Periodic Table of Swearing

[papillon]

Nice. I like your improvised hammer and sickle much better than mine.
I might have to modify my avatar now. I was going to replace the stars with three tiny racist hats to give it a fashionable twist for Spring-Summer.
[spoiler]http://i.imgur.com/7SSFq.jpg[/spoiler]

[Za-zen]

Never understood the logic behind having your mags to the front of your webbing. When prone you have to tilt your body in order to reload. When crouched they are just damn awkward. Our standard layout was on our hips, makes for a fast tac reload too.

Or you could just hit the 'R' key and Reload.
Noob.

That's the way our tactical vests were also. During training we went prone but more of our engagements in Afghanistan we were either standing or kneeling.

I always tried to spend as much time as possible laying down. Bonus points for the "r" to reload.

[JTC]

Never understood the logic behind having your mags to the front of your webbing. When prone you have to tilt your body in order to reload. When crouched they are just damn awkward. Our standard layout was on our hips, makes for a fast tac reload too.

Or you could just hit the 'R' key and Reload.
Noob.

That's the way our tactical vests were also. During training we went prone but more of our engagements in Afghanistan we were either standing or kneeling.

I always tried to spend as much time as possible laying down. Bonus points for the "r" to reload.

Of course prone is the most stable and safe position. A lot of our tics were in cities and poppy/marijuana fields.

[Jan Steen]

The Colombian guerrilla group Farc claim they are fighting for social justice. One of their Social Justice Warriors is, curiously enough, a Dutch girl from a normal, that is to say, privileged background.

Tanja Nijmeijer, a graduate whose 'social justice' quest led to a fighting role with the Farc rebels, is negotiating with Havana.

Nijmeijer became involved in the Farc's network of urban guerrillas in Bogotá, helping to bomb police stations and the city's bus network, crimes for which she has been indicted in Colombian courts.

The Farc is accused of indiscriminate killing of civilians, forced recruitment and kidnapping. She is unapologetic, saying the guerrillas are not the victimisers. "We have been the victims of this war," she says, despite the tens of thousands of civilians affected by Farc actions.

What would her role be in a post-conflict Colombia? "I am a Farc guerrilla and will continue to be one," she says. "If we achieve peace with social justice I would stay in the Farc and continue to do what is needed."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/ja ... s-colombia

Having been in Colombia myself, I can state that I have nothing but contempt for this guerrilla scum who kidnap and murder perfectly ordinary people. They are just as bad as the local drug mafia and the paramilitary groups.

Why do I bring this up? Well, from now on, every time I hear one of the FTB/A+ bloggers or commenters going on about social justice, I can point to those Colombian guerrillas, who consider themselves Social Justice Warriors and victims, and say calmly: “you are no better than them.”

Is that unreasonable? Not if you ask PZ Myers. That's how guilt by association works.

[sacha]

uniforms don't suit me... except for Catholic schoolgirl skirts..

Useless without the patent leather shoes. Which is why I didn't give you one of the cool kid's hats.

saddle shoes. I have a vintage pair in perfect condition.

schoolgirls.jpg

(15.1 KiB) Downloaded 118 times

The Catholic school uniform stereotype consists of a pleated plaid skirt or jumper (a sleeveless dress), Mary Jane or saddle shoes, a blouse, and a sweater, for girls

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_school_uniform

[Darren]

I'm a few pages behind, so this may have been already corrected, but I want to get this out before I move on:

Regarding Matt Dillahunty, a couple points:

1) he seems to be quite the prima donna. I caught the start of a TAE show once, where he was yelling and screaming at the production crew, and bragging about how "I am a famous atheist, any show would love to have me, so don't be so incompetent."

This, IIRC, was staged for the lulz. The crew were all in on it.

2) either it was TAE or the non-prophets, I cannot remember, but I think it might have been Russell Glasser who said that it was entirely -acceptable- to mutilate baby boys.

Yes, this was Glasser. He's the whiniest of the lot.

[ReneeHendricks]

Bwahahahahahahaha! Entirely too funny:

@jennifurret If you debate my blocking policies or what is or isn't harassment, you'll be blocked. Tweeting at me is a privilege, not a right

Yes. Tweeting *you*, Jenni, is a "privilege".

[another lurker]

Mykeru wrote:

My totally anecdotal experience is that people, once they can break out of the "don't get involved" apathy, aren't women hating transphobic misogynistic racist scumbags. Most people think rape is a terrible, inexcusable thing. That gay bashing is a criminal act. That if there is a widespread practice of paying women less, all things being equal, the hammer would come down.

Am I wrong? Does that prove I don't get it? Should I seek enlightenment by assuming most people are shits?

Most people are not shits. I think, more than anything, people will try to avoid confrontation, or just succumb to peer pressure. I don't know a whole lot about Muslim societies, but from what I have seen on TV (a Canadian woman made a documentary about the treatment of women in Algeria) it's pretty clear that though these societies may be restrictive, that it's certainly not routine for every single husband to beat every single wife. The husbands interviewed in the documentary about Algeria seemed to support their wives, but felt trapped by societal expectations, and the whole -honour- thing. So in short, people, as a whole, are not shits. However, creeps will take advantage of any power they are granted, by virtue of race/sex/religion/etc.

And Mykeru, I noticed that you are presented as the anti-christ over on FTB. To me, you sound like a perfectly reasonable fella :)

[JackRayner]

For the record, I have really only heard the FTB et al. opinions on rape culture. Well, that and a bit of what MRA's have to, but many of them are batshit crazy as well.

