Exposing the stupidity, lies, and hypocrisy of Social Justice Warriors since July 2012
http://slymepit.com/phpbb/
Well, it could be worse.lonesagi wrote:Brilliant. I concur.Michael K Gray wrote:The very reason to not invite Andrew to be one's best man:
(Pat of a Mitchell & Webb Youtube clip)
I failed to notice, and I believe at least one other got caught.Submariner wrote: Who here can tell me the difference between Chris Clarke and P Zed?
:lol:Jan Steen wrote:http://i.imgur.com/zpu6I0D.jpg
Social science is the intelligent design of real science.Karmakin wrote:One of my last posts on Crommunist, was about how he was talking about the different "levels" of Social Justice, I pointed out that much of their culture/movement was actually at below a 101 level. This was a couple of days after he was SHOCKED..SHOCKED I tell you that a study showed that minorities are racist at about an equal amount as whites. (Which of course most people would tell you...DUH)Jack wrote:Yes, their extensive lexicon of new words and redefinition of existing words is the same behaviour you would see in a cult (which is why I chose my signature) It's easy to invent words, slap a meaning on it with no evidence it is valid and use them for any argument you wish. However it means 99% of what they write is total crap. They even have that covered by calling it 'Advanced Sociology 301' which has the neat trick of blaming the reader for not accepting their junk ideology. As someone noticed earlier they also have the stopper in the wording 'double down' which means 'I have no valid response to your argument and as you won't agree with me immediately I won't talk to you any more but I will happily patronise and abuse you instead.'Karmakin wrote:Didn't stop them from attacking Hall herself, after all.windy wrote:Pot? Kettle? Even if the 'pit somehow toned down to the level of Hall's blog, it'd still be considered "going out of their way to be cruel and purposefully hurt"... wtf-ever.
It's not so much that they're hypocrites, it's that the tribalism trumps any notion of right and wrong or rationality or irrationality. Whatever they do is fine and dandy, whatever we do is wrong and horrible. What is being talked about there is a classic "tone" argument...something that they've railed against in the past. You also see it in the attitude about "hyperskepticism"....then going and demanding triple-plated proof for anything that someone who disagrees says.
Just like a cult.
The oppressor/oppressed model is the intelligent design of sociology.
h/t Razib KhanI’ve written about this before, and won’t rehash the arguments here, save to say that I think we should publish first, and then review. But one could argue that I haven’t really practiced what I preach, as all of my lab’s papers have gone through peer review before they were published.
No more. From now on we are going to post all of our papers online when we feel they’re ready to share – before they go to a journal. We’ll then solicit comments from our colleagues and use them to improve the work prior to formal publication. Physicists and mathematicians have been doing this for decades, as have an increasing number of biologists. It’s time for this to become standard practice.
Well, it's obvious you aren't consulting the right doctor for the job:I'm not a doctor, but Google informs me that if I were to seek out random testosterone injections without a valid medical prescription, just to see what it feels like on a whim, that this is actually illegal because testosterone is listed as a controlled substance in the United States (I'm assuming if we classify it that way the other first world nations will as well). So by encouraging women go out without the aid of a doctor and seeking testosterone is actually encouraging the violation of controlled substances laws. I also highly doubt that if I walk into a doctor and say "Hey, I want some testosterone injections" and for the reason of "I just want to try it you know", that most doctors would probably not go along with it.
or intelligencelonesagi wrote:Tact isn't exactly one of Peezus' strong points. Or etiquette. Or empathy.rocko2466 wrote:Yes. We are all triggered by that photograph, but moving on...
PZ posts about his book: http://www.freezepage.com/1361597432WEFVOZWZCH
and then says, about his blog:
He says this three fucking days after Melody Hensley - who helped him edit his fucking book - had a fucking breakdown on Twitter and had her boyfriend take her to the ER.It’s true. If I did have an editor for the blog, they’d have a nervous breakdown and collapse in the first day. Either that or they’d only allow me to post one thoroughly vetted sentence a week.
I declare his new name as Poe Z Myers.
Meanwhile, the song on my Youtube channel tomorrow (Sunday) may address people's speculation about the preparation for advertising that book...
