoma wrote: Tomorrow is a Latter Day.


I loved the shit out of that album. Still to see the show!

Saw it in NYC on opening night, and here in Seattle a couple of weeks ago. It really is a blast.


I was in NYC with my missus late 2011. We went to buy tickets, but the only tickets were obstructed view so we thought we'd give it a miss. Hugely regret it! I listened to the album on repeat for like two months straight.
User avatar
rocko2466
.
.
 
Posts: 707
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2013 10:56 pm

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]

Postby Michael K Gray » Sun Feb 03, 2013 1:49 am  •  [Post 3668]

rocko2466 wrote:I was in NYC with my missus late 2011. We went to buy tickets, but the only tickets were obstructed view...

These seats are reserved for the A✝ mental-cripples who claim to be blind-'enhanced'.
Trouble is, they are all such delicate flowers¹ that none of them can ever leave their Gran's attic.
And these misogynistic concerts do not offer the comical trigger-warnings which are their opiate of choice.

________________________
¹ "Flowers" may be offensive as they are a plant's sex organs. And, as we know, sex is not a fit subject for the A✝ dinner table, or any table for that matter, except perhaps a table in a brothel.
(Blackadder fans can stay schtum.)
User avatar
Michael K Gray
.
.
 
Posts: 2480
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 4:04 am
Location: Adelaide, South Australia

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]

Postby rayshul » Sun Feb 03, 2013 2:02 am  •  [Post 3669]

Hm. I didn't read SDG's posts as an advocation of people going out to attack, and more like a stream of thought of someone righteously fucked off. But I can see why there's legal risk involved there and I'm glad everyone has "stood down" and recognised this.

On a side note I personally use readers-of-Marcotte as a way to find out which people I no longer wish to associate with. I suspect I'm motivated by the fact I have a male (white) child, and that reading those kinds of things or encouragement of that kind of thought process is dangerous to him and his future. I think the views of her and Taslima are utterly abhorrent, however it's my understanding that Al spoke to Taslima and encouraged her to research male rape and its rate of occurrence. I have also definitely noticed more reporting of male rape in the news in recent years.
"My hyper-important vagina is offended, appease it at once!" - Philip of Tealand
User avatar
rayshul
.
.
 
Posts: 2058
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 4:00 am

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]

Postby rayshul » Sun Feb 03, 2013 2:17 am  •  [Post 3670]

Recent acid attack. Perpetrator is a woman, apparently. Horrifying story and pictures. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-21305223

This sort of thing is why I'm against the niqab, really.
"My hyper-important vagina is offended, appease it at once!" - Philip of Tealand
User avatar
rayshul
.
.
 
Posts: 2058
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 4:00 am

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]

Postby Michael K Gray » Sun Feb 03, 2013 2:28 am  •  [Post 3671]

rayshul wrote:Recent acid attack. Perpetrator is a woman, apparently. Horrifying story and pictures. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-21305223
This sort of thing is why I'm against the niqab, really.

Not even an acid resistant niqab, or a caustic burkha?
One does not need a pH D in chemistry to understand the benefits of one of these Burqas modelled by a misogynist:
Antacid بُرقع‎
User avatar
Michael K Gray
.
.
 
Posts: 2480
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 4:04 am
Location: Adelaide, South Australia

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]

Postby rayshul » Sun Feb 03, 2013 2:31 am  •  [Post 3672]

Michael K Gray wrote:
rayshul wrote:Recent acid attack. Perpetrator is a woman, apparently. Horrifying story and pictures. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-21305223
This sort of thing is why I'm against the niqab, really.

Not even an acid resistant niqab, or a caustic burkha?
One does not need a pH D in chemistry to understand the benefits of one of these Burqas modelled by a misogynist:
Antacid بُرقع‎

Hot.
"My hyper-important vagina is offended, appease it at once!" - Philip of Tealand
User avatar
rayshul
.
.
 
Posts: 2058
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 4:00 am

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]

Postby comslave » Sun Feb 03, 2013 2:33 am  •  [Post 3673]

rayshul wrote:Recent acid attack. Perpetrator is a woman, apparently. Horrifying story and pictures. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-21305223

This sort of thing is why I'm against the niqab, really.



The reason I'm against face covering is that security systems will increasingly rely on facial recongition software to prevent crimes or identify perpetrators. Face covering interferes with the effectiveness of this software. And I don't see why one group gets a pass on face covering.
Sometimes a cup of coffee is just a cup of coffee.
User avatar
comslave
.
.
 
Posts: 374
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2012 2:30 am

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]

Postby Michael K Gray » Sun Feb 03, 2013 2:39 am  •  [Post 3674]

rayshul wrote:
Michael K Gray wrote:Antacid بُرقع‎

Hot.

Yes, I imagine that they would be.
User avatar
Michael K Gray
.
.
 
