Periodic Table of Swearing

[Keating]

I see a lot of common sense from here on the thread (i'm only on comment 40 somethin)

Eh, I don't know. I'm generally a lurker; most people are. I think some people aren't exactly the most eloquent in their comments. There is often a lot of background knowledge that is required to get the point, or it is expressed in such a way that the point being made appears different from what is intended. My thought is that it could be a strategic mistake to comment in haste without completely thinking through what you're trying to say. This schism will be won or lost with the lurkers. I think this 'side' is also showing signs of being an echo chamber and treating everything from the other 'side' with bad faith.

-----

I'm starting to think that 'colour/sex blindness' may be one of those basic assumptions I was thinking about earlier. It seems to be the most consistent underlying point of difference between the two sides.

[sacha]

"Extroverts" vs. "introverts". I detest speaking to any more than 2 or 3 people at a time. There is much more of a case to be made for "discrimination" against introverts - though introverts are thankful for the exclusion.

I'm as introverted as they come. In fact, when I take the Myers Briggs test, I pretty much always score 100% introvert.

That being said, the idea of talking to three or four people on their own makes me break out into a cold sweat. I stammer. I stumble. I just...freeze up.

But, get me in front of a crowd of dozens or hundreds, and I'm right at home. In fact, I volunteer for the occasion anytime I can (briefings at work, etc...).

I'm the same way. It's odd, but then I read that a number of actors are the same way. Maybe it is due to a controlled environment? Plus I get a rush from it.

It is because speaking to or three people is intimate and speaking to a crowd is methodical. Two very different experiences.

[sacha]

I'm the same way. It's odd, but then I read that a number of actors are the same way. Maybe it is due to a controlled environment? Plus I get a rush from it.

It is because speaking to or three people is intimate and speaking to a crowd is methodical. Two very different experiences.

I did not finish my comment.

I can do either, but entertaining a crowd gives me a rush as well, especially now that I am such a unsocial loner.

[sacha]

Wow. There are a lot of "guests" on this site. I've noticed this afternoon as many as 35. If you like this site, why not just sign up and let yourself be known? There's no banning here, there's no recriminations for anything you might say. You might have to take some ribbing. But that's about it.

I've been reading through old posts. Came across this and figured I'd say hi. Hi.

hi

[sacha]

"Gender Traitor" has been around a lot longer than Skeptifem

Ah, so it has! My bad. Then, I'll revise: says the woman who's fine using the term "gender traitor" to describe other women. I'll stand by my previous statements of her shutting her trap, though. :D

she's a complete loon.

[sacha]

But Steerzo? Fuck off.

wow. Steersman is finally a true pitter

[Steersman]

But "Steerzo"? Fuck off.

wow. Steersman is finally a true pitter

Gawd! Better than a hug; any day, any type. ;-)

Curious process though implicit in all of that, the validation and promotion of certain norms of behaviour. Something I noted in a comment or two over on Shermer’s recent thread, the very human tendency to want to be part of a group, regardless of the values espoused by it.

Most problematic when it leads to group-think and a “my country; right or wrong” type of attitude; something worth defending when the principles themselves are. Bit of a crucial difference but something in common as well that Shermer alluded to with his quote of Benjamin Franklin: “we must all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately.”

[time to call it a day; night all]

[SPACKlick]

snip...
Also, what is "gender/colorblind bias"? I would have thought that looking past someone's "race" would be a good thing? The wish of saying "that person" instead of "that black person" somehow implies a prejudice of some sort?
...snip

Yeah, this is what I got banned for over at the A+ boards, apparantly Race is not just "biological group" but includes "Cultures, ethnicities, ethnography, community and cultural history". So it's actually, cultural history and to ignore that is to ignore who someone is, or some bullshit. I don't call that race because it isn't. Jackasses

[justinvacula]

[youtube]aHKIMOgoJoU[/youtube]

PZ can modify the lyrics if he'd like.

[Michael J]

Are these guys frigging crazy. They go out of their way to misinterpret Shermer. Is their aim to alienate every 'A' lister Atheist? I really don't get it. It can't help them in the long term.

I think this 'side' is also showing signs of being an echo chamber and treating everything from the other 'side' with bad faith.

I agree with the second part but I don't think the first isn't true. To me an echo-chamber is a place where people shutout the outside world. I don't think that anyone has been banned here. Also most of the people here appear on other forums and blogs. Except for the FTB blogs most blogs seem to have a ratio of anti-FTBer commenters to FTB supporters of around 3 to 1. I can see that FTB will become more like UD where the denizens wont dare venture out and the controls on new commenters will get tighter and tighter.

[sacha]

I think this 'side' is also showing signs of being an echo chamber and treating everything from the other 'side' with bad faith.

I agree with the second part but I don't think the first isn't true. To me an echo-chamber is a place where people shutout the outside world. I don't think that anyone has been banned here. Also most of the people here appear on other forums and blogs. Except for the FTB blogs most blogs seem to have a ratio of anti-FTBer commenters to FTB supporters of around 3 to 1. I can see that FTB will become more like UD where the denizens wont dare venture out and the controls on new commenters will get tighter and tighter.

We disagree too much for this to be an echo chamber, but I have seen what I consider obvious sarcasm from them, quoted here as if they were serious. I don't have a problem if the point is to show hypocrisy about sarcasm. If they get furious from some obvious sarcasm on our side, and they display the very same subject with sarcasm, I'm fine with pitters pretending to act as if they believe they were serious, that is equal to me. When it is not a subject we have made sarcastic comments about, and it is obvious sarcasm on their part, and pitters are disingenuous by posting it as if it was not sarcasm, that bothers me... fuck I'm tired. I can't articulate what I'm thinking. Time to get some sleep...

[Keating]

I agree with the second part but I don't think the first isn't true. To me an echo-chamber is a place where people shutout the outside world. I don't think that anyone has been banned here.

