Bleeding from the Bunghole

[Tribble]

Well, that Rael photo spurred a bit more digging:

She's a Jersey Girl: Rape ("Sexual Assault"), No time limit N.J. Stat. § 2C:1-6(a)(1)

Also, it seems that she's not even 50. Assuming she went to the University of Charleston right after HS, she's about 45. Which correlates with her White Pages listing age range of 45-49. (And they get my age-range information spot on, so I'm thinking they're right.) She then seems to have, eventually, gone to graduate school at Rowan University or, perhaps, just finished her Bachelor's degree, I can't be sure.

If the rapes happened at Charleston , there is no Statute of Limitations in West Virginia. If they were at Rowen, it's a New Jersey sited university. If she's lived anywhere else, the White Pages aren't showing it, yet they've got me going back until 1984...

Laws change over time. Were those statues of no limitation on time in place?

When a SOL changes, it applies to anything not tolled.

[BarnOwl]

<snip>

If you read the comments on that thread you'll notice that there while it is blindingly obvious that Sanderson's source was oolon's butterflies and wheels comment, there is absolutely no sense that the commenters - or indeed the blog author Avicenna - see anything wrong with oolon spreading a rumor about accusations being made about Avicenna.

Avicenna himself does himself no favors in my eyes by blatantly lying about the situation - "quoting" things from the slymepit that haven't been said here and seemingly accepting any unevidenced charge against us without the slightest hesitation.

And if he finds lying so easy they why on earth should we accept the rest of his testimony about even receiving an email in the first place - or at the very least, his description of him reporting accusations to the authorities where he is currently working and the subsequent two week emergency security procedures that resulted.

Frankly, I don't buy his story, and for a very simple set of reasons.

Avicenna is pseudonymous.
He is currently working in India, I guess as part of his medical training - a placement in a charity that deals with womens health issues.

Are we supposed to believe that his current employers are glued to his blog and twitter account and are likely to believe everything that is written about him - by any anonymous online individual?

And that they would instigate a two week investigation beacuse of an anonymous accusation against a pseudonymous online name, involving a time period they could verify in a second?
(Remember, Avicenna was working at their clinic in India at the time the allegations concern.)

<snip>

I find Avicenna's deliberate and repeated dishonesty to be particularly disturbing behavior for a medical professional. Can he turn off the histrionic lying-for-attention-and-sympathy when dealing with patients?

[Mykeru]

I wouldn't disagree with any of that, but when it comes to the current situation , Peezus et al ain't members of the Tea Party are they? This whole thing is a movement from the left. The Tea Party are an equivalent movement from the right, but the fucking Tea Party isn't looking to take over the skeptical movement are they?

Hey, I hang with Right-wing Libertarians on occasion. And unlike the chaotic left, they have a simple solution:

Whatever your problem is, monetary devaluations, personal dissatisfaction, the suspicion that your explosive diarrhea has something to do with the Benghazi cover up, it's all the same solution: Ron Paul. Just hand everything over to him and it's done in one.

Vastly different from what you're describing and, bonus, it'll be in the real world, not just some half-assed blog.

:whistle:

[Mykeru]

The conference culture is different: They act like they are having Groundhog Day at those things where all the cool kids are doing it, and the lie is there is no consequences and no hangover because they treat these things like they exist outside of time. Until the next morning where people's heads hurt and they have vague memories of someone touching someone else, if only if it was someone holding back their hair to puke.

What I don't understand are the speakers who will booze it up heavily the night before they have to do a speech. A speech is essentially a performance. I don't see how anyone thinks they can do a competent job hung over.

Have you seen Becky speak? Being drunk is probably her way of steeling her nerves to speak about things she rarely knows about - she either parrots other people or else talks endlessly about herself. Maybe being hung over gives her an excuse for being bad, or at least she may think so. Now, the audience, they would benefit from being drunk, but if you made a game (say, one drink per smirk, slam the drink for a rape=threat email/twitter/etc), you'd be dead of alcohol poisoning.

Re: the IIDB split - is that the one - 2007? I thought I was back on forums before that, but it could be. All I remember was some mods doing something to others, but I wasn't involved so I didn't really care.

deLurch,

You misunderstand the mind of the drunk. It works like this:

When you have nothing to do, and are bored, that's a good reason to drink.

When you have something to do, and are stressed, that's a good reason to drink.

Have to give a speech in front of people on something you know fuck all about and with little preparation due to the above? That's a _________________________

Yes, it's a quiz. Fill in the blank.

[codelette]

I was stupid enough to buy Final Fantasy VII remake for PC, so I'm a few pages behind. If I've missed anything interesting other than over-population and water in California, could somebody give me a heads up? Thanks.

As for hugs and kisses, the Mediterranean culture in very much into those, guys on girls, guys on guys, girls on guys, girls on girls... An American friend of mine in Florida was shocked to see me kiss a french girl on the cheeks as a greeting and asked me if there was anything between us. On the other hand, the captain of the Female US Formation Skydiving in 2003 would from time to time just come to me and give me a kiss on the lips for no reason whatsoever. She did this to other guys too.

I don't know if this advances the discussion, just anecdotes...

With Puerto Ricans, the hugging and kissing is mostly restricted to women on men, men on women, and women on women. It should be noted though, that they're usually faux-kisses, where you touch cheeks and make a kissy sound, like so.

Man on man hugging happens, but it's mostly between male friends and family. Even then though, it's not always a regular hug. We often do the whole hanshake with a hug, illustrated here, though we switch our hands to this midway, which results in our hands being higher up between us, and chest to chest contact can't happen.

...did I loose anyone yet? :?

There's also the hug with loud pat-in-the-back accompanied with a "cabroooooon, tanto tiempooo!". :lol:

[Cunning Punt]

Well, that Rael photo spurred a bit more digging:

She's a Jersey Girl: Rape ("Sexual Assault"), No time limit N.J. Stat. § 2C:1-6(a)(1)

Also, it seems that she's not even 50. Assuming she went to the University of Charleston right after HS, she's about 45. Which correlates with her White Pages listing age range of 45-49. (And they get my age-range information spot on, so I'm thinking they're right.) She then seems to have, eventually, gone to graduate school at Rowan University or, perhaps, just finished her Bachelor's degree, I can't be sure.

If the rapes happened at Charleston , there is no Statute of Limitations in West Virginia. If they were at Rowen, it's a New Jersey sited university. If she's lived anywhere else, the White Pages aren't showing it, yet they've got me going back until 1984...

So, I'm even more skeptical of her story... Unless this happened while driving through in a different state, or further back than any reasonably available records, things are really not adding up with her story.

She had this pointed out to her in the very FB link shown here. She just turned it around into "WAH!! victim blaming". What a pathetic person she is.

[jjbinx007]

2 things.

Firstly, does anyone else remember a Google hangout PZ made a few months back where he was chatting to a bunch of girls and one of them was holding a glass full of alcohol up to the webcam most of the time? It wasn't like she was drinking it - she was holding it in shot deliberately as if to say "Look at me! I'm drinking alcohol!" like some silly college student.

Secondly, AtheismPlus has... sorry, typo. The North Korean Government has just executed some people for making pornographic videos:

http://english.chosun.com/site/data/htm ... 01412.html

This bit caught my eye:

The source added that all of the families of the executed appear to have been sent to prison camps under North Korea's barbaric principle of guilt by association.

[Tribble]

Oh look, first comment of the presentation is a reference to her alcoholism.

I had a go at analysing that one.

http://psych0drama.blogspot.co.uk/2012/ ... ously.html
http://psych0drama.blogspot.co.uk/2012/ ... ly_30.html
http://psych0drama.blogspot.co.uk/2013/ ... ously.html

Couldn't go more than 19 minutes though, it just got too frustrating. Basically she doesn't say a single thing that isn't either irrelevant or objectionable.

