Periodic Table of Swearing

[Tigzy]

http://freethoughtblogs.com/dispatches/ ... riminally/

Ed sed:

Here’s an interesting development. Prosecutors in Belgium, where the “Church” of Scientology has its European headquarters, are preparing to file criminal charges against the organization for extortion, fraud, illegal practice of medicine and privacy violations...

If this works, it could be replicated in other countries. They’ve already been convicted of fraud in France. And if the evidence seized here builds a strong case, there’s no reason it couldn’t be used elsewhere.

What was that you said about not upsetting your advertisers, Ed?

[Tony Parsehole]

I'm suspicious of people who defend their ignorant, retarded opinions with "I was just trolling". Firstly it's an ideal way to deflect any criticism and claim superiority:"You actually believed I want all the queers rounded up and shot? Ha! I was just trolling and you are too stupid to see!"
Secondly no troll in his/her right mind just admits they are trolling.The fun is in stringing people along and getting peoples backs up. If, after a few angry replies, somebody says "Whoa I never meant it I was just trolling" I call bullshit. I could be wrong but this age old graphic exists for a reason.

Sometimes, they were trolling though, or just making a mockery out of something, and they do not want to be recognized as being serious. When I got too mad at someone they revealed they were trolling and I believed them. Not sure if I believe this person was trolling though ;)

Indeed. Sometimes they were "just trolling" but sometimes they weren't hence me being suspicious.

Good post on Pharyngula BTW!

[Tony Parsehole]

http://freethoughtblogs.com/dispatches/ ... riminally/

Ed sed:

Here’s an interesting development. Prosecutors in Belgium, where the “Church” of Scientology has its European headquarters, are preparing to file criminal charges against the organization for extortion, fraud, illegal practice of medicine and privacy violations...

If this works, it could be replicated in other countries. They’ve already been convicted of fraud in France. And if the evidence seized here builds a strong case, there’s no reason it couldn’t be used elsewhere.

What was that you said about not upsetting your advertisers, Ed?

Ed, the total fucking hypocrite. I hope TF00t sees your earlier screenshot of the Scientology advert and Ed's post.

[Eucliwood]

It's always been about poisoning the well with PZ and the rest of his cult. If you disagree with them in any way, you are tarred and feathered as a misogynist, rape enabler, rape apologist, MRA scumbag who is pissed off that his right to rape women is being threatened by the Gnu Feminists.

Also, if you disagree with them in any way, that makes you automatically a Slymepitter, whether or not you have actually heard of the Slymepit. It's how they downplay the fact that such a large portion of the atheist/skeptic community is disgusted by them - they just say "Oh, the opposition is just a few disgruntled slymepit scum, overlook them."

You have it to a T, sir. I think it's particularly shameful to abuse very serious labels such as "rape enabler" or "rape apologist." But they have no shame. I'd love to douse myself in invisible spray and slap all who abuse such labels.

It is on purpose. Some of his commenters can be excused for being stupid, but PZ has shown many times that he is a hypocrite with no moral standards. He deliberately misreads everything, as the frame is more important than reality. Funny how much he ragged on Mooney, yet now does the same things as him and that other guy who seemed to disappear from the internet (just remembered him, can't remember name), as well as his other "opponents" (maybe teachers would be better) such as Kwok and the Discovery Institute.

In a way, it's like the "you are what you eat" trope - PZ became the people he used to fight against.

Ugh, YESSS... disgusting and sad. I'm tired of him playing his stupid little games and getting away with it

Indeed. Sometimes they were "just trolling" but sometimes they weren't hence me being suspicious.

Good post on Pharyngula BTW!

Thanks hun. Where? Which one? And do YOU, Tony parsehole, mind having the ABSOLUTE HONOR of carrying out my idea?

I mean this one: "Okay, I have an idea. Can someone please say something like this on a blog post (that is NOT on Jason's blog) about the potential-rapist crap? Then tell me what their reaction is. You shouldn't say it verbatim.. you should say something like "If someone, knowing that I was accused of rape before, suspecting me of being capable of this before getting to know me, then they're probably not the type of person I want to be friends with anyway."

If they have a negative reaction, then we have a conflict here. Wait until the reaction to point out that a fellow blogger of theirs said such a thing, and ask if he was criticized or called the same things?

Might be a dumb idea but... I still want someone to do it."

Hopefully they aren't reading this and trying to prepare everyone to reply politely. Unfortunately, even if they do, it'll just prove they've got some conflicting views within themselves. ;)

[astrokid.nj]

...
He: Let's go to the real estate and sort it then
She: YOU WON'T TAKE MY WORD FOR IT (more excuses, some screaming, counter accusations, storms out of flat to call cops that she's terrified for her life from crazy boyfriend)

Etc. A drama that is played out in one variant or another every second of every day.

Crazy Woman Landlord Attacks Man & Then Tries To Cry Rape When She Realizes he's recording it
[youtube]WtkFOR3gYsE[/youtube]

Even the mainstream knows this shit for a long time.. Conviction but no tangible evidence

Last month, a jury in Stillwater, Okla., found the former Dunbar High School basketball player guilty on two counts of rape by instrumentation...
“This is the classic case of injustice: Eleven whites and one Asian on the jury. Two white victims. Darrell being a black male athlete. There is no corroborating evidence. No rape kit. No DNA. There is nothing in [Darrell’s] background that would make you think he would ever do anything like this,” Grant said.
“This is the classic lynching of a black male.”.

