Jim the Pleb Made Me Do It

[rayshul]

Meanwhile, your response indicated that you think staying at home with the kids is a privilege?

Well it's certainly a sign that you're quite privileged or you're doing it really, really rough/relying on welfare.

Really? So if you are stuck home with the kids, you have it good, or you are on welfare, got it. Thanks for clarifying.

Seems like it to me. It's pretty hard to live on just one income these days. Most couples I know with kids either both work (one or both part time) and rely on childcare or family members, or have one member of the couple making more-than-average wage. Friend of mine (Australian) has estimated to me that you need at least $50k a year to cover mortgages, essentials and other costs if your partner is staying home full time - otherwise you're very very limited in what you can do and wind up living paycheque to paycheque.

[erikthebassist]

So ftr, I had no idea disqus comments auto emailed anybody that commented, I will ditch it post haste, I guess I will have to go unmoderated for now. I will trust since y'all claim to be to be good peeps that I won't get trolled. I can delete comments with squarespace built in moderation but I can't ban commenters unless I moderate every comment and require email addy's from any one who wants to bypass moderation.

[erikthebassist]

Meanwhile, your response indicated that you think staying at home with the kids is a privilege?

Well it's certainly a sign that you're quite privileged or you're doing it really, really rough/relying on welfare.

Really? So if you are stuck home with the kids, you have it good, or you are on welfare, got it. Thanks for clarifying.

Seems like it to me. It's pretty hard to live on just one income these days. Most couples I know with kids either both work (one or both part time) and rely on childcare or family members, or have one member of the couple making more-than-average wage. Friend of mine (Australian) has estimated to me that you need at least $50k a year to cover mortgages, essentials and other costs if your partner is staying home full time - otherwise you're very very limited in what you can do and wind up living paycheque to paycheque.

I live pay check to pay check, but I'd much rather go to work than stay at home with kids all day. I'm failing to understand why staying at home with slobbering and screaming kids is a privilege.

[rayshul]

Seems like it to me. It's pretty hard to live on just one income these days. Most couples I know with kids either both work (one or both part time) and rely on childcare or family members, or have one member of the couple making more-than-average wage. Friend of mine (Australian) has estimated to me that you need at least $50k a year to cover mortgages, essentials and other costs if your partner is staying home full time - otherwise you're very very limited in what you can do and wind up living paycheque to paycheque.

I live pay check to pay check, but I'd much rather go to work than stay at home with kids all day. I'm failing to understand why staying at home with slobbering and screaming kids is a privilege.

I think I'm looking at this from the perspective of the family - if your family can afford to live on one adult's wage (and have children in the first place without having to rely on government support or seriously limiting your lifestyle), you're doing pretty okay. There are childcare services if you both would prefer to work. (Getting into them can be difficult, of course... but that's another problem.)

Much like you I'd rather go to work; my husband however was able to decide whether he wanted to work or stay home and raise the kids (one currently, three by the end of the year). I think that's a pretty privileged decision he was able to make. He chose to be a stay at home dad and loves it.

In contrast several parents I know want to stay home (one father is working from home part time at this point) but can't for financial reasons.

[rayshul]

I think you're focussed on your own dislike of the idea of raising kids, and are finding it difficult to separate this (I don't want it) from the very real financial issues that make it impossible for others to make their own choices (Why would they want it, it's good they don't have to).

[lonesagi]

I think I just ruptured an organ laughing.

Ellenbeth just Goatse'd Michael's thread. :lol: :lol: :lol:

You are so right. :) The Nugent threads are the like the first Gulf War. You go in expecting the Republican Guard wielding nerve gas and end up with a turkey shoot resulting in the Highway of Death. The FTBers are hopeless and helpless in the field.

I actually feel kinda sorry for Michael now. He must be sitting there, peeking through his fingers at the monitor screen, going, 'What the fuh - what the fuck has happened here?'

Some reflections on the recent dialogue

[Maximus]

Alright i'm five minutes in. She's just told me that damsel in distress is french for damsel in distress.

OH NO... does Phil know :shock:

[JackSkeptic]

I think I just ruptured an organ laughing.

Ellenbeth just Goatse'd Michael's thread. :lol: :lol: :lol:

You are so right. :) The Nugent threads are the like the first Gulf War. You go in expecting the Republican Guard wielding nerve gas and end up with a turkey shoot resulting in the Highway of Death. The FTBers are hopeless and helpless in the field.

I actually feel kinda sorry for Michael now. He must be sitting there, peeking through his fingers at the monitor screen, going, 'What the fuh - what the fuck has happened here?'

Some reflections on the recent dialogue

This is not going to go well. Good luck to him anyway.

[JackSkeptic]

Alright i'm five minutes in. She's just told me that damsel in distress is french for damsel in distress.

OH NO... does Phil know :shock:

'The French have no word for Entrepreneur'

[Jan Steen]

http://s14.postimage.org/acck67869/Sam_Harrius.jpg

That's a classic.

[Maximus]

@16bitheretic, THAT WAS AWESOME :clap: :clap: :clap:

[lonesagi]

I think I just ruptured an organ laughing.

Ellenbeth just Goatse'd Michael's thread. :lol: :lol: :lol:

You are so right. :) The Nugent threads are the like the first Gulf War. You go in expecting the Republican Guard wielding nerve gas and end up with a turkey shoot resulting in the Highway of Death. The FTBers are hopeless and helpless in the field.

I actually feel kinda sorry for Michael now. He must be sitting there, peeking through his fingers at the monitor screen, going, 'What the fuh - what the fuck has happened here?'

