Anne Robinson has no soul, and is history, thank fuck!

[JackSkeptic]

Amusement to be had at A+ where Hyperdeath the site admin dared to go against the party line by claiming that "reverse racism" can happen. This has NOT gone down well with the faithful, including two of the mods.

Expect a grovelling retraction soon.

Yeah - it's pretty spectacular - I'm hoping Ceepolk tries to temp-ban Hyperdeath. The soft underbelly of intellectually bankrupt SJW thinking on racism is on full display in that thread.

That thread is so full of LOLwankery!

http://slymepit.com/staticimgs/isms.jpg

It's funny that piegasm's avatar is one of the most racist and misogynistic races in the Star Trek Universe.

It was that post which got be thinking about Hitler's bunker. Their world is sinking, deckchairs are arranged. Business as usual.

[Lsuoma]

http://slymepit.com/staticimgs/trilo.jpg

[katamari Damassi]

http://img5.imageshack.us/img5/7431/9ce ... ae63d8.png

We have a winner!

[welch]

That should have been "lend" not "led". I blame vodka shots (it's Wednesday and I'm happy - fuck you all ;))

This is mainly annecdotical evidence, but I think that there are fields that tend to be more interesting to women and others are more interesting to men.

I work in software development, and in my experience, women don't tend to be interested in being programmers. I have never seen the sexism or bad attitudes some people claim are common in IT (the A+ guys would be killing me right now for saying that), and in fact 2 of the 4 or 5 best programmers I know are women. One of them was even my boss at a certain moment. From my position, I don't see anything that's keeping them from being a programmer except their own wish.

your experience must not involve getting out much. While not a "perfect" 50-50 split, the idea that women don't tend to be interested in being programmers is not only silly stupid, but just wrong. If anything, the number of women I see at programming conferences each year is rising, in terms of proportion. Are their fields of programming that have more women than others, of course. But that is a *far* cry from "Women don't tend to be interested in being programmers". Of course, since you're throwing the entirety of programming into one bag, which is remarkably dumb, it's kind of hard to actually know what the fuck you're really talking about.

What kind of programming do you do? What industries have you worked in? On and on.

Conversely, I've seen a lot of people in requirements analysis and testing. My hyphotesis is that these fields allow them to work more with people and less with machines, and women, in my experience, tend to be more interested in people than machines. That's not saying that women cannot work with machines, or that men can't work with people, just that in average they tend to lean towards one side or the other.

A very useful response to the kind of people you mention is to ask them about the fields where women are over represented, and ask them if that worries them. If they were equal opportunity worriers, I'd actually be able to take them seriously.

right now I'm undecided. Do I show your post to the women who will, using large amounts of valid statistics and research, rationally destroy your "hypothesis" or do I feed it to the women who will run you through a wood chipper and feed you to their dogs.

decisions, decisions.

[welch]

That should have been "lend" not "led". I blame vodka shots (it's Wednesday and I'm happy - fuck you all ;))

This is mainly annecdotical evidence, but I think that there are fields that tend to be more interesting to women and others are more interesting to men.

I work in software development, and in my experience, women don't tend to be interested in being programmers. I have never seen the sexism or bad attitudes some people claim are common in IT (the A+ guys would be killing me right now for saying that), and in fact 2 of the 4 or 5 best programmers I know are women. One of them was even my boss at a certain moment. From my position, I don't see anything that's keeping them from being a programmer except their own wish.

your experience must not involve getting out much. While not a "perfect" 50-50 split, the idea that women don't tend to be interested in being programmers is not only silly stupid, but just wrong. If anything, the number of women I see at programming conferences each year is rising, in terms of proportion. Are their fields of programming that have more women than others, of course. But that is a *far* cry from "Women don't tend to be interested in being programmers". Of course, since you're throwing the entirety of programming into one bag, which is remarkably dumb, it's kind of hard to actually know what the fuck you're really talking about.

What kind of programming do you do? What industries have you worked in? On and on.

Conversely, I've seen a lot of people in requirements analysis and testing. My hyphotesis is that these fields allow them to work more with people and less with machines, and women, in my experience, tend to be more interested in people than machines. That's not saying that women cannot work with machines, or that men can't work with people, just that in average they tend to lean towards one side or the other.

A very useful response to the kind of people you mention is to ask them about the fields where women are over represented, and ask them if that worries them. If they were equal opportunity worriers, I'd actually be able to take them seriously.

right now I'm undecided. Do I show your post to the women who will, using large amounts of valid statistics and research, rationally destroy your "hypothesis" or do I feed it to the women who will run you through a wood chipper and feed you to their dogs.

decisions, decisions.

[Tigzy]

Grrr. In my reading as of late, I'm finding more and more articles/posts on people (feminists and their "white knights") being all bent out of shape over the lack of the female voice within different fields/topics. For whatever reason, many people tend to attribute this to sexism and the patriarchy. Even more discouraging is that these people don't even bother to think of reasons *other* than sexism or patriarchy. I'd love to see other feedback on this. I'm not saying "it's the nature of the female" but I do think there are some inherent traits that led themselves towards women not being so vocal in various fields/topics. Thoughts?

Somewhat relevant - PZ links to a blogpost reporting a ***sexist*** comment on an academic list-serv. Those darn misogynists. He doesn't name the offender. So who is this sexist troll who said female grad students (or possibly applicants) need to step it up if they want to succeed in highly-competitive research fields?

https://twitter.com/cbjones1943

Looks to me like feminists dislike CB Jones for being an old-fashioned gender-blind realist who doesn't think women or anyone else should be exempted from the obligation to compete.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... -question/
http://www.freezepage.com/1361391315JPLAVQNXPH

It wasn't Peezee, it was Chris Clarke. Don't feel bad about the error, though - it seems that discerning Peez's words from his clone blogger has proven awkward for many.

[Altair]

your experience must not involve getting out much. While not a "perfect" 50-50 split, the idea that women don't tend to be interested in being programmers is not only silly stupid, but just wrong. If anything, the number of women I see at programming conferences each year is rising, in terms of proportion. Are their fields of programming that have more women than others, of course. But that is a *far* cry from "Women don't tend to be interested in being programmers". Of course, since you're throwing the entirety of programming into one bag, which is remarkably dumb, it's kind of hard to actually know what the fuck you're really talking about.

What kind of programming do you do? What industries have you worked in? On and on.

Enterprise web applications, mainly for health and insurance companies, Portals for banks and financial companies, mobile applications for the 3 fields.
At the risk of sounding like an SJW, the fact that your experience has been different doesn't say anything about mine. That's what I've seen in the companies I've worked for/with, nothing else.

right now I'm undecided. Do I show your post to the women who will, using large amounts of valid statistics and research, rationally destroy your "hypothesis" or do I feed it to the women who will run you through a wood chipper and feed you to their dogs.
decisions, decisions.