I mean, within the first three minutes or so she begins a string of lies about Dr David Holmes to the end that he is some kind of insulter of women. His field - he has dedicated his life to the forensic understanding of stalking, domestic violence and online harassment.

And then it just gets worse...

Personally, I think one of the most dangerous things about feminism is how it enshrines and presents an insane dichotomy of women into society. An almost Victorian world-view of women coupled with a 'traditional masculine' world-view. That is women are helpless, non-sexual, incompetent-actors who are perpetual victims and need a strong man/society/legal system to protect them from the evils (men really) of the world. And yet, we're supposed to simultaneously recognize that women are strong, sexually-liberated-fuck-who-you-want, goddess-empowered go-getters who can anything a man can do and need no man to 'have it all.'

And when one (both) of this (these) aspect(s) gets challenged when the legitimate work done to understand the real actions and problems of men and women shows us that women are just as 'bad' or 'dysfunctional' as men, it's just not acceptable to feminists. It's, in their world view, impossible that women are anything but 'just the victims' (with minor bones thrown out to encompass some tiny minority of women who have done bad things that they somehow still twist back to 'patriarchy') as they present in their various generic feminist assertions that 'men are bad because of XYZ, and women are their victims.'

And, as predictable as sunrise, feminists will attack these researchers for pointing that women are just as fucked-up as men across a wide domain of dysfunctional and abusive areas.

[Apples]

Thought I'd take a gander at Greta's blog to see what this leading activist was up to. Saw her plugging this event that she was appearing at.

Look at these fucking hipsters!

At first I was drawn in by the balding, goateed middle-aged men ...

http://www.godlessperverts.com/wp-conte ... 50x150.jpg
http://www.godlessperverts.com/wp-conte ... rip-2B.jpg
http://www.godlessperverts.com/wp-conte ... 020734.jpg

... but the froth really started to peak when I saw "soon to be fashion icon" Virgie Tovar, world-class expert on fatness and fatshion, who recommends that you "lose the hate, not the weight," preferably with the help of a chiropractor and her coaching services.

She is apparently "one of the nation’s leading experts and lecturers on fat discrimination and body image." [watch out Melissa McEwan!] "She holds a Master’s degree in Human Sexuality with a focus on the intersections of body size, race and gender."

http://www.virgietovar.com/lose-hate-not-weight.html

http://www.virgietovar.com/uploads/3/8/ ... 7_orig.jpg

[youtube]SFEtH1mRAHk[/youtube]

[yomomma]

<snip>
It sounds like a conspiracy theory of the highest order, like the government is orchestrating this or something. I mean, that would make about as much sense.

It is a conspiracy of the Catholic Church. They have been praying to Jesus Christ to smite the atheists with the rape-virus. In fact, pope Benedict resigned as could no longer handle the pressure knowing that so many women had been raped at A/S cons, a direct result of this prayer conspiracy.

:lol:

[Pitchguest]

Does anyone remember the thread/blog post where Stephanie Zvan gave the oh-so-good advice, "if you don't like it, don't read it"?

Maybe it wasn't exactly those words, but it must have been fresh in both John's and mine's memory for us to reference it here:

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/wwjtd/2013 ... -944902594
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/wwjtd/2013 ... 45016405¨

Should give me some leverage, but I can't find it.

[Tribble]

This pops up fairly often in the "advice-sphere" portion of Reddit. People who are not anti-sex (generally exactly the opposite), but are very strictly anti-masturbation as they believe that an orgasm not with one's partner (I.E. by yourself) is a form of cheating. In a lot of these cases they'll actually go to pretty extreme lengths to facilitate this belief. I.E. trying to always be sexually available. This often breaks up relationships as it seems odd and unnatural to most people.

lol. Masturbation is important in relationships and I honestly don't understand why these people have hang-ups about it. Unless you've been very, very, very lucky in life, sexual desires regarding frequency/availability can often get out of sync (illness, stress, injury), or just flat-out don't match, in couples and without masturbation, you can get frequency-fulfillment strains in the relationship which can lead to fighting, dysfunctional behaviors, cheating...

[Tribble]

Ugh, Crybaby Amy, Melodramatic Meoldy, Ophelia and Sarah Jones as speakers? Not a conference I'd ever attend. Not unless I was allowed to slit my own wrists afterwards....

Afterwards?

You got stamina.

Yeah, I was thinking 'before' and just lay my corpse out in the room. No need to die after subjecting myself to all that suffering.

[yomomma]

I spent a month or two reading the thunderdome/lounge rather religiously, and it does appear that a large chunk of the baboons have been victimized in some way. I vaguely recall a complaint about how someone was raped, and how she was told that 'no one will believe you, because you're ugly, and ugly girls don't get raped'. If true, it is incredibly sad. But who knows? Caine, btw, was a victim of a violent rape during a robbery.

Yes, I think we need to be careful when asking why the baboons seem to be so massively skewed from the statistical norm. They are a self-selecting group of ("probably" - thanks, Louis!) genuine sexual-assault victims who have understandably rigid views on gender, sexuality, physical/sexual assault and other issues.

A "self selecting group" doesn't really explain it though. It's not that I don't believe anyone who claims they've been raped, but it makes zero sense why skeptic women seem to be victimized in such greater numbers than any other group. And even if they were, were they raped at skeptic events? If they do represent the statistical averages, why is it that women in the skeptic community are the ones that extrapolate their experiences to the degree in which they do?

Maybe the skeptic community needs to ask themselves, why are sexual assault victims so attracted to our community? There has to be a psychological explanation, like it makes them feel smart, which grants them a sense of control over their surroundings. I mean, I used to go to software conventions that were much larger than the skeptic community and there was no feminist brigade accusing every man, woman and child of RAPE!!!!

Or could it be, (aside from the real victims), that these people are socially retarded and don't know how to interact with each other because they are too academic for their own good?

[James Caruthers]

Either way, clearly the atheist community has a huge problem with being evil patriarchal rapists. So maybe if we ban sex, ban booze and all the women bring their mothers to chaperone, we can tame this massive rape and misogyny issue.

At the very least, I would like to see this happen (at least the first two) and see if that reduces the rape claims. If it doesn't, I this will expose those in the community who are career fake victims.

[James Caruthers]

*If it doesn't, at least this will..." Edit button dammit.

[yomomma]

We have to consider the possibility that having been sexually abused or assaulted is what motivated many of these women to become strident gender feminists in the first place. Especially if it happened in childhood, they may form a bad opinion of men as a "species."

That's not really the profile of child victims though. They typically (and I'm generalizing here) become child advocates and become deeply involved in child rights issues, unless these people are outliers for one reason or another.

I do agree with you, that some of them try to redefine sexual assault and rape outside the definition of the law.

[Dick Strawkins]

A "self selecting group" doesn't really explain it though. It's not that I don't believe anyone who claims they've been raped, but it makes zero sense why skeptic women seem to be victimized in such greater numbers than any other group. And even if they were, were they raped at skeptic events? If they do represent the statistical averages, why is it that women in the skeptic community are the ones that extrapolate their experiences to the degree in which they do?

Maybe the skeptic community needs to ask themselves, why are sexual assault victims so attracted to our community? There has to be a psychological explanation, like it makes them feel smart, which grants them a sense of control over their surroundings. I mean, I used to go to software conventions that were much larger than the skeptic community and there was no feminist brigade accusing every man, woman and child of RAPE!!!!

Or could it be, (aside from the real victims), that these people are socially retarded and don't know how to interact with each other because they are too academic for their own good?

If you go to online feminist 'safe-spaces', like Shakesville, you'll find an even higher concentration of abuse victims/survivors.

The skeptical/atheist community wasn't such a draw for these people until Elevatorgate, after which places like FTB seemed to take the view that they could increase the numbers of women in the movement by adopting similar 'safe-space' approaches to the question of rape and sexual abuse.