Posts: 2480
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 4:04 am
Location: Adelaide, South Australia

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]

Postby DeepInsideYourMind » Sun Feb 03, 2013 2:40 am  •  [Post 3675]

comslave wrote:
rayshul wrote:Recent acid attack. Perpetrator is a woman, apparently. Horrifying story and pictures. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-21305223

This sort of thing is why I'm against the niqab, really.



The reason I'm against face covering is that security systems will increasingly rely on facial recongition software to prevent crimes or identify perpetrators. Face covering interferes with the effectiveness of this software. And I don't see why one group gets a pass on face covering.


And very valid arguments in terms of social interactions and general identification http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_ban ... e_covering
User avatar
DeepInsideYourMind
.
.
 
Posts: 481
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2013 12:43 am

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]

Postby Phil_Giordana_FCD » Sun Feb 03, 2013 2:44 am  •  [Post 3676]

Oh dear, I've been such a misogynist yesterday evening! I dared share the stage with two extremely talented female singers, and I've stollen all their girl power with my maleness.

You wish. I was so ashamed of my vocal performances compared to theirs, I had to refuse payment after the show. This from someone with an already negative bank account balance.

(disclaimer: I seem to still be a bit drunk from yesterday, and wanted to post something so my position as most prolific poster here doesn't dwindle...)

Videos coming soon, in the music topic.
"It is science we are talking about here. It doesn't matter if you like the person making the argument. Sometimes the evidence supports the nice people and sometimes complete bastards are on the correct side of a scientific argument." -Strawkins
User avatar
Phil_Giordana_FCD
.
.
 
Posts: 4433
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 12:56 am
Location: Nice, France

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]

Postby Steersman » Sun Feb 03, 2013 2:45 am  •  [Post 3677]

comslave wrote:
rayshul wrote:Recent acid attack. Perpetrator is a woman, apparently. Horrifying story and pictures. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-21305223

This sort of thing is why I'm against the niqab, really.



The reason I'm against face covering is that security systems will increasingly rely on facial recongition software to prevent crimes or identify perpetrators. Face covering interferes with the effectiveness of this software. And I don't see why one group gets a pass on face covering.

This is, I think, a start:
In December 2012, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that Muslim women must remove niqabs in some cases when testifying in court.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niq%C4%81b#Canada
User avatar
Steersman
.
.
 
Posts: 3798
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 10:58 pm

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]

Postby Dick Strawkins » Sun Feb 03, 2013 2:47 am  •  [Post 3678]

Lsuoma wrote:I thought that at some time I would need to post something like this, but it has been longer than I expected.

There are a few things that will get you permanently banned as soon as I find out, with no appeal:

1. Being Mabus posting a la Mabus.
2. Posting child pornography.
3. Posting spam or warez or malware or links to same.
4. Posting if you have already been permanently banned for any reason.

Other things that MAY get you banned, but where the ban may be negotiable, or, if already imposed may be reversed, are:

1. Posting stuff that I am advised will possibly lead to personal legal liability for me. On of my (seven!) sisters-in-law is a criminal trial attorney whom I have consulted WRT the Pit, and will continue so to do. Her decision, as my attorney, informs my decision in every case of potential legal liability. I may or may not decide to discuss specifics in public (i.e. on the Pit), but I will post announcements if possible.
2. Boring my fucking arse off. It's a big arse, so this is not instantaneous. But once it hits the floor, it needs a lot of re-hoisting.
3. Posting stuff that you have been explicitly asked/told not to. I MAY listen to communications here, but I may choose not to respond. If I tell you not to post stuff, the minimum reason is that I don't want you to. In such a situation the following applies:

a) Is your name Lsuoma Californensis? If not, fuck off.
b) If so, are you the Lsuoma Californensis that owns this board? If not, fuck off.

Addendum: this has been a busy night, and I hope that nobody (in alphabetic order Decius, Somedumbguy)will leave the Pit permanently because of it. Tomorrow is a Latter Day.


Whay SDG posted was, in my opinion, the first time anyone here has posted anything even close to the sort of rape threats that the FTB crowd claim is a constant feature of this place.
To hell with the silly Steffalump type jokes, SDG's stuff is exactly what they have been waiting for for the past seven months since the forum began.
I don't think we can simply sweep it under the carpet.
You list a set of rules (and despite what people might think of free speech or moderation, it is implicit in the running of a site like this that there must be some rules.)
Is it too much to ask to include a couple of extra rules that have, over time, developed into the norm for behavior on this forum. These are:
Don't make threats of violence against people - including the sort of youtube comment style 'threats' that Watson relies on - which is exactly what SDG did.
Don't doxx people (meaning giving out personal information that is not easily googled, and even if it is, doesnt contain home or work addresses)
This place is like a public bar to a lot of us. We come here to laugh and goof about while catching up on the latest FTB shenanigans. With those stupid rape wishes SDG has done the equivalent of purning up and taking a huge shit on the floor. That sort of behavior - and the failure to condemn that behavior - is exactly the reason why the MRA movement is doomed to remain at arms length from most of us here.
Thanks very much SDG, you complete and utter fuckwit.
PZ Myers: "Hypocrisy is a bitch, isn't it?"
User avatar
Dick Strawkins
.
.
 
