Periodic Table of Swearing

#32176

Crommuknob on Twitter:

Crommunist â€@Crommunist
Well it's Wednesday, which means a new post from @HaifischGeweint, and a fresh round of crazy leaking in from the Slymepit.

Yeah. We are the crazy ones. Halffish's blog post is perfectly sane and reasonable.

Fuck you Crom and Half Fish. I hope you have sex with somebody who has HIV and neglects to disclose the fact to you. That way you can feel all warm and fuzzy inside that you never hurt their feelings.

#32177

Sorry, I forgot to put quotation marks around the tweet.

#32178

Tony Parsehole wrote:
cunt wrote:Yeah fucking brilliant, who decides the potential transmission rate at which you need to inform. Is it 0.001% chance, 0.1% chance, 10%? Is it by law, does the infected person play it by ear? Who fucking knows and really who cares because luckily there's fuck all chance the law is ever going to change just to make exceptions to laws of consent based on how oppressed half-fish feels about this particular issue.
Exactly.
This episode is the lowest I've seen from FTB/A+ yet. No shit. This hands down beats the FBRCC* shite

They do this every time. Just when you think it can't get any more fucked up the scum on FTB invent something new.
I wonder what the fuck is going to come next.

Former Belorussian Radiactive Closed City

Most of it I find just funny. This is the first thing in a long time thats actually managed to piss me off.

#32179

"I don't want you to kill me"

"OMFG you are totally discriminating against me. HALP"

#32180

You HIVogynists need to stop your AIDSsplaining now. Stop. Just stop. Don't do that.

When you develop AIDS and experience the discrimination and emotional trauma you'll face when privileged STD-free elitists ask if you have a disease that might kill them if they fuck you, then you'll understand. Until then, you have no business speaking about something you have no knowledge about, unlike Rebecca Watson, so shut the fuck up or I'm temp-banning the lot of you for 27 hours.

#32181

Crom, in the comments of his comedy blog:

To use an absurd example, letâ€™s say that I suffer from night terrors. I have been on medication and havenâ€™t had an episode in over a year. I hook up with someone, but donâ€™t tell her I have night terrors. I suffer an episode and end up fracturing her jaw (while asleep). Is that sexual assault, justly punished by a lengthy jail sentence and registry as a sex offender? I would think not, even though there was a risk that I did not disclose to the partner.

Now obviously a fractured jaw isnâ€™t the same as HIV, but the argument and principle are still in the ballpark.

No. No they are not.
I'm not even going to bother to explain why as it would be an exercise in patronisation.

#32182

Tony Parsehole wrote:Crommunist says:
What about in the case where there is no reasonable risk of transmission? Below some CD4 count, your risk of transmission is near-zero, so weâ€™re asking people to subject themselves to the risk of potentially disastrous discrimination based on a near-zero probability of harm. The risk/benefit calculation seems off there.

That just shows why you need to tell your partner so they can make a risk assessment for themselves.

You see, if you have a LOW CD4 count ('below some CD4 count...') you are not just HIV+. You have AIDS. And at this point, a huge viral load.

If you are an IDIOT who thinks 'Meh, there is no reasonable risk I will transmit. Im below some CD4 count.' YOU ARE NOT THE ONE WHO SHOULD BE IN CHARGE OF THE CALCULATIONS.

YOU ARE AN IDIOT.

Ive written numerous times about criminal transmissions/attempted transmissions of HIV. The best argument against it is that people wont get tested (dont know, cant be criminal, GENIUS!!!), but then you just mandate testing and thats fixed.

But you dont have the right to put someone else at risk, to change someone elses live forever, just because you think the odds are low. Im sure a drunk driver who kills a car full of people thought the risk was low that he would do that, but that doesnt change the outcome.

#32183

By the way is Halfabrain HIV positive or just a fucking psychopath? I'm just wondering why HE (I'm just going to call HIM this because it will really piss HIM and the other arseholes off) is promoting this poisonous idea.If HE is positive I reckon HE should get up Crommunist like a rat up a drainpipe and see how our favourite FTB blogger feels about it then.

#32184

All this talk about HIV/AIDS reminded me of...

