Now sponsored by [spoiler]my dick[/spoiler]

[ReneeHendricks]

Getting this man to relax and *not* do stuff is just about impossible.

Now-- Hear me out-- this might be an instance where it is ethical to infect someone with the ReGreta virus. If lounging about all day, doing nothing beyond 'farting' would cause him mental and physical distress, infecting him might, in fact, be the moral thing to do.

:D Which is why I'm making sure everything is done before he gets home. Plus, I'm pulling out a shit ton of vids I know he likes so he'll be trapped in that cycle of "oo, I haven't seen this in a while". Muahahahahaha!

[Zenspace]

:o Hey, I'm OK with all that, but a Frenchman!?!?! We really have to draw the line somewhere, people! :whistle:

Hey! I'm mostly Italian. I just happen to live in Transalpine Gaule*.



*With the caveat that we are still not 100% were Cisalpine Gaule started and were Transalpine Gaule ended. Also, I'm quite happy to live in a department that still holds to its Roman name (Alpes Maritimae). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpes_Maritimae

:lol: Geneology can be really fascinating stuff. Mine is primarily Orkney Scot, which is really mostly Norwegian. Figure a bunch of big guys with a penchant for a good brawl wearing horns and skirts. Fun bunch, yes?

[ReneeHendricks]

Getting this man to relax and *not* do stuff is just about impossible.

Now-- Hear me out-- this might be an instance where it is ethical to infect someone with the ReGreta virus. If lounging about all day, doing nothing beyond 'farting' would cause him mental and physical distress, infecting him might, in fact, be the moral thing to do.

Oh, and a bit of serious advice-- I had to trick partner into taking the pain meds*. "I DONT NEED THE PAIN MEDS BLAH BLAH BLAH", yeah. Pain releases all kinds of inflammatory cytokines, interferes with sleep, interfere with breathing, and Im sure in your case, will interfere with eating-- things necessary for the healing process. He needs to do nothing and get better-- make sure he takes the main meds as prescribed.




* RAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPE!!!!

Yeah. That's the trickiest bit. He's a man who deals with pain on a daily basis (constant pain in his feet - he often feels like he's walking on broken glass).

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

Getting this man to relax and *not* do stuff is just about impossible.

Now-- Hear me out-- this might be an instance where it is ethical to infect someone with the ReGreta virus. If lounging about all day, doing nothing beyond 'farting' would cause him mental and physical distress, infecting him might, in fact, be the moral thing to do.

:D Which is why I'm making sure everything is done before he gets home. Plus, I'm pulling out a shit ton of vids I know he likes so he'll be trapped in that cycle of "oo, I haven't seen this in a while". Muahahahahaha!

That sounds like a very good plan to me!

[cunt]

Yep, Paul Fidalgo will remove comments that hit too close to the bone. Left the one up where I called another poster "darling" though.

[Altair]

:D Which is why I'm making sure everything is done before he gets home. Plus, I'm pulling out a shit ton of vids I know he likes so he'll be trapped in that cycle of "oo, I haven't seen this in a while". Muahahahahaha!

If the vids fail, there's another way to keep a man distracted, and it has an almost 100% success rate.
Just saying :whistle:

[EucliwooItself]

Paradoxically, it seems probable that the 'Pit is actually more racially diverse than A+, it is certainly more ideologically diverse, and it is sure as hell a safer and friendlier place for its posters.[youtube]2msbfN81Gm0[/youtube]

That should be slymepit's new tagline.

[Submariner]

Yeah. I'm not even going to attempt to catch up. So, I hope everyone is doing great and that FfTB/A+ are still giving the gift that keeps on giving :D

Too bad, you missed a few good submarine guy videos :whistle:

[Skep tickle]

Yeah. I'm not even going to attempt to catch up. So, I hope everyone is doing great and that FfTB/A+ are still giving the gift that keeps on giving :D

Hi, Renee, it's good to see you smiling (via smiley, at least). I hope things are going well after your guy's surgery. I'm sending you all my best wishes and lots of e-hugs.

Thanks! My guy is out of ICU and in a regular hospital room. They had to give him insulin yesterday to counteract something else (not sure what that's about but will be finding out later today). He's bored out of his mind so that's a good sign. He'll probably be home tomorrow and we might even hear something about the testing of the mass prior to that (not completely certain).

Now all I have to do is massively clean the house and get everything set before he's home tomorrow. Getting this man to relax and *not* do stuff is just about impossible.

So glad to hear he's come through the surgery well, making progress and will be home soon! Remember to shove stuff into closets and under furniture as you "clean" today. I hear that the Slymepit and candy cane vodka are also helpful to take in during the cleaning process. :D

The insulin would have been for elevated blood sugar. They've almost certainly been giving him IV fluids, which may well contain dextrose, besides which they may have given him a couple of doses of high-dose steroids (like dexamethasone) after surgery to limit swelling in his airway given the surgery to tongue and back of throat, and steroids raise blood sugar. (I don't know if ENT docs give steroids after airway surgery; it's really common after brain surgery, another situation where even short-term swelling could have significant consequences).

[Metalogic42]

Wow, some of the commenters on AVFM are just as crazy as FTB o_O

No; there’s no difference between “radical” feminism and “equity” feminism. Equity feminism is merely the shield the radical feminism uses for plausible deniability reasons. “Radical” feminism are actually the people in control of the feminist movement, they are also in positions of power all across the world working on anti-male legislation.

Then there’s “Radical radical” feminism. You know, the types like “The Femitheist” and “the radfem hub”, but as the agent orange showed even the radical radical feminism is already in positions of power to make legislation. Really, the only difference between “radical” feminism and “radical radical” feminism is that the later comprises themselves of “radical” feminists that have lost patience or their mind, so they are actually spouting their goals; as opposed to keeping them in the shadows.

To not point this out, to not hammer this reality into people’s brains, is to let the hate movement that is feminism continue onward unopposed; and then you can expect the gas chamber one of these days.

[ReneeHendricks]

So glad to hear he's come through the surgery well, making progress and will be home soon! Remember to shove stuff into closets and under furniture as you "clean" today. I hear that the Slymepit and candy cane vodka are also helpful to take in during the cleaning process. :D

The insulin would have been for elevated blood sugar. They've almost certainly been giving him IV fluids, which may well contain dextrose, besides which they may have given him a couple of doses of high-dose steroids (like dexamethasone) after surgery to limit swelling in his airway given the surgery to tongue and back of throat, and steroids raise blood sugar. (I don't know if ENT docs give steroids after airway surgery; it's really common after brain surgery, another situation where even short-term swelling could have significant consequences).

