Periodic Table of Swearing

[Ape+lust]

I'll just leave this here:

http://freedomthinkingblog.wordpress.co ... r-you-love

She had the audacity to get cancer and receive help from her closest friends...

Always with the self-serving embellishments.

Fuck. I got POEed. Well played, sir/madam.

[mordacious1]

Damn! Now I can't complain to the wife about her buying $80 practical, nice and well made shoes for work. If she ever brought home a pair of those witch shoes, I'd laugh my ass off until I found out how much they cost.

[rayshul]

I don't pay for my shoes.

/princess

[Pitchguest]

Hahahahahahaha,

http://freedomthinkingblog.wordpress.co ... -you-love/

That’s the same ‘Becca’ that called me a ‘cunt’.

What?! No I didn’t!

Becca:

Banned, for calling Rachel Watmore a ‘cunt’. You lot and your gendered epithets. This is what’s called ‘reasonable dissent’ these days.

She did, or John did, or Steve, or someone. She’s probably just as bad.

Indeed, Rachel. I banned her just in case she calls you a ‘cunt’. She’s clearly the sort.

Oh, my sides! Ahahahaha!

I could say more about this but I don’t have the time or the energy right now.

Obviously a Poe.

[Al Stefanelli]

I'll just leave this here:

http://freedomthinkingblog.wordpress.co ... r-you-love

She had the audacity to get cancer and receive help from her closest friends...

Always with the self-serving embellishments.

Fuck. I got POEed. Well played, sir/madam.

They are good :)

The purpose of this blog is to attack religion, fight for social justice, promote the role of women in the skeptical commmunity, attack anyone advocating Men’s Rights (i.e. Men’s Rights Assholes) and all other sexists, misogynists and sexist misogynists.

[welch]

Reed: @nataliereed84 Fuck. Fuck. More and more and more I think I seriously need to leave FTB... (12:59 p.m. Mon, Jan 7)

Looks like Natalie Reed left FtB. Tweeted the above, the tweeted that she just sent the email to make it efficient. Trying to parse, but it appears she received threats from somewhere that she refers to "inside." I won't speculate. She also bid adieu to atheism, or something.

Nat and I have had our differences, but I kinda like her blog.

Oh evidently atheism MADE her post, or something stupid. Here: http://dissentionisnothate.wordpress.co ... ly-adults/

[Pitchguest]

Eerie, though, because I couldn't tell it from FTB.

[welch]

Reed: @nataliereed84 Fuck. Fuck. More and more and more I think I seriously need to leave FTB... (12:59 p.m. Mon, Jan 7)

Looks like Natalie Reed left FtB. Tweeted the above, the tweeted that she just sent the email to make it efficient. Trying to parse, but it appears she received threats from somewhere that she refers to "inside." I won't speculate. She also bid adieu to atheism, or something.

Nat and I have had our differences, but I kinda like her blog.

Oh evidently atheism MADE her post, or something stupid. Here: http://dissentionisnothate.wordpress.co ... ly-adults/

Had a thought...bets someone tries to blame j. Griffith?

[Pitchguest]

I just noticed; there's a user by the name LiftGATE saying this,

You are all brave heroines.

Genius.

[John Greg]

Argh! I got taken in too. I should have twigged to the names, but, well, FfTB, Skepchick, and, in particular A+ have become so irrational, lunafundy, and mind bogglingly invested in misrepresenting anything the other side says and rewriting history, that it has become increasingly difficult, for me, to distinguish between them and a POE.

[Darren]

Enjoy!

a1XW4HH1oLA

I felt the anger.

[Ape+lust]

I just noticed; there's a user by the name LiftGATE saying this,

You are all brave heroines.

Genius.

It was the explanations for the deletions that made me go "wait..."

[Skep tickle]

I'll just leave this here:

http://freedomthinkingblog.wordpress.co ... r-you-love

Oh sure! Just leave your garbage lying around. :naughty:

Interesting comment by "RightSideNegative" there, and the home page says "Lastly, be sure to follow this blog’s official Twitter account, @atheismplus." :shhh:

Several fresh comments about shoegate (not using that term) on that account.

[John Greg]

welch said:

Had a thought...bets someone tries to blame j. Griffith?

That was my immediate thought: Oh, oh, someone's going to claim Reed's leaving is all Griffith's fault and he's going to get crucified again.

