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

James Caruthers wrote:

John Greg wrote:H. Korban said:

One must understand, however, that understanding the Quran is not simple. There are bewildering array of interpretations....

But that is of course the fundmental root of both the wonder (for the naive and gullible few) and the ultimate danger (to human social and intellectual freedom) of all religious texts. Understanding fantastical gobbledegook that has no actual, empirical meaning is inevitabley fraught with difficulty; that's not a coding bug, it's a design feature.

All religious texts are quite intentionally vague, opaque, self-contradictory, and so on, and open to any interpretation that any creative individual wishes to endow them with; therefore, any mad man or saint can claim to know specifically and doctrinally what the words mean, and hence what laws they dictate, and hence what the people must do to be saved/holy/WTF, and our mad man/saint can thereby lead a people to whatever ends that mad man or saint should so choose. And it would seem that pretty much invariabley most of the "leading" interpretators, our various beloved mad men and saints, are mostly just out for some variation on power, wealth, and/or social control.

The truth of most religious texts is ultimately the same truth as is carried in a dream: pure interpretation, invention, and fantasy.

Which is why we cannot mass deport people who believe in a nebulous philosophical system which they can interpret in either good or evil ways depending on their own moral character.

CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: You are now the pit's Sesame Street Big Bird.

Kirbmarc wrote:

Steersman wrote:And, no doubt, many if not most Christian fundamentalists are greatly impressed by the "wonderful, lucid detail" with which William Lane Craig "proves" the existence of God. And you might note that Adam Croom is also a linguist, and, presumably, one with a few more publications under his belt than has Kirbmarc. And you might consider that being a supposed expert isn't a guarantee of the correctness of a claim, that "we" - at least those with a claim or pretension to the label of "skeptic" - have an obligation to assess various claims on their merits.

To give Steers some marginal credit, my supposed authority isn't what matters in this debate, and neither is the number of publications under my belt (or those under Croom's belt for that matter) ....

Kirbmarc wrote:... although those numbers are pretty much the same (at least according to LinkedIn) since neither I nor Croom are key figures in the world of linguistics. Of course I can't link to my page on LinkedIn without doxxing myself and i won't risk exposing myself in such a fashion on a forum occasionally visited by people who have an axe to grind against me but I'm happy to provide it in private to those who want to check (even Steersman).

Kirbmarc wrote:But that's a marginal issue. What matters is that Croom supports only the first half of the Steers argument (i.e. "there are some contexts in which slurs do not correspond exactly to their NPC") but not the second half (i.e. "therefore if people from the in-group and the out-group use a term the context remains the same and the pragmatic implicatures are the same"), as I have previously shown with direct quotes from the paper in question and other papers (which explain that Croom is trying to find a linguistic explanation for the phenomenon of reappropriation, not a justification for the use of slurs from members of the out-group).

nig·ger (nĭg′ər)
n. Offensive Slang
1.
a. Used as a disparaging term for a black person: "You can only be destroyed by believing that you really are what the white world calls a nigger" (James Baldwin).
b. Used as a disparaging term for a member of any dark-skinned people.
2. Used as a disparaging term for a member of any socially, economically, or politically deprived group of people.

Kirbmarc wrote:By the way I'm planning to contact Adam Croom privately and ask him some clarifications about the article in question. If and when he answers I will ask for his permission to publish his words on this website. Steersman will no doubt appreciate a comment from the author of the paper he's been discussing for months so far.

comhcinc wrote:

CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: You are now the pit's Sesame Street Big Bird.

http://www.wwe.com/f/styles/superstar_p ... 1_full.png

Really though. Dude went all steersman wall of text when she said IF.

Eskarina wrote: Being a atheist, however, I'd have no problem on pissing on religious books if I thought it would stop abuse in the name of said religion.

John Greg wrote:H. Korban said:

One must understand, however, that understanding the Quran is not simple. There are bewildering array of interpretations....

But that is of course the fundmental root of both the wonder (for the naive and gullible few) and the ultimate danger (to human social and intellectual freedom) of all religious texts. Understanding fantastical gobbledegook that has no actual, empirical meaning is inevitabley fraught with difficulty; that's not a coding bug, it's a design feature.
<snip>

The truth of most religious texts is ultimately the same truth as is carried in a dream: pure interpretation, invention, and fantasy.

