The Periodic Table's Younger, Sexier, Sibling Thread...

[Tkmlac]

A short note on the question of whether or not rape is treated as more harmful than other crimes due to a culture's twisted idea of sex: It's really not. It's akin to torture in a lot of ways. Someone is literally holding you down and using your body to pleasure themself against your will. It will probably be the worst thing that ever happened to the victim and the memory of it won't fade.

have to disagree with you Tkmlac. It has plenty to do with the sacred pussy of the "good" women.

I posted a comment on AVfM in regards to false rape accusations, but the majority of it (posted below) works just as well for this discussion:

...Less experienced women seem to equate sex with love far more than those who are less puritanical.

their consent is a “precious gift” for only the “most worthy” of men.

they often need to believe that they would only consent to sex with the “perfect man” who has unconditional love and respect for them. Their “Knight in Shining Armour”.

They are more likely create and believe a fantasy to rationalise spreading their legs...

They are more likely to be ashamed, more likely to feel something was taken from them...

I am not insinuating that rape is always easier emotionally for women who are unconventional in the way they view sex.
I do think most women, especially in the US, have a very similar view of sex and their vaginas, to the puritanical women I described in my comment (even when they claim otherwise).
Sex, is tied to their self-worth, and self-respect, and I believe that is at the centre of rape itself. Rapists know what they are taking away from the woman, and are aroused by the power that gives them.

Many heterosexual men believe that "straight" sex is tied to their masculinity, and a homosexual encounter would significantly diminish it*. When they are raped anally or orally, the rapist is taking something very important to them, that defines who they are, which is also tied to their self-worth, and self respect.

I am also not saying that it is easier for a heterosexual man who is raped by a woman heterosexually, but we all know that for most men, their self-worth does not diminish by having sex with someone they don't love, and they usually do not see the need to blame the woman the next day, even if they regret their decision.

The same puritanical women who regret sleeping with someone, are more likely to find a way to put the blame on anyone but themselves. From convincing herself that he was a creep who used her, to reporting him as having raped her.
When your self-worth is tied to sex, it can manifest in all sorts of demented ways, including self-destruction.



*and before some bellend accuses me of equating masculinity with being heterosexual, one's preference in sexual partner means nothing to me. Who one is has nothing to do with who they love, who they choose to fuck, where they came from, what they look like, what colour or shade of colour they are, if they are disabled, or not, how much formal education they have had, who they are descended from, how much money they have, how privileged they are, or anything else that has fuck all to do with what sort of person one is.

Why hate someone based on the color of their skin any of the above when, if you take the time to get to know them as a human being, you can find so many other things to hate them for?" - Dennis Miller

I have to disagree. Rape comes with much more than penetration. The traumatic psychological effects aren't from how special whatever part was used was, but the fact that someone took away your bodily autonomy, removed your ability to choose what happens to it and uses their power over you to force you into something against your will. That's not to say that there aren't some women who believe in that magic vagina crap and might feel that way, but even without that, the experience is horrible.

[Karmakin]

And yes. That last line is why the whole shoes thing REALLY pisses me off. It's not even just hypocrisy. It's just massive amounts of fail and lack of self-awareness.

[Lsuoma]

Sigh. Oh, Oolon.

ool0n.JPG

Do try to get it correct. I placed you on the "foe" list here and then blocked you on Twitter not because you and I had a conversation on Twitter but because I find you to be a distasteful, two-faced, fence-riding asshole.

Unfortunately, I still run across your dripping verbal diarrhea everywhere else on the 'net, it seems.

The guy is incredibly stupid if he can't tell the difference between shutting your windows so you can't hear a moron spouting off outside your house, and going outside and taping his mouth shut.

Wait - I'll fix that:

The guy is incredibly stupidif he can't tell the difference between shutting your windows so you can't hear a moron spouting off outside your house, and going outside and taping his mouth shut.

There we go!

[Dick Strawkins]

Sigh. Oh, Oolon.

ool0n.JPG

Do try to get it correct. I placed you on the "foe" list here and then blocked you on Twitter not because you and I had a conversation on Twitter but because I find you to be a distasteful, two-faced, fence-riding asshole.

Unfortunately, I still run across your dripping verbal diarrhea everywhere else on the 'net, it seems.

Oolon's post is wrong or dishonest because there's a huge difference between being ignored/foed and being banned. It's the difference between one person in a room refusing to listen to you, and being thrown out of the room altogether. For example I have yet to foe anyone, though I do skim long posts if they don't seem interesting to me. Similarly I expect that some of my posts are uninteresting to other people, and some may even have set me to ignore. However if I set someone to ignore, I wouldn't be removing their posts for everyone else who reads here, and that's important. That's why Eucliwood has been complimented on some of their posts even though they got a lot of grief when they first started. At FTB or A+, they would have been banned (or are banned) and that would have been the end of it with one more person excluded from those clubs. As far as I'm aware there's nothing stopping oolon from posting here except their own fear that no one will care.

I set him to ignore because he was proven time and again to be telling lies. I will engage with anyone from any side of this debate but only if it is a genuine conversation. He spent half his time running back to the FTB boards to crow about how he was fooling us into thinking he was interested in a conversation, but was instead just trying to take the piss.
It's all very well to try to do that but I think he needs a quick recap of trolling-101 - particularly the part about the importance of not admitting you are a troll.
What sort of idiot turns up on a messageboard to say the equivalent of, "Hi, I'm a troll", and expects everyone to listen to them?
Oh, yes.
oolon.

[Lsuoma]

Trying to post here using my notebook. Getting returns showing IP blocked for spamming. Funny. It shares the same broadband connection as my mobile device. (tether)
Weird.
Can admin drop me some advice on this or. . . . . anyone here who's seen this sort of thing before?

Same broadband connection != same IP address. Let me know the IP, and I'll take a look. PM, please.

[Dilurk]

I'm with Reap to a certain extent. There are groups around that make-a-wish for the disabled and dying, and when you make a donation to one of these groups, the money may be going to someone who may be dead in less than a year from cancer. I've also given money to people in need just to get them out of a tight spot or to help them along in life. I'd support Greta 100% in buying a new pair of shoes if she had less than 1 year to live, even if that was not the original stated purpose of her fund. However, if it were me that had donated to the specific purpose of her rent and food, I would have appreciated a note from Greta first. "Look guys I have paid off my rent do you mind if ?". I have not donated to her, as I like to donate to people I personally know. If her donors are ok with the way she spent donated funds then we have no business being critical at all.

I hope you enjoy the shoes Greta and best wishes in life. Do not let the Internet get you down.

[masakari2012]

Sounds like they teamed up and are intentionally making fun of FTB.

[youtube]WxmP3gcZ-sA[/youtube]

[youtube]pJhcKXfLqNE[/youtube]

[Lurkion]

Dilurk. I think that's off the mark.

Not saying she's as bad as an evangelical, but if an evangelical preacher took all these donations to help people to get into heaven and paid himself a massive salary even if his followers were okay with that we should be outraged just because the ethics are independent of the victim.

Greta did something unethical but her followers don't care. As you'd expect with a cult.
Which FTB effectively is.

