Quantcast

«

»

Aug 06 2013

We’re Number One!

From the Twitter user who brought you the wholly nonexistent walkout during PZ’s wholly nonexistent debate at CONvergence/SkepchickCon, I bring you the wholly nonexistent “The #WomenAbusers Anti-FTB Bot”. It is, of course, intended as some kind of mirror of The Atheism+ Block Bot, which would make “#WomenAbusers” the group it belongs to and “Anti-FTB” what it does. The latter implication is supported by the fact that all this amounts to is a screen shot tweeted at various bloggers and commenters. The former implication is–probably–not intentional.

Screen shot emailed to me yesterday. Text provided in the post.

The #WomenAbusers Anti-FTB Bot

“All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.”
-George Orwell

This bot aims to name those who demean, abuse, and intimidate women who don’t toe the #FTBullies line. The #FTBullies are a collective of abusive bloggers commenters who reside, by and large, at FreeThoughtBlogs, Skepchick, and A=. It also includes many Twitter followers and trolls. These listings will provide useful assistance for women in the atheist/secularism movements to feel safe and avoid the numerous women abusers there are out there.

Level 1
This level is reserved for the slimiest and ugliest of the women abusers. These people provide a space (usually a blog or a website) where women who dissent against them can be abused, dog-piled, and libelled. It is also reserved for those who send threats of violence, or defend or [sic] those that send threats of violence.

Level 2
This level is reserved for those dark creatures who inhabit the realm of FTB, Atheism+, and Skepchick, and utilize those spaces to further the abuse of women. Notable abuse by this level of abusers include the labelling of women as “chill girls”, “sister punishers”, or “gender traitors”.

Level 3
This level is reserved for those pesky little shites who parrot the #FTBullies mantras an apply a level of hyperskepticism about the claims from abused women who have dissented against the #FTBullis. Other irksome tactics include the repeated requests for evidence, even though it has already been supplied.

Members will be added in the near future, but to begin with, the list of Level 1 #WomenAbusers are:

@OpheliaBension (Ophelia Benson); @pzmyers (PZ Myers); @gregladen (Greg Laden); @szvan (Stephanie Zvan); @rebeccawatson (Rebecca Watson)

There you have it, folks. We’re as bad as it gets. This is the worst of what women who “dissent” from us receive. The worst abuse they get is being talked about in our comment threads by multiple people. Libel supposedly occurs, though no one knows quite where, and one threat to kick a man’s ass is counted as abuse against women. A term used a couple of times has been so entirely not overwhelmed by the general level of abuse as to still be notable two years later. And they’ve already told us about everything bad that’s happened to these women so we shouldn’t ask about anything else that might actually constitute abuse.

I love projects like this to document just how awful and evil we are. They require such puffery, such conflation as to constitute the very best defense. As I said yesterday when I saw this, this is an own goal of epic proportions.

24 comments

Skip to comment form

  1. 1
    Kevin, Youhao Huo Mao

    Do these people still not get that we weren’t the first people to use “chill girls” but indeed an Anti-FTB person used that term?

    They’re like creationists. It doesn’t matter how many times you say something, if it doesn’t jive with their viewpoint they don’t hear or see it.

  2. 2
    Wowbagger, Designated Snarker

    Yeah, I’d be pretty cowed by the fact that its creator Rich Sandersen is regularly tweeting out the list updates to all of his (at time of writing) – wait for it – 195 followers. No, that’s not a typo. I think he’s whoever coined the term ‘pissant’ had in mind.

  3. 3
    Scr... Archivist

    But Stephanie, it’s satire: https://twitter.com/RichSandersen/status/363416011996803072

    Meanwhile, actually using Oolon’s open software to make a real block-list would be “sad”. There isn’t even going to be a website.

    I should add that their hijacking of the #womenabusers hashtag is positively Rovian. Look at the different perspectives on the meaning of the hashtag prior to July 31, 2013. So are they saying that FTB bloggers and commenters are abusers of women, or that they are women who abuse? And how is it abuse to help people avoid online harassment?

    I don’t understand these people. Have they ever have been hurt by anything in their lives? Don’t they understand why others would want to avoid pain?

