The Refuge of the Toads

[rayshul]

Is organised atheism dead yet?

[Brive1987]

So, I'm guessing is that her character is a lesbian, and for some reason that means that men can't find her attractive? Is that how it works?

This sounds like a job for a scientific study!

Now all we need to do is find a large collection of videos of straight women, and a large collection of lesbians to see if it is possible to find them attractive. Does anyone have any suggestions on where one might find such an archive? If what she is saying is true, then it might be somewhat rare to find. But search and review we must. For science!

-Solyent 6df

Your best bet is the lingerie section of the Target catalog. The gay gals have short hair.

[Brive1987]

This is Georgia. Charity comes from the church, not the state! No but yeah in a separate letter ( why they didn't just send it all together and save on postal) a second letter came from the hospital asking me to call a number so they can help me find a way to help pay for this.

My point was a lot of our foreign pitters just didn't understand why I was hesitating. I wanted them to see what uninsured people have to deal with.

That bill is an ultrasound, some blood work, couple of needles a small dose of medicine, and about 5 minutes labor of a doctor and nurse.

Will you be getting health care from your new employer? Or is that taking a few months to kick in?

-Soylent 6df

Maybe depends if I can afford it and yeah it takes a couple of months. One way or the other it doesn't effect this bill.

Luck your "labour" with the "nurse" ended after only 5 mins. Next time don't pick a medically themed establishment for your ball sack activities.

[Pitchguest]

Dana Hunter reviews the Ghostbuster movie. The best thing about it is there is nothing in it for men to enjoy and lots of great stuff for man haters.

So, my dear friend and fellow Orbit blogger Aoife has already told you what’s best about Holtzmann. She absolutely steals the show. She is 100% not there for the straight male gaze. I love that. I love that the only somewhat sexualized woman was for women. And I’m so sad I’m almost completely straight, because being Holtzmann is now my new life goal, and I just don’t think almost completely straight people can even come close to managing that.

Oh that and whiny man babies are assholes for not liking the movie.

So, I'm guessing is that her character is a lesbian, and for some reason that means that men can't find her attractive? Is that how it works?

Why would Holtzmann appeal more to women, exactly? And why would people draw the conclusion she's gay?

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/t6nhYEe-YUY/hqdefault.jpg

Oh. Right. Because she looks like a stereotypical dyke.

Way to be progressive, Dana. :snooty:

[MarcusAu]

Is organised atheism dead yet?

It's sure starting to smell that way*


*Not discounting the good work of Atheist & Atheist friendly organisations such as - FFRF, MFFRF, Americans United for the Separation of Church and State etc...

So...maybe.

[Brive1987]

Lucky your "labour" with the "nurse" ended after only 5 mins. Next time don't pick a medically themed establishment for your ball sack activities.

Ok that was lacking in empathy.

Sorry.

So did she find a pulse?

http://i.imgur.com/j1Rkjo7.jpg

[Malky]

Com I agree that the bill is insane and must carry a huge profit margin. As I am in the UK it is difficult to understand why the US Healthcare system operates this way as in the long run it will cost them more. Hopefully you can get a huge discount off this and a reasonable payment plan (i.e. practically forever). When your work plan become available is there a large copay with it?

[Hunt]

Go to financial and request charity care. They have certain obligations, depending on your state's laws.

This is Georgia. Charity comes from the church, not the state! No but yeah in a separate letter ( why they didn't just send it all together and save on postal) a second letter came from the hospital asking me to call a number so they can help me find a way to help pay for this.

My point was a lot of our foreign pitters just didn't understand why I was hesitating. I wanted them to see what uninsured people have to deal with.

That bill is an ultrasound, some blood work, couple of needles a small dose of medicine, and about 5 minutes labor of a doctor and nurse.

You know you could have just screamed very loudly at your scrotum. Works just as well as ultrasound.
Yeah, I'm sure they'll "help" you pay for it, like determining if you have any assets to sell, like your car. Whittle them down on the cost. Ask what Medicare would have agreed to pay, then tell them something is better than nothing. Then let the pit help out. Good luck.

[feathers]

Is organised atheism dead yet?

It's resting.

[Kirbmarc]

Is organised atheism dead yet?

It's resting.

Pining for the forums.

[CommanderTuvok]

Dumbest thing I heard today:

"Well Disney paid 4 billion for Star Wars and TFA didn't make it back, so that's technically a failure, and Sony can make money on sales of the older movies just like Disney does."

It is amusing watching SJWs desiring a Hollywood blockbuster to make big profits. SJWs traditionally virtue signal their opposition to capitalism, except of course, when it benefits them directly.

[CommanderTuvok]

Kinda shows how much Dana Hunter know about men.( I'm assuming Holtzman is the blonde with the crazy hair) I thought She looked pretty hot. So yes the straight male gaze is still in play. The fact she looked like a nerdy geek only makes the fantasy seem more a realistic possibility. ( granted I believe I read that she (Holtzman) is a lesbian, but, that's what suspension of reality is for)

Fail on that one Dana... Try again.

