Nerds. Nerds EVERYWHERE...

[BlueShiftRhino]

To sum it up: if a white atheist man wears a tacky T-shirt, he's a horrible, evil sexist who should be ashamed of himself.

You know, if you all keep piling on Mykeru, he'll never come back.

[Old_ones]

And old one someone retweeted...

Christopher #Hitchens is a racist, sexist, warmonger. The fact that people are choosing to look past this just because he died is appalling.
2:45 AM - 18 Dec 2011

That's pretty fucking hilarious. If his flaws were overlooked at all, I'm pretty sure it was because he was a brilliant writer and orator and people were terrified of being cut to ribbons by his razor sharp wit. I guess now that he is dead its finally safe for eminent intellectuals like Anita to take him on.

[Rat Bastard]

And old one someone retweeted...

Christopher #Hitchens is a racist, sexist, warmonger. The fact that people are choosing to look past this just because he died is appalling.
2:45 AM - 18 Dec 2011

That's pretty fucking hilarious. If his flaws were overlooked at all, I'm pretty sure it was because he was a brilliant writer and orator and people were terrified of being cut to ribbons by his razor sharp wit. I guess now that he is dead its finally safe for eminent intellectuals like Anita to take him on.

It's typical SJW coward behavior. They pick soft targets that can't defend themselves or respond back. What better target than someone who is dead? Nothing new here.

[Rat Bastard]

After Coyne's Pharyngula dis from yesterday, PZ just had to flail helplessly back. So this morning he goes back nearly a week to dig up an article on evolutionary psychology to critique that Coyne wrote on WEIT. What a small, petty man.

I disagree strongly. It's fair that he tackles it and it is umimportant what has motivated him. Maybe he didn't have time earlier? Maybe he wrote it and it was almost done and then JAC posted PZMs comment? Maybe he was really irked and really wrote it in spite? We don't know and it's stricly unimportant. I like to see what everyone has to bring to the table and hope to learn something from the dispute. I haven't read yet what PZ Myers has to say on the subject and hope its not a massive ideological rant, or worse.

Here is the link:
http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... ogy-again/

There are some science-friendly folk (including atheists) who simply dismiss the entire field of evolutionary psychology in humans TEH PATRIARCHY, saying that its theoretical foundations are weak or nonexistent. I’ve always replied that that claim is bunk, for its “theoretical foundations” are simply the claim that our brains and behaviors, like our bodies, show features reflecting evolution SUBLIMINAL PROGRAMMING THROUGH MICRO-AGGRESSION in our ancestors SOCIETY.

Here PZ, FTFY

[NoGodsEver]

After Coyne's Pharyngula dis from yesterday, PZ just had to flail helplessly back. So this morning he goes back nearly a week to dig up an article on evolutionary psychology to critique that Coyne wrote on WEIT. What a small, petty man.

I disagree strongly. It's fair that he tackles it and it is umimportant what has motivated him. Maybe he didn't have time earlier? Maybe he wrote it and it was almost done and then JAC posted PZMs comment? Maybe he was really irked and really wrote it in spite? We don't know and it's stricly unimportant. I like to see what everyone has to bring to the table and hope to learn something from the dispute. I haven't read yet what PZ Myers has to say on the subject and hope its not a massive ideological rant, or worse.

Here is the link:
http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... ogy-again/

I wasn't commenting on the content, although if it's anything like stuff he's written on EP in the past, we can probably dismiss it pretty readily. As to whether or not he wrote it in response to Coyne's piece yesterday, that seems too obvious to dispute. And you're right, it doesn't reflect on the content (that would be what, genetic fallacy), but my point was that he's petty. And you surely can't deny that.

[jimthepleb]

[youtube]rHBxJCq99j[/youtube]
For some reason I enjoy this video ...can't think why, but it does make me think of another lurker for some reason.

[Matt Cavanaugh]

Of course they're racist. Identity politics is all about putting people into categories and judging people as representative of those categories, not as individuals - the last thing they want to do is judge you by the content of your character. White supremacist things black people are inferior, sees a black guy and, knowing nothing else about him, thinks "that guy's inferior". SJW thinks white men are oppressive shitlords, sees a white man and, knowing nothing else about him, thinks "that guy's an oppressive shitlord". It's all about the prejudice.

But the particularly nasty racism we're seeing at the moment, not just from the SJWs but the mainstream liberal media, is to assume thugs and criminals are typical poor black Americans. I have no doubt the vast majority of poor black Americans, like every other demographic, are decent people doing their best to make their way in the circumstances they were born into, and make up the majority of the victims of black criminals, because criminals tend to pick on the people around them. Lefties know that being racist is wrong, and to be not racist they have to support black people - but their prejudice about black people is that they're all criminals and thugs, so they support criminals and thugs, and throw decent black people under the bus. It's contemptible.

