Today is the 23rd anniversary of the Montreal Massacre.
The killer, 25-year-old Marc Lépine, was armed with a legally obtained Mini-14 rifle and a hunting knife: he had earlier told a shopkeeper he was going after "small game". Lépine had previously been denied admission to the École Polytechnique and had been upset, it later transpired, about women working in positions traditionally occupied by men. Before he opened fire, Lépine shouted: "You’re all a bunch of feminists, and I hate feminists!" One student, Nathalie Provost, protested: "I’m not feminist, I have never fought against men." Lépine shot her anyway.
The gunman then moved through the college corridors, the cafeteria, and another classroom, specifically targeting women to shoot. By the time Lépine turned the gun on himself, 14 women were dead and another 10 were injured. Four men were hurt unintentionally in the crossfire.
I remember following the events of that day intently, horrified that there are people who will kill women simply because they are women. And these anonymous monsters on the internet who shriek affrontedly about women and feminists and moan that any feminist allies are ‘manginas’ — to me, every one of them has the name Marc Lépine, and is just hiding it in shame and fear and hatred and cowardice.
Since it was mentioned in the comments, here are the names of the murdered women:
Geneviève Bergeron (born 1968), civil engineering student
Hélène Colgan (born 1966), mechanical engineering student
Nathalie Croteau (born 1966), mechanical engineering student
Barbara Daigneault (born 1967), mechanical engineering student
Anne-Marie Edward (born 1968), chemical engineering student
Maud Haviernick (born 1960), materials engineering student
Maryse Laganière (born 1964), budget clerk in the École Polytechnique’s finance department
Maryse Leclair (born 1966), materials engineering student
Anne-Marie Lemay (born 1967), mechanical engineering student
Sonia Pelletier (born 1961), mechanical engineering student
Michèle Richard (born 1968), materials engineering student
Annie St-Arneault (born 1966), mechanical engineering student
Annie Turcotte (born 1969), materials engineering student
Barbara Klucznik-Widajewicz (born 1958), nursing student
Thank you for posting PZ.
A sad rememberance and an important one. Hate doesn’t exist in a vacuum.
Unlike the stuff that our press and politicians insist must be remembered (the Maine, Pearl Harbor, 9/11) this is one that should be. But it’s ignored.
I wonder if it because the victims were women? or because we couldn’t start a war and kill people because of it?
It might also be worth taking into account that Marc Lepine was apparently an atheist, which should serve as a reminder that abandoning religion doesn’t necessarily mean that you also abandon other irrational hatreds and pathologies.
While I appreciate you posting this, we need to remember to focus attention on the women who died, not the person who did this.
Remembering the women who died on December 6th, 1989 –
Geneviève Bergeron (born 1968), civil engineering student
Hélène Colgan (born 1966), mechanical engineering student
Nathalie Croteau (born 1966), mechanical engineering student
Barbara Daigneault (born 1967), mechanical engineering student
Anne-Marie Edward (born 1968), chemical engineering student
Maud Haviernick (born 1960), materials engineering student
Maryse Laganière (born 1964), budget clerk in the École Polytechnique’s finance department
Maryse Leclair (born 1966), materials engineering student
Anne-Marie Lemay (born 1967), mechanical engineering student
Sonia Pelletier (born 1961), mechanical engineering student
Michèle Richard (born 1968), materials engineering student
Annie St-Arneault (born 1966), mechanical engineering student
Annie Turcotte (born 1969), materials engineering student
Barbara Klucznik-Widajewicz (born 1958), nursing student
Some of them probably weren’t even feminist,” she says, “they just had the nerve to believe they were peers, not subordinates of their male classmates
Except that they were feminists, even if they did not call themselves that. Because in a world that contains a substantial number of people, and institutions, that say you are inferior, merely living as if you are equal is a radical political act.
(And no, I can’t possibly forget. My wife — an engineer — was taking a course at Carleton at the time, and I drove her to class later that evening. And tried not to think about copy-cats.)
orangeroughly:
Actually, it’s important to remember the person who murdered all those people, because he’s most certainly not all alone in his feelings about women. We see that brand of hate on a regular basis here. It doesn’t pay to ignore it.
Nonetheless, orangeroughy’s reminder of the victims as well is appreciated.
QFMFT.
It’s important to remember the victims, that’s true, but it is also important to look at the hatred behind this horrific crime and realize how this shit still happens today because there are people, real people with real access to real guns and weapons, who still believes the same shit Marc Lepine believed, shouts it from every possible (virtual) rooftop they can and sometimes really do act on it. Vide Anders Brevik and that guy who shot up a gym full of women a few years back (George Sodini), and the countless individual victims of intimate partner violence every day.
Hi Caine, Fleur du mal,
In the aftermath of the December 6th massacre, Canadian feminists called attention to the fact that the vast majority of media coverage focused on the man who did this, and that fact that his name became well known and recognized, while his victims were mourned anonymously. There was a push to ensure that the victims of gendered violence were not left as anonymous victims, while we profiled, named and talked about the men who committed these horrific acts.
I think we have learned little. Look at the coverage of the Kasandra Perkins murder recently, and on where the focus and majority of the news coverage was focused. We can see that once again the man perpetrating violence was named, discussed and profiled, while the female victim was silenced, in more ways than one.
I was simply pointing out that in our remembrance of these acts, we need to think carefully about the way we frame our discussions, so that we are not unthinkingly falling into patriarchal patterns of silencing and effacing women, while paying all of the attention to men.
Orangeroughy:
Yes, I understand that and agree.
“And these anonymous monsters on the internet who shriek affrontedly about women and feminists and moan that any feminist allies are ‘manginas’ —to me, every one of them has the name Marc Lépine, and is just hiding it in shame and fear and hatred and cowardice.”
You are a very disturbed person, not as disturbed as Marc Lépine, but close. To equate internet dissent with this disgusting act is beyond reprehensible.
This:
. . .can never be repeated, remembered, and applied enough.
@12: There’s “internet dissent,” and then there’s blind misogynist loathing. For exhibit A, I point you to the infamous Rationalia thread titled “Would it be immoral to rape a Skepchick?” Act butthurt all you like. These are real attitudes that exist.
@12: You haven’t been paying attention, have you? There’s been a good deal more than “dissent” going on lately (where “lately” is now 17 months and counting…..). For an example, just back up to the previous post.
Internet dissent?
LOL.
Fuck off, you little pissant.
Skeeve once again shows that the misogynists will label themselves appropriately, given half a chance.
I do not agree with the extent of Skeeve’s comment, but I think PZ goes too far at the end. The murder of these women was a horrible act. The shooter was a nasty piece of work. Internet MRAs and their ilk are disgusting and I will continue fighting against their anti-human ideas. That said, it’s a dangerous, broad brush to paint them as murderers who simply hide their deadly intent. Certainly if any of them are advocating violence against women, then the comparison is accurate. But are they all doing so?
Je Me Souviens.
The motto of Quebec is well served here. I remember. And we must not forget.
Vehement hatred composed of words knows a violent manifestation in action. It would do many people well not to forget that what they merely espouse is something that someone who espouses the same is willing to act on, to horrific effect. Perhaps some are too young to be complicit in the actions of Marc Lépine, but they should know that they represent the same things he does, they are, in a way, his legacy.
This is to you, anti-feminists, MRAs and others, Marc Lépine may be dead, but he lives on within you, a murderous coward, the manifestation of your hate, and there is little difference between you and him.
Ironic.
Rape and death threats are not ‘dissent’. They are the violent outbursts of the cowardly and the vicious, and spill out into meatspace on a regular basis.
Eamon, click through the link on Skeeve’s name. They’ve been paying plenty of attention. They just like things the way they are.
Skeeve:
Do not think I agree with you. You look to be MRA scum. You do more than _dissent_ . While you may not be murdering women-congrats, you aren’t THAT scummy-your anti equality views are the antithesis of progressive ideals.
His suicide note implies he was actually a believer when he said
“Because I have decided to send the feminists, who have always ruined my life, to their Maker”
The epithet of “atheist” I suspect was an attempt to explain away his behavior in a way a Christian could understand.
This thread is not as likely to drop kick the hornets nest because even the most misogynist trolls feel creeped out by that guy…. I think? .
@18: No, it’s probably not the case that every pitiful woman-hating loser with a keyboard is secretly itching to go on a murder rampage. The same can be said, most likely, of racists. But the point I think is to be wary of how toxic ideas can take root, and bloom into something genuinely horrible in the real world. When this sort of hate runs unchecked, and the poisonous environment it creates becomes a thriving subculture, you can never predict who out there may decide he’s justified in taking it to the next level. Therefore, combatting the hate on all fronts needs to happen.
Skeeve, fuck you.
Tony, what you’ve written is utterly stupid, unthinkingly shallow.
Shame on you for this awful display of categorical thinking.
If some rapid Christian holds up Jason Robert Bourque and Daniel George McAllister as typical atheists, it will be on a precedent you set.
Tony—would your opinion be the same if the post had said, “I see all of you homophobia-deniers and gay-bashing-jokesters as having the same names as the men who killed Matthew Shepard”? Or, would you consider it a proper calling-out of the people creating and maintaining the violent atmosphere that allows that killing?
Oh seriously. Fuck off so hard. The first thing that comes to your mind is to defend the honor of the fucking misogynists who just talk about raping and beating women (hahahahah!), instead having been found to do it. Nice priorities.
And yes, Christians will abandon their centuries-long measured and kind appraisal of atheists because PZ. They’ve never accused atheists of being mass murderers after all.
Are you honestly this stupid?
Hey, googlemess, think before you type. This behaviour is with precedent. What this man did, not yet long ago, was put to action the seething hate of misogynists everywhere, preceding him and contemporary. The current batch is his legacy, the legacy of every man who has put action to his words. An ideology of hate toward women is at the heart of this.
I should hardly have to say that atheism is not an ideology and certainly doesn’t entail any particular action by any individual. Misogyny is not similar. Shame on you.
Tony:
Oh, you think so, do you? How nice for you that reading things like “I literally want to rape her in half” have no particular impact on you. For women, most interactions on the ‘net deal with a whole hell of a lot of howling monstrosities ready to close in at the drop of a sentence. Earlier in the year, there was yet another blog post by a woman blogger, who was writing a goodbye, having been effectively silenced by the mob. One more in a very long line of women who have been silenced.
Have you forgotten about Jen McCreight already? What about the lengths these men are willing to go to, in finding personal information and outing it? Really, Tony, you aren’t thinking here.
@18: I don’t pay enough attention to know the exact prevalence of various levels of nasty, but it’s common knowledge there have been threats of violence emanating from certain quarters. I figure these things fall on a continuum: at one end there are entitled fools who grumble to their buddies that they can’t get laid or their wives are lousy cooks; at the other end there are hate-deranged losers with guns. In between you have eg. the Slymepitters. It’s a difference of degree, not kind.
Josh:
Ok, so not so much that they’re doing the murderous act, as their words and deeds contribute to the atmosphere that allows such vicious murders to occur.
****
Thomathy:
You are correct. I didn’t think that through.
I retract my statement.
Caine:
You are right.
I posted without thinking this through.
I am deeply sorry.
Thank you, Tony, that means a lot to me.
@27, shame on your for your lack of even the basic ability to construct an analogy. In PZ’s case, you have a group of people defined by the fact that they’re communicating their hatred compared to someone who communicated that his hatred was his motive. In your case, you have a group of people united by a common disbelief compared to two people whose motive baffled the police.
It’s the most profoundly irrelevant comment I’ve seen in some time, and I’ve spent the last few days battling spam and talking about Rebecca Watson.
Why are people who type angry, vulgar messages in this very thread lecturing other people about hate on the Internet. Please continue to yell at a brick wall and stand by your hatred of people who disagree with you. It amuses us and reminds us the mentality we are dealing with.
Tony, that was fast. If it matters, I never expected that from you, your post at #18. I was taken aback. I’m glad you’re willing to retract your statement.
____
That was fast. I find it difficult to believe that even misogynists could find this polarizing. If they’re disgusted by Marc Lépine, what do they think of themselves? Is the difference between their hatred and his so expansive in their minds that they think their threats are actually categorically different from his actions? How disconnected from reality can they be? Do they really think they’re hate exists inside a bubble? Fuck. That’s awful.
They’re perpetuating a culture of delusional hate. They don’t need to explicitly advocate violence in order to be responsible for their part in it, when some delusional, hateful asshole actually commits violence. How is it at all “dangerous” to link them to it, any more than it is to link those who are “merely” advocating violence (explicitly) but not actually doing it themselves?
Well, so much for self-styled skeptics being open to evidence.
Googlemess thinks harsh insults are the equivalent of actual misogyny. It’s all “hate.” Yep, it’s that stupid.
Thomathy:
Once I actually thought about what PZ said, really thought about it, I understood how and why I fucked up. It seriously bothers me that even for one second I aided in supporting MRA assholes.
Yes, googlemess, telling an asschapeau to kindly play a game of hide and go fuck yourself is EXACTLY the same as an entire culture of misogyny. Totally.
Wait, are you suggesting that evidence doesn’t mean ‘whatever blatant lies i can come up with that makes it seem like I have an argument”? because that’s clearly what sc thinks it means.
Because anger is not hate, not an emotion that goes on and on no matter how someone behaves. Because vulgarity is not the problem when someone carts in a gun to kill a bunch of strangers because they share an irrelevant characteristic.
Did you really have to ask this?
Remember kids, “I want to skull-fuck you until you have a hole in the back of your head faggot bitch” is morally equivalent to “fuck off with your bigotry.”
Googlemess, who is this us? Are you speaking here for a collective? Are you relaying the contents of this thread to a group of some sort?
Your pretense is transparent. You are amused. And that’s great. You find outrage, even hate, directed at hatred to be amusing.
It’s a great tactic to silence people, to silence victims, by telling them that they mustn’t hate those who hate them. That they should endure stoically and without emotion the abuses visited upon them.
You’ll notice, however, that no one here has advocated anything even remotely similar to the kind of personal or general, violent, intrusive, dehumanising things that misogynists suggest or perpetrate against women. Instead, we discuss remembrance of a horrible act and how horrible those that perpetuate the hate that incensed such an act is.
Or you won’t notice and you won’t care, because this is just amusing. Be amused, please, while some of us work toward a better world, instead of dwelling amused in one where such horrific hate is manifest.
@45: Yes, Stephanie, apparently they really have to ask that.
There were several sc_messes who were banned this year, the last one being the loathsome kaylakaze or summat. I’m getting a whiff of previously banned asshat.
Josh:
Of course it is, Josh. After all, content doesn’t matter. Only vulgarities and unseemly displays of anger, annoyance or irritation.
Caine, Fleur du mal, it’s possible that the stench of MRA is always familiar. Perhaps you’re getting of a whiff of another such dirtbag who will be summarily banned.
Possibly, Thomathy. Time will tell.
Skeeve, you dishonor the memory of Robert Asprin with your apologia for misogyny. Stop using that name.
The most apt description of internet haters I have seen lately. A brick wall. And then the brick wall wonders why we’re angry and won’t explain feminism nicely.
It will, Caine, and hopefully sooner rather than later. I suspect that this thread will be getting longer.
Are you fucking kidding me? Really, this is the best you can come up with, comparing a horrendous act of violence with people who do not share your opinion on various social justice issues?
Wow, Godwin would be impressed…
Did I just read that? I’m never going to defend those idiots online who are downright abusive and communicate threats, but comparing them to a mass murderer is just ridiculous.
Anybody with an ounce of reason would see that.
[meta, cause I can’t deal with the fuck actually going on at the moment]
Has anybody noticed that, while FtB has lost a number of bloggers the ones who are missed were snatched away by Patheos while the good riddance ones are now doing their own much better thing?[/meta]
Yeah, because those mass murderers exist in a vacuum. One day just some weird thoughts nobody else is thinking and nobody else supports turn up in their heads.
Al, your new little friends spend a lot of time dehumanizing people and opining that we ought to be made to go away. A number of them are perfectly happy to tell us what kind of violence we deserve. Hang out with them all you want. Don’t act stupid about what kind of people they are.
Gosh, Al, I guess you don’t get streams of rape threats and other violence along with general nastiness every. single. day. for blogging while female. That’s not exactly ‘not sharing an opinion’.
It’s just funny, I suppose, that whole forums and blogging networks are created in order to espouse hate against particular women along with women in general. Hey, the internet isn’t real, right? So who the fuck cares about what the women have to deal with? Couldn’t possibly be hate which fosters and enables a culture of violence against us, eh? Nah.
Of course, you’re the idiot who thinks bitch is a homonym, right?
Al, peter:
Engage your brains for a second.
Hell, my dumbass posted the exact same responses you both did until I gave it proper thought. MRAs and anti feminists foster an enviro nment where women are treated as less than equal. They dehumanize women through their actions. The toxic environment they have developed and encouraged leads others of their ilk to act on their hateful rhetoric.
