FrankGrimes wrote:Look, I'm not saying she was trolling. I think she just posted some stuff without thinking and was probably caught up in the moment. Either way, who cares. Bottom line, no pile on and definitely inconsistent and not exactly sincere.
Hi Frank,
Please please please forgive me for using the term "pile on".
I know I've tried twice to distance myself from it twice already by saying I just meant she got a lot of responses in a short time - this clearly isn't good enough. I am so so so so so sorry.
Can we now move on from the fact that I used the phrase pile on, which was obviously a massively unfair perception to come to of a new poster talking about a difficult subject in a likely hostile environment in which she elicited replies more quickly than she could reasonably be expected to field.
I am a fundamentally rotten cur and I abase myself in a forlorn hope of a return to your favour.
As for the rest of your post - overly cynical interpretation to my eyes. I still can't see where she has been necessarily inconsistent, and her stated intent in coming here was to clear up the misconception. She did respond to questions. As I said to Mykeru, I don't see why someone can't be upset - then happy - then upset again and then to decide to take the Sunday off. It can be the case that someone cheers up in company, enjoys some socialising, gets back to their room tired and maybe maudlin drunk and say to themselves "this is a bit much, I'm still rattled, time to go home".
I'll ignore the embarrassing and overly obvious sarcasm but if you cant see the inconsistencies then you're just being willfully ignorant.
You couldn't take the time to actually take my arguments seriously? I'm calling troll. I expected as much.
Reap wrote:Adam Lee obviously out during recess is tweeting away giving us all an example of how to behave like mature intelligent adults. That dude is just sad
Reap, that's a fucking terrible phrase you've got in your avatar. Is it a Glenn Beck quote?
"Truth. The new hate speech."
Maybe next time you could have:
"POLITICAL CORRECTNESS: IT'S GONE MAD"
"GET TO THE BACK OF THE BUS, NEGRO"
or
"GOLD! BUY GOLD! I'M BUYING GOLD-RECYCLING COMPANIES, BUT YOU SHOULD BUY GOLD!"
That's kinda dramatic. Things boring at home?
It totally depends on your perspective. "During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." ~George Orwell
I probably won't be taking you up on your suggestions, sorry. Thanks for trying to think of ones I would like though.... very thoughtful of you, or something.
katamari Damassi wrote: I did one of those genetic ancestry tests-father's line-and according to it, I have zero Italian in me. I'm strictly northern European, Anglo-Saxon, Celt, and a smidgen of Polish Jew. So he is either not my biological father(I find this unlikely as I resemble him-except for the dark olive complexion-too much), or our ancestors just had a bit of a layover in Sicily but are really from somewhere else. I am very confused.
The Normans, of norse origin, did have a kingdom for a while in southern Italy (I think they were passing through on a crusade and were invited to help with a rebellion and stayed). I wouldn't be surprised if they left a few y chromosomes in the local gene pool. And no mixing in the y, means that if that's all you had tested, it would track as from the north if your father-line did come from a viking way back, or some local celt that the Norman had bred with when in Normandy.
Reap wrote:Adam Lee obviously out during recess is tweeting away giving us all an example of how to behave like mature intelligent adults. That dude is just sad
In passing, a bit of a heads-up: your hot-link in the web icon under your avatar leads to “WordPress Installation†page which is maybe not what you intended; certainly not the “ReapSowRadio†page (as below).
But just listened to your interview with Ally Fogg which I quite enjoyed, although it was rather long and could have done with a bit of editing.
However, you both made some cogent observations about the state of skepticism-atheism in general as well as on aspects of the paranormal field. And his comments about Lindsay’s speech and “apology†were likewise. Although I was a little disappointed to hear that he thought the speech was “rudeâ€, and that he relied overmuch on some Marxist type analysis – which seems decidedly problematic in itself, and something I wonder whether he’s given much thought to.
But the crux of the matter was, of course, “The Great Rift†on which I think he had some useful ideas and suggestions, although he also seems to be harbouring a few misconceptions as well. However, while the whole situation seems to be a major can of worms which a few sentences of mine are unlikely to resolve, I might suggest that your tendency to interrupt your guests tends to detract from the benefits they might provide to the issues discussed.
Steersman, you telling me I need to edit because the content was too long makes me smile. I like to leave the conversation as is as much as possible and I have other things that I prefer to spend my time on rather than listening to a conversation I've already had over and over. Besides who says I didn't do a bit of editing to it? ;)
I'll pay attention to my "tendency to interrupt" my guests. I wasn't aware that it was tendency.
I know I was a bit annoyed during this interview because like I said during the podcast- It wasn't what I had in mind at all. I'm not sure what suggestions he had that haven't already been brought up. It's hard to have useful suggestions when you don't know the facts of the matter
Abbie: Virology (ERV, to be precise) John C. Welch: IT, published author, three books, two assists, one solo. One of the assists was the only book, that I'm aware of on OS X Server 1.X, and sold quite well for a bit. dresq: Clinical and forensic psychology Skep Tickle: M.D Barn Owl: Teaching at medical school John Greg: Professional musician: 16 yrs > sound tech/deejay: 4 yrs > technical writer: 13 yrs ongoing Phil Giordana: Musician, skydiving instructor Sacha: dog expert, and managing director of Gender Traitors International AndrewV69: IT (Z/OS, Solaris, AIX, DB2, Linux, blah blah blah ... long since retired) Michael J: IT Za-zen: Proprietor, employer, general hate figure of a company that will not fund/ donate to, or in any other way support any organisation that promotes the Fftb fuckwits. Money talks. KiwiInOz: Environmental consultancy stuff - sustainable development and climate adaptation at the mo. JackRayner: Digital artist [illustration/animation/design, etc]. Gefan: Formerly Production Manager, now semi-retired and consulting part-time FrankGrimes: Musician, grower of chilli's and professional cider drinker. Windy: biology, mostly fishies Zenspace: Photographic artist and general life philosopher mike150160 (new guy): Ph.D. Oncology. Make the drugs safe for the Big Pharma TheMudbrooker: Pipelayer/General Laborer Cunning Punt: mechanical engineer, mostly consumer product design Anonymous Cowherd: Cognitive Science (retired), Research Consultancy (retired), Bloated Plutocrat (Manhattan anyone?) Lsuoma: PhD Quantum Chemistry, Computer-Aided Drug Design, Bioinformatics, DBA, Operations and Development Manager, Cloud Services Remick: Embedded Software Engineer, mainly defense, real time OS systems. ReneeHendricks: Web Production Manager/Web Developer VAXherd: PhD Sociology. Work in Science IT. Currently Neuroimaging, formerly Space Plasma Physics, Sociology, Computer Science Codelette: EE, Telecom (TDM transport, telephony, MW systems Mykeru: GS-12/5 Computer Specialist (WebPresence, TelePresence, Multi-Media, Graphics). BA Analytic Philosophy/Journalism (NAU). Premise Sign/Billboard Painter/Construction Edward Gemmer: Protection, Instruction, & Management of Prostitutes Whig: Unemployed lower-middle class former Higher Education office drone Greylurker: Electronic Engineer, custom railway and subsea stuff Dave: Pointy-Haired Boss and Lawyer. I once knew IT, but they made me forget how to actually do anything when I got a secretary JAB: MSc Physics, did a few years of contract industrial research, then went into a teaching Lab Tech job in undergrad Physics labs and have been doing that for a couple decades. Secondary duties along the way include things like Radiation Safety Officer. Angry_Drunk: Inebriate. JackSkeptic: Professional qualification and practitioner until recently. Now semi retired. Tigzy: Along the lines of what JackRayner does. Definitely not a Timelord like Lsuoma is. free thought police: semi-retired, makes fishing lures, slumlord katamari Damassi: radiation therapist debaser71: ex IT, stay at home dad Slither: Ph.D. Computer Science, academic Parge: Java/Web Developer, Ex-Corpsman USNR Badger3k: High School teacher (biology & others) Metalogic42: independent contractor - miscellaneous Cunt: Web Dev / PHP twat. Formerly assistant site manager (building) and qualified bricklayer. Stretchycheese: quantitative analyst, MA in political science Dick Strawkins: Molecular geneticist, specializing in oncology/leukemia bovarchist: blue-collar prole Tribble: Former Cop/Fed. CPA, CFE, some other financial stuff (all now inactive though licensed). Currently Chef stuck in opening hell in own restaurant. Steersman: Electronics engineering technologist – control systems (cybernetics – the greatest thing since sliced bread); retired. Brief career as a welder (“spark idiotâ€). Also, in the views of some, Dick & Pain in the ass, Ph.D. clownshoe: Software Engineer / Project Manager Gumby: Old life-Software engineer (telephony, DB, PBX/ACD/host integration) New life-home renovation contractor 16bitheretic: part time student, part time intern slave, full time bitch TheMan: Audio/visual Archive Producer Darth Cynic: Ten year enlistment office drone, Ba History, dithering on Ma, homemaker & angry person Mister_Kolle: Informal science educator and stand-up comedian zenbabe: Medical Laboratory Monkey ('scientist'). aka body fluid tester & analyzer babysitter & vein/artery stabber Al Stefanelli: Pope of the Holy Church of Shaolin Ninja Monks. Doctor of Heresy. White Cock of Authority. Computer Scientist. Publisher of Syndicated News Services. Retired author, writer & civil rights activist.