The trouble is that there is a basic problem of incompatibility between the notions of a 'safe-space' for rape survivors (which will entail accepting their claims without requiring solid evidence) and the basic notions of skepticism (which involves requiring claims to be supported by evidence before you support them.) The type of feminism promoted by PZ and his allies made a conflict with skeptics inevitable - but not necessarily with atheists. Hence you still find plenty of atheists on pharyngula, but very few who are hard core skeptics.

[yomomma]

Anyways, we were flirting on FB. I thought we were having a good time. She was the one to bring up anything sexual, saying something to the extent of "Oh, come on, you know you're just doing this because you wanna fuck me."

Towards the end of the night, I needed to go to bed and made the joke "Okay, I'm done masturbating to you, you can stop talking to me now."

So, she deletes me after that and I have no idea why. She tells me later on it was because of the masturbation joke and that women aren't just sex objects. She said I should be glad she didn't publicly shame me.

It was fucking shocking as hell. I thought it was just harmless, flirty, joking around. That's when I learned these types of bitches are FUCKING DANGEROUS. She wanted to publicly shame me over a joke within a private conversation? Ridiculous.

So yeah, I think part of it was because of her previous relationship with a Christian control freak. She was a Christian, too. I think a lot of atheists join atheist groups to fill the void of religion, yet they don't realize they fall into dogma-like ways of thinking.[/quote]

LOL. I'm not sure that's why she scolded you.

She was offended because you said, "Okay, I'm done masturbating to you, you can stop talking to me now."

You totally dismissed her. She felt used and discarded because she was hoping she meant something to you. It sounds very stereotypical actually, but it's absolutely true from a female's perspective. She was hurt. She probably wanted to continue to talk to you and have an emotional affair because that's how women are.

Now, we might be getting somewhere here. I wonder if this type of thing is happening to skeptic women. Their humiliation that xyz speaker or person they met at a convention, only wanted to have sex (of which they consented to) and not a relationship, is what triggers a lot of this. Interesting.

[deLurch]

Shermer is one of the few atheist speakers with sex appeal (in my humble bisexual opinion). Dude exudes charisma in his debates. He can def do better than that Janice chick.

And that might be part of his problem. Do you know all of the girls that are seen as constantly flirting with everyone else around them? They are constantly sending off signals of attraction, but they do not intend to be flirting. It is just the way they are. Shermer may have the same issue.

It's the kind of problem, where if you buy drinks for the crowd, some woman will think that he was clearly trying to get her drunk to get into her pants.

It's the kind of problem, where if the woman in front of him in line drops the tongs, so he opts to say something light hearted and whimsical to take the pressure off of her bumbling error, she will take it as a come on.

[yomomma]

Anyways, we were flirting on FB. I thought we were having a good time. She was the one to bring up anything sexual, saying something to the extent of "Oh, come on, you know you're just doing this because you wanna fuck me."

Towards the end of the night, I needed to go to bed and made the joke "Okay, I'm done masturbating to you, you can stop talking to me now."

So, she deletes me after that and I have no idea why. She tells me later on it was because of the masturbation joke and that women aren't just sex objects. She said I should be glad she didn't publicly shame me.

It was fucking shocking as hell. I thought it was just harmless, flirty, joking around. That's when I learned these types of bitches are FUCKING DANGEROUS. She wanted to publicly shame me over a joke within a private conversation? Ridiculous.

So yeah, I think part of it was because of her previous relationship with a Christian control freak. She was a Christian, too. I think a lot of atheists join atheist groups to fill the void of religion, yet they don't realize they fall into dogma-like ways of thinking.

Ooops, let's try this again with the correct quoting.

***

LOL. I'm not sure that's why she scolded you.

She was offended because you said, "Okay, I'm done masturbating to you, you can stop talking to me now."

You totally dismissed her. She felt used and discarded because she was hoping she meant something to you. It sounds very stereotypical actually, but it's absolutely true from a female's perspective. She was hurt. She probably wanted to continue to talk to you and have an emotional affair because that's how women are.

Now, we might be getting somewhere here. I wonder if this type of thing is happening to skeptic women. Their humiliation that xyz speaker or person they met at a convention, only wanted to have sex (of which they consented to) and not a relationship, is what triggers a lot of this. Interesting.[/quote]

[yomomma]

The trouble is that there is a basic problem of incompatibility between the notions of a 'safe-space' for rape survivors (which will entail accepting their claims without requiring solid evidence) and the basic notions of skepticism (which involves requiring claims to be supported by evidence before you support them.) The type of feminism promoted by PZ and his allies made a conflict with skeptics inevitable - but not necessarily with atheists. Hence you still find plenty of atheists on pharyngula, but very few who are hard core skeptics.

Right. Makes perfect sense actually. PZ has long disassociated himself and publicly announced his departure from the skeptic community. This is why I don't understand why they just don't start their own thing and leave everyone else alone. It's like they won't be happy until the skeptic community is destroyed.

[welch]

So, Thibeault hates Reddit and will tell you how awful it is, despite also telling you he's never used the place. Today he dropped his first submission and was told he posted in the wrong forum. Instead of posting in the suggested forum, he slinks off to the safe space of the APlus subreddit. But instead of linking his blog, he puts up a link to the thread he was just bounced out of and gets laughed at by APlussers.

Anyway, it's not important, I'm just amused by his regular Ladenesque fuckups.

In the APlus comments, Thibeault mentions that the FtB subscription service PZ was talking about is actually a thing.

It's going to be brilliant watching FtB made even more toxic by their demented commentariat expecting entitlements for their money.

http://i.imgur.com/26NPT1E.png

HE'S working on it?

Oh lord, this will be good. It will probably involve bitcoins printed on legos by the time he's done.

[yomomma]

Either way, clearly the atheist community has a huge problem with being evil patriarchal rapists. So maybe if we ban sex, ban booze and all the women bring their mothers to chaperone, we can tame this massive rape and misogyny issue.

At the very least, I would like to see this happen (at least the first two) and see if that reduces the rape claims. If it doesn't, I this will expose those in the community who are career fake victims.

Yeah, they don't seem to really want a solution, do they? Their proposed solutions aren't even within anybody's control. A skeptic organization cannot make the police arrest someone and try them and put them to death without evidence.

[Tribble]

A "self selecting group" doesn't really explain it though. It's not that I don't believe anyone who claims they've been raped, but it makes zero sense why skeptic women seem to be victimized in such greater numbers than any other group. And even if they were, were they raped at skeptic events? If they do represent the statistical averages, why is it that women in the skeptic community are the ones that extrapolate their experiences to the degree in which they do?

Maybe the skeptic community needs to ask themselves, why are sexual assault victims so attracted to our community? There has to be a psychological explanation, like it makes them feel smart, which grants them a sense of control over their surroundings. I mean, I used to go to software conventions that were much larger than the skeptic community and there was no feminist brigade accusing every man, woman and child of RAPE!!!!

Or could it be, (aside from the real victims), that these people are socially retarded and don't know how to interact with each other because they are too academic for their own good?

If you go to online feminist 'safe-spaces', like Shakesville, you'll find an even higher concentration of abuse victims/survivors.

The skeptical/atheist community wasn't such a draw for these people until Elevatorgate, after which places like FTB seemed to take the view that they could increase the numbers of women in the movement by adopting similar 'safe-space' approaches to the question of rape and sexual abuse.

The trouble is that there is a basic problem of incompatibility between the notions of a 'safe-space' for rape survivors (which will entail accepting their claims without requiring solid evidence) and the basic notions of skepticism (which involves requiring claims to be supported by evidence before you support them.) The type of feminism promoted by PZ and his allies made a conflict with skeptics inevitable - but not necessarily with atheists. Hence you still find plenty of atheists on pharyngula, but very few who are hard core skeptics.

Thing is I give victimization claims, like I give respect, provisionally. And the more outlandish you behave, the more you flog your 'victimization' in public, the more you use your 'victimization' to attack others, the more outlandish your claims become, the more outlandish you react to criticism or questions, the more likely I am to withdraw my support/belief in your claims (or the respect I'd provisionally given you).

