If thou gazest long into the Pit, the Pit will also gaze into thee

Zenspace wrote:

BarnOwl wrote:http://i1158.photobucket.com/albums/p60 ... 2d0d9f.png

Narcissistic assholes and their privileged, indolent, all-expenses-paid conference-attending lifestyles.

That is a telling (and a bit funny) exchange if you understand 'corporate speak'. OB, on the other hand, is just grubbing for a free trip.

Pretty fucking immature and weird to put him on the spot by doing it on twitter. One thing that makes Ophie so bizarre is that she's like a self-centered teenager in an old lady's body.

I think Mabus might be back.

(our ads are up to $3.60!!! I dunno what that means, but its up from $0.07!!!!)

Fuck me, I've just had a look at Ellenbeth Wach's twitter feed for the first time - she's as mad as a badger's ankle.

I can see her five years from now, wandering around disused bus stops hauling a shopping trolley filled with mangy cats, all the while muttering 'slymepitters...everywhere...under my bed...pitter...haters' and smelling like the unwashed tights of an aged dowager.

Mad. Quite mad.

Apples wrote:
Pretty fucking immature and weird to put him on the spot by doing it on twitter. One thing that makes Ophie so bizarre is that she's like a self-centered teenager in an old lady's body.

Yep, she also creeps me out when she starts with the dude's, bro's and lolspeak. Stick to reading the People's Friend and sucking boiled sweets granny.
(that should piss off the ageism warriors)

Tigzy wrote:Fuck me, I've just had a look at Ellenbeth Wach's twitter feed for the first time - she's as mad as a badger's ankle.

I accidentally encountered her once on FB. Took that opportunity to block her ASAP. Crazy ass hose beast.

Apples wrote:

Zenspace wrote:

BarnOwl wrote:http://i1158.photobucket.com/albums/p60 ... 2d0d9f.png

Narcissistic assholes and their privileged, indolent, all-expenses-paid conference-attending lifestyles.

That is a telling (and a bit funny) exchange if you understand 'corporate speak'. OB, on the other hand, is just grubbing for a free trip.

Pretty fucking immature and weird to put him on the spot by doing it on twitter. One thing that makes Ophie so bizarre is that she's like a self-centered teenager in an old lady's body.

Yes, immature and a stupid game overall. One could interpret that a prior conversation had taken place with Lindsey where he implied CFI would be interested in sending her if not for other obligations on her part. Her gambit was to lever Law's interest in an effort to change Lindsey's mind and get a free international trip out of the deal. Lindsey is having none of it. The problem with a public backdoor outreach like that is the risk of a public takedown, which is what she received, albeit in polite corporate speak. Lindsey cut it off before Law had a chance to respond. A secondary problem with the method is Lindsey is likely to remember such a stupid game. The smarter move would have been a direct phoned call to Law. No email record left and more personal. The hint is that she isn't in with Law to be comfortable enough doing that, or her interpersonal skills aren't very good (never saw that coming!) or she is just lazy. None of those represent qualities you want in a high level corporate representative. :naughty:

Did I ever mention that I'm a corporate strategist?

Fellow Pitters looking for a laugh should head on over to Ophelia Benson's blog post on Mykeru. She pretty much burst into tears after I informed her that, by deleting my posts, she proved Mykeru's points. I feel slightly foolish for not having screencaped my posts, but it wasn't as if I was writing a new charter for the United Nations. What I said was basically, I'd tell her my full name but she and her friends have doc-dropped before, and I can't take the risk that they contact my employers and try to get me fired. I also tried to placate her early on by telling her that, no, I wasn't an MRA, or an anti-feminist, and I had never used the word 'cunt', 'bitch' or any other derogatory word when referring to women. Of course, allowing this post to get through the filter would be inconsistent with the Rebecca Watson/Melody Hensley/Ophelia Benson threat narrative so it had to go.

Lsuoma wrote:

Skep tickle wrote: While there may be wonderful reasons to palpate the breasts in one's vicinity, breast self-exam (BSE) for screening isn't one of them.

TBH, I can't think of any good reason NOT to palpate the breasts in one's vicinity.

Curious that there is some evidence to suggest that the evolutionary roots for that instinct lie in the efforts of babies – of more than a few species – to stimulate the generation and delivery of mother’s milk. Though one might argue that, as with other instincts, it can become somewhat pathological – as Terry Thomas in It’s a Mad, Mad, Mad World noted with his observation about the fixation of many American men on “boozums”. Certainly seems to be the case that there are “leg-men” and “breast-men”, although I at least tend to be more of a “womb-man”, figuratively speaking at least.

