Periodic Table of Swearing

Old subthreads
justinvacula
.
.
Posts: 1832
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 12:48 pm
Location: Pennsylvania
Contact:

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#14886

Post by justinvacula »

Thanks for the support everyone. Please do send the letters to the Secular Coalition :)

bhoytony
.
.
Posts: 3017
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 9:56 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#14887

Post by bhoytony »

I see that Jason Thibidooobeedoo (the real one) has signed the petition twice. I demand a recount.
It's a fucking dogs dinner over there. I'm sure the SCA will take it very seriously when it arrives in their inbox.

ERV
Arnie Loves Me!
Arnie Loves Me!
Posts: 1556
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 4:57 pm

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#14888

Post by ERV »

justinvacula wrote:Thanks for the support everyone. Please do send the letters to the Secular Coalition :)
Well, I mean they keep pulling stunts like this as if they are catching anyone by surprise.

"I KNOW! Lets send hate mail to NatGeo about Abbie!" As if NatGeo didnt know what they were buying into when they bought out a blog group that included PZ-desecrating-crackers-Myers. As if NatGeo hasnt gotten piles of hate mail/angry phone calls about me regarding the XMRV fiasco. As if NatGeo, a publishing organization that has been around for seemingly forever and has published countless 'controversial' articles/covers/magazines/etc, will be shocked and horrified by hate-mail to censor one of their writers.

"I KNOW! Lets send hate mail to Abbies department head!" As if my dept head and I havent already had discussions about my blog. As if we have not discussed, as reasonable, responsible adults, what my free-speech rights are as a student, and what my dept head expects from me as a student. As if I havent actually already had these discussions with not only this department head, but the last one, and my boss, and the dean of graduate students. As if they havent already gotten hate-mail about me from XMRV psychos, HIV Deniers, Creationists, etc.

"I KNOW! Lets harass SCA about Vacula!" As if any/all major corporations base their hiring decisions on the opinions of internet mobs. As if they didnt all already burn their credibility with SCA with their asinine response to Edwina. As if SCA hasnt already dealt with this kind of lynch mob with Edwina, and have seen how she has worked out well despite the mob. Yeah, lets try the exact same thing that didnt work with Edwina on Justin!

Theyre fucking retards.

Steersman
.
.
Posts: 10933
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 8:58 pm
Contact:

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#14889

Post by Steersman »

John Greg wrote:BREAKING NEWS

Stefunny InZvanity has now started a petition to have Justin Vacula removed from the SCA.

link: http://freethoughtblogs.com/almostdiamo ... coalition/

and

link: http://www.change.org/petitions/secular ... ter-of-sca

Jesus, these people really are mentally unsound and emotionally unblanced.

:popcorn:
Just made this comment over on Zvan’s petition post. But since it is likely to remain in moderation until the Second Coming of Christ – or until the A+Theists reach a conclusion, and my money is on the former – here it is in all its glory, such as it is:
http://i50.tinypic.com/m7cbpg.jpg

Additional links in the post: “... Jason Thibeault’s “Apology” and Justin Vacula’s comments in Jason’s previous post ....”

Badger3k
.
.
Posts: 3466
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 6:53 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#14890

Post by Badger3k »

justinvacula wrote:Thanks for the support everyone. Please do send the letters to the Secular Coalition :)
I just did. I tried to keep it polite, and referred to your detractors as people whose idea of activism is to whine on blogs and try to get people fired. Your kind of activism is what's needed. I get the idea that Steffunny and her ilk are the old, bitter people who see that they have no talent or will or ability to do what others do, so they try to reduce them to their level so that they can feel good about themselves, if only for a little while.

CommanderTuvok
.
.
Posts: 3744
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 1:18 pm

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#14891

Post by CommanderTuvok »

justinvacula wrote:Thanks for the support everyone. Please do send the letters to the Secular Coalition :)
Keep your chin up, Justin. They have shown beyond reasonable doubt that they are beneath contempt.

Stefunny Svan has shown herself to be one of the very worst bullies - and have you noticed Greg Laden is again lurking around when the slavering dogs are in for the kill.

CommanderTuvok
.
.
Posts: 3744
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 1:18 pm

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#14892

Post by CommanderTuvok »

The latest insanity...

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

Apparently, appointing Justin to that position is racist, or summat.

Trophy
.
.
Posts: 601
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2012 2:17 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#14893

Post by Trophy »

Johann the Cabbie wrote:Blaghag also attacked Hemant a while back, I think before elevatorgate. He did a post on celebrity atheists. One was a picture of a shirtless Ricky Gervais with the word atheist written on his chest. Hemant wrote that everyone knew Gervais was an atheist, but he just wanted to post the picture.

The rest of his post was about Kari Bryon of Mythbusters. He wrote a full bio of her and ended with a photo of her (not shirtless, very tame) and wrote that he just wanted to post her photo.

Jen went batshit and wrote her own post criticizing Hemant, basically saying that he was sexualizing Bryon.

If anyone requests it, I can attempt to find the relevant links.
First, relevant links: this and then this.

You know, Jen has some sort of a point. I mean, I can agree to disagree as long as she maintains her point of view consistently. But the problem with these folks is that they do not. I don't know about Jen but I know that many of her supporters are hypocrites. For example, Alexa comments that:
Alexa:
Still, why play into that sexist trope when you don't have to? You could have said, "Kari is awesome. I love a woman who is sexy and intelligent!" That's a line that acknowledges both her mind and her looks; it doesn't dismiss her thoughts and opinions. I know you probably didn't mean it like it came off, but that line definitely made me ( a woman) feel uncomfortable.
I have seen many men being shot down as sexist pigs for saying exactly that. If he has said something like that, they would even make a bigger fuss about him sexualizing women. It's all gifts from the bullshit mountain.

CommanderTuvok
.
.
Posts: 3744
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 1:18 pm

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#14894

Post by CommanderTuvok »

Just this mean that any campaign to remove Queen Bee from the SGU podcast is totes justified now?

I mean, she is completely unsuitable, has a history of bullying people, is on friendly terms with a pro-violence campaigner, has been caught out lying, was booted off a forum because she abused moderator privileges, sexually harassed people at conventions...and knows fuck all about science or skepticism.

bhoytony
.
.
Posts: 3017
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 9:56 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#14895

Post by bhoytony »

I see that slimy turd oolon is over at Stefunny's blog sticking the knife into Justin.