Yep - he had a steriod anti-inflammatory that did exactly that. He told me just a bit ago.

[Submariner]

Hey, Did anyone figure out who that Ragnarok Foghat guy was??

[TFJ]

Altair"

I tried doing a gender reversal, and what I found, sadly based only on anecdotal evidence, is that women seem to react in the opposite way.
Most of the anger and hate seems to be coming from women whose worst experience has been being asked out while in an elevator or mocked on a blog.

There seems to be a number of women who have been actually assaulted and raped, but most of the time they seem to be on the other side, opposing the hate coming from these other women.

That got me thinking, since I would find any anger coming from these women, who have actually been hurt by some men before, understandable while not nice to read.

I don't find that so surprising. It's easy to think of people who commit assault and rape as being fundamentally immoral, or evil. The people who do such things are obvious outliers. The kind of stuff you typically see in a divorce is petty and unnecessarily cruel and vindictive. It's harder to fathom

[cunt]

Wow, some of the commenters on AVFM are just as crazy as FTB o_O

Both sides are pretty crazy in the gender wars. A few of the actual MRA posters (or sympathisers) here manage to make good points every so often, but the Futrelle interpretation is not totally worth ignoring. The MRA movement does seem to be one that attracts genuine misogynists.

It's kind of funny that the FTB crew love Manboobz so much though, while they hate the slymepit with a passion.

[another lurker]

Wow, some of the commenters on AVFM are just as crazy as FTB o_O

No; there’s no difference between “radical” feminism and “equity” feminism. Equity feminism is merely the shield the radical feminism uses for plausible deniability reasons. “Radical” feminism are actually the people in control of the feminist movement, they are also in positions of power all across the world working on anti-male legislation.

Then there’s “Radical radical” feminism. You know, the types like “The Femitheist” and “the radfem hub”, but as the agent orange showed even the radical radical feminism is already in positions of power to make legislation. Really, the only difference between “radical” feminism and “radical radical” feminism is that the later comprises themselves of “radical” feminists that have lost patience or their mind, so they are actually spouting their goals; as opposed to keeping them in the shadows.

To not point this out, to not hammer this reality into people’s brains, is to let the hate movement that is feminism continue onward unopposed; and then you can expect the gas chamber one of these days.

I came across a commenter on AVFM once who was a theist. He posted about how women are destroying the world by getting jobs, and how they should stay home, have babies and clean house, as God intended.

I hate to say, but it was originally comments like that that made me think 'man, MRA's are assholes.'

But, I have since learned NOT to judge the entire movement based on a few fucktards:P And I find myself having more and more empathy with the MRA movement!

But the haters can go fuck themselves, imo.

[Apples]

In comment 52 over at the current Thunderdome, Nerd of Redhead has remounted his hobby horse and is riding again! Interestingly, despite permission from Sheriff Strange Gods Before Me, he has not returned to *POOF*.

It's all, of course, still the usual spittle-flecked and repetitive routine mantra and "this is a SCIENCE blog, you have to provide links to peer-reviewed EVIDENCE" and "welcome to real science." And now introducing.... *FLOOSH*

Just as we don’t understand your lack of reasoning. You aren’t as smart as you think you are. I haven’t seen you cite any evidence to back your OPINION. And as Christopher Hitchens said “that which is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence”. Your whole argument can *FLOOSH* be dismissed as evidenceless drivel, whereas we have a couple of years of evidence showing our null hypotheses are correct.

Heh, heh. Little freudian slip there. I assume, as a self-styled scientistician, he meant that their null hypotheses have been proven incorrect, which would, in most labs, be the sign of a successful hypothesis. But whatevs. Sometimes grampa has some food stuck in his beard. We love him all the same. Floosh!

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... erdome-16/
http://www.freezepage.com/1359315031CZZHTTYPXI

[another lurker]

In comment 52 over at the current Thunderdome, Nerd of Redhead has remounted his hobby horse and is riding again! Interestingly, despite permission from Sheriff Strange Gods Before Me, he has not returned to *POOF*.

It's all, of course, still the usual spittle-flecked and repetitive routine mantra and "this is a SCIENCE blog, you have to provide links to peer-reviewed EVIDENCE" and "welcome to real science." And now introducing.... *FLOOSH*

Just as we don’t understand your lack of reasoning. You aren’t as smart as you think you are. I haven’t seen you cite any evidence to back your OPINION. And as Christopher Hitchens said “that which is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence”. Your whole argument can *FLOOSH* be dismissed as evidenceless drivel, whereas we have a couple of years of evidence showing our null hypotheses are correct.

Heh, heh. Little freudian slip there. I assume, as a self-styled scientistician, he meant that their null hypotheses have been proven incorrect, which would, in most labs, be the sign of a successful hypothesis. But whatevs. Sometimes grampa has some food stuck in his beard. We love him all the same. Floosh!

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... erdome-16/
http://www.freezepage.com/1359315031CZZHTTYPXI

And what is he doing quoting KNOWN EVIL MISOGYNIST HITCHENS???

NERD IS A TRAITOR111!!111

I certainly hope someone calls him on that!

[AndrewV69]

This kind of hyperbolic talk from Ophelia and friends trivializes real violence and redefines all criticism/insult/parody/mockery as potential "abuse," on a par with a felonious assault.

Sorry, but the snide morons pooh-poohing the value of freedom of speech as "freeze peach" can fuck right off. That shit is more chilling and infantile than any static emitted by online trolls.

Well, none of this is new unfortunately, and has been going on for as long as I can remember. If you follow the link that Steersman gave Pinker notes that:
http://www.pasadena.edu/files/syllabi/txcave_18360.pdf

Anyone familiar with academia knows that it breeds ideological cults that are prone to dogma and resistant to criticism.

And it is still going strong today. Combine ideological cults, the viewpoint that disagreeing with you is an act of violence and we get this "freeze peach" mentality in that there is only one acceptable opinion:

‘Not every opinion is valid:’ Carleton University free speech wall torn down within hours
http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/01/22 ... eech-wall/

Only hours after students installed a “Free Speech Wall” at Carleton University to prove that campus free speech was alive and well, it was torn down by an activist who claimed the wall was an “act of violence,” against the gay community.

