Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It

[John Greg]

EBW, had a "sense of humour"? WTF?!?

[JackSkeptic]

Stop the presses! Bill O'Reilly said something reasonable:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/2 ... ostpopular

I've often thought O'Reilly just plays to the camera. His actual beliefs are far more tolerant than they appear.

[Apples]

Steersman takes Aratina to the woodshed in this comment at Nugent's:

http://www.michaelnugent.com/2013/03/26 ... ent-209002

Incidentally, the Sewer Rat admitted yesterday at Nugent's that he doesn't identify as a skeptic and said on Twitter that he "doesn't think doxxing is a big deal."

[AndrewV69]

I expect it will happen in around 80 years though if things continue to unfold they way they have been so far.

Interesting - so what do you see as the order of events/causation (assuming that things continue to unfold as they are)?

Well, I would advise you to take this with a grain of salt simply by virtue of my being wrong in my expectation before. For example:

- No outright revolt in Spain apart from periodic demonstrations over their family law reform act in 2004 which has to day seen approximately 130,000 men imprisoned for at least 24 hours per year and is still ongoing. So that amounts to over a million men imprisoned so far just on the say so of a woman to date in Spain.

- No further significant ideologically motivated massacres in the Western countries after the 9/11 in the USA and the 7/7 incident in the UK. The Anders Breviek business in Norway, was not only a surprise, but small in scale relative as to what I am expecting to eventually happen despite the efforts of the DHS to prevent it.

So, while I do expect that eventually women will become disenfranchised in Western countries, it looks as if the current situation will have to deteriorate far more than it has now before that will happen.

In short, it looks as if nothing less than a financial crisis worse than what Greece is currently experiencing will do it. Hopefully I am wrong about all of this but I am not optimistic. People were started sounding the alarms about things like derivatives from as far back as the mid 80's.

One thing I do surmise though, some of our systems are far more resilient than you might think at first. We will see. And like I have said before. I really hope I am wrong.

[JackSkeptic]

EllenBeth has just resigned from her presidency of the Florida Humanists: https://twitter.com/EllenBethWachs/stat ... 6810451968

Discussing it with Poltroolon (who, as you can see from the subsequent tweets, embarrasses himself yet again by getting the wrong end of the stick as regards her reasons for resigning) , she gives some hint that online events (recent or otherwise) have played a part in her decision:

EllenBeth Wachs ‏@EllenBethWachs 58m

@ool0n I'm wishing I never got involved with the movement. I'd be happier, wealthier and still have a good reputation.

EllenBeth Wachs ‏@EllenBethWachs 54m

@ool0n Online spills into real life and IRL bleeds online. Everything has cause and effect.

Janine the Hallucinating Thickoid (Janphar), seeing how Ellenbeth's decision has clearly been affected (in part, at least) by recent events at Pharyngula, tries to save face by, er, derailing on to the subject of the Slymepit. Ellenbeth makes it clear that the house of Janine and pals isn't exactly free of shit itself:

http://i.imgur.com/6sjlHlR.png

Too late, Janine. Pharyngula's culpability in this can't be denied. You'd probably call it harassment if it hadn't been you and your buddies doing it. :lol:

I fail to see "many" waving it around like a "trophy on a stick". My impression is that "some" might be construed as doing so, but not enough to make it "many".

Or did I get it wrong?

In any event while I do see to recall her being mocked from time to time, I certainly can not recall any SP here attacking her with the unabashed vitriol, not to mention the enthusiastic viciousness unleashed on her by the baboons.

I do not think EBW was unreasonable in having an expectation that the baboons should at a minimum, been charitable in disagreeing with her. It had to have been a disorienting experience.

She would have got a totally different reception if they had known who she was but many did not. Identity politics at it's finest. It's not what you say but who you are that matters. By the time her detractors found out it was too late.

I fully expect some blogs pointing the finger at us.

[JackSkeptic]

EBW, had a "sense of humour"? WTF?!?

Yep. She occasionally did a provocative post to pull our legs and that heavy breathing thing takes humour.

[Apples]

So, while I do expect that eventually women will become disenfranchised in Western countries, it looks as if the current situation will have to deteriorate far more than it has now before that will happen.

So the scenario you're talking about is political/economic collapse and/or a revolution by men and chill girls, and in the post-upheaval societies women will return to traditional roles? Do you think there's any way this could be achieved peacefully, or without revolution?

[Apples]

.... aaand John Greg makes sure the Rat is well and truly thrashed.

http://www.michaelnugent.com/2013/03/26 ... ent-209003

[AndrewV69]

Steersman takes Aratina to the woodshed in this comment at Nugent's:

http://www.michaelnugent.com/2013/03/26 ... ent-209002

Incidentally, the Sewer Rat admitted yesterday at Nugent's that he doesn't identify as a skeptic and said on Twitter that he "doesn't think doxxing is a big deal."

Well I think it was pretty clear before this that Aratina is not a skeptic. And, I dunno about you but when I see Steersman swearing I take it as a sign that he is a bit annoyed.

[Dilurk]

EllenBeth has just resigned from her presidency of the Florida Humanists: https://twitter.com/EllenBethWachs/stat ... 6810451968

Discussing it with Poltroolon (who, as you can see from the subsequent tweets, embarrasses himself yet again by getting the wrong end of the stick as regards her reasons for resigning) , she gives some hint that online events (recent or otherwise) have played a part in her decision:

EllenBeth Wachs ‏@EllenBethWachs 58m

@ool0n I'm wishing I never got involved with the movement. I'd be happier, wealthier and still have a good reputation.

