Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

Old subthreads
Dick Strawkins
.
.
Posts: 5859
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:34 pm

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#19021

Post by Dick Strawkins »

Skep tickle wrote:Jumping ahead to ask people here, based on a twitter conversation just now:

What would it take for you to believe a claim of sexual harassment or assault?

Are there certain circumstances in which you'd be more likely to believe it (evidence, etc) & if so what type of circumstance(s) would that/those be, in general?

Do you think the person's gender would influence your likelihood of believing the claim?

If the claim were made by someone on one side or the other of The Schism, would the side she or he is on influence your belief in the claim?

I anticipate there will be rude answers, but am also interested in a couple of serious/straightforward responses. Thanks.
Just another quick thought on this question.
It occurred to me that the claims of sexual assault and harassment in the skeptical community seem to be skewed in a strange way.
Not only have almost all the claims come from the pro-FTB/Skepchick side against their non FTB/Skepchick opponents, but the claims of actual assault have not involved random skeptics who make up 99% of the skeptic movement, they have, rather, almost exclusively involved accusations against the people at the top or with power, the most famous skeptics - Shermer, Krauss, Grothe, Radford, Bora Zivkovitz, Bill Nye etc, and with further accusations of tacit support of Dawkins, Ron Lindsay and teh JREF in general.

In fact the only accusation of sexual assault that I can remember that didn't involve a famous skeptic, was made by Ashley Paramore against some former friend of hers, who she accused (without naming names) of groping her at some conference party.
Of note, I recall that there was a general acceptance of her claim from pitters at the time.
There was no clear 'agenda' behind her accusation and she gave the impression that this event had seriously affected her.

But this got me thinking.
Why, if the atheist/skeptical community is by and large a kind of drunken fratboy date-rape nightmare (if we are prepared to believe PZ and chums), why are almost all the accusations involving just the big names?
Why aren't there more incidents involving nobodies, like in Ashley Paramore's case?

So, to add another factor to Skep Tickle's original question, I think that the lack of an obvious political agenda makes an accusation more compelling.

Mykeru
.
.
Posts: 4758
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 6:52 am

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#19022

Post by Mykeru »

Really? wrote:
Mykeru wrote:
Skep tickle wrote:Jumping ahead to ask people here, based on a twitter conversation just now:

What would it take for you to believe a claim of sexual harassment or assault?
A police report would be a nice start. I know that logic is subverted by the claim that "the police don't do anything, blah, blah, blah". At which time a rape kit could then be used for "sexual assault" assuming that is anything like rape -- the intentional vagueness of the terminology and baiting and switching between terms being part of the problem -- as physical evidence trumps all. Obviously in the case of rape the presence of semen doesn't prove rape, but the absence does thrown the claim into question. On the other hand, evidence of trauma, ligatures, coercion, physical violence, etc. has no place in what could be claimed was an act of consensual sex. JUst because people can hypothesis grey areas doesn't mean there aren't cases that are unequivocally rape.

I would be more apt to believe a claim where the mechanism of investigation is initiated that, to a degree, is outside the control of the claimant. If one isn't bringing the legal system into it, then what exactly is the claimant trying to accomplish?

Otherwise, a claim of sexual assault is merely a claim like any other claim. And a claim where the person making it actually avoids means of proving or disproving the claim is itself suspect.
WTF, you homophobic transphobic Hitler? When a woman is apparently hypnotized and raped by a EW CISMAN'S evil glare and diseased MONSTER COCK, the right thing to do is WRITE AN EDITORIAL FOR THE SCHOOL PAPER. Then she must CONTACT TWITTER.

How dare you suggest that the police or investigators get involved? Why do you hate women? The accused should simply be rounded up and executed when found.
The rational given years back was that you report these things to the authorities not only for oneself, but out of consideration for future victims of one's perpetrator. That has been conveniently abandoned in the Social Justice Accuser's calculations.

P.S. Hitler did nothing wrong, (quote-mining alert!) you panty-boy fag.

James Caruthers
.
.
Posts: 6257
Joined: Sun Aug 25, 2013 2:50 pm

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#19023

Post by James Caruthers »


rayshul
.
.
Posts: 4871
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 2:00 am

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#19024

Post by rayshul »

I will say that I never questioned a rape accusation before encountering the SJW-ers through Elevatorgate. Despite the fact that when I look back on things that happened in my own life to people I knew, I understood that false rape accusations, false pregnancies, etc, were things that definitely did happen.

I guess that if anything I should be thankful that the way they say that you should always believe the woman made me stop and think... hey. Maybe that's not always the right thing, maybe you should wait for the verdict before blaming someone.

Hunt
.
.
Posts: 3282
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 5:04 am

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#19025

Post by Hunt »

Matt Cavanaugh wrote: *That creepy, head-down, glaring eyes up pose she always makes in photos.
Yes, she's really got to stop doing that. Maybe she thinks it's a alluring pose. It isn't. It makes me want to lock my doors.

DownThunder
.
.
Posts: 859
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2012 8:10 pm

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#19026

Post by DownThunder »

The term "belief" is a very loaded term, though. Whatever you mean by "believe" it should not be the basis for any revenge or punitive measures against anybody until facts are proven. When people say "believe the victim" I take it to mean that they are going to act in accordance with the notion that any allegation is true.

The safest way is not to act against any accused person until facts are established (unless that act is investigating the claim). You can still offer support to an alleged victim through other means like counselling etc. Although false allegations do put a burden on resources, in police investigations or otherwise, the consequences are still less than acting against an accused eg, damaged reputation or careers, imprisonment, vigilante violence and even death. Those are things which cannot be taken back once they have been done.

I never thought a "sceptics" community would struggle with the idea that the existence of a claim is not evidence of said claim. It is obvious however that the circumvention of this notion is not applied to any set of claims, it is applied specifically to feminist narratives about how men and women interact.