This isn't victim blaming. This is dealing with the reality of human behavior and the result of being burned too many times by women (and men) who've spun their attention seeking 'poor me' stories. Who make claims that, the more you look at them, the dodgier they get.

[welch]

Does anyone remember the thread/blog post where Stephanie Zvan gave the oh-so-good advice, "if you don't like it, don't read it"?

Maybe it wasn't exactly those words, but it must have been fresh in both John's and mine's memory for us to reference it here:

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/wwjtd/2013 ... -944902594
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/wwjtd/2013 ... 45016405¨

Should give me some leverage, but I can't find it.

Pretty much all the FC(n) have said that at some point.

And I agree, it's good advice. Which is why I so rarely read their tripe.

[Dick Strawkins]

2 things.

does anyone else remember a Google hangout PZ made a few months back where he was chatting to a bunch of girls and one of them was holding a glass full of alcohol up to the webcam most of the time? It wasn't like she was drinking it - she was holding it in shot deliberately as if to say "Look at me! I'm drinking alcohol!" like some silly college student.

You'll have to be more specific.
All the pharyngula google hangouts include drunken female PZ fans as standard.
They will also generally include one or more of the following:

1. Middle aged neck-bearded atheist man who complains about the sexists in the movement, all the while ignoring or talking over the women participants of the hangout (usually there are about three or four of these guys per hangout - making it appear that there is a glitch with the software and the same person is being shown more than once)

2. Painfully unfunny pharyngula wit, whose 'jokes' are about as hilarious as root canal surgery. Usually Brownian/AnthonyK.

3. Thin guy in his early thirties, who reminds you of the kind of person that's usually described with a twenty page story on truecrime.com
If you've got kids, after spotting this guy you'll usually have a sudden urge to check if they are OK

4. Very large woman - only one allowed per hangout due to bandwidth limits. Or maybe screenwidth limits.

5. Happy couple. Too happy. They are cult hunting. If that comet hadn't tuned up in 1997 they'd probably be participating in a Heavens Gate google hangout.

[yomomma]

Anyway, it seems quite clear to me currently that the baboons appear to be mirroring norms that are appearing elsewhere, and there just may be larger societal issues at stake. Certainly if these sorts of attitudes become normative in more public spaces, and in institutions and corporations we are in for some very interesting times in the years ahead.

Well, I think smart politicians have figured out a way to politicize a fake war on women, to make women feel like they've been marginalized all along, then nothing in their lives becomes their fault, it becomes everyone elses fault and the politicians get elected on it when they don't give a fuck about women and know full well how privileged white American women are. Women are basically being used for political gain, but if they know it, they don't care because it feels good to be absolved of responsibility. Less pressure that way.

[Tribble]

Either way, clearly the atheist community has a huge problem with being evil patriarchal rapists. So maybe if we ban sex, ban booze and all the women bring their mothers to chaperone, we can tame this massive rape and misogyny issue.

At the very least, I would like to see this happen (at least the first two) and see if that reduces the rape claims. If it doesn't, I this will expose those in the community who are career fake victims.

Yeah, they don't seem to really want a solution, do they? Their proposed solutions aren't even within anybody's control. A skeptic organization cannot make the police arrest someone and try them and put them to death without evidence.

I bet they fantasize about that, though.

What I wonder most though, is how many of the 'feminist-men' are like Ted Haggard, Jimmy Swaggart, etc.? Guys who are projecting their problems and hang-up on to other men. Guys who'd love to rape, abuse women, be general-fuckwit-hostile-alpha-douche-bags towards women if they thought they could get away with it...

They certainly have no problem infantilizing women then white-knighting them on the Internet. Both of which are, in my book, demeaning and sexist as hell. As if women can't possibly fight their own battles...

[Kareem]

I suspect that the following are relevant to all this business of "always believe the victim" mentality and the associated willingness to abandon any sort of due process for the accused reflected in the US education system and what we see currently with the A/S "community".

For example we have apparently a situation where a Yale advocacy group declares war on the presumptively innocent accused of sex offenses and in North Carolina college officials having a conniption over the law allowing students to be represented by an attorney must not want the playing field leveled in school hearings.

Some of the justifications I see from time to time, strike me as so thin as to be transparent that there is a different agenda being worked on than the one ostensibly given. For example When young men are expelled from college for alleged sex offenses, that's not punishment, it's just teaching 'good citizenship'.

Anyway, it seems quite clear to me currently that the baboons appear to be mirroring norms that are appearing elsewhere, and there just may be larger societal issues at stake. Certainly if these sorts of attitudes become normative in more public spaces, and in institutions and corporations we are in for some very interesting times in the years ahead.

At any rate, I do expect to be entertained.

This is the kind of stuff the MRAs should be leading with, not making fun of tumblr feminists. Given that one particular group of men have been historically harmed by presumption of guilt, why are black A+ers like Crommunist more concerned with J.T. Eberhard than with their friends pushing for a guilty until proved innocent mindset? I'm sure he knows of stories like this: http://www.cotwa.info/2013/08/white-wom ... black.html
But I'm guessing they'll just mock the idea with the presumption of innocence version of freeze peach.

[ThePrussian]

Good God, is that real? I knew Myers was twisted, but is that real?

Yes, that was an extremely good example of his utter bullshit. And it inspired this, and a few similar variations of absolutely true (and still public-facing) contradictions.

http://i.imgur.com/ntZfyhG.png

click to expand each.

http://i.imgur.com/f3BtLsW.png

I thought I made more, but can't find 'em... you get the idea.

Indeed I do. Hmmm....

http://i39.tinypic.com/2v28mef.jpg

[Lsuoma]

Disturbing material deleted.

Yep, it's clear why she's still a virgie.

[James Caruthers]

http://freethoughtblogs.com/amilliongod ... nt-page-3/
Okay, I'm done. I'm fucking done. I never once called Oolon a troll in the comments, I was super polite the entire time, but I've now been labeled a troll. Presumably because I post here and I posted on FTB, and all 'pitters are the spawns of satan, mykeru and justin vacula. And I know from being reading FTBlogs that once a label is given by a "trusted" member of FTB, it sticks regardless of the truth or falseness of the label. So I'm done, fuck the lot of them, they even called the guy who explicitly said he was not a pitter, a pitter troll.

They still fucking owe Sanderson an apology. With his name left up in the article, more and more dumbshits are going to read the article, ignore the comments correcting the article and convict Sanderson even after he was exonerated.

I bet they fantasize about that, though.

What I wonder most though, is how many of the 'feminist-men' are like Ted Haggard, Jimmy Swaggart, etc.? Guys who are projecting their problems and hang-up on to other men. Guys who'd love to rape, abuse women, be general-fuckwit-hostile-alpha-douche-bags towards women if they thought they could get away with it...

They certainly have no problem infantilizing women then white-knighting them on the Internet. Both of which are, in my book, demeaning and sexist as hell. As if women can't possibly fight their own battles...

Oh, I know. I think this is part of a long-term plan to rewrite the legal system. If women are convinced not to report crimes because they believe the police are always misogynist (I guess female police are all "chill girls"), then more rapes will go unreported and fewer men (and women, but lol women don't ever rape because patriarchy) will be convicted. At the same time, vlog, blog and online publication of anonymous, unnamed or unverified rape stories will fuel internet rape hysteria. Eventually the hysteria will reach critical mass, and the legal system will be changed to soften the burden of proof in rape cases, remove the assumption of innocence and weight the testimony of an alleged victim much higher than that of an alleged rapist. One could argue that this is already the case (I have no idea), but I'm talking about formalizing this process and enshrining it in American law.