It’s no different than the KKK. They maintained a culture of hatred that enabled their murderous members to act on their desires.
This is not a question of differing beliefs. This is about treating women as equals.
This is about not enabling people like Marc.
This is about a subset of the population that doesn’t treat women as human beings.
This is a very trivial detail but I am struck by the fact that most of those women were born either in my year of birth or within three years.
The MRAs and slymepitters of this world support the likes of Marc Lépine up to the moment he pulls the trigger.
Please, Al, what disagreement would be had up to the moment he became a murderer.
Are you really so credulous that you believe this nonsense about ‘we just disagree with you’ or are you actively trying to rationalize the torrent of backwards, antediluvian hate that spews constantly from the misogynyosphere?
I think everyone needs to hold on a second a reread the article. PZ didn’t merely equate the people who use rape threats, people who actively harass females, people who de-humanise women etc. to Marc Lépine. He simply said those people “who shriek affrontedly about women and feminists and moan that any feminist allies are ‘manginas’”
This encompasses a hell of a lot more people than the types which are being described in all the comments above. People need to take stock of the words PZ actual said and realise they are far more encompassing than the types of people the commenters are describing.
So yes, it might be warranted to compare those types with Marc Lépine, but I reiterate, PZ comments encompass a lot more people than that. Anyone who uses ‘mangina’ for instance. Not a term I condone but usage does not equal mass murderer, no more than stating anti-Semitic pejoratives makes somebody Hitler.
If i may add some more bovine faecal grist to the bullshit mill:
– People who express concerns about immigration online are all closet race supremacists.
-People who campaign and advocate welfare reforms online, such as health care free at the point of delivery, are all undercover hardline communists.
– People who show concern over western diets online are all dyed in the wool body fascists
– People who advocate relaxing recreational drug regulations online are all secret anarchists
ah yes, one more:
– (nutty?) Professors who campaign against stereotyping and pigeonholing online then tar all members of some group he assigns them to with the broadest of broad brushes are all blatant and unashamed hypocrites.
All one of them.
Jim
peterferguson, you’ve got to be kidding me. You think labeling feminist allies manginas is a common thing? You think shrieking affrontedly about women is a common thing? You think shrieking affrontedly about feminists is a common thing?
I don’t know where you’re hanging out, but it’s time to move.
You really fucking need to think about this. While not all anti-semites are Hitler, Hitler gets cover from the anti-semites.
There are no “good” misogynists. Hatred exists on a continuum. I’m not sure what the point of coddling people on the shallow edge of the cesspool is except to enable them to dive deeper.
Peter:
All of the people who diminish or dehumanize women exist on a spectrum. Every time a woman is called a ‘cunt’, everytime a woman is raped and dismissed by police, every time men treat women as nothing more than sexual objects–that contributes to a culture that does not value women.
If Marc valued women as people those women would still be alive.
Where did he get his opinions? Who influenced him? What speeches did he hear? What books did he read?
His dehumanization of women was cultivated over time and everything that contributed to his beliefs played a role in the Montreal Massacre.
You are right, Jim; that was fucking bullshit.
Hey, nothing wrong with arguing that females are the lesser end of humanity.
Looks like the misogyny-apologists have their marching orders. *eyeroll*
Oh look, the king of idiots is here. Going for another attention grab, noelplum?
noelplum99:
Fuck off.
Jim, quote the part of PZ’s description of the group he’s talking about that is comparable to anything you’ve listed.
These are lazy analogies that move from a specific idea to a broader ideology, not from a weakly held version of an idea to a more strongly held version of the same idea.
This one is better. Unfortunately, it happens to be 100% true, so I’m not sure what your point is.
Heh! I followed Skeeve’s home link. He highly praises a youtube video that Jim made.
@71 Janine
Pleased you agree with me on that much, at least.
If people have opinions and views most of us find objectionable they need to be aired and addressed. Same goes for the idiots who deny the holocaust; same goes for the extreme man-hating and trans-hating rad fems; same goes for climate denialists.
Using rhetoric to smear a group outside and apart from the arguments themselves are tricks both political wings play and it is always to our detriment imho.
Jim.
From the article:
(emphasis mine)
@noelplum
How Very Serious of you.
Janine:
How veddy unsurprising. I’m sure they celebrated with civilised crumpets and tea.
@75 Stephanie,
Engage with me or block me, but don’t block me when you find it convenient to and engage with me elsewhere.
I may not use the term ‘mangina’ but if PZ wishes to imply my criticism of ANY groups online makes me akin to some closet online murderer then the problem lies with him, not me.
I have actually saved a few lives over the last twenty years, i haven’t taken a single one. How Bout your good self?
Your honest opinion? Like when you smear the whole Atheism+ movement or the whole of FTB or… who else are you smearing these days?
You can’t even criticize people without doing the thing you’re attempting to shame them for. Meh.
Jim, I think that sharculese at #76 does a good job of pointing out why your list is bullshit. And why the argument you have presented is bullshit.
Jim:
You need to rethink what Janine was agreeing on. It is not what you think.
Stephanie,
Did I say they were common? No. Luckily I have never encountered anything of the types of misogynists listed above.
That being sad if ever do encounter a man who uses the term “mangina”, I will think very little of him and will argue against him about his usage, but equating him to mass murderer I will not.
“You really fucking need to think about this. While not all anti-semites are Hitler, Hitler gets cover from the anti-semites.”
A few other comments have made this same sentiment, that these people enable the more extreme misogynists. And you have total agreement from me, In fact, it is a point I bring up when talking to religious moderates, they enable the the more extreme elements of their religion.
But does that make all muslims terrorists. No, but that is the logic being employed here.
Just for Al, let me quote a colleague of his:
And there’s the money shot.
Jim:
You do not get to set the terms by which anyone chooses to engage you.
Janine:
Jim couldn’t argue his way out of a wet paper bag if you handed him scissors.
Excuse me, lots of ethically ambiguous people have save lives. How does this bolster your claim that your argument does not lend cover for those men who kill women because they are women and because they are ?
Tony @74
At least you are consistent.
However, i will do as you ask. I graduated in acoustic engineering and I recall enough to know that I am clearly adding unwanted damping to your echo chamber (reverberation chamber to give it it’s proper name). I mean why the hell would anyone want to hear from someone who disagrees, right?
Me fucking off, as per request.
Jim
Wrongly constructed sentence.
… meh. I can’t even bother.
Is this thread going to be another one about noelplum99? I think we’ve already had that.
If I could, I would give you a cookie.
Don’t forget to write a book about your time in the gulag, Mr. Solzhenitsyn.
Brownian:
Early, too.
Beatrice:
Yes, we have, and if the fuckwit attempts another massive thread derail with his “look what I can do!” crap, I’m sending an alert.
Fucking ‘geers and their inability to write.
It’s ‘its’. Who taught you English?
@94 Janine
Way to try and dismiss the point I was trying to make by focusing on one irrelevant aspect of it.
Poor widdle Jim, feeling so persecuted because he is not part of the .
Because is a legitimate talking point and dismissing it is just plain mean.
Please, what is that strong point that you are so proud of.
It’s right there if you’d like to read it.
And can we lose the snark and condescension, always pointless in a conversation.
Janine:
Poor little cupcake. He even missed the opportunity to partner up with Ragarth and the .
Maybe if you could disagree without be a whiny, self-congratulatory tool?
What’s the difference between telling these assholes to go fuck themselves, and all the assholes who claim they really want a fair shake for women while reserving the right to call them cunts who deserve to be raped?
Really, I’d like to know.
Because truly, deeply, down inside, I think the Slymepitters and their associated apologist remoras really do have a valid point, the subhuman pieces of shit that they are.
Pointless? You haven’t been reading your EP.
Snark and condescension evolved for a reason.
And the ones shrieking about women and feminists? What have you been doing for the last yaer-plus?
Next thing you’ll tell me that sarcasm is pointless in conversation.
Brownian,
I didn’t say it was pointless, I said it was pointless in a conversation, i.e. this one, which is actually quite serious in subject matter.
I will make this very clear for you, peterferguson.
Any philosophy and any religion that is based on denying a portion of the population their humanity provides cover for those few who murder for the sake of said philosophy or religion.
Even of most of the adherents do not support the acts of murder.
Let us pull out one random internet MRA, say, JohnTheOther. He has not murdered anyone. On what points would JohnTheOther and Marc Lépine disagree?
Stephaine,
I only got any way involved with the atheist, sceptic movement recently, roughly 8 months ago.
Fool! Sarcasm has always been useful in taking down bad arguments.
@109:
If you don’t want to be snarky and sarcastic, great. Quit trying to control the tone for others. If you’re more concerned with policing HOW people express themselves, rather than focusing on WHAT they say, this isn’t as serious a conversation as you claim.
Well, this is just gonna be a treat for everyone concerned.
Brownian, what’s the likelihood that this will devolve into just asking questions?
So many of them them would be exactly of my age now… :(
Janine,
I agree that they provide cover, I have already said as much.
But there is a spectrum of hate.
For example, we have three misogynists, one who believes women aren’t all that smart. The second thinks women shouldn’t work, and the third who outright hates women and feels they should never leave the house and has actively killed women.
I agree that the first example provides cover for #3 and further infects society with his misogyny, but I simply do not agree with the fact that he should be equated with the third example.
Your problem cupcake is that nobody here gives a flying fuck about your idiotic OPINION. Maybe if you started by acknowledging not only could you be, but you are wrong…
As opposed to what? A valuable, useful discussion that moves humanity forward as a whole?
This is the atheoskepticosphere. There is only one truth in the atheoskepticosphere: we’re smarter because we don’t believe.
From that, all wanking follows.
I do not feel like rehashing Elevator Guy, Richard Dawkins’ , , , and all of the rest of that shit again.
“Brownian, what’s the likelihood that this will devolve into just asking questions?”
Pre-judging somebodies behaviour based on no evidence whatsoever, nice use of critical thinking skills.
What the fuck do you think would be fair?
I don’t have to have witnessed every sunrise to know the sun’s gonna come up tomorrow, but I’m glad to see you’re not actually adverse to using snark and condescension.
Did you find it helpful?
Brownian:
I think the “fuck you” and “go fuck yourselves” tend to be an expression of exasperation or dismissal, as in “I find you loathsome and there’s no talking with you.”
I don’t think anyone can claim to want equality for women while reserving rape threats for those special moments. Anyone can be told to “fuck off”, anyone can be an asshole, but not everyone has a cunt and not everyone is at the same risk of rape.
When you reserve the right to issue rape threats or yell “cunt!”, you’re not so subtlety reminding a person that in your eyes, they are not an actual human being and you can be easily put in your place.
Or something like that.
Both of these things are evidence.
Does anyone else long for the days when that was all we saw?
peterferguson, do you think the people who simply don’t think women are very smart are the male ally = mangina, shrieking about womebn and feminists ones?
Stephanie,
I have a lot of friends on the Interwebz, and many of them are mutual between you and I. So, the whole ‘guilt by association‘ thing is not only moot, but unfounded here.
Thus, my comments and opinions are my own and neither reflect endorsement or condemnation of anyone else’s comments unless I directly quote them.
The fact is that PZ’s correlation and/or comparison to an individual who chose mass murder with someone who expresses an opinion about something is disingenuous. It’s right out of the Godwin’s Law handbook.
As well, I have never, not once, suggested that anyone deserve to be abused, bullied or have their civil rights violated in any sense of the word. As far as I am aware, off-color jokes notwithstanding, I have not come across anyone on the Slymepit who is serious about wanting the same.
Receiving critical analysis of commentary, points of view and opinions – even when that criticism is acerbic – is part and parcel to writing in the public sector. Branding someone who has a differing point of view as some sort of a monster is childish behavior, as is working in concert to get dissenting voices banned from social networking.
Frankly, there has been a lot of plain batshit crazy things coming out of a few of the blogs here lately, and ignoring the overwhelming opposition by people who are not even connected with the Slymepit should give pause.
It’s not disagreement. It’s hate which enables, excuses, diminishes and is responsible for threats and violence. It is responsible for undermining a culture of constructive disagreement, which could reduce violence between disagreeing parties. Big difference.
If you disagree that there is a difference, you’re a naive fucking idiot. If you’re trying to throw whatever shit you can at us to continue the campaign of hate, then you’re a hateful, naive fucking idiot.
Either way, take your ball, your foam-stuffed agreement-absorbing brain, along with the rest of your idiotic fucking analogies, and go the fuck home.
Whoops, thanks Caine. There is a vast difference.
What I was actually wondering was,
How is it that these people who claim to want safety, security, and equality for women AND yet reserve the right to call them cunts and argue that they should be raped complain when they themselves are told to fuck themselves?
I just. can’t. deal. with. it.
Tonight of all nights.
I’m usually a good PZ sockpuppet-minion, read all the cmments before I reply, yadda, yadda.
But I just can’t deal with a bunch of guys tonight whose biggest concern about a post that remembers those women who were murdered by a fucking misogynist for the fact that they were women is that PZ’s post might be a tad unfair to non-massmurdering misogynists.
Just shut the fuck up.
“I don’t have to have witnessed every sunrise to know the sun’s gonna come up tomorrow”
No but you must have witnessed a few, which is some evidence at least, which is more than none whatsoever. And no I am not adverse to using snark and condescension when I’m talking to people who are adding nothing to the relevant discussion. And how are those two quotes evidence that I will resort to just asking questions?
Al, your ability to surround yourself with people you don’t want to take at their word is…something.
I am, frankly, underwhelmed.
And what does that mean?
It automatically loses the argument? Is that it?
Jesus Christ, but skeptics have a lot of little cultural dogmas. Find yourselves some hats and you could be Catholics.
What is disingenuous is this; those disagreeing opinions that PZ is condemning is the very same reasons given by Marc Lépine.
But hey, what are a few jokes between friends>
*nudge nudge wink wink*
Instead, you opt to brand “a sort of monster” as someone who just has a differing point of view. Why?
That doesn’t follow. Or make sense.
Translation: The lurkers support me in e-mail.
But seriously, why should the fact that pointing out odious bullshit makes people uncomfortable be a reason to stop. It’s more like a reason to keep going.
Brownian:
This I can’t answer. Perhaps they feel it’s treating them as less than manly.
Giliell:
QFT and emphasis.
I was in college when this happened, within a short day’s drive. I also spent a lot of time on a predominantly male engineering school campus, since that was where my boyfriend went to school. I spent an awful lot of time in the next few days and weeks listening to many of the male students complaining about all the women in their labs and classes, bemoaning the unsuitability of women to “real engineering”, and how distracting they were and the unfairness of the slots they were taking up (the school had a 7:1 male:female ratio, btw), and thinking – Marc Lépine would sit right at this table with you, participate in this very conversation and think you were on his side.
I’m seeing a lot of that with some of the commenters in this thread. It’s not whether you would shoot people yourself – but if someone who was that lost in hatred were sitting and talking with you and your friends, what would he think?
Since Al Stefanelli is here, I suppose this is a fine time to laugh at him again.
Seriously though. And a FAQ.
Stephanie,
Well let’s assume the guy who thought that women were not all that smart was shrieking affrontedly at feminists who were protesting about sexism in academia. Does equate him to a mass murderer?
Well, peterferguson, I was just asking a question. Don’t imagine that I had formed a thought on your future behaviour based on the fact that you have admitted to having only entered this arena 8 months ago and I could infer that you don’t know that much about the subject matter. After all, I have no evidence whatsoever.
As Brownian correctly points out, this is the ‘atheoskepticosphere’, we’re incredulous unbelievers. You exemplify this.
Anyhow, I’m …glad that you inferred that I was referring to you. That’s some insight. You must at least be aware of at least some ‘stuff’.
I explained in my first post why I think contemporary misogynists are the legacy of Marc Lépine (indeed, of others like him), even complicit in the actions of their contemporary misogynist peers and how they perpetuate a world where vehement hatred can move from threats (also ideas and words) to violent action. The only difference is that they haven’t acted out their threats.
They don’t merely disagree on an issue of social justice, if there were even a legitimate disagreement to be had, they hate women and their ilk actually do real harm to women. They may not call themselves separate or different because they didn’t act where someone else did. They are not islands unto themselves.
Oh, also, this.
Yeah, actually, you have done this repeatedly. Reap Paden is quite abusive. He can’t string two thoughts together to save his life, in my limited experience, but he is determinedly abusive. Are you going to tell me I didn’t deserve that abuse, or are you going to remain silent and buds with him and suggest that I did?
The slimepitters specialize in abuse. They delight in it, and you’ve been there for plenty of it. Are you going to say that their targets don’t deserve it, or are you going to remain silent and buds with them and suggest we deserved the abuse?
Similarly, I’ve witnessed more than a few conversations?
Boy, have I heard that few thousand times from whiny, hypocritical assholes.
Er, that’s a question.