Hunt
.
.
Posts: 3282
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 5:04 am

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#19027

Post by Hunt »

Dick Strawkins wrote: But this got me thinking.
Why, if the atheist/skeptical community is by and large a kind of drunken fratboy date-rape nightmare (if we are prepared to believe PZ and chums), why are almost all the accusations involving just the big names?
Why aren't there more incidents involving nobodies, like in Ashley Paramore's case?
I'm sure to "them" (PZ, et al.) the rationale is that of a district attorney "making an example." They figure the big names will "send a message," etc. Also, it's high drama and just a hell of a lot more fun trying to bring down the big fish than the little minnows. In this, I guess I don't fault them. It's the same reason all people are attracted to big lights, high traffic blogs, etc. It's more bang for your buck. It may not be the prettiest strategy to look at, but it is a rational way to allocate time and resources.

Mykeru
.
.
Posts: 4758
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 6:52 am

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#19028

Post by Mykeru »

James Caruthers wrote:Have you all forgotten the life lessons Mountain Dew taught you?

http://philly.barstoolsports.com/files/ ... -wrong.jpg
http://i.huffpost.com/gen/728061/thumbs ... 570.jpg?12
Ah, thanks for the context. That'll learn them to do lazy-assed crowd-sourced product naming contests.

#9: Diabeetus

SoylentAtheist

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#19029

Post by SoylentAtheist »

rayshul wrote:I will say that I never questioned a rape accusation before encountering the SJW-ers through Elevatorgate. Despite the fact that when I look back on things that happened in my own life to people I knew, I understood that false rape accusations, false pregnancies, etc, were things that definitely did happen.

I guess that if anything I should be thankful that the way they say that you should always believe the woman made me stop and think... hey. Maybe that's not always the right thing, maybe you should wait for the verdict before blaming someone.
Kind of like how the whole #NotUpForDebate thing suddenly got a large chunk of Pro-Choice supporters thinking and talking about the ethical implications of abortion and where legal lines lay. They were so over the top they got a bunch of planned parenthood supporters to advocate for positions of that would be closer to the anti-abortion agenda.

Skepchick/FtB/A+ explained:
http://i.imgur.com/FsstEpi.jpg

Hunt
.
.
Posts: 3282
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 5:04 am

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#19030

Post by Hunt »

DownThunder wrote:The term "belief" is a very loaded term, though. Whatever you mean by "believe" it should not be the basis for any revenge or punitive measures against anybody until facts are proven. When people say "believe the victim" I take it to mean that they are going to act in accordance with the notion that any allegation is true.
Well, not only is "belief" loaded, but also "victim" in "believe the victim" is tautological, or question begging. That is the fundamental fallacy of the whole discussion. If they really wanted to use more accurate--but far less suggestive--language, they would say "believe the person making the claim," but then all kind of skeptical criteria start to kick in: Why believe the person making the claim? That's where they rely heavily on statistics. Most rape claims are true, but are most sexual harassment claims true? I don't know. And then there is the almost universal SJW error of applying general statistics to specific case instances, often with very special confounding factors. For instance, the Stollznow/Radford contest happens in the wake of a messy breakup. What do the stats say regarding this? Who the hell knows?

In partial answer to Skep tickle's question, I would say, paraphrasing Reagan, "take seriously, but verify." Always take seriously, always verify.

rayshul
.
.
Posts: 4871
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 2:00 am

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#19031

Post by rayshul »

SoylentAtheist wrote:
rayshul wrote:I will say that I never questioned a rape accusation before encountering the SJW-ers through Elevatorgate. Despite the fact that when I look back on things that happened in my own life to people I knew, I understood that false rape accusations, false pregnancies, etc, were things that definitely did happen.

I guess that if anything I should be thankful that the way they say that you should always believe the woman made me stop and think... hey. Maybe that's not always the right thing, maybe you should wait for the verdict before blaming someone.
Kind of like how the whole #NotUpForDebate thing suddenly got a large chunk of Pro-Choice supporters thinking and talking about the ethical implications of abortion and where legal lines lay. They were so over the top they got a bunch of planned parenthood supporters to advocate for positions of that would be closer to the anti-abortion agenda.
It makes you think. Well, it makes you WANT to think, doesn't it? And at least delay judgement until you have a clearer idea of what's going on.

Mykeru
.
.
Posts: 4758
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 6:52 am

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#19032

Post by Mykeru »

Dick Strawkins wrote:
My problem is not one of thinking people are lying about rape.
It is that situations where the accuser and accused have been drinking and where the accuser wakes up, realizes sex has taken place but cannot remember consenting, therefore assumes rape, are going to be indistinguishable from situations where the accuser HAS actually consented but has had an alcoholic blackout and simply failed to register memories of an event in which she had given consent.

I am not talking about situations where the accuser remembers the assault and recalls saying no, resisting but being overpowered or threatened in some way. I am talking about situations where she has no memory whatsoever of the incident.

In this situation I don't think she is lying about believing she has been raped.
In fact I think there is actually a possibility that she was raped.
But I also think there is a possibility that she wasn't - she has just suffered a blackout.
And you will find, in these drunken rape/sex accounts, especially among the amen chorus of supporters, a consistent tendency to conflate "passed out drunk" with "blackout drunk". Which, in a way, shows the error in accepting one person's extremely subjective version of events.

To an objective observer a person who is "blackout drunk" does purposeful things, is conscious albeit fucking bombed and the "blackout" only comes in after the fact when the person hasn't formed memories of the incident due to being really drunk. In the subjective view of the blackout drunk, awoken with "beer fear" unable to remember what they did, that memory lapse is interpreted as being passed out. Perhaps on purpose.