These internet feminists really have no clue.

Completely agree. I was mystified when I saw that. The Commander certainly wouldn't say no to unleashing some ectoplasm with Holtzman.

[Cnutella]

Ah, how the SJW ebegging schtick has changed. Anita, 150 grand to produce videos, and quits before done, some fatso gets (what?) 20 grand to produced comic stickers of fat people, and fails to deliver. Stolznow gets 50 grand before decided to settle before the money is all spent. Watson gets 9 grand because Radford asked her to remove a 2 year old post that no one had viewed in years, and keeps all but $20! Heina cons chumps for 10 grand for a book that will never see the light of day (and keeps it all, despite "hard promising" to return it!).

To be fair, Anita has recently upped production on the Tropes VS Women series and has pushed out two in the last two months (they just haven't been getting a lot of attention). I'm not sure whether they reflect the original set of topics that she promised in the Kickstarter, but they're still coming.

Of course, I suspect that this new diligence is less about meeting her originally stated goals and more about returning to what she knows after her attempt to raise money for her Ordinary Women series got a disctinctly lukewarm reception (it only made its goals because three or four of angel donors kicked in $75K or so in the last 10 days of the fundraiser).

[Kirbmarc]

Kinda shows how much Dana Hunter know about men.( I'm assuming Holtzman is the blonde with the crazy hair) I thought She looked pretty hot. So yes the straight male gaze is still in play. The fact she looked like a nerdy geek only makes the fantasy seem more a realistic possibility. ( granted I believe I read that she (Holtzman) is a lesbian, but, that's what suspension of reality is for)

Fail on that one Dana... Try again.

These internet feminists really have no clue.

No sexually suggestive imagery that can appeal to straight males. Nope. None whatsoever.

http://www.williambrucewest.com/wp-cont ... usters.gif

[Cnutella]

By the way, Ilona Staller is an anagram of Real Stallion. Is there something s/h/it hasn't told us?

Are you sure it's not Real Stalllon?

[CommanderTuvok]

Just realised. Wasn't Dana Hunter the one who had a massive falling with Ofie "transphobe" Benson? The pair of them had a dinner planned with Peezus, and Ofie had to cry off when the transphobia issue kicked off......

Fucking hilarious.

PS - Holtzman can lick the Commander's gun any time. Plus, looks like she's got a good grip.

[feathers]

Just realised. Wasn't Dana Hunter the one who had a massive falling with Ofie "transphobe" Benson? The pair of them had a dinner planned with Peezus, and Ofie had to cry off when the transphobia issue kicked off......

Fucking hilarious.

PS - Holtzman can lick the Commander's gun any time. Plus, looks like she's got a good grip.

Interspecies Pon Farr?

[screwtape]

I daresay someone already thought of this:

weightwatchers.jpg

(116.58 KiB) Downloaded 155 times

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

Why do they have reflective bands on their suits? So ghosts can spot them more easily?

[comhcinc]

So a follow up.

I didn't post that bill to ebeg. Just letting people know what the uninsured deal with in the US because it has been a topic of discussion. Let me see if I can answer some of this.

Skep looking back over the bill, I found where it stated that the doctor bills separately. So yes there is more bills to come.

Living in Georgia I do not qualify for medicaid. In some other states I would. I also don't qualify for automatic discounts on healthcare via the online government market place because I don't make enough.

Some people was wondering what the bill would have looked like with insurance. I can tell you on the last plan I was on, which was a pretty good plan, that emergency room visit would have cost me $100, but I would have just gone to either my doctor or an urgent care place and it would have only cost $20.

Oddly enough I am talking my son to an urgent care place in a little bit because he fell off his bed last night and I think he might have broke his arm (again last time he jumped off a chair). Because we are not completely insane in this country he is covered via medicaid (or medicare can't remember which one) and his trip today will cost us $0.

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

Also, on that picture the blond one looks more like Judge Doom for Who Framed Roger Rabbit than an actual, normal human being.

[feathers]

Why do they have reflective bands on their suits? So ghosts can spot them more easily?

So Sony's creditors can spot them more easily.

Also they look more like garbage collectors this way.

[KiwiInOz]

So just a follow up for those of you who was interested in my emergency room trip. Got the bill in today

http://i.imgur.com/mHEAg5v.jpg

This is why I was hesitate to go get my ball sack checked out.

We've got doctors here. Surely they could talk you through diy over the internet. No cost.

[Tribble]

As of now the box office for GB (both domestic and foreign) is $159,587,152 after 20 full days of release. The budget was $144 million, not counting the $100 million or so spent on marketing.
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?pa ... rs2016.htm

Sony Gives Themselves A Positive Review

One of the first positive reviews that appeared on YouTube was this review, by Youtube-favicon.png Island Arcade.
OK hey, sure, a positive review of the movie was almost an inevitability. And hey, maybe this guy legitimately enjoyed the film. No accounting for taste, but they do at least have the right to have their own opinions.

