The Saga of Paula Kirby »« My skin is at stake!

Episode CCCXLVII: The Saga of Thunderf00t

I made a video! Since Thunderf00t has been baying about the great injustice done to him on youtube, I figured I’d reply in the same place. So here’s why Thunderf00t was fired.

Hey, maybe we should have an online poll in the comments about who was right!

Nah, that would be stupid.

(Episode CCCXLVI: Long overdue.)

Comments

  1. Dr. Esteleth Dyke, Medicine Woman and Snark Machine says

    Side rant:
    Yes, local Humane Society, I adopted Morgan from you. In general, I’ve heard good things about you.

    I got your flier about your campaign to expand your facilities and all that. Great!

    However.

    When you call me to ask for my donation, please do not make me sit through a 5 minute speech before I am asked the basic question, “Do you think you’d be able to donate?” If I answer “yes” to the earlier question of, “Did you receive our mailing about the campaign? Did you look it over?”

    Seriously.

    I am disappoint.

  2. birgerjohansson says

    “Do rats form long-term pairs?”
    Some rodent species do.
    Rats? I don’t know, maybe there are subspecies that do.
    — — — —
    Cicero, my tomcat, just cheerfully bit me when I scratced his tummy, and sharpened his claws on my hand. It is his way of saying “hello”. Squid can’t do that, whatever P Z says.
    — — — — —
    Much of central and western Europe has so much rain there are problems with flooding. Bad news for the coming olympic games in London.

  3. Wowbagger, Deputy Vice-President (Silencing) says

    jonathanslively wrote (on page 1):

    You’re killing your own movement with these nonsensical tirades.

    If ‘the movement’ is one that opposes equality and social justice, then it deserves to be killed off; I, for one, would gladly piss on its corpse.

    But I’m kind fascinated at the ‘logic’ that leads people to make claims like this. How, precisely, is ‘atheism’ being harmed by these kinds of schisms? Do people who are on the fence about the existence of gods look at the fact that there appear to be two (broad) groups of unbelievers – those who just want to bang on about atheism and nothing else because everything else about the world is fine the way it is; and those who believe that atheism is only one part of the bigger rational picture and that we should try and improve everything rather than just one aspect of it – and think, “well, the atheists don’t all agree on issues of social justice; I guess I have to go back to church”?

    The number of atheists looks to be increasing; the number of ‘camps’ they separate themselves into on other issues seems unlikely (to me) to be preventing that. Our disagreements on other issues don’t change the fact there’s no reason to believe in gods. It’s the joy of not claiming an infallible dogma.

  4. chigau (間違っていない) says

    Caine
    Is it necessary to keep the litters “intact”?
    Could you pick and choose individuals for keeping, breeding, adopting-out?
    (Just curious. Answer when you have a minute. August is fine.)
    (Have some more USB rum.)

  5. says

    Did a quick look up. According to old animal reproduction notes, in high concentrations a female rat in heat will be mate with multiple males, (hence the need for large testes and the plug). I think from that my guess is going to be that they do not pair bond over erotically.

  6. chigau (間違っていない) says

    And because my rum is anything but virtual,
    a joke® from my childhood,
    .
    .
    Speaking of movements
    Q: What is brown and sits on the piano stool?
    A: Beethoven’s Last Movement.

    Thank you.
    Try the waiter.
    Tip your veal.

  7. portia says

    My understanding is that TET is for non sequitors or general comments, sorry if I have it wrong, but here goes. (I have commented on Pharyngula before, but not often). I just came from a thread about the stupid Daniel Tosh rape jokes and got inundated with rape threats for saying what he did was wrong…I just need to be somewhere where people are decent. Thank you all for doing what you do, you really do help when I want to give up on the world.

  8. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy says

    Hey Portia. You’re right about TET. I’m sorry about other places. :( It’s shitty and rotten the way those people were willing to hurt you for standing up for yourself. I hope you feel better soon.

  9. chigau (間違っていない) says

    portia
    Welcome.
    It’s not only TET, most of Pharyngula is mostly safe.
    (have some grog)

  10. portia says

    Thanks Cipher. I really appreciate it. I’m working to enjoy the evening in spite of it, with some success.

  11. says

    Chigau:

    Is it necessary to keep the litters “intact”?
    Could you pick and choose individuals for keeping, breeding, adopting-out?
    (Just curious. Answer when you have a minute. August is fine.)
    (Have some more USB rum.)

    No, it’s not necessary to keep them intact, but we had already decided on keeping Esme & Havelock’s eleven. I have no doubt we’ll be suckered into keeping a few of Rubin & Sam’s. There will be no more breeding. Nope. Not ever.

  12. portia says

    chigau –
    Thanks for the grog :) I’ve lurked enough to feel pretty confident that Pharyngula regulars are some of my favorite people that I don’t know IRL.

  13. chigau (間違っていない) says

    Caine
    re rat breeding
    I didn’t necessarily mean you breeding rather leaving some of the ratlets intact so the adopters could breed.
    (I know you’re kinda remote so your options are limited.)
    (They live sooo fast!!!)

  14. weakswimmer says

    I hope it’s a huge success, Portia.

    It’s good to have somewhere to go that’s nice and full of grog and cute ratlets (with grog for Caine).

    At a bank worked a man called Mr. Paddywack. One day, a ceramic frog came in to get a loan, but Mr. Paddywack wasn’t sure if the frog qualified for the loan. He talked to his boss about it, and the boss replied, “It’s a nicknack, Paddywack. Give the frog a loan.”

  15. Pteryxx says

    There will be no more breeding. Nope. Not ever.

    >_>

    *notes the date*

    J’SAYIN…….

  16. portia says

    weakswimmer, that is one of my favorite old jokes. Only I always triple the length of it and botch the delivery. I like your version.

  17. weakswimmer says

    @ Portia:

    Thank you! Glad it was good. The reason it was shorter was because I couldn’t remember how my mother told it. I mostly remembered the major points.

  18. says

    Jesus Motherfucking Godsdamn Christ, no more Futurama for me. DirecTV decided to cancel a shitload of channels because of a dispute with viacom. What in the motherfuckety fuck fuck am I paying for here?

    Damn, that’s bad. Umm… it is Futurama o’clock pretty soon, isn’t it? *stretches torrenting fingers*

  19. says

    Taking this here from the Tosh thread because I don’t want “somethingnew” to think I’m on his side:

    Wait… expecting people not to talk during the movie is authoritarian now? I thought that was, you know, good manners. Considering that I pay to watch the movie, not to hear some random asshole run their mouth.

    Spontaneously yelling “Ah, shit!” when the promising trailer turns out to be for yet another M. Night Shyamalan flick? That’s one thing. Keeping up a running conversation during the movie? Uh, no. Your living room is the place for that.

    This, plus parents who don’t know the concept of “age-appropriate,” plus high ticket prices, plus utter shit at mainstream box offices, is why I haven’t gone to the movies in years.

  20. says

    Chigau:

    Speaking of movements
    Q: What is brown and sits on the piano stool?
    A: Beethoven’s Last Movement.

    I’d call you immature, but I spent a small chunk of time today writing a Wham! parody called “Careless Sphincter”….

    (Inspiration was first comment to this post, which incorporates another scatological Wham! parody.)

  21. says

    @Katherine
    *hugs* He doesn’t sound like he’d have been much of a friend either.

    @Ogvorbis
    Bummer about the car.

    @Caine
    Now all you need to do is teach them the arts of war, and then take over the world with an army of adorable rodents.

    @maxdevlin
    Deists? Seriously? That’s what you’re going with? Well, at least you made it clear that you don’t know shit right upfront for easier ignoring in future.

    @birgerjohansen #10
    Too late for my grandmother, but good news for my mother, and in the longer term my siblings and myself (it seems to run in the family)

    @Portia
    Hello and welcome.

  22. says

    Wait… expecting people not to talk during the movie is authoritarian now? I thought that was, you know, good manners. Considering that I pay to watch the movie, not to hear some random asshole run their mouth.

    Spontaneously yelling “Ah, shit!” when the promising trailer turns out to be for yet another M. Night Shyamalan flick? That’s one thing. Keeping up a running conversation during the movie? Uh, no. Your living room is the place for that.

    No one said that.

  23. says

    Daisy Cutter, the movie example was just distraction by the asshole. Expecting people to sit down and listen to rape “jokes” by a stand up comedian certainly is authoritarian.

  24. says

    Audley, I agree that the comedy club is a different kettle of fish, but SomethingOldAndBusted got snarked for expecting a quiet atmosphere at a movie theater, too.

    No he got snarked for acting like it’s the same thing.

  25. says

    Daisy:

    … got snarked for expecting a quiet atmosphere at a movie theater, too.

    Well, yeah. You can’t expect a quiet atmosphere at a movie theater. It sucks, but that’s they way it is.

    (Actually, I’ve found that mall movie theaters are the worst, “stand alones” tend to be much better. My guess is that malls are full of people that go to the movies because they’re bored with the rest of the mall, whereas people purposefully go to indivual theaters.)

  26. says

    I found arthouse theatres (I like arty movies, so sue me) to be better than mainstream theatres, but that was still no guarantee. About the only place I’ve ever been where viewers were reliably quiet was the Harvard Film Archive.

  27. chigau (間違っていない) says

    My oven is clean but I totally forgot about the stovetop.
    *sigh*
    A woman’s work is never done.

  28. weakswimmer says

    Movie theater talking =/= heckling a comic. If they’re horrible, the comic can hear about it. A movie hears nothing.

    Oddly enough, the theater that my family goes to most often that isn’t that bad with noise (except for the movies themselves potentially being too loud) is owned by the casino in front of it. Some of the casinos have pretty good food, too.

  29. Dr. Esteleth Dyke, Medicine Woman and Snark Machine says

    The worst theater I ever went to had food service, complete with waiters in the theater.

    It was not an enjoyable viewing experience.

  30. hotshoe says

    What I’m drinking right now:

    Galliano lime cooler for a hot summer night.

    How to make one:
    Squeeze one lime into a tall glass. Use one of those grip-handled type squeezers and put some pressure on it so you get all the juice plus some of the oils from the peel, etc, not just a little “hint of lime”.
    Eyeball the amount of lime juice and add the same amount of Galliano. Don’t add too much, it will be too sweet.
    Fill to the top with chilled soda water. Okay to add a few ice cubes if you want, but if the water is chilled, not necessary. We never have ice at our house, anyways, haven’t for thirty years.

    Drink.
    Repeat.

    They’re supposed to be refreshing, not hammering, so don’t expect to get drunk – or even loose – from just one.

    But of course, it does depend on how big the limes are – and the ones from the Mexican market this week are at least as big as lemons, more like size of oranges. That takes a lot of Galliano to match the juice amount in one glass.

    So, yeah, I might be posting just the teensiest bit impaired.

  31. portia says

    It occurred to me earlier that it would be nice if, instead of “Well if you heckle a comic you’re gonna get some abuse” the universal reaction was “Well if you joke about rape in your stand up routine you’re gonna get heckled!”

    (Thank you to everyone for the welcome)

  32. ibyea says

    Guys, after the last few days working in my parents’ food place, I think I am starting to understand why Chief Ramsey seems perpetually pissed everytime he is in a kitchen. ^_^

  33. ibyea says

    @Ing
    American Ramsey. Yeah, I don’t know what the Americans do to the show, but American Ramsey is really pissed off compared to the UK one.

  34. thunk, impressionable yoot says

    Welcome to the thread, portia.

    Hugs (ankle or otherwise) are available upon request, and so is grog.

    It is advised you drink the latter immediately though.

    (Is it telling of me being an astronomy geek if I think of your nym as an inner moon of Uranus?)

  35. portia says

    I enjoy hugs after the initial shock of a triggering has worn off. So thank you. Hugs welcomed and appreciated.

    Is it telling of me as a theatre/law geek that it is intended as a Shakespeare reference? :)

  36. Amblebury says

    Hello, Portia, all.

    Thunk Is it telling that my first thought was Shakespeare?

    birgerjohansson I don’t think I’ve ever told you how much I appreciate your links. In fact, I’ll often come to the TET and not comment, because I spend all my time reading them. Thanks!

  37. ibyea says

    Guys, I have a question. In my bank statement, there is this withdrawal from something called “service charge”. What the heck is that? Is that another way banks try to rip people off? Whatever it is, it makes me a bit angry.

  38. portia says

    ibyea –
    If I’ve missed something and that’s not a serious question, sorry.
    But usually, that refers to an ATM charge. Did you use an ATM that was not affiliated with your bank?

  39. thunk, impressionable yoot says

    ibyea: Yes, what portia said.

    It’s typical for ATMs to add a small fee (~ 2.00 US) to customers not part of their bank.

  40. Amblebury says

    Thunk Now you’ve got me racing off to check out the moons of Uranus.

    Now that I think about it, I do remember hearing that before :)

  41. ibyea says

    @portia and thunk
    No, I never ever have used the ATM. Also, I haven’t used my debit card since the Reason Rally.

  42. Amblebury says

    And…I typed Mons instead of moons. Moar coffee rqd.

    They’re fascinating, Thunk.

  43. says

    I pay a monthly 4 € service fee for online access and debit card, but I suppose this is one of those things that works very differently in the US.

  44. portia says

    Hm…if your account has been inactive that can lead to charges from the bank sometimes. That’s all I can think of atm.

  45. ibyea says

    @portia
    Wait, they charge you for trying to save money?! What kind of rip off is that?

  46. thunk, sadly not in gale crater says

    Yup. You can soak up Martian and lunar geography in Google Earth too.

  47. portia says

    At any rate, I’ve had some success with customer service (especially at a bank where a few ~cue US-centrism~ dollars is really no difference to them) by calling and saying “This charge makes no sense to me, could you please remove it?”

  48. portia says

    Ibyea –

    Oh yes, welcome to capitalist America! Where saving money costs you money. It’s absolutely the case. Though, it can change if you threaten to change banks.

  49. Amblebury says

    Thanks! Right now I’m finding out about Margaret, she (it, I suppose) with the most eccentric orbit of any moon in the solar system.

    Wow. Imagine seeing that.

  50. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ says

    ibyea, there’s all sorts of reasons this can happen, inactivity as portia said, also some accounts require a minimum balance.

    You should call them and ask exactly what’s going on and how you can avoid it. Maybe they have a different kind of account, maybe you’d be better off at another bank.

  51. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ says

    calling and saying “This charge makes no sense to me, could you please remove it?”

    Yep, try this too. Sometimes works.

  52. thunk, sadly not in gale crater says

    Amble:

    I do believe Nereid has a more eccentric orbit. And it’s bigger.

    Also orbiting Neptune, Triton has an eccentricity of basically zero. There are some interesting hypotheses regarding its formation.

  53. ibyea says

    @ixchel
    Probably inactivity. It says in the Description on my statement: Invactive. And I haven’t used it since the Reason Rally. The evidence all fits.

  54. thunk, sadly not in gale crater says

    Oh, wait. Remember, osculating orbital elements count for nothing! :p

  55. ibyea says

    @thunk
    Isn’t the hypothesis being that Triton used to be a Kuiper Belt object that got trapped? Or maybe I am thinking of the wrong moon.

  56. Amblebury says

    Zero? An effectively perfect circle, would that mean?

    Thunk, if you were to recommend any telescopes for home use, what would they be? Mine is old, and never was much good anyhow. I’d like a better one.

  57. thunk, sadly not in gale crater says

    For starters, I don’t even have a telescope. Armchair astronomer here.

    Second, I don’t know. There are a number of books on the subject (e.g. Harrington’s Star Ware) and a few others.

  58. thunk, sadly not in gale crater says

    Also, Amble (can’t reply straight), quite close. As in 0.000016

  59. Amblebury says

    Thanks – I’ll see if the library has the book, or any similar. If not they’ll be able to get one interloan.

  60. Lonely Panda, e.s.l. says

    Many comments ago, because I am not very fast–

    thunk, welcoming portia:

    (Is it telling of me being an astronomy geek if I think of your nym as an inner moon of Uranus?)

    portia:

    Is it telling of me as a theatre/law geek that it is intended as a Shakespeare reference? :)

    Several years ago, I was watching Shadow of the Vampire (a fictional account of the filming of Nosferatu). At one point the cast and crew are on a train with the name Charon. The significance of this only made sense after my spouse clued me in with a bit of remedial Greek mythology (I only knew Charon as a moon of Pluto).

  61. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ says

    Fuck me I didn’t know Pluto had two moons, let alone five.

    Next you’re going to tell me there’s a fifth element.

  62. thunk, sadly not in gale crater says

    ixchel:

    And they’re in nice near-resonances too.

    Charon’s orbital period can be defined as one unit

    so S/2012 P1 (fifth moon) orbits in three.

    Nix in four, S/2011 P1 (fourth moon) five, and Hydra six.

    These ratios are not exactly correct, yet they are still nice.

  63. thunk, sadly not in gale crater says

    ibyea:

    And after Pluto, even more fun awaits.

    The IceHunters project is searching for a small TNO in the right path to visit in 2015-2020.

    Although I’m too lazy (shame on me), ordinary people can participate, so it is said.

  64. Tony aka The Psychic Octopus says

    Who likes Chocolate Milk?
    Who likes liquor?
    Mixed together?
    I had a taste of Adult Chocolate Milk tonight. It tastes just like chocolate milk, with a kick. But I couldn’t taste the liquor itself. It was so smooth, perfect to drink on the rocks, and was 40 proof.
    Here (warning there’s a song playing on the main page that’s entertaining on the one hand-I think because the singer has a pleasant voice-yet dumb on the other):
    http://www.adultchocolatemilk.com/?seccion=home

    (one thing I noticed in the pics of the couples and friends, a woman is hugging a guy while *he* cooks; it stood out to me because even today, there are still too many commercials that show the woman cooking, or doing something domestic)

  65. thunk, sadly not in gale crater says

    ibyea: yes, the geometry isn’t right.

    The probe has only a limited amount of hydrazine fuel, so therefore can only shift one degree from its post-Pluto trajectory.

    Sedna’s on the opposite side of the sun from Pluto.

  66. thunk, sadly not in gale crater says

    Remember. Space is BIG. Also, points in space are very hard to get to. Both Earth and target are constantly moving, and you only have limited velocity change available.

    It’s not like fantasy, where craft can turn on a dime.

  67. Oenotrian says

    {{hugs}} and virtual liquor for Katherine, Ogvorbis, and Caine. {{hugs}} and welcome to Portia.

    I’ll be flying out to Idaho some time next week to be with my mother. If all goes according to plan, they’ll be putting in her pacemaker on Wednesday. She had a good, long talk last night with my brother, who is an RN, and he reassured her much better than I could.

    My eldest was born at exactly 37 weeks, and because of circumstances, we knew precisely when the date of conception was. He was just early because of fetal stress. The twins were born at 38 weeks, to the day, which was exactly right for twins. I was always told that the due date should be calculated ±14 days.

