Bunkspubble!

Old subthreads
ERV
Arnie Loves Me!
Arnie Loves Me!
Posts: 1556
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 4:57 pm

Re: Bunkspubble!

#1981

Post by ERV »

decius wrote:As one of the most vilified women in the community, I urge you to drop a line at Neurologica Blog, Abbie.
Why? Steven Novella is a misogynist.

Arent we told that exclusion is part of the rampant misogyny in atheism? Excluding female skeptics from "Best atheists authors!" "Best atheist bloggers" "Best atheist podcasts" lists is sexist? Excluding females from speaker line-ups at conferences is sexist (except when Phil Plait does it)? Exclusion is one way the patriarchy keeps women down.

Thus Novella utilized the oppressive tool of exclusion when he covered the XMRV fiasco. His post went up long after my role in the XMRV-CFS take-down was complete-- so long after it was even after my role/blog was referenced in a peer-reviewed journal article, written by one of The Top Dogs in virology. And yet, despite the fact a female atheist/skeptic/blogger brought down that monster, Novella managed to exclude referencing me or my role, in any way/shape/form.

It cannot be due to ignorance or laziness (remember, those arent excuses for excluding good female writers/speakers!). It certainly is nothing personal with me, not that I slapped down his show co-host (its never personal, its always misogyny!).

We arent supposed to interact with misogynists, we are supposed to drum them out of the movement, rite?


Whatever, this experiment I wanted to work this morning didnt so Im in a bad mood.

Angry_Drunk
.
.
Posts: 458
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2012 12:33 pm
Contact:

Re: Bunkspubble!

#1982

Post by Angry_Drunk »

welch wrote:
decius wrote:
Tony Parsehole wrote: Creationists were saying for years that PZ's style of "debate" was fucked up and nobody cared.
Looks like they were right for once.
What is there to debate with a creationist or with a flat-earther, though? Ridicule is too much of an acknowledgement already.
But the point is, PeeZus' behaviour is no different now than it was. He's refined his tactics a bit, but really, it's not some bizarre 180.
A million times this. PeeZus is the same juvenile derpwad that though that playing soggy biscuit with a communion wafer was some sort of profound statement. But hey, when it was the religionists getting their oxen gored...

welch
.
.
Posts: 9208
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:05 am

Re: Bunkspubble!

#1983

Post by welch »

Remick wrote:
Pitchguest wrote:from here http://freethoughtblogs.com/butterflies ... bal-abuse/
Kausik Datta
February 14, 2013 at 2:37 pm (UTC -8) Link to this comment
But you forget, Ophelia…
(a) Paula Kirby has not been verbally abused as a gamer. Therefore, verbal abuse of women gamers doesn’t exist. And anyone who disagrees is a bully, bully I say!
(b) Verbal abuse of women gamers? Do you know how much harsher and more inhuman conditions women in the Middle East, Africa, or [-insert country of appropriate outrage here-] face? Everything else pales in comparison, I tells ya! Wimmin gamerz, forsooth!

[Ewww. While typing these in, I threw up in my mouth a little. Sadly, the memories are still fresh.]
Misogyny in the Middle East is a real problem. Verbal harassment in games is a first world problem. I'm sure you can connect the dots. With all that's happening to women in the Middle East, they would LOVE it if all they had to contend with was fuckwits insulting them online. But if you want to marginalize them because the Prune has a stick up her arse with a fetish for drama, then all I can say to you is: FUCK YOU.

Also, you suck at making analogies. But do you want to know what makes me puke a little in my mouth? Idiots like you.

Its all bullshit anyways. EVERYONE gets verbally harassed in games. By your opponent. Hey it happens in non video-games too. Do you see how much Basketball players, football players, american football players, fuck every sport, trash talk their opponents? If women were integrated into any of these sports, are their opponents supposed to not trash talk them because they are women.

When Zinedine Zidane headbutted Marco in the World cup Final, it was because Marco got to him. It is part of the game, you have to keep your cool. If you can't, you shouldn't play competitively. Same shit with card games, do top poker players not try to put female players on tilt? Of course they try to. It is all pure and utter bullshit.

Having been involved with Roller Derby for a few years now, I've learned enough to spot the difference between a normal hit, and a hit. The latter is usually timed better, with an eye on damage and humiliation. The trash-talking is awesome as well. Then, afterwards, we all go to a bar and have fun, because what happens in the game, stays in the game. It's all just part of the game, and if you take it seriously, you need to find a new game.

decius
.
.
Posts: 1365
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 12:08 am

Re: Bunkspubble!

#1984

Post by decius »

I never heard him partake in any of that rhetoric and he is possibly the brightest skeptic around. In my opinion, he's worth engaging.

Git
.
.
Posts: 1271
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:31 pm
Location: Engerland

Re: Bunkspubble!

#1985

Post by Git »

Do his eyes really look like that?

Dick Strawkins
.
.
Posts: 5859
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:34 pm

Re: Bunkspubble!

#1986

Post by Dick Strawkins »

ERV wrote:
decius wrote:As one of the most vilified women in the community, I urge you to drop a line at Neurologica Blog, Abbie.
Why? Steven Novella is a misogynist.

Arent we told that exclusion is part of the rampant misogyny in atheism? Excluding female skeptics from "Best atheists authors!" "Best atheist bloggers" "Best atheist podcasts" lists is sexist? Excluding females from speaker line-ups at conferences is sexist (except when Phil Plait does it)? Exclusion is one way the patriarchy keeps women down.

Thus Novella utilized the oppressive tool of exclusion when he covered the XMRV fiasco. His post went up long after my role in the XMRV-CFS take-down was complete-- so long after it was even after my role/blog was referenced in a peer-reviewed journal article, written by one of The Top Dogs in virology. And yet, despite the fact a female atheist/skeptic/blogger brought down that monster, Novella managed to exclude referencing me or my role, in any way/shape/form.

It cannot be due to ignorance or laziness (remember, those arent excuses for excluding good female writers/speakers!). It certainly is nothing personal with me, not that I slapped down his show co-host (its never personal, its always misogyny!).

We arent supposed to interact with misogynists, we are supposed to drum them out of the movement, rite?


Whatever, this experiment I wanted to work this morning didnt so Im in a bad mood.
Very bad show by Novella there.
For those who didn't follow the story, Abbie was involved in exposing a huge scientific fraud a couple of years ago, that involved a paper in Science from a group working on a (fake?) virus called XMRV. There was some great detective work involved and a fantastic gotcha moment when a picture from the paper was revealed to be faked. It was a brilliant piece of scientific skepticism and provokedthe journal Science into forcing a retraction of the paper.
In any other circumstances this would have been the story of the year in the skeptical community. But because it involved ERV it was purposefully ignored by skeptics rather than risk provoking the VIPs of skepticism.

decius
.
.
Posts: 1365
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 12:08 am

Re: Bunkspubble!