This needs to be stamped on their blogs as a warning.codelette wrote:In regards to McBoobquake and the rest of her gang. I daresay that their obsession with "diversity" and ill-informed ways as to how to lure more blacks/hispanics into their world is born from a morbid antropological curiosity. They only see white people in places because they themselves decided to live in places where the majority is white. Seattle, Minneapolis...there's even graphical evidence as to how white the places are. Want to experience diversity? Move to the South.
But they really don't wanna do that. They seem to like the idea of mingling with more minorities only in theory.
erm .... I may have to retract that bit about the meds. I am also going to let someone else sort that out.Very cool paper! The following crazy idea occurred to me as a way to discriminate the other two axes of the embryo. You could lay each slice in a consistent orientation onto a substrate that has had deposited onto it a two-dimensional grid of distinct indexing oligos, and then do an in situ ligation reaction to ligate the indexing oligos to the embryonic mRNA. Once the ligation is done, then you sequence the entire slice’s mRNA together, but each mRNA molecule is associated with its position in the grid by virtue of being ligated to the indexing oligo corresponding to that grid position.
Fuck. I read it somewhere on here maybe? Her and her boyfriend Simon or some shit? Let me find it. I'll get back to you.windy wrote:Saw the breakdown, but when did she edit his book?rocko2466 wrote: He says this three fucking days after Melody Hensley - who helped him edit his fucking book - had a fucking breakdown on Twitter and had her boyfriend take her to the ER.
I declare his new name as Poe Z Myers.
In other not-really-news: this by any chance 'our' julian?Pot? Kettle? Even if the 'pit somehow toned down to the level of Hall's blog, it'd still be considered "going out of their way to be cruel and purposefully hurt"... wtf-ever.This whole thing is ridiculous. Those offended on Amy Roth’s behalf have behaved incredibly childishly towards Dr. Hall and Dr. Hall’s defenders have gone out of their way to be cruel and purposefully hurt.
Of the two I find Roth’s party less distasteful and judging from the complete disregard for others (Once again, thank you, Hitch, for giving jerks an excuse to be callous human beings) I’m glad to not be part of the skeptical community. You people are outright cruel and hurtful just to win a web argument.
nice work rayshul and congratulations :dance:katamari Damassi wrote:Way to flaunt your fertile, childbearing privilege there Rayshul. Not all of us have a uterus you know?Skep tickle wrote:!!! :shock: :) :Drayshul, commenting on ZJ's suggestion that people try opposite-sex hormones, wrote:Theoretically I'd be interested in that - I'm pretty sure my gender's not important to me in the slightest, but I doubt I'd want to be a man because a) I'm 100% certain that women get a better deal out of life in virtually every way and b) I'd be a *short* man, and I just don't think I could accept that. (I'm also a leetle worried because I'm fairly aggressive and swear a lot, and I realise my gender probably lets me get away with a fuck load of behaviour that would not be considered "socially appropriate" from a man.) Of course currently pregnant with twins so it's not like I could do any hormone shit. But I'd be interested in an experiment if one was ever done that involved that sort of thing.
If you'd mentioned it earlier, I missed the announcement.
Congratulations! When are you due, and how are you doing?
And, of course, you are currently doing some serious "hormone shit" - only it's not at all the approach ZJ' was suggesting :lol:
That's my A+theism way of saying congratulations.
AndrewV69 wrote:In other news,
While scrolling by the last rant directed at me by walsh, I got the impression that he seemed to think that Summers lost his job at Havard, not because of the gender feminists AKA, the "PC crowd" but because of money.
The problem with the "over a billion" dollars loss is that Summers agreed to step down in 2006 after a no-confidence vote. The swap contracts that went bad happened in 2008 which was two years later.
I dunno about you folks, but in my experience, you can hardly ever go wrong if you follow the money. So despite welsh appearing to be wrong, rather than dismiss it as just another one of his caffeine fuelled rants I decided to look into it.