Posts: 4154
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 6:34 pm

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]

Postby Michael K Gray » Sun Feb 03, 2013 2:56 am  •  [Post 3679]

comslave wrote:
rayshul wrote:Recent acid attack. Perpetrator is a woman, apparently. Horrifying story and pictures. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-21305223

This sort of thing is why I'm against the niqab, really.



The reason I'm against face covering is that security systems will increasingly rely on facial recongition software to prevent crimes or identify perpetrators. Face covering interferes with the effectiveness of this software. And I don't see why one group gets a pass on face covering.

ATTENTION ALL Citizens of the A+ State!
Citizen ComSlave has expressed the will of the goodthink Kommentariat admirably!
Big Bother admires ComSlave's willingness to change his name to comport with Newspeak, and deny the double-atheism-plus-ungood of personal privacy!

The A+Theism Executive Komittee has decided that the anti-state unthink misogynist dodge of face-coverings are to be countered by placing a Telescreen® in every home.
Thanks to de-rationing and the free market the price of nutrition-free bread has now gone down to eighty-five Roubles an ounce.
And here is good news for state house-persons, the following goods are now in the shops:
Plastic and sawdust elephant night-shirts
Second hand concrete parachutes
Artificial explodable woollen bloomers
Men's self igniting tailless shirts - with anti thunder-sheet attachment.
There are unlimited supplies in the shops!!

We love Big PZ!

Image
User avatar
Michael K Gray
.
.
 
Posts: 2480
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 4:04 am
Location: Adelaide, South Australia

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]Koala Lovers[/spoiler]

Postby Phil_Giordana_FCD » Sun Feb 03, 2013 2:56 am  •  [Post 3680]

Michael K Gray wrote:For the few animal lovers¹ amongst us:
Thirsty koala follows walker, drinks three bottles of water
Dateline, mid-summer, South Australia, (a bit up the road from here):
A THIRSTY koala has made the rare move of climbing down a tree before following a walker along suburban roads, drinking three bottles of water over an hour.

Woo-Hyang Sun wrote:"I was walking near the Black Hill Conservation Park entrance (when) my husband spotted a koala in a tree," Mrs Sun said.
"We took some photos, and initially the koala looked scared.
"She kept looking at me and looked like she wanted something, so I poured some water in my palm, and the koala drank it at once.

But that was not enough.
As the temperature began to rise, the thirsty koala became even more ambitious.
635361-koala.jpg

After sustaining long eye contact with Mrs Sun's husband for several minutes, the koala succumbed to the prospect of a cool drink of water and climbed down from the tree, not at all phased by her suburban surroundings.
Not only did the koala hit the streets of Athelstone for a leisurely stroll, it almost threatened to get behind the wheel of Mrs Sun's car.
"When I opened the car door, she was poking her head to look inside my car, I guess for more water?," she said.


"After she finished the whole bottle, she was waving her hand, I guess, for more water.
"She followed me for an hour and ended up drinking three bottles altogether - definitely the friendliest koala I've ever seen."


Read the whole story with more cute piccies at http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/thirsty-k ... s-of-water

_________________________
¹ Punishable by 5 years imprisonment and a $50,000 fine


And this is probably the reason why the whole of humanity is not doomed yet.

A very pleasant sight on a sunday morning.
"It is science we are talking about here. It doesn't matter if you like the person making the argument. Sometimes the evidence supports the nice people and sometimes complete bastards are on the correct side of a scientific argument." -Strawkins
User avatar
Phil_Giordana_FCD
.
.
 
Posts: 4433
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 12:56 am
Location: Nice, France

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]

Postby Reap » Sun Feb 03, 2013 2:57 am  •  [Post 3681]

Michael K Gray wrote:
bhoytony wrote:There seem to be people here who assume that everybody who is posting on this blog want the exact same outcome as themselves. Sorry, but your goals aren't necessarily the goals of anybody but yourself.

Too true. Nearly a "deepity"
About the only commonality between us is a distaste for hypocrisy.



You are correct. I hadn't stopped to think about what it was on the common side which is interesting and a bit depressing
You aren't a complete idiot..some pieces are missing

If you were offended.. I take full responsibility, especially if it makes you cry
User avatar
Reap
.
.
 