Tigzy
Pit Art Master
Pit Art Master
Posts: 6789
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 6:53 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#14896

Post by Tigzy »

My little contribution to the SCA:
I am just writing this in support of Justin Vacula's appointment to your organisation, which is currently being criticised by a small yet vociferous number of bloggers. In particular, Stephanie Zvan of FreeThought Blogs has raised an issue about this, to the extent that she has set up a petition against Justin's appointment.

It should be noted that Ms Zvan remains friendly with a former fellow FreeThought blogger called Greg Laden, a man who was dismissed from that blog network for making a threat of violence against another blogger on that network: http://freethoughtblogs.com/rockbeyondb ... -guys-win/

The next day, Ms Svan made a post detailing how she was going to serve on various panels alongside Mr Laden at the 2012 Skepchickon: http://freethoughtblogs.com/almostdiamo ... -schedule/

And sometime later, she posted in defence of Laden's remarks on the panel 'Vive Le Difference', of which she was also a panellist: http://freethoughtblogs.com/almostdiamo ... ed-brains/

You'll note that at no point has she ever condemned Mr Laden for his threat, and in fact has often defended him on certain issues, including the one mentioned above. Given the fact that Ms Zvan was not sufficiently moved by Mr Laden's threatening email to his co-blogger to defer from sharing panel space with him, nor even condemn for him it all, then it's probable that Ms Zvan's campaign against Justin Vacula is motivated more by personal animosity than genuine concern. After all, if Ms Zvan was that concerned by such things, then she would surely have at least raised an issue against Mr Laden sitting on the 'Don't Feed The Trolls' panel, where 'A discussion about the recent wave of internet bullying against women and what we can do about it.' took place. Again, Ms Zvan was not sufficiently moved by Mr Laden's threats to suggest that Mr Laden would be unsuitable for this panel.

Regards
Saved all the webpages referred to here, just in case...

JackRayner
.
.
Posts: 1166
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2012 12:27 am
Location: In the basement of the University of Minnesota Morris
Contact:

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#14897

Post by JackRayner »

Trophy wrote:
Johann the Cabbie wrote:Blaghag also attacked Hemant a while back, I think before elevatorgate. He did a post on celebrity atheists. One was a picture of a shirtless Ricky Gervais with the word atheist written on his chest. Hemant wrote that everyone knew Gervais was an atheist, but he just wanted to post the picture.

The rest of his post was about Kari Bryon of Mythbusters. He wrote a full bio of her and ended with a photo of her (not shirtless, very tame) and wrote that he just wanted to post her photo.

Jen went batshit and wrote her own post criticizing Hemant, basically saying that he was sexualizing Bryon.

If anyone requests it, I can attempt to find the relevant links.
First, relevant links: this and then this.

You know, Jen has some sort of a point.
What point? That because "too many people" only appreciate women for their looks making any joke about it is an issue? All that amounts to is "I didn't like the joke". That's actually a pretty uncompelling "point". Or maybe I'm missing something? :think:

Tigzy
Pit Art Master
Pit Art Master
Posts: 6789
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 6:53 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#14898

Post by Tigzy »

And now PZ squeaks one out as regards the SCA thing: http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... volunteer/
Come on, SCA. Exercise some care and vet your volunteers better. After Edwina Rogers, we need some confidence-builders in the organization, and learning that they’ve made this awfully stupid appointment does NOT fill me with confidence. Why would you want a guy who posted an op-ed on AVoiceForMen, a hate site, and who posts the home addresses of a woman he dislikes on another hate site, as a candidate to represent a state organization?

Of course, it could just be that the organization is so desperate for volunteer help that they’ll take the dregs. That’s not a confidence builder, either.

There’s a petition. Unfortunately, it’s already full of trolls using fake names — change.org really needs to tighten up their procedures. These petitions already reek of uselessness, and the fact that they’re so easily gamed makes them totally pointless.
Silly old fart.

bhoytony
.
.
Posts: 3017
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 9:56 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#14899

Post by bhoytony »

Tigzy wrote:And now PZ squeaks one out as regards the SCA thing: http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... volunteer/
There’s a petition. Unfortunately, it’s already full of trolls using fake names — change.org really needs to tighten up their procedures. These petitions already reek of uselessness, and the fact that they’re so easily gamed makes them totally pointless.
Silly old fart.
I hope Steffy reads that and chokes on the fact that her hero PeeZus thinks her grand idea "reeks of uselessness".

SkepticalCat
.
.
Posts: 371
Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2012 5:36 pm
Location: Georgia, USA

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#14900

Post by SkepticalCat »

It absolutely pisses me off to no end to see these bastards going after young people like Justin Vacula and Abbie Smith. Not that I think they're incapable of defending themselves, but when I think about what life was like for me when I was in my mid-20s - trying to find a job, debating whether to pursue a graduate degree, dealing with the death of a parent - and then imagining having to do all those things while also having a bunch of jerks trying to interfere with my livelihood because I believe in uncensored speech and reject Victimhood Culture - I become very angry! Zvan, Myers, Benson, Watson, Laden, etc. - you people are behaving in an utterly loathsome manner. If you're wondering why interest in FreeThoughBlogs is declining you need only look in the mirror.

Especially disappointing to see Ed Brayton chime in as he did against Justin. He's generally stayed out of this mess rather than siding vocally with the baboons, which led me to think there was some hope for him, but I have just deleted my bookmark to his blog. No more FTB for me!

acathode
.
.
Posts: 888
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2012 6:46 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#14901

Post by acathode »

bhoytony wrote:
ConcentratedH2O, OM wrote:Sad times over at FfTB: Meyers has just posted the news that he is disabling comments on his YouTube videos. Instead, he is going to invite people to follow a link back to his blog to comment on the stories there.

Fuck! Have we damaged the poor old crank's credibility and viewership to the point where he's realized that YT commenters are actually on an intellectual level with The Horde?

Hehe! Poor old cunt.
Probably needs the money these views of his site will generate. Times are hard over at FfTB
He really only have one video up that get any traffic - the thunderf00t one. It was on it's way to getting a nice red lightsaber with something around 50-60% dislikes and steadily rising, and 8-9/10th of the comments were negative for a long time.

It's not about the revenue, it's all about silencing the dissenters and hiding the fact that these people have lost a lot of reputation among the "regular Joe" atheists, those people that for example just watch some youtube videos and leave a comment or two. Myers getting chewed out and a fat thumbs down in the comment section on his own video makes him lose face, and that's something he can't allow. He's basically using the same kind of logic as the typical creationist youtuber, who disable their comments and like/dislike bars for the exact same reasons.

