Periodic Table of Swearing

[UnbelieveSteve]

In a related matter, I'm going with 92.4% chance that UnbelieveSteve didn't actually spend 17 hours reading this thread from page 1 to the high 700's.

But in case I'm wrong, can we have the edit function? ;)[/quote]

:-) I'm good but not that good.
I did however read the entire thread content but over a much longer period of time.

Damn it. No diet coke for me.

Did i f*ck up this post? I did it on my mobile. Edit function puhlease? Eh fork it. 8-)

[Skep tickle]

from here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vasectomy_reversal

From what I have read, vasectomy reversal it is closer to a 98% or 99% success rate with the surgical technology of today, but instead of linking numerous sources, perhaps Skeptickle or Barn Owl or other person more qualified to answer the "easily reversed" question would do so.

Vasectomy reversal is technically much easier than trying to reverse iatrogenic damage to fallopian tubes (they don't simply "ligate" the fallopian tubes any more at a "tubal ligation" - they tend to pretty aggressively make sure that tube's never going to transport eggs or sperm again, including burying the uterine end of the tube into the uterine wall & sewing it in place or burning the ends with an electrical probe). More successful, I'm sure.

Besides sperm donation & storage before vasectomy and vasectomy reversal, there's another approach: sperm can be aspirated from the testis & injected directly into the egg (ICSI, a type of IVF) then transferred directly into the uterus. Plan to save up now if you're going to go that route; fertility treatments like this are expensive*. 'Course, microsurgery to reattach the tiny ends of the vas deferens costs a fair penny*, too.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vasectomy# ... _vasectomy

*Disclaimer: this pertains to the US, where treatments for infertility are almost never covered by health insurance

[Skep tickle]

Mild Aspergers and mild Tourettes? Forgive my scepticism of that claim.

Mild = self diagnosed normally. I've seen so many self-diagnosed autistics online, but this is the first time someone has claimed Tourettes.

He declared that he had "mild tourettes" the day after he called someone a cunt while the prune was within earshot.

True dat.

LOL. Link?

[Mister_Kolle]

Nobel Laureate Rita Levi-Montalcini died today. She was 103 fucking years old.

She, ladies and gentlemen, was a fucking proper feminist. There was no fucking whining white-girl bullshit from her! Read here obit here: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/31/scien ... t-103.html

What are the odds anyone at FtB mentions her passing?

[John Greg]

MKG, welcome back, good sir.

And, sincere condolences.

[somedumbguy]

I stated that those accused of rape, because of the very way the system is set up, do not get fair trials. [Or, if you would prefer, get trials less fair than those accused of any other crime.] I see no talk of "likelihood". I don't know the numbers, and none of us ever will, I suspsect, so it would be pretty foolish of me to speak about the likelyhood of the innocent being convicted. It happens, that much I know, and that much you will fucking concede.

It happens, and it's fucked up that it happens, no doubt: but does it happen more than any other alleged crime? Is there a greater number of false convictions for rape than other crimes?

I would say it's likely, if only for these reason:

For other crimes, if you make a false accusation, or perjure yourself in court, you are likely to be charged with a crime yourself.

But in cases of rape and sexual assault, there are large groups of feminists that say, "If we charge a person for making a false accusation, that will discourage other *true* victims from coming forward. Since every rapist must be found, we must not charge Jane for making a false accusation".

And this is amplified with the various new ways that the definition of rape is broadened to include "she was drunk but when she woke up she decided she would never have slept with the guy, so it must've been rape", and the insistence that prosecutors increase their rape convictions.

And it is amplified further in that in most measuring processes we understand about False Positives and False Negatives and realize that if we naively try to reduce False Negatives, False Positives will increase, and vice versa. So that any process that demands we reduce false negatives (rapes that are unreported) while claiming as feminists do that there are no or incredibly rare or so few as to be ignorable False Positives will almost certainly increase False Positives.

And that's what we see when we hear so many women give their rationalizations for why they lied and made a false accusation of rape. That there was very little incentive not to.

I understand this is circumstantial and indirect evidence of why there are probably higher rates of false convictions of rape than for other crimes.

[Ape+lust]

http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/ ... 663570.jpg

[Gumby]

Now Animal Andy and Tkmlac have stolen my hat as well. Mykeru, you'll pay for this outrage!