[windy]

Surly Amy wants to extend her grants to blokes, apparently:

http://skepchick.org/2013/01/will-there ... ly-grants/

Maybe we should extend an olive branch to this one. She isn't in the same league as PZ Myers and Ophelia Benson in terms of crushing dissent, and does sound like she is having a hard time. Yes, the t-shirt incident was ridiculous; but IIRC it was more Ophelia Benson who was keen to turn this into a stick to attack opponents with.

Unless she has done something more heinous that I am not aware of, and as such deserves her ill-treatment?

The problem is that what she classifies as "ill-treatment" often bears a remarkable similarity to the t-shirt incident. In what universe is that twitter joke "hateful", for example?

I like that in her Venn diagram, you can't be an "asshole" if you aren't an atheist and a skeptic. A+ers must be the atheists with too much free time on the internet that aren't skeptics?

[Dilurk]

Dilurk. I think that's off the mark.

Not saying she's as bad as an evangelical, but if an evangelical preacher took all these donations to help people to get into heaven and paid himself a massive salary even if his followers were okay with that we should be outraged just because the ethics are independent of the victim.

That's a very good point.

Greta did something unethical but her followers don't care. As you'd expect with a cult.
Which FTB effectively is.

There is definitely a lot of hero worship going on which is antithetical to being a good sceptic.

[Mykeru]

I'll just leave this here:

http://s3-ec.buzzfed.com/static/enhance ... 7202-1.jpg

Fat is misogyny! Just saying...

[Git]

An interesting article pointed to by Stephen Fry on twitter http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/com ... 46788.html

Fuck Robert Fisk. He's never met a genocidal Jihadi he hasn't attempted to get up the arse of.

[SPACKlick]

That Petition in DETAIL.

We support making the atheist movement more diverse and inclusive.

Hey Me too.

It's long been clear that the skeptical movement has a preponderance of white men.

Not sure Preponderance is the right word here, plurality seems better but OK.

While we don't disdain their participation, we believe skepticism is valuable and important to people in all walks of life,

I don't believe you about the disdain but I agree with the second half.

and in accordance with that principle, we consider it vital to have a movement that reflects the demographics of the society we live in.

WOAH THERE! Vital that it mirrors the demographic? So if more men than women are interested in it you're either going to ban men or force women to join? There may well be a discrepancy between demographics of subcultures, that's not bad as long as there aren't barriers to anyone joining. How many middle aged white guys do you know in the local Kwanza appreciation society?

To that end, we urge the atheist and skeptical organizations to make a conscious commitment to diversity: to intentionally reach out to people of all ages, genders and ethnic backgrounds to speak at our conventions, to serve on our boards of directors, and to be the public faces and representatives of skepticism.

I agree, consider everyone and pick the best of them, the most interesting of them, the most promising of them regardless of their demography.

We support strong, sensible anti-harassment policies at our gatherings.

Keyword = Sensible.

There have been too many instances of people at atheist conferences reporting bad behavior and unwelcome conduct by fellow attendees.

Well one genuine complaint is too many but I suspect they mean something stronger than that and as a Skeptic, I'd have to ask for evidence.

When it's repetitive or especially egregious, this unwelcome conduct may rise to the level of harassment, defined as behavior intended to demean, threaten or intimidate others.

Very true,

We hold that preventing harassment is a legitimate and obvious goal for conference organizers, and that this can be done through the implementation of fairly simple and well-tested conduct policies.

I'm not sure it should be a goal, getting attendees is a goal, preventing harassment is more an obligation, but that's merely quibbling.

We support the people in our community who've been the target of bullying, harassment and threats.

How exactly? By banning them for admitting to being raped, and then for admitting to fault? By grossly overstating the harassment you feel and minimising their ordeals? I don't believe you.

Outside the conference environment, there are prominent members of the atheist community who've been subjected to a vicious and persistent campaign of online harassment, including obsessive streams of slurs and invective, threatening messages, sexually-tinged taunting, and malicious impersonation on social media, all carried out with the goal of bullying them into silence.

Oh yeah, I remember when you did that, shame on you.

We stand shoulder-to-shoulder in support of the people who've been harassed in this way, and forcefully and unequivocally condemn those who've carried out the harassment. Unless they change their ways and make amends, they have no place within the movement.

You're right, you don't.

[Mykeru]

That Petition in DETAIL.

Outside the conference environment, there are prominent members of the atheist community who've been subjected to a vicious and persistent campaign of online harassment, including obsessive streams of slurs and invective, threatening messages, sexually-tinged taunting, and malicious impersonation on social media, all carried out with the goal of bullying them into silence.

Well, I wouldn't say I'm prominent, but it's nice of them to start addressing my harassment by Ophelia Benson, Greg Laden and Melody Hensley.

That's what they are talking about, right?

[SPACKlick]

[spoiler]

A short note on the question of whether or not rape is treated as more harmful than other crimes due to a culture's twisted idea of sex: It's really not. It's akin to torture in a lot of ways. Someone is literally holding you down and using your body to pleasure themself against your will. It will probably be the worst thing that ever happened to the victim and the memory of it won't fade.

have to disagree with you Tkmlac. It has plenty to do with the sacred pussy of the "good" women.

I posted a comment on AVfM in regards to false rape accusations, but the majority of it (posted below) works just as well for this discussion:

...Less experienced women seem to equate sex with love far more than those who are less puritanical.

their consent is a “precious gift” for only the “most worthy” of men.

they often need to believe that they would only consent to sex with the “perfect man” who has unconditional love and respect for them. Their “Knight in Shining Armour”.

They are more likely create and believe a fantasy to rationalise spreading their legs...

They are more likely to be ashamed, more likely to feel something was taken from them...

I am not insinuating that rape is always easier emotionally for women who are unconventional in the way they view sex.
I do think most women, especially in the US, have a very similar view of sex and their vaginas, to the puritanical women I described in my comment (even when they claim otherwise).
Sex, is tied to their self-worth, and self-respect, and I believe that is at the centre of rape itself. Rapists know what they are taking away from the woman, and are aroused by the power that gives them.

Many heterosexual men believe that "straight" sex is tied to their masculinity, and a homosexual encounter would significantly diminish it*. When they are raped anally or orally, the rapist is taking something very important to them, that defines who they are, which is also tied to their self-worth, and self respect.

I am also not saying that it is easier for a heterosexual man who is raped by a woman heterosexually, but we all know that for most men, their self-worth does not diminish by having sex with someone they don't love, and they usually do not see the need to blame the woman the next day, even if they regret their decision.

The same puritanical women who regret sleeping with someone, are more likely to find a way to put the blame on anyone but themselves. From convincing herself that he was a creep who used her, to reporting him as having raped her.
When your self-worth is tied to sex, it can manifest in all sorts of demented ways, including self-destruction.



*and before some bellend accuses me of equating masculinity with being heterosexual, one's preference in sexual partner means nothing to me. Who one is has nothing to do with who they love, who they choose to fuck, where they came from, what they look like, what colour or shade of colour they are, if they are disabled, or not, how much formal education they have had, who they are descended from, how much money they have, how privileged they are, or anything else that has fuck all to do with what sort of person one is.

