Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It

[Dick Strawkins]

Over on Butterflies and Wheels that annoying condescending nincompoop, 'rorschach,' whines about Vacula and pogsurf but tells those Irish ladeez not to worry. He's going to sort them out.

rorschach
June 24, 2013 at 7:36 pm (UTC -7)
I would have preferred Tzortzis over Vacula or Wiesner. But yes, it will be great despite those trolls. I also hope that we can come up with a strong declaration that can send a signal out to improve things for women in in particular Ireland.

Someone has probably posted the schedule already but am I getting it wrong in thinking that the topics seem a little ill-suited for the American contingent?

Ophelia has some knowledge of the effect that fundamentalist religion has on womens health, through her work on her "God Hates Women" book. But "Reproductive rights and Irish abortion law"? I really don't think she has any expertise in this area whatsoever. There must be plenty of Irish women that would be far better suited to that panel. Off the top of my head I could name two - Grannia Spingies, of the Irish Atheist society and Senator Ivana Bacik.
Abortion rights in Ireland is a complicated topic. The public attitude is far different from that of many other western societies. For example there is very low levels of public support for the sort of abortion laws that are in operation in the UK. At the same time the Irish public respects the right of travel of pregnant women (and doesn't ask questions if they travel to the UK to get an abortion.) Those in Ireland in favor of reproductive rights tend to work within that reality - looking to make small amounts of progress, such as changing the law to allow for abortion in the case of a medical emergency. It is always the case, however, that those rights that women do have, may be put at risk by proposing too broad a reform of the current laws.


As for PZ's session:
"Secular Values in Society Leonie Hilliard, Nina Sankari, Farhana Shakir, PZ Myers"

I wonder if PZ can work with the European version of secularism. In Europe secularism does not mean atheism - it simply means the application of the states laws in a manner independent of any one religion.
Lets hope PZ doesn't try anySkepticon type card tricks.



For Watson: "Session 3 – Separation of Church and State Ann Brusseel, Annie Laurie Gaylor, Rebecca Watson, Michael Nugent"

This seems to be a session where the 'women' aspect is irrelevant. All it takes is someone with some experience of activism against state support of religion. Has Rebecca Watson done anything along this line?
Vacula would have been a more apt pick than Watson.

Saturday 29th of June

9.30am-10.15am - Introduction – Annie Laurie Gaylor

10.15am-11.30am Session 1 – Reproductive rights and Irish abortion law Ophelia Benson, Clare Daly, Anthea McTiernan, Ailbhe Smyth, Doctors for Choice

11.45am-1 pm - Session 2 – Secular Values in Society Leonie Hilliard, Nina Sankari, Farhana Shakir, PZ Myers

2.15pm-3.30pm - Session 3 – Separation of Church and State Ann Brusseel, Annie Laurie Gaylor, Rebecca Watson, Michael Nugent

4.45pm-6.00pm - Session 4 – Human Rights Jane Donnelly, Maryam Namazie, To Be Confirmed, Dan Barker

6.15pm-7.00pm - Keynote Speaker – Taslima Nasrin

Sunday 30th of June

10.15am-11.30am - Session 5 – Politics and Campaigning Rachel Donnelly, Maryam Namazie, Ann Marie Waters, Carlos Diaz

11.45am-1pm - Session 6 – Finalising the Declaration Panelists representing outcomes of each of sessions 1-5

2.15pm-3.30pm – Session 7 – Review of Conference and What Next Kate Smurthwaite, others to be confirmed

3.30pm – 4.15pm - Closing speeches

[Dick Strawkins]

Justin tweeted a link to this Q he posted on facebook: "Can someone please explain to me why Rebecca Watson is included on a "Separation of Church and State" panel at the Empowering Women Through Secularism conference? Thank you."

https://www.facebook.com/justinvacula/p ... 5328364327

Some dude has derailed it onto abortion. Evangeline Claire (aka Eucliwood) is in the comments, giving as good as she gets.

I hope she contacts Lsuoma once she's 18 & can be reactivated here.

Ha! I've just made the same point about Rebecca Watson without seeing your or Justin's posts.

[ThreeFlangedJavis]

Have you asked him? I expect he might say that that was his old un-re-educated self before he had seen the errors of his ways, had seen the light of True Feminism ™. At least as far as his “it works, bitches” comment is concerned.

But that doesn’t mean that he isn’t entitled to think that those who haven’t been similarly “enlightened” and who use such words are guilty of misogyny. And you and I are entitled to think, as I at least do, that he has his head well up his ass because there’s no empirical justification for his argument by which he makes that judgement.

So he's entitled to think that the 'unenlightened' are guilty of misogyny and yet somehow he was not a misogynist before his enlightenment? Don't forget that he was always a feminist. Further, how can he reserve such harsh judgement for the 'unenlightened' when in accordance with your defence above it is feasibly just a matter of timing and perspective, rather than a character issue, that separates him from the 'unenlightened'.

[bovarchist]

BTW, that's an open invitation for anybody to come look. I also have a Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VandenEykelPhotography and I could use all the Likes I can get </shamelesswhore>

Not on facebook, so I went here http://www.vanden-eykel.com/photography/

I looked at all of the photos, bovarchist, enjoyed all and am quite keen on many.

Non-inclusive list:

Loved Dusty the cat in "animals", because it took a minute to figure out what that grey bit of fluff was until I noticed his eye :)
Marvin and the waitress in "portraits" look like interesting people. Bit jealous you got to see Colbert live.
The Phoenix Cross picture in "remnants" is particularly appealing. Bit of irony with a phoenix, but it makes me think of old, small, wild graveyards which I always find completely captivating. Weathered gravestones+wild flowers and unkempt trees and grasses=yum.
So many good ones in "other", God Face, Closing Ceremonies, Emerald Lake Boats, Moody Park Clock, Forgotten, Apples I like because of the one jarringly askew.
Won't even try to pick favorites from "Panoramas", so many are stunners.

Glad you posted the link. Lots of pretty to come home from work and see

Thank you for your kind words :)

Phoenix Cross comes from the BC town of Phoenix, which doesn't exist anymore. The entire town was turned into a pit mine. The graveyard is still there though, and you would love it. My favorite stone was for "Maria Poscente and her twin baby boys" which tells a sad enough story by itself, but even better is that although they died in 1905, someone is still regularly leaving flowers on the grave.

[bovarchist]

I'll say it, before someone else is forced to (but it won't be funny);

With the FtB goon squad, it's more appropriate to use the Rule of Turds.