Posts: 602
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2012 12:27 am
Location: Fremont CA

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]

Postby Steersman » Sun Feb 03, 2013 3:10 am  •  [Post 3682]

Dick Strawkins wrote:
Lsuoma wrote:I thought that at some time I would need to post something like this, but it has been longer than I expected.

There are a few things that will get you permanently banned as soon as I find out, with no appeal:

1. Being Mabus posting a la Mabus.
2. Posting child pornography.
3. Posting spam or warez or malware or links to same.
4. Posting if you have already been permanently banned for any reason.

Other things that MAY get you banned, but where the ban may be negotiable, or, if already imposed may be reversed, are:

<snip>

Addendum: this has been a busy night, and I hope that nobody (in alphabetic order Decius, Somedumbguy)will leave the Pit permanently because of it. Tomorrow is a Latter Day.

<snip>

Don't make threats of violence against people - including the sort of youtube comment style 'threats' that Watson relies on - which is exactly what SDG did.

<snip>

And what evidence do you adduce to support that contention? For instance, how about this statement of SDG’s:

I'd say Marcotte needs a shit ton more rape in her life. Mary Koss, Nasrim Tasleema who say that men can't be raped? Fine, fuck them both. Get raped chickadees. Fuck off AND DIE.


Is that any more of a credible “threat” of rape than the similar one directed at Watson that virtually all and sundry here and have pooh-poohed as just the complaints of a bunch of “stupid, whiny, witless Baron Munchausens”?

Methinks you might find his other comments along the same line to be equally extreme but hardly credible as actionable threats. “Sauce for the goose” and all that ….
User avatar
Steersman
.
.
 
Posts: 3798
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 10:58 pm

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]

Postby rayshul » Sun Feb 03, 2013 3:12 am  •  [Post 3683]

DeepInsideYourMind wrote:
comslave wrote:
rayshul wrote:Recent acid attack. Perpetrator is a woman, apparently. Horrifying story and pictures. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-21305223

This sort of thing is why I'm against the niqab, really.


The reason I'm against face covering is that security systems will increasingly rely on facial recongition software to prevent crimes or identify perpetrators. Face covering interferes with the effectiveness of this software. And I don't see why one group gets a pass on face covering.


And very valid arguments in terms of social interactions and general identification http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_ban ... e_covering


In Australia there were a series of crimes by someone in a burkha, as well as a court case where a woman had attacked a cop (I think! memory hazy) but could not be convicted because she refused to remove her burka. Therefore it was impossible to identify her. There's a lot of fuckery that goes on with this sort of thing (down with this sort of thing!).
"My hyper-important vagina is offended, appease it at once!" - Philip of Tealand
User avatar
rayshul
.
.
 
Posts: 2058
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 4:00 am

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]

Postby Steersman » Sun Feb 03, 2013 3:17 am  •  [Post 3684]

Michael K Gray wrote:
comslave wrote:
rayshul wrote:Recent acid attack. Perpetrator is a woman, apparently. Horrifying story and pictures. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-21305223

This sort of thing is why I'm against the niqab, really.



The reason I'm against face covering is that security systems will increasingly rely on facial recongition software to prevent crimes or identify perpetrators. Face covering interferes with the effectiveness of this software. And I don't see why one group gets a pass on face covering.

ATTENTION ALL Citizens of the A+ State!
Citizen ComSlave has expressed the will of the goodthink Kommentariat admirably!
Big Bother admires ComSlave's willingness to change his name to comport with Newspeak, and deny the double-atheism-plus-ungood of personal privacy!

The A+Theism Executive Komittee has decided that the anti-state unthink misogynist dodge of face-coverings are to be countered by placing a Telescreen® in every home.
Thanks to de-rationing and the free market the price of nutrition-free bread has now gone down to eighty-five Roubles an ounce.
And here is good news for state house-persons, the following goods are now in the shops:
Plastic and sawdust elephant night-shirts
Second hand concrete parachutes
Artificial explodable woollen bloomers
Men's self igniting tailless shirts - with anti thunder-sheet attachment.
There are unlimited supplies in the shops!!

We love Big PZ!

http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/photo ... ture_3.jpg

Riiight-on there brother Michael!

And aspirins inexorably lead to mainlining heroin and mother’s milk is the straight-and-narrow path to being a Bowery bum on Skid Road!
User avatar
Steersman
.
.
 
Posts: 3798
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 10:58 pm

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]

Postby Michael K Gray » Sun Feb 03, 2013 3:48 am  •  [Post 3685]

Steersman wrote:And aspirins inexorably lead to mainlining heroin and mother’s milk is the straight-and-narrow path to being a Bowery bum on Skid Road!

I only JUST took you off "ignore" to find that, true to form, you are still your vapidly humour-free contrarian self.
Oh well, back to ignore mode, you pointless tape-worm.
That experiment in optimism over experience lasted all of 53 seconds.
User avatar
Michael K Gray
.
.
 