What strikes me about many of the SJWs at FtB is that they have very limited experience interacting with people of different ethnicities and socioeconomic backgrounds IRL, as friends, co-workers, and neighbors. It's just my impression, mind you, but that sort of insularity and homogeneity in everyday experiences is bound to contribute to a narrow, bigoted view of the world.

My very white ex-GF from very white Fargo used to go on about how wonderful and special African Americans were, how much she liked African Americans. I asked her if she knew many blacks growing up in Fargo. She knew the two black people in her high school, and both had been nice. "Darling," I replied, "I dated two black people in high school."

[SkepticalCat]

And old one someone retweeted...

It's typical SJW coward behavior. They pick soft targets that can't defend themselves or respond back. What better target than someone who is dead? Nothing new here.

If she actually wrote this and the date stamp is accurate, it was two days after Hitchens died.

[comhcinc]

And old one someone retweeted...

It's typical SJW coward behavior. They pick soft targets that can't defend themselves or respond back. What better target than someone who is dead? Nothing new here.

If she actually wrote this and the date stamp is accurate, it was two days after Hitchens died.

She did. I remember her doing it when it happened.

[another lurker]

[youtube]rHBxJCq99j[/youtube]
For some reason I enjoy this video ...can't think why, but it does make me think of another lurker for some reason.

"There was a problem with the network"


Fuck you, jimbo!

[screwtape]

You want to see this vivid field trip through postmodernism and some ideas history.

Lecture 35, Postmodernism, of UGS 303, Ideas of the Twentieth Century, University of Texas at Austin, Fall 2013
[youtube]we6cwmzhbBE[/youtube]

There's a lot of good lectures in his YT channel aren't there? Thank you—I have my entertainment/education set up for the next few days!

[jimthepleb]

[youtube]rHBxJCq99j[/youtube]
For some reason I enjoy this video ...can't think why, but it does make me think of another lurker for some reason.

"There was a problem with the network"


Fuck you, jimbo!

[youtube]rHBxJCq99jA[/youtube]
2:05 is the moment I'm referring to ;)

[Aneris]

After Coyne's Pharyngula dis from yesterday, PZ just had to flail helplessly back. So this morning he goes back nearly a week to dig up an article on evolutionary psychology to critique that Coyne wrote on WEIT. What a small, petty man.

I disagree strongly. It's fair that he tackles it and it is umimportant what has motivated him. Maybe he didn't have time earlier? Maybe he wrote it and it was almost done and then JAC posted PZMs comment? Maybe he was really irked and really wrote it in spite? We don't know and it's stricly unimportant. I like to see what everyone has to bring to the table and hope to learn something from the dispute. I haven't read yet what PZ Myers has to say on the subject and hope its not a massive ideological rant, or worse.

Here is the link:
http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... ogy-again/

I wasn't commenting on the content, although if it's anything like stuff he's written on EP in the past, we can probably dismiss it pretty readily. As to whether or not he wrote it in response to Coyne's piece yesterday, that seems too obvious to dispute. And you're right, it doesn't reflect on the content (that would be what, genetic fallacy), but my point was that he's petty. And you surely can't deny that.

I read it. It's utter crap. And he is dishonest as usual.

But then Coyne pulls his magic “proof” out of his hat: the existence of sexual dimorphism. Yeah, who has a problem with that? Men and women look different in grand and subtle ways. Some of those differences were almost certainly selected for. Again, I don’t know anyone who denies that, so it’s kind of weird to use it as his triumphant example. Except that he seems to think all those lefty wackos — you know, feminists, apparently — are in the business of denying the obvious.

Well, then...

We'll start big, with the feminist view of gender. The most definitive statement I know of comes from Simone De Beauvoir's 1949 work, "The Second Sex." I quote: [tablet]

• “The biological and social sciences no longer admit the existence of unchangeably fixed entities that determine given characteristics, such as those ascribed to woman, the Jew, or the Negro. [tablet: 1949!] ... But does the word woman, then, have no specific content? This is stoutly affirmed by those who hold to the philosophy of the enlightenment, of rationalism, of nominalism; women, to them, are merely the human beings arbitrarily designated by the word woman. Many American women particularly are prepared to think that there is no longer any place for woman as such; if a backward individual still takes herself for a woman, her friends advise her to be psychoanalysed and thus get rid of this obsession.”

A quick aside: most of what I’ll reference for the time being was written before the term “gender” was used to describe humanity. When you hear "sex," think gender instead. Anyway, the vast majority of the feminist movement still agrees with De Beauvoir.

and here...