  4. 4
    Bjarte Foshaug

    I personally searched the FTB arhive for every occurrence of “Sister punisher” and “gender traitor” a few months ago, and, hardly surprising, almost every occurrence turned out to be slimepitters endlessly repeating the mantra that “any woman who disagrees” with the “FTB hivemind” is “automatically labelled” as “gender traitor” and “sister punishers”. As I pointed out at the time, I’m pretty sure the handful of uses (as opposed to mentionings) by non-slimepitters amount to orders of magnitude less than the far, far more toxic venom that Stephanie, Ophelia etc. get thrown at them in a single day. And this is coming from the very same people who accuse their targets of being “professional victims” who go out of their way to find things things to complain about. The amount of projection going on is ridiculous.

    Re. “Chill girls” and “Queen bees”, Stephanie did indeed use the words in one of her posts, in which she wrote:

    How do you know whether you’re a chill girl? Simple. Is your reaction to complaints from other women of harassment and discrimination based on gender to turn to the guys and say, “Nah, I’m fine. It’s all cool”? Then you’re a chill girl.

    How do you know whether you’re a queen bee? Simple. Did you struggle your way up to a position of power or influence in what was decidedly a man’s world, only to then turn around and tell other women that unless they can do what you did, they have to stay in their subservient positions? Then you’re a queen bee.

    Notice, first of all, that Stephanie doesn’t accuse any particular woman of being a chill girl or queen bee. She most definitely doesn’t say that “anybody who disagrees” with her, or anybody she happens to “dislike”, is a chill girl or queen bee. Instead, she identifies certain specific criteria and states that if they apply to you, then by definition that’s what’s meant by a “chill girl” or a “queen bee”. If the criteria don’t apply, there is no reason why anybody should feel attacked in any way.

    Secondly, these are not actual “slurs” in any non-Newspeak sense of the word, any more than “misogynist” or “racist” are slurs. These are labels that identify a person as displaying certain patterns of behavior or attitudes, not as belonging certain disfavored groups. That’s a key difference right there.

  5. 5
    G Pierce (Was ~G~)

    “Ugliest”? No, he’s not sexist at all. I wish they would build a bot and add me to their list. I wonder why they don’t want any of those people blocked? Why would they care if communication were blocked between the two of them. Gee, I wonder….

  6. 6
    Anthony K

    It’s a testament to the power of propaganda that dipshits like Rich can divorce themselves so fucking far from reality that it’s bullies who avoid their victims via tools like the BlockBot, not the other way around.

  7. 7
    PZ Myers

    I approve. I think it’s perfectly fine for people to create an opt-in blocklist that includes my name.

    Especially when it highlights me as one of the big villains in the Evil League of Evil. I’m flattered! I’m also working on my terrible death whinny right now.

  8. 8
    Tom Foss

    So if showing people’s blurred-out twitter handles while talking about abusers is enough cause to sue for libel, this actually calling specific people abusers is surely lawsuit-worthy libel, right? They understand that “they did it first, so it must be okay” isn’t a defense in court, right?

  9. 9
    Sili

    I personally searched the FTB arhive for every occurrence of “Sister punisher” and “gender traitor” a few months ago

    I have somewhere made the comparison to “house negros”. Just for the record.

  10. 10
    D. C. Sessions

    This level is reserved for the slimiest and ugliest of the women abusers.

    It’s rather telling that when looking for the most disparaging terms they could find they picked those two. “Ugly” of course needs no comment, but “slimy” is also misogynist. It’s used far, far more often against women than against men — and for sexual reasons that are obvious once the question arises.

    Telling indeed.

  11. 11
    Tom Foss

    I wonder if that might be a more regional thing, D.C.. When I hear “slimy” applied as an insult, my first thought is of the smarmy, sleazy, weaselly, hair-slicked-back villains you might find in an ’80s movie (and often played by William Atherton), all male. Maybe it’s confirmation bias, but I can’t recall ever hearing that insult used against a woman.

  12. 12
    D. C. Sessions

    Have they ever have been hurt by anything in their lives?

    I’m certain that they have. If nothing else, a threat to privilege hurts. In fact, it arguably hurts more than more material harm does to people who experience abuse and deprivation on a daily basis. Not because it’s more harmful, but because humans normalize their experiences — routine hunger becomes normal and so does a routine that includes nothing but comfort to the point that a Ben and Jerry’s brain freeze becomes the traumatic tragedy of the week.

