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

[welch]

I don't give a fuck!

I know, which is why I don't say this more often. I just usually facepalm to myself, and try to work out why people who seem to hate FTB etc. so much would go to such lengths to help them.

if this place so offends your sensibilities, by all means, there are other places on the internet you may go. Please, do go there.

I imagine you spend just as much time tut-tutting at the FTB lot...oh wait, no you fucking don't, certainly not on your site.

let's see, posts wherein Notung has directly opposed FTB using the tools he feels we should limit ourselves to:

Since 24 Aug. 2012, you've done this TWICE. Once about "DrunkenRapeGate" and once about A+. The rest of it is naught but philosophy theory with the occasional petition request. So it's pretty clear you aren't about to sully your hands pointing out the problem with FTB/A+ et al.

If you are unwilling to do the work yourself, then shut the fuck up about how the people who ARE doing the work fill their toolbox.

[welch]

It gave me pause too, for a moment.

The only way you're not going to get that stuff is if we have moderation against things which are hurtful, crude, or offensive. As soon as you have that, you have to determine what crosses that threshold and who makes that judgement. I don't trust anyone to decide for me what I should see and read.

So I could set up my own forum, try to tempt you all over, and then engage in the thankless job of deleting crass content whilst scaring you all off back here. Or I can face up to the fact that only a moron would judge me for the things that bhoytony or whoever say, and relax again.

Maybe even laugh at a few of those excerpted posts.

The first part is a fair point, and I know that any unmoderated place is going to get like that. So rather than blaming the forum itself (I don't) I blame the individuals involved - many of whom I do find amusing sometimes.

I also agree that only someone dishonest or stupid would try to judge someone by the fact they post/visit here. But so what? It still gives them rhetorical ammo to use against 'Slymepitters', and helps discredit the only place hosting a free and continuous discussion on these issues.

Yes. I'm sure we are quite convenient for you.

[welch]

So I just watched the Google hangout with PZ, C0nc0rdance, TruePooka and SkepticalHeretic, and wow, PZ flat out lied throughout the whole thing. When pressed by C0nc0rdance and SkepticalHeretic about his banning policies and even about this very site and Abbie Smith, he either deflected like crazy, claimed he didn't ban anyone except those who failed to coherently argue a point, and that he didn't build a wall within his blog. He also claimed that plenty of dissenting views are expressed on Pharyngula. WTF, is there a 3rd magical Pharyngula somewhere that doesn't feature the auto-bans just for being a member of a site like this and where people whose comments which are not in line with the majority opinion aren't deleted, altered or never seen after the majority of users deem them unnaceptable for being contrary to popular viewpoints?

[youtube]1Q7PprXJ-h8[/youtube]

I take nothing PeeZus says seriously unless he says it to my face.

[decius]

Bullshit, and you can't even come close to proving that on any level. Prove to me, show me one fucking scintilla of proof that if we, right the fuck now, behaved as they, or you wish us to, that anything, any. fucking. thing. would change one goddamned iota.

I respectfully disagree. There are high-profile atheists who would have otherwise contributed but have been positively put off. You might argue that it's their loss and I would be tempted to agree to some extent. But knowing a few of them, I can assure that heir intellectual prowess would be a formidable asset. You'd agree that low-brow shit isn't for everyone.

[jimthepleb]

I am pretty sure we can continue to self-regulate as we have done in the past. Last night was an excellent example of someone not being tolerated when the unspoken boundaries were crossed. There was unequivocal condemnation of his behaviour, and within the ensuing conversation he even rowed back himself given a little time for retrospection. Lsuoma has given us a list of what he will not tolerate and as owner of the board he is the final arbiter of what is, and is not permissible. I do wonder what would have happened had Lsuoma not been active at the time of the posting. A lag in dealing with this kind of crap could be extremely risky, as it leaves the potential for a rogue comment to lie unedited for several hours, giving vindictive lurkers the ability to make hay while the issue is not addressed.
Perhaps it would be an idea to give some (limited) ops to some of the more established commenters just to cover your (large) arse? Although it's a job i wouldn't want in a month of Sundays. Just throwing it out there.

[welch]

Let's put this in perspective here.
Steffie had to trawl through months of slympit threads to find those pictures.
We simply don't post such stuff that often.
PZ posted some similar pictures that he found here a couple of months back and I think they are also in Stephies post.
The most recent ones are that doggy humping a cow gif.

Yep, but it only takes a few to make it look like it's representative - let's face it, that's all they want or need to do.

Steffie, if you are reading, I promise in future to never post a picture that contains a reference to your weight (BTW, the Zepplin one was not about your weight, it was based on your over-inflated ego)

In future all my photoshops of you will, instead, be based on your dishonesty, on your stupidity, and most importantly, on your support for misogynistic insults and acts of violence commited against women by your good friend Greg Laden.
;)

So you're saying we should post things that they don't want to reproduce on their blog. That might be a better strategy!

you have a fucking blog, be my guest. Post away.

[jimthepleb]

bad sex is never good. mediocre sex isn't even good. fuck the cardio aspect. can one fuck a cardio aspect?

With great effort.

well my cardio aspect is fucked.

[welch]

What I think is that it is a fair point to ask people to avoid crude jokes based on peoples weight or looks.

I'm as fat as a hog and ugly as a blobfish. When I sit around the house, I really sit *around* the house. And I'm so ugly, even the elephant man paid to see me.

I'm the biggest asshole you will ever know.

[welch]

I don't give a fuck!

I know, which is why I don't say this more often. I just usually facepalm to myself, and try to work out why people who seem to hate FTB etc. so much would go to such lengths to help them.

I acknowledge you as my moral superior.

He's talking about strategy (as he sees it), not morality.

Exactly - I can't believe you even had to say that - felt like I was commenting on Pharyngula for a second!

Funny how when one lectures people about how they are saying the wrong kinds of things in a pompous manner, it comes across as a morality lecture as well. HOW DOES THAT HAPPEN?

fucking magnets.

[Cunning Punt]

Eightheded.