But to answer, 1) your claim of ‘no evidence whatsoever’ is absolutely idiotic. Look, kid, your parents might think you’re special, but you haven’t said anything new, interesting, or relevant. I’ve seen that go down a thousand times before.
2) by your own admission, you’re fucking new here. You have no clue what’s transpired before, so it’s a given that a whole shitload is going to have to be rehashed just so you can fucking participate, which you’ll want to do, and it’ll consist of you idiotically asking a shitload of questions about every fucking point as if they haven’t been asked before.
For fuck’s fucking sake, if you’re so goddamned new, then shut your fucking cakehole and read, dumbass.
Actually, branding Lépine as some sort of fairy tale monster that emerged from a wolf cave (where he was raised by wolves (possibly inside a vacuum inside a cave)) instead of out of a misogynistic culture we all live in is harmful.
Probably not. But the misogynists who do vehemently hate women thought he was on their side and would tacitly approve of violence against women.
Please, peterferguson, read what Tapetum wrote at #140.
And reread it.
And read it one more time.
That is pretty batshit.
Al, I demand you apologise for being white and male.
And I guarantee that I’m the first one who’s ever done so. I’ll even put down money. Let’s say, $100.
peterferguson, if you agree that they provide cover to perspectives that can include premeditated murder, why are you more concerned with protesting for the reputation of these enablers of said vicious acts rather than mourning the damage they do?
Al Stefanelli, so you don’t approve of banning and ostracism? So we can expect you to publicly rebuke the next person who suggests banning Rebecca Watson from attending a skeptical event?
(By the way, I for one will certainly judge some people as monsters for ‘differing opinions’. Speaking of Godwin, would you hesitate to make a moral judgement on a Neo-Nazi who opined that the Jews had it coming to them?)
Brownian:
Echoing. Take this suggestion seriously. There are a whole lot of people here who do not fill like hand feeding you 101 or the compleat history of incredibly nasty behaviour towards women on and off the ‘net.
Go all the way back to Pharyngula Sciborg. Most of the comments haven’t been imported yet, but you might garner a clue or three.
Al:
These ‘differing opinions’ are hateful, sexist, and dehumanizing. They strongly influence those who act on their violent thoughts.
If we were talking about homophobic bigots or white supremacists, would you be so proud to count them among your friends? If so, that worries me. If not, what is the difference between associating with racists and palling around with sexist fuckers who spew venom about women.
Seriously, you are neck deep in privilege. You are so unable to conceieve of the harm these ‘allies’ of yours are doing that you make excuses for them.
Stop. You give them legitimacy by not condemning them.
Let’s assume that.
Oh, hey. Look at how that changes things. Look at how he’s suddenly motivated to act in rage, to confront women in ways meant to intimidate and to remove them from public life.
Not a mass murderer actually. Someone who is not a mass murderer only because of shame or fear. You remember that part of what PZ said, right? Because it’s important.
So, at this point, what is the difference between this guy and the not-a-mass-murderer? What exactly separates the guy who is willing to step all over women’s rights and lives in his rage from the guy who doesn’t dare to do so permanently?
This…
…AGAIN?
I’m off to eat the pot brownies that Brownian unintentionally inspired me to make.
Seriously, when some people’s biggest problem is “TEH GASP OH NOES PZED DUN USED NORTY WERDZ/RHETORICINGISATION” as opposed to…ooooh I dunno, let me think of something off the top of my head…the aspects of societies and cultures that systematically relegate women to second class status making the type of mass murder referred to in the OP more likely (as opposed to less likely), it’s time for me to get fucked up.
Why? Because it just is okay?
Oh, and what Gilliel said at the end of #131. MRA’s/Assorted anti-woman whiners,: Please, for everybody’s sake, just shut the fuck up, you’re ruining my enjoyment of being a member of this species.
Louis
Brownian,
“Er, that’s a question.” Of course it is, the comment was about resorting to JUST asking questions. I didn’t know asking one question would damn to to that position.
“by your own admission, you’re fucking new here. You have no clue what’s transpired before, so it’s a given that a whole shitload is going to have to be rehashed just so you can fucking participate, which you’ll want to do, and it’ll consist of you idiotically asking a shitload of questions about every fucking point as if they haven’t been asked before.
For fuck’s fucking sake, if you’re so goddamned new, then shut your fucking cakehole and read, dumbass.”
Where to start with this absolute batshit-stupidity of a statement. When I replied to Stephaine stating I’m new to the atheism/sceptic community, it was in relation to her asking me what I was doing a year ago plus. That does not mean I haven’t read up on what was going on, I’ve had 8 months to do so and I have, so don’t assume I am lacking any information unless I demonstrate it. Such as making ridiculously stupid assumptions about a person.
Oh and incidentally, the question “What would JohnTheOther/Insert MRA/Misogynist here and Marc Lépine disagree about when it came to feminism/women’s rights etc, obviously apart from Marc’s mass murder?” is a fucking good one, and one I would very much like to see answered.
I will not be holding my breath.
Louis
Back during the ‘Nam war protests, a common slogan was that you were either part of the solution, or part of the problem. As MLK so elequently phrased it:
Those of you who complain about PZ overreaching are the white moderates afraid of change. You hold back change by poo-pooing and trying to soften the truth about society, and some people in it. If you won’t be part of the solution, at least have the decency to shut the fuck up and let those trying to create change do so without your unnecessary impedements.
Marc Lepine probably wouldn’t wet his pants at the sight of a couple of hipsters with putty knives?
Do you understand what just asking questions refers to?
I can’t quite wrap my head around the kind of culture that makes people HATE women, or feel murderous because women are in power. I mean, I know plenty of people here who dismiss women, who patronise them… but outright hate?
@JimmyNoPlums – Fuck off back to your wretched hegdesh, so you can empty your sack at the thought of brutally slaying women.
@Al – You scare me. I trusted you, and now my story is in your blog comments for your MRA friends to laugh at. I was stupid to trust.
But I can’t stop thinking of a late friend of mine. She had encephalopathy due to an inherited problem. You remind me of her and I’m torn. I saw her go from an animal rights activist to a dog-kicker, almost overnight. Couldn’t blame or hate her, but I removed the dogs from the situation.
Sadly, women (and the people who want our lives to be better) aren’t dogs. We’re everywhere, being hurt by people who think that blowing out our candles will make theirs burn brighter. Please leave our flames alone, as long as you’re able.
To this shining brown star:
Disagreement? We’re being beaten, raped and killed. We’re denied our rights. We’re taunted, mocked, harassed, threatened, and verbally, physically and sexually brutalised. The biggest cause of death in pregnancy is murder, rape and sexual assault is rarely punished, and if it gets to trial then it’s us, not the rapist, who’s blamed.
You’re a nanocephalic piece of pond slime if you think that the only thing we’re upset about is a bunch of misogynist dolts shouting “GET RAPED CUNT” at us.
Decades after the Montreal Massacre nothing has changed. Women are still hated, beaten, raped add killed for desiring full human status. Teen girls are engaged and married off to men they do not know, let alone love, and are consigned to lives of servitude. Trafficked children are charged with sex crimes, baby girls are drowned or buried alive, yet all you scream is “BUT THE MEN! WHAT ABOUT THEM? I’M AN EQUALIST, FEMINISM IS DIVISIVE DOGMA!”, and you whine, and wail, and claim that women have equality already, so we should just shut up and take it.
You know what? I would fucking die for my cause, literally die. If someone said “You’d be the last one, no more sexism and misogyny from now on”. I’d go quietly and joyously. This is just internet lulz for you and your little mates, just mental circle-jerking, because it doesn’t affect you 24/7/365. It isn’t nagging and scratching at you, like a stone in your shoe, so all you can see is PZ comparing hateful men who hate women, to a hateful man that hated and killed women. Zero in, double down, and cry “NO FAAAIIIRRR”, anything to distract us from Lepine’s victims.
For fuck’s sake, peterferguson, use tags when you are quoting others. You can see how to set them up just above the box you enter your comments.
Al:
What’s also disingenuous is suggesting that people who indulge in the vilest misogynist invective, going to the extent of posting “joking” threads about raping Skepchicks, are harmlessly “expressing an opinion.” I mean, strictly speaking, that kind of trolling shit is “expressing an opinion,” sure. But you’d be naive as hell to suggest the “opinion” being expressed isn’t coming from a very real, dark place that provides justification for that rare fringe-dweller who decides today is the day to get even.
I mean, if all the MRA’s and slimepitters were saying were things like “I disagree with this feminist blogger because [calm and erudite expression of dissenting opinion],” nobody would be having a problem. Instead, what we have is a situation in which, if you were to play a drinking game requiring taking a shot whenever the word “cunt” popped up in an online discussion about the Skepchicks or any prominent feminist blogger, your liver would explode inside of five minutes. And by blithely ignoring the reality of that, you’re kind of giving it your tacit approval.
Why even brush off these kinds of “opinions,” on anything other than the most general of “free speech” grounds? Think about what it takes to be someone who even thinks that way. Of all the people I’ve despised in all my life — say, Pat Robertson, Ann Coulter, and the like — in all my criticisms of them, I have never once found it necessary or even remotely desirable to express a wish for their violent injury or death, let alone fantasize about committing the deed myself. Even conceding that people who talk aren’t the same as people who do, shouldn’t the fact that there’s probably something deeply fucked up about someone who would even talk about it give you pause?
Stephanie,
Exactly who do I “surround myself” with? I interact with a lot of people in several venues on a variety of platform who espouse different points if view.
Limiting your interaction to only people who are just like you may work well for you, but I prefer a more diverse method, as it keeps sharp my critical thinking skills.
Imagine my surprise when I finally decided to check out the Slymepit for myself, only to find it nothing even remotely like what I was led to believe.
Also, the term “surrounding yourself” is usually relegated to real world situations. The only people I surround myself with are my family.
What Al said:
Why we lol’d:
Yes, Brownian, the logical fallacy of JAQ’ing off.
I see that you are not clear about what hate is.
The Internet is a part of the real world. Are you deliberately trying to make yourself look like an idiot ? Or you are just a clueless fuckwit ?
NoelPlum99 beat you to the echo chamber comment. If you’re not even going to read the comments on this thread, then this comes across as pretty disingenuous.
It takes a special sort of person to take a thread about a mass shooting and make it about how totally super neat and awesome they are.
This shit makes my skin crawl.
Good (though it’s not a logical fallacy, it’s a derailing technique).
So stay away from the ones you haven’t yet engaged in (here’s a handy list) and you’ll be golden.
Stephanie, Janine, Tony, Caine
I unfortunately must go, thoroughly enjoyed the conversation and I most certainly am not as ardent in my position as I was when I started. Tapetum’s comments and a few of yours have been quite compelling. I’m still not entirely convinced but it is a topic which is worth further inquiry. When I have time (maybe tomorrow or the day after) I will revisit this page and reread the comments again (probably need more than one thorough going over).
Enjoyed the conversation (even you Brownian) peace out.
Brownian, watch those plurals. They’ll get you in hot water one day, by George. Or peter …
Glad you found some people’s arguments compelling. I deal almost exclusively in snark and condescension.
Well, he didn’t hit ’em all. Not even close.
Is “I’ve enjoyed our conversation.” on any Bingo card?
I didn’t get a goodbye? peterferguson, I’m hurt.
____
Good grief! It’s all about these people isn’t it? Make the thread all about them and then announce their flounce.
It’s funny, but people notice you’re gone when you stop posting. It’s gratuitous to bid farewell at all, let alone in such a manner.
Damnit, but it’s no wonder such people find these things so hard to grasp.
Martin:
You’d think so, at least you’d hope a person would be a decent enough of a human being to figure this all out.
It’s interesting Al spends so much time denying the concept of privilege, proud of his ignorance. The expression of rape threats and “jokes” comes from these men as an expression of the power differential.
No matter how much I disliked a person, even if I hated them, would I ever threaten, joke about or wish for that person to be raped. Ever. Because being raped is that bad. It’s bad beyond the imaginings of these willful clowns who live in abject fear of their privilege and power in society waning.
*these things = the topics being discussed in this thread.
Who hangs out at your blog these days, Al? Who do you cohost podcasts with? What forum do you go to for online validation?
You know very well what I’m talking about. Acting coy just makes you look dishonest. It’s really pretty disappointing.
Bwahahahahaha!
Al, do you remember how all this started? Rebecca told a little story designed to help answer the question, “Why is my meeting/conference all white dudes? Where are the women?”
Not only that, but I actually blog on topics that aren’t playing to the atheist masses. “Not just like me” yells at me every day on twitter or the blog or both about how they disagree. The fact that I disagree with them in turn hardly means I don’t see differning viewpoints.
If you’re trying to sting, you actually have to have a point.
I think its on the one at home. Typical gesture tacitly acknowledging the trolling while pretending it wasn’t here to preach.
Sharculese:
Well, see, it was dead women. Who cares, when one can argue about how mean and unfair Pharyngula is to the poor, poor menz?
Well, Stephanie, what you don’t seem to understand is that these things are just “off-color jokes”. Funny funny haha. They’re not serious or important like the imaginary people telling Al to apologize for his penis are.
What? Can’t you take a joke?
(I can make this post only because I’m home sick and already have a bucket handy.)
Rather than relying on your impressions (possibly desensitized to casual misogyny), I’ve done a sample:
“At 10590 comments, that’s an average of 1 cunt or twat for every 11 comments.”
Peterfergusen=ragarth?
****
Also,
AL STEFANELLI
fuck you.
You are so fucking blind to your privilege. You don’t care that your friends treat women like shit.
Do you also hang out with people who bully gays?
Are trans* hating people on your speed dial?
Do you go to brunch with racists calling for latinos to “go home”?
To think I used to respect you. Join the pile of scum like Reap Paden, Wooly Bumblebee, JohntheOther and the rest of their disgusting ilk. It’s clear freethought is not a skill you have cultivated.
Neither is your ability to empathize with the concerns of women.
Tapetum has said it all already.
…
Daniel Tosh says: “Wouldn’t it be funny if, like, five guys raped her right now?”
And there are men in the audience who laugh, and think “What I did wasn’t bad.” There are men in the audience who laugh, and think “Yeah, sometimes those bitches deserve it.” There are men in the audience who laugh, and think “Nobody tells me no.”
…
Pappa asks on a Rationalia thread “Would it be immoral to rape a Skepchick? Not for gratification or power or anything, just because they’re so annoying.” (Paraphrased – these may not be the exact words he used)
And there are men in that online community who think “That’s a good way to shut a woman up.” There are men in that online community who think “It’s really not bad if the target deserves it.” There are men in that online community who think “It’s not fun if there’s no struggling.” (This last one is paraphrased from an actual comment on that Rationalia thread)
…
Men complain about initiatives to get more women into male-dominated fields. Men complain about the changing atmosphere at work and at school. Men complain about women’s inherent inferiority, about what women ought to be doing, about what women are really good for.
And Marc Lepine hears this, and thinks “I’m going to be a hero.”
@163: Martin, your Jedi mind tricks will not work on me.
@168: Matt, that I would have to explain my reference to ‘the real world‘ as being descriptive between cyberspace and meatspace is actually reflecting your insult right back at yourself.
I see several of you have derailed the comments with straw men, logical fallacies, false dichotomies, etc. Jesus, some of you are so predictable.
This is why I never come here. You guys can never stay on topic.
Bye, Al. This is a slymepit-free zone.
You see? That’s not even remotely like my expectation of 1 for every 10 comments.
We should not “equate” these things, just like we should not “equate” murderers with mass murderers. Can’t you people do math?
Is “That’s why I never come here.” on any Bingo card?
—
oooh
Al got bamned!
Really? So much for…
So much for staying on topic. Al can’t even remember his own point from comment to comment.
Al, does this mean you’re not going to take me up on my bet in #149?
Well, at least Al got in one last comment to show he was just going to go on ignoring #144. I guess that’s “stay silent and support” then.
We stay on topic. Your problem is that the topic isn’t about you and what you want to talk about. It will never be about you, and what you want to talk about, especially after the banhammer. *takes off splat protection*
Sad. I’ve been waiting months for Al to tell me all the obvious fallacies I’ve been making. Guess that’ll have to wait for another blog.
Mythbri:
Or thinks “I’m the only one who has the nerve to do what we all feel and talk about.”
It’s a different version of Schrodinger’s Rapist. When the guys are sitting around complaining about women, talkin’ smack, all that, they don’t know which of the guys they’re with are rapists (and they don’t seem to care, either), nor do they know which one will be the next guy to pick up a gun and get a few things off his chest, so to speak.
what the fuck happened to Stefanelli. Didn’t he used to be coherent and honest?
Right, because when I last checked, the topic is how unfair everyone is to Al and all the poor, forsaken non-violent bigots of the world, not women who were murdered.
Oh look, Al got his ‘pit wings.
Somebody asked him to apologise for being white and male, apparently.
I thought I heard the sound of a Hoggle ejaculating.
