Nerds. Nerds EVERYWHERE...

[jugheadnaut]

Just a warning that Hornbeck has a guest article on OB's titled: A Statistical Analysis of a Sexual Assault Case

Don't say you weren't warned.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/butterflies ... more-15671

I won't say I wasn't warned. I know that in general he comes across like someone with an IQ of about 95 who went to college where he was exposed to reasoned analytical argument. He learned how to mimic the structure and tone and the surface details, but it's a facade. There's no actual reasoned analysis. His stuff is like a cargo cult airport.

In this case, he spends a lot of time introducing the 'statistical analysis' method he's about to use. It's very advanced, so he needs a couple of steps to describe it. But, I'll take the chance that the benighted denizens of the pit can understand it in one step. Here it is, which I'll state in general terms although he didn't:

If x% of a given population has property y, then the probability that a randomly selected member of that population has that property is x%.

He didn't actually have the intellectual rigor to say 'randomly selected'. I had to add that.

[JacquesCuze]

[.quote="BlueShiftRhino"]If that was even partly to me, I can't imagine that I'm not banned by her yet. I may even be on the Block Bot list, if such exists any more.

My parents would be so proud.[./quote]
You can tell if someone has blocked you by trying to fav or RT one of their tweets. (There may be other ways, too, but that's a quick one.) You can still do a "manual RT" ("Edit & retweet" or "Quote & retweet" or, in what seems like poetic justice in this case, you can copy/paste their tweet & put "RT" or quotes & their twitter name on it.

There's got to be an easier way to do that on Mac!

I know on Windows in Chrome, I just click "follow" on that person. If I am blocked, I can't follow. If I can follow, I unfollow. That does generate a notification to them of course that you're planning on stalking and harassing and bullying them.

/techsplanation, sorry.

<snip>

Sure, you can also try Following.

But:
(a) at least on Tweetdeck that's 2 clicks not 1 (vs 1 click for fav or RT), and

(b) I don't care to be thought of as following, seen as trying to follow, or accidentally actually following any of the people I'd be thinking might have blocked me

At least with a fav or RT (w/ or w/o canceling it if it goes through) you can pick a tweet that might make 'em wonder why you would fav or RT that particular one. :)

For whatever reason (by which I mean I am an idiot) I didn't understand what you were doing the first time you wrote it. And yeah, those are both better ways to do it than what I've been doing. I bet that will work on Chrome on Windows too!

thank you!

[JacquesCuze]

iamcuriousblue is a bloke?

That will take some processing for me.

Me too.

I didn't confuse iacb with BluHarmony, I've met BH & follow her on twitter. But I think with iacb's support of sex work I initially confused iacb w/ Violet Blue, the woman who was invited to speak at a conference in SF in 2/2013 then had her talk canceled because its theme included sex & that violated the conference policy. Not that lately I've been thinking they're the same person. But you know how your mind can play subtle tricks on you and forget to let you in on it.

Here's the Ada Initiative's take on the Violet Blue episode:
http://adainitiative.org/2013/02/keepin ... nferences/

There was a sex worker blogger known as Renegade Evolution. She was at times a feminist, blogging on one of the big tier fem blogs (feministing, or feministe) and hten she wasn't a feminist and she was blogging at feministcritics (of the three blogs just mentioned, I think it's feministcritics I most want to see a server meltdown with extreme prejudice). And all the time she was blogging about daily porn shoots and shit. I ran into iacb there. Good times, good times.

[jugheadnaut]

Is this a known thing?

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

http://freethoughtblogs.com/butterflies ... more-15685

I guess when a Marine corporal calls his sergeant a sexist, the sergeant will tell him he appreciates the feedback and will try to do better in the future. Joe should have tried that.

[didymos]

So this study really fucks up a major part of Sarkeesian's thesis:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 065813.htm

[Clarence]

So this is all takes to get blocked? Yes this bot is all about protecting people from the worst of the worst I am sure.

You guys remember when I was crying because I was already on the @blockbot and could not level up?

Welp ... I just checked and I did LEVEL UP MOFOS!!! YAY ME!!!

http://bb.sarahlicity.co.uk/#@andrewv691

@andrewv691 is Level 2 on the Block Bot list.
Check their reported tweets on Storify.
Tags added by blockers include: pileon.

Permanent Link: http://bb.sarahlicity.co.uk/#andrewv691

So I can not believe my eyes! What was the offending tweet? :
https://storify.com/The_Block_Bot/379053169

@Slymepit @dougal445 @saramayhew I once gave away an entire department to get rid of someone like @MelodyHensley So they have my sympathies.

FUCK YES!!! I leveled up! *fistpump* Wooty Woot!!!

Congratufuckinglations, Andrew. Be proud, Pitter. Be proud.

[comhcinc]

Anyway, all that being said, I still vociferously disagree with anyone who claims to want to discuss important issues by banning comments they don't like. That is not how progress is made; that is not how debate works; that is not the way to opening minds and allowing diverse opinions to grow.

I honestly think that it is better to just turn comments off than selectively ban comments. Like shit or get off the pot.

[Clarence]

iamcuriousblue is a bloke?

That will take some processing for me.

Me too.

I didn't confuse iacb with BluHarmony, I've met BH & follow her on twitter. But I think with iacb's support of sex work I initially confused iacb w/ Violet Blue, the woman who was invited to speak at a conference in SF in 2/2013 then had her talk canceled because its theme included sex & that violated the conference policy. Not that lately I've been thinking they're the same person. But you know how your mind can play subtle tricks on you and forget to let you in on it.

Here's the Ada Initiative's take on the Violet Blue episode:
http://adainitiative.org/2013/02/keepin ... nferences/

There was a sex worker blogger known as Renegade Evolution. She was at times a feminist, blogging on one of the big tier fem blogs (feministing, or feministe) and hten she wasn't a feminist and she was blogging at feministcritics (of the three blogs just mentioned, I think it's feministcritics I most want to see a server meltdown with extreme prejudice). And all the time she was blogging about daily porn shoots and shit. I ran into iacb there. Good times, good times.

What the hell do you have against Feminist Critics? It's probably got the most "be nice to everyone" moderation on the freaking internet and feminists hardly ever show up.

