You are seeing her without makeup and party clothes.Gumby wrote: Yeah, she is obviously underage in those pics. Not even a question.
Paul Myers will be Hugo Schwyzer #2. I'm calling it here. The cognitive dissonance between what he does, who he is, and what he says is eventually going to eat at him until he finally has a mental breakdown.Ericb wrote:Maybe he really believes that he's a White Night of Colour on a crusade against the rape culture. Oh the glory he will feel this afternoon. The Skepchicks will be swooning at his feet.Jonathan wrote:PZ has a dig at Thunderf00t, because that's worked so well for him in the past:
http://www.freezepage.com/1376496950FCSAQWJLYT
Increasingly I'm thinking he's not going to retract after all; instead he'll try and bullshit his way through whatever comes next.
[img] http://www.arthursclipart.org/stories/s ... ixote1.gif [ /img]
Bookmarked for later. Thanks.Southern wrote:I hope you enjoy - the crazyness of the comic is to be seen to be believed. And it was supposed to be taken somewhat seriously!
In the light of day, sans party clothes and makeup. You may have a subtle point.Gumby wrote: Yep. "But your honor, I was fooled. just look at her tits!" isn't going to play well in court.
I'm pretty sure Peez is gonna comply. He'll wait until the very last minute -- literally hold his finger over the return key while watching the clock -- and also issue some grandiose statement as to why he selflessly ate his hat to save the crusade and protect his sources, he retracts in words but not in spirit, the fight goes on, bla-dy-bla.deLurch wrote:Paul Myers will be Hugo Schwyzer #2. I'm calling it here. The cognitive dissonance between what he does, who he is, and what he says is eventually going to eat at him until he finally has a mental breakdown.
I've sometimes noticed patterns when a blogger isn't happy with a post making the news to post a lot in order to get the troublesome post off the "front page" and to reposition the blogger as a good guy.Matt Cavanaugh wrote:I'm pretty sure Peez is gonna comply. He'll wait until the very last minute -- literally hold his finger over the return key while watching the clock -- and also issue some grandiose statement as to why he selflessly ate his hat to save the crusade and protect his sources, he retracts in words but not in spirit, the fight goes on, bla-dy-bla.deLurch wrote:Paul Myers will be Hugo Schwyzer #2. I'm calling it here. The cognitive dissonance between what he does, who he is, and what he says is eventually going to eat at him until he finally has a mental breakdown.
btw, has everyone noticed how Peez has written like 19 posts in the past two days? I don't see the dude as a tweaker, but his patterns to fit bipolar.
In any event, I suspect most people understand at a biological level that sex with a someone who is at the pre-adolescence stage of development is wrong.Southern wrote:Either way, an adult should know better than sleep with prebubescent/early pubescent younglings. Specially if they lived 30+ years over this pale blue dot - they got time to learn how to behave and control themselves.
:mrgreen:Dick Strawkins wrote:I think he will refuse to admit his error and instead use the publicity to sell his book.
I do not know where you get the idea that people, like myself, who were always atheist have never "been tested". We, everyone in the world, is surrounded, literally surrounded, by tests of woo, daily, hourly. One, and only one of many possible examples is called advertising.Not that people who were raised atheist are necessarily prone to Baboonery; they just haven't really been tested.
Guest wrote:[quote="DeepInsideYourMind"People who can't read and quote mine really shouldn't be allowed on the Internet, they just embarrass themselves
The baboonite arguments were coming from yourself and I explained why that was the case in the previous post. Now, fuck off, cunt.Tribble wrote:Oh, look, one of the baboons making a strawman argument.
Yes, and it comes off as disingenuous, very: "We're all fine here, now, thank you. How are you?".Matt Cavanaugh wrote:
I'm pretty sure Peez is gonna comply. He'll wait until the very last minute -- literally hold his finger over the return key while watching the clock -- and also issue some grandiose statement as to why he selflessly ate his hat to save the crusade and protect his sources, he retracts in words but not in spirit, the fight goes on, bla-dy-bla.
btw, has everyone noticed how Peez has written like 19 posts in the past two days? I don't see the dude as a tweaker, but his patterns to fit bipolar.