Why hate someone based on the color of their skin any of the above when, if you take the time to get to know them as a human being, you can find so many other things to hate them for?" - Dennis Miller

[/spoiler]
I have to disagree. Rape comes with much more than penetration. The traumatic psychological effects aren't from how special whatever part was used was, but the fact that someone took away your bodily autonomy, removed your ability to choose what happens to it and uses their power over you to force you into something against your will. That's not to say that there aren't some women who believe in that magic vagina crap and might feel that way, but even without that, the experience is horrible.

Ok, apologies in advance for minimising anyone's experience (sincere one's because I reckon I'm gonna word this badly)

The experience being horrible is significantly different from the experience being life changingly bad. I would agree wholeheartedly that the 30 or so minutes I spent being violated were truly horrible. I've only had one worse experience and that involved being able to see my own abdominal organs. However after it was over, it was over. It didn't change who I was or what I was or the world or my expectations, just my feelings about one disgusting fuckwit I'd previously loved. Even the fact the police couldn't pull a case together wasn't traumatising, it was expected.

[Mzone]

Anyone know what is going on with Darkmatter2525 and NegationofP?

[youtube]WxmP3gcZ-sA[/youtube]

[youtube]pJhcKXfLqNE[/youtube]

[Pitchguest]

Good grief.

Someone on Atheism+ posts a limerick that includes the word "wanker" and is accused of sexual harrassment!

What is wrong with these people?!

Christ, these people are demented.

And yet I'm not surprised. If I recall correctly Eowyn was the poster who once asked for a temporary ban from the forum because she had things she needed to do but couldn't bear to leave the computer.

...

[spoiler]

Thinking about Eucliwood's nascence here has made me want to start a forum where the necessary delay between posts is very long, maybe as much as 24 hours. It would encourage such a radically different style of interacting with people, more like sending a letter than chatting. I think mainly though I just want to stop using this place to distract myself from writing my thesis.

Easily done: just ask Lsuoma to give you a temporary ban.

I'm only getting myself banned from the Slymepit if I can get a t-shirt for it.

(seriously though I might consider that, cheers)

[/spoiler]

:shifty:

[Gefan]

Re Amy, looking at "the story so far" I think there's at least one conclusion that can reached fairly easily.
From the belief that her feelings are so important that her emotional comfort should be guaranteed by law, through the general histrionics, to the spectacle of a middle-aged woman dressing like she's auditioning for a supporting role in a remake of Reality Bites, it seems apparent that we're dealing with a level of emotional maturity that is definitely sub-adult (and quite possibly pre-adolescent).
It's appallingly easy for white, middle class, American women to come to such a place and it is very, very hard at Amy's age to change.
If she manages it then it won't be an overnight process. If she's developing some self-awareness, some compassion for those outside her perceived in-group, if she is, in-short, starting to grow the fuck up, then she should be commended and supported.
If the Pit is experiencing such growth while our enemies implode surely it has something to do with a growing realization that while buffoonery will be called out here, we're ultimately reasonable and that they are not.

We make peace with our enemies not with our friends.

[Dilurk]

An interesting article pointed to by Stephen Fry on twitter http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/com ... 46788.html

Fuck Robert Fisk. He's never met a genocidal Jihadi he hasn't attempted to get up the arse of.

I thought Robert Fisk seemed to be a dinosaur here. What I found more interesting is how the piece outlined the growing dichotomy of the past from here and now. Yes a threatening paper mail (how quaint) could end up at the "cop shop" but a comment or e-mail usually does not. What Mr. Fisk fails to realise is electronic communication is a cross between verbal and written form of language. I am reminded of the scene in "Twelve angry men" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/12_Angry_Men_(1957_film)

Juror 8 presents a convincing argument that one of the witnesses, an elderly man, who claimed to have heard the boy yell "I'm going to kill you"

How many times have each of us said something like this verbally? How many times have we meant it? And worse, carried it out.

The 'net allows us the chance to be close to spontaneous, in an almost verbal manner, but also then locks these words down in concrete. We can all be quoted out of context, cherry picked to make each and everyone of us look really nasty in writing, when we were closer to the verbal end of casual communication.

When do we take something seriously and when do we ignore it? Where is the line to be drawn? Do we need to search ourselves to question whether we are doing this to others?

[windy]

A short note on the question of whether or not rape is treated as more harmful than other crimes due to a culture's twisted idea of sex: It's really not. It's akin to torture in a lot of ways. Someone is literally holding you down and using your body to pleasure themself against your will. It will probably be the worst thing that ever happened to the victim and the memory of it won't fade.

I am not insinuating that rape is always easier emotionally for women who are unconventional in the way they view sex.
I do think most women, especially in the US, have a very similar view of sex and their vaginas, to the puritanical women I described in my comment (even when they claim otherwise).
Sex, is tied to their self-worth, and self-respect, and I believe that is at the centre of rape itself. Rapists know what they are taking away from the woman, and are aroused by the power that gives them.
...

The same puritanical women who regret sleeping with someone, are more likely to find a way to put the blame on anyone but themselves. From convincing herself that he was a creep who used her, to reporting him as having raped her.
When your self-worth is tied to sex, it can manifest in all sorts of demented ways, including self-destruction.
...

I have to disagree. Rape comes with much more than penetration. The traumatic psychological effects aren't from how special whatever part was used was, but the fact that someone took away your bodily autonomy, removed your ability to choose what happens to it and uses their power over you to force you into something against your will. That's not to say that there aren't some women who believe in that magic vagina crap and might feel that way, but even without that, the experience is horrible.

Looks like you two cunts are talking past each other. Sacha is not arguing that puritanical ideas are the only thing that makes the experience traumatic, only that they can make it worse.

[Parge]

Good grief.

Someone on Atheism+ posts a limerick that includes the word "wanker" and is accused of sexual harrassment!

What is wrong with these people?!

Feck. Why did I go there? Well, apparently, for the Lolz!!!!

That wasn't the backing of the train up to the station. At all. Here's a day off to figure out what you want to say next to resolve the situation.

He's like the fucking Colonel Klink of moral outrage. "Hogan!!! Thirty days in the cooler!!!" There's got to be a truckload of impotence somewhere else in that guy's life.

The Banhammer: meting out justice in the spirit of the Gulag, with all the shock and awe of a pillow fight against an asthmatic anorexic with polio.

[windy]

[spoiler]

Thinking about Eucliwood's nascence here has made me want to start a forum where the necessary delay between posts is very long, maybe as much as 24 hours. It would encourage such a radically different style of interacting with people, more like sending a letter than chatting. I think mainly though I just want to stop using this place to distract myself from writing my thesis.

Easily done: just ask Lsuoma to give you a temporary ban.

I'm only getting myself banned from the Slymepit if I can get a t-shirt for it.

(seriously though I might consider that, cheers)

[/spoiler]
:shifty:

:whistle:

[Tigzy]

[spoiler]

Good grief.

Someone on Atheism+ posts a limerick that includes the word "wanker" and is accused of sexual harrassment!

What is wrong with these people?!

Feck. Why did I go there? Well, apparently, for the Lolz!!!!

That wasn't the backing of the train up to the station. At all. Here's a day off to figure out what you want to say next to resolve the situation.

