The Refuge of the Toads

[comhcinc]

In the past I have judged people on the color of their character.

You want to play a dark elf ranger? Really.

Gayniggers from Outer Morrowind.

Failed. Turn in your geek card.

[Lsuoma]

I do feel uncomfortable violating your safe space with this fact though so I may as well leave it at that. I will leave you to your nonsense.

I am afeared that this will be another Teflon flounce.

:think:

[dogen]

I do feel uncomfortable violating your safe space with this fact though so I may as well leave it at that. I will leave you to your nonsense.

I am afeared that this will be another Teflon flounce.

:think:

Homophobe.

[Old_ones]

Is there an Oppression Scale somewhere that makes it easier to understand the pecking order as to who's allowed to attack who depending on who's the most oppressed?

Because right now I see SJWs defending brown-skinned rapists and attacking white gay men, so presumably being brown-skinned gives you a free pass, but being gay is not having a sufficiently high enough Oppression Score because it's offset by being white and male.

Its not so much a scale as it is a combat system. In practice all kinds of SJWs will attack one another and the winners are decided by sophisticated dice rolling mechanics that are hidden from plain site. Here is a basic guide to the system:

Base privilege check (determines base oppression credibility level) - Roll this number of dice based on your primary identification. People who fall into more than one category pick that category with the highest dice values.

Black: 2d10 - If the value seen on one dice is a 9 or 10 and the enemy is white the enemy takes the "white guilt" status and is unable to roll until the status is lifted. A failure (combined roll of <4) inflicts the "invisible" status effect, which allows other warriors to ignore this combatant until the status is lifted.

Middle Eastern - 2d10

Woman : 2d8 - An additional d10 is rolled to determine conventional attractiveness. Warrior gets 1 "white knight" token for each value over five rolled on this dice. A failure (roll of less than 4) on this dice inflicts the "invisible" status. Add +1 to your oppression credibility roll per "white knight" token. White knights are discarded after each battle is over.

Native American/Pacific Islander: 2d6 - Combined roll of less than 2 inflicts "invisible".

Hispanic or Asian: 1d6

White Male: Coin flip, Heads counts as 1, tails inflicts "invisible" status.

Jewish: Considered white unless the discussion is the Holocaust, in which case player rolls 2d12. -1 to rolls if the argument involves Israel.

Qualifiers

Gay/Lesbian: +2 to any roll

Trans: +4 to any roll, +6 if your primary identification is woman, and you roll an attractiveness of over 5

Genderqueer: +1 to any roll

Otherkin/Headmates/Genders that sound like sci-fi/fantasy races: +8 if the arena is tumblr, -4 if the arena is anything else.

Opponents who question "social justice"
Start the round with "invisible" status, because you've probably already blocked them.

End Game
Scores are totaled for each battle after both combatants have rolled.

The warrior who ends up with the highest overall credibility wins the argument. In case of arena battles between well defined "sides" scores may be totaled and compared across groups.

[Guestus Aurelius]

Looks like the "new" Melissa Click video has made mainstream news now. I feel a bit bad for her—she's just one person, and the problem is so much bigger than her. But she's insisted on staying on in her position, and she hasn't been particularly apologetic or honest, so my sympathy only extends so far.

[blitzem]

Is there an Oppression Scale somewhere that makes it easier to understand the pecking order as to who's allowed to attack who depending on who's the most oppressed?

Because right now I see SJWs defending brown-skinned rapists and attacking white gay men, so presumably being brown-skinned gives you a free pass, but being gay is not having a sufficiently high enough Oppression Score because it's offset by being white and male.

Its not so much a scale as it is a combat system. In practice all kinds of SJWs will attack one another and the winners are decided by sophisticated dice rolling mechanics that are hidden from plain site. Here is a basic guide to the system:

Base privilege check (determines base oppression credibility level) - Roll this number of dice based on your primary identification. People who fall into more than one category pick that category with the highest dice values.

Black: 2d10 - If the value seen on one dice is a 9 or 10 and the enemy is white the enemy takes the "white guilt" status and is unable to roll until the status is lifted. A failure (combined roll of <4) inflicts the "invisible" status effect, which allows other warriors to ignore this combatant until the status is lifted.

Middle Eastern - 2d10

Woman : 2d8 - An additional d10 is rolled to determine conventional attractiveness. Warrior gets 1 "white knight" token for each value over five rolled on this dice. A failure (roll of less than 4) on this dice inflicts the "invisible" status. Add +1 to your oppression credibility roll per "white knight" token. White knights are discarded after each battle is over.

Native American/Pacific Islander: 2d6 - Combined roll of less than 2 inflicts "invisible".

Hispanic or Asian: 1d6

White Male: Coin flip, Heads counts as 1, tails inflicts "invisible" status.

Jewish: Considered white unless the discussion is the Holocaust, in which case player rolls 2d12. -1 to rolls if the argument involves Israel.

Qualifiers

Gay/Lesbian: +2 to any roll

Trans: +4 to any roll, +6 if your primary identification is woman, and you roll an attractiveness of over 5

Genderqueer: +1 to any roll

Otherkin/Headmates/Genders that sound like sci-fi/fantasy races: +8 if the arena is tumblr, -4 if the arena is anything else.

Opponents who question "social justice"
Start the round with "invisible" status, because you've probably already blocked them.

End Game
Scores are totaled for each battle after both combatants have rolled.

The warrior who ends up with the highest overall credibility wins the argument. In case of arena battles between well defined "sides" scores may be totaled and compared across groups.

