Mortification of mind and flesh »« Botanical Wednesday: Plump and protuberant

They have moved beyond parody

This apparently has something to do with Elevatorgate. Somehow. In some strange, distorted, funhouse mirror world.

There have been some peculiarly crazy people obsessing over me and Rebecca Watson, and how we’re evil tyrants out to destroy the life of good manly men. One of the craziest is Franc Hoggle, who early on staked out a position somewhere in the stratosphere above delusional Disneyland, with rants about how Watson had been preaching some New Age weirdness about “the divine yoni” and other such excretions from his imagination. Now though, he has gotten even with us all. He has taught us a lesson.

Just for the sake of full disclosure: I have just jerked off with an eastern european lady with a real body, cellulite and all. She has a couple of kids and a real life she keeps separate from the ‘net. We had an adult transaction. There was no shame or guilt involved. She agrees I was probably the one exploited. We laugh about that. I tell her thank you. You made my night honey. She tells me thank you for not being an asshole. I say hey… I know its a free world. We exchange token kisseys.

Apparently, a crime has occurred… If you believe… hard enough…

Fuck you PZ. Fuck you Becky. Neo-puritans. Neo-Nazis.

Yes. A lunatic MRA has paid for a session with a woman in which he masturbated angrily while thinking rude thoughts about me and Rebecca Watson, and he’s now bragging proudly about it on the internet. We have so oppressed him that he needed sexual release in order to properly express his outrage. Somehow, he finds satisfaction in spiting my puritanical Nazi desires to destroy his proud tumescence by ejaculating before a sex worker.

I’m going to have to deflate him a bit. I have no problem with his activities, and am not going to suggest that he’s a bad person at all. Quite the contrary, I think it was good use of his time, and I urge all of his fellow gentlemen who have been busily concocting angry fantasies about women to embrace their frustrations and whip their penises out, grasp them tightly in their hands, and wank. Wank furiously. Wank angrily. Wank with passion. Wank gloriously. Wank with sublime satisfaction that at last you have discovered the wellspring of your desire, and you have found a way to express it that makes us all happy…you, me, the women who don’t have to deal with your advances, the women you pay to receive them. I’m not even bothered by the fact that I’m a figure in your kink, Mr Hoggle, as long as you keep it in your imagination and don’t expect gratification from me in real life.

But you are one weird little wanker, you know.

Comments

  1. says

    But you are one weird little wanker, you know.

    That’s a fact. What on earth does a consensual sex act have to do with sexism?

    These…wankers are seriously out there. I wish they had their own wanky planet. Yeesh.

  2. Tethys says

    I wonder what the eastern european woman with cellulite had to say about the little wanker after he left.

  3. Classical Cipher says

    PZ… Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooo…

    Also, um, ew? Like, yay for this guy having a consensual… transaction (ew ew ew ew ew)… but I dislike him a great deal, think he’s a disgusting creep, and therefore… yuck. I’m going to go wash my whole mind.

  4. peter says

    holy fucking jesus….that waste of perfectly good human skin can actually exist and breathe, not to mention string words together on a machine. Inconceivable…

  5. Friendly says

    We exchange token kisseys.

    I’m envisioning a Hershey’s chocolate product that looks like a foil-wrapped coin with a little printed tag coming out of it.

  6. IslandBrewer says

    Wow, this Hoggle guy is really obsessed with PZ and Rebecca. It makes me wonder if he made that poor woman wear a PZ mask while he was …

    Blech. Just … ew.

  7. raven says

    Now I know where stalkers come from.

    Unfortunately, I knew that already a few decades ago.

  8. Moonkitty says

    She tells me thank you for not being an asshole

    The fact that someone in her line of work feels the need to say this to a client strikes me as ironic in the context of his argument (women who speak up when they feel sexually disrespected by men are anti-sex and want to oppress the menz!!11!).

    Somehow I suspect Hogswallow failed to notice the irony.

  9. Daniel Schealler says

    Haha!

    That maka me laff.

    Thanks for that PZ. It was good to end my day on a laugh.

    I have never made but one prayer to God, a very short one: “O Lord make my enemies ridiculous.” And God granted it.

  10. Cowalker says

    I can picture it all too well. Hoggle fap, fap, fapping away, thrilled by imagining the horror and fear on PZ’s and Watson’s faces at the spectacle of his CRIMINAL activity. The Eastern European lady smiling and doing a little math in her head. (If PZ gets him riled up once a week, 52 times . . . .) It is pretty funny.

  11. Charlie Foxtrot says

    Um,Yeah… I’m just gonna haveta go and file that under “Confusing TMI”…

  12. says

    Fuck you PZ. Fuck you Becky. Neo-puritans. Neo-Nazis

    Puritans and Nazis were probably closer to MRAs than they are to PZ or Watson. Way closer.

    P.S. I want Comic Sans back.

  13. says

    This is a man truly lacking in nuance. RW is one of the feminists with a positive view of sexuality. She has never been an anti sex-worker or anti-porn crusader. I would assume she shares something like PZ’s sentiments about this incident, but I wouldn’t blame her if she refused to read his post or any reference to it (because… EW)

  14. Ragutis says

    Wait a minute… so, if I can find a cash-strapped college girl to watch me beat the bishop to that pic of Michelle Bachmann and the corndog*, I can Harry Potter the MN Congresswoman into supporting single-payer healthcare and taxing the churches and super-rich?

    *I have a feeling that’s going to cost extra…

  15. Otrame says

    Hoggle, dear, that whooshing noise above your head was the point. You really think that RW and PZ are opposed to consensual sex? Really?

    Wow. You really are dumb.

  16. D9000 says

    What I’m getting from this is that the guy paid to have a wank. Now, I dunno about any of youse, but personally I always got those for free. Paying for wanking yourself off? The word ‘loser’ comes to mind for some reason.

  17. Azkyroth says

    Puritans and Nazis were probably closer to MRAs than they are to PZ or Watson. Way closer.

    Hell, they were closer to MRAs than MRAs WISH they were to PZ or Watson.

  18. says

    D9000:

    Paying for wanking yourself off?

    Eh, in all fairness, wanking with help is pretty big business. Think of all the phone sex lines, etc. Either phone or internet is a safe, healthy way for sex workers to operate and there’s nothing wrong with indulging oneself that way if they’re so inclined.

    It’s what’s in Hoggle’s brain that makes him such a weird wanker, not the act itself.

  19. AnneH says

    I read a news story today about a learning disabled middle school student who was raped twice by the same boy, the second time in the school library. The school denies all responsibility and blames her for being raped.

    http://www.news-leader.com/article/20110816/NEWS12/110816008/Lawsuit-filed-against-Republic-School-District-over-rape-claim

    It is horror stories like this that force women to be suspicious of men, as Rebecca Watson was suspicious of the man in the elevator. American women are trained to think that they are responsible for whatever happens to their genitals, consenting or not, so they damn well better keep their defenses up. This mindset doesn’t want to hold a man responsible for what he does with his erection. It’s the woman’s fault if a man loses control.

    I’m tired of this crap. Guys, you are responsible for what you do with your bodies. Get a grip already.

  20. Beatrice, anormalement indécente says

    This was TMI.
    And then I imagined he posted it so that he could enjoy the feedback…. you know, enjoy. Ew, ew, ew. But if he must read this thread and wank, at least I hope that eastern european woman makes some profit in the process.

  21. says

    AnneH:

    American women are trained to think that they are responsible for whatever happens to their genitals, consenting or not

    It’s not just American women. It’s pretty much women everywhere. The patriarchal views on purity and being virginal have a fuckton to answer for all over the world.

  22. says

    Beatrice:

    And then I imagined he posted it so that he could enjoy the feedback….

    Someone like Hoggle needs to fuel his purported rage because that makes him feel his views are justified and he’s right, dammit! That’s the point of publicly posting this mess. He’ll read all the responses and have him self all worked up for another go. (At frothing and wanking, I’m sure).

    It’s truly pathetic. He’s been one of the worst frothers over Egate and just cannot let it go.

  23. saintstephen says

    This franc hoggle dude, whoever he is, may indeed be a wanker, but he’s definitely not stupid. I just now read this article, and this one, and also this one, and found them to be interesting, provocative, and quite well-written.

  24. embertine says

    Well thanks for that. I have been wondering how to resist the temptation of the cakes that are permanently in my office. The case of the dry heaves that this post has given me should do nicely.

  25. Moggie says

    She tells me thank you for not being an asshole.

    You know, on a scale of 1-10 for praise from your sexual partner, this is at best a 3, between “I didn’t throw up” and “baby, you were so adequate”. I think he should aim higher.

  26. A. Nuran says

    I’m getting a picture…
    A picture of a Bulgarian Women’s Shot Put team member wearing a black vinyl SS uniform and a PZ mask while Hoggle furiously burps his worm.

    God Damn! I don’t think there are enough drugs in the world to help me forget that image.

  27. Michael says

    He’s got a strange obsession with you, all right. You don’t have to try to insult him more by calling him kinky. He’s given you enough real material to criticize. Why is it so bad to have a kink?

  28. neutron_tamper says

    We have so oppressed him that he needed sexual release in order to properly express his outrage.

    P.Z. I’ve been reading your posts for a little over a year now. Your impish wit has made me smile many times. But, the above quote…it is god damned hilarious. Well done sir!

  29. Forbidden Snowflake says

    You know, on a scale of 1-10 for praise from your sexual partner, this is at best a 3, between “I didn’t throw up” and “baby, you were so adequate”.

    Somewhere in the league of “I’ve smoked some things smaller than that”…

    Michael: I didn’t perceive it as mocking him for having a kink. If one can’t laugh at someone who gratifies himself furiously TO SPITE ONE, what can one laugh at?

  30. moonkitty says

    He’s been one of the worst frothers over Egate

    Is this one of Smith’s fanboiz? Aw, how proud she must feel.

  31. The Lone Coyote says

    while Hoggle furiously burps his worm.

    I thought I knew every term for masturbation, but ‘burping the worm’ is my new alltime favorite. So stealing it.

    I’ve been known to brag about my sexual prowess sometimes, like any red-blooded male primate will when he’s feeling cocky…. but this is something I would never brag about. Yeah, there’s no shame in paying for sex, but it’s not exactly what I’d call ‘bragworthy.’

    “Dear Penthouse: I totally paid some girl to watch me masturbate. It was awesome!”

    I know I’m a weirdo and all, but I much much much prefer it when a girl, you know, actually finds me attractive enough to -want- to have sex with me… no money involved. It doesn’t happen often, but when it does, it’s pretty fun.

  32. Badland, delurking for a bit says

    Ugh. Googled him and ended up at ERV.

    *reaches for mind bleach*

    I feel dirty..

  33. Midnight Rambler says

    I’m getting a picture…
    A picture of a Bulgarian Women’s Shot Put team member wearing a black vinyl SS uniform and a PZ mask while Hoggle furiously burps his worm.

    Fuck, why did I just have to read all the way to the end of the comments? I was doing okay up until I read this.

  34. =8)-DX says

    Hmmm.
    Girls and guys. A large number of comments have been “ew”. I strongly disagree with that sentiment. Why does the image of a man furiously masturbating disgust you enough to make you express such sentiments? It’s an activity most of us do as well (and we look as absurd as teh Hogglemaister doing it), and its nothing to be ashamed of or disgusted by. (More to laugh at). As for Eastern-European sex workers? I’d say go for Eastern and Central European women in general: we are the porn-house of the world, but some of these women can give you more than a cock-tease. What about a meaningful relationship?

  35. Otranreg says

    @7 Since it’s 2011 and not 1999, I think it’s more like wmv or mp4.

    Anyhow, what a stupid way to waste money. It’s pay-per-view porn, essentially, and there’s more that plenty of the usual pay-once-interfere-with-yourself-till-you-drop kind. There are also interactive live-action DVDs (and excellent 3D hentai games), which renders the only serious advantage of the service this bozo has used completely non-existent.

  36. says

    =8)-DX:

    Why does the image of a man furiously masturbating disgust you enough to make you express such sentiments?

    That sound you hear is the point whooooshing waaaay over your head. No one is squicked out by masturbation, dude. This is a man who has been frothing at the mouth over Egate for a good while now, claiming there was no sexism, none, no, none at all, and his public recounting of his encounter is his way of proving his point (or so he thinks). Then there’s this stuff:

    Apparently, a crime has occurred… If you believe… hard enough…

    Fuck you PZ. Fuck you Becky. Neo-puritans. Neo-Nazis.

    You might want to pay attention to the wee wanker’s point in doing all this. It ain’t about a jerk-off session. Reading comprehension, it’s a good thing.

  37. says

    I honestly don’t see the connection between elevatorgate and having an ‘adult transaction’ with a consenting partner.

    It just looks like an excuse for this guy to point out: “I totally leave the house! I don’t just sit and wank in my basement all day, I get other people to join in! Look at meeeeeeeee!”

    No rage here, just some confusion

  38. NuMad says

    From the Original Post,

    But you are one weird little wanker, you know.

    I think this is my all-time favourite sentence from a Pharyngula post.

    Not being an asshole* is a good thing, but this guy is suffering from a case of extreme delusion if he thinks he’s not defending assholes.

    *In the context he describes it’s not that it’s not worthy of some note… it’s just that there’s something warped about using it as a trophy.

  39. NuMad says

    I must register a complaint: this blog post was false advertising! I went to this gentleman’s blog expecting to be entertained by similarly transparent crackpot flailing and found to my horror wall to wall opaque, smirking anti-feminist* verbiage. It seems as though he’s only this special flavour of wrong when he delves into the concrete, which is extremely rare it would seem.

    *One bright spot is him sniggering about “Watsonians” (he’s fond of clever word coinage) lacking in nuance, which is deliciously ironic in light of this post. The specific nuance had to do with feminists supposedly being unable to understand a distinction between “gender feminism” and “equity feminism”… yes, he is of that particular species of fool that believes that praising a “good” variety of feminists protects him from being identified as a garden variety anti-feminist, despite it being apparent that those feminists only exist (to him) by virtue of their opposition to other feminists on the topic at hand and their merciful silence on all other matters.

  40. says

    Why should only his fellow gentlemen do that?

    “…and whip their penises out, grasp them tightly in their hands, and wank. Wank furiously. Wank angrily. Wank with passion. Wank gloriously. Wank with sublime satisfaction that …”

    uuuups….

    it fell off

    what should i do now?

  41. says

    A picture of a Bulgarian Women’s Shot Put team member wearing a black vinyl SS uniform and a PZ mask while Hoggle furiously burps his worm.

    “Fuck am I hard now”

  42. Steve LaBonne says

    This clown can’t even manage to jerk off without paying? And we’re suposed to be impressed by what a manly man he is? Yup- loser.

  43. says

    I think we should all wank right back to Hoggle. He wanks at use then, we wank back.

    It could become like a thing.

    It would probably replace blogs altogether.

  44. Audley Z. Darkheart OM (OS), purveyor of candy and lies says

    You know, maybe Hoggle has a point. I haven’t had a good, angry wank session in a while.

    Don’t worry, I’ll report back.

    *wanders off to pick a fight with Mr Darkheart*

  45. JCfromNC says

    Actually, “adult transaction” probably doesn’t mean monetary in this case. He’s one of those that thinks of sex as an exchange, where the man takes it and may or may not give anything in return (dinner, jewelry, promises of love & devotion, etc.), rather than as a mutual activity shared between consenting adults.

    He’s still a weird little wanker, though. And I ain’t getting out of the boat to click on that link, either.

  46. says

    an eastern european lady with a real body, cellulite and all

    Yup, all those women fortune enough not to have cellulite don’t have “real bodies.” Don’t you love that insult?
    /tangent

  47. It'spiningforthefyords says

    It doesn’t bother me, either. It is simply odd he has to inform the cyberworld, though, as if it cared. I hear there are webcams set up by similar people in their toilets, to let the world in on each physical excretion: this sounds pretty much the same.

    I doubt I’ll be tuning in, though.

  48. says

    So this guy has a lady with a real body in the room and he is still jerking off instead of engaging in sex. I’d say PZ and Rebecca are the least of his worries, because he obviously doesn’t know what the hell he is doing.

  49. Naked Bunny with a Whip says

    Lawrence, I’m pretty sure they were just on camera over the internet. I have friends who do this sort of thing, though they don’t usually describe it so clinically.

  50. jose says

    Not sure who “they” are here… it would be more like “he has moved beyond parody”, no?

  51. Audley Z. Darkheart OM, (OS), purveyor of candy and lies says

    Tim:

    Yup, all those women fortune enough not to have cellulite don’t have “real bodies.” Don’t you love that insult?

    Welcome to Being a Woman 101. Everything about us is governed by a nasty Catch-22: If we’re fat, we’re unattractive, but if we’re thin, we’re not a “real” (whateverthefuck that means) woman. If we’re quiet, we need to learn to stand up for ourselves, but if we’re assertive, we’re bitches. We’re either prudes or sluts and either way we can’t win.

    Honestly, there isn’t one area of our lives where this doesn’t apply. It sucks.

  52. says

    My, how surprising…

    Another elevatorgate post, not like we hadn’t already had more than enough of those (vastly more than enough)

    Can we /please/ give it a fucking rest, heh.

    It’s amazing, Rebecca Watson makes a civilised point about it in her talk and that’s suddenly license for every controversy/publicity loving wanker to leap on board with their 2p’s worth, multiple times, over months, repeatedly reigniting the same arguments that have been done to death.

    Stop it.

  53. MudPuddles says

    I had a good look around his website. I don’t really think he likes you PZ. I think he’s very angry, about… many things, but mostly about you and Rebecca Watson. In fact, he is so angry and dislikes you both so much that he seems to have dedicated his entire blog to long, loooong posts about you. You take up an inordinate amount of his time, his thoughts and his energy. Man, he really lets rip. What would he do without you guys? I think he hates you so much that he almost loves you.

  54. Cuttlefish says

    It’s an image that shocks, stuns, and boggles
    As we look through our internet goggles
    But our lexicon switches
    And now, when we itches,
    We drop trou and hoggle our toggles.

  55. moggie says

    This thread has ruined wanking for me. Thanks a bunch, angry wanking guy! You’ve taken away the one thing which gave my empty, atheistic life meaning!

  56. What a Maroon says

    Guys, you are responsible for what you do with your bodies. Get a grip already.

    Hoggle did.

  57. acm says

    PZ’s post makes me think of Rorschach’s blog title and tagline (in an interesting new light!), and Hideki’s comment makes me hear Marge Simpson from the epside “Itchy and Scratchy and Marge” – “Don’t to that, don’t do that!”.

  58. jose says

    By the way, I’m not sure this woman he’s talking about was so pleased to kiss him as he thinks. She’s an immigrant with little children to feed, working as a prostitute.

    However, I guess she did a good job, because she made him think he was not being an exploitator who took advantage of the fact that she can’t afford being honest about him.

  59. Lyra says

    Hoo boy. I like to consider myself sex-positive, and included in that is my feeling that sex-work should be legal and isn’t inherently degraded. But wow, commends like

    She tells me thank you for not being an asshole.

    really challenge me.

    In all my life, I have never had someone thank me for not being an asshole except when that person is routinely subject to asshole behavior in whatever situation they are interacting with me in. I’ve only ever had anyone say (to me or other people) something on par with “I’m so glad that she wasn’t an asshole” if past experience had led that person to assume that any given individual (including me) was likely to be an asshole. If this woman felt the need to thank Franc for not being an asshole, then this woman must have been routinely subject to sexual interactions with men who acted assholishly. The mere fact that she was happy he wasn’t an asshole means that past experience had taught her to expect that any given client (including him) was going to be an asshole, and that it was surprising that he was not.

    That’s not how sex work should be operating. That’s setting the bar far, far too low. Franc should be worried about the wellfare of this woman if she’s involved in sex work and the top bar for their interaction is him not being an asshole. If not being an asshole is praiseworthy, what kind of interactions is she generally having? It’s painful and scary to think about.

  60. illuminata says

    The post and most of the comment thread had me laughing so hard I think I pulled a few muscles.

    The dude who pays someone to watch him jerk off – and then TELLS everyone about it, not self aware enough to know he just publically humiliated himself – classic.

    Mocking the shit out of that wanking whackjob – epic.

    Cthuthlu bless Pharyngula.

  61. joed says

    “Hello, babies. Welcome to Earth. It’s hot in the summer and cold in the winter. It’s round and wet and crowded. At the outside, babies, you’ve got about a hundred years here. There’s only one rule that I know of, babies—God damn it, you’ve got to be kind.” –Kurt Vonnegut, God Bless You, Mr Rosewater

  62. illuminata says

    If this woman felt the need to thank Franc for not being an asshole,

    Ah, but, all we have is Frank’s word that she said this. The same dude who beats off angrily while thinking about bloggers he’s never met because they don’t agree with him on something. The dude who denies the reality of sexism. The dude who considers himself the exploited one in this interaction.

    I’d be willing to bet a not-small amount of money that, if she did say it, it was sarcastic.

    I’m finding it very, VERY hard to believe that this dude wasn’t being an asshole.

  63. MJtheProphet says

    I’m relatively new to the site, so maybe I missed something, but did PZ or Rebecca Watson speak out against prostitution in the past or something? Are scientists and/or bloggers and/or skeptics suddenly puritans/Nazis now? Or is this guy just even more insane than I’d heard?

  64. Lyra says

    @illuminata

    That is a very real possibility. It made me think of another situation where people like to say things like Franc said: when they are protesting too much. For example, a guy who is regularly called an asshole or who expects to be called an asshole might work in the “And so-and-so thanked me for not being an asshole” not because so-and-so actually said that, but to avoid being called an asshole after having shared the story.

  65. Antiochus Epiphanes says

    Franc should be worried about the wellfare of this woman if she’s involved in sex work and the top bar for their interaction is him not being an asshole. If not being an asshole is praiseworthy, what kind of interactions is she generally having? It’s painful and scary to think about.

    Maybe that’s a prearranged part of the transaction.

    “Baby…” hoggle, hoggle, hoggle…”Tell me I’m not an asshole”

  66. Randomfactor says

    On the plus side, “to hoggle” now enters the dictionary alongside the immortal “santorum.” Well, a couple inches in front rather than alongside, but…

  67. pharylon says

    PZ lost his feminism credibility to me with the Bachmann/corndog picture he later took down (without apologizing for).

    Woman I Like: How dare someone hit on her after drinking with her in a bar until 4 in the morning! Sexism! Hasn’t he heard about all those women being raped in elevators?!?

    Woman I Dislike: Ha ha! Look at the woman! She’s putting something in her mouth that looks like a dick! And her reptilian skin! She’s so old! Like, in her 40s!

    Of course, it’s not like he makes fun of male politicians for their looks, no, he attacks them on their substance (as we should, because there’s a lot to attack Bachmann over).

    Guess he’s got to remind us of how he’s, like, totally feminist and stuff by flogging Elevatorgate some more.

  68. John D says

    Wow.. Franc is totally correct about PZ and the fempecked Pharyngulite hoards. You act like a bunch of hypocritical self-righteous nitwits. Most of you are too judgemental and indoctrinated to even understand the irony here. Have fun with your concept that women are delicate flowers and the idea that sexual desire is wicked and perverted. Pathetic bunch of liberal left wing politically correct clones.

    PZ – I enjoyed your blog when you wrote about biology (which is something you understand). Now that you are preaching to everyone about how fucking ethical you are, you just sound like a lefty preacher…. just what the world needs… more preachers.

  69. Bernard Bumner says

    Woman I Dislike: Ha ha! Look at the woman! She’s putting something in her mouth that looks like a dick! And her reptilian skin! She’s so old! Like, in her 40s!

    Ventriloquism is even more entertaining when we can see your lips moving.

  70. StevoR says

    @35. D9000 : 18 August 2011 at 1:46 am

    What I’m getting from this is that the guy paid to have a wank. Now, I dunno about any of youse, but personally I always got those for free. Paying for wanking yourself off? The word ‘loser’ comes to mind for some reason.

    He probably wanted to have sexual intercourse with her but didn’t have enough cash to afford it. :-P

  71. SallyStrange, Spawn of Cthulhu says

    Hoggle, dear, that whooshing noise above your head was the point. You really think that RW and PZ are opposed to consensual sex? Really?

    Wow. You really are dumb.

    I think it’s more that folks like the dude you were responding to don’t actually believe that consensual sex is a real possibility. In their twisted, transactional view of sexual pleasure, sex is a commodity possessed by women and sought after by men. Women don’t actually enjoy sex, they just trade it for other things. Which other things they sell it for depends on your flavor of misogyny. Men are expected to seize any possible chance to get the sex, whether by tricking a woman into it, coercing her, forcing her (just don’t get caught! use alcohol for plausible deniability), or, if you’re the more traditional sort, by bribing her with expensive gifts and promises of financial support for potential offspring. But since women don’t actually enjoy sex, the idea of simply approaching a woman with a sincere offer of a mutually enjoyable, consensual exchange of sexual pleasure seems to them to be hopelessly idealist or naive.

    Or so I gather.

  72. Pierce R. Butler says

    “Hoggle [transitive verb]: to …”

    Okay, all you UrbanDictionary.com posters, Google bombers, Wiki editors, et al: you have your day’s assignment!

  73. Bernard Bumner says

    Pathetic bunch of liberal left wing politically correct clones.

    I enjoy it when people attempt to use the terms left wing and liberal as insults, you right wing reactionary, you.

