The Refuge of the Toads

Old subthreads
Spike13
.
.
Posts: 3014
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2014 3:40 pm
Location: Dirty Jersey, on the Chemical Coast
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#47161

Post by Spike13 » Tue Aug 23, 2016 6:55 pm

The Chrysler Córdoba .... Rich Corinthian leather....

Don't get me started in 70's AMC products.

AndrewV69
.
.
Posts: 7970
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 7:52 pm
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#47162

Post by AndrewV69 » Tue Aug 23, 2016 7:11 pm

Shatterface wrote:
jet_lagg wrote:Carrier is a PUA who thinks paying lip service to feminism will absolve him of his sins.

As for Alice Dreger, I'm not familiar, but just from reading this I like her. She's spot on about it being a culture clash, and I don't doubt it's irritating as hell to be hit on night and day. I get livid if I'm asked for change more than once on my way to the subway. "Who are these people? Do they think they're entitled to my money, or even my time?" From their perspective it's a brand new encounter and I'm just being an asshole. For me they're part of a series of a events that I think they should be aware of.
Dreger's book, Galileo's Middle Finger, is very good.

She's sympathetic to transgenders but does t shy away from the idea of autogynophilia as a cause: she just thinks we should be more understanding towards autogynophiles.

She is one of those regularly 'disinvited' from universities.
I started reading Galileo's Middle Finger recently. Got to around Chapter 4 and put it aside for later. Seems I want to be entertained more than educated right now because I am reading some really low grade Fantasy at the moment.

Welp, off to play some WOW and possibly some FFXIV after. Laters.

jet_lagg
.
.
Posts: 2570
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 1:57 pm
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#47163

Post by jet_lagg » Tue Aug 23, 2016 7:25 pm

Spike13 wrote:
deLurch wrote: BS SJWs aside, what do people here propose is the right solution for true intersex women (e.g. this woman born with female genitalia & internal testes) in athletic competitions?

* Allow them to compete in woman's competitions and call it the day?
* Only allow them to compete in men's competitions?
* Allow fellow female competitors to shoot up testosterone to be more competitive?
* Other?

Personally, I am leaning towards the first option.

The lords of the olymics will never sully their hands with this.

I honestly think that the scenario I outlined will be what happens. A massive uptick in female athletes caught on performance enhancers.

Records will fall in record number, followed by Floyd Landis/Lance Armstrong style shit shows.

Again, why fund all that money into women's events if it's clear they have no hope of winning.

This is going to be a dark era in women's sports.
Aside from wishing identity politics could be divorced from the the discussion (big surprise, as that's the one issue the pit is unified upon), I'm happy with the state of affairs. The people seen as women get to compete as women and the people seen as men get to compete as men. This will necessarily lead to an argument over whether or not what's "seen as" is approximating what "is". To draw a comparison, it's widely regarded that Phelp's wingspan and peculiarities in lactic acid build up give him an unfair advantage. Should we allow competitors to dope up or utilize prosthetics that even the playing field? If you had perfect knowledge of all statistical advantages you could design a game where everyone had a more or less random chance of winning, but nobody would be happy with that, for the same reason we're not really interested in who can win coin flipping competitions.

Keating
.
.
Posts: 1964
Joined: Fri Apr 10, 2015 3:18 pm
Location: South of anteater guy
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#47164

Post by Keating » Tue Aug 23, 2016 7:28 pm

deLurch wrote:
DrokkIt wrote:Today on social media:
https://scontent-lhr3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/ ... e=584AE419
BS SJWs aside, what do people here propose is the right solution for true intersex women (e.g. this woman born with female genitalia & internal testes) in athletic competitions?

* Allow them to compete in woman's competitions and call it the day?
* Only allow them to compete in men's competitions?
* Allow fellow female competitors to shoot up testosterone to be more competitive?
* Other?

Personally, I am leaning towards the first option.
Put them in the Paralympics with other 'special' people who have genetic conditions that prevent them competing as regular athletes.

Tapir
.
.
Posts: 598
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2012 2:59 am
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#47165

Post by Tapir » Tue Aug 23, 2016 7:59 pm

Don't feed Mokgadi after midnight.

Really?
.
.
Posts: 6341
Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2013 2:34 pm
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#47166

Post by Really? » Tue Aug 23, 2016 8:12 pm

jet_lagg wrote:
Aside from wishing identity politics could be divorced from the the discussion (big surprise, as that's the one issue the pit is unified upon), I'm happy with the state of affairs. The people seen as women get to compete as women and the people seen as men get to compete as men. This will necessarily lead to an argument over whether or not what's "seen as" is approximating what "is". To draw a comparison, it's widely regarded that Phelp's wingspan and peculiarities in lactic acid build up give him an unfair advantage. Should we allow competitors to dope up or utilize prosthetics that even the playing field? If you had perfect knowledge of all statistical advantages you could design a game where everyone had a more or less random chance of winning, but nobody would be happy with that, for the same reason we're not really interested in who can win coin flipping competitions.
As I said a few pages ago, there is no easy answer and no answer that is fair to all. Semenya and the others didn't cheat like Armstrong did. Their bodies naturally do what they do. On the other hand, it's not fair to ask a stock Toyota Camry to race an F1 car on a straightaway. I agree that this will make the SJW contingent queasy, as they need to further define "woman" in terms of biology. If any of us met Semenya, we'd call her "her." But the confusion comes when stacking Semenya and the others up to "XX" women or whatever you want to call them.

So it sucks, no matter how you slice it. Semenya feels she's a woman. She was raised as a woman. She lives her life (unlike some people we know) as a woman, so I don't want to take that away from her in any unnecessary sense.

On the other hand, Phelps's advantages seem to be mechanical and less about being "more male." If I had his wingspan, I wouldn't be able to beat a middle schooler in the pool. He, on the other hand, has done all of the homework and training. Same thing with Ryan Lochte, who seems to have the IQ of a Freethought Blogger.

I guess the point is that if you're going to split things up by male/female, then you need to define "male" and "female." And I find it somewhat unfair to have an "everyone on the planet!" category and an "only womyn allowed, shitlords" category. Tiger Woods could pick up the extra championships he needs to beat Nicklaus if he would simply become Tigera. Right?

HunnyBunny
Pit Sleuth
Pit Sleuth
Posts: 1404
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2014 9:54 am
Location: Blue
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#47167

Post by HunnyBunny » Tue Aug 23, 2016 8:23 pm

deLurch wrote:
DrokkIt wrote:Today on social media:
https://scontent-lhr3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/ ... e=584AE419
BS SJWs aside, what do people here propose is the right solution for true intersex women (e.g. this woman born with female genitalia & internal testes) in athletic competitions?

* Allow them to compete in woman's competitions and call it the day?
* Only allow them to compete in men's competitions?
* Allow fellow female competitors to shoot up testosterone to be more competitive?
* Other?

Personally, I am leaning towards the first option.
Yeah, excellent suggestion that first 'option'. It's not like women's sports are proper sports, nobody really cares. In fact, fuck it, stick 'em all in the Para-olympics, cos ain't nobody gonna watch it anyways. Only men's sports is important enough to bother with, AM I RIGHT?