On which point, one might note the observation that there are many men – and probably no few women – who spend half their lives trying to get out and the other half trying to get back in. I doubt that anyone ever said that human psychology was not at least decidedly interesting ….

jg64 wrote:I think Mabus might be back.

http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lz3hzhfV8r1qfnfsa.gif

Damn. I just looked at Mykeru's new video. It's up to 8233 views, 793 upvotes and a paltry 23 downvotes.

jimthepleb wrote:Dawkins under fire for describing a woman as histrionic.
:o
https://twitter.com/RichardDawkins/stat ... 3713736704
bad richard :naughty:

Similar SJWs followed up by attacking his use of the term "barbaric" for elephant poachers in Africa ... they decided it was "colonial" and "racist"


You couldn't make these people up ... quite literally ... if you were an author and wrote them into a book, your editors would reject the book as being unrealistic and unbelievable

Submariner wrote:Additionally it should be pointed out to PeZus, that women have had the vote for 92 years and they make up a true majority of the population in the US. If the numbers of women in Congress is indicative of anything, it's that most women vote for the best candidate just like men do and not on the basis of that candidates gender, race, or hair color.

There are a million factors that go into these disparities. You of course have to have female candidates to get females elected, so if you really wanted to get into it you'd need to look at how many mediocre male candidates were chosen over superior female candidates. Then there's the whole feeder system in politics -- state legislatures, being active in local party apparatuses, etc. It takes a long time for old-school old-boy-network stuff to be junked. A large number of Senators serve in the House first. Are we moving strongly in the right direction? Certainly - and that's where I want to tell PZ to fuck off. He likes to claim that men have "all the political power" -- as though women haven't made extraordinary gains and received millions of male (and female!) votes in the last 20 years.

I live in New Hampshire, one of the most rural, historically-Republican, civil-libertarian, curmudgeonly states in the northeast. Our entire congressional delegation is female -- Senate and House. Female governor, female speaker of the State House, female chief of the Supreme Court. Sometimes it seems like PZ fell asleep in 1950 (or whenever during his teen years he became an "ardent feminist") and hasn't absorbed any information since.

The fact is that "the patriarchy," to the extent that it exists, correlates strongly with religious conservatism, which has a huge amount of support from women. And since PZ's brand of far-left politics and his scorched-earth approach to atheism have no chance of appealing to anyone who doesn't already agree with him -- and are guaranteed to turn off a lot of fence-sitters -- he's widely-disliked and is a liability to the broader secular and progressive movements. That he obviously doesn't care just reflects the fact that he's a selfish and lazy prick who would rather get blog-hits through manufactured controversies than actually influence people of good will.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/02/us/po ... wanted=all

Steersman wrote:Certainly seems to be the case that there are “leg-men” and “breast-men”, although I at least tend to be more of a “womb-man”, figuratively speaking at least.

Ever the contrarian, eh Steers.

If you want to make yourself dumber, read "Will's" stuff about Harriet Hall on Slepchick. It's his type of intellectual mumbling that really puts a bad taste in the minds of anyone interested in feminism. He has a very difficult time understanding anything he actually links to, and he also doesn't seem to understand anything that Harriet Hall actually says.

Tigzy wrote:

jimthepleb wrote:Dawkins under fire for describing a woman as histrionic.
:o
https://twitter.com/RichardDawkins/stat ... 3713736704
bad richard :naughty:

Aaand...Rebecca Watson just flooshed!

Why is it that there seems to be more gals than guys who are “histrionic”? More of a gal thing? The way that one might say in the face of the fact that there are 10 times as many guys in prison as there are gals, "[crime], it's more of a guy thing"?

Really rather “problematic” – to say the least – that many people – mostly postmodernists of various stripes, but most relevantly here, “gender feminists” – would rather deny facts than to give any ground on their dogma. Curious and curiouser ….

Tigzy wrote:

Steersman wrote:Certainly seems to be the case that there are “leg-men” and “breast-men”, although I at least tend to be more of a “womb-man”, figuratively speaking at least.

Ever the contrarian, eh Steers.

Someone has to carry the flag, to be the little drummer boy, for the uniqueness of individuality in the face of onslaughts from group-think in all of its many forms and manifestations … ;-)

Apples wrote:

Submariner wrote:Additionally it should be pointed out to PeZus, that women have had the vote for 92 years and they make up a true majority of the population in the US. If the numbers of women in Congress is indicative of anything, it's that most women vote for the best candidate just like men do and not on the basis of that candidates gender, race, or hair color.

There are a million factors that go into these disparities. You of course have to have female candidates to get females elected, so if you really wanted to get into it you'd need to look at how many mediocre male candidates were chosen over superior female candidates. Then there's the whole feeder system in politics -- state legislatures, being active in local party apparatuses, etc. It takes a long time for old-school old-boy-network stuff to be junked. A large number of Senators serve in the House first. Are we moving strongly in the right direction? Certainly - and that's where I want to tell PZ to fuck off. He likes to claim that men have "all the political power" -- as though women haven't made extraordinary gains and received millions of male (and female!) votes in the last 20 years.

I live in New Hampshire, one of the most rural, historically-Republican, civil-libertarian, curmudgeonly states in the northeast. Our entire congressional delegation is female -- Senate and House. Female governor, female speaker of the State House, female chief of the Supreme Court. Sometimes it seems like PZ fell asleep in 1950 (or whenever during his teen years he became an "ardent feminist") and hasn't absorbed any information since.