He's like the fucking Colonel Klink of moral outrage. "Hogan!!! Thirty days in the cooler!!!" There's got to be a truckload of impotence somewhere else in that guy's life.

The Banhammer: meting out justice in the spirit of the Gulag, with all the shock and awe of a pillow fight against an asthmatic anorexic with polio.

[/spoiler]

LMFAO! I swear, I honestly thought Eowyn Entwife (fuck it woman - go the whole hog and call yourself Sally Slapcabbage of Glastonbury, why don't ya?) was making a joke with that response. I mean, come on:

Cultural deconstruction for those who are not too familiar with the details of the role that certain types of limericks play in the English-speaking world (and BTW, this is the part about which the classic sexual harasser claims that it's all in my head, that I am the one with the problem...)

1) "There was a young lady..." is a classic start for a limerick with a sexual pun. DO NOT follow the links unless you want to read a pile of examples: http://www.anvari.org/shortjoke/Limeric ... -arse.html and one more at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/There_once ... d_versions

2) The use of the word "wanker" in the limerick makes the sexual connotations explicit.

There, deconstructed. That was easy. Then the conclusion:


3) Making such a limerick exclusively about any individual and/or in a dedicated safe space is sexual harassment and a violation of our rules.

That would actually be pretty good satire if she wasn't being serious. :lol:

[AbsurdWalls]

[spoiler]

Thinking about Eucliwood's nascence here has made me want to start a forum where the necessary delay between posts is very long, maybe as much as 24 hours. It would encourage such a radically different style of interacting with people, more like sending a letter than chatting. I think mainly though I just want to stop using this place to distract myself from writing my thesis.

Easily done: just ask Lsuoma to give you a temporary ban.

I'm only getting myself banned from the Slymepit if I can get a t-shirt for it.

(seriously though I might consider that, cheers)

[/spoiler]
:shifty:

:whistle:

[spoiler]

Good grief.

Someone on Atheism+ posts a limerick that includes the word "wanker" and is accused of sexual harrassment!

What is wrong with these people?!

Christ, these people are demented.

And yet I'm not surprised. If I recall correctly Eowyn was the poster who once asked for a temporary ban from the forum because she had things she needed to do but couldn't bear to leave the computer.

Yeah, imagine somebody doing that...

[/spoiler]

:shock:

[Pitchguest]

[spoiler]

That Petition in DETAIL.

We support making the atheist movement more diverse and inclusive.

Hey Me too.

It's long been clear that the skeptical movement has a preponderance of white men.

Not sure Preponderance is the right word here, plurality seems better but OK.

While we don't disdain their participation, we believe skepticism is valuable and important to people in all walks of life,

I don't believe you about the disdain but I agree with the second half.

and in accordance with that principle, we consider it vital to have a movement that reflects the demographics of the society we live in.

WOAH THERE! Vital that it mirrors the demographic? So if more men than women are interested in it you're either going to ban men or force women to join? There may well be a discrepancy between demographics of subcultures, that's not bad as long as there aren't barriers to anyone joining. How many middle aged white guys do you know in the local Kwanza appreciation society?

To that end, we urge the atheist and skeptical organizations to make a conscious commitment to diversity: to intentionally reach out to people of all ages, genders and ethnic backgrounds to speak at our conventions, to serve on our boards of directors, and to be the public faces and representatives of skepticism.

I agree, consider everyone and pick the best of them, the most interesting of them, the most promising of them regardless of their demography.

We support strong, sensible anti-harassment policies at our gatherings.

Keyword = Sensible.

There have been too many instances of people at atheist conferences reporting bad behavior and unwelcome conduct by fellow attendees.

Well one genuine complaint is too many but I suspect they mean something stronger than that and as a Skeptic, I'd have to ask for evidence.

When it's repetitive or especially egregious, this unwelcome conduct may rise to the level of harassment, defined as behavior intended to demean, threaten or intimidate others.

Very true,

We hold that preventing harassment is a legitimate and obvious goal for conference organizers, and that this can be done through the implementation of fairly simple and well-tested conduct policies.

I'm not sure it should be a goal, getting attendees is a goal, preventing harassment is more an obligation, but that's merely quibbling.

We support the people in our community who've been the target of bullying, harassment and threats.

How exactly? By banning them for admitting to being raped, and then for admitting to fault? By grossly overstating the harassment you feel and minimising their ordeals? I don't believe you.

Outside the conference environment, there are prominent members of the atheist community who've been subjected to a vicious and persistent campaign of online harassment, including obsessive streams of slurs and invective, threatening messages, sexually-tinged taunting, and malicious impersonation on social media, all carried out with the goal of bullying them into silence.

Oh yeah, I remember when you did that, shame on you.

We stand shoulder-to-shoulder in support of the people who've been harassed in this way, and forcefully and unequivocally condemn those who've carried out the harassment. Unless they change their ways and make amends, they have no place within the movement.

You're right, you don't.

[/spoiler]

Very nice break-down and a good illustration of their mental state, however there is one thing: I'm curious what statistics they go by when they say there's been "too many instances of people reporting bad behaviour and unwelcome conduct by fellow attendees." Because by my count, the amount of complaints of harassment or otherwise at this year's TAM was ... zero. And frankly, the other conventions had little no to no complaints as well. A few complaints here and there surely can't amount "too many"? Or are they going by the measure of "one too many", meaning one complaint is enough to spoil the entire convention?

They weren't kind to provide us with any evidence of these assertions, so we will just have to trust them at their word. Which, as we know, as sceptics and freethinkers, will never happen and it's ironic they should ask us to give them that kind of benefit. That is, for those who really wish to remain sceptics and freethinkers and not mindless, echo chambering automatons.

When Ashley Miller was accusing DJ Grothe of lying about reports of harassment at TAM, they looked at it thoroughly and found out that Ms. Miller had actually not filed any report at TAM that year. It should surprise nobody, then, that her harassment didn't get reported because there was none. DJ Grothe was also not involved in the incident with Ashley Miller and her perpetrator, only the security at the convention were and the situation dealt with quickly and efficiently. Ms. Miller only thought - presumed - that DJ was involved and therefore saw fit to misrepresent him, the JREF, TAM, for her mistake.

Anyway, I wish I had the ability -- one might even say the privilege -- to really stick it to these clowns. They repel me.

[Pitchguest]

Correction: I - repel - them.

[AbsurdWalls]

I'm curious what statistics they go by when they say there's been "too many instances of people reporting bad behaviour and unwelcome conduct by fellow attendees." Because by my count, the amount of complaints of harassment or otherwise at this year's TAM was ... zero. And frankly, the other conventions had little no to no complaints as well.

...

When Ashley Miller was accusing DJ Grothe of lying about reports of harassment at TAM, they looked at it thoroughly and found out that Ms. Miller had actually not filed any report at TAM that year. It should surprise nobody, then, that her harassment didn't get reported because there was none. DJ Grothe was also not involved in the incident with Ashley Miller and her perpetrator, only the security at the convention were and the situation dealt with quickly and efficiently. Ms. Miller only thought - presumed - that DJ was involved and therefore saw fit to misrepresent him, the JREF, TAM, for her mistake.