I have mentioned this before and I think it merits repeating, we are looking at the difference between modern and the latest postmodern styles of discourse as noted in cases of academic mobbing.

http://arts.uwaterloo.ca/~kwesthue/regiftedxmas12.html

Postmodern discourse
Over the past half century, a competing mode of discourse, the one I call postmodern, has become steadily more entrenched in academe. Following are ten of its hallmarks, as Roberts and Sailer describe on their blogs:
• "persons and positions are ordinarily closely related," with little insistence on keeping personal identity separate from the questions or issues under discussion;
• "sensitivity, inclusivity, and inoffensiveness are key values";
• priority on "cooperation, collaboration, quietness, sedentariness, empathy, equality, non-competitiveness, conformity, a communal focus";
• "seems lacking in rationality and ideological challenge," in the eyes of proponents of modern discourse;
• tends to perceive the satire and criticism of modern discourse as "vicious and personal attack, driven by a hateful animus";
• is oriented to " the standard measures of grades, tests, and a closely defined curriculum";
• lacking "means by which to negotiate or accommodate such intractable differences within its mode of conversation," it will "typically resort to the most fiercely antagonistic, demonizing, and personal attacks upon the opposition";
• "will typically try, not to answer opponents with better arguments, but to silence them completely as ‘hateful’, ‘intolerant’, ‘bigoted’, ‘misogynistic’, ‘homophobic’, etc.";
• has a more feminine flavour, as opposed to the more masculine flavour of modern discourse;
• results in "stale monologues" and contexts that "seldom produce strong thought, but rather tend to become echo chambers."



When competing discourses collide

Roberts's original post describes the competing modes of discourse in rich detail and shows how differences between them play out in today's culture wars, as "offense-takers" and "offense trolls" use "human shields" and accusations of "hate speech" to silence opponents. That entire post, long as it is, merits close reading. For present purposes I highlight just one of Roberts's hypotheses: "Lacking a high tolerance for difference and disagreement, sensitivity-driven discourses will typically manifest a herding effect. Dissenting voices can be scapegoated or excluded and opponents will be sharply attacked." This is but another way of saying that proponents of the postmodern mode of discourse have a tendency to engage in workplace mobbing, that is, to gang up on opponents and run them out of their jobs. Scapegoating and mobbing, so I have argued elsewhere, are pretty much the same thing. Roberts's use of the former term probably derives in part from his reading of René Girard, the world's foremost student of scapegoating, a wise scholar from whom I myself have learned a lot.

There is a biological/genetic/behavioural explanation for this: A relatively small amygdala has been linked to all kinds of pathologies:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amygdala

I encourage you to do your own GoogleFu on this to see for yourself what manner of topics, subjects, papers, studies on the subject pop up.

In any event I picked this one because it reminds me of PeeZuss Christ, Twatson, and Laden:
http://www.upenn.edu/pennnews/current/node/4183

Raine and his colleagues have demonstrated that adult psychopaths have an amygdala that is 18 percent smaller in size compared to normal controls. The amygdala is part of the brain’s limbic system that is critical for emotion, especially for fear conditioning.
Psychopaths also showed lower activity in the amygdala when confronted with moral dilemmas as compared to controls. Raine says this suggests that, “psychopaths know right from wrong, but they do not have the feeling of what is right and what is wrong.”

*shrug*

Next time you ask yourself "what is wrong with these people?" the answer is simple: "brain damage"

[rayshul]

How does your guy feel about video games and puzzles? They're a good way to keep a man resting but still brainly-active.

[ThreeFlangedJavis]

Wow, some of the commenters on AVFM are just as crazy as FTB o_O

No; there’s no difference between “radical” feminism and “equity” feminism. Equity feminism is merely the shield the radical feminism uses for plausible deniability reasons. “Radical” feminism are actually the people in control of the feminist movement, they are also in positions of power all across the world working on anti-male legislation.

Then there’s “Radical radical” feminism. You know, the types like “The Femitheist” and “the radfem hub”, but as the agent orange showed even the radical radical feminism is already in positions of power to make legislation. Really, the only difference between “radical” feminism and “radical radical” feminism is that the later comprises themselves of “radical” feminists that have lost patience or their mind, so they are actually spouting their goals; as opposed to keeping them in the shadows.

To not point this out, to not hammer this reality into people’s brains, is to let the hate movement that is feminism continue onward unopposed; and then you can expect the gas chamber one of these days.

Possibly a little conspiracy theory laden, but not necessarily so. Harriet Harman, quite senior in the last UK Labour Gov, is quite the radfem and a poster on radfemhub, although I would need to see evidence that she had access to the 'inner sanctum' where social workers referred to boys as 'little rapists'. The involvement of Swedish radfems in Govt has been well documented (ask Scented about that). See what Erin Pizzey has to say about how well her message goes down. Consider the UN's stipulation that aid to African rape victims go to women only despite the fact that almost all of the male prisoners in the various Central African conflicts are raped, according to some aid workers. I believe H. Clinton had something to do with that. The reluctance to criticise Valerie Solanas by some supposed moderates might suggest something. Admittedly I don't have links to this stuff because I'm horrendous at bookmarking, but google it if you are interested. Is the infiltration of radfemminess into mainstream politics that far-fetched considering some of the shite that comes out of both left and right these days?

[soldierwhy]

And now introducing.... *FLOOSH*

I don't think he has seen definitions 4, 5 and 7 on the urban dictionary:

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=floosh

How hard would it be to get those at the top?

[somedumbguy]

In comment 52 over at the current Thunderdome, Nerd of Redhead has remounted his hobby horse and is riding again! Interestingly, despite permission from Sheriff Strange Gods Before Me, he has not returned to *POOF*.

It's all, of course, still the usual spittle-flecked and repetitive routine mantra and "this is a SCIENCE blog, you have to provide links to peer-reviewed EVIDENCE" and "welcome to real science." And now introducing.... *FLOOSH*

Just as we don’t understand your lack of reasoning. You aren’t as smart as you think you are. I haven’t seen you cite any evidence to back your OPINION. And as Christopher Hitchens said “that which is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence”. Your whole argument can *FLOOSH* be dismissed as evidenceless drivel, whereas we have a couple of years of evidence showing our null hypotheses are correct.