The fact is that "the patriarchy," to the extent that it exists, correlates strongly with religious conservatism, which has a huge amount of support from women. And since PZ's brand of far-left politics and his scorched-earth approach to atheism have no chance of appealing to anyone who doesn't already agree with him -- and are guaranteed to turn off a lot of fence-sitters -- he's widely-disliked and is a liability to the broader secular and progressive movements. That he obviously doesn't care just reflects the fact that he's a selfish and lazy prick who would rather get blog-hits through manufactured controversies than actually influence people of good will.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/02/us/po ... wanted=all

+1. It drives me crazy that that clan claim to be so over the top progressive in how they treat people, yet in the same breathe claim religious people and most atheists are idiots who aren't worthy of life. Considering the huge bulk of African American and Latino immigrants in America are religious to very religious, you could legitimately make the claim that PZ is one of the most racist people in the atheist community.

Zenspace wrote:

BarnOwl wrote:http://i1158.photobucket.com/albums/p60 ... 2d0d9f.png

Narcissistic assholes and their privileged, indolent, all-expenses-paid conference-attending lifestyles.

That is a telling (and a bit funny) exchange if you understand 'corporate speak'. OB, on the other hand, is just grubbing for a free trip.

See, this is a good example of what hardens my heart.
I've tried to lay off Laden because he seems to be such a fundamentally sad individual. Really, would anyone want to be Greg Laden?
Lately I've had my doubts about saying much about Benson because she obviously has crippling sexual neuroses. Even allowing for her trying to make them everyone else's problem, I was getting queasy about piling on.

And then we get this shit.

If you display a pathological sense of entitlement, you've guaranteed me as your enemy.

Ophelia, you spoiled, poisonous, manipulative child.
Grow. The. Fuck. Up.

Richard Dworkins wrote:@Andrewv69.

Ah I thought you meant you were going to read Derrida's text.

Oh no sir. There are limits to my self abuse.

Richard Dworkins wrote: Your quote from R. Scot Bakker (I've never heard of him) does seem apt. However I'd suggest there is a certain personality to which such applies and I think this personality type are so self absorbed and self righteous that they are detrimental no matter what their pet cause or ideology is. A good friend of mine calls them "The Never-wrongs" I prefer Certainists. It is a phase of adolescence that they have never had to socially develop beyond.

Bakker is a home product of Canukistan, as is Steven Erikson
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R._Scott_Bakker

he attended the University of Western Ontario to pursue a degree in Literature and later an MA in Theory and Criticism. After nearly completing, but ultimately abandoning, a Ph.D in Philosophy at Vanderbilt University he moved to London, Ontario, where he now lives with his wife.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_Erikson

Steven Erikson (born October 7, 1959) is the pseudonym of Steve Rune Lundin, a Canadian novelist, who was educated and trained as both an archaeologist and anthropologist.[1]
His best-known work is the ten-volume fantasy series Malazan Book of the Fallen, which by 2006 had sold over 250,000 copies.

I was a Certainists myself, but I outgrew it before I was out of adolescence. I was going to cite hjhornbeck as an example but I reconsidered.

Not sure what exactly what to make of his special kind of whatever the hell it is he is suffering from. See his comments here:
https://unsolicitedcomment.wordpress.co ... christina/

Steersman wrote:

Tigzy wrote:

Steersman wrote:Certainly seems to be the case that there are “leg-men” and “breast-men”, although I at least tend to be more of a “womb-man”, figuratively speaking at least.

Ever the contrarian, eh Steers.

Someone has to carry the flag, to be the little drummer boy, for the uniqueness of individuality in the face of onslaughts from group-think in all of its many forms and manifestations … ;-)

You know who you are, don't you Steers - do you remember that scene in Life of Brian, when the crowd cheers, 'We're all individuals!!'? And then that one guy afterwards, who says, 'I'm not...'? ;)

AndrewV69 wrote:So Finally got around to reading the OB post here:

And in Sweden
http://freethoughtblogs.com/butterflies ... in-sweden/ and following the links I eventually wound up at http://www.thelocal.se No surprise there.

Perhaps one of our Swedish residents can weigh in on what I see as "pushback". I would be interested in seeing if their opinion matches my understanding, that in recent years this extreme reaction to the narrative has racheted up in intensity.

To tell the truth I have been expecting some sort of extreme reaction from Sweden for some time now. In fact, I was genuinely surprised that Norway beat them to it with Anders Breivik.

(Which shows just how much I know actually.)

Ehm, already did... in response to TedDahlberg who brought it up a few days ago.
But to repeat myself, this is not directed at women specifically, it's directed at everyone, both men and women, on both the left and the right political spectrum. However, feminists and leftist journalists have more control over our national media, and are trying to make this into a the people who vote for the "Swedish Democrats" are not only racists but also misogynists who try to silence women on the left.

Za-zen wrote: And Lee? You wonder why we don’t want to talk to these people?

http://anr.apartmentj.com/?p=894

Za-zen, you ignorant slut! What was the point of asking them for “one proven case of sexism within the organised movement"? You know by the way they define "sexism" they automatically win. And even if they could show you one case you'll accept, then what? If there has been one murder within the organised atheism movement, does that show that the atheist movement is pro-murder?