Outstanding. +20 Internets. Screencapped for posterity.

[ERV]

Looks like the "new" Melissa Click video has made mainstream news now. I feel a bit bad for her—she's just one person, and the problem is so much bigger than her. But she's insisted on staying on in her position, and she hasn't been particularly apologetic or honest, so my sympathy only extends so far.

Save your pity. I can get the link later, but an article just came out where she says she hasn't 'ruled out' suing MU and Mark.

She hasn't ruled out suing the kid she attacked.

No pity.

[Shatterface]

In the past I have judged people on the color of their character.

You want to play a dark elf ranger? Really.

I judge them on the content of their skin.

[ERV]

http://www.columbiamissourian.com/news/ ... 58b82.html

"... nor did she rule out filing a lawsuit against the UM System Board of Curators, MU or Schierbecker..."

[jmpea81]

Thoroughly useless FTBlogger Aoife - who you'll remember as that one who recently managed to bring the network's revenues up a bit by squatting down to piss all over the fresh corpse of David Bowie - has got Nugent's dander up.

She claims the Nuge made a homophobic remark. I'm not gonna not spoil it for you - enjoy, and be amazed, at what she premises Nugent's apparent homophobia on: http://www.michaelnugent.com/2016/02/15 ... ous-smear/

[youtube]GFLGRidfFo4[/youtube]

viewtopic.php?f=31&t=472&p=339951#p339951 ;-)

[Really?]

http://www.columbiamissourian.com/news/ ... 58b82.html

"... nor did she rule out filing a lawsuit against the UM System Board of Curators, MU or Schierbecker..."

From second paragraph:

Click lay low while conversations about her spread across campus, the nation and the Internet. After receiving legal and public relations advice, she's decided to speak.

Awesome proofreading.

In Columbia police body camera footage, the 5-foot-tall Click implored officers for space

How is her height relevant to her assault?

The tall, skinny Schierbecker slipped through the wall of supporters and walked toward the camp. Again, Click was caught unaware on video.

How is his body relevant?

This comment amused me:

I don't see this coming out in a positive way for Click. Fair or unfair, in education, right or wrong, once accused you lose. Sad but true.

[Tigzy]

viewtopic.php?f=31&t=472&p=339951#p339951 ;-)

Well. Shit. Shitting ninja shitting chromosomally damaged sweaty shitting ballbags.

Still, it deserved airing again.

[feathers]

I do feel uncomfortable violating your safe space with this fact though so I may as well leave it at that. I will leave you to your nonsense.

I am afeared that this will be another Teflon flounce.

:think:

Homophobe.

Is Teflon gay? Never thought of it like that, but now you say so... This is why Real Men nowadays use stainless steel to cook in, right? Or perhaps even cast steel.

[jimthepleb]

In the past I have judged people on the color of their character.

You want to play a dark elf ranger? Really.

I judge them on the content of their skin.

I judge them on the wearability of their skin.

[jmpea81]

Still, it deserved airing again.

Indeed. Michael Nugent is like Mr. Miagi, chopstick-catching one damned lie after another.

[Guestus Aurelius]

Looks like the "new" Melissa Click video has made mainstream news now. I feel a bit bad for her—she's just one person, and the problem is so much bigger than her. But she's insisted on staying on in her position, and she hasn't been particularly apologetic or honest, so my sympathy only extends so far.

Save your pity. I can get the link later, but an article just came out where she says she hasn't 'ruled out' suing MU and Mark.

She hasn't ruled out suing the kid she attacked.

No pity.

Christ.

[jmpea81]

Still, it deserved airing again.

Indeed. Michael Nugent is like Mr. Miagi, chopstick-catching one damned lie after another.

Argh! Quote fail.

[Guestus Aurelius]

http://www.columbiamissourian.com/news/ ... 58b82.html

"... nor did she rule out filing a lawsuit against the UM System Board of Curators, MU or Schierbecker..."

From second paragraph:

Click lay low while conversations about her spread across campus, the nation and the Internet. After receiving legal and public relations advice, she's decided to speak.

Awesome proofreading.

Can't tell whether you're being genuine or sarcastic, but to be clear, the phrase is indeed "lie low," and so "lay low" is the correct past tense.

[Stretchycheese]

Dana Hunter is spitting chips about NECSS, Dawkins and the whole damn privilaged world.

http://archive.is/dJk95

We on the social justice side of the Deep Rifts™ will change the face of atheism. We will make a secular community where women, people of color, queer folk, trans folk, disabled folk, and other underrepresented folk find safe harbor. We will defeat the harassers, the old-school sexists, the gentlemen racists, the trolls, the harassers, the assholes, the greedy, and the other assorted jackasses that make movement atheism such a terrible place right now. We will resolve this shit, and we will make a better world.

And we will remember who stood with us, who failed us, and who opposed us.

What a fucking loon.

I wonder when SJWs will make their own book of Revelation.

Revelation: 21: 6-8
6 And he said to me, “It is done! I am the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end. To the thirsty I will give from the fountain of the water of life without payment. 7 He who conquers shall have this heritage, and I will be his God and he shall be my son. 8 But as for the cowardly, the faithless, the polluted, as for murderers, fornicators, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars, their lot shall be in the lake that burns with fire and sulphur, which is the second death.”

When will people like Dana Hunter realize they sound less like rational skeptics and far more like millenarian cultists.

There shall be a great battle and the sinful shall be judged! Behold, here cometh our new utopian world for the elect!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millenarianism

In the modern world, economic rules or vast conspiracies are seen as generating oppression. Only dramatic events are seen as able to change the world and the change is anticipated to be brought about, or survived, by a group of the devout and dedicated. In most millenarian scenarios, the disaster or battle to come will be followed by a new, purified world in which the believers will be rewarded.