[katamari Damassi]

From what I have read, vasectomy reversal it is closer to a 98% or 99% success rate with the surgical technology of today, but instead of linking numerous sources, perhaps Skeptickle or Barn Owl or other person more qualified to answer the "easily reversed" question would do so.

I guess I'm not current on this. Still, better safe than sorry. Something could always go wrong.

[decius]

I would say it's likely, if only for these reason:

Sorry, you can't pull this stuff out of your arse. There are actual stats and figures available. Now I can't possibly dig them up for you, but last time it took me 30 minutes of research to find out a few incontrovertible facts which completely contradict what you're alleging.

I'll be back on line in a day or two and we can talk some more.

[somedumbguy]

I would say it's likely, if only for these reason:

Sorry, you can't pull this stuff out of your arse. There are actual stats and figures available. Now I can't possibly dig them up for you, but last time it took me 30 minutes of research to find out a few incontrovertible facts which completely contradict what you're alleging.

I'll be back on line in a day or two and we can talk some more.

Argument form of:

1) You pulled this out of your arse
2) I have numbers that I can't find that completely contradict what you are saying.

[BarnOwl]

Nobel Laureate Rita Levi-Montalcini died today. She was 103 fucking years old.

She, ladies and gentlemen, was a fucking proper feminist. There was no fucking whining white-girl bullshit from her! Read here obit here: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/31/scien ... t-103.html

What are the odds anyone at FtB mentions her passing?

Rita Levi-Montalcini was freaking awesome - she wrote several engaging review articles and retrospectives on nerve growth factors and their discovery in her later years. Can't remember offhand whether they're available free online, but I can check.

When she was working on chicken embryos in Turin, she would ride around to local farms on her bicycle to get fertilized eggs for her experiments - no easy task in the WW2 era, I'm sure. Definitely not the type of intellectual who would crap her panties over Twitter parodies or vague cautionary non-threats.

[somedumbguy]

FWIW, my stuff pulled out of my arse, is based on real world story after real world story after real world story.

And based on existence of the Innocence Project, and based on micro-economic incentive theory and based on an understanding of statistical analysis and statistical processes.

[ReneeHendricks]

Quick thanks to Philip and Decius - lovely chat, guys!

[decius]

Somedumbguy, I give you my word that I will post the stats. I just can't do so right now, but that doesn't prevent you from doing your homework rather than pontificating from the data-vacuum of your arse.
Hint, if you're in a rush, you can google items like, but not limited to, "wrongful rape convictions" and refer only to unbiased scholarly sources, to agencies akin to the innocence project or even the UN.

Renee, Phil, it was lovely talking to you. Take care and happy new year.

[somedumbguy]

Somedumbguy, I give you my word that I will post the stats. I just can't do so right now, but that doesn't prevent you from doing your homework rather than pontificating from the data-vacuum of your arse.
Hint, if you're in a rush, you can google items like, but not limited to, "wrongful rape convictions" and refer only to unbiased scholarly sources, to agencies akin to the innocence project or even the UN.

Renee, Phil, it was lovely talking to you. Take care and happy new year.

Well, I haven't seen your sources, so it's a bit unfair of me to say "there are lies damned lies and statistics" but I do encourage you to read COTWA and the Fathers and Families blog and listen to civil libertarians like Jonathan Turley, Jeralyn Merritt, and FIRE.

[Lsuoma]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... ssuoft.png

[Tigzy]

Nobel Laureate Rita Levi-Montalcini died today. She was 103 fucking years old.

She, ladies and gentlemen, was a fucking proper feminist. There was no fucking whining white-girl bullshit from her! Read here obit here: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/31/scien ... t-103.html

What are the odds anyone at FtB mentions her passing?

From the article:

Scientists had virtually no idea how embryo cells built a latticework of intricate connections to other cells when Dr. Levi-Montalcini began studying chicken embryos in the bedroom of her house in Turin, Italy, during World War II. After years of obsessive study, much of it at Washington University in St. Louis with Dr. Viktor Hamburger, she found a protein that, when released by cells, attracted nerve growth from nearby developing cells.

One of four children, Rita Levi-Montalcini was born in Turin on April 22, 1909, to Adamo Levi, an engineer, and Adele Montalcini, a painter, both Italian Jews who traced their roots to the Roman Empire. In keeping with the Victorian customs of the time, Mr. Levi discouraged his three daughters from entering college, fearing that it would interfere with their lives as wives and mothers.