Matt Cavanaugh wrote:So, all of you calling Rebecca Watson "fat" and "out of shape" will be posting pix of your hot wenches, right?
(SPARC servers you named "Lara_Croft" don't count.)
I'd post a picture of my ex-wife, but I'm not interested in linking up my Flickr account. If I knew how to post a picture directly in to the forum, I'd do so. But 'img' requires a URL. I won't post pictures of my family members under any circumstance.
Can't believe I'm the only one who posted anything.
Slowly ruining my basement dueling, misogynist virgin street cred here, goddammit...
FrankGrimes wrote:I'll ignore the embarrassing and overly obvious sarcasm but if you cant see the inconsistencies then you're just being willfully ignorant.
You don't ignore something by referring to it.
You couldn't take the time to actually take my arguments seriously? I'm calling troll. I expected as much.
Go back to the link you provided me for Jack Raynor's analysis. You will see it becomes a matter of debate. A few posts later Renee gives what I consider to be a fairer analysis. She and I may be wrong, of course, but as far as I can see she's right, the girl isn't being inconsistent as a matter of malicious intent regarding Justin, and she didn't actually claim to be triggered by Justin as Jack claimed. Apparent confusion remains and the girl herself later appears to clear this up, her attitude in posts made here are internally consistent.
This is the point I was making to Lusoma, who claimed her posts here were not. Lusoma said she went from labelling Justin the triggerer to deeming the slides to be the problem. To me it seems that she always claimed the slides constituted the issue - her broadside at Justin was over the tangentially related issue of finding his post on the convention policy overly flippant. That's a little harsh of her, but even I find Justin's attitude to the issue somewhat sarcastic (and I don't feel the need to ignore the sarcasm) even though I hare some of his qualms.
JackRayner wrote:What I remember is that she dropped in, lied all over the place, and left before answering a single important question. A bunch went prostrate immediately, and some called bullshit.
Now that I've copied her posts please show me where she necessarily tells a clear untruth.
Untruth?
Any point in which she A] Made any connection between Vacula's blog and her personal issues, and B] Asserted that Vacula was "flippant" about something "that is very real and painful" to her.
Now, if you're so fucking concerned with whiteknighting that you can't see the apparent, then I must reiterate: FUCK OFF.
What's that you see, right near the fucking start? "Her tweet claims Vacula's blog is trivializing her concerns."
Feel free to look before and after my post. I'm not saying she claimed Vacula's blog triggered her, and I'm not even disputing whether she was really "triggered" or not. I'm calling out the BS associations and claims she made.
FrankGrimes wrote:I'll ignore the embarrassing and overly obvious sarcasm but if you cant see the inconsistencies then you're just being willfully ignorant.
You don't ignore something by referring to it.
You couldn't take the time to actually take my arguments seriously? I'm calling troll. I expected as much.
Go back to the link you provided me for Jack Raynor's analysis. You will see it becomes a matter of debate. A few posts later Renee gives what I consider to be a fairer analysis. She and I may be wrong, of course, but as far as I can see she's right, the girl isn't being inconsistent as a matter of malicious intent regarding Justin, and she didn't actually claim to be triggered by Justin as Jack claimed. Apparent confusion remains and the girl herself later appears to clear this up, her attitude in posts made here are internally consistent.
This is the point I was making to Lusoma, who claimed her posts here were not. Lusoma said she went from labelling Justin the triggerer to deeming the slides to be the problem. To me it seems that she always claimed the slides constituted the issue - her broadside at Justin was over the tangentially related issue of finding his post on the convention policy overly flippant. That's a little harsh of her, but even I find Justin's attitude to the issue somewhat sarcastic (and I don't feel the need to ignore the sarcasm) even though I hare some of his qualms.
The problem with her claims is that they changed over that day. Did the slides REALLY trigger her, or did her friends later that night suggest that she was triggered and she bought it? She saw the slides early in the day(at least by 1-2 in the afternoon), but seemed fine. Late that night/the next day, she made complaints about it.
She then referred to Justin's post as if he had somehow taken her story into consideration while writing his post, even though it was from BEFORE the conference. Hence her "flippant" remark. How could he seem like such a nice guy in person but THEN write this post that treated me so insignificantly????? Because after all, the whole thing with triggering is that it is a world view that everyone else must go out of their way to make your life easier and better. And why not? Every 5 year old thinks they are the center of the universe, most of us just grow out of it before adulthood.
There is a big difference between someone deliberately triggering you(abuse), and you happening to be triggered by an event(every day life). To act like they are the same thing is either terribly dishonest, or incredibly naive.
JackRayner wrote:What I remember is that she dropped in, lied all over the place, and left before answering a single important question. A bunch went prostrate immediately, and some called bullshit.
Now that I've copied her posts please show me where she necessarily tells a clear untruth.
Untruth?
Any point in which she A] Made any connection between Vacula's blog and her personal issues, and B] Asserted that Vacula was "flippant" about something "that is very real and painful" to her.
Now, if you're so fucking concerned with whiteknighting that you can't see the apparent, then I must reiterate: FUCK OFF.
:roll:
Do you not think that for someone who is genuinely invested in such things that Justin's post might - as a matter of subjective opinion - come across as flippant?
Even though I largely agree with Justin in that I think the policy thing is overcooked, I discern a little flippancy there, from time to time.
So it's not a lie is it - it's a subjective perspective perhaps alien to your own.
So her perspective is her perspective and whilst it might strike you as irrational, that's not a lie.
Remick wrote:There is a big difference between someone deliberately triggering you(abuse), and you happening to be triggered by an event(every day life). To act like they are the same thing is either terribly dishonest, or incredibly naive.
Do the sufferers of PTSD claim they are the same thing - or do they claim it's to the same effect?
Remick wrote:There is a big difference between someone deliberately triggering you(abuse), and you happening to be triggered by an event(every day life). To act like they are the same thing is either terribly dishonest, or incredibly naive.
Do the sufferers of PTSD claim they are the same thing - or do they claim it's to the same effect?
Can someone give an example of some "deliberately triggering" someone else? No, I'm not asking for a hypothetical, I can figure those out myself.
Because it seems that "deliberate triggering" (the modern version of gaslighting) is a rare to the point of nonexistent phenomena. The way this usually plays out is that someone goes about their business, doing their own thing, talking about shit that matters to them and suddenly some gormless entitled little fucker comes flying out of the woodwork accusing that person of "triggering them" even though no one has any idea who the fuck they are much less what their supposed triggers are.
Remick wrote:There is a big difference between someone deliberately triggering you(abuse), and you happening to be triggered by an event(every day life). To act like they are the same thing is either terribly dishonest, or incredibly naive.
Do the sufferers of PTSD claim they are the same thing - or do they claim it's to the same effect?
Can someone give an example of some "deliberately triggering" someone else? No, I'm not asking for a hypothetical, I can figure those out myself.
No idea, but just to point out that Remick seems to me to be using it to mean the traumatic event in itself, as opposed to the flashback or whatever.
Remick wrote:There is a big difference between someone deliberately triggering you(abuse), and you happening to be triggered by an event(every day life). To act like they are the same thing is either terribly dishonest, or incredibly naive.
Do the sufferers of PTSD claim they are the same thing - or do they claim it's to the same effect?
It is the expectation of others/the world that is the issue. You can and should expect that people will not deliberately trigger you, unless you are dealing with someone who has done so before. You can't expect that you won't BE triggered by something.
That is the issue with "Trigger warnings"tm. Why should I evaluate whether I should need to issue a "Trigger warning" if aspects of my talk/presentation touch on sensitive issues? Shouldn't I be able to expect responsible adults to take a look into what the talk/presentation is about and evaluate for themselves whether they think there might be an issue for them to attend? Most of these things have a paragraph or more of a description of the talk so the audience will know if they want to attend.