  68. Tony aka The Psychic Octopus says

    Vilem Saptar:

    I’ll refrain from using it going forward and I’ve realized I should sensitize myself to actually exercising more forethought, and not just knowing that I must, before jumping in and adopting what appear to be “approved” mannerisms and patterns of behaviour. Not that anyone else is responsible for my slip-ups.

    Ah, if only the trolls following PZ around could learn this lesson…they could be on the ‘winning side’…part of the cool kids…among elite company. As it stands they are on the Pro Sexist Side and each one of them gets the free consolation prize: Masturbation Via Porcurpine (that’s what it should be from now on! Troll #435456 You Now win a free MvP; perhaps even Personal Masturbation Porcupine for those that don’t get it)

  69. jemby5 says

    You don’t like that TF used Bold face and italics in his posts? Huh? I didn’t know we were talking to William – fucking – Shakespeare here. Your a Biology Professor last time I looked, unless the English department recently grandfathered you in.

    You don’t like that he called you out on straw maning his arguments. That’s like saying you can fight me but you’re not allowed to block my punches.

    You then go on to define Free Thought in your own image. You don’t get to have it both ways. You can’t say that lots of disagreements and inner debating take place at FTB, but once someone disagrees with an issue near and dear to your heart it’s suddenly anti-Free Thought.

    TF is a fellow academic like yourself, has spent over four years now promoting science and skepticism, personally came to your house and interviewed you, the video of which went up on his channel. He disagrees on one issue and you come to the Sherlock – Holmes – conclusion that he came to FTB to troll people. Really?

    No doubt your supporters have, do , and will support you on your actions. Same is true for TF’s. However, you have left a permanent scar in the paper trail by your behavior. Disagree with P.Z.’s political views and your banned. No debate, no discussion, no questions – banned.

  70. John Morales says

    jemby5 specimen:

    [1] You don’t like that TF used Bold face and italics in his posts? Huh? [2] I didn’t know we were talking to William – fucking – Shakespeare here. [3] Your [sic] a Biology Professor last time I looked, unless the English department recently grandfathered you in.

    1. Nah, it’s not the usage, it’s its incompetence.

    2. Nah, just not an incompetent writer (though PZ abuses apostrophes, now and then).

    3. PZ is less incompetent, by far.

    TF is a fellow academic like yourself, has spent over four years now promoting science and skepticism, personally came to your house and interviewed you, the video of which went up on his channel. He disagrees on one issue and you come to the Sherlock – Holmes – conclusion that he came to FTB to troll people. Really?

    It’s their respective competence at their avocation which is in question, and the threshold of minimality of which thunderpod failed to meet.

    No doubt your supporters have, do , and will support you on your actions. Same is true for TF’s.

    You are one of the pod’s supporters, and look at your degree of competence.

    However, you have left a permanent scar in the paper trail by your behavior. Disagree with P.Z.’s political views and your banned. No debate, no discussion, no questions – banned.

    You are bullshitting.

  71. says

    Moggie @285 (or so) asked,

    is Horde assistance coordinated only via FB now? Since I don’t book face, I feel a bit left out. Is Josh running a general fund?

    Sometimes these things start on Facebook and are resolved there; this sounded like it needed a few more people, so I mentioned it here. In the past, Josh has very kindly coordinated transactions through various means and passed them on in one transaction through the best and fastest way. In this case, J. was travelling in Europe so I thought it would be nice to have someone in the U.S. to make sure things got where they were going. As it happened, individuals did the trick very quickly.

  72. says

    You don’t like that TF used Bold face and italics in his posts? Huh? I didn’t know we were talking to William – fucking – Shakespeare here. Your a Biology Professor last time I looked, unless the English department recently grandfathered you in.

    Yeah, uhm, there is a certain standard of quality here on FtB. You don’t have to be fucking Shakespear, but writing like a 14 year old on 4chan or indeed a youtube creationist troll just isn’t good enough, sorry.

    You don’t like that he called you out on straw maning his arguments. That’s like saying you can fight me but you’re not allowed to block my punches.

    No, PZ doesn’t like being accused of strawmanning when he clearly didn’t. At most PZ misunderstood Tfoot as a consequence of his crappy writing (and I for one don’t think PZ misunderstood anything).

    You then go on to define Free Thought in your own image.

    Again, no. The definition of Freethought used by PZ is actually the correct dictionary definition. Fuck, it’s even on Wikipedia. Please make an effort and don’t go about making unsupported statements. Thunderf00t appears to be conflating freedom of speech and freethought. The two are not the same. Tfoot was ignoring pretty much all the evidence and didn’t even bother to look at Grete Christina or Richard Carrier’s arguments.His behavior corresponded in no way to anything close to freethought.

    You can’t say that lots of disagreements and inner debating take place at FTB, but once someone disagrees with an issue near and dear to your heart it’s suddenly anti-Free Thought.

    Except of course that many of the FTBloggers do disagree on any number of things, and so do the commenters here, so how come other people didn’t get kicked out.

    However, you have left a permanent scar in the paper trail by your behavior. Disagree with P.Z.’s political views and your banned. No debate, no discussion, no questions – banned.

    Except that there has been debate. There has been discussion. There have been questions. AND Tfoot isn’t banned. He is still free to comment on FTB. He was, however, fired. FTB is under no obligation to provide anyone with a platform. Tfoot is free to start his own blog; he is free to continue his videos, but FTB is under no obligation to let him do this here. ESpecially since what Tfoot was doing was trotting out ill-informed nonsense about a topic he knew fuck-all about and he didn’t even bother to educate himself. Again, his behavior was not in line with the very idea of Freethought.

  73. Tony aka The Psychic Octopus says

    Rush Limbaugh may have hired callers to his show? Bought Facebook ‘LIKES’?

    http://www.alternet.org/newsandviews/article/1026763/rush_limbaugh%27s_phony_empire_exposed/#paragraph3
    If you’ve ever listened to a right-wing talk show and were impressed that a caller teed up a perfect swing for the talk show host, you may have been listening to a setup. For example, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Mark Levin and Glenn Beck are syndicated by a company called Premiere Networks. That very company has a secretive voice talent hiring service called Premiere On Call with an ironclad confidentiality agreement:
    “By joining this roster/agreeing to perform work for Premiere you are also agreeing to keep the type of work that you perform confidential. This applies to information acquired while working for Premiere or any of its affiliates.
    Disclosure to any third party, sharing project information or publicizing(including via social media) may be considered grounds for dismissal or further action”

    and

    So why would Rush fake Facebook likes, perhaps buy Twitter followers and then not use Twitter, and possibly hire phony callers to tee up his talking points? One possible reason is his demographic. Rush listeners tend to be male, white, and old. (I can say that; I likewise fall into that demographic.) Thus, Rush listeners tend not to be Twitter and Facebook users. What better explanation could there be for Rush launching these social media platforms to mainstream media acclaim, and then not using them?

    It would be _rich_ if it was discovered Rush has an incredibly small listening audience.

  74. Tony aka The Psychic Octopus says

    Waiting for this iteration of TET to die has made me wonder what the cut off is for the end of a TET or TZT thread? Length of time? Specific number of posts?

  75. says

    Waiting for this iteration of TET to die has made me wonder what the cut off is for the end of a TET or TZT thread? Length of time? Specific number of posts?

    Heh, funny. I’ve been wondering the same thing.

  76. Beatrice says

    Used to be 666 posts for TET, I’m not sure what it is now that we go for more than one page. And with PZ being so busy lately, the cut off is mostly when he has time, I guess.

  77. Tony aka The Psychic Octopus says

    I had to facepalm myself with both hands when I casually asked a regular bar guest/friend of mine whether or not she ‘believed’ in evolution (she had previously mentioned she was taking biology classes). I had meant it as a joke (I mean if you’re taking college level biology courses and you’re studying to be a dentist isn’t evolution applicable to both?)
    She then told me that she does NOT believe in evolution.

    Ouch.
    Ouch.
    Two facepalms later, my “at work gotta be professional and not confront people on their stupidity” side took over.
    Still.
    Really?

    I wonder…
    PZ (or anyone), how far could someone advance in the study of biology while refusing to believe evolution is real and (I’m guessing) rejecting everything it’s has provided a foundation for?

  78. ibyea says

    I wish the comments would go over the next page every 666 comments, instead of 500. :)

  79. says

    I had meant it as a joke (I mean if you’re taking college level biology courses and you’re studying to be a dentist isn’t evolution applicable to both?)

    When I started studying biology at university, there was actually a creationist student in my class. She left after a semester or so.
    By the way, isn’t Don McLeroy- you know, creationist and former member of the Texas state board of education- a dentist?

    PZ (or anyone), how far could someone advance in the study of biology while refusing to believe evolution is real and (I’m guessing) rejecting everything it’s has provided a foundation for?

    I don’t know. What I do know is that there is a creationist called Peter Borger, who apparently works as a molecular biologist in the Netherlands. Another dutch biologist, Willem Ouweneel, used to be a creationist (though he has since given up creationism apparently). So, there are creationist biologists out there, strangely. Something must have gone seriously wrong in their education.

  80. Tony aka The Psychic Octopus says

    Some interesting bits from The Guardian:

    Northern Constabulary advises would-be extras not to respond to adverts asking for a £60 deposit to appear in Wood Evil
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2012/jul/11/police-warning-horror-film-extras-scam?CMP=EMCNEWEML1355

    and

    Work is beginning to transform the area around Stonehenge from a “national embarrassment” into a tranquil setting for one of the world’s great prehistoric monuments.
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/culture/2012/jul/11/stonehenge-facelift-a344-english-heritage?CMP=EMCNEWEML1355

    Probably in top ten of the Bucket List…

    Trigger Warning*:
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .

    The minister for disabled people, Maria Miller, has called for a change in attitude and behaviour towards wheelchair users and other disabled people as one man said he was taking legal action against bus companies in London after being refused permission to board on 28 occasions.
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/jul/11/row-wheelchairs-buses-minister-attitude?CMP=EMCNEWEML1355

    Later in the article it is mentioned that some passengers would verbally abuse drivers of some buses if they attempted to assist a disabled passenger. That’s shitty.

    *Was it appropriate to place a trigger warning here? Sometimes I’m unclear if I should (which is when I usually opt *TO* put one in, just on the off chance. It’s not like it hurts the post if I label it as such, but it could be a benefit to a person whom it might).

  81. Tony aka The Psychic Octopus says

    pentatomid @118:

    I’m speechless.
    A creationist molecular biologist?
    Isn’t that an oxymoron of the highest caliber?

  82. Tony aka The Psychic Octopus says

    Ok, this is both good and bizarre.

    The billionaire philanthropist Melinda Gates, a practising Catholic, has thrown down the gauntlet to the Vatican and vowed to dedicate the rest of her life to improving access to contraception across the globe.

    Gates, who with her husband, Bill, the founder of Microsoft, is one of the world’s biggest players on development issues, predicted that women in Africa and Asia would soon be “voting with their feet”, as women in the west have done, and would ignore the church’s ban on artificial birth control.

    A highly visible (& influential?) and wealthy Catholic challenging the Roman Catholic Church’s position on contraception. Hmmm.

  83. birgerjohansson says

    Children with disabilities four times as likely be to victims of violence as children who are not disabled http://medicalxpress.com/news/2012-07-children-disabilities-victims-violence-disabled.html
    — — — —
    Climate Change. The Fear of the Physical Threat is Starting to Trump Ideology.
    http://bigthink.com/risk-reason-and-reality/climate-change-the-fear-of-the-physical-threat-is-starting-to-trump-ideology?page=all
    It might take another Hurricane Katrina to make people comprehend the urgency.
    — — — —
    Native American populations descend from three key migrations http://phys.org/news/2012-07-native-american-populations-descend-key.html
    I hope they will not re-bury “Kennewick man” so we can do DNA testing.
    — — — —
    Scientists place 500-million-year-old gene in modern organism http://phys.org/news/2012-07-scientists-million-year-old-gene-modern.html
    — — — —
    Making ‘renewable’ viable: Engineers develop new technology for grid-level electrical energy storage
    http://phys.org/news/2012-07-renewable-viable-technology-grid-level-electrical.html

  84. birgerjohansson says

    Amblebury,
    Thank you!

    — — — — —
    Regarding Triton;
    I think it is supposed to have started as a double planet from the Kuiper belt, passing near Neptune. The part of the binary travelling retrograde in its orbit relative the path past Neptune dropped below the local escape velocity, and got stuck in orbit.

    The outermost small moons of Jupiter are also believed to have started as binary asteroids. If we send sample return missions to them we could sample a lot of asteroid populations (and the original asteroids might have formed at solar distance that have now been cleared from orbital debris by the gravity disruptions of the outer planets).

    BTW I used to hope we would find a Mars-size or even an Earth-size planet in the “scattered disc” outside Pluto (quite feasible) but what can you do with a planet that is mostly water ice? At least Mars has a rock surface.
    I believe Io is the last big object to actually have a solid rock surface, and that surface is constantly changing because of volcanism.
    As for the Uranus and Neptune: There is not much you can do with a world with a superdense atmosphere and a crust made of a 10.000 km thick layer of high-density ice.

  85. Matt Penfold says

    It seems the free market has failed once more, this time in providing security personnel for the Olympics.

    G4S (a firm that provides security, runs prisons etc) won a £300 million contract to supply 10,000 security people for the games. A fortnight ago it seems it suddenly decided it could not bothered supplying them all. As a result the Government has had to order the army to supply personnel to make up the numbers. Some 3,500 soldiers, some of whom have just come back from Afghanistan and are due extended leave, will have to be re-deployed.

    One just hopes that G4S are made to cover the entire cost of providing the soldiers, and that the cost exceeds £300 million.

    BBC report here.

  86. Owlmirror says

    I always get agitated when a person says “if you could see within my heart”.

    If you could see within my heart . . . that would be a pretty cool superpower, actually, and you should join a cardiologist team and help them do diagnoses.

    OᴥO

  87. says

    PZ, according to the definition you posted in your video by Susan Jacoby, Tfoot could only be accused of contravening the principles of free thought if he presented an irrational argument. I have not seen evidence presented to support this.

    I may not attend atheist or similar conferences, but I do attend engineering conferences from time to time, and I cannot honestly say that I have witnessed more sexual harassment during these (after parties included), than in any other similar social venue outside of a conference, like a sports-pub etc.

    I cannot find fault with this core of Tfoot’s argument. Unless someone can present evidence that shows that sexual harassment increases at a social venue that is populated by a common interest group?

    Let me ask this…
    If one looks at the core of TFoot’s argument, which I see as, “I’ve seen no evidence that sexual harassment is more frequent at a convention (or within a common interest group), than in a similar social setting removed from a conference, or populated by people who do not share a common interest.
    Is there a problem with this foundation of the argument?

  88. says

    I’m speechless.
    A creationist molecular biologist?
    Isn’t that an oxymoron of the highest caliber?

    Well, you’d certainly think so, but there he is, Peter Borger. ANd his arguments are completely stupid (not that one would expect otherwise from a creationist). Basically he has taken the idea of ‘seperately created kinds’ and translated it into molecular genetics jargon. It’s all pretty ridiculous. As far as I know he’s not well known outside of the Netherlands, but in the Netherlands he’s a pretty big name in creationist circles apparently (or at least he was a couple of years ago).

  89. carlie says

    I do attend engineering conferences from time to time, and I cannot honestly say that I have witnessed more sexual harassment during these (after parties included), than in any other similar social venue outside of a conference, like a sports-pub etc.

    Are you male or female? That is extremely relevant to whether you notice sexual harassment that is going on.

    And the issue isn’t that these conferences have MORE sexual harassment than the average place, but that we expect BETTER THAN THE USUAL AMOUNT OF HARASSMENT from people who are supposedly rationalists. “Hey, come spend a lot of money to come to our conference, you probably won’t be harassed any more than you usually are” isn’t really a very good marketing strategy, is it?

    Besides, TF was saying shit that was really negative. FtB didn’t want to have an employee who alienated a large portion of their clientele. You can think about it as simply as that if you want to.

  90. says

    If one looks at the core of TFoot’s argument, which I see as, “I’ve seen no evidence that sexual harassment is more frequent at a convention (or within a common interest group), than in a similar social setting removed from a conference, or populated by people who do not share a common interest.
    Is there a problem with this foundation of the argument?

    Well the problem with thunderfoot was that noone – not PZ, not Rebecca Watson – was claiming that sexual harassment was more common at conferences than elsewhere in society. Noone at all. Thunderf00t was pretending that that was what PZ and others were basing their arguments for harassment policies on, therefore Tfoot was either horribly ill-informed (in wich case his opinion is worthless) or dishonest (which would make him an asshole). Also, even if that was all Thunderf00t’s argument was, how the fuck is that an argument against harassment policies? Many hotels, bars, non-atheist/skeptic conferences have had harassment policies for years. And, let’s face it, sexual harassment is pretty damn common everywhere, including conferences. Besides, why settle with ‘not worse than average’ when we can strive to be better?
    And than off course, there’s the matter of Tfoot making it out as if PZ and the rest were saying that to get consent to do anything at all, you’d have to go ‘fill out forms in triplicate’ or go through some other formal procedure. Again something noone ever proposed.

  91. Matt Penfold says

    PZ, according to the definition you posted in your video by Susan Jacoby, Tfoot could only be accused of contravening the principles of free thought if he presented an irrational argument. I have not seen evidence presented to support this.

    Well if you have not bothered looking, you wouldn’t would you ? Admitting to wilful ignorance is not very clever.

    I may not attend atheist or similar conferences, but I do attend engineering conferences from time to time, and I cannot honestly say that I have witnessed more sexual harassment during these (after parties included), than in any other similar social venue outside of a conference, like a sports-pub etc.

    No one has been claiming that there is more harassment at atheist/sceptic conferences. Deliberate deceit on your part is not very clever either.

    I cannot find fault with this core of Tfoot’s argument. Unless someone can present evidence that shows that sexual harassment increases at a social venue that is populated by a common interest group?

    Again, you are being deliberately dishonest here. No one has claimed there is more harassment, just that harassment takes place. Thunderfoot declared that such harassment was not a problem. Given he is not the typical target of sexual harassment, he showed a cavalier disregard to those who are. It seems you share his disdain for the victims of sexual harassment.

    Let me ask this…
    If one looks at the core of TFoot’s argument, which I see as, “I’ve seen no evidence that sexual harassment is more frequent at a convention (or within a common interest group), than in a similar social setting removed from a conference, or populated by people who do not share a common interest.
    Is there a problem with this foundation of the argument?

    Yes, there is problem with it, and that no one has claimed harassment is more frequent. You are lying when you say they have.

    Would you like to explain why you have lied ? And just why you thought you could get away with it (simple ignorance must ruled out, no one can be that obtuse) ?

  92. Matt Penfold says

    Are you male or female? That is extremely relevant to whether you notice sexual harassment that is going on.

    His Facebook page reveals him to be male.