It was not a future that Rita wanted. She had decided to become a doctor and told her father so. “He listened, looking at me with that serious and penetrating gaze of his that caused me such trepidation,” she wrote in her autobiography, “In Praise of Imperfection” (1988). He also agreed to support her.

She graduated summa cum laude from the University of Turin medical school in 1936, the same year that Mussolini issued a manifesto barring non-Aryan Italians from having professional careers. She began her research anyway, setting up a small laboratory in her home to study chick embryos...

An elegant presence, confident and passionate, she was a sought-after speaker until late in life. “At 100, I have a mind that is superior — thanks to experience — than when I was 20,” she said in 2009.

Most definitely not a skepchick.

[ReneeHendricks]

Renee, Phil, it was lovely talking to you. Take care and happy new year.

Happy new year to you as well. It's nice to put a voice with the name :)

[Sulaco]

About Joé McKen (Bio I found on-line). He does not hide himself at all on-line. :doh:

"My name is Joé McKen, though I'm usually known around the Web as Bumdark. I was born on December 29, 1991, in the heart of frigid Québec, Canada (meaning I'm currently 17 years old). I've moved a considerable amount of times already (over 14 at last count), ranging from Québec to Texas ('96–'01). I don't suppose my heart ever really left the Lone Star State, considering what a shithole this place is here ... but I digress. I'm currently out of High School and am slowly but surely pursuing my nascent music composition career. (And you may stress "slowly".) I basically live alone by myself in my room most of my days, but that's out of choice, not necessity – general people irk me. I don't trust strangers for crap. But I suppose my double-jackpot of mild Asperger's and mild Tourette's may count for that in some way or another. =( (Seriously, two rare neurological disorders at once ... someone up there doesn't like me, do they?) And so, deprived of any creative outlets, I originally created this blog to post my random thoughts and opinions on anything and anything that interests me, from current events to debates and social issues, to whatever. If anything, this blog is more of a personal journal than an actual web log in itself, so that one day perhaps I can look back and see how far I've come (if I've evolved). And so dear readers, I hope you'll forgive me if you find me to be particularly abrasive or trenchant in my posts, and especially my replies to people who just reek of stupidity or intolerable close-mindedness. My "defiance" is only as "respectful" as my patience and/or current mood allows me to be. ;) (Emotions are overrated.) You can check out my profile at IMDb.com for some "Top-10"-style favorites lists concerning various media and topics, and to check out my history there. Or whatever you feel like doing."

Welp, that explains a lot...

A complete, hipster bell end.

Mild Aspergers and mild Tourettes? Forgive my scepticism of that claim.

It makes perfect sense if you ponder it:

"If I am offensive, stupid, or continuously annoying, it's never my fault, I have conditions!. Also, if you aren't always supportive of everything I do or say, YOU'RE A BAD PERSON, YOU ABLEIST"

Yep, good ol' Assburger's Syndrome http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?db ... 2832#comic
Mind you, I suffer from mild Tourette's as well. It develops every time I stub my toe.

[somedumbguy]

I mean, feminists pressure legislatures and society to roll back burden of proof, to roll back on Blackstone (10 guilty men) (http://www2.law.ucla.edu/volokh/guilty.htm), to roll back on many protections that we offer to other people charged with other crimes.

They also insist that rates of rape charges and rape conviction increase. While denying that false accusations and false convictions are any sort of issue at all.

And this is mediated by prosecutors and judges that need to be re-elected and understand what tough on crime means as well as needing feminist support.

How could such pressure not increase rates of wrongful conviction above other crimes?

[Steersman]

To respond to a couple of comments from franc-the-crank:

Seems like an irc would remove most of that from the thread.

And how hard is that to do? This hard.

But like steersqueer, they probably expect someone else to do it.

Ah, Steersman, The beguilingly insufferable Steersman. How to quantify this character?

You neglected the chronic inability to look up even the most trivial piece of information for himself, instead expecting others to do it for him. Then when they fail to do so, or simply tell him to fuck off, dancing a victory jig of his own peculiar sort. "Derailing" doesn't even come close to expressing his talents.