  74. says

    John D:

    Have fun with your concept that women are delicate flowers and the idea that sexual desire is wicked and perverted.

    You read just to watch your lips move, don’t you?

    You certainly don’t do it for comprehension.

  75. Paul W. says

    Wait, is it to “hoggle one’s toggle,” a la Cuttlefish, or to “toggle one’s hoggle” as occurred spontaneously to me?

    The latter seems right to me, partly because toggle is pretty verby and hoggle as a noun resonates with the longstanding (though not especially common) use of “hog” meaning penis.

    The subtleties of language are important, and think it’s Very Important that we get this just right. Maybe we need an online poll.

    BTW, my favorite euphemism for anything is in fact a euphemism for wanking, and ideally for wanking with a woman’s assistance.

    It’s teaching our children to fly.

  76. ChasCPeterson says

    Not for the first time I wonder at the amount of blatant misrepresentation people are willing to commit just to Prove Once and for All that PZ Myers is a Hypocrite!!!!!!

    Hey, pharylon and John D (if those are your real names): why is that so important to you? Whay are you willing to just make shit up–‘reptilian skin’ for example, ‘wicked and perverted’ for another–just for a gotcha?

    Suppose you scored your points. (You haven’t, imo; Myer’s positions have been pretty consistent throughout afaict. As I argued briefly at the time, though, I didn’t think the Bachmann post was sexist. Many disagreed, some pretty persuasively.) But suppose you did.
    So what?

  77. SallyStrange, Spawn of Cthulhu says

    Wow.. Franc is totally correct about PZ and the fempecked Pharyngulite hoards. You act like a bunch of hypocritical self-righteous nitwits. Most of you are too judgemental and indoctrinated to even understand the irony here. Have fun with your concept that women are delicate flowers and the idea that sexual desire is wicked and perverted. Pathetic bunch of liberal left wing politically correct clones.

    Thanks for clarifying that you’re an anti-feminist asshole who thinks it’s edgy and daring to contest the idea that women are people. No actually, anti-feminism is quite retrograde and mainstream. Just because feminists hold sway on this particular blog, does not mean that you’re some kind of brave ideological hero for using gendered insults like “fempecked.”

    PZ – I enjoyed your blog when you wrote about biology (which is something you understand). Now that you are preaching to everyone about how fucking ethical you are, you just sound like a lefty preacher…. just what the world needs… more preachers.

    Nobody is forcing you to read or comment. The old scienceblogs Phargyngula address exists specifically for dipshits like yourself. In other words, the door is thataway. You don’t like it when people apply evidence-based reasoning to their social milieu as well as their physical environment? It’s a hard world, cupcake. Seems like NatGeo is more your style.

  78. John D says

    Sorry Bernard – you are the one jumping to conclusions. I am no right wing reactionary. I will state again though, that the leftist part of the liberal philosophy is bankrupt. There is little value to be found in politically correct speech and the lefty dance around social rules (like how to ask someone for coffee). These ideas are a disgrace and a grand waste of time.

  79. ChasCPeterson says

    teaching our children to fly.

    That’s a remarkably androcentric view of reproductive biology there, Paul.
    Homunculi? Or seed, mayhap to find purchase in her soil?

    ‘Teaching what-could-have-been-somewhat-less-than-half-of-our-hypothetical-children’s-genomes’ doesn’t have the same ring, I’ll grant that, but still.

  80. SallyStrange, Spawn of Cthulhu says

    There is little value to be found in politically correct speech and the lefty dance around social rules (like how to ask someone for coffee).

    Since when did basic social etiquette become a lefty position? Has the right wing explicitly embraced its role as the Party of Assholes now?

  81. greame says

    I have to agree with JohnD here. I read the articles pointed out by saintstephen (45), and franc was absolutely right in that, just as illuminata (96) said,

    Ah, but, all we have is Frank’s word that she said this

    ,all we have on this whole fucking elevatorgate is…Watsons word.

    *ducks and runs*

  82. John D says

    Sally – when did I say or even imply that women are not people. Hyperbolic accusations much? Last time I checked there were plenty of women who enjoyed masturbating… maybe they even used toys to do it. Of course, for Rebecca and PZ it is a great idea to insult men for how they masturbate. (tee hee… isn’t it cute… isn’t it funny… let’s talk about sex dolls that men use… )

    Don’t you find it odd that your heroes PZ and Watson like to tell men how to have sex? I sure do.

  83. says

    John D:

    I will state again though, that the leftist part of the liberal philosophy is bankrupt.

    Really? In what way?

    There is little value to be found in politically correct speech and the lefty dance around social rules (like how to ask someone for coffee).

    You’re very correct here. We need to give up all social rules. If people don’t like being called a nigger, they shouldn’t have dark skin. If women keep disagreeing with you, they should get used to being called bitches. People from China should be amused by college kids pulling the edges of their eyes up and using pidgin English.

    Fuck political correctness. It has no place in society. People just need tougher skin if they’re not just like you.

  84. SallyStrange, Spawn of Cthulhu says

    Sally – when did I say or even imply that women are not people. Hyperbolic accusations much?

    You appear to be one of those fools who thinks it’s cool, edgy, and daring to criticize feminism. Feminism is, as they say, “the radical notion that women are people.”

    QED.

  85. McWaffle says

    What’s up with the term “politically correct” exactly? I don’t think I know what it means. I only see it thrown around as a liberal-bashing insult that means “not casually using racist/sexist/homophobic epithets.” Is that all it is?

  86. says

    McWaffle:

    What’s up with the term “politically correct” exactly? I don’t think I know what it means. I only see it thrown around as a liberal-bashing insult that means “not casually using racist/sexist/homophobic epithets.” Is that all it is?

    Yep. It’s useful for identifying sexists, racists, and homophobes, though.

  87. pharylon says

    pharylon:

    Woman I Dislike: Ha ha! Look at the woman! She’s putting something in her mouth that looks like a dick! And her reptilian skin! She’s so old! Like, in her 40s!

    Hey! I think I found a picture of the PZ you’re describing!

    Man, that’s a good one. I’ll have to remember it! :)

    I really don’t think I’m strwamanning, but YMMV. He removed the original contents of the post, so I can’t quote them directly, he just said they were too easily misunderstood. I think that, in fact, the problem was he slipped up. I’m not saying PZ is playing at being feminist and is secretly misogynistic or anything crazy, but I do think, to paraphrase Avenue Q, “we’re all a little bit sexist sometimes.”

    That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t try and do better, mind you. I’ll admit it, I’m racist. I was raised that way; my Dad taught me that the NAACP was the black version of the KKK. Seriously. It’s so deep in my psyche, I don’t know if I’ll ever completely get it out, but I know it’s a part of me, and every day when I have a negative gut reaction to a person of color, I try to examine my own thoughts. Am I being racist right now? Am I unfairly judging this person? And sometimes I decide I am, and I try to correct my behavior.

    I think PZ screwed up with the Bachmann pic and his comments on them. I think that’s understandable, because we live in a patriarchal society that – in general – treats women differently and holds them to different standards. The trick is acknowledging when you screw up and trying to make sure it doesn’t happen again. He just tried to sweep it under the rug instead.

    Generally, I actually agree with him on feminist issues. Like, probably 90% of the time. But I don’t think Elevatorgate was a big deal. Hitting on someone after you’ve been drinking with them all night is an acceptable time to do it, elevator or not.

    I *do* think Dawkins made a bad argument about it (“there’s worse offenses going on, don’t complain”), and he probably should have clarified/apologized for those. If the bar about complaining about sexism was genital mutilation, feminists wouldn’t be able to complain about much. He and others asked Dawkins to apologize/explain. That’s reasonable, though I do think it all got blown out of proportion.

    In the same way, I think PZ should have explained/apologized for the Bachmann pic and remarks, but instead he just deleted the offensive remarks and tried to hide it all. If I can employ some patriarchal idioms for an ironic purpose, he should have had some balls and manned up about his mistake instead of pretending it didn’t happen ;)

  88. Bernard Bumner says

    Sorry Bernard – you are the one jumping to conclusions. I am no right wing reactionary.

    Alack!

    But I was only experimenting with political epithets as insults.

    Feel free to substitute suitable descriptors and see just how insulting it feels.

    I will state again though, that the leftist part of the liberal philosophy is bankrupt.

    State away. Feel free to show your working out.

  89. SallyStrange, Spawn of Cthulhu says

    But I don’t think Elevatorgate was a big deal. Hitting on someone after you’ve been drinking with them all night is an acceptable time to do it, elevator or not.

    Interesting how you find it impossible to say that you think Elevatorgate “wasn’t a big deal” without mangling at least one key fact: Elevator Dude was not “drinking with” Rebecca Watson.

    If you accept that Watson is telling the truth, then you should stick to her version of events.

    If you think Watson is lying, then explain why you think this and justify it with evidence.

    I find it hard to believe that you somehow missed this basic fact, that there were no “drinking together” activities between Watson and ED. Conclusion: it is highly probable that you are lying yourself.

  90. says

    Don’t you find it odd that your heroes PZ and Watson like to tell men how to have sex?

    I don’t tell anyone how to have sex. Go to it! Have fun!

    But I do point and laugh when loons think they’re somehow making a valid point against me when they masturbate furiously while hating some random person on the internet, a practice that now has a new name, hoggling.

    Hoggling: imagining that your angry wank session somehow represents a bold, courageous critique of feminism.

  91. What a Maroon says

    And so another thread on elevatorgate blasts its way towards 900 posts. And the popcorn industry rejoices.

  92. says

    Wow.. Franc is totally correct about …

    It’s not Franc, it’s Angry Wanking Guy *.

    * Thanks Moggie at 89.

    Have fun with your concept that women are delicate flowers and the idea that sexual desire is wicked and perverted.

    Are you deliberately misrepresenting people here, or are you just so stupid you can’t help but miss the point?

    Pathetic bunch of …

    Worthless opinion noted.

    … liberal …

    This is an insult?

    … left wing …

    Right wing thank you. Although being close to centre on the political spectrum, I’m probably a raving communist to some dunderhead like you?

    … politically correct …

    Simply believing women should be treated with respect is PC now?

    … clones.

    We’re not clones, we’re PZs sock puppets.

    Now hurry up, you’ll be late for your date with your hand.

  93. says

    pharylon:

    I really don’t think I’m strwamanning, but YMMV. He removed the original contents of the post, so I can’t quote them directly, he just said they were too easily misunderstood. I think that, in fact, the problem was he slipped up. I’m not saying PZ is playing at being feminist and is secretly misogynistic or anything crazy, but I do think, to paraphrase Avenue Q, “we’re all a little bit sexist sometimes.”

    Yeah, it sucks sometimes. It’s part of that “background sexism” all the kids are talking about these days. It’s hard to avoid, really.

    I didn’t think PZ was commenting on Bachmann’s appearance at all, though, as you stressed in the post to which I originally replied. Nor did he reference any sexual overtones. It was disturbing picture of a disturbing politician. It wasn’t until I looked back a second time I thought, “Oh, this is going to cause a shitstorm.”

    It seemed more a case of unintentional bad judgement, rather than an intentional denigration of Bachmann based on her gender or intrinsic appearance.

    So I think it’s a bit unfair to say

    PZ lost his feminism credibility to me with the Bachmann/corndog picture he later took down (without apologizing for).

    Granted, you are only speaking for yourself, as you say. I just think it’s a bit harsh.

    But that’s me. As you say, YMMV.

  94. pharylon says

    Interesting how you find it impossible to say that you think Elevatorgate “wasn’t a big deal” without mangling at least one key fact: Elevator Dude was not “drinking with” Rebecca Watson.

    If you accept that Watson is telling the truth, then you should stick to her version of events.

    If you think Watson is lying, then explain why you think this and justify it with evidence.

    I find it hard to believe that you somehow missed this basic fact, that there were no “drinking together” activities between Watson and ED. Conclusion: it is highly probable that you are lying yourself.

    Um, she said she was at the hotel bar until four in the morning talking to this man among others. That implies drinking, and if she later clarified that she wasn’t drinking at the bar, I think it’s understandable that I, Richard Dawkins, or anyone else, assumed she was drinking there. Since, you know, that’s what people generally go to bars for. :)

    Regardless, it’s still a very informal setting, and depending on the tone of the conversation, he could have felt it was acceptable. I mean, it’s hard for me to say as I wasn’t there. I do think women probably have to put up with unwanted attention than they want, and that’s a form of sexism. But at some point, someone has to hit on someone else. I don’t think hitting on the opposite sex is always wrong, and hanging out and talking with someone until four in the morning must mean you’re getting along well with that person.

    Now, if the tone of the conversation was more of a continuation of the panel, then yes, it was inappropriate. But that’s not the image conjured into my head from her initial Youtube account. Again, I could be wrong. That could absolutely be what it was like, but it’s not the image I (and I think, most) would picture when you set it up as being in a bar at 4:00 am.

    And, seeing that’s the impression I assume Dawkins got as well when he made his comment, then no, I don’t think it’s all that big of a deal. The way she described it, it didn’t sound like sexism to me. Maybe she didn’t do a good job of describing it at first, maybe I did a bad job of listening.

    I certainly don’t think it’s worse than making fun of women for vaguely phallic food.

  95. John D says

    Sally – I do not think it is cool or edgy to insult feminism. I only like to point out that “radical” feminism is a foolish and dangerous idea. The kind of “feminism” I am concerned about is the one where Watson can claim asking her for coffee is “sexualizing” while at the same time claiming that it is funny to insult men’s masturbation habits.

    I know many sane and reasonable women who call themselves feminists. This is fine when feminism is the idea that men and women deserve equal rights and access.

    The new version of radical feminism makes claims that include the idea the porn is equal to abuse, that men having sexual ideas about women is always objectification and that all men should act as if they are “potential” rapists. These claims are outrageous and should be discouraged.

    Nigel – are you saying it is healthy to treat the word “nigger” like it is some kind of sacred evil? You think the current hypocritical use of the word is good for social health? Currently, if you are black you can call someone a nigger (and do it with great glee) but if you are white you have to feel guilty and ashamed of your race and call it the “n” word. You think this is a good thing? Really?

    (This is about the time someone calls me a misogynist and racist… I will wait for it…. I have already been called sexist).

  96. SallyStrange, Spawn of Cthulhu says

    By the way, it’s perfectly plausible that PZ was accessing a bit of unconscious sexism in choosing a photo of Bachman. I missed the post in question so I have no opinion about that. It’s perfectly legitimate to critique PZ on that point. It’s entirely possible he was accessing some unconscious criticism, and nothing should stop anyone from pointing it out to him if/when it’s the case.

    But to say that it ruins his “feminist credibility,” for you, and at the same time using a false version of events to explain why you don’t think the Great Elevator Incident was a big deal?

    Not really buying whatever pharylon is selling.

  97. says

    … Hoggling: imagining that your angry wank session somehow represents a bold, courageous critique of feminism.

    Huh.

    Well, different strokes, ‘n all, I guess.

  98. pharylon says

    PZ lost his feminism credibility to me with the Bachmann/corndog picture he later took down (without apologizing for).

    Granted, you are only speaking for yourself, as you say. I just think it’s a bit harsh.

    But that’s me. As you say, YMMV.

    You’re right. It was too harsh. I apologize to PZ, for what that’s worth. How about this:

    I believe, from the whole Elevatorgate+Bachamnn thing that PZ is selectively applying his feminism ideals, probably not on purpose, and he has lost some credibility in my eyes for demanding better behavior of others (Dawkins) than he does of himself.

    I didn’t think PZ was commenting on Bachmann’s appearance at all, though, as you stressed in the post to which I originally replied. Nor did he reference any sexual overtones. It was disturbing picture of a disturbing politician. It wasn’t until I looked back a second time I thought, “Oh, this is going to cause a shitstorm.”

    I didn’t find the picture disturbing at all. I find Bachmann reprehensible, but the picture wasn’t anything bad, unless you make the sexism connection.

  99. John D says

    Sally says: “By the way, it’s perfectly plausible that PZ was accessing a bit of unconscious sexism in choosing a photo of Bachman.”

    Haha. Awesome support for your hero. He posts a picture of a politician he hates on his site, it shows her going down on a corn dog, he makes a comment about her lizard hinged jaw…. and…. (wait for it)… you claim it is “unconscious”.

    See – the problem with rude speech is that once you start doing it you have to let everyone else do it. PZ is the king of rude speech… and I am okay with this. The hypocrisy comes in when he makes special rules about what kind of rude speech is acceptable and what kind of rude speech is not acceptable.

  100. says

    John D:

    Nigel – are you saying it is healthy to treat the word “nigger” like it is some kind of sacred evil?

    Have I treated it that way? Not that I can tell.

    Do you support the use of the word nigger to demean someone?

    You think the current hypocritical use of the word is good for social health? Currently, if you are black you can call someone a nigger (and do it with great glee) but if you are white you have to feel guilty and ashamed of your race and call it the “n” word. You think this is a good thing? Really?

    Uhm… near as I can remember, I never once mentioned this. So I’m not sure what “Really?” is supposed to mean, here, other than you trying to imply I hold an opinion I have not stated.

    But it seems to me you find all discussion of social rules (that is, etiquette) to be useless:

    There is little value to be found in politically correct speech and the lefty dance around social rules (like how to ask someone for coffee).

  101. BismarkE says

    Pass the brain bleach, please. Also, I wish this post had the word “wank” in it a few more times. Hilarious.

  102. says

    Oh, man, once again the usual suspects are trying to steer this into a stupid discussion of radical feminism, further distorting the issue. This has never been about radical feminism. It’s been about common sense, ordinary respect for fellow skeptics and atheists, which that lot has tried to denounce as an infringement on their right as men.

    If you start whining about elevators and radfems and who is the true feminist and whatever, I will shut you down cold. So stop now.

    This thread is about an idiot caught hoggling. He thought it was about elevatorgate, but really, it’s about oblivious privilege and obnoxious stupidity.

  103. SallyStrange, Spawn of Cthulhu says

    Sally – I do not think it is cool or edgy to insult feminism.

    Your impression of a person who thinks this is amazingly accurate.

    I only like to point out that “radical” feminism is a foolish and dangerous idea.

    I am a radical feminist. The kind who believes that women are people. That makes me foolish and dangerous, eh?

    The kind of “feminism” I am concerned about is the one where Watson can claim asking her for coffee is “sexualizing” while at the same time claiming that it is funny to insult men’s masturbation habits.

    You appear to be lying through your teeth here. That, or you’re severely cognitively impaired. If you believe Watson’s version of events, and there is really no reason not to, then Watson’s assessment was correct: she was being sexualized. Also, making fun of men who write long posts on their blogs about their masturbation habits, while thinking that this constitutes some sort of clever riposte to Watson’s daring, “radical” suggestion that men not hit on women who don’t want to be hit on, is extremely funny.

    I know many sane and reasonable women who call themselves feminists. This is fine when feminism is the idea that men and women deserve equal rights and access.

    Right, feminists are okay with you as long as they don’t act like feminists and don’t make you uncomfortable in any way. Yes, my original assessment of you is proving more and more correct, your dishonest protestations notwithstanding. Perhaps you are lacking in self-understanding? It’s the only reason I can think of for your obviously false denial of the label of “dude who thinks it’s cool and edgy to criticize feminism.” All you’ve done so far is say, no no I just think it’s cool and edgy to criticize RADICAL feminism. For some reason you think that changes the meaning of the statement. It doesn’t.

    The new version of radical feminism makes claims that include the idea the porn is equal to abuse

    Citation needed

    that men having sexual ideas about women is always objectification

    Citation needed

    and that all men should act as if they are “potential” rapists.

    All men are potential rapists. Do you have trouble with the meaning of the word “potential”? All women are potential rapists too, it’s just that the likelihood of them being an actual rapist is much diminished.

    These claims are outrageous and should be discouraged.

    You need to demonstrate several things for your argument to gain ground. First, you need to show that your claims about “radical feminism” are true. That is, you need to demonstrate that you understand what you’re attempting to critique. Then you can work on demonstrating why the claims made by radical feminism are truly outrageous. Then, you can work on showing why you think the outcome of “discouraging” people from making such claims would be positive for everyone, not just misogynists.

    Nigel – are you saying it is healthy to treat the word “nigger” like it is some kind of sacred evil? You think the current hypocritical use of the word is good for social health? Currently, if you are black you can call someone a nigger (and do it with great glee) but if you are white you have to feel guilty and ashamed of your race and call it the “n” word. You think this is a good thing? Really?

    Oh, looky. He thinks it’s “edgy” to yell “nigger” out loud as well. How adorable.

    (This is about the time someone calls me a misogynist and racist… I will wait for it…. I have already been called sexist).

    Dude… if it’s happening that much, that you’ve come to expect it… Maybe you are. Ever thought of that?

  104. Janine, The Little Top Of Venom, OM says

    PZ links to and makes a comment about a man who thinks that his paying a woman to watch him masterbate is somehow in defiance of the known neo-puritan and neo-nazis, Watson and Myers. And this brings out menz who complain about leftist liberals and feminists.

    How squalid and petty of the menz.

  105. John D says

    Thanks PZ for telling me what this is really about. I am too stupid to figure it out myself. And here I thought it was about hypocrisy. Instead it is about privilege. I feel better now that I know this is all about the concept of privilege and how this concept is used to excuse hypocrisy.

    It is clear to me now. You are so smart.

  106. Sal Bro says

    On the surface, all the hoggling over PZ by F. Hogglemeister and Abbie Smithoggle’s hogglehoard is kinda funny in how pathetic and weird it is. But it’s been making me increasingly uneasy. It’s just abnormal to obsess about one person so much. PZ, the mockery of those loons is fun, but do also take care of yourself.

  107. SallyStrange, Spawn of Cthulhu says

    Sally says: “By the way, it’s perfectly plausible that PZ was accessing a bit of unconscious sexism in choosing a photo of Bachman.”

    Haha. Awesome support for your hero. He posts a picture of a politician he hates on his site, it shows her going down on a corn dog, he makes a comment about her lizard hinged jaw…. and…. (wait for it)… you claim it is “unconscious”.

    Most sexism that I encounter on a day to day basis is unconscious.

    The thing that distinguishes feminists from misogynists is not that feminists never ever say a sexist word or do a sexist thing. The thing that distinguishes them is the response to the criticism.

    That is, when you tell a feminist that he may have done something sexist, the response will be, “Hmm. Really? I didn’t see it that way at first. I didn’t intend to. I’ll think about this and try to avoid it in the future.”

    However, when you tell a misogynist that he may have done something sexist, the response is typically denial. The more sexist, the more vehement the denial is. Rarely, you run into the sort of person who is blatant about really sincerely hating women, and doesn’t mind claiming the label of “sexist.” But these sorts are a tiny minority. If they were the source of our gender equality problems, our problem would be fixed already. But they’re not. The problem stems from subconscious assumptions made by both men and women about their roles in society, and what it means to be masculine or feminine.

    A feminist understands that it’s worth fixing. A misogynist doesn’t want to hear about it. That’s the difference.

  108. pharylon says

    All men are potential rapists. Do you have trouble with the meaning of the word “potential”? All women are potential rapists too, it’s just that the likelihood of them being an actual rapist is much diminished.

    Yeah…. I have to disagree there. All people are potential murders, astronauts, millionaires as well. That is to say, most people you meet are not, will not, and have never been any of those things. Worrying that the average person you meet on the street is a rapist is pretty unreasonable (note, I said average, if there are warning signs, they shouldn’t be ignored!). I know you didn’t really say that, but it seemed to be the implication. Am I misunderstanding?

  109. theophontes says

    Franc Hoggle has proved he’s a “derp”
    telling us of his trouser snake’s burp
    While over at ERV
    he brags he’s a perv –
    but reaction there’s just cricket’s chirp…

  110. John D says

    No Sally – you are wrong. A misogynist is someone who hates women. You really should use the word properly.

    A person can easily support traditional roles for men and women and not hate women.

    Definition of MISOGYNY (from our friends at Webster)
    : a hatred of women

  111. Audley Z. Darkheart OM (OS), purveyor of candy and lies says

    Slightly more on topic:
    Pierce:

    “Hoggle [transitive verb]: to …”

    Already covered by Rusty Venture:

    When you jerk off so much your dick gets all red and sore.

  112. says

    All people are potential murders, astronauts, millionaires as well. That is to say, most people you meet are not, will not, and have never been any of those things.

    I believe it’s 1 in 4 women who have been raped, or an attempt made on them.

    Worrying that the average person you meet on the street is a rapist is pretty unreasonable

    Most rapes are not done on the street.

  113. Nerd of Redhead, Dancer on Trolls says

    Am I misunderstanding?

    Yep, deliberately misunderstanding. Why don’t you shut up and listen, instead of acting like you don’t know what is going on. You’ve been around long enough you should have picked up on it by now, or you a serious learning disability.

  114. Paul W. says

    ChasCPeterson:

    Srsly?

    Yes, “teaching our children to fly” does suggest an androcentric, homuncular view of semen. IMO that intensely archaic stoopidness masquerading as merely charming quaint hokeyness is a big part of the joke. Combined with bizarre cartoony images of scads of little children swooping and diving and careening—wait, that’s what you do with your children? How do they all end up?—oh nooo! Oh, the humanity! Think of the children!

    With five cute and sweet-sounding words, “teaching our children to fly” casually evokes several levels of over-the-top dumbness about reproduction, about what’s an “unborn child,” about what’s a person that an adult is responsible for, what would constitute responsible behavior if that were true, etc.