MarcusAu
.
.
Posts: 7181
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2016 11:49 am
Location: Llareggub
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#47168

Post by MarcusAu » Tue Aug 23, 2016 8:45 pm

I don't much care about sporting competitions either way.

As long as any government that I am paying taxes to, is not investing (to very little return) in the training and sponsoring of athletes, I say let a thousand flowers bloom.

Just as it is with religion, there should be a separation of identy-politics and state. People can be free to believe whatever they want, but it should not be up to the government to define what a woman or a man is. Or an otherkin for that matter.

That said, I would not be adverse to private organisation having their own rules as to who can complete. Some might have no restrictions on performance enhancing drugs, or not separate by sex or disability.

I would be less supportive of an organisation that was excluding people on the basis of say - race. However, in the end, if they want to wear their prejudice on their sleeve - that would be up to them.

Really?
.
.
Posts: 6341
Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2013 2:34 pm
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#47169

Post by Really? » Tue Aug 23, 2016 8:51 pm

HunnyBunny wrote:
Yeah, excellent suggestion that first 'option'. It's not like women's sports are proper sports, nobody really cares. In fact, fuck it, stick 'em all in the Para-olympics, cos ain't nobody gonna watch it anyways. Only men's sports is important enough to bother with, AM I RIGHT?
Not sure how sarcastic you are being, but I think women's sports are often better than those in which men engage and I wouldn't want to see "women's sports" go away. Women's gymnastics are far better to me than the men's (as is the case for everyone else). Women's tennis is usually better than men's after the rise of the unreturnable serve. I wouldn't want to take women's track and field or basketball away, either. As I said a couple posts up, the difference comes when we try to un-define or re-define "women."

What's the fair way to do either of these? It's complicated.

MarcusAu
.
.
Posts: 7181
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2016 11:49 am
Location: Llareggub
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#47170

Post by MarcusAu » Tue Aug 23, 2016 8:54 pm

HunnyBunny wrote:
Yeah, excellent suggestion that first 'option'. It's not like women's sports are proper sports, nobody really cares. In fact, fuck it, stick 'em all in the Para-olympics, cos ain't nobody gonna watch it anyways. Only men's sports is important enough to bother with, AM I RIGHT?
I'm sure that women can wink a tiddly with the best of them.

HunnyBunny
Pit Sleuth
Pit Sleuth
Posts: 1404
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2014 9:54 am
Location: Blue
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#47171

Post by HunnyBunny » Tue Aug 23, 2016 8:56 pm

Really? wrote:
HunnyBunny wrote:
Yeah, excellent suggestion that first 'option'. It's not like women's sports are proper sports, nobody really cares. In fact, fuck it, stick 'em all in the Para-olympics, cos ain't nobody gonna watch it anyways. Only men's sports is important enough to bother with, AM I RIGHT?
Not sure how sarcastic you are being, but I think women's sports are often better than those in which men engage and I wouldn't want to see "women's sports" go away. Women's gymnastics are far better to me than the men's (as is the case for everyone else). Women's tennis is usually better than men's after the rise of the unreturnable serve. I wouldn't want to take women's track and field or basketball away, either. As I said a couple posts up, the difference comes when we try to un-define or re-define "women."

What's the fair way to do either of these? It's complicated.

sorry should have included a [sarcasm=on, mode='you have got to be fucking kidding me you sexist twat']

There is no fair way, but one way you disadvantage 51% of the planet, the other way you disadvantage 0.001% of the planet. It ain't rocket science.

Really?
.
.
Posts: 6341
Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2013 2:34 pm
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#47172

Post by Really? » Tue Aug 23, 2016 9:01 pm

HunnyBunny wrote:
Really? wrote:
HunnyBunny wrote:
Yeah, excellent suggestion that first 'option'. It's not like women's sports are proper sports, nobody really cares. In fact, fuck it, stick 'em all in the Para-olympics, cos ain't nobody gonna watch it anyways. Only men's sports is important enough to bother with, AM I RIGHT?
Not sure how sarcastic you are being, but I think women's sports are often better than those in which men engage and I wouldn't want to see "women's sports" go away. Women's gymnastics are far better to me than the men's (as is the case for everyone else). Women's tennis is usually better than men's after the rise of the unreturnable serve. I wouldn't want to take women's track and field or basketball away, either. As I said a couple posts up, the difference comes when we try to un-define or re-define "women."

What's the fair way to do either of these? It's complicated.

sorry should have included a [sarcasm=on, mode='you have got to be fucking kidding me you sexist twat']

There is no fair way, but one way you disadvantage 51% of the planet, the other way you disadvantage 0.001% of the planet. It ain't rocket science.
The sad thing is that normal people like me are 90% with women on their Title IX/sporting complaints, but get labeled MRA's because they observe that WNBA players get paid far less than NBA players because the WNBA makes far, far less money. (Not to mention the fact that 95% of WNBA players couldn't make it in the NBA.)

But there's no problem with eliminating 100 year old college sports programs because we need to accommodate 100% of women who want to participate in collegiate sports and far fewer men.

HunnyBunny
Pit Sleuth
Pit Sleuth
Posts: 1404
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2014 9:54 am
Location: Blue
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#47173

Post by HunnyBunny » Tue Aug 23, 2016 9:10 pm

Man stabs 3, kills one, shouts Alluh Akbar twice in Queensland Australia.
Deputy Commissioner Gollschewski said witnesses reported the man used the Arabic phrase "Allahu Akbar", meaning "God is great", during the attack and police body-worn cameras captured him saying it when arrested.
The Aussie Police:

"This is not about race or religion. It is individual criminal behaviour."

Although it could be that he is French...

http://www.theage.com.au/queensland/fre ... qzw0i.html

I wonder if tendency to scream Alluh Akbar while dismembering people is listed as a symptom in the DSM 5

Really?
.
.
Posts: 6341
Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2013 2:34 pm
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#47174

Post by Really? » Tue Aug 23, 2016 9:14 pm

HunnyBunny wrote:Man stabs 3, kills one, shouts Alluh Akbar twice in Queensland Australia.
Deputy Commissioner Gollschewski said witnesses reported the man used the Arabic phrase "Allahu Akbar", meaning "God is great", during the attack and police body-worn cameras captured him saying it when arrested.
The Aussie Police:

"This is not about race or religion. It is individual criminal behaviour."

Although it could be that he is French...

http://www.theage.com.au/queensland/fre ... qzw0i.html

I wonder if tendency to scream Alluh Akbar while dismembering people is listed as a symptom in the DSM 5
A person who suffers from fundamentalist Islam must be accepted with open arms and we must ensure that his beliefs are respected as we treat him.

deLurch
.
.
Posts: 8447
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2012 6:11 am

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#47175

Post by deLurch » Tue Aug 23, 2016 9:18 pm

Honestly, I am thinking that the Olympic policy on testosterone levels makes more and more sense. Someone like Caster hasn't done anything wrong, nor engaged in any performance body tweeking. She was born and raised a woman. Intersex with internal testes.