Heh, heh. Little freudian slip there. I assume, as a self-styled scientistician, he meant that their null hypotheses have been proven incorrect, which would, in most labs, be the sign of a successful hypothesis. But whatevs. Sometimes grampa has some food stuck in his beard. We love him all the same. Floosh!

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... erdome-16/
http://www.freezepage.com/1359315031CZZHTTYPXI

I truly, and mean truly, believe you have a different sort of null hypothesis than those self-assured scientifically illiterate arrogant social justice warrior assholes.

(Here is a scientist in another field that also wants to change the notion of null hypothesis:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 120223.htm)

[Apples]

Is the infiltration of radfemminess into mainstream politics that far-fetched considering some of the shite that comes out of both left and right these days?

Perhaps not -- but the "you can expect the gas chamber one of these days" does tend to make one take the whole argument less seriously.

[Submariner]

Ha. I remember bug juice, too.

[youtube]GGKEyIO4-xo[/youtube]

[Dick Strawkins]

In comment 52 over at the current Thunderdome, Nerd of Redhead has remounted his hobby horse and is riding again! Interestingly, despite permission from Sheriff Strange Gods Before Me, he has not returned to *POOF*.

It's all, of course, still the usual spittle-flecked and repetitive routine mantra and "this is a SCIENCE blog, you have to provide links to peer-reviewed EVIDENCE" and "welcome to real science." And now introducing.... *FLOOSH*

Just as we don’t understand your lack of reasoning. You aren’t as smart as you think you are. I haven’t seen you cite any evidence to back your OPINION. And as Christopher Hitchens said “that which is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence”. Your whole argument can *FLOOSH* be dismissed as evidenceless drivel, whereas we have a couple of years of evidence showing our null hypotheses are correct.

Heh, heh. Little freudian slip there. I assume, as a self-styled scientistician, he meant that their null hypotheses have been proven incorrect, which would, in most labs, be the sign of a successful hypothesis. But whatevs. Sometimes grampa has some food stuck in his beard. We love him all the same. Floosh!

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... erdome-16/
http://www.freezepage.com/1359315031CZZHTTYPXI

Is Nerd really sure he wants to stick with "Floosh"?

According to the online Urban Dictionary:

floosh

Floosh: A female ejaculation that goes everywhere all over the place; squirt
damn that girl flooshed all over my body, wow!
15 14
Floosh

In the same way that cunt is an extremely bad word for vagina, floosh is an extremely bad word for ass hole.
"That girl is such a floosh!"
5 4
floosh

1.a word to show excitement

2.an ugh-oh moment

3.Derek Cadiere
1. I went to the store and saw a gangster and i was all like "FLOOSH"

2.Little kid: I made a floosh mommy!
Mommy: what the fuck did you do?
little kid: i saw daddy in the pool and he was floatin like ma dead fish and you said if ma fish floated i had to flush him so i pulled daddy's plug!
Mommy: FLOOSH he didnt rewrite his will yet I'M FUCKING RICH FLOOSH FLOOSH

3. Did you see the floosh's face when he saw me in booksamillion. the only reason that dumbass floosh left was because he was with a fat ass chick who wasnt his girlfriend and I'm telling lacy!!!!!!!!!
7 9
floosh

a fanny fart - means the same as queef but sounds way better. can also be used as an insult
'that girl made a rumbling sound'

'dude she totally just flooshed'

'alright dan?'

'go away you fuckin floosh'

[AndrewV69]

Wow, some of the commenters on AVFM are just as crazy as FTB o_O

No; there’s no difference between “radical” feminism and “equity” feminism. Equity feminism is merely the shield the radical feminism uses for plausible deniability reasons. “Radical” feminism are actually the people in control of the feminist movement, they are also in positions of power all across the world working on anti-male legislation.

Then there’s “Radical radical” feminism. You know, the types like “The Femitheist” and “the radfem hub”, but as the agent orange showed even the radical radical feminism is already in positions of power to make legislation. Really, the only difference between “radical” feminism and “radical radical” feminism is that the later comprises themselves of “radical” feminists that have lost patience or their mind, so they are actually spouting their goals; as opposed to keeping them in the shadows.

To not point this out, to not hammer this reality into people’s brains, is to let the hate movement that is feminism continue onward unopposed; and then you can expect the gas chamber one of these days.

His issue is that he is blending and extending differences into one mass. Not that he is completely wrong wrong about "positions of power to make legislation", all you have to do is look up Critical Law Theory and review the body of work by Catherine Anne MacKinnon:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catharine_MacKinnon

Of course there is a difference between “radical” feminism and “equity” feminism, but for some people
certain court ruling like the recent one here in Canukistan may lead to the perhaps not unreasonable suspicion that it is all but legal for a woman to kill any man she pleases:

See the husband in the Nova Scotia hitman case deny allegations he pursued a ‘reign of terror’ against his wife
http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/01/21 ... hael-ryan/

One comment:

It should be understood now that in Canada, a woman may kill a man who no longer even lives near her simply because she feels he is abusive somehow. Canada, why don't you just make it a right for women to kill men at their own discretion, or reduce it to a minor misdemeanor or something? It'll save the Crown money and at least put men on notice that any woman may kill them at any time by merely claiming abuse.

Teacher Nicole Ryan hires hitman to kill ex husband – Supreme Court sets her free
http://www.avoiceformen.com/video/teach ... -her-free/

Anyway, like I said in an earlier post, the MRM is too young. Give us time and we will eventually produce lunacies that will have the Radfems astounded and consumed in envy, if not awe.

I can hardly wait. :popcorn:

(Cue the theory that the powers that be decided it was better to deal with King than Malcom X)

[Tigzy]

And now introducing.... *FLOOSH*

I don't think he has seen definitions 4, 5 and 7 on the urban dictionary:

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=floosh

How hard would it be to get those at the top?

:lol: Yeah, I'd heard 'floosh' in connection with a ladysquirt. Poor old Nerd, what a weak-minded dotard. Still, I notice he didn't stick with 'foof'. Guess someone took some advice from the Slymepit there.

You know, one day someone is going to write a Javascript Nerd of Redhead random phrase generator, and no-one will be able to tell the difference.