  93. says

    Hello there

    Oenotrian

    My eldest was born at exactly 37 weeks, and because of circumstances, we knew precisely when the date of conception was.

    Do you know the date of conception or that of happy adult entertainment? Cause there can be some days between that.
    Funny enough, I rememeber exactly when and how #1 was made while Mr. remembers the little one :)

    Good luck for your mum. My grandpa had a pacemaker and he lived very well with it.

    +++++
    Ahhh, talking about mums, mine has another “episode”. Her former boss (a wonderful woman and a superior as you would wish for) has died (fuck cancer) and now she has a good reason to stay in bed (near the bottles) and not go to work. And the best is my dad who has announced sarcastically to my sister that he’s going to drown himself now.
    Fucking asshole, I have to say. Where was he a year ago when his daughters were trying to change things, when his daughters were talking about the situation and the alcohol? Oh right, he was right behind our mum, backed her up, denied her alcoholism and told us after every fucking time that this time things would change. Now that it might be too late he’s annoyed.

  94. says

    Depressing news here in Russia. First, the criminalization of even saying the word “gay” in public is outlawed here, in beautiful SPb (where there are still huge dance clubs and a Michigan Festival-ish camping trip I went to last month).

    I’ve had a LiveJournal for the last 11 years, though I sort of gave it up in the last two (my gf’s blog is very popular and she says things better than I do, with photos–my linked name is to her journal). I just read this:

    Живой Журнал за свободу информации:

    On the 11th of July Russian State Duma held the second reading of the amendments to the Law “On Information, Information Technologies and Protection of Information.” LiveJournal is holding a protest against proposed amendments, as they can result in the creation of censorship in the Russian segment of the Internet, which is prohibited by the Constitution of the Russian Federation.

    What are these amendments about?

    Amendments shall be adopted within the framework of the Bill № 89417-6 – the Bill ‘on childrens’ protection from information harmful to their health and development’. The Bill would create a blacklist of blocked internet sites and proposes several other changes to the law, including liability for telecom service providers for failing to protect children.
    How does this lead to the censorship on the Internet?

    Lobbyists supporting the amendments argue that these amendments are directed only against illegal or inappropriate content for children.

    However, the system of blocking such content does not apply any appeals or procedures for reconsideration. The lack of restrictions to this law make it hard to interpret the proposed amendments as anything other than censorship.

    In practice this means that a provider will be able to block a certain site on ministerial orders without a court’s judgment. We believe that the amendments to the law can lead to censorship in the Russian segment of the Internet, creating a black list, stop-lists and blocking certain sites. Unfortunately, the practice of law in Russia indicates a high probability of the worst-case scenario.

    I love how you never hear about this stuff beforehand in Russia. It’s always in hindsight, and I watch the news fairly rapturously.

    I’ll be interested in seeing how this plays out. It’s never on the up-and-up here so it will be used nefariously. (Believe me, I know. I’ve spent the last year and a half trying for Russian residency and palm-greasing is a requirement.)

  95. Forbidden Snowflake says

    Tfoot could only be accused of contravening the principles of free thought if he presented an irrational argument. I have not seen evidence presented to support this.

    Wait, is the mighty logical chain “my dumbass fans say you’re wrong” –> “the skeptical movement says you’re wrong” –> “you’re wrong” not an irrational argument?

  96. Matt Penfold says

    Wait, is the mighty logical chain “my dumbass fans say you’re wrong” –> “the skeptical movement says you’re wrong” –> “you’re wrong” not an irrational argument?

    Only in the minds of the rational. If you are a Thunderfoot fan it constitutes overwhelming evidence your hero is right.

  97. says

    That is honestly an honest answer I can appreciate.
    If you don’t like the guy, say so.
    I just can’t understand the need to dress it up as per PZ’s response.
    I mean, it should be as simple as “We don’t like you, because your views/arguments could/would offend our clientele. GTFO.”

    I do of course have some criticism of such a stance, but I do appreciate it’s honesty.

  98. echidna says

    Leonde:

    Tfoot could only be accused of contravening the principles of free thought if he presented an irrational argument. I have not seen evidence presented to support this.

    Presenting that dishonest graph, claiming the authority of a research scientist while doing so, contravenes the principles of free thought quite convincingly.

  99. says

    “Besides, TF was saying shit that was really negative. FtB didn’t want to have an employee who alienated a large portion of their clientele.” – carlie

    That is honestly an honest answer I can appreciate.
    If you don’t like the guy, say so.
    I just can’t understand the need to dress it up as per PZ’s response.
    I mean, it should be as simple as “We don’t like you, because your views/arguments could/would offend our clientele. GTFO.”

    I do of course have some criticism of such a stance, but I do appreciate it’s honesty.

  100. says

    Anyway, that was not what I initially logged into Pharyngula to say!

    I feel like I always drop in here like a пух* and then disappear. It’s because I generally have terrible wifi. Not at home, but I’m rarely at home. Now I am at home.

    This is what I wanted to say:

    .

    Audley — Besides the fact that I’m thrilled you’re soon to have a child, I must thank you immensely for your long-time-ago recommendation of Dragon Age: Origins. I love that game SO much and have played it in every available incarnation. (I just hate The Fade.)

    .

    Katherine — Your situation really hits me in the heart. I am a cis-woman but I worked as a merchandising manager in a huge book store in San Francisco for years. There were at least a dozen transwomen on my staff (and correct me if I’m not using the term you want to use for yourself).

    One day, as I was cashiering with Mary-Jane, I heard three customers call her “sir” as they took their change. Not blithely, but passive-aggressively. I intervened to the best of ability, but it likely was not enough. Of course, it wasn’t enough. I was dumbfounded, frankly. I’d never had to deal with that before. (Yes, I’m a lesbian and I got “sir”ed all the time because I was more butch than not but it’s not the same.)

    The fourth customer to do so was greeted with Mary-Jane slamming her drawer shut and shouting, in her Irish brogue, “Fuck you, you motherfucker and drop dead!”

    I was not in charge of scheduling but I took Mary-Jane off the register and into the back where I let her off for the day, paid, of course. The store manager told me I had to fire her the next day. I refused. I knew they wouldn’t fire me so they acquiesced, their “provision” being she never worked register again. Yes! Exactly! Keep her out of ignorant people’s vitriol and all will be well.

    That still makes me nearly vomit when I think about it. And I was only a peripheral participant. I hate people.

    .

    Caine — Oh wow. 26. If I were there, I’d take a few off your hands (easy to say when I’m a continent away). My Meena only had eight babies, and I thought that was a lot. It’s been years since I had rats and those photos of the babies make me WANT.

    My best to you as always. I hope all works out and the babies find human parents like you.

    .
    .
    .

    *fluff. Saint Petersburg is covered with fluffs from certain trees (I tried looking them up but my Russian to English google-fu is very weak) during the early summer. It’s the summer snow.

  101. says

    Leonde,

    Have you not read any of the responses given? Thunderf00t was dishonest, refused to look at evidence and used a scientifically worthless poll. That is not rational. That is not in line with Freethought. It has nothing to do with liking the guy or not.

  102. John Morales says

    leonde:

    If you don’t like the guy, say so.
    I just can’t understand the need to dress it up as per PZ’s response.

    If it ain’t “no Sir, I don’t like it” it’s too much for you?

    (The obvious reason it’s “dressed up” is because a basis was given for his lack of merit at FTB and his consequent eviction, not because of liking or otherwise)

  103. Matt Penfold says

    That is honestly an honest answer I can appreciate.
    If you don’t like the guy, say so.
    I just can’t understand the need to dress it up as per PZ’s response.
    I mean, it should be as simple as “We don’t like you, because your views/arguments could/would offend our clientele. GTFO.”

    It is not dressed up. Thunderfoot said and did the things PZ says he did.

    And please, you need to explain why you felt the need to lie. No one has claimed that there is more harassment at atheistic/sceptic conferences. That was a lie on your part, and not even an original one. You know it is it a lie, we know it is a lie, you are fooling no one, so why keep up the pretence ?

  104. says

    “Noone at all. Thunderf00t was pretending that that was what PZ and others were basing their arguments for harassment policies on, therefore Tfoot was either horribly ill-informed (in wich case his opinion is worthless) or dishonest (which would make him an asshole). Also, even if that was all Thunderf00t’s argument was, how the fuck is that an argument against harassment policies? Many hotels, bars, non-atheist/skeptic conferences have had harassment policies for years. And, let’s face it, sexual harassment is pretty damn common everywhere, including conferences. Besides, why settle with ‘not worse than average’ when we can strive to be better?” – Pentamoid

    Apologies, I’m not getting the block quote tag to work as intended.

    But don’t all bars already have anti-harassment policies encapsulated in the “right of admission reserved” boards above the doors of all bars?

    I would agree that conferences could benefit from that line simply printed on the ticket bought.
    Or would you want specifically stipulated rules of admission?

  105. Matt Penfold says

    But don’t all bars already have anti-harassment policies encapsulated in the “right of admission reserved” boards above the doors of all bars?

    Many do. So what ?

    And you still have not explained why you lied. The longer you go without doing so, the more dishonest you look. At the moment you just come across as clueless sexist arsehole, but you are rapidly heading towards total lying scumbag territory.

  106. Vilém Saptar says

    weakswimmer:

    At a bank worked a man called Mr. Paddywack. One day, a ceramic frog came in to get a loan, but Mr. Paddywack wasn’t sure if the frog qualified for the loan. He talked to his boss about it, and the boss replied, “It’s a nicknack, Paddywack. Give the frog a loan.”

    Um, explain please?
     
    portia,
    Welcome! I thought of Merchant of Venice too.
     
    Caine,
    Qyoot ratlet deja vu; your ratties are lucky they live in a condo :)
     
    Tony,

    Ah, if only the trolls following PZ around could learn this lesson…they could be on the ‘winning side’…part of the cool kids…among elite company.

    Aw, thanks!
    And yeah Melinda Gates said the same thing on Colbert too, recently.

  107. says

    “And please, you need to explain why you felt the need to lie. No one has claimed that there is more harassment at atheistic/sceptic conferences. That was a lie on your part, and not even an original one. You know it is it a lie, we know it is a lie, you are fooling no one, so why keep up the pretence ?” – Matt Penfold

    Apologies, I’m battling to keep up.
    And again apologies.
    It was not an intentional lie.
    In my opinion, and yes it’s only my opinion, creating rule-set for the attendance of a conference would imply that the specific rules contained therein would be based on actual past events that occurred that we want to avoid in future.

    Why would a conference have rules and regulations regarding behavior that is not a problem? “Keep off the grass” is a sign one uses because you have had issues with people that walk frequently over a patch of grass and trample it. Hence all lawns do not have the sign.

    So if a conference wants to specify rules around sexual harassment (or a group of people wants a conference organizer to do so), I drew the conclusion that this must mean that sexual harassment is a common problem at conferences.

  108. says

    Leonde,

    But don’t all bars already have anti-harassment policies encapsulated in the “right of admission reserved” boards above the doors of all bars?

    So what?

    And what the hell would be wrong with a clear definition of harassment, so that no dispute is possible? Honestly why do some people object to a harassment policy? If you’re not planning on harassing people, why have a problem with a fixed, clearly defined policy put in place?

    Also, you might want to check what such a policy actually is. For example:

    http://www.centerforinquiry.net/news/center_for_inquiry_announces_policy_on_hostile_conduct_harassment_at_confer/

    or

    http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2012/06/26/the-american-atheists-code-of-conduct/

    Because they’re certainly not the thing Tf00t is making them out to be.

    And BTW, the name’s pentatomid, not pentamoid (don’t worry about that, though. Most people make that mistake at some point. I don’t know why.

    Also: blockquotes are done like this:

    [blockquote]blablabla[/blockquote], but with the [ replaced by <

  109. says

    “And you still have not explained why you lied. The longer you go without doing so, the more dishonest you look. At the moment you just come across as clueless sexist arsehole, but you are rapidly heading towards total lying scumbag territory.”

    Apologies again. English is not my first language, so it does take me some time to try and get to the right words I want to use. Like “rules” or “laws” are not the correct words for the rules of attending a conference, but it’s the closest I could get.

  110. Matt Penfold says

    It was not an intentional lie.

    Yes it was. You have claimed that people have been saying there more harassment at atheist/sceptic conferences than there is generally. No one has made that claim. You have not offered any evidence to support that claim.

    So again, why did you lie ?

  111. says

    So if a conference wants to specify rules around sexual harassment (or a group of people wants a conference organizer to do so), I drew the conclusion that this must mean that sexual harassment is a common problem at conferences.

    So, you’d only enforce rules when something bad has already happened, rather than make sure it doesn’t happen in the first place? Okaaaaay…
    Besides, harassment at conferences does happen. It’s not at all uncommon. We’re just saying that it’s not necessarily more common at conferences than anywhere else.

  112. Vilém Saptar says

    Also,
    Hello all
     
    Gilliel,

    Now that it might be too late he’s annoyed.

    I’m sorry about your mum’s episode, but what do you mean too late, if you don’t mind me asking?

  113. says

    ‘enforce rules’ was probably a poor choice of words on my part in my previous comment. ‘put rules/a policy in place’ would have been better.

  114. Gnumann, quisling of the MRA nation says

    @ Leonde: why haven’t you answered Matt Penfold’s question? Do you really feel you have the right to ask people questions when you’re not answering theirs?

  115. says

    Yes it was. You have claimed that people have been saying there more harassment at atheist/sceptic conferences than there is generally. No one has made that claim. You have not offered any evidence to support that claim.

    So again, why did you lie ?

    As stated in my previous post, I drew the conclusion from the “need” to include rules against it.

    If people that attend conferences do not tend to park eachother in the parking lot, I would not expect a rule “Please note, that if you park another person in, your vehicle will be towed”, at a conference where this does not happen often.

    If there isn’t a problem, or if the problem is small, I do not see the need for pre-emptive rule.

  116. says

    So, you’d only enforce rules when something bad has already happened, rather than make sure it doesn’t happen in the first place?

    Yes.
    I have not seen rules and policies at conferences that encompass every foreseeable negative interaction.

  117. says

    @ Leonde: why haven’t you answered Matt Penfold’s question? Do you really feel you have the right to ask people questions when you’re not answering theirs?

    I’m sorry, but I thought I have explained? Is it not to satisfaction?

  118. says

    Villém

    I’m sorry about your mum’s episode, but what do you mean too late, if you don’t mind me asking?

    No, I don’t mind.
    It might be too late for her to pull around. I don’t know how her liver and pancreas look like (and she makes sure nobody does), but i know that her mind is already showing severe signs of decay and it is very likely that even if the rest of her body might be saved, there’s already extensive damage to her brain.

  119. says

    So, er, I went out and got one of those, ahem, Mac thingies today. Not the retina display one, mind you, can’t get it for weeks here in Australia, and it’s too expensive anyway. But a Macbook Air, just to satisfy my curiosity about the whole Mac business. (Btw, I looked at the 2880×1800 display of those new Macbooks and was like, “yeah, so where’s the retina display?”, apparently not an uncommon reaction, from what the sales person told me)

    Then I drove home from the shopping center and got a flat tyre. It was raining. And there was no way the nuts on the tyre would budge. It went downhill from there.

  120. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls says

    If there isn’t a problem, or if the problem is small, I do not see the need for pre-emptive rule.

    Where is your evidence that harassment is a “small problem”? All of TF’s sycophants fail to provide any such EVIDENCE, which makes me wonder if there is any to back up that assertion. They simply repeat unevidenced claims and OPINIONS. Whereas evidence was presented here that harassment occurs, is not a little problem, and it drives women away from attending conferences.

  121. Gnumann, quisling of the MRA nation says

    If there isn’t a problem, or if the problem is small, I do not see the need for pre-emptive rule

    Hey – lackwit. Stop trying to interprent what people are saying. You’re either dishonest or so bad at it you got no place here.

    No-one has said there isn’t a problem (not counting trolls and the ignorant here of course). And no-one has said it’s a special problem for conferences.

  122. says

    Markita:

    Audley, it’s coffee that you don’t want to have while breastfeeding. Caffeine gets passed along.

    From what I’ve read (and Mattir confirmed), a moderate amount is okay. So I’m not going to go cold turkey right away.

    Krasnaya,
    You’re welcome! If Mr Darkheart ever finishes the games he’s playing (the latest DLC for Skyrim and ME3), I was hoping to play through DA one more time before the spawn pops out!

  123. Beatrice says

    If there isn’t a problem, or if the problem is small, I do not see the need for pre-emptive rule

    Let us assume for a moment that you are right and that no problem exist. Why does the rule bother you then? It will be there, there will be no need for it. No nothing. Words on the paper. Why would it bother you?

  124. says

    Besides, harassment at conferences does happen. It’s not at all uncommon. We’re just saying that it’s not necessarily more common at conferences than anywhere else.

    But is it not illegal in the US? Sexual harassment?
    It is here in South Africa.
    Hence we do not have redundant rules at conferences like, don’t commit murder while at the conference.

    The “strong perfume” “rule” is a perfect example of a “rule” I would expect to see at a conference.

    Could I ask this?
    Do you believe that including a sexual harassment clause in the “rules” of a conference will reduce the amount of sexual harassment at a conference, or at the venues such a group visits after the conference?

  125. Forbidden Snowflake says

    But don’t all bars already have anti-harassment policies encapsulated in the “right of admission reserved” boards above the doors of all bars?

    I would agree that conferences could benefit from that line simply printed on the ticket bought.

    If you get kicked out of your neighborhood bar and it feels kind of unfair and arbitrary, it’s still no big deal.
    If you get kicked out of a conference for which you have spent thousands of money and traveled across the country, then it is a big deal and you have the right to know just what rule did you break. In order to have the right to kick people out who didn’t do something downright criminal, a conference needs to have a publicly-announced policy.
    Also:

    In my opinion, and yes it’s only my opinion, creating rule-set for the attendance of a conference would imply that the specific rules contained therein would be based on actual past events that occurred that we want to avoid in future.

    If there isn’t a problem, or if the problem is small, I do not see the need for pre-emptive rule.

    So, first a policy is only needed if there were any incidents, then it’s suddenly not needed even if there are incidents, but the problem is small (for conveniently shifting values of “small”, I’m sure…). This is goalpost-moving on your part.
    And another thing to consider: how would you even go about estimating the prevalence of harassment without a document detailing what harassment is and how people who were harassed should report it? Saying that a policy isn’t needed as long as there is no estimate of the size of the problem is effectively trying to sweep the issue under the rug forever.

  126. says

    Yes.
    I have not seen rules and policies at conferences that encompass every foreseeable negative interaction.

    Look, even if no harassment has ever happened at a conference (which isn’t true, but suppose), harassment is common enough in society in general to take it into account when organizing a conference.

    If there isn’t a problem, or if the problem is small, I do not see the need for pre-emptive rule.

    We’re not saying that there’s no problem. We’re not saying the problem is small. We’re saying it’s not endemic to conferences. It’s as much a problem at conferences as it is outside of conferences and it’s a significant problem. The more so since it’s underreported.