So if caster can compete, what about all the other transsexual women? They probably don't have any more of an advantage than Caster does even if they don't opt to lop off their balls.

The only other alternative is to reclassify the requirements for women's Olympic competitions to 'XX' only. People like Caster would probably get the shaft. Allow her to compete in the men's division. But my guess is she wouldn't come close.

Someone is going to get the shaft. Either intersex woman like Caster or 'XX' women.

CaptainFluffyBunny
.
.
Posts: 7556
Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 8:39 am
Location: Somewhere in the pipes
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#47176

Post by CaptainFluffyBunny » Tue Aug 23, 2016 9:29 pm

Gumby wrote:Biggest piece of shit car I ever had was a 1982 Dodge Omni 024 hatchback. It was horribly engineered and the carburetor would suck up oil vapors, thereby clogging it up. I had to take it in almost weekly to get the carb cleaned out, but even that didn't stop the tendency to stall at every red light and stop sign. When at a red light I always had to shift into neutral and rev the engine until the light turned green. A practice which eventually made the transmission disintegrate. I ended up junking that car, after spending an obscene amount to keep it running. I hope it's being tortured by car satan in car hell.
I had a 1964 Plymouth Valiant for my first car. $100. Slant six, push-button transmission. I ran the hell out of that thing for four years, only repair was fixing a radiator leak. Lotta memories from that old thing. Wish I still had it.

katamari Damassi
.
.
Posts: 5414
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 10:32 am
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#47177

Post by katamari Damassi » Tue Aug 23, 2016 9:33 pm

Really? wrote:

Translation of the quote you isolated: "These sexist assholes won't stop calling me names, those pieces of shit. Every time I read one of the threats they direct at me, I just want to rip their heads of and hack their social media."
No, Dreger is cool. A lot of the harassment she gets is from trans activists upset at her book.

MarcusAu
.
.
Posts: 7181
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2016 11:49 am
Location: Llareggub
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#47178

Post by MarcusAu » Tue Aug 23, 2016 10:53 pm

Katamari - you seem somewhat irregular. How is everything going?

piginthecity
.
.
Posts: 1003
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2012 9:20 am
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#47179

Post by piginthecity » Tue Aug 23, 2016 11:08 pm

jet_lagg wrote:
Sometimes straight men on Twitter start a professional conversation with me. They admire my work. They talk shop in a spirited and friendly fashion. And then they start DM’ing to talk. And then they hit on me.

A man friend of mine told me, “The problem is you have an attractive photo and you talk about sex all the time.” Uh. So I changed my photo to my rat’s, and I started talking less about my sex life and restricting myself to talking about sex research. (Too bad, though. Some of my best tweets were things like: “Sex in middle age—when you ask to be on top so you can get the FitBit credit.”)

That slowed down the problem, but it hasn’t ended it. And yeah, I know a lot of my feminist sisters will want to call this sexual harassment, but I think it’s really more like a culture clash, one that has to do with innate sex differences. Men tend to see the whole world as a safe place to look for sex. And I’m a woman who writes openly about sex, so they think I’m comfortable being solicited.
Carrier is a PUA who thinks paying lip service to feminism will absolve him of his sins.

As for Alice Dreger, I'm not familiar, but just from reading this I like her. She's spot on about it being a culture clash, and I don't doubt it's irritating as hell to be hit on night and day. I get livid if I'm asked for change more than once on my way to the subway. "Who are these people? Do they think they're entitled to my money, or even my time?" From their perspective it's a brand new encounter and I'm just being an asshole. For me they're part of a series of a events that I think they should be aware of.
(Bolding in Dreger quote is mine)

Yes, she is right about the culture clash. That's a good way to look at it. I'd take it a little bit further, though, focussing on the part I've bolded. The culture clash is partly to do with the way men tend to look at sex in the abstract which can be separated from the emotional or relationship side but women don't.

Hence, from the point of view of the man she's talking about, they are not actually soliciting her personally, but are rather saying "As part of this interesting conversation I'd like to point out that judging by your picture and the way you talk I find you sexually appealing and am experiencing an urge to let you know about this in either a subtle or an unsubtle way and would quite enjoy your response to this circumstance which is acknowledging myself as a sexual being."

Wheareas, Alice is hearing "Now that we have talked about sex in the abstract, I now want to close that conversation and start a completely different one about the possibility of me (insert name here) getting on a plane, coming to your house and engaging in sex with you. The rest of this conversation is merely a coded and tacit offer of the above. If you don't want to go down this road with me you're sooner or later going to have to do the somewhat taxing work of declining this offer without hurting my feelings."

In other words, the men still think they are talking about sex. Albeit slightly 'getting off' on it. Alice thinks they have stopped talking about it and started hitting on her instead.

piginthecity
.
.
Posts: 1003
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2012 9:20 am
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#47180

Post by piginthecity » Tue Aug 23, 2016 11:10 pm

MarcusAu wrote:Katamari - you seem somewhat irregular. How is everything going?
You Dulcolax salespeople are never off duty, eh Marcus !

MarcusAu
.
.
Posts: 7181
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2016 11:49 am
Location: Llareggub
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#47181

Post by MarcusAu » Tue Aug 23, 2016 11:22 pm

piginthecity wrote:
MarcusAu wrote:Katamari - you seem somewhat irregular. How is everything going?
You Dulcolax salespeople are never off duty, eh Marcus !
I like to keep my hand in.

MarcusAu
.
.
Posts: 7181
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2016 11:49 am
Location: Llareggub
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#47182

Post by MarcusAu » Wed Aug 24, 2016 12:39 am

If I'm going to pitkill - I would prefer it to be on a musical note:

[youtube]
[/youtube]

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

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#47183

Post by paddybrown » Wed Aug 24, 2016 1:05 am

piginthecity wrote:
jet_lagg wrote:
Sometimes straight men on Twitter start a professional conversation with me. They admire my work. They talk shop in a spirited and friendly fashion. And then they start DM’ing to talk. And then they hit on me.

A man friend of mine told me, “The problem is you have an attractive photo and you talk about sex all the time.” Uh. So I changed my photo to my rat’s, and I started talking less about my sex life and restricting myself to talking about sex research. (Too bad, though. Some of my best tweets were things like: “Sex in middle age—when you ask to be on top so you can get the FitBit credit.”)

That slowed down the problem, but it hasn’t ended it. And yeah, I know a lot of my feminist sisters will want to call this sexual harassment, but I think it’s really more like a culture clash, one that has to do with innate sex differences. Men tend to see the whole world as a safe place to look for sex. And I’m a woman who writes openly about sex, so they think I’m comfortable being solicited.
Carrier is a PUA who thinks paying lip service to feminism will absolve him of his sins.

As for Alice Dreger, I'm not familiar, but just from reading this I like her. She's spot on about it being a culture clash, and I don't doubt it's irritating as hell to be hit on night and day. I get livid if I'm asked for change more than once on my way to the subway. "Who are these people? Do they think they're entitled to my money, or even my time?" From their perspective it's a brand new encounter and I'm just being an asshole. For me they're part of a series of a events that I think they should be aware of.
(Bolding in Dreger quote is mine)

Yes, she is right about the culture clash. That's a good way to look at it. I'd take it a little bit further, though, focussing on the part I've bolded. The culture clash is partly to do with the way men tend to look at sex in the abstract which can be separated from the emotional or relationship side but women don't.