[Keating]

"Justin Vacuous: Have you Even Got 10 Rape Threats in Your Life?"

[spoiler][youtube]bsNvh3BcnXA[/youtube][/spoiler]

Oh, gee, she made a response video to mine...

Considering she has been known to make up being raped, I wouldn't take her too seriously…

[youtube]4YOh50a6O3M[/youtube]

[lurktard]

Is any part of that confusing to you?

No, and thanks for this answer. It makes your point of much clearer and more reasonable looking to me.

(Cool story, bro - trigger warning)

I am actually aware of the right of way on water. I have been rowing in my teenage years on the Kiel Fjord, including during Kiel Week (world's largest annual sailing regatta with large side program), which looks like this: http://www.travel1000places.com/ResV/de ... ck_780.jpg
(The big sailing ships are only there one day - but the water is litterd with small boats the whole week. The actual competitive racing is further out on the water, in the photographer's back.)
Once the steersman of the boat I was rowing in decided, it would be funny to row through that mess full speed in a straight line, basically "because fuck you that's why." We had the right of way, yet the sailors yelled shit at us. Not very surprisinging.
We thought it was pretty funny and I'm still grinning now, remembering and writing down that scene.

But was it a responsible thing to do? Fuck, no. It was pretty irresponsible, despite having official right of way and relatively low damage capabilities. It's irresponsible to needlessly risk harm on other people (or their property), but risk always exists. Important thing is to include all the relevant facts into your risk calculation. Damage is one of them.
My point still stands: Even with right of way, such a dick move like we pulled that day on the water, would have been much more irresponsible, if we had a bigger boat actually capable to easily damage/sink the other boats (in case of a fuck up). The responsibility would have been bigger. Can't you agree with that?
Well, obviously you can't, or you would have by now. We gotta agree to disagree. Thanks nontheless. I'm out of here for this topic and go back to lurking, until I need to complain about some other shit. (Also don't want to clutter this thread too much with this topic. PZ Watson might start worrying not being in focus!)

[HoneyWagon]

[spoiler]

And she was trying to Doxx me too BTW.

http://i1192.photobucket.com/albums/aa3 ... e71107.png

Her little minions are trying to find info on me, and all they can find is an old entry on Ophie's blog that was bullshit and outed as such, and a website from 2009-2010 when I was breeding rabbits. And the funniest part is they are saying that I plagiarized the House Rabbit Society. ROFL! I was a HRS member and if they knew anything about the HRS, they'd know that they encourage people to post their info on their breeding sites because their whole point is to spread awareness and good care practices about owning and caring for rabbits. GAH! These people are fucking ridiculous! And of course Melody is acting like she knows nothing. She'd better watch it because one day she's going to try and doxx the wrong person, and it will bite her in the ass.

Can you comment on that post? It would be hilarious to see you spook them.

[/spoiler]

The post is mysteriously gone now. Why am I not suprised :think:

I know this is a few hours after you posted, but I still see it on her site, for the record.

[Skep tickle]

Back in Justin Vacula's debate invitation thread at Atheism+,

Suppose that the debate resolution was as follows: “Atheism Plus is more of an asset to the freethought movement than the SlymePit.”

piegasm replies:

Oh I'd love* to hear someone make an argument for how a misogynist circle jerk of a forum like the SlymePit is any kind of asset to the freethought movement. I imagine it would run something like "Bitches ain't shit. QED."

*for values of "love" equal to "dislike immensely"

ceepolk expands her prior "don't care about atheism" viewpoint:

... I don't care about the freethought movement. Just like I don't care about the Atheist movement. I'm not interested in being part of a movement that I cannot personally support. and what stops me is the quality of the people who push the freethought movement and the atheism movement. I don't think much of most of them, and simply being an atheist or a freethinker isn't enough for me. If it's enough for you, well that's fine, you're an adult, you can associate with whoever you want and decide for yourself what's good enough for you.

Just like I'm doing.

if what is going to convince someone that they should talk to people into Atheism Plus rather than people from the slymepit is who won a debate, which is in no way a factual activity or the sort of material one ought to give a lot of weight while making a decision, well, I'm not convinced those folks are the sort of people I'm interested in knowing. They might turn out to be great. But I'm content with those who read, reflect, and investigate for themselves.

