Periodic Table of Swearing

[Notung]

You mean talking about it rather than ignoring it? Well partly because I wanted to say why it was that some people appeared to be 'admitting' to being rapists. It wasn't because they are rapists, as Watson seems to imply. I also wanted to write a post on the subject in general - Watson's accusations are only one small part of that. It's also a good way of getting people to read it - link it to a current event that everyone's talking about.

[Gefan]

I've been trying to describe this for months!

This is a standard operating procedure for all of the FTB SJW's, skepchicks. Say something stupid (or at least debatable), ignore or belittle any rational criticism, scoop up all the troll droppings for public display and call it a win! Ophelia does it, Svan does it, Greta does it, PZ does it (although he often tries to look like he's actually responding to criticism), Canuck does it, McCreight does it, pretty much every dedicated feminist on the internet does it.....Crommunist is the only one who is any good at acting like he's playing fair, but he's still unwilling to concede a point pretty much ever. Just keep regurgitating the "oppression" jargon and splitting hairs until everyone thinks it's all settled. Watson is the most over-the-top and obvious about it, yet still gets away without any real criticism from the SJW's.

And yet if anyone dares to point out that "elevatorgate" or any of these bullshit "issues" are purely manufactured controversies with little relation to reality, they are "part of the problem".[/quote]

Becky?
Fox News called. They want their playbook back.

[welch]

You mean talking about it rather than ignoring it? Well partly because I wanted to say why it was that some people appeared to be 'admitting' to being rapists. It wasn't because they are rapists, as Watson seems to imply. I also wanted to write a post on the subject in general - Watson's accusations are only one small part of that. It's also a good way of getting people to read it - link it to a current event that everyone's talking about.

But you're having a serious philosophical discussion to try and dispute claims made by a manipulative pain in the ass. You could have written lorem ipusm and the result would be the same. Her game was not about "rape is bad". Setting aside the criminally idiotic, WE KNOW THAT. Her game was about getting a bunch of well-intentioned fools to once again argue meaningless point, so she could liberally quote mine the fuck out of them. In the process, she got a nice bit of payback on Ed Clint.

You cannot treat these gomers seriously. Really.

I mean, it's a great post, and in terms of the logic and philosophy stuff, it looks really solid. But you're arguing about cheese to a shark tearing your leg off.

[Notung]

But John, I'm not arguing against them as such. I'm using it as a catalyst for a post for its own sake. I don't expect them to engage me at all, and if they do it'll be some kind of ad hominem, as we all know. It's really just to talk about the issue of intoxication and consent in a rational way. So far the only comment thread on this is on Skepchick, and we know how tolerant they are of objections to their view. I wanted to provide a comment thread where people can state and defend their own views without getting deleted.

[ConcentratedH2O, OM]

Apparently I've never had consensual sex.

Good times, guys, good times.

I love having rape sex. Both people are so relaxed, and fun, and just fucking happy to be enjoying the rape sex moment. (Becky Whatnot's definition.)

Having said that, I fucking hate rapists, and would curdle their eyeballs with vinegar given the chance. (Everyone else's definition.)

[welch]

But John, I'm not arguing against them as such. I'm using it as a catalyst for a post for its own sake. I don't expect them to engage me at all, and if they do it'll be some kind of ad hominem, as we all know. It's really just to talk about the issue of intoxication and consent in a rational way. So far the only comment thread on this is on Skepchick, and we know how tolerant they are of objections to their view. I wanted to provide a comment thread where people can state and defend their own views without getting deleted.

Then yank the links and references. It's a good piece without them. But as long as you even seem to make it about them, they will make damned sure it IS about them. Have a good debate about consent. Just don't let them be the subject.

[rayshul]

Apparently I've never had consensual sex.

Good times, guys, good times.

I love having rape sex. Both people are so relaxed, and fun, and just fucking happy to be enjoying the rape sex moment. (Becky Whatnot's definition.)

Having said that, I fucking hate rapists, and would curdle their eyeballs with vinegar given the chance. (Everyone else's definition.)