What's so crazy about stating that "rape culture" does not exist where we live? :think:

Jack, MRA's say a lot of things. And some of those things are reasonable, and some are not. I was talking about the crazy shit. I am still learning about rape culture. The extreme MRA's are no better than the extreme SJW's, imo. Utterly.Fucking.Delusional.Dreams.of.Imagined.Persecution.

Tell some of those. At this moment, what you're saying just sounds like middlegrounder nonsense; "Feminists say some crazy shit about rape culture... Ooh, ooh! Almost forgot: but so do MRAs!"

I'm being serious; name some of the "crazy" things that some MRAs say about rape culture. I haven't heard any yet, and I'll join in and call it crazy if it conflicts with reality.
:popcorn:

[real horrorshow]

Suddenly it all becomes very clear: the hipster skepchicks are channeling Velma from Scooby Doo.

Thanks a bunch for ruining that fantasy for me. :-x

Maybe this will help: cosplay Velma

[Edina Monsoon]

I'm a few pages behind, so this may have been already corrected, but I want to get this out before I move on:

Regarding Matt Dillahunty, a couple points:

1) he seems to be quite the prima donna. I caught the start of a TAE show once, where he was yelling and screaming at the production crew, and bragging about how "I am a famous atheist, any show would love to have me, so don't be so incompetent."

This, IIRC, was staged for the lulz. The crew were all in on it.

Yup, it was for April Fool's Day.

[Angry_Drunk]

Atheism is that, I fully agree, and a person's atheism conveys no information about their politics. But if we're talking about an atheist movement? If we mean a movement to make more people atheists, a proselytising campaign, then yes, that would also be politically neutral. But if we mean a secular movement, looking to do away with religious constraints on freedom, then it seems to me that's a libertarian cause.

Hypothetically it might be that the religious constraint on my freedom is a tithe, which the Church will spend on battered women's shelters; that's a good cause, but I'd want that tithe gone all the same, and any atheist movement worthy of the name would campaign against it. We're out to be free of religious interference, just as the libertarians are out to be free of state interference, and that's why I characterise the atheist movement as a basically libertarian concept.

I don't think it's possible to argue that "secularism" necessarily follows from "atheism". It's fully possible to be an atheist (lack of belief in deities) and believe that the State should enforce a Church (Buddhism, Cult of Personality, etc). Conversely many secularists are, in fact, theists who happen to believe that the State and Church should be separate.

In that regard yes, "secularism" can be considered a "libertarian*" philosophy but in no way can the same be said of "atheism".

*I'm purposefully ignoring the fact that many people (not saying you) say "libertarian" and actually mean "Libertarian".

[Altair]

Maybe this will help: cosplay Velma

Hmm, between that picture and Sacha's link that took me to Wikipedia's page about Uniform Fetishism, my productivity for the rest of the afternoon will be zero.
That's what I get from reading the Pyt at work.

[Mykeru]

Never understood the logic behind having your mags to the front of your webbing. When prone you have to tilt your body in order to reload. When crouched they are just damn awkward. Our standard layout was on our hips, makes for a fast tac reload too.

Mine is to the left just behind the mid-line. You have to also consider where that mag and tac light are going to end up if you bend over. Having to draw, much less reload is pretty low on the list of things that will actually happen. For tromping around in the woods you have to be able to move for cutting wood, bending over a fire cooking. A firearm is a "just in case" item and 99.9% of the time it's just three lbs of "just in case" dead weight. You hope.

I had one guy on an outing going on about buying a bulletproof vest. It was the same guy who thought buying gold for the collapse of civilization was a good idea. I gave a miss on pointing out that civilization is just fine and concentrated on how tasty gold is and what intrinsic value it has greater than, say, antibiotics for trade. Anyway, I pointed out that avoiding getting yourself in stupid situations and not carrying around dead weight that impedes mobility, is probably a better strategy. Oh, and he was wearing cotton m1980 cammo BDUs and it started raining. I had to loan him a poncho. Well, it is kind of trial and error.

But he did listen, which goes to show even a newb survivalist is more open to dissent than an FTBer.

Also, I made note that in case of emergency, I would kill and eat him first.

[Darren]

BTW, on Thunderfoot's video (this is something my husband noticed), on the fFTB Google Hangout notice how many times Peezus kept hitting on Becka's screen...she wasn't even talking.

Is that how it works? I just assumed it was voice activated. If Rebecca was particularly close to her mic, her breathing may have set if off?

[sacha]

I've got a heads up on PeeZus' next post. It will go something like this:

"It turns out Adolf Hitler was a vegetarian. The company you vegetarians keep. *tut*"

hate to be a pedant, but Hitler was nota vegetarian

Ha ha, I did wonder if someone would pick up on that. Luckily, since my point was only "associate with", then it would still stand even if Hitler was faking vegetarianism.

Although as with Franc, I am unconvinced by the claims he wasn't a veggie. Most such claims rely on the fact that he was reported to have liked meat (several of my vegetarian friends also like meat and ate it prior to conversion; some have real difficulties with bacon, it does not mean they are not vegetarian), and that it was a ruse to appear pure. The latter argument is particularly unconvincing, appears to have no direct supporting evidence and only seems to be added to allow the dismissal of the fairly large stack of evidence supporting his vegetarianism from contemporary reports.

But then, there are so many people who have researched Hitler, you can find a historian somewhere who will make pretty much any claim you can think of. I can find you historians who claim Hitler was an atheist :whistle:

Vegetarian or not, it's irrelevant either way, I just want to see the word used correctly.

baby deer.png

(68.09 KiB) Downloaded 102 times

[Darren]

Is that how it works? I just assumed it was voice activated. If Rebecca was particularly close to her mic, her breathing may have set if off?