Also - if there's some kind of stated rule about 'no rape threats' or 'no wishing that people get killed/raped', then that will help dispel the myth that rape threats are what the posters here do. If you see what I mean.

Or certain people will say, "See? They actually need a Rule to stop themselves from saying this kind of thing."

Which is why i think that a community-based manifesto or code of conduct is better than a "rule".

Actually I do agree with it. So, twelthed, or thirteenthed or whatever it is. As far certain other people are concerned you are damned if you do, damned if you don't. I also think, and I've said this before, making fun of people's involuntarily acquired characteristics (as MKG put it) is wrong, gives the baboons ammo, and is unnecessary, as their words are more than enough. And SDG is a fucking hot headed moron obviously embittered by whatever shit he's been through and is unable to think rationally about this stuff.

[Tigzy]

Bullshit, and you can't even come close to proving that on any level. Prove to me, show me one fucking scintilla of proof that if we, right the fuck now, behaved as they, or you wish us to, that anything, any. fucking. thing. would change one goddamned iota.

I respectfully disagree. There are high-profile atheists who would have otherwise contributed but have been positively put off. You might argue that it's their loss and I would be tempted to agree to some extent. But knowing a few of them, I can assure that heir intellectual prowess would be a formidable asset. You'd agree that low-brow shit isn't for everyone.

Put off from what? Disagreeing with the FTB mob? If these high-profile atheists reckon that such a stance is contingent on being a contributing member of the pit, then I'd guess their intellectual prowess ain't that great.

[Git]

What I think is that it is a fair point to ask people to avoid crude jokes based on peoples weight or looks.

I'm as fat as a hog and ugly as a blobfish. When I sit around the house, I really sit *around* the house. And I'm so ugly, even the elephant man paid to see me.

I'm the biggest asshole you will ever know.

Are we having an arsehole-off?

Right, arseholes at dawn then. Or outside in the playground at breaktime (obviously a catholic school :D ).

[ReneeHendricks]

And here we go (thanks SDG):

jenniferphillips:

So I took one for the team. I followed some of Stephanie’s links to the pit last night and read some of the surrounding comments. There were, indeed, a few posters who said they found, for example, that Jerry Conlon’s acid comment was out of bounds (example). Of course others in that discussion were suggesting that Jerry Conlon was a fake account created by the baboons, that Ophelia was baiting people *hoping* for just such a reaction, that it was just a joke, etc. etc. A range of responses, in other words, a minority (but non-zero) number of which were disapproving.

I skipped to the end of the current conversation and became acquainted with a commenter named ‘SomeDumbGuy’ who apparently doesn’t like Amanda Marcotte very much–based on the fact that he concluded his comment with the phrase ‘Fuck her. Fuck her. Kill her. Dump her in a ditch’. This actually did get some negative attention from the mod and a couple of other posters. That was at 11PM PST last night. This morning, the offensive phrase written by SDG that I reproduced above has been miraculously modified to read “Kiss her. Kiss her. Kiss her. Kiss her on the cheeks”.

Not being an obsessive, thought policing stalker, I did not think to produce a screen shot of the original. However, evidence of the original content can still be gleaned from the reactions on that page (see, for example, here)

It goes without saying that this evidence isn’t going to fly with the True Skeptics, but I know what I saw.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/lousycanuck ... ent-101295

[Karmakin]

Eightheded.

Also - if there's some kind of stated rule about 'no rape threats' or 'no wishing that people get killed/raped', then that will help dispel the myth that rape threats are what the posters here do. If you see what I mean.

Or certain people will say, "See? They actually need a Rule to stop themselves from saying this kind of thing."

Which is why i think that a community-based manifesto or code of conduct is better than a "rule".

Actually I do agree with it. So, twelthed, or thirteenthed or whatever it is. As far certain other people are concerned you are damned if you do, damned if you don't. I also think, and I've said this before, making fun of people's involuntarily acquired characteristics (as MKG put it) is wrong, gives the baboons ammo, and is unnecessary, as their words are more than enough. And SDG is a fucking hot headed moron obviously embittered by whatever shit he's been through and is unable to think rationally about this stuff.

Exactly. Want to REALLY get to them? Call them out for what they are.

Over-entitled bigots of the highest order.

[jimthepleb]

I love watching welch and sacha play catch up. There's a bit of me thinking 'yeah just wait 'til you see what XXXX said!' Endlessley funny.

[jimthepleb]

What I think is that it is a fair point to ask people to avoid crude jokes based on peoples weight or looks.

I'm as fat as a hog and ugly as a blobfish. When I sit around the house, I really sit *around* the house. And I'm so ugly, even the elephant man paid to see me.

I'm the biggest asshole you will ever know.

Are we having an arsehole-off?

Right, arseholes at dawn then. Or outside in the playground at breaktime (obviously a catholic school :D ).

Goatse's at 10 paces.

[decius]

Put off from what? Disagreeing with the FTB mob? If these high-profile atheists reckon that such a stance is contingent on being a contributing member of the pit, then I'd guess their intellectual prowess ain't that great.

Do I really have to spell out for you what low-brow shit is made of? To get the point across a bit hyperbolically, can you imagine one Dawkins posting here during a puke pictures fest ? Would that make him an idiot or someone who can think of more fitting venues for his thoughts?

[Tigzy]

Put off from what? Disagreeing with the FTB mob? If these high-profile atheists reckon that such a stance is contingent on being a contributing member of the pit, then I'd guess their intellectual prowess ain't that great.

Do I really have to spell out for you what low-brow shit is made of? To get the point across a bit hyperbolically, can you imagine one Dawkins posting here during a puke pictures fest ? Would that make him an idiot or someone who can think of more fitting venues for his thoughts?

I dunno - maybe you could spell out to me why the slymepit ought to have the monopoly on anti-FTB sentiment. Are anti-FTB people not really anti-FTB unless they post here? Are these people not true anti-FTBers, or something?