[another lurker]

My boyfriend's aunt murdered her husband (with a knife). She is a complete and total psychopath. She is complete and utter scum and the lowest of the low.

Of course, and not unsurprisingly, she brought out the whole 'he was abusive line' - which was a total lie!

It is upsetting to see how women can literally get away with murder simply by claiming that the guy was abusive. For the record, she did not get away with it, and is now in prison!

[BarnOwl]

It looks like this is becoming an increasingly common sentiment in the FTB/A+ community. And quite frankly, it's bullshit. It baffles me how people on their side can't see it for what it is - an attempt to guilt-trip opponents and control the conversation. Or maybe that's what they all want? Fortunately for us though, I think this right here is what makes so many people make the jump to the 'pit. They spout all this "yeah, you can't understand what it's like" stuff, then one day, they're the one who can't understand, even though they actually do. Then it becomes apparent what bullshit it actually is.

Sorry to dredge this up from a previous page, but I was out exercising my privilege horses.

Understanding the situations and struggles of others doesn't require that we have the same experiences. That's what empathy and language are for (though A+ Grimalkin seems to believe that we "neurotypicals" are devoid of empathy). Empathy and language are basic human characteristics - so basic, in fact, that deficits in either or both define autism spectrum disorders. The A+ continent, and many of the FtBers and Skepchicks, make this mistake over and over again, or perhaps it's deliberate. People can refuse to listen, and they can fail to be empathetic, but it's ridiculous to dismiss everyone with "You can't possibly understand blah blah because you haven't lived it."

What the A+ contingent definitely don't seem to want are solutions to their problems. Don't like the clothing choices available in your locale or country? Well, why not make your own clothes in an inexpensive and relatively easy manner, then?

NO!!! DO NOT WANT!!! You can't possibly understand what it's like to be oppressed by your clothing!!!!

Don't like the expense of restaurant meals, or have dietary restrictions or budget constraints? Well, why not prepare your own meals from fresh, healthy, and inexpensive ingredients, then?

NO!!! DO NOT WANT!!!! You can't possibly understand what it's like to have sequencing problems, three bazillion imaginary food sensitivities, and the calorie requirements of an ultramarathoner!!!

And so on, and so on, and so on ....

[Tony Parsehole]

Does Nerd of Redhead ever cite scientific papers himself?
Just askin'.

[Metalogic42]

[="BarnOwl"]NO!!! DO NOT WANT!!!! You can't possibly understand what it's like to have sequencing problems, three bazillion imaginary food sensitivities, and the calorie requirements of an ultramarathoner!!![/quote]

Ahahahahaha! But yeah, solutions are anathema to them. Ironically, some of the people opposed to their professional victimhood *do* know what its like, because they have the same problems. But they don't know that, because not everyone with those problems is a whiny little bitch.

[Metalogic42]

The above post is what happens when I'm too lazy to open the full editor. Feel free to throw gendered slurs my way.

[16bitheretic]

Thanks! My guy is out of ICU and in a regular hospital room. They had to give him insulin yesterday to counteract something else (not sure what that's about but will be finding out later today). He's bored out of his mind so that's a good sign. He'll probably be home tomorrow and we might even hear something about the testing of the mass prior to that (not completely certain).

Now all I have to do is massively clean the house and get everything set before he's home tomorrow. Getting this man to relax and *not* do stuff is just about impossible.

Great news! Hope the tests come out well.

Dunno what to tell you on the making him stay put, chloroform maybe?
I keed, I keed

[BarnOwl]

Solutions would deprive the A+ers of their victim status, and would often entail actual, you know, work.

My other social media hangout is Ravelry, and I'm tempted to contrast the solutions and discussions on Ravelry forums with those on related A+ forums. Ravelry has loads of forums on clothing and food options for people on limited budgets, with fiber or food sensitivities, with disabilities, with ethical constraints, with environmental or social justice concerns, etc. But the Ravelry citizenry tends to focus on solutions.

[LMU]

mood2 gives ceepolk a piece of their mind. Get it before it's gone: atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=716&p=67103#p67103

[Tony Parsehole]

Broken link LMU

[LMU]

:oops: trying again: http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic ... 103#p67103

[Steersman]

Steersman. I have you on "ignore" for what I consider good reason.
…
How on earth do you manage to say so much, yet be so utterly vapid?

The more I read about the topic the more convinced I am that gender-equity feminism manifests a significant and decidedly problematic watershed in the movement.

What the flying fucking fuck does that even mean, for fux sake?

I take it then that you didn’t read the section of Pinker’s The Blank Slate I referenced? Nor are much familiar with the undercurrents that recently motivated Watson’s attempted hatchet-job of evolutionary psychology?

A type-sample of that to which I refer.
A non-response that not only does not even attempt to answer a direct question "What the flying fucking fuck does that even mean, for fux sake?", but distracts with a totally irrelevant fucking side question.

Considering that more than a few here apparently managed to see what I was getting at you might want to consider the possibilities that I’m not speaking Urdu as you suggested and that the problem is less with the transmitter than with the receiver.

But since one might argue that one can lead some Aussies to a syllogism even if one can’t make them think, at least without cutting up the components of the argument into smaller bite-sized chunks, my statement – “gender-equity feminism manifests a significant and decidedly problematic watershed in the movement” – qualifies as the abstract to Pinker’s synopsis in the linked chapter of his. Not much point to the abstract section of a document if you quote the entire document in that section.

And since even that might not suffice to get the point through your apparently rather thick skull, let me try rephrasing that statement in point form, starting with a definition from a dictionary which, apparently, some Aussies have never heard of or don’t know how to use:

1) watershed: “A critical point that marks a division or a change of course; a turning point”;
2) the gender-equity division in feminism seems predicated, in part, on the nature-nurture dichotomy and debate;
3) a significant percentage of feminists – those subscribing to gender feminism – largely repudiate the idea that genetics has any influence on human behaviour – i.e., they believe, rather dogmatically, that human psychology is entirely a matter of nurture, that gender is a social construct;
4) the foregoing largely flies in the face of significant amounts of credible science, notably evolutionary psychology and behavioral genetics;
5) that repudiation constitutes some problematic anti-intellectualism and science denialism – the implications and consequences of which are profound and far-reaching;
6) hence, that issue constitutes a significant watershed, a turning point, in both feminism and its credibility in the broader discourse.

