How cute.
Yesterday a guy invited me to do a podcast on Women in Secularism and “problems with online discussion (cyber bullying).” I said sure. Later he told me that he has a couple of partners on the podcast, one of whom is…Reap Paden. Oh. Not doing that then.
So what do we have here? Why it’s a blog post by Reap Paden wondering why I could possibly not want to chat with him.
Ophelia Benson was offered a guest spot on the A-News podcast today. She accepted too. Then when she learned the details ( I am a co-host on the show) She pulled out (so to speak) Ophelia has done public speaking before right? So it isn’t that she is unable to speak in public. What is it with these people who gleefully libel and slander people left and right showing no ability to grasp the concept of responsible behavior in even its basic form? They can spout off constantly claiming they want the world to be a better place but can’t be bothered to actually talk about it with anyone who doesn’t already subscribe to their thinking. What is Ophelia Benson worried about? Does she think I am going to come through her computer monitor and steal all her cat food from her or somethin? Even if I was a ranting prick to her all she would have to do is hang up. She would then have a REAL example of someone behaving the way she has been claiming. That would also provide her with something else she yearns for. I think you could call it the “holy grail” of freethought blogs , credibility. No one there has it but they all long for it. Over and over again they have tried to claim they possess it but it always turns out to be made out of the same stuff you find in Mr Rodgers neighborhood, make-believe and sock puppets. I find it laughable that any of these ‘social justice warriors’ really think that by avoiding human interaction with anyone except those who smile and nod the world is going to give them any consideration. What a huge waste of time. I have a standing offer to anyone who wants to offer their side of things and have a real back and forth conversation. No one can claim I am unable to do anything but rant, all they need to do is take a look at the list of people who have been guests on my podcasts.
That’s not the end of the “paragraph,” it goes on even longer, but that’s a sample. Great, isn’t it? Why would I not want to go on his podcast and share a laugh about my passion for eating cat food? And hey, if I did go on it and he went on too long about cat food, I could just hang up! It’s golden! I don’t know why I passed up the chance!
Yes I do. There are many many podcasts. I can choose which ones to do. I don’t want to do one with Reap Paden, because I dislike the way he talks to and about people, including me. I prefer to do podcasts with thoughtful people.
I love the idea that doing his podcast would give me credibility. How would it do that, exactly? And then there’s his accusing freethought blogs of sockpuppetry. Project much?
Here’s the rest of that long “paragraph” (free advertising for Reap! I’m so generous):
I have more than proven myself able to have an adult conversation there is no valid excuse to decline especially if you really believe in the words coming out of your mouth or popping out of your keyboard. I can’t imagine what it must be like to not be able to stand up for what you believe in because it is so fragile and weak. If you remove it from the protective wrapper of your warped perception it will be crushed under the weight of common sense, how good could it be really? I don’t even disagree with everything they find fault with but we will never find common ground as long as they refuse to exchange ideas and instead only attack or misrepresent. I they can’t even manage to find a way to get along with other skeptics and atheists how could they possibly think they can win a battle with religious people over all the things they are hoping to change? Not a chance[.]
There is no valid excuse to decline? I need an excuse? I’m obliged to do his podcast? That makes about as much sense as insisting that blocking people on Twiter is a crime against free speech.
In any case I have good reasons to decline his podcast: he talks a lot of vicious shit, and I want nothing to do with him. I don’t “refuse to exchange ideas”; I simply refuse to talk to him.
His control of language is another reason; I can’t keep up with him. Call me fragile and weak if you must.
Now I know PZ has been very supportive of me and I don’t mean to insult him but, to be honest, PZ is like a conceited, bitter, vindictive, bully. He is far too busy to ever make sure his point is clear or to make a case for his side of an argument. He is to important to be bothered by silly details like being accurate and honest. It is much easier to shut down the critics by shutting off the comments and/or banning them when (or sometimes before) they post presenting a counter opinion. If we could harness the condescension and arrogance contained in PZ’s head it could power 3 states an still be enough to run the intense limelight he thinks constantly shines on him.
I wonder what he would say if he did mean to insult PZ.
But then at the end he has a change of heart and tries to reach out.
No matter what you say PZ Myers or how many times you ban me. No matter how great you think you are Stephanie Zvan. No matter how badly you wanna be famous, smart, and or cool Adam Lee. No matter how many times Ophelia Benson claims the sky is falling. No matter how long Ed Brayton keeps his fat head buried in the sand so he can deny the damage he has not only allowed but encouraged. And the same for the rest of you…. I am not going to allow you to force your thinking on me or allow you to try and force it on others without saying something about it. I don’t know what happened that resulted all you loons getting hit on the head with a safe at once but you people remind me of a damn zombie invasion only you ate your own brains now you just wonder around bumping into each other.
Hmmm…maybe I should do that podcast after all.
Kidding! Totally kidding.
He’s the most extreme example of a reactant personality I’ve seen in a long time. Wouldn’t be a bit surprised if he goes full meltdown in real life over something one of these days.
?
Oh well you know, I pulled out except not really because no penis but then again I’m so repulsive so maybe sort of penis –
You get the idea.
So…more of that proving himself able to have an adult conversation, then?
http://media.comicvine.com/uploads/7/72205/2494342-oh_wait_youre_serious_let_me_laugh_even_harder.jpg
So adult he calls him PZ Lyers and makes fun of Ed Brayton’s weight. And that’s the very mildest of it.
Ah, the golden oldies. Remember “I think I can speak on behalf of at least a whole hell of a lot of people”? Remember “Some of the incredible things I have seen you post lately make me wonder if you have been eating too much cat food or something”?
Nostalgia. Pure nostalgia.
http://freethoughtblogs.com/butterfliesandwheels/2012/10/reap-paden-is-another-mencken-or-even-hitchens/
What an odd thing to say. I’ve never in my life worried that somebody would or could “force their thinking on me.”
Beneath all his self-importance he’s a scared little guy, isn’t he?
He’s basically the same as every creationist who has ever yelled at PZ or Richard Dawkins declaring “YOU’RE JUST TOO SCARED TO DEBATE ME!!!!”
You didn’t get to do a podcast with Reap Paden? Welp, you’re not missing much. Oolon did it, and Paden spent most of the show verbally abusing Oolon to his face. It was an incredibly professional way to treat a guest if I do say so myself.
Reap Paden seems like he got a degree in Dildology from the University of Dildianapolis, Dildiana.
” I they can’t even manage to find a way to get along with other skeptics and atheists how could they possibly think they can win a battle with religious people over all the things they are hoping to change?”
I They. I They.