I'd settle for one proven case of anti-misogyny warrior that doesn't lecture to people like they are 12. Failing that, one case of beer to at least make a drinking game out of it.

Steersman wrote:Why is it that there seems to be more gals than guys who are “histrionic”? More of a gal thing? The way that one might say in the face of the fact that there are 10 times as many guys in prison as there are gals, "[crime], it's more of a guy thing"?

Well, if you believe Wikipedia, Histrionic Personality Disorder is more common in women by a factor of 4-to-1. Maybe Sally Strange should edit that entry to adjust for teh patriarchy handicap.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Histrionic ... y_disorder

acathode wrote:

AndrewV69 wrote:So Finally got around to reading the OB post here:

And in Sweden
http://freethoughtblogs.com/butterflies ... in-sweden/ and following the links I eventually wound up at http://www.thelocal.se No surprise there.

Perhaps one of our Swedish residents can weigh in on what I see as "pushback". I would be interested in seeing if their opinion matches my understanding, that in recent years this extreme reaction to the narrative has racheted up in intensity.

To tell the truth I have been expecting some sort of extreme reaction from Sweden for some time now. In fact, I was genuinely surprised that Norway beat them to it with Anders Breivik.

(Which shows just how much I know actually.)

Ehm, already did... in response to TedDahlberg who brought it up a few days ago.
But to repeat myself, this is not directed at women specifically, it's directed at everyone, both men and women, on both the left and the right political spectrum. However, feminists and leftist journalists have more control over our national media, and are trying to make this into a the people who vote for the "Swedish Democrats" are not only racists but also misogynists who try to silence women on the left.

So, in other words, different country-same script.

Speaking of Sweden, I noticed that Alia Al-Mahdi, the Egyptian woman whose naked protest prompted Maryam Namazie's nude revolutionaries calender, was involved in a Femen style naked protest outside the Egyptian embassy in Stockholm just before Christmas.
I didn't see this reported on FTB.

http://www.thelocal.se/articleImages/45198.jpg

http://www.thelocal.se/45198/20121220/#.URgVqmdvGQd

Steersman wrote:

Tigzy wrote:

jimthepleb wrote:Dawkins under fire for describing a woman as histrionic.
:o
https://twitter.com/RichardDawkins/stat ... 3713736704
bad richard :naughty:

Aaand...Rebecca Watson just flooshed!

Why is it that there seems to be more gals than guys who are “histrionic”? More of a gal thing? The way that one might say in the face of the fact that there are 10 times as many guys in prison as there are gals, "[crime], it's more of a guy thing"?

Really rather “problematic” – to say the least – that many people – mostly postmodernists of various stripes, but most relevantly here, “gender feminists” – would rather deny facts than to give any ground on their dogma. Curious and curiouser ….

I may regret this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Histrionic ... y_disorder

DeepInsideYourMind wrote:

jimthepleb wrote:Dawkins under fire for describing a woman as histrionic.
:o
https://twitter.com/RichardDawkins/stat ... 3713736704
bad richard :naughty:

Similar SJWs followed up by attacking his use of the term "barbaric" for elephant poachers in Africa ... they decided it was "colonial" and "racist"


You couldn't make these people up ... quite literally ... if you were an author and wrote them into a book, your editors would reject the book as being unrealistic and unbelievable

They want to feel superior to everyone else by pretending to be very open-minded and non-racist. For the most part, they don't have a clue what the rest of the world goes through and what suffering and racism means. Think of them as big losers who need to put others down to feel superior.

I'm laughing hard at PZ's reply to "Noelplum":

PZ wrote:This is a self-selected community. Look at the header on the blog: liberals, atheists, science-minded people will congregate here. It’s a successful center for that kind of person, and that means that people with different views — well, those that have a speck of self-awareness — will know that they are going to be a tiny minority in a swarm of opinionated, outspoken, ferocious liberals. Venturing here will be daunting. The mirror of community is that there will also be self-selected avoidance.

I don't know about you but that argument sounds vaguely familiar. I can't quite remember when or where I saw something similar. I swear I heard someone say something similar and got called some "s" word, and then some "m" word and then was told to do some "apolo-something something". Probably it was all imagination though.

windy wrote:

Za-zen wrote: And Lee? You wonder why we don’t want to talk to these people?

http://anr.apartmentj.com/?p=894

Za-zen, you ignorant slut! What was the point of asking them for “one proven case of sexism within the organised movement"? You know by the way they define "sexism" they automatically win. And even if they could show you one case you'll accept, then what? If there has been one murder within the organised atheism movement, does that show that the atheist movement is pro-murder?

I'd settle for one proven case of anti-misogyny warrior that doesn't lecture to people like they are 12. Failing that, one case of beer to at least make a drinking game out of it.

Yeah i agree with you, and they also make the false causal link from instances of what they describe as sexism, as a need for the atheist movement to adopt a position arguing for social justice in society. But that is the point, their whole agenda is formed on a concoction of smoke and mirrors, perpetuation of false and debunked claims, appeals to emotion, special pleading, and most finally goal post shifting.