Indeed, surely it's an issue of "too few instances of people reporting bad behaviour and unwelcome conduct", seeing as their argument is that there is a lot of this stuff going on that people are too afraid to talk about.

[ReneeHendricks]

I'm curious what statistics they go by when they say there's been "too many instances of people reporting bad behaviour and unwelcome conduct by fellow attendees." Because by my count, the amount of complaints of harassment or otherwise at this year's TAM was ... zero. And frankly, the other conventions had little no to no complaints as well.

...

When Ashley Miller was accusing DJ Grothe of lying about reports of harassment at TAM, they looked at it thoroughly and found out that Ms. Miller had actually not filed any report at TAM that year. It should surprise nobody, then, that her harassment didn't get reported because there was none. DJ Grothe was also not involved in the incident with Ashley Miller and her perpetrator, only the security at the convention were and the situation dealt with quickly and efficiently. Ms. Miller only thought - presumed - that DJ was involved and therefore saw fit to misrepresent him, the JREF, TAM, for her mistake.

Indeed, surely it's an issue of "too few instances of people reporting bad behaviour and unwelcome conduct", seeing as their argument is that there is a lot of this stuff going on that people are too afraid to talk about.

This is the bit that gets me. If you're being harassed, WTF are you not speaking up about it?

[Tigzy]

This is the bit that gets me. If you're being harassed, WTF are you not speaking up about it?

It's the Patriarchy, beaming mind control rays into her head to keep her compliant and skilled at making sandwiches.

BTW, on Peez's latest post, he says this:

...It’s targeted specifically at ‘booth babe’ culture, where women are used as sexualized props to peddle commercial products...

'Sexualised props', Peezee? O Rly?

http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mco3o ... o1_500.gif

[Dilurk]

ERV: I'm sure you know about this one http://www.stanford.edu/group/nolan/tut ... dvant.html but it is very interesting stuff.

[Pitchguest]

At least booth babes doesn't get creepy, middle aged men proposing to do the sex thing.

Oh wait.

[ReneeHendricks]

This is the bit that gets me. If you're being harassed, WTF are you not speaking up about it?

It's the Patriarchy, beaming mind control rays into her head to keep her compliant and skilled at making sandwiches.

BTW, on Peez's latest post, he says this:

...It’s targeted specifically at ‘booth babe’ culture, where women are used as sexualized props to peddle commercial products...

'Sexualised props', Peezee? O Rly?

http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mco3o ... o1_500.gif

Yeah, I read that as well. So, I'll just come out and say it: I have no problem with "booth babes". I've known a few and they love doing it. Not one single one of them were forced into being "booth babes". They are proud of their bodies and have no qualms with their bodies being shown off. I wonder if I should stop looking at art with nudes because clearly they were nothing but "sexualized props"?

[Zenspace]

Husband has asked me about this video clip. He's seen people talking about how "casually sexist" this is and does not grasp why. I don't either. This is... unrelated to pitter business (heh), but does relate to the fascinating shit feminists think.

P99qJGrPNLs

Oh, there are 'traditional' sexist flags all over that puppy, unless you take the time to look beyond the quick flash surface details. The surface: multiple, aggressive, armored and heavily armed men attacking a lone, scantily clad female. That is all some people will (or perhaps can or want) to see.

Take a moment to really look and there is a hell of a lot more going on in there and most of it goes in the other direction - the target (by all visual indicators) is a murderous robot that happens to be constructed to resemble a human female. It reminds me of an old sci-fi story that the Terminator movies were based on. Can't remember the title or author at the moment. I would love to find. Copy and reread that old gem.

You are thinking of "Blade Runner" http://www.gradesaver.com/do-androids-d ... /section8/

As an aside, and as a graphics person myself, the cgi work is stunning. Even better, I'm loving the soundtrack. Any idea who the music is by? Love to buy a copy of that music!

No, that's not it. I'm familiar with Bladerunner history. That is a completely different plot line that Terminator. The story I'm recalling, like Terminator, is completely post apocalyptic. There are scattered human survivors being hunted by fully robotic 'hunterkillers', most of which are obviously autonomous machines of varying degrees of complexity. As in Terminator, the computers that are designing and building these machines develop increasingly complex models, finally achieving designs that have appearances and behaviors indistinguishable from humans - all to complete its assigned task of killing the enemy, which apparently is every real human.

You could be thinking of Second Variety by Philip K Dick, made into the movie Screamers. Terminator was inspired by 2 Outer Limits episodes: Demon with a Glass Hand, and Soldier, both written by Harlan Ellison.

Zou3gou3 made the 'Second Variety' connection above. Already downloaded it from Gutenberg press.

Interesting info on the rest! I am a HUGE fan of Ellison's work. Now I have to look up all those new bits, too. Thanks a bunch!! :D

[Tkmlac]

Husband has asked me about this video clip. He's seen people talking about how "casually sexist" this is and does not grasp why. I don't either. This is... unrelated to pitter business (heh), but does relate to the fascinating shit feminists think.

[youtube]P99qJGrPNLs[/youtube]

Because boobs.

[KarlVonMox]

new information about a previous conversation -

alternative to vasectomy and easily reversible: birth control for men

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reversible ... r_guidance

Harriet Hall writes about it here: http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/ind ... l-for-men/


Autonomy for men in regards to birth control, and easily reversible. I hope it passes clinical trials.

Sounds good! But progress seems agonizingly slow.

[John Brown]

Good grief.

Someone on Atheism+ posts a limerick that includes the word "wanker" and is accused of sexual harrassment!

What is wrong with these people?!

It seems to me that there are only two appropriate responses to people like that: Utter contempt and mocking them unrelentingly.

This is really no small matter. If you take that kind of world view to its logical conclusion, you can't but concluded that it is anti-human, anti-beauty, anti-cosmopolitan, and anti-civilization. It reflects the most base form of tribalism.

I have no earthly idea why anyone would put themselves anywhere near the vicinity of such toxic, unthinking creatures.

They deserve no pity or quarter. Fighting them has nothing to do with prejudice against women or minorities (as the simple minded Adam Lee likes to profess), and everything to do with wanting to live in a world where objective reality trumps ideology.

Fuck those wankers.

[John Brown]

Re Amy, looking at "the story so far" I think there's at least one conclusion that can reached fairly easily.
From the belief that her feelings are so important that her emotional comfort should be guaranteed by law, through the general histrionics, to the spectacle of a middle-aged woman dressing like she's auditioning for a supporting role in a remake of Reality Bites, it seems apparent that we're dealing with a level of emotional maturity that is definitely sub-adult (and quite possibly pre-adolescent).
It's appallingly easy for white, middle class, American women to come to such a place and it is very, very hard at Amy's age to change.
If she manages it then it won't be an overnight process. If she's developing some self-awareness, some compassion for those outside her perceived in-group, if she is, in-short, starting to grow the fuck up, then she should be commended and supported.
If the Pit is experiencing such growth while our enemies implode surely it has something to do with a growing realization that while buffoonery will be called out here, we're ultimately reasonable and that they are not.

We make peace with our enemies not with our friends.

Her tagline; "Surly Amy kicks ass on a daily basis," says it all.