EllenBeth Wachs ‏@EllenBethWachs 54m

@ool0n Online spills into real life and IRL bleeds online. Everything has cause and effect.

Janine the Hallucinating Thickoid (Janphar), seeing how Ellenbeth's decision has clearly been affected (in part, at least) by recent events at Pharyngula, tries to save face by, er, derailing on to the subject of the Slymepit. Ellenbeth makes it clear that the house of Janine and pals isn't exactly free of shit itself:

img http://i.imgur.com/6sjlHlR.png /img

Too late, Janine. Pharyngula's culpability in this can't be denied. You'd probably call it harassment if it hadn't been you and your buddies doing it. :lol:

I fail to see "many" waving it around like a "trophy on a stick". My impression is that "some" might be construed as doing so, but not enough to make it "many".

Or did I get it wrong?

In any event while I do see to recall her being mocked from time to time, I certainly can not recall any SP here attacking her with the unabashed vitriol, not to mention the enthusiastic viciousness unleashed on her by the baboons.

I do not think EBW was unreasonable in having an expectation that the baboons should at a minimum, been charitable in disagreeing with her. It had to have been a disorienting experience.

She would have got a totally different reception if they had known who she was but many did not. Identity politics at it's finest. It's not what you say but who you are that matters. By the time her detractors found out it was too late.

I fully expect some blogs pointing the finger at us.

Slymepit is a propaganda meme nothing more and nothing less. A key part of any propaganda campaign is finding a common enemy, which can be manufactured out of whole cloth if need be. Instead of asking the disquieting questions of your own group/tribe/country it's easier to simply claim it was the fault of your enemy. "The Hun" "The Commies" "Iraq has WMDs".

I am not on a side. I post at the 'pit because Lsuoma allows just about any riff raff to post.

So I speak for myself and only myself. I have repeatedly said that I will not support bullying no matter the source and
I somehow suspect I am not the only one that feels that way.

Will anyone else stand with me and denounce this bullying and support EBW?

[Aneris]

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

[Apples]

Will anyone else stand with me and denounce this bullying and support EBW?

Can't tell if you're being serious, or somewhat ironic and just talking about the Pharyngula massacre.

Assuming you're serious (forgive me if you're not): Which "bullying" are we supposed to denounce? The reason she got attention from the 'Pit in the first place is that she went on a month-or-so long Twitter campaign smearing this place. She was the one who originally Tweeted that we were racists because I had ironically used the term "darkies" to describe the noblesse oblige approach to race relations implied in Jen McWrong's post.

Anyway, I haven't noticed anyone focusing negative attention on her since the "don't be fooled by his game when he rapes your daughter" Twitter-scuffle eventuated in John Brown's youtube apology.

I give her tons of credit for what she said in the exchange with Janphar posted above, "I am guilty. So no, I can't fault them for that." I think her Pharyngula experience genuinely opened her eyes to what we were talking about.

[JackSkeptic]

EllenBeth has just resigned from her presidency of the Florida Humanists: https://twitter.com/EllenBethWachs/stat ... 6810451968

Discussing it with Poltroolon (who, as you can see from the subsequent tweets, embarrasses himself yet again by getting the wrong end of the stick as regards her reasons for resigning) , she gives some hint that online events (recent or otherwise) have played a part in her decision:

EllenBeth Wachs ‏@EllenBethWachs 58m

@ool0n I'm wishing I never got involved with the movement. I'd be happier, wealthier and still have a good reputation.

EllenBeth Wachs ‏@EllenBethWachs 54m

@ool0n Online spills into real life and IRL bleeds online. Everything has cause and effect.

Janine the Hallucinating Thickoid (Janphar), seeing how Ellenbeth's decision has clearly been affected (in part, at least) by recent events at Pharyngula, tries to save face by, er, derailing on to the subject of the Slymepit. Ellenbeth makes it clear that the house of Janine and pals isn't exactly free of shit itself:

img http://i.imgur.com/6sjlHlR.png /img

Too late, Janine. Pharyngula's culpability in this can't be denied. You'd probably call it harassment if it hadn't been you and your buddies doing it. :lol:

I fail to see "many" waving it around like a "trophy on a stick". My impression is that "some" might be construed as doing so, but not enough to make it "many".

Or did I get it wrong?

In any event while I do see to recall her being mocked from time to time, I certainly can not recall any SP here attacking her with the unabashed vitriol, not to mention the enthusiastic viciousness unleashed on her by the baboons.

I do not think EBW was unreasonable in having an expectation that the baboons should at a minimum, been charitable in disagreeing with her. It had to have been a disorienting experience.

She would have got a totally different reception if they had known who she was but many did not. Identity politics at it's finest. It's not what you say but who you are that matters. By the time her detractors found out it was too late.

I fully expect some blogs pointing the finger at us.

Slymepit is a propaganda meme nothing more and nothing less. A key part of any propaganda campaign is finding a common enemy, which can be manufactured out of whole cloth if need be. Instead of asking the disquieting questions of your own group/tribe/country it's easier to simply claim it was the fault of your enemy. "The Hun" "The Commies" "Iraq has WMDs".

I am not on a side. I post at the 'pit because Lsuoma allows just about any riff raff to post.

So I speak for myself and only myself. I have repeatedly said that I will not support bullying no matter the source and
I somehow suspect I am not the only one that feels that way.

Will anyone else stand with me and denounce this bullying and support EBW?