This is why I should read the whole thread before replying... my question has already been answered.

[Tony Parsehole]

Latest is up: http://dissentionisnothate.wordpress.co ... ly-adults/

Nice one mate. Funny and snarky. My favourite.

[another lurker]

[spoiler]

For the record, I have really only heard the FTB et al. opinions on rape culture. Well, that and a bit of what MRA's have to, but many of them are batshit crazy as well.

What's so crazy about stating that "rape culture" does not exist where we live? :think:

Jack, MRA's say a lot of things. And some of those things are reasonable, and some are not. I was talking about the crazy shit. I am still learning about rape culture. The extreme MRA's are no better than the extreme SJW's, imo. Utterly.Fucking.Delusional.Dreams.of.Imagined.Persecution.

Tell some of those. At this moment, what you're saying just sounds like middlegrounder nonsense; "Feminists say some crazy shit about rape culture... Ooh, ooh! Almost forgot: but so do MRAs!"[/spoiler]

That women are the biggest oppressors of men throughout history. That women are more violent and aggressive than men. That women are the real oppressors of well, everything. That women force men to go fight and die in wars so they can stay home, have babies, and knit.

And the reason that I am 'middle-grounding' as you put it, is because this whole 'men vs. woman' thing is completely asinine. We need to look at culture and society as a whole, and analyse -why- things are the way they are, instead of blaming one race/sex for all of society's ills. Men as a whole are not an evil monolith, and neither are women. And if injustice exists, we need to ask why, and not point fingers and say 'hehehe evil plot by men to get more pussy' or 'hehe evil plot by women to have babies and oppress men'.

Both viewpoints are completely delusional and do nothing but encourage one group to hate another.

And for the record, my experience thus far, in regards to what blogs I have read, is this: FTB for a few months, a little big of AVFM, RawStory.

Podcasts I have listened to: Bob Price, Cognitive Dissonance, TAE, Godless Bitches, Thinking Atheist, The Angry Atheist, Inkredulous, Irreligiosophy.

As you can see, I am just starting. Have I been getting a completely balanced view? Perhaps not, but that's why I am here:P

[Darren]

So for my New Years resolution I promised myself I need to read books more often. I have a small problem though. After a few pages I tend to read myself into a trace and start skimming. Does anyone else have this problem and how did you overcome it?

I only have this problem if I'm reading something I'm not particularly interested in. Solution: Read stuff you are interested in.

[Tony Parsehole]

[spoiler]

http://i.imgur.com/7SSFq.jpg

[/spoiler]

Can't believe you made that on Gimp. You're such a cunt.

[Lsuoma]

Did I break the board with my last post? All I did was use the quote function, as usual. Sorry if I did, no idea what went wrong!

No, I think it was me abusing the spoiler tags. Sorry everyone! :oops:

I'm going to edit your post to take the spoiler tags out.

[Mykeru]

saddle shoes. I have a vintage pair in perfect condition.

Pics or GTFO.

And Mykeru, I noticed that you are presented as the anti-christ over on FTB. To me, you sound like a perfectly reasonable fella

I know, aren't I? For some reason, we get that a lot here in the SlymePit.

[Tony Parsehole]

So for my New Years resolution I promised myself I need to read books more often. I have a small problem though. After a few pages I tend to read myself into a trace and start skimming. Does anyone else have this problem and how did you overcome it?

I've quit two books in my life. Stalin by Robert service was sacked about 50-70 pages from the end because it was as interesting as reading a washing machine repair manual (Simon Sebag Montefiore's bio was much better IMO) and I stopped reading Ulysses by James Joyce after about 150 pages of complete nonsense because it's fucking shite.
A good tip to sticking with a book is getting rid of distractions. Turn off the telly and lock the kids in the cellar/shed, make a cuppa and enjoy.

[Guest]

Atheism is that, I fully agree, and a person's atheism conveys no information about their politics. But if we're talking about an atheist movement? If we mean a movement to make more people atheists, a proselytising campaign, then yes, that would also be politically neutral. But if we mean a secular movement, looking to do away with religious constraints on freedom, then it seems to me that's a libertarian cause.

Hypothetically it might be that the religious constraint on my freedom is a tithe, which the Church will spend on battered women's shelters; that's a good cause, but I'd want that tithe gone all the same, and any atheist movement worthy of the name would campaign against it. We're out to be free of religious interference, just as the libertarians are out to be free of state interference, and that's why I characterise the atheist movement as a basically libertarian concept.

I don't think it's possible to argue that "secularism" necessarily follows from "atheism". It's fully possible to be an atheist (lack of belief in deities) and believe that the State should enforce a Church (Buddhism, Cult of Personality, etc). Conversely many secularists are, in fact, theists who happen to believe that the State and Church should be separate.

In that regard yes, "secularism" can be considered a "libertarian*" philosophy but in no way can the same be said of "atheism".

*I'm purposefully ignoring the fact that many people (not saying you) say "libertarian" and actually mean "Libertarian".

Ah, quite right. Secularism is a group of which atheism is not a strict subset. You may consider that point cheerfully conceded.

And yes, 'libertarian' is another one of those words that's become distorted with time, especially when capitalised. I call myself a liberal, but so many people these days think _that_ is a synonym for 'socialist' as well! It's really quite a terrible mess.

[LMU]

Did I break the board with my last post? All I did was use the quote function, as usual. Sorry if I did, no idea what went wrong!

No, I think it was me abusing the spoiler tags. Sorry everyone! :oops:

I'm going to edit your post to take the spoiler tags out.