[JacquesCuze]

Just for balance, it does seem to me that Coyne is rather censorious, if in a purportedly "even-handed" way (I don't know about that either way).

So you have people at Oaf's claiming to have been censored, and clearly some MRAish-type stuff was as well. Can't really see any good reason for either, although I can't pretend that I know the full stories either.

It's always seemed too much that way to me, one reason why I haven't bothered with WEIT for years prior to today. I'm not especially concerned--he can do what he wants with his blog--I just don't want it to pretend by omission that it's a bastion of openness, when I tend to steer clear of it because I think it isn't--and I think that the evidence today bolsters that sense of it that I've had.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
http://tinyurl.com/mxaa3p

Yeah, I wasn't impressed with what I could see of his moderation on that thread.

Lot's of shit being thrown around that wasn't modded out, making his specific mod decisions odd.

[Clarence]

And by the way, Renegade Evolution used to BLOG for Feminist Critics.
I know, b/c I was there at the time. Me & Feminist Critics go back to 2006 or thereabouts.

[Clarence]

So this study really fucks up a major part of Sarkeesian's thesis:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 065813.htm

Bookmarked for future research.

[Clarence]

Just a warning that Hornbeck has a guest article on OB's titled: A Statistical Analysis of a Sexual Assault Case

Don't say you weren't warned.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/butterflies ... more-15671

You fucker.
Yes, you warned me.
But you didn't put a TRIGGER WARNING on that link. Asshole.

;)

[JacquesCuze]

[.quote="Brive1987"]iamcuriousblue is a bloke?

That will take some processing for me.[./quote]
Me too.

I didn't confuse iacb with BluHarmony, I've met BH & follow her on twitter. But I think with iacb's support of sex work I initially confused iacb w/ Violet Blue, the woman who was invited to speak at a conference in SF in 2/2013 then had her talk canceled because its theme included sex & that violated the conference policy. Not that lately I've been thinking they're the same person. But you know how your mind can play subtle tricks on you and forget to let you in on it.

Here's the Ada Initiative's take on the Violet Blue episode:
http://adainitiative.org/2013/02/keepin ... nferences/

There was a sex worker blogger known as Renegade Evolution. She was at times a feminist, blogging on one of the big tier fem blogs (feministing, or feministe) and hten she wasn't a feminist and she was blogging at feministcritics (of the three blogs just mentioned, I think it's feministcritics I most want to see a server meltdown with extreme prejudice). And all the time she was blogging about daily porn shoots and shit. I ran into iacb there. Good times, good times.

What the hell do you have against Feminist Critics? It's probably got the most "be nice to everyone" moderation on the freaking internet and feminists hardly ever show up.

The whole two threads bullshit.

Here's the thread for feminists to pound on you. You can't post there.
Here's the thread no one reads where you can post but you have to be polite.
Barry Da Pimp Deutsch did the same thing for years.

Fuck'em and let their servers burn.

[Clarence]

I really don't know what the SJWs are after at the end of the day. Say they could succeed in getting rid of Dawkins, Harris, etc., banishing them from the atheist movement, shunning them from TAM and other conferences, etc. What would we have in its place. Greta Christina pontificating about the right for feminists to tell naught rape fantasy stories, but shunning men for enjoying them. What is the point. Hearing annoying talks from the likes of Avicenna, Alex Gabriel and the Canuck, I'd want to vomit or take speed to stay awake at one of those conferences. I think I'd become a Christian again, if that was all that there was to offer. Of course not, but you get the point.

In the very unlikely event they 'win' and the Big Names are damaged to the point they all but vacate visible roles in the atheist/skeptic community, it will be a pyrrhic victory. The SJW 'leaders', and the entire movement really, will have been exposed as dogmatic zealots in the eyes of enough atheists and skeptics that any beachhead they may have had in the community will be lost. There will be no PZ Myers as keynote speaker (or any speaker) and no workshops teaching about social justice activism at the big tent cons, or even the smaller cons. It will be only at explicit SJW cons, where speakers sometimes outnumber attendants and talks are given mostly to empty chairs, that they can have a big role.

I don't think Peez and Co. have any real battle plan. They're just lashing out. They know their numbers are relatively small. But they believe they are the chosen ones, the conscience of the community and the moral exemplars. They expect to be treated like the priest class of the community. And when a priest is disrespected by a member of the nobility, all they can do is point their fingers in rage and shout 'heretic!'.

That's not to say the SJW movement doesn't have real power and isn't dangerous. They have two big weapons: a disproportionate number of SJW journalists and identity politics university departments around the world. Whenever there's a battle, there will be SJW journalists ready to write deeply slanted narratives in widely read publications exclusively from the SJW point of view. And identity politics university departments, with funding completely disconnected from the objective value of their work, will keep churning out the specious propaganda that SJW's use as 'intellectual ammunition'.

Well, yes, they DO attempt to write the 'intellectual history' - with a lack of care about truth that would put Orwell's Ministry of Truth to shame.

But it's worse than that.
While it's true that the 'atheism/skepticism community' won't show up at their conventions or buy into their ideas - most of us will just go our own way- they will achieve two things:
A. Skeptic will come to mean SJW
B. They will have the institutional resources that remain after they are abandoned.

Also, they will hurt the process of spreading skeptical thought memes and tactics. Science popularizers and myth debunkers and such help teach something that already isn't properly taught in schools: logic and critical analytical techniques. Heaven knows we don't need our culture to become even more dumb: but by spreading the more skeptical atheists and rationalists to the wind the SJW will hurt critical thought itself.

[Clarence]

What the hell do you have against Feminist Critics? It's probably got the most "be nice to everyone" moderation on the freaking internet and feminists hardly ever show up.

The whole two threads bullshit.

Here's the thread for feminists to pound on you. You can't post there.
Here's the thread no one reads where you can post but you have to be polite.
Barry Da Pimp Deutsch did the same thing for years.

Fuck'em and let their servers burn.

Except:
A. You CAN post there. And feminsts are NOT ALLOWED to 'pound' on you. Indeed, more than once ballgame has told a feminist off on my behalf.
B. In practice, since feminists HARDLY EVER SHOW UP (that's the big problem with the site) you find people placed in the 'other thread' for getting upset at someone from another website or something. They do not allow vilefication, so much as I might want to, I can't call Anita Sarkeesian a horrid lying bitch. And yet, even if I DID do so at WORST I'd get a 'strike through' and/or a warning.