We all have things that "trigger" us in varying ways and varying degrees. If put a "trigger warning" at the top of my paragraph for a talk, will you suddenly actually read the description and make up your mind? Or should you be doing that anyways?
There is an expectation for any talk/presentation that isn't to a captive audience(school auditoriums for example). That the audience is interested in the subject, knows what the subject is, and has looked at what is going to be covered for the talk(how else would they know if they should attend??).
That said. I understand the woman's complaint, she didn't know there would be graphic images. Ok, but if you know the subject matter, and there is a big projector and screen.... I would expect someone to mention that they are about to put graphic images up, and I have a very, very hard time believing the speaker did not mention this. It just might not have been in the "WARNING: GRAPHIC IMAGES", It might have been something like "The following images will depict what I mean..." or "Here is an example". You get the point. I highly doubt it was a "surprise" out of nowhere.
What likely happened is there was some heads up given, but the woman who complained didn't think it would bother her as much as it did.
Holy shit. That has happened to literally everyone.
Remick wrote:There is a big difference between someone deliberately triggering you(abuse), and you happening to be triggered by an event(every day life). To act like they are the same thing is either terribly dishonest, or incredibly naive.
Do the sufferers of PTSD claim they are the same thing - or do they claim it's to the same effect?
Can someone give an example of some "deliberately triggering" someone else? No, I'm not asking for a hypothetical, I can figure those out myself.
Because it seems that "deliberate triggering" (the modern version of gaslighting) is a rare to the point of nonexistent phenomena. The way this usually plays out is that someone goes about their business, doing their own thing, talking about shit that matters to them and suddenly some gormless entitled little fucker comes flying out of the woodwork accusing that person of "triggering them" even though no one has any idea who the fuck they are much less what their supposed triggers are.
Justin Griffith either claims that Laden did that to him, or others claim it was deliberate on justin's behalf.
But I am sure it does happen more often than you think Mykeru, we "normies" just call it emotional abuse.
Abbie: Virology (ERV, to be precise) John C. Welch: IT, published author, three books, two assists, one solo. One of the assists was the only book, that I'm aware of on OS X Server 1.X, and sold quite well for a bit. dresq: Clinical and forensic psychology Skep Tickle: M.D Barn Owl: Teaching at medical school John Greg: Professional musician: 16 yrs > sound tech/deejay: 4 yrs > technical writer: 13 yrs ongoing Phil Giordana: Musician, skydiving instructor Sacha: dog expert, and managing director of Gender Traitors International AndrewV69: IT (Z/OS, Solaris, AIX, DB2, Linux, blah blah blah ... long since retired) Michael J: IT Za-zen: Proprietor, employer, general hate figure of a company that will not fund/ donate to, or in any other way support any organisation that promotes the Fftb fuckwits. Money talks. KiwiInOz: Environmental consultancy stuff - sustainable development and climate adaptation at the mo. JackRayner: Digital artist [illustration/animation/design, etc]. Gefan: Formerly Production Manager, now semi-retired and consulting part-time FrankGrimes: Musician, grower of chilli's and professional cider drinker. Windy: biology, mostly fishies Zenspace: Photographic artist and general life philosopher mike150160 (new guy): Ph.D. Oncology. Make the drugs safe for the Big Pharma TheMudbrooker: Pipelayer/General Laborer Cunning Punt: mechanical engineer, mostly consumer product design Anonymous Cowherd: Cognitive Science (retired), Research Consultancy (retired), Bloated Plutocrat (Manhattan anyone?) Lsuoma: PhD Quantum Chemistry, Computer-Aided Drug Design, Bioinformatics, DBA, Operations and Development Manager, Cloud Services Remick: Embedded Software Engineer, mainly defense, real time OS systems. ReneeHendricks: Web Production Manager/Web Developer VAXherd: PhD Sociology. Work in Science IT. Currently Neuroimaging, formerly Space Plasma Physics, Sociology, Computer Science Codelette: EE, Telecom (TDM transport, telephony, MW systems Mykeru: GS-12/5 Computer Specialist (WebPresence, TelePresence, Multi-Media, Graphics). BA Analytic Philosophy/Journalism (NAU). Premise Sign/Billboard Painter/Construction Edward Gemmer: Protection, Instruction, & Management of Prostitutes Whig: Unemployed lower-middle class former Higher Education office drone Greylurker: Electronic Engineer, custom railway and subsea stuff Dave: Pointy-Haired Boss and Lawyer. I once knew IT, but they made me forget how to actually do anything when I got a secretary JAB: MSc Physics, did a few years of contract industrial research, then went into a teaching Lab Tech job in undergrad Physics labs and have been doing that for a couple decades. Secondary duties along the way include things like Radiation Safety Officer. Angry_Drunk: Inebriate. JackSkeptic: Professional qualification and practitioner until recently. Now semi retired. Tigzy: Along the lines of what JackRayner does. Definitely not a Timelord like Lsuoma is. free thought police: semi-retired, makes fishing lures, slumlord katamari Damassi: radiation therapist debaser71: ex IT, stay at home dad Slither: Ph.D. Computer Science, academic Parge: Java/Web Developer, Ex-Corpsman USNR Badger3k: High School teacher (biology & others) Metalogic42: independent contractor - miscellaneous Cunt: Web Dev / PHP twat. Formerly assistant site manager (building) and qualified bricklayer. Stretchycheese: quantitative analyst, MA in political science Dick Strawkins: Molecular geneticist, specializing in oncology/leukemia bovarchist: blue-collar prole Tribble: Former Cop/Fed. CPA, CFE, some other financial stuff (all now inactive though licensed). Currently Chef stuck in opening hell in own restaurant. Steersman: Electronics engineering technologist – control systems (cybernetics – the greatest thing since sliced bread); retired. Brief career as a welder (“spark idiotâ€). Also, in the views of some, Dick & Pain in the ass, Ph.D. clownshoe: Software Engineer / Project Manager Gumby: Old life-Software engineer (telephony, DB, PBX/ACD/host integration) New life-home renovation contractor 16bitheretic: part time student, part time intern slave, full time bitch TheMan: Audio/visual Archive Producer Darth Cynic: Ten year enlistment office drone, Ba History, dithering on Ma, homemaker & angry person Mister_Kolle: Informal science educator and stand-up comedian zenbabe: Medical Laboratory Monkey ('scientist'). aka body fluid tester & analyzer babysitter & vein/artery stabber Al Stefanelli: Pope of the Holy Church of Shaolin Ninja Monks. Doctor of Heresy. White Cock of Authority. Computer Scientist. Publisher of Syndicated News Services. Retired author, writer & civil rights activist. Git: Former Software Engineer (Telecomms), recently acquired a BSc. in Astrophysics, currently on a "career break".
Dave2 wrote:
Now that I've copied her posts please show me where she necessarily tells a clear untruth.
Untruth?
Any point in which she A] Made any connection between Vacula's blog and her personal issues, and B] Asserted that Vacula was "flippant" about something "that is very real and painful" to her.
Now, if you're so fucking concerned with whiteknighting that you can't see the apparent, then I must reiterate: FUCK OFF.
:roll:
Do you not think that for someone who is genuinely invested in such things that Justin's post might - as a matter of subjective opinion - come across as flippant? Even though I largely agree with Justin in that I think the policy thing is overcooked, I discern a little flippancy there, from time to time. So it's not a lie is it - it's a subjective perspective perhaps alien to your own. So her perspective is her perspective and whilst it might strike you as irrational, that's not a lie.
Here, let me spell it out for you: Vacula's blog was about harassment policies. Aycewhatever's episode was unrelated.
Here's a break down of the events for you, Barnie style, since it seems like my summary post wast too difficult for you to follow:
- Aycewhatever posted a tweet linking to Vacula's blog.
- Karla posted a link to it here, and some mocked it, thinking she was saying that Vacula's blog itself made her feel unsafe.
- Aycewhatever then came to the pit to "clarify" what the tweet was about, during which she shared some sob story unrelated to the blog.
Now, is it possible that what she meant to say is that she disagrees with Vacula on the matter of conference "anti-harassment" policies? Yes. That's most likely it. What the fuck does her being "triggered" at some totally unrelated talk have anything to do with that? Nothing. Playing the victim sure did pay off though, because it got several here to immediately go prostrate and apologize, and she got to do a hit-and-run smear on Vacula not caring about the wimmin'z safety, getting out of dodge before anyone with their brain still functioning could stop her and ask her justify her bullshit. Hell, the effectiveness of her victim act has such a long tail, that here you are, weeks later, still making a fucking fuzz about it. You're bringing this bullshit up as a reason to be apprehensive about the pit? Pathetic.