[dogen]

I am afeared that this will be another Teflon flounce.

:think:

Homophobe.

Is Teflon gay? Never thought of it like that, but now you say so... This is why Real Men nowadays use stainless steel to cook in, right? Or perhaps even cast steel.

No, it was the 'flounce'. See link upthread to latest Mick 'Based Sealion' Nugent's latest post.

[Shatterface]

How is her height relevant to her assault?

She was punching up.

[dogen]

Dana Hunter is spitting chips about NECSS, Dawkins and the whole damn privilaged world.

http://archive.is/dJk95

We on the social justice side of the Deep Rifts™ will change the face of atheism. We will make a secular community where women, people of color, queer folk, trans folk, disabled folk, and other underrepresented folk find safe harbor. We will defeat the harassers, the old-school sexists, the gentlemen racists, the trolls, the harassers, the assholes, the greedy, and the other assorted jackasses that make movement atheism such a terrible place right now. We will resolve this shit, and we will make a better world.

And we will remember who stood with us, who failed us, and who opposed us.

What a fucking loon.

I wonder when SJWs will make their own book of Revelation.

Revelation: 21: 6-8
6 And he said to me, “It is done! I am the Alpha Beta and the Omega, the beginning and the end. To the thirsty I will give from the fountain of the water of life without payment. 7 He who conquers shall have this heritage, and I will be his God and he shall be my son. 8 But as for the cowardly, the faithless, the polluted, as for murderers, fornicators, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars, their lot shall be in the lake that burns with fire and sulphur, which is the second death.”

FTFY.

[Shatterface]

I think Teflon Flounce is 39th in line to the throne.

[Tapir]

Flounce tugs to Nugent if h wants them.

[Clarence]

I don't care if closed minded SJWs here don't read my posts. I can see what I am dealing with.

You are not, I repeat NOT dealing with all white and straight people here. I very much doubt your insane screeds will get the slightest bit of traction here. You're really not very clever, and the Creativity Movement website is positively bonkers. Seriously, do really fuck off. Despite what you've heard, the only racists on this board are yourself and Steersman. And if you wanted to take Steers with you on your way out, that would be lovely.

Yes I realise this board is full of your sort. What is hilarious is that you would claim to favour freedom of speech when you clearly can't take it any more than the forums used by the SJWs. Quite what you even opposed the SJWs for I don't know - because you refuse to look at who they regard as "the enemy" in this word lest you should have to put into words that they are talking about White Heterosexual Men. No one has been able to explain what other group than this the SJWs you supposedly dislike so strongly campaign against most vociferously.
I do feel uncomfortable violating your safe space with this fact though so I may as well leave it at that. I will leave you to your nonsense.

Just understand that while most of the pit is downright relentless against race baiters and other identitarians, no one speaks for the Pit. I don't consider Steers, racist, for instance. I have a higher standard for that word than merely defending the use of the term nigger or being aware of the need to properly vet Muslim immigrants /refugees esp given the crap that a considerable amount of Muslims are causing in the world right this very minute.

Far as I'm concerned, you can stay. You might even learn something. Regardless, I respect people who can defend their viewpoints more than those who can't. Just me speaking.

[Clarence]

I do feel uncomfortable violating your safe space with this fact though so I may as well leave it at that. I will leave you to your nonsense.

I am afeared that this will be another Teflon flounce.

:think:

Homophobe.

lol

[Clarence]

You don't seem to understand the elegant checks & balances built-in to the US justice system. The burden is on the state to provide a fair trial & if the state fails to do so, the accused walks free... which incentivizes the state to uphold their burden. Regardless of whether the crime is victimless pot smoking or rape.

Do you have any difficulty understanding that racism might prevent a black accused of raping a white from receiving a fair trial in a racist courtroom? If you can comprehend that, then why would it be 'insane' to posit that a man might be wrongfully convicted of raping a woman in a courtroom with anti-male (or pro-female) biases?

So then you have proof this happens in every rape trial? because you have to prove that it happens in every rape case, that it is literally unavoidable, indeed, impossible for a man to be legitimately convicted for rape under any circumstances, even with hard, non-memory-based evidence.

that's the only way that Elam's "all rape trials must be nullified by the jury" shit to be anything but utter nonsense.

Here in nyc, for over a decade, hundreds of thousands of men were stopped & searched by police without reasonable suspicion or probable cause. They were systematically arrested for minor offenses such as carrying marijuana, a pot pipe, or a boxcutter used at work. Any outstanding warrants were also cause for arrest-- at a time when the 'Broken Window Theory' was used to treat infractions such as pubic urination, open container, riding a bicycle on the sidewalk, jumping the subway turnstyle, and literal jaywalking-- as worthy of high fines and jailtime. The Broken Window citations were overwhelmingly directed at males.

Many who are capable of seeing the discrimination inherent in 90% of the "randomly" stopped citizens being non-white-- nonetheless seem incapable of concern that 100% of the citizens were explicitly profiled for being male. The NYPD policy was to only search males, for fear of sexual harassment and assault charges if random women were frisked.