The one thing a person who claims their drunken blackout behavior was actually unconsciousness wants is to claim diminished and or non-existent responsibility for their drunken behavior.

That this takes root so firmly in the SJW puking-on-shoes convention culture is no surprise at all. Their drunk is your responsibility.

But if that's the case, then we've got a bunch of people on death row who killed (and maybe even raped) other people when blackout drunk that should hit the streets.

James Caruthers
.
.
Posts: 6257
Joined: Sun Aug 25, 2013 2:50 pm

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#19033

Post by James Caruthers »

Mykeru wrote:
James Caruthers wrote:Have you all forgotten the life lessons Mountain Dew taught you?

http://philly.barstoolsports.com/files/ ... -wrong.jpg
http://i.huffpost.com/gen/728061/thumbs ... 570.jpg?12
Ah, thanks for the context. That'll learn them to do lazy-assed crowd-sourced product naming contests.

#9: Diabeetus
I don't know why companies assume anyone is going to get excited over their lame-ass products, just because the marketing guys are excited about them (or pretend to be). Hype can work in the entertainment industry sometimes, but it doesn't work for soft drinks. :lol:

I liked "Fapple." One of the other entries was "Fabulous Apple," so it seems they might have been working that gag on multiple levels.

Suet Cardigan
.
.
Posts: 1304
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2013 9:26 am
Location: England, a bastion of barbarism and cluelessness

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#19034

Post by Suet Cardigan »

Hunt wrote:
Matt Cavanaugh wrote: *That creepy, head-down, glaring eyes up pose she always makes in photos.
Yes, she's really got to stop doing that. Maybe she thinks it's a alluring pose. It isn't. It makes me want to lock my doors.
It's called the Kubrick Stare:

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/KubrickStare

Badger3k
.
.
Posts: 3466
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 6:53 am

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#19035

Post by Badger3k »

Skep tickle wrote: I won't link the tweet because his account is private (& the link might not work for everyone, anyway). But I don't recall having agreed through the "follow" button never to quote his tweets, & in the spirit of his free speech absolutism, here are 2 snippets from a conversation he started with this tweet:
d4m10n wrote:So @Aneris23 and @Ellesun I am curious why you guys continue to defend the Pit. The posters seem to revel in a sort of blind rage approach.
Several tweets later, one thread of that conversation, with Notung, included this:
d4m10n wrote:@SIN_Notung There we continue to disagree. When all the non-fence-sitters are in the "bitches be lying" camp, that is strongly indicative.
(The "bitches be lying" was his comment, though in quotes in his tweet. I added the Koolaid part, hence it wasn't in quotes in my comment you quoted above.)
It's quotes like the bit above that really exposes the lie that Damion is just doing it to get people to think about their biases, unless he has a huge blind spot over his own and refuses to even think about how that affects him...(ref the Stollznow thread). We "revel in the blind rage approach" - wtf does that even mean, and who is we, kemo sabe? Sorry, he's not shown any interest in anything resembling honest discourse, kind of like Svan.

EdwardGemmer
.
.
Posts: 496
Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2013 2:15 pm

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#19036

Post by EdwardGemmer »

I've represented a lot of rapists. I'm not a big fan of the "let the courts decide." For one, rape cases are just plain difficult cases. We have a standard in criminal law of proving someone guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. When we are talking about breaking into a house, or shooting someone, or robbing someone, this standard makes sense. There aren't many other plausible explanations for pointing a gun at someone and taking their stuff.

Sexual violence just looks different. You are asking a court system to try and look back at an encounter between two people who know each other, one or both may have been drinking, they may have engaged in some consensual sexual activities, and then try to find a point in time where whatever occurred was not consensual. On it's face, it's very difficult to do. It's very often a he said, she said affair, and usually both stories sound plausible, and we know that sometimes, the accusers are just making things up. However, a false rape allegation and a true rape allegation sound exactly alike, so how can one know months or years after the fact?

That is conflated with the penalties for rape, which are enormous. Someone convicted of rape in Ohio has to do a minimum of three years in prison, and is ordered to register as a sex offender for the rest of his life. Rape cases going to trial are pretty much a coin flip, but wow, that's a heck of a coin flip. So even if you are completely innocent of a rape charge, the penalties are so massive that it is probably in your best interests to work out a plea, especially if you are offered some not sex offense.

feralandproud
.
.
Posts: 260
Joined: Thu Oct 31, 2013 3:49 pm
Location: sunny motherfuckin' florida

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#19037

Post by feralandproud »

D4m1on replies: (can't embed protected accounts, i guess)
Damion Reinhardt ‏@D4M10N Protected Tweets 7h
@Ellesun By using my FREEZE PEACH to counter what you say. Certainly a more noble approach than trying to lawyer you into the ground, eh?
Why's it gotta be "lawyer you into the ground"? Isn't it just as likely that he's trying to clear his name and salvage what's left of his reputation?

BarnOwl
.
.
Posts: 3311
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:18 pm
Location: The wrong trouser of Time

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#19038

Post by BarnOwl »

On Peezus' "25 years of futility" thread:
Thijs Goverde
2 April 2014 at 3:00 am (UTC -5)
Of course, and unfortunately, the obvious hypocrisy of scientists like PZ Myers is a truckload of grist to the denialist mill. The denialists’ reasoning might go:
1) if scientists really beleived AGW is a serious problem, they would change their behaviour and limit their CO2 emissions.
2) they fly all over the fucking globe, which is basically the most efficient way of putting more CO2 into the atmosphere.
3) therefore, these scientists do not really believe AG is a serious problem.
4) therefore these scientists are lying.