FTB in general, and Myers in particular, seem to have a deep aversion to free discussion, where people are allowed to disagree and point out flaws and errors in the FTBers reasoning. FTB meet those sorts of things with various brute attempts to silence them, and not with reason and superior arguments of the kind that one would expect from people that are not only active, but even aspire to lead, in a community where reason, skepticism and logic are seen as the cornerstones for their world-view.

From their carefully moderated comment sections, to their attacks on other forums, to their false DMCA abuses, to trying to get the EVR blog shut down, to Greg Ladens RL harassments, their need to always control the discussion and to silence dissenters that threaten their narrative seem to be everywhere. Even the recent hate against SCA and Justin could be argued stems from a need for them to control what is being said, and who is allowed to speak.

I view Myers shutting down the youtube comments as a natural next step due to this thinking, and I'm surprised he even allowed them in the first place. It'll be interesting if the rest of the FTBers follow suit though, most of the people/videos connected to A+ and FTB on youtube are growing their own red lightsabers, even Matt Dillahunty is sporting something like 20-30% dislikes on his videos where he talks about A+...

Guest

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#14902

Post by Guest »

With all the resentment towards Justin I'd read over at FTB, the first time I went to his site I was expecting some MRA-esque shit. I knew not to expect anything to the extent that could be assumed from the outrage in their comments, but when I went there I was genuinely surprised at how perfectly reasonable and civil all the posts were and how they were truly skeptical in their assessment of arguments. I consider myself quite impartial to the whole brouhaha and think that anyone else fairly level-headed would be able to see the value of his arguments. For all the pride that they take in pointing out the logical fallacies in the arguments of others, they seem remarkably unaware of how much they create straw men in arguments themselves.

It's part of a trend that I think is pretty clear to those who have been on the net for a while, where to really gain the upperhand in an argument you have to assert yourself on a pedestal above your 'opponent'. Nearly every thread I read at FTB involves users trying to 'win by condescension' - 'Oh, *scoff* I'm so bored by these arguments" (read: I'm trying to dismiss your comments on the basis that they are beneath me), the unusual predilection for them to call others "Cupcake" because they have limited their vocabulary regarding insults (read: I'm trying to belittle you and by proxy insinuate that your argument is beneath me, see previous) or the typical brush-off "Your concern is noted" (read: despite what you are saying, we've predetermined it's useless so we are trying to belittle you whilst we dismiss your argument). I'm sure you'll see it in the next lengthy comment section over there, it's a silly tactic that is repeatedly employed.

Anyway, I think Justin more than presents himself well. His ability to remain civil in the face of aggression is certainly an attribute that you would want in a leader. I was worried that his post at A Voice for Men would - again - have been some silly MRA-type thing, but no, I see that it is just an opinion piece on the Surly Amy TAM incident. Whether or not readers are in agreeance with him regarding that post is of course an individual matter, but I think it is quite obvious that an objective reading of that does not lead to accusations of "misogyny".

Just a couple of extra thoughts regarding censorship: the treatment of ERV by some FTB users, whereby I heard that some even contacted her department to notify them of a perceived lack of professionalism (is that right?) makes me hesitant to use my personal email address when posting there. I'm not saying that this itself is censorship, but an environment which can make one feel hesitant to post without the worry of being vilified for expressing an unpopular opinion (not hard to do there, despite being a firm believer in social justice) is not conducive to productive discussion imo. That is just my view, maybe I just need to harden up, and it might be because I'm more sensitive to criticism than the next person, but I have tried changing my email address there just in case I did rub someone the wrong way and they attempted to seek me out on Facebook or Twitter etc. Something that I did find ironic though was a comment (not sure which thread it was in) where someone bragged about tearing down some MRA posters that they saw in their town. I can imagine it was probably advertising stupidity anyway (I think a lot of the MRA stuff is drivel and consider myself - shock horror to those at FTB (and maybe here too) - a feminist) but the idea that you have the right to tear down someone else's posters because you simply disagree with them is ridiculous. Just because you are on what I would perceive to be the "right" side of the debate, you do not have the right to vandalise or literally tear down the speech of those that oppose you. I think that flies completely in the opposite direction of free speech, especially when you are being targeting specifically due to what you are saying.

ERV
Arnie Loves Me!
Arnie Loves Me!
Posts: 1556
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 4:57 pm

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#14903

Post by ERV »

Guest-- I dont know what info FfTB gets, but I get the following:
Username
Email
IP#

Which means I know that 'two people' are the same person if they only change their username and email. I can easily search for the old name/email from the matching IP#.

I do not recommend anyone casually post there with real names/emails/IP#s unless you dont mind being d0xed. Changing your name/email is not enough.

Baron

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#14904

Post by Baron »

http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2012/ ... -big-goof/

The Secular Coalition of America’s Big Goof
Posted by Greg Laden on September 29, 2012

"But it is not. Much more recently, the SCA appointed as a co-director for one of its state groups a guy who has developed a very firm reputation as a Mens Rights Advocate and overall Sexist Misogynist Creep. Or at least, so it appears."

Vacula published a piece on Men’s Rights Activist site “A Voice for Men” in which he attacks modern feminism and equates feminists with vampires and piles on with the attacks already underway designed to silence the Skepchicks (a group of women skeptics with whom I’ve worked for a few years) in particular Amy Roth Davis

This act and related activities by Vacula clearly place him in the camp of anti-feminist anti-women pro-sexist activists who should not be leaders in a humanist movement which does, pretty much, have liberal and progressive political values. He has also been a regular member of the famous “slime pit” which, sadly, was a product of this very blog network (though it has been expunged).

Apparently, Vacula has been criticized for being less than smart i the arguments he’s made about various legal positions, and for showing poor leadership.

CommanderTuvok
.
.
Posts: 3744
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 1:18 pm

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#14905

Post by CommanderTuvok »

Oolon says "Justin is well known for his shameless self promotion it seems"

What? Like PZ Myers? Ophelia Benson? Stefunny Svan? Scurvy Amy? Plus all those other retards at FfTB.

Justin actually gets things done at roots level. The Baboons do fuck all, except stick their fingers up their rectums and then sniff them to get high.

Oh, and Oolon, we always knew you were a wankstain.