If you have to say something like that, the only one you're trying to convince is yourself.

People who *do* kick ass on a daily basis show it through action, rarely through words.

[Zenspace]

Greta accepts more donations for shoes! Also asks people to donate money to a charity of her choice. But she will spend money donated to her on shoes. At this point it must be just to try and piss off the people who criticized her for her initial shoe purchase.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/greta/2013/ ... l-justice/

Of course she thinks she's pissing off. But she's not. We're laughing at the people she's duped into donating to her shoe fund.

Yup. Gotta love the smell of hate edged, vengeance driven charity in the evening. :whistle:

My point was that Greta is asking her fans to donate more of their money to charity, while she admits to having received even more donations to herself, which she is flat out admitting will be spent on more luxurious designer shoes.

It just comes off as a bit hypocritical (if not that, at least very odd) that she in the same blog post, asks for people to donate money to charity, she spends money donated to her now on overpriced shoes.

I have nothing against the charity or her encouraging people to donate to it. I just find it a bit odd (and in bad form a bit, considering she got so much flack for her initial show purchase) that when she does receive more donations, she doesn't spend that money on the charity she is asking people to donate to.

Oh, I agree completely. Any respect I had for her, and there was not all that much left at this point, just evaporated completely with this last episode, pretty much for the reasons you outline. To think I actually considered sending her money at one point. I'm glad I decided to hold off for a bit to see how things went with her. My comment had more to with the 'let's give to charity and piss off those slymers' attitude. Talk about missing the effen point.

[Tkmlac]

At least booth babes doesn't get creepy, middle aged men proposing to do the sex thing.

Oh wait.

it might have been asked already, but is there a link to that full talk? I'd like to see how he worked that in.

[Oneiros666]

Anyone know what is going on with Darkmatter2525 and NegationofP?

[spoiler][youtube]WxmP3gcZ-sA[/youtube]

[youtube]pJhcKXfLqNE[/youtube][/spoiler]

Why did BionicDance 'have to make this video'? If she wanted to tell DarkMatter something directly, all she had to do was send him a PM. She _certainly_ did not 'have to' make a YT video telling the WORLD how horrible DarkMatter is without actually explaining why. I smell fishy fake-drama-to-gather-views a long way here. But of course, I may be wrong; but then this video should never have been made public.

[Gefan]

Husband has asked me about this video clip. He's seen people talking about how "casually sexist" this is and does not grasp why. I don't either. This is... unrelated to pitter business (heh), but does relate to the fascinating shit feminists think.

[youtube]P99qJGrPNLs[/youtube]

Because boobs.

This makes me realize (like I needed reminding) that I am very old.
To me the clip contained (to my admittedly untutored eye) a new level of graphic realism, and it suggested interesting themes and ideas.
Oh, and yes, I suppose the female machine / android / replicant / terminator / whatever the fuck it was did have boobs.
Being as I'm not thirteen years old that wasn't a major concern.
I'm starting to think that the other side never mentally gets beyond age thirteen.

[Tigzy]

At least booth babes doesn't get creepy, middle aged men proposing to do the sex thing.

Oh wait.

it might have been asked already, but is there a link to that full talk? I'd like to see how he worked that in.

http://www.tubechop.com/watch/745147

Needless to say, this is a presentation brought to you by:

The Sid James
http://www.vinmag.com/online/media/gbu0 ... /TS055.jpg
School of Feminism.

[papillon]

About this personal appearance stuff:
It's puerile, immature and tasteless.

http://i639.photobucket.com/albums/uu11 ... c2bfe4.jpg
http://i639.photobucket.com/albums/uu11 ... b1a193.jpg

.... yet still makes me laugh :)

[Scented Nectar]

I'm curious what statistics they go by when they say there's been "too many instances of people reporting bad behaviour and unwelcome conduct by fellow attendees." Because by my count, the amount of complaints of harassment or otherwise at this year's TAM was ... zero. And frankly, the other conventions had little no to no complaints as well.

...

When Ashley Miller was accusing DJ Grothe of lying about reports of harassment at TAM, they looked at it thoroughly and found out that Ms. Miller had actually not filed any report at TAM that year. It should surprise nobody, then, that her harassment didn't get reported because there was none. DJ Grothe was also not involved in the incident with Ashley Miller and her perpetrator, only the security at the convention were and the situation dealt with quickly and efficiently. Ms. Miller only thought - presumed - that DJ was involved and therefore saw fit to misrepresent him, the JREF, TAM, for her mistake.

Indeed, surely it's an issue of "too few instances of people reporting bad behaviour and unwelcome conduct", seeing as their argument is that there is a lot of this stuff going on that people are too afraid to talk about.

This is the bit that gets me. If you're being harassed, WTF are you not speaking up about it?

In one of Ashley's initial articles on it (her blog just before joining fftb), she admitted (in the comments I think) that well you see, she hadn't actually mentioned the SEXUAL part of what the guy was doing, and that he was just taken away for being a bit too drunk or in the wrong room or something.

Then, as though she thought DJ could mind read, she just stupidly continued to still blame DJ Grothe for not having any record of her sexual harassment happening. I was like, what the fuck??? But there it was, right on her page. I wonder if it's still online or if she's taken it down. I don't remember what her blog used to be called or I'd check.

[AronRa]

It looks like Aron Ra has finally accepted the FTB/Skepchick kool-aid and posted a defense of all things Twatson.

Really? When did I do that?

He classes patriarchy deniers with moon landing deniers and holocaust deniers.

I never did that either.

Because obviously there is as much evidence for patriarchy as there is for the holocaust, but if you ask to see it you're a misogynist.

I don't know what you're talking about, and I think that makes two of us.

He also tries to smear Tf00t by associating him with trolls who have posted in the comments of his youtube vids.

Wrong again. Wouldn't think of it. I have many criticisms of Thunder's arguments on this topic, but so far I have taken all of them to him directly. I may do so again, only in a public forum this time, but still on the terms of two-way conversation in real time. Whether that discussion will happen hasn't yet been negotiated.

[Tigzy]

Aron, it's already been made clear that post made a mistake in its attribution.

Welcome to the Pyt, by the way. Peezee will of course stop talking to you now.

[ReneeHendricks]

It looks like Aron Ra has finally accepted the FTB/Skepchick kool-aid and posted a defense of all things Twatson.

Really? When did I do that?

He classes patriarchy deniers with moon landing deniers and holocaust deniers.

I never did that either.

Because obviously there is as much evidence for patriarchy as there is for the holocaust, but if you ask to see it you're a misogynist.

I don't know what you're talking about, and I think that makes two of us.

He also tries to smear Tf00t by associating him with trolls who have posted in the comments of his youtube vids.

Wrong again. Wouldn't think of it. I have many criticisms of Thunder's arguments on this topic, but so far I have taken all of them to him directly. I may do so again, only in a public forum this time, but still on the terms of two-way conversation in real time. Whether that discussion will happen hasn't yet been negotiated.

Um, did someone miss something and not notice the post that this is referring to was written by "lilandra"? Even I noticed this.

[comslave]

Slymepit Rule #1 - Tolerance.

Even for you, you fucking ass-munch.

I'll pass that comment on to Justicar.