The only question is.. how many more men's lives have to be destroyed? Or as Erin Pizzey puts it, in Refuting 40 years of lies about domestic violence

"Dean: I’m sure there are Canadian and other men who are scoffing at this because they’ve never gotten into that situation, but I’ve…
Erin: Those men scoff all over the world, because it’s not their situation. Where is the humanity in men for each other? We women have it naturally with each other, but men don’t seem to have the same ability to discuss emotional issues.

[JackRayner]

Incidentally, good catches from Elevatorgate on Hensley - if they haven't been posted here.

http://elevatorgate.wordpress.com/2013/ ... um=twitter

Seriously? Only gynocentric ideologues like Hensley would try to turn the "friend zone" into something that shames women. PeeZus Christ! I've been working on getting guys [it's mostly always guys] out of the friend zone from both sides for several years now. Half of the time, I feel like these college kids I'm around think I'm smoking crack when spell it out for them.

For the men, I find that it is a refusal to believe that mom was fucking wrong, and "being nice" will not get you vagina [certainly not from your dream girl] unless you already have something that women want. It's another type of "just world" delusion, wherein if you're "nice" people will feel obligated to reciprocate in exactly the way that you want. Doesn't work that way.

For the women, I find that it is a bit of cowardice and/or over empathy. They're afraid of doing something that will upset someone else's fee fees...without realizing that all they're doing is prolonging the hurt fee feeness. Of course, I get looked at like I've just uttered some unspeakable evil when I suggest this to the friends that have asked in the past. The sad thing is that you end up with an angrier chump the longer this is prolonged.

I really wish people would just stop...

Incidentally, good catches from Elevatorgate on Hensley - if they haven't been posted here.

http://elevatorgate.wordpress.com/2013/ ... um=twitter

Melody Hensley: Women will be represented equally in the secular community as speakers conferences, and as leaders and board members of organizations.

If the Atheist Census gives an accurate representation of the secular community (73.6% male), a 50-50 male-female split is actually an over-representation of women, isn't it?

http://www.atheistcensus.com/

More women equals more equality! Haven't you been keeping up with your Feminism 101?! :whistle:

[Skep tickle]

... Indeed. Sometimes they were "just trolling" but sometimes they weren't hence me being suspicious.

Good post on Pharyngula BTW!

Thanks hun. Where? Which one? ...

Your post in PZ's thread that's on AVfM's post on Tf00t's video. I linked it above (in the post with PZ's banning comment about you, in red)

___

Several people are calling PZ out for not having watched the video, good for them. And I like this, comment #88 in that thread at PZ's:

Okay, PZ, so you are back to taking lessons from David Futrelle, attack the commentators of a blog, or zine, and ignore the issues the authors of that blog or zine have.

So, let me point out that John The Other has issued a challenge to debate you PZ.

http://www.avoiceformen.com/video/remin ... pz-meyers/

Anyway, let’s all think about what might happen PZ, if someone were to examine you or examine atheism by looking at the commentators and your commentator policy, and your explicit encouragement of their behaviors.

[Metalogic42]

I made a similar point as Eucliwood, over on Skepchick:

If you think people are ever obligated to let you have sex with their bodies for any reason, that’s fucked up and is the same thing that rapists think.

Many rapists also think that [insert your favorite food here] is delicious. So what? Obligation is not enforcement of obligation. Yes, sometimes rape is the enforcement of obligation (and other times, the obligation isn’t there to begin with), and that enforcement is wrong. But that doesn’t mean the obligation doesn’t exist.

And the response?

Something being delicious is not a common motivating factor for rape. Feeling that a person OWES you sex and you are therefore entitled to use of that person’s body is. This is a non-sequitur on your part.

This is exactly what PZ is doing. Even if most slymepitters were vile misogynists, he still wouldn't be justified in auto-banning every single one. Hell, even if literally every single one was a misogynist, he still shouldn't ban them, because being a misogynist, or a rapist, or a murderer, doesn't preclude one from making good points sometimes. And making a good point that many rapists happen to also make doesn't make one a rapist.

[JackRayner]

Carrie Poppy in full skepchick uniform. Morrissey glasses with pretendy-lenses and a Surly-ramic proclaiming she's a vegan. I never knew who Carrie Poppy was until 5 minutes ago and already I think she's a cunt.
http://skepchick.org/wp-content/uploads ... -small.jpg

Why are they all so fucking hideous? It may be one source for their resentment, but it's never an excuse.

You think so? :think:

Maybe it's the residual alcohol talking, but I'd let her rape me....

[Tigzy]

Oh bloody hell - there's just not enough laughing smileys in the world for this one:

PZ Myers

1 January 2013 at 12:46 pm (UTC -6)

Unfortunately for the argument some of you are making, I have zero interest in debating either Thunderf00t (he’d be throwing the straw so thickly I’d probably come down with terminal hay fever) or JohnTheOther (deadly dull psycho so in love with his own words he’d try to drown me in tedious loquaciousness). Both have discredited themselves as tools of a patriarchal pathology. That’s why I don’t watch either of their macho ideological videos, and why you aren’t going to convince me to start.

"THEM BOYS IS BOTH POSSESSED BY DEEMUNZ, I TELLS YA!"

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... ent-524808

Oh, and NoelPlum steps in:

PZ Myers @155

That’s why I don’t watch either of their macho ideological videos, and why you aren’t going to convince me to start.