Though the second wave of feminism popularized the idea that a person’s gender is distinct from her or his physiological sex and is socially and culturally constructed, it largely left unquestioned the belief that there was such a thing as true physical (biological) sex. The separation of gender from sex was a powerful rhetorical move used to break down compulsory gender roles, but it allowed feminists to question only half of the problem, avoiding the question of the naturalness of essential female and male sexes. Transfeminism holds that sex and gender are both socially constructed; furthermore, the distinction between sex and gender is artificially drawn as a matter of convenience.

PZ Myers knows nobody? It's all an illusion and a stramwn what Jerry Coyne writes?

PZ Myers himself...

He knows nobody? Never ever heard of it?

Here is the entire conversation.


PZ Myers... defeated by PZ Myers.

[Aneris]

FTBCon 2 link.

And Matt's stuff on the subject, all over the place:
http://skeptischism.com/atheismneat

[BlueShiftRhino]

[youtube]rHBxJCq99jA[/youtube]2:05 is the moment I'm referring to ;)

Is she Debbie Harry's daughter?

(rhetorical ... I know how to google)

[BlueShiftRhino]

I get the impression that there is no previous statement by PZ Myers that PZ Myers isn't willing to throw under the bus if PZ Myers believes that it will help PZ Myers in his current argument with or attack upon someone more thoughtful and famous than PZ Myers.

[jimthepleb]

I get the impression that there is no previous statement by PZ Myers that PZ Myers isn't willing to throw under the bus if PZ Myers believes that it will help PZ Myers in his current argument with or attack upon someone more thoughtful and famous than PZ Myers.

Weirdly this is exactly what i think goes on in PZ's mind. IE he thinks of himself in the third person.

[Matt Cavanaugh]

After Coyne's Pharyngula dis from yesterday, PZ just had to flail helplessly back. So this morning he goes back nearly a week to dig up an article on evolutionary psychology to critique that Coyne wrote on WEIT. What a small, petty man.

I disagree strongly. It's fair that he tackles it and it is umimportant what has motivated him. Maybe he didn't have time earlier? Maybe he wrote it and it was almost done and then JAC posted PZMs comment? Maybe he was really irked and really wrote it in spite? We don't know and it's stricly unimportant. I like to see what everyone has to bring to the table and hope to learn something from the dispute. I haven't read yet what PZ Myers has to say on the subject and hope its not a massive ideological rant, or worse.

Here is the link:
http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... ogy-again/

I wasn't commenting on the content, although if it's anything like stuff he's written on EP in the past, we can probably dismiss it pretty readily. As to whether or not he wrote it in response to Coyne's piece yesterday, that seems too obvious to dispute. And you're right, it doesn't reflect on the content (that would be what, genetic fallacy), but my point was that he's petty. And you surely can't deny that.

1) Peez completely rejects EP for conflicting with his PoMo dogma. He straw mans it as genetic determinism in the most simplistic of terms;

2) Peez' posts are like mushrooms, which sprout like spores having floated onto the manure pile of his mind. He lurks at the Pit, lurks at Nugent's, lurks at WEIT. When I mentioned his mermaid dream, he had to post about how he had no desire to impregnate his female students. When I mocked his 'i coulda been a zebra fish research contendah' lament, he had to post about how important zebra fish research is. He responds at Pharyngula to comments at Nugent's. When the Pit was talking non-stop about chainsaws, Peez posted with an awkward allusion to a chainsaw.

Here: has anyone heard about how PZ Myers calls waitresses patronizing names like "sweetie" and "sugar"?

[jimthepleb]

Would Nec pass a Turing test?

[BlueShiftRhino]

What I find particularly annoying in PZ's latest rant (and I really try to avoid being annoyed by him) is this particular straw man: "What we oppose is the credulous insistence that every single difference is a product of selection...." I'm annoyed by this because it is such a tiny jump from there to: "What we oppose is the credulous insistence that every single difference is a product of Teh Patriarchy...."

Some sub-fields in psychology are still battling over nature vs nurture when it's been clear for decades that this is a false dichotomy and a totes dead-end question. The best "spin" I can put on my current annoyance is that I'm transferring my feelings about naive and simplistic psychologists to PZ.

What I really should do is just wait the ten minutes until the next time that PZ needs evo-psych to make some point about how ancient sex-roles are no longer appropriate. As long as we're talking about the evil past, it seems, one is totes allowed to make reference to the core principles of evo-psych (as long as you don't give them credit for the ideas).

[dog puke]

Would Nec pass a Turing test?

Nec invented computers, the Antikythera mechanism and Ukranian.

[jimthepleb]

Student Fakes a Rape Threat to Advance Diversity Initiatives
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/3 ... rine-timpf

[another lurker]

2:05 is the moment I'm referring to ;)

Ah. I see. She is a minimalist, like me. Good for her!