    The Princess and the Pea has nothing to the Prince, the Piss, and the Moan.

  13. 13
    Tom Foss

    It’s notable too that there was a bit of mythologizing some time ago where Slymepitters tried to shop around the meme that “slime pit” was originally meant to refer to Abbie Smith’s genitals, and not something more like this.

  14. 14
    Great American Satan

    Wait, so the response to a block bot on one side is not a block bot from the other, but actually just a list of names? I guess they don’t care about shielding their side’s precious wimmenz from your evil evil defamations and slurz.

    I think it’s more of a “You defamed us by making that list, we defame you back!” move, which … Is more of the same that’s been going on for years. People over here make a valid point about them, they feel grievously insulted, and flood the internet with hateful propaganda about a handful of ladies they don’t like (& PZ’s manjayjay).

    The real tragedy is that they didn’t create an actual blockbot, because it their side ever decided to stop this hyper-scrutiny and obsession with A+ & FtB, this would end overnight.

  15. 15
    F [i'm not here, i'm gone]

    At some point, by the time I got to the end of comment thirteen, I had this running through my head: Slimer, no sliming! (à la Dora teh Explorer).

  16. 16
    G Pierce (Was ~G~)

    I wish there were a block bot from people offline, too.

  17. 17
    Lou Doench

    As Off-Key Second Chair Baritone in the Approved Male Chorus, I plan on doing my level best to get on this list. I guess I need to tweet more. I bet I can get to Level 3 by the end of the week. See, it is just like a game!

  18. 18
    CaitieCat, getaway driver

    Now I want to join Twitter, just so I can have the pleasure of being named a #1 Top WomenAbuser, like the various people whom I respect enormously that are already in that category. I figure it’s like the Religious Reich’s decrying of the Four Horsemen; you don’t get on the list if you’re not effective.

    Minna-san ganbarou! Faito!*

    I guess I’ll just have to keep working at it. I reckon when there are way more of us in their #1 than they have following the Bot, it’ll be a nice shortlist of “those who are actually accomplishing anything in atheism today”.

    * Everyone try their hardest! Fight!

  19. 19
    Jafafa Hots

    I was happy to be informed a few days ago via tweet that I was on the list.
    How the person who created the list was able to tweet that news to me if he had blocked me, I dunno.

    Unless of course he didn’t really block me?
    (Or perhaps twitter is coded strangely… a definitely possibility)

  20. 20
    Jafafa Hots

    (I am definitely possibility way past my bedtime.)

  21. 21
    oolon

    Pffft, I’m still upset I’m only a a level 2 … BTW they are all free to block me, automated or not. I can live with it for some reason.

    But talking about women abusers I’ve found something quite disturbing. The group that attacked Caroline Criado-Perez uses a hashtag to organise their attacks on women online. The group seems to be mainly #cuntsec peeps and uses #InternetOp as their call to arms. There was a manifesto by the group I saw describing how they would dogpile people online when there is a tweet to that hash. Guess who retweeted it ->

    https://twitter.com/AmbrosiaX/status/364704085892546560

    The link is currently hacked by another group – but what was there was basically describing what they did to Caroline. SO what is Ambrosias aim here? Highlight how horrible they are .. ? Nope ->

    https://twitter.com/AmbrosiaX/status/364921092156030977

    Trying to sic these disgusting people on ElevatorGATEs targets with his storifying. So either Edie is thick as pulverised brick or she knows exactly what she is doing here. I’m guessing the latter given she tweeted the link to the manifesto.

  22. 22
    cee

    I wish they would make this. and add everyone they can possibly think of. and then harangue all their friends into using it, so they can be completely untroubled by the poisonous views of those awful horrible FTB and Atheism+ people.

    I have no idea what they’d talk about, though.

  23. 23
    Jackie

    Those ass-backward haters are twisted as corkscrews, aren’t they?

  24. 24
    Wowbagger, Designated Snarker

    cee wrote:

    I have no idea what they’d talk about, though.

    Probably exactly what they talked about before their sense of entitlement forced them to jump on this particular harassment bandwagon, I suppose.

    So, nothing.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>