Actually I tell a lie - by Becky standards I have actually begun having consensual sex on occasion but ended up in nonconsensual sex, without getting off the cock.

[rayshul]

Man Finally Put In Charge Of Struggling Feminist Movement
http://www.theonion.com/articles/man-fi ... /?ref=auto

Someone must've linked to this already

[Skep tickle]

here, a longer version of what I'm on about: http://dissentionisnothate.wordpress.co ... ca-watson/

Fabulous.

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

I have to say, I didn't know Watson was such an ardent follower of Dvorak.

Don’t follow that at all. Did he/she/they develop the bait-and-switch technique?

Methinks either she’s drunk now – or most of the time – or she’s a piss-poor communicator or she’s a fraud ….

"either", "or". You keep using those words. I don't think they mean what you think...

/Montoya

[sacha]

claims.jpg

(27.54 KiB) Downloaded 180 times

"Is there a problem with claims of rape being taken too seriously?"


yes.



"Women never lie." -Scott Poole

[sacha]

This is now a topic of discussion on my Facebook. Comments are flooding in, mostly against Rebecca's statement. Note, my FB page is a good representation of a cross-section of humanity.

http://www.alstefanelli.com/watsonrape.jpg

Andy Wulf makes a good point on your Facebook

Andy Wulf Drinking alcohol, and losing control of one's own faculties, is itself a choice. In my estimation, to make that choice is to preemptively take responsibility for any decisions that person might make that s/he may not have made if s/he were sober. The fact that many people don't treat the decision to intoxicate themselves with as much gravity as they should is, frankly, their problem.

well done, Andy Wulf.

[Notung]

here, a longer version of what I'm on about: http://dissentionisnothate.wordpress.co ... ca-watson/

Hehe - well you do things your way and I'll do things my way! :)

[sacha]

Tony don't be so stupid, if both parties are drunk in a mixed gender bonking session it is the patriachy, therefore rape. If it is two lesbians it could not possibly be rape, because it is girl love. If it is two men drunk and humping that's only rape on one parties part if they don't switch around. If they do switch then it's mutual rape.

Just watched a fellow opine about several of these topics. Interesting coincidence. Even the lesbian rape thing. I haven't checked it out myself, but according to him it happens as often as male on female rape but it is often ignored.

With that point about lesbian rape in mind, and assuming that it is true, and with the fact that your average female cannot overpower your average male, the conclusion he makes about the relative rarity of female on male rape is sound: Most women don't because they cannot.

Men rarely admit it, much less report it.

and women are able to rape men easier than you think. If the man fights back, she calls the police, and he is taken away (mandatory in the US if it is a domestic violence dispute).

or, they can just threaten to scream "rape".

I've heard of women threatening to tell everyone the man is impotent if he does not have sex with them, or that he's a paedophile...

women don't need physical strength, they have blackmail.


they also have roofies

[Steersman]

I have to say, I didn't know Watson was such an ardent follower of Dvorak.

Don’t follow that at all. Did he/she/they develop the bait-and-switch technique?

Methinks either she’s drunk now – or most of the time – or she’s a piss-poor communicator or she’s a fraud ….

"either", "or". You keep using those words. I don't think they mean what you think...

/Montoya

Seems this might be what you’re getting at, although it appears that I’m still sort of in the clear:

Usage Note: The traditional rule holds that either should be used only to refer to one of two items and that any is required when more than two items are involved: Any (not either) of the three opposition candidates still in the race would make a better president than the incumbent. But reputable writers have often violated this rule, and in any case it applies only to the use of either as a pronoun or an adjective. When either is used as a conjunction, no paraphrase with any is available, and so either is unexceptionable even when it applies to more than two clauses: Either the union will make a counteroffer or the original bid will be refused by the board or the deal will go ahead as scheduled.

But I’m still at a loss as to the meaning of “/Montoya”, even after checking Wikipedia ….

[rayshul]

Reading that piece by Sikivu Hutchinson I was taken aback by the overt racism of it. The hate is almost tangible. FreeThoughtBlogs can be proud to give a voice to this talented pupil of Josef Goebbels.

I stopped reading Richard Dawkins site when he started promoting her.