But some eagle eyed viewers at Furious Fanboys Archive today-ico.png(archive) noticed a few issues with the video. Like how this person never actually reviewed another movie before. Or that the account was created right around when Fembusters started production. Or how the account only has 350-ish subscribers, but somehow managed to gain access to an official Sony screening of the movie. And there are pictures of the reviewer with Paul Feig on his Twitter.

That's right: Sony actually produced a positive review of the movie themselves. Yes, they are THAT desperate. This wasn't the first time Sony Pictures did something like this: they invented a critic by the name of David Manning in order to give Sony's movies positive quotes to use in their advertisements. Sony ultimately was sued over this and lost (no surprise).

The YouTube guy denies and denies. But considering a complete and utter nobody got to review AND post before the review embargo dates AND Sony didn't shut him down with their heavy hand like they did with all the negative reviews... Bullshit.

You can read a brief synopsis about Manning here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Man ... us_writer) Which I think is funny that Sony got caught because studios have been doing that forever.

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

So just a follow up for those of you who was interested in my emergency room trip. Got the bill in today

http://i.imgur.com/mHEAg5v.jpg

This is why I was hesitate to go get my ball sack checked out.

We've got doctors here. Surely they could talk you through diy over the internet. No cost.

I don't know about the internet, but it would have cost less for Com to just book a flight here. In fact, it would have cost him nothing but the plane tickets. Couch provided as always.

[Hunt]

At least Dana Hunter seems to have given up her quest to battle duck misogyny. Pining for lesbianism is a step toward sanity from that, right. Right?

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

In fact, it's fucking depressing that tax-paying US citizens would be better off with a plane ticket to another country than going to a US hospital. Fucking shame, US.

[Tribble]

Dumbest thing I heard today:

"Well Disney paid 4 billion for Star Wars and TFA didn't make it back, so that's technically a failure, and Sony can make money on sales of the older movies just like Disney does."

Yeah I don't think they understand that Disney bought a property. Star Wars: The Force Awakens made $247 million its first weekend. It released to theaters at 100% of Box to Disney. That's right, if you went opening weekend, Disney got 100% of that money and the theatre only made money on popcorn.

I don't know the rest of the splits. But it did take in over $2 billion world-wide during its release. It cost $306 to make and $170 million to market. So, obviously it was profitable just a movie property. I just don't know how profitable the actual film was.

I have no idea how much they made in licensing, but Star Wars has always charged a hefty licensing fee and made tons of money on toys, games, etc. And, of course, we still have the inevitable DVD releases. The Director's Cuts releases. The Boxed Set releases. Re-releases on possible format upgrades (like from VHS to DVD or Vinyl to CD).

And, of course, the franchise is going to keep churning out profits as long as they don't screw it up. Rogue One is coming out soon and that's got a lot of buzz. I doubt it does as well as Star Wars, but I believer it will do well. Star Wars Episode VIII is in production. We have all the new books that be written. All the new character action figures.

It's like buying the US Mint and getting to print your money.

[Tribble]

As of now the box office for GB (both domestic and foreign) is $159,587,152 after 20 full days of release. The budget was $144 million, not counting the $100 million or so spent on marketing.
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?pa ... rs2016.htm

They better sell a fuckton of lunchboxes and action figures.

Well, they're not gonna get there on video games.

http://www.develop-online.net/news/fire ... cy/0222540

The game was a trainwreck. The Metacritic on it was 30 from gaming magazines with best being a 58. They couldn't find anyone in the professional realm to defend it except a few shills in the 'user' side.

[sp0tlight]

So just a follow up for those of you who was interested in my emergency room trip. Got the bill in today

http://i.imgur.com/mHEAg5v.jpg

This is why I was hesitate to go get my ball sack checked out.

Fucking hell, this is morbid stuff. :(

[Hunt]

In fact, it's fucking depressing that tax-paying US citizens would be better off with a plane ticket to another country than going to a US hospital. Fucking shame, US.

Basically, insurance companies have all politicians' balls in a vice. It's very difficult to fight against the kind of money we're talking about, that is fucking trillions of dollars, and I'm not even exaggerating. Obama had the chance to introduce a single payer options, but...wait for it... balls in a vice. Sanders talked the talk, but I'm pretty sure the same would have happened to him. Trump, well, Trump will never go single-payer, and Hillary doesn't have balls to put in a vice, but she wouldn't do it anyway.

[Kirbmarc]

Dumbest thing I heard today:

"Well Disney paid 4 billion for Star Wars and TFA didn't make it back, so that's technically a failure, and Sony can make money on sales of the older movies just like Disney does."

Yeah I don't think they understand that Disney bought a property. Star Wars: The Force Awakens made $247 million its first weekend. It released to theaters at 100% of Box to Disney. That's right, if you went opening weekend, Disney got 100% of that money and the theatre only made money on popcorn.