Certainly she was bullied. They do that all the time of course. What did surprise me and was quite an eye opener is how little she and I assume others know about the sort of blogs and comments we are targets of too. Any one of us would have told her what the reaction would be, it was a given.

I am not 'anti-feminist' I am anti that sort of ideology that poisons and damages everything it touches, including her. So one of the great irony's is what we are trying to achieve supports her in this by default. Not that I expect her or anyone to care about that.

[AndrewV69]

Newest brain drain article from Jezebel:

http://jezebel.com/5992479/if-i-admit-t ... g-prophecy

If I Admit That ‘Hating Men’ Is a Thing, Will You Stop Turning It Into a Self-Fulfilling Prophecy?


...if only the author changed some things around and was skeptical of patriarchy - here is a rewrite:
...
same as hating all women. But more on that in a minute.) Are you happy now? Is this what you wanted?

[/quote]

You starting to sound like a MRA to me. :shock: Something you want to share with us? In any event, thanks for the link. I am going to read it now.

[Wonderist]

Not sure how many folks have followed the "harassment" kerfuffle this week. As we all know, Svan and Benson have been trying, through sheer repetition, to cement the meme that they are victims of "harassment" by their critics.

Vjack (whom I don't normally read) put up a post at Atheist Revolution about how "harassment" is defined. It's not perfect, perhaps not what I would have written, but it's not bad:

http://www.atheistrev.com/2013/03/under ... sment.html

Needless to say, when Ophie noticed that vjack's thesis undermined her case for being a victim of "harassment" by the likes of *ahem* the Slymepit, her panties became uncomfortably bunched:

http://freethoughtblogs.com/butterflies ... arassment/

She then had someone named Tom Foss write a guest post about it:

http://freethoughtblogs.com/butterflies ... /#comments

Meanwhile, Atheist Alliance International tweeted a link to vjack's article, which pissed off the FTB thought traffic controllers, and AAI proceeded to delete the tweet and apologize for it, as documented in a bunch of twitter chatter that Stephanie Zvan featured yesterday:

http://freethoughtblogs.com/almostdiamo ... -pressure/

And here are vjack's followups:

http://www.atheistrev.com/2013/03/my-re ... iance.html

http://www.atheistrev.com/2013/03/athei ... ional.html

I'll just quote part of one of Tom Foss's comments over at Ophelia's. I think the "quality" of the reasoning is self-evident:

The civil harassment guidelines are more relevant, not just because they are more uniform and clearly-outlined than the state-by-state hodgepodge of cyberharassment guidelines, not just because blogging, being a source of income for most of the targets, forms an online workplace, but also because the primary complaint of the harassed (besides the general annoyance) has been the creation and reinforcement of a chilly climate in the atheist community–you know, a hostile environment. It’s true that the workplace analogy is just that–analogous–but when we’re talking about harassers creating and contributing to a generally unwelcome atmosphere for certain people, hostile environment harassment is clearly and obviously the most relevant topic.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/butterflies ... ent-512540

Apologies for the lack of freezepages - would have exceeded my daily quota with the links in this one post.

Haven't read vjack's posts, but the nail in the coffin of the harassment allegation is the concept of a public figure. Specifically, a limited public figure, of which any prominent blogger is one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_figure

In United States law, public figure is a term applied in the context of defamation actions (libel and slander) as well as invasion of privacy. A public figure (such as a politician, celebrity, or business leader) cannot base a sample on incorrect harmful statements unless there is proof that the writer or publisher acted with actual malice (knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard for the truth).[1] The burden of proof in defamation actions is higher in the case of a public figure.

The controlling precedent in the United States was set in 1964 by the United States Supreme Court in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan. It is considered a key decision in supporting the First Amendment and freedom of the press.

A fairly high threshold of public activity is necessary to elevate people to public figure status. Typically, they must either be:

a public figure, either a public official or any other person pervasively involved in public affairs, or
a limited purpose public figure, meaning those who have "thrust themselves to the forefront of particular public controversies in order to influence the resolution of the issues involved." A "particularized determination" is required to decide whether a person is a limited purpose public figure, which can be variously interpreted.

According to attorney Aaron Larson:[2]

A person can become an "involuntary public figure" as the result of publicity, even though that person did not want or invite the public attention. For example, people accused of high profile crimes may be unable to pursue actions for defamation even after their innocence is established...

A person can also become a "limited public figure" by engaging in actions which generate publicity within a narrow area of interest. For example, [jokes about]... Terry Rakolta [an activist who spearheaded a boycott of the show Married With Children] were fair comments... within the confines of her public conduct [and] protected by Ms. Rakolta's status as a "limited public figure".

[JackSkeptic]

Not sure how many folks have followed the "harassment" kerfuffle this week. As we all know, Svan and Benson have been trying, through sheer repetition, to cement the meme that they are victims of "harassment" by their critics.

