Bob Larson is one creepy dude. We last saw him shoveling breakfast into his pie-hole while mocking foolish Mormon beliefs, but what was neglected is his lunacy. He’s an exorcist. He has now recruited a trio of teenage girls to carry out his game.
I told you he’s creepy.
Anyway, there’s a bizarre poll associated with the article about Larson’s teenage exorcism squad — they clearly need more input from demon deniers. Or perhaps more demons. And I know just where to find both.
Do you believe in demon possession?
Yes, demons are real. 42%
No, ridiculous 44%I am currently possessed by a demon. 14%
Why does Larson dress up like a catholic priest? Also, gotta love it when a “man of god” surrounds himself with a group of young ladies… I’m sure there’s no improper behavior or anything, though.
And the crazy just keeps on rolling in.
Voted, in the “I’m possessed” column. “Ridiculous” is now far ahead, with “believe” and “I’m possessed” running neck and neck.
I couldn’t resist. I voted the possessed option. But the “no” option is 70% now.
How can you vote “No” when you could vote “I am currently possessed by a demon.”?
I admitted the truth.
I had to go with, “I’m possessed”.
Currently the demon possessing me has been through quite a bit of replication, in the process stimulating mucus and heat producing reactions by my own body, which is causing a lot of yuck and headache – as predicted for those possessed by demonic forces.
I have tentatively named my possessor A(H1:N1).
I’m really hoping that I’ll become possessed by some miso soup quite soon, but that’s probably dependent on my partner’s kids letting her get up for 10 minutes.
One of those teenaged girls is his daughter.
I am currently possessed by a demon who is causing me to believe that believing in demons is “ridiculous.” I was going to complain that this answer wasn’t an option, till I realized that this is exactly what Larson means by putting in that second response.
It’s just like believing in God, I bet. Everybody already knows demons are real: the choice is to either accept that, or deny it.
“One of those teenaged girls is his daughter.”
Home-schooled, beauty pageant contestant to boot – I’m just waiting for that contribution to society to start rolling in…
“Or maybe you spent $9.95 US to take his online “Demon Test” — 21 questions to find out if you have the Devil or his minions in you.”
I admit that I’d like to see those questions, just for the fun of it. Now I will have to make those up myself…
“Or maybe you spent $9.95 US to take his online “Demon Test” — 21 questions to find out if you have the Devil or his minions in you.”
Who’s going to want to admit they’re unimportant enough to get stuck with a minion? ;)
One of those teenaged girls is his daughter.
The other two are her clones.
Now 4% “Real”, 72% “Ridiculous”, 24% “Possessed”. I had no problem with voting “possessed”, if I was willing to pay 10 bucks for Larson’s test I’m sure it would come out that way.
“…teenage exorcism squad…”
CHEERLEADER! (Demon’s are, like, so gross!)
SO-AND-SO! (Thinks Linda Blair is, like, so gross!)
WHAT’-HER-FACE! (Writes poetry about demons!)
THE UGLY ONE! (Dates demons!)
Of course it is. Slayers are born.
But look again who this “authority on exorcism” is:
Scary. That kind of supposed professional believes in demons.
(Sees results…)
(Lawls…)
(Begin hissing, sibilant ‘demon’ voice…)
Yessss… we are EVERYWHERE, human Bob Larson. EVERYWHERE! You think you and your pathetic Scooby gang of weak, teenage minions can hope to thwart us? We shall drag you and all you love and your whole, pitiful world of Wal-Marts, megachurches and wholesome family entertainment prominently featuring painfully beige Dick Clark clones down to the FLAMES!!!!
(… end hissing, sibilant ‘demon’ voice…)
(/In other news, dibs on ‘The Painfully Beige’ as a band name.)
What sort of shitty demon would let someone they’re possessed take such a test?
Even if it’s not a full incarnation and the demon can only influence not control any mind taker worth their salt knows the “eh it’s a waste of time” or “oh wait did I leave the stove on” trick to get the host’s attention away from anything that might expose the truth.
UNLESS the demon is actually pushing them to take the test and making them give answers that send back a “no of course you’re not possessed” which raises the question: what sort of shitty demon hunter would make such a test that can be easily exploited?
This asshole either is a charleton, an idiot, or incompetent who can’t think tactically or strategically to save his life.
FSM dammit! I tried to vote that I am possessed by my own personal demon, but it forced me to deny its existence :((
How utterly pathetic does this fool have to be before he loses every last vestige of credibility? Oh, I forgot that Christians have already demonstrated that they’ll believe any old tripe!
Dr. Richard Gallagher, a professor of clinical psychiatry at New York Medical College and also on the faculty of the Columbia University Psychoanalytic Institute…
Ummmm… Physician, heal thyself.
I have to admit I am baffled. I can’t tell if the fact that their story is shit means that they don’t actually believe it, or do believe it and are too brick stupid to actually think of the implications. If it’s the later they are very lucky demons aren’t real, they’re bringing the proverbial knife to a gun fight in this battle of wits.
Maybe the test is rigged so that it shows everyone is possessed by demons. If it shows that you’re not, it must mean your demonic side cheated.
But then again, any decent demon would see through that feeble attempt at deceit.
I suppose this is what Eric Hovind’s “students” from yetersday’s Thunderdome session aspire to become… when they’re aren’t trolling presuppositional bullshit on blog comments forums.
Which is like being an authority on werewolves, vampires, ghouls, elves, fairies, pixies, ghosts, or Thetan spirits.
Which century are we living in now?
And do remember to put a saucer of milk out for the Brownies. I saw one once. It looked a lot like a stray cat of all things. And oddly enough, it much preferred dry cat food.
I mean for fuck sake, I may be biased as I am a malevolent consciousness that uses poisoned memes to ensnare minds into my collective, but it seems like they never thought at all how someone who earned the title “FATHER OF LIES” and his minions might actually think and strategize.
Of course there’s a reality show coming. *eyeroll*
Here are the questions, as found at this link:
http://www.fstdt.com/QuoteComment.aspx?QID=51424
Basically, if you’ve experienced trauma in your life, you’re vulnerable to demons — and to shysters like Larson who prey on the emotionally vulnerable.
Good thing he didn’t ask “Do you often inadvertently type homophones?” I did that twice just in the last sentence! One of them was “pray” instead of “prey”, which I almost left in.
“incested”?
That.
They’ve got the cult niche down, anyway. Step one: find the frightened and fragile and vulnerable. Step two: tell them your fictions are the answer.
I sorta figure the more mental health literacy becomes a thing, and the less mental health issues come with a stigma, the more these assholes will be out of business. The more people can say to a friend, listen, that looks a bit like major depression; it happens, there’s things can be done about it (and things done by competent therapists and professions, not so much idiots with wooden stakes, mallets, ‘holy water’ and crosses), the more these goons will be out of business.
‘Course, I guess,some of it is also about society itself being sick-making. ‘Financial issues’? Srsly? What’s that include, like 95 percent of the people on the planet, ’round now?
@Chigau
I think that’s when someone writes a slash fic of you and a relative
I can’t find this short story I like online and it’s hard to find in print as it’s only in one Anthology so sharing a scan here
https://plus.google.com/u/0/photos/101491646383347443531/albums/5742977349169852433/5804022866644250354?authkey=COTNzvm0lfS69AE
https://plus.google.com/u/0/photos/101491646383347443531/albums/5742977349169852433/5804022866971933122?authkey=COTNzvm0lfS69AE
THAT is how you possess someone
A few years ago, Kimberly Daniels claimed that Mars candy company hires witches for Halloween. They insert demons into the candy which is supposed to do something. But what?
Demon 1. What’s up?
Demon 2. Not much. I’m running Mitt Romney with the gang. It’s an easy job. The guy is so warped, he scares us!!!
Demon 1. That is frightening, hope you get hazard pay. I’m stuck inside a small Snickers bar for Halloween. It’s boring, just sitting on a shelf.
Demon 2. So why are you there?
Demon 1. It’s make work. The boss doesn’t want us hanging around fundie xians because they end up possessing us and then we have to shake them off.
All that happens to candy demons is, we end up inside the intestines of a 6 year old and shortly after that end up at a sewage treatment plant.
As a gay woman, I really only had one choice. It was like, 72% No, 24% Demon, 4% take exorcists too seriously , last I saw.
