Nerds. Nerds EVERYWHERE...

[Guestus Aurelius]

Things should be quicker now.

Apologies for prior slowness.

Fuck you into the ground, assrocket.

Wait, no, you're cool.

[Guestus Aurelius]

Wow, I got seriously ninja'd there with the assrocket.

[JacquesCuze]

Just look at this piece of reasoning from Schwyzer in which he explains which words you shouldn't use and why:

When I talk to my women's studies classes about the origin and meaning of these gender-based insults, many of them are stunned. (You'd be amazed how few understand that "suck" is derived from "cocksucker", and thus to say something or someone "sucks" is to use anti-gay/anti-woman language. They are also stunned that "asshole" is also anti-gay, misogynistic speak; "asshole" is invariably only used for men, despite the fact that women also possess this part of the anatomy -- it is used to refer to men who allow themselves to be penetrated like women.) What they want to know, of course, is when and how one can continue to use these words without perpetuating gender violence.

What an asshole!

Never heard that asshole is anti-gay and misogynistic.

FWIW, using the wiki as a source it appears the obvious etymology is accurate:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asshole

The word arse in English derives from the Germanic root *arsaz, which originated from the Proto-Indo-European root *ors, meaning "buttocks" or "backside".[1] The combined form arsehole is first attested from 1500 in its literal use to refer to the anus. The metaphorical use of the word to refer to the worst place in a region (e.g., "the arsehole of the world"), is first attested in print in 1865; the use to refer to a contemptible person is first attested in 1933.[2] In the ninth chapter of his 1945 autobiography, Black Boy, Richard Wright quotes a snippet of verse that uses the term: "All these white folks dressed so fine / Their ass-holes smell just like mine ...". Its earliest known usage in newspaper as an insult was 1965.[3] As with other vulgarities, these uses of the word may have been common in oral speech for some time before their first appearances in print. By the 1970s, Hustler magazine featured people they did not like as "Asshole of the Month."[4] In 1972, Jonathan Richman of Modern Lovers recorded his song "Pablo Picasso", which includes the line "Pablo Picasso was never called an asshole."

...

The word is mainly used as a vulgarity, generally to describe people who are viewed as stupid, incompetent, unpleasant, or detestable.[6]

This word or its literal translation is found in colloquial speech in a number of cultures besides English[7] because it describes both an intimate part as well as an organ of elimination, both of which are considered to be taboo parts of the body in many societies.[8]

The English word ass (meaning donkey, a cognate of its zoological name Equus asinus) may also be used as a term of contempt, referring to a silly or stupid person. In the United States (and, to a lesser extent, Canada), the words arse and ass have become synonymous; however, in the rest of the English-speaking world ass refers only to the animal, and not one's rear end. It is worth noting that speakers of some varieties of English "drop their R's" before consonants, leading to a pronunciation of arse that is quite similar to ass

The Hugo quote can be traced to here: http://www.hugoschwyzer.net/2004/09/20/ ... rds-words/

His analysis there seems as legit as any of his pieces.

[JacquesCuze]

You might be surprised, but a lot of critical pedagogy and feminist theory consists of descriptions of personal experiences.

So you take a class about teaching and you expect to learn to teach. Instead, you read a thousand essays that are all variations on the same theme:

"I am a proud Mestizo...Mestizo blood flows through my veins. I understand the world around me, but those I encounter can't understand what I've been through..."

Actually in many ways I admire that.

There are several men's issues (custody abuse, parental alienation, false accusations, rape) where I would like to set up well funded websites that could be expected to stay around for more than six months, with staff and marketing budget, to collect the first person stories of men, captured in text, photos, audio & video of men world wide abused by the system to put a face on what is happening, and to counter feminists who would make claims that these abuses false accusations occur so infrequently we can and should ignore them.

There have been some attempts at this, but the sites rarely stay up for long.

No, no. You're giving the literature I'm talking about too much credit. You and I (it seems) would both be fine with gender studies in the sense of actually looking at the biases in the system that keep children away from good fathers and with bad fathers, etc.

The stuff I'm talking about has zero substance.

"I'm a cismale who identifies as a human being. I was born with a penis and have always felt comfortable with it. One day, in sixth grade, I felt some strange feelings in that penis. It was getting hard even though I was thinking about algebra..."

I'm just saying there is a lot of power in collecting all those personal stories and the feminists figured out how to channel that and use it to support their political agenda and create the whole #BeleiveSurvivors uncritically stuff.

[Apples]

I may have mentioned this before, but I had a girlfriend who informed me that her younger sister whose boyfriend had cheated on her had gotten revenge on him by making a bunch of shit up about him and successfully getting a restraining order.