There is an anti-male disparity at every stage of the criminal justice system-- from who gets profiled, who gets searched, who gets a warning vs. a citation, who is arrested on-site, who is released from the precinct vs. 'put through the system' (fingerprinted, photographed, and jailed until put before an arraignment judge), who is released on their own recognizance vs. requiring bail or left waiting in jail without bail. There's a disparity in amount of bail demanded, the conditions in jail, the harshness of sentences, the size of plea bargain offered, whether the convicted person is offered alternatives such as public service hours, or treatment programs, in lieu of imprisonment. There are currently activist efforts to abolish prison altogether... for women. Because any woman convicted of drunk driving or drowning her baby... must be a victim, forced to do such a thing by the patriarchy. Only boys & men are to be held responsible for their own actions.

This discriminatory environment has a compound-interest effect, so that a male & female with identical criminal behaviors appear to be a criminal with a long rap sheet & an innocent citizen, respectively. Long before a man finds himself on trial for rape, he has already been sorted into a guilty category, to be used as evidence against his character at trial.

Or threat of trial: the accused man will inevitably be offered a harsh plea-- perhaps 5 years in prison, if he agrees to spare the state the hassle of proving their case against him, vs. 25-to-life if he takes his chances on justice.

Atop all this comes the gender-specific legislation... of the Duluth Model and the Violence Against Women Act; in which a woman reporting herself a victim is mandated to be assigned a specially-trained advocate social services worker, but a male can be discouraged from filing an official report-- and frequently treated as-if he is the perpetrator. The lists of phone numbers on police documents provide phone numbers for female victim's services-- and programs for male perpetrators. The social workers were trained in institutions which teach Patriarchy Theory and Privilege and 1in4 rape statistics, as scientific fact. Also 'Believe the Women' and 'All Men Are Rapists'. Shelters for male victims don't exist. A male who takes his children away from an abusive woman-- triggers an Amber Alert for abduction.

New York recently passed a 'Rape Is Rape' law, which discarded the former hierarchy of sexual-assault offenses, greater & lesser, in favor of all such charges now being officially deemed forms of Rape.

Also of note are the Rape Shield Laws which sacrifice a defendant's right to face his accuser and gather a robust defense-- in favor of hiding the accusser's identity and relevant sexual history.

The rape hysteria on college campuses is well-documented. Would you object to a student-juror in a college kangaroo court-- who refused to participate in the miscarriage of justice... such as the defendant not being allowed legal counsel, or a 51%/preponderance of evidence standard being applied (as mandated by the Obama Administration, rather than the 98%/beyond a reasonable doubt.

The college campus lunacy is spreading. California and New York have made 'yes means yes' affirmative consent a state law, without a shred of concern that the standard is only applied to whether a female said yes, or had a beer, or 'felt' obligated to have sex. The same Mary Koss who spawned the 1-in-4 rape college rape stat in the 1980s now advises the FBI & CDC that males forced to penetrate females should not be counted as 'rape' victims, but should be categorized in a separate 'other' category. The number of males reporting having been forced to penetrate-- is higher than the number of females reporting being penetrated. No 'rape is rape', if you're male.

I start this discussion knowing that males can't expect equal treatment under the law for littering or sitting on a park bench after dusk, so it's no great leap to extend that to rape charges. I discard much of Paul Elam's essay as irrelevant (rather than incorrect), but his central assertion still stands. I don't know how welch arrived at the notion that a juror must be 100% sure the specific case being tried has been tainted as illegitimate. The appearance of an unfair trial-- REASONABLE DOUBT-- is sufficient. Better 10 guilty men walk free, than one innocent suffer.

Thanks SD. I think I should still do my post and link to the specific statutes and such , but its been my experience that somehow policies and even LAWS that downright discriminate on the basis of sex (almost always) to the disadvantage of males are ignored by a vocal contingent here. One thing you forgot to mention is that - in Federal rape prosecutions at least - past ACCUSATIONS (they do not have to be CONVICTIONS merely accusations) of sexual abuse and assault can be brought against a defendent. This is unprecedented in pretty much all criminal law as it acts to prejudice a jury. The specific goal when this was done in the 1990's was to get more convictions.

Literally, anyone who thinks "The Patriarchy" doesn't care about rape victims deserves a rusty spokesgay AND a porcupine up their poop chute.

[DaveDodo007]

If you're here, Sargon fags, you should ask him to see if he can get William Shetterly on his show. That'd be eyeopening for everyone.

Is that you Grumby?

[Lsuoma]

http://www.columbiamissourian.com/news/ ... 58b82.html

"... nor did she rule out filing a lawsuit against the UM System Board of Curators, MU or Schierbecker..."

No sympathy.

"I'll do what the fuck I want till I get in a difficult position, then I'll try to avoid taking responsibility for my actions."

Grow up, Melissa, grow up...

[d4m10n]

...ask him to see if he can get William Shetterly on his show. That'd be eyeopening for everyone.

Everyone concerned with entryism should ask Shetterly on their show. Come to think of it, I've never heard him do one.

Maybe he did this show, but as a sci-fi author http://tenminutes.libsyn.com/rss

[HoneyWagon]

Believe it or not Latsot and I are still swapping love letters over Amy. He has thoughtfully provided her with our criticism of the Rhino.

http://i.imgur.com/x96Ja6H.jpg

I'm going to ask Amy for a custom-order 'ramic, consisting only of the words "Ceci n'est pas un turd".

Remember these?

[Old_ones]

I am still waiting to see your tits.

Can I identify as a woman or is that identity politics? When women campaigned for the vote was that unacceptable "identity politics" and would it be so if Saudi women campaingned against getting executed for showing their tits? What's wrong with identifying yourself as oppressed? It is necessary to do so if you are going to change things.

You can identify as whatever the fuck you want, just don't expect it to sell your bullshit on this board.