[comhcinc]

Student Fakes a Rape Threat to Advance Diversity Initiatives
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/3 ... rine-timpf

Best quote from the article about faking the threat:

“I made the wrong decision after being harassed about the problems I have tried to discuss not being real and wanted to show you all they are real,” he said.

[debaser71]

Interesting paragraphs in that article about 109 women being prosecuted.

"A US law professor, who will be speaking at the Commons, said the UK’s stance on false allegations is more aggressive than in countries such as the United States, Canada and Australia. Prof Lisa Avalos, of the University of Arkansas, said false allegations in the US were dealt with as a misdemeanour offence, not a felony – and most women were not jailed if found guilty.

“In the course of my research I have not found any country that pursues these cases against women rape complainants in the way the UK does. The UK has an unusual approach and I think their approach violates human rights,” she said."

Sort of gives away just how lenient the courts are in other countries.

Anyway I do not favor prison, in general, so I certainly don't want to see people locked up in a cage for this stuff. But at the same time, some sort of punishment is in order, for sure. For me, I'd start with the police not having the power to kidnap people based only on an accusation in the first place. That way, people's lives aren't ruined and therefore the crime of a false accusation isn't as severe. It would be just a waste of the police's time instead of a serious crime against an innocent person.

[BlueShiftRhino]

Student Fakes a Rape Threat to Advance Diversity Initiatives
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/3 ... rine-timpf

Complete with "scared to leave my house."

These people need to get better writers ... or, at least, stop sharing materials.

If only there was some SJW with, say, a degree in communications and actual work experience as a media consultant. She ... um, or her boyfriend ... um, or just he ... could create little packets of "So, you want to get attention by being the victim of a rape threat?" and sell them on the internet. I'm sure that certain Feminists would buy them with high Frequency.

[screwtape]

Would Nec pass a Turing test?

Hah! My autistic son (who is not like Nec) suggested he be entered as a contender in the next competition just last night. He imagined having to wrap him in silver paper and attach a couple of blinkenlampen und buttonen fur gefingerpoken. Sadly, I think he'd be detected as a machine....

[Kirbmarc]

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/imag ... 9ieYP6ZxGg

[Gefan]

If you want to have sex with Lindy West, it's rape.
If you don't want to have sex with Lindy West, it's fat-shaming and rape.
If you tell Lindy West you don't want to have sex with her, it's harassment, fat-shaming and rape.
If you respond to this comment, it's stalking, harassment, fat-shaming, and rape.
If you don't respond to this comment, you're erasing Lindy West's femininity.

Lindy West can go fuck herself.

Not guilty.
Guilty.
Not guilty on the grounds that I've never met her.
Guilty.
Not guilty on the grounds that my mind spontaneously shuts down when confronted with the phrase; "Lindy West's femininity".

I throw myself upon the mercy of the court.

[comhcinc]

If you want to have sex with Lindy West, it's rape.
If you don't want to have sex with Lindy West, it's fat-shaming and rape.
If you tell Lindy West you don't want to have sex with her, it's harassment, fat-shaming and rape.
If you respond to this comment, it's stalking, harassment, fat-shaming, and rape.
If you don't respond to this comment, you're erasing Lindy West's femininity.

Lindy West can go fuck herself.

Not guilty.
Guilty.
Not guilty on the grounds that I've never met her.
Guilty.
Not guilty on the grounds that my mind spontaneously shuts down when confronted with the phrase; "Lindy West's femininity".

I throw myself upon the mercy of the court.

http://www.returnofkings.com/wp-content ... 20x349.png

Would do for the M&Ms.

[Skep tickle]

After Coyne's Pharyngula dis from yesterday, PZ just had to flail helplessly back. So this morning he goes back nearly a week to dig up an article on evolutionary psychology to critique that Coyne wrote on WEIT. What a small, petty man.

I disagree strongly. It's fair that he tackles it and it is umimportant what has motivated him. Maybe he didn't have time earlier? Maybe he wrote it and it was almost done and then JAC posted PZMs comment? Maybe he was really irked and really wrote it in spite? We don't know and it's stricly unimportant. I like to see what everyone has to bring to the table and hope to learn something from the dispute. I haven't read yet what PZ Myers has to say on the subject and hope its not a massive ideological rant, or worse.

Here is the link:
http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... ogy-again/

Archive link: https://archive.today/Ju9jS

[some guy]

...
PZ Myers himself...

What always amazes me is that the "Culture hypothesis" (and the "Nurture hypothesis") always seems to get a free pass: perfectly acceptable to assert as the basis for some difference without evidence, and the burden is on others to prove otherwise. Yet, apart from explaining details (as opposed to fundamental differences**) the evidence for it is extremely weak.