This girlfriend subsequently threatened me with a restraining order when we had an argument and I asked her to leave my apartment :bjarte:

Monkey see, monkey do.

[Really?]

Oh, Storifying tweets is okay again:

Cool.

I thought this one was funny and hope it makes the cut:

[DownThunder]

Just saw this on Quora the other day:

What is the worst experience you've had with a girl, dating or not?

Mike Leary, Psychotherapist in private practice, Individual-Marital-Parenting-A&D:

I have had two different ones, complete strangers, a couple of years apart accuse me of touching them when I told them the theater had a no texting policy. This was in the middle of the movie.

They started yelling at me so I went to get the manager. They quickly followed, continuing to yell I had put my hands on them.

One got thrown out and the other damn near got me thrown out for life and a felony assault from what the manager said.

They are women who learned how to deflect issues and use the system.

http://www.quora.com/What-is-the-worst- ... ing-or-not#

Out of interest, is there a way to block websites from putting that translucent overlay over the whole page, in cases where they want you to sign in? I think twitter has done that to me as well. Seems like it could be blocked since the actual website text is still underneath.

[Brive1987]

:cdc:

Oh, here we go again. Way to trigger me you assrocket. I am literally raging with shake right now. Seriously considering tossing my surlies all over your feet, you hetcispat ANIMAL. If you were only half the man Ogvorbis is, you would have one tenth enough honor to admit your mistake and APOLOGIZE.

As half an Ogvorbis, I've had at least one girl, which is more than you've ever stuck your stumpy "mushroom" in.

Your apology to me may have been signed in turd, but that more than you'll ever get from me.

:popcorn:

Oh, go fuck a spokesgay with a rusty Nerd, douchejuice. Brive? "Brie" more like, because I can smell your cheesy stink from here.

Well if the hat fits ......

http://i.imgur.com/Ja3nVft.jpg

:shock: :dance:

[katamari Damassi]

Speaking of desperate Pharyngula posts, just look at the latest:

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

Dana's solution is so simple and brilliant that Peezus can't see any downside to it.

So then, she's come up with a solution that will end the abortion problem.
Fantastic!

What is it?

Apparently it's the compulsory sterilization of all males (after they've stored a few vials of sperm in a deep freeze, for future planned breeding puposes.)

We could also sterilize all women who are pro-choice. They can donate eggs or adopt if they think they might want to have a child. Will be cheaper than sterilizing all men and preserves bodily autonomy because you can avoid being sterilized by being pro-life. Can't see any downside to it.

:dance: :drool:

I actually kind of agree with them here. What straight guy wouldn't want to control his fertility? Do you really want to risk knocking up a Stollznow? There have been cases where women have lied about using contraceptives, bitten holes in condoms, spit semen into their vaginas after blowing a dude. If I were straight I think I would've gone that route.

[Gumby]

Oh, here we go again. Way to trigger me you assrocket. I am literally raging with shake right now. Seriously considering tossing my surlies all over your feet, you hetcispat ANIMAL. If you were only half the man Ogvorbis is, you would have one tenth enough honor to admit your mistake and APOLOGIZE.

assrocket.

8-)

Ugh. Why do all of the rockets need to be phallic shaped? You guys can't even build ONE vagina-shaped rocket?

http://abagond.files.wordpress.com/2011 ... killer.jpg

[JacquesCuze]

Just saw this on Quora the other day:

What is the worst experience you've had with a girl, dating or not?

Mike Leary, Psychotherapist in private practice, Individual-Marital-Parenting-A&D:

I have had two different ones, complete strangers, a couple of years apart accuse me of touching them when I told them the theater had a no texting policy. This was in the middle of the movie.

They started yelling at me so I went to get the manager. They quickly followed, continuing to yell I had put my hands on them.

One got thrown out and the other damn near got me thrown out for life and a felony assault from what the manager said.

They are women who learned how to deflect issues and use the system.

http://www.quora.com/What-is-the-worst- ... ing-or-not#

Out of interest, is there a way to block websites from putting that translucent overlay over the whole page, in cases where they want you to sign in? I think twitter has done that to me as well. Seems like it could be blocked since the actual website text is still underneath.

Not really, because they all use slightly different, though similar, techniques to do so.

If you use adblock plus, you can add your own custom filters to suppress that shit.

[DeepInsideYourMind]

Oh, Storifying tweets is okay again:

It would be a boring and short Storify if the two dozen or so attendees were the only Tweets included :D

[Guest]

Did the rap happen yet?