All of that is rather rich coming from someone who seems unable and unwilling to follow a lead even when the link is readily available and when the information is to their advantage – although that it entails having to admit having made a mistake might have something to do with that. But more specifically, you say in your “Things baboons say [TBS] …”:

http://i46.tinypic.com/350maeb.jpg

Which is not at all true since Myers did not actually delete at least three posts from Skep Tickle /Skeptixx. And I informed you of that through a message on TBS and a post here plus a further message on TBS which I didn’t save but which included, I think, the required proof for those with limited skills in obtaining the “most trivial piece of information”. Not at all a case of “nit-picking trivia” to point out that Myers did not, in fact, “erase all traces of Skeptixx’s posts”.

But none of that led you to correct that TBS item. I really don’t give much of a rat’s ass that you shoot yourself in the foot – all lols gratefully received, after all – but when such activities diminish the credibility of the ‘Pit and, supposedly, authoritative and foundational source documents then I think one has an obligation to say something – even repeatedly where there’s some indication of someone having buried their head in the sand or some other place where the sun don’t shine.

[astrokid.nj]

Astro, a few pages back, was celebrity-mongering on account of Chaplin's alleged involvement with the MRA. This by itself is as impressive a move as promoting Scientology through Cruise's membership and constitutes a typical propaganda tactic. Chaplin and Cruise are actors, not public intellectuals, so who the fuck cares what they think.

I have no interest in discussing stuff with this fellow, and I am sure he returns the favour.. but Celebrity Mongering? Here's what I wrote..

After studying the looonng history of Fathers rights and mens rights (Did you know that Charlie Chaplin was a MRA?), and studying male/female/society psychology its clear to us that this is unlike other civil rights issues in recent memory

I could have instead mentioned this Unknown Writer from 1856 who analyzed the issue of unbalanced changes to coverture Putnam's Monthly Magazine of American Literature, Science and Art Volume 0007 Issue 38 (February 1856) Title: A Word for Men's Rights, or from the same era as Chaplin Samuel Reid and Sigurd Hoeberth.. Activists from 1925-26, but those neither roll out of my memory as easily and more importantly they wouldnt be intuitively familiar to readers would they?

[Eucliwood]

I mean, feminists pressure legislatures and society to roll back burden of proof, to roll back on Blackstone (10 guilty men) (http://www2.law.ucla.edu/volokh/guilty.htm), to roll back on many protections that we offer to other people charged with other crimes.

They also insist that rates of rape charges and rape conviction increase. While denying that false accusations and false convictions are any sort of issue at all.

And this is mediated by prosecutors and judges that need to be re-elected and understand what tough on crime means as well as needing feminist support.

How could such pressure not increase rates of wrongful conviction above other crimes?

Wow, are you fucking SERIOUS? That's so wrong. There are already so many screwed up cases of people being unjustly thrown in jail, imo.

[Spence]

Mild = self diagnosed normally. I've seen so many self-diagnosed autistics online, but this is the first time someone has claimed Tourettes.

He declared that he had "mild tourettes" the day after he called someone a cunt while the prune was within earshot.

True dat.

LOL. Link?

Sorry, not sure if my "true dat" was sufficiently dripping with sarcasm. I should probably use smilies more :mrgreen:

[Lsuoma]

http://launiusr.files.wordpress.com/201 ... adter1.jpg

[Darren]

http://i.imgur.com/Dt73V.jpg

[Eucliwood]

Mild = self diagnosed normally. I've seen so many self-diagnosed autistics online, but this is the first time someone has claimed Tourettes.

He declared that he had "mild tourettes" the day after he called someone a cunt while the prune was within earshot.

True dat.

LOL. Link?

Sorry, not sure if my "true dat" was sufficiently dripping with sarcasm. I should probably use smilies more :mrgreen:

I don't see why that should be unbelievable for someone with Tourette's. There are people that have the unfortunate tic of saying "nigger" ffs. And you can certainly tell it is a *forced* tic. Bitch sounded like a strangled pig. Don't disagrace them or act like they're just lying racists just to frustrate this guy.

Alert: Joe McKen is 21 years of age. Not 17. Confirmation bias screw up. So no more ageism against teenagers. Kthnx.


And ugh, I am so pissed off at PZ FUCKING MYERS calling US sexists and misogynists too. Why doesn't he just come out and say it? "Everyone that doesn't like me is clearly a misogynist." I fucking hate his guts now. He's mislabelling at least most of us.