Steersman wrote: Although I hope you'll provide a reasonably fair synopsis of my argument if you describe it in any detail.

Guest wrote:HARPING ON: THE HYPOCRISY AND LIES OF TWITTER’S MOST NOTORIOUS ‘ANTI-ABUSE’ ACTIVIST, RANDI HARPER, PART 1

breitbart.com/big-journalism/2015/06/29/harping-on-the-hypocrisy-and-lies-of-twitters-most-notorious-anti-abuse-activist-randi-harper-part-1/

AndrewV69 wrote:

Eskarina wrote: Being a atheist, however, I'd have no problem on pissing on religious books if I thought it would stop abuse in the name of said religion.

I actually have an issue with this. All I see that doing is ticking off people and closing their minds to any sort of discourse. Especially for people who have religion as an integral part of their lives how do you come back from that?

(assuming you want to of course)

Kirbmarc wrote:

Steersman wrote: Although I hope you'll provide a reasonably fair synopsis of my argument if you describe it in any detail.

Give me a succinct (300-400 characters long) exposition of your argument that you can find suitable to be sent to Croom and I'll quote it verbatim.

Steersman wrote:

Kirbmarc wrote:

Steersman wrote: Although I hope you'll provide a reasonably fair synopsis of my argument if you describe it in any detail.

Give me a succinct (300-400 characters long) exposition of your argument that you can find suitable to be sent to Croom and I'll quote it verbatim.

Will do. Within what sort of time-frame?

James Caruthers wrote:

Steersman wrote: I actually have Idries Shah's The Sufis somewhere, although I haven't had the chance to more than glance through it.

Fucking seriously? :lol:

How about reading one of those books, you illiterate pleb? Go learn what the fuck Sufis are before you spout off about how Muslims who won't piss on their holy book (which no religious person will do) should be deported.

And differentiating between those was largely my point about "pissing and mass deportation", the former of which is of course largely hyperbolic, and the latter of which may be somewhat impractical. However, if the Islamic community isn't able to rein-in the whackos, those who think that their "divine authority" trumps secular ones, if push comes to shove, then I can see that many more are likely to consider banning Muslim immigration in general, or that mass deportation is the lesser of the evils.

"And differentiating between those was largely my point about "pissing and mass deportation", the former of which is of course largely hyperbolic, and the latter of which may be somewhat impractical. However, if the Black community isn't able to rein-in the violent thugs, those who think that their "slave history" trumps white culture, if push comes to shove, then I can see that many more white people are likely to consider banning Black immigration in general, or that mass deportation back to Africa is the lesser of the evils."

Fixed.

James Caruthers wrote:Both links are to wikipedia articles.

Well played, Steers.

How long, ye simple ones, will ye love simplicity? and the scorners delight in their scorning, and fools hate knowledge? Proverbs 1:22

Steersman wrote:

James Caruthers wrote:Both links are to wikipedia articles.

Well played, Steers.

How long, ye simple ones, will ye love simplicity? and the scorners delight in their scorning, and fools hate knowledge? Proverbs 1:22

Even you suggested or quoted a prof to the effect that Wikipedia is frequently a good place to start. Which you clearly need. One generally needs to crawl before trying to trying to walk, much less run.

Steersman wrote:But I think the best example or case is that afforded by the epithet "cunt": one might reasonably argue or suggest that the word might well have started off as insult or as a "disparaging term" for all women, even if implicitly, but that it has, through the magic of reappropriation, been redefined to apply only to those women who have "degraded the [female] community through" particularly obnoxious behaviour. And which has then been utilitized by the out-group to target both those individuals in the female in-group, and those in the out-group.

Wikipedia wrote:The earliest known use of the word, according to the Oxford English Dictionary, was as a placename for the London street Gropecunt Lane, c 1230.