[jimthepleb]

And here we go (thanks SDG):

jenniferphillips:

So I took one for the team. I followed some of Stephanie’s links to the pit last night and read some of the surrounding comments. There were, indeed, a few posters who said they found, for example, that Jerry Conlon’s acid comment was out of bounds (example). Of course others in that discussion were suggesting that Jerry Conlon was a fake account created by the baboons, that Ophelia was baiting people *hoping* for just such a reaction, that it was just a joke, etc. etc. A range of responses, in other words, a minority (but non-zero) number of which were disapproving.

I skipped to the end of the current conversation and became acquainted with a commenter named ‘SomeDumbGuy’ who apparently doesn’t like Amanda Marcotte very much–based on the fact that he concluded his comment with the phrase ‘Fuck her. Fuck her. Kill her. Dump her in a ditch’. This actually did get some negative attention from the mod and a couple of other posters. That was at 11PM PST last night. This morning, the offensive phrase written by SDG that I reproduced above has been miraculously modified to read “Kiss her. Kiss her. Kiss her. Kiss her on the cheeks”.

Not being an obsessive, thought policing stalker, I did not think to produce a screen shot of the original. However, evidence of the original content can still be gleaned from the reactions on that page (see, for example, here)

It goes without saying that this evidence isn’t going to fly with the True Skeptics, but I know what I saw.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/lousycanuck ... ent-101295

Yup, entirely fucking predictable. When i read SDG's comment i sat here for 5 minutes with my head in my hands knowing what was to come. I almost wish Lsuoma hadn't edited his comment, but its not my arse on the line, so we could keep the context of the reaction to it.
To be fair to JenBPhillips, at least she DOES point out that there was a negative reaction but not that it was from almost ALL the registered users online at the time.
SDG you took a big steaming dump on our porch and have now flounced to leave us whatever heat it attracts. Nice work fella! :doh:

[d4m10n]

If no one supported SDG respecting that particular post, and if the mod went so far as to pull the offending language, then how can it possibly make sense to attribute his attitude and language to the Pit in general?

No one here is applauding or enabling what SDG wrote. Canuck, please take note.

[decius]

I dunno - maybe you could spell out to me why the slymepit ought to have the monopoly on anti-FTB sentiment. Are anti-FTB people not really anti-FTB unless they post here? Are these people not true anti-FTBers, or something?

That isn't what I was saying or implying, not even close.

[sacha]

You can no longer be a middle-of-the-road feminist or social-justice advocate in this conversation because it's now a Setarian extreme-left struggle against every invisible power axis in society. It's like the war on terror -- amorphous, borderless, endless, and impossible to win (which of course suits the professional ideological arms-dealers and A+ security apparatchiks and language surveillance police just fine).

QFT

[Metalogic42]

If no one supported SDG respecting that particular post, and if the mod went so far as to pull the offending language, then how can it possibly make sense to attribute his attitude and language to the Pit in general?

No one here is applauding or enabling what SDG wrote. Canuck, please take note.

It doesn't make sense. But this never stopped them before, why would it now?

[justinvacula]

http://i.imgur.com/EKz6wUk.jpg

[Tigzy]

I dunno - maybe you could spell out to me why the slymepit ought to have the monopoly on anti-FTB sentiment. Are anti-FTB people not really anti-FTB unless they post here? Are these people not true anti-FTBers, or something?

That isn't what I was saying or implying, not even close.

From what I can glean, you said that intellectually rigorous, high profile atheists would be put-off by what you perceive as low-brow humour at the pit. My question was: 'Put off from what, exactly?'

Put off from contributing here? So fuckin what. This could only possible be a problem if the pit had a monopoly - or most of the people here had an intent to monopolise - on anti-FTB sentiment.

Put off from making anti-FTB statements in general? In which case, their so-called intellectual prowess ain't up to much.

[decius]

Put off from contributing here? So fuckin what. This could only possible be a problem if the pit had a monopoly - or most of the people here had an intent to monopolise - on anti-FTB sentiment.

The intellectual prowess required for concocting such monumental false dichotomies should be commended.

[justinvacula]

http://skepticink.com/justinvacula/2013 ... lar-woman/

30 comments now including

I don't know how you thought Secular Woman was going to address women's attendance without looking at the gender dynamics of the community. I mean, did you think that SW was just going to encourage cons to print everything a lady-friendly shade of pink? Give away free chocolate? Maybe have more speakers covering Female Interest topics like hair-curling and vacuuming?

You wrote, "Secular Woman is no longer a fresh breath of air in the conversation surrounding problems women face, but rather is voicing the same narrative we have been hearing from Freethought Blogs and the Skepchick network."

I mean, I'm sorry that you have to keep hearing from all these women that predatory male behavior in community/activist spaces is really alienating for them. That must be hard for you. But maybe the fact that you have to keep hearing it is not a sign that more and more women are going mad with feminism without your guidance; maybe it's a sign that something's really wrong.

To switch up the dynamics a little, if my friends who are people of color complain repeatedly about racism in a community space I share with them (say, in a gaming group or something), I can either do what you seem to be doing and say, "Well if I as a white person haven't personally seen this racism, it's not happening and y'all are imagining it," or I can admit that since we're talking about experiences that are less likely to happen to me that maybe I shouldn't be judging from my limited experiential sample size and should at least consider the perspective that the people most likely to experience racism are the probable experts on experiencing racism.

I'm sure you have a lot of women friends. I'm just wondering how many women in your own personal social circle would have to tell you someone's behavior was a problem before you'd believe that they're qualified to judge such things. Are you the kind of guy that women feel like they can come to if another man is being inappropriate and they need backup? Or is your blog an accurate representation of how seriously you take reports from women about their own problems?

[sacha]

Abbie!

Ricky Gervais needs you:

AIDS vs Rabies.png

(56.76 KiB) Downloaded 128 times

[Pitchguest]

Guys. Anita Sarkeesian has announced she's soon about to release her FIRST VIDEO. Six months delayed after the original due date, and two months after the most recent due date, her very first video. A video which she asked her backers to make the work for her, a video she got more than 26 times more budget for, a video with more than 26 times the production it otherwise would have had. It better be one hell of a presentation.

On top of that, her videos are badly researched (best example being her review of Bayonetta) and are designed to draw emotional responses from her audience rather than relying on any evidence of systemic sexism or misogyny in games, or within the bigger gaming community.