CommanderTuvok
.
.
Posts: 3744
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 1:18 pm

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#14906

Post by CommanderTuvok »

ERV wrote:I do not recommend anyone casually post there with real names/emails/IP#s unless you dont mind being d0xed. Changing your name/email is not enough.
Sound advice. These bullies have shown their colours when it comes to leaking personal information. PZ, Surly Amy, Rebecca Watson and Greg Laden have all done it. ALWAYS use a proxy/tor when visiting their cesspits.

Sulaco
.
.
Posts: 158
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 1:54 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#14907

Post by Sulaco »

Ol' TP* Greg really needs to stop huffing model glue.

* That can stand for Trailer Park or toilet paper given the shit that he continuously spews.

Steersman
.
.
Posts: 10933
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 8:58 pm
Contact:

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#14908

Post by Steersman »

Guest wrote: .... Something that I did find ironic though was a comment (not sure which thread it was in) where someone bragged about tearing down some MRA posters that they saw in their town. I can imagine it was probably advertising stupidity anyway (I think a lot of the MRA stuff is drivel and consider myself - shock horror to those at FTB (and maybe here too) - a feminist) but the idea that you have the right to tear down someone else's posters because you simply disagree with them is ridiculous. Just because you are on what I would perceive to be the "right" side of the debate, you do not have the right to vandalise or literally tear down the speech of those that oppose you.
Exactly. While I too am more than a little skeptical about the Voice for Men site, I think there’s some justification for arguing that at least some aspects of the FTB/Skepchick/A+Theism position are quite a bit worse. For instance, you might be interested in these posts (here & here) from A Voice for Men about the feminist vandalism in Vancouver and this A+Theism post gleefully recounting the involvement of some A+Theists/feminists in that vandalism ....

Steersman
.
.
Posts: 10933
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 8:58 pm
Contact:

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#14909

Post by Steersman »

CommanderTuvok wrote:Oolon says "Justin is well known for his shameless self promotion it seems"

What? Like PZ Myers? Ophelia Benson? Stefunny Svan? Scurvy Amy? Plus all those other retards at FfTB.

Justin actually gets things done at roots level. The Baboons do fuck all, except stick their fingers up their rectums and then sniff them to get high.

Oh, and Oolon, we always knew you were a wankstain.
Speak for yourself CommanderTuvok.

I figure Oolong, among a few others apparently, at least tries to give the SlymePit the benefit of the doubt and is not as quick as many others to tar us all with the same brush ....

CommanderTuvok
.
.
Posts: 3744
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 1:18 pm

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#14910

Post by CommanderTuvok »

Steersman wrote:I figure Oolong, among a few others apparently, at least tries to give the SlymePit the benefit of the doubt and is not as quick as many others to tar us all with the same brush ....
He's still wrong about JC. I couldn't care less if he gives the Pit the benefit of the doubt.

bhoytony
.
.
Posts: 3017
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 9:56 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#14911

Post by bhoytony »

Guest wrote:Something that I did find ironic though was a comment (not sure which thread it was in) where someone bragged about tearing down some MRA posters that they saw in their town. I can imagine it was probably advertising stupidity anyway.
Now I generally find the MRA's a bit silly, but this is the poster we are talking about. It's hardly the KKK.

http://www.picvalley.net/u/1888/9336746 ... qYs3wT.JPG

bhoytony
.
.
Posts: 3017
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 9:56 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#14912

Post by bhoytony »

CommanderTuvok wrote:
Steersman wrote:I figure Oolong, among a few others apparently, at least tries to give the SlymePit the benefit of the doubt and is not as quick as many others to tar us all with the same brush ....
He's still wrong about JC. I couldn't care less if he gives the Pit the benefit of the doubt.
JC? have you had a vision on the road to Damascus?

Steersman
.
.
Posts: 10933
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 8:58 pm
Contact:

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#14913

Post by Steersman »

CommanderTuvok wrote:
Steersman wrote:I figure Oolong, among a few others apparently, at least tries to give the SlymePit the benefit of the doubt and is not as quick as many others to tar us all with the same brush ....
He's still wrong about JC. I couldn't care less if he gives the Pit the benefit of the doubt.
I assume you mean JV? Though I’ll agree to the extent that I think he’s very wide of the mark with this comment over there:
As for the petition, well I have reservations painting the slimepitters as all unremittingly awful but I wouldn’t want Vacula as a leader of any group I was involved in. His writing for a voice for men alone would rule that out. How could he read the comments from his ‘readers’ on that post and not retch? I don’t doubt some of the extreme hate for people like Amy come from the nuts that hang out there. So for encouraging that I voted him down one…
That there might be more than a few “nuts who hang out there” is hardly justification for arguing that Justin’s post was in any way reflective or consistent with the comments from them. Rather sloppy thinking on oolon’s part methinks ....
I couldn't care less if he gives the Pit the benefit of the doubt.
If you think that what you and other “Pitters” have to say is worth saying and disseminating to the widest possible audience then I would think that you might want to be more supportive of those who have some credibility in those venues and who promote that idea. Doing otherwise seems to bear some resemblance to shooting oneself in the foot ....

ConcentratedH2O, OM
.
.
Posts: 6555
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2012 8:51 pm

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#14914

Post by ConcentratedH2O, OM »

Some cunt called "chigau" whines that Meyers's redirection of YT commenters to his own blog hasn't yet delivered the goods:
It’s been, what, four hours.
Where are they?
You sad cunt. I thought Meyers's Horde believed themselves above all others, intellectually. And that you were all happy to chirp and whistle in your cage, discussing important shit like how best to bleach Meyers's ass.

So shouldn't you be happy that you aren't being infested by the cunts who comment on YT? They're hardly going to raise the level of discussion at Pharyngula are they?

Are they?

CommanderTuvok
.
.
Posts: 3744
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 1:18 pm

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#14915

Post by CommanderTuvok »

Yes, of course I meant JV.

Although like JC, JV is getting crucified at the moment!!!

astrokid.nj
.
.
Posts: 128
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2012 12:54 pm
Location: Atheist MRA MGTOW

vandalising posters

#14916

Post by astrokid.nj »

Vandalism is ok as long as you have "progressive politics" on your side. Its "freedom of expression". Mona says so.
[youtube]P0jSSLleGiY[/youtube]

JackRayner
.
.
Posts: 1166
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2012 12:27 am
Location: In the basement of the University of Minnesota Morris
Contact:

Re: vandalising posters

#14917

Post by JackRayner »

astrokid.nj wrote:Vandalism is ok as long as you have "progressive politics" on your side. Its "freedom of expression". Mona says so.
[youtube]P0jSSLleGiY[/youtube]
Saw that a few nights ago. By the actions of people like this, you'd figure plenty is justified if you feel strongly enough about it...