#1987

Post by decius »

Angry_Drunk wrote:
A million times this. PeeZus is the same juvenile derpwad that though that playing soggy biscuit with a communion wafer was some sort of profound statement. But hey, when it was the religionists getting their oxen gored...
He's also one of those atheists who think their lack of faith is some sort of intellectual achievement per se. This is weird, because he used to do science in the past, so he should know the difference between renouncing a delusion and expanding one's knowledge.

Dick Strawkins
.
.
Posts: 5859
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:34 pm

Re: Bunkspubble!

#1988

Post by Dick Strawkins »

Git wrote:
Do his eyes really look like that?
These days his eyes are mostly like this:

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

Git
.
.
Posts: 1271
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:31 pm
Location: Engerland

Re: Bunkspubble!

#1989

Post by Git »

BarnOwl wrote:
Submariner wrote: I think that may be the appeal of the SJW flag. It gives social acceptability to the behaviors you mentioned. They get to be assholes but can claim the moral high ground.
Agreed. It also gives them a pass on actually doing something constructive for real social justice. It's not as if they were the types to mentor at-risk kids in public schools, or to work at soup kitchens or with roadway/waterway clean-up groups at university, for example. No Peace Corps or Teach for America or Clean Water Action, either ... that would disrupt the path to success and $$$. But other people should totes be doing those things, right? Just like other people should reduce their travel, heating/cooling energy consumption, and food miles.
Just as its always other women who have to go into STEM fields, and not gender studies like SJWs.

I'm detecting a pattern here...

JAB
.
.
Posts: 500
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 6:04 am
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: Bunkspubble!

#1990

Post by JAB »

masakari2012 wrote:TheMudbrooker, yep. Also, they invent problems and then claim to have the solution for it. The only way for those of you who are white and male to be free of the problem is to accept that you have privilege which interferes with your understanding of what they claim, admit that you are wrong, and follow what they say, and put your faith in their "greater" wisdom.

It sounds like Alcoholic's Anonymous.
Why am I suddenly reminded of the Possum Lodge pledge from the Red Green Show:

I'm a man,
but I can change,
if I have to,
I guess

Git
.
.
Posts: 1271
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:31 pm
Location: Engerland

Re: Bunkspubble!

#1991

Post by Git »

Gumby wrote:
CommanderTuvok wrote:Good to see some pictures of dogs. Leave the stoopid cats to the Creepy Clowns. Posting pics of cats here is an insult to Arnie.
Fuck off.

The one, the original, and the only Gumby:

http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd24 ... 89da72.jpg

http://i225.photobucket.com/albums/dd24 ... 1ac908.jpg
Best catte ever.

Angry_Drunk
.
.
Posts: 458
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2012 12:33 pm
Contact:

Re: Bunkspubble!

#1992

Post by Angry_Drunk »

decius wrote:
Angry_Drunk wrote:
A million times this. PeeZus is the same juvenile derpwad that though that playing soggy biscuit with a communion wafer was some sort of profound statement. But hey, when it was the religionists getting their oxen gored...
He's also one of those atheists who think their lack of faith is some sort of intellectual achievement per se. This is weird, because he used to do science in the past, so he should know the difference between renouncing a delusion and expanding one's knowledge.
Exactly. This is why I tend to use the term "atheist movement" with derision. It makes about as much sense as saying you're part of the "physics movement".

Git
.
.
Posts: 1271
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:31 pm
Location: Engerland

Re: Bunkspubble!

#1993

Post by Git »

Angry_Drunk wrote:
decius wrote:
Angry_Drunk wrote:
A million times this. PeeZus is the same juvenile derpwad that though that playing soggy biscuit with a communion wafer was some sort of profound statement. But hey, when it was the religionists getting their oxen gored...
He's also one of those atheists who think their lack of faith is some sort of intellectual achievement per se. This is weird, because he used to do science in the past, so he should know the difference between renouncing a delusion and expanding one's knowledge.
Exactly. This is why I tend to use the term "atheist movement" with derision. It makes about as much sense as saying you're part of the "physics movement".
There is no god but Ernest Rutherford and James Clerk Maxwell is his prophet.

welch
.
.
Posts: 9208
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:05 am

Re: Bunkspubble!

#1994

Post by welch »

Philip of Tealand wrote:I play the MMO Star Wars The Old Republic, have been since last year

If there is one thing you can guarantee is some gamers can be incredibly rude, childish and irascible to point of stupidity.

I've also learned that an incredible amount of the fanboys and girls are fantastically fussy and prone to turning an amusing shade of puce if something is not going their way - eg the sky is not the right shade of luminous purple, that character class can do .00005% more damage than mine can etc etc RAGE, RAGE, Delicious RAGE!

You get the trash talk from people, most bratty teenagers, with the obligatory bad spelling and OMFG U NOOOB - they are not the world's best players but seem to think they are and that all should be able to play at the same level as them.

I agree with with Aweraw wrote, there are people who are going to use trash talk to weaken their opponent's concentration and rising to it does you no good at all and it is a lesson the Baboons would do well to learn to do instead of turning their sensitivity settings to the lowest levels and having their hyper-important vaginas/RadFem approved penises hurt so badly!
I found that rather a lot of MMOs are full of dipshits. So I don't play them. I found one that I like, D&D Online, and the dipshit level is kept to something I can easily ignore and deal with. The overall community on the game has a low tolerance for dipshittery, and the game is designed and maintained in a way that helps. It makes joining PUGs a lot of fun, and some of them have been epically hilarious. Especially the stoners.

Do I demand that WoW et al change to be more like DDO? No. I simply don't play WoW. This seems so very simple, and yet...

welch
.
.
Posts: 9208
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:05 am

Re: Bunkspubble!

#1995

Post by welch »

cunt wrote:I think most things are alive when you kill them.
It would seem to be impossible to kill them otherwise.

welch
.
.
Posts: 9208
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:05 am

Re: Bunkspubble!

#1996

Post by welch »

Angry_Drunk wrote:
cunt wrote:I think most things are alive when you kill them.
Zombies.

:snooty:
I always wondered if that was "killing" or "permanently rendering unable to function". In the case of the undead, there's a difference.

JAB
.
.
Posts: 500
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 6:04 am
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: Bunkspubble!

#1997

Post by JAB »

Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:Seriously, we were joking about Physioprof's style of writing, but now it makes my eyes bleed.