The Irish rule of thirds.

Check yer fekkin' "th" privilege, ya fekkin' people from somewhere Nort ov us. Ye can talk when ya stop crossin' out da mistakes on yer "o"s.

Christ Mary and fekkin' Jesus fekkin' christ on a wee dunkey, isn't dis wat we fart fer? Will de legions of Anglo fekkin' Saxon shoit never stop oppressin' us?

O. Hello there Mr Myers, welcome to Dublin. Do hope you find it acceptable. Now, which bit of your arse do I kiss?

That would be the bit with Rebecca Watson's face on it, so it would.

[katamari Damassi]

And your sense of humor is kind of gay.

The pit could use some more gay. This dump is entirely too heterosexual.

http://www.biography.com/imported/image ... -1-402.jpg

http://www.lesjones.com/www/images/post ... abinet.jpg

https://fbcdn-sphotos-b-a.akamaihd.net/ ... 4057_n.jpg

There. Now shut the fuck up.

Well now it's too gay.
Love the Fiestaware.

[some guy]

Justin tweeted a link to this Q he posted on facebook: "Can someone please explain to me why Rebecca Watson is included on a "Separation of Church and State" panel at the Empowering Women Through Secularism conference? Thank you."

Well, if you check her CV, besides being an active researcher in Evolutionary Biology (I think she wrote a textbook on the subject) she is also a noted constitutional law scholar focused on First Amendment issues. Her amicus brief in the Dover trial was seminal in Judge Jones' final ruling (lol! he plagiarized sections of that: remember how that pissed off the DI people!).

Anytime you hear of a grass roots effort to address instances of this around the country (school-led prayer, religious symbols in schools and on public property, etc) you'll find Rebecca behind the scenes crafting the arguments that give it the strongest legal weight. But her perspective is also international: her monograph on the laws and traditions in other western societies with respect to church/state issues remains the authoritative source for anyone seeking a comparative assessment of the evolution in such laws throughout the western world.

[Dick Strawkins]

Have you asked him? I expect he might say that that was his old un-re-educated self before he had seen the errors of his ways, had seen the light of True Feminism ™. At least as far as his “it works, bitches” comment is concerned.

But that doesn’t mean that he isn’t entitled to think that those who haven’t been similarly “enlightened” and who use such words are guilty of misogyny. And you and I are entitled to think, as I at least do, that he has his head well up his ass because there’s no empirical justification for his argument by which he makes that judgement.

So he's entitled to think that the 'unenlightened' are guilty of misogyny and yet somehow he was not a misogynist before his enlightenment? Don't forget that he was always a feminist. Further, how can he reserve such harsh judgement for the 'unenlightened' when in accordance with your defence above it is feasibly just a matter of timing and perspective, rather than a character issue, that separates him from the 'unenlightened'.

ThreeFlangedJarvis, stop using special pleading*!

* in Steersman's head 'special pleading' seems to be defined as "the demand that PZ Myers, and he alone, is not allowed a special dispensation from the behavior he demands of others"

Special Pleading?

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

[Cunning Punt]

Cruise/Marcotte do have uncanny facial similarity. Note, I don't mean they look the same...but there's something there.

It's the boat-load of crazy-cultist they share.

This calls for one of those morphing gif thingies. Which sadly I have no idea how to do.

[deLurch]

I don't know. Here she looks cute:

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ScJIMPn19Fk/T ... /BksXc.jpg

and here she looks like that demon from Krull:

[img] [ /img]

Even in that first picture she's just not sexy at all to me. Almost repulsive.

Mullets are never attractive. That is the issue.

[Tony Parsehole]

Mullets are never attractive. That is the issue.

I think you may be right. Also, dyed-eyebrows.....And anorexia.

[Tigzy]

Yep! Greg's definitely Back. His latest move is to successfully get a bit orcish on JT Eberhard's frodo: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/wwjtd/2013 ... x-with-me/

Apparently, Greg's a little steaming (I can imaging his angry pate flushing quite red, like the cap of a fly agaric mushroom), because his testosterone-damaged women's brain has concluded that JT's only a feminist so he can get bare nekked with a gurl.

I liked this bit in JT's response:

Oh snap! He’s on to me. Here I’ve been giving the impression that I empathize with harassment and inequality, not just because I give a damn about justice and fairness in general, but also because I have friends in the movement like Stephanie Zvan who have been harassed by a cabal of very malicious people and that pisses me off. But Greg has seen through that hard-to-believe ruse. What if my fiancee finds out? At least then I can stop pretending like the subversion and harassment of friends bothers me, right?

I wonder if he's trying to send a message here that Zvan isn't quite so likely to play Squealer to Greg this time? Anyways, I look forward to her response. :popcorn:

[ERV]

Justin tweeted a link to this Q he posted on facebook: "Can someone please explain to me why Rebecca Watson is included on a "Separation of Church and State" panel at the Empowering Women Through Secularism conference? Thank you."

Well, if you check her CV, besides being an active researcher in Evolutionary Biology (I think she wrote a textbook on the subject) she is also a noted constitutional law scholar focused on First Amendment issues. Her amicus brief in the Dover trial was seminal in Judge Jones' final ruling (lol! he plagiarized sections of that: remember how that pissed off the DI people!).

Anytime you hear of a grass roots effort to address instances of this around the country (school-led prayer, religious symbols in schools and on public property, etc) you'll find Rebecca behind the scenes crafting the arguments that give it the strongest legal weight. But her perspective is also international: her monograph on the laws and traditions in other western societies with respect to church/state issues remains the authoritative source for anyone seeking a comparative assessment of the evolution in such laws throughout the western world.

I loled :)

Its the same thing we see with Creationists/anti-vaxers/etc-- Experts in nothing are magically experts in everything.

When I was 'debating' Charles Jackson, someone in the audience asked a physics question. I am not a physicist, and I said as much. Not ol Chuckie, though! His degree in education made him magically an expert in not only physics, but geology, molecular biology, math, etc.

As much as I personally dislike, for instance, Greta Christina, I couldnt care less if organizers wanted her to do her 'Why are atheists so angry?' talk for literally the 5,000,000,000th time. Whatever. But when you have Surly Amy flying across the country to talk about homeopathy, and Watson flying across the ocean to talk about Separation of Church and State, that is a problem.

It is *no* different than Jenny McCarthy talking about vaccines, or Dembski talking about biochemistry, or Behe about mathematics.

