I get email

This is new! I usually don’t get rape fantasies, but Thunderf00t’s angry rabble have opened up exciting new vistas.

The whole point of free-thinking is to express what you have been thinking to others; what would the point of Socrates’ trial have been if he had not made the impressive speeches he made? If the people judging him had simply written him off as ‘too out there’ and simply condemned him five minutes into his talking? The point I’m trying to make is that as much as I think Watson is at a minimum misguided, you are culpable for much worse. Free Speech is the fundamental human right; without it, we are all doomed. You removing his website because you disagree on a matter of opinion makes you as bad as the papacy banning books, or Iran banning books, etc. etc…. In other words, by shutting off free expression you have sauntered effortlessly to lines the old and evil; too much information is bad, we decide what you should be exposed to, let’s have Salman Rushdie killed for writing something we don’t agree with. You have not tried to have Tf00t killed yet(my, what restraint you have), but at this point I wouldn’t be surprised to see that either. You’re supposed to be a scientist; a little open-mindedness goes a long way in investigating the truth.

In this modern world the only way to survive and live well is to laugh, rather than cry… A little cynicism never hurt anyone.

Anyway, I don’t believe I shall be reading your blogs any more; at least until you apologize to Mr. f00t; if you don’t all I can to is hope you get raped to death by Jaguars in the Yucatan. Next time think with your brain instead of your balls, and maybe over time I’ll grow to trust and respect you again. until then, eat shit. I mean, you’re supposed to be a scientist, for Christ’s sake.

I could swear some more but based off what I know of you you’re probably bawling already. Nobody likes a crybaby. You old cunt.

Thanks for your time!

Phil Krstulich,

someone who actually believes in equality of right for all humankind, and who isn’t a two-faced fuck who pretends to be in favor of free speech while trying to stamp it out.

Curses! My plan to have Thunderf00t killed has been exposed!

I have now seen a teeny tiny fraction of what Anita Sarkeesian gets.

2,516 comments on this post.
  1. Jasper of Maine:

    How dare you have eliminated all of TF’s avenues for free speech!

    I’ve never gotten this line of argumentation. If you’re in my house yelling at my guests, and I tell you to leave, I haven’t violated your free speech. You still have it.

  2. Brad:

    Phil, you spelled chrissake wrong.

  3. Josh, Official SpokesGay:

    raped to death by Jaguars

    Which immediately evoked in my mind an image of luxury cars having their way with you. I was like WUT?

  4. pentatomid:

    Josh,

    Transformers?

  5. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:

    Yawn PK, your concern is noted, along with your lack of stating Tf is responsible for what he says, and if what he says is foolish, he deserves to be treated like a fool, which he was. Evidently you only think “free speech” comes into play if others are discomforted, and you agree with it, including half the population. And I don’t believe for one second you are for women’s rights and against harassment, unless it is extremely blatant. You haven’t shown you know how to shut the fuck up and listen to those who disagree with you.

  6. Josh, Official SpokesGay:

    Seriously though, this is so unhinged it’s almost impossible to believe he really thinks these things. Two years ago I would have been certain it was a parody. I am now disabused of that innocence.

  7. Martin Wagner:

    Just goes to show all atheist aren’t rational. Otherwise they’d know that “freethought” does not mean…

    1) Say whatever you like without being called on it.
    2) Insult anyone you like without being called on it.
    3) Make lousy arguments without being called on them.
    4) Anyone who disagrees with you and says so is trying to suppress and censor you.

    If thunderf00t had shown the least interest in engaging in dialogue with the people criticizing his posts, rather than doubling down on his douchebaggery, he might still be here today. But I’m sure he and his fanboys are happy validating each other over what a bunch of evil thought-police tyrants we all are.

  8. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    The whole point of free-thinking is to express what you have been thinking to others; what would the point of Socrates’ trial have been if he had not made the impressive speeches he made?

    Bwahahaha.
    :D

  9. summerminor:

    Does anyone believe he ever actually did read this blog before? I mean, other than looking for something to get annoyed by and whine about.

  10. AlanMac:

    Since when does freedom of thought and opinion equal freedom from criticism, responsibility, or accountability for those thoughts.

  11. Josh, Official SpokesGay:

    Martin, don’t forget that Freethought also means:


    1. The right to have your views hosted, paid for, and promoted on anyone’s server.
    2. The right to have the above in perpetuity because if a site cuts you off that means it’s disappeared you from the entire interwebz.

  12. Ace of Sevens:

    What? Besides the other stuff, I’m not clear on how your balls kicked Thunderf00t off the network.

  13. garyb:

    Tell him you were exercising your right to free speech. When did the idea that government is not allowed to punish anti-government speech become the idea that anything can be said to anyone else without consequences?

  14. hyperdeath:

    I’m not clear on how your balls kicked Thunderf00t off the network.

    PZ has prehensile testicles.

  15. Woo_Monster, Sniffer of Starfarts:

    Ace of Sevens,

    What? Besides the other stuff, I’m not clear on how your balls kicked Thunderf00t off the network.

    Their little narrative is that PZ kicked TF off FTB in order to get into RW’s pants*.

    *enough acronyms for ya?

  16. pentatomid:

    WTF? If there are any people in all this ‘thinking with their balls’, surely it’s Team Misogyny?

  17. pentatomid:

    Their little narrative is that PZ kicked TF off FTB in order to get into RW’s pants*.

    What? Whaaat? Whaaaa…. Jesus Babiroussa Christ, these people… WTF is wrong with them?

  18. Woo_Monster, Sniffer of Starfarts:

    It is just more ignorance and projection. They can’t imagine any guy *not* “thinking with their balls”, so that is what they accuse PZ of.

  19. IslandBrewer:

    So, Phil and Tfoot’s definition of free speech is the same as Anne Coulter’s.

    Charming.

  20. Hayden:

    Thunderf00t’s response.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o1mLHdTsmPc&feature=g-u-u

    Honestly, this whole thing has been embarrassing to watch from *both* side.

  21. eric:

    …all I can to is hope you get raped to death by Jaguars in the Yucatan…

    Its the extraneous detail that surprises me. Not just raped, but raped by jaguars. And not just jaguars, jaguars in the Yucatan.

    I suspect that if/when I get drunk and do some ill-advised internet venting, my own hatemail would not measure up to these guys’ standards. No jaguars. No exotic locales. I’d probably do no better than a few f-bombs and your-momma comments.

  22. DonDueed:

    Bloody well right! You’re supposed to be a scientist, PZ, so go do some science!

    Like maybe figure out how these people manage to operate a computer. There’s a Nobel with your name on it if you can explain that.

  23. Hayden:

    *sides.

    Stupid fingers.

  24. Woo_Monster, Sniffer of Starfarts:

    I, for one, would like to thank PZ for the restraint he has shown in not murdering Thunderfoot.

  25. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    Honestly, this whole thing has been embarrassing to watch from *both* side.

    Elaborate.

  26. Ace of Sevens:

    Their little narrative is that PZ kicked TF off FTB in order to get into RW’s pants*.

    I don’t think they fit would him.

  27. Josh, Official SpokesGay:

    both sides

    Yep. Because not putting up with Tfoot’s irrational, embarrassing, and obnoxious obliviousness is just as bad as Tfoot’s irrational, embarrassing, and obnoxious obliviousness.

  28. dapartypoopah:

    Well to be fair we are not talking about criticism, we are talking about banning people. But to be fair again I doubt TF was banned for just the fact that he made stupid arguments. Right?

  29. Woo_Monster, Sniffer of Starfarts:

    Honestly, this whole thing has been embarrassing to watch from *both* side.

    Want to elaborate more on how the side refuting TF’s bullshit is also embarrassing for you to watch? Or not, as it is bound to be a load of false equivalency.

    Stupid fingers.

    Based on your first comment, the problem may not be in your fingers.

  30. What a Maroon, Applied Linguist of Slight Foreboding:

    It’s worse than Phil imagines. PZ and co. are stamping on the free speech rights of roughly 7 billion people (not to mention countless squid) by not giving them free access to blog on FTB.

    Clearly, they have powers of oppresion that Hitler, Stalin and Mao could only dream of.

  31. Josh, Official SpokesGay:

    Based on your first comment, the problem may not be in your fingers.

    You beat me.

  32. Ze Madmax:

    Hayden @ #20

    Honestly, this whole thing has been embarrassing to watch from *both* side.

    One side is using rape threats and crying that their right to free speech is being infringed upon. The other side is just rude.

    So… a pox on both your houses?

  33. Woo_Monster, Sniffer of Starfarts:

    You beat me.

    I knew I only had a short window to work with that line. I did my best.

  34. Josh, Official SpokesGay:

    we are talking about banning people

    The fuck is it with so many people today and that word? Banning. It’s uttered as if the action is just shy of shoving people into a pit and shooting them. Besides, when a newspaper fires a columnist we don’t say they “banned” that person. What the fuck is that even supposed to mean?

    Seriously. Unpack that fucking concept before you use it!

  35. Ze Madmax:

    dapartypoopah @ #28

    Well to be fair we are not talking about criticism, we are talking about banning people. But to be fair again I doubt TF was banned for just the fact that he made stupid arguments. Right?

    Thunderf00t wasn’t banned.

  36. Randomfactor:

    I, for one, would like to thank PZ for the restraint he has shown in not murdering Thunderfoot.

    Alas, PZ’s already released the kraken. TF’s doobed, I tell ya, doobed.

  37. Thomathy, Holy Trinity of Conflation: Atheist-Secularist-Darwinist:

    Hayden:

    Stupid fingers.

    Yeah, blame your fingers.

    _____

    Jaguars in the Yucatan are a microcosm of human society. The worst of it, anyhow. On good advice, I’d avoid their territory.

  38. Josh, Official Yucatan Jaguar:

    Jaguars in the Yucatan are a microcosm of human society. The worst of it, anyhow. On good advice, I’d avoid their territory.

    Damn tootin’.

  39. Sili (I have no penis and I must jizz):

    what would the point of Socrates’ trial have been if he had not made the impressive speeches he made? If the people judging him had simply written him off as ‘too out there’ and simply condemned him five minutes into his talking?

    Oooh? I didn’t realise we’d found the court transcripts!

    Or does this fella think Platon wrote anything but fiction?

  40. SC (Salty Current), OM:

    I have now seen a teeny tiny fraction of what Anita Sarkeesian gets.

    Oh, I’m sure that’s just more edgy, 4channy, raucous humor. Nothing to do with collective misogyny or silencing uppity women. Just send Justin Griffith to reason with them.

  41. Josh, Official Yucatan Jaguar:

    SC, you just don’t get that culture.

  42. Ernst Hot:

    New Statesman also has an article (quite visual, be warned) about the abuse directed towards Anita Sarkeesian. I don’t have the words to properly describe how fucking disgusted I am.

    On a positive note I love the header graphics on Feminist Frequency.

  43. Sili (I have no penis and I must jizz):

    I don’t think they fit would him.

    Well, he has grown rather svelte.

  44. Ibis3, denizen of a spiteful ghetto:

    Apologize to Mr. f00t?

    (That sound is me giggling uncontrollably.)

  45. feralboy12:

    I, too, have noticed with ever growing concern the complete disappearance from the internet of Thunderfoot since you went all Nacht Und Nebel on his ass. Has anybody here seen my old friend Thunderfoot? I turn around and he’s gone.

  46. LykeX:

    You removing his website…

    Thunderf00t owns FtB? That’s news to me.

  47. Woo_Monster, Sniffer of Starfarts:

    Ernst Hot, thanks for that link, but now I am feeling sick to my stomach. That “interactive “Beat Up Anita Sarkeesian” game”, is one of the most disgusting thing I have ever seen. Absolutely fucking disgusting.

    The piece of shit who made that game had this to say in the description,

    Any form of constructive criticism, even from fellow women, is either ignored or labelled to be sexist against her.

    Just wow. He calls this “constructive criticism”? He is surprised when he is labelled “sexist”?

    Fuck this slimey fucker.

  48. dogeared, spotted and foxed:

    Like Josh said, it’s so easy to read this as parody. My first instinct is to imagine Mr. Krstulich merrily typing this out as a ridiculous homage to recent events or a tasty little amuse-bouche to offer between the heartier fare of this blog.

    Then I realize that no, Paul was probably pounding away on his keyboard thinking “PZ will be stunned into shocked realization of deepest shame by my manly logics, Yucatan jaguar rape threats and a blatant use of the cunt-word! Go me! So-crates! FREE SPEEEEEECH!

  49. sc_78943705727ce8b5cd2d182cbc30c5cc:

    PZ,

    You really just showed the movement how fucking pathetic you are.
    I have read your blog for years because I loved your takedowns of creationists. Its more than a little bit ironic that you used to (righfully) mock Ken Ham for refusing to link to this blog or open up comments because he knew that he couldn’t compete with free expression. Turns out you’re just as much of a simpering asshole.

  50. Sili (I have no penis and I must jizz):

    Thunderf00t’s response.

    I don’t understand.

    How can Blunderfoot respond when he’s banned and silenced?

    Does not compute. My little, feminist brains hurtz just thinking about it.

  51. Jasper of Maine:

    sc_78943705727ce8b5cd2d182cbc30c5cc

    Don’t let the door hit you on the way out.

  52. Woo_Monster, Sniffer of Starfarts:

    sc_78943705727ce8b5cd2d182cbc30c5cc,

    Whaaaaa, whaaaa, whaaaa!!!11!

    Yawn

  53. FluffyTheTerrible:

    PZ,

    You really just showed the movement how fucking pathetic you are.
    I have read your blog for years because I loved your takedowns of creationists. Its more than a little bit ironic that you used to (righfully) mock Ken Ham for refusing to link to this blog or open up comments because he knew that he couldn’t compete with free expression. Turns out you’re just as much of a simpering asshole.

    Oh, look, a shiny new chew toy. How about you first figure out how to have a proper nym on this board ,before tackling more complicated intellectual activities, like thinking and typing at the same time?

  54. Josh, Official Yucatan Jaguar:

    I have read your blog for years just today cuz leave Thunderfoot alone

    Fixed.

  55. ChasCPeterson:

    Has anybody here seen my old friend Thunderf00t?
    Can you tell me where he’s gone?
    He made a lot of people facepalm
    But it seems the true free-thinkers they’re banned young.
    I just looked around
    And he’s over on Y*uT*be celebrating himself like always.

  56. Sili (I have no penis and I must jizz):

    Its more than a little bit ironic that you used to (righfully) mock Ken Ham for refusing to link to this blog or open up comments because he knew that he couldn’t compete with free expression. Turns out you’re just as much of a simpering asshole.

    And yet here you are in the open comments getting a hearing?

    MAI BRANE HERTZ!

  57. LykeX:

    How can Blunderfoot respond when he’s banned and silenced?

    Because he’s a real man and your fascist, feminazi, censorious bullying is no match for his alpha-male masculine manliness.

    Or something.

  58. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    Its more than a little bit ironic that you used to (righfully) mock Ken Ham for refusing to link to this blog or open up comments because he knew that he couldn’t compete with free expression. Turns out you’re just as much of a simpering asshole.

    If PZ had mocked Ken Ham for not paying to host Pharyngula, that equivalence would not be quite so false.

  59. ChasCPeterson:

    The whole point of free-thinking is to express what you have been thinking to others

    It sez so right here in my Oxford Complete Edition of the Impressive Speeches of Socrates.

  60. Ace of Sevens:

    Thunderf00t is free to comment as always. He just doesn’t like speaking in forums he doesn’t control.

  61. Josh, Official Yucatan Jaguar:

    Oxford Complete Edition of the Impressive Speeches of Socrates.

    heheheheheh

    /Bender

  62. Tethys:

    Oh dear, yet another idiot making stupid, stupid, accusations without engaging a single brain cell. Stupids gotta stupe.

    Sili Or does this fella think Platon wrote anything but fiction?

    I am unfamiliar with the philosopher/general to which you refer.

    SC Just send Justin Griffith to reason with them.

    My my, what a lovely piece of snark. ♥

  63. Josh, Official Yucatan Jaguar:

    He just doesn’t like speaking in forums he doesn’t control.

    Zing. That’s really insightful.

  64. PZ Myers:

    Errm, Thunderf00t hasn’t been banned.

  65. Sili (I have no penis and I must jizz):

    PZ has prehensile testicles.

    They prefer to be called spermatophores.

  66. Josh, Official Yucatan Jaguar:

    Errm, Thunderf00t hasn’t been banned.

    YEAH HUH! Banning means when you don’t let him have a blog here!

  67. Ze Madmax:

    *re-reads Josh’s ‘nym*

    ROFL

    *wipes coffee off keyboard/screen*

    *ahem* where would you like your shiny new Intertoobs delivered?

  68. Audley Z. Darkheart (liar and scoundrel):

    PZ!
    I can haz free speech, too? You’re squashing my First Amendment rights by not giving me a blog!

    (This calls into question: did “freedom of speech” exist before the internet?)

    I ♥ this bit:

    In other words, by shutting off free expression you have sauntered effortlessly to lines the old and evil; too much information is bad, we decide what you should be exposed to, let’s have Salman Rushdie killed for writing something we don’t agree with.

    Yes, because deciding that Thunderf00t and his crappy blog wasn’t a good fit for FtB is exactly like issuing a fatwā. Also, because TF has been booted from this blog network, there have been assassination attempts on his life! Just like Salman Rushdie.

    Tru fax.

  69. Ernst Hot:

    Woo_Monster, Sniffer of Starfarts #47

    Ernst Hot, thanks for that link, but now I am feeling sick to my stomach.
    That “interactive “Beat Up Anita Sarkeesian” game”, is one of the most disgusting thing I have ever seen. Absolutely fucking disgusting.

    That’s why I put the warning there, I had a similar reaction myself. How lacking in empathy are these people who find that shit funny?

    I don’t think I could have made a better case for feminism if I tried…

  70. davidbohm:

    terrse on the whole situation:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W6iGBEFMOHU&feature=g-all-lik

  71. Woo_Monster, Sniffer of Starfarts:

    God, Thunderfoot. Your fans are some of the stupidest trolls I have seen in a while. I yearn for shinier chew-toys. Rajkumar, come back…

  72. Bronze Dog:

    Josh, Official SpokesGay:
    “raped to death by Jaguars ”

    Which immediately evoked in my mind an image of luxury cars having their way with you. I was like WUT?

    pentatomid:
    Josh,

    Transformers?

    Probably Bayformers, given what I’ve heard of those movies.

    It’s really amazing, reflecting on how so many idiots don’t understand the meaning of censorship even though it’s a core issue in the information age.

    You can write whatever you want, but I don’t have to loan you my pencil to do it. I don’t have to loan you my stationary and my implied approval that comes with it, either. FTB simply withdrew permission for TF to use their pencils and stationery.

    There isn’t exactly a crippling shortage of writing instruments, nor an FTB monopoly on such devices to warrant censorship concerns. TFoot is free to use generic pencils and generic paper provided by Blogger and WordPress. He’s free to use the film provided by YouTube. He’s free to use stationery from whoever else might want his writing associated with them. Welcome to the information age.

  73. Josh, Official Yucatan Jaguar:

    #70—Literally the only words I could understand in that wharblegarble were “fuckin’” and “email.”

  74. FluffyTheTerrible:

    I find it rather disheartening – to say the least – that a person who apparently has a working knowledge of Socrates and Salman Rushdie can equate their situations to TF’s, and, most importantly, that they can go from talking about Socrates to rape threats in the space of a couple a paragraphs without missing a beat or having their head explode from the contradiction.

    I used to console myself with the fact that most hate comments of the internet are justified by the anonymity of the system and the lack of education of the persons writing the hate comments .. now, I’m not so sure.

    I wonder if you can easily recognize such individuals in every day life – the ones who consider rape threats a valid argument to be employed in a conversation.

    [I posted a comment with similar content, but different wording, and it seemed to have got lost...apologies if this is a duplicate]

  75. T-Foot actually has integrity unlike some assholes.:

    THe gallling thing about this bullshit move is that it seems to go against every principle of free expression you have been expounding for years. Turns out your just a fucking hypocrite.

    T-F00t’s post yesterday “PZ Myers and the Art of Shameless Dishonesty” was dead on.

  76. michaeld:

    How ever will thunderf00t get his views out without a blog. Now he only has his youtube account with ~155,000 subscribers!

    Oh the humanity he’ll never be able to get his message out to people ever again!!!!

  77. Josh, Official Yucatan Jaguar:

    THe gallling thing about this bullshit move is that it seems to go against every principle of free expression you have been expounding for years. Turns out your just a fucking hypocrite.

    What is this werdz?

  78. FluffyTheTerrible:

    @ T-Foot actually has integrity unlike some assholes.

    Wow, does my asshole have integrity? How do you find out if it doesn’t? Will it affect my ability to shit all over your hateful argument?

  79. Woo_Monster, Sniffer of Starfarts:

    THe gallling thing about this bullshit move is that it seems to go against every principle of free expression you have been expounding for years.

    LOL. Because, for years, PZ has been expounding the principle that free expression entails that anyone whosoever can host a blog on his network, regardless of quality.

  80. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    THe gallling thing about this bullshit move is that it seems to go against every principle of free expression you have been expounding for years.

    Free expression requires that you host ALL PEOPLE on your blog site! YOU ARE SILENCING ME! I DEMAND MY OWN FTB IMMEDIATELY!

    (To clarify, since I’ve been faux-complaining about this for several days: I don’t actually want one.)

  81. ChasCPeterson:

    ROFL
    *wipes coffee off keyboard/screen*
    *ahem* where would you like your shiny new Intertoobs delivered?

    Internet Police. License and registration, please?
    yeah, I could cite you twice for that comment, but I’ll let you off with a warning this time.
    Please comment more safely in the future and have a nice day.

  82. pentatomid:

    T-F00t’s post yesterday “PZ Myers and the Art of Shameless Dishonesty” was dead on.

    We are aware of said post and are thoroughly unimpressed. Piss off.

  83. CJO:

    Sili (I have no penis and I must jizz)

    Delurking on a MRA madness thread, simply to say, Sili, your nym made me laugh. Really hard.

    Best. Ellison. reference. Evar.

    The rest of y’all. Keep up the mockery. Sometimes we must laugh in order not to cry.

  84. Audley Z. Darkheart (liar and scoundrel):

    Somebody else doesn’t know what “free expression” means! *cough*TfootHoggler @ 75*cough!*

    Are you assholes really so stupid that you think everyone is guaranteed a particular platform. If so, I want my very own Free Thought Blog or I’m contacting the ACLU!

  85. Josh, Official Yucatan Jaguar:

    *ahem* where would you like your shiny new Intertoobs delivered?

    I’ll take delivery in the rear.

  86. Ernst Hot:

    I DEMAND that Thunderf00t let me post videos on his channel!

    What? I can’t? Why does he hate freedom of speech so much?!?

  87. Rev. BigDumbChimp:

    Errm, Thunderf00t hasn’t been banned.

    BAH facts.

    Useless I say! What when we have vitriol and self important anger!

  88. FluffyTheTerrible:

    Also, did you know Loftus made a post commenting on Thunderfoot’s latest vlogging “masterpiece”? I really have to stop visiting that site, it really makes my blood boil.

  89. Josh, Official Yucatan Jaguar:

    If U DOANT let mE drive ur CAr yur dinnieing me driverz LiCense!11!!11!

  90. Audley Z. Darkheart (liar and scoundrel):

    Josh:

    What is this werdz?

    Oh oh oh! I think it’s time!

    Shorter T’foot Hoggler: Herp a derp!

  91. savagemutt:

    I’ve never gone to an atheism or skepticism conference or meetup because I’ve been afraid of being intimidated by all the smart people there.

    If Phil is at all representative of some portion of that population, then my fears have been misplaced.

  92. Larry:

    Raped to death by Jaguars

    I think I caught their show at the Colosseum in 2006 as the intro band for Alison Krauss. Hell of a set if I remember.

  93. Rev. BigDumbChimp:

    I’ll take delivery in the rear.

    haaayooo

  94. Woo_Monster, Sniffer of Starfarts:

    I have been BANNED (from posting vids on TF’s youtube channel)

    CENSORSHIP!!!!!!

    TALIBAN!!!!!

    FEMINAZIS!!!!!!!!!

    Y U NO LIKE FREE SPEEEEEEEEEECH?????????????

  95. karpad:

    I cannot speak for anyone else, but…

    I’m not sure if I’m just getting more bitter or what, but the anti-feminist brigade has been more and more tiresome as of late.

    Used to be I could spend hours and hours arguing and showing them why they’re wrong. And they would be humiliated and make increasingly stupid statements digging holes for themselves.

    Now, I see the comments on the New Statesman link and I just think how wrong they are, and how it just doesn’t feel worth the effort to correct them anymore.

    It just comes off as so morally indefensible that I simply cannot understand them defending so obviously a morally indefensible position

    Words fail, and I am exhausted. So if I seem curt, simply calling you wrong, stupid and dismissing you instead of treating your arguments with respect, it is because you have skull badges on your caps.

  96. Josh, Official Yucatan Jaguar:

    karpad, most of us feel the same way. Try mockery; it helps a little.

  97. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    I have been BANNED (from posting vids on TF’s youtube channel)

    See, everybody? Thunderf00t has no integrity and doesn’t care about free expression! So much for “free” thinking! What a hypocrite!

  98. duce7999:

    I am so disappointed in Thunderf00t. I find this all so very sad. I fully support PZ and FTB in their decision. I truly hope that Thunderf00t has a realization and seeks to make amends. Just because I agree with him on ‘A’ doesn’t mean I have to tolerate his poor behavior. The man is drowning in his privilege.

  99. Josh, Official Yucatan Jaguar:

    I wanna hoggle you, all night
    fap you into sunlight
    hoggle you, all night
    fap the night away

  100. Audley Z. Darkheart (liar and scoundrel):

    Karpad,
    I hear ya. We each contribute what we can and remember: you don’t have to fight every battle.

  101. pentatomid:

    Karpad,

    Trust me, you are not alone in feeling that way.

  102. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    Karpad, it gets to all of us eventually/occasionally. Sometimes it works to rest, sometimes you can’t rest and just swear and ridicule until you feel better, sometimes you get depressed and give up for a while (different from resting). This sort of thing is precisely why people who come here and tell us all to be nicer and not to be on such a hair trigger and to treat everyone like reasonable, good faith interlocutors are so fucking unbearable for a lot of us – this shit gets exhausting. I like to remember the phrase “Don’t let the bastards grind you down,” but eventually they just fucking do and there’s no “letting” involved.

  103. davidbohm:

    Josh, Official Yucatan Jaguar:

    yah, sounded like Sean Connerys long-lost brother!

  104. Sili (I have no penis and I must jizz):

    Josh, Official Yucatan Jaguar

    I thought you were more of a cougar.

  105. Hayden:

    @All above

    This entire episode was a giant case of both sides misinterpreting each other’s statements. Simply put, PZ, et al., want conferences to adopt harassment policies. The point of this is so that a person being harassed has some form of official recourse. Totally sensible.

    For some reason TF interprets this as deputizing a squad of fun police who have lists of pre-approved fun activities, and straying outside these guidelines will result in some sort of punishment. Clearly idiotic, and not what has been proposed. However, his main point boils down to this. If people are having fun together, it’s no one else’s business. Totally sensible.

    Enter the responses. PZ attributes the following positions to TF. “It’s OK if you abuse women in a bar; bars are free-range markets for men to exercise their will.” Later, “And his solution, which is to ignore all threats except the ones where you get to bring in the FBI and have them arrest someone, is so laughably black-and-white that it suggests he is entirely oblivious to the situation.” And again, “There is an attitude that women are there not as colleagues and respected partners in the goals of the movement, but as eye candy and sex toys”, followed by, “Thunderf00t expresses that same sense of privilege.” These quotes are all gross mischaracterizations of what TF actually said, which is that consenting adults should be left to their own devices.

    Of course, among all that garbage above, PZ actually *agrees* with that point (“If she wants you to nibble on her leg, or she wants to nibble on yours, fine, have fun.”). As well he should, because it’s a sensible position. Unfortunately, that part of the message was lost among all the noise. TF responds with more straw men of his own and the whole thing proceeds down the shitter.

    Ultimately, the person who got it right in all of this was Christina Rad. She hit’s the nail on the head with one sentence.

    These policies are not meant to take the fun out of the event, but to ensure that if someone needs help, help is available.

    This should have been the thrust of PZ’s message. This could have lead to a constructive discussion, about the real point of contention, which is not whether we should have harassment policies at all, but rather what form they should take. TF seems to think a simple “Management reserves the right to refuse admission” is sufficient. PZ wants something more like the American Atheists’ policy which he posted. The discussion should have been about which of the two is appropriate. Instead we eventually ended up with sarcastic drivel that added nothing to the discussion.

    Between the two, I think TF came out of this looking worse, but PZ did not exactly make a good showing, either. I lost a lot of respect for both parties involved.

  106. Josh, Official Yucatan Jaguar:

    That’s nice Hayden.

  107. Rev. BigDumbChimp:

    hahaha

  108. skeptifem:

    THe gallling thing about this bullshit move is that it seems to go against every principle of free expression you have been expounding for years.

    I could be mistaken, but I am pretty sure PZ is in the “hey lets NOT debate creationists” camp with richard dawkins and others based on the idea that its a waste of fucking time and only gives the false impression that people should give a fuck about what pastors and sitcom actors have to say about the subject. It isn’t against free thought to give a brand new wanker a go at restating the same old failed arguments over and over again. TF is about as well versed in social sciences (and law, and english) as kirk cameron is in biology. Why should anyone care what he thinks of sexual harassment policies?

  109. Sili (I have no penis and I must jizz):

    Josh, Official SpokesGay:
    “raped to death by Jaguars ”

    Which immediately evoked in my mind an image of luxury cars having their way with you. I was like WUT?

    pentatomid:
    Josh,

    Transformers?

    Probably Bayformers, given what I’ve heard of those movies.

    More like TF Kiss-players.

  110. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    Look, Hayden. If TF misrepresents the issue of harassment policies to such an extent that he thinks “consenting adults!” is an argument against them, he’s being disingenuous or he’s jumping into a situation in complete ignorance to run his mouth. Neither one deserves serious consideration. By focusing on this dumbass and irrelevant “central point” to the exclusion of the words he actually put in his post, you are being disingenuous too. If “Consenting adults!” was all he meant to say, and the only thing acceptable to respond to, that should have been all he put in his post.

  111. davidbohm:

    Hayden: Yah.. drama drama drama. Why not calmly establish what can be agreed upon, what can be compromised upon and what are the fundamental differences of oppinion?.

    I am surpriced to see this out of two people in academia (I would have said grownups, but it would have been unfair to children).

  112. Hayden:

    @110

    Yes. TF was being ridiculous. You will get no disagreement from me there.

  113. "We Are Ing The Matrimonial Collective":

    I agree both sides are just as bad. Shame on all of you for your rape threats and temper tantrums.

  114. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    I am surpriced to see this out of two people in academia (I would have said grownups, but it would have been unfair to children).

    STOP with the both-sides shit, seriously. Thunderf00t behaved like a fucking ignorant, dishonest asshole. It is not incumbent upon PZ or anyone else to treat him like he’s an honest interlocutor.

  115. FluffyTheTerrible:

    @ Hayden

    You seem to think your stance on the subject of TF hasn’t been discussed thoroughly around here, and we didn’t already dismantle most of the stuff in your post.

    The fact that you decide to present TF’s posts in a positive light and to pretend they contained simple, reasonable, easy to understand nuggets of wisdom – when in fact they were incoherent messes of verbal diarrhea – tells me all I need to know about you and how honest you are about this.

    Also, stop trying to share the blame. TF was the sole architect of designing and digging his hole, with most people on FtB -PZ included – trying to stop him.

    Finally, you must have a very interesting definition of respect if you say you lost it for both TF and PZ. Something tells me the things I would have to believe and say and do in order to gain your *respect* are quite unappealing – and that’s an understatement.

  116. Josh, Official Yucatan Jaguar:

    Hayden has looked at fights from both sides now and still somehow he can’t tell them apart.

  117. "We Are Ing The Matrimonial Collective":

    Also Tfs writing sucked. That alone should be enough to dump his blog

  118. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    Yes. TF was being ridiculous. You will get no disagreement from me there.

    And yet you apparently want to complain because PZ refused to pretend “Wahhh consenting adults!” was a real point, and refused to ignore the vast pile of shit in which Thunderf00t buried that shiny little bit of glass.

  119. Tethys:

    I lost a lot of respect for both parties involved.

    Perhaps this is due to the fact that you are hard of thinking?

    Your tedious trolling is noted tho.

    p.s. I do not give one single fuck for anyone (ie: hayden and TF) who defends misogyny and claims that attacking misogyny is equally as bad as espousing misogyny.

  120. life is like a pitbull with lipstick ॐ:

    Free Speech is the fundamental human right

    Hmmmmmm.

    I’m gonna have to say “no.”

    It’s possible to have freedom from want, without any freedom of speech. But it is not possible to have freedom of speech, without any freedom from want (you would die if you had zero freedom from want).

    Therefore, freedom from want is a more fundamental human right.

    You removing his website because you disagree on a matter of opinion makes you as bad as the papacy banning books, or Iran banning books, etc. etc….

    Both the Vatican and Iran are nation states. I wonder if this is important.

    Hmmm. Governments and speech. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

    I think I recall reading a pretty well established standard reference on this issue at one ti… oh here it is:

    “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

    +++++
    Is FreethoughtBlogs a government entity?

    Or is it Brayton’s property?

    Does Brayton have a right to kick people off his property?

    Is being kicked off another person’s property “as bad” as being kicked off public property?

  121. "We Are Ing The Matrimonial Collective":

    Also racism

    I didn’t follow his YT drama but I’ve gotten whifts that misrepresenting people and being a douche isn’t new

  122. Audley Z. Darkheart (liar and scoundrel):

    Hayden:
    *yawn*

    If you’re so disappointed with all of this, why don’t you consider just fucking right along?

  123. Louis:

    I was raped to death by jaguars in the Yucatan once.*

    I got better.

    Louis

    * Just remember that being raped to death by a jaguar in the Yucatan is a serious crime. Being accused of being a jaguar who rapes people to death in the Yucatan is also a serious crime. And therefore both sides have their hands covered in jaguar poo.

  124. hyperdeath:

    Hayden also believes that one of the World Trade Center towers was destroyed in a controlled demolition, that 3 million Jews died in the Holocaust, that the universe is 6.9 billion years old, that Obama was partially born in the US, and that Loch Ness contains half a monster.

  125. skeptifem:

    Also Tfs writing sucked. That alone should be enough to dump his blog

    Yes. This. It isn’t snobbery, either. Comradde Physioproffe has often been accused of bad writing on FTB (because of his olde english e’s and cursing), but you understand what the fuck he is trying to say. That should be a minimum requirement for getting hosted on FTB.

  126. reasonable fellow:

    Tell him you hope he finds christ someday.

  127. whheydt:

    Who was it that said, “Freedom of the press doesn’t mean YOUR freedom of MY press”?

    FtB is Ed & PZ’s “press”.

    –W. H. Heydt

  128. life is like a pitbull with lipstick ॐ:

    Any good reading materials on general (or specifically group-oppression-related) “both sides” arguments? Besides that XKCD comic?

    I want to link them from the wiki.

  129. ricardodivali:

    After reading that fanboi screed I feel slightly bad for Thunderfoot.

    Karpad, there is one good thing about those kind of commentors on New Statesman. No matter how many others tell you you are wrong, or are being too shrill and just making a fuss… when you read those comments you know damn well that you are in the right. Because anyone writing that stuff has to be utterly indifferent, cruel and frankly… thick as pigshit.

  130. life is like a pitbull with lipstick ॐ:

    And therefore both sides have their hands covered in jaguar poo.

    I lol’d.

  131. Markita Lynda—damn climate change!:

    @75, thanks for reminding me to unsubscribe. He now has only 154,999 subscribers.

  132. Drolfe:

    I can’t remember at this point, did any of Tf00t’s posts on this topic include the word “consent” or “consenting”? Iirc, that’s part of what made that first post about leg biting so dumb. We all thought, duh consent, and he was all triplicate thought police killjoys!!

  133. hyperdeath:

    Another problem with Thunderf00t’s blog, was that his page formatting style was blatantly plagiarized.

  134. Rev. BigDumbChimp:

    False equivalence is fun. Yay.

  135. ImaginesABeach:

    Chas @ 81 -

    I read the comment by Ze Madmax and concluded, as you did, that it was in violation of the New Coyote Rules. I could not, however, have responded as well as you did.

    Please accept a silent round of applause in lieu of an offer of some quantity of internets.

  136. skeptifem:

    haha missed this in the video description:

    There is also a litany of other reason why I do not hold freethoughtblogs in high regard. Chief among these was their pressure on me to yield to someone WHO STATED THAT THEY WERE USING COPYRIGHT LAW (not for protection of copyright) BUT TO STIFFLE DEBATE

    MY DEBATE! ITS BEEN STIFFLED!

    He is like 12, emotionally speaking. Jesus.

  137. irenedelse:

    feralboy:

    I, too, have noticed with ever growing concern the complete disappearance from the internet of Thunderfoot since you went all Nacht Und Nebel on his ass.

    Careful, there, Orac may suddenly pop up shove a Hitler Zombie in your face… ;)

  138. Hayden:

    @115

    The fact that you decide to present TF’s posts in a positive light and to pretend they contained simple, reasonable, easy to understand nuggets of wisdom – when in fact they were incoherent messes of verbal diarrhea – tells me all I need to know about you and how honest you are about this.

    I think verbal diarrhea is a very accurate assessment of TF’s first post. I didn’t think a detailed dissection of TF’s writing was necessary, because I didn’t think people here needed to be reminded what a poor showing TF made.

  139. michaelblayney:

    Have the Foot’s fanboys yet made a point that can’t be summed up with “it’s only free speech if you agree with me?” Because god-fucking-damn, the company one keeps says loads — particularly about his ability to convey the basics of free thought. Based on these idiots I’d dare say he’s a fucking failure.

  140. Audley Z. Darkheart (liar and scoundrel):

    Skeptifem:

    He is like 12, emotionally speaking.

    What’s the Crommunist quote?

    “Stupids gonna stupe.” I think it’s apt.

  141. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    For some reason TF interprets this as deputizing a squad of fun police who have lists of pre-approved fun activities, and straying outside these guidelines will result in some sort of punishment.

    yep. “for some reason”. we don’t know why. this mystifying behavior has never at all occurred before and is not at all part of a pattern that manifests every time a feminist policy is adopted, be it harassment policies at atheist conferences or policies that would allow women to wear shoes other than high-heels at work.

  142. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    yep. “for some reason”. we don’t know why. this mystifying behavior has never at all occurred before and is not at all part of a pattern that manifests every time a feminist policy is adopted, be it harassment policies at atheist conferences or policies that would allow women to wear shoes other than high-heels at work.

    This.
    Thank you.

  143. Duncan:

    Oh no, another entitled internet asshole who equates their freedom of speech with someone else’s compulsion to provide a platform for them.

    The owners of any blog or forum that you use have the right to ban you on a whim. The better blogs and forums are run by people who generally wait for you to give them a good reason to ban you. The worst are free of all moderation.

  144. michaeld:

    Ok having listened to his video well 2/3 of it I can’t help but wonder if he was trying to push the limits. He makes the point over and over again that they wouldn’t censor based on content. Combined with the tone of his post its almost like he took it as a challenge. Let’s pick a fight with several other bloggers right of the bat with ill informed posts. Doesn’t fact check a damn thing and barely interacts in the conversation. To top it off the whole thing was formatted like the usual trollish rants on the internet.

    I’m just left with the impression it was one big attempt to troll the rules and see just how much shit he could get away with.

  145. Ace of Sevens:

    He seems to think free use means that he is free to use whatever copyrighted material he wants. Was it too much to spend five minutes reading the Wikipedia page? His situation is very similar to one of their counter-examples.

  146. reasonable fellow:

    There is also a litany of other reason why I do not hold freethoughtblogs in high regard. Chief among these was their pressure on me to yield to someone WHO STATED THAT THEY WERE USING COPYRIGHT LAW (not for protection of copyright) BUT TO STIFFLE DEBATE

    Does FTB have a revenue sharing policy amongst its authors? I’m betting that it does and the only reason he took it down at all is because ‘fair use’ argument doesn’t fucking apply when you’ve got ads all over the page.

  147. Hayden:

    I’m just left with the impression it was one big attempt to troll the rules and see just how much shit he could get away with.

    Pretty much. He decides to stir the shit with his first post, then cries about the backlash. He tries to equate it to academic freedom, but misses the fact that tenure (how academic freedom is protected) has to be earned.

  148. What a Maroon, Applied Linguist of Slight Foreboding:

    PZ won’t provide me with a platform! Help! Help! I’m being repressed!

  149. Louis:

    Stiffle debate…

    {snigger, giggle}

    Oh yeah, my debate’s stiffled.

    Louis

  150. Alukonis, metal ninja:

    BOTH SIDES OMGWTFBBQ!!!!!111!!!one!!!eleventy!!!

  151. Audley Z. Darkheart (liar and scoundrel):

    Seriously, PZ. I think you owe me, Cipher, and What a Maroon our own blogs. In the interest of free expression and whatnot.

  152. "We Are Ing The Matrimonial Collective":

    Wtf? Tfoot is complaining about abuse of copyright to stop discusion? Isn’t that the same guy who used a DMCA case as leverage to make a creatonist do a little dance and disapear for a while

  153. reasonable fellow:

    “We Are Ing The Matrimonial Collective”
    6 July 2012 at 2:28 pm
    Wtf? Tfoot is complaining about abuse of copyright to stop discusion? Isn’t that the same guy who used a DMCA case as leverage to make a creatonist do a little dance and disapear for a while

    Well, yes, but they also told the creationists dad on him.

    Ah, the academic arena.

  154. Ernst Hot:

    What is it most IRC servers always post when you log on…

    Ah, here it is:

    However, some rules exist to prevent abuse and make the network a better place. Use of an IRC network is a privilege, not a right; abuse of privilege will lead to loss of privilege. Server administrators have absolute say over whether you are allowed to use their server or not.

    Sounds reasonable enough. I don’t recall anyone complaining about that.

    But apparently if you’re feminazistasibullies, you lose all property rights.

  155. skeptifem:

    Seriously, PZ. I think you owe me, Cipher, and What a Maroon our own blogs. In the interest of free expression and whatnot.

    I want one too! Stiffling (a combination of stifling and sniffling) is something no internetian deserves.

  156. irenedelse:

    @SC #40:

    Just send Justin Griffith to reason with them.

    It’s sadly ironic, in the light of his falling out with Greg Laden, to note that about a year ago, just after Elevatorgate started, Greg tried just that for a time with ERV and her commentariat… Didn’t work very well either.

    @ChasPeterson #55:

    Oh, nice one!

    @Audley #68:

    PZ!
    I can haz free speech, too? You’re squashing my First Amendment rights by not giving me a blog!

    Yeah! J*hn Kw*k was a piker to demand only a Leica Rangefinder! Blogs for everybody or no True Free Speech™!

  157. life is like a pitbull with lipstick ॐ:

    What a dumbass.

    There is also a litany of other reason why I do not hold freethoughtblogs in high regard. Chief among these was their pressure on me to yield to someone WHO STATED THAT THEY WERE USING COPYRIGHT LAW (not for protection of copyright) BUT TO STIFFLE DEBATE

    Turns out the law doesn’t care. If you violate someone’s copyright, and they decide to pursue you because they don’t like what you said, the law is still on their side. (Property law does not conform to toddlers’ expectations about fairness.)

    I doubt that what the copyright holder stated was as straightforward as what Thunderfoot claims here, since he’s known to distort others’ meanings, but even if it were exactly as he claims, Brayton would still be legally compelled.

  158. "We Are Ing The Matrimonial Collective":

    We should give the feminazi hive mind its own collective blog
    I sugest we name it Lightning Hand. Just a name I plucked out of the aether

  159. dapartypoopah:

    If TF wasn’t banned what happened? Advised to leave? An offer to resign? You mean that kind of deal?

  160. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    If TF wasn’t banned what happened?

    he got fired. which is not the same as banned. do you understand this, or must I explain the difference?

  161. Audley Z. Darkheart (liar and scoundrel):

    skeptifem and irene:
    Either FtB gives blogs to everyone or they’ve proven what a bunch of free speech stiffling femifacsists they really are!

  162. michaelblayney:

    He’s not banned from the site; he’s still free to comment on the blogs. He no longer has a personal blog, however.

  163. smhll:

    #FTBullies don’t think adding jaguars improves the Socratic Method.

  164. SC (Salty Current), OM:

    WHO STATED THAT THEY WERE USING COPYRIGHT LAW (not for protection of copyright) BUT* TO STIFFLE DEBATE

    Sounds angry. Hope he deosn’t have a riffle.

    *The “BUT” should be inside the parentheses, fool.

  165. Audley Z. Darkheart (liar and scoundrel):

    Ing:

    Lightning Hand

    I snortled.

  166. Tethys:

    Hayden

    I didn’t think people here needed to be reminded what a poor showing TF made.

    If you agree that TF made a poor showing (which is a massive understatement BTW), then why this?

    I lost a lot of respect for both parties involved.

    These two statements aren’t really compatible IMO.

  167. SC (Salty Current), OM:

    Laden wasn’t banned, either. He’s commented at Griffith’s.

  168. AJ Milne:

    This is new!

    O brave new world / That has such people in’t.

  169. reasonable fellow:

    You stiffled my arguments against da cock-blocking. Your a real jerk, bozo.

  170. socratic jaguar ॐ:

    #FTBullies don’t think adding jaguars improves the Socratic Method.

    “Like jaguars through the Yucatan, so are the days of our lives.”

  171. What a Maroon, Applied Linguist of Slight Foreboding:

    O brave new world / That has such people in’t.

    ‘Tis new to thee.

  172. otrame:

    You know, raped to death in the Yucatan by jaguars…. Where in hell did he come up with that and what was the point? It sounded like someone trying to be like the nastier sort of commenter we’ve had and not knowing quite how to do it.

    And BTW, Josh, you wanting your Internet delivered in the rear is an example of earning a double Internet. And also shows why panti liners were such an important invention for us seniors.

  173. Tethys:

    I’m just left with the impression it was one big attempt to troll the rules and see just how much shit he could get away with.

    Too bad he can’t seem to care about all the people he continues to splash with shit.

  174. dapartypoopah:

    “he got fired. which is not the same as banned. do you understand this, or must I explain the difference?”

    What is the problem? Is it really so hard to just say he was fired? Why the need for such a condescending attitude? In the future shall I just stfu till some atheists pope informs my unworthy peasant mind what I should and shouldn’t know?

  175. pentatomid:

    life is like a pitbull with lipstick ॐ

    Okay, I totally read your comment @120 in the voice of the chamberlain from The Dark Crystal.

  176. Hayden:

    If you agree that TF made a poor showing (which is a massive understatement BTW), then why this?

    I lost a lot of respect for both parties involved.

    Because they’re not mutually exclusive statements. TF made a poor showing, so I lost respect for him. PZ also made a bad showing, so I lost respect for him, too.

  177. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain:

    You have not tried to have Tf00t killed yet(my, what restraint you have), but at this point I wouldn’t be surprised to see that either.

    Ann Romney, is that you?

  178. SC (Salty Current), OM:

    In the future shall I just stfu

    Yes.

  179. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain:

    In the future shall I just stfu till some atheists pope informs my unworthy peasant mind what I should and shouldn’t know?

    You want to know something?

    That is a fucking fabulous idea!

    You should shut the fuck up until there is an atheist pope.

  180. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    In the future shall I just stfu till some atheists pope informs my unworthy peasant mind what I should and shouldn’t know?

    or, you could just fucking read the thread in which you’re posting, since people already said he was fired before you asked.

  181. Audley Z. Darkheart (liar and scoundrel):

    Partypoopah,
    You couldn’t take your two brain cells and rub them together hard and vigorously enough to figure out that TF got fired?

    And, so what if he got banned, too? What has that got to do with anything?

  182. ricardodivali having sniffles over stiffles:

    Finally, a moniker worthy of my slightly annoyingness. Thank you everybody. I’ll treasure it always.

  183. reasonable fellow:

    You know, raped to death in the Yucatan by jaguars…. Where in hell did he come up with that and what was the point? It sounded like someone trying to be like the nastier sort of commenter we’ve had and not knowing quite how to do it.

    It sounds to me as if he returned to that sentence a few times to add extra levels of weird vitriol.

  184. FluffyTheTerrible:

    @ Hayden

    If you agree that TF made a poor showing (which is a massive understatement BTW), then why this?

    I lost a lot of respect for both parties involved.

    Because they’re not mutually exclusive statements. TF made a poor showing, so I lost respect for him. PZ also made a bad showing, so I lost respect for him, too.

    Again with equating two things that couldn’t be any more dissimilar and trying to vilify both, although only one truly merits vilification.

    OK, in your own words, what made you lose respect for PZ?
    That’s like saying – prepare to be Godwinned – that you lost respect for the Nazis for what they did, but you also lost respect for the prosecutors at the Nurenberg trial because..I don’t know…they weren’t nice enough.

  185. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    …and by “people” I actually mean Josh

  186. Tethys:

    Because they’re not mutually exclusive statements. TF made a poor showing, so I lost respect for him. PZ also made a bad showing, so I lost respect for him, too.

    Logic fail.

    This is victim-blaming. The fact that PZ did not react to TF’s misogyny in the exact perfect manner which you would prefer is not a valid criticism.

  187. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:

    Hayden –> Killfile. Just because it doesn’t know enough to STFU with terminal insipidity, I don’t have to listen to it…

  188. nigelTheBold, who sings like a needle to the ear:

    dapartypoopah:

    What is the problem? Is it really so hard to just say he was fired? Why the need for such a condescending attitude? In the future shall I just stfu till some atheists pope informs my unworthy peasant mind what I should and shouldn’t know?

    So, you didn’t know anything about the argument you were diving into? You just jumped in, opened your mouth, and proceeded to gnaw on your feet?

    I’m not sure you need an Atheist Pope* to give you knowledge. You might try to do that for yourself once in a while.

    * An excellent suggestion, BTW. I can imagine nothing so useless, and I’m a fan of useless things. Which probably explains why I’m responding to you.

  189. ricardodivali having sniffles over stiffles:

    It sounded like someone trying to be like the nastier sort of commenter we’ve had and not knowing quite how to do it.

    It’s the “You sir are a Poopyhead” of death threats.

  190. SamStrange: bottom-feeding, work-shy peasant:

    Why the need for such a condescending attitude?

    It’s the proper attitude to take when speaking to an inferior such as yourself.

    (Inferior at reading for comprehension, anyway.)

  191. socratic jaguar ॐ:

    You know, raped to death in the Yucatan by jaguars…. Where in hell did he come up with that

    Probably riffing from S. M. Stirling:

    This book is technically fairly well executed, but politically leaves me cross-eyed. Warning for sexual violence, weird race issues, and general ookiness. … She is captured, and ceremonially raped by a jaguar as a precursor to being used as a human sacrifice.

    Derivative!

  192. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain:

    Nerd, what restraint you are showing by not killing Hayden by dropping a file on Hayden. Because we all so want to kill that person.

  193. Khantron, the alien that only loves:

    That first post of his started out so badly I think he should have been thrown out right away. Seriously people on the internet call other people “racist,” “bigot,” and “misogynist” for a reason. It’s because a lot of people on the internet are being racist, bigoted, and misogynistic.

    Seriously when thunderf00t and Patcondell went on their “bomb those dirty muslims and don’t let them emigrate away from oppressive theocracies” ranting their subscriber bases exploded. TheAmazingAtheist slags feminists and his subscriber count isn’t hurt, it’s helped. Misogyny, bigotry, and racism is everywhere on the internet. I blame Reagan, personally.

    Also Thunderf00t had no respect for the facts. He called the Tantive IV a cruiser. Seriously? Here’s a clue, a cruiser isn’t going to be completely dwarfed by a destroyer.

  194. ChasCPeterson:

    I’m just left with the impression it was one big attempt to troll the rules and see just how much shit he could get away with.

    Totally. The key line in his PZ vid (which he mutters really quickly and with no visual reinforcement) is at 1:22:

  195. What a Maroon, el papa ateo:

    You should shut the fuck up until there is an atheist pope.

    I suspect there’s been more than one.

  196. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain:

    I blame Reagan, personally.

    Reagan is not the cause. He is their patron saint.

  197. Josh, Official Yucatan Jaguar:

    socratic jaguar ॐ–

    Jaguar-Twin powers activate! Form of: snark!

  198. ChasCPeterson:

    …just after he interprets PZ’s promise of 100% freedom of content as “as assurance of academic integrity” *eyeroll*:

    Now, to an extent such liberties exist only as long as you can use them. So, I decided to challenge the plurality on a point that I thought they were way off base on…

    which turns out to be a “disproportionate amount of time” spent on sexual harassment and “supporting crazies like Rebecca Watson, who first went off the deep end with all that stuff about coffee and elevators…”

    He went in trolling.

  199. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain:

    What A Maroon, I am sure their has been a few atheist popes over the centuries; for a long time the church was one of the few places where an ambitious commoner could gain real power.

    Perhaps I should say Pope Of Atheists. But in my defense, I was mockingly using the words of a fuckface.

  200. reasonable fellow:

    I don’t think he went in trolling. Its just back-pedalling bullshit.

    See guys. I didn’t make a fool of myself, I was trolling. You get it? Haha. Anyways, back to being cool and smart.

  201. ericpaulsen:

    Raped to death by jaguars? Isn’t that kind of random and unlikely? If he had really wanted to threaten PZ maybe he should have said he hoped PZ would accidentally stumble into one of their NAMBLA meetings and get raped to death. Given their hatred of women and the number of MRA assholes out there I think this is a far more realistic threat.

  202. jjgdenisrobert:

    Uh PZ: I fail to see the “rape fantasy” you promised in this letter. It’s not the best repartee, sure, but a “rape fantasy” it certainly ain’t. All it is is someone who’s pissed off at you. He’s wrong about the free-speech issue (since FTB is not a government institution, free speech doesn’t enter into it), but since I have yet to hear any cogent, verifiable reasons as to why tfoot was given the boot, I’ll agree with at least this: that there is every chance that tf00t was booted solely because he disagreed with you and Ed. Now, since this is Ed’s site, he has the right to boot anyone he wants. But BS’ing about the reasons is just infantile.

  203. Bronze Dog:

    Sili:

    More like TF Kiss-players.

    I yield my internets to you.

    I don’t get the assertion that ThunderF00t and everyone else were arguing past each other, that both had legitimate points, yadda yadda. The “good” points of TFoot’s arguments were basic stuff that everyone accepted and had no trouble saying they accepted.

    The problem I had was that he and others were minimizing or even denying a problem an unprivileged group had and calling for silence. I’ve seen the same trope used against minority races, against LGBT’s, and even against atheists like myself. I may be white and male, but my atheism gives me at least some understanding into how privilege rationalizes itself into inaction because I’ve been subjected to some of those tropes by Christians arguing against expressing my grievances.

  204. What a Maroon, el papa ateo:

    What A Maroon, I am sure their has been a few atheist popes over the centuries; for a long time the church was one of the few places where an ambitious commoner could gain real power.

    Perhaps I should say Pope Of Atheists. But in my defense, I was mockingly using the words of a fuckface.

    Point taken. (To be honest, I was riffing off your post to show off my new ‘nym.)

  205. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    I fail to see the “rape fantasy” you promised in this letter. It’s not the best repartee, sure, but a “rape fantasy” it certainly ain’t.

    Read better.

    if you don’t all I can to is hope you get raped to death by Jaguars in the Yucatan.

    Given that you apparently don’t read shit before commenting on it, I’m not surprised you have yet to hear any cogent, verifiable reasons as to why tfoot was given the boot.

  206. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain:

    I finally spotted my typo. Dammit, that is one of the most embarrassing ones.

  207. pentatomid:

    Also Thunderf00t had no respect for the facts. He called the Tantive IV a cruiser. Seriously? Here’s a clue, a cruiser isn’t going to be completely dwarfed by a destroyer.

    He did WHAT?!

  208. Gregory Greenwood:

    Wow, Phil Krstulich really is a special snowflake isn’t he?

    The whole point of free-thinking is to express what you have been thinking to others; what would the point of Socrates’ trial have been if he had not made the impressive speeches he made?

    I love the fact that his opening gambit is to compare Thunderf00t – an angry online ranter who loudly demands that people respect his ‘right’ to chow down on the leg of any woman who catches his eye – to one of the most famous thinkers of the classical period.

    I haven’t had that good a laugh in a while.

    If the people judging him had simply written him off as ‘too out there’ and simply condemned him five minutes into his talking?

    Well, Socrates did have the advantage of actually making sense… I know, I know ’twas a dirty trick to make effective use of logic and reason, but he was a bit like that.

    Also, I would like to raise a point of order – PZ and others did not dismiss Thunderf00t after five minutes. They read his screeds first (and, given how poorly they were written, that probably took a while), and only then came to the entirely reasonable conclusion that he was a pompous prat swimming in his own private ocean of unexamined cis/het male privilege.

    The point I’m trying to make is that as much as I think Watson is at a minimum misguided,

    I know! I mean, who decapitates a poor chap and rips his spinal column from his rapidly cooling corpse for a trophy merely for asking them to go back to their room for ‘coffee’?

    … No, wait, that’s not right. All Watson did was say ‘guys don’t do that’. No Predator-esque decapitations/vertebrae theft in sight.

    How was that ‘at a minimum misguided’? Isn’t she allowed to object to some cluless dood cornering her an elevator at 4 AM to proposition her after she expressly stated that she was tired and wanted to sleep, and had just finished giving an address in which she had expressed how annoying she finds such behaviour? I wonder what Krstulich thinks her mistake was, other than failing to fall down immediately and worship teh mighty pee-pee, of course?

    you are culpable for much worse. Free Speech is the fundamental human right; without it, we are all doomed. You removing his website because you disagree on a matter of opinion makes you as bad as the papacy banning books, or Iran banning books, etc. etc….

    I don’t think this chap has a very good grasp of the internet if he thinks that Thunderf00t being booted off Freethought Blogs will take away his freedom of speech.

    Thunderf00t is free to be an insufferable misogynist on his own blog and all over much of teh intertoobs, where his particular brand of entitled tomfoolery will doubtless be welcomed with open arms – his freedom of speech is in no way dependent on his ability to post on FTB.

    It would take a spectacularly dishonest or epicly oblivious person to consider that the equivalent of book burnings. Fortunately, Krstulich seems to have both those bases well covered.

    In other words, by shutting off free expression you have sauntered effortlessly to lines the old and evil; too much information is bad, we decide what you should be exposed to, let’s have Salman Rushdie killed for writing something we don’t agree with. You have not tried to have Tf00t killed yet(my, what restraint you have), but at this point I wouldn’t be surprised to see that either.

    Oh, PZ, you and your ninja cephalopod death squads…

    Seriously though – Krstulich actually thinks that it is credible that PZ means to have Thunderfoot killed? He really has traded reality for paranouid delusion.

    You’re supposed to be a scientist; a little open-mindedness goes a long way in investigating the truth.

    It is news to me that uncritically accepting the claims of misogynists is now a requirement of rigorous scientific endeavour…

    In this modern world the only way to survive and live well is to laugh, rather than cry… A little cynicism never hurt anyone.

    I am pretty sure that being cynical about the proposition; ‘women are human beings too, and should be accorded the fundamental respect that all people deserve’ most certainly does hurt people.

    Anyway, I don’t believe I shall be reading your blogs any more; at least until you apologize to Mr. f00t

    Oh teh noes! Some random angry dudebro isn’t going to read Pharyngula anymore? However are you going to cope now, PZ?

    As threats go, this has to be on a par with threatening atheists with the fires of a hell that doesn’t exist.

    if you don’t all I can to is hope you get raped to death by Jaguars in the Yucatan.

    Now that is just weird. And rather nasty, like all rape fantasies. I think we have a Hoggler here…

    What is the betting that the defence of Krstulich or others like him will be “but you tell people to stick decaying porcupines up their bottoms all the time”. The difference being that we invite people to do that to themselves when they have been behaving rather badly (usually being revoltingly bigoted, or otherwise being disgusting by doing such things as engaging in rape fantasies like Krstulich), whereas Krstulich and his ilk specifically fantasise about the rape of the target of their ire by a third party (even where the choice of hypothetical rapists is deliberately ridiculous, as in this case).

    Next time think with your brain instead of your balls…

    The projection is strong with this one…

    and maybe over time I’ll grow to trust and respect you again. until then, eat shit.

    Krstulich Imagines that PZ craves his approval? Aww, naivete like that is kinda cute…

    I mean, you’re supposed to be a scientist, for Christ’s sake.

    Why does this guy think he is the arbiter of what constitues a ‘true’ scientist, I wonder?

    someone who actually believes in equality of right for all humankind…

    And yet, just a few lines before;

    I could swear some more but based off what I know of you you’re probably bawling already. Nobody likes a crybaby. You old cunt.

    Oh look – a gendered insult paired with a crass and toxic meme about the ‘acceptable’ performance of stoic, unemotional masculinity.

    It appears that Krstulich isn’t smart enough to realise that he is broadcasting his hypocrisy here. I imagine it is but one of the many, many things he is not smart enough to grasp…

  209. Josh, Official Yucatan Jaguar:

    Raped to death by jaguars? Isn’t that kind of random and unlikely?

    You’d be surprised. It isn’t talked about openly but most assaults are committed by draguars. These are roving gangs of male jaguars in feminine finery (falsies, sequined gowns, etc.). Their attacks are almost always preceded by a string of shoe burglaries in rural villages. High heels are disproportionately likely to be stolen*

    *Incidentally this is how conservationists estimate draguar populations. If 40 pairs of heels in Village A go missing in one night you know there are 20 draguars in the vicinity

  210. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain:

    What A Maroon, it there a title that you demand that you be called.

    The only problem it this, I will ignore the demand and the title.

    And want to kill you. But my restraint will make me look good.

  211. interrobang:

    Apparently, on the Internet, it is too much to ask to be allowed to bounce someone down your front steps on their ear if you invite them to dinner and they proceed to squat on your Persian rug and take a huge steaming dump. That’s a speech act, don’t you know, and everyone must be free at all times to say anything they want, unless it’s feminist or translates to “Will you creeps knock that off already?” As we used to say in my misspent yout’, some people’s children…!

    Also, Josh, I love you in a completely platonic way, but in context, isn’t being all jaguary right here right now sort of like pinning a giant “I AM A RAPIST” sign on yourself? I get the joke, but I’m a little weirded out by it anyway.

  212. viggen111:

    The whole point of free-thinking is to express what you have been thinking to others; what would the point of Socrates’ trial have been if he had not made the impressive speeches he made? If the people judging him had simply written him off as ‘too out there’ and simply condemned him five minutes into his talking?

    A big contingent of the free thought movement thinks that “free thought” means “no limits at all.” Some limits are needed or codes of civil conduct between humans would not be possible. Taken too far, there’s bound to be a problem. “Free speech” has always been a tenuous freedom because lies, libel and slander are all technically protected by it, and sometimes shouldn’t be. What we are seeing in this entire controversy, right back to elevator gate and peoples’ unwillingness to simply adhere to a civil code of conduct and to accuse people like PZ of being fascist or two-faced is the result of expecting no limits and then becoming surprised to learn that they are actually expected to adhere to some. Any limit appears fascist if you don’t want to see it imposed on you.

  213. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    Sounds angry. Hope he deosn’t have a riffle.

    I couldn’t stop laughing for a disproportionately long time after reading this.

  214. Tethys:

    Jaguar-Twin powers activate! Form of: snark!

    I am now giggling madly over the cartoon image in my head Of Josh and SJ in the form of a giant anatomically correct jaguar dildo-cluebat as a visual representation of snark.

  215. feralboy12:

    Uh PZ: I fail to see the “rape fantasy” you promised in this letter.

    What part of “hope you get raped by jaguars in the Yucatan” don’t you understand?

    but since I have yet to hear any cogent, verifiable reasons as to why tfoot was given the boot

    Reasons have been given. The fact that you haven’t heard them is probably a function of those “reading for comprehension” skills that you demonstrated with the first blockquote I pasted.

  216. Josh, Official Yucatan Jaguar:

    I get the joke, but I’m a little weirded out by it anyway.

    And I’m more than a little weirded out by your defense of male circumcision recently, especially when you described it in terms of the “end-user” experience. Are we even?

  217. What a Maroon, el papa ateo:

    Janine,

    “Su pulpostad” will do quite nicely.

    And if you ever lose your restraint, promise me that you’ll saute me in olive oil with some garlic and a touch of pimenton.

  218. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    If you are ever in danger of being raped to death by jaguars in the Yucatan, you need only summon Ixchel. As the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war, she is obviously an early radical feminist, so she’ll have your back.

  219. ChasCPeterson:

    Couple more Tf snippets I transcribed. He is either himself ignorant of the meaning of the term ‘freethought’ or he is disingenuously encouraging that confusion in his viewers. He also is the source of the “banned from FTB” claim. Further, he claims to have been “banned” for “minor political dissent” about “feminism”.

    It seems that freethought really did not extend as far as some minor political dissent on [Myers's] views on feminism.

    I know what a lot of you are thinking: ”Freethought’ Blogs’ actually banned you?! Are you kidding me? [comparison of 'freethought blogs' to Orwellian government departments]…
    ‘FTB where you’ve got absolute freedom to think as freely as you want, as long as those free thoughts actually agree with ours.’ [visually reinforced]

  220. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    a giant anatomically correct jaguar dildo-cluebat

    oh
    god

    I will never be able to unsee that.

  221. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    I will never be able to unsee that.

    *wobble wobble*

  222. #FTBully Foot Soldier:

    It seems that freethought really did not extend as far as some minor political dissent on [Myers's] views on feminism.

    And that, right there, is thunderf00t’s problem in a nutshell. What he considers minor is a big fucking deal to lots of us, and instead of recognizing that, he continues to double down.

    Good riddance.

  223. nonny:

    I know it’s your blog and you can post what you like but I don’t think this guy deserves the publicity you’ve given him. He’s trying so hard to be edgy but he just comes off as a boring troll. I want the thirty seconds it took to read his rant back.

  224. What a Maroon, el papa ateo:

    nonny,

    You’re in luck. One of the magical powers vested in me is the ability to restore time lost in reading inane internet posts. Now just close your eyes and count slowly…

    One one thousand
    Two one thousand

    Twenty-nine one thousand
    Thirty one thousand

  225. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain:

    Nonny, do you seriously think that if PZ just said nothing else about ThunderingFool, the latest clusterfuck would just end?

  226. fredsalvador:

    You removing his website because you disagree on a matter of opinion makes you as bad as the papacy banning books

    I’m wondering how long it took him to think up Vatican City as an alternative to the Third Reich. When Hitler stops being shocking, there’s always Reductio Ad Pontifex!

    Something I find amusing about the whole “Dr Phil blows a gasket” saga is that Dr Phil and his defenders within the secular community seem to think FtB, a blogging hub run by avowed feminist PZ Myers, should for some reason allow people who misconstrue, misrepresent or miss the point entirely on gender equality the same ‘right to reply’ they quite rightly deny to creationists who misconstrue, misrepresent and miss the point of science.

    If you’re going to host Thunderfunk’s blog, why not extend Ian Juby the same courtesy? At least Juby’s ridiculous evidences for God are sometimes funny, whereas Dr Phil’s tendency to piss, moan, and send forth his braying hordes every time someone dares to tell him he’s talking shite gets very old very fast.

  227. Tethys:

    I will never be able to unsee that.

    *wobble wobble*

    I apologize for that. My brain is somewhat delirious due to day 5 of living in a sauna.

    Feline peni are scary! Do not google!

  228. SC (Salty Current), OM:

    I know it’s your blog and you can post what you like but I don’t think this guy deserves the publicity you’ve given him.

    I agree. It’s a triffling affair.

  229. Brownian:

    Feline peni are scary!

    Penes.

  230. M. A. Melby:

    To state the obvious:

    It’s not fair to make any inferences about Thunderf00t’s character based on an absolutely fucking asinine letter just because this guy is a fan of Thunderf00t.

    I hope nobody is.

  231. ImaginesABeach:

    I’m not usually one for conspiracy theories, but I have to wonder if t00t didn’t do this whole thing just to get more subscribers.

    FTB provides a lot of exposure, doesn’t it? And I suspect there are a lot of people who had never heard of t00t before that are hoggling madly to his videos.

  232. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    To state the obvious:

    It’s not fair to make any inferences about Thunderf00t’s character based on an absolutely fucking asinine letter just because this guy is a fan of Thunderf00t.

    I hope nobody is.

    Why would you post something like this?

  233. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain:

    Penes

    Once more, I am very sorry.

  234. ChasCPeterson:

    Inferences about Thunderf00t’s character can be drawn readily enough from his own fucking asinine writings.

  235. ImaginesABeach:

    M.A. Melby -

    I don’t think anyone needs to consider his fans before judging his character. He put his character right out there on the curb with the garbage.

  236. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain:

    It’s not fair to make any inferences about Thunderf00t’s character based on an absolutely fucking asinine letter just because this guy is a fan of Thunderf00t.

    There is no need to. Most of us have already inferred ThunderingFool’s character based on his own words.

  237. ricardodivali having sniffles over stiffles:

    It’s not fair to make any inferences about Thunderf00t’s character based on an absolutely fucking asinine letter just because this guy is a fan of Thunderf00t.

    I hope nobody is.

    I don’t think we have actually. Maybe a bit of light allusion for comic purposes. I think TF’s character more than speaks for itself frankly.

  238. Brownian:

    It’s not fair to make any inferences about Thunderf00t’s character based on an absolutely fucking asinine letter just because this guy is a fan of Thunderf00t.

    Thunderf00t, the racist, sexist, half-wit?

    Regression to the mean suggests that making inferences about his character based on other people could only help his reputation.

    If you take the average of Thunderf00t and Phil Krstulich you end up with a passably literate Thunderf00t.

    It may not be fair to do so, but it’s an improvement.

  239. charlessoto:

    Whacko. But, having just walked through the Hall of the Americas at the Houston Museum of Natural Science, I appreciated the jaguar thing. There were some really cool antiquities there. And the Paleo Hall was very nice. My son enjoyed the planetarium’s show on black holes.

  240. reasonable fellow:

    M. A. Melby
    6 July 2012 at 3:59 pm
    To state the obvious:

    It’s not fair to make any inferences about Thunderf00t’s character based on an absolutely fucking asinine letter just because this guy is a fan of Thunderf00t.

    Well tough luck sonny-jim because i’m going to anyway. This guy is thunderf00ts fanbase nowadays because his (tf00ts) arguments are so abysmally poor that only total shit-heads like this guy could possibly agree with them.

  241. fredsalvador:

    It’s not fair to make any inferences about Thunderf00t’s character based on an absolutely fucking asinine letter just because this guy is a fan of Thunderf00t.

    I hope nobody is.

    So do I, because it’s completely unneccesary. Anyone who has ever watched one of Dr Phil’s “dramas” play out can see how puerile, crass, and narcissistic he is; all good qualities when it comes to debunking creationist fuck-poop in an entertainingly condescending manner, but which serve you poorly when you’re trying to pull a community together.

  242. Kalliope:

    Josh –

    You are on FIRE. You had me LOL — literally!