Thanks! I'll go write "Use the preview button!" 50 times :oops:

[Tigzy]

...I stopped reading Ulysses by James Joyce after about 150 pages of complete nonsense because it's fucking shite...

That said, Joyce's mucky love letters to Nora Barnacle are pure poetry:

My sweet little whorish Nora I did as you told me, you dirty little girl, and pulled myself off twice when I read your letter. I am delighted to see that you do like being fucked arseways. Yes, now I can remember that night when I fucked you for so long backwards. It was the dirtiest fucking I ever gave you, darling. My prick was stuck in you for hours, fucking in and out under your upturned rump. I felt your fat sweaty buttocks under my belly and saw your flushed face and mad eyes. At every fuck I gave you your shameless tongue came bursting out through your lips and if a gave you a bigger stronger fuck than usual, fat dirty farts came spluttering out of your backside. You had an arse full of farts that night, darling, and I fucked them out of you, big fat fellows, long windy ones, quick little merry cracks and a lot of tiny little naughty farties ending in a long gush from your hole. It is wonderful to fuck a farting woman when every fuck drives one out of her. I think I would know Nora's fart anywhere. I think I could pick hers out in a roomful of farting women. It is a rather girlish noise not like the wet windy fart which I imagine fat wives have. It is sudden and dry and dirty like what a bold girl would let off in fun in a school dormitory at night. I hope Nora will let off no end of her farts in my face so that I may know their smell also.

You say when I go back you will suck me off and you want me to lick your cunt, you little depraved blackguard. I hope you will surprise me some time when I am asleep dressed, steal over to me with a whore's glow in your slumberous eyes, gently undo button after button in the fly of my trousers and gently take out your lover's fat mickey, lap it up in your moist mouth and suck away at it till it gets fatter and stiffer and comes off in your mouth. Sometimes too I shall surprise you asleep, lift up your skirts and open your drawers gently, then lie down gently by you and begin to lick lazily round your bush. You will begin to stir uneasily then I will lick the lips of my darling's cunt. You will begin to groan and grunt and sigh and fart with lust in your sleep. Then I will lick up faster and faster like a ravenous dog until your cunt is a mass of slime and your body wriggling wildly.

Goodnight, my little farting Nora, my dirty little fuckbird! There is one lovely word, darling, you have underlined to make me pull myself off better. Write me more about that and yourself, sweetly, dirtier, dirtier.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/1 ... ames_Joyce

[ReneeHendricks]

So for my New Years resolution I promised myself I need to read books more often. I have a small problem though. After a few pages I tend to read myself into a trace and start skimming. Does anyone else have this problem and how did you overcome it?

I've quit two books in my life. Stalin by Robert service was sacked about 50-70 pages from the end because it was as interesting as reading a washing machine repair manual (Simon Sebag Montefiore's bio was much better IMO) and I stopped reading Ulysses by James Joyce after about 150 pages of complete nonsense because it's fucking shite.
A good tip to sticking with a book is getting rid of distractions. Turn off the telly and lock the kids in the cellar/shed, make a cuppa and enjoy.

Oddly enough, I've found reading on my Kindle rather than an actual book has made me pay attention and not skim so much. Also what Tony says: distractions, be gone!

[Oneiros666]

And yes, 'libertarian' is another one of those words that's become distorted with time, especially when capitalised. I call myself a liberal, but so many people these days think _that_ is a synonym for 'socialist' as well! It's really quite a terrible mess.

Very different in Norway:

Kommunist = Communist
Sosialist = Socialist
Sosialdemokrat = Socialist- Democrat. Left wing of the American Green Party.
Kristenkonservativ = Christian conservative (similar social views as the American Christian Right, economic policies identical to socialist-democrat)
Konservativ = Conservative (similar to the left wing of the Democrats
Liberalist = Liberalist / Right-wing Democrats, 'moderate' libertarian
Ultraliberalist = Libertarian

[Altair]

That said, Joyce's mucky love letters to Nora Barnacle are pure poetry:

Sometimes too I shall surprise you asleep, lift up your skirts and open your drawers gently, then lie down gently by you and begin to lick lazily round your bush. You will begin to stir uneasily then I will lick the lips of my darling's cunt. You will begin to groan and grunt and sigh and fart with lust in your sleep. Then I will lick up faster and faster like a ravenous dog until your cunt is a mass of slime and your body wriggling wildly.

Since the FTBers read the pit, in the next days we´re going to find several blog posts stating that James Joyce was a rapist that raped sleeping women, and it´s going to be Tigzy´s fault :naughty:

[JackRayner]

[spoiler]

For the record, I have really only heard the FTB et al. opinions on rape culture. Well, that and a bit of what MRA's have to, but many of them are batshit crazy as well.

What's so crazy about stating that "rape culture" does not exist where we live? :think:

Jack, MRA's say a lot of things. And some of those things are reasonable, and some are not. I was talking about the crazy shit. I am still learning about rape culture. The extreme MRA's are no better than the extreme SJW's, imo. Utterly.Fucking.Delusional.Dreams.of.Imagined.Persecution.

Tell some of those. At this moment, what you're saying just sounds like middlegrounder nonsense; "Feminists say some crazy shit about rape culture... Ooh, ooh! Almost forgot: but so do MRAs!"[/spoiler]

That women are the biggest oppressors of men throughout history. That women are more violent and aggressive than men. That women are the real oppressors of well, everything. That women force men to go fight and die in wars so they can stay home, have babies, and knit.