I’m Larson, but you can call me Larson the demon killer. Has a nice ring to it, don’t you think?
Yeah. This guy is fucking scum.
I wish I was possessed by a demon.
I was disappointed by that quiz… Was expecting more:
1. Have you ever crawled up a wall and onto the ceiling?
2. Do you regularly projectile vomit while spinning your head 360 degrees?
3. Do you speak demonic on a regular basis?
4. etc
Does being possessed by Legion grant the right to multiple votes?
This is only slightly related to the Bob Larsen story but it is related to the blog post title:
“Vampire Ecology: Twilight vs. Buffy”
http://theoystersgarter.com/2009/04/20/vampire-ecology/
Based on theoretical population biology, we can be pretty sure that we are not living in the “Twilight” fictional universe because we would otherwise be awash in starving top predators.
If vampires do exist (an unlikely “if”), then we must be in the Joss Wheadon “Buffyverse” where slayers keep the vampire predators in check.
The grad student exercise in explaining population ecology through pop culture can be found here:
http://www.hphomeview.com/Tips/Vampire%20Ecology%20in%20the%20Jossverse.pdf
I can contact some friends to take care of that. Don’t you worry, we’ll get you sorted in no time.
I’m possessed! Come spank it out of me, girls!
Current score:
Believe: 2%
Fail to believe: 64%
Possessed: 34%
Possessed is making a very strong showing lately. My demonic overlord is hopeful at the results.
Yessssss, be fruitful and multiply, my brothers and sisters.
AJ Milne #29 wrote:
Step three: Point to any sort of improvement, for any sort of reason, as evidence that your fictions must be true. Otherwise, they wouldn’t have worked, would they?
I’m not sure if calling the tendency to seek out frightened, fragile, vulnerable people “compassion” is a fourth step, or just a reassuring marketing label.
Sure.
We could all make up a far more accurate Demon test.
4. Do you feel an overwhelming urge to burn science textbooks?
5. Believe pregnant rape victims received a gift from god?
6. Hate gays, women, nonwhites, Democrats, and Episcopalians?
(Give yourself a bonus point if you are gay, female, or nonwhite.)
7. Think Rick Santorum and Michelle Bachmann are sane?
8. Believe people become scientists because they hate god and want to destroy religion.
9. Think Romney tells the truth and hasn’t changed a position in the last day.
10. Think Bob Larson isn’t just in it for the money.
11. etc.
Stock response: Only if you’re Republican. Otherwise it’s voter fraud.
Well since I have epilepsy I had to vote ‘Posessed’ – who am I to argue with milennia of medical opinion?
A succubus is having her way with me as we speak.
/clicks link
“Hmmm… that guy looks like John Peel. With a posse of teenaged exorcists… Gives a new meaning to ‘Teenage Kicks,’ no? Hmmm…”
/sing to the tune of The Undertones’ “Teenage Kicks”
Teenage demons, so hard to beat
When they possess someone on my street
Another girl from the neighborhood
Spitting bile, pea soup and blood
Want to exorcise you good and right
Give you teenage kicks from God’s light
All right!
(insert guitar solo)
What happened to you, Satan? You used to be cool.
@Nms
I’M STILL COOL! I MODERATE SUB-REDDITS!!! THAT HAS TO COUNT FOR SOMETHING!!!??? KIDS LOVE THE REDDIT RIGHT!?
14! That’s quite an infestation. Maybe you guys should spray for them, and try not to leave any food uncovered.
Not nearly skeptical enough, otherwise he’d be out of a job, and Larson wouldn’t have a TV show.
Who are these quacks, and why haven’t they been struck off? *spits*
So I was going to attempt a joke about Gallagher being an authority on exorcisms, but it turns out that Gallagher is evil.
@Satan
reddit is like so 2010, you’re totally embarrassing me Satan
..believes he’s an expert in demonic possession, and that it is a real phenomenon. I wonder what his employers think of this?
Buffy may not be true, but I watched ‘Abraham Lincoln, Vampire Hunter’ last night. Wow! You guys sure kept that quiet, Churchill only ever fought Daleks.
I’m offended that PZ would use this story as an opportunity to bash my belief in Buffy the Vampire Slayer. Of course, I don’t believe that BtVS is *literally* true, but it’s foolish to say that it’s not real…anyone can go onto Netflix and see the fact of it.
What do you mean, not real? I watched her for years on television. Next you’ll try to tell me that SpongeBob SquarePants isn’t real either.
SpongeBob the Vampire Squid Slayer?
Wow Gallagher heckles other comedians. According to some this is worse than rape
Here are my answers to the questions
1) Do you sometimes exhibit uncontrollable outbursts of anger or violence?
I am in complete control of my outbursts of anger and violence
2) Have you experimented with two or more forms of the occult?
I am qualified to Paramount Grand Master Level in no less than 37 occult disciplines – but when I want a beer I find it’s easiest to just buy it
3) Have you been sexually violated (raped, incested, molested)?
Baby – I do the violating round here
4) Do you sometimes manifest behavior not consistent with your normal personality?
Yes – sometimes I pretend to be a normal decent human being
5) Do you abuse alcohol or drugs to escape painful past experiences in life?
No – I abuse alcohol and drugs because I enjoy it
6) Do you commit immoral or illegal acts, contrary to your customary values?
No – immoral and illegal acts are totally consistent with my values
7) Have you ever attempted or contemplated suicide?
Only as somebody else’s assistant
8) Are you sometimes overwhelmed with feelings of severe depression and hopelessness?
No – but for some reason everybody who listens to me for more than 5 minutes is … (Think Ted Stryker/’Airplane’)
9) Do you indulge in self-abusive behavior such as anorexia, bulimia, cutting or self-mutilation?
Only on the third Wednesday of every month – moderation in all things
10) Have you experienced life-changing trauma from which you haven’t recovered?
I experience life changing trauma every day and it does me no harm
11) Do you know of ancestors who committed murder, suicide, or sexual perversion?
To the best of my knowledge, none of my ancestors didn’t
12) Do voices tell you to commit illegal acts, blaspheme God, or indulge in immoral acts?
Yes – but I find I can think of bigger and better ones all by myself
13) Have you asked Satan to take your life in exchange for something?
Yes – but the cheque bounced, so I got it back
14) Do you live a fear-based life resulting in paranoia or multiple phobias?
No – but everybody around me does for some reason …
15) Have you experienced emotional or physical abuse from your biological parents?
My parents were too afraid of me to do that …
16) Have you been emotionally or physically abandoned by either biological parent?
Twice daily
17) Have you felt repeated, disabling episodes of rejection or depression?
No – I have only ever had a single disabling episode of rejection or depression: it’s still going on
18) Have you failed repeatedly in significant relationships?
No – the first time it fails is fatal for the other person
19) Have you failed to experience trust and lasting love from a significant other?
I refer you to my previous answer …
20) Do you consistently experience serious health or financial issues?
Definitely
21) Are you significantly hindered in prayer, worship, Bible reading and church attendance?
Not the least bit hindered – I just can’t be @rsed
.
the name says it all
.
.
Woo begets woo.
Don’t worry. Buffy the Vampire Slayer is metaphorically true.
She is part of the ground state of all being.
Well, she *did* die to save the world, and was resurrected.
Yes but we can all agree that Dawn does not exist right? Also most of the S8 comic, Dracula, and The fucking goddamn fucking fuck fuck fucking fuck fuck GODDAMN IT JESUST CHRIST FUCK FUCK FUCK Immortal?
*OT nerd rage*
FUCKING IMMORTAL!! NOT JUST WORSE EPISODE OF ANGEL EVER REALLY UP THERE FOR WORST TV EPISODE I’VE EVER PERSONALLY SEEN. FUCKING FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK *starts foaming at mouth and is sedated by dart*
Very creepy short story, Ing. Excellent.
(and yes, you’d think the “exorcists” would at least be able to cope with that level of thinking … meh)
Noooooooooo ! Not… SpongeBob !?!
*collapses in tears*
Now that’s something I would definitely watch.