As for the two threads thing if you look closely you will see that sometimes the No Hostility thread is the more popular and sometimes the "RP" thread is more popular.

Comparing Feminist Critics to Alas is a very low blow.

[JacquesCuze]

What the hell do you have against Feminist Critics? It's probably got the most "be nice to everyone" moderation on the freaking internet and feminists hardly ever show up.

The whole two threads bullshit.

Here's the thread for feminists to pound on you. You can't post there.
Here's the thread no one reads where you can post but you have to be polite.
Barry Da Pimp Deutsch did the same thing for years.

Fuck'em and let their servers burn.

Except:
A. You CAN post there. And feminsts are NOT ALLOWED to 'pound' on you. Indeed, more than once ballgame has told a feminist off on my behalf.
B. In practice, since feminists HARDLY EVER SHOW UP (that's the big problem with the site) you find people placed in the 'other thread' for getting upset at someone from another website or something. They do not allow vilefication, so much as I might want to, I can't call Anita Sarkeesian a horrid lying bitch. And yet, even if I DID do so at WORST I'd get a 'strike through' and/or a warning.

As for the two threads thing if you look closely you will see that sometimes the No Hostility thread is the more popular and sometimes the "RP" thread is more popular.

Comparing Feminist Critics to Alas is a very low blow.

Sorry, but whatever, my experience differs, and both sites' experiments in separate and unequal are failures. I haven't been there in years and whenever I accidentally find myself there via some link, I spit and split immediately.

I've had this conversation with some of the editor/mods when I've run into them at reddit.

"no, no, we're the good guys!"

No, you're fucked up beyond all repair.

[Skep tickle]

In other news:

Mother of two, 34, is arrested for 'sexually assaulting' three 15-year-old male students at the high school where she taught.

Seems to me that there is an epidemic of this kind of thing going on. I dunno about you lot but practically every day there is a news report about a woman sexual predator and authority figure teacher charged with the rape of some sweet innocent underage teenage boy!

(And why the fuck did this never happen to me when I was a little lad? This is so fucking unfair!!! ... all boys school with five female teachers in total and most of them over 60 years old SMH).

Also did a search and apparently the number of lucky victims has been upgraded to five according to this report: Cops: NJ teacher now faces 5 counts of having sex with students.

ANYWAY WHERE IS THE OUTRAGE FROM THE USUAL SUSPECTS???

The headline here has the same issue that got Benson up in arms a couple of weeks ago (& irks me too): women being identified first or primarily by their relationships, in situations where men usually wouldn't be, or at least not as the first or main portrayal.

I know it's the Daily Mail, so consider these questions rhetorical:

• Why did they lead with "Mother of 2..."?
• When a male teacher does stuff like this, is the headline "Father of 2..." or is it "Teacher..." (or maybe "Male teacher..." since teacher is so often assumed to be female) ?
• Frankly, why not just lead with "Teacher charged with [whatever the teacher was charged with: sexual assault, rape, statuatory rape] of 3 [or however many] students"?

One would hope it would be the same legal charge(s) regardless of the teacher's gender & the students' genders and would be based on what is thought to have happened (Yes, I know the legal charges could vary by gender in some jurisdictions, since there are some places where men can't legally be raped, which is just stupid.)

At any rate. I don't expect Benson to pick up this story & run with it on the basis of the "Mother of 2..." part, but that appearing in a headline is exactly what she was blogging about just recently, when it was a woman headed into a high-faluting job, not accused of sex-related crime against boys, of course.

[Clarence]

Dawkins, on Coyne's post:

Thank you, Jerry.

I long ago declared that I would not wish to go on living if I found myself in a world dominated by people who no longer care about what’s true and express open contempt for factual evidence. Either a 1984 world where the Party in power is the sole arbiter of what is “true” and enforces it with violence; or a world where truth is whatever society deems it to be, regardless of evidence, and where dissenters are ruthlessly punished by vitriolic abuse or ostracism rather than violence.

I fear we are sleepwalking towards that feared world, where people shun evidence and despise facts: a world where dogma is king, emotion is queen and evidence is exiled; and where dissent from orthodoxy is suppressed by verbal if not physical jackboots.

Richard

http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com ... nt-1062166

Well, that should send foam flying out of PZ's mouth :mrgreen:

What a fantastic comment.
Love the phrase "we are sleepwalking towards that feared world"
Sleepwalking is a pretty perfect word to describe the years-long non-actions of him, Shermer, Kraus, Nugent, CFI, etc, who just ignore (or tacitly endorse with con invites) all the things that drive pitters, and pitters-at-heart, mad with frustration and disgust and mocking laughter.

For whatever it is worth, why I have always respected Dawkins is because I've picked up on that attitude from him before even though he never, to my knowledge, explicitly stated it. And I share it.

[Clarence]

The whole two threads bullshit.

Here's the thread for feminists to pound on you. You can't post there.
Here's the thread no one reads where you can post but you have to be polite.
Barry Da Pimp Deutsch did the same thing for years.

Fuck'em and let their servers burn.

Except:
A. You CAN post there. And feminsts are NOT ALLOWED to 'pound' on you. Indeed, more than once ballgame has told a feminist off on my behalf.
B. In practice, since feminists HARDLY EVER SHOW UP (that's the big problem with the site) you find people placed in the 'other thread' for getting upset at someone from another website or something. They do not allow vilefication, so much as I might want to, I can't call Anita Sarkeesian a horrid lying bitch. And yet, even if I DID do so at WORST I'd get a 'strike through' and/or a warning.

As for the two threads thing if you look closely you will see that sometimes the No Hostility thread is the more popular and sometimes the "RP" thread is more popular.

Comparing Feminist Critics to Alas is a very low blow.

Sorry, but whatever, my experience differs, and both sites' experiments in separate and unequal are failures. I haven't been there in years and whenever I accidentally find myself there via some link, I spit and split immediately.

I've had this conversation with some of the editor/mods when I've run into them at reddit.

"no, no, we're the good guys!"

No, you're fucked up beyond all repair.