And the reason that I am 'middle-grounding' as you put it, is because this whole 'men vs. woman' thing is completely asinine. We need to look at culture and society as [*snip*]

Whoa, pause. We're having failure to communicate, it seems. Let me start over:

Did you say MRAs say crazy shit about *rape culture*? If so, what? If no, disregard.

[Pitchguest]

Ok, I just had to:

http://s3-ec.buzzfed.com/static/enhance ... 8518-7.jpg

[Maximus]

[spoiler]

For the record, I have really only heard the FTB et al. opinions on rape culture. Well, that and a bit of what MRA's have to, but many of them are batshit crazy as well.

What's so crazy about stating that "rape culture" does not exist where we live? :think:

Jack, MRA's say a lot of things. And some of those things are reasonable, and some are not. I was talking about the crazy shit. I am still learning about rape culture. The extreme MRA's are no better than the extreme SJW's, imo. Utterly.Fucking.Delusional.Dreams.of.Imagined.Persecution.

Tell some of those. At this moment, what you're saying just sounds like middlegrounder nonsense; "Feminists say some crazy shit about rape culture... Ooh, ooh! Almost forgot: but so do MRAs!"[/spoiler]

That women are the biggest oppressors of men throughout history. That women are more violent and aggressive than men. That women are the real oppressors of well, everything. That women force men to go fight and die in wars so they can stay home, have babies, and knit.

And the reason that I am 'middle-grounding' as you put it, is because this whole 'men vs. woman' thing is completely asinine. We need to look at culture and society as a whole, and analyse -why- things are the way they are, instead of blaming one race/sex for all of society's ills. Men as a whole are not an evil monolith, and neither are women. And if injustice exists, we need to ask why, and not point fingers and say 'hehehe evil plot by men to get more pussy' or 'hehe evil plot by women to have babies and oppress men'.

Both viewpoints are completely delusional and do nothing but encourage one group to hate another.

And for the record, my experience thus far, in regards to what blogs I have read, is this: FTB for a few months, a little big of AVFM, RawStory.

Podcasts I have listened to: Bob Price, Cognitive Dissonance, TAE, Godless Bitches, Thinking Atheist, The Angry Atheist, Inkredulous, Irreligiosophy.

As you can see, I am just starting. Have I been getting a completely balanced view? Perhaps not, but that's why I am here:P

Agreed, great post. I just listened to a 3 hour audiobook (available on youtube,perhaps someone could link it) The Myth of Male Power, by Warren Farrel. He was largely involved in the feminist movement, and praises a lot of the great things they accomplished, and goes on to show how it changed and how it fails to take a larger view of society into account. He lays it out very nicely and is very fair and very balanced. I highly recommend it.

[Dilurk]

Looking at the bar-lowering of victimhood.

I know this is entirely anecdotal, and yes, there are bigoted assholes out there, but I think this is more indicative of how the real world works.

...
Reminds me of this dated little experiment done a while ago:
...

The one overt asshole in that clip is also, not surprisingly a cowardly little weasel.

And Russell Blackford's article about Islam and "Islamaphobia" bears repeating.


http://metamagician3000.blogspot.com.au ... festo.html

[another lurker]

Whoa, pause. We're having failure to communicate, it seems. Let me start over:

Did you say MRAs say crazy shit about *rape culture*? If so, what? If no, disregard

My original sentence was unclear. All I meant to say is that I have only read FTB and a tiny bit of AVFM. I have learned about 'rape culture' from FTB and the podcast 'Citizen Radio'. I have not actually read about rape culture on AVFM. I have heard -other- crazy shit on AVFM and for the most part I have disdain for extremists who paint themselves as victims. Be they MRA's, religious fundamentalists, SJW's, treehuggers, or white supremacists. They are all fanatics, and fanatics.ruin.everything. Every single one of these groups might have a valid point (ok, fundies, and racists, no) but reacting violently, and suppressing speech, merely because people might have different viewpoints, is utter bullshit:P

And I had asked earlier, on this blog, if fanatics -really- do care about their pet cause? Or is it just a vehicle for them to get attention, fame, and fortune. If FTB is any example, I would have to say yes, lonely douchebags want to be seen as very.special.oppressed.people.requiring.extra.special.love.and.attention.from.society.

Fuck 'em.

[Tony Parsehole]

...I stopped reading Ulysses by James Joyce after about 150 pages of complete nonsense because it's fucking shite...

That said, Joyce's mucky love letters to Nora Barnacle are pure poetry:

My sweet little whorish Nora I did as you told me, you dirty little girl, and pulled myself off twice when I read your letter. I am delighted to see that you do like being fucked arseways. Yes, now I can remember that night when I fucked you for so long backwards. It was the dirtiest fucking I ever gave you, darling. My prick was stuck in you for hours, fucking in and out under your upturned rump. I felt your fat sweaty buttocks under my belly and saw your flushed face and mad eyes. At every fuck I gave you your shameless tongue came bursting out through your lips and if a gave you a bigger stronger fuck than usual, fat dirty farts came spluttering out of your backside. You had an arse full of farts that night, darling, and I fucked them out of you, big fat fellows, long windy ones, quick little merry cracks and a lot of tiny little naughty farties ending in a long gush from your hole. It is wonderful to fuck a farting woman when every fuck drives one out of her. I think I would know Nora's fart anywhere. I think I could pick hers out in a roomful of farting women. It is a rather girlish noise not like the wet windy fart which I imagine fat wives have. It is sudden and dry and dirty like what a bold girl would let off in fun in a school dormitory at night. I hope Nora will let off no end of her farts in my face so that I may know their smell also.