Everything the SJW crew is doing has the unintended effect of painting women as helpless victims and children who need looking after by all the men around them. Stupid signs that say "don't rape" are insulting sexist bullshit. Nobody would put signs up saying "don't steal" or "don't shoot people" because most hardened, repeat offenders don't give a flying fuck what the law is and can't be educated. The assumption is that non-rapist men (the vast majority of men) can apparently stop rape by ceasing to rape women. That makes no goddamn sense. :|

I won't speculate as to the motives of male members of the SJW crowd, but it is telling that a lot of them joke about rape and other sexual misconduct ("you won the prize, I have to sleep with you") while condemning others. I honestly don't think MRAs, MRMs, humanists and other non-feminists joke about rape all that often. I suppose it is a bit like Ted Haggard and homosexuality, now that you mention it.

[Ape+lust]

You'll have to be more specific.
All the pharyngula google hangouts include drunken female PZ fans as standard.
They will also generally include one or more of the following:

1. Middle aged neck-bearded atheist man who complains about the sexists in the movement, all the while ignoring or talking over the women participants of the hangout (usually there are about three or four of these guys per hangout - making it appear that there is a glitch with the software and the same person is being shown more than once)

2. Painfully unfunny pharyngula wit, whose 'jokes' are about as hilarious as root canal surgery. Usually Brownian/AnthonyK.

3. Thin guy in his early thirties, who reminds you of the kind of person that's usually described with a twenty page story on truecrime.com
If you've got kids, after spotting this guy you'll usually have a sudden urge to check if they are OK

4. Very large woman - only one allowed per hangout due to bandwidth limits. Or maybe screenwidth limits.

5. Happy couple. Too happy. They are cult hunting. If that comet hadn't tuned up in 1997 they'd probably be participating in a Heavens Gate google hangout.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

[Pitchguest]

http://freethoughtblogs.com/amilliongod ... nt-page-3/
Okay, I'm done. I'm fucking done. I never once called Oolon a troll in the comments, I was super polite the entire time, but I've now been labeled a troll. Presumably because I post here and I posted on FTB, and all 'pitters are the spawns of satan, mykeru and justin vacula. And I know from being reading FTBlogs that once a label is given by a "trusted" member of FTB, it sticks regardless of the truth or falseness of the label. So I'm done, fuck the lot of them, they even called the guy who explicitly said he was not a pitter, a pitter troll.

They still fucking owe Sanderson an apology. With his name left up in the article, more and more dumbshits are going to read the article, ignore the comments correcting the article and convict Sanderson even after he was exonerated.

What's hilarious is that oolon (or as we like to call him, the slimy turd) tried to make a point by asserting that "we" from the Slymepit hadn't acknowledged Watson correcting her mistake on Gallileo, and that we apparently keep bringing it up now and again because of our "overblown ego", when in the same fucking post he brought up Jerry Conlon (supposedly) "threatenening to throw acid in (sic) peoples (sic) faces."

The Jerry Conlon incident has been refuted, and corrected, numerous times. Yet he brought it up. Because of his "overblown ego"?

http://freethoughtblogs.com/amilliongod ... ent-132450

[Git]

The Godless Perverts Story Hour is an evening about how to have good sex without having any gods, goddesses, spirits, or their earthly representatives hanging over your shoulder and telling you that you’re doing it wrong. We’ll be bringing you depictions, explorations, and celebrations of godless sexualities, as well as critical, mocking, and blasphemous views of sex and religion.

Isn't sex the one area where even the religious forget about the supernatural? My experiences with Christian girls tells me that faith leaves the bedroom when the clothes come off.

It doesn't sound like they're really going all out on the sex show aspect either. Very half hearted. Sounds more like another unwarranted superiority lecture, some backpatting and snickering about the oh so naughty topic of sexy sex.

Fuck me, these neo-puritans would have a heart-attack if they walked into my local munch, or ventured onto Fet.

Their whole obsession with satansex is very revealing - it reveals them to be the sort of people who'd faint at the very mention of anything other than missionary-position sex with the lights out. And even then they consider that to be shameful. And they want to enforce that shame onto everyone else.

It seems you can take the religion out of the uptight John-Lithgow-preacher, but the shame remains, it seems.

Meanwhile, the rest of us get on and have fun with our bodies and our fetishes. In the words of Anthony Bourdain, our bodies aren't temples, they're amusement parks.

[franc]

http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd24 ... 2f9bc3.jpg

Who the fuck made this? It's had me giggling like a maniac for 10 hours now. It is a Cynic tour de force. Awesome. Diogenes would approve 110%

[Service Dog]

You'll have to be more specific.
All the pharyngula google hangouts include drunken female PZ fans as standard.
They will also generally include one or more of the following:

1. Middle aged neck-bearded atheist man who complains about the sexists in the movement, all the while ignoring or talking over the women participants of the hangout (usually there are about three or four of these guys per hangout - making it appear that there is a glitch with the software and the same person is being shown more than once)

2. Painfully unfunny pharyngula wit, whose 'jokes' are about as hilarious as root canal surgery. Usually Brownian/AnthonyK.

3. Thin guy in his early thirties, who reminds you of the kind of person that's usually described with a twenty page story on truecrime.com
If you've got kids, after spotting this guy you'll usually have a sudden urge to check if they are OK

4. Very large woman - only one allowed per hangout due to bandwidth limits. Or maybe screenwidth limits.

5. Happy couple. Too happy. They are cult hunting. If that comet hadn't tuned up in 1997 they'd probably be participating in a Heavens Gate google hangout.

6. PZ starts out looking at a map, then he gets frustrated, orders everybody but a few to leave, bystanders listen through the door, one young frau cries and is reassured, then PZ's lowers his voice and speaks in defeated tones.

[SPACKlick]

Avicenna himself does himself no favors in my eyes by blatantly lying about the situation - "quoting" things from the slymepit that haven't been said here and seemingly accepting any unevidenced charge against us without the slightest hesitation.

I think when Avicenna says there was a claim that alibi's don't count he may have been referring to this post

viewtopic.php?f=31&t=351&p=123922&hilit=alibi#p123922

An alibi? So effing what? Farah Jama had an alibi, and was still wrongly convicted of rape (based on contaminated DNA evidence) despite no evidence a crime even took place.

[Ericb]

http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd24 ... 2f9bc3.jpg

Who the fuck made this? It's had me giggling like a maniac for 10 hours now. It is a Cynic tour de force. Awesome. Diogenes would approve 110%

Gumby

[SPACKlick]

I have a request for the Photoshoppers/gimps/paint.netters here

[snip]

And turn it into a "blank" by getting rid of the text (especially the footer text.)
[snip]

did my best

dudebro.jpg

If by "did my best" you mean "I found a blank on the internet", then well done...

http://landsharkattacks.blogspot.com/20 ... cline.html
Just one example.

Some mad skilz there!
:naughty:

Yes my best googling, i didn't strictly claim it was a photoshop... sheesh. :whistle:

[franc]

http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd24 ... 2f9bc3.jpg

Who the fuck made this? It's had me giggling like a maniac for 10 hours now. It is a Cynic tour de force. Awesome. Diogenes would approve 110%

Gumby

Well, if Gumby's a fag, I'll suck him dry. Hetero foibles into the dust bin.

[Dick Strawkins]

http://freethoughtblogs.com/amilliongod ... nt-page-3/
Okay, I'm done. I'm fucking done. I never once called Oolon a troll in the comments, I was super polite the entire time, but I've now been labeled a troll. Presumably because I post here and I posted on FTB, and all 'pitters are the spawns of satan, mykeru and justin vacula. And I know from being reading FTBlogs that once a label is given by a "trusted" member of FTB, it sticks regardless of the truth or falseness of the label. So I'm done, fuck the lot of them, they even called the guy who explicitly said he was not a pitter, a pitter troll.

They still fucking owe Sanderson an apology. With his name left up in the article, more and more dumbshits are going to read the article, ignore the comments correcting the article and convict Sanderson even after he was exonerated.