She is unbelievably, disgustingly racist.

And yeah I'm late to that party. :/

[Skep tickle]

But I’m still at a loss as to the meaning of “/Montoya”, even after checking Wikipedia ….

http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/you-keep- ... k-it-means

[AndrewV69]

But I’m still at a loss as to the meaning of “/Montoya”, even after checking Wikipedia ….

*spew*

OMFG! mouthful of wINE ALL OVER the fucking kkkeyboard.

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

But I’m still at a loss as to the meaning of “/Montoya”, even after checking Wikipedia ….

*spew*

OMFG! mouthful of wINE ALL OVER the fucking kkkeyboard.

Same here.

Although it's coffee.

And my computer screen.

[Crookedmouth]

I also find the comment section in the Black Sceptic article totally astonishing (well... sort of). Rewrite that article to suggest a violent masculinity at the heart of blackness/yellowness/etc and link to it o, say Pharyngula and the comments would be in the 500's before mid-morning and the baboon $hit would be knee deep.

There may (MAY) be some truth in the assertion, but it's the hypocrisy that disappoints and surprises me. That article should be more widely distributed.

[Steersman]

But I’m still at a loss as to the meaning of “/Montoya”, even after checking Wikipedia ….

http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/you-keep- ... k-it-means

Thanks muchly; another party that I'm somewhat late to myself ... :-)

[comslave]

Apparently I've never had consensual sex.

Good times, guys, good times.

Technically, no woman can ever have consensual sex with a man because the patriarchy has already sentenced her to sex through a gradual but constant wearing down of her will.

[Steersman]

Apparently I've never had consensual sex.

Good times, guys, good times.

Technically, no woman can ever have consensual sex with a man because the patriarchy has already sentenced her to sex through a gradual but constant wearing down of her will.

Stepford wives all ….

Although I expect that there’s at least a grain of truth to the matter. Seems to be plenty of evidence of how we can all, potentially or theoretically at least, be brainwashed into accepting dogma and acting in ways that are quite reprehensible. “Those who make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.”

[Philip of Tealand]

Helllllllloooooooooo!

Soooo, I apologise for not posting for a while, I've been a bit busy - not even had time to rape anyone it has been that hectic

I leave this alone for 5 mins and wow, will you look at this - I see this a nice article about Michael Shermer getting Witch of The Week after getting quote mined by Ophelia and now Twatson and Jenny are getting their collective attention seeking drug fix by yelling RAPE again!

Cor, those Warrior Feminist Crusaders and their special RAPE detecting powers sure are good at their jobs!

How has everyone been, I hope you are all well and if possible drinking the Tea like there is no tomorrow like I am!

[Steersman]

But I’m still at a loss as to the meaning of “/Montoya”, even after checking Wikipedia ….

*spew*

OMFG! mouthful of wINE ALL OVER the fucking kkkeyboard.

Same here.

Although it's coffee.

And my computer screen.

Methinks that was somewhat of an overreaction on your part and that of Andrew’s. Particularly since I would say that the “meme” was used incorrectly or was invalid:

“You Keep Using That Word, I Do Not Think It Means What You Think It Means” is a phrase used to call out someone else’s incorrect use of a word or phrase during online conversations.

[Steersman]

here, a longer version of what I'm on about: http://dissentionisnothate.wordpress.co ... ca-watson/

Hehe - well you do things your way and I'll do things my way! :)

Interesting post and I appreciate seeing Stangroom’s article on the topic. As he suggests it can be a bit of a moral dilemma, but that seems largely due to the very large number of potential cases – one can think of all sorts of exceptions where no single hard-and-fast rule is going to cover all bases.

For instance, I would say that, somewhat similar to one of Stangroom’s, if a couple decide to get drunk and have sex then the act of consent at the beginning generally covers the situation through the whole course of actions. However after they’ve started imbibing if one of them gets uncomfortable about the way things are developing – someone pulls out some whips and chains, for example – and decides to withdraw that initial consent then I don’t think that the other party can reasonably claim that prior consent covers later stages.