I don't know the rest of the splits. But it did take in over $2 billion world-wide during its release. It cost $306 to make and $170 million to market. So, obviously it was profitable just a movie property. I just don't know how profitable the actual film was.

I have no idea how much they made in licensing, but Star Wars has always charged a hefty licensing fee and made tons of money on toys, games, etc. And, of course, we still have the inevitable DVD releases. The Director's Cuts releases. The Boxed Set releases. Re-releases on possible format upgrades (like from VHS to DVD or Vinyl to CD).

And, of course, the franchise is going to keep churning out profits as long as they don't screw it up. Rogue One is coming out soon and that's got a lot of buzz. I doubt it does as well as Star Wars, but I believer it will do well. Star Wars Episode VIII is in production. We have all the new books that be written. All the new character action figures.

It's like buying the US Mint and getting to print your money.

Disney execs are anything but stupid. Star Wars is a cash cow franchise, and they're going to milk it for what it's worth. It's a long-term investment.

Many times I wonder whether today a lot of people have lost the perception that allows us to understand long-term investments of any kind. We live in the age of fast internet, fast food, quick changes of jobs and short-term relationships. We want immediate gain and pleasure, immediate social change, immediate improvements. In reality most things take at least some time to succeed. It's really hard to achieve a string of immediate successes, and many times you have to be grateful of partial victories in the short run. It's not bad to be ambitious, but we've come to point where a lack of immediate triumph it's chalked up as a loss.

[comhcinc]

In fact, it's fucking depressing that tax-paying US citizens would be better off with a plane ticket to another country than going to a US hospital. Fucking shame, US.

Ha you are right!
http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/2016080 ... f98e92.jpg

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

[Karmakin]

In fact, it's fucking depressing that tax-paying US citizens would be better off with a plane ticket to another country than going to a US hospital. Fucking shame, US.

Basically, insurance companies have all politicians' balls in a vice. It's very difficult to fight against the kind of money we're talking about, that is fucking trillions of dollars, and I'm not even exaggerating. Obama had the chance to introduce a single payer options, but...wait for it... balls in a vice. Sanders talked the talk, but I'm pretty sure the same would have happened to him. Trump, well, Trump will never go single-payer, and Hillary doesn't have balls to put in a vice, but she wouldn't do it anyway.

The thing is by "insurance company" it doesn't mean just the CEO's...the medical insurance industry creates a lot of well-paying jobs. People are not really happy about the idea of giving that up. Moving to a single payer system would probably mean a significant direct hit to the GDP because of that, for people who care about that sort of thing.

I remember reading an interview with Obama circa 2007 where he said that if he was going to build a system from scratch, it would be single payer...but American can't handle losing all those jobs.

It's not just the insurance companies either. Doctors and hospitals need staff to be able to navigate all the various insurance systems. In Canada here? Generally doctor offices are two person operations.

[Lsuoma]

Yes, a bill like that is crazy and what's more that may not be all of it - dunno what the itemized portion looked like but sometimes radiologist &/or ER doc's fees are billed separately from the facility (hospital) charges.

com, I hope Emory's Charity Care info linked here before you went in fave you reason to think you would qualify for their Charity Care...and, of course, that you do qualify!

My recent TIA visit cost $11K and counting.

[InfraRedBucket]

Why do they have reflective bands on their suits? So ghosts can spot them more easily?

The worse irritation of the costumes is that optical illusion created by the reflective strip in their shins.
"do my legs look skinny in this?"

http://i.imgur.com/sQyXq1B.jpg

[Karmakin]

I have to admit, I've become intrigued by what seems to be most atheists on Youtube turning their guns on Steve Shives, and I've looked into him a bit more to try and find out why. And my god, but he's a cock. Most of the attention seems to be focused on this video, where he complains that when he got into online atheism it was all about slagging of creationists, but now all online atheists but him are horrible bigots, not naming any names but <cough>Amazing Atheist</cough>.

[youtubePYirFeZBGwU[/youtube]

Key quote:

I thought yeah, this is a community built on reason and facts and science and empiricism, and we value objectivity and we value examining our beliefs, and examining the beliefs of others, and really honestly auditing what we think and what we say, and finding the truth no matter what it is, whether it's uncomfortable for us or not, and cutting through the cognitive bias that shapes so much of our thinking.

Shives must know what he's saying, on some level at least. He talks about "examining our beliefs", visibly realises "hang on, I don't allow any examination of my beliefs", and amends that to "the beliefs of others". And "auditing what we think and say" sounds a bit like Arthur Chu's Social Justice Stormtrooper post, where he says, "I rigorously manage my own thinking and purge myself of dangerous "unthinkable" thoughts -- "mindkill" myself -- on a regular basis."

He sounds like I did when I was still a Christian, but starting to suspect that I didn't believe it anymore, so I had to insist more strongly that I did in an effort to convince myself. And the main reason I tried to convince myself to remain a Christian was the knowledge that I'd lose friends if I stopped.