"because fucke you, thatte’s why"

Fucker shouldn't be allowed near a keyboard. Or a pen. Or chalk.
I'm thinking that he may be the only person where disemvoweling his posts would make them easier to read.

welch
.
.
Posts: 9208
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:05 am

Re: Bunkspubble!

#1998

Post by welch »

ERV wrote:
decius wrote:As one of the most vilified women in the community, I urge you to drop a line at Neurologica Blog, Abbie.
Why? Steven Novella is a misogynist.

Arent we told that exclusion is part of the rampant misogyny in atheism? Excluding female skeptics from "Best atheists authors!" "Best atheist bloggers" "Best atheist podcasts" lists is sexist? Excluding females from speaker line-ups at conferences is sexist (except when Phil Plait does it)? Exclusion is one way the patriarchy keeps women down.

Thus Novella utilized the oppressive tool of exclusion when he covered the XMRV fiasco. His post went up long after my role in the XMRV-CFS take-down was complete-- so long after it was even after my role/blog was referenced in a peer-reviewed journal article, written by one of The Top Dogs in virology. And yet, despite the fact a female atheist/skeptic/blogger brought down that monster, Novella managed to exclude referencing me or my role, in any way/shape/form.

It cannot be due to ignorance or laziness (remember, those arent excuses for excluding good female writers/speakers!). It certainly is nothing personal with me, not that I slapped down his show co-host (its never personal, its always misogyny!).

We arent supposed to interact with misogynists, we are supposed to drum them out of the movement, rite?


Whatever, this experiment I wanted to work this morning didnt so Im in a bad mood.

it's even sillier when the first comment references your work, and novella can't be arsed to acknowledge that.

Angry_Drunk
.
.
Posts: 458
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2012 12:33 pm
Contact:

Re: Bunkspubble!

#1999

Post by Angry_Drunk »

welch wrote:
Angry_Drunk wrote:
cunt wrote:I think most things are alive when you kill them.
Zombies.

:snooty:
I always wondered if that was "killing" or "permanently rendering unable to function". In the case of the undead, there's a difference.
Well, non-supernatural-based zombies exhibit most of the criteria for "life" (reproduction, response to stimuli, interaction between organisms & (possibly) digestion). I'd say it's life, John, but not as we know it.

Remick
.
.
Posts: 312
Joined: Wed Nov 07, 2012 12:47 pm

Re: Bunkspubble!

#2000

Post by Remick »

Angry_Drunk wrote:
welch wrote:
Angry_Drunk wrote:
cunt wrote:I think most things are alive when you kill them.
Zombies.

:snooty:
I always wondered if that was "killing" or "permanently rendering unable to function". In the case of the undead, there's a difference.
Well, non-supernatural-based zombies exhibit most of the criteria for "life" (reproduction, response to stimuli, interaction between organisms & (possibly) digestion). I'd say it's life, John, but not as we know it.
I would disagree with reproduction, they typically pass an infection on. They don't actually reproduce.

cunt
.
.
Posts: 2768
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2012 8:06 am

Re: Bunkspubble!

#2001

Post by cunt »

Gefan wrote:
cunt wrote:Have any of you actually been on those ships? They're pretty great, jet ski-ing and diving around Caribbean islands every day and then get french cuisine from a five star restaurant at night. Did you enjoy your lobster sir? Would you like another one?
They're are some awesome resorts (many of them adults only) around the Caribbean where you can have the same experience minus the density of people and the being herded on and off the boat. I think the objection to cruises is usually based on them being a bit regimented and that you're trapped in close proximity to too many people.
Only one we've done was down the Nile. No kids on board but we didn't care for having an itinerary each day.
If you've somehow gotten through life without becoming as misanthropic as we have then I can see the appeal.
Horses for courses I guess. I don't like really like adult-only holidays. I actually prefer seeing kids running around, jumping in pool, enjoying themselves and annoying the old fuckers. It adds a bit of chaos into the mix.

The excursions can be a bit regimented but more importantly they're rip-offs. I used to just get off the boat and hire a taxi (actually, bad idea in Jamaica), take me to your best, closest, beach and where can I can score some weed?

Gumby
Pit Art Master
Pit Art Master
Posts: 5543
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:40 am

Re: Bunkspubble!

#2002

Post by Gumby »

Git wrote: Best catte ever.
Yes, she was. I still miss her.

Za-zen
.
.
Posts: 2683
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:39 am

Re: Bunkspubble!

#2003

Post by Za-zen »

Dick Strawkins wrote:
ERV wrote:
decius wrote:As one of the most vilified women in the community, I urge you to drop a line at Neurologica Blog, Abbie.
Why? Steven Novella is a misogynist.

Arent we told that exclusion is part of the rampant misogyny in atheism? Excluding female skeptics from "Best atheists authors!" "Best atheist bloggers" "Best atheist podcasts" lists is sexist? Excluding females from speaker line-ups at conferences is sexist (except when Phil Plait does it)? Exclusion is one way the patriarchy keeps women down.

Thus Novella utilized the oppressive tool of exclusion when he covered the XMRV fiasco. His post went up long after my role in the XMRV-CFS take-down was complete-- so long after it was even after my role/blog was referenced in a peer-reviewed journal article, written by one of The Top Dogs in virology. And yet, despite the fact a female atheist/skeptic/blogger brought down that monster, Novella managed to exclude referencing me or my role, in any way/shape/form.

It cannot be due to ignorance or laziness (remember, those arent excuses for excluding good female writers/speakers!). It certainly is nothing personal with me, not that I slapped down his show co-host (its never personal, its always misogyny!).

We arent supposed to interact with misogynists, we are supposed to drum them out of the movement, rite?


Whatever, this experiment I wanted to work this morning didnt so Im in a bad mood.
Very bad show by Novella there.
For those who didn't follow the story, Abbie was involved in exposing a huge scientific fraud a couple of years ago, that involved a paper in Science from a group working on a (fake?) virus called XMRV. There was some great detective work involved and a fantastic gotcha moment when a picture from the paper was revealed to be faked. It was a brilliant piece of scientific skepticism and provokedthe journal Science into forcing a retraction of the paper.
In any other circumstances this would have been the story of the year in the skeptical community. But because it involved ERV it was purposefully ignored by skeptics rather than risk provoking the VIPs of skepticism.
Very few are actually aware of this. There is a huge problem in the community, it's the deference to the special ones. And it continues. Look, rebecca watson is a joke, that isn't mossogony it's just fucking obvious, and what's more is anybody who is anybody knows it! yet people who should supposedly know better continue to either bypass their brain in order to be her apologist, or avoid calling her out because they don't want to deal with the wrath of the sycophants. Novella you fall into the brain malfunction category. You think she brings popular appeal? I think your brain is mushed. She brings nothing to the table a performing monkey couldn't.