I have attempted a hypothesis.
Silly Pharyngulite PZ-sockpuppets. What’s with all those comparisons to racism and LGBT-hate?
Don’t you know that the only on-line/IRL people who can without hesitation be likened to their murdering brethren are teh Mooslums?
In other words, someone told him he doesn’t know everything and isn’t right about everything, despite his white maleness. how dare they!
Al:
Seriously, this is the entirety of your response to my suggestion that you think about the subject at hand a little more deeply?
Yeah, you’re a fucking tool. Good riddance.
This is true. Unlike, say, Al’s little buddy Reap, one can reasonably predict that my sentences will usually contain words that are syntactically related and be demarcated by punctuation.
And that is very unfair of you, Brownian. How dare you make sense? You might give the guys pictorial headaches.
Good riddance indeed. I had no idea that he was friends with PigFucking Bigot Paden, so I had some lingering respect for Stephanelli.
Now, I know better. So, thanks, Al! Your committment to hatred over social justice is loud and clear!
How long until Al starts a thread on his blog about this?
Is there no way to hold a mirror to yourselves and see what you’ve actually become?
At one time, this was one of the best blogs on the entire internet.
ॐ:
Probably some truth to that. It may also be that Al ran headlong into the phenomenon of “All the social justice stuff is great, until it starts to affect ME and MY privileges.”
Here’s Reap Paden, Staying on Topic.
Yes, that’s the train Al’s hitched his wagon to.
Already a cynic, my instinctive distrust of people has deepened considerably over the last two years. They can literally be Mr. Hyde all along and you won’t know it for years. Stefanelli is just one of . . .god, I’d say dozens. . . of people over the past two years who shocked the hell out of me by turning out to be, well, morally depraved.
I see a fuckhead who thinks passive-aggressive whining is more effective than argument.
Wait, was holding it backwards and looking at Skeeve.
Before all the uppity cunts, faggots, and manginas stopped taking your bullshit? Before bloggers like PZ had to spend more time calling out the frothing misogynists and their “just disagreeing” fellow travelers?
Eat me raw.
What, until we started saying that women are people?
Yours never was.
Welp that’s the end of things then. Some random whiny dude is disappointed. No coming back from that one.
Thank you for demonstrating how this blog fell, Josh.
Brownian, We Are All Spartacats!
lol @ Ian, that really hurt. your wit is incredible.
Josh, if both of us were straight, I’d ask you out. You do have a way with words.
Skeeve, your name describes you. Go hang out at the Slymepit. They’re more to your liking.
Who is Ian?
Yeah, that’s always an argument-winner on YouTube.
My name describes a kid from Klaad, who is a wizard in training, learing his skills from from a demon who lost his powers. How does that equate to the slymepit?
The sheer bile directed at the “slmyepitters” is quite bewildering. I lurk over there and they always come across as a perfectly reasonable bunch, with a mountain of real world experience and accomplishments. They do point out the occasional absurdities presented on FTB, but surely thats the essence of free thought?.
Yeah, it’s a right shame. The stats are what, 5 hits a day now? No commenters anymore, huh? Tsk.
Wait…
Brown Ian?
bwahahahaha
Chigau:
I just checked. Nothing started on his blog yet.
That’s me, according to the Slymepitters. They think they’re ‘outing’ me by using it. Generally, it’s how you know someone’s a ‘pitter.
Worked like a fucking charm.
Whoa whoa whoa. Don’t you start outing people’s real names.
Thank you PZ and to Gen, Uppity Ingrate @9
Lest we forget the innumerable women who suffer through things not fatal but no less terrible every day.
I hope for the best with my daughters and for everyone’s daughters, granddaughters and great granddaughters.
Would, that we could, fathom and describe what brings out such evil in certain individuals. Mental illness is such a protean abnormality, clutching onto individuals and their progeny, skipping generations, seemingly to occur randomly.
Harkening back to my generations old training in psychology-is it nature or nurture. I tend to favor a large dose of the former with a pinch of the latter.
No further will I delve into the realm of evopsych. Awaiting PZ’s next installment.
This isn’t an argument, Ian. Just stating things as I see them. You and Josh and countless others are the reason for the state of this blog today. Calling me an MRA and/or misogynist, as was done earlier in the comments, is the most laughable thing.
Aw fuck, I was seconds late.
OMG! the poor terrified straight white bigots! Whatever will they do! Wherever will they go!
It’s certainly not the essence of good thought, is it? Let me guess, you bypassed the SG’s post of enumeration regarding the frequency the words cunt and twat are used over there.
Yeah, sounds just like a bastion of cultural goodness! Who cares about all those whiny cunts, amirite?
You’ve outted yourself, Ian. Remember the Google Hangouts? It’s not like it’s a secret. Do you all see conspiracies everywhere?
Like I said, it’s a Slymepit Shibboleth. You can immediately identify one whenever they refer to me as “Ian”.
I honestly didn’t expect it to work so well.
Don’t ever underestimate their capacity for being thoroughly disgusting, repulsive human beings.
Still one of the best blogs on the internet, with some of the best commenters ever. And by best I mean Caine, Josh, Tony, Esteleth, Brownian, chigau, and honestly I could list you all but I’d be another hour typing.
I’m grateful to your abilities to fight this fight in the way that you do. I am impressed and would make cakes and cookies and mixed drinks for all of you, if I could.
No Light @161
Thank you for this comment. I’m not sure exactly why, but it touched me deeply, so thank you.
OMG that’s genius. Hey, Skeve Pitter, My real name is Hortence VanUppity.
no, it’s Prudence McPearlClutcher.
no, it’s Chastity Sparklebottom.
Thanks, Skeeve. Your ongoing stupidity is my consolation prize.
Caine:
Bypass? Probably not. But those don’t really matter. Those are just words, they don’t mean anything.
Fuck me, but you are fucking stupid.
You really don’t have any idea what’s going on here, do you?
@diefledermaus:
Is the following an example of slymepitters being perfectly reasonable?
Well, this thread makes the Pit seem like the Athenaeum Club.
By the logic of the various things the Hangout chyrons said, my name is “Cancer Free.” Or “Because Fuck You, That’s Why.”
How… reassuring?
Nah.
My name is Estelle Leth. OBVIOUSLY.
Illuminata:
Mine’s Adrea Spedding.
Skeeve:
Do you understand the problems many of us have with the Slymepit and it’s denizens?
@224:
Please click the link provided by SGBM at 183. Yes, words like ‘cunt’ are dehumanizing and one of many examples why I and many others find them vile.
Yeah. I know. Even I’m surprised at how easily they went for the cheese.
Saying I’m stupid is so much easier that actually proving it, huh?
@dielfledermaus:
But can you answer the question? Is that an example of slymepitters being reasonable?
Do you want to provide a better example? Do you want me to look around the slymepit for a few more examples of my own?
Not at all. You’re doing a pretty good job of the latter, so it can’t be all that hard.
Tony, yes I do. I’ve been reading the new slymepit and catching up on the last year or so. I understand the “cunt” and “twat” argument. As an Anglophile, I see no problem with using cunt is most cases, it’s all about context. But that still isn’t good enough, is it? But I also see a disparity is how the site is described here as to what it actually is in reality.
Oh, I meant:
“Thank you for proving my point, Skeeve.”
@diefledermaus:
While I’m at it, when’s the last time an “ftbully” showed up at the slymepit just to stir shit? Bear in mind slymepitters show up here on pretty much every thread related to their pet peeve to stir shit.
Yeah, just full of uppity women and the men who won’t do the right thing and shut them up, eh?
Jump on a pogo stick and fuck yourself right on out of here. The pit is waiting with open arms.
Prompted by this to look also for the survivor quoted by PZ. I found A survivor speaks, an interview from 3 years ago with Nathalie Provost.
This interview is all kinds of awesome. Two things struck me; both related to the events 23 years ago.
First, she recognizes that she is, and was, a feminist after all.
Second, she humanizes, not dehumanizes.
But I recommend you read the interview, and see all the stuff I didn’t quote. You may well be struck by something else!
Another recommended link:
Lessons of the Montreal Massacre: Why women must fight to be what they want, article from the Star on the 20th anniversary also quoting Nathalie Provost.
Tell ’em “Ian” says Hi.
Are men not allowed to be actual feminists now? We only get to be allies?
Thank you for that post, chrisho-stuart.
So *ahem* Ian.
I just googled Ian Brown.
Which one are you: the journalist, the musician, the photographer…
That’s something else. I’ve only used mangina when referring to gay friends.
In the context that it’s being used here, it doesn’t make sense.
@Skeeve:
Are you kidding? I’ve only ever seen it used as a synonym for “beta male”.
@257
Depends who you ask some say yes some say no.
Yes seriously. And it’s not used to describe a person, but a part of their body. Their mangina.
Ooh, can I be the one that’s the lead singer of The Stone Roses? Except I don’t so much love the middle name George. Call me Ishmael.
A while back I wrote this in an email to my coworkers:
“My new name was Framboiseobyrnewiczbergensteinington. I recommend you practice saying it in case you ever need to scream it from your school window to save Fantasia from the Nothing.”
It didn’t take.
@243:
Well of course you see it that way. You’re not thinking through things. That and you see no problem with sexist language.
Freethinking: you fail at it.
BINGO!
It does warm my jingoistic yankee heart to see “anglophiles” so blithely assume that their nationality makes it perfectly reasonable to use women’s body parts as slurs. “Crikey, we all does it over here, Guv’nor, so it must be jolly good!”
@diefledermaus:
I hope you’re planning on backing up your claims by responding to my questions. I’d really like to know whether you think the comment I quoted is a reasonable position. If you agree that it’s unreasonable I’d like to ask what you think the probably response from slymepitters would be: would they acknowledge the unfairness and mean-spiritedness of it and try to point these out to the commenter? Would they object that it’s no good to “sink to the same level as the ftbullies”?
So what do you think about it and how would you guess other slymepitters would think about it?
holyshit
Why the venom and maldiction coming from regular commenters here?!
Certainly I have received my share of the mean spirited, nasty commenters. It is interesting to see it evolve from @12 onward.
Perhaps they are using this site as a way to expel energy of frustration and anger in their lives. Frustration and anger they are not able to deal with in other sittings but the anonymity of the net allows them to blow off steam.
I don’t know but something is going on that is not healthy(imho).
Surly the regulars can do better, with much less venom.
@Skeeve:
So you’ve never seen it used as a synonym for “beta male”?
chrisho-stuart, your link is borked. I think this is the interview to which you refer:
http://m.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/a-survivor-speaks/article1390009/?service=mobile
Thank you.
The only difference between Marc Lepine and any of the Slymepitters is that Marc Lepine had a gun and a willingness to act on his convictions.
Not all words mean the same thing in all instances.
Heh. I know Brown Ian’s real name, and it’s far more swarthy and foreign than “Ian”.
Skeeve:
You really are a fucking idiot.
And don’t call me surly, joed.
@joed:
What is the purpose of your comment?
It looks like the purpose is to stir shit, which seems always to be the purpose of your comments. Strange that you would cite frustration and anger as bad things when it seems you’re deliberately trying to provoke frustration and anger.
@Skeeve:
That’s not what I asked.
Chigau:
Echoed.
You ruined it, PZ! It was a perfectly good secret Shibboleth for indicating ‘pitters, and you ruined it!
@daniellavine
Yes I have, I just haven’t used it that way. I just doesn’t make sense to me in that context.
It suits him much better than Ian, too.
Besides, Spartacats isn’t all that foreign. Ethnocentrist.
@Skeeve:
Then surely you should complain to the slymepitters about their nonsensical use of the term rather than complaining here that criticism of their terminology makes no sense. I’m sure you’ll get right on that, right?
Brownian:
Like the ‘pitters are going to believe PZ. Please.
Well, as a queer, I can tell you, Skeeve, that I don’t have a mangina. Nor do I like the word.
Let’s not be silly. Brownian has in the past identified as Ian Brown. Whether or not that’s his real name isn’t important. In my mind, he’s Ian Brown, aka Brownian.
How am I an idiot because my friends and I use mangina to describe a part of the body?
@daniellavine I could, but it wouldn’t do any good.
@Tony I don’t have a mangina either, but many of my friends do, and they don’t have a problem at all calling it that.
double holyshit
That’s a load of shit. I’ve been Brownian for close to a decade, know as that here for half of that. In exactly two videos I used Ian Brown, and the Slymepitters jumped all over it.
And you don’t have a fucking mind, dipshit.
Great job, Brownian, Josh and countless others!
As mentioned earlier, why so much anger towards someone who hasn’t shown the same?
I’ve seen one of those two videos. What does that have to do with anything, I’ve said this. You identified as Ian Brown, so you’re Ian Brown. If you’re not, then why are you so defensive over a phony name?
You are such a liar.
Well, you are an idiot. Not too keen on particle theory, either.
Skeeve,
At the Slymepit, Dec 05 2012, said about someone who is genderqueer:
Also
Context!
Caine
Remember Breivik?
He wrote that shit down. That. Shit.
+++
Illuminata
I think I need a new role-play character…
+++
Wait, gays get special bodyparts?
Or Google.
Giliell:
Apparently. There’s no actual anatomical bit, mind.
@Caine and @Brownian and anyone else. I’ll not call names, but I will prove my intentions.
Brownian is Ian Brown to me. Not APVK. I kept using the phony name for simplicity.
Truth: My first exposure to the word “mangina” was as a description of a body part.
As in a dehumanizing description of a trans man’s genitals.
That it’s used outside of a specifically MRA context is in no way a defense of the word. Good lord.
Skeeve @ 251;
I am a Brit, and I would just like to point out that ‘cunt’ is indeed commonly used over here as a means of insulting someone by comparing them to the genitalia of women. It still functions as a misogynistic gendered insult on this side of the pond, contrary to the claims of some UK MRAs that it has some other totally non-misogynistic meaning once you leave the US.
That sais, even if the meaning did change radically over the 5,000 miles that separate us, that would not alter the fact that its common usage in the US is as a gendered insult. When you know that you are entering a discussion which includes large numbers of people from a culture where a certain phrase is strongly associated with a particular form of bigotry, then it behoves you to educate yourself about such terms, rather than try to hide behind wilfull ignorance.
As an example, when I was growing up in Blighty, ‘faggot’ referred to one of two things – a bundle of firewood or a particularly unpleasant loosely meat-based foodstuff. However, when I entered offline and online environments that included many Americans, I quickly learned that the term’s connotation in the US was very different, and so I altered my lexicon accordingly.
I didn’t just stand there saying ‘well, it doesn’t mean that in the UK, so grow a thicker skin’. And why? Because I placed myself in the position of someone confronted with that slur, even if used in error, and I considered how unreasonable it would be for the person who used the phrase to quibble over variances in meaning across cultures rather than simply apologising and avoiding the phrase while talking to people who they know it will offend due to its bigoted connotations in their culture. It seems like a basic precaution to be taken by anyone who is more concerned with avoiding punching down the power gradient than they are with bolstering their own egos and seeking to maintain some notional ‘right’ to use a term in a context where they know it contributes to discrimination.
“Nothing even remotely like what I was led to believe,” said Al Stefanelli.
Yikes. That’s chilling.
@Skeeve:
Are you sure? I’m told slymepit is like the Athenaeum Club compared to this thread. Everyone’s saying how reasonable they are over there. Have I been misled?
This has been quite a derail. I should wander off now. I only came to express my displeasure at the ending paragraph of this post.
Goodnight
Ogvorbis at #3says
“Unlike the stuff that our press and politicians insist must be remembered . . . this is one that should be. But it’s ignored.”
Canada and the Canadian Government are not ignoring this: http://www.swc-cfc.gc.ca/dates/vaw-vff/index-eng.html
“Nothing even remotely like what I was led to believe.”
Bigotry like this is what makes me ashamed to share a species with the ‘pitters.
A creeper writes what?
@daniellavine didn’t see your post until I hit the Submit button.
Yes, it’s a complete freespeech zone. The only time anyone has been called out to my recollection was when a couple of real MRA’s have joined and try to post their shit, they were driven out. And when Justin Vacula did his SurlyAmy address post. Other than that, to each their own.
Many there use the Ignore function to bypass reading crap they know some posters make.
Driven out? How so? And is Justin’s post with Amy’s address still up?
Is that seriously Al Stefanelli? That’s pretty disappointing. I used to be a fan.
That’s page 645, if Al would like to confirm (except “S/h/it” which is on the next). The four blockquotes mentioned in my #293 are from three different commenters, by the way, not one lone bigot.
But Al should remember it without my help, since he posted three times on that page. Yesterday.
“Free speech zones” are the cages they erect for protesters at political conventions. What you mean to say is that the slymepit has no community standards.
Now with more preview:
That’s page 645, if Al would like to confirm (except “S/h/it” which is on the next). The four blockquotes mentioned in my #293 are from three different commenters, by the way, not one lone bigot.