[deLurch]

So now we went from "one sentence" to "bilingual"
http://i.imgur.com/qtsrEh1.png
...and she clarified that she was live tweeting some other Hispanic dude (therefore, her jab at Hispanic 'pitters justified...).

Ahhh... there is a big difference between a fully bi-lingual poster a la Quebec, versus just throwing in a single one-liner in Spanish, which is what she originally proposed.

[ERV]

Ahhh... there is a big difference between a fully bi-lingual poster a la Quebec, versus just throwing in a single one-liner in Spanish, which is what she originally proposed.

Unless you have members who are bilingual in Spanish and can interact with Spanish-only 'new members', I dont think there is.

I stick with my original advice "If you have members who are fluent in other languages, advertise it".

[karlaporter]

So now we went from "one sentence" to "bilingual"
http://i.imgur.com/qtsrEh1.png

...and she clarified that she was live tweeting some other Hispanic dude (therefore, her jab at Hispanic 'pitters justified...).

What a nasty liar.
As you said, she was criticised not for suggesting bilingual flyers, but for suggesting people should include on sentence of Spanish within their usual flyers in order to attract hispanics. The original tweets smacked of tokenism. That's what drew the criticism.
Nobody complained about having bilingual flyers - she didn't mention that term.
Now she tries to pretend that she did.

Listen, Jenny from the blog, one sentence is not bilingual flyers.
'Bilingual flyers' mean all of the text is in both languages.

The original tweet of course did NOT say bilingual as you have noted. It said a sentence.

A few of points here:

If you put a sentence in Spanish on the flyer then the implication is there will be Spanish language content at the event or accommodations for Spanish speakers who are not bilingual. It's like 'Se habla español' on a store sign - someone who works there speaks Spanish and will take care of you. If not, that's just a bad joke/insult/ awfully poor business practice.

Would you put 'Witamy Polskich klientów' on your flyer if no one spoke Polish just to let Poles know you are thinking of them? How about Chinese people, where is their welcome? Why single a demographic out if you want to be inclusive?

If you have bilingual flyers you ought to be prepared to serve X-Language speaking non-English speakers.

Not all Latinos / Hispanos read or even speak Spanish. Think about it...... not all Italo-Americans speak Italian.

If the event is targeted toward speakers of another language, by all means promote materials in that language.

If you want to be inclusive and welcoming to all than use language that reflects that, like for example: "All members of the OshKosh community welcome!" or "We dig diversity".

One of the first principals of marketing to Latinos is "Speak to me in my language" - however, that does not necessarily mean Spanish language is the only way to do that. 'Speak my language' means 'touch my heart'. There are many ways to do this, some examples are: Have someone who is a member of the Latino community hand out flyers to Latino businesses and promote on social media. Try having ethnically diverse food (do research - there are 20+ Spanish speaking countries many of who share few cultural/culinary similarities, so don't think tacos fly for everyone).

Just because someone is from a particular ethnicity or speaks a certain language doesn't make them an expert on marketing, even to others of their own demographic. Are all English speakers experts on marketing to Anglos? It doesn't make them an expert on diversity either.

[Cunt of Personality]

I have a sneaky suspicion that Rebecca Watson knows next-to-fuck-all about issues pertaining to separation of church & state in Ireland and how it fits within the broader context of European Human Rights legislation.

Unless, maybe the ECHR get Twitter death threats that she could help out with.

I'm getting cynical in my old age.

[bovarchist]

Yep! Greg's definitely Back. His latest move is to successfully get a bit orcish on JT Eberhard's frodo: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/wwjtd/2013 ... x-with-me/

Apparently, Greg's a little steaming (I can imaging his angry pate flushing quite red, like the cap of a fly agaric mushroom), because his testosterone-damaged women's brain has concluded that JT's only a feminist so he can get bare nekked with a gurl.

I liked this bit in JT's response:

Oh snap! He’s on to me. Here I’ve been giving the impression that I empathize with harassment and inequality, not just because I give a damn about justice and fairness in general, but also because I have friends in the movement like Stephanie Zvan who have been harassed by a cabal of very malicious people and that pisses me off. But Greg has seen through that hard-to-believe ruse. What if my fiancee finds out? At least then I can stop pretending like the subversion and harassment of friends bothers me, right?

I wonder if he's trying to send a message here that Zvan isn't quite so likely to play Squealer to Greg this time? Anyways, I look forward to her response. :popcorn:

Greg's been such a downer since Mr. Hat dumped him.

[Kareem]

Yep! Greg's definitely Back. His latest move is to successfully get a bit orcish on JT Eberhard's frodo: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/wwjtd/2013 ... x-with-me/

Apparently, Greg's a little steaming (I can imaging his angry pate flushing quite red, like the cap of a fly agaric mushroom), because his testosterone-damaged women's brain has concluded that JT's only a feminist so he can get bare nekked with a gurl.

I liked this bit in JT's response:

Oh snap! He’s on to me. Here I’ve been giving the impression that I empathize with harassment and inequality, not just because I give a damn about justice and fairness in general, but also because I have friends in the movement like Stephanie Zvan who have been harassed by a cabal of very malicious people and that pisses me off. But Greg has seen through that hard-to-believe ruse. What if my fiancee finds out? At least then I can stop pretending like the subversion and harassment of friends bothers me, right?

I wonder if he's trying to send a message here that Zvan isn't quite so likely to play Squealer to Greg this time? Anyways, I look forward to her response. :popcorn:

I guess all his "I hate the slymepit" talk didn't give him enough points to express disagreement.

[deLurch]

When you give in to bullies once and give them your lunch money, they don't go away; they keep coming back to demand more and more every day, and if you don't give in to them, they'll flush your head down a toilet pan or beat you up (or Zvan will squash you like a flea). Ron is now beholden to the bullies. He's ruined his career, I don't see him being there 12 months from now. The bullies will just continue their harassment to try and get Melody or ElevatorShit to take over from him.

Yeah, the sky is falling too. Give me a break. He gave them a minor concession. This is hardly a pattern, calm the fuck down until it is.

What Lindsay did isn't a bad effort under normal circumstances. His problem is that what he had at hand was a clean break a-la-JREF. They hand voluntarily turned their backs on him and his organization, were turning down his organization's money and were not going to go to his conferences. He had effectively gotten rid of them.

But now that their narrative is that they are "accepting" his apology, that means they are back in. They will be going to the conferences, making lists of demands, expecting him to dance like a puppet for them. He will be watched and is ready to be their witch-of-the-week at any given notice. If I were him, I would toss out an extra line along the lines of "But I don't apologize for any of the criticisms I have made" solely to piss them off immediately and get this over with.