[Skep tickle]

We could also sterilize all women who are pro-choice. They can donate eggs or adopt if they think they might want to have a child. Will be cheaper than sterilizing all men and preserves bodily autonomy because you can avoid being sterilized by being pro-life. Can't see any downside to it.

:dance: :drool:

I actually kind of agree with them here. What straight guy wouldn't want to control his fertility? Do you really want to risk knocking up a Stollznow? There have been cases where women have lied about using contraceptives, bitten holes in condoms, spit semen into their vaginas after blowing a dude. If I were straight I think I would've gone that route.

Hmm. Trying to picture how that would work without an intermediary step like a turkey baster. :think:

[Kenteken]

Did the rap happen yet?

meg, forgot logging in.

[Brive1987]

Oh, for the new members, - ConcentratedH2O and I are on the best of terms.

I have a PM trail to prove it, and will not hesitate to publish.

Still waiting for a book on pornography though, so maybe we have a ways to go yet.

[Apples]

Wow, I got seriously ninja'd there with the assrocket.

Honey badger doesn't give a shit.

[katamari Damassi]

I actually kind of agree with them here. What straight guy wouldn't want to control his fertility? Do you really want to risk knocking up a Stollznow? There have been cases where women have lied about using contraceptives, bitten holes in condoms, spit semen into their vaginas after blowing a dude. If I were straight I think I would've gone that route.

Hmm. Trying to picture how that would work without an intermediary step like a turkey baster. :think:

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/7024930/ns/he ... 0HucPldUnM

[Apples]

I actually kind of agree with them here. What straight guy wouldn't want to control his fertility? Do you really want to risk knocking up a Stollznow? There have been cases where women have lied about using contraceptives, bitten holes in condoms, spit semen into their vaginas after blowing a dude. If I were straight I think I would've gone that route.

Hmm. Trying to picture how that would work without an intermediary step like a turkey baster. :think:

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/7024930/ns/he ... 0HucPldUnM

"the sperm were hers to keep"

it's a sad and beautiful world.

[Guestus Aurelius]

Oh, for the new members, - ConcentratedH2O and I are on the best of terms.

I have a PM trail to prove it, and will not hesitate to publish.

Still waiting for a book on pornography though, so maybe we have a ways to go yet.

Yeah, the porn book is an interesting part of the Stollznow–Radford saga. Couldn't Radford turn it around and claim that he felt harassed that a woman he hooked up with a couple of times sent him a book on pornography out of the blue?

It's also just a particularly damning piece of evidence. You don't send a porn book to someone who's been sexually harassing you and won't leave you alone.

[Michael J]

Oh, Storifying tweets is okay again:

It would be a boring and short Storify if the two dozen or so attendees were the only Tweets included :D

They need the trolls, nobody else is listening to them

[Guestus Aurelius]

(Assuming that Radford's telling the truth about that—he actually didn't back it up with any evidence. The card is not evidence of the gift.)

[Apples]

Ugh. Why do all of the rockets need to be phallic shaped? You guys can't even build ONE vagina-shaped rocket?

The French, of course, have tried (wait for it).

[youtube]-8MEVVU3bxM[/youtube]

The most apt retort post of the day, by a cuntry mile.

[Brive1987]

(Assuming that Radford's telling the truth about that—he actually didn't back it up with any evidence. The card is not evidence of the gift.)

The card itself is damning, per her published narrative.

So I don't think the risk would be worth the gain in inventing the book - quite apart from it making him appear a bit sleazy to some.

[Apples]

His analysis there seems as legit as any of his pieces.

eggzackly. His whole career can be chalked up to his advanced, even coprophilic, ability to feign credibility even when he's completely full of shit.

http://www.lamag.com/Pics/Images/featur ... ugo_h2.jpg
When Schwyzer was teaching at Pasadena City College, porn actress Jessica Drake spoke on campus. Photograph by James Carbone. http://www.lamag.com/features/2014/03/2 ... go-problem

Here's one of the Twitter threads in which you can see Melody Hensley flirting with him a year ago



And here she and Burbly Amy encourage him to come to the WIS conference:

[JacquesCuze]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/book ... t-one.html

http://i.imgur.com/Qj46w7A.jpg

Professor Robert Hare is a criminal psychologist, and the creator of the PCL-R, a psychological assessment used to determine whether someone is a psychopath. For decades, he has studied people with psychopathy, and worked with them, in prisons and elsewhere. “It stuns me, as much as it did when I started 40 years ago, that it is possible to have people who are so emotionally disconnected that they can function as if other people are objects to be manipulated and destroyed without any concern,” he says.