Since it is a hyphotesis, "destroying" it with research and statistics should be the way to go, but if you prefer to show it to these women who own wood chippers and dogs, no skin off my back.

[welch]

Grrr. In my reading as of late, I'm finding more and more articles/posts on people (feminists and their "white knights") being all bent out of shape over the lack of the female voice within different fields/topics. For whatever reason, many people tend to attribute this to sexism and the patriarchy. Even more discouraging is that these people don't even bother to think of reasons *other* than sexism or patriarchy. I'd love to see other feedback on this. I'm not saying "it's the nature of the female" but I do think there are some inherent traits that led themselves towards women not being so vocal in various fields/topics. Thoughts?

Possibly related, and as it ties in with my observations on IQ and other things it is simply because :

The average woman could not care less about some things. End of story. Period. The average woman does not give a flying fuck at a rolling donut hole about the things some of the lunatics are always going on about.

What "things"? Fuck, that set, as you describe it, includes the entire fucking UNIVERSE. I'm absolutely, 100% sure that if you have a set of things that large, there will be a LOT of things the average woman is not interested in. I'm unsure how that statement could be more vague.

The Judgy Bitch agrees:
Her IQ is higher than Einstein’s. What does she care about? Her nails, fake tanning, and her hair. Lady genius in action!
http://judgybitch.com/2013/02/18/her-iq ... in-action/

HER AMBITION IN LIFE IS TO BE A SHOWGIRL!

*shrug*

Hear that Abbie? You can best contribute to society by having male babies. A blogger, a *woman* blogger on the internet said so, and as we all know, BLOGGERS KNOW FUCKING EVERYTHING.

Remember I noted that women tend to be conservative as a whole? Apparently she agrees also:

http://judgybitch.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/chart.jpg


YMMV

How the fuck does a graph about IQ show how women are more conservative than men? Wait, how the fuck did this silly bint become a fucking authority on this shit? Well, let's just take a look at their backgrounds:

Judgy Bitch has an undergraduate degree in Film Theory (useful!), a Master’s degree in Business Administration and she has recently been admitted to a PhD program in Entrepreneurship and Innovation, but she is not sure she wants to go just yet. She is a full time mother to her three children, PinkyPinkyPie, LittleDude and MissBossyPants and a full time wife to Mr. JudgyBitch. Her children have never seen the inside of a daycare center and her husband has never made his own sandwich, and that makes her very happy. She lives in a small town, has one car, doesn’t own a big screen TV and has never been to an all inclusive resort on vacation. She doesn’t buy scented candles, throw cushions or frozen pizza.

Oh, she also doesn’t give a fuck what you think about her.

Princess Pixie Pointless has dropped out of several universities, tech schools and bars. She lives in an expensive city filled with assholes and art. Princess Pointless has worked at every under paid job imaginable, from fish-gutter, to slide projector,to party girl, video maker to mother. She is crap at housework but can set your house on fire in a blink.
Princess Pixie Pointless loves art and burgers. She has opinions but generally keeps them to herself.

A businesswoman and a professional dropout. Fuck all those dipshits doing all that high-faluting research, WE GOT US A FILM SCHOOL GRADUATE TELLING US HOW SHIT REALLY WORKS.

Fuck me, you ARE stoned when you post.

[Apples]

Grrr. In my reading as of late, I'm finding more and more articles/posts on people (feminists and their "white knights") being all bent out of shape over the lack of the female voice within different fields/topics. For whatever reason, many people tend to attribute this to sexism and the patriarchy. Even more discouraging is that these people don't even bother to think of reasons *other* than sexism or patriarchy. I'd love to see other feedback on this. I'm not saying "it's the nature of the female" but I do think there are some inherent traits that led themselves towards women not being so vocal in various fields/topics. Thoughts?

Somewhat relevant - PZ links to a blogpost reporting a ***sexist*** comment on an academic list-serv. Those darn misogynists. He doesn't name the offender. So who is this sexist troll who said female grad students (or possibly applicants) need to step it up if they want to succeed in highly-competitive research fields?

https://twitter.com/cbjones1943

Looks to me like feminists dislike CB Jones for being an old-fashioned gender-blind realist who doesn't think women or anyone else should be exempted from the obligation to compete.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... -question/
http://www.freezepage.com/1361391315JPLAVQNXPH

It wasn't Peezee, it was Chris Clarke. Don't feel bad about the error, though - it seems that discerning Peez's words from his clone blogger has proven awkward for many.

Oops - good catch.

[DeepInsideYourMind]

Grrr. In my reading as of late, I'm finding more and more articles/posts on people (feminists and their "white knights") being all bent out of shape over the lack of the female voice within different fields/topics. For whatever reason, many people tend to attribute this to sexism and the patriarchy. Even more discouraging is that these people don't even bother to think of reasons *other* than sexism or patriarchy. I'd love to see other feedback on this. I'm not saying "it's the nature of the female" but I do think there are some inherent traits that led themselves towards women not being so vocal in various fields/topics. Thoughts?

Observing from the perspective of a person raised up in the 90's and 00's in a first world nation, I suspect that outside of the nature/nurture debate many fail to recognize a key component of human behavior (as I see it anyways), and that is something called the Path of Least Resistance.

There's for the most part in first world societies little preventing women in modern times from joining STEM fields or traditionally "manly" pursuits such as military and police in terms of legal prohibitions. Additionally the social stigmas of men and women who take on careers in fields traditionally aligned opposite their gender are fading as time passes. But now that the legal walls have come down we see that societal changes on a wide scale, particularly in a nation like the US with a very large population and alot of diversity, happen on the scale of decades and generations, not in short time periods.

Women are increasing their presence in STEM and in heavy physical careers like police work, but to expect a ratio of 50-50 right now is unrealistic. All we can realistically do is remove legal barriers, educate all children in an egalitarian style now and going forward, and accept the fact that change happens slowly, whereas I think everyone expects it overnight. (I say a similar thing about long term change when it comes to people talking about the rise of atheism/agnosticism in the US. We will win against the theocrats and fascist end times loons, but we're looking at change on the scale of decades)

But as far as the SJWs and their so-called advocating on behalf of women: fuck off, I don't need your help. I can achieve what I want to without your trying to paint me as some helpless little creature who needs your benevolent sexism and your divisive rhetoric that would try to use my ethnicity or gender to prop yourselves up as some hero on the internet.

Absolutely.

In the "west" feminism had its place, and it largely achieved its objectives. On the whole, there are few barriers left to women in most fields (individual exceptions apply, but these are few and should be individually corrected)

We have largely achieved equality of opportunity.