Some reflections on the recent dialogue

This is not going to go well. Good luck to him anyway.

This was my thinking too. Maybe he'll examine some of his own presumptions and do his research this time.

Mr. Nugent, if you're reading this I would recommend the following as a jumping off point:

http://rationalugandan.wordpress.com/20 ... vatorgate/
http://rationalugandan.wordpress.com/20 ... kepticism/
http://rationalugandan.wordpress.com/20 ... slime-pit/
http://www.scentednectar.com/slimepit-archive/

(I doubt that he is. It hasn't exactly worked out well for him so far.)

[skepandsprinkles]

Hey, guess who finished the first part of her epic takedown on mysoginy over videogames?

Anita Snarkess, that's who.

Huh, I actually didn't find the video half bad, and did agree with a lot of it. As a female gamer I am frustrated by a lack of representation in a lot of games (and movies). It's slowly getting better, but there's still a long way to go. Of course whether the issue boils down to misogyny or games not traditionally being a female past time and game developers relying heavily on what sold in the past is up for debate. Personally I think the more females there are playing and the more it's asked for the better the odds of seeing a female character as a main "strong" protaginist."

[Skep tickle]

So ftr, I had no idea disqus comments auto emailed anybody that commented, I will ditch it post haste, I guess I will have to go unmoderated for now. I will trust since y'all claim to be to be good peeps that I won't get trolled. I can delete comments with squarespace built in moderation but I can't ban commenters unless I moderate every comment and require email addy's from any one who wants to bypass moderation.

Seems best to ditch that feature. Thanks. (You're right, I had thought you'd emailed it to me on purpose, but stand corrected on that.)

[Trophy]

Hey, guess who finished the first part of her epic takedown on mysoginy over videogames?

Anita Snarkess, that's who.

Actually I liked the video a lot. I think it offer solid analysis.

[Skep tickle]

Just got caught up. Lots of really good comments, y'all (here, there, on twitter, on your own blogs, etc).

The whole Nugent thing - just wow. Can't believe he tweeted the link to Ophelia's shame-thread to all his American feminist buddies. Wonder whether any of them (Ophelia especially) will drop out of the AI conference.

Did Aratina & Josh lay into Nugent at his site, or were references to them commenting on their twitter interaction w/ Derek?

If it was at Nugent's site, can someone post a link? There are several threads there & I'm finding it hard to tell them apart, aside from the OP.

[Skep tickle]

And, for a moment, back to erik's stuff. Erik, could you put a link to your blog in your sig, if you want traffic from here? I have to keep looking back to a post where you linked it (as I"m not planning to bookmark it).

To your "DBAD, Civility..." post I replied:

So "dick" is fine* but "cunt" "tears down the dignity and self esteem of half the population"? Can you explain why that would be?

*As in: "Don't be a dick" and "dickishness" from your quotes of Phil Plait and PZ Myers at the start of this post - and particularly PZ's comment, "some of the most wonderfully dickish skeptics I know are female", which is IMO a more sexist comment than anything else on this page, because he seems to be praising the women for acting like men.

You replied:

"So "dick" is fine* but "cunt" "tears down the dignity and self esteem of half the population"? Can you explain why that would be?"

Because one attacks the marginalized half of the population, and the other attacks the privileged half.

"because he seems to be praising the women for acting like men."

I read it as he was saying that calling it "tactical dickishness" implies that only men are capable of possessing "a forthright core of assertiveness and confrontation", exactly the opposite of how you read it, funny how that works huh?

I replied (and here I have added bolding to point out part of my reference to staying at home:

Marginalized half, privileged half? Even if we're going to pretend things are black and white, in some arenas it's one gender that's privileged and in others it's the other.

Which "half" has a higher death rate from birth on, resulting in a shorter life expectancy, both from biomedical and from sociocultural causes of death? Which "half" comprises the work force in most of the most dangerous & grueling professions? Which "half" often is, or feels, less able to choose to spend time with children (whether by staying at home when children are young, entering professions which work with young children, or maintaining parental relationship with children of a heterosexual relationship after split in said relationship)? Etc.

My "forthright core of assertiveness" doesn't seem male or "dickish" to me. It seems like a forthright core of assertiveness, which implies no particular gender, except insofar as it is part of the package that is me. Other people's MMV, of course.

And Erik, please don't email responses to me. I didn't subscribe by email, or at least I didn't intend to, and I don't see an option to unsubscribe. I doubt you meant it this way, but it comes across as kind of creepy/stalky in a "guys don't do that" way. ;-)

Also, I used a throw-away email. :-)

[Dick Strawkins]

http://i.imgur.com/b11b7OW.jpg

Aratina Cage shows a rather nasty racist side.
Skepsheik points out disgusting racism on Atheist Ireland's website and says the rather obvious point that this type of language is not consistent with Atheist Ireland's aims of creating a welcoming environment for all, free from bigotry.
Aratina dismisses these concerns out of hand.

Aratina, time to check your white middle-class privilege :snooty:

[Trophy]

I just finished it. What a waste. All I could think of the entire time watching it was, "You got $160,000, why didn't you just make your *own* damn game?"

Right. What a stupid comment. So, she writes up a proposal to do videos on a subject matter that interests her a lot. She gets much more money and your idea is that she should switch and do something completely different in an area where she has no expertise. Right. And you wish to be taken seriously?

No, instead we are supposed to think that these videos are a revolutionary look into sexism in the video game industry. What tripe. And oh joy, we can look forward to part 2 of the trope next time. I guess in another year or so?