Our understanding of the brain is still in its infancy, and it’s not so many decades since psychological disorders were seen as character failings. Slowly we are learning to think of mental illnesses as illnesses, like kidney disease or liver failure, and personality disorders, such as autism, in a similar way. Psychopathy challenges this view. “A high-scoring psychopath views the world in a very different way,” says Hare. “It’s like colour-blind people trying to understand the colour red, but in this case ‘red’ is other people’s emotions.”

At heart, Hare’s test is simple: a list of 20 criteria, each given a score of 0 (if it doesn’t apply to the person), 1 (if it partially applies) or 2 (if it fully applies). The list includes: glibness and superficial charm, grandiose sense of self-worth, cunning/manipulative, pathological lying, emotional shallowness, callousness and lack of empathy, a tendency to boredom, impulsivity, criminal versatility, behavioural problems in early life, juvenile delinquency, and promiscuous sexual behaviour. A pure, prototypical psychopath would score 40. A score of 30 or more qualifies for a diagnosis of psychopathy. Hare says: “A friend of mine, a psychiatrist, once said: ‘Bob, when I meet someone who scores 35 or 36, I know these people really are different.’ The ones we consider to be alien are the ones at the upper end.”

But is psychopathy a disorder – or a different way of being? Anyone reading the list above will spot a few criteria familiar from people they know. On average, someone with no criminal convictions scores 5. “It’s dimensional,” says Hare. “There are people who are part-way up the scale, high enough to warrant an assessment for psychopathy, but not high enough up to cause problems. Often they’re our friends, they’re fun to be around. They might take advantage of us now and then, but usually it’s subtle and they’re able to talk their way around it.” Like autism, a condition which we think of as a spectrum, “psycho­pathy”, the diagnosis, bleeds into normalcy.

We think of psychopaths as killers, criminals, outside society. People such as Joanna Dennehy, a 31-year-old British woman who killed three men in 2013 and who the year before had been diagnosed with a psychopathic personality disorder, or Ted Bundy, the American serial killer who is believed to have murdered at least 30 people and who said of himself: “I’m the most cold-blooded son of a bitch you’ll ever meet. I just liked to kill.” But many psychopathic traits aren’t necessarily disadvantages – and might, in certain circumstances, be an advantage. For their co-authored book, “Snakes in suits: When Psychopaths go to work”, Hare and another researcher, Paul Babiak, looked at 203 corporate professionals and found about four per cent scored sufficiently highly on the PCL-R to be evaluated for psychopathy. Hare says that this wasn’t a proper random sample (claims that “10 per cent of financial executives” are psychopaths are certainly false) but it’s easy to see how a lack of moral scruples and indifference to other people’s suffering could be beneficial if you want to get ahead in business.

http://i.imgur.com/wKo07BL.jpg

...

http://i.imgur.com/y0meYfU.jpg

So psychopaths often welcome their condition, and “treating” them becomes complicated. “How many psychopaths go to a psychiatrist for mental distress, unless they’re in prison? It doesn’t happen,” says Hare. The ones in prison, of course, are often required to go to “talk therapy, empathy training, or talk to the family of the victims” – but since psychopaths don’t have any empathy, it doesn’t work. “What you want to do is say, ‘Look, it’s in your own self-interest to change your behaviour, otherwise you’ll stay in prison for quite a while.’ ”

...

Speaking to all these experts, I notice they all talk about psychopaths as “them”, almost as a different species, although they make conscious efforts not to. There’s something uniquely troubling about a person who lacks emotion and empathy; it’s the stuff of changeling stories, the Midwich Cuckoos, Hannibal Lecter. “You know kids who use a magnifying glass to burn ants, thinking, this is interesting,” says Hare. “Translate that to an adult psychopath who treats a person that way. It is chilling.” At one stage Ronson suggests I speak to another well-known self-described psychopath, a woman, but I can’t bring myself to. I find the idea unsettling, as if he’d suggested I commune with the dead.

[Sulman]

... quite apart from it making him appear a bit sleazy to some.

Well, he is. He may well be the victim of a vicious smear campaign, but it it is also clear he is a bit of a douchebag.

[Mykeru]

Whatever else may be going on in her life, Karen Stollznow knows her stuff & is doing actual investigation & scholarship on stuff applicable to the A/S movement; see (well, listen to) the interview linked at the page below:

http://www.skepticink.com/backgroundpro ... s-america/

(The link was posted here in the past page or two; just listened to it)

Yes, and whatever else you can say about Hitler, those trains did run on time:

http://ww2today.com/wp-content/uploads/ ... merika.jpg

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-clUOb8z59Xo/T ... _16988.jpg

Now I'm sure there's a reason why you insist on minimizing Stollznow's actions, if not outright shilling for her, or why you had to make a point to pop into the #skeptech timeline to assure them that there was only one SlymePitter (me) making fun of them, but it's probably not all that interesting and aside from being mildly annoyed, it's probably not worth worrying about.