But, even with full equality of opportunity, it will take a number of generations before things truly even out. Girls being born now will experience equality throughout every stage of their lives, so will be largely able to freely choose their path. But even then, their parents or their work colleagues may be a generation or two behind on their thinking or upbringing. Most of my generation (mid 40s) believe in equality of opportunity, but some lingerers still remain, and older generations harbour more and more prejudice - usually merely through conditioning over their lifetimes than actually believing women are anything less.

And with each generation that prejudice becomes less and less.

There is only so much you can do to "correct" people's thinking. It is a slow and tedious process, and you will never get everyone. Witness religion, and how pervasive this dogma is, despite overwhelming easily understood and presented evidence.

The most effective evolutionary tactic is to let those who still believe women are less ... die out ... quite literally.

Till then, challenge oppression or unequal treatment where it is evident, but accept that your best efforts cannot possibly hope to compete with the tactic of "wait for the bigots to eliminate themselves from the psychological gene pool"

[welch]

your experience must not involve getting out much. While not a "perfect" 50-50 split, the idea that women don't tend to be interested in being programmers is not only silly stupid, but just wrong. If anything, the number of women I see at programming conferences each year is rising, in terms of proportion. Are their fields of programming that have more women than others, of course. But that is a *far* cry from "Women don't tend to be interested in being programmers". Of course, since you're throwing the entirety of programming into one bag, which is remarkably dumb, it's kind of hard to actually know what the fuck you're really talking about.

What kind of programming do you do? What industries have you worked in? On and on.

Enterprise web applications, mainly for health and insurance companies, Portals for banks and financial companies, mobile applications for the 3 fields.
At the risk of sounding like an SJW, the fact that your experience has been different doesn't say anything about mine. That's what I've seen in the companies I've worked for/with, nothing else.

Oh, if only you'd qualified your statement that way. "I work in a specific area, namely web portals for enterprise IT applications from large companies"

that MIGHT have made more sense. You're still wrong, but at least you're not acting as though you are speaking for all programming. Also, when I worked for a company that was a combined Life Insurance/Bank/Financial Services company, our programming staff was about 40% female.

right now I'm undecided. Do I show your post to the women who will, using large amounts of valid statistics and research, rationally destroy your "hypothesis" or do I feed it to the women who will run you through a wood chipper and feed you to their dogs.
decisions, decisions.

Since it is a hyphotesis, "destroying" it with research and statistics should be the way to go, but if you prefer to show it to these women who own wood chippers and dogs, no skin off my back.

or maybe you could stop confusing "me" with "THE ENTIRE PLANET". That's another option.

[nippletwister]

No I didn't just stick my dick in the toaster. I'm toaster-gendered. Please check the glyph chart, and your privilege.

Despite our disagreements, I love you now. Though I will look at my toast with suspicion for a while.....

[DeepInsideYourMind]

your experience must not involve getting out much. While not a "perfect" 50-50 split, the idea that women don't tend to be interested in being programmers is not only silly stupid, but just wrong. If anything, the number of women I see at programming conferences each year is rising, in terms of proportion. Are their fields of programming that have more women than others, of course. But that is a *far* cry from "Women don't tend to be interested in being programmers". Of course, since you're throwing the entirety of programming into one bag, which is remarkably dumb, it's kind of hard to actually know what the fuck you're really talking about.

What kind of programming do you do? What industries have you worked in? On and on.

Enterprise web applications, mainly for health and insurance companies, Portals for banks and financial companies, mobile applications for the 3 fields.
At the risk of sounding like an SJW, the fact that your experience has been different doesn't say anything about mine. That's what I've seen in the companies I've worked for/with, nothing else.

right now I'm undecided. Do I show your post to the women who will, using large amounts of valid statistics and research, rationally destroy your "hypothesis" or do I feed it to the women who will run you through a wood chipper and feed you to their dogs.
decisions, decisions.

Since it is a hyphotesis, "destroying" it with research and statistics should be the way to go, but if you prefer to show it to these women who own wood chippers and dogs, no skin off my back.

From personal experience in the same industries, I totally agree with Altair ...

I've known some fantastic women developers ... just not very many. And oddly, they have been largely from a non-programming background, for example mathematicians who happen to program for a living as quants.

Development is largely an unglamorous, boring , and monotonous job .. I know very few developers in the profession by choice (and most who are came via programming games in their youth). Maybe women just don't enjoy it. I have never seen a single employer (out of literally hundreds I have consulted for) who didn't give women exactly the same opportunity. School career advice may be a different issue ... but as I got f**k all of any use, I dont doubt women get f**k all useful advice either.

[DeepInsideYourMind]

finger.png

(58.86 KiB) Downloaded 270 times

Corrected to show where I stand

[Altair]

Oh, if only you'd qualified your statement that way. "I work in a specific area, namely web portals for enterprise IT applications from large companies"

that MIGHT have made more sense. You're still wrong, but at least you're not acting as though you are speaking for all programming. Also, when I worked for a company that was a combined Life Insurance/Bank/Financial Services company, our programming staff was about 40% female.

In this part I cannot be wrong, since I'm merely relating what my experience has been. I am not yet extrapolating anything to the larger population, so again, there is no way this part of my post was wrong. If it doesn't jive with your experience, cool, but that's something else.

or maybe you could stop confusing "me" with "THE ENTIRE PLANET". That's another option.

I thought that calling it a "hypothesis" would imply that I was not asserting a fact, if there's contrary evidence and statistics, again, cool. If I had said "I'm totally sure that women don't like programming", you might have a point here.

[Git]

It reminds me of this:

http://pokemon.neoseeker.com/w/i/pokemon/f/f1/Unown.png

That looks like Darth Vader's Tie Fighter on the top right...

[nippletwister]

Look at this image that Will included in his most recent response to Harriet Hall. Just look at it for awhile:

http://skepchick.org/wp-content/uploads/url-3.jpeg

Dunno about you, but I'm thinking crop circles.

Do you think they are trying to communicate with us?

This means something!


...it means that SJW's are as self-obsessed as anyone else and more than most.

[Tigzy]

Look at this image that Will included in his most recent response to Harriet Hall. Just look at it for awhile:

http://skepchick.org/wp-content/uploads/url-3.jpeg

Dunno about you, but I'm thinking crop circles.

Do you think they are trying to communicate with us?

This means something!


...it means that SJW's are as self-obsessed as anyone else and more than most.

If it comes to circular, shallow imbecilities inscribed by planks, then I'd say the SJW comparison was apt.