This might also be a reason why the denialist ‘scientists’ sound credible to some people.
PZ Myers and his ilk don’t put their money where their mouth is. The denialist ‘scientists’ may be in the habit of putting their mouth where their money is, but at least their mouth & money can be found in the same place. To some people, that might mean something.
:clap:

Mykeru
.
.
Posts: 4758
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 6:52 am

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#19039

Post by Mykeru »

feralandproud wrote: D4m1on replies: (can't embed protected accounts, i guess)
Damion Reinhardt ‏@D4M10N Protected Tweets 7h
@Ellesun By using my FREEZE PEACH to counter what you say. Certainly a more noble approach than trying to lawyer you into the ground, eh?
Why's it gotta be "lawyer you into the ground"? Isn't it just as likely that he's trying to clear his name and salvage what's left of his reputation?
A long time ago D4m1on revealed himself to be a hack. He's simply one of those people who aligned themselves to the skeptical community not because he adheres to the methodology -- he will dispense with it when convenient -- but because it allows him to act superior. Mostly in front of the dumbest people in the room. What's important to D4m1on's type isn't the unvarnished truth, but really, how most everyone fails to live up to his always externally directed standards. That and acting as though he's performing a community service by grinding axes.

He's a dick.

Here's a whole roomful of the same smug, low-wattage assholes:

http://skepchick.org/wp-content/uploads ... -Panel.jpg

DeepInsideYourMind
.
.
Posts: 681
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2013 10:43 pm

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#19040

Post by DeepInsideYourMind »

EdwardGemmer wrote:I've represented a lot of rapists. I'm not a big fan of the "let the courts decide." For one, rape cases are just plain difficult cases. We have a standard in criminal law of proving someone guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. When we are talking about breaking into a house, or shooting someone, or robbing someone, this standard makes sense. There aren't many other plausible explanations for pointing a gun at someone and taking their stuff.

Sexual violence just looks different. You are asking a court system to try and look back at an encounter between two people who know each other, one or both may have been drinking, they may have engaged in some consensual sexual activities, and then try to find a point in time where whatever occurred was not consensual. On it's face, it's very difficult to do. It's very often a he said, she said affair, and usually both stories sound plausible, and we know that sometimes, the accusers are just making things up. However, a false rape allegation and a true rape allegation sound exactly alike, so how can one know months or years after the fact?

That is conflated with the penalties for rape, which are enormous. Someone convicted of rape in Ohio has to do a minimum of three years in prison, and is ordered to register as a sex offender for the rest of his life. Rape cases going to trial are pretty much a coin flip, but wow, that's a heck of a coin flip. So even if you are completely innocent of a rape charge, the penalties are so massive that it is probably in your best interests to work out a plea, especially if you are offered some not sex offense.
When you come up with a viable alternative to letting the courts decide, then feel free to let us know .... until then, it may be a bloody awful way to deal with the issues, but it's far better than any suggested alternative I know

Dick Strawkins
.
.
Posts: 5859
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:34 pm

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#19041

Post by Dick Strawkins »

feralandproud wrote: D4m1on replies: (can't embed protected accounts, i guess)
Damion Reinhardt ‏@D4M10N Protected Tweets 7h
@Ellesun By using my FREEZE PEACH to counter what you say. Certainly a more noble approach than trying to lawyer you into the ground, eh?
Why's it gotta be "lawyer you into the ground"? Isn't it just as likely that he's trying to clear his name and salvage what's left of his reputation?
If you are a teacher in that situation the rumors may be enough to ruin your career. If you were a young academic without tenure the rumours would be enough to destroy your career (as attested by none other than PZ Myers himself.)

I'm never quite sure with Damion whether he is simply trolling, or whether he is a little bit stupid. Probably a bit of both, mixed with a very limited life experience. He has come out with things before about doxxing (he can't see the fuss about it - thinks it causes no harm to anyone) and this recent anti-libel free speech absolutism, that fail to stand up to even the most basic scrutiny and yet it is impossible to discuss it with him since he either moves the goalposts, or runs away and doesn't answer your points.
If anyone has ever gotten into an argument with him on his skeptic ink blog you should recognize the pattern of him holding posts in moderation for days at a time and then abruptly changing his argument.

I think his basic problem is that he sees himself as a 'movement skeptic' - someone who is important or powerful in some way to the community. As such he is forced to play movement skepticism politics - which in US terms means trying to portray himself as a moderate, halfway between the extremists on either side - FTB, and (of course) the slymepit. This explains his silly demonizing of the pit.
He knows very well that the pitters are a mixed bunch and that there is no way to lump us together in the way he's been trying (claiming that we think all rape accusations are 'bitchez lyin'.) Yet he has no choice to but portray us as the mirror image of the worst of FTB if only so that he can claim the middle ground.
He got his knickers in a twist when he had a fight with Franc about a year ago and has been butthurt by it ever since.
He even tried to destroy the slymepit community at one stage by promoting an alternative forum so that he could poach the non-Franc-like pitters.
How did that turn out Damion? :lol:

Mykeru
.
.
Posts: 4758
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 6:52 am

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#19042

Post by Mykeru »

feralandproud wrote: Why's it gotta be "lawyer you into the ground"? Isn't it just as likely that he's trying to clear his name and salvage what's left of his reputation?
I should point out that the Clown Car has no problem with a person mounting a defense against accusations of sexual harassment/assault, provided it is inadequate, ineffective and easily dismissed.

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 17791
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#19043

Post by Brive1987 »

d4m10n wrote:
@SIN_Notung There we continue to disagree. When all the non-fence-sitters are in the "bitches be lying" camp, that is strongly indicative.
That is really wrong on a couple of obvious levels. If he said that then he is merely self venting prejudice.

Whatever.