Jesus, have you seen that guy sexually harassing me on Twitter? Where's the outrage?

I think he's on a mission to have sex with every man in the developed world. Then he'll move on to Africa.

[LMU]

[spoiler]

It looks like Aron Ra has finally accepted the FTB/Skepchick kool-aid and posted a defense of all things Twatson.

Really? When did I do that?

He classes patriarchy deniers with moon landing deniers and holocaust deniers.

I never did that either.

Because obviously there is as much evidence for patriarchy as there is for the holocaust, but if you ask to see it you're a misogynist.

I don't know what you're talking about, and I think that makes two of us.

He also tries to smear Tf00t by associating him with trolls who have posted in the comments of his youtube vids.

Wrong again. Wouldn't think of it. I have many criticisms of Thunder's arguments on this topic, but so far I have taken all of them to him directly. I may do so again, only in a public forum this time, but still on the terms of two-way conversation in real time. Whether that discussion will happen hasn't yet been negotiated.[/spoiler]

I believe that the post here: http://freethoughtblogs.com/aronra/2013 ... m-deniers/ is what Katamari Damassi was talking about. The post was by Lilandra, but at first it was mistakenly thought to have been made by AronRa because it was on the Ace of Clades blog.

[Scented Nectar]

[spoiler]

I'm curious what statistics they go by when they say there's been "too many instances of people reporting bad behaviour and unwelcome conduct by fellow attendees." Because by my count, the amount of complaints of harassment or otherwise at this year's TAM was ... zero. And frankly, the other conventions had little no to no complaints as well.

...

When Ashley Miller was accusing DJ Grothe of lying about reports of harassment at TAM, they looked at it thoroughly and found out that Ms. Miller had actually not filed any report at TAM that year. It should surprise nobody, then, that her harassment didn't get reported because there was none. DJ Grothe was also not involved in the incident with Ashley Miller and her perpetrator, only the security at the convention were and the situation dealt with quickly and efficiently. Ms. Miller only thought - presumed - that DJ was involved and therefore saw fit to misrepresent him, the JREF, TAM, for her mistake.

Indeed, surely it's an issue of "too few instances of people reporting bad behaviour and unwelcome conduct", seeing as their argument is that there is a lot of this stuff going on that people are too afraid to talk about.

This is the bit that gets me. If you're being harassed, WTF are you not speaking up about it?

[/spoiler]
In one of Ashley's initial articles on it (her blog just before joining fftb), she admitted (in the comments I think) that well you see, she hadn't actually mentioned the SEXUAL part of what the guy was doing, and that he was just taken away for being a bit too drunk or in the wrong room or something.

Then, as though she thought DJ could mind read, she just stupidly continued to still blame DJ Grothe for not having any record of her sexual harassment happening. I was like, what the fuck??? But there it was, right on her page. I wonder if it's still online or if she's taken it down. I don't remember what her blog used to be called or I'd check.

Found it.
http://ashleyfmiller.wordpress.com/2012 ... mment-3715

[UnbelieveSteve]

Trying to post here using my notebook. Getting returns showing IP blocked for spamming. Funny. It shares the same broadband connection as my mobile device. (tether)
Weird.
Can admin drop me some advice on this or. . . . . anyone here who's seen this sort of thing before?

Are you using any anti-virus software with an active guard?

Solved it.
Cleaned out my notebook. Did a rescan. Reported my IP as AOK.
Back to business as usual.
Fuck you MYKERUUUUU!!
Somehow it's your fault. I know it.

[AbsurdWalls]

[spoiler]

It looks like Aron Ra has finally accepted the FTB/Skepchick kool-aid and posted a defense of all things Twatson.

Really? When did I do that?

He classes patriarchy deniers with moon landing deniers and holocaust deniers.

I never did that either.

Because obviously there is as much evidence for patriarchy as there is for the holocaust, but if you ask to see it you're a misogynist.

I don't know what you're talking about, and I think that makes two of us.

He also tries to smear Tf00t by associating him with trolls who have posted in the comments of his youtube vids.

Wrong again. Wouldn't think of it. I have many criticisms of Thunder's arguments on this topic, but so far I have taken all of them to him directly. I may do so again, only in a public forum this time, but still on the terms of two-way conversation in real time. Whether that discussion will happen hasn't yet been negotiated.

Um, did someone miss something and not notice the post that this is referring to was written by "lilandra"? Even I noticed this.[/spoiler]

That is indeed the confusion that occurred.

[Al Stefanelli]

Sorry if this is a repost. I am about ten pages behind and probably will not catch up until the weekend is done.

Has anyone seen the Change dot Org petition in the form of a letter to,

"The Leaders of Atheist, Skeptical and Secular Groups: Support Feminism and Diversity in the Secular Community"

The petition is by Adam Lee, and singles out Thunderf00t. The petition reads:

[spoiler]To:

Dan Barker and Annie Laurie Gaylor, Co-presidents, Freedom from Religion Foundation
Ronald Lindsay, President, Center for Inquiry
Rebecca Hale, President, American Humanist Association
David Silverman, President, American Atheists
David Niose, President, Secular Coalition for America
August Brunsman, Executive Director, Secular Student Alliance
D.J. Grothe, President, James Randi Educational Foundation
Elisabeth Cornwell, Executive Director, Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science

We, the undersigned, are atheists, skeptics and nonbelievers who value free speech and rational thought and who seek to build a strong, thriving movement that can advocate effectively for these values. We've chosen to put our names to this petition because we want to respond to a video created by a blogger calling himself Thunderfoot. In this video, Thunderfoot attacks named individuals who've been active in promoting diversity and fighting sexism and harassment in our movement. He describes these people as "whiners" and "ultra-PC professional victims" who are "dripp[ing] poison" into the secular community, and urges conference organizers to shun and ignore them.

We hold this and similar complaints from other individuals to be seriously misguided, false in their particulars and harmful to the atheist community as a whole, and we want to set the record straight. We wish to clarify that Thunderfoot and those like him don't speak for us or represent us, and to state our unequivocal support for the following goals:

* We support making the atheist movement more diverse and inclusive. It's long been clear that the skeptical movement has a preponderance of white men. While we don't disdain their participation, we believe skepticism is valuable and important to people in all walks of life, and in accordance with that principle, we consider it vital to have a movement that reflects the demographics of the society we live in. If our community continues to be dominated by white men, it will become increasingly out-of-touch and irrelevant as Western society becomes increasingly multiracial and multicultural and as non-Western countries gain economic and cultural power.

To that end, we urge the atheist and skeptical organizations to make a conscious commitment to diversity: to intentionally reach out to people of all ages, genders and ethnic backgrounds to speak at our conventions, to serve on our boards of directors, and to be the public faces and representatives of skepticism. We believe that there are talented, dedicated and eminently qualified people of every gender and every race, and that seeking them out will strengthen our movement and broaden its appeal.

* We support strong, sensible anti-harassment policies at our gatherings. There have been too many instances of people at atheist conferences reporting bad behavior and unwelcome conduct by fellow attendees. When it's repetitive or especially egregious, this unwelcome conduct may rise to the level of harassment, defined as behavior intended to demean, threaten or intimidate others. We hold that preventing harassment is a legitimate and obvious goal for conference organizers, and that this can be done through the implementation of fairly simple and well-tested conduct policies.