[youtube]kFNs2mOkKzc[/youtube]

#32185

ERV wrote:
But you dont have the right to put someone else at risk, to change someone elses live forever, just because you think the odds are low. Im sure a drunk driver who kills a car full of people thought the risk was low that he would do that, but that doesnt change the outcome.

That's exactly the point. Feelings and discrimination don't come into it.

#32186

#32187

That just shows why you need to tell your partner so they can make a risk assessment for themselves.

You'd think this simple point would be fucking obvious, but no apparently not.

#32188

Holy shit... I wander off for a little while, and I come back to see this? It's cool to hide your HIV status from sexual partners? I just... words don't even...

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-SglqaiNd3jw/U ... 081456.jpg

#32189

Both Half-Fish and Crom seem to be forgetting that the risk of being infected is greater if there happens to be a cut or lesion 'down there', as it were. Which is why it's essential to inform a partner that one is HIV-positive before getting too intimate; for all the 'converted' might know, the possible sexual partner could have a spot, sore or scratch which they might ordinarily not worry about.

Also, a low viral load is not necessarily an indicator that the HIV-positive person is effectively safe. From wiki (my bolding):

The viral load in the blood is a good predictor of the likelihood of transmitting HIV to another. The higher the viral load value, the more viral elements there are in tissues and in circulating blood and other body fluids. Individuals with HIV are most contagious during the earliest (acute) stages of the infection. At this phase the immune response is still developing and antibody levels against the virus are often too low to be detected. Antibody testing at this stage often yields a negative result. This scenario increases the importance of HIV education and early detection and diagnosis. Widespread testing could provide significant public health benefits. There is no safe period for an individual infected with HIV. HIV can be passed to another individual even when the viral load has dropped to undetectable. The viral load test only detects the amount of virus circulating in the blood (about 2%). Approximately 98% of the HIV is actually in the body tissues such as the lymph nodes, gut-associated lymphoid tissue (GALT), spleen, brain, and other body tissues and fluids. Viral level fluctuations in these tissues parallel the levels in the blood but there is not an immediate correlation in time or rate.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viral_load#Contagiousness

#32190

"But your Honour! I didn't need to tell her I had HIV as the chance of infection was extremely low! Yes, she contracted the virus from me but how is that my fault? She should have asked me if I had HIV before I back-scuttled her!"

#32191

sacha wrote:
welch wrote: Once did a karaoke night where I sang every song as Mr. Hanky. Voice was fucked for days. Totally worth it.
mp3?

ha, no.

nor am I going to link the video of me trying to sing "whole lotta rosie"

#32192

A person gives a presentation on a field of science they know almost nothing about. Their knowledge is based mainly if not exclusively on popular writings and reports in tabloid newspapers. Nevertheless, this person suggests that this entire field of science is a scam. An expert then writes a detailed critique, pointing out serious flaws and misrepresentations.

How does a certain group of people defend the lecturer?

1. The lecturer was only criticising this field of science as represented in the popular media.
2. It doesn't matter that the lecturer only has a bachelor's degree in an unrelated field.
3. The expert doesn't like the lecturer, therefore his criticisms can be discarded.
4. The lecturer was a woman, therefore only misogynists would criticise her.
5. It wasn't even a lecture, it was a stand-up comedy act.

Never before was so much straw burned by so few.

#32193

Rystefn wrote:Holy shit... I wander off for a little while, and I come back to see this? It's cool to hide your HIV status from sexual partners? I just... words don't even...

Welcome to the most fucked up point in FTB history yet.

BTW can somebody please screencap that Crommunist blogpost before it gets edited to fuck? I would but can't on this computer.

Guessed · #32194

http://i47.tinypic.com/mv14c8.png

Just 'capped the comment because I can't believe he's actually making that argument. It's a strange world we live in when those who are trying to make a case for, or explain away, someone intentionally infecting another with HIV (without their consent!) are supposedly the "sane" ones.

#32195

Tony Parsehole wrote:
Rystefn wrote:Holy shit... I wander off for a little while, and I come back to see this? It's cool to hide your HIV status from sexual partners? I just... words don't even...
Welcome to the most fucked up point in FTB history yet.