Pointed enough for you?

Wassa matta? Scared of telling the truth about your multiple inadequacies and feel the need to deflect direct questioning to others who have zero idea of your thought-processes, such as they may be?

What a dick-head. That you need spoon-feeding is my fault?

[Gumby]

mood2 gives ceepolk a piece of their mind. Get it before it's gone: atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=716&p=67103#p67103

For posterity, in case it gets memory-holed:

ceepolk, trying to justify why the A+ forum treats everybody not in the "in-group" like dog shit:

Exactly. Exactly. What wound up happening is that a lot of people who have been immersed in talking about these issues for years, sometimes to each other, and sometimes not, came to this forum expecting a space where third years, final years, and graduate students could talk to each other. Each other. It's never been a secret. And if it has a forbidding atmosphere to somebody who just walked into the department by mistake, well. I can understand that. I'm not even a little bit moved to change it.

And mood2 gives ceepolk the business:

So now the trolls have mostly lost interest in this place, and it's become clear this is only intended to be a 'safe space' for the in-group, I take it this is the new meme which is supposed to justify treating anyone who not in the in group like a piece of shit.

Unfortunately some genuinely vulnerable people still buy into your self-aggrandising, self-justifying, self-self-self bullshit. And as the supply of noobs runs out for you to pick over and bully, there's no reason why this current self-justification can't be turned on any In Group member who falls out of favour.

You might have the jargon down pat, and a technical menu of SJ ideas to pick from to selectively use against people, but you show little grasp of the underlying principles of fairness and solidarity. And you've helped turn the idea of A+ from something which could have grown into a positive movement for change into your own tiny personal club. Where you get to talk the talk endessly without actually doing anything, make up never-ending rules to use as gotchas when desired, and 'discipline' anybody who disagrees or doesn't play your games your way. Or just bow to your self-proclaimed expertise and authority. Why anyone takes you half as seriously as you take yourself is beyond me.

Making you, piegasm and flewellyn mods here was a serious mistake. And as you're clearly much more committed to your power games than the welfare of the people who come here to give their own perspectives on SJ issues, it's not going to change. You're never going to give up your mighty ban stick. And you'll continue to use it to disappear dissenters.

It's clear to me why you're 'not even a little bit moved to change it'.

:clap:

[Tigzy]

@LMU

A fine and apt vent by Mood2 there. Have snipped and plonked it onto the old HDD. Worthy of being reproduced here, I think:

Re: Are the moderators here censorious, capricious and biase

Postby mood2 » Sun Jan 27, 2013 8:37 pm
Ceepolk -

Exactly. Exactly. What wound up happening is that a lot of people who have been immersed in talking about these issues for years, sometimes to each other, and sometimes not, came to this forum expecting a space where third years, final years, and graduate students could talk to each other. Each other. It's never been a secret. And if it has a forbidding atmosphere to somebody who just walked into the department by mistake, well. I can understand that. I'm not even a little bit moved to change it.

So now the trolls have mostly lost interest in this place, and it's become clear this is only intended to be a 'safe space' for the in-group, I take it this is the new meme which is supposed to justify treating anyone who not in the in group like a piece of shit.

Unfortunately some genuinely vulnerable people still buy into your self-aggrandising, self-justifying, self-self-self bullshit. And as the supply of noobs runs out for you to pick over and bully, there's no reason why this current self-justification can't be turned on any In Group member who falls out of favour.


You might have the jargon down pat, and a technical menu of SJ ideas to pick from to selectively use against people, but you show little grasp of the underlying principles of fairness and solidarity. And you've helped turn the idea of A+ from something which could have grown into a positive movement for change into your own tiny personal club. Where you get to talk the talk endessly without actually doing anything, make up never-ending rules to use as gotchas when desired, and 'discipline' anybody who disagrees or doesn't play your games your way. Or just bow to your self-proclaimed expertise and authority. Why anyone takes you half as seriously as you take yourself is beyond me.


Making you, piegasm and flewellyn mods here was a serious mistake. And as you're clearly much more committed to your power games than the welfare of the people who come here to give their own perspectives on SJ issues, it's not going to change. You're never going to give up your mighty ban stick. And you'll continue to use it to disappear dissenters.


It's clear to me why you're 'not even a little bit moved to change it'.

http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic ... 103#p67103

[Tony Parsehole]

:oops: trying again: http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic ... 103#p67103

Nice. Telling it like it is.

You might have the jargon down pat, and a technical menu of SJ ideas to pick from to selectively use against people, but you show little grasp of the underlying principles of fairness and solidarity. And you've helped turn the idea of A+ from something which could have grown into a positive movement for change into your own tiny personal club. Where you get to talk the talk endessly without actually doing anything, make up never-ending rules to use as gotchas when desired, and 'discipline' anybody who disagrees or doesn't play your games your way. Or just bow to your self-proclaimed expertise and authority. Why anyone takes you half as seriously as you take yourself is beyond me.

[another lurker]

:oops: trying again: http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic ... 103#p67103

And surprise surprise, the best 'rebuttal' anyone can come up with is 'check your privilege:

Onamission 5 wrote: I see we're going to try and revive the personal attack tactic. Mood2, I recommend you read moar. Take heed that your perspective may be based in certain status quo privileged attitudes, and try to see those places where your hackles go up as a challenge to learn what life is truly like from another pov. Do some reading on being an ally. Do some reading on what it's like to have to babystep potential allies through their bullcrap over and over and over again. Do some reading from earlier on the board and see what it's like for marginalised folks when the type of atmosphere you seem to be lobbying for happens.

I hate to break it to you, but the trolls have not decided to leave us alone. You can thank the mods' banhammer happy keyboards for that not having affected you as much as it's affected some of the members in longer standing.

[Tony Parsehole]

:oops: trying again: http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic ... 103#p67103

And surprise surprise, the best 'rebuttal' anyone can come up with is 'check your privilege:

Onamission 5 wrote: I see we're going to try and revive the personal attack tactic. Mood2, I recommend you read moar. Take heed that your perspective may be based in certain status quo privileged attitudes, and try to see those places where your hackles go up as a challenge to learn what life is truly like from another pov. Do some reading on being an ally. Do some reading on what it's like to have to babystep potential allies through their bullcrap over and over and over again. Do some reading from earlier on the board and see what it's like for marginalised folks when the type of atmosphere you seem to be lobbying for happens.