Tony Parsehole
.
.
Posts: 6658
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 8:16 am
Location: Middlesbrough

Re: Bunkspubble!

#2004

Post by Tony Parsehole »

Git wrote:
Do his eyes really look like that?
I used my mad shoop littlefying skillz to make them appear fractionally beadier than normal.

mordacious1
.
.
Posts: 1061
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:33 pm

Why people hate you

#2005

Post by mordacious1 »

ERV'S post reminds of a situation I had in the military. I had over 40 people working for me and one day an Airman came to me and said, "All the people here hate me because I'm black". I replied that I took these situations seriously and would deal with it immediately if true. Then I asked him if when he said "all" he meant ALL. He answered yes. But, I said, 22 of these people are black, how can they hate you because you're black? It seems the black people hated him because he wasn't black enough (which can happen, but I didn't see it).

Now, the real reason people didn't like him (I don't think anyone "hated" him), IMO, was that he was a total asshole and was emotionally and mentally unstable. He basically annoyed the shit out of everyone. But in his mind it couldn't be that. For the women in the atheist movement that think that everyone hates them because they are a woman: First, I don't think anyone really hates you, despise, yes, annoyed by you, yes, wish you'd take a hike, yes. Hate, no. Second: You're disliked because of what you do and how you do it, and your personality. It has nothing to do with your sex (as far as I've seen). Let me give you a hint about life, not everyone is going to like you. Deal with it. Calling someone a chill girl or gender traitor because they disagree with you is warped thinking at best.

Gumby
Pit Art Master
Pit Art Master
Posts: 5543
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:40 am

Re: Bunkspubble!

#2006

Post by Gumby »

Dick Strawkins wrote: Very bad show by Novella there.
For those who didn't follow the story, Abbie was involved in exposing a huge scientific fraud a couple of years ago, that involved a paper in Science from a group working on a (fake?) virus called XMRV. There was some great detective work involved and a fantastic gotcha moment when a picture from the paper was revealed to be faked. It was a brilliant piece of scientific skepticism and provokedthe journal Science into forcing a retraction of the paper.
In any other circumstances this would have been the story of the year in the skeptical community. But because it involved ERV it was purposefully ignored by skeptics rather than risk provoking the VIPs of skepticism.
A good summary.

Very depressing, really. Abbie not only was involved in the XMRV takedown, but she's on the front lines of real science every day, fighting HIV. What the fuck do Peezus, Ophie, Zvan, Watson, Christina et. al. do? Whinge on their fucking blogs, dox, harass, ban, and censor. And dominate the American skeptic conference speaker circuit by sermonizing about a barking mad version of feminism, and occasionally the ill-prepared and often anti-science science presentation. But of course, first they must discuss how hammered they were the night before their speech.

It's a fucking shame the leaders of skeptic and atheist organizations care more about selling tickets to conventions than actually supplying interesting and knowledgeable speakers. When it comes to dumbing-down and degrading the A/S conference scene, they are as guilty as PZ and his gang of alcoholic money-grubbing attention whores.

Submariner
.
.
Posts: 1127
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2013 11:05 pm
Location: Florida, US of A
Contact:

Re: Bunkspubble!

#2007

Post by Submariner »

Gumby wrote:
It's a fucking shame the leaders of skeptic and atheist organizations care more about selling tickets to conventions than actually supplying interesting and knowledgeable speakers. When it comes to dumbing-down and degrading the A/S conference scene, they are as guilty as PZ and his gang of alcoholic money-grubbing attention whores.

Here's an idea: how about they make atheist/skeptic conferences about atheism/skepticism using atheist/skeptic speakers and whoever the fuck shows up, shows up.

katamari Damassi
.
.
Posts: 5429
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 10:32 am

Re: Bunkspubble!

#2008

Post by katamari Damassi »

Philip of Tealand wrote:
Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:Fuch the media! I shared this video on FB:

[youtube]90Omh7_I8vI[/youtube]

And the header is "UFO"!!!

People don't really like astronomy, do they?
Are Russians completely unflappable or something?

They seem completely at ease during all that

"Oh, that'll be another asteroid then? Hmmm what to have for breakfast?"
Well until it's positively identified as a meteor then it technically is an unidentified flying object.
I saw a similar though slightly less spectacular one in west Africa about 15 years ago and while I was super excited about it, the locals were just bemused.

katamari Damassi
.
.
Posts: 5429
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 10:32 am

Re: Bunkspubble!

#2009

Post by katamari Damassi »

Tony Parsehole wrote:
Git wrote:
Do his eyes really look like that?
I used my mad shoop littlefying skillz to make them appear fractionally beadier than normal.
Thanks for the nightmare fuel Tony.

Pitchguest
.
.
Posts: 4024
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 3:44 pm

Re: Bunkspubble!

#2010

Post by Pitchguest »

Apples wrote:Heh - wind has re-energized the Batshit Insane Moderators thread.

http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic ... start=1900
On the contrary, cipher, wind showed the rest of you up to be liars. Or was there no secret forum that you denied existed?

Oh, there was? Aw shucks. :roll:

JackSkeptic
.
.
Posts: 3222
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2013 5:23 pm
Location: UK

Re: Why people hate you

#2011

Post by JackSkeptic »

mordacious1 wrote:ERV'S post reminds of a situation I had in the military. I had over 40 people working for me and one day an Airman came to me and said, "All the people here hate me because I'm black". I replied that I took these situations seriously and would deal with it immediately if true. Then I asked him if when he said "all" he meant ALL. He answered yes. But, I said, 22 of these people are black, how can they hate you because you're black? It seems the black people hated him because he wasn't black enough (which can happen, but I didn't see it).

Now, the real reason people didn't like him (I don't think anyone "hated" him), IMO, was that he was a total asshole and was emotionally and mentally unstable. He basically annoyed the shit out of everyone. But in his mind it couldn't be that. For the women in the atheist movement that think that everyone hates them because they are a woman: First, I don't think anyone really hates you, despise, yes, annoyed by you, yes, wish you'd take a hike, yes. Hate, no. Second: You're disliked because of what you do and how you do it, and your personality. It has nothing to do with your sex (as far as I've seen). Let me give you a hint about life, not everyone is going to like you. Deal with it. Calling someone a chill girl or gender traitor because they disagree with you is warped thinking at best.
Yep, it's denial at it's finest, the same way PZ calls anyone who disagrees with him a troll. As suggested earlier this behaviour would be hard to spot when he is attacking Creationists and the like. Now it is readily apparent.

