If thou gazest long into the Pit, the Pit will also gaze into thee

Matt Cavanaugh wrote:

Aneris wrote:I had a creative fit and made this Slymepit header. It's a suggestion only.

[.img]http://i.imgur.com/ltWWtvP.png[/img]

I don't know the actual specifications and whether it looks good enough without changing the entire colour scheme. This forum software probably can allow users to select a theme they prefer (i.e. keep the current), if that is a concern. Just in case, here are some possibilities:

[.img]http://i.imgur.com/050whrc.png[/img]

It's awesome. How do I get one?

James Caruthers wrote:http://gretachristina.typepad.com/greta ... -thin.html

Greta Christina, of all people, wrote this about the toxic denial of the fat acceptance movement. Funny how fat activists only notice the hatred when they go against the core tenets of the ideology.

Essentially, when I started writing about weight loss, I was treated like a traitor. I was treated like a threat. Even though I made it clear that I wasn't advocating weight loss for everybody, the mere fact that I was choosing to lose weight myself was seen as undermining the principles of the movement. And I was told, in no uncertain terms, to knock it off.

Our bodies out right to decide This didn't just piss me off. It baffled me. I'd always thought of the fat acceptance movement as essentially about empowerment and self-ownership. Our bodies, our right to decide. Apparently, not so much. Apparently, the decision to manage my health by losing weight was not really mine. Apparently, my body didn't belong to me. It belonged to the fat acceptance movement. Many of whom felt entirely comfortable telling me what I should and should not do with it.

And I'm not the only one. When I started blogging about my weight loss, I wasn't just met with toxic denialism from FA advocates. I was also met with a hugely positive response from readers who were dealing with the same stuff. Like me, a lot of my readers identified as fat-positive, but because of serious health concerns, they were now working on losing weight... and were trying to reconcile their fat-positivity with their weight loss. And a number of these readers had dealt with the same hostile, concern-trolling, denialist reaction from the FA movement. They felt the movement had made an important and valuable difference in their lives, they felt a connection with it that they wanted to maintain... and yet they felt like they'd been abandoned by it, even pushed out of it. Margo put it best in her email to me: "The body / fat positive communities don't seem to have any place for me, even though these are communities I've sought out, identified with and gained a lot from over the years. Firstly, I've done the unthinkable and dropped my body fat percentage intentionally, and secondly, the scientist in me just can't deal with the faith-like basis for some of the debates on health, weight and weight loss anymore. I just wish there was a place to talk about the intersection of these issues with feminism without feeling that I'm a FA and feminism drop-out."

What. The. Hell.

What kind of feminism is this?

What kind of movement claims to be about empowerment... but disavows people for making their own choices about their bodies?

What kind of movement claims to be about self-ownership... but abandons people who deviate from the movement's norm?

What kind of movement claims to be about self-esteem... but treats people like traitors for loving their bodies and wanting to take care of them the best way they know how?

Full body project I still think there is a hugely important place in our society for a fat acceptance movement. I think we need a movement that advocates for treating people with dignity, equality, and respect, regardless of their size; a movement that resists the impossible cultural ideals of beauty; a movement that encourages fat people to love themselves and take care of themselves, regardless of whether they lose weight; a movement that speaks out for fat people's right to make their own choices about their bodies and their health.

I think her position in the article tends a little too much into "empathy," "feminism" and "my body my choice" arguments, and doesn't spend enough time on the conspiracy theories and junk science produced by these groups. However, it's a decent little article on its own and a fucking grade-A article by FTB standards.

didymos wrote:

Yep. Practically a fucking Klan member at this point.

Tapir wrote:Natalie has been re-tweeting Suey fucking Park ffs.

Opyt wrote:

didymos wrote:

Yep. Practically a fucking Klan member at this point.

I was going to comment on that, but I'm a bit late to the party. So I'll just leave it to Richie Sanderson. :clap:

Also, holy shit that's a long winded series of responses to herself. Better suited for a medium of more than 140 characters.

ReneeHendricks wrote:My take on the whole Dawkins/personal fucking preferences thing:

http://skeptischism.com/blog/2014/06/28/social_justice/

Oh, and Natalie Reed is pinching the bridge of Natalie's nose now because of me :)

Tribble wrote:

Dick Strawkins wrote:
So, what is she: radfem, poe, contrarian?