  243. truebutnotuseful:

    Phil Krstulich wrote:

    I don’t believe I shall be reading your blogs any more; at least until you apologize to Mr. f00t

    It amuses me to no end that Phil Krstulich seems to think Thunderf00t’s actual name is Thunder F00t. As in “I hope you enjoy your stay with us, Mr. F00t” or “shall I have your ladyleg pre-warmed, Mr. F00t?”

    You have not tried to have Tf00t killed yet(my, what restraint you have), but at this point I wouldn’t be surprised to see that either.

    Always with the accusations of violence. Why are they so quick to go there? Projection?

  244. fastlane:

    After reading through the comments, I got this disturbing image of PZ going all Oprah…

    You get a blog, and you get a blog, and YOU get a blog…..

    I think I need some stronger drink.

  245. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain:

    I don’t believe I shall be reading your blogs any more; at least until you apologize to Mr. f00t

    Reminds me of when Meatloaf was referred as Mr Loaf.

  246. Audley Z. Darkheart (liar and scoundrel):

    MA Melby:

    I hope nobody is.

    You’re fucking kidding, right? I’m sorry, but T’f00t has made enough of an ass of himself in the past few weeks that seeing this kind of reaction from one of his supporters is not a fucking surprise.

    WON’T SOMEONE THINK OF THE THUNDERF00TS!

  247. Brownian:

    Always with the accusations of violence. Why are they so quick to go there? Projection?

    No, they’re just incredibly fucking stupid human beings.

  248. fastlane:

    I think TF’s character more than speaks for itself frankly.

    In caps lock, neon letters. It’s clear, if not exactly eloquent.

  249. Caine, Fleur du mal:

    Raped to death by Jaguars in the Yucatan? I wonder how long that took them. It’s obviously their version of the decaying porcupine meme.

    I did get a laugh out of the Slime Pit’s tagline, “porcupine free since 2012″. These assclowns are endlessly amusing when it comes to their notion of free speech and free thought.

  250. feralboy12:

    It amuses me to no end that Phil Krstulich seems to think Thunderf00t’s actual name is Thunder F00t.

    If you want to get real formal, it’s Mr. Thunder J. Foot, Jr., I think.
    I did once tell a troll to call me “Mr. 12″ but I suspect I would have become confused had he actually done so.

  251. Tethys:

    I appreciated the jaguar thing.

    What?! You appreciate rape fantasies featuring South American felines?

    That’s disgusting!

    penes

    Yup, brain officially melted now.

  252. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    Freethought

    Not to be confused with Freedom of thought

  253. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    And just for good measure:

    +++++
    Freedom of thought

    “It is different from and not to be confused with the concept of freedom of speech or expression.”

  254. Caine, Fleur du mal:

    ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ

    Oooh, I like this one. Keep it a while, please.

  255. allencdexter:

    I’m still a bit hazy as to the substance of this dispute. I’m also a free thinker and have my own blog on blogger. I say whatever I wish anytime I wish and I’m sure a lot of people don’t like what I have to say. They can start their own blogs any time they wish, so I’m certain this blogger can do the same.

    There are a lot of blogs I’m aware of but don’t regularly visit just because they don’t really appeal to me, not necessarily because I violently disagree with them. PZ’s blog is one of my daily musts. He’s clear, concise and logical. Even though he’s a scientist, I don’t need a Phd to understand his posts.

    This vitriol is a bit disconcerting. Like Rodney King, I wonder why we can’t all just get along.

  256. amblebury:

    Crispy Creme Christ on an Incredulity Cracker, that was a bit much to wake up to.

    Chap seems a tad upset.

  257. Audley Z. Darkheart (liar and scoundrel):

    Brownian:

    Penes.

    Isn’t that a type of pasta?

  258. Kalliope:

    jjgdenisrobert
    6 July 2012 at 3:12 pm
    Uh PZ: I fail to see the “rape fantasy” you promised in this letter.

    jjg was promised a rape fantasy and he is sorely disappointed. I feel for him. The sweet expectation of the desired thing, only to find out it wasn’t there… Like opening the fridge and expecting that last piece of pie, only to find it isn’t there!

    He was promised!

  259. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain:

    This vitriol is a bit disconcerting. Like Rodney King, I wonder why we can’t all just get along.

    Because it is fucking hard and rather dispiriting to treat people who think that woman either do not face harassment or should shut up about it with respect.

    Why is that so hard to understand?

  260. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    I’ll try, but I start having technical difficulties* with the blog software here whenever I change my nym away from a couple of old standards. This’s why I had to drop old man jenkins pretty quickly.

    *which are partly my fault and partly que sera sera

  261. Kalliope:

    This vitriol is a bit disconcerting. Like Rodney King, I wonder why we can’t all just get along.

    Rodney King was beaten to within an inch of his life by public officials. Those who rioted did so because they were outraged by years and years and years of abuse.

    If not for the abuse by those in power, there would have been no riots. Everyone would have gotten along.

  262. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain:

    Audley, follow the link that I provided. That should answer your question.

    *snicker*

  263. Audley Z. Darkheart (liar and scoundrel):

    allencdexter:

    This vitriol is a bit disconcerting. Like Rodney King, I wonder why we can’t all just get along.

    I’m sorry, what? This is a “must read daily blog” for you and you’ve never noticed that PZ (and the commenters) can be rather rude?

    Either you’re mind boggling stupid or you’re a liar. Which is it?

  264. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    Audley, click on Janine’s #233.

  265. ricardodivali having sniffles over stiffles:

    I wonder why we can’t all just get along.

    We like to keep the number of “deep rifts” somewhat equal to the number of “youz-is-all-a-hivemind”s.

  266. CJO:

    Reminds me of when Meatloaf was referred as Mr Loaf.

    Or when Hitch kept calling Mos Def “Mr. Definitely” on Bill Maher, except, oh right, that was fucking hilarious, while Phil here is just pathetic and rather dim.

  267. Audley Z. Darkheart (liar and scoundrel):

    Janine:

    Once more, I am very sorry.

    Why are you sorry? Those are fucking awesome. :D

    *tootles off to see if peen pasta can be ordered*

  268. Brownian:

    I’m sure a lot of people don’t like what I have to say.

    I wonder why we can’t all just get along.

    You’re so almost there.

  269. Tethys:

    I wonder why we can’t all just get along.

    Because rational people prefer not to make accommodation for, or associate with asshole misogynists? /wildguess

  270. pip r.lagenta:

    It looks as if freethoughtblogs is committing suicide. What’s up with that?

  271. Audley Z. Darkheart (liar and scoundrel):

    Awe, yeah! Amazon will gift wrap your order of Weenie Linguini!

  272. Brownian:

    It looks as if freethoughtblogs is committing suicide. What’s up with that?

    Nothing, dear. Go back to having that dream in which you’re cognitively distinct from religious folk.

  273. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain:

    Please explain, pip.

  274. Brownian:

    Janine’s link reminds me that I need to have the ol’ Q-tip up the P-tip test again.

  275. 'Tis Himself:

    Bad news for the dudebros. I’ve had a look around the shop and we’re fresh out of Yucatanian jaguars. We’ve got some Guatemalan jaguars but otherwise they’ll have to wait for a new shipment to arrive in six to eight months.

  276. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain:

    O.o

  277. kemist, Dark Lord of the Sith:

    policies that would allow women to wear shoes other than high-heels at work.

    There are places that force women to wear high heels at work ?!?

    My poor flat feet are curling in fright.

    I don’t think this would fly where I live though. All workers here are covered for accidents / work-related illnesses – health care and salary.

    No boss would willingly risk having to pay for the intensive orthopedic and physiotherapy care as well as the stiff fee that would undoubtedly result were they to force people into foot-destroying shoes.

    Plantar fascitis, anyone ?

  278. ricardodivali having sniffles over stiffles:

    Pip – I didn’t know rolling around on the floor laughing at stupid comments was so similar to seppuku.

    Brownian, I can’t believe I missed that. I don’t know whether to damn you, or have your babies.

  279. AJ Milne:

    … “Shall I have your ladyleg pre-warmed, Mr. F00t?”

    <Snerk>

  280. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    I need to have the ol’ Q-tip up the P-tip test again.

    pip pip!

  281. vexorian:

    Meh, these guys really think that not reading FTB blogs are going to be a severe punishment to this community.

    Please, be my guest and also boycott these sites by not commenting anymore.

  282. Tethys:

    Inca prostate exam or South American rape jaguar?

  283. klatu:

    if you don’t all I can to is hope you get raped to death by Jaguars in the Yucatan

    You old cunt.

    Oh brother…
    You know, I did plan to refute this post in detail. But after that, nothing can be said. Nothing. There is no discussion. It is dead. DEAD!

  284. ricardodivali having sniffles over stiffles:

    There are places that force women to wear high heels at work ?!?

    I have seen the long term damage to womens’s feet from high heels. It might have pretentions of being “shapely” (or whatever) in the beginning, but it sure doesn’t end that way.

  285. 'Tis Himself:

    There are restaurants which require waitresses, who are on their feet constantly, to wear heels.

  286. amblebury:

    Pene linguini.

    I once had the searingly brilliant idea of making a penis-shaped breakfast cereal…PORNFLAKES!

    I coulda been a contenda for the 1%.

  287. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain:

    Ambleberry, Pornflakes kind of bring to mind dried, well, secretions.

    *back away slowly*

  288. Audley Z. Darkheart (liar and scoundrel):

    Janine:

    Pornflakes kind of bring to mind dried, well, secretions.

    Not if it pills first.

    Eeeeeeew.

  289. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain:

    Not if it pills first.

    Pornnuts.

    I.
    Must.
    Stop.

  290. Brownian:

    I once had the searingly brilliant idea of making a penis-shaped breakfast cereal…PORNFLAKES!

    Will it cure my grape nuts?

  291. Audley Z. Darkheart (liar and scoundrel):

    Janine:

    Pornnuts.

    O.o
    o.O
    O.O

    Eeeeeeeew.

  292. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain:

    Audley, you have no case to complain. You are the one ordering Weenie Linguini.

    *snort*

  293. jochematteveld:

    Thunderf00t was being a complete idiot and an asshole, and utterly wrong. But removing his blog for it was simply abuse of your power as the admin here. I’d expect better from you; when someone thinks and says stupid things like these, they should be ridiculed and their arguments refuted, not censored (Yeah, I know you didn’t censor him completely and he still has his youtube channel and can still post comments).

    To make a long story short, my opinion of both of you has dropped quite a bit by this ridiculous business.

  294. What a Maroon, el papa ateo:

    Oh brother…
    You know, I did plan to refute this post in detail. But after that, nothing can be said. Nothing. There is no discussion. It is dead. DEAD!

    But he thanked PZed at the end. He was being civil. So you see, that makes it all better.

  295. nigelTheBold, who sings like a needle to the ear:

    To make a long story short, my opinion of both of you has dropped quite a bit by this ridiculous business.

    Oh, horrors! Your opinion meant so much.

  296. Noadi:

    @293 First of all it was not PZs sole decision to fire Thunderf00t, especially since PZ doesn’t have that authority as Ed Brayton owns the network (though it’s run fairly democratically from what I understand).

    Second: what part of this being a privately owned blog network do you not understand? He was invited to participate and when he abused that invitation was was fired.

  297. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain:

    So, jochematteveld, instead of lecturing about how badly PZ abused his power, what should have the FTB administration done.

    (Though to be honest, in light of ThunderingFool’s call for war against followers of islam, he should never have been invited to join. But a lot of people here also admired Hitchens.)

  298. Brownian:

    they should be ridiculed and their arguments refuted

    Thunderf00t made arguments?

    Did you read his blog posts?

  299. M. A. Melby:

    “Why would you post something like this?”

    TF put his foot in his mouth badly (very badly). As many people pointed out, he spoke for himself and it’s absolutely fair to judge him on that basis.

    This is an individual’s letter and it’s MUCH worse than anything Thunderf00t has actually said (as far as I am aware) and I doubt very much that he would be anything but embarrassed and horrified that someone claiming to be his fan wrote this crap.

    So, yeah, I was just putting that out there – and it seems that very few people are falling into the “guilty by association” trap that was just placed on the floor.

  300. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain:

    So happy we passed your test, M. A. Melby.

    (sarcasm)

  301. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    Melby, I didn’t ask why you think it would be wrong to judge TF by his fan’s stupid behavior. I asked why you would post something like that. If you had no evidence that anyone was doing that, why the vague finger-wagging at nobody? If you did have evidence that anyone was doing that, why the vague finger-wagging at nobody?

  302. Jessa:

    Awe, yeah! Amazon will gift wrap your order of Weenie Linguini!

    I’m giggling at the “Customers Who Bought This Item Also Bought” section includes:

    A different brand of penis pasta
    Super Fun Penis Candy
    Party Pecker Straws
    Blue Balls Penis Ice Cube Tray
    Crest 3-D White Advanced Vivid Whitening Strips

    I understand the penis novelty items, but a teeth whitening system?

  303. smhll:

    @243 You made me LOL uncontrollably! It was awesome!

  304. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain:

    Jessa, did you notice that Weenie Linguini had one Five Star review.

  305. What a Maroon, el papa ateo:

    Thunderf00t was being a complete idiot and an asshole, and utterly wrong.

    Good start….

    But removing his blog for it was simply abuse of your power as the admin here.

    Uh oh.

    Power corrupts, amirite?

    I’d expect better from you;

    You forgot “young man”.

    when someone thinks and says stupid things like these, they should be ridiculed and their arguments refuted,

    Ridicule and refutation at FTB? Perish the thought….

    not censored

    Yeah, PZ, you should really stop abusing your vast governmental powers. Next think you know, he’ll be taking away our virtual cupcakes.

    (Yeah, I know you didn’t censor him completely and he still has his youtube channel and can still post comments).

    Oh, wait, so you mean there are other obscure corners of the internet where he can post? So PZ isn’t all-powerful?

    Another illusion shattered.

    To make a long story short, my opinion of both of you has dropped quite a bit by this ridiculous business.

    And we’re all crying in our cornflakes over the news. Please, anonymous internet user, whatever can we do to win back your respect?

  306. Brownian:

    Oh, horrors! Your opinion meant so much.

    Not to further pile on jochematteveld, but I really do not get this weird obsession everyone’s supposed to have with the opinions of their fans.

    There’s all this blathering on and on about how the freethinking community is a beacon of rationality unto the darkness, and what’s the best argument people seem to come up with? “I don’t idolise you as much any more.”

    It’s like the community of skeptics is the living embodiment of sad trombone.

  307. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    jochematteveld,

    Thunderf00t was being a complete idiot and an asshole, and utterly wrong.

    Yes.

    But removing his blog for it was simply abuse of your power as the admin here.

    1) Why? You’ve simply asserted this. Support your assertion with logic and evidence.

    2) Why do you imagine that Myers did it, anyway? Isn’t Brayton is the owner of FTB?

    I’d expect better from you; when someone thinks and says stupid things like these, they should be ridiculed and their arguments refuted, not censored

    As you admit immediately afterwards, he hasn’t been censored.

    But let’s get Socratic and follow this notion where it leads.

    3) Here is a list of people who’ve been actually banned from this blog. Do you believe it’s wrong for all of them to have been banned; i.e., no commenter should ever be banned from any blog anwhere ever?

    4) Do you believe that private entities like Brayton/FtB are morally required to grant a platform for everyone else’s views, even though it costs money/time/effort to provide that platform?

    If you answered “no” to questions 3 or 4, please explain why a different principle should apply here.

    (Yeah, I know you didn’t censor him completely and he still has his youtube channel and can still post comments).

    5) Do you realize that if TF had been allowed to keep blogging, Brayton would have had to keep on paying him money?

    6) Do you believe that employers should be obliged to keep all employees, no matter what stupid shit they say, and keep on paying them indefinitely?

  308. ricardodivali having sniffles over stiffles:

    and their arguments refuted, not censored (Yeah, I know you didn’t censor him completely and he still has his youtube channel and can still post comments).

    Translation : You censored someone, except not really, and now i’m really angry. Because I as a random person on the internet Ishould get to tell Ed Brayton how to run his privately owned blog space.

    Grrrr….

    Grrr… I say.

  309. Brownian:

    This is an individual’s letter and it’s MUCH worse than anything Thunderf00t has actually said (as far as I am aware) and I doubt very much that he would be anything but embarrassed and horrified that someone claiming to be his fan wrote this crap.

    Did you read his blog posts?

  310. Tethys:

    jochemattveld, I already explained this one today, so I will just repost my #186.

    Because they’re not mutually exclusive statements. TF made a poor showing, so I lost respect for him. PZ also made a bad showing, so I lost respect for him, too.

    Logic fail.

    This is victim-blaming. The fact that PZ did not react to TF’s misogyny in the exact perfect manner which you would prefer is not a valid criticism

  311. Caine, Fleur du mal:

    But removing his blog for it was simply abuse of your power as the admin here.

    No it wasn’t. Jesus Christ. What is it, exactly, about a private blog network you don’t grasp? Ed Brayton put this together and it’s at his (and the other bloggers) discretion to decide who and what content they want here. Rocket science it ain’t.

    Laden fucked up too and was uninvited. Hey, that’s part of life – figuring out that you have to take responsibility for your actions and words.

  312. Audley Z. Darkheart (liar and scoundrel):

    Janine:

    Audley, you have no case to complain. You are the one ordering Weenie Linguini.

    Dude. I was going to send it to you– why else would I have it gift wrapped?

    :p

    jochematteveld:

    But removing his blog for it was simply abuse of your power as the admin here.

    Remind me, what is an admin’s job again?

    … when someone thinks and says stupid things like these, they should be ridiculed and their arguments refuted, not censored

    By your own admission T’f00t wasn’t censored. Do you have a point or do you want a little bit of stinky cheese with your whine?

    To make a long story short, my opinion of both of you has dropped quite a bit by this ridiculous business.

    And I’m sure that there’s somebody, somewhere that honestly cares about your opinion.

    MA:

    So, yeah, I was just putting that out there – and it seems that very few people are falling into the “guilty by association” trap that was just placed on the floor.

    Jesus fucking Christ, what is it about Thunderf00t that brings out the trolling morons?

  313. ruteekatreya:

    THe gallling thing about this bullshit move is that it seems to go against every principle of free expression you have been expounding for years.

    When did PZ advocate to give Ken Ham space at TAM? Or for that matter, at FTB?

    It looks as if freethoughtblogs is committing suicide. What’s up with that?

    What. Freethoughtblogs is a website, it is not a sentient being. What.

  314. SC (Salty Current), OM:

    Please, anonymous internet user, whatever can we do to win back your respect?

    Nothing. He shan’t be reading these blogs any more.

  315. Caine, Fleur du mal:

    Jessa:

    I’m giggling at the “Customers Who Bought This Item Also Bought” section includes:

    A different brand of penis pasta
    Super Fun Penis Candy
    Party Pecker Straws
    Blue Balls Penis Ice Cube Tray
    Crest 3-D White Advanced Vivid Whitening Strips

    I understand the penis novelty items, but a teeth whitening system?

    Oh hey, if a dude is gonna impress the ladeez with all his mighty peen products, gotta have a pretty smile!

  316. Woo_Monster, Sniffer of Starfarts:

    I’d expect better from you; when someone thinks and says stupid things like these, they should be ridiculed and their arguments refuted, not censored (Yeah, I know you didn’t censor him completely and he still has his youtube channel and can still post comments).

    Fool. Removing a parasite from your network is not censorship.

    M.A. Melby,

    This is an individual’s letter and it’s MUCH worse than anything Thunderf00t has actually said (as far as I am aware) and I doubt very much that he would be anything but embarrassed and horrified that someone claiming to be his fan wrote this crap.

    What Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy said at #301

    So, yeah, I was just putting that out there…

    Don’t next time. At least without pointing out whom you think you are addressing.

  317. Caine, Fleur du mal:

    Audley:

    Jesus fucking Christ, what is it about “Thunderf00t” that brings out the trolling morons?

    You really have to ask?

  318. Woo_Monster, Sniffer of Starfarts:

    Did you read his blog posts?

    And have you seen what his fans typically act like?

  319. larryharnett:

    Geez, Louise. I’m an atheist, but you guys are starting to look like you’re trying to outdo religion with all the schisms and subgroups you’re forming, looking for or making up stuff to feud about. Think I’ll just take my lonely atheism and go elsewhere, thank you.

  320. Woo_Monster, Sniffer of Starfarts:

    Goodbye, larry.

  321. Audley Z. Darkheart (liar and scoundrel):

    Caine:

    You really have to ask?

    I want to know what the hell their beacon looks like. Then I can totally dismantle it and maybe pretend that those morons don’t exist for an evening.

  322. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    larryharnett,

    Do you think we should agree about everything?

    Or do you just think we should stop talking about the things we disagree on?

  323. Woo_Monster, Sniffer of Starfarts:

    Think I’ll just take my lonely atheism and go elsewhere, thank you.

    The part I emphasized is lulzworthy.

  324. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain:

    Damn. He leaves before I have a chance to say; Hello, Larry!

    *hangs head in shame*

  325. Setár, self-appointed Elf-Sheriff of the FreethoughtBlogs Star Chamber:

    Crossposted from TET, with the same HUGE MASSIVE FUCKING GIANT TRIGGER WARNING and reading the headline should be enough:

    Flash Game Makes Players Beat Up Tropes vs Women Creator

    -shudder- someone is going to make a rape game next, I just know it.

    If anyone needs me, I’ll be in the smoking room.

  326. Woo_Monster, Sniffer of Starfarts:

    Leave a little atheism behind for the rest of us!!!111!

  327. Caine, Fleur du mal:

    Think I’ll just take my lonely atheism and go elsewhere, thank you.

    Aaaw, be sure to spread your lonely siren song all across the internet, Cupcake. I’m sure there’s another lonely Cupcake out there for you somewhere.

  328. fredsalvador:

    Think I’ll just take my lonely atheism and go elsewhere, thank you.

    Allow me to suggest “to hell”. It’s funny because it’s ironic, since I’m an atheist, and you’re an atheist, which means we’re all going to hell anyway.

  329. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain:

    I struggled so hard not to do this.

    Alas! I am weak!

  330. Brownian:

    Audley, I’ve read previous comments by M.A. Melby. I don’t know why xe’s saying such silly things, but xe’s no trolling moron.

  331. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:

    Think I’ll just take my lonely atheism and go elsewhere, thank you.

    Ah gee, another MRA fuckwit we care nothing about, because at the end of the day it says nothing but attitude in its post. Actual evidence and arguments might make us care. But crockaduck tears with attitude? I don’t think so Tim…

  332. Woo_Monster, Sniffer of Starfarts:

    Setár, self-appointed Elf-Sheriff of the FreethoughtBlogs Star Chamber, #325, Ernst Hot’s link at #42 also discusses that game.

  333. ricardodivali having sniffles over stiffles:

    I’m sorry your atheism isn’t interested in equality Larry. Perhaps that’s why it’s so lonely.

    (Is it me, or are these sudden huffmeisters like Larry all starting to sound like sock puppets? I’m getting suspicious.)

  334. Tethys:

    Think I’ll just take my lonely atheism and go elsewhere, thank you.

    Great idea! We’re full-up on idiots around here.

  335. "We Are Ing The Matrimonial Collective":

    Thunderf00t was being a complete idiot and an asshole, and utterly wrong. But removing his blog for it was simply abuse of your power as the admin here. I’d expect better from you; when someone thinks and says stupid things like these, they should be ridiculed and their arguments refuted, not censored (Yeah, I know you didn’t censor him completely and he still has his youtube channel and can still post comments).

    To make a long story short, my opinion of both of you has dropped quite a bit by this ridiculous business.

    I presume also of Benson who was quite annoyed at TF as well, right?

    Cause everyone is just as bad.

  336. Jasper of Maine:

    Geez, Louise. I’m an atheist, but you guys are starting to look like you’re trying to outdo religion with all the schisms and subgroups you’re forming, looking for or making up stuff to feud about. Think I’ll just take my lonely atheism and go elsewhere, thank you.

    Ahh yes, I remember the good old days when all atheists were in 100% agreement, there was no diversity, and none of them were opinionated, and there were no comment threads.

    What in the world happened to atheism??????

  337. Pteryxx:

    Re Gregory Greenwood above, referring to Rebecca Watson:

    How was that ‘at a minimum misguided’? Isn’t she allowed to object to some cluless dood cornering her an elevator at 4 AM to proposition her after she expressly stated that she was tired and wanted to sleep, and had just finished giving an address in which she had expressed how annoying she finds such behaviour? I wonder what Krstulich thinks her mistake was, other than failing to fall down immediately and worship teh mighty pee-pee, of course?

    Hang on… she MADE A VIDEO giving her opinion. On youtube even. Isn’t that teh Free Speech these dudes keep banging on about? Or is Free Speech only a right accorded to real people guys?

  338. Johnny Pez:

    I’ve had a look around the shop and we’re fresh out of Yucatanian jaguars.

    Nitpick: Yucatecan.

  339. Antiochus Epiphanes:

    Think I’ll just take my lonely atheism and go elsewhere, thank you.

    Splitter.

  340. Improbable Joe:

    I know I’m late to the party, and I haven’t read all the comments yet… but the whole DMCA abuse thing was a big thing on YouTube a few years ago, and that’s ACTUAL unfair silencing of people’s voices. That’s different from the members of FtB deciding that T-f00tie isn’t a good fit for this blog network. You’d think F00l & The Gang would be able to tell the difference.

  341. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart, MD, PhD, DDS, Esq, OM:

    Brownian:

    I don’t know why xe’s saying such silly things, but xe’s no trolling moron.

    Okay, I’ll take you at your word for it.

    It was an awfully trollerific post, though.

  342. davidbohm:

    Loftus has written top 10 things he is against. top 3:

    1) Religious faith. My particular niche is arguing against Christianity, especially evangelicalism. Of course this means I am against pseudo-science and all faith-based reasoning in favor of evidence-based reasoning.

    2) Theocracies in their more extreme dictatorial forms as well as in elected officials and pundits within democracies like the US.

    3) Racism, Sexism, Misogyny, Homophobia and gay bashing. I am not diminishing these things by listing them all together. It’s just hard to know how to rank them. The common theme is that they stand in opposition to rich white heterosexual religious male power and privilege.

  343. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain:

    Oh what a lonely boy.

    More apologies.

    I am so very sorry.

  344. SC (Salty Current), OM:

    A different brand of penis pasta
    Super Fun Penis Candy
    Party Pecker Straws
    Blue Balls Penis Ice Cube Tray
    Crest 3-D White Advanced Vivid Whitening Strips

    I understand the penis novelty items, but a teeth whitening system?

    My guess: the first four are for the bachelorette party and the last for the wedding.

  345. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain:

    Loftus is against Racism, Sexism, Misogyny, Homophobia and gay bashing. yet he is angry at the people who are struggling against that.

  346. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    Think I’ll just take my lonely atheism and go elsewhere, thank you.

    Splitter.

    At least I died laughing.

    (Before the other jaguars got me.)

  347. Brownian:

    It was an awfully trollerific post, though.

    I can’t dispute that. But if memory seves, such posts are not hir usual MO.

  348. SC (Salty Current), OM:

    Think I’ll just take my lonely atheism and go elsewhere, thank you.

    I imagine the exit reel as Larry leaves the stage. It’s very short.

  349. Jafafa Hots:

    You really have to ask?

    Hey, the net can be tricky. I just accidentally triggered a Justicar/ScentedNectar tag team match on twitter. Didn’t even know it was Justicar I was trying to talk to. He accused me of using guilt by association.

    Even if I were the type to do that, in Justicar’s case it would be overkill. He insisted I only hold him accountable for his own words.

    Will do. So much to choose from.

  350. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain:

    Taking My Business Elsewhere

    This one is a good song.

  351. Jessa:

    Janine and SC: Yeah, I thought of that connection about five seconds after hitting “Submit”. My brain is working slowly today.

  352. Ace of Sevens:

    FTB isn’t YouTube or Wrodpress. If one of those places had kicked Thunderf00t off for being a shitty writer and intellectually dishonest, I would complain. FTB isn’t about letting everyone have their say, though. Kicking THunderf00t off is no more an abuse of Ed and PZ’s power than not inviting him in the first place would have been.

  353. "We Are Ing The Matrimonial Collective":

    Loftus has written top 10 things he is against. top 3

    So is rush Limbaugh. If you believe the way he tells it. You can’t magically decree yourself to be right or an ‘ally’

  354. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain:

    Jessa, we are all sluggish in the US right now.

    It is too damned hot!

  355. truebutnotuseful:

    feralboy12 @ #250 wrote:

    If you want to get real formal, it’s Mr. Thunder J. Foot, Jr., I think.
    I did once tell a troll to call me “Mr. 12″ but I suspect I would have become confused had he actually done so.

    Jr., you say? I bet he’s always telling people “please, call me Thunder. Mr. F00t is my father.”

  356. Johnny Pez:

    larryharnett, your atheism isn’t nearly as lonely as my atheism. My atheism is so lonely that it has to disbelieve in an inflatable God doll.

  357. Caine, Fleur du mal:

    Jafafa Hots:

    I just accidentally triggered a Justicar/ScentedNectar tag team match on twitter.

    Heh. Neither one of them has a hope in hells of matching wits with you.

  358. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain:

    Heh. Neither one of them has a hope in hells of matching wits with you.

    True. But the non stop tediousness will tear you up.

  359. Brownian:

    Heh. Neither one of them has a hope in hells of matching wits with you.

    LOL. That’s for sure. Go get ‘em, Jafafa!

  360. ImaginesABeach:

    I’m on my nook so can’t link but M.A. Melby blogs and sseems more likely to support Greta and Ophelia an PZ than t00t.

  361. Lofty:

    Sniff sniff
    Thunderfart is invited to the party
    Thunderfart lets off some huge stink bombs
    Thunderfart is asked to desist
    Thunderfart refuses
    Thunderfart does some more
    Thunderfart asked to leave
    Thunderfart’s anal efflusions now waft where they are valued
    Everyone’s happy except for the Thunderfart Appreciation Society.
    I love FTB! Long live extractor fans.

  362. gshelley:

    @Hayden
    You are wasting your time. Anybody with any reading comprehension can tell you aren’t defending TF, but to many of the people here, what he said was so bad that any attack is justified, it doesn’t matter if PZ responded to what TF actually wrote, all they care about is that he criticized TF. You say “neither came out well” and they read “Both were as bad as each other”, you say “some of PZ’s responses were to things TF didn’t say” and they read “TF did nothing wrong”
    They aren’t mature adults and trying to reason with them as though they are is not going to achieve anything.

  363. Gregory Greenwood:

    Pteryxx @ 337;

    Hang on… she MADE A VIDEO giving her opinion. On youtube even. Isn’t that teh Free Speech these dudes keep banging on about? Or is Free Speech only a right accorded to real people guys?

    I get the impression that these MRA charmers think that free speech is a bonus perk that comes with a bloke’s standard issue pee-pee.

    Or possibly they think that free speech is not a right accorded to a person as a whole, but rather is a right specifically of the peen itself. It certainly seems like they employ some organ other than their brain when they compose their inane comments…

  364. "We Are Ing The Matrimonial Collective":

    Comment by gshelley blocked. [unkill]​[show comment]

    Because i’m just that intolerant of your free speech

  365. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain:

    I get the impression that these MRA charmers think that free speech is a bonus perk that comes with a bloke’s standard issue pee-pee.

    The penis is a Talking Stick.

    I!
    Should!
    Shut!
    Up!
    Now!

  366. dalehusband:

    Thunderf00t strikes out at P Z Myers again:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o1mLHdTsmPc

    Baseball pun intended! I did not know that P Z was the absolute ruler of Freethought Blogs!

    Seriously, Thunderf00t seems to have lost his mind!

  367. SC (Salty Current), OM:

    True. But the non stop tediousness will tear you up.

    And bluharmony lies like Rangel on a beach chair, which is also exasperating.

  368. christophburschka:

    hope you get raped to death by Jaguars in the Yucatan.

    Still unfunny, but points for originality I guess.

  369. Caine, Panthera Susurratrix:

    gshelley:

    Anybody with any reading comprehension can tell you aren’t defending TF, but to many of the people here, what he said was so bad that any attack is justified, it doesn’t matter if PZ responded to what TF actually wrote, all they care about is that he criticized TF.

    You should run off right now and hit up NG or TLC or Discovery for a show on your amazing psychic abilities! Truly. You’re just like all the rest of the amazing psychics – you don’t get a single thing right.

  370. speedweasel:

    Hi all,

    Can someone please point me to the considered and substantive exchanges on this whole PZ/TFoot/FTB thing? I’m arriving late and I get the feeling that the show is over, the quality commentariat have left and this thread contains the drunk teenagers still hanging around in the parking lot.

    My concern is noted, etc.

  371. alanwilliamson:

    When Thunderf00t was on FTB, he was being a total dick and acting like a child. His writing was rubbish. That is why I thought the owner of the site kicked him off.

  372. Caine, Panthera Susurratrix:

    SC:

    And bluharmony lies like Rangel on a beach chair, which is also exasperating.

    All bluharmony has in life is lies.

  373. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain:

    And bluharmony lies like Rangel on a beach chair, which is also exasperating.

    Eew!

    I am still trying to delete that image from my brain. It does not help that The Daily Show still likes to use it.

  374. Caine, Panthera Susurratrix:

    alanwilliamson:

    When Thunderf00t was on FTB, he was being a total dick

    Just so you know, we don’t use gendered slurs or insults here. Stick with asshole. Everyone has one.

  375. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    Can someone please point me to the considered and substantive exchanges on this whole PZ/TFoot/FTB thing?

    Right this way: http://google.com/

  376. rorschach:

    @ 337,

    Hang on… she MADE A VIDEO giving her opinion.

    No, she made a video about moving house and unpacking boxes. It lasted 5 minutes, was rather tedious to watch, and in it she made a 20-second offhand remark : “Guys, don’t do that”.

  377. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    methferret,

    I’m arriving late and I get the feeling that the show is over,

    It is.

    the quality commentariat have left

    Have you read this thread? It’s hilarious. Funniest in the last month at least.

    and this thread contains the drunk teenagers still hanging around in the parking lot.

    What, you don’t like for us to have fun?

  378. alanwilliamson:

    Thunderf00t -Trollin’ and immaturity for the win!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4sXT6YqS_Ow

  379. keithroragen:

    It is a shame. I am fairly new to atheism and I was ushered here largely by the two of you. I probably would have been content to be one of those “dictionary atheists” you despise so much, but for seeing the discrimination and hatred directed at atheists. I was heartened to see in increase in skepticism and a decrease in religiosity. I was excited to see a movement coalesce that might hasten the advance of a more secular society. Now I see the movement torn asunder over the the relative importance of sexual harassment policies at conferences. It is a shame.

    I have no desire to take sides on any of these issues. I think it is a bit petulant to continue to take shots at Tf00t in this forum when you have banned him from being able to reply, but what is really disheartening is to see you and your followers go after Tf00t’s fans. I count myself among them. I can no more divorce myself from the vitriol directed at fans of Thunderf00t than I can the vitriol directed at atheists. I hope this will pass soon.

  380. "We Are Ing The Matrimonial Collective":

    Just so you know, we don’t use gendered slurs or insults here. Stick with asshole. Everyone has one.

    Except apparently Thunderfoot

  381. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    I think it is a bit petulant to continue to take shots at Tf00t in this forum when you have banned him from being able to reply

    Well see you’re wrong about that.

    He has not been banned.

    He could comment here if he wanted to.

  382. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    Now I see the movement torn asunder over the the relative importance of sexual harassment policies at conferences. It is a shame.

    Because to you, atheism per se is more important than women’s safe participation in atheist social spheres.

  383. Caine, Panthera Susurratrix:

    keithroragen:

    Now I see the movement torn asunder over the the relative importance of sexual harassment policies at conferences. It is a shame.

    Relative importance? What is that, Keith? How relevant sexism and sexual harassment is to those with penises?

    I have no desire to take sides on any of these issues.

    Okay, thanks for letting us know you don’t give a shit about 51% of the population. That was terribly…irrelevant.

  384. "We Are Ing The Matrimonial Collective":

    I have no desire to take sides on any of these issues. I think it is a bit petulant to continue to take shots at Tf00t in this forum when you have banned him from being able to reply, but what is really disheartening is to see you and your followers go after Tf00t’s fans. I count myself among them. I can no more divorce myself from the vitriol directed at fans of Thunderf00t than I can the vitriol directed at atheists. I hope this will pass soon.

    You’re a fucking idiot.

  385. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    considered and substantive exchanges

    You’re obviously just here to be stupid and insulting, but here’s a nice breakdown of some of blunderf00t’s wrong for anybody who’s actually interested.

  386. Josh, Official Yucatan Jaguar:

    Jeezis christ on a cracker but it’s fucking sticky and disgusting and hot and horrible. Only good thing about the weather is it’ll probly keep the draguars inactive tonight so my heels will be safe.

  387. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain:

    ThunderingFool has been commenting about this. Just hot here.

    But look at it this way, he can use the responses on YouTube to prove that he is still correct.

  388. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    pharyngula DOT wikia DOT com/wiki/Deep_Rifts

  389. "We Are Ing The Matrimonial Collective":

    Seriously, you expect me to feel bad about being mean to TFoot’s fans when

    a) His fans were a huge problem and proved to be assholes
    b) You’ve given me reason to dislike you personally

    Hell, all you’ve shown me is that I was 100% right in judging all of Tfoot’s mouthbreather fan base as utter oblivious idiots

  390. dianne:

    Thanks for your time!

    Does anyone find it odd to sign off a letter that includes insults, slander, and rape threats with “thanks”?

  391. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    I have no desire to take sides on any of these issues.

    Thanks. I’m always so glad to hear about assholes’ apathy to behavior that disproportionately affects my life because it’s not their problem.

    what is really disheartening is to see you and your followers go after Tf00t’s fans.

    HAHAHAHAHA.
    I hereby nominate you for most inane and oblivious concern troll of the thread.

  392. "We Are Ing The Matrimonial Collective":

    Seriously, it was just last night that I was thinking “you know people may have a point, why am I so hair triggered and impulsively snappy at people. Occasionally that leads me into putting my foot in my mouth. Why don’t I slow down and start treating people nicer” then someone like keith shows up and I smack myself in the head saying “OH RIGHT NOW I REMEMBER!”

  393. Josh, Official Yucatan Jaguar:

    Now I see the movement torn asunder over the the relative importance of sexual harassment policies at conferences. It is a shame.

    And there was rending of garments and gnashing of teeth.

  394. Rev. BigDumbChimp:

    The misinformation and misunderstanding of the ThunderFoot incident is working its way to Great Desecration levels.

    Seriously people, read up before you open your mouth er.. keyboard and look like a giant fool.

  395. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    I can no more divorce myself from the vitriol directed at fans of Thunderf00t than I can the vitriol directed at atheists.

    Well, a lot of Thunderf00t’s fans are really terrible people, racist sexist stupid pieces of shit.

    If you’re one of Thunderf00t’s few not-racist not-sexist not-stupid fans then surely you’ve noticed this already.

    So if the criticism happens to not apply to you, don’t get all offended. We’re just talking about the vast majority of Thunderf00t’s fans who are sexist racist warmongers.

    But you, hey, I’m sure you’re cool. You’re not like the rest of ‘em. Right?

    Right?

  396. jenniferphillips:

    I can no more divorce myself from the vitriol directed at fans of Thunderf00t than I can the vitriol directed at atheists.

    But apparently the vitriol directed at women, and the token males who consider them equal members of society, is a-ok with you. Thanks for laying out your priorities so plainly, dude.

    And Jeebus, for the eleventybillionth time, TF is not fucking banned. He can comment here if he wants to. He can make 100 rebuttal videos per hour if he wants to. He can start his own fucking blog if he wants to. The total eradication of his 1st amendment rights have been greatly exaggerated.

  397. SamStrange: bottom-feeding, work-shy peasant:

    I have no desire to take sides on any of these issues.

    Well you can fuck right off then. Intelligent, compassionate people understand that it’s necessary to take sides when you’re talking about justice. One important aspect of justice and equality for women is the ability for women to participate fully in public life, such as conferences.

    So fuck you. You’re one more Thunderfoot fan who sucks. Just like Thunderfoot.

    DEEEEEEEP RIIIIIFTS!

  398. sheeptick:

    “Thunderf00t’s angry rabble”

    Surely you’re not implying that Thunderf00t condones or is somehow responsible for this trollish post are you? He certainly doesn’t deserve ownership of every angry fool on the internet rising to his defense. This is the INTERNET after all. Examples of unrestrained viciousness leaping from the id of the anonymous, or at the very least, emotionally removed individuals typing from the safety and sanctuary of their home computers is not an unknown phenomena. Alas.

    I really haven’t been following this fur ball very closely and obliquely experiencing it unfold this way makes my heart sink. I happen to love and respect all of the actors (I suppose I’ll call you) that I happen to know about. Thunderf00t, Rebecca Watson, Ophelia Benson, Blaghag, the Skepchicks, DJ Grothe, et. al. and especially you PZ. Everyone of you have been lights in my life that have helped me understand and develop a more articulate way of expressing my thoughts on atheism and skepticism as a worldview. Such shrewdness, competence, moxie and humor! Now look at you all. In-group / Out-group primate baloney.

    I don’t know exactly what thunderf00t has said that caused you to shun him from this little (but potent) group of yours but it strikes me that you invited him into Free Thought Blogs for the admirable qualities he possesses in the first place. He’s been such a tremendous contributor to this cause of ours, why couldn’t this have been settled by discourse, by entreaty, and finally by tolerant consensus? And what’s so wrong with having an outlier in the mix? Maybe he’d come around to your perspective if you gave him a chance. Perhaps this internecine beef could have provided a way for all of us to hone our arguments.

    Has his entire character been impugned by a week or two of impassioned disagreement? I should like to weigh an individual’s worth on the whole of one’s work and contributions and not on a single litmus test. Yes?

    Get on the phone all of you. Talk. Work it out and then come back to exemplify our ideals. All of you are better than this.

  399. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    dianne,

    Does anyone find it odd to sign off a letter that includes insults, slander, and rape threats with “thanks”?

    It’s probably a deliberate joke.

    When I send scathing letters to advertisers I’m always gushingly polite at the very end.

  400. Caine, Panthera Susurratrix:

    I can no more divorce myself from the vitriol directed at fans of Thunderf00t than I can the vitriol directed at atheists.

    However, sustained vitriol aimed at women is just dandy, amirite?

    I’m about to do some susurring up in here.

  401. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    I really haven’t been following this fur ball very closely and obliquely experiencing it unfold this way makes my heart sink.

    Oh my fuck! Why do you do this? Why do you come into this thread and post your fucking two screens of whining schlock when you SELF-ADMITTEDLY DO NOT UNDERSTAND THE FUCKING SITUATION? Fuck off!

  402. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    sheepdip,

    “Thunderf00t’s angry rabble”

    Surely you’re not implying that Thunderf00t condones or is somehow responsible for this trollish post are you?

    Not necessarily. Can you read?

    Thunderf00t’s followers, they are angry rabble, are they not?

    Whether they got to be more that way as a result of following him, now there’s a question for science!

  403. Josh, Official Yucatan Jaguar:

    Get on the phone all of you. Talk. Work it out and then come back to exemplify our ideals.

    You admit you can’t be bothered to read just why this happened, yet you have no problem giving orders to the participants. Go fuck yourself.

  404. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain:

    Get on the phone all of you. Talk. Work it out and then come back to exemplify our ideals. All of you are better than this.

    Great. An other both sides are bad now.

    I ask you for your wisdom, sheeptick. How much harassment should a woman put up with before she can complain? How much should a man ignore before he decides to he can side with the harassed women.

    Please, fucking help us work this out.

    You are better than giving us an empty lecture!

  405. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    I don’t think this would fly where I live though.

    and where’s that, for reference? (I have this weird impression you’re from Germany, but don’t quite recall)

    anyway, the policy and resulting drama I’m referring to is from Britain, from 2009*: http://uk.reuters.com/article/2009/09/16/us-britain-shoes-heels-idUKTRE58F3WL20090916

    *there’s some new drama about EU regulations and hairdressers, but fuck if I know what that’s about, since the articles on the first page of google are dailymail & friends

    I think it is a bit petulant to continue to take shots at Tf00t in this forum when you have banned him from being able to reply

    he isn’t banned from replying, so you’re just making shit up.

    what is really disheartening is to see you and your followers go after Tf00t’s fans.

    receiving e-mails != “going after”

    can no more divorce myself from the vitriol directed at fans of Thunderf00t

    TF fans are a systemically disprivileged social group? (or differently: false equivalence)

  406. jenniferphillips:

    What is up with all the hand-wringing, disillusioned commenters turning up here? I mean, Hand-wringers, does this usually work for you? I’m honestly curious as to what you hope to accomplish by such entreaties.

  407. Rev. BigDumbChimp:

    I don’t know exactly what thunderf00t has said that caused you to shun him from this little (but potent) group of yours but it strikes me that you invited him into Free Thought Blogs for the admirable qualities he possesses in the first place.

    Then perhaps you should go read about it before you come in talking about shit you obviously know exactly nothing about.

    Don’t you think?

  408. Rev. BigDumbChimp:

    sigh

    I don’t know exactly what thunderf00t has said that caused you to shun him from this little (but potent) group of yours but it strikes me that you invited him into Free Thought Blogs for the admirable qualities he possesses in the first place.

    Then perhaps you should go read about it before you come in talking about shit you obviously know exactly nothing about.

    Don’t you think?

  409. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    Get on the phone all of you. Talk.

    another fuckweasel who thinks real-time communication is somehow magically better than a medium where you get to take your time to respond and can’t be interrupted.

  410. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:

    They aren’t mature adults and trying to reason with them as though they are is not going to achieve anything.

    *checks AARP card*
    If you lie about mature adults not being here, what else will you lie about? Everything in your post is my conclusion, based on you being caught out in a blatant lie. Do try not be funny when your own hypocrisy is so easily exposed. It backfires, making you look immature and ridiculous…

  411. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    I don’t know exactly what thunderf00t has said

    if you don’t know what this is about, why are you in this conversation?

  412. Caine, Panthera Susurratrix:

    sheeptick:

    All of you are better than this.

    Here’s a suggestion, Cupcake: you run right off with this message of luv to Tfoot and his fans at yootube, then deliver it to the Slyme Pit. Let us know what happens, ‘kay?

  413. John Morales:

    sheeptick:

    Has his [thunderpod's] entire character been impugned by a week or two of impassioned disagreement?

    Revealed, not impugned.

    Get on the phone all of you. Talk. Work it out and then come back to exemplify our ideals.

    They did, thus the booting out of the incompetent one.

    (Sheesh!)

  414. rorschach:

    I don’t know exactly what thunderf00t has said that caused you to shun him from this little (but potent) group of yours but

    Stop right there. Have enough self-respect and respect to the commenters here to read up, get a clue, then come back and give us your valued opinion.

  415. SamStrange: bottom-feeding, work-shy peasant:

    Now look at you all. In-group / Out-group primate baloney.

    We are primates, and it is in-group/out-group dynamics, but that doesn’t mean it’s baloney.

    Try again, this time after informing yourself and putting your thinking cap on.

  416. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:

    He’s been such a tremendous contributor to this cause of ours, why couldn’t this have been settled by discourse, by entreaty, and finally by tolerant consensus?

    Because that would require TF to admit he went overboard, needed to back down instead of doubling down, and generally act with more maturity on his part than he was capable of. So, why make a fool of yourself pretending he is more mature than what the evidence shows. All the TF defenders keep ending up with egg of their face with facts. Why don’t you lose the ‘tude, and save your face?

  417. Tethys:

    I don’t know exactly what thunderf00t has said that caused you to shun him

    *headdesk*
    You may as well just come right out and state:

    “I am an ignorant idiot, hear me pontificate!”

  418. sheeptick:

    “another fuckweasel”

    Yeah I’m a fucking monster. No question.

    “somehow magically better”

    So you’re suggesting misunderstandings that happen in print cannot be resolved by real time or better yet, face to face conversation?

  419. "We Are Ing The Matrimonial Collective":

    Now why did TFoot have to be so mean to that nice Canadian Christian boy? Despite their disagreements why didn’t they talk it out like adults rather than get the DMCA involved and issuing ultimatums!?

  420. "We Are Ing The Matrimonial Collective":

    You know I am not privy to the back talk here, but I’m going to take a guess that dialogue would have been easier if TF didn’t ignore e-mails and instead kept digging his hole deeper.

  421. speedweasel:

    @Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy #385.

    Thanks for the link. I guess I was just being snarky after getting halfway down the thread and despairing as to the calibre of conversation on Pharyngula.

    I apologise if my comment was casually insulting to the thread participants.

  422. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain:

    You are not helping your case, sheeptick. People have addressed your self admitted ignorant concerns. And yet you will not answer in kind.

  423. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    keithroragen,

    Now I see the movement torn asunder

    This is always an amusement to me. What exactly is it supposed to mean?

    It is so obviously a reaction like “Mommy and Daddy are fighting!” Do these people think that because two of their Atheist Parents are disagreeing, they are going to get a divorce and that is going to be The End of Atheism?

    So PZ and Thunderfoot have an argument. What results do you think are going to come of it?

    Me, I have this totally unsubstantiated gut feeling that it’s a good thing, because it gets more people thinking about sexism, but honestly I really can’t quantify that. Null hypothesis is that it makes no difference and I can’t think of anything that suggests otherwise. Regarding the general discussions about sexual harassment at conferences, American Atheists did come out with a good conference policy, so that’s a positive result in general near this issue, but it wasn’t a result of the dispute with Thunderfoot.

    How does this actually “hurt atheism”? What does it mean when you say “the movement is torn asunder”? It’s so obviously just your gut feeling of discomfort — nothing necessarily follows from that. Fucking make a substantive argument otherwise, if you think I’m wrong.

  424. truebutnotuseful:

    sheeptick wrote @ #398:

    I really haven’t been following this fur ball very closely

    I don’t know exactly what thunderf00t has said

    I for one am glad you’re here to tell us all how you feel about a situation you admit to knowing nothing about, and fully intend to give your opinion every gram of weight it deserves.

  425. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    Yeah I’m a fucking monster. No question.

    you’re confused.

    So you’re suggesting misunderstandings that happen in print cannot be resolved by real time or better yet, face to face conversation?

    they cannot be resolved better than in writing, no.

    what the fuck is it with privileging a form of conversation in which you can be emotionally manipulated, talked over, yelled at, interrupted, and have to try to think on the fly without the luxury of having the time to compose your argument?

  426. SamStrange: bottom-feeding, work-shy peasant:

    So you’re suggesting misunderstandings that happen in print cannot be resolved by real time or better yet, face to face conversation?

    No, your interlocutor suggested that face-to-face or telephone interactions don’t automatically (“magically”) resolve disputes better than written interaction does.

    Do you always argue this dishonestly?

  427. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:

    So you’re suggesting misunderstandings that happen in print cannot be resolved by real time or better yet, face to face conversation?

    That requires the immature acting party, in this case TF, to back down. Until you show he was capable and willing to do so, you don’t have a case. TF was playing hardball, and it backfired.

  428. Lyn M: hysterical feminazi fembot watsonista dramatic name caller:

    @ Audley Darkheart #151

    Seriously, PZ. I think you owe me, Cipher, and What a Maroon our own blogs. In the interest of free expression and whatnot.

    I should get two. My nym is considerably longer.

  429. Rev. BigDumbChimp:

    sheeptick,

    Some advice.

    When you come into a highly charged forum and basically scream

    I have no clue what you are all discussing but I heard some bad things and I think you are all very mean

    It doesn’t say much good about you.

    SO my advice is to at least have a clue what you are talking about instead of coming in waving your arms and yelling

    LOOK AT MY IGNORANCE AND INCREDULITY! PAY ATTENTION TO THEM!

  430. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    It is so obviously a reaction like “Mommy and Daddy are fighting!” Do these people think that because two of their Atheist Parents are disagreeing, they are going to get a divorce and that is going to be The End of Atheism?

    I loled, but …probably.

  431. "We Are Ing The Matrimonial Collective":

    No, your interlocutor suggested that face-to-face or telephone interactions don’t automatically (“magically”) resolve disputes better than written interaction does.

    Do you always argue this dishonestly?

    Only in text.

  432. Tinjoe:

    you invited him into Free Thought Blogs for the admirable qualities he possesses in the first place

    And then he proceeded to step into something he doesn’t understand, was dismissive of people’s first hand experience, knowledge, and criticisms. He argued in bad faith, and then he turned to his YouTube community to back him up with a laughably ridiculous poll.

    Whatever goodwill got him the gig, evaporated when he double (or triple) downed on his initial post. It really doesn’t matter that he wrote poorly, he didn’t seem to be honestly engaging with anyone that was telling him “You’re wrong and here is why”

    So until you go back and read a dozen blog posts, and a couple hundred comments from people who already have, kindly keep your ignorance to yourself please.

  433. keithroragen:

    ixchel,

    I think it will result in two factions squabbling with each other instead of working together towards a common goal.

    Please tell me I am wrong.

  434. "We Are Ing The Matrimonial Collective":

    If we get a schism that can make a less monochrome atheism then I will get my jackhammer and pound away at that fault line!

  435. Antiochus Epiphanes:

    [ot]

    You should run off right now and hit up NG or TLC or Discovery for a show on your amazing psychic abilities!

    Speaking of NG, the slime pit has left the Borg for sectors unchartered.*

    As you were.

    *you probably all knew that.

  436. Antiochus Epiphanes:

    Sigh…uncharted

  437. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    Get on the phone all of you. Talk.

    What sheepdip means to say is “I don’t like watching my Atheist Parents fight in public; it makes me feel like the Christian Kids At School have Better Families and they look down on me.”

    (These are understandable feelings when little kids feel them as regards an actual family. It’s not okay to carry over this childhood response to every other public dispute between “big people” that happens later in life. Some fights really should be public, because we are trying to publicly change the culture.)

  438. "We Are Ing The Matrimonial Collective":

    you invited him into Free Thought Blogs for the admirable qualities he possesses in the first place

    Which I might point out was a stupid idea

    a) It ignored some troubling negatives
    b) the talents he had, were not in fucking prose and PZ never got a preview writing sample. This was the equivalent of inviting a mime to a barber shop quartet

  439. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain:

    So, keithroragen, answer this simple question. How much harassment should women put up with for the sake of atheist unity?

  440. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    I think it will result in two factions squabbling with each other instead of working together towards a common goal.

    what is this common goal in this case, and how is it more important than the minimization of sexual harassment of women, that it’s more important to sweep all disagreements about the latter under the carpet?

  441. SamStrange: bottom-feeding, work-shy peasant:

    I think it will result in two factions squabbling with each other instead of working together towards a common goal.

    Please tell me I am wrong.

    You are wrong.

    The Thunderfoot faction was never interested in working towards any common goals.

    As demonstrated by Mr. F00t (hee hee) himself, and his fans too, their only goal is feeling better and smarter than anyone else because that is part of their “skeptic/atheist” identity.

    Any more questions?

  442. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    keithroragen,

    I think it will result in two factions squabbling with each other instead of working together towards a common goal.

    There are white supremacist atheists over at Stormfront.

    Do you think it would be a good idea for us to “work together” with them toward “a common goal”?

    (Hint: if you’re thinking mmmmmmmaybe, then you’re wrong, because we don’t really have a common goal with them; we want to make atheism a movement where people of color can feel welcome.)

  443. John Morales:

    keithroragen:

    Please tell me I am wrong.

    You’re wrong.

  444. Caine, Panthera Susurratrix:

    keithroragen:

    Please tell me I am wrong.

    You’re wrong.

    AE:

    Speaking of NG, the slime pit has left the Borg for sectors unchartered.*

    They’ve made no secret of their location.

  445. "We Are Ing The Matrimonial Collective":

    Would you really think so well of TF if he stopped addressing creationism claims because PZ was mean to him?

  446. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    I think it will result in two factions squabbling with each other instead of working together towards a common goal.

    Yeah, it would be much better if one group of atheists (women) would just put up with being made to feel unwelcome and treated like shit and not make such a fuss about it. Because common goals! And you don’t want to take sides!
    Here’s a hint: Just because you’re a spineless little shit, that doesn’t mean you get to expect us to be.

  447. "We Are Ing The Matrimonial Collective":

    So is the Slymepit password protected?

  448. bannedatheist:

    Hiya Josh, Yucatan Jaguar of DOOOOOMMMM. RE #37… It might be my fault for bandying the term “banned” around all too loosely. I never meant it to go this far. :D

    But seriously, fellow Banned Atheists… if you’re reading this, check it out: You got banned, but it’s just the internets. You have not been silenced. I don’t feel silenced, and hell, it’s my fucking username.

    I got banned from DemocraticUnderground.com for engaging in an ad hominem attack on a bigoted troll. My crime? I called him a “bigot” and a “troll” and I got PPR’d from my favorite forum. Did I then mount a troll campaign to discredit DU?

    Fuck no. I started my own blog. I have not been silenced, and neither has TF. I didn’t LIKE getting banned, but the fact is I DID knowingly violate DU’s TOS, which states that ad hominem attacks would get me banned.

    I truly think FtB would benefit from this type of policy in the comments thread. It gets nastier in here than it ever does in the Religion forum on DU, and it’s mostly all atheists. WTF?!?

    I might wear “Banned” on my sleeve, but I wouldn’t think twice about banning, for instance, #397 who writes, “Well you can fuck right off then.” See that’s an ad hominem attack that isn’t conducive to intellectual dialogue. It would get one PPR’d from DU in a hot second. Pretty scary when Catholics and atheists can debate more intelligently and civilly on DU than atheists and atheists at FtB.

    If you have to get personal, you just lost the argument. If this was my site, you would also get banned. If two people were both getting personal, they would BOTH get banned.

    That’s how I unpack it, Josh. What say ye?

    Some of us atheists can wear “banned” as a badge of honor, because we took our lumps… but kept our perspective.

    Rock on.

  449. Caine, Panthera Susurratrix:

    I think it will result in two factions squabbling with each other instead of working together towards a common goal.

    Oh, do tell. What is this common goal? Please state it, briefly. You’ve already stated there is only one goal, so keep that in mind.

  450. SC (Salty Current), OM:

    Speaking of NG, the slime pit has left the Borg for sectors unchartered.*

    As you were.

    *you probably all knew that.

    I didn’t. What do you mean?

  451. sheeptick:

    “Because that would require TF to admit he went overboard, needed to back down instead of doubling down, and generally act with more maturity on his part than he was capable of. So, why make a fool of yourself pretending he is more mature than what the evidence shows. All the TF defenders keep ending up with egg of their face with facts. Why don’t you lose the ‘tude, and save your face?”

    Perhaps he would admit given the time. I do know the he’s been a pretty great guy for quite a long time and I find it hard to believe that his view that this is a small problem rather than a large one somehow erases all of that. Why was he invited in the first place?

    I understand his plea for quietism towards this problem of sexism, threatening and obnoxious behavior can be infuriating but I don’t think he’s unsympathetic to the problem root and branch because of that. I believe he said so didn’t he? Call the cops on the offenders if warranted. Remove the offending oafs from the conference outright. He’s not advocating sexist behavior is he?

    I don’t think it marks him as an awful person because he doesn’t think as you. People can be good and wrong at the same time. For every thunderf00t there appears to be 10 or 15 against amongst the Free thought bloggers. Talk about small problems. Allow the honest dissent, as long as it’s honestly given.

  452. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    If you have to get personal, you just lost the argument.

    No. If you’re so intellectually weak that you can’t understand an argument because someone got personal making it, you’re not worth arguing with.

  453. "We Are Ing The Matrimonial Collective":

    @bannedatheist

    One might argue that you just insulted them and didn’t do an Ad hom arguement and thus didn’t voilate their terms. But they’re assholes

    I might wear “Banned” on my sleeve, but I wouldn’t think twice about banning, for instance, #397 who writes, “Well you can fuck right off then.” See that’s an ad hominem attack that isn’t conducive to intellectual dialogue. It would get one PPR’d from DU in a hot second. Pretty scary when Catholics and atheists can debate more intelligently and civilly on DU than atheists and atheists at FtB.

    Oh never mind. You don’t understand it either and are an idiot.

    Seriously fuck this civility idea in the goddamn eye socket with a barbed wire condom or chainsaw strap on.

  454. Caine, Panthera Susurratrix:

    Bannedatheist:

    You got banned, but it’s just the internets.

    Are you simply attempting to demonstrate stupidity in action? Thunderfoot was not banned – he can comment anywhere he likes at FTB.

  455. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    Sheeptick, I’m tired of your ignorant bullshit. If you don’t understand the fucking situation, shut the fuck up about it. Stop telling people who HAVE followed it closely because they’ve been fucking involved in it how you think things are based on your total fucking lack of research. It’s worthless and insulting.

  456. "We Are Ing The Matrimonial Collective":

    TF was banned is going to be the new RW freaked out and humiliated a socially awkward guy.

    Narrative being rewritten. Amazing how skeptics literally cannot recognize this shift even over the course of what, three weeks at most?

  457. Caine, Panthera Susurratrix:

    Ing:

    So is the Slymepit password protected?

    Doesn’t seem to be, I didn’t go poking around.

    SC, see the link @444. NG came down on the slimepit, so they’ve moved out of the Sciborg collective.

  458. bannedatheist:

    Just reread my #448 and last few sentences included some “you”s. Please note these are rhetorical “you”s — as in “one could say” == “you could say” etc. Not pointed at any one individual.

    Just sayin’ — FtB would get better if they would put a posting policy in place that states that those engaging in personal attacks will get the ban.

  459. sheeptick:

    Categorical no. Fine got ya. More than you know.

  460. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:

    I do know the he’s been a pretty great guy for quite a long time and I find it hard to believe that his view that this is a small problem rather than a large one somehow erases all of that.

    Given your apologetics for him, I don’t believe a word of your claims. That’s what you get when you don’t do your homework, and find out the FACTS before making as ass of yourself with ignorance.

    but I don’t think he’s unsympathetic to the problem root and branch because of that.

    His behavior and words speak otherwise. Quit making a fool of yourself defending the indefensible. It only makes you look bad.

    Call the cops on the offenders if warranted.

    Why should cops be called when it is against the terms of attending? Why should they be called except to eject someone who won’t leave when asked? You aren’t making sense…

    I don’t think it marks him as an awful person because he doesn’t think as you. People can be good and wrong at the same time.

    Most of us here don’t think he is necessarily a bad person except he is not sympathetic toward women being harassed and how to stop it. Quit making a fool of yourself defending him. He can do that himself.

  461. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    Just sayin’ — FtB would get better if they would put a posting policy in place that states that those engaging in personal attacks will get the ban.

    Your bare, bullshit assertion is noted.

  462. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    bannedatheist,

    I wouldn’t think twice about banning, for instance, #397 who writes, “Well you can fuck right off then.” See that’s an ad hominem attack that isn’t conducive to intellectual dialogue.

    Well, what was #397 in reply to. Let’s check.

    I have no desire to take sides on any of these issues.

    Well you can fuck right off then. Intelligent, compassionate people understand that it’s necessary to take sides when you’re talking about justice. One important aspect of justice and equality for women is the ability for women to participate fully in public life, such as conferences.

    So fuck you. You’re one more Thunderfoot fan who sucks. Just like Thunderfoot.

    DEEEEEEEP RIIIIIFTS!

    Nope, I disagree. That’s healthy intellectual dialogue. Some people should fuck right off, and Sam has potentially identified one.

    (I hold out a very tiny little hope that keithroragen is going to learn something here about why atheism plus anti-sexism needs to fight against atheism plus sexism, and why the former is better than the other. But until keithroragen learns this, Sam has made a valid call.)

  463. sheeptick:

    “cupcake”

    “Here’s a suggestion, Cupcake: you run right off with this message of luv to Tfoot and his fans at yootube, then deliver it to the Slyme Pit. Let us know what happens, ‘kay?”

    It’s a terrible affliction my naivete. Do you always diminish people in these interactions?

  464. bannedatheist:

    See the #454, “Are you simply attempting to demonstrate stupidity in action?” would get one banned from DU in under five minutes…

    I’m saying — GOOD!! Ban them! Ban TF!! Hell, I’d ban you, Caine!

    You clearly misunderstood me, and then engaged in ad homimem attacks on me personally. That’s exactly what I’m talking about. A sane policy that everyone knows about SHOULD include requiring civil discourse, meaning one can’t just start hurling insults around willy-nilly. I didn’t engage in any such personal attacks.

    I also have thick skin. Calling me names makes me happy because it makes the name-caller look like the tool they are.

  465. Ace of Sevens:

    @451. This isn’t the first Internet fight that THunderf00t’s been in. Can you name any examples where he backed down and admitted any degree of fault?

  466. "We Are Ing The Matrimonial Collective":

    Just sayin’ — FtB would get better if they would put a posting policy in place that states that those engaging in personal attacks will get the ban.

    Oh yes that’s the best thing for dialogue! Draconian moderation that punishes heated debate.

    Cause everyone loves thanksgiving so much that they want to make every single experience on the net a recreation of grinding your teeth and pretending you don’t hate the absolute fuckstick sitting across from you talking about how Obama should just show his birth certificate

  467. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    It’s a terrible affliction my naivete. Do you always diminish people in these interactions?

    Do you always presume to lecture people on things they understand better than you do?
    ‘Cause let me tell you, that would be some funny shit to watch.

  468. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    . A sane policy that everyone knows about SHOULD include requiring civil discourse, meaning one can’t just start hurling insults around willy-nilly. I didn’t engage in any such personal attacks.

    How about you stop asserting stupid shit for five seconds and read the actual standards and practices here, and thereafter reflect on the fact that different people value different things?

  469. John Morales:

    bannedatheist:

    Just sayin’ — FtB would get better if they would put a posting policy in place that states that those engaging in personal attacks will get the ban.

    Yeah, better for the trolls.

    (bah)

    sheeptick:

    Perhaps he would admit given the time.

    Exceedingly doubtful.

    (The trajectory of his posting here strongly indicates otherwise)

  470. Antiochus Epiphanes:

    [

    SC, see the link @444. NG came down on the slimepit, so they’ve moved out of the Sciborg collective.

    Sure, but I didn't chart it. Did Ngeo really slam the door? It was kind of hard to tell wtf was going on. Caine, if you did the homework on this, the kind thing to do is not make me, youl know...poke around in tthere. Cuz I'm not going to. But I wanna know.
    ]

  471. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    If you have to get personal, you just lost the argument.

    Huh. I guess Christopher Hitchens never won a single argument.

  472. SC (Salty Current), OM:

    SC, see the link @444. NG came down on the slimepit, so they’ve moved out of the Sciborg collective.

    I’d rather not go to their link, but that’s great news (not totally unexpected). Seems like just a few short weeks ago Abbie was saying how cool with it all NatGeo was.

  473. What a Maroon, el papa ateo:

    I think it will result in two factions squabbling with each other instead of working together towards a common goal.

    Here are some of my goals:
    I want AGW to be stopped and reversed.
    I want my kids to have a fruitful and happy life.
    I want everyone’s bodily autonomy to be respected.
    I want everyone to be equal, regardless of superficial attributes like skin color or religious belief or gender.
    I want war to end.
    I want the Red Sox to win the World Series.
    I want everyone to have sufficient food, drink, shelter, and health care to live a happy and productive life.
    I want the world to be safe for everyone to wander through without fear of being attacked.
    I want no to mean no.
    I want to live half the year in Lisbon and half in Boston.
    I want people to stop believing superstitious nonsense.

    I doubt there are many people in the world who share all my goals. But if I had to sacrifice the last goal to achieve the others, I’d do it without hesitation.

  474. SamStrange: bottom-feeding, work-shy peasant:

    I might wear “Banned” on my sleeve,

    But you do.

    but I wouldn’t think twice about banning, for instance, #397 who writes, “Well you can fuck right off then.” See that’s an ad hominem attack that isn’t conducive to intellectual dialogue.

    *sigh* That wasn’t an ad hominem.

    It would get one PPR’d from DU in a hot second.

    Which is why I don’t post on DU. If I were commenting on a site with policies like DU, I would have said something along the lines of,

    “It appears you don’t share our goals and are willing to subordinate equality for women to advancement of atheism. That is a compromise I am not willing to make. It makes me wonder why you bother posting here, when you could be conversing with others, who, like you, don’t share our interest in feminism.”

    Saying you can fuck right off then is far more satisfying, and conveys the message better.

    Pretty scary when Catholics and atheists can debate more intelligently and civilly on DU than atheists and atheists at FtB.

    Wait, you WERE just talking about politeness, and now suddenly you bring intelligence into it. They’re not related. You haven’t established any relationship. Linking them, out of the blue like you just did, makes your comment look stupid.

    If you have to get personal, you just lost the argument.

    Only stupid people truly believe this.

    If this was my site, you would also get banned.

    If this was your site, it would suck and nobody would be commenting on it.

    If two people were both getting personal, they would BOTH get banned.

    And you would be left only with androids and Vulcans commenting.

    Just sayin’ — FtB would get better if they would put a posting policy in place that states that those engaging in personal attacks will get the ban.

    No it wouldn’t.

    Bald assertion, meet bald assertion.

  475. SamStrange: bottom-feeding, work-shy peasant:

    Whoops. Didn’t scroll my preview screen down. Naughty Sam.

    If you have to get personal, you just lost the argument.

    Only stupid people truly believe this.

    If this was my site, you would also get banned.

    If this was your site, it would suck and nobody would be commenting on it.

    If two people were both getting personal, they would BOTH get banned.

    And you would be left only with androids and Vulcans commenting.

    Just sayin’ — FtB would get better if they would put a posting policy in place that states that those engaging in personal attacks will get the ban.

    No it wouldn’t.

    Bald assertion, meet bald assertion.

  476. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    Ahem.

    What is the common goal?

  477. bannedatheist:

    Heh. I see that my point is well taken.

    Excellent. Throw yourselves onto the pikes of my rhetoric. Hurl insults when you have no arguments. Say I’m not worth arguing with, because you have no argument to make.

    But know this: it doesn’t work. You didn’t win the debate, and in the end, it is only the attacker who looks stupid.

    DU learned this over the course of multiple iterations, and despite having been banned from the site, I accept it. I DID break the rule against personal attacks by calling a bigot a “bigot”.

    If you read what I wrote, I said I think it was RIGHT to ban TF. I didn’t realize he hadn’t actually been banned, but I would have banned him.

    If FtB WANTS to have a pit of insults, never mind. I’m not going to stay here and trade one-liners. See, I like fully formed sentences with clauses, and even better, well-formed paragraphs built like a sandwich. Call me crazy. Just don’t call me crazy on DU. (It’ll getcha banned.)

  478. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:

    It’s a terrible affliction my naivete. Do you always diminish people in these interactions?

    When they behave as immaturely as you have, yes. Your concern is noted. Now, its time to shut the fuck up, as you have nothing cogent to say. And it shows.

    A sane policy that everyone knows about SHOULD include requiring civil discourse,

    Fuckwit, look at the masthead. Do you see your name there? No, it says PZ Myers. And here’s what PZ Myers has to say about this blog, trumping your mere OPINION seven ways from Sunday, making it irrelevant:

    This is a rude blog. We like to argue — heck, we like a loud angry brawl. Don’t waste time whining at anyone that they’re not nice, because this gang will take pride in that and rhetorically hand you a rotting porcupine and tell you to stuff it up your nether orifice. If you intrude here and violate any of the previous three mores, people won’t like you, and they won’t hold back—they’ll tell you so, probably in colorful terms.