[Guest]

Oh FFS Walter!
Why are you here?

Is there a reason I shouldn't be here?

Up to you? First your offended by 'gay images' then you want more gay images, then this place is too heterosexual for you. Not to mention all the other whining and going on, the EBW EBW EBW EBW EBW EBW EBW EBW EBW EBW....... 'I. Not obsessed with EBW.

If this place is too heterosexual for you then add content you would like or "why are you here?"

[Dick Strawkins]

I see that Rebecca Watson's calm, restrained and professional attitude towards Richard Dawkins continues to reap dividends.

http://storify.com/ElevatorGATE/convers ... -1-submanu

[JackSkeptic]

Justin tweeted a link to this Q he posted on facebook: "Can someone please explain to me why Rebecca Watson is included on a "Separation of Church and State" panel at the Empowering Women Through Secularism conference? Thank you."

Well, if you check her CV, besides being an active researcher in Evolutionary Biology (I think she wrote a textbook on the subject) she is also a noted constitutional law scholar focused on First Amendment issues. Her amicus brief in the Dover trial was seminal in Judge Jones' final ruling (lol! he plagiarized sections of that: remember how that pissed off the DI people!).

Anytime you hear of a grass roots effort to address instances of this around the country (school-led prayer, religious symbols in schools and on public property, etc) you'll find Rebecca behind the scenes crafting the arguments that give it the strongest legal weight. But her perspective is also international: her monograph on the laws and traditions in other western societies with respect to church/state issues remains the authoritative source for anyone seeking a comparative assessment of the evolution in such laws throughout the western world.

In the UK she crafted the Magna Carter and many are convinced she is the real William Shakespeare on the basis it couldn't be a man as their brains are damaged.

[Remick]

When you give in to bullies once and give them your lunch money, they don't go away; they keep coming back to demand more and more every day, and if you don't give in to them, they'll flush your head down a toilet pan or beat you up (or Zvan will squash you like a flea). Ron is now beholden to the bullies. He's ruined his career, I don't see him being there 12 months from now. The bullies will just continue their harassment to try and get Melody or ElevatorShit to take over from him.

Yeah, the sky is falling too. Give me a break. He gave them a minor concession. This is hardly a pattern, calm the fuck down until it is.

What Lindsay did isn't a bad effort under normal circumstances. His problem is that what he had at hand was a clean break a-la-JREF. They hand voluntarily turned their backs on him and his organization, were turning down his organization's money and were not going to go to his conferences. He had effectively gotten rid of them.

But now that their narrative is that they are "accepting" his apology, that means they are back in. They will be going to the conferences, making lists of demands, expecting him to dance like a puppet for them. He will be watched and is ready to be their witch-of-the-week at any given notice. If I were him, I would toss out an extra line along the lines of "But I don't apologize for any of the criticisms I have made" solely to piss them off immediately and get this over with.

Or since they have welcomed him back with open arms, any complaints in the future for simply not using them as speakers will be much harder to disguise. Flipping back to "I guess Ron doesn't actually get it since he doesn't want me as a speaker" just doesn't provoke the outrage as well as their usual shtick.

[Apples]

When you give in to bullies once and give them your lunch money, they don't go away; they keep coming back to demand more and more every day, and if you don't give in to them, they'll flush your head down a toilet pan or beat you up (or Zvan will squash you like a flea). Ron is now beholden to the bullies. He's ruined his career, I don't see him being there 12 months from now. The bullies will just continue their harassment to try and get Melody or ElevatorShit to take over from him.

Yeah, the sky is falling too. Give me a break. He gave them a minor concession. This is hardly a pattern, calm the fuck down until it is.

What Lindsay did isn't a bad effort under normal circumstances. His problem is that what he had at hand was a clean break a-la-JREF. They hand voluntarily turned their backs on him and his organization, were turning down his organization's money and were not going to go to his conferences. He had effectively gotten rid of them.

But now that their narrative is that they are "accepting" his apology, that means they are back in. They will be going to the conferences, making lists of demands, expecting him to dance like a puppet for them. He will be watched and is ready to be their witch-of-the-week at any given notice. If I were him, I would toss out an extra line along the lines of "But I don't apologize for any of the criticisms I have made" solely to piss them off immediately and get this over with.

Agreed. I wish he would say/write something in public that expands on the themes he touched on in his WIS2 remarks. He and CFI was in a better position last week when it was written off by the SJW parasites.

[Zenspace]

When you give in to bullies once and give them your lunch money, they don't go away; they keep coming back to demand more and more every day, and if you don't give in to them, they'll flush your head down a toilet pan or beat you up (or Zvan will squash you like a flea). Ron is now beholden to the bullies. He's ruined his career, I don't see him being there 12 months from now. The bullies will just continue their harassment to try and get Melody or ElevatorShit to take over from him.

Regardless of how one parses Lindsay's apology, he has opened himself up to being seen as weak, as not willing to tough it out and stand by his words, and therefore ripe for future picking. By caving in (even partially) to shrieking bullies, Lindsay has potentially put himself into the position of being viewed as their puppet. That is not the image one wants to project as the head of a major organization devoted to critical thinking and the intellectual independence that the concept of skepticism is critically bound to.

Even if all he did was apologize for hurt fee fees and not for what he actually said, the propaganda spinners are already making it clear (Greta's list of demands for example) that they consider Lindsay their bitch now.

All Lindsay has accomplished is to make himself look weak, vulnerable, and a tool of the FTBullies.

It matters zero fucks what it LOOKS like until we see something that actually matters, like a Melody promotion or the line up of speakers for Wis3.

I'm going with Remick on this one. Lindsay's 'apology' was an exercise in minimalism - offering form with little substance. More interesting is watching how everyone projects their own interpretation on the blank sheet of paper that Lindsay provided in that 'apology'. Look at the changing interpretations being projected even here at the Pyt, changing as the FC(n) narrative is broadcast.

The response from the FC(n) wannabe's is especially laughable. I think the initial statement from the CFI Board floored them (what do you mean they didn't cave!?!?!?! Waaaaaaahhhhhh!!!!), along with the realization that suddenly it was going to be just them and the crickets, so that when Lindsay proffered his late 'apology' they all did an immediate about face on their Very Strongly Held Principles and are tripping over themselves to re-establish their connection to the CFI teat. Of course positioning is vitally important and because they are Never Wrong and All Things Magnanimous spring from them, their reversals have to project Lindsay as the one who caved and that any reconciliation is a product of the FC(n) sjw benevolence and largess.