It'll be a cold day in hell when someone properly calls ME a sexist or calls me out on any sexism. It's like accusing me of filming children being beaten (which has happened to me...I was hurt and offended that that would happen to me of all people). Sexism makes my blood boil. People filming beatings make my blood boil.

god, I fucking hate PZ Myers. And I can't do anything about it.

[Lsuoma]

BTW, the eagle-eyed among you will have noticed a change in the editor.

[spoiler]See if you can guess what it is![/spoiler]

[Tigzy]

BTW, the eagle-eyed among you will have noticed a change in the editor.

[spoiler]See if you can guess what it is![/spoiler]

:clap:

[Gumby]

BTW, the eagle-eyed among you will have noticed a change in the editor.

[spoiler]See if you can guess what it is![/spoiler]

An edit button?

[Maximus]

@eucliwood

Go over to pharyngula and let him know what you think. I think it would lead to a wonderful discussion :popcorn: :popcorn:

[UnbelieveSteve]

BTW, the eagle-eyed among you will have noticed a change in the editor.

[spoiler]See if you can guess what it is![/spoiler]

Umm. I don't like the colour.

[Tigzy]

So no more ageism against teenagers. Kthnx.

Nice one - I'd even go so far as to say you should be awarded an honest to goodness Agincourt salute for that.

[Spence]

I mean, feminists pressure legislatures and society to roll back burden of proof, to roll back on Blackstone (10 guilty men) (http://www2.law.ucla.edu/volokh/guilty.htm), to roll back on many protections that we offer to other people charged with other crimes.

They also insist that rates of rape charges and rape conviction increase. While denying that false accusations and false convictions are any sort of issue at all.

And this is mediated by prosecutors and judges that need to be re-elected and understand what tough on crime means as well as needing feminist support.

How could such pressure not increase rates of wrongful conviction above other crimes?

Yes, there are lobby groups. What does the existence of lobby groups prove? Nothing really. The people who make the decisions (legislators, lawyers, judges) are familiar with lobby groups and are unlikely to be severely prejudiced by them - unless you have evidence otherwise (but I note your evidence largely amounts to a mixture of hand-waving and anecdata).

Rape conviction rates are typically LOWER than other forms of violent crimes in the UK (which I'm familiar with, I know less about the US), so even though they are increasing, the absolute measure is almost certainly more relevant and is indicative that there are likely to be fewer wrongful convictions of rape than other crimes. In the UK in particular, this is often because a jury is unlikely to convict someone of a crime carrying such a heavy sentence on one persons word against another - so such cases rarely even reach trial.

Also, who is denying false allegations exist? Certainly the people that matter - the police, the CPS, legislators, lawyers, judges - are well aware that false allegations exist, and the court system is there to protect against that. These people know what they are doing - probably better than you do. But no justice system is perfect, and of course you can find innocent people wrongly convicted of rape, just as I can give you a long long list of people wrongly convicted for murder. That is not evidence that in any way supports your claim without a more complete and nuanced analysis, which you appear incapable of.

This is reminiscent of the gun debate we had earlier. The debate tends to consist of thoughtless polemic perspectives, giving out absolutes based on little more than anecdotes. Only a few made much sense - perhaps my favourite comments on this was by welch, who pointed out that no system was perfect, but you have to have some kind of a system, and you can work from there to refine and improve. But doing so requires you to objectively assess data, to understand how the present system works, and to be able to analyse where weaknesses in the system might be and how to improve them. Getting hysterical about one-off events and making absolute claims (feminists have lobby groups! therefore wrongul convictions!) doesn't get you anywhere.

[Mykeru]

BTW, the eagle-eyed among you will have noticed a change in the editor.

[spoiler]See if you can guess what it is![/spoiler]

Bite me, loser.

[Darren]

[spoiler]http://i.imgur.com/FLlVg.jpg[/spoiler]

[Lsuoma]

[spoiler]http://i.imgur.com/FLlVg.jpg[/spoiler]

You fucking winner!

[KacyRay]

I'm not sure what the deal is over there. I've made honest attempts to have conversations. Honest attempts to exchange points of view. What an incredibly tribal place!

From your posting history, I can see no attempts to have conversations. Lsuoma even pointed you in the right direction. What more do you require?

Sorry! I was pretty drunk when I posted that and I'm still getting used to the feel of this forum.

I was taking about FemiTribeBlogs (tribal)... I wasn't talking about here. Thanks for pointing me in the right direction.