Paul Myers needs to start dating Jen McCreight(sp?)'s boyfriend just so he has someone to yank his foolish ass off the internet when he starts over doing it and and digging himself in deeper.Matt Cavanaugh wrote:btw, has everyone noticed how Peez has written like 19 posts in the past two days? I don't see the dude as a tweaker, but his patterns to fit bipolar.
Lelz.Setár, genderqueer Elf-Sheriff of Atheism+ wrote:I understand the anger, but, seriously, the atheist equivalent of the Daily Mail is somewhere very near to the Slymepit.
JackRayner wrote:
To start, I'm not trying to "justify" anyone's violation of the law of he land [so, yeah, this is an "academic explanation". If you don't give a fuck about the topic, then feel free to stay out of it...maybe?], I'm just stating that fucking a minor doesn't mean you're a pedophile, especially when it's 13-14 year olds. Next, 11 mightn't fall under pedophilia either, just as a heads up. And lastly, when it is and isn't "okay" to fuck a post-pubescent human is solely dependent on that culture's views, and the laws [whether tribal or governmental] they may make from these views. If you feel the need to apply some moral value to these things, be my guest, just know they're not objective.
Whistling past the graveyard... :eusa-whistle:Yes, and it comes off as disingenuous, very: "We're all fine here, now, thank you. How are you?".
Guest wrote:The baboonite arguments were coming from yourself and I explained why that was the case in the previous post. Now, fuck off, cunt.Tribble wrote:Oh, look, one of the baboons making a strawman argument.
Yes, to your entire paragraph.The "album" difference is interesting.... My preferred interaction with the world and with other people is full of narrative and context, and shuffling things randomly or arranging them to suit myself disrupts that structure in ways that I find very disorienting.
Matt Cavanaugh wrote:btw, has everyone noticed how Peez has written like 19 posts in the past two days? I don't see the dude as a tweaker, but his patterns to fit bipolar.
You get used to that around here. Not behaving the way someone else thinks you should? Baboon. It's pretty much the "I don't like you, you're a big mean poopy-head" argument. It's about as effective a rejoinder as a one of the high school jocks yelling "FAAG" as they drive by while you walk your dog. They are terribly amused by it, you wonder just what the fuck happened, shrug and watch your dog do its business.Guest wrote:The baboonite arguments were coming from yourself and I explained why that was the case in the previous post. Now, fuck off, cunt.Tribble wrote:Oh, look, one of the baboons making a strawman argument.
Holy shit. So you admit that "irony" at least has various meanings, you fucking clown?Tribble wrote:And a boring baboon with no sense of his ironic behavior at that...
Rope apologist wrote:<blockquote>In more important matters than debating age of consent with closet Victorians, has PZ Myers retracted yet?</blockquote>
No.
What truly important person would take down such truly important words before it's truly necessary?
With luck, he'll be too important to do so in two and a half hours, as well
The age of consent in many US states prior to 1880 was 10 or 12:Tribble wrote:JackRayner wrote:
To start, I'm not trying to "justify" anyone's violation of the law of he land [so, yeah, this is an "academic explanation". If you don't give a fuck about the topic, then feel free to stay out of it...maybe?], I'm just stating that fucking a minor doesn't mean you're a pedophile, especially when it's 13-14 year olds. Next, 11 mightn't fall under pedophilia either, just as a heads up. And lastly, when it is and isn't "okay" to fuck a post-pubescent human is solely dependent on that culture's views, and the laws [whether tribal or governmental] they may make from these views. If you feel the need to apply some moral value to these things, be my guest, just know they're not objective.
Just to make it more fun, our current age-of-consent laws are a product of early feminism and social purity (Christian) organizations. So, before we extended childhood and infantilized our young adults into an extended childhood, they were considered old enough to make these decisions. Now they're not.
And, to be honest, I'm glad our children do get to experience an abnormally extended childhood. But pretending young adults are the same as children... Well, we see the result.
In more important matters than debating age of consent with closet Victorians, has PZ Myers retracted yet?