@Opposablethumbs
It reminds me of the Psirins from Red Dwarf, who have illusive powers. Their standard MO was to first do a very half assed job to lull people into complacency…then ramp it up with serious mind fucks (best one being creating an illusion of a meteor about to hit a ship…right in front of a real meteor. Party recognizes the first one as an illusion and ignores it only to get hit by the real one moments later)
@Beatrice
I knew I could count on someone. And to think my mom said pouting will get me nothing.
Flirty fishing.
I confess, I’m a succubus, the Bulldog is a demon and Naughty Marvin is a satyr. Kirby vacuum company has placed a do not enter sign on the boundary of the Mansion.
Ugh. Found out that a family friend performed an ‘exorcism’ on some kid who was apparently too out of it to talk properly and couldn’t say Jesus.
-.-
I don’t visit them any more than I have to to maintain civility anymore.
Goddamn, I’m in a minority of demon-possessed. How the hell can we take over the world when there are so few of us? We should be protected as an endangered species – Bob Larson needs a new job. I figure someone already told him he needs to get laid, which is why he’s got his Buffy Squad. I’m sure those poor women will be feeling all sorts of creepy things in the dark.
I think it actually would have been better to skew this pol towards 99% “possessed”, and then see what the crew in the article think of the results.
Currently 2% yes; 69% no; 29% possessed;
2,540 total votes
This news site is a joke…or it’s just a slooooooooooooow day for the World News section.
@ 27 Trebuchet says:
Not too dissimilar from a test used to determine “is this person insane?”
I wonder if “immoral acts” includes “fleecing the gullible via fraud”?
I’m not possessed by a demon but my computer is. Must be the trauma of being owned by me and having small children upend cups of juice on the keyboard.
Yes, the last two answers are the same according to Larson and followers. They think that:
1. Demons do exist
2. Demons do possess people
3. If you disagree with the above that is because you are possessed by a demon who is blinding you to the truth.
The Devil’s greatest deception is convincing us that he does not exist.
Given these premises, I would have to say that I am possessed by a demon and that I have been convinced of Satan’s greatest lie.
@74:
It’s the local paper for a town of less than 6000 population, pretty much in the middle of
nowhereSaskatchewan. You’re expecting the NY Times?raven
They are sane.
You should stop using mental illness as an insult.
@79
To be pedantic I actually started wondering about Bachmann, especially since hearing she suffers from headaches and possible black outs, that she is undiagnosed with something. That is unrelated to her politics though.
The Demon-Haunted World should be recommended reading.
“diagnosed with something”
Not very useful terminology there.
Stress-related migraines are not counterposed to sanity.
Q1: Did you just pay 9.95 for the privilege of seeing this questionnaire?
A1: If you answered yes, you are possessed of the demons of gullibility and stupidity. Call us on 001-555-37586 to receive counselling and exorcism. Please have your credit card ready before your call.
Yech. Failed to notice I was linking to a right-wing website there. Here’s a better one.
@SGBM
I know I was just commenting that I was wondering whether given that and public behavior she might not actually be undiagnosed, (brain tumor?) which would be tragic but is unrelated to her politics.
@SGBM
Ignore me it was a side point that didn’t matter
You know I like you, Ing, but I can’t respect where you’re trying to take this conversation. That sounds like ignorant, uninformed wondering — you aren’t qualified to leap from migraine to “zomg brain tumor” in your internet diagnosis, and what the hell public behavior are you alluding to? nothing that isn’t explicable by being a showman — and derailing the important point.
I should learn to refresh the page.
Local news here has been playing up the fear card lately. First it was “does the home you’re about to buy have ghosts?”
and then it was “Are there really satanic cults right here, trying to kidnap your children ?”
Not surprisingly, the scammers who were interviewed said yes.
Now this boob. If he weren’t a con man I’d be laughing at him.
@ Steve Caldwell #38
Another answer is one of my favorite’s (stop me if you’ve heard this one before):
Comparison/Contrast of Jesus and Dracula: they both demand total loyalty and allegiance from their followers, give them eternal life as a reward, and have died and come back from the dead themselves.
Difference: Dracula at least practices some quality control.
I am horrified to have to report that I have had an official Episcopalian exorcist to dinner in my home, multiple times. Most of the time he is a completely innocuous English literature professor turned innocuously feel-good liberal Episcopalian priest, with an incredibly acerbic sense of humor and lovely taste in food and wine. Then there’s him when he talks about his (fortunately rare) encounters with demons possessing Episcopalians. I still don’t know quite how to reconcile these two.
I suspect that my exorcist friend is quite a bit more fun at parties than Mr. Larson. Also, he refers potential exorcisees for psychiatric help as a first, second, and third resort. Apparently psychiatrists can resolve most situations in which exorcism is sought by Epicopalians.
I’d love to see the Episcopalian quiz for demonic possession. Lots of questions about place settings I expect.
I’ve always found it funny that the same people who will claim some vision of “jebus appeared at the foot of my bed” but will then say “demons don’t exist”. I know many theists who will swear by both of these statements. I always want to tell them to at least be consistent in their delusions.
And I of course voted “I’m currently possessed” It was behind the others but “ridiculous” was in the 70s and yes the demons are knocking on my door was only at 1%.
Oh, excuse me, someone is knocking at me door…
I have a confession to make. I am actually possessed by demons. That explains why I am an atheist.
She who is possessed by demons possesses demons.
(Why yes, I like silly word-play)
“He estimates about 50% of the population has an evil presence lingering inside.”
Must be Democrat voters.
Wait, I just saw his criteria for demonic possession. Clearly the Tea Partiers have spread the infection to the rest of the Republicans.
Further details on Bob Larson’s online demon test can be found at this YouTube video – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=osyKMNxf6I0
To the 21 questions, one answers either “Never”, “In the past”, or “Currently”. Items marked “Never” have no value. Items marked “Past” are scored as one point. Items marked “Currently” are scored as two points. Crucial questions (one through seven) add one additional point to the final score.
Then the website tries to sell you books, DVDs, or a spiritual evaluation with Bob Larson.
From the article: “How can a five foot women push four men around”
Clearly, this person has never worked in psychiatric medicine.
Of course I am possessed by a demon. That is why I hate fictional God and White Jesus.
I am possessed by the Demon Rum.
(and why is it always gone?)
I am possessed by the demon Pad Tai
*UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUURRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRP*
See I’m speaking in tongues
Pad Thai contains tongue??‽??
ick
Careful how you vote: That could be just what the demons want! Or, what the priest wants you to think with respect to how many people are “deceived” about the existence of demons. How deep does the conspiracy go?
Why does Terry Long from the Teen Titans come to mind?
Pfft. Seriously, teenagers? Now that’s just silly.
@ OP
The footage of the purchasing of mormon underwear and an inter view with Larson, was made by an Australian documentary filmaker John Safran. He went to Larson for an “exhorcism”. It did not end well:
Link to Pfffft. (Go to Episode 8.) Video here.
It would appear John was pretty freaked out by Bob.
1% 50 votes Yes, demons are real.
71% 3002 votes No, that’s ridiculous
28% 1193 votes I am currently possessed by a demon.
So many possessed. So few aware of it. Bwhahahahahahahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!
Why didn’t you spoiler that! Way to crush my childhood memories… ;_;
(Also, no tweed or glasses? No way that creepy Larson guy is a proper Watcher.)
I voted twice, for me and my demon.
How long before we find out Bob the Demon Hunter has been putting the Holy Ghost into his God Squad and filling them all with Living Water?
Bob Larson is the most pranked radio preacher of all time. I’ve personally pranked him twice, and one of the most favored pastimes when I lived in Berkeley, besides getting stoned, was pranking Bob Larson.
If you want to prank him just make up some bullshit church, like the Church of Frank Zappa, or the Church of Joseph Stalin and he will interview you.
He’s a carnival barker.
Ah, I see the poll now stands at 53 (that’s votes, not %) for demons, 3310 against and 1282 are currently spewing pea soup all over their bedrooms.
And at the risk of sound terribly sexist, his three assistants can exorcise me any day…
You sound terribly sexist.
Oddly enough, in fundie circles being terribly sexist is considered proof that you’re NOT possessed by demons.
*sigh*
His tv show will be very popular especially when the teenage girls have to mud wrestle the demons while wearing bikinis.
@A. R @98:
Or seen my karate and aikido teachers.