(** E.g., men (but not women) being sexually attracted to the sight women's faces = fundamental difference (and likely biological). Men (but not women) being sexually attracted to the sight of a woman's face adorned with bright red lipstick = a detail (and possibly cultural))

[Skep tickle]

You want to see this vivid field trip through postmodernism and some ideas history.

Lecture 35, Postmodernism, of UGS 303, Ideas of the Twentieth Century, University of Texas at Austin, Fall 2013
[youtube]we6cwmzhbBE[/youtube]

10 min in and so far I just see a white dudebro mansplaining. ;)

[BlueShiftRhino]

(** E.g., men (but not women) being sexually attracted to the sight women's faces = fundamental difference (and likely biological). Men (but not women) being sexually attracted to the sight of a woman's face adorned with bright red lipstick = a detail (and possibly cultural))

Hey, just count your blessings that you're not a (literal) baboon. Imagine being turned on by bright red ass-stick, instead.*

*Clarence, not-with-standing, who I shall be using as Exhibit 1 in my next lecture on the evolutionary origins of spanking Asian school-girls

[rakon]

Interesting paragraphs in that article about 109 women being prosecuted.

"A US law professor, who will be speaking at the Commons, said the UK’s stance on false allegations is more aggressive than in countries such as the United States, Canada and Australia. Prof Lisa Avalos, of the University of Arkansas, said false allegations in the US were dealt with as a misdemeanour offence, not a felony – and most women were not jailed if found guilty.

“In the course of my research I have not found any country that pursues these cases against women rape complainants in the way the UK does. The UK has an unusual approach and I think their approach violates human rights,” she said."

Sort of gives away just how lenient the courts are in other countries.

Anyway I do not favor prison, in general, so I certainly don't want to see people locked up in a cage for this stuff. But at the same time, some sort of punishment is in order, for sure. For me, I'd start with the police not having the power to kidnap people based only on an accusation in the first place. That way, people's lives aren't ruined and therefore the crime of a false accusation isn't as severe. It would be just a waste of the police's time instead of a serious crime against an innocent person.

Well, there was a case in Germany were a female teacher was sentenced to 5 1/2 years in jail after the accused male colleague had finished his 5 years jail sentence for the supposed rape. Sadly the guy was fucked even after his innocence was proven and he died from a heart attack shortly after being released.

[comhcinc]

10 min in and so far I just see a white dudebro mansplaining. ;)

It clicks good at about the 30 minute mark.

[Shatterface as Guest]

Would Nec pass a Turing test?

Hah! My autistic son (who is not like Nec) suggested he be entered as a contender in the next competition just last night. He imagined having to wrap him in silver paper and attach a couple of blinkenlampen und buttonen fur gefingerpoken. Sadly, I think he'd be detected as a machine....

There's a fascinating sequence at the start of the otherwise poor sf movie The Machine where a guy with an artificially reconstructed brain fails the Sally-Anne test used for assessing autistic children:

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sally–Anne_test

Personally I thought my own assessment was more like the Voight-Kampf test from Blade Runner.

Philip K Dick used to babysit a friend's autistic child and I suspect that was one of the influences on Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep. It certainly provided Dick with inspiration for the autistic child in his novel Martian Time-Slip

Shatterface

[Kirbmarc]

What irks me about the nature-culture dispute is that few people in the "culture" camp consider that "culture" has to come from somewhere. Cultures don't magically appear from the sky, and aren't the result of a conspiracy of reptilian aliens (or of Evil White Men).

Cultural attitudes are shaped by environmental and biological factors. Case in point:

[E.g., men (but not women) being sexually attracted to the sight women's faces = fundamental difference (and likely biological). Men (but not women) being sexually attracted to the sight of a woman's face adorned with bright red lipstick = a detail (and possibly cultural))/quote]

It's interesting to notice that lipstick isn't a recent fad, or at least not as recent as some people would believe. It was already popular in Ancient Sumeria about 5,000 years ago, and its use was extremely widespread among the women of the Indus Valley civilization from 3,000 BC to 1,500 BC.

Lipstick have enjoyed different degrees of popularity, and has often been banned on the ground of being sexually inappropriate. Bright red lips have always been considered attractive, even "too attractive" for a "good woman".

Why? Is it an ancient conspiracy of lipstick producer that carried on their ancestor's con to modern age? Is it a trick of The Patriarchy?

Or maybe it's because lipstick is actually attractive to men because of biological reasons? Plenty of studies show that men are attracted to women's mouths. Lipsticks enhances women's lips, makes them look very red, glossy and plump.

Why are men attracted to women with plump, red lips? It turns out that aroused women lick their lips much more frequently than women who aren't aroused. If you lick your lips, they look more red, more glossy and more plump.