Is this just one eternal thread that just goes on and on forever?

[Maximus]

@kacyray, was that you that was over on Ed's blog kicking ass the other day? Pretty impressive the way you kept your cool, and stayed on subject despite all the morons trying to attack you.

[BarnOwl]

I knew Bora at SciAm would provide some links, and it wouldn't surprise me if he has a post up soon on his blog. Scientific American has made this 1993 profile of Dr. Levi-Montalcini available free online for the next 30 days:

http://www.scientificamerican.com/artic ... montalcini

[somedumbguy]

I mean, feminists pressure legislatures and society to roll back burden of proof, to roll back on Blackstone (10 guilty men) (http://www2.law.ucla.edu/volokh/guilty.htm), to roll back on many protections that we offer to other people charged with other crimes.

They also insist that rates of rape charges and rape conviction increase. While denying that false accusations and false convictions are any sort of issue at all.

And this is mediated by prosecutors and judges that need to be re-elected and understand what tough on crime means as well as needing feminist support.

How could such pressure not increase rates of wrongful conviction above other crimes?

Yes, there are lobby groups. What does the existence of lobby groups prove? Nothing really. The people who make the decisions (legislators, lawyers, judges) are familiar with lobby groups and are unlikely to be severely prejudiced by them - unless you have evidence otherwise (but I note your evidence largely amounts to a mixture of hand-waving and anecdata).

What does the existence of lobby groups prove?

On the one hand, that is a reasonably skeptical question to ask. On the other hand, I do wonder what country you are writing from.

(but I note your evidence largely amounts to a mixture of hand-waving and anecdata)

And you respond to arguments drawn from economics and statistics with your own hand-waving argument that is summarized with the statement, "you say the color of the sky is blue, but you only cite anecdata for that!"

Rape conviction rates are typically LOWER than other forms of violent crimes in the UK (which I'm familiar with, I know less about the US), so even though they are increasing, the absolute measure is almost certainly more relevant and is indicative that there are likely to be fewer wrongful convictions of rape than other crimes.

Math error. "likely to be fewer wrongful convictions of rape than other crimes" only in absolute terms, I believe this discussion has been about rates of wrongful conviction. Your claim that having a lower conviction rate must mean rates of false conviction are lower is not logically or mathematically sound.

Also, who is denying false allegations exist? Certainly the people that matter - the police, the CPS, legislators, lawyers, judges - are well aware that false allegations exist, and the court system is there to protect against that.

"citation-needed", and no, the people that matter are among those that benefit from having high conviction rates. The people that matter as you say, are the ones targeted by feminists to understand that women don't like, to understand that children don't lie, to understand that to be re-elected they need to increase rape convictions and be tough on rape. They are also likely to be the ones to support the rape arrests or any arrest in their departments, because tribalism.

These people know what they are doing - probably better than you do. But no justice system is perfect, and of course you can find innocent people wrongly convicted of rape, just as I can give you a long long list of people wrongly convicted for murder. That is not evidence that in any way supports your claim without a more complete and nuanced analysis, which you appear incapable of.

Ya know, fuckhead, for someone that keeps on telling me how incompentent my arguments are, fuckface, your arguments rely on the same if not more hand waving analysis.

At this point retard, since you are incapable of discussing my arguments cogently asswipe without name calling me, and bullying, why don't you jam your keyboard up your ass and kill yourself.

At some point if you wish to have a discussion where you can argue without the name calling or slurs or disparagement, I am welcome to hearing what you have to say.

Until then, piss off.

[Mr Danksworth]

I'm not sure what the deal is over there. I've made honest attempts to have conversations. Honest attempts to exchange points of view. What an incredibly tribal place!

From your posting history, I can see no attempts to have conversations. Lsuoma even pointed you in the right direction. What more do you require?

Sorry! I was pretty drunk when I posted that and I'm still getting used to the feel of this forum.

I was taking about FemiTribeBlogs (tribal)... I wasn't talking about here. Thanks for pointing me in the right direction.

Is this just one eternal thread that just goes on and on forever?

Aye, it just goes and goes. To infinity and beyond! Welcome to our little slice of paradise.

[Tkmlac]

I wanna try!

Django Unchained
[spoiler]uses the N word.[/spoiler]

[Al Stefanelli]

[spoiler]http://blog.mydot.com/image.axd?picture ... inch-1.jpg[/spoiler]

[somedumbguy]

Without stating I am an expert on any of these matters, I have given specific places, and named specific experts where people can learn more.