We want to encourage robust debate over opinions and beliefs, as a good rational community should, and we believe that the wide adoption of anti-harassment policies advances this goal by fostering a rational atmosphere of civility and respect, where all people can express their opinions freely and feel comfortable in doing so. We applaud the conferences and organizations that have already created model policies in this regard, and we urge others to do likewise.

* We support the people in our community who've been the target of bullying, harassment and threats. Outside the conference environment, there are prominent members of the atheist community (including most of the people named in Thunderfoot's video) who've been subjected to a vicious and persistent campaign of online harassment, including obsessive streams of slurs and invective, threatening messages, sexually-tinged taunting, and malicious impersonation on social media, all carried out with the goal of bullying them into silence. We stand shoulder-to-shoulder in support of the people who've been harassed in this way, and forcefully and unequivocally condemn those who've carried out the harassment. Unless they change their ways and make amends, they have no place within the movement.

To put a stop to this bad behavior once and for all, we need to change the culture of the atheist movement so that sexism isn't condoned or defended, just as racism and homophobia aren't condoned or defended. We're grateful to the leaders of the movement who've spoken out against harassment, and we encourage all atheists and skeptics, regardless of their influence or prominence, to do likewise.
Sincerely,
[Your name][/spoiler]

[decius]

It looks like Aron Ra has finally accepted the FTB/Skepchick kool-aid and posted a defense of all things Twatson.

Really? When did I do that?

He classes patriarchy deniers with moon landing deniers and holocaust deniers.

I never did that either.

Because obviously there is as much evidence for patriarchy as there is for the holocaust, but if you ask to see it you're a misogynist.

I don't know what you're talking about, and I think that makes two of us.

He also tries to smear Tf00t by associating him with trolls who have posted in the comments of his youtube vids.

Wrong again. Wouldn't think of it. I have many criticisms of Thunder's arguments on this topic, but so far I have taken all of them to him directly. I may do so again, only in a public forum this time, but still on the terms of two-way conversation in real time. Whether that discussion will happen hasn't yet been negotiated.

Cunty Windbag.

It's pretty obvious what was misattributed to whom and how easily that could occur, since it's hosted on your fucking blog.

A single line minus the smug pomposity could have clarified the issue. Go back to the baboon enclosure, before Lord Peezus sees you here.

[cunt]

Hi Aron. Next time you see Matt Dillahunty can you tell him to stop making youtube videos while he's driving.

[Al Stefanelli]

http://www.wcoa.info/amandamisogynist.jpg

A club 'only for misogynsts?'

Jesus fucking Christ...

[JAB]

In one of Ashley's initial articles on it (her blog just before joining fftb), she admitted (in the comments I think) that well you see, she hadn't actually mentioned the SEXUAL part of what the guy was doing, and that he was just taken away for being a bit too drunk or in the wrong room or something.

Then, as though she thought DJ could mind read, she just stupidly continued to still blame DJ Grothe for not having any record of her sexual harassment happening. I was like, what the fuck??? But there it was, right on her page. I wonder if it's still online or if she's taken it down. I don't remember what her blog used to be called or I'd check.

And then, when filling out the questionaire at the end of the conference, again failed to mention it.

There's a well known process that is used to aid in actually changing things in a community and I believe the United Way in the US requires it, or used to. It's called "Outcome Measurement". The idea is that it isn't enough to say you don't like something in society and I'm going to do X about it. If you want to get funding for it you should have to work through the process of writing down clearly what the problem is, how your action is going to change it, and then figure out some way to measure the way your action helps things. In my opinion DJ was trying to do the right thing with the end of conference questionnaire by trying to measure the size of the perceived problem of harassment at TAM. He could then use that as feedback of looking at what policies or education etc had a desirable effect and which were negative. He ran into a bit of a problem that no harassment was reported.

The Skepchicks etc however aren't actually wanting to measure it or, indeed, reduce it. So they don't want it measured. They just want to keep using the "fact" of it politically.

Another example I would say is the number 20% of women will be raped or whatever. When was that measured and how? Has the same survey been done again after all of the "no means no" campaigns to see if they have worked at all. If they worked, what is the current percent? If it's still the same, why haven't you tried another strategy?

The reason why this hasn't been done (or actually I bet it has, but as DJ has shown, you can never make a problem like this look like it's getting smaller) is because these folks aren't interested in solving a problem, just in exploiting it for political gain.

[ReneeHendricks]

http://www.wcoa.info/amandamisogynist.jpg

A club 'only for misogynsts?'

Jesus fucking Christ...

This seems to be something retweeted among several "feminist" atheists/skeptics online. Very, very sad.

[Tkmlac]

It looks like Aron Ra has finally accepted the FTB/Skepchick kool-aid and posted a defense of all things Twatson.

Really? When did I do that?

He classes patriarchy deniers with moon landing deniers and holocaust deniers.

I never did that either.

Because obviously there is as much evidence for patriarchy as there is for the holocaust, but if you ask to see it you're a misogynist.

I don't know what you're talking about, and I think that makes two of us.

He also tries to smear Tf00t by associating him with trolls who have posted in the comments of his youtube vids.

Wrong again. Wouldn't think of it. I have many criticisms of Thunder's arguments on this topic, but so far I have taken all of them to him directly. I may do so again, only in a public forum this time, but still on the terms of two-way conversation in real time. Whether that discussion will happen hasn't yet been negotiated.

I was skeptical of this post because Wednesday night, Aron and Tf00t were on Dogma Debate together (I still have to dl the podcast, so I haven't listened to it). There were three internet atheists that pretty much tipped the scales for me. AronRa, tf00t and Matt Dillahunty. I hate the tribalism that has pitted some against another and what not. I won't ever completely agree with any of them on feminism, but I don't follow them for that and still have a lot of respect for all three.

[codelette]

Regarding the supposed sexism on the "CyberPunk 2077" trailer, at least people complaining can say stuff like "boobs". But, where's the rape culture in this video?
[youtube]rmx4twCK3_I[/youtube]

Melissa McEwan wrote the following turd:

[Content Note: Rape culture.]

I've been meaning for ages to post about this State Farm advert, which I see constantly, and makes my teeth grind every damn time.
[...]
At that moment, we know the man who has arrived to take Jane on a date is a liar who has manipulated her into a date with false information—and that the trusting Jane is evidently too naïve to detect nakedly fraudulent claims. And as he gives a skeevy grin to Mike, Jane's neighbor and apparent friend, that conveys his intentions, Mike merely gazes back at him nonchalantly.

Because that's what guys do, amirite? Bros before hos. I mean, shit, it's like the hugest violation of the Man Code ever to cockblock a total stranger who is almost certainly going to rape your friend.

All of this is played for laughs. And the context in which it is supposed to be funny is a rape culture that tells the damnable lies that coercive sex is not rape, that rape is vanishingly rare, that this scenario is absurd, that it is so far removed from any reality that it's okay to laugh at the creepy man who is luring Jane on a date under false pretenses.

Yeah. Somehow I'm not laughing.

Yep.