Is it possible that lipstick is a subconscious signal to the men around that a woman is aroused? I'd say that it is a reasonable possibility, and it might need some testing. But if I'm offering this hypothesis, I'm being an Evil Evolutionary Psychologist, and I'm sciencesplaining culture.

I need more Peezus in my heart, and to shut up and listen.

I should do what the esteemed azhael says:

Both genders have breasts and a penis, that’s definitely a commonality between them if ever there was one, and yet we treat male breasts as if they were something entirely different because of their size (just ignore that both are capable of producing milk through the action of prolactine), and we treat a clitoris and a penis as magically different things because one is bigger and fused around the urethra, and the other is small and unfused and that’s supossed to make them radically different. Both are fucking erectile, but never mind that.

It's only a matter a size. Men's nipples are only smaller tits. A girlcock is just an overgrown clitoris.

[BlueShiftRhino]

Ogvorbis is Philip K Dick?

[BlueShiftRhino]

It's only a matter a size. Men's nipples are only smaller tits. A girlcock is just an overgrown clitoris.

You know, when you put it like that, I'm starting to understand why evo-psych folks are dying off: they never get laid because they have the worst pick-up lines.

[Cunning Punt]

Faye Reagan?

I of course have NO idea who that is, but I could watch her all day.

[Kirbmarc]

Sexual dimorphism is actually pretty small in humans compared to other species. Just look at our closest relatives. Let’s face it, we are trained to put people in the “male” and “female” category from birth (and there are no other categories and everybody must fit those categories because apparently we could not deal with the uncertainty of not knowing which label fits). Therefore we think it’s obvious and clear. I’m not sure if some hypothetical alien species would even notice the difference.
“Sex” is not a neat biologocal category that exists independently of gender

Yes, aliens wouldn't be able to tell apart a man from a woman (WARNING: possibly NSFW). It's much, much easier to tell apart a a male from a female bonobo. or male from a female chimpanzee, for that matter.

[Southern]

Ogvorbis is Philip K Dick?

Ogvorbis is C******** F****. Ask Nec_V20 about that.

[Kirbmarc]

It's only a matter a size. Men's nipples are only smaller tits. A girlcock is just an overgrown clitoris.

You know, when you put it like that, I'm starting to understand why evo-psych folks are dying off: they never get laid because they have the worst pick-up lines.

That's the POV of a SJW, in case it wasn't clear enough.

[BlueShiftRhino]

It's only a matter a size. Men's nipples are only smaller tits. A girlcock is just an overgrown clitoris.

You know, when you put it like that, I'm starting to understand why evo-psych folks are dying off: they never get laid because they have the worst pick-up lines.

That's the POV of a SJW, in case it wasn't clear enough.

Yeppers. I got it.

Plus, if I were to go after you for anything, it would be posting a picture of male and female bonobos and chimps with the two males in the center and the two females relegated to the sides.

[katamari Damassi]

You know, when you put it like that, I'm starting to understand why evo-psych folks are dying off: they never get laid because they have the worst pick-up lines.

That's the POV of a SJW, in case it wasn't clear enough.

Yeppers. I got it.

Plus, if I were to go after you for anything, it would be posting a picture of male and female bonobos and chimps with the two males in the center and the two females relegated to the sides.

Stop erasing trans* chimps, shitlord!

[feathers]

You can't doxx someone from an IP address unless you are a super elite hacker, the FBI, or a sysadmin who works for the ISP and just happens to also have access to the entire customer db.

Or unless that person has a fixed IP where s/he runs their webserver too. In which case they probably are clever enough not to use it in a situation where they really don't want to be found out.

[Shatterface as Guest]

Sexual dimorphism is actually pretty small in humans compared to other species. Just look at our closest relatives. Let’s face it, we are trained to put people in the “male” and “female” category from birth (and there are no other categories and everybody must fit those categories because apparently we could not deal with the uncertainty of not knowing which label fits). Therefore we think it’s obvious and clear. I’m not sure if some hypothetical alien species would even notice the difference.
“Sex” is not a neat biologocal category that exists independently of gender

Yes, aliens wouldn't be able to tell apart a man from a woman (WARNING: possibly NSFW). It's much, much easier to tell apart a a male from a female bonobo. or male from a female chimpanzee, for that matter.

If aliens can't tell us apart how do you explain Earth Girls Are Easy and Mars Needs Moms?

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth_Girls_Are_Easy

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Needs_Moms

Shatterface

[BlueShiftRhino]

Faye Reagan?

I of course have NO idea who that is, but I could watch her all day.

Three hours so far and she still hasn't dropped it. I want to be her when I grow up.

[Old_ones]

Would Nec pass a Turing test?