[JAB]

Grrr. In my reading as of late, I'm finding more and more articles/posts on people (feminists and their "white knights") being all bent out of shape over the lack of the female voice within different fields/topics. For whatever reason, many people tend to attribute this to sexism and the patriarchy. Even more discouraging is that these people don't even bother to think of reasons *other* than sexism or patriarchy. I'd love to see other feedback on this. I'm not saying "it's the nature of the female" but I do think there are some inherent traits that led themselves towards women not being so vocal in various fields/topics. Thoughts?

Somewhat relevant - PZ links to a blogpost reporting a ***sexist*** comment on an academic list-serv. Those darn misogynists. He doesn't name the offender. So who is this sexist troll who said female grad students (or possibly applicants) need to step it up if they want to succeed in highly-competitive research fields?

https://twitter.com/cbjones1943

Looks to me like feminists dislike CB Jones for being an old-fashioned gender-blind realist who doesn't think women or anyone else should be exempted from the obligation to compete.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... -question/
http://www.freezepage.com/1361391315JPLAVQNXPH

It wasn't Peezee, it was Chris Clarke. Don't feel bad about the error, though - it seems that discerning Peez's words from his clone blogger has proven awkward for many.

What's Clarke doing writing blog posts? He's supposed to be busy finishing off ghost writing PZ's book!

[welch]

your experience must not involve getting out much. While not a "perfect" 50-50 split, the idea that women don't tend to be interested in being programmers is not only silly stupid, but just wrong. If anything, the number of women I see at programming conferences each year is rising, in terms of proportion. Are their fields of programming that have more women than others, of course. But that is a *far* cry from "Women don't tend to be interested in being programmers". Of course, since you're throwing the entirety of programming into one bag, which is remarkably dumb, it's kind of hard to actually know what the fuck you're really talking about.

What kind of programming do you do? What industries have you worked in? On and on.

Enterprise web applications, mainly for health and insurance companies, Portals for banks and financial companies, mobile applications for the 3 fields.
At the risk of sounding like an SJW, the fact that your experience has been different doesn't say anything about mine. That's what I've seen in the companies I've worked for/with, nothing else.

right now I'm undecided. Do I show your post to the women who will, using large amounts of valid statistics and research, rationally destroy your "hypothesis" or do I feed it to the women who will run you through a wood chipper and feed you to their dogs.
decisions, decisions.

Since it is a hyphotesis, "destroying" it with research and statistics should be the way to go, but if you prefer to show it to these women who own wood chippers and dogs, no skin off my back.

From personal experience in the same industries, I totally agree with Altair ...

I've known some fantastic women developers ... just not very many. And oddly, they have been largely from a non-programming background, for example mathematicians who happen to program for a living as quants.

Development is largely an unglamorous, boring , and monotonous job .. I know very few developers in the profession by choice (and most who are came via programming games in their youth). Maybe women just don't enjoy it. I have never seen a single employer (out of literally hundreds I have consulted for) who didn't give women exactly the same opportunity. School career advice may be a different issue ... but as I got f**k all of any use, I dont doubt women get f**k all useful advice either.

Really. Because my experience, being statistically invalid as it is, disagrees with that. Almost every dev I know got into it because they wanted to be a programmer. Male and female alike. The reasons are quite varied, but the numbers of "I just stumbled into it' are far higher, in my experience for the sysadmin field than the programming field.

In fact, under the age of 35 or so, one of the things they seem love about it, regardless of gender, is the ability to create without the limitations you see in other fields. Are the numbers identical to population numbers? no, but few industries are. However, over the decades I've been in this field, I've seen the numbers of women who are devs increase *radically*, far more than sysadmins. Which is fine, I wouldn't recommend a dog with rabies be a sysadmin, even if they already have the proper temperament.

My current place of employment doesn't have any women programmers, but that's because they're too smart to work for what we'd be able to pay them.

[Altair]

Ophelia is still angry at Harriet Hall's post and is now taking offense at the people who say that it has to do with age. She also complains at being called a prune.

http://www.freezepage.com/1361396413AXRMRZBNHP

My favorite part is at the end:

No. It isn’t. The theme is saying breaking down gender barriers is great, but also, women shouldn’t have to break down barriers in the first place, so just telling women to push harder while not “complaining” i.e. trying to say what the barriers are and why it shouldn’t be up to individuals to break them down, is not good enough.

This plays nicely with their idea that taking any precautions to avoid being assaulted/raped/hurt means blaming the victim.
They want to live in a perfect world, one where bad things don't happen or if they happen you just have to wish real hard to fix them.

There shouldn't be barriers for women, and there shouldn't be barriers for men. People shouldn't get raped or assaulted, and people should be able to walk around at night without fear.

But the thing is we don't live in a perfect world. THERE ARE barriers (for both genders), and there is danger, for both genders, and there are things we can do to minimize the risk we face, and we can choose to "complain" or we can choose to do something. Both are valid in my opinion, since not everyone has the personality type to be an activist, but saying "there shouldn't be barriers, there shouldn't be barriers" while clicking your heels will accomplish nothing.

It's funny that these people consider themselves activists and warriors, since they don't actually want to do anything. The world is not perfect, but accepting that bad things exist and bad things happen is the first step to correct them.

[Michael J]

Hardly a slap-down. Novellas post is nothing but limp-wristed "oh, this must be a big mis-understanding" crap. It's quite obviously not.

It is all relative. Although weak by most internet standards for Novella this is screaming at the skepchicks to STFU

[Git]

Renee said:

I think he's not showing because he hasn't done his first official post yet.

He's done two posts. Maybe you need to refresh your browser / delete your cache, or something like that? I'm a techy know-nothin'; so don't hold it against me.

Probably. I'm having speed issues at the moment so I'll try later.

http://www.bridgat.com/files/AMPHETAMINES_Speed_3.jpg

Top tip: if you stop taking it, you might get some sleep.

[DeepInsideYourMind]

Really. Because my experience, being statistically invalid as it is, disagrees with that. Almost every dev I know got into it because they wanted to be a programmer. Male and female alike. The reasons are quite varied, but the numbers of "I just stumbled into it' are far higher, in my experience for the sysadmin field than the programming field.

In fact, under the age of 35 or so, one of the things they seem love about it, regardless of gender, is the ability to create without the limitations you see in other fields. Are the numbers identical to population numbers? no, but few industries are. However, over the decades I've been in this field, I've seen the numbers of women who are devs increase *radically*, far more than sysadmins. Which is fine, I wouldn't recommend a dog with rabies be a sysadmin, even if they already have the proper temperament.

My current place of employment doesn't have any women programmers, but that's because they're too smart to work for what we'd be able to pay them.

Yep, really. I find most are in it by accident, or because it was the easiest course in uni, or because it pays better than almost any other profession for the actual effort involved, or because you can be a developer without wasting 4 years in uni getting a degree, because it is one of the few really talent based professions rather than one requiring academic paper.