However, how Anita Sarkeesian advertised her campaign to collect money for her videos was nothing short of genius. Comments on all of her videos are closed or highly moderated to remove any illusion of dissent, however the video which advertised her Kickstarter neither had comments moderated nor closed. Since the campaign was to make videos about sexism in videogames and perhaps in the gaming community at large, and that YouTube is ripe with adolescent teenagers and trolls, this was the perfect opportunity for her. Using her position as a woman, she laid on the sensationalism, the threats she received, the insults, everything we know and recognise from the FC(n) [who knows, maybe she got a lesson or two?] With the right advertising, getting it publicised to enough mediums. Presto!

On the other hand, Lousy Canuck says different. (Warning: leads to FTB) Her videos are greatly researched and she's controversial because she "dared to look at a space, the gaming world, that a whole lot of men believe they own, for the record." (Of course, by saying "a whole lot of men" he's using a renowned Fox News tactic by uttering unevidenced fluff, but safe of people calling him full of shit.) Although he adds a moment of clarity where he says, " ...people have called her a scammer repeatedly because no videos [after her campaign] had then been produced" he later falls back into status quo with the next sentence. Shame. Then he says he thinks her very first video after eight months will be "very well researched," because she has a Tumblr account with "well over a hundred video game screenshots." (If you're curious, it's this one.) Yeah, we're in trouble now. A little over a hundred pictures of cherrypicked examples where women might or might not be subject to sexism (by the way, is this a good time to mention that sexism is a two-way street?), Anita Sarkeesian is supposed to school us all in why, once and for all, the gaming community (and gamer culture) are a bunch of dicks.

[Tigzy]

Put off from contributing here? So fuckin what. This could only possible be a problem if the pit had a monopoly - or most of the people here had an intent to monopolise - on anti-FTB sentiment.

The intellectual prowess required for concocting such monumental false dichotomies should be commended.

So tell me - why is it important to the anti-FTB/skepchick/A+ cause in general that these intellectually rigorous atheists post here? Sure, it might be good for the pit; but it changes nothing for the anti-FTB cause in general, as I'm pretty sure these intellectual hard-hitters have enough intellectual hard-hittingness to combat the FTB/skepchick/A+ crowd as they see fit, with or without participation in the pit. It can only be a problem if you believe that anti-FTB sentiment should be concentrated here.

[Pitchguest]

*that should be "safe FROM people calling him full of shit." >_<

[Karmakin]

Guys. Anita Sarkeesian has announced she's soon about to release her FIRST VIDEO. Six months delayed after the original due date, and two months after the most recent due date, her very first video. A video which she asked her backers to make the work for her, a video she got more than 26 times more budget for, a video with more than 26 times the production it otherwise would have had. It better be one hell of a presentation.

On top of that, her videos are badly researched (best example being her review of Bayonetta) and are designed to draw emotional responses from her audience rather than relying on any evidence of systemic sexism or misogyny in games, or within the bigger gaming community.

However, how Anita Sarkeesian advertised her campaign to collect money for her videos was nothing short of genius. Comments on all of her videos are closed or highly moderated to remove any illusion of dissent, however the video which advertised her Kickstarter neither had comments moderated nor closed. Since the campaign was to make videos about sexism in videogames and perhaps in the gaming community at large, and that YouTube is ripe with adolescent teenagers and trolls, this was the perfect opportunity for her. Using her position as a woman, she laid on the sensationalism, the threats she received, the insults, everything we know and recognise from the FC(n) [who knows, maybe she got a lesson or two?] With the right advertising, getting it publicised to enough mediums. Presto!

On the other hand, Lousy Canuck says different. (Warning: leads to FTB) Her videos are greatly researched and she's controversial because she "dared to look at a space, the gaming world, that a whole lot of men believe they own, for the record." (Of course, by saying "a whole lot of men" he's using a renowned Fox News tactic by uttering unevidenced fluff, but safe of people calling him full of shit.) Although he adds a moment of clarity where he says, " ...people have called her a scammer repeatedly because no videos [after her campaign] had then been produced" he later falls back into status quo with the next sentence. Shame. Then he says he thinks her very first video after eight months will be "very well researched," because she has a Tumblr account with "well over a hundred video game screenshots." (If you're curious, it's this one.) Yeah, we're in trouble now. A little over a hundred pictures of cherrypicked examples where women might or might not be subject to sexism (by the way, is this a good time to mention that sexism is a two-way street?), Anita Sarkeesian is supposed to school us all in why, once and for all, the gaming community (and gamer culture) are a bunch of dicks.

You know, when she first did the whole KS thing, I was actually on the other "side". And my reaction was oh shit. This is going to go over like a bag of bricks, and it's going to absolutely ruin the image of feminism to a whole lot of people.

Still have the same reaction, except it's laughs rather than oh shit.

[welch]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... n_Girl.jpg
I guess Ophelia still has Nazi Germany on the brain, because, after her post saying, again, that she never made an analogy between TAM and Nazi Germany (she was just comparing Grothe to Goebbels -- it's TOTALLY DIFFERENT ;)) ..... she has a new post up.

In her current post, "When is World Yellow Star Day?" she complains about something called "World Hijab Day" and quotes two ex-muslim girls who still feel family pressure to wear the hijab.

According to the BBC -

Originated by New York woman Nazma Khan, the movement has been organised almost solely over social networking sites. It has attracted interest from Muslims and non-Muslims in more than 50 countries across the world.

For many people, the hijab is a symbol of oppression and divisiveness. It's a visible target that often bears the brunt of a larger debate about Islam in the West.

World Hijab Day is designed to counteract these controversies. It encourages non-Muslim women (or even Muslim women who do not ordinarily wear one) to don the hijab and experience what it's like to do so, as part of a bid to foster better understanding.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-21283301

Now, the hijab may be stupid and oppressive and patriarchal and religious -- but, especially in this context, it is really not comparable to the yellow star. Good job Ophie -- way to beat that reputation as a knee-jerk godwinner.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/butterflies ... -star-day/

Its not directly comparable, but it is on the same continuum. The hijab is a misogynistic hate rag, a death shroud almost up there with a nazi uniform, a symbol of an actual fucking patriarchy.