Seems to me that part of the problem is that people are of the rather black-and-white view that consent is granted at the beginning rather than that it is something that takes place at each stage of the process. Seems that the claim-to-fame for alcohol at least is that it tends to reduce inhibitions, but one can hardly argue that the first drink removes all of them, that one can’t exhibit and manifest control and consent, albeit of reduced extent and force, at subsequent stages other than the first one at the start.

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

Ok, Steers.

I hate having to explain a joke, especialy one that is borderline not funny and relies on pop-culture knowledge.

You said:

Methinks either she’s drunk now – or most of the time – or she’s a piss-poor communicator or she’s a fraud ….

To which I made the Montoya comment, meaning to somehow change your phrasing to:

Methinks she’s drunk now – most of the time – she’s a piss-poor communicator she’s a fraud ….

Get it?

I'm the XXIst century's Bill Hicks, I know...

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

And if you go "who's Bill Hicks?", I won't address you anymore. EVER!

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

I know it's quite early (or late) for Pitters, but I was hopefuly expecting at least 2 or 3 "who's Bill Hicks?" by now.

We need to work on our comedy timing...

[Michael J]

I know it's quite early (or late) for Pitters, but I was hopefuly expecting at least 2 or 3 "who's Bill Hicks?" by now.

We need to work on our comedy timing...

Biil Hicks?

[Rawrsome]

I know it's quite early (or late) for Pitters, but I was hopefuly expecting at least 2 or 3 "who's Bill Hicks?" by now.

We need to work on our comedy timing...

Biil Hicks?

Pretty sure he was one of the guys from new kids on the block.

[Steersman]

Ok, Steers.

I hate having to explain a joke, especialy one that is borderline not funny and relies on pop-culture knowledge.

You said:

Methinks either she’s drunk now – or most of the time – or she’s a piss-poor communicator or she’s a fraud ….

To which I made the Montoya comment, meaning to somehow change your phrasing to:

Methinks she’s drunk now – most of the time – she’s a piss-poor communicator she’s a fraud ….

Get it?

I'm the XXIst century's Bill Hicks, I know...

I would have suggested that “or” could have been the inclusive variety which is essentially what you’re getting at there if I’m not mistaken:

Methinks she’s drunk now AND she’s a piss-poor communicator AND she’s a fraud ….

But different culture. Speaking of which you could also take a look at Aesop’s fable about the fox and the crane which I believe we’ve discussed before ….

As for Bill Hicks, I hadn’t heard of him before, although I see that he seems to have had a head on his shoulders – a modern day prophet ….

[sacha]

You're not only a stupid cunt, but you're weak too."

"They have no real power other than what you give them."

It's all the same thing, internet trolls, catcalling men, (chicks that thought they could intimidate me - ah, memories of my youth), the SJWs trying to lay a guilt trip on everyone, Becky...

However, it is all irrelevant, because very few people have the ability to immediately see it for what it is, and not react, let alone turn the tables. By reacting, you perpetuate the idiocy. You hand them your power.

The most effective weapon is simply not giving someone the reaction they expect. It completely throws them off, they become confused, and very soon they are extremely frustrated that their bullets are bouncing off. Once they realise their best attempts have no effect, rather quickly they give up and move on to an easier target. Without the desired reaction, it isn't worth the effort, and word gets around. Soon no one fucks with you. I knew this from the time I was quite young. I had it perfected when I was still a kid. It is incredibly empowering.

The interesting thing is that I can explain this a hundred times, and even try and teach someone how to do it convincingly, and the second they are confronted with a situation where someone is trying to get under their skin, they are simply unable to stop themselves from reacting. It absolutely amazes me.

I feel like a broken record that has managed to continue to skip for decades.

At some point I will just take a screen shot of this comment in its entirety, and put it up somewhere so I can simply link to it like this:
----->.

and the new people can click on it, and the regulars can ignore it.


welch so obviously is one of the few people I have ever known who not only sees the game immediately, but is a master at playing.
He understands how bloody frustrating it can be, when it seems like I can count the people I've met on one hand, who are able to make it through the first round of level one (ignore). There are times I read welch's comments when I can feel my blood pressure normalising.
So, cheers mate.