I know a lot who love it now, but not who made a conscious choice to be in it.

From a great blog "About me" I once read:

I'm living the dream, writing enterprise applications in the insurance sector, using Java and Oracle technologies.

Just like I dreamed about when I was a kid{/quote]

[nippletwister]

Grrr. In my reading as of late, I'm finding more and more articles/posts on people (feminists and their "white knights") being all bent out of shape over the lack of the female voice within different fields/topics. For whatever reason, many people tend to attribute this to sexism and the patriarchy. Even more discouraging is that these people don't even bother to think of reasons *other* than sexism or patriarchy. I'd love to see other feedback on this. I'm not saying "it's the nature of the female" but I do think there are some inherent traits that led themselves towards women not being so vocal in various fields/topics. Thoughts?

Here's on thing I don't understand....even if in a specific case, the imbalance is purely, 100% because of socialized roles and institutional discrimination, and could be changed.....why do none of them ever look at progress already made and acknowledge that sometimes change takes time? It's always this obviously fake sense of surprise that we're still "so far away from equality"....as if we're just supposed to fire all the old white guys, and force unqualified women into various fields against their will.

I think it was Edward Gemmer who brought up the fact that women only make up a minority of congresspeople and that we've never had a woman president. But these facts tell us nothing, really. How reasonable is it to expect a 50/50 ratio of congresspeople when women just don't run as much, and have only had a few decades to catch up? It takes years, sometimes decades for a single person to become an electable figure. What about conservative christian populations? They are going to be even slower to change. There simply hasn't been enough time for full equality to have penetrated all levels of society and all jobs, and enough women have to want the changes to happen. If no women get involved, no amount of affirmative action will help. Instead of taking this simple fact on board and encouraging education (which almost always helps, even if slowly) and equality of opportunity, it seems that most of the SJW's and many other people automatically assume unbelievable amounts of hidden institutional bigotry- even short of any evidence, even when the evidence is against the idea. They are so wrapped up in the dogma, they simply cannot believe that inequality could ever occur without injustice and bigotry necessarily being involved.

[Michael J]

Look at this image that Will included in his most recent response to Harriet Hall. Just look at it for awhile:

http://skepchick.org/wp-content/uploads/url-3.jpeg

Dunno about you, but I'm thinking crop circles.

Surely we can add a few to this.

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

If my cock rotates does that mean I'm a 'rotated variant'? These are important issues and I need to know.

Clockwise or anti-clockwise?

[Lapsang Souchong]

I don't mind her voice, it's her repugnant dismissive attitude that puts me off. I really stopped listening 6 months ago when I found out about all the crazy going on, and it not being addressed on the show (lie of omission?). It's like ignoring that your priests are molesting kids because they don't do it "in" the church. (Yes, yes an exageration, but hopefully people get the point) I mean how can you have one of your co-hosts causing all sorts of crazy drama, and not address it?

People a bunch of pages back were commenting on AronRa, about how he was 'staying out of it', and good for him. I disagree, avoiding the conversation does nothing to help solve the problem. Hopefully AronRa and Steve Novella get more involved. The only way to get past all this crap is to have the conversations, and not have high minded people stay out of it, because well it so petty.

It's not that I find her voice intrinsically annoying, it's rather that every time I'm subjected to it, I'm reminded of all the poison and vitriol that's come from it, her finger tips and her quarter.

I suspect that one of the reasons some don't (or are reluctant to) enter into the fray is because of the promiscuity with which these assholes fling around such accusations as misogynist and rape enabler, etc., against anyone who dares criticize them. They're as bad as the ADL and their constant accusations of "antisemitism" when anyone dares criticize Israel.

I sometimes think that the whole agenda of the Woman-Child and her Skepchick crew, and the rest of their ilk, is to have everyone else kiss their asses. The whole conference policy thing was nothing more than a power play along with the grandstanding of the "Speaking Out" series (at the Skepchick site), eliciting essays to the website from various prominent male secularists to say, "hating women isn't very nice". That came in the aftermath of Amy's butthurt after TAM 2012.

[Cunning Punt]

Trigger warning - do not read this if you have coffee in close proximity to your keyboard.

You know how recently, SGBM has been going on about people 'bullying' him. Well, this post here...I mean, I have to wonder - is SGBM actually Simpleflower?
http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... ent-565997

Explain what was actually wrong with what I said. It is a fact that Joe harassed me for hours last night. It is a fact that he said all those horrible things. It is a fact that you are now contributing to the bullying.

Why am I not supposed to say these things?

Why am I not supposed to point out when I am being treated unfairly?

(even now I’m shaking as you are attempting to accuse me of bullying)

You are contributing to the bullying me!

But why don’t you stop and think? Think how it makes me feel when you say these things about me, or when Joe says all those horrible things about me?

I was shaking last night, but I wasn’t just shaking. I was crying and I kept feeling like I was going to throw up. I couldn’t get to sleep because I knew that he would keep on bullying me while I was sleeping.

And yes, your aggression against me now is making me shake. That’s about the least of my concerns right now, but it is upsetting. Why don’t you stop to think about my feelings before you lay into me?

:lol: :lol: :lol: 'I couldn’t get to sleep because I knew that he would keep on bullying me while I was sleeping.' Please bear in mind that this bullying consists of other Pharyngulites saying things he doesn't like. Fuckin hilarious. SG, if you're reading - you have my sympathies. Not because of the so-called bullying, but because you're such a pathetic dingbat that you could give an amoeba delusions of grandeur.

I couldn't run away because I knew that even thousands of miles away, he would keep hitting me.

Damn you Simpleflower/SGBM !! How can rocko2466 keep up with the dramatic readings?

[Gumby]

OH, wait - hang on. What's this?

This account, @Tigzy_J, was suspended for following other users too aggressively.

Following is a way to receive information in your timeline, from a person, company, or organization. However, a disproportionately large number of the users you followed have blocked your account or reported your account as spam. For more information about following best practices, please review the Following limits and best practices.

Well, the only person I followed who could conceivably not want to be followed by me is Natalie Reed. So I think I'd best go check to see if I've been added to the block bot list...

I'm on Oolon's sad little block bot list but my account is still active. Maybe I have enough tweets and followers for twitter's algorithms to give me the benefit of the doubt.

[welch]

Hardly a slap-down. Novellas post is nothing but limp-wristed "oh, this must be a big mis-understanding" crap. It's quite obviously not.

It is all relative. Although weak by most internet standards for Novella this is screaming at the skepchicks to STFU

That's how I saw it. Novella is not much of a shouter, so for him, that's quite strident.