Fair enough, it could just be a difference in meanings. I meant more that this group is fairly self-selecting, and most people have similar opinions here. That can generate an echo chamber lite, if you like, because pretty much everyone agrees on the fundamental assumptions.

---

In other news...

[SPACKlick]

Looking at some stuff by Michael Shermer and sorry to say but, I don't like him, not one bit.

at This debate for IQ2 America, I spent 90% of it thinking, "shut up Michael" or "get back to the point Michael".

All told, I', not overly impressed with is writing either, he's clearly an actual skeptic, but leaves me with a sense of "meh"

[Scented Nectar]

But to elaborate somewhat by considering another case I have been thinking about, there’s this Wikipedia article on the Medical genetics of Jews. I ran across it as a result of discussing with Scented Nectar the fact that Ashkenazi Jews tend to be rather long-lived, although I hadn’t realized that there are some problems that apparently seem to derive from the same causes.

That’s an interesting page. I’m a carrier for the type of hemophilia they mention there. Not that I plan on having kids, but interesting to know.

[Scented Nectar]

There are already plenty of men who feel ashamed that being dominant and rough turns them on because they are made to feel ashamed by society, which has succeeded in convincing them that not only is something wrong with them for being sexually aroused by this, but that women, like children, cannot give consent, and they need to protect women by dismissing their preference for the same type of sex, no matter how much they would like to participate, add the fact that there are not a lot of men who like being dominant sexually, and then on top of that, add the fear of being set up as some sort of insurance policy/blackmail in case they ever want to leave the relationship, and I may as well enter a convent.

My preferences are not even BDSM, I can't imagine what women who enjoy being truly physically hurt, and like me, would never even think of using it against someone are feeling about this, although perhaps in the BDSM community, there is not such a problem getting what one wants. I don't know, I've never been interested in that scene.

I'm just glad that I got to experience everything I wanted to try (at least twice) when I was younger, now I want less physical dominance, and more psychological, so I very rarely have any "evidence" left after a particularly enjoyable evening, and I'm very glad that my age preference in men is mid to late 50's, because elder men with more experience are able to read women a hell of a lot better, choose a hell of a lot better, and the men I'm attracted to, not only have a good idea of what sort of person I will be after, but know precisely what will interest me, long before our clothes are shed, and if they ever had any shame about what they like, they lost it years before they met me.

My bold etc. You realize don't you, that you just gave PZ a raging boner?

That is IF, in that video of PZ making poker sex jokes, he was overdoing it pretending the opposite, saying he would submit to having sex with the volunteer. Maybe his real inclinations are quite the opposite to "submitting", and he's all ashamed and extra feminist because of it?

[curious lurker]

FfTB sanction (and proudly flaunts) ignoring the laws of copyright.

Now, forget for a moment how plain fucking pathetic a person's life must be to spend an evening watching a cheaply-made movie just so you and three other halfbreeds can mash out some cutting comments about how you can totally see that the alien mask is made from cardboard and jism.

:(

Never heard of MST3K? Only reason I don't do this is because I don't have any friends.

Damn, you mean MST3K is more pathetic than spending your time threshing about in PZ's Pit of Fanged Horrors? I must lead a more pathetic life than I've ever dared think, if that's the case.

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

From the same thread, some unchecked privilege from mod Mai:

"We ordered the chef's special "Prix Fixe" menu, and proceeded to embark on a culinary adventure that memories are made of...course after amazing course, glass after glass of wine, all served on beautiful china, crystal and flatware, accompanied with the impeccable service typical of a classic French restaurant."

They've probably never been to a real classic French restaurant...

[Tigzy]

Pruney is still wittering on about the Michael Shermer thing. This time she's affronted by Shermer explaining that she didn't, in effect, get what he was going on about. In any case, I couldn't help but smirk when I saw these two entries:

He said it. He could have just said it was a stupid thing to say, he was thinking on his feet and made a hash of it. But indignation at me for pointing it out? No. I don’t think he has a case.

I simply assumed he meant what he said.

I know the feeling, Effie - I, amongst many others, assumed Rebecca Watson meant what she said when damning evo-psych as whole in that recent talk of hers. Perhaps Svan might send you a missive detailing where you've gone so very wrong here... :lol:

[papillon]

They've probably never been to a real classic French restaurant...

Here's Mai enjoying a little something from the cheez board..
http://i639.photobucket.com/albums/uu11 ... cheese.jpg

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

"Extroverts" vs. "introverts". I detest speaking to any more than 2 or 3 people at a time. There is much more of a case to be made for "discrimination" against introverts - though introverts are thankful for the exclusion.

I'm as introverted as they come. In fact, when I take the Myers Briggs test, I pretty much always score 100% introvert.

That being said, the idea of talking to three or four people on their own makes me break out into a cold sweat. I stammer. I stumble. I just...freeze up.

But, get me in front of a crowd of dozens or hundreds, and I'm right at home. In fact, I volunteer for the occasion anytime I can (briefings at work, etc...).

I'm the same way. It's odd, but then I read that a number of actors are the same way. Maybe it is due to a controlled environment? Plus I get a rush from it.

Play in front of thousands? No problemo.

Speak for some time in front of hundreds? I don't think I'd manage.

[franc]

My bold etc. You realize don't you, that you just gave PZ a raging boner?

You know what would surprise me less than anything in this world? Pics surfacing of Myers in a dog collar getting pissed on by a gang of east European whores in school uniforms.

[Jan Steen]

Yes Baal, where were you when StevoR was advocating genocide against all Islam just because a few Jihadists operate under its banner? Where were you when the Slymepitters are making rape threats against Rebecca Watson and run intimidation tactics against other women who are well known skeptics? Until you address those problems with you taking them repeatedly to task, and linking to it for our verification, you haven’t a leg to stand on. We will ignore your criticism, since it comes from an obvious HYPOCRITE.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... ent-510630

Did anyone here ever make rape threats against Rebecca Watson? Or is Psycho of Redhead just lying?