    We do have a general guideline for handling new people. If you’re a first time commenter, you get three strikes: you can make three comments, and the regulars are supposed to restrain themselves and try to get you to engage rationally before they are allowed to release the rabid hounds. They are hoping you will oblige them and give them an excuse to let slip the leash, so be warned.

    Take you OPINION and shove it up your ass with a decaying porcupine–sideways. That is what you deserve for thinking you run this blog…

  479. bannedatheist:

    Delicious. If these sane posting policies that prohibit ad hominem attacks are so “stupid” (wow, that’s a ZINGER) then how come their site has about 10,000X as many viewers and posters?

    Ah, evidence. MMmmmm.

  480. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:

    because you have no argument to make.

    Those who tone troll have no arguments, except tone trolling. And PZ’s word trumps their tone trolling each and every time. Funny how they never pick up on the fact they have lost the argument, and are tacitly conceding defeat on the argument prior to their tone trolling.

  481. sheeptick:

    “sheeptick:

    Has his [thunderpod's] entire character been impugned by a week or two of impassioned disagreement?

    Revealed, not impugned.”

    I’d say impugned. Taken on the whole he’s a great guy. Keep in mind he’s not advocating rotten behavior towards women but rather that it’s not a big problem.

    “Get on the phone all of you. Talk. Work it out and then come back to exemplify our ideals.

    They did, thus the booting out of the incompetent one. (Sheesh!)”

    I read this blog a lot and didn’t see this. I read some email interaction. I’ll take a link and shut up if true. He’s hardly incompetent. I raise your “Sheesh!” with a Please.

  482. John Morales:

    [meta + OT]

    bannedatheist:

    I also have thick skin. Calling me names makes me happy because it makes the name-caller look like the tool they are.

    It’s not your tegument’s thickness that you demonstrate, and thickies such as you clearly are thus made happy because you don’t see the substance of such comments for the names you get called.

    (Calling people tools isn’t name calling? ;) )

  483. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    It’s the Sheeptick show! All baseless bullshitting, all the time!

  484. truebutnotuseful:

    bannedatheist wrote @ #448:

    I truly think FtB would benefit from this type of policy in the comments thread.

    Um, no. I’ll gladly take substance over style, please. If you can’t handle grownups saying ‘fuck’ to each other, find another blog.

    It gets nastier in here than it ever does in the Religion forum on DU, and it’s mostly all atheists. WTF?!?

    Um, maybe because people who argue in good faith are more concerned with the validity of ideas than the tone in which those ideas are expressed?

    I wouldn’t think twice about banning, for instance, #397 who writes, “Well you can fuck right off then.”

    It’s telling how you conveniently ignored the rest of the paragraph immediately following the sentence you lifted. You know, the one where SamStrange made their argument. Why do you care more about whether someone says ‘fuck you’ than whether they make a sound argument?

    If you have to get personal, you just lost the argument.

    Did you really just write that? Consider the following:

    Person A: “The sky is orange.”
    Person B: “Oh fuck off, the sky is blue.”

    By your logic, Person A wins despite be demonstrably wrong. That is incredibly fucking* stupid.

    * Congratulations! You win, because I used the ‘f-word.’

  485. "We Are Ing The Matrimonial Collective":

    Excellent. Throw yourselves onto the pikes of my rhetoric. Hurl insults when you have no arguments. Say I’m not worth arguing with, because you have no argument to make.

    But know this: it doesn’t work. You didn’t win the debate, and in the end, it is only the attacker who looks stupid.

    No no that’s ok. No need to address any points made just go ahead with insults.

    Seriously, how fucking hypocritical and/or stupid are you?

  486. Tinjoe:

    @BannedAtheist

    I keep feeling like you don’t understand ad hominem.

    If someone says something bigoted, you are free to explain why it is bigoted, from experience that effort is wasted and calling them a bigot is the shortcut. Similarly if someone is being a troll.

    Telling someone to “fuck off” is perfectly fine if they are going to fence sit on a topic that clearly has two sides.Thunderf00t’s article made statements regarding the importance of conference and the level/existence of harassment, not surprisingly people disagreed with much of his content.

    Do you feel that Thunderf00t sufficiently made his case and adequately addressed the criticisms? If you’ve been following then you have an opinion on this, if not then your ignorance on the subject doesn’t further the discussion and you’re encouraged to stop contributing.

  487. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:

    Keep in mind he’s not advocating rotten behavior towards women but rather that it’s not a big problem.

    Since it is not a problem to TF, but it is a problem to us, we win by default. Your OPINION shows you don’t understand the problem. Deal with TF, not us. Why can’t you do that, go to the source of the problem, which is TF and his ego?

    He’s hardly incompetent.

    I couldn’t see otherwise from his actions while here. Quit apologizing for him. He can do that himself. Why isn’t he????

  488. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain:

    Keep in mind he’s not advocating rotten behavior towards women but rather that it’s not a big problem.

    Shit, sheepcake, I fucking love it when a great guy engages in not a big deal harassment of me.

    Fuck ThunderingFool.

    And fuck you for not understanding why this is a problem.

  489. bannedatheist:

    #478 — Excellent. There it is. There’s the TOS I was looking for.

    Interestingly, it’s the same Terms of Service that 4chan/b/ has, minus Desu and, y’know, humor.

    So, really, everybody just comes here to insult each other? Really? Wow. Is there ANYONE who is willing to have a civil discourse with someone they find they agree with, if they would just stop hurling juvenile names at each other.

    It’s pretty sad. I thought it was a classier and more erudite crowd than that. Guess everyone’s just practicing for sparring with the /b/oys at 4chan, because this isn’t intelligent. It’s not entertaining, either.

    No longer sure what the point is, but it’s been illuminating.

    Ta-ta!

    Oh, yeah, and…

    sudo !!

  490. sheeptick:

    “We are primates, and it is in-group/out-group dynamics, but that doesn’t mean it’s baloney. Try again, this time after informing yourself and putting your thinking cap on.”

    I understand we are primates but I refer to the dynamic as base and it certainly seems like baloney. I’m learning more and more all the time as I read and sift. Sorry I wade in late, perhaps you’ll change my views on intolerance towards thunderf00t by entreaty.

  491. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    Interestingly, it’s the same Terms of Service that 4chan/b/ has, minus Desu and, y’know, humor.

    Yay! More bare fucking assertions!
    What a worthless fucking waste of comments.

  492. sheeptick:

    “This is new! I usually don’t get rape fantasies, but Thunderf00t’s angry rabble have opened up exciting new vistas. The whole point of free-thinking is to express what you have been thinking to others; what would the point of Socrates’ trial have been if he had not made the impressive speeches he made? If the [...]

    You are not helping your case, sheeptick. People have addressed your self admitted ignorant concerns. And yet you will not answer in kind.”

    I didn’t write any of this

  493. "We Are Ing The Matrimonial Collective":

    Comment by bannedatheist blocked. [unkill]​[show comment]

    What a fucking asshole

  494. Caine, Panthera Susurratrix:

    AE:

    Sure, but I didn’t chart it. Did Ngeo really slam the door? It was kind of hard to tell wtf was going on. Caine, if you did the homework on this, the kind thing to do is not make me, youl know…poke around in tthere. Cuz I’m not going to. But I wanna know.

    I don’t know all that much, however, yes, it does appear that NG finally paid attention to the email[s] they received in regard to the slimepit and told Abbie they had to tone it down. Naturally, tone it down being anathema, there was an immediate discussion about preserving the slimepit, that bastion of freethought and free speech and also honouring Abbie. (Yep, for realz.)

    (If you click on the comments for any Sciborg/NG thread, you’ll see each comment has a ‘report abuse’ link.)

    A forum has been set up for the SP and the last I heard, there was a heated debate about whether or not to allow editing. It appears to be causing a DEEP RIFT!!1!

    That’s all I know, ’cause I have no wish to go poking about in there.

  495. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain:

    Now the sheepcake is throwing together random quotes.

    This is not the brightest troll.

  496. "We Are Ing The Matrimonial Collective":

    FFS sheeptrick the HTML code for quoting is right above the damn box you comment in.

  497. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    it certainly seems like baloney

    An excellent summary of your blather.
    Will you go the fuck away and read?

  498. "We Are Ing The Matrimonial Collective":

    I don’t know all that much, however, yes, it does appear that NG finally paid attention to the email[s] they received in regard to the slimepit and told Abbie they had to tone it down. Naturally, tone it down being anathema, there was an immediate discussion about preserving the slimepit, that bastion of freethought and free speech and also honouring Abbie. (Yep, for realz.)

    Oh god…that long scree about what a hero Abbie Smith is was fucking hilarious.

  499. sheeptick:

    “I for one am glad you’re here to tell us all how you feel about a situation you admit to knowing nothing about, and fully intend to give your opinion every gram of weight it deserves.”

    THAT is fine. I’m learning as I go. I think it’s okay to express the opinion as long as I disclose my knowledge, yes? But I don’t think the opinion is completely without merit. I’m not really addressing the specifics you understand.

  500. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:

    Is there ANYONE who is willing to have a civil discourse with someone they find they agree with, if they would just stop hurling juvenile names at each other.

    It happens frequently. When one sticks to the topic, doesn’t troll like you are doing, and argues in good faith, meaning they can be wrong. You aren’t there yet. You can’t be wrong, even if you are. This is PZ’s blog, not yours. You should apologize to PZ for presuming you have any say in how he runs his long running blog. That would show honesty and integrity on your part…

    Sorry I wade in late, perhaps you’ll change my views on intolerance towards thunderf00t by entreaty.

    Here’s some advice from an old fart. Shut the fuck up and listen. It’s given to MRA fuckwits, but you need to do the same thing. Your mouth is ahead of your mind.

  501. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    Keep in mind he’s not advocating rotten behavior towards women but rather that it’s not a big problem.

    Since he’s wrong about that, his argument contributes to making the world a worse place for women. Just like if he were minimizing the problem of racism, it would make the world worse for people of color.

    As such, we don’t consider him to be a great guy.

    (Your ability to distance yourself from issues of sexism like this is a manifestation of your male privilege.)

  502. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain:

    Abbie, don’t be a hero
    Don’t be a fool with your life

    I have too many crappy seventies era pop songs in my head.

  503. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    I think it’s okay to express the opinion as long as I disclose my knowledge, yes?

    As a series of concern-trolling rhetorical questions and ignorant fucking commands? No.

    But I don’t think the opinion is completely without merit.

    How nice for you.

  504. "We Are Ing The Matrimonial Collective":

    THAT is fine. I’m learning as I go. I think it’s okay to express the opinion as long as I disclose my knowledge, yes? But I don’t think the opinion is completely without merit. I’m not really addressing the specifics you understand.

    no it literally is wasting time and making noise. Seriously would you expect any geologists to fucking humor me if I go in mention how I know nothing of the subject but have strong opinions!

    In fact strong opinions and ignorance is profoundly immoral IMO

  505. John Morales:

    [OT]

    bannedatheist:

    Delicious. If these sane posting policies that prohibit ad hominem attacks are so “stupid” (wow, that’s a ZINGER) then how come their site has about 10,000X as many viewers and posters?

    Your metric for meritoriousness is popularity?

    (Your guess of four orders of magnitude is rather ridiculous, BTW)

    Ah, evidence. MMmmmm.

    <snicker>

    Your asserting something both fallacious and implausible is evidence that you’ve asserted it, not that it’s factual.

  506. Caine, Panthera Susurratrix:

    Ing:

    Oh god…that long scree about what a hero Abbie Smith is was fucking hilarious.

    Yes. That actually left me speechless textless. For those who missed it, here ya go.

  507. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    See that’s an ad hominem attack

    now telling people is called an “ad hom” too? that term doesn’t mean anything anymore, does it, other than being a fancy way of saying “you’re mean to me”

    Pretty scary when Catholics and atheists can debate more intelligently and civilly

    to confuse lack of “bad” words with not just civility but intelligence is a sign that you’re probably neither civilized nor intelligent, since you confuse form for substance.

  508. rorschach:

    Doesn’t seem to be, I didn’t go poking around.

    I did. If you think we have deep rifts…And also, if you thought you had seen the bottom of the pit…

  509. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain:

    Pretty scary when Catholics and atheists can debate more intelligently and civilly

    The Hoax, a catholic medieval wannabe, was always so fucking civil. No bad words, just poisonous ideas.

  510. Antiochus Epiphanes:

    Caine: Merci. And mercy.

  511. bannedatheist:

    Hi Tinjoe #486. I was almost out of here when I saw your comment. That’s more like it! Thanks for a level-headed reply that didn’t include insults.

    Like I said, I was banned from DU precisely for calling a bigot a “bigot”. If it had been real life, I would have called him much worse. But I was on DU, and they have a policy against ad hominem attacks. You call it a shortcut. I call it a waste of my time. On the webs, everybody’s a nobody. If I can’t continue an argument, or I can’t win with reason and without engaging in a personal attack, I write them off. I don’t switch to 3rd grade antics as my plan B. DU encourages such civility by banning anyone who violates the personal attack rule. Either folks talk in their grown-up voices, or they find another website to lurk on (like this one, in my case).

    I prefer DU. Kinda missing it right now… liberal Xtians and all. At least they make an effort to communicate complex thoughts using English.

    RE: TF. I’ve sorta followed the story. I stand by PZ and Ed 100%. I’m saying if it was me, I’d ban about half of the slimepit, too.

  512. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    keithroragen

    keithroragen

    keithroragen

    Just wanted to get your attention.

    Please read these two posts:

    http://tigerbeatdown.com/2010/11/23/a-very-special-episode-of-grey-areas-privilege-denying-dude-edition/

    http://saltycurrent.blogspot.com/2012/06/note-to-those-who-say-they-oppose.html

  513. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    I think it’s okay to express the opinion as long as I disclose my knowledge, yes?

    where the fuck did you get the idea that it’s “ok” to have a public opinion on a subject you know fuck-all about?

    whatever happened to not having and not voicing an opinion until you know, and restricting oneself to asking questions until then?

  514. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    RE: TF. I’ve sorta followed the story. I stand by PZ and Ed 100%

    Alright then you need to read this too:

    http://tigerbeatdown.com/2010/11/23/a-very-special-episode-of-grey-areas-privilege-denying-dude-edition/

  515. sheeptick:

    “No, your interlocutor suggested that face-to-face or telephone interactions don’t automatically (“magically”) resolve disputes better than written interaction does. Do you always argue this dishonestly?”

    I’m not suggesting anything would be “magically or automatically” resolved. But I think it might be possible. Why not try? Perhaps there are nuances that could be flushed out that all parties could agree upon. I think the guy who objected (he called me fcukweasel or something I think – so confusing this forum) further replied that he did think writing was superior and the way to go and was further contemptuous of my viewpoint.

    My experience doesn’t bear this out in any case. I happen to have seen a couple of videos of PZ and thunderf00t getting along nicely and these two admiring each quite openly. Why would it be so impossible for them to work this out?

  516. "We Are Ing The Matrimonial Collective":

    Like I said, I was banned from DU precisely for calling a bigot a “bigot”.

    And how the fuck does DU thus improve ‘civil’ debate.

    Also you are aware that it is common trolling to bait people into breaking a rule like that while you snicker at them being punished?

  517. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:

    At least they make an effort to communicate complex thoughts using English.

    We do here too. With a few more English words, in case you haven’t notice. But no, you are too busy complaining to say “this is what I believe, and this is the evidence (link to evidence) to back it up”. Easy, if you aren’t just bullshitting like you are doing.

    Where’s PZ’s apology for you telling him how to run his long lasting blog??? No honesty and integrity is noted from a tone troll. Not surprising…

  518. SamStrange: bottom-feeding, work-shy peasant:

    Somebody let me know when bannedasshole starts saying something of substance, okay? I don’t have killfile but my scroll button works just fine.

  519. Jim:

    I just saw Flight of Dodos, which is a great documentary on the religious right and their efforts to kill science by bringing creationism/i.d. into the classroom.

    The guy who did it was a former evolutionary biologist who studied under Gould. In parts of the documentary he went back to Harvard and interviewed a number of prominent scientists about evolution and about right wing efforts to dilute science education.

    His point was really interesting. He exposed the scientists as a bunch of loud mouth, arrogant, and socially lazy assholes. He also showed that often the right wing spokes-people actually seem personable. I couldn’t go along with that completely; I find right wing idiots just too obnoxious to bear. However, I am extremely biased, so I gave the documentary author the benefit of the doubt.

    His points about the scientists, however, were right on: they did come off loud mouthed, arrogant, and socially lazy (they thought it beneath them to engage in debate or to campaign for science education).

    It really changed my opinion on the secular movement. I used to enjoy PZ’s nasty rants once in a while. Now, I just see an arrogant, self-consumed academic who takes great pride in being an asshole. I appreciate all PZ has done to get the word out, but, come on, some of his posts just drip with adolescent “whose on top” bullshit.

    I think Dawkins comes closer to what our movement needs. He knows how to present a good, strong argument; to make public appearances, and he does it without being an asshole. He is rather charming.

    Yea, I know: if you don’t like PZ why come to the site.
    Just wanted to share something I saw on a great documentary.
    And, acting like an angry adolescent usually only appeals to other angry adolescents.

    Cheers PZ

  520. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    Your metric for meritoriousness is popularity?

    Even funnier: xe also posted derisively that our standards and practices were like 4chan’s. Now, the numbers aren’t reliable, but 4chan? Way more users than DU.
    Your argument from popularity is broken.

  521. ibyea:

    @Ing
    That speech was just weird. I would never fawn over someone like that. Even my own personal heroes.

  522. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    where the fuck did you get the idea that it’s “ok” to have a public opinion on a subject you know fuck-all about?

    Guh! It says in the First Amendment that everybody is supposed to have a strong opinion about everything, and state those opinions constantly, no matter how uninformed, preferably while drunk, because otherwise the terrorists have won!

  523. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    The Hoax, a catholic medieval wannabe, was always so fucking civil. No bad words, just poisonous ideas.

    still true. did you know I got tone trolled on my own blog for telling him to stop hijacking conversations?

  524. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain:

    My experience doesn’t bear this out in any case. I happen to have seen a couple of videos of PZ and thunderf00t getting along nicely and these two admiring each quite openly. Why would it be so impossible for them to work this out?

    Translation: I am openly talking out of my ass and yet I want to be able to move back in time.

    Sheepcake, you are still doing yourself no favors.

  525. "We Are Ing The Matrimonial Collective":

    I just saw Flight of Dodos, which is a great documentary on the religious right and their efforts to kill science by bringing creationism/i.d. into the classroom.

    The guy who did it was a former evolutionary biologist who studied under Gould. In parts of the documentary he went back to Harvard and interviewed a number of prominent scientists about evolution and about right wing efforts to dilute science education.

    His point was really interesting. He exposed the scientists as a bunch of loud mouth, arrogant, and socially lazy assholes. He also showed that often the right wing spokes-people actually seem personable. I couldn’t go along with that completely; I find right wing idiots just too obnoxious to bear. However, I am extremely biased, so I gave the documentary author the benefit of the doubt.

    His points about the scientists, however, were right on: they did come off loud mouthed, arrogant, and socially lazy (they thought it beneath them to engage in debate or to campaign for science education).

    It really changed my opinion on the secular movement. I used to enjoy PZ’s nasty rants once in a while. Now, I just see an arrogant, self-consumed academic who takes great pride in being an asshole. I appreciate all PZ has done to get the word out, but, come on, some of his posts just drip with adolescent “whose on top” bullshit.

    I think Dawkins comes closer to what our movement needs. He knows how to present a good, strong argument; to make public appearances, and he does it without being an asshole. He is rather charming.

    Yea, I know: if you don’t like PZ why come to the site.
    Just wanted to share something I saw on a great documentary.
    And, acting like an angry adolescent usually only appeals to other angry adolescents.

    Cheers PZ

    Oh for Fucks sake

  526. Tinjoe:

    I think everyone is willing to engage in civil discourse, as you define it Argue in good faith, be willing to admit you might be wrong and be willing to listen when you are wrong will get you a long way.

    Repeating the same thing over again, or trying to dictate how an established community behaves themselves is just a way to derail whatever conversations were going, and then people get prickly.

  527. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    Jim,

    I think Dawkins comes closer to what our movement needs.

    Dawkins who dismisses women’s concerns of safety at conferences.

    +++++
    The never-ending stream of privileged mansplaining douchebags never ends, does it?

  528. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    I think Dawkins comes closer to what our movement needs.

    Yes, our movement needs a whole lot more of that minimizing of women. I personally love being silenced by my heroes and ignored when I answer their ignorant questions! And lol at this

    (they thought it beneath them to engage in debate or to campaign for science education)

    as an attempted slam on PZ!

  529. sheeptick:

    “Yeah I’m a fucking monster. No question.”

    “you’re confused.”

    Wait I thought I was a “fuckweasel” Isn’t that what you wanted to say. Again.

    “So you’re suggesting misunderstandings that happen in print cannot be resolved by real time or better yet, face to face conversation?”

    “they cannot be resolved better than in writing, no. what the fuck is it with privileging a form of conversation in which you can be emotionally manipulated, talked over, yelled at, interrupted, and have to try to think on the fly without the luxury of having the time to compose your argument?”

    Quite a drama you got envisioned there don’t you think? How about the just talk. Him, Greta Christina, Rebecca, DJ, the whole lot of them. Perhaps they will surprise all.

  530. truebutnotuseful:

    Since we’re apparently manufacturing new rules for discourse that are independent of whether an argument is empirically supportable or logically consistent, I propose a few new ones, inspired by blandatheist.

    1. When you affect the speaking style of a moustache-twirling villain, you have lost the argument. See:

    Excellent. Throw yourselves onto the pikes of my rhetoric.

    2. If you bleat repeatedly about name-calling – while yourself engaging in name-calling – you have lost the argument. See:

    Calling me names makes me happy because it makes the name-caller look like the tool they are.

    3. If you threaten to flounce because you don’t want to stay and “trade one-liners,” but then you stay and trade one-liners, you have lost the argument. See:

    I like fully formed sentences with clauses, and even better, well-formed paragraphs built like a sandwich. Call me crazy.

    If these sane posting policies that prohibit ad hominem attacks are so “stupid” (wow, that’s a ZINGER) then how come their site has about 10,000X as many viewers and posters?

    Guess everyone’s just practicing for sparring with the /b/oys at 4chan, because this isn’t intelligent.

    Because judging arguments on the basis of their structure and their connection to reality is HARD! Much easier to sneer at gutter language and flounce in a huff.

  531. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:

    But I think it might be possible. Why not try?

    Why should anything be done now. TF is divorced form FtB, not to return. Why do you think any talking at this stage would change that fact, other than delusional thinking (or not thinking) on your part? Just another MRA tone troll fuckwit.

  532. John Morales:

    [meta]

    bannedatheist:

    Like I said, I was banned from DU precisely for calling a bigot a “bigot”.

    FFS!

    Therefore, you come to this nasty place and persistently whine and blah the effect that this place should change more like that place that banned you and then you’d like it more.

    Your opinion is noted, stupid and antithetical to the spirit of this place as it is.

  533. "We Are Ing The Matrimonial Collective":

    I seriously seriously seriously hate everyone, if the impotent floundering skeptic movement dies a horrible death from this schism I will not shed a single solitary tear.

  534. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    Quite a drama you got envisioned there don’t you think?

    The fact that you don’t recognize that this is incredibly common in in-person and not “quite a drama” doesn’t speak well of you.
    But then, you apparently completely lack a healthy sense of self-awareness, since you are still babbling at people who know the situation better than you do.

  535. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain:

    Jim, thank you for that giant turd. That was needed.

    *eyeroll*

  536. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    The Hoax, a catholic medieval wannabe, was always so fucking civil. No bad words, just poisonous ideas.

    Mmmmmm. I remember one time he was particularly nasty to Janine, but I don’t remember exactly what he said. I just remember I blew up at him and said something like “why the fuck would we ever want to build bridges with you”

  537. Caine, Panthera Susurratrix:

    Jim:

    I think Dawkins comes closer to what our movement needs.

    What our movement needs? Really? Yes, his Dear Muslima spoke volumes to all the women in the atheist/skeptic communities. Oh, wait, what am I saying? Women don’t count, do they Jim?

    You’re quite the asshole, swimming in that oversized pool of privilege.

  538. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:

    And, acting like an angry adolescent usually only appeals to other angry adolescents.

    And your tone trolling showed your angry adolescent side. Keep in mind you have no place coming to PZ’s blog and criticizing it without appearing crude and rude. Which you were.

  539. 'Tis Himself:

    Has the tone troll gone away yet? Has sheepdip learned to read before writing admitted ignorance?

  540. Lyn M: hysterical feminazi fembot watsonista dramatic name caller:

    To make a long story short, my opinion of both of you has dropped quite a bit by this ridiculous business.

    This particular sentiment has come up regularly of late. I am inferring that it is supposed to mean “You are both wrong”. So it seems to be tone trolling of the xkcd kind. Can’t see the point of it, otherwise.

    *shuffles feet*

    Oh-KAY, can’t see the point of it either way.

  541. John Morales:

    sheeptick:

    Quite a drama you got envisioned there don’t you think?

    Such disingenuous evasiveness!

    The rebuttal was a direct response to your question, thus any inherent drama you perceive was inherent in it.

    More to the point, you’ve not rebutted that response, but merely characterised it as dramatic and reiterated your original point.

    (There’s a name for that)

  542. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    Perhaps there are nuances that could be flushed out that all parties could agree upon

    why do you think a form of communication that is full of interruptions and doesn’t allow a person to take the time to compose their thoughts and arguments is better for flushing out nuances?

    I think the guy who objected

    interesting assumption there

    further replied that he did think writing was superior

    I do, personally. Ive asked you why you think otherwise. are you actually going to respond?

  543. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:

    Quite a drama you got envisioned there don’t you think? How about the just talk.

    Why aren’t you getting them all on the phone now, instead of talking to those who won’t take the action you want? Typical of MRA fuckwits. Can’t do the job, must leave it up to others as they aren’t the mature ones… You suggestion is three days to late. Any fuckwit knows that… Which shows your lack of intelligence and utter banality.

  544. Josh, Official Yucatan Jaguar:

    I seriously seriously seriously hate everyone, if the impotent floundering skeptic movement dies a horrible death from this schism I will not shed a single solitary tear.

    Word up gurl. Have a glass of wine on me.

  545. Caine, Panthera Susurratrix:

    Ixchel:

    The never-ending stream of privileged mansplaining douchebags never ends, does it?

    No.

  546. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    Sheeptick.

  547. "We Are Ing The Matrimonial Collective":

    Oh and you know what “old timer skeptics” PEOPLE STILL BELIEVE IN BIGFOOT!

    So you set the bar impossibly low and still failed. Take a fucking bow!

  548. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    then how come their site has about 10,000X as many viewers and posters?

    You don’t seriously think the only reason why DemocraticUnderground is bigger than Pharyngula is due to tone, do you?

    Do you?

    Have you tried counting how many atheists there are, and how many Democrats?

    (I’m not bashing what DU does; they have a different purpose. It is entirely possible that their practices coincide well with their purpose.)

  549. Josh, Official Yucatan Jaguar:

    Know what else is hysterical? Someone citing Dawkins as the civil voice of reason. Why, I thought he was the most arrogant, self-absorbed cruel and shrill bastard ever.

    Note the phenomenon this flushes out: There will always be a subset of people who judge worth based on the perceived and relative “meanness” of two parties. They never make any absolute judgments, they’re like passive frames pushed to and fro by the Overton window sliding back and forth. Pathetic.

  550. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    I seriously seriously seriously hate everyone, if the impotent floundering skeptic movement dies a horrible death from this schism I will not shed a single solitary tear.

    Seconded as fuck.

    the guy who objected

    I bet you don’t know why this was a really bad idea to say here. Do you, sheeptick?

  551. "We Are Ing The Matrimonial Collective":

    Note the phenomenon this flushes out: There will always be a subset of people who judge worth based on the perceived and relative “meanness” of two parties. They never make any absolute judgments, they’re like passive frames pushed to and fro by the Overton window sliding back and forth. Pathetic.

    A fetish of apathy

  552. sheeptick:

    “That requires the immature acting party, in this case TF, to back down. Until you show he was capable and willing to do so, you don’t have a case. TF was playing hardball, and it backfired.”

    Yeah, you might be right. I really don’t know what TF is capable of. I do know I’ve had a lot friends speak out of turn and later regret it. I’ve had friends be wrong. I’ve even had friends who were misunderstood. The point I’d like to make is those friends remained my friends until they went beyond any chance of reconciliation. This whole dust up seemed to span a couple of weeks. The guy is a good guy. He was INVITED in because he was a good guy, so why not let him stay, speak his mind and let the consensus decide his fate? By, let’s say, not reading his blog.

    However, Thunderf00t fading into ignominy on Free Thought Blogs would probably be unlikely considering his comportment on Youtube. The fucker has been a champion there, hasn’t he? Not an asshole or a woman hater, callous boor or whatever. But a genuinely good guy. Why doesn’t that count? Why put your chits in if all that happens is you’re jettisoned from fellowship over a controversial viewpoint? Defeats the purpose of Free Thought.

    You think he’s wrong, convince him.

  553. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    I am loving this comment by truebutnotuseful.

  554. "We Are Ing The Matrimonial Collective":

    He was INVITED in because he was a good guy, so why not let him stay, speak his mind and let the consensus decide his fate? By, let’s say, not reading his blog.

    Because he was actively slagging off other people here.

    Apparently everyone thinks Benson should just go fuck herself.

  555. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    The guy is a good guy.

    No he isn’t.

    He was INVITED in because he was a good guy,

    No he wasn’t. This is an objectively false claim. It’s not a matter of opinion.

    He was invited because he made good videos against creationism. Full stop.

    Get your fucking facts right.

  556. sheeptick:

    “sheeptick, Some advice. When you come into a highly charged forum and basically scream

    I have no clue what you are all discussing but I heard some bad things and I think you are all very mean

    It doesn’t say much good about you. SO my advice is to at least have a clue what you are talking about instead of coming in waving your arms and yelling

    LOOK AT MY IGNORANCE AND INCREDULITY! PAY ATTENTION TO THEM!”

    I didn’t write any of this

  557. M. A. Melby:

    “Melby, I didn’t ask why you think it would be wrong to judge TF by his fan’s stupid behavior. I asked why you would post something like that. If you had no evidence that anyone was doing that, why the vague finger-wagging at nobody? If you did have evidence that anyone was doing that, why the vague finger-wagging at nobody?”

    OH! Fair point.

    I wasn’t accusing anyone of anything – that’s why I said it was “obvious”. However, yeah, I guess it didn’t need saying.

    Sorry about that.

  558. Caine, Panthera Susurratrix:

    let the consensus decide his fate?

    The consensus did decide his fate, fuckwit. Deal with it.

  559. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart, MD, PhD, DDS, Esq, OM:

    You know what I’ve learned about myself today? I totally ignore posts in which the poster doesn’t bother to differentiate quotations from the rest of their screed.

    (I could probably teach my turtle how to blockquote properly and she doesn’t even have fingers.

    Just sayin’.)

  560. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    keithroragen, as you watch the obtuse responses from sheeptick, consider what it’s like to deal with this kind of shit every single day like many women here do.

    Then think about whether the anger you see here is understandable.

  561. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    He was INVITED in because he was a good guy

    what? no.

    he was invited because he made good anti-creationist videos and because he and PZ were friends. He is not a “good guy”, and was known not to be a good guy by many people who’ve seen his anti-muslim videos, for example.

  562. Josh, Official Yucatan Jaguar:

    Yeah. Can’t be bothered with commenters who can’t bother to format. It’s an act of orthographic hostility.

  563. John Morales:

    sheeptick:

    However, Thunderf00t fading into ignominy on Free Thought Blogs would probably be unlikely considering his comportment on Youtube. The fucker has been a champion there, hasn’t he?

    I don’t watch youtube personalities, but I hear the fucker (to employ your quaint idiom) can manage to deride creationists competently.

    Big deal.

    The point is that, as a blogger here, he was hardly a champion; rather, he was a pathetic failure. Shot himself in the foot.

    (Deal with it)

  564. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    The consensus did decide his fate, fuckwit. Deal with it.

    Quoted for fucking truth.

    +++++
    “Hey! Hey wimminz! I don’t understand why you don’t like having your personal safety dismissed! Maybe you are jumping to conclusions! Maybe you should put up with months and months and months of it before you decide that you’re really sure you don’t like having your personal safety dismissed!”

  565. nonny:

    Janine- I think Thunderfoot will be angry for a while, no matter what PZ does or doesn’t say, and the people who have decided to hate this blog for whatever reason will continue to do so.

    Having said that, I think ‘Phil’ is clearly trolling. His email seems designed to bait the community here, he uses the c-word and references rape, which even a casual reader of the blog like me knows are red flags to all of you. What trolls want is a reaction. PZ has given him one. If he’s like most trolls, he’ll enjoy the attention, even if it’s negative. I doubt exposing his stupidity is worth the time and effort, especially since he might enjoy it.

  566. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:

    The guy is a good guy.

    Your fuckwitted OPINION isn’t shared, not will it be until the right words come from TF. You aren’t helping make that happen, as it must come from TF. Go do your efforts there, not here.

    Thunderf00t fading into ignominy on Free Thought Blogs would probably be unlikely considering his comportment on Youtube.

    Actually not that surprising. Two different skill sets are needed for films and blogging. He has one, but not both. It showed very rapidly.

    Why doesn’t that count?

    Gee, telling half the population they are nothing but playthings? That isn’t what a good guy does. It is what a jerk does. And you know that. Stop defending him.

    Defeats the purpose of Free Thought.

    Free thought is more than ideas. It is also the evidence required to make informed decisions. TF ignored the evidence. Which is terminally bad for a scientist.

    You think he’s wrong, convince him.

    Ass backwards. He must convince us he is right, with that evidence he ignored (like not reading the proposed policy for three days). And you ignore too. Time to shut the fuck up. You are repeating yourself ad nauseum.

  567. Tinjoe:

    You think he’s wrong, convince him.

    I thought that’s what PZ, Greta, Zinnia, hundreds of comments attempted to do. And what was his ultimate response, a YouTube comment poll saying “My fans agree with me more than they agree with you”

  568. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    Not an asshole or a woman hater, callous boor or whatever. But a genuinely good guy.

    You’re wrong about that.

  569. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    I didn’t write any of this

    actually, that’s very much what you wrote, in effect. or what did you think your first comment was, saying you don’t know shit about shit but are going to kill a teal deer with your opinion anyway?

  570. gworroll:

    Unless I severely misread the post announcing their departure, Thunderf00t and Greg Laden were not removed for their views, rather, they were removed for their treatment of other FtB bloggers?

    Did I miss something or did the email writer miss something?

  571. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    “Oh wait, you already have put up with months and months and months of it? Years of it? A lifetime of it? Still, you can’t be sure until I’m sure!

  572. Caine, Panthera Susurratrix:

    Audley:

    (I could probably teach my turtle how to blockquote properly and she doesn’t even have fingers.

    Just sayin’.)

    Well, Emery isn’t stupid or willfully ignorant. Hell, the rats do a better job than the current crop of stupid.

  573. sheeptick:

    “And then he proceeded to step into something he doesn’t understand, was dismissive of people’s first hand experience, knowledge, and criticisms. He argued in bad faith, and then he turned to his YouTube community to back him up with a laughably ridiculous poll. Whatever goodwill got him the gig, evaporated when he double (or triple) downed on his initial post. It really doesn’t matter that he wrote poorly, he didn’t seem to be honestly engaging with anyone that was telling him “You’re wrong and here is why” So until you go back and read a dozen blog posts, and a couple hundred comments from people who already have, kindly keep your ignorance to yourself please.”

    Well the best way out of ignorance is stepping in,so to speak, and I’m learning as I go along. I freely admitted my ignorance so good on me, eh . I’ll take links btw.

    At any rate, my knowledge of the man up to this dust up has been hugely positive. And my points have been general and non-specific which are valid points nonetheless. I won’t shut up on you vouchsafe. Cripes I just got here.

  574. SamStrange: bottom-feeding, work-shy peasant:

    I do know I’ve had a lot friends speak out of turn and later regret it. I’ve had friends be wrong. I’ve even had friends who were misunderstood.

    I’ve heard a lot about this “being wrong” thing, but the closest I’ve ever come to it is watching my friends be wrong.

  575. anathema:

    Yeah, you might be right. I really don’t know what TF is capable of. I do know I’ve had a lot friends speak out of turn and later regret it. I’ve had friends be wrong. I’ve even had friends who were misunderstood. The point I’d like to make is those friends remained my friends until they went beyond any chance of reconciliation. This whole dust up seemed to span a couple of weeks.

    Well, how long should people have given Thunderf00t to come around on this issue? How many utterly clueless paranoid screeds should he be able to write before someone asks him to leave?

    It’s not as if none of the other bloggers here tried to explain to him why he was wrong. Yet Thunderf00t merely dug his heels in deeper. How much longer did this need to go on before it meets your standards of being beyond a chance of reconciliation?

    However, Thunderf00t fading into ignominy on Free Thought Blogs would probably be unlikely considering his comportment on Youtube. The fucker has been a champion there, hasn’t he? Not an asshole or a woman hater, callous boor or whatever. But a genuinely good guy.

    Thunderf00t’s behavior on youtube has hardly shown him to be a “genuinely good guy”. Don’t get me wrong, I originally liked much of his work, back when he stuck to debunking creationism.

    But then came the Islamophobia. And the way he acted when he came into conflict with other youtubers. And his insistence on talking about issues which he clearly knew nothing about.

    Thunderf00t showed himself to be an asshole long before he was invited to FTB.

  576. WMDKitty (Always growing and learning):

    @Josh & Pentatomid (#3 &4, respectively) — Rule 34. Just… Rule 34.

    @hyperdeath (#14) — I misread that as “prehensile tentacles”.

    @Josh (#99) — You… you just ruined “Rock With You”. NOOOOOO!!!!!

    @Josh( #209) — I misread “draguar” as “draugar” and wondered why Nord grave-wights would want high heels.

    @Brownian (#229) — Thank you! Now I know what the plural of “penis” is!

    ===

    And I can’t even continue after reading the phrase “weenie linguini”, I’m trying not to fall out of my chair laughing!

  577. Caine, Panthera Susurratrix:

    Ixchel:

    “Hey! Hey wimminz! I don’t understand why you don’t like having your personal safety dismissed! Maybe you are jumping to conclusions! Maybe you should put up with months and months and months of it before you decide that you’re really sure you don’t like having your personal safety dismissed!”

    :snort: You’re forgetting, we’re dealing with a particularly toxic strain of privilege: “If it doesn’t affect me, it doesn’t matter, don’t you get that! Sheesh, stop complaining!”

    That and “He’s a genuinely good guy, what’s your problem, why you so mean!?”

  578. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    What trolls want is a reaction. PZ has given him one. If he’s like most trolls, he’ll enjoy the attention, even if it’s negative.

    Go here.

  579. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart, MD, PhD, DDS, Esq, OM:

    Josh:

    It’s an act of orthographic hostility.

    That’s it! Refusing to learn how the comments flow is just fucking obnoxious.

    (Seriously, it’s HTML. How fucking hard can it be to Google that shit?)

    ixchel:

    “Hey! Hey wimminz! I don’t understand why you don’t like having your personal safety dismissed! Maybe you are jumping to conclusions! Maybe you should put up with months and months and months of it before you decide that you’re really sure you don’t like having your personal safety dismissed!”

    *raised eyebrow*

    Only months and months? How about our entire damned lives?

    nonny:

    I doubt exposing his stupidity is worth the time and effort, especially since he might enjoy it.

    I for one am glad that after 565 comments, someone has finally figured this out.

    (And why not fight against trolls? We’re supposed to let this shit slid &/or not have fun calling them out?)

  580. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    Why put your chits in if all that happens is you’re jettisoned from fellowship over a controversial viewpoint? Defeats the purpose of Free Thought.

    Freethought

    Not to be confused with Freedom of thought

    +++++
    Freedom of thought

    “It is different from and not to be confused with the concept of freedom of speech or expression.”

  581. WMDKitty (Always growing and learning):

    And a whole bunch of stuff seems to have disappeared while I was posting.

    Okay, then. Disregard.

  582. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart, MD, PhD, DDS, Esq, OM:

    ixchel:

    “Oh wait, you already have put up with months and months and months of it? Years of it? A lifetime of it? Still, you can’t be sure until I’m sure!“

    There we go! (Should have refreshed!)

  583. John Morales:

    nonny:

    I doubt exposing his stupidity is worth the time and effort, especially since he might enjoy it.

    O ye of little faith!

    Have you considered that it’s a bit of a throwaway post by PZ, that it’s (so far) garnered 572 comments, that it’s topical?

    (Really, just how much time and effort do you imagine PZ spent on this? I wager significantly less than the author did. :) )

  584. Lyn M: hysterical feminazi fembot watsonista dramatic name caller:

    I have no desire to take sides on any of these issues. I think it is a bit petulant to continue to take shots at Tf00t in this forum when you have banned him from being able to reply, but what is really disheartening is to see you and your followers go after Tf00t’s fans. I count myself among them. I can no more divorce myself from the vitriol directed at fans of Thunderf00t than I can the vitriol directed at atheists. I hope this will pass soon.

    I demand to know which of you is forcing this poor man to come to this website and then turn on the comments and read them and then submit a comment himself. Who is it! Speak up!

    And please note, the poor fellow HAZ A SAD. Is there no end to this infamy?

    Oh, and no keithroragen, Toot is not banned.

  585. SC (Salty Current), OM:

    For those who missed it, here ya go.

    Oh my word.

  586. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain:

    Sheepcake, you fucking do not get it. The problem is that that you are ignorant about the issue. Most people are. That is not a failing.

    The problem is that your proudly proclaim and still insist on throwing shit. And whine to the big blue sky when people point this out to you and tease you in the process.

    Also, here is a huge fucking hint for you. People here are upset that ThunderingFool is so willing to dismissing what women have to say. And the simple fact that you call him a great guy and seem to agree with his dismissal of women’s concerns shows that you share the same believe.

    This makes you a gibbering idiot.

    I did write this.

  587. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    Only months and months? How about our entire damned lives?

    I know.

    I mean to say it appears sheepdip wants you to put up with it until T + more months &months &months,

    where T is the arrival time of Thunderfoot at FtB.

  588. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart, MD, PhD, DDS, Esq, OM:

    ixchel:

    I mean to say it appears sheepdip wants you to put up with it until T + more months &months &months….

    My bad. I didn’t get the whole gist of that post ’til I saw your continuation at 571.

  589. John Morales:

    sheeptick:

    At any rate, my knowledge of the man up to this dust up has been hugely positive. And my points have been general and non-specific which are valid points nonetheless. I won’t shut up on you vouchsafe. Cripes I just got here.

    You’re transparent; your white-knighting for thunderpod consists of endlessly repeating you think he’s a good guy and can’t you all just get along and make me happy?

    (Why can’t you face reality?)

    Yeah, you just got here, and you have the repertoire of a vuvuzela.

  590. John Morales:

    [meta]

    SamStrange @74, pearls and swine.

  591. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    Well the best way out of ignorance is stepping in,so to speak,

    No, that’s not true.

    The best way is to get yourself an education in the matter. If you want help, you’ll probably get it, but you should stop making statements and start asking questions.

    Immediately stop making statements. Then think clearly about what you want to ask. Then go google and see if you can find the answer. If you can’t, then ask, but don’t make any more statements while you ask.

  592. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain:

    …you have the repertoire of a vuvuzela.

    Nice.

  593. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    Well the best way out of ignorance is stepping in,so to speak, and I’m learning as I go along.

    No. The best way out of ignorance is to shut up and listen. Maybe you’re learning faster this way – although I doubt it – but you’re also annoying the fuck out of a lot of other people who have put up with more bullshit than they can stand at this point.

    WMDKitty, don’t worry, the comments didn’t disappear! When the comments thread gets to more than 500, we go to a second page. Right above the comments box it should say “Older comments” and can take you back to the other ones.

  594. Caine, Panthera Susurratrix:

    Lyn M:

    I demand to know which of you is forcing this poor man to come to this website and then turn on the comments and read them and then submit a comment himself. Who is it! Speak up!

    It was me. I whispered to the Jaguars of Doom™ and they immediately took off and dragged the poor man here unwillingly by his tattered clothing.

  595. sheeptick:

    “What sheepdip means to say is “I don’t like watching my Atheist Parents fight in public; it makes me feel like the Christian Kids At School have Better Families and they look down on me.” (These are understandable feelings when little kids feel them as regards an actual family. It’s not okay to carry over this childhood response to every other public dispute between “big people” that happens later in life. Some fights really should be public, because we are trying to publicly change the culture.)”

    “sheepdip” says: Quite the contrary. I advocate letting the man stay in Free Thought Blogs and fight the issue out in public.

    In this community.

    Why not? I hardly think TF is beyond the power of reason. Is that what you really think?

    He feels the threatening and hostile actions towards women during atheist and skeptical conferences is overblown and no more reflective on its attendants than it is towards the general republic at large. He’s not advocating boorish behaviour is he? Maybe he got defensive when called on it. Maybe he didn’t handle it well. So?

    He deserved to be here before because he has contributed so much to this community in the past, now he’s persona non grata. I don’t get this. Was he out and out hateful or something?

    I’ll take links, elucidate me.

  596. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    My bad. I didn’t get the whole gist of that post ’til I saw your continuation at 571.

    That’s ’cause the gist wasn’t originally there. ;)

    And I noticed that only after posting, so I hastily fixed it.

    My bad, actually. — Your initial reading was an obvious one.

  597. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    He deserved to be here before because he has contributed so much to this community in the past, now he’s persona non grata. I don’t get this. Was he out and out hateful or something?

    Go fuck yourself.

  598. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain:

    Blockquote! Fucking use them fuckface!

  599. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    A link for you, asshole!

  600. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    Quite the contrary. I advocate letting the man stay in Free Thought Blogs and fight the issue out in public.

    NOOOOOO.

    You did in fact say not to fight in public.

    “Get on the phone all of you. Talk. Work it out and then come back to exemplify our ideals. All of you are better than this.”

    LYING PIECE OF SHIT.

  601. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain:

    Was he out and out hateful or something?

    Nothing at all hateful telling women that their concerns are no big deal. Fucking assclown.

  602. Caine, Panthera Susurratrix:

    Was he out and out hateful or something?

    As you cannot be bothered to speak from a position of knowledge and prefer to wallow in your ignorance as if that were something to be proud of, you can fuck right off.

  603. Tethys:

    pssst WMD kitty. If you click the older comments link above the leave a reply box you can see the first 500 comments.

  604. John Morales:

    Poseur: I’ll take links, elucidate me.

    <snicker>

  605. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain:

    Caine, the asshat already knows that ThunderingFool dismisses what women have to say about harassment. He said so himself. One of the few facts he actually had.

    But ThunderingFool is a great guy.

  606. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart, MD, PhD, DDS, Esq, OM:

    cheaptricksheeptick:

    Was he out and out hateful or something?

    What in the high holy hell is this shit?

    Yes. Dismissing women’s concerns as being a killjoy is a pretty fucking hateful thing to do.

    Do you know how to Google? Can’t you look this shit up yourself or are you totally incapable of performing the simplest tasks?

  607. Amphiox:

    He feels the threatening and hostile actions towards women during atheist and skeptical conferences is overblown and no more reflective on its attendants than it is towards the general republic at large

    “reflective towards the general republic at large” =/= “overblown”

    And that is the point.

  608. Ariaflame, BSc, BF, PhD:

    WMDKitty, previous comments on another page, see older comments at bottom of comments.

    Really wish that could be at top of comments too.

  609. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    I hardly think TF is beyond the power of reason. Is that what you really think?

    in the short term? definitely beyond reasoning with. in the long term? who the fuck knows, but I don’t feel like dealing with him for the years it might take him to stop being Holden Caulfield

  610. John Morales:

    [meta]

    Audley, Janine has already summarised the tick’s plea:

    But ThunderingFool is a great guy.

    (Case closed, apparently)

  611. Caine, Panthera Susurratrix:

    Janine:

    But ThunderingFool is a “great guy”.

    I’m sure he is as long as you’re another guy or a chill girl willing to offer up a leg.

  612. Tinjoe:

    sheeptick

    It might be time for you to go seek an education on the matter. I would suggest a decent starting point is Thunderf00ts original post. If you can’t find it, one of his latest videos is him reading it. Next you can read various FTBlogger’s posts in reply. Read up on the comments. Visit any Feminist 101 links that pop up in the comments.

    Don’t ask in this thread for someone to hold your hand on this because from what I’ve seen in the past most people don’t have the patience nor should they.

  613. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain:

    Audley, don’t do that. I love Cheap Trick.

  614. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    He deserved to be here before because he has contributed so much to this community in the past, now he’s persona non grata. I don’t get this. Was he out and out hateful or something?

    1)”so much”? he did one good series on creationists. then, when he veered into other topics, he stopped being good at it, as the anti-muslim videos show.
    2)yes, minimizing women’s experiences with harassment is harmful. what does it matter whether something harmful is accompanied by some negative emotion like hate, though?

  615. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    He’s not advocating boorish behaviour is he?

    That’s unclear at best. The answer appears to be yes; he does not seem to be clear on the concept of consent.

    Maybe he got defensive when called on it. Maybe he didn’t handle it well. So?

    So atheist women shouldn’t have to put up with this. It’s not anyone’s job to make TF’s head right, except that it’s TF’s job.

    He doesn’t get to start by deliberately trolling,

    he doesn’t get to waste the time of people who need this issue handled right — that’d be women — while he who can walk away at any time,* sucks up all the time and energy of those who are already an less privileged class.

    That whole arrangement, where the less privileged are expected to do all the work for the more privileged — that is oppression in itself.

    *I’ve given you that link several times now. Demonstrate to me that you’ve read it. You say “I’ll take links, elucidate me.” Well then prove it, sheepdip. Show me that you can learn things.

  616. Amphiox:

    Why not? I hardly think TF is beyond the power of reason. Is that what you really think?

    His double-down, triple-down, and quadruple-down follow-up blog posts, and his continuing inexcusable behavior on his youtube posts, certainly suggest so.

    He’s not advocating boorish behaviour is he?

    That depends on whether or not you think deliberately engaging in boorish behavior, which his blog posts on this subject (which was the ONLY THING he blogged about at all while he was here) certainly were, count as “advocating”.

    Was he out and out hateful or something?

    Yes he was. And still is.

  617. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart, MD, PhD, DDS, Esq, OM:

    John:
    Oh yes! The plea that Thunderf00t is some sort of awesome d00d. So convincing.

    *eyeroll*

  618. anathema:

    Quite the contrary. I advocate letting the man stay in Free Thought Blogs and fight the issue out in public.

    In this community.

    Why not? I hardly think TF is beyond the power of reason. Is that what you really think?

    Well, gee, why would we think that TF is “beyond the power of reason” on this particular issue? Could it possibly be that all attempts to reason with him on this issue failed? Could it be his complete unwillingness to really address the points his opponents made or engage in any sort of dialogue?

    FTB didn’t kick him out after his first spluttering rant on harassment policies. Nor his second one. People tried to reason with him. People tried to reason with him in this community.

    But Thunderf00t just dug himself in deeper and deeper. Both commenters and bloggers at FTB tried to engage him in a reasonable discussion. Yet he refused to participate.

  619. Tethys:

    Well the best way out of ignorance is stepping in,so to speak,

    Too stupid for words.
    Comment by sheeptick blocked. [unkill]​[show comment]

  620. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart, MD, PhD, DDS, Esq, OM:

    Audley, don’t do that.

    Sorry, Janine.

    *scuffs toe in dirt*

  621. John Morales:

    Tinjoe:

    It might be time for you to go seek an education on the matter. I would suggest a decent starting point is Thunderf00ts original post. If you can’t find it, one of his latest videos is him reading it.

    Strange antics of interpretive dance and vocalisation he must have performed, to accurately reflect the post’s use of ALLCAPS and various other n00bie’s efforts at emphasis and rhetoric. ;)

    (Cargo-cult blogging, it was)

  622. drbunsen le savant fou:

    you’re supposed to be a scientist, for Christ’s sake.

    Help, I’ve fallen in a vat of irony and I can’t get up.

  623. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    Work it out and then come back to exemplify our ideals.

    Our ideals are not Thunderfoot’s ideals.

    So there is nothing else to discuss.

  624. Amphiox:

    I think it is a bit petulant to continue to take shots at Tf00t in this forum when you have banned him from being able to reply

    “Banned him from being able to reply”? What fantasy universe are you living in?

    He has not been banned from commenting anywhere on FtB to my knowledge. He can reply in the comment threads as much as he wants.

    He is fully free and able to reply (and has) whenever he wants by all the other channels he has available to him. Such as his continuing series of pathetic and hateful youtube videos.

  625. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain:

    Drbunsen, I will suggest that you seek the services of First Alert.

  626. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    It might be time for you to go seek an education on the matter. I would suggest a decent starting point is Thunderf00ts original post. If you can’t find it,

    It’s still right here:

    http://freethoughtblogs.com/thunderf00t/2012/06/25/misogynist/

  627. M. A. Melby:

    sheeptick:

    Quite the contrary. I advocate letting the man stay in Free Thought Blogs and fight the issue out in public.

    At first I thought he wasn’t given enough of a chance, simply because the act of inviting him in the first place implied some commitment to try to make it work. He was here for such a short period of time.

    I was wrong.

    I made the false assumption that he was kicked out just because of the quality of his writing. Later, I found out that wasn’t the case. It was also clear from the announcement. So, I should have known better.

    In the end, it is absolutely inappropriate of anyone else to force the admin of FtB to work with someone they simply do not want to work with.

    Making the assumption that they made the decision to ask him to leave cavalierly is insulting. Unless you have as much information as they do and are also forced to live with the decision (either way) as they are…

    Well, it really is none of our business.

  628. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart, MD, PhD, DDS, Esq, OM:

    Also, because I’m feeling fucking charitable and Googling shit for people that don’t deserve it: blockquote.

  629. sheeptick:

    Thank You! I just waded in here today and have always loved the views and wit of all involved. It just strikes me odd that TF is an awful person. We’ll see.

  630. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart, MD, PhD, DDS, Esq, OM:

    Fucking moron.

  631. maelmenoret:

    That e-mail was so full of stupid, I need to wash my brain.

  632. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain:

    Bless your heart.

  633. "We Are Ing The Matrimonial Collective":

    Comment by sheeptick blocked. [unkill]​[show comment]

    I just don’t fucking care anymore.

  634. Josh, Official LuncheonMeat:

    I made the false assumption that he was kicked out just because of the quality of his writing. Later, I found out that wasn’t the case. It was also clear from the announcement. So, I should have known better.

    Thank you for acknowledging this. The sniffy, disdainful reactions ex nihilo are really fucking irritating.

  635. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:

    And my points have been general and non-specific which are valid points nonetheless. I won’t shut up on you vouchsafe. Cripes I just got here.

    They haven’t been valid points due to ignorance, and you know that. You deliberately lie if you think otherwise. And why bother? You aren’t succeeding in helping TF. Only he can do that, and you need to work on him, not us. Since you don’t know what happened, time to shut the fuck up, as you have nothing to say. And you know that, but are too stubborn and too much of an MRA to take advice.

  636. SamStrange: bottom-feeding, work-shy peasant:

    It just strikes me odd that TF is an awful person.

    You do realize, fuckwit, that most inveterate racists are perfectly affable in person (especially if you’re not a person of color), love their mothers, don’t kick puppies, and enjoy eating a nice piece of apple pie now and then. Doesn’t mean their views on race aren’t poisonous and vile.

    What exactly is your fuckwitted definition of a “great guy”, anyway?

  637. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain:

    I Don’t Care Anymore

    He had a few worthwhile solo songs.

  638. "We Are Ing The Matrimonial Collective":

    @Janine

    Thank you.

  639. Josh, Official LuncheonMeat:

    Ugh, Phil Collins. Official Margarine of White Dood Chamber Music.

  640. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    It just strikes me odd that TF is an awful person.

    Regardless of his awfulness (yes he is a terrible person, but still, I’m willing to set this aside and discuss something else)

    regardless of his awfulness, he behaved with profound intellectual dishonesty here, of a degree which skeptics should not countenance.

    Read his initial post, read the responses — Greta’s has been linked for you already — and then read the shit that he continued to post. Even if we disregarded his inability to write, and even if we disregarded his overt sexism and warmongering, we should not put up with such intellectual laziness and dishonesty.

  641. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart, MD, PhD, DDS, Esq, OM:

    Phil Collins kind of creeps me out, to be honest.

  642. Josh, Official LuncheonMeat:

    Yeah, Phil Collins is douchey in that. . .Elton John kinda way. You know what I mean.

  643. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain:

    Josh, I will enjoy a few of his early solo songs. And nothing after Take A Look At Me Now. And I will main anyone who plays Sussudio.

  644. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart, MD, PhD, DDS, Esq, OM:

    They both give me the creeps!

  645. Lyn M: hysterical feminazi fembot watsonista dramatic name caller:

    @ Jim #19

    I just saw Flight of Dodos …

    That would be Flock of Dodos.

    If the film did such a good job of presenting the creationists in a positive light, why did the Discovery Institute repudiate the film? It appears that it was pro-evolution and that you seem to have fastened onto only a small part of the documentary.

  646. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain:

    That would be maim.

  647. 'Tis Himself:

    It just strikes me odd that TF is an awful person.

    Just because someone is good at one thing and you like him for that doesn’t mean he’s not a complete asshole in other ways.

  648. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain:

    Let us not forget Billy Joel when it comes to creepy.

  649. Josh, Official LuncheonMeat:

    Oh, so right Janine. I (shudder) actually bought his An Innocent Man LP with my paper route money. The fuck?

  650. WMDKitty (Always growing and learning):

    @Cipher (#593) — AH! Okay, I haz a dumb today.

    @Tethys, Ariaflame (#s 603 & 608, respectively) — Thank you!

  651. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain:

    I know. I had a copy of Glass Houses.

    You may be right…

  652. Lyn M: hysterical feminazi fembot watsonista dramatic name caller:

    @sheeptick #52

    Yeah, you might be right. I really don’t know what TF is capable of. I do know I’ve had a lot friends speak out of turn and later regret it. I’ve had friends be wrong. I’ve even had friends who were misunderstood. The point I’d like to make is those friends remained my friends until they went beyond any chance of reconciliation. This whole dust up seemed to span a couple of weeks. The guy is a good guy. He was INVITED in because he was a good guy, so why not let him stay, speak his mind and let the consensus decide his fate? By, let’s say, not reading his blog.

    Now I don’t know your friends, and have no idea what the issue was that created the problem, but it seems to me that your friends were completely wrong. You should have treated them differently and that is something you should think about.

    /sarcasm off

  653. ckitching:

    I don’t get it. Virtually every thunderf00t defender has the same completely wrong idea about what freedom of speech actually means. Freedom of speech doesn’t mean someone is required to provide a podium and audience for your speech. It doesn’t mean private parties you have a relationship with are prohibited from ending their relationship (i.e. employment) with you as a consequence of your speech. It doesn’t mean you can say whatever the hell you want with no one ever calling you out on it.

    None of this is new, of course, but I just can’t help but wonder where these stupid ideas came from.

  654. 'Tis Himself:

    Let us not forget Billy Joel when it comes to creepy.

    A guy I know says he comes from “Allentown, as advertised by Billy Joel.”

  655. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    Now I don’t know your friends, and have no idea what the issue was that created the problem, but it seems to me that your friends were completely wrong. You should have treated them differently and that is something you should think about.

    Eeeeeeeheheheheee!

    ahhh

    heh

    whew

  656. "We Are Ing The Matrimonial Collective":

    @Chitching

    http://www.cracked.com/funny-3809-internet-argument-techniques/

    #8

  657. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain:

    Phil Collins did play drums on this.

    And on this.

    He was a damned powerful drummer.

  658. Lyn M: hysterical feminazi fembot watsonista dramatic name caller:

    @ Caine, Panthera Susurratrix #94

    AHA! You are truly evil! The poor fellow. You must whisper again and let him go back whence he came. If they’ll have him of course.

  659. Rev. BigDumbChimp:

    It just strikes me odd that TF is an awful person.

    There you go waving that incredulity around like a bad fart.

  660. Ace of Sevens:

    It just strikes me odd that TF is an awful person.

    I agree that it’s odd how awful he is.

  661. 'Tis Himself:

    Phil Collins also plays drums on this.

  662. Tethys:

    Speaking of Phil Collins and creepy.

  663. Caine, Panthera Susurratrix:

    Lyn M:

    AHA! You are truly evil! The poor fellow. You must whisper again and let him go back whence he came. If they’ll have him of course.

    But the Jaguars of Doom™ are hungry! Famished, even!

    Rev. BDC:

    There you go waving that incredulity around like a bad fart.

    +8

  664. Lyn M: hysterical feminazi fembot watsonista dramatic name caller:

    @ Caine, Panthera Susurratrix #163

    Ooo, good point about the famished thing. Must rethink.

    … Just wondering, has he been tested for toxins? Jaguars of Doom™ are pretty rare.

  665. 'Tis Himself:

    There you go waving that incredulity around like a bad fart.

    To quote DDFMM, thread won!

  666. feralboy12:

    Shit, I think I’m almost caught up with this thread.
    What the fuck is with these waterhead tone trolls? I always feel like some stranger has wandered into my house and started telling me how the furniture is all wrong and needs to be moved. I start to ask “who the fuck are you?” but before the words get out the jerk has started pulling the couch away from the wall and is castigating me for not helping him.

    Let us not forget Billy Joel when it comes to creepy.

    So I had this dream about a year or so ago, where I’m standing on the rooftop of some building, two or three stories high, overlooking a parking lot. Over to the left is some kind of community center, and from inside I hear music–Billy Joel songs. It’s a Billy Joel concert.
    Then the music stops, the door opens, and out walks–Billy Joel. He steps out into the parking lot, looks around, and turns to go back inside. But the door is locked and he can’t get in.
    Then I look at the rooftop I’m standing on and notice there’s several inches of snow around me. And a lightbulb goes on in my head and I think…”I CAN THROW SNOWBALLS AT BILLY JOEL!” It’s an exciting prospect, one of those once-in-a-lifetime opportunities.
    My third throw hits him squarely between the shoulders, and I’m then treated to a slow-motion, zoom-in shot of the impact.

  667. nonny:

    Cipher- Thank you, that was interesting. I’m not sure I’m totally convinced by it; it seems like ‘Phil’ has managed to control the conversation to some extent, since we’re talking about him and thunderfoot instead of squid or something. But I guess it’s true we can’t know his motivation and he’s probably getting plenty of reinforcement from his buddies anyway.

    One thing PZ could do (which he’s probably thought of himself already) is report ‘Phil’ to his email provider.

    Audley- If you enjoy dealing with trolls, then fine, have fun. I don’t have much patience for this kind of thing. I doubt anyone who would send an email like that would be capable of understanding or caring why wishing rape on people is wrong. I think they know and chose to do it anyway. What can you say about someone like that?

    John- I hope you’re right. I hope PZ is enjoying his conference and doesn’t give this asshole another second’s thought.

    I think I’ll just stop reading this thread.

  668. Seabisquick:

    This may be somewhat off-topic, but I think it’s interesting, so enjoy if you can. It’s funny that Mr. Krstulich invokes Socrates as someone who got a raw deal. It turns out that Socrates probably was justifiably tried and executed. He likely wasn’t tried on trumped-up “corrupting the youth” charges as commonly believed. It appears that he was an important factor in establishing the worst, most brutal dictatorships in Athenian history. The “impressive speeches” Krstulich refers to are likely the imaginings of a master propagandist (Plato) who was trying to cast his mentor and hero in the most positive light possible.

    Read the story, as told in an interview with I.F. Stone at http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/socrates/ifstoneinterview.html. I.F. Stone was a legendary investigative journalist who worked almost exclusively by poring over official government documents to suss out the secrets that they inadvertently tell.

  669. John Morales:

    [applied meta]

    To recapitulate the OP:

    Curses! My plan to have Thunderf00t killed has been exposed!
     
    I have now seen a teeny tiny fraction of what Anita Sarkeesian gets.

    (So much chatter about the first, so little about the second)

  670. Cephas Borg:

    Hi all!

    As one of the angry rabble, and as a long-term (but very occasional and somewhat timid) SharkTank Diver (TM), I’d have to say it’s been really educational watching what’s happened here over the past few weeks.

    As something of an individualist, I don’t necessarily agree with everything the bloggers here (or anywhere else I lurk) say, or even imply, PeeZed and Mr F00t included. I *did* enjoy the comments, mostly, especially when I saw so many people saying so many things I’d like to have said, except they were saying them using far fewer words – and were far funnier – than I could ever be.

    Having said that, I should probably just shut the fuck up… But I’ve worn the Underdog cape and sandals for so long, I just can’t help myself.

    See, the thing is… I’m unconscionably pleased that there *are* other places on the internet for voices to be heard, apart from the voices here on the FTBs. (Wooo! What a zinger! Take *that*! And *that*!)

    Reading through all the comments here over the past few months has made me realise that this particular blog is no longer a place for free speech, or, what’s worse, free thought, on a variety of subjects and concepts. (Luckily not science though, which will always keep me coming back for more! I just don’t need to read the comments…)

    It doesn’t matter a fart in a firestorm, really, to anyone else. But I’m no longer capable of contributing anything positive (in terms of the subjects discussed here), and I’m not learning anything new from what used to be a fantastic bunch of the sharpest and funniest minds I ever found, so it’s no great loss to anyone else, PZ or no. I know that, and I really wish I could’a said all this as cleverly and succinctly as you guys can!

    But the fact that I really don’t like the atmosphere here anymore really sucks. (Only to me, obviously!) But it just feels wrong that the sharpest and healthiest blog community in my little book of learning tools has become… well, what it’s become.

    Thanks for the fun, everyone, it was a great time for me, and I really appreciated the fire, the wit, and the compassion.

    I won’t let the door hit me on the arse on my way out. Apologies, as always, for the digital diarrrhoea.

    Cheers,
    Pete in Aus.

  671. "We Are Ing The Matrimonial Collective":

    Reading through all the comments here over the past few months has made me realise that this particular blog is no longer a place for free speech, or, what’s worse, free thought, on a variety of subjects and concepts. (Luckily not science though, which will always keep me coming back for more! I just don’t need to read the comments…)

    It doesn’t matter a fart in a firestorm, really, to anyone else. But I’m no longer capable of contributing anything positive (in terms of the subjects discussed here), and I’m not learning anything new from what used to be a fantastic bunch of the sharpest and funniest minds I ever found, so it’s no great loss to anyone else, PZ or no. I know that, and I really wish I could’a said all this as cleverly and succinctly as you guys can!

    But the fact that I really don’t like the atmosphere here anymore really sucks. (Only to me, obviously!) But it just feels wrong that the sharpest and healthiest blog community in my little book of learning tools has become… well, what it’s become.

    FFS

    Are all you people really this fucking goddamn stupid?

    You know what. i quit. This is it. Straw. Pack animal. Back. Broken. I am done with this skeptical bullshit.

    A schism or even a complete collapse would be the best fucking thing to happen to skepticism as far as I’m concerned. These people are so dumb that I do not want to be associated with them.

    All over the idea that we treat people decently. This is un-be-fucking-leavable. There is nothing worth salvaging in this subculture.

  672. sheeptick:

    This is crazy. I just read the entirety of TF’s blog on Free Thought Blogs and he’s not not out of his mind. He made some good points. Essentially he found sexual harassment a minor issue and the code of behaviour issued from the Skepchicks to be insulting and futile. The threats towards Rebecca Watson from the internet to be idle. Welcome to the fray seems to his response. Seems like he’s used to it. How many rape threats she received surely compares to the death threats he’s had. Eh, PZ?

    Dismissive yes. Arrogant yes. But you jerks dogpiled him and had a hand in this. This man is no enemy to brother or sister here. (Yes, I know “brother” and “sister” and other words like “fellowship” are laden but this is indeed how I feel towards all of you.)

    I regret defending his dismissive and combative attitude but the essential point that these conferences are safe and enjoyable for women is valid, if not entirely. But for goodness’ sake what happens in bars amongst drunk people surely cannot be laid at the doorstep of conference goers.

    His failing is a focus on making points as he sees them, and a lack of expressing empathetic regard for the real perceptions and experiences within the community. Gawd almighty, tough shit.

    I got a lot of vituperative insults for defending someone I innocently thought a good person by you people. And honestly I felt you attacked one you saw as ignorant rather than explain. No problem. I never wrote anything awful. You did. Being offended and feeling the need to attack people you think stupider/lesser than you is pretty fucking rotten.

    PS. I personally endorse a fair and respectful code of conduct, ANYWHERE(!)

    Except here. Right?

  673. echidna:

    Curses! My plan to have Thunderf00t killed has been exposed!

    I have now seen a teeny tiny fraction of what Anita Sarkeesian gets.
    (So much chatter about the first, so little about the second)

    I’ve noticed that. The flak she’s getting is just unbelievable; I can’t really wrap my head around it.

  674. John Morales:

    [meta]

    Pete in Aus.:

    It doesn’t matter a fart in a firestorm, really, to anyone else. But I’m no longer capable of contributing anything positive (in terms of the subjects discussed here), and I’m not learning anything new from what used to be a fantastic bunch of the sharpest and funniest minds I ever found, so it’s no great loss to anyone else, PZ or no. I know that, and I really wish I could’a said all this as cleverly and succinctly as you guys can!

    You’ve reached your limit, you congratulate yourself, and you wish you could be succint.

    (why do you imagine anyone would care?)

    I won’t let the door hit me on the arse on my way out. Apologies, as always, for the digital diarrrhoea.

    You talk the talk, can you walk the walk?

  675. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    sheeptick:

    http://freethoughtblogs.com/greta/2012/06/25/so-much-wrong-part-1-thunderf00t-and-sexual-harassment/

    http://freethoughtblogs.com/greta/2012/06/26/so-much-wrong-part-2-thunderf00t-and-sexual-harassment/

    http://freethoughtblogs.com/greta/2012/06/27/so-much-wrong-part-3-thunderf00t-and-sexual-harassment/

    http://freethoughtblogs.com/greta/2012/06/28/so-much-wrong-part-4-thunderf00t-and-sexual-harassment/

    http://freethoughtblogs.com/greta/2012/06/29/so-much-wrong-part-5-thunderf00t-and-sexual-harassment/

  676. SamStrange: bottom-feeding, work-shy peasant:

    Yeah, if skepticism is the Thunderf00t racist/sexist privileged fanboi movement then I’m out. Y’all can have it.

    I’m a humanist. Fuck y’all.

  677. John Morales:

    [meta]

    sheeptick @172, your puling is cringe-worthy.

    I got a lot of vituperative insults for defending someone I innocently thought a good person by you people.

    Over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over.

    Yup.

    (Shitty being you, no?)

  678. otrame:

    Dear sheeptick,

    Okay, please listen. Here is where you are going wrong.

    1. Stating opinions about a situation you admit you don’t know about. Can you really not see how ridiculous that is?

    2. If you are going to quote, USE BLOCKQUOTE. I personally agree with Dr. Audrey: if you can’t be bothered to learn this simple bit of formatting, I can’t be bothered to read what you have to say.

    One more thing. You really need to get out of the habit of using big words. Half the time, it is clear you don’t know what they mean. Once or twice might be typos or over-enthusiastic auto-correction software, but your posts are full of inaccurate word choices. Stick to simple words. You can still be quite eloquent. Look up words. For instance

    I won’t shut up on you vouchsafe.