[EdgePenguin]

[spoiler]

And she was trying to Doxx me too BTW.

http://i1192.photobucket.com/albums/aa3 ... e71107.png

Her little minions are trying to find info on me, and all they can find is an old entry on Ophie's blog that was bullshit and outed as such, and a website from 2009-2010 when I was breeding rabbits. And the funniest part is they are saying that I plagiarized the House Rabbit Society. ROFL! I was a HRS member and if they knew anything about the HRS, they'd know that they encourage people to post their info on their breeding sites because their whole point is to spread awareness and good care practices about owning and caring for rabbits. GAH! These people are fucking ridiculous! And of course Melody is acting like she knows nothing. She'd better watch it because one day she's going to try and doxx the wrong person, and it will bite her in the ass.

Can you comment on that post? It would be hilarious to see you spook them.

[/spoiler]

The post is mysteriously gone now. Why am I not suprised :think:

I know this is a few hours after you posted, but I still see it on her site, for the record.

Has somebody contacted CFI to explain how Melody is bringing them into serious disrepute?

[Darren]

Back in Justin Vacula's debate invitation thread at Atheism+,

piegasm replies:

Oh I'd love* to hear someone make an argument for how a misogynist circle jerk of a forum like the SlymePit is any kind of asset to the freethought movement. I imagine it would run something like "Bitches ain't shit. QED."

Aww, shit... I'm gonna have to come up with a new closing statement.

[Angry_Drunk]

I have often been chided for my lack of stylish footwear at computer shows.

More often for having footwear with a certain over-abundance of style :)

[sacha]

Although I have been referred to as a Gender Traitor as long as I can remember, and have always been able to see sexism towards men with a very different perspective than most women, and even though I have always defended men when women made sexist comments, and have always been more comfortable around men, I thought of myself as "pro-equality". I am a MRA because I live in the US.

BTW when was the term "gender traitor" coined and by which individuals or groups, as least in your experience? Lesbian separatists etc?

I remember it being used as far back as the mid 70's, but my guess would be early to mid 60's.

I would think it was the first wave feminists who first used it towards the stereotypical 1950's housewives.

[sacha]

BTW when was the term "gender traitor" coined and by which individuals or groups, as least in your experience? Lesbian separatists etc?

I believe it was skeptifem, post elevatorgate.

decades prior to that.

[franc]

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

[Skep tickle]

Xanthe & ceepolk are hashing out some trans* [sic] stuff in the "Are moderators capricious..." thread at atheism+ forum.

I thought I'd mostly picked up the lingo, at least at a basic level, but then Xanthe posts this:

By the way, I reject the argument that this is about tone: the point is about assumptions about newcomers and that a position of disprivilege means that you have all of your social justice ducks in a row, intersectionally.

:shock: :? :roll:

then they move to "trans* people who are immersed in cisnormative rhetoric" and "internalized essentialism" but at least I grok what those are about.

[AndrewV69]

They are good :)

The purpose of this blog is to attack religion, fight for social justice, promote the role of women in the skeptical commmunity, attack anyone advocating Men’s Rights (i.e. Men’s Rights Assholes) and all other sexists, misogynists and sexist misogynists.

Dammit man! This is what the MRA fight is all about! We want the same freedoms the SJW and the Femtheists have!

Freedom from responsibility!

Freedom from accountability!

Freedom!

To be free to do anything we want without consequences!

[spoiler]http://i.imgur.com/whh33.jpg[/spoiler]

Freedom!

[AndrewV69]

Eerie, though, because I couldn't tell it from FTB.

By the time you got to this post, do you really think you had three legs to stand on you fucking ablist cunt?

Gertrude DuBois
January 7, 2013 at 6:16 am

Indeed, Rachel. I banned her just in case she calls you a ‘cunt’. She’s clearly the sort.

[Skep tickle]

BTW when was the term "gender traitor" coined and by which individuals or groups, as least in your experience? Lesbian separatists etc?

I believe it was skeptifem, post elevatorgate.

decades prior to that.

When I poked around within the past few days, the older references I found to that specific term (from the early 90's & prior, 'cuz I'm searching the internet not some Women's Studies Department archives) were referring to gay men. Couple of posts on the results of my search are here, the next post down, and 3 posts after that.

As I said there, I found late 20th century* feminist literature that used the term "traitor" but I didn't turn up "gender traitor".


(*Damn, does that make it sound like a long time back!)

[Skep tickle]

Dammit man! This is what the MRA fight is all about! We want the same freedoms the SJW and the Femtheists have!