"Women priests. Great, great. Now there's priests of both sexes I don't listen to" - Bill Hicks

[Matt Cavanaugh]

SF authors have almost all gone the SJW route.

Are there any genres or kinds of authors that haven't gone the SJW route, aside from white supremacists?

Noir and crime fiction. Military fiction. Spy fiction.

Mostly because members of the military or of law enforcement check them out and they're not in the SJW demographic.

SJWs seem to thrive in geeky subcultures aimed at 20-30 somethings.

It'd be impossible to SJW-ify a Jack Reacher novel. Strong female characters, an occasional female villain, with Reacher distilled masculinity who still collaborates easily with (& occasionally bangs) them, while breaking bad guys' arms with his bare hands.

The only way to fuck up the Reacher universe would be to cast, I dunno, Tom Cruise or somebody as him.

[Clarence]

So he's right. And if rape wasn't such an abhorrent crime (not as bad as murder, but STILL) and perhaps if I didn't have a family member who was raped I might agree with him about the Jury Nullfication thing. But it really is the only big thing that I"m aware of that I disagree with his stance on (as do OTHERS at A Voice for Men, they are not a freaking hive mind), so calling him a male radfem is a bit much.

One of the considerations that made me think of "openly affiliating with MRA" as being quite an important issue in these times (apart from the straightforward thought, "wtf, my reluctance is just the last trace of SJW bamboozlement in my system, why am I even heeding its promptings? I long ago ceased to care about being called names!"), was the reflection that if male rape is soooo sooooo heinous, why isn't female rape also considered heinous? Let's set aside rape with violence (which is of course likely to be largely a male thing) and consider the type of rape that's like the "grooming" of young offenders by female prison guards. Isn't that just as heinous as the male-to-female version?

But it's considerations like this that lead to the Honey Badger speculations about gynocentrism - you don't have to go all the way with Alison Tieman's psychosocial history of the world, to notice that there's a peculiar imbalance in the way we view women vs. men in society, and that it "covers up" female agency, and female malicious intent, with a sort of waft of gauze such that the thought that women can be just as nasty as men, and just as emotionally cold, sort of slides off the mind.

Which is just the same old: "sugar and spice and all things nice."

And the thing is, while it's possible to say that the HB matriarchy theory is an ideology, and while I would agree that there's always a danger it could go that way, actually its basis is just evolutionary biology (things like sexual dimorphism, neoteny, etc., leading to high value female and expendable male, etc., etc.), which is straightforward falsifiable science. The psychosocial side (e.g. how male and female infants, respectively are likely to view and react to big momma, "Das Ewigweibliche", how She is the first and most important child trainer of both boys and girls) is naturally more dubious, but as I said in a previous post, it's not like those sorts of ideas have no validity whatsoever. Patriarchy theory has always had a grain of truth to it, and if the HB theory goes deeper than patriarchy theory (which it does, or at least purports to do) that shouldn't necessarily be a strike against it. All these kinds of informed speculation are worth taking into consideration, it's just that it's not wise to formulate any political policy as a direct logical consequence of taking them to be true.

Really it's the "political use made of ideas that are essentially merely speculative" that's problematic, not "speculative ideas simply being a part of a political movement". The bad thing is when the movement loses sight of specificity and falsifiability, and the speculative theory starts to drift off, untethered to reality testing.

Anyway, the upshot of it is that one ought to openly affiliate loosely with MRA, for the very same reason that feminists home in on their biggest enemy as being MRA - because it exposes the hypocrisy of feminists thrusting the dictionary definition in peoples' faces. MRA is an arrow straight to the heart of feminist quasi-religious ideology because it exposes that "equality before the law" is a "Motte" term for feminism, and that they mean by "equality" something entirely different from "equality" as that's ordinarily understood by most people (which is something like "equal treatment by any treating agent or agency").

There's a difference in saying that SOME parts of society or the law are matriarchal or even downright GYNOCENTRIC (They aren't the same, anymore than Patriarchy and Andrarchy are the same though feminists love to mix them up) without making it some sort of UNILATERAL plot throughout all society and history.

Where this hit me was when Typhon (Allison) was doing a video series on The Ottoman Seraglio (Harem means the women IN the Seraglio) and she was making an argument that throughout the entire history of the Ottoman Empire the various Sultans and such did little more than the will and whims of the Seraglio. I pointed out that while you COULD find times when it was obvious the women in the Seraglio had both overt and covert power that history was more complicated and the influence waxed and waned. Apparently that was a THOUGHTCRIME.

It's the same way with present history. I do think MODERN WESTERN societies are as close to gynocracy as has ever existed on this Earth. In whole areas of the law and social policy women are exempted from responsibilities, given special treatments/rights, privileged, and the society as a whole contains very little criticism directed at women as a group and far far more praise and pity (if you assume they are all victims). But this is not some Universal condition, not all women agree with it, and there are limits -even now- to female power. Plus the policies are sometimes schizophrenic and hurt some women even as they help others. So it's more complicated then simply taking "The Patriarchy" and turning it around on the feminists. In reality all human societies have had matriarchal and patriarchal elements: how could they not? We are a sexed species. And casting blame on women as a whole or men as a whole for all your problems or all the social problems is bigoted, counterproductive, and hateful. Lastly, I have no more truck with an unfalsifiable theory of Universal Gynocrentricism then I have with the All Powerful Patriarchy (Andrarchy, damn it, you Jezebels!).

[Clarence]

http://www.columbiamissourian.com/news/ ... 58b82.html

"... nor did she rule out filing a lawsuit against the UM System Board of Curators, MU or Schierbecker..."