    Does not actually make any sense at all. I THINK you meant “I won’t shut up because you say so.”. See, simple words, expressing a thought. No big words to get completely wrong.

    Anyway, you’ve gotten off to a very bad start, but if you actually learn from your mistakes… Who knows what could happen?

  679. Brownian:

    That’s cool, Seabisquick. Thanks for the link.

    @bannedatheist:

    Like I said, I was banned from DU precisely for calling a bigot a “bigot”. If it had been real life, I would have called him much worse. But I was on DU, and they have a policy against ad hominem attacks. You call it a shortcut. I call it a waste of my time. On the webs, everybody’s a nobody. If I can’t continue an argument, or I can’t win with reason and without engaging in a personal attack, I write them off. I don’t switch to 3rd grade antics as my plan B. DU encourages such civility by banning anyone who violates the personal attack rule. Either folks talk in their grown-up voices, or they find another website to lurk on (like this one, in my case).

    I prefer DU. Kinda missing it right now… liberal Xtians and all. At least they make an effort to communicate complex thoughts using English.

    RE: TF. I’ve sorta followed the story. I stand by PZ and Ed 100%. I’m saying if it was me, I’d ban about half of the slimepit, too.

    I agree with all of this, bannedatheist, except for your insistence that Pharyngula should adopt DU’s standards, if I’m not misunderstanding your argument.

    I understand that you see a different kind and level of discourse at DU, and I appreciate that. As you say, they banned you from calling a bigot a bigot*, and probably much worse than that in real life. So real life is not DU, and neither is Pharyngula. Here the discourse might not be up to the certain standards of DU, but you can call a bigot a bigot. Something may be lost, but something is surely gained?

    That may be my public health bias talking, but social interaction is multifaceted and complex.

    *You seem somewhat proud of being banned for that. I don’t see anything wrong with that. You also seem to have come around to see the value in their policy. That’s great too. Would you see the value in having one type of discussion with certain rules at DU, and another type of conversation with different rules on Pharyngula?

  680. SamStrange: bottom-feeding, work-shy peasant:

    Obviously none of these fucking assholes clicked the link to Anita Sarkeesian’s story, or else they wouldn’t be crapping all over the thread about how Thunderf00t is so fucking right that sexism and harassment is just NO BIG FUCKING DEAL.

    I don’t know how to express my anger. It runs deep.

  681. John Morales:

    [meta]

    sheeptick:

    I regret defending his dismissive and combative attitude but the essential point that these conferences are safe and enjoyable for women is valid, if not entirely.

    You regret it but nonetheless you had an essential point which was valid if not entirely.

    (Piteous prevarication is pitifully pathetic)

  682. otrame:

    Wait. Did bannedatheist actually stick the flounce? Wow. Didn’t see that coming.

  683. Rev. BigDumbChimp:

    ॐ, chance sheeptick will read those?

    And get it?

  684. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    sheepdip,

    I just read the entirety of TF’s blog on Free Thought Blogs and

    you didn’t read his critics, though, did you.

    So you really aren’t understanding why we’re bothered.

  685. sheeptick:

    “I don’t get it. Virtually every thunderf00t defender has the same completely wrong idea about what freedom of speech actually means. Freedom of speech doesn’t mean someone is required to provide a podium and audience for your speech. It doesn’t mean private parties you have a relationship with are prohibited from ending their relationship (i.e. employment) with you as a consequence of your speech. It doesn’t mean you can say whatever the hell you want with no one ever calling you out on it.

    None of this is new, of course, but I just can’t help but wonder where these stupid ideas came from.”

    Fine, don’t invite people in, dismiss them a week or two later and call you place Free Thought Blogs. It tarnishes the reputation of the endeavor. And it has.

  686. SamStrange: bottom-feeding, work-shy peasant:

    So, quick poll: which one of you fuckwits actually read the New Statesman article about Anita Sarkeesian?

    Silence will be taken as a “no” which means you’re talking out of your fucking ass and don’t deserve to have anything you say taken seriously.

  687. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    ॐ, chance sheeptick will read those?

    And get it?

    Small.

    However my addressing that to sheepdip was but a convenient facade: I was just going to use this thread to start collecting all the responses to TF.

    And then I’m going to think about linking them all on the wiki. If this is going to be an ongoing boondoggle then it’d be nice to have a handy set of public bookmarks.

  688. SamStrange: bottom-feeding, work-shy peasant:

    Here’s the link from the OP about Anita Sarkeesian.

    There are in fact several articles about her since what happened to her was so fucking egregiously and obviously sexist.

    But, you know, sexism ISN’T A PROBLEM, IT’S NOT A BIG DEAL, IT WOULD BE BETTER IF WE JUST STOPPED TALKING ABOUT IT.

    That’s Chunderf00t’s ever-so-reasonable “position.”

  689. echidna:

    sheeptick,

    And honestly I felt you attacked one you saw as ignorant rather than explain.

    There really isn’t a lot to explain, except that one of the things that seems to have gone under the radar is that Thunderf00t broke one of the basic rules of conversation on Freethought Blogs: that assertions need to be backed up with credible evidence. The other basic rule is to engage in the argument. TF made no sign that he was even listening.

    Freethought doesn’t mean freedom of thought or freedom of expression. It refers to a philosophical viewpoint that, as wikipedia puts it, holds opinions should be formed on the basis of science, logic, and reason, and should not be influenced by authority, tradition, or other dogmas. TF just basically said sexism isn’t a problem he said so. Any evidence he presented was laughable. It was an argument by authority, which he of all people ought to have known better than to make.

  690. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    sheepdip,

    and call you place Free Thought Blogs.

    Freethought

    Not to be confused with Freedom of thought

    +++++
    Freedom of thought

    “It is different from and not to be confused with the concept of freedom of speech or expression.”

  691. Brownian:

    Ing, 171:

    I think I’m there. Other than the personal friendships I have with people here, I don’t really have much in common with the community of skeptics.

    Ironically, despite the claims of humorless feminism, it’s the slymepit.com (ha-ha, aren’t we brave?) type of people I find that aren’t funny. Rather, their humor is common. I can hear sexist “there’s the kitchen” Star Wars jokes anywhere (I mean, literfuckingally anywhere because the goddamn internet). I don’t need my boring stereotypes served with an attitude because they happen to use the names of logical fallacies in arguments with people who think Jesus wrassled unicorns on Wednesdays.

  692. SamStrange: bottom-feeding, work-shy peasant:

    Fine, don’t invite people in, dismiss them a week or two later and call you place Free Thought Blogs. It tarnishes the reputation of the endeavor. And it has.

    You keep on showing your ass. Thunderfoot tarnished his own reputation. FTB preserved theirs by kicking him the fuck out.

    “Freethought” doesn’t mean we have to give a fair listen to every stupid idea out there. Women are people and should be listened to. That premise is not up for debate. If you think it is, you’re a misogynist. Thunderfoot apparently thinks it is. Ergo, he doesn’t belong on FreeThoughtBlogs.

    If FTB weren’t fucking awesome you wouldn’t be complaining about your hero getting booted. Heh.

  693. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    So, quick poll: which one of you fuckwits actually read the New Statesman article about Anita Sarkeesian?

    That article contained one of the most triggering lines of text I’ve seen in a while, and the only reason I was able to get that far before being too nauseous to continue was that she blurred out the image it was describing. I have never been so glad to be a low-profile, pseudonymous commenter as I am right now, and I am fucking sick that callous pieces of shit like the ones who harass her exist.
    I was kinda trying to ignore it because the thread was funny, but yeah. It’s horrible.

  694. SamStrange: bottom-feeding, work-shy peasant:

    So, Sheeptick, did you read the fucking article about Anita Sarkeesian?

  695. SamStrange: bottom-feeding, work-shy peasant:

    That article contained one of the most triggering lines of text I’ve seen in a while, and the only reason I was able to get that far before being too nauseous to continue was that she blurred out the image it was describing.

    That sucks, Cipher. *hugs*

  696. Brownian:

    It tarnishes the reputation of the endeavor.

    Making difficult decisions tarnishes the reputation of the endeavor?

    Has anyone claimed the website “Stepford Atheism” yet? Because I think I’ve found the solution to this issue.

  697. John Morales:

    sheeptick:

    Fine, don’t invite people in, dismiss them a week or two later and call you place Free Thought Blogs. It tarnishes the reputation of the endeavor. And it has.

    <snicker>

    What tarnishes it for you and your ilk polishes it for us and our ilk; also, a week is a long time in the blogosphere.

    PS: Any reply to SamStrange’s question?

    Did you “actually read the New Statesman article about Anita Sarkeesian?“, or are you merely concerned with your object of admiration, the thunderpod?

  698. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    And honestly I felt you attacked one you saw as ignorant rather than explain.

    Oh, wah.
    You came in here, admitted you didn’t know shit about what was going on, and started issuing orders, then demanded that we educate you because you are apparently completely fucking helpless and can’t educate yourself. It’s not our job to fucking spoonfeed you. But go read the link I provided at 99 in its entirety, as well as those provided by ixchel at 175.

  699. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    And honestly I felt you attacked one you saw as ignorant rather than explain.

    http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2012/07/06/i-get-email-20/comment-page-2/#comment-388753

    http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2012/07/06/i-get-email-20/comment-page-2/#comment-388763

    also http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2012/07/06/i-get-email-20/comment-page-2/#comment-388803

    Maybe he got defensive when called on it. Maybe he didn’t handle it well. So?

    So atheist women shouldn’t have to put up with this. It’s not anyone’s job to make TF’s head right, except that it’s TF’s job.

    He doesn’t get to start by deliberately trolling,

    he doesn’t get to waste the time of people who need this issue handled right — that’d be women — while he who can walk away at any time,* sucks up all the time and energy of those who are already an less privileged class.

    That whole arrangement, where the less privileged are expected to do all the work for the more privileged — that is oppression in itself.

    *I’ve given you that link several times now. Demonstrate to me that you’ve read it. You say “I’ll take links, elucidate me.” Well then prove it, sheepdip. Show me that you can learn things.

  700. sheeptick:

    “ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ
    6 July 2012 at 8:49 pm

    Keep in mind he’s not advocating rotten behavior towards women but rather that it’s not a big problem.

    Since he’s wrong about that, his argument contributes to making the world a worse place for women. Just like if he were minimizing the problem of racism, it would make the world worse for people of color.

    As such, we don’t consider him to be a great guy.”

    I see your point.

  701. SamStrange: bottom-feeding, work-shy peasant:

    Answer the fucking question, Sheeptick.

  702. SamStrange: bottom-feeding, work-shy peasant:

    Goddamn. I better get on my bike before I go all apeshit up in here. Later homies.

  703. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    Aww Sam. *hug back* Thanks. Have fun.

  704. Caine, Panthera Susurratrix:

    Sam Strange:

    I don’t know how to express my anger. It runs deep.

    Same here. “I’m not a hypocrite, I’m a woman“. Yeah, no problem there at all. (And that’s one of the polite, civil ones.)

    Colour me out of the skeptic’s club too. Anything so stuffed with people who are hostile to me simply because I’m female is not something I’m interested in being part of at all. As it stands now, if you’re aren’t a chill girl™ you simply aren’t welcome.

  705. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    Cephas Borg / Pete in Aus.,

    Reading through all the comments here over the past few months has made me realise that this particular blog is no longer a place for free speech, or, what’s worse, free thought, on a variety of subjects and concepts.

    I cannot find any reading of this statement which does not translate as “people should be able to say whatever they want and nobody should ever be told to fuck off.”

    What do you think freedom of speech is supposed to mean? All I can parse is that you are a liar or a dumbshit who does not care to think clearly about what the fuck free speech actually means.

    Apparently you believe it means freedom from harsh criticism. Prove me wrong.

  706. chigau (間違っていない):

    <blockquote>paste quote here</blockquote>
    =

    paste quote here

    Easy.
    You can even copypaste the <blockquote>paste quote here</blockquote> stuff

  707. Caine, Panthera Susurratrix:

    From the New Statesman article, which apparently, little fanbois of Tfoot just can’t manage to read:


    Every time this happens, more women get the message: speak up, and we will come for you. We’ll try to ruin your life, tear you apart, for having an opinion.

    This ^ is what we have been fighting, steadily, for a long damn time already. The proof is littered all over the damn ‘net that this happens. How about you fanbois discuss this for a change?

  708. Josh, Official LuncheonMeat:

    I wish somehow the fuckheads could be forced to take a vacation from their infestation efforts, and that the rest of us could somehow go on a month’s sabbatical to recuperate our sanity. Good god but I’m feeling beat up and I know I don’t have it even half as bad as the women.

  709. kimberlyparker:

    I know it’s been said before, but I feel the need to say it again: Saying “you should get a sense of humor” does not absolve you of being a complete and utter asshat.

  710. John Morales:

    I am certainly not the first woman to suffer this kind of harassment and sadly, I won’t be the last. But I’d just like to reiterate that this is not a trivial issue. It can not and should not be brushed off by saying, “oh well that’s YouTube for you“, “trolls will be trolls” or “it’s to be expected on the internet”. These are serious threats of violence, harassment and slander across many online platforms meant to intimidate and silence. And its not okay. Again, don’t worry, this harassment will never stop me from making my videos! Thank you for all your support!

    Those who are discussing the OP will know what my quotation references and its originator.

  711. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    more responses to thunderfoot

    http://freethoughtblogs.com/crommunist/2012/06/26/putting-your-thunderfoot-in-it/

    http://freethoughtblogs.com/zinniajones/2012/06/gotta-disagree-with-you-here-thunderf00t/

    http://freethoughtblogs.com/lousycanuck/2012/07/04/the-inner-badgers-live-reaction-to-thunderf00ts-video-about-harassment-policies-ftbullies/

  712. "We Are Ing The Matrimonial Collective":

    If anything hurt FTB’s rep it was the poor decision making in giving TF his blog and revoking it in what many saw as a probably or inevitable result from day one. Hopefully it was a wake up call on being more discriminating (feel free to quote mine that assholes) in the selection process.

  713. sheeptick:

    sheeptick:

    Fine, don’t invite people in, dismiss them a week or two later and call you place Free Thought Blogs. It tarnishes the reputation of the endeavor. And it has.

    What tarnishes it for you and your ilk polishes it for us and our ilk; also, a week is a long time in the blogosphere.

    PS: Any reply to SamStrange’s question?

    Did you “actually read the New Statesman article about Anita Sarkeesian?“, or are you merely concerned with your object of admiration, the thunderpod?

    I just read the New Statesman article and it’s deplorable. What would make you think I would feel otherwise? I was merely describing a lack of empathy towards Rebecca Watson (who I admire a great deal) on thunderF00t’s behalf because of the abuse he must suffer because of his own public profile. He feels it’s a rough and tumble world on the internet and one will get these attacks. Men most likely death threats, women the same plus sexual abuse. He discounts them as idle trollish behaviour by impotent men (or women, we can’t know really)

  714. "We Are Ing The Matrimonial Collective":

    Also hopefully it was a lesson that spoken oration and video editing =/= prose skill.

  715. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    Sheeptick, the link at 99 describes your behavior beautifully. Go. The fuck. Away.

  716. Josh, Official LuncheonMeat:

    Jesus Christ. . you can’t even manage to fucking set off your quotes, sheep.

    GO FUCK YOURSELF UNTIL YOU CAN ACT LIKE A HUMAN BEING.

    You don’t deserve the attention of anyone here.

  717. "We Are Ing The Matrimonial Collective":

    @Sheeptrick

    FFS, LEARN TO QUOTE. THE CODE HAS BEEN EXPLAINED TO YOU AND IS PROVIDED ABOVE YOUR WINDOW.

    You’re current formatting is incredibly unaccommodating to everyone.

  718. John Morales:

    sheeptick:

    I was merely describing a lack of empathy towards Rebecca Watson (who I admire a great deal) on thunderF00t’s behalf because of the abuse he must suffer because of his own public profile.

    o.O

  719. chigau (間違っていない):

    &ne;
    =

  720. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    I was merely describing a lack of empathy towards Rebecca Watson (who I admire a great deal) on thunderF00t’s behalf because of the abuse he must suffer because of his own public profile.

    There are a great many people who have suffered that sort of bullshit, yet manage to not act like fucking callous idiots who dismiss other people’s lives.

  721. Ing: Gerund of Death:

    I was merely describing a lack of empathy towards Rebecca Watson (who I admire a great deal) on thunderF00t’s behalf because of the abuse he must suffer because of his own public profile.

    ….

    uuuuuuuuum.

    ING HAS CRASHED PLEASE REBOOT

  722. Josh, Official LuncheonMeat:

    I was merely. . .

    Not listening at all after that.

  723. Ing: Gerund of Death:

    See a decent person if they got such bullshit might be empathetic enough not to shit on someone else.

  724. Josh, Official LuncheonMeat:

    Excuse me while I prick my cat’s ear to test her blood sugar, a more pleasant task than reading this thread.

  725. John Morales:

    [meta]

    Shift-comma (left angle bracket) then ‘b’ ‘l’ ‘o’ ‘c’ ‘k’ ‘q’ ‘u’ ‘o’ ‘t’ ‘e’ then shift-fullstop (right angle bracket)and then the pasting of the quotation and then shift-comma ‘/’ then ‘b’ ‘l’ ‘o’ ‘c’ ‘k’ ‘q’ ‘u’ ‘o’ ‘t’ ‘e’ then shift-fullstop is too elite a technique for some, apparently.

    (F33zum Я l33tz!)

  726. Ing: Gerund of Death:

    Excuse me while I prick my cat’s ear to test her blood sugar, a more pleasant task than reading this thread.

    Yes I too shall look for a more pleasent task to distract myself. Oh look! It’s been months since I sandpapered my genitals and dipped them in lemon juice! I should get on that!

  727. Brownian:

    Men most likely death threats, women the same plus sexual abuse. He discounts them as idle trollish behaviour by impotent men (or women, we can’t know really)

    “We have similar difficulties only you also have a completely different set of difficulties. Suck it the fuck up bitch; the most important issue in my life is that I be able to gnaw on a woman’s leg without asking her first. I mean, yeah, I know rape and harassment are bad ‘n’ all, but did you see this picture of me having fun? Surely we can all agree that this picture represents the most important issue we all face.”

  728. tigtog:

    Sheeptick, please use some of the links here at this post to learn how to format text effectively in HTML for ease of reading. I can’t be the only one who routinely killfiles commentors who can’t/won’t learn how to do this.

  729. Josh, Official LuncheonMeat:

    Yes I too shall look for a more pleasent task to distract myself.

    May I suggest you indulge your desire to engage in the purchasing of many cloth funnels, some you can’t even spare the expense for.

    That’s what you can do.

  730. sheeptick:

    i”xchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ”

    this is an excerpt from one you proffer. Crommunist.

    “Here’s a weird factoid factlet (Matt Penfold has rightly pointed out that I am using the word ‘factoid’ incorrectly) that might blow TF’s mind: bars actually do have sexual harassment policies. However, when they (we) enforce those policies, they often take the form of punches in the face and getting your ass dragged outside by a bunch of ‘roid-swollen malcontents who’ve been watching your drunk ass try to inappropriately touch that woman under her dress for the last half hour and are really excited to fight.”

    First of all this is not representative, I hope, of this blogger and lord (note the small “l”) knows he has a point to make here but you linking to this makes me wonder? Have you read all the arguments? Are you fully in command here?

    Laugh Out Loud.

    Zinnia Jones, who I very much like, makes a great yet, not broad, argument doesn’t she? It’s about the nature of the “straw poll” and how “straw polls” don’t amount to much. Which is very true. I agree. This was a stupid thing to TF to do.

    With you so far.

  731. Josh, Official LuncheonMeat:

    FUCK YOU SHEEP. LEARN TO QUOTE OR NO ONE WILL READ YOUR COMMENTS. BE A HUMAN BEING

  732. sheeptick:

    “Sheeptick, please use some of the links here at this post to learn how to format text effectively in HTML for ease of reading. I can’t be the only one who routinely killfiles commentors who can’t/won’t learn how to do this.”

    Thank you I will learn this, just not tonight.

  733. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    First of all this is not representative, I hope, of this blogger and lord (note the small “l”) knows he has a point to make here but you linking to this makes me wonder? Have you read all the arguments? Are you fully in command here?

    Your shtick is not funny anymore, shitstain.
    Shut the fuck up.

  734. Ace of Sevens:

    I’d agree that inviting someone and kicking them off a week and a half later looks bad, but the problem is with the first part, not the second part. Was anyone familiar with his oeuvre and FTB surprised at how this turned out?

  735. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    Thank you I will learn this, just not tonight.

    CHRIST. FUCK YOU, YOU FUCKING OBNOXIOUS LITTLE TWIT.

  736. Josh, Official LuncheonMeat:

    NO ONE WILL READ OR COMMENT ON YOUR POSTS UNTIL YOU LEARN TO BLOCKQUOTE SHEEP. FUCK OFF AND DIE UNTIL THEN.

  737. Lyn M: hysterical feminazi fembot watsonista dramatic name caller:

    Thank you I will learn this, just not tonight.

    because I am a huge douchebag and I hope no one can understand what I say so I can lie about it later.

    !!!I NEVER SAID THAT!!!!

  738. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    I was merely describing a lack of empathy towards Rebecca Watson (who I admire a great deal) on thunderF00t’s behalf because of the abuse he must suffer because of his own public profile. He feels it’s a rough and tumble world on the internet and one will get these attacks.

    Well that lack of empathy makes him something other than a great guy.

    Expecting women to deal with threats of sexual abuse without complaining — that is in practice siding with the oppressors, because that’s exactly what the people who make threats of sexual abuse expect. They expect to be able to keep doing it and getting away with it forever and ever.

    Instead of giving up in apathy, like Thunderfoot expects, we want to push as hard as we can and as fast as we can to change social expectations — however slightly, because every little bit helps.

    Those people who suggest we stop pushing, they are dead weight at best, and they become enemies when they try hard enough. Thunderfoot has been pushing against us instead of pushing against those who make threats of sexual violence, or at least getting out of the way.

    If he would get the fuck out of the way and go back to making anti-creationist videos and otherwise being socially useless, then he would at least not be an enemy. But he has chosen to be a reactionary conservative on this issue, so now we have to fight him too; that makes more work for people who he sometimes vaguely claims to be in general agreement-about-goals with. Well, if he’s really in vague agreement-about-goals, then he could at least quit pushing against us and stop making more work for us.

  739. Lyn M: hysterical feminazi fembot watsonista dramatic name caller:

    @ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ #238

    Well, if he’s really in vague agreement-about-goals, then he could at least quit pushing against us and stop making more work for us.

    But but but but … some might think that means maybe he was, like, not totes cool!!

  740. chigau (間違っていない):

    <blockquote>paste quote here</blockquote>
    =

    paste quote here

    Easy.
    You can even copypaste this
    <blockquote>paste quote here</blockquote>
    and paste your quote in place of “paste quote here”.

  741. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    Thank you I will learn this, just not tonight.

    Dude it is really easy. Don’t worry about the other stuff anybody linked. Just do what chigau said:

    +++++
    <blockquote>paste quote here</blockquote>
    =

    paste quote here

    Easy.
    You can even copypaste the <blockquote>paste quote here</blockquote> stuff
    +++++

    That’s all there is to it! So easy.

    If you keep commenting without using the blockquote method, then I am going to have to be very unkind to you. It would not be fair to others here for me to keep engaging you as politely as I have been — it appears I have been inadvertently reinforcing your rude disregard for others here.

  742. chigau (間違っていない):

    I’m going to bed.

  743. Caine, Panthera Susurratrix:

    I was merely describing a lack of empathy towards Rebecca Watson (who I admire a great deal) on thunderF00t’s behalf because of the abuse he must suffer because of his own public profile.

    Fuck off, pisscake. Let me tell you something – a family member started raping me when I was three years old. It went on for 6 damn years. I had a mother who was convinced I’d be schizophrenic, like my father, so she started having me locked up on a whim, starting when I was seven years old. It got worse from there.

    I have empathy for other people, especially those who are being harassed and threatened on a daily basis for simply having the fucking nerve to speak out while being female.

    Just for speaking out here at Pharyngula, I’ve received threats via email, I’ve been harassed, had nasty ass blog posts written about me, etc. I haven’t run out of empathy. Or brains.

    You dare to bring up the minor shit Tfoot has gotten on yootube? There isn’t enough fuck in the universe to tell you to fuck off with.

  744. anathema:

    First of all this is not representative, I hope, of this blogger and lord (note the small “l”) knows he has a point to make here but you linking to this makes me wonder? Have you read all the arguments?

    Okay. Good to know that you didn’t what was written about this topic over on Crommunist. Mind you, I’m not entirely sure why this is. You just quoted a section and completely failed to provide any actual criticism of the points he made.

    And even if you don’t like what was written on Crommunist, what about what Greta Christina wrote? Are you actually going to address anything of substance here?

  745. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    And even if you don’t like what was written on Crommunist, what about what Greta Christina wrote? Are you actually going to address anything of substance here?

    No, xe’s Just Saying that TF is a great guy and it’s our job to convince hir away from that view and not hir job to actually learn shit. Because xe’s Just Saying.

  746. sheeptick:

    I’m gonna learn this HTML shit I promise. If i ever decide to come back. Ha Fuck.

    Yes he’s probably less than a great guy but are you really better? Are you out there 24/7 putting yourself out fighting dipshit christians? (or people like me?) And making a dent? He really is. He’s a great fucking guy, maybe he needs his conscience expanded about sexually inequality. Good he’s ripe. Fucker already pledges the allegiance to alter of rationalism.

    But to me TF means something. He’s fought for both of us. If that sounds trite to you then, well, fuck you. Sorry but fuck you.

    “If he would get the fuck out of the way and go back to making anti-creationist videos and otherwise being socially useless, then he would at least not be an enemy. But he has chosen to be a reactionary conservative on this issue, so now we have to fight him too; that makes more work for people who he sometimes vaguely claims to be in general agreement-about-goals with. Well, if he’s really in vague agreement-about-goals, then he could at least quit pushing against us and stop making more work for us.”

    Yeah, I respect that. This guy is no reactionary conservative I think. On this issue, teeter. Maybe he got out too far ahead and now got his ass sawed off. I still like him and want everyone to get along. Better. Not perfect Better. : )

  747. nms:

    You don’t need to learn HTML. You already know how to copy-paste, and chigau has helpfully provided you will a special case of copy-paste that will make your comments less infuriating to read, or at least, infuriating in new ways.

    This could not have been made easier for you.

  748. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    John Morales says:

    Shift-comma (left angle bracket) then ‘b’ ‘l’ ‘o’ ‘c’ ‘k’ ‘q’ ‘u’ ‘o’ ‘t’ ‘e’ then shift-fullstop (right angle bracket)and then the pasting of the quotation and then shift-comma ‘/’ then ‘b’ ‘l’ ‘o’ ‘c’ ‘k’ ‘q’ ‘u’ ‘o’ ‘t’ ‘e’ then shift-fullstop is too elite a technique for some, apparently.

  749. sheeptick:

    “Fuck off, pisscake. Let me tell you something – a family member started raping me when I was three years old. It went on for 6 damn years. I had a mother who was convinced I’d be schizophrenic, like my father, so she started having me locked up on a whim, starting when I was seven years old. It got worse from there.

    I have empathy for other people, especially those who are being harassed and threatened on a daily basis for simply having the fucking nerve to speak out while being female.

    Just for speaking out here at Pharyngula, I’ve received threats via email, I’ve been harassed, had nasty ass blog posts written about me, etc. I haven’t run out of empathy. Or brains.

    You dare to bring up the minor shit Tfoot has gotten on yootube? There isn’t enough fuck in the universe to tell you to fuck off with.”

    How dare you take a personal tragedy and fling it at innocent persons who you do not know as if they could possibly share the blame. Shame on you. I do not and could never condone what happened to you but empathy is EXACTLY the emotion I would like to get across.

    All threats are awful. Epithets are a little less worse. Consider that.

  750. John Phillips, FCD:

    John Morales
    7 July 2012 at 12:10 am

    sheeptick:
    Fine, don’t invite people in, dismiss them a week or two later and call you place Free Thought Blogs. It tarnishes the reputation of the endeavor. And it has.

    What tarnishes it for you and your ilk polishes it for us and our ilk; also, a week is a long time in the blogosphere.

    QFFT.

    I don’t visit as often as I would like and so often miss out on a lot here or get to it a bit late to add anything worthwhile that han’t already been said. However, the number of misogynistic maroons that have slithered out from under the shitheap since elevatorgate, and more recently over the thunderf00t in mouth debacle, has been truly sickening and sadly amazing and I am not easily amazed.

    But, still, as a 60 year old man, who, while never a deliberate misogynist or sexist, admittedly still has to necessarily occasionally check against my own privilege, for which I thank many on this and allied blogs for educating me, I have found it profoundly dispiriting when I consider the responses of so many of my fellow men on these and other blogs over the last year or so. Worse, knowing that at least a significant fraction, if not most, are atheists, they don’t even have the excuse, however poor, of religion to fall back on as a reason for their toxic misogyny.

    However, I can say that I do relish reading as well as learning from so many of you on here and across FTB, both bloggers and commenters, as you fight the good fight. For that I thank you one and all. It’s just a very great pity that in 2012, for FSM’s sake it’s the bloody 21st Century, we are still having to go through this crap. While I am mainly a cup half full type, the ignorance of so many, and yet displayed with apparently such obvious, and oblivious, pride, does tend to occasionally tip me over into a cup half empty frame. But, amongst all the crap, I can guarantee that more than a few of you will manage with your postings, especially when retorting to the many tone trolls and derailers that pop up so repeatedly, to have me ROTFLMAO and helping ‘top’ my cup up again.

    For that I also offer a heartfelt thanks.

    P.S. I followed the link to the SP blog, oh my, are they really from the same planet, let alone the same species, as the rest of us. I am not trying to dehumanise them, but oh, the concentrated toxic stupidity displayed with such gusto and obliviousness, I would hardly have believed it if I hadn’t read it for myself.

  751. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    I was going to tell you precisely what an insensitive piece of shit you are for what you said above, but then you posted this.

    How dare you take a personal tragedy and fling it at innocent persons who you do not know as if they could possibly share the blame. Shame on you.

    You fucking pile of shit, get the fuck out of this thread. Don’t fucking come back. You don’t deserve a fucking second more from anyone here.

  752. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain:

    All threats are awful. Epithets are a little less worse. Consider that.

    Shitstain, I hope you have a fucking care taker you reminds you to take a breath every so often.

    Also, just fucking go away.

    And have your care taker delete this blog from your computer’s memory.

  753. nms:

    Shame on you. I do not and could never condone what happened to you but empathy is EXACTLY the emotion I would like to get across.

    You have failed utterly.

  754. tigtog:

    Skeptick, it’s way past the time when this would have been most useful, but nonetheless it’s never too late to learn The First Rule Of Holes.

  755. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    What a self-centered, oblivious, shameless fucking monster. I didn’t think my opinion of the disgusting puddle of rank piss could go any lower, but jesus fucking christ.

  756. Gnumann, quisling of the MRA nation:

    I still can’t see any blockquotes in the little sheepshitstains posts. Either he’s trolling or too stupid and selfish to bother with.

    It doesn’t matter which one, so I’m not going to try and find out.

  757. sheeptick:

    <a href="

  758. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    sheepshit, like I said, I can’t be polite to you unless you blockquote; it wouldn’t be fair to others here. So I hope you fuck off real soon now.

    Yes he’s probably less than a great guy but are you really better?

    Yes. You are a worthless piece of shit.

    Are you out there 24/7 putting yourself out fighting dipshit christians?

    Yes, they come through here all the time and we try to teach them. I hope you slip in the shower.

    And making a dent?

    Yes. But again, we aren’t concerned just with atheism. We also teach people about sexism and racism, and in almost every such thread we get lurkers popping up to thank us for all they’ve learned over the years. You are a disappointment to your family.

    He really is. He’s a great fucking guy, maybe he needs his conscience expanded about sexually inequality.

    Not our job to fix him, you FUCKING PIECE OF SHIT WHO WON’T LISTEN.

    Atheist women shouldn’t have to put up with this. It’s not anyone’s job to make TF’s head right, except that it’s TF’s job.

    He doesn’t get to start by deliberately trolling,

    he doesn’t get to waste the time of people who need this issue handled right — that’d be women — while he who can walk away at any time,* sucks up all the time and energy of those who are already an less privileged class.

    That whole arrangement, where the less privileged are expected to do all the work for the more privileged — that is oppression in itself.

    *I’ve given you that link several times now. Demonstrate to me that you’ve read it. You say “I’ll take links, elucidate me.” Well then prove it, sheepdip. Show me that you can learn things YOU FUCKING USELESS SHEEP.

    Good he’s ripe. Fucker already pledges the allegiance to alter of rationalism.

    Wrong. That doesn’t make him any better at learning about sexism. You shitstain.

    But to me TF means something. He’s fought for both of us.

    No, he’s never fought for me. And hey, that’s okay, I don’t need him to. I just don’t want him to stand in my way. Shut the fuck up and stop talking about things you are too stupid to ever understand, fuckbucket.

    Yeah, I respect that. This guy is no reactionary conservative I think.

    Yes he is. He is a misogynist and a genocidal warmonger. And you are a sycophantic toad.

    On this issue, teeter.

    Since we care about sexism, we aren’t going to look the other way about this. Why is this hard to understand, you goddamned duckwit?

    I still like him and want everyone to get along. Better. Not perfect Better

    It’s okay to want everyone to get along; it’s not okay to demand this from us instead of him. You are siding with sexism. If you care about sexism and you want him to learn then you should be lecturing him and not us. We’re not the ones who should change. He should change.

    You are barking up the wrong tree. What you are doing is bad, and you should feel bad.

    Read this: http://saltycurrent.blogspot.com/2012/06/note-to-those-who-say-they-oppose.html

    You asshole.

  759. Pteryxx:

    How dare you take a personal tragedy and fling it at innocent persons who you do not know as if they could possibly share the blame. Shame on you.

    O_o Holy shit, sheeptick, THAT is what you consider empathy? You made a claim about the source of Thunderfoot’s dismissiveness being abuse HE’D suffered. Caine was REFUTING YOU. And YOU dare try and shame her and dismiss her? Do only guys on the internet get the get-out-of-personal-shaming-free card in your world?

    You just victim-blamed. You’re not fucking innocent anymore, if you ever were.

  760. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain:

    Also, fuckface, here is a little fucking clue for you.

    Caine was almost murdered. It was not for lack of trying. That person seceded in murdering others.

    HOW THE FUCK DOES HAVING NAMES TOSSED AT YOU EVEN COMES CLOSE?

    You speak of empathy. You have none. You have shown that empathy is when people coddle your fucking pet peeves.

    Fucking grow up, you fucking moral monster.

  761. Caine, Panthera Susurratrix:

    John Phillips, FCD, deflouncing momentarily to say Thank You! You’re one of the people who makes the fight better and provides strength.

    *reflouncing*

  762. Lyn M: hysterical feminazi fembot watsonista dramatic name caller:

    @ Caine

    And yes, I know I am quoting you sheeptick,

    How dare you take a personal tragedy and fling it at innocent persons who you do not know as if they could possibly share the blame. Shame on you. I do not and could never condone what happened to you but empathy is EXACTLY the emotion I would like to get across.

    All threats are awful. Epithets are a little less worse. Consider that.

    See, it’s all about him. I mean you had the nerve to point out, using a powerful example, that people can undergo great harm for many years, and yet manage to be real people who can care and feel and think and act. But because it is all about him, that example was “flinging” something at him, “an innocent”.

    And of course, you neglected to understand that threats and epithets really sting, you know. I mean, really.

    Thus, you are in the wrong yet again. Amazing how that works out, isn’t it? So instead of dealing with the reality, he had to turn on you and tell you off. Mmm-mmm-mmm.

    Sheeptick, that was one immense fail you showed us all there.

    And for the sake of others here, I think you should be told that there are even more histories among the people commenting that show that people can suffer horror, yet be brave and considerate. At any moment, they could throw something real at you as if it had relevance and made a point.

    Try to get over it.

    Oh, and how could you know? Because if you had read some of these threads before shooting off with your opinions, you would have seen some of these commenters speak up about what they have endured and survived. But reading, well, how does that work?

  763. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    I still can’t see any blockquotes in the little sheepshitstains posts. Either he’s trolling or too stupid and selfish to bother with.

    Oh, that’s easy now. Xe’s a fucking revolting monster who utterly lacks even a tattered shred of human decency. It takes a special kind of fucking evil to shame a rape survivor for daring to mention her rape to other people, but that is precisely what xe dared to do in this fucking thread. The only reason to bother with hir is to tell hir precisely how disgusting xe is, and precisely how hard to fuck off.

  764. C.C.Fuss:

    Oh hai everyone,
    I haven’t been paying attention to any of this, but I have a very important opinion that I am certain noone else could possibly have said yet! It is this:
    You all are meanies who use bad words and banning and censorship. Why are you so angry and mean when I am not aware of all the bad stuff those guys did, and therefore it didn’t happen, unless you all take the time to walk me personally through the entire backstory.

    Also you are blockquotenazis. And you should change your comment policy to be like some random other blog that I just got banned from for violating their comment policy.

    And don’t you dare going telling me about bad stuff that has happened to you! I didn’t do it, so why should I have to be aware of it?!

  765. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    Worthless troll,

    How dare you take a personal tragedy and fling it at innocent persons who you do not know as if they could possibly share the blame

    Uh, no, that’s not what happened.

    Caine made a comparison; you said Thunderfoot gets abused; Caine showed why your characterization is offensive.

    Shame on you for trying to shame Caine.

    Again, if you want to make things better then stop bothering people here and go bother Thunderfoot.

    If you care about sexism then you must recognize the difference between systematic group oppression, and interpersonal disputes. Women are an oppressed class. Vloggers are not. Thunderfoot being fired from FtB is not anything like being subjected to sexism. Sexism is a societal problem, in a way that Thunderfoot being fired is not. You are focusing on the wrong people here; you are making things worse instead of better; you are further contributing to the oppression of women by pushing against them here in their fight against sexism instead of at least getting out of the way.

    You know how to stop. You should stop.

  766. sheeptick:

    I was going to tell you precisely what an insensitive piece of shit you are for what you said above, but then you posted this.

    “How dare you take a personal tragedy and fling it at innocent persons who you do not know as if they could possibly share the blame. Shame on you.”

    You fucking pile of shit, get the fuck out of this thread. Don’t fucking come back. You don’t deserve a fucking second more from anyone here.

    They, who she assigned do NOT SHARE any blame. NONE. IT is unfair and reprehensible to take a personal tragedy and use it to advantage in an objective argument. I have all the sympathy in the world for this woman but it makes me sick to think that her pain trumps REASON.

  767. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    Get the fuck out of here.

  768. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    You’ve shown yourself to be a despicable piece of shit. Fucking vile assholes like you are unwelcome around decent human beings. I don’t know or care what part of this you don’t get. Just go the fuck away.

  769. nms:

    IT is unfair and reprehensible to take a personal tragedy and use it to advantage in an objective argument.

    Yes, that would have been unfair. Unfortunately for you, Caine didn’t do that.

    and @C.C.Fuss

    I was going to comment on your comment but in doing so I would have violated the New Coyote Rules so I won’t instead.

  770. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    piece of sheep shit,

    They, who she assigned do NOT SHARE any blame. NONE. IT is unfair and reprehensible to take a personal tragedy and use it to advantage in an objective argument. I have all the sympathy in the world for this woman but it makes me sick to think that her pain trumps REASON.

    Uh, no, that’s not what happened.

    Caine made a comparison; you said Thunderfoot gets abused; Caine showed why your characterization is offensive.

    Shame on you for trying to shame Caine.

    Again, if you want to make things better then stop bothering people here and go bother Thunderfoot.

    If you care about sexism then you must recognize the difference between systematic group oppression, and interpersonal disputes. Women are an oppressed class. Vloggers are not. Thunderfoot being fired from FtB is not anything like being subjected to sexism. Sexism is a societal problem, in a way that Thunderfoot being fired is not. You are focusing on the wrong people here; you are making things worse instead of better; you are further contributing to the oppression of women by pushing against them here in their fight against sexism instead of at least getting out of the way.

    You know how to stop. You should stop.

  771. Lyn M: hysterical feminazi fembot watsonista dramatic name caller:

    @ sheepshag

    They, who she assigned do NOT SHARE any blame. NONE. IT is unfair and reprehensible to take a personal tragedy and use it to advantage in an objective argument. I have all the sympathy in the world for this woman but it makes me sick to think that her pain trumps REASON.

    Sheeptick, if you had showed any REASON, then I suppose we would have to deal with that fake issue. But since you are avoiding the valid point she made, then I guess you are just a dumb troll after all the posturing. And that’s being kind.

    This isn’t a debating society in which there are crappy little rules about logic and any other shit you think somehow defends you or makes what you said right in any context whatsoever. You blew it. You can’t think of any way out except to say she is wrong because she mentioned PERFECTLY RELEVANT FACTS that happened to be personal. You moron.

  772. C.C.Fuss:

    See, that was meant to be satire, but on rereading it’s more like a collection of Greatest Troll Hits From The Thread.

    ===

    Seriously, though, that video ‘game’ in the linked New Statesman article. There are no words for that.
    It’s seriously fucking awful to make threats of violence. But that game involves a realism in imagining inflicting violence that is a whole nother thing. The fact that some people think that is funny is just too sickening to think about for too long…

  773. Lyn M: hysterical feminazi fembot watsonista dramatic name caller:

    CC Fuss, prepare to be revolted. Read what sheepshagger said. And have a bucket handy.

  774. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain:

    Pile of fucking shit. Fucking read this and comprehend.

    You tried to excuse the words of ThunderingFool by pointing out the “abuse” he suffer at our hands. Caine pointed out that she suffered real abuse and does not engage in the actions of TF, thus refuting your claim.

    And now you whine about a real person pointing her real abuse, that it is somehow unfair to you.

    You are not the reasonable one here. You are so fucking far from it that the actual use of reason confuses and confounds you.

    Fucking go away.

    Also, I would not be surprised that PZ, reading your reaction to Caine’s story, bans you. Not for the clusterfuck of stupity you dumped here. It will be showing yourself to be an inhumane oaf.

  775. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain:

    C. C. Fuss, normally, that kind of satire would be highly appreciated. You just happened to drop it off at the wrong time.

    Things got really serious. I hope you understand.

  776. Lyn M: hysterical feminazi fembot watsonista dramatic name caller:

    And I apologize to morons. I used the term without thought.

  777. ruteekatreya:

    I was kind of amused by the idea that TF (or anyone else) ‘deserved’ to be here… but then I got to the asshole being a complete piece of shit and I stopped being amused. Fuck off.

  778. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    sheep shit,

    They, who she assigned do NOT SHARE any blame. NONE. IT is unfair and reprehensible to take a personal tragedy and use it to advantage in an objective argument. I have all the sympathy in the world for this woman but it makes me sick to think that her pain trumps REASON.

    Even though you are a liar who’s mischaracterized what Caine said,

    by this standard, it was morally wrong of you to say:

    How many rape threats she received surely compares to the death threats he’s had. Eh, PZ?

    the abuse he must suffer because of his own public profile.

    By your own standard, you should not have mentioned any of this.

    Obviously you are a terrible person, by your own standard and by ours. So whichever side is right, you are bad and you should feel bad.

  779. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    C. C. Fuss, normally, that kind of satire would be highly appreciated. You just happened to drop it off at the wrong time.

    Things got really serious. I hope you understand.

    What Janine said. Unfortunately, sheeptick is busily sucking all of the air out of the room with hir reprehensible behavior.

  780. Pteryxx:

    IT is unfair and reprehensible to take a personal tragedy and use it to advantage in an objective argument. I have all the sympathy in the world for this woman but it makes me sick to think that her pain trumps REASON.

    Explain why Thunderfoot’s death threats weren’t “personal tragedies” when YOU used them to excuse his dismissiveness of others. Explain why HIS pain doesn’t represent some sort of betrayal of reason. (You weren’t originally claiming it trumped reason; you were claiming it trumped empathy. Nice goalpost shift there.)

    Then try and explain, if you can, why bad things happening to women, to Caine, to Anita Sarkeesian, to Rebecca Watson, to all the women catching massive shit on the internet and in person every day, somehow make THEM unreasonable while Thunderfoot gets away with understandable lack of empathy.

    You pathetic hateful wretch.

  781. C.C.Fuss:

    @LynM: Yes, I have been reading the very valuable contributions of the sheep tick. Ugh. I don’t know how you guys keep going at this after so many waves of gnnnnnnnnnnnnnnrrrrrrrrrgh!

    @nms:

    I was going to comment on your comment but in doing so I would have violated the New Coyote Rules so I won’t instead.

    uh, OK, I’m lost on this one. I looked up the Pharyngula wiki to no avail. Google got me this which is about a pelt incentive in Canada. I assure you that my pelt is not even a bit sniny and not worth harvesting!

  782. C.C.Fuss:

    Janine and all:
    Yes, sorry.
    It probably didn’t come across well, but sheeptick was making me just as angry as the rest of you – especially the reaction to Caine was just revolting.
    I tend to revert to sarcasm when I’m angry (probably a bad habit). I’ll be more careful!

  783. Lyn M: hysterical feminazi fembot watsonista dramatic name caller:

    @ CC Fuss

    @LynM: Yes, I have been reading the very valuable contributions of the sheep tick. Ugh. I don’t know how you guys keep going at this after so many waves of gnnnnnnnnnnnnnnrrrrrrrrrgh!

    Because WE ARE PHARYNGULA

    /spartan voice

  784. Travis:

    I wish I could say something substantive but I really cannot. Over the course of the entire day I have read about 750 comments in this thread and have been left in a state of despair. Ok, not despair but some sadness that the skeptical community has a rather large idiot problem.
    Many years ago I got interested in skepticism after having been a big believer in UFOs, ghosts, etc. I was never a believer in god, and once I got over my paranormal problem I realized I was an atheist and began reading about this. I thought science, skepticism and atheism went together very well. For a long time I was also under the mistaken impression that people in the skeptical community were rational, thoughtful people, probably as I had met so few that had similar interests as I did and knew no better. Then I ran into the libertarian crowd of atheists and skeptics and found that many were completely divorced from reality. It was disappointing to learn this but I was having too much fun with creationists to think much about it. So I went along happily for years thinking this was a small group, occasionally seeing them pop up, eventually finding this blog many years ago and encountering them regularly, but still seeing them as a small section of the entire group of atheists. Then EG happened. Since then my feelings towards many in the skeptical community have plummeted and after reading this thread I hope they have hit rock bottom. How anyone can read the supporters of Thunderfoot in this thread and think they are in any way reasonable is beyond my ability to think at 03:30. The ignorance of the topic at hand, the complete lack of historicity, the same stupid questions and points being brought up over and over again (whinging about free speach, censorship and TF’s supposed banning being three issues that come to mind immediately). Combine that with the constant tone trolling and I have to say they are every bit as bad as the worst creationists when it comes to completely vacuity and sheer intellectual laziness.

    Sigh. I wish I was not so tired, I fear my rambling makes no sense. But I have found this whole experience to be so frustrating and there is something about this specific thread that has exacerbated those feelings.

  785. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain:

    No need to apologize, C.C. Most of us have a very wide sarcastic streak.

    I was more worried that we might have scared off a seemingly reasonable newbie. (I say that because I do not recall your name.)

    Sarcasm is just about always welcome. Just that this was one of the few times where is just did not work. But, like I said, that is not your fault.

    I hope that if the future, things are not so harsh for you here.

  786. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    It’s not your fault at all, C. C. (although at some point we may need to duel to see who is the One True CC). Pretty sure no one was expecting the thread to get this nasty all of a sudden.

  787. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain:

    Travis, your rant did make sense. Yes, all of this is distasteful, tiring and frustrating. But you carry on, struggle, fight, learn and teach in the simple hope that the situation gets better.

    Please, do not worry to much that you feel frustration. I think all decent people will feel that. You just try to do what you can to try to improve what is around you. Even it it seens that it has barely improved.

  788. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain:

    I did something that I try to avoid, I allowed my anger at a troll to keep me up later than I should be. I should have been in bed an hour ago. I need to be up for work. So I am bowing out. I will see how this is resolved by tomorrow night.

    Bye.

  789. C.C.Fuss:

    Thanks Janine – no worries!

    And yes, I guess I’m a sort-of newbie; I’ve been lurking since forever but only commented a handful of times because nothing worthwhile to add / in the wrong time zone and missed the main conversation.

    @ Travis and others re. ‘traditional’ skepticism:
    I had a similar experience, but much longer ago. I joined my local skeptics group way back when I was still in undergraduate. They all seemed like nice fun folks. But then I got more involved with the wider community, and the email list (as it was back then pre-blogs) and found a very wide, deep streak of nasty sexism, along with very strong tribalism around stuff like global warming denialism, anti-anything-that-remotely-seemed-like-hippies-might-like-it, and so on. Trying to say anything about it just resulted in a massive pile-on.

    There was one memorable occasion when I objected to a rape joke on the email list and was uniformly berated by everyone there for being a humourless feminazi blah blah, then when I kept arguing with them, it turned out that actually I should have just kept quiet because everyone else agreed with me (despite none of them having said so) and thus I was being a BULLY to the rape-jokist guy.

    …So yeah. I wouldn’t be crying a river either if the ‘skeptic movement’ disappears.

  790. sheeptick:

    —–“Fuck off, pisscake. Let me tell you something – a family member started raping me when I was three years old. It went on for 6 damn years. I had a mother who was convinced I’d be schizophrenic, like my father, so she started having me locked up on a whim, starting when I was seven years old. It got worse from there.

    I have empathy for other people, especially those who are being harassed and threatened on a daily basis for simply having the fucking nerve to speak out while being female.

    Just for speaking out here at Pharyngula, I’ve received threats via email, I’ve been harassed, had nasty ass blog posts written about me, etc. I haven’t run out of empathy. Or brains.

    You dare to bring up the minor shit Tfoot has gotten on yootube? There isn’t enough fuck in the universe to tell you to fuck off with.””—–

    FULL STOP

    NO ONE compared her personal tragedy with ANYTHING AT ALL!! No one wants any woman to suffer I never ever implied such ever. THis was TOTALLY unprovoked.

    BTW, does anyone here know my personal tragedy? Would it be appropriate to bring it up??

    I was assaulted. I was raped. ergo STFU??? Good enough for the PZ crowd I guess.

    This brouhaha has nothing to do with the issue at hand. For someone to come out w/ an epithet at the start , a anecdotal testimony and then competely derail an entirely irrelevant conversation means what??? THis makes sense to you? What the hell is wrong with every last one of you?

  791. Lyn M: hysterical feminazi fembot watsonista dramatic name caller:

    I truly believe things can be changed even though the process is slow and can be very frustrating.

    Here’s a story about why I feel that. I didn’t keep tight statistics as I went, but when I was deciding on a career change, I added up what I had done as a lawyer. My education was subsidized by the government and taxes, and I felt I should give fair value back. Had I really done anything? Did it matter?

    At the end of 25 years, I had helped about 2,000 people, helped them deal with domestic violence, stalkers, that sort of thing. I also worked for Children’s Aid for years. There, I know I helped get about 300 children out of homes where they were at risk, sometimes at risk of severe harm. I also helped hundreds more stay in their homes, but in safety. Some of those people were taken from situations of immediate and severe physical danger. When you add the family members who were not my clients but who were affected by work I did, that meant at least some 5,000 people in all. The town I was living in had fewer people than that. I could look at it and see the numbers. I realized that every day, you do what you can. Every day, you try. It does have an effect and it does matter.

    Changing society is like that. One person at a time. Stay with it, Travis and everyone else.

  792. tigtog:

    Sheeptick:

    1. *You* argued that Thunderf00t was justified in empathy-failure because he’s received lots of horrible threats (implying that lots of horribleness justifies jaded scorn)

    2. Caine shared that she personally has experienced far more horribleness than just lots of horrible threats, yet she does not have empathy-failure, and feels that experiencing horribleness would never be a justification for empathy-failure.

    She was answering you directly, and you are shaming her for pointing out so clearly that your point was craptastic.

  793. echidna:

    Sheeptick,

    Thunderfoot asserted that people on FTB talk way too much about feminism for his taste, because, afterall, it isn’t that much of a problem. He didn’t really pin down what he was talking about, but said that he didn’t want policies to spoil his fun.

    The fact is that sexism is a problem, just not one readily seen by men. Men who talk as if women are just blowing things out of proportion are part of the problem.

    Now go find a drop bear.

  794. Lyn M: hysterical feminazi fembot watsonista dramatic name caller:

    @ sheeptick

    You apparently cannot see that telling us that Caine’s statement was somehow not fairsy is anything but utter wankery.

    Somehow or other, you know “the right way” to do everything, and a true story that refutes you is derailing things.

    This fail seems to be way, way beyond reach-ability. I have raised cats with more insight than you are demonstrating.

    Maybe each and every one of us are not wrong. Maybe you blew it.

  795. Caine, Panthera Susurratrix:

    Lyn M:

    When you add the family members who were not my clients but who were affected by work I did, that meant at least some 5,000 people in all.

    You give me heart. And strength. Thank you for being you, thank you for the work you’ve done, for all those you have made safe, for all those you sought justice for over the years. ♥

    Havelock adds:

    1111111111111111111111111111111111111

  796. tigtog:

    Now go find a drop bear.

    Clenched tentacle salute to my fellow member of the Antipodean contingent of the Horde.

  797. tigtog:

    argggh. The shame of blockquote fail.

  798. Lyn M: hysterical feminazi fembot watsonista dramatic name caller:

    @ Caine

    Thank you, but I sure had the easier row to hoe. I have said it before and I say it again. I admire you and the others who have spoken out. I admire the guts you have to keep on in ordinary life, nevermind taking up the extra weight of dealing with …

    Let me stop there.

    And to Havelock, as a long time cat keeper, I had to read over and over how cute you rats are. I also had to look at a lot of cutie pie pics. Now, I actually think rats are kind of cool. So 1111111111111111111111111111 back atchya.

  799. Travis:

    Changing society is like that. One person at a time. Stay with it, Travis and everyone else.

    Quite true. I think today was made worse by my need to fight ignorance on another front today, regarding sexual freedom here in Canada. There was a lot of frustration and annoyance piled into the day. I would like to think that society is changing but it is a long and tiring battle. Thankfully there seems to be many others that can take one’s place when one is feeling a little burnt out. I will certainly stay with it as these issues are important to me but maybe take the weekend off.

  800. sheeptick:

    ___Sheeptick:

    1. *You* argued that Thunderf00t was justified in empathy-failure because he’s received lots of horrible threats (implying that lots of horribleness justifies jaded scorn)–

    Yes. He’s Jaded. perhaps

    ___2. Caine shared that she personally has experienced far more horribleness than just lots of horrible threats, yet she does not have empathy-failure, and feels that experiencing horribleness would never be a justification for empathy-failure.___

    That is not what she said at all.

    –Just for speaking out here at Pharyngula, I’ve received threats via email, I’ve been harassed, had nasty ass blog posts written about me, etc. I haven’t run out of empathy. Or brains.

    You dare to bring up the minor shit Tfoot has gotten on yootube”—

    That is what she said. AS IN SHUT UP. because anything Tfoot says means is miniscule, which is, ironically enough, what tFoot was saying about Rebecca Watson.

    Let’s get to the heart of this. You don’t know my pain = shut your unfeeling mouth.

    Is this the level of discourse we are at? I myself have suffered. May surprise you, my horrible state might fit some sort of awful characterization you might wish upon me. But this does not allow me to shut you up on a here or anywhere.

    She was answering nothing, she was bullying me on a message board in order to make people dislike me. THere was nothing germaine or revealing that she said that affected this issue at all.

  801. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    sheepdip,

    NO ONE compared her personal tragedy with ANYTHING AT ALL!!

    ? You are not very smart are you.

    The reason Caine brought that up was because you were comparing Thunderfoot’s and Rebecca Watson’s experiences. Things are not the same for men and women as a class. As atheists they both get death threats; as a woman Rebecca also gets rape threats. Life is generally speaking worse for atheist women than for atheist men.

    No one wants any woman to suffer I never ever implied such ever.

    And Caine didn’t imply that you wanted women to suffer. Let me repeat that, since you seem incapable of reading for basic comprehension.

    Caine didn’t imply that you wanted women to suffer.

    If you don’t understand why Caine said what she said, read again. Then read again. Read everything we’ve said to you about it. Then fuck off for a while, because you’ve become very tiresome. Then if you come back, which you shouldn’t, but if you come back read again everything we’ve said to you about it. Ask a stupid question if you must.

    And then you’ll see Caine didn’t imply that you wanted women to suffer.

    THis was TOTALLY unprovoked.

    Wrong. You were using Thunderfoot’s experiences to excuse his lack of empathy about sexism generally and Watson specifically.

    BTW, does anyone here know my personal tragedy? Would it be appropriate to bring it up??

    It would be appropriate. Feel free to talk about it.

    I was assaulted. I was raped.

    That’s awful. You didn’t deserve for that to happen to you.

    ergo STFU??? Good enough for the PZ crowd I guess.

    But no, not ergo STFU, because people here haven’t been minimizing sexual violence. If anyone had been minimizing sexual violence then it would make sense for you to follow with ergo STFU.

    This brouhaha has nothing to do with the issue at hand.

    Yes it does.

    For someone to come out w/ an epithet at the start , a anecdotal testimony and then competely derail an entirely irrelevant conversation means what??? THis makes sense to you?

    It wasn’t irrelevant — and you’ve been doing anecdotes throughout this entire thread — but let me try to teach you something about empathy here.

    If someone brings up a personal tragedy that you can’t understand the relevance of, it is not appropriate to berate them for it. It may be that they were triggered by something you didn’t understand. You can do a few things; you can ignore it, you can try to offer sympathy, you can apologize if you see what you said that may have triggered the reaction, you can simply affirm what they’ve said and continue arguing (this is not quite ignoring the matter, but similar). Not all of these things are equally good, mind. Ignoring the matter can be callous too. I’m not saying it’s a great thing.

    But — all of these options are better than telling them they shouldn’t have talked about their own experience. All of these options are better than claiming it was inappropriate for them to talk about their own personal suffering.

    We should want a world in which people feel able to bring up their experiences. Scolding people for bringing up their personal suffering doesn’t help bring about a better world. Sometimes people have to talk about it, even at times you feel are inopportune. Talking about it at inopportune times is better than not talking about it. (And again, I’m not granting your suggestion that this was an inopportune time. It’s very clear that it wasn’t. I’m just showing you what you can do when you don’t understand why a person said something about their personal experiences, how you can deal with those sitations without hurting people.)

  802. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    Now sheeptick, stop trying to shame Caine. It makes you a bad person.

  803. adamgordon:

    I can’t believe I just read through this entire thread. Sheeptick really is a special little snowflake, isn’t xe?

  804. Lyn M: hysterical feminazi fembot watsonista dramatic name caller:

    @ sheeptick

    I was merely describing a lack of empathy towards Rebecca Watson (who I admire a great deal) on thunderF00t’s behalf because of the abuse he must suffer because of his own public profile.

    That is you saying his lack of empathy arose out of the abuse he suffered.

    [and yet] I haven’t run out of empathy. Or brains.

    That bit, sheeptick, was Caine making the point that Tfoot’s failure to consider the problem for women arose out of his lack of empathy, which could not be forgiven due to the stress of internet criticism as persons who had suffered more managed empathy.

    The don’t you dare part, was rhetoric, intended as I interpret her statement, to mean, how can you say such things.

    After which, you stated over and over that Caine had unforgivably relied on the truth to rebut your argument, derail the thread and otherwise not be fairsy.

    Still not getting it, are you?

  805. echidna:

    tigtog:

    Clenched tentacle salute to my fellow member of the Antipodean contingent of the Horde.

    Ta.

  806. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    Use your blockquoting ability. You did it once. You can do it again.

    Yes. He’s Jaded. perhaps

    That’s not okay.

    ___2. Caine shared that she personally has experienced far more horribleness than just lots of horrible threats, yet she does not have empathy-failure, and feels that experiencing horribleness would never be a justification for empathy-failure.___

    That is not what she said at all.

    In fact it is what she said.

    She quoted you saying:

    “I was merely describing a lack of empathy towards Rebecca Watson (who I admire a great deal) on thunderF00t’s behalf because of the abuse he must suffer because of his own public profile.”

    And she responded:

    I have empathy for other people, especially those who are being harassed and threatened on a daily basis for simply having the fucking nerve to speak out while being female.

    Just for speaking out here at Pharyngula, I’ve received threats via email, I’ve been harassed, had nasty ass blog posts written about me, etc. I haven’t run out of empathy. Or brains.

    Those parts I bolded, they are very important. Ruminate on them.

    That is what she said. AS IN SHUT UP. because anything Tfoot says means is miniscule,

    This is a distortion. See those bolded parts above? You’re leaving out their importance. You were trying to justify Thunderfoot’s lack of empathy. She responded by telling you to shut up because she is still capable of empathy and therefore Thunderfoot should be capable too.

    She did not simply say you should shut up because she’s had it worse than Thunderfoot has. She was very clearly referencing your excusing of his lack of empathy, and she was very clearly pointing out that it was not a valid excuse.

    Is this the level of discourse we are at? I myself have suffered.

    You’re allowed to talk about it here.

    May surprise you, my horrible state might fit some sort of awful characterization you might wish upon me.

    You said you were raped; I guarantee no one here wishes that upon you. It’s awful and you didn’t deserve it.

    But this does not allow me to shut you up on a here or anywhere.

    That really depends on what the person is saying. If they’re saying “rape isn’t bad” for instance then it would justify you telling them to shut the fuck up.

    She was answering nothing,

    Except for all those bits I bolded, eh.

    she was bullying me on a message board in order to make people dislike me.

    We already disliked you. And no, she wasn’t bullying you. She responded substantively about your claims regarding Thunderfoot’s empathy.

    THere was nothing germaine or revealing that she said that affected this issue at all.

    Except for all those bits I bolded.

  807. John Morales:

    [meta]

    sheeptick:

    She was answering nothing, she was bullying me on a message board in order to make people dislike me.

    It wasn’t bullying (rather, it was a pained response to you) and she hardly needs to do anything to make people dislike you.

    Let’s get to the heart of this. You don’t know my pain = shut your unfeeling mouth.

    Is this the level of discourse we are at? I myself have suffered. May surprise you, my horrible state might fit some sort of awful characterization you might wish upon me. But this does not allow me to shut you up on a here or anywhere.

    No-one is shutting you up, scum-bucket — you’re merely despised for your apologias and your entitlement complex and your (de facto) malicious cluelessness.

    (Caine, OM is a well known and respected regular, you’re a drive-by whiner who’s poisoned their own well)

    Why don’t you go comment on the thunderpod’s youtube channel?

  808. Lyn M: hysterical feminazi fembot watsonista dramatic name caller:

    @ John Morales #307

    It is interesting that the only motive sheeptick can imagine for Caine is that she wants him to look bad. Yet he cannot see that actually, he looks bad.

  809. nms:

    argggh. The shame of blockquote fail.

    Don’t worry. In this thread, blockquote fail looks pretty good by comparison.

  810. amblebury:

    Thank you ixchel for articulating my thoughts so elegantly:

    If someone brings up a personal tragedy that you can’t understand the relevance of, it is not appropriate to berate them for it. It may be that they were triggered by something you didn’t understand. You can do a few things; you can ignore it, you can try to offer sympathy, you can apologize if you see what you said that may have triggered the reaction, you can simply affirm what they’ve said and continue arguing (this is not quite ignoring the matter, but similar). Not all of these things are equally good, mind. Ignoring the matter can be callous too. I’m not saying it’s a great thing.

    Lynn M Just – thanks, for doing what you did, for doing what you do.

    Caine I’ve never taken the opportunity, I don’t think, to say…here’s my problem. There aren’t words. Admiration, respect, grief for your suffering? No word or phrase has the gravity.

    May I humbly offer you aroha – love?

    Sheeptick I’m sorry you were assaulted. That’s horrible, it shouldn’t happen to anyone. Not acknowledging Caine’s experience was horrible. You shouldn’t do that to anyone.

    I knew someone, too well, who had a frightening lack of empathy for the experience of those around hir. Who became wildly defensive when called on their lack of empathy, who’d clutch at any straw, fabricate any story to get out of the responsibilty of being fully human/humane. That person still scares me. Don’t be them.

    Stop. Educate yourself. Perhaps get some help.

  811. John Morales:

    [meta]

    Lyn, I for one don’t know what sheeptick’s gender is.

  812. Lyn M: hysterical feminazi fembot watsonista dramatic name caller:

    John, absolutely true. I went from a comment way way back in the thread that appeared to me to suggest male. After trying to search for whatever key words I thought I had, I could not find it.

    It is interesting that the only motive sheeptick can imagine for Caine is that she wants him xe to look bad. Yet he xe cannot see that actually, he xe looks bad.

    FIFMyself

  813. Ermine:

    Sheeptick, Sheeptick, for your own sake if no one else’s, learn the First Rule of Holes!

    Stop digging. Stop. NOW!
    Go away. You’ve made yourself -spectacularly- unwelcome. Do you see anyone else speaking up in your defense? At this point you don’t even have the PUAs and MRAs on your side anymore.

    If you want to ever salvage anything here, just go away for at least 12 hours. I suggest reading this thread again, especially other people’s responses to yours, and your responses (or failures to respond) to each of them. Figure out what you’ve done wrong, and try to work out just how abject your apology would have to be, if you expect anyone here to ever speak to you with anything but loathing. If you get past that, -then- write something. If it hasn’t taken you at least a couple of days, go away until it does!

    Right now, you’re just not listening to anyone, and no one at all wants to hear a word from you either. You can’t possibly accomplish any good by continuing this conversation. Are you going to continue it anyway, just to dig yourself into that hole a little deeper?

  814. John Morales:

    [meta]

    Lyn, kudos.

    (and yeah, fail on multiple levels by the tick, and making the fundamental attribution error is just one of them)

  815. sheeptick:

    ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ

    You keep implying that I’m stupid or dense.

    I’m not.
    Don’t really like that and to be honest, haven’t said anything of the sort towards you. Or anyone tonight.

    I like people here but this is an horrible forum for honest discussion. Pretty easy to see how these misunderstandings erupt. That abused girl came out with an epithet towards me. Not impressed. I’ve been abused and sure suffered plenty. Sure I have. This quality grants no one an inroad towards reason in my book. Quit making excuses for the poor thing. If you want to parse her words and import them into your arguments that is your affair entirely but you’ve not raised her by my standard. Pathetic, sad, and deserving of help, just not the sort you are offering.

    You know what sucks? I’m probably your best friend in a way. I like what you say and how you say it.

    Oh, and I get how I don’t get it. Not so fucking dumb.

    Little drunk and could give fuck all about the message board here but I had my say and you’ve had your entertainment.

  816. Lyn M: hysterical feminazi fembot watsonista dramatic name caller:

    John, thank you. And I agree with the parenthetical comment. Attribution was just one of many.

    Looked like transference to me, actually, in the psychological sense. (I know all about psychology, btw, because my sister took psychology and I used to have dinner with her every day. Nearly.)

  817. nms:

    gross

  818. Lyn M: hysterical feminazi fembot watsonista dramatic name caller:

    @ John

    From #315

    That abused girl came out with an epithet towards me. Not impressed. I’ve been abused and sure suffered plenty. Sure I have. This quality grants no one an inroad towards reason in my book. Quit making excuses for the poor thing.

    It is comments like this that inclined me to think male. And a few other things, but I will wait to be more sure about that.

  819. nms:

    sheeptick is getting too unpleasant to even mock properly

  820. John Morales:

    sheeptick:

    I like people here but this is an horrible forum for honest discussion. Pretty easy to see how these misunderstandings erupt. That abused girl came out with an epithet towards me. Not impressed. I’ve been abused and sure suffered plenty. Sure I have. This quality grants no one an inroad towards reason in my book. Quit making excuses for the poor thing. If you want to parse her words and import them into your arguments that is your affair entirely but you’ve not raised her by my standard. Pathetic, sad, and deserving of help, just not the sort you are offering.

    It ain’t Caine I see blubbering before me, and she’s no girl, either.

    Little drunk and could give fuck all about the message board here but I had my say and you’ve had your entertainment.

    Your drunken incompetence aside, this ain’t a “message board”, it’s PZ’s blog’s comment section, and you’re not entertaining but pitiably clueless, and honest discussion is what’s showing your attributes.

    Again: why not go to the thunderpod’s “message board” and do your thing there?

  821. Lyn M: hysterical feminazi fembot watsonista dramatic name caller:

    @ nms

    Indeed.

  822. Gordon:

    So this guy is for unlimited free speech, but Rebecca is “at best misguided” for saying “don’t do that”?

    What about her sacred free speech?

    Sweet zombie jebus! Why cant you let it go? She didn’t do anything wrong.

  823. fredsalvador:

    in it she made a 20-second offhand remark : “Guys, don’t do that”

    No; she spent a full minute criticising the actions of a random stranger who made a pass at her. While she was stuck in the elevator with him. Alone, inebriated, in a foreign country, at 4 in the morning. Then explained why this was a shitty thing to do – especially to a woman who has just made a speech explaining how it makes her uncomfortable to be sexualised by her audience.

    Damnit, world! How can you not SEE this woman is an extremist nutjob?!

    AND she had obviously not brushed her hair before making that video. Her PINK hair.

    Hell in a handcart, I tells ya!

  824. John Morales:

    fredsalvador @323, your trolling is duly noted.

  825. Khantron, the alien that only loves:

    I think Fredsalvador was being facetious, John Morales.

  826. Praedico:

    Okay, I know this has been said dozens of times in various threads – probably a few dozen in this thread alone – but I have to say it or I’m going to go crazy.

    To the email writer and his ilk:

    IT’S THE FUCKING INTERNET, PEOPLE!
    FTB are under no obligation to let thunderf00t spew his drivel here. He can go to blogspot, tumblr, wordpress, twitter, facebook, livejournal or fucking myspace and let forth the crazy there. Or, he can get his own, independent website.
    You are not entitled to a blog hosted by a private organisation because ‘free speech’. You can say what the fuck you like, they’re just not going to pay you to do it here.
    And if FTB ‘don’t represent majority of the freethinking community’ then who the fuck CARES that you can’t have a blog here? Go find or found a blog network that you think does!

  827. Khantron, the alien that only loves:

    Seriously, we were too mean to a guy who in a discussion about sexism started by making a get in the kitchen “joke” for no fucking reason. He was never an honest actor, and the bloggers here still gave him the benefit of the doubt, and he continued to troll. So he was fired.

    I agree with the people that thought thunderf00t’s eventual removal was likely from the first announcement. I didn’t expect it to be so quick and I suspected it would be for racism, not misogyny.

  828. Louis:

    I have caught up on this thread and I have three (3) things to say that are of the utmost relevance and importance:

    1) Some people believe every word of Genesis, I don’t even think Phil Collins is that good a drummer.

    2) I’m not an Aussie but I Fear The Drop Bear.

    3) I don’t know who you are. I don’t know what you want. If you are looking for a conversation without swearing whilst simultaneously being clueless and dismissing the very real problems of sexism and its denial, I can tell you I don’t have patience. But what I do have are a very particular set of skills; skills I have acquired over a very long career. Skills that make me a nightmare for people like you. If you step back from the internet and think, that’ll be the end of it. I will not look for you, I will not pursue you. But if you don’t, I will look for you, I will find you, and I will mock the living bejesus out of you.