I hate to break it to you, but the trolls have not decided to leave us alone. You can thank the mods' banhammer happy keyboards for that not having affected you as much as it's affected some of the members in longer standing.

That reads as "FUK U NOOOB!"

[Gumby]

Cipher chips in with:

The fact that the forums aside from I&A were meant for upper-level discussion of SJ issues was never a secret, and is not a "new meme." I knew it before I joined here, and therefore took my ignorance of certain issues (sex work) to what was at the time the Education forum before being asked; I'll probably end up spending some time over there wrt race and workers' rights at some point in the future because I am lacking necessary historical knowledge. It's got nothing to do with bullying; it has always been fundamental to the purpose and setup of the forums, and is why there's a separate I&A section.

http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic ... 105#p67105

WRONG WRONG WRONG. Bad idea or not, Atheism+, forum and all, was envisioned by Jennifer McCreight to be inclusive of everybody who wanted to be part of it, not a private club for pretentious Social Justice Studies 301 wankers.

See what happens when you don't pay attention to the development your Big Idea, Jen?

[cunt]

I like the fact they still don't get anything. Even as every other post on their forum is from a mod/admin/setar/cipher. Brick-headed.

[Metalogic42]

I like the fact they still don't get anything. Even as every other post on their forum is from a mod/admin/setar/cipher. Brick-headed.

They're the Xie-Man Privilege Haters Club.

[AbsurdWalls]

:oops: trying again: http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic ... 103#p67103

And surprise surprise, the best 'rebuttal' anyone can come up with is 'check your privilege:

Onamission 5 wrote: I see we're going to try and revive the personal attack tactic. Mood2, I recommend you read moar. Take heed that your perspective may be based in certain status quo privileged attitudes, and try to see those places where your hackles go up as a challenge to learn what life is truly like from another pov. Do some reading on being an ally. Do some reading on what it's like to have to babystep potential allies through their bullcrap over and over and over again. Do some reading from earlier on the board and see what it's like for marginalised folks when the type of atmosphere you seem to be lobbying for happens.

I hate to break it to you, but the trolls have not decided to leave us alone. You can thank the mods' banhammer happy keyboards for that not having affected you as much as it's affected some of the members in longer standing.

This, and her follow-up reply, demonstrate that "professional victim" idea in a much stronger way than is shown typically. In the in-group of A+ we have a group of people who are arguably disadvantaged in some way, and who have turned their attention to studying and shaping their understanding of that disadvantage. They've done this to the extent that they think to disagree with how they feel about being a X or Y is to be anti-X. The arrogance of their position really comes out when you consider that they will mouth off about these privilege and 'splaining concepts to other people who are also X (and who disagree with their position).

[Steersman]

Steersman. I have you on "ignore" for what I consider good reason.
…
How on earth do you manage to say so much, yet be so utterly vapid?

The more I read about the topic the more convinced I am that gender-equity feminism manifests a significant and decidedly problematic watershed in the movement.

What the flying fucking fuck does that even mean, for fux sake?

I take it then that you didn’t read the section of Pinker’s The Blank Slate I referenced? Nor are much familiar with the undercurrents that recently motivated Watson’s attempted hatchet-job of evolutionary psychology? On the assumption that your answers to one or both of those are “no”, here are, hopefully, a couple of salient quotes from Pinker that might provide some illumination:

….
Equity feminism is a moral doctrine about equal treatment that makes no commitments regarding open empirical issues in psychology or biology. Gender feminism is an empirical doctrine committed to three claims about human nature. The first is that the differences between men and women have nothing to do with biology but are socially constructed in their entirety.
….

Exactly.

To answer the “SAT question” posed: Creationism is to feminism as evolution is to X?

Considering that both creationism and feminism (in its gender form at least) are dogmatic and faith based, and that evolution is, more or less, the wooden stake through the heart of the former, one can argue that X is “evolutionary psychology and behavioral genetics” ….

[Trophy]

On other news, Jerry Coyne is turning to a political moron. His latest post is about a cartoon on London Times that is supposed to be anti-semitic. The cartoon depicts Netanhayoo. So basically, back to playing the victimhood card that criticism of Israeli leaders is anti-semitism.

I would have challenged Jerry if I were not banned from whyevolutionistrue for calling Pat Condell a racist asshole.

[Scented Nectar]

Wow, some of the commenters on AVFM are just as crazy as FTB o_O

No; there’s no difference between “radical” feminism and “equity” feminism. Equity feminism is merely the shield the radical feminism uses for plausible deniability reasons. “Radical” feminism are actually the people in control of the feminist movement, they are also in positions of power all across the world working on anti-male legislation.

Then there’s “Radical radical” feminism. You know, the types like “The Femitheist” and “the radfem hub”, but as the agent orange showed even the radical radical feminism is already in positions of power to make legislation. Really, the only difference between “radical” feminism and “radical radical” feminism is that the later comprises themselves of “radical” feminists that have lost patience or their mind, so they are actually spouting their goals; as opposed to keeping them in the shadows.

To not point this out, to not hammer this reality into people’s brains, is to let the hate movement that is feminism continue onward unopposed; and then you can expect the gas chamber one of these days.

Possibly a little conspiracy theory laden, but not necessarily so. Harriet Harman, quite senior in the last UK Labour Gov, is quite the radfem and a poster on radfemhub, although I would need to see evidence that she had access to the 'inner sanctum' where social workers referred to boys as 'little rapists'. The involvement of Swedish radfems in Govt has been well documented (ask Scented about that). See what Erin Pizzey has to say about how well her message goes down. Consider the UN's stipulation that aid to African rape victims go to women only despite the fact that almost all of the male prisoners in the various Central African conflicts are raped, according to some aid workers. I believe H. Clinton had something to do with that. The reluctance to criticise Valerie Solanas by some supposed moderates might suggest something. Admittedly I don't have links to this stuff because I'm horrendous at bookmarking, but google it if you are interested. Is the infiltration of radfemminess into mainstream politics that far-fetched considering some of the shite that comes out of both left and right these days?

Here's a taste of what was current in Sweden in 2005. Note also that Sweden had their feminist belief in satanic child rape in the 2000s, a couple decades late to the false memory game, but chock full of the paranoid hate/fear and without evidence.