Sorry, but after all this Savile exposure recently, I have a very very fuckin’ low tolerance for arsewipes with their ‘hurr hurr, jailbait teen girls hurr hurr’ shit. Fuck right off.
NMS
I blame twilight.
@Emrysmyrddin: Firstly, they’re not jailbait – read the article before climbing on your high horse. Secondly… ah screw it, I can’t be bothered. Some people will climb on a soap box over any stupid issue, just so they can jump and down and show the world how indignant they are.
People make jokes. You might not like them. Tough – that’s life.
And you decided my quote was aimed solely at you…because? Go back and read the thread, and then I invite you, personally this time, to go fuck yourself. Soapbox indeed.
gerwynpetty,
Cut the crap. You started that sentence with the preemptive “at the risk of” which shows you were perfectly aware of the sexist nature of your statement.
Clearly all of you scoffers on this thread haven’t heard of sophisticated demonology. Those of us who aren’t so close-minded know that demons are really just metaphors for axis 2 disorders. Also quantum mechanics.
I’m fed up with the fucking pervasive idea that IT’S JUST FINE to salivate over young girls. Fed up to the fucking back teeth. I’ve lost count of the number of damn jailbait pics that I’ve reported over just the past week on places like FB, with comments galore along the lines of ‘hurr, hurr, it’s just a picture, hurr’, and I expect fucking better from Pharyngula – so if you want to be like the lowlife inbreds on FB dribbling over young girls, go right the fuck ahead, but I reserve the right to call you a dribblng hurr hurr douche.
.
Christ
.
I need a lie down. Fucking people.
Gerwinpetty
Does this sound familiar?
You knew it was sexist, and now you are calling sexism “some stupid issue”?
Do you think you are going to impress people here with that bullshit, or are you just here to troll?
Slight inaccuracy in this post…
They’re not all teenagers, one of them is 20
(Also, Willow>Buffy)
or quantum mechanical 2 axis disorders :)
Young women… creepy dude with a control/power complex… sounds like yet another incarnation of Joseph Smith to me.
There’s a video on you tube of Bob Larson interviewing Necrobutcher, of Mayhem fame. Worth watching, especially to see how calm and polite Necro is.
I love the young lady’s comment that “There’s almost a tangible presence of evil,” …yeah, almost tangible but really just in their heads.
Gerwinpetty:
That shit is terribly sexist, and you obviously knew it when you posted or else you wouldn’t have included the disclaimer. What you basically just said was, “I know this might hurt some people, and I know that by saying this I am willingly contributing to a patriarchal culture, but I’m going to say it anyway.” How about next time you feel the urge to post stupid shit like that, you either don’t post it or take it somewhere else. We are not interested.
You know what? No. Fuck that shit. This is not about Emrysmyrddin being too sensitive about your supposed humor or any other fucking excuse like that. This is about the fact that you willingly and knowingly made a sexist remark and don’t seem to give a damn about it. “Jokes” like that contribute to a society in which it is ok to engage with young women, not on the relative merits of their beliefs, but only as sexual objects. The notion that “that’s life” for women like me is only true so long as people like you continue to prop up the patriarchy.
But you know what else? It wasn’t even funny. If you were even slightly funny you wouldn’t have to rely on old sexist bullshit for your jokes. Recycling the same sexist crap that’s been said for centuries isn’t witty, edgy, topical, or any other kind of funny. It’s lazy and stupid, and we don’t want to fucking hear it.
—
On a related topic, the next time someone dismisses someone because they are a young girl rather than because of the substance of their beliefs I am going to loose my cool. I am only 3 – 5 years older than those girls, and I am really tired of people like me being dismissed for being young and female. I encourage you to question their beliefs, methods, his motives in recruiting them, and the power-dynamics at play in that sort of relationship. I am certainly questioning all of those things. But please don’t be the lazy asshole who uses the mere involvement of young girls as proof of the ridiculousness of a belief.
gerwynpetty @ 112;
You see a charlatan promoting the old con of demonic possession (a belief that has caused no small amount of suffering in the past and that is the kind of irrational blather that is popisoning the American public discourse) along with three young women, a sight that brings to mind all manner of unpleasant associations with cults that specialise in exploiting vulnerable youngsters, and almost your first thought is to drool over the young women in question, completely ignoring their humanity in favour of treating them as objects that please your sexual aesthetic.
That you know this is sexist is made clear by your disclaimer, and yet you go right ahead anyway, knowing that you are objectifying these women, and that by extension you are telling all the other women on Pharyngula that your first response to them, should you see any image of them, will be to evaluate their relative attractiveness rather than the content of their arguments.
All this is bad enough, but when you are called on it by Emrysmyrddin @ 117 and other commenters, instead of considering the impact of your words and how they might effect the women who post and lurk here, you promptly double down with your attitude that oblectifying women is totes OK, and anyone who disagrres is some humourless hysteric.
@ 119 you write;
They are young women, and you are replicating the same attitude as that promoted by the arseholes who laugh at ‘jailbait’ photos – that young women, whether above the age of consent or not, exist primarily as a source of enjoyment for men rather than as actual people. That it is acceptable to ignore the humanity of the women in question in order to drool over them without their consent.
It may come as a shock to you, but women don’t actualy exist solely to please your peen. They are actually people in their own right, with their own hopes, dreams and aspirations, and a great many of them do not enjoy being fantasised about by every entitled jerk who wanders by and sees a piece of meat rather than a human being.
And then we get to;
Because pointing out that women – even young, attractive ones that have a funny effect on your apparently all-important peen – are still people rather than pieces of living, three dimensional porn is totally a stupid issue that people use solely to show their false indignation. It is not as though recognising the humanity of women has any ethical merit in its own right, afterall. Wow, you really told all us feminazis, didn’t you?
And people also make racist and homophobic jokes. They also make transphobic jokes and rape jokes and jokes that mock the differently abled, and all manner of other jokes that punch down the power gradient and reinforce the inequality and bigotry that infects our society, but its all good – the targets of these paragons of comedy should just listen to you, and grow a thicker skin, right? Afterall, people make racist/homophobic/transphobic/rape jokes. You might not like them. Tough – that’s life… right?
gerwinpetty:
Emrysmyrddin, Beatrice, Hurin, blogofmyself:
And this is why I love it here. Thank you.
“Hur Hur jailbait” comments aside, if he isn’t screwing them now, including his daughter, he’s grooming them. The setup is just too classic. Respected authority figure gives them fame (of a sort), some money and makes them feel special. He gives them a sense of power that is completely dependent on his approval. And he spends a lot of time alone with them.
I just crash into this attitude (it seems like) everywhere; I’m physically sick of it. You hurr-hurrs can’t have Pharyngula too. It’s just not on.
PS my #132 – ETA thank you to Gregory Greenwood too. Why this place is not the grin-and-bear-it gauntlet that too many others are.
opposable thumbs
Seconded.
Emrysmyrddin
Agreed.
Wait, are they losing ‘demons are real’ votes? I coulda swore the total was higher (not the percent) originally…
Hey, PZ don’t drag Buffy the Vampire Slayer into this!
She’s on the side of good not evil!
&&&&&
Latest figures as of now:
Poll – Monday, October 29, 2012
Do you believe in demon possession?
Yes, demons are real = 1% 66 votes
No, that’s ridiculous = 72% 4,138 votes
I am currently possessed by a demon = 27% 1,530 votes
PS.
Not the far Side cartoon writer /drawer surely?
No.
Good.
No relation I hope?
@130. blogofmyself – 28th October 2012 at 1:22 pm :
Well said – and suggested by me (for whatever little that’s worth) that that comment be nominated for the New Molly Award.
I voted ‘posessed’, of course. =^_^=
1%
67 votes
Yes, demons are real.
72%
4164 votes
No, that’s ridiculous
27%
1545 votes
I am currently possessed by a demon.
… and the demon stole an ‘s’.
I love all of you who tore gerwynpetty a new one. What a douche. Pathetic. Having worked out that something one is about to say shouldn’t be said, but going ahead and saying it anyway? Seriously lacking in character, that.
Wow… it would appear as if people need to grow a sense of humour around here. Yes, nunbnuts, I made a joke. God forbid! I dared to poke fun at people caught up in a patently ridiculous situation. And wow, I dared to voice an opinion shared by most straight men who saw their picture.