  127. says

    So, first a policy is only needed if there were any incidents, then it’s suddenly not needed even if there are incidents, but the problem is small (for conveniently shifting values of “small”, I’m sure…). This is goalpost-moving on your part.

    Apologies again. I was thinking about the parkinglot manners.
    If one person a year gets parked in by some guy in the parking lot, I do not see a need for a rule by the conference to ban such bad parking manners.
    Nor do I see such a rule having an impact on a thoughtless person that just parks his car anywhere, so that other people cannot leave, because he blocked them in.
    Maybe I’m wrong, but I just can’t see that a person would modify such rude behaviour, just because a non-legislative piece of paper says he must.

  128. Forbidden Snowflake says

    If people that attend conferences do not tend to park eachother in the parking lot, I would not expect a rule “Please note, that if you park another person in, your vehicle will be towed”, at a conference where this does not happen often.

    Do you think it’s generally better for a parking lot not to display such a sign?

  129. says

    Woops, major blockquote fuck up. How the hell did I do that.
    Anyway:

    Yes.
    I have not seen rules and policies at conferences that encompass every foreseeable negative interaction.

    Look, even if no harassment has ever happened at a conference (which isn’t true, but suppose), harassment is common enough in society in general to take it into account when organizing a conference.

    If there isn’t a problem, or if the problem is small, I do not see the need for pre-emptive rule.

    We’re not saying that there’s no problem. We’re not saying the problem is small. We’re saying it’s not endemic to conferences. It’s as much a problem at conferences as it is outside of conferences and it’s a significant problem. The more so since it’s underreported, one of the things that can be countered with a decent policy in place.

    Also: did you check out the links to actual policies I provided?

  130. Vilém Saptar says

    leonde swardt:

    If there isn’t a problem, or if the problem is small, I do not see the need for pre-emptive rule.

    I think Pteryxx posted links to research that demonstrated how widespread and frequent this problem was at conferences of all sorts. I’ll try to find and repost them here.

    The fact that you, one person, went to a few Engineering cons, and didn’t yourself witness any harrasment or reports of harrassment, conclusively establishes beyond all possible doubt that harrassment “isn’t a problem” or “the problem is small”?
    Right.
    Nevermind all that data and research, you’ve seen it with your own two eyes, amirite?

    Because problems such as this, esp. because of underreporting by victims, (due to all the shit they have to then take) appear not to be all that widespread and frequent, doesn’t mean we shouldn’t give heed to what people who are raising these issues are saying.
     
    Before Tfoot went and did his post, he must have erred on the side of caution, looked at what was being said and then done some due diligence before marching right on and strawmanning left and right. He’s supposed to be a skeptic, after all.

  131. says

    We’re not saying that there’s no problem. We’re not saying the problem is small. We’re saying it’s not endemic to conferences. It’s as much a problem at conferences as it is outside of conferences and it’s a significant problem. The more so since it’s underreported.

    Do you feel, just as an opinion, I won’t hold you to it… But do you feel that adding a sexual harassment clause would reduce the number of sexual harassment incidents at a conference, compared to a conference that does not have such a rule?

    Would such an exact rule be better, or have more impact on the problem, than a general “right of admission reserved” rule?

  132. John Morales says

    leonde:

    [1] Could I ask this?
    [2] Do you believe that including a sexual harassment clause in the “rules” of a conference will reduce the amount of sexual harassment at a conference, or at the venues such a group visits after the conference?

    1. Stupidly redundant question, since you go ahead and ask anyway.

    2. Well, if attendees are aware of it it should reduce incidence to the extent only those who transgress either knowingly or inadvertently will do so, but the point is not so much its incidental reduction, but rather the change of status quo where doing such is an official transgression, not just poor ethics.

    (People will know they have the organisation on their side in these cases)

  133. Vilém Saptar says

    Also as PZ and all others have said repeatedly, just because this problem isn’t unique to Atheist/Skeptic cons doesn’t mean you shouldn’t address them. If anything, these cons must be the first to address these problems.

    To say they’re no different than any other cons is such a lousy ass defence.

  134. John Morales says

    leonde:

    Would such an exact rule be better, or have more impact on the problem, than a general “right of admission reserved” rule?

    Whence this purported dichotomy?

  135. says

    The fact that you, one person, went to a few Engineering cons, and didn’t yourself witness any harrasment or reports of harrassment, conclusively establishes beyond all possible doubt that harrassment “isn’t a problem” or “the problem is small”?

    I’m sorry, I didn’t mean for it to sound like I have never seen it.
    I’ve seen it, and we asked the bouncers to remove the gentleman, which they duly did.
    Typically, when I see a woman that looks uncomfortable, I simply ask her the question out loud, so that men (or the man) with her can hear. “Is this guy bothering you m’am?”
    That’s usually enough to get them to move on, without making a scene.

    But I cannot say that the problem is worse at conferences than at my local pub/restaurant that we might go to on a Friday night.

  136. Forbidden Snowflake says

    If one person a year gets parked in by some guy in the parking lot, I do not see a need for a rule by the conference to ban such bad parking manners.

    Why not? Whom would it hurt? Even if it won’t prevent incidents (though it probably will; people can be primed towards more moral behavior by a mere reminder of the existence of moral rules), it will prevent people claiming that their cars were towed without warning.
    The sign just hangs there. It doesn’t ask for food or anything. What is the problem exactly?

    Nor do I see such a rule having an impact on a thoughtless person that just parks his car anywhere, so that other people cannot leave, because he blocked them in.

    Psychological research says you’re wrong.

  137. Beatrice says

    But do you feel that adding a sexual harassment clause would reduce the number of sexual harassment incidents at a conference, compared to a conference that does not have such a rule?

    What do you think will happen?

    Since you are the one opposing I would love to know.

  138. says

    Apologies again. I was thinking about the parkinglot manners.
    If one person a year gets parked in by some guy in the parking lot, I do not see a need for a rule by the conference to ban such bad parking manners.
    Nor do I see such a rule having an impact on a thoughtless person that just parks his car anywhere, so that other people cannot leave, because he blocked them in.

    And the parkinglot would be better without the rule because… Because what exactly? This still isn’t an argument against harassment policies.
    And even if a harassment policy doesn’t change the harasser’s behavior, it ensures that the person harassed can feel safe reporting the incident and will be taken seriously.

  139. John Morales says

    leonde:

    I am sorry, but those words are beyond my vocabulary.

    You should be sorry, O incompetent one.

    (You’re on the internet, online dictionaries are a click away)

  140. Forbidden Snowflake says

    Would such an exact rule be better, or have more impact on the problem, than a general “right of admission reserved” rule?

    Hey, why didn’t you address the problem with “right of admission reserved” that I outlined in #168?

  141. says

    What do you think will happen?

    Since you are the one opposing I would love to know.

    Nothing.
    I think such a rule will have no impact on sexual harassment at conferences.
    I would much rather be the guy that steps in when I see a woman in trouble, and actually try to do something, than be a guy who waves the rules of the conference in another person’s face, who (in my limited experience) is usually drunk at the time.
    There’s a saying in south africa, in most bars that I’ll try to translate…
    Get drunk, get clever, get “bliksem’d” (crude language for get beaten up)

  142. Vilém Saptar says

    leonde swardt:

    But I cannot say that the problem is worse at conferences than at my local pub/restaurant that we might go to on a Friday night.

    Again. How do you know this?

    (Man, don’t you read?)

  143. Forbidden Snowflake says

    Typically, when I see a woman that looks uncomfortable, I simply ask her the question out loud, so that men (or the man) with her can hear. “Is this guy bothering you m’am?”
    That’s usually enough to get them to move on, without making a scene.

    Do you understand why a situation in which a woman depends on strangers intervening to stop harassment is not ideal?

  144. Vilém Saptar says

    Also, even if that were true….

    (You should be able to complete this sentence by now)

  145. says

    Hey, why didn’t you address the problem with “right of admission reserved” that I outlined in #168?

    Sorry, I’m falling behind a bit.

  146. Beatrice says

    Nothing.
    I think such a rule will have no impact on sexual harassment at conferences.

    See, we disagree there. But what I don’t get is why does the rule bother you if you believe it will have no impact, neither good nor bad. Why does it bother you if it just sits there uselessly?

    I would much rather be the guy that steps in when I see a woman in trouble, and actually try to do something, than be a guy who waves the rules of the conference in another person’s face, who (in my limited experience) is usually drunk at the time.

    What, does the rule magically stop you from playing a knight in shining armor?
    You can it still do it, but it would be great it the woman in question could then complain about the person who harassed her and that person could (if needed) be removed from the premises so that he doesn’t bother any more people. Or do you think it would be better if other attendees played bouncers? Now that would make situation more dangerous and unfair.

    And when you say “steps in”, what do you mean? Punch him in the face, challenge him for a duel? What would such a brave man like you do, instead of being a rule waving coward?

    There’s a saying in south africa, in most bars that I’ll try to translate…
    Get drunk, get clever, get “bliksem’d” (crude language for get beaten up)

    Oh. SO your stepping in would include violence. Admirable.

  147. says

    Forbidden Snowflake @157: It may be. I have to wait for my gf to get home so I can ask her. They certainly look like the пух trees. I cannot remember the Russian name for them right now so I can’t confirm. But thanks for looking that up!

  148. Beatrice says

    Argh, this time I preview.

    Nothing.
    I think such a rule will have no impact on sexual harassment at conferences.

    See, we disagree there. But what I don’t get is why does the rule bother you if you believe it will have no impact, neither good nor bad. Why does it bother you if it just sits there uselessly?

    I would much rather be the guy that steps in when I see a woman in trouble, and actually try to do something, than be a guy who waves the rules of the conference in another person’s face, who (in my limited experience) is usually drunk at the time.

    What, does the rule magically stop you from playing a knight in shining armor?
    You can it still do it, but it would be great it the woman in question could then complain about the person who harassed her and that person could (if needed) be removed from the premises so that he doesn’t bother any more people. Or do you think it would be better if other attendees played bouncers? Now that would make situation more dangerous and unfair.

    And when you say “steps in”, what do you mean? Punch him in the face, challenge him for a duel? What would such a brave man like you do, instead of being a rule waving coward?

    There’s a saying in south africa, in most bars that I’ll try to translate…
    Get drunk, get clever, get “bliksem’d” (crude language for get beaten up)

    Oh. SO your stepping in would include violence. Admirable.

  149. says

    If you get kicked out of your neighborhood bar and it feels kind of unfair and arbitrary, it’s still no big deal.
    If you get kicked out of a conference for which you have spent thousands of money and traveled across the country, then it is a big deal and you have the right to know just what rule did you break. In order to have the right to kick people out who didn’t do something downright criminal, a conference needs to have a publicly-announced policy.

    Is sexual harassment not a crime in the United States?
    Sorry, I’m really not familiar with your laws, but it most definitely is in south africa.

    So, sexual harassment is most certainly a criminal offense, and if a person wants to make a big deal of being kicked out of a conference, he could face criminal charges. Or just leave quietly.

  150. says

    Do you feel, just as an opinion, I won’t hold you to it… But do you feel that adding a sexual harassment clause would reduce the number of sexual harassment incidents at a conference, compared to a conference that does not have such a rule?

    Would such an exact rule be better, or have more impact on the problem, than a general “right of admission reserved” rule?

    Yes, I do think that harassment would be reduced with such a rule. For one thing, harassment would be clearly defined, and therefore there are basically no excuses for anyone guilty of harassment.
    Secondly, a harassment policy would ensure people felt comfortable to report incidents involvin harassment. As a result, harassers can be kicked out, making sure they can’t harass any more people in the conference. Hence, the policy makes the conference a safer place for everyone.
    Would such an exact rule be better? Probably, yes. For the reasons stated above.
    I still don’t see what you’ve got against a well thought out harassment policy. You’ve not managed to show one disadvantage that comes with having one, and you haven’t shown why your proposed ‘right of admission reserved’ rule would be better.

    I would much rather be the guy that steps in when I see a woman in trouble, and actually try to do something, than be a guy who waves the rules of the conference in another person’s face, who (in my limited experience) is usually drunk at the time.
    There’s a saying in south africa, in most bars that I’ll try to translate…
    Get drunk, get clever, get “bliksem’d” (crude language for get beaten up)

    Facepalm! The policy would not stop you from helping someone. It does, however, create a framework so that it becomes possible to report the person responsible and, for example, have him kicked out of the conference.

  151. Vilém Saptar says

    leonde swart,

    But I cannot say that the problem is worse at conferences than at my local pub/restaurant that we might go to on a Friday night.

    Try again?

  152. says

    See, we disagree there. But what I don’t get is why does the rule bother you if you believe it will have no impact, neither good nor bad. Why does it bother you if it just sits there uselessly?

    Just because such a rule would be redundant.
    Like adding a rule, “do not kill other conference goers”.
    It needlessly creates the perception that the problem is rife, and discourages women from attending such conferences.
    Just like Tfoot’s criticism of FTB would create the perception that FTB is not all that FT.

  153. Beatrice says

    Like adding a rule, “do not kill other conference goers”.

    Hm. Murder is generally frowned upon in society. Most of the time.
    Sexual harassment is, in theory, frowned upon, but when you dig just a tiny bit deeper you realize that people will usually bend over backwards in order no to acknowledge sexual harassment when they see it. They will make excuses and then rationalize their choices. So yeah, there needs to be a rule to make possible victims of harassment feel safer. To show that the harassment will not be tolerated. That if they complain, those complaints won’t be mocked and dismissed as it often happens.

  154. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls says

    So, sexual harassment is most certainly a criminal offense, and if a person wants to make a big deal of being kicked out of a conference, he could face criminal charges.

    Actually, I doubt if a cop would arrest anybody. That is your problem, you think there is back-up when their isn’t. Why do you find a pact with the organizers saying this shouldn’t be done to be troublesome? Unless, of course, you intend to harass women…Liberturdian illogic need not apply, as it is bullshit.

  155. says

    Facepalm! The policy would not stop you from helping someone. It does, however, create a framework so that it becomes possible to report the person responsible and, for example, have him kicked out of the conference.

    I have asked this of another poster as well…
    Does the US not have sexual harassment laws?
    If not, then by all means, all conferences would most definitely need a sexual harassment clause.

  156. Forbidden Snowflake says

    Krasnaya Koshka: their Russian name is тополь (plural: тополя).

  157. says

    Damsel in distress!
    Let me get to my mighty steed!
    Attack!
    And now kiss me, good girl.

    So acting morally and honorably warrants ridicule here?

  158. says

    How does this rule stop you from helping someone?

    It does not.

    Just because such a rule would be redundant.
    It needlessly creates the perception that the problem is rife, and discourages women from attending such conferences.

  159. Beatrice says

    leonde swardt

    I would much rather be the guy that steps in when I see a woman in trouble, and actually try to do something, than be a guy who waves the rules of the conference in another person’s face, who (in my limited experience) is usually drunk at the time.

    This part of what you wrote bothers me. How does the existence of a policy stop you from helping someone?
    And what do you mean with “steps in”? Why can’t that include having a conference rule to back-up you interference?

  160. says

    Huh? A sexual harassment policy is redundant?

    Sexual harassment is not a criminal offense in the US and if it were, considering how low the conviction rate for rape is, I doubt law enforcement would take victims seriously.

    Also, plenty of harassment policies in work and public places remind people not to get into fistfights. Is that too redundant, too?

  161. Vilém Saptar says

    leonde swardt,

    Like adding a rule, “do not kill other conference goers”.
    It needlessly creates the perception that the problem is rife, and discourages women from attending such conferences.

    WTF?
    First, harrassment is much much more common than killing at conferences.

    Second, there is no doubt-and-shame/blame culture associated with murders. Everyone treats them with a seriuosness that isn’t afforded to harrassment claims, which weirdly, is a problem, even though murder is a much worse crime.
    Note : I’m not saying murder = harrassment.

    Three, you’re an idiot.

  162. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls says

    Still no evidence presented by the TF sycophant that sexual harassment at cons is a “small thing”. The null hypothesis is that it is a “big thing” until you show otherwise with hard evidence. Which makes your whole line of “argument” especially specious, as it is nothing but lies and bullshit.

  163. says

    This part of what you wrote bothers me. How does the existence of a policy stop you from helping someone?
    And what do you mean with “steps in”? Why can’t that include having a conference rule to back-up you interference

    Because of the perception that having the rule creates.
    Just like the perception would be created if you still had Tfoot here.
    As it was explained to me earlier, it was about the perception that would be created, that was the reason Tfoot was banned from here. #130
    I would hate for women, that share similar views to my own, would stop attending these conferences, because the perception is created that they will be sexually harassed.

  164. Beatrice says

    It needlessly creates the perception that the problem is rife, and discourages women from attending such conferences.

    No. You know what it actually creates?
    It shows that harassment will not be tolerated. It shows women that the conference organizers care about them. That they will step in and make sure harassers are removed from the premises and not given a chance to bother anyone else there.

    It doesn’t discourage women from attending. If I could attend any kind of conference, I would be much more inclined to attend one with an anti harassment policy than one without. Because those with one show that they care. And not just abstractly or with empty words, but that they will take action if needed.

    This idiot is angering me. Keeps going in circles, ignoring all reason.

  165. Beatrice says

    No, I want to know how you would “step in”. I’m really starting to wonder what kind of shit are you up to. You made it seem as if your “stepping in” is somehow better than someone stepping in with a policy supporting their actions.

  166. echidna says

    So acting morally and honorably warrants ridicule here?

    Many a rescuer has required favours in kind. This is the moral, I believe, of Hansel and Gretel – the children had done nothing themselves to warrant the trouble they were in. They were vulnerable, making them easy prey for the witch.

    Helping others is a good thing, but it’s hard to do this without expecting gratitude.

  167. says

    I have asked this of another poster as well…
    Does the US not have sexual harassment laws?
    If not, then by all means, all conferences would most definitely need a sexual harassment clause.

    First of all, I’m not American and don’t know the details of the law in the US. Secondly, as I’ve mentioned before, sexual harassment is quite often underreported because the reports are often not taken seriously or, even worse, the victims are often blamed (whether by police officers, security guards,…). A clear policy would ensure people felt comfortable and safe reporting incidents in the knowledge that they’ll be taken seriously and that assistance can be called upon.

    So acting morally and honorably warrants ridicule here?

    Missing the point much?

    It needlessly creates the perception that the problem is rife, and discourages women from attending such conferences.

    Says a male… Who has little experience with conferences or sexual harassment… And is clearly clueless when it comes to the entire discussion that’s been happening… Hmmm?

  168. says

    Huh? A sexual harassment policy is redundant?

    Sexual harassment is not a criminal offense in the US and if it were, considering how low the conviction rate for rape is, I doubt law enforcement would take victims seriously.

    Thank you!
    And I stand corrected.
    I did not know that the US does not have laws against sexual harassment.
    We have several such laws in south africa, including constitutional rights to that effect.
    Hence we rely on those to safeguard women.