Returning my arguments that I provide with links and explanation with hand waving arguments, with disparagement of how incompetent I am and my arguments are, with assurances of how you "know" differently, and with refusal to look at the sources, or read the people I have listed is just as baboon as when the PZ Myers and Ophelia Benson commentariat state flat out they won't read "MRA Materials".

Why not just state you have no idea what skepticism is and you know I both wrong and a rapist, and be done with it. It would be much simpler and at least the baboons are smart enough to cut to the chase.

[Hemisphere]

@Kacyray

These might have been useful in your lengthy argument on Ed Brayton's FtB page:

"Pro-feminism
Main article: Pro-feminism
Pro-feminism is the support of feminism without implying that the supporter is a member of the feminist movement. The term is most often used in reference to men who are actively supportive of feminism. The activities of pro-feminist men's groups include anti-violence work with boys and young men in schools, offering sexual harassment workshops in workplaces, running community education campaigns, and counseling male perpetrators of violence. Pro-feminist men also are involved in men's health, activism against pornography including anti-pornography legislation, men's studies, and the development of gender equity curricula in schools. This work is sometimes in collaboration with feminists and women's services, such as domestic violence and rape crisis centers.[187][188]

And:

Anti-feminism

...

Writers such as Camille Paglia, Christina Hoff Sommers, Jean Bethke Elshtain, Elizabeth Fox-Genovese and Daphne Patai oppose some forms of feminism, though they identify as feminists. They argue, for example, that feminism often promotes misandry and the elevation of women's interests above men's, and criticize radical feminist positions as harmful to both men and women.[196] Daphne Patai and Noretta Koertge argue that the term "anti-feminist" is used to silence academic debate about feminism.[197]"


Totally reasonable to support equality for women without automatically being labelled a 'feminist'.

(Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminism#Reactions)

[somedumbguy]

Without stating I am an expert on any of these matters, I have given specific places, and named specific experts where people can learn more.

Returning my arguments provided with links and explanation with your own hand waving arguments, with disparagement of how incompetent I am and my arguments are, with assurances of how you "know" differently, and with refusal to look at the sources, or read the people I have listed is just as baboon as when the PZ Myers and Ophelia Benson commentariat state flat out they won't read "MRA Materials".

Why not just state you have no idea what skepticism is and you know I both wrong and a rapist, and be done with it. It would be much simpler and at least the baboons are smart enough to cut to the chase.

Trying to clarify that for me.

[ReneeHendricks]

ROFLMAO! This is hilarious. I've no clue why she's pulling up as malware but it cracks me up!

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/A_ZQu0fCEAAHXww.jpg:large

[Tkmlac]

ROFLMAO! This is hilarious. I've no clue why she's pulling up as malware but it cracks me up!

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/A_ZQu0fCEAAHXww.jpg:large

Chrome did that to me on another person's twitter profile. It's a Chrome thing. Google is trying to think for you.

[Al Stefanelli]

ROFLMAO! This is hilarious. I've no clue why she's pulling up as malware but it cracks me up!

[img]Huge%20fucking%20malware%20warning[/img]

Chrome did that to me on another person's twitter profile. It's a Chrome thing. Google is trying to think for you.

I got that when I pulled up Tweetdeck this morning. I clicked for the advance report and it told me that nothing happened, ever. Lmao.

[ReneeHendricks]

ROFLMAO! This is hilarious. I've no clue why she's pulling up as malware but it cracks me up!

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/A_ZQu0fCEAAHXww.jpg:large

Chrome did that to me on another person's twitter profile. It's a Chrome thing. Google is trying to think for you.

:D I'm sure. I still find it hilarious. It has something to do with twitpic, certainly. It just gave me a proper smile today!

[fascination]

On the topic of rape and false accusations, I saw rape conviction rates brought up here. This is a good article I ran across awhile ago about the conviction rates of rapists:
http://m.guardiannews.com/commentisfree ... tion-rates
Most people think rape conviction rates are low. Well, according to this article they're not low at all in comparison with other crimes. BTW, apologies for the poor spelling and grammar. My keypad is acting up.

[ReneeHendricks]

ROFLMAO! This is hilarious. I've no clue why she's pulling up as malware but it cracks me up!