Some people take being attacked for their views or simply being disliked by someone very, very personally. They can't separate disliking someone's views with disliking them personally (I think it was Ceepolk on A+ that actually stated it was the same thing) That is why for them Ad Hominems are fine and not a logical fallacy. It is very sloppy thinking.

In all my years of talking to believers of all sorts I always avoided discussions with those who took things personally as it always ended up getting nowhere very fast. That is why I feel FtB/A+ can never be reasoned with, they are incapable of dispassionate discussion which is necessary to reach some common ground or at least an appreciation of what someone is saying.

They break the rules of rational thought on a whim and unless they change they have no place in any 'movement' who's very foundation relies on it. They should set up a feminism movement, join that and leave the rest of us alone and stop hijacking the words 'Freethought' and 'Atheism (plus)'.

JackSkeptic
.
.
Posts: 3222
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2013 5:23 pm
Location: UK

Re: Why people hate you

#2012

Post by JackSkeptic »

mordacious1 wrote:ERV'S post reminds of a situation I had in the military. I had over 40 people working for me and one day an Airman came to me and said, "All the people here hate me because I'm black". I replied that I took these situations seriously and would deal with it immediately if true. Then I asked him if when he said "all" he meant ALL. He answered yes. But, I said, 22 of these people are black, how can they hate you because you're black? It seems the black people hated him because he wasn't black enough (which can happen, but I didn't see it).

Now, the real reason people didn't like him (I don't think anyone "hated" him), IMO, was that he was a total asshole and was emotionally and mentally unstable. He basically annoyed the shit out of everyone. But in his mind it couldn't be that. For the women in the atheist movement that think that everyone hates them because they are a woman: First, I don't think anyone really hates you, despise, yes, annoyed by you, yes, wish you'd take a hike, yes. Hate, no. Second: You're disliked because of what you do and how you do it, and your personality. It has nothing to do with your sex (as far as I've seen). Let me give you a hint about life, not everyone is going to like you. Deal with it. Calling someone a chill girl or gender traitor because they disagree with you is warped thinking at best.
I worked in a warehouse many years ago with about 30 people. I was one of the few whites and I got no racist abuse at all (except some joking around which I did not care about) But the Jamaicans and West Africans were extremely racially abusive to each other and it was also a skin tone thing. The management couldn't do anything as they were scared of being called racist.

JackSkeptic
.
.
Posts: 3222
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2013 5:23 pm
Location: UK

Re: Bunkspubble!

#2013

Post by JackSkeptic »

Pitchguest wrote:
Apples wrote:Heh - wind has re-energized the Batshit Insane Moderators thread.

http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic ... start=1900
On the contrary, cipher, wind showed the rest of you up to be liars. Or was there no secret forum that you denied existed?

Oh, there was? Aw shucks. :roll:
I also think it's funny some think that someone accidentally linking to the secret forum which lead to a page 'not available' is the same as someone directly telling them. It is just a piece of evidence added to the rest, it is not an outright statement 'there is a secret forum'. But then some are motivated to call Wind a liar as they can't help themselves when they base their thought processes on pure emotion.

Git
.
.
Posts: 1271
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:31 pm
Location: Engerland

Re: Bunkspubble!

#2014

Post by Git »

Tony Parsehole wrote:
Git wrote:
Do his eyes really look like that?
I used my mad shoop littlefying skillz to make them appear fractionally beadier than normal.
You can never tell with spectacle-wearers though....

bhoytony
.
.
Posts: 3017
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 9:56 am

Re: Bunkspubble!

#2015

Post by bhoytony »

Lsuoma wrote:
Trophy wrote:
Lsuoma, can you also respond to this stupid comment?
Fuck you all up the council.
You know you have to explain this for the Septics.

16bitheretic
.
.
Posts: 448
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2012 7:00 pm

Re: Bunkspubble!

#2016

Post by 16bitheretic »

Remick wrote:
As someone who plays shooters online. I can tell you I have a hard time telling "female sounding" from "pre-pubescent boy" in some cases, though the actual words used often help differentiate. I didn't play much Halo-3, but I will say when Halo2 was new, the latter category was more prevalent than the former. Either way, the voice can be associated with a n00b, and n00bs get bullied and shit talked more than vets, this is true in every case. So when women start entering the gaming world, there is a (correct) feeling that an unknown female/squeeky voice is probably a newbie. I don't harrass newbies, but I certainly see it happen a lot. Honestly, the most common bullshit I hear is getting called a "nigger" for some reason by someone with a bit of a southern accent.

I will also comment, I used to play WoW for a while, and the women/girls in the guilds I was a part of were typically treated better than the guys, as long as they could do their job. Women who could not do their job, were often part of raids due to relationships with guild leaders, and that led to resentment and bullshit, but it had to do with them sucking at their job, not their gender.
I've never played any MMOs, but I did play some halo 2 matches on my brother's Xbox and I can say that there were some jackasses who got really nasty with the verbal insults when they heard me on the headset and realized I was a girl. However, I don't paint that as anything stemming from some system wide misogyny, I recognize that these people are just fuckheads in general and if they thought I was black they'd probably call me a nigger, if they thought I was Mexican they'd probably call me a beaner, and if they realized I'm Asian-American ethnicity they'd probably call me a chink or say I'm fresh off the boat or something. Trolls will use ANYTHING to piss off and offend their target and personal attributes are the simplest and easiest way to get under the skin of someone you've decided to taunt or bully.

All in all though the ratio of jackasses to well behaved Halo 2 players was much lower than people like Anita Sarkeesian and all the others who want to paint all gamers as basement dwelling misogynistic, racist creeps would have you believe. I think some of the situation also really depends on the types of games you play. I know alot of the other girls and women I've encountered who play games do play alot of MMO type and fantasy role play games where things are more cooperative. I don't use headsets very often if I play games, but with stuff like the Borderlands games, where everyone operates as a team, I've never had any assholes torment me. The times I have encountered gendered insults and attacks were all in competitive type games where as I said before I don't think the people really truly hated women, they just found the quickest way to piss me off and insult based on the sole attribute about me that they had knowledge of.

Cunning Punt
.
.
Posts: 1335
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2012 10:50 am

Re: Bunkspubble!

#2017

Post by Cunning Punt »

welch wrote:
cunt wrote:I think most things are alive when you kill them.
It would seem to be impossible to kill them otherwise.
http://i.imgur.com/BQbija2.jpg

Zenspace
.
.
Posts: 923
Joined: Sun Dec 23, 2012 11:13 am

Re: Bunkspubble!