You say when I go back you will suck me off and you want me to lick your cunt, you little depraved blackguard. I hope you will surprise me some time when I am asleep dressed, steal over to me with a whore's glow in your slumberous eyes, gently undo button after button in the fly of my trousers and gently take out your lover's fat mickey, lap it up in your moist mouth and suck away at it till it gets fatter and stiffer and comes off in your mouth. Sometimes too I shall surprise you asleep, lift up your skirts and open your drawers gently, then lie down gently by you and begin to lick lazily round your bush. You will begin to stir uneasily then I will lick the lips of my darling's cunt. You will begin to groan and grunt and sigh and fart with lust in your sleep. Then I will lick up faster and faster like a ravenous dog until your cunt is a mass of slime and your body wriggling wildly.

Goodnight, my little farting Nora, my dirty little fuckbird! There is one lovely word, darling, you have underlined to make me pull myself off better. Write me more about that and yourself, sweetly, dirtier, dirtier.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/1 ... ames_Joyce

*Bolding mine*
That's just epic. I never knew people could get so excited by farts.
"Naughty farties"? WTF?

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

Ok, I just had to:

http://s3-ec.buzzfed.com/static/enhance ... 8518-7.jpg

Cats don't wear glasses. Go get a real life!

[Tigzy]

*Bolding mine*
That's just epic. I never knew people could get so excited by farts.
"Naughty farties"? WTF?

You've never done it with a woman when she has an attack of the farts? Tis a fine pleasure indeed. Especially when she covers her face in embarrasment while still riding you furiously. Bit late to go all shy now, m'lady...

[Maximus]

[quote="sacha"]
baby deer.png
OMFG Bambi hates teh jews :o

[EdgePenguin]

Ok, I just had to:

http://s3-ec.buzzfed.com/static/enhance ... 8518-7.jpg

What a poser. Does she have a nictitating membrane surgically implanted in each eye? I think not. Does she make her boyfriend wear a condom with hooks on it to lacerate her vagina and trigger ovulation? Doubt it!

At the very least, you don't get to claim to be a cat if your can't lick your own anus clean.

[JackRayner]

Re: Dillahunty's video-

[TRIGGER WARNING]His mention of sex parties also disturbed me quite a bit. Visually creative people shouldn't be exposed to such thoughts. :( [Yeah. I'm a fucking lookist. Sue me.] [/TRIGGER WARNING]

Like someone mentioned just before, I was ready to tune out as soon as he said "doesn't get it". This made it all the more humorous when, after claiming Thunderf00t was making equivocations, he began lumping criticisms about the censoring of offensive/dissenting speech with criticisms about their hypocrisy [about rules against sexually suggestive behavior/speech/attire, in this instance].

What a fucking buffoon! Really, between Dillacunty being dishonest or being a moron, I definitely go with fucking moron.

[another lurker]

Maximus wrote:

Agreed, great post. I just listened to a 3 hour audiobook (available on youtube,perhaps someone could link it) The Myth of Male Power, by Warren Farrel. He was largely involved in the feminist movement, and praises a lot of the great things they accomplished, and goes on to show how it changed and how it fails to take a larger view of society into account. He lays it out very nicely and is very fair and very balanced. I highly recommend it.

Thank you! I will take a look at it!

Have you heard of Marvin Harris? I read two of his books, "Cows Pigs Wars and Witches", and "Cannibals and Kings: the Origins of Cultures".

I hate to label myself, but if I was going to say anything, I would describe myself as an 'environmental determinist.'

Oppression happens because it works. Religion happens because it works. If kidnapping and raping women means that your tribe will survive, then you do it. If slavery is a way to bolster your society's economy, and beat the enemy, you do it.

Now none of the above are moral actions, but in a certain time and place, they -worked- for that culture. Thankfully, with the advent of technology, humans no longer have the need for religion (or to oppress anyone, really), as it were. Unfortunately, the churches of the world have not received this message, and they are still holding on for dear life to ideas that might have meant survival thousands of years ago, but tend to retard progress in the modern age.

[John Brown]

So for my New Years resolution I promised myself I need to read books more often. I have a small problem though. After a few pages I tend to read myself into a trace and start skimming. Does anyone else have this problem and how did you overcome it?

I've quit two books in my life. Stalin by Robert service was sacked about 50-70 pages from the end because it was as interesting as reading a washing machine repair manual (Simon Sebag Montefiore's bio was much better IMO) and I stopped reading Ulysses by James Joyce after about 150 pages of complete nonsense because it's fucking shite.
A good tip to sticking with a book is getting rid of distractions. Turn off the telly and lock the kids in the cellar/shed, make a cuppa and enjoy.

I've given up on three:

-Ulysses by James Joyce, but only because I wasn't ready for it. I'm going to give it another go probably this year.
-Gravity's Rainbow by Thomas Pynchon. Since I loved The Crying of Lot 49, I was rather surprised at how terrible this was.
-Infinite Jest by David Foster Wallace. This is a book people casually drop in a conversation to let you know how hip and smart they are. I tried. I really did. I got half way through before I finally stopped torturing myself.

[another lurker]

edit: 'moral' in the above post should read as 'ethical' I guess. I forgot that 'moral' has religious connotations!

[Rystefn]

Says the guy with red hair and glasses...

They all want to be like me when they grow up.

Speaking of which, think red would look good on my pubes?

Still catching up, but I'm pausing to respond to this. No. No one looks good with red pubes. No one.

(Note: No one actually has naturally red hair. When I say red, I mean the color. Some people manage to pull off a natural orange-brown sort of color, but even that's pretty rare, really.)

[Maximus]

Thank you! I will take a look at it!

Have you heard of Marvin Harris? I read two of his books, "Cows Pigs Wars and Witches", and "Cannibals and Kings: the Origins of Cultures".