Wikipedia wrote:Use of the word as a term of abuse is relatively recent, dating from the late nineteenth century. Reflecting different national usages, cunt is described as "an unpleasant or stupid person" in the Compact Oxford English Dictionary, whereas Merriam-Webster has a usage of the term as "usually disparaging and obscene: woman",noting that it is used in the U.S. as "an offensive way to refer to a woman"; and the Macquarie Dictionary of Australian English gives "a contemptible person." When used with a positive qualifier (good, funny, clever, etc.) in Britain, New Zealand, and Australia, it can convey a positive sense of the object or person referred to.

The word appears to have not been strongly taboo in the Middle Ages, but became taboo towards the end of the eighteenth century, and was then not generally admissible in print until the latter part of the twentieth century. The term has various derivative senses, including adjective and verb uses.

Wikipedia wrote:Cunt has been attested in its anatomical meaning since at least the 13th century. While Francis Grose's 1785 A Classical Dictionary of The Vulgar Tongue listed the word as "C**T: a nasty name for a nasty thing",it did not appear in any major English dictionary from 1795 to 1961, when it was included in Webster's Third New International Dictionary with the comment "usu. considered obscene". Its first appearance in the Oxford English Dictionary was in 1972, which cites the word as having been in use since 1230 in what was supposedly a London street name of "Gropecunte Lane". It was, however, also used before 1230, having been brought over by the Anglo-Saxons, originally not an obscenity but rather a factual name for the vulva or vagina. Gropecunt Lane was originally a street of prostitution, a red light district. It was normal in the Middle Ages for streets to be named after the goods available for sale therein, hence the prevalence in cities having a medieval history of names such as "Silver Street" and "Fish Street". In some locations, the former name has been bowdlerised, as in the City of York, to the more acceptable "Grape Lane".

The word appears several times in Chaucer's Canterbury Tales (c. 1390), in bawdy contexts, but it does not appear to be considered obscene at this point, since it is used openly. A notable use is from the "Miller's Tale": "Pryvely he caught her by the queynte." The Wife of Bath also uses this term, "For certeyn, olde dotard, by your leave/You shall have queynte right enough at eve ... What aileth you to grouche thus and groan?/Is it for ye would have my queynte alone?" In modernised versions of these passages the word "queynte" is usually translated simply as "cunt".[22][23] However, in Chaucer's usage there seems to be an overlap between the words "cunt" and "quaint" (possibly derived from the Latin for "known"). "Quaint" was probably pronounced in Middle English in much the same way as "cunt". It is sometimes unclear whether the two words were thought of as distinct from one another. Elsewhere in Chaucer's work the word queynte seems to be used with meaning comparable to the modern "quaint" (curious or old-fashioned, but nevertheless appealing).[24] This ambiguity was still being exploited by the 17th century; Andrew Marvell's ... then worms shall try / That long preserved virginity, / And your quaint honour turn to dust, / And into ashes all my lust in To His Coy Mistress depends on a pun on these two senses of "quaint".

Wikipedia wrote:As a derogatory term, it is comparable to prick and means "a fool, a dolt, an unpleasant person – of either sex". This sense is common in New Zealand, British and Australian English, where it is usually applied to men or as referring specifically to "a despicable, contemptible or foolish" man. During the 1971 Oz trial for obscenity, prosecuting counsel asked writer George Melly "Would you call your 10-year-old daughter a cunt?" Melly replied "No, because I don't think she is." In the 1975 film One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, the central character McMurphy, when pressed to explain exactly why he does not like the tyrannical Nurse Ratched, says, "Well, I don't want to break up the meeting or nothing, but she's something of a cunt, ain't she, Doc?"

In American slang, the term can be used to refer to a woman, or "a fellow male homosexual".

Steersman wrote:Even you suggested or quoted a prof to the effect that Wikipedia is frequently a good place to start. Which you clearly need. One generally needs to crawl before trying to trying to walk, much less run.

Kirbmarc wrote:

Steersman wrote:Even you suggested or quoted a prof to the effect that Wikipedia is frequently a good place to start. Which you clearly need. One generally needs to crawl before trying to trying to walk, much less run.

The Wikipedia page on "Cunt" (from which I've quoted extensively in my previous comment) doesn't support your "nigger-cunt" theory.