This ideology just really baffles me. The idea that if you don’t like an opponents perspective you avoid coming in to contact with it and attempt to critique it blind is amongst the most absurd I have ever come across (and not the first time i have heard you or your house trolls make it)

I know you like to debunk releigion and it seriously concerns me that you haven’t the faintest idea what is involved: do you go out your way to ignore WLC, Plantinga, Comfort? Perhaps indulge in Ehrman, Finkelstein and R E Friedman but avowedly make sure you avoid wasting a single moment considering the counter cases because you know they will be wrong.

However full of shit you think Thunderf00t is (and god knows I have laid in to his videos enough times over the years) to not watch it is both ignorant and stupid.

Jim
of course i could be wrong here, obviously I am responding to this blog entry of yours having not read it /sarcasm off

Which immediately sets Nerd of Redhead off like a clapping monkey.

[Tony Parsehole]

Carrie Poppy in full skepchick uniform. Morrissey glasses with pretendy-lenses and a Surly-ramic proclaiming she's a vegan. I never knew who Carrie Poppy was until 5 minutes ago and already I think she's a cunt.
http://skepchick.org/wp-content/uploads ... -small.jpg

Why are they all so fucking hideous? It may be one source for their resentment, but it's never an excuse.

You think so? :think:

Maybe it's the residual alcohol talking, but I'd let her rape me....

I'd let Jeanette Krankie rape me but she's still an ugly cunt!

[another lurker]

If Pharyngulates are so intelligent, rational and mature, then why is there a "Lounge" and a "Thunderdome?"

Certainly, intellectuals of such a high caliber would not need special places to fight like high school children?

[UnbelieveSteve]

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

[Gumby]

Oh bloody hell - there's just not enough laughing smileys in the world for this one:

PZ Myers

1 January 2013 at 12:46 pm (UTC -6)

Unfortunately for the argument some of you are making, I have zero interest in debating either Thunderf00t (he’d be throwing the straw so thickly I’d probably come down with terminal hay fever) or JohnTheOther (deadly dull psycho so in love with his own words he’d try to drown me in tedious loquaciousness). Both have discredited themselves as tools of a patriarchal pathology. That’s why I don’t watch either of their macho ideological videos, and why you aren’t going to convince me to start.

Shorter PZ:
"Oh, I'd debate them, but I know they'd suck, so no way. Besides, they're patriarchal tools because I say so."

Those are the words of a shit-flinging coward who is clearly uncomfortable with the idea of actually defending his assertions.

[Gumby]

If Pharyngulates are so intelligent, rational and mature, then why is there a "Lounge" and a "Thunderdome?"

Certainly, intellectuals of such a high caliber would not need special places to fight like high school children?

Blog hits = revenue

[Metalogic42]

Telling me I have some kind of obligation to watch every asshole banging on about me on youtube is ridiculous. Have you noticed how many of those cretins are out there, and how repetitive and ‘noxious their claims are? Tf00t is only one of thousands, and he’s got less credibility on issues of equality than some random mullethead yanked out of a Hooters and put in front of a camera.

Hahahaha.

No PZ, you don't have an obligation to watch every one of your critics. But you do have an obligation to watch every one you decide to post about. And as for credibility - maybe Thunderf00t doesn't have expert credentials, but because he's been such a prominent face in the skeptic community for so long, he's certainly got far better credentials than most of the people who comment on your blog.

Seriously, PZ is trying his hardest to stir up trouble here. More fuel for the Us vs. Them fire.

[mikelf]

I suppose you mean this book:
http://i.imgur.com/hOneM.jpg

August of 2013? Da fuq? That's what, two years late now? Jesus, he's starting to get into Duke Nukem territory.

http://i1341.photobucket.com/albums/o74 ... 4fa84b.jpg

[Dick Strawkins]

For Renee
http://i.imgur.com/xuJgq.jpg

[Gumby]

Telling me I have some kind of obligation to watch every asshole banging on about me on youtube is ridiculous. Have you noticed how many of those cretins are out there, and how repetitive and ‘noxious their claims are? Tf00t is only one of thousands, and he’s got less credibility on issues of equality than some random mullethead yanked out of a Hooters and put in front of a camera.

Hahahaha.

No PZ, you don't have an obligation to watch every one of your critics. But you do have an obligation to watch every one you decide to post about. And as for credibility - maybe Thunderf00t doesn't have expert credentials, but because he's been such a prominent face in the skeptic community for so long, he's certainly got far better credentials than most of the people who comment on your blog.

Seriously, PZ is trying his hardest to stir up trouble here. More fuel for the Us vs. Them fire.

Well, at least he's finally acknowledging that there's thousands of people who think he's full of shit. They must all be SlymePitters, too, even though there's less than 500 registered users here.

[Skep tickle]

Totally boring thread at Atheism+ forum about Tf00t's video. Funny part is a mod altered the title of the thread to include TW (Trigger Warning).

[Gumby]

For Renee
http://i.imgur.com/xuJgq.jpg

Awesome. I love the juxtaposition of PZ and the robot. One's a synthetically intelligent repetitively babbling automaton, and the other is the robot.

[another lurker]

Gumby: are pharyngulates a particularly high caliber of intellectual?

Or do they just parrot the same talking points over and over?

[Gumby]

Totally boring thread at Atheism+ forum about Tf00t's video. Funny part is a mod altered the title of the thread to include TW (Trigger Warning).

Trigger warning: Someone is disagreeing with us on the internet!!!11!