Not much difference, when compared to religion. At least a lot theists have the fear of eternal hell fire for not complying with their dogma. In my opinion, non-religious ideologues like this, who adhere to their dogma fervently, to the point of unlawful, morally reprehensible behavior, are even worse. It's why I've become almost completely disinterested in theists since I jumped into this ordeal (the endless drama factories that are Skepchick, FftB, and so on) earlier this year. There's just something wildly interesting about seeing self-proclaimed skeptics and champions of reason fail so fucking hard!

Saying that I'm just here for the LOLs wouldn't really cover it all...

astrokid.nj
.
.
Posts: 128
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2012 12:54 pm
Location: Atheist MRA MGTOW

Re: vandalising posters

#14918

Post by astrokid.nj »

JackRayner wrote: ...
Not much difference, when compared to religion. At least a lot theists have the fear of eternal hell fire for not complying with their dogma. In my opinion, non-religious ideologues like this, who adhere to their dogma fervently, to the point of unlawful, morally reprehensible behavior, are even worse. It's why I've become almost completely disinterested in theists since I jumped into this ordeal (the endless drama factories that are Skepchick, FftB, and so on) earlier this year. There's just something wildly interesting about seeing self-proclaimed skeptics and champions of reason fail so fucking hard!...
Agreed. I was listening to this interview with Hitch.. where he concedes this point right away. And later on (Part2), Prager brings in feminism and communism as competing ideologies.
[youtube]Y4JJqXISBiI[/youtube]
If there is one thing that I am fascinated about after all this, its psychology and how its changed over time due to environmental and cultural pressures. Any pointers to entry-level literature on this will be appreciated. I get a feeling that its pathological altruists that lead these modern ideologies.

astrokid.nj
.
.
Posts: 128
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2012 12:54 pm
Location: Atheist MRA MGTOW

2013 American Atheists National Convention in Texas

#14919

Post by astrokid.nj »

Guys, Get your tickets soon. Our favourite baboons are gonna be speaking. PeeZus and Becky not included (yet).
[youtube]yUFNsUn9nxc[/youtube]

Badger3k
.
.
Posts: 3466
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 6:53 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#14920

Post by Badger3k »

Tigzy wrote:And now PZ squeaks one out as regards the SCA thing: http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... volunteer/
Come on, SCA. Exercise some care and vet your volunteers better. After Edwina Rogers, we need some confidence-builders in the organization, and learning that they’ve made this awfully stupid appointment does NOT fill me with confidence. Why would you want a guy who posted an op-ed on AVoiceForMen, a hate site, and who posts the home addresses of a woman he dislikes on another hate site, as a candidate to represent a state organization?

Of course, it could just be that the organization is so desperate for volunteer help that they’ll take the dregs. That’s not a confidence builder, either.

There’s a petition. Unfortunately, it’s already full of trolls using fake names — change.org really needs to tighten up their procedures. These petitions already reek of uselessness, and the fact that they’re so easily gamed makes them totally pointless.
Silly old fart.

Funny - all that time "pharyngulating" online polls, showing how useless they are, and he just discovers that online petitions suffer the same flaws? Orly? What a tool.

Badger3k
.
.
Posts: 3466
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 6:53 am

Re: 2013 American Atheists National Convention in Texas

#14921

Post by Badger3k »

astrokid.nj wrote:Guys, Get your tickets soon. Our favourite baboons are gonna be speaking. PeeZus and Becky not included (yet).
[youtube]yUFNsUn9nxc[/youtube]
I think Awfeelia and reGreta are going to be there - it was on the A-news podcast or something else I listened to. I guess they'll let anybody speak for them, especially those who hang out with makers of "terroristic threats" - to use the vernacular of today.

:snooty:

AndrewV69
.
.
Posts: 8146
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 7:52 pm

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#14922

Post by AndrewV69 »

A Voice for Men excoriated the SPLC here:

http://www.avoiceformen.com/misandry/sy ... ured-hate/

I also thought of the baboons and the usual suspects when I read this part:
The Soviet Union’s first leader, Vladimir Lenin, explained, “We can and must write in a language which sows among the masses hate, revulsion, and scorn toward those who disagree with us.

Trophy
.
.
Posts: 601
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2012 2:17 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#14923

Post by Trophy »

JackRayner wrote:What point? That because "too many people" only appreciate women for their looks making any joke about it is an issue? All that amounts to is "I didn't like the joke". That's actually a pretty uncompelling "point". Or maybe I'm missing something? :think:
The point could be "too many people only appreciate women for their looks so let's be very careful when we post things online". You might not agree with it but it's another point of view and as I said, I would respect that point of view as long as it is maintained consistently.

Phil_Giordana_FCD
That's All Folks
That's All Folks
Posts: 11875
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 10:56 pm
Location: Nice, France
Contact:

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#14924

Post by Phil_Giordana_FCD »

I hate sunday mornings! Activity here gets pretty low, like everyone is in church or something.

Or maybe just resting after a hard week of work, in which case: rest well!

This was my totz useless thread bump...
The point could be "too many people only appreciate women for their looks so let's be very careful when we post things online". You might not agree with it but it's another point of view and as I said, I would respect that point of view as long as it is maintained consistently.
Same goes for women in regard to men. Let's not make it a one-sided issue, please.

Johann the Cabbie
.
.
Posts: 28
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 10:55 am
Location: Some dairy farm in Holland.
Contact:

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#14925

Post by Johann the Cabbie »

Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:I hate sunday mornings! Activity here gets pretty low, like everyone is in church or something.

Or maybe just resting after a hard week of work, in which case: rest well!
Or nursing hangovers.
Same goes for women in regard to men. Let's not make it a one-sided issue, please.
In the same post, Hemant also posted a photo of a shirtless Gervais with the same joke about just wanting to post his picture. No one complained about him sexualizing Gervais, which is terribly heteronormative.

My main complaint with Jen's post is that she didn't mention the Gervais photo, so her readers did not have the full context of the story unless they clicked thru the link. That is dishonest reporting.