Poor baby. Look, keep defending Becky Watson all you want. The mere fact that she's playing the pedophile game in tarring and feathering Krauss clearly isn't of concern to you. Rather, just you strange definition of what a pedophile is...Guest wrote:Holy shit. So you admit that "irony" at least has various meanings, you fucking clown?Tribble wrote:And a boring baboon with no sense of his ironic behavior at that...
Indeed, you expect this shit to fly in atheist+ land but make an argument someone doesn't like or misunderstand and they start ascribing nefarious motives to you HERE? Jesus fuck.welch wrote: You get used to that around here. Not behaving the way someone else thinks you should? Baboon. It's pretty much the "I don't like you, you're a big mean poopy-head" argument. It's about as effective a rejoinder as a one of the high school jocks yelling "FAAG" as they drive by while you walk your dog. They are terribly amused by it, you wonder just what the fuck happened, shrug and watch your dog do its business.
You'll find a correlation between the "BABOON" yellers and the "I'M IGNORING YOU, YOU'RE A CUNT" lot.
I'm sure the horrible, horrible pain i'm in from a bunch of people I don't know calling me names comes through.
In terms of music, that's actually a fairly recent thing. Even into the mid-1960s, Albums were collections of singles, nothing more. It's not until you get bands becoming more than just extensions of the A&R department at a label, and the rise of the Singer/Songwriter that Albums were considered as anything more. The Beatles are probably more responsible for this than any other entity.John Greg wrote:BarnOwl said (http://www.slymepit.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... 03#p118103):
Yes, to your entire paragraph.The "album" difference is interesting.... My preferred interaction with the world and with other people is full of narrative and context, and shuffling things randomly or arranging them to suit myself disrupts that structure in ways that I find very disorienting.
In the old days, when pop music was carefully written and performed rather than just downloaded from software, the artists involved, though sometimes only the prodcuers of the albums, spent a great deal of time deciding on track order. In some cases, determining track order took almost as much time as the initial recording (in particular, people like Zappa and Neil Young spent days, sometime weeks, determining track order). I am not certain, but I think the process of spending a lot of time determining track order began during the Big Band era (1940ish).
In a very real sense, CDs, the "shuffle" function, and of course the musical abortion known as iPod, have rendered that process completely moot.
Mykeru and Welch, both of you just confirmed why I tend to appreciate each of you with all those comments.welch wrote:While I have, do, and will tell grownups that they need to stop giving power to people they have never met just because it's the internet, I do not do that for kids, and for the reasons you give. She wasn't trying to be a whore or a slut. She was taking pictures of herself for her boyfriend. She was looking pretty for someone she cared about, and because someone couldn't resist the temptation to hack an account and then further resist the temptation to put what they found on the internet, what is a trying time at best became something no kid should have to go through.Mykeru wrote:First, I think the whole pedophile/hebephile distinction is a horse out of the barn, like trying to convince people "begging the question" doesn't mean "raising the question". Too late, sometimes you just get swamped by the stupid.welch wrote: Also, she was trying to post those pics so that only one or two people could see them, and some goob hacked the account. So now they're all over the internet, photoshopped to look nude, and she can't get away from them ever. If you read about the whole thing, it's completely fucked up. She was getting real threats to the point where she and her family, (intelligently) called the cops about it. Ended up having to be home schooled because everyone in the schools she tried to attend were calling her whore, porn star, etc.
What I find disturbing is the shit she got over these pictures and the sense of betrayal she must have felt with their being disseminated. No matter how "well-developed" you think she is, she's a kid -- walking raw never and all -- and more often than not kid's worst enemies are other kids. As adults it's hard to remember the sheer devastation of being made a spectacle by your peers.
The dilemma is that on one hand we want to protect kids and severely punish those who prey on them -- even to the extent of confusing all miscreants with the lowest of predators -- yet kids are raised in this highly sexualized atmosphere which is a by product of our society being based on selling people shit they don't need and/or is bad for them.
Honestly, knowing the back-story, I would hesitate to stick yet another link on the internet.