BTW can somebody please screencap that Crommunist blogpost before it gets edited to fuck? I would but can't on this computer.

I've got it all excluding the comments.

#32196

Cheers, Cunt.

#32197

Tony Parsehole wrote:
Rystefn wrote:Holy shit... I wander off for a little while, and I come back to see this? It's cool to hide your HIV status from sexual partners? I just... words don't even...
Welcome to the most fucked up point in FTB history yet.

No shit... Just when I thought my opinion of that lot had hit rocks bottom, the fuckers turn up with drills and dynamite shouting "don't stop until you hit the core!"

#32198

Steersman wrote: â€œsnide remarks and open insults to Allahâ€

Ah! You are correct. Of course, I should have checked before saying anything.

#32199

JayTeeAitch wrote:All this talk about HIV/AIDS reminded me of...

[youtube]kFNs2mOkKzc[/youtube]

Chris Morris is a genius. If you haven't seen it I recommend Four Lions his film about British Islamist terrrorists.

#32200

Half-fish chimes in on my 'infected is infected' post.

HaifischGeweint says:
December 5, 2012 at 11:18 pm
Have you ever had unprotected sex with someone who was not, at the time, a virgin? Congratulations. Youâ€™re INFECTEEED with HPV, and your body can now INFECT your future partners with a virus that could kill them with cervical cancer over roughly the same time span in the absence of treatment as untreated HIV typically becomes AIDS and takes a life.

Shouldnâ€™t you be telling all your partners about your status? After all, youâ€™re potentially killing someone by having sex with them.

HPV is even transmitted via skin-to-skin contact, so either one of you wearing a condom doesnâ€™t protect you. And if you think oral sex is your way out, think again. Thatâ€™s how people get throat cancer from HPV.

You can change the way you talk about this subject matter, or you can continue to expose your bigotry, at which point Iâ€™m sure youâ€™ll talk yourself straight out of prospective sex partners in just a matter of time. At this point, I sure wouldnâ€™t go near you or anyone else who talked like you. I couldnâ€™t reconcile my clitoral erection with the urge to spontaneously projectile vomit.

#32201

cunt wrote: A couple of people actually get shot at in that vid. One from a very close distance that makes me wonder how the person could have possibly missed.

This gives away the fact that you have never been in a firefight up close and personal. The sheer random shit that can go down in an instant can take your breath away when you think about it later, not to mention give you the shakes.

I will let the ex-combat people here tell you about it, though in my experience not many people feel inclined to talk about it.

#32202

I'd just call her a poison-cunt if it was me. How's that bigotry you fucking retard mutant?

#32203

Rystefn wrote:
Tony Parsehole wrote:
Rystefn wrote:Holy shit... I wander off for a little while, and I come back to see this? It's cool to hide your HIV status from sexual partners? I just... words don't even...
Welcome to the most fucked up point in FTB history yet.
No shit... Just when I thought my opinion of that lot had hit rocks bottom, the fuckers turn up with drills and dynamite shouting "don't stop until you hit the core!"

What could possibly top this? Go on. Think. What on Earth could they come up with next week that tops this?
I can't wait to see how they do it but they will. Guaranteed.

My money is on "smothering a screaming baby is fine if you feel the infant is discriminating against your gender"

#32204

d4m10n wrote:If Watson had given a talk which revealed some depth and breadth of understanding of the field, I'd accept the applicability of PZâ€™s argument that laypersons are sometimes qualified to talk about science. It's not a bad argument, it just doesn't work here.

She was doubly stumped when asked by an attendee (in both Germany and Missouri) if she could provide *any* examples of EP working well as a science. In both cases she admitted that such examples might exist, but that she'd never personally come across them. Anyone even remotely familiar with the field should start rattling off the list of cross-cultural human universals and some of the experiments done to test whether they are, in fact, more than cultural. Or maybe talk about even deeper psychological traits like the ability to rapidly acquire grammar, or maybe the inbuilt forms of sloppy thinking such as hyperbolic discounting and agency hyperdetection which also appear to be universal. Or, hell, any number of other studies that don't touch upon the sacred field of sex and gender. It's not that hard, even a layman like me could do it. Instead, she just filibustered with a whole load of empty speculation. Had she emphatically shouted out, â€œI JUST DON'T KNOW WHAT I'M DOING!â€ it would have been no more damning.

or at least take the question on notice and be prepared the next time you are likely to be asked again.