Excuse me, back to videos.

[JacquesCuze]

[youtube]vAkXPpBnSkM[/youtube]

John Pinette's Original Chinese Buffet routine.

[DownThunder]

I think the biggest embarrassment with the hugo affair was that it showed many feminists, perhaps most, still think with their ovaries when dealing with men. Even ones who would spit on just about every man they come across acted like giggling school girls around hugo. Seeing hensley (even marcotte..... :shock: :shock: :shock: ) flirt with him still brings a bit of vomit up into my mouth. Im convinced male feminists are part flawed thinking, part putting on a show for women.

[Brive1987]

Not to be pedantic and white-ant a perfectly good point but:

Mussolini was the trains.
Hitler was the autobahns.

And even then Il Duce fucked it up: http://www.snopes.com/history/govern/trains.asp

[Skep tickle]

Whatever else may be going on in her life, Karen Stollznow knows her stuff & is doing actual investigation & scholarship on stuff applicable to the A/S movement; see (well, listen to) the interview linked at the page below:

http://www.skepticink.com/backgroundpro ... s-america/

(The link was posted here in the past page or two; just listened to it)

Yes, and whatever else you can say about Hitler, those trains did run on time:

[.img]http://ww2today.com/wp-content/uploads/ ... merika.jpg[/img]

[.img]http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-clUOb8z59Xo/T ... _16988.jpg[/img]

Now I'm sure there's a reason why you insist on minimizing Stollznow's actions, if not outright shilling for her, or why you had to make a point to pop into the #skeptech timeline to assure them that there was only one SlymePitter (me) making fun of them, but it's probably not all that interesting and aside from being mildly annoyed, it's probably not worth worrying about.

Excuse me, back to videos.

Minimizing Stollznow's actions? I stand by what I said, "whatever else may be going on in her life, she [knows her stuff]." So what? Just because someone behaves quite badly in one area doesn't mean they have no redeeming qualities in any area. I've given $ to the side I believe has the evidence to back up its truth claim (fwiw, it's not the side that's raked in $55K so far), but I think the next step is the court case & decision.

Why I popped into the #skeptech timeline to say there was only one Pitter? Because they repeatedly assume that everyone giving them a hard time is a Pitter, even though that's quite untrue. I wanted to call them on that. At the time I weighed in, unless I am inaccurately mapping Twitter nyms to Pitter nyms (which is possible), you were the only Pitter among the several people poking fun of them on #skeptech, though one more joined in soon after.

[Mykeru]

http://media.salon.com/2012/11/AP950301 ... 80x960.jpg

Jeffrey MacDonald: A guy who knew his stuff. A fine doctor, an officer and a gentleman. Well, aside from that bit where he stabbed and bludgeoned his entire family to death.

http://cheddarbay.com/Unsolved%20Myster ... Found2.jpg

I'm sorry, what were we talking about again?

[ConcentratedH2O, OM]

Oh, for the new members, - ConcentratedH2O and I are on the best of terms.

I have a PM trail to prove it, and will not hesitate to publish.

Still waiting for a book on pornography though, so maybe we have a ways to go yet.

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

[Brive1987]

Oh, for the new members, - ConcentratedH2O and I are on the best of terms.

I have a PM trail to prove it, and will not hesitate to publish.

Still waiting for a book on pornography though, so maybe we have a ways to go yet.

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

OK, OK, I'll hoist the white flag.

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

[Matt Cavanaugh]

Whatever else may be going on in her life, Karen Stollznow knows her stuff & is doing actual investigation & scholarship on stuff applicable to the A/S movement; see (well, listen to) the interview linked at the page below:

http://www.skepticink.com/backgroundpro ... s-america/

(The link was posted here in the past page or two; just listened to it)

Are you saying that we must ignore Stollznow's horrible behavior, because of her 'contribution' to the A/S movement?

1) You're greatly overestimating: the importance of Stollnzow's work; the importance of JREF & TAM to the skeptical movement; the importance of the skeptical movement itself, not only to everyday people, but also to most skeptically-minded people;

2) Even if Stollznow were actually producing work of value, she's toxic now, an embarrassment to anyone who associates with her. She needs to go.

[welch]

Yes, don't bully confessed child rapists, focus on bullying those who some third party claimed touched them inappropriately, maybe somehow, a few times. That's where we need to focus our efforts. How can we ever change society if we don't start with ambiguous he said / she said cases and create a big toxic cesspool of opinion and tribalism before reason?