But Al should remember it without my help, since he posted three times on that page. Yesterday.
Skeeve:
That you haven’t heard it used to describe a person doesn’t make mangina a harmless word. I’ve heard it used as an insult.
Urban dictionary is hardly a great reference, but it reflects how people use certain terms. “Mangina” is a word used a few different ways. I’ve heard the word used as an insult more than a few times.
@Skeeve #308
I don’t have to do that here.
I’ll try harder.
Tony:
I’ve only seen it used as an insult. Going by the UD definitions, it doesn’t matter if one intends to use it as insult, it functions as one, in the same way as cunt. The absolute worst thing you can call a male is a word for female genitalia, which runs you smack into the “there’s nothing worse than being a woman” territory.
Well, he was led to believe it was a freeze peach zone. However, there was a severe shortage of freeze peaches. They have also been known to drive out some people there, limiting the freeze peach supply even more.
Y so angry when other people haven’t said naughty words to you? Jeezis, get a new script.
Just like the Athenaeum Club!
By the way, diefledermaus, aren’t you going to come back and explain how reasonable “I’d just call her a poison-cunt if it was me. How’s that bigotry you fucking retard mutant?” is for us?
Or was “Well, this thread makes the Pit seem like the Athenaeum Club” the best you could come up with?
Jeez, PZ, what’s with the over-the-top comparisons?
Right, because you certainly wouldn’t want to call that shit out like a decent human being. Nope.
I thought these stupid fucks are all about honest, vigorous debate?
Liars and cowards, the whole fucking lot of them.
@Brownian:
If s/he wasn’t willing to defend “safe space is just like apartheid” s/he’s not going to defend “poison cunt”.
What’s interesting to me about the “safe space is like apartheid” argument is that it’s open to the same criticism as PZ’s sentiment in the OP: that comparing safe space — private online communities that disallow certain kinds of rhetoric — to apartheid might be a little unfair, or hyperbolic or, ya know, Godwinny. And yet I didn’t see anyone on that thread in the slymepit make such an argument. It would be easy: “not wanting to talk to you is not the same as a totalitarian government policy aimed at you because of the color of your skin.” In fact, the only responses were more like “Wow, gee, I never thought about it that way. I guess we’re all a little like Nelson Mandela.”
Of course you didn’t.
So, suffice it to say, we can add diefledermaus to the list of cowardly, chickenshit liars who show up to complain about how unfairly the Slymepit is treated and then run off with their tails between their legs when confronted with actual Slymepit quotes.
QFMFT
Brownian:
For such enthusiastic debaters, odd they’ve never run across Qui tacet consentire videtur, ubi loqui debuit ac potuit.*
*For the hard of thinking: Thus, silence gives consent; he ought to have spoken when he was able to.
Skeeve @248:
If you get it one day, you’ll agree why you’re stupid.
****
daniellavine:
You know, that’s a good question.
They *love* coming here spouting their anti-feminist bullshit.
Has the reverse ever happened?
****
joed 269:
FFS.
You privileged, insensitive fucker.
Dehumanization of women.
Bullying.
Insults based on women’s body parts.
Online harassment.
Threats of sexual assault.
Sexual harassment.
Rape culture.
Dismissing women’s concerns.
Sexualized violence against women.
Entitled men who think women should be honored to get attention.
Bitchez be crazy.
Women have been dealing with this shit here, and many places online and in real life. It’s ubiquitous. It’s so fucking bad that many people, like you and Skeeve don’t even understand why it’s bad. Neither one of you stop to think of the damage it does. Heck, neither one of you thinks anything of this stuff. Why is that?
How about because you’re fucking privileged to never have to deal with it.
You don’t have to worry about sexual harassment on a daily basis.
You don’t have to worry about getting cat calls as you walk down the street.
You don’t have to worry about rape statistics.
You don’t have to worry about having your serious concerns dismissed simply because of your sex.
There’s so much you never have to deal with because of your privilege. When you’re called out…when your privilege is mentioned…you defend yourself. You double down. You refuse to see that you have advantages that women do not have. You refuse to understand that women are systematically oppressed across the planet. You refuse to see that sexism and misogyny are ingrained in American culture, as well as many across the planet. You rationalize the problems. You don’t think things through.
People like you laugh at rape jokes.
People like you stay silent when women speak up about abuse.
People like you dismiss women when they say they’ve been raped.
People like you call women ‘cunts’ when they are assertive and refuse to stay silent.
People like you show no support for your fellow human beings when they’re sexually harassed.
People like you enable the culture of rape across the planet.
People like you give legitimacy to anti feminists, misogynists, and MRAs.
People like you think you’re allies. Through your apathy, you show that you’re not allies.
But you have the chance to change. You will NOT lose any rights if you recognize that women are systematically dehumanized. You won’t lose your privilege if you start defending women. You’ll still benefit from being a male if you criticize those who make rape jokes.
You won’t lose any rights.
You will gain compassion. Empathy. Understanding.
Please. Stop and think. Look at the evidence all around you. Take off the blinders. Realize the damage that’s being done
Every.
Single.
Day.
You’re contributing to it when you defend the Slymepitters. You contribute to it when you defend Reap Paden (looking at you Al Stefanelli). You contribute to it when you call *anyone* a slut or a cunt.
If you really care about your fellow humans…if you really value women as human beings with full bodily autonomy and the right to self determination…stop and think about who and what you continue to enable.
Because I was a physics student in the 1980s.
Because Lepine’s views were what I heard all the time.
Because there is no clear distinction between Lepine’s views and those of the modern MRAs who infest the slimepit.
And because what Giliell says bears repeating:
Just shut the fuck up. Until you can acknowledge that 14 women were slaughtered in the name of your ideas, just shut the fuck up.
Skeeve hates what this blog has become since it started actively calling out misogyny in the skeptic community, but don’t you dare call Skeeve a misogynist.
Alethea:
Well said.
PZ Myers now bans Al Stefanelli ?? Wow, Al is a extremely well known and respected atheist/skeptic, a man known as being reasonable and level-headed. PZ Myers I think your behavior when dealing with feminism is based on the same thing we see among many homophobes. Many homophobic men have homosexual desires. Those men are the most likely to show hostility toward gay individuals, including self-reported anti-gay attitudes, endorsement of anti-gay policies and discrimination such as supporting harsher punishments for homosexuals. Let’s replace the word homosexual with misogynist and then consider your ‘over the top behavior’. I drank beers with you after a talk in Berkeley CA a couple years ago. The way you eyed all the female students while working to get as much food/drink for free as possible was nothing less than creepy. I think YOU are a pig PZ and you view women as objects and it bothers you but you can’t stop the thinking in your head. This causes you to act like a man obsessed with feminism. After all you have a daughter, other men like you are a threat to her. This would explain a lot. Brownian, your real name means nothing because no one really cares about what you have to say. You are an unperson. Every breath you take means others continue to suffer your stupidity, beyond that, your contributions are only fodder for those who specialize in ridicule. You are a ongoing joke. Enjoy the little bubble you have here boys, belittle to your hearts desire. You can’t handle it out in the real world so this is the best place for you. You are condemned to the limited reach of this blog there is no place for you among reasonable people. PZ the next time you speak in public to a group I DARE you to tell them they are all potential rapists or that they are defined by the people they associate with online. Better start thinking about screening commenters PZ a storm is a commin and you will reap the whirlwind. Forced into isolation even more, as it should be. You have gone too far
Please don’t thank me. I do what I can to turn them against me so others don’t have to deal with their shit, but at the end of the day it’s not lost on me that this is a thread about the murder of fourteen women derailed by a bunch of men.
Hear that women? We’re boys again. Gad, the stupidity is formidable.
Hey, cupcake, tell us again how you assholes could never, ever be violent or do something silly, like threaten people?
Explain the evidence in 313, you fuckfaced lickspittle.
Ah yes, the MRA fuckwits don’t think, and believe “freeze peach” means they can post idiocy without being refuted. Show me where in the constitution of the US of A, and SCOTUS decisions, where freeze speech can’t be critiqued by private citizens, such as those posting here. Or, shut the fuck up Skeeve….
Brownian, thanks very much for correcting my link to the interview with Nathalie Provost.
There are all kinds of reasons to give more voice to the women directly involved… one of which is quite simply that what she says is really really good. And, ironically or not, would most likely be appreciated by nearly everyone on all sides of the recent side track into in-fighting.
C’mon, dpitman, you hit’n’run chickenshit:
Let’s see what you got.
chrisho-stuart, thanks for posting it. Your quotes were enough to google for the link.
Skeeve @280:
Try thinking about it more.
What does it mean to use the word mangina?
What is the origin of the word?
What does it mean to apply it to someone.
If you tell someone you want to fuck their “mangina”, what are you saying? If it’s gay sex we’re talking about, the hole you’re fucking is the anus. It’s not the mangina. Oh, funny, ha ha. You’re poking (see what I did there) fun at a guy by intimating that the hole you’re fucking them with is just like a woman. But why do you need to say that? Is the asshole a vagina? No it’s not. It’s something different. If it’s something different, why use that term? There’s a reason that people are using a tweaked version of vagina to refer to a guy’s anus. What could that reason be? Is it just funny ha ha? Or is there something more? Think about how often gay men are treated as less than men. Think about how gay men are equated with women.
I used to have a degree of shame as a gay man. Let me lay it out for you:
I like to get fucked.
Do you know how long it took before I could say that without feeling embarrassed? Without feeling like there was something wrong with me?
I’ve been out since I was 20. I turn 37 in less than two weeks. It took about 12/13 years before I came to terms with the fact that I like to get fucked. Why would I have an issue with that?
I felt that getting fucked implied that I was “girly”. I thought that since I’m a guy, I shouldn’t be girly. I should be masculine. Big, brawny stud. I couldn’t rationalize it.
To be honest, I don’t know what happened, but at some point, I stopped fretting about it. I owned up to it. I decided that I wasn’t embarrassed to get fucked. I decided it’s not shameful.
As I’ve come to understand feminism, kyriarchy, privilege, misogyny, sexism et al. I’ve realized that I associated being a bottom with being a woman–and I thought there was something *wrong* with that.
THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH BEING A WOMAN.
THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH BEING FUCKED.
THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH BEING QUEER.
I have a fuller understanding of that now. Is there more I can learn? Almost certainly. Do I feel like I’m in a better place because I recognize the above?
Hell yes.
So if there’s nothing wrong with being gay…
If there’s nothing wrong with a guy getting fucked…
If “who’s the man” and “who’s the woman” are ridiculous questions that are insulting to women and men…
MANGINA is a sexist term.
There’s a spark of hope in me right now.
This spark hopes that you understand what I just said.
Please, for the sake of a LOT of people, stop and think beyond your personal experiences.
Yeah, I hear the Pope’s infallible too.
Skeeve:
Uh, then you’re stupid. You said he “outed” himself. If, as you say, ‘Ian Brown’ is not his name, then he didn’t out himself. So every joke you make about him has no merit.
Think more.
You’re great at this knee jerk response to comments. Now try thinking about what people are saying and think about what *you* are saying BEFORE you post a response.
And yes, I say all that knowing exactly how much I fucked up earlier today.
Neither you nor your friends are thinking this through. Words mean things.
Goddamn it Tony. There’s too many bottoms already. :)))
Is that supposed to fucking mean anything?
Are you satisfied with how it is in the real world? Are you satisfied that there are rapists and murderers in the real world? Can you “handle” that? Or is that even though you’re a stupid piece of shit, you also want the real world to be better than it actually is?
Reap the whirlwind, PZ. I bet that means something, “out there” in the real world (but not wherever here is, apparently,).
Because everything is just as it should be. I’m sure I’ve heard this kind of nonsense before.
ar ar ar ar ar ar.
I hear the echo. Is this an echo chamber or what?
The reverb from the Slymepit is deafening. They can’t modulate the feedback….
#344 was a fantastic post, Tony.
Skeeve:
There’s a part of me-a really big part of me-that thinks this is a waste of my time.
Yet there’s still this small part of me…this itsy bitsy teeny weeny infinitesimal part of me that hopes *something* I say will get through to you.
No one.
I mean *NO ONE*.
Has a mangina.
This is a silly term created for…? I don’t know the exact reason it was created, but I know the effect it has. I know that it’s a term that is highly sexist. I know it’s a term that can be directed to a gay person to make them feel bad.
Take off your blinders. Please.
I don’t relish insulting you.
I take no pride in treating you and others like you as scum.
I do so based on what you say and what you do.
I would much rather have you as allies. I would rather see from you, from Al, from Reap, from DJ Groethe, from Abbie, from any of those likeminded people…I would much rather see a post from any of you that says:
“I get it. I see where I was wrong. I see how much harm I was doing. I see the mentality I was enabling. I can’t change what I said or what I did, but I get it now. I’m sorry.”
AND
not only that, but I would love to see any of the above not just say all that, but live it. Anyone can say they’ve changed, but if they follow it up consistently…? If they show that they truly comprehend the nature of their epiphany…?
I really wish you knew how important this is. I’m getting teary eyed typing this (and years ago, I thought if a guy cried there was something wrong/feminine about him–> never again), but I wish you could see how much this means to me. How much it means to women and men around the world.
I’ve never begged.
I beg of you.
Stop.
Think.
Truly consider what I have said.
Listen to Caine.
Listen to Esteleth.
Listen to Carlie.
Listen to Janine.
Listen to Brownian.
Listen to Louis.
Listen to PZ.
Listen to Jadehawk.
Listen to SGBM.
Listen to SC.
Listen to every feminist out there.
Does every feminist have it right?
No.
Some of them do go too far.
But most of them…?
Most of them want nothing more than
Equal
Treatment
For
Women
&
Men.
Is that really too much to ask for?
Like, this fucking ass-wad understands that I have a corporeal body; that I actually live in the ‘real world’ with it, right? I don’t actually live on this blog, but use technology to access it from a variety of locations in the ‘real world’?
Pull yourself together, you spam-spewing brain-dead asshole.
dpitman
Look down at your keyboard. See the key marked “return” or “enter”? Learn it. Know it. Love it.
If you neglect it, it will feel sad, just like I did after I read your subliterate spew.
Tony:
It’s mostly to replace pussy, when that word was being applied to a man. If anything, mangina was meant to be more scathing.
While I appreciate your efforts in regard to Skeeve, I wouldn’t expect much. He’s a liar.
@Gregory Greenwood #299
I just want to say that was a brilliant comment, sir, and I wholeheartedly agree!
Does “Goodnight” mean something different here? Re: #303 above.
/shrug
I followed another link back here and see I’m still being talked at.
@Tony ∞2012 recipient of the coronal mass erection∞
I understand your point of view regarding mangina. And I promise I won’t use it after this sentence anywhere that you will see.
I’ve been out as a gay man since 1985. I’ve experienced a variety of gay culture in the US and Europe, and outside of this recent use of calling male supporters of feminism that word, it has always referenced the anus of a gay man. And in all these years, I have never heard it used in a derogatory way, as such.
I will admit I don’t have much experience in the transgendered world, and if you say it has been used to dehumanize persons coping with those issues, and I can never really be sure who is reading what I write, I’ll refrain from using that particular in future.
And with that, I’ll bid you goodnight again.
If you’ve been out that long you’ve had long enough to wake the fuck up, Skeeve. How many fucking gay dudes do I have to remind that homophobia is a subset of misogyny? Like teaching class to a bunch of rocks.
rq @237:
I’m honored that you think so highly of me. I hope that my fuck up today is nothing more than a blip on the radar.
I well and truly want a world where *everyone* is equal. Full stop.
****
SGBM @293:
What’s the emoticon for FUCK, that sucks?
That’s how I feel after reading that comment.
I’m trying so hard here, but certain individuals are making this incredibly difficult.
(in case anyone cannot figure it out, none of the above is directed towards SGBM, whom I consider to be a good person)
****
Gregory Greenwood @299:
If I may continue my appreciation of your comments from yesterday…
…the words “you rock” just don’t do you justice.
****
Brownian @300:
That’s telling.
I understand selection bias. But FFS! Looking at SGBM’s post upthread, it’s easy to see that sexist/misogynist comments at the Slymepit are common. It’s not a rare situation.
****
Skeeve @308:
That’s part of the problem.
Ignoring those individuals who contribute to the culture of oppression. You ignore them so YOU do not have to deal with them. Part of the impact of that is their comments are unchallenged. They’re allowed to say what they want without any rebuttal. No one to say “what you said was wrong and this is wrong”.
Gregory Greenwood @303:
Reproductive isolation is a hallmark of species boundaries, and I don’t know about you, but I sure as hell ain’t gonna fuck any of ’em.
Translation dear lurkers, I have nothing but attitude and fuckwittery, and hope that going away for a while will futilely change that. Check back tomorrow lurkers for another episode in “I was a teen-aged fuckwit at XX years old”.