    It’s making fun of all of that; it’s so wrong.

    Besides, it was my wife who thought it was utterly hysterically funny, and brought it to my attention as the Funniest Thing Evar. So it couldn’t be sexist, right? (<– joke)

  115. Linnea the lurker says

    Pharylon @134

    But at some point, someone has to hit on someone else. I don’t think hitting on the opposite sex is always wrong, and hanging out and talking with someone until four in the morning must mean you’re getting along well with that person.

    Now, if the tone of the conversation was more of a continuation of the panel, then yes, it was inappropriate.

    You’d think that on the internet, where everything is right there, in writing, people wouldn’t get such important details wrongs. RW and EG were not “hanging out and talking with” each other. At most, he was in her general vicinity, listening to but not participating in a group conversation. His invitation to his room for “coffee” was the first thing he ever said to her.

    Now, do you see where the problem is?

  116. pharylon says

    1 in 4 college women have either been raped or suffered attempted rape.

    When 1 in 4 college folks are victims of murder, or attempted murder, maybe you can draw this equivalence. Until then, you are vastly underestimating the chance of rape.

    I have a lot of trouble with that statistic. It just seems high. I’m not saying it’s wrong, it just seems high to me. I don’t have the time now, but I’ll have to follow that up later. I will admit that, if true, it changes things.

    Still, like with many crimes, if I’m not mistaken women are vastly more likely to be raped by someone they know than a stranger.

    We always worry our children will be kidnapped by some stranger in a van, but it (almost) always turns out to be the estranged parent or unhinged uncle that does it. With rape, you need to worry more about the ex boyfriend than the guy waiting in line at the unisex bathroom.

  117. McWaffle says

    Why doesn’t everybody respect how little regard I give to others’ emotions? Is that so much to ask? I should be able to use racial insults and hit on whoever I like, and they should all give me high fives for my commitment to equality! Since I’m not racist, everybody should clap when I use racist words! Why doesn’t everybody understand that I’m a paragon of rationality? That I’m BEYOND race and gender?! If you think I said something sexist, you must be the REAL sexist! Why can’t I just do and say whatever I want and have everybody love and respect me unconditionally? Don’t you know who I am? ME!

    Just remember, if you’re insulted by something I say, it proves you are an irrational hypocrite that cares only for yourself. Think a bit harder about how I feel next time, will you?

  118. SallyStrange, Spawn of Cthulhu says

    As I said in the thread about Mennonite rapists: John D, if you can’t be bothered to take measures to make yourself stand out from the mass of people (men and women) who really do hate women, then don’t be surprised if you get lumped in with them.

    If you can’t be arsed to oppose the rhetorical, ideological, and political efforts of those who sincerely hate women, then sorry, your apathy towards women’s rights doesn’t earn you a “non-woman-hater” badge.

    Women are people. Get on board, or don’t complain when people observe that you’re not on board.

    To Pharylon: surveys of young men in the US indicate that, if you don’t use the word “rape,” 12% of them will admit to forcing or attempting to force someone to have sex with them. That’s 1 in 8. Let’s say that the surveys were all incredibly flawed and the percentage is actually half that. 6% of men, or 1 in 24, is still way too high.

    About 6% of rapists end up in jail because of their crime.

    Those add up to lousy odds for a woman. Attempting to paint women who observe these odds and act accordingly as irrational is really not helping you differentiate yourself from a misogynist. I do hope that you consider “differentiating myself from misogynists” as a worthy goal that’s worth pursuing.

  119. says

    pharylon:

    I have a lot of trouble with that statistic. It just seems high.

    It does, doesn’t it? It would imply there’s a deep social issue here, one that deserves careful and rational consideration.

    It’s interesting you so blithely choose to discount the statistic.

    Still, like with many crimes, if I’m not mistaken women are vastly more likely to be raped by someone they know than a stranger.

    Most definitely! That does not mean women don’t get raped by strangers to a far larger degree than other people are murdered.

    And they are also more likely to be raped by a stranger who follows them into an elevator, rather than the guy who does not follow them into an elevator.

    These are the sorts of situational judgements women must make all the time.

  120. pharylon says

    Yep, deliberately misunderstanding. Why don’t you shut up and listen, instead of acting like you don’t know what is going on. You’ve been around long enough you should have picked up on it by now, or you a serious learning disability.

    That just seems rude. I did specifically say that she didn’t state that, it was just the implication I got, and I wanted clarification before I started to argue with her about it.

    Really, come on. I just hadn’t jumped into her argument with John D because I pretty much agreed with Sally. She was making her points well enough I didn’t feel the need to butt in. That was the first time I’d seen something she said that bugged me, and so I thought I was probably misunderstanding. So I asked for clarification.

    Man, can’t a guy even ask if his assumptions are wrong without getting attacked? Isn’t asking for clarification and making sure you have a clear understanding of the situation exactly what we want? I know I’m not a regular commenter (longtime reader, though!) but come on. I was being pretty civil there.

  121. pharylon says

    I have a lot of trouble with that statistic. It just seems high.

    It does, doesn’t it? It would imply there’s a deep social issue here, one that deserves careful and rational consideration.

    It’s interesting you so blithely choose to discount the statistic.

    I didn’t blithely discount it. I said I’ll do some in-depth reading on it later. Don’t have time now… I’ve got to get some work done. And with that said, I need to tear myself away from this thread. It’s sucked up my morning!

  122. Ing: Head of Vagina Gastapo says

    No Sally – you are wrong. A misogynist is someone who hates women. You really should use the word properly.

    A person can easily support traditional roles for men and women and not hate women

    No you can’t. The traditional roles are ones that place women subservient. This can only be justified with assesing them as inherently inferior and then responding either thruogh hate or some twisted whiteman’s burden esq equivlent.

    Let’s do a simple demographic swap and see if this fits

    No Sally – you are wrong. A racist is someone who hates blacks. You really should use the word properly.

    A person can easily support traditional roles for whites and colloreds and not hate colloreds

  123. SallyStrange, Spawn of Cthulhu says

    Man, can’t a guy even ask if his assumptions are wrong without getting attacked? Isn’t asking for clarification and making sure you have a clear understanding of the situation exactly what we want? I know I’m not a regular commenter (longtime reader, though!) but come on. I was being pretty civil there.

    As an alternative to whining, you could try googling “rape statistics” before you just discount what other people are saying, in full knowledge of the fact that you are speaking on a subject of which you are ignorant, compared to your interlocutors.

    That way, you wouldn’t look like a whining lazy idiot whose axe-grinding is more important to him than self-education and actual data.

  124. Nerd of Redhead, Dancer on Trolls says

    It just seems high. I’m not saying it’s wrong, it just seems high to me.

    Sorry fuckwit, but it sticks until you can show solid evidence otherwise. Your opinion is that of an asshat at the moment, so we don’t give a flying fuck about your unsupported opinions.

    Isn’t asking for clarification and making sure you have a clear understanding of the situation exactly what we want?

    Then shut the fuck up and listen. You aren’t listening, you are preaching.

  125. McWaffle says

    Actually, I remember being a huge asshole in my freshman year of college (2005) about that very statistic. I know and understand the exact feeling. I was a huge ass about when they made us watch the “please don’t wear racist costumes to Halloween” video as well. I think a lot of people go through a bit of a egoistic, hyper-rationalist, quasi-libertarian stage.

  126. Audley Z. Darkheart OM (OS), purveyor of candy and lies says

    pharylon:

    That just seems rude.

    I’m sure someone will call the WAAAAAAAAH-bmulance momentarily. Just hang tight!

  127. Ing says

    Man, can’t a guy even ask if his assumptions are wrong without getting attacked? Isn’t asking for clarification and making sure you have a clear understanding of the situation exactly what we want? I know I’m not a regular commenter (longtime reader, though!) but come on. I was being pretty civil there.

    Ask for the list of anti-feminist trolls and see if any of your behavior could be taken as that. That’ll go a way to explaining if people are mad at you.

  128. pharylon says

    OK, one last post before I go: I made the comment questioning you before anyone brought up rape statistics, and when they did I freely admitted they would be a game changer if true (and I would read up on them later).

    It’s entirely possible I’m wrong about them. I wouldn’t have imagined that the statistics were even remotely that high, but I’ve stated repeatedly I may be wrong. I will be googling it later when I have time (seriously, I’m already behind for the day). I think it’s possible to educate someone genuinely looking for answers, and who bends over backwards to say “I may be wrong, but…” when they disagree with you, or even just ask for a clarification on your position.

    If that’s whining, then I’m guilty of whining. I hope to continue to whine the rest of my life, looking for people to help me understand where my views of the world are wrong.

    Thanks to most of you, though. It’s been an enlightening morning.

  129. SallyStrange, Spawn of Cthulhu says

    I’m sure someone will call the WAAAAAAAAH-bmulance momentarily.

    Actually, I called it preemptively when I saw that there was a post referencing Rebecca Watson today. I figured we’d be needing their services. And here it is!

  130. says

    pharylon:

    I didn’t blithely discount it. I said I’ll do some in-depth reading on it later.

    I apologize. “Blithely” was an ill-chosen word.

    Your initial reaction to the statistic, one of disbelief, is common among men. Not so common among women. I considered all the women I know, and how many have been raped, and the number (1 in 6) seems about right.

    Keep in mind, the 1 in 4 is college women, and includes both rape, and attempted rape.

    Anyway, I’m glad you’re going to research this. Too many menz just say, “That seems high,” and move on.

  131. Hairhead says

    Aarrgh! I have read several thousand posts of this Elevatorgate garbage, trying to come up with a post which actually adds something, rather than wearing the rut deeper.

    Maybe I’ve got something.

    One common thing which the apologists for EG bring up over and over again is, “He only asked her for coffee!”. These people also make many other statements of that ilk. Their basic stance is: “He didn’t ask her for SEX!” or “It’s an elevator, not a rape-palace!” etc. and so on. I have to call them “Dictionary-Nazis” (and I’m not Godwinning the thread).

    Their entire defense is mind-numbing literalness. Every adult person knows that asking someone to one’s hotel room for coffee at 4am is actually asking for sex. Not these people. Most people realize that cornering a physically smaller person in a small, windowless room with a closed door and suggesting invasive physical intimacy, against the previously-expressed wishes of that person is both disrespectful and creepy. No, they say, I looked up “elevator” in the dictionary and it doesn’t say, “A place where women are frequently raped”, therefore Watson and any other women who are creeped out are sexist jerks!

    What this is, really, is solipsism. The entire world exists only as an extension of themselves. Therefore there is neither context nor subtext, and no other person has an existence worth valuing. This is why the discussion of Elevatorgate quickly degenerated to “Watson should be raped!” and other such obscenities. To these people, we (and Watson, and PZ) don’t really exist as people.

    Not really well expressed, but just some thoughts before I go to work.

  132. Ing says

    @Pharylon

    So, I don’t think spanking is good. I’m not defending it. Not at all. But I don’t think it’s the worst thing ever, and I’m more speaking out of the hyperbole here than anything else. Like, for instance, that they should go to jail for advocating spanking because someone who bought their book killed their child. That’s crazy, unless maybe the book advocated tying children to the bed and beating them for hours. But I doubt it, or the linked segment would have probably brought it up.

    This is the exact sort of bullshit that makes people think you’re just an asshole.

    You’re doing Devil’s Advocate Trolling.

  133. Audley Z. Darkheart OM (OS), purveyor of candy and lies says

    John D:

    A person can easily support traditional roles for men and women and not hate women.

    Suuuuuure. Those men who “support traditional [gender] roles” just don’t want us to be educated, in the workforce, to have control of our bodies, or live our lives as we see fit. In other words, Get in the kitchen and make me a sammich, bitch.

    Actively working to take our hard-earned rights away is nothing short of hateful.

  134. Ing says

    What you’re doing it seemingly arguing indefensible positions simply to upset people and then retreat into “I was just sayin!”

  135. Audley Z. Darkheart OM (OS), purveyor of candy and lies says

    Sally,
    Ha! Awesome pic.

    Oh, how I wish the WAAAAAAAH-mbulance would actually take the whiners away!

  136. Tabby Lavalamp says

    Pharylon @134…

    Regardless, it’s still a very informal setting, and depending on the tone of the conversation, he could have felt it was acceptable.

    It would be interesting to hear her how her tone when she said “I dislike being hit on at these conferences” and “I’m tired and going to bed” made it seem acceptable to ignore her actual words.

    I mean, it’s hard for me to say as I wasn’t there. I do think women probably have to put up with unwanted attention than they want, and that’s a form of sexism. But at some point, someone has to hit on someone else.

    Even if the person being hit on has talked at length about “please don’t hit on me”? Neither PZ Myers or Rebecca Watson have said that nobody should ever hit on anyone again. As much as I’ve read of the comments, nobody here has said that. The only time it ever comes up is when the words are being put into the mouths by critics who see any talk of “appropriate” as a draconian attempt to stifle human sexuality.

    I don’t think hitting on the opposite sex is always wrong

    Nobody here does. I do hope you’re not around any open flames as I worry about the safety of that strawman you just built.

    and hanging out and talking with someone until four in the morning must mean you’re getting along well with that person.

    It would. If, you know, you had been talking with that person. On the other hand, this was a group of people which, yes, EG was a part of, but he didn’t say anything to Watson the entire time. There was no rapport built up over hours of conversation. I don’t know about you, but I neither get along well or get along poorly with people I’ve never spoken to.

    Again, I could be wrong.

    By how much you’re either misrepresenting or forgetting about how everything happened, yes, you could be wrong.

    That could absolutely be what it was like, but it’s not the image I (and I think, most) would picture when you set it up as being in a bar at 4:00 am.

    When I picture being in a bar at 4am and one person invites another back to their room, I see them has having personally conversed at some point. I imagine that they would have built up some rapport and that their personal conversation had gone well. This isn’t even just if the interest is sexual. If it’s purely a platonic interest, there should be some interaction before inviting someone back to your room.

    Here are the important aspects that get ignored by those accusing Watson and Myers of some form of sexual feminazism…

    EG had never previously spoken to Watson.
    Watson said she doesn’t like being hit on, and EG was there for that talk.
    Watson said, at 4am, that she was tired and going to bed, and EG was there to hear that.
    EG then, as soon as Watson was alone, invited her to his room.

    My favourite (or perhaps “favourite” with quotes would be more applicable) part of the whole thing is hearing the critics keep crying “He only invited her for coffee, can’t men invite women for coffee anymore?!?!” while ignoring the whole alone with a strange man in his room aspect. And yes, he was a stranger. She hadn’t been getting along well with him because they had never spoken to each other before the elevator.

    I don’t know about you, but even if I had been talking and getting along well with someone, if I say that I’m tired and going to bed, if they ignore that and ask me for coffee at that point (as opposed to some time the next day) – in their room or not – suddenly we’re not getting along so well.

  137. Janine, The Little Top Of Venom, OM says

    A person can easily support traditional roles for men and women and not hate women.

    And we now get to root of all of the menz discomfort about any form of feminism.

    So, John D, how much education can a woman get before she is too educated to be a good wife and obedient mate? Should a married woman be allowed to have a job? If so, how much responcibility should she be allowed to have? How should a woman be punished if she has no desire to follow “traditional” gender roles.

    How much do you hate women who try to rise above their “traditional” role of obedient house maker?

  138. SallyStrange, Spawn of Cthulhu says

    I’m rather bummed that my chosen nickname for the still-anonymous would-be Casanova, “Elevator Dude,” with its much more amusing and double-entendre-laden abbreviation, never really caught on.

  139. Silver says

    Has anyone else interpreted that his tryst might have been completely virtual?

    She has a couple of kids and a real life she keeps separate from the ‘net.

    Sounds like he was only part of her “‘net” life to me. And this eastern european lady may have literally been a continent away, on Skype or a webcam. Would explain why he only jerked off instead of having sex right?

  140. Audley Z. Darkheart OM (OS), purveyor of candy and lies says

    Ing,

    The traditional role for women is “livestock”

    Too true. Every time I here about a woman’s “traditional role” I shudder.

  141. says

    Silver:

    Has anyone else interpreted that his tryst might have been completely virtual?

    I believe that’s the working hypothesis. Nothin’ like a little chatroulette.

    What amuses me is Hoddle’s apparent assumption he’s being shocking or something, rather than simply vaguely sad.

  142. theophontes says

    @ Pharylon

    Here is a report that might be worth reading. Please do so carefully.

    The Sexual Victimisation of College Women. (Link)

    (The above mentioned statistics appear on page 10)

    The report comes compliments of Phil Giordana at ERV. (Who thought he was proving something completely different to what the report concludes. He seems to think he is banned here. I thought he had a reprieve of his dungeon sentencing.)

  143. says

    A person can easily support traditional roles for men and women and not hate women.

    Um, no. For the most part, many people who support “traditional roles”* are very anti-women. Even if the individual themselves might not be, the system is still an anti-women system.

    *for your culture’s view of “traditional” anyways

  144. John D says

    Hey nitwits. I was explaining the definition of misogynist. I claimed that someone who supports traditional gender roles is not necessarily a misogynist.

    So then… like six nitwits go all off butthurt that I am claiming women should be “barefoot and pregnant” or something.

    My specific point was only about the definition of misogynist. The word is used incorrectly as a baseless accusation against anyone who disagrees with any radical feminist assertion. It’s name calling at its most obvious.

    PS – the 1 in 4 rape statistic is pure bullshit. It was created from an unscientific magazine poll and included in the definition of rape things like “Have you ever had sex when you didn’t really want to?” Somehow if you answer yes to this question you have been raped. I guess this mean my wife has raped me. Don’t buy the bullshit folks. There are piles of it around.

  145. Rey Fox says

    What amuses me is Hoddle’s apparent assumption he’s being shocking or something, rather than simply vaguely sad.

    I’ll give him points for honesty. The standard move out of the MRA playbook is to claim that your girlfriend/wife/booty call totally agrees that Watson is an irrational fembeast in his distorted version of the story.

  146. says

    Hey nitwits. I was explaining the definition of misogynist. I claimed that someone who supports traditional gender roles is not necessarily a misogynist.

    You weren’t fucking reading right. “Traditional gender roles” are inheritably misogynic, and those who support them are supporting a misogynic system. You don’t need intent for an action to be sexist and misogynic.

  147. Hairhead says

    John D. – “traditional gender roles” to hundreds of millions of people MEANS “barefoot and pregnant”. You ought to know this.

    Now just tell us: what “traditional gender role” do you want women to play? (Notice, no snark or sarcasm or loading the question to make you out an ass, just a request for information.)

  148. Rey Fox says

    So then… like six nitwits go all off butthurt that I am claiming women should be “barefoot and pregnant” or something.

    Maybe you should clarify what you mean by “traditional roles” and try to explain how they’re not all rooted in subservience, and how the very idea of designating a subset of roles/occupations for women isn’t inherently anti-freedom and treating women as less than human.

    I think Sally has you pretty well pegged.

    My specific point was only about the definition of misogynist.

    You can argue definitions all you want, you’re still a strawmanning idiot.

    and included in the definition of rape things like “Have you ever had sex when you didn’t really want to?”

    Keep digging that hole.

  149. John D says

    I will repeat. Misogyny is the “hatred of women”. The operative word here is hatred. Hatred is an emotional state. It makes no claims about roles, or rights, or anything.

    A person can “love” women and still believe in traditional gender roles.

    What part of the word hatred do you not understand?

    hate (thanks to our friends at Webster)
    noun, often attributive \ˈhāt\
    1
    a : intense hostility and aversion usually deriving from fear, anger, or sense of injury

    Please read your dictionary.

  150. illuminata says

    the 1 in 4 rape statistic is pure bullshit

    Translation: I’m probably a rapist, so I have to say this.

    Bigots are boring, worthless creatures the world is better off without. So, John, do the world a great big favor and jump off a really high bridge.

    kisses!

  151. The Panic Man And His Gloves Of Running Urgently says

    Why, exactly, are people giving these trolls the time of day? They’re only here to try and convince people of bullshit – namely, that they, in their “women are stupid for sticking up for themselves” and “hurrrr stupid bitch cunt twatson” fugue states, are somehow more feminist than PZ. They’re obvious ERV-scum brought here by He Of The Empty Jergens Bottle to follow up on his stupidity, and like all scum, they need to be skimmed off.

  152. Ing says

    Can anyone source either John Dees claim that it’s a magazine poll or source the statistic?

    I saw 1/6 which isn’t really much better

  153. illuminata says

    A person can “love” women and still believe in traditional gender roles.

    No he can’t, you putrid piece of congealed monkey vomit. He cannot think women are supposed to be fuckable mommy house slaves and still love them.

    And you clearly don’t think so either, or you wouldn’t have used scare quotes around the word.

  154. John D says

    Ray – do you know what a strawman is? How is my point about the definition of rape from a stupid magazine pole a strawman? Please start making sense and using words properly.

    Definition of STRAW MAN (from our friends at Webster)
    1
    : a weak or imaginary opposition (as an argument or adversary) set up only to be easily confuted
    2
    : a person set up to serve as a cover for a usually questionable transaction

    Do you ever tire of making up the definitions for words?

  155. Rich Woods says

    Traditional roles? Why the hell would anyone want to restrict societal options to what happened in the past, rather than encouraging everyone to find out (in their pursuit of life, liberty and happiness) what works better now and potentially in the future?

    Oh yeah. Some people don’t feel complete unless they can control others.

  156. Ing says

    @John Dee

    We get your definition. You’re just wrong because traditional roles are either hateful or dehumanizing (which you know…hearing “it’s not personal” has never lifted the spirits of a single slave)

    Why, exactly, are people giving these trolls the time of day? They’re only here to try and convince people of bullshit – namely, that they, in their “women are stupid for sticking up for themselves” and “hurrrr stupid bitch cunt twatson” fugue states, are somehow more feminist than PZ. They’re obvious ERV-scum brought here by He Of The Empty Jergens Bottle to follow up on his stupidity, and like all scum, they need to be skimmed off.

    A) It has been shown to make people who are victims or victimized feel better and comfortable about speaking

    B) Nonsense shouldn’t go unchallenged for the benefit of the lurkers

    C) If you string them along enough they loose the facade and degrade into the “Dumb cunt” level rants.

  157. Beatrice, anormalement indécente says

    A person can “love” women and still believe in traditional gender roles.

    A husband can also beat his wife because he “loves her too much” (yes, that excuse is actually used, probably along with “but you’re making me do this”). He wouldn’t qualify as a misogynist either, right? Because he loves his wife so much.

  158. says

    John_D

    Misogyny is the “hatred of women”.

    Hatred of women is what “Traditional gender role” is based on, cupcake. Reread the part about intent before you accuse people of being unable to comprehend you.

    As for rape statistics, use Google scholars. Obviously the result will vary depending on certian populations but you will notice that if you narrow it with “in college” or “spouse/wife/intimate partner” you will find that it’s higher than you think.

  159. John D says

    Nice personal attack illuminata. Hmmmmm…. I claim a statistic is bullshit and ask people to be careful of the way rape statistics are used and this makes me a potential rapist.

  160. heliobates says

    What part of the word hatred do you not understand?

    If your actions convey hatred and contempt for an “other”, does it matter if you ever personally feel that you hate the “other”?

    Not from the “other’s” point of view, it doesn’t. You may as well admit to hating them, because you treat them as if you do.

  161. Rey Fox says

    do you know what a strawman is?

    Your definition of “radical feminism” falls under that category.

    Would you care to address “traditional gender roles” now?

  162. says

    Oh look I even did some of it for you.

    The incidence of violence and acquaintance rape in dating relationships among college men and women.
    Aizenman, Marta; Kelley, Georgette
    Journal of College Student Development, Vol 29(4), Jul 1988, 305-311.

    Abstract

    Investigated the following aspects of violence in dating relationships among college students: incidence and type of violence, attitudes toward such violence, sex-related differences in being the perpetrator or victim, relationships to punishments received as children, and association of violence with personality variables (e.g., well-being, sense of control, comfort with one’s sexuality). 400 male and 400 female undergraduates completed questionnaires regarding their experiences with abuse in romantic relationships. The incidence of violence reported was 25% for women and 7% for men. Ss’ varying perceptions of relationship violence are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)

    You will find that some stats are higher or lower. Even if some of it is lowered, it still doesn’t mean everything is a-okay.

  163. Audley Z. Darkheart OM (OS), purveyor of candy and lies says

    John D:

    PS –the 1 in 4 rape statistic is pure bullshit.

    Not according to the DoJ, but what do those assholes know?

    According to United States Department of Justice document Criminal Victimization in the United States, there were overall 191,670 victims of rape or sexual assault reported in 2005. [19] 1 of 6 U.S. women has experienced an attempted or completed rape.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_statistics#United_States

    Read the article. It explains why that number is lower than the 1 in 4 stat (the report has been critisized for having too narrow a definition or rape).

  164. Ing says

    Have you had sexual intercourse when you didn’t want to because a man gave you alcohol or drugs?

    An affirmative answer was counted as rape.

    And that’s an argument AGAINST the poll!? Okkkkkkkkkkkkk so what should we call ruffies now since “date rape drug” is apparently wrong? “Surprise Penetration Happy Fun Time Drug”?

    Seriously, for moaning about definitions, what one for rape are you using?

  165. Ing says

    I hope you don’t mind if I treat your skepticism, skeptically.