Whatever. I can respect a difference of opinion on say, Paul Elam, because even people who like him more than loathe him would admit he is an asshole and can be stubbornly stupid at times. Indeed, the only reason I have any USE for A Voice For Men at all is because of the OTHER people on site and many of the things they do are things that either no one else is doing or that everyone can agree on.

But Ballgame compared to Barry Fucking Will Ban Your Ass and Selectively Moderates Douche? Are you on drugs, or did you eat too many peppers? You can't even compare the 'two threads' shit anyway because on Feminist Critics both threads display at the same time on the main part of the site and initially one can post in EITHER one of them at one's choice, whereas on ALAS MRA's and such are shuttled to an entire walled off section of the site.

Someone peed in your wheaties. Congratulations on being literally the only person I have ever run into who complains about ballgame and daran and compares them to BD, and who, in addition is not a feminist.

It sure is a whacky world.

[Satan]

Just putting my 2 cents in again to say that I don't think using images of people who clearly have Down's Syndrome to represent a stupid person is cool/acceptable/whatever word sounds non-SHWish enough to maintain my Pit cred.

There are so many similar photos available of drunks, rednecks and other morons, I don't like people choosing the one of a Down's person.

^^^^^
As above.

The intellectually disabled have enough problems to deal without being tarred by association with FTB.

[Clarence]

And with that, I am off to mountain country until Friday, and because I'll only have some access to public internet at a library I probably won't post here at all.
I want to say I'm happy that (whether belated or not) some more 'big names' are backing poor ol' Dawkins. Perhaps it is still possible to defeat (via marginalization) the SJW infestation in this community after all, and I want to thank the many Mykerus and Pitters who have been fighting the good fight and laughing the good lolz.

I'm also feeling a bit more hopeful about #gamergate over the past 2 days. I really, really hate these people , these SJW's who operate on emotion and play dirty because I know the abuse they enable often is even worse than the abuse they do on their own. And watching them win, esp in THIS community... a community built on rationalism and using ones brain... well, I sometimes despair for humanity and the humanist in me grieves.

So keep up the fight, Pitters. You have my gratitude.

[JacquesCuze]

[.quote="JacquesCuze"]

The whole two threads bullshit.

Here's the thread for feminists to pound on you. You can't post there.
Here's the thread no one reads where you can post but you have to be polite.
Barry Da Pimp Deutsch did the same thing for years.

Fuck'em and let their servers burn.[./quote]

Except:
A. You CAN post there. And feminsts are NOT ALLOWED to 'pound' on you. Indeed, more than once ballgame has told a feminist off on my behalf.
B. In practice, since feminists HARDLY EVER SHOW UP (that's the big problem with the site) you find people placed in the 'other thread' for getting upset at someone from another website or something. They do not allow vilefication, so much as I might want to, I can't call Anita Sarkeesian a horrid lying bitch. And yet, even if I DID do so at WORST I'd get a 'strike through' and/or a warning.

As for the two threads thing if you look closely you will see that sometimes the No Hostility thread is the more popular and sometimes the "RP" thread is more popular.

Comparing Feminist Critics to Alas is a very low blow.

Sorry, but whatever, my experience differs, and both sites' experiments in separate and unequal are failures. I haven't been there in years and whenever I accidentally find myself there via some link, I spit and split immediately.

I've had this conversation with some of the editor/mods when I've run into them at reddit.

"no, no, we're the good guys!"

No, you're fucked up beyond all repair.

Whatever. I can respect a difference of opinion on say, Paul Elam, because even people who like him more than loathe him would admit he is an asshole and can be stubbornly stupid at times. Indeed, the only reason I have any USE for A Voice For Men at all is because of the OTHER people on site and many of the things they do are things that either no one else is doing or that everyone can agree on.

But Ballgame compared to Barry Fucking Will Ban Your Ass and Selectively Moderates Douche? Are you on drugs, or did you eat too many peppers? You can't even compare the 'two threads' shit anyway because on Feminist Critics both threads display at the same time on the main part of the site and initially one can post in EITHER one of them at one's choice, whereas on ALAS MRA's and such are shuttled to an entire walled off section of the site.

Someone peed in your wheaties. Congratulations on being literally the only person I have ever run into who complains about ballgame and daran and compares them to BD, and who, in addition is not a feminist.

It sure is a whacky world.

Let me make it worse than.

Barry Da Pimp Deutsch LITERALLY pimped out his feminist traffic by using his moderately high traffic ratings to sell his domain to porn sites who then made subdomains with his domain to link to their site to pump up their google juice. I think they also hosted actual porn at his domain. All of this clearly contrary to what his feminists would almost certainly want their traffic to be doing. He said he had to do this to pay the rent.

He's a fucking hypocritical asshole.

Regardless, his site is a shit ton more interesting than feministcritics. If I had to spend time in a doctor's waiting room reading on my WAP feature phone a website and my choice was Alas A Blog or Feminist Critics, hands down I would pick Alas A Blog, because there there is something being said.

Feminist Critics is just a huge wasteland moderated by dipshits saying nothing.

Anyway, I'm out, have a good night,

[JacquesCuze]

Oh. I do have a question of the Pit.

Popehat doesn't like the label Social Justice Warrior or SJW, he thinks it's a slur.

What do social justice warriors call themselves? What is a twitter friendly (ie short) name for them? (That is not a slur).

I don't think Popehat has done his homework, he thinks both sides are the same in many ways, which demonstrates he hasn't done his research, but what do social justice warriors call themselves?

I don't think it's feminists, though I myself do think of the social justice league as Septic Feminists, I would think they think they are more than just feminists.

[Brive1987]

"True Atheists"

[Brive1987]

My "kooky theory of the week" is that Poppy approached Smith/RemieV while building her post sacking/resigning case against JREF.

Poppy was clearly Stollznow's go to girl in her escalation against Grothe. She project managed KSs release onto FtB with PZ. And project managed the JREF leaked emails angle there.

It was also a Poppy who introduced RemieV to PZ at the same time (Aug 2013). RemieV had no previous connection and had actually come out against Watson in 2011.

There is no way in my mind RemieV just happened to contact Poppy (coincidently as Poppy was mobilising her own war) at this time after 5 years of inactivity.

And that accounts for the definitive "I was raped, I was coerced into a position where I could not consent" SJ speak in the release. Quid pro quo.