Posts: 2480
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 4:04 am
Location: Adelaide, South Australia

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]

Postby Michael K Gray » Sun Feb 03, 2013 3:55 am  •  [Post 3686]

rayshul wrote:In Australia there were a series of crimes by someone in a burkha, as well as a court case where a woman had attacked a cop (I think! memory hazy) but could not be convicted because she refused to remove her burka. Therefore it was impossible to identify her. There's a lot of fuckery that goes on with this sort of thing (down with this sort of thing!).

That is basically not true.
In a case where a burka-wearing female was pulled over by Aussie cops for dangerous driving (by dint of obscured vision), she elected to take the case to court, rather than pay the fine. Her defence was based on Religious Privilege trumping state laws. In Australia!
If I remember rightly, her defence was dismissed, and the fine & demerit points upheld.
User avatar
Michael K Gray
.
.
 
Posts: 2480
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 4:04 am
Location: Adelaide, South Australia

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]

Postby Phil_Giordana_FCD » Sun Feb 03, 2013 4:07 am  •  [Post 3687]

ConcentratedH2O, OM wrote:
rocko2466 wrote:
My fave picture from her post about "men hate woman's bodies" -
Image


That's not a shaving accident, unless the woman (? Proof of gender?) has Parkinson's.

It's clearly self harm, either real or staged: check out the multiple slashes across the heel. Nice idea if you're into that kind of thing: gets nice chafed by shoes, but hidden by trousers, so provides an all-day reminder of how worthless you are while remaining hidden from the public.


I have to ask: did you mean this comment to be sarcastic, or did you fall off the crib in your infancy?
"It is science we are talking about here. It doesn't matter if you like the person making the argument. Sometimes the evidence supports the nice people and sometimes complete bastards are on the correct side of a scientific argument." -Strawkins
User avatar
Phil_Giordana_FCD
.
.
 
Posts: 4433
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 12:56 am
Location: Nice, France

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]

Postby Dick Strawkins » Sun Feb 03, 2013 4:21 am  •  [Post 3688]

Steersman wrote:Is that any more of a credible “threat” of rape than the similar one directed at Watson that virtually all and sundry here and have pooh-poohed as just the complaints of a bunch of “stupid, whiny, witless Baron Munchausens”?

Methinks you might find his other comments along the same line to be equally extreme but hardly credible as actionable threats. “Sauce for the goose” and all that ….


I didn't say SDG made a credible threat. I think, however, he made the kind of idiotic, nasty wowbagger style remark that has always been criticized in the past by the pit.
Is it too much to ask people to show some degree of responibility to the other members of the pit?
You don't post (legal) porn here because that will make the site inaccessible to those viewing at certain workplaces. You don't post spam or warez because it's illegal or timewasting.
If you can't behave in an adult and responsible way in the slymepit then you risk doing something that gets the entire forum closed. Isn't that why both Eucliwood AND that idiot who posted the (similated?) cp picture were banned?
PZ Myers: "Hypocrisy is a bitch, isn't it?"
User avatar
Dick Strawkins
.
.
 
Posts: 4154
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 6:34 pm

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]selfish Libertarians[/spoiler]

Postby Michael K Gray » Sun Feb 03, 2013 4:24 am  •  [Post 3689]

Dick Strawkins wrote:
Steersman wrote:Is that any more of a credible “threat” of rape than the similar one directed at Watson that virtually all and sundry here and have pooh-poohed as just the complaints of a bunch of “stupid, whiny, witless Baron Munchausens”?

Methinks you might find his other comments along the same line to be equally extreme but hardly credible as actionable threats. “Sauce for the goose” and all that ….


I didn't say SDG made a credible threat. I think, however, he made the kind of idiotic, nasty wowbagger style remark that has always been criticized in the past by the pit.
Is it too much to ask people to show some degree of responibility to the other members of the pit?
You don't post (legal) porn here because that will make the site inaccessible to those viewing at certain workplaces. You don't post spam or warez because it's illegal or timewasting.
If you can't behave in an adult and responsible way in the slymepit then you risk doing something that gets the entire forum closed. Isn't that why both Eucliwood AND that idiot who posted the (similated?) cp picture were banned?

Cue Bhoytony to hypocritically observe that he doesn't give a tinker's toss about your opinion, yet bothers to post an intense selfish rant against it...
User avatar
Michael K Gray
.
.
 
Posts: 2480
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 4:04 am
Location: Adelaide, South Australia

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]

Postby Michael K Gray » Sun Feb 03, 2013 4:32 am  •  [Post 3690]

Frankie Boyle:
"A merry-go-round is a just a Sushi-bar for Pædophiles"
User avatar
Michael K Gray
.
.
 