“I can’t even manage to find a way to get along with other skeptics and atheists…..”
Fixed the typo for ya Reap!
And just how incompetent are they? Did he seriously think you’d agree to go on a show with him? What was he going to do if you’d gotten all the way on there, heard him, and hung up?
Dumb.
I didn’t read the quotes. I think I’d rather try to find wisdom in the smears of feces on the bottom of the litterbox than hear anything more of what Rape Pardoner has to say about women. Does that make me a fellow cat lady?
Indeed, the numerous photoshopped images of PZ, Stephanie, etc. on that blog post just reek of maturity and professionalism.
I also love how Reap Paden provided “a list of some of the people I’ve had conversations with on ReapSowRadio and The Angry Atheist podcasts.”. It’s a long list, full of names like “Jim”, “Fred”, “Fandick” and, way down at #100, ‘Reap Paden’
heh.
I interpreted the “cat food” comment as implying you were an archetypal crazy cat lady, not that you ate it.
*shrug* OTOH, I’m not sure it’s worth trying to decipher this juvenile crap.
Jamessweet, see here. It’s both.
And I can’t speak for Ophelia, but I find trying to decipher this juvenile crap pretty goddamn entertaining. 🙂
Ah, thanks for the context. I think I can speak on behalf of at least a whole hell of a lot of people when I say that is pretty fucked up.
Those quotes contain weapons grade self-importance and projection. (Thoroughly undeserved I’m sure.)
He accuses PZ of being a bully and of believing the sun shines out his (PZ’s) bum. Yet reap thinks that just because he came down from upon high and offered the accursed Ophelia a place on his esteemed podcast, Ophelia is required by such bestowment to appear/discourse/respond. Not receiving the cloying nod of ascent Ophelia is honour bound to give, he then proceeds to bully her. What possible reason could Ophelia have not to take part after such a gift of parley?
He doesn’t mean to insult, and insults like there’s no tomorrow.
He wants free speech by ridiculing, belittling and generally insulting the person not the idea, thus ensuring speech is one way.
He’s a bit worried about PZ, hence the semi-deference. But ye wenches have been told!
It’s a bit sad when someone steals all of their rhetorical moves from WWE pre-fight confrontations.
I think I can speak on behalf of at least a whole hell of a lot of people when I say that Ophelia rocks.
I’ll bet Paden hasn’t caught on yet that he just tarred himself with his own brush.
having apparently already adopted the thinking of Lucky (though he fancies himself as Pozzo):
… labors left unfinished crowned by the Acacacacademy of Anthropopopometry of Essy-in-Possy of Testew and Cunard it is established beyond all doubt all other doubt than that which clings to the labors of men that as a result of the labors unfinished of Testew and Cunnard it is established as hereinafter but not so fast for reasons unknown that as a result of the public works of Puncher and Wattmann it is established beyond all doubt that in view of the labors of Fartov and Belcher left unfinished for reasons unknown of Testew and Cunard left unfinished it is established what many deny that man in Possy of Testew and Cunard that man in Essy that man in short that man in brief in spite of the strides of alimentation and defecation wastes … I resume alas alas on on in short in fine on on abode of stones who can doubt it I resume but not so fast I resume the skull fading fading fading and concurrently simultaneously what is more for reasons unknown in spite of the tennis on on the beard the flames the tears the stones so blue so calm alas alas on on the skull the skull the skull the skull in Connemara in spite of the tennis the labors abandoned left unfinished graver still abode of stones in a word I resume alas alas abandoned unfinished the skull the skull in Connemara in spite of the tennis the skull alas the stones Cunard
Paraphrasing… it would look great on his curriculum, not so good on yours.
Ophelia not participating in Reap Paden’s podcast is denying Paden FREEZE PEACH! He should be able to abuse Ophelia. Her refusal to submit to his bullying is just another example of FTB bullying. Won’t anyone think of the immature slympitters?
he seems to be doing a false equivalence with “guest spot on a podcast”. That phrase can mean different things, hence there were “details” which could be learned.
It’s like opening a yogurt container in the fridge, and discovering it is full of yesterday’s carrots and potatoes. but you wanted yogurt, so what is the mystery to this guy if you put the container back in the fridge?
this is so simple and basic. what even is with this “truth” blog person…
also, can we just:
“Ophelia has done public speaking before right? So it isn’t that she is unable to speak in public. What is it with these people who gleefully libel and slander people left and right showing no ability to grasp the concept of responsible behavior in even its basic form? ”
can we just marvel at the discontinuity of the train of thought here?
Yes. Yes we can.
peterh, he’s had months now to figure that out. It still hasn’t happened.
Poor Reap’s tiny brain can’t process that fact that he’s not entitled to Ophelia’s (or anyone else’s, for that matter) time and energy.
It’s a good reminder of what’s at the heart of this shit-storm: entitled, petulant assholes stamping their feet because they aren’t getting what they want. Most of them just want to hear how they’re better than the religious; some of them want to treat women as second-class citizens and not face any repercussions for doing so; others just want to be paid attention to because, damn it, they’ve got a Philosophy PhD and Rebecca Watson doesn’t.
And they don’t know how else to deal with that beyond throwing temper tantrums and abusing people.
Wow, Reap is a piece of work. The ridiculously long paragraphs, the terrible site design, the crude photoshoppery, the sub-sophomoric humor, truly a luminary of the atheist movement. It really takes the cake where he strawmans Adam Lee. I can scarcely imagine what his podcast must sound like.
Sock puppets? I’ve documented 15 aliases Reap Paden has used to circumvent my filters and post on Pharyngula.
You made me look at his site. He’s really fond of the argumentum ad photoshop, isn’t he?
That was completely unhinged. How can declining to do a podcast specifically to avoid someone be equated with forcing one’s thinking on that person?
I can’t help but think this is not Reap Paden’s typical response to someone refusing a podcast with him.
Well, they make ranty podcasts, desperately try to troll blogs where they are banned and wallow in slime.
I have no problem claiming it. Mind you, I’ve only read what you’ve written, but seeing how you’ve yet to figure out the concept of paragraphs I can’t really see how you’d be able to do anything but rant.
Child, the difference between you and a five-year-old in the middle of a tantrum is that you use more complicated words (but without the understanding necessary to claim that they are part of your vocabulary) but make less sense.
I believe, Tom, that you can imagine it, but you (wisely) don’t want to try. I found the podcast he did with Oolon that Aratina Cage referenced above. His (post-production) spoken introduction was well-poisoning, and it hung together just they way he writes.