Strawman. You are just supposed to think that the videos will be about those subject matters listed by her in her kickstart proposal. If you criticize PZ, Ophelia and the co for sloppy use of logic, you better make sure your own arguments don't suffer from the same flaw.

[DownThunder]

I just finished it. What a waste. All I could think of the entire time watching it was, "You got $160,000, why didn't you just make your *own* damn game?"

Simply because someone like her does not possess the brain to do so. Her skills lie in emotional toying, and convincing others to infect and destruct things which have already been created. She is simply not creative enough.

[Reap]

Damn this forum moves fast. Just sayin'.

FrankGrimes....do I know you from somewhere? The name is familiar...I think

[Dick Strawkins]

Damn this forum moves fast. Just sayin'.

FrankGrimes....do I know you from somewhere? The name is familiar...I think

It's a character from 'The Simpsons'

[Reap]

Damn this forum moves fast. Just sayin'.

FrankGrimes....do I know you from somewhere? The name is familiar...I think

It's a character from 'The Simpsons'

Ha Ha Fuck you. I know that.....duh. I also know someone who goes by that screen name

[FrankGrimes]

Damn this forum moves fast. Just sayin'.

FrankGrimes....do I know you from somewhere? The name is familiar...I think

http://simpsons.wikia.com/wiki/Frank_Grimes

On my phone at the moment, at a gig so I'll probably have some more amusing anecdotes about people telling me to fuck off. Good times.

Also @erik, I've had the great privilege of being able to look after my son the majority of the time. Some of my mates would give their eye teeth to have what I have had. I've been able to watch him grow up and guide him through life. It's been fucking fantastic. Many of my friends, both male and female are jealous.

[JackSkeptic]

http://i.imgur.com/b11b7OW.jpg

Aratina Cage shows a rather nasty racist side.
Skepsheik points out disgusting racism on Atheist Ireland's website and says the rather obvious point that this type of language is not consistent with Atheist Ireland's aims of creating a welcoming environment for all, free from bigotry.
Aratina dismisses these concerns out of hand.

Aratina, time to check your white middle-class privilege :snooty:

They will eventually turn on him, it's what ideologues do when someone does not toe the party line. When that will happen is a matter of opinion. If he stops poisoning the well and grossly misrepresenting people purely because he finds something offensive they will see that as a sign of weakness.

Then, Michael, you may have wished your disdain of that freedom of expression you so easily dismiss is not there to protect you. You may finally understand why posts you deem offensive are allowed here. Or not, makes little difference as I see nothing good coming from this one way or the other.You we're warned time and again what would happen. A lot of trust has been squandered, a trust freely given and thrown away, at least from me. A victim of a censor is the censor himself.

[FrankGrimes]

Damn this forum moves fast. Just sayin'.

FrankGrimes....do I know you from somewhere? The name is familiar...I think

It's a character from 'The Simpsons'

Ha Ha Fuck you. I know that.....duh. I also know someone who goes by that screen name

In that case, nope. I don't go by this screen name anywhere else. I have an account at Jref forum but I won't be saying what that is.

[codelette]

So, yeah, today feminism taught me a valuable lesson!

The cultural assumption that women will change their names upon marriage – the assumption that we'll even think about it, and be in a position where we make a "choice" of whether to keep our names or take our husbands' – cannot be without consequence.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... en-married

The lesson being that most of the time they refer to "women" and "culture" as a single entity.

There's no assumption in my culture that a woman will need to change her name after marriage. Actually, married women pass their last names (along with the dad's last name) to their children. But hey, you know, anglo-saxon feminism is the arbiter of all women lives. All over the world...

[Tony Parsehole]

Hey, guess who finished the first part of her epic takedown on mysoginy over videogames?

Anita Snarkess, that's who.

Huh, I actually didn't find the video half bad, and did agree with a lot of it. As a female gamer I am frustrated by a lack of representation in a lot of games (and movies). It's slowly getting better, but there's still a long way to go. Of course whether the issue boils down to misogyny or games not traditionally being a female past time and game developers relying heavily on what sold in the past is up for debate. Personally I think the more females there are playing and the more it's asked for the better the odds of seeing a female character as a main "strong" protaginist."

As a male gamer I am interested in what you think could/should be improved in regard to female representation in games and what aspects need better/more female representation (NPC's, PC's, antagonists, etc.)
I'm not being sarcastic here just interested to learn a different P.O.V.

[Tony Parsehole]

So, yeah, today feminism taught me a valuable lesson!

The cultural assumption that women will change their names upon marriage – the assumption that we'll even think about it, and be in a position where we make a "choice" of whether to keep our names or take our husbands' – cannot be without consequence.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... en-married

The lesson being that most of the time they refer to "women" and "culture" as a single entity.

There's no assumption in my culture that a woman will need to change her name after marriage. Actually, married women pass their last names (along with the dad's last name) to their children. But hey, you know, anglo-saxon feminism is the arbiter of all women lives. All over the world...

The Guardian is the left-wing version of The Daily Mail. Blinkered, biased and opinionated dross with a misguided idea that they own the moral high-ground.

[Guest]

Fascist tit

Take a 12ns ban, cunt.

obviously power has gone straight to your head, and you are just like hitler

WORSE than hitler! after all, he never banned people from online forums

[TheMan]

Biting satire orcrude and offensive? The Onion in some beef about using the the word "cunt" about a 9 yo.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/o ... -c-424113#

[DownThunder]

So, yeah, today feminism taught me a valuable lesson!