No sympathy.

"I'll do what the fuck I want till I get in a difficult position, then I'll try to avoid taking responsibility for my actions."

Grow up, Melissa, grow up...

I'm with the Facist Tit and ERV on this one.
Assault a freaking kid and a kid who was acting as a reporter in a public area at that?
And you are thinking of suing?

Fuck that, Melissa. And fuck you. You deserve to be ruined. No, your hubby and little baby would not be legit targets, but YOU...you should never teach at any reputable place again.

[HoneyWagon]

https://www.facebook.com/sara.e.mayhew/ ... 3657051015

http://i.imgur.com/cZNk5dW.png

[DaveDodo007]

Dana Hunter is spitting chips about NECSS, Dawkins and the whole damn privilaged world.

http://archive.is/dJk95

We on the social justice side of the Deep Rifts™ will change the face of atheism. We will make a secular community where women, people of color, queer folk, trans folk, disabled folk, and other underrepresented folk find safe harbor. We will defeat the harassers, the old-school sexists, the gentlemen racists, the trolls, the harassers, the assholes, the greedy, and the other assorted jackasses that make movement atheism such a terrible place right now. We will resolve this shit, and we will make a better world.

And we will remember who stood with us, who failed us, and who opposed us.

What a fucking loon.

She should tell that to Gefan, griffton or whatever his fucking name is. :P

[Matt Cavanaugh]

http://imgur.com/MTJkpN0.jpg

Did Lil' Alex do this cover art, too?

I mean, fuck me! All you gotta do is drop some fucking type onto a stock fucking photo. But you can't fucking kern the apostrophe? And you place the left edge so close to the wooden door that you create optical magnetism.

I'd suggest that Alex instead do something he's good at, but whining doesn't pay much.

[dogen]

Believe it or not Latsot and I are still swapping love letters over Amy. He has thoughtfully provided her with our criticism of the Rhino.

http://i.imgur.com/x96Ja6H.jpg

I'm going to ask Amy for a custom-order 'ramic, consisting only of the words "Ceci n'est pas un turd".

Remember these?

Ah yes, the "Dr" Richard Carrier product line...

[Steersman]

[.quote="Creativity73"]I don't care if closed minded SJWs here don't read my posts. I can see what I am dealing with.[/.quote]

You are not, I repeat NOT dealing with all white and straight people here. I very much doubt your insane screeds will get the slightest bit of traction here. You're really not very clever, and the Creativity Movement website is positively bonkers. Seriously, do really fuck off. Despite what you've heard, the only racists on this board are yourself and Steersman. And if you wanted to take Steers with you on your way out, that would be lovely.

Yes I realise this board is full of your sort. What is hilarious is that you would claim to favour freedom of speech when you clearly can't take it any more than the forums used by the SJWs. ....

Just understand that while most of the pit is downright relentless against race baiters and other identitarians, no one speaks for the Pit. I don't consider Steers, racist, for instance. I have a higher standard for that word than merely defending the use of the term nigger or being aware of the need to properly vet Muslim immigrants /refugees esp given the crap that a considerable amount of Muslims are causing in the world right this very minute.

Far as I'm concerned, you can stay. You might even learn something. Regardless, I respect people who can defend their viewpoints more than those who can't. Just me speaking.

Thanks - most appreciated; too bad others are apparently incapable of using or reading a dictionary - and following a line of argument more convoluted than "See Spot run". ;-)

In any case, I quite agree with you about the crap far too many Muslims are causing these days. Maybe arguably or not, it seems that the Quran is substantially worse than Mein Kampf, and that those who ignore or try to camouflage that elephant in the room are hardly much better than Quislings. Somewhat apropos of which, something from a recent post over at Quillette, Tutors and Examiners of the Mind: German media and the migrant crisis, on the rather egregious and shameful attempts of Germany to peddle propaganda:

The problems here were abbreviated recently and efficiently in remarks made by Wolfgang Herles, a grandee of German broadcasting and former head of the Bonn division of ZDF (Zweites Deutsches Fernsehen, effectively the German state broadcaster). In a story which itself, ironically, went little-reported in the wider European media, Dr Herles commented that publicly-funded broadcasters in Germany, including ZDF, routinely took orders from the Federal government in line with an ideologized vision of multicultural harmony and a pan-European, pro-immigration agenda. He said:

We have the problem that we are too close to the government. The topics we cover are determined by the government. But many of the topics the government wants to stop us from reporting are more important than the topics they want us to cover. We must, we are told, report in such a way that serves Europe and the common good. Today we are not allowed to say anything negative about the refugees. This is government-led journalism, and this leads to a situation in which the public loses their trust in us. This is scandalous.

Consider those remarks and let them percolate a while. These aren’t the warnings of a dissident Russian journalist bravely running the risk of death by radioactivity while speaking out from London exile (in which case we’d shrug our shoulders and ask: “What does he expect? It’s the Kremlin”) — these are the warnings of the former chief of the state broadcaster in Europe’s largest and (theoretically) most progressive democracy.

Something seriously rotten in Denmark - and in more than a few other "Western" countries. But some encouraging evidence that at least some are learning to read the writing on the wall:

[Outed1TimeAsGrey!]

I want to set-up an anonymous forum for Academics to discuss SJW who scare them into silence.

Any suggestions where/how to do this?

Would it be practical here?

I have already set-up a very open group with examples of video and documents about how the 'political correctness' is limiting academic freedom. But Prof Gad Saad explained that many of his colleagues are to frightened to even click a 'like' button in case some student objects.