You know what – you can take your “I’m soooo offended” attitude and shove it up your arse. I can understand people being upset over an invitation to somebody’s hotel room, but over a fairly bog-standard joke. Get a life people. Do you run around around with your hands clapped over your ears lest god-forbid somebody says that might offend you.
Actually, no – I think the opposite is true – because you LIKE being offended, being able to wail about how you’re being oppressed, jumping up and down, drawing to attention to yourselves by crying out “No! Look! I’m the most offended around here!” Pathetic the lot of you. Some serious growing up needs to be down around here.
And as for Tigger the Wingnut “something one is about to say shouldn’t be said” – that is so wrong, it’s not even right.
Who are you to decide what can and cannot be said? Are you the arbiter on free speech. Yes, free speech comes with responsibilities and if you all want to engage in hand-wringing and pious wailing over what I said, that’s your right, but you have no right to decide what “shouldn’t be said.”
In fact, that makes you an ever bigger dick than what I supposedly am, for even thinking that way.
Oh yes… “Tits!”
let the wailing commence.
FREE SPEECH!!!!!!1111eleventsyy!
Cupcake, you’re the one wailing. I’m rolling my eyes in exasperation.
You were perfectly aware that what will follow in this sentence is sexist. Cut the “it was just a joke” crap.
Own your fucking mistake and stop whinging.
I know – because god forbid I would want to be exorcised by three cute girls.
Suddenly I see some mind reader here is making all about my “almighty peen.” Gosh – it would appear as if the sob sisters have one-track minds to boot.
And how much clearer can I make it: I MADE NO FUCKING MISTAKE. The joke was intentional. Deal with your lack of humour.
*yawn*
Your whinging is tiresome.
Oh, and maybe read comments 130 and 131.
I don’t see much use in explaining shit to you over and over again if you can’t be bothered to read what people have already written.
If the joke was intentional then you must accept the consequences that have arisen from you having made it. It seems you don’t want to accept those consequences, in which case you had no business making the joke.
Either take responsibility or what you say, or don’t say it.
gerwinpetty: Before before saying stupid things like it was just a joke, you really need to this:
A Framework for Thinking about the (not-so-funny) Effects of Sexist Humor
Julie A. Woodzicka Washington and Lee University
Thomas E. Ford Western Carolina University
Europe’s Journal of Psychology, 6(3), pp. 174-195
You then need to explain why you are quite so clueless.
Yawn.
I’ve said my say.
I’ll leave you to your sad little lives where you filter out everything that might just offend you.
I’m guessing you don’t watch TV, or listen to comedy shows either? Or are you the kind who write letters to comedians to tell off-colour jokes?
And Matt – where exactly have I not accepted responsibility for what I said? Or does “responsibility” in your book mean that I should apologise for an off-the-cuff comment that a bunch of hand-wringers took excetion to?
Sorry, not going to happen. There, that’s taking responsibility. If you can’t take a little joke, tough shit.
PS Mail me that politically-correct talk-fest you mentioned and I’ll read it. Maybe.
Oh Beatrice, yes, I read Gregory’s comments. You’re right – people do make racist/homophobic/transphobic/rape jokes. You’re right – you might not like them. But that doesn’t give you the right to say they can’t be told.
But that’s life. Get over it.
So you did try excusing yourself on the grounds it was “just a joke” ? What does your thinking it was a joke have to do with anything ?
You have not bothered reading that paper have ? That makes your ignorance willful of course.
Well you have yet to explain your ignorance about the pernicious effects of sexist humour, so do you intend to offer an explanation as to why you are so clueless on the matter ?
Apparently in some quarters taking responsibility for your actions means refusing to take responsibility for your actions and then running away to continue avoiding the repercussions of your actions.
I have come to really really hate the “it was a joke” excuse. So much so that when someone comes out with it, I pretty much considered it a de-fact admission on their part that they are a scummy excuse for a human being.
Well. According to your own FREE SPEECH argument, I have at least as much right to say that as they have a right to say those jokes. But I’m not saying can’t, I’m saying shouldn’t. Of course, in this particular space, you’re get a lot of shit for telling these jokes, but that’s still not a can’t. The internet is vast, pointing out that you’re an asshole hardly trumps your right to be an asshole everywhere else.
Of course, we’re not talking about anyone’s right to say bad jokes. We’re talking about those jokes contributing to harmful stuff (sexism/racism/homophobia/…) and how people should be aware of the effect of their words. You should realize it yourself that these jokes are harmful. That’s what people here are telling you. “I can say whatever I want and you can’t stop me” really isn’t an argument against that. It’s just vacuous chest-thumping.
—
On this blog, if you spot sexist shit, it will be pointed out to you that it’s not welcome here. If you keep it up, it will be pointed out that you’re not welcome here.
Get over it.
On this blog, if you
spotspout sexist shit, it will be pointed out to you that it’s not welcome here. If you keep it up, it will be pointed out that you’re not welcome here.“you have yet to explain your ignorance about the pernicious effects of sexist humour”
Oh I see. So unless I justify my actions according to your definition of how the world works, then I’m in the wrong? Well, here’s a newsflash – I don’t subscribe to that little theory. Ok?
Just because you want to live in some sterile, group-think society where everybody thinks pure thoughts and nobody dares say anything out of turn, because it might just offend somebody – screw that. Yes, I know *gasp! shock! horror!” Somebody doesn’t think like I do! Guess what – unless you’re telling knock-knock jokes, a lot of humour does offend. Tough shit to all of you. I’m not sure what part of “I am not apologising for your hyperactive sensibilities” you don’t get? Either way, it must be a cold, dark world you all live in, scared of treading on somebody’s toes all the time.
Matt – “You have not bothered reading that paper have you” Not unless you provide me a source with where to get it. I’m certainly not running around for you. YOU want to impart your wisdom – YOU do the work, ok, friend? While you’re at it – send me something on why ageist, racist, anti-Republican, anti-redneck, anti-stupid people humour is also bad. Because evidently is must be.
In fact, unless you’ve approached PZ with exactly the same arguments when he’s made jokes about religion, or Republicans, or anybody with a batshit insane theory, I’m calling you lot all hypocrites.
But because it’s fashionable to be all pro-feminist in a post-elevatorgate world, we can jump on that bandwagon. For that matter, why aren’t you taking similar offence to people making jokes about Larson?
Oh yes, because you all think Larson is batshit insane and is therefore exempt from your moral outrage.
And that’s why you’re hypocrites.
Now, if you’ll excuse me, I have to tell a joke about a black, lesbian, hunchback over at the NAACP site.
gerwynpetty:
I’ve been watching a lot of Supernatural lately so I voted for being possessed (yes, it’s incredibly cheesy and ridiculous but that’s the fun and it treats the Bible the way Hercules and Xena treated Greek mythology).
gerwynpetty, fuck off.
I gave you a citation. Here it is again, only annotated for your benefit.
A Framework for Thinking about the (not-so-funny) Effects of Sexist Humor
The title of the paper.
The authors of the paper, plus the main institution at which they work.
The name of the journal, plus the volume the paper appeared in, and the pages on which it is to be found.
If you cannot work out how to get hold of a copy with that information, I doubt you would understand it if you did.
Really, this is basic stuff.
You know, Beatrice, if you were less anti stuff and more pro stuff, your outlook on life wouldn’t be so fucked up. Positive reinforcement and all that.
You should try it some time.
Oh, and admitting you cannot use Google is hardly likely to make us thing you are very intelligent.
Lol, I also love how I’m the one whinging, but there’s at least 5 people who’ve derailed the comments thread to insist that I’m wrong and they’re right.
gerwynpetty, it’s worth the time showing lurkers why sexism is wrong and harmful.
You’re worth shit, but thanks for providing a lesson in “kids, don’t do this”.
By the way, did you all also jump on the “spank it out of me” comment above?
Hmmm?
Are you at least consistent in your moral outrage?
Found it Matt – despite your lack of help. Really, you can quote names, but can’t even copy/paste a URL? Not very helpful are you?
Still found it. Got as far as ‘facilitate tolerance of sexism and discriminatory behavior among men’ and wrote it off as crypto-facsist feminist bullshit. Tell me, what does telling anti-establishment jokes facilitate amongst men? Or jokes about drug-taking? Or any other standard of the repartee? Why not outlaw comedy alltogether, because damn! Some of it’s going to offend somebody somewhere.