The cultural assumption that women will change their names upon marriage – the assumption that we'll even think about it, and be in a position where we make a "choice" of whether to keep our names or take our husbands' – cannot be without consequence.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... en-married

The lesson being that most of the time they refer to "women" and "culture" as a single entity.

There's no assumption in my culture that a woman will need to change her name after marriage. Actually, married women pass their last names (along with the dad's last name) to their children. But hey, you know, anglo-saxon feminism is the arbiter of all women lives. All over the world...

Yeah, you can take my name.

Can I take everything you own?

Equality and all that.

[Wonderist]

Zvan reminds everyone what this is really all about:

The last thing we’re doing right now is having an argument over what words are polite. This is an argument over who gets to participate in our movements. Don’t forget that for a minute. It’s the only light in which all of this makes sense.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/almostdiamo ... the-words/
http://www.freezepage.com/1362666269FBBGSFSKFG

And here I thought we could all participate together, but as individuals. But apparently, she thinks, "We can participate, but *you* can't." Well, good luck trying to stop me, Zvan. Your shit doesn't work on me. I've been dealing with this kind of shit since I was a kid. Bluntly, I'm smarter than you at this. You've got a losing strategy. You're going to end up with an army of might-as-well-be-theists at this rate. And we already know how to deal with that. Duh. :roll:

[AbsurdWalls]

I see "Man with Boobs" as an example of negative trope, I am genuinely wondering if Sarkeesian is going to rip on any portrayal of a women in a game that seems too "butch" or tough. I've seen other gender feminist types who complain about really strong, aggressive and tough women in popular fiction as "just a man with tits", one example being the hispanic space marine in the movie Aliens who was a woman with noticeable musculature, short butch-style hair and an attitude about combat that fits in right alongside a 1980s Stallone or Schwarzenegger character. I have actually seen people rip on that character as being an example of how a woman can't be strong unless they make her masculine. Um, cis-hetero-normative much? Is Sarkeesian going to follow suit and complain about female characters that aren't feminine enough in those two videos? Very interesting...

I have seen that style of argument happen in regards to careers. The theory is that the patriarchy prevents women from being able to reach the top of various career ladders. Counter-examples are provided of women who did manage to do so. These women are dismissed as having "become men" in order to succeed. Stunning, we have two propositions:

1) Women cannot reach the top of X career.
2) Ms. Name is a woman.

Then we get a fact
3) Ms. Name reaches the top of X career.

Which should cause us to reject either 1) or 2). I really did not think anyone would ever reject 2) and make the "Ms. Name is no longer a woman" argument. It blew my mind the first time.

I think this elucidates why some of the people who hold to the patriarchy idea etc. desire a revolutionary change. They see a system that REQUIRES people to be men to succeed (even if they are women). That restraint is implemented in several ways. For example, if the supposed barrier is against managing a company then they might say managers are expected to boss their employees around, that is a male characteristic, and we need to find a non-male way of managing (i.e. one that does not involve managers being assertive).

I am not saying every feminist believes this, but I have spoken to some who do. I know "feminism is sexism" is frequently said by axe-grinding idiots, but in this particular case it does seem to me that it is sexist to say that to be assertive or competitive is un-womanly.

[Gumby]

Zvan reminds everyone what this is really all about:

The last thing we’re doing right now is having an argument over what words are polite. This is an argument over who gets to participate in our movements. Don’t forget that for a minute. It’s the only light in which all of this makes sense.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/almostdiamo ... the-words/
http://www.freezepage.com/1362666269FBBGSFSKFG

And here I thought we could all participate together, but as individuals. But apparently, she thinks, "We can participate, but *you* can't." Well, good luck trying to stop me, Zvan. Your shit doesn't work on me. I've been dealing with this kind of shit since I was a kid. Bluntly, I'm smarter than you at this. You've got a losing strategy. You're going to end up with an army of might-as-well-be-theists at this rate. And we already know how to deal with that. Duh. :roll:

Well at least they're outright admitting that their goal is to keep people they don't like out of the community. That's a keeper quote right there.

[daisyw]

From Nugget's place:

Hey! I have some questions!

1) What do you expect from a site called THE SLIME PIT?
2) How are people who dislike the Slime Pit’s content finding out about what’s there?
3) Why not ignore the Slime Pit and not visit it?

Seriously. The place is pretty transparent in its name about its attitude and content i.e.: pit of slime… So if you’re not looking to hang out it a “pit” that contains “slime”, why are you going?

It would be pretty mean to setup a MeanThingsAboutSaraMayhew.com but if I went there and read those mean things then complained they were harassing me there, would you really feel all that sorry for me? After all, I don’t have to go there.

Anyway…I’m off to join ChritianMingle.com so I can complain I’m being discriminated against for being atheist…

I find it amazing to hear that Sara Mayhew thinks that people here care about what she's saying enough to create a 'hate site' about her.

What is it with her paranoia regarding this? It seems to be misplaced and unnecessary.

Also, I wonder if she's realised that nobody cares about her enough to do that?

[Gumby]

From Nugget's place:

Hey! I have some questions!

1) What do you expect from a site called THE SLIME PIT?
2) How are people who dislike the Slime Pit’s content finding out about what’s there?
3) Why not ignore the Slime Pit and not visit it?

Seriously. The place is pretty transparent in its name about its attitude and content i.e.: pit of slime… So if you’re not looking to hang out it a “pit” that contains “slime”, why are you going?

It would be pretty mean to setup a MeanThingsAboutSaraMayhew.com but if I went there and read those mean things then complained they were harassing me there, would you really feel all that sorry for me? After all, I don’t have to go there.