DaveDodo007 wrote:

Pitchguest wrote: Well, at least if he adopted he wouldn't "discriminate based on genetics." Right, Tauriq?


http://i214.photobucket.com/albums/cc13 ... retard.png

Was that last awesome smillie meant to go #fulloolon?

Kirbmarc wrote:

Steersman wrote:Even you suggested or quoted a prof to the effect that Wikipedia is frequently a good place to start. Which you clearly need. One generally needs to crawl before trying to trying to walk, much less run.

The Wikipedia page on "Cunt" (from which I've quoted extensively in my previous comment) doesn't support your "nigger-cunt" theory.

Steersman wrote:

James Caruthers wrote:Both links are to wikipedia articles.

Well played, Steers.

How long, ye simple ones, will ye love simplicity? and the scorners delight in their scorning, and fools hate knowledge? Proverbs 1:22

Even you suggested or quoted a prof to the effect that Wikipedia is frequently a good place to start. Which you clearly need. One generally needs to crawl before trying to trying to walk, much less run.

"And differentiating between those was largely my point about "pissing and mass deportation", the former of which is of course largely hyperbolic, and the latter of which may be somewhat impractical. However, if the Black community isn't able to rein-in the violent thugs, those who think that their "slave history" trumps white culture, if push comes to shove, then I can see that many more white people are likely to consider banning Black immigration in general, or that mass deportation back to Africa is the lesser of the evils."

x_?_x wrote:

Guest wrote:HARPING ON: THE HYPOCRISY AND LIES OF TWITTER’S MOST NOTORIOUS ‘ANTI-ABUSE’ ACTIVIST, RANDI HARPER, PART 1

breitbart.com/big-journalism/2015/06/29/harping-on-the-hypocrisy-and-lies-of-twitters-most-notorious-anti-abuse-activist-randi-harper-part-1/

You beat me to the punch. Anyone who's followed GG even slightly probably knows who Harper is and has seen some examples of her hypocrisy and nastiness in action.

This first article seems to be written to the uninitiated. Once again, an "online abuse activist" is outed as a horrible little troll that gets away with murder because they are either a) female or b) espousing the right opinions.

Randi Harper's case is especially egregious as the original title for her resoundingly criticized 'blockbot' was originally called the "GG-Blacklist." I.e. - everyone listed should be shunned from the video games industry. Ironic that people who have no authority over a consumer market consider their opinions to be binding, such that individuals these outsiders disagree with should be blacklisted.

It's a stunning bit of arrogance when you really think about it.

And now for something different: fat puns. I really hope Harper can shed the weight of her heavy burdens.

Guest wrote:

x_?_x wrote:

Guest wrote:HARPING ON: THE HYPOCRISY AND LIES OF TWITTER’S MOST NOTORIOUS ‘ANTI-ABUSE’ ACTIVIST, RANDI HARPER, PART 1

breitbart.com/big-journalism/2015/06/29/harping-on-the-hypocrisy-and-lies-of-twitters-most-notorious-anti-abuse-activist-randi-harper-part-1/

You beat me to the punch. Anyone who's followed GG even slightly probably knows who Harper is and has seen some examples of her hypocrisy and nastiness in action.

This first article seems to be written to the uninitiated. Once again, an "online abuse activist" is outed as a horrible little troll that gets away with murder because they are either a) female or b) espousing the right opinions.

Randi Harper's case is especially egregious as the original title for her resoundingly criticized 'blockbot' was originally called the "GG-Blacklist." I.e. - everyone listed should be shunned from the video games industry. Ironic that people who have no authority over a consumer market consider their opinions to be binding, such that individuals these outsiders disagree with should be blacklisted.

It's a stunning bit of arrogance when you really think about it.

And now for something different: fat puns. I really hope Harper can shed the weight of her heavy burdens.

Yeah, this report was pretty much a nothing burger for anyone following this. Hopefully it will be background for some much harder pieces.

ThreeFlangedJavis wrote:It doesn't matter what you say to the Steersman, it sustains itself on the attention like a science fiction evil entity that absorbs the energy of whatever is thrown at it.

Kirbmarc, you are feeding the monster.

Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:

Kirbmarc wrote: In general in the middle ages black people were a rarity in Europe. People knew that they existed, you could see some of them in the capitals and especially in the commercial districts and in the courts

So, basically the same as today?