The hacking and dumping the pics out is somewhat personal to me because of what I do. I have access, literally, to the personal photos and what not of hundreds of people. it wouldn't even be "hacking" in the sense of bypassing security. I have root access to their stuff. I literally AM the security in a sense, and I am keenly aware of the trust that involves.
I have, in the course of my job, seen some rather personal stuff. emails, photos, and whatnot. None of it was illegal, or even close. (Professional trust ends where the law begins. I find kiddie porn on a hard drive, that computer is shut down and the cops are called. period.) but it was obviously private stuff. I cannot imagine the thought process that makes it okay to dump someone's private pictures, videos, or thoughts out on the internet just for lulz. not like that. Not for an adult, not for a kid.
I know adults that kind of thing has happened to. Ex-boy/girlfriends get mad at the breakup and all those pictures you took or the stupid poems you wrote are now on the internet. They're better able to cope, but it's not much easier.
People don't magically change because they post here.Guest wrote:Indeed, you expect this shit to fly in atheist+ land but make an argument someone doesn't like or misunderstand and they start ascribing nefarious motives to you HERE? Jesus fuck.welch wrote: You get used to that around here. Not behaving the way someone else thinks you should? Baboon. It's pretty much the "I don't like you, you're a big mean poopy-head" argument. It's about as effective a rejoinder as a one of the high school jocks yelling "FAAG" as they drive by while you walk your dog. They are terribly amused by it, you wonder just what the fuck happened, shrug and watch your dog do its business.
You'll find a correlation between the "BABOON" yellers and the "I'M IGNORING YOU, YOU'RE A CUNT" lot.
I'm sure the horrible, horrible pain i'm in from a bunch of people I don't know calling me names comes through.
constantly. It's one of her standard MO's. A variant is to reply to a comment, demand you reply in <timelimit> or you're admitting you're wrong, all after banning you from commenting.Guest wrote:As an aside, does Zvan regularly delete comments she doesn't like without even commenting on the deletion or explaining why? A bunch of pretty good commentary seems to have disappeared from her latest piece.
And clearly that it it.bhoytony wrote:There can be only one
[youtube]XAg5KjnAhuU[/youtube]
Really? That's really welch typing that in, or was he hacked?welch wrote: You get used to that around here. Not behaving the way someone else thinks you should? Baboon.
Dude, how many times here have I called someone a baboon?Ä uest wrote:Really? That's really welch typing that in, or was he hacked?welch wrote: You get used to that around here. Not behaving the way someone else thinks you should? Baboon.
Part of the problem is that at least in the US, we don't take adulthood seriously. For example, drinking. We spend 21 years telling kids NONONONONONO, and then at midnight on their 21st birthday, we say "OKAY KID, DO AS THOU WILT", and are shocked, SHOCKED that it doesn't turn out well.zenbabe wrote:Mykeru and Welch, both of you just confirmed why I tend to appreciate each of you with all those comments.welch wrote:While I have, do, and will tell grownups that they need to stop giving power to people they have never met just because it's the internet, I do not do that for kids, and for the reasons you give. She wasn't trying to be a whore or a slut. She was taking pictures of herself for her boyfriend. She was looking pretty for someone she cared about, and because someone couldn't resist the temptation to hack an account and then further resist the temptation to put what they found on the internet, what is a trying time at best became something no kid should have to go through.Mykeru wrote:
First, I think the whole pedophile/hebephile distinction is a horse out of the barn, like trying to convince people "begging the question" doesn't mean "raising the question". Too late, sometimes you just get swamped by the stupid.
What I find disturbing is the shit she got over these pictures and the sense of betrayal she must have felt with their being disseminated. No matter how "well-developed" you think she is, she's a kid -- walking raw never and all -- and more often than not kid's worst enemies are other kids. As adults it's hard to remember the sheer devastation of being made a spectacle by your peers.
The dilemma is that on one hand we want to protect kids and severely punish those who prey on them -- even to the extent of confusing all miscreants with the lowest of predators -- yet kids are raised in this highly sexualized atmosphere which is a by product of our society being based on selling people shit they don't need and/or is bad for them.
Honestly, knowing the back-story, I would hesitate to stick yet another link on the internet.