#2018

Post by Zenspace »

Za-zen wrote:On the way into work today, there was a few crazies on the morning talkshow i listen to. The topic, well, i'm not sure what the topic was, other than "the interwebz are ebil, ppl are misusing the interwebz!", i never did get the memo as to the defined purpose of the internet. It's almost as if a section of society has recently stumbled upon it, and thinks it belongs to someone, and therefore have a purpose, and if it doesn't have a purpose they damn well are going to ensure it does have one, that one being, the purpose they want it to serve.

Fuckwits.

Back to the story; one person was recounting the horrific tale of what happened to her. She had been on a networking site, fell in love with a guy, and he turned out to be a she. As in it was a girl pretending to be a male on the site.

Oh! The Horror! Her world fell apart "the only way i can describe it, is as being raped, except for the physical part, it is exactly like that"..... Seriously, she said that. Some people should be advised by their shrinks to not go out their door.

Second nutter chirps in; " it's about time the police did something about fake profiles on internet sites, they are really damaging to people"..... At this stage the reasonable part of my brain is telling me to change the fucking channel, the masochist in me persists though, as i must punish myself, more! More!

The host attempted to inject some semblance of sanity; "surely that would be too much for our already overstretched law enforcement".... You what!? You fucking dingbat! How the fuck did you get a job hosting a radio show! Should you not be challenging the fucking premise!!!

Arrived in work, with my prejudice that the human race is 90% stupid fucks reinforced. Ahhh i love my morning drives.

One of my personal axioms: the larger the group of people, the greater its resemblance to a collective of squabbling monkeys.

welch
.
.
Posts: 9208
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:05 am

Re: Why people hate you

#2019

Post by welch »

mordacious1 wrote:ERV'S post reminds of a situation I had in the military. I had over 40 people working for me and one day an Airman came to me and said, "All the people here hate me because I'm black". I replied that I took these situations seriously and would deal with it immediately if true. Then I asked him if when he said "all" he meant ALL. He answered yes. But, I said, 22 of these people are black, how can they hate you because you're black? It seems the black people hated him because he wasn't black enough (which can happen, but I didn't see it).

Now, the real reason people didn't like him (I don't think anyone "hated" him), IMO, was that he was a total asshole and was emotionally and mentally unstable. He basically annoyed the shit out of everyone. But in his mind it couldn't be that. For the women in the atheist movement that think that everyone hates them because they are a woman: First, I don't think anyone really hates you, despise, yes, annoyed by you, yes, wish you'd take a hike, yes. Hate, no. Second: You're disliked because of what you do and how you do it, and your personality. It has nothing to do with your sex (as far as I've seen). Let me give you a hint about life, not everyone is going to like you. Deal with it. Calling someone a chill girl or gender traitor because they disagree with you is warped thinking at best.
If someone calls you an asshole, consider they may be correct. I'm not saying they ALWAYS are, but if a lot of people are calling you an asshole, allow for the possibility that they're not wrong. You may in fact be, an asshole.

16bitheretic
.
.
Posts: 448
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2012 7:00 pm

Re: Bunkspubble!

#2020

Post by 16bitheretic »

Cunning Punt wrote:
welch wrote:
cunt wrote:I think most things are alive when you kill them.
It would seem to be impossible to kill them otherwise.
http://i.imgur.com/BQbija2.jpg
LOL, the lobster thing reminds me of this meme which made the rounds a couple years ago:

http://i1322.photobucket.com/albums/u58 ... 8fc497.jpg

Apples
.
.
Posts: 2406
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2013 12:39 pm

Re: Bunkspubble!

#2021

Post by Apples »

Pitchguest wrote:
Apples wrote:Heh - wind has re-energized the Batshit Insane Moderators thread.

http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic ... start=1900
On the contrary, cipher, wind showed the rest of you up to be liars. Or was there no secret forum that you denied existed?

Oh, there was? Aw shucks. :roll:
Hyperdeath confirms that wind was telling the truth (making Flewellyn look like the punitive gaslighting dishonest prick that he is) ... Cipher excuses her own full-of-shitness by stating that she wasn't talking to Hyperdeath ... and wind gets banned from Forum Matters (as was mood2, if I recall correctly - for defending wind). So... if you have a complaint about the A+ SJ Police and it turns out to be legit ... you'll probably be banned from the mods complaint office, which makes perfect sense, since that's where you're told to go with complaints about the mods.

Zenspace
.
.
Posts: 923
Joined: Sun Dec 23, 2012 11:13 am

Re: Bunkspubble!

#2022

Post by Zenspace »

decius wrote:
ERV wrote: Question:
If what we are dealing with in skepticism is genuine misogyny, why are some women targets, and some are not? Misogyny is the hatred of *women* and yet Watson is a target, while I am not*. Ive never gotten any irl, email, blog comment, or YouTube comment that I would classify as 'misogynistic', in +6 years (granted I have fewer YouTube talks up than Watson, but mine have more views), certainly not from anyone I know is an atheist/skeptic.

Why?

Genuine question for those who think misogyny is 'rampant' in skepticism.

*Maybe* its *not* misogyny?

*Maybe* it has something to do with individuals and their behaviors/personalities, and nothing to do with females in general?




* Lets ignore the fact that Im the one who the self-proclaimed feminists try to get fired from all avenues of employment. FEMINISM!
As one of the most vilified women in the community, I urge you to drop a line at Neurologica Blog, Abbie.
Agreed. Worded exactly as you did above, because that comment really says it all. Your call, of course, but I would love to see the reaction over there. :popcorn:

Metalogic42
.
.
Posts: 1252
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2012 10:56 am

Re: Bunkspubble!

#2023

Post by Metalogic42 »

Cipher wrote:Because she doesn't give one single fuck about the nightmare she caused for people here with her actions, because it's all about wind, and when it's not about wind, it should be.
The nightmare! It was so tragic, the way wind....did what, exactly? Well whatever it was, we can be assured that it was worse than being kidnapped and murdered. Now the A+ secret forum members will need years of therapy.

Gumby
Pit Art Master
Pit Art Master
Posts: 5543
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:40 am

Re: Bunkspubble!

#2024

Post by Gumby »

Submariner wrote:
Gumby wrote:
It's a fucking shame the leaders of skeptic and atheist organizations care more about selling tickets to conventions than actually supplying interesting and knowledgeable speakers. When it comes to dumbing-down and degrading the A/S conference scene, they are as guilty as PZ and his gang of alcoholic money-grubbing attention whores.