The problem I find with the utter lack of broadcast positions from either CFI/Lindsay statement is that there is nothing to indicate they have turned away from the FC(n) grifters either. This leaves me very uncomfortable and I'm therefore hesitant to rejoin CFI with my membership dollars only to find out they are still supporting the FC(n) bullshit.

Bother.

[ThreeFlangedJavis]

When you give in to bullies once and give them your lunch money, they don't go away; they keep coming back to demand more and more every day, and if you don't give in to them, they'll flush your head down a toilet pan or beat you up (or Zvan will squash you like a flea). Ron is now beholden to the bullies. He's ruined his career, I don't see him being there 12 months from now. The bullies will just continue their harassment to try and get Melody or ElevatorShit to take over from him.

Yeah, the sky is falling too. Give me a break. He gave them a minor concession. This is hardly a pattern, calm the fuck down until it is.

What Lindsay did isn't a bad effort under normal circumstances. His problem is that what he had at hand was a clean break a-la-JREF. They hand voluntarily turned their backs on him and his organization, were turning down his organization's money and were not going to go to his conferences. He had effectively gotten rid of them.

But now that their narrative is that they are "accepting" his apology, that means they are back in. They will be going to the conferences, making lists of demands, expecting him to dance like a puppet for them. He will be watched and is ready to be their witch-of-the-week at any given notice. If I were him, I would toss out an extra line along the lines of "But I don't apologize for any of the criticisms I have made" solely to piss them off immediately and get this over with.

If reports are to be believed, the poor man's been trapped in a room by the Hensley and given the full shouting and waterworks. He's a broken man. Have mercy.

[Guest]

Oh FFS Walter!
Why are you here?

Is there a reason I shouldn't be here?

To answer your question, the Pit is the only internet "home" I have right now and, unlike my real life home, I'm unlikely to be evicted. Just think of me as the Pit's problem child.

Just to clarify further. IM not suggesting you shouldn't be here or that you are not welcome.
Just expressing exasperation that you don't seem to actually 'enjoy' this place, hence 'Why <do you choose> to be here?" ( not actually after a response by the way )

[Other Guest]

What Lindsay did isn't a bad effort under normal circumstances. His problem is that what he had at hand was a clean break a-la-JREF. They hand voluntarily turned their backs on him and his organization, were turning down his organization's money and were not going to go to his conferences. He had effectively gotten rid of them.

But now that their narrative is that they are "accepting" his apology, that means they are back in. They will be going to the conferences, making lists of demands, expecting him to dance like a puppet for them. He will be watched and is ready to be their witch-of-the-week at any given notice. If I were him, I would toss out an extra line along the lines of "But I don't apologize for any of the criticisms I have made" solely to piss them off immediately and get this over with.

Do their opinions matter? This fight happened in a small corner of the internet. Most people won't hear about it. A longer/louder fight could reach enough people to matter. That would help FTB and hurt CFI.

Lindsay's in a great position now. The noise has dropped off. He hasn't promised or conceded any resources. It doesn't really matter if the FTBloggers think they've won.

In a couple months, CFI can start putting together a new speaker lineup and quietly drop the FTBloggers. So long as Lindsay keeps his head down for the next conference cycle, he can be quietly rid of them.

[Zenspace]

And of course, while addressing these issues, one always has to keep an eye on the mission of the organization, which is to promote skepticism in society at large: lose sight of that goal and everything becomes pointless.

Which is the main issue I have with any of the FC(n) crowd having any type of formal relationship as representatives of CFI in any way, shape or form. Their presence utterly guts the CFI claim to skepticism. I'm all for WiSC3 as it would give CFI an opportunity to offset some of the critiques that hit them this year (unfounded as they were), but have a completely different set of speakers that are actually qualified to represent what woman can accomplish in the modern society. By this I mean women like Harriet Hall, Abby Smith, Barbara Drescher, etc., etc. Drop the celebrity crap and bring in the strong, intelligent, freethinking women of accomplishment. It's not like there is really a shortage of them. Now THAT would be an interesting conference and send one hell of a message as well.

[ReneeHendricks]

Oh FFS Walter!
Why are you here?

Is there a reason I shouldn't be here?

Up to you? First your offended by 'gay images' then you want more gay images, then this place is too heterosexual for you. Not to mention all the other whining and going on, the EBW EBW EBW EBW EBW EBW EBW EBW EBW EBW....... 'I. Not obsessed with EBW.

If this place is too heterosexual for you then add content you would like or "why are you here?"

And while you're at all this bitching, "Guest"...why don't you LOG THE FUCK IN OR GET A DAMNED NYM?

Fuck.

[ReneeHendricks]

Just to clarify further. IM not suggesting you shouldn't be here or that you are not welcome.
Just expressing exasperation that you don't seem to actually 'enjoy' this place, hence 'Why <do you choose> to be here?" ( not actually after a response by the way )

Much like some of us express exasperation at a lack of LOGGING THE FUCK IN OR GETTING A FUCKING NYM, eh?

[ReneeHendricks]

Seriously. Why is it so difficult for some to log in or get a damned account and log in? I keep thinking they're trying to hide who they are (cough, cough ... ool0n).

[Apples]

I like how Carrier makes a point that Tucker is a prominent scholar in exactly the shit Dick was writing about, but he never saw it. He totally swears he never saw it. Really, he absolutely never saw his work.

I like Carrier because his pomposity makes him wear his bullshit on his sleeve.

In fairness to Carrier, Tucker's book is practically impossible to find online. Not. It is, um, the #1 result on Google when I search on 'bayesian historiography,' a companion volume that he edited is the 4th link, and the 6th is the direct Google Books link to his book. I'm no SEO expert, but I have a sneaking suspicion Carrier's post yesterday didn't vault it from total invisibility to domination of the first page of google results in 24 hours.

[deLurch]

Do their opinions matter? This fight happened in a small corner of the internet. Most people won't hear about it. A longer/louder fight could reach enough people to matter. That would help FTB and hurt CFI.

On this we both completely agree.

Lindsay's in a great position now. The noise has dropped off. He hasn't promised or conceded any resources. It doesn't really matter if the FTBloggers think they've won.

He is in OK position for now. But now that they have an expectation of him and CFI, they will be watching him like a hawk. To them, he is already tainted, and they will be quick to throw him & CFI under the bus for the slightest of perceived insults.