Vjack (whom I don't normally read) put up a post at Atheist Revolution about how "harassment" is defined. It's not perfect, perhaps not what I would have written, but it's not bad:

http://www.atheistrev.com/2013/03/under ... sment.html

Needless to say, when Ophie noticed that vjack's thesis undermined her case for being a victim of "harassment" by the likes of *ahem* the Slymepit, her panties became uncomfortably bunched:

http://freethoughtblogs.com/butterflies ... arassment/

She then had someone named Tom Foss write a guest post about it:

http://freethoughtblogs.com/butterflies ... /#comments

Meanwhile, Atheist Alliance International tweeted a link to vjack's article, which pissed off the FTB thought traffic controllers, and AAI proceeded to delete the tweet and apologize for it, as documented in a bunch of twitter chatter that Stephanie Zvan featured yesterday:

http://freethoughtblogs.com/almostdiamo ... -pressure/

And here are vjack's followups:

http://www.atheistrev.com/2013/03/my-re ... iance.html

http://www.atheistrev.com/2013/03/athei ... ional.html

I'll just quote part of one of Tom Foss's comments over at Ophelia's. I think the "quality" of the reasoning is self-evident:

The civil harassment guidelines are more relevant, not just because they are more uniform and clearly-outlined than the state-by-state hodgepodge of cyberharassment guidelines, not just because blogging, being a source of income for most of the targets, forms an online workplace, but also because the primary complaint of the harassed (besides the general annoyance) has been the creation and reinforcement of a chilly climate in the atheist community–you know, a hostile environment. It’s true that the workplace analogy is just that–analogous–but when we’re talking about harassers creating and contributing to a generally unwelcome atmosphere for certain people, hostile environment harassment is clearly and obviously the most relevant topic.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/butterflies ... ent-512540

Apologies for the lack of freezepages - would have exceeded my daily quota with the links in this one post.

Haven't read vjack's posts, but the nail in the coffin of the harassment allegation is the concept of a public figure. Specifically, a limited public figure, of which any prominent blogger is one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_figure

In United States law, public figure is a term applied in the context of defamation actions (libel and slander) as well as invasion of privacy. A public figure (such as a politician, celebrity, or business leader) cannot base a sample on incorrect harmful statements unless there is proof that the writer or publisher acted with actual malice (knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard for the truth).[1] The burden of proof in defamation actions is higher in the case of a public figure.

The controlling precedent in the United States was set in 1964 by the United States Supreme Court in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan. It is considered a key decision in supporting the First Amendment and freedom of the press.

A fairly high threshold of public activity is necessary to elevate people to public figure status. Typically, they must either be:

a public figure, either a public official or any other person pervasively involved in public affairs, or
a limited purpose public figure, meaning those who have "thrust themselves to the forefront of particular public controversies in order to influence the resolution of the issues involved." A "particularized determination" is required to decide whether a person is a limited purpose public figure, which can be variously interpreted.

According to attorney Aaron Larson:[2]

A person can become an "involuntary public figure" as the result of publicity, even though that person did not want or invite the public attention. For example, people accused of high profile crimes may be unable to pursue actions for defamation even after their innocence is established...

A person can also become a "limited public figure" by engaging in actions which generate publicity within a narrow area of interest. For example, [jokes about]... Terry Rakolta [an activist who spearheaded a boycott of the show Married With Children] were fair comments... within the confines of her public conduct [and] protected by Ms. Rakolta's status as a "limited public figure".

It reminds me of their 'living room' concept. They liken their online presence to being in their own living room and they can let in or throw out anyone they like. That is true, they can and that's fine. However they then reserve the right to say what they like as if they were shouting it out on a street corner or in other people's houses (such as twitter and conferences) They don't get to do that. That's why this 'leave me alone' victim narrative is so fallacious.

It's also why I do not care about A+(other than their hijacking the name) as they have little to no influence outside their private space. So to me they are an irrelevance. That's fine. FtB et al do have a big influence outside their own spaces. That is not fine until they are able to take genuine criticism and stop attacking those who's only crime is to disagree with them.

[Apples]

Interesting Twitter exchange in which Improbable Joe talks (mainly with Aratina, even though it's on Setar's timeline) about how betrayed he felt by the "Susan" affair at Pharyngula:

[Apples]

Same conversation, slight overlap - IJoe calls John Morales "the biggest troll on that site" and SGBM (who has been absent from Pharyngula lately) is discussed without being named.

[Cunning Punt]

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

Every now and then your avatar ... does something.... just out of the corner of my eye.

[Dilurk]

I found this amusing http://butyoureagirl.com/about/resume/

[John Greg]

Jeebles, the old battleaxe is still going after Shermer: http://freethoughtblogs.com/butterflies ... u-mad-bro/

I also find it pretty funny that two of her latest and dearest fawning sycophantic ass lickers are Setar and Brony. Fuck, with friends like these....

[Apples]

Every now and then your avatar ... does something.... just out of the corner of my eye.

http://i843.photobucket.com/albums/zz35 ... _cheek.gif

[Cunning Punt]

Interesting Twitter exchange in which Improbable Joe talks (mainly with Aratina, even though it's on Setar's timeline) about how betrayed he felt by the "Susan" affair at Pharyngula:

Whew. Improbable Joe looks to be in a bad way. I hope he can get some help. From where I'm sitting though the reprimand he got was pretty mild compared to what some get. I guess empathy's a two way street, or is that a redundant statement?

[Aneris]

Same conversation, slight overlap - IJoe calls John Morales "the biggest troll on that site" and SGBM (who has been absent from Pharyngula lately) is discussed without being named.

Oh my gawd, they are such snowflakes and very clearly need serious help. For those who haven't read the incident. It was like this:

Snowflake Sue: Hi guys, I'm snowflake sue, pleeese be nice. I like you all,
Everyone: Hi Sue.
Rude Joe: I think Sue is a tad too nice, many trolls here lately.
Everyone: *Gasp*
Everyone: But Joe! How can you be so incredible mean!
Everyone: unspeakable.
Everyone: The worst. Ever.
Chris Clone: Thats soo terrible. I'm crying now.
Rude Joe: I have failed you all. I go away now for being such a disappointment. Don't cry for me, I don't deserve it.

The End. QQ.