I hate to label myself, but if I was going to say anything, I would describe myself as an 'environmental determinist.'

Oppression happens because it works. Religion happens because it works. If kidnapping and raping women means that your tribe will survive, then you do it. If slavery is a way to bolster your society's economy, and beat the enemy, you do it.

Now none of the above are moral actions, but in a certain time and place, they -worked- for that culture. Thankfully, with the advent of technology, humans no longer have the need for religion (or to oppress anyone, really), as it were. Unfortunately, the churches of the world have not received this message, and they are still holding on for dear life to ideas that might have meant survival thousands of years ago, but tend to retard progress in the modern age.

No, I haven't read Marvin Harris, but the books look fascinating! Thanks for recommending them!

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

What a poser. Does she have a nictitating membrane surgically implanted in each eye? I think not. Does she make her boyfriend wear a condom with hooks on it to lacerate her vagina and trigger ovulation? Doubt it!

At the very least, you don't get to claim to be a cat if your can't lick your own anus clean.

Alson how does a cat dye their own hair? It seems we've got ourself the RW/SJW prototype here.

[Angry_Drunk]

Ah, quite right. Secularism is a group of which atheism is not a strict subset. You may consider that point cheerfully conceded.

And yes, 'libertarian' is another one of those words that's become distorted with time, especially when capitalised. I call myself a liberal, but so many people these days think _that_ is a synonym for 'socialist' as well! It's really quite a terrible mess.

Not meaning to pick on you by the way. I just feel that this is an important point to make from time to time. The worst crime of the FTB/Skepchick/A+ jackasses, ignoring the part about them being a bunch of pan-handling New Media Douchebag grifters, is contaminating atheism and skepticism with their personal toxic version of Progressivism.

Mind you, I say this as a Progressive myself. As far as I'm concerned those jackholes are a pox on true Progressive thought. For instance, there's this delightful post by everybody's favorite Smaegol impersonator:

http://gregladen.com/blog/2011/10/get-a-clue-lady/

Where Laden unleashes on a fellow Progressive (and, OMG, woman) for not being his kind of liberal.

I also think there needs to be some balance given the propensity for some of the more conservative posters here to pull the "Lefties do this..." bullshit. Believe me, we Lefties don't want these assholes any more than you do.

[AnimalAndy]

Latest is up: http://dissentionisnothate.wordpress.co ... ly-adults/

Great post with a bunch of excellent points!

[leafs]

RE "I bet Thunderf00t is laughing his fucking arse off at Dillahunty's attempt at a rebuttal."

actually, my jaw has just been on the floor in stunned silence! The amount of projection is amazing.
Matt also looks around a lot in the video, its kinda like he knows this is just BS spin.

Sure he banned me on twitter and YT months ago, after I made a comment about him being banned on the A+theism forums made for great drama to go with popcorn.

Now in the very video where Matt is saying how he had a bad day, so he banned a load of people then secretly regretted it later, and Im dishonest for not knowing that.... he is now going on a ban frenzy. LMAO... you cant write stuff this stupid.

Thunder, you and Dillahunty should have a live discussion. Both are very reasonable and succinct in the atheism debate realm. There is nothing but good that could come out of it at this point.

[Tigzy]

Speaking of saucy little fartlets (from Peezee's new, more in-depth post about Thunderf00t's latest video - when he just links to Dolly Dillahunty's latest piece of dangerous driving): http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... ent-525922

LykeX on 2 January 2013 at 12:57 pm

Those youtube comments just drain my will to live. Not only are they hideously dishonest and/or misinformed, but they’ve chosen a venue that makes any serious, prolonged discussion all but impossible, so you can’t properly correct them.

I'm trying to figure which I find funnier - the arrogance or the self-obliviousness.

[bhoytony]

'Progressive'. What's that? To me, it's what socialists call themselves in polite society: it means all the same things, but has lighter and fluffier connotations, you know, without all the mass murder.

I'm going to take a wild guess and say that this fucking retarded gobshite is a septic. What is it with you morons, do you have any idea what socialist actually means in the real world outside USA! USA! USA!, do you?
Socialism = mass murder does it? You're a fucking idiot.

[Oneiros666]

[spoiler]Not meaning to pick on you by the way. I just feel that this is an important point to make from time to time. The worst crime of the FTB/Skepchick/A+ jackasses, ignoring the part about them being a bunch of pan-handling New Media Douchebag grifters, is contaminating atheism and skepticism with their personal toxic version of Progressivism.

Mind you, I say this as a Progressive myself. As far as I'm concerned those jackholes are a pox on true Progressive thought. For instance, there's this delightful post by everybody's favorite Smaegol impersonator:

http://gregladen.com/blog/2011/10/get-a-clue-lady/

Where Laden unleashes on a fellow Progressive (and, OMG, woman) for not being his kind of liberal.

I also think there needs to be some balance given the propensity for some of the more conservative posters here to pull the "Lefties do this..." bullshit. Believe me, we Lefties don't want these assholes any more than you do.[/spoiler]

These people amaze me. I mean, imagine actually sitting down and writing drivel like this:

The sign indicates that you are complaining about the world you made, presumptive middle class straight white lady with the presumably genderonormative hat on her baby

So this white middle class male are making gross assumptions about a woman he knows nothing about except the sign she holds up. What if she's holding a boy in her arms and that she actually tries to break with the 'pink=female' cliché? What if she is a lesbian? She certainly doesn't mention her sexual orientation in her sign. What if she's poor? She doesn't have fancy clothes, and she's attending an Occupy protest; this is actually indicative of a lack of income; not comfortable middle class living.