[Oglebart]

I think Teflon Flounce is 39th in line to the throne.

Hey, show some respect. That's Prince Edward to you!

[Steersman]

I want to set-up an anonymous forum for Academics to discuss SJW who scare them into silence.

Any suggestions where/how to do this?

Would it be practical here?

I have already set-up a very open group with examples of video and documents about how the 'political correctness' is limiting academic freedom. But Prof Gad Saad explained that many of his colleagues are to frightened to even click a 'like' button in case some student objects.

Welcome aboard, obligatory greetings, and helpful lynx. :-)

But seems like an excellent idea - maybe someone else can suggest one of the other subsections here. And while you may have seen this article in the Tablet Magazine, it seems a useful point of reference for everyone:

Time for the Academy To Put Its Pencils Down
Don’t dismiss the petulant students at Yale and elsewhere
—they’re here to tell us what we should’ve known a long time ago: American academia is beyond salvation

[BarnOwl]

I am still waiting to see your tits.

Can I identify as a woman or is that identity politics? When women campaigned for the vote was that unacceptable "identity politics" and would it be so if Saudi women campaingned against getting executed for showing their tits? What's wrong with identifying yourself as oppressed? It is necessary to do so if you are going to change things.

Dammit, now I want some fried chicken.

[Aneris]

I've typoed worse things. :/

You know the Sargon thing has got me thinking about the origins of the SJW. I've been online since 1991/1992 and part of forums and chats. I don't remember anything SJW-ish until the introduction of trigger warnings in fanfiction (which are the online equivalent of codes of conduct). That MUST have happened around 2002 or so, which would date it shortly after 9/11.

I note that popular accounts of the phrase don't register until 2008 but it was in widespread usage in fanfiction for a long time before that. It is much, much older than people seem to think it is. I don't know how to sort unstructured data but you should find it first in fanfiction.net or livejournal.com - the phrase or idea of trigger warnings.

I swear this was the beginning, I don't think it existed before this.

I think of this as a postmodernist movement, with roots specifically in law schools (!) My hypothesis is that it a continuation of the Critical Race Theory movement. Involved in that were people like Kimberlé Crenshaw — the very same person who also popularized Intersectionality. Both of these concepts seem to easily cover most of the ideology. Of course they themselves are embedded in a tradition, which is postmodern in the first place (that is post-structuralist). This glues quite well with the prevalent beliefs in the anthropoly departments.

This is part of the strain that leads over Critical Theory, and Frankfurt School back to Marx, Hegel and Kant — which you can see as “default left” ideology. Eventually you hit on the divide between Geisteswissenschaften and Naturwissenschaften, one type of “sciences” concerned with experiences, the other with the independently observable. Unlike other critics (I'm looking at you Gary Edwards) I don't see this itself as the problem. The idea isn't bad per se — and you can't blame some eighteenth century bloke for confusions of millenial teenagers. All of that matters in some sense, but what matters more what happened in the 1980s and 1990s.

Postmodernists seem like Dark Matter. You cannot observe them well directly, as they deny they exist, and play all sorts of fancy word games. But you can see the reaction very well.

1994.........“Higher Superstition: The Academic Left and Its Quarrels with Science”
1996..........Sokal Affair
1997–98......Impostures Intellectuelles / Fashionable Nonsense: Postmodern Intellectuals' Abuse of Science (Sokal/Bricmont)
2002..........The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature
...
2009..........RaceFail
2011..........Elevatorgate
2014..........GamerGate

Next to Kimberlé Crenshaw, another founder is Richard Delgado, also from a Law School.

He is a founder of the critical race theory school of legal scholarship, and is also notable for his scholarship on hate speech, and for introducing storytelling into legal scholarship.

By 2002, over 20 US law schools and at least 3 foreign law schools offered critical race theory courses or classes which covered the issue centrally

This thing is explicitly postmodernist, and has these features taken from the article, and abridged a bit.

• A critique of liberalism: CRT scholars favor a more aggressive approach to social transformation as opposed to liberalism's more cautious approach, favor a race conscious approach
• Storytelling/counterstorytelling and “naming one's own reality”—using narrative to illuminate and explore experiences of racial oppression [that would be lived experience]
• Intersectionality
• Essentialism philosophy—reducing the experience of a category (gender or race) to the experience of one sub-group (white women or African-Americans). Basically, all oppressed people share the commonality of oppression. However, that oppression varies by gender, class, race, etc.
• Non-white cultural nationalism/separatism, Black nationalism—exploring more radical views arguing for separation and reparations as a form of foreign aid [we know this as aspect when violated as “Cultural Appropriation”]
• White privilege refers to the myriad of social advantages, benefits, and courtesies that come with being a member of the dominant race
• Microaggression refers to the sudden, stunning, or dispiriting transactions that mar the days of people of color.

There is a reason why this is such a nightmare. It was invented by postmodernist lawyers.

[Guest_0048cc29]

If you think the system is rigged, and I think ServiceDog makes a great case it is, and if you think that system is sending people to jail and ruining lives, I think not participating and even monkeywrenching are on the table.

As a commenter at Volokh wrote:

volokh.com/2011/02/25/suppression-of-jury-nullification-advocates-speech-outside-courthouse/comment-page-1/

Nullification is the ONLY reason juries exist. They were created as a way for the people to veto the whims of the king. The need for that check on the power of the state has not diminished since then. If anything, it has become more important.