Anyway…I’m off to join ChritianMingle.com so I can complain I’m being discriminated against for being atheist…

I find it amazing to hear that Sara Mayhew thinks that people here care about what she's saying enough to create a 'hate site' about her.

What is it with her paranoia regarding this? It seems to be misplaced and unnecessary.

Also, I wonder if she's realised that nobody cares about her enough to do that?

You're reading it wrong.

[Tony Parsehole]

Well at least they're outright admitting that their goal is to keep people they don't like out of the community. That's a keeper quote right there.

A nice example of circular logic too.
"Pitters are bad because they use bad werdz". When shown evidence that her side uses those words (and sometimes worse) it doesn't matter because "Pitters are bad and we need to get them out of the community".

[Gumby]

These people are so petty.

http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd24 ... 911f62.jpg
http://freethoughtblogs.com/almostdiamo ... ent-211009

Yes Wowbagger, because everyone but your precious FTB gods are "second-rate" speakers.

Maybe you should tell those sour grapes to die in a fire.

[Steersman]

From Nugget's place:

Hey! I have some questions!

1) What do you expect from a site called THE SLIME PIT?
2) How are people who dislike the Slime Pit’s content finding out about what’s there?
3) Why not ignore the Slime Pit and not visit it?

Seriously. The place is pretty transparent in its name about its attitude and content i.e.: pit of slime… So if you’re not looking to hang out it a “pit” that contains “slime”, why are you going?

It would be pretty mean to setup a MeanThingsAboutSaraMayhew.com but if I went there and read those mean things then complained they were harassing me there, would you really feel all that sorry for me? After all, I don’t have to go there.

Anyway…I’m off to join ChritianMingle.com so I can complain I’m being discriminated against for being atheist…

I find it amazing to hear that Sara Mayhew thinks that people here care about what she's saying enough to create a 'hate site' about her.

What is it with her paranoia regarding this? It seems to be misplaced and unnecessary.

Also, I wonder if she's realised that nobody cares about her enough to do that?

She maybe didn’t phrase it as well as she might have but it seems to be a hypothetical case to present an analogy: if someone had created such a site then if she had gone there and had then seen such “mean things” then it would have been her fault. Which is then, more or less, the same – analogously –as people coming here to the Pit and seeing “mean things” said about them - ergo, their “fault”….

But I thought that bit at the end about joining “ChritianMingle.com” was a nice touch – kind of a cherry on top to the argument, although I think she might be misjudging where the Pit is really coming from ….

[tina]

Zvan reminds everyone what this is really all about:

The last thing we’re doing right now is having an argument over what words are polite. This is an argument over who gets to participate in our movements. Don’t forget that for a minute. It’s the only light in which all of this makes sense.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/almostdiamo ... the-words/
http://www.freezepage.com/1362666269FBBGSFSKFG

And here I thought we could all participate together, but as individuals. But apparently, she thinks, "We can participate, but *you* can't." Well, good luck trying to stop me, Zvan. Your shit doesn't work on me. I've been dealing with this kind of shit since I was a kid. Bluntly, I'm smarter than you at this. You've got a losing strategy. You're going to end up with an army of might-as-well-be-theists at this rate. And we already know how to deal with that. Duh. :roll:

Yup....that quote lights up and pays up in silver dollars. You can take part if we say you can. And this 'movement' is what exactly? Steffuny...you are ....oh, never mind.

[Apples]

Did Aratina & Josh lay into Nugent at his site, or were references to them commenting on their twitter interaction w/ Derek?

If it was at Nugent's site, can someone post a link? There are several threads there & I'm finding it hard to tell them apart, aside from the OP.

Not sure I've seen every comment on all the Nugent threads, but I only saw Ratface/SpokesPrick doing their dance on twitter.

[Wonderist]

Are people de-cloaking in large numbers here? That at least would be a positive outcome of nuggetgate if nothing else.

I was already in the process of decloaking (with the help of Phil and Lsuoma re: forgotten PW), but N*gge*Gate did indeed spur me to post some updates here.

[windy]

Did Aratina & Josh lay into Nugent at his site, or were references to them commenting on their twitter interaction w/ Derek?

If it was at Nugent's site, can someone post a link? There are several threads there & I'm finding it hard to tell them apart, aside from the OP.

I haven't seen them over there. Oolon, official spokesturd, goes back and forth and tattles to them.

[Karmakin]

I see "Man with Boobs" as an example of negative trope, I am genuinely wondering if Sarkeesian is going to rip on any portrayal of a women in a game that seems too "butch" or tough. I've seen other gender feminist types who complain about really strong, aggressive and tough women in popular fiction as "just a man with tits", one example being the hispanic space marine in the movie Aliens who was a woman with noticeable musculature, short butch-style hair and an attitude about combat that fits in right alongside a 1980s Stallone or Schwarzenegger character. I have actually seen people rip on that character as being an example of how a woman can't be strong unless they make her masculine. Um, cis-hetero-normative much? Is Sarkeesian going to follow suit and complain about female characters that aren't feminine enough in those two videos? Very interesting...

I have seen that style of argument happen in regards to careers. The theory is that the patriarchy prevents women from being able to reach the top of various career ladders. Counter-examples are provided of women who did manage to do so. These women are dismissed as having "become men" in order to succeed. Stunning, we have two propositions:

1) Women cannot reach the top of X career.
2) Ms. Name is a woman.

Then we get a fact
3) Ms. Name reaches the top of X career.