Johann the Cabbie
.
.
Posts: 28
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 10:55 am
Location: Some dairy farm in Holland.
Contact:

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#14926

Post by Johann the Cabbie »

Thanks for finding the links, Trophy.

Trophy
.
.
Posts: 601
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2012 2:17 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#14927

Post by Trophy »

Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:Same goes for women in regard to men. Let's not make it a one-sided issue, please.
Yeah I know. I personally do not mind such comments at all, unless they are done in a very tasteless way (which of course a very subjective thing to say). But yeah, you are right that this is the main point. And as I said, there is no problem with her logic as long as she is consistent. For example, I remember at least one video of a female youtuber who was fantasizing about having sex with PZ and Richard Dawkins. If Jen doesn't like her video then I can respect her opinion but if she makes excuses and ad hoc rationalizations, then, yeah, it's hypocrisy.

Trophy
.
.
Posts: 601
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2012 2:17 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#14928

Post by Trophy »

Johann the Cabbie wrote:In the same post, Hemant also posted a photo of a shirtless Gervais with the same joke about just wanting to post his picture. No one complained about him sexualizing Gervais, which is terribly heteronormative.
Actually, that's not exactly what he said. He said:
In the latest issue of Rolling Stone (full article not available online), comedian Ricky Gervais talks about his atheism. That’s not new. I just like this accompanying picture:
...
I’m pretty sure that’s what fundamentalist Christians think about when they hear the word “atheist”…
On Byron though, he said:
This whole post was really just an excuse to post a picture of Kari.
The two statements are close but they are not the same.

Phil_Giordana_FCD
That's All Folks
That's All Folks
Posts: 11875
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 10:56 pm
Location: Nice, France
Contact:

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#14929

Post by Phil_Giordana_FCD »

Trophy wrote:
Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:Same goes for women in regard to men. Let's not make it a one-sided issue, please.
Yeah I know. I personally do not mind such comments at all, unless they are done in a very tasteless way (which of course a very subjective thing to say). But yeah, you are right that this is the main point. And as I said, there is no problem with her logic as long as she is consistent. For example, I remember at least one video of a female youtuber who was fantasizing about having sex with PZ and Richard Dawkins. If Jen doesn't like her video then I can respect her opinion but if she makes excuses and ad hoc rationalizations, then, yeah, it's hypocrisy.

Ok, I see your point and agree. The problem here is not what is being said, but the double standards, hypocrisy, and overall switches in positions on issues.

Not very sceptical, is it?

Michael K Gray
.
.
Posts: 2480
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 2:04 am
Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Contact:

Mars vs Venus

#14930

Post by Michael K Gray »

One vital issue in male/female interactions (that should be obvious) is that of the vastly differential cost of pregnancy for males and females.
I have waited and waited for the usually perspicacious Girl-Writes-What to slam this observation down on the table as an a priori given.
But she hasn't yet.
For it is the very source of the differences that she talks about!
Females pay dearly for pregnancy, males nary a jot.
It must be instinct in females, 'born' over eons of dying in childbirth, that they intrsinsically couple coitus with a good potential of having it kill them after 9 months. Scary stuff, even if only subliminally.
And that is only the start of the fretfulness: 8/12/18 years of having to feed the bastard, knowing that one might well be knocked-up by a passing cavemen to make yet another grave threat.
Yet males don't have to give a tinker's cuss about such worries.

For females who suspect that they may be fertile, this is the ultimate source of female infantilisation, of reluctance to mate, demands for special treatment & cetera.

It is, I think, the "Elephant in the Room", as far as these feminista discussions go.
They have all ignored this ultra-basic, concrete, scientific fact.

Discuss.
No more than 500 words, double-spaced, due by 5pm Tuesday.
Poke submissions into the pigeon-hole of Ass Prof Myers.

Trophy
.
.
Posts: 601
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2012 2:17 am

Re: Mars vs Venus

#14931

Post by Trophy »

Michael K Gray wrote:One vital issue in male/female interactions (that should be obvious) is that of the vastly differential cost of pregnancy for males and females....
Females pay dearly for pregnancy, males nary a jot.
It must be instinct in females, 'born' over eons of dying in childbirth, that they intrsinsically couple coitus with a good potential of having it kill them after 9 months. Scary stuff, even if only subliminally.
And that is only the start of the fretfulness: 8/12/18 years of having to feed the bastard, knowing that one might well be knocked-up by a passing cavemen to make yet another grave threat.
Yet males don't have to give a tinker's cuss about such worries.

For females who suspect that they may be fertile, this is the ultimate source of female infantilisation, of reluctance to mate, demands for special treatment & cetera.

It is, I think, the "Elephant in the Room", as far as these feminista discussions go.
They have all ignored this ultra-basic, concrete, scientific fact.

Discuss.
No more than 500 words, double-spaced, due by 5pm Tuesday.
Poke submissions into the pigeon-hole of Ass Prof Myers.
I call total and absolute bullshit on it. Reproductive strategies are way too complex to be summarized in one or two sentences. First of all, the asymmetry in pregnancy costs exists in pretty much all mammals, namely in bonobos and don't tell me bonobos have "reluctance to mate". The high death rate at childbirth also exist in spotted hyenas where females dominate males all the time and where submissive males have a much higher rate of getting laid. So no, what you say does not compute.

Scented Nectar
.
.
Posts: 4969
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2012 4:45 am
Contact:

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#14932

Post by Scented Nectar »

ConcentratedH2O, OM wrote:Sad times over at FfTB: Meyers has just posted the news that he is disabling comments on his YouTube videos. Instead, he is going to invite people to follow a link back to his blog to comment on the stories there.

Fuck! Have we damaged the poor old crank's credibility and viewership to the point where he's realized that YT commenters are actually on an intellectual level with The Horde?

Hehe! Poor old cunt.
I think he's realized that youtubers won't take his bullshit without laughing at him and pointing out his idiocy. And herding youtubers is like herding cats. That's why very few will take him up on his offer to visit his cage of herded baboons. On youtube, it's the creationists and feminists who are usually the ones scared of comments and ratings. Also, not many people read discriptions, much less click them. They'll just see comments and ratings are disabled, laugh, say "that figures", and move on.