Hence, from the point of view of the man she's talking about, they are not actually soliciting her personally, but are rather saying "As part of this interesting conversation I'd like to point out that judging by your picture and the way you talk I find you sexually appealing and am experiencing an urge to let you know about this in either a subtle or an unsubtle way and would quite enjoy your response to this circumstance which is acknowledging myself as a sexual being."

Wheareas, Alice is hearing "Now that we have talked about sex in the abstract, I now want to close that conversation and start a completely different one about the possibility of me (insert name here) getting on a plane, coming to your house and engaging in sex with you. The rest of this conversation is merely a coded and tacit offer of the above. If you don't want to go down this road with me you're sooner or later going to have to do the somewhat taxing work of declining this offer without hurting my feelings."

In other words, the men still think they are talking about sex. Albeit slightly 'getting off' on it. Alice thinks they have stopped talking about it and started hitting on her instead.
I think what happens from the male point of view is, you encounter a woman who asserts her right to talk openly about sex without being judged or shamed for it, and think "this is a woman with whom I can talk about sex without being judged or shamed". And you're wrong, because double standards.

Phil_Giordana_FCD
.
.
Posts: 11862
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 10:56 pm
Location: Nice, France
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#47184

Post by Phil_Giordana_FCD » Wed Aug 24, 2016 1:06 am

deLurch wrote: BS SJWs aside, what do people here propose is the right solution for true intersex women (e.g. this woman born with female genitalia & internal testes) in athletic competitions?

* Allow them to compete in woman's competitions and call it the day?
* Only allow them to compete in men's competitions?
* Allow fellow female competitors to shoot up testosterone to be more competitive?
* Other?

Personally, I am leaning towards the first option.
Allow them to compete in woman's competitions, but if their performance is too far ahead of what you'd expect from the usual top times for women in previous events, don't grant the Gold. Maybe a blue ribbon for participating...

DrokkIt
.
.
Posts: 1327
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 4:01 pm
Location: Brit-Cit
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#47185

Post by DrokkIt » Wed Aug 24, 2016 1:14 am

deLurch wrote:Honestly, I am thinking that the Olympic policy on testosterone levels makes more and more sense. Someone like Caster hasn't done anything wrong, nor engaged in any performance body tweeking. She was born and raised a woman. Intersex with internal testes.

So if caster can compete, what about all the other transsexual women? They probably don't have any more of an advantage than Caster does even if they don't opt to lop off their balls.

The only other alternative is to reclassify the requirements for women's Olympic competitions to 'XX' only. People like Caster would probably get the shaft. Allow her to compete in the men's division. But my guess is she wouldn't come close.

Someone is going to get the shaft. Either intersex woman like Caster or 'XX' women.
As far as I understand it, having been a man or having matured with high testosterone levels gives one body proportions that are mechanically advantageous- hip height, shoulder to waist ratios etc.
Ceasing to produce testosterone might well remove the performance increasing aspects, but you'd still have the physical ones.

MarcusAu
.
.
Posts: 7181
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2016 11:49 am
Location: Llareggub
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#47186

Post by MarcusAu » Wed Aug 24, 2016 1:17 am

Participants could identify themselves as lying outside of the gender norms by wearing something of a particular shape and colour.

Similarly, people wanting special treatment on the basis of their religion could wear a symbol.

For maximum efficiency - the precise details could be worked out by the government.

Steersman
.
.
Posts: 10154
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 8:58 pm
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#47187

Post by Steersman » Wed Aug 24, 2016 1:19 am

gurugeorge wrote:[Post 46401]
Steersman wrote:Although as a bit of a quibble, I think that "saying that an objective reality exists" is somewhat of a premise rather than an iron-clad fact. Seems to make much more sense than any alternatives on tap, and there seems to be many facts to support the contention, but I don't know that it's actually been proven in any sense similar to what you'd find in geometry or algebra.
Since I'm particularly interested in the philosophy behind this, I'll chip in here. ….
Bit late, but better late than never. First, thanks for the thumbnail sketch, the Coles Notes overview. :-) However (incoming qualifications!), a quibble or two:
gurugeorge wrote:The problem is that the modern philosophy of the 17th and 18th centuries (Descartes, Berkeley, Locke, Leibniz, Hume, Kant, etc.) painted itself into a corner, a corner called "representationalism", i.e. the idea that what we perceive in the first instance isn't things which exist independently of us, but intermediary representations that are part of us ("sense-data", "qualia", etc.). Think of it like we have a painting in our "minds" (whatever they are) and that painting "represents" reality in some way.

That idea initially seemed plausible (as it arose partly from considerations of art re. perspective, partly from the general scientific development of the day) but the trouble is it leads directly to an un-answerable global scepticism, because the gap between representation and reality a) is logically unbridgeable (no way of proving that the painting truly represents what's "out there"), and b) leads to a mind/body dualism (the stuff of the painting must be "mental", different from the stuff that's "out there").

Now counter to this, there's always been a strain in philosophy that disagreed with the very idea of representationalism, that held we are directly aware of a mind-independent reality, that what we perceive in the first instance is that mind-independent reality. ….
“On the one hand you have A, and on the other you have B. And if you put them together then on the one hand you have the other.” So to speak. :-)

Somewhat of a jest but one, I think, that illustrates a central problem of not only philosophy but also of much else including politics and religion – and probably sex too. And that is the tendency to paint things as either black or white – you probably know that Kierkegaard wrote a book titled Either/Or for which he was apparently mocked by the street urchins of Copenhagen (clever lads and lasses) – rather than trying to find a workable shade of gray: more interested in thesis and antithesis than synthesis. Arguably the essence of David Smalley’s recent post.

But in the case in question – representationalism versus, I assume, “direct realism” – I kind of expect that there are a few flies in each of those ointments, that each of them are somewhat abstractions even if there might be more than a little bit of substance under each of their hoods. And, in the case of representationalism, I think that your “logically unbridgeable” is an untenable assumption based, arguably or in part, on that either/or point of view. Aristotle – quoted in part because you’re using him as an “expert witness” :-) - said something that I think affords a bit of a way off the horns of the dilemma you’ve described:
It is the mark of an instructed mind to rest satisfied with the degree of precision to which the nature of the subject admits and not to seek exactness when only an approximation of the truth is possible.
Relative to which, Stephen Hawking and Leonard Mlodinow in their 2010 book, The Grand Design (haven’t read it yet myself) apparently coined the term “model-dependent realism” – which probably qualifies as a latest manifestation of “representationalism” – and argued that “the only meaningful thing is the usefulness of the model”. All our models, all our representations, are only “approximations of the truth”, but that in no way justifies the rather specious claim, made by the inimitable HJ Hornbeck among others, that “it’s models all the way down” (I suggested he test out his “theory” by jumping out of a 12th story window but he has, apparently, not yet deigned to do so).