    Louis

  829. Lyn M: hysterical feminazi fembot watsonista dramatic name caller:

    Ooooooo, Louis. That sounds like fun!

    If you have two cupcakes, would you give me one?

  830. Louis:

    Lyn,

    I have just managed to avoid a “give you one joke”. I believe I have earned all the cupcakes.

    Happily, I would be overjoyed to share!

    Louis

  831. Lyn M: hysterical feminazi fembot watsonista dramatic name caller:

    *Annoyedly remembers something*

    Please?

  832. Lyn M: hysterical feminazi fembot watsonista dramatic name caller:

    Great! You win two ways as we can assist each other to torture chat with them.

    And did you know that when you put <puppy eyes inside the full set of brackets, the comment disappears?</puppy eyes

  833. ricardodivali having sniffles over stiffles:

    Sheeptick

    He feels the threatening and hostile actions towards women during atheist and skeptical conferences is overblown and no more reflective on its attendants than it is towards the general (re?)public at large.

    It says a lot that this guy thinks “average” is something to aim for and represent at a skeptical conference.

    Does he want to be “Joe the plumber” when he grows up?

  834. Louis:

    BTW that “Taken” parody was An Joke.

    Has anyone else seen that film? What an unreconstructed bit of clueless middle aged impotent male wish fulfilment.

    [SPOILERS]

    Basically, American-White-Super-Daddy rushes to rescue his Pure-White-Virginal-Daughter, who was kidnapped for being Female-In-The-Europe,* JUST before her noble white virginity was wrested from her by Nasty-Arab.

    American-White-Super-Daddy is also Honest Joe Protecting Little Women Who Totally Want To Be Fucked/Daddied/Both By Him, and he is totally unlike Super Rich A-Bit-Jewy-New-Yet-Weak-Husband of Horrid-Ex-Wife who couldn’t deal with American-White-Super-Daddy’s superness. However, she moistly recognises American-White-Super-Daddy’s awesome superness and gives him a Female Look to make him go to The Europe and rescue their Pure-White-Virginal-Daughter.

    Incidentally, American-White-Super-Daddy has been reduced to Honest Joe Protecting Little Women by The Government For Some Reason. The Government is something as bad as The Europe. Apparently they have them there.

    Whilst in The Europe, American-White-Super-Daddy is betrayed by Perfidous-Frenchie, who he kills Righteously. He also shoots the wife of Perfidous-Frenchie, but only wounding her because she has Women Parts and is thus not a proper threat worthy of killing, in order to demonstrate that Torture Works Motherfuckers.

    American-White-Super-Daddy also gets to kill Eastern-Europeans-Who-Are-All-The-Same-And-Probably-Ex-Commies by the boatload, which is Very Reasonable. American-White-Super-Daddy then kills Nasty Arab and chums before whisking Pure-White-Virginal-Daughter back to the Safety Of The America and the undying shame of Super Rich A-Bit-Jewy-New-Yet-Weak-Husband and eternal slightly moist gratitude of Horrid-Ex-Wife.

    [REVIEW]

    VOMIT!

    Louis

    * The Europe is a Villainous Place where True Americans should not go because The Europe is full of Envious Foreigners who hate America. If anyone, especially a Vulnerable-Woman goes to The Europe they will be kidnapped and raped and put on drugs to work as a prostitute.

  835. Lyn M: hysterical feminazi fembot watsonista dramatic name caller of death:

    @ricardodivali having sniffles over stiffles

    Average means you have a penis, silly. You have to start there.

  836. irenedelse:

    @ Louis #334:

    Ugh. Thanks for helping us avoid that horror. I weep for the brains of those involved in making it, though ;_;

  837. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:

    Essentially he found sexual harassment a minor issue and the code of behaviour issued from the Skepchicks to be insulting and futile.

    That isn’t a good point. It is a bullshit opinion that should be and was called out. There was nothing there except “don’t tell me what I can and can’t do”. What a loser if you think mature adult behavior with proper consent isn’t possible. Still not making a cogent point, and you can’t/won’t. That requires you to shut the fuck up and listen, the same with TF. Neither of you can do that. Your egos are in your way.

  838. Lyn M: hysterical feminazi fembot watsonista dramatic name caller of death:

    But Louis, did you like the movie?

  839. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:

    She was answering nothing, she was bullying me on a message board in order to make people dislike me.

    What the fuck is this? I dislike you because you are a dishonest liar and bullshitter lacking honesty, integrity, and evidence. Caine was icing on the cake, a mere addition to your own stupidity. You need to understand your real problem, which is why must you continue to lie and bullshit to yourself, then attempt to lie and bullshit to those who do know the complete score, since we were there through the process? Try silence, as the hole you have dug for yourself is wwwaaayyyy over your head.

  840. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    I think I will respond to sheeptick many hours from now when I imagine the sheepdrunk has worn off.

    Meanwhile,

    That isn’t a good point. It is a bullshit opinion that should be and was called out. There was nothing there except “don’t tell me what I can and can’t do”. What a loser if you think mature adult behavior with proper consent isn’t possible.

    quoting this for truth.

  841. Louis:

    Irenedelse,

    Oh you have to see it, it’s the holotype of it’s species. Morons the internet wide fap over it endlessly.

    Louis

    P.S. Lyn M, liked it? Loved it. A tour de force, a rip roaring rollercoaster cliché from start to finish.

  842. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:

    I like people here but this is an horrible forum for honest discussion.

    Especially if you are engaging in a dishonest discussion, which you are. You haven’t stopped lying and bullshitting since your first post. Your OPINION is worthless due to those lies that have been exposed. You need to shut the fuck up and listen, but like all MRA/MRA apologists, you are too stupid and egotistical to do so. You brought all the “abuse” you have received on yourself for being stupid, lying, not listening, and thinking you are smarter than you really are. Your own behavior has been atrocious from your first post. Get real. Which requires you to shut up for a while. The situation with TF is irrevocable. He will never return.

  843. Lyn M: hysterical feminazi fembot watsonista dramatic name caller of death:

    Louis, that’s what I thought. Your review showed such feeling for the film.

  844. Ogvorbis: Dogmaticus sycophantus:

    Louis:

    I think I saw that film. Did it star Harrison Ford? Did he continuously look either put upon or angry? (A film I am glad I did not see in a theatre.)

  845. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain:

    Little drunk and could give fuck all about the message board here but I had my say and you’ve had your entertainment.

    Not that you give a shit about this, you already have your narrative about these exchanges and you are the brave man standing up for truth and reason; but I was not fucking entertained.

    Pathetic excuse of a human.

  846. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart, MD, PhD, DDS, Esq, OM:

    John:

    Shift-comma (left angle bracket) then ‘b’ ‘l’ ‘o’ ‘c’ ‘k’ ‘q’ ‘u’ ‘o’ ‘t’ ‘e’ then shift-fullstop (right angle bracket)and then the pasting of the quotation and then shift-comma ‘/’ then ‘b’ ‘l’ ‘o’ ‘c’ ‘k’ ‘q’ ‘u’ ‘o’ ‘t’ ‘e’ then shift-fullstop is too elite a technique for some, apparently.

    Goddamn! I am so stealing this to use in the future (with proper attribution, of course).

    And I have to echo this from CC:

    …So yeah. I wouldn’t be crying a river either if the ‘skeptic movement’ disappears.

    Like SallySamStrange, I’m not a skeptic, I’m a humanist. I am so fucking tired of dudebros (and chillgirls) using the battle cry of “SKEPTICISM!” to dismiss the very well documented and understood discrimination/harassment/violence against women. “Skepticism” isn’t a club that you get to beat your opponents over the head with, especially when you can’t back up your own worthless opinions. Your gut feeling that everything is cool is THE EXACT FUCKING OPPOSITE of skepticism.

    Gordon:

    So this guy is for unlimited free speech, but Rebecca is “at best misguided” for saying “don’t do that”?

    What about her sacred free speech?

    Did you know? Free speech only applies with particular caveats:
    1) You’re a pee-pee haver
    and
    2) You don’t side with the Femi-Fascists
    or
    3) As a non- pee-pee haver, you agree with the dudes all the time

    Free speech is not afforded to us who don’t have pee-pees and form our own opinions.

    See? Simple!

    Louis:

    If you are looking for a conversation without swearing whilst simultaneously being clueless and dismissing the very real problems of sexism and its denial, I can tell you I don’t have patience. But what I do have are a very particular set of skills; skills I have acquired over a very long career. Skills that make me a nightmare for people like you. If you step back from the internet and think, that’ll be the end of it. I will not look for you, I will not pursue you. But if you don’t, I will look for you, I will find you, and I will mock the living bejesus out of you.

    Great, now I’ve peed on my porch furniture. >:(

    (Side note: I saw an interview with Liam Neeson on The Graham Norton Show not very long ago where he said that fans ask him to quote this speech all the time. The funny thing is: he can never remember it. Poor guy.)

    What an unreconstructed bit of clueless middle aged impotent male wish fulfilment.

    Well, yeah. It was written by Luc Besson (of La Femme Nikita, The Professional, The Fifth Element, The Transporter fame. That’s what pretty much all of his scripts are about.)

  847. opposablethumbs:

    I’m more than a day late here (eh, timezones, stupid work stuff etc.) but it can never be said enough: thank you, all of you, people like Caine and Lynn – and ixchel here – and many others, for caring and never backing down or giving up in the face of fractal and never-ending douchebaggery, for your eloquence and passion and facts and skills.

    I notice that sheeptick actually used the good ol’ “I’m probably your best friend in a way” line. Unbelievable.
    No, sheeptick, you are not my best friend or a friend to anyone here. You have done nothing but demonstrate a contemptible double-standard (we should excuse poor dear tf’s lack of empathy because of his experiences, but ignore the fact that others who have survived experiences immeasurably worse are yet able to retain their empathy). I am truly sorry that you were raped. Nobody here has ever belittled sexual abuse – except the trolls, of course, which is why we don’t like you.

  848. tigtog:

    (Side note: I saw an interview with Liam Neeson on The Graham Norton Show not very long ago where he said that fans ask him to quote this speech all the time. The funny thing is: he can never remember it. Poor guy.)

    I commend his taste in forgetting that speech ASAP. I’d much rather listen to Neeson’s speech from Love, Actually, although given the untimely death of his wife Natasha Richardson I’d never be so insensitive as to ask him to do it (the speech is a widower talking to his son). But Michael Collins/Rob Roy/Oskar Schindler all had some meaningful things to say that weren’t just mindless kickarsery.

  849. Johnny Pez:

    I’m not a skeptic, I’m a humanist.

    QFT.

    I don’t identify as a skeptic, I identify as a feminist who also happens to be an atheist. I started lurking here after E-gate broke because Amanda Marcotte pointed out PZ as someone who Got It, and so he is.

    I don’t comment very often because the rest of you say what needs to be said much more eloquently than I can, but I do want to take a moment to say what a fantastic community you all are.

    That is all.

  850. Gregory Greenwood:

    Louis @ 341 (with regard to the Taken movie;

    liked it? Loved it. A tour de force, a rip roaring rollercoaster cliché from start to finish.

    I have err… well… I suppose I shall have to call it ‘good’ news, then; they have made a sequel, and it seems to be more of the same.

    And by ‘more of the same’, I mean jus that – pretty much the exact same premise reiterated complete with middle aged male wish fulfilment fantasies, kidnapped family members, and large numbers of eminently shoot-able and conveniently non-American types having unfortunate encounters with pieces of high velocity lead…

    So… there you go. Enjoy (if that is humanly possible). Absolutely none of that troublesome originality stuff, guarenteed.

  851. Naked Bunny with a Whip:

    I looked for the Pharyngula podcasts on Thunderf00t’s YouTube channel, but I couldn’t find them. I guess he’s pro-censorship and anti-freethought for not promoting them.

  852. Louis:

    Oggie, #344,

    Nah it was Liam Neeson. Unless I’ve not noticed you being funny again…very possible and entirely my own fault!

    Gregory, #350,

    Did I miss those [enormous sarcasm] tags off again? Oh deary, deary me, I’m SO careless! ;-)

    Taken is bad. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not sat here in a smoking jacket puffing on a menthol and with a book of Derrida on my lap claiming to only watch High and Mighty Intellectual Films With Subtitles and Moody Lighting (and minimal Dutch Tilts). Far from it. I like a schlock horror or a raucous comedy as much as the next idiot. Film can be illuminating and entertaining, and I am not naive enough to expect the bulk of Hollywood output to fulfil those needs. I even own a television and have recently had my faith in the medium restored by The Wire which I thought was brilliant. Hell, my favourite film is Animal House, I’m not going to apologise for it! t’s not the only film I like.

    But things like taken are actively poisonous IMO. It’s just so blatantly nasty. I don’t mean gore and guts, yawn, I mean in attitude. That is a film replete with toxic privilege and dumbitude. It really is worth watching just to have your jaw drop.

  853. Louis:

    Oops, I need to use the preview. Gosh!

    Louis

  854. Ogvorbis: Dogmaticus sycophantus:

    Nah it was Liam Neeson. Unless I’ve not noticed you being funny again…very possible and entirely my own fault!

    No, nothing funny.

    I just remember an 80s movie, starring Harrison Ford, whith a remarkably similar plot. Not sure the name of it.

  855. Beatrice:

    Is that Rade Šerbeđija finally playing a role where he isn’t an evil East European criminal with revenge/mayhem-for-the-fun-of-it fantasies? Nah.

  856. Beatrice:

    Šerbeđija -> Šerbedžija

  857. Ogvorbis: Dogmaticus sycophantus:

    Louis:

    Sorry.

    The film I remembered was Frantic but the idea is similar.

    My bad. I need to remember to stay out of popular culture discusssions. My cluelessness is obvious.

  858. Louis:

    Oggie,

    I need to remember to stay out of popular culture discusssions. My cluelessness is obvious.

    Well since you remembered a film I’d forgotten…I think you’re better than you might think! ;-)

    Get your booty into these conversations, man!

    Louis

  859. Ogvorbis: Dogmaticus sycophantus:

    Well since you remembered a film I’d forgotten…I think you’re better than you might think!

    I misremembered the plot (it was his wife, not daughter). I couldn’t remember the name and, without imdb, I would never have even come close. Don’t worry about not remembering it. It was emminently forgettable.

  860. SamStrange: Femi-Fascist with a (silicon) pee-pee:

    Great, now I’ve peed on my porch furniture. >:(

    Knocked up as you are, I have no trouble believing this is true.

  861. Gregory Greenwood:

    Louis @ 352;

    Did I miss those [enormous sarcasm] tags off again? Oh deary, deary me, I’m SO careless! ;-)

    Oh, I know you were being sracastic about it – I read your hilarious review of it @ 334. It had me in stitches, so I thought I would play along in style by mentioning the risible sequel to Taken in all its orginality-free-zone-ness.

    I apologise for the fact that the funniest part of the post I intended to be humourous was my lack of competence at the whole humour thing.

    Taken is bad.

    Yup, by pretty much any reasonable measure it is awful.

    Don’t get me wrong, I’m not sat here in a smoking jacket puffing on a menthol and with a book of Derrida on my lap claiming to only watch High and Mighty Intellectual Films With Subtitles and Moody Lighting (and minimal Dutch Tilts).

    Now, that is quite the image – lung cancer and cinematic pretensiousness…

    ;-)

    Far from it. I like a schlock horror or a raucous comedy as much as the next idiot. Film can be illuminating and entertaining, and I am not naive enough to expect the bulk of Hollywood output to fulfil those needs.

    I too have a liking for horror movies and various other assorted films that probably are, to the objective observer, absolutely horrible dreck. That said, I do have my standards. I have a relative who likes Sixties and Seventies era Bond movies, and expects me to sit through them with her. I swear, I half expect her to ask what that strange grinding noise is, and I will have to answer that it is my teeth. The sheer level of casual misogyny, homophobia and racism of movies like Diamonds are Forever and Live and Let Die turns my stomach.

    I even own a television and have recently had my faith in the medium restored by The Wire which I thought was brilliant.

    There is the odd diamond to be found among the sea of cubic zirconia that makes up most television programmes, it is true. I have been known to laugh myself sick while watching The Big Bang Theory, for example. The Wire is, of course, fantastically well written, and then there are my perennial favourites – Sir David Attenborough’s nature documentaries and the fantastic programmes on physics done by Professor Stephen Hawking.

    Hell, my favourite film is Animal House, I’m not going to apologise for it! t’s not the only film I like.

    OK…each to hir own, I guess… *edges slowly away*

    But things like taken are actively poisonous IMO. It’s just so blatantly nasty. I don’t mean gore and guts, yawn, I mean in attitude. That is a film replete with toxic privilege and dumbitude.

    Hollywood does occasionally outdo itself with movies that go even further than usual down the route of acting as propaganda for the patriarchy, usually involving gruff, emotionally stunted male characters that kill a bunch of disposeable, one dimesnional racist stereotypes usually played by dark skinned/Eastern European/Asian extras ‘bad guys’ while treating the offensively-misogynist-trope-compliant obligatory scatily clad, eyelash-fluttering, simpering female cipher lead as his just ‘spoils of war’.

    It really is worth watching just to have your jaw drop.

    So it does have some educational value, afterall…

    ;-P

  862. ChasCPeterson:

    I’m not a skeptic, I’m a humanist.

    I find it odd to frame them as alternatives.
    People are skeptics, humanists, atheists, agnostics, feminists, libertarians, racists, socialists etc. etc. in all kinds of combinations. It’s massive orthogonality.

    Then you have how people identify–or not–with the various Movements that go with each label.
    The problem seems to be emanating mostly from people who identify as part of the Skeptics Movement or whatever. Not from ‘skeptics’ less tribally defined.

  863. Louis:

    Oggie,

    Wellllllll, wife not daughter basically means substitute Property for Pure-White-Virginal-Daughter. Mind you daughters, having Lady Parts™ are still Property but they are property with Virginity that must be protected, whereas wives must be must be a cook in the living room, a whore in the kitchen and a maid in the bedroom. Or something. ;-)

    Anyway, I am hoping I’ll entice a nice cupcakey MRA to come and disagree bitterly with my Taken synopsis. I want to be told “it’s just a bit of fun”.

    Louis

  864. Setár, self-appointed Elf-Sheriff of the FreethoughtBlogs Star Chamber:

    Raging Bee left this comment over at Lousy Canuck:

    The attacks on FTB as a place given to “flame wars,” and the “hive-mind” BS, are both nothing but a right-wing propaganda campaign aimed at discrediting FTB without even looking at the substance of what’s being said here. Lots of commenters complain about “flame wars,” but NONE of them specified which FTB posts were “flame wars” as opposed to heated arguments of substance. Why no citation? Because the complainers knew they were full of shit, and any citation would bring a reader to a post where a substantive argument was at the heart of the “flames” — an argument the complainers didn’t want us to notice.

    This is classic Rovian propaganda. Take it as proof that you’re making a difference, and keep up the good work.

    I wholeheartedly agree. For that matter, I think it no coincidence that the privileged (it’s NOT just misogynist, I spent years on a forum filled with people who would do/condone what Sarkeesian is getting, they’re Guys On The Internet right on down to giggling over “nigger”. I used to be one of them. I am not proud of the days I spent at age 14 giggling at how we’d spam up our own Ventrilo chat with Microsoft Sam endlessly repeating “nigger”.) section of skepticism overlaps heavily with the libertarian and right-wing contingent (what I like to refer to as “Penn fans”).

    I do not think that this is sheer coincidence.

    I should also note that the one time I have dealt with a conservative “skeptic” with regards to applying skepticism to politics, they were making exhortations about how skeptics need to have diversity of ideas, evidence apparently be damned because there might be a rational argument for conservatism, somewhere out there, and all of the people in the thread suggesting that applying skepticism results in liberal policy were just making assumptions.

    I also don’t think that this is a coincidence.

    There is also the phenomenon of the self-identified “centrist” or “independent”, who “sits on the fence” complaining about “both sides” all the time, even though the regressives’ conduct involves strawmen, silencing tactics, lies, threats and overall dishonesty and bullying while the liberals’ involves calling out that conduct. There are numerous examples of such “fence-sitters” both in the social justice debacle and in mainstream politics.

    …yeah, I don’t think that’s a coincidence either.

  865. jackrawlinson:

    Thunderf00t has an “angry rabble”, eh? Thanks goodness things are more civilised over here.

    The hypocrisy continues to astonish.

  866. Rev. BigDumbChimp:

    The hypocrisy continues to astonish.

    Oh get over your self Jack. Your false equivalency is astonishingly stupid.

  867. FluffyTheTerrible:

    @ jackrawlinson

    Oh look, sheepshag – or whatever the hell xe name was – has left the building, but fear not, another distinguished actor enters stage left: jackrawlinson.

    Do tell us, oh smart one, how exactly are we hypocrites?

    Also, this is beginning to feel like a game of guacamole … let’s see how many rounds jack lasts.

  868. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:

    Still waiting for JR to say something cogent without attitude. But then, like a typical MRA, attitude is all it has…Right JR????

  869. davidbohm:

    Not a Taken-fan either. The overall “hero-rescue-damsel-in-distress” theme is an integral part of hollywood; what I am wondering is if there is any movie featuring a heroine/hero figure rescuing someone which is not objectionable on grounds of sexism?

  870. Setár, self-appointed Elf-Sheriff of the FreethoughtBlogs Star Chamber:

    Did Ophelia pop in and ban jackrawlinson already? -checks- no, doesn’t look like it.

  871. Louis:

    Rev BDC,

    Oh I don’t know, we can get a bit angry and rabble-y over here too, seems fine as far as it goes.

    Of course the problem with Jack is he doesn’t realise that the anger and rabble-y-ness aren’t really that important. The difference, as you doubtlessly refer to with your comment about Jack’s “false equivalence”, is in the content of what’s being said by the angry rabbles.

    More than that, I’m kind of a fan of angry rabbles, they can be quite useful at times. And that’s a second thing that Jack and chums don’t get. I don’t think anyone here is advocating “angry rabble all the time everywhere”, but “angry rabble at Pharyngula” doesn’t seem like a crime to me. Of course when the Man Fee Fees are hurt and Pee Pees shrivel, reality takes a back seat to privilege protection.

    Louis

  872. SamStrange: Femi-Fascist with a (silicon) pee-pee:

    I’m not a skeptic, I’m a humanist.

    I find it odd to frame them as alternatives.

    I find it odd that “liberal” and “libertarian” are framed as alternatives.

    But that’s the way it is.

    Not because any rational reading of the true meaning of either word should give you to understand that they’re mutually exclusive, but because a sizeable faction of self-described skeptics appear to be actively opposed to humanist values.

  873. Ogvorbis: Dogmaticus sycophantus:

    JackRawlinson:

    Would you care to back up your assertion with actual cited quotes? Yeah, we fucking swear around here, but we also try to make cogent and supported arguments. So please point out exactly where I, or others, are hypocrites.

  874. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart, MD, PhD, DDS, Esq, OM:

    Chas:

    The problem seems to be emanating mostly from people who identify as part of the Skeptics Movement or whatever. Not from ‘skeptics’ less tribally defined.

    Uh, yeah. ‘Cos “skeptics” don’t know what the hell “skepticism” actually means. Which I’ve already explained in the post you quoted.

    And, quite frankly, I really don’t give two shits if Big Foot or ETs or whatever exist.

  875. Josh, Official LuncheonMeat:

    And, quite frankly, I really don’t give two shits if Big Foot or ETs or whatever exist.

    BUTT CHUPAKABRAS WASHED UP MONSTIR ON BEECHEZ CATTLE VAMPIERZ!!2131!

  876. Setár, self-appointed Elf-Sheriff of the FreethoughtBlogs Star Chamber:

    SamStrange #372:

    …because a sizeable faction of self-described skeptics appear to be actively opposed to humanist values.

    Not just that, but also evidence-based policy in general. The contingent that kicks up a fuss over feminism seems to share a lot of members with the libertarian contingent, and a lot of arguments (if not members) with the contingent that kicks up a fuss about diversity of ideas if it is even suggested that applying skepticism leads one to liberal policy.

    It’s like accommodationism only with politics. Seems that while us atheists have succeeded in not treating religions as sacred cows, a very loud contingent of us still wants to treat “political” issues as sacred cows.

  877. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart, MD, PhD, DDS, Esq, OM:

    BUTT CHUPAKABRAS WASHED UP MONSTIR ON BEECHEZ CATTLE VAMPIERZ!!2131!

    *gives Josh the finger!*

  878. Antiochus Epiphanes:

    The problem I see with “skepticism” is that at best, it is the beginning of rational thought. It’s important, but only as one of many tools for understanding the world.

    The problem that I am seeing with self-identifying skeptics is that they often lack the intellectual honesty that the label would seem to imply. It is easy to be skeptical about nonsensical factual claims, but much more difficult to be skeptical of one’s own ethics.

    One thing I have learned from his blog (and others at FtB) is to doubt my own goodness. As it turns out, I am not a wholly good person*. I am a hypocrite. I am arrogant. And I am not fair.** These are things I hope to fix.

    I hardly want to be in a community that doesn’t challenge my deepest and most dearly-held biases. So whatevs, I guess.

    *You’re OK. You’ve fainted is all.
    **Et cetera. There are lots of things, but I’m not in a confessional now, am I?

  879. cyberCMDR:

    Wow. Just read through the whole damn thread.

    How do the xtians ever get the idea that atheists can’t be moral? This whole thread was a brutal give and take on what constitutes moral behavior, all with no references to a bronze age book of myths!

    This. This is morality in action. Painfully, slowly, turning assholes into thinking human beings. Transforming personal tragedies into examples of how a person can be a moral human being.

    Thank you all for being here. As a white, middle aged male I don’t have the benefit(?) of perspective of being in a less privileged group. Unless I read it here, and extract that perspective vicariously through these debates. I don’t have the verbal skills or gift of humor that so many of you have, but I am proud to call myself a member of this community.

  880. Louis:

    Gregory,

    Don’t diss Animal House, there will be….consequences. ;-)

    I could put you on Double Secret Probation.

    Louis

  881. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart, MD, PhD, DDS, Esq, OM:

    Oh hey, I missed a response to me.
    Nonny (667):

    I doubt anyone who would send an email like that would be capable of understanding or caring why wishing rape on people is wrong.

    So? Who the fuck cares if they “get it” or not?

    That doesn’t mean that other people can’t learn. That doesn’t mean that other people can’t become empathetic. That doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t show our support to everyone who is fighting against this disgusting behavior.

    It’s fine that you don’t have the patience for trolling, but to imply that feeding the trolls is worthless is demonstrably false.

  882. Louis:

    Antiochus Epiphanes,

    I am not a wholly good person

    WHAT!!!!!! Everyone here is a paragon of virtue and righteousness. Pure in thought and deed in every way. Be banished from our sight (site?) until you have perfected yourself.

    Louis

    P.S. Well it is what the Slimepitters and such think we claim isn’t it?

  883. Gregory Greenwood:

    Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart, MD, PhD, DDS, Esq, OM @ 374;

    And, quite frankly, I really don’t give two shits if Big Foot or ETs or whatever exist.

    I tend to agree that ‘old school’ scepticism doesn’t really deal with the religious elephant in the room. While I would concede that if Big Foot actually existed, or if contact with aliens was acheived, then it would of course be a big deal, the odds against such things are long to say the least, and the amount of time expended on such thigs is pretty disproportionate.

    For myself, I would say that I don’t care if people choose to believe in such things without evidence, except in so far that it is likely that, at some point, we will once again run into a theist who claims; “yeah, but you can’t prove that Big Foot/Aliens/the Loch Ness Monster doesn’t exist, and that means that your precious scientific method is flawed – therefore god…”

    It is as depressingly inevitable as it is incredibly moronic.

    What I really don’t understand is why so many ‘old school’ sceptics are so hostile to expanding rational scepticism to religious truth claims, and also seem to be so adamantly opposed to applying rational thought to issues of social justice. It is like they are afraid to leave their comfortable little fringe bubble of social, political and cultural irrelevancy or something…

  884. nigelTheBold, who sings like a needle to the ear:

    SamStrange:

    …a sizeable faction of self-described skeptics appear to be actively opposed to humanist values.

    A-fuckin’-men.

    I’ve seen far too many people self-identify as skeptic just to excuse their own obtuseness. Don’t accept AGW? You’re skeptical of global warming. Don’t accept the social disease of extreme socioeconomic disparity? You’re skeptical the poor are disadvantaged. Don’t accept RW was on-target with her simple, “Guys, don’t do this?” You’re skeptical that a clumsy pass in an enclosed space is really that uncomfortable for the passee.

    Too many folks use skepticism as a shield for their own privilege. It’s a tool, one that needs to be used appropriately to be of any real use. And like any tool, it can be misused.

    I am a humanist that uses skepticism to sieve the nonsense from my understanding of reality. I’m not perfect in its use yet, but I’m working on it.

    I distrust anyone who identifies strictly as a skeptic.

    (And don’t get me started on the folks who use free thought to justify their own willful ignorance.)

  885. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart, MD, PhD, DDS, Esq, OM:

    cyberCMDR:
    ♥!

  886. Gregory Greenwood:

    Louis @ 380;

    Don’t diss Animal House, there will be….consequences. ;-)

    I could put you on Double Secret Probation.

    Say it with me now – Deeeep Riffffts!

    ;-P

  887. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart, MD, PhD, DDS, Esq, OM:

    Gregory:

    “yeah, but you can’t prove that Big Foot/Aliens/the Loch Ness Monster doesn’t exist, and that means that your precious scientific method is flawed – therefore god…”

    Sadly, theists already use this argument to prove that evolution is false– look at what’s taught through the Accelerated Christian Education curriculum:

    Some scientists speculate that Noah took small or baby dinosaurs on the Ark…. are dinosaurs still alive today? With some recent photographs and testimonies of those who claimed to have seen one, scientists are becoming more convinced of their existence…

    Have you heard of the ‘Loch Ness Monster’ in Scotland? ‘Nessie,’ for short, has been recorded on sonar from a small submarine, described by eyewitnesses, and photographed by others. Nessie appears to be a plesiosaur.

    And without taking down the religious component, there’s nothing that so-called “skeptics” can do to put a dent in the claim.

    It is like they are afraid to leave their comfortable little fringe bubble of social, political and cultural irrelevancy or something…

    Bingo! :D

  888. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart, MD, PhD, DDS, Esq, OM:

    Me:

    Sadly, theists already use this argument to prove that evolution is false–

    Herp a derp! That was your point, Gregory. Need moar coffee.

    Anyway, just fighting against the silliness of crypto-zoology (or whatever the fuck it’s called) and psychics and whatnot isn’t enough nor is it particularly useful if you don’t attack the underlying causes.

    And since “skeptics” won’t focus on the big picture problems, they are pretty fucking useless IMHO.

  889. Gregory Greenwood:

    Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart, MD, PhD, DDS, Esq, OM @ 387;

    Sadly, theists already use this argument to prove that evolution is false– look at what’s taught through the Accelerated Christian Education curriculum:

    Gah! Teh stoopid – it burns!

    I heartily detest that Accelerated Christian Education business. It is nothing more than creationist indoctrination masquerading as education.

    @ 388;

    That was your point, Gregory. Need moar coffee.

    Perhaps the reduced efficacy of your coffee is the result of the fact that you are imbibing caffeine for two now?

    Dark Foetus is nicking off with your precious, precious caffeine from inside the womb! The utter cheek of it!

    ;-P

    Anyway, just fighting against the silliness of crypto-zoology (or whatever the fuck it’s called) and psychics and whatnot isn’t enough nor is it particularly useful if you don’t attack the underlying causes.

    QFT.

    And since “skeptics” won’t focus on the big picture problems, they are pretty fucking useless IMHO.

    QFT with a cherry on top.

    Herp a derp!

    Just a heads up, but I was reading a discussion on one of the threads recently (The Zombie Thread, I think) where some of the regulars were pointing out the possible ableist connotations of this phrase, since it apparently can function as an allusion to mental illness, specifically the stereotypical depiction of the vocalisations of some sufferers.

    I am not sure how credible that interpretation is, but it is certainly worth bearing in mind, so I thought I would mention it.

  890. Louis:

    Gregory,

    It’s a shame isn’t it. We can’t use “butthurt”, we can’t use “herp derp”, and soon we won’t be able to slap women on the arse and tell them to make us a sammich and fetch us a beer.

    It’s Political Correctness Gorn Maaaaad I Tells Ya.

    Louis

  891. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart, MD, PhD, DDS, Esq, OM:

    Gregory:

    I am not sure how credible that interpretation is, but it is certainly worth bearing in mind, so I thought I would mention it.

    I appreciate the head’s up, but I’ve defended the use of “herp a derp” before.

    Long story short, it comes from the expression “derp!” which originated in the movie Basketball and it was not mocking anyone with a disability, just one of the stupid protagonists.

  892. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart, MD, PhD, DDS, Esq, OM:

    So, unless “stupid” is off limits too, I don’t see how “herp a derp” is ablist.

  893. skeptifem:

    Holy fucking shit, look at this monstrosity of a thread.

    I had a hard time reading after someone said they thought flight of the dodos had a great point. The point to me seemed to be “creationists are so much nicer, that must be why everyone believes them!”, except they weren’t nice at all. That dude would have known that if he had asked them about queers or where everyone else is going to go when they die.

  894. skeptifem:

    yeah DERP is a southpark thing that they have used over and over. Like the “rob schneider is…” spoofs from the john edwards episode used “derp” to replace all the stupid nonsense that usually goes in movie previews (I watched it recently, I’m not a big fan of theirs).

  895. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:

    I had a hard time reading after someone said they thought flight of the dodos had a great point.

    There’s a godbot/creobot nymed Jim that comes by every month or so and complains about our tone. I think that was him. I don’t believe a word he says, since he never, ever, shows evidence, just his OPINION as a creobot/godbot/fuckwitted idjit. Which, of course, is presuppositionally wrong.

  896. Pteryxx:

    So, unless “stupid” is off limits too, I don’t see how “herp a derp” is ablist.

    I agree that ‘herp a derp’ isn’t ablist, but it’s starting to *become* ablist, due to being interpreted that way in some subcultures. See the recent flap over the fan-named character “Derpy Hooves” in MLP recently:

    http://www.equestriadaily.com/2012/02/amy-keating-rogers-response-to-derpy.html

    But I got about 10 emails saying how offended folks were. People labeled me an “ableist” (a word I’d never heard of) and said that I was being insensitive to the disabled by calling this character “derpy.” I then did a search on what derpy meant and the first things that came up were “embarrassing” and “awkward” which is what I thought. But then when I did more in-depth searches, I discovered that one definition is “retarded.”

    Now, you have to realize that reading that made my heart sink. My son Soren (of Soarin’ fame) is severely disabled. We do not use the word “retarded” in our house because it really has become an offensive slur. And while I knew that it was only a minority of people that defined “derpy” this way, it still upset me that I was the writer that put that name out there. It was painfully ironic and goes against the fact that I’m an advocate for the disabled.

    Long story short, the actual episode where the character was named Derpy was edited to remove the name. Instead, she’s now called Ditzy Doo… which I’m not wild about, because “ditzy” is (or used to be) sexist, similar to “airhead”. Maybe “ditzy” is undergoing a gender-neutral shift.

  897. Pteryxx:

    er, take a ‘recently’ out of there. Too tired to preview properly.

  898. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart, MD, PhD, DDS, Esq, OM:

    Here’s the thing, though: the same argument could be used for “stupid”. Yes, some people will use both expressions against those with disabilities, so are both off limits?

    I mean, it’s awfully hard to insult someone’s intelligence without using a word that at some point hasn’t been used against a disabled person.

    (And considering that “ditzy” has always applied to women (or men acting like women), it’s worse than “derp” which 1) has been much more recently coined and 2) we can trace back to it’s origins.)

  899. davidbohm:

    I mean, it’s awfully hard to insult someone’s intelligence without using a word that at some point hasn’t been used against a disabled person.

    An option would be not to insult peoples intelligence (half joking, I am doing it all the time).

    But seriously, how often is insulting people with an derogatory application of an attribute which is (a) a handicap (b) often have a genetic or developmental component to it a good idea?

  900. triciapetersen:

    Using a stunt email such as this in an attempt to taint the opposition is silly. I’m sure there are plenty more that accurately display the opposition’s position far better … but why use those? That would be – gasp! – an attempt to resolve the situation! No. This has gone far beyond any feminist argument to straight up brass tack ego upon ego. What a disappointment.

  901. Ace of Sevens:

    @400. Can you refer to these reasonable arguments rather than just speculating that they exist?

  902. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart, MD, PhD, DDS, Esq, OM:

    But seriously, how often is insulting people with an derogatory application of an attribute which is (a) a handicap (b) often have a genetic or developmental component to it a good idea?

    That’s not what I’m arguing against.

    My point is that “herp a derp” does not specifically target the disabled and it never has.

  903. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    Using a stunt email such as this in an attempt to taint the opposition is silly. I’m sure there are plenty more that accurately display the opposition’s position far better … but why use those?

    Are you new here? The I Get Emails feature – which is long-running – is not meant to “taint the opposition” or “accurately display the opposition’s position.” It’s meant for the audience to laugh at/sigh at/rage at some of the amusing/disappointing/vile shit that ends up in PZ’s mailbox. If you’d like to stop being a condescending asshole for a few seconds and think about shit, I imagine you’d realize that’s a perfectly valid thing to do on a blog.

  904. Josh, Official LuncheonMeat:

    triciapeterson, “the opposition” dirtied its own taint.

  905. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    Although, actually, if you’d thought about shit for a few seconds, you’d also realize that this is part of the opposition’s position. Since there’s not just one opposition, that doesn’t mean it’s anyone else’s position, but sending emails like this is in fact something “the opposition” does. You can tell because “the opposition” just did it.

  906. alanwilliamson:

    Thunderf00t’s writing on this blog was rubbish.

  907. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart, MD, PhD, DDS, Esq, OM:

    tricia:

    This has gone far beyond any feminist argument to straight up brass tack ego upon ego.

    Even if we dismiss all of T’f00t’s arguments during his short stint at FtB, considering that this email contains a rape fantasy, I think that this really hasn’t gone beyond “any feminist argument”.

    But you stupids gotta stupe, amIright?

  908. Josh, Official LuncheonMeat:

    Rite Audley? So stoop’id.

  909. davidbohm:

    Dr. Audley: I was largely referring to words such as stupid, idiot, etc.

    For instance stupid very often has the meaning of being of low intelligence (a handicap), and it is specifically referring to a person of low intelligence in a derogatory manner (for instance it would also be extremely bad form to call a person who actually had low intelligence “stupid”).

    So what I am getting at is what makes stupid “okay”? Take for instance the word “fat” (which I assume we both agree should not be used in a derogatory way). “Fat” share both the genetic/developmental component, and the insulting component to people who are actually fat.

    Also please notice I am myself calling people stupid all the time, so no bad intent on your part was implied, I assume i am in the wrong on this issue.

  910. Gregory Greenwood:

    Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart, MD, PhD, DDS, Esq, OM;

    I see your point. As I say, I am not sure to what degree the phrase is accruing ableist connotations over time, and I apologise if I came across as trying to put you on the spot here through poor communication.

    ——————————————————————

    Louis @ 390;

    It’s a shame isn’t it. We can’t use “butthurt”, we can’t use “herp derp”, and soon we won’t be able to slap women on the arse and tell them to make us a sammich and fetch us a beer.

    It’s Political Correctness Gorn Maaaaad I Tells Ya.

    Why is it so darn hard to be a man? No one cares about our man fee-fees (IMPORTANT!) or our pee-pees (EVEN MOAR IMPORTANT!!1!!11!). And what about our rights? Our rights to slap passing shapely female backsides at will*. Our rights to have sammichs made for us**.

    Don’t you just miss the good old days***?

    —————————————————————-

    * Essential to the continued survival of the species, dontcha know. What? Do you want our species to descend into a loose group of itinerant clans of barbarous cannibals scuttling through the irradiated wilderness of our once great (and, naturally, entirely peen-built) civilisation? Well, do you?

    ** Because men are congenitally incapable of using a knife to make a sandwich for ourselves without accidentally inflicting severe lacerations on ourselves and possibly enagaging in the impromptu amputation of one or more digits. Truefacts.

    *** Well, ‘good’ if you were a heterosexual, middle aged, middle or upper class, white male – but it is not like anyone else actually counts for anything, amiright?

  911. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart, MD, PhD, DDS, Esq, OM:

    david:

    So what I am getting at is what makes stupid “okay”?

    My rule of thumb (and, hey, if other’s don’t agree with it, that’s okay) is whether or not the word/expression targets a specific group of people.

    For instance, anyone can be or act stupidly, but a word like “retard” has a specific meaning and is used to “punch down” at a group of people that are already discriminated against. “Retard” carries specifics that “stupid” does not.

  912. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart, MD, PhD, DDS, Esq, OM:

    Gregory:

    As I say, I am not sure to what degree the phrase is accruing ableist connotations over time, and I apologise if I came across as trying to put you on the spot here through poor communication.

    It’s okay.

    Just because I don’t think that “herp a derp” is ablist doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t be having this conversation. As Pteryxx has pointed out, it’s an expression that’s evolving and I think we should be mindful of that.

  913. Crip Dyke, MQ, Right Reverend Feminist FuckToy of Death & Her Handmaiden:

    Wow am I late to this party. I’ve been overwhelmed with trying to get my house sold and my belongings packed. Yeesh.

    But I am surprised that no one seems to have taken this e-mail writer to task for his rather pitiful attempts at threat. If you really wanna scare someone, you gotta go all Zoe on their ass:

    If they take the ship , they’ll rape us to death, eat our flesh, and sew our skins into their clothing… And, if we’re very, very lucky, they’ll do it in that order.

    Now THAT is the kind of thing over which I might prefer reading Tf00t’s maunderings on the irrelevance of fighting sexism.

  914. Josh, Official LuncheonMeat:

    Besides, stupid people never think they’re stupid anyway. They just assume you’re referring to someone else.

    That’s because they’re stupid.

  915. dogeared, spotted and foxed:

    Skimming and a bit threadrupt.

    To everyone who is ever so sad about the bad werdz, oh so terribly disappointed with “both sides”, and wounded to the quick because people won’t respect their desperate pleas for everyone to all get along, I present some amazing information – FTB is not the only place to comment.

    There’s the new slymepit where you can pull “mean” quotes out of context and be hailed as a hero. (Note: calling for peace there is not recommended but both sides, right?) There’s TF’s youtube channel where you can tell him how disappointed you are. (both sides!) There’s even the JREF forum where you can find a fabulously PC-free discussion of sexism at TAM, which is primarily lead by a creationist and an anti-vaxxer. (Both sides? More like all sides!)

    These places don’t expect anything from you. Your unoriginal patter will find a safe haven, your feelings will be wrapped in cotton wool and, with a bit of luck, you won’t be challenged on anything and your precious worldview can remain intact. Win/win!

  916. Sili (I have no penis and I must jizz):

    Besides, stupid people never think they’re stupid anyway. They just assume you’re referring to someone else.

    That’s because they’re stupid.

    I see stupid people. They don’t know they’re stupid.

    To quote Messrs Dunning & Kruger.

  917. cyberCMDR:

    re the validity of “stupid” as an insult. There are other valid words that have not been tainted by their application to the disabled. We can borrow from other languages.

    For example, “stultus” comes from the Latin word for stupid, from which we get SAT words like stultify or stultification. The most stupid (in Latin) would be stultissimus.

    Other possibilities include dolt, doofus, nanoencephalite, paene-sentient, etc. Might be fun to get creative here.

  918. Josh, Official LuncheonMeat:

    I’m not giving up stupid. Give me a break.

  919. davidbohm:

    For instance, anyone can be or act stupidly, but a word like “retard” has a specific meaning and is used to “punch down” at a group of people that are already discriminated against. “Retard” carries specifics that “stupid” does not.

    That anyone can act stupidly is IMHO a bit circular: One could just as well say “anyone can act retarded”; it all boils down to wether the word is innocent or not in the first place (retarded also has a perfectly innocent meaning, as in the opposite of advanced).

    Your second point central; is it used to “punch down at” a specific group, ie. how would a specific group feel about having the term applied. I agree this is central. So how does one determine that? One could apply the “could you say it to the face”-test, but saying “You are retarded” to a person with a mental handicap is IMHO about as incensitive as saying: “you are stupid”.

    My feelings on the issue is that it boil down to degree, the degree to which stupid /merely/ refer to ideas, and the degree retardation refer to the handicapped.
    Both words are essentially very similar in terms of being offensive.

  920. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart, MD, PhD, DDS, Esq, OM:

    Josh:
    Me neither.

  921. Josh, Official LuncheonMeat:

    No, no, no. “Stupid” is not strongly associated with the disabled the way “retard” is. Seriously—where does this idea come from?

  922. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart, MD, PhD, DDS, Esq, OM:

    david:

    “anyone can act retarded”

    Which is used at the expense of people who are actively discriminated against. It is used to to hurt people with very specific disabilities and is used to dehumanize those with Down Syndrome (etc.).

    Stupid does not have the same connotations, sorry.

    Both words are essentially very similar in terms of being offensive.

    Holy shit, no they’re not.

    I have no problem dropping problematic terms, but I have not yet seen a convincing argument that “stupid” specifically targets the disabled.

  923. davidbohm:

    Dont worry, I was just asking myself the question by what standard we should tell “Stupid”, “Retarded” and “herp-a-derp” apart.

    They can pry “stupid” from my cold dead lips!

  924. Crip Dyke, MQ, Right Reverend Feminist FuckToy of Death & Her Handmaiden:

    David:

    anyone can act retarded

    yes. Just like anyone can act gay, any man can throw like a girl, and any human being can be lame.

    Yes. Exactly like that.

  925. Rev. BigDumbChimp:

    I believe dumbfuck is the preferred nomencalture

  926. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart, MD, PhD, DDS, Esq, OM:

    Rev:
    You have been all sorts of full of win lately. ;)

  927. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart, MD, PhD, DDS, Esq, OM:

    And, david, next time you feel like JAQing off, do it in the privacy of your own home.

  928. davidbohm:

    Dr. Audley: They last sentence was me being stupid, I meant to say something else (about properties of the word, potential for harm and bla bla bla) and forgot to take it out.

  929. 'Tis Himself:

    Finally caught up with the thread.*

    Sheepdip thinks that women might have it rough but won’t anyone consider poor Thunderfool’s hurt fee-fees? Also sheepdip can use blockquotes but won’t because that shows too much respect to others on the thread.

    Cephas Borg thinks we’re all meanies and won’t visit this blog again. Does anyone else remember Cephas Borg posting here because the name rings absolutely no bells for me.

    jackrawlinson thinks we’re hypocrites because…well, just because.

    triciapetersen is concerned.

    In other words, a normal feminist thread at Pharyngula.

    As with several other members of The Horde, I’m feeling skeptical about self-proclaimed skeptics. They seem to ignore the famous Feynman.

    *You can thank the thunderstorms over the Sound that I’m here.

  930. Caine, Panthera Susurratrix:

    Amblebury:

    May I humbly offer you aroha – love?

    Of course, gratefully accepted. ♥

  931. 'Tis Himself:

    I forgot a word in my post #429. The penultimate sentence should read: They seem to ignore the famous Feynman quote.

  932. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    Sheepdip thinks that women might have it rough but won’t anyone consider poor Thunderfool’s hurt fee-fees? Also sheepdip can use blockquotes but won’t because that shows too much respect to others on the thread.

    Yep. I was so irritated by hir inconsistency when I went to bed that it kept me up for a while. Apparently, Thunderf00t gets death threats on the internet and acts like a callous douche to people getting death threats and rape threats, and that makes him a great guy, but Caine suffers horrible abuse and brings it up in an argument sheepshit doesn’t understand and shame on her. Tearing out my hair.

  933. Caine, Panthera Susurratrix:

    Rev. BDC:

    I believe dumbfuck is the preferred nomencalture

    I like dumbfuck’s cousins, fuckwit and lackwit.

    ******
    So I poke my head back in and see Sheeptick called me:

    bully/girl/poor thing/pathetic/sad/in need of help and I’m sure more that I missed. Just in case you’re trying to read, sheepstick, I haven’t been a girl for many a decade. I’m a woman. I’m also doing just fine, thank you. I have a happy life and a successful career. I’m sure you wanted to know, eh?

    All I did was dismantle *one* of your incredibly stupid arguments. I didn’t say a word about you. You’re a case point in being pathetic, when you’re reduced to attempting to pat me on the head. Tsk. Tfoot deserves you, in full.

  934. cyberCMDR:

    Ah well. Dumbfuck works just fine. I’ve always been the type to prefer terms like “fecal inventory” to shit list, but that’s just me. Limited range, I guess.

    Carry on.

  935. Caine, Panthera Susurratrix:

    ‘Tis:

    Does anyone else remember Cephas Borg posting here because the name rings absolutely no bells for me.

    I recognize it. On and off poster, infrequent, nothing major.

  936. Ernst Hot:

    That makes sense (stupid not being ableist), I was wondering about that.

    Now, can I metaphorically punch in the teeth of the next person I hear use the expression window-licking mong?

  937. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    Now, can I metaphorically punch in the teeth of the next person I hear use the expression window-licking mong?

    Please do.

    Seriously, I hope sheepshit gets banned with extreme prejudice. I missed the post with the “pathetic sad” bit. What an evil fuck.

  938. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart, MD, PhD, DDS, Esq, OM:

    Ernst Hot:

    Now, can I metaphorically punch in the teeth of the next person I hear use the expression window-licking mong?

    Go for it.

  939. Caine, Panthera Susurratrix:

    cyberCMDR:

    I’ve always been the type to prefer terms like “fecal inventory” to shit list, but that’s just me.

    Hey, that’s fine. Language play is most definitely appreciated here. Why, there are many people who show up here with Craniorectum syndrome and the like.

    One of the beautiful thing about Pharyngula is that all manner of approaches are appreciated and used. Everyone is free to develop their own particular style. Me, I’m simple, I tend to vitriol laced with Cupcakes. ;D

  940. Ernst Hot:

    How about sociopath? I’d call the person who made that disgusting beat up Anita Sarkeesian game a sociopath, the same goes for the people who found it funny.

  941. Ogvorbis: Dogmaticus sycophantus:

    In other words, a normal feminist thread at Pharyngula.

    Not quite. We have not had the requisite discussion about whether a slang term for lady bits is a gendered insult or not. Or did it come up and I just missed it?

  942. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart, MD, PhD, DDS, Esq, OM:

    Ssssshhhhhhhh, Oggie! I do not want to have to explain that using “cunt” is really fucking misogynistic again!

  943. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    How about sociopath? I’d call the person who made that disgusting beat up Anita Sarkeesian game a sociopath, the same goes for the people who found it funny.

    I have drawn and undrawn conclusions myself several times. That conversation has been had at length over here. I think it’s worth reading anyway.

  944. Ogvorbis: Dogmaticus sycophantus:

    Awe, c’mon, Audley, the 157th time’s the charm!

  945. Ernst Hot:

    Cipher:

    Thanks, I’m too tired to read all that now, but I’ll bookmark it for later.

  946. davidbohm:

    Dr. Audrey: I have been giving what you wrote some thought and you have convinced me on the stupid/retarded issue.
    But I think its a fine line to draw and many things to potentially wrong, for instance “senile”, “moron”, etc.

  947. cyberCMDR:

    Caine,
    Thanks. Speaking of Latin, love the nym .

    Latin: The only good language is a dead language!

  948. cyberCMDR:

    Ach! Dropped the “panther whisperer” part of my comment because I used angle brackets!

  949. Louis:

    There are two truths about Latin:

    1) Latin is a language as dead as dead can be, it killed off all the Romans, and now it’s killing me.

    2) A gentleman need not know Latin, but he should at least have forgotten it.

    The first applied to my learning of Latin (7 years behind the desk, man and boy), the second to my current predicament.

    Hurrah! And Bod Shave My Ding.

    Louis

  950. davidbohm:

    C0nc0rdance has a video on the issue:
    “PZ Myers vs. Thunderf00t”
    From video description:


    I don’t feel very strongly one way or the other on feminism or sexism at conferences. I think everyone wants an inclusive, safe environment. There’s a disagreement about how best to achieve that, and I’m open to reasonable arguments on the topic. I’m also sympathetic to people who have championed this cause, because I’m sure they get frustrated with attempts to educate and motivate the apathetic masses (like me). I feel the same way on my own issues. That doesn’t exempt them from honest participation in the debate.

    I think the video capture the sentiment of many outsiders very well.

  951. cyberCMDR:

    Louis,
    It’s gotten better, if you study using the Cambridge series of texts. It isn’t the drill and kill method I had in High School. It presents a continuing set of stories just beyond the current skill level of the last lesson so most kids can parse it, then provides the vocabulary and lessons (conjugations, etc.) afterwords.

    It’s a bit of a Roman soap opera, so it keeps the kids engaged. They featured the family in the series in a Doctor Who episode, when he went back to Pompeii. That tells you a bit about how popular it is in England (and the US).

  952. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    Since we’re talking about Latin now :P does anyone have a good study resource for Latin meter? I’ve been at Latin for a while now and am at the grad level, but meter has always been one of those concepts my brain refuses to pick up, and it seems like no matter how much I study it, it disappears a week later. What I’d really like is, like, a workbook with clean texts, with scanned-out versions in the back.

  953. Caine, Panthera Susurratrix:

    cyberCMDR:

    Latin: The only good language is a dead language!

    I have a fondness for Discworld Latin. I have two inscription rings with Discworld mottoes on them: Nihil Privatus (Assassin’s Guild) and Non Temetis Messor (DEATH’s motto). :D

  954. Caine, Panthera Susurratrix:

    Louis:

    2) A gentlemanperson need not know Latin, but they should at least have forgotten it.

    This would be me (with a couple of fixes). I learned Latin in Catholic school and while I didn’t promptly forget it, forget I did.

  955. Russell:

    The Ministry Of Hypocrisy commends to your attention PZ’s remarks on the hazards of parochiality in this video he made at home

  956. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart, MD, PhD, DDS, Esq, OM:

    I’ve been thinking about what Josh said:

    “Stupid” is not strongly associated with the disabled the way “retard” is. Seriously—where does this idea come from?

    I think it’s because some people tend to use “retarded” in place of “stupid” or use it as a stronger flavor of “stupid”*. Because of this, people who have good (but not very well thought out) intentions have started equating the two terms, even though they absolutely should not. They think they’re being the “good guys” even though they’ve let the bigots color their usage and thought process.

    *You could substitute a lot of slurs here: think about kids using “that’s so gay” when they mean that something is stupid or unappealing.

  957. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart, MD, PhD, DDS, Esq, OM:

    Oh noez! Accusations of teh groopthink!

  958. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    commentary sorted (somewhat) by commenter, because this comment is so fucking long.

    As something of an individualist, I don’t necessarily agree with everything the bloggers here (or anywhere else I lurk) say,

    there’s two ways to interpret this silly sentence:
    1)you are an individualist who agrees only when another person is right; as opposed to people who aren’t you and aren’t individualists, who apparently pick a famous person they like, and then just by default agree with them. As a consequence, you often puff yourself up as a maverick, the only person who dares disagree, while claiming everyone else is a dogmatist.
    2)you are an individualist and thus must guard said identity by randomly disagreeing regardless of right-or-wrong, and preferably strike a “neutral” or “moderate” or “centrist” position on any issue regardless of value. As a result, you will often pull false equivalences to defend this centrist/neutral stance.

    Let’s read the rest of your comment and see which of those two you’ll turn out to be. Or will you be maybe a heretofore unknown kind of “person who calls themselves an individualist”? that would be refreshing.

    But I’ve worn the Underdog cape and sandals for so long, I just can’t help myself.

    hmmm… tricky… could go either way so far.

    Reading through all the comments here over the past few months has made me realise that this particular blog is no longer a place for free speech, or, what’s worse, free thought, on a variety of subjects and concepts.

    ah, clearly an “individualist” of flavor #1

    But I’m no longer capable of contributing anything positive (in terms of the subjects discussed here)

    that’s somewhat self-evident, given this post.

    But it just feels wrong that the sharpest and healthiest blog community in my little book of learning tools has become… well, what it’s become.

    you mean you haz a sad because what you admit is the sharpest community around has actually had the gall to arrive at some conclusions, and isn’t willing to re-debate whether the earth is round anymore?

    conclusion: you’re a combination of #1 and #2: you apparently seem to believe that coming to conclusions is evil and the same evidence should be re-debated as if it were fresh evidence (because True Skeptics are only allowed to accept conclusions in biology and physics, but not social science? or are you similarly open to re-discussing over and over again whether evolution really is true, and letting people host blogs that claim that to be so?), and anyone who has allowed themselves to come to a conclusion about reality based on the evidence they have has become a “dogmatist” if they do not grant equal standing to ignorant hypothesizing and re-hashing of old arguments, instead simply dismissing them as the bullshit they are.

    *sigh*

    how… ubiquitous.

    - – - – -

    This is crazy.

    mental health has fuck-all to do with this, so don’t use “crazy”.

    He made some good points. Essentially he found sexual harassment a minor issue and the code of behaviour issued from the Skepchicks to be insulting and futile. The threats towards Rebecca Watson from the internet to be idle.

    which one is it; did he make good points, or did he say that stupid, ignorant shit. seriously, what evidence does he base his claims of harmlessness on? the fact that he, a large white straight dude, never got attacked?

    Welcome to the fray seems to his response. Seems like he’s used to it.

    he has never experienced the “it” he wants RW to get used to.

    How many rape threats she received surely compares to the death threats he’s had. Eh, PZ?

    “surely”? based on what evidence? your wishful thinking?

    This man is no enemy to brother or sister here.

    you don’t get to decide this. he’s an enemy of progress, and he has positioned himself as an opponent of something many women (and not a few men) very much want at the conferences, for their comfort and safety.

    I regret defending his dismissive and combative attitude but the essential point that these conferences are safe and enjoyable for women is valid,

    no it isn’t. these conferences aren’t safe, or else there would be no harassment. we know for a fact that there is, and plenty of it.

    But for goodness’ sake what happens in bars amongst drunk people surely cannot be laid at the doorstep of conference goers.

    if the conference-goers are the drunk people at the bar, of fucking course it can.

    I never wrote anything awful.

    incorrect. you write entitled, ignorant bullshit before, and now you have written an apologia for harassment, since you say that TF’s minimizing of it is “valid”.

    Being offended and feeling the need to attack people you think stupider/lesser than you is pretty fucking rotten.

    boring strawman. what we’ve attacked is your attitude of entitlement to airing your self-admittedly ignorant opinions and have them corrected; politely.

    Fine, don’t invite people in, dismiss them a week or two later and call you place Free Thought Blogs. It tarnishes the reputation of the endeavor. And it has.

    not in the minds of people who actually understand what freethought is. because in reality, it’s actually acceptable to admit one has mde a mistake and correct it; it’s the free thinking, intellectually honest thing to do.

    He feels it’s a rough and tumble world on the internet and one will get these attacks. Men most likely death threats, women the same plus sexual abuse. He discounts them as idle trollish behaviour by impotent men (or women, we can’t know really)

    indeed he does. and he’s wrong, and basing his opinion on wrong assumptions, namely that men re treated as badly in our society as women. this is blatantly not true; it’s an argument from deep ignorance to claim otherwise, and wilfull ignorance to refuse to accept evidence and arguments for an inequality in treatment of men and women on the internet. and defending it is similarly ignorant, for the same reasons.

    Yes he’s probably less than a great guy but are you really better?

    yes. objectively, we are “better” if “good” is defined as being helpful to social progress rather than a hindrance.

    Are you out there 24/7 putting yourself out fighting dipshit christians?

    interesting priority. FYI, fighting religion is not the single most important social issue. Most of us put a lot more energy in fighting against racism, sexism, classism, etc. than we do against the single and comparatively minor targed of “dipshit chirstians”.

    And making a dent?

    yes.

    He’s a great fucking guy,

    no he isn’t. he is siding with the oppressors when he minimizes sexual harassment, and when he pretends that his experience on the internet and elsewhere is comparable to the experience of people who aren’t large Whitey C McStraighterson-types.

    maybe he needs his conscience expanded about sexually inequality.

    “maybe”? fuck you. there’s no fucking “maybe” about it.

    Fucker already pledges the allegiance to alter of rationalism.

    evidence does not actually suggest this to be true. evidence suggests allegiance to the sort of “skepticism” and “freethinking” that’s basically nothing other than “you’re not the boss of me” and “I’m never ignorant, just skeptical” reactant bullshit.

    He’s fought for both of us.

    he has not fought for me. he has however fought against me and my right not to be harassed, and has attempted to guilt me and others into shutting up about wanting the harassment to end.

    If that sounds trite to you then,

    not trite. privileged, presumptuous and wrong.

    This guy is no reactionary conservative I think.

    this is half of a false dichotomy. there’s more to the world of politics than “liberal” and “conservative” as understood by US politics. In the sense however that he doesn’t want the world to change lest it may diminish his “fun” and privilege, he’s very much being on the conservative rather than the progressive side of social justice issues.

    I still like him and want everyone to get along.

    I have no desire to “get along” with people who actively fight against progress in matters of social justice.

    They, who she assigned do NOT SHARE any blame. NONE. IT is unfair and reprehensible to take a personal tragedy and use it to advantage in an objective argument. I have all the sympathy in the world for this woman but it makes me sick to think that her pain trumps REASON.

    her pain is evidence, evidence that exposes the likes of you and TF as ignorant and dismissive. It outs the likes of you and TF as the ones who are not on the side of reason, dismissing evidence as you’ve done here, with claims that frame the evidence of real abuse and harassment as not part of “an objective argument” or somehow placed in conflict with “reason”.

    NO ONE compared her personal tragedy with ANYTHING AT ALL!! No one wants any woman to suffer I never ever implied such ever. THis was TOTALLY unprovoked.

    you’re the one who thought it was a valid point to claim that the abuse women get is comparable to the abuse men get. and now you’re having a fucking fit because someone showed you one piece of evidence that that’s not the case? you’re shitty at this whole “reason” thing.

    That is not what she said at all.

    actually that’s exactly what she said. your failure to comprehend doesn’t make it otherwise.

    Let’s get to the heart of this. You don’t know my pain = shut your unfeeling mouth.

    this is a lie. the “heart of this” is that TF’s assumption that his experiences are comparable to women’s experiences are factually incorrect, and that you can’t handle dealing with the evidence for that fact without throwing a fit.

    she was bullying me on a message board in order to make people dislike me.

    this is egocentric bullshit. FYI, we already dislike you for your defense of someone who opposes progress on matters of social justice, and for your entitled presumptuousness in believing you were entitled to polite responses to your public airing of a self-admittedly ignorant opinion.

    THere was nothing germaine or revealing that she said that affected this issue at all.

    this is factually incorrect.

    You keep implying that I’m stupid or dense.

    this is also factually incorrect. the “implication” is that you’re ignorant and have problems following this argument because of your ignorance and presumptuousness. whether you’re stupid or dense and therefore ignorant is not actually known.

    I like people here but this is an horrible forum for honest discussion.

    this is not true.

    That abused girl came out with an epithet towards me.

    don’t do this. it’s infantilizing.

    Quit making excuses for the poor thing.

    don’t do this. it’s infantilizing and condescending as fuck.

    I’m probably your best friend in a way.

    you’re one presumptuous, egocentric fuck.

    - – - – -

    Yeah, if skepticism is the Thunderf00t racist/sexist privileged fanboi movement then I’m out. Y’all can have it.

    QFT. more and more, “skepticism” just looks like an excuse to never have to accept that one is ignorant, by rephrasing it as being “skeptical”. AGW denialists have perfected this art, but the privileged Whitey C. McStraightersons are very good at it, too.

    Obviously none of these fucking assholes clicked the link to Anita Sarkeesian’s story, or else they wouldn’t be crapping all over the thread about how Thunderf00t is so fucking right that sexism and harassment is just NO BIG FUCKING DEAL.

    why look at the evidence, when simply assuming that it’s no worse than the trolling dudes on the internet get?

    - – - – - –

    Oh hai everyone,
    I haven’t been paying attention to any of this, but I have a very important opinion that I am certain noone else could possibly have said yet! It is this:
    You all are meanies who use bad words and banning and censorship. Why are you so angry and mean when I am not aware of all the bad stuff those guys did, and therefore it didn’t happen, unless you all take the time to walk me personally through the entire backstory.

    Also you are blockquotenazis. And you should change your comment policy to be like some random other blog that I just got banned from for violating their comment policy.

    And don’t you dare going telling me about bad stuff that has happened to you! I didn’t do it, so why should I have to be aware of it?!

    I don’t know who you are, but I like your style

    - – - – - -

    At the end of 25 years, I had helped about 2,000 people, helped them deal with domestic violence, stalkers, that sort of thing. I also worked for Children’s Aid for years. There, I know I helped get about 300 children out of homes where they were at risk, sometimes at risk of severe harm. I also helped hundreds more stay in their homes, but in safety. Some of those people were taken from situations of immediate and severe physical danger. When you add the family members who were not my clients but who were affected by work I did, that meant at least some 5,000 people in all.

    but are you sure that you’re “making a dent”? [/sarc]

    - – - – -

    I find it odd to frame them as alternatives.

    they aren’t, if taken literally. they are however, in the sense that “skepticism” has become a hideout for dudebros & friends who want to feel s00perSMRT because they can debunk bigfoot, UFO’s and in a few cases, but who have no desire to use skepticism on their “opinions”. the original arguments against including atheism in skepticism were about this, and the arguments about how social issues don’t belong and/or are matters of ideology and personal preference are a continuation of that.

    and in that sense, skepticism is opposed to humanism, since it defends the right of dudebros & friends to forever “be skeptical” about social justice and activism issues, and hterefore not actually do anything (compare the situation to climate activist vs “skeptic”)

  959. cicely. No further comment.:

    sheeptick, if you’re still here:

    *brandishing a large package of frozen green beans*

    Insert rectally. Sideways.
    -

  960. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    and in a few cases, but

    I accidentally a word. the word is “religion”.

  961. Caine, Panthera Susurratrix:

    Russell:

    The Ministry Of Hypocrisy commends to your attention PZ’s remarks on the hazards of parochiality in this video he made at home

    We saw those waaaaaaaay back when PZ posted them here. What’s your point, fuckwit?

    ObMiniRant: Why in the fuckety fuck do all the assclowns and assorted douchecakes think a person cannot learn and grow? Why do think a once held thought or opinion is etched in stone? Like Abbie being all upsetty that PZ didn’t crusade against the patriarchy years and years ago backchannel at Sciborg.

  962. Crip Dyke, MQ, Right Reverend Feminist FuckToy of Death & Her Handmaiden:

    Janine, Fucking Dyke of Rage Mountain said:

    So, keithroragen, answer this simple question. How much harassment should women put up with for the sake of atheist unity?

    No. I wanna lay all the cards on the table. Exactly how many kiddierapists should we ignore for ATHEIST UNITY.

    Really. I don’t wanna fight. And those kiddierapists, they always have friends or family willing to say what a good piece of insightful commentary they wrote last week just after they were done raping a child or two.

    I can handle adult women being harassed, belittled, photoed. Heck, if it’s adult on adult rape, I’m not fussed.

    What I really want to know is: when someone says we shouldn’t talk about kiddie rapists in our midst because atheism is more important, how many paragraphs should I write in support?

  963. cyberCMDR:

    Cipher,
    Went rummaging through our references (spousal unit was a Latin teacher!), and found nothing at the level of detail you probably want.

    You might want to check the American Classical League to see if they have resources.

    Sorry.

  964. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    Went rummaging through our references (spousal unit was a Latin teacher!), and found nothing at the level of detail you probably want.

    Aww, thanks for doing that! I’ll try out the ACL too.

  965. Caine, Panthera Susurratrix:

    Cicely:

    sheeptick, if you’re still here:

    *brandishing a large package of frozen green beans*

    Insert rectally. Sideways.

  966. magistramarla:

    Cipher,
    I’m a former HS Latin teacher, and I had the same brain-block that you have when it comes to scansion. I admitted that to my AP students, gave them some handouts and let them figure it out among themselves. There would usually be a band student among them who would get it and explain it to the others.
    (I never could learn to read music, either)

    Bolchazy-Carducci publishes some great workbooks that might be what you are looking for. I have “A Vergil Workbook” in my hand. It would provide you with the excerpts to try on your own. If you also order the teacher’s manual, you will find many of those excerpts properly scanned. There are also manuals available for Catullus, Ovid and others, if you prefer Elegiac Poetry.

  967. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    on the topic of insults:

    I’ve come to the conclusion a while back that all “traditional” insults in the English language (and probably others; been to lazy to do the “research”) derive (or used to derive) their power to insult from the implication that the person/thing thusly insulted is (like a) member of a lower-status group.

    there are two ideal solutions to the problem:
    1)stop using all insults and negative words, ever; not bloody likely.
    2)be creative and invent new ones; more likely, and when it’s teamwork, it’s working well. I don’t think “fuckweasel”, “cupcake”, “dingleberry”, etc. carry any kyriarchical baggage, but it is a lot of work to re-create an entire vocabulary set. plus, for some types of insult (esp. ones insulting people’s intelligence), they’ll simply end up on the euphemism mill and if sufficiently popularized, WILL come to be a synonym for “retarded”

    Personally, I try for solution #2, but I’m actually ridiculously bad at it (took me forever to stop using “lame”, can’t manage to stop using “suck”, have given up on not using “blow”, and don’t have the willpower to refrain from insulting people’s intelligence via the idiot/stupid/moron set of labels, when I should be more accurate and use “ignorant”, “privileged”, “entitled”, “in denial”, etc. instead; plus, I seem to lack the creativity to come up with new, kyriarchy-free insults)

    oh, and on the “sociopath” thing: I’m somewhat suspicious of anything that implies conforming to the kyriarchy, no matter how vilely, is abnormal/exceptional (“monster”, “sociopath”, “crazy”, etc.), since it erases the systemic causes of people being able/wanting to behave that way.

  968. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    (I never could learn to read music, either)

    Omg me neither! I didn’t even think about that – I could read the notes, but I had to hear the rhythms. I got away with it for a while because of my memory. (And indeed, I can pick up spoken meter the same way – I had the first ten lines of the Odyssey memorized in spoken meter for a while, for instance. I just can’t scan things out.)

    Bolchazy-Carducci publishes some great workbooks that might be what you are looking for. I have “A Vergil Workbook” in my hand. It would provide you with the excerpts to try on your own.

    I will definitely look that up. Thank you so much :)

    If you also order the teacher’s manual, you will find many of those excerpts properly scanned.

    That’s a great idea! I didn’t even think about that. Awesome.

  969. magistramarla:

    Cipher,
    You’re welcome! I may be disabled and retired, but the old teaching skills are still there.

  970. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart, MD, PhD, DDS, Esq, OM:

    Jadehawk:

    Personally, I try for solution #2, but I’m actually ridiculously bad at it…

    That’s why I steal other people’s insults! :D

  971. 'Tis Himself:

    That’s why I steal other people’s insults!

    Only a fuckwit asswipe would do something like that.

  972. davidbohm:

    Here is an interesting term I have often seen thrown around in the sceptic community, “psychopath”.

    Clearly refers to a specific group with a mental disorder (ASPD) and applied as a derogatory term.