Wussies.

[Metalogic42]

Totally boring thread at Atheism+ forum about Tf00t's video. Funny part is a mod altered the title of the thread to include TW (Trigger Warning).

Has anyone ever pointed out to them that their egregious use of "trigger warnings" probably disparages the experiences of people with PTSD who are actually harmed by trauma stressors?

[JackRayner]

So, listen to this by Ana Kasparian from the TYT Network. Watch the whole thing (it's only two minutes long):

[youtube]fBfngXUYlno[/youtube]

Right? She gets it.

Maybe.

They did a story a while back about some lady that had a photo of her's 'shopped so that there was a dick near her face and Ana when on some rant about how that should be banned. I think that was around the point that I unsubbed from their channel. [Also pretty sure that what followed was Ana having her head photoshopped into several porn stills by people across the web.]

Yea, the folk here at the Pit haven't taken it that far, but if one type of photoshopped image was banned, there would be no reason why the rest shouldn't follow...

[Jan Steen]

One of the creepier moments in Tf00t’s video is where a certain Esteleth says this:

Yeah, I could say all manner of words. You know, like, I have the right to do that. I have the Freedom of Speech. But my right to do that ends the second that's one, that somebody who's affected by those words hears me.

On the tread at Pharyngula where PZ pulls his guilt-by-association card on Tf00t, this very same Esteleth (who now calls herself Esteleth has eaten ALL the gingerbread! Suck it!) now says:

I will be the first to admit that what I said was phrased inarticulately. But seriously, if the accusation is that I’m an “ultra-PC” feminist harpy, then…

Is this a retraction, or just an admission that her grammar sucked? And if it is a retraction, why didn’t all the other bright SJWs present at the time (including PZ, Rebecca Watson and Anthony K) speak out against it right away? It's not exactly a triviality.

By the way, Tf00t is a “useless human being”, if we are to believe Anthony K here. It’s a pity that Jesus doesn’t exist, otherwise he could have availed himself of the assistance of Anthony during the Last Judgement.

There is talk of a new Google+ Pharyngula hangout. Veteran commenter Nerd of Redhead weighs in:

Like Esteleth, I would consider it badge of honor. But, until I retire, not enough hours in the day…

This clown is commenting 24/7 in every thread on Pharyngula, but there are not enough hours in the day for a video conference. WTF? He probably realises himself that shouting “citation needed” and “your OPINION can be dismissed” all the time will not be enough to sustain the conversation. Or maybe he just looks like Quasimodo.

[Pitchguest]

You know what, I'm half tempted to make an article praising something that PZ Myers have done and then send that article to AVfM. It's probably going to take me a while to find something that isn't incriminating, but I'm sure a while back, he would have something. Or maybe, just do a write-up about his other blog posts that were slammed by own commentariat, like his post about Michelle Bachmann with a corndog in her mouth -- a bit of sexually suggestive objectification on the run -- which of course was defended wholesale by his sycophants, and the original post now, sadly, memoryholed. Brilliant. Or how about when he recounted the story of a murdered woman who was choked to death by an octopus, and in a joke lamented the death of the octopus rather than the murdered woman. Genius. The blog post where he posts a picture of a bunny comic about a "girl bunny" depicted as the daft one is also pretty great and should be lauded considerably. Bravo, PZ, bravo.

Maybe adding the incident at Skepticon where -- bursting with machismo -- he propositioned a random woman in the audience for sex from his podium, for good measure. He is so money. PZ, if you're reading, know that you have my full support as a slymepitter.

:hankey:

[Dick Strawkins]

http://i.imgur.com/avCAO.jpg
Higher resolution image.

[Gumby]

Gumby: are pharyngulates a particularly high caliber of intellectual?

Or do they just parrot the same talking points over and over?

IMO there's some very bright people there but most of them are pseudo-intellectuals who unravel quickly and resort to personal attacks when serious attempts are made to debate them. Mostly, when they're not viciously piling on people, they like to hang out and try to impress each other with arcane trivia.

[another lurker]

Gumby: are pharyngulates a particularly high caliber of intellectual?

Or do they just parrot the same talking points over and over?

IMO there's some very bright people there but most of them are pseudo-intellectuals who unravel quickly and resort to personal attacks when serious attempts are made to debate them. Mostly, when they're not viciously piling on people, they like to hang out and try to impress each other with arcane trivia.

They recently piled on someone over the non-use of 'trigger warning' when the original post contained certain icky details, and there was no trigger warning for -that-. The 'miscreant' tried to defend him/herself with this information and was told 'this isn't about you, get off your cross.'

I love the irony! They make literally everything about them and the possibility of their hurt feelings!

[ReneeHendricks]

For Renee
http://i.imgur.com/xuJgq.jpg

Freaking awesome!!! Thanks :) Saved it so my guy can see it (when he's awake - the ban of being the non-swing shift adult).

[Skep tickle]

Here's another one at A+ forum: Tell us what you like about this place and its users - Opening post is by a mod (Catherine) and ends with this (bolded in original): Mod Note: this thread will be heavily moderated and any hint of negativity will be capriciously censored

Not surprisingly, it's a feel-good thread about A+. Here are a couple of 1-liners from the posts that follow:

"I feel like, for once, I can count on people listening to me on issues *I* find important."

"There is a distinct lack of libertarians. lol"
and in agreement to that: "Hee. Yes. That definitely raises the intelligence level and the sincerity of conversations here."