[franc]

Yes Baal, where were you when StevoR was advocating genocide against all Islam just because a few Jihadists operate under its banner? Where were you when the Slymepitters are making rape threats against Rebecca Watson and run intimidation tactics against other women who are well known skeptics? Until you address those problems with you taking them repeatedly to task, and linking to it for our verification, you haven’t a leg to stand on. We will ignore your criticism, since it comes from an obvious HYPOCRITE.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... ent-510630

Did anyone here ever make rape threats against Rebecca Watson? Or is Psycho of Redhead just lying?

It's Schrodinger's Rape Threats against Watson. Because not making them doesn't mean you don't make them.

[franc]

Yes Baal, where were you when StevoR was advocating genocide against all Islam just because a few Jihadists operate under its banner? Where were you when the Slymepitters are making rape threats against Rebecca Watson and run intimidation tactics against other women who are well known skeptics? Until you address those problems with you taking them repeatedly to task, and linking to it for our verification, you haven’t a leg to stand on. We will ignore your criticism, since it comes from an obvious HYPOCRITE.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... ent-510630

Did anyone here ever make rape threats against Rebecca Watson? Or is Psycho of Redhead just lying?

It's Schrodinger's Rape Threats against Watson. Because not making them doesn't mean you don't make them.

Seriously, I'd rather fuck cow manure. It would be warmer and tighter.

[Tigzy]

Yes Baal, where were you when StevoR was advocating genocide against all Islam just because a few Jihadists operate under its banner? Where were you when the Slymepitters are making rape threats against Rebecca Watson and run intimidation tactics against other women who are well known skeptics? Until you address those problems with you taking them repeatedly to task, and linking to it for our verification, you haven’t a leg to stand on. We will ignore your criticism, since it comes from an obvious HYPOCRITE.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... ent-510630

Did anyone here ever make rape threats against Rebecca Watson? Or is Psycho of Redhead just lying?

I've not seen anything like that here. To paraphrase the red-headed Nerdy one himself: 'Citation fucking needed. Or *poof* what can be asserted without fact can be dismissed without fact *DISMISSED POOF GONE* weeble weeble like Hitchens gibber gibber water is an organic molecule fnarp fnarp etc etc

Still, given that Nerd clearly sees little distinction between a verifiable truth and an unverifiable falsehood, I have no problem in outing him as a dirty little wombat fiddler.

[Scented Nectar]

My bold etc. You realize don't you, that you just gave PZ a raging boner?

You know what would surprise me less than anything in this world? Pics surfacing of Myers in a dog collar getting pissed on by a gang of east European whores in school uniforms.

Whatever he's into, I'm sure he's embarrassed by it. He's a little too quick to tell people how vanilla he is, even to the point of saying that he's done in 5 minutes, but being the good man that he is, he makes sure Mary's happy, which he says takes a half hour. TMI? Yeah, or protesting too much. Who knows?

I have no link to the article where he gave both their times it takes to come, but I think it was within the last year somewhere.

[Scented Nectar]

Yes Baal, where were you when StevoR was advocating genocide against all Islam just because a few Jihadists operate under its banner? Where were you when the Slymepitters are making rape threats against Rebecca Watson and run intimidation tactics against other women who are well known skeptics? Until you address those problems with you taking them repeatedly to task, and linking to it for our verification, you haven’t a leg to stand on. We will ignore your criticism, since it comes from an obvious HYPOCRITE.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... ent-510630

Did anyone here ever make rape threats against Rebecca Watson? Or is Psycho of Redhead just lying?

I think she's just bold faced lying. Or she's so stupid that she's got all her enemies existing in some sort of conspiracy where all of us are responsible for what each other does.

I doubt Watson has received even one CREDIBLE rape threat. Youtube crazy "shit 'n run" comments don't count, just as they don't count with comments that boastfully threaten to both murder AND rape (eg; I'll fuck you right into the ground!) etc.

Watson does though, send sexually violent and graphic, pictures, to men that she doesn't like. She sends them this material uninvited. It's material that if ever a man sent that to her (in anger like she did), she'd have made it the next somethingGate. The 2 articles below document her lying about being called a cunt, and also her sending the material I've just described.
http://scentednectar.blogspot.com/2012/ ... llows.html
http://scentednectar.blogspot.com/2012/ ... t-lie.html

[franc]

Whatever he's into, I'm sure he's embarrassed by it. He's a little too quick to tell people how vanilla he is, even to the point of saying that he's done in 5 minutes, but being the good man that he is, he makes sure Mary's happy, which he says takes a half hour. TMI? Yeah, or protesting too much. Who knows?

Yes. It's like priests that bugger kids. All hellfire on Sundays. That's why they won't shut up about my candidness about things I have no shame about. Puritans are funny like that.

http://th818.photobucket.com/albums/zz1 ... eywank.gif

[Pitchguest]

Yes Baal, where were you when StevoR was advocating genocide against all Islam just because a few Jihadists operate under its banner? Where were you when the Slymepitters are making rape threats against Rebecca Watson and run intimidation tactics against other women who are well known skeptics? Until you address those problems with you taking them repeatedly to task, and linking to it for our verification, you haven’t a leg to stand on. We will ignore your criticism, since it comes from an obvious HYPOCRITE.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... ent-510630

Did anyone here ever make rape threats against Rebecca Watson? Or is Psycho of Redhead just lying?

I've not seen anything like that here. To paraphrase the red-headed Nerdy one himself: 'Citation fucking needed. Or *poof* what can be asserted without fact can be dismissed without fact *DISMISSED POOF GONE* weeble weeble like Hitchens gibber gibber water is an organic molecule fnarp fnarp etc etc

Still, given that Nerd clearly sees little distinction between a verifiable truth and an unverifiable falsehood, I have no problem in outing him as a dirty little wombat fiddler.