  973. Grumps:

    Insults? Fuck. The possibilities are endless http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cAy4zULKFDU

  974. Sili (I have no penis and I must jizz):

    Interesting.

    I’m starting to recognise Jadehawk’s posts by the marjanovićing.

  975. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart, MD, PhD, DDS, Esq, OM:

    ‘Tis:

    Only a fuckwit asswipe would do something like that.

    Listen cupcake, how’s about you take this porcupine and shove it in backwards, mmmmmkay?

    ;D

  976. Grumps:

    ..or one could go for the full taunt… http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=895eSm4oQRw&feature=related

  977. Setár, self-appointed Elf-Sheriff of the FreethoughtBlogs Star Chamber:

    For anyone who still wants to complain about “both sides”: SHUT THE FUCK UP.

  978. Tethys:

    IT little profits that an idle tick,
    By this still screen, among these barren ‘tubes,
    Match’d with an bigots wit, I mete and dole
    Unequal laws unto a savage race,
    The hoard, and mock, and feed, and know not me.

  979. moshiachone:

    Male readers,

    Just face it. PZ’s blog is not for you. Only lesbians and male lesbians are allowed to post here. If you deviate from the party line you’re going to get all the shut up‘s, fuck you‘s and take your oppressing penis elsewhere‘s you can handle. And if you complain about it, you’re a tone troll. And if you do it back, you’ll get banned, or shouted down by the lesbian majority.

    Was it always like this? I’ve been reading this blog for months and never noticed it. Sure, PZ called US soldiers murderers, so I knew he was hyper leftist, politically. And I knew he was feminist, but not the hyper feminism I keep seeing now.

    I’m not even on Tfoot’s side. I just don’t like the abuse that’s been tossed all over, the assumption of bad faith by the lesbians vs. anyone who deviates, however minutely, from the party line.

    This is not a blog to read if you are male.

    Have at it, harpies and male fellow travelers.

  980. Sili (I have no penis and I must jizz):

    Whitey C. McStraightersons

    “C.” ?

  981. Tethys:

    hoardhorde

  982. Setár, self-appointed Elf-Sheriff of the FreethoughtBlogs Star Chamber:

    davidbohm #472:

    Here is an interesting term I have often seen thrown around in the sceptic community, “psychopath”.

    Clearly refers to a specific group with a mental disorder (ASPD) and applied as a derogatory term.

    And thanks for proving that you don’t know shit about ASPD. Antisocial personality disorder is fucking dangerous. It’s called “antisocial personality” for a goddamn reason: people with ASPD think that all of their actions are justified, no matter how horrible those actions are.

    Worse yet, the tendency for ASPD (and other Cluster B personality disorders such as NPD) is that the person with it doesn’t think they have a problem — it’s everyone else that is the problem*. As such, it’s hard to even get a diagnosis.

    But that doesn’t make psychopaths and sociopaths any less fucking dangerous to the people around them.

    Seriously. Do some fucking research before you litigate.

    * – taken from my memory of a discussion in the comments here, not necessarily wholly accurate, and I don’t have the time to go look for the thread because I’m about to leave work. If someone could expand on this, that would be awesome.

  983. Rawnaeris:

    I am Threadrupt, I read the first 40 or so comments when this first got posted.
     
    But holy FUCK this sparked a thousand comment thread?!
     
    That is all. I will go attempt to finish this thread now.

  984. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    “C.” ?

    yep. Whitey McStraighterson’s middle name is “cis”

  985. smhll:

    the same completely wrong idea about what freedom of speech actually means. Freedom of speech doesn’t mean someone is required to provide a podium and audience for your speech. It doesn’t mean private parties you have a relationship with are prohibited from ending their relationship (i.e. employment) with you as a consequence of your speech. It doesn’t mean you can say whatever the hell you want with no one ever calling you out on it.

    None of this is new, of course, but I just can’t help but wonder where these stupid ideas came from.

    From USian people who, as kids, slept through Civics class, but got a couple of questions right on the multiple choice test. Probably because the questions were worded loosely.

  986. Setár, self-appointed Elf-Sheriff of the FreethoughtBlogs Star Chamber:

    Jadehawk:

    Whitey C McStraighterson

    Shouldn’t that read The Rev. Whitey C. McStraighterson, M.B.A.?

  987. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    Only lesbians and male lesbians are allowed to post here.

    This is so fucking mind-numbingly stupid that I don’t even know how to engage it.

  988. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart, MD, PhD, DDS, Esq, OM:

    Sili:

    “C.” ?

    Cis-, maybe?

    moshiachone:

    Only lesbians and male lesbians are allowed to post here.

    Good news, everyone! Apparently I’m a lesbian! Where the pretty laydeez at?

    I’ve been reading this blog for months and never noticed it.

    Oh my. How fucking precious.

    I just don’t like the abuse that’s been tossed all over, the assumption of bad faith by the lesbians vs. anyone who deviates, however minutely, from the party line.

    Are you in high school? Seriously, I know that us Femi-Fascists are all assumed to be butch dykes, but I haven’t seen it quite so bluntly spelled out since I was about 18 or so.

    (Oh wait, I graduated high school early. Hmmmm, I’ll give you freshman or sophomore in college, maybe.)

  989. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    I haz a confoozd (non-sarcastically).

    Setar, are you saying internet-diagnosing people with ASPD by calling them sociopaths/psychopaths is ok?

    Are you saying that calling people sociopaths/psychopaths is not diagnosing them with ASPD, and thus not ableist, and therefore internet-diagnosing people with these lables is ok and/or accurate?

    Are you saying psychopath/sociopath has a meaning other than “person who has a damaged brain and is therefore harmful”, and if so, what is it?

    Are you saying something completely else, and if so, what?

  990. karpad:

    Louis:
    Going back, oh, a third of the thread, I do take issue with your review of Taken.

    Not that it isn’t politically vile. I watched it, even enjoyed it to some degree even the whole time I was thinking “wow, this is reactionary as fuck.”

    But you neglected to mention The Friend.

    The Friend, is, of course, the one to blame. She has sex. She smokes. She drinks. Her flirting with some cute boy is what gets innocent-pure-daughter targeted by Eastern European kidnappers in the first place. None of these are portrayed as having been done to any kind of excess. But she isn’t pure and virginal.

    And so the second act, maybe-he’s-found-his-daughter reveal was in fact that he found The Friend. Dead with a needle in her arm. For her vile sins of taking Virginal-Daughter to Europe, and flirting with some boy.

    That right there. The girl who dies because she wasn’t pure enough to be rescued? That’s what pushed it over the edge for me from reactionary patriarchy schlock into full blown Chick Tract.

    I remember thinking at the time, wondering how anyone could take it seriously. Or indeed, if it was intended seriously, because it frequently felt like it was jumping over the line into self-parody.

    But there are people who take it seriously. Just like there are people who like The Wire because “Omar is a badass!” as if they couldn’t possibly have misunderstood more.

  991. Setár, self-appointed Elf-Sheriff of the FreethoughtBlogs Star Chamber:

    Heh. If we’re to apply davidbohm’s logic, we should stop using “pedophile”. It doesn’t matter if the group we’re referring to is actually dangerous to others, we can’t derogate them!

  992. 'Tis Himself:

    Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy #487

    If the cupcake is true to form, xe just make the one drive-by post and disappear back into the slimepit, never to be seen here again. So let’s ignore hir unless xe comes back.

  993. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    Only lesbians and male lesbians are allowed to post here.

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    the lesbian majority

    halp, I’m being oppressed.

    I just don’t like the abuse that’s been tossed all over

    (another) someone doesn’t know what the word “abuse” means.

    This is not a blog to read if you are male

    this is factually incorrect and probably stems from the well-known confusion between “male” and “asshole” in misogynist circles.

    Have at it, harpies and male fellow travelers.

    which is it. is this not a blog to read if you’re male, or are there male fellow travelers? it can’t be both, you know.

  994. davidbohm:

    And thanks for proving that you don’t know shit about ASPD. Antisocial personality disorder is fucking dangerous. It’s called “antisocial personality” for a goddamn reason: people with ASPD think that all of their actions are justified, no matter how horrible those actions are.

    I dont understand what I wrote in my post which you think is wrong, specifically I didnt claim ASPD wasnt dangerous. Can you point out where my post “prove” anything? Do you disagree psychopathy (as it is commonly used) does not refer to ASPD in the same way “retard” does not refer to someone with a mental disabillity?

  995. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    If we’re to apply davidbohm’s logic, we should stop using “pedophile”. It doesn’t matter if the group we’re referring to is actually dangerous to others, we can’t derogate them!

    actually, david’s logic says you can’t use “pedophile” as an insult when you cannot have any evidence that they’re in fuck pedophiles, since you can’t diagnose people over the internet with personality disorders.

  996. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    that they’re in fuck pedophiles,

    fact goddamnit, fact!

    *sigh*
    *facepalm*

  997. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:

    Just face it. PZ’s blog is not for you. Only lesbians and male lesbians are allowed to post here. I

    Checks PZ’s practices and standards, sees lies in the first sentences. Not good for the poster. Obvious fuckwitted idjit.

    If you deviate from the party line you’re going to get all the shut up‘s, fuck you‘s and take your oppressing penis elsewhere‘s you can handle.

    Gee, and if all you do is preach male privilege and fuckwittery, why shouldn’t that the be treated with the disdain it deserves?

    I’ve been reading this blog for months and never noticed it

    Evidently you lie about reading this blog. It has been pro-feminist for years. Only a liar and bullshitter wouldn’t have noticed. Just another drive-by MRA, full of attitude and lies.

    I just don’t like the abuse that’s been tossed all over,

    Who the fuck are you to talk about abuse and bad language. Look at the masthead. Your name isn’t there. And PZ does run a rude blog according to his standards and practices. So, WHAT IS YOUR PROBLEM, and why must lesbians be every second word? I would say you have the problem, where women who aren’t interested in your pitiful self must be lesbians, not discerning women.

  998. cyberCMDR:

    Male readers,

    Just face it. PZ’s blog is not for you. Only lesbians and male lesbians are allowed to post here.

    Guess I’m a male lesbian, ’cause I do like “wimminz” and I also like Pharyngula.

    It can be challenging, but I recognize that I do have some assumptions that need challenging. The thing is, we don’t recognize our blind spots until they are pointed out. Sometimes it takes repeated exchanges before that blind spot becomes discernible. Sometimes that revelation doesn’t happen, and sometimes you have to fight to justify your point. But you must be present to win.

    Pharyngula is more than a blog site, it is a discovery process.

  999. Setár, self-appointed Elf-Sheriff of the FreethoughtBlogs Star Chamber:

    Jadehawk #489:

    Are you saying psychopath/sociopath has a meaning other than “person who has a damaged brain and is therefore harmful”, and if so, what is it?

    A person who engages in abusive behaviour to such degree and repetitiveness with little or no regret or self-evaluation, to the point where it can no longer be reasonably said that they are accounting for anyone but themselves.

    I already have ‘pitizen’ in mind as an alternative, though. I think I’ll stick to that for now; ASPD is sticky enough with how we almost can’t diagnose it in the first place.

  1000. Setár, self-appointed Elf-Sheriff of the FreethoughtBlogs Star Chamber:

    Or we could just call those people what they are: conservatives.

  1001. 'Tis Himself:

    cyberCMDR #498

    Pharyngula is more than a blog site, it is a discovery process.

    You, Sir, win one internets.

  1002. Setár, self-appointed Elf-Sheriff of the FreethoughtBlogs Star Chamber:

    (and yes, attempting to forcibly stifle or derail a discussion counts as abusive in that one is abusing others by denying them the ability to have said discussion when they want to have it)

  1003. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    Barely skimmed thread, going to reply to sheeptick next.

    I’ve always been uncomfortable calling myself a skeptic because it feels like calling myself a hacker — it’s a term others should apply to you if they decide you warrant it, not one you should just claim for yourself. Moreso in the case of skeptic, because basic cognitive biases inhibit useful introspection about whether you’re really acting like a skeptic.

  1004. myeck waters:

    Awright, you heard the drive-by troll. All youse non-lesbians get outta the pool!

    Sheesh.

  1005. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    I already have ‘pitizen’ in mind as an alternative, though. I think I’ll stick to that for now; ASPD is sticky enough with how we almost can’t diagnose it in the first place.

    that sounds like a good idea.

    Or we could just call those people what they are: conservatives.

    that’s true, but guaranteed to spark stupid-ass arguments about the meaning of the word :-p

  1006. davidbohm:

    Setar

    Heh. If we’re to apply davidbohm’s logic, we should stop using “pedophile”. It doesn’t matter if the group we’re referring to is actually dangerous to others, we can’t derogate them!

    Setar, for my “logic” to apply to anything we must first agree an actual disorder such as mental disorders of ASPD.

    Then my logic would say we should still call pedophiles pedophiles, but NOT use pedophilie in a derogatory manner such as: “you are a pedophile” (compare to “you are a retard”). You are free to disagree, I was only throwing out an oppinion, and i didnt have pedophilia in mind.

    So explain to me where my post prove anything. So far i am going to say you are wrong.

    I just now saw Jadehawk said what i wanted to say only better.

  1007. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    basic cognitive biases inhibit useful introspection about whether you’re really acting like a skeptic

    QFT

  1008. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    Awright, you heard the drive-by troll. All youse non-lesbians get outta the pool!

    Sheesh.

    Erm… *looks confused, tries to stand half-in and half-out of the pool*

  1009. davidbohm:

    A correction for my post #6, I meant to say: Setar, for my “logic” to apply to anything we must first agree pedophilia is an actual mental disorder such as ASPD.

  1010. Caine, Panthera Susurratrix:

    I’ve been reading this blog for months and never noticed it.

    Months?

    Bwhahahahahahahahahahahaha! :falls over laughing: Oh, so cute.

    Awright, you heard the drive-by troll. All youse non-lesbians get outta the pool!

    As a bisexual, I’m claiming my right to hang out in the pool.

  1011. Sili (I have no penis and I must jizz):

    Boo. Spamfilter.

  1012. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart, MD, PhD, DDS, Esq, OM:

    All youse non-lesbians get outta the pool!

    *looks confused, tries to stand half-in and half-out of the pool*

    *sits on edge of pool, watching the lesbians have all the fun*

  1013. M. A. Melby:

    davidbohm:

    My feelings on the issue is that it boil down to degree, the degree to which stupid /merely/ refer to ideas, and the degree retardation refer to the handicapped.
    Both words are essentially very similar in terms of being offensive.

    Many of the words we use for “stupid” are just normalized words that used to refer to various categories of “mental retardation” – such as “idiot” “moron” etc.

    However, they haven’t been used clinically for a long enough time that many people don’t remember their origins.

    Those words are bad enough, but “Retarded” is not one of those words. It has been used clinically and in government documents and other uses very recently – to refer to people with developmental and cognitive disabilities.

    However, the history of a word, by itself, is not the reason people don’t use a particular word. Many of the common words we use have horrible origins, and it would be difficult to cleanse our language of the remnants of all the hateful disgusting pitfalls of our collective history.

    What makes it not okay to use a word, is if using that word currently actively harms an embattled group of people. If you don’t know how to figure out if a group is “embattled” just ask yourself, “When was the last time this group has been targeted for mass slaughter by the dominant culture?” If you can answer that question, then maybe, ethically, your unrepentant desire to use a slur used against them is trumped by their interest not to be reminded that assholes that sometimes have guns treat them as subhuman.

    And who do you ask, if you want to know if using a word currently actively harms an embattled group of people?

    You ask that group of people.

    If someone uses that sort of language and just somehow missed the damned memo, it’s polite to simply educate that person. Sure. Count yourself educated.

    Of course, I would have hoped that a well-publicized national level campaign against the word’s use in government and media would have tipped you off.

    But y’know, you strike me as a willfully ignorant jerk-face, ultra-privileged piss-ant wannabe pseudo-intellectual stallion monkey who just can’t think of anything else you could possibly say; ’cause your inner imagination-works lingo-static insultation mechanism got a putrid piece of maggot-soaked word vomit stuck in it’s gears so it was replaced by a used 5th grade bully’s you bought, being sold at a garage-sale after the original owner grew the fuck up.

    Just sayin’.

  1014. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    Melby,
    :D

  1015. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    I’m reminded of bell hooks’s “I advocate …” instead of “I am a …”.

    But “I advocate skepticism” still sounds to me like “I advocate acting like I’m the smartest fucker in the room.”

    Maybe “I advocate asking ‘how do you know that?’”

  1016. smhll:

    How dare you take a personal tragedy and fling it at innocent persons who you do not know as if they could possibly share the blame. Shame on you. I do not and could never condone what happened to you but empathy is EXACTLY the emotion I would like to get across.

    Hmm, from tone trolling to shame on you in less than two days. I guess that’s a pretty predictable trajectory.

    Tip to the very persistent commenter who wants to make Pharyngula more genteel.

    Yes, empathy is a lovely quality.

    However, paragraphs that begin with “How dare you…” are rarely chock full of empathy. The phrase more commonly indicates rage and self-centeredness.

    In this case, your empathy score is zero. And all of us can see your ass.

    It’s nice, sort of, that you are outraged by what Caine experienced. But being outraged at her is grossly wrong.

  1017. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart, MD, PhD, DDS, Esq, OM:

    ixchel:

    “I advocate acting like I’m the smartest fucker in the room.”

    “And fail miserably.” :D

  1018. M. A. Melby:

    Then my logic would say we should still call pedophiles pedophiles, but NOT use pedophilie in a derogatory manner such as: “you are a pedophile” (compare to “you are a retard”). You are free to disagree, I was only throwing out an oppinion, and i didnt have pedophilia in mind.

    Yep.

    However, it would be nice is “pedophile” stopped being used synonymously with child molester or child rapist. Having desires and acting on them are two different things. I suspect that it has been put in use essentially as a euphemism because the subject is just so incredibly uncomfortable.

    Of course, this has nothing to do with using the “r-word” as a derogatory term.

    (My apologies for the slight derailment, however much the thread is already completely off the tracks.)

  1019. Gregory Greenwood:

    moshiachone @ 479;

    Male readers,

    Just face it. PZ’s blog is not for you.

    Wait – I like Pharyngula and the culture here of not giving bad arguments a free pass simply because of the privilege of the person who put them forward, and I am pretty sure that I am a man…

    *checks*

    Yup, definately a man. Either that or a strange tubular parasite has attached itself to my lower abdomen…

    Assuming for the sake of time and parsimony that I am indeed, as appearances would seem to suggest, a man, why would Pharyngula not be for me, especially given the fact that I feel rather comfortable here?

    Only lesbians and male lesbians are allowed to post here.

    What makes you think that the female Pharyngulites are all lesbians? Sure, we have lesbian commneters here, and they are a vital component of the Horde, but why would you claim that being a lesbian is a requirement for commenting? Tell me you aren’t wheeling out the tired and bigoted trope that all women who take a stand on issues of gender equality and social justice are automatically ‘mannish lesbians’? Quite apart from being offensively bigoted, that claim has been so comprehensively demolished, so often, that it is hard to believe that anyone would still be taken in by it.

    Oh, and I have to ask – what exactly is a “male lesbian”? I am assuming that you are not employing a truly odd means of referring to homosexual men here, so I think I need a little clarification…

    If you deviate from the party line you’re going to get all the shut up‘s, fuck you‘s and take your oppressing penis elsewhere‘s you can handle.

    What “party line”? If you mean the broad consensus that women are human beings too, and should be treated as such, then why is that so offensive to you?

    Also, it is not the penis that does the oppression – it is the patriarchal culture that affords privilege to those who possess penises for no other reason than the possession of a penis, and thereby defines womanhood as ‘lesser’ by default. This then plays into homophobia, because a man who ‘acts like a woman’ by being sexually attracted to other men is tainted by association in the minds of those who see women as inferior by nature.

    And if you complain about it, you’re a tone troll.

    Actually, people are considered to be tone trolling here if they are concerned more with the way something is being said, than with the content of the comment. All that serves to do is to derail the conversation into a fruitless discussion on the relative merits of ‘civility’ rather than dealing with the actual topic at hand.

    And if you do it back, you’ll get banned, or shouted down by the lesbian majority.

    You have to be pretty obnoxious to get banned around here. PZ usually confines someone to the zombie thread after several warnings for bigoted or otherwise disruptive behaviour, and only bans them if they ignore that injunction or repetitively flaunt their prejudice.

    And again – where do you get this idea that there is a lesbian majority on Pharyngula from? A majority of people who think that all women, including lesbians, should be accorded the fundamental level of respect due to all humans, certainly, but no majority of Kinsey 4 and 5 women that I have ever observed.

    Was it always like this? I’ve been reading this blog for months and never noticed it. Sure, PZ called US soldiers murderers, so I knew he was hyper leftist, politically. And I knew he was feminist, but not the hyper feminism I keep seeing now.

    Putting on a uniform does not automatically excuse you of murder if you kill in the name of an illegitimate war – ‘just following orders’ is not a perfect defence.

    And what is so ‘hyper-feminist’ about recognising the personhood of women? Why should women be treated like living sex dispensers for every clueless bloke who wonders along and can’t be bothered to find out if she is actually receptive to any advance or not before launching into his full repertoire of manipulative pick up artist techniques? Why should they be subjected to a society that judges them on their appeartance rather than their arguments? Why should they have to put up with the innumerable misogynists who seek to excuse or outright deny the existence of rape culture?

    I’m not even on Tfoot’s side.

    The content of your comment seems to suggest otherwise.

    I just don’t like the abuse that’s been tossed all over, the assumption of bad faith by the lesbians vs. anyone who deviates, however minutely, from the party line.

    Are we reading the same blog? A few choice epithets uttered in the heat of impassioned debate is hardly comparable to the systematic denial of the very humanity of women that we see ever more increasingly in the sceptical community. You think that the discourse here is rough on those who ‘deviate from the party line’ that women are people too? Click on PZ’s link to Anita Sarkeesian’s blog in the OP, and take a look at the vitriole she has endured for simply proposing to examine the problems with sexist tropes in video gaming. Do you honestly think that the two situations are anything close to equivalent?

    This is not a blog to read if you are male.

    Still a bloke.

    Still reading Pharyngula (and enjoying it and learning all the while).

    Still one among many.

  1020. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    Yup, definately a man. Either that or a strange tubular parasite has attached itself to my lower abdomen…

    just as a reminder, it’s a male gender identity not a penis that makes one male. meaning, you should be checking your brain, not your underwear :-p

  1021. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    All youse non-lesbians get outta the pool!

    *looks confused, tries to stand half-in and half-out of the pool*

    *sits on edge of pool, watching the lesbians have all the fun*

    *still teetering halfway into the pool* What I can’t figure out is which of the men – er, I mean, “males” – have to get out of the pool. Apparently some of them are lesbians and are allowed in the pool, except that they’re also not allowed in the pool, because they’re males? Are the male lesbians who are and aren’t allowed in the pool the males who like women? Also, what about males without oppressing penises? Oh, everything is so confusing. My ladybrains are overheating.

  1022. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    Also, what about males without oppressing penises?

    or, for that matter, lesbians with oppressing penises? are they allowed in the pool, or not?

  1023. birgerjohansson:

    Louis:
    “Latin is a language as dead as dead can be, it killed off all the Romans, and now it’s killing me”

    You can reconstruct the pronounciations of some words by words loaned by other languages. Surprise! “Cesar” was pronounced “Kaisar”. And that big-mouthed lawyer was named “Kikero”. Pity the Etruscans did not come up on top. At least their language would have been interesting.
    — — —
    Anyway, I don’t really understand why anyone would like to emulate the Romans (including neoclassic architecture). They were the second worst arseholes of history, after the Mongols. After the Romans annexed the last free hellenistic kingdoms, philosophy abruptly ceased to produce new names (apart from some mysticists who obfuscated the understanding of nature even further).
    — — —
    Speaking of names, it is sad that so many post-Swedish names that come up in the US news are those of douchebags: Lindquist, Rehnquist and wossname that old senator (now dead) who got a black maid’s daughter pregnant when she was 15

  1024. birgerjohansson:

    Oops, forgot this isn’t the open thread!

    Anyway, keep up the good work.
    PS I don’t think I am lesbian.
    And I like it here.

  1025. Caine, Panthera Susurratrix:

    I advocate acting as a decent human being capable of critical thought, even when aimed at myself.

  1026. Gregory Greenwood:

    Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe @ 20;

    just as a reminder, it’s a male gender identity not a penis that makes one male. meaning, you should be checking your brain, not your underwear :-p

    Yup, that would be my cis/het privilege talking. Apologies.

    Still, being cis-sexual, I can look down there as an easy shortcut. And, of course, man fee-fees and oppressive pee-pees = IMPORTANT, as you know…

    ;-P

  1027. davidbohm:

    Melby:

    What makes it not okay to use a word, is if using that word currently actively harms an embattled group of people. If you don’t know how to figure out if a group is “embattled” just ask yourself, “When was the last time this group has been targeted for mass slaughter by the dominant culture?” If you can answer that question, then maybe, ethically, your unrepentant desire to use a slur used against them is trumped by their interest not to be reminded that assholes that sometimes have guns treat them as subhuman.

    And who do you ask, if you want to know if using a word currently actively harms an embattled group of people?

    You ask that group of people.

    I largely agree to this. I also tried googling the terms (moron, idiot, retard) and see how many images of people who looked as if they might by mentally handicapped turned up and it largely seem like a working heuristic.

    I also tried to find oppinion from support organizations of mentally retarded on the use of the terms, and again the only thing i could come up with was opposition to “retarded” in law texts and so on.

    Still I do not think it is entirely as clear-cut as you make it out. I dont think it is easy to “ask that group of people” since the group may be very diverse, in my country there is disagreement amongst homosexuals about the correct terms for homosexuals.

    Also I do not think it clears up the “psychopath-as-a-derogatory-term”-issue, but i know nothing about how much actual psychopaths feel about the word.

    You are spot on about the difference between pedophiles and child molesters, neither group is contained in the other. That was my mistake.

  1028. ChasCPeterson:

    it’s a male gender identity not a penis that makes one male

    *raises one eyebrow in a Spock-like manner*

    get your own damn terminology

  1029. ChasCPeterson:

    (oops, that was more a McCoy line)

  1030. birgerjohansson:

    Oppressing penises?
    I think Richard Corben’s sword-and-sorcery parody “Bodyssey” had one of those (in the early, non-censored version).

    And Ralph König has a graphic novel with a man-eating GM organism that mimics a condom. Is that close enough?

    Kryten’s cybernetic penis (in “Red Dwarf”) is not so much “oppressive” as “at large”. I mean, it escaped.
    Hmm…if a cybernetic penis has more smarts than a human, would it be allowed to run for office? (South Park:… cybernetic penis vs. douchbag)

  1031. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    *raises one eyebrow in a Spock-like manner*

    get your own damn terminology

    What is that supposed to mean?

  1032. Improbable Joe:

    Gregory Greenwood:

    Yup, that would be my cis/het privilege talking. Apologies.

    You’ve been SILENCED BY THE FEMISTASI!!!

    … do you feel more silenced, or more bullied, as an overall percentage? I’m going to do a totally scientific survey where I ask 4-5 people and them make a huge generalization about the entire Internet. :)

  1033. Gregory Greenwood:

    All youse non-lesbians get outta the pool!

    *looks confused, tries to stand half-in and half-out of the pool*

    *sits on edge of pool, watching the lesbians have all the fun*

    As the possessor of male gender identity with pee-pee (I like to think thoroughly non-oppressive, but maybe I am just kidding myself) who remains here on Pharyngula of my own free will and rather enjoys the expereince (thus suggesting that I am a ‘male lesbian’), I have an important question:-

    I hear there is a pool of lesbians around here someplace – now am I allowed to get in it, or should I watch from the sidelines with Audley?

    I ask on behalf of my potentially oppressive pee-pee (but only if the lady in question is into that kind of stuff). For some reason, the little (though not all that little, ahem) fella really, really wants to know…

    ;-p

  1034. ChasCPeterson:

    Whitey C. McStraighterson

    I’d think the ‘cis’ was covered already by the ‘straight’.

    (I’m not real happy about this new ‘___ C. __erson’ trope. as you might imagine.)

  1035. Khantron, the alien that only loves:

    So the terminology as it currently exists is not inclusive, so we should leave it be and get other terminology? Maybe we should just change the uninclusive terminology to something inclusive. That seems easy enough. Maybe we can get people whining about “political correctness gone mad!” along the way so we know who to shun.

  1036. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:

    Well, I wasn’t in the pool as my steel-toed troll stomping boots make me sink.

  1037. Khantron, the alien that only loves:

    You’d be wrong then chas, as I understand it cis/trans* is a completely classification from gay/straight.

  1038. ChasCPeterson:

    It meant that ‘male’ has had a perfectly good and useful scientific definition for centuries, and which is still current. If you want a term that means ‘identifies as a member of a masculine gender’ you (where ‘you’ is sociologists and Studies studiers) should get your own instead of trying to redefine one that exists. IMO.

  1039. Gregory Greenwood:

    Improbable Joe @ 32;

    You’ve been SILENCED BY THE FEMISTASI!!!

    … do you feel more silenced, or more bullied, as an overall percentage?

    I actually rather enjoy any opportunity to better understand my privilege and take steps to rectify unintentionally othering or discriminatory behaviour. It is one of the reasons I like it here so much. That, the spanking couch, and the ghey secks with Brownian queue…

    Perhaps you should just put me down under the ‘kinky that way’ column?

    I’m going to do a totally scientific survey where I ask 4-5 people and them make a huge generalization about the entire Internet. :)

    Congratulations, my young Padawan, you have now mastered The Way of the Pitizen…

    :-)

  1040. Khantron, the alien that only loves:

    If you think we’re being mean with Mr. Whitey C. McStraighterson now you probably don’t want to hear what people call him behind his back.

  1041. Khantron, the alien that only loves:

    Spoiler alert It’s Genocider Opresston.

  1042. Lonely Panda, e.s.l.:

    Male readers,

    Just face it. PZ’s blog is not for you. Only lesbians and male lesbians are allowed to post here. If you deviate from the party line you’re going to get all the shut up‘s, fuck you‘s and take your oppressing penis elsewhere‘s you can handle. And if you complain about it, you’re a tone troll. And if you do it back, you’ll get banned, or shouted down by the lesbian majority.

    That rather sounds like you are trying to use lesbian as an insult.

    I think the party line, if there is one, is that one should try to be a decent human being. If you deviate from that (intentionally or not), then yes, you’ll receive some very vocal criticism. One of the reasons I read Pharyngula is that it reminds me that there are people who care about injustice and that it’s worthwhile to fight it rather than give up. This makes up for the times that I read and discover that people (and sometimes even myself) can also be asses in ways that I had never realized.

  1043. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    get your own damn terminology

    what.

    are you going to tell me trans women aren’t female, and trans men aren’t male?

    the terminology is accurate, and it isn’t “mine”.

    I’d think the ‘cis’ was covered already by the ‘straight’.

    why would you think such a thing? there’s both gay and straight trans people.

    If you want a term that means ‘identifies as a member of a masculine gender’

    so you are saying that trans men aren’t male. fascinating. on what basis do you make this radfemmy conclusion?

  1044. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    I’d think the ‘cis’ was covered already by the ‘straight’.

    You’d be wrong about that.

  1045. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    ‘identifies as a member of a masculine gender’

    actually it’s “has a brain that perceives itself as male”. it’s biology, a brain that has a body-map for male. on what basis do you privilege other parts of such an ambiguously sexed body?

  1046. Improbable Joe:

    Gregory Greenwood @39:

    I’ll put you down for “mangina” then.

    … it is boggling my mind that people actually think that way. I mean, really: at worst, accepting the things that people tell you from perspectives you don’t share and that don’t directly affect you should be neutral. It doesn’t take anything away from me to accept that there are people without a penis who identify as male. The effort it takes to keep that idea in my head and/or live with people reminding me when I forget is so minimal that even if I didn’t care about equality and social justice I can’t imagine making a big stink about it, like Chas is doing. Doesn’t cost him anything for “male” to be more inclusive, any more than marriage equality takes away from my marriage.

  1047. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    ‘identifies as a member of a masculine gender’

    oh, and since I’m picking on this silly definition, there’s no such thing as “masculine gender”. there’s masculine expression (that’s the social role part), and then there’s a male gender as well as a male sex (I personally dislike these distinctions, but the former refers usually to the brain’s self-perception, whereas the latter refers to the rest of the body).

    There are masculine trans women. there are feminine trans men.

  1048. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    for that matter, there are masculine cis women and feminine cis men. “masculine” and “feminine” are arbitrary social designations and cannot refer to gender identity, since gender identity doesn’t appear to be any more socially constructed than other scientific concepts (species, planet, etc.)

  1049. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    ‘identifies as a member of a masculine gender’

    Uh, yeah, no.

  1050. reasonable fellow:

    It doesn’t take anything away from me to accept that there are people without a penis who identify as male.

    That doesn’t mean I have to accept them as male. I accept that they identify as male.

  1051. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    That doesn’t mean I have to accept them as male. I accept that they identify as male.

    Get the fuck out of here with your transphobic shit.

  1052. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    That doesn’t mean I have to accept them as male

    oh? why not?

  1053. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    Oh, and since you’re so “reasonable,” how about you fuck off to Natalie Reed’s blog, shut the fuck up (this step is very important, because she doesn’t need you annoying her with your fuckery), and read?

  1054. opposablethumbs:

    This is not a blog to read if you are male

    this is factually incorrect and probably stems from the well-known confusion between “male” and “asshole” in misogynist circles.

  1055. Improbable Joe:

    That doesn’t mean I have to accept them as male.

    That’s why we don’t accept you as a reasonable or decent person. And unlike you and your bigotry, we’re judging you on your behavior, not on your identity.

  1056. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    Doesn’t cost him anything for “male” to be more inclusive

    he’s been complaining about the social sciences usurping common words to mean something else (which apparently other sciences don’t do, and “community” means the same thing in plain English as it does in ecological jargon, right chaz?), and he apparently thinks this is another instance of this.

  1057. M. A. Melby:

    Still I do not think it is entirely as clear-cut as you make it out. I dont think it is easy to “ask that group of people” since the group may be very diverse, in my country there is disagreement amongst homosexuals about the correct terms for homosexuals.

    This is true if we are talking about what is the preferred term. “Mentally retarded” is still used as a clinical term in some areas of the world to refer to someone with developmental disability.

    It is NOT used that way in the U.S. currently. It is not a preferred term.

    However, regardless of whether or not it is still used clinically. It has NEVER been “preferred” as an insult.

    For example, the word “gay” is a preferred term in the U.S. for homosexual (usually referring to a male homosexual person). It wasn’t always.

    However, there has been a campaign to attempt to end it’s use – as an insult.

    Frankly, it’s rude to use any term that refers to a group of people as an insult. Period.

    However, some words simply have a special place in the U.S. as pretty much the worst words you can use (currently), in almost any context. The “r-word” is one of them.

    One reason for that, is simply that the group, that the slur or insult refers to, deals with real socially perpetuated injury and emotional harm. So the terms simply have more power.

  1058. reasonable fellow:

    Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe
    7 July 2012 at 6:31 pm

    That doesn’t mean I have to accept them as male

    oh? why not?

    Why should I? What does it matter what I think about transgendered folks anyway so long as I’m not abusing them?

  1059. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    Why should I? What does it matter what I think about transgendered folks anyway so long as I’m not abusing them?

    You’re a bigoted douche. Go away.

  1060. raven42:

    1. Thunderf00t has a vast number of options for ways to express himself. If he wants a blog he can literally have one set up on WordPress or BlogSpot in a matter of minutes. FTB is in no way obliged to give him a platform, least of all when there are dozens of other platforms he can use, for free even.

    2. I liked Thunderf00t’s YouTube videos, but his blog on FTB was utter shit. Completely setting aside whether or not one agrees with his sentiments, the quality of his writing was just abysmal. That alone was sufficient reason to drop him.

  1061. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:

    Why are those who put “reasonable” in they ‘nym never reasonable? Except by Medieval standards?

  1062. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    What does it matter what I think about transgendered folks

    well, it makes you prejudiced. one would think a reasonable person would prefer not to be prejudiced. but aside from that, you’re not just thinking about them, or else I wouldn’t know about it.

    so long as I’m not abusing them?

    by stating in public that you don’t accept them as what they are, you are contributing to their oppression. at best, a statement like the one you’ve made is a microaggression.

  1063. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    What does it matter what I think about transgendered folks anyway so long as I’m not abusing them?

    Oh, and you fucking asshole, by coming here and posting about how you don’t accept that they are their gender, you are abusing them.

  1064. reasonable fellow:

    Whats so unreasonable about what i’ve said?

  1065. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    Whats so unreasonable about what i’ve said?

    You mean aside from it being a bigoted load of shit that directly harms people who are already suffering horribly from oppression?

  1066. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    Whats so unreasonable about what i’ve said?

    you’re publicly airing your anti-trans prejudices. what about that could possibly be reasonable?

  1067. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    Jadehawk,

    so you are saying that trans men aren’t male. fascinating. on what basis do you make this radfemmy conclusion?

    Some of us who are not going to give up radical feminism per se (and I’m not even sure how I could, any more than I could convince myself the sky is red) because of some transphobic assholes would like to object that:

    Chas is expressing the common trans-dismissive attitude of the patriarchy, not a uniquely feminist form of trans-dismissiveness.

    I think you’re making a mistake here similar to how when people hear “there’s some misogyny among gay men” they take away the notion that gay men are especially misogynistic, rather than “gay men grew up in the same misogynistic culture as everybody else.”

  1068. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    Unreasoning fucker,
    If you actually care about learning why what you said was shitty and stupid, shut the fuck up, and take your ass to Natalie’s. I provided a link above.

  1069. davidbohm:

    M.A.Melby: I am not talking about preferred term, I am talking about identifying terms which are morally wrong to use in a derogatory fashion from those which are not.

    I think the following are particulary interesting cases: psychopath, senile.

    because they are based on mental disorders/disabillities (disorder may not be the right term).

  1070. reasonable fellow:

    Its hardly prejudiced to not identify biological males as females or vice-versa. I think everyone deserves equal rights.

  1071. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    *sigh*

    you’re right, I shouldn’t have thrown “radfemmy” out there. I just failed to resist the temptation, considering who I was talking to.

  1072. Gregory Greenwood:

    @ Improbable Joe;

    I’ll put you down for “mangina” then.

    Ah, yes. The Pitizens do love that phrase. This is where things start to get confusing, though – I am now a lesbian male with both an oppressive pee-pee and a mangina? How am I ever supposed to work out whether or not I am supposed to be in the pool now?

    … it is boggling my mind that people actually think that way. I mean, really: at worst, accepting the things that people tell you from perspectives you don’t share and that don’t directly affect you should be neutral. It doesn’t take anything away from me to accept that there are people without a penis who identify as male. The effort it takes to keep that idea in my head and/or live with people reminding me when I forget is so minimal that even if I didn’t care about equality and social justice I can’t imagine making a big stink about it, like Chas is doing. Doesn’t cost him anything for “male” to be more inclusive, any more than marriage equality takes away from my marriage.

    I think that it boils down to the simple fact that most people who have social privilege want to hang onto it. It takes a long time and no small amount of concerted effort to not only recognise that your privilege is unearned and actively toxic, but them to also let it go, knowing that by doing so you are placing yourself firmly outside the ingroup of most mainstream definitions of ‘acceptable’ performance of the privileged group you have just repudiated. The cost of such an action can be felt in the ways that you are ostracised, and even demonised, by those who see nothing wrong with their privilege, and react very negatively to anyone who pokes holes in their smug little bubbles of self righteousness.

    In a sense, it is like libertarianism – libertarians hate anyone pointing out that they are where they are not solely by the means of some American Dream, sweat-of-their-own-brow fantasy, but by their unearned privilege with regards to the accident of their birth which happened to land them in a group that was, to some degree, privileged. The same is true with male privilege – cis/het men whose sense of self (and, indeed, self-worth) is, at least in part, predicated upon the idea that they got to where they are on their own merits, perhaps in the face of some kind of adversity, do not like being reminded that by the mere fact of being cis/het male they almost certainly had an easier time of it than a homosexual man, a woman, or a transgendered person would have in their place with all other factors remaining equal.

    PZ described being a white, cis/het male as being the ‘easy setting’ for life, and such white, cis/het men who cling to their privilege feel that this belittles their personal acheivements and that there is nothing they can do about it – their advantage is a product of the very fact of who and what they are in the context of contemporary society. They will always be advantaged, and thus they can never say that all they have acheived, they acheived on their own. Many people would rather deny the existence of their privilege altogether than admit to such a possibility.

    That is my take on it, anyway.

  1073. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    Its hardly prejudiced to not identify biological males as females or vice-versa. I think everyone deserves equal rights.

    No. Stop babbling and go fucking read.

  1074. smhll:

    This is not the blog for the staunchly prejudiced.

    (Unless they want to learn. Which would surprise me. Which is a small form of pre-judging on my part.)

  1075. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    biological males as females

    this is ignorant crap. trans women are ambiguously sexed, biologically speaking, and therefore you cannot claim they’re “biologically male”. and once they’re on hormones they’re unambiguously biologically female, and therefore once again you cannot claim that they’re “biological males”, in the same way that AIS women are not “biologically male”. we’re not chickens, ffs.

  1076. FluffyTheTerrible:

    @ reasonablefellow

    Its hardly prejudiced to not identify biological males as females or vice-versa. I think everyone deserves equal rights.

    You seem to be very confused about what prejudiced and equal rights mean. It’s very simple: you have to treat people as THEY want to be treated. So, if someone identifies as male, and refers to himself as male, then you will address them as such, no matter what YOU think.

  1077. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    I think everyone deserves equal rights.

    you don’t think trans people have the right to have their sex accepted, so obviously that’s not true.

  1078. Improbable Joe:

    Doesn’t everyone deserve the equal right to define themselves? It isn’t like we can read other people’s minds and tell them what’s going on, it only works the other way around. And since it doesn’t hurt you to accept their self-identification, why go out of your way to contradict them?

  1079. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:

    I think everyone deserves equal rights.

    Not shown by your posts. Try again, after you have learned a bit. Go and follow the suggested links. Or shut the fuck up.

  1080. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    P.S. Chas, unless you were being sarcastic when you responded to the incorrect use of ad hominem with your “language evolves” thing and I missed it (a genuine possibility!), lol at you.

  1081. hyperdeath:

    Gregory Greenwood:

    Yup, definately a man. Either that or a strange tubular parasite has attached itself to my lower abdomen…

    I seemed to have picked one of those up as well. I expect my parasite is bigger than your parasite though.

  1082. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    Bilaterally Gynandromorphic Chickens And Why I’m Not “Scientifically” Male

    for those who throw around “biologically male” as a supposed refutation to trans femaleness, and vice versa

  1083. Gregory Greenwood:

    @ reasonable fellow;

    Its hardly prejudiced to not identify biological males as females or vice-versa. I think everyone deserves equal rights.

    (Emphasis added)

    And why shouldn’t those equal rights include being referred to by the gender identity term that the individual in question prefers?

    What do you lose by calling, say, a female gender identified transexual a woman, whatever sexual organs she may have been born with? Set that against what transexual people gain by being treated well enough by society that their gender identity is respected, and tell me which you think should carry the greater weight.

  1084. reasonable fellow:

    Not shown by your posts. Try again, after you have learned a bit. Go and follow the suggested links. Or shut the fuck up.

    Unless you think its a ‘right’ for people to see you in the way that you’ve defined for yourself this doesn’t hold water.

  1085. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    oh but gregory, he’s ok with “calling” them by what ever silliness they want. but he still reserves the right to point out publicly that he thinks they’re wrong, the silly people.

  1086. Forbidden Snowflake:

    If you’re confused by this part of what Jadehawk said:

    we’re not chickens, ffs.

    You can consult this text for clarification.
    Or fuck it, just consult this text, full stop.

  1087. Forbidden Snowflake:

    Oh well, serves me right for not refreshing.

  1088. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    Unless you think its a ‘right’ for people to see you in the way that you’ve defined for yourself this doesn’t hold water.

    you have the right to be correctly identified and accepted as the sex that you are. you are denying this right to trans people by publicly saying that they’re not what they claim to be (but you’ll humor them anyway)

  1089. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    Unless you think its a ‘right’ for people to see you in the way that you’ve defined for yourself this doesn’t hold water.

    Are you incapable of shutting the fuck up and learning before you run your mouth?

  1090. Gregory Greenwood:

    @ hyperdeath;

    I seemed to have picked one of those up as well. I expect my parasite is bigger than your parasite though.

    *Sigh* Not another parasite-waving contest…

    Afterall, everyone knows that it is not the size of your parasite that matters, but what you do with it.

    ;-P

  1091. FluffyTheTerrible:

    @ reasonablefellow

    I’ll repeat my previous post, since you don’t seem to bother to read people’s replies:

    It’s very simple: you have to treat people as THEY want to be treated. So, if someone identifies as male, and refers to himself as male, then you will address them as such, no matter what YOU think.

    Also, Gregory Greenwood, @ #83 makes a similar, just better worded point.

    So why do you want to go around policing people’s gender and deciding who should identify as what?

  1092. reasonable fellow:

    What do you lose by calling, say, a female gender identified transexual a woman, whatever sexual organs she may have been born with?

    I could say honesty and integrity but the real answer is that I would probably be polite in real life. This is the internet though and people seem to be offended that I don’t think something.

  1093. M. A. Melby:

    he’s been complaining about the social sciences usurping common words to mean something else (which apparently other sciences don’t do, and “community” means the same thing in plain English as it does in ecological jargon, right chaz?), and he apparently thinks this is another instance of this.

    Funny how the first day of my Science Inquiry course (I used to teach not too long ago) involved explaining how scientists use terms differently than in every-day use and if they relied on the vague definitions that they are accustomed to (you know, like people who use “male” to mean “has a penis”) that they would be come confused.

    You know, that in science, we create jargon to be specific enough that when we communicate that our words have meaning?

    I would ask “reasonable fellow” if he wanted to clarify that, to be sure your assessment was fair.

    However, he just said that he didn’t have to accept transgender men as male because he seems to think that being “male” is different than identifying as “male” – so I’m inclined not to care so much what he thinks about language.

  1094. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    So why do you want to go around policing people’s gender and deciding who should identify as what?

    again, he’s ok with letting them “identify as” whatever they want, but he’ll still insist on saying in public that they’re wrong.

    and this is of course not at all condescending, belittling, and contributing to their oppression. no, you see, it’s reasonable.

  1095. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    I could say honesty and integrity but the real answer is that I would probably be polite in real life. This is the internet though and people seem to be offended that I don’t think something.

    I’m offended that you chose to voice your ignorant, harmful opinion here. Keep your fucking mouth shut if you’re a bigoted piece of shit. If you think you’re not a bigoted piece of shit, go fucking learn how to act like a decent human being.

  1096. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    This is the internet though and people seem to be offended that I don’t think something.

    since I’ve already corrected this, I have to conclude either that you’re not reading the responses you’re getting, or you’re lying.

    again, if you were just thinking it, I wouldn’t know about it. you’re not just thinking it, you’re saying it publicly. that’s at best a microaggression, and in any case it contributes to the oppression of trans people.

  1097. reasonable fellow:

    Calm down Cipher, you’ll do yourself an injury.

  1098. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    Calm down Cipher, you’ll do yourself an injury.

    Oh, fuck yourself, you condescending puddle of vomit. You come in here waving your smug bigotry around like a flag and have the nerve to act like it’s fucking virtue. Get the fuck out of here.

  1099. Gregory Greenwood:

    @ Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe;

    oh but gregory, he’s ok with “calling” them by what ever silliness they want. but he still reserves the right to point out publicly that he thinks they’re wrong, the silly people.

    Ah, I see. I don’t doubt that our avowedly ‘reasonable’ friend considers that a most important distinction. Pity that it doesn’t make a blind bit oif difference in practice.

    Saying;

    “There, there – of course you are a man/woman, dear…”

    And then following it up with a public statement to the effect of;

    “Isn’t it sad when they think they are men/women? It’s obvious that they aren’t really that gender…”

    Is no better than just outright denying their gender identity straight off the bat.

  1100. Forbidden Snowflake:

    I could say honesty and integrity but the real answer is that I would probably be polite in real life. This is the internet though and people seem to be offended that I don’t think something.

    Unless you came to your opinion a mere few minutes ago, you were thinking the same thing for as long as you’ve been commenting here, and no one was mad at you. This changed when you started saying.

    I agree with Cipher that it would be a really good idea for you to read the linked article (at minimum; you should really check out more of her “Essential Reeding”) before you continue this discussion.

  1101. dogeared, spotted and foxed:

    reasonablefellow, It is reasonable to assume that you know less about being trans than actual transpeople. Since an actual transperson has spent the time to educate people like yourself, you can either go, read and inform yourself on the subject or you can admit that you’re nothing more than a stubborn jackass who thinks that an uneducated opinion trumps educated fact.

    And that would be very, very bad skepticism. (Sweet, I’ve been dying to use that line in this thread.)

  1102. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    I could say honesty and integrity

    let it be know that “honest” bigots who air their bigotry publicly are not better people than people who know they have bigoted prejudices but do their best not to actually let them out of their head, lest they do harm to people.

    and there’s no integrity in airing one’s prejudices, unless as a part of working to reduce/eliminate them

  1103. Forbidden Snowflake:

    *refresh*
    Or, alternatively, you could fuck off.

  1104. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    Calm down Cipher, you’ll do yourself an injury.

    alright everyone, do you have your bingo cards ready?

  1105. FluffyTheTerrible:

    @ reasonablefellow

    I could say honesty and integrity but the real answer is that I would probably be polite in real life. This is the internet though and people seem to be offended that I don’t think something.

    I suppose you consider yourself all polite and civilised for letting the horrible people get away with identifying as whatever they feel to be, but here’s the thing: even if you don’t voice your bigotry, it’s still going to colour all your actions and attitudes towards them. Even if people don’t voice their racism – to give another example – they are still going to do racist things.

    We are not the thought police. It’s just that what you think will lead to a certain type of behaviour, and that, in its turn, will affect people’s lives in a negative manner.

    So,once again, what do honesty and integrity have to do with anything?

  1106. Improbable Joe:

    Also, being calm and unemotional in your language while being a bigot doesn’t make you reasonable,less of a bigot, or the intellectual superior of people who use more coarse language while defending against your bigotry.

  1107. 'Tis Himself:

    unreasonable fellow

    Its hardly prejudiced to not identify biological males as females or vice-versa.

    It has to do with how people identify themselves. There are trans-women who identify themselves as women even though they have penes and testicles. There are trans-men who identify themselves as men even though they have vaginas and ovaries. I go along with the self-identification rather than the genitalia. But then I’m not bigoted in that respect, unlike you.

    As Improbable Joe noted, it doesn’t make any difference to me what someone else identifies themselves as. So why should it make a difference to you?

  1108. ruteekatreya:

    I could say honesty and integrity

    You could say that, but you would be wrong. If you’re referring to a woman, you’re referring to a woman, transgender or not. Bigotted asshat.

    This is the internet though and people seem to be offended that I don’t think something.

    People are angry that you are a piece of shit and a bigot who is denying gender identity. But then, it’s clear you think this shit is BIOLOGICAL TRUFAX, absent evidence.

    Calm down Cipher, you’ll do yourself an injury.

    “I think I touched a nerve”, then? Oh, why don’t the trolls get some interesting material.

    Ing, I’m not so sure about the idea of just giving up on the skeptic movement. It’s got wonderful people like this ‘reasonable fellow’ guy, I’m so /sure/ there’s something worth salvaging here.

  1109. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    This is the internet though

    luddite

  1110. reasonable fellow:

    again, if you were just thinking it, I wouldn’t know about it. you’re not just thinking it, you’re saying it publicly.

    It wasn’t exactly as if I barged in and announced it with no context. That was the topic, and I offered an opinion on it. For right or wrong mine probably is the majority opinion. Not to say that majority rules, but telling people to stfu if they express it isn’t likely to win many people over.

    As Improbable Joe noted, it doesn’t make any difference to me what someone else identifies themselves as. So why should it make a difference to you?

    I’ve already said that it doesn’t. People can call themselves the king of mars for all I care. I’m not going along with it though.

  1111. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    It wasn’t exactly as if I barged in and announced it with no context. That was the topic, and I offered an opinion on it.

    “It’s just my opinion!” Yeah, and your opinion is damaging bigotry. Shut the fuck up.

    For right or wrong mine probably is the majority opinion.

    Do you think we don’t know that a lot of people are transphobic bigots?
    Shut the fuck up.

    Not to say that majority rules, but telling people to stfu if they express it isn’t likely to win many people over.

    Tone troll more, you disgusting piece of shit. You’ve already been given the resources to educate yourself. Shut the fuck up.

  1112. 'Tis Himself:

    For right or wrong mine probably is the majority opinion.

    The argumentum ad populum is a logical fallacy.

    I’ve already said that it doesn’t. People can call themselves the king of mars for all I care. I’m not going along with it though.

    In other words it does make a difference to you since you cling to your bigoted viewpoint and refuse to acknowledge the wants and desires of a persecuted minority. You are a bigot. QED.

  1113. Forbidden Snowflake:

    Not to say that majority rules, but telling people to stfu if they express it isn’t likely to win many people over.

    You sound concerned.

    As Improbable Joe noted, it doesn’t make any difference to me what someone else identifies themselves as. So why should it make a difference to you?

    I’ve already said that it doesn’t. People can call themselves the king of mars for all I care. I’m not going along with it though.

    If it didn’t make a difference to you, you’d go along with it. As it is, you are making a conscious effort to protest trans* people’s asserted identification.
    And you still haven’t read the Reed article, AFAICT.

  1114. Gregory Greenwood:

    @ reasonable fellow;

    I could say honesty and integrity

    So you are some kind of body morphology gender essentialist? Not born with a penis and you can never really be a man, not born with a vagina and you can never really be a woman, right?

    First, answer me this – where does that leave intersex people who are born with both, or neither?

    Secondly, what makes you think that gender is a function purely of the structure of genital organs? It is a mistake that one can slip into without thinking (I myself did it upthread when joking about looking into my underwear to check that I was still a man in reply to a bizarre screed about only lesbians being allowed to comment on Pharyngula), but in practice your gender, and how you perform it, is a matter of self-body pereception far more than one of the flesh and blood mechanics of what lies between your legs.

    On that basis, how is your ‘honesty’ or ‘integrity’ negatively impacted by acknowledging the neurological reality of how that person perceives their gender?

    the real answer is that I would probably be polite in real life.

    This is still ‘real life’, you know, and you are engaging in the denial of the gender idenity of trans people, which is not merely impolite, but actively harmful since it contributes to their social exclusion and oppression.

    This is the internet though and people seem to be offended that I don’t think something.

    What you think in the privacy of your own mind is not at issue here, what you wrote – on this very public forum – is.

  1115. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    It wasn’t exactly as if I barged in and announced it with no context.

    I cannot imagine why you’d think this is relevant.

    That was the topic, and I offered an opinion on it.

    you did. and because your opinion is based in prejudice, you did harm by doing so. this was in fact one of the rare instances where a microaggression was caused directly by prejudice, but let’s face it, it doesn’t matter whether you actually think what you said. if you said it without thinking that, it would have caused the same amount of harm.

    For right or wrong mine probably is the majority opinion.

    and? the majority opinion towards trans people is prejudiced against them.

    Not to say that majority rules, but telling people to stfu if they express it isn’t likely to win many people over.

    you were told to STFU until you’ve informed yourself. that you’re currently in the throes of reactance is unfortunate but normal, but it’s not going to convince us to be more polite, since we’re constantly confronted with evidence that in fact, people do change their minds when encountered with harsh criticism of their prejudice and their oppressive actions.

    I’ve already said that it doesn’t. People can call themselves the king of mars for all I care. I’m not going along with it though.

    and you’re being condescending and oppressive again. congratulations. does this make you feel proud, to be ignorantly spewing bigotries like this, instead of informing yourself via the conveniently provided reading material?

  1116. Improbable Joe:

    And now unreasonable bigot is describing trans people as equivalent to people with serious delusions, and that’s what he considers to be “honesty and integrity”.

  1117. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    also, “reasonable”fellow has now hit 3 suqares on the bingo card. I’m so gonna win this round.

  1118. FluffyTheTerrible:

    @ reasonablefellow

    For right or wrong mine probably is the majority opinion. Not to say that majority rules, but telling people to stfu if they express it isn’t likely to win many people over.

    That’s a cute logical fallacy you have there. The number of people who hold a certain opinion is irrelevant to the truth value of that opinion. At one point, millions of people thought that black people were inferior and deserved to be treated as such. Also, most did not change that hideous opinion without being shaken out of it. To paraphrase another commenter here, change of any sort, especially social change, does not happen without trauma. You don’t get people to relinquish their privilege by being nice to them.

    People can call themselves the king of mars for all I care. I’m not going along with it though.

    You seem to think not going along with someone’s delusions and not respecting someone self-identification of gender are the same thing. They are not.
    If someone tells you their given name is Bob, but they hate it and they feel their name is Tom, you are probably going to call them Tom, and not question it. People identifying as male or female is the same thing, only this time they have a lot more reasons, hormonal, psychological and physical, to identify as one or the other.

    Nobody is trying to pull the wool other your eyes, people are just trying to live their lives. Why can’t you accept that?

  1119. w00dview:

    This shit is unbelievable. Seriously the humongous shitstorm that has arisen because Rebecca Watson said she does not want to be hit on while she is in an elevator? Scores of clueless fuckwits screeching “MISANDRY!111!” and “FEMINAZIS!!!OMG!1!!1 WHAT ABOUT DA MENZ11!11!”. People have explained over and over the raw deal women get in many sceptic circles and yet they are dismissed as too emotional, hysterical or irrational. As if sceptic meant being like Spock 24-fucking-7. NEWSFLASH: Being angry, disappointed and sad can be fucking valid sometimes. It can be what helps many fight for better treatment of minorities, help address economic inequality and stop gibberish being taught in science classes. It’s called passion and it is what is helping to make the sceptical movement relevant in modern society.

    Sceptics who insist misogyny is not a big deal are just as delusional as people who deny scientific reality. The regulars are amazing for being able to fight this bullshit time and time again. Don’t think you are not making a difference. 2 years ago, feminism never popped into my mind as something that concerned me but after reading the arguments over on FTB about privilege and how it can be used to justify inequality I was convinced. In other words I shut the fuck up and listened. Big thanks to everyone here for educating me. I sincerely appreciate it. Misogyny is a serious problem and the fact that many in the sceptic movement refuse to confront it is a fucking disgrace. Also those atheists who whine about feminism having nothing to do with atheism? Are you shitting me? What do you think is the direct cause of misogyny in the first place! Christ, people can be obtuse.

  1120. reasonable fellow:

    First, answer me this – where does that leave intersex people who are born with both, or neither?

    I agree thats a difficult question, but what percentage of the trans community do you think really fit into this category?

    Secondly, what makes you think that gender is a function purely of the structure of genital organs? It is a mistake that one can slip into without thinking (I myself did it upthread when joking about looking into my underwear to check that I was still a man in reply to a bizarre screed about only lesbians being allowed to comment on Pharyngula), but in practice your gender, and how you perform it, is a matter of self-body pereception far more than one of the flesh and blood mechanics of what lies between your legs.

    You’re projecting. I never said anything about genitalia. For me its about chromosomes.

    What you think in the privacy of your own mind is not at issue here, what you wrote – on this very public forum – is.

    I’m being taken to task for it as well. That’s fine.

  1121. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    but what percentage of the trans community do you think really fit into this category?

    technically all of them, unless you’re a mind-body dualist.

    For me its about chromosomes.

    we’re not chickens. also, AIS women are not male and not trans, either.

  1122. Forbidden Snowflake:

    People can call themselves the king of mars for all I care.

    Is this the trans* equivalent of invoking strangely-colored people?

  1123. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    I’m being taken to task for it as well. That’s fine.

    Stop babbling. Go read.

  1124. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    Is this the trans* equivalent of invoking strangely-colored people?

    hmmm… sounds about right.

  1125. 'Tis Himself:

    Gregory Greenwood in #72 noted:

    The same is true with male privilege – cis/het men whose sense of self (and, indeed, self-worth) is, at least in part, predicated upon the idea that they got to where they are on their own merits, perhaps in the face of some kind of adversity, do not like being reminded that by the mere fact of being cis/het male they almost certainly had an easier time of it than a homosexual man, a woman, or a transgendered person would have in their place with all other factors remaining equal.

    Transphobic bigots like reasonable fellow are quite likely objecting to trans-women as rejecting the privilege cis-hetro men have “struggled so hard” to achieve. They’re objecting to trans-men falsely aspiring to male privilege.

  1126. reasonable fellow:

    technically all of them, unless you’re a mind-body dualist.

    Well the question was how many transexual people have both sets of genitalia or none at all. Seeing as that’s a physical thing i’d say that mind-body dualism doesn’t come into it.

  1127. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    Transphobic bigots like reasonable fellow are quite likely objecting to trans-women as rejecting the privilege cis-hetro men have “struggled so hard” to achieve. They’re objecting to trans-men falsely aspiring to male privilege.

    nah. in this case it’s probably much simpler than that: he simply doesn’t know better, and like all people doesn’t like ambiguity and shades of grey to suddenly materialize in what he was taught to believe are clear-cut, black-and-white issues.

    everyone does this when running into complexity and ambiguity where clarity and simpleness was always assumed.

  1128. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    Well the question was how many transexual people have both sets of genitalia or none at all. Seeing as that’s a physical thing i’d say that mind-body dualism doesn’t come into it.

    no one ever told you the brain is a sex organ?

    point being, at the very least, trans people have parts of their “primitive” brain that is sexed differently from other parts of their body. that would make them intersex, i.e. people who exhibit characteristics of both sexes, or none.

    also, if you admit that intersex people are a “difficult” case, it’s obvious you do not in fact base maleness and femaleness in chromosomes.

  1129. myeck waters:

    I sort of want to respond to the asswipe who feels it would damage their integrity to update their gender glossary database, but I can’t, as their ‘nym posits them to be “reasonable” and it would damage my integrity to call them that, so I will just yell vaguely out into the ether to fuck off and go fucking fuck yourself while you’re at it.

  1130. FluffyTheTerrible:

    @ reasonablefellow

    You might want to have people think that it’s all about science with you – and no, chromosomes are not the end all, be all of sex – but, in fact, it’s all about power, and making yourself feel important.

    You somehow think you have the right to deny a person his identity, and maybe mistreat them, or shame them, because they don’t conform to your narrow idea of what they should be.

    You obviously don’t want to relinquish that claim to power, but don’t worry. It’s only a matter of time, and bigots like you are going to disappear. Just stop depicting yourself as some great believer in science and reason …you are just a hateful bigot.

  1131. Caine, Panthera Susurratrix:

    PZ, when you have a moment, would you please consider a quarantine for ‘reasonable fellow’, who is a willfully ignorant, obtuse, bigoted pos? Thank you.

  1132. Forbidden Snowflake:

    If Mohammed won’t go to the mountain, the mountain will come to Mohammed.
    From Natalie Reed’s article:

    [...]the assumption that the primary or best definition of sex is genetic. On the one side we have males, who are XY, and on the other we have females, who are XX, and sometimes we have various intersex conditions. It’s a tidy and unambiguous definition that provides comfortably hard answers. One’s DNA can’t be changed by current medical science, so under this definition a man will always be a man and can only be superficially changed to resemble a woman, and vice versa.[...]
    Even if we are looking at sex specifically, and disregarding gender with all its relative, subjective, soft-science-ness that is often so unappealing to some skeptics, we still find that the genetic definition of sex is not necessarily the best way of looking at things.

    In truth, sex is a loose aggregation of a variety of variables. Chromosomes, yes, but also hormonal levels, genitals, secondary sexual characteristics, skeletal structure and so on. We consider each of these traits to be male, female, or not quite either, then collectively make some kind of rough, relatively subjective determination as to whether it is a male body, a female body or an intersexed body. This is not unlike the daily process of gendering we engage in every time we come across another human being. We make a quick, subconscious, intuitive weighing of the feminine cues against the masculine ones and make a judgment call on how we should mentally categorize that person. But even in a medical situation, where we are strictly looking at an individual’s anatomy, it can still be just as much of a subjective judgment call based on the relative weight being given to individual traits, and there’s no real reason to say the karyotype gets the final say.

    Just a sample of Reed’s article and its relevance to reasonable fellow’s position and the vacuity thereof.

  1133. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart, MD, PhD, DDS, Esq, OM:

    What the shit, people? I tootle off for a couple of hours to shoot at some aliens and yet another asshole shows up?

    reasonable douche:

    I never said anything about genitalia. For me its about chromosomes.

    “It’s not about biology, it’s about biology, dammit!”

  1134. 'Tis Himself:

    Jadehawk #127

    Yeah, you’re probably right. Likely I’m reading too much into reasonable bigot’s expressions of transphobia.

  1135. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:

    Unless you think its a ‘right’ for people to see you in the way that you’ve defined for yourself this doesn’t hold water.

    Your theories don’t hold water. You know that, and are attempting to deflect attention from your idiocy. Try silence, the best deflector in the world.

    Well the question was how many transexual people have both sets of genitalia or none at all.

    That was never the question, and you know it. More evasions… Try silence…

  1136. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    Chas,

    If you want a term that means ‘identifies as a member of a masculine gender’ you (where ‘you’ is sociologists and Studies studiers)

    You should consider that this usage didn’t originate from academia at all; it originated from transsexual people of all sorts of educational backgrounds, expressing themselves as they understood their own experiences: “I am a man / male” and “I am a woman / female”.

    The real world impact of your arguments will not be confined to academia, either.

  1137. John Morales:

    Self-named “reasonable fellow”:

    You’re projecting. I never said anything about genitalia. For me its about chromosomes.

    It’s not someone’s projection, it’s that your ontology is weak; chromosomal sex is but one aspect of people’s sexuality (and aneuploidy means it’s not a simple binary, either).

    I guess you’ve not seen the Genderbread Person.

  1138. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    You might want to have people think that it’s all about science with you

    it ain’t working, for the record, since he’s getting the science wrong, too. which he’d know if he’d bother to read the link about gynandromorphic chickens.

    oh, and here’s some more science showing that transness is not some counterfactual personal preference or delusion:
    http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/imp/jcs/2008/00000015/00000001/art00001
    http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v378/n6552/abs/378068a0.html
    http://jcem.endojournals.org/cgi/content/full/85/5/2034

  1139. Gregory Greenwood:

    @ reasonable fellow;

    I agree thats a difficult question, but what percentage of the trans community do you think really fit into this category?

    That people who fall into the intersex category exist is beyond dispute, and the point holds as a means of demonstrating the problematic nature of your position. You say the question is difficult – given your stance on the topic, I can see why that would be the case for you. Would you care to provide an answer?

    Also, as Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe pointed out, gender identity is a function of one’s brain chemistry, and so unless you accept mind/body dualism, every transexual is both male and female in so far as their body is structured such that it shows characteristics of one gender, but the architecture of the brain is structured in such a fashion that it identifies as another.

    Why should the fleshy bits in the nether regions take precedence over the brain’s functionality? Afterall, that is the organ responsible for our character and personality, our thoughts and aspirations – everything that makes each of us who we are.

    You’re projecting. I never said anything about genitalia. For me its about chromosomes.

    And why is this chromosomal structure so important? Everyone has at least one ‘X’ chromosome – some have two, some have one and this little thing we call a ‘Y’ chromosome that modifies the expression of the ‘X’ in some regards, and some have rarer chromosomal structures that can lead then to have, say, two ‘X’s and a ‘Y’. And then there is the fact that chromosome expression can be influenced by environmental and hormonal factors, meaning that chromosomal structure alone is hardly biological destiny. Why should any of these factors determine how a person’s gender identity should be viewed?

    I’m being taken to task for it as well. That’s fine.

    So why do you keep advocating publicly for this position, when the harm it is doing has been repeatedly explained to you?

  1140. 'Tis Himself:

    What the shit, people? I tootle off for a couple of hours to shoot at some aliens and yet another asshole shows up?

    Damn it, Audley, how many times do we have to tell you business before pleasure? Shoot at aliens on your own time.

  1141. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    I tootle off for a couple of hours to shoot at some aliens and yet another asshole shows up?

    well, there is a rather limitless supply of them, after all. and apparently, bigotry functions like virtual particles: if there’s a bigotry vacuum, there’s always a chance for a bigot or two to pop into existence ex nihilo. [/severely butchered physics]

  1142. Gregory Greenwood:

    @ ‘Tis Himself;

    Transphobic bigots like reasonable fellow are quite likely objecting to trans-women as rejecting the privilege cis-hetro men have “struggled so hard” to achieve. They’re objecting to trans-men falsely aspiring to male privilege.

    I certainly think that there are transphobic bigots like that out there in the world, but I think that Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe is probably right – reasonable fellow probably has not encountered a position such as ours before, as xe may have hinted with hir reference to the ‘majority position’ mirroring hir own, and probably doesn’t really know what to make of it, and so is retreating back into the comforting territory of established tropes about the limits of gender identity.

  1143. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    also, if maleness and femaleness are chromosome caused, then AIS women would be male, even though they’re barely even “intersex”, since they usually have wholly female genitalia and brain structures except for having testicles instead of ovaries.

    seriously, in a species that’s so obviously sexed by hormones rather than cromosomes, insisting on sexing people by chromosomes is just not scientific or rational.

  1144. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    Jadehawk,

    In deep space, those virtual bigots just collide and annihilate each other, but since the Earth is a massive bigotry well, one bigot is sucked into the atmosphere and eventually collides with civilization, while the other bigot is flung out of the solar system.

  1145. cyberCMDR:

    @reasonablefellow:
    OK, here’s the Reader’s Digest version: “It’s their call.”

    If Rebecca Watson feels uncomfortable in a confined space with a stranger trying to make some moves on her, IT’S HER CALL!

    If someone is more comfortable living as a male or female, regardless of their chromosomal makeup, IT’S THEIR CALL.

    ASSUMING that you have the privilege of deeming their call to be wrong is an indication of your sense of privilege. You haven’t lived their lives, so don’t presume that your opinion is natural law. This is especially true with any group that historically have been denied the right to make their own calls on how to live their lives.

    Here’s another Reader’s Digest quote for you: Debate concepts, not identities.

    We each have the responsibility to become the best person we can be, which is not always an easy task. As such, who we choose to be should be accepted, as long as it doesn’t impair the lives of those around us.

  1146. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    In deep space, those virtual bigots just collide and annihilate each other, but since the Earth is a massive bigotry well, one bigot is sucked into the atmosphere and eventually collides with civilization, while the other bigot is flung out of the solar system.

    :-D

  1147. reasonable fellow:

    Why should the fleshy bits in the nether regions take precedence over the brain’s functionality? Afterall, that is the organ responsible for our character and personality, our thoughts and aspirations – everything that makes each of us who we are.

    I don’t think it should. I also don’t think that you can ignore a persons physicality and focus solely on the make up of their brain, or their own opinions of where they are in the ‘gender-spectrum’.

  1148. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    I don’t think it should. I also don’t think that you can ignore a persons physicality and focus solely on the make up of their brain, or their own opinions of where they are in the ‘gender-spectrum’.

    And your opinion of their lives and experiences is better than theirs precisely why?

  1149. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    I also don’t think that you can ignore a persons physicality and focus solely on the make up of their brain

    so instead you do the opposite, and ignore their brain in favor of the rest of their body?

    why?

    how is this not mind/body dualism?

    or their own opinions of where they are in the ‘gender-spectrum’.

    you’re an ignorant fuckweasel who knows nothing about the science of transness. read the links I’ve provided you, they show clearly that transness is not an opinion.

    your ignorance-based bigotry is tedious. go learn something, m’kay?