What's hilarious is that oolon (or as we like to call him, the slimy turd) tried to make a point by asserting that "we" from the Slymepit hadn't acknowledged Watson correcting her mistake on Gallileo, and that we apparently keep bringing it up now and again because of our "overblown ego", when in the same fucking post he brought up Jerry Conlon (supposedly) "threatenening to throw acid in (sic) peoples (sic) faces."

The Jerry Conlon incident has been refuted, and corrected, numerous times. Yet he brought it up. Because of his "overblown ego"?

http://freethoughtblogs.com/amilliongod ... ent-132450

It always amuses me to see them use the "but it was six years ago!" excuse to try to explain away PZ's hentai rape porn posts.

It's exactly the same logic that Catholic fundies tried to use to excuse child abuse by priests - nobody in those days knew that kiddy fucking was immoral! It's the same with PZ - It was 2007! How on Earth was he to know that rape porn was problematic!

[Git]

I wouldn't disagree with any of that, but when it comes to the current situation , Peezus et al ain't members of the Tea Party are they? This whole thing is a movement from the left. The Tea Party are an equivalent movement from the right, but the fucking Tea Party isn't looking to take over the skeptical movement are they?

Hey, I hang with Right-wing Libertarians on occasion. And unlike the chaotic left, they have a simple solution:

Whatever your problem is, monetary devaluations, personal dissatisfaction, the suspicion that your explosive diarrhea has something to do with the Benghazi cover up, it's all the same solution: Ron Paul. Just hand everything over to him and it's done in one.

Vastly different from what you're describing and, bonus, it'll be in the real world, not just some half-assed blog.

:whistle:

Urgh. The JesusRon Paul cult. :evil:

Its almost as bad as the Apple Cult. ;)

[Git]

Either way, clearly the atheist community has a huge problem with being evil patriarchal rapists. So maybe if we ban sex, ban booze and all the women bring their mothers to chaperone, we can tame this massive rape and misogyny issue.

They could also make burqas compulsory too. And segregate by gender as well.

Perhaps this is why the SJWs have a hard-on for a certain Middle-Eastern Death Cult?

[Mykeru]

all 'pitters are the spawns of satan, mykeru and justin vacula.

Some thoughts:

1. Satan doesn't really exist.

2. Justin Vacula is just a 3-dimensional manifestation of a hyper-dimensional sentient mustache.

What you got left sounds about right. Look, FTB knows I'm calling the shots, lie outrageously, am bent on the destruction of puppies and only hate Oolon, to the point of ice-picking him into a sieve, because he's the guardian the internet deserves.

[Dave2]

http://psych0drama.blogspot.co.uk/2012/ ... ously.html

I was a long time listener to the SGU and used to enjoy Rebecca's contribution to the show. She had no expertise on the science, but neither do most of the rest of the SGU panel - apart from Steve Novella (try to imagine the SGU without Steve Novella - it wouldn't work, yet any the other members could be lost without affecting the quality.)
What she has, is a talent for reactive humor - nothing brilliant, but you could safely rely on her to come up with geeky jokes every week.

Whilst I never listened to the show, and thus can't tell if her humour was more on point, I agree with everything you said about public speaking. I've a BA in Drama and whilst I quite like the idea of public speaking, I'd be reluctant to give a talk unless I'd rehearsed it a few times.

I don't think you're suggesting anything like this Dick, - but I'm just going to go on a bit of a rant here in general about jokes in presentations and stuff...

I'd just like to highlight that in my experience even Rebecca's jokes are pressed into the service of misleading people. And it's annoying because she's apparently using the jokes to illustrate a point, but even the point is so way off that the joke is kind of a lie.

For example in the segment I link to above she makes a fair few quips, but in order to find them at all amusing I would think you'd have to ignore the fact that she is basically making the circumstances leading up to the joke up out of whole cloth.

So for example she says that "problem number four" with "Dr Holmes' line of reasoning" is that "if women like fashion more than men was King Louis the 14th just some fabulous outlier?"

Which gets a laugh or two, but those who are laughing are perhaps missing that:

a) Dr Holmes didn't make such a claim.
b) The answer is an obvious "yes".
c) The king on the overhead projection at this moment is not Louis the 14th.

So she not just wrong, she's compounded wrong - but I've pointed that out to people who are like "well ... it's just a joke".

[Dick Strawkins]

Avicenna continues off the deep end.

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

I Get Mail – A Quickee

Letters

by Avicenna

Uh I post on the Slymepit sometimes and I’d never heard of you, nor do I have any idea who Richard Sanderson is, nor have I ever claimed that “FTBers are slacktivists”.

However a variety of members of the Slymepit have.

In fact I came over recently to read a few posts. A fair few like discussing “REAL” activism. It is one of the reason the Slymepit have in general left me alone apart from the faux pas by the few who don’t know what I do.

To your peers, a slacktivist is just someone who writes about a topic. Because I actually do “real social justice”.

…… However, what happened to you was reprehensible and you have my sympathy. I’m just perplexed as to how it somehow supposedly has anything to do with me.

Have you read the forum that you are part of?

Let’s see. You got Pitchguest trying to convince people that my rape accusation was not malicious but a stunt to demonstrate the callous nature and ease by which fake accusations go through while ignoring the very real difficulties it caused.

You have deniers of such accusations in your midst and the only reason there aren’t more in that thread is because this caused “Real Damage” to someone who actually was helping women. In short? The little object lesson backfired by actively harming women.

You can’t stop Child Birth, women who would have delivered at hands of doctors delivered in the hands of untrained midwives who are for emergency deliveries we cannot cover rather than for these. Some of those were difficult. Only time will tell us of the damage caused.

It nearly cost me my job and my career. So people who think FTB are filled with evil bitch feminists who hate men and their man parts could mock PZ.

And this sort of thinking is part of the Slymepit.

Okay just look at this way. A bit ago there were Individuals mocking Taslima Nasrin for being a professional victim and not speaking well. You mean like Jessica Ahlquist? Or are only young white ladies allowed to be “victimised by religion” and speak about it?

To explain the level of difference? Taslima has a religious fatwa on her head for her death set at an amount of money that’s frankly obscene and has had people attempt to kill her. And the Slymepitter was mocking her English. Question? I bet she speaks English better than his Bengali.

The Slyme’s done things like that. Tasteless and mildly hurtful things that allow majorly hurtful things to slide through and then to cover it up.

The condemnation of the actions of the Accusers is only taking place because the Slyme think that the joke’s gone “too far”. They had no problems with the #FTBully thread people and often laughed at their antics until it goes too far then it’s tutting and shaking of heads.

The faux rape campaign and all who participated in it have actually harmed real physical women who don’t have access to proper healthcare. The people who sat around gleefully cataloguing other false rapes are part of it.

I think the guy is having some sort of breakdown.
His girlfriend, who he uses on his blog to promote himself as some kind of perfect partner, dumped him in the past week - after she caught him cheating on her with his ex (I think it was more emotional cheating rather than physical.)

He is now making the most outlandish claims.
Are we to seriously believe that Richard Sandersons tweet about oolons comment, has put women's lives at risk - and nearly cost Avicenna his job and career?

How is that even remotely possible?

[Gefan]

6. PZ starts out looking at a map, then he gets frustrated, orders everybody but a few to leave, bystanders listen through the door, one young frau cries and is reassured, then PZ's lowers his voice and speaks in defeated tones.

I think I saw something like that once, somewhere...

[Tribble]

It always amuses me to see them use the "but it was six years ago!" excuse to try to explain away PZ's hentai rape porn posts.

It's exactly the same logic that Catholic fundies tried to use to excuse child abuse by priests - nobody in those days knew that kiddy fucking was immoral! It's the same with PZ - It was 2007! How on Earth was he to know that rape porn was problematic!

Yes, but it's okay when PZ does it because he's been neutered by feminism...