Uuuuurgh, just reading the comments on that thread is making me doubt the sanity of humanity. Or at least part of it.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't there an argument about the "gender" of using "cupcake" as an insult to someone once on Pharyngula? I could've sworn I'd read one. Anyway, the Pharyngulite wiki on "cupcake" is, er... well, it's something alright. Caine Flower Power is just insane. I have this nagging feeling that PZ's blog is the only place where she and Nerd of Redhead can espouse their delusions and PZ lets them, because let's face it, he's not really a champion of human rights, is he? Nor of women's for that matter. Maybe a bellydance now and then to keep himself entertained. Ponce.

[real horrorshow]

Also, how dare Shermer look at an attractive woman the way no man has ever looked at Josh Spokesgay.

You've hit the core of it right there!

[Dilurk]

Interesting video

[youtube]GZAxwsg9J9Q[/youtube]

I don't see anyone here boasting about harassing. I am quite sure RW gets hate e-mail much as Jessica Alhquist does but what I don't see is evidence that it is from either atheists or slymepitters

[Dilurk]

Speaking of Evil little thing I'd rather read her site than a few others I refuse to mention.

[BarnOwl]

Yes Baal, where were you when StevoR was advocating genocide against all Islam just because a few Jihadists operate under its banner? Where were you when the Slymepitters are making rape threats against Rebecca Watson and run intimidation tactics against other women who are well known skeptics? Until you address those problems with you taking them repeatedly to task, and linking to it for our verification, you haven’t a leg to stand on. We will ignore your criticism, since it comes from an obvious HYPOCRITE.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... ent-510630

Did anyone here ever make rape threats against Rebecca Watson? Or is Psycho of Redhead just lying?

Most of them are lying most of the time, as far as I can tell. They can always edit comments to create false threats and to discredit people they don't like. Or they can claim that they've received e-mail threats from whomever, and fail to show the (nonexistent) e-mails. None of these tactics surprises me any longer. They've become a traveling circus of lies and hypocrisy, and an embarrassing carnival of ridiculous bigots online.

[Tigzy]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't there an argument about the "gender" of using "cupcake" as an insult to someone once on Pharyngula? I could've sworn I'd read one. Anyway, the Pharyngulite wiki on "cupcake" is, er... well, it's something alright. Caine Flower Power is just insane. I have this nagging feeling that PZ's blog is the only place where she and Nerd of Redhead can espouse their delusions and PZ lets them, because let's face it, he's not really a champion of human rights, is he? Nor of women's for that matter. Maybe a bellydance now and then to keep himself entertained. Ponce.

Ha-haaa - so that's what 'cupcake' means to a Pharygulite. I honestly thought it was just a throwaway insult, given how liberally it's applied. Looking at that list, I think it's fair to assume, as a general rule, that if a baboon refers to you as 'cupcake', it probably means that you are normal.

Seems like a badge of honour to me. For my sins, I've been dungeonated, but as far as I'm aware, no baboon has as yet referred to me as a cupcake. Alas.

[BarnOwl]

PZ responds to Reap's video:

Hmmm. You could argue that I’m a bad comedian, but there’s nothing anti-feminist in any of those clips…that is, unless you think that humor and joking about sex are somehow incompatible with feminism.
It gets worse, though, and Paden left it out — I did have that woman come up on stage so I could have sex with her. Of course, it was in a talk about sex and genetics, where I used a deck of cards to illustrate recombination, so it was a little less provocative than you might think — we swapped cards for a bit. Lasciviously.
And the clip with Rebecca is a bit that John the Other didn’t understand, either — it was Rebecca yanking JT’s chain, and the handler she was “abusing” was in on the joke from day one.
It’s revealing when this is the worst dirt he can dig up on us, isn’t it?

[Pitchguest]

Interesting video

GZAxwsg9J9Q

I don't see anyone here boasting about harassing. I am quite sure RW gets hate e-mail much as Jessica Alhquist does but what I don't see is evidence that it is from either atheists or slymepitters

That's the thing, innit? Both of these women are so sure they're dealing with proponents of either the atheist or gaming community, and they never once ask the question if maybe they're making sweeping generalisations or judging matters prematurely. However, I'm beginning to think if TED has begun to wane in importance or at least wane in the measures of quality control, if Anita Sarkeesian of all people is given an opportunity to talk at TED.

The thing is, many of her assertions are fallacious and many of them are false. Again, it's another one of those instances where I just don't get it. Seems to be a lot of that lately. For example, the most damning example I can think of where you know she doesn't take this seriously or at the very least have no idea what she's talking about, is her review of Bayonetta where she outright lies about the plot, no clue as to how the game mechanics work and it's as if she worked off someone else's suggestion. Not just a sloppy review, but revealing. Either she has no interest in the future of gaming, or she's an opportunist. Or both. I mean, she hasn't even finished that one episode she promised to make four months ago - and the new schedule said it would be early winter, late autumn. Even by Canadian standards, that timestamp has long passed. Her latest update on her Kickstarter is December 10th, which you can't read unless you're a backer. Get fucking to it or get used to be called a fraud.*

*I mean, for fuck's sake, she needed $6000, she got that upshot by 26 times (and then some), what more does she need? She was supposed to do the fucking research herself anyway, so why is she asking her backers for "suggestions" on what to talk about? You're supposed to have that sorted out before you start asking for money, you idiot. Furthermore, projects that required 100 times the funding and was perhaps funded with 10% more than they hoped for is right on schedule for release. For example this project that I backed is soon to be Greenlit on Steam, and that needed a minimum of $500,000. What? What?

[John Brown]

Stephanie Svan's latest is actually fairly good in its attack against this idea of "chivalry." Though, I do have a few points.