Freedom from responsibility!

Freedom from accountability!

Freedom!

To be free to do anything we want without consequences!

http://i.imgur.com/whh33.jpg

Freedom!

Does this mean I shouldn't expect reimbursement for the new keyboard I'm going to need after reading (& viewing) that?

[masakari2012]

Real horrorshow, it appears you are applying different changes to this hypothetical than I did.

Well, what are the parameters of your hypothetical? You mentioned Einstein getting killed by the Nazis and General Relativity. I don't see Einstein, ensconced in the US, as being in much danger. Even if he was killed, he wasn't the only physicist in the world, General Relativity would have been developed anyway. Clue me in.

At first, I was simply opening up for jokes about the alternate universe thing, but didn't realize that you take it as seriously. If I were to take this scenario more seriously, I would have to be told what the rules or parameters are first.

It reminds me of a conversation where people were asked who would win in a boxing match between Nikola Tesla and Thomas Edison. I went strictly on size, and thought that Nikola would win, given his longer reach. Someone else then said that Nikola Tesla would lose because he wouldn't fight. So what happened is that someone else came along and applied different rules than I was thinking of. I could have argued with the person and say, "no! no! no!, you're looking at it wrong", but of course, I knew he was applying his own standards, and there is no wrong in that, unless the standards were already set.

I was thinking about the Nazi thing more a long the lines of them being able to build such a jet as in the picture you posted, and that they would have had to progress drastically. So I started from that point, and went backwards. For that to happen, the must have toppled over the US, because I don't see them as progressing for that long if the US were still around. So then I mentioned the Einstein part as a joke to where someone would respond saying that the credit was given to some non-Jewish German scientist, since the Nazis, given their history, would have rewrote things however they wanted. And yes, I figured that General Relativity would have been understood anyway, which is why I asked the joke about your joke (being your universe).

I'm more interested in seeing such a scenario for Civ V or Civ IV.

[RedWedding]

[spoiler]

And she was trying to Doxx me too BTW.

http://i1192.photobucket.com/albums/aa3 ... e71107.png

Her little minions are trying to find info on me, and all they can find is an old entry on Ophie's blog that was bullshit and outed as such, and a website from 2009-2010 when I was breeding rabbits. And the funniest part is they are saying that I plagiarized the House Rabbit Society. ROFL! I was a HRS member and if they knew anything about the HRS, they'd know that they encourage people to post their info on their breeding sites because their whole point is to spread awareness and good care practices about owning and caring for rabbits. GAH! These people are fucking ridiculous! And of course Melody is acting like she knows nothing. She'd better watch it because one day she's going to try and doxx the wrong person, and it will bite her in the ass.

Can you comment on that post? It would be hilarious to see you spook them.

[/spoiler]

The post is mysteriously gone now. Why am I not suprised :think:

I know this is a few hours after you posted, but I still see it on her site, for the record.

Has somebody contacted CFI to explain how Melody is bringing them into serious disrepute?

Well, Melody did not post that, it was posted on her wall and she has not deleted it yet (if she wants to)
As the poster (Stacy) is a volunteer as CFI LA and (Alice Who liked the post) is the office manager of CFI LA, maybe that group should be contacted.
It won't do any good of course.

[Lurkion]

[spoiler]

Hahahahahahaha,

http://freedomthinkingblog.wordpress.co ... -you-love/

That’s the same ‘Becca’ that called me a ‘cunt’.

What?! No I didn’t!

Becca:

Banned, for calling Rachel Watmore a ‘cunt’. You lot and your gendered epithets. This is what’s called ‘reasonable dissent’ these days.

She did, or John did, or Steve, or someone. She’s probably just as bad.

Indeed, Rachel. I banned her just in case she calls you a ‘cunt’. She’s clearly the sort.

Oh, my sides! Ahahahaha!

I could say more about this but I don’t have the time or the energy right now.

Obviously a Poe.

[/spoiler]

Fcking awesome. I love this. It's so REAL.

[franc]

Dammit man! This is what the MRA fight is all about! We want the same freedoms the SJW and the Femtheists have!

Freedom from responsibility!

Freedom from accountability!

Freedom!

To be free to do anything we want without consequences!

http://i.imgur.com/whh33.jpg

Freedom!

Does this mean I shouldn't expect reimbursement for the new keyboard I'm going to need after reading (& viewing) that?