Michael K Gray
.
.
Posts: 2480
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 2:04 am
Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Contact:

Re: Mars vs Venus

#14933

Post by Michael K Gray »

Trophy wrote:
Michael K Gray wrote:One vital issue in male/female interactions (that should be obvious) is that of the vastly differential cost of pregnancy for males and females....
Females pay dearly for pregnancy, males nary a jot.
It must be instinct in females, 'born' over eons of dying in childbirth, that they intrsinsically couple coitus with a good potential of having it kill them after 9 months. Scary stuff, even if only subliminally.
And that is only the start of the fretfulness: 8/12/18 years of having to feed the bastard, knowing that one might well be knocked-up by a passing cavemen to make yet another grave threat.
Yet males don't have to give a tinker's cuss about such worries.

For females who suspect that they may be fertile, this is the ultimate source of female infantilisation, of reluctance to mate, demands for special treatment & cetera.

It is, I think, the "Elephant in the Room", as far as these feminista discussions go.
They have all ignored this ultra-basic, concrete, scientific fact.

Discuss.
No more than 500 words, double-spaced, due by 5pm Tuesday.
Poke submissions into the pigeon-hole of Ass Prof Myers.
I call total and absolute bullshit on it. Reproductive strategies are way too complex to be summarized in one or two sentences. First of all, the asymmetry in pregnancy costs exists in pretty much all mammals, namely in bonobos and don't tell me bonobos have "reluctance to mate". The high death rate at childbirth also exist in spotted hyenas where females dominate males all the time and where submissive males have a much higher rate of getting laid. So no, what you say does not compute.
An interesting and intelligent response. Thank you.
A few observations, if I may:
Reproductive strategies are way too complex to be summarized in one or two sentences.
Yet you attempt exatcly this in your missive.
If you feel able to dismiss my contribution for that reason, then surely you will not begrudge me for rejecting your offerring for the very same reason?
This would be "case dismissed" in a court of law.

But I shall induldge your better nature.
You provide anomolous examples wherein Å“strus of females is externally visible, rare and seasonal, when compared to humans.
This is clearly NOT the case for homo sapiens.
Ovulation is cryptic to BOTH sexes.
This is the game-changer. The other elephant-in-the-room.
It makes ALL the difference between mammals with overt Å“strus, and those with cryptic Å“strus.

Bullshit? Not proven m'lud!

Trophy
.
.
Posts: 601
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2012 2:17 am

Re: Mars vs Venus

#14934

Post by Trophy »

Michael K Gray wrote:You provide anomolous examples wherein Å“strus of females is externally visible, rare and seasonal, when compared to humans.
This is clearly NOT the case for homo sapiens.
Ovulation is cryptic to BOTH sexes.
This is the game-changer. The other elephant-in-the-room.
It makes ALL the difference between mammals with overt Å“strus, and those with cryptic Å“strus.

Bullshit? Not proven m'lud!
The two examples were given to show that "high cost of pregnancy" and "risky childbirth" does not determine sexual strategies of males or females. So now you are adding concealed ovulation to the mix but how does it help your argument of "reluctance to mate"? Even if you come up with some explanation, what is your evidence that this is in fact the right reason and that human females have a natural reluctance to mate that is not bound to culture?

AnonymousCowherd
.
.
Posts: 1708
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2012 2:49 am
Location: The Penumbra of Doubt

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#14935

Post by AnonymousCowherd »

All this talk of Beccy's tuchis and Ophelia's finger wagging keep reminding me of something.

Maybe this;

"What are these
So wither'd and so wild in their attire,
That look not like the inhabitants o' the earth,
And yet are on't? Live you? or are you aught
That man may question? You seem to understand me,
By each at once her choppy finger laying
Upon her skinny lips: you should be women,
And yet your beards forbid me to interpret
That you are so."

Which (boom boom) would make you wonder just how old Ophelia really is.

Still, I'm sure the weird sisters would just love the comparison.

Maybe this, then:

"Old lady judges watch people in pairs
Limited in sex, they dare
To push fake moral insult, and stare
While money doesn't talk, it swears
Obscenity, who really cares?
Propaganda, all is phoney"
(B. Zimmerman, 1965)

What's old is new again. Well, maybe not everything.

Reap
.
.
Posts: 630
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2012 10:27 pm
Location: Reno Nevada
Contact:

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#14936

Post by Reap »

I'm just sitting around thinking about some of the comments that have been made about people on a personal level. For example say......PZ Myers doing what can only be described as 'shit talking' on his blog. I wonder if PZ has ever considered the fact that some people do not, take kindly, to such behavior. That leads me to wonder if PZ is ready to defend such remarks when face to face with someone who has an issue. When you talk shit about someone and then need to back it up while looking into their eyes it is much different than just pecking on some buttons and giggling to yourself. I mean how long does he think he can go slandering and not be confronted about it? I know whenever I write a blog or do a podcast I always keep in mind never to say anything I wouldn't be willing to say to a person's face in rl. Maybe PZ does the same. I guess time will tell.

cunt
.
.
Posts: 2768
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2012 8:06 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#14937

Post by cunt »

Guest:
Something that I did find ironic though was a comment (not sure which thread it was in) where someone bragged about tearing down some MRA posters that they saw in their town. I can imagine it was probably advertising stupidity anyway (I think a lot of the MRA stuff is drivel and consider myself - shock horror to those at FTB (and maybe here too) - a feminist) but the idea that you have the right to tear down someone else's posters because you simply disagree with them is ridiculous. Just because you are on what I would perceive to be the "right" side of the debate, you do not have the right to vandalise or literally tear down the speech of those that oppose you. I think that flies completely in the opposite direction of free speech, especially when you are being targeting specifically due to what you are saying.
Belief in their own morality sometimes lead tightly knit groups to commit immoral/illegal acts as a means to an end. I bet at least one of the feminists there didn't really even agree with the actions they were carrying out, but couldn't express a disagreement with the group.

ERV
Arnie Loves Me!
Arnie Loves Me!
Posts: 1556
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 4:57 pm

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#14938

Post by ERV »

Reap wrote:I'm just sitting around thinking about some of the comments that have been made about people on a personal level. For example say......PZ Myers doing what can only be described as 'shit talking' on his blog. I wonder if PZ has ever considered the fact that some people do not, take kindly, to such behavior. That leads me to wonder if PZ is ready to defend such remarks when face to face with someone who has an issue. When you talk shit about someone and then need to back it up while looking into their eyes it is much different than just pecking on some buttons and giggling to yourself. I mean how long does he think he can go slandering and not be confronted about it? I know whenever I write a blog or do a podcast I always keep in mind never to say anything I wouldn't be willing to say to a person's face in rl. Maybe PZ does the same. I guess time will tell.
Myers is fine against Creationists, but not against his witches, and he knows it. Chris 'Tinkerbell' Stedman deposed of him rather easily when they 'debated' a while back (Chris works with theists to do volunteer work, what an asshole!). When I commented that I was going to do exactly what Stedman did and debate the FfTBullies irl, Myers proclaimed I was threatening to kill him and he would never speak at a conference with me. So, yeah he already knows how he will fare if he has to defend his behavior in real life. That is, he wont.

cunt
.
.
Posts: 2768
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2012 8:06 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#14939

Post by cunt »

All bullies are cowards in their hearts.