There are two layers of interpretation in the following paragraph. Stephanie Svan is quoting Esfahani Smith's article which uses one of Christina Hoff Sommer's quotes to drive the point home:

"Chivalry arose as a response to the violence and barbarism of the Middle Ages. It cautioned men to temper their aggression, deploying it only in appropriate circumstances—like to protect the physically weak and defenseless members of society. As the author and self-described “equity feminist” Christina Hoff Sommers tells me in an interview, “Masculinity with morality and civility is a very powerful force for good. But masculinity without these virtues is dangerous—even lethal.”

Note, Christina Hoff Sommers isn't talking about the concept of "chivalry," here. She's talking about the effects that civilization has had on taming "masculinity." Which seems to be true, though a narrow view of history. Civilization has tamed human nature, of which men *and* women are both a part. Camille Paglia brings this up repeatedly in her writings. The nature of mankind is to conquer nature. In doing so, we tame ourselves.

But, Stephanie doesn't take a wide view of these things. There's no room for interpretation or nuance, it seems. She takes the quote, "Masculinity with morality and civility is a very powerful force for good. But masculinity without these virtues is dangerous - even lethal." and throws out the following tweet:

"For the #atheismplus and #ftbullies tweeters: http://bit.ly/ZkmyMZ Hoff Sommers tells you that all men are potential violent rapists."

Sorry, I can't give you the direct link. She has me blocked.

It might also be noted that the original article advocates for the return of "chivalry," but there is not one mention of the return of "lady like behavior."

Make of that what you will.

[Tigzy]

Peezee, doth protesting a little too much as usual: http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... n-exposed/

Rebecca Watson: man asking a woman to come to his room 'for coffee' in an elevator: guys, don't do that. It's exploiting an asymmetrical power/privilege relationship, and completely ignores the possibility that the woman might not welcome this attention.

Peezee Myers: man asking a woman up on stage and proceeds to make lewd remarks at her: guys, do that, because - in the words of Hyperdeath on that thread - it's just harmless banter.

Sorry Peezee - I admire your efforts in doubling down on this, but really, you're...

[youtube]X1VgcxE9Lpw[/youtube]

[John Brown]

PZ responds to Reap's video:

Hmmm. You could argue that I’m a bad comedian, but there’s nothing anti-feminist in any of those clips…that is, unless you think that humor and joking about sex are somehow incompatible with feminism.
It gets worse, though, and Paden left it out — I did have that woman come up on stage so I could have sex with her. Of course, it was in a talk about sex and genetics, where I used a deck of cards to illustrate recombination, so it was a little less provocative than you might think — we swapped cards for a bit. Lasciviously.
And the clip with Rebecca is a bit that John the Other didn’t understand, either — it was Rebecca yanking JT’s chain, and the handler she was “abusing” was in on the joke from day one.
It’s revealing when this is the worst dirt he can dig up on us, isn’t it?

Oh, so it's absolutely horrible and deceitful when people take PZ out of context, but when he does it to others..well, that's just fine.

The point, PZ. You missed it.

[Outwest]

PZ responds to Reap's video:

Hmmm. You could argue that I’m a bad comedian, but there’s nothing anti-feminist in any of those clips…that is, unless you think that humor and joking about sex are somehow incompatible with feminism.
It gets worse, though, and Paden left it out — I did have that woman come up on stage so I could have sex with her. Of course, it was in a talk about sex and genetics, where I used a deck of cards to illustrate recombination, so it was a little less provocative than you might think — we swapped cards for a bit. Lasciviously.
And the clip with Rebecca is a bit that John the Other didn’t understand, either — it was Rebecca yanking JT’s chain, and the handler she was “abusing” was in on the joke from day one.
It’s revealing when this is the worst dirt he can dig up on us, isn’t it?

Amazing equivocation. It's out of context. Hmm, like Shermer's statement they went all butt-wild over? If Shermer's statement is sexist, clearly what Myers said was also sexist. At least be consis...oh wait! I forgot who I was referring to.

[SenorBeagle]

Interesting video

GZAxwsg9J9Q

I don't see anyone here boasting about harassing. I am quite sure RW gets hate e-mail much as Jessica Alhquist does but what I don't see is evidence that it is from either atheists or slymepitters

That's the thing, innit? Both of these women are so sure they're dealing with proponents of either the atheist or gaming community, and they never once ask the question if maybe they're making sweeping generalisations or judging matters prematurely. However, I'm beginning to think if TED has begun to wane in importance or at least wane in the measures of quality control, if Anita Sarkeesian of all people is given an opportunity to talk at TED.

The thing is, many of her assertions are fallacious and many of them are false. Again, it's another one of those instances where I just don't get it. Seems to be a lot of that lately. For example, the most damning example I can think of where you know she doesn't take this seriously or at the very least have no idea what she's talking about, is her review of Bayonetta where she outright lies about the plot, no clue as to how the game mechanics work and it's as if she worked off someone else's suggestion. Not just a sloppy review, but revealing. Either she has no interest in the future of gaming, or she's an opportunist. Or both. I mean, she hasn't even finished that one episode she promised to make four months ago - and the new schedule said it would be early winter, late autumn. Even by Canadian standards, that timestamp has long passed. Her latest update on her Kickstarter is December 10th, which you can't read unless you're a backer. Get fucking to it or get used to be called a fraud.*

*I mean, for fuck's sake, she needed $6000, she got that upshot by 26 times (and then some), what more does she need? She was supposed to do the fucking research herself anyway, so why is she asking her backers for "suggestions" on what to talk about? You're supposed to have that sorted out before you start asking for money, you idiot. Furthermore, projects that required 100 times the funding and was perhaps funded with 10% more than they hoped for is right on schedule for release. For example this project that I backed is soon to be Greenlit on Steam, and that needed a minimum of $500,000. What? What?

You beat me to the Kickstarter thing, damn you! Funnily enough, I saw an article about this very topic yesterday (complete with a couple of white knights in the comments):

http://www.destructoid.com/epic-comment ... 0143.phtml

Sarkeesian seems to be, instead of actually making the damn video she begged for money to make, dining out on her victimhood status after she got trolled to shittery.