    1) Using a more recent figure wouldn’t have made much difference. For completed rape, more recent major studies have found that around 10%-15% of women have been raped sometime in their lifetime, which is in line with what Koss found. (For example).

    2) I also agree that the wording of that one question, regarding alcohol, was too ambiguous. However, removing that question’s results didn’t make a large difference to Koss’ findings.

    Also, later researchers repeated Koss’ study with that question replaced by “Have you engaged in sexual intercourse when you didn’t want to but were so intoxicated under the influence of alcohol or drugs that you could not stop it or object?” It didn’t change the results.

    3) “Only 27 percent of the women Koss counted as having been raped identified themselves as rape victims.”

    73% answered no to the question, “it was definitely rape”; it’s not safe to conclude from that they’re sure it was not rape!

    We have to consider context: we’re talking about young women, most of whom were raped by someone they knew (usually someone they were dating and had already been sexually fooling around with), who were in high school over 20 years ago, when discussions of date rape were extremely rare. It is any surprise that most of them weren’t positive that their experience was “definitely” rape?

    4) “Moreover, 42 percent of labeled rape victims, went on to have sex with their attackers at a later date.”

    All we know from the study is that 43% had intercourse with their rapist (or “rapist”) at some later date. We don’t know anything else; we don’t know how many of those later occasions were voluntary and how many were repeat rapes, for example. We do know, however, that the typical rapist is very often a boyfriend – someone the victim is dating before the rape.

    So what does this 43% figure really tell us? IMO, it could show that girls who are violently abused (and rape is a form of violent abuse, no less than battery) by boyfriends don’t always immediately break off the relationship. Is that really a shocker, or anything that we should accept as proof that a girl or women can’t really have been raped? (Over 50% of the rape victims in Koss’ study were raped by someone they were dating – and had gone at least as far as “petting above the waist” with them before the rape.) (Also, keep in mind that we’re hardly talking about a group of experienced, sexually confident woman here; over 40% of the rape victims were virgins at the time of the rape.)

    This critique of Koss just restates the old “a woman who stays must not really have been abused” myth.

    5) “If 1/4 of college women are being raped,”

    That’s a misstatement of what the study found. Koss was measuring lifetime prevalence, not rapes that take place during college years. (Also, the 1/4 figure includes attempted rapes, which isn’t clear from how you state it here.)

    An more accurate statement of Koss’ finding is “one in four college women has experience rape or attempted rape in her lifetime.”

    6) I’m not sure that you know or appreciate the historic context of Koss’ work.

    Before Koss, many people argued that rape happened very, relatively rarely — Neil Gilbert argued that the “real” number of rapes was around 1 in 1000 women, for example. Koss’ findings — which have been replicated by later studies — showed that rape was a much more serious and widespread problem than that; that most rapes aren’t reported to police; and that the typical rapist is not a stranger jumping out of the bushes, but a friend, acquaintance or boyfriend.

    None of these findings are at all controversial today.

    Koss’ studies weren’t perfect, but they were innovative and important, and their major findings have been replicated by later studies. I don’t think calling her work “bogus” is reasonable, or shows much familiarity with the field of rape prevalence research.

  166. John D says

    Right Ing – we all know that if two people get drunk and have sex that it is always the man’s fault. I forgot this feminist rule.

  167. Nerd of Redhead, Dancer on Trolls says

    PS – the 1 in 4 rape statistic is pure bullshit.Citation needed, but you knew that and failed to provide one. Put up, or shut the fuck up. Your opinion isn’t worth the electrons used to post your idiocy. Back it up, or shut up.

  168. Rey Fox says

    Seriously, for moaning about definitions, what one for rape are you using?

    The “man jumps out of the bushes, overpowers, and rapes someone” definition. So if it’s not a stranger, and there’s no physical overpowering, and no bushes, then it must not be rape.

    Sort of like how misogyny is only if someone throws darts at pictures of women all day.

  169. Mattir-ritated says

    I’ve given some thought to the Bachmann picture, which I thought was quite amusing, and I’ve decided that it doesn’t strike me as particularly sexist. Should Rick Perry or any other sex-hating scold be photographed eating such silly food, I would be glad to mock them. It has nothing to do with the configuration of their genitals, it’s the juxtaposition of their bizarre rhetoric on sex and the sexual associations of the food.

    This is quite different from the frequent and tedious comments about Ann Coulter’s appearance. Should Ann Coulter or Bill O’Reilly take to ranting even more about porn and sexual activity and then get photographed wearing something that’s unintentionally similar to bondage gear, I hope PZ will post the photo. Particularly if it’s a photo of them TOGETHER…

  170. illuminata says

    Don’t start whining about personal attack now, cumdrip, since you started it. Whiny sack of bigot shit.

    Have you had sexual intercourse when you didn’t want to because a man gave you alcohol or drugs?

    An affirmative answer was counted as rape.

    See what I mean? Rapist. The only sort of dude who is this invested in pretending this isn’t rape, is a rapist.

  171. Ing says

    Seriously whether it’s 1/4 or 1/6 or 1/8 there’s still he fairly shocking problem that it’s a ratio of two single digit numbers.

  172. says

    Here is another specifically pertaining to rape:

    Rape on campus: The prevalence of sexual assault while enrolled in college.
    Finley, Colleen; Corty, Eric
    Journal of College Student Development, Vol 34(2), Mar 1993, 113-117.

    Abstract

    Examined the frequency with which sexual assault (SA) occurs on a college campus and determined its prevalence involving force, alcohol, and psychological pressure. Prevalence rates were compared between 99 female and 95 male 1st-yr students and 148 female and 183 male upper-level (UL) students. Focus was on SA that occurred only while Ss were enrolled in the university and on campus. Ss completed a sexual experience survey. The overall rate of SA in college was high, with 1 in 5 1st-yr Ss reporting SA compared with 1 in 3 UL Ss. The most common single reason for SA was psychological pressure. Rates of forceful SA reported by women were 3–5 times higher than those reported by men. Alcohol was more commonly involved than was force. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)

  173. Nerd of Redhead, Dancer on Trolls says

    Dang, blockquote error #215. I’m telling JohnD he needs to cite the literature to back up his statement, which is the first sentence.

  174. says

  175. illuminata says

    we all know that if two people get drunk and have sex that it is always the man’s fault. I forgot this feminist rule.

    So, in addition to being a rape-aoplogist and a bigot, you’re this fucking stupid too?

    LOL I have to admit, its deeply satisfying to know whiny misogynists are worthless to the core.

  176. Hairhead says

    Back in post 172 I said that many of these trolls are Dictionary-Nazis; if it’s not in the dictionary, it’s not true! (Followed by: “He asked her for coffee, not sex!” and “He can’t hate women, he says he loves them! He didn’t use the word hate, so even though he believes women are subhumans who should not compete with men, he still loves them! See!”)

    Could I ask for a better example right after my post? I think not!

    BTW John, if you support a societal mindset that limits the potential of people in direct relation to the genitals they were born with, you don’t love those people — in fact, by supporting their oppression, you, by your actions “hate” them — even if you do not let the word pass your lips.

  177. Ing says

    Right Ing – we all know that if two people get drunk and have sex that it is always the man’s fault. I forgot this feminist rule.

    Who is strawmanning?

    a) the question specified because of drugs given to the women…if you wanted to argue it’s higher because of mutual druggyness that MIGHT be fair

    b) If a woman is too drunk to consent and a man isn’t too drunk to perform, yes it is his fault.

  178. says

    John D:

    PS – the 1 in 4 rape statistic is pure bullshit. It was created from an unscientific magazine poll and included in the definition of rape things like “Have you ever had sex when you didn’t really want to?”

    Actually, no. It was created from a DoJ study on college sexual assault.

    If you’re going to attempt to discredit statistics, at least know which statistics you are trying to discredit.

  179. pharylon says

    Just had to check back in. Couldn’t resist. I’ve avoided talking about Elevatorgate anymore because PZ asked us not to. But I’ll just say that from what several have said, I clearly misunderstood the situation, and Elevator Guy’s hitting on her were clearly sexist if what I’m given to understand is true. However, Dawkins initial comment was made with these same misunderstanding of the situation . And that’s all I have to say about that.

  180. heliobates says

    <blockquoteSo if it’s not a stranger, and there’s no physical overpowering, and no bushes, then it must not be rape.

    Even the ambush predator scenario above is still the woman’s fault, because women make this stuff up all the time.

    Yup, hatred remains below threshold detection levels.

  181. Ing says

    However, Dawkins initial comment was made with these same misunderstanding of the situation . And that’s all I have to say about that.

    A) No it wasn’t

    B) Whither Richard’s apology?

    C) He blanketly told ALL women to shut up.

  182. John D says

    This does get tedious. The statistic from wikipedia is from a Colorado advocacy group and not the Justice Department (just to be clear). The trick here is to separate a criminal act from an act with a fuzzy definition. My point is that the 1 in 4 stat is bullshit. I stand by that since it uses a very fuzzy definition for rape (and is not a random sample ….. remember… stats 101… the sample must be random).

    I am not saying rape is rare nor am I saying it is not a real threat. I am saying that the 1 in 4 stat is remarkably tenacious and misleading. It is this kind of crap that makes women think they will be assaulted in a hotel elevator.

  183. John D says

    Splitting hairs there Nigel. It was done by Koss for a Magazine. A magazine that is happy to get a spectacular result.

  184. jose says

    @230, “I am not saying rape is rare nor am I saying it is not a real threat. I am saying that the 1 in 4 stat is remarkably tenacious and misleading. It is this kind of crap that makes women think they will be assaulted in a hotel elevator.”

    I think real threats have a lot to do with people thinking they are threatened.

    What do you think we should do against this real threat?

  185. Ing says

    My point is that the 1 in 4 stat is bullshit. I stand by that since it uses a very fuzzy definition for rape

    No it doesn’t.

  186. Hairhead says

    John, if at this late stage in the conversation you don’t realize that women DO get assaulted in elevators, and in hotel elevators at that, you’re not just ignorant, you’re actively on the side of the abusers of women. Every single post you make, John, you reveal yourself more and more clearly to be an unpleasant person, a misogynist, and a sexist. You’re doing it all to yourself.

  187. Ing says

    Even if 1/4 is too low the statistics are still hovering around 1/6->1/8. The numbers are STILl high. It’s little consolation that it’s not 1/4

    also the fact that you apparently find penetrating someone who is too drunk to consent not rape speaks volumes.

  188. says

    So…what number is tolerable? 1 in 6? 1 in 8? 1 in 10?

    You know, even if you try very, very hard to pretend that the number is inflated to some degree, it still means that a significant number of women in your circle of friends and family has been or will be raped in their lifetime.

    Oh, wait, I forgot the topic of this article. Even if it’s 1 in 4, the average number of women they know who have been raped is on average less than 1.

  189. says

    My point is that the 1 in 4 stat is bullshit. I stand by that since it uses a very fuzzy definition for rape

    No it isn’t. They all clearly outline what rape is (which is, if you haven’t guessed, is sex where the other partner hasn’t given consent). Rape isn’t excluded to some random guy bursting out of no where. Many rape, in fact, happens when a woman is intoxicated while the man isn’t.

  190. jose says

    ” Have you had sexual intercourse when you didn’t want to because a man gave you alcohol or drugs?

    An affirmative answer was counted as rape. “

    Well… of course it was. If you drug someone and take advantage of the fact that the other person is drugged and can’t say anything, there’s no consent… that’s pretty clearly rape… is that controversial? o_O

  191. kG says

    Don’t buy the bullshit folks. – John D.

    Nice of you to include this warning along with all your bullshit, John.

  192. says

    John D:

    This does get tedious. The statistic from wikipedia is from a Colorado advocacy group and not the Justice Department (just to be clear).

    It’s a good thing I’m not using Wikipedia.

    Please note the projected statistics indicate one in five to one in four college women are the victims of rape, or attempted rape.

    I am not saying rape is rare nor am I saying it is not a real threat. I am saying that the 1 in 4 stat is remarkably tenacious and misleading. It is this kind of crap that makes women think they will be assaulted in a hotel elevator.

    No. You’re saying you don’t believe research because it interferes with your man-view of reality.

    Splitting hairs there Nigel. It was done by Koss for a Magazine. A magazine that is happy to get a spectacular result.

    Do you ever do your own research on research, or do you rely on sites that do your mansplaining for you?

    The DoJ did their own study. I never once referenced Koss, so I’m not splitting fucking hairs.

  193. illuminata says

    So…what number is tolerable?

    To Johnnyboy, any number is tolerable. Rape is what the bitches get for not being housebound fuckable mommies, like god says they should be.

  194. says

    Oh, wait, I forgot the topic of this article. Even if it’s 1 in 4, the average number of women they know who have been raped is on average less than 1.

    Oh this is probably true. They’re in a little rosy world where they don’t know anyone who has been raped (largely because they hang out with only the dudez), so obviously any woman claiming that rape is common is being hysterical.

    The rest of us must live with (and fight) the fact that one or more of our loved ones have suffered this trauma and have been unfairly blamed for it.

  195. Rey Fox says

    However, Dawkins initial comment was made with these same misunderstanding of the situation .

    He was educated on the facts and spouted more BS until he was comprehensively getting his ass kicked, and then apparently decided it was one of those internet things that’s beneath him.

  196. Ing says

    I am not saying rape is rare nor am I saying it is not a real threat. I am saying that the 1 in 4 stat is remarkably tenacious and misleading. It is this kind of crap that makes women think they will be assaulted in a hotel elevator.

    Let me distill your argument

    Accepted premise: Rape is not rare
    Accepted premise: Rape is a real threat
    Assertion: Women should act as if rape is rare and a non-threat

    WTF?

  197. Nerd of Redhead, Dancer on Trolls says

    Still no citation from MRA loser JohnD to back up his “bullshit” claim. Immature loser tactics JohnD, as your word is worthless by now. Try looking up information, and quit bothering those who do have information.

  198. says

    By the way, if you’re wallowing in the pigslop at ERV, that’s no problem. But if you’re now echoing comments there from banned nitwits here, that is a problem. Don’t bother.

    I am of course referring to that innumerate moron, Phil Giordana, who is unable to discriminate between a yearly statistic and a cumulative one. Giordana is gone, we don’t need anyone relaying babble for him.

  199. Quodlibet says

    Gyeong Hwa:

    They’re in a little rosy world where they don’t know anyone who has been raped

    Yes, and it’s because they are in denial about the broad spectrum of behaviors that can be described as rape.

    John D, consider the case of my daughter’s best friend, who finally has gotten herself out of a relationship with a young (18!) man who did the following:

    1 – When they had sex for the first time, she was somewhat ignorant of the sex act and wasn’t sure what was going to happen and when, and she asked him to go slowly and explain to her. He said not a word, just forced himself into her and hurt her. He did that a lot. That is rape. What would you call it?

    2 – During the three years of their relationship, he deceived her about his condom use. He would put one on prior to penetration, then control the act in such a way that we could remove it soon after and finish the act without protection, for his own pleasure. Not only is that selfish, it is an assault of her body in a way to which she did not consent. I call it rape – how about you?

    3 – During the relationship, he coerced and threatened her into having sex when she did not want to have it. He never hit her, pushed, or punched, or restrained her. Still, I call that rape – how about you?

    I look forward to your answers, and if this were not so nausea-inducing, I would go make popcorn.

    This was an abusive controlling relationship and it was very diffiecult for her to get out. And to make it all worse, because this young woman comes from a repressive Catholic household, and her mother WILL NOT DISCUSS SEX WITH HER, she was unable to get birth control pills or to even talk with her parents about the abusive relationship. This summer, she became friends with my daughter, who was able to help her understand that she had been assaulted, and helped her get out of the relationship.

    This young woman has never reported these incidents to anyone…hence they are not part of the statistics, even the ones that you think are unrealistically high. Nonetheless, hers is not a unique or even a rare story. It’s part of the whole story on rape, one which many people aren’t aware of.

  200. julian says

    “Well… of course it was. If you drug someone and take advantage of the fact that the other person is drugged and can’t say anything, there’s no consent… that’s pretty clearly rape… is that controversial?”- jose

    Not to imply anything about anyone but I’ve always suspected a lot of people don’t count that as rape. Once heard a coworker relate a party he went to where a young woman was date raped by 2 men. He refused to count that as rape (even telling the police ‘Dude, she wasn’t raped. I saw it. She was into it.’) citing he’d seen her talking to the guys the day after at the mall and she ‘didn’t look mad’ as evidence.

    Of course this being the military we’re definitely a more misogynistic culture than the skeptical community (not entirely convinced of that given the last few weeks) but given just how many men make it clear they want a girl fucked up by the end of the night, I’m starting to suspect where their sympathies lie.

  201. John D says

    I hope you all are enjoying your soiling yourselves over this. I love how you pile on with characterizations of my position. Since you all cannot summarize my position I will spell it out for you.

    1) The 1 in 4 statistic is tossed about as if this means a woman has a 1 in 4 chance of being violently attacked and raped by a stranger in public. You will all agree (I hope) that this is not what the 1 in 4 stat means. But…. use of this statistic over and over in the media and on the blogosphere gives the impression that random stranger rape in public is very common. Random stranger rape in public is rare.

    2) Many women have the impression (often due to the 1 in 4 stat) that they are likely to be assaulted and raped in public by a stranger. This irrational fear makes women unrealistically fearful of places like hotel elevators. Hotel elevators are very safe and woman who fear riding in a hotel elevator with a man have an irrational fear. Some places (like enclosed parking garages) are not very safe. These unsafe places should be aggressively patrolled and monitored by camera.

    3) Irrational fear is a bad thing in general. It affects our happiness and behaviors adversely. There are many women who think an elevator is unsafe yet have no concerns about parking garages. This is not smart or helpful.

    4)Watson claiming a man should not make a polite pass at someone in an elevator is silly. She should get over it and I suspect she would have had no trouble with the pass if it was from a man she was interested in.

    5) Watson (and eventually PZ and the other atheist moralizers) should stop acting like the sex and speech police. It is really stupid coming from a guy who smashed communion wafers as a gag or from a woman who encourages the blasphemy challenge. This is hypocrisy.

    6)Rape is a serious crime and I do not wish to diminish the seriousness. Claiming men are somehow rape apologists for picking on Watson, PZ, Plait, and the rest of the atheist moralizers does not make someone a rape apologist.

    7) almost everyone uses the work misogynist incorrectly… Please stop it.

    These are my claims.

  202. illuminata says

    Shorter JohnD: I’m a misogynstic rape-apologist. This is my only claim, which I repeat often.

    Go die.

  203. The Lone Coyote says

    A woman can be drunk and still consent to sex. They do it all the time. The key word is CONSENT. Sticking it in her when she’s too drunk to consent or withhold consent is rape.

    Fuck traditional gender roles. Traditional gender roles are the reason I still have to fight my own insecurities because I don’t act like a big chest-thumping alpha male asshole. I’m a hetero man, and traditional gender roles do sweet fuck all for me.

    Traditional gender roles are part of the reason I have only one male friend my own age in the world right now. I’m just not ‘one of them’ and never have been. Traditional gender roles are the reason I feel like if I don’t hit on women constantly, I’ll die alone. (because there’s something seriously weird about a girl who asks guys out, right? They should play hard to get and if you don’t pursue them, you’re just a ‘pussy,’ amirite guys?)Traditional gender roles are the reason I STILL, even now, have to fight these ridiculous and somewhat irrational self esteem issues in myself. I feel pathetic even typing that last paragraph, but hell, I’ll let it stand anyways.

    I thank the feminists of Pharyngula for trying to help me understand that no, I’m not a neutered sackless wimp just because I respect boundaries. I still have a long ways to go.

    Take your traditional gender roles, and cram them up your urethra Johnny.

  204. says

    I am not saying rape is rare nor am I saying it is not a real threat. I am saying that the 1 in 4 stat is remarkably tenacious and misleading. It is this kind of crap that makes women think they will be assaulted in a hotel elevator.

    Hey jackass: I’ve been assaulted in a hotel elevator. A glass elevator. In the middle of the day. It’s not just a story some people make up.

  205. julian says

    “I suspect she would have had no trouble with the pass if it was from a man she was interested in.”

    Generally speaking that’s one of the things that separates a consensual act from a non consensual act; reciprocated feelings/desires. That’s probably why I don’t mind my wife waking me with a kiss but would freak out if you did. People are allowed to set their own boundaries when it comes to sex and their bodies. If you don’t enjoy being outside the potential partners zone it doesn’t make your case stronger to complain someone she likes/is more comfortable with/finds more appealing is.

  206. Audley Z. Darkheart OM (OS), purveyor of candy and lies says

    Jesus fucking Christ. I’ve lost count of that number of times that some dude has barged in here telling women that our fear is totes irrational. Hear that ladies? We’re all irrational (and, by extension hysterical)! Glad we’ve got you to clear that up for us, Johnny Dumbass.

    Questions!
    1) Home invasions have been in decline for the past 15 years or so, to the point where they are a relatively rare occurrence. Do you still lock your house? If so, why are you acting so irrationally?

    2) What constitutes “traditional gender roles”?

  207. Linnea the lurker says

    If you wait until you are alone in an enclosed space with someone, and the first words you address to them are, in effect, “Hey baby, want to come up to my place?”, this is not polite.

    Saying, “Guys, don’t do that” isn’t policing. It’s advice. The fact that so many react to this by saying, in effect, “Women, you’re wrong about how you want to be treated” or “I defend my right to be creepily impolite” is, well . . . depressing.

  208. Quodlibet says

    But…. use of this statistic over and over in the media and on the blogosphere gives the impression that random stranger rape in public is very common.

    You seem to be the only one here who has that impression.

    Many women have the impression (often due to the 1 in 4 stat) that they are likely to be assaulted and raped in public by a stranger.

    Citation, please. Who are the “many women” and how do you know they feel that way?

    There are many women who think an elevator is unsafe yet have no concerns about parking garages.

    Ditto.

    Watson claiming a man should not make a polite pass at someone in an elevator is silly.

    You are willfully obtuse.

    Rape is a serious crime and I do not wish to diminish the seriousness.

    And yet you do.

  209. Ing says

    The 1 in 4 statistic is tossed about as if this means a woman has a 1 in 4 chance of being violently attacked and raped by a stranger in public. You will all agree (I hope) that this is not what the 1 in 4 stat means. But…. use of this statistic over and over in the media and on the blogosphere gives the impression that random stranger rape in public is very common. Random stranger rape in public is rare.

    ok…before you were claiming non violent attack isn’t rape, now you’re arguing like we are?

  210. says

    “I believe, from the whole Elevatorgate+Bachamnn thing that PZ is selectively applying his feminism ideals, probably not on purpose, and he has lost some credibility in my eyes for demanding better behavior of others (Dawkins) than he does of himself.”

    Cupcake, no one gives a shit what you think. And it’s odd how you could equate them.

    Just because you think the pic of Bachmann going whole hog is sexy doesn’t mean that’s why it was posted. In the same way that a grandmother posts pics of her adorable gran babies playing in a tub makes them child porn.

    It’s in the eye of the beholder. You sick fuck.

  211. says

    John D:

    The 1 in 4 statistic is tossed about as if this means a woman has a 1 in 4 chance of being violently attacked and raped by a stranger in public. You will all agree (I hope) that this is not what the 1 in 4 stat means. But…. use of this statistic over and over in the media and on the blogosphere gives the impression that random stranger rape in public is very common. Random stranger rape in public is rare.

    That is not how it was represented here, though, was it? I stated it quite plainly that 1 in 4 was the chancees of a women in college either being the victim of rape, or attempted rape.

    Your claim wasn’t that the statistic is often used in a misrepresentative manner, but that it is “bullshit.” I agree the number does not mean what many people represent it to mean, but the case here was not misrepresentative.

    Your strident apologia and vehement opposition to the actual facts is revealing, though, as is your inability to admit you were wrong. It speaks poorly to your character.

  212. Ing says

    @Nigel

    The fact he promotes “Traditional” roles is enough of his character. That he calls that “love” is disgusting.

    I repeat: what would we call someone who promoted traditional racial roles?

  213. Linnea the lurker says

    Gaah, disappearing quotes! Let me try that again:

    Watson claiming a man should not make a polite pass at someone in an elevator is silly.>

    If you wait until you are alone in an enclosed space with someone, and the first words you address to them are, in effect, “Hey baby, want to come up to my place?”, this is not polite.

    Watson (and eventually PZ and the other atheist moralizers) should stop acting like the sex and speech police.

    Saying, “Guys, don’t do that” isn’t policing. It’s advice. The fact that so many react to this by saying, in effect, “Women, you’re wrong about how you want to be treated” or “I defend my right to be creepily impolite” is, well . . . depressing.

    (Did I do it right that time?)

  214. Nerd of Redhead, Dancer on Trolls says

    almost everyone uses the work misogynist incorrectly… Please stop it.Who gives a shit what a misogynist evidenceless fuckwitted asshat like yourself thinks cupcake? You don’t tell us what we think or do, with inane pointless points. Get over yourself, as we see you are just another imamature MRA living in your parent’s basement.

  215. John D says

    illuminata says: “Shorter JohnD: I’m a misogynstic rape-apologist. This is my only claim, which I repeat often.

    Go die.”

    Nice… you are a class act. I am not sure I have a follow up to your desire for me to die. Is there a word for this (like JohnDogyny meaning the desire for John D to die).