Freedom from aesthetic courtesies!

[masakari2012]

Wow! A lot has happened since yesterday. I saw the WoolyBumblebee post on Melody's wall, but I got side tracked due to Tf00t's video, then I signed out. Here's a screencap which I took of the same pic, just incase.

[spoiler]http://i.imgur.com/BFrGe.png[/spoiler]

[franc]

Has somebody contacted CFI to explain how Melody is bringing them into serious disrepute?

Well, Melody did not post that, it was posted on her wall and she has not deleted it yet (if she wants to)
As the poster (Stacy) is a volunteer as CFI LA and (Alice Who liked the post) is the office manager of CFI LA, maybe that group should be contacted.
It won't do any good of course.

Nope. Not with a baboon like Ron Lindsay in charge. He's either completely complicit or, now that he's realised that he's allowed vipers into his nest, he's too terrified to make a move.

[rayshul]

[youtube]ApozFPboUAQ[/youtube]

[comslave]

Okay, if she never ever cyber begged, then what she does with her money would be her own business. But because she cyber begged...WTF?!??!?!!!


[youtube]YAvzqFeKV3s[/youtube]

[comslave]

Okay, if she never ever cyber begged, then what she does with her money would be her own business. But because she cyber begged...WTF?!??!?!!!


[youtube]YAvzqFeKV3s[/youtube]

The White Shirt of Authority has spoken.

[TedDahlberg]

I like Ben Radford; as far as I can tell, he seems like an actual sceptic. He seems like one of those rare people who remain as unbiased as humanly possible far past the point where most people would chew their own arm off in frustration. I admire that trait. For example: Trigger Warnings: Public Service or Fallacious Fad?

I really need to get around to reading his Chupacabra book, it's been sitting on my shelf since it came out.

[rayshul]

That was the new Thunderf00t video by the way - didn't post any details because I wanted to be able to shout FIRST.

[Reap]

Hi I posted a new blog about Ed Brayton and company in case you want to read it.
http://reapstruth.blogspot.com/2013/01/ ... h-now.html

[ButterCup]

I like Ben Radford; as far as I can tell, he seems like an actual sceptic. He seems like one of those rare people who remain as unbiased as humanly possible far past the point where most people would chew their own arm off in frustration. I admire that trait. For example: Trigger Warnings: Public Service or Fallacious Fad?

I really need to get around to reading his Chupacabra book, it's been sitting on my shelf since it came out.

You know Melody Hensley is rumored to have tried to get him fired, right?
He started firestorm with this post, and many of the skepchick ilk were out for blood.

[ButterCup]

That was the new Thunderf00t video by the way - didn't post any details because I wanted to be able to shout FIRST.

Sorry. 2 early birds already posted that on page 269
viewtopic.php?f=31&t=73&start=43400#p45609

[DownThunder]

Hi I posted a new blog about Ed Brayton and company in case you want to read it.
http://reapstruth.blogspot.com/2013/01/ ... h-now.html

Theyre all a few years old. More than enough time to become a born-again feminist super hero.

[masakari2012]

Nice try rayshul, but I beat you to it (I posted it yesterday). But because you shared it, I ended up watching it again. It truly is a great video.

[TedDahlberg]

Hi I posted a new blog about Ed Brayton and company in case you want to read it.
http://reapstruth.blogspot.com/2013/01/ ... h-now.html

I love the washing machine analogy, made me chuckle.

[TedDahlberg]

I like Ben Radford; as far as I can tell, he seems like an actual sceptic. He seems like one of those rare people who remain as unbiased as humanly possible far past the point where most people would chew their own arm off in frustration. I admire that trait. For example: Trigger Warnings: Public Service or Fallacious Fad?

I really need to get around to reading his Chupacabra book, it's been sitting on my shelf since it came out.

You know Melody Hensley is rumored to have tried to get him fired, right?
He started firestorm with this post, and many of the skepchick ilk were out for blood.

I hadn't heard that rumour, but I wouldn't be surprised if it were true. It will be interesting to see if there's any reaction to the post I linked to. One gets the feeling that it's analogous to poking an anthill with a stick.

[Dick Strawkins]

Speaking of doxxing, Damion, on Skeptic Ink has a post from last week where he asks people where they draw the line.
So far only a couple have replied, Justin Griffiths and myself.