I have never figured her out. But I don't really watch her videos anymore, either. Her voice grates...

TiBo wrote:

Couldn't help myself :D I think "transplain" didn't exist yet, but it came so naturally, I just had to use it :whistle:

Lsuoma wrote:

dog puke wrote:Quick! To the Batcave!

Down the rabbit hole.

To the Globe Theatre.
http://i.imgur.com/CMuh9vT.jpg

'The fool doth think he is wise, but the wise man knows himself to be a fool.'
-Avicenna

Dog Puke - you have at least 40% of the best five posts ever on Teh Pit. You can do me first, and Gumbers gets sloppy rectal seconds, no risk!

Tigzy wrote:

Opyt wrote: I was going to comment on that, but I'm a bit late to the party. So I'll just leave it to Richie Sanderson. :clap:

Also, holy shit that's a long winded series of responses to herself. Better suited for a medium of more than 140 characters.

She didn't acquire the nickname 'Natalie Screed' for nothing.

That's how almost all her tweets are. She's comically inept at twitter.

KenD wrote:

James Caruthers wrote:Imagine if people on drugs acted like fat activists. "Why isn't a junkie body beautiful and sexy?" "You should never invalidate my lived experience as a proud drug-user by telling me to stop smoking so much crack."

You've not run into many drug rights activists then?

The sane ones argue for drug decriminalisation/legalisation as a harm reduction measure. They generally believe that the war on drugs causes more damage than the substances themselves, and feel that resources would be better spent in helping addicts quit.

But then there are those who'll argue that their hard drug use is an entirely valid lifestyle choice that's being unfairly demonised by the mainstream media and Big Pharma shills. I've seen them claim that using heroin is less harmful than drinking a beer, and certainly no worse than the occasional cup of coffee when you get up in the morning. Being a bit concerned about someone's harmless drug injecting hobby, let alone refusing to hire them because of it, is nothing but the gross ignorance of a bigot.

I see this now and then in the sex worker rights movement. When someone (even if they're in favour of decriminalising sex work) brings up the junkie hookers leaving used needles in their street, and argues that they should be given help to quit, they'll find themselves under attack from certain SW SJWs for their paternalistic assumption that those ladies might not be as happy and healthy as can be.

Scented Nectar wrote: She still believes that men should be no more than 2-10% of the total population. The only thing she's retracted is the humiliation ceremony, where men and boys are marched naked down the public streets and then get publicly castrated.

I think her new version of it leaves out the humiliation ceremony part. They still get castrated. She must have gotten too many complaints from her otherwise allies. I guess they didn't complain about the sexual slavery parts though. She plans to keep the remaining 2-10% of uncastrated men and boys locked away, and women can choose which ones they want to use for sex and/or pregnancy. The men have no say in it. Rape of captive men will be the norm if she had her way.

She has also mentioned that mentally and physically ill people should be killed. Included in this category, she has women who she considers too sympathetic towards men or boys.

Something of note that she has said in the past, is that she intends to forward her plans openly, but at the same time, right under people's noses. She's not a poe, but pretends not to be a feminist even though she's hooked up with the separatists who used to post at radfemhub, the one's exposed in the Agent Orange files a couple of years ago.

AndrewV69 wrote:Oh dear!


[.tweet][/tweet]

AndrewV69 wrote:Oh dear!

welch wrote:

James Caruthers wrote:http://gretachristina.typepad.com/greta ... -thin.html

Greta Christina, of all people, wrote this about the toxic denial of the fat acceptance movement. Funny how fat activists only notice the hatred when they go against the core tenets of the ideology.

Essentially, when I started writing about weight loss, I was treated like a traitor. I was treated like a threat. Even though I made it clear that I wasn't advocating weight loss for everybody, the mere fact that I was choosing to lose weight myself was seen as undermining the principles of the movement. And I was told, in no uncertain terms, to knock it off.

Our bodies out right to decide This didn't just piss me off. It baffled me. I'd always thought of the fat acceptance movement as essentially about empowerment and self-ownership. Our bodies, our right to decide. Apparently, not so much. Apparently, the decision to manage my health by losing weight was not really mine. Apparently, my body didn't belong to me. It belonged to the fat acceptance movement. Many of whom felt entirely comfortable telling me what I should and should not do with it.