Posts: 2480
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 4:04 am
Location: Adelaide, South Australia

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]

Postby clownshoe » Sun Feb 03, 2013 4:42 am  •  [Post 3691]

Michael K Gray wrote:
rayshul wrote:In Australia there were a series of crimes by someone in a burkha, as well as a court case where a woman had attacked a cop (I think! memory hazy) but could not be convicted because she refused to remove her burka. Therefore it was impossible to identify her. There's a lot of fuckery that goes on with this sort of thing (down with this sort of thing!).

That is basically not true.
In a case where a burka-wearing female was pulled over by Aussie cops for dangerous driving (by dint of obscured vision), she elected to take the case to court, rather than pay the fine. Her defence was based on Religious Privilege trumping state laws. In Australia!
If I remember rightly, her defence was dismissed, and the fine & demerit points upheld.


Are you talking about Carnita Matthews? or someone else?
It wasn't a series of crimes, just one (but according to news paper reports had a history of other traffic offences). She was convicted of making a false statement to police in 2010 and sentence to six months in prison. Carnita Matthews then appealed that conviction and it was over-turned, and then she tried to get court costs from the police but was that turned down by the judge. If she was the person in side the burqa (and the apellantt judge could not be sure which is why he overturned the conviction) then she did indeed get away with it because her face was covered.
Full Frontal Zealotry podcast: http://everdense.com/ffz/
User avatar
clownshoe
.
.
 
Posts: 195
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 7:57 pm

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]

Postby decius » Sun Feb 03, 2013 5:21 am  •  [Post 3692]

Thanks, Lsuoma.

Rayshul, check your PM.
User avatar
decius
.
.
 
Posts: 1265
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 2:08 am

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]

Postby decius » Sun Feb 03, 2013 5:24 am  •  [Post 3693]

Dick Strawkins, check your PM please.
User avatar
decius
.
.
 
Posts: 1265
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 2:08 am

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]

Postby Za-zen » Sun Feb 03, 2013 5:34 am  •  [Post 3694]

Breathe deeply and become the chocolate

Dillahunty: @Zaminuszen You seem to confuse free speech with freethought. Ironic that you do this while claiming we don't know the difference. Bye!
User avatar
Za-zen
.
.
 
Posts: 1526
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 6:39 am

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]

Postby Jan Steen » Sun Feb 03, 2013 5:57 am  •  [Post 3695]

Deeply disappointed that Stephanie Zvan failed to include my photoshop of her:

Image

If you look closely you will see that it's her face. It's a still from The Wicker Man, a thriller about a radfem society :) . She'll have to admit that I didn't make her look bad; not physically, at least.
Fighting hypocrisy since Sun Oct 14, 2012.
User avatar
Jan Steen
.
.
 
Posts: 1811
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2012 5:18 am

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]

Postby Dick Strawkins » Sun Feb 03, 2013 6:08 am  •  [Post 3696]

decius wrote:Dick Strawkins, check your PM please.


OK, so apparently the comments that SDG originally posted have been edited and his original words were much more in line with the sort of violent rape fantasies that we have collectively condemned.
Part of the reason I post here is because I found it the one place in the online atheist community where people were taking seriously the problem of hypocrisy.
There is a line to be drawn in the sand here.
Bad taste jokes about someone being a fatty are juvinile and silly.
Calling for people to be raped is so far over the line that I am seriously wondering whether we have been set up.
The alternative, and probably closer to the truth is that we have some crossover with the MRA community who don't seem to take this sort of shit seriously.
I suggest we do take it seriously.
PZ Myers: "Hypocrisy is a bitch, isn't it?"
User avatar
Dick Strawkins
.
.
 
Posts: 4154
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 6:34 pm

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]

Postby Dick Strawkins » Sun Feb 03, 2013 6:26 am  •  [Post 3697]

Jan Steen wrote:Deeply disappointed that Stephanie Zvan failed to include my photoshop of her:

Image

If you look closely you will see that it's her face. It's a still from The Wicker Man, a thriller about a radfem society :) . She'll have to admit that I didn't make her look bad; not physically, at least.


I recognized the allusion - and I was going to complain to you about it.
Even though it's from the remake, the character you've painted as Svan is, I think, the same as the character called 'Willow' in the original 1973 movie, where she was played by the incredibly sexy Britt Eckland.
The dance scene in the pub bedroom is one of the most erotic scenes ever in a mainstream movie.
Well it was, until you done that photoshop.
Now I'll never be able to watch it again without thinking of Svan.
:twisted:
PZ Myers: "Hypocrisy is a bitch, isn't it?"
User avatar
Dick Strawkins
.
.
 
Posts: 4154
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 6:34 pm

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]

Postby AnonymousCowherd » Sun Feb 03, 2013 6:27 am  •  [Post 3698]

didymos wrote:
masakari2012 wrote:I read through that JREF forum every couple of weeks to see what's going on. They had a few good points, which I took away from there. But the Pit is far superior.