Methinks thou dost methinks too much.Steersman wrote:I guess I’ll have to embark on a 12 step program to curtail my use of the word – methinks ….lonesagi wrote:Meh, I just like to give you a good ribbing and/or take the piss more than anything... although you do have an unhealthy fascination with "methinks" and use it way too fucking much.Steersman wrote::icon-lol:lonesagi wrote:Steers, I owe you an apology. You are obviously not the most tedious, verbose poster on the 'pit.AndrewV69 wrote:In other news,
Blah blah blah.
<snip>
That has to qualify as a classic left-handed compliment – thanks, I think.
Though to be fair to Andrew, his posts, I think, have a fair amount of meat to them, just that they frequently require more time and effort to parse than I, at least, frequently have time for ….
Which brings up my first question after seeing the photo (well, after; "Why Lsuoma? Why?"): namely, how long do you think they spent arguing over who's going to pay the tab?Tigzy wrote:Rebecca Watson: 'Right, that's my round in. What are the rest of you having?'
Having worked with an MTF trans and had a close family member who is an FTM trans, this is not some minor shit. Taking hormones, passing as a different gender is a profoundly transformative experience, and the idea that you should just start slamming hormones to "see if you're really who you think you are" is almost obscene as an idea.AndrewV69 wrote:http://www.slymepit.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... 879#p66879
Norah Vincent did try living like a man for 18 months. She is not straight though, so she did wind up going out on dates with women while posing as a man.decius wrote: And which straight "cis" person would even contemplate the possibility of gender-surfing?
http://abcnews.go.com/2020/Entertainmen ... 982&page=1Book here:She continued her emotional descent, and a week later, checked in to a hospital with severe depression. Identity, she concluded, was not something to play around with.
"When you mess around with that, you really mess around with something that you need that helps you to function. And I found out that gender lives in your brain and is something much more than costume. And I really learned that the hard way," she said.
I think there probably is something to what you're saying. But I also think there is a tendency to over analyze this, complicated by the fact that many feel uncomfortable discussing race frankly.codelette wrote:In regards to McBoobquake and the rest of her gang. I daresay that their obsession with "diversity" and ill-informed ways as to how to lure more blacks/hispanics into their world is born from a morbid antropological curiosity. They only see white people in places because they themselves decided to live in places where the majority is white. Seattle, Minneapolis...there's even graphical evidence as to how white the places are. Want to experience diversity? Move to the South.
But they really don't wanna do that. They seem to like the idea of mingling with more minorities only in theory.
dude, get the quote right:Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:I'm preparing sausage rolls. Not an innuendo...
The continual assumption that non-honkies are somehow always poor, unable to do for themselves, is ridiculous and racist as hell. Yes, it is absolutely correct to point out that in the US, if you're not white, by and large, you take it in the shorts more than honkies. There's rather a lot of supporting data, although it is SLOWWWWWWWLY getting better.Jack wrote:No one likes to be patronised. They really can't grasp that treating every minority as a victim is offensive to people in those groups who are quite capable of sticking up for themselves as long as there is an equal footing. I want an equal footing, no more and no less. Most people do. Only people with 'issues', those with no ability to understand the subtlety and complexity of human relations and those trying to get an unfair advantage buy into their ideology.Apples wrote:A post from Lilandra at Ace of Clades quotes a Pew survey about African-American religious affiliation:Which leads to the hypothesis that the single greatest obstacle to blacks' involvement in the secular movement is people like PZ Myers and his hostile, alienating, arrogant brand of gnu atheism. Same probably goes for women, if you believe Secular Census type data. Not to mention folks like Jen McWrong, who broadcast the notion that to get the darkies interested you have to talk about drugs and jail.Pew Survey wrote:While the U.S. is generally considered a highly religious nation, African-Americans are markedly more religious on a variety of measures than the U.S. population as a whole, including level of affiliation with a religion, attendance at religious services, frequency of prayer and religion’s importance in life. Compared with other racial and ethnic groups. Compared with other racial and ethnic groups, African-Americans are among the most likely to report a formal religious affiliation, with fully 87% of African-Americans describing themselves as belonging to one religious group or another, according to the U.S. Religious Landscape Survey, conducted in 2007 by the Pew Research Center’s Forum on Religion & Public Life.