Shives comes across like a man who thinks he's trapped. I'd like to appeal to him here. Steve, you're not trapped by anything but your own pride. You know the shite you're spouting is wrong, and you also know now matter how fervently you spout it, it won't protect you when the Social Justice Gang turn on you, as they inevitably will. Look at Carrier. That's you in a few years. Maybe a few weeks. Maybe tomorrow. Join us, Steve. Come to the dark side. We have cake.

<blocked>

I mean that's the thing. I'm not a big fan of TAA videos, but I DO like TJ's podcast, Drunken Peasants. And one thing that's fairly frequent on that show is that they're kind of re-examining various political beliefs in one form or another, mainly because there's often disagreement. There's a LOT of nuance displayed among the craziness.

Shives' is coming from the particular feminist view that classical academic sociology has it all figured out, and if you're not completely 100% on board with that you must be a bigot. First of all, that's not going to convince anybody. Second of all, no. Society is constantly changing. The idea that any discipline can 100% figure out something as complicated as human societies is absolutely the height of arrogance.

And yeah. Shives' eventually is going to be forced to disagree with something. And he'll lose everything when he does. That's the way that works.

[InfraRedBucket]

Aplols if already covered but I was was a bit baffled why FTB was included in Carrier's legal sights so thought it might be worth reposting his reply to a question from his site. I might add I am not "August Berkshire" , don't know if its anyone we know or even a pitter.

AUGUST BERKSHIRE JULY 31, 2016, 1:11 AM
I am not a patron but perhaps you’d like to post and answer this anyway. You have offered explanations for many things but not for the following. As a point of information, I do not understand what case you’d have against the FtB and Orbit networks. The networks do not employ the bloggers, nor is there an employed editor who makes the decision to publish the posts against you. They are self-published. It would seem to me that this is not comparable to the New York Times publishing something but rather akin to a private citizen making an accusation against you on a bus. You can’t sue the bus company, can you?

REPLY

RICHARD CARRIER JULY 31, 2016, 9:40 AM POST AUTHOR
They both have statements on record that indicates that they engage in content control. And content control makes them liable, in the same fashion as, for example, the New York Times. The mere fact that FtB suspended my account demonstrates they engage in content control, as does the fact that they have and deployed an ethics committee to decide who can continue blogging there; they are therefore legally equivalent to a newspaper, and not to, for example, Facebook or Patheos. The Orbit likewise states that it is an operating collective that coordinates its activity among its content providers, and their providers run the network, which evinces similar content control responsibility; they also no doubt have the equivalent of an ethics committee; likewise on departing FtB one of their stated goals to us was to have more control over the network and who blogs there and on what. So unless they are willing to commit perjury, they can’t claim they aren’t collectively responsible for their network’s content. Nor do I think they would honestly try that, since it contradicts their values to claim disinterest in whether their members use the network for defaming other persons.

[Hunt]

In fact, it's fucking depressing that tax-paying US citizens would be better off with a plane ticket to another country than going to a US hospital. Fucking shame, US.

Basically, insurance companies have all politicians' balls in a vice. It's very difficult to fight against the kind of money we're talking about, that is fucking trillions of dollars, and I'm not even exaggerating. Obama had the chance to introduce a single payer options, but...wait for it... balls in a vice. Sanders talked the talk, but I'm pretty sure the same would have happened to him. Trump, well, Trump will never go single-payer, and Hillary doesn't have balls to put in a vice, but she wouldn't do it anyway.

The thing is by "insurance company" it doesn't mean just the CEO's...the medical insurance industry creates a lot of well-paying jobs. People are not really happy about the idea of giving that up. Moving to a single payer system would probably mean a significant direct hit to the GDP because of that, for people who care about that sort of thing.

I remember reading an interview with Obama circa 2007 where he said that if he was going to build a system from scratch, it would be single payer...but American can't handle losing all those jobs.

It's not just the insurance companies either. Doctors and hospitals need staff to be able to navigate all the various insurance systems. In Canada here? Generally doctor offices are two person operations.

I understand the argument. It starts to get ludicrous when the same people arguing that we can't lose the jobs turn around and then argue against Keynesian economics. As if having an army of paper pushers isn't pretty much the same things as digging a hole and then filling it in. Austrian economics; it's gotta be right because it's....Austrian?

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

In fact, it's fucking depressing that tax-paying US citizens would be better off with a plane ticket to another country than going to a US hospital. Fucking shame, US.

Ha you are right!

*snip pics*

Always. But if you ever need more medical attention, maybe consider the option. Pretty sure we could all bag in (sorry) for an overseas flight in case of emergency.

[Tribble]

How the hell is it 2/100? I'm not saying you're wrong, but I'm a little shocked. I'm an extremely boring straight male who happens to love people of all colors and stripes, so I've always embraced my gay acquaintances and I just find that hard to believe. Maybe I'm a sheltered weirdo.