Chris:
Well, that’s good to know. It’s a pity that many of them have married and bred.
@Josh Do me a favor and keep me out of your posts. Your online persona is one of the worst I’ve ever read.
Your only saving grace is the great work you do with the cemeteries.
I’ve noticed those with the long ass titles in their nym have some of the worst attitudes on FTB. What are you compensating for?
As Nerd so aptly shows
From now on, just call Skeeve ‘Ian’.
You’re doing it wrong. You’re refusing to leave a blog you claim to no longer be able to stand, such a pity and all that.
Say goodbye and stick the fucking flounce.
Oh fuck you.
THAT’S IT.
I’VE HAD IT.
Comment 333 took that cake.
I have fucking tried to be understanding.
I’ve tried to get people to comprehend where they are wrong.
I’ve tried to show people that their reasoning is wrong.
But I have my fucking limits.
Comment 333 is it.
I don’t know who the FUCK you are, but if you’re reading this, PLEASE
PLEASE
Read this with all the animosity, frustration, disdain, and anger you want to.
Because you’re the recipient.
You are the person that got door #1. You get to receive all the anger…all the frustration…all that exhaustion.
You get to be the person who represents everything that is wrong with the Atheist/Skeptic movement.
You didn’t bother to fucking think.
You sided with AL-fucking-Stefanelli without giving one second thought to what he was talking about. You defended what he had to say. You enabled sexist MRAs. You provided support for anti feminist fuckwits. You showed where your loyalties lie.
I HATE people like you.
I hate people like you with every fiber of my being.
I can’t explain how.
I can’t detail why.
All I know is
I
Am
Sick
&
Tired
of
People
Like
You.
I’m sick of people like you who diminish, who demean, who dismiss women and their concerns. I’m so fucking goddamned tired of seeing people like you who do don’t give a rat’s ass about women. Oh sure, you pretend to. You act like you do. But when push comes to shove, you buckle. It’s not that important.
Let me tell you something:
I was ready to fucking quit my job.
I was ready to tell my boss that if sexual harassment of women was going to happen where I work I would NOT work there. I worked with women who were dealing with sexual harassment. It was from their fucking General Manager. When I heard about that, I was irate. I’m still fucking mad. When I heard about it, it was all I could do not to let the world know. But I waited. I wanted to make sure that whatever action I took was desired. I don’t want to be a White Knight. I’m not trying to rescue women from anything. I *do* want to support women. If I have a woman tell me they’ve been harassed or sexually attacked…’
NO hesitation.
NO doubt.
It is my sincere hope that the women in my life know that if they are faced with sexism or misogyny that I will support them. No strings attached.
I don’t know when.
I don’t know how.
But it is one of my most fervent wishes that this STOPS. I can deal with people calling me a faggott. I can deal with being treated like a second class citizen because I have sex with guys.
I CANNOT DEAL WITH PEOPLE TREATING HALF THE POPULATION OF THE PLANET AS UNWORTHY OF EQUAL RIGHTS.
dpitman = mental gymnast
@128
Dear Al,
You know, I used to like you a lot. I have viewed your estrangement here most sadly.
Because I don’t think you are a mindless drone, I want to try to explain.
Shortly after Oklahoma City happened, I was taking my son and his friends to the movies. One of them asked me, “Why did he do that?”
I told him that there were a bunch of people, unhappy with losing a tiny amount of privilege–such as the white guy would always get the job, no matter how qualified the black guy was–and they were told that everything wrong in society is because of the liberals and the blacks and whatever. And they believed it. Because they didn’t want to believe that their troubles were caused by their own failings.
And the way they dealt with their unhappiness was to get together in groups and whine at each other, talking about how bad things are and how much worse things are going to be, getting more and more ridiculous in their complaints–mind you, this was before the internet was readily available to anyone with a few bucks. Some of these types like to get out in the woods and play soldier and pretend that they are amazing freedom-fighters and they are for the most part not a real problem, because they are losers. I said, if they were capable of actually doing something, they would be out there doing something. BUT every once in a while, someone becomes part of the group, sits and listens to how bad things are and how much worse things are going to be and he believes every word of it. After a while he starts wondering why the only thing that happens is talk. And he decides to do something. And he actually does, because he is not a loser. He is just fucking sick, a nutjob.
And when the babies are buried and the firefighters get out of the hospital–or the young women taking classes are buried–people talk about what lead the nutjob to do what he did. Then the group of play soldiers and the people who “just” call women nasty names but don’t “really” hate women will claim that they had nothing to do with it. To some extent that is true. They would not have killed anyone. They might have been nasty to a black guy, or called a young engineering student a cunt, but they wouldn’t have killed anyone. That guy was just crazy.
And he was. Just crazy. Swimming in a stew of toxic ideas. Told over and over about the coming race war or that women are evil ball cutters, determined to ruin the lives of every man they meet. And getting crazier.
Will any of the people in the Slymepit and and fellow travelers turn out to be one of those nutjobs?
Probably not.
But only probably. And that is what PZ was talking about. That is the connection between a few people spewing hatred on the internet, and someone like Tim McVey or Marc Lépine.
rq – Thank you. That means a lot.
Caine, Janine, Josh, Spartacats-Ian Stone-RosesMan, and the rest – There’s a little light flickering tonight thanks to you all.
Gregory Greenwood – Thanks fellow Brit. I loathe “Anglophiles” who try and justify “Cunt” with “OhmyGODIloveEngerlandsoooomuch, HarryPotterSherlockWillsandKateandsconesandteaandFishandChipsLawdluvaduck!”
Gag.
Dungpitman – You don’t get it and can’t hope to. Go back to your cave little boy.
But first, hear this. You will never know the constant, rumbling fear. The terror of beatings, sexual assault, rape and murder. You don’t walk the streets waiting for unwanted touch, insults, spitting, shouting. You don’t lie awake at night weeping and shaking, worrying for your sistets. daughters, friends. The arrival of a new baby, a beautiful new little person to be adored, will never make your heart lurch a little when you find she’s a girl. You won’t want to grab her and run far and fast, because you want to protect her. You don’t see that baby, and think sadly that only too soon she’ll realise she’s considered inferior, told she’s a cunt slag whore slut bitch twat, disposable and interchangeable. You’ll never wish it was possible to shield them, gather them up, hide them. You’ll never bargain with the universe “Take me. I will take the abuse so she will never have to”.
You’ll never scream silent screams, hot tears streaming, when you read about another raped girl, another dead woman. Your guts won’t twist until you vomit, when you read of another cover-up of decades of sexual abuse of innumetable children. You don’t notice our bruises. our hunched-over, “make me invisible” walk, but you don’t want to anyway. We’re only women, bitches, Wash Iron Fuck Etc lolololol.
While you, and people like you exist. we’ll always just be subhuman ambulatory orifices.
There is no flounce, ya goof. I was leaving originally because of the derail I was contributing to.
I’m not saying goodbye, but, see ya later!
I want to add to BROWNIAN @334.
This post is about the women that were slain at the hands of a murderous misogynist. These were women with hopes…dreams…desires.
They were killed by someone for nothing more than the NONcrime of being women.
That is inexcusable.
They should not be dead.
If you support MRAs…
If you support antifeminists…
If you defend rape culture…
YOU contribute to a culture where women are killed because they are women.
If this describes you, you have my everlasting, disdain.
It means flounce, with further posts being trolling. You fell for the bait, being an idjit.
@Nerd: See #369
/sigh
Sorry, tell me in words of one syllable or less how “good-bye” doesn’t mean flounce, while I snicker at your fuckittery. Why are MRA’s so damn stupid, that they think we can’t read between their lies….
/Sigh for terminal fuckwittery. You lose every time…
“I’m leaving!”
Two posts later: “I SAID I’M LEAVING.”
Ten posts later: “OMG YOU GUYS I’M TOTALLY LEAVING.”
Josh:
You’re a bottom?
I thought you were versatile!
Try living in Florida.
It seems like for every 200 gay men, you get a complimentary bottom.
Oh, and Chris @357
I’ve been delighted with your input to this blog, but I got to say. With
you made me love you a little.
What’s the record for failing to stick multiple flounces in one thread?
lol@ MRA
lol@ flounce. know your memes, goofy.
*giggle*
Compare with Name Brands™ like
and
and save!
Yep. Any day now, I’m sure. Maybe.
Wait, are you saying that anyone that disagrees is the same as a homicidal mass murderer? wow, just wow… get help.. professional help.
Look dear lurkers, a liar and MRA bullshitter who can’t stick a flounce thinks its funny to be called on being a liar a bullshitter. I’ll leave it up you to draw your conclusions…..But I wouldn’t trust anything it says. Treat with extreme skepticism…
This is fun. I was leaving earlier, so has not to be blamed on continuing the derail. But, since you kept going after i left, it looks like that’s not a problem.
If you’re going to accuse me of flouncing, as least make sure you’ve run me off and I’m not just tired of reading the same posts over and over.
I said “goodnight” as a polite way of parting. If you want to think of it as a flounce…whatever helps you sleep at night. /shrug
#382 Harryphillips, I bet that for some of these men, murdering and raping women would be really easy, in wartime for example. They may not have ‘the balls’ to do it in civilized society, but take away those inhibitions and I bet many of these casual misogynists would not think twice about the murder and rape of women.
harryphillips:
Wait, are you yet another lackwit who can’t manage to read a thread prior to commenting? Wow, just wow… learn to read.. before you spew the same shit which has been spewed a dozen times before.
I’m a dessert topping and a floor wax.
I don’t know how many times it was, but I bet raj-whatever (of thunderdome fame) has the record. There were times when it was one comment after another, after another, in short succession, all containing some variation of “I have nothing useful to say” and “bye.”
Yes it is troll, you lose every time you post past your flounce, proving to the lurkers you are a troll. How can you prove to them you aren’t a troll? SHUT THE FUCK UP….
Hilarious.
Defintely, a troll who can’t stick its flounce. And thinks its not telling the lurkers what a liar and bullshitter it is…You lose, as always MRA troll.
Politely say goodnight as I close the door is not a flounce.
Screaming as I run out of the room is.
And what do I care what the lurkers think?
Oh, and thanks for dehumanizing me by calling me an “it”.
Nice.
Is that how you justify your over-the-top reaction to someone not in your in-group?
You understand that we want you to leave, without coming back, right? Don’t bother being polite, just fuck off already.
Why do you ask us what you care about? Are you incapable of thinking?
When Poe’s law can be applied so readily to a thread of comments like this, it is a sad day for the skeptic community.
PZ, can’t you see what your disregard for rational thought has resulted in? We are all judged by your legacy, and yours is quite pathetic.
I pity you.
Well he was referring to ‘troll’ as gender neutral rather than you, but cut that kind of shit out, Nerd. If you’re going to use a gender neutral term, use something like ‘xe’ or ‘hir’ that doesn’t carry the dehumanising connotations of ‘it’.
Well, when we look back I can say that I was there and witnessed the start of that Cult. Is there a book on the Cult’s dogma or is it only available here on the blog?
@consciousness razor
You’re the first to say so.
And I guess rhetorical questions aren’t something you’re experienced with?
Amazing how a memorial to an awful crime brings out the sad little boys who think that talking about misogyny is worse than misogyny.
They’re like Nazi sympathizers at an Auschwitz memorial…
We’re very experience with rhetorical questions from abject and proven losers like yourself. What is you point, other than you are trolling.
Actually the sad part is the disingenuous juxtaposition created by pz using the anniversary of an awful crime.
Yeah. In the future, PZ, use passive-aggressive references to the concept of rationalism, rather than making points that are cogent and specific and can be then discussed. For instance, refer to Poe’s Law and Godwin’s Law as if they were instance argument-winners, rather than shorthands for calling an argument unwarranted or absurd (and, as shorthands, they don’t actually offer any actual evidence for either absurdity or hyperbole). By all means, just bring them up and let them sit there, doing the thinking for you.
Because that’s how skepticism operates.
Someone needs to come up with an Idiot to English phrase book.
What in the fuck is this nonsense supposed to mean? Are you going to be yet another Skeevy, who declares with all seriousness what a sad and pitiful blog this is now, but who can’t manage to actually leave it?
You think it’s disingenuous to talk about anti-feminism on the anniversary of the murder of women by a killer who targeted feminists?
Go back to talking about how God doesn’t exist, all of you. You’re no fucking use for anything else.
Skeevy: an award for you:
http://i990.photobucket.com/albums/af25/jjimmykeller/Golden-Troll-Award.jpg
Brownian:
That might be a bit deep for them. Best confine them to UFOs and Bigfoot. Y’know, proper purview for skepticism.
Tony said this for one reason –
but I’d want to hear that from a bunch of blokes in an Australian pub. They were the usual lot with the usual ‘jokes’ about women and sex and violence. As is usual in such places, people come and go throughout the evening. One particular evening, a member of the group returns after a half hour’s absence and says that he’s finally done for that cow.
And they laughed.
Until it dawned on a few of them that he was serious. He’d gone home and strangled his wife and come back for a reviving beer. So they talked him into calling the cops.
That woman was the sister of a friend of mine and the much loved aunt of his children.
The “what ifs” I’ve always wondered about:
What if pub talk didn’t permit laughter at “jokes” about killing your wife.
What if blokes in bars stepped up and objected to any talk of domestic violence.
What if rape was never, ever funny.
What if, for the previous 10 years, every time this bloke had said something violent about his wife, half a dozen blokes had told him he was entirely, totally wrong-headed.
What if his expressed violent urges had been met with “If you don’t like her, leave her, you idiot. No need to hurt her.”
Do any of these people now wonder whether their customary conversational licence to say such things and make light of them gave that one man ‘permission’ to feed his violent attitudes and
eventually act on them? Do they wonder whether they contributed in any way?
I don’t know whether she’d still be alive if pub behaviour was different, but I’m pretty sure her husband wouldn’t have been so casual and cavalier about announcing what he’d done.
mildlymagnificent:
I am so sorry for your loss. The culture and talk which gives tacit assent and encouragement is something we’ve been attempting to hammer home throughout this thread. So far, it’s come to nothing outside of PZ is being meeeeaaaan and unfair.
HarryPhillips,
Levine’s actions did not happen in a vacuum. In some corner of his mind, he was doing what seemed to be the right thing.
To take another example, there was a thousand years or more of anti-semitic rhetoric in Europe, sanctioned and promoted by the church, along with pogroms and other socially-endorsed activities. You know how that turned out – and it serves as an example of just how powerful constant hate speech can be, and how it warps social norms.
Along side this rhetoric was a constant drumbeat about the inferiority of women. It has warped how men think of women, and how women think of themselves.
Do you think that rhetoric has no power? If you do, then why are you here? If not, then why are you arguing?
Do you think it is ok to compare those that disagree with the great and wonderful PZ to a mass murdering homicidal maniac?
You’re the first to say so.
You’re as oblivious as they come.
I don’t know. Do you guess that?
@329 Tony
right back at ya’ Tony. Your comment probably says more about you than whatever you are aiming at.
How venomous do you want to be?
fucking blockquotes. This should be in one:
I have another example of hate speech for you:
Do you recognise it?
Actually, Skeeve, recalling an awful crime on its anniversary and using it as a reminder of how far we have yet to go is the polar opposite of “disingenuous“.
The point is, the fertile ground for this sort of poison harvest is the prevailing misogyny at large in our cultures. What better day to reflect on that — to honor the women who died that day by addressing the ongoing problem, which after all is the only hope of ever aspiring to truly overcome it?
Or do you deny that the problem of deadly violence against women continues?
This is who PZ described:
This is what you’re lying about him describing:
Don’t you fucking lie to my face, you piece of shit.
@Harryphillips:
hey, if we were to compare a bunch of racists to the KKK would that be unfair to the racists?
harryphillips:
I think that this is the tell. You don’t even believe your own trolling if you need to so blatantly misrepresent your opponent’s argument to make your point.
Are you claiming that PZ has said that people who disagree with him are comparable with homocidal maniacs? You have strayed a long way from what PZ actually said to make that argument.
arrenfrank:
They aren’t quite that coy. They deny that fostering anti-women rhetoric and creating spaces specifically for expressing misogyny is in any way harmful. Shorter Skeeve and those of his ilk: hey, we aren’t out shooting wimmin, what you being so mean to us for?
Those ellipses give you away. You are misrepresenting the argument. You can’t just thow in the pronoun without stating who the pronoun refers to. It’s hardly an group that is identifiable by any means other than by their own toxic hate-speech.
Might I remind you of this very post:
Did you even read the original post?