http://freethoughtblogs.com/aronra/2013 ... ent-black/
http://www.freezepage.com/1361626496WWJSYNNZBK
[youtube]fXo4CfjqN5c[/youtube]
I wouldn't care about that at all but to steal the word 'Atheism' and 'Freethought' as well as trying to inject their ideology into a community which has no interest in their simplistic narrative is dishonest. If they renamed Atheism Plus to 'SJW+' and 'FtB' to 'Rad Fem Blogs' and left the rationalists get on with what they have always done no one would give a crap. If they stopped trying to hijack conferences with exclusions and histrionics no one would care.
The various movements we have all been part of or interested in had the great strength of being roughly united in how we discuss, openly and without censure, what we believe. That allowed us to communicate effectively together no matter what our race, colour or background. We are not idealogs and are happy to question all our beliefs and consider what people say far more important than who they are.
FtB and A+ go against everything we stand for which is why I am motivated to speak out against it. For me what they believe is almost incidental to the way they project themselves and behave. They are not interested in Atheism or any form of rationalism, some have even said that openly. Blogs by PZ are 90% Ad Hominem and 10% strawman. They have no place in a rationalist community who are doing it's best to try and deal with the overwhelming issues we all face in this world.
That's insulting on almost every level. What, dem po old black folks don't be making enough bling to do internships? REALLY???Further, the tools that bring in people outside of circles of collegiality and friendship, like internships (unpaid or low-paying), lack appeal to minorities who may lack the funds to learn the ropes and get an in. Some families may heavily discourage (and thus not provide support and funds for) such internships in favor of a more aggressive pursuit of degrees or permanent employment.
I'd pay real money to see them suddenly dropped off on one end of Calle Ocho in Miami. Comedy fucking gold.codelette wrote:In regards to McBoobquake and the rest of her gang. I daresay that their obsession with "diversity" and ill-informed ways as to how to lure more blacks/hispanics into their world is born from a morbid antropological curiosity. They only see white people in places because they themselves decided to live in places where the majority is white. Seattle, Minneapolis...there's even graphical evidence as to how white the places are. Want to experience diversity? Move to the South.
But they really don't wanna do that. They seem to like the idea of mingling with more minorities only in theory.
Who is paying the tab?Gefan wrote:Which brings up my first question after seeing the photo (well, after; "Why Lsuoma? Why?"): namely, how long do you think they spent arguing over who's going to pay the tab?Tigzy wrote:Rebecca Watson: 'Right, that's my round in. What are the rest of you having?'
I'd like to hear that conversation.Gefan wrote:Which brings up my first question after seeing the photo (well, after; "Why Lsuoma? Why?"): namely, how long do you think they spent arguing over who's going to pay the tab?Tigzy wrote:Rebecca Watson: 'Right, that's my round in. What are the rest of you having?'
That makes no more sense to me than his usual shitte. :lol: But maybe this time it's different?AndrewV69 wrote:Hmmm,
Comrade PhysioProf shows up and he also has the audacity to link to his blog.
His comment has no extra vowels so perhaps he is off his meds (or on them) because he actually and for once uses words that ....
http://www.michaeleisen.org/blog/?p=1304#comment-226448erm .... I may have to retract that bit about the meds. I am also going to let someone else sort that out.Very cool paper! The following crazy idea occurred to me as a way to discriminate the other two axes of the embryo. You could lay each slice in a consistent orientation onto a substrate that has had deposited onto it a two-dimensional grid of distinct indexing oligos, and then do an in situ ligation reaction to ligate the indexing oligos to the embryonic mRNA. Once the ligation is done, then you sequence the entire slice’s mRNA together, but each mRNA molecule is associated with its position in the grid by virtue of being ligated to the indexing oligo corresponding to that grid position.
Huh? Not referring to me, I hope?Jack wrote:
It's jut another argument from emotion which Hitchens railed against. It does not come to the correct conclusions except by chance. If his argument is 'They are a less bad therefore correct' it is a complete fallacy. One great loss in all of this is the inability to avoid Ad Hominems, a mainstay of any critical thought process. PG et al indulge in this all the time and on reflection he always did. They should not be surprised when they get called on it and their arguments treated as fallacious.