Ok, I'll see myself out...

Billie from Ockham wrote:As much I love Bernie Sanders, that isn't happening. So, it seems to me, the best thing for the Democrats to do for about the next year is keep bringing up Margaret Thatcher and Angela Merkel.

Aneris wrote:Steersman, or Kirbmarc will you please make a new thread titled “The Nigger-Cunt Hypothesis”? It's a bad idea to ask two people, so please Steersman, will you do it? I just ask. I was under the impression each time that steersman is about to get it, but after it turned into a running gag, a farce and now a fad, I think it might take even longer than expected (this is recursive, it will take longer than you expect, even if you take this into account).

ConcentratedH2O, OM wrote: Rachel. Dolezal.
Richard. Dawkins.
One is a woman,
Of African might,
Soul of the lion,
Skin black as night.
One is a white man,
Evil of course,
But he will tremble,
When the lion roars.

Rachel Dolezal,
You are my gal,
African sisters we are definitely,
Hot lesbian lovers I hope becomes reality,
Me licking your nipples while you writhe like a snake,
With delight and so tasty,
Like a nice piece of hake.

Richard Dawkins,
You are a man,
You cannot come into me,
For my vagina says No Entry,
The melons I like are not those called water,
For I do prefer,
The ones on a woman: a mom or a daughter.

Billie from Ockham wrote:

Shatterface as Guest wrote:I've done some research and apparently it isn't actually possible to electrocute yourself while utinating on a Steersman unless you penis comes into contact.

Shatterface

What makes it "impossible" to be electrocuted by peeing on something (with decent voltage) is the fact that pee usually breaks up into drops after traveling less than a foot from your penis. However, if you are blessed with (or maybe saddled with, depending on your point of view) an urethra that is capable of producing long-distance laminar flow, then it is possible.

[youtube]dNTEtI6iToM[/youtube]

Please note that one prerequisite of an urethra that is capable of laminar flow is high straight-line length immediately before the exit. Hence, males who are hung like horses and/or pee while at least semi-turgid are at the most risk, while young women are at the least risk. How's that for privilege, pisslord?

Brive1987 wrote:I'm going to call bullshit on PZs claim that the typical plumber has the same store of bon mots as a nobel laureate.

Naturally this depends on your definition of "interesting things to say"

Peez really has got his knickers in an ophie knot over successful scientists.

Brive1987 wrote:I'm going to call bullshit on PZs claim that the typical plumber has the same store of bon mots as a nobel laureate.

Naturally this depends on your definition of "interesting things to say"

Y.B. Yeats wrote:How far away the stars seem, and how far is our first kiss, and ah, how old my heart.

a plumber wrote:Did you know you have a dead mouse under here?

Aneris wrote:Steersman, or Kirbmarc will you please make a new thread titled “The Nigger-Cunt Hypothesis”? It's a bad idea to ask two people, so please Steersman, will you do it? I just ask. I was under the impression each time that steersman is about to get it, but after it turned into a running gag, a farce and now a fad, I think it might take even longer than expected (this is recursive, it will take longer than you expect, even if you take this into account).

Steersman wrote:

Aneris wrote:Steersman, or Kirbmarc will you please make a new thread titled “The Nigger-Cunt Hypothesis”? It's a bad idea to ask two people, so please Steersman, will you do it? I just ask. I was under the impression each time that steersman is about to get it, but after it turned into a running gag, a farce and now a fad, I think it might take even longer than expected (this is recursive, it will take longer than you expect, even if you take this into account).

Roger wilco; will do. In which forum would you, or others, suggest I create it? The “Periodic Table of Swearing - The Undead Thread” or “Freethought, Atheism, Skepticism and Science”? Or is that even an option? Or are there others?

Matt Cavanaugh wrote:http://imgur.com/qZfmMtF.jpg

That is so Peez' actual fantasy, it's creepy.

x_?_x wrote:

Matt Cavanaugh wrote:http://imgur.com/qZfmMtF.jpg

That is so Peez' actual fantasy, it's creepy.