I'm not having a go at fellow Pitters, the game comprehension rate is far superior here, than with the general population.
I'm just voicing my frustration (just one of thousands) with the human race...

[JackRayner]

Welch has nailed Twatson better than anyone else.

Agreed. Letting it sink in deep and hoping it informs my future reactions to her bullshit.

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

As for Bill Hicks, I hadn’t heard of him before,

Not making any friends here...

[sacha]

Apparently I've never had consensual sex.

Good times, guys, good times.

not to worry, at least you are not a serial rapist like me.

[sacha]

here, a longer version of what I'm on about: http://dissentionisnothate.wordpress.co ... ca-watson/

"You’re going to lose because you think the horse will eventually stop, except it’s a goat, you’re on mars, and martian goats can run for years."

hahaha!

[sacha]

Actually I tell a lie - by Becky standards I have actually begun having consensual sex on occasion but ended up in nonconsensual sex, without getting off the cock.

you are my hero

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

So, it seems, by Watson's standards, we've all been rapists/rape victims at some time or other.

Thanks, I feel better about being raped now.

Cunt!

[JackRayner]

Man Finally Put In Charge Of Struggling Feminist Movement
http://www.theonion.com/articles/man-fi ... /?ref=auto

Someone must've linked to this already

Hilarious! I got as far as "Let's just say the movement never really had a head for numbers." and I had to stop reading, or else I might have the neighbors call the cops on me. It's 3:55am here, the walls are thin, and I'm laughing my ass off! :lol:

If there was any non-satirical feminist outrage about this when it released, I want to know!

[sacha]

Helllllllloooooooooo!

Soooo, I apologise for not posting for a while, I've been a bit busy - not even had time to rape anyone it has been that hectic

I leave this alone for 5 mins and wow, will you look at this - I see this a nice article about Michael Shermer getting Witch of The Week after getting quote mined by Ophelia and now Twatson and Jenny are getting their collective attention seeking drug fix by yelling RAPE again!

Cor, those Warrior Feminist Crusaders and their special RAPE detecting powers sure are good at their jobs!

How has everyone been, I hope you are all well and if possible drinking the Tea like there is no tomorrow like I am!

You missed the tea biscuit pissing contest.

[JackRayner]

Tony don't be so stupid, if both parties are drunk in a mixed gender bonking session it is the patriachy, therefore rape. If it is two lesbians it could not possibly be rape, because it is girl love. If it is two men drunk and humping that's only rape on one parties part if they don't switch around. If they do switch then it's mutual rape.

Just watched a fellow opine about several of these topics. Interesting coincidence. Even the lesbian rape thing. I haven't checked it out myself, but according to him it happens as often as male on female rape but it is often ignored.

With that point about lesbian rape in mind, and assuming that it is true, and with the fact that your average female cannot overpower your average male, the conclusion he makes about the relative rarity of female on male rape is sound: Most women don't because they cannot.

Men rarely admit it, much less report it.

and women are able to rape men easier than you think. If the man fights back, she calls the police, and he is taken away (mandatory in the US if it is a domestic violence dispute).

or, they can just threaten to scream "rape".

I've heard of women threatening to tell everyone the man is impotent if he does not have sex with them, or that he's a paedophile...

women don't need physical strength, they have blackmail.

they also have roofies

Hm. Those are good points.

[sacha]

So, it seems, by Watson's standards, we've all been rapists/rape victims at some time or other.

Thanks, I feel better about being raped now.

Cunt!

those who cry wolf have no empathy for the truly victimised

[Philip of Tealand]

Helllllllloooooooooo!

Soooo, I apologise for not posting for a while, I've been a bit busy - not even had time to rape anyone it has been that hectic

I leave this alone for 5 mins and wow, will you look at this - I see this a nice article about Michael Shermer getting Witch of The Week after getting quote mined by Ophelia and now Twatson and Jenny are getting their collective attention seeking drug fix by yelling RAPE again!

Cor, those Warrior Feminist Crusaders and their special RAPE detecting powers sure are good at their jobs!