As I said before, if this petty bullshit is your reason for wanting to remain distant, then I say save your concern trolling and Fuck Off already.
Dave2 wrote:
JackRayner wrote:
Dave2 wrote:and she didn't actually claim to be triggered by Justin as Jack claimed.
Fuck. YOU. I never claimed any such bullshit.
Once again, I invite you to FUCK OFF.
Did I misconstrue you mate?
I'm so sorry.
Read "blamed Justin for her reaction" instead. Or supply your own - no doubt highly eloquent - alternative.
Remick wrote:
But I am sure it does happen more often than you think Mykeru, we "normies" just call it emotional abuse.
No, we normies call it "reminded of an unpleasant memory". Not to downgrade PSTD flashbacks, but seriously, the people who go on about "triggers" usually don't have PSTD. They are just a less charming version of Pat in Silver Linings Playbook (whether he has traumatic brain injury as suggested in the book or bipolar as in the movie) running around trying to avoid anything that will stop them from achieving the mystical state of being 100% positive all the time. Mostly by blaming the universe for every stray thought between their ears that doesn't come straight from Happy-Land.
Dave2 wrote:
Do the sufferers of PTSD claim they are the same thing - or do they claim it's to the same effect?
Can someone give an example of some "deliberately triggering" someone else? No, I'm not asking for a hypothetical, I can figure those out myself.
No idea, but just to point out that Remick seems to me to be using it to mean the traumatic event in itself, as opposed to the flashback or whatever.
No... I am not disputing what ever intial event now causes you(generic) to be ABLE to be triggered by certain stimuli, I was comparing chance encounters with something that triggers you to someone deliberately exposing you to it, knowing your issues.
I don't know where you are, but here in the UK TV and Radio shows featuring potentially upsetting content do get trailed, sometimes before the preceding commercial break, with such warnings.
Last week I stayed up past my bedtime to catch Ben Wheatley's A Field in England and Kill List. And even though they were on way past watershed, and on a cult channel, and only likely to attract people who already knew of their reputation, the breaks were bookended with warnings. I didn't even think the films were that shocking - perhaps it's part of the hype?
Now seeing as that's a bit of a cultural norm - is it unreasonable of people to expect at least that from a venue purporting to take such matters seriously?
Remick wrote:
But I am sure it does happen more often than you think Mykeru, we "normies" just call it emotional abuse.
No, we normies call it "reminded of an unpleasant memory". Not to downgrade PSTD flashbacks, but seriously, the people who go on about "triggers" usually don't have PSTD. They are just a less charming version of Pat in Silver Linings Playbook (whether he has traumatic brain injury as suggested in the book or bipolar as in the movie) running around trying to avoid anything that will stop them from achieving the mystical state of being 100% positive all the time. Mostly by blaming the universe for every stray thought between their ears that doesn't come straight from Happy-Land.
I can agree with that. I just never know if I haven't had enough terrible shit happen in my life, or if I just don't let it affect me as much as others.
Remick wrote:There is a big difference between someone deliberately triggering you(abuse), and you happening to be triggered by an event(every day life). To act like they are the same thing is either terribly dishonest, or incredibly naive.
Do the sufferers of PTSD claim they are the same thing - or do they claim it's to the same effect?
Can someone give an example of some "deliberately triggering" someone else? No, I'm not asking for a hypothetical, I can figure those out myself.
Because it seems that "deliberate triggering" (the modern version of gaslighting) is a rare to the point of nonexistent phenomena. The way this usually plays out is that someone goes about their business, doing their own thing, talking about shit that matters to them and suddenly some gormless entitled little fucker comes flying out of the woodwork accusing that person of "triggering them" even though no one has any idea who the fuck they are much less what their supposed triggers are.
Any point in which she A] Made any connection between Vacula's blog and her personal issues, and B] Asserted that Vacula was "flippant" about something "that is very real and painful" to her.
Now, if you're so fucking concerned with whiteknighting that you can't see the apparent, then I must reiterate: FUCK OFF.
:roll:
Do you not think that for someone who is genuinely invested in such things that Justin's post might - as a matter of subjective opinion - come across as flippant?
Even though I largely agree with Justin in that I think the policy thing is overcooked, I discern a little flippancy there, from time to time.
So it's not a lie is it - it's a subjective perspective perhaps alien to your own.
So her perspective is her perspective and whilst it might strike you as irrational, that's not a lie.
The thing is, looking at her original tweets and comments, it really did come across as though she was accusing *justin* of triggering her. It took more than a few go-rounds to get her to explain that no, that wasn't the case. So it was some images, which mind you, having not seen, I can't even tell what the fuck she's actually talking about. So she didn't help things at all by being vague about what was happening, and yeah, the fact that her 'triggering' took everyone by surprise does matter. There's a lot of WTF in this.
I'm I supposed to know the specifics from the name-drop?
You know I love Laden about as much as shitting toothpicks sideways, but can you give specifics? Probably not because there never are with this happy horseshit, it's "Oh, Laden triggered Griffith", the problem being that "triggering" isn't as concrete an act as, say, a blowjob.
JackRayner wrote:
Here, let me spell it out for you: Vacula's blog was about harassment policies. Aycewhatever's episode was unrelated.
Here's a break down of the events for you, Barnie style, since it seems like my summary post wast too difficult for you to follow:
- Aycewhatever posted a tweet linking to Vacula's blog.
- Karla posted a link to it here, and some mocked it, thinking she was saying that Vacula's blog itself made her feel unsafe.
- Aycewhatever then came to the pit to "clarify" what the tweet was about, during which she shared some sob story unrelated to the blog.
All information I have already made people aware that I am fully cognizant of earlier in this conversation.
Now, is it possible that what she meant to say is that she disagrees with Vacula on the matter of conference "anti-harassment" policies? Yes. That's most likely it. What the fuck does her being "triggered" at some totally unrelated talk have anything to do with that? Nothing. Playing the victim sure did pay off though, because it got several here to immediately go prostrate and apologize, and she got to do a hit-and-run smear on Vacula not caring about the wimmin'z safety, getting out of dodge before anyone with their brain still functioning could stop her and ask her justify her bullshit. Hell, the effectiveness of her victim act has such a long tail, that here you are, weeks later, still making a fucking fuzz about it. You're bringing this bullshit up as a reason to be apprehensive about the pit? Pathetic.
You deny her right to say that as someone with this issues she finds the opinion of an acquaintance on related matters irritating?
As I said before, if this petty bullshit is your reason for wanting to remain distant, then I say save your concern trolling and Fuck Off already.
Being here talking about it in some depth is remaining distant is it?
Remick wrote:There is a big difference between someone deliberately triggering you(abuse), and you happening to be triggered by an event(every day life). To act like they are the same thing is either terribly dishonest, or incredibly naive.
Do the sufferers of PTSD claim they are the same thing - or do they claim it's to the same effect?
It is the expectation of others/the world that is the issue. You can and should expect that people will not deliberately trigger you, unless you are dealing with someone who has done so before. You can't expect that you won't BE triggered by something.
That is the issue with "Trigger warnings"tm. Why should I evaluate whether I should need to issue a "Trigger warning" if aspects of my talk/presentation touch on sensitive issues? Shouldn't I be able to expect responsible adults to take a look into what the talk/presentation is about and evaluate for themselves whether they think there might be an issue for them to attend? Most of these things have a paragraph or more of a description of the talk so the audience will know if they want to attend.
We all have things that "trigger" us in varying ways and varying degrees. If put a "trigger warning" at the top of my paragraph for a talk, will you suddenly actually read the description and make up your mind? Or should you be doing that anyways?
There is an expectation for any talk/presentation that isn't to a captive audience(school auditoriums for example). That the audience is interested in the subject, knows what the subject is, and has looked at what is going to be covered for the talk(how else would they know if they should attend??).
That said. I understand the woman's complaint, she didn't know there would be graphic images. Ok, but if you know the subject matter, and there is a big projector and screen.... I would expect someone to mention that they are about to put graphic images up, and I have a very, very hard time believing the speaker did not mention this. It just might not have been in the "WARNING: GRAPHIC IMAGES", It might have been something like "The following images will depict what I mean..." or "Here is an example". You get the point. I highly doubt it was a "surprise" out of nowhere.
What likely happened is there was some heads up given, but the woman who complained didn't think it would bother her as much as it did.
Holy shit. That has happened to literally everyone.
I may be one of the biggest arachniphobes you know of. To the point where i can't even look at pictures of the damned things without wanting to hit said picture with a bat. Spiders really freak me the fuck out.