Am I the only one fascinated by Watson's belly in that picture?

x_?_x wrote:Am I the only one fascinated by Watson's belly in that picture?

Bhurzum wrote:

x_?_x wrote:Am I the only one fascinated by Watson's belly in that picture?

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Gunt

(Simply calling it what it is)

KiwiInOz wrote:

x_?_x wrote:

Matt Cavanaugh wrote:http://imgur.com/qZfmMtF.jpg

That is so Peez' actual fantasy, it's creepy.

Am I the only one fascinated by Watson's belly in that picture?

I will have to check my thesaurus for synonyms and antonyms of fascinated, just to be sure.

AndrewV69 wrote:I was going to ask how you even know that this is a word but then I has second thoughts.

Steersman wrote:

AndrewV69 wrote:

Eskarina wrote: Being a atheist, however, I'd have no problem on pissing on religious books if I thought it would stop abuse in the name of said religion.

I actually have an issue with this. All I see that doing is ticking off people and closing their minds to any sort of discourse. Especially for people who have religion as an integral part of their lives how do you come back from that?

(assuming you want to of course)

How do you fell about the Piss-Christ? And the Danish cartoons which, if I'm not mistaken, led to the deaths of more than 200 people? How about supporting the Irish anti-blasphemy laws? And supporting Charlie Hebdo? Seems that "pissing on religious books" is only the paradigmatic example that summarizes and encompasses all those actions, and many more besides.

Oglebart wrote:

Aneris wrote:Steersman, or Kirbmarc will you please make a new thread titled “The Nigger-Cunt Hypothesis”? It's a bad idea to ask two people, so please Steersman, will you do it? I just ask. I was under the impression each time that steersman is about to get it, but after it turned into a running gag, a farce and now a fad, I think it might take even longer than expected (this is recursive, it will take longer than you expect, even if you take this into account).

I had just started writing a post to say the same thing Aneris. Tedious doesn't even begin to describe it.

PZ Myers wrote:Our colleague here at FtB, Tauriq Moosa, had enough of the nonstop harassment on Twitter, and has left the medium. This is a real loss; his was an entertaining, humane, and vigorous voice, which is probably why the #GamerGate goons targeted him and did their damnedest to drive him offline. And they claim to be on the side of ethics…while Tauriq’s greatest crime was to write a balanced review of a game (he liked it, and also stated some of its problems with race) which prompted all these people who say they are trying to improve ethics in game journalism to stomp all over him. They couldn’t come up with any actual ethical issues, and really just didn’t like a review that treated a game as less than perfection.

You can learn more about the harrassment at The Mary Sue and Inquisitr. There is now a hashtag, #IStandWithTauriq, which the gamergaters are proudly trashing — they’re calling him a racist, comparing him to Hitler, making rape jokes, and when I checked in earlier, some vile scumbag was flooding it with racist cartoon porn, so be warned. As always, there are piles of gg assholes disingenuously claiming there was no harassment, under a hashtag that revels in flinging shit and immediately disproves their innocence.
Once again, I am appalled at how miserably repugnant some people can be.

Aneris wrote:By now PZ Myers sounds entirely like the Nazi “Wochenschau”...

https://archive.is/vJFrN

Re: Project “Save Space” in Eastern Europe, attacking poles over human races.

Open this thread and you see a tendentious black and white image of Mr Moosa, as if he not only quit Twitter but ended his life. PZ Myers writes pure propaganda. He not only largely leaves out why Mr Moosa found himself in a controversy, he invents new reasons: people drove him off because this is what evil does to good.

PZ Myers wrote:Our colleague here at FtB, Tauriq Moosa, had enough of the nonstop harassment on Twitter, and has left the medium. This is a real loss; his was an entertaining, humane, and vigorous voice, which is probably why the #GamerGate goons targeted him and did their damnedest to drive him offline. And they claim to be on the side of ethics…while Tauriq’s greatest crime was to write a balanced review of a game (he liked it, and also stated some of its problems with race) which prompted all these people who say they are trying to improve ethics in game journalism to stomp all over him. They couldn’t come up with any actual ethical issues, and really just didn’t like a review that treated a game as less than perfection.