It is not his usual shitte - he's suggesting an experimental procedure that might give some useful information - but it doesn't sound practical in terms of the original experiment (Physioproffes suggestion is very speculative and unlikely to work with the drosophila embryos - they don't contain enough mRNA for it to survive the fragmentation and ligation process in sufficient quantities.Cunning Punt wrote:That makes no more sense to me than his usual shitte. :lol: But maybe this time it's different?AndrewV69 wrote:Hmmm,
Comrade PhysioProf shows up and he also has the audacity to link to his blog.
His comment has no extra vowels so perhaps he is off his meds (or on them) because he actually and for once uses words that ....
http://www.michaeleisen.org/blog/?p=1304#comment-226448erm .... I may have to retract that bit about the meds. I am also going to let someone else sort that out.Very cool paper! The following crazy idea occurred to me as a way to discriminate the other two axes of the embryo. You could lay each slice in a consistent orientation onto a substrate that has had deposited onto it a two-dimensional grid of distinct indexing oligos, and then do an in situ ligation reaction to ligate the indexing oligos to the embryonic mRNA. Once the ligation is done, then you sequence the entire slice’s mRNA together, but each mRNA molecule is associated with its position in the grid by virtue of being ligated to the indexing oligo corresponding to that grid position.
Isn't that Dana Carvey in Church Lady get up on the right there?Dick Strawkins wrote:Who is paying the tab?Gefan wrote:Which brings up my first question after seeing the photo (well, after; "Why Lsuoma? Why?"): namely, how long do you think they spent arguing over who's going to pay the tab?Tigzy wrote:Rebecca Watson: 'Right, that's my round in. What are the rest of you having?'
Isn't it obvious?
It's the schmuck towards whom they are all grinning/gurning.
I remembered seeing that photo before (and not just in my nightmares) so I did a google image search and found it.
The original photo appeared on a blog post by Adam Lee - the official gimp of the FTB/Skepchick posse.
I'm thinking about how small Drosophila embryos are and how one could reliably place cryosections of them in a consistent orientation on a "two-dimensional grid of distinct indexing oligos." Sounds like something a BSD lab PI would force his grad students and postdocs to try.Cunning Punt wrote:That makes no more sense to me than his usual shitte. :lol: But maybe this time it's different?AndrewV69 wrote:Hmmm,
Comrade PhysioProf shows up and he also has the audacity to link to his blog.
His comment has no extra vowels so perhaps he is off his meds (or on them) because he actually and for once uses words that ....
http://www.michaeleisen.org/blog/?p=1304#comment-226448erm .... I may have to retract that bit about the meds. I am also going to let someone else sort that out.Very cool paper! The following crazy idea occurred to me as a way to discriminate the other two axes of the embryo. You could lay each slice in a consistent orientation onto a substrate that has had deposited onto it a two-dimensional grid of distinct indexing oligos, and then do an in situ ligation reaction to ligate the indexing oligos to the embryonic mRNA. Once the ligation is done, then you sequence the entire slice’s mRNA together, but each mRNA molecule is associated with its position in the grid by virtue of being ligated to the indexing oligo corresponding to that grid position.
I assume he meant PZ.Phil wrote:Huh? Not referring to me, I hope?
If they openly displayed their ideology around where I live it would also be hilarious. As a Honkey I'd just watch in amusement. I have a feeling they would take one look around here and run as fast as they can to their nearest 'safe space' to get back to their internet warrior crap.welch wrote:I'd pay real money to see them suddenly dropped off on one end of Calle Ocho in Miami. Comedy fucking gold.codelette wrote:In regards to McBoobquake and the rest of her gang. I daresay that their obsession with "diversity" and ill-informed ways as to how to lure more blacks/hispanics into their world is born from a morbid antropological curiosity. They only see white people in places because they themselves decided to live in places where the majority is white. Seattle, Minneapolis...there's even graphical evidence as to how white the places are. Want to experience diversity? Move to the South.