The hacking and dumping the pics out is somewhat personal to me because of what I do. I have access, literally, to the personal photos and what not of hundreds of people. it wouldn't even be "hacking" in the sense of bypassing security. I have root access to their stuff. I literally AM the security in a sense, and I am keenly aware of the trust that involves.
I have, in the course of my job, seen some rather personal stuff. emails, photos, and whatnot. None of it was illegal, or even close. (Professional trust ends where the law begins. I find kiddie porn on a hard drive, that computer is shut down and the cops are called. period.) but it was obviously private stuff. I cannot imagine the thought process that makes it okay to dump someone's private pictures, videos, or thoughts out on the internet just for lulz. not like that. Not for an adult, not for a kid.
I know adults that kind of thing has happened to. Ex-boy/girlfriends get mad at the breakup and all those pictures you took or the stupid poems you wrote are now on the internet. They're better able to cope, but it's not much easier.
The problem with kids from 13-18 (particularly on the younger end of that range) is that they're so fresh into some sort of adulthood. Their bodies might be all grown up, but their brains sure as hell aren't, for males I think the frontal cortex isn't finished wiring itself up until early 20s? They should get the time to ease into real adulthood, their brains, their psychologies, need time to catch up to their bodies. A 13 year old boy or girl might be sexually mature physically, but that doesn't give a full blown adult (not a woman, nor a man) in their 20s, 30s, etc the right take advantage of that and screw up their minds, which are still fairly childlike.
I think you nailed it Wonkey Donkey. No matter what happens, PeeZus will claim victory.Wonky Donkey wrote: Just under 5 and a half hours to go and the infamous handgrenade blog post is still there. Whilst PZ is in a lose lose situation, the movement that are using him as a conduit are in a win win situation.
1. Case: it gets pulled. Yet another sign how the patriarchy suppresses the poor fragile woman, hear us roar!.
2. Case: it stays there. PZ standing up to the bullies, hear us roar!
3. Case: goes to court, salacious details come out and get rebutted - becomes a public platform for da message, hear us roar!
4. Case: goes to court, as above, PZ loses - see (1)
5. Case: goes to court, as above, Shermer loses - becomes a public platform for da message and hear da movement roar til your ears bleed!
Either way, significant damage has and will be done to the conference circuit's ability to chose its own speakers without help from da movement. The drip feeding keeps it in the news.
Jesus Christ, how did she ever gain as much notoriety as she does with her shitty blogging style? She should just Twitter everything instead.Dick Strawkins wrote:Ophelia spots the Mr Deity video. :D
No need to click the link, she just posts the video along with the following three words:
"Behold an asshole"
http://freethoughtblogs.com/butterflies ... us-geddit/
No, you just go off on multi-day tangents excoriating people, often over some minor disagreements, often using the same "listening" skills as a Genghis Khan.welch wrote:Dude, how many times here have I called someone a baboon?Ä uest wrote:Really? That's really welch typing that in, or was he hacked?welch wrote: You get used to that around here. Not behaving the way someone else thinks you should? Baboon.
Allow me to introduce you to some new space age technology from the future that will solve all of your problems.Matt Cavanaugh wrote:Being unable to block "Guest" makes me feel like I'm in Harlan Ellison's I Have No Mouth and I Must Scream
If I recall correctly for males a bit later than that. For females a whole lot earlier (can not be arsed to look it up ATM). Which is why generally it is recognized that girls tend to mature emotionally earlier.zenbabe wrote: The problem with kids from 13-18 (particularly on the younger end of that range) is that they're so fresh into some sort of adulthood. Their bodies might be all grown up, but their brains sure as hell aren't, for males I think the frontal cortex isn't finished wiring itself up until early 20s?
Relatively speaking of course.zenbabe wrote: They should get the time to ease into real adulthood, their brains, their psychologies, need time to catch up to their bodies. A 13 year old boy or girl might be sexually mature physically, but that doesn't give a full blown adult (not a woman, nor a man) in their 20s, 30s, etc the right take advantage of that and screw up their minds, which are still fairly childlike.