Oh, and bin Laden is naturally 'offended' by this woman's sign. I mean, how dare she try to make the world a better place!? The nerve. He is the only one allowed to protest! HIM and HIM alone! FIGHT THE PATRIARCHY!

Fucking pathetic douchebag.

[JackRayner]

Whoa, pause. We're having failure to communicate, it seems. Let me start over:

Did you say MRAs say crazy shit about *rape culture*? If so, what? If no, disregard

My original sentence was unclear. All I meant to say is that I have only read FTB and a tiny bit of AVFM. I have learned about 'rape culture' from FTB and the podcast 'Citizen Radio'. I have not actually read about rape culture on AVFM. I have heard -other- crazy shit on AVFM and for the most part I have disdain for extremists who paint themselves as victims. Be they MRA's, religious fundamentalists, SJW's, treehuggers, or white supremacists. They are all fanatics, and fanatics.ruin.everything. Every single one of these groups might have a valid point (ok, fundies, and racists, no) but reacting violently, and suppressing speech, merely because people might have different viewpoints, is utter bullshit:P

And I had asked earlier, on this blog, if fanatics -really- do care about their pet cause? Or is it just a vehicle for them to get attention, fame, and fortune. If FTB is any example, I would have to say yes, lonely douchebags want to be seen as very.special.oppressed.people.requiring.extra.special.love.and.attention.from.society.

Fuck 'em.

Oh geez. Yes. All the same. :roll:

Why do I get that feeling that some of this "crazy shit" you're talking about is about your own failure to understand the points being made? :think: It's like that time Johann the Cabbie went and debated Paul Elam on Jury Nullification and Johann sunk to name calling [and then abandoned the debate all together] when he realized he had no idea what he was talking about.

Eh. Fuck it. I'm given crazy looks when I tell people that Nemo's dad should have turned into a female after his mom and siblings were swallowed up, so I guess I shouldn't expect a different reaction to other unusual statements...

[another lurker]

Jack Rayner:

So if I see an MRA say something that I think is ridiculous, it is because I do not understand the point? So MRA's are -always right-, and if we disagree, we are just too stupid to get it? Is -that- what you are saying?

[katamari Damassi]

I've quit two books in my life. Stalin by Robert service was sacked about 50-70 pages from the end because it was as interesting as reading a washing machine repair manual (Simon Sebag Montefiore's bio was much better IMO) and I stopped reading Ulysses by James Joyce after about 150 pages of complete nonsense because it's fucking shite.
A good tip to sticking with a book is getting rid of distractions. Turn off the telly and lock the kids in the cellar/shed, make a cuppa and enjoy.

Got through Ulysses, but didn't make it passed page two of Finnegan's Wake. Although I finished Don Quixote it is the only book that I have flung at the wall on more than one occasion. The only reason to read that piece of shit is that it's old.

[Oneiros666]

Got through Ulysses, but didn't make it passed page two of Finnegan's Wake. Although I finished Don Quixote it is the only book that I have flung at the wall on more than one occasion. The only reason to read that piece of shit is that it's old.

Hehe. Good one.

How do you guys think a comment such as this would've been received over at AtheismPlus? I suspect a lot of the folks there pride themselves of having tortured themselves through Finnegans Wake and other shite tripe just so they can brag about it endlessly.

Personally I have no time for reading unreadable pretentious garbage. Last book I read was 'Total Recall' by Arnold Schwarzenegger. Interesting and entertaining.

[katamari Damassi]

Maximus wrote:

Agreed, great post. I just listened to a 3 hour audiobook (available on youtube,perhaps someone could link it) The Myth of Male Power, by Warren Farrel. He was largely involved in the feminist movement, and praises a lot of the great things they accomplished, and goes on to show how it changed and how it fails to take a larger view of society into account. He lays it out very nicely and is very fair and very balanced. I highly recommend it.

Thank you! I will take a look at it!

Have you heard of Marvin Harris? I read two of his books, "Cows Pigs Wars and Witches", and "Cannibals and Kings: the Origins of Cultures".

I hate to label myself, but if I was going to say anything, I would describe myself as an 'environmental determinist.'

Oppression happens because it works. Religion happens because it works. If kidnapping and raping women means that your tribe will survive, then you do it. If slavery is a way to bolster your society's economy, and beat the enemy, you do it.

Now none of the above are moral actions, but in a certain time and place, they -worked- for that culture. Thankfully, with the advent of technology, humans no longer have the need for religion (or to oppress anyone, really), as it were. Unfortunately, the churches of the world have not received this message, and they are still holding on for dear life to ideas that might have meant survival thousands of years ago, but tend to retard progress in the modern age.

Huge Marvin Harris fan here! I can't recommend his books enough!

[Angry_Drunk]

Hehe. Good one.

How do you guys think a comment such as this would've been received over at AtheismPlus? I suspect a lot of the folks there pride themselves of having tortured themselves through Finnegans Wake and other shite tripe just so they can brag about it endlessly.

Personally I have no time for reading unreadable pretentious garbage. Last book I read was 'Total Recall' by Arnold Schwarzenegger. Interesting and entertaining.

Nah, Joyce was a European honkey with a dick, reading him would be exposing themselves to the Phallacracy.

[Parge]

So if I see an MRA say something that I think is ridiculous, it is because I do not understand the point? So MRA's are -always right-, and if we disagree, we are just too stupid to get it? Is -that- what you are saying?

What specifically do you mean by "drunk"?

Oops. Wrong topic. Or not.

FYI, this particular conversational tactic probably won't work here.