But they really don't wanna do that. They seem to like the idea of mingling with more minorities only in theory.
WHAT fucking book? There's no real evidence for its existence, right?Skep tickle wrote:(I can't speak to whether or not MH helped PZ edit his fucking book)
Fucking Spic!Gumby wrote:Julian The Neck-Snappin' Spic weighs in on the Harriet Hall controversy. In response to someone who said "but I support her right to have her point of view, and state it without the petty attacks she has been subjected to, supposedly by members of her own community, the skeptics", The Violent One opines:
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/ind ... ent-113435Because she’s been so above this all, right? No talk of witch hunts or professional victims looking to be offended, right? None of that ever happened, I assume.
This whole thing is ridiculous. Those offended on Amy Roth’s behalf have behaved incredibly childishly towards Dr. Hall and Dr. Hall’s defenders have gone out of their way to be cruel and purposefully hurt.
Of the two I find Roth’s party less distasteful and judging from the complete disregard for others (Once again, thank you, Hitch, for giving jerks an excuse to be callous human beings) I’m glad to not be part of the skeptical community. You people are outright cruel and hurtful just to win a web argument.
Thank you for your sage words, Julian. You may now continue to stay classy and above all this nonsense by issuing more of your patented violent death threats :roll:
Totally intended quotemine...welch wrote:dude, get the quote right:Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:I'm preparing sausage rolls. Not an innuendo...
Fuck Apples
Plural. It's an old carlin bit
lurking coward wrote:Isn't that Dana Carvey in Church Lady get up on the right there?Dick Strawkins wrote:Who is paying the tab?Gefan wrote:Which brings up my first question after seeing the photo (well, after; "Why Lsuoma? Why?"): namely, how long do you think they spent arguing over who's going to pay the tab?Tigzy wrote:Rebecca Watson: 'Right, that's my round in. What are the rest of you having?'
Isn't it obvious?
It's the schmuck towards whom they are all grinning/gurning.
I remembered seeing that photo before (and not just in my nightmares) so I did a google image search and found it.
The original photo appeared on a blog post by Adam Lee - the official gimp of the FTB/Skepchick posse.
https://www.google.com/search?q=dana+ca ... lENUrkHcBM:
I never found Dana Carvey particularly funny, BTW, but Greta looks frightfully similar to his Church Lady character.
[Jen looks like she's in the before shot for a tooth whitening product.]
dick :-PPhil_Giordana_FCD wrote:Totally intended quotemine...welch wrote:dude, get the quote right:Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:I'm preparing sausage rolls. Not an innuendo...
Fuck Apples
Plural. It's an old carlin bit
All this harping on about people's teeth makes us British people feel rather uncomfortable... not very inclusive.lurking coward wrote: [Jen looks like she's in the before shot for a tooth whitening product.]
Do people actually say "honky" where you're from or is it an affectationne?welch wrote:honkies
No, I was just copying the word used earlier:)AbsurdWalls wrote:Do people actually say "honky" where you're from or is it an affectationne?welch wrote:honkies
I'd never heard it used by anyone before your appearance on Reap's podcast.
Interesting bit on BBC radio this morning about dental hygiene:AbsurdWalls wrote:All this harping on about people's teeth makes us British people feel rather uncomfortable... not very inclusive.lurking coward wrote: [Jen looks like she's in the before shot for a tooth whitening product.]
I was quoting welch's usage not yours. I know it's not a "thing" in the UK.Jack wrote:No, I was just copying the word used earlier:)AbsurdWalls wrote:Do people actually say "honky" where you're from or is it an affectationne?welch wrote:honkies
I'd never heard it used by anyone before your appearance on Reap's podcast.
The colour of someone's skin is not referred to much unless describing someone. If anyone used 'Person of Colour' they would be laughed at.
Yes just realised, sorry.AbsurdWalls wrote:I was quoting welch's usage not yours. I know it's not a "thing" in the UK.Jack wrote:No, I was just copying the word used earlier:)AbsurdWalls wrote:Do people actually say "honky" where you're from or is it an affectationne?welch wrote:honkies
I'd never heard it used by anyone before your appearance on Reap's podcast.