[youtube]yn3cHsHnUPM[/youtube]

I also wrote an article about it here:
http://scentednectar.blogspot.com/2012/ ... riget.html where I talk about how I naively tried to tell PZ about it (before EG happened), thinking at the time that he was actually against sexism and false beliefs in satan. Hahahah, yeah right, eh?

[Lsuoma]

On other news, Jerry Coyne is turning to a political moron. His latest post is about a cartoon on London Times that is supposed to be anti-semitic. The cartoon depicts Netanhayoo. So basically, back to playing the victimhood card that criticism of Israeli leaders is anti-semitism.

I would have challenged Jerry if I were not banned from whyevolutionistrue for calling Pat Condell a racist asshole.

Yeah, I saw that. Coyne was complaining that Scarfe gave Netenyahoo a big nose. Guess he knows nothing of Scarfe and his work.

[Tigzy]

On other news, Jerry Coyne is turning to a political moron. His latest post is about a cartoon on London Times that is supposed to be anti-semitic. The cartoon depicts Netanhayoo. So basically, back to playing the victimhood card that criticism of Israeli leaders is anti-semitism.

I would have challenged Jerry if I were not banned from whyevolutionistrue for calling Pat Condell a racist asshole.

At first glance, the Netanyahu figure does have a disconcerting tinge of the kind of anti-semitic cariacatures seen in wartime Nazi propaganda. But then again, this is the work of Gerald Scarfe, who is notorious for his often disturbing grotequerie - and he makes everyone appear grotesque, no matter what their ethnicity.

Thatcher, for instance:
http://www.port.ac.uk/uopnews/wp-conten ... actyl2.jpg

[Trophy]

Yeah, I saw that. Coyne was complaining that Scarfe gave Netenyahoo a big nose. Guess he knows nothing of Scarfe and his work.

Besides, the nose doesn't look like the "stereo-typical" anti-semite Jewish nose.

[Apples]

I truly, and mean truly, believe you have a different sort of null hypothesis than those self-assured scientifically illiterate arrogant social justice warrior assholes.

(Here is a scientist in another field that also wants to change the notion of null hypothesis:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 120223.htm)

I'm sure you're right, in the sense that your null is "that which is presumptively assumed to be true." But, regardless, scientific work doesn't technically involve trying to prove your null hypothesis. If that's what you're doing, you're not doing hypothesis testing.

The SJWs have "reversed the null" in the sense that they say, "harassment is rampant in the atheoskeptic community" -- burden of proof on those who disagree. Of course, if they wanted to be sciencey about it, they'd need to define "rampant" precisely, in a way that could be unrejected/rejected by experiment. To scientifically "prove" rampant harassment, they'd need to take as their null some specified low number that would count as "non-rampant" and then nullify it with good evidence.

This obviously hasn't happened, which is why they were so excited about the nonsense numbers from Secular Census. In fact, the best evidence we have (from DJ Grothe) indicated that the problem is very, very minor. The SJWs will declare victory / cry foul regardless of the data, because they've already showed that they are incapable of skepticism and impervious to disconfirming evidence. In their view, it's immoral to even ask the question if Saints Becky and Ophelia and Peezus have already dispensed their papal bullshit on the subject.

Of course, if they are unwilling to define their terms precisely and use specific numbers, there's really nothing to discuss, from a skeptical/scientific point of view. It's just a food fight, which suits baboons just fine.

As for Trenberth/Judith Curry, I'll stick my neck out and say that atheoskeptics should be willing to give some slack to "climate skeptics" and avoid calling them deniers. Some science is politicized and uncertainties are minimized by those who have a lot of reputational investment (and a lot of grant money) sunk into their attempted disproofs of the null. The basically flat global temps over the last 15 years have busted a lot of model projections, so global warming is looking a lot less catastrophic and climate sensitivity lower than originally feared. Spiegel Online has an interesting 8-part series on this: http://www.spiegel.de/international/wor ... 86697.html

[AbsurdWalls]

Heh. Glob the Funct, the A-plusser who wrote a completely innocent limerick about bankers and ended up being shamed and temp-banned in the aftermath, came back to start a thread titled, "Kafkaesque."

I was banned for a week, for reasons I'm still not clear about.
When I asked for clarification, I was told by a moderator to drop the issue, or my ban would become permanent.

This bothers me deeply.
Is there not a safe space within a safe space where we can discuss this openly?

Right, so permaban it is then...

Gotta love the "off with his head!" efficiency of these folks.
http://amodernmilitarymother.com/wp-con ... r-head.jpg

http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=3782

Glob fought against apartheid in South Africa and was persecuted by the police for it (he received death threats and had his comings-and-goings restricted).

Even that didn't prepare him for the A+ forums!

[cunt]

You really know you've pwned an argument when the only response you get is a ban and people saying "nuh-uh". Sorry Stacy, I can't comment any more on Pauly-boys blog.

[AndrewV69]

What a dick-head. That you need spoon-feeding is my fault?

*spew*

Fucking coffee, nose, keyboard.

(For those not in the know: Steersman has stood trial on more than one occasion (with justification) that he has to be spoonfed).

Ahahahaah!

And dinna worry MKG (not that I think you would be). I love you as much as Steersman.

[Gumby]

The dictatorial, bullying in-crowd pussies over at A+ remind me of Greg Neidermeyer.

[youtube]0Dy2fo6E_pI[/youtube]

[KarlVonMox]

On other news, Jerry Coyne is turning to a political moron. His latest post is about a cartoon on London Times that is supposed to be anti-semitic. The cartoon depicts Netanhayoo. So basically, back to playing the victimhood card that criticism of Israeli leaders is anti-semitism.

I would have challenged Jerry if I were not banned from whyevolutionistrue for calling Pat Condell a racist asshole.

Ah, Im inclined to agree with this - the first time I've ever been dissapointed with something Jerry Coyne wrote. What is supposed to be anti-semitic about that cartoon, other than Netanyahu having a big nose?

[free thoughtpolice]

Steersman; Has anyone told you that your writing is poorly focused and unnecessarily long winded and verbose? That you come across as pretentious and not as clever as you think you are? That you must have skipped English class the day they were teaching how to edit?
If so do you blame the reader and not your crappy writing?
If you are able to answer these questions in under a thousand words I may even read your response.