I had to stop about three quarters of the way through. Early on, Oolon had pointed out that Reap had banned him on Reap’s blog. He stated outright that he didn’t understand why Reap was so exercised about banning on PZ’s blog when he does the same thing. Reap replied that it was different, of course, because Oolon was irritating. Did he explain exactly how and why it was different? (Everyone knows to answer that question with a two-letter word.)
Did he really say that? Well then! Perhaps people should listen to him for about 10 seconds to judge the accuracy of that statement. I was more than a little surprised when I found out he is an adult.
Possibly Reap doesn’t realize how irritating most people find him. I suspect, though, that the difference is that Reap doesn’t consider someone irritating PZ or the FTB commentariat to be important, but someone irritating Reap Paden?! Why, that’s an affront to the entire atheist world (Or at least the parts of it that are Reap Paden).
Ophelia not participating in Reap Paden’s podcast is denying Paden FREEZE PEACH!
Someone give that man an empty chair.
Wait, do you mean the Camels with Hammers guy or somebody else? What did I miss?
Amphigory @38:
I suspect it was Russell Blackford’s latest tantrum.
Reap:
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAaaaaa*koff koff choke*
No, no he hasn’t. All he does is rant, often incoherently, and the lack of proper paragraphs and spacing only adds to that perception. He spews nasty, hate-filled rants, and then expects people to… what? Accept them as gospel truth, just because he’s “teh Alpha Male” or something?
Ophelia, stick by your principles — this douchenozzle ain’t worth the time of day.
He’s spamming! Check Avicenna’s latest – recycled Reap rant!
http://freethoughtblogs.com/amilliongods/2013/01/30/i-get-mail-apparently-i-am-officially-a-ftbully/
Reap’s bullshit is not only irrationally toxic and hateful (and in every conceivable way, the complete opposite of what he describes it as), but it reads like it was written by a pre-adolescent D student. I’m willing to give people a bit of latitude with their syntax and grammar if their content’s engaging, but Reap’s writing has no redeeming features at all.
The vague invitation to the podcast, the decline upon knowing who’d be on it and the subsequent junior-high crowing from Reap makes this whole situation look like a bit of a setup. Ophelia wasn’t informed it was Reap’s territory until after she’d accepted, Ophelia (understandably) declined, now Reap gets to jump up and down and beat his chest. It wouldn’t surprise me one bit if he had the “guy” issue the the invitation vaguely for precisely that purpose (just like PZ and R. Dawkins were invited via subterfuge to be in “Expelled”). Of course I’m speculating, which is pointless; I just wouldn’t put anything past the douchebrigade – their obsession with “winning” this fight is as public as it is enduring.
Yes, Reap has some serious problems. One of the smaller ones is paragraphs, some of the larger ones include concepts like “freedom of speech”, “sockpuppet” and I suspect anything that goes beyond “me me me me me”.
I’m generally not that fond of comparing adult behaviour to children. Children have a good excuse, they’re children, their brains and skills are still developing. Reap and his friends have no excuse.
You’re nearly there, Mr. Paden. If you can just get a little louder and a little more assertive, brutish, and vulgar, I’m sure it will add up to a valid point in the end.
“I am not going to allow you to force your thinking on me”
Someone has watched ‘Scanners’ a few too many times.
@Aratina
That’s one reason he banned me from his blog, because I have to show I’m capable of adult conversation before I’ll be allowed into the discussion. You could argue that often applies to me, but where is his self-realisation?
Ophelia probably missed a great opportunity as I believe on A-News there is also his mate Brian who I should sue for inflicting facepalm injuries on me. If anyone managed to get that far in Reaps podcast the bits where Brian says misogynist, homophobic, racist and transphobic terms are fine because he knows people from each group who use the terms to refer to themselves or don’t complain when he uses them is…. Well I was somewhat discombobulated.
Oh.. And Gilliel, LOL
I will admit to reading the Pharyngula comment threads at times and Reaps comments are clearly identifiable even after being mangled by PZ. Pretty impressive that his writing style is that unique.
Mandrellian @ 42, My thoughts exactly. A transparent setup indeed. Effing pathetic.
Make that 16 aliases, and I’ve lost track of the number of blocked posts he’s tried to make. I just found a couple of his test posts, where he’s probing to find ways to comment, caught in the spam filter.
He just doesn’t get it. I don’t like him, I have the right to tell him he can’t shit on my carpet, and yet he keeps rattling the doorknobs trying to find a way to get in and leave a nasty dump somewhere in my house. And the fact that I don’t let him is an abridgment of his FREE SPEEEEEEEEEECH rights.
I think I have just understood what some people mean by “critical thinking”. Self-satisfaction has a lot to answer for.
mandrellian @ 42 –
Oh, I know. That was my first thought, of course (yesterday afternoon when a friend alerted me to a sneery tweet from one of the fake Twitter accounts under my name), and I said so to the guy who invited me – I might as well say it was Lee Moore, since Paden made the whole thing public instantly and thus his co-hosts are already implicated in his games. But I think Paden’s trick was played on Lee too; he was very annoyed about it. But Paden? Oh yes. Definitely a setup. But it’s hilarious if he thought that I would have any difficulty saying no once Lee told me Paden is a co-host. What, I would think it was my duty to go ahead? Please. They’re not the BBC.
PZ @ 49 – finding new sockpuppets of Reap’s – oh that’s right, I was alerted to one of his here just a couple of days ago! A few hours before the invitation to do the podcast, in fact.
Has this become common enough to merit a new standard logical fallacy category? The argument from incivility?
Argument from Incivility – asserting your argument is valid because someone refuses to discuss it with you. Hinges on the misconception that the only reason someone would not want to talk to you is because they cannot match your “brilliant” arguments.
Or perhaps just a Paden Gambit.
His problem is the “She won’t talk to a human being who disagrees with her” part. It’s not that he “disagrees” (great euphemism), it’s that he’s not a human being.
Sounds just like creationists whining that Dawkins won’t debate them. People have a moral responsibility to disengage from those whose behavior is immoral, to not give them credibility, to indicate that the behavior is so beyond what humans owe each other that the person’s presence should not be tolerated.
So sorry that that’s “judgmental”, get over it.
I’m willing to bet most, if not all, women have experienced guys doing that towering over you thing when they are trying to intimidate you into silence or compliance. This is what Pig Fucking Bigot Paden is doing – Intimidation, internet style. All this hilarious, ridiculous posturing is to cover the fact that a) all of his critics are right about him and b) he isn’t fooling anyone. So, he puffs up his chest and tries his hardest to macho his way to credibility. Which, of course, fails miserably, which is why he’s obsessed with not getting attention – spending all his time making sockpuppet accounts, etc. If he doesn’t get attention, he can’t convince us how totally awesomely macho he is! And how totally awesomely right about everything that makes him because penis!