You're such a baboon for saying that. I'm ignoring you from now on. You're a cunt. OPINION is not EVIDENCE. * FLOOOSH * as per Hitchen's quote. DATA_ERROR. SYSTEM_FAILURE. REBOOT. REBOOT.welch wrote:You get used to that around here. Not behaving the way someone else thinks you should? Baboon. It's pretty much the "I don't like you, you're a big mean poopy-head" argument. It's about as effective a rejoinder as a one of the high school jocks yelling "FAAG" as they drive by while you walk your dog. They are terribly amused by it, you wonder just what the fuck happened, shrug and watch your dog do its business.Guest wrote:The baboonite arguments were coming from yourself and I explained why that was the case in the previous post. Now, fuck off, cunt.Tribble wrote:Oh, look, one of the baboons making a strawman argument.
You'll find a correlation between the "BABOON" yellers and the "I'M IGNORING YOU, YOU'RE A CUNT" lot.
I'm sure the horrible, horrible pain i'm in from a bunch of people I don't know calling me names comes through.
Three whole words! She must have spent hours on that post, trying different combinations, finding just the write words for the tone she wants. Truly a masterpiece, a....dare I say it...tour de force?Dick Strawkins wrote:Ophelia spots the Mr Deity video. :D
No need to click the link, she just posts the video along with the following three words:
"Behold an asshole"
http://freethoughtblogs.com/butterflies ... us-geddit/
I love the first comment. "I thought he was one of the good guys".Dick Strawkins wrote:Ophelia spots the Mr Deity video. :D
No need to click the link, she just posts the video along with the following three words:
"Behold an asshole"
http://freethoughtblogs.com/butterflies ... us-geddit/
Can you go a single post without including any such references, Ted?Matt Cavanaugh wrote:Being unable to block "Guest" makes me feel like I'm in Harlan Ellison's I Have No Mouth and I Must Scream
ftfywelch wrote:Same thing with sex and all the other 'privileges' of adulthood. The US spends a lot of time laying the groundwork to sabotage the fuck out of kids from 18 on, and then we act all shocked and butthurt that kids between 18 and oh,25-2652-62 are a pack of fucking idiots. Well, what do you expect? "Gosh, I have no experience whatsoever with sex and drinking, but lo, magically due to my age, all the wisdom required to manage some of the trickiest shit I will ever deal with has poured itself into my fucking skull, and I shall of course be totes responsible with those things."
I'm surprised kids handle that shit as well as they do.
Fantastic!Gefan wrote:The clock is ticking in the bunker, and Peezus receives a call...
[youtube]ctMdUcWy-O0[/youtube]
Please understand that, originally this was about Ophelia Benson's doxxing of Skeptickle (remember that?) but, by the time I finally figured out how to do this properly, further events in baboonery had overtaken us all and I had to re-write the whole fucking thing (along with another fourteen scenes to be named later).
Mykeru, I feel your pain.
I can’t see a lot to be ashamed about in being a victim, although I also think it is entirely natural and quite justified to wonder as to how much responsibility they might bear for the event. Rather much like a report of a vehicle accident: were they intoxicated? Driving while texting? But I also wonder if the victim’s name is to be published then why not that of the supposed criminal?Ä uest wrote:MRAs and certain feminists have thought what needs defanging is the notion that rape is a crime that shames it's victims, and shames them to the extent their names should not be published.Steersman wrote: <snip>
But I think the evidence is that current systems aren’t working all that great, and that some effort should be expended to find better ones instead of allowing far too many people – victims and perpetrators – to fall through the cracks.
nvmJackRayner wrote:Can anyone get me a decent image of the racist hat so I can put it on my Gooby? The green hat isn't doing it for me.
[Sent Gumby a PM, but haven't heard back from him....]
Early Cuyler wrote:I love the first comment. "I thought he was one of the good guys".Dick Strawkins wrote:Ophelia spots the Mr Deity video. :D
No need to click the link, she just posts the video along with the following three words:
"Behold an asshole"
http://freethoughtblogs.com/butterflies ... us-geddit/
pfft!! They're so far into the us vs them mentality it makes the baby Jesus puke.