Kind of reminds me of when that Hugo Schwyzer admitted he'd been bullshitting the feminists for years, just telling them what they wanted to hear and even exploiting several women through this connection, because he could.

The uproar was.. mild. He'd been sort of useful after all, and attacking him harshly would only shine a spotlight on how fucking stupid you were to be fooled, so Hugo is just misguided and needs to work things out. Just like Oggy doesn't need help, just time to check his privileges.

Mild? I didn't see it that way.

To echo Really? name any other field that would be so completely taken in by one of their professors, then revealed to be gaming and hoaxing them, that would excoriate that professor and never examine what was wrong with themselves and their methods that they could be taken in so?

Even now, when feminists focus in on evil Hugo, they miss how feminists, feminist theory, enabled Hugo, ignored men and women that told them Hugo was a fraud, and even put down their own feminists who criticized Hugo from way back.

that's hardly surprising. He played them all, and like the victims of any other con, coming to terms with that will take a long time, if ever. I mean, for fuck's sake he tried to kill his girlfriend, and they managed to explain that away. There's a lot of guilt in the reactions to him you're seeing.

[welch]

To echo Really? name any other field that would be so completely taken in by one of their professors, then revealed to be gaming and hoaxing them, that would excoriate that professor and never examine what was wrong with themselves and their methods that they could be taken in so?

Even now, when feminists focus in on evil Hugo, they miss how feminists, feminist theory, enabled Hugo, ignored men and women that told them Hugo was a fraud, and even put down their own feminists who criticized Hugo from way back.

One of the problems with academic feminism is that it is unfalsifiable. Like theology, there is no way of telling whether any of the claims is true or untrue - leading to the 'experts' like Schwyzer, simply making things up as they go along.

Just look at this piece of reasoning from Schwyzer in which he explains which words you shouldn't use and why:

When I talk to my women's studies classes about the origin and meaning of these gender-based insults, many of them are stunned. (You'd be amazed how few understand that "suck" is derived from "cocksucker", and thus to say something or someone "sucks" is to use anti-gay/anti-woman language. They are also stunned that "asshole" is also anti-gay, misogynistic speak; "asshole" is invariably only used for men, despite the fact that women also possess this part of the anatomy -- it is used to refer to men who allow themselves to be penetrated like women.) What they want to know, of course, is when and how one can continue to use these words without perpetuating gender violence.

What an asshole!

the fact they allowed themselves to fall for it is even more incredible. That's always the trick. You don't actually sucker people. You get them to do all the work themselves, and you just deposit the money.

[Really?]

Whatever else may be going on in her life, Karen Stollznow knows her stuff & is doing actual investigation & scholarship on stuff applicable to the A/S movement; see (well, listen to) the interview linked at the page below:

http://www.skepticink.com/backgroundpro ... s-america/

(The link was posted here in the past page or two; just listened to it)

Are you saying that we must ignore Stollznow's horrible behavior, because of her 'contribution' to the A/S movement?

1) You're greatly overestimating: the importance of Stollnzow's work; the importance of JREF & TAM to the skeptical movement; the importance of the skeptical movement itself, not only to everyday people, but also to most skeptically-minded people;

2) Even if Stollznow were actually producing work of value, she's toxic now, an embarrassment to anyone who associates with her. She needs to go.

We have been told repeatedly in the past few years that a person's accomplishments don't matter. Dawkins is an intellectual superhero and has been perhaps the most accessible skeptic out there to people who aren't in the community.

But he told Beckybooze to stop being unpleasant about something as silly as being politely invited for coffee, so we need to forget he ever did anything good.

What's good for the sauce is good for the gander, or whatever Beckybooze might have said in the bar last night.

[DownThunder]

I'm sorry, what were we talking about again?

OK, but let's put that in more reasonable terms:

Each of these speakers is a mix of benefits and costs. Their knowledge and qualifications are a benefit, while their propensity for drama and personal promotion at the expense of individuals, or even entire genders, is a cost.

From what I can see, the costs outweigh the benefits. There are many people who could fulfil the knowledge benefit while lacking the drama.

Why this isn't reflected in conferences...NFI.

[Mykeru]

Are you saying that we must ignore Stollznow's horrible behavior, because of her 'contribution' to the A/S movement?

That kind of argument seems oddly familiar.

http://i.lv3.hbo.com/assets/images/docu ... d-1024.jpg

Oh yeah. Some people cite Roman Polanski's (vastly over-rated) skill as a director as a mitigating factor in his drugging and anally raping a 13 year-old girl.