The bigotry, insecurity and desperation waft off him like a tornado.
…’adult’ conversation…I do not think it means what he think it means. ‘Adult video store conversation’ perhaps. ‘Beavis and Butthead-twelve year old hetero male-desperately attempting to ur-macho impress his school yard peers as they’re smoking behind the bus barn-conversation’ perhaps.
He appears to be playing the “Internet Game” as described by Theramin Trees on youtube. Gleefully and fully aware of his deceptive tactics. Can’t say I’d want to be in a work environment with such individuals.
I would ask what the English language did to provoke such treatment, but that would be victim blaming.
Ding ding ding.
He’s kinda made his bed, seems to me. Got rather a lot to live down, now. Doesn’t leave a lot of dignified exits, obviously.
Were I a far nicer person, I might almost feel some sympathy.
I really don’t.
(And I think I can live with that.)
Reap’s envy is just dripping off of him. He desperately wants to be able to make everyone listen to him.
“I they can’t even manage to find a way to get along with other skeptics” is just a classic freudian slip. As they say, this guy has so many psych issues that you could have a whole conference on him. However, that would just feed into his narcissism
@garnetstar
Oh he’s human alright, and we won’t gain anything from othering people like that.
But I have noticed that, often, these assholes focus on disagreement itself and not the reasons FOR disagreement, it’s very telling. You’ll see complaints of “omg banned for merely disagreeing!” instead of “banned for vicious misogynistic/racist/homophobic assholery(for example)”.
—
Uh, when the hell did that ever happen? NOBODY here is trying to force anyone to think differently. The only behaviour that comes close to that is Reap Paden and co’s inability to let us get on with what we find important while they could go off and do whatever they feel is important(the pitters keep insisting that creationists/separation of church and state are the bigger issue for atheism, yet shouting at bloggers who promote social justice is apparently even more important/threatening to them than creationism!). Projection, indeed.
Oh ffs. I was even more set up than I thought. Their most recent podcast, dated the day I was invited –
http://a-news.apartmentj.com/?p=848
The second half is devoted to talking to some guy called Anton Hill. A few weeks ago he tweeted at me out of nowhere – I don’t know him, I’d never had any kind of contact with him, he was a total stranger to me – to demand that I give him evidence (or maybe he said proof) that the mildew pit is misogynist. I said no, do your own homework.
Oh my god call the cops!
I don’t have time or inclination to explain everything to every stranger who tweets at me. I explain things in blog posts, not in tweets to strangers.
But he thinks this is an outrage. Last week somebody sent me a link to a 20 minute video he did on the subject. Yes really! 20 minutes! Now a starring role on the Reap podcast – all because I won’t do people’s homework for them on Twitter.
Godalfuckingmighty what do these people expect.
Lee never mentioned the podcast. Not even after Reap’s post and the tweet from the impersonation account (one of them). (Did I mention the tweet? I don’t think I did. There’s too much to mention. It’s boring. I leave lots out, because it’s boring.)
Gee, Mr Hill, I’m terribly sorry I wouldn’t explain everything to you on Twitter. I’m terribly sorry I didn’t know you from Adam and get tired of strangers accosting me to demand that I use up all my time on them. I’m terribly sorry I ended up calling you a creep because you wouldn’t stop insisting that I use up all my time on you. I’m a horrible, hateful, evil, Nazi person. So sorry.
I didn’t listen to all of that podcast, by the way, or all of that part of it. Two or three minutes maybe. Maybe it ends with all of them realizing the whole thing is ridiculous and they should stop hounding me!
Yeah, not likely. A commenter on Reap’s recent post linked to a screen shot of a Facebook conversation between you and Harriet Hall (and some other
derailersparticipants whose identities are protected). So, pretty much any exchange you have anywhere with anyone that tangentially relates to anything you might be thinking wrongly about will be preserved and exhaustively analyzed forevermore. Boring, you say? Evidently not!I know – someone pointed that out to me too. We thought it was…interesting that their identities are protected. Why’s that then?
They are Travis Roy and Richard Murray. Brian Engler (the discussion was on his page) commented that this was the second conversation they had derailed in the two days since he accepted their friend requests, so good bye. I blocked them.
I just want to say that I admire the people who could actual read all that. I tried. I tried to read what he wrote, but I just ended up skimming it quickly before I finished the first passage. It was actually painful.
I couldn’t read it in full, either. I have an eye-rolling self-protective instinct in the face of bullshit. Though I try not to roll my eyes in public, it’s almost impossible to make myself listen to, much less read, self-serving nonsense like Paden’s.
The comments make much better reading, fortunately. Nepenthe, you nearly cost me a computer screen with #58!
True. Bad blog posts/videos/podcasts can be the source of brilliant comments. Maybe life is fair after all.
Reap Paden, too cowardly to not hide behind his excuse of “I don’t really mean to insult them”. Sheesh.
Yeah, that’s so cute.
“I don’t mean to insult him but INSULT INSULT INSULT INSULT.”
Golly whoops! How did that happen? You didn’t MEAN to insult him but SOMEHOW you did. I guess you’re incompetent as well as an insulting jerk, otherwise you’d not be doing things you didn’t mean to do.
SallyStrange,
If Reap were a potential romantic partner, that would be a clear red flag of potential abusiveness, wouldn’t it? “I don’t mean to insult, but I couldn’t help it because he’s so deserving” sounds a little too much like “I don’t mean to slap her around, but I couldn’t help it because she keeps pissing me off.”
@Improbable Joe
I think it is clear from the way he treated Oolon, a guest on his show on whom he heaped personal abuse, that he is indeed an abusive person–no romantic relationship necessary.
Aratina Cage, I’m not aware of that specific instance, but I’ve never seen him NOT be abusive. I was just pointing out that the rage comes along with the abdication of agency and “I was provoked” justification
I wasn’t trying to negate anything you said, Joe, just adding to it. 🙂 So, I do agree with you. On Twitter I was comparing it to road rage, which I think also has that false “I was provoked into hurting her” component. It is often our moral duty in a civil, democratic society to move on and not retaliate for a perceived slight. Of course, making what they do moral is one of the reasons that the FTBully meme is necessary; they’re being oppressed!
Has Reap ever expressed any conspiracy-theory beliefs? His mindset towards disagreement is almost exactly the same as creationists, truthers, and the like. He feels as though anything less than sycophantic agreement is a threat to his very being. But off the top of my head, I can’t ever remember him expressing any common conspiracy theories.