The link to the Washington Post article on percentages in the US was in my original comment.
1.8% for men, 1.5% for women and 0.4% for bisexuals seems pretty much in line with most real hard core studies I have seen. Gay advocates had been say 2-5%, and has been slowly creeping up to 10%+ But these are just advocates trying to inflate their numbers to appear bigger than they really are. As if being gay has suddenly become a fashionable choice as opposed to a genetic pregestation determination.

As far as you experiences not meshing with your real life encounters, keep in mind that not every gay person is walking around with a sign on their heads, and not everyone comes across as a stereotype. The bulk fit in and are unseen unless you are looking for a hook up. Just like religion & politics, not everyone runs around constantly advertising their preferences. Not to mention available gay people tend to go to gay bars to increase their possible matches looking to hook up so they are less inclined to hang out at no-gay bars.

Queer Nation, ACT UP and GLAAD were pimping 10% back in the 1980s. That got knocked in the dirt over time and some of their spokesmen, later, actually admitted that they were lying in order to increase their political power.

And the same old playbook. Look at BLM.

In the US there are 1.1 million cops. Of the 1,000 or so people shot-and-killed by the police, about 40% are black (which lines up with the crime demographics). Of them, 96% were armed (or apparently armed) while actively resisting arrest. Like the guy in LA. Two-thirds of them were either high or mentally ill. The other 4% were tragedies made out of mistakes, bad-judgement and over-reactions.

Or just over one per month. Meanwhile, on average, just under 2 cops are killed by blacks every month. Yet the cops are the bad guys and blacks are 'innocent victims of white cop racism.' So, ultimately, BLM uses these small handful of cases to act as if there is this huge problem with 'white cop racism leading to genocide.' (And, yes, some BLM do claim the cops are committing genocide. They really need to buy a dictionary.)

Anyway, sure many cops are assholes. Most are not. And the vast majority never draw their weapon save for training purposes and certainly don't shoot anyone. Never mind being in the genocide business.

Meanwhile blacks are killing each other at a rate 8x greater than whites do in the white population. Yet BLM doesn't give a fuck.

[deLurch]

Living in Georgia I do not qualify for medicaid. In some other states I would. I also don't qualify for automatic discounts on healthcare via the online government market place because I don't make enough.

You don't qualify for automatic discounts because you make too little money? That is a strange way to arrange the system.

[Dave]

In fact, it's fucking depressing that tax-paying US citizens would be better off with a plane ticket to another country than going to a US hospital. Fucking shame, US.

Ha you are right!
http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/2016080 ... f98e92.jpg

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

The stopover in IST might carry its own risks however.

[Brive1987]

I'm saddened at the SJ low intensity shilling-for-Amy.

[VickyCaramel]

Is organised atheism dead yet?

It has become decentralized and puts out propaganda encouraging people to self radicalize.

[deLurch]

Hmmmm... just thinking over the possibilities of Brive's comment.
1. Amy Frank wasn't "in group" before this.
2. Richard Carrier was "in group" so no matter how this plays out, they still look bad, it is just a matter of degree.
3. Legal threats went out. They are more worried about having assets to cover their own asses. Even if Amy Frank wins or gets a stalemate, it doesn't mean it will help them.
4. They can always drop Amy and claim that she fooled them if the case goes south.
5. They got burned already by Karen Stollznow.
6. $3k just gets Amy the ability to talk to a lawyer & respond do Carrier's legal threat. It wouldn't be a decisive win.
7. Amy Frank probably hasn't given them money or asspats before. This is quid pro quo.
8. She sounds too much like Ann Frank.
9. Richard knows most of the dirt on the Atheist/Skeptic SJW crowd and he has been using it here or there.
10. SJW tactics only work if the target doesn't fight back.
11. They think Richard Carrier is just crazy enough to go all the way.
12. Amy Frank did not get approval prior to coming out with her complaint, so they could not plan, so she does not receive as much favor.
13. They are still planning.
14. Richard is already tanked no matter what happens from here on out. They will use back channels and private messages to groups who did not hear about this the first time through.

[Malky]

Yes, a bill like that is crazy and what's more that may not be all of it - dunno what the itemized portion looked like but sometimes radiologist &/or ER doc's fees are billed separately from the facility (hospital) charges.

com, I hope Emory's Charity Care info linked here before you went in fave you reason to think you would qualify for their Charity Care...and, of course, that you do qualify!

My recent TIA visit cost $11K and counting.

Presumably cost your insurance company? - or is that the Co pay?

[Billie from Ockham]

So, I'm guessing is that her character is a lesbian, and for some reason that means that men can't find her attractive? Is that how it works?

I'm come across many feminists who just don't get porn or eye-candy in movies and elsewhere. You mention that you find a certain famous woman attractive and they immediately shake their head and remind you that you'll never have a chance to fuck someone like that. At first I thought that they were just trying to kill my fantasy buzz. It slowly soaked in that they actually took the comment seriously and were trying to be nice (at least, in their mind) by reminding me that said famous hot woman was out of my reach and I should stop thinking about her.