How has everyone been, I hope you are all well and if possible drinking the Tea like there is no tomorrow like I am!

You missed the tea biscuit pissing contest.

You all managed to piss Tea biscuits? Was that not the most painful contest ever?
:)

[Guest]

But I’m still at a loss as to the meaning of “/Montoya”, even after checking Wikipedia ….

Methinks that was somewhat of an overreaction on your part and that of Andrew’s. Particularly since I would say that the “meme” was used incorrectly or was invalid:

“You Keep Using That Word, I Do Not Think It Means What You Think It Means” is a phrase used to call out someone else’s incorrect use of a word or phrase during online conversations.

[/quote]

You haven't watched Princess Bride??

/shakes head in disbelief

Concurs with Phil and Andrew.

[KiwiIO unplugged]

Damn. That was me, KiwiInOz (unplugged).

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

After reading Notung's blog post and subsequent comments, then unwisely following a link, I came upon this ED marvel:

https://encyclopediadramatica.se/BitingBeaver

I know ED is usualy prone to exagerations (understatement of the century), but, Sounds a bit too familiar to me...

[Dick Strawkins]

I blogged about all this: http://skepticink.com/notung/2012/12/19 ... o-consent/

I left a comment on your site.
My basic point is that I think you are making a mistake in trying to choose the most charitable reading of her statements and then looking for a rationale behind it.
The question is why should we be forced to interpret her words in such ways?
Should Rebecca not be expected to be clear in her pronouncements?
She has a very privileged voice in the skeptical community. She has lots of followers, many of them women - and many of them, we have seen, the victims of rape and assault. If you start equating rape with 'sex while drunk' you are going to find that almost every non T-totaller who has been in a long term relationship could be viewed as either a rapist or a victim of rape.
How can that not diminish those who are survivors of sexual assault?

It is speculation to suggest that Rebecca is simply doing this to drum up the usual controversy - goading those who think she is now calling rapists into sending her insulting or abusive replies, which are, again, parceled up as evidence of the great misogynistic conspiracy.
It is not speculation, however, to suggest that someone who is qualified in communication and has years of experience in the field, is manifestly failing to communicate in a responsible manner about this subject.

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

Oh, for context re ED:

https://images.encyclopediadramatica.se ... ursona.gif

[Steersman]

As for Bill Hicks, I hadn’t heard of him before,

Not making any friends here...

Sorry – “prophet” wasn’t genuflection enough? Not everyone has had the same set of experiences ….

And, somewhat along the same line and not to throw too many stones, but I’ve noted with some amusement that you and sacha and franc, in particular, seem to be rather sensitive about any “bad werdz” directed Hitchens’ way – if I were really a troll I might have some fun “winding you up” on the topic. While I have read very little of him, I am certainly willing to concede that he seems also to have had a sensible perspective on and insight into quite a number of topics. And I’ve got “Hitch 22” on my to-read list.

But bad karma I think to put anybody on too high a pedestal that we lose sight of their humanity and their clay feet.

[Steersman]

But I’m still at a loss as to the meaning of “/Montoya”, even after checking Wikipedia ….

Methinks that was somewhat of an overreaction on your part and that of Andrew’s. Particularly since I would say that the “meme” was used incorrectly or was invalid:

“You Keep Using That Word, I Do Not Think It Means What You Think It Means” is a phrase used to call out someone else’s incorrect use of a word or phrase during online conversations.

You haven't watched Princess Bride??

/shakes head in disbelief

Concurs with Phil and Andrew.

Yes, I’ve watched it, but that was more than a few years ago. I tend not to remember every line of every movie I’ve watched or every book I’ve ever read. Must be nice to have a photographic memory like you and Phil and Andrew apparently have ….

[KiwiIO unplugged]

:moon: :moon:

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

Steers:

First of all, Hitch was a whiney cunt in more than one ways. Some of his "revolutionary" positions I could never live with. I don't give a fuck if you insult him. Show me where I ever expressed sensitivity when it comes to insulting Hitchens. He was a drunk, a fatty, a smoker, a Brit, a Leftist, and one of the best thinkers I've ever been graced to read. That should cover it.