Here's an idea: how about they make atheist/skeptic conferences about atheism/skepticism using atheist/skeptic speakers and whoever the fuck shows up, shows up.
That would be absolutely the thing to do. But I have some doubts as to whether that will actually happen. American conferences (the larger ones) seem to have largely degenerated into purely social events, with the presentations not given much weight. Hence the popularity at these cons of intellectual lightweights like Spuds "Party Animal" McMyers and his dimwitted harem of drunken radfems. I think things will get worse before they get better.

Pitchguest
.
.
Posts: 4024
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 3:44 pm

Re: Bunkspubble!

#2025

Post by Pitchguest »

Apples wrote:
Pitchguest wrote:
Apples wrote:Heh - wind has re-energized the Batshit Insane Moderators thread.

http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic ... start=1900
On the contrary, cipher, wind showed the rest of you up to be liars. Or was there no secret forum that you denied existed?

Oh, there was? Aw shucks. :roll:
Hyperdeath confirms that wind was telling the truth (making Flewellyn look like the punitive gaslighting dishonest prick that he is) ... Cipher excuses her own full-of-shitness by stating that she wasn't talking to Hyperdeath ... and wind gets banned from Forum Matters (as was mood2, if I recall correctly - for defending wind). So... if you have a complaint about the A+ SJ Police and it turns out to be legit ... you'll probably be banned from the mods complaint office, which makes perfect sense, since that's where you're told to go with complaints about the mods.
Ripping off a scab and squeezing out fresh blood, I think we need another dramatic reading. Rocko, you game?

Zenspace
.
.
Posts: 923
Joined: Sun Dec 23, 2012 11:13 am

Re: Bunkspubble!

#2026

Post by Zenspace »

Dick Strawkins wrote:
ERV wrote:
decius wrote:As one of the most vilified women in the community, I urge you to drop a line at Neurologica Blog, Abbie.
Why? Steven Novella is a misogynist.

Arent we told that exclusion is part of the rampant misogyny in atheism? Excluding female skeptics from "Best atheists authors!" "Best atheist bloggers" "Best atheist podcasts" lists is sexist? Excluding females from speaker line-ups at conferences is sexist (except when Phil Plait does it)? Exclusion is one way the patriarchy keeps women down.

Thus Novella utilized the oppressive tool of exclusion when he covered the XMRV fiasco. His post went up long after my role in the XMRV-CFS take-down was complete-- so long after it was even after my role/blog was referenced in a peer-reviewed journal article, written by one of The Top Dogs in virology. And yet, despite the fact a female atheist/skeptic/blogger brought down that monster, Novella managed to exclude referencing me or my role, in any way/shape/form.

It cannot be due to ignorance or laziness (remember, those arent excuses for excluding good female writers/speakers!). It certainly is nothing personal with me, not that I slapped down his show co-host (its never personal, its always misogyny!).

We arent supposed to interact with misogynists, we are supposed to drum them out of the movement, rite?


Whatever, this experiment I wanted to work this morning didnt so Im in a bad mood.
Very bad show by Novella there.
For those who didn't follow the story, Abbie was involved in exposing a huge scientific fraud a couple of years ago, that involved a paper in Science from a group working on a (fake?) virus called XMRV. There was some great detective work involved and a fantastic gotcha moment when a picture from the paper was revealed to be faked. It was a brilliant piece of scientific skepticism and provokedthe journal Science into forcing a retraction of the paper.
In any other circumstances this would have been the story of the year in the skeptical community. But because it involved ERV it was purposefully ignored by skeptics rather than risk provoking the VIPs of skepticism.
Thanks for that background. Still being fairly new to all this I am not privy to a lot of the history, which is actually quite relevant. Looks like I've got some links to read later.

Gumby
Pit Art Master
Pit Art Master
Posts: 5543
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:40 am

Re: Bunkspubble!

#2027

Post by Gumby »

bhoytony wrote:
Lsuoma wrote:
Trophy wrote:
Lsuoma, can you also respond to this stupid comment?
Fuck you all up the council.
You know you have to explain this for the Septics.
Really, we "septics" are not all that fascinated with every little colloquialism that comes from across the pond, despite what some here apparently think.

http://mspedagogy.files.wordpress.com/2 ... .jpg?w=272

Remick
.
.
Posts: 312
Joined: Wed Nov 07, 2012 12:47 pm

Re: Bunkspubble!

#2028

Post by Remick »

Metalogic42 wrote:
Cipher wrote:Because she doesn't give one single fuck about the nightmare she caused for people here with her actions, because it's all about wind, and when it's not about wind, it should be.
The nightmare! It was so tragic, the way wind....did what, exactly? Well whatever it was, we can be assured that it was worse than being kidnapped and murdered. Now the A+ secret forum members will need years of therapy.
Ugh, I wish I could still post there, even if it would immediately result in me being banned again.

BTW, I emailed the forum admin address there to see if there is anyway to contest a permanent banning. Several times. I also emailed hyperdeath to ask the same question, no response in over 2 weeks. I suppose they want to force me to make a sock in order to PM someone so they can then ban me for socking.

JackSkeptic
.
.
Posts: 3222
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2013 5:23 pm
Location: UK

Re: Bunkspubble!

#2029

Post by JackSkeptic »

Remick wrote:
Metalogic42 wrote:
Cipher wrote:Because she doesn't give one single fuck about the nightmare she caused for people here with her actions, because it's all about wind, and when it's not about wind, it should be.
The nightmare! It was so tragic, the way wind....did what, exactly? Well whatever it was, we can be assured that it was worse than being kidnapped and murdered. Now the A+ secret forum members will need years of therapy.
Ugh, I wish I could still post there, even if it would immediately result in me being banned again.

BTW, I emailed the forum admin address there to see if there is anyway to contest a permanent banning. Several times. I also emailed hyperdeath to ask the same question, no response in over 2 weeks. I suppose they want to force me to make a sock in order to PM someone so they can then ban me for socking.
The easiest way to be banned is say something that is true or presents a decent argument not in their favour. Wind only survived as they wanted information from him. It would have been churlish to ban after that so they simply banned him from the very forums he successfully called them out on. Stalin would be proud of them. I would be banned in minutes even though my post would not be trollish. They do not want atheists like me. They want us marginalised, the very thing they pretend to fight against.

There's a word for people like that. Wankers.

Submariner
.
.
Posts: 1127
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2013 11:05 pm
Location: Florida, US of A
Contact:

Re: Bunkspubble!

#2030

Post by Submariner »

They don't want atheists like me either. Cis-male, white, middle-aged, hetero, middle class, former military, economically conservative, and socially centrist.
The only thing I have going for me is I'm kinda ugly.

free thoughtpolice
.
.
Posts: 11165
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2012 4:27 pm

Re: Bunkspubble!