It is identical to arguing with a theist. That is why you have to nail them down and attempt to narrow a conversation to prevent obfuscation. It's what i've been trying to do with Hermit on that thread, with very little success. He wants to wax lyrical, and not be specific.

Caught you hoggling, Kabuki-face! :D

http://i.imgur.com/uKto08v.png

But rest assurred, o vacuous soul of the pomo skeptical movement, no rumours will get started about this. Really, you're not that important. However much you may think otherwise.

I am also sure that Steersman, if anyone could possibly show us an example of us doing the same. Not that I can recall any of us doing it, though "love is blind" may have something to do with it.

Right, well I go too far sometimes but I like Steersman.

That's why their posts appear to outsiders like myself little different in style to an extreme religious group.

PeeZus take the wheeee-heeeel. Take it from my hands.

Tigzy wrote:Caught you hoggling, Kabuki-face! :D

http://i.imgur.com/uKto08v.png

But rest assurred, o vacuous soul of the pomo skeptical movement, no rumours will get started about this. Really, you're not that important. However much you may think otherwise.

Make a joke?

She is a joke.

Zenspace wrote: Yes, immature and a stupid game overall. One could interpret that a prior conversation had taken place with Lindsey where he implied CFI would be interested in sending her if not for other obligations on her part. Her gambit was to lever Law's interest in an effort to change Lindsey's mind and get a free international trip out of the deal. Lindsey is having none of it. The problem with a public backdoor outreach like that is the risk of a public takedown, which is what she received, albeit in polite corporate speak. Lindsey cut it off before Law had a chance to respond. A secondary problem with the method is Lindsey is likely to remember such a stupid game. The smarter move would have been a direct phoned call to Law. No email record left and more personal. The hint is that she isn't in with Law to be comfortable enough doing that, or her interpersonal skills aren't very good (never saw that coming!) or she is just lazy. None of those represent qualities you want in a high level corporate representative. :naughty:

Did I ever mention that I'm a corporate strategist?

My work experience from the age of 20 onwards has been limited to academia, so I'll admit to being ignorant about corporate strategy.

Ophelia, apparently, has little or no experience from either realm, and is just there for the free hand-outs. I had that attitude in a minor sort of way after living in New Orleans for several years: if there's a parade, music fest, or baseball game going on, there damn well better be liberal distribution of free stuff. Beads, moon pies, bags of crisps, plastic cups, stuffed animals, frisbees, cabbages, potatoes, etc.

Tigzy wrote:Caught you hoggling, Kabuki-face! :D

http://i.imgur.com/uKto08v.png

But rest assurred, o vacuous soul of the pomo skeptical movement, no rumours will get started about this. Really, you're not that important. However much you may think otherwise.

:lol:

It's harassment! It's abuse! They made me look! They forced me to read the SlymePit!

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

http://anr.apartmentj.com/?p=894#comment-772

Apples wrote:

Steersman wrote:Why is it that there seems to be more gals than guys who are “histrionic”? More of a gal thing? The way that one might say in the face of the fact that there are 10 times as many guys in prison as there are gals, "[crime], it's more of a guy thing"?

Well, if you believe Wikipedia, Histrionic Personality Disorder is more common in women by a factor of 4-to-1. Maybe Sally Strange should edit that entry to adjust for teh patriarchy handicap.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Histrionic ... y_disorder

Veddy interestink! The nefarious "Patriarchy" at work!

But thanks. Will be interesting to see whether any of the FfTB-pearl-clutching crowd has the intestinal fortitude and intellectual honesty to address that point. Maybe Watson will concede [ha!] that evolutionary psychology isn’t all a case of selling soap ….

Looking for a link to that video where Peezus was asked about his banhammer style, ending with him giving the most convoluted answer about his only banning people attempting to "derail" or some other such shit.

I believe it was direct linked in one of the locked threads. My search-fu could not find it.

Okay, Steersman, look - I have to ask...

What do you mean when you say you are a 'womb-man' as opposed to a 'breast man' or 'leg man'?

Caine, poisoned chalice wrote:Tethys, I was *stomped* on by Truthmachine and SC when I first started commenting here years ago. It stung, a lot, but they were right. Yes, we do hold the commentariat here to a very high standard.

Illuminata wrote:
If only you had called yourself poisoned cunt

Ah, that’s where I went wrong. But wait, it was stated in the slymepit that ‘poison cunt’ was the term for a transwoman, and I’m not trans…so confusing, all this gender stuff, eh?

;)

Actually, Caine, you fucking pompous waste of oxygen, "poison-cunt" was a reference to Haifisch's grotesque argument that HIV "poz" folks aren't morally obligated to reveal their status to their partners.

Protip - caricaturing your opponents with NSFW photoshops is actually morally superior to caricaturing your opponents by lying through your teeth about them.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... /#comments (#251)
http://www.freezepage.com/1360535738ZHQANZTSHR

Mykeru wrote:Looking for a link to that video where Peezus was asked about his banhammer style, ending with him giving the most convoluted answer about his only banning people attempting to "derail" or some other such shit.

I believe it was direct linked in one of the locked threads. My search-fu could not find it.