[ReneeHendricks]

Reading the post at A Million Gods and saw this: "How the fuck can anyone be a part of the Slymepit with absolute fuckwits like this in the rank is beyond me." - says the member of an online blog group that houses PhysioProffe. The mind reels.

[Mykeru]

http://psych0drama.blogspot.co.uk/2012/ ... ously.html

I was a long time listener to the SGU and used to enjoy Rebecca's contribution to the show. She had no expertise on the science, but neither do most of the rest of the SGU panel - apart from Steve Novella (try to imagine the SGU without Steve Novella - it wouldn't work, yet any the other members could be lost without affecting the quality.)
What she has, is a talent for reactive humor - nothing brilliant, but you could safely rely on her to come up with geeky jokes every week.

Whilst I never listened to the show, and thus can't tell if her humour was more on point, I agree with everything you said about public speaking. I've a BA in Drama and whilst I quite like the idea of public speaking, I'd be reluctant to give a talk unless I'd rehearsed it a few times.

I don't think you're suggesting anything like this Dick, - but I'm just going to go on a bit of a rant here in general about jokes in presentations and stuff...

I'd just like to highlight that in my experience even Rebecca's jokes are pressed into the service of misleading people. And it's annoying because she's apparently using the jokes to illustrate a point, but even the point is so way off that the joke is kind of a lie.

For example in the segment I link to above she makes a fair few quips, but in order to find them at all amusing I would think you'd have to ignore the fact that she is basically making the circumstances leading up to the joke up out of whole cloth.

So for example she says that "problem number four" with "Dr Holmes' line of reasoning" is that "if women like fashion more than men was King Louis the 14th just some fabulous outlier?"

Which gets a laugh or two, but those who are laughing are perhaps missing that:

a) Dr Holmes didn't make such a claim.
b) The answer is an obvious "yes".
c) The king on the overhead projection at this moment is not Louis the 14th.

So she not just wrong, she's compounded wrong - but I've pointed that out to people who are like "well ... it's just a joke".

Way back when, I did a lot of theater in high school, university and was a member of a theater company. Stage fright is something you just have to deal with. I was in a production of Ted Tally's Terra Nova playing R.F. Scott and was about to bug out. It was a huge production, big audience and I basically never left the stage for 2 1/2 hours save for intermission.

Then I noticed the guy playing Amundsen had an uncontrollably shaking leg. It's just something you deal with.

I tend to think stage fright is not a function of your own lack of confidence, but perversely the respect and weight you give to an audience. One of the little tricks some people teach is to imagine the audience in their underwear, to humanize them. I got into the habit of listening backstage to the audience as they were seated. To hear their voice and get a sense of them. And most people don't go to a movie, much less a live performance, wanting to hate it.

Some actors I knew, and this was pure ego and lack of self-confidence, had a short cut in the form of having utter contempt for the audience. Something I never got a handle on, as it seemed to be a fast-track to sucking the energy out of yourself.

Watson has contempt. That's how she deals. She drips with it in her writing and her Twitter posts but in a more face-to-face she dresses it up and dials it down slightly with this lame "uh...so...yes" snarky act. That's how she is able to have little preparation and terrible presence. And I suspect she knows she's really not trying and so her getting accolades from the people she has contempt for just feeds on more contempt.

Hey, how do you think someone like P.Z. Meyers and Ophelia Benson, two people basically afraid of their own shadows in person, cope?

[deLurch]

I think the guy is having some sort of breakdown.
His girlfriend, who he uses on his blog to promote himself as some kind of perfect partner, dumped him in the past week - after she caught him cheating on her with his ex (I think it was more emotional cheating rather than physical.)

He is now making the most outlandish claims.
Are we to seriously believe that Richard Sandersons tweet about oolons comment, has put women's lives at risk - and nearly cost Avicenna his job and career?

How is that even remotely possible?

I was initially somewhat sympathetic to the guy. People make mistakes. But for someone who's big issues is false accusations, he sure makes an awful lot of them. Even AFTER he has been provided with explicit details of the order of events. We hardly knew he existed. But if he is going to make this big of a fool of himself, he is more than welcome to have at it.

Dude lost his girlfriend and street SJW cred and now the baby wants attention. Fuck him. Not my issue.

[Dick Strawkins]

http://psych0drama.blogspot.co.uk/2012/ ... ously.html

I was a long time listener to the SGU and used to enjoy Rebecca's contribution to the show. She had no expertise on the science, but neither do most of the rest of the SGU panel - apart from Steve Novella (try to imagine the SGU without Steve Novella - it wouldn't work, yet any the other members could be lost without affecting the quality.)
What she has, is a talent for reactive humor - nothing brilliant, but you could safely rely on her to come up with geeky jokes every week.

Whilst I never listened to the show, and thus can't tell if her humour was more on point, I agree with everything you said about public speaking. I've a BA in Drama and whilst I quite like the idea of public speaking, I'd be reluctant to give a talk unless I'd rehearsed it a few times.

I don't think you're suggesting anything like this Dick, - but I'm just going to go on a bit of a rant here in general about jokes in presentations and stuff...

I'd just like to highlight that in my experience even Rebecca's jokes are pressed into the service of misleading people. And it's annoying because she's apparently using the jokes to illustrate a point, but even the point is so way off that the joke is kind of a lie.

For example in the segment I link to above she makes a fair few quips, but in order to find them at all amusing I would think you'd have to ignore the fact that she is basically making the circumstances leading up to the joke up out of whole cloth.

So for example she says that "problem number four" with "Dr Holmes' line of reasoning" is that "if women like fashion more than men was King Louis the 14th just some fabulous outlier?"

Which gets a laugh or two, but those who are laughing are perhaps missing that:

a) Dr Holmes didn't make such a claim.
b) The answer is an obvious "yes".
c) The king on the overhead projection at this moment is not Louis the 14th.

So she not just wrong, she's compounded wrong - but I've pointed that out to people who are like "well ... it's just a joke".

I think she is feeding off her reputation for 'snark' - and it's what the kind of people who WANT to see a Rebecca Watson talk have come to expect. They pay to hear a jokey talk, with mockery of the particular target of the day being the prime ingredient. She is entertainment rather than expert, which is why her talks give the impression of a (decidedly average) stand up comedian show rather than a factual presentation. And, as you've noticed, she cares more about getting the joke in rather than getting the facts right.
You might even forgive her if the jokes were particularly good and she acknowledged that she is just a comedian, but no, we are supposed to take her seriously on real scientific subjects like evolutionary biology!
Did she ever get around to replying to Ed Clint's destruction of her Skepticon talk or did she leave that to Peezus?

[Dave]

It always amuses me to see them use the "but it was six years ago!" excuse to try to explain away PZ's hentai rape porn posts.

It's exactly the same logic that Catholic fundies tried to use to excuse child abuse by priests - nobody in those days knew that kiddy fucking was immoral! It's the same with PZ - It was 2007! How on Earth was he to know that rape porn was problematic!

Yes, but it's okay when PZ does it because he's been neutered by feminism...

That statement risks implying that PZ once had a dick.

Im sure that was not your intention.

[James Caruthers]

Avicenna continues off the deep end.

That's not the deep end, that's drowning yourself in an inch of rain water.

I can't understand at least half of what he is trying to say. He sounds unhinged. It seems like he's identified the enemy and can't give up his idea that somehow the 'pitt is responsible for all the bad things that happen to him. And of course, copious amounts of guilt by association. Seems to be a trend that if you can't "get" someone for holding an unpopular idea, you can "get" them by claiming they haven't come out openly against it. And if they have, you can always claim they were lying and didn't come out against that unpopular idea to a sufficient degree.

Almost the entire post is about the *assumed motivations* of others. I'm not saying it doesn't happen here, because it does, but I see this on FTB a lot. I think people who get all caught up in the personal motivations of the other side tend to go off the deep end and become crazy nuts. You see it with the right and left wingers in this country, they all have a narrative giving the worst possible motivations to the other side. Just ask a Republican why people vote Democrat, or a Democrat why people vote Republican. The more extreme they are, the crazier the narrative gets.