You really do have a very screwed up idea of the world – not to mention very wrong per-conceptions about myself, if you think I am sexist.
In afct, if that’s what you base your opinion of me on, then you’re a bigger bigot than I’ll ever be.
Beatrice – it’s only sexism in your mind. What if it had been three hot, young men standing with the preacher and I’d said the same thing?
I’m guessing you wouldn’t have said a word. Utter silence. Because it’s only sexism if it offends your morals right?
And where are your comments denouncing the “spank” comment above?
Sorry, but you are a nasty little hypocrite.
Got a grown-up to help did you ?
And you have proved our point for us.
Be gone with you scum.
I raise the same point with you. What if it had been three young men standing there. I bet you wouldn’t have said a word.
Why not?
Also, where is your denunciation of the “spank” comment above?
If you’re going to be morally outraged, at least be consistent.
No need to get all huffy and snippy just because I’m holding up a mirror to your own actions.
Oh look, gerwynpetty wants us to explain sexism to him, because he apparently isn’t aware of it.
Fuck off troll
I see our “free speech means don’t criticize my speech” troll is still trolling. And can’t do its own research, or back up its claims. Pitiful specimen.
“crypto-facsist feminist bullshit” I think he called it.
An odd description for a reality that has been well documented and has ample evidence to support it. But then he is a bear with very little brain, as his inability to understand a citation of an academic paper demonstrates.
The fact remains that
a) you haven’t attacked all the other so-called sexist comments on here
b) You yourselves obviously subscribe to the sexist “fairer sex” myth, because how DARE somebody make a joke about three girls, wereas making the same oke about three boys is perfectly fine
c) You haven’t attacked all the other offensive humour on this site.
Therefore, for all your lame name-calling (seriously, all these pretenses to academic superiority and you’re reduced to playground name-calling? pathetic) the fact remains that you’re a bunch of hypocrites.
Until you can show that you are equal-opportuntity offendees, that label will stick. You call me a bigot for telling a sexist joke. Fine, I call you bigots for allowing all the other offensive on this site to stand.
And now I shall leave, thus allowing you all to indulge in mutual masturbation and back-slapping and self-congratulation on how we “showed that troll.”
Of course, referring to somebody you disagree with as a troll is really the lowest form of debating, but then, I expected nothing less from you.
Toodle-pip.
PS Beatrice, you really do need to get laid.
Of course, a woman talking about sexism means she needs a fuck. You’re doing really well showing us that you’re not sexist.
Boring troll is just trying to get banned now. Yawn.
Bets on the flounce?
Why should I talk to someone who cares so much about their freedom of speech but would obviously be ok with genocide?
Debate is easy when you can assert someone else’s opinion and then attack it.
Dipshit here can’t be trusted, while he claims to be all about freedom of speech he would have no trouble with someone trying to silence Pauly Shore
Unevidenced assertion *POOF* dismissed as fuckwittery and hyperbole. “That which is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence” Christopher Hitchens.
Does anyone know what this means?
@chigau
He earlier asserted that if someone made the same comment but genders were flipped no one would be mad about that. He’s entire line of argument is apparently bent on his inability to distinguish his fantasy from reality.
Also he kicks puppies
He seems to have confused making jokes about someone being a Republican with someone being a women. For some reason (being thick probably) he cannot tell the difference between something that is a choice and something that is not.
Also please take note of shifting goal posts
a) Porbably sexist but a joke
b) Not sexist get off my back
c) Yeah well you’re hypocrits according to the elves that see into the future!
d) well you’re just picking on me and ignoring everyone else!
I think this one is probably the key.
@Chigau
and let us not forget that if we were all in Narnia he totally would sell us out to the White Witch. Fucking asshole.
Ing
I never liked her.
I’m glad that house landed on her.
Well, aside from the short, catchy song by Guided By Voices, Demons Are Real, I’m going to have to go with no.
Who would’ve thunk that someone who went out of his way to defend his admittedly sexist joke by repeating “IT WAS JUST A JOKE” as if that actually was a defense would also play the FEMINISTS ARE NAZIS card. It is almost like he was actually just as sexist as he appeared the entire time! Amazing!
Matt Penfold
I took a look at that paper. Didn’t get very far though, the first few sentences are not just tendentious, they are just blank assertions of someone’s opinion. I hope you’re not claiming that a paper that starts like that has anything to do with science. Let’s hope it wasn’t financed with public money.
gerwynpetty’s quip was out-of-place here, although I defy any man here to deny they wouldn’t expect to hear something similar in male-only company and that they wouldn’t call it out.
You don’t need anti-sexism or whatever to disapprove of the quip: good old-fashioned manners work much better and are less contentious. It’s just not considerate to say things like that in front of the ladies.
From a dialectic point-of-view, though, gerwynpetty kept his end up very well against the numberless horde, and those who started whinging most strongly were just left bleating a pathetic “whinge” at the end.
Too many big words for you ?
Why not try being honest, and admit that evidence is not going to change your mind. You would still be a scumbag, but a bit more of an honest one.
So what?
Oh really? The part where he called people femminazis or told them to get laid or any of the other actually sexist shit?
I smell socks
I was thinking of socks, too.
Do you understand how abstracts work?
I’ll change my whinge into a “headdesk”.
You are missing the point by a couple of miles. What men say amongst each other need not be any different than what men say in front of women. I’m not a lady and I don’t care much about people who want to protect a “lady” from naughty words that they will happily use in front of other guys. That’s not the points. The point is that , for example, calling someone a bitch contributes to sexist culture, no matter if you use it only in front of men or in mixed company.
I don’t object to woman being treated as sexual objects because my lady ears/eyes can’t take it, but because it’s harmful. It’s sexist.
The fact that people feel like bad jokes (ignoring context) can go unattested just means people need to call them out more.
That said there is a time and place for crude jokes. All jokes are inside jokes, comedy is a connection between speaker and audience.
At work people put on a comedian who had a large portion of his routine dedicated to how rude the French were for not helping him find the Eifle Tower. This completely broke the connection for me as a) my experience in France didn’t match it at all and b) I couldn’t get over how anyone in Paris could miss the TOWERING ILLUMINATED PHALLUS that dominated the skyline. Nothing else he said could be taken as hilarious for me after that.
Typically hur hur statements themselves actually aren’t funny. The only time they can be funny is if you continue it into crossing the line twice, or absurdity (see the Monty Python Innuendo sketch WINK WINK NUDGE NUDGE), invoke a Crow Syndrome or subvert expectations.
For those who haven’t seen the article, here are the first three paragraphs that has oh so many crying SHRILL ANTISCIENTIFIC FEMINAZIS!
Oh, and here’s the abstract, which is probably been mistaken as an introductory paragraph rather than a summary:
None of this sounding particularly harsh? None of it sounding like it warrants dismissal as non-scientific? None of it sounding like it could accurately characterized as “fascist”? Yeah, I’m sure everyone here is absolutely SHOCKED about the fact that anti-feminists dismiss feminist literature by mischaracterizing it.
Yeah. That’s it. It is all about being polite and about feelings. Nothing about reinforcing a sexist culture that actually harms people.
Forgive us if we don’t take the opinions of someone so obviously clueless as if they were of paramount importance.
Since I put an example where my point should have been, the point (finally) is that sexism isn’t just that thing that gets recognized by women and completely fine when you’re with the guys. Sexism is still sexism when you share your sexist thoughts with men, it’s still harmful and it still hurts women by way of contributing to the overall sexist culture and reinforcing bad attitudes some men have towards women.
I am picturing clastum3 as Foghorn Leghorn.
For example “rape jokes are unfunny” is either true or not depending on how you define a rape joke.
Wanda Syke’s routine of wishing she could leave her pussy at home to avoid rape is hilarious, but is mocking the prevalence of rape and drawing attention to a female POV on it. Both funny and productive
George Carlin’s routine of proving even rape can be funny by getting people to imagine Porky Pig raping Elmar Fudd works because it starts out in a pure absurdity, then hilariously and hypocritically mocks and berates the audience for laughing at it by attributing rape apologetic to the situation ‘I know what you’re thinking; ELMAR WAS ASKING FOR IT”. Maybe not as productive but still funny
Another comedian whose name escapes me made a joke about why do we kill killers but not rape rapists? Mocking vindictive justice philosophy and mocking the fact that as a society we are find committing one crime upon criminals but not another (the routine detailed a judge who was very uncomfortable about having to administer sentencing).