  1150. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ:

    This effect is known as Dawkins radiation.

  1151. reasonable fellow:

    And your opinion of their lives and experiences is better than theirs precisely why?

    Did I say it was better? Yeah, though, I tend to value my own opinion over that of other people… Good point.

  1152. reasonable fellow:

    so instead you do the opposite, and ignore their brain in favor of the rest of their body?

    why?

    I’m not ignoring anything. I’m labeling them as trans-sexual. Which seems to be an accepted term in that community.

  1153. John Morales:

    fellow who imagines themselves reasonable:

    I don’t think it should. I also don’t think that you can ignore a persons physicality and focus solely on the make up of their brain, or their own opinions of where they are in the ‘gender-spectrum’.

    Already told ya, your ontology is weak.

    Sexual identity and gender identity are not the same category, and lumping them together confuses your thinking.

    (You’re braying your ignorance)

  1154. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    Yeah, though, I tend to value my own opinion over that of other people

    actually, as regards this conversation, you’re valuing your fact-free opinion over scientific evidence.

    you have that in common with AGW deniers who value their opinion that CO2 isn’t dangerous because plants need it over the scientific evidence; with creationists who value their opinion that the bible is true over the scientific evidence; with anti-vaxxers who value their opinions about the connection between autism and MMR over the scientific evidence; etc.

  1155. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    I’m not ignoring anything.

    you are. you admit that you cannot definitively declare intersex folks as “male” or “female”, but can claim that you can do so for trans people. if you didn’t ignore it the brain in favor of other body parts, you’d be capable of accepting that trans men are biologically male.

  1156. reasonable fellow:

    you have that in common with AGW deniers who value their opinion that CO2 isn’t dangerous because plants need it over the scientific evidence; with creationists who value their opinion that the bible is true over the scientific evidence; with anti-vaxxers who value their opinions about the connection between autism and MMR over the scientific evidence; etc.

    Sure. I notice you still haven’t answered my question. What percentage of people who identify as trans-sexuals (for want of a better term) were born with both sets of genitalia or none at all? Do you think its typical?

  1157. 'Tis Himself:

    And your opinion of their lives and experiences is better than theirs precisely why?

    This is the wrong question. “reasonable” fellow should be asked:

    And your opinion of their lives and experiences is preferred to theirs precisely why?

    IOW, why is hir bigotry to be granted precedence over other peoples’ wants and desires?

  1158. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart, MD, PhD, DDS, Esq, OM:

    ‘Tis:

    Damn it, Audley, how many times do we have to tell you business before pleasure? Shoot at aliens on your own time.

    You’re only saying that because you couldn’t go sailing today. :p

    Shorter “reasonable” fellow: I don’t know what “biology” means!

  1159. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    Sure. I notice you still haven’t answered my question. What percentage of people who identify as trans-sexuals (for want of a better term) were born with both sets of genitalia or none at all? Do you think its typical?

    Do you think it’s relevant?

  1160. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    I notice you still haven’t answered my question. What percentage of people who identify as trans-sexuals (for want of a better term) were born with both sets of genitalia or none at all?

    I have answered that question. since the brain is a sex organ, all of them were. you’re engaging in mind/body dualism. stop it, it’s not rational or scientific.

  1161. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    and I’ve noticed that you’ve refused to explain how you can claim that intersex people are a “difficult” case if you believe it’s chromosomes that determine sex.

  1162. reasonable fellow:

    I have answered that question. since the brain is a sex organ

    That isn’t answering the question. You know as well as I do that in this instance we’re talking about actual penis/vagina.

  1163. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    btw, the definition of intersex doesn’t actually limit itself to “genitalia”, but to characteristics that are typically used to distinguish male from female. the brain is NOT excluded from this, your archaic and anti-scientific mind-body dualism notwithstanding.

  1164. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    You know as well as I do that in this instance we’re talking about actual penis/vagina.

    who’s “we”? you’re the only one who doesn’t know what intersex means and is using it inaccurately.

    also, didn’t you say you distinguished by chromosomes, not by genitalia? and now you’ve even reduced it to a single set of sexual characteristics?

    you know what that’s called? it’s called goalpost shifting.

  1165. reasonable fellow:

    I’m going to take that as “a tiny percentage” then.

  1166. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    I’m going to take that as “a tiny percentage” then.

    at least you admit that you prefer to lie to yourself than follow the evidence.

  1167. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    but on the note of this admission of lying to yourself… whatever happened to that “honesty and integrity” you were bragging about earlier?

  1168. John Morales:

    [meta]

    Such obsession about genitalia, from someone who earlier wrote: “You’re projecting. I never said anything about genitalia. For me its about chromosomes.”!

  1169. reasonable fellow:

    Now i’m the one lying to myself.

  1170. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    Now i’m the one lying to myself.

    interesting use of the word “now”. your implication that trans people are “lying to themselves” (or are you claiming that we’re the ones lying to ourselves? about what, I wonder?) has been duly noted.

    other than that, yes. you are lying to yourself by pretending my answer to your question was the exact opposite of what it actually was. it’s truly not my fault you can’t cope with the biological maleness of trans men.

  1171. John Morales:

    Now i’m the one lying to myself.

    Whence the ‘now’? :)

    (As an aside, told ya your ontology is weak: transsex and intersex are also different categories)

  1172. reasonable fellow:

    interesting use of the word “now”. your implication that trans people are “lying to themselves” (or are you claiming that we’re the ones lying to ourselves? about what, I wonder?) has been duly noted.

    Well thats been my position from the beginning. You might have noticed about 10 morons calling me names because of it.

  1173. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    transsex and intersex are also different categories

    depending on the usage. when people engage in mind-body dualism, then they are two different sort of things. when people aren’t engaging in mind-body duality, and follow what evidence we have, it starts looking as if transsex is a sub-category of intersex, in which the brain exhibits physical characteristics of one sex, and the remaining body (mostly) presents characteristics of another.

  1174. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:

    Well thats been my position from the beginning.

    Exactly what someone lying and bullshitting to hide their confusion would say. You are a dishonest fool, lacking honesty and integrity. I can’t believe anything you say without third party evidence.

  1175. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    Well thats been my position from the beginning.

    well, I’m glad you’ve spelled it out even clearer just how much of a bigot you are. I have been giving you the benefit of the doubt insofar as I assumed that you thought trans people were simply wrong. But you think of them the way Christians think of atheists. You think they “know” they’re not what they claim to be and are lying.

  1176. reasonable fellow:

    You are a dishonest fool, lacking honesty and integrity.

    I don’t think i’ve been dishonest.

  1177. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    I don’t think i’ve been dishonest.

    evidence shows otherwise.

  1178. 'Tis Himself:

    You’re only saying that because you couldn’t go sailing today. :p

    Actually I did go sailing for several hours this morning, before the thunderstorms showed up. :-þ

  1179. John Morales:

    [meta]

    imagines-they’re-reasonable:

    Well thats been my position from the beginning. You might have noticed about 10 morons calling me names because of it.

    Leaving aside that ‘moron’ does not mean someone more informed than you, your position from the very beginning was opinion from ignorance, and you’ve conspicuously resisted polluting that ignorance with knowledge.

  1180. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    anyway. I’ve got work to do, miniatures to paint, and cardboard to shred, all of which will be a far more productive use of my time, now that we’ve established that “reasonable”fellow isn’t interested in the evidence and is lying, both to us and to himself.

    I might be back tomorrow to respond to whatever will be worth responding to.

    Ta.

  1181. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:

    I don’t think i’ve been dishonest.

    You mean you don’t think, period. Why haven’t you just tried silence to avoid being wrong, instead of working your way from mildly wrong to more wrong?

  1182. reasonable fellow:

    But you think of them the way Christians think of atheists. You think they “know” they’re not what they claim to be and are lying.

    You’ve hit upon something there. What does it matter what christians think of atheists? It doesn’t make us believe in god.

  1183. Lyn M: hysterical feminazi fembot watsonista dramatic name caller of death:

    @Jadehawk No. 458

    but are you sure that you’re “making a dent”? [/sarc]

    Wellll, maybe a dimple then, but yeah, I’m sure. ;)

  1184. osmosis:

    So.. who here has heard of BIID?

  1185. cyberCMDR:

    You’ve hit upon something there. What does it matter what christians think of atheists? It doesn’t make us believe in god.

    Hmmm. So you’re saying that we shouldn’t let other people define us?

  1186. John Morales:

    Specimen:

    You’ve hit upon something there. What does it matter what christians think of atheists? It doesn’t make us believe in god.

    This ain’t an open thread. Go take it to TZT, if you want to chit-chat.

  1187. mythbri:

    @reasonable fellow

    What Christians (the majority) think of atheists (the minority) has a great deal to do with how atheists are perceived and treated in society as a whole. Similarly, the way that cis-sexual people (the majority) think of trans-gendered people (the minority) has a great deal to do with how trans-gendered people are treated in society as a whole. Atheists, in the United States, in general, don’t have to deal with nearly so much prejudice as trans-gendered people. I just took the comparison that was made and ran with it – I’m not trying to make the respective experiences equivalent.

    You’ve already been informed that your dismissive attitude toward respecting and accepting someone else’s gender identity is problematic, and contributes to the prejudice that trans-gendered people face. If you were truly interested in honest discussion, then you would have bowed out of the conversation and read up on the subject, as I did when I first realized my ignorance on the subject. You can still do that. I think you should.

  1188. dogeared, spotted and foxed:

    misnomerfellow @182

    You’ve hit upon something there. What does it matter what christians think of atheists? It doesn’t make us believe in god.

    What does this dodge, evade, change of subject have to do with anything? Unless you’re saying that the Christian belief that atheists really do believe does not hurt atheists therefore your ad populum bigotry against trans-people does not hurt them.

    See, if you had taken a few moments to read up, you would realize how very laughably, wretchedly wrong you are.

    Learning new stuff is fun! Go try it!

  1189. reasonable fellow:

    Hmmm. So you’re saying that we shouldn’t let other people define us?

    Sure, why would you?

  1190. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:

    Why are folks who use reasonable in their ‘nyms so unreasonable? False advertising…

  1191. cethis:

    If PZ ran the Internet, I could understand Phil’s anger, but he doesn’t. Thunderf00t can start up his own blog. TF still has his YouTube account, so he can posting there if he wants.

    TF just no longer gets any share of the revenue generated by FTB. If he wanted that, he should have treated his blog as another job, and Ed and PZ as his bosses.

    TF didn’t lose his free speech. I’m sure we’ll be hearing more from him. It just won’t be under the FTB banner.

  1192. M. A. Melby:

    reasonable:

    You’re projecting. I never said anything about genitalia. For me its about chromosomes.

    reasonable:

    That isn’t answering the question. You know as well as I do that in this instance we’re talking about actual penis/vagina.

    ?

  1193. cyberCMDR:

    Sure, why would you?

    You seem comfortable with the idea of defining transsexuals, rather than letting them do it themselves. By extension, that implies Christians can define us.

  1194. QueQuoi, traded in her jackboots for jillstilettos:

    Pharyngula is more than a blog site, it is a discovery process.

    It has been a discovery process for me. I have learned a lot about how to be stronger and un-fucking-forgiving when I see shit in my everyday life and on the internetz…

    i.e.…
    Fuck you if you are so insecure in your straight marriage that you think gay people marrying will somehow affect you.
    Fuck you and your marginalizing of the poor, and your support of Ron Paul. I would love to see what would actually happen to you in your libertarian wet dream.
    Fuck you when you laugh at the guy in the wheelchair trying to get on the bus. Fuck you and your ableist jokes.
    Fuck you if you think that half the planet is just there for your fucking pleasure.
    Fuck you if you think that your ability to make your stupid fucking rape joke takes precedence over the feelings of someone who has been raped.
    Fuck you if are not arguing in good faith. If I even get a whiff of JAQ’ing off from you, I now know that there is no reason to attempt to engage you in a reasonable argument. I will call you a liar and offer you a porcupine, and tell you to buy your own shortening for lube.

    I spent 20 years of my adult life being nice, and Pharyngula has taught me that when you are fighting for civil rights and social justice for all, there is not a single fucking reason to be nice. I am sick of being nice, and I am officially done with nice. If some sexist, racist, homophobic fuck doesn’t like it, they can French kiss my round, rosy Ozark ass.

    Thank you PZ and Caine and Hyperdeath and Carlie and Nerd of Redhead.
    Thank you Cipher and Louis and Brownian and Jadehawk and Audley.
    Thank you Nigel and ‘Tis and Ing and Wowbagger and John Morales and Salty Current.
    Thank you especially to Sally/Sam Strange and Josh, Official Spokesgay (h/t for my extended ‘nym, and thanks for the great fun on #FTBullies the other night)

    There is now one more angry, vocal, active, tough old broad out there because of all of you.

  1195. reasonable fellow:

    You’ve already been informed that your dismissive attitude toward respecting and accepting someone else’s gender identity is problematic, and contributes to the prejudice that trans-gendered people face.

    My “prejudice” if that’s what you want to call it is that biological females can never become men, and that biological males can never become women. That doesn’t mean that i’m prejudiced against trans-sexuals or think that they should have lesser rights or be subjected to harassment or anything else.

  1196. reasonable fellow:

    Well done M.A Melby. You noticed two parts of a discussion without anything in between.

  1197. Caine, Panthera Susurratrix:

    QueQuoi:

    There is now one more angry, vocal, active, tough old broad out there because of all of you.

    YES! There’s a couple of people ahead of you, but you’ve made my OMnom list.

  1198. johannas:

    So… I actually followed that link on the first comment page to thunderf00t’s video attacking PZ. And the comments…dear Lord, the comments.

    I tried wading in there, maybe get some factual information out there about how TF wasn’t banned but fired, how he is not entitled to a paid platform, how sexual harrasment is not a ‘minor political disagreement’ and I just…

    The stupid, it burns. So much.

    Of course, they tried reducing it to Rebecca Watson. Then I got this lovely response:

    “She proceeded to call the incident a case of sexism, by the end of that video. That was the radical part. The part where she said “don’t do that” just made me think she was either homosexual or prudish. ”

    Yup. Women who don’t like being hit on at 4 am in tightly enclosed spaces are either prudes or dykes. This is totally the first assumption you should make about them.

    So yeah. Closed my browser, rocked in the corner for a while, and am now basking in the wonderful feeding frenzy of the horde taking apart clueless, transphobic assholes. I would like to thank the regulars for keeping up this constant battle against mindless prejudice, because I couldn’t even keep it up for a few hours without utterly despairing.

    I think the saddest thing is that I used to like thunderf00t, years ago, when he’d only just started making his ‘Why do people laugh at creationists’ videos. Those were good. They were funny, they were educational, they were what my baby atheism needed. I drifted away when TF started getting political and… Pat Condell-y. Now I’m just saddened to see this man I’d genuinely admired as an honest intellectual engage in the most dishonest debate tactics, proudly taking a stance as yet another misoginist douchenozzle seemingly incapable of recognizing how devoid of empathy his positions are.

  1199. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:

    There is now one more angry, vocal, active, tough old broad out there because of all of you.

    Welcome to Pharyngula. The Pharyngula Saloon and Spanking Parlor (Patricia, Princess of Pullets, Proprietor), serves grog and swill (some of the swill looks like normal bar drinks in dirty glasses), along with popcornz and bacon sammiches (some even made by men like yours truly). Free internet access. All newcomers get a free drink of choice, a bowl of popcornz, and a 10 e-ducat credit chit. Entertainment is provided by the Pullet Patrol™ trying to prank us, and security is provided by the Lilac Berets™.

  1200. John Morales:

    specimen:

    My “prejudice” if that’s what you want to call it is that biological females can never become men, and that biological males can never become women.

    That is the very definition of prejudice: you’ve prejudged.

    (Shame it was on the basis of ignorance, though)

    In your world, everyone is assigned maleness or femaleness at birth on a chromosomal/gonadal basis, and then forevermore their gender identity must match their assigned sex identity else you will imagine they’re lying to themselves.

    (The real world still exists, though)

  1201. Rumtopf:

    biological females can never become men, and that biological males can never become women. That doesn’t mean that i’m prejudiced against trans-sexuals

    Does not fucking add up by definition.

  1202. reasonable fellow:

    In your world, everyone is assigned maleness or femaleness at birth on a chromosomal/gonadal basis, and then forevermore their gender identity must match their assigned sex identity else you will imagine they’re lying to themselves.

    You’re trying to put words in my mouth. You’ve been doing that a lot.

    I think that people can change their sexual identity, but if they identify as the opposite gender then they are lying to themselves. Whats wrong with “trans-sexual” anyway?

  1203. mythbri:

    @reasonable fellow

    Yup, that’s the harmful attitude that was identified, and just because you think that trans-gendered people should be free from all harassment except the kind that you espouse here doesn’t mean that you’re not doing harm.

    I hesitate to derail the thread any further, but consider the case of Caster Semenya, who has a rare condition in which she has outward female genitalia, and an internal set of testes instead of ovaries. She is a woman. She was raised as a woman, identifies as a woman, and yet since she performed “too well”, she came under scrutiny and gender policing, and her athletic career suffered as a result.

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

    If you have a problem with accepting other people’s identities, then you should keep it to yourself lest you contribute to the aforementioned harm that trans-gendered people experience. Educate yourself.

  1204. ChasCPeterson:

    “I am a man / male” and “I am a woman / female”

    It’s not just academic. The adjectives ‘male’ and ‘female’ mean something. And they are applicable to platypuses, turtles, sea urchins, insects, asparagus plants, and any dioecious organism, as well as to the gonads of monoecious/hermaphroditic organisms of all kinds.
    ‘Man’ and ‘woman’ have of course until extremely recently referred to male and female (in the sense above) humans.
    I get the (again very recent, but by the same token progressive) distinction between sex and gender, and you can call yourself a man or a woman as you please as far as I’m concerned. But, I’m sorry, your implicit human exceptionalism does not warrant the redefinition of the word ‘male’. IMO. It refers to the production of small and usually motile gametes. Not a psychological self-identification. *shrug*

  1205. reasonable fellow:

    If you have a problem with accepting other people’s identities, then you should keep it to yourself lest you contribute to the aforementioned harm that trans-gendered people experience. Educate yourself.

    This is just bullshit. Expressing an opinion is not harmful in itself.

  1206. Lyn M: hysterical feminazi fembot watsonista dramatic name caller of death:

    What do you lose by calling, say, a female gender identified transexual a woman, whatever sexual organs she may have been born with?

    I could say honesty and integrity but the real answer is that I would probably be polite in real life. This is the internet though and people seem to be offended that I don’t think something.

    Riiiiight. We all are so convinced of the power of honesty, that when confronted with a baby we feel is really, really ugly, we say to the parents, “That’s one ugly kid. I am forced to say this because I have honesty and integrity which I will not besmirch by speaking anything but what I think is the absolute truth. So there.”

  1207. Caine, Panthera Susurratrix:

    Johannas:

    Yup. Women who don’t like being hit on at 4 am in tightly enclosed spaces are either prudes or dykes.

    Mmmm. What they might be if cornered in a tightly enclosed space by an unwanted party is never specified. You just know it wouldn’t be prude or fag. Heh.

  1208. M. A. Melby:

    Well done M.A Melby. You noticed two parts of a discussion without anything in between.

    No, you missed the point. You said it was “all about chromosomes, and then people gave you examples of when it really isn’t “all about chromosomes”.

    Then you got all mad when someone didn’t talk about genitals when defining “intersex”.

    I generally use the term “intersex” very broadly, but it usually is used to describe a baby who cannot be assigned a gender at birth according to their genitalia because it is “ambiguous”.

    That’s a relatively small group of people; and it used to be that they would be assigned at birth anyway and sometimes given surgery to be more female-typical. That has been a disaster when the original gender assignment is different than the gender identity of the child.

    Transgender people are a different gender than they were originally assigned at birth. There are some similarities there. The parents assign a gender based on the genitalia, but later find out that they (the parents) were mistaken about the child’s gender.

    Although experiences vary greatly, it is sometimes very disturbing to have a gender different than the one that is usually assigned to you based on your appearance. It is difficult to look at your body and know it is wrong.

    For others to insist that you are not the gender you actually are is insulting and pretty damned terrible. To purposefully mis-gender someone is beyond rude – it is abusive.

    You do not understand the words coming out of your mouth.

    It is NOT being truthful to mis-gender a transgender person. You are not LYING to be polite by gendering them correctly. When you misgender a transgender person, you are telling a lie that has been told to hir over and over and over again since zie was born.

    It’s a slap in the face.

  1209. reasonable fellow:

    Riiiiight. We all are so convinced of the power of honesty, that when confronted with a baby we feel is really, really ugly, we say to the parents, “That’s one ugly kid. I am forced to say this because I have honesty and integrity which I will not besmirch by speaking anything but what I think is the absolute truth. So there.”

    Well apparently you couldn’t even read through that quote so..

  1210. John Morales:

    [datum]

    Transsexual and Intersex Gender Identity.

    BTW, the author’s story is remarkable:

    Actually, I am a Rocket Scientist. Also hormonally odd (my blood has 46xy chromosomes anyway) and for most of my life, I looked male, and lived as one, trying to be the best Man a Gal could be. Anyway, in May 2005 that started changing naturally for reasons still unclear, and I’m now Zoe, not Alan : happier and more relaxed not to have to pretend any more.

  1211. reasonable fellow:

    Then you got all mad when someone didn’t talk about genitals when defining “intersex”.

    No, I asked whether that was typical or not of the trans-sexual experience. I haven’t got a real answer yet.

  1212. 'Tis Himself:

    You’re trying to put words in my mouth. You’ve been doing that a lot.

    If you think someone is misinterpreting you, then correct them. Whining just isn’t enough.

    I think that people can change their sexual identity, but if they identify as the opposite gender then they are lying to themselves.

    See, this is where you show your bigotry. You’ve decided by fiat that a person remains their birth gender until they die. Those of us who are arguing with you say this is wrong, it’s incorrect, it’s not lying! If someone self-identifies as a man or a woman then that’s what they are, regardless of your opinions and prejudices. Sorry if reality doesn’t match your bigotry.

    Whats wrong with “trans-sexual” anyway?

    You seem to be the one with the problem about transexuals.

  1213. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:

    Reasonable Fellow, you need to change your ‘nym. You aren’t reasonable, you are prejudiced and prejudgemental. Try Presuppositional Fellow, which is more in line with your beliefs.

  1214. reasonable fellow:

    If someone self-identifies as a man or a woman then that’s what they are, regardless of your opinions and prejudices

    If someone self-identifies as the god neptune I am not obliged to agree with them.

  1215. mythbri:

    @reasonable fellow

    That’s not what I mean – bigoted opinions is harmful, especially when they are expressed by the majority of an oppressive society. Your dismissal of other people’s gender identity is harmful, and as you said, probably in line with the majority. The argument for the correctness of a cannot be based on majority opinion. The majority of people believe in God – that doesn’t make them right.

    You have expressed an ignorance of the fluidity of biological gender, gender identity and people who are gender-queer. Educate yourself.

  1216. codobus:

    This is just bullshit. Expressing an opinion is not harmful in itself.

    Oh if only this were true. It turns out that stating something like

    My “prejudice” if that’s what you want to call it is that biological females can never become men, and that biological males can never become women

    Is not only hateful, it can severely hurt those reading it like myself. It reminds some of us how we’ll never be in precisely the body we were supposed to have, and that’s something that my own mind brings up often enough you don’t have to pile on. It’s called triggering, and doing on purpose is some of the lowest type of interaction.

    You suck. Same to you Chas.

  1217. cyberCMDR:

    I think that people can change their sexual identity, but if they identify as the opposite gender then they are lying to themselves.

    OK, thought experiment: Take two young children (one male, one female), while secondary sex characteristics haven’t kicked in yet. Swap their brains (this is hypothetical, so go with it) and let them grow up. At maturity, the boy is interested in other boys and the girl likes girls. To feel more comfortable, they become transsexuals. Are they lying to themselves?

    No? If not, it is because their brains are what drive their sexuality. The brains of males and females generally have some subtle but distinctive differences in the size and organization of some sub-components. They have found that the brains of many gay men are morphologically closer to that of female brains. It is the brain, not the chromosomes or the physical sex characteristics, that determine sexuality.

    Geez, this is as bad as the creationists, assuming that all living things come in “types”, and cannot change (evolve) due to some supernatural law.

  1218. ChasCPeterson:

    gah, selfquote:

    It refers to the production of small and usually motile gametes. Not a psychological self-identification. *shrug*

    And also not a combination of chromosomes.
    (in some lizards, almost all turtles and all crocodilians, sex–male or female–is determined by the temperature at which the egg is incubated.)

  1219. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:

    If someone self-identifies as the god neptune I am not obliged to agree with them.

    No, but you aren’t reasonable if you don’t. You show your prejudices if you don’t. Again, why not shut the fuck up and quit embarrassing your self. You have embarrassed your ‘nym since this topic started with your unreasonable presuppositions. Silence, saves you from foot in mouth disease…

  1220. mythbri:

    Blech! I failed at my word salad. Meant to say that “bigoted opinions are harmful” and “The argument for the correctness of a fact.” Sorry for that.

  1221. 'Tis Himself:

    This is just bullshit. Expressing an opinion is not harmful in itself.

    Pol Pot had the right idea, 20% of all Kampucheans needed to be exterminated. Just my opinion.

    Blacks are an inferior race, fit only for menial jobs. Just my opinion.

    Jews are greedy bloodsuckers who kill Christian babies to make Passover matzos. Just my opinion.

    Lesbians should be raped straight. Just my opinion.

    Gays should be stoned to death. They all have AIDS anyway so killing them would be a blessing. Just my opinion.

    Transexuals are lying to themselves. Just my opinion.

    See how opinions work?

  1222. QueQuoi, traded in her jackboots for jillstilettos:

    There’s a couple of people ahead of you, but you’ve made my OMnom list.

    Hi Caine! As as ex-chef, I am perfectly happy just to be on the nomnom list. If you ever need USB baked goods, I can post an order form here on TET.

  1223. ChasCPeterson:

    I suck because I object to redefinition of the words ‘male’ and ‘female’? I have not strengthened any systems of structural discrimination in any way, just talked about 2 words and their meanings.

  1224. John Morales:

    Specimen:

    In your world, everyone is assigned maleness or femaleness at birth on a chromosomal/gonadal basis, and then forevermore their gender identity must match their assigned sex identity else you will imagine they’re lying to themselves.

    You’re trying to put words in my mouth. You’ve been doing that a lot.

    If someone self-identifies as the god neptune I am not obliged to agree with them.

    Strange how my adumbration of your position is sufficient to account for your claims, no?

    So, anyway: in what manner have I misrepresented your position?

  1225. reasonable fellow:

    Is not only hateful, it can severely hurt those reading it like myself. It reminds some of us how we’ll never be in precisely the body we were supposed to have, and that’s something that my own mind brings up often enough you don’t have to pile on. It’s called triggering, and doing on purpose is some of the lowest type of interaction.

    Really, because being called a bigot, and pile of vomit, and a piece of shit, and that I suck, rather than engage in honest debate is really hateful to me. I just wish people would respect my feelings.

  1226. Ing: Gerund of Death:

    I suck because I object to redefinition of the words ‘male’ and ‘female’?

    Yes it’s very important that you defend traditional marriage definitions.

  1227. Ing: Gerund of Death:

    Really, because being called a bigot, and pile of vomit, and a piece of shit, and that I suck, rather than engage in honest debate is really hateful to me. I just wish people would respect my feelings.

    Go fuck yourself miss.

  1228. QueQuoi, traded in her jackboots for jillstilettos:

    If someone self-identifies as a reasonable fellow I am not obliged to agree with them.

  1229. reasonable fellow:

    That hurt. People shouldn’t be allowed to say that.

  1230. M. A. Melby:

    But, I’m sorry, your implicit human exceptionalism does not warrant the redefinition of the word ‘male’. IMO. It refers to the production of small and usually motile gametes. Not a psychological self-identification. *shrug*

    Why are you so certain that transgenderism doesn’t happen in other animals – cause I’d be really surprised if it didn’t.

    We don’t use “male” and “female” to refer to our gametes. If you were in a horrible accident you would not suddenly become non-gendered. When you use “he” and “she” – you are referring to gender identity, absolutely. You don’t call women who have had surgery due to endrometriosis and ovarian cysts – “it” or something horrible.

    Most males have male-typical gametes and most females have female-typical gametes – so in every-day speech a great number of people simply haven’t make distinctions.

    For lack of a better analogy – it’s like how so many people use “mass” and “weight” interchangeably. Most of the time, it doesn’t matter. It doesn’t matter until it really really matters.

  1231. mythbri:

    @reasonable fellow

    Why should intolerance be tolerated? What makes your feelings more important than the ones you’re hurting? Does your experience of being called names on the internet compare to telling trans-gendered people that they’re inherently dishonest and lying to themselves?

  1232. Ing: Gerund of Death:

    That hurt. People shouldn’t be allowed to say that.

    Kindly immolate yourself

  1233. 'Tis Himself:

    Really, because being called a bigot, and pile of vomit, and a piece of shit, and that I suck, rather than engage in honest debate is really hateful to me. I just wish people would respect my feelings.

    There’s an easy fix if you don’t want to be called those things. Stop being a bigot and people won’t call you on your bigotry. Even a pile of vomit piece of shit sucking bigot should be able to figure that one out. Unless they’re really fucking stupid.

  1234. cyberCMDR:

    That hurt. People shouldn’t be allowed to say that.

    Gosh, you mean someone expressing their opinion can hurt?

  1235. John Morales:

    Specimen:

    rather than engage in honest debate

    You aren’t debating, you’re endlessly asserting your ignorant opinion and dismissing on the basis of ignorance and incredulity.

    Have you even looked at any of the links provided, O declaimer of lack of honest debate?

    I for one cited the Genderbread Person and A.E. Brain’s resource on Transsexual and Intersex Gender Identity.

    Any comments about those?

    (Others have cited other sources, you’ve equally ignored them, any comments about those?)

  1236. M. A. Melby:

    No, I asked whether that was typical or not of the trans-sexual experience. I haven’t got a real answer yet.

    Then you didn’t read my post…or did you want an actual number for some reason?

  1237. Timothy (TRiG):

    Not to say that majority rules, but telling people to stfu if they express it isn’t likely to win many people over.

    Win you over? You want to be won over? For a start, you could show some evidence that you’re engaging in good faith.

    Listen, some people here are actually trying to reason with you (they have more patience than I). Others are trying to get you to shut up and go the fuck away.

    Personally, I don’t care much if you’re a bigotted arsewipe. As long as it’s happening between your own ears and not affecting anyone else, I really don’t give a shit. To that end, aggressive speech (to make you go away) and mockery (to put you off saying bigotted things in other contexts) serve nicely.

    They haven’t worked on you yet, but they are time-tested. Blatent racism is a lot less frequent than it used to be, because people don’t dare to be openly racist any more*.

    Similarly, mockery, shock, and horror will eventually stop people being openly transphobic or homophobic or whatever.

    TRiG.

    * This is not by any means actually true, yet. But it’s a lot more true than it used to be.

  1238. reasonable fellow:

    I just looked at the genderbread website. Wow, my mind is changed. How much for a t-shirt?

  1239. Rumtopf:

    Ah, so calling someone a bigot is JUST as bad as being one. What a reasonable way to think.

  1240. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart, MD, PhD, DDS, Esq, OM:

    r**s*n*bl* fellow:

    I think that people can change their sexual identity, but if they identify as the opposite gender then they are lying to themselves.

    Let’s say that despite the mountain of evidence that Jadehawk and John Morales have provided*, that you are correct and trans- people are just lying to themselves**.

    So the fuck what? Why do you even care?

    Like has been said time and time again, how someone else identifies doesn’t harm you in the slightest, even if they’re lying to themselves.

    Why are you putting up this fight, r**s*n*bl* fellow? What’s your stake in all of this?

    *Sorry if I missed anyone!

    **Why do I feel like this was an old argument used against gay men and lesbians?

  1241. John Morales:

    I just looked at the genderbread website. Wow, my mind is changed. How much for a t-shirt?

    Your cogent analysis and impeccable rebuttal becomes you.

  1242. mythbri:

    @reasonable fellow

    Way to impress me with your reasonableness, honesty and integrity.

    Oh, wait… What’s the opposite of impressed, again?

  1243. reasonable fellow:

    Why are you putting up this fight, r**s*n*bl* fellow? What’s your stake in all of this?

    I’m not ‘putting up a fight’ – i’m talking. Other people are being really aggressive but that is not something I can control.

  1244. Ing: Gerund of Death:

    I’m not ‘putting up a fight’ – i’m talking. Other people are being really aggressive but that is not something I can control.

    Well this is why I say fuck the skeptics

  1245. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart, MD, PhD, DDS, Esq, OM:

    QueQuoi:

    Thank you PZ and Caine and Hyperdeath and Carlie and Nerd of Redhead.
    Thank you Cipher and Louis and Brownian and Jadehawk and Audley.
    Thank you Nigel and ‘Tis and Ing and Wowbagger and John Morales and Salty Current.
    Thank you especially to Sally/Sam Strange and Josh, Official Spokesgay (h/t for my extended ‘nym, and thanks for the great fun on #FTBullies the other night)

    ♥! Thank you, QueQuoi!

  1246. Josh, Official LuncheonMeat:

    As seen on Twitter:

    SpokesGay sez—Having a ‘nym formed : “[adjective meaning level-headed] + [atheist/man] is infallibly diagnostic of douchebaggery.

    Examples: “reasonable fellow,” “rational thinker,” “rational atheist”

    The more you know. . .

  1247. reasonable fellow:

    Your cogent analysis and impeccable rebuttal becomes you.

    No really, that image of a gingerbread man was powerful stuff.

  1248. Lyn M: hysterical feminazi fembot watsonista dramatic name caller of death:

    @reasonablefellow

    I don’t think it should. I also don’t think that you can ignore a persons physicality and focus solely on the make up of their brain, or their own opinions of where they are in the ‘gender-spectrum’.

    Question: How do you find out? Particularly the chromosomes.

    *Visualizes reasonablefellow’s workplace. Shudders*

  1249. nms:

    Ponies were mentioned and I must comment

    Pteryxx:

    I agree that ‘herp a derp’ isn’t ablist, but it’s starting to *become* ablist, due to being interpreted that way in some subcultures. See the recent flap over the fan-named character “Derpy Hooves” in MLP recently

    There wouldn’t have been any flap if the character had simply been named “Derpy”. It was the voice that moved the character from silly to offensive.

    -

    humble opinions:

    I just looked at the genderbread website. Wow, my mind is changed. How much for a t-shirt?

    Send this one back, I think it’s broken.

  1250. John Morales:

    No really, that image of a gingerbread man was powerful stuff.

    To what stuff do you refer, the which its power you concede?

  1251. C.C.Fuss:

    Argh, I go away, watch some Tour de France, get some sleep, go to the gym, and suddenly there’s a completely new annoying troll in the thread? (yeah, I know, that never happens normally…)

    I think the ‘reasonable’ nym is the same phenomenon as the German Democratic Republic, the People’s Republic of Korea, the Center for American Progress, and (for my fellow Aussies) ‘Honest John’ and ‘WorkChoices’.

    Seems to be something common to authoritarian personalities to do this. And the whole “I get to decide whether you are a man or a woman, based on traditional definitions” is pretty darn authoritarian.

  1252. John Morales:

    [meta]

    PS I doubt it’s only I who has noticed the morph of “the Genderbread Person” to the “gingerbread man”.

    (Oblivious people are oblivious)

  1253. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart, MD, PhD, DDS, Esq, OM:

    r**s*n*abl*fellow:

    I’m not ‘putting up a fight’ – i’m talking. Other people are being really aggressive but that is not something I can control.

    Uh huh.

    Gee whiz, it’s almost as if you pissed some of us off with your assertions that it’s biology! and they’re lying to themselves. I mean, golly, you’ve triggered at least one poster– did you even notice that? Do you even care?

    And if you’re not putting up a fight, then why haven’t you fucked right along, then?

  1254. C.C.Fuss:

    LynM:

    Question: How do you find out? Particularly the chromosomes.

    *Visualizes reasonablefellow’s workplace. Shudders*

    Just what I was thinking.
    So, if I meet ‘reasonable fellow’, and claim to be a woman, he’s gonna want a blood test before he believes me, and otherwise refuse to assign me a gender?

  1255. reasonable fellow:

    I mean, golly, you’ve triggered at least one poster– did you even notice that? Do you even care?

    Oh come off it.

    And if you’re not putting up a fight, then why haven’t you fucked right along, then?

    This is a good discussion I feel.

  1256. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart, MD, PhD, DDS, Esq, OM:

    Also, what about my other question, irrational fellow?

    Why do you care if someone is lying to themselves?

    (Stupid asshole. I feel sleazy just writing that out and if it weren’t because of your ignorance, I wouldn’t have had to. I’m gonna have to loofah really hard when I shower tonight.)

  1257. C.C.Fuss:

    This is a good discussion I feel.

    I’ll add ‘narcissism’ to my previous ‘authoritarian’.

  1258. mythbri:

    @reasonable fellow

    Oh, this is a good discussion? So your thoughtful and intellectual analysis of the information that people have offered you is “good discussion” and not disagreeable trolling? Could have fooled me. Come to think of it, you did fool me.

  1259. John Morales:

    C.C.Fuss,

    So, if I meet ‘reasonable fellow’, and claim to be a woman, he’s gonna want a blood test before he believes me, and otherwise refuse to assign me a gender?

    No, no, he’ll go by what you look like wearing clothing.

    If that fails, he’ll go by what you look like not wearing clothing.

    If that fails, he’ll need a cellular sample to determine your chromosomal make-up — that being the bottom line.

    (It’s all very simple, really)

  1260. reasonable fellow:

    Why do you care if someone is lying to themselves?

    I don’t, as has been said many times.

  1261. Lyn M: hysterical feminazi fembot watsonista dramatic name caller of death:

    @ reasonablefellow

    Well apparently you couldn’t even read through that quote so..

    Oh, must be so, since I didn’t agree with you.

  1262. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart, MD, PhD, DDS, Esq, OM:

    Oh come off it

    This ^ is exactly why so many of us are under the impression that you’re a miserable sack of shit. You can’t back up any of your arguments and you’re fucking dismissing another persons feelings and struggles.

    I’m supposed to think that you’re reasonable after that? Seriously? Grow a fucking empathy glad or something.

  1263. reasonable fellow:

    So, if I meet ‘reasonable fellow’, and claim to be a woman, he’s gonna want a blood test before he believes me, and otherwise refuse to assign me a gender?

    I think it’ll be obvious.

  1264. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart, MD, PhD, DDS, Esq, OM:

    I don’t, as has been said many times.

    ??

    Am I supposed to believe your actions or your words?

    You are really adept at lying to yourself, I’ve noticed.

  1265. C.C.Fuss:

    John Morales:

    No, no, he’ll go by what you look like wearing clothing.

    If that fails, he’ll go by what you look like not wearing clothing.

    If that fails, he’ll need a cellular sample to determine your chromosomal make-up — that being the bottom line.

    Ah, yes, of course you’re right – what every reasonable person would do.
    And since my clothed appearance is not as indicative of my chromosomal makeup as a reasonable person might be warranted in thinking, and he’ll never get the second and third kind of information, there will be lots of confusion. I find this quite satisfying to imagine.

    (Seriously, I really do like annoying the “but how can you tell whether they’re a man or a woman?!” folks)

  1266. C.C.Fuss:

    I think it’ll be obvious.

    DO YOU NOW. How…..reasonable. And surprising.

    And what if the gender that seems obvious to you does not ‘match’ my chromosomes? How will you know whether to refuse to go along with my self-described gender identity?

  1267. reasonable fellow:

    Am I supposed to believe your actions or your words?

    You are really adept at lying to yourself, I’ve noticed.

    You only have my words to go by and i’ve repeatedly stated that I don’t care how people identify themselves. I object to being told how I must view them.

  1268. ruteekatreya:

    I think it’ll be obvious.

    That you’re a complete douchebag? It is.

    Really, because being called a bigot, and pile of vomit, and a piece of shit, and that I suck, rather than engage in honest debate is really hateful to me.

    You’re an asshole, and a massive bigot. Your feelings on how you feel about that are irrelevant here, because assholes and massive bigots face no problem from society; if anything, they are bolstered by it.

  1269. Lyn M: hysterical feminazi fembot watsonista dramatic name caller of death:

    I think it’ll be obvious.

    Chromosomes, those giant lumps we have festooned all over us.

  1270. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart, MD, PhD, DDS, Esq, OM:

    i’ve repeatedly stated that I don’t care how people identify themselves. I object to being told how I must view them.

    Is it just me or does the beginning of this statement not match the end?

  1271. M. A. Melby:

    Oh come off it.

    No, cause the reason so many people are screaming and yelling and posting you links and freaking the hell out of you – is not JUST because they like to read themselves type – but because your particular brand of willful ignorance is so powerful it kills people.

    …and even though my nephew survived and he is doing really well these days, that’s not how everyone fairs.

    I was very unaware of what was going on at the time. Now I know better. I’ve actually looked into the *gasp* scientific literature about gender identity and LISTENED to my nephew who is very knowledgeable.

    You don’t even seem to know what “gender identity” means and are making statements about how others must be “lying to themselves”?!

    About 41% of transgender people have attempted suicide and YOUR type of attitude absolutely contributes to that.

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40279043/ns/health-health_care/t/transgender-americans-face-high-suicide-risk/#.T_j9ONUkKSo

    So, NO it’s not appropriate for you to insist that anyone “come off it”.

    What you should be saying right now is:

    “Sorry” and “Thank you”

  1272. reasonable fellow:

    Chromosomes, those giant lumps we have festooned all over us.

    You’ll be the angry dude in a skirt probably.

  1273. nms:

    asking a skeptic to examine their baseless beliefs is literally worse than Hitler and Stalin combined

  1274. nms:

    and the clock has struck Porcupine

  1275. davidbohm:

    reasonable fellow: I am being a bit confused what your position is, are you saying male/female is defined by chromosome makeup?

  1276. John Morales:

    clueless specimen:

    [1] You only have my words to go by [2] and i’ve repeatedly stated that I don’t care how people identify themselves. [3] I object to being told how I must view them.

    1. Such inanity presented as revelation!

    2. You do care, at the very least to the extent you consider them liars when their identification does not match your prejudice.

    Evidence: you popped in to spout how this is so.

    3. No one is telling you how you must view them, but rather who they are and that a (ahem) reasonable view entails being informed.

    (Recalcitrant defiance to addressing one’s ignorance is ignominious)

  1277. mythbri:

    @reasonable fellow

    Okay, Troll Status confirmed.

  1278. reasonable fellow:

    reasonable fellow: I am being a bit confused what your position is, are you saying male/female is defined by chromosome makeup?

    Yeah. Those things that define gender.

  1279. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart, MD, PhD, DDS, Esq, OM:

    You’ll be the angry dude in a skirt probably.

    Wow. Okay.

    It’s always nice when bigots shed their “reasonable” pretenses, isn’t it? No… not nice. Every fucking bit as disgusting.

    (It seems, fellow, that you’re totes okay with how a person identifies as long as they “pass”. Am I getting close?)

  1280. Rev. BigDumbChimp:

    You’ll be the angry dude in a skirt probably.

    What was that about not being a bigot again?

  1281. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart, MD, PhD, DDS, Esq, OM:

    *headdesk!*

    At least look up what “gender” means.

    (Here’s a hint: it’s not the same as sex!)

  1282. reasonable fellow:

    Wow. Okay.

    It’s always nice when bigots shed their “reasonable” pretenses, isn’t it? No… not nice. Every fucking bit as disgusting.

    Whatever, i’m supposed to put up with being called a piece of shit bigot. Big surprise I hit back eventually.

  1283. cyberCMDR:

    @reasonablefellow:
    Listen, definitions matter.

    Being told that you can’t “marry” because others want an unchanging definition of marriage matters. Being told you are not a real man or woman because you had a sex change matters. Just because it doesn’t affect you directly does not mean that it doesn’t matter to others. Especially when that definition is associated with discrimination and/or violence against the person so defined.

    This is essentially what this thread has been about, when TF stated that the concerns of women about harassment were overblown. He wasn’t the person or group being harassed (or worse), SO HE DOESN’T GET TO DECIDE! Neither do you.

  1284. Lyn M: hysterical feminazi fembot watsonista dramatic name caller of death:

    You’ll be the angry dude in a skirt probably.

    Gosh, that so stings. Imagine such a horror. And I’ll be ugly, yes?

    Oh, and I am part Scots, but let’s skip that.

  1285. davidbohm:

    reasonable fellow: That was also how I understand your posts. But according to wikipedia (i am no biologist), being able to produce sperm is what define “male”. I guess I was wondering why you choose genetic makeup?

  1286. mythbri:

    @reasonable fellow

    BIG SURPRISE that you hit back on the people that commentors here are trying to educate you about. BIG SURPRISE that your assertion that you don’t care and that you’re polite about people you believe to be lying to themselves turns out to be not so true.

    Way to attack the vulnerable when you get all pissy. Truly, that was big of you.

  1287. Rev. BigDumbChimp:

    Reasonable fellow, different subject, but somewhat related…

    What’s your take on so called ex-gay therapy?

  1288. reasonable fellow:

    But according to wikipedia (i am no biologist), being able to produce sperm is what define “male”. I guess I was wondering why you choose genetic makeup?

    True enough. I think most people are going to have great difficulty producing sperm without a Y chromosome.

  1289. reasonable fellow:

    Gosh, that so stings. Imagine such a horror. And I’ll be ugly, yes?

    Oh, and I am part Scots, but let’s skip that.

    Well if you’re part scottish the ugliness is implied. Thats a joke by the way.

  1290. Rev. BigDumbChimp:

    Thats a joke by the way.

    hilarious

  1291. Lyn M: hysterical feminazi fembot watsonista dramatic name caller of death:

    Well if you’re part scottish the ugliness is implied. Thats a joke by the way.

    Because so many Scots kills themselves as a result of bigotry. I appreciate the comment that you were only joking.

    Jokes never hurt.

  1292. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart, MD, PhD, DDS, Esq, OM:

    Whatever, i’m supposed to put up with being called a piece of shit bigot. Big surprise I hit back eventually.

    Because being called a bigot is every bit as bad as making bigoted statements, right?

    Once again, thanks for showing your true colors. Too bad they’re so fucking ugly.

  1293. davidbohm:

    reasonable fellow: Sure, sure. Actually when I think about it I think the two things are equivalent according to the wikipedia definition of “male”.

  1294. dogeared, spotted and foxed:

    Whatever, i’m supposed to put up with being called a piece of shit bigot. Big surprise I hit back eventually.

    You’ve been hitting the entire time, dumbass.

  1295. M. A. Melby:

    being able to produce sperm is what define “male”

    FFS

    oh – You had testicular cancer? How does it feel not to be male?

    I mean – you looked it up on wiki….are you a cartoon?

  1296. reasonable fellow:

    reasonable fellow: Sure, sure. Actually when I think about it I think the two things are equivalent according to the wikipedia definition of “male”.

    We can only draw one conclusion from this: Wikipedia is a bigoted hate-site committed to driving transexuals to suicide through the relentless repetition of bio-truth.

  1297. C.C.Fuss:

    You’ll be the angry dude in a skirt probably.

    *nods enthusiastically*
    Yes, that’s me!
    .
    .
    .
    … or is it??? *conspiratorial look*

    Whatever, i’m supposed to put up with being called a piece of shit bigot. Big surprise I hit back eventually.

    Maintaining honesty and integrity as a self-described ‘reasonable fellow’ defending the sanctity of outdated gender norms is hard, man.

  1298. Lyn M: hysterical feminazi fembot watsonista dramatic name caller of death:

    @ CC Fuss

    Hmmmmm

    No, I think it’s me. I am famously a guy, and in a skirt and angry as all heck.

    But we could alternate, if you like.

  1299. davidbohm:

    Melby: Yes i looked it up on wikipedia. No I am not a cartoon.

  1300. Caine, Panthera Susurratrix:

    Really, because being called a bigot, and pile of vomit, and a piece of shit, and that I suck, rather than engage in honest debate is really hateful to me.

    You are a toxic, vile, willfully ignorant bigot who serves less purpose than fetid pus. That’s not only my opinion, fuckwit, I have a post after post after post of evidence that is the case.

    We’re all on solid ground here, douchebiscuit. It’s you who is dancing on quicksand.

  1301. Rev. BigDumbChimp:

    We can only draw one conclusion from this: Wikipedia is a bigoted hate-site committed to driving transexuals to suicide through the relentless repetition of bio-truth.

    Are you like a weredumbfuck, when the night gets on and the moon comes out you become someone with supernatural powers of dumbfuckery?

  1302. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart, MD, PhD, DDS, Esq, OM:

    Lyn:

    I am famously a guy, and in a skirt and angry as all heck.

    This is so punk rock.

  1303. reasonable fellow:

    You are a toxic, vile, willfully ignorant bigot who serves less purpose than fetid pus. That’s not only my opinion, fuckwit, I have a post after post after post of evidence that is the case.

    Pack that evidence into your fucking clown car and drive down to the D.As office shit for brains.

  1304. Lyn M: hysterical feminazi fembot watsonista dramatic name caller of death:

    Pats pockets of poodle decorated circle skirt

    I have some cybergarlic here somewhere. I swear.

    Checks purse (sorry, sorry Manpurse)

    There you go!

  1305. Lyn M: hysterical feminazi fembot watsonista dramatic name caller of death:

    @ Audley

    Is it OK that its a poodle-decorated circle skirt? I can’t manage the ponytail due to short hair, but hey, maybe I could braid my beard?

  1306. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart, MD, PhD, DDS, Esq, OM:

    Lyn:
    The circle skirt makes you even more badass. :)

  1307. myeck waters:

    Risable fellow:

    You do not fit in here. You will never fit in here. You should go and find some other part of the internet where you will fit in better.

    And even if you don’t find another part of the internet, you should go.

    This is not the place for you.

  1308. C.C.Fuss:

    No, I think it’s me. I am famously a guy, and in a skirt and angry as all heck.

    Oh. *pouts*
    ….Uh, I mean, *pouts LIKE AN ANGRY DUDE*

    But we could alternate, if you like.

    Yayy!
    And the rest of the time I can confound the super-chromosome-detecting powers of reasonable fellows everywhere by not wearing a skirt.

  1309. davidbohm:

    reasonable fellow: You certainly get that impression.

    Actually the talk-page for the “male” wikipedia page contain some interesting information regarding chromosonal makeup and the physiological sex you might want to check out if you are interested.

  1310. Lyn M: hysterical feminazi fembot watsonista dramatic name caller of death:

    @ Audley

    Welllll, then, I also found some bowling shoes, white ankle socks and a bowling bag I appliqued with scots terriers, one pink one blue, and a charm bracelet. I won’t even begin to list all the charms, except I think the Harley wirespoke front wheel cap is special.

    @ CC Fuss

    Ooooo, and MAN pout. Like wow, so totally man that I just completely believe you are a man, right down to your blue-shaded chromosomes.

  1311. Crip Dyke, MQ, Right Reverend Feminist FuckToy of Death & Her Handmaiden:

    he’s been complaining about the social sciences usurping common words to mean something else (which apparently other sciences don’t do, and “community” means the same thing in plain English as it does in ecological jargon, right chaz?), and he apparently thinks this is another instance of this.

    That’s nothin.

    Physicists have appropriated Strange (sorry Sally & Sam!), Magic (sorry everyone!), and even Flavor! (Sorry Ms. Cripdyke!)

    In fact, I wasn’t going to mention this because I didn’t want to scare the McStraighterson family, but physicists are totally appropriating and redefining

    Top and Bottom!!!11!1!one!!

    Imagine, people in a community picking words to communicate ideas the way that they think is best even when others don’t use the word in the same way!

    They even – horrors – defend and justify the practice. I’ve heard physicists (well, one) say that they want everyone to know about this freaky Top/Bottom stuff.

    There’s a reason “Quark” is more than half “Queer”. I say we storm CERN with pitchforks and torches.

  1312. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart, MD, PhD, DDS, Esq, OM:

    Lyn,
    Can we please braid a pink ribbon into your beard?

  1313. Lyn M: hysterical feminazi fembot watsonista dramatic name caller of death:

    @CC Fuss

    by not wearing a skirt

    Awesome. I thought you actually disappeared there for a moment, but if I squinch up my eyes, virilily and look side-ways, I can just see you.

    Pretty cool power there.

  1314. Lyn M: hysterical feminazi fembot watsonista dramatic name caller of death:

    @Audley

    Be my guest. I prefer satin, if you’ve got it. Not so fond of sequins, though.

  1315. M. A. Melby:

    So, why don’t you at least look up “gender identity” as well. Cause the wiki for “male” is referring to the “male sex” as in the organisms that carries the “male” gamete in order to breed. This use is only used as the categorical male-typical when discussing reproduction. That’s it. Nothing more. At all.

    It is not referring to “male” in the context of gender and gender identity.

    Latching onto a specific use of the term “male” and using that definition as a prescription onto a more complex subject is a misuse.

    Science, and especially science jargon, is NOT prescriptive. It describes. If you are using “male” to mean a WHOLE MESS of distinct things, that may or may not occur together, you’re just being sloppy.

    A transgender man’s gender is male. He may have some or all female-typical reproductive organs, depending on if he has chosen to remove them or not. (..and it’s none of your goddamn business.)

    If you are discussing GENDER and not someone’s sexual organs – their gender is the gender that they identify as. THE END.

    That’s how that works.

  1316. M. A. Melby:

    “If you are discussing GENDER and not someone’s sexual organs – their gender is the gender that they identify as. THE END.”

    AARGH

    …and even if you are talking about their sexual organs…

    Which you should really refrain from doing – cause it’s rude.

  1317. Lyn M: hysterical feminazi fembot watsonista dramatic name caller of death:

    There’s a reason “Quark” is more than half “Queer”. I say we storm CERN with pitchforks and torches.

    Counts carefully. Nods

    Yep, she’s right.

    Checks bowling bag for torches

    I’m sure I packed a few. Sure makes for more fun “barbeques”, if you get my drift. At least that’s what I tell the cops. ;)

  1318. davidbohm:

    Melby: So in that case, one can be male (as in gender) and not male (as in sex) at the same time.

  1319. Caine, Panthera Susurratrix:

    Pack that evidence into your fucking clown car and drive down to the D.As office shit for brains.

    To you being a toxic, vile, willfully ignorant bigot who serves less purpose than fetid pus, I’ll add that you are utterly abysmal at the art of insult.

  1320. Josh, Official LuncheonMeat:

    If some sexist, racist, homophobic fuck doesn’t like it, they can French kiss my round, rosy Ozark ass.

    TESTIFY girl.

  1321. Lyn M: hysterical feminazi fembot watsonista dramatic name caller of death:

    Hopes Josh notices the outfit. Jangles the Harley cap audibly.

  1322. Josh, Official LuncheonMeat:

    Oooh Daddy!. . .errr. . I mean. . mommy. . I mean. . .rowr!

  1323. C.C.Fuss:

    @ Lyn M:
    LOL!
    Being an angry dude in a skirt is awesome. :-D

    Crip Dyke:

    That’s nothin.

    Physicists have appropriated Strange (sorry Sally & Sam!), Magic (sorry everyone!), and even Flavor! (Sorry Ms. Cripdyke!)

    And don’t forget those dreadful statisticians, with their “Normal Distribution”. I mean. As if ‘normal’ could be a distribution of things and not just exactly one thing!

  1324. Josh, Official SpokesGay:

    Oh, and reasonable fellow? Fuck off and die. You’re a scum bag and I wouldn’t turn my back on you for any amount of money. You’re the reason I have to keep my guard up for myself and my friends. You pose as an ally but you’re an enabler or worse.

  1325. Lyn M: hysterical feminazi fembot watsonista dramatic name caller of death:

    Thank you, Josh.

    Tosses beard over shoulder.

    Well, it was a slice all. CC Fuss, get that skirt on because I’m out of here. Got me some shoppin’ to do.

    And Josh, I think Momma-Daddy is pretty cool. Just sayin’.

  1326. Josh, Official SpokesGay:

    Lyn M: Yes Sir-Ma’am!

  1327. C.C.Fuss, backup angry dude in a skirt:

    I’M ON IT!!!

  1328. M. A. Melby:

    Melby: So in that case, one can be male (as in gender) and not male (as in sex) at the same time.

    In a fashion.

    However, since the terms “gender” and “sex” are used so interchangeable in every-day speech, there is a problem. We’re stuck with antiquated lingo based at one time on religiously corrupted biology (God made binary MAN and WOMAN) and the other based on pseudo-science that asserted that gender was completely a social construct. (That failed notion was based in part on a pivotal falsified study that resulted in David Reimer’s eventual suicide.)

    Being referred to with a gendered-term (such as female) if a person is male; even if you are using the term “sex” to define the category should simply be avoided. The reason being is that nobody uses the strict definition of “sex” to refer to a person, in fact, in strict definition it doesn’t even make sense to use it to refer to an individual.

    “biological sex”
    “real sex”
    blah blah blah

    Are all considered really rude – and understandably so. They are also problematic in their connotations. For example, it reinforces the myth that gender identity has no physiological basis and promotes the dehumanizing concept of not being a “real” man or woman if you are transgender.

    So: the accepted terms (that are in use currently) are:

    cis-male
    cis-female
    transgender male
    transgender female

    If someone is cis, that means that the gender that they identify as is the same gender as the one they were assigned at birth, usually due to their outward physical appearance.

    If someone is trans, that means that the gender that they identify as if a different gender as the one they were assigned at birth, usually due to their outward physical appearance.

    When you are referring to someone with a gendered term – you just use the one that the person prefers. You don’t judge hir or assume what’s in hir head or hir pants. Most of the time, people want to be referred to with a gendered term that best represents their gender identity.

    I’ve also heard good arguments for simply retiring the term “trans-sexual”; and I tend to agree.

  1329. nigelTheBold, who sings like a needle to the ear:

    nigel wanders in, looks around. The room is filled with friendly, smiling, familiar faces, as comforting as a pillow pressed to the face. But something is off. He smells putridity as some people sniff farts.

    Oh, hi, reasonable fellow! It’s such a surprise to see you here, among all us skirt-wearin’* angry dudes. You did have a point somewhere, didn’t you? Or were you just happy to see us?

    Please, accept my gracious invitation to fuck right the fuck off. It’s for tomorrow, a Sunday morning affair. The dress is casual, the location is any-fucking-where but here. Libations will be served, as long as you provide them, to drown your grief.

    Also, too, there will be a heapin’ helpin’ of We Don’t Give A Fuck. So please, dress accordingly, drive soberly, and arrive promptly at fuck-you-o’clock.

    You’re welcome!

    * As if that’s a bad thing. Access is the word! As is the cool breeze up among all the hot-and-sweaties.

  1330. M. A. Melby:

    Good night.

  1331. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    miniatures are drying. let’s have a peek, shall we?

  1332. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    It’s not just academic. The adjectives ‘male’ and ‘female’ mean something. And they are applicable to platypuses, turtles, sea urchins, insects, asparagus plants, and any dioecious organism, as well as to the gonads of monoecious/hermaphroditic organisms of all kinds.
    ‘Man’ and ‘woman’ have of course until extremely recently referred to male and female (in the sense above) humans.
    I get the (again very recent, but by the same token progressive) distinction between sex and gender, and you can call yourself a man or a woman as you please as far as I’m concerned. But, I’m sorry, your implicit human exceptionalism does not warrant the redefinition of the word ‘male’. IMO. It refers to the production of small and usually motile gametes. Not a psychological self-identification. *shrug*

    chas, you’re such a hypocrite. The gamete-based definition is the newer definition, and it’s specifically only applicable to reproductive biology. It’s neither the universal, nor the most common, nor the original definition, but rather it’s a definition derived from the broader, plain-English word for man, being its adjective (not the other way round, as you claim). It’s no more the One True Definition of “male” than the one for computer parts is. So basically, you constantly whine when you notice specific social-science jargon that isn’t synonymous with plain English, but you want plain-English words to conform to specific reproductive-biology jargon? That’s bullshit. Hypocritical bullshit. Unwarranted hypocritical bullshit to boot, since the existence of the gamete-based definition is evidence for changing biological definitions as more knowledge of biology flows in. otherwise, it would never have been extended to things that aren’t bepenised animals in the first place.
    Also, claims about exceptionalism in this case are also bullshit, since no one claimed other animals can’t be trans (animals that act as if they were the other sex are after all not unheard of).
    And lastly, knowing your on sex is not “psychological self-identification” any more than me knowing which arm is mine and which is yours is “psychological self-identification”.

    - – - – -

    You’ve hit upon something there. What does it matter what christians think of atheists? It doesn’t make us believe in god.

    1)you’re lying again. It’s been explained to you that if these opinions never left your head via words or actions, they wouldn’t matter. This is still the case, and you claiming again that it’s about the thinking despite repeated corrections is a lie.
    2)it’s evidence for willful ignorance,when Christians continue saying this after being corrected
    3)saying it is a form of erasure. You don’t actually believe that actual transness exists, any more than these Christians believe that atheists really exist. Spreading that view by voicing it publicly makes it look like people advocating for atheist (or trans) rights are asking for special favors for their silly flights of fancy. This hinders progress.

    My “prejudice” if that’s what you want to call it is that biological females can never become men, and that biological males can never become women.

    this is a factually wrong statement, since trans people are never unambiguously “biologically” one sex or the other, since the exhibit characteristics of both. You’ve already admitted that you don’t really use chromosomes for identification of sex (or else you wouldn’t claim intersex people are a “difficult” case), so you don’t actually have anything factual left to stand on; all you have is your irrational need to defend your prejudice from fact, exemplified by your refusal to look at the articles (especially the science articles I linked earlier) provided to you.

    That doesn’t mean that i’m prejudiced against trans-sexuals or think that they should have lesser rights or be subjected to harassment or anything else.

    this is incorrect. You are prejudiced against transsexuals by denying that they can ever be the biological sex their brains have always been. This denial of who they are, and calling them liars, is harassment, and it’s an example of how you’re denying them a right that you already have.

    In your world, everyone is assigned maleness or femaleness at birth on a chromosomal/gonadal basis, and then forevermore their gender identity must match their assigned sex identity else you will imagine they’re lying to themselves.

    You’re trying to put words in my mouth. You’ve been doing that a lot.
    I think that people can change their sexual identity, but if they identify as the opposite gender then they are lying to themselves.

    amazing how the words that are supposedly being put into your mouth are synonymous with what you say right after complaining about it.

    Whats wrong with “trans-sexual” anyway?

    nothing, it just doesn’t mean “person who lies to themselves about which sex they are”. It means “person whose brain is a different sex than other body parts”.

    This is just bullshit. Expressing an opinion is not harmful in itself.

    this is factually incorrect. Here are two examples of how publicly stated opinions cause harm:
    Stereotype threat
    Microaggressions

    No, I asked whether that was typical or not of the trans-sexual experience. I haven’t got a real answer yet.

    you’re lying. And you’re doing this because you were also lying when you said you determine sex by chromosomes, since intersex people wouldn’t constitute a “difficult” case if you really thought chromosomes determined sex.

    Really, because being called a bigot, and pile of vomit, and a piece of shit, and that I suck, rather than engage in honest debate is really hateful to me. I just wish people would respect my feelings.

    and

    That hurt. People shouldn’t be allowed to say that.

    you’re very ignorant and very dishonest. None of the things people were calling you or saying to you were “punching down the power gradient” and thus cannot trigger the effects (like stereotype threat and microaggression) of oppressive speech.

    Also, you’re the one not engaging in honest debate, since you’ve not read any of the articles and evidence provided to you. Nor have you addressed most of the arguments presented to you in-thread. Instead, you do non-honest, non-discussion bullshit like this:

    I just looked at the genderbread website. Wow, my mind is changed. How much for a t-shirt?

    I’m not ‘putting up a fight’ – i’m talking.

    you’re putting up a fight. Specifically, you’re being defensive of your prejudice, and are refusing to read and address the evidence provided to you.

    I mean, golly, you’ve triggered at least one poster– did you even notice that? Do you even care?

    Oh come off it.

    And if you’re not putting up a fight, then why haven’t you fucked right along, then?

    This is a good discussion I feel.

    you’re an egocentric, callous, and ignorant fuck to blithely dismiss the harm you’ve done directly to at least one person, to call a conversation that is causing such harm “good”, and to call a conversation in which you’ve not engaged with a single argument or piece of evidence a “discussion”, nevermind a “good discussion”.

    So, if I meet ‘reasonable fellow’, and claim to be a woman, he’s gonna want a blood test before he believes me, and otherwise refuse to assign me a gender?

    I think it’ll be obvious.

    another bit of evidence that when you said it was about chromosomes, you were not telling the truth. Chromosomes are not “obvious”. Sometimes (but not always. I’m surrounded by androgynes of various genders and sexes), the effects of hormones are obvious, but they need not correspond to any particular chromosomal combination. So when you say that it’ll be obvious, you are saying that you will be judging them by external secondary and tertiary sexual characteristics. Not chromosomes.

    You only have my words to go by

    your words, the act of typing them and hitting send, your participation in this conversation, are actions.

    I object to being told how I must view them.

    you’re lying, since it’s your actions, not your thinking, that has been criticized. And this fact has been pointed out to you repeatedly.

    You’ll be the angry dude in a skirt probably.

    this comment is pure transphobia, trying to insult/dismiss someone in this fashion.

    reasonable fellow: I am being a bit confused what your position is, are you saying male/female is defined by chromosome makeup?

    Yeah. Those things that define gender.

    1)stop lying. If you actually believed that, you wouldn’t call intersex people a “difficult” case, since they often have no chromosomal anomalies.
    2)chromosomes don’t define gender. They don’t define sex either, that would be hormones (in humans)

    Whatever, i’m supposed to put up with being called a piece of shit bigot. Big surprise I hit back eventually.

    using transphobic insults is not “hitting back” for being called a bigot. It’s just proving us right.

    of bio-truth.

    this is still factually incorrect. And seriously, are you surprised that a crowdsourcing site promotes the most common and popular, rather than the most accurate, view on something?

  1333. nigelTheBold, who sings like a needle to the ear:

    C.C.Fuss, backup angry dude in a skirt:

    I’M ON IT!!!

    That was quick.

    Love the ‘nym. It’s quite dashing.

    Though I have to admit, I’m not sure what is required for something to be “dashing,” other than to hurl it into the fireplace.

  1334. Josh, Official SpokesGay:

    Whatever, i’m supposed to put up with being called a piece of shit bigot. Big surprise I hit back eventually.

    Yeah. You are supposed to put up with it fucker. Because you are a piece of shit bigot. You don’t have to be, and you can change, and lots of us have been pieces of shit bigots before we got smacked upside the head with empathy.

    Who cares if your babyish reactance causes you to “hit back?” Be a human being and take it on board.

  1335. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    where the fuck is DDMFM? I need to know what “angry dude in a skirt” is in French.

  1336. eriktrips:

    I am not going to stick around to see how this comment thread ends or even where it goes from here, but I wanted to offer this in the spirit of, oh I don’t know, pissing into the wind perhaps (not that I would know how that usually turns out..):

    More original minds than mister fellow’s have pondered the relationship between “sex” and “gender” and “biology”. I would suggest extending the critique to the current cis-mythology of chromosomal determinism so often trundled out to excuse discursive ignorance concerning sex and gender in human cultures.

    If that’s too heady, try Cordelia Fine’s Delusions of Gender. It’s not airtight, but it is skeptical (in the strong sense) enough to get you started.

    Caine, your effort to educate that whiny sheepguy was noble and brave and I hope the landing was not as painful as it looked from here.

    I am going to move on to more recent posts now as reading this thread in its entirety has completely exhausted me, but for the record, watching the social and political evolution at Pharyngula over the last year has been really, really sweet. You know, in case people are getting the idea that most lurkers are still knuckledragging “skeptics” who have no clue how to examine an assumption.

  1337. Josh, Official SpokesGay:

    I was just wondering that, Jadehawk. Where the hell IS David? Is anyone in contact with him?

  1338. Josh, Official SpokesGay:

    watching the social and political evolution at Pharyngula over the last year has been really, really sweet.

    It has, hasn’t it? Despite how bloodying it’s been (and it has been). Thanks for saying so and for that reminder.

  1339. Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe:

    I was just wondering that, Jadehawk. Where the hell IS David? Is anyone in contact with him?

    oh, d’oh. he’s probably digging for prehistoric critters in Poland. I forgot. and by “forgot” I meant I repressed it, because I’m envious as fuck.

  1340. nigelTheBold, who sings like a needle to the ear:

    eriktrips:

    … watching the social and political evolution at Pharyngula over the last year has been really, really sweet. You know, in case people are getting the idea that most lurkers are still knuckledragging “skeptics” who have no clue how to examine an assumption.

    I hate to post just to say, “Me too,” especially since I’m not technically a lurker, but, “Me too.” I’ve really enjoyed (and grown from) the evolution* of Pharyngula. I think I am a better person because of some of these discussions.

    * Pun intended, sorta.

  1341. Josh, Official SpokesGay:

    Heheheh:) Thanks Jadehawk.

  1342. davidbohm:

    Melby:

    When you are referring to someone with a gendered term – you just use the one that the person prefers. You don’t judge hir or assume what’s in hir head or hir pants. Most of the time, people want to be referred to with a gendered term that best represents their gender identity.

    I hear you.

  1343. C.C.Fuss, backup angry dude in a skirt:

    NigelTheBold:

    Love the ‘nym. It’s quite dashing.

    Though I have to admit, I’m not sure what is required for something to be “dashing,” other than to hurl it into the fireplace.

    Why thank you! *preens*
    *then stops preening to wonder about hurling nym into fireplace*

    where the fuck is DDMFM? I need to know what “angry dude in a skirt” is in French.

    Ummmm. Something like “mec furieux dans une jupe”
    But my French is really rusty, especially my grammar.
    (I think “qui portent une jupe” might also be right but I’m not sure whether either is idiomatic)

  1344. Ariaflame, BSc, BF, PhD:

    Another example of how bigotted attitudes towards trans people can hurt?
    Possible trigger warning…
     
     

    In Sweden a trans-woman was assaulted and her attacker ripped off her pants in a fairly obvious prelude to raping her before a witness intervened and the police arrived and arrested the attacker. This is bad. But the bit that has caused outrage is that the judge dropped the ‘attempted rape’ charge because it was not a cisgender woman then she couldn’t have been raped even if it had not been stopped because she was a ‘physical man’ (ignoring of course the fact that men can and do get raped) and thus the attempted rape charge was dropped (the attacker still got jail time for the assault charge and a fine).

  1345. Caine, Panthera Susurratrix:

    Eriktrips:

    Caine, your effort to educate that whiny sheepguy was noble and brave and I hope the landing was not as painful as it looked from here.

    I’m bouncy, all is good. :) Thank you and thank you for your post.

  1346. bastionofsass:

    Awright, you heard the drive-by troll. All youse non-lesbians get outta the pool!

    Can’t. Hold. Breath. Any. Longer.

    Was hoping to be able to stay underwater so no one would notice I was there, but my lung capacity is what it is.

    Maybe I needed one of those air hoses the “mermaids” at Florida tourist traps, er, attractions use.

    *grumble* Knew I should’ve learned to scuba.