"1. It's existence. At all. Despite all the dicks and sticks and thicks that want it to go away.

2. The intelligence. And lots of it. Yum.

3. The honesty. Yes it's brutal at times, but who ever said this shit would be easy.

4. The variety. Plenty of people and ideas that I would not run into anywhere else. " (also challenges the comments above about libertarians)

"Conversations here are way less repetitive than in realms where trolls keep scribbling their agenda over my/our agenda with crayon."

"I like that the approach to solving problems here is to take them seriously. It's refreshing to have an alternative to the painfully obvious internet shitlord path where some person with time and opinions to spare just suggests that the solution to everything is to think and act just like them and then the problem would become a teeny-tiny non-problem. "

"I like being treated like a human being."

From Setar: "I like being able to talk about real solutions and being able to shove out people who barge in complaining that the real solutions don't work because they wrote this wall of jargon using their thesaurus and laced it with a lot of passive aggression, condescension and implications that they can't ever be called out on because they didn't say exactly that."

[Pitchguest]

So, listen to this by Ana Kasparian from the TYT Network. Watch the whole thing (it's only two minutes long):

fBfngXUYlno

Right? She gets it.

Maybe.

They did a story a while back about some lady that had a photo of her's 'shopped so that there was a dick near her face and Ana when on some rant about how that should be banned. I think that was around the point that I unsubbed from their channel. [Also pretty sure that what followed was Ana having her head photoshopped into several porn stills by people across the web.]

Yea, the folk here at the Pit haven't taken it that far, but if one type of photoshopped image was banned, there would be no reason why the rest shouldn't follow...

Possibly. But it seems now she's on the right track. As she says, it's the nature of the internet. If you want any chance of becoming a public figure, you need to get a thicker skin.

[Gumby]

Totally boring thread at Atheism+ forum about Tf00t's video. Funny part is a mod altered the title of the thread to include TW (Trigger Warning).

Has anyone ever pointed out to them that their egregious use of "trigger warnings" probably disparages the experiences of people with PTSD who are actually harmed by trauma stressors?

Trigger warning for Atheism+ thread about a video made by someone who doesn't agree with them: Necessary

Trigger warning for when Greg Laden tried to intentionally activate Justin Griffith's PTSD with threats of violence against him: Not necessary

Get it straight, willya?

[another lurker]

And I hate to point this out, really I do - there's a trope that feminists are ugly but damn, I recently watched a Pharyngula video, and the women ARE ugly.

BTW who is "Tony Leung' and some guy named "Scaramanga" - are they Pharyngula regulars? Do they go by different nicknames on the forum?

[ReneeHendricks]

First - that should have been "bane" not "ban" on my last post. Second - I'd love to know...where the fuck do these asshats at A+ go in the real world? I mean, they certainly can't expect the same level of, well, soft pillows, bouncy chairs/couches, and sweet musak being piped in that they do online, right?

[Gumby]

They recently piled on someone over the non-use of 'trigger warning' when the original post contained certain icky details, and there was no trigger warning for -that-. The 'miscreant' tried to defend him/herself with this information and was told 'this isn't about you, get off your cross.'

I love the irony! They make literally everything about them and the possibility of their hurt feelings!

I can only imagine the English language, and the content of most writing, if these incompetent nitwits ever had their way. I'm reminded of an old Cracked Magazine cartoon from decades ago, when they imagined what it would be like in a world so PC that no one was allowed to be offended. One panel of the cartoon is a TV news reporter near the scene of a fatal shooting. He says "We can't show you the scene itself of course, but here's some footage of a nearby pond and the startled looks on the faces of the ducks when the shots rang out!"

[Skep tickle]

First - that should have been "bane" not "ban" on my last post. Second - I'd love to know...where the fuck do these asshats at A+ go in the real world? I mean, they certainly can't expect the same level of, well, soft pillows, bouncy chairs/couches, and sweet musak being piped in that they do online, right?

Certainly they can! Didn't you read Luna's blog - the bears are supposed to accommodate the bunnies so as not to threaten, scare, or accidentally harm the bunnies at any time and in any way.

[Metalogic42]

Totally boring thread at Atheism+ forum about Tf00t's video. Funny part is a mod altered the title of the thread to include TW (Trigger Warning).

Has anyone ever pointed out to them that their egregious use of "trigger warnings" probably disparages the experiences of people with PTSD who are actually harmed by trauma stressors?

Trigger warning for Atheism+ thread about a video made by someone who doesn't agree with them: Necessary

Trigger warning for when Greg Laden tried to intentionally activate Justin Griffith's PTSD with threats of violence against him: Not necessary

Get it straight, willya?

*headdesk*

They really don't get it at all. The worst (best?) part is, "trigger warnings" are completely useless unless you know someone's specific trigger, because practically anything could potentially be a trigger - the sound of a bell, a picture of an open field, etc. But who knows, maybe they'll see this and TW the whole forum.

[welch]

I suppose you mean this book:
http://i.imgur.com/hOneM.jpg

August of 2013? Da fuq? That's what, two years late now? Jesus, he's starting to get into Duke Nukem territory.

http://i1341.photobucket.com/albums/o74 ... 4fa84b.jpg

ooohhhhh...good one

[another lurker]

They recently piled on someone over the non-use of 'trigger warning' when the original post contained certain icky details, and there was no trigger warning for -that-. The 'miscreant' tried to defend him/herself with this information and was told 'this isn't about you, get off your cross.'