It appals me how many liberals defend it.

And people no more "choose" to wear it any more than a slave "chooses" to wear leg-irons. Defending one is like defending the other.

I disagree. I don't doubt that some women do in fact choose to wear a headscarf. Some probably do it for religious reasons, some will do it for cultural reasons, and some for sartorial reasons. Doubtless, other women are coerced into wearing it. I know someone who wears one when leaving her family home and then immediately takes it off. I have seen other women get chided on the street by men they don't know to "fix their headscarf" because it wasn't covering them enough. Those are real problems, but while some people do in fact choose to wear it I could never support banning it (I think you suggested doing so previously, forgive me if not). It is already illegal to threaten or coerce someone into doing something they don't want to, it should not be illegal to wear particular clothing.

Don't you know that if you disagree with Git about the middle east, you're wrong, and probably a nazi?

[decius]

So tell me - why is it important to the anti-FTB/skepchick/A+ cause in general that these intellectually rigorous atheists post here? Sure, it might be good for the pit; but it changes nothing for the anti-FTB cause in general, as I'm pretty sure these intellectual hard-hitters have enough intellectual hard-hittingness to combat the FTB/skepchick/A+ crowd as they see fit, with or without participation in the pit. It can only be a problem if you believe that anti-FTB sentiment should be concentrated here.

There are many practical reasons why having intelligent and articulate persons on board is better for any community, but let's just keep it empirical with one practical example. After Al joined us, the FtB anti-slyme propaganda lost a lot of traction. It is difficult to cast in a bad light a place which is frequented by individuals of his calibre. Furthermore, his presence and vocal support immediately attracted many other people.
I don't need to remind you of the importance of large readerships/memberships and public support in times of conflict.

[Mr Danksworth]

http://i.imgur.com/EKz6wUk.jpg

I didn't realize it was the Stupid Bowl today either. Who cares?

[welch]

Back when I was a casual reader of FTB, if I saw something like Steffie's post, without knowledge of the context, I really would have believed that this is a den of rapists and serial harassers. I am just glad that I came here to see for myself. It is a shame that many people will just take Zvan's post, and posts like it, at face value.

I was a casual FTBer myself, and didn't check the Pit (over at ERV) for quite a while. Just assumed all the bad things said about it were true.

However, when I finally put my skeptic's glasses on when Elevatorgate erupted, one of the things I did was check out the Pit for myself. Of course, I found that Peezus et al were lying their asses off.

The way I see it, both people who are becoming disgusted with FTB and people who are fully indoctrinated into the FTB cult come here to look. Many who were getting sick of FTB and their dishonest malicious bullshit stay here, like I did. The cultists will stay where they are. Some won't like either the Pit or FTB, and just disappear. It would be like that no matter what we posted here.

Whether or not some of the stuff on this site can be considered offensive is really no importance to me. The fact that I can say things or post pics that might be considered offensive to some is very important to me, because that's what makes the Pit the complete opposite of FTB, where every word and link is carefully scrutinized by the pitchfork-wielding villagers for the smallest sign of political incorrectness or deviation from approved athe-fem dogma. The free speech that the FTBers so tellingly mock as "FREEZE PEACH" is the Pit's greatest asset, one that they give up when they choose the FTB side.

If someone that hangs around on FTB wants to take the words of Peezus, Stephalump and Ophie regarding the Pit at face value, like I once did, then so be it. This place continues on regardless.

the pit didn't get started until elevatorbintgate.

[welch]

I took it to mean 'strategy' as well.

The naming of the pit is unfortunate, if we were to view this purely as a propaganda war.

But if people don't care then /shrug

TBH I knew people didn't care after the last time I tried saying this. I actually had a lot more support back then, but it only takes one or two. You have to convince absolutely everyone and, of course, I can't force them to agree - this isn't Pharyngula after all.

I was just venting and making my position on all this clear.

and lecturing us on our poor behavior. Don't forget that part.

[welch]

So - Peez pops up on Steffy's 'look at these people bein meanz to me' post, in order to point out that certain commentators at t'pit are incorrect to suggest that 'they' (the FTB crowd) get a good living out of the conference circuit:

PZ Myers

February 2, 2013 at 5:05 pm (UTC -6)

maintaining their monopoly of highly paid speaker positions in the US conference circuit

Bwahahahahahahahahahaha! Ha! Hahahahahahahahaahahahahahaaaaa!! Heee!

Don’t do that again. My lungs hurt now.

Hot top for people who think this is a way to make living: NONE of the major organizations pay me a penny to come speak. They cover my travel costs, and that’s it. Reason Rally? $0. TAM? $0. NECSS? $0. American Atheists, American Humanists, IEHU? $0. Skepticon? $0. And that’s OK with me.

Smaller meetings will sometimes give me an honorarium, typically $50-$100. Academic conferences where I’ve been a keynote speaker pay more, perhaps $1000. I did close to 30 talks last year, and I probably cleared $4000-$5000 total, none of it from the “atheist/skeptic conference circuit.” Those conferences can get us for dirt cheap, because we’re there to promote the cause, not make a profit.

So Peez would have us believe that his speaking gigs are largely in support of his cause rather than his pocket. And, presumably, nothing to do with partying with the skepchicks - but I digress. Anyways, were this statement made in isolation, then maybe I could believe it. Peezus is, after all, about as fanatical enough.

But...well, remember what Greta said? When she had her cancer scare? here, let's look at it again:

I’ve had to cancel my appearance at Skepticon, as well as all my other speaking gigs for the next couple of months — and I already had to cancel several speaking gigs when my dad died. Speaking gigs are a significant part of my income, both for the honoraria and the book sales.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/greta/2012/ ... -for-help/

Well, in fairness to Peez, his book isn't out yet, and hasn't been out yet for a long time - so we have no way of knowing how much the speaking gigs are likely to affect his book sales. Nevertheless, Greta still feels that the speaking gigs remain a significant part of her income - which leads me to believe that:

A: Greta must really enjoy abject poverty. 'Splains the Fluevogs I suppose; must feel like a step up from scabby rags. Just.
B: Greta does indeed make a fair bit of cash from the speaking gigs, and Peez is being...disingenuous.
C: Peez deliberately avoids asking for too much cash for his speaking gigs, because it's for the cause. Which does lead one to wonder why he says it's not a great way to make a living, if he's only taken it upon himself not to charge much for his speaking gigs.