It’s like that guy from Don’t Start Me Off claiming they never try to hurt people’s feelings. It makes me wonder what they think they ARE trying to do.
Mmm..catfood. Yummy, yummy catfood.
Wait, what were we talking about?
@caveatimperator,
Well he, Renee and Brian on their podcast said, with no hint of satire, that there exist feminists that actively want to kill *all* men. They did tone this down to 90% with the other 10% kept for breeding purposes since we cannot do parthenogenesis yet… Sounds like a pretty nutty belief arisen from their dislike of all things “radfem”
Heheh, it’s like Valerie Solanas is trolling them from beyond the grave.
Thought. Cats like cream. So cream is a cat food. Ophelia, I think you’ve earned a big bowl of strawberries and cream for not spending a podcast discussing cat food with this man.
Or maybe a glass of Baileys. Or strawberries with Baileys.
I think Valerie Solanas must be the ultimate troll. She has trolled far more people than any /b or Anonymous action has so far.
Oolon,
They may be reacting to the guest essay by Vliet Tiptree at radicalhub.com (link), which caused great consternation in MRA circles: the abuser-in-chief at AVfM put a bounty up for anyone who could reveal the writer’s real name (since Vliet Tiptree is a pseudonym), and the article is regularly cited as evidence of the claim that radical feminists want all men killed or whatever.
I don’t see it as productive to discuss whether Renee and Brian’s claim is correct (despite the fact I’ve provided a link for doing just that); what would be more telling is just how many radical feminists actually support that view. It’s an eminently testable claim but I suspect it’s more convenient to spread untruths about radical feminism as my guess would be, only a minute fringe believe in extermination as an answer.
Xanthë, I think you have to take a step further back and figure out what ‘radical feminist’ even means. Their definition seems…pretty broad.
Reap Paden :
Emphasis added.
Meaning I guess that PZ is NOT a “conceited, bitter, vindictive, bully” just resemble sone closley the difference being ..?? Well Reap doesn’t say.
Ophelia Benson :
He’d have left out the word “like” perhaps? Because leaving it in means what he said wasn’t insulting PZ at all, not one little bit. (Sarcasm.)
For the record, I”ve eaten catfood once myself. I tried a whiskette (dry catfood biscuit thingummy) once – most revolting taste ever. Think it must have been one of the mythical mouse flavoured ones? I’m also a non-neurotypical male who is happily owned by a black tortoiseshell cat, FWIW.
@80. sheila :
Good thinking there I concur.
Cats love milk as well and will certainly eat human food if they can get away with it. Not sure if the fictional Garfields love of lasagne (spelling?) is based on a real felis domesticus individual (or more) or not but that’s another possibility too.
In support of Ophelia I have just eaten some catfood for lunch!
(It was high quality canned tuna. My cats think that’s catfood, though they don’t like the rocket, basil or olives that I had with it.)
Captaintripps – “Reap Paden seems like he got a degree in Dildology from the University of Dildianapolis, Dildiana.”
In another thread, I said that people should call out ad hominem’s when they see them, especially from people on their own side of the debate. If I expect others to point out ad hominem attacks, I should do so myself. I need to point out that the above comment is pure ad hominem without other content. If we would like the other side to refrain from comments about age, sex, weight, whatever, it would probably be best to take the high road and avoid slinging ad hominem mud right back.
I agree that there is a lot to criticize in what Reap Paden has said. I don’t need to repeat what others have said in this thread. However I think comparing him to a dildo is not the best way to put forward the criticism.
dsmccoy, you are ugly therefore you are wrong. Now see that’s an ad hominem. If I had said “you are ugly and you’re wrong,” that would not be an ad hominem but simply an insult, coupled with an observation. Ad hominem is not a synonym for insult, and anyone who claims otherwise is a liar, a crook, and a gin-sot.
dysomniak, you caluminous onion-eyed measle,
I took the liberty of assuming that in the context of a post in a thread discussing a person’s statements, a bare insult can be considered to have an assumed “He’s wrong because …” in front of it,
you puking beetle-headed dewberry.
Whatever terminology you use for it, you errant fly-bitten mammet, contentless insults should be avoided at all costs, you ruttish fen-sucked malcontent.
Yep, dysomniak is correct.
That’s just a straight up insult.
Though it may be indicative of prejudice against dildos.
Happily, being inanimate objects rather than people, dildos are not members of a societally marginalized group.
@ Oolon, I’m listening to your appearance on the ReapSow podcast now. (Link: http://www.reapsowradio.com/?p=31336) Wow! You really maintained your cool, despite all the well-poisoning, misinformation and insults being thrown at you. This Reap character is a real piece of work.
dsmccoy (#88)
Such can only be assumed by the revoltingly dishonest. The gushing sphincter’s arguments–such as they are–aren’t being determined based on his degree of dildoishness; his degree of dildoishness is being determined based on his arguments—or the vacuity thereof.
So… am I the only one here who thinks the Friskies Seafood Dinner smells pretty darned appetizing?
I’ve never tasted it, but it always makes me want fish.
Ophelia is a “prawn” from District 9? O.o
yeah, no. far more likely is “he’s ridiculously wrong, therefore…”
but good to know you need to make up stuff about people to have a point.
Jadehawk – “but good to know you need to make up stuff about people to have a point.”
My sin was the misuse of the word ad hominem in describing an insult. I apologize for that.
Assuming a prefix was merely meant as a defensive jest in reply to a playfully written comment pointing it out.
I apologize yet again if it wasn’t funny.
I’m not telling anyone to shut up or anything. All I’m saying is if you want to be able to criticize people for slinging contentless insults in your direction, you should be able to recognize it when someone you agree with slings one in the other direction as well.
Criticizing the content is the higher road, and there is plenty of fodder for that.
Maybe you think an insult is justified.
Fine. Maybe so.
But that doesn’t that make it harder to honestly criticize Lee Moore when he says “I also understand that many of them feel justified”?
Whether one is justified or not is a fact claim. Whether one FEELS justified is an entirely different matter, and justified they FEEL doesn’t really enter into it. They’re hurting people.
To explain further, dsmccoy, it is trivially true to say that they feel justified. EVERYONE feels justified in what they are doing, otherwise they wouldn’t be doing it.
Does that make sense? Or am I missing something?
@Xanthe, thanks for the link, I’ll read that. The definition of “radfem” for Reap, Al etc. is any feminist who disagrees with them… I think… At least Al Stefanelli had a great quote in that podcast saying that Feminism comes in varying degrees of severity… Bit like the pox maybe?