But while it is maybe a reasonable conjecture that “models all the way down” is the case, the point about the usefulness of a model seems to spike its guns: even though, when we make a measurement of, say, a length of a bar we might not know its precise length but we would still know that it was between, say, 3.14 meters and 3.15 meters. Likewise with our models: the Standard Model of physics is, apparently, rather incomplete, and is bedeviled by some thorny questions but its “approximations” have proven to be quite useful in a myriad of ways: maybe arguably, a situation that would be unlikely to hold if those models were totally out to lunch, if they were totally incongruent with “reality”.

And it seems clear that the creation of the model itself is really a manifestation of the scientific method: a hypothesis is tendered and tested, and the results of the tests are used as feedback to correct and refine the model. And it is that feedback from “reality” in both the creation of the model and in its pervasive uses which at least strongly suggests the high degree of congruence between model and reality, even if the correspondence is not perfect: the proof is, more or less, in the pudding.

Maybe it’s true that we are “directly aware of a mind-independent reality”, but it seems clear that that awareness is badly flawed, quite limited, and consists largely of approximations, of models, at best: "through a glass, darkly". Seems best to aim for a synthesis of the two positions you’ve described.

HunnyBunny
Pit Sleuth
Pit Sleuth
Posts: 1404
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2014 9:54 am
Location: Blue
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#47188

Post by HunnyBunny » Wed Aug 24, 2016 1:20 am

paddybrown wrote:
piginthecity wrote: Carrier is a PUA who thinks paying lip service to feminism will absolve him of his sins.

As for Alice Dreger, I'm not familiar, but just from reading this I like her. She's spot on about it being a culture clash, and I don't doubt it's irritating as hell to be hit on night and day. I get livid if I'm asked for change more than once on my way to the subway. "Who are these people? Do they think they're entitled to my money, or even my time?" From their perspective it's a brand new encounter and I'm just being an asshole. For me they're part of a series of a events that I think they should be aware of.
(Bolding in Dreger quote is mine)

Yes, she is right about the culture clash. That's a good way to look at it. I'd take it a little bit further, though, focussing on the part I've bolded. The culture clash is partly to do with the way men tend to look at sex in the abstract which can be separated from the emotional or relationship side but women don't.

Hence, from the point of view of the man she's talking about, they are not actually soliciting her personally, but are rather saying "As part of this interesting conversation I'd like to point out that judging by your picture and the way you talk I find you sexually appealing and am experiencing an urge to let you know about this in either a subtle or an unsubtle way and would quite enjoy your response to this circumstance which is acknowledging myself as a sexual being."

Wheareas, Alice is hearing "Now that we have talked about sex in the abstract, I now want to close that conversation and start a completely different one about the possibility of me (insert name here) getting on a plane, coming to your house and engaging in sex with you. The rest of this conversation is merely a coded and tacit offer of the above. If you don't want to go down this road with me you're sooner or later going to have to do the somewhat taxing work of declining this offer without hurting my feelings."

In other words, the men still think they are talking about sex. Albeit slightly 'getting off' on it. Alice thinks they have stopped talking about it and started hitting on her instead.
I think what happens from the male point of view is, you encounter a woman who asserts her right to talk openly about sex without being judged or shamed for it, and think "this is a woman with whom I can talk about sex without being judged or shamed". And you're wrong, because double standards.[/quote]

Or, what happens is that someone posts this on a forum, and people decide that Alice had meant things she hasn't fucking said, hinted at, implied, mentioned anywhere in her original piece. And then they write a post about how wrong she is for saying the things she didn't say.

All Alice Dreger has said is that men dm her and 'hit on' her after a private conversation on a professional level' (please read that in a Carrier-esque voice). You lot have decided she's just getting men all wrong.

Alice Dreger is ok, I don't agree with everything she says, but she has my sympathy for being on the wrong side of the trans-cabal.

sp0tlight
.
.
Posts: 890
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2014 5:17 am
Location: Central Urope
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#47189

Post by sp0tlight » Wed Aug 24, 2016 1:22 am

rayshul wrote:One Punch Man is great fyi
Red few chapters of manga, still sitting on anime. Maybe today is a day?

Steersman
.
.
Posts: 10154
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 8:58 pm
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#47190

Post by Steersman » Wed Aug 24, 2016 1:31 am

deLurch wrote:Honestly, I am thinking that the Olympic policy on testosterone levels makes more and more sense. Someone like Caster hasn't done anything wrong, nor engaged in any performance body tweeking. She was born and raised a woman. Intersex with internal testes.

So if caster can compete, what about all the other transsexual women? They probably don't have any more of an advantage than Caster does even if they don't opt to lop off their balls.

The only other alternative is to reclassify the requirements for women's Olympic competitions to 'XX' only. People like Caster would probably get the shaft. Allow her to compete in the men's division. But my guess is she wouldn't come close.

Someone is going to get the shaft. Either intersex woman like Caster or 'XX' women.
Need to cut to the chase and go back to the dictionary definitions for man and woman, i.e, male and female humans, i.e., humans who produce either sperm or ova. I rather doubt Caster could produce either so should be disqualified. So let it be written; so let it be done ... ;-)

KiwiInOz
.
.
Posts: 4949
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:28 pm
Location: Brisbane
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#47191

Post by KiwiInOz » Wed Aug 24, 2016 1:40 am

HunnyBunny wrote:snip

You lot have decided she's just getting men all wrong.
#notallmenonthepit

Steersman
.
.
Posts: 10154
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 8:58 pm
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#47192

Post by Steersman » Wed Aug 24, 2016 1:46 am

HunnyBunny wrote:Man stabs 3, kills one, shouts Alluh Akbar twice in Queensland Australia.
Deputy Commissioner Gollschewski said witnesses reported the man used the Arabic phrase "Allahu Akbar", meaning "God is great", during the attack and police body-worn cameras captured him saying it when arrested.
The Aussie Police:

"This is not about race or religion. It is individual criminal behaviour."

Although it could be that he is French...

http://www.theage.com.au/queensland/fre ... qzw0i.html

I wonder if tendency to scream Alluh Akbar while dismembering people is listed as a symptom in the DSM 5
A tendency that seems to be present in a disturbingly large percentage of the Muslim population. Ready to consider closing the borders to them, and deporting those already here? ;-)

In any case, a couple of my tweets on the issue, the last one being a link to a video and a transcript of a woman Saudi journalist; rather remarkable in itself - some commendable courage being shown methinks. The lead paragraph in the transcript:
Saudi journalist and TV host Nadine Al-Budair recently criticized the "hypocrites" who say that the terrorists "do not represent Islam or the Muslims." After the abominable Brussels bombings, it's time for us to feel shame and to stop acting as if the terrorists are a rarity," she said, in an address that aired on the Saudi Rotana Khalijiyah TV on April 3. "Why do we shed our own conscience?" she asked. "Don't these perpetrators emerge from our environment?"


sp0tlight
.
.
Posts: 890
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2014 5:17 am
Location: Central Urope
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#47193

Post by sp0tlight » Wed Aug 24, 2016 1:47 am

Shatterface wrote:Yes, but the British capacity for being surprised by slight changes in weather is boundless.
We have a jokey saying over here, whenever the cities gets covered completely in snow and paralyzed: the winter weather (in February) caught the road services by surprise.