#32205

bhoytony wrote:
Chris Morris is a genius. If you haven't seen it I recommend Four Lions his film about British Islamist terrrorists.

"12 bottles of bleach please"

#32206

AndrewV69 wrote:
cunt wrote: A couple of people actually get shot at in that vid. One from a very close distance that makes me wonder how the person could have possibly missed.
This gives away the fact that you have never been in a firefight up close and personal. The sheer random shit that can go down in an instant can take your breath away when you think about it later, not to mention give you the shakes.

I will let the ex-combat people here tell you about it, though in my experience not many people feel inclined to talk about it.

Um, this isn't a military firefight. Its one guy firing a gun from his car as its stopped at a traffic lights.

#32207

Tony Parsehole wrote:
bhoytony wrote:
Chris Morris is a genius. If you haven't seen it I recommend Four Lions his film about British Islamist terrrorists.
"12 bottles of bleach please"

'Let's blow up t'internet!'

#32208

Tigzy wrote:
Tony Parsehole wrote:
bhoytony wrote:
Chris Morris is a genius. If you haven't seen it I recommend Four Lions his film about British Islamist terrrorists.
"12 bottles of bleach please"
'Let's blow up t'internet!'

"Are they gonna make me fuck a dog brutha?"

#32209

Tony Parsehole wrote:
bhoytony wrote:
Chris Morris is a genius. If you haven't seen it I recommend Four Lions his film about British Islamist terrrorists.
"12 bottles of bleach please"

[youtube]ZAGO_l_YTbk[/youtube]

#32210

Haifisch:

"Definitions donâ€™t list connotations. You can argue until the cows come home about the definition of a word like â€œinfectedâ€ in various schools of thought, but none of that answers to THE CONNOTATION IN COMMON USE OF THE WORD."

The connotations of the word infected? Like "that infection is something I really don't want and could kill me so please don't stick your dick up me"?
In this case those connotations are a good thing. Calling HIV infection "Conversion" or "Fairy dream happy time" is just misleading and wrong.

#32211

I had largely ignored Crommunist and his zany co-author because they are really irrelevant, but that post really is actually psychotic. Chris Morris popped into my mind as well, but I see I have been beaten to that punchline.

Oh well. I'm just about to finish a blog post mansplaining why shooting people in the face should be decriminalised (because it oppresses gun owners who don't shoot people in the face).

Once I've finished that I'm going to do a presentation that uses Judy Mikovits as proof that the entire field of retrovirus research - no, bigger, of biology - is pseudo science.

Then I just have to wait for the speaking jobs to rooolllllll in.

Anyway, just time for a lamb jalfrezi before all of that.

#32212

I'm absolutely loving watching PZ and Black Svan humiliate themselves in their own shit.

skepCHUD · #32213

On the other hand what's really wrong with converting someone? Once they get HIV/AIDS they can't be crippled by "privilege".

#32214

A new low has been hit.
Imagine the SchrÃ¶dinger's Rapist scenario - except that the man knows there is a non-negligible probability he will rape the woman, and this probability is higher for him than for most other men. The woman doesn't know that he comes with this increased risk, and he doesn't want to tell her.
What would FTBs say then?

#32215

Tony Parsehole wrote:Haifisch:

"Definitions donâ€™t list connotations. You can argue until the cows come home about the definition of a word like â€œinfectedâ€ in various schools of thought, but none of that answers to THE CONNOTATION IN COMMON USE OF THE WORD."

The connotations of the word infected? Like "that infection is something I really don't want and could kill me so please don't stick your dick up me"?
In this case those connotations are a good thing. Calling HIV infection "Conversion" or "Fairy dream happy time" is just misleading and wrong.

You'll be converted instead, like an AAC file into MP3. Not that much better or worse, ok so now you have disease that causes failure of your immune system. Don't be so prejudiced.