Now who does that remind me of...?

[Dilurk]

Interesting video

GZAxwsg9J9Q

I don't see anyone here boasting about harassing. I am quite sure RW gets hate e-mail much as Jessica Alhquist does but what I don't see is evidence that it is from either atheists or slymepitters

That's the thing, innit? Both of these women are so sure they're dealing with proponents of either the atheist or gaming community, and they never once ask the question if maybe they're making sweeping generalisations or judging matters prematurely. However, I'm beginning to think if TED has begun to wane in importance or at least wane in the measures of quality control, if Anita Sarkeesian of all people is given an opportunity to talk at TED.
The thing is, many of her assertions are fallacious and many of them are false. Again, it's another one of those instances where I just don't get it. Seems to be a lot of that lately. For example, the most damning example I can think of

I know nothing really of gaming.

where you know she doesn't take this seriously or at the very least have no idea what she's talking about, is her review of Bayonetta where she outright lies about the plot, no clue as to how the game mechanics work and it's as if she worked

So she is being attacked not because she is female but because she does not know what she is talking about?
Can you mention any other female gamers who do know what they are talking about?

[Reap]

PZ responds to Reap's video:

Hmmm. You could argue that I’m a bad comedian, but there’s nothing anti-feminist in any of those clips…that is, unless you think that humor and joking about sex are somehow incompatible with feminism.
It gets worse, though, and Paden left it out — I did have that woman come up on stage so I could have sex with her. Of course, it was in a talk about sex and genetics, where I used a deck of cards to illustrate recombination, so it was a little less provocative than you might think — we swapped cards for a bit. Lasciviously.
And the clip with Rebecca is a bit that John the Other didn’t understand, either — it was Rebecca yanking JT’s chain, and the handler she was “abusing” was in on the joke from day one.
It’s revealing when this is the worst dirt he can dig up on us, isn’t it?

Oh, so it's absolutely horrible and deceitful when people take PZ out of context, but when he does it to others..well, that's just fine.

The point, PZ. You missed it.

What The fuck??! The context?? REALLY??! He has lost his fuckin mind. It doesn't matter if he was there to read books to children or do a cool new dance routine. If anyone else was up there PZ would be jumping their shit. Fuckin lunatic just can't stop takin shit.... boo fuckin hoo

[Altair]

For example, the most damning example I can think of where you know she doesn't take this seriously or at the very least have no idea what she's talking about, is her review of Bayonetta where she outright lies about the plot, no clue as to how the game mechanics work and it's as if she worked off someone else's suggestion.

My guess would be she only saw the cover and maybe some screenshots and she thought "A woman wearing tight clothing that shows her back in a pose that let's viewers see her ass? OBJECTIFYING, HORRIBLE AND RAPEY".

I haven't played the game, but it seems to have a female protagonist that kicks ass, which is something Sarkeesian should like.

http://bit.ly/Un9MH6

Either she has no interest in the future of gaming, or she's an opportunist. Or both.

(snip)

*I mean, for fuck's sake, she needed $6000, she got that upshot by 26 times (and then some), what more does she need? She was supposed to do the fucking research herself anyway, so why is she asking her backers for "suggestions" on what to talk about? You're supposed to have that sorted out before you start asking for money, you idiot.

She doesn't care about gaming, or women or anything. She's an opportunist who convinced a lot of people to give her money to buy games for research. They bought her. games. FOR RESEARCH. How dumb do you have to be to give someone money so they can buy video games ?

From http://www.flickr.com/photos/anitasarke ... 619451560/
http://bit.ly/W0rSEy

So far we’ve purchased over 300 games for this project. As of now we can play games from the following systems: SNES, Gamecube, Wii, PS2, PS3, PS Vita, Xbox, Xbox 360, iPad, OSX. We are also looking to acquire a 3DS XL when it becomes available next month.

[Rystefn]

Sorry to anyone who was expecting to hear from me about the next Skype call. I've been sick as fuck all week.

[Altair]

There are two layers of interpretation in the following paragraph. Stephanie Svan is quoting Esfahani Smith's article which uses one of Christina Hoff Sommer's quotes to drive the point home:

"Chivalry arose as a response to the violence and barbarism of the Middle Ages. It cautioned men to temper their aggression, deploying it only in appropriate circumstances—like to protect the physically weak and defenseless members of society. As the author and self-described “equity feminist” Christina Hoff Sommers tells me in an interview, “Masculinity with morality and civility is a very powerful force for good. But masculinity without these virtues is dangerous—even lethal.”

Note, Christina Hoff Sommers isn't talking about the concept of "chivalry," here. She's talking about the effects that civilization has had on taming "masculinity." Which seems to be true, though a narrow view of history. Civilization has tamed human nature, of which men *and* women are both a part. Camille Paglia brings this up repeatedly in her writings. The nature of mankind is to conquer nature. In doing so, we tame ourselves.

To be honest I don't like that quote. The way she worded it, it sounds like it's only masculinity that can be dangerous and lethal without morality and civility, which is not the same as saying "civilization has tamed human nature".

By focusing on "masculinity", even if it made sense in the context of chivalry, she made it sound like men are dangerous and need to be restrained, while women are not.

I like Christina Hoff Sommers a lot, and she has done a lot to counter rad-fem ideology, but she dropped the ball there.

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

Ok, here's my rape joke:

http://www.google.com/url?source=imglan ... hBahY1Sfnw

[John Brown]

Interesting video

GZAxwsg9J9Q

I don't see anyone here boasting about harassing. I am quite sure RW gets hate e-mail much as Jessica Alhquist does but what I don't see is evidence that it is from either atheists or slymepitters

That's the thing, innit? Both of these women are so sure they're dealing with proponents of either the atheist or gaming community, and they never once ask the question if maybe they're making sweeping generalisations or judging matters prematurely. However, I'm beginning to think if TED has begun to wane in importance or at least wane in the measures of quality control, if Anita Sarkeesian of all people is given an opportunity to talk at TED.