Keating
.
.
Posts: 1964
Joined: Fri Apr 10, 2015 3:18 pm
Location: South of anteater guy
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#47194

Post by Keating » Wed Aug 24, 2016 2:03 am

KiwiInOz wrote:#notallmenonthepit
#yesallmen

MarcusAu
.
.
Posts: 7181
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2016 11:49 am
Location: Llareggub
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#47195

Post by MarcusAu » Wed Aug 24, 2016 2:07 am

HunnyBunny wrote:
...

You lot have decided she's just getting men all wrong.

...
I reserve the right to disagree with anything anyone says even if they didn't say it.


[youtube]
[/youtube]

KiwiInOz
.
.
Posts: 4949
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:28 pm
Location: Brisbane
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#47196

Post by KiwiInOz » Wed Aug 24, 2016 2:19 am

Keating wrote:
KiwiInOz wrote:#notallmenonthepit
#yesallmen
#i'mallman

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

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#47197

Post by paddybrown » Wed Aug 24, 2016 2:55 am

HunnyBunny wrote:
paddybrown wrote: I think what happens from the male point of view is, you encounter a woman who asserts her right to talk openly about sex without being judged or shamed for it, and think "this is a woman with whom I can talk about sex without being judged or shamed". And you're wrong, because double standards.
Or, what happens is that someone posts this on a forum, and people decide that Alice had meant things she hasn't fucking said, hinted at, implied, mentioned anywhere in her original piece. And then they write a post about how wrong she is for saying the things she didn't say.

All Alice Dreger has said is that men dm her and 'hit on' her after a private conversation on a professional level' (please read that in a Carrier-esque voice). You lot have decided she's just getting men all wrong.

Alice Dreger is ok, I don't agree with everything she says, but she has my sympathy for being on the wrong side of the trans-cabal.
Julie Bindel is on the wrong side of the trans-cabal, and she's straight-up evil. I have no reason to think Alice Dreger is anything like her, I just think she's fallen into a common double standard when it comes to being judgemental of people's sexual desires, but just an illustration to show that my enemy's enemy is not necessarily my friend.

Keating
.
.
Posts: 1964
Joined: Fri Apr 10, 2015 3:18 pm
Location: South of anteater guy
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#47198

Post by Keating » Wed Aug 24, 2016 2:57 am

KiwiInOz wrote:
Keating wrote:#yesallmen
#i'mallman
#i'mtheman

HunnyBunny
Pit Sleuth
Pit Sleuth
Posts: 1404
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2014 9:54 am
Location: Blue
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#47199

Post by HunnyBunny » Wed Aug 24, 2016 3:16 am

paddybrown wrote:
HunnyBunny wrote:
paddybrown wrote: I think what happens from the male point of view is, you encounter a woman who asserts her right to talk openly about sex without being judged or shamed for it, and think "this is a woman with whom I can talk about sex without being judged or shamed". And you're wrong, because double standards.
Or, what happens is that someone posts this on a forum, and people decide that Alice had meant things she hasn't fucking said, hinted at, implied, mentioned anywhere in her original piece. And then they write a post about how wrong she is for saying the things she didn't say.

All Alice Dreger has said is that men dm her and 'hit on' her after a private conversation on a professional level' (please read that in a Carrier-esque voice). You lot have decided she's just getting men all wrong.

Alice Dreger is ok, I don't agree with everything she says, but she has my sympathy for being on the wrong side of the trans-cabal.
Julie Bindel is on the wrong side of the trans-cabal, and she's straight-up evil. I have no reason to think Alice Dreger is anything like her, I just think she's fallen into a common double standard when it comes to being judgemental of people's sexual desires, but just an illustration to show that my enemy's enemy is not necessarily my friend.
How did you decide she has fallen into a common double standard? She said nothing about the conversations she had other than she was hit on. There is no evidence to suggest she is mis-reading those conversations, because she never provided a transcript.

As for Bindel, straight-up evil is far too SJW. Why? Because she is a radical feminist? Because she supports women who have been abused? Because she is a lesbian who won't fuck men in dresses? Because she thinks sex-work is demeaning? Which one makes her straight-up evil?

Gumby
Pit Art Master
Pit Art Master
Posts: 5439
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:40 am
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#47200

Post by Gumby » Wed Aug 24, 2016 3:24 am

CaptainFluffyBunny wrote:
Gumby wrote:Biggest piece of shit car I ever had was a 1982 Dodge Omni 024 hatchback. It was horribly engineered and the carburetor would suck up oil vapors, thereby clogging it up. I had to take it in almost weekly to get the carb cleaned out, but even that didn't stop the tendency to stall at every red light and stop sign. When at a red light I always had to shift into neutral and rev the engine until the light turned green. A practice which eventually made the transmission disintegrate. I ended up junking that car, after spending an obscene amount to keep it running. I hope it's being tortured by car satan in car hell.
I had a 1964 Plymouth Valiant for my first car. $100. Slant six, push-button transmission. I ran the hell out of that thing for four years, only repair was fixing a radiator leak. Lotta memories from that old thing. Wish I still had it.
Most reliable car I ever had was a slant-six 72 Dodge Dart. Rusted out ugly motherfucker painted that classic Dart puke green. Ran great the entire time I had it. I miss that car, it was so easy to work on.

screwtape
.
.
Posts: 2399
Joined: Sun Aug 18, 2013 7:15 am
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#47201

Post by screwtape » Wed Aug 24, 2016 3:32 am

piginthecity wrote:
MarcusAu wrote:Katamari - you seem somewhat irregular. How is everything going?
You Dulcolax salespeople are never off duty, eh Marcus !
You know what they say: "if the bottom falls out of your world, take Dulcolax, and let the world fall out of your bottom."

And after which:
suppositories.jpg
(45.81 KiB) Downloaded 151 times

HunnyBunny
Pit Sleuth
Pit Sleuth
Posts: 1404
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2014 9:54 am
Location: Blue
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#47202

Post by HunnyBunny » Wed Aug 24, 2016 3:34 am

CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: I had a 1964 Plymouth Valiant for my first car. $100. Slant six, push-button transmission. I ran the hell out of that thing for four years, only repair was fixing a radiator leak. Lotta memories from that old thing. Wish I still had it.
We had a Valiant in New Zealand when I was a kid. Must have been around 71. I loved that car! As I remember it had the bench seat up front which I loved as the youngest of four kids forever stuck on somebody's lap in benchless cars. It also sounded awesome and I remember my Dad revving it up on the driveway, although I was only 4-5 at the time, so this may be not quite accurate. After the Valiant we got a Datsun and that sure sounded shit. And bucket seats up front, so back to sitting on Mum's lap :(

screwtape
.
.
Posts: 2399
Joined: Sun Aug 18, 2013 7:15 am
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#47203

Post by screwtape » Wed Aug 24, 2016 3:42 am

From WEIT, I see that Caster Semenya is an anagram of 'Yes, a secret man.' So now we know.

sp0tlight
.
.
Posts: 890
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2014 5:17 am
Location: Central Urope
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#47204

Post by sp0tlight » Wed Aug 24, 2016 3:44 am

My father bought Ford Taurus once from his boss. Another proof that Marxism had it right, the exploitation of working class is unparalleled.