Nothing Avicenna posts is going to change the fact that Sanderson (who, as far as I can tell, doesn't post regularly here) was accused of character assassination via a false rape claim by Avicenna and Oolon (well, Oolon accused the entire 'pitt). He denied the charge and proof was provided that Oolon was Sanderson's source. He has not received an apology or any acknowledgment from Avicenna that he was not the person. The page was not updated last time I checked, so Avicenna is apparently cool with leaving up a false accusation of character assassination, even though his own false rape accusation made him flip his shit.

[Tribble]

Avicenna continues off the deep end.

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

I Get Mail – A Quickee

Letters

by Avicenna

Uh I post on the Slymepit sometimes and I’d never heard of you, nor do I have any idea who Richard Sanderson is, nor have I ever claimed that “FTBers are slacktivists”.

However a variety of members of the Slymepit have.

In fact I came over recently to read a few posts. A fair few like discussing “REAL” activism. It is one of the reason the Slymepit have in general left me alone apart from the faux pas by the few who don’t know what I do.

To your peers, a slacktivist is just someone who writes about a topic. Because I actually do “real social justice”.

…… However, what happened to you was reprehensible and you have my sympathy. I’m just perplexed as to how it somehow supposedly has anything to do with me.

Have you read the forum that you are part of?

Let’s see. You got Pitchguest trying to convince people that my rape accusation was not malicious but a stunt to demonstrate the callous nature and ease by which fake accusations go through while ignoring the very real difficulties it caused.

You have deniers of such accusations in your midst and the only reason there aren’t more in that thread is because this caused “Real Damage” to someone who actually was helping women. In short? The little object lesson backfired by actively harming women.

You can’t stop Child Birth, women who would have delivered at hands of doctors delivered in the hands of untrained midwives who are for emergency deliveries we cannot cover rather than for these. Some of those were difficult. Only time will tell us of the damage caused.

It nearly cost me my job and my career. So people who think FTB are filled with evil bitch feminists who hate men and their man parts could mock PZ.

And this sort of thinking is part of the Slymepit.

Okay just look at this way. A bit ago there were Individuals mocking Taslima Nasrin for being a professional victim and not speaking well. You mean like Jessica Ahlquist? Or are only young white ladies allowed to be “victimised by religion” and speak about it?

To explain the level of difference? Taslima has a religious fatwa on her head for her death set at an amount of money that’s frankly obscene and has had people attempt to kill her. And the Slymepitter was mocking her English. Question? I bet she speaks English better than his Bengali.

The Slyme’s done things like that. Tasteless and mildly hurtful things that allow majorly hurtful things to slide through and then to cover it up.

The condemnation of the actions of the Accusers is only taking place because the Slyme think that the joke’s gone “too far”. They had no problems with the #FTBully thread people and often laughed at their antics until it goes too far then it’s tutting and shaking of heads.

The faux rape campaign and all who participated in it have actually harmed real physical women who don’t have access to proper healthcare. The people who sat around gleefully cataloguing other false rapes are part of it.

I think the guy is having some sort of breakdown.
His girlfriend, who he uses on his blog to promote himself as some kind of perfect partner, dumped him in the past week - after she caught him cheating on her with his ex (I think it was more emotional cheating rather than physical.)

He is now making the most outlandish claims.
Are we to seriously believe that Richard Sandersons tweet about oolons comment, has put women's lives at risk - and nearly cost Avicenna his job and career?

How is that even remotely possible?

I hate to say this, but I can't actually follow the originally-quoted post. It doesn't make much sense and gives the impression of randomly-strung-together talking points. Kind of like an FTB 'madlibs' than anything approaching what actually happened which I thought was clear:

1. Oolon was the source of the rumor for Sanderson's purposes.
2. It had nothing to do with the SlymePit.
3. Magical thinking has somehow made the SlymePit the problem, rather than Oolon's obvious trolling and stirring up shit, something the baboons have yet to figure out.
4. When someone points all that out, they're an abuser or something. And other issues must immediately be conflated into the narrative so as to make it impossible to discuss Avicenna getting totally and completely trolled by Oolon, which is supported and reinforced by the FTB culture to which he's completely blind.

[Ape+lust]

Avicenna continues off the deep end.

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

I think the guy is having some sort of breakdown.
His girlfriend, who he uses on his blog to promote himself as some kind of perfect partner, dumped him in the past week - after she caught him cheating on her with his ex (I think it was more emotional cheating rather than physical.)

He is now making the most outlandish claims.
Are we to seriously believe that Richard Sandersons tweet about oolons comment, has put women's lives at risk - and nearly cost Avicenna his job and career?

How is that even remotely possible?

He pulled the same kind of Oolonic shit on tkmlac in January, mischaracterizing her objections, arguing around the point, gish galloping instead of answering.

http://athmorality.blogspot.com/2013/01 ... -used.html

He wants to be one of the name players in FtB drama, getting butthurt when told "FtB" as we use it only refers to the core handful and not him. Once, when explaining he'd never met Rebecca, he said as an aside something like, "Rebecca darling, we should meet; MRAs would melt down, slymers would wail buckets." For an near-unknown, he has a overblown sense of his renown.

[Tribble]

Reading the post at A Million Gods and saw this: "How the fuck can anyone be a part of the Slymepit with absolute fuckwits like this in the rank is beyond me." - says the member of an online blog group that houses PhysioProffe. The mind reels.

Right, because mocking hysterical, lying fuckwits for being hysterical, lying fuckwits who are in the process of demonizing the vast majority of atheists, skeptics, men and non-conforming women makes us bad people. We're just supposed to swallow their bullshit and not point out the lying, the hypocrisy, the faux victimization, they rampant (almost cult-like) conformity of their world views that lack nuance, subtlety and more than a passing grounding in reality.

And the thing is the SlymePit isn't even special as the baboons attack EVERYONE who does not capitulate. It's not just the 'SlymePit' in their cross hairs. It's not just Thunderf00t. It's not just the Amazing Atheist. Or Shermer. Or Lindsay. Or Krauss. It's everyone. Every man, woman and child in society at-large that doesn't buy-off on their demented, bullshit world view is, in their eyes, some rape-apologizing, misogynistic, Schrodinger's rapist and, regardless of their actual views and good works, must be demonized.

I feel like they missed their calling in life. They should have been part of Chairman Mao's Central Committee. They'd have fit in so well.

[Kareem]

Avicenna continues off the deep end.

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

I think the guy is having some sort of breakdown.
His girlfriend, who he uses on his blog to promote himself as some kind of perfect partner, dumped him in the past week - after she caught him cheating on her with his ex (I think it was more emotional cheating rather than physical.)

He is now making the most outlandish claims.
Are we to seriously believe that Richard Sandersons tweet about oolons comment, has put women's lives at risk - and nearly cost Avicenna his job and career?

How is that even remotely possible?

He pulled the same kind of Oolonic shit on tkmlac in January, mischaracterizing her objections, arguing around the point, gish galloping instead of answering.

http://athmorality.blogspot.com/2013/01 ... -used.html

He wants to be one of the name players in FtB drama, getting butthurt when told "FtB" as we use it only refers to the core handful and not him. Once, when explaining he'd never met Rebecca, he said as an aside something like, "Rebecca darling, we should meet; MRAs would melt down, slymers would wail buckets." For an near-unknown, he has a overblown sense of his renown.

I was really hoping this was all just an honest mistake that would end in a kind of "I'm not saying I was wrong but I was wrong" type of statement.
If Avicenna is reading this: you can easily admit that Richard Sanderson and the Pit had nothing to do with your false rape accusation and then use that to make yourself seem above all the drama. Everyone saves face, the dishonesty stops, and you prove yourself logical and honest despite all the schism nonsense.