But, I also get that they don't freak OTHER people the fuck out, and that some people even find the little bastards cute or cool. I can't imagine that, but i freely admit my reaction is completely irrational. I'm not even allowed to kill them around the house, I tend to go a bit overboard. Melissa doesn't think using wasp and hornet killer as a flamethrower is appropriate for some reason.
so, as genuinely hard as it is at times, I don't expect anyone to put trigger warnings on pictures of spiders. I don't expect them to even think that way, because this is my issue, not theres. If a talk has a lot of unexpected spiders, I just leave. I don't yell at anyone. If it's a momentary spider, I just look away. So i really do understand the concept of things that cause instant, unreasonable responses that you cannot, or can barely shut off. I live in Florida, spiders are somewhat common here. Big bastards. I get 'triggered' a lot.
but it's my job to manage it. No one else's. I appreciate it when those who know give me a heads up, but I don't require it, because that seems rather unfair of me.
I'm I supposed to know the specifics from the name-drop?
You know I love Laden about as much as shitting toothpicks sideways, but can you give specifics? Probably not because there never are with this happy horseshit, it's "Oh, Laden triggered Griffith", the problem being that "triggering" isn't as concrete an act as, say, a blowjob.
Well, he tried to. If you go to the RBB site on FTB, and look search for "Laden", you can find the post pretty quick. Laden starts working the "have you killed anyone like a good soldier does" schtick pretty hard. I thought it was a pathetically obvious attempt, and I don't believe it triggered anything in Justin but serious contempt, however, it's pretty obvious what Laden's trying to do.
I don't know where you are, but here in the UK TV and Radio shows featuring potentially upsetting content do get trailed, sometimes before the preceding commercial break, with such warnings.
Last week I stayed up past my bedtime to catch Ben Wheatley's A Field in England and Kill List. And even though they were on way past watershed, and on a cult channel, and only likely to attract people who already knew of their reputation, the breaks were bookended with warnings. I didn't even think the films were that shocking - perhaps it's part of the hype?
Now seeing as that's a bit of a cultural norm - is it unreasonable of people to expect at least that from a venue purporting to take such matters seriously?
I wasn't at said event, so I have no idea what was availible where. But, I have a very hard time believing that any talk given there didn't have some intro paragraph or descriptions in pamphlets or on signs or whatever. Not the speaker or the conventions fault if attendees can't be bothered. Like if you recorded Kill List, then fastforwarded through the commercials and didn't bother to look at the warning screen.
Here in the states any time you come back from break during prime time will have a series of boxes explaining at least the rating level, and what caused said rating (Violence, brief nudity, graphic images). If the show is called "swamp murders" you can bet the graphic images are of dead bodies, or the violence was from re-enactments.
So if you go to a talk regarding, women's issues and safety(or something to do with rape prevention), and there is a large projector there. I would at least consider what might be shown.
Whatever, I'm not even convinced it was that traumatic for her, I think there is a decent chance she was convinced of how horrible it was later by her super SJW friends.
Person 1 "You know, they showed these really graphic images regarding: (triggering stuff)"
Person 2 "OMG, Really? Are you ok?"
Person 3 "That happened to me once, I like couldn't go outside for a week!"
Person 4 "Ugh! this happens all the time, When will they learn"
Person 3 "This is a big deal, you should write a complaint"
Person 1 acquires victim points.... current victim level now greater than person 2-4..... reward: become new head of party/become center of attention.
This all happens even without the explicit desire of person one... but once it starts it is addictive to many.
I don't know where you are, but here in the UK TV and Radio shows featuring potentially upsetting content do get trailed, sometimes before the preceding commercial break, with such warnings.
Last week I stayed up past my bedtime to catch Ben Wheatley's A Field in England and Kill List. And even though they were on way past watershed, and on a cult channel, and only likely to attract people who already knew of their reputation, the breaks were bookended with warnings. I didn't even think the films were that shocking - perhaps it's part of the hype?
Now seeing as that's a bit of a cultural norm - is it unreasonable of people to expect at least that from a venue purporting to take such matters seriously?
The warnings I saw in A Field In England were about flashing lights and stroboscopic effects and I would imagine were aimed at epileptics.
I'm I supposed to know the specifics from the name-drop?
You know I love Laden about as much as shitting toothpicks sideways, but can you give specifics? Probably not because there never are with this happy horseshit, it's "Oh, Laden triggered Griffith", the problem being that "triggering" isn't as concrete an act as, say, a blowjob.
Laden's letter to Griffith, dec 2012:
]
Laden wrote:
Justin,
What I said in a public comment (that you should grow up) is the ultra mild version. What I said on the mailing list is still the mild version. Here’s the real version and it is the last thing you are ever going to hear from me until you have issued a fully adequate and very public apology to everyone you’ve offended. I say that fully knowing that you do not have to issue such an apology. All you get if you do is that I recognize that you exist. You certainly don’t need me thinking of you as a human being.
Justin, have you ever killed anyone? By that, I mean, in your tours of duty, did you ever have someone you know die and that happened because you failed to do something, or worse, because you DID do something? I’m thinking not. I’m thinking you probably are a good soldier. You probably didn’t do that..
bhoytony wrote:The warnings I saw in A Field In England were about flashing lights and stroboscopic effects and I would imagine were aimed at epileptics.
I'm sure you're right, I really just fancied name-dropping the movie (what did you think? - I couldn't work out whether the conjuror was a charlatan or not - preferred Sightseers).
katamari Damassi wrote: I did one of those genetic ancestry tests-father's line-and according to it, I have zero Italian in me. I'm strictly northern European, Anglo-Saxon, Celt, and a smidgen of Polish Jew. So he is either not my biological father(I find this unlikely as I resemble him-except for the dark olive complexion-too much), or our ancestors just had a bit of a layover in Sicily but are really from somewhere else. I am very confused.
The Normans, of norse origin, did have a kingdom for a while in southern Italy (I think they were passing through on a crusade and were invited to help with a rebellion and stayed). I wouldn't be surprised if they left a few y chromosomes in the local gene pool. And no mixing in the y, means that if that's all you had tested, it would track as from the north if your father-line did come from a viking way back, or some local celt that the Norman had bred with when in Normandy.
Good ol' Robert Guiscard and his conquest. Plus, you've got some Greek/Balkan blood coming over to Sicily in two large waves from Constantinople in 1204 and 1453.
welch wrote:
I may be one of the biggest arachniphobes you know of. To the point where i can't even look at pictures of the damned things without wanting to hit said picture with a bat. Spiders really freak me the fuck out.
So, in an ideal world, that's hold the whole "trigger warning" thing is supposed to work?
Fair enough. The thing is, Welch has to do a bit of "sharing" before I even knew that. Is that why circle-jerking confessional sharing is so important to these folks? Maybe they need Med-Alert bracelets or, even better, T-shirts announcing their Kryptonite.
You know what really triggers me? Pictures of nubile brunette women with pert tits and long coltish legs. I really hate that. Scares the shit out of me.
welch wrote:
I may be one of the biggest arachniphobes you know of. To the point where i can't even look at pictures of the damned things without wanting to hit said picture with a bat. Spiders really freak me the fuck out.
So, in an ideal world, that's hold the whole "trigger warning" thing is supposed to work?
Fair enough. The thing is, Welch has to do a bit of "sharing" before I even knew that. Is that why circle-jerking confessional sharing is so important to these folks? Maybe they need Med-Alert bracelets or, even better, T-shirts announcing their Kryptonite.
You know what really triggers me? Pictures of nubile brunette women with pert tits and long coltish legs. I really hate that. Scares the shit out of me.
Don't nobody post that shit.
:drool:
They already share due to the oppression olympics! More triggers = more gold medals. If you are ignorant of their triggers it is just because you aren't sentitive enough or don't recognize what a VIP they are.
I'm I supposed to know the specifics from the name-drop?
You know I love Laden about as much as shitting toothpicks sideways, but can you give specifics? Probably not because there never are with this happy horseshit, it's "Oh, Laden triggered Griffith", the problem being that "triggering" isn't as concrete an act as, say, a blowjob.
Well, he tried to. If you go to the RBB site on FTB, and look search for "Laden", you can find the post pretty quick. Laden starts working the "have you killed anyone like a good soldier does" schtick pretty hard. I thought it was a pathetically obvious attempt, and I don't believe it triggered anything in Justin but serious contempt, however, it's pretty obvious what Laden's trying to do.
Yes, well, it's Laden. Saying he "tried to trigger Justin" is just a step closer on the doable meter than "he tried to blow up his head like that dude in Scanners".