If that's all that this were, then it would only be a curiosity to me. But it's important when it comes to things like video-games causing violence and porn causing rape. If you have no ability to fantasize, then you'll end up believing in those putative links. Why else would someone "indulge" (my new favorite word) in video-games and porn if you weren't planning to go on a killing and rape spree?

Or, let me put it this way: how many feminists play D&D?

[Oglebart]

My recent TIA visit cost $11K and counting.

TIA??? Things In Arsehole??

Too soon?....

[Billie from Ockham]

So, I'm guessing is that her character is a lesbian, and for some reason that means that men can't find her attractive? Is that how it works?

This sounds like a job for a scientific study!

Twenty-five years ago, when I was teaching a version of undergrad methods that required a project, one team did a simple experiment. They showed two samples of straight males the same picture of a woman, one group being told a bunch of stuff about her including that she was currently in a relationship, the other group told the same stuff except that she was currently unattached. They also showed two samples of straight women the same picture of a man, with the same two conditions. In all cases, the key measure was the rated attractiveness of the target. For the men, the target being in a relationship raised her score by about one point out of seven. For the women, the target being in a relationship lowered his score by about the same amount. The students concluded that men are competitive while women avoid conflict.

During questions (because every group did a presentation), someone raised the alternative possibility that men want a woman who is in a relationship because this implies a higher likelihood of her being sexually active, while women want a man who is not in a relationship because this implies a lower chance of the his being sexually active and, therefore, a lower chance of his having an STD. On the spot, we designed the follow-up study (but never did run it).

I can't imagine doing an experiment like this today. I'd be in my dean's office, if not losing tenure.

[Billie from Ockham]

Is organised atheism dead yet?

It's resting.

Pining for the forums.

:clap: :clap: :clap:

[comhcinc]

Living in Georgia I do not qualify for medicaid. In some other states I would. I also don't qualify for automatic discounts on healthcare via the online government market place because I don't make enough.

You don't qualify for automatic discounts because you make too little money? That is a strange way to arrange the system.

Your telling me. Basically it has to do with the way the laws were written. It was assumed by the federal government that states were take the medicaid expansion. The automatic discounts (which are tax rebates or something like that) kick in for people who don't quailfy for the expansion due to income.

In states like Georgia you are just fucked as before.

[Billie from Ockham]

By the way, Ilona Staller is an anagram of Real Stallion. Is there something s/h/it hasn't told us?

Are you sure it's not Real Stalllon?

Yes, I know that this is a sans serif comment, but it reminds me of another class-room incident. One student was named Iona Something. When verifying who was there the first day, I went through the list, but not only was "eena something" not there, but a woman named "eye-own-ah something" was there but not on my list.

I have stopped assuming that Americans know how to pronounce the names that they give their children. One popular name hitting college right now is Ciara, pronounced "see-are-uh" ... the link between this and Keira Knightley is missed by most people.

Might as well walk into an American Irish pub on St Patrick's day and say "kimmer uh ha hoo" to the bar-tender.

[Billie from Ockham]

In fact, it's fucking depressing that tax-paying US citizens would be better off with a plane ticket to another country than going to a US hospital. Fucking shame, US.

Only poor people can't afford health-care.

The US has too many poor people.

Seems a rational system to me.


Wake me up when 50+ cis white males with good jobs can't get their free boner pills.

[Shatterface]

Shives' is coming from the particular feminist view that classical academic sociology has it all figured out, and if you're not completely 100% on board with that you must be a bigot. First of all, that's not going to convince anybody. Second of all, no. Society is constantly changing. The idea that any discipline can 100% figure out something as complicated as human societies is absolutely the height of arrogance.

And yeah. Shives' eventually is going to be forced to disagree with something. And he'll lose everything when he does. That's the way that works.

I remember watching a documentary on CERN and the scientists were as excited by the possibility they wouldn't find the Higgs as much as the possibility they would, because then they'd have to rethink the standard model.

There's a delight in not knowing that you find among genuine scientists, or the simply curious, that you don't find in the social sciences.

Nobody joins the social sciences because they like to be surprised; it's all about confirming what they already 'know'.

[Billie from Ockham]

Aplols if already covered but I was was a bit baffled why FTB was included in Carrier's legal sights so thought it might be worth reposting his reply to a question from his site. I might add I am not "August Berkshire" , don't know if its anyone we know or even a pitter.

AUGUST BERKSHIRE JULY 31, 2016, 1:11 AM
I am not a patron but perhaps you’d like to post and answer this anyway. You have offered explanations for many things but not for the following. As a point of information, I do not understand what case you’d have against the FtB and Orbit networks. The networks do not employ the bloggers, nor is there an employed editor who makes the decision to publish the posts against you. They are self-published. It would seem to me that this is not comparable to the New York Times publishing something but rather akin to a private citizen making an accusation against you on a bus. You can’t sue the bus company, can you?