I know nothing about cars and even I know how amazingly shitty this piece of metal was.

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

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#47205

Post by paddybrown » Wed Aug 24, 2016 4:28 am

HunnyBunny wrote:
paddybrown wrote: Julie Bindel is on the wrong side of the trans-cabal, and she's straight-up evil. I have no reason to think Alice Dreger is anything like her, I just think she's fallen into a common double standard when it comes to being judgemental of people's sexual desires, but just an illustration to show that my enemy's enemy is not necessarily my friend.
How did you decide she has fallen into a common double standard? She said nothing about the conversations she had other than she was hit on. There is no evidence to suggest she is mis-reading those conversations, because she never provided a transcript.
She's judging men for hitting on her. She's trying not to, but she uses the word "solicited" rather than "hit on", which, it seems to me, puts the worst possible spin on the exchange.

There is nothing wrong with hitting on people. All relationships and all sexual encounters begin with someone hitting on someone. The necessary ambiguity of flirting means that sometimes the signals are going to be misread and when one party (usually the male in heterosexual encounters) makes an unambiguous move it's going to be embarrassing for all concerned, but it's a fact of life. When I was young that was understood and most people tried to be nice about it. But we seem to be getting rather more intolerant of it these days, and saying "he hit on me" is enough for everyone to agree that he's done something disgusting and immoral.

The double standard is that women (rightly) want to be able to speak openly about sex as a natural and healthy part of human life, but some women retreat to the old-fashioned notion that sex is a disgusting imposition that men put on women when they express sexual desires that don't coincide with hers. We are (rightly) expected not to be judgemental of any expression of female sexuality, but we may not express our own when there are ladies present, or we're the worst kind of sleaze.
HunnyBunny wrote:As for Bindel, straight-up evil is far too SJW. Why? Because she is a radical feminist? Because she supports women who have been abused? Because she is a lesbian who won't fuck men in dresses? Because she thinks sex-work is demeaning? Which one makes her straight-up evil?
She's a proud misandrist of long-standing.

VickyCaramel
.
.
Posts: 2034
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2013 10:24 am
Location: Sitting with feet up
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#47206

Post by VickyCaramel » Wed Aug 24, 2016 4:37 am

jet_lagg wrote:
HunnyBunny wrote:
Skep tickle wrote:Alice Dreger is thinking of leaving Twitter (or, is planning to leave):
[.tweet][/tweet].[.tweet][/tweet]



Sounds like Alice Dreger has come into contact with Richard Carrier, PhD sleaze:
Sometimes straight men on Twitter start a professional conversation with me. They admire my work. They talk shop in a spirited and friendly fashion. And then they start DM’ing to talk. And then they hit on me.

A man friend of mine told me, “The problem is you have an attractive photo and you talk about sex all the time.” Uh. So I changed my photo to my rat’s, and I started talking less about my sex life and restricting myself to talking about sex research. (Too bad, though. Some of my best tweets were things like: “Sex in middle age—when you ask to be on top so you can get the FitBit credit.”)

That slowed down the problem, but it hasn’t ended it. And yeah, I know a lot of my feminist sisters will want to call this sexual harassment, but I think it’s really more like a culture clash, one that has to do with innate sex differences. Men tend to see the whole world as a safe place to look for sex. And I’m a woman who writes openly about sex, so they think I’m comfortable being solicited.
http://alicedreger.com/trolls
Carrier is a PUA who thinks paying lip service to feminism will absolve him of his sins.

As for Alice Dreger, I'm not familiar, but just from reading this I like her. She's spot on about it being a culture clash, and I don't doubt it's irritating as hell to be hit on night and day. I get livid if I'm asked for change more than once on my way to the subway. "Who are these people? Do they think they're entitled to my money, or even my time?" From their perspective it's a brand new encounter and I'm just being an asshole. For me they're part of a series of a events that I think they should be aware of.
It is part of life. Yesterday a 30 year old hit on me, it made me feel good even though it was a bit ham fisted. If I didn't get hit on I would be looking in the mirror wondering what I was doing wrong. But it is annoying as fuck most of the time, especially when some ugly loser is throwing you cheesy chat-up lines... my deep down reaction is, "How dare you, I am way out of your league".

But what really annoys me is having to do some work. Often flattery is thrown my way, the law of reciprocity means I have to at the very least respond by saying "thank you" and telling them they are very kind for mentioning it. Or I could be a complete bitch, either way it's my choice and I have all the power. It is an annoyance I discuss with my friends, especially the nasty approaches (because you do get "A white bitch belongs on a black dick" type opening lines), but I don't think it is something worth bitching about in public, firstly because it is just the way it is. Secondly I don't want to sound like I am actually boasting even though it seems pretty obvious that it is something the vast majority of women seem to go through to some degree.

First world problems.

Shatterface
.
.
Posts: 5898
Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2014 2:05 pm
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#47207

Post by Shatterface » Wed Aug 24, 2016 4:42 am

Bindel has proposed putting men in concentration camps.

If she isnt evil, who the fuck is?

Sunder
.
.
Posts: 3858
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2013 1:12 pm
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#47208

Post by Sunder » Wed Aug 24, 2016 4:44 am

sp0tlight wrote:
rayshul wrote:One Punch Man is great fyi
Red few chapters of manga, still sitting on anime. Maybe today is a day?
The cartoon is a condensed version of the first seven volumes. Might as well read through that far before watching.

Hunt
.
.
Posts: 3069
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 5:04 am
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#47209

Post by Hunt » Wed Aug 24, 2016 4:47 am

Just listened to the first hour of the Myers/Smalley debate. Ho-li-fuck, PZ is as nutty as I ever thought he was. Stay tuned until the last part about Ellen Degeneres' horrible racism by intent. PZ is truly a true believer. I will never write anything ever again about the possibility of him snapping out of it. The man is a robotic ideologue.

MarcusAu
.
.
Posts: 7181
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2016 11:49 am
Location: Llareggub
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#47210

Post by MarcusAu » Wed Aug 24, 2016 4:48 am

VickyCaramel wrote:
It is part of life. Yesterday a 30 year old hit on me, it made me feel good even though it was a bit ham fisted. If I didn't get hit on I would be looking in the mirror wondering what I was doing wrong. But it is annoying as fuck most of the time, especially when some ugly loser is throwing you cheesy chat-up lines... my deep down reaction is, "How dare you, I am way out of your league".

But what really annoys me is having to do some work. Often flattery is thrown my way, the law of reciprocity means I have to at the very least respond by saying "thank you" and telling them they are very kind for mentioning it. Or I could be a complete bitch, either way it's my choice and I have all the power. It is an annoyance I discuss with my friends, especially the nasty approaches (because you do get "A white bitch belongs on a black dick" type opening lines), but I don't think it is something worth bitching about in public, firstly because it is just the way it is. Secondly I don't want to sound like I am actually boasting even though it seems pretty obvious that it is something the vast majority of women seem to go through to some degree.