    All have my apologies. I was really under the impression that sexual harassment was a criminal offense in the US.

  169. says

    As it was explained to me earlier, it was about the perception that would be created, that was the reason Tfoot was banned from here.

    It wasn’t just about perception. As has been clearly explained to you a number of times now, Thunderf00ts behavior did not constiture freethought, therefore there was no place for him on FTB.

  170. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls says

    Because of the perception that having the rule creates.

    What perception? Why isn’t reasonable rules reasonable. All I hear from you is the immature “don’t tell me what to do”, but society can and will tell you what to do. So, what is your real problem?

  171. says

    Missing the point much?

    I must have. I’m just not smart enough to catch all the insinuations made here.

    I stated a good moral action, that I would expect any and every man to take if he witnesses sexual harassment of a woman.
    Then I got this as a comment on it.

    Damsel in distress!
    Let me get to my mighty steed!
    Attack!
    And now kiss me, good girl.

  172. echidna says

    I would much rather be the guy that steps in when I see a woman in trouble, and actually try to do something,

    I would rather have the policy in place so that I could smoothly look after the situation myself with the impersonal backup of the conference organisers, without someone needing to rescue me.

  173. says

    Audley @165: I’m also playing Skyrim but it’s not as “magical” to me as DAO. I would not have found Skyrim without you, too. :) You’re shaping my gaming in great ways.

  174. carlie says

    leonde swardt, the word is “proactive”. That means you have a set of regulations in place already so that if and when a problem comes up, you already have guidelines to go by. Piecing together regulations after the fact in response to specific situations is of course often done, but that usually leads to pretty shitty regulations that have loopholes big enough for a truck to drive through. Doing it beforehand, basing it on general principles of behavior that is wished to be encouraged, is a much more sound method and leads to better regulations, better enforcement, and better behavior.

  175. JAL: Snark, Sarcasm & Bitterness says

    At a bank worked a man called Mr. Paddywack. One day, a ceramic frog came in to get a loan, but Mr. Paddywack wasn’t sure if the frog qualified for the loan. He talked to his boss about it, and the boss replied, “It’s a nicknack, Paddywack. Give the frog a loan.”

    Um, explain please?

    It’s a joke, playing off of this children’s song, This Old Man.

    I think anyway.

  176. says

    Helping others is a good thing, but it’s hard to do this without expecting gratitude.

    Why?
    Why would helping for the sake of just helping not be the norm? Altruism?

    Any ways…
    I’ve been called an idiot enough for today.
    I was just trying to understand what you guys thought was wrong with Tfoot’s argument.
    I simply got called “idiot” lots, and got treated with hostility.

    I finally got a straight answer, sort of. That the US does not have sexual harassment laws, and that law enforcement in south africa is apparently better than that of the US, since they take those kinds of charges very serious here.

    It was worth the visit, and thank you for having me for this brief time.

  177. says

    Leonde swardt,

    Then I got this as a comment on it.

    >blockquote>Damsel in distress!
    Let me get to my mighty steed!
    Attack!
    And now kiss me, good girl.

    Yes, so I noticed, since I read the comments and all that… And there’s a good reason for that. You apparently don’t see how it would be better if the woman (or more accurately the harassment victim in general; the rules apply to all, after all) could rely on a framework of clear rules and the impersonal actions of the conference in stead of being dependent on the ‘good will’ of random strangers?

  178. says

    Why do you think we’re idiots, ls?

    I’m sorry, I never meant to create the perception that women are idiots, and I apologize profoundly if that is what came across.

  179. Beatrice says

    Look at my #217. Are you telling me the word idiot is the only thing you saw there? You know, besides where I explained why your perception of how women will perceive the policy is bullshit.

    You didn’t simply get called an idiot, you got detailed explanations of your idiocy.

  180. says

    So acting morally and honorably warrants ridicule here?

    Yes, because you show your utter cluelessness.
    Honourably? My dear, I shit on your “honour”. It’s what gives guys like you a kick, being honourable, helping those poor womenz. So much better than having a policy and instruments that grants women (and other victims of harassment) OMG rights! Because a woman who just calls security and has the effort dealt with in the context of a harassment policy doesn’t give you an excuse to feel all so good and *spit* honourable.
    You’re just like those USAssholes who oppose wellfare financed via taxation but who will generously give to charity, because paying your taxes just doesn’t polish your halo and makes you holier than you like giving to charity does. And it gives you fucking power, to have those women depend on your goodwill to rescue them. Because should you decide that the bitch ain’t shit you can just turn away.
    So, take your honour and shove it where the sun doesn’t shine.

  181. Gnumann, quisling of the MRA nation says

    So acting morally and honorably warrants ridicule here?

    Being a misogynic PoS and at the same thinking you’re acting morally always warrants ridicule.

    You come off like this “We should not level the playing field, women should throw themselves at my mercy instead”.

    That shit doesn’t fly very well.

  182. says

    I’ve been called an idiot enough for today.

    And with reason.

    I was just trying to understand what you guys thought was wrong with Tfoot’s argument.

    And you were given the answer to that from the very start, yet you dishonestly went with:

    If you don’t like the guy, say so.
    I just can’t understand the need to dress it up as per PZ’s response.
    I mean, it should be as simple as “We don’t like you, because your views/arguments could/would offend our clientele. GTFO.”

    Which isn’t anything like the responses you were given.
    When you start off being dishonest, you cannot expect people to act politely towards you.

  183. says

    I simply got called “idiot” lots

    You were note ‘simply called idiot’. People have explained everything very well to you. You apparently are to intellectually lazy to see it, though, which is sad.

  184. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls says

    I stated a good moral action, that I would expect any and every man to take if he witnesses sexual harassment of a woman.

    No, you didn’t. That moral action would be PREVENTING the harassment from happening in the first place. You are a fool if you think “saving” someone isn’t a pick-up line. That is why you aren’t and won’t get anywhere here. Your perspective is screwed up. Still no evidence shown that harassment is a “little problem”.

  185. Gnumann, quisling of the MRA nation says

    I’m sorry, I never meant to create the perception that women are idiots, and I apologize profoundly if that is what came across.

    I’m sorry. I can’t accept that apology. It means nothing unless you show some will to mend your ways. Being a clueless git that speaks of things beyond his moral and intellectual capabilities is a choice. You can change. (But no, it’s not our job to educate you).

  186. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls says

    That the US does not have sexual harassment laws,

    They do, but it applies to employers/organizations, not individuals. You keep on lying. Try looking up facts before you come to the shark tank. It helps your ego by keeping your mouth shut, and your foot out of it.

  187. Vilém Saptar says

    Ah, found ‘em.

    leonde swardt, here you go:

    http://freethoughtblogs.com/almostdiamonds/2012/06/01/how-big-is-the-problem/

    http://www.aauw.org/learn/research/upload/DTLFinal.pdf

    http://www.uiowa.edu/csw/reports/sexual-harassment/2004Sexual-Harassment-Survey-012306-ExecSummary.pdf
     
    About the getting called idiot thing, you did act a little thick, so you came off as one, so you got called on it. If you still feel offended, I’m sorry.
     
    And I think your claim about South Africa having laws or better laws aginst sexual harrassment while the US “not having” them, and the claim about harrassent claims being taken more seriously in SA, and the implied non-existence of doubt/shame/blame culture, is unsubstantiated, until you provide some supporting data.
     
    Patriarchy and rape-culture being as universal as they are, this is unlikely.

  188. says

    You apparently don’t see how it would be better if the woman (or more accurately the harassment victim in general; the rules apply to all, after all) could rely on a framework of clear rules and the impersonal actions of the conference in stead of being dependent on the ‘good will’ of random strangers?

    I am sorry, but you are correct, no I really don’t.

    Waving a useless piece of paper with a sexual harassment rule on it, in a possibly drunk man’s face, does not do anything to defuse the situation.
    Taking clear action does. Backing up a woman, so they guy knows that friends/society is behind her, gets results.

    Helping someone, even if they don’t ask for help, or atleast offering help.

    Paper is great, but it does no action.
    Don’t worry, she can help herself, rape is illegal. She has the law on her side. Is not the way to help someone.

    That might be what scares me most of all this.

    I almost get the impression of lazyness here. An unwillingness to get involved.
    Once we have a sexual harassment clause, we don’t have to step in and help a women being hit on at a bar during a conference.
    The clause is there! And we’re all equal opportunity. She can help herself with the clause!

    That’s a lazy bullshit attitude.
    Stuff the clause, help where you can.
    There are more serious problems that could use your thought and actions, than pieces of paper with useless clauses on.

    Rape is one of the most violent and despicable crimes, and it is not stopped by laws against it.
    The reason I use it, is because, worst case scenario, that is where such a situation could end up at. Such sexual harassment as under discussion here.

    And after the fact, it is no comfort to the victim that she should’ve cited the clause to defuse the situation.

    Get off your asses men, and stop trying to have conference rules absolve you of what is expected of you. Help and protect those in need. Anyone. If you can help, help. If you can’t, get someone that can.

  189. Vilém Saptar says

    JAL,

    It’s a joke, playing off of this children’s song, This Old Man.

    Thanks! I still dont get it, though. *scratches head*

    It’s probably, I dunno, because the boss puns with the poem’s lyrics? And whats with the “ceramic frog”?

    I’ll try again later.

  190. says

    leonde swardt @ 187:

    I would much rather be the guy that steps in when I see a woman in trouble, and actually try to do something, than be a guy who waves the rules of the conference in another person’s face, who (in my limited experience) is usually drunk at the time.

    When YOU see a woman in trouble? By that time (when YOU notice it), a woman is already way past her “trouble” point. You do know that women are socialized to be pleasant and non-confrontational? No? If she’s expressing distress, it’s HUGE distress.

    Why does the woman have to wait until she’s “in trouble”? WTF? Seriously, dude, rules beforehand would maybe help some women NOT get cornered. Unless you enjoy helping damsels in distress so that it behooves you to have no rules beforehand so you can “save” them.

    Blargh.

  191. Beatrice says

    Waving a useless piece of paper with a sexual harassment rule on it, in a possibly drunk man’s face, does not do anything to defuse the situation.
    Taking clear action does. Backing up a woman, so they guy knows that friends/society is behind her, gets results.

    It’s not a useless piece of paper. It allows the conference organizers to interfere and even kick the person out if needed.
    That is backing up that woman. That is what shows that the society has her back.

  192. Beatrice says

    Rape is one of the most violent and despicable crimes, and it is not stopped by laws against it.

    That’s it then. Let’s erase all the laws against rape. They’re obviously useless and they’re just stopping white knights like leonde swardt from helping women in need.

  193. Beatrice says

    Get off your asses men, and stop trying to have conference rules absolve you of what is expected of you. Help and protect those in need. Anyone. If you can help, help. If you can’t, get someone that can.

    Someone who can… Someone who can… Maybe someone who can kick the freaking harasser out because they have the anti-harassment rule to backup their decision?!
    Jesus, you are an idiot.

  194. Nutmeg says

    Tony:

    PZ (or anyone), how far could someone advance in the study of biology while refusing to believe evolution is real and (I’m guessing) rejecting everything it’s has provided a foundation for?

    There’s rumoured to be a professor in the Micro department at my university who doesn’t believe in evolution. Apparently he uses the principles of evolution to guide his research, but actually believes in creation.

  195. Pteryxx says

    Heya Vilém Saptar. My links were mostly about underreporting of sexual harassment, but they also describe it as common.

    Studies show harassment incidences such as 52% (over 10 years at university), or 90% (in the military), or approaching 100% (street harassment) depending on the venue and study construction. My cites are in the OP here:

    http://freethoughtblogs.com/lousycanuck/2012/06/02/the-further-hyper-skepticism-stalling-our-conversation/

    Others are in comments:

    http://freethoughtblogs.com/lousycanuck/2012/06/02/the-further-hyper-skepticism-stalling-our-conversation/#comment-63148

    http://freethoughtblogs.com/lousycanuck/2012/06/02/the-further-hyper-skepticism-stalling-our-conversation/#comment-63161

    Also see citations for chilly climate for women in STEM research… I *think* there’s mention within chilly climate research of sexual harassment and/or sexist treatment at professional conferences as part of the overall pattern making STEM fields unwelcoming to women. I don’t have a specific cite *for conferences* on this computer.

    However, it’s disingenuous to claim that conferences, or atheist/skeptic conferences in particular, must have LESS harassment than occurs everywhere else in society, especially with the established anecdotal reports and the lack of solid data from policies and reporting.

  196. Pteryxx says

    whoops, on refresh, Vilem beat me to it. *salutes*

    to leonde swarte:

    If I’m being harassed in a bar at a conference, I don’t want to have to depend on the kindness of strangers. I don’t know whether other folks in the bar are going to support me. If they do, I don’t know whether the folks supporting me are genuine allies, white-knight wannabes, jackalopes spoiling for an excuse for a fight, or what. If they are genuine allies, I don’t know if they have the knowledge or experience or ability to help me handle the situation — and I don’t want to put them in that position anyway. It’s not their job. They’re there to enjoy the conference, too. If I’m being harassed, I want to be able to turn to conference staff or volunteers, who have been trained in how to deal with these kinds of situations, and who have the authority to act. And I want the people attending the conference to know ahead of time that harassment won’t be tolerated.

    From Greta Christina.

    http://freethoughtblogs.com/greta/2012/06/27/so-much-wrong-part-3-thunderf00t-and-sexual-harassment/

  197. carlie says

    Waving a useless piece of paper with a sexual harassment rule on it, in a possibly drunk man’s face, does not do anything to defuse the situation.
    Taking clear action does. Backing up a woman, so they guy knows that friends/society is behind her, gets results.

    Ah, I think I see the problem here.

    The policy isn’t just for the woman in the situation, it’s for the conference staff and organizers as well. That way they know what to do when someone complains that they’ve been harassed. There are clear guidelines in place for what they should do in terms of reporting etc., and it gives them heavy (and legal) backup when they go to the guy and tell him to knock it off or he’ll get thrown out of the conference. And the organizers then can distribute and publicize the policy, thereby forewarning anyone thinking of acting like a jerk that there will be consequences to their actions and those consequences will be carried out. Having a clear, good, highly-publicized policy is backing up women so that they know that society is behind them.

  198. says

    Someone who can… Someone who can… Maybe someone who can kick the freaking harasser out because they have the anti-harassment rule to backup their decision?!

    Conference organizers cannot kick a man out of bar, even if he is sexually harassing a woman.

    Kicking him out of the conference the next day only makes sure that the same cannot happen that night. It does not retro-actively help the woman of the night before.

  199. Pteryxx says

    *correction: leonde swardt. Apologies for misspelling… not quite awake yet.

  200. Beatrice says

    leonde swardt,,

    Hm, rape in South Africa. Are you claiming that rape is a minor problem there? Since the laws are so clear and brave lads such as yourself are there to protect the ladies.

  201. Beatrice says

    Kicking him out of the conference the next day only makes sure that the same cannot happen that night. It does not retro-actively help the woman of the night before.

    And you handling that guy instead erases the past how exactly?

  202. says

    leonde swardt @244:

    Once we have a sexual harassment clause, we don’t have to step in and help a women being hit on at a bar during a conference.
    The clause is there! And we’re all equal opportunity. She can help herself with the clause!

    (clip)

    Get off your asses men, and stop trying to have conference rules absolve you of what is expected of you. Help and protect those in need. Anyone. If you can help, help. If you can’t, get someone that can.

    Because it’s all a men’s world and all men are in it and women are simply props. You sound, frankly, like a monster. Why can’t there be rules beforehand? Men are not animals, as you suggest.

    Like, wow, dude, really? Do you have any women in your life?

    If you see someone you care about (be they men or women or both), would you not try to help them if they were in distress? Or even people you don’t even know! (Criminy, I helped a family in Turkey find their lost daughter just this past weekend!) Why would a harassment policy lead you to such dire dis-empathy?

  203. says

    Hm, rape in South Africa. Are you claiming that rape is a minor problem there? Since the laws are so clear and brave lads such as yourself are there to protect the ladies.

    He’s probably roaming the streets every night to make sure he doesn’t get into an area where he might actually see some. And since you really can’t invade the privacy of the home, the rapists are safe there.

    Conference organizers cannot kick a man out of bar, even if he is sexually harassing a woman.

    They can kick him out of the fucking conference. Also, hotel bars are quite often locations that are included in the rent you pay the hotel. Conference organizers have right of admission there. I.E. private speakers parties etc.
    You are an idiot

  204. Beatrice says

    And did you miss all those explanation about how such a policy makes women feel safer?
    That’s what I would call one of the benefits of it.

  205. says

    And did you miss all those explanation about how such a policy makes women feel safer?
    That’s what I would call one of the benefits of it.

    Isn’t that like saying religion is good, because it makes believers feel safe and loved?

  206. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls says

    Waving a useless piece of paper with a sexual harassment rule on it, in a possibly drunk man’s face, does not do anything to defuse the situation.

    Citation need. Along with your citation to the evidence that harassment is a “small matter”. You, of course, do nothing to change the dynamic either. You are an evidencless idjit with a white knight complex. But you are a predator.

  207. carlie says

    Thanks! I still dont get it, though. *scratches head*

    It’s probably, I dunno, because the boss puns with the poem’s lyrics? And whats with the “ceramic frog”?

    Ahem. Puns run in my family – please allow me to translate.

    The longer and more obscure the setup story, the bigger the payoff in terms of the subsequent pun. The level of cleverness the pun achieves rises with each completely-unrelated-to-the-original-phrase word that can be shoehorned in it and still be recognizable by cadence and rhyme as the original phrase.

    As for this particular one, a ceramic frog is a doodad known in the states as a “knicknack”, something that is cute and has no actual purpose other than to sit around and look pretty. It being a frog is to rhyme with the original dog.

  208. Pteryxx says

    Conference organizers cannot kick a man out of bar, even if he is sexually harassing a woman.

    Actually they can, when the bar or event is part of the convention venue. They can also intervene with authority to tell the harasser to stop, revoke their con badge on the spot if necessary, or formally report to *the bar’s management*. Having a policy means *the conference* takes responsibility for stopping harassment, instead of leaving it up to interpersonal discussion between the harasser, the victim, and whatever other individuals might intervene for good or ill.

    Kicking him out of the conference the next day only makes sure that the same cannot happen that night. It does not retro-actively help the woman of the night before.

    And ensuring the same can’t happen the next day, or the next night, to the next victim, *or the same victim again*, are GOOD consequences devoutly to be wished.

    Now you’re just scrambling for excuses to hate on policies, leonde.

  209. Beatrice says

    leonde swardt,

    Except that the policy actually has a real influence on them and their safety. Which has been explained numerous times, you dolt.

  210. says

    But you are a predator.

    citation needed.

    Weird that in a community mentality, like encountered here, even moral actions are deemed suspicious.