@Cyranothe2nd, keeping cool while being insulted is my English superpower, we all secretly agree that we are no good so insults are only points of common ground. Hence the self deprecation we are famous for… Now if he had been nice or complimented me (English Kryptonite) I would have been reduced to a quivering mess. Anyway if you managed to sit through the whole thing you have my admiration as it was rather long on time and short on content.
@Xanthe, read the link, not quite Solanas level but I reckon the transphobia was more insulting than the “misandry” … Soooo far from any feminist, commenter or blogger, on FtBs it seems ridiculous to use the same label to describe them.
@ SallyStrange
Of course, everyone who ever used and insult felt it was justified. It feels the same on either side, which is why feeling that it is justified is not an excuse for sinking to pure insults.
What is the rhetorical difference between “cat food” and “dildo”? If you want to criticize someone for the cat food insult, calling him a dildo is not the best way to do it.
It just gives people on the other side a place to point and say “see, they’re doing the same thing”.
Lee Moore and others say there are reasonable people on the other side of the argument, “grownups” if you will. I found myself saying out loud that, if there are grownups on that side they should be calling people on the use of insults. They’re not. Then I saw the “dildo” insult, and figured I can’t expect anyone else to do something I don’t do myself.
dsmccoy (#96)
Your problem is you don’t know what the fuck this side’s criticism is aimed at. (Or you do, and you’re trolling.) It’s not about “slinging insults.” It’s the misogyny, the harassment, the targeted hate, the slurs, the rank dishonesty, and the constant overreaction to mild criticism or reasonable objections that are the problem.
dude. they’re not “insulting” us, they’re harassing us. if insults were all there was to this, we probably not really be having these “deep rifts”, since every poster at pharyngula has at some point or another been insulted by virtually every other poster on pharyngula, en masse.
one is an implied ageist slur, the other is an insult
Look, dsmccoy, if you want to argue that calling Reap Paden a dildo is not justified, go right ahead, nobody is stopping you.
I was just pointing out that your logic was laughable: everyone FEELS justified in what they do. Feeling justified and being justified are two different things.
Now I know PZ has been very supportive of me and I don’t mean to insult him but, to be honest, PZ is like a conceited, bitter, vindictive, bully.
PZ is supportive, but he’s still going to call PZ such nasty names? Is this guy a hyocrite, a lunatic, or just too zarking immature to even listen to himself?
And why are these people so hung up on PZ anyway? If you have so little use for the guy, just don’t read his blogs — there’s plenty of much better alternative reading on FTB alone, and it’s not being buried by Seal Team Forty-Two.
No matter how long Ed Brayton keeps his fat head buried in the sand so he can deny the damage he has not only allowed but encouraged.
WHAT damage? Any specifics that I might have missed in about SEVEN YEARS of regularly reading Ed’s blogs?
People like this give self-parody a bad name.
Oh, and calling Reap Paden a dildo is an insult to dildos, which do more good, with less accompanying harm, than people like Reap will ever do.
see now that is a good reason to complain about the dildo-based insult.
Yeah, I’m rather a fan of dildos. Paden, not so much. Am I justified in calling him a “jerk” or does my recognizing and labeling his jerk-like behavior 100% balance out all his slurs and sockpuppeting and harassment? If a person is acting mean and I call them mean, does that make me mean and now we’re even? That’s your “logic,” dsmccoy.
@ A. Noyd “Your problem is you don’t know what the fuck this side’s criticism is aimed at.”
I do know. Misogyny. The insults are only the disgusting icing on the misogyny cake.
I just prefer when the justified rebuttal isn’t similarly iced.
@SallyStrange “everyone FEELS justified in what they do. Feeling justified and being justified are two different things.”
Everyone is certain they are justified. Certainty itself is a feeling.
(Burton, “On Being Certain” is good on this one.)
Look, I’m not a troll.
I’ll just shut up about this before people start accusing me of being the tone patrol or something.
I know you’re not a troll because I saw your thoughtful comments over at Crommunist’s, but seriously. Either make the case against dildo or stop, well, tone trolling. Because that’s what you’re doing here.
I think you responded to my comment with a tautology or something along those lines. I’m still not seeing that you get that “justification” can be evaluated rationally, independent of whether the “I’m right and this is a good thing to do!” feeling is present. Naturally, since people don’t generally do things unless they have that feeling.
Perhaps you should define “justified.” I’m taking it to mean something like “warranted, proportionate, reasonable.” I.e., calling someone “mean” after they do a bunch of obviously mean stuff is “justified.” Calling someone a worthless ugly cunt because you think anti-harassment policies are not needed at conferences is not “justified.”
#88
I took the liberty of assuming that in the context of a post in a thread discussing a person’s statements, a bare insult can be considered to have an assumed “He’s wrong because …” in front of it,
.
This is strictly correct. That is exactly the ploy so depressingly used by Reap Paden, who is a person who can write a whole paragraph of insult without any rational argumentation and offer it as a reasonable comment.
http://anr.apartmentj.com/?p=886
.
Clearly, insult is seen as a proper argument, so it is correct to regard it as an ad hominem attack: I think that the idea is to encourage support from people who have already concluded that the person attacked is wrong, and that “wrong” people are worthless. The arguments don’t need to be stated, because the writer can assume that others will agree — and that is all that matters. It may not be logically an ad hominem argument, but that is not the point. The point is to garner support, and if there is enough support, the Padens of this world will feel justified. We’re not talking about reason here, but about gathering opinion.
the idea is to encourage support from people who have already concluded that the person attacked is wrong,
There is also the possibility that insulting language appeals to certain kinds of people: if you can insult someone, they must be really wrong. It’s like giving people permission to abuse.
dsmccoy (#111)
Then why did you say “if you want to be able to criticize people for slinging contentless insults in your direction…” if you know that’s not what’s being criticized?
thank you for at least listening to my shows and the ones I have participated in. Your help ,by blogging and commenting, has helped us grow our site and others. keep up the good work, we appreciate any help in spreading atheism around the world, thank you.
Brian, how does half a podcast devoted to an angry guy ranting about my failure to do what he told me to do on Twitter, help spread atheism around the world? That podcast seems to me more a matter of spreading misogyny around the very small fraction of the “atheist community” that will hear it.
And I didn’t listen to two minutes of that podcast as a favor to you, so there’s no need to thank me. I listened because it was dedicated to bashing me (for disobeying Alton Hill’s orders on Twitter); naturally I was curious.