It's not about which forum is teh bestest. I posted that because watching an APlusser deploy what is usually a winning SJW tactic and having it go completely awry is pretty funny.


It's the kind of thread Notung should approve of. No profanity, no gratuitous insults, "lively" but hardly acrimonious debate. I see at least one refugee from The Borg found there way there which, AFAIAC, is a still win for the good guys. The 'Pit isn't for everyone, but we're still here. And what would The Borg do for an enemy if we weren't? (That's not really a serious question - they can invent them out of thin air.)
it seems to me that science and love of my fellow human beings is more than sufficient argument to guide the entirety of my life - Rev. PC Myers.

"But I love..I love..all people" E. Mielke, Stasi head 1957-89, shortly before his murder trial.
User avatar
AnonymousCowherd
.
.
 
Posts: 1247
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2012 4:49 am
Location: The Penumbra of Doubt

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]

Postby decius » Sun Feb 03, 2013 6:37 am  •  [Post 3699]

Dick Strawkins wrote:
Part of the reason I post here is because I found it the one place in the online atheist community where people were taking seriously the problem of hypocrisy.
There is a line to be drawn in the sand here.
Bad taste jokes about someone being a fatty are juvinile and silly.
Calling for people to be raped is so far over the line that I am seriously wondering whether we have been set up.
The alternative, and probably closer to the truth is that we have some crossover with the MRA community who don't seem to take this sort of shit seriously.
I suggest we do take it seriously.


I couldn't agree more.
User avatar
decius
.
.
 
Posts: 1265
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 2:08 am

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]

Postby Jan Steen » Sun Feb 03, 2013 6:49 am  •  [Post 3700]

Dick Strawkins wrote:I recognized the allusion - and I was going to complain to you about it.
Even though it's from the remake, the character you've painted as Svan is, I think, the same as the character called 'Willow' in the original 1973 movie, where she was played by the incredibly sexy Britt Eckland.
The dance scene in the pub bedroom is one of the most erotic scenes ever in a mainstream movie.
Well it was, until you done that photoshop.
Now I'll never be able to watch it again without thinking of Svan.
:twisted:


Yeah, that sucks. I deeply, deeply and most humbly apologise. :oops:
Fighting hypocrisy since Sun Oct 14, 2012.
User avatar
Jan Steen
.
.
 
Posts: 1811
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2012 5:18 am

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]

Postby Jan Steen » Sun Feb 03, 2013 6:56 am  •  [Post 3701]

decius wrote:
Dick Strawkins wrote:
Part of the reason I post here is because I found it the one place in the online atheist community where people were taking seriously the problem of hypocrisy.
There is a line to be drawn in the sand here.
Bad taste jokes about someone being a fatty are juvinile and silly.
Calling for people to be raped is so far over the line that I am seriously wondering whether we have been set up.
The alternative, and probably closer to the truth is that we have some crossover with the MRA community who don't seem to take this sort of shit seriously.
I suggest we do take it seriously.


I couldn't agree more.


Seconded.
Fighting hypocrisy since Sun Oct 14, 2012.
User avatar
Jan Steen
.
.
 
Posts: 1811
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2012 5:18 am

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]

Postby EdwardGemmer » Sun Feb 03, 2013 7:04 am  •  [Post 3702]

I've always thought of FTB as like Dwight from the Office, full of weird inane rambling that THEY ARE ABSOLUTELY SURE ABOUT! The Slymepit gets to be Jim and take the role of pranking them at every opportunity.
User avatar
EdwardGemmer
.
.
 
Posts: 387
Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2013 4:15 pm

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]

Postby AnonymousCowherd » Sun Feb 03, 2013 7:11 am  •  [Post 3703]

Dick Strawkins wrote:
decius wrote:Dick Strawkins, check your PM please.


OK, so apparently the comments that SDG originally posted have been edited and his original words were much more in line with the sort of violent rape fantasies that we have collectively condemned.
Part of the reason I post here is because I found it the one place in the online atheist community where people were taking seriously the problem of hypocrisy.
There is a line to be drawn in the sand here.
Bad taste jokes about someone being a fatty are juvinile and silly.
Calling for people to be raped is so far over the line that I am seriously wondering whether we have been set up.
The alternative, and probably closer to the truth is that we have some crossover with the MRA community who don't seem to take this sort of shit seriously.
I suggest we do take it seriously.


I didn't see SDG's original flameout (and don't wish to, but I'll take the Big L's word for it), but I'm going to strongly disagree with all of his violent phantasies.