So now Lindsay & CFI may be subjected to long protracted rants of a longer duration of time about how horrible they are and how they hate women. Where as JREF just gets largely ignored and maybe transparently bitterly sniped at on occasion.

In a couple months, CFI can start putting together a new speaker lineup and quietly drop the FTBloggers. So long as Lindsay keeps his head down for the next conference cycle, he can be quietly rid of them.

I hope that is the case*. But sadly, I expect this will just result in a protracted war of image assassination.

* Actually the best case scenario would be if everyone could sit down like adults and discuss proffered ideas based on their merits instead of resorting to witches-of-the-week and character assassination, but I don't really think that is an option with the fc(n) crowd.

[Dick Strawkins]

I like how Carrier makes a point that Tucker is a prominent scholar in exactly the shit Dick was writing about, but he never saw it. He totally swears he never saw it. Really, he absolutely never saw his work.

I like Carrier because his pomposity makes him wear his bullshit on his sleeve.

In fairness to Carrier, Tucker's book is practically impossible to find online. Not. It is, um, the #1 result on Google when I search on 'bayesian historiography,' a companion volume that he edited is the 4th link, and the 6th is the direct Google Books link to his book. I'm no SEO expert, but I have a sneaking suspicion Carrier's post yesterday didn't vault it from total invisibility to domination of the first page of google results in 24 hours.

It turns out that Tucker's book was first published in 2004, eight years before Carrier's great new idea was published.

http://www.amazon.com/Our-Knowledge-Pas ... Hardcover]

[bovarchist]

Which is the main issue I have with any of the FC(n) crowd having any type of formal relationship as representatives of CFI in any way, shape or form.

I've been meaning to ask for a long time what FC(n) means. I keep hoping I'll figure it out from context, but no luck so far, and even Google doesn't help.

[ReneeHendricks]

Which is the main issue I have with any of the FC(n) crowd having any type of formal relationship as representatives of CFI in any way, shape or form.

I've been meaning to ask for a long time what FC(n) means. I keep hoping I'll figure it out from context, but no luck so far, and even Google doesn't help.

I know "FC" is short for "Fainting Couch". Not sure about the small "n" - I believe it's a number, though.

[another lurker]

Which is the main issue I have with any of the FC(n) crowd having any type of formal relationship as representatives of CFI in any way, shape or form.

I've been meaning to ask for a long time what FC(n) means. I keep hoping I'll figure it out from context, but no luck so far, and even Google doesn't help.

I know "FC" is short for "Fainting Couch". Not sure about the small "n" - I believe it's a number, though.

viewtopic.php?f=30&t=58

The Fainting Couch 5

I believe it refers to the whiniest of the FTB'ers.

[Dick Strawkins]

Which is the main issue I have with any of the FC(n) crowd having any type of formal relationship as representatives of CFI in any way, shape or form.

I've been meaning to ask for a long time what FC(n) means. I keep hoping I'll figure it out from context, but no luck so far, and even Google doesn't help.

As Renee said, it stands for fainting couch and the n is the number of members.
The number started with 6 (PZ, Watson, Greta, Ophelia, Svan and Laden) but Laden was dumped by FTB when he became too much of a liability and nobody was really sure who to include (Lousy Canuck? Jen McCreight? etc)

It's not an idea moniker, which is probably why it isn't used that often. but we've never really come up with an ideal term for them.
(FTB is used frequently but it's not good since its only a minority of FTB bloggers who are drama whores.)

[ThreeFlangedJavis]

Do their opinions matter? This fight happened in a small corner of the internet. Most people won't hear about it. A longer/louder fight could reach enough people to matter. That would help FTB and hurt CFI.

On this we both completely agree.

Lindsay's in a great position now. The noise has dropped off. He hasn't promised or conceded any resources. It doesn't really matter if the FTBloggers think they've won.

He is in OK position for now. But now that they have an expectation of him and CFI, they will be watching him like a hawk. To them, he is already tainted, and they will be quick to throw him & CFI under the bus for the slightest of perceived insults.

So now Lindsay & CFI may be subjected to long protracted rants of a longer duration of time about how horrible they are and how they hate women. Where as JREF just gets largely ignored and maybe transparently bitterly sniped at on occasion.

In a couple months, CFI can start putting together a new speaker lineup and quietly drop the FTBloggers. So long as Lindsay keeps his head down for the next conference cycle, he can be quietly rid of them.

I hope that is the case*. But sadly, I expect this will just result in a protracted war of image assassination.

* Actually the best case scenario would be if everyone could sit down like adults and discuss proffered ideas based on their merits instead of resorting to witches-of-the-week and character assassination, but I don't really think that is an option with the fc(n) crowd.

I'm toying with the idea of sending CFI an email suggesting that perhaps WIS3 could benefit from speakers/panels better qualified and outside the sphere of influence of the usual clique. I would urge them to consider that the conference is supposed to represent all women, not the select few and objections to leaving out the Stefunny types for people actually qualified to speak with some authority on their subjects would point to the real agenda. The idea is not go all tribal on them, but to get them to look at the credentials of the speaker list and contrast them to the alternatives.

[SkepticalCat]

Which is the main issue I have with any of the FC(n) crowd having any type of formal relationship as representatives of CFI in any way, shape or form.

I've been meaning to ask for a long time what FC(n) means. I keep hoping I'll figure it out from context, but no luck so far, and even Google doesn't help.

As Renee said, it stands for fainting couch and the n is the number of members.
The number started with 6 (PZ, Watson, Greta, Ophelia, Svan and Laden) but Laden was dumped by FTB when he became too much of a liability and nobody was really sure who to include (Lousy Canuck? Jen McCreight? etc)

It's not an idea moniker, which is probably why it isn't used that often. but we've never really come up with an ideal term for them.
(FTB is used frequently but it's not good since its only a minority of FTB bloggers who are drama whores.)

I always assumed Lousy Canuck was #6 (all FTB bloggers), not Watson...