#32216

Tony Parsehole wrote:Haifisch:

"Definitions donâ€™t list connotations. You can argue until the cows come home about the definition of a word like â€œinfectedâ€ in various schools of thought, but none of that answers to THE CONNOTATION IN COMMON USE OF THE WORD."

The connotations of the word infected? Like "that infection is something I really don't want and could kill me so please don't stick your dick up me"?
In this case those connotations are a good thing. Calling HIV infection "Conversion" or "Fairy dream happy time" is just misleading and wrong.

He/she is not infected! She/he is a "gift giver". http://www.tampabay.com/news/health/article1170784.ece

I'll suggest he/she use "spreading the ninja". Ninjas are cool...

#32217

Speaking of "connotations" calling HIV infection "conversion" is fucking sick.

"Hey I converted three women today and they didn't even know!"

#32218

Mr Danksworth wrote:Half-fish chimes in on my 'infected is infected' post.

HaifischGeweint says:
December 5, 2012 at 11:18 pm
Have you ever had unprotected sex with someone who was not, at the time, a virgin? Congratulations. Youâ€™re INFECTEEED with HPV, and your body can now INFECT your future partners with a virus that could kill them with cervical cancer over roughly the same time span in the absence of treatment as untreated HIV typically becomes AIDS and takes a life.

Shouldnâ€™t you be telling all your partners about your status? After all, youâ€™re potentially killing someone by having sex with them.

HPV is even transmitted via skin-to-skin contact, so either one of you wearing a condom doesnâ€™t protect you. And if you think oral sex is your way out, think again. Thatâ€™s how people get throat cancer from HPV.

You can change the way you talk about this subject matter, or you can continue to expose your bigotry, at which point Iâ€™m sure youâ€™ll talk yourself straight out of prospective sex partners in just a matter of time. At this point, I sure wouldnâ€™t go near you or anyone else who talked like you. I couldnâ€™t reconcile my clitoral erection with the urge to spontaneously projectile vomit.

"Sorry I gave you AIDS, but you probably already had HPV anyway and was possibly gonna die from cancer, so stop oppressing me just because I deliberately exposed you to another potentally fatal disease, you fascist!"

#32219

Spence wrote: Oh well. I'm just about to finish a blog post mansplaining why shooting people in the face should be decriminalised (because it oppresses gun owners who don't shoot people in the face).

You do realise that there are posters who will agree with that sentiment and not recognise it as satire. (byraway, they will all be Septics )

#32220

Tony Parsehole wrote:Speaking of "connotations" calling HIV infection "conversion" is fucking sick.

"Hey I converted three women today and they didn't even know!"

I read this Rolling Article a while ago about "conversion parties", gift givers and bug chasers. Cannot find it, but read this: http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread670012/pg1

#32221

IJLTH

[youtube]e1S_vA0ougg[/youtube]

And no, no apologies for putting this in the main thread...

#32222

Lsuoma wrote:IJLTH

[youtube] [/youtube]

And no, no apologies for putting this in the main thread...

Right I'm going to drown this thread in videos

#32223

codelette wrote:
He/she is not infected! She/he is a "gift giver". http://www.tampabay.com/news/health/article1170784.ece

I'll suggest he/she use "spreading the ninja". Ninjas are cool...

Thanks. That's the second most fucked up thing I've read tonight!

#32224

Rystefn wrote:
Tony Parsehole wrote:
Rystefn wrote:Holy shit... I wander off for a little while, and I come back to see this? It's cool to hide your HIV status from sexual partners? I just... words don't even...
Welcome to the most fucked up point in FTB history yet.
No shit... Just when I thought my opinion of that lot had hit rocks bottom, the fuckers turn up with drills and dynamite shouting "don't stop until you hit the core!"

http://www.geekosystem.com/wp-content/u ... nkhole.jpg

#32225

That shit about HIV 'conversion' has to be parody surely? I mean I've met some fucking muppets in my time but, seriously?

It's almost worth hoping that the Mayans were right and the world will end in a few weeks, we as a species do not deserve to continue if we are producing lunatics like this.