I love the irony! They make literally everything about them and the possibility of their hurt feelings!

I can only imagine the English language, and the content of most writing, if these incompetent nitwits ever had their way. I'm reminded of an old Cracked Magazine cartoon from decades ago, when they imagined what it would be like in a world so PC that no one was allowed to be offended. One panel of the cartoon is a TV news reporter near the scene of a fatal shooting. He says "We can't show you the scene itself of course, but here's some footage of a nearby pond and the startled looks on the faces of the ducks when the shots rang out!"

People are not allowed to defend themselves. Ever, for any reason. They cannot even explain why. Nope. If you have sinned on Pharyngula, you are expected to automatically say "I am a worthless piece of shit I apologize for being so thoughtless/stupid/misogynistic/etc please forgive me I promise it will never happen again."

[Metalogic42]

First - that should have been "bane" not "ban" on my last post. Second - I'd love to know...where the fuck do these asshats at A+ go in the real world? I mean, they certainly can't expect the same level of, well, soft pillows, bouncy chairs/couches, and sweet musak being piped in that they do online, right?

Either they don't go out, ever; or they're inventing their offense just so they can start shit with people.

[somedumbguy]

Totally boring thread at Atheism+ forum about Tf00t's video. Funny part is a mod altered the title of the thread to include TW (Trigger Warning).

Has anyone ever pointed out to them that their egregious use of "trigger warnings" probably disparages the experiences of people with PTSD who are actually harmed by trauma stressors?

Oddly enough one or two feminists have made that point or similar:

http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blog ... n-asshole/

Of course, that was only years after MRAs, etc., pointed out how derailing and propagandistic trigger warnings were.

[Gumby]

First - that should have been "bane" not "ban" on my last post. Second - I'd love to know...where the fuck do these asshats at A+ go in the real world? I mean, they certainly can't expect the same level of, well, soft pillows, bouncy chairs/couches, and sweet musak being piped in that they do online, right?

Certainly they can! Didn't you read Luna's blog - the bears are supposed to accommodate the bunnies so as not to threaten, scare, or accidentally harm the bunnies at any time and in any way.

What about when the bears are in the mood for some hasenpfeffer? What's the bunny trigger warning for that?

[another lurker]

First - that should have been "bane" not "ban" on my last post. Second - I'd love to know...where the fuck do these asshats at A+ go in the real world? I mean, they certainly can't expect the same level of, well, soft pillows, bouncy chairs/couches, and sweet musak being piped in that they do online, right?

Either they don't go out, ever; or they're inventing their offense just so they can start shit with people.

I was reading a radfem blog and one of the posters said that she was excellent at 'playing feminine' in the real world, but when she got home she could relax and be all HATE HATE HATE!

So, perhaps, this is how the FTBers go about their lives.

BTW, could someone explain to me the other side of the story in regards to Rebecca Watson and Elevator Gate? Over the past few months I have been an infrequent reader of FTB - and I just tuned out the drama because it was stupid and did not interest me. But I would like to know. The FTBers keep saying that a guy was really creepy in the elevator, and that Rebecca Watson was like 'hey dudes, don't be creepy in elevators' and then apparently the entire blogosphere erupted with people making misogynistic death threats against Rebecca Watson because she said something so reasonable.

The thing is, what she said -is- reasonable. And the reaction to that seems way over the top. So my question is, what details, if any, are the A+ people glossing over in this episode? I cannot see the rest of the atheist community being THIS hateful and THIS misogynistic over something as non-controversial as 'hey, don't hit on chicks in confined spaces it's scary'.

Can anyone enlighten me?

[Skep tickle]

And I hate to point this out, really I do - there's a trope that feminists are ugly but damn, I recently watched a Pharyngula video, and the women ARE ugly. ...

Most people, male and female, don't match the societal expectation for beauty, and atheist/skeptic groups seem to have at least their fair share of those.

If you want a convention full of babes, you might try a gathering of Christian women, where you'll find some fair proportion who claim they need to work hard to make/keep themselves looking good, for God/Jesus/their husbands. For example this "Makeover devotional, http://www.juliabettencourt.com/dev/beautifuldev.html:

One thing about beauty that we all know as women is that it is a daily thing. In other words we have to keep ourselves up. If we let ourselves go what happens? We're not quite so beautiful anymore are we? It is the same with being beautiful in Christ. We have to constantly work at it. Here are some things to help us improve our beauty in Christ.

(goes on to list cleanser, moisturizer, wrinkle cream, foundation, eye makeup, lipstick)

[comslave]

Oh bloody hell - there's just not enough laughing smileys in the world for this one:

PZ Myers

1 January 2013 at 12:46 pm (UTC -6)

Unfortunately for the argument some of you are making, I have zero interest in debating either Thunderf00t (he’d be throwing the straw so thickly I’d probably come down with terminal hay fever) or JohnTheOther (deadly dull psycho so in love with his own words he’d try to drown me in tedious loquaciousness). Both have discredited themselves as tools of a patriarchal pathology. That’s why I don’t watch either of their macho ideological videos, and why you aren’t going to convince me to start.

Shorter PZ:
"Oh, I'd debate them, but I know they'd suck, so no way. Besides, they're patriarchal tools because I say so."

Those are the words of a shit-flinging coward who is clearly uncomfortable with the idea of actually defending his assertions.

It seems I recall watching a video where PeeZus willingly debates debated a muslim, whose views were infinitely more patriarchal than anything Thunderf00t would come up with.