I'll admit it: Laden's sheer stupidity, lack of competency and general inability to wipe his ass without accidentally donkey-punching his own nut-sack from behind almost gives him a pass.
bhoytony wrote:The warnings I saw in A Field In England were about flashing lights and stroboscopic effects and I would imagine were aimed at epileptics.
I'm sure you're right, I really just fancied name-dropping the movie (what did you think? - I couldn't work out whether the conjuror was a charlatan or not - preferred Sightseers).
Kill List certainly was heavily flagged.
What did I think? I thought that posting an example to prove your point that doesn't prove your point makes you look like an idiot. I also think that I agree with Jack, why don't you fuck off.
welch wrote:
I may be one of the biggest arachniphobes you know of. To the point where i can't even look at pictures of the damned things without wanting to hit said picture with a bat. Spiders really freak me the fuck out.
So, in an ideal world, that's hold the whole "trigger warning" thing is supposed to work?
Fair enough. The thing is, Welch has to do a bit of "sharing" before I even knew that. Is that why circle-jerking confessional sharing is so important to these folks? Maybe they need Med-Alert bracelets or, even better, T-shirts announcing their Kryptonite.
You know what really triggers me? Pictures of nubile brunette women with pert tits and long coltish legs. I really hate that. Scares the shit out of me.
Don't nobody post that shit.
:drool:
They already share due to the oppression olympics! More triggers = more gold medals. If you are ignorant of their triggers it is just because you aren't sentitive enough or don't recognize what a VIP they are.
I've seen their kindred spirits. This time of year while biking I keep running into (figuratively) runners and even cyclists with ear-buds in place. Very often if I see someone wearing earbuds (wires flop-flop flopping) I decline giving them an "audible" on passing as a waste of time and effort.
Which is nice because my real urge is to give them a Moe-slap to the back of their head as I go by.
Occasionally I've gotten shit from these people who will yell things at my back and then pop their buds out when I hit brakes and swing back to discuss it with them. The consensus from these sorts of people is their compromising their situational awareness puts extra onus on me to watch out for them. Even to the point of gauging the volume level of whatever shit-music they are using as a training montage soundtrack for their mundane lives. Or so they claim.
So apparently I can't just go about my business with trigger-folk either, instead I have to tap dance in their minefield. How special.
So, in an ideal world, that's hold the whole "trigger warning" thing is supposed to work?
Fair enough. The thing is, Welch has to do a bit of "sharing" before I even knew that. Is that why circle-jerking confessional sharing is so important to these folks? Maybe they need Med-Alert bracelets or, even better, T-shirts announcing their Kryptonite.
You know what really triggers me? Pictures of nubile brunette women with pert tits and long coltish legs. I really hate that. Scares the shit out of me.
Don't nobody post that shit.
:drool:
They already share due to the oppression olympics! More triggers = more gold medals. If you are ignorant of their triggers it is just because you aren't sentitive enough or don't recognize what a VIP they are.
I've seen their kindred spirits. This time of year while biking I keep running into (figuratively) runners and even cyclists with ear-buds in place. Very often if I see someone wearing earbuds (wires flop-flop flopping) I decline giving them an "audible" on passing as a waste of time and effort.
Which is nice because my real urge is to give them a Moe-slap to the back of their head as I go by.
Occasionally I've gotten shit from these people who will yell things at my back and then pop their buds out when I hit brakes and swing back to discuss it with them. The consensus from these sorts of people is their compromising their situational awareness puts extra onus on me to watch out for them. Even to the point of gauging the volume level of whatever shit-music they are using as a training montage soundtrack for their mundane lives. Or so they claim.
So apparently I can't just go about my business with trigger-folk either, instead I have to tap dance in their minefield. How special.
Yeah, I don't fucking get people who run/bike with music blaring. Part of the point of getting out it to get away from all that shit.
Mykeru wrote:
If you go right to her Evo-Psych talk, notice the very first responses she makes to criticism of her talking about things she knows fuck-all about is to claim Ed Clint is an admitted rapist.
Too stupid for words.
The thing that struck me from that incident was not Watson's clumsy "Ed Clint is a rapist" charge, rather it was PZ Myers and Greg Laden jumping in to the comments to make that accusation.
Two points to remember about this
First, Ed Clint was talking about a specific clip from a sit-com where you could judge how inebriated the woman was (not very - we are talking a couple of glasses of wine level.) Clint makes the obvious joke that if that level of drunkeness equals rape, then he was guilty of rape. He wasn't admitting rape - he was laughing at the idea that a couple of glasses of wine level inebriation equals lack of consent.
Second, PZ Myers has himself in the past been accused by one of his students of rape, or at least threatened with this by a student.
He should know that you do not joke around with accusations of rape.
Laden, well he's an utter scumbag, we can't expect any other behavior, but Myers?
What this tells me is that his 'lifelong feminism' is a sham. He doesn't give a shit about 'ending rape culture' and he's quite prepared at the drop of a hat to diminish real incidences of rape by comparing them to a sitcom joke.
Remick wrote:
But I am sure it does happen more often than you think Mykeru, we "normies" just call it emotional abuse.
No, we normies call it "reminded of an unpleasant memory". Not to downgrade PSTD flashbacks, but seriously, the people who go on about "triggers" usually don't have PSTD. They are just a less charming version of Pat in Silver Linings Playbook (whether he has traumatic brain injury as suggested in the book or bipolar as in the movie) running around trying to avoid anything that will stop them from achieving the mystical state of being 100% positive all the time. Mostly by blaming the universe for every stray thought between their ears that doesn't come straight from Happy-Land.
I can agree with that. I just never know if I haven't had enough terrible shit happen in my life, or if I just don't let it affect me as much as others.
I've had some personal experience with various traumatic events and can therefore be considered an expert on the matter (based on my lived experiences, don't you know!) I've experienced two types: physical and emotional.
The physical was the result attempting to centerpunch the grill of a Buick while racing another car on my bicycle. I took a corner on the outside, passing the car I was racing (a friend was driving) on to a little used access road. Trouble was, this time it was being used by a Buick sedan going 55+ mph in the opposite direction. I was likely doing about 30 mph, so an impact speed of 80 mph, wearing only cut-off shorts, no shirt, no shoes. POW! Through some combination of fast reflexes, snap decision making and more than a little luck, the bike took most of the hit, but I still took enough to get body punched into a stationary air roll and into the pavement. I went immediately into shock from the impact, but as it turned out, the only serious injury was a compression tear on my foot that required 10 stitches to close and I couldn't walk on that foot for about a month. Got off easy, really, when one considers what should have happened. Anyway, to get to the point now that you have the backstory:
While the accident was pretty spectacular, I was not seriously injured. My foot healed quickly and I was good to go - perfectly happy and normal. Repaired/rebuilt the bike and back on the road in 4 weeks. Here is the thing: a few days after getting back on the bike, I was riding down a road when a car came up behind me - I was on the shoulder, the car was in its lane moving at a normal speed, completely safe and normal riding conditions. My body freaked out! My (conscious) mind had no idea what was going on, but my body started shaking violently and uncontrollably. I actually had to stop and get off the bike until the shaking stopped. It was one of the strangest experiences I ever had.
I needed to ride to get around, not having a car. So I forced myself to ride around cars and within two weeks was pretty much fully acclimated again. Been riding pretty consistently ever since, to this day. To keep this short, I will summarize by stating the emotional trauma (a MUCH longer and more complicated story - I'll spare you!) was dealt with in a similar manner. Regroup. Look the issue squarely in in face. Take your time, regain your footing an move forward. It worked physically and it worked emotionally. Because of this success, I tend to have little sympathy for persons claiming to be 'triggered' by everyday events (like pictures, for crying out loud). My attitude is, to quote one of Mykeru's favorite's (Rule #5 IIRC) is to 'toughen the fuck up'. I think one of the contributing factors in modern Western society is that most people never experience a truly serious trauma, physical or emotional. The result is we get a class of people that every little thing that upsets them is OMG, End Of The World HORRIBLE. Sorry, I'm not buying into that. If you want to live your life being rattled by every little thing, suit yourself. I've got better things to do.
Important caveat: PSTD with military personal is an entirely different matter. What some of these people experience is so far of the scale for the rest of us that it is, quite literally, impossible to relate in any meaningful way.
bhoytony wrote:What did I think? I thought that posting an example to prove your point that doesn't prove your point makes you look like an idiot. I also think that I agree with Jack, why don't you fuck off.
Well it'd certainly be a boon to be eidetic.
Do you contend that the phenomena I was attempting to illustrate isn't apparent whether or not my example was spot on?
welch wrote:Jesus, what is it with PZ's fuckwit fans and "six years ago"/"eight years ago". You don't have to go back even CLOSE to that far to find rich evidence of the little fat toad being his cowardly hypocritical self.