[JackSkeptic]

Same conversation, slight overlap - IJoe calls John Morales "the biggest troll on that site" and SGBM (who has been absent from Pharyngula lately) is discussed without being named.

Oh my gawd, they are such snowflakes and very clearly need serious help. For those who haven't read the incident. It was like this:

Snowflake Sue: Hi guys, I'm snowflake sue, pleeese be nice. I like you all,
Everyone: Hi Sue.
Rude Joe: I think Sue is a tad too nice, many trolls here lately.
Everyone: *Gasp*
Everyone: But Joe! How can you be so incredible mean!
Everyone: unspeakable.
Everyone: The worst. Ever.
Chris Clone: Thats soo terrible. I'm crying now.
Rude Joe: I have failed you all. I go away now for being such a disappointment. Don't cry for me, I don't deserve it.

The End. QQ.

Business as usual then.

[Apples]

Oh my gawd, they are such snowflakes and very clearly need serious help. For those who haven't read the incident. It was like this:

LOL! spot on. I'd feel bad for IJoe, if I didn't see his face whenever I look up twat in the dictionary. Protip: don't make Pharyngula your primary space for social interaction, unless you don't mind a knife in the back (Joe should know this, as a knife-guy).

[Aneris]

Every now and then your avatar ... does something.... just out of the corner of my eye.

[youtube]3zoxPrUZpvo[/youtube]

I guess, it has been exposed five times now.

[Apples]

NPR Marketplace currently doing a segment on Bronies and (the female counterpart) Pegasisters.

[JackSkeptic]

.... aaand John Greg makes sure the Rat is well and truly thrashed.

http://www.michaelnugent.com/2013/03/26 ... ent-209003

But...but...I win because of feelings!!!! We'll cure cancer and fly to the moon on feelings!!!!!

[youtube]CyBcHUe4WeQ[/youtube]

[John Greg]

I certainly have no sympathy for Joe. He is without question one of the top ten jackasses and spreaders of deceit and disinformation.

Fuck him if cannot take what he dishes out. Just fuck him.

[justinvacula]

I have expanded my thoughts on the Jezebel article I linked earlier today in a Skeptic Ink Network piece of my own...with criticism of feminism with the atheist/skeptic community -

"If I Admit That ‘Hating Women’ Is a Thing, Will You Stop Turning It Into a Self-Fulfilling Prophecy?"

http://www.skepticink.com/justinvacula/ ... -prophecy/

Enjoy.

[BarnOwl]

OB writes:

Birds!
My god the bird life here. I don’t know what the birds are – they’re not the birds you see in Seattle, so I don’t know. There’s a ubiquitous one that’s black with a long tail and a very loud voice. After I crossed the Congress Avenue bridge and Cesar Chavez Street I approached a cluster of oak trees on the corner and my god the din – it was an absolutely defeaning racket of those black birds, whatever they are, shouting. You never hear bird noise like that in Seattle – let alone in downtown Seattle! It was very impressive and foreign and cool.

FFS. Why doesn't she just ask someone what kind of birds they are? Great-tailed Grackles, btw - Boat-tailed Grackles are more common along the Gulf Coast. That's the thing about birds ... there are different species in different environments. The same appears to be true for plants and for other animals, oddly enough. I can't imagine how that happens. :roll:

I don't travel without a bird field guide appropriate for the region to which I'm going, but then I don't travel much at all these days. Depending on the season, I usually have field guides for wildflowers and trees as well.

[John Greg]

Really, sometimes it just gets too funny and too silly. InSvanity posts a wee post linking to a faux aplogy, clearly intended as satire, regarding a woman writing an article for a gaming site. So far as I can tell, Stefunny does not understand that it is satire (quelle surprise), and, so far as I can tell, intends to sort of mock / dismiss them. Mind you, it really is hard to tell what her point is because she doesn't in fact make a point. Well, of course, that could be intentional. That way, whatever side the majority of her readers fall she can pretend that was her intent (http://freethoughtblogs.com/almostdiamo ... /#comments).

She says:

Really, this is how you do it:

(Steffy's quote from article here)

Well, it’s how you do it when you don’t mean a word of it, anyway.

Aaaaaanyway, the first comment asks her:

What would you consider an appropriate apology, for a given offense?

And that's it. That's the entirety of his comment. And so, her response:

Claus, I’m approving this so people can see the kind of question people think it’s appropriate to ask me and expect me to answer. Just off the top of my head, I see that your comment (1) has nothing to do with the post linked; (2) comes from someone who doesn’t value my opinion and is, thus, asking for some other reason he did not see fit to share; (3) indicates that I’m expected to stop what I’m doing and provide you information about the inside of my head for no benefit to me; and (4) is meaningless. What is “a given offense” that I could possibly come up with any sort of reasonable answer? Don’t answer that question, by the way, Claus. I didn’t ask it for your benefit.

Head-desk, ya know? I mean, well, I don't know what I mean ... that's all just too fucking ludicrous.

[AndrewV69]

So, while I do expect that eventually women will become disenfranchised in Western countries, it looks as if the current situation will have to deteriorate far more than it has now before that will happen.

So the scenario you're talking about is political/economic collapse and/or a revolution by men and chill girls, and in the post-upheaval societies women will return to traditional roles? Do you think there's any way this could be achieved peacefully, or without revolution?

I would say in fact that usually political instability follows financial inequality and/or instability. As long as things are going well economically I believe it is reasonable to expect a fairly peaceful transition from one form to another.

Unfortunately, I do not see peaceful times ahead. What we are looking at is a financial system with a gigantic "mountain of debt" (google that phrase) that is unsustainable.