REPLY

RICHARD CARRIER JULY 31, 2016, 9:40 AM POST AUTHOR
They both have statements on record that indicates that they engage in content control. And content control makes them liable, in the same fashion as, for example, the New York Times. The mere fact that FtB suspended my account demonstrates they engage in content control, as does the fact that they have and deployed an ethics committee to decide who can continue blogging there; they are therefore legally equivalent to a newspaper, and not to, for example, Facebook or Patheos. The Orbit likewise states that it is an operating collective that coordinates its activity among its content providers, and their providers run the network, which evinces similar content control responsibility; they also no doubt have the equivalent of an ethics committee; likewise on departing FtB one of their stated goals to us was to have more control over the network and who blogs there and on what. So unless they are willing to commit perjury, they can’t claim they aren’t collectively responsible for their network’s content. Nor do I think they would honestly try that, since it contradicts their values to claim disinterest in whether their members use the network for defaming other persons.

Carrier might want to check out Section 230 of the CDA. Just sayin'.

[Billie from Ockham]

Might as well walk into an American Irish pub on St Patrick's day and say "kimmer uh ha hoo" to the bar-tender.

Being American, I mixed up the two Gaelics. Please make the above: "co-nuss tah too."

[CommanderTuvok]

Hmmmm... just thinking over the possibilities of Brive's comment.
1. Amy Frank wasn't "in group" before this.
2. Richard Carrier was "in group" so no matter how this plays out, they still look bad, it is just a matter of degree.
3. Legal threats went out. They are more worried about having assets to cover their own asses. Even if Amy Frank wins or gets a stalemate, it doesn't mean it will help them.
4. They can always drop Amy and claim that she fooled them if the case goes south.
5. They got burned already by Karen Stollznow.
6. $3k just gets Amy the ability to talk to a lawyer & respond do Carrier's legal threat. It wouldn't be a decisive win.
7. Amy Frank probably hasn't given them money or asspats before. This is quid pro quo.
8. She sounds too much like Ann Frank.
9. Richard knows most of the dirt on the Atheist/Skeptic SJW crowd and he has been using it here or there.
10. SJW tactics only work if the target doesn't fight back.
11. They think Richard Carrier is just crazy enough to go all the way.
12. Amy Frank did not get approval prior to coming out with her complaint, so they could not plan, so she does not receive as much favor.
13. They are still planning.
14. Richard is already tanked no matter what happens from here on out. They will use back channels and private messages to groups who did not hear about this the first time through.

Reading that was like Holtzman talking dirty in my ear.......

I'm loving it!

[deLurch]

15. They are battle weary, and fatigue has set in. They have seen this before so it is no longer new fresh and exciting. Hard to motivate the troops much less yourself with an old hat.

[paddybrown]

Aplols if already covered but I was was a bit baffled why FTB was included in Carrier's legal sights so thought it might be worth reposting his reply to a question from his site. I might add I am not "August Berkshire" , don't know if its anyone we know or even a pitter.

AUGUST BERKSHIRE JULY 31, 2016, 1:11 AM
I am not a patron but perhaps you’d like to post and answer this anyway. You have offered explanations for many things but not for the following. As a point of information, I do not understand what case you’d have against the FtB and Orbit networks. The networks do not employ the bloggers, nor is there an employed editor who makes the decision to publish the posts against you. They are self-published. It would seem to me that this is not comparable to the New York Times publishing something but rather akin to a private citizen making an accusation against you on a bus. You can’t sue the bus company, can you?

REPLY

RICHARD CARRIER JULY 31, 2016, 9:40 AM POST AUTHOR
They both have statements on record that indicates that they engage in content control. And content control makes them liable, in the same fashion as, for example, the New York Times. The mere fact that FtB suspended my account demonstrates they engage in content control, as does the fact that they have and deployed an ethics committee to decide who can continue blogging there; they are therefore legally equivalent to a newspaper, and not to, for example, Facebook or Patheos. The Orbit likewise states that it is an operating collective that coordinates its activity among its content providers, and their providers run the network, which evinces similar content control responsibility; they also no doubt have the equivalent of an ethics committee; likewise on departing FtB one of their stated goals to us was to have more control over the network and who blogs there and on what. So unless they are willing to commit perjury, they can’t claim they aren’t collectively responsible for their network’s content. Nor do I think they would honestly try that, since it contradicts their values to claim disinterest in whether their members use the network for defaming other persons.

Carrier might want to check out Section 230 of the CDA. Just sayin'.

Yeah. My brief exposure to Free Thought Blogs was when Ally Fogg went there. I assumed it would be like the old days on alt.atheism and talk.origins, and boned up on logical fallacies and the scientific method. And I may as well have been talking Klingon for all it meant to the commenters. They were particularly baffled by the notion of falsifiability as a guard against confirmation bias. Why would you want to falsify anything? And if you don't believe in rape culture, you think like a creationist.

As it turns out, the commenters on Ally's blog were orders of magnitude less batshit than the ones on PZ's, but I didn't stick around to find out.