Answer:

[youtube]7qnd-hdmgfk[/youtube]

[NoGodsEver]

What irks me about the nature-culture dispute is that few people in the "culture" camp consider that "culture" has to come from somewhere. Cultures don't magically appear from the sky, and aren't the result of a conspiracy of reptilian aliens (or of Evil White Men).

Cultural attitudes are shaped by environmental and biological factors. Case in point:

[E.g., men (but not women) being sexually attracted to the sight women's faces = fundamental difference (and likely biological). Men (but not women) being sexually attracted to the sight of a woman's face adorned with bright red lipstick = a detail (and possibly cultural))/quote]

It's interesting to notice that lipstick isn't a recent fad, or at least not as recent as some people would believe. It was already popular in Ancient Sumeria about 5,000 years ago, and its use was extremely widespread among the women of the Indus Valley civilization from 3,000 BC to 1,500 BC.

Lipstick have enjoyed different degrees of popularity, and has often been banned on the ground of being sexually inappropriate. Bright red lips have always been considered attractive, even "too attractive" for a "good woman".

Why? Is it an ancient conspiracy of lipstick producer that carried on their ancestor's con to modern age? Is it a trick of The Patriarchy?

Or maybe it's because lipstick is actually attractive to men because of biological reasons? Plenty of studies show that men are attracted to women's mouths. Lipsticks enhances women's lips, makes them look very red, glossy and plump.

Why are men attracted to women with plump, red lips? It turns out that aroused women lick their lips much more frequently than women who aren't aroused. If you lick your lips, they look more red, more glossy and more plump.

Is it possible that lipstick is a subconscious signal to the men around that a woman is aroused? I'd say that it is a reasonable possibility, and it might need some testing. But if I'm offering this hypothesis, I'm being an Evil Evolutionary Psychologist, and I'm sciencesplaining culture.

I need more Peezus in my heart, and to shut up and listen.

I should do what the esteemed azhael says:

Both genders have breasts and a penis, that’s definitely a commonality between them if ever there was one, and yet we treat male breasts as if they were something entirely different because of their size (just ignore that both are capable of producing milk through the action of prolactine), and we treat a clitoris and a penis as magically different things because one is bigger and fused around the urethra, and the other is small and unfused and that’s supossed to make them radically different. Both are fucking erectile, but never mind that.

It's only a matter a size. Men's nipples are only smaller tits. A girlcock is just an overgrown clitoris.

I haven't read it (yet), but doesn't The Extended Phenotype cover some of this ground? That biology influences the environment, which would also include culture? I mean, Dawkins wrote it, so it's obviously wrong, but there might be something there.

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

After Coyne's Pharyngula dis from yesterday, PZ just had to flail helplessly back. So this morning he goes back nearly a week to dig up an article on evolutionary psychology to critique that Coyne wrote on WEIT. What a small, petty man.

I disagree strongly. It's fair that he tackles it and it is umimportant what has motivated him. Maybe he didn't have time earlier? Maybe he wrote it and it was almost done and then JAC posted PZMs comment? Maybe he was really irked and really wrote it in spite? We don't know and it's stricly unimportant. I like to see what everyone has to bring to the table and hope to learn something from the dispute. I haven't read yet what PZ Myers has to say on the subject and hope its not a massive ideological rant, or worse.

Here is the link:
http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... ogy-again/

You are adorably naive.

[feathers]

I get the impression that there is no previous statement by PZ Myers that PZ Myers isn't willing to throw under the bus if PZ Myers believes that it will help PZ Myers in his current argument with or attack upon someone more thoughtful and famous than PZ Myers.

Weirdly this is exactly what i think goes on in PZ's mind. IE he thinks of himself in the third person.

Nobody fucks with the Peezus!

[feathers]

My very white ex-GF from very white Fargo used to go on about how wonderful and special African Americans were, how much she liked African Americans. I asked her if she knew many blacks growing up in Fargo. She knew the two black people in her high school, and both had been nice. "Darling," I replied, "I dated two black people in high school."