Which should cause us to reject either 1) or 2). I really did not think anyone would ever reject 2) and make the "Ms. Name is no longer a woman" argument. It blew my mind the first time.

I think this elucidates why some of the people who hold to the patriarchy idea etc. desire a revolutionary change. They see a system that REQUIRES people to be men to succeed (even if they are women). That restraint is implemented in several ways. For example, if the supposed barrier is against managing a company then they might say managers are expected to boss their employees around, that is a male characteristic, and we need to find a non-male way of managing (i.e. one that does not involve managers being assertive).

I am not saying every feminist believes this, but I have spoken to some who do. I know "feminism is sexism" is frequently said by axe-grinding idiots, but in this particular case it does seem to me that it is sexist to say that to be assertive or competitive is un-womanly.

Well, a lot of what goes for modern feminist ideology and culture IS sexist. That's simply the way it is. That's not to say that all feminism is sexist...equity feminism isn't sexist at all. But generally speaking, modern feminist culture is running away from that as fast as they can.

But yes, that is an increasingly common thing. I'd actually go as far as to say that there's a whole bunch of prominent feminists (Amanda Marcotte is a really good example of this) who over just a few years ago have made a dramatic ideology change from equity feminism to something...new. Which is why some people call it Neofeminism. Others refer to it as Gender Feminism, but I don't think it's an accurate description to what they actually believe.

What they're saying is that a lot of "traditional male" traits are negative and that a lot of "traditional female" traits are positive, and our society needs to promote the positive traits that are currently punished and punish the negative traits that are currently rewarded. Needless to say, this is sexist as fuck, not to mention REALLY FUCKING DAMAGING to young boys who might be hearing that message. (You know that whole argument about what real harm is feminism doing? Here you go)

When it comes to games, what they want are female characters who act accordingly to traditional female traits, without traditional masculine traits. The problem with this, is that main characters of games generally speaking are going to be the direct actors, and as such, they are going to act in an assertive and aggressive fashion, especially in action games. In non-action games...RPGs and Adventure games..this isn't needed so much..and guess what? You see characters who don't act in such a way. Surprise surprise.

In any case, I think that gaming has come a long way in terms of gender representation, and while there's still quite a bit to go I think, most of that is less about sexism/misogyny and more about the constant forward motion and improvement in terms of writing and story-telling in such a young genre. I think that when more complex writing in video games started becoming a real thing...and that's only really happened in the last few years really...that's when we started to see a massive leap forward in the portrayal of women in video games. And a massive leap forward in the portrayal of MEN in video games as well. It's a VERY young artform, balancing story-telling, interactivity and a "show, don't tell" focus.

[tina]

Are people de-cloaking in large numbers here? That at least would be a positive outcome of nuggetgate if nothing else.

I was already in the process of decloaking (with the help of Phil and Lsuoma re: forgotten PW), but N*gge*Gate did indeed spur me to post some updates here.

Fucking Romulan cunts...cloaking, de-cloaking..never know if they're coming or going. You have the bridge No 1...I'll be in the ready room. :twisted: :evil: :mrgreen:

[Apples]

Zvan reminds everyone what this is really all about:

The last thing we’re doing right now is having an argument over what words are polite. This is an argument over who gets to participate in our movements. Don’t forget that for a minute. It’s the only light in which all of this makes sense.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/almostdiamo ... the-words/
http://www.freezepage.com/1362666269FBBGSFSKFG

And here I thought we could all participate together, but as individuals. But apparently, she thinks, "We can participate, but *you* can't." Well, good luck trying to stop me, Zvan. Your shit doesn't work on me. I've been dealing with this kind of shit since I was a kid. Bluntly, I'm smarter than you at this. You've got a losing strategy. You're going to end up with an army of might-as-well-be-theists at this rate. And we already know how to deal with that. Duh. :roll:

Well at least they're outright admitting that their goal is to keep people they don't like out of the community. That's a keeper quote right there.

I have to give Zvan a bit of credit for rhetorical skill here - even though it's an accurate summarizing quotation which concludes the article, it's a slight quotemine, in that the context of the entire post would imply that "who gets to participate in our movements" includes the notion that opposition to the FTFeministas/SJW equates to a desire to bar women/disprivileged folks from participation.

So, cunning creepy clown that she is, she's both advocating exclusion of folks with a nuanced/questioning view of feminism/social justice and at the same time accusing them (us) of creating an environment unwelcoming to women/minorities/whomever. Of course, the demographics of the 'Pit alone make it obvious that she is full of shit. The implicit ideological litmus-test is patent and insidious. But I think Svan is one of the more effective baboons because of her decent rhetorical skills and her willingness to use scorched earth tactics.

[welch]

Meanwhile, your response indicated that you think staying at home with the kids is a privilege?

Well it's certainly a sign that you're quite privileged or you're doing it really, really rough/relying on welfare.

Really? So if you are stuck home with the kids, you have it good, or you are on welfare, got it. Thanks for clarifying.

I wifi could have stopped working when I was a single parent.

[welch]

So ftr, I had no idea disqus comments auto emailed anybody that commented, I will ditch it post haste, I guess I will have to go unmoderated for now. I will trust since y'all claim to be to be good peeps that I won't get trolled. I can delete comments with squarespace built in moderation but I can't ban commenters unless I moderate every comment and require email addy's from any one who wants to bypass moderation.

You can change that, but disqus comments can be complex.

[ERV]

Meanwhile, your response indicated that you think staying at home with the kids is a privilege?

Well it's certainly a sign that you're quite privileged or you're doing it really, really rough/relying on welfare.