So one can only hope it would be done "peacefully". We are talking about western cultures here where "traditional" roles(1) have had different meaning in other cultures and even within similar "Western" cultures you can point to differences in outcomes(2) depending on locality.

What I see will be more of a two-tier split between those who have assets and those who do not. I expect the middle class for example to shrink considerably and concurrent with a loss of upward social mobility, a decline in influence as to how societal benefits are allocated. Note that I do not expect that they will be silenced so much as ignored by the people who do have influence. In any event, people who are struggling to acquire adequate food and shelter on a daily basis, do not seem to have too much energy left over to worry too much about other things, much less the power to affect it if they did.

I do not see the various elite classes worrying too much about the fate of the lower orders any more than they have traditionally done in the past, except where there is a clear indication that it might have a negative impact on their continued well being(3). Even then I expect the initial and continued response will be the utilization of violence till it becomes not only ineffective but a detriment. Note that I am not expecting exactly the same scenario but similar patterns and cycles we have seen in the past to reoccur.

In any event, whatever laws there are on the books will be ignored in light of the actual reality that most people will experience except where someone with the right influence can utilize it.


1). We are probably on the same page about "traditional roles" but I wanted to make a point that the only thing really traditional is that to date only women can and do give birth to children. Arguably all society have been organized around this fact and most of the more successful societal organizations were centered upon assigning specific roles divided by sex with notable exceptions to the generally most "popular" one such as the Muso of China(a), the Nayar of India(b) and the Spartans of Ancient Greece(c).

a). The Muso of China http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mosuo
b). The Nayar of India http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nair
c). Spartan women in Ancient Greece http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_ancient_Sparta

2). For example, in Canada the Quebec Feminists insisted that women did not not need men, and this was reflected in how common law arrangements were treated in regards to property acquited during such a relationship, and how entitlements were assigned after a breakup. Despite a recent high profile case to claim the same rights as awarded to those who did get married, nothing has changed in that respect.

The BC government by contrast, unilaterally and retroactively and recently decreed that anyone who has lived common law for two years as of March 18, 2013 was now and in the future considered an unmarried spouse and entitled to the same benefits as those who had legally tied the knot. Specifically:

http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/03/17 ... d-couples/

breakups between any couple that has shared the same roof for more than two years — or has had a child together — will now carry many of the trappings of divorce, including a 50/50 division of assets and debts.

3). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janissary# ... isbandment

As Janissaries became aware of their own importance they began to desire a better life. By the early 17th century Janissaries had such prestige and influence that they dominated the government. They could mutiny and dictate policy and hinder efforts to modernize the army structure. They could change Sultans as they wished through palace coups. They made themselves landholders and tradesmen. They would also limit the enlistment to the sons of former Janissaries who did not have to go through the original training period in the acemi oÄŸlan, as well as avoiding the physical selection, thereby reducing their military value. When Janissaries could practically extort money from the Sultan and business and family life replaced martial fervour, their effectiveness as combat troops decreased. The northern borders of the Ottoman Empire slowly began to shrink southwards after the second Battle of Vienna in 1683.

[welch]

Will anyone else stand with me and denounce this bullying and support EBW?

Can't tell if you're being serious, or somewhat ironic and just talking about the Pharyngula massacre.

Assuming you're serious (forgive me if you're not): Which "bullying" are we supposed to denounce? The reason she got attention from the 'Pit in the first place is that she went on a month-or-so long Twitter campaign smearing this place. She was the one who originally Tweeted that we were racists because I had ironically used the term "darkies" to describe the noblesse oblige approach to race relations implied in Jen McWrong's post.

Anyway, I haven't noticed anyone focusing negative attention on her since the "don't be fooled by his game when he rapes your daughter" Twitter-scuffle eventuated in John Brown's youtube apology.

I give her tons of credit for what she said in the exchange with Janphar posted above, "I am guilty. So no, I can't fault them for that." I think her Pharyngula experience genuinely opened her eyes to what we were talking about.

It would seem that she is at least open to some form of self-awareness. I highly encourage this, as it's the kind of thing I should be encouraging.

[Jan Steen]

http://i.imgur.com/9pGrJip.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/FkEnSKi.jpg

[welch]

Interesting Twitter exchange in which Improbable Joe talks (mainly with Aratina, even though it's on Setar's timeline) about how betrayed he felt by the "Susan" affair at Pharyngula:

Oh boo-hoo, we hurt aratina so badly because we didn't kiss his ass enough. Wah.

[welch]

I certainly have no sympathy for Joe. He is without question one of the top ten jackasses and spreaders of deceit and disinformation.

Fuck him if cannot take what he dishes out. Just fuck him.

That's my attitude on a lot of them. They love to dish it out, but when they pick the wrong target...like people who did this kind of shit, only at night: http://www.flickr.com/photos/b1crewchie ... hotostream



Then they discover the difference between their little playground shit and someone who can really be evilly mean.

[rayshul]

I'd be interested if EBW wrote about her experiences coming from a radically pro-FtB stance to where she is now.

[Zenspace]

Steersman takes Aratina to the woodshed in this comment at Nugent's:

http://www.michaelnugent.com/2013/03/26 ... ent-209002

Incidentally, the Sewer Rat admitted yesterday at Nugent's that he doesn't identify as a skeptic and said on Twitter that he "doesn't think doxxing is a big deal."

Well I think it was pretty clear before this that Aratina is not a skeptic. And, I dunno about you but when I see Steersman swearing I take it as a sign that he is a bit annoyed.