In any case, something doesn't add up here; and I'm not talking about Greta's accounts, either.

They pay him nothing but he cleared $5K.

They pay him nothing but travel. Air travel averages out to about $500 or so. Sometimes more, sometimes less based on a wide variety of factors. Hotels are $750 - $1500.

But he makes no money from this.

Math. how's THAT work.

[welch]

[

Its not directly comparable, but it is on the same continuum. The hijab is a misogynistic hate rag, a death shroud almost up there with a nazi uniform, a symbol of an actual fucking patriarchy.

It appals me how many liberals defend it.

And people no more "choose" to wear it any more than a slave "chooses" to wear leg-irons. Defending one is like defending the other.

Does this include orthodox Jewish hair coverings of scarves and wigs?

Yes.

And to repeat: Yes.

Orthodox Jewish hair coverings of scarves and wigs are as bad and as equally misogynistic and barbaric as the hijab.

and no women choose to wear them, ever. Right, got it.

[welch]

Voluntary my arse.

As I said before, defending a woman's right to wear a veil is like defending a slave's right to wear leg-irons.

Yes, yes, dear, we get it. Now run along, I saw some people defending arabs in the back yard.

[jimthepleb]

Guys. Anita Sarkeesian has announced she's soon about to release her FIRST VIDEO. Six months delayed after the original due date, and two months after the most recent due date, her very first video. A video which she asked her backers to make the work for her, a video she got more than 26 times more budget for, a video with more than 26 times the production it otherwise would have had. It better be one hell of a presentation.

For that money she better have fireworks shooting out of her arse, dancing girls, a full philharmonic orchestra with choir and a basket of cute puppies.

[welch]

My post was a reaction to your remark about skipping over all of the insults and because of that, not even realizing how much of that there is here. That sounded pretty condescending to me.

Well that's just what I do - it's not moral, it's just because I don't find them interesting. I do sometimes find the *jokes* funny - but only the funny ones! I like AngrySkepchick, for instance.

And to be clear; I wasn't being sarcastic. I acknowledge you as my moral superior, so feel free to take a victory lap and really enjoy it. I'm not in any competition to be the most morally upstanding, or even nicest guy around. I simply do not care about the pwecious fee-fees of the professional victims, or the just plain thin skinned special snowflakes, I do not care what they or their disciples, or you, or most other people think of me. Give no quarter and ask no quarter.
Now if you were genuinely talking tactics, then I still have to disagree. There are no moderates at Almost Diamonds. If there were, and they had an IQ above room temperature(celsius scale),then they would've seen through the Cowntess' schtick and moved on already.

Well I'm not trying to take any moral high ground here. Even if they 'deserve it', I don't insult people online because it isn't productive. I usually keep all that inside my head. Regarding tactics: there are moderates who might see a retweet of Zvan's post, or they might have only a passing interest in the 'drama'. Unless they look fairly deeply (which is time-consuming) I can see how an intelligent person who doesn't know any better might think this fight is between feminists fighting for women's rights and evil internet misogynists who hate women.

You're not taking any moral high ground, just lecturing us on our behavior. Right. Perfectly clear.

[welch]

And kippah wearers can fuck off too. What sort of demented fucking idiot thinks that his imaginary friend will punish him for the rest of existance for [1]not wearing a certain type of hat?[/i]

Is there anyone who shouldn't fuck off?

I mean, besides you.

[TheMan]

So, the Baboollies appear to have discovered the Streisand Effect...

The veil is more akin to the same veil a nun would wear. It's more a symbol one is married to God rather than ownership to the husband. Unmarried young Muslim women wear a veil too.

[welch]

And kippah wearers can fuck off too. What sort of demented fucking idiot thinks that his imaginary friend will punish him for the rest of existance for [1]not wearing a certain type of hat?[/i]

Who cares? What business is it of yours? How have they stomped on your dick this morning?

If they leave me alone, and are otherwise ethical and moral members of the community, why should I care what the fuck they do?

are you new?

[AndrewV69]

And here we go (thanks SDG):

jenniferphillips:

So I took one for the team. I followed some of Stephanie’s links to the pit last night and read some of the surrounding comments. There were, indeed, a few posters who said they found, for example, that Jerry Conlon’s acid comment was out of bounds (example). Of course others in that discussion were suggesting that Jerry Conlon was a fake account created by the baboons, that Ophelia was baiting people *hoping* for just such a reaction, that it was just a joke, etc. etc. A range of responses, in other words, a minority (but non-zero) number of which were disapproving.

I skipped to the end of the current conversation and became acquainted with a commenter named ‘SomeDumbGuy’ who apparently doesn’t like Amanda Marcotte very much–based on the fact that he concluded his comment with the phrase ‘Fuck her. Fuck her. Kill her. Dump her in a ditch’. This actually did get some negative attention from the mod and a couple of other posters. That was at 11PM PST last night. This morning, the offensive phrase written by SDG that I reproduced above has been miraculously modified to read “Kiss her. Kiss her. Kiss her. Kiss her on the cheeks”.

Not being an obsessive, thought policing stalker, I did not think to produce a screen shot of the original. However, evidence of the original content can still be gleaned from the reactions on that page (see, for example, here)

It goes without saying that this evidence isn’t going to fly with the True Skeptics, but I know what I saw.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/lousycanuck ... ent-101295

Unfortunately,

jenniferphillips has mostly made a reasonably fair and balanced comment which is also factually true.

Perhaps someone can "spin" her comment, but I can not. I would feel obligated to point out the truth if such an attempt was made (not that I am saying I think someone here would do so).