Really? So if you are stuck home with the kids, you have it good, or you are on welfare, got it. Thanks for clarifying.

Seems like it to me. It's pretty hard to live on just one income these days. Most couples I know with kids either both work (one or both part time) and rely on childcare or family members, or have one member of the couple making more-than-average wage. Friend of mine (Australian) has estimated to me that you need at least $50k a year to cover mortgages, essentials and other costs if your partner is staying home full time - otherwise you're very very limited in what you can do and wind up living paycheque to paycheque.

I live pay check to pay check, but I'd much rather go to work than stay at home with kids all day. I'm failing to understand why staying at home with slobbering and screaming kids is a privilege.

What is it with FfTBers/Skepchicks and their 'fans' being terrible with children?

Erikthebassist-- bravely defending women, but fuck those slobbering and screaming children!! Amirite?

Freak.

[welch]

I think you're focussed on your own dislike of the idea of raising kids, and are finding it difficult to separate this (I don't want it) from the very real financial issues that make it impossible for others to make their own choices (Why would they want it, it's good they don't have to).

If there's any privilege involved it's being able to have one parent stay home as a choice at doesn't severely impact the family in a bad way. As I said, I would have loved to have been able to be at home, or even work from home when my son was young, but it wasn't an option.

[katamari Damassi]

I think I just ruptured an organ laughing.

Ellenbeth just Goatse'd Michael's thread. :lol: :lol: :lol:

You are so right. :) The Nugent threads are the like the first Gulf War. You go in expecting the Republican Guard wielding nerve gas and end up with a turkey shoot resulting in the Highway of Death. The FTBers are hopeless and helpless in the field.

I actually feel kinda sorry for Michael now. He must be sitting there, peeking through his fingers at the monitor screen, going, 'What the fuh - what the fuck has happened here?'

Some reflections on the recent dialogue

This is not going to go well. Good luck to him anyway.

I feel a little bad about referring to him as a "disingenuous dickhead" now. Just a little though.
If anything it's good to see that Justin's reasonableness has finally triumphed over spittle flecked histrionics.

[Apples]

Hey Pitters. When I post online these days, I always post as SallyStrange. Or, if not as SallyStrange, something entirely unrelated. Not as just plain Sally or Sally Super or whatever. Just SallyStrange. So try to keep your wits about you and not drag innocent people into your irrational hostility against me, okay?

Also, FYI: no IUD yet, I’m still happy with the Nuvaring. Haven’t menstruated in about three years now, and it feels great. Perhaps you can work that into a photoshop somewhere.

LOL. Thanks for the hysterical update, Sally :D

http://www.michaelnugent.com/2013/03/07 ... ent-197727

[welch]

So, yeah, today feminism taught me a valuable lesson!

The cultural assumption that women will change their names upon marriage – the assumption that we'll even think about it, and be in a position where we make a "choice" of whether to keep our names or take our husbands' – cannot be without consequence.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... en-married

The lesson being that most of the time they refer to "women" and "culture" as a single entity.

There's no assumption in my culture that a woman will need to change her name after marriage. Actually, married women pass their last names (along with the dad's last name) to their children. But hey, you know, anglo-saxon feminism is the arbiter of all women lives. All over the world...

Hell, even that bastion of feminism, the laden himself assumes that. He assumed my wife had take my name. She hadn't one reason being branding for her art. Bothered me not at all. I think I'd assumed she'd be keeping it. It's not like there aren't a passel of welches already, and we're not having any kids ourselves.

[katamari Damassi]

[quote="ERV]What is it with FfTBers/Skepchicks and their 'fans' being terrible with children?

Erikthebassist-- bravely defending women, but fuck those slobbering and screaming children!! Amirite?

Freak.[/quote]
Because children require attention and attention seeking is a zero sum game.

[welch]

Fascist tit

Take a 12ns ban, cunt.

obviously power has gone straight to your head, and you are just like hitler

WORSE than hitler! after all, he never banned people from online forums

LOL

well-played

[katamari Damassi]

Zvan reminds everyone what this is really all about:

The last thing we’re doing right now is having an argument over what words are polite. This is an argument over who gets to participate in our movements. Don’t forget that for a minute. It’s the only light in which all of this makes sense.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/almostdiamo ... the-words/
http://www.freezepage.com/1362666269FBBGSFSKFG

And here I thought we could all participate together, but as individuals. But apparently, she thinks, "We can participate, but *you* can't." Well, good luck trying to stop me, Zvan. Your shit doesn't work on me. I've been dealing with this kind of shit since I was a kid. Bluntly, I'm smarter than you at this. You've got a losing strategy. You're going to end up with an army of might-as-well-be-theists at this rate. And we already know how to deal with that. Duh. :roll:

Well at least they're outright admitting that their goal is to keep people they don't like out of the community. That's a keeper quote right there.

I have to give Zvan a bit of credit for rhetorical skill here - even though it's an accurate summarizing quotation which concludes the article, it's a slight quotemine, in that the context of the entire post would imply that "who gets to participate in our movements" includes the notion that opposition to the FTFeministas/SJW equates to a desire to bar women/disprivileged folks from participation.

So, cunning creepy clown that she is, she's both advocating exclusion of folks with a nuanced/questioning view of feminism/social justice and at the same time accusing them (us) of creating an environment unwelcoming to women/minorities/whomever. Of course, the demographics of the 'Pit alone make it obvious that she is full of shit. The implicit ideological litmus-test is patent and insidious. But I think Svan is one of the more effective baboons because of her decent rhetorical skills and her willingness to use scorched earth tactics.