I don't believe they are serious threats any more than Rebecca's set of messages or the "butterfly tagger" nonsense. We can laugh them off and point out the hypocrisy of the FTBorgers but it doesn't do any good to start sending the very messages they have shown they will treat as a threat. I don't care if it was the red wine, red bull or red mist talking, it was unneccessary, unpleasant and dumb.

In theory, I don't like to see restrictions on what people say or how they say it but, obviously, there have to be some. Given the opposition will not hesitate to stoop to any level to shut us up, giving them the opportunity to do so is daft. It was the same with Eucli- there doesn't have to be any substance to the allegations, but making them can get the site shut down until they are investigated and, eventually, chucked out. Afterwards, of course, you become "that hate site that was dealing pr0n to little girls" (cue colon), and that shit can stick, even if it is totally disproved.

So this is my pub too, but if I haven't got enough sense to stop myself from doing things that will get it closed down (even temporarily), I shouldn't be surprised if the landlord wants to keep his license and boot me out on the keister.
it seems to me that science and love of my fellow human beings is more than sufficient argument to guide the entirety of my life - Rev. PC Myers.

"But I love..I love..all people" E. Mielke, Stasi head 1957-89, shortly before his murder trial.
User avatar
AnonymousCowherd
.
.
 
Posts: 1247
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2012 4:49 am
Location: The Penumbra of Doubt

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]

Postby AnonymousCowherd » Sun Feb 03, 2013 7:25 am  •  [Post 3704]

Paul Fidalgo drinks the Koolaid. http://freethoughtblogs.com/nearearthob ... nd-listen/
Not a very interesting read, as it's just a retreat of the usual A+ mantra, and the A+ remoras glom on pretty quickly. Notung shows up and tries to be reasonable and, er, skeptical, so you can guess how that went.

The A+ers seem to spend more time on FTB than on their own forum safe space, only going back there to tell each other how they commented before the 'Pit did, and *group hug*.

So with CFI continuing to throw skepticism under the bus, and PZ and Jen also wanting to renounce skepticism, will CFI become the Centre for Feminist Ideology? I wonder how the rank and file feel about that?
it seems to me that science and love of my fellow human beings is more than sufficient argument to guide the entirety of my life - Rev. PC Myers.

"But I love..I love..all people" E. Mielke, Stasi head 1957-89, shortly before his murder trial.
User avatar
AnonymousCowherd
.
.
 
Posts: 1247
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2012 4:49 am
Location: The Penumbra of Doubt

Re: Now sponsored by [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]

Postby AnonymousCowherd » Sun Feb 03, 2013 7:41 am  •  [Post 3705]

clownshoe wrote:
Michael K Gray wrote:
rayshul wrote:In Australia there were a series of crimes by someone in a burkha, as well as a court case where a woman had attacked a cop (I think! memory hazy) but could not be convicted because she refused to remove her burka. Therefore it was impossible to identify her. There's a lot of fuckery that goes on with this sort of thing (down with this sort of thing!).

That is basically not true.
In a case where a burka-wearing female was pulled over by Aussie cops for dangerous driving (by dint of obscured vision), she elected to take the case to court, rather than pay the fine. Her defence was based on Religious Privilege trumping state laws. In Australia!
If I remember rightly, her defence was dismissed, and the fine & demerit points upheld.


Are you talking about Carnita Matthews? or someone else?
It wasn't a series of crimes, just one (but according to news paper reports had a history of other traffic offences). She was convicted of making a false statement to police in 2010 and sentence to six months in prison. Carnita Matthews then appealed that conviction and it was over-turned, and then she tried to get court costs from the police but was that turned down by the judge. If she was the person in side the burqa (and the apellantt judge could not be sure which is why he overturned the conviction) then she did indeed get away with it because her face was covered.


Mathews was lucky. The original offence was a traffic one (which stood), but then "someone" with their face covered made a claim that the traffic Police had made her remove her covering and was therefore a racist. That complaint was found to be untrue and she was sentenced to a fine and six months porridge. This was appealed and she got off the false complaint charge, but had to pay her costs. The judge refused those costs (and they were more than court costs) because he thought another judge might reasonably have convicted her! The State government immediately extended Police and others powers to demand removal of face coverings for ID purposes, so it likely won't happen again. There have since been huge protests by helmeted "youths" outside the Church of Laterday Motorcycle Couriers.
it seems to me that science and love of my fellow human beings is more than sufficient argument to guide the entirety of my life - Rev. PC Myers.

"But I love..I love..all people" E. Mielke, Stasi head 1957-89, shortly before his murder trial.
User avatar
AnonymousCowherd
.
.
 
Posts: 1247
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2012 4:49 am
Location: The Penumbra of Doubt

PreviousNext

Return to Periodic Table of Swearing - The Undead Thread

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: deLurch, ERV, Huehuehue, katamari Damassi, Linus, Parody Accountant, Really?, Yanbu and 8 guests