Joking about say tying a co-worker to a basement radiator and having your way with her by contrast….not funny, not productive. Just creepy.
The more sensitive the subject material the better your delivery or message has to be to make it work.
It seems not. What is it about misogynists and not being unable to understand an academic citation, or understand an abstract just gives an outline of what the paper discusses, and does not include the evidence used to support the conclusions ?
Freedom of speech means “I can make a sexist remark but you can’t tell me it’s sexist.” Freedom of speech only goes one way for gerwynpetty.
Because actually understanding science would make it harder for them to dismiss feminism as unscientific. Ignorance just makes things so much easier.
Beatrice
What you seem to be aiming for, then, is total thought and speech control, and that frightens people.
Do you never, in female-only company, use disrespectful words of men in general or in particular?
Social mores have always had to accommodate a certain amount of inconsistency and even hypocrisy, and it will probably always be like that.
Oh fuck off.
Men calling women bitches is a necessary hypocrisy. People saying they’re not ok with that is TOTALITARIAN DOMINATION!!!!
Where the fucking hell did I say that? Stop making things up when you don’t have anything intelligent to say.
You are welcome to call me an asshole, in company of men, women or anyone else. You will notice that I am objecting to sexist language and not swear words in general.
You really don’t understand do you ?
Mmmm… world domination. Sounds fun. As long as I’ll have minions to deal with the paperwork.
Someone talked about liberals not playing the long game. Actually we are. A Romney loss could set the GOp back for a long time. Look at what THEY are saying to their audience. They are terrified of an Obama win and pulling out every stop for this election. Think about what they are afraid of. Palpatine is on the Death Star people, pull up your pants, stop whining and take the tactical shot.
wrong thread
I think the menz are afraid they will be the minion. Although I am a man, I’m not afraid since the menz have told be I am not a real man.
According to some people, the alternative to just sitting by or actively contributing to cultural sexism is if we are all totalitarian Thought Police. No wonder they think that feminists are Nazis: Because countering and attempting to improve culture is just like sending people off to concentration camps for being different.
Let no one accuse the anti-feminists of being un-nuanced.
#215
Not sure if you haven’t got your sarcasm a little twisted there.
Whatever, it backfires, because nuancing is not a word that often springs to mind in connection with pharyngula. It’s the violence of the language used round here that gets people thinking you might pass your idle hours dreaming up delectable ways to enforce your opinions.
Ing: Technically it was the wrong thread, but it seemed strangely appropriate.
I am, of course, referring to nuance about ideas, not about the “nuance” that is all about politeness and tone. But nice try.
Care to address that you are most likely a fucking moron who thought that the abstract to Matt Penfold’s article was the introductory paragraph? Or are you just going to go down the road of crying about how mean Pharyngulites are to people who don’t know what the fuck they are talking about?
clastrum3 is unable to see nuance if it includes rude words, apparently.
Or more likely, unable to see nuance if it includes not being a raging sexist douchecanoe.
Crap. I tried to post an answer to fuckwit’s latest, but some word combination in it triggers moderation.
So, fuckwit, decide: are we using too much naughty language here, or are we trying to make naughty language illegal? I know it’s sometimes difficult to keep various lies straight, but these two are really obviously in contradiction so maybe you should try a bit harder.
Oh no, bad words! Now clastrum3 is no longer actually an idiot, because we are all meanies! What have you done!?
I am probably wasting my time, but in case gerwynpetty fails to stick the flounce.
@ 144;
Your wording here is illuminating – you start by complaining that people here are tryuing to define what can and cannot be said, but this morphs into shouldn’t be said by the end of thje p[aragraph.
No one here is oppressing your freedom of speach. No one is saying that you cannot make offensive jokes, they are saying that you shouldn’t make them. No sanction is being applied to you beyond the commenters here calling you on your bigotry and calling you an arsehole for, well, being an arsehole.
Even if you were to be banned from this site, it still wouldn’t undermine your freedom of speech. The internet is vast, and their are countless sites were the regulars are bigoted enough to laugh uproariously at your misogynistic pseudo-humour, and you will never need to deal with nasty people telling you what a sexist git you are and insisting on all this personhood of women stuff that hurts your delicate feelings so. 4Chan springs to mind, for instance. I’m sure you will fit in just fine there.
In summary, you have the right to say whatever offensive tripe you want, but you don’t have the right to demand that no one criticise you for saying it.
That double-edged sword with ‘free speech’ engraved on the blade sure is sharp, isn’t it?
@ 146;
Actally, @ 131 I wrote;
and;
At no point did I use the term ‘almighty’, and in both cases the point being made was that women have an existence beyond your sexual desire for them. That you were sexually objectifying them seems clear, unless you care to assert that;
Wasn’t actually a sexual statement, and that you genuinely want these women to exorcise you because you think their cruxifixes are particularly trendy or something…
No one is arguing that your joke was unintentional. We are saying that your joke was sexist. You mistake lies in not recognising, or more accurately refusing to admit, the sexist character of the joke.
@ 151;
Just because something is mainstream does not automatically prevent it from being bigoted or harmful. Popular culture is awash with with misogynistic, racist, homophobic and otherwise bigoted tropes. As an example, I was skimming channels a few days ago, and I stumbled across a comedy programme called House of Lies that supposedly satirised the corporate culture of management consultants in the current economic crisis.
This show was riddled with racist stereotypes, misogynistic jokes, and a particularly egregious running joke about one of the characters leaving a bar with a transexual, with all the other characters mocking him for this act, replicating the highly toxic and bigoted idea that transexuals are somehow unnatural, and that intimacy with them is disgusting. While one might argue that the show is delibertaely painting the characters as unsympathetic in order to play up to the public’s antipathy toward corporate culture, the fact remains that no countervailling point was ever made, and the episode left off with the idea that trans* people are repellant unchallenged.
I found that episode highly offensive, and the attitudes it promted extremely harmful. The fact that it was a mainstream comedy show in no way mitigated this. Jokes made at the expense of vulnerable groups such as the trans* community may be a popular component of mainstream comedy, but that doesn’t make it right.
Spoken with the true voice of privilege. Again, I never said that such jokes couldn’t be told, but I certainly think that they shouldn’t be told. I am curious as to why you are so accepting of such toxic ‘humour’ – do you really think that a cheap laugh is worth promoting racist, misogynistic, homophobic or otherwise bigoted attitudes that contribute to ongoing inequality in society? Doesn’t it bother you that a rape joke told to raise a few chuckles among the privileged and oblivious could easily trigger the trauma of an actual rape survivor? Is it reasonable or just that such a feeble excuse for the lowest common denominator of comedy is bought with the pain of those it targets? Where is your empathy?
Your interpretation of a progressive, inclusivist and tolerant worldview is very revealing indeed.
@ 159;
The difference here is that when a joke mock a particular religion, political affiliation or irrational belief, it is mocking a choice that someone has made, and element of themselves over which they have control. Conversely, when a joke targets a woman for her sex, or a homosexual for their sexual orientation, or a member of an ethnic minority for their race, or a trans* poerson for their gender identity, then the joke is made aat the expense of a person with regard to an attribute of themselves that they cannot control.
Mocking a harmful or foolish belief is not the same as, say, telling a woman that she will never be more than a sex object because she is a woman. This distinction is rather important.
You should really understand an argument before simply ‘writing it off’, you know. And ‘crypto fascist’? You are literally wheeling out the old ‘feminazi’ canard here? You really think that this is going to help your;
case?
And you accuse me of behaving as if I am capable of ‘mind reading’…
Also, the matter of historical context is important here. Answer me this; who has been treated as the sex class, sexually objectified and used as little more than a vector to bringing forth the next generation throughout history, women or men? And this who will suffer greater harm from the continuation of such objectification?
Take your time.
@ 176;
You really are utterly clueless aren’t you? here is a tip – misrepresenting your opponents position, and then attacking a position that they never adopted, is not what credible arguments are made of.