[Scented Nectar]

And I hate to point this out, really I do - there's a trope that feminists are ugly but damn, I recently watched a Pharyngula video, and the women ARE ugly.

BTW who is "Tony Leung' and some guy named "Scaramanga" - are they Pharyngula regulars? Do they go by different nicknames on the forum?

Many try to be ugly on purpose (especially lesbians - crewcut hair + ugly hipster glasses), in hopes that less men will think sexual thoughts about them, and conversely, others do the opposite of that, a kind of stubborn insistence that men should find them attractive without them having to groom, or look good, or even despite looking fugly bad. A man is a sexist if he can't get it up for a 500 pound woman with braided pit hair and legs hairier than a horse, and the breath of her friend's menstrual blood. He's sexist because he gets aroused by whatever is currently thought of as good looking, instead of what's not considered good looking. A nonsexist man, they'll claim, will be aroused by her brain alone (assuming she has one). You better not friendzone her, you misogynist!

But don't dare switch it around and expect them to fuck anything other than some ideal man that only exists in their heads, and who even if real, wouldn't be able to get it up for the fugly even with 20 viagras and a paper bag.

[Gumby]

People are not allowed to defend themselves. Ever, for any reason. They cannot even explain why. Nope. If you have sinned on Pharyngula, you are expected to automatically say "I am a worthless piece of shit I apologize for being so thoughtless/stupid/misogynistic/etc please forgive me I promise it will never happen again."

And then you are still under scrutiny until you have proven beyond all doubt that you have acquiesced completely to whatever FTB/A+ PC dogma is in vogue. There's one guy who repeatedly apologized on A+ for things he thought and felt that were against A+ feminist dogma... things he thought and felt many years before. He was basically begging for forgiveness for being a male. He simply couldn't grovel and debase himself enough before the A+ fems. It was pathetic mewling for approval. I wish I had screencaps of that. Maybe i'll look sometime.

[Rystefn]

So, I prefer to mostly just read what other people are saying; and if I do bother to open my mouth at all it's only occasionally, and really only to relieve boredom - I tend to just stay on the sidelines rather than "take sides" by actually joining a community. But after an extremely headdesk-worthy exchange on skepchick.org wherein I was accused of being a rapist even though I explicitly stated "rape is wrong" (here if you want to read it: http://skepchick.org/2012/12/skepchick- ... /#comments), I've realized that this ridiculousness is getting to be a huge problem, so I'm throwing my lot in with y'all.

So, hi everyone. I guess I'm an evil misogynistic bastard now. :lol:

I'm still catching up, but I just had to say how terribly, terribly sorry I am that you had to cross paths with that hysterical harpy, Marilove. That bitch is fucking insane. One time she was flipping out and screaming at one person that it is the man's fucking responsibility to make sure the woman has an orgasms every time they have sex, while at the same time screaming at another person about how some women cannot ever have orgasms no matter what happens. The cognitive dissonance would make my fucking head asplode.

[Skep tickle]

... BTW, could someone explain to me the other side of the story in regards to Rebecca Watson and Elevator Gate? Over the past few months I have been an infrequent reader of FTB - and I just tuned out the drama because it was stupid and did not interest me. But I would like to know. The FTBers keep saying that a guy was really creepy in the elevator, and that Rebecca Watson was like 'hey dudes, don't be creepy in elevators' and then apparently the entire blogosphere erupted with people making misogynistic death threats against Rebecca Watson because she said something so reasonable.

The thing is, what she said -is- reasonable. And the reaction to that seems way over the top. So my question is, what details, if any, are the A+ people glossing over in this episode? I cannot see the rest of the atheist community being THIS hateful and THIS misogynistic over something as non-controversial as 'hey, don't hit on chicks in confined spaces it's scary'.

Can anyone enlighten me?

There was some discussion here a couple of days ago (so, like 40 pages ago, heh) about a 2010 thread at Laden's blog that showed that some of this stuff was already roiling around, with Stephanie Zvan a chief roiler, back then.

Also consider how toxic the commenters at PZ's site have been, starting well before the Elevatorgate thing.

Spark, meet gasoline.

[another lurker]

And I hate to point this out, really I do - there's a trope that feminists are ugly but damn, I recently watched a Pharyngula video, and the women ARE ugly.

BTW who is "Tony Leung' and some guy named "Scaramanga" - are they Pharyngula regulars? Do they go by different nicknames on the forum?

Many try to be ugly on purpose (especially lesbians - crewcut hair + ugly hipster glasses), in hopes that less men will think sexual thoughts about them, and conversely, others do the opposite of that, a kind of stubborn insistence that men should find them attractive without them having to groom, or look good, or even despite looking fugly bad. A man is a sexist if he can't get it up for a 500 pound woman with braided pit hair and legs hairier than a horse, and the breath of her friend's menstrual blood. He's sexist because he gets aroused by whatever is currently thought of as good looking, instead of what's not considered good looking. A nonsexist man, they'll claim, will be aroused by her brain alone (assuming she has one). You better not friendzone her, you misogynist!

But don't dare switch it around and expect them to fuck anything other than some ideal man that only exists in their heads, and who even if real, wouldn't be able to get it up for the fugly even with 20 viagras and a paper bag.

I used to work as a stripper. I had those black plastic glasses back in 1999. Guys found them to be super sexy hot. And now the emo crowd has ruined it. If I ever get another pair of glasses like that, people will just assume im a douchebag. It's irritating.