And I'm not the only one. When I started blogging about my weight loss, I wasn't just met with toxic denialism from FA advocates. I was also met with a hugely positive response from readers who were dealing with the same stuff. Like me, a lot of my readers identified as fat-positive, but because of serious health concerns, they were now working on losing weight... and were trying to reconcile their fat-positivity with their weight loss. And a number of these readers had dealt with the same hostile, concern-trolling, denialist reaction from the FA movement. They felt the movement had made an important and valuable difference in their lives, they felt a connection with it that they wanted to maintain... and yet they felt like they'd been abandoned by it, even pushed out of it. Margo put it best in her email to me: "The body / fat positive communities don't seem to have any place for me, even though these are communities I've sought out, identified with and gained a lot from over the years. Firstly, I've done the unthinkable and dropped my body fat percentage intentionally, and secondly, the scientist in me just can't deal with the faith-like basis for some of the debates on health, weight and weight loss anymore. I just wish there was a place to talk about the intersection of these issues with feminism without feeling that I'm a FA and feminism drop-out."

What. The. Hell.

What kind of feminism is this?

What kind of movement claims to be about empowerment... but disavows people for making their own choices about their bodies?

What kind of movement claims to be about self-ownership... but abandons people who deviate from the movement's norm?

What kind of movement claims to be about self-esteem... but treats people like traitors for loving their bodies and wanting to take care of them the best way they know how?

Full body project I still think there is a hugely important place in our society for a fat acceptance movement. I think we need a movement that advocates for treating people with dignity, equality, and respect, regardless of their size; a movement that resists the impossible cultural ideals of beauty; a movement that encourages fat people to love themselves and take care of themselves, regardless of whether they lose weight; a movement that speaks out for fat people's right to make their own choices about their bodies and their health.

I think her position in the article tends a little too much into "empathy," "feminism" and "my body my choice" arguments, and doesn't spend enough time on the conspiracy theories and junk science produced by these groups. However, it's a decent little article on its own and a fucking grade-A article by FTB standards.

She'll be having to backpedal on that soon enough. The hardcore people in those groups won't let that stand.

Dick Strawkins wrote:She also spends half her time in twitter chatting to people like occasional pitter subman.
Her video production is of far better quality than the average radfem too.

So, what is she: radfem, poe, contrarian?

James Caruthers wrote:The troll in me can't help but enjoy this. She's managed to wind up so many people and even inspired AVfM to dox her and then defending it as "doxxing for justice."
And why is it "doxxing for justice?"
Because she has a dumbass opinion that will NEVER become law.

TiBo wrote:

James Caruthers wrote:The troll in me can't help but enjoy this. She's managed to wind up so many people and even inspired AVfM to dox her and then defending it as "doxxing for justice."
And why is it "doxxing for justice?"
Because she has a dumbass opinion that will NEVER become law.

It's fair to say that there's quite a high probability that woman will sooner or later hurt somebody in a serious manner, and those who know her also know that "oh we didn't see that one coming" wouldn't fly as a credible answer...

dog puke wrote: So I am reaping you? what I have sown? :cdc:

Matt Cavanaugh wrote:

She just stands there for 40 minutes, because Suey Park is a joke.

Pagancat wrote:Natalie reed is a troll. Also a dodo head

TiBo wrote:

AndrewV69 wrote:Oh dear!

104597.jpg

deLurch wrote:

Dick Strawkins wrote:She also spends half her time in twitter chatting to people like occasional pitter subman.
Her video production is of far better quality than the average radfem too.

So, what is she: radfem, poe, contrarian?

She does have above average video editing skills. The last time I looked for an answer to that question, it had turned out that her real life identity had been revealed & that didn't go over too well in her real life since she was working as a day care worker. At that time she claimed satire, but the people who knew her in real life, said no, she really is like this in real life.

I say, not-poe. Mentally ill radfem who may be back peddling a bit now, since her real life identity has been released. And should probably be getting the same mental health help that Elliot Rodger would have received had his announcements been caught in time.

If you do a google on it, you should be able to find the information on her.

James Caruthers wrote:

TiBo wrote:

James Caruthers wrote:The troll in me can't help but enjoy this. She's managed to wind up so many people and even inspired AVfM to dox her and then defending it as "doxxing for justice."
And why is it "doxxing for justice?"
Because she has a dumbass opinion that will NEVER become law.

It's fair to say that there's quite a high probability that woman will sooner or later hurt somebody in a serious manner, and those who know her also know that "oh we didn't see that one coming" wouldn't fly as a credible answer...