#32226

soldierwhy wrote:That shit about HIV 'conversion' has to be parody surely? I mean I've met some fucking muppets in my time but, seriously?

It's almost worth hoping that the Mayans were right and the world will end in a few weeks, we as a species do not deserve to continue if we are producing lunatics like this.

The HIV shite on Crom's blog is the inevitable conclusion of a policy of insulating oneself from criticism. Eventually, all the sycophants saying "yes" mean you just go too fucking far.

#32227

Tony Parsehole wrote:
codelette wrote:
He/she is not infected! She/he is a "gift giver". http://www.tampabay.com/news/health/article1170784.ece

I'll suggest he/she use "spreading the ninja". Ninjas are cool...
Thanks. That's the second most fucked up thing I've read tonight!

Found the original article! This whole thing is really fucked up: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/828217/posts

I found weird that HF tried to drop the usage of the correct terminology "HIV-infected" with terminology used by a fringe group...but then FTB bloggers are a whole bunch of lunatics, so I guess it is pretty much self-explanatory.

#32228

Nah, this person probably means well, and doesn't at least fantasise about spreading HIV. We should change the law so this guy couldn't be criminalised.

#32229

codelette wrote:
Tony Parsehole wrote:
codelette wrote:
He/she is not infected! She/he is a "gift giver". http://www.tampabay.com/news/health/article1170784.ece

I'll suggest he/she use "spreading the ninja". Ninjas are cool...
Thanks. That's the second most fucked up thing I've read tonight!
Found the original article! This whole thing is really fucked up: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/828217/posts

I found weird that HF tried to drop the usage of the correct terminology "HIV-infected" with terminology used by a fringe group...but then FTB bloggers are a whole bunch of lunatics, so I guess it is pretty much self-explanatory.

Shit is fucked up. look at this from that link:

"the welcome page to barebackcity.com, which claims 48,000 registered users, up from 28,000 about a year ago, recently said. "Be the first to seed a newbie and give him a pozitive attitude!"

(bolding mine)

Poz. meaning HIV infected. That's the word HaiFisch is slinging around and it's used on a website devoted to infecting people with HIV.......I wonder if there is anything to that.

#32230

bhoytony wrote:
Spence wrote: Oh well. I'm just about to finish a blog post mansplaining why shooting people in the face should be decriminalised (because it oppresses gun owners who don't shoot people in the face).

You do realise that there are posters who will agree with that sentiment and not recognise it as satire. (byraway, they will all be Septics )

I support the decriminalization of shooting people in the face, not because it oppresses gun owners who don't shoot people in the face. I support it because there are people in this world who really really need to be shot in the face. Sure, right after it gets passed, you'll see spike in the rate of people getting shot in the face, but it will normalize soon enough, and the net result will be fewer assholes and dipshits around.

#32231

Excuse me, while I go find a large weapon with which to kill myself with...

[youtube]iGNIDXUaVts[/youtube]

#32232

Tony Parsehole wrote: "the welcome page to barebackcity.com, which claims 48,000 registered users, up from 28,000 about a year ago, recently said. "Be the first to seed a newbie and give him a pozitive attitude!"

(bolding mine)

Poz. meaning HIV infected. That's the word HaiFisch is slinging around and it's used on a website devoted to infecting people with HIV.......I wonder if there is anything to that.

There was a weekend web on the site. Where i'm getting these screenshots from.

http://www.somethingawful.com/d/weekend ... change.php

#32233

See, all of HF blogpost is not about "hey, don't be a bigot with HIV+ people"; you read the terminology used and you realized he/she is into dangerous fetishes. Hey, Crommie, your friend is a wacko. And you are one too. :)

#32234

skepCHUD wrote:On the other hand what's really wrong with converting someone? Once they get HIV/AIDS they can't be crippled by "privilege".

Check your non-converted privilege and stop healthsplaining.

#32235

cunt wrote:
There was a weekend web on the site. Where i'm getting these screenshots from.

http://www.somethingawful.com/d/weekend ... change.php

http://i.somethingawful.com/u/kewpuh/ww ... n28_03.gif

Erotic literature has changed somewhat since my day.