We have many guests, on many episodes, just because you didn’t enjoy one doesn’t mean you wouldn’t enjoy another We also had (I think, one of your friends) Ellen Beth Wachs on and she was awesome and it was a great episode. we give everyone their time to talk and their time to say whatever they want to. Sure, I might joke about something that could be considered offensive,, but at the end of the day I try to give everyone their time to talk about what ever they want to If you want to get on the show and call me names for an hour that is fine, but i think we could still talk about things that are relevant and engaging to an audience. I am sure you are working on more than just battleing trolls and that there are many passions in the movement that you could tell us and the audience about. The invite is always open and we could even talk about anything you want to. Guests on the show get to bring their own topics.
Hell, if you know someone who is a cancer survivor maybe they would be interested in being on one of my other shows ( I have an entire show devoted to cancer survivor stories) . Not everything i do revolves around atheism. I just happen to be an atheist activist but I am more an entertainer with a microphone, and I do still thank you for listening .
You forgot to mention the list of people I have had productive conversations with. Let’s see…..120+ people vs you and your handful of blogger friends, none of whom have ever met me except PZ and he was so happy to talk to me he was almost running in circles. No wonder he didn’t bring up the racist thing.
What is it with you and connecting the dots? You started all this by sticking your nose into what wasn’t your business. I had no idea who the hell you were until you started being unfair and making judgements about people’s character when you had no right to do so. It is not your or anyone’s place to define me for the rest of the world, Get over yourself. When I don’t lay down and take it you start talking more and then you present my words in your context never giving a thought to the possibility that maybe I have the right to be pissed off. That parody account on twitter pisses you off doesn’t it? Then you kinda know what I mean. You continuously create problems by acting like a jerk and then you cry about the fallout, it really is tiresome to watch and hear about. Was there ever a time when you were too busy writing about real issues and had no time to make things up?
I have made no demands of you, I simply expect some behaviors from people who are adults. If you can the time to blog about me then why not take that time and clear up any mistakes I have made about your actions? I have said I will listen. Still you refuse to even consider it and as usual take it over the line and use it to further misrepresent me and my motives. Obviously I can respond with more than an onslaught of vulgarity You can’t claim to know what a conversation between us would be like. I think we could end the exchange with at least a better understanding of each other. It would give me a reason to have some respect for you. This isn’t the first time I have had a disagreement with someone, in fact this is nothing compared. Some of the people I have had issues with are now good friends and even I would have told you at one point that could never happen. You underestimate me and yourself. I’m not out to do you harm but I won’t allow you to continue to harm my character or cause others to consider me a bad person just because I didn’t let you bully me without a reply. Yea I have a sarcastic attitude and an off-beat sense of humor somehow I doubt you lack the ability to deal with those traits. I don’t see you as a victim of anything except your choice to play one. We are already having a conversation Ophelia only you are acting like a child and gossiping to your friends about me instead of addressing me directly and I am addressing you directly both on my blog and here. You simply picked the wrong person to libel this time, it was bound to happen sooner or later.
Reap Paden, I’ve already said why I don’t want to have a chat with you. Furthermore, my reasons are obvious to anyone who knows the background, or even just to anyone who has listened to the podcast you did with oolon.
At least we can be pretty sure it won’t have paragraph breaks.
…I try to give everyone their time to talk about what ever they want to…
In other words, in the guise of “evenhandedness,” you make no attempt to separate worthwhile material from utter crap. And you expect us to think that’s going to lead to a podcast worth watching? If you can’t be bothered to acknoledge a distinction between good and bad material, why should we be bothered to watch your show?
Oh, and Reap? Your last comment shows an absolutely abysmal lack of self-control. And since people who lack self-control can’t be trusted to follow rules or keep promises, there’s no point in making any kind of deal or compromise with people like you. Just like there’s no point in negotiating with a poodle on PCP.
I got over trying to force people who didn’t like me to interact with me in 8th grade.
What is wrong with these people?
Oh, FFS…
It’s not Ophelia who’s harming your character or causing others to consider you a bad person. You do that better than she ever could every time you open that extra anus you carry around in your face. To accuse Ophelia of bullying you is like beating up another person and accusing her of hitting your fists with her face.
This is cool. I missed it on the first quick read.
See it? I’m gossiping to my friends about him by writing a post on my blog, but he is addressing me directly by…writing a post on his blog.
“Knowing” is perhaps not possible, yet there exists a massive body of evidence that makes “having a pretty damned good idea” entirely possible.
Oh, and notice how the very same people who accuse feminists like Ophelia of being “professional victims” turn into the world’s biggest crybabies the moment they get a homeopathic dose (as in nothing at all) of their own medicine in return. It’s pathetic.
Is that an admission that he runs one of the impersonation accounts? Also, see, they are doing it to piss you off. That’s the purpose.
Oh, but I’m sure a “conversation” with Reap would be productive. He’ll only verbally bash you 30-40 times, not 50 times. He swears.
Well but you see I “continuously create problems by acting like a jerk” so my writing a post about Paden’s post about me is therefore EXACTLY THE SAME as using my real name on a fake Twitter account. Identical, I tells ya.
Can we PLEASE add “failure to use carriage returns/enter/paragraph breaks” to the reasons for instant banning from FTB?
My eyes, they can only take so much.
[Citation needed]
Just for fun, please explain, FOR STARTERS, how you would know.
Wait, what? [Citation seriously fucking needed]
Was this before or after she was invited to be on the podcast? I ask merely for information.
If you feel accurate portrayal of your actions define you (which it should), and you don’t like that definition, well, gee, let me see, maybe you should look at your actions. You’re not very bright, are you?
Project much, cupcake?
You have the right to be pissed off. It’s a free-ish country. You don’t get to pretend that your reasons are valid, though. So far, we reserve the right to call you an incoherent whiny little douche because of your actions.
Seriously? Are you working on a false equivalency bingo card we don’t know about?
Oh do tell. Name one thing. I double-dog dare you.
Obvious and stupid lie. Your reaction to Ophelia’s refusal shows that it was, in fact, a demand; a demand you cannot believe she had the gall to ignore.
Like not whining incoherently when you do not get your way?
Ah, so your lack of comprehension is now her problem.
Obvious and stupid lie, judging from your behavior so far.
Obviously, yes. You can respond with an onslaught of whining.
Please point out where she is obligated to find out, when your past performances suggest it would be less fun than a root canal and less productive than acupuncture.
Right. But you’re not demanding anything.
And you feel your respect would mean anything to anyone because… because… no, really, feel free to jump in at any time.
Really? I never would have guessed… with your winning personality, empathy and excellent communication skills.
Uh-huh. Riiiight.
This coming from someone who doesn’t like others defining him. Your lack of self-awareness is astonishing.
Harm your character? If it is anything like the WATB you have been so far here, your character doesn’t need any harming. It is weak, passive-aggressive and sad all by itself.