This Google hang-out:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Q7PprXJ-h8

Tigzy wrote:Caught you hoggling, Kabuki-face! :D

http://i.imgur.com/uKto08v.png

But rest assurred, o vacuous soul of the pomo skeptical movement, no rumours will get started about this. Really, you're not that important. However much you may think otherwise.

That was sort-of obvious, it was surprising to see people jumping on it here (specifically people jumping on Ophelia for joining in with their joke).

I argue that these fuckbubbles know nothing about social justice in the first place, and i'm not arguing that they need a degree in a related subject to do so. They have a lot of bullshit ideology that they don't understand the fundamentals of, most of which is grounded in nothing other than "the world doesn't recognise my value therefore there is something wrong with the world" it's gross entitlement.

Their social justice nonsense is better descibed as "hipster politics". Void of any substance. They wouldn't pass muster in any poltical move i was ever involved in. Whiny self obsessed turds, good for nothing outside of regurgitating half baked propaganda and claims of victimhood.

Whilst they all squeee'd! Over how fabulous beyonce was at the superbowl with her sex positivism (are these people fucking blind, she's a shite singer without the tape playing, and her whole performance was an appeal to mens dicks, i'm not complaining i'm just squinting my eyes at the hypocracy) I the sexist mysoggynasty that i am, who thinks weemen should make more samwichs enjoys the voices and stories of shown below, not that any of those fuckwits could make the connection. I don't claim any other atheist has to hold my politics to share a movement with me or be a decent human being.


[youtube]GdMPWZoCep0[/youtube]

Rant over

Tigzy wrote:Okay, Steersman, look - I have to ask...

What do you mean when you say you are a 'womb-man' as opposed to a 'breast man' or 'leg man'?

Twas merely, or partly, a pun, dear lad: “womb-man” => wo-man => woman. Though, to be clear, I’m not the last, at least genetically speaking (I assume).

And an analogy: as Lsuoma’s desire to “palpate” any breasts that happen to be walking by – with or without any visible means of support, but which might be frowned upon by the local constabulary – was to him being, presumably, a “breast-man” so might my classification as a “womb-man” be to a desire to “return” there, literally or figuratively speaking …. Elementary, my dear Watson …. :-)

This sounds potentially interesting:

America has a wide digital divide - high-speed Internet access is available only to those who can afford it, at prices much higher and speeds much slower in the U.S. than they are around the world. . But neither has to be the case, says Susan Crawford, former special assistant to President Obama for science, technology and innovation, and author of Captive Audience: The Telecom Industry and Monopoly Power in the New Gilded Age. On the next Moyers & Company, (check local listings), Crawford joins Bill to discuss how our government has allowed a few powerful media conglomerates to put profit ahead of the public interest - rigging the rules, raising prices, and stifling competition. As a result, Crawford says, all of us are at the mercy of the biggest business monopoly since Standard Oil in the first Gilded Age a hundred years ago. "The rich are getting gouged, the poor are very often left out, and this means that we're creating, yet again, two Americas, and deepening inequality through this communications inequality," Crawford tells Bill.

Sounds like a Merkin problem - what about elsewhere in the industrialized world? Here in the US, high-speed internet access in one's home or apartment really is a kind of privilege, and there are many people who simply can't afford it. What about the UK, Australia, France, Germany, Sweden, Norway, Canada, Brazil, Japan, etc.?

@Steersman

Oh. Right. I just wondered if you liked the way women's tummies generally stick out a little bit.

Za-zen wrote:I argue that these fuckbubbles know nothing about social justice in the first place, and i'm not arguing that they need a degree in a related subject to do so. They have a lot of bullshit ideology that they don't understand the fundamentals of, most of which is grounded in nothing other than "the world doesn't recognise my value therefore there is something wrong with the world" it's gross entitlement.

Their social justice nonsense is better descibed as "hipster politics". Void of any substance. They wouldn't pass muster in any poltical move i was ever involved in. Whiny self obsessed turds, good for nothing outside of regurgitating half baked propaganda and claims of victimhood.

Whilst they all squeee'd! Over how fabulous beyonce was at the superbowl with her sex positivism (are these people fucking blind, she's a shite singer without the tape playing, and her whole performance was an appeal to mens dicks, i'm not complaining i'm just squinting my eyes at the hypocracy) I the sexist mysoggynasty that i am, who thinks weemen should make more samwichs enjoys the voices and stories of shown below, not that any of those fuckwits could make the connection. I don't claim any other atheist has to hold my politics to share a movement with me or be a decent human being.

Rant over

This, although I'd add on to it that it's not like there's a deep complex version of academic feminism that they could learn that would make their ideas a whole lot better. It's actually similar to theology in that way, where the best they can hope for is the ability to cloud over their beliefs more effectively.

ERV wrote:

Tigzy wrote:Fuck me, I've just had a look at Ellenbeth Wach's twitter feed for the first time - she's as mad as a badger's ankle.

I accidentally encountered her once on FB. Took that opportunity to block her ASAP. Crazy ass hose beast.