I for one do not want to participate in any of Zvan's movements.

[welch]

Well it's certainly a sign that you're quite privileged or you're doing it really, really rough/relying on welfare.

Really? So if you are stuck home with the kids, you have it good, or you are on welfare, got it. Thanks for clarifying.

Seems like it to me. It's pretty hard to live on just one income these days. Most couples I know with kids either both work (one or both part time) and rely on childcare or family members, or have one member of the couple making more-than-average wage. Friend of mine (Australian) has estimated to me that you need at least $50k a year to cover mortgages, essentials and other costs if your partner is staying home full time - otherwise you're very very limited in what you can do and wind up living paycheque to paycheque.

I live pay check to pay check, but I'd much rather go to work than stay at home with kids all day. I'm failing to understand why staying at home with slobbering and screaming kids is a privilege.

What is it with FfTBers/Skepchicks and their 'fans' being terrible with children?

Erikthebassist-- bravely defending women, but fuck those slobbering and screaming children!! Amirite?

Freak.

It's the latest hipster ism: the child free movement. Which, in and of itself, I think is great. Not having kids should not be cause to have people telling you endlessly why you're wrong or assuming you secretly want them. But because humans, you have "I don't want kids" turn into "KIDS ARE EEEEVIL. BREEDERS!!"

[Submariner]

Snip

I feel a little bad about referring to him as a "disingenuous dickhead" now. Just a little though.
If anything it's good to see that Justin's reasonableness has finally triumphed over spittle flecked histrionics.

I am still of the opinion that he's being disingenuous. His next post/blog on this matter will likely reveal whether he is really reflecting on his a priori assumptions or just strategizing.

[AbsurdWalls]

I see "Man with Boobs" as an example of negative trope, I am genuinely wondering if Sarkeesian is going to rip on any portrayal of a women in a game that seems too "butch" or tough. I've seen other gender feminist types who complain about really strong, aggressive and tough women in popular fiction as "just a man with tits", one example being the hispanic space marine in the movie Aliens who was a woman with noticeable musculature, short butch-style hair and an attitude about combat that fits in right alongside a 1980s Stallone or Schwarzenegger character. I have actually seen people rip on that character as being an example of how a woman can't be strong unless they make her masculine. Um, cis-hetero-normative much? Is Sarkeesian going to follow suit and complain about female characters that aren't feminine enough in those two videos? Very interesting...

I have seen that style of argument happen in regards to careers. The theory is that the patriarchy prevents women from being able to reach the top of various career ladders. Counter-examples are provided of women who did manage to do so. These women are dismissed as having "become men" in order to succeed. Stunning, we have two propositions:

1) Women cannot reach the top of X career.
2) Ms. Name is a woman.

Then we get a fact
3) Ms. Name reaches the top of X career.

Which should cause us to reject either 1) or 2). I really did not think anyone would ever reject 2) and make the "Ms. Name is no longer a woman" argument. It blew my mind the first time.

I think this elucidates why some of the people who hold to the patriarchy idea etc. desire a revolutionary change. They see a system that REQUIRES people to be men to succeed (even if they are women). That restraint is implemented in several ways. For example, if the supposed barrier is against managing a company then they might say managers are expected to boss their employees around, that is a male characteristic, and we need to find a non-male way of managing (i.e. one that does not involve managers being assertive).

I am not saying every feminist believes this, but I have spoken to some who do. I know "feminism is sexism" is frequently said by axe-grinding idiots, but in this particular case it does seem to me that it is sexist to say that to be assertive or competitive is un-womanly.

Well, a lot of what goes for modern feminist ideology and culture IS sexist. That's simply the way it is. That's not to say that all feminism is sexist...equity feminism isn't sexist at all. But generally speaking, modern feminist culture is running away from that as fast as they can.

But yes, that is an increasingly common thing. I'd actually go as far as to say that there's a whole bunch of prominent feminists (Amanda Marcotte is a really good example of this) who over just a few years ago have made a dramatic ideology change from equity feminism to something...new. Which is why some people call it Neofeminism. Others refer to it as Gender Feminism, but I don't think it's an accurate description to what they actually believe.

What they're saying is that a lot of "traditional male" traits are negative and that a lot of "traditional female" traits are positive, and our society needs to promote the positive traits that are currently punished and punish the negative traits that are currently rewarded. Needless to say, this is sexist as fuck, not to mention REALLY FUCKING DAMAGING to young boys who might be hearing that message. (You know that whole argument about what real harm is feminism doing? Here you go)

When it comes to games, what they want are female characters who act accordingly to traditional female traits, without traditional masculine traits. The problem with this, is that main characters of games generally speaking are going to be the direct actors, and as such, they are going to act in an assertive and aggressive fashion, especially in action games. In non-action games...RPGs and Adventure games..this isn't needed so much..and guess what? You see characters who don't act in such a way. Surprise surprise.

In any case, I think that gaming has come a long way in terms of gender representation, and while there's still quite a bit to go I think, most of that is less about sexism/misogyny and more about the constant forward motion and improvement in terms of writing and story-telling in such a young genre. I think that when more complex writing in video games started becoming a real thing...and that's only really happened in the last few years really...that's when we started to see a massive leap forward in the portrayal of women in video games. And a massive leap forward in the portrayal of MEN in video games as well. It's a VERY young artform, balancing story-telling, interactivity and a "show, don't tell" focus.

That's interesting, because when I think of the game with the best writing that had been achieved so far, Planescape:Torment (sequel on Kickstarter atm), the way women are handled in that game is not great.