    Kaessa – I am sorry to hear your story. People do get assaulted regularly for their wallets and purses and such. I hope they were caught and that you were not to badly hurt. Assaulting someone on a glass elevator is really bold of them and I wonder if they were mentally ill.

    Lone Coyote – I can’t quite see how your embracing modern feminism will get you a partner, but good luck. I am pretty socially awkward myself but was lucky enough to find someone who saw something in me.

    Quodlibet – interesting story… but it has nothing to do with any of my claims… so… I guess you just wanted to tell a good story.

  216. Nerd of Redhead, Dancer on Trolls says

    Dang, another blockquote failure. I’ll try again:

    almost everyone uses the work misogynist incorrectly… Please stop it.

    Who gives a shit what a misogynist evidenceless fuckwitted asshat like yourself thinks cupcake? You don’t tell us what we think or do, with inane pointless points. Get over yourself, as we see you are just another imamature MRA living in your parent’s basement.

  217. Ing says

    Havn’t been to EVR is this really the bullshit the author is promoting? WTF is wrong with her?

  218. Sili says

    It’s not Franc, it’s Angry Wanking Guy *.

    * Thanks Moggie at 89.

    I’m no Cuddlefish, but isn’t Angry Wanky Guy better?

  219. Ing213 says

    I can’t quite see how your embracing modern feminism will get you a partner, but good luck. I am pretty socially awkward myself but was lucky enough to find someone who saw something in me.

    Maybe because you wont’ be going around to people trying to go on with their lives going “YOU HOT! BOOBZ OR GTF!?”

    really if you didn’t see the point of Quilly’s story you’re beyond stupid.

  220. illuminata says

    Nice… you are a class act.

    Considering the source, hogfucker, thanks for the compliment.

    What I am, shitsucker, is your worst nightmare: a very vocal, obnoxious atheist, feminist and rape survivor you can’t silence. Terrifying, isn’t it! There are women you can’t intimidate into shutting up! Women who know more about rape than your tiny atrophied brain will ever be able to handle. And you can’t silence them! Women who aren’t subservient fuckable mommies and you can’t silence them! The horror!

    Everything you’ve posted her is part and parcel of the same pack of obvious lies, motivated by apathetic misogyny and ignorance. It’s tedious, pointless and fruitless to treat a useless sack of rape-apologist shit like yourself with anything but mocking and contempt.

    You can’t silence us. Accept it or run on home to fuckable mommy.

  221. illuminata says

    I am pretty socially awkward myself but was lucky enough to find someone who saw something in me.

    “something” being his fist.

  222. heliobates says

    …I can’t quite see how your embracing modern feminism will get you a partner, but good luck…

    Deep-fried-Jezus onna stick, are you completely incapable of reading for comprehension?

    … but it has nothing to do with any of my claims… so… I guess you just wanted to tell a good story.

    Tone deaf and all thumbs.

  223. Ing says

    Just imagine how beautifully romantic their first date was. She looked into his eyes…he into hers…she back into his…he used the opportunity to slip out the eye dropper and move it over her drink…

  224. Quodlibet says

    John, I didn’t offer that “story” in order to tell a “story.” If you read it carefully, the post includes some specific questions addressed to you. I described three scenarios and asked your opinion as to whether each of them could be described as “rape.” (I await your replies.) But beyond that, I shared the anecdote to illustrate that 1) Rape happens in lots of ways other than the surprise violent assault by a stranger and 2) Many rapes are not reported, so whatever statistics are cited, they are too low.

    This discussion reminds me of another case where someone simply could not accept the truth.

    My daughter, who was about 3 at the time, was playing outdoors with other kids aged 3-4. The moon was showing in the daytime sky, and the kids were looking at it and talking about it.
    Daughter said, “People have been there, you know.”
    Little boy: “No, they haven’t.”
    Daughter: “Yes, they have.”
    He: “No. How could they get there?”
    She: “They flew in a rocket.”
    He: “Impossible. You’re crazy!”

    She looked at me (mom) and … shrugged.

    He couldn’t conceive that what she said was true, so he just rejected it.

  225. The Lone Coyote says

    Lone Coyote – I can’t quite see how your embracing modern feminism will get you a partner, but good luck. I am pretty socially awkward myself but was lucky enough to find someone who saw something in me.

    Aahhhhh I get it now. Thanks for explaining it to me. I’m embracing feminism in some vague hope of getting myself a partner here on pharyngula. I was always under this weird sorta delusion that I’m embracing feminism because women are people like me.

    SO HOW ABOUT IT LADIES? ANYONE LOOKING FOR A GUY WHO NEVER CUTS HIS HAIR, CHASES RABBITS AND SQUIRRELS, AND CALLS HIMSELF SEMI FERAL? LIMITED TIME OFFER! NO TAKERS? No? None? Nowhere?

    awwww. Fuck.

    Well, I’m still gonna be a feminist.

  226. says

    People do get assaulted regularly for their wallets and purses and such. I hope they were caught and that you were not to badly hurt. Assaulting someone on a glass elevator is really bold of them and I wonder if they were mentally ill.

    I wasn’t hurt physically… but being assaulted and groped on an elevator at 14 by a guy twice your size is not quite the same thing as having your wallet or purse stolen. It’s a little bit more personal.

    Again… elevators are not safe places. They are enclosed places that can become traps at the push of a button. Even a glass elevator 10 stories up.

  227. John D says

    Illuminata – you really don’t scare me. Just so you know. Are you trying to scare me? (because it isn’t working). You really do enjoy cursing at me… and I appreciate that… I am a big fan of cursing (but, you are not that good at it yet. Keep working at it though, and eventually you may produce some quality work that I can respect). Hogfucker and shitsucker are really no more than middle school quality.

    I wonder if you are taking out your rage on me for something a horrible person did to you in the past. If so, you may want to seek therapy.

    Cursing can be good therapy, but seriously, please do better than hogfucker. It’s just weak.

    I didn’t really expect this to get so personal with you. It is PZ that I have the issue with… but… any port in a storm I guess.

    And a message to PZ. You really do have a gift for insulting others. Perhaps you would consider giving Illuminata some lessons. You do pretty good work in the insult department.

  228. says

    People do get assaulted regularly for their wallets and purses and such. I hope they were caught and that you were not to badly hurt. Assaulting someone on a glass elevator is really bold of them and I wonder if they were mentally ill.

    Oh.. and nobody caught the guy. Why? I never told anyone. I was too ashamed, I thought it was my fault because I was wearing my bathing suit coming up from the hotel swimming pool.

    I’m glad I know better now.

  229. Audley Z. Darkheart OM (OS), purveyor of candy and lies says

    Johnny Dumbass:

    –I can’t quite see how your embracing modern feminism will get you a partner, but good luck

    Oh right, ‘cos all men who “embrace modern feminism” are emasculated losers, right? Here’s a pro-tip, dumbfuck: Negging doesn’t actually work, no matter what the PUA guides say.

    Hey, guys! Yes, you guys who actually respect women! Every single one of you is a virgin, right?

  230. says

    Kaessa:

    Oh.. and nobody caught the guy. Why? I never told anyone. I was too ashamed, I thought it was my fault because I was wearing my bathing suit coming up from the hotel swimming pool.

    You, and an estimated 75% – 95% of victims of sexual assault.

  231. NuMad says

    So the definition of misogyny requires one to punch the air, grind their teeth and repeat a few times that they hate women to apply?

    Does the same standard of definition-by-etymology apply to homophobia? Are people who run away from gay people and visibly shake in their boots the only one who qualify as “homophobes?”

  232. says

    John D, you silly little hoggling, I think you’ve finished shooting your wad and have nothing more to say. How about toddling back to ERV and finding solace among your fellow pissants? At this rate of plummet, you’re not going to find any respect here, that’s for sure.

  233. Nerd of Redhead, Dancer on Trolls says

    Hey, guys! Yes, you guys who actually respect women! Every single one of you is a virgin, right?

    Been married to the Redhead for 35+ years. Neither of us were virgins when we married, as we had been practicing for a while.

  234. illuminata says

    you really don’t scare me. Just so you know. Are you trying to scare me? (because it isn’t working).

    *facepalm* LOL Cthuthlu on a pogo stick, you’re a moron.

    Hogfucker and shitsucker are really no more than middle school quality.

    Translation: He wishes he thought of it first.

    Let’s play Rape-Apologist Bingo!

    I wonder if you are taking out your rage on me for something a horrible person did to you in the past. If so, you may want to seek therapy.

    B 12.: You’re just hysterical/crazy and therefore not qualified to speak.

    I didn’t really expect this to get so personal with you.

    I 25: This is all academic to me. It makes me uncomfortable to have reality shoved in my face.

    It is PZ that I have the issue with… but… any port in a storm I guess.

    N 37: I wanted to talk to a man about this.

    Bonus square: weirdly placed sexual innuendo.

    Aww . . . is that it? I’m still two squares short!

  235. Dhorvath, OM says

    Oh, wait, I get it. None of the sex that I have had counts because I never picked anyone up or hit on anyone to have it.

  236. horace says

    >No he can’t, you putrid piece of congealed monkey vomit. He >cannot think women are supposed to be fuckable mommy house >slaves and still love them.

    Dear Illuminata,

    a lot of women want to be stay at home house wives. Does this make them fuckable mommy house slaves ?

  237. John D says

    Kaessa – I am really sorry this happened to you.

    Lone Coyote – I said good luck and I mean it. I wish you success finding something that works for you and someone to be with. I was just sharing my opinion that women often prefer a man who is polite yet still assertive. It is a tough blend. Open the door for them, but don’t apologize if you disagree with them. But… what the hell do I know. If you ask everyone here I am a hogfucking, shitsucking, date rapist, misogynist. Peace!

    Audley – I had to look up negging. This is a new one on me. I don’t suspect negging is a good approach but it might work for some couples. When did I say negging would work? did I say this? That was a silly thing for you to say.

  238. Waffler (not McWaffle) says

    Why do people jump to the conclusion that when men lack respect for women, dismiss their concerns, question their experiences, belittle them and otherwise fail to listen to them in any substantive way, that they don’t like women? It’s perplexing. I can understand why JohnD is so confused. Perhaps he should go away and think about it for a while, maybe he’ll come up with something.

  239. John D says

    PZ – hoggling… nice. See Illuminata… this is quality work. Give up shitsucker…really.

    Illuminata – haha – “any port in a storm”. I did not mean this to have any sexual innuendo… but you fems are really good at spotting potential innuendo. hell… you can probably smell it. Neat… a very useful skill if you want to be a writer. Perhaps this is a career for you if you can perfect your insults.

  240. heliobates says

    @illuminata

    I’m still two squares short!

    Rilly? The mansplainin’ in #250 doesn’t show up anywhere on your card?

    You don’t get nothing for this:

    Watson claiming a man should not make a polite pass at someone in an elevator is silly. She should get over it and I suspect she would have had no trouble with the pass if it was from a man she was interested in.

    What about “fuzzy definition for rape”?

    Seems like there’s an entire card’s worth in #104. John D does kinda lead with his chin.

  241. illuminata says

    a lot of women want to be stay at home house wives. Does this make them fuckable mommy house slaves ?

    Dear Horace: do I seriously have to explain what “want” means? Think, then post.

    +

    Dear JohnD: thanks for conceding defeat. I love that all your flaccid misogynists are always such extreme cowards.

  242. Ing says

    a lot of women want to be stay at home house wives. Does this make them fuckable mommy house slaves ?

    Depends. Are they staying at home because they want to and have a equal relationship? Or does even if she want to she still have to submit to her husband?

    Also, you’re an idiot.

    – I said good luck and I mean it. I wish you success finding something that works for you and someone to be with. I was just sharing my opinion that women often prefer a man who is polite yet still assertive.

    You don’t know shit.

    Your advice boils down to “Be an asshole who fakes respect”

  243. says

    heliobates:

    Seems like there’s an entire card’s worth in #104. John D does kinda lead with his chin.

    There’s a funny joke there involving Dancing With The Stars and a 55-gallon drum of mayonaise, but I’m too lazy to figure out what it is.

  244. Ing says

    – “any port in a storm”. I did not mean this to have any sexual innuendo

    Check Urban Dictionary.

  245. pharylon says

    Man, that’s a nice strawman you have there. Stuffed to the brim with ideas that are easy to argue with! Let’s see..

    Cupcake,

    OK, you lead off with a diminutive nickname to establish your superiority. Nice start!

    no one gives a shit what you think.

    And yet, here you are talking about it.

    And it’s odd how you could equate them.

    I didn’t equate them, I compared them. I think they’re both instances of sexism because, as I stated earlier, Dawkins made a bad argument that women shouldn’t complain about anything short of genital mutilation and PZ mocked a female politician with a pic of her eating a phallic food.

    Just because you think the pic of Bachmann going whole hog is sexy doesn’t mean that’s why it was posted.

    Never said that, nice try. I thought it was sexist. Only one syllable off, though, so I give you partial credit. But yeah, it’s just me. That’s why PZ is always posting pictures of politicians eating all kins of food! Not just women eating vaguely phallic food!

    I just must have missed all those posts… Hell, one other person in this thread even called the picture “disturbing,” which I also think is sexist. I didn’t think the picture was disturbing at all, just in bad taste. But don’t let that stop you.

    In the same way that a grandmother posts pics of her adorable gran babies playing in a tub makes them child porn.

    It’s in the eye of the beholder. You sick fuck.

    Yeah, I disagree with you, so I must be a pedophile! Strong finish!

  246. John D says

    Hey heliobates – Why don’t you go to my post at #250 and resond to it? Can you handle it? I have laid out my claims (fuck… I even numbered them). All I get from the Pharyngulites is a bunch of insults and blather. What a bunch of nitwits.

  247. julian says

    “but you fems are really good at spotting potential innuendo. hell… you can probably smell it.”

    Can I just say that I love insults like ‘fempecked’ and ‘pussified man bitch.’ I think they say a lot about the people who use them. Great indicators if you want a peak into the psyche of the folks who hate you.

    And fems now too! I hope I’m not assuming to much in guessing it’s short for feminists? ‘You-you- YOU FEM!’

  248. illuminata says

    What a bunch of nitwits.

    So, you’re cool with insults then, chickenshit leaking puss boil?

  249. Ing says

    Hey heliobates – Why don’t you go to my post at #250 and resond to it? Can you handle it? I have laid out my claims (fuck… I even numbered them). All I get from the Pharyngulites is a bunch of insults and blather. What a bunch of nitwits.

    Addressed and ignored. Why bother.

  250. Nerd of Redhead, Dancer on Trolls says

    JohnD, if you don’t think women are your equal, you are misogynist. And you don’t appear to think women are your equal, and should be listened to as seriously as you want to be taken, as you dismiss their concerns, like any misogynist would do. A character defect you can work on.

  251. Quodlibet says

    John @ 300

    Hey heliobates – Why don’t you go to my post at #250 and resond to it? Can you handle it? I have laid out my claims (fuck… I even numbered them). All I get from the Pharyngulites is a bunch of insults and blather. What a bunch of nitwits.

    .

    *Thinks….Hmmm…seems to be some sort of dissonance here. Remembers. Oh yeah.*

    .

    Hey, John, at #248 I numbered my questions to you. Why don’t you respond?

  252. Ing says

    @John D

    I think Coyote is from his description more of an alpha male than you, beta…shouldn’t you shut up in his presence and go whimper?

  253. McWaffle (not Waffler) says

    @292

    Ha! I’ve been sitting on this randomly-chosen pseudonym since 6th grade. If I remember right, it was for some reason the only AIM name I could get without using random numbers.

    I’m not a huge commenter here though, so I don’t think you have to worry too much about mistaken identity. It’s not like anybody recognizes me.

  254. Vicki, running low on patience says

    Coyote–

    Never cut your hair? At all? Really?

    Do you catch many of those rabbits and squirrels, and what sort of stew recipes do you know?

  255. Quodlibet says

    [Sorry, blockquote fail!]

    John @ 300

    Hey heliobates – Why don’t you go to my post at #250 and resond to it? Can you handle it? I have laid out my claims (fuck… I even numbered them). All I get from the Pharyngulites is a bunch of insults and blather. What a bunch of nitwits.

    .

    *Thinks….Hmmm…seems to be some sort of dissonance here. Remembers. Oh yeah.*

    .

    Hey, John, at #248 I numbered my questions to you. Why don’t you respond?

  256. julian says

    “Why don’t you go to my post at #250 and resond to it? Can you handle it? I have laid out my claims (fuck… I even numbered them).”

    They did.

    You were asked point blank why you brought up point one when no one here argued rape is scary big man in bushes. (It was also pointed out that seemed to the definition of rape you leaned towards.) Kaessa used her own experience of being molested in an elevator to try and illustrate why what you call an irrational fear isn’t irrational nor should it be regarded with contempt. I tried to address part of your point four and everyone (for the most part) have pointed out they aren’t being the sex police and asking people to be a little more aware of how they come off when propositioning other people isn’t any kind of radical. It’s basic human interaction.

    I don’t think anyone directly touched six but more than a few people have pointed out the ridiculousness of the strict definition game you’re playing. (Including pointing out how incredibly sexist and anti-woman behavior wouldn’t count as misogynistic in your book.)

  257. pharylon says

    pharylon – get John D’s dick out of your mouth and try again.

    This is fun! The only time I’ve mentioned John D is when I said I disagreed with him, and Sally was doing a good job of taking him down, but hey, you disagree with me, so I must be a misogynist asshole like someone else you disagree with! I’m learning about all kinds of opinions I didn’t know I had here!

  258. says

    Ing:

    Addressed and ignored. Why bother.

    No shit.

    1. A non sequitur. Answered in #260 by me.

    2. A long string of assertions with no evidence, soundly refuted by Kaessa in #253 and #277.

    3. A premise founded on conflating fear with caution, followed by a string of assertions. Addressed by Quodlibet in #257.

    4. Strawman representation of both the situation, and Watson’s reaction. Addressed by Linnea the lurker in #262.

    5. Misrepresentation of positions of both Myers and Watson. Addressed by Linnea the lurker in #262.

    6. Nothing of substance to refute, as your complaints about Myers, Plait, and Watson are based on strawman representations of their views.

    7. Refuted by NuMad at #282.

    Do I have to do this every time you insist nobody has addressed your concerns, even though you seem to ignore every post of substance? Or are you too busy whinging on about illuminata’s insults?

  259. The Lone Coyote says

    John D: I don’t need your dating advice. Polite but assertive? Maybe alot of women ‘like’ that in a man because society has taught them to expect no better? I’m gonna ignore the fact that you’re being condescending, and just take your ‘advice’ at face value. The reason I posted that rant back there, is that ‘traditional gender roles’ say I’m not good enough. I’m a failed male specimen. I’m weaker than the rest, because when a girl acts like she’s not interested in me in a romantic way, it just means she’s playing ‘hard to get’ and I should BE A MAN and GROW A PAIR and pursue her around until she gives in. Isn’t that how traditional gender roles for men work?

    Fact is I’m just not an assertive person. When hanging with my ex and the kid (and before you jump on that, we still love each other a lot. She’s my ‘ex’ because she finally decided to stop trying to fit into the mold and shame herself, and come out as a lesbian), I’m very happy that I have an assertive woman there to tell me how to deal with the kid. I’d be completely lost otherwise. With her playing alpha female in that little pack, I never feel confused as to what’s expected of me, and I can focus on doing the best I can and making the little baby smile and giggle.

    And how weird is it that she tells me I’m the only man who ever respected her or treated her as an equal, when the most noble thing I ever did was actually take my dick out of her when she said “We’re done” or “it’s kinda sore”? (sorry if that disturbs anyone). If anyone wants to know why I decided to embrace modern feminism, it’s that, right there.

    Equality doesn’t emasculate me. It sets me free. But society doesn’t really see it that way. Even typing about my lesbian ex, I wince a little, because I expect to be mocked for it. I have been before.

    How telling is it that John D assumes the only reason I decided to ‘embrace modern feminism’ is so I can get laid? It couldn’t possibly be that I want to treat women like people too. Nope. According to traditional gender roles, the only reason I should be nice to women is so they’ll fuck me.

  260. horace says

    >do I seriously have to explain what “want” means? Think, >then post.

    Illuminata

    So women such as my girlfriend who think want this have been conditioned by me or society ? Please overcome your girlish shyness and be more explicit.

  261. Waffler (not McWaffle) says

    JohnD’s stupid list, addressed:

    #1 absent your definitions of ‘public’ and ‘rare’, we’re left with handwaving dismissiveness of concerns over rape.

    #2 stupid mansplaining away legitimate fears about rape.

    #3 more mansplaining

    #4 more mansplaining regarding how women should feel in a particular situation. Strange definition of ‘polite’ noted.

    #5 ridiculous hyperbole. Speech police? Seriously?

    #6 disingenuous blather

    #7 clueless misunderstanding of language

    0 for 7. Please go away and rethink. Or just go away.

  262. The Lone Coyote says

    Vicki: Yes. I have a low success rate, like most predators, but I DO have a success rate. Usually I just wing it when making a rabbit stew… fry it up with some onions, carrots, maybe a bit of potato, and anything else that smells good, and then add water or broth and make a stew. Next time though, I’m gonna roast it asian style. My cousin’s boyfriend told me how it’s done in china, and it sounds excellent.

    I never cut my hair because it’s sort of a ‘symbol’ of my wild nature. It sorta keeps itself at a certain length… not sure how that works.

  263. says

    Nigel:

    Or are you too busy whinging on about illuminata’s insults?

    Do you really have to ask, Nigel? The first resort of the Cupcake is to clutch the pearls tightly and get a case of the vapors. That’s so much more important than any substance.

  264. horace says

    @295

    >do I seriously have to explain what “want” means? Think, >then post.

    Dear Illuminata,

    so I and society have brainwashed my girlfriend into wanting to be a stay at home house wife ? Overcome your girlish shyness and be more explicit.

  265. John D says

    Quodlibet – Oh – I don’t have to answer each point. I have just one answer. I should have answered, but it is very hard to keep up with this blog since it has no nesting. My answer is no. This was not rape. I don’t think the police would call it rape either (but I could be wrong about this… if so I appreciate a correction). This was clearly a fraud and she was in an abusive relationship. I don’t think it is useful to call that rape. Perhaps it is child abuse since the parents had left her so ignorant. I find the boyfriend guilty of lying and deceit and the parents guilty of neglect.

    Ing – maybe Lone Coyote is more alpha man than I am. It is quite possible. I am fit and reasonably athletic, but I am just average sized (if not a bit too thin for most). Fortunately my wife likes thin men. I usually get things done by being nice to people and doing my share of the work.

  266. Quodlibet says

    The Lone Coyote:

    And how weird is it that she tells me I’m the only man who ever respected her or treated her as an equal, when the most noble thing I ever did was actually take my dick out of her when she said “We’re done” or “it’s kinda sore”? (sorry if that disturbs anyone). If anyone wants to know why I decided to embrace modern feminism, it’s that, right there.

    That is one of the most beautiful things I have ever read in Pharyngula. You are the best sort of man.

    Equality doesn’t emasculate me. It sets me free. But society doesn’t really see it that way. Even typing about my lesbian ex, I wince a little, because I expect to be mocked for it. I have been before..

    You bring tears to my eyes. Yes, equality sets us free. We can be ourselves, and love ourselves, and love others more freely. Your child is lucky to hav a father like you.

    Note to John: Take a lesson here about what it means to be a man, a whole person, a human being.

  267. says

    TLC:

    It sorta keeps itself at a certain length… not sure how that works.

    People have a set hair length, but most people don’t test that out. A friend of mine has always been annoyed that her hair won’t grow longer than 2 inches past the nape of her neck.

    Mine will grow to mid-thigh length, then stop. That’s my limit. Mister is a longhair, but his limit is mid shoulder-blades. /OT

  268. Audley Z. Darkheart OM (OS), purveyor of candy and lies says

    Congrats, John D, for being able to look up a word!

    Here’s the breakdown: TLC stated that he respects women, you responded with, “good luck getting a date!”, so I was lead to believe that you think that being respectful is wrong, hence the “negging”.

    This really isn’t that hard. Are you as monumentally stupid in real life, or do you just troll for shits and giggles?

    Care to address my other points? You know, the ones that were oh so helpfully numbered for you.

    1) Do you lock you front door? If so, isn’t that irrational of you?
    2) Define “traditional gender roles”.

  269. says

    John D:

    maybe Lone Coyote is more alpha man than I am.

    This is not about “alpha men”, Cupcake. The mere fact that you use such terminology shows you to be all the things you keep denying.

    What separates you from TLC is that TLC is an actual human being, one who thinks and feels it’s important to view and treat women as actual human beings. That would not be you, Cupcake, with your alpha-ism and traditional roles. :eyeroll:

  270. horace says

    >And how weird is it that she tells me I’m the only man who >ever respected her or treated her as an equal, when the most >noble thing I ever did was actually take my dick out of her

    Damn it, Coyote that’s moving. You have changed my mind. Perhaps I was influencing her choice of being a stay at home housewife. I am going to unchain her and let her out of the basement.

  271. Quodlibet says

    John D @ 300

    Hey heliobates – Why don’t you go to my post at #250 and resond to it? Can you handle it?

    MANY OTHERS:

    We answer your points. Why don’t you answer ours?

    John D @ 323

    Oh – I don’t have to answer each point. I have just one answer. I should have answered, but it is very hard to keep up with this blog since it has no nesting.