It should be the duty of every judge in every case to inform the jury of their age-old right and duty to judge the alleged law as well as the alleged law-breaker. That duty used to be enshrined in at least a few state constitutions.

Voir dire is itself an egregious form of jury tampering that has become epidemic in our courts. Juries are supposed to be randomly selected from the defendant's peers, that is, people of his station in life who are likely to actually know him personally. Instead, the jury is whittled down by voir dire to imbeciles and state worshipers.

Would it be reasonable for a South African to vote to acquit any black man that came to trial during apartheid?
Would it be reasonable to insist that person pick and choose which cases were the ones to acquit on?

If the penalties are jail and worse, in a system where we claim it is better that 100 guilty go free than imprison one innocent, does the system have to be rigged as badly as apartheid was before a policy of fulltime jury nullification becomes reasonable?

[Lsuoma]

I want to set-up an anonymous forum for Academics to discuss SJW who scare them into silence.

Any suggestions where/how to do this?

Would it be practical here?

I have already set-up a very open group with examples of video and documents about how the 'political correctness' is limiting academic freedom. But Prof Gad Saad explained that many of his colleagues are to frightened to even click a 'like' button in case some student objects.

How many people are you talking about hosting? I can probably set something up to get you going to see if it's a flyer.

[Steersman]

[.quote="comhcinc"]I am still waiting to see your tits.[/.quote]

Can I identify as a woman or is that identity politics? When women campaigned for the vote was that unacceptable "identity politics" and would it be so if Saudi women campaingned against getting executed for showing their tits? What's wrong with identifying yourself as oppressed? It is necessary to do so if you are going to change things.

[.img][/img]

Dammit, now I want some fried chicken.

:lol: And some watermelon for dessert ... ;-)

Though I think she has a point. Not really unreasonable for people to group together in common cause, even if that means that the groups are defined by race or sex. Seems a moot point whether any of us should have more rights than others simply for being a member of some particular group. However, it seems the other side of the coin is that, very frequently, basic rights are also denied on the basis of race or sex - in which case it seems entirely justified to make common cause to redress the balance.

[dogen]

Based Sealion plus others (some from here) are kicking the shit out of Aoife over Flouncegate.

:popcorn:

[comhcinc]

Dammit, now I want some fried chicken.

I always want fried chicken.

[BarnOwl]

https://www.facebook.com/sara.e.mayhew/ ... 3657051015

http://i.imgur.com/cZNk5dW.png

Wishing locked-in syndrome on Dawkins? Or anyone, for that matter? Of course the dumb cunt probably doesn't realize that locked-in syndrome isn't limited to mutism: it means that the the person can't make any voluntary movements, other than with the extraocular muscles. People with locked-in syndrome can still have a good quality of life (with technological assistance of course), but that doesn't mean that you should wish the condition on anyone, so that your shitty Skepchicks can invade a conference.

[jugheadnaut]

Ah yes, the "Dr" Richard Carrier product line...

It inspired probably my best pit shoop (not saying much). Here again is Amy Roth's Jizzy Night, peer reviewed by Dr. Richard Carrier.

http://i.imgur.com/rnR4Tep.jpg

[HoneyWagon]

That is beautiful.
There are no words

[HoneyWagon]

That is beautiful.
There are no words

[Matt Cavanaugh]

Lol. Melissa Click will regret she ever met Mark Schierbecker, if she doesn't already.

[youtube]h4AkSAj3Txs[/youtube]

Newly obtained footage shows Melissa Click, the professor who grabbed my camera at a Concerned Student protest in November is seen berating police officers at a homecoming parade in October.

MELISSA CLICK screams at officer: "Get your f*cking hands off me!"

Schierbecker may just become Click's own personal, one-man Slymepit.

[HoneyWagon]

So beautiful, I had to double post

[Tigzy]

I want to set-up an anonymous forum for Academics to discuss SJW who scare them into silence.

Any suggestions where/how to do this?

Would it be practical here?

I have already set-up a very open group with examples of video and documents about how the 'political correctness' is limiting academic freedom. But Prof Gad Saad explained that many of his colleagues are to frightened to even click a 'like' button in case some student objects.

Yeah, you're free to make your own thread/threads on the Slymepit, and it comes with pretty much a no doxxing rule and very few limits on your speech. You can be as anonymous and outspoken as you want here.

The one problem you might have is the occasional troll or shitposter passing by. Given the freedoms of the Pit, they aren't likely to be banned for it, either - unless they break any rules concerning the no spamming/doxxing/illegal material rules. However, you're personally free to ignore anyone you like by foe-ing them, which will hide their posts when you log in.

If you're looking for something a little more refined, it *might* be possible to have a closed, members-only type thread - but you'll have to contact the Fascist Tit (Lsuoma) or Skeptickle about that. I don't think it's likely, but it doesn't hurt to ask.

[Tigzy]

Oh, ninjad by the chinky with tits. Never mind.

[Steersman]

So beautiful, I had to double post

Quite understandable - I periodically do the same .... ;-)

[Aneris]

And while I'm at it: oppression, power and all that stuff seems to come from Foucault. He is remarkably similar to the SJWs of today, except that he was hard working. Consider how SJWs have a problem with civility, and argue Foucaultesque that it only masks nastiness, and hence “justified anger” is good. Check this out.

Michel Foucault.

[youtube]BBJTeNTZtGU[/youtube]

I concede that thinkers like him are great artists. They are good to shake things up and must be taken seriously as much is necessary to not feel too comfortable with one's own established ideas. But not any more than that (to tease out where one ends and the other begins, that's of course the big question, and where empiricism should enter the picture).