[Dick Strawkins]

[Gumby]

And here's the likely evidence that the Block Bot results in user suspensions:

The Block Bot The Block Bot ‏@The_Block_Bot

I just added https://twitter.com/tigzy_j to my blocklist #FTBullies

https://twitter.com/The_Block_Bot/statu ... 5039940608

Again, I made no tweets that were directed at any baboons - no mention of any bab had the @ prefix.

Seems my little experiment worked out then. :whistle:

I've seen it said here that Twitter doesn't care, but really, this is wrong. People who don't "@" any FTBers or A+ers but still get suspended because of this inanity should complain to twitter, if they care.

[Gumby]

Here's a version of ool0n's blocklist without the rest of the bullshit on his page.
No registering necessary. http://x2t.com/blocklist

There's nearly two hundred twitter accounts there!
Are those two nitwits still trying to convince people that their objective is to block only those accounts persistantly making unwanted tweets at FTBers?
Bollocks.

Yep, this is harassment and censorship, no doubt.

[Tigzy]

Damn you Simpleflower/SGBM !! How can rocko2466 keep up with the dramatic readings?

Fuck yes! Rocko, this needs a reading. Linky again: http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... ent-565997

[Michael J]

...My hyphotesis is that these fields allow them to work more with people and less with machines, and women, in my experience, tend to be more interested in people than machines. That's not saying that women cannot work with machines, or that men can't work with people, just that in average they tend to lean towards one side or the other...

I teach a tiny bit of programming to my students and I find that women "get it" just as easily as men do. That's got me thinking about my work where even within the same job title there are some components (technical skills) that are "optional" (well, sometimes), such as programming. You can choose to program your own solutions, to get someone else to do it for you, or to find an off-the-shelf solution that works. Thinking about it, I don't think I can point to any particular trend I have noticed based on gender. One issue with that though is that there is a gender imbalance in my field (guessing 20-30% female) so that makes it harder to spot the differences in the behaviours of each gender.

Our Business Analysts were almost always female (and most of the males were gay strangely enough). I think that it is more about what happens back in school. Girls who want to do computing/engineering aren't seen as cool by the other girls.

[Gumby]

It is illuminating that Queen Bee has tweeted that she won't be going back to Hall's thread because of the "bullies". Can anyone tell me a comment on there that comes anywhere near to matching the vitriol and abuse you find at Pharyngula?

It was a pre-emptive flounce because she knew if she stuck around she'd get her glob ass handed to her. She knew what she wrote was petty, vindictive and childish.

[Tigzy]

And here's the likely evidence that the Block Bot results in user suspensions:

The Block Bot The Block Bot ‏@The_Block_Bot

I just added https://twitter.com/tigzy_j to my blocklist #FTBullies

https://twitter.com/The_Block_Bot/statu ... 5039940608

Again, I made no tweets that were directed at any baboons - no mention of any bab had the @ prefix.

Seems my little experiment worked out then. :whistle:

I've seen it said here that Twitter doesn't care, but really, this is wrong. People who don't "@" any FTBers or A+ers but still get suspended because of this inanity should complain to twitter, if they care.

TBH, I'm not that bothered. A minor inconvenience, at best. If it happens again, I figure it might be best to let Twitter know about it. Their TOS state that mass unfollowing utilities are doubleplus not good, so if that also goes for mass blocking - well, who knows.

Tis fair to say that Ooley does indeed live up to the image of a modest man, with much to be modest about.

[Altair]

It is illuminating that Queen Bee has tweeted that she won't be going back to Hall's thread because of the "bullies". Can anyone tell me a comment on there that comes anywhere near to matching the vitriol and abuse you find at Pharyngula?

It was a pre-emptive flounce because she knew if she stuck around she'd get her glob ass handed to her. She knew what she wrote was petty, vindictive and childish.

That didn´t stop her from writing about it on her own blog. Engaging in a blog or forum they cannot control and where they cannot silence really is terrifying for them.

[free thoughtpolice]

Ogvorbis who is apparently still deeply troubled by his abuse at the hands of hid scoutmaster 30 years ago.


Ogborvis
"I have someone that, if things get too bad (I (fifteen or so years ago) attempted suicide so I do have some idea where that line is), I can tallk to. I am just scared shitless of talking to anyone about this outside of the pseudonymous presence on line. I know what I did. I suspect what I did. And this is shit that is beyond the pale of acceptable."

Someone else
"I have no doubt that he suffered the trauma of child rape, but I also remember the Satanic ritual abuse thing of the 1980s, which produced extremely vivid false memories for the victims"

Ogvorbis
"My memories fit together fairly seamlessly so I really do think I did what I remember."

[AbsurdWalls]

...My hyphotesis is that these fields allow them to work more with people and less with machines, and women, in my experience, tend to be more interested in people than machines. That's not saying that women cannot work with machines, or that men can't work with people, just that in average they tend to lean towards one side or the other...

I teach a tiny bit of programming to my students and I find that women "get it" just as easily as men do. That's got me thinking about my work where even within the same job title there are some components (technical skills) that are "optional" (well, sometimes), such as programming. You can choose to program your own solutions, to get someone else to do it for you, or to find an off-the-shelf solution that works. Thinking about it, I don't think I can point to any particular trend I have noticed based on gender. One issue with that though is that there is a gender imbalance in my field (guessing 20-30% female) so that makes it harder to spot the differences in the behaviours of each gender.

Our Business Analysts were almost always female (and most of the males were gay strangely enough). I think that it is more about what happens back in school. Girls who want to do computing/engineering aren't seen as cool by the other girls.

I find it very difficult to believe that girls in school give a flying fuck about the career aspirations of other girls. Certainly at my school I don't think "what you want to do when you grow up" ever came up as a topic of interest. The only things I remember were a weedy guy who got made fun of for wanting to join the army (he's an Officer now), and people making fun of other people who did or did not want to go to university, or those who did not get into a "top" university.

[DeepInsideYourMind]

I couldn't understand the DragonCon angle for Skepchicks ...

Why a sudden hatred of the event and the shareholder peadophile drama ...

Then I just saw this video

James Randi at Dragon Con last year ...

Oh, yes you skeptics might be thinking "that's most likely coincidence" "correlation/causation" blah blah ... but I think it's probably related, as I think TAM and JREF and James Randi are now objects of the A+/Skepchick/FTB mafiosa

The furore would have timed very nicely to when speaker position for TAM were being filled and a certain group didn't get any invites too ...

[Cunning Punt]

There's quite a few they've left out, the privileged fucks.

http://i.imgur.com/IgeZ0nz.jpg

[Michael J]

Steven Novella chimes in to the Harriet Hall threat with a bit of a slapdown for Rebecca - pointing out that there are many posts on Skepchick blog using exactly the same language that the SJW and Watson are using to criticize Hall.