    Translation: LA LA LA LA LA LA

  272. says

    Do I have to do this every time you insist nobody has addressed your concerns, even though you seem to ignore every post of substance?

    Whenever an MRA says no one addressed his concern, I read it as “I don’t care to actually read what they wrote.”

  273. illuminata says

    Dear Hoarce:

    Three things:

    1) that piece of rabbit fur you rub on your dick is not a girlfriend.

    2) how can you possibly not understand the definition of the word “want”? If she WANTS to be a housewife, what the fuck does that have to do with what we’re talking about here?

    3) All that said, wanna-ba housewives are, ultimately, suicidally naieve. I work in family law. I see what happens to them when Horace Can’t Read casts them off for wife 3.0. Cthuthlu help her *when* she’s cast off and has no marketable job skills.

    Get over your childish stupidity and learn to read.

  274. Toasted Rye says

    I am going to weight in for the first time on all of this as I see it.
    First Elevatorgate.
    I lurked several sites during the entirety of the whole story. I read half a million comments I think. I didn’t come to any solid conclusions except that the skeptic community has a difficult time being skeptical sometimes too. This is on both sides of the debate. I won’t address specifically EG because anyone with sense can see he acted inappropriately at best and threateningly at worst. Watson imo did the right thing offering advice to all men the this behavior is considered creepy by many peoples standards no matter the good intentions one has. It seems to me that when McGraw commented on the vid she was simply trying to say that she didn’t think it was a big deal. If she had simply said I don’t see it as a big deal, things may have been left well enough alone. The way that she presented it was however symptomatic of several instances where people say “I can’t see the wrongness in this so you should keep your mouth shut.” I know those aren’t the actual words but that is the impression that I gathered from her comment. It then seemed that Watson considered that comment as representative of several instances where people try and shut each other up in the feminist movement. I personally think she could have chosen from a plethora of other comments to illustrate this better and with less nuance than that specify one but it was likely fresh on her mind and that is what happened. Then McGraw seems to be offended at being called out withoutwhat she considered proper avenue for recourse and all hell breaks loose.
    I think it is good that we disagree on the sides of subtle types of sexism. I think it keeps us reevaluating our positions to see people get worked up by something we see as nothing. I think when someone says they consider soothing to be no big deal especially in the face of greater wrongs we are well within reason to correct them, even publically, but it is in our best interest to not inflate facts to do so. If your argument is sound it will remain so without the aid of exxageration. If someone disagrees with you dispite your presenting a solid argument then weigh whether this one issue is enough for you to discount other positive attributes you have found with them in the past. If you haven’t found positive attributes from the person you disagree with then by all means discount that persons words until they offer substance.
    I kind of went off on an arguing tangent. Sorry. Back to the aftermath of elevatorgate. I did not read ERV before this. I only started reading when she called Watson Twatson. I tried like hell to look past the obvious juvenile behavior of gender slurs in a critique of someones feminist cred. There could have been a good argument in that post. It had potential but she went for cheap scathing humor and it lost any point she was trying to make for most people. I also tried to read comments and past post of hers on the topic but I found to be juvenile on the whole so ERV is not likely to become a regular blog for me to read. Very little utility gained in my experiences there.
    Here I have read quite dissenting opinions over a number of aspects related to elevatorgate. Some I want to address.
    Rape. Fuck the statistics. Who cares if it is one in four to one in twenty. Rape is common. Far to fucking common imo. It is too common in men women and children for all of us to not try and be vigilant about it. We should all try and be aware of the types of situations thatare more statistically likely to be a danger for us and act accordingly. So the arguments that rape stats are imperfect do not stand in the face of arguments for vigilance.
    The arguments that Watsonand those like her are somehow preventing courtship from happening at skeptical events is also ridiculous. Watson offered advice. If you think you are entitled to hit on someone in that manner simply be forward that there are a large number of people that will not find it welcome and some may speak cubically about it. It is simply a perspective. Take the advice if you want to date someone like Watson.
    the argument about whether to name names. This is a public world and just be prepared if you say something someone may call you on it. That should help you better critique your future public words.
    I think my wall of text is done here. I simply got tired of arguing with myself over this issue. Forgive typos. Phone typing is hard for the dyslexic.

  275. John D says

    Waffler – Is calling something mansplaining really a reason or explanation of your position? This is like when I asked my kid why they took their pants off (or some other odd thing) and they say “because”. Of course I say… “because” is not a reason. (just as mansplaining is not a reason).

    PS to others. Your replies to my claims are really not at all convincing to me but I appreciate you taking the time. Not much steam left in this ole’ windbag but it was interesting to say the least.

    Wow Coyote – you have a very interesting life story. I would not mock you for your relationships. I only mock people when I disagree with their ideas. The debate is not about the person as much as it is about the ideas. Yeah – I am sure my advice is probably not useful to you. seriously… good luck.

  276. Forbidden Snowflake says

    So women such as my girlfriend who think want this have been conditioned by me or society ?

    Jebus, you’re dumb. How the hell did you even come up with this? It doesn’t resemble anything that anyone has said to you.

    Here’s a third rendition, this time with extra-small words: under ‘traditional gender roles’, what the woman “wants” is of no importance. Therefor, a woman who chooses a path which happens to coincide with ‘traditional gender roles’ is not akin to “mommy-slave”, who by definition of ‘slave’ would not have chosen her position.

    Nice job getting offended over nothing, though.

    Please overcome your girlish shyness and be more explicit.

    Expecting interlocutor to be intelligent enough to look at the moon, not at the finger =/= girlish shyness

  277. illuminata says

    One more thing: if people think men have a low opinion of sex workers, they should hear how they talk about housewives.

    “housepet” is the most frequently heard insult in family court.

    Also “useless slag”, “gold-digging frigid slut” (?!?), “lazy cunt”. etc.

    From their soon to be ex-husbands, in front of their children.

    $40 says Horace is 7.5 years away from exactly this.

  278. John D says

    Illuminata – what a bogoted thing to say when you claim “All that said, wanna-ba housewives are, ultimately, suicidally naieve. I work in family law. I see what happens to them when Horace Can’t Read casts them off for wife 3.0. Cthuthlu help her *when* she’s cast off and has no marketable job skills.”

    Your true colors are shining through.

    Just so you know, my wife have been pretty traditional. she works part time and does most of the stuff with the kids. She is not a book smart as I am so I am able to get a much better paying job than she can. It works out for us. We have been married 27 years and she would be thrilled to know you think she is suicidally naive.

    We made a promise to each other… and that is important to us. Maybe you only see relationships when they fall apart. My successful marriage means I never go see you in the layers office.

  279. Forbidden Snowflake says

    It sorta keeps itself at a certain length… not sure how that works.

    AFAIK, hairs have their lifespan, after which they tend to fall out naturally. Obviously, limited lifespan =>> limited length.

    The same is true for all hairs, everywhere. It’s the same way that your eyelashes and leg hairs keep themselves at a certain length. They just don’t live nearly as long as head-hair and beard-hair.

  280. illuminata says

    What’s bogoted? Is that like, “I got these shoes at Payless! Bogoted!”

    We all understand that your too stupid to understand context, rape-apologist, but you didn’t honestly think anyone here is going to take your word one your claims of having a happy marriage, right? Wherein you described your wife as dumb?

    Sorry, douchecanoe, I don’t believe for even a split second anything you have to say about your “marriage”.

  281. jose says

    Rape means a sexual activity without consent, and it isn’t limited to copulation. In Spain, for instance, the law considers oral sex without consent rape, too. I’m sure the same happens in a number of states in the US (can someone look that up?)

    All three cases listed in #248 would be considered as such because there was no consent. In my country, anyway.

    What does “alpha man” mean?

  282. 'Tis Himself, pour encourager les autres says

    Hey John D,

    I’ve been married for almost 40 years. My wife initially became interested in me because I treated her as a person instead of a vagina. So how does that fit in with your delusions on how men get laid? Or will you finally admit you’re talking out of your asshole?

  283. says

    ‘Tis:

    I’ve been married for almost 40 years.

    I’ve been married for 32. Oh wait, that doesn’t count ’cause I don’t have a penis, right?

    Well, Mister treated me like a person. Always has and we were friends first. We’re still friends. That’s a good foundation for a relationship.

  284. 'Tis Himself, pour encourager les autres says

    What does “alpha man” mean?

    The term is usually “alpha male.” The wikipedia article says: “In social animals, the alpha is the individual in the community with the highest rank.”

  285. Sili says

    Headline in a paper (on the net) here: “Marriage without sex is just friendship”.

    Can’t say I bothered to find out what that was supposed to be about.

  286. John D says

    haha Illuminata – I meant bigoted (not bogoted). A misspelling.

    You are a hyperbolic nitwit. I never said my wife was dumb. I said she is not as book smart as I am and doesn’t find work that pays as much as I do. She likes working part time and having more time with the kids. I don’t mind working full time and I usually cook dinner and do laundry. She does the shopping and all the school stuff (like enrolling the kids in basketball). She is also a Girl Scout leader (which you are welcome to do as an atheist by the way… yay Girl Scouts!!!).

    I guess you don’t have to believe me about my marriage. I have been blogging under the name of John D for years. There are many who know me and know I am honest. well… really… I am sure you care nothing about me since you have already wished my dead. Whatever.

  287. Audley Z. Darkheart OM (OS), purveyor of candy and lies says

    Illuminata:

    What’s bogoted? Is that like, “I got these shoes at Payless! Bogoted!”

    I loled so fucking hard.

    Please accept this sniny new internet made out of cupcakes. XD

    jose,

    What does “alpha man” mean?

    In short: Douchebag.

    Yo, JOHN D!
    You gonna take a stab at my questions (which have been presented twice now) or are you gonna continue to dodge? ‘Cos refusing to actually engage anyone’s point is totes charming, believe me.

  288. heliobates says

    Hey heliobates – Why don’t you go to my post at #250 and resond to it?

    John, I say this with utter sincerity and a Christlike overflowing love for you: go fuck yourself. With or without a dead porcupine.

    If you meant what you said in #104, there is no reasoning with you on any of these issues. If you didn’t, then you’re a disingenuous troll who has no hope of understanding what most of the commentariat are saying to you, never mind me.

    Can you handle it?

    Tell ya what, on the infinitesimally small chance that I’m wrong about you, we can start with your claim #4:

    Watson claiming a man should not make a polite pass at someone in an elevator is silly. She should get over it and I suspect she would have had no trouble with the pass if it was from a man she was interested in.

    Please demonstrate (since you are the claimant), with quotes from the original YouTube video, that your version of the infamous event is the correct one, because anyone who understands the issue knows that it just didn’t go down that way. Can you handle it, Pumpkin?

    Careful, illuminata is only 2 squares away from “Bingo!”, and she’s not the only one playing.

  289. John D says

    Yes Audley – I can answer your little questions….

    1) Do you lock your front door? If so, isn’t that irrational of you?

    It is not irrational to lock your front door. Once in a while someone tries to get in who is not welcome. It is usually just a bum since an organized thief would not be stopped by a meager lock on a door. I lock my car as well just to keep our the punk kid who would take my CDs. An organized thief would be able to steal my old man car if they wanted.

    I have no generalized fear that anyone will break into my house. I never think about it. I do lock my door since it is easy to do and the house came with a lock.

    2) Define “traditional gender roles”.

    I was using the term “gender roles” to simply make a point about the definition of misogyny. No doubt you don';t use the definition properly so it doesn’t really matter what traditional gender roles are or how I define them.

  290. Audley Z. Darkheart OM (OS), purveyor of candy and lies says

    John D:

    Watson claiming a man should not make a polite pass at someone in an elevator is silly.

    You know, since you won’t listen to anyone here, I’ll have Eddie Izzard explain what “would you like a cup of coffee?” really means.

  291. opposablethumbs, que le pouce enragé mette les pouces says

    Lone Coyote:

    Aahhhhh I get it now. Thanks for explaining it to me. I’m embracing feminism in some vague hope of getting myself a partner here on pharyngula. I was always under this weird sorta delusion that I’m embracing feminism because women are people like me.

    QFA (quoted for awesome) (also QFC for the cool)

    … and for the MRAs it’s still all about getting something by taking it away from somebody else. Never even occurs to ‘em that a person might think or do something not because they think there’s something in it for them, but because it’s the right thing to do.

  292. illuminata says

    Please accept this sniny new internet made out of cupcakes. XD

    *slowly raises both arms above head*

    Cue Rocky Theme!!

    *runs up stairs really slowly*

    +

    P. S. Johnny: bonus points for being too fucking dumb to know the definition of “hypocrite”, “bigot” and “housewife” before declaring your wife stupid (more so than YOU?!?), and then whining some more about blah blah blah. You lost, mr. magoo, just accept it.

    I work on the side of discarded housewives, doing the best we can within the bounds of the law to make sure their lives are not destroyed by douchebag husbands who call them dumb on the internet.

    The woman i saw today had been married 46 years before being cast off. I’m sure I’ll see Mrs. D soon.

  293. 'Tis Himself, pour encourager les autres says

    John D #348

    No doubt you don’;t [sic] use the definition [of misogyny] properly

    Translation: I have a strict definition of misogyny and will accept no other definition because if I did then I’d have to admit to my own misogyny (even though my hatred of women shines through every comment I make).

  294. Audley Z. Darkheart OM (OS), purveyor of candy and lies says

    John D:
    Were you trying to belittle me? You’re gonna have to try harder than that, sweetheart.

    It is not irrational to lock your front door. Once in a while someone tries to get in who is not welcome.

    So, you don’t want “a bum” to break into your house, even though it’s statistically unlikely to happen, so you lock up. But when a woman takes precautions against stranger rape (which is statistically less likely to happen than a rapist being someone that she knows), she has irrational fear. Which is, of course, “unhealthy”. Do I have that about right, asshole?

    Never mind that rape (even stranger rape) happens, oh I don’t know, once in a fucking while. That’s us ladies, just being hysterical!

    I have no generalized fear that anyone will break into my house. I never think about it. I do lock my door since it is easy to do and the house came with a lock.

    So, why bother? You must be worried about it, since otherwise you wouldn’t bother to lock your door.

    I CAN HAZ CONSISTENCY, PLZ?

    I was using the term “gender roles” to simply make a point about the definition of misogyny.

    Oh yes, the dictionary definition. How charming.

  295. Nerd of Redhead, Dancer on Trolls says

    Still no evidence to pack up his idiocy from JohnD. He just appears to be a typical MRA loser, all mouth, no substance. Can’t refute the truth, just pretends he never heard it, and keeps talking jingos like a liberturd. Like we haven’t seen this before in the 5000+ posts on this subject. Can’t even be original, just pathetic.

  296. illuminata says

    Translation: I have a strict definition of misogyny and will accept no other definition because if I did then I’d have to admit to my own misogyny (even though my hatred of women shines through every comment I make).

    but he loves women! as long as they have no opinions he doesn’t authorize, no ideas of their own, no gainful employment, no autonomy, and definitely no desire to do anything but what he tells them to do.

    the bible sez that’s what all women want, so it must be true.

  297. says

    I was using the term “gender roles” to simply make a point about the definition of misogyny.

    Oh look, an evasion. Probably best since if we list “traditional gender roles”, it would turn out to be very misogynic.

  298. says

    Audley:

    Never mind that rape (even stranger rape) happens, oh I don’t know, once in a fucking while. That’s us ladies, just being hysterical!

    It happens far more often than that (which you know). I can’t even count all the serial rape cases (all stranger rapes) nor all the cases of women raped by a stranger who didn’t get out of it alive.

    That’s bad enough, then you get to count all the acquaintance rapes, date rapes and familial rapes. Yeah, it’s all in our heads. :eyeroll:

    I get so fucking sick and tired of morally repugnant asshole misogynists like Johndy spewing their shit all over the place, just like I get so fucking sick and tired of having to point out that yes, rape happens. It happens in various ways and forms to all different types of people (yes, men and boys too) all.the.fucking.time.

    These assholes think that because it hasn’t happened to them (or anyone they know*) it really isn’t all that big of a deal.

    *Like anyone they know would tell such a monumental asspimple about their being raped.

  299. NuMad says

    John D,

    I was using the term “gender roles” to simply make a point about the definition of misogyny. No doubt you don’;t use the definition properly so it doesn’t really matter what traditional gender roles are or how I define them.

    That’s just plain wrong. How can you make a point about “traditional gender roles” being unlinked to misogyny if “traditional gender roles” is a blank category? You might as well have said nothing at all.

    What about when “traditional gender role” include women being subjected to, lets say, ritual genital mutilation? Shouldn’t that modify one’s appraisal of how much misogyny can motivate the defence of the gender roles that frame the practice? Or does the absence of cartoonish, vocally expressed hatred disqualify any aspect of gender roles from reflecting any misogyny at all?

    If so, what word would you use to describe what does motivate the defence of “gender roles” that harm or subjugate women, in the absence of crudely vocalized negative emotions?

    Or is it that the absence of a word to express this would be satisfactory to you?

    Antigyny would be such an ugly coinage.

  300. Kevin says

    @John D.

    I’ve pretty much stayed out of this whole EG thing, but I have to chime in with a few clues for you.

    Clue #1: If you’re trying to minimize the impact of rape and sexual assault by criticizing statistics, your thinking might need some adjustment. This is exactly akin to responding to US murder rate statistics with something like “well, the murder rate in Afghanistan is higher than ours, so it can’t be that bad here.” Dismissing abysmal statistics by claiming that date rape, coerced sex, drunken/drugged NONCONSENSUAL sex does not conform to your redefinition of rape could land you 20+ years in a maximum security prison. Just sayin’.

    Clue #2: The phrase “traditional gender roles” does not mean “a woman who marries a man and has children and lives in a nuclear family,” no matter what the income disparity might be between the two or how they divide up diaper duty. “Traditional gender roles” means nothing more and nothing less than “the woman is subservient to the man”, usually because some holy book declares this to be so (like the Bible, Quran, Book of Moron, and on and on).

    So, when you use the phrase “traditional gender roles” to mean “nuclear family”, you are in fact waving a red flag of cluelessness in front of people. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but that’s just the way it is.

    Clue #3: When a woman (many, many, many women, in fact) tell you that she is uncomfortable with the interpersonal transaction that occurred in the elevator, you should believe her. It’s not your place to dismiss her concerns. That you can’t understand why a woman alone in a foreign country in an elevator with a stranger at 4 am asking her to his room for “coffee” might be just a bit uncomfortable is perhaps the Platonic Ideal of cluelessness.

  301. Ermine says

    Thanks John D.(ickhead?), for making your character perfectly clear. Your own words tell me more about you than anything anyone else here could possibly say, and it’s not a pretty sight.

    Intelligent, -thinking- people would probably wonder eventually why the only people on their side seemed to be MRAs and other misogynists. It may take you quite a bit longer to figure it out, but don’t worry, the rest of us already have.

    Since you’re having so much trouble already responding to other people’s posts, please don’t feel you have to respond to mine. I’m certainly not going to reply if you do!

    …You know, its just too bad about ERV. I -liked- her and her blog, at least until it became a haven for raving lunatics and women-haters. The first time she used ‘Twatson’, was the beginning of the end for me. Oh well! She seems to be happy with her new-found friends, and I’m not, (*shudder!*), so there’s one less blog for me to follow.

    Thank you PZ and all the rest of you here on Pharyngula, for making this place what it is. Thank you from the bottom of my heart!

    -Ermine!

    (Long-time lurker and occasional poster, former Mormon, and survivor of ‘spare the rod’ abuse and other christian “love” from his own family – Been there, done that. Never Again!)

  302. SallyStrange, Spawn of Cthulhu says

    but he loves women!

    I don’t trust anyone who says he loves “women,” the generalized group. Really, any person who happens to have a vagina, you just love them automatically? But you don’t do this for people with penises? It’s such an obvious lie, it’s amazing to me that people still say this unselfconsciously and think they should get a cookie because they have decided that the fictional monolith in their mind labeled “women” is an attractive fictional monolith, rather than a threatening fictional monolith.

  303. jose says

    Thanks people for the clarification. Wow, that’s something I hear from lions documentaries and such. Sort of like when Cesar Millán says “the pack leader”, right? Do we really apply it to humans? Odd.

    About being a housewife. I think the ideal we should fight to achieve would be a society where you can choose to be a housewife if you want. However the traditionally accepted idea is that the husband is supposed to go to work and bring food to the table while the wife is supposed to take care of the house and the children.

    In my opinion these roles or any other role go against our individual freedom. I think all of us should work to get what we want out of life (the so-called “pursuit of happiness”.) Since each person is different, having roles of any kind would make little sense to me in that ideal society, for they would be, by definition, inaccurate. This doesn’t apply only to sex; it also has to do with social class, race, etc.

  304. says

    Kevin:

    That you can’t understand why a woman alone in a foreign country in an elevator with a stranger at 4 am asking her to his room for “coffee” might be just a bit uncomfortable is perhaps the Platonic Ideal of cluelessness.

    While you’ll have to share with illuminata for a bit, I believe you deserve the keys to the internet.

  305. SallyStrange, Spawn of Cthulhu says

    Thanks people for the clarification. Wow, that’s something I hear from lions documentaries and such.

    Yeah. What’s funny about it is, in wolf packs, it’s often a female that’s alpha.

    Even funnier: in some primates, the betas get just as much tail as the alphas, if not more. Plus, they have lower stress levels.

    Also, primate culture, baboon culture for example, changes.

  306. Nerd of Redhead, Dancer on Trolls says

    Hello, Ermine! Wander over to our lounge. :)

    Also, stop by the Pharyngula Saloon and Spanking Parlor, Patricia, Princess of Pullets™, proprietor. Drinks range from non-alcoholic to grog/swill that guarantee hangovers, and organic snacks, like popcornz and BLT’s heavy on the B. Free drink and intro tab for first time visitors.

  307. Carlie says

    Hm. That comment about ERV made me go over there and browse a bit just out of curiosity, and none of the posts she’s made this entire month so far has more than 45 comments except the one about Elevatorgate. It’s still going strong, and is still almost entirely people who are looking at Pharyngula posts and comments and whining about how awful PZ is and how mean and “illogical” we all are. That seems to be a bit of an unhealthy level of obsession on a group level.

  308. Classical Cipher says

    Just hopping into this thread to announce that I am a proud misoJohnDist. JohnD, I think you’re putrid slime, so dim you’d be readily outshone by a failing Christmas light. At this point, I see no use in arguing with you. Just wanted you to add another voice to the chorus of contempt for you – you ought to be ashamed of your posts here, and at this point, you’re useless except as than an example to others.

    (#301 illuminata, don’t do that.)

  309. says

    Carlie:

    That seems to be a bit of an unhealthy level of obsession on a group level.

    To be fair, some of PZ’s longer threads have all been about Elevatorgate.

    Granted, most of it has been trying to correct people like John D, who have a completely twisted representation of events.

    But then, when RW’s statement can be summed up as, “Guys, this was creepy — try to not do similar creepy things,” and PZ saying, “Here’s some good advice from someone with experience,” I’m not sure how those views can be so grotesquely misrepresented.

  310. John D says

    Wow – blogging with this group is like trying to communicate with a bunch of aliens from another planet. You use the wrong definitions for words, you make hyperbolic and exaggerated claims, you don’t use reasoned arguments, and you use infantile insults to claim victory. You are like the fucking Borg.

    How did you all get so similarly and strangely indoctrinated? The cult of PZ. Very strange to witness, but quite fascinating. I sure do enjoy my time here. Never before have I been called a rapist, stupid, idiot, misogynist, shitsucker, hogfucker, John D(ickhead), liar, to go fuck myself, etc. all in one short afternoon.

    A class act here… really outstanding. Humanists at their best.

  311. Classical Cipher says

    You use the wrong definitions for words,

    Citation needed.

    you make hyperbolic and exaggerated claims,

    Citation needed.

    you don’t use reasoned arguments,

    Be more specific with that claim. Because I’m scrolling up and finding a number of them, none of which have the nym John D above them.

    and you use infantile insults to claim victory.

    Citation needed.

  312. SallyStrange, Spawn of Cthulhu says

    Mmm, yes. The Borg maneuver. “You all agree on something that I disagree with you about, therefore you are just like the Borg!” How creative. Haven’t heard that in a few hours at least.

    Yes. We are all indoctrinated into the belief that women are people. We all agree on this, and think that further debate on the question, “Are women really people?” is pointless and counterproductive.

    You have a reason as to why this is a bad thing?

  313. Nerd of Redhead, Dancer on Trolls says

    John D, still no citations for your bullshit. You are just a jingoist like liberturds, MRA’s and RWA’s, losers all. You can fix that by actually backing up what you say with citations to the proper literature, but we both know what a liar and bullshitter you are, so that is out.

  314. Kevin says

    @John D.

    No sir. You are the one who is communicating poorly. In particular by not listening to anything that’s been said.

    A misogynist is a “woman hater”.

    One who proclaims that his fondness for “traditional gender roles” is in fact declaring in a loud voice that he hates “uppity” women.

    The people here see you declare your preference for “traditional gender roles” and rightly see you saying “I prefer my women to be barefoot and pregnant, walking two steps behind me”.

    That’s patriarchy, and it’s born of your belief that you are “better” as a male than a woman. This shines through every post, loud and clear. It could not be more evident than if you declared yourself to be proud of the Orthodox Jewish prayer said every morning thanking god that you were not born a slave, a woman, or a Gentile.