[welch]

And kippah wearers can fuck off too. What sort of demented fucking idiot thinks that his imaginary friend will punish him for the rest of existance for [1]not wearing a certain type of hat?[/i]

Who cares? What business is it of yours? How have they stomped on your dick this morning?

If they leave me alone, and are otherwise ethical and moral members of the community, why should I care what the fuck they do?

Unfortunately, monotheism people especially has have shown us that it is they are incapable of leaving anyone else alone. Religion isHumans are, by its their nature a conquering and supremacist virus.

Fixed that for you.

[jimthepleb]

And kippah wearers can fuck off too. What sort of demented fucking idiot thinks that his imaginary friend will punish him for the rest of existance for [1]not wearing a certain type of hat?[/i]

Who cares? What business is it of yours? How have they stomped on your dick this morning?

If they leave me alone, and are otherwise ethical and moral members of the community, why should I care what the fuck they do?

are you new?

Read on McWelch. Read on!

[welch]

TBH I knew people didn't care after the last time I tried saying this. I actually had a lot more support back then, but it only takes one or two. You have to convince absolutely everyone and, of course, I can't force them to agree - this isn't Pharyngula after all.

No, there was a lot of support for the idea that it's better to avoid mocking people for involuntary physical traits- there is less support for the idea that it's possible to stop the "insult mining" that way.

Pretty much. The idea that any change of behavior here will change shit on the FTB/A+ side is ludicrous in its naive stupidity.

As far as invisible unknown people who may or may not be watching...how is changing one's behavior for THEM any different than changing one's behavior for an invisible unknown man in the sky who may or may not be watching?

[Pitchguest]

Post in moderation over at Lousy's:

jenniferphilips:

So fucking predictable. That comment by somedumbguy received universal condemnation from members of the 'Pit, nobody condoned it, yet you pick that as your point of contention. Unbelievable. You won't see this, though, since I won't be let out of moderation.

And Jerry Conlon's tweet? Was disapproved of. Don't you even try to go there. After he posted that, we almost said in unison that it was a tremendously stupid thing to say so I'm not sure why it is that again you should slander members of the 'Pit in that fashion. Also you know what, what does it matter what the original said if members of the 'Pit actively condemned it? This is exactly like when a new member saw fit to post a picture of what looked like child porn one time, which obviously wasn't condoned in any way, the content was removed, members looked at it in disgust and the first member EVER on the Slymepit to be banned.

However, if you, jenniferphilips, would have decided to prance your way over there at that exact moment, you would have seen it as a point of contention. Ridiculous. The least favourite son, oolon, thought it was a moment of triumph whereupon he quickly SCREENSHOTTED the child porn and mused whether to send it to the FBI. (He didn't mean it, of course, but the lengths you people go to denigrate is appalling.) For what it's worth, I couldn't give a shit what you think about Somedumbguy posting that on the Slymepit. What is important what happened afterwards, something you gleefully omit to paint a dishonest narrative. Disgraceful.

[Git]

What I think is that it is a fair point to ask people to avoid crude jokes based on peoples weight or looks.

I'm as fat as a hog and ugly as a blobfish. When I sit around the house, I really sit *around* the house. And I'm so ugly, even the elephant man paid to see me.

I'm the biggest asshole you will ever know.

Are we having an arsehole-off?

Right, arseholes at dawn then. Or outside in the playground at breaktime (obviously a catholic school :D ).

Goatse's at 10 paces.

:goatse: :goatse: :goatse: :goatse: :goatse: :goatse: :goatse: :goatse: :goatse: :goatse:

[welch]

And people no more "choose" to wear it any more than a slave "chooses" to wear leg-irons. Defending one is like defending the other.

I am going to have to disagree with you on that one. I am reasonably certain I can find lots of examples (for example such as forums such as Islam Awakening) where the women would violently disagree and insist that it is their right to wear one, and in fact you are attempting to oppress them by taking away their right to do just that.

Can you cite anything from a fairly credible source that agrees with the position you just made?

Just to clarify, I am reasonably certain you can find women who object to wearing the hijab, but I believe you blunder with your blanket statement about the choice to do so.

Git knows everything, dontcha know?

[welch]

And kippah wearers can fuck off too. What sort of demented fucking idiot thinks that his imaginary friend will punish him for the rest of existance for [1]not wearing a certain type of hat?[/i]

Who cares? What business is it of yours? How have they stomped on your dick this morning?

If they leave me alone, and are otherwise ethical and moral members of the community, why should I care what the fuck they do?

Unfortunately, monotheism especially has shown us that it is incapable of leaving anyone else alone. Religion is by its nature a conquering and supremacist virus.

In other words, you've got no reason to justify your statement about kippah wearers except your own desire to spread atheism.

Yes indeed, I am a giant non-fluffy uncompromising arsehole (one might say an utter git) when it comes to religion. I'm not so much a atheist as an anti-theist.

Thank GOD you told us. Else we might have been confused.

[Scented Nectar]

A separatist has sent me 'death' threats (good old internet bravado 'threats') and mentions the Pit too. So, might as well post this all here, partly to show Watson what a threat is and what it is not.

Here's a death threat (screen caps below) that is way more real sounding than the "you deserve..." or "I wish... happens to you" types that Watson gets once in a while. And notice how, even though it's more real sounding than Watson's page of hate 'threats', one can see that this is very likely just an internet bravado attempt to scare someone. It's very unlikely that they mean it.

I think you have made your point. Something like this would be a gift to OB, Twatson and that lot.

Now, if the author was actually in the same country I think I might be tempted to do something, like pay them a visit myself if it was not too inconvenient.

Or, you could do what I actually did last time something threatened me, call the police in their country (in their town), and fax supporting documentation to said same authorities.

The police officer I spoke to said that he had planned to swing by that address anyway. Surprise! he was already on their radar and this was a good excuse to pay said person a visit.

YMMV

Ooooo, the feminists would looove to get a threat like that. They'd probably cum reading it. But, even though it's more realistic sounding than the "I hope you..."s, I don't think it has enough credibility to report anywhere. I certainly want to laugh at it though, and make it public to compare to Watson's page 'o hate (yeah, I know, that's ALL her pages).