Pro-Tip people: If you are going to be heinous, don't suck at your day job. Makes all the difference.

[Brive1987]

What's good for the sauce is good for the gander, or whatever Beckybooze might have said in the bar last night.

OMG, Steers - tell me its not true.

:pray:

[Really?]

Are you saying that we must ignore Stollznow's horrible behavior, because of her 'contribution' to the A/S movement?

That kind of argument seems oddly familiar.

http://i.lv3.hbo.com/assets/images/docu ... d-1024.jpg

Oh yeah. Some people cite Roman Polanski's (vastly over-rated) skill as a director as a mitigating factor in his drugging and anally raping a 13 year-old girl.

Pro-Tip people: If you are going to be heinous, don't suck at your day job. Makes all the difference.

Ugh. That's such an excellent comparison. Polanski is a helluva director. He's done some classics. But he drugged and anally raped a 13-year-old and ran away to Europe.

Stollznow has done some okay scholarship...okay, you know...and she has (seemingly) attempted to ruin a man's reputation with false claims and beats up people she claims to care about.

If the FTB folks refuse to watch Rosemary's Baby, surely they'll refuse to support someone who has been violent against a partner, right?

[feralandproud]

If I attended any conventions, I'd be concerned about someone with Stollznow's history being there. Unless she's going to be chaperoned the whole time, I wouldn't feel exactly safe. That's not hyperbole, that's just a fact. I once had a drunken EX stand outside of my apartment, call the police, and claim I hit her. I didn't even know she was there, but guess who got taken downtown that night :bjarte: ...so fuck that, if her career suffers to keep everyone else at ease, so be it. By the looks of things, she brought this shit on herself.

Also, Schwyzer? I just don't get it. It has to be the line of bullshit he runs, 'cause all I see when I see him is shit hair, bad skin, etc...

[decius]

An artist's or an author's work stands on its own merit. It's perfectly possible to be a total arse, produce immortal art and even set standards for centuries to come - Bernini and Caravaggio to wit.

If her books are that good, there's no reason to ditch them. However, skepticism is a method promoted as an antidote to deception.
There's some basic incompatibility between being a public face for skepticism and fabricating evidence in order to rig the system.

[Skep tickle]

If someone does something unlawful, they should pay the appropriate price/restitution/etc (as determined by law), and anyone involved with them in similar circumstances in the future should exercise caution, but IMO that the person doesn't turn into an Old Testament leper.

I would hope it's obvious that that's my opinion, rather than something I'm claiming is a fact everyone must agree with. And it's obvious some people don't agree - that's completely fine.

IMO Polanski should ideally have paid the piper for his sexual assault. But that doesn't detract from his talent as a director - nor is it excused by that.

[Skep tickle]

Re OT lepers: "that person" not "that the person"...

[Mykeru]

There's some basic incompatibility between being a public face for skepticism and fabricating evidence in order to rig the system.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_JYoRQmUQKsI/T ... 0/bing.png

[Mykeru]

If someone does something unlawful, they should pay the appropriate price/restitution/etc (as determined by law), and anyone involved with them in similar circumstances in the future should exercise caution, but IMO that the person doesn't turn into an Old Testament leper.

So Ben Radford is made an "Old Testament leper", personally and professionally, on account of her accusations, but the accuser, having lied and fabricated evidence to make him and "Old Testament leper" should not herself be treated as an "Old Testament leper" because, well, that's too much.

I really and truly don't give a shit about anything else you may say on this subject.

[Really?]

If someone does something unlawful, they should pay the appropriate price/restitution/etc (as determined by law), and anyone involved with them in similar circumstances in the future should exercise caution, but IMO that the person doesn't turn into an Old Testament leper.

I would hope it's obvious that that's my opinion, rather than something I'm claiming is a fact everyone must agree with. And it's obvious some people don't agree - that's completely fine.

IMO Polanski should ideally have paid the piper for his sexual assault. But that doesn't detract from his talent as a director - nor is it excused by that.

Personally, I agree with you. If Polanski had kept to his deal and served his time, okay...fine. I'm even fine with the man's movies and how we should examine them as works of art on their own merit, so long as we acknowledge he's an Ogvorbis. (Polanski had trauma in his childhood, too.)

Our friends over in Looneyville disagree with us. I, for one, hope that they are constantly reminded that they are offering Oggy and Stollznow mercy that they choose not to offer people who have committed far lesser "crimes."

[Skep tickle]

An artist's or an author's work stands on its own merit. It's perfectly possible to be a total arse, produce immortal art and even set standards for centuries to come - Bernini and Caravaggio to wit.