The thing is, many of her assertions are fallacious and many of them are false. Again, it's another one of those instances where I just don't get it. Seems to be a lot of that lately. For example, the most damning example I can think of where you know she doesn't take this seriously or at the very least have no idea what she's talking about, is her review of Bayonetta where she outright lies about the plot, no clue as to how the game mechanics work and it's as if she worked off someone else's suggestion. Not just a sloppy review, but revealing. Either she has no interest in the future of gaming, or she's an opportunist. Or both. I mean, she hasn't even finished that one episode she promised to make four months ago - and the new schedule said it would be early winter, late autumn. Even by Canadian standards, that timestamp has long passed. Her latest update on her Kickstarter is December 10th, which you can't read unless you're a backer. Get fucking to it or get used to be called a fraud.*

*I mean, for fuck's sake, she needed $6000, she got that upshot by 26 times (and then some), what more does she need? She was supposed to do the fucking research herself anyway, so why is she asking her backers for "suggestions" on what to talk about? You're supposed to have that sorted out before you start asking for money, you idiot. Furthermore, projects that required 100 times the funding and was perhaps funded with 10% more than they hoped for is right on schedule for release. For example this project that I backed is soon to be Greenlit on Steam, and that needed a minimum of $500,000. What? What?

You beat me to the Kickstarter thing, damn you! Funnily enough, I saw an article about this very topic yesterday (complete with a couple of white knights in the comments):

http://www.destructoid.com/epic-comment ... 0143.phtml

Sarkeesian seems to be, instead of actually making the damn video she begged for money to make, dining out on her victimhood status after she got trolled to shittery.

Now who does that remind me of...?

I'm a casual gamer at best, but you don't have to delve very deeply to see the turmoil over Sarkeesian in the gaming community. There are dozens, if not hundreds of Youtube videos which address this issue.

Sarkeesian basically followed a very well scripted, and successful formula. She came into the gaming community from the outside, declared almost everything she saw as sexist, made numerous videos "pointing out" this systemic "sexism," asked for money to call out more "sexism," acted surprised and alarmed when people pushed back against this...and...profit!

[Outwest]

PZ responds to Reap's video:
<snip>

What The fuck??! The context?? REALLY??! He has lost his fuckin mind. It doesn't matter if he was there to read books to children or do a cool new dance routine. If anyone else was up there PZ would be jumping their shit. Fuckin lunatic just can't stop takin shit.... boo fuckin hoo

Really Reap. Did you expect anything else? Seriously? I know as soon as I saw the video yesterday that someone would let Myers know about it and he'd start attacking you. Small intellect. Juvenile behavior. That's Myers.

[jimthepleb]

I have no link to the article where he gave both their times it takes to come, but I think it was within the last year somewhere.

I misread that as they have both come once in the last year. I wonder if it was in the same month. Poor Mrs Myers.

[JackTheGuessRayner]

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

Um....what the fuck is their problem, exactly?

All I'm really seeing is that their issue with the quote is that he's......."ignoring privilege"? [I'm ignoring the "speaking for blacks/women" bit, that's just ignant] What the fuck does that even mean? Are they saying that blacks and women should be treated as MORE than people? That they really want non-minority, non-women people [lol, all white men] to prostrate themselves?

I know, I know! I'm being naive right now by thinking that reason could be applied to anything flying out of these idiots' asses, but....

[Mykeru]

I've been sick as fuck

That's why we love you man.

Hugs.

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

And of course, "rape" in French is "viol" :http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viol

Cultures, languages, the magic of it all...

[JackRayner]

Um....what the fuck is their problem, exactly?

All I'm really seeing is that their issue with the quote is that he's......."ignoring privilege"? [I'm ignoring the "speaking for blacks/women" bit, that's just ignant] What the fuck does that even mean? Are they saying that blacks and women should be treated as MORE than people? That they really want non-minority, non-women people [lol, all white men] to prostrate themselves?

I know, I know! I'm being naive right now by thinking that reason could be applied to anything flying out of these idiots' asses, but....

This was me, by the way. Not sure why I got logged out. [Totally misspelled "Guest", too. :lol: ]

[John Brown]

There are two layers of interpretation in the following paragraph. Stephanie Svan is quoting Esfahani Smith's article which uses one of Christina Hoff Sommer's quotes to drive the point home:

"Chivalry arose as a response to the violence and barbarism of the Middle Ages. It cautioned men to temper their aggression, deploying it only in appropriate circumstances—like to protect the physically weak and defenseless members of society. As the author and self-described “equity feminist” Christina Hoff Sommers tells me in an interview, “Masculinity with morality and civility is a very powerful force for good. But masculinity without these virtues is dangerous—even lethal.”

Note, Christina Hoff Sommers isn't talking about the concept of "chivalry," here. She's talking about the effects that civilization has had on taming "masculinity." Which seems to be true, though a narrow view of history. Civilization has tamed human nature, of which men *and* women are both a part. Camille Paglia brings this up repeatedly in her writings. The nature of mankind is to conquer nature. In doing so, we tame ourselves.

To be honest I don't like that quote. The way she worded it, it sounds like it's only masculinity that can be dangerous and lethal without morality and civility, which is not the same as saying "civilization has tamed human nature".

By focusing on "masculinity", even if it made sense in the context of chivalry, she made it sound like men are dangerous and need to be restrained, while women are not.

I like Christina Hoff Sommers a lot, and she has done a lot to counter rad-fem ideology, but she dropped the ball there.

Maybe she did, but it's one quote taken out of an entire interview, without any context. The reader has no idea what her "wider view" is unless they research her other work.

Even so, I agree with this quote. Masculinity without the constraints of civilization is barbarous. Her argument would have been better served had she said "Humans" instead of "Masculinity," but her point is taken.