Phil_Giordana_FCD
That's All Folks
That's All Folks
Posts: 11875
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 10:56 pm
Location: Nice, France
Contact:

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#14940

Post by Phil_Giordana_FCD »

Franc's latest:

http://greylining.com/2012/10/01/stefan ... is-broken/

Quite brilliant and hilarious, as always, when Franc is in blog mode.

Phil_Giordana_FCD
That's All Folks
That's All Folks
Posts: 11875
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 10:56 pm
Location: Nice, France
Contact:

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#14941

Post by Phil_Giordana_FCD »

Ok, I really hate sundays! Can't you people not get a life and post on here instead?

Or at least go sign the petition: http://www.change.org/petitions/secular ... of-the-sca

JackRayner
.
.
Posts: 1166
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2012 12:27 am
Location: In the basement of the University of Minnesota Morris
Contact:

Re: Mars vs Venus

#14942

Post by JackRayner »

Trophy wrote:
Michael K Gray wrote:One vital issue in male/female interactions (that should be obvious) is that of the vastly differential cost of pregnancy for males and females....
Females pay dearly for pregnancy, males nary a jot.
It must be instinct in females, 'born' over eons of dying in childbirth, that they intrsinsically couple coitus with a good potential of having it kill them after 9 months. Scary stuff, even if only subliminally.
And that is only the start of the fretfulness: 8/12/18 years of having to feed the bastard, knowing that one might well be knocked-up by a passing cavemen to make yet another grave threat.
Yet males don't have to give a tinker's cuss about such worries.

For females who suspect that they may be fertile, this is the ultimate source of female infantilisation, of reluctance to mate, demands for special treatment & cetera.

It is, I think, the "Elephant in the Room", as far as these feminista discussions go.
They have all ignored this ultra-basic, concrete, scientific fact.

Discuss.
No more than 500 words, double-spaced, due by 5pm Tuesday.
Poke submissions into the pigeon-hole of Ass Prof Myers.
I call total and absolute bullshit on it. Reproductive strategies are way too complex to be summarized in one or two sentences. First of all, the asymmetry in pregnancy costs exists in pretty much all mammals, namely in bonobos and don't tell me bonobos have "reluctance to mate". The high death rate at childbirth also exist in spotted hyenas where females dominate males all the time and where submissive males have a much higher rate of getting laid. So no, what you say does not compute.
You're making the classic mistake of confusing the now popularized "bonobo handshake" with reproductive sex. All of this "sex" that bonobos have become popular for is not only just done when some sort of tension easing is needed, (it's not some constant orgy) but it is also not done until ejaculation.

The way that I would summarize why differing sexual strategies, to include mate choice, between the males and females of any specific species exist, is this: Parental Investment.

cunt
.
.
Posts: 2768
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2012 8:06 am

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#14943

Post by cunt »

http://i.imgur.com/0OtAt.jpg

Don't make fun of the lynch mob. That's harassment.

JackRayner
.
.
Posts: 1166
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2012 12:27 am
Location: In the basement of the University of Minnesota Morris
Contact:

Re: Mars vs Venus

#14944

Post by JackRayner »

JackRayner wrote:
Trophy wrote:
I call total and absolute bullshit on it. Reproductive strategies are way too complex to be summarized in one or two sentences. First of all, the asymmetry in pregnancy costs exists in pretty much all mammals, namely in bonobos and don't tell me bonobos have "reluctance to mate". The high death rate at childbirth also exist in spotted hyenas where females dominate males all the time and where submissive males have a much higher rate of getting laid. So no, what you say does not compute.
You're making the classic mistake of confusing the now popularized "bonobo handshake" with reproductive sex. All of this "sex" that bonobos have become popular for is just done when some sort of tension easing is needed, (it's not some constant orgy) and it is not done until ejaculation.

The way that I would summarize why differing sexual strategies, to include mate choice, between the males and females of any specific species exist, is this: Parental Investment.
I made some corrections to make one of those sentences easier to read. So, uh, read my above quote instead.

JackRayner
.
.
Posts: 1166
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2012 12:27 am
Location: In the basement of the University of Minnesota Morris
Contact:

Re: Periodic Table of Swearing

#14945

Post by JackRayner »

Trophy wrote:
JackRayner wrote:What point? That because "too many people" only appreciate women for their looks making any joke about it is an issue? All that amounts to is "I didn't like the joke". That's actually a pretty uncompelling "point". Or maybe I'm missing something? :think:
The point could be "too many people only appreciate women for their looks so let's be very careful when we post things online". You might not agree with it but it's another point of view and as I said, I would respect that point of view as long as it is maintained consistently.
Her concern and her admonition is petty. Before even reaching any level of "hypocrisy", let's look at [this interpretation of] her "point" and see if it's got anything worth "respecting";
"too many people only appreciate women for their looks..."
I don't care. And I won't presume to have the right to tell others what they're allowed and not allowed to appreciate others for, be they men or women. That's their business, and what I appreciate women for and would prefer to be personally appreciated for is mine.
"...so let's be very careful when we post things online."
And to her I would say no. It's absurd asking others to adjust their behavior—which, if I were the one that made the joke, I would argue was as harmless as a gentle breeze—simply because Person A believes that it communicates attitudes that they disagrees with. I'm not waiting to take the next elevator just because someone thinks a rapist would do the opposite, just as I'm not going to abstain from commenting—jokingly or not—on women's looks just because some people believe women's only worth is their looks. I have no control over the rest of the world, and in fact, the people that hold these attitudes (Can she read minds, anyhow?) are the ones she should take it up with if she cares that much.

So, in my opinion, which I feel is well reason, the "point", even before reaching any level of hypocrisy, has little worth respecting. It's just pointless whining. A weak attempt at manipulation, which I think would show negatively on the blogger over at Pantheos if he fell for it...

Locked