#2031

Post by free thoughtpolice »

That's a hell of a scam Ophelia Benson has going on.
http://freethoughtblogs.com/butterfliesandwheels/.
Boo hoo some evil misogynists are ridiculing poor me on twitter.
Anthony k. showing why he was formerly known as Brownnoser, replies " Have no fear fair maiden we'll send you money to punish those rakes".
Ophie should teach a course to psychics and other grifters on how to seperate fools from their money.

JackSkeptic
.
.
Posts: 3222
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2013 5:23 pm
Location: UK

Re: Bunkspubble!

#2032

Post by JackSkeptic »

Submariner wrote:They don't want atheists like me either. Cis-male, white, middle-aged, hetero, middle class, former military, economically conservative, and socially centrist.
The only thing I have going for me is I'm kinda ugly.
Maybe we should make a 'safe space' for us uglys. We could do it under the 'Abelist' meme. Other people are more able to pull than we are.

Submariner
.
.
Posts: 1127
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2013 11:05 pm
Location: Florida, US of A
Contact:

Re: Bunkspubble!

#2033

Post by Submariner »

Jack wrote:
Submariner wrote:They don't want atheists like me either. Cis-male, white, middle-aged, hetero, middle class, former military, economically conservative, and socially centrist.
The only thing I have going for me is I'm kinda ugly.
Maybe we should make a 'safe space' for us uglys. We could do it under the 'Abelist' meme. Other people are more able to pull than we are.
"That's a good looking post you made there, Jack....ummm" :doh:

Remick
.
.
Posts: 312
Joined: Wed Nov 07, 2012 12:47 pm

Re: Bunkspubble!

#2034

Post by Remick »

Jack wrote:
Remick wrote:
Metalogic42 wrote:
Cipher wrote:Because she doesn't give one single fuck about the nightmare she caused for people here with her actions, because it's all about wind, and when it's not about wind, it should be.
The nightmare! It was so tragic, the way wind....did what, exactly? Well whatever it was, we can be assured that it was worse than being kidnapped and murdered. Now the A+ secret forum members will need years of therapy.
Ugh, I wish I could still post there, even if it would immediately result in me being banned again.

BTW, I emailed the forum admin address there to see if there is anyway to contest a permanent banning. Several times. I also emailed hyperdeath to ask the same question, no response in over 2 weeks. I suppose they want to force me to make a sock in order to PM someone so they can then ban me for socking.
The easiest way to be banned is say something that is true or presents a decent argument not in their favour. Wind only survived as they wanted information from him. It would have been churlish to ban after that so they simply banned him from the very forums he successfully called them out on. Stalin would be proud of them. I would be banned in minutes even though my post would not be trollish. They do not want atheists like me. They want us marginalised, the very thing they pretend to fight against.

There's a word for people like that. Wankers.
I am aware. I posted there for a while.

AndrewV69
.
.
Posts: 8146
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 7:52 pm

Re: Why people hate you

#2035

Post by AndrewV69 »

Jack wrote:I worked in a warehouse many years ago with about 30 people. I was one of the few whites and I got no racist abuse at all (except some joking around which I did not care about) But the Jamaicans and West Africans were extremely racially abusive to each other and it was also a skin tone thing. The management couldn't do anything as they were scared of being called racist.
I am not really surprised that you reported that those two groups did not get along. I can believe that sparks would fly.

In my experience, Jamaicans seem to have some sort of inherent assumption that they are superior to anyone else in the world (for some reason a lot of other West Indians appear to dislike them intensely). Africans on the other hand, appear to look down on West Indians as inferior due to not only being the descendants of slaves, but also mixed race.

Both of those groups however, appear to agree that Black Americans on the whole are worthless.

Did you have any Black Americans in the mix? Then chances are it would have been a three way mix of mutual lothing and contempt. Black Americans for some strange reason, tend to get riled up about being treated as though they are inferior.

I am generalizing of course, I am certain that individuals differ in degree and some are no doubt free from bias, but that is my overall impression of those groups.

Tigzy
Pit Art Master
Pit Art Master
Posts: 6789
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 6:53 am

Re: Bunkspubble!

#2036

Post by Tigzy »

free thoughtpolice wrote:That's a hell of a scam Ophelia Benson has going on.
http://freethoughtblogs.com/butterfliesandwheels/.
Boo hoo some evil misogynists are ridiculing poor me on twitter.
Anthony k. showing why he was formerly known as Brownnoser, replies " Have no fear fair maiden we'll send you money to punish those rakes".
Ophie should teach a course to psychics and other grifters on how to seperate fools from their money.
At this rate, those poor old sods are likely to end up bankrupt, what with the way Benson goes on and on about her online woes.

free thoughtpolice
.
.
Posts: 11165
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2012 4:27 pm

Re: Bunkspubble!

#2037

Post by free thoughtpolice »

Also from the "brave Hero and the impersonation.." thread a half-assed threat.


Lofty

February 14, 2013 at 5:58 pm (UTC -8)

These stink bugs need nuking. Small donation coming your way for the pest controllers.

Ophie is a terrorist raising money for a nuclear weapon?

bhoytony
.
.
Posts: 3017
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 9:56 am

Re: Bunkspubble!

#2038

Post by bhoytony »

Gumby wrote:
bhoytony wrote:
Lsuoma wrote: Fuck you all up the council.
You know you have to explain this for the Septics.
Really, we "septics" are not all that fascinated with every little colloquialism that comes from across the pond, despite what some here apparently think.
I'll say it yet again. There are a lot of people on here who take me, and particularly themselves, very, very seriously. Most of them seem to be septics.

Gumby
Pit Art Master
Pit Art Master
Posts: 5543
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:40 am

Re: Bunkspubble!

#2039

Post by Gumby »

bhoytony wrote:
Gumby wrote:
bhoytony wrote:
Lsuoma wrote: Fuck you all up the council.
You know you have to explain this for the Septics.
Really, we "septics" are not all that fascinated with every little colloquialism that comes from across the pond, despite what some here apparently think.
I'll say it yet again. There are a lot of people on here who take me, and particularly themselves, very, very seriously. Most of them seem to be septics.
:lol:

OK, bud, whatever you say.

bhoytony
.
.
Posts: 3017
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 9:56 am

Re: Bunkspubble!

#2040

Post by bhoytony »

Gumby wrote:
:lol:

OK, bud, whatever you say.
Oh, a smiley. Sorry, you obviously don't take yourself seriously then.

Locked