Second: would you please lighten up for a fucking moment? Do I have to spray every single pseudo-humorous post I make with a farandole of smileys for your reading comprehension?

[sacha]

But bad karma I think to put anybody on too high a pedestal that we lose sight of their humanity and their clay feet.

You know that game called Don't Give Away Your Power? I complemented welch for being a master player.

Hitch was ruler of the universe...

I don't believe in Karma.

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

Yes, I’ve watched it, but that was more than a few years ago. I tend not to remember every line of every movie I’ve watched or every book I’ve ever read. Must be nice to have a photographic memory like you and Phil and Andrew apparently have ….

You can also try to use your fucking fingers and type simple stuff on your plastic-keys-thingy. If you were not able to find Inigo Montoya via Wikipedia, I will have to start doubting your ability to cross-reference things.

Damn it Steers! Half past ten AM, and already you've pissed me off!

[sacha]

Hitch's imperfections made me love him even more, although Phil and I have very different perceptions of what his imperfections were.

Show me where I have had to stop genuflecting in order to have an irrational response to someone who criticised Hitch.

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

Hitch's imperfections made me love him even more, although Phil and I have very different perceptions of what his imperfections were.

You don't even know that, you imperfect you!

(No, really, there are a few things from Hitch-22's early paragraphs that made me cringe. Made me feel like he was yet another of those college students trying to "go with the wave". Later chapters somehow redeem his stances, but there are still many things from his earlier years I disagree with. For specifics, I'll have to crack the book open and retype quotes. Or I can use my Google-Fu)

[Steersman]

Steers:

First of all, Hitch was a whiney cunt in more than one ways. Some of his "revolutionary" positions I could never live with. I don't give a fuck if you insult him. Show me where I ever expressed sensitivity when it comes to insulting Hitchens. He was a drunk, a fatty, a smoker, a Brit, a Leftist, and one of the best thinkers I've ever been graced to read. That should cover it.

"Ask and it shall be given":

Just waiting for them to posthumously attack The Hitch. Then there will be real trouble...

Lay off Hitch. See above. You want to call him a "cultist" you need to bring some ammo.

Can’t find the one from sacha at the moment – what I have in the way of photographic memory is fading a little, getting late in the day in more ways than one – but I would say those two qualify as “rather sensitive”.

Second: would you please lighten up for a fucking moment? Do I have to spray every single pseudo-humorous post I make with a farandole of smileys for your reading comprehension?

Sorry – I’m humour challenged; you need to check your privilege in that regard. Context me boy, context – I’m not a fucking mind reader nor do I have the time to track down every coy allusion that you might be amused by ….

And speaking of which, all I found in the Wikipedia "disambiguation page" on Montoya had a list as long as your arm - I'm supposed to track them all down? GMAB.

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

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

I have a way longer arm than that, believe you me.

Just waiting for them to posthumously attack The Hitch. Then there will be real trouble...

Attack =/= insult. And I'm the fucking English-as-a-second-fucking-language guy here.

Also, Franc is Franc, Sacha is Sacha, and I'm me. Don't play the FTB game of guilt by association.

if you're desperate for a win, ask me about American Football, Baseball, Basketball or Ice Hockey. That's a 99.9% win for you.

[Tony Parsehole]

After reading Notung's blog post and subsequent comments, then unwisely following a link, I came upon this ED marvel:

https://encyclopediadramatica.se/BitingBeaver

I know ED is usualy prone to exagerations (understatement of the century), but, Sounds a bit too familiar to me...

Aye, that's a brilliant article filled with amazingly mental quotes such as this little gem in relation to her 13 year old son's porn use:

I've talked until I'm blue in the face, I've grown angry and yelled, I've cried when I was alone and when I was in front of him. I've had him read Dworkin, my site, and other places (namely OAG's site) and I still can't unseat this problem. He can recite feminist literature all day long, he can understand the tenets, the ideas behind it, how it links together but he will not allow this knowledge to stand in the way of his porn use.

Forcing a kid to repeat "tenets" of feminism and "recite feminist literature all day long" . How very fundamentalist.