You can learn more about the harrassment at The Mary Sue and Inquisitr. There is now a hashtag, #IStandWithTauriq, which the gamergaters are proudly trashing — they’re calling him a racist, comparing him to Hitler, making rape jokes, and when I checked in earlier, some vile scumbag was flooding it with racist cartoon porn, so be warned. As always, there are piles of gg assholes disingenuously claiming there was no harassment, under a hashtag that revels in flinging shit and immediately disproves their innocence.
Once again, I am appalled at how miserably repugnant some people can be.

The article by Tauriq Moosa shows perfectly why #GamerGate exist. Gamers, internationally, have to deal with postmodern identity bollocks and put up with Anglo-American racism which SJWs demand that it's also discussed in a Polish game. The project could have a catchy name like “creating safe space in the east” or so. Aren't there thousands of US titles good enough for it? So Europeans as per SJW cultural imperialism have to portray a US society at all times? Or what PoC are the correct ones? Right, dark skin colour = one identity, and they are all a racial Schicksalsgemeinschaft, like the Whites. Hence Poland must fulfill the assigned White People duty as well, despite the fact that especially the polish weren't seen as “white” and never had much a say in anything up until recently.

How was is in the golden olden days of the movement before Elevatorgate? Was the US secular movement always this way, that nobody was criticized for blatant propaganda?

Aneris wrote:Let's say I made a game in a fantasy world. I would have to depict the environment, villages and people living in them.

Part One
“Yay, I can finally come up with my game idea, I'm sticking to MY culture, and I have some nuance, idea, thing that I want to show and tell”

• Social Justice Warriors: Racist! Where are the People of Colour. You can add griffons and wolpertingers and all these creatures but no black people?!

Part Two
“Okay, now I do part two. This time I add other ethnicities. I breaks my game world, because how come all those multicultural people live in rural medieval villages? But whatever, I'll just make it!”

• Social Justice Warriors: “Did you literally just blackface some characters? OMG! racist!!”

Part Three
“Hey everyone, we make part three. This time, I'll promise, it's going to be awesome, we include African mythology into it! You'll love it.

• Social Justice Warriors: You don't get to culturally appropriate other people's cultures! This is slavery and colonialism all over again! This erases the delegetimized marginalized and their stories!

Part Four
“Part Four is coming! We now hired an african writer for the african mythology! We listened!”

• Social Justice Warriors: And you expect applause for just being a decent person! Fuck off!
  [...] And what about the marginalized LGTBQRVX people of the Kamchatka Peninsula!? [...] Women are just objects in the game, you can interact with them and they aren't real people! Misogyny!

Part Five
“Hey guys, we make part five now! It's set on a fictionalized north-sea coast. Everyone is a white fisherman! u mad lol!”

• Social Justice Warriors: racist! sexist!

Skep tickle wrote:"Please" - at The Indelible Stamp, Tauriq Moosa's blog: https://archive.is/SvQM3
Damion & Iamcuriousblue in the comments
h/t @thewtfmagazine

Tauriq wrote:Maybe use this time to try get more people employed who aren’t straight white men.

Tauriq wrote:but please use this energy to get us jobs, get us recognised, get us safe and able to feed ourselves in industries we love but are told we’re not allowed in.

Tauriq wrote:PPS: People asking for evidence don’t care about evidence.

Oglebart wrote:

Brive1987 wrote:I'm going to call bullshit on PZs claim that the typical plumber has the same store of bon mots as a nobel laureate.

Naturally this depends on your definition of "interesting things to say"

Peez really has got his knickers in an ophie knot over successful scientists.

Is there a link for these comments please? I identify as a plumber/heating engineer and would be interested if the wanker wants to get personal :mrgreen:

Brive1987 wrote:Rest easy. PZ would much rather engage with a plumber than a laureate.

Sunder wrote:

Brive1987 wrote:Rest easy. PZ would much rather engage with a plumber than a laureate.

And I'm sure the plumber and the laureate would much rather engage with each other than PZ.

Sunder wrote:

Brive1987 wrote:Rest easy. PZ would much rather engage with a plumber than a laureate.

And I'm sure the plumber and the laureate would much rather engage with each other than PZ.