Damion seemed to be arguing for a position where it is fine to doxx an anonymous fellow skeptic if they write an attack piece about you: he provided an example of Brave Hero @ElevatorGate as someone he considers ethically doxxable.
The trouble with this, as I see it, is where exactly you draw the line.
If you are prepared to doxx elevatorgate if he attacks/mocks you then what's to stop you doxxing Natalie Reed if SHE writes a piece critical of you?
My comments there seem to take about two days to appear for some strange reason so I've linked my latest reply below.
I think Damion has raised an important point.
Where do you draw the line over exposing someones online identity?

http://skepticink.com/backgroundprobabi ... ping-docs/

Dick Strawkins said:

Damion, you started this post with the question:

"What general rules ought we to follow when it comes to protecting
pseudonymous posters? What have I missed, and what rules should be added or modified?"

I have tried to make pose a few questions that you seem to be desperate to avoid and instead try to deflect it into a silly and mistaken ad hominem attack.

Let's try again, shall we?

It's probably best that we define terms a little better than you have done in the initial post. "Doxxing" seems to mean different things to different people.

The definitions you linked to were not for the term doxxing. A decent definition I've found on the social engineering wiki is:

"Doxing or Doxxing is the act of identifying a person from one small bit
of information such as an email address. The "Doxer" uses this email
address to find out phone numbers, address, real name etc of the target. Doxing is "legal" as long as you are only finding publicy available information, it becomes illegal if you stalk the person through online chat services, like facebook or msn, or if you hack into their social accounts, like facebook, twitter, gmail hotmail etc".

I certainly do not think that simply linking a pseudonym to a real life name qualifies as doxxing. For example is saying that "ERV" is actually 'Abbie Smith' an example of doxxing? The reason why that would NOT be doxxing but revealing Natalie Reed's RL name WOULD be doxxing is that the former has openly revealed her name online while the latter has not, and indeed Natalie has frequently made public her fear about someone using nefarious means (viewing private emails etc - similar to the social engineering definition I've provided) to expose her RL name.

In other words, if an individual reveals their own name in a public place and links it to theor online pseudonym, reporting this does not, in my eyes constitute doxxing.

In light of your point about Coffee Loving Skeptic being open about his RL name I will say that I was not aware of this (I had never seen his RL name being linked to CLS so I assumed, wrongly, I guess, that others had revealed his name and postings without his permission.) That being the case I withdraw the charge that he was doxxed - although if the rumors are true that people were complaining to his employer then I think he was, himself, the victim of harrassment, rather than doxxing.

As regards Walid Husayen, I think you are shifting the goalposts a little too quickly for my liking. According to wikipedia he was "chatting online using the sarcastic Web name God Almighty" - which, I guess should qualify as an anonymous pseudonym.

And where on earth did you get the idea that "His clever pseudonym 'Waleed Husayen' didn't offer any protection because he was personally known to those who turned him in to Palestinian authorities."

Have you been taking "ethical arguing" classes with Stephanie Svan?

If you do the slightest research on the matter you will see that he was exposed though the actions of a suspicious internet cafe owner.
" Using software to check on what his client was doing, Abu Asab
discovered Husayin's sacrilegious Facebook writings. Abu Asab said he and three friends knew of Husayin's actions and that "maybe somebody informed the authorities"
As for one of his pseudonyms (and clearly he had more than one if he called himself "Almighty God" on some sites) being spelled very similar to his real name, I am not sure that this is much evidence of him being careless or not trying to protect his RL identity. Remember, he wasn't writing in English, the Arabic writing of these names may appear very different to native speakers (for example if you click on the arabic translation on the bottom of the wikipedia page you get a story, in arabic, about a completely different Walid Husayin.) Perhaps you speak and read Arabic and can correct me on this but considering it took keycapture (I presume) software to epose what he was writing - leading to his arrest - I think it is pointless to argue that he exposed himself by using his "real" name.
The method of exposing Husayin (by a suspicious internet cafe owner) is unlikely to affect much of us in the skeptical community. The doxxing danger comes from, as Natalie Reed has said, those who have access to private email addresses (for example blog owners who can see which username links to which registered email address) and who subsequently leak this information online.

I hoped I had been clear previously but if not I will explain my criteria.

IF someone maintains an anonymous online identity with no explicit links by themselves to a RL name then I take the view that they are anonymous by choice and do not think that exposing their RL name is an ethical position.