Za-zen
.
.
Posts: 2683
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:39 am

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#19044

Post by Za-zen »

Mykeru wrote:
feralandproud wrote: D4m1on replies: (can't embed protected accounts, i guess)
Damion Reinhardt ‏@D4M10N Protected Tweets 7h
@Ellesun By using my FREEZE PEACH to counter what you say. Certainly a more noble approach than trying to lawyer you into the ground, eh?
Why's it gotta be "lawyer you into the ground"? Isn't it just as likely that he's trying to clear his name and salvage what's left of his reputation?
A long time ago D4m1on revealed himself to be a hack. He's simply one of those people who aligned themselves to the skeptical community not because he adheres to the methodology -- he will dispense with it when convenient -- but because it allows him to act superior. Mostly in front of the dumbest people in the room. What's important to D4m1on's type isn't the unvarnished truth, but really, how most everyone fails to live up to his always externally directed standards. That and acting as though he's performing a community service by grinding axes.

He's a dick.

Here's a whole roomful of the same smug, low-wattage assholes:

http://skepchick.org/wp-content/uploads ... -Panel.jpg
That's on scary ass room, what sub reality, cock sucking, ego stroking, attention whoring drama fest was that taken at?

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 17791
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#19045

Post by Brive1987 »

Now it's the JDs and coke talking. However I think Damion mistakes the pretty uniform skepticism of the pit towards SJl ideologically informed interpretations of (say) sexual harassment/assault with a complete lack of nuance on the subject.

And with that premise set, it's not too far from "un-nuanced" to bigoted.

Dick Strawkins
.
.
Posts: 5859
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:34 pm

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#19046

Post by Dick Strawkins »

Za-zen wrote:
That's on scary ass room, what sub reality, cock sucking, ego stroking, attention whoring drama fest was that taken at?
That looks like SkepchickCon 2012.

Za-zen
.
.
Posts: 2683
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:39 am

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#19047

Post by Za-zen »

Seriously there's a chick half way down the aisle, that they should boot into the daylight for her own good.

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 17791
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#19048

Post by Brive1987 »

Re the picture of the room full of weird.

Is that PZ asleep on the left in a black tee shirt?

feralandproud
.
.
Posts: 260
Joined: Thu Oct 31, 2013 3:49 pm
Location: sunny motherfuckin' florida

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#19049

Post by feralandproud »

Dammit, all these years I've been giving Luigi too much credit :bjarte:

Dick Strawkins
.
.
Posts: 5859
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:34 pm

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#19050

Post by Dick Strawkins »

Brive1987 wrote:Re the picture of the room full of weird.

Is that PZ asleep on the left in a black tee shirt?
No, Peezus is on the panel - he and Greg Laden are there as experts on the female orgasm (I kid you not)

http://lanyrd.com/2012/skepchickcon/swcwt/

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 17791
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#19051

Post by Brive1987 »

No wonder everyone looks so bored. Obviously nothing of relevance could have been said there.

"Have you come yet"

Southern
.
.
Posts: 3464
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 4:28 pm
Location: Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#19052

Post by Southern »

Mykeru wrote:
feralandproud wrote: D4m1on replies: (can't embed protected accounts, i guess)
Damion Reinhardt ‏@D4M10N Protected Tweets 7h
@Ellesun By using my FREEZE PEACH to counter what you say. Certainly a more noble approach than trying to lawyer you into the ground, eh?
Why's it gotta be "lawyer you into the ground"? Isn't it just as likely that he's trying to clear his name and salvage what's left of his reputation?
A long time ago D4m1on revealed himself to be a hack. He's simply one of those people who aligned themselves to the skeptical community not because he adheres to the methodology -- he will dispense with it when convenient -- but because it allows him to act superior. Mostly in front of the dumbest people in the room. What's important to D4m1on's type isn't the unvarnished truth, but really, how most everyone fails to live up to his always externally directed standards. That and acting as though he's performing a community service by grinding axes.

He's a dick.

Here's a whole roomful of the same smug, low-wattage assholes:

http://skepchick.org/wp-content/uploads ... -Panel.jpg
I notice that there's an impressive lack of racial diversity on this room - apparently, there's only one person that is not blinding white (maybe there's more on the back of the room, but are the Skepchicks really lumping non-whites on the back of the room?) . I can see more bald neckbeards than non-whites on this honkiefest.

Watson, don't do that.

JayTeeAitch
.
.
Posts: 595
Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2012 9:54 am

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#19053

Post by JayTeeAitch »

BarnOwl wrote:On Peezus' "25 years of futility" thread:
Thijs Goverde
2 April 2014 at 3:00 am (UTC -5)
Of course, and unfortunately, the obvious hypocrisy of scientists like PZ Myers is a truckload of grist to the denialist mill. The denialists’ reasoning might go:
1) if scientists really beleived AGW is a serious problem, they would change their behaviour and limit their CO2 emissions.
2) they fly all over the fucking globe, which is basically the most efficient way of putting more CO2 into the atmosphere.
3) therefore, these scientists do not really believe AG is a serious problem.
4) therefore these scientists are lying.

This might also be a reason why the denialist ‘scientists’ sound credible to some people.
PZ Myers and his ilk don’t put their money where their mouth is. The denialist ‘scientists’ may be in the habit of putting their mouth where their money is, but at least their mouth & money can be found in the same place. To some people, that might mean something.
:clap:
Epic takedown from Nerd, reaching into his pre-teen argument vault:
No, scientist, unlike YOU, understand that the plane is going there anyway. One more passenger doesn’t change anything. The hypocrisy is only in your mind. You sound like a denialist making a fuckwitted point.