First world problems.
Check your privilege - these are not the sort of responses I get when leaving the house in a dress...or naked for that matter.

DaveDodo007
.
.
Posts: 1322
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2012 12:48 pm
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#47211

Post by DaveDodo007 » Wed Aug 24, 2016 4:50 am

HunnyBunny wrote:
paddybrown wrote:
HunnyBunny wrote:
Or, what happens is that someone posts this on a forum, and people decide that Alice had meant things she hasn't fucking said, hinted at, implied, mentioned anywhere in her original piece. And then they write a post about how wrong she is for saying the things she didn't say.

All Alice Dreger has said is that men dm her and 'hit on' her after a private conversation on a professional level' (please read that in a Carrier-esque voice). You lot have decided she's just getting men all wrong.

Alice Dreger is ok, I don't agree with everything she says, but she has my sympathy for being on the wrong side of the trans-cabal.
Julie Bindel is on the wrong side of the trans-cabal, and she's straight-up evil. I have no reason to think Alice Dreger is anything like her, I just think she's fallen into a common double standard when it comes to being judgemental of people's sexual desires, but just an illustration to show that my enemy's enemy is not necessarily my friend.
How did you decide she has fallen into a common double standard? She said nothing about the conversations she had other than she was hit on. There is no evidence to suggest she is mis-reading those conversations, because she never provided a transcript.

As for Bindel, straight-up evil is far too SJW. Why? Because she is a radical feminist? Because she supports women who have been abused? Because she is a lesbian who won't fuck men in dresses? Because she thinks sex-work is demeaning? Which one makes her straight-up evil?
That is because sometimes the pit falls into the 'Grannies in the wainscott' mode aka evolutionary psychology is true because becky and PZ oppose it. :roll: I have seen enough of Ed Clint to know he is a retarded wanker, basically no better than the SJW/feminists when it comes to rationality. Lefty/liberals need their gods just as much as any creationist Christian.

Though Bindel is Hitler without power so I understand where her opponents are coming from and this is coming from (Godwin is overused except when talking about Bindel.) someone who hates the 'anyone who disagrees with me is Hitler' argument.

feathers
.
.
Posts: 6113
Joined: Tue Aug 13, 2013 3:12 am
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#47212

Post by feathers » Wed Aug 24, 2016 4:50 am

Shatterface wrote:Bindel has proposed putting men in concentration camps.
That could be swell. Like an all-men's "fishing" weekend we could drink and fart and belch and piss out the campfire as we please!

HunnyBunny
Pit Sleuth
Pit Sleuth
Posts: 1404
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2014 9:54 am
Location: Blue
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#47213

Post by HunnyBunny » Wed Aug 24, 2016 4:53 am

Shatterface wrote:Bindel has proposed putting men in concentration camps.

If she isnt evil, who the fuck is?
She did? Or did she make a joke in an interview? I thought we were on he sceptical side of things here, not AVFM or Pharyngula style crap.
Men can be sensitive creatures. Last year I made a joke in an interview in response to the question, “What can we do to end male violence?”, a campaign I have been involved with since 1979. I replied, jokingly, that if men could not learn to behave themselves, it might be a good idea to put them into an enclosed space, modelled a bit like a holiday camp, with a choice of quad bikes, white vans or bicycles. Female partners, mothers and friends could visit, and take them out like a library book, returning them at the end of the day. This would continue, I suggested, until men could learn to behave better towards women.

Within hours of the interview going online, men’s rights groups were accusing me of wanting to put men in “Nazi concentration camps”. And they say feminists are the ones with no sense of humour.
You might not agree with her, but writing stuff as a rad fem makes her evil? Really?

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... -fertility

sp0tlight
.
.
Posts: 890
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2014 5:17 am
Location: Central Urope
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#47214

Post by sp0tlight » Wed Aug 24, 2016 4:56 am

Sunder wrote:
sp0tlight wrote:
rayshul wrote:One Punch Man is great fyi
Red few chapters of manga, still sitting on anime. Maybe today is a day?
The cartoon is a condensed version of the first seven volumes. Might as well read through that far before watching.
7 volumes I can do, let me put it on my "once I fuck off the office" list.

Shatterface
.
.
Posts: 5898
Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2014 2:05 pm
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#47215

Post by Shatterface » Wed Aug 24, 2016 4:57 am

If you can think about another group you could joke about putting in a concentration camp let me know.

Accusing me of behaving like a Pharyngulite is fucking retarded.


Sunder
.
.
Posts: 3858
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2013 1:12 pm
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#47217

Post by Sunder » Wed Aug 24, 2016 5:03 am

Gumby wrote:
Shatterface wrote:Jerry Coyne has cited Carrier as a credible source of the historicity of Jeebus:
As for J. Warner Wallace, author of Cold-Case Christianity and now adjunct professor of apologetics at Biola University, his book appears to be based purely on whether Scripture seems reliable to a detective (see here for his case). Apparently it does. But if the case for Christianity (or rather the divinity of Jesus) is best made by Wallace and Strobel, yet refuted by many others, including the Biblical scholars Bart Ehrman and Richard Carrier, then one should hardly commit one’s life to the doctrine.
https://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.co ... /#comments
The commenters are actually treating carrier as a reliable scholar, with one frequent commenter (Ben Goren) touting Carrier's work as objective and fair because Bayes. Lolol.
Ben Goren's a slightly improved Nerd of Redhead 2.0 prototype.

As has been said innumerable times, the key question if you're an atheist is "does any of the Bible's miracle claims stand up to scrutiny?" Biblical scholarship resoundingly says no. From there, the historicist/mythicist argument is just a niche tangent. But it's clear that a large proportion of the mythicist camp has a vested interest in their preferred conclusion, and like the project this onto historicists claiming they're giving cover to or are themselves secret Christians.

Barbie's Boyfriend
.
.
Posts: 762
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2016 11:29 am
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#47218

Post by Barbie's Boyfriend » Wed Aug 24, 2016 5:03 am

It is part of life. Yesterday a 30 year old hit on me, it made me feel good even though it was a bit ham fisted. If I didn't get hit on I would be looking in the mirror wondering what I was doing wrong. But it is annoying as fuck most of the time, especially when some ugly loser is throwing you cheesy chat-up lines... my deep down reaction is, "How dare you, I am way out of your league".

Am I outta your league???
006edited.jpg
(296.27 KiB) Downloaded 146 times

Sunder
.
.
Posts: 3858
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2013 1:12 pm
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#47219

Post by Sunder » Wed Aug 24, 2016 5:06 am

This is gonna be a chore I can tell.

Better get some coffee.

Sunder
.
.
Posts: 3858
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2013 1:12 pm
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#47220

Post by Sunder » Wed Aug 24, 2016 5:15 am

David's fans seem to have found PZ a chore to sit through.

I wonder if PZ's fans thought the same of David.

Locked