The colour of someone's skin is not referred to much unless describing someone. If anyone used 'Person of Colour' they would be laughed at.
As a 'merkin I've never heard it used except in a tongue-in-cheek context -- like a blaxploitation film or a welch post. I'd guess its use (if it was ever really used much by minorities as a slur against whites) peaked in the early 70s. I'd think 'cracker' had/has more currency as a sincere slur against whites.Jack wrote:No, I was just copying the word used earlier:)AbsurdWalls wrote:Do people actually say "honky" where you're from or is it an affectationne?welch wrote:honkies
I'd never heard it used by anyone before your appearance on Reap's podcast.
The colour of someone's skin is not referred to much unless describing someone. If anyone used 'Person of Colour' they would be laughed at.
Further down the thread, Tigzy points out that julian has been contributing to the "childish," "cruel and hurtful" behavior rather than being above it. In response julian claims that responding to something that offends you with threats of violence is just "responding in kind". Sort of like threatening to bomb someone's house for drawing Mohammed, except that it's wrong when religion does it. Perhaps we should have a draw julian day.Lsuoma wrote:Fucking Spic!Gumby wrote:Julian The Neck-Snappin' Spic weighs in on the Harriet Hall controversy. In response to someone who said "but I support her right to have her point of view, and state it without the petty attacks she has been subjected to, supposedly by members of her own community, the skeptics", The Violent One opines:
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/ind ... ent-113435Because she’s been so above this all, right? No talk of witch hunts or professional victims looking to be offended, right? None of that ever happened, I assume.
This whole thing is ridiculous. Those offended on Amy Roth’s behalf have behaved incredibly childishly towards Dr. Hall and Dr. Hall’s defenders have gone out of their way to be cruel and purposefully hurt.
Of the two I find Roth’s party less distasteful and judging from the complete disregard for others (Once again, thank you, Hitch, for giving jerks an excuse to be callous human beings) I’m glad to not be part of the skeptical community. You people are outright cruel and hurtful just to win a web argument.
Thank you for your sage words, Julian. You may now continue to stay classy and above all this nonsense by issuing more of your patented violent death threats :roll:
Lsuoma wrote:Fucking Spic!Gumby wrote:Julian The Neck-Snappin' Spic weighs in on the Harriet Hall controversy. In response to someone who said "but I support her right to have her point of view, and state it without the petty attacks she has been subjected to, supposedly by members of her own community, the skeptics", The Violent One opines:
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/ind ... ent-113435Because she’s been so above this all, right? No talk of witch hunts or professional victims looking to be offended, right? None of that ever happened, I assume.
This whole thing is ridiculous. Those offended on Amy Roth’s behalf have behaved incredibly childishly towards Dr. Hall and Dr. Hall’s defenders have gone out of their way to be cruel and purposefully hurt.
Of the two I find Roth’s party less distasteful and judging from the complete disregard for others (Once again, thank you, Hitch, for giving jerks an excuse to be callous human beings) I’m glad to not be part of the skeptical community. You people are outright cruel and hurtful just to win a web argument.
Thank you for your sage words, Julian. You may now continue to stay classy and above all this nonsense by issuing more of your patented violent death threats :roll:
It was quite popular in the 70s in the US, kind of died out after that.AbsurdWalls wrote:Do people actually say "honky" where you're from or is it an affectationne?welch wrote:honkies
I'd never heard it used by anyone before your appearance on Reap's podcast.
that's real regional, and causes you more problems if you aren't a local when you use it.Apples wrote:As a 'merkin I've never heard it used except in a tongue-in-cheek context -- like a blaxploitation film or a welch post. I'd guess its use (if it was ever really used much by minorities as a slur against whites) peaked in the early 70s. I'd think 'cracker' had/has more currency as a sincere slur against whites.Jack wrote:No, I was just copying the word used earlier:)AbsurdWalls wrote:Do people actually say "honky" where you're from or is it an affectationne?welch wrote:honkies
I'd never heard it used by anyone before your appearance on Reap's podcast.