If they publicise their online identity in connection with their RL name then I view this as their own choice that their pseudonym is not anonymous. They are the ones who made the decision.

I certainly do not regard linking a name to a pseudonym as doxxing in this case (I think a similar case existed with Brownian and Atheist Nexus - where he created a public page that explained that his RL identity was the same as Brownian on Pharyngula - in fact all it took was googling "Brownian" and "Pharyngula" to find it)

So what about exposing people to danger?
Yes, I did say that exposing anonymous individuals may result in unforseen threats. But talking about the words of a non anonymous person may also result in threats to them. We obviously need to draw the line somewhere.

For me - and, I am open to having my mind changed on this, it is still a somewhat grey area to me - the question is one of anonymity. If someone is truly anonymous on the internet and, for example, can only be linked to their RL persona by use of private communications, email or IP addresses, then this is where I draw the line.

It would be wrong of me to expose them online.

So exposing Natalie Reed's RL name is a big NO from me.


If they personally publicise their RL name and link it to their online name then any subsequent exposure of this link is not doxxing.

It is reading and remembering.

This is a fascinating discussion Damion, and it deserves more exposure - I'll link it to the slymepit to see if anyone can help with your Natalie Reed dilemma ;)

[Jan Steen]

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

[sacha]

BTW when was the term "gender traitor" coined and by which individuals or groups, as least in your experience? Lesbian separatists etc?

I believe it was skeptifem, post elevatorgate.

decades prior to that.

When I poked around within the past few days, the older references I found to that specific term (from the early 90's & prior, 'cuz I'm searching the internet not some Women's Studies Department archives) were referring to gay men. Couple of posts on the results of my search are here, the next post down, and 3 posts after that.

As I said there, I found late 20th century* feminist literature that used the term "traitor" but I didn't turn up "gender traitor".
(*Damn, does that make it sound like a long time back!)

I remember being referred to as a Gender Traitor in school when I was about 11, but as we all know, memory is far from reliable.
I read The Handmaid's Tale when it was first published, so that was 1985, and I was a lot older than 11 in 1985.

Atwood may have used the term to refer to gay men, but I can see how women would use it against other women, especially ones that defended the men. It is possible that the term came from the book. It was a very popular book, however it is much more likely that Atwood simply resurrected the term.

I would think it has been around nearly as long as "race-traitor". It's not much of a leap from that term which everyone had heard of long before I was born, but since I have no evidence for that, and no way to tell if I inserted the term into memories after the fact, I will have to say 1995 because I was using it to refer to myself at least 17 years ago, that I am certain of.

I was not particularly liked by the girls by 11 or 12, I matured fast, looked a lot older, and was not at all insecure about it.
I got a lot of attention from men of all ages, I was well aware of the sexual power I had, and loved every minute of it. If the term Gender Traitor was around at all, I fit the description.

as one can see, not much has changed.

[Ape+lust]

Hi I posted a new blog about Ed Brayton and company in case you want to read it.
http://reapstruth.blogspot.com/2013/01/ ... h-now.html

That's a bullseye post, Reap. They do act like royalty, ordering everyone around and expecting indulgence when ignoring the rules they cram down throats.

That Google Hangout clip... sheesh, it was wincingly painful to watch. Inept dorks interrupting each other, being "funny." Their strained, thudding humor is a bigger crime than hypocrisy. Of course, right in the middle was Miss Your Rights Should be Over When You Hurt My Feelings, hur-hurring about clipping nutsacks. Nice going, missy.

And for chrissakes, PZ needs to stand up straight and close his mouth once in a while. He's always schlumping around with his gob hanging open -- what's with that? Does he like the taste of dustmites and farts?

[Struth]

I just noticed; there's a user by the name LiftGATE saying this,

You are all brave heroines.

Genius.

Please can you point to the page that says this? I tried doing a search on some of the linked pages; can't find it.

[Struth]

Oh, never mind, it's this: http://freedomthinkingblog.wordpress.co ... comment-22

[masakari2012]

I laugh every time I see Ape+lust's avatar... download/file.php?avatar=347_1352096683.jpg

[Ape+lust]

[spoiler]http://i.imgur.com/bAUdX.jpg[/spoiler]

:lol:

[Ape+lust]

I laugh every time I see Ape+lust's avatar... download/file.php?avatar=347_1352096683.jpg

Thanks, so do I :D. Those ladies are priceless. That pic was a one in a million lucky find. I had to do something with them.