[Apples]

Latest comment on the Teen Skepchick thread where Greg Laden quips that JT is a fake feminist trying to get laid:

Ehhh… tbh my opinions of JT are largely colored by the one time I talked to him at an SSA conference, and he spent most of that interaction telling a long, drawn-out anecdote about fucking women and stealing their silverware. I was the only woman at the table, and really everyone was too flabbergasted to call him out on it, but it was certainly a huge WTF for all of us sitting there. So, yeah, I have a hard time seeing him as a real ally.

http://teenskepchick.org/2013/06/20/cfi ... an-apology

[Aneris]

Latest comment on the Teen Skepchick thread where Greg Laden quips that JT is a fake feminist trying to get laid:

Ehhh… tbh my opinions of JT are largely colored by the one time I talked to him at an SSA conference, and he spent most of that interaction telling a long, drawn-out anecdote about fucking women and stealing their silverware. I was the only woman at the table, and really everyone was too flabbergasted to call him out on it, but it was certainly a huge WTF for all of us sitting there. So, yeah, I have a hard time seeing him as a real ally.

http://teenskepchick.org/2013/06/20/cfi ... an-apology

With people like PZ Myers and Jason Thibeault, who somehow ended up being falsely accused of sexual harassment, and with Greg 'Creepy' Laden and JT Eberhard on your team, what could possibly go wrong.

[Tony Parsehole]

Greg Laden saying another bloke isn't a real feminist.
Comedy gold.

[Wonderist]

Phew! Finally got a new laptop. :dance: Thanks to everyone for all the great advice on what to get! I went with Lenovo, and the Bic lighter strategy: cheap and disposable.

Freaking library had a maximum time limit of 1 hour, even if no one else was around. Crazy. No wonder they're getting slowly mothballed by the local municipal gov't. When libraries fall way behind the times.... sigh. Dark Ages, here we come.

Now I've got about 100 Slympit pages to catch up on... argh. Cheers, all! Good to be back. :P

[AndrewV69]

My favorite stone was for "Maria Poscente and her twin baby boys" which tells a sad enough story by itself, but even better is that although they died in 1905, someone is still regularly leaving flowers on the grave.

Over a 100 years later someone is still leaving flowers? I was curious so I looked and found this:
http://ernestartist.org/November25_2010_02.htm
Center frame: Maria Poscente 1890 to 1918 and her twin baby boys...

mptwins-02.jpg

(141.7 KiB) Downloaded 252 times

Also this:

March 31, 2010.

Phoenix Cemetery. Even though the last body was interred here in 1919, memories are not so quick to fade away in the minds of loved ones. These bears can't be that old. Someone still cares, and takes the time to visit here.

The stone reads:
In Loving Memory Of
Maria Poscente
1890-1918
And Her Twin Baby Boys

mptwins-01.jpg

(125.76 KiB) Downloaded 252 times

I have also seen some sad tales in a couple of family graveyards myself. I have an ancestor whose 2nd wife apparently buried him beside his 1st. wife and 12 children who all died at the same time of cholera in the mid-1800s. He married his 2nd wife shortly after that and had 10 more children with her. His 2nd wife and some of her children were subsequently buried there also.

There were so many children less than five years old buried there. Modern health has come a long way since then clearly. Half or more of your children no longer die before they grow up, not to mention the risk of childbirth in the first place.

We take a lot for granted these days.

[free thoughtpolice]

I like how Carrier makes a point that Tucker is a prominent scholar in exactly the shit Dick was writing about, but he never saw it. He totally swears he never saw it. Really, he absolutely never saw his work.

I like Carrier because his pomposity makes him wear his bullshit on his sleeve.

In fairness to Carrier, Tucker's book is practically impossible to find online. Not. It is, um, the #1 result on Google when I search on 'bayesian historiography,' a companion volume that he edited is the 4th link, and the 6th is the direct Google Books link to his book. I'm no SEO expert, but I have a sneaking suspicion Carrier's post yesterday didn't vault it from total invisibility to domination of the first page of google results in 24 hours.

It turns out that Tucker's book was first published in 2004, eight years before Carrier's great new idea was published.

http://www.amazon.com/Our-Knowledge-Pas ... Hardcover]

I wonder where Tucker got the time machine so he could read Carrier's tour de force, then return to the past and plagiarize chapter 6?

[JAB]

I'm toying with the idea of sending CFI an email suggesting that perhaps WIS3 could benefit from speakers/panels better qualified and outside the sphere of influence of the usual clique. I would urge them to consider that the conference is supposed to represent all women, not the select few and objections to leaving out the Stefunny types for people actually qualified to speak with some authority on their subjects would point to the real agenda. The idea is not go all tribal on them, but to get them to look at the credentials of the speaker list and contrast them to the alternatives.

I think the way they loaded their sessions was by choosing a bunch of celebrities (ie friends of melody) then asked them what they wanted to talk about. I think a MUCH better strategy for a conference that actually accomplishes the goal of furthering inquiry etc would to first decide what topics they might want to have presented/discussed, then look for the best woman to give a talk on it. It's that sort of thing that would give a conference a rep for a place to be enlightened rather than a place for a party. I guess it depends on your goal which you prefer, I guess.

[KiwiInOz]

P.S.

One more thing about Die Antwoord.

When they first came out I played the two clips to woman from South African. She said that unless you were from SA you could not possibly appreciate how vile and disgusting their lyrics were. Apparently she was also particularly revolted and offended at what Yolandi did at 5:13.

(I was already familiar with the turkish version of the "up yours" hand gesture so I had no trouble figuring that out)

Ok, since we're on the subject of Die Antwoord answer me this:
Is Yolandi Visser sexy?
I think she looks like a 13 year-old unwashed crack-whore who has been sentenced to hard labour in a Siberian uranium mine but the internet at large disagrees with me and thinks she's fit as fuck. Am I missing something?
Thoughts?
http://www.iainclaridge.co.uk/blog/wp-c ... isser1.jpg

No. Just no.

YMMV.

[Dave]

I'm toying with the idea of sending CFI an email suggesting that perhaps WIS3 could benefit from speakers/panels better qualified and outside the sphere of influence of the usual clique. I would urge them to consider that the conference is supposed to represent all women, not the select few and objections to leaving out the Stefunny types for people actually qualified to speak with some authority on their subjects would point to the real agenda. The idea is not go all tribal on them, but to get them to look at the credentials of the speaker list and contrast them to the alternatives.

I think the way they loaded their sessions was by choosing a bunch of celebrities (ie friends of melody) then asked them what they wanted to talk about. I think a MUCH better strategy for a conference that actually accomplishes the goal of furthering inquiry etc would to first decide what topics they might want to have presented/discussed, then look for the best woman to give a talk on it. It's that sort of thing that would give a conference a rep for a place to be enlightened rather than a place for a party. I guess it depends on your goal which you prefer, I guess.

That sort of approach would also require much more effort on the part of the conference organizer.

[Pagancat]

P.S.