  1347. moshiachone:

    People, remember:

    No matter how the apologists try to spin it, being asked for coffee when it is unwelcome and perceived as harassing is no different from being raped.

  1348. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:


    No matter how the apologists try to spin it, being asked for coffee when it is unwelcome and perceived as harassing is no different from being raped.

    Get the fuck out of here and don’t come back.

  1349. Caine, Panthera Susurratrix:

    People, remember:

    Nope. See, we live in reality, unlike fuckwitted assweasels like you.

    Gad, you’re boring. Go back to your pit, Cupcake, until you can come up with something that is at least amusing.

  1350. C.C.Fuss, backup angry dude in a skirt:

    People, remember:

    You’ve got to strawman your opponents! It’s the only way to win!

    FOR STRAWVICTORY!!

  1351. ckitching:

    moshiachone wrote:

    People, remember: blah, blah

    Oh, is that the game we’re playing now? Can I try?

    People remember:

    Asking men not to corner women in elevators while asking for sex is no different from forced castration and the extinction of humanity.

    How’d I do?

  1352. nigelTheBold, who sings like a needle to the ear:

    moshiachone:

    People, remember:

    No matter how the apologists try to spin it, being asked for coffee when it is unwelcome and perceived as harassing is no different from being raped.

    Bwah?

    Where the fuck did that come from?

    Or is that an intentional strawman of the story in which a guy makes a clumsy pass at a woman in an elevator (basically objectifying her), and the woman uses that incident as a side note in a presentation about sexual objectification and she says, “Guys, don’t do that”?

    Because, really. No matter how the apologists try to spin it, being told, “Guys, don’t do that” is no different from a call for universal castration.

  1353. nigelTheBold, who sings like a needle to the ear:

    ckitching:

    Asking men not to corner women in elevators while asking for sex is no different from forced castration and the extinction of humanity.

    Curse you for stealing my line! That’s no different from lobotomizing me.

  1354. Josh, Official SpokesGay:

    I fucking hate people. And for “people”, read: menz, mostaccioli.

  1355. chiptuneist:

    People, remember:

    When building a strawman, it’s important to ensure that it’s properly secured to the ground. This is usually done by placing at least a small amount of the actual position you’re attempting to weaken on the base. Here you can see a strawman that has not been secured properly. The creator has attempted to secure it with the word ‘coffee’, but alas, that is woefully inadequate to prevent it from being blown apart by the winds of howling laughter before a match can even be struck.

  1356. SamStrange: Femi-Fascist with a (silicon) pee-pee:

    Ummmm. Something like “mec furieux dans une jupe”
    But my French is really rusty, especially my grammar.
    (I think “qui portent une jupe” might also be right but I’m not sure whether either is idiomatic)

    “mec fache en jupe

    Imagine an accent egu over the E in “fache”

  1357. moshiachone:

    Huh? I just said exactly what you people say.

    I guess I gotta remember to throw in a lot of witticisms like “fuck” and “fuckwit” and tell people to “get the fuck out,” and other such clever turns of phrase.

  1358. Josh, Official SpokesGay:

    I guess I gotta remember to throw in a lot of witticisms like “fuck” and “fuckwit” and tell people to “get the fuck out,”

    Don’t forget “And die choking on my own dick.”

  1359. SamStrange: Femi-Fascist with a (silicon) pee-pee:

    Huh? I just said exactly what you people say.

    Sweetie, if you’re going to lie, at least TRY to make it a bit subtle.

  1360. nigelTheBold, who sings like a needle to the ear:

    moshiachone:

    Huh? I just said exactly what you people say.

    Ah! I see your problem here.

    You failed to establish your actual position. What you presented was, in fact, a literal representation of what some have actually claimed. So any intended irony in your post was lost in what can possibly be called the Poemuda Triangle™. (Yeah, I’ve trademarked that.)

    But, yeah. A couple of “fucks’ woulda helped.

  1361. C.C.Fuss, backup angry dude in a skirt:

    mec fache en jupe

    Ah, thanks!
    I never really had occasion to learn which of the different ‘angry’ words were best in what context.
    …One of these days I need to relearn all my lost French.

  1362. chiptuneist:

    Huh? I just said exactly what you people say.

    As the individual straws used in the construction of the strawman spiral through the air, the creator expresses confusion at its premature destruction. How could it be, it is wondered, that my absurd misrepresentation of a fairly well established and thoroughly discussed chain of events was so easily dismantled by nothing more than the breath of a few guffawing humans? If only this aspiring straw engineer had taken the time to ground their creation with the slightest appearance of actually understanding the position they built their strawman from, all of this could have been avoided.

    For at least two minutes. DON’T let this happen to you!

  1363. SamStrange: Femi-Fascist with a (silicon) pee-pee:

    @ C.C.

    “gene” (again with the accent) would also work. Might even be better. It’s been a while for me too. But I think “fache” is good.

  1364. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    Huh? I just said exactly what you people say.

    Lying scum.

  1365. Caine, Panthera Susurratrix:

    Nigel:

    So any intended irony in your post was lost in what can possibly be called the Poemuda Triangle™

    .

    +8 with a tentacle on top.

    _____________

    Huh? I just said exactly what you people say.

    Oh, poor scarecrow. Didn’t anyone tell you that you need a brain to play here?

  1366. nigelTheBold, who sings like a needle to the ear:

    moshiachone:

    Huh? I just said exactly what you people say.

    So, I’m confused. Perhaps it’s because it’s 2:20 am. Perhaps it’s because I just watched Battle: LA. Maybe it’s because I’m a bit slow to cognate. It might be that you’ve not communicated precisely what you intend.

    In any case, I’m confused.

    Do you mean that we have literally said being cornered in an elevator is no different from rape? Or are you implying you agree with us that that is an extreme strawman of the situation, and you were originally having a go at humor?

    If it’s the latter, you don’t have the caché to pull it off. If the former, you’re a willfully ignorant douchepie. In either case, you’ve got some ‘splainin’ to do.

    Or, you could just flee, and post here no more.

  1367. Ariaflame, BSc, BF, PhD:

    faché?

    (fach&eacute;)

    And I see the strawmanspinner is either extremely ignorant, or extremely dishonest. The first will be remedied by actually going and learning about what happened. The second, well, it depends on whether it is a chronic condition, but if this is the case then they can just fuck off until they are prepared to be honest.

  1368. SamStrange: Femi-Fascist with a (silicon) pee-pee:

    faché

    Yeah, thanks Ariaflame.

  1369. ckitching:

    moshiachone wrote:

    Huh? I just said exactly what you people say.

    {{Citation needed}} The only people I ever see saying that kind of nonsense have been drive-by MRA trolls. It’s not us that turned Rebecca’s remarkably tame criticism into this straw feminist argument that flirting is rape.

    It’s so sad that this elevator incident is even being discussed today. She didn’t really say anything that ought to be that controversial. I guess we can look forward to Anita Sarkeesian having increasingly ridiculous words inserted into her mouth for months, and months, and years to come.

  1370. SamStrange: Femi-Fascist with a (silicon) pee-pee:

    I guess we can look forward to Anita Sarkeesian having increasingly ridiculous words inserted into her mouth for months, and months, and years to come.

    “Seeing sexist depictions of women in videogames is EXACTLY LIKE BEING RAPED WITH A CACTUS.”

    Shit, now I’ve done it.

  1371. nigelTheBold, who sings like a needle to the ear:

    moshiachone:

    …and other such clever turns of phrase.

    By the by, we’re still waiting on those clever turns of phrase. We’ve provided many examples, several of which were devoid entirely of any derivation of “fuck.” (My favorite is chiptuneist at #355.)

    Or was this simply another poor strawman? If so, you might attempt a course in underwater basket weaving or somesuch. Y’know, to build your straw-construction skills.

    I really hope you’re more skilled in your chosen vocation than you are in straw construction. Valhalla forbid you are an actual engineer.

  1372. Jadehawk, mec faché en jupe:

    ta daa

  1373. SamStrange: Femi-Fascist with a (silicon) pee-pee:

    Nice, Jadehawk! Ya like my new one?

  1374. Jadehawk, mec faché en jupe:

    Ya like my new one?

    nice. anything specific that occasioned it?

  1375. SamStrange: Femi-Fascist with a (silicon) pee-pee:

    Not really. Just liked Audley’s remarks about Femi-Fascists and wanted to emphasis the extreme important of man fee-fees pee-pees.

    Also, curious to see if any trolls peg to the “silicon” and realize I’m posting in drag.

  1376. chiptuneist:

    Valhalla forbid you are an actual engineer.

    People, remember: Using superglue to attach important components is exactly like using bolts.

  1377. nigelTheBold, who sings like a needle to the ear:

    sigh

    All right. Who broke our troll? I know it was passed around like a joint at a Grateful Dead concert (only with a bit more joyous shaking). But seriously. This one lasted two posts. That’s it.

    Aren’t they better constructed, mostly?

    (nigel looks at the fine print on the bottom of the troll.)

    Designed and built by moshiachone?

  1378. chiptuneist:

    Designed and built by moshiachone?

    LOL, I’ve got nothing that’s going to be better than that. You win.

  1379. nigelTheBold, who sings like a needle to the ear:

    LOL, I’ve got nothing that’s going to be better than that. You win.

    No way. You’ve been crackin’ my shit up like rocks at hard time on the chain gang.

  1380. chiptuneist:

    Oh no, it couldn’t be…

    *peers at nigel’s shit*

    DAMN YOU MOSHIACHONE!

  1381. nigelTheBold, who sings like a needle to the ear:

    *peers at nigel’s shit*

    *snort*

    DAMN YOU MOSHIACHONE!

    Oh, I’d like to think I have higher grade shit that that.

    At least, that’s what I’d like to think.

    Now I think I must trudge off to bed. While this will never get old (thanks to your strawman instructional videos [which I seriously think you should make]), I myself am. (Getting old, I mean.) (Which means I gotta get to bed, as it’s after 3am. And I’m old.)

    G’night, y’all. Leave some bits of the trolls for me, if you can. I’ll be back someday.

  1382. moshiachone:

    See, that’s what’s so fun about the echo chamber.

    Previously, when I brought up that a point minutely dissenting from the received wisdom of this august panel, I was literally told a story about anal rape (which of course had nothing to do with coffee, elevators, harassment). From you reasonable people. And no other reasonable person thought that that was out of line or extremist, because, of course it wasn’t and isn’t.

    Now, when I agree with you, and say, sure, a coffee invitation is just like rape, you turn on me and say: stop making a strawman, it’s nothing like rape.

    You have got to be more consistent. How can an adherent absorb the party line if it keeps wavering back and forth? Be as strident as possible.

  1383. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy:

    Now, when I agree with you, and say, sure, a coffee invitation is just like rape, you turn on me and say: stop making a strawman, it’s nothing like rape.

    Your inability to fucking read is not our problem. Get the fuck out of here.

  1384. theophontes (坏蛋):

    @ SamStrange:Femi-Fascist with a (silicon) pee-pee

    I get the horrible impression you missed the little picture thingy I made for you. (Linky)

  1385. John Morales:

    moshiachone, your trolling is feeble and your lies ludicrous.

    (rebarbative you are)

  1386. SamStrange: Femi-Fascist with a (silicon) pee-pee:

    I was literally told a story

    Imagine that. Naturally you have a link.

    @ Theophontes

    No I missed that. Thanks!

  1387. C.C.Fuss, backup angry dude in a skirt:

    {{comic sans|Previously, when I brought up that a point minutely dissenting from the received wisdom of this august panel, I was literally told a story about anal rape}}

    No! Literally???
    And this was literally an assertion that elevator propositioning and rape are the same thing?
    Well, that’s us told.

    ….So did you have problems with allegories as a child? Or, for that matter, now?

  1388. C.C.Fuss, backup angry dude in a skirt:

    Awwww. What did I do wrong?

  1389. John Morales:

    [OT]

    C.C.Fuss, use the q tag by itself for your formatting Gumbyspeak — it’s been set up for just that, here.

  1390. Caine, Panthera Susurratrix:

    I was literally told a story

    Are you sure it wasn’t figurative? Perhaps metaphorical? Maybe a figment of your woeful imagination? Because if someone actually told you a story, in the literal sense, I’m absolutely sure that anyone with a dram of integrity would happily provide a link to said story. Just sayin’.

  1391. truebutnotuseful:

    mushy chode wrote @ #382:

    See, that’s what’s so fun about the echo chamber.

    It’s so echoey, it has nearly 1,400 posts of spirited debate! It’s echolicious!

    Also: why are you still posting here? Are you a lesbian?

  1392. C.C.Fuss, backup angry dude in a skirt:

    Awwww. What did I do wrong?

    Awesome! Thank you!

  1393. Lyn M: mec fach&eacute en jupe of death:

    *Sniffles*

    The accent thingy didn’t wooooork in my nym. That hurts nearly as bad as being called an angry dude in a skirt. I mean, whoa.

  1394. Ariaflame, BSc, BF, PhD:

    I’ve forgotten the code for the actual actual gumby stuff I think it involved code tags and blockquote tags, and opening and closing stuff before starting the blockquote, but I don’t think I bookmarked the page. :(

    Also moshiachone – Link, or it didn’t happen.

  1395. John Morales:

    [OT]

    Lyn, you’ve tried to use a HTML entity, rather than a character.

    Cut and paste it, the standard font supports it.

    (Check out theophontes #384 for an example)

  1396. Orange Utan:

    Lyn M

    The accent thingy didn’t wooooork in my nym. That hurts nearly as bad as being called an angry dude in a skirt. I mean, whoa.

    Looks like you forgot the ; on the end of the acute. If that doesn’t work, copy and paste the actual character.

    &eacute; gives é

  1397. Lyn M: mec fach&eacute en jupe of death:

    Cut and paste. Dang. I thought of that, but then I thought, nooooo, code it.

    Thank you, John. Once again, right.

  1398. Lyn M: mec faché en jupe of death:

    I think that worked.

    Happy once again.

    *Braids more ribbon into the beard.*

  1399. Lyn M: mec faché en jupe of death:

    @ Orange Utan, I had thought the ; was some deformed smiley.

  1400. Orange Utan:

    @Lyn M

    I had thought the ; was some deformed smiley.

    When used in a smiley, it’s a wink ;)

    For html entities, it’s basically a closing tag.

  1401. Lyn M: mec faché en jupe of death:

    That had been my impression, yes. And it worked a treat, thanks.

  1402. throwaway:

    Holy shit, this whole thread!

    Not sure I want to put my muck-wading boots on to get caught up. Not sure my muck-wading boots even go high enough. I will answer this from Moshiachone :

    Face it: if you’re a man then PZ’s blog is not for you

    I’m a man. I always feel welcome. I want everyone to feel welcome. Maybe you meant to say “PZ’s blog is no longer a he-man woman-haters club.” It never was.

  1403. fredsalvador:

    You have got to be more consistent. How can an adherent absorb the party line if it keeps wavering back and forth?

    The “party line” doesn’t waver; the patriarchal undercurrent of human society is responsible for all of the misogyny. ALL of the misogyny. Everything from shit-heads who think propositioning lone women in elevators or handing conference speakers their Super Special Swingers Card is A-OK, to death sentences for rape victims and infibulation. Said undercurrent must therefore be choked off, and the Order Of Things that springs from it re-ordered, if equality is to be realised.

    It’s like having a mole in your garden. You can go out, every single day, with a big steel mallet, and crush all of the little molehills with extreme prejudice; but until you tear the whole thing up by the roots and evict the mole, nothing will ever change.

    Be as strident as possible.

    But not TOO strident; you might hurt my Privilege Bone and provoke Angryman Response Mode (now with extra gender slurs!), which will, of course, be YOUR OWN FAULT for being too strident to listen to my PRATTs and logical fallacies!

  1404. throwaway:

    Caveat: Obviously, I will make an exception for not being welcoming to derailers, trolls, enablers, privilege-blinds, sexists, axe-grinders, liars, JAQers, gaslighters, shit-stirrers, etc.

    As a regular reader of much of this blog since the Dover trial, I see a lot of good commenters here get battle-weary from onslaughts. They will not have patience, nor should it be expected, for people who generally mean harm and cannot back their arguments up, nor for anyone who is willing to pontificate about history when they don’t know the story, or those that wilfully misrepresent facts. That they would block you, or call for your ban, or choose intense vitriolic insults against you when your intent is to disrupt, is 100% understandable. This is not bullying. Being banned or shouted at or having your views exposed as unconvincing is an outcome of discourse. You should expect that outcome if you step over a line.

    I’ve seen how these arguments go down, I know how future ones will go down, because the responses to new names is always: to first, show that they’re wrong, or to tell them that this has been addressed. Then if they have crossed a line, they would be told about it (when inadvertant) or to be cleverly insulted were it intentional. Then the combative person either digs in deeper or flounces while tone-trolling. It’s like a choreographed routine, and I’ve found that, for the most part, regular commenters here can be patient, even with the most irrationally obtuse, and more often than not will kill the hateful with kind words.

    All of this lends itself to an environment where myself and others can feel welcome – racism, sexism, ableism and bigotry are checked and met with large vocal opposition, as it should be. And when mistakes in judgment happen, pharyngulites or FTBers or the Borg are the first to apologise. This is the rarest occurrence of all because they’re mostly right.

    I fucking hate that the word ‘bully’ is being applied to FTBers It makes me want to tear my hair out in frustration that anyone could make the claim that people are being silenced for simple disagreements. No, they’re being kicked out of an area of the internet where they are no longer welcome due to their own attitudes and approach to discussion. Not for their dissent, but for being tireless vapid dissenters with no substance or validity.

  1405. John Morales:

    fredsalvador:

    The “party line” doesn’t waver; the patriarchal undercurrent of human society is responsible for all of the misogyny.

    No, it’s an instantiation, not an undercurrent.

    ALL of the misogyny. Everything from shit-heads who think propositioning lone women in elevators or handing conference speakers their Super Special Swingers Card is A-OK, to death sentences for rape victims and infibulation. Said undercurrent must therefore be choked off, and the Order Of Things that springs from it re-ordered, if equality is to be realised.

    Propositioning a lone woman one has followed into the elevator in the wee hours after a lengthy time mingling at a bar where decent coffee was available after a long day’s conferencing after a talk relating to the experiences of women at conferences and her position and after said woman has stated she’s tired and off to bed and invited for a coffee in one’s room supposedly because their talk was interesting was found to be inappropriate and the woman in question found it a bit creepy and asked men not to do that, yes.

    (You are one of your referenced eponymous shit-heads, no?)

    It’s like having a mole in your garden. You can go out, every single day, with a big steel mallet, and crush all of the little molehills with extreme prejudice; but until you tear the whole thing up by the roots and evict the mole, nothing will ever change.

    You’re no mole, but merely a troll.

    (bah)

  1406. drbunsen le savant fou:

    Why are folks who use reasonable in their ‘nyms so unreasonable?

    Because they don’t know what words mean.

  1407. drbunsen le savant fou:

    July Molly nom for QueQuoi here

  1408. Lyn M: mec faché en jupe of death:

    Perhaps I’m just in a really good mood because of the recent beard braiding, but I thought fredsalvador had backed down from some positions, and then tried to be supportive. He did post one comment I took as sarcastic, too. This one seems straight up, if possibly over- stated, although I can’t think of misogyny not caused by some aspect of patriarchy.

    If I’m hallucinating here, someone hand me a platter of ice cubes. I’ll dump them down my cleavage myself for a waker upper.

  1409. John Morales:

    [meta]

    Lyn, I been around a long time.

    (Trolling is trolling, though it may ostensibly be poeing)

  1410. drbunsen le savant fou:

    the same phenomenon as the German Democratic Republic, the People’s Republic of Korea, the Center for American Progress, and (for my fellow Aussies) ‘Honest John’ and ‘WorkChoices’.

    Or, indeed, “the Lucky Country”.

  1411. Lyn M: mec faché en jupe of death:

    Yes, John, you have.

    Just checking if I missed a posting or other indicator, because I was surprised not to agree with you right off the bat.

  1412. Jadehawk, mec faché en jupe:

    *squints*

    hmm

    can’t tell if honest or very subtle sarcasm. maybe I should go to sleep and try again in the morning.

  1413. Lyn M: mec faché en jupe of death:

    If I have been taken in, so be it. Time will tell.

  1414. drbunsen le savant fou:

    So, can someone show me the way to the nym changing-rooms? I’m just dying to try this adorable little number on.

  1415. Sili (I have no penis and I must jizz):

    Why are folks who use reasonable in their ‘nyms so unreasonable?

    Why is common sense so uncommon?

  1416. Lyn M: mec faché en jupe of death:

    Should be part of a banner headline, can hover cursor and then click on edit profile.

  1417. Louis:

    Ok, threadrupt from ~#1000 to ~#1400, I just want to reply to Karpad at #990 (#490 previous page):

    Karpad,

    ZOMG I forgot The Friend! You are absolutely right! Nasty crusty dead friend who deserved death because she did The Wicked Things.

    You are of course, right. Thanks for the addition.

    Louis

  1418. drbunsen le savant fou:

    Aww, never mind. Jadehawk beat me to it, and lawd knows turning up to the ball in the same nym just isn’t done.

    /grumbles

  1419. Wowbagger, Vile Demagogue:

    Bloody hell. I spent half my weekend’s spare time (of which there wasn’t much; had a wedding, an opera and theatre-at-the-cinema) jousting with idiots on Twitter and haven’t been checking in here so have missed what I’m guessing is yet another onslaught of dimwits begging for a clue-by-four.

    Oh, well. No doubt there’ll be another before too long.

  1420. Lyn M: mec faché en jupe of death:

    By the way, Jadehawk, Dr. Bunsen is right. I hope you don’t mind my all but duplication. I was too preoccupied by the whole ampersand thing to notice.

  1421. drbunsen le savant fou:

    Aaaaahhh found it. It’s right above this box, where it says “Logged in as [nym]“

  1422. drbunsen le savant fou:

    *this box meaning the text entry box.

  1423. Wowbagger, Deputy Vice-President (Silencing):

    Hello, new nym.

  1424. drbunsen le savant en colère dans une robe d'été belle (la robe est aussi en colère):

    *sashays through the room twirling hir fancy new nym*

  1425. Lyn M: type en colère en jupe caniché of death:

    Nevermind. Thought of a way around this.

  1426. drbunsen le savant en colère dans une robe d'été belle (la robe est aussi en colère):

    Wowbagger, that looks simply darling on you. I insist you keep it.

  1427. Lyn M: type en colère en jupe caniché of death:

    Ooooookay. Now I ask Dr Bunsen if my nym is OK with him. Not too close?

  1428. drbunsen le savant en colère dans une robe d'été belle (la robe est aussi en colère):

    en jupe caniché of death

    \o/ :D

  1429. drbunsen le savant en colère dans une robe d'été belle (la robe est aussi en colère):

    Pas du toût, chérie, pas tu toût.

  1430. drbunsen le savant en colère dans une robe d'été belle (la robe est aussi en colère):

    Merde. Un sufit des accents.

  1431. Muz:

    Real late to this party. I do think, on the face of it, it’s kind of a pity TF was kicked out before this recent flareup had a bit of time to cool off. But some are suggesting backroom stuff I’m not aware of gong on, so I dunno.

    I was going to add, and I doubt I’m the first, that it is rather irritating seeing TF trot out the “Rebecca Watson is just a whiny drama whore” thing in that recent video. That it’s not rape and death threats, it’s just trolls, lol, man up.
    Particularly irritating when not so long ago he took rather vague threatening language from Dawah Films very personally indeed, and people backed him up. What Dawah Films said is nothing compared to what RW gets (and I believe they are often from the same people, so saying DF is different because of pre-existing escalating animosity or whatever doesn’t seem to fit. Happy to be proved wrong, of course.)

  1432. drbunsen le savant en colère dans une robe d'été belle (la robe est aussi en colère):

    Besides, poodle skirt > pretty summer frock

  1433. Lyn M: type en colère en jupe caniché of death:

    Merci, Dr. Bunsen. I am quite proud of the accent grave, actually.

  1434. Lyn M: type en colère en jupe caniché of death:

    Lol! If you say so. I can picture the poodle skirt with patch pockets and all. A pretty frock, well I’m not so clear, although I’m thinking peau de soie, perhaps in eau du nile? If that captures your eyes, of course.

    I feel so franshe, tu sais?

  1435. Crip Dyke, MQ, Right Reverend Feminist FuckToy of Death & Her Handmaiden:

    Jadehawk, chef d’orchestre féministe

    where the fuck is DDMFM? I need to know what “angry dude in a skirt” is in French.

    People have made good attempts at this, but I thought I’d still throw mine in…

    not least because I believe (though I could be wrong) that fâché uses a circomflex over the A.

    So…

    How about:

    1. un type fâché dans une jupe… (literal, but perhaps not idiomatic. I don’t think I’d phrase it this way; I’m just taking off from the English.)

    or

    2. un type fâché habillant d’une jupe… (perhaps still not the best, but it’s what I would have come up with on my own.)

    or

    3. un type fâché portant une jupe… (it’s just not what I’d say with the folks with whom I speak french).

    None are perfect, though I’m partial to #2. . I’m not sure “type” and “dude” are really synonymous, but it’s close. I tend to think of “type” as “guy”, but with a little more dudebro than “guy” carries in English. Also, when dealing with trans stereotypes, I’m not sure what image would really carry the same meanings. This is a pretty good, though with “type” not perfect, literal translation. It’s the imagery of which I’m unsure. And I don’t have any trans friends who speak French that I can call on right now.

    I never use “mec”. I’ll have to ask friends about it and the connotations it carries. More learning – that’s always good!

    Also, Jadehawk, did you say miniatures were drying? You paint gaming minis, maybe? I have done, though I haven’t recently. Got 200 unpainted minis in my art room just waiting for me to have about 3 years of free time.

  1436. throwaway, these are not the bullies you're looking for:

    Not a jedi mind trick. A jedi mind truth-by-four.

  1437. Lyn M: type en colère en jupe caniché of death:

    Crip Dyke

    I have to agree about un type. It doesn’t sound as dudebro to me either, but since I just made up canichè out of whole cloth, I thought what the hey. It differentiates the nyms.

    You are right about the circumflex.

  1438. Setár, self-appointed Elf-Sheriff of the FreethoughtBlogs Star Chamber:

    Oh hell. This entire half-ounce is made up of massive buds on stems.

    Bah. Happy fun times to all who have slogged it out this far. -lights up and passes a joint to the next interested pitizen stomper-

  1439. Louis:

    Ok I have caught up with the thread….wow. Some many fuckwits, so little time. Well done to all of you labouring in the salt mines against a tide of dumbfuckery.

    There is one (entirely unserious) thing that I have to contribute to the trans conversation though:

    In my life there have been a very large number of great big, ugly men, myself included, who have been regularly seen in public wearing skirts, dresses, lingerie and sundry feminine garments. We call these people “rugby players”.

    These “people”* are not normally transexual, cross dressers proper, or intersex. I do feel that people like “reasonable fellow” should approach one of us and tell us we are not male when we are so attired.

    I believe the results would be interesting.

    Louis

    * I’m not sure I can claim we Gentlemen Who Play With Odd Shaped Balls are really people. I mean we look human, sort of, but we do sing a wide variety of badly scanning songs about women’s genitals and masturbating monkeys (separate songs I assure you), and attempt to drink our body weight in neat alcohol on a daily basis.**

    ** This is in no way to blot out the fact that men wrestling around in mud together, showering with each other or getting together in a giant tiled bath and singing about women in an oh-so-not-compensating way is massively homoerotic.*** That’s right out and completely false I want that understood from the get go.

    *** Because this isn’t true and therefore doesn’t need blotting out, all right? Clear?

  1440. Louis:

    Setar,

    I’ll take a hit if that’s okay, I haven’t had any good grass in a while.

    Louis

    P.S. Bugger…now I want a real joint. There’s a real problem with being upper middle class, when one approaches a gentlemen in a public hostelry and delicately enquires if they are willing to sell one some cannabis of some description, the gentleman in question usually mistakes one for a member of the constabulary. Why does no one feel my pain?*

    * #1%problems

  1441. John Morales:

    [OT]

    Louis, I knew a rugby player, once.

    He had a double-barreled name and a prodigiously capacious urine bladder, the which would, if not intimidate, then shock ordinary mortals when emptied in the usual way.

    (The other two rugby players I’ve known were Maori; their missing incisors kind of a trademark of the nature of the sport sans mouthguards)

  1442. drbunsen le savant en colère dans une robe d'été belle (la robe est aussi en colère):

    Louis, surely you can send one of your people out for tedious errands of that nature?

  1443. 'Tis Himself:

    I’ve changed my nym a couple of times. While that presents no problem at Pharyngula, several other FTB blogs assume I’m a new commenter and put my posts in moderation. So I’m using the stripped down version of my nym for ever and ever or until FTB (or my computer) gets wonky, whichever happens first.

  1444. drbunsen le savant en colère dans une robe d'été belle (la robe est aussi en colère):

    FYI, it has been argued elsewehere (and convincingly, by my measure) that the wearing of skirts and dresses by macho manly mcdudebros (and rugby players) contributes to the mocking and belittlement of transfolk. Co-option, and all that.

  1445. reasonable fellow:

    Josh, Official SpokesGay
    7 July 2012 at 11:42 pm

    Oh, and reasonable fellow? Fuck off and die. You’re a scum bag and I wouldn’t turn my back on you for any amount of money. You’re the reason I have to keep my guard up for myself and my friends. You pose as an ally but you’re an enabler or worse.

    Hello entity, by which pronoun set and subset shall i refer to you?

  1446. 'Tis Himself:

    Here’s a picture for unreasonable bigot to hoggle over.

  1447. sphex:

    Since this seems to be the thread for this kind of thing, I too want to delurk and offer a heartfelt thank you to the brave, patient, witty, and frickin’ smart denizens of the Pharyngula horde who never give up fighting the good fight (as a group, although individuals (understandably) occasionally may need to take a break).

    I have been reading Pharyngula (and comments) since the .org days, and it has been (and continues to be) quite an education- and on several occasions, lol entertainment.

    I don’t post much myself because… well, I don’t feel that witty, nor that smart. But I am another person who IRL has become significantly less willing to put up with shit, and much MORE willing to call people out on obnoxious behavior. Thanks to all of you, I have increasingly good arguments to back up what I say.

    When moshiachone showed up on this thread, I slumped a little inside, thinking “oh, not again!!!!” And if I felt that way as a reader, I can only imagine what you commenters must feel. (Well, I suppose there’s probably an element of “sniny!”.)

    Anyway, that feeling of “slump” is what prompted me to delurk to say: I am another person for whom you make a difference. And since I am a teacher, I like to think the difference you make gets multiplied to some small extent, every single semester.

    I love this place. Thank you for making it what it is.

  1448. Crip Dyke, MQ, Right Reverend Feminist FuckToy of Death & Her Handmaiden:

    I haven’t been reading as long, but I agree with you, Sphex, that this place is special.

    I, myself, felt like I couldn’t take on moshiachone tonight. But I also knew for a fact that I didn’t have to. That feels really, really good.

  1449. Lyn M: type en colère en jupe caniché of death:

    @ sphex

    Welcome to the shark tank, sphex. You’ll find the water is just fine. It’s some of the denizens you have to watch out for.

  1450. Lyn M: type en colère en jupe caniché of death:

    @Tis Himself

    But which one is the boy and which the girl? I see no chromosomes.

  1451. reasonable fellow:

    But which one is the boy and which the girl? I see no chromosomes.

    I think we’d have to ask them what they identify as first.

  1452. Lyn M: type en colère en jupe caniché of death:

    I don’t think there is any “we” about it. You’re just going to ignore them if they get it wrong, by your lights.

  1453. 'Tis Himself:

    Silly Lyn, in the picture at 446 they’re both women ’cause they’re both wearing skirts or dresses. Here’s a picture of two men wearing jeans.

  1454. Sophia, Michelin-starred General of the First Mediterranean Iron Chef Batallion:

    Mandatory gene mapping now, is it? Great! We can all know what chromosomes we have, then go on to Not Care like we all do anyway because gender is a mental thing.

    If I were to JAQ off for a moment…
    reasonable fellow, if you were to have genetic testing done and find out that your chromosomes didn’t match your perceived sex, would you instantly consider yourself no longer a man?

  1455. drbunsen le savant en colère dans une robe d'été belle (la robe est aussi en colère):

    unreasonable dimbulb:

    Which part of FUCK OFF did you miss?

  1456. Lyn M: type en colère en jupe caniché of death:

    ‘Tis

    D’oh! I am like that. It’s the breeze beneath my skirt. Makes me all silly.

  1457. Setár, self-appointed Elf-Sheriff of the FreethoughtBlogs Star Chamber:

    Louis #440: come to Vancouver, we don’t bite and the pot is better than most other places. =D

  1458. throwaway, these are not the bullies you're looking for:

    Hello entity, by which pronoun set and subset shall i refer to you?

    How about you don’t refer to anyone as anything unless you have something cogent to say to them? Pretty passive-aggressive of you to downplay the impact you had on them by jokingly claiming you want to defer to proper pronoun usage at a point where someone has told you the negative effects it had on them. You’re just looking to press buttons in that case. You could start by saying “I’m sorry that I’m an unempathetic asshole and bigot.”

  1459. sphex:

    @’Tis #453

    Link didn’t work for me… am I doing something wrong?

  1460. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:

    Unreasonable fellow is still unreasonable. What else is new…

  1461. reasonable fellow:

    You could start by saying “I’m sorry that I’m an unempathetic asshole and bigot.”

    All i’ve said is that identifying as a male doesn’t necessarily make you male. Its hardly a bigoted or fringe position.

  1462. Lyn M: type en colère en jupe caniché of death:

    All i’ve said is that identifying as a male doesn’t necessarily make you male to me. Its hardly a bigoted or fringe position.

    FIFY

  1463. Matt Penfold:

    All i’ve said is that identifying as a male doesn’t necessarily make you male. Its hardly a bigoted or fringe position.

    When it comes to gender it is all about what you identify as. Self identification is at the very core of the definition of gender.

    How come you do not know this ?

  1464. 'Tis Himself:

    sphex #459

    You didn’t miss anything. It was an advertising picture of a male model and female model wearing jeans.

  1465. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:

    YAWN, bigot still defending his idiocy? Not a REASONABLE FELLOW, as it refuses to use reason. Not surprising, and typical of those who use reasonable in a ‘nym. They are presuppositionalists.

  1466. reasonable fellow:

    When it comes to gender it is all about what you identify as. Self identification is at the very core of the definition of gender.

    How come you do not know this ?

    I don’t think it is. I know people have tried arguing seriously about this, but I found the idiots throwing shit too distracting. So, tell me again. Why should self-identification trump biology and societal standards?

  1467. Lyn M: type en colère en jupe caniché of death:

    Nerd, if old reasonable there can’t get it after all the times it has been explained and linked to, then he just can’t get it.

    Where can’t means won’t, of course.

  1468. Matt Penfold:

    I don’t think it is.

    Tough. You are wrong, deliberately so it would seem.

  1469. reasonable fellow:

    Lyn M: type en colère en jupe caniché of death
    8 July 2012 at 7:35 am

    Nerd, if old reasonable there can’t get it after all the times it has been explained and linked to, then he just can’t get it.

    If its a decent point it can probably be summed up in a few paragraphs. This “GO READ FUCKWIT” mentality reminds of conspiracy forums.

  1470. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:

    Yawn, if UNREASONABLE FUCKWIT was going to convince us, that would have happened last night. No new evidence, so the chances of convincing us of anything new: zero. Typical of unreasonable blokes to double down when they lost. You aren’t losing, you lost last night.

  1471. Lyn M: type en colère en jupe caniché of death:

    If its a decent point it can probably be summed up in a few paragraphs. This “GO READ FUCKWIT” mentality reminds of conspiracy forums.

    If no one had explained, linked or talked to you, I might just think you made a point.

    And of course, this IS a conspiracy forum. Also an echo chamber and all kinds of fail, and this because many of us are tired of holding your dear little hand and explaining again, until you decide we are mean.

    *near fatal eyeroll*

  1472. throwaway, these are not the bullies you're looking for:

    All i’ve said is that identifying as a male doesn’t necessarily make you male. Its hardly a bigoted or fringe position.

    By stating that, honestly, you’re not fucking helping the people who identify as male or female. You’re just a reminder that they will not live up to your strict biological definition, that others will see them in even less favorable terms than you. Your semantics games are hurtful. You should spend some time thinking about what it’s like for someone to hear that “You’re a [wo]man (but not really a [wo]man)”. It’s a psychological mindfuck and you don’t care, so long as you’re semantically correct. That is what makes you a bigot.

  1473. reasonable fellow:

    It’s a psychological mindfuck and you don’t care, so long as you’re semantically correct. That is what makes you a bigot.

    I’m happy for people to self-identify as whatever they want. I’m not going to attempt to deny people their rights.

    Its the aggressive insistence that them self-identifying as something means that I should also agree with them. Not only in words, but in thought. Semantics don’t really matter to me. I just don’t like being pushed around.

  1474. jessiexl:

    reasonable fellow
    If someone describes themselves as happy or sad, would you believe yourself entitled to ignore that and decide on your own description?

  1475. 'Tis Himself:

    So, tell me again. Why should self-identification trump biology and societal standards?

    Because a person is who they think they are. Just because you think transgender* is icky is no reason for you to deny them their personality.

    And I know you’ve claimed that you don’t care what they claim. Well guess what, asshole, your continued arguing that a person’s gender is decided by their birth gender assignment (an assignment done by others) tells us loud and clear that it does make a difference to you. So you need to examine your own lying before you make statements about transgenders lying.

    *Just in this thread I’ve become convinced that “transsexual” is incorrect terminology and “transgender” is preferred. So thought modification is an ongoing thing, even for old guys like me.

  1476. reasonable fellow:

    You’re just a reminder that they will not live up to your strict biological definition, that others will see them in even less favorable terms than you.

    They will though. If i’m a bigot according to the posters on this forum the outside world should actually be terrifying and its much less open to the discussion than I am.

    I empathize with that, but you’re not going to change peoples minds by screaming bigot at them.

  1477. Sophia, Michelin-starred General of the First Mediterranean Iron Chef Batallion:

    Again:

    fellow. If you were to find out your chromosomes didn’t match your gender, would you immediately reject your gender and accept a new one?

  1478. reasonable fellow:

    fellow. If you were to find out your chromosomes didn’t match your gender, would you immediately reject your gender and accept a new one?

    I’d call myself a trans-sexual or trans-gendered person and be done with it.

  1479. Matt Penfold:

    reasonable fellow,

    Would you really regard people with Androgen insensitivity syndrome as men ? You have heard of AIS I trust.

  1480. 'Tis Himself:

    I empathize with that, but you’re not going to change peoples minds by screaming bigot at them.

    We’re not trying to change your mind. You’re a lost cause. You’ve decided that you hate and despise transgenders and nothing we say will change your hatred of them.

    What we’re doing is showing lurkers that hatred and fear of transgenders is wrong and hurtful to actual human beings, using your hatred and fear as an example. You’re a training aid, nothing more.

  1481. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:

    I empathize with that, but you’re not going to change

    We aren’t trying to change your fuckwitted mind Unreasonable fuckwit. We are trying to get you to see that you have no chance of changing ours due to lack of evidence and lack of empathy. You need to come to grips with the fact you lost the argument last night before you even started it. The bigotry bullshit is just the unreason you are still continuing your futile efforts to win us over. It’s not working…You don’t have the right evidence.

  1482. reasonable fellow:

    If someone describes themselves as happy or sad, would you believe yourself entitled to ignore that and decide on your own description?

    Of course, i’d make a judgement based on their behavior. Though if somebody outright came out and said “i’m happy” that’d be enough reason alone for me to doubt it. Whats your point again?

  1483. 'Tis Himself:

    Since it’s 9 o’ the clock, it’s time for me to go sailing. I’ll be back in several hours.

  1484. reasonable fellow:

    Nerd Of Redhead. If you aren’t interested in talking to me then why not just shut up yourself and stop addressing me.

  1485. Louis:

    Dr Bunsen, #442,

    I have sent The Boy to Dealer McDope’s Drug Mart.

    and re: #444,

    Yeah, I had a paragraph in that post that I deleted about that. I was being deliberately silly with the post, so I took it out. You are right though, I think that angle could be/has been successfully argued.

    The last lecture I ever had as an undergrad we celebrated by getting out a comedy inflatable sex sheep and lobbing it about. The lecturer was Welsh and none of us had made the connection. It was an honest piece of unthinking tomfoolery. He didn’t take it well…

    I’m sure that the cross dressing by Dudebros and Rugby Players does indeed contribute to the climate of discrimination against transpeople. It might be a cultural phenomenon, i.e. a bit of parochial British colour, but the comedy cross dressing of men as women and women as men has a decent legacy here. I doubt it’s entirely innocent, in fact I know it’s not, and that Intent is not Magic, hence why I mentioned the insult I inadvertently gave to a Welsh lecturer who I admired.

    I think this sort of thing does present We Folk Of Comedy Nature with a genuine problem. It’s pretty tough to do anything that doesn’t end with the accidental or incidental treading on someone’s toes. That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t try not to tread on toes, of course we should try to avoid that. Nor does it mean that when toes have been trodden on we shouldn’t try to make amends, apologise and strive not to do so in the future. Of course we should try to minimise any and all contributions we make to the general oppression of vulnerable groups.

    This does play into a few conversations that have been had recently, notably above. If people call people “stupid” or use “herp derp” or “idiot” etc, these can be used as unambiguous referents to genuinely vulnerable groups. Not that their use has not evolved from those prior uses, as M A Melby and others have pointed out above, there are varying shades of grey here. It’s trickier than I think we suppose sometimes.

    Even in the case of racism, which I’ve been on the receiving end of a few times (understatement of the decade!*), I try to give people the benefit of the doubt where comedy is concerned. That is an entirely personal choice by the way, no one else has to make it, and yes I realise it is an extension of my awesome privilege in most arenas.

    Irony is the classic example. I think SGBM (or whatever his current incarnation is) linked a really fascinating study about it (I might be mistaken about that). It’s so easy for a comic to make an ironically X-ist joke and for a proportion of his/her audience to take the joke at face value whilst another proportion sees the irony.

    I also think it depends on what question one is asking. If one is asking “do my toes hurt after this person trod on them?” then yes, I think intent is not magic. If one is asking “did this person mean to hurt my toes even if they did hurt them, and does this affect how I should respond?” I think it is valid to take intent into account. I also think their separate questions. So whilst my wife’s aunt’s racism infuriates me, some clueless twit asking me “where I’m from” (despite my very British accent etc) is still racist, it’s just crap racism.

    I’m not sure there is An Answer. I think it’s up to the individual to decide what they will put up with. I’m totally convinced even the most innocently intended “joke” can harm, I’m not totally convinced there is only one way to deal with humour (and I know you’re not saying there is).

    Sorry to have rambled, it’s just something that interests me and my views are in flux about.

    Louis

    * My wife’s aunt who is currently seriously ill in hospital and giving me a moral quandary because I hate racists with a passion, refers to me as “the half breed”. Not within earshot. She’s not that stupid. This is just one of the many exciting things I’ve enjoyed!

  1486. Lyn M: type en colère en jupe caniché of death:

    And then when someone didn’t agree with you and called you something less than pleasant, you would feel just hunky dory.

    Day in, day out. Year in, year out.

    Person after person, not willing to accept you as you present yourself.

    But that’s OK, because … chromosomes? These other poeple are the majority? Your perceptions and identity just don’t count?

    After all, if your perceptions and identity did count, wouldn’t it be pushing those others around to have them accept it?

    At least according to your comments, that would appear to be so.

  1487. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:

    If you aren’t interested in talking to me then why not just shut up yourself and stop addressing me.

    If you continue with your fuckwitted and unreasonable campaign to muddy the waters, you will be show to the third group here, the lurkers, just how much of a liar, bullshitter, and bigot you are. And that is the group I am talking to. I can’t talk to you, your mind is as closed as that of a Calvinist, and you know that. I’m pointing out to the world you presuppose your answer, and no amount of evidence will change your mind. Which is exactly what is happening.

  1488. Lyn M: type en colère en jupe caniché of death:

    Pharygulites, I have to call it a day. I’m due to leave tomorrow morning about 6:30 ish and I have things yet to do.

    Catch you later.

  1489. throwaway, these are not the bullies you're looking for:

    Its the aggressive insistence that them self-identifying as something means that I should also agree with them. Not only in words, but in thought. Semantics don’t really matter to me. I just don’t like being pushed around.

    Aggressive? I’ll tell you something about aggressive.

    Through junior high and high school I had a friend who identified as female. The jokes and the tear-jerking de-stressing sessions we went through stick with me to this day. She was seen as male, biologically speaking, and that one fact was an excuse to slam her against lockers, push her down stairs, grope her, pull her pants down and point at the penis, put laxatives in her drink then prevent her from using either of the restrooms and other myriad of distasteful shit. The assaults happened because those people did not see her as a female, but an easy target for ridicule due to non-conformity. You’re lending credence to those assaults by saying that they are not conforming to their “true” gender.

    You claim be all for people having their rights to identify as whatever they wish. But your insistence that your birth gender is the one you really are does not take into account the wiring of the brain. How presumptuous of you to identify someone as their bits and dangles and chromosomes. You’re contradicting yourself when you say they have a right to identify as that, yet don’t afford them the luxury of being correct about their own feelings about who they are. Brain trumps penis. Brain trumps vagina. Every time.

  1490. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:

    Oh, and Unreasonable Fuckwit, you always have the choice of ceasing to post here. Make use of that before you get laughed out as terminally stoopid.

  1491. Sophia, Michelin-starred General of the First Mediterranean Iron Chef Batallion:

    Right. So you’d call yourself something else, but would you start acting differently? Would you ask people to stop calling you ‘he’ or ‘she’? Would you continue to perceive yourself as you always had, seeing as nothing had in fact changed for you apart from a clarifying of the biological facts of your body?

    My guess is nothing would change. The gender you identify as is the one you feel yourself to be. Refusing to accept someone else’s gender because it doesn’t match your own idea of gender expression is as absurd as anyone else doing the same to you. The reasons behind it don’t matter.

    Your biological sex is entirely separate from your gender. Yes, most people are cisgendered – they identify as male or female and have those primary sexual characteristics. The fact remains that some DO NOT. These people’s gender may differ from their biological sex. This isn’t some sparkly new feminist agenda item, it’s simply how things are. People are only starting to learn about it now as we slowly chip away at the stupid old-fashioned notions of sex, gender and orientation being inextricably linked, but it’s there.

    Either learn about it or be left behind, that’s all there is to it.

  1492. reasonable fellow:

    I can’t talk to you, your mind is as closed as that of a Calvinist, and you know that.

    You haven’t tried. You’ve made an assumption of my character and nothing will change your mind on that. Keep going. For the lurkers. It must be nice for you to think that you’re actually doing some good.

  1493. Louis:

    Have a good one Lyn M. We’ll keep some muppets warm for you!

    Louis

  1494. reasonable fellow:

    You’re lending credence to those assaults by saying that they are not conforming to their “true” gender.

    I’m not lending credence to any assaults. I don’t think people should be assaulted for any reason.

  1495. Louis:

    Reasonable Fellow,

    You’ve been linked to a variety of materials of varying degrees of technicality and yet you appear to be reluctant to engage with those materials and instead maintain your original opinion in the face of readily available evidence.

    Does that sound like a sceptical attitude?

    Louis

  1496. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:

    You’ve made an assumption of my character and nothing will change your mind on that.

    Actually, your lack of acceptance of the evidence presented to you does that. Evidence you aren’t listening, have made up your mind, and intend to bully us into submission. Look and laugh lurkers. The Unreasonable fuckwit is nothing but a bully without an argument. Just attitude.

  1497. reasonable fellow:

    You’ve been linked to a variety of materials of varying degrees of technicality and yet you appear to be reluctant to engage with those materials and instead maintain your original opinion in the face of readily available evidence.

    I’ve already requested that they be linked again. The thread was moving fast last night and i’ll be damned if i’m going to read through that crap again.

  1498. throwaway, these are not the bullies you're looking for:

    I’m not lending credence to any assaults. I don’t think people should be assaulted for any reason.

    You’re agreeing with the bullies. You use the same rationale they do. Do you think bullies see your caveats? Nope, all they hear is “not really [fe]male.” You and those like you enable the assaulters a peace of mind.

    Your refusal to budge on this issue is mind-boggling. What kind of investment do you have with this issue? If it’s purely intellectual then fuck right off. Real world, real issues. Stop trying to be an ivory tower “ally” against bigotry. You’re not, and you’re not helping.

  1499. Nightjar:

    Why should self-identification trump biology

    Is the brain not a biological organ, now?

  1500. reasonable fellow:

    You’re agreeing with the bullies. You use the same rationale they do. Do you think bullies see your caveats?,

    No, their rationale is “this person is different from us, and in a weaker position so we can do whatever we want”. That’s not my rationale at all.

  1501. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:

    Look lurkers, Unreasonable fuckwit simply can’t change its mind, or shut the fuck up. It is as closed as a bank vault over the weekend. No new facts or empathy allowed. It can only repeat well refuted slogans over and over, and thinks that is an argument, just like liberturds. It is an attempt to bully us.

  1502. Louis:

    Reasonable Fellow,

    Do you think it’s reasonable, or even a healthy facet of a sceptical attitude, to ask others to do your homework for you?

    Rather than wind people up on the net, which you seem to think is what you are doing, why not, in fact, read back, and avail yourself of those materials? It won’t take you more than ~45 mins at the most. You could then do your own independent research, believe me when I say it’s a good thing to do.

    Louis

  1503. Matt Penfold:

    No, their rationale is “this person is different from us, and in a weaker position so we can do whatever we want”. That’s not my rationale at all.

    True, your attitude, by your own admission, is that you will just do what you want anyway because no fucker is going to tell you what to do.

    You are still a bully.

  1504. Nightjar:

    I’ve already requested that they be linked again. The thread was moving fast last night and i’ll be damned if i’m going to read through that crap again.

    Oh, FFS.

    Here you go:

    http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2012/07/06/i-get-email-20/comment-page-3/#comment-389459

    http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2012/07/06/i-get-email-20/comment-page-3/#comment-389524

    http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2012/07/06/i-get-email-20/comment-page-3/#comment-389616

  1505. Ogvorbis: Dogmaticus sycophantus:

    Male readers,

    Just face it. PZ’s blog is not for you. Only lesbians and male lesbians are allowed to post here.

    Unzips trousers. Opens the envelope flap. Still male.

    And, oddly, I feel very at home here.

    The support of human rights for all humans, male, female, straight, gay, lesbian, transgendered, disabled, neuro-typical or non, is refreshing.

    I’ve been reading this blog for months and never noticed it.

    And I have been reading here for about 4 years and commenting for about 3. What’s your point? That you lack the ability to grok written English?

    yep. Whitey McStraighterson’s middle name is “cis”

    MY guess as ‘Christian.’

    that they’re in fuck pedophiles,

    fact goddamnit, fact!

    The Tpyos is strong in this one.

  1506. throwaway, these are not the bullies you're looking for:

    No, their rationale is “this person is different from us, and in a weaker position so we can do whatever we want”. That’s not my rationale at all.

    Both have the same presumptions about gender identity. The notion of difference stems from the idea that equipment == identity, that is the framework from which bullies work as well.

    You’re also suffering from #4.

  1507. reasonable fellow:

    Do you think it’s reasonable, or even a healthy facet of a sceptical attitude, to ask others to do your homework for you?

    I’m not asking people to do my homework. I’ve been asking for people to put across a genuine argument as to how its severe bigotry and harmful for me to think of trans-gendered people as trans-gendered people rather than male/female depending on the case.

    So far, i’ve got “fuck off bigot”, “read more”, and “troll”.

  1508. Matt Penfold:

    So far, i’ve got “fuck off bigot”, “read more”, and “troll”.

    You got those because of your wilful ignorance. You need to go away and learn. For some reason you don’t want to do that. You are so lazy you demand people provide the links you won’t read again, because it is beyond to scroll back.

  1509. reasonable fellow:

    You’re also suffering from #4.

    I haven’t attacked your grammar or spelling once. I don’t care about that stuff so long as the point comes across.

    @nightjar

    Thanks for that. I’ve only had a quick skim through the links so far but all seem to be saying that trans-gendered people have issues with gender identity – something I don’t deny.

  1510. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart, MD, PhD, DDS, Esq, OM:

    Why should self-identification trump biology

    Is the brain not a biological organ, now?

    This was one of Jadehawk’s big points yesterday– besides the fact the r**s*n*bl*fellow is pretty much a flat-out asshole, they seem to be unable to drop the notion of mind/body dualism.

    So sad. An asshole and an idiot.

  1511. throwaway, these are not the bullies you're looking for:

    So far, i’ve got “fuck off bigot”, “read more”, and “troll”.

    Let’s add “liar” to the list.

  1512. jessiexl:

    reasonable fellow
    <blockquote cite="If someone describes themselves as happy or sad, would you believe yourself entitled to ignore that and decide on your own description?"

    <blockquote cite="Of course, i’d make a judgement based on their behavior. Though if somebody outright came out and said “i’m happy” that’d be enough reason alone for me to doubt it. Whats your point again?"

    The point is that such matters are subjective, as are matters of personal identity. You seem to want to impose your own assessment in preference to the assessment others have of themselves. Overriding other people in this way and telling them what they are or what they feel makes them unhappy. Why do you do that?

  1513. reasonable fellow:

    Let’s add “liar” to the list.

    Lets, its about as true as the other examples.

  1514. Sophia, Michelin-starred General of the First Mediterranean Iron Chef Batallion:

    “this person is different from me*, and in a weaker position** so I can do whatever I want***”

    * looks like a guy, wants to be called a lady.

    ** there are only a few of them around and us normal people don’t talk about them in polite conversation because… eew. (see *)

    *** They’re obviously a guy, so I’ll naturally address them using male pronouns.

    Bullying on all counts. They’re different, they’re in a socially difficult position and you insist on doing what you think is normal rather than respect their identity. See?

  1515. Dr. Audley Z. Darkheart, MD, PhD, DDS, Esq, OM:

    (Psssst jessie: [blockquote] text [/blockquote] (replace with angled brackets) will work. I have no freaking idea why blockquote cite is such a pain in the ass.)

  1516. Matt Penfold:

    Lets, its about as true as the other examples.

    Well you are an idiot. Only an idiot could look at someone with AIS and think it appropriate to call them a man. Yet you would do just that.

  1517. Louis:

    Reasonable Fellow,

    I hate to point this out to you but you’ve received a far sight more than that. Sure you’ve received those things too, and you’ll get more of them. Look at it this way, you are coming into a conversation and making comments about an established field of study, like it or not, that has a good deal of evidence behind it and you are coming in ignorant. No crime there, we’re all ignorant of many things.

    In addition, you are demonstrating your ignorance to a group that contains people who a) know this field of study well because it is their own, b) suffer from the discrimination/effects of the ideas that your comments are, perhaps inadvertently, reflecting, and even perhaps c) both. So you’re “just asking questions” of people who know the topic and for whom it is not merely an intellectual exercise. Some of those people are not going to be kind, rightly so, in dismissing you as yet another fool in a series of unpleasant fools.

    This is also why “just asking questions” is in scare quotes. Some people are just honestly asking questions out of ignorance, no crime again, as I say. The problem is that many are not, it’s all too familiar a refrain “hey I’m just asking question” when they are doing anything but honestly just asking questions. More than that, and this isn’t particularly the case in this thread, “just asking questions” can frequently derail conversations where people are talking about issues pertaining to vulnerable people. So, for example, people “just ask questions” about male circumcision on a thread about female circumcision, moving the topic from the problems facing women to those facing men, which may or may not have wrinkles and subtleties that are not identical. It’s something to be aware of. Just like I was saying in reference to humour above. It’s very possible to accidentally tread on toes.

    Louis

  1518. reasonable fellow:

    I’ll add idiot to the list if it makes you feel special Matt.

  1519. Matt Penfold:

    I’ll add idiot to the list if it makes you feel special Matt.

    I note you have been unable to explain why people with AIS should be referred to as male. Presumably because you know what however you answer it will destroy your argument.

  1520. reasonable fellow:

    I get what you’re saying Louis. You can hardly blame someone for adopting a bunker mentality when they’re being constantly insulted and likened to a middle-school bully though. I’m reading through some of the articles that have been linked, but so far they’re addressing issues that aren’t exactly what i’ve been talking about.

  1521. Nightjar:

    its severe bigotry and harmful for me to think of

    You’re not just thinking, though, are you?

    trans-gendered people as trans-gendered people

    that are “lying to themselves” and in delusion (“king of mars” and all that), right? Yeah, you’re so totally not being an ignorant and harmful bigot.

    rather than male/female depending on the case.

    Because who cares about the brain when it comes to humans and what gender they perceive themselves to be. Not you, right?

  1522. Beatrice:

    reasonable fellow,

    The way we think usually influences what we do. When you say that you would be polite to trans* folks, but think to yourself that they are just deluding themselves, it is highly improbable that what you think would in no way influence your words or actions. And I’m not talking just about politeness, I’m talking about situations when you hear someone insulting trans* people for who they are (where you agree with them in part, so would you be able to put all that aside and defend them?) or situations where you might have to vote or sign a referendum or petition that would support trans* people.

    Then we also come to situations like this one here, where you decided to voice your thoughts. Now that your thoughts have been let loose on the unsuspecting readers of Pharyngula, they are not just innocent thoughts floating around your head. Now they are having an influence on the outside world, on people who read your words.
    And what you are saying is that trans* people are just deluding themselves. That Natalie Reed (whose blog you should really start reading to educated yourself : link) can call herself a woman all she wants, but she’ll never be one. That is harmful. It hurts the individual who reads that, and it’s harmful because it perpetuates the false belief that many other people share.

  1523. jessiexl:

    Audley #15. Thanks. I think I missed off the second part of the bracket. Then I hit submit rather than preview by accident.

  1524. Mattir:

    I haven’t had time this weekend to be an active participant in this thread, but I just wanted to say that I totally love the Pharyngula Horde. You make me want to stop waxing my annoying ladybeard and instead grow a long luxurious under-chin beard which I can festoon with Harley themed charms and pretty hand dyed silk ribbons.

    For RF, how about this: you say you’re a human, but I, because I know the Truth™, decide to view you as a sea urchin. Won’t this color how I treat you? Why yes, it leads me to contemplate the use of your lovely innards as sushi. It leads me to figure that I need not make the restrooms of Teh Humanz accessible for your use. It leads me to shape my behavior towards and about you in ways more suitable for an echinoderm – I carry salt water about so as to be able to splash you with it. I make sure to wear sturdy shoes so that if I step on you, I don’t get a nasty spine through my foot. I contemplate whether there’s money to be made drying you out and selling your dessicated form as a tourist souvenir.

    Yep, how I view you makes no difference at all…

    ((It would be very very wrong to sell dessicated troll exoskeletons to unsuspecting tourists. This image was just for hyperbole. Also, just think what would happen if they got rehydrated. ))

  1525. Sophia, Michelin-starred General of the First Mediterranean Iron Chef Batallion:

    On the upside of all of this, I’ve been googling interesting genetic permutations of biological sex and chromosomal… stuff. Intersex things.
    SO. INTERESTING.

    Reading up on gynandromorphic organisms themselves is incredibly cool. Seriously, and on a lighter note reasonable fellow, you might like to even just read the wikipedia Intersex article. It’s gosh-darned fascinating, and sheds a lot of light on the ambiguity of even biological sex.

  1526. Louis:

    Reasonable Fellow,

    I’m not worried about your bunker mentality, it is understandable, not necessarily forgiveable but understandable.

    The culture at Pharyngula is such that when you start getting brickbats lobbed at you there is a very high chance you need to step away and shut up. Hell I’m relatively regular here and I’ve fallen foul of this a few times. Almost everyone has. I might get a post, or two posts more benefit of the doubt than you, but not much more than that. That’s the value of this place. Well, that and the amazing orgies. ;-)

    I’m not being mean when I say “go away, stop commenting for a bit, and read”. It’s not from a desire to get rid of you or silence you, it’s from a desire to believe my fellow humans can really learn no matter how hard it is. It’s tough as hell, I’ve doubled down a time or two myself, I KNOW!

    Start reading, you’ll be amazed. If you truly care it’s time for you to do the work, debate is a shitty way to educate yourself or learn about a topic, it’s a superb way to motivate you to learn, but a shitty means.

    Louis

  1527. Matt Penfold:

    Here is a photo of some people.

    reasonable fellow considers everyone of them to be male, and says he would insist on calling male to their face.

  1528. Beatrice:

    where you agree with them* in part, so would you be able to put all that aside and defend them**?

    *the asshole who does the insulting
    **trans people

    (I suck at writing)

  1529. M. A. Melby:

    I’ve already requested that they be linked again. The thread was moving fast last night and i’ll be damned if i’m going to read through that crap again.

    Scroll up and read my post before I said “good night”. I tried to make this as clear and concise and I could.

    Please ask any questions if you still don’t understand.

  1530. drbunsen le savant en colère dans une robe d'été belle (la robe est aussi en colère):

    I’ve been googling interesting genetic permutations of biological sex and chromosomal… stuff. Intersex things.
    SO. INTERESTING.

    INORITE??

    Why, it’s like reason-resistant failure here is allergic to information or something. Strange, I always thought “Skeptics™” liked learning things.

  1531. drbunsen le savant en colère dans une robe d'été belle (la robe est aussi en colère):

    And has apparently never heard of Google or Wikipedia.

  1532. rrede:

    Delurking! I’ve been reading for Pharyngula for some time (found out about you all over at Manboobz where I post as Ithiliana–I’m coming in here via my yahoo account because wordpress blog issues are giving me hives). Over the last month, I find myself reading more and more blogs in the group, and more and more comments, and wanting to talk *MORE* (especially on this amazing thread). I’m a queer woman and an academic in rural Texas–my *fun* project the last few years is working on starting a Safe Spaces program (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safe-space) at my university (the straight cis white male administrators cannot understand the problem because everybody is so nice to them!).

  1533. M. A. Melby:

    reasonable fellow considers everyone of them to be male, and says he would insist on calling male to their face.

    To be fair, he said he’d put aside his “integrity” and be “polite” and call them female if they wanted even though they are “lying” to themselves.

    …so he doesn’t understand what the problem is.

  1534. reasonable fellow:

    I wish I had a pubmed or nature subscription. I can only read the synopsis of the really interesting sounding stuff.

  1535. Matt Penfold:

    To be fair, he said he’d put aside his “integrity” and be “polite” and call them female if they wanted even though they are “lying” to themselves.

    …so he doesn’t understand what the problem is.

    I accept the correction, and you are right, he does not understand what the problem is. Have you noticed how he has totally ignored the issue of people with AIS ? It is almost as if his tiny brain cannot cope.

  1536. stuartvo:

    I’m Just Asking a Question here, but:

    Do the fuck-head trolls wait for PZ to be out of town before launching their pathetic little attacks, or does it just seem that way?

    Because there have been several of them on this thread who have been so repetitive, so obnoxious, so obtuse, so repetitive, and so insensitive, that had the Overlord been here their asses would have landed in the dungeon long ago.

    BTW, and FWIW, I feel that “grotesque insensitivity” deserves its own bullet-point in the Pharyngula Standards, because recently there have been some breathtaking examples thereof displayed here. Examples if the “I’m ashamed to share a species with these people, let alone a gender” scale. :-(

  1537. Beatrice:

    To be fair, he said he’d put aside his “integrity” and be “polite” and call them female if they wanted even though they are “lying” to themselves.

    But I’m wondering what he’d do if it wouldn’t be just about using female pronouns for someone, if one of the women in the picture actually struck a conversation with him. Would he be able to keep his thoughts about how she’s deluded to himself or would they spill over with little prompting, like on this thread?

  1538. Sophia, Michelin-starred General of the First Mediterranean Iron Chef Batallion:

    drbunsen:

    Oh… I’m always the idealist. Anyone can learn, it’s getting them to actually want to that’s the challenge.
    Still, I’m following the Pharyngula Brand Fang-snininess TZT Chewtoy Regime and it’s done WONDERS. I’ve lost simply LOADS of ingrained societal prejudice and gained argumentative and insult capability beyond my Wildest Dreams!

    I’ve yet to take Porcupine Insertion 101, it’s not the sort of thing we folks talk about back home, and plenty of my friends are porcupine fanciers but you know… they should really keep it to themselves. Not that there’s anything WRONG with that…

    … sorry, apparently I’m tired.

  1539. Beatrice:

    Do the fuck-head trolls wait for PZ to be out of town before launching their pathetic little attacks, or does it just seem that way?

    I haven’t been here for very long, but that is my impression too.

  1540. Matt Penfold:

    Do the fuck-head trolls wait for PZ to be out of town before launching their pathetic little attacks, or does it just seem that way?

    I am not sure they wait for PZ to be out of town, but more that when he is out of town there is less control of them spewing their bigotry. I’m pretty sure if PZ was about, reasonable fellow
    would have at the very least been banished to TZT.

  1541. carlie:

    Back from vacation, missed most of the party. But I’ll chime in on this:

    Why should self-identification trump biology a

    Are you fucking serious? All kinds of things trump biology, because we have big brains. Why should glasses trump biology when biology says you shouldn’t be able to see clearly? Why should insulin trump biology when biology says you should die young with a shitty pancreas? Why should clothes trump biology when people’s bodies aren’t worth crap in cold climates? Biology is not a trump card. The entire history of humanity is finding ways around biology.

    Chas – I know where you’re coming from, but come on. You’re defining genetic and physiological maleness, which is separate than gender identification maleness, and you know it. Science words are not the same as common words all over the place; community was a good example as used earlier. And as was also mentioned, the idea of male and female as referring to gender presentation was around long before biologists discovered gametes and matched the small one to the gender they already called male.

  1542. reasonable fellow:

    But I’m wondering what he’d do if it wouldn’t be just about using female pronouns for someone, if one of the women in the picture actually struck a conversation with him. Would he be able to keep his thoughts about how she’s deluded to himself or would they spill over with little prompting, like on this thread?

    I’m pretty good at keeping quiet in those sorts of situations. I’d be thinking it though, sorry.

  1543. throwaway, these are not the bullies you're looking for:

    I haven’t attacked your grammar or spelling once. I don’t care about that stuff so long as the point comes across.

    Now address the issue that is pertinent to the discussion we were having. Because you just proved my point: super-tunnel vision caused you to casually disregard the first part of my post. It had nothing to do with grammer[sic].

    Your insistence that trans-people are not the sex they identify as, but rather trans-people, otherizes them. You do lend credence to the development of a hierarchy with your dismissal of self-identity as not reflecting their (according to you) true physical nature, thus not their whole self.

    Self-identity IS the whole. Self-identity is the end-all, be-all of gender identity. Brain trumps penis, brain trumps vagina. It’s OK to say that they were born with male anatomy, but they’re really female and vice versa – that is the truth. It is reality. “They’re identifying male (but really female because of the titties and lack of a Y chromosome)” is not approximately true since it doesn’t acknowledge that what and who we are is determined by the brain not by the body (which is just in the way.)

    It would be like telling a person who is working on sculptures that they’re really a painter because they have a paintbrush for a pinky, but it’s okay with you if they keep on sculpting. If they’re sculpting than they’re a sculptor, their anatomy has fuck-all to do with it. And they definitely don’t need you giving the green light for them to “contradict” their anatomy.

  1544. Matt Penfold:

    I’m pretty good at keeping quiet in those sorts of situations. I’d be thinking it though, sorry.

    You almost certainly would not know.

  1545. reasonable fellow:

    “They’re identifying male (but really female because of the titties and lack of a Y chromosome)” is not approximately true since it doesn’t acknowledge that what and who we are is determined by the brain not by the body (which is just in the way.)

    How is it tunnel-vision to take all aspects of a person into account. The brain is important but the body is not irrelevant.

  1546. nigelTheBold, who sings like a needle to the ear:

    reasonable fellow:

    Why should self-identification trump biology and societal standards?

    I’d say because the first is a relatively recent development, and the second is mutable. We can’t change the biological standard, any more than we can change the scientific definition of theory (though some have tried). But even in biology, sex is not as easy as the simple male/female duality.

    But it’s the second standard you list that I’d like to address.

    Societal standards provide roles which have labeled male and female. As much as some of us dislike the fact these roles exist in the first place*, they are very much ingrained into society.

    I’m not arguing against the behavior associated with those roles. I’m arguing against the fact we’ve defined those behaviors as either male or female, and made them two rigidly-defined stereotypes applicable to the biological happenstance of being born with a penis or a vagina (or both, or neither). This in spite of the fact that behavior is a continuum which pays little heed to the biological definitions.

    So the societal standard is based on behavior which is often contrary to the biological standard. So, which standard to you apply? The societal (which is behavior-based), or the biological (which is based strictly on physical attributes)?

    I won’t argue we should call folks by their own identity simply to make their lives easier. That’s an argument from consequence. What I am saying is, you’ve already identified the crux of the argument. The tension is based on the disparity between the biological definition of male and female, and the societal definition, which is based on behavior, not biology.**

    Yes, much of society still attempts to equate biological identity with societal identity. But, as society is mutable, we can fix that, and bring the definition in line with the way society already defines sexual identity — with behavior.

    That’s really all we’re attempting to do, to reconcile the societal definition of gender and sexual identity with itself, to make it non-contradictory. Since the fundamental definition of roles seems to be based on behavior, it’s easier to bring the words into alignment with that, rather than creating new roles with new definitions of behavior.

    * Pink for girls, blue for boys? How arbitrary can you get?

    ** And as we identify with our societal roles***, doesn’t it make sense to use the roles we choose to identify ourselves?

    *** I’m a programmer, for instance. That’s how I primarily identify, outside of my own cis-maleness.

  1547. Ogvorbis: Dogmaticus sycophantus:

    Do the fuck-head trolls wait for PZ to be out of town before launching their pathetic little attacks, or does it just seem that way?

    I think that when PZed (blessings upon him) is out of town it is not unusual for banhammered ex-commenters to show up under new ‘nyms and with new IP addresses. I haven’t seen that during this troll infestation. What also happens (and muddies the experimental waters a bit) is that, anytime PZed posts about feminism, privilege, or the toleration of misogyny by other bloggers, MRAs tend to come out of the woodwork. A few may be honest, but I think a shitload of them come here, toss some privilege around, and then slink back to their chosen haunts to complain about how mean we are.

  1548. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls:

    Look lurkers, same-old same-old from Unreasonable fuckwit. It couldn’t change its mind if it had to, seeing how the whole concept is beyond its understanding. And won’t shut the fuck up and listen, like any reasonable person would do. No hope for it. Terminally trite, boring, banal, insipid, and shallow in its thinking.

  1549. Beatrice:

    reasonable fellow,

    I would like to see a comment on my #22

  1550. drbunsen le savant en colère dans une robe d'été belle (la robe est aussi en colère):

    I’m pretty good at keeping quiet in those sorts of situations.

    Liar. You are in one of those situations right now. There are several trans* people who are regulars here. You’ve already grossly offended and hurt one of them.

    Now simply be fucking off with you. Go. Read. Google. Wiki. And come back – if ever – when you are less stupid, less egregiously insensitive, and less of a bigoted lackwit.

  1551. Beatrice:

    reasonable fellow,

    As drbunsen says, you are not keeping quiet right now, which was addressed in my #22, so I would appreciate it if you acknowledged my second point about actively doing harm on this thread.