Indeed. I think I saw the glinting of some sharp edges in that post, Steersman. Nice work.

[JackSkeptic]

I'd be interested if EBW wrote about her experiences coming from a radically pro-FtB stance to where she is now.

I see no evidence she has changed her position on anything.

[justinvacula]

http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013 ... y-suggests

"Majority Disaffection"

“We’re all unhappy – apparently that’s what equality looks like,” she said. “Every other group feels discriminated against as well, and when having these conversations with people who are members of these other groups, it’s important that you understand that.”
Miles surveyed 671 student affairs professionals, primarily in the South and Midwest. About 230 respondents were black, and 415 were white.
Snippets from the responses of white men suggested many of them feel unfairly judged and at times professionally limited because of their race and gender.
“I feel that being a white male often makes me a target within the higher ed community,” one respondent said, adding that he’s been “accused” of being racist and insensitive. Another said he believed a minority colleague resented him for getting a position they both applied for, chalking it up to “white privilege.”
“White men dominate the field,” one man said. “I fully support affirmative action, but I also recognize that, at times, it makes advancement for white men more difficult.”
Another: “I don’t generally have to think about my race when I do my work. I also don’t think that people think, ‘Oh, he’s white,’ when they work with me, but often consider the race of the person if they are not white.”
Some men said they’d be fired for voicing these thoughts in the workplace.

[Zenspace]

I found this amusing http://butyoureagirl.com/about/resume/

Yeah, the page was taken down right about the time she was fired. She seems to have gone completely silent for the present.

[Steersman]

Every now and then your avatar ... does something.... just out of the corner of my eye.

Hackshine/Gif/Tongue_in_cheek.gif

Interesting; learn something new everyday. How did you know where to find it? Seen it somewhere before? Black-belt google-fu? :-)

[Steersman]

Steersman takes Aratina to the woodshed in this comment at Nugent's:

http://www.michaelnugent.com/2013/03/26 ... ent-209002

Incidentally, the Sewer Rat admitted yesterday at Nugent's that he doesn't identify as a skeptic and said on Twitter that he "doesn't think doxxing is a big deal."

Well I think it was pretty clear before this that Aratina is not a skeptic. And, I dunno about you but when I see Steersman swearing I take it as a sign that he is a bit annoyed.

Indeed. I think I saw the glinting of some sharp edges in that post, Steersman. Nice work.

Thanks – all. Although I have to give some credit to Aratina for at least showing up for the game – at least in this thread; the rest of the FtTB crowd seem “conspicuous for their absence”. But I wonder – is he some “stalking horse” to allow “them” to determine where “we” are coming from before the big game? Curious and curiouser ….

[JackSkeptic]

Steersman takes Aratina to the woodshed in this comment at Nugent's:

http://www.michaelnugent.com/2013/03/26 ... ent-209002

Incidentally, the Sewer Rat admitted yesterday at Nugent's that he doesn't identify as a skeptic and said on Twitter that he "doesn't think doxxing is a big deal."

Well I think it was pretty clear before this that Aratina is not a skeptic. And, I dunno about you but when I see Steersman swearing I take it as a sign that he is a bit annoyed.

Indeed. I think I saw the glinting of some sharp edges in that post, Steersman. Nice work.

Thanks – all. Although I have to give some credit to Aratina for at least showing up for the game – at least in this thread; the rest of the FtTB crowd seem “conspicuous for their absence”. But I wonder – is he some “stalking horse” to allow “them” to determine where “we” are coming from before the big game? Curious and curiouser ….

Perhaps, but if they need to know where we are coming from it does rather invalidate all their opinions about us doesn't it?

I actually feel Aratina was being genuine. For him emotions are everything and by his own admission he is not a skeptic. I feel he is a good person wrapped up in a story woven by the more devious elements in all this. People that use other people's genuine emotions to achieve their own idealogical ends. People like McEwan have turned this into a fine art.

[justinvacula]

Richard Carrier apparently used his speaking time at #aacon13 to stump for Atheism Plus:

http://i.imgur.com/bVA3MbR.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/6Qop9Zs.jpg

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

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

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

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

[Wonderist]

Richard Carrier apparently used his speaking time at #aacon13 to stump for Atheism Plus:

http://i.imgur.com/bVA3MbR.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/6Qop9Zs.jpg

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

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

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

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

I'm foreseeing an EllenBeth Wachs moment for Carrier in the not so distant future.

[welch]

Richard Carrier apparently used his speaking time at #aacon13 to stump for Atheism Plus:

http://i.imgur.com/bVA3MbR.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/6Qop9Zs.jpg

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

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

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

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

I'm foreseeing an EllenBeth Wachs moment for Carrier in the not so distant future.

That would require something carrier has neither possession of, nor use for:


A spine

[rayshul]

I'd be interested if EBW wrote about her experiences coming from a radically pro-FtB stance to where she is now.

I see no evidence she has changed her position on anything.

From that conversation with janphar, I don't think she's so pro-FtB any more.

[rayshul]

http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013 ... y-suggests

"Majority Disaffection"

“We’re all unhappy – apparently that’s what equality looks like,” she said. “Every other group feels discriminated against as well, and when having these conversations with people who are members of these other groups, it’s important that you understand that.”
Miles surveyed 671 student affairs professionals, primarily in the South and Midwest. About 230 respondents were black, and 415 were white.
Snippets from the responses of white men suggested many of them feel unfairly judged and at times professionally limited because of their race and gender.
“I feel that being a white male often makes me a target within the higher ed community,” one respondent said, adding that he’s been “accused” of being racist and insensitive. Another said he believed a minority colleague resented him for getting a position they both applied for, chalking it up to “white privilege.”
“White men dominate the field,” one man said. “I fully support affirmative action, but I also recognize that, at times, it makes advancement for white men more difficult.”
Another: “I don’t generally have to think about my race when I do my work. I also don’t think that people think, ‘Oh, he’s white,’ when they work with me, but often consider the race of the person if they are not white.”
Some men said they’d be fired for voicing these thoughts in the workplace.