[JackSkeptic]

And here we go (thanks SDG):

jenniferphillips:

So I took one for the team. I followed some of Stephanie’s links to the pit last night and read some of the surrounding comments. There were, indeed, a few posters who said they found, for example, that Jerry Conlon’s acid comment was out of bounds (example). Of course others in that discussion were suggesting that Jerry Conlon was a fake account created by the baboons, that Ophelia was baiting people *hoping* for just such a reaction, that it was just a joke, etc. etc. A range of responses, in other words, a minority (but non-zero) number of which were disapproving.

I skipped to the end of the current conversation and became acquainted with a commenter named ‘SomeDumbGuy’ who apparently doesn’t like Amanda Marcotte very much–based on the fact that he concluded his comment with the phrase ‘Fuck her. Fuck her. Kill her. Dump her in a ditch’. This actually did get some negative attention from the mod and a couple of other posters. That was at 11PM PST last night. This morning, the offensive phrase written by SDG that I reproduced above has been miraculously modified to read “Kiss her. Kiss her. Kiss her. Kiss her on the cheeks”.

Not being an obsessive, thought policing stalker, I did not think to produce a screen shot of the original. However, evidence of the original content can still be gleaned from the reactions on that page (see, for example, here)

It goes without saying that this evidence isn’t going to fly with the True Skeptics, but I know what I saw.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/lousycanuck ... ent-101295

Unfortunately,

jenniferphillips has mostly made a reasonably fair and balanced comment which is also factually true.

Perhaps someone can "spin" her comment, but I can not. I would feel obligated to point out the truth if such an attempt was made (not that I am saying I think someone here would do so).

I see nothing wrong with what she said either. SDG is a wanker. I'm not expecting her to follow up though and state there was a lot of disapproval which lead to discussions of a formal set of forum rules. But then why should she?

[welch]

I see hijab and kipah wearers the way I see surlyramic wearers. They're groupthink identity badges. "Look at my kipah! That means I'm part of an elite group. Hey you're also wearing a kipah! We should be friends." That sort of thing.

Similar levels of brainwashing involved too.

yer so smrt an' dreamy.

[Scented Nectar]

The depths of human depravity, seemingly at its nadir, refuses to be held in check by the buoyancy of reason and plummets ever deeper.

That little group of youtube separatists (the ones that cluster around Krista/Femitheist) are some of the most baffling, insane cases of truth being stranger than fiction that I've ever seen. They've recently aligned themselves with the separatists at radfemhub (the ones Agent Orange exposed), but even though they share the same elimination of men dream, the youtube ones are incredibly more incoherent and stupid or something. More childish maybe.

No less bloody dangerous though. I really thought femitheist was a poe. Scary stuff.

She might be one. Under her real name life, she has mugshots from partying with the boys too hard, and she has boyfriends, a child, and also it seems she considers herself a christian. She does NOT lead a separatist lifestyle under her real name (which also has pictures), so she wasn't lying way back when she doxxed herself. I won't repeat the dox here). She may very well be a poe. Or a set of twins?

[welch]

No, there was a lot of support for the idea that it's better to avoid mocking people for involuntary physical traits- there is less support for the idea that it's possible to stop the "insult mining" that way.

I'm not sure that's right - IIRC on Justin Griffith's now infamous thread, people like Justicar and a few of the newbies (at the time) were saying we're 'cleaning it up' (referring especially to a certain kick, which was being 'insult mined' to high heaven). Then, naturally that plan went out of the window pretty quickly and pissed a few people off.

on ERV, sure.

[AbsurdWalls]

And here we go (thanks SDG):

jenniferphillips:

So I took one for the team. I followed some of Stephanie’s links to the pit last night and read some of the surrounding comments. There were, indeed, a few posters who said they found, for example, that Jerry Conlon’s acid comment was out of bounds (example). Of course others in that discussion were suggesting that Jerry Conlon was a fake account created by the baboons, that Ophelia was baiting people *hoping* for just such a reaction, that it was just a joke, etc. etc. A range of responses, in other words, a minority (but non-zero) number of which were disapproving.

I skipped to the end of the current conversation and became acquainted with a commenter named ‘SomeDumbGuy’ who apparently doesn’t like Amanda Marcotte very much–based on the fact that he concluded his comment with the phrase ‘Fuck her. Fuck her. Kill her. Dump her in a ditch’. This actually did get some negative attention from the mod and a couple of other posters. That was at 11PM PST last night. This morning, the offensive phrase written by SDG that I reproduced above has been miraculously modified to read “Kiss her. Kiss her. Kiss her. Kiss her on the cheeks”.

Not being an obsessive, thought policing stalker, I did not think to produce a screen shot of the original. However, evidence of the original content can still be gleaned from the reactions on that page (see, for example, here)

It goes without saying that this evidence isn’t going to fly with the True Skeptics, but I know what I saw.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/lousycanuck ... ent-101295

Unfortunately,

jenniferphillips has mostly made a reasonably fair and balanced comment which is also factually true.

Perhaps someone can "spin" her comment, but I can not. I would feel obligated to point out the truth if such an attempt was made (not that I am saying I think someone here would do so).

I see nothing wrong with what she said either. SDG is a wanker. I'm not expecting her to follow up though and state there was a lot of disapproval which lead to discussions of a formal set of forum rules. But then why should she?

Yeah, that reminds me of Dillahunty's objection to Thunderf00t "quote-mining" him in his video.

"Yeah that happened, but it wasn't me!"* (in that sense him being himself)

*Fake quote, can't remember original wording

[welch]

Couldn't both be true? Could PZ get nothing because he demands nothing and OB demands a price. Or it could simply be the $5 pa and the extra books she sells make a difference. Not to forget that spending a big portion of the year being fed by other people is worth a lot.

On another point. The only conferences I've been to are the GAC conferences in Melbourne. The thing I found surprising about PZ is that he pretty much wanders around alone. People (me included) stop to say hi and chat for awhile but you don't see him with a phalanx of followers.

well, given how creepy and unctuous he is in person, this is not a surprise.