    That you have not had your wife murder you in your bed after 27 years of marriage does not prove that deep in your heart of hearts you do not consider yourself superior to her in more than just educational attainment and income-generating ability.

    You sir, are a misogynist, pure and simple. Even if you love the female form, whack off to girl-on-girl porn, and pat the little woman on the head before you head off to slay the lions or whatever it is that you do for the family.

    Sad to say, you’ll probably never be anything else. Because you’re not listening to a word anyone else is saying.

  315. says

    John D:

    Never before have I been called a rapist, stupid, idiot, misogynist…

    Quacks like a duck…

    Seriously, John, you have to admit your showing here is less than stellar. Between your mis-representation of both RW’s and PZ’s position, your raving apologia for Menz, your ignoring of most of the substantive posts, you’ve really presented a fairly dishonest face.

    Why is it you imagine we should respect you?

    Just the one bit in which I was involved, you went from, “The 1-in-4 claim is bullshit!” to, “the 1-in-4 claim is often misrepresented!” All without a retraction of the “bullshit” claim, nor an acknowledgement that we were not misrepresenting that statistic. Instead, you powered on without changing your tune one fucking bit.

    That was some grade-A asshole, right there. A big, brown, smelly, resilient toroid of asshole.

    You’ve shown you’re not willing to involve yourself in honest debate. You present assertions with no evidence, opinions as fact, and have essentially shown a disregard for pretty much anything anyone here says.

    So, why should we show you respect, exactly?

    Just because that shit is politely ignored in other company doesn’t mean you can get away with it here. This isn’t indoctrination. This isn’t groupthink. Believe me, we get in some pretty serious knock-down drag-outs between ourselves, as well — SEE Classical Cipher calling out illuminata above. No, Babycakes, this is honest rational debate.

    Maybe it’s too honest for you.

    The thing is, Sweet Pea, you just don’t cut it. You’ve shown a disregard for facts, a contempt for the experiences of others, and an overblown sense that your own opinions trump those of others.

    So, why should we show you respect, exactly?

  316. SallyStrange, Spawn of Cthulhu says

    John D, as I’ve said before, whatever your dictionary definition of misogyny is, you have to admit that there are people out there who are unashamed to admit that they hate women.

    You act similarly to them when you announce that you “support” traditional gender roles. I don’t judge people who choose traditional gender roles negatively, but I do see active support for an institution that was built on misogyny and relies on misogyny for its continuation as an extension of misogyny.

    Sorry if that hurts your feelings. If you don’t like being called a misogynist then try harder to make yourself seem different from misogynists.

  317. Audley Z. Darkheart OM (OS), purveyor of candy and lies says

    Ah, the last sputtering gasps of a troll with no argument– OMG!! GROUPTHINK!!

    How sad, John. How very fucking sad.

    Never before have I been called a rapist, stupid, idiot, misogynist, shitsucker, hogfucker, John D(ickhead), liar, to go fuck myself, etc. all in one short afternoon.

    Translation: It gets lonely in my mom’s basement.

  318. jose says

    John D, I hope you got something positive out of it as well. For example you learned that the three points listed in the comment #248 constitute rape because there’s no consent. That’s a good thing to know.

  319. heliobates says

    …you don’t use reasoned arguments…

    Pearls before swine. Reread your #104 again, and ask yourself honestly if you deserve better treatment than you’ve received.

    Aw, who am I kidding. That’s like putting Zaphod Beeblebrox in the The Total Perspective Vortex.

  320. says

    Aargh, my post was eaten. Trying again.

    Johndy:

    blogging with this group

    You aren’t blogging here, let alone with us. You are one of a number of people posting at a blog.

    You can’t even get that much right, what makes you think your misogynistic stances are correct, Cupcake? You filled our bingo card sometime ago.

    Now you’ll spend ages on telling us we’re an echo chamber, we’re nasty, we use bad language, yada, yada, yada.

    :yawns: Do us a favour, Cupcake – run back to the loving misogyny of the slimepit. Spare us the endless whinging. Here’s your decaying porcupine, don’t let the door hit you (we don’t like assprints on our door) and be sure to stick the flounce! Ta.

  321. says

    Fuck me, but John D is a fucking poster child for privilege. “Oh, ladies, you certainly don’t have anything to complain about when a complete fucking stranger approaches you for sex in an enclosed space. Why, you should be fucking honored.”

    Y’know, before this whole Elevatorgate thing exploded, I was just one of three.28 billion guys who thought that women’s experiences were similar to mine. I had no fucking clue, in spite of the fact my sister was raped when she was 13 (and never reported it), that this was a widespread issue, a big deal.

    I do have to hand it to John D. He and his ilk have shed the scales from my eyes over the last couple of months.

    Fuck.

    Me.

  322. says

    Nigel:

    Why, you should be fucking honored.

    Yeah, it’s adorable, ennit? Throughout Egate, I’ve stated way too many times that I will not get on an elevator with a male stranger. Given my experiences, it’s simply too far out of my comfort zone. Not that I’m thrilled about enclosed stairways, either. Which is the point – as a woman, just about every single place I find myself could end up in a bad way. Just the constant need for awareness can grate on a person.

    I do have to hand it to John D. He and his ilk have shed the scales from my eyes over the last couple of months.

    That’s the good side of it all. A lot of people have come to understand privilege and a perspective different from their own. That’s always a good thing.

  323. 'Tis Himself, pour encourager les autres says

    John D, you’ve made it amply clear you do not consider women to be people. Even though that doesn’t meet your tight-assed definition of misogyny, it fits everyone else’s definition. As I said before, the only reason you cling to your strict definition is that if you used any other definition then you’d have to admit you’re a misogynist.

    Actually, you do fit your own pet definition of misogynist. You do hate women. You hate the idea they think of themselves as people and you hate men like me who also think of women as people. So just admit openly you hate women. We won’t think the less of you. It would be difficult to think the less of you as it is.

  324. John D says

    Dood gets on elevator with Beckie in the wee hours after they were presumably both partying in the bar.

    Dood says “Don’t take this the wrong way but I find you very interesting. Would you like to come to my room for coffee?”

    Beckie says “No”

    They go to their rooms.

    *****************************************

    Conclusion according to Beckie and PZ and McWrong: Dood is a creeper who has priveledge. Beckie should have been scared because he talked to her. Beckie was “sexualized” because going for “coffee” could have been an invitation for sex.

    Conclusion according to everyone I have ever met: Dood must not have been interesting to Beckie. Sounds like the dood was polite. Maybe he needs a better line.

  325. says

    John D #373:

    Wow – blogging with this group is like trying to communicate with a bunch of aliens from another planet. You use the wrong definitions for words, you make hyperbolic and exaggerated claims, you don’t use reasoned arguments, and you use infantile insults to claim victory. You are like the fucking Borg.

    May I ask why you didn’t provide any quotes as examples of this behaviour? It’d be a lot more convincing if you showed where people were “[using] the wrong definitions for words … [making] hyperbolic and exaggerated claims … and [using] infantile insults to claim victory” or acting “like the fucking Borg”. I can excuse you slightly on the last since it’s a generalized statement of behaviour and quite frankly you are one person in one thread making one argument, and possibly on the second-to-last because you might feel slighted due to tone (don’t, you’ll find that not only is it easier to make rational responses, you will also be able to point out where other people may be trying to use this against you — you’ll also find it much easier to be here, which can be seen as a bonus), but the first two can be backed up with quotes.

    Remember: don’t just say it, show it.

  326. says

    Jebus. John D, you’re just rehashing the same delusions your gang has had for months.

    You’re too stupid to continue here.

    Goodbye.

  327. heliobates says

    Franc is totally correct about PZ and the fempecked Pharyngulite hoards. You act like a bunch of hypocritical self-righteous nitwits. Most of you are too judgemental and indoctrinated to even understand the irony here.

    SCENE: A hospital ward. Two police officers (both menz, because girls are just too delicate for this job and besides, they should be home making sammiches) are interviewing a badly beaten John D.

    OfficerManz 1: So, tell us again what happened before you were attacked.

    JohnD: “It was like trying to communicate with aliens. All I did was walk into the biker bar and say ‘Hey, which one of you fat losers owns the Harley'”…

  328. lordsetar says

    Damn it. I had a takedown of his last in the works, too. Why do I always have to show up right at the end…-sigh-

  329. Audley Z. Darkheart OM (OS), purveyor of candy and lies says

    Apparently, Johnny Douchecanoe didn’t feel the need to click on my Eddie Izzard link.

    I haz a sad. :(

  330. bookworm says

    Because of a large time difference I’ve just logged in and read all 383 posts, and it was fascinating. John D, although barraged with reasoned responses to his numerated points, simply ignored them and collapsed all argument into ‘You’re all picking on me!’. That, and his ‘I know what women want’ nonsense. The earth is round, and John D has undoubtedly never listened to a woman in his life.

  331. Nerd of Redhead, Dancer on Trolls says

    John D is gone, but for you next MRA fuckwitted fool, either be prepared to present citations to the scientific literature, or shut the fuck up before you even start. Your attitude and preaching will get you banhammered. Try using facts for a change…but I’m not holding my breath…

  332. Ermine says

    Nerd & Caine,

    Thanks for the welcome, but I do already know about The Endless Thread – I really am a long-time reader! You’ll find posts from me going back several years, and I’ve been reading Pharyngula since before it arrived at ScienceBlogs – something very close to a decade now.

    You and Caine are two of the voices I most enjoy reading, thanks to your clear-headed thinking and common decency, traits which are all too often in short supply, as we can see from Johndy-boy above.

    I don’t post nearly often enough because I’m waayy over here on the west coast, AND often on rather a late schedule when it comes to reading the news, so by the time I read an article and get through all the comments, everything I might have said has already been said, often several times over! I also tend to come over all verbose once I start writing something, and not only does the writing take too much time, but no one wants to read me going off into a long rant on something that everyone else has already ranted on. If I’m ever early enough that what I have to say hasn’t already been said, I’ll say something, honest!

    I know about TET, but I’m usually here for the news and articles, and taking part regularly in TET would take more time than I really want to lose. TET tends to be the one part of Pharyngula that I -don’t- read religiously. (And yes, I fully expect that to be quote-mined someday by someone trying to claim that I’m ‘just as religious as they are’, or that “See? Atheism is a religion!” because I used the word. *sigh* Some people..)

    In this instance though, I couldn’t help finally piping up to voice my disgust at John D. Really, whatever he may tell himself, his own words have damned him more than anything anyone else could possibly have said. I just wanted to speak up and let him know that even the lurkers (one of the ones willing to unlurk, anyway) could see the hole he had dug himself into – and we’d really prefer it if he pulled the dirt in on top of himself now so we didn’t have to hear him embarrass himself any further, thank you very much!

    Yikes, this is already getting long. See what I mean? I start to write “Hey, thanks!”, and the next then you know I’m ten paragraphs in and going strong.

    -Ermine!
    (Why the explanation point? have you ever seen an ermine? They live their lives between exclamation points!)

    It’s great to soar with the eagles, but you never see a weasel getting sucked into a jet engine, now do you?

  333. says

    in the wee hours after they were presumably both partying in the bar

    I know he’s banned now… but that part, repeated over and over in different forms by assorted idiots hellbent on defending EG’s actions, is pissing me off. Apparently, being in the same physical location without ever having interacted is already enough familiarity to start propositioning someone. If you think about the consequences of such thinking, it’s downright disturbing: it would suddenly mean that the people who ride the same bus with me on my commute aren’t “strangers” and can proposition me; it would mean people who eat their lunch at the same time as me aren’t “strangers” and can proposition me; it means other passengers on a transatlantic flight aren’t “strangers” and can proposition me while waiting in line to the lavatory.

    Basically being physically present anywhere for any extended period of time is already an invitation to be propositioned. No right to privacy at all. Chilling.

    Fucking disturbing

  334. says

    Ermine, just because other people have said similar to what you want to say does not stop anyone else!

    but no one wants to read me going off into a long rant on something that everyone else has already ranted on.

    Oh, don’t think that, we love a good rant here. You should know that by now. :D

  335. says

    John D, I know you’re still reading, so Imma point something out to you:

    Dood gets on elevator with Beckie

    See that bit I emphasized? Her name is Rebecca Watson. You show your disrespect not only towards her, but to women in general by using a nickname, which, you do not know that she herself uses and that you are not in a position to use.

    Your assholism shines from every single stupid word you write, John.

  336. SallyStrange, Spawn of Cthulhu says

    It’s great to soar with the eagles, but you never see a weasel getting sucked into a jet engine, now do you?

    Mustelids are the coolest. I’m a particular fan of the fishercat!

  337. says

    Jadehawk:

    it would suddenly mean that the people who ride the same bus with me on my commute aren’t “strangers” and can proposition me;

    That’s the way a fair amount of men think. A lot of women who end up being stalked were out and about doing their business when they are simply spotted by someone. Someone who decides they are a good target for their particular obsession.

  338. says

    The late, not-so-great John D:

    Conclusion according to Beckie and PZ and McWrong: Dood is a creeper who has priveledge. Beckie should have been scared because he talked to her. Beckie was “sexualized” because going for “coffee” could have been an invitation for sex.

    Yeah. No need to take the word from the person who was actually fucking there. Let’s all get on board John D’s excellent, though not-so-accurate, synopsis!

    Great fucking way to make a point, dude.

    And an excellent example of what I meant when I said you didn’t take anyone else’s experiences seriously.

    Conclusion according to everyone I have ever met: Dood must not have been interesting to Beckie. Sounds like the dood was polite. Maybe he needs a better line.

    And you said you weren’t a misogynist?

    You sure play a great one on TV, then.

  339. heliobates says

    Yeah. No need to take the word from the person who was actually fucking there.

    One of the only amusing aspects of EG has been the instant conversion of every ERV-fan/MRA into hardcore Pyrhonnian skeptic about this and only this event.

    Because it’s a woman’s version, we suddenly have to fall all over ourselves extending the benefit of the doubt to the “real” victim here… sort of the way that “innocent until proven guilty” becomes an uncontrovertible truth whenever there’s a high-profile rape accusation (a la Domenic Strauss-Khan).

    Absolutely illuminating.

  340. SallyStrange, Spawn of Cthulhu says

    it would suddenly mean that the people who ride the same bus with me on my commute aren’t “strangers” and can proposition me;

    That’s the way a fair amount of men think. A lot of women who end up being stalked were out and about doing their business when they are simply spotted by someone. Someone who decides they are a good target for their particular obsession.

    …Odds are that they don’t even understand WHY they regard women this way. It’s a holdover from the days when women were more or less explicitly legal chattel. An unchaperoned woman in public is akin to a cow wandering away from her pasture, only the proper way to show a cow her place is simply to capture the cow and return her to her pasture, whereas the way to show a woman her place is to demonstrate that being in a public place without her owner husband or father is to demonstrate to her that she is public property, by making use of her body in whatever way a man wants to. Consent was irrelevant. We’re still transitioning out of this cultural phase. Fucking slowly.

  341. Classical Cipher says

    John D has asked everyone he has ever met what they think about ElevatorGate, and they all gave him the same answer.
    Fascinating.

  342. says

    SallyStrange:

    We’re still transitioning out of this cultural phase. Fucking slowly.

    Yes. Very slowly. And a certain segment of the population is refusing the transition altogether, such as the slimepit crew, MRAs and PUAs. They’re simply shifting it to fair game. For them, it’s not so much about chattel now, it’s about hunting. I don’t find that in any way to be comforting.

  343. 'Tis Himself, pour encourager les autres says

    John D has asked everyone he has ever met what they think about ElevatorGate, and they all gave him the same answer.

    I just asked everyone in the world if John D was a misogynist and they all answered “yes” except for one dude who was stoned and John D himself. True Fact!

  344. SallyStrange, Spawn of Cthulhu says

    ‘Tis

    You asked the whole world, and you only found one guy who was stoned?

    I call shenanigans.

  345. says

    heliobates:

    One of the only amusing aspects of EG has been the instant conversion of every ERV-fan/MRA into hardcore Pyrhonnian skeptic about this and only this event.

    You are oddly amused. I just wanna rip my own fucking eyes out.

    “Oh, we’re so much more skeptical than you! All you sheep do is follow Becky and Meyers [sic] because you’re such fucking smirks!

    “Oh, and, Groupthink.”

    My fucking itchy balls.

  346. NuMad says

    John D-Parted,

    You use the wrong definitions for words, you make hyperbolic and exaggerated claims, you don’t use reasoned arguments, and you use infantile insults to claim victory. You are like the fucking Borg.

    Okay, maybe resistance really isn’t that futile, but otherwise none of that sounds particularly Borg-like!

    Who else figures that John had this little parting shot prepared in advanced before he even posted his first comment here?

    The only place I’ve come across “fempecked” before was Hoggle’s blog; I figure John marinated there a while before flopping his way here.

  347. Insipid Moniker says

    The saddest part about reading this is that, while I cringe to admit it, I can look back and identify with John D. I can very clearly remember thinking I was all about women’s rights, and of course men aren’t smarter than women, and how I would speak out for equality…and then go pull every disgusting psychological trick I could think of to get laid. Funny thing, though, it wasn’t about the sex, because I’ve always had more and better sex when I’ve been in a stable relationship with someone I respect. It was about societal perception of my manliness (typing that hurt) yes, I sadly admit to being a recovering doodz. The other funny thing was that, when I started to feel guilty about what I was doing, and started considering the fact that I was in no way treating women as equals, I started to accumulate a whole lot more female friends. Who suddenly had interesting, funny, intelligent opinions. Crazy how that worked.

  348. says

    Insipid Moniker:

    yes, I sadly admit to being a recovering doodz.

    That’s not sad and it takes intelligence and heart to realize you were wrong about something and change. Just look at all the menz who are simply entrenching themselves further and deeper into sexism. That is not you.

    when I started to feel guilty about what I was doing, and started considering the fact that I was in no way treating women as equals, I started to accumulate a whole lot more female friends. Who suddenly had interesting, funny, intelligent opinions. Crazy how that worked.

    It’s wonderfully rewarding, treating people like people. :)

  349. heliobates says

    @NuMad

    Who else figures that John had this little parting shot prepared in advanced before he even posted his first comment here?

    Yea, verily all that came to pass wast foretold in the Book of MRA, comment #104.

    @nigel

    You are oddly amused. I just wanna rip my own fucking eyes out.

    It the suddenness that strikes me. An MRA is a frothing Klingon calling women “hysterical” and “hyperbolic”, for 100 posts, and then as soon as a woman explains her experience or a la Rebecca Watson, or cites a statistic, instantly the MRA turns Vulcan:

    “Quite simply Captain, I examined the problem from all angles, and it was plainly her fault. Logic informed me that under the circumstances, the woman was clearly over reacting and needs to get over herself. Logical decision, logically arrived at….”

    It’s a kind of Theatre of the Cognitive Dissonance. Yes it’s hideous to watch but it’s so un-selfconsiously desperate at the same time.

  350. Horse-Pheathers says

    This Hoggle fellow does seem inordinately angry about something….

    The thought occurs to me…..maybe…..what if…..could Hoggle actually be Elevator Dude’s embarrassed alter-ego?

  351. Rey Fox says

    Humanists at their best.

    Heh, sure. I was talking with Jules a couple weekends ago, and we concluded that the elevator thing separated the humanists from the atheists, and I know which group I’m throwing my lot in with.

  352. The Panic Man And His Gloves Of Running Urgently says

    *runs into thread*

    …okay, I’m finally back from work, time to put this troll’s lights o- damn it, why am I always late?

    And here I had a three-paragraph-long lesson on why JohnDumbass is a slime mold minus the fascinating parts. Ah well, that’s what working second shift gets you.

  353. says

    Rey:

    the elevator thing separated the humanists from the atheists

    I’ve gone beyond that. I recently re-read Dune for the umptieth time and have begun to consider Egate as a type of gom jabbar. It determines who is human.

  354. theophontes , flambeau du communisme says

    @ PZ #247

    By the way, if you’re wallowing in the pigslop at ERV, that’s no problem. But if you’re now echoing comments there from banned nitwits here, that is a problem. Don’t bother.

    It was I that reposted his link in my comment at #186.

    Giordana is gone, we don’t need anyone relaying babble for him.

    I should have checked the dungeon first. (Link)

    Please accept my apologies on both of these issues.

  355. Janine, The Little Top Of Venom, OM says

    So John D is the first troll in the new digs to get the banhammer. What an honor. The folks at ERV will throw a party for him.

  356. Forbidden Snowflake says

    heliobates:

    One of the only amusing aspects of EG has been the instant conversion of every ERV-fan/MRA into hardcore Pyrhonnian skeptic about this and only this event.

    The REALLY amusing part was when they declared that we should be skeptical of Watson’s account because extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence SIMULTANEOUSLY to claiming that the elevator incident was perfectly trivial, nothing out of the ordinary and not worth making a fuss about.

    p.s. true story. This one time, even in the same comment.

  357. H-Bomb says

    That guy, John Douche, made my head hurt. I would ask someone to summarize his argument, but I’m just not that cruel.

    In other news, angry wanker is angry. It is okay to jerk off while cybersexing with some person on the ‘net. It is not okay to brag about it like you are the hottest thing to ever happen to women and everyone who thinks that women are human is a nazi. WTF is that even about?

    I do appreciate the evening’s reading, though.

  358. Philip Legge says

    Janine,
    So John D is the first troll in the new digs to get the banhammer. What an honor. The folks at ERV will throw a party for him.

    Actually, aside from the trolls who were initiated straight into The New Dungeon without having first posted here, that honour went straight to Dennis Markuze, posting on the very first day this website opened (he also trolled Chris Rodda and Ed Brayton; presumably all of the Free Thought Blogs copped a serve of M*bus that day).

    References to his last, ill-fated visit to Pharyngula start here at comment #22. One of the expunged comments, predictably, apparently consisted of a threat.

  359. Bernard Bumner says

    Well, I know the stain is fading away, but I just wanted to make an observation about John’s last misfired broadside.

    This:

    Dood must not have been interesting to Beckie. Sounds like the dood was polite. Maybe he needs a better line.

    Because Rebecca Watson would have been drinking coffee if only EG had a better line?

    Because women are just waiting to hear the magic words? Presumably it is a bit like Captain Marvel and Shazam! (Wikipedia is your friend, if you aren’t familiar with such comic book geekery.) Abracadabra! And that not at all interested women turns into a raging nympho, ready to satisfy the swollen lust of a stranger?

    Most charitably, he means that she wouldn’t have been offended if EG had been more charming and/or funny. Which is just another egregious example of missing the point. He doesn’t seem to understand that being approached for sex can be irritating/vexing/intimidating in various circumstances. Yet another person who just thinks that others should accomodate any proposition.

  360. says

    heliobates:

    “Quite simply Captain, I examined the problem from all angles, and it was plainly her fault. Logic informed me that under the circumstances, the woman was clearly over reacting and needs to get over herself. Logical decision, logically arrived at….”

    Now that’s amusing.

    Not so odd after all.

  361. Rev. BigDumbChimp says

    Good fucking grief. I’m glad I missed John D.

    To quote Zappa

    Some scientists claim that hydrogen, because it is so plentiful, is the basic building block of the universe. I dispute that. I say there is more stupidity than hydrogen, and that is the basic building block of the universe.

    John and the rest of the morons who can’t even get the arguments straight are datapoints in that theory.

  362. illuminata says

    Kids: apologies for that comment way up that. That was a total asshole thing to post and I have no excuse for it. Apologies and thx for the calling out. I def deserved it.

  363. Merrily Dancing Ape says

    Hmm. There seems to be a notion that once you get rid of Christian prudery, there is nothing immoral about prostitution since it is a form of consensual sex.

    While that might have validity in theory, it is terribly incorrect in practice. Prostitution anywhere in the world, including in America, is usually associated with the following:

    * human trafficking
    * slavery / indentured servitude
    * organized crime
    * drug addiction

    The main driving force behind prostitution, even when these other factors are not at play, is economic disparity between women and men. Prostitution is therefore deeply anti-feminist.

    There is a chance that the Russian prostitute was brought to America by the mob and is in a coercive situation. To pay to receive sexual services from her is to reward her captors and in that way participate in the coercion.

    It’s a complicated issue, of course, and many prostitutes do not consider themselves to be exploited. Nevertheless, there is a moral component to this issue that humanists must consider, for it has nothing to do with religious prudery; it has to do with living by the principle that all humans beings are equal.

    (I tried to post this comment a couple times before and it didn’t seem to take, so I apologize if multiple copies suddenly appear.)

  364. says

    Hoggle:

    Watching you self-destruct is better than sex.

    Cupcake, the only thing destructing around here is your brain. However, if your delusion is, indeed, better than your weird, angry, public wankery, all I can say is good. I’m afraid your sex life wankery is as boring and pathetic as everything else about you.

  365. SallyStrange, Spawn of Cthulhu says

    Paul? Oh right, PZ.

    Based on your description of your wank sessions, Hoggle, a great many things are better than sex. At least for you.

  366. Waffler, purveyor of delicious waffles says

    I wonder who the hoggler thinks PZ is defrauding. We’ll never get a coherent explanation, I predict.

  367. says

    MDA:

    The main driving force behind prostitution, even when these other factors are not at play, is economic disparity between women and men.

    Gee, ya don’t say! :eyeroll: I note you leave male prostitutes out of the equation.

    Prostitution is therefore deeply anti-feminist.

    Many feminists, like myself, want to see prostitution legalized, with protections in place, such as unions, health coverage, safety, etc.