One more thing about Die Antwoord.

When they first came out I played the two clips to woman from South African. She said that unless you were from SA you could not possibly appreciate how vile and disgusting their lyrics were. Apparently she was also particularly revolted and offended at what Yolandi did at 5:13.

(I was already familiar with the turkish version of the "up yours" hand gesture so I had no trouble figuring that out)

Ok, since we're on the subject of Die Antwoord answer me this:
Is Yolandi Visser sexy?
I think she looks like a 13 year-old unwashed crack-whore who has been sentenced to hard labour in a Siberian uranium mine but the internet at large disagrees with me and thinks she's fit as fuck. Am I missing something?
Thoughts?
http://www.iainclaridge.co.uk/blog/wp-c ... isser1.jpg

No. Just no.

YMMV.

I'm torn on this issue. On the one hand shes hideous but on the other hand i'm desperate. I suppose I could just close my eyes and pretend i'm wanking.

[Walter Ego]

Up to you? First your offended by 'gay images' then you want more gay images, then this place is too heterosexual for you. Not to mention all the other whining and going on, the EBW EBW EBW EBW EBW EBW EBW EBW EBW EBW....... 'I. Not obsessed with EBW.

If this place is too heterosexual for you then add content you would like or "why are you here?"

And while you're at all this bitching, "Guest"...why don't you LOG THE FUCK IN OR GET A DAMNED NYM?

Fuck.

Oh, dear! Did someone get up on the wrong side of the bed today?

[Southern]

So now we went from "one sentence" to "bilingual"
http://i.imgur.com/qtsrEh1.png

...and she clarified that she was live tweeting some other Hispanic dude (therefore, her jab at Hispanic 'pitters justified...).

Hi Jen Horseface! Glad you read what I wrote, but I'll reiterate again: fuck you and your Hispanic friends, if they think that "Latino = Spanish". I realize they probably are from Argentina, that stupid place whose grand contribution to humanity was giving asylum to Nazis after WW II (thanks, Perón you fucker, because of you, Joseph Mengele died in Brazil), but I still find it reprehensible.

Again, fuck you.

[AndrewV69]

Up to you? First your offended by 'gay images' then you want more gay images, then this place is too heterosexual for you. Not to mention all the other whining and going on, the EBW EBW EBW EBW EBW EBW EBW EBW EBW EBW....... 'I. Not obsessed with EBW.

If this place is too heterosexual for you then add content you would like or "why are you here?"

And while you're at all this bitching, "Guest"...why don't you LOG THE FUCK IN OR GET A DAMNED NYM?

Fuck.

Oh, dear! Did someone get up on the wrong side of the bed today?

It is a Breeder thing Walter. Something you would not understand.

(better shush now ... you are just going to make it worse)

/troll flamebait

[Dave2]

I think the way they loaded their sessions was by choosing a bunch of celebrities (ie friends of melody) then asked them what they wanted to talk about. I think a MUCH better strategy for a conference that actually accomplishes the goal of furthering inquiry etc would to first decide what topics they might want to have presented/discussed, then look for the best woman to give a talk on it. It's that sort of thing that would give a conference a rep for a place to be enlightened rather than a place for a party. I guess it depends on your goal which you prefer, I guess.

So what would be nice would be to see some women who aren't aligned with the usual suspects contact CFI and outline their ideas for talks they could give. If WiS3 were to feature a woman making the points Ron tried to make in his introduction to WiS2 would that provoke a more reasoned debate?

[Metalogic42]

Phew! Finally got a new laptop. :dance: Thanks to everyone for all the great advice on what to get! I went with Lenovo, and the Bic lighter strategy: cheap and disposable.

Freaking library had a maximum time limit of 1 hour, even if no one else was around. Crazy. No wonder they're getting slowly mothballed by the local municipal gov't. When libraries fall way behind the times.... sigh. Dark Ages, here we come.

Now I've got about 100 Slympit pages to catch up on... argh. Cheers, all! Good to be back. :P

Good to have you back. If you want a faster way to catch up, both myself and Aneris have recently (past few pages) written summaries of the goings-on. They don't go back that far, but at least you'll know what's going on at the moment.

[Southern]

It's obvious from his words how much genuine contempt he has for women. I'm not joking when I say the A+ rationale for this is "Black rappers can't be blamed for their supposed misogyny because the white-supremacist patriarchy force them to do it".

Not that this is unbelievable to me (after having seen some of the debates and arguements from FTB, very believable), but do you have a source where that was the consensus in a similar situation?

Well, what I know is that I never saw any SJW (A+, PZ, etc.) say anything about the likes of Lil'Wayne, Drake and Future for things like this:

And these hoes love me like Satan…
F-ck with me and get bodied
And all she eat is dick
She on a strict diet
(...)
She say “I never wanna you make you mad,
I just wanna make you proud”
I say “baby, just make me cum,
Then don’t make a sound”
(...)
These hoes got pussies like craters
Can’t treat these hoes like ladies, man…
Pussy, money, weed, codeine
She say my dick feel like morphine
I hope my name tastes like sardines to these n-ggas
She wake up, eat his dick
Call that breakfast in bed, 69.96
(..)
Yeah, all my bitches love me
And I love all my bitches
But it’s like soon as I cum
I come to my senses

To be fair to Lil Tunechi, he's still a better person than Ophelia Benson and Stephunny Lardass:

And I would say these hoes’ names
But then I would be snitchin’

EVEN LIL'WAYNE KNOWS THAT DOXXING IS WRONG!

[bovarchist]

My favorite stone was for "Maria Poscente and her twin baby boys" which tells a sad enough story by itself, but even better is that although they died in 1905, someone is still regularly leaving flowers on the grave.

Over a 100 years later someone is still leaving flowers? I was curious so I looked and found this:
http://ernestartist.org/November25_2010_02.htm
Center frame: Maria Poscente 1890 to 1918 and her twin baby boys...

mptwins-02.jpg

Also this:

March 31, 2010.

Phoenix Cemetery. Even though the last body was interred here in 1919, memories are not so quick to fade away in the minds of loved ones. These bears can't be that old. Someone still cares, and takes the time to visit here.

The stone reads:
In Loving Memory Of
Maria Poscente
1890-1918
And Her Twin Baby Boys

mptwins-01.jpg

My own set from when I was there in 2009:
http://www.vanden-eykel.com/photography ... ard01.html

[TheMudbrooker]

Loves me some Garfunkel and Oates

[youtube]j8ZF_R_j0OY[/youtube]