It just puzzles me why she wouldn't confide in her stalwart defenders (if you want to call them that) on JREF forums or JREF itself. Maybe she didn't actually have any and that's why.

Well firstly she "reached out" to JREF (?) and got rebuffed. Probably cause they required her to make a formal complaint and all she wanted to do was stiff Shermer or cover for the sex that happened and could never be undone.

Can't see much satisfaction to be had from JREF forums

I wouldn't be surprised if her leaving JREF and complications with Wagg didn't leave her vulnerable to getting caught up in the Poppy crusade. A chance to enact retribution and be part of a bigger picture perhaps. She has said now that she wishes she had been more circumspect in how she released the info. I read that to say she recognises the rape angle (which is very FtB) stole from whatever she really was trying to do.

After 5 years I don't believe it was a simply charitable warning to the gals. Definitely either desire for payback or desire to be in the wider game. Or both.

[comhcinc]

I don't think Popehat has done his homework, he thinks both sides are the same in many ways, which demonstrates he hasn't done his research, but what do social justice warriors call themselves?

Much like you can't say colored people but people of color is okay the correct term is Warriors for Social Justice.

[DeepInsideYourMind]

In other news:

Mother of two, 34, is arrested for 'sexually assaulting' three 15-year-old male students at the high school where she taught.

Seems to me that there is an epidemic of this kind of thing going on. I dunno about you lot but practically every day there is a news report about a woman sexual predator and authority figure teacher charged with the rape of some sweet innocent underage teenage boy!

(And why the fuck did this never happen to me when I was a little lad? This is so fucking unfair!!! ... all boys school with five female teachers in total and most of them over 60 years old SMH).

Also did a search and apparently the number of lucky victims has been upgraded to five according to this report: Cops: NJ teacher now faces 5 counts of having sex with students.

ANYWAY WHERE IS THE OUTRAGE FROM THE USUAL SUSPECTS???

The headline here has the same issue that got Benson up in arms a couple of weeks ago (& irks me too): women being identified first or primarily by their relationships, in situations where men usually wouldn't be, or at least not as the first or main portrayal.

I know it's the Daily Mail, so consider these questions rhetorical:

• Why did they lead with "Mother of 2..."?
• When a male teacher does stuff like this, is the headline "Father of 2..." or is it "Teacher..." (or maybe "Male teacher..." since teacher is so often assumed to be female) ?
• Frankly, why not just lead with "Teacher charged with [whatever the teacher was charged with: sexual assault, rape, statuatory rape] of 3 [or however many] students"?

One would hope it would be the same legal charge(s) regardless of the teacher's gender & the students' genders and would be based on what is thought to have happened (Yes, I know the legal charges could vary by gender in some jurisdictions, since there are some places where men can't legally be raped, which is just stupid.)

At any rate. I don't expect Benson to pick up this story & run with it on the basis of the "Mother of 2..." part, but that appearing in a headline is exactly what she was blogging about just recently, when it was a woman headed into a high-faluting job, not accused of sex-related crime against boys, of course.

Yes I have seen "father of 2 ..." versions ... the suggestion is that a parent should know better than to abuse children, etc etc - hoenstly I think this is reasonable

"Teacher charged with" would (sexism alert!!!!) imply 'male' to most readers (men and women), so using "Mother of ..." avoids that immediate presumption

As to charges - of course it *should* be the same, but oddly (sexism again!!) women tend to be looked upon more compassionately than men in situations of sexual assault / rape and pedophilia .... hence, they get lower sentences.

As to why they are looked upon more compassionately, well, presumably Feminists (wanting equality) would be all over that

[Old_ones]

I really don't know what the SJWs are after at the end of the day. Say they could succeed in getting rid of Dawkins, Harris, etc., banishing them from the atheist movement, shunning them from TAM and other conferences, etc. What would we have in its place. Greta Christina pontificating about the right for feminists to tell naught rape fantasy stories, but shunning men for enjoying them. What is the point. Hearing annoying talks from the likes of Avicenna, Alex Gabriel and the Canuck, I'd want to vomit or take speed to stay awake at one of those conferences. I think I'd become a Christian again, if that was all that there was to offer. Of course not, but you get the point.

I don't think they have a clearly thought out objective. Self righteousness feels good on the ego. Dramatic posts get clicks which means money and ego gratification. I think a lot of the witch hunt is motivated by self aggrandizement.

The rest is probably a result of the fact that post equity feminists (or gender feminists or whatever) tend to take an underpants gnomes approach to pursuing the problems they attack.

Phase 1 - Accost misogynists
Phase 2 - ?
Phase 3 - No more rape!

Its a natural consequence of the fact that they trace all of their concerns back to these poorly defined unicorns like "patriarchy" and "rape culture". If these are subtle social norms then they can't really attack them directly; so they have to go after individual men for daring to talk about rape logically or for calling someone a cunt, and hope that weakens whatever weird abstraction it is that they are trying to fight. Then once patriarchy is finally defeated in phase 2 all these magic changes will happen and we'll live in a perfectly equal society where 50% of CEOs are women, and no one gets hit on by creeps at TAM.

[youtube]tO5sxLapAts[/youtube]

[Brive1987]

Just checking this is good isn't it?

http://i.imgur.com/gMV9oZz.jpg

Btw now the Period Table has been smashed, are we shooting for 700 pages? Or does a mod or someone have the magic lever to create a new thread?

[jugheadnaut]

Oh. I do have a question of the Pit.

Popehat doesn't like the label Social Justice Warrior or SJW, he thinks it's a slur.

What do social justice warriors call themselves? What is a twitter friendly (ie short) name for them? (That is not a slur).

I don't think Popehat has done his homework, he thinks both sides are the same in many ways, which demonstrates he hasn't done his research, but what do social justice warriors call themselves?

I don't think it's feminists, though I myself do think of the social justice league as Septic Feminists, I would think they think they are more than just feminists.

I think SJW's are happy to call themselves social justice activists (or advocates). I'll also sometimes use the term when I'm trying to be rigorously neutral, but I think this gives them too much credit, since it's a very particular version of social justice they're advocating for.