  211. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls says

    Isn’t that like saying religion is good, because it makes believers feel safe and loved?

    Non-sequitor, avoiding your problem of lack of evidence that you are right. Why can’t you shut the fuck up? It is obvious you are simply trolling now.

  212. carlie says

    Leonde – harassment doesn’t just happen in bars. It happens in broad daylight during conferences too, albeit often in a more subtle way.

    And you’re still not getting it – Minimally, the staff person can remind the guy of the policy and that he’s noticeably violating it, and often just that much public light shed makes the little creep stop doing it. To get him out of the bar, the conference staff person can get the hotel bouncer (or the person being harassed can). And it’s a GOOD THING to kick him out of the conference, because then the harassed person doesn’t have to worry about running into the guy all the time for the rest of the conference.

  213. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls says

    Weird that in a community mentality, like encountered here, even moral actions are deemed suspicious.

    And why shouldn’t they be, when you want it to happen, so you can rescue and receive favors, instead of being prevented. You are a predetor until you show otherwise. By acknowledging the need for harassment policies.

  214. carlie says

    Ooo, and here’s another reason – suppose the conference guy is harassing a woman at the hotel bar who is entirely unrelated to the conference itself. Know who all will get pissed off at that? The hotel, who has to deal with this guy and might now look at the conference as a bunch of lugs and a liability to them and they might just not want to have them at their place in the future. And they would have legal standing to do so, if they can claim that previous incidents set the precedent that this conference requires extra security staffing that they can’t afford. If it’s clear that the conference staff will smack down hard on those guys, that sends a good message to the hotel and to other nearby people (such as that harassed woman) about the conference and its organization.

  215. says

    And why shouldn’t they be, when you want it to happen, so you can rescue and receive favors, instead of being prevented. You are a predetor until you show otherwise. By acknowledging the need for harassment policies.

    Since I was told that the US does not have laws against sexual harassment as portrayed here, I stood corrected, and made a post to that effect.
    That’s kinda long ago now already #221
    Before you convicted me of being a predator, and demanding that I prove my innocence.
    I love the way things work here…

  216. Beatrice says

    Krasnaya Koshka,

    Beatrice @248: Exactly. It seems he wants to dashingly “save” women.

    Yes, he is true gentleman. I’m imagining him throwing a glow at a harasser and challenging him for a duel.

    BTW, I’ve long been a fan of yours.

    0.0 *blush*

  217. says

    Ooo, and here’s another reason – suppose the conference guy is harassing a woman at the hotel bar who is entirely unrelated to the conference itself. Know who all will get pissed off at that? The hotel, who has to deal with this guy and might now look at the conference as a bunch of lugs and a liability to them and they might just not want to have them at their place in the future.

    That is the best reason I have read here for a need to have a sexual harassment policy!

  218. Pteryxx says

    Jadzia626: Some of the best posts come at the end of those long contentious threads. Excellent rant.

  219. says

    Tony:

    PZ (or anyone), how far could someone advance in the study of biology while refusing to believe evolution is real and (I’m guessing) rejecting everything it’s has provided a foundation for?

    On a dig as an undergraduate, one of my classmates told me that the Early Cambrian fossils we were finding had been sneaked into the ground by professors.

    That person went on to graduate school.

    I’d wager it’s possible for someone to get pretty damn far.

  220. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls says

    What is your real problem sycophant? I see two possible irrationalizations, either you can’t stand the idea of a piece of paper telling you how you should be behaving in society, or you are so tied up to your “save the damsel” bullshit you can’t see it is bullshit. What is your real problem?

  221. says

    Yes, he is true gentleman. I’m imagining him throwing a glow at a harasser and challenging him for a duel.

    Unfortunately I cannot prove that I am not a predator. Very difficult to prove a negative. Hence, by your social groups standard, I am indeed labelled a predator. Or a pervert, or whatever else they can pile on an expect me to prove I am not.

  222. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls says

    There is your problem…

    Actually no, since you haven’t supplied any third party evidence to back up any claim you have made. Which makes them irrationalizations. And you know that. Why keep lying to us?

  223. Beatrice says

    Kicking him out of the conference the next day only makes sure that the same cannot happen that night. It does not retro-actively help the woman of the night before.

    And you handling that guy instead erases the past how exactly?

    Since you way is obviously better than ours… Any comments?

    (I love how you ignore whenever you show yourself to be an idiot)

  224. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ says

    Waving a useless piece of paper with a sexual harassment rule on it, in a possibly drunk man’s face, does not do anything to defuse the situation.
    Taking clear action does. Backing up a woman, so they guy knows that friends/society is behind her, gets results.

    What you may not have realized is that knowing the sexual harassment rule exists and Is A Rule will help make more people more confident that they should back up the woman.

    It is a situational factor that makes helping behavior more likely to occur.

  225. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ says

    Waving a useless piece of paper with a sexual harassment rule on it, in a possibly drunk man’s face, does not do anything to defuse the situation.
    Taking clear action does. Backing up a woman, so they guy knows that friends/society is behind her, gets results.

    What you may not have realized is that knowing the sexual harassment rule exists and Is A Rule will help make more people more confident that they should back up the woman.

    It is a situational factor that makes helping behavior more likely to occur.

  226. says

    leonde swardt @264:

    And did you miss all those explanations about how such a policy makes women feel safer?

    That’s what I would call one of the benefits of it.

    Isn’t that like saying religion is good, because it makes believers feel safe and loved?

    WOMEN are just like the religious? WHAT? We’re women because we were born women. What’s wrong with making women feeling more comfortable in an increasingly woman-hostile world? How are we like religious folks?

    Oh, I see. leonde swardt “others” women like he “others” the religious. We’re all one big “other”. Only white males exist.

  227. Pteryxx says

    I think leonde swardt has lost flavor. May I suggest that further responses to him go into TZT?

  228. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ says

    Waving a useless piece of paper with a sexual harassment rule on it, in a possibly drunk man’s face, does not do anything to defuse the situation.
    Taking clear action does. Backing up a woman, so they guy knows that friends/society is behind her, gets results.

    What you may not have realized is that knowing the sexual harassment rule exists and Is A Rule will help make more people more confident that they should back up the woman.

    It is a situational factor that makes helping behavior more likely to occur.

  229. says

    Actually no, since you haven’t supplied any third party evidence to back up any claim you have made. Which makes them irrationalizations. And you know that. Why keep lying to us?

    And you keep building an argument in the most abrasive way possible, hoping that I’m gonna have some crazy emotional outburst, call you names, and leave in huff.
    Really? name-calling kinda loses it’s luster when I have to google what it means…

    I’m at the office, or getting ready to head home actually.

    I was just curious as to why Tfoot’s argument was considered irrational as per a definition given by PZ.

    I was told that it wasn’t really about that, but…

    Besides, TF was saying shit that was really negative. FtB didn’t want to have an employee who alienated a large portion of their clientele. You can think about it as simply as that if you want to.

    Other than that I simply asked questions about the prevalence of sexual harassment at conferences compared to other social gatherings.

    I was told that it was not more prevalent, but there was a need for a policy nonetheless.

    I later got a really good argument from carlie, that really made a lot of sense.
    And ofcourse the doctor’s explanation regards laws against sexual harassment in the US.

    So in a way I understand much better why the need for such a policy can be identified.

    You, ofcourse, didn’t really contribute anything to my understanding of the subject. And if I may allow myself some fallacies, as I do, I don’t really think you ever do. You’re the big bark, no bite dog. The empty can, that makes the noise and hurls the insults, but doesn’t add anything to a conversation that helps convince the other party of your argument.

  230. says

    WOMEN are just like the religious? WHAT? We’re women because we were born women. What’s wrong with making women feeling more comfortable in an increasingly woman-hostile world? How are we like religious folks?

    Oh, I see. leonde swardt “others” women like he “others” the religious. We’re all one big “other”. Only white males exist.

    I’m sorry, but I think you misunderstood my post.

  231. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ says

    Goddamn spam filter is eating my links to the Situationist blog.

    This is getting out of hand.

  232. Matt Penfold says

    As stated in my previous post, I drew the conclusion from the “need” to include rules against it.

    If people that attend conferences do not tend to park eachother in the parking lot, I would not expect a rule “Please note, that if you park another person in, your vehicle will be towed”, at a conference where this does not happen often.

    If there isn’t a problem, or if the problem is small, I do not see the need for pre-emptive rule.

    What the fuck are you on about ?

    I asked why you lied and said people had claimed that harassment was a bigger problem at atheist/sceptic conferences than in general. No one has claimed they have, so why did you say they have ?

    Now I ask again, for about the fourth time now, why did you lie ?

  233. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls says

    I was just curious as to why Tfoot’s argument was considered irrational as per a definition given by PZ.

    You didn’t listen to PZ. Otherwise, you would know.

    Other than that I simply asked questions about the prevalence of sexual harassment at conferences compared to other social gatherings.

    No, you trolled and provided no evidence or even evidence you were attempting to find evidence. And your OPINION is not evidence.

    I was told that it was not more prevalent, but there was a need for a policy nonetheless.

    And you provide no logical reason why such a policy wasn’t needed. You presupposed it wasn’t necessary. That shows lack of listening on your part.

    You, ofcourse, didn’t really contribute anything to my understanding of the subject.

    Actually I did, but you won’t acknowledge that. Who cares about your understanding, when you weren’t trying to understand, but only ridicule? Asking questions is a typical trollish response. You were trolling. Be an adult and admit it.

  234. says

    leonde swardt @292 – Okay, granted, it’s definitely possible.

    So explain.

    Thanks.

    It was said that one of the reasons for such a policy, no matter if it’s effective or not, was that it would make women feel safer.

    I am of the opinion that that would be a fantasy, similar to sense of love and security that religion gives to believers.

    A feeling of “being safer” is not grounded in reality. Feeling safer is not the same as being safer.
    So even though religious people can say that they feel loved and safe, because they are religious, it does not mean that religion has a purpose.

    So a clause to make people feel safer, is not a reason to have such a clause, if it is ineffective to yield actual results.

  235. says

    Actually I did, but you won’t acknowledge that. Who cares about your understanding, when you weren’t trying to understand, but only ridicule? Asking questions is a typical trollish response. You were trolling. Be an adult and admit it.

    There are more than enough of your fellow posters here that I had a very civil discussion with, and who convinced me that you do indeed need a sexual harassment clause.

    Why would I admit to trolling?

    Why don’t you simply admit, that you were wrong in your assessment that I am troll.
    That anyone who would come here and mention Tfoot, must immediately be a blind follower of tfoot, and thus must be here to troll.

  236. Matt Penfold says

    I am of the opinion that that would be a fantasy, similar to sense of love and security that religion gives to believers.

    Given how ignorant you. and how lacking in honesty, why do you think your opinion is worth anything ?

  237. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls says

    A feeling of “being safer” is not grounded in reality. Feeling safer is not the same as being safer.

    But it does help people make the decision to come. Anybody can see that who isn’t presupposed against the idea., like you are.

    So a clause to make people feel safer, is not a reason to have such a clause, if it is ineffective to yield actual results.

    Citation needed, as the document may have the effect of inhibiting certain people, or having some predators not attend. Then it is a positive effect. But then, that requires not presupposing a result and looking at the evidence, not what you want the evidence to be.

  238. says

    What the fuck are you on about ?

    I asked why you lied and said people had claimed that harassment was a bigger problem at atheist/sceptic conferences than in general. No one has claimed they have, so why did you say they have ?

    Now I ask again, for about the fourth time now, why did you lie ?

    Why would I bother to answer you if you insist on addressing me in such an uncivil manner?

    I have explained, what you perceived as a lie, twice already.
    Yet you choose to ignore it.

  239. says

    @ Tony:

    PZ (or anyone), how far could someone advance in the study of biology while refusing to believe evolution is real and (I’m guessing) rejecting everything it’s has provided a foundation for?

    Very far. Off the top of my head, I recall there was once a guest on the SGU podcast (Dr. Ray Greek, I think, who writes about the science of animal models) who explained that he kept believing in YEC even while in his final years of medical school, and that he only started doubting the biblical literalist worldview when he talked with people who do exegesis, who could challenge him on the dogma that the words in Genesis were straight out from the mouth of God.

    Learning how the Bible was written (and compiled over the centuries…) can be an eye-opener for the kind of clever believers very apt to rationalize away the evidence of the fossil record, of genetics, etc.

  240. Matt Penfold says

    There are more than enough of your fellow posters here that I had a very civil discussion with, and who convinced me that you do indeed need a sexual harassment clause.

    Their arguments were nothing that has not been said many times before. You need to explain why you were ignorant of them.

    That anyone who would come here and mention Tfoot, must immediately be a blind follower of tfoot, and thus must be here to troll.

    Well you did lie, and refused to even admit you did let alone apologise. That does not reflect well on you. YOu need to explain why you lied.

    Demanding answers to questions long answered is something trolls do. Lying is also something trolls do. If you object to being called a troll, stop behaving like one.

  241. says

    But it does help people make the decision to come.

    citation needed.
    Why is it that you can discuss the matter, and assert fact, and I cannot?

    I stated many time, in my arguments, “my opinion”. It does not carry any factual weight, but it portrays why I have/had my view point. And some people her accepted my viewpoint, and counter argued it, and convinced me.

  242. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls says

    I have explained, what you perceived as a lie, twice already.
    Yet you choose to ignore it.

    Why should we take your word for anything other than lies and bullshit? Your truefulness does appear to be in question due to obvious distortions of the truth, and ignoring of facts.

  243. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ says

    The Impact of a University Policy on the Sexual Harassment of Female Students

    http://www.jstor.org/stable/1982220

    Our survey results indicate that reports of faculty/staff sexual harassment of female undergraduates have declined over the past six years. Our analyses suggest that the sexual harassment policy and grievance procedure established at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst helped prevent faculty/staff sexual harassment of female undergraduate students.

  244. says

    Well you did lie, and refused to even admit you did let alone apologise. That does not reflect well on you. YOu need to explain why you lied.

    reference the statement / post# please?

  245. says

    You know how antiharassment policies aren’t like religion, ls? Religion is a fairy tale, whereas antiharassment policies make people feel safer because they allow for the enforcement of the rules. Policies have the power to change a given situation, whereas “God” does not.

    I’ve asked you this before, but I’ll give it another shot: Many harassment policies also include a clause forbidding violence. Since violent actions are already illegal, do you have a problem with an anti-violence clause being included as well?

  246. says

    leonde swardt @297:

    And so, if it’s no skin of your nose, why not do it?

    I understand you think that all men are pigs and won’t abide by it but most women would disagree. It would give pause to someone, maybe in the grips of alcohol, to think “Uh, maybe I should sleep it off”.

    And it would give women, the real people in the equation, a sense of “we have someone to report to”, “we know they have our backs”, “we don’t have to be alone” even if we don’t have leonde swardt as our white knight.

    Get it? I really, really don’t understand why you’re still here, fighting this. It doesn’t concern you at all.

  247. Matt Penfold says

    Why would I bother to answer you if you insist on addressing me in such an uncivil manner?

    Lying is not civi, and yet you have lied. Inflicting your ignorance on us is not civil either, and you have also done that.

    I will take no lessons from you in civility.

    I have explained, what you perceived as a lie, twice already.
    Yet you choose to ignore it.

    No you have not. Claiming you have is also a lie. Lying is something of habit for you it seems.

    Now explain to us why you claimed people had said atheist/sceptic conferences had more incidents of harassment than generally. You did make that claim, and that claim is untrue. You need to explain why you said. To date you have refused to do so.

    You need to stop being so fucking dishonest.

  248. says

    I’ve asked you this before, but I’ll give it another shot: Many harassment policies also include a clause forbidding violence. Since violent actions are already illegal, do you have a problem with an anti-violence clause being included as well?

    I think Carlie’s counter argument to mine, would cover that, nad I conceded the point.

    I can understand the need for a anti-violence clause as it could help with liabel. I hope I worded that right.
    That a anti-violence clause would give an assurance to the landlord of the venue.

  249. says

    You need to stop being so fucking dishonest.

    Nah. I think you’re now just playing a game with me, that I can never win, because you’ll either not allow me to explain, as you will not refer me to what you perceive as a lie, or simply reject my explanation outright.

  250. Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls says

    Why is it that you can discuss the matter, and assert fact, and I cannot?

    You can discuss, but only if you are prepared to consider yourself wrong. If you are only preaching, which you are, you aren’t discussing. Which you obviously aren’t, as you are wrong. But you, making the claims that go against common sense, like policies don’t discourage behavior, need to back up those claims with third party evidence. Or you need to retract those claims.

  251. Matt Penfold says

    reference the statement / post# please?

    Already have, but since you are clearly none to bright, here is what you said:

    I cannot find fault with this core of Tfoot’s argument. Unless someone can present evidence that shows that sexual harassment increases at a social venue that is populated by a common interest group?

    No one has made that claim that sexual harassment is increased at atheist/sceptic conferences. In fact, people have suggested the opposite is true, that incidents of harassment may well be lower at such events.

    What you said is not true. Further, you know it not be true.

    So you lied. I want you to explain why you lied. So far you have not done so, but you have lied about claiming you did.

    So stop fucking about, and explain why you lied.

  252. JAL: Snark, Sarcasm & Bitterness says

    But it does help people make the decision to come.

    citation needed

    Read the fucking threads on this! There were several women who came forward and said “No, I’m not going to TAM due to their treatment of women and sexual harassment”. There were threads about other conferences sexual harassment policies where women said “I feel better going knowing about their policy”.

    Good fucking lord. Go read and educate yourself. Not our responsibility to hold your hand and think for you when you come into our lounge talking bullshit.

    Go read the threads on this, you clearly haven’t. Are you too fucking lazy, intellectually dishonest or trolling?

  253. Matt Penfold says

    Nah. I think you’re now just playing a game with me, that I can never win, because you’ll either not allow me to explain, as you will not refer me to what you perceive as a lie, or simply reject my explanation outright.

    You refuse to explain. I have asked you repeatedly, and not once have you bothered to explain. So cut the crap and stop claiming I am not giving you a chance. You have had many chances, and you are too dishonest to take any of them.

  254. says

    So, if we’re looking at it from the landlord’s (and not the victim’s point of view) anti-sexual harassment policies keep the event organizers and the venue from getting sued. It helps with liability.

    Honestly, it’s a win/win/win. People are less likely to be harassed, victims have backup, and the coordinators have covered their own asses.

  255. says

    ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ

    I must apologize for other comments to you in the past. You hit a very hot spot on a very “hot” day and I was not fair to you. You probably don’t remember (I’m not a frequent commenter) but I immediately felt bad about my heated “conversation” with you.

    Do with that as you will.

  256. Beatrice says

    That idiot is still here?

    Did you finally read all the answers you got? Because you have been repeating you shtick after it has been refuted dozens of times. Fuck off already.

  257. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ says

    Krasnaya Koshka, I remember, and thank you.