If her books are that good, there's no reason to ditch them. However, skepticism is a method promoted as an antidote to deception.
There's some basic incompatibility between being a public face for skepticism and fabricating evidence in order to rig the system.

Good point (though evidence has only been presented on 1 side).

[Brive1987]

My personal view on the KS thing approximates a firing.

"You have done, and continue to do, great work. But that little thing you did? Sorry - leave your keys on the way out."

She is on probation until she matches those 2010 emails with equal and opposite ones - and explains why this nuanced situation escaped her narrative in SA. And I'd say the clock is ticking down quickly on that front.

..............

Correct me if I am wrong. But so far she hasn't offered a single shred of actual evidence to support her extended career killing anecdote.

And it was this blood in the water that brought on the anti Krauss / Shermer stampede and ratcheted up the pressure on JREF.

[Guestus Aurelius]

My personal view on the KS thing approximates a firing.

"You have done, and continue to do, great work. But that little thing you did? Sorry - leave your keys on the way out."

She is on probation until she matches those 2010 emails with equal and opposite ones - and explains why this nuanced situation escaped her narrative in SA. And I'd say the clock is ticking down quickly on that front.

..............

Correct me if I am wrong. But so far she hasn't offered a single shred of actual evidence to support her extended career killing anecdote.

And it was this blood in the water that brought on the anti Krauss / Shermer stampede and ratcheted up the pressure on JREF.

Agreed on the first part, and I think you're mostly correct on the second part. The only "evidence" on her side that I can think of is CFI's investigator's ruling (which is unclear to us still) and her friend who claims to have "witnessed" the harassment as it was going on (forget who, but I swear someone said they personally witnessed phone calls or texts or e-mails coming in on Stollznow's phone?). Nothing convincing except anecdote so far, unless I've missed something.

[Sulman]

And it was this blood in the water that brought on the anti Krauss / Shermer stampede and ratcheted up the pressure on JREF.

This bothered me from the beginning. If she has a case, she is either being very disciplined and not releasing specific details as per Radford's strategy, or she has very little credible evidence and has relied on the power of the smear.

Interestingly, I find the narrative that she is a victim quite interesting, because she does not come across that way. Quite the opposite, and my cynicism suggests she has seen the climate and the leverage therein and identified it as useful.

[ConcentratedH2O, OM]

Oh, for the new members, - ConcentratedH2O and I are on the best of terms.

I have a PM trail to prove it, and will not hesitate to publish.

Still waiting for a book on pornography though, so maybe we have a ways to go yet.

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

OK, OK, I'll hoist the white flag.

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

http://i.imgur.com/rFCt604.jpg

[Skep tickle]

If someone does something unlawful, they should pay the appropriate price/restitution/etc (as determined by law), and anyone involved with them in similar circumstances in the future should exercise caution, but IMO that the person doesn't turn into an Old Testament leper.

So Ben Radford is made an "Old Testament leper", personally and professionally, on account of her accusations, but the accuser, having lied and fabricated evidence to make him and "Old Testament leper" should not herself be treated as an "Old Testament leper" because, well, that's too much.

You skipped the "should pay the appropriate price/restitution/etc" part if there is a verdict against her, which I would hope would include a public retraction and a good chunk of $, and after that everyone & every group in "the community" gets to decide how they react to her & to him.

It does seem like a complete & total shame that she seems to have won in the arena of public opinion, and that that may not be something BR can undo.

I really and truly don't give a shit about anything else you may say on this subject.

Fine. Put me on ignore, then. And you might want to block me on Twitter, too, cuz I might accidentally say something there.

[Sulman]

Offered without comment.

[KiwiInOz]

Offered without comment.

Now we just need to teach those diseases not to infect. Surely we can all get along.

[Guestus Aurelius]

I'll also add that if it turns out that Radford is guilty, he'll obviously be forever persona non grata, and in fact he probably already is forever persona non grata simply because he was accused and because fucking assholes like Orac don't approve of the way he's handled the personal shitstorm.

That being the case, yes, I think that anyone found to have made malicious false accusations should be persona non grata. I agree that that doesn't mean that said person is incapable of doing quality work, but if I were actually "involved" in the A/S community (apart from posting here), I'd want the community to treat a false accuser similarly to how it would treat an actual perp of the crime in question.

I think maybe that's how it should be in law, too (when it comes to malicious false accusations). The more heinous the crime, the more severe should the penalty be, and the more severe also should the penalty be for maliciously falsely accusing somebody of it. Same penalty?

[ConcentratedH2O, OM]

Offered without comment.

She should use her influence within the skeptical community to start a riot against these loathsome bacteria.