I prefer 'identity politics activists' as a neutral term. The main problem is that many people don't know what that it means. It's also not an exact fit, but I think it's close enough. Social justice Marxists is an accurate term, but obviously 'Marxist' comes with a lot of baggage. Even if SJW's privately would embrace the term, they definitely don't want it used as a general description and would probably play the McCarthyism card if it is used this way.

[The Yeti]

Just a warning that Hornbeck has a guest article on OB's titled: A Statistical Analysis of a Sexual Assault Case

Don't say you weren't warned.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/butterflies ... more-15671

Hornbeck has really cemented his status as the dumbest of the FTB dumbfucks with that post_ He is like the SJW version of John Derbyshire, except that Derbyshire actually understands math.

[Brive1987]

Just a warning that Hornbeck has a guest article on OB's titled: A Statistical Analysis of a Sexual Assault Case

Don't say you weren't warned.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/butterflies ... more-15671

I won't say I wasn't warned. I know that in general he comes across like someone with an IQ of about 95 who went to college where he was exposed to reasoned analytical argument. He learned how to mimic the structure and tone and the surface details, but it's a facade. There's no actual reasoned analysis. His stuff is like a cargo cult airport.

In this case, he spends a lot of time introducing the 'statistical analysis' method he's about to use. It's very advanced, so he needs a couple of steps to describe it. But, I'll take the chance that the benighted denizens of the pit can understand it in one step. Here it is, which I'll state in general terms although he didn't:

If x% of a given population has property y, then the probability that a randomly selected member of that population has that property is x%.

He didn't actually have the intellectual rigor to say 'randomly selected'. I had to add that.

So. If half the pop of traditional marriages are men then there is a 50% chance of a random selection from the group being a woman?

You know? I actually feel the power of that knowledge.

[zenbabe]

Just putting my 2 cents in again to say that I don't think using images of people who clearly have Down's Syndrome to represent a stupid person is cool/acceptable/whatever word sounds non-SHWish enough to maintain my Pit cred.

My first reaction was to say that folks with Downs don't mind because, after all, they have Downs, but, on further thought, I not only agree but regret my first reaction (even if they don't mind because, after all, they have Downs).

:lol:

Anyway. Twitter.
Near as I can figure...
So you have you timeline of people you follow and the random things they tweet. As you follow more people, the timeline gets busier, and Twitter will kind of sample what people you follow are tweeting. Otherwise the tweets could become nonsense gibberish. Heh. Well yes, but they'd scroll by too fast to comprehend them all. So you might see a tweet there in that random sampling that looks interesting, and then click on it and view conversation, or go to the tweeter's page and see all their tweets, including the ones that didn't appear in your own timeline of the people you follow.

The "." to start a tweet will force a tweet you tw ..will force a tweet you write and send.. into the timeline of everyone who follows you, bypassing the random selection program Twitter is using, making SURE your followers see it.

I think that's how it works.
I also think it's a bit obnoxious, though I can see why it might rarely be useful.
There's something very "look at me me me me me" about it.
And dog-whistle-y about it
Which is why I laugh at how often PZ and Ophie, for example, seem to use it

[comhcinc]

I have been on twitter for years and I get all tweets of the people I follow. I haven't heard of twitter hiding post like facebook did.

[Satan]

I don't think it's feminists, though I myself do think of the social justice league as Septic Feminists, I would think they think they are more than just feminists.

I think "feminists" is the closest thing to a label used by SJWs for self-identification. Not all feminists are SJWs, but there is a much better than 50% chance that anyone who identifies as a feminist will be an SJW and there are no SJWs who don't identify as feminists.

SJWs work to hide the fact that they are an ideological movement by co-opting labels used by other groups and/or calling themselves "good people" (or similar) instead of coming up with a name to describe their ideology. This looks like a deliberate strategy--it's hard to form a unified front against an enemy that is comprised of people who won't even admit to being part of a common ideology.

"Social justice activists" describes what these people think they are but it's too long for twitter and SJWs don't seem to use it for self-description.

[Kirbmarc]

That's not to say the SJW movement doesn't have real power and isn't dangerous. They have two big weapons: a disproportionate number of SJW journalists and identity politics university departments around the world. Whenever there's a battle, there will be SJW journalists ready to write deeply slanted narratives in widely read publications exclusively from the SJW point of view. And identity politics university departments, with funding completely disconnected from the objective value of their work, will keep churning out the specious propaganda that SJW's use as 'intellectual ammunition'.

To be honest I'm not as concerned about the potential damage to the "atheist movement" (which is limited) as I am about the damage of SJW-inspired laws. After all, if Dawkins or Harris aren't invited to a conference, or if lots of angry people on the Internet refer to them as "assholes", I can still read their books, watch their interviews and the like. No big deal.

But laws are another thing. Moral panics hinder the ability of people to reason, and get them to vote for "tough on crime" politicians who write misguided laws that do a lot of collateral damage. Think about the satanic ritual child abuse hysteria. People lost their jobs and their reputations, some of them even went to jail, over a load of bullshit.

I'm deeply concerned that the "rape epidemic" moral panic will lead politicians to forget about innocent until proven guilty and swallow the SJW "women never lie" bullshit. I'm concerned about innocent people losing their job, being thrown out of college, or even going to jail because someone cries rape. I'm worried about people being fired because a harpy complained about a dongle joke.

And I'm also worried about the changes in social attitudes caused by SJW narrative. I'm worried about geeky gamer kids being labeled as potential rapists. I'm worried about sexually successful men being shunned as "harassers". I'm worried about girls and women growing up expecting special rights, or being harassed by the police "for their own good" because they've been drinking and are flirty.

[paddybrown]

Congratulations on being literally the only person I have ever run into who complains about ballgame and daran and compares them to BD, and who, in addition is not a feminist.

It sure is a whacky world.

Ballgame and Daran are the equivalent of the kids who sit with the nerds because the cool kids won't let them sit at their table, but make no secret that they despise the nerds and would be right there at the cool kids' table like a shot if they'd have them. Their desperation for feminists to talk to them so they can ditch the MRA scum cluttering up their comment threads is palpable, and is the reason feminists won't talk to them except occasionally to troll them.