[img]Huge%20fucking%20malware%20warning[/img]

Chrome did that to me on another person's twitter profile. It's a Chrome thing. Google is trying to think for you.

I got that when I pulled up Tweetdeck this morning. I clicked for the advance report and it told me that nothing happened, ever. Lmao.

To be perfectly honest, I know there's nothing wrong. But it gave me the biggest smile today :D

[Dan]

ROFLMAO! This is hilarious. I've no clue why she's pulling up as malware but it cracks me up!

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/A_ZQu0fCEAAHXww.jpg:large

Google has decided that twitpic is malware. http://www.theverge.com/2012/12/30/3818 ... suspicious

[BarnOwl]

Ophelia, Stephanie, Rebecca, Jen, and Greta all read the profile of Dr. Levi-Montalcini, and have summarily retracted and apologized for all their whingeing "poor little me" dishonest victim posts.

[spoiler]Not really.[/spoiler]

[fascination]

From the article:
"The conviction rate for rape is 58%. That bears repeating. The conviction rate for rape, is 58%. The conviction rate for reportable crimes of all types is 57%. I know you will have heard the figure of 6%. Everyone has. That figure is actually an attrition rate, not a conviction rate, and even as an attrition rate it is wrong – the attrition rate for rape is in the region of 12%."

These are figures from the U.K. I don't know the figures for the U.S.

[somedumbguy]

On the topic of rape and false accusations, I saw rape conviction rates brought up here. This is a good article I ran across awhile ago about the conviction rates of rapists:
http://m.guardiannews.com/commentisfree ... tion-rates
Most people think rape conviction rates are low. Well, according to this article they're not low at all in comparison with other crimes. BTW, apologies for the poor spelling and grammar. My keypad is acting up.

Interesting, and thank you.

[JackRayner]

I stated that those accused of rape, because of the very way the system is set up, do not get fair trials. [Or, if you would prefer, get trials less fair than those accused of any other crime.] I see no talk of "likelihood". I don't know the numbers, and none of us ever will, I suspsect, so it would be pretty foolish of me to speak about the likelyhood of the innocent being convicted. It happens, that much I know, and that much you will fucking concede.

It happens, and it's fucked up that it happens, no doubt: but does it happen more than any other alleged crime? Is there a greater number of false convictions for rape than other crimes?

Hart tot tell. I can't find it at the moment, but I remember reading that of almost 900 exonerations that the Innocence Project has tracked, over 200 were for rape/sexual assault. [Begging the question?->]Anyone that's done even a little research on the subject would have found that this is out of proportion with the actual rate of rape/sexual assault. [You could call rape a rarity when compared to the rest of violent crime...]

Anyways, if the case really is that there is a disproportionately large number of erroneous rape/sexual assault convictions, in comparison to the actual occurrence of rape/sexual assault, I'd feel safe in stating that the differing manner in which courts handle these cases is directly related to it...

[AchronTimeless]

Since I've been a vocal advocate of NOT having kids for a while now, I'm thinking about just putting my money where my mouth is and getting a vasectomy - this discussion from somedumbguy and sacha about being at risk for child support payments for 18 years every time one has sex makes the list of benefits even stronger.

Im only 25 though, and from what I hear its difficult at my age for a doctor to take you seriously if you say you want a vasectomy.

easy surgery, easy recovery, and easily reversed.

It is difficult for a woman to get her tubes tied at that age.

not so easy surgery, not such an easy recovery, and not so easily reversed, plus:

"Just wait, you will change your mind" *pat on the head* "All women want to be a mother, you'll see." "you will feel differently when it's your own" "You will regret it once you realise your time has passed"

That sort of patronising is what I received from women, when I was your age and mentioned I had no desire to have children, not from men.

The vast majority of real sexism I have ever experienced was from other women.

I've never wanted children, that conviction only got stronger as I got older. Nothing changed when "my clock was ticking", no regrets, no remorse, not for even a moment.

I do not have the maternal gene, and those like us should be taken far more seriously. Why would you want someone who has no desire to have children, to fucking have children?

Not so sure about "easily reversed". My advice would be to have some samples frozen at a sperm bank just as a back-up measure.

Ah, there's an easier route.

Go get yourself diagnosed with gender dysphoria. Not only will the hormones make you effectively sterile, but you'll get a nice set of tits to play with when you're bored. Win/Win