[KarlVonMox]

Peezee, doth protesting a little too much as usual: http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... n-exposed/

Rebecca Watson: man asking a woman to come to his room 'for coffee' in an elevator: guys, don't do that. It's exploiting an asymmetrical power/privilege relationship, and completely ignores the possibility that the woman might not welcome this attention.

Peezee Myers: man asking a woman up on stage and proceeds to make lewd remarks at her: guys, do that, because - in the words of Hyperdeath on that thread - it's just harmless banter.

Sorry Peezee - I admire your efforts in doubling down on this, but really, you're...

[youtube]X1VgcxE9Lpw[/youtube]

These people are insane. PZ defines the parameters of what is sexism and what isn't, and it seems he can just change them at will to suit his purposes, even if they contradict each other all the time. If what PZ did on that stage isn't "exploiting an asymmetrical power/privilege relationship" according to what they have said all year, I want to see a full heartfelt apology to ElevatorGuy.

[Pitchguest]

Interesting video

GZAxwsg9J9Q

I don't see anyone here boasting about harassing. I am quite sure RW gets hate e-mail much as Jessica Alhquist does but what I don't see is evidence that it is from either atheists or slymepitters

That's the thing, innit? Both of these women are so sure they're dealing with proponents of either the atheist or gaming community, and they never once ask the question if maybe they're making sweeping generalisations or judging matters prematurely. However, I'm beginning to think if TED has begun to wane in importance or at least wane in the measures of quality control, if Anita Sarkeesian of all people is given an opportunity to talk at TED.
The thing is, many of her assertions are fallacious and many of them are false. Again, it's another one of those instances where I just don't get it. Seems to be a lot of that lately. For example, the most damning example I can think of

I know nothing really of gaming.

where you know she doesn't take this seriously or at the very least have no idea what she's talking about, is her review of Bayonetta where she outright lies about the plot, no clue as to how the game mechanics work and it's as if she worked

So she is being attacked not because she is female but because she does not know what she is talking about?
Can you mention any other female gamers who do know what they are talking about?

There's plenty of them on YouTube, but I just had a massive brainfart. Shit. Errr. The ones off the top of my head at the moment, Tara Long of Destructoid, Dodger Leigh (Press Heart to Continue), the host from ZoominGaming. Damn, so many I'm forgetting. Anyway, these people know what they're talking about. Not poseurs like Anita, and I'm not just saying that because she's a woman. She obviously has no idea.

[jimthepleb]

Interesting video

GZAxwsg9J9Q

I don't see anyone here boasting about harassing. I am quite sure RW gets hate e-mail much as Jessica Alhquist does but what I don't see is evidence that it is from either atheists or slymepitters

That's the thing, innit? Both of these women are so sure they're dealing with proponents of either the atheist or gaming community, and they never once ask the question if maybe they're making sweeping generalisations or judging matters prematurely. However, I'm beginning to think if TED has begun to wane in importance or at least wane in the measures of quality control, if Anita Sarkeesian of all people is given an opportunity to talk at TED.

The thing is, many of her assertions are fallacious and many of them are false. Again, it's another one of those instances where I just don't get it. Seems to be a lot of that lately. For example, the most damning example I can think of where you know she doesn't take this seriously or at the very least have no idea what she's talking about, is her review of Bayonetta where she outright lies about the plot, no clue as to how the game mechanics work and it's as if she worked off someone else's suggestion. Not just a sloppy review, but revealing. Either she has no interest in the future of gaming, or she's an opportunist. Or both. I mean, she hasn't even finished that one episode she promised to make four months ago - and the new schedule said it would be early winter, late autumn. Even by Canadian standards, that timestamp has long passed. Her latest update on her Kickstarter is December 10th, which you can't read unless you're a backer. Get fucking to it or get used to be called a fraud.*

*I mean, for fuck's sake, she needed $6000, she got that upshot by 26 times (and then some), what more does she need? She was supposed to do the fucking research herself anyway, so why is she asking her backers for "suggestions" on what to talk about? You're supposed to have that sorted out before you start asking for money, you idiot. Furthermore, projects that required 100 times the funding and was perhaps funded with 10% more than they hoped for is right on schedule for release. For example this project that I backed is soon to be Greenlit on Steam, and that needed a minimum of $500,000. What? What?

You beat me to the Kickstarter thing, damn you! Funnily enough, I saw an article about this very topic yesterday (complete with a couple of white knights in the comments): ![/quote]

Sarkeesian is a great demonstration of hypoagency in action. I particularly love her anti-lego diatribes as they are so poorly informed on so many levels, and she omits to mention that ALL lego people were sexless until recently, while opining the lack of 'female' firefighters. HTArcade on youtube has made a number of good videos on her 'project' although I wouldn't agree with all of his analysis.
Like RW and FftBers she confuses trolling (rife in the gaming community) with sexism.
There are some excellent girl-gamers out there, but they tend to be gaming IME rather than whinging about how excluded they feel. I would be more impressed if some of the more experienced and better known women gamers were joining in with sarki-poos but there is a deafening silence from all but the whiteknights one would usually expect to see. How she is getting a platform at developer conferences is beyond me, and she stands to do a great deal of damage to the medium if she continues to be listened to by those making the games.
There has been a backlash against her speech at TEDx though, including a very carefully worded letter to all the TEDx organisers telling them to be aware of 'woo' the timing of which leads me to think it was aimed at that speech in particular.

[KarlVonMox]

PZs comment #18 on that thread:

The person in the audience was a volunteer. If she’d shown any reluctance or embarrassment I would have let her step down, no problem.

I lol'ed at this. Imagine if EG had said anything remotely similar.

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

Apologizes to all for the lame puns and jokes, but lately I've found myself viewing the sheer stupidity of these SJWs to be not worthy of my time. What Mykeru and others said on the Schermer thread is more than enough (and boy, Ben Zvan is such a cunt!)