And that's why the 'ex'? :P

[Tribble]

PeeZus has a greener-than-thou rant about some video featuring Carl Sagan, and froths on about how we're destroying Earth and ignoring the natural beauty around us etc. Some sycophant at Raw Story picked up on PeeZus' brilliant analysis, yet it's not all worshipful groveling in the comments of the original post. This, for instance, from commenter jack lecou:

I agree with F.O. upthread: This seems like a profoundly uncharitable reading/viewing.
I mean, for pity’s sake, the narration in the video is Sagan reading from his ‘Pale Blue Dot’ book. A book inspired (in part) by Voyager’s image of a shockingly tiny, fragile earth hanging in the inhospitable void.
If anyone thinks the underlying message of that book (or the quote in the video) is to exploit that little blue dot for all its worth and then — when it’s dingy and ruined — to move on to the more hospitable climes of Iapetus or wherever…I don’t even know what to say.
There’s plenty in the video to nitpick for those inclined – like fur coats on Saturn, or Sagan’s probably dubious evo-psych. But to take the latter, a bit of musing about happenstance in our distant past resulting in an atavistic human urge to wander, and read into it some kind of exhortation to deliberately/negligently exploit the planet and move on like locusts now requires careful ignorance of practically every other word ever written or spoken by the man. It’s beyond straw manning – dipping dangerously down into quote mining territory.
The lecture which follows also seems unnecessary in that light. Carl Sagan, of all people, was, I expect, pretty well versed in the bleak inhospitality of the rest of the solar system, the tremendous difficulty of space travel, and the vital importance and fragility of our own little ‘wanderer’. As are many (most?) ‘space enthusiasts’, especially those who’d list Sagan as an inspiration and influence. Which probably includes the maker of this video.

That's funnier than hell. Sagan was an environmentalist! He was very clear how lucky we were. How we won the cosmic lottery. And how fragile and easily damaged the world was and that it was 'in our hands to take care of it.' And he had his ideas about how to do it:

"[E]veryone’s an environmentalist — and yet the environment appears to be in worse shape than ever. The problems of the seventies are back with a vengeance, often transposed into new landscapes, and new ones have joined them. Species we hardly knew existed are dying off en masse; oceans are acidifying in what sounds like the plot of a second-rate horror movie; numerous fisheries have collapsed or are on the brink; freshwater supplies are scarce in regions home to half the world’s population; agricultural land is exhausted of nutrients; forests are being leveled at staggering rates; and, of course, climate change looms over all.

These aren’t issues that can be fixed by slapping a filter on a smokestack. They’re certainly not about hugging trees or hating people. To put it bluntly, we’re confronted with the fact that human activity has transformed the entire planet in ways that are now threatening the way we inhabit it — some of us far more than others. And it’s not particularly helpful to talk in generalities: the idea that The Environment is some entity that can be fixed with A Solution is part of the problem.

The category “environmental problems” contains multitudes, and their solutions don’t always line up: water shortages in Phoenix are a different matter than air pollution in Los Angeles, disappearing wetlands in Louisiana, or growing accumulations of atmospheric carbon. So instead of laying out some kind of template for a sustainable future, I argue that there’s no way to get there without tackling environmentalism’s old stumbling blocks: consumption and jobs. And the way to do that is through a universal basic income.

[BlueShiftRhino]

I get the impression that there is no previous statement by PZ Myers that PZ Myers isn't willing to throw under the bus if PZ Myers believes that it will help PZ Myers in his current argument with or attack upon someone more thoughtful and famous than PZ Myers.

Weirdly this is exactly what i think goes on in PZ's mind. IE he thinks of himself in the third person.

Nobody fucks with the Peezus!

But it's almost like that stupid pseudo-paradox: if God is omnipotent can He make a stone so heavy that He can't lift it?

Only this time it's only Peezus has the mental power to fuck with Peezus because if anyone else has posted the same disagreement with the previous Peezus, he or she would be burned at the stake.

[bhoytony]

I didn't know there was a 2007 movie made out of Romeo Dallaire's book on the Rwanda genocide. Watching it right now. It gives me the chills.

Just going to watch it. I saw another film about Rwanda a while ago called Shooting Dogs which was quite good if I remember correctly.

[Aneris]

Does anyone know how it comes that these terms appear to be conflated often (my impression) and appear to denote the same type of conflict, even though they refer to vastly different things?

nature vs nurture
nature vs culture
genes vs environment
inherit vs learned

I just note that when Postmodernist types refer to whatever is opposite of nature or genes they usually mean blue toys, gender roles of their parents, how kids are parented. That is they decidedly mean what is best described as culture. Whereas nature vs nurture can be an entirely biological conflict that has little or nothing to do culture. Here the opposite of side of nature means the stress level of homrones in the womb, epigenetics, and maybe very early parenting patterns, but certainly not "kid watches mom, emulates behaviour" kind of stuff.

Can anyone shed some light on the situation?

[Gefan]

http://www.returnofkings.com/wp-content ... 20x349.png

Would do for the M&Ms.

You think you're getting any of those M&Ms?

Good luck with that.

[Skep tickle]

10 min in and so far I just see a white dudebro mansplaining. ;)

It clicks good at about the 30 minute mark.

I enjoyed & learned from the whole thing. Aneris, thanks for posting that! And for your cogent analyses posted not only here but in various threads at Nugent's, and at WEIT which are for me often aha-moments.