It's the same sense of time that thinks the 'pit has been serving up a "shitstorm" for three years. Apparently, you can "contract" it from waiting at airports.
It's like the joke about the lawyer who arrived at the Pearly Gates, and St. Peter wrote down his age as 82. "No, I was only 55" the lawyer protested. "Yeah, we got 82 by adding up your billable hours."
Al Stefanelli wrote:Abbie: Virology (ERV, to be precise) [et al.]
What's the point of this list? I'm suspecting it's a good one, but please elaborate.
I explained before that it was out of curiosity, for a bit of fun, and maybe informative if certain subjects come up (you know, to see who to ask about X or Y subject). It's not mandatory, of course :)
Yeah, I don't fucking get people who run/bike with music blaring. Part of the point of getting out it to get away from all that shit.
I couldn't run or bike with music on if my life depended on it. Tried it once, and I set my path on whatever I was listening to. It was speed metal...
I used to listen to music to help set the pace, but never that. I always tried to keep an ear free so that I could hear what was around me. Grew up in Chicago with three gangs in my neighborhood, as well as numerous dogs in the house, so I learned early to pay attention to what was going on around me. Saved my bacon (and my shoes) many times.
Zenspace wrote:
I've had some personal experience with various traumatic events and can therefore be considered an expert on the matter (based on my lived experiences, don't you know!) I've experienced two types: physical and emotional.
The physical was the result attempting to centerpunch the grill of a Buick while racing another car on my bicycle. I took a corner on the outside, passing the car I was racing (a friend was driving) on to a little used access road. Trouble was, this time it was being used by a Buick sedan going 55+ mph in the opposite direction. I was likely doing about 30 mph, so an impact speed of 80 mph, wearing only cut-off shorts, no shirt, no shoes. POW! Through some combination of fast reflexes, snap decision making and more than a little luck, the bike took most of the hit, but I still took enough to get body punched into a stationary air roll and into the pavement.
A bit of pedantic dickery here, but Mythbusters actually did an entire episode around the myth that if two objects collide, you add up their independent speeds. They demonstrated pretty conclusively that if two cars traveling 50km/hr hit head on, it is NOT the equivalent of hitting a brick wall at 100. Each car experiences a collision of 50, nothing more.
BUT...I don't bring it up just to be a pedantic dick. One thing the episode did not test is what happens if the two objects are travelling at different speeds. When I read that you were going 30 and the car was going 55, I spent some time trying to figure out if that was like hitting a wall at 55 for you, or 30, or something intermediate. Guess MB needs to do a followup.
Zenspace wrote:
I've had some personal experience with various traumatic events and can therefore be considered an expert on the matter (based on my lived experiences, don't you know!) I've experienced two types: physical and emotional.
The physical was the result attempting to centerpunch the grill of a Buick while racing another car on my bicycle. I took a corner on the outside, passing the car I was racing (a friend was driving) on to a little used access road. Trouble was, this time it was being used by a Buick sedan going 55+ mph in the opposite direction. I was likely doing about 30 mph, so an impact speed of 80 mph, wearing only cut-off shorts, no shirt, no shoes. POW! Through some combination of fast reflexes, snap decision making and more than a little luck, the bike took most of the hit, but I still took enough to get body punched into a stationary air roll and into the pavement.
A bit of pedantic dickery here, but Mythbusters actually did an entire episode around the myth that if two objects collide, you add up their independent speeds. They demonstrated pretty conclusively that if two cars traveling 50km/hr hit head on, it is NOT the equivalent of hitting a brick wall at 100. Each car experiences a collision of 50, nothing more.
BUT...I don't bring it up just to be a pedantic dick. One thing the episode did not test is what happens if the two objects are travelling at different speeds. When I read that you were going 30 and the car was going 55, I spent some time trying to figure out if that was like hitting a wall at 55 for you, or 30, or something intermediate. Guess MB needs to do a followup.
Zenspace wrote:
I've had some personal experience with various traumatic events and can therefore be considered an expert on the matter (based on my lived experiences, don't you know!) I've experienced two types: physical and emotional.
The physical was the result attempting to centerpunch the grill of a Buick while racing another car on my bicycle. I took a corner on the outside, passing the car I was racing (a friend was driving) on to a little used access road. Trouble was, this time it was being used by a Buick sedan going 55+ mph in the opposite direction. I was likely doing about 30 mph, so an impact speed of 80 mph, wearing only cut-off shorts, no shirt, no shoes. POW! Through some combination of fast reflexes, snap decision making and more than a little luck, the bike took most of the hit, but I still took enough to get body punched into a stationary air roll and into the pavement.
A bit of pedantic dickery here, but Mythbusters actually did an entire episode around the myth that if two objects collide, you add up their independent speeds. They demonstrated pretty conclusively that if two cars traveling 50km/hr hit head on, it is NOT the equivalent of hitting a brick wall at 100. Each car experiences a collision of 50, nothing more.
BUT...I don't bring it up just to be a pedantic dick. One thing the episode did not test is what happens if the two objects are travelling at different speeds. When I read that you were going 30 and the car was going 55, I spent some time trying to figure out if that was like hitting a wall at 55 for you, or 30, or something intermediate. Guess MB needs to do a followup.
With the two objects striking head on at 50 MPH, assuming they both have the same mass, they act as stationary objects on each other, so their speeds are not combined. In a collision where one is traveling at 30 and another 50, assuming the same mass, my guess learned opinion would be they still act as stationary objects and the one at 30 strikes at 30 and the one at 50 does as well, of course with very different speeds momentum comes into play. All things being equal, a bicycle traveling 30 mph and a car traveling, considering their different speeds and masses and therefore the variables in momentum as a function of kinetic energy will act in such a way to create a huge unresolvable argument between those who authoritatively know dick and those who know just enough to be cognitively dangerous to themselves, neither of which will be particularly good at physics, but both will declare victory and denounce the other as fucking morons.
Abbie: Virology (ERV, to be precise) John C. Welch: IT, published author, three books, two assists, one solo. One of the assists was the only book, that I'm aware of on OS X Server 1.X, and sold quite well for a bit. dresq: Clinical and forensic psychology Skep Tickle: M.D Barn Owl: Teaching at medical school John Greg: Professional musician: 16 yrs > sound tech/deejay: 4 yrs > technical writer: 13 yrs ongoing Phil Giordana: Musician, skydiving instructor Sacha: dog expert, and managing director of Gender Traitors International AndrewV69: IT (Z/OS, Solaris, AIX, DB2, Linux, blah blah blah ... long since retired) Michael J: IT Za-zen: Proprietor, employer, general hate figure of a company that will not fund/ donate to, or in any other way support any organisation that promotes the Fftb fuckwits. Money talks. KiwiInOz: Environmental consultancy stuff - sustainable development and climate adaptation at the mo. JackRayner: Digital artist [illustration/animation/design, etc]. Gefan: Formerly Production Manager, now semi-retired and consulting part-time FrankGrimes: Musician, grower of chilli's and professional cider drinker. Windy: biology, mostly fishies Zenspace: Photographic artist and general life philosopher mike150160 (new guy): Ph.D. Oncology. Make the drugs safe for the Big Pharma TheMudbrooker: Pipelayer/General Laborer Cunning Punt: mechanical engineer, mostly consumer product design Anonymous Cowherd: Cognitive Science (retired), Research Consultancy (retired), Bloated Plutocrat (Manhattan anyone?) Lsuoma: PhD Quantum Chemistry, Computer-Aided Drug Design, Bioinformatics, DBA, Operations and Development Manager, Cloud Services Remick: Embedded Software Engineer, mainly defense, real time OS systems. ReneeHendricks: Web Production Manager/Web Developer VAXherd: PhD Sociology. Work in Science IT. Currently Neuroimaging, formerly Space Plasma Physics, Sociology, Computer Science Codelette: EE, Telecom (TDM transport, telephony, MW systems Mykeru: GS-12/5 Computer Specialist (WebPresence, TelePresence, Multi-Media, Graphics). BA Analytic Philosophy/Journalism (NAU). Premise Sign/Billboard Painter/Construction Edward Gemmer: Protection, Instruction, & Management of Prostitutes Whig: Unemployed lower-middle class former Higher Education office drone Greylurker: Electronic Engineer, custom railway and subsea stuff Dave: Pointy-Haired Boss and Lawyer. I once knew IT, but they made me forget how to actually do anything when I got a secretary JAB: MSc Physics, did a few years of contract industrial research, then went into a teaching Lab Tech job in undergrad Physics labs and have been doing that for a couple decades. Secondary duties along the way include things like Radiation Safety Officer. Angry_Drunk: Inebriate. JackSkeptic: Professional qualification and practitioner until recently. Now semi retired. Tigzy: Along the lines of what JackRayner does. Definitely not a Timelord like Lsuoma is. free thought police: semi-retired, makes fishing lures, slumlord katamari Damassi: radiation therapist debaser71: ex IT, stay at home dad Slither: Ph.D. Computer Science, academic Parge: Java/Web Developer, Ex-Corpsman USNR Badger3k: High School teacher (biology & others) Metalogic42: independent contractor - miscellaneous Cunt: Web Dev / PHP twat. Formerly assistant site manager (building) and qualified bricklayer. Stretchycheese: quantitative analyst, MA in political science Dick Strawkins: Molecular geneticist, specializing in oncology/leukemia bovarchist: blue-collar prole Tribble: Former Cop/Fed. CPA, CFE, some other financial stuff (all now inactive though licensed). Currently Chef stuck in opening hell in own restaurant. Steersman: Electronics engineering technologist – control systems (cybernetics – the greatest thing since sliced bread); retired. Brief career as a welder (“spark idiotâ€). Also, in the views of some, Dick & Pain in the ass, Ph.D. clownshoe: Software Engineer / Project Manager Gumby: Old life-Software engineer (telephony, DB, PBX/ACD/host integration) New life-home renovation contractor 16bitheretic: part time student, part time intern slave, full time bitch TheMan: Audio/visual Archive Producer Darth Cynic: Ten year enlistment office drone, Ba History, dithering on Ma, homemaker & angry person Mister_Kolle: Informal science educator and stand-up comedian zenbabe: Medical Laboratory Monkey ('scientist'). aka body fluid tester & analyzer babysitter & vein/artery stabber Al Stefanelli: Pope of the Holy Church of Shaolin Ninja Monks. Doctor of Heresy. White Cock of Authority. Computer Scientist. Publisher of Syndicated News Services. Retired author, writer & civil rights activist. Git: Former Software Engineer (Telecomms), recently acquired a BSc. in Astrophysics, currently on a "career break". Matt Cavanaugh: Horse trainer/riding instructor; ex- marketing executive; ex- graphic designer; ex- German-to-English translator. BA in History, Assoc. in Graphic Design & Communications.