[paddybrown]

Just a warning that Hornbeck has a guest article on OB's titled: A Statistical Analysis of a Sexual Assault Case

Don't say you weren't warned.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/butterflies ... more-15671

I was warned, and didn't bother clicking or reading. But... how can you do a statistical analysis of one thing? Is this another one of those "only 2% of rape accusations are false, so therefore everyone accused of rape is as close to guilty as make no odds" things?

[Kirbmarc]

I was warned, and didn't bother clicking or reading. But... how can you do a statistical analysis of one thing? Is this another one of those "only 2% of rape accusations are false, so therefore everyone accused of rape is as close to guilty as make no odds" things?

It's more like the M&Ms analogy. "6% of men are rapists, therefore whenever I meet a man there's 6% probability he's a rapist, therefore I wish I could accuse people of being rapists, because it's possible that they are, but if I accuse someone with little to no evidence I'm going to get sued, and that's terrible."

[Opyt]

I don't think Popehat has done his homework, he thinks both sides are the same in many ways, which demonstrates he hasn't done his research, but what do social justice warriors call themselves?

Much like you can't say colored people but people of color is okay the correct term is Warriors for Social Justice.

I don't know, I'm thinking more and more of using the term "shitkicker". It's just SJL is shorter. I refuse to allow them the moniker of "Warrior" simply because that was one of the deeply ingrained brainwashing tactics the Army used. :lol:

[Some Lurker]

Oh. I do have a question of the Pit.

Popehat doesn't like the label Social Justice Warrior or SJW, he thinks it's a slur.

What do social justice warriors call themselves? What is a twitter friendly (ie short) name for them? (That is not a slur).

I don't think Popehat has done his homework, he thinks both sides are the same in many ways, which demonstrates he hasn't done his research, but what do social justice warriors call themselves?

I don't think it's feminists, though I myself do think of the social justice league as Septic Feminists, I would think they think they are more than just feminists.

Intersectionalist Feminists?

[Daran]

Congratulations on being literally the only person I have ever run into who complains about ballgame and daran and compares them to BD, and who, in addition is not a feminist.

Thanks for your kind words about our blog. I've had an encounter with JacquesCuze before, or if not him, someone with the same combination of hostility toward us and inability to utter a sentence about us without it containing a factual error. To summarise:

As you note, by default, everyone is allowed to comment in either of the dual threads. The purpose of the parallel thread is to give us more moderation options. On a few occasions we have restricted particularly truculent individuals (both feminist and non-feminist) to the parallel threads. On a few occasions we have temporarily restricted the main thread to bloggers and a single individual - not always a feminist - in order to allow the bloggers to have a focused discussion with them.

You have never (to my recollection) suffered a sanction worse than having a comment moderated because you make a good faith effort to comply with our requirements. Moderator action is only required on those occasions when your passion gets the better of you. There are a range of more severe measures we can and will take against against less cooperative guests up to and including outright banning. These are unusual. We have sometimes banned feminists.

When I defend my blog in third-party spaces, it is to correct factually inaccurate and misleading statements about it. I do not say "we're the good guys".

[Skep tickle]

This bit from one of Shatterface's comments at Coyne's blog here made me smile:

Much as I’ve grown to dislike Myers, those who post on his blog resemble the bubbling blob of hate that lives inside a Dalek.

How perfect. "EXTERMINATE! EXTERMINATE! EXTERMINATE!"

[Kirbmarc]

How perfect. "EXTERMINATE! EXTERMINATE! EXTERMINATE!"

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

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

I think SJW's are happy to call themselves social justice activists (or advocates). I'll also sometimes use the term when I'm trying to be rigorously neutral, but I think this gives them too much credit, since it's a very particular version of social justice they're advocating for.

I prefer 'identity politics activists' as a neutral term. The main problem is that many people don't know what that it means. It's also not an exact fit, but I think it's close enough. Social justice Marxists is an accurate term, but obviously 'Marxist' comes with a lot of baggage. Even if SJW's privately would embrace the term, they definitely don't want it used as a general description and would probably play the McCarthyism card if it is used this way.

Funny that you're mentioning Marxists. Someone at Michael Nugent's blog posted the Wikipedia article for "entryism". See if you can spot the similarities with SJW tactics:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entryism

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

But laws are another thing. Moral panics hinder the ability of people to reason, and get them to vote for "tough on crime" politicians who write misguided laws that do a lot of collateral damage. Think about the satanic ritual child abuse hysteria. People lost their jobs and their reputations, some of them even went to jail, over a load of bullshit.

I'm deeply concerned that the "rape epidemic" moral panic will lead politicians to forget about innocent until proven guilty and swallow the SJW "women never lie" bullshit. I'm concerned about innocent people losing their job, being thrown out of college, or even going to jail because someone cries rape. I'm worried about people being fired because a harpy complained about a dongle joke.

If you're not familiar with it, I invite you to read this French case:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outreau_trial

[comhcinc]

http://www.rappler.com/world/regions/us ... r-equality

The problem with campaigns like this is while I can get behind a lot of the ideas they are attempting to push, they always have to attach bs. Some choice quotes from the article and my take.

“I want men to take up this mantle so their daughters, sisters and mothers can be free from prejudice but also so their sons have permission to be vulnerable and human, too and in doing so, be a more true and complete version of themselves,” Watson said.

I can assure you that I am raising my daughters to be independent. They do not need men to support them.

Watson spoke at length about her personal experience as a feminist, and how society views the concept. The 24-year-old actress took on her role as UN Women ambassador 6 months ago. Earlier this month, she visited Uruguay to learn about women's political participation there.

24 year old rich woman from first world country explains things.

Watson said she decided to become a feminist after being called “bossy” for wanting to direct a play at 8, and grew up as a teenager seeing how gender stereotypes stopped her girl friends from joining sports teams, and male friends from expressing their feelings.

That is a lie. 8 year olds don't have a clue about political ideologies.

The more I spoke about feminism, the more I realized that fighting for women’s rights has too often become synonymous with man-hating. If there is one thing I know for certain is that this has to stop. For the record, feminism by definition is the belief that men and women should have equal rights and opportunities. It is the theory of political, economic and social equality of the sexes.

Coffee shop feminist who has not took the time to look in to why people have issues with feminism.

I will unfairly use this as yet another reason why Harry Potter sucks.