He should be careful.
She might kick him off the 'Skepchicks Guide to the Universe'

Gwod, wouldn't it be nice if she gets pissed with Novella and flounces from SGU? I'd love to be able to listen to that podcast without being subjected to her annoying voice.

I don't mind her voice, it's her repugnant dismissive attitude that puts me off. I really stopped listening 6 months ago when I found out about all the crazy going on, and it not being addressed on the show (lie of omission?). It's like ignoring that your priests are molesting kids because they don't do it "in" the church. (Yes, yes an exageration, but hopefully people get the point) I mean how can you have one of your co-hosts causing all sorts of crazy drama, and not address it?

People a bunch of pages back were commenting on AronRa, about how he was 'staying out of it', and good for him. I disagree, avoiding the conversation does nothing to help solve the problem. Hopefully AronRa and Steve Novella get more involved. The only way to get past all this crap is to have the conversations, and not have high minded people stay out of it, because well it so petty.

I think that they are better out of it. I think that the majority of skeptics and atheists don't really care about or are bored by the whole mess. A few years ago I heard that SGU gets 50k downloads for each episode. They may get a lot of emails at the moment from people wanting him to dump RW but I am sure that they would get a load more if they started to buy into this stuff.

This isn't a split in the movement it is a small bubble of particularly noisy SJWs and if I was a Name in the movement I'd ignore the whole mess and just respond when they take something I say out of context.

[Cunning Punt]

:happy-jumpyellow:
Hah!

[Dick Strawkins]

I couldn't understand the DragonCon angle for Skepchicks ...

Why a sudden hatred of the event and the shareholder peadophile drama ...

Then I just saw this video

James Randi at Dragon Con last year ...

Oh, yes you skeptics might be thinking "that's most likely coincidence" "correlation/causation" blah blah ... but I think it's probably related, as I think TAM and JREF and James Randi are now objects of the A+/Skepchick/FTB mafiosa

The furore would have timed very nicely to when speaker position for TAM were being filled and a certain group didn't get any invites too ...

Look, the pedophile aspect to DragonCon has been public for years and before now the Skepchicks have chosen to ignore it completely.
They have only taken notice this year because someone else started to call for a boycott and thus their hand was forced. If they publicly announce they are going to do the same thing they've done for the past four years then they risk getting accused of supporting a pedophile.
Therefore they pretend to have suddenly found out about it just recently (ha!) and are shocked, shocked! to have learned about it.
Oh whatever shall we do?
(Presumably the same as usual - go and get pissed with their friends and sell a few ceramic trinkets to their sycophantic marks)

[Apples]

Looks like plagiarist 'Tis Himself ----> Rodney Nelson has morphed again:

He is commented about for continuing to plagiarize. He is commented about for continuing to lie.

Nevertheless, some lies have gone unmentioned until now.

I watched him almost certainly lie about being in the infantry (come on, he wasn’t in both the Army and the Navy). He contributed what is almost certainly a false data point to that discussion, and it’s an important discussion, so it’s important that people don’t lie about it. But I didn’t say anything, because I know I’ll be blamed for pointing out a lie.

I watched him blatantly lie on Chris Clarke’s civility pledge. (Look at the HTML source; notice “comment-author-rodneynelson”.) He’d commented two days earlier — he wasn’t “delurking” — he was just changing his nym to Ulysses without saying so, which is against the rules. And he made it look like here’s a new commenter who was moved to delurk by this post. But I didn’t say anything, because I know I’ll be blamed for pointing out a lie.

It's also clear that SGBM spends an amazing amount of time doing detective/archival work at FTB (checking HTML source?).

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... erdome-20/ (comment 672)
http://www.freezepage.com/1361399319CLZRFYCLJU

[Apples]

The Cuntfaced Mods thread is active again.

Quontir points out the obvious, Piegasm replies that "context matters, yo," Flewellyn says, "what do you want," Setar pretends to be a mod, and Stephen T says if the mods were unfair the regulars would call them out.

http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic ... start=1925

[Lsuoma]

Re that Thunderdome thread: think PeeZus got permission to use the Mario image?

[free thoughtpolice]

I posted that before finishing writing.
Ogvorbis posted that response to someone who asked if he was getting help.

[CommanderTuvok]

The Slyme Pit Block Bot Watch.

26 Followers (after much fanfare and a ticker-tape parade, the number of followers has increased by, erm, NONE, in the last 24 hours.)

The Slyme Pit Block Bot Watch. Charting the phenomenal popularity of Oolon's Block Bot so you don't have to!!!

[AndrewV69]

A businesswoman and a professional dropout. Fuck all those dipshits doing all that high-faluting research, WE GOT US A FILM SCHOOL GRADUATE TELLING US HOW SHIT REALLY WORKS.

Fuck me, you ARE stoned when you post.

Ahahahaah!

I suspect if you cut down on your caffeine intake you may calm down somewhat. But I could be wrong.

[AndrewV69]

From personal experience in the same industries, I totally agree with Altair ...

I've known some fantastic women developers ... just not very many. And oddly, they have been largely from a non-programming background, for example mathematicians who happen to program for a living as quants.

Development is largely an unglamorous, boring , and monotonous job .. I know very few developers in the profession by choice (and most who are came via programming games in their youth). Maybe women just don't enjoy it. I have never seen a single employer (out of literally hundreds I have consulted for) who didn't give women exactly the same opportunity. School career advice may be a different issue ... but as I got f**k all of any use, I dont doubt women get f**k all useful advice either.

I suspect demographics might have something to do with it. Based on my experience (and only mine) I am not surprised to see that the majority of COBOL programmers are way over 30 and women. Need I mention that some years ago "they" stopped teaching it in educational institutions?

Web and related languages (like Perl) mostly younger males and females. Engineering is majority male. Same with Performance and Capacity planning. Project management and Administration roughly 50:50. Unix sysadmins, Z/OS Systems Programmers tend to be majority male also, extending down to support techs.

The majority of women in Engineering, especially those with double degrees tended to drop out and become a SAHM by the time they had a second child. Retaining them beyond five years was a lost cause.

Most of the female "nerds" that I have ever encountered tended to be like their male counterparts, somewhat antisocial and working odd hours. Not all of them of course, I can think of a Linux developer who was very social, and got recruited from Aussieland to a job in Ottawa based on entirely on her Usenet posts.

Once again, the above is based on my personal experience and seeing as I am retired, things may have changed since then.

[Mr Danksworth]

It is illuminating that Queen Bee has tweeted that she won't be going back to Hall's thread because of the "bullies". Can anyone tell me a comment on there that comes anywhere near to matching the vitriol and abuse you find at Pharyngula?

It was a pre-emptive flounce because she knew if she stuck around she'd get her glob ass handed to her. She knew what she wrote was petty, vindictive and childish.