Mykeru wrote:
I've seen their kindred spirits. This time of year while biking I keep running into (figuratively) runners and even cyclists with ear-buds in place. Very often if I see someone wearing earbuds (wires flop-flop flopping) I decline giving them an "audible" on passing as a waste of time and effort.
Which is nice because my real urge is to give them a Moe-slap to the back of their head as I go by.
Occasionally I've gotten shit from these people who will yell things at my back and then pop their buds out when I hit brakes and swing back to discuss it with them. The consensus from these sorts of people is their compromising their situational awareness puts extra onus on me to watch out for them. Even to the point of gauging the volume level of whatever shit-music they are using as a training montage soundtrack for their mundane lives. Or so they claim.
So apparently I can't just go about my business with trigger-folk either, instead I have to tap dance in their minefield. How special.
Dude, don't let other people's bad behavior get you into an accident. And if it ever comes to it in court, when they determine liability, not taking actions to avoid an accident can make you liable.
Zenspace wrote:
I've had some personal experience with various traumatic events and can therefore be considered an expert on the matter (based on my lived experiences, don't you know!) I've experienced two types: physical and emotional.
The physical was the result attempting to centerpunch the grill of a Buick while racing another car on my bicycle. I took a corner on the outside, passing the car I was racing (a friend was driving) on to a little used access road. Trouble was, this time it was being used by a Buick sedan going 55+ mph in the opposite direction. I was likely doing about 30 mph, so an impact speed of 80 mph, wearing only cut-off shorts, no shirt, no shoes. POW! Through some combination of fast reflexes, snap decision making and more than a little luck, the bike took most of the hit, but I still took enough to get body punched into a stationary air roll and into the pavement.
A bit of pedantic dickery here, but Mythbusters actually did an entire episode around the myth that if two objects collide, you add up their independent speeds. They demonstrated pretty conclusively that if two cars traveling 50km/hr hit head on, it is NOT the equivalent of hitting a brick wall at 100. Each car experiences a collision of 50, nothing more.
BUT...I don't bring it up just to be a pedantic dick. One thing the episode did not test is what happens if the two objects are travelling at different speeds. When I read that you were going 30 and the car was going 55, I spent some time trying to figure out if that was like hitting a wall at 55 for you, or 30, or something intermediate. Guess MB needs to do a followup.
With the two objects striking head on at 50 MPH, assuming they both have the same mass, they act as stationary objects on each other, so their speeds are not combined. In a collision where one is traveling at 30 and another 50, assuming the same mass, my guess learned opinion would be they still act as stationary objects and the one at 30 strikes at 30 and the one at 50 does as well, of course with very different speeds momentum comes into play. All things being equal, a bicycle traveling 30 mph and a car traveling, considering their different speeds and masses and therefore the variables in momentum as a function of kinetic energy will act in such a way to create a huge unresolvable argument between those who authoritatively know dick and those who know just enough to be cognitively dangerous to themselves, neither of which will be particularly good at physics, but both will declare victory and denounce the other as fucking morons.
Have at it, kids.
:lol: :lol: :lol:
I see you have experience with these complex matters. :dance:
Personally, my equation resolved itself like this: "Shit - BUICK" <BANG!> KE=m*V2 "Motherfucker, that HURT!"
welch wrote:
I may be one of the biggest arachniphobes you know of. To the point where i can't even look at pictures of the damned things without wanting to hit said picture with a bat. Spiders really freak me the fuck out.
So, in an ideal world, that's hold the whole "trigger warning" thing is supposed to work?
Fair enough. The thing is, Welch has to do a bit of "sharing" before I even knew that. Is that why circle-jerking confessional sharing is so important to these folks? Maybe they need Med-Alert bracelets or, even better, T-shirts announcing their Kryptonite.
You know what really triggers me? Pictures of nubile brunette women with pert tits and long coltish legs. I really hate that. Scares the shit out of me.
Don't nobody post that shit.
:drool:
That's kind of the problem. Unless I tell EVERYONE, how the hell should anyone be responsible because they have a picture of a spider in their preso? I mean, sure, if you're showing pics of decapitated bodies, or porn, yeah, I can see expecting a warning. Unless your session is a medical study of decapitated corpses, or you're presenting a study on porn. Because then, you should expect certain things.
but in general, what the hell? Okay, someone got beat up and the idea of someone with a black eye is really bad. but to expect warnings for anything that MIGHT be a trigger? How is that even POSSIBLE?
Zenspace wrote:... I took a corner on the outside, passing the car I was racing (a friend was driving) on to a little used access road. Trouble was, this time it was being used by a Buick sedan going 55+ mph in the opposite direction. I was likely doing about 30 mph, so an impact speed of 80 mph, wearing only cut-off shorts, no shirt, no shoes. POW! Through some combination of fast reflexes, snap decision making and more than a little luck, the bike took most of the hit, but I still took enough to get body punched into a stationary air roll and into the pavement.
A bit of pedantic dickery here, but Mythbusters actually did an entire episode around the myth that if two objects collide, you add up their independent speeds. They demonstrated pretty conclusively that if two cars traveling 50km/hr hit head on, it is NOT the equivalent of hitting a brick wall at 100. Each car experiences a collision of 50, nothing more.
BUT...I don't bring it up just to be a pedantic dick. One thing the episode did not test is what happens if the two objects are travelling at different speeds. When I read that you were going 30 and the car was going 55, I spent some time trying to figure out if that was like hitting a wall at 55 for you, or 30, or something intermediate. Guess MB needs to do a followup.
For Zenspace, had his head struck the car, the collision really would have been as if he struck a stationary car at 80mph. Two identical cars each doing 50mph colliding head on is (roughly) equivalent to just one hitting a brick wall at 50 because a brick wall does not crumple: all of the energy is dissipated by just the one car; whereas in a the head-on scenario, both cars crumple and absorb (approximately) equal energy. (And you'd much prefer your car crash into a stationary car than into a brick wall).
So Zen's head travelling 30 mph into a what, for him, would be a solid object (a car) moving 50 in the opposite direction would cause equivalent damage as if he were moving 80 and the car 0. (or he 0 and the car 80).
(BTW, in the dual car, head-on scenario: if one were doing 50 and the other 30, each car would experience the forces equivalent to hitting a brick wall at 40 mph)