And I was treated like a piece of meat when I was a dancer. Both men and women were equally nasty. Many men were pretty shitty, propositioning me, attempting to cheat on their wives. Upstanding members of the community, no less. But I never did learn to hate men. I just learned that not all people are as they seem, especially the upwardly mobile folks. Mostly however, I learned that a lot of guys are just lonely and want a girl to flirt with them. I was a failure as a stripper because I was too shy to flirt. I just could not 'pretend' to be attracted to someone when I wasn't.

[Gumby]

It seems I recall watching a video where PeeZus willingly debates debated a muslim, whose views were infinitely more patriarchal than anything Thunderf00t would come up with.

If it's the same video I'm thinking of (and I might very well be wrong), it was at GAC in Melbourne a year or so ago, and it was a brief exchange outdoors, more than a more formal debate. I remember it being more about creationism than anything else. If you can find the vid I'd be interested in checking it out. I'll look as well.

[CommanderTuvok]

For Renee
http://i.imgur.com/xuJgq.jpg

Do the Pit Crew realise the original 1960s Lost In Space series was set in 1997!!!

:lol:

[Skep tickle]

A new thread at Atheism+ forum: Jen McCreight has moved past Internet Atheism, ... by SkepticalJay, a member for 4 months but with low post count. In opening post he links to her announcements on twitter and says:

There are other interesting tweets there too expressing her frustration with (my terrible paraphrasing) organized or Internet feminism, which I also interpret to mean atheism plus.

Have we gone too far? I don't feel that myself, but well some of the threads around here do not express the feelings of tolerance and support for others I had thought atheism plus was about several months ago.

I do note though that as a white, attractive, young, grad student, perhaps Ms. McCreight needs to check her privilege when comparing feminism to the "Portlandia feminist bookstore."

No responses yet (it hasn't been up long).

[Metalogic42]

Totally boring thread at Atheism+ forum about Tf00t's video. Funny part is a mod altered the title of the thread to include TW (Trigger Warning).

Has anyone ever pointed out to them that their egregious use of "trigger warnings" probably disparages the experiences of people with PTSD who are actually harmed by trauma stressors?

Oddly enough one or two feminists have made that point or similar:

http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blog ... n-asshole/

Of course, that was only years after MRAs, etc., pointed out how derailing and propagandistic trigger warnings were.

Check out this prophetic comment from that link (bold mine):

Definitely don't want you to add trigger warnings. I don't object to their being used sometimes, & I can appreciate the idea that a feminist blog should be a "safe space" of sorts where women don't have to fear seeing traumatic subjects discussed insensitively. But the way it's used on many blogs is just ridiculous -- if a post has rape or assault in the title/subject matter, the writer will put a warning, even if there's nothing in the post more graphic than the word "rape." I've seen it even with less violent topics like a woman being called called a bitch... which I suppose could be triggering to a woman who's been verbally harassed... but it just seems like major overkill. & anyway, the amount of asshole comments this blog gets renders the "safe space" idea moot.

[Darren]

One of the creepier moments in Tf00t’s video is where a certain Esteleth says this:

Yeah, I could say all manner of words. You know, like, I have the right to do that. I have the Freedom of Speech. But my right to do that ends the second that's one, that somebody who's affected by those words hears me.

That was one of the stupider moments in a clip full of stupidity.

Even if we accept her assertion for the sake of argument, does she realise "speech", in the free-speech sense, doesn't just refer to vocalisation? Should we refrain from writing anything that someone, somewhere, at some time, might "be affected by" just in case they read it?

What a dolt.

[Gumby]

I used to work as a stripper. I had those black plastic glasses back in 1999. Guys found them to be super sexy hot. And now the emo crowd has ruined it. If I ever get another pair of glasses like that, people will just assume im a douchebag. It's irritating.

Yes, those nerdy glasses used to be very sexy. Now it screams "useless annoying hipster".
http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd24 ... 67a7a7.jpg

[comslave]

And I hate to point this out, really I do - there's a trope that feminists are ugly but damn, I recently watched a Pharyngula video, and the women ARE ugly.

BTW who is "Tony Leung' and some guy named "Scaramanga" - are they Pharyngula regulars? Do they go by different nicknames on the forum?

There's an inverse porportion rule out there that states a woman's fear of being raped is inversely porportional to her atractiveness. I suspect this is because attractive women have no problem acquiring the company of men, and therefore have a harder time developing bigotted assertions about them, whereas unattractive women have fewer contacts with men and therefore find it easier to hold bigotted assertions.

It's basically similar to how some white people are afraid of people of color due to not knowing any.

It also has to be noted that beauty is often performed. That is to say, you need to make an effort to keep the weight off and wear makeup. A woman who hates men professionally is likely to do whatever it takes to not be attractive.

[Skep tickle]

It seems I recall watching a video where PeeZus willingly debates debated a muslim, whose views were infinitely more patriarchal than anything Thunderf00t would come up with.

If it's the same video I'm thinking of (and I might very well be wrong), it was at GAC in Melbourne a year or so ago, and it was a brief exchange outdoors, more than a more formal debate. I remember it being more about creationism than anything else. If you can find the vid I'd be interested in checking it out. I'll look as well.

This is from World Atheism Conference in Dublin in 6/2011, not sure if it's the same encounter y'all are remembering. (Note this video is from the Muslim "side"):

[youtube]3T5Pm7qLH50[/youtube]