This argument doesn't fly either. You can't put someone in prison for the thoughts in their head. Until she actually commits a crime, she can't be considered a criminal, and that's true no matter how bad the thoughts in her head are.

Call the cops if you really think she's a threat. Tell her to seek therapy and mental help. You can't put someone in prison for thought crime.

Guest wrote:

Guest wrote:

Reply

Tony the queer shoop wrote:

"*This is othering. People think that “normal” humans don’t act in such horrible ways. “Normal” humans don’t go on killing sprees. Only people who are not normal do that. People who are other. People who are different than the rest of us. People who are not normal human beings. This distancing leads to dehumanizing bc it treats a category of humans as if they aren’t like the rest of us. Not just different, but deserving of certain types of treatment. Which is just what homophobic bigots do. Or misogynistic arseholes. Or transphobic douchebags. Or ableist fuckwits."

It reminds me of the way the ableist fuckwits tried to claim that Ted Kaczynski (the Unabomber) wasn’t totally sane. Anyone that isn’t a homophobic/ misogynist/transphobic douchebag/ bigot/ arsehole would know that it was the culture of toxic environmentalism that was totally to blame for Ted becoming a serial murderer!

James Caruthers wrote:The troll in me can't help but enjoy this. She's managed to wind up so many people and even inspired AVfM to dox her and then defending it as "doxxing for justice."

And why is it "doxxing for justice?"

Because she has a dumbass opinion that will NEVER become law.

So here, I'm the new Krista now:

"I think every man should be castrated except for me and Tony Parsehole, and all men should be enslaved as my personal castrati legions, and all women shall be required to fan me and pop peeled grapes into my mouth."

I expect my doxxing in a prompt and professional manner. :snooty: Get to it.

Her beliefs about men are just a lot shlick material for herself. They don't merit even a response.

Dick Strawkins wrote:Yesterday Peezus praised the actor Simon Pegg (Star Trek, Hot Fuzz, Shaun of the Dead) for 'getting it' about feminism when he tweeted something in praise of the everyday feminism project.
Pegg seemed to answer those who tweeted at him about his feminist credentials, which lead to some interesting interactions.

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

The picture linked was the following screencapture of one of Simon Pegg's own tweets.

http://www.sabotagetimes.com/wp-content ... 60529.jpeg



Bad feminist :naughty:

James Caruthers wrote:

TiBo wrote:

James Caruthers wrote:The troll in me can't help but enjoy this. She's managed to wind up so many people and even inspired AVfM to dox her and then defending it as "doxxing for justice."
And why is it "doxxing for justice?"
Because she has a dumbass opinion that will NEVER become law.

It's fair to say that there's quite a high probability that woman will sooner or later hurt somebody in a serious manner, and those who know her also know that "oh we didn't see that one coming" wouldn't fly as a credible answer...

This argument doesn't fly either. You can't put someone in prison for the thoughts in their head. Until she actually commits a crime, she can't be considered a criminal, and that's true no matter how bad the thoughts in her head are.

Call the cops if you really think she's a threat. Tell her to seek therapy and mental help. You can't put someone in prison for thought crime.

deLurch wrote:

James Caruthers wrote:The troll in me can't help but enjoy this. She's managed to wind up so many people and even inspired AVfM to dox her and then defending it as "doxxing for justice."

And why is it "doxxing for justice?"

Because she has a dumbass opinion that will NEVER become law.

So here, I'm the new Krista now:

"I think every man should be castrated except for me and Tony Parsehole, and all men should be enslaved as my personal castrati legions, and all women shall be required to fan me and pop peeled grapes into my mouth."

I expect my doxxing in a prompt and professional manner. :snooty: Get to it.

Her beliefs about men are just a lot shlick material for herself. They don't merit even a response.

Doxxing for justice? The only kind of doxxing that should ever be done is to the police or relevant authorities.

So if you had seen the Elliot Rodger's videos except for his last one prior to his rampage would you have thought them trolls or not? I would be hard pressed to believe they were not troll videos. This is why the impression of people who know this people in real life is far more relevant, with people who seem so over the top.

The concern with someone like femtheist is not that her wishes will become law, but that her outspoken desires are so violent, that it is not beyond the realm of possibility that she might act on them of her own accord ala Elliot Rodgers.