The colour of someone's skin is not referred to much unless describing someone. If anyone used 'Person of Colour' they would be laughed at.
But of course. In D-minor.Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:John: to the tune of Kyle's Mom is a Bitch?
Can't be D-minor. Only two chords in this song, and they're in major mode. But if it were in D, then it would be: D A D A D A...welch wrote:But of course. In D-minor.Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:John: to the tune of Kyle's Mom is a Bitch?
I think you've misread that.rocko2466 wrote:Simon and Melody edited (and will promote) PZ's book.
Humorously, they will promote through CFI. Because CFI is their own little club for circle-jerking with their friends.
http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... ent-554698
(Ergo, my comments about PZ making "editor-nervous-breakdown" jokes are accurate.)
I see where you are coming, and I tend to agree you about people gathering together based on culture (which is somehow why people tend to gather based on race or ethnicity). However, the Radiohead/Star Wars and lack of appeal to Hispanics are not a great example.Guest wrote: I think there probably is something to what you're saying. But I also think there is a tendency to over analyze this, complicated by the fact that many feel uncomfortable discussing race frankly.
Frankly, to some extent, the reason there aren't many blacks or Hispanics at skeptic conferences (aide from the already mentioned fact that both groups tend to be more religious than non-Hispanic whites) is the same reason you wouldn't find too many blacks and Hispanics at a Star Wars convention or at a Radiohead show for that matter. It's not racism, it's just a cultural difference. The 'skeptic scene', like it or not, tends to attract nerdy white people. Even those blacks and Hispanics who are inclined towards skepticism aren't likely to be interested in going to a conference.
It might be interesting to investigate why these differences in culture exist across ethnic groups, but in the current PC climate I doubt this could be undertaken with the required objectivity or rigor. The only politically acceptable answer to any such questions is "racism!" When it comes to sociology we are basically living in the Middle Ages, and the PC thought police (mostly liberal white academics) are the clerics.
Honestly, the skeptic scene, white disproportionately white, isn't really so much of a white thing as it is a 'nerd' thing. It's a subcultures type that s mostly but not exclusively white (you could say the same of Radiohead's fan base, and so far as I knew, nobody suspects Radiohead of being racist, consciously or otherwise).
You know, not many East Asians are into American Football. Is this because the NFL has a systemic anti-East Asian bias? There are Aldo hardly any Jewish football players; is this due to rampant anti-semitism in football? Should football players make special efforts to get Jews and Asians to go to football games? Should Radiohead make a special appeal to blacks and Hispanics to start digging their music?
As a matter of fact, I don't recall ever seeing a Swedish matador, or a black Mariachi fan. Racism?
Whatever. You see where I'm coming from... :roll:
Richard Dworkins wrote:I assume there is some history with this Julian chap and Welch's enthusiastic use of spic to refer to him?
I want to see them writing about thiswelch wrote:I'd pay real money to see them suddenly dropped off on one end of Calle Ocho in Miami. Comedy fucking gold.codelette wrote:In regards to McBoobquake and the rest of her gang. I daresay that their obsession with "diversity" and ill-informed ways as to how to lure more blacks/hispanics into their world is born from a morbid antropological curiosity. They only see white people in places because they themselves decided to live in places where the majority is white. Seattle, Minneapolis...there's even graphical evidence as to how white the places are. Want to experience diversity? Move to the South.
But they really don't wanna do that. They seem to like the idea of mingling with more minorities only in theory.
http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=4030Eowyn Entwife wrote:What do people think, would it be useful to have in the wiki a list of organizations that present themselves as having research-based knowledge about social justice related issues but in reality are a front for some more or less fundamentalist dogma?
You know who else is a spic? Brad Pitt.Lsuoma wrote:BTW, hello Julian, you spic!
Yeah Eowyn, it would be useful indeed. And the list could be alphabetically-ordered. Guess who would figure in the first spot?Apples wrote:Unintentional irony, A+ style:
http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=4030Eowyn Entwife wrote:What do people think, would it be useful to have in the wiki a list of organizations that present themselves as having research-based knowledge about social justice related issues but in reality are a front for some more or less fundamentalist dogma?