@Caine:
I’ve noticed a trend. Racist ‘right-wing’ forums in Canada also seem to think that all manner of hate speech, down to calling for the actual genocide of jews/gays (well, not christians, natch) is completely ok, as its ‘free speech’. As long as noone is actually murdering the targeted group…such ‘free speech’ is perfectly permissible! (in their eyes)
And these right-wingers get REALLY mad when groups like the southern poverty law center, and anti-hate groups take the neo-nazi’s to court. They cry over all the lives ruined – the neo-nazi, he was just minding his own business calling for the genocide of the jews…why did the nasty liberals have to RUIN HIS LIFE ITS NOT LIKE HE KILLED ANYONE!!!1111
And I really am not making this up. They really do believe this, and they blame actual racism/misogyny etc on LIBERALS and FEMINISTS!
I get it, Caine.
It’s just that to anyone who realizes that violence on such a scale doesn’t happen in a sociocultural vacuum, the violence itself and the prevailing attitudes that relate to it are inseparable.
Bobo:
Yeah, we get plenty of that phenomenon with the misogyny clubs, too. They’re very fond of yelling ““, as if that neutralizes the toxicity of their words or takes the venom out of their voices.
So, HarryPhillips, you maintain that :
means
Right. How dare you ask me if I read the original post, and quote back to me the very quote that appears in my previous comment.
You comments are slime.
Yep, that totally describes anyone who disagrees with PZ. It says right there that disagreeing with PZ is…
Doesn’t everybody see it?
Fuck. I’m just hallucinating again. Never mind.
All haters are the same. They see themselves as the victims (of the group they are hating on). When said group stands up for itself, the haters lose it, crying “look, see! we really are victims!” and they whine, and cry, and commit more crimes, cuz they are the victims here, and they gotta protect themselves – from jews, blacks, roma, women…etc
harryphillips @ 421:
Yes we did, you lying fucknut, and unlike you we comprehended it. Which is why we know that the part you’re dishonestly leaving out of your quote-mining goes like this:
So while I am sure PZ does disagree with “anonymous monsters on the internet who shriek affrontedly about women and feminists and moan that any feminist allies are ‘manginas’” — because decent human beings tend to disagree with such sentiments, and unlike you, PZ’s a decent human being — clearly the passage is referring to that specific group, and not just anyone who disagrees with PZ for any reason. Moreover, it condemns them on the basis of their misogyny, and not on any “disagreeing with PZ” metric.
It is thus clear that the only reason PZ’s quote has you so mad is that you are, in fact, one of the “anonymous monsters on the internet who shriek affrontedly about women and feminists and moan that any feminist allies are ‘manginas’,” and you really don’t like being told you’ve been a bad boy for that. Tsk tsk.
This comment is a public service announcement for the intellectually impacted, brought to you by Adult Reading Comprehension and Honesty. (Banned on Fox News.)
What harryphillips is deliberately and dishonestly omitting with his ellipsis:
Funny, I don’t see any part of that as equating to ‘disagreeing with PZ’.
Here’s the thing.
Imagine, if you will, Marc Lépine getting access to the internet.
Imagine he finds A Voice For Men and other MRA sites.
Would he agree with what he found there? Probably.
Would he think that they agreed with him? Also probably.
So, when you complain about PZ complaining about misogynists, all I can think of is Hamlet (III.ii):
(slight edit)
Wowbagger:
That’s because to harryphillips and his fellow liars, there are no anonymous monsters on the internet who shriek affrontedly about women and feminists and moan that any feminist allies are ‘manginas’, just a bunch of fellows chatting and sharing jokes and the like.
No, the sad part your responses to the the TRUTH, nothing but MRA fuckwittery. Lose again abject loser. You can’t win, as the evidence says otherwise. If it didn’t, you would lead with it, not your OPINION and ATTITUDE. Nothing but OPINION and ATTITUDE seen so far. Typical MRA fare abject loser fare…
As a casual observer, I can’t help but notice how polarised and personal these debates seem to immediately become. There seems almost instantly to be a “with us or against us” attitude and the ease at which people start raging at others to “go fuck themselves” is a little scary.
Maybe I am showing my ignorance, but aren’t there genuine (non-shouty) arguments to be made? Cannot one person posit that it may be possible to regard people as equal regardless of gender and yet to believe that those who do not hold the identical opinion are not apologists to terrible crimes? I have two wonderful daughters who I want to be afforded every opportunity in life. I hope they will not encounter sexism or racism (we are mixed race) but wherever there is ignorance about race or gender, I have tried to teach them to educate and explain away the ignorance, as getting angry will not change a bigoted opinion and lowers you to a level unbecoming of an intelligent person. They already show the maturity not to continue arguing with someone who starts shouting at them. They are 5 & 8.
In the UK, the Church of England has just voted not to accept women Bishops. However misguided I think that to be, I do not believe that the Church of England are horrendous apologists to the sorts of abuses being thrown around and discussed on here. Perhaps a Church is a bad example on this blog, but the general point is the same. The majority of the congregation would find no similarity in their position and that of the murderer above named. Though the church occupies a misogynistic position, it also finds (and preaches) that violence against others is wrong, regardless of their gender, faith, race and sexuality. Here someone could make the argument that PZ was wrong in his summation. You may not agree with that argument and the argument can easily be countered but it IS a position that can be argued reasonably and without resorting to “fuck you” and other insults.
I rarely comment on blogs anymore because any dissent I express seems to lead to me being personally attacked. Ad-hominem is alive and well on these blogs! However, I would urge all contributors to resist from these attacks and whenever someone causes your wrath to wax greatly, pause and ask them to state their argument, then dissect their argument fully and forensically. It is more satisfying and is more likely to remove ignorance than any insult.
Finally, where I am from, a mangina is when a man tucks his bits between his legs to make it look like he is a lady. I don’t think I’ve ever used it as an insult! Also, over here, ALL profanities seem to have a friendly, jovial application as well as the harsh, dehumanising ones. The importance is in knowing when and where to use them.
Thank you so much for this post, PZ. I remember that dark day, too. I was nursing my 8-month-old baby girl when I read about the murders in the paper. I wanted to wrap my daughter in my arms and keep her safe from the violent misogynists forever. I really didn’t think that by the time she got to college, there would still be arguments about her right to control her own body, or people telling her that she is “less than”. Fortunately, she’s a feminist, and knows that’s bullshit.
I believe every troll in this thread has attempted to equate “blatant hatred of women and feminism” with “disagreement”. You see, they simply disagree with PZ that women are people, that women shouldn’t be given less respect than men by default, that misogyny is bad, etc. etc. It’s just a difference of opinion, is all. How dare you try to police other people’s thoughts by judging their mere opinions? How dare you oppose people who just happen to actively try to undermine half of society based on their genitalia? Can’t you just leave the innocent MRA’s alone?
I would like to think that they are Stedmanning the fuck out of their conversations. I wonder how many monocles and chocolate fountains they have imagined are in the slymepit’s virtual parlor? I wonder how many times they have discussed how bitches ain’t shit during games of polo, or while having tea and crumpets? I wonder how many butlers and maids they have imagined, busy at work in the background as they talk about the finer points regarding how bitches have it coming? I’m sure they have imagined up all sorts of college degrees in the burgeoning field of Female Inferiority. I’m sure some of them imagine that they are the country’s leading professors in the field by this point.
@407
Jesus. Fucking. Christ. In a cracker.
Oh, and not that it should make a difference, I am not a member of the Church of England. I was just proposing an argument.
Hey, you know what? Today isn’t about you.
It’s about Geneviève Bergeron, Hélène Colgan, Nathalie Croteau, Barbara Daigneault, Anne-Marie Edward, Maud Haviernick, Maryse Laganière, Maryse Leclair, Anne-Marie Lemay, Sonia Pelletier, Michèle Richard, Annie St-Arneault, Annie Turcotte andBarbara Klucznik-Widajewicz .
Having a sad because you’re being oppressed by feminists? Too fucking bad. This is a Day of Remembrance and Action on Violence Against Women. Fourteen women were killed and another 10 women were injured because they were women. If, in the light of that fact, you still can’t stop wangsting about your feelings for one day, then just fuck off.
Really. It’s not about you.
Taking the RC church as an obvious example, it might be that there is some sort of a cover-up going on that women are less likely to condone. I’m sure there are plenty of abuses going on in the Church of England. Including the idea that rape is the fault of women.
#433 no, the church of england are not apologists and nor do they endorse violence against women, BUT they still contribute to the belief that women are inferior to men, no?
chadgething:
What makes you think they haven’t been made, repeatedly? Do you think perhaps it’s you missing almost two years of history, which has resulted in this particular polarization? Want to know what started it? A woman saying “Guys, don’t do that.”
No, that’s not the importance. The importance is realizing that it isn’t friendly and jolly to aid in the proliferation of assholes feeling free to toss around cunt (or berk), pussy, mangina and the like. Why? Have you asked yourself why it’s insulting to compare a man to a woman’s genitals? Perhaps you should, as you’re raising up those kids of yours. I’m sure you won’t mind at all when people start calling them cunts.
He bring up a 23 year old mass murder and then compares the perpetrator to people who disagree with him. Then when people come on his comment section to disagree with him he bans them or expects his followers to brate them. Are you people really more than sheep?
chadgething wrote:
Yeah, how dare people get upset that there are those out there who don’t believe they’re fully human, and enjoy reminding them of this at every opportunity. Why, it should be a completely emotion-free, dry academic discussion – since, after all, it’s not as if this causes any real problems for anyone*, amirite?
*Well, not anyone imporant – just women.
Defending the cunting and twatting that goes on in the misogynosphere is not “disagreeing.”
Yes. Some of us are sheeple. All the wool, none of the hooves.
anteprepro:
No doubt. Going by Stefanelli’s account, it’s a wonderful place, with wonderfully witty dialogue such as .
Definitely an intellectual, civilised place, oh yeah.
Wow, the stupid is strong in you ducky
Have you bothered reading the comment thread at all?
I suggest you take a look at #429, along with #428
Chadgething, your concerns are noted.
ducky1349 @ 442: Please stop being deliberately stupid and dishonest. It makes life so very difficult.
ducky1349 wrote
Please cite the exact sentence(s) that you believe PZ used when he compared those who disagree with him with the perpetrator.
The exact sentence(s).
duckywhatever:
You sound as if you disapprove of this.
No, he did not do that. Jesus, another one that can’t manage reading.
And which one of the fucking illiterate slymepitters are you, ducky?
Only I don’t recognize your name, but I recognize your kind …
God dammit. I had something perfectly cromulant to add to the conversation, but I’m just a sheep, so what’s the point? It’s not like I’ve got informed opinions or can read for comprehension or anything.
BAAAAH BAAAAH BAAAAH!
Audley, people are asking after you in PET.
/back on topic
Ah, so keep sweet, smile, and nod while hearing that I’m a “Fucking useless unrapeable crippled dyke-kike fat bitch”?
Oh good advice thanks. I don’t feel silenced at all!
Just two words before I scamper off to face the hatets with a grin:
Stonewall
Suffragettes.
Sometimes righteous anger and the fire in our bellies is all we fucking have, our last hope.
Audley:
Ladeebrainz, Audley, ladeebrainz. Absolutely useless, those things.
No Light:
Of course not. When women are nice and submissive, even the most toxic misogynist will be transformed! This is similar shit to “good girls don’t get raped.” Right.
This is correct. PZ thinks women are human beings. Lépine thought they weren’t human. The slymepitters think women aren’t human. There’s a one-to-one correspondence between Lépine and people like Skeeve, Al Stefanelli and ducky1349. They all disagree with PZ by thinking women aren’t human.
ducky1349 @ 442: Look ducky, here are the facts:
1. Marc Lépine was a terrible fucking person who was almost certainly psychotic (in the clinical sense) and his psychosis manifested itself externally as a hatred of women; classic misogyny. The same classic misogyny that MRAs show every goddamn day.
2. The lives of the women that Marc Lépine needlessly and cruelly snuffed out were snuffed out for one simple reason: they were women. They were killed because he was a mentally unwell intolerant fuck.
3. PZ wrote a post to highlight this disgusting massacre because PEOPLE NEED TO REMEMBER. History goddamn repeats itself and this is one fucking event that must never be repeated. People need to know the name Marc Lépine and they need to immediately think: fuck him.
4. Agreement with such sentiment doesn’t make ‘us’ sheep, it makes us morally healthy individuals.
If you could read the thoughts of Marc Lépine and the thoughts of any run-of-the-mill MRA side-by-side, could you tell the difference?
Yeah, that’s what I thought – this is why PZ needed to post this.
Esteleth–
Got it.
Caine–
Right. Laydee brainz. Only good for a couple of things: raising babbys and bakin’ cookies. I’m always forgetting my place!
way late and a dollar short, but I agree with what Martin Wagner said @ 25:
that said, I also think PZ could have done better to illustrate this very important point; that the important thing is not to react to the violence that erupts, so much as it is to prevent it by opening up the subculture that creates it to scrutiny. I don’t think the imagery used in the post does that.
All skeptics are supposed to be for scrutinizing their own beliefs, and where they might lead to, right?
meh, who am I kidding. Drama ahoy!
Yeah, how dare PZ compare Lepine – a man who devalued women to the point where he felt it was okay for him to murder some of them for their ‘crimes’ – to a bunch of guys who demand the right to continue devaluing women on the internet for their ‘crimes’.
No, no link there. None whatsoever. Huh-uh.
Oh joy. Someone is here to tell us about the evils of BOTH SIDES. Because those who hate the haters are JUST AS BAD as haters. Didn’t you know that it is tribalism, us vs. them, in-group mentality to make people who hate women into an Other?
Too ignorant to realize that genuine arguments can be conveyed by shouting? Probably.
Is impossible for idiots to not play the game of “It’s Just Opinions” regarding the negative treatment of women? Is it not possible to stop pretending that this is a simple difference of opinion, when the matter of disagreement largely revolves around how we decide to treat our fellow human beings? Are we really going to play the “It’s Just Opinions” regarding racism and homophobia as well, or are only women so lucky? Are you going to say that run of the mill racists aren’t really responsible for lynchmobs and that standard homophobes aren’t really responsible for anti-gay violence? Are we really going to apply this hand-wringing standard to everyone, or is it all just a crock of shit?
1. Anger and teaching are not mutually exclusive, nor are intelligence and anger.
2. It is not our responsibility to educate people, especially about something so simple.
3. Most of these people are unable and/or unwilling to be educated.
4. Expecting us not to get angry with such people is reinforcing privilege and handicaps the already underprivileged.
5. Anger in the face of bigotry should not be considered just as morally low as bigotry itself.
Again with the “dissent”. Fuck, people disagree here all the time. Will all you “dissenters” get that through your fucking skulls? It isn’t a point of a pride that you are “dissenting” if you can’t actually make your fucking point or a good fucking argument. Cry all the way home about how we didn’t give a warm reception to the same fucking lame-ass arguments we’ve eviscerated time and time again. There are loads of creationists and climate denialists and libertarians and conservatives and accomodationists bigots who have put “Dared to Dissent on Pharyngula and they yelled at me!” on their resumes. They were torn apart because they stated their case boldly without having anything to back it up. Putting a “I Dissented” sticker on your shirt and then whining about how we didn’t all fall on our knees and praise you for your insight is pretty much the M.O. of any idiot who comes in here with a hare-brained idea and an inability to argue their way out of a paper bag. If they could actually argue their point, then their reception would become less hostile. Put up or shut the fuck up.
Ironic coming from the third or fourth drive-by commenter who has posted pretty much the same idea, using the same dishonest “disagree with him” substitution, in about the same amount of words. I remember hearing that Republicans regularly use the strategy, knowingly or not, of attacking their opponents in the area that is the Republican’s own greatest weakness, e.g. Bush attacking Kerry’s tour of duty in Vietnam while having done next to nothing himself during that war. I think that MRAs have adopted the same behavior. Surprise, surprise!
#440 The argument I was putting forwards was that some might hold misogynistic viewpoints and even defend them publicly but have no truck with the sorts of actions or threats of which are being discussed. From that perspective I was showing that it is possible to disagree with PZ without being an apologist to the murder, rape or assault of anybody, female or male. There does not need to be a closet hatred of women to hold that position, though it could easily be argued that the origins of such a doctrine may reside in such a historically held belief.
#441 I am well aware of the elevatorgate explosion into the Skeptic world. I am also very aware of the fact that the debate lost reason and became polarised almost immediately. I attempted to contribute at the early stage but was shouted down and withdrew. Elevatorgate was the spark but there were already tensions waiting to explode. What shocked me was the abject lack of reason being displayed by Skeptics who had previously prided themselves upon their powers of reason.
As for the use of profanities, I think you missed my point. When someone is using insults aimed to hurt, it is to be condemned. The word takes on a completely different meaning in a different context. Think of the words as a knife: in one situation, they are helping you prepare your gourmet meal and in another, they are a thuggish weapon of fear and death. When someone uses such words against my daughters, I will weigh up the situation before acting.