[AnonymousCowherd]

BTW when was the term "gender traitor" coined and by which individuals or groups, as least in your experience? Lesbian separatists etc?

I remember it being used as far back as the mid 70's, but my guess would be early to mid 60's.

I would think it was the first wave feminists who first used it towards the stereotypical 1950's housewives.

I heard it back in the early 70's and it had been around for some time even then. It was a "New Left" hangover from when feminists and Marxists were circling each other to see if they were friends or not. It seemed to be modelled on "class traitor" which, of course has a much longer herstory history.

[Gumby]

Why do Greta, Ophelia, Stephanie et al. even care what most 'Pytters think about their behavior? It's not as if most of us have any influence on their speaking and writing gigs. We may mock them here and point out their hypocrisy and arrogance, but when has that ever affected their ability to promote themselves or participate in A/S meetings?

They care what we think for the same reasons that the former Soviet bloc cared about Samizdat - they are powerless to stop it or doing anything about it, and what we think now propagates itself virally without any effort. It is genuinely grass roots. The resistance to the baboons has reached the stage where it is now fully networked. Various disparate blogs, vlogs and podcasts are now aware of each other's existence, aware that they are all being attacked by a common enemy. As I have stated several times, it's kinda like the Arab spring - groups from everywhere that otherwise have little commonality (other than godlessness/skepticism) are now realising that they do have a common goal in resisting the lunacy that is trying to take control of the movements and rule by fiat.

It is very much like the contempt for traditional politicians in much of the West. The politicians may think they control opinion by by holding sway over much of the public communication space, but they don't fool all of the common people who see through their tricks and see them for what they are. The baboons may get published in USAToday, WashPo, Slate, Salon etc., but the Samizdat now has a full head of steam and has permeated everywhere - the common people cannot fail but run across it now. They may control the public narrative, but the people's narrative is slowly being irrecoverably lost. This is what burns. This is why they care.

Love us or loathe us - we did good. Though we may not get much public credit for undoing the baboon empire, we would not be where we are today were it not for the sustained efforts of the entire 'pit. I think you can all buy yourselves a well earned beer and have a few moments self-satisfied of smugness.

Once that's done, it's back to the grindstone. The job's only half done.

Deserves a repost.

[Dick Strawkins]

Ape+Lust's remark about the dreaful sense of humor of the FTB crowd got me thinking about whether any good joke has come out of their side in the past year and a half.
I mean, people here aren't perfect. Someone on this side must have said or done something silly or hypocritical within that time that could be mocked the way we joke about their carry on.
The closest I could think of is the recent cartoon by Jesus and Mo (Hi Author ;) ) where he pokes fun at Justin Vacula's line about needlework being a girl thing.

http://www.jesusandmo.net/strips/2012-12-26.png

Naturally Ophelia is there in the comments, policing them for correctness.
The thing is, I'm not sure if this joke isn't on two levels.
First, obviously, he pokes fun at Justin Vacula's clumsy remark about needlework.

Second, Ophelia clearly thinks he's making fun of Shermer at the same time.
On this one, however, I think the joke is on her.
Unlike Justin, Shermer used the word "mostly" to indicate that he wasn't talking in exclusive terms - just in terms of percentages.
Yet the joke requires the initial speaker (who was apparently Mo) to NOT say "mostly" - otherwise the whole setup doesn't work. Bringing in the addition of "mostly" and "some" provides the punchline.

Author, if you are reading, were you making fun of Ophelia?
:D

[Jan Steen]

The shoe affair reminds me of a well-know anecdote from the Bible:

Then Mary took about a pint of pure nard, an expensive perfume; she poured it on Jesus’ feet and wiped his feet with her hair. And the house was filled with the fragrance of the perfume.
But one of his disciples, Judas Iscariot, who was later to betray him, objected, “Why wasn’t this perfume sold and the money given to the poor? It was worth a year’s wages.” He did not say this because he cared about the poor but because he was a thief; as keeper of the money bag, he used to help himself to what was put into it.
“Leave her alone,” Jesus replied. “It was intended that she should save this perfume for the day of my burial. You will always have the poor among you, but you will not always have me.” (John 12: 3-8)

The tactics to defend the indefensible haven’t changed. Slander your critics and question their motives (Call Judas a betrayer and a thief and then pretend that this renders his objection invalid. A pure ad hominem argument.) and throw in some special pleading.