[Kirbmarc]

If you're not familiar with it, I invite you to read this French case:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outreau_trial

Appalling, but not unexpected. Child sexual abuse and rape are the crimes most likely to cause moral outrages that give credibility to obvious lies and mistakes from psychologists and experts who "suggest" answers to the witnesses.

Despite what feminists may say, an accusation of a sexual crime is almost always believed, even when it's blatantly false or incoherent. We don't live in a "rape culture", we live in a culture where people lose their minds when they hear the word "rape".

And feminists want to do away with due process, evidence or presumption of innocence, because women never lie, their memories are always perfect, and men are all disgusting pigs who deserve to die, innocent or guilty.

[paddybrown]

http://www.rappler.com/world/regions/us ... r-equality

“I want men to take up this mantle so their daughters, sisters and mothers can be free from prejudice but also so their sons have permission to be vulnerable and human, too and in doing so, be a more true and complete version of themselves,” Watson said.

Oh, you'll give me your permission to be human, will you? Fuck off.

[Pogsurf]

Just for balance, it does seem to me that Coyne is rather censorious, if in a purportedly "even-handed" way (I don't know about that either way).

So you have people at Oaf's claiming to have been censored, and clearly some MRAish-type stuff was as well. Can't really see any good reason for either, although I can't pretend that I know the full stories either.

It's always seemed too much that way to me, one reason why I haven't bothered with WEIT for years prior to today. I'm not especially concerned--he can do what he wants with his blog--I just don't want it to pretend by omission that it's a bastion of openness, when I tend to steer clear of it because I think it isn't--and I think that the evidence today bolsters that sense of it that I've had.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
http://tinyurl.com/mxaa3p

Yeah, I wasn't impressed with what I could see of his moderation on that thread.

Lot's of shit being thrown around that wasn't modded out, making his specific mod decisions odd.

I got banned on WEIT for expressing my own version of Dear Muslima. I noticed that whenever we got notice of an imminent stoning to death many commentators got very hot under the collar. I contended that stonings do occur, but they are relatively rare occurances. I compared the number of deaths that occur through stoning with the number which occur via aeriel bombardment. In particular I mentioned that the USA was the world leader par execellence at causing death through aerial bombardment.

Of course my comment distracted his commenters from their very real need to grumble about the scourge that is stoning to death, and so I was banned.

[paddybrown]

http://www.rappler.com/world/regions/us ... r-equality

“I want men to take up this mantle so their daughters, sisters and mothers can be free from prejudice but also so their sons have permission to be vulnerable and human, too and in doing so, be a more true and complete version of themselves,” Watson said.

Oh, you'll give me your permission to be human, will you? Fuck off.

Also, why would you want someone to be vulnerable, unless you wanted to hurt them?

[AnonymousCowherd]

Just a warning that Hornbeck has a guest article on OB's titled: A Statistical Analysis of a Sexual Assault Case

Don't say you weren't warned.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/butterflies ... more-15671

Hornbeck has really cemented his status as the dumbest of the FTB dumbfucks with that post_ He is like the SJW version of John Derbyshire, except that Derbyshire actually understands math.

Yes, truly awful. And with just the right amount of unjustified condescension from someone who knows bugger all about the things he is prattling about.

Dear Horneck: go learn what an error bar is, why it may not be either available, or the not most useful measure in these circumstances, and why you haven't provided any estimate of error despite your claim to have done so. You might also consider why the two estimates of the prevalence of rape you give differ by an order of magnitude - that's usually just a failure to replicate. So knock yourself out finding out about all the other sources of error you missed. Also, BSRhino will be along in a second to explain how useful Bayesian methods are.

[AndrewV69]

I doubt this went down well actually:

[AnonymousCowherd]

Oh. I do have a question of the Pit.

Popehat doesn't like the label Social Justice Warrior or SJW, he thinks it's a slur.

What do social justice warriors call themselves? What is a twitter friendly (ie short) name for them? (That is not a slur).

I don't think Popehat has done his homework, he thinks both sides are the same in many ways, which demonstrates he hasn't done his research, but what do social justice warriors call themselves?

I don't think it's feminists, though I myself do think of the social justice league as Septic Feminists, I would think they think they are more than just feminists.

So what if Popehat thinks it's a slur? - anyone who can't properly name the Pope's hat(s) can't talk about slurs.

Anything you call this bunch of tossers wil be interpreted as a slur as soon as it become useful for them to do so. If they can't come up with an agreed definition for their ideology, and a proper name for themselves that applies to all members of the group, they should bloody well have to put up with whatever we call them for our convenience.

[BarnOwl]

From a comment by tina at Nugent's blog:

On the way they pick up victim points and beautifully designed ceramic trinkets for going up against and silencing a sceptic. And if the brave warrior is tired or literally shaking and crying rage tears from all the effort, they must return to the Pharyngulate fortress for ‘poncehugs’ or to collect more ‘spoons’ so that their ‘health’ is restored and the quest may continue. And the quest can never end. It must not ever end. If it ends their fantasies will dissolve , their supercharged superhero egos and social justice warrior points will vanish in a puff of reality.

Brilliant! LMAO! :lol: :lol: :clap:

If one of the consequences of this latest righteous outragedignation is that Myers stops getting all-expense-paid trips to speak at international conferences, I'd say it's a Good Thing. Good for atheist/skeptic organizations, good for the planet. :dance:

[Hunt]

Everyone take cover. Dawkins just complimented Carrier. Carrier's head will now swell like a watermelon and explode.

Actually I think it's a clever subversive plot by Dawkins to divide and conquer FtB.

[Brive1987]

I doubt this went down well actually:

He "."ed her. :lol:

[Brive1987]

Everyone take cover. Dawkins just complimented Carrier. Carrier's head will now swell like a watermelon and explode.

Actually I think it's a clever subversive plot by Dawkins to divide and conquer FtB.

It's a wedge. Carrier will explode with confliction. Do I acknowledge? How can I not? But he is the enemy. My friends will call me "rat". How can I not boast? :angry-screaming:

Bwhah :popcorn:

[Brive1987]

Ninja'ed by the post I was replying to. Is that a first?

[Brive1987]

Over at FtB they are weeping for their lost freeze peach.

http://i.imgur.com/y8ZxCad.jpg


I think they are starting to realise the nature of their predicament.

http://i.imgur.com/i0A7mnI.jpg