She has pretty much taken over and attention-whore spammed the comments to my Opie Benson follow up. As I have never banned a user or deleted a comment, I have to just content myself with tormenting her.

That one comment revealed her arrest for domestic violence, and apparent history of harassment, she apparently took umbrage and has decided to triple-down on the crazy.

She is absolutely hands-down twirling bat shit insane and has the emotional maturity of a zygote.

BarnOwl wrote:This sounds potentially interesting:

America has a wide digital divide - high-speed Internet access is available only to those who can afford it, at prices much higher and speeds much slower in the U.S. than they are around the world. . But neither has to be the case, says Susan Crawford, former special assistant to President Obama for science, technology and innovation, and author of Captive Audience: The Telecom Industry and Monopoly Power in the New Gilded Age. On the next Moyers & Company, (check local listings), Crawford joins Bill to discuss how our government has allowed a few powerful media conglomerates to put profit ahead of the public interest - rigging the rules, raising prices, and stifling competition. As a result, Crawford says, all of us are at the mercy of the biggest business monopoly since Standard Oil in the first Gilded Age a hundred years ago. "The rich are getting gouged, the poor are very often left out, and this means that we're creating, yet again, two Americas, and deepening inequality through this communications inequality," Crawford tells Bill.

Sounds like a Merkin problem - what about elsewhere in the industrialized world? Here in the US, high-speed internet access in one's home or apartment really is a kind of privilege, and there are many people who simply can't afford it. What about the UK, Australia, France, Germany, Sweden, Norway, Canada, Brazil, Japan, etc.?

It's cheap and easily available most places in Europe. There is no real divide- at least not for those living in urban areas; rural internet connection is, like mobile phone connectivity, very variable.

BarnOwl wrote:

Mykeru wrote:Looking for a link to that video where Peezus was asked about his banhammer style, ending with him giving the most convoluted answer about his only banning people attempting to "derail" or some other such shit.

I believe it was direct linked in one of the locked threads. My search-fu could not find it.

This Google hang-out:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Q7PprXJ-h8

Thank you!

Back to the editor...

Apples wrote: There are a million factors that go into these disparities. You of course have to have female candidates to get females elected, so if you really wanted to get into it you'd need to look at how many mediocre male candidates were chosen over superior female candidates. Then there's the whole feeder system in politics -- state legislatures, being active in local party apparatuses, etc. It takes a long time for old-school old-boy-network stuff to be junked.

No no no, it has to be that women representatives are getting turned off after constantly being groped and sexually propositioned in the House and the Senate. It's worse there than at atheist conferences! All this talk about external factors that make less women enter politics in the first place is just an excuse. Nice try, Apples Shermer.

Tigzy wrote:Caught you hoggling, Kabuki-face! :D

http://i.imgur.com/uKto08v.png

But rest assurred, o vacuous soul of the pomo skeptical movement, no rumours will get started about this. Really, you're not that important. However much you may think otherwise.

You know, for someone who supposedly doesn't want to interact with us, she knows exactly what the fuck we're saying as fast as we say it.

I bet her idea of a "silent" treatment is a 3-hour monologue on how she's not talking to you any more.

AbsurdWalls wrote: That was sort-of obvious, it was surprising to see people jumping on it here (specifically people jumping on Ophelia for joining in with their joke).

I can see the CFIsters joking, but Ophelia has repeatedly benefitted from all-expenses-paid trips to conferences. in fact, it seems to be a way of life for her, and to me that's entitlement. You may see it differently. Clearly she has fans who think her contributions are sufficiently worthy and interesting that they're willing to pay her way.

In any case, it's not as if I'm "harassing" or "abusing" her on Twitter, or in the comments section of her blog. I don't even have a Twitter account, and I don't comment on any of the FtB blogs. If they want to come over here and read the 'Pit, roll around in the satire and mockery, and then take the scents back to the other truffle pigs, fine. But Ophelia is hardly being "jumped on."

New one up: http://dissentionisnothate.wordpress.co ... to-idiots/

BarnOwl wrote:This sounds potentially interesting:

America has a wide digital divide - high-speed Internet access is available only to those who can afford it, at prices much higher and speeds much slower in the U.S. than they are around the world. . But neither has to be the case, says Susan Crawford, former special assistant to President Obama for science, technology and innovation, and author of Captive Audience: The Telecom Industry and Monopoly Power in the New Gilded Age. On the next Moyers & Company, (check local listings), Crawford joins Bill to discuss how our government has allowed a few powerful media conglomerates to put profit ahead of the public interest - rigging the rules, raising prices, and stifling competition. As a result, Crawford says, all of us are at the mercy of the biggest business monopoly since Standard Oil in the first Gilded Age a hundred years ago. "The rich are getting gouged, the poor are very often left out, and this means that we're creating, yet again, two Americas, and deepening inequality through this communications inequality," Crawford tells Bill.

Sounds like a Merkin problem - what about elsewhere in the industrialized world? Here in the US, high-speed internet access in one's home or apartment really is a kind of privilege, and there are many people who simply can't afford it. What about the UK, Australia, France, Germany, Sweden, Norway, Canada, Brazil, Japan, etc.?