#443 I didn’t say it was wrong to get upset but seriously, what do you want? What are you trying to achieve? If you want to share knowledge and eradicate misogyny then you can’t do it by shouting at misogynists. You have to show them why you believe they are wrong. Swearing at them is counter productive and just gives them the opportunity to swear back. It reduces you and your argument to nothing more than a game of “Who can swear loudest and longest” rather than debating the points and showing why an argument is wrong. Even with terrorists, sooner or later, you have to talk to them. After years of conflict in Northern Ireland, people realised that. I hope people here can learn from the mistakes of others and not allow their discussion boards to be lists of insults, bile and hateful invective. There is nothing wrong with passion and anger, only how you decide to channel it.
Chadgething, you are presuming in your 464 that the misogynists – especially the MRAs – want to learn. Most of them do not. They know what feminism is and they are enraged by it.
Well, osmosis just drove by Chris’s post to tell us all that more women murder husbands than men murdering wives. Gosh, this evening just gets better and better.
Chadgething, spare us your chill girl act. Ta.
Caine –
Yay! I can now trundle peacefully across the world, beaming like a sodium arc light, knowing I’m forever shielded from abuse of all sorts.
I could even acquire some children now that I can teach them how to disarm thugs, rapists, homophobes and MRAs. Such a mitzvah chadge has done me!
Unfortunately people you regard as “Against” Pharyngula in this particular issue are awful people. The point has been made many times in this thread that all the hatred and bile against women created the culture where a Mass Murder can kill 14 people for being “Feminist”. There’s a depressingly large population of people who don’t seem to think that Rape jokes are in poor taste, or think that it’s perfectly normal to talk whimsically about how you’d like to rape some uppity woman.
There aren’t really any genuine non-shouty arguments to be made in favor of the opinion that women are second-class citizens and rape isn’t a problem. There are many non-shouty arguments to be made IN FAVOR of the idea that women are human beings. However the MRA crew do not deal in non-shouty arguments. That’s their entire playbook, they tone troll, lie and distort, and depressingly commonly unleash endless torrents hatred, bile, and bigotry. I’m not exaggerating either, Go back up and read those Slymepit posts and consider charming MRA specimens like Skeeve and go over to the Manboobz blog. The people who come over here and tone troll (like you) are lending cover for the really sick and nasty folks out there.
Except that misogynists and misogyny ARE apologetics for a terrible crime. The crime was motivated by MRA bullshit, the only difference between Lepine and the usual gang of shitheaded males is that Lepine believed in it enough to take action. There is no difference in philosophy and doctrine between Lepine and Joe Shithead MRA man, the only difference is that Lepine took it more seriously. Rather than playing pretend and bellyaching and playing the victim and shouting down anyone who added a note of skepticism to their self-aggrandizing theatrics Lepine seriously believed that he needed to strike a blow against feminism.
I’m glad to hear your daughters are doing well and I wish them the best in their life. However this isn’t, and never was, about ignorance. A couple dozen or so comments above you you’ll find Harryphillips knowingly and intentionally distorting what PZ said in this post. In the hundred or so posts above that you’ll find many instances of Skeeve being a complete asshole. Further up than that you’ll find several Slymepit apologists who are carefully avoided addressing how scummy the pit. Further up than that you’ll find Al Stefeneli bloviating and making it all about him. The saying goes you shouldn’t ascribe to malice what you can ascribe to stupidity, but these people are knowingly distorting and lying and misrepresenting the truth. They aren’t stupid, and that just leaves Malice.
You’re not helping your case with this. Mangina may have never been used as an insult to or around you, but it is used as an insult. The lovely MRA people will unironically call any man who supports women’s rights a “Mangina” because to them being associated with a woman is the worst insult they can imagine. Arguing that you can use a profanity in a friendly jovial tone doesn’t remove the fact that it’s still an insult in any other context. Same with racial slurs, some people might use the N-word in a friendly manner but it still has strong racist connotations. And yes, it’s important to use them appropriately, but things like Mangina and Cunt and other gendered language have negative meanings and they help frame the culture in a bad way. You might not mean it in an offensive way when you call a woman a cunt but it is still an offensive word and an offensive meaning. In a public forum in the internet you should watch your language especially in a discussion about Misogyny.
Genuine arguments are not “non-shouty.” You can shout an airtight argument. Try it for yourself or just take this example:
Socrates is a man!!!11eleventy!!
All men are mortal!! Didn’t you fucking know that?!?!?
Therefore Socrates is mortal. CHECKMATE, ASSHOLE!
See? It still works just fine, with or without “shoutiness” or “rudeness” or whatever you mean by that.
But to answer your question, there are non-shouty arguments to be made. Made about what?
First, the claim is not simply that it’s possible to regard them as equal, but we that should regard them as equal.
The answer is “no.” Arguing they should not be treated equally is engaging in apologetics for terrible crimes. (I assume this means violent crimes.) People commit crimes against them in particular because of their supposed inferiority or moral inferiority.
Besides, even without causing violence or committing a crime (since not everything wrong is outlawed), not treating them equally, whatever that may entail for a given person, is by itself a fucking terrible thing to do.
Why should we ask the congregation themselves, if they may not realize (or not care enough about to openly admit) the consequences of their own positions? Those consequences can be known by anyone. We don’t have to go to the slimepit, to ask them whether they’re causing harm, then believe whatever they say. Even if we did, we shouldn’t expect the answer to be “yes,” because they’re not an unbiased source. But the point remains that even if they were unbiased, the consequences don’t depend on how they assess the situation anyway.
It’s not my problem that they wish their bigoted nonsense didn’t feed into a culture which causes people to be violent anyway. You can add wishful thinking to their list of mistakes. (Never mind, it was already there.)
Ad hominem is a fallacy, not just an insult. You shouldn’t make some bogus claim that someone committed a fallacy in their own argument, if all they did was insult you. Unless you just felt like whining and can’t deal with people making arguments you don’t know how to respond to. Then, of course, that’s exactly what you should do.
As a not so casual observer, I can’t help but notice how much of a condescending tool you can be.
You’re equating “dispassionate” with genuine.
Guess what, women don’t get to be dispassionate when it’s their bodies and their lives on the line. Might I remind you this is a thread about 14 women that were assassinated because some guy thought they weren’t his equals? Can you even hear me over the sound of your tut-tutting everyone over displays of emotion?
Oh wait, this is a person who thinks “fuck” is a bigger offense than misogyny. For a moment, I thought I was talking to a human being with brains. Silly me.
@449 I remember following the events of that day intently, horrified that there are people who will kill women simply because they are women. And these anonymous monsters on the internet who shriek affrontedly about women and feminists and moan that any feminist allies are ‘manginas’ — to me, every one of them has the name Marc Lépine, and is just hiding it in shame and fear and hatred and cowardice.
@ Josh: So what the last time I checked you had the right to speak like an idiot.
So far I have been called stupid and an MRA good job guys really helping someone feel welcomed.
QFT. I agree. I don’t have time for this, but I didn’t want to miss the change to agree with PZ, and express disagreement with the crowd of haters. Honestly, I don’t know what’s the matter with some of these people.
The way to avoid that is to not act stupid and also, don’t spew the same shit MRAs do. Easy.
By the way, this post and thread is not titled “Welcome Wagon”. Try saying something intelligent and you’ll note a different reception.
Ducky1349 confirmed as blind. It’s very impressive he posts something that disproves his argument as though it proves his argument, it’s a very Creationist approach to arguing I have to say.
Oh yeah, the debate did lose reason and became polarized. Just like most political debates. And just like most political, one side was a tad less reasonable and a tad more polarizing than the other…
[Warning: Sardonic Understatements Above]
Citation needed. Shouting makes arguments more visible. Shouting makes emotions clear. Shouting makes the presence of an opposition known. Shouting is a means by which a minority can become a vocal minority. It is a key way to gain influence, power, without violence. It is how we make sure that they will hear us, and that if they do not hear our actual message, that they will at very least know that their bullshit won’t go unchallenged.
Again, not mutually exclusive with shouting. And if you believe it is, you have yet to show why quiet and gentle logic is more effective. This is pretty much accomodationism all over again. Fucking stop while you are ahead.
Oh really. Why don’t you listen to what your daughters say about the situation?
And if your daughters are not there, I really, sincerely hope that you will not hesitate or vacillate or “weigh up the situation”. It does not matter what your daughter might or might not have done, that language is off-limits, those words are off-limits, no matter what. Get in there and close that rubbish down.
Anteprepro:
Advice which is seldom heeded, unfortunately.
@ 472. I doubt that given the reputation thislace has gotten.
mildlymagnificent:
But someone might say “what precious little cunts!” and that would be all friendly and jolly and other things ending in olly.
*eyeroll*
Could someone try to rent the world’s smallest violin for the day? Somebody mistook Pharyngula for Mr. Roger’s Neighborhood.
@chadgething. #433:
It’s how long since feminism started up as a definite thing, now? At least 160 years by now. People who are still misogynist aren’t doing it because they haven’t got the memo, or simply haven’t heard good arguments, they’re doing it because they choose to remain ignorant and hateful. Yes, it’s wrong to yell at someone when you’re introducing a new idea. But we aren’t introducing a new idea at this point, or even close to doing so. We’re deep into “I can’t believe I still have to protest this shit” territory and accelerating. Long before this time, to use a wildly inappropriate metaphor, Sun Tzu would have had these people beheaded.
For that matter, complaining that PZ’s blog comments are being too shouty and profane and ignorance-intolerant is… well, it’s like going to the public pool and complaining that it’s too wet. If you want quiet friendly conversation from people who are willing to gently reason with people who are essentially aiding and abetting a crime against civilization more than a century after anyone had any reasonable excuse to do so, you really shouldn’t be here. (I’m not really sure where you should go for what sounds to me like superhuman patience, but it’s definitely not here.)
(For that matter, if you’re looking for civil discussion, well, since when has it been polite to denigrate people for things they can’t help, such as gender, skin color, or height? The worst you can say about people being rude to misogynists is that they are responding in kind to people who are already themselves rude. Even Miss Manners says that being polite does not mean making yourself into a doormat.)
*lifts head out of lawn* *continues chewing*
Hey! What’s wrong with sheep? They are fluffy and adorable, except when they’ve been shorn, when they are pathetically cute. I’d rather be a sheep* than a misogynist.
*begins chewing cud*
*I feel so strongly that the singular of sheep should be shoop.
chadgething @464:
So then…we’re supposed to think…what? That someone who’s all “I’m not down with killing women at all, but I still fucking hate them” is okay? That when we encounter misogynist talk and behavior online and IRL, the nice way to handle it is to shrug and go, “Well, as long as he isn’t shooting women, then I shouldn’t really attack him for his opinions“? I don’t see your point.
I mean, why even think this is a meaningful distinction worth making? Why do you decline to realize that all of the misogynists who happen not to be mass killers are still very much responsible for feeding the toxic climate of hate that inspires those rare nutcases? Mostly, why the blue fuck defend being a misogynist of any sort?
ducky1349 @ 471:
Maybe this had something to do with that wonderful first impression you made.
You gotta love it: show up in a comment thread, troll and lie, then cry that everyone is being mean to you.
Is there some formal psychological term for lack of self-awareness this profound?
:) See also: truth machine.
Fine. Go away then.
It seems like one of the key things I say to every nascent troll. It never does anything, but at least I can say I tried to warn whatever vestiges of humanity lie on the other side of that distant computer screen.
Just out of curiosity has ever mentioned this anniversary before?
The Vicar:
QFMFT. I’ve been an active feminist for 41 years now. Back in the ’70s and ’80s I was all optimistic that we’d be past this shit by this time. Colour me silly.
There’s this thing called Google. Use it. It is not our job to educate you nor to fetch information for you.
I thought you were leaving.
Because it’s just, like, their opinions, man. It’s just a simple disagreement, an ordinary everyday kinda thing. Just a few dissenters against the feminist paradigm, ya know. Can’t fault someone just for being different and thinking different, dig it. Can’t we all just get along, and let misogynists hate women in peace? I mean, as long as they are only providing justifications for other people to hurt women, instead of hurting women themselves, it’s no harm, no foul, amirite?
Martin:
Fuckwit.
chadgething wrote
I want to make the kind of people who espouse misogynist ideas fucking pariahs. I want them to have their bullshit called on by everyone, all the time. I want them left with nowhere to go where they will be able to spout their idiocy without it being shouted down.
And you don’t get that by asking them politely to stop. The last few years amongst the atheist community has reminded us of that.
Hmm… I think this is an argument for more swearing, since I have great faith in this commentariat’s ability to outswear the misogynists, but I have zero faith in the misogynist’s ability to debate “the points”* in a manner suggesting that there’s anything between their ears besides oatmeal.
*What fucking points?
Resolved: Bitches ain’t shit
Point 1: She had it coming.
Point 2: Sandwiches.
Point 3: Child support is slavery.
I think the high school debate in which I argued negative against the proposition that every major city on the planet should be nuked into glass was more productive.
Nepenthe:
You forgot
@ducky1349 – what in the name of dog makes you think that anyone here wanted to welcome you?
@chadgething – I am so hoping that you do not actually have daughters. Let me assure you that if someone calls the DaughterSpawn a cunt, I will not “weigh the situation.” I will, at a minimum, use (and recommend that she consider using) some hostile language. Surprisingly, it will not have to include gendered insults to be plenty rude and get the point across.
Sigh. Why am I sure that the True Skeptic Folks busy wringing their hands here about how anti-feminist rhetoric has nothing, NOTHING, to do with murders like this one are not remotely so public in their support of, say, the Islamist rhetoric that motivated the September 11 hijackers. I mean, what’s the chance that anyone, let alone someone with an ENGINEERING background, could take such rhetoric seriously?
Fuck you, chadgething and ducky1349.
Anyone else find that MRAs, anti-feminists, and other assorted apologists for misogyny are disproportionately terrible at English? Just wondering after reading a post by Reap Paden, who also illustrated my “attack them for your own greatest weakness” observation by accusing someone of idiocy while writing incoherent bilge.
#454 I just believe that you make more progress with a rational argument that doesn’t include telling people to “go fuck yourself”. It takes two people to argue. When one person calmly states a fact, it doesn’t matter how much the other person rants or rages, there will e one person looking foolish and one person who is right. Have the courage in the truth of your argument, rather than relying on who has the loudest mouth or the greatest stamina for insult. That isn’t an unreasonable position, is it?
Also, you mention Stonewall and the Sufragettes. Stonewall in the UK has been fantastic with non-violent and hard-hitting factual campaigning. Standing in public saying “I’m gay and proud of it” does not correspond to saying “fuck you”. The suffragettes had much success through their peaceful protests involving non-cooperation. Emily Davisons actions in front of the Kings horse at Epsom may have set back the movement, whereas, following the leadership of Emmeline Pankhurst and the dedication shown by women during the war against Germany, it was no longer a tenable position to deny women the vote. It wasn’t shouting longest that won the day, it was cold, hard proof that the sexism was unjustified. Righteous anger is fine, it’s how it is channelled that is important.
#462 I don’t understand your issue with me saying I prefer a debate to a hate-fest. I didn’t equate any levels of badness from either side, merely pointed out that it degenerates quickly. I think that is a shame. I certainly don’t think it is as easy to say there are those who hate women and those who don’t. I think that sort of blanket statement makes it very hard to have a constructive debate about anything. Perhaps my prose is of poor quality but by “non-shouty” arguments, I meant reasoned discussions as opposed to resorting to “well fuck you” responses.
I think you may have missed the meat of my argument that I believe it perfectly possible to hold an opinion that I may completely disagree with, whilst not believing you to be an apologist for the extreme expression of such an opinion.
It may not be our responsibility to educate people but if we disagree with them, maybe we owe it to ourselves to put forwards our case and rely on reason. Isn’t that what brought us to the Skeptic blogs in the first place? If someone does not want to be educated but still disagrees with me, I would rather stand by my argument as I know that is right. I don’t enjoy insulting people as it doesn’t really cause any progress or achievement. I also don’t believe that people cannot be educated. Every repetition of a just argument is a chip in the stone edifice of ignorance. Soon, it will come crashing down. Anger in the face of bigotry is not morally low, but again, how you channel that anger makes a difference. To an outside observer, two people trading insults are as bad as each other. One person swearing while another reiterates a just argument does not have the same effect.
Dissent is a good thing. Dissent forces us to examine our own position and to restate it, leading us to bett understand our position in the process. If people leave because they have been berated, is that really a good thing? Would it not be better if their arguments were meticulously disproven to the point that they had nothing further to contribute? I have been called a rape-apologist in the past for saying that men chatting up women does not mean they want to rape them! That position was one of dissent from the particular view expressed and led to insults being thrown, rather than a discourse on social settings and appropriateness of social interactions. I again, would have thought that a Skeptical movement would have no problem ridiculing the poorly contrived arguments of the genuine misogynists and rightly blocking those who then resort to aggressive and insulting behaviour. However, I do not expect to have insults thrown at me for attempting to encourage discourse from people who have in a previous breath complained about insults they have recieved! Let us remain with our arguments and allow reason to prevail.