    I also would not say that all sex workers are anti-feminists. I know more than a few feminist sex workers.

  368. SallyStrange, Spawn of Cthulhu says

    A sampling of Franc Hoggle’s well-reasoned responses to the criticisms showing in the threads on his own site:

    “Scan your tits, or shut up.”

    “Hold still. Hard to get a cum shot right.”

    “As above, Hold still. Hard to get a cum shot right.”

    “That Becky is an ugly cunt I wouldn’t fuck with Gaddafi’s dick. I feel lighter now.”

    “Bet you could scrape a baked on lasagne tray with your pussy. No, I will no longer take any of you seriously. Thanks for asking.”

    “What’s black and blue and hates sex? A rape victim. Go to town. Slander me to hell and back. Your audience is shrinking.”

    “Haw haw. Go wax your pussy.”

    Aand… my personal favorite…

    “Watson and Myers are the vilest whores. Chumpies like you believe they are pure – while they exploit you. For personal gain.”

    Help, help, I’m being exploited!

    Hee hee.

    This should be amusing.

  369. Ing says

    I don’t trust anyone who says he loves “women,” the generalized group. Really, any person who happens to have a vagina, you just love them automatically? But you don’t do this for people with penises?

    Reminded of Demetri Martin’s comment “Isn’t saying you like kids like saying that you like people…for a while”

    Thanks people for the clarification. Wow, that’s something I hear from lions documentaries and such.

    Yeah. What’s funny about it is, in wolf packs, it’s often a female that’s alpha.

    Even funnier: in some primates, the betas get just as much tail as the alphas, if not more. Plus, they have lower stress levels.

    Also, primate culture, baboon culture for example, changes.

    I’ve also heard that in Chimps, determination of the alpha is highly influenced by the female’s opinions. Females will side with current alphas or against them depending on who has won their support and can greatly tip the scales in a challenge. Also males have been known on occasion to form alliances and over throw current alphas and form a joint female access.

    blogging with this group is like trying to communicate with a bunch of aliens from another planet. You use the wrong definitions for words, you make hyperbolic and exaggerated claims, you don’t use reasoned arguments, and you use infantile insults to claim victory. You are like the fucking Borg.

    How did you all get so similarly and strangely indoctrinated? The cult of PZ. Very strange to witness, but quite fascinating. I sure do enjoy my time here. Never before have I been called a rapist, stupid, idiot, misogynist, shitsucker, hogfucker, John D(ickhead), liar, to go fuck myself, etc. all in one short afternoon.

    I am laughing so hard because this is an IDEAL example for ‘The Sisko” Troll.

    Paul, you are a fraud. Watching you self-destruct is better than sex.

    Ummm….you publicly admitted to jizzing over a flat screen and that the only compliment you could get for a sexual encounter was “Thanks for not being abusive” and you somehow think you’re looking heroic in this?

    Two can play that game, MEN start inflating those dolls! Women, charge those batteries! If it’s a war he wants then, by god, we’ll give him one. *dons Patton Helmet and crop*

  370. jose says

    #431 I agree. I can’t escape the thought that, regardless of voluntariness or how nicely s/he may be treated, a prostitute is turning him/herself into a consumer good. That the client is temporarily buying someone.

    I also don’t like the idea that sex is something to be buyed instead of shared, but that’s only a personal feeling.

  371. ChasCPeterson says

    Bet you could scrape a baked on lasagne tray with your pussy.

    wut
    I…

    I don’t get this one. What could it possibly even mean?

    Is somebody being disparaged for being an unapologetic mammal?
    Otherwise I just don’t even.

    (It does suggest that Mr. Hoggle may be a professional dish washer though. Not that there’s anything wrong with that.)

  372. says

    Hoggle:

    Paul, you are a fraud. Watching you self-destruct is better than sex.

    What? Someone is self-destructing? Can I watch? Can I?

    Oh! You mean PZ? How’s he self-destructing? I was kind of hoping for a Scanners-level head asplode. Instead, I get Hoggle mistaking amusement for self-destruction.

    Franc, to quote Buzz Lightyear: You are a sad, strange little man, and you have my pity.

  373. says

    ChasC:

    I don’t get this one. What could it possibly even mean?

    I’m not sure myself. I suspect it’s a reference to large labia, but I could be wrong. Perhaps Hoggle and his angry inch stick to cyber-sex due to a fear of vagina dentata (which could clean up a baked on lasagna tray, of course).

  374. Ing says

    I agree. I can’t escape the thought that, regardless of voluntariness or how nicely s/he may be treated, a prostitute is turning him/herself into a consumer good. That the client is temporarily buying someone.

    I also don’t like the idea that sex is something to be buyed instead of shared, but that’s only a personal feeling.

    I agree. I can’t escape the thought that, regardless of voluntariness or how nicely s/he may be treated, a therapist is turning him/herself into a consumer good. That the client is temporarily buying someone.

    I also don’t like the idea that compassion is something to be buyed instead of shared, but that’s only a personal feeling.

  375. Merrily Dancing Ape says

    Caine:

    No, I did not say that sex *workers* are anti-feminists. Prostitution as an institution is anti-feminist. The fact that there are male prostitutes doesn’t discount that.

    Legalizing prostitution may be a way to achieve harm reduction. But the best way to improve the lives of women forced into prostitution is to deal directly with the economic disparity between men and women, so that women have other opportunities to earn a living wage. Steinem, as usual, has insightful things to say on the subject:

    Question: Can stripping or prostitution ever be empowering for women?

    Gloria Steinem: The word “empower” is troubling. I mean I have spent 40 years talking to women. I sat before the election, interviewed prostituted women in Las Vegas and so it isn’t… You know little girls do not wake up in the morning and say “I dream of being a prostitute.” It is a terrible, terrible life. Body invasion is more traumatic than even getting beaten up. In certain circumstances, obviously, it may be a way to survive. And we rationalize ways to survive. But I think what we need to look at is we need to pull back and say to ourselves why is it that men need… some men; it’s actually not the majority of men… but that some men go to prostitutes and need that kind of dominance. It’s the disease of… It’s getting addicted to masculinity. What is that about?

    In the egalitarian cultures… People think prostitution has always existed, but it hasn’t and even rape was very rare. For instance, when Europeans arrived on this continent they wrote about how shocked they were that the 500 or so native groups here didn’t rape even their female captives. They were shocked. So we need to stop asking so many questions of the people who are in various circumstances and feel they have to do this and start asking on the demand side why is there a demand for this. What has been eroticized by male dominant systems of all kinds is dominance and passivity. We need to eroticize equality. I always say to audiences of men: “Cooperation beats submission. Trust me.” At least it makes them laugh. That is what is troubling and of course in the meantime we have to stop arresting prostitutes and not arresting traffickers and pimps. It’s absurd. We’re arresting the victim or the survivor and not the oppressor.

  376. says

    Awwww. Hoggle just opened the door a crack, shouted some incoherent string of words, then slammed the door and bolted. That’s really too bad — he sounded so squeaky, I salivated a little.

    His anger makes me giggle like a child in a tickle-fight.

  377. Ing says

    @Jose

    I figured it was self explanatory. What part didn’t you get?

    Some people are paid for sex
    Some people are paid for intimacy

    Why did we decide sex is something sacred while intimacy is not?

  378. Bernard Bumner says

    I’m not sure myself. I suspect it’s a reference to large labia…

    I thought he was trying to invoke the hairy feminist stereotype by comparing unshaven pubic hair to a pan scourer. I presumed that it indicated that good, submissive, sexually available women are hairless in his mind’s eye, whereas horrible, frigid feminists are hirsute and therefore also unappealing.

    This is what happens when pornography is one’s only source of sexual imagery.

    Hmmm… trying to inhabit the mind of a childish wanker may be dangerous.

  379. says

    MDA:

    No, I did not say that sex *workers* are anti-feminists. Prostitution as an institution is anti-feminist.

    Prostitutes are sex workers. The way prostitution is viewed is most definitely problematic. A lot of people choose to do it, you know, and are actively fighting for legalization, the right to unionize, get healthcare and other benefits, etc. In more than once situation, when it has been legalized, was safe and paid well, it was considered a good job option by many people.

    Prostitution/sex work via the net and cyber-sex, much like phone sex, is now considered to be a good option by a lot of people, because it’s safe and pays well.

    Oh, and don’t dig up quotes by Steinem. She ain’t the be all and end all, ya know. I’ve been a feminist for over 30 years. I was around when she was news.

  380. says

    I think I’ll let Hoggle hoggle for a little while longer, if he wants (I doubt that he will). But really, it’s more polite to hoggle in the privacy of your own place — most people aren’t interested in watching.

    Although…he does have a bit of a kink in which he apparently likes people watching him hoggle.

  381. jose says

    I guess I’m not familiar with these therapists. I don’t think we have them here. Is it like buying a friend or something?

  382. says

    SQB:

    WTF? Rape jokes? What a shitstain!

    Yeah. Class act, isn’t he?

    And he’s the kind with whom the likes of John D align themselves. All of us leftists just hate freedom so much, we ask people to consider treating women like people, and not like lasagna-pan cleaners.

    We’re such nazis!

  383. Ing says

    The word “empower” is troubling. I mean I have spent 40 years talking to women. I sat before the election, interviewed prostituted women in Las Vegas and so it isn’t… You know little girls do not wake up in the morning and say “I dream of being a prostitute.” It is a terrible, terrible life. Body invasion is more traumatic than even getting beaten up. In certain circumstances, obviously, it may be a way to survive. And we rationalize ways to survive. But I think what we need to look at is we need to pull back and say to ourselves why is it that men need… some men; it’s actually not the majority of men… but that some men go to prostitutes and need that kind of dominance. It’s the disease of… It’s getting addicted to masculinity. What is that about?

    Oh my god, so much bullshit

    a) You’re using the fact that some people do a job out of desperation to ban people who may be indifferent to or even WANT to do the job

    b) You’re defining it as an invasion in of itself…as if someone couldn’t actually ever consent in sex work

    c) You’re presuming all men who visit a prostitute are dominating assholes.

    d) You’re dismissing any opinion from actual sex workers who disagree as their rationalizations for a bad situation. The fact that they may be honest isn’t a consideration. They are victims FULL STOP.

    C is especially wrong for me because by promoting this meme that only monstrous ogres visit prostitutes, you are discouraging people who might actually treat them well from being customers. You’re making shit worse by lowering the choices a sex worker may have in clients to be soley towards the undesirable type.

  384. says

    Bernard:

    I thought he was trying to invoke the hairy feminist stereotype by comparing unshaven pubic hair to a pan scourer.

    Oh! Geez, that never occurred to me. I have very little body hair, so I guess I don’t think that way. Or something.

    I presumed that it indicated that good, submissive, sexually available women are hairless in his mind’s eye, whereas horrible, frigid feminists are hirsute and therefore also unappealing.

    Er…the Hoggle must not have had a wide range of experience.

  385. ChasCPeterson says

    Posted by FH, August 18, 2011 at 11:59 pm:

    This just needs preserving before chickenshit deletes it. Nothing to add otherwise.

    …followed by the entire OP above verbatim, including the quote about his transaction, which he has therefore personally posted three times now.

    Above (#432):

    Franc Hoggle1 says:
    19 August 2011 at 8:25 am
    Paul, you are a fraud. Watching you self-destruct is better than sex.

    Posted by FH, August 19, 2011 at 12:43 am:

    You’re a fraud Paul. Stand up like a man for the first time in your worthless life and admit it. You are a disgusting, whore-for-rent, venomous toad. That’s why Becky loves you. She owns you. Chickenshit.

    You sent your venom my way a few weeks ago. It hasn’t worked. You are sending it again. At my guess, there is a 90% drop in approved disapproval. You’re word as god is vapourising. Wanker. You can’t even destroy a loser like me you loser. Oh Skepchick save me!!!

    Betting on the wrong gang of fascists to boost your own worthless empire. Slut, whore, loser. I’d never use these words on a female. You are special Paul.

    Repugnant aging loser, second tier atheist celebrity wannabe, watching his star fading.

    Glad I’m not you.

    So I guess he decided to comment after all.

    [uh but OK, very different timestamps. FH's most recent post is stamped "August 20, 2011 at 12:14 am" and Pharyngula is on Eastern US time, I think, where it's now 10:40 on Aug. 19.]

  386. Franc Hoggle2 says

    SallyStrange, Spawn of Cthulhu says:

    Whatever. The thing is you folks actually seem to think you deserve respect. Awesome. That is the money shot. You deserve respect. Wow. just wow.

  387. Franc Hoggle2 says

    SallyStrange, Spawn of Cthulhu says:

    Whatever. The thing is you folks actually seem to think you deserve respect. Awesome. That is the money shot. You deserve respect. Entitled. Wow. just wow. Oops. I came in my beard.

  388. heliobates says

    I thought he was trying to invoke the hairy feminist stereotype by comparing unshaven pubic hair to a pan scourer.

    It’s not the “feminist” stereotype any more. It’s the “you’re not conforming to the pornographic norms” stereotype. As in “grooming habits not in conformance with minimum fuckability standards, as judged by empornulated men”.

    Twisty Faster has, like, 400 posts about this stuff over at ibtp

    Will there ever be a day that I don’t weep for my daugter and the world she will inherit?

  389. Bernard Bumner says

    Caine,

    Er…the Hoggle must not have had a wide range of experience.

    Well… sometimes he uses the left hand and sometimes he uses the right hand.

    I’m not sure what it could be about his magnetic charm that the objects of his desire might find so off-putting. A stud like that should have enough notches on his bedposts that you would mistake it for a termite infestation.

  390. says

    Hoggle, how about you marshal that tiny brain of yours and figure out preview so that you don’t double post, Cupcake? I know it’s difficult for you, but try.

    Now, you’ve been Hoggle1 and Hoggle2. Make up your mind, wee angry wanker. You just keep on adding more stupid. It’s not helping.

  391. amc says

    Christ, ERV’s pagehits are a despicable bunch of wankers. I won’t click through to that blog again.

  392. says

    At my guess, there is a 90% drop in approved disapproval.

    Um…

    Repugnant aging loser

    Oh, the wee angry wanker thinks he isn’t going to age.

    second tier atheist celebrity wannabe, watching his star fading.

    Oh, you’re all upsetty over that sniny Humanist of the Year award that was just bestowed on PZ. Don’t worry, Sugar, you’ll get over it. Go have another angry session with Rosy Palm.

  393. says

    Sb is on Eastern time. This site is on my local Central time. That may change though — there has been talk of everyone standardizing their time zone so things like the “latest post” box work properly.

    Hoggle is a very weird person who’s operating on a whole suite of crazy ideas. I’m a college professor with a blog. I do not consider myself a god, I don’t have an empire, I don’t consider myself an atheist celebrity on any tier — I’m a guy who writes stuff on the internet, which, sadly, does not give one any real power at all.

    I’m not going to complain when my “star is fading”, either. I’m in my mid-50s; most of my day-to-day work is in teaching, and everyone who reads the blog has a very skewed view of where most of my time is spent. You really can’t attack me through the blog — it’s my public face, sure, but most of me is invested in college education.

    Also, I don’t know where this idea that I’m fading right now is coming from. I don’t see it. If we just look at web traffic, my FtB site is at 90% of the old Sb site, which is better than I expected at this stage of the move, especially given the technical gaffes in the first few weeks. Meanwhile, the old Sb site is currently down to about 50% of its former traffic, which is less catastrophic than I expected. So total page views is at 90%+50% or 140% of the levels before I made the move.

    But I have totally lost Franc Hoggle as a fan, which to his mind apparently translates as a big decline. Alas, to me it looks like a huge net gain.

  394. Rev. BigDumbChimp says

    Seems as though projection is Hoggle’s strong suit.

    With all his talk of cumshots, I’d rather not think of that.

  395. Bernard Bumner says

    heliobates,

    It’s not the “feminist” stereotype any more.

    I suppose not. It was clearly intended to be an insult, which is as ridiculous as it is tragic.

    It would be nice to live in a world where such standards of beauty/attractiveness were dismissed with the contempt they deserve.

    Still, at least Franc isn’t as intolerant of cellulite as he apparently is of pubic hair… Real women with real bodies. On the internet.

  396. Merrily Dancing Ape says

    #458 Ing:

    a) You’re using the fact that some people do a job out of desperation to ban people who may be indifferent to or even WANT to do the job

    I didn’t say anything about banning prostitution. I’m saying that, while in theory prostitution doesn’t have to be like this, in reality prostitution (AS AN INSTITUTION) is anti-feminist, and that humanists should recognize that. (I am NOT saying that prostitutes themselves are anti-feminists. Generally speaking they are, rather, victims of an anti-feminist culture that doesn’t offer them the same opportunities as men to earn a living wage.)

    b) You’re defining it as an invasion in of itself…as if someone couldn’t actually ever consent in sex work

    In a different comment you compared prostitution to psychotherapy. You have a notion of prostitution that strikes me as frankly a little out of touch with reality. I’m sure there are prostitutes like the ones you imagine, but they’re not the norm. Let’s put it this way: do you really think most prostitutes would choose to allow males whom they don’t know and to whom they are not sexually attracted to penetrate their vaginas, if they had other opportunities to earn a living wage and were totally free to choose?

    c) You’re presuming all men who visit a prostitute are dominating assholes.

    No, they’re not necessarily assholes. For example, there is no indication that Hoggle was an asshole to the prostitute he hired. But they’re supporting an exploitative industry.

    The customers are not the men who concern me most. Behind most prostitutes (including ones on the Internet by the way) are criminal organizations. These really *are* dominating assholes, and you shouldn’t be defending them.

  397. says

    I’m afraid the fun is over — I’m going to have to ban Hoggle. His latest posting is in praise of Veronika Moser, which is fine for him and it does clarify exactly what he likes in a woman: degradation. I’d just rather not see it promoted here.

    (In case you didn’t know, Moser is a specific kind of porn star, specializing in scheisseporn. Scat. Women smearing themselves with feces. And that’s the last we need to hear about it here.)

  398. ChasCPeterson says

    aw, man, I didn’t know. And now I know too much.
    Last anybody needs to hear about it here; agreed.

  399. Bernard Bumner says

    PZ’s facist reign of terror continues!

    The shit-smeared body of Hoggle, cock in hand, webcam at the ready, lies where it fell, abused and castrated by the fearsome Paul himself, and is trampled into the ground beneath the jackbooted march of the Pharyngula hoards.

  400. Matt Penfold says

    Oh thanks PZ!

    I was just about to eat a bar of chocolate and I read about scheisseporn. Talk about off-putting!

    Not as bad as the time I was eating chocolate ice-cream and a medical documentary came on with a patient undergoing a colostomy.

  401. Keep on togglin' says

    if only I can prove once and for all that PZ Myers is a poopyhead hypocrite then maybe I won’t feel so small…

  402. bluharmony says

    Am I going to be instantly murdered in this thread or can I say something (borderline on topic)?

  403. Linnea the lurker says

    Can I say something in this thread or will I be instantly murdered?

    Are you still alive? Then apparently, you can.

  404. Nerd of Redhead, Dancer on Trolls says

    Can I say something in this thread or will I be instantly murdered?

    We won’t murder you. Too hard to get rid of the body, as we need to repair the trebuchet after the move. You may be mocked however.

  405. Rambling T. Wreck says

    bluharmony:

    Obviously, you can say something in this thread. You just did.

    Will you be instantly “murdered”? This is Pharyngula, you say what you say and take your chances!

  406. Classical Cipher says

    Christ, ERV’s pagehits are a despicable bunch of wankers. I won’t click through to that blog again.

    I’m going to take this opportunity to once again exhort the Horde to always post Slimepit warnings with their Slimepit links. I don’t remember exactly where it came up, but I clicked on a link and found myself over there. Yuck.

    Can I say something in this thread or will I be instantly murdered?

    We don’t even have the power to throw peas at you through the internet, bluharmony. Much as I wish I did. Go ahead and keep pretending words are fists though, that’s fun for everybody. But just for good measure, since you brought it up, I hope you live a long, healthy life, full of learning, so that you have the opportunity to look back on this stage of your life with the shame and regret it so richly deserves.

  407. bluharmony says

    Sorry for the double post. Don’t worry, I expect to be attacked, so have fun with it. I just wanted to say that I think that everyone here is doing their best to make the world a better place, both for women and for others. I see absolutely nothing wrong with this. I just wish there were more opportunities to engage in reasoned debate (like analysis of statistics, for one).

    My disagreements with you are fairly minor, but I was unable to discuss those anywhere but the slimepit, so I did. And I like quite a few of the folks in the slimepit as well. My friend Russell Blackford, comes to mind, for one. I don’t like the MRAs, in fact, they’re quite scary, but I only think only to of the posters truly fit that label.

    I love PZ’s writing and always have. He’s an immensely talented men, and he fights for what he believes in (and, for the most part, what I believe in). Occasionally I get angry about minor disagreements, just like anyone else, but it’s a passing thing. I like him quite a lot.

    As for my issues with EGate, they were quite minor – I disapproved of the lecture criticizing McGraw, because RW’s analysis of objectification was either wrong or at least debatable, according to some of the most important feminist writers of today. That’s what was seriously disappointing to me. I was similarly disappointed with the Dawkins boycott and with the factual inaccuracies in her Krauss piece. That said, RW is a great writer and speaker; she’s qualified to speak as to skepticism and to communicate science, and I wish her not harm. Some of the comments on her YouTube video are just awful, and she’s a brave woman to deal with that in such a confident, intelligent, and humorous way. Sorry for the typos. Feel free tear me apart now, I won’t stay around long to watch.

  408. bluharmony says

    I did stand up for the people I cared about, including PZ and Greg Laden. My issues were fairly benign, and I was just looking for someone to listen. As always, I can be wrong and often am, but sometimes it’s good to have open debate to figure out where I was wrong.

    This was the first time in my life encountering MRA-types (only two truly fit that category, but there are some gray areas, I suppose), and it was a bit shocking. Truly.

    One of the things I like about that discussion is that everyone felt free to drop in and argue, and that really fleshed out my views on the subject. I don’t think that could have happened anywhere else.

    And if you care to have a look, you’ll notice that I have enemies there as well. And it’s quite unusual for me to make enemies; I tend to like everyone, and forgive people within minutes.

  409. Classical Cipher says

    My issues were fairly benign, and I was just looking for someone to listen.
    Let’s have a moment of silence for poor, sweet bluharmony. Everyone who cares about bluharmony’s plight, stfu until further notice.

  410. bluharmony says

    @Classical Cypher: If I did wrong, and I’m sure that some of the things I’ve said have been stupid, joking, and careless, but I always regret and doubt everything I do, so there’s not much to worry about that.

    I was merely standing up for something I thought was wrong, and that issue has to do with McGraw. The only reason it relates back to the elevator incident is because it’s important to know what McGraw actually heard before the CFI conference, since the language at the CFI conference changed a bit. And there’s a transcript of that. Based on the transcript only, I would have drawn the same conclusion.

    But, I think Rebecca had every right to say what she did. That’s entirely her prerogative, and it is good advice to men, generally speaking. It’s not something that I would like said on my behalf, but I think everyone understands that people are different.

  411. says

    You’re still associating with that gang of misogynists…and I’m sorry, there are far more than two of them.

    I just took a look at the slimepit to see if maybe it wasn’t as bad as I thought, since you’re trying to vouch for them. And what do I find? They’re talking about my wife: “his bitter bitchy hag of a white privileged wife” who “probably looks like sheila Wellstone, and keeps his balls in a dungeon.” And you’ve got the Hoggle saying I have “a predilection for ugly, stupid pussy”.

    That is the company you keep. Those are the people Russell Blackford finds more comfortable than the commenters at Benson’s or my place.

    Nobody is going to murder you here. But nobody is going to find you good company, either — there’s something wrong with you, and we’d rather just stay away from you.

  412. bluharmony says

    My issues were fairly benign, and I was just looking for someone to listen.
    Let’s have a moment of silence for poor, sweet bluharmony. Everyone who cares about bluharmony’s plight, stfu until further notice.

    I have no plight, and I don’t expect anyone to feel sorry for me. I’m just explaining how some of the people on the other side feel; mind you, not all.

    I have no issues with feminism in general, although I have my vies on that, which begin with liberal or egalitarian) equity feminism, and expand to embrace those issues that I think are most important to women today. We have a different approach; I want to address things through legislation (including diversity programs); you want to address things through consciousness raising. But are valid techniques. Please don’t think that I subscribe to Sommers’ conservative definition of equity feminism; I don’t. Because equality under the law is not the same thing as true equality, as we all know.

  413. consciousness razor says

    Everyone who cares about bluharmony’s plight, stfu until further notice.

    So that means I don’t have to stfu then, right?

    I wonder if slime has an even stronger stench after sitting out and rotting for a few weeks. What’s hard to believe is it wasn’t noticeable to her right from the start.

  414. Classical Cipher says

    If I did wrong, and I’m sure that some of the things I’ve said have been stupid

    True now. You’re a lying moron, and you have no problem wallowing in the shit spewed by a gang of misogynists in order to indulge your desire to whinge impotently about something you mistakenly consider a breach of etiquette. Now you’re here to mewl about no one listening to you except said handful of misogynists, and lie about being unable to discuss things outside of their company. Ever thought about why you found such a warm reception there and cold dismissal elsewhere? Maybe it’s because what you had to say was worthless except to those creeps. And maybe that’s because you’re one of them.