Oh yes, telling a woman who is discussing sexism that she ‘needs to get laid’. I’ve never hear that one before. Remind me how you totally aren’t a sexist jerk again?
—————————————————————–
Oh and clastum3 @ 192;
You understanding of social scientific research is less than impressive.
Sexism isn’t OK just between the boys. It is still harmful because it still contributes to misogynistc attitudes in broader society, and should still be opposed, but there are situations (such as where it may imperil one’s job) where a person may be forced by circumstances to let it pass, while still not condoning it.
Sexism isn’t a problem because it is impolite – it is a problem bnecause it is bigoted.
If you consider rants about feminazis and telling a woman she needs to ‘get laid’ to be ‘holding his end up very well, then you are very easily impressed indeed.
anteprepro : I could just as soon ask you to admit whether you weren’t trying to be too clever with your sarcasm and got it wrong.
That the violent language has nothing to do with what they would do in practice was said about AH and his crew in the ’30’s.
On the Penfold’s article: is not an abstract a summary of the content? Is there a single falsifiable thesis in the whole article, or even any objectively verifiable data? And I have to admit that “a framework for thinking about…..” involves just too many difficult words for me to imagine what the substantive content might be. This is not science.
Poor, poor gerwinpetty/clastrum3/socks. They live in a world so devoid of humour that the only way they can get a laugh – or even imagine anyone getting a laugh, ever – is by punching down.
And they don’t even grasp the concept of punching up.
Poor benighted creatures that they are, oh woe, oh deary deary me.
Dodging the question, while repeating something I’ve already explained was stupid? You’re a real gem.
Yeah, you’ve heard it right folks: clastrum just compared Pharyngula to Nazi Germany.
Yes, a summary . The actual details of it are glossed over and left for the actual article. So, that makes the following two comments of yours…
…completely…
fuckwitted.
But that should really come as no surprise at this point.
Oh dear! Quick everyone, run for your lives! Hurry now, hurry back up that slippery slope before it’s too late! No! Leave him. LEAVE HIM! It’s too late for little Timmy, they’ve taken away his ability to form bi-labial plosives! Those asterds!! NOOOOO! Save YOURSELF!!!11!!
But seriously, thought control, really? [spots a shiny object] I believe this is yours? [hands calstrum3 his tin-foil hat]
Seriously though, yes dammit I mean it this time, harumph. A culture is made of the actions of the individuals within it. I want to end the culture of patriarchy and misogyny in which most of the world lives. Not only can I not do that by fiat or force, I wouldn’t even if it were possible.
What I can do is call out the minor little instances of sexism I observe, loudly, with finger pointing and sarcasm aforethought. I can make it uncomfortable for the douchecanoes to display their ignorance and hatred publicly. If you think that that’s some form of totalitarian mind control you’re really are too stupid to ever understand how privilege soaked you are.
You have the right to say whatever idiotic thing you want.
You do not have the right to use someone else’s platform to say it.
You do not have the right to not be called on your idiocy.
You do not have the right to not be criticized for what you say.
Just because you can say something, doesn’t mean that you should.
It also doesn’t mean it has any value.
*sigh*
*mopping nose-projected-beer off the netbook*
what a waste
Those asterds!!
Oh socks, you have fallen such a long way down.
I think that it was my comment, waaaaay back at number 143, that (against all common sense) made gerwynpetty think that his ‘free speech’ was threatened.
I’ve re-read it, and still cannot see where he gets the idea that I am threatening to stop him saying anything. I was simply summing up what he himself had said about his own thought processes prior to making that first sexist remark.
gerwynpetty
112
Then he strawmans what I said:
144
No, you cannot read for comprehension.
What I said was:
Where is that me telling you what “can and cannot be said”, gerwynpetty?
Why did you write:
if you hadn’t already, before you typed a word, worked out that what you were about to say was sexist? Which was what I said!
You knew it was sexist and posted it anyway.
Good grief. The guy is beyond help. Knowingly makes a sexist joke, and when called out on it thinks that my pointing out how carelessly he is acting threatens his ‘free speech’.
Well, guess what? I actually know how your precious ‘free speech’ is defined in your precious US constitution and nowhere does it say
And the first amendment to the US constitution has nothing to do with private internet blog sites or people in other countries either, douchebag. If you are going to throw the US constitution at grannies on the other side of the planet, perhaps you should read it first. Ooops, sorry, I forgot; you can’t read and understand at the same time, can you?
I’m a granny-on-the-internet and I invite everyone to not fuck with me.
W00t! \O/ \O/ \O/ \O/ \O/
The more unfuckable grannies on the internet, the better!
… Wait. That came out wrong.
Tigger
Don’t you just ♥ English?
Indeed I do!
One of my favourite funny poems from childhood:
We’ll begin with a box, and the plural is boxes,
But the plural of ox becomes oxen, not oxes.
One fowl is a goose, but two are called geese,
Yet the plural of moose should never be meese.
You may find a lone mouse or a nest full of mice,
Yet the plural of house is houses, not hice.
If the plural of man is always called men,
Why shouldn’t the plural of pan be called pen?
If I speak of my foot and show you my feet,
And I give you a boot, would a pair be called beet?
If one is a tooth and a whole set are teeth,
Why shouldn’t the plural of booth be called beeth?
Then one may be that, and three would be those,
Yet hat in the plural would never be hose,
And the plural of cat is cats, not cose.
We speak of a brother and also of brethren,
But though we say mother, we never say methren.
Then the masculine pronouns are he, his and him,
But imagine the feminine: she, shis and shim!
@ ^ Tigger_the_Wing : Cheers – love that one.
Do you now who wrote that and where it’s from by any chance please?
@222.Gregory Greenwood – 29th of October 2012 at 1:16 pm :
Excellent comment, very well said indeed and seconded by me FWIW.
@199.anteprepro
@ ^ D’oh! Blockquote fail on my part, sorry.
Guess its pretty clear where there.
FossilFishy (Νεοπτόλεμος’s spellchecker) @ 226;
I believe this sniny new internet is yours. Collect it quickly, before those asterds steal it…
StevoR,
Sorry, I have no idea who first wrote it and Google isn’t being much help. Certainly, it is over 50 years old, because it was old when I first learned it as a small child (and I’ll be 55 on Saturday).
Fun with Words, which is pretty good at tracking down the origins of amazingly obscure stuff, doesn’t know either.
@^ Tigger_the_Wing : Ok. fair enough and thanks for trying.
Gregory Greenwood: “The difference here is that when a joke mock a particular religion, political affiliation or irrational belief, it is mocking a choice that someone has made”
Ah I see. So because somebody doesn’t think the way you do, they’re open for mockery and abuse, regardless of how that may traumatise them.
Thank you for explaining how a bigoted hypocrite’s mind works. You may crawl back into your gutter now.
[meta]
gerwynpetty:
1. So you claim.
2. So disingenuous!
The contention is one very specific case of different thought, the difference itself is clearly articulated.
(Your paraphrase is nothing like the original claim)
3. Care to warrant your own contention?
gerwynpetty @ 241;
Having difficulty sticking the landing, are we?
No, you really don’t.
You are doing it again – misrepresenting someone else’s opinion, and then arguing against something they never actually said. It isn’t a very honest way to approach debate.
What I actually wrote was;
The point I was making is that a religious belief, political affiliation, or irrational position (all of which are things that can and do inflict real harm, on those that hold the beliefs in quuestion, other people and society at large) are aspects of a person that they can control. They are choices. Mocking a choice that is irrational or harmful is emphatically not the same thing as attacking a person for an attribute of themselves that they cannot control, such as their sex or gender identity.
At no point did I suggest ‘abusing’ anyone, or that mockery should be applied to people simply because they think differently than I do. No one is going to be fooled by your transparent attempts to strip context from that quote.
As for ‘traumatising them’ – are you seriously asserting that mocking someone’s unevidenced beliefs amounts to trauma on a par with that caused by systemic misogyny, homophobia, transphobia, ableism or racism?
Beliefs are not above debate in a free society, no matter how devoutly they are held. And here I was thinking that you were the grand champion of free speech at any cost…
You @ 144;
(Emphasis added)
Or is it only your free speech that is an absolute?
If you start projecting much more, you could find gainful employment renting yourself out as a spotlight.