  258. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain says

    I am waiting for the comedy styling of Nixon and the headless clone of Agnew.

  259. carlie says

    Having the policy does make women actually safer, because it lowers the amount of harassment that happens (see references other people provided) and gives them and everyone around them backup that helps them decide to speak up and gives them a way to have the harasser kept from them.

    The only reason I brought up the badmouthing/clientele thing with regard to FtB was that minimally, in the absence of anything else, that alone would have been justification enough to boot Thunderfoot. That wasn’t the main or only reason, but even that would have been enough, so there’s no support for the idea that he shouldn’t have been let go.

  260. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy says

    Ee! Once More With Feeling is the episode being reviewed at Mark’s today!
    (It’s not up yet. It’ll go up at 3pm Central. I’m just excited.)

  261. says

    Audley, YES! That is my kitten. He’s almost six months old and his ears are humongous! He’s a red-point Siamese so he talks all the time and is on me constantly.

    ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ: Thank you for accepting my apology. My rant that day had actually little to do with you and a lot to do with other people in my (internet) life at that particular time.

  262. Rey Fox says

    First you said this:

    Just because such a rule would be redundant.
    Like adding a rule, “do not kill other conference goers”.
    It needlessly creates the perception that the problem is rife, and discourages women from attending such conferences.

    Then when people pointed out that harassment policies do indeed make women feel safer, which would logically lead to more of them attending a conference, you said:

    A feeling of “being safer” is not grounded in reality. Feeling safer is not the same as being safer.

    Just in case you thought no one would notice your goalpost shifting.

    I may not be of the female persuasion myself, but I have to go with Greta on this one: I would feel much safer at a conference with stated rules than one of Leonde’s Wild West conferences where I’d be dependent on some third party witness who’s watching for whatever reason. And that’s if there even was a witness, because it’s not like harassers aren’t savvy enough to plan to do their shit when no one’s looking.

  263. says

    You may have seen news coverage of the guy who burned down his own house in Arizona, the guy who had an escape ladder at the ready, who used a scuba tank to provide oxygen during the escape, and who was a financial scammer. Something about the combination of hutzpah, stupidity and fraud pinged my mormon radar.

    I looked it up. Yep, the guy was a mormon. “Was” until he killed himself with what appeared to be a dose of cynanide, which he took in a courtroom.
    Link to ABC News story.

    …Michael Marin, 53, was convicted on Thursday of purposefully burning down his $2.55 million mansion in the tony Biltmore Estates neighborhood of Phoenix after he was unable to keep up with mortgage payments and a plan to raffle his house through a charity fundraiser failed. He faced up to 16 years in prison….

    Clad in scuba gear and breathing with an oxygen tank, Marin climbed down a ladder from the second floor of his mansion to escape the fire….
    Investigators determined he had set the home on fire from four different points using an accelerant. Twenty-eight phone books were also found near packing boxes, which were used as kindling for the fire…
    The 53-year-old had a taste for living large and was known for his eclectic interests. He was a self-published author. He owned and piloted a Cessna 310, had scaled Mt. Everest, served as a Mormon missionary and later as an executive in Japan, and was a diehard fanatic of the Burning Man festival….

    “We the jury, duly impaneled and sworn in the above entitled action upon our oath, do find the defendant Michael James Marin guilty of arson of an occupied structure,” said a foreman.
    Moments later, Marin discreetly popped something into his mouth and died.

    Former Wall Street trader, Yale graduate, collector of the works of Picasso, and guy who could not pay his mortgage is still a mormon, I guess, in the Outer Darkness.

    From ex-mormons commenting on the story:

    And, pray tell, why are so many rich Mormons up to their eyeballs in fraud?

    I was never a companion [missionary companion] of Mr Marin but shared an apartment for a few months in the Tokyo South Mission.

  264. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain says

    And, pray tell, why are so many rich Mormons up to their eyeballs in fraud?

    Well, it is a religion founded on fraud.

    Wait a second, aren’t they all?

  265. Richard Austin says

    Hrm, I think there’s another way to handle the value of the harassment policy:

    Whether or not it decreases the actual incidence of harassment, it makes people aware that harassment takes place at all – something that seems to be sorely needed (unfortunately) in many communities. Especially if such a policy details various types of harassment that will not be tolerated, it can be an educational tool as well as a safety and enforcement tool.

    Also, by explicitly stating a policy of non-discrimination, a conference helps to change the cultural tone of the group (if not society at large), even if such discrimination wasn’t taking place in that culture (though we all know it does), to include an explicit stance of non-discrimination.

  266. says

    Lynna, my grandfather was devoutly Mormon. But he prided himself in defrauding the government. He was extremely proud of Pinetop, Arizona as he felt his family had founded this place for Mormonism. That’s where he met my grandmother. They both were in court for as long as I knew them.

    “Bad court date. We lost $16,000. Good court date . We won $40,000. Bad court date. Grandpa has to go to prison. Good court date. Grandpa was only in for two weeks (not long enough to get a haircut!). Bad court date. He has to pay a $5,000 fine. Good court date. We won $165,0000!”

    I remember the last one the best because that’s when I got a real air hockey game.

  267. portia says

    Vilem –

    “Ceramic frog” can be replaced with anything that the hearer might afterward recognize as a “knick knack.” As in, the bank manager is telling his inferior that the customer is a knick knack, and therefore must be given a loan. The joke is probably better spoken, as the teller can speak rhythmically to evoke the tune of the song.

  268. Ogvorbis: Dogmaticus sycophantus says

    Hi, all.

    Sorry to be so quiet. I had a shitty night. Every damn time I write about what happened to me as a kid I remember something new. Something different. Something scary. That’s why I had to bail yesterday.

    Sorry to dump this shit on all of you.

    =======

    leonde swardt:

    Did it ever occur to you that having a strong, upfront, and very visible sexual harrassment policy at a conference serves to put the potential perpetrators on notice? As in, “If you plan to engage in activities which could be considered harrassment, either do not come or behave like an adult human being”? Or am I missing something?

    {{hugs}} and virtual liquor for Katherine, Ogvorbis, and Caine.

    What did I do this time?

  269. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain says

    Why did it take so long for NOM and the Banana Man’s acolyte to find each other?

  270. says

    Janine, I love your videos. Here is my favorite.

    I have Kate Bush tattooed on my left hand in kanji. I did it myself with a sewing needle and india ink. Never regretted it.

  271. carlie says

    I just called a friend to use the ceramic frog joke. I changed the name of the loan officer to Mr. Patrick Whack, and mentioned later that his friends called him Paddy, but it was all over as soon as I said the “whack” part. She knew right where it was going.

  272. says

    I am active today because I have steady wifi. Such a luxury. Plus, my gf is home. Double-luxury.

    I have not seen that video before but then I am in Russia so most videos are blocked to me.

    So thank you! I could actually watch and save that one.

  273. thunk, sadly not in gale crater says

    ah, me is threadrupt> Hello all:

    Leonde Swardt:

    Recognize that codified rules are more consistent than you coming in and saving people.

    Come back when you have done so?

    Koshka:

    WTF, Piter? It’s a shame that certain sections of russia are so regressive.

    I was actually hatched there, but moved out shortly, so don’t have really any experience with the local culture.

  274. portia says

    Carlie –

    That’s usually how my puns go. Good attempts at disguising the punchline though…

  275. Rey Fox says

    When I heard the joke, the loan officer was named “Patty Black”, and the frog was a flesh-and-blood frog trying to put up some gewgaw as collateral.

  276. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain says

    Giliell, as long as no woman reports anything, nothing happens.

    And all of the women who did not attend will now know it is safe.

  277. says

    @Ogvorbis

    Hi, all.

    Sorry to be so quiet. I had a shitty night. Every damn time I write about what happened to me as a kid I remember something new. Something different. Something scary. That’s why I had to bail yesterday.

    Sorry to dump this shit on all of you.

    Sorry to hear that. Hope you feel better now. *hugs*

    One can only hope people realise what “triggering” means.

    There isn’t much that triggers me because I never experienced much pain and distress. I think the most painful experiences I had as a child was enforced gender stereotypes. I had some pretty bad days, but I am now able to put them into a context that makes sense and no permanent harm was done to me.

    Still, as I said in that thread in my comment to you, I have people in my family that have experiences that can trigger uncontrollable emotions. It is not to be taken lightly.

  278. Matt Penfold says

    Seems like TAM didn’t have a harassment policy after all. But I’m sure DJ can claim a 100% harassment-free Con

    Well no, because even if harassment is reported to a JREF official and dealt with effectively, it will not have been reported officially since, there being no anti-harassment policy, there can be no mechanism for reporting such harassment.

  279. dogeared, spotted and foxed says

    threadrupt, as usual. But miffed.

    Seriously, what’s with this trend of snowflakes barging in with some completely unsubstantiated opinion. Then trying to dictate the tone of response to such an absurd degree that when they don’t get the (undeserved) respect that that they haven’t earned, they immediately declare moral victory.

    It makes no freaking sense. And no, Leonard you’re not special. Just the latest in a long line of “Here’s what I think, no I can’t back it up, but you weren’t nice to me so I win!”

  280. Matt Penfold says

    Seriously, what’s with this trend of snowflakes barging in with some completely unsubstantiated opinion. Then trying to dictate the tone of response to such an absurd degree that when they don’t get the (undeserved) respect that that they haven’t earned, they immediately declare moral victory.

    It makes no freaking sense. And no, Leonard you’re not special. Just the latest in a long line of “Here’s what I think, no I can’t back it up, but you weren’t nice to me so I win!”

    It pisses me off as well. There is no excuse for it. No one can come here and in all honesty claim they are unaware of the issues. The might actually be unaware of the issues, but only because they have made an effort not be aware of them. That is just rude, yet when people express exasperation at having to explain the shit yet again, it is those of us who are exasperated who are called uncivil!

  281. Pteryxx says

    Ugh. With neither a policy nor commitment from con organizers, if and when harassment DOES happen, now it can only be handled by 1) silence, 2) covert networking, 3) OVERT networking, i.e. twitter/net calls for action. TAM’s playing with fire here.

  282. chigau (女性) says

    And all of the women who did not attend will now know it is safe.

    I didn’t attend and I felt perfectly safe.
    I think I’ll do the same next year.

  283. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain says

    I get tired of being called “uncivil” by people who argument that there is a certain that I should fulfill.

  284. mythbri says

    @Giliell

    I left a comment full of reading recommendations for your girls back at Crommunist’s place – would you like me to re-post here?

    Apologies for my enthusiasm – I love to read.

  285. Illuminata, Genie in the Beer Bottle says

    Ogvorbis – If you accept hugs, please accept a million from me.

    Seriously, what’s with this trend of snowflakes barging in with some completely unsubstantiated opinion. Then trying to dictate the tone of response to such an absurd degree that when they don’t get the (undeserved) respect that that they haven’t earned, they immediately declare moral victory.

    But, these are sexist dudes, right? Even unconsciously sexist, such a dude is going to assume he has a valuable opinion everyone wants to hear*. When he discovers that they don’t, and realizes he has no way to back up what he said, he retreats to tone trolling in hopes that societal conditioning will shut the bitchez up.

    * which, for some reason, brought to mind the cast commentary on the Fellowship of the Ring where Sean Astin says basically exactly that. He says something like “If I have a thought, doesn’t everyone want to hear it?” now, I’m not calling Astin a sexist, just saying they suffer from the same delusions that anyone cares what they think.

  286. Janine: Fucking Dyke Of Rage Mountain says

    Sad, I do not need to hit the link to know what that refers too.

  287. says

    @Illuminata

    What annoys me the most is the “let me explain this thing to you” condescending tone coming from people talking from a point of privilege. This is not just a gender issue, it is also an issue in many other contexts.

    I am far from perfect in any way, but when people talk about a collective experience of an underprivileged group, I shut the fuck up and listen to what they say. There is nothing wrong with ignorance as long as you are willing to learn something.

    Why are people so afraid of ignorance that they need to fake knowledge? I think more people should get a degree in science if not for anything other than the humbling experience of learning how little you actually know.

  288. chigau (女性) says

    From the linked article, “…why fix something that’s not broken,…”
    85 lbs.?
    Her back must be totally wrecked.

  289. says

    thunk, sadly not in gale crater @351:

    You were born here? Why would you want to leave? This is a joke because obviously you left before you had any choice. I so LOVE Russian people! And the music and the food (I have gained 30 lbs being here).

    This culture is, for the most part, so healthy. They have no problem if you bawl or freak out or can’t leave the house. It’s all normal here. You can be as emotional as you want and they just love you.

    If I wasn’t a homo it would be better–Russians hate homos. You just have to pretend you’re not homo (aka Closet). I don’t do that and my students know I’m a lesbian but I can get away with it because I’m American. From San Francisco! So, of course, I’m gay. No-one bothers me about it, usually.

    I also have a good time because I’m whitey-white. I see “slightly dark” people stopped in the street every fucking day and dumped into police cars. In the last three years, I have not once been stopped and asked for my papers–so my EXTREME privilege is that I’m white. I’ve been shown my privilege week after week at the Immigration office. They welcomed me and made appointments for me (I am American) and bent over backwards for me.

    So I am beloved and (below-line) reviled. It’s no different than the state I grew up in, Arizona.

    Russia is not very different from America, honestly, except they have better food, relationships (they’re forgiving of everything and not stand-offish) and way more holidays. Russians rarely work.

  290. Illuminata, Genie in the Beer Bottle says

    Jadzia – Def agreed that this is not just a gender related problem.

    Why are people so afraid of ignorance that they need to fake knowledge?

    This touches the source of the problem – they don’t think its fake knowledge. They don’t realize who trite, pedantic and ridiculous they sound. Which is why they react with denial when some obnoxious asshole like me strips the veneer from their comments and posts what they are actually saying (i.e. “shut up bitchez!”) Clearly, I must just be insulting them because they are paragons of intelligence and insight! I’m not pointing out their blindspots, I’m just a meanie. (which is true – I’m not nice to bigots)

    They think they’re saying something reasonable! valuable! interesting! insightful! While, in reality, they are the person who walks into the burn unit of a hospital screaming about how no one’s paying attention to their paper cuts.

    And they really, really fail to grok that.

  291. cicely (Imagine it starts with a capital 'C'.) says

    *hugs* for LDTR, and sorry you need to disengage. Lurk well.
    :)

    The first volley of ratlets having achieved squeeability:
    *squeeee!*

    I’ve been thinking…. Maybe I’ve been too hasty to deny that there is any useful purpose for peas.

    Now, while ordinarily I wouldn’t allow peas freezer-space in my house (for fear that they would contaminate the food), it’s also true that I wouldn’t ordinarily stock my freezer with decaying porcupines. But perhaps, just maybe, two wrongs can be made to make a right.

    After all, I need something to stuff the porcupicicles with, so they’ll hold their shape, don’t I?

    And besides, frozen green beans are way too good for the Common Cupcake.

    You know, it’s unfortunate. I bet there are many men who have their names in all lowercase as their nyms with their facebook linked through them who are perfectly decent people. But I’ve seen such a flood of such posters spouting idiotic fuckery that now my hackles immediately go up.

    Hmmm….
    *pops out and slightly alters ‘nym*
    -

  292. says

    @Illuminata

    This touches the source of the problem – they don’t think its fake knowledge. They don’t realize who trite, pedantic and ridiculous they sound.

    “Fake knowledge” was just a polite way of saying “they pulled it out of their ass”. :)

    But yeah, what you said …

  293. Illuminata, Genie in the Beer Bottle says

    jadzia – oh I know you know that. I just like typing it out and making THEM read it.

  294. thunk, sadly not in gale crater says

    Oh, koshka:

    Yes, I didn’t leave voluntarily.

    And no, I don’t know why my folks were so eager to get away.

  295. thunk, sadly not in gale crater says

    And yes, I am a straight cis white dood.

    Said folks often tend to have trouble understanding the concept of privilege though.

    My dad comes from Belarus; he said “If you told the residents of (small town) that they were privileged, they would beat you up!”.

    Comically missing the point.

  296. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy says

    Never read the comments.
    I figured because I was at Shakesville that I’d be okay to read the comments.
    But no. The post I was reading (Huge trigger warning. Contains graphic description of rape. The comments are possibly worse.) was from 2007, which is apparently before they had their current stringent commenting policies… or, apparently, any manner of comment moderation at all?
    :(
    Anyway, I found that post through this one, which is, while not particularly earthshattering for those of us already informed on the subject, a decent response to people who try the simplistic bullshit strawman that their shitty rape jokes directly and simply cause people to rape. (It might have been already linked in the Tosh thread, but I don’t want to dig back through to check. Someone’s keeping a roundup of these, right? Maybe on the Wiki? I can’t find it there, but maybe it should be.)

  297. says

    thunk @379: If your dad comes from Belarus I have a good idea of why he left.

    Everyone from the former USSR wants to be part of Russia because they had it good when they were part of it. They had oil and gas and had jobs. Former Soviet states that I’ve been to (most of them) now are suffering. The Ukraine seems to be the most okay but all the rest have sent scads of refugees to Russia.

    Estonia suffers a lot because so many of the young people have left now that they’re a part of the E.U. There are no jobs in Estonia. What does Estonia export?–Goes the joke. Young workers. That’s all they have and they’ve left.

    Only old folks* remain and this taxes (no pun intended) their system. They have no resources of their own and they’re sinking.

    There’s a very long story about why most Estonians (who are actually Russian) don’t try to get back to Russia but I haven’t the patience to write it all out right now.

    Suffice it to say, Belarus is the same. (Most of my “Russian friends” in the states were Belorussian, which Russians do not consider to be Russians, at all.)

  298. Pteryxx says

    (It might have been already linked in the Tosh thread, but I don’t want to dig back through to check. Someone’s keeping a roundup of these, right? Maybe on the Wiki? I can’t find it there, but maybe it should be.)

    I’m keeping a list of cites from the Tosh thread, but just as a local doc. Didn’t someone volunteer to organize Jadehawk’s cache of links off her blog? If a list goes on the Pharynguwiki, even though we can’t link it directly here, I’d bookmark it and then tinyurl it as a reference. Sort of Horde Feminism 101?

  299. says

    *Чорт. I forgot my asterisk. Folks. Folk. This is a normal word in Russian (I live on Narodnaya Ulitsa – Folk’s Street.) Like folk songs, folk heroes, etc. This is for Brownian, because I think his racist hesitation was right in context but it’s not right in other contexts.

  300. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy says

    Yep. And that way those of us who aren’t super good at remembering where things came from would be able to pull specific links from it quickly when needed. :)

  301. ChasCPeterson says

    Comically missing the point.

    No, just using a different meaning of ‘privileged’. Polysemy ftw again.

  302. Pteryxx says

    Dumb question… do tinyurl links expire? Could someone make a tinyurl link for this prospective Pharyngufeminism page, put the tinyurl *on the page* and then everyone just uses that?