Za-zen
.
.
Posts: 2683
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:39 am

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#19054

Post by Za-zen »

It's the "i did not fail" room from American idol

[youtube]bwdHe1-Us90[/youtube]

decius
.
.
Posts: 1365
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 12:08 am

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#19055

Post by decius »

EdwardGemmer wrote:I've represented a lot of rapists.
Rape culture at its finest.

decius
.
.
Posts: 1365
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 12:08 am

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#19056

Post by decius »

EdwardGemmer wrote:I've represented a lot of rapists.
Rape culture at its finest.

Selenite
.
.
Posts: 49
Joined: Sat Jun 08, 2013 10:45 am

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#19057

Post by Selenite »

EdwardGemmer wrote: Sexual violence just looks different. You are asking a court system to try and look back at an encounter between two people who know each other, one or both may have been drinking, they may have engaged in some consensual sexual activities, and then try to find a point in time where whatever occurred was not consensual. On it's face, it's very difficult to do. It's very often a he said, she said affair, and usually both stories sound plausible, and we know that sometimes, the accusers are just making things up. However, a false rape allegation and a true rape allegation sound exactly alike, so how can one know months or years after the fact?
I agree that criminal court is a bad venue for a lot of this. Among other reasons: someone can be a boorish asshole even if they stop short of commiting an actual felony.

It's reasonable that skeptic conventions (or communities) should want to remove aggressively-rude assholes.

Your post highlights a basic problem with a lot of these whisper-campaigns. People are avoiding 'formal' venues because they don't think they can prove their claims to a neutral arbitrator.

And this creates my whole problem with the move for 'harassment policies' or 'naming names'. A sane policy would tie long-term decisions to some formal process. Probably people would present their cases to a neutral third-party mediator. Then the mediator would make a binding decision.

The 'problem' is that this policy would be binding arbitration by anther name. And we just said above that accusers are avoiding that sort of thing because they don't think they can support their claims (true or not) at any sort of standard in a neutral setting.

But the harassment 'policies' I've seen barely fit the definition of 'policy'. Instead of laying out some predictable and well-defined pattern of organizational behavior, they all seem to include an 'out' that amounts to, "The head of the organization can always choose to ignore all this and just do whatever -- just like they could before we wasted paper on the preceeding text."

Even after thousands of words spent on supposedly setting policy it's unclear to me what certain people are actually pushing to do. Their options all kind of suck.
1. Make decisions via evidence at a neutral arbitrator -- this has all the downsides of any other binding arbitrarion
2. Make decisions via evidence at an emotionally invested arbitrator -- a fleshed-out court of opinion has all the downsides of court, with the additional bonus of being biased against the unpopular and less-powerful
3. Make decisions without eidence via arbitrator -- we bypass the problems of evidence, but this is an overt, non-skeptical, witch-hunt.

The shittyness of the above options makes me think that organizations should just 'punt' and tell people to hash 'he-said she-said' things out via some external mediator (courts or otherwise). Other mediators are experts and better equipped for fair decisions.

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 17791
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#19058

Post by Brive1987 »

If rape or physical assault is reported call the police.

If someone is being boorish, intervene and reassert common-sense standards.

It's really not that difficult. Cons are not courts.

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 17791
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#19059

Post by Brive1987 »

JenM's mother has died.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... mccreight/

Bugger. I have lost both my parents. Life is a bitch.

paddybrown
.
.
Posts: 1728
Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2013 7:06 am
Contact:

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#19060

Post by paddybrown »

Skep tickle wrote:Jumping ahead to ask people here, based on a twitter conversation just now:

What would it take for you to believe a claim of sexual harassment or assault?
I have very carefully not commented on he Radford/Stollznow case, but in general I think an accusation of sexual misconduct is an easy method of character assassination that plays on the damsel in distress reflex.

The law on sexual harassment has gone from being a justifiable protection for people in a vulnerable position from being exploited by people in a stronger position, to a subjective, practically arbitrary weapon available almost exclusively to women. I've received treatment from women that would be a clear case of sexual harassment if the sexes were reversed, but weren't in reality, not only because people don't take such complaints seriously from men, but because they really weren't that big a deal. They might have caused me momentary embarassment or discomfort, but who the hell ever said I have the right to go through life in uninterrupted comfort? I'm a grown-up, it's up to me to set my boundaries and communicate them.

It's a double bind based on traditional gender roles. Men must initiate, so we have to lay our cards on the table and take responsibility for our sexual behaviour. Women do not have to intiate, so can express their sexual desires indirectly and retain plausible deniability. Women are traditionally thought of as being diminished and degraded by sexual behaviour and men are not. So behaviour that is sanctionable when done by a man to a woman is just a natural hazard to be negotiated when done by a woman to a man. The fact that feminists reinforce such traditional, stereotypical attitudes to the sexes by continually trying to broaden the definition of sexual harassment is something that used to surprise me.

Plus, of course, sexual harassment is currently being used as a wedge to get certain identitarian entryists into positions of influence in the sceptic movement by crying damsel in distress and vilifying any man who doesn't come running as a misogynist. So accusations of sexual misconduct tend to make my skepticism-sense tingle.

Dick Strawkins
.
.
Posts: 5859
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:34 pm

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#19061

Post by Dick Strawkins »

Brive1987 wrote:JenM's mother has died.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... mccreight/

Bugger. I have lost both my parents. Life is a bitch.
That is sad new for her.
When I read her post a while back about her mother being diagnosed with ovarian cancer I knew this was not too far around the corner. Unlike breast cancer, ovarian cancer is almost always detected far too late, with little that can be done except delay the inevitable by a year or two at a cost of very painful surgery or some rather debilitating chemo. My mother died of the same condition almost exactly seven years ago.

Dick Strawkins
.
.
Posts: 5859
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:34 pm

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#19062

Post by Dick Strawkins »

paddybrown wrote: snip...