In Canada we have four big companies that control everything. We have the worst cell phone prices in the first world. Three year standard contracts and outrageous prices. Our big media companies are trying to force pay-per usage bills on us - whereby they cap user download allowances at a low number, and then charge customers exorbitant overage fees. The lack of competition has resulted in stagnation, rather than greater access for all.

I believe that the UK government, a few years back, forced an open marketplace on the media companies (who formerly had a stranglehold) and now, from what I understand, there is plenty of competition, and Britons have some of the best internet in the world. I could be wrong however, so, any of the Brits here can correct me...

These companies oversell their bandwidth, and rather than upgrade the infrastructure (which is really expensive) they choose to fuck customers up the ass instead.

BarnOwl wrote:

AbsurdWalls wrote: That was sort-of obvious, it was surprising to see people jumping on it here (specifically people jumping on Ophelia for joining in with their joke).

I can see the CFIsters joking, but Ophelia has repeatedly benefitted from all-expenses-paid trips to conferences. in fact, it seems to be a way of life for her, and to me that's entitlement. You may see it differently. Clearly she has fans who think her contributions are sufficiently worthy and interesting that they're willing to pay her way.

In any case, it's not as if I'm "harassing" or "abusing" her on Twitter, or in the comments section of her blog. I don't even have a Twitter account, and I don't comment on any of the FtB blogs. If they want to come over here and read the 'Pit, roll around in the satire and mockery, and then take the scents back to the other truffle pigs, fine. But Ophelia is hardly being "jumped on."

Guys, you're missing the point...think of how easy it is to wind hensley up! You don't even need twitter. She's almost monitoring this place in real-time. Fuck, this is some wonderful information and you're arguing about getting a joke or not.

justinvacula wrote:http://i.imgur.com/RPZuzOa.jpg

http://anr.apartmentj.com/?p=894#comment-772

If you happen to run across Ophelia Benson at that upcoming Secular Women conference, I might suggest that you give her a detailed lesson on the philosophy and logic of analogies. For instance, here on Lousy Canuck’s site she swears a blue-streak that she didn’t make an analogy between “Nazi Germany and TAM”, yet in that tweet she admits that she was doing so even if it was a bad one. Pro-tip for you, Ophelia:

It's important to note that the above analogy [Hand:Palm => Foot:Sole] is not comparing all the properties between a hand and a foot, but rather comparing the relationship between a hand and its palm to a foot and its sole. While a hand and a foot have many dissimilarities, the analogy is focusing on their similarity in having an inner surface.

Do note that what is being compared are the relationships, not the particular attributes. But a comparison – the noting of “similarities or differences” – is still being made.

In any case, another elaboration on the theme in Harriet Hall’s recent post on the topic.

BarnOwl wrote:

AbsurdWalls wrote: That was sort-of obvious, it was surprising to see people jumping on it here (specifically people jumping on Ophelia for joining in with their joke).

I can see the CFIsters joking, but Ophelia has repeatedly benefitted from all-expenses-paid trips to conferences. in fact, it seems to be a way of life for her, and to me that's entitlement. You may see it differently. Clearly she has fans who think her contributions are sufficiently worthy and interesting that they're willing to pay her way.

In any case, it's not as if I'm "harassing" or "abusing" her on Twitter, or in the comments section of her blog. I don't even have a Twitter account, and I don't comment on any of the FtB blogs. If they want to come over here and read the 'Pit, roll around in the satire and mockery, and then take the scents back to the other truffle pigs, fine. But Ophelia is hardly being "jumped on."

Yeah, if there's one thing that defines Ophelia Benson it's sense of humor. I'm sure anyone, unfamiliar with her satirical bent, offering her a free trip will be rebuffed with; "No! I couldn't possibly!".

welch wrote:

BarnOwl wrote:

AbsurdWalls wrote: That was sort-of obvious, it was surprising to see people jumping on it here (specifically people jumping on Ophelia for joining in with their joke).

I can see the CFIsters joking, but Ophelia has repeatedly benefitted from all-expenses-paid trips to conferences. in fact, it seems to be a way of life for her, and to me that's entitlement. You may see it differently. Clearly she has fans who think her contributions are sufficiently worthy and interesting that they're willing to pay her way.

In any case, it's not as if I'm "harassing" or "abusing" her on Twitter, or in the comments section of her blog. I don't even have a Twitter account, and I don't comment on any of the FtB blogs. If they want to come over here and read the 'Pit, roll around in the satire and mockery, and then take the scents back to the other truffle pigs, fine. But Ophelia is hardly being "jumped on."

Guys, you're missing the point...think of how easy it is to wind hensley up! You don't even need twitter. She's almost monitoring this place in real-time. Fuck, this is some wonderful information and you're arguing about getting a joke or not.

Sup melody! since I'm a villain no matter what simply for posting on the 'pit, I've taken the liberty of giving you a 2-for-1 parody name special, completely divorced from any and all context, so you don't even have to bother quotemining. Spread this around all you want, maybe a few people will get a good laugh:

Histrionic Hensley.
Maniac Melody.