  303. says

    Just saw this on Wonkette and had to share:

    Mark Thompson, a radio host who attended Romney’s speech, is backing Shelton’s claim.

    Thompson told Lawrence O’Donnell, host of The Last Word, that Romney “brought about 20 black Republicans with him,” who served as “applauders for his applause lines.” Thompson called the move “bizarre,” and added, again echoing Shelton, that these were the black leaders Romney was referring to in his comments on Fox.

    Gov Hairgel brought black Republicans with him to his speech to the NAACP to make it look like he has support from African Americans. That is quite possibly the most pathetic thing I’ve heard yet so far this campaign.

    http://wonkette.com/478001/mitt-romney-vs-most-black-people#more-478001

  304. cicely (Imagine it starts with a capital 'C'.) says

    Tip your veal.

    Calf tipping?

    Hi, portia! Welcome. *chocolate*?
    :)

    birgerjohansson I don’t think I’ve ever told you how much I appreciate your links.

    Seconded.

    PZ (or anyone), how far could someone advance in the study of biology while refusing to believe evolution is real and (I’m guessing) rejecting everything it’s has provided a foundation for?

    When I was in college (late ’70s-early ’80s, in OK), one of the upper-division biology professors was an outspoken creationist. He attributed the similarities between different organisms to a “common designer” with a signature “style”, rather than descent from a common ancestor. As of a couple of years ago, he was still teaching, though not at that university.

    *fluff. Saint Petersburg is covered with fluffs from certain trees (I tried looking them up but my Russian to English google-fu is very weak) during the early summer. It’s the summer snow.

    Like cottonwood fluff, maybe?

    So if a conference wants to specify rules around sexual harassment (or a group of people wants a conference organizer to do so), I drew the conclusion that this must mean that sexual harassment is a common problem at conferences.

    Sexual harassment is a common problem. Period. At conferences, as in non-conferences. The people running the conference have no means (short of by example, and by speaking up) of making it clear that this behavior is unacceptable in the community and culture in general. They do have such means at conferences under their management, by setting standards (possibly the word you’re looking for instead of “rules” or “laws”, though there’s absolutely overlap), adhering to them, and enforcing them; i.e., not treating the published standards as “lip service” for PR purposes, with breaches swept under the rug in order to preserve the conference’s reputation while throwing the victims of harassment under the bus.
    -

  305. cicely (Imagine it starts with a capital 'C'.) says

    Addendum: In my estimation, people who say that “there is no problem with sexual harassment at conferences”, or “if there is such a problem, it is too small to matter” really mean, “I haven’t personally been sexually harassed, or first-handedly witnessed what I unambiguously identify as sexual harassment”, and are implying that if it ain’t about them, it ain’t important, and therefore it doesn’t matter.

    -

  306. says

    Krasnaya Koshka
    Can I ask you something?
    I really enjoyed the Nightwatch pentalogy, and I thought it was an interesting view on Russian society and mentality, like they neither see themselves as part of Europe, nor of “the Orient”. Can you confirm that?

  307. cicely (Imagine it starts with a capital 'C'.) says

    I would much rather be the guy that steps in when I see a woman in trouble, and actually try to do something,

    leonde…what if there is no such guy present? What happens then? What happens if there are other guys present, but they won’t intervene because it doesn’t harm them if this woman (so stupid as to wander about without male protection, yet!) is harassed? Or if they think, “Well, it’s a bar; why would anyone even go to a bar if they weren’t hoping to get lucky; she’s only getting what she (by implication) came here for”?
    And the “damsel in distress” references the assumption, plain in past history, and literature past and present, that a woman must have a protector (husband, father, brother, etc.) regulating her decisions, behavior and activities. It accepts and requires that women be passive creatures, acted upon by others, never capable of independent action.
    -

  308. Pteryxx says

    wow, Cipher, that’s a good looking wiki start so far.

    I put a background linkdump in Jason’s comments here:

    http://freethoughtblogs.com/lousycanuck/2012/06/14/in-medias-res-how-to-find-the-plot-if-youre-just-tuning-in/#comment-65520

    and oniongirl added one later, with a bunch more stuff:

    http://freethoughtblogs.com/lousycanuck/2012/06/14/in-medias-res-how-to-find-the-plot-if-youre-just-tuning-in/#comment-66251

    ——————–

    I hoarded the good stuff out of the Tosh thread all in one big txt file… so I just stuck it in a pastebin. That’s about all the energy I have atm.

    http://pastebin.com/ucju6Xsp

  309. says

    I had a funny thought that the legal buffs might want to help me with.

    So in court cases we can have evidence or questions stricken from the record but the problem is that the jury can’t be expected to unhear what they heard even when told to ignore it.

    So why don’t we just video tape a trial and then edit it to remove anything that the Jury isn’t supposed to consider and play it back for them?

  310. says

    Giliell, not to be confused with The Borg @394:

    I’ve only seen the first two movies (both in America as I’ve never seen them available here, oddly) and I have read the books. (I loved them, as it’s so outside of the Russian ouvre.)

    Russians, even here in SPb, do not consider themselves European. In Moscow, I have a lot less experience (only in airports and hotels and lesbian bars). But I know this:

    They still think Europeans are far less than what they are. Russians in big cities feel they are highly superior to anyone else, in my experience. No one has suffered as they have and no one has writers like they do. No artists nor architects like they do.

    They hate the “orient”. I’ve heard nothing but foulness about China, ever. This is the only context in which I’ve heard “the orient” used.

    Does this answer your question? I have a roomful of people right now so I’m taking a census. But am I asking the right question(s)?

  311. carlie says

    But no. The post I was reading (Huge trigger warning. Contains graphic description of rape. The comments are possibly worse.) was from 2007, which is apparently before they had their current stringent commenting policies… or, apparently, any manner of comment moderation at all?

    Oh yeah. That was one of the instigating threads that started the trend towards the current commenting policy. For comparison, most of the threads around that time tended to be around 50 comments or so, maybe 100 if it was a hot topic. Notice that one was close to 300. The next year the Fat Princess thing happened (2200 comments!), and the commenting policy got tightened down even more.

  312. carlie says

    leonde…what if there is no such guy present? What happens then?

    ? Out in public without her protector? Do any women actually do that?

  313. cicely (Imagine it starts with a capital 'C'.) says

    “Once More With Feeling” is my very favoritest Buffy episode.

    *hugs* for Ogvorbis. Sorry last night was so rough.
    -

  314. says

    ? Out in public without her protector owner? Do any women actually do that?

    FTFY

    Krasnaja Koshka
    Yes, thank you very much. It’s hard to get an idea about an actual country and culture that’s so far away (funny enough, not that far away in terms of distance)

    mythbri
    Thanx for the recommendations. They’re still pretty young (2 & 5), but I seriously love Pratchett, they have no chance to escape him.

  315. carlie says

    Well now. Someone just got done checking into a large, nameless conference in Las Vegas and didn’t see any evidence of a harassment policy in any of the official materials they were handed.

  316. says

    Lynna, my grandfather was devoutly Mormon. But he prided himself in defrauding the government….

    Yep. I’m not surprised. The “mormons are honest” meme is one of the biggest scams of all.

  317. Moggie says

    Markita Lynda:

    Sometimes these things start on Facebook and are resolved there; this sounded like it needed a few more people, so I mentioned it here. In the past, Josh has very kindly coordinated transactions through various means and passed them on in one transaction through the best and fastest way. In this case, J. was travelling in Europe so I thought it would be nice to have someone in the U.S. to make sure things got where they were going. As it happened, individuals did the trick very quickly.

    Thanks. I saw one of the past appeals and sent some money to Josh, hence my question. It upsets me a little to think that someone here might be hurting and I never find out about it since I don’t do FB.

  318. Moggie says

    Giliell:

    I really enjoyed the Nightwatch pentalogy, and I thought it was an interesting view on Russian society and mentality, like they neither see themselves as part of Europe, nor of “the Orient”.

  319. mythbri says

    @Giliell

    No problem! And you can probably start them on The Enchanted Forest Chronicles by Patricia C. Wrede when they get a little older.

    And seconded on loving Pratchett. So much in his really good books to un-pack. As a friend said, “Pratchett will rip out your brain and play basketball with it.”

  320. Moggie says

    Agh, premature submitification.

    Giliell:

    I really enjoyed the Nightwatch pentalogy, and I thought it was an interesting view on Russian society and mentality, like they neither see themselves as part of Europe, nor of “the Orient”.

    I loved the books. Not having read much modern Russian literature, it was interesting to see Lukyanenko’s take on present-day Russian capitalism and kleptocracy. He has a rather gloomy view of the country’s direction, doesn’t he?

  321. says

    Lynna @404:

    This is one of the many reasons I love your Moments of Mormon Madness so much. It IS my family. They’re absolutely going to heaven but they’re awful people.

    To give respect, my grandfather, when he was dying, asked for me to be the one to sling him over my shoulder and take him to bed. My paternal grandma was a wee lady (Missouri Sioux, through and through, but a Mormon) so she could not hoist him and I was always a tall, strapping woman.

    She would scream at me about being a dyke all day long but I was there to hoist him. And he repented to me. How he repented.

    “You know all those things I said about injuns and spades, I didn’t mean it.” Okay, old man, let me change your patches and put you on the toilet. He was always so proud before of being related to someone in the KKK.

    Grandma offered me $10,000 to go “straight” at that time. She had a small wad of $1000 dollar bills (I’m assuming they were real) and peeled off ten of them. I refused, being young and militant.

    I was there for granddad. Her payment of the best waffles in the world every morning was enough for me. Besides, I was never going to “go straight”

    He asked for a closed casket when he died. Well, yeah, he looked terrible and I was the oldest grandchild and would never expect my younger relatives to look at him this way.

    Grandma decided on open casket and I declined to go to his funeral. I’d been there when he died, for good gourd’s sake.

    “I will haunt you when I die,” she said to me. But it never happened.

    Sorry about that ramble! Obviously I need to get out more.

  322. says

    Moggie @ 408: It’s true. Believe me. All Russians know this is true. You can’t even submit papers to the government without a slip of a couple thousand rubles.

  323. Tony aka The Psychic Octopus says

    :::avoiding the mass stupidity in any of leonde’s posts, hopefully. I think everyone else has probably eviscerated the stupidity therein.:::
    ~~

    Giliell:

    Ahhh, talking about mums, mine has another “episode”. Her former boss (a wonderful woman and a superior as you would wish for) has died (fuck cancer) and now she has a good reason to stay in bed (near the bottles) and not go to work. And the best is my dad who has announced sarcastically to my sister that he’s going to drown himself now.

    Damn. Has your mother had problems with alcohol for a while? And was your father’s reference to literally drowning himself, or drowning himself in a bottle of liquor? I hope he’s not serious about either and I’m so sorry you’re having to deal with this.

    ~~

    Krasnaya:

    Depressing news here in Russia. First, the criminalization of even saying the word “gay” in public is outlawed here, in beautiful SPb (where there are still huge dance clubs and a Michigan Festival-ish camping trip I went to last month).

    There are times I’ve wondered how things are for LGBTQI people in other developed countries. If you can’t even speak the word gay in Russia, that doesn’t sound good at all.
    What is allowed?
    Homosexual?
    Queer?

    BTW, I have no idea what this is a picture of on your GF’s LiveJournal blog, but it is *beautiful*:
    http://i57.photobucket.com/albums/g233/Nikolkaya1/nikolkaya5/nikolkaya6/3R5W0334-1.jpg

    It’s always in hindsight, and I watch the news fairly rapturously.

    How trustworthy are the major news sites in Russia? Or do you have to search far and wide for as non biased a news outlet as possible?
    Oh, and what is the image in your gravatar? It looks like one of those cats with no hair.

    That still makes me nearly vomit when I think about it. And I was only a peripheral participant. I hate people.

    Ugh. That situation sounds awful.
    I’m happy that standing your ground resulted in her not being fired (as well-I’m assuming-no repercussions directed toward you).

    I hope all works out and the babies find human parents like you.

    I wonder how easy that will be. So many people are scared of rats (what a silly fear too, they’re adorable). On top of that, many, many people don’t know how to properly care for other humans let alone animal companions.
    ~~
    To all:
    What are some of the best news sites out there?

    I like the Guardian and AlterNet. I recall Ed Brayton (I think it was him) put up a list of his favorite sites a while back, some of which were news sources. I forgot to save the damn page though, so I need to hunt back for that (unless someone has a handy link to it).

    ~~

    I somehow missed this post by weakswimmer

    At a bank worked a man called Mr. Paddywack. One day, a ceramic frog came in to get a loan, but Mr. Paddywack wasn’t sure if the frog qualified for the loan. He talked to his boss about it, and the boss replied, “It’s a nicknack, Paddywack. Give the frog a loan.”

    ROTFLMAO (rolling on the floor laughing my ass off)
    Vilem Saptar that’s a slightly tweaked version of a children’s nursery rhyme.

    ~~

    rorschach:

    Then I drove home from the shopping center and got a flat tyre. It was raining. And there was no way the nuts on the tyre would budge. It went downhill from there

    Sounds like you started the day off reasonably well, but now it’s turned into one of those days. :(

  324. says

    Sorry about that ramble! Obviously I need to get out more.

    Hey, that was one of the more entertaining rambles I’ve seen on The Endless Thread. It’s right up there with Walton’s posting-while-drunk works of art.

    If you were a real mormon, one whose ability to tell right from wrong had been neatly excised, you would have taken the $10,000 to go straight and then never bothered to take a single step along that quixotic road.

  325. says

    Tony aka The Psychic Octopus @411:

    That photo is of old town Antalya, Turkey. It was such a beautiful day! This was last Saturday. We had a great guide, Oksana.

    No, you can’t say “homosexual” or “lesbian” either but, as my gf, says, the cops take two hours to get to robberies and car accidents. They’re not going to be gunning for words. Still, it sucks.

    My gravatar is Tosha, my red-point Siamese kitten. He has fur though sphynx cats are very popular here.

    As far as the reliability of news here in Russia? It’s not reliable. Putin owns most of the news channels, I believe. Today on the news was a half hour about an influx of vampires in Vladivostok. What?!!! Vampires. In the news.

    There were no repercussions on me for standing up for Mary-Jane. I think my boss secretly wanted me to, actually. She was getting shit from above but I was soon thereafter sent to Michigan for higher management training. Sometimes doing good things works out nicely, thankfully.

    I so wish people would get over the weird rat-freak out. They’re sooooo smart and so cute and so cuddly. Actually, my kitten, Tosha, often reminds me of a lanky rat.

    Yeah, I’m with you, Tony. More flagons of empathy all around! On the house.

  326. Owlmirror says

    I just called a friend to use the ceramic frog joke. I changed the name of the loan officer to Mr. Patrick Whack, and mentioned later that his friends called him Paddy, but it was all over as soon as I said the “whack” part. She knew right where it was going.

    Plenty of names would work just as well. Although I would go with Patricia/Patty for the first name,

    Black (as mentioned above) ; Hatt; Hack; Stack; Capp; Trapp (It’s a trap!); maybe some others.

    And instead of a frog, the animal could be a male pig (with the knicknack rather than being the knickknack, as also mentioned above).

    Hm. You could also make it be about a representative of a city in the Czech republic, maybe offering some gilded church monstrosity (or monstrance?) as collateral, and the boss (maybe set it in the national Bank/World Bank/wealthy provider of capital loans NGO/whatever) has Generic Slavic Accent: “. . . give to Prague a loan”.

    /PunsAreObjectivelyEvil

  327. Ogvorbis: Dogmaticus sycophantus says

    *hugs* for Ogvorbis. Sorry last night was so rough.

    Thanks. It hasn’t been just last night. All day I’ve been on edge. There is something right on the edge of my memory that is scaring the everloving shit out of me and I don’t know what it is. I glimpse a camera in the almost memory and then am out of it. I feel sick. I have been on the edge of a panic attack all day. Sinus pain, the runs, you name it.

    Have I mentioned that I really hate this shit?

  328. says

    Lynna @412-

    Thank you! I often kick myself for that but I was trying to show the old woman that she couldn’t buy my sexuality. I am who I am.

    I found it terribly insulting at that moment, actually.

    Yeah, I could easily have taken the money and not done it. (I can’t do it, even thirty years later.) But it was so… gross.

    So atheist morals for the win!

  329. Tony aka The Psychic Octopus says

    leonde sez this:

    The “strong perfume” “rule” is a perfect example of a “rule” I would expect to see at a conference.

    My response is more general (i.e. to everyone):
    why is there a no ‘strong perfume’ rule in some codes of conduct? IIRC, Greta Christina had a post about the codes of conduct for various conventions, and one of them had a similar no cologne/perfume policy. I wear cologne, and was curious what the problem was. Allergies?

    ~~
    Alethea:
    What is the deal with peoples’ laptops lately? Four or five of us have had issues. There’s something in the water I think :)

    ~~

    Vilem Saptar:

    To say they’re no different than any other cons is such a lousy ass defence.

    ^^^^This. A thousand times.
    Why is it hard for some people to comprehend such a wacky idea?

    ~~

    John Morales @184:
    thank you for the laugh of the day :)
    Will you be here all week?

    ~~

    leonde:

    I think such a rule will have no impact on sexual harassment at conferences.

    I couldn’t resist responding to you. The stupid in your posts leaks off the page.
    Without the rule, women are dealing with sexual harassment at conferences (the degree to which it occurs doesn’t matter for the purposes of the current ‘create a sexual harassment policy’ argument; the fact is that it *DOES* happen). If a woman is harassed at a con lacking such a policy, what are they supposed to do? There’s no set of guidelines in place for them to follow through. There’s no chain of command. They’re supposed to tell whom exactly? Remember, we’re not talking about JUST at the bar in a convention hotel, but the entire hotel. Without a policy in place, she could be handily dismissed (and women *have* been dismissed).
    With a policy in place, women have a course of action that they can follow. They know they have the backing of the convention organizers. Those that might feel like indulging in certain behaviors will know beforehand that certain things are off limits.
    TO RECAP:
    no policy=women keep getting harassed and there’s nothing they can do about it
    policy=women have recourse if they get harassed, and all convention goers are aware that certain type of behavior are unacceptable.
    If someone doesn’t like a harassment policy, they can go elsewhere. In fact, I would hope they would go elsewhere. I certainly wouldn’t want to be at a convention with people that feel sexual harassment is A-OK.

    Also, I feel the need to wonder why you keep bringing up the subject of local bars/pubs?
    I work in a bar/restaurant.
    We had a situation recently where our general manager (who is no longer with us) sexually harassed several employees. The employee handbook specifically states that sexual harassment of any kind is intolerable. He knew that when he was hired. As a result of violating the policy, he was terminated (rightfully so). The women he harassed are able to continue working in a safe environment.
    Tell me again why sexual harassment policies are not a good thing?

  330. says

    Ogvorbis @416-

    Yeah, you’ve been on the front lines for awhile. I’ve seen your recent work and totally understand.

    I hope you can at last relax and am wishing all the best for you.