The fact that feminists reinforce such traditional, stereotypical attitudes to the sexes by continually trying to broaden the definition of sexual harassment is something that used to surprise me.
Some egalitarian type feminists are OK in this regard, but third wave, SJW- style neo-feminism has a lot to answer for.
These sorts of movements come in waves (does anyone remember the "new man" concept from the late eighties, early nineties - a kind of proto pro-feminist man image - which was heavily promoted by womens groups at the time but fell out of favor after a couple of years) and I can see the current SJW craze disppearing in the not too distant future.

Lsuoma
Fascist Tit
Posts: 11692
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 5:58 pm
Location: Punggye-ri

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#19063

Post by Lsuoma »

Hunt wrote:
Matt Cavanaugh wrote: *That creepy, head-down, glaring eyes up pose she always makes in photos.
Yes, she's really got to stop doing that. Maybe she thinks it's a alluring pose. It isn't. It makes me want to lock my doors.
My guess is she wants to avoid face-on shots due to having a turkey wattle.

dogen
.
.
Posts: 2585
Joined: Fri May 17, 2013 1:06 pm

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#19064

Post by dogen »

Za-zen wrote:
Mykeru wrote:
Here's a whole roomful of the same smug, low-wattage assholes:

http://skepchick.org/wp-content/uploads ... -Panel.jpg
That's on scary ass room, what sub reality, cock sucking, ego stroking, attention whoring drama fest was that taken at?
BetaCon?

Lsuoma
Fascist Tit
Posts: 11692
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 5:58 pm
Location: Punggye-ri

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#19065

Post by Lsuoma »

Brive1987 wrote:JenM's mother has died.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... mccreight/

Bugger. I have lost both my parents. Life is a bitch.
<victim>
I lost both mine by the time I was 27.
</victim>

Lsuoma
Fascist Tit
Posts: 11692
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 5:58 pm
Location: Punggye-ri

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#19066

Post by Lsuoma »

dogen wrote:
Za-zen wrote:
Mykeru wrote:
Here's a whole roomful of the same smug, low-wattage assholes:

http://skepchick.org/wp-content/uploads ... -Panel.jpg
That's on scary ass room, what sub reality, cock sucking, ego stroking, attention whoring drama fest was that taken at?
BetaCon?
Epsilon Semi-Moron.

Old_ones
.
.
Posts: 2168
Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2013 3:46 pm
Location: An hour's drive from Hell.

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#19067

Post by Old_ones »

Skep tickle wrote: Several tweets later, one thread of that conversation, with Notung, included this:
d4m10n wrote:@SIN_Notung There we continue to disagree. When all the non-fence-sitters are in the "bitches be lying" camp, that is strongly indicative.
(The "bitches be lying" was his comment, though in quotes in his tweet. I added the Koolaid part, hence it wasn't in quotes in my comment you quoted above.)
So then I'm guessing this clown basically thinks there are two positions on sexual harassment and assault accusations: "believe all victims" and "bitchez be lying". Its always good to see freethinkers who are capable of handling complex issues without kneejerk reactions and sloganeering.

:roll:

Mykeru
.
.
Posts: 4758
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 6:52 am

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#19068

Post by Mykeru »

Za-zen wrote:
That's on scary ass room, what sub reality, cock sucking, ego stroking, attention whoring drama fest was that taken at?
Skepchickon, S'natchurally.

John D
.
.
Posts: 5966
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2012 4:23 am
Location: Detroit, MI. USA

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#19069

Post by John D »

dogen wrote:
Za-zen wrote:
Mykeru wrote:
Here's a whole roomful of the same smug, low-wattage assholes:

http://skepchick.org/wp-content/uploads ... -Panel.jpg
That's on scary ass room, what sub reality, cock sucking, ego stroking, attention whoring drama fest was that taken at?
BetaCon?
It looks like some kind of comic book or sci fi convention. There are at least seven cosplayers in the crowd that I can see, but there are probably more. They look like they have spent all day at the convention and are just waiting to see who has won some kind of contest. Perhaps they are waiting for a guest speaker or something. I suspect it smells pretty ripe in there since it si possible some of those people have been playing collectible card games for 36 hours straight. These types of events are attended by mostly whites because those black folks are not allowed to buy comic books.

Mykeru
.
.
Posts: 4758
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 6:52 am

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#19070

Post by Mykeru »

Brive1987 wrote:
Bugger. I have lost both my parents. Life is a bitch.
Did you look under the refrigerator?


http://www.freewebs.com/draagonfliir/Ra ... o_hell.jpg

Mykeru
.
.
Posts: 4758
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 6:52 am

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#19071

Post by Mykeru »

John D wrote: It looks like some kind of comic book or sci fi convention. There are at least seven cosplayers in the crowd that I can see, but there are probably more. They look like they have spent all day at the convention and are just waiting to see who has won some kind of contest. Perhaps they are waiting for a guest speaker or something. I suspect it smells pretty ripe in there since it si possible some of those people have been playing collectible card games for 36 hours straight. These types of events are attended by mostly whites because those black folks are not allowed to buy comic books.
Or you could just read the hotlink URL:

http://skepchick.org/wp-content/uploads ... -Panel.jpg

Although, everything you say is true. What's the fun of having a nominally "skeptical" convention if you can't dress up like a total douche and sit around on your fat, pasty white asses looking bored and hungover while the Skepchicks make even a primal pleasure no fun whatsoever.

JackSkeptic
.
.
Posts: 3222
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2013 5:23 pm
Location: UK

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#19072

Post by JackSkeptic »

SoylentAtheist wrote:
Skep tickle wrote:Thanks for all the comments, including the double-post replies :) - and feel free to comment further, if so inclined.