Yeah, I'm not surprised. It's pretty fucked up. I've become immediately distrusting of any organisation that values "diversity" because I'm like... exactly what the fuck does that mean? Does that mean they're going to treat my kid like a second class citizen and shut him the fuck down all the time? Because in my experience it absolutely fucking does.

[ConcentratedH2O, OM]

Every now and then your avatar ... does something.... just out of the corner of my eye.

Hackshine/Gif/Tongue_in_cheek.gif

Interesting; learn something new everyday. How did you know where to find it? Seen it somewhere before? Black-belt google-fu? :-)

Hehe! Steers, you salty old dog. Here you go big guy, just for you and your middle stump:

http://www.bing.com/search?q=Kaya+Scodelario

[justinvacula]

http://i.imgur.com/b0mQ3Y6.jpg

[rayshul]

Atheism Plus. AHAHAHHA. It's not going to happen, guys.



Of course, FtB are assholes and douchebags according to Shakesville, right...

[clownshoe]

Atheism Plus. AHAHAHHA. It's not going to happen, guys.

Atheism Plus... Guys don't do that.

[nippletwister]

http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013 ... y-suggests

"Majority Disaffection"

“We’re all unhappy – apparently that’s what equality looks like,” she said. “Every other group feels discriminated against as well, and when having these conversations with people who are members of these other groups, it’s important that you understand that.”
Miles surveyed 671 student affairs professionals, primarily in the South and Midwest. About 230 respondents were black, and 415 were white.
Snippets from the responses of white men suggested many of them feel unfairly judged and at times professionally limited because of their race and gender.
“I feel that being a white male often makes me a target within the higher ed community,” one respondent said, adding that he’s been “accused” of being racist and insensitive. Another said he believed a minority colleague resented him for getting a position they both applied for, chalking it up to “white privilege.”
“White men dominate the field,” one man said. “I fully support affirmative action, but I also recognize that, at times, it makes advancement for white men more difficult.”
Another: “I don’t generally have to think about my race when I do my work. I also don’t think that people think, ‘Oh, he’s white,’ when they work with me, but often consider the race of the person if they are not white.”
Some men said they’d be fired for voicing these thoughts in the workplace.

Yeah, I'm not surprised. It's pretty fucked up. I've become immediately distrusting of any organisation that values "diversity" because I'm like... exactly what the fuck does that mean? Does that mean they're going to treat my kid like a second class citizen and shut him the fuck down all the time? Because in my experience it absolutely fucking does.

pointless anecdote: In college I was an arts student, literature and music. I noticed that my two professors whom were gay males were actually quite good at dealing with all kinds of students from all kinds of backgrounds, the straight males were good teachers, but constantly had to be "on guard" so as not to offend anyone, and several of the females and minority professors were already wrapped up in opening everyone's eyes to other perspectives.....as long as it wasn't the perspective of a white male.

It wasn't all that bad to be honest, but one exchange I had really opened my eyes. In my music class, there were only 10 students, and none of us were prodigies, mostly just untutored kids from high school bands. We all had to work hard as hell. I was the only one who was also paying rent and working full time. The 50-something hispanic man who was a returning student, and the women all got as much face time and extra help as they needed, or it least it seemed so, going by what I saw and heard from other students.
At one point, I was completely swamped with school and work, and started to fall behind. I had all of one ten-minute talk with the female associate professor. I asked for any advice she could give, all I got was "work harder". I didn't even ask for any outside of class time. I asked if she could maybe just inquire about my homework status once in a while, to keep me on schedule. She told me point blank "I'm not your mom. You just need to shape up", yet she continued to pretty much shower half the class with all the extra time and attention they needed.

I don't really object to what she said, but the double standard was fucking appalling. And this was 20 years ago in Bakersfiled, not exactly a hot bed of progressivism. For all my "privilege", all it got me was all the responsibility of a full adult, and not an ounce of the compassion that they liked to talk about and shower on anyone not white and male.

Just my 2 cents.

[justinvacula]

We already have the makings of a 'harassment' and 'objectification' narrative at #aacon13 - when harassment doesn't exist feminists will create it:

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

http://i.imgur.com/uBEBg3Q.jpg

[Aneris]

We already have the makings of a 'harassment' and 'objectification' narrative at #aacon13 - when harassment doesn't exist feminists will create it:
http://i.imgur.com/JorWseN.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/uBEBg3Q.jpg

I keep wondering what they actually mean. I was almost asking them directly. But since this isn't possible anymore (because it would be considerd JAQing or whatever form of trolling--well done FTBullies), I am lost what they keep referring to and where their argument is. They keep blogging all day, surely they have a breakdown somewhere that clearly indicates how we (slymepit = forum = here) conspire to harass someone. Haven't seen anything.

[justinvacula]

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

Al? Is that you swinging your white cock of authority around?

[Cunning Punt]

Every now and then your avatar ... does something.... just out of the corner of my eye.

http://i843.photobucket.com/albums/zz35 ... _cheek.gif

She's far too young to know what that means....or maybe I'm getting too old.