Reality check: you are not now, have never been, and never will be funny. Note that I had never heard of you and punched up a few of your podcasts to be able to form an opinion… and holy Hakalela, you are one of the most juvenile, snide, un-funny people I have heard in a long time. Maddox, you are not.
Project much, cupcake?
The rest of it has already been addressed. Can someone get this guy a pacifier?
“Lee Moore and others say there are reasonable people on the other side of the argument, “grownups” if you will. I found myself saying out loud that, if there are grownups on that side they should be calling people on the use of insults. They’re not. ”
I have. So has Mike Wright. check the comments section on http://anr.apartmentj.com/?p=886 for one example.
and We both write for A-News. and Ill continue to call people out on it both publicly and privately and hold out a tiny, microscopic grain of hope that someone, somewhere, someday will finally listen. Ive always hated this whole clusterf**k of a situation from day one. Im done trying to ignore it. There are good points and bad points to both sides as far as I can see. There are more sides to this than just “Our side is good and your side sucks” kind of thinking.
Celia. Well of course it’s not the case that one “side” is perfect and the other side is the negation of perfect. But it’s also not the case that each “side” is as bad as the other. Your rather lazy comment seems to be saying it is (but because of the laziness I can’t really tell).
Saying “There are good points and bad points to both sides as far as I can see” isn’t saying very much. Sure there are; of course there are; but that still leaves plenty of room for there to be a lot more, or worse, bad points on one side than the other. You can probably find many lists of such bad points right on this thread. There are things our “side” doesn’t do. We don’t talk about how ugly, old, sexually repulsive, or fat people are. We don’t photoshop. We don’t monitor and “report” every blog post, tweet,and comment anyone the other “side” makes. We don’t have a forum devoted to almost nothing but monitoring and bashing everything we can find about the other “side.” We don’t make up nasty nicknames. We don’t use Twitter to harass them and talk shit about them all day every day. We don’t pick fights with them on Twitter and then do long boring videos and long boring podcasts about their irritation with us for picking fights on Twitter.
Your colleague Anton Hill did the latter to me. Now he’s complaining on Twitter and Facebook that I am going after him. Your “good points and bad points to both” looks like bullshit to me in light of that. Have you told your colleague that he acted like an asshole and still is? If not, I have zero interest in your opinion.
it also appears like you paint anyone associated with people who you don’t like or agree with with the same brush. Maybe that’s partially the fault of people like me who dont typically like to get mixed up in this sort of thing and therefore haven’t been as visible but Im trying to change that.
and Ive spoken with Anton about acting like a jerk. So have several others. I think he’s starting to question his actions. It might be slow in the coming because people tend to hold on tightly to positions theyve been very public about but i see progress happening.
No it doesn’t. I didn’t say anything like that. I addressed what you said in your comment.
And I responded to what I read in your comment responding to me.
there’s a difference between something appearing one way to someone and that someone stating such a thing as a fact. It does appear sometimes like that to me. but again, im not really saying that is something you and your blog commentators are setting out to do. Not trying to blame. trying to clarify. I dont really understand all the social dynamics going on here. Im not terribly good at reading people’s underlying drives and nuances. I never have been. that’s why my writing so far on the site has been restricted to science topics. But I’ve discovered i’d like to understand. and I’d like to help the situation get resolved if i can. I may fumble here and there but im trying. have a good night.
Sigh. Well Celia if you want to understand maybe you need to look around a little more – at the “slyme pit” for instance. Again, it’s just lazy to point out that there’s a difference between appearance and fact. I know that, but it doesn’t follow that there are no facts here, or that it just is (as if “naturally”) the case that both sides are identical amounts of wrong or bad or malicious.
It’s like your colleague Anton. I didn’t do anything to him; he picked a fight with me, then he spent a lot of time and energy and words talking shit about me. If people then come along afterwards and say lazy things like “there’s a difference between something appearing one way to someone and that someone stating such a thing as a fact” it’s just annoying.
But you have a good night too.
If Celia does not want to visit the pit, here is a not so nice round up of typical slymie action.
If you have kids in the room, get them out of there.
Celia, I’ve watched Anton’s video and read his comments to YouTube arguments against it. I’ve listened to the podcast on which he discusses his tweet spat with Ophelia. I hope, in the knowledge that you have a relationship with him, that you can get through and not relent. You see him as a reachable person; I’m willing to believe that he’s been dragged in. As far as I know, he made an “I agree with you…oh, wait, no I don’t” video about Rebecca Watson over a year ago and hasn’t been otherwise much involved until recently.
Right now, he’s got support from those on the podcast who didn’t tell him at the time not to say “fuck her” about Ophelia when another co-host suggested she might–hypothetically–be calling Anton a misogynist since this episode. He’s says he’s got “sources” who are telling him things about Ophelia that he includes in Facebook and YouTube comments (even on a channel other than his own this morning). He may now be stopping of his own accord, but if you can at the least throw weight to that trend, it will be helpful.
Oh? Anton A Hill is still talking smack about me? Because he picked a fight with me and I didn’t thank him for picking a fight with me? And Lee Moore still wants us to discuss their grievances…
Which YouTube channel is this?
I’ll name it if you’d like, but it’s a tiny one that follows Tf00t, does clearly unscripted, evidence-free rants against feminists and gun control laws, getting occasional comments from MRAs. Anton made the comment on a video with fewer than 80 views posted weeks ago.
Anton, in a comment on his own channel, had claimed from “sources” that you’d insulted him because the snark “(in coolio glasses)” was about his visual impairment. A comment to him pointed out that in no way was it directed at a disability and that he should read it for himself to prove there was no ring in his nose. Eleven hours after that being pointed out to him, he said that you had “allegedly insulted” his disability on the tiny channel. He was chewed out about it there, too.
Ah no in that case don’t bother. Thanks.
I found that comment about the supposed snipe at his visual impairment on his vid. My god what an asshole he is. I commented there too to underline that it was about his DARK GLASSES and that I didn’t know he had a visual impairment when I said it.
I also, motivated by all this dishonesty, forced myself to listen to most of the rest of that part of the podcast. I still didn’t hear the part about “fuck her for accusing you of misogyny in the future which we are predicting she will” because I still skipped ahead once or twice when the boredom got too excruciating. So much dishonesty, so much random spiteful for-no-reason malice, so much aimless ranting hatred.
That’s a podcast. Wo! Entertaining!
An “entertainment” source I’d not be willing to undergo in public. That would display to too many people that I have an extensive vocabulary of…interjections. I said a few as I listened to both the video and the podcast.
Heh.