However, it seems not to have convinced d4m10n that there's a single person in the Pit who hasn't drunk the (to quote him) "bitches be lying" Koolaid about any claim of sexual harassment & assault. (Course I'm not sure he even looked, despite direct links via twitter.)
Well he is free to hold whatever opinion he wishes. I respect him more for asking questions and reviewing evidence, even if I disagree with his (as phrased by you) determination.

The issue is that all people lie at times for all sorts of reasons. No specific gender should be sanctified to the level that we should think that they are any less human that the rest of the population.
d4m10n had already come to his conclusion. He sometimes has black and white thinking on the use of swearwords as well. He can post here if he disagrees.

I find the Slympit less sexist, racist and homophobic than chunks of FtB and all of Atheism+. Even Clarance is fairly moderate. But then I do not care about words, I care about the intent behind them.

zenbabe
.
.
Posts: 920
Joined: Sat Apr 27, 2013 6:51 pm

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#19073

Post by zenbabe »

Dick Strawkins wrote:
Brive1987 wrote:Re the picture of the room full of weird.

Is that PZ asleep on the left in a black tee shirt?
No, Peezus is on the panel - he and Greg Laden are there as experts on the female orgasm (I kid you not)

http://lanyrd.com/2012/skepchickcon/swcwt/
With RW too huh.

http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lwlcz72xZP1qmiyih.gif

John D
.
.
Posts: 5966
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2012 4:23 am
Location: Detroit, MI. USA

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#19074

Post by John D »

Mykeru wrote:
John D wrote: It looks like some kind of comic book or sci fi convention. There are at least seven cosplayers in the crowd that I can see, but there are probably more. They look like they have spent all day at the convention and are just waiting to see who has won some kind of contest. Perhaps they are waiting for a guest speaker or something. I suspect it smells pretty ripe in there since it si possible some of those people have been playing collectible card games for 36 hours straight. These types of events are attended by mostly whites because those black folks are not allowed to buy comic books.
Or you could just read the hotlink URL:

http://skepchick.org/wp-content/uploads ... -Panel.jpg

Although, everything you say is true. What's the fun of having a nominally "skeptical" convention if you can't dress up like a total douche and sit around on your fat, pasty white asses looking bored and hungover while the Skepchicks make even a primal pleasure no fun whatsoever.
Oh my God! I thought this was some kind of random picture from a comic book con. Hoho. I didn't notice the hotlink name. Fuck is that's funny.

Lsuoma
Fascist Tit
Posts: 11692
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 5:58 pm
Location: Punggye-ri

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#19075

Post by Lsuoma »

BTW, I see McArthur Park/Chop Suey/Short Round has "enacted the labor", and is being quoted by the BBC (what is it with those maroons?), where she attempts too pull an oolon-style "LOL, I trollz U!".
Short Round wrote:There's no reason for me to act reasonable, because I won't be taken seriously anyway. So I might as well perform crazy to point out exactly what's expected from me.
Those trendy social media stories really have Auntie hooked!

Oh, and some pundit Kang (or was it Kodos?) says"
Kang wrote:If we take #CancelColbert at face value, we can easily dismiss it as shrill, misguided, and frivolous. But after speaking to Park about what she hoped to accomplish with all this (a paternalistic question if there ever was one), I wonder if we might be witnessing the development of a more compelling - and sometimes annoying and infuriating - form of protest, by a new group of Merry Pranksters, who are once again freaking out the squares in our always over-reacting, always polarized online public sphere.
No, it is shrill, misguided, and frivolous.

Pitchguest
.
.
Posts: 4024
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 3:44 pm

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#19076

Post by Pitchguest »

John D wrote:
dogen wrote:
Za-zen wrote:http://skepchick.org/wp-content/uploads ... -Panel.jpg

That's on scary ass room, what sub reality, cock sucking, ego stroking, attention whoring drama fest was that taken at?
BetaCon?
It looks like some kind of comic book or sci fi convention. There are at least seven cosplayers in the crowd that I can see, but there are probably more. They look like they have spent all day at the convention and are just waiting to see who has won some kind of contest. Perhaps they are waiting for a guest speaker or something. I suspect it smells pretty ripe in there since it si possible some of those people have been playing collectible card games for 36 hours straight. These types of events are attended by mostly whites because those black folks are not allowed to buy comic books.
I love the guy snoozing at the front there. Or is he imagining something? He looks to be in that inbetween state. Also, if I'm not mistaken that's Christina Rad at the front on the other side. Also a guy dressed as Luigi for...whatever reason. And a girl with some epic cleavage at the back in the middle. Yowsa. Finally, WHERE DEM BROTHERS AT? Ahem. I mean. I unwittingly infiltrated the white people's club and it's time for a new wave of Skepchickcon.

Tigzy
Pit Art Master
Pit Art Master
Posts: 6789
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 6:53 am

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#19077

Post by Tigzy »


zenbabe
.
.
Posts: 920
Joined: Sat Apr 27, 2013 6:51 pm

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#19078

Post by zenbabe »

Tigzy rofl!

feralandproud
.
.
Posts: 260
Joined: Thu Oct 31, 2013 3:49 pm
Location: sunny motherfuckin' florida

Re: Mykeru, what a Cnut, eh? Discuss.

#19079

Post by feralandproud »

Lsuoma wrote: *snip*

No, it is shrill, misguided, and frivolous.
Yeah, I pointed out how quick she abandoned the hashtag when it backfired on her. It's telling in it's own way that her "satire" was basically the exact same shit that the SJL pulls every day. I think the whole satire fallback excuse was used because:

1. Like I said, the whole thing kind of blew up in her face.

2. She's attempting to downplay the obviously racist statements she made during most of the whole debacle.

Speaking of which, why has no news outlet pointed out all the racism in that hashtag? Does the whole world believe "you can't be racist towards white people? I haven't explored twitter enough to know whether that's a one-way street or not.


Locked