Southern wrote:
Actually, you can. Try to be a Neo-Nazi in Germany - you're going to prision faster than you can learn how to spell any German word correctly.

Tapir wrote:Natalie has been re-tweeting Suey fucking Park ffs.

Tigzy wrote:Hahaaa!

Dawkins' transgressions hit Zvan! She again reveals herself to be a secret - well, okay, not-so-secret - pitlurker by linking to Ape's turd-muncher 'shop. Zvan declares the Dawk a de facto Slymepitter. She's very cross.

Welcome Dawkins. Here's your customary fuck off.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/almostdiamo ... d-dawkins/
http://www.freezepage.com/1403984645ENCRGRZDRH

There are a number of problems with that statement, of course. First of all, we don’t know enough about Shakespeare to know that he was white. It’s probably, but not anything like a given in Elizabethan England. Secondly, no one’s upset with Shakespeare. People are upset that Dawkins chose all white men to represent humanity, then defended his choice as being based on merit. Thirdly, several people suggested other poets, such as Omar Khayyam or Maya Angelou as better. They’re not making their choices because they’re unable to forgive Shakespeare anymore than atheists are atheists because they’re mad at God.

Clarence wrote:

deLurch wrote:

James Caruthers wrote:The troll in me can't help but enjoy this. She's managed to wind up so many people and even inspired AVfM to dox her and then defending it as "doxxing for justice."

And why is it "doxxing for justice?"

Because she has a dumbass opinion that will NEVER become law.

So here, I'm the new Krista now:

"I think every man should be castrated except for me and Tony Parsehole, and all men should be enslaved as my personal castrati legions, and all women shall be required to fan me and pop peeled grapes into my mouth."

I expect my doxxing in a prompt and professional manner. :snooty: Get to it.

Her beliefs about men are just a lot shlick material for herself. They don't merit even a response.

Doxxing for justice? The only kind of doxxing that should ever be done is to the police or relevant authorities.

So if you had seen the Elliot Rodger's videos except for his last one prior to his rampage would you have thought them trolls or not? I would be hard pressed to believe they were not troll videos. This is why the impression of people who know this people in real life is far more relevant, with people who seem so over the top.

The concern with someone like femtheist is not that her wishes will become law, but that her outspoken desires are so violent, that it is not beyond the realm of possibility that she might act on them of her own accord ala Elliot Rodgers.

What you are forgetting , Lurch, is Elliot's posting history. He had quite a few posts over an extended period of time at Anti-PUA, bodybuilding and other sites that said the same things (or worse) as his videos, which he also often posted at the same places. It's not like his videos and blog posts were always separate, so yes, I'd be inclined to take him seriously. As you might remember other people on those forums often condemned him or tried to help him. Even at some pretty extreme places, Elliot gave off a 'vibe' of not being quite 'all there'.

Clarence wrote:

Dick Strawkins wrote:Yesterday Peezus praised the actor Simon Pegg (Star Trek, Hot Fuzz, Shaun of the Dead) for 'getting it' about feminism when he tweeted something in praise of the everyday feminism project.
Pegg seemed to answer those who tweeted at him about his feminist credentials, which lead to some interesting interactions.

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

The picture linked was the following screencapture of one of Simon Pegg's own tweets.

http://www.sabotagetimes.com/wp-content ... 60529.jpeg



Bad feminist :naughty:

About the picture: BOING!
I'm a straight heterosexual male, and I'm not afraid to show it! :dance:

James Caruthers wrote:Krista lives in the US, not the UK. Your UK laws are irrelevant. Only US laws matter, and you have the right, as a US citizen, to think what you wish and express your opinions openly, even if some consider them hateful.

If you or anyone else thinks she needs to be in custody, call the fucking cops and let them make that judgment. You and I as laypeople are not qualified, and no, I'm not convinced that Femitheist = = Elliot Rodger.

didymos wrote:

Boo-fucking-hoo. Maybe stop joining in on twitter pile-ons, Nat?

Tigzy wrote:Hahaaa!

Dawkins' transgressions hit Zvan! She again reveals herself to be a secret - well, okay, not-so-secret - pitlurker by linking to Ape's turd-muncher 'shop. Zvan declares the Dawk a de facto Slymepitter. She's very cross.

Welcome Dawkins. Here's your customary fuck off.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/almostdiamo ... d-dawkins/
http://www.freezepage.com/1403984645ENCRGRZDRH