I used to post on a local a/s board. Occasionally a 9/11 troofer or a cretionist would stumble in and do this sort of bullshit.. They'd drop in to the middle of a conversation, say a bunch of stupid shit, call everyone a sheeple/sinner, the run back to wherever they came from. Ms. Watson did exactly the same thing. She is a drive by troll, plain and simple.

[Maximus]

Steven Novella chimes in to the Harriet Hall threat with a bit of a slapdown for Rebecca - pointing out that there are many posts on Skepchick blog using exactly the same language that the SJW and Watson are using to criticize Hall.

He should be careful.
She might kick him off the 'Skepchicks Guide to the Universe'

Gwod, wouldn't it be nice if she gets pissed with Novella and flounces from SGU? I'd love to be able to listen to that podcast without being subjected to her annoying voice.

I don't mind her voice, it's her repugnant dismissive attitude that puts me off. I really stopped listening 6 months ago when I found out about all the crazy going on, and it not being addressed on the show (lie of omission?). It's like ignoring that your priests are molesting kids because they don't do it "in" the church. (Yes, yes an exageration, but hopefully people get the point) I mean how can you have one of your co-hosts causing all sorts of crazy drama, and not address it?

People a bunch of pages back were commenting on AronRa, about how he was 'staying out of it', and good for him. I disagree, avoiding the conversation does nothing to help solve the problem. Hopefully AronRa and Steve Novella get more involved. The only way to get past all this crap is to have the conversations, and not have high minded people stay out of it, because well it so petty.

I think that they are better out of it. I think that the majority of skeptics and atheists don't really care about or are bored by the whole mess. A few years ago I heard that SGU gets 50k downloads for each episode. They may get a lot of emails at the moment from people wanting him to dump RW but I am sure that they would get a load more if they started to buy into this stuff.

This isn't a split in the movement it is a small bubble of particularly noisy SJWs and if I was a Name in the movement I'd ignore the whole mess and just respond when they take something I say out of context.

What would be your response to the old quote that 'all it takes for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing'?

[DeepInsideYourMind]

Of course, sometimes you just get assholes in software development http://www.redditlog.com/snapshot/2626/2887

[Skep tickle]

Lol'ing at the piling on hyperdeath, site admin, at A+:

Re: British family told to send daughter to Hindu school
Post by trinioler » Wed Feb 20, 2013 10:52 pm

Then consider that Hyperdeath has had a pretty consistent history of unhelpful and even harmful comments around here. If they had come from anyone but an admin, they'd have been banned by now. Basically, what I'm saying is, Hyperdeath should probably start shaping his behavior up, or probably focus on making the site work. I know its offensive to him, but we can't keep having an admin that will gaslight members around.
_______________________________
Preferred pronouns: Ask me.

Haha. Their creator (Jen M) decided pretty much immediately that she didn't want to touch them with a 10 foot pole, and now they would ban their site admin if they could. (And what does hyperdeath "should..focus on making the site work" mean? To them, I mean. I know what it would mean to me.)

Next move, hyperdeath. Will he double down, flounce, or capitulate?

If he doubles down, will he bring up anything he knows from PMs or the secret forum? (I doubt it, but it's an interesting possibility.)

If he flounces, will he hand the keys to the castle over to someone else, or take them with him, or simply shut the site down?

If he capitulates, will he allow himself to be broken like a filly & paraded around on a training lead?

:popcorn:

[Lurkion]

I now will do a shameless repost of my video to cater for time differences.

[youtube]CLNR_TMQU6A[/youtube]

In other news, I have a Chris Clarke one in preparation. It's slightly musical.

Has that Atheismplus thread been deleted? If so, they must be keeping an eye on you Rocko. You are being watched.

Nope. it's here.

http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic ... 005#p70753

[Skep tickle]

Aaaand capitulate it is! But that's not enough for Kassiane, who breaks out the training bit to put in his mouth:

Re: British family told to send daughter to Hindu school
Post by Kassiane » Thu Feb 21, 2013 12:21 am

I withdraw my previous comment. I wasn't distinguishing between racism in the vernacular sense, and racism as a sociological term.

To clarify, when I said that "reverse racism" exists, I meant so in the vernacular sense. I certainly don't believe (and I apologize for implying) that institutionalized reverse racism exists.

Isn't I&A the place for getting all that "reverse racism" vernacular bullshit out of people's systems? This is in theory an advanced, or at least intermediate, sociological space. It's a given that people are using the sociological definition!

Not to continue the derail train, but I mean really. That's not even 101. That's remedial.

[Lurkion]

What the hell is "alternate form"?

They transform into a car, or airplane...it depends.

But are they Autobot or Decepticon. That's the real question. And don't even get me started on the other variants.

So that means we get Trans-Formers and Cis-Formers :think: ?

Cis-Formers are just cars.

[Metalogic42]

Lol'ing at the piling on hyperdeath, site admin, at A+:

Re: British family told to send daughter to Hindu school
Post by trinioler » Wed Feb 20, 2013 10:52 pm

Then consider that Hyperdeath has had a pretty consistent history of unhelpful and even harmful comments around here. If they had come from anyone but an admin, they'd have been banned by now. Basically, what I'm saying is, Hyperdeath should probably start shaping his behavior up, or probably focus on making the site work. I know its offensive to him, but we can't keep having an admin that will gaslight members around.
_______________________________
Preferred pronouns: Ask me.

Haha. Their creator (Jen M) decided pretty much immediately that she didn't want to touch them with a 10 foot pole, and now they would ban their site admin if they could. (And what does hyperdeath "should..focus on making the site work" mean? To them, I mean. I know what it would mean to me.)

Next move, hyperdeath. Will he double down, flounce, or capitulate?

If he doubles down, will he bring up anything he knows from PMs or the secret forum? (I doubt it, but it's an interesting possibility.)

If he flounces, will he hand the keys to the castle over to someone else, or take them with him, or simply shut the site down?

If he capitulates, will he allow himself to be broken like a filly & paraded around on a training lead?

:popcorn:

He capitulated:

I withdraw my previous comment. I wasn't distinguishing between racism in the vernacular sense, and racism as a sociological term.

To clarify, when I said that "reverse racism" exists, I meant so in the vernacular sense. I certainly don't believe (and I apologize for implying) that institutionalized reverse racism exists.

Of course, that's not good enough, not for A+...drama, enter stage left:

Isn't I&A the place for getting all that "reverse racism" vernacular bullshit out of people's systems? This is in theory an advanced, or at least intermediate, sociological space. It's a given that people are using the sociological definition!

Not to continue the derail train, but I mean really. That's not even 101. That's remedial.

:popcorn: