Sam Harris does it again, opening his yap and exposing his biases.
Liberals have really failed on the topic of theocracy. They’ll criticize white theocracy, they’ll criticize Christians. They’ll still get agitated over the abortion clinic bombing that happened in 1984. But when you want to talk about the treatment of women and homosexuals and free thinkers and public intellectuals in the Muslim world, I would argue that liberals have failed us.
Hell yes, I’m still agitated over any abortion clinic bombing. Shouldn’t we all be? I’m also agitated over female genital mutilation and shooting girls who want an education in Pakistan. I can be frustrated by all the onslaughts against modernity everywhere; I don’t treat it as a failure of liberalism that American women are fighting for their rights at home as a priority; I’m sure that almost all of them feel a sense of solidarity with women around the world, but in most cases they are far more limited in what they can do about Somalia than they are about taking action in their own back yard.
Libby Anne really rips into him for that stupid remark.
Violence against abortion clinics and abortion providers dates back to at least the 1980s and continues in the present. Eight doctors or clinic providers have been murdered, the last one only five years ago. In fact, the clinic that was bombed in the 1984 incident Harris mentions was bombed again in 2012—and completely gutted as a result. I hear of arson and death threats, and it shakes me. I’ve served as an escort at my local Planned Parenthood clinic. It can be very scary—for all involved. Women often have their license plate numbers recorded by anti-abortion protesters calling them “murderers,” and in some areas of the country doctors who perform abortions have to wear masks when entering clinics to protect their identities. Just recently a writer for the high-profile National Review called for hanging women who have had abortions.
Americans are facing a wave of oppression of women’s reproductive rights: there have been 230 restrictions enacted since 2011. The majority of abortion clinics in Texas have been shut down by entirely legal means, and Sam Harris wants to blame liberals for not doing enough to protect freethinkers in the Muslim world? The only way liberals have failed is in not being as obsessed with Islam as Harris…but since Harris isn’t a particularly good example of an individual with liberal ideals, you’ll have to forgive me if I say “so fucking what?”
I say we must fight the fights we can. It’s important to stand up for women’s freedom world-wide, but it’s futile and hypocritical if we can’t even do the same for women at home.
I think Libby Anne is right. Harris is using Islamic oppression as a pretext for dismissing serious concerns right here in the United States.
I’m getting really, really fed up with these white males who want to be the arbiters of where and how we women are to direct our outrage. The mansplainin’, it’s really got to go.
Shorter Harris: “Dear Muslims…”
Godsfuckingdamnit. “Dear Muslima…”
Has Harris done anything I should know about for women in Somalia lately?
If he’s really upset with how liberals have failed, why isn’t he out there trying to fix things himself? Really, with all this writing and condemning, he’s wasting his own good time. Get out there, Harris!! Women are being oppressed everywhere, but especially in Saudi Arabia! Help them!!!
Uh, what? No, he didn’t.
According to Harris, hell yes. For fuck’s sake, that’s exactly the point of what he was saying, not the opposite of that.
Harris doesn’t treat it as a failure either, PZ.
That’s a reasonable point. If it weren’t mixed in with a bunch of dishonest distortions, somebody might actually notice it.
The War on Women is extremely serious right now. We’re talking about practically rolling back Roe v Wade here. You can’t just dismiss that. What the fuck.
Harris is really bent on exposing himself as a bigoted fuck lately. If the Christian right was allowed as much sway over the US government as Islamic fundamentalists are in those parts of the world, the US would look not very different from Muslim majority countries. The Christian right is working very hard to get us to that position and the assault on abortion rights is part of that. If Harris was genuinely concerned about the rights of women and homosexuals and free thinkers, that would freak him the fuck out. But instead he sneers at it because what he really cares about is being the lone, courageous hero willing to stand up and speak uncomfortable truths about big, bad, scary Muslims. His interest in women, homosexuals and free thinkers in Muslim regions extends only as far as he’s able to weaponize them against Islam.
I would argue that Sam Harris doesn’t want to talk about abortion clinic bombings! See how easy it is to turn it around? Why does Sam Harris only want to talk about Muslims these days? Bias!!! Checkmate! This line of argument borders on the moronic. Liberals haven’t failed. Liberals just have a lot of things to talk about.
I also call bullshit on the notion that liberals don’t want to attack non-white theocracy. I know plenty of liberals that do. I do. PZ does and just about all commentators here do. I don’t know any liberal that gives Saudi Arabia a pass. And talking about abortion clinic bombings is not an example of giving Saudi Arabia a pass. I suggest this all started because Harris is frustrated that all liberals don’t support the same white theocracy that he likes to support over a brown theocracy (Israel over Hamas). The fact that some/many liberals like to add some nuance there simply pisses him off. I’ve never seen a liberal support Hamas and its rockets (but yes I know it probably has happened). I’ve seen liberals support Palestinian civilians. But Harris, the liberal, supported Israel’s bombing campaign which disproportionately killed civilians. Like Hitchens, the liberal, supported the US bombing Iraq which again resulted in the deaths of so many civilians. Maybe we should talk more about that.
consciousness razor @ 5
Bullshit. His point was that liberals will criticize something that happened 30 years ago but they won’t say a word about Islam. He said it in a sneering manner which got a laugh from the audience. He said it as if 1984 was the last time there was any threat to abortion rights in the US and yet those damn liberals are still all agitated over it.
I’ve listened to that segment on Real Time a couple of times now. I don’t see how else to interpret a guy saying “liberals have failed” and “they’re still upset about an event in 1984” and “they don’t fight theocracy”. He certainly does treat it as a failure; he comes right out and says “Liberals have really failed.”
It’s a good thing i never liked him…makes actively disliking him a much smoother process.
And that thing that happened 30 years ago? It still matters. Something like that cuts a deep wound in our society, just like it would in any society. You do not have to be embarrassed about how fucking long ago it was, while you’re still “agitated” now. That’s because this stuff actually does matter, so we actually should be consistent about it, not make excuses when other people in other societies are doing things that are just as bad.
That’s what he said. Maybe there’s a fuckload wrong with it — feel free to rip it to fucking shreds for all I care, like some people aren’t making such excuses for example — but that’s not even remotely like saying we shouldn’t care about our “own” problems and that is why we should care about some other group of people’s problems. It’s simply fucking dishonest to completely change the meaning of his statement by taking it out of context.
@consciousness razor #5:
I absolutely agree with you. I feel as if people are now simply looking for things to argue about whenever Harris opens his mouth about something. It bothers me when, on comments sections, I start seeing the sort of belligerance and insults I usually see posted by fanatic sectarian theists against non-believers.
PZ, I love reading you, but on this issue we are in disagreement. That which you criticise about what Harris said, is precisely in accordance with what you say he should have said. Stop twisting his words.
Well put Seven Of Mine. Harris’s portrayal of liberals was simply appalling. A collection of falsehoods designed to mislead the audience. And it worked. He is a clever man and knows how to word things well. It doesn’t make him right.
Oh gee. Once again, Harris is apparently a hugely fucking incompetent communicator, and we should give Mr. Professional Communicator a pass on saying deeply offensive things because he doesn’t really MEAN to trivialize the fight for abortion rights in the USA and other “Western” countries. We should just, you know, read his mind, and know that he means well, and that will make all the context magically make those words okay.
As Libby Anne points out (apparently none of y’all Harris defenders read her piece?), the same abortion clinic that was bombed in 1984 was bombed again in 2012 and completely gutted as a result.
Harris has no fucking idea what he’s talking about. But since he’s a fucking sexist, he doesn’t see the problem in speaking authoritatively on the current state of the struggle for women’s rights in the West, despite having no idea what that current state really is. This is arrogance, ignorance, and bias combining to make a man make a fool of himself.
@mig06 #13:
Could it not be that Harris has just been saying some appalling things lately?
From what I can read, Harris is upset that liberals aren’t calling for a Jihad against Jihadism. The odor of Islamic bigotry is overwhelming on his part.
To quote Tip O’Neil, “all politics are local”. I worry more about local politics, and want to get that straightened out, than worry about what is happening half a world away and letting things slide into theocracy her at home.
The main takeaway here is that Sam Harris really doesn’t like liberals and will seize any chance he can to discredit liberalism. I’m not a huge fan of liberalism myself, but it’s far preferable to Harris’ brand of libertarian right wing authoritarianism.
I keep on hearing that liberals won’t criticize Islam, yet I have no problems finding liberals criticizing Islam.
You know, conservatives weren’t saying jack shit about anti-women policies in Afghanistan or Saudi Arabia prior to 2001. But liberals, particularly liberals, WERE. And still are. What Harris is pissed about, so far as I can tell, is that we’re not unconditionally willing to bomb the middle east into a parking.
Lot.
Failing to be consistent, PZ. I know you’re a lot more intelligent and honest and literate than this.
As far as “prioritizing” goes, I don’t know (or care) what he’d say. But it’s not a matter of setting one’s priorities to condemn (or not) a hateful ideology in some distant place on the other side of the planet. It takes basically no time and no resources — some people don’t (or even actively refuse to do so) because they think they’re not supposed to or are confusing the issue with something else. Whether that’s right or not, it’s a different phenomenon.
Who said I’m embarrassed by it? The point is that 30 fucking years ago is not the last time something like that happened. The same clinic Harris referenced was set on fire in 2012. It’s only been 5 years since the last time an abortion clinic employee was murdered for being an abortion clinic employee. And we all know that women seeking abortions are harassed mercilessly on a daily basis outside abortion clinics that they often have to travel 100s of miles to get to. And Sam Harris decides to cite an incident from 30 years ago. Why do you suppose that is? It certainly isn’t because he’s not aware of what is happening to abortion rights in this country in the present. It’s because he wants to make it sound like it’s a thing of the past.
It’s fucking dishonest of you to accuse people of taking things out of context when you’re the one who keeps trying to parse Harris’ words completely absent the context of the current state of abortion rights in the US and absent the context of everything else he said on that show. He brought up the bombing of an abortion clinic 30 years ago, glossing over everything that’s happened since and is still happening, so he could sneer at it before lauding himself as the lone voice of reason willing to speak the truth about the real problems.
In a fucking nutshell.
Abortion access is WORSE now for most women than it was in 1984. So why go back to 1984 for a reference point to discuss the fight for reproductive rights?
Answer: to paint being concerned with abortion rights as admirable but quaint and outdated.
And this is where the comments section starts being belligerant and I stop reading. This is happening all to often now. Sadly. i wish we would stop fighting amongst ourselves and focus on the religitards that insist on turning everyone else a religitard. I’m off. Have fun here.
Everyone is inconsistent. We all address the problems that confront us most personally. I’d like to see poverty addressed more strongly, but I still make it a greater priority to pay my mortgage payment every month.
So am I a failure as a liberal if I donate less to charity than I give to Bank of America to cover my house payments?
I’m with the others on Harris’s comment being a bad one.
It’s objectively an ignorant comment. He’s ignorant about what people are really worried about with respect to violence and abortion. He said something stupid related to women’s issues and he did it to make a point about the relative importance of sociopolitical issues to American liberals. His larger point might be true, but he did himself no favors with this and pretending otherwise is not wise.
I’m fucking angry about this.
If my anger causes your brain to turn off somehow, thereby preventing you from parsing factual content from emotional content, that’s your problem, not mine.
mig06 @ 27
Door, ass, etc.
@mig06
Have fun maintaining an inability to to handle disagreement in emotionally intense situations. I’m sure that skill will come in handy when you deal with religious folks that you feel you need to compare to the mentally ill.
In any case, anyone who still feels comfortable using “tard” as an insulting suffix is nobody I wish to fight beside for any cause. Do fuck off, and feel free to stay away.
QFT.
If Harris had said “They’ll get agitated about the ongoing efforts by religious extremists to restrict access to abortion” then consciousness razor’s reading might be just about tenable. But he didn’t say that. He talks about 1984 instead, thus implying that it’s an out-of-date concern. Why the desperate effort to parse his words more favourably than they deserve?
I’m fucking angry about this.
If my anger causes your brain to turn off somehow, thereby preventing you from parsing factual content from emotional content, that’s your problem, not mine.
No, it’s not a problem to me at all, and my brain doesn’t switch off because you go on a hissy fit. I’d just rather not look at it. It’s that simple. I’ve done nothing to you whatsoever, yet you direct your cursing and anger to me for simply stating the obvious, and then I’m the one who’s got a problem?? Take a chill pill. It’s much easier to have a conversation when no one is throwing rabid fits at eachother. In any case, I don’t know you, you don’t know me, so let’s part ways now. Enjoy the chat.
@consciousness razor: “According to Harris, hell yes. For fuck’s sake, that’s exactly the point of what he was saying, not the opposite of that.”
In all seriousness, having watched the clip, I don’t understand at all how you come to that conclusion. The quote of Harris above is complete, it is a full paragraph, and he absolutely didn’t say we should be agitated about the 1984 abortion clinic bombing. I see no indication that PZ and Seven of Mine’s interpretation is anything but accurate. I really just don’t see it at all. I’d love to know where you’re getting that idea, when it flies in the face of the rhetorical technique he’s employing and it flies in the face of his actual words. Are you reading Harris’ mind? Are you inventing what you want him to be saying?
Here’s some more anger, to make sure you go away. ANGER ANGER ANGER!
Quick! Look away!
@mig06: I thought we were several comments past the point where you stop reading. Kindly stick the flounce.
*Notices rabid fit being thrown.*
Is isn’t a Vulcan discussion group, but you are pretending like it is. So, take your own advice about the chill pill.
Oh, well then, I suppose that’s a good thing. Because everyone does everything right, and this is the best of all possible inconsistent worlds.
So what exactly was Ben Affleck doing in that video? Was he not addressing problems, since they aren’t confronting him or about him personally? Or was he tossing everything in but kitchen sink to resist the very idea that he should simply say something about the problems with Islam when he had the opportunity?
I see that Mr Harris is still digging that hole. Since he’s so fond of digging, perhaps we should direct him to the Deep Rift, because it’s apparently not deep enough yet. Go away, Sam Harris, you aren’t helping.
Also too, GRRRRR ARRRRGGGGHHHH!
You want some fucking context? What about the context of Sam Harris being a bigoted, racist, anti-Muslim, anti-Arab, torture, preemptive war and genocide apologist shitstain of a man with an habit of using Muslim women as a cudgel to bash on their religion and their people?
@ mig06 36
I’m sorry but you seemed to have left out the part where you demonstrate that anyone’s emotion has affected their logic. You anger seems to have prevented you from doing your duty in a disagreement. If emotion gives you problems addressing the logic in the argument of another, simply leave and be silent. You posturing is transparent, especially to someone working on the same damn flaw.
You read it that way, and it implies you disagree with PZ here:
Either he’s still agitated as well he should be, or it’s supposedly out-of-date … because, I don’t know why… “OMG 30 years is almost like forever!!11!”
On the point of female genital mutilation, we should be careful with equating it to a “Muslim problem”, as Reza Aslan pointed out: http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2014/oct/02/reza-aslan/fact-checking-reza-aslans-retort-bill-maher/
But will he stick the flounce? Inquiring minds want to know.*
It’s telling that one of the commenters defending Harris would use “tard”.
*Actually, no they don’t.
@consciousness razor 45
Harris’s quote,
Reading it that way is sensible. The sense of agitation among these liberals is being minimized by reference to the fact that they are still emotionally concerned about clinic bombings a long time ago.
How do you parse this?
mig06 @27:
Ah, yes the ole ‘we all need to work together under the big tent of atheism, even if not everyone is made to feel welcome’ bullshit. Haven’t seen that in a while.
Also, fuck you for the ableism.
I do hope you won’t return though.
Sam Harris is an idiot, a raving fount of sheer stupidity. This is not news. It’s sad that anyone gives a fuck what he says because he has nothing useful to say, but he’s just another lunatic libertarian with a fetish for killing brown people who fouls the earth. Bemoan his type, but he himself is no longer important, if indeed he ever was.
Consciousness razor, do you think that Harris is unaware of the second bombing that happened at that same clinic that was bombed in 1984? Or is he aware of it and deliberately not mentioning it? If the latter, feel free to speculate about his motives for omitting that salient fact. If the former, feel free to speculate about his motives for opining on the state of women’s rights in the USA despite not actually know what the state of women’s rights in the USA is.
Knowing, even.
@consciousness razor: “So what exactly was Ben Affleck doing in that video? Was he not addressing problems, since they aren’t confronting him or about him personally?”
Wait, what does what Ben Affleck did after Harris made his statement about liberals have to do with it?
No one said we shouldn’t be interested in problems that don’t affect us personally, only that people naturally are more likely to be more invested in things that affect us personally. So even if bringing up Affleck’s personal decision about how to respond wasn’t a complete misdirection from the content of Harris’ statement beforehand, it still doesn’t contradict anything anyone’s said about what issues anyone should be involved in and in what way. In fact, it appears in this conversation that it’s only Harris telling anyone that there are some issues they shouldn’t care so much about.
But for the record, what I think Affleck did was get defensive, as a liberal, and lash out.
in case zie hasn’t stuck the flounce:
mig06 @ 36
I know this will shock you, but people can be angry and make rational arguments at the same time. Simply accusing someone else of being “angry” doesn’t negate everything they say, nor does it mean their arguments are automatically invalid because they are simultaneously feeling emotion, despite your attempt to use accusations of anger/emotion as a rhetorical strategy. Nice try, though.
Using “hissy fit” which is completely gendered and intended to denigrate a (perceived) woman’s feelings as being less valid was also pretty revealing. You may want to work on that.
mig06 @36:
First off, if people are angry over this, such is their right, so why don’t you back off with comments like “chill out”. It implies that you think others’ concerns aren’t important. It’s dismissive and obnoxious.
Secondly, we’ve already begun to know things about you based on your comments:
1- you think atheists should put aside their differences-no matter how significant those differenes are-in the name of big tent atheism. The Great Rifts over the last few years have shown that there are significant problems in the atheist movement with sexism, misogyny, racism, homophobia, and transphobia. For the movement to be more welcoming, these problems need to be addressed. People who want to be part of the movement need to know that it will be welcoming to them, not hostile. Unfortunately a segment of the atheist movement *is* hostile to various oppressed groups, rather than welcoming. This is a problem which you dismiss with your comments about how we should stop fighting among ourselves and focus on religious issues. Dismissing the very real sexism and misogyny in the movement that affects women is offensive and you deserve to be called out for it.
2-we know you’re someone who has no problem adding the suffix ‘-tard’ to words, which means you have no problem using mental retardation as an insult. That ableism and it’s disgusting. It shows you have no regard for people with mental disabilities.
3- you’re mistaken if you think people cannot reach conclusions about you based on the words you write.
As you continue to type and leave more messages, people will learn more about you. For my part, based on what I’ve read thus far, I find I don’t like you.
I was not at all impressed with Affleck’s performance. I’m not a fan of Reza Aslan’s apologetics.
But I’m now surprised that the gnomic utterances of Sam Harris now demand careful interpretation, and can be twisted to support any interpretation you want, so that even “liberals are failures!” can now mean, “good job, liberals!”
He’s trying to “fix” things by climbing on a soapbox and brandishing his authoritarian secret plan to end the war against terrorism.
***
What Harris means is that he’s shocked, shocked! to realize that a great many liberals find disgusting his implications that Islam magically turns its followers into primitive subhumans and that tough militarized love is needed to Kill the
IndianMuslim so the Man can be Saved.The atheist movement in a nutshell.
“We need to come together to insist that everyone become an athiot! Links to talk.origins will fix the world!”
Sam Harris has outed himself as a complete idiot. I already knew that when I got halfway through his book and then decided it was an insult to the brain.
Once again. The Moslems are over there ruining their society. The fundie xians are over here, ruining ours. I live here, not there!!!
We have our own version of Toxic Religion fanatics and they are causing the same problems here and that directly effects me and the people I know.
Don’t know. I was unaware, but I know that doesn’t help much. If I had to guess, he’s probably unaware too. Probably not for long.
Doubtful. And I don’t see how he’d be motivated to do that anyway.
He was quite clearly saying liberals stand up for certain causes, women’s rights being one of them. He did not opine on their state in the US (good or bad, or better or worse than in 1984). That is a fabrication. The contrast is between what some liberals “agitated” about here (rightly!), compared to what some are willing to ignore or even support (wrongly!) “over there.” That is very plainly and very straightforwardly what he was talking about.
Whatever fifty-moves-ahead-of-you, saying-it-but-not-really-saying-it-but-saying-it-anyway, ten-levels-up meta-discussion you think he’s having involves too much interpretation and speculation and bias (which I have against Harris as well) to say anything interesting about it. You might even be right (the odds are against it, when you play that game), but it still doesn’t give anyone a reason to distort what he’s saying. Which is what PZ did.
CR, knock it the fuck off with this “distort what he’s saying” bullshit.
Libby Anne and Ophelia Benson came to the same interpretation of Harris’ words. Obviously you have a different interpretation, but that’s no reason to go around accusing people of dishonesty.
Why?
No, seriously, why?
If I’m going to be treated as badly under atheism as I would be under religion, why should I lift a finger to try to help make that happen?
Harris sounds like he’s saying that just because we have problems here, there are worse problems over there that need our attention right n… squirrel! IE, his is of those opinions that small problems aren’t worth fixing when big problems also exist. Also, the issue of ranking the sizes of problem where local ones are “small” and remote ones are “huge”. Then somehow trying to shame Liberals for working on local, addressable, problems instead of those *big* problems over there.
Harris seems to me to speak in broad generalities, then turn to trivial details of language to claim he’s being misrepresented. It’s deceptive and evasive behavior and it leads me to question his motivations and what he really believes and wants to be calling for. He needs to explain how critical liberals need to be (since plenty of liberals have been very critical) or being critical isn’t enough, what we ought to do or what policies we ought to support. Must we support racial profiling or the Bush wars or torture or drone strikes?
From actually listening to the clip, consciousness razor is the one doing all the “distorting” of what Harris said and meant. It’s not fucking rocket science to be able to comprehend it.
No. It’s not a fabrication. You are pushing a fabrication here, by saying that it’s unfair interpretation to read into him SPECIFICALLY mentioning 1984, when there are many more recent acts of anti-choice terrorism to refer to. He is opining that the most relevant thing to mention about the struggle for reproductive rights is something that happened 30 years.
If they’re rightly “agitated”, then why use the word “agitated,” instead of something more neutral, like “concerned,” and why misleadingly imply that the most important thing that they’re agitated about happened 30 years ago?
Yeah sure. It’s so plain and straightforward. That’s why we need you to explain what Mr. Professional Communicator REALLY meant.
consciousness razor@60:
Here is the sentence that seems to be giving you problems:
The emphasis is mine. But even without any special emphasis, that word ‘still’ is not an unimportant one here – in fact, it carries quite a bit of rhetorical freight, a fact which a clever polemicist such as Harris surely understands. In the context of the overall point of liberal “failure”, he obviously means it as an indictment, and not just a neutral statement of what liberals believe.
To miss that or pretend it doesn’t exist is either disingenuous or really sloppy reading.
It is when they won’t even fucking listen to someone saying what the thing means in plain fucking English. They just insist on their elaborate, inconsistent, conspiratorial interpretation — if they can even pick one — only to complain about how “careful” they have to be when attending to all of the subtleties they invented.
But yeah, sure, it’s bullshit. Whatever.
What a load of crap. I’ve watched the segment, and there is no implication whatsoever that liberals are rightly agitated about the 1984 bombing. If he thinks it was the last such bombing, he should shut up until he’s educated himself. If he doesn’t, what could possibly be the point of mentionging that bombing specifically, and for that matter, using the dismissive word “agitated”? He could simply have said: “Liberals are rightly very concerned about violence against abortion clinic staff and bombings of clinics in the USA, but…”
You’re really getting good at this projection thingy, CR!
Where the bloody fuck did you learn “plain fucking English”? Ask for a full refund, because that institution heavily failed you.
That, or stop being a disingenuous prick who accuses others of being disingenuous pricks.
Oh, child, I’m afraid that PhD in Interpretology you got in your cereal box is just a toy. It doesn’t actually make you the sole authority.
Yes, that’s clearly what’s happening here. Dude, do you even English? For someone who feels like he invented the language, you clearly flail when it’s not Harris speaking it.
Read. Better.
I’m explaining things to you in plain English. According to your own comments, this is where you should be thanking me for the lesson, not stewing in your own piss.
CR, you may want to consider that if you think it’s plain and obvious, and a bunch of other native speakers are saying they don’t see it at all, it may be that you are the one who is mistaken? If it were so plain and obvious, wouldn’t at least some other people have seen it without needing your persistent explanations?
TL;DR: Hole. Rule. Down tools, dude.
Same Harris did one thing right here. He is wearing a giant, flashing neon sign that says, “I’m stupid and/or lying.” Outing himself like this is accidently a real service to humanity.
There have been a lot more than one family planning clinic bombing. No one knows too well but the NYTs has it at over 100.
And the last one wasn’t in 1984. A few seconds on Google showed one from Wisconsin in 2012.
And it isn’t just bombings and arson. Eight MD’s or employees have been assassinated, 150 people wounded, some seriously.
This is just xian terrorism, a serious problem in the USA for decades.
Hey, have you ever considered that perhaps you’re not quite as intelligent, honest, or literate as you assume yourself to be?
Sam Harris doesn’t seem able to read a calendar or know what Google is.
The bombings aren’t good. But the real damage is being done by the fundie xians and GOP with their War on Birth Control, defunding family planning programs and trying to restrict access to birth control, something as basic to our society as indoor plumbing and electricity.
I don’t give a fuck about authorities, asshole. Watch the fucking video (again?) and summarize his and Maher’s point yourself.
Then why have you appointed yourself one, to the point where you’re accusing those who don’t agree with you of deliberate dishonesty?
@consciousness razor – Seriously, we’ve watched the video. It’s clearly, with no complicated parsing, an attempt to minimize liberals’ concerns with our own domestic issues and suggest that we’re paying too much attention to old stuff that isn’t that big a deal when we should be focusing our attention on theocracy in the Middle East. It’s Dear Muslima all over again. It’s obvious. It’s what he said. It’s in context. You’re being obtuse, dishonest, or both.
You won’t even try to summarize it, will you? Is there a transcript of the whole thing somewhere? Maybe that would help.
I’ll handle this for you, CR:
“Nope! You’re twisting his words! Plain English! I’m obviously right, you liars!”
How was that? Have I summarized your last few comments correctly?
Did the fucking snicker and laughs in response to Harris’ 1984 statement not fucking register with you that the statement was meant to mock what liberals “still” choose to get “agitated” by?
How bloody dense are you? How much Dunning-Kruger are you packing into that brain of yours?
There’s the small problem that he has no evidence that it’s true. Instead, he expects you to believe that supporting Muslims and Arabs over his colonialist, bigoted, empathy-addled propositions is the same as not being concerned about their fate. Because Mr. “torture and genocide are OK if done to brown people because white man’s burden” is really the one we should listening to about empathy!
consciousness razor #60
His comment very easily leaves the impression that anti-choice violence is ancient history and doesn’t happen anymore, so why are those silly people worrying about it.
I agree, you can also read it as “liberals have a long memory about subject A, while ignoring subject B”. However, the whole reason we have a long memory about anti-choice violence is that it’s still happening. As such, referencing a bombing 30 years ago (while pointedly not mentioning more recent violence) is simply an attempt to belittle and dismiss actual concerns.
It really boils down to the same thing: Pretending that this is a silly thing to concern yourself with because it’s ancient history and not relevant anymore. I’m not sure he comes out smelling much better with this reading.
I have been a lurker on Pharyngula since before it migrated to SciBlogs, then to here. I must admit I am dangerously close to simply removing it from my feeds at this point. Let me explain why before you skewer me.
PZ has a lot to say of value about atheism, skepticism, and feminism…everything on the liberal front honestly. He has alwyas attacked with relish ideas that need skewering, and I love his rants. However, I feel as if in recent months he has had primarily one target: other people in the freethought community he deems to be out of line with the current push toward promoting feminism. I support this push, by the way. It’s the way PZ and some others are going about it in terms of internecine warfare. Sam Harris is a mixed bag, who has alway shad a particular axe to grind: the feverish growth of Islamic extremism. He shares this concern with Hitchens and quite a few others who are concerned about the existential threat form the outside here: in large swaths of the world there is no chance to have a meaningful discussion about women’s rights, etc. because Islam perpetuates a patriarchy so strong that it may take centuries to reach something like an Enlightenment to change it. And Sam Harris et al want to change that. What good does it do us to fully liberate and equalize all freethinking women over here if we won’t dedicate the same energy to demanding that these oppressive regimes do the same? People are dying over there for what they believe. And we sit over here obsessed with what happens in elevators. Newsflash: no person that changed the world has a squeaky-clean background. Call them out and hold them accountable, but if the community forgives them, let it go. We need fewer paragons of virtue and more people of action in our community.
PZ wages war because Harris calls liberals what they have been on this issue: appeasers. Many liberals simply want to focus on these domestic and interior issues, and hide behind the flag of “tolerance” because of the fact that yes, most Muslims are not terrorists or terrorist sympathizers. However, a much larger percentage of them do support these institutions and movements that directly harm free thoght around the world than we will ever see from Christianity again. Make no mistake, if you are a freethinker: Islam is the enemy. So long as 1/4 of the world’s population lives under a faith (and usually a state) that can order them killed for trying to change their minds about religion, then our domestic battles, important thought they are, are simply homefront matters. Do I think we have to go to war and put boots on the ground to grind these extremist Muslims out? No, and it wouldn’t work anyway. But I tire of logging into what used to be my favorite blog and seeing post after post directed at the other people in the freethought movement. This quest on all sides for ideological purity is silly.
PZ, be the better man here. Find your common ground with Harris et al. Yes, if douchebags try to set up threesomes at conferences, call them out on it. I want women to feel safe and welcome in our movement. But we need more of our energies directed outward. This civil war is going to sweep the leg form underneath a growing freethought movement that has the chance to effect real change in the West…which could eventually spread to the rest of the world. But we aren’t going to get there by fighting each other over these, yes I’ll say it, far less important issues.
-Long Time Reader, First-Time Commenter
I forgot to add:
“He’s not a lizard person, you Truthers!” to my 81 above.
*eyeroll*
CR, again, I see only two plausible explanations for why Harris went out of his way to mention an abortion bombing that occurred in 1984.
1. He knows that there have been terrorist acts committed against abortion providers since then, but deliberately chose to omit that fact in order to characterize liberals as out of touch with current events because they’re “STILL AGITATED” about something that happened 30 years ago
2. He is genuinely unaware of all those more recent anti-choice terrorist attacks, in which case he’s completely uninformed about the state of reproductive rights and women’s equality in the US, but doesn’t care enough to let that stop him from using his ignorant misperceptions of that struggle to make a point.
Either he’s incompetent, or he’s maliciously attacking liberalism with misleading statements.
Your only alternative explanation for this set of data is that everyone but you and mig06 are lying liars who hate Harris so much that we just dance in glee at the chance to twist and distort his statements. Needless to say, I don’t find this plausible, but hey. Whatever lets you sleep at night, I guess.
@ consciousness razor
What’s inconsistent? All anyone is saying is that it’s bleedlingly fucking obvious that when someone says “they’ll still get agitated over X that happened 30 years ago but not Y that’s happening now” that they’re saying “X is old news, we should be paying attention to Y now.” I mean, if it was someone who hadn’t built a career as an anti-muslim bigot and who hadn’t shown himself very recently to be ignorant and dismissive of women’s issues in the west I suppose I could buy “it’s great that you care about X but Y matters too” as a reasonable interpretation. However, we’re clearly not talking about someone like that. We’re talking about Sam Harris. But you go on with your bad decontextualizing while accusing others of decontextualizing self.
Threesomes???
Yeah, no, threesomes aren’t the problem. RAPISTS AND HARASSERS AND THE PEOPLE WHO COVER FOR THEM ARE THE PROBLEM.
Door, ass, etc.
You conspiracy-monger, you!
You cannot think that this is an honest summary of what’s happened and also be a longtime lurker. How’s about you go back to pretending to be a longtime lurker, you fucking sleaze.
lazinessevolved @ 85
How about we just collectively roll our eyes, stop reading right here and then remind you not to let the door smack you on the ass on the way out? Does that work for you?
This is not fucking hard, CR.
Harris is doing an appeal to consistency (the thing which you love to whine about).
“You oppose X, Y, and even Z, but not A?”
The “even Z” is supposed to be some far-out-there thing that’s not nearly as important as X or Y, and Z is often meant to be somewhat comical in nature (remember the snicker from what I assume is Maher and laughs from the audience when Harris makes the 1984 statement?).
This isn’t exactly some sort of rare argumentative style coined exclusively by Harris. This is pretty damn fucking common of a tactic, and the Z of this argumentative style is clearly supposed to be somewhat unimportant and diminished. Hence the “still”, the “agitated”, and the mention of something from 30 years ago.
Get a goddamn clue. For fuck’s sake.
@lazinessevolved
Then don’t support Harris!
@Consciousness razor: “You won’t even try to summarize it, will you? ” Summarize what? The whole quote is right there. That’s all he said on the subject in this appearance. The video is right there to watch. He’s talking about liberalism failing. He goes on to talk about Islam, not about abortion clinics. He says nothing to praise liberals on abortion rights, or suggest they were right. Would he have had Affleck not interrupted? There’s no indication that he would since he clearly moved on.
Do you have a transcript of him saying something different that supports your case?
I don’t think this conversation is going anywhere, consciousness razor.
I watched it and heard it the same as the others here. It’s minimizing the issue of the War on Women in America and acting like reproductive rights is somehow outdated. I find it highly likely that Harris is uninformed about reproductive rights problems in the US. So he’s basically using his ignorance to insult American liberals. Not very nice.
That common ground all but doesn’t exist. It’s about the size and shape as the sharp end of a pencil.
Sam Harris isn’t an asset to the atheist community IMO, or humanity in general. We would all be better off if he found an ugly fundie xian cult and…joined it. He can make them look bad instead.
My contempt for Sam Harris has zero to do with PZ, who at the time I had barely heard of. I read his book, got halfway through it, and decided he was ruining whole seconds of my life for no gain. I’ve seen enough since then to decide that I was understating the case.
But it’s just ideological purity to nitpick over silly little differences like whether or not to go to war and shoot lots of Muslims! We should agree to disagree! Big tent!
*Offer of “agree to disagree” not valid for theists.
@ consciousness razor
We don’t need to. The issues that we are concerned with here are only related to his main point to the extent that his persuasive abilities are really bad with respect to the groups that he references in supporting that point.
His point can be correct or not and our concerns still stand. You seem to need us to talk about this main point very badly despite this.
@85 lazinessevolved
What community? Just because YOU forgave him it doesn’t mean others must. As you can see there are many people here who have no intention of compromissing. That’s because those things you seem to consider petty, forgivable, silly little trivialities, matter a lot to others. The fact that they are sufficiently unimportant to you that you are willing to ignore them and move on says more than enough about you.
Nice has nothing to do with it. It’s “I’m the only one brave enough to say it!” pure and simple, and it works on atheists because in general, they’re dumb as fucking shit, coasting on the misapprehension that because they got shoved in a locker by jocks once they must therefore be geniuses, evidence be damned.
lazinessevolved @85:
PZ is not waging war with Sam Harris. Hyperbolic statements like that don’t help make your point. He has criticized things that Sam Harris has said. He’s not pouring over every single thing Harris says. He hasn’t devoted post after post to the things Harris says. He’s criticized him a handful of times.
Got some figures and sources for this “much larger percentage”?
Also, next time you come to work, leave your “Islam is the biggest problem in the world ZOMG! Why won’t everyone agree with me?” nametag at home please.
Honestly, if you can’t imagine a good that comes if we could “fully liberate and equalize all freethinking women over here”, irrespective of what’s happening elsewhere, then that says all we really need to know about how you truly feel about women, their humanity or lack thereof, or really pretty much anyone who is not you.
I wish people would realise that throwing away a few bad apples that are contaminating “the movement” is not going to make it break down and disappear… It’s really getting very annoying to hear all those cries about how the infighting is going to destroy the movement. No….it won’t…and you know why? Because unbelievers will still be unbelievers if Sam Harris never spoke publicly ever again, and most of all, because there are OTHER public figures. We don’t need Sam Harris, or Richard Dawkins or whoever….the movement is not dependent on them even if they have been successful in changing lots of people’s minds. Those same people would have changed their minds with other books, other authors…There is nothing in their books that is particularly difficult, nothing that is so unique and revolutionary that only they can supply the world with it…
“The movement” is not nearly as weak or as dependent on this big public figures as some people think…Unbelievers as a demographic will continue to grow in number, you can depend on that, Sam Harris or no Sam Harris….
@joebleau 104:
Right on. And what Carlie asked upthread, since it’s been glossed over.
lazinessevolved @85:
Oh, I forgot this:
(bolding mine)
Really? Shall we take a walk back through PZ’s posts in recent months and put the lie to your statement?
Also, the fact that you’re complaining about PZ’s criticisms of people like Sam Harris, while simultaneously claiming to love his rants that skewer certain ideas shows that you don’t have a problem with the things Harris says *and* that you think PZ shouldn’t either. It’s almost like you don’t read what he’s written. Or you can’t take a step back from your fanboi worship of Sam Harris to see the problems in the statements he makes.
In any case, your dismissal of the shitty things said by various people in the atheist movement is noted. Your complaints about PZ’s criticism of people in the freethought movement (I’m guessing you’re talking about Dawkins, Coyne, Harris, et al) show that you’re yet another fan of big tent atheism; willing to ignore the problems in the movement in the name of solidarity.
You don’t care that various people in the movement have made sexist, misogynistic statements.
You don’t care that many of these people are considered leaders in the movement with people who listen to them and hang on their words as if these people can say and do no wrong.
You don’t care that many people are pissed off at these statements because-in many cases-they perpetuate harmful stereotypes about gender roles or Rape Culture.
We get it.
You don’t care.
But some of us, including PZ, do care.
And we’re going to keep speaking up and speaking out.
We’re going to keep criticizing bad ideas whether they come from fundamentalist fools or freethinking fuckwits. Bad ideas are bad ideas and none should be shielded from criticism.
Since you can’t seem to deal with that, perhaps it’s best you stop subscribing to this blog. I’m sure there are plenty of blogs out there that will fit your less than empathetic and compassionate sensibilities.
Well it appears I may have used the word “religitard”, which I didn’t even know as a word until I saw it written on some post on this site at one point, and it caused quite a stir. I actually didn’t know of its association with mental illness, and for that I apologise. Now I know how that word came about, and I’ll refrain from using it much in the same way I argue against anyone claiming that religion is a mental illness. In any case, jumping to drastic conclusions about me seems premature at best. I have a close family member with severe mental disability, and other family members with physical disabilities. I help take care of them and have volunteered in hospices that treat people with advanced dementia. I have also been to Africa volunteering; once in the Gambia helping to build schools, and again in Kenya a few years back when the severe drought happened. So don’t come and tell me you know me by a couple of comments I made. You dislike me. That’s perfectly fine. I don’t know you anyway. I regret that this blog has turned into a war zone where anyone who disagrees is told to fuck off right off the bat. It’s not constructive and pointless. Feel free to rip this to shreds again and tell me to fuck off all you like. You’ve already made up your mind about anyone who doesn’t agree with you. I’m not wasting anymore time with this. Have a good day.
Fuuuuuuuuuck. The vitriole. Which is why I haven’t commented here before. I am well-versed on all of the apporiate “gates”, so don’t insult my intelligence or involvement. What I wrote was my genuine concern as a person invlved in this movement and alongtime fan of PZ. I am hit with “you fucking sleaze” and “says more than enough about you” and “let the door smack you on the ass on the way out”.
I am one of you, assholes, and on probably 99% of things we would completely agree. But because I think Harris has a point about how we do need to focus more attention outward right now, you’d have me leave, never come back, and consider me a sleazeball for expressing my frustration at thie focus on feminism at the expense of the external enemy. This thread isn’t Thunderdome. Can you at least pretned to be civil in your disagrements? Or is your need for purity so all-encompassing that you would genuinely rather have a reader like myself stop coming here altogether, stop funding FtB, perhaps stop working on the ground for freethoght altogether?
You really all need to listen to yourselves. You are creating a dangerous echo chamber here. Go, read this old post I love and read almost monthly as a reminder: http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2007/06/12/we-stand-awed-at-the-heights-o/
That pot points out what is great about this community. We all can have a common purpose. It’s okay to criticize the Harrises and Dawkinses. I even agree with the criticisms. But make these critiques and then move along to other topics. I used ot log in here and find a veritable buffet of interesting posts and discussions. Now it’s 99% gamergate or elevatorgate or whatevergate. It’s not unimportant stuff to talk about. But I have limited time and the economy of information matters to me. I feel like everything meaningful to be said on the feminism in atheism topic has essentially been said. Now we have to do the actual work of including women as equals and fighting for their rights. Let’s do that! But grilling Harris because he thinks his particular pet project is more important than your per project? It’s a silly waste of time, for one thing. It’s made even worse by the fact that Harris is right on the fact that extremist Islam is the True Enemy.
If you reply to this with the previosu tone of “get the fuck out of here’ I won’t even acknowledger you. Speak to the actual matter at hand? Glad to talk. There’s no need for the type of shit that was ust flung at me and you should feel bad for being so ungracious if you did so.
So many typos but honestly I was upset at the insults. Sorry about that, it’s a bit hard to read.
Anthony K @92:
Aw, I missed that comment by the nitwit. I guess I wasted a few too many nice words and failed to employ the big gunz which get so many people riled up.
How about “distant”? Even Z … despite its distance (in time, in terms of its relevance to your own personal life, etc.). Wouldn’t that be a closer analogy to the Islamic world, from our point of view, given that Harris clearly doesn’t believe it is unimportant or is worth diminishing? Does anyone here think that’s unimportant or worth diminishing?
Maybe I’m not being touchy enough about the word “still” or “agitated” or how woefully-ignorant Harris is about any number of things. I don’t know. That doesn’t seem quite as relevant as the main thrust of his and Maher’s argument, right from the very beginning, which is about consistently applying liberal values (because these two fuckers at least say that they’re valuable, whatever hate and warmongering is going on underneath). It’s hard to see how some vague insinuation like that, even if it really was intended, is supposed to be there — that he meant to undermine his whole argument, which is targeted to liberals to remind them of the kinds of things they supposedly care about (no matter where or when they’re happening), so that they’ll join him in his Muslim-bombing/torturing escapades or whatever it is he wants to do. I don’t see how that could be the most reasonable interpretation.
@102 Anthony K
You don’t have to insult and stereotype atheists, jocks, and bullied kids all at once to make your point.
Just because we disagree with something you said, and challenged it, you take it to mean you will be forever hated. WHY?
@doublereed 113:
You’re right. I apologise for doing that, and I’ll watch myself in the future. I’m sorry.
@ #114 Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls
I was referring to comment #55
What external enemy that is in the process of taking over Western democracies? There aren’t any. Which is why we see anybody with this attitude as an anti-Islamic bigot (in lieu of islamophobic).
As I said above, there is nothing wrong with prioritizing problems near you compared to something happening halfway around the world.
So… let me get this straight.
lazinessevolved @85 sees Sam Harris minimizing the very real problems faced by American women—who only make up, you know, ≈50% of the American population—a stance which is pretty damned likely to persuade American women that the atheist movement, a movement in which Harris is a prominent figure, doesn’t have a place for women.
lazinessevolved also sees PZ calling Harris out for that minimization, a stance which is pretty damned likely to help persuade American women that the atheist movement really and truly does have a place for women.
And it’s PZ who is somehow divisive and weakening the atheist movement and yada yada yada?
Hmmm. How long have you been on this planet, lazinessevolved? And what color is the sky on your homeworld?
Even granting that we all agree on 99% of everything (doubtful) maybe that 1% is a set of deal breaker issues.
We can’t move along to other topics when those critiques not only don’t get listened to, but get vilely rejected, and those critiques are about being treated as fully human by other members of the movement.
But we can’t! Because too many people “high up” in the movement still don’t believe it’s important! Do you think we love talking about the same damned thing over and over and over? Do you think we wouldn’t rather talk about a hundred other things?
It takes an awful lot of privilege to call being treated as equally human a “pet project”.
Tony @107
I am not a Harris fanboi. Harris has serious issues, especially as regards his militaristic willingness. He happens to be right about a particular one. That has value and he is a contributor to the freethought community.
I am an unabashed supporter of a big tent for atheism. You wanna know why? Because I have lived my entire life as the only damn atheist I usually know here in the South. Because we need to have actual results, not just dreams. Does that mean some of the effective pushers of things that matter to us as a group can be occasionally unsavory? it may…because no leader in history is without a skeleton in their closet. You guys are right to criticize what people like Harris and Dawkins get wrong. But taking someone like me to task for not being as feverish in my criticism is a form of meta-critique. You want me to devote my energies to all of the interpersonal interactions guys like these have and be some sort of moral police. I decline. At the same time as I deplore some things they have done, I am not willing to set fire to a voice like Harris’ because he didn’t focus as much on oyur pet issue as you would like. I want Harris to continue to be a public voice, same as Dawkins, same as Hitch before he passed too soon.
You guys here are so busy trying to enforce the issues meta that you are going to end up losing sight of the real fight. This country has a long history of counter-Reformations, and we have made progress recently. I am nto saying to completely let go of your gripes with these misogynistic douchebags. But we don’t have anyone else to go to bat for us on the public stage just yet, and we need their leverage. Be pragmatic: once the “nones” have their basic domestic needs implemented, go ahead and pillory these guys. And yes, if they do something illegal and actionable, I will be right there with you ready to expel them. But for fuck’s sake, we need to stop wasting so much energy on these goddamn inquisitions!
lazinessevolved @ 109
1) Speaking up repeatedly about the hatred of women in society IS “doing the actual work”
2) That goal cannot be accomplished while rapists and misogynists are the spokespeople for the movement. Women are not equal in a movement where the most public figures are known to be rapists and not only protected but repeatedly invited back to major gatherings
3) That you feel everything meaningful has been said is your issue. You are an absolute fool for thinking that, but nobody is disputing your right to feel that way. However that gives you no right to whinge that another person’s blog is not sufficiently catering to your personal preferences. If you would like to read about other topics, there are billions of other websites out there for you to read. Or start your own.
@carlie
Don’t talk about my supposed “privilege”. An honest reading of what I wrote would demonstrate my point. Harris cares mroe about the Islam issues than anything else. PZ cares more about the feminism angle. Ergo, in regular language, each is their pet project. It’s not meant to be derogatory of one or the other. It’s just stating that they care more about those particular issues than others. Stop quibbling over language.
Bitches be crazy, right?
(/sarcasm)
lazinessevolved @109:
Then maybe you should consider the points being made that came along with the insults instead of pretending they don’t exist.
You’re not my ally. You’re dismissing the very real and very harmful things Sam Harris and others have said in favor of “everyone working together”. This ignores-as many people have said over the years-the fact that the movement is not very welcoming to many people, especially women. It’s hard to find common ground with people who want you to stay in the kitchen and make sammiches.
Oddly enough, we’ve had this pointed out for years. Perceptive people might note that a few people have actually made changes to our commenting styles in response. Also, PZ made changes to the commenting rules in response to complaints.
(bolding mine)
Sigh…
I guess you’re going to make me do this:
10/14- Nye! Nye! Nye!, A Useful Illustration
Nothing in these two about gamergate, elevatorgate, or whatevergate
General Harris instructs liberals to surrender on the home front and #GamerGate is getting the attention of the media
Obviously examples of what you’re complaining about. That’s not 99% though. It’s 50%.
10/13- Why aren’t Republicans supported by more women?, “I had brought the necessary supplies.”, Cafe Scientifique this month, Mary’s Monday Metazoan: Sexy frog, Another weird twist on the argument, Tomorrow, Drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring, Actually, when it involves the Catholic church, it’s never good news
Nothing about gamergate, elevatorgate, or whatevergate
9/30- More demands on your wallet!, Let’s learn science from the Duggars!, How about if we just shut down the NFL?, About ol’ HP Lovecraft…, Cafe Scientifique tonight, Don’t erotic fiction publishers realize that someone is going to get screwed here?, The difference between atheists and humanists, I have seen the future!
Nothing about gamergate, elevatorgate, or whatever gate
Shall I go on pointing out how ridiculous your point is? I could and it would be easy. PZ still posts a “veritable buffet of posts and discussions”. Some of those posts are related to the problems in the atheist movement. Some of those discussions are related to the shitty things Harris, Dawkins, or Coyne have said.
But not all of them.
Not 99% of them.
Not 50% of them.
A relative few of them actually discuss those subjects, if you take the time to look at *all* of the posts in a give time period. Why don’t you go back through the archives and look for yourself? You’d see that your point is completely without merit.
No, what you’re doing is whining and complaining that PZ is even discussing this in the first place. You overinflate the amount of discussion time he gives to these subjects to try to make a point that he’s talking about it too much. Given that he doesn’t talk about this stuff that often, the only conclusion I can reach is that you’re lying when you say you’re “on our side”. That you’re lying when you say “on 99% of these topics we probably agree”.
I know I don’t agree with you on the subject of the atheist movements resistance to treating women and oppressed people better. You just don’t want to talk about the problem. You focus on the relative few posts that PZ dedicates to this subject, and ignore all the other posts that aren’t related to it. It’s almost like you’re confirming your bias.
Wonder what that says about you.
Oh, and btw, FUCK OFF.
lazinessevolved @ 109
I wasn’t actually kidding when I said I was going to stop reading at the passage I quoted. Nobody ever has anything useful to say after phrases like “Let me explain why before you skewer me.” That’s pretty much tone-troll speak for “I’m about to say something really ignorant and then hold myself up as a paragon of civil discourse in comparison to you on the grounds that you used naughty words.”
I think Sam Harris is, to some degree, making a privileged-white-male-American mistake. Without realizing it, he thinks that other people should focus their attention mostly on the same issues on which he focuses his attention. He also thinks that other people should think like him.
With Sam Harris, it’s a matter of degree. How closely do you match his take on everything? On that criteria he judges all of us.
Sam, you need some balance.
drst @ 122
1) Yes, speak repeatedly. But maybe also speak about a few other things half as often as he used to? I miss the more general feel of Pharyngula, when it covered a lot of topics of interest to skeptics. It’s skewed toward particular internal issues now, and that is bad for 2 reasons: it makes it a less valuable blog for purposes of keeping up with the wider range of freethought issues, and it also is running off people who dare to criticize the status quo here. The insults to me earlier are proof of it. For which I have yet to see the word “sorry”.
2) If a person committed rape, then they need ot be charged with a crime. That hasn’t happened. Creepy sleazy shit? Yep. Rape? A bridge too far. Misogyny? All over the place. Inexcusable. But what you guys here seem to want to do is lop the head off of the movement in a quest for purity, when we don’t yet have people with the same clout to fight our external battles in place. I want to see Watson ad others be prominent. I want to see them on the talk shows. We have a rightful gripe with the media that the people they want to have on are white males. It’s bullshit. But if you snipe these guys, then you are ceding the media space to the conservative anti-intellectuals. Don’t like Harris or Dawkins? Fine, let’s work to replace them. But the end result if you all get your way is that there will be practically no “big name” freethinkers willing to say controversial things and move the ball forward on our consensus issues. As much as I love a guy like deGrasse Tyson, him and many like him are unwilling to really rock the boat.
3) No, I am not a fool. but thanks for the insult. Eervything meaningful on this toic was said by 3 months ago. Now all that is happening is quoting and sniping at each other. I am a customer of FtB, and I have as much of a right to “whine” as anyone who comes here. I was civil about it, I brought up that as a longtime reader I’d really like it if the posts went back to a more general feel…and I was treated like shit for saying it. I like PZ and I want ot hear what he has to say on a wide range of topics. Not just one.
I must admit that I’m starting to enjoy Harris more nowadays. Before, I thought he was just a wanker, way too impressed with his own intelligence. But now I’m really starting to appreciate his genius trolling. He’s starting to insult anyone who feels empathy for any reason. Soon, he will join the august pantheon of Michelle Bachman, Bill O’Reilly et. al. I mean, can’t you see it, Sam Harris on cable TV intoning, “Scary Muslims go in, Muslim terrorists go out… you can’t explain that liberals.“
lazinessevolved @ 121
In other words, you women and your allies should just shut up and swallow this shit for the greater good. Wait your turn. Someday we’ll worry about atheism being such a sexist, bigoted mess. After we’re successful. Because right now it’s much more important for my personal comfort to ignore all of this.
Gee, where have women heard that before?
Abolition.
The civil rights movement.
It’s always the response of the men in charge to tell women to wait their turn. You are saying nothing new or even perceptive.
You also seem not to have considered the possibility that having a movement whose public faces denigrate and endanger half the population may be a much bigger obstacle to the movement’s success than people calling out that kind of behavior from within.
Seven @ 125
Yet you keep replying. I am not a concern troll, I am a person that misses seeing more things on the Pharyngula feed than sniping at other leading freethinkers over their disagreements on the feminism issues. Do you need validation from me that you hurt my feelings by not reading all of my words? You won’t get it. And I don’t care about the naughty words, I said fuck plenty of times. What I take exception to are the direct insults. It’s pointless and just an attempt to shut me up and drive me off. I won’t engage on that level, but I will keep talking about what matters.
@azhael 105
This post is about criticizing a prominent member of the atheist community, with some connections to similar bad behavior in other prominent atheists. That some are willing to leave over this behavior does matter, but you seem unwilling to mention what the people who are considering leaving are saying. If you cared about persuasion you would be talking about their concerns in a way that makes it clear that you understand what is bothering them.
@ lazinessevolved 109
That is one nice big long tone-troll that simultaneously asks us to ignore things that are bothering us for the sake of group solidarity.
I really don’t give a shit. Complaining about emotion just means you have a problem with emotion, not the people here. If you can’t handle emotion and a persons logic that is your weakness and I am happy to let you engage in flaw-building exercises. Religion is full of emotion and you choose to handicap yourself because they will not avoid emotion for you.
The problems that exist in religion with respect to women are also present in the society at large. Religion is human social behavior and these atheist feminists are focusing attention outward, AND inward. You are the one choosing to ignore religion for the sake of sacrificing victims, and your path has us sacrificing victims as well. You want us to ignore parts of religion in the atheist movement. You are not my ally.
Seeing as that is something the religious do as well I have to ask
lazinessevolved 109:
And you sit over here obsessed with what I call you. Newsflash: no person that changed the world has a squeaky-clean background.
I have a lot more where “you fucking sleaze” came from, but since you’re interested in the big picture, I know you’ll ignore such trivialities, assface.
@lazinessevolved/121
I absolutely understand what you’re saying here and, to be honest, I agree to a significant extent. I, too, am willing to put up with people who fall down on issues that are less important to me so as to be able to work with them on issues that are more important to me.
The problem is that, for many of us, our atheism is not and never has been the biggest issue. You say “Because I have lived my entire life as the only damn atheist I usually know here in the South . . .” but for many of us this is “Because I have lived my entire life as a woman” or “Because I have lived my entire life as a trans-person” or ” “Because I have lived my entire life as a POC” or ” “Because I have lived my entire life as a poor person.”
If the atheist movement is unconcerned with issues that are vital to me (see above), I will drop it instantly. You may be a big tent atheist, but I’m a big test social justice-er. If I’m forced to choose between a theist who is invested in social justice an an atheist who is not interested in social justice, the social justice aspect will be my determining factor, not the atheism/theism.
Thus, I hope you can understand if I choose to take myself out of the big tent of your atheism. I’d much rather be in a big tent with theists than misogynists/etc.
mig06 @108:
You know what would be cool?
If you’d at least include the name and comment number of the person you’re responding to (like I just did with you).
It would be even better if you’d quote the comment you’re responding to.
<blockquote> place quoted text here </blockquote>
produces
Did you even read my comment @55? Because I explained how your words paint a picture of your character. I never said I know you. I said:
Do you disagree with that?
Do you think that people cannot come to know the opinions and beliefs of others based on what they say? How does that work? How could anyone ever come to know someone else if they don’t assess the beliefs and opinions of the other individual? Do you think it takes interacting with someone in meatspace? To get to know someone’s opinion, do you have to interact with them for X number of times? I’d be really curious to know.
I explained why the comments you made illuminate who you are. No, the comments don’t paint the total picture of you, nor did I ever claim they did. But your comments do point to things about you that I don’t like. If that troubles you, perhaps you ought to ask yourself why someone would have problems with the things you say.
Also, I didn’t tell you to fuck off. You’re mixing my response up with others. I was actually being rather kind, given the disdain I felt for your comments thus far. Contrary to your opinion, this blog isn’t a war zone that is hostile to disagreement. You’re placing the responsibility for civility and politeness on others, but not bothering to look at the comments you’ve made yourself. Like lazinessevolved you’re being dismissive of a serious concern in the atheist movement, and you’re basically telling people to get along with one another in the name of big tent atheism and stop worrying about the problems of sexism and misogyny. And you can’t see a problem with that. Nor can you see why people would get pissed off at that. And you complain about people using coarse language with you. You deride comments containing harsh language while failing to engage in the substance of those comments. I actually can’t believe I’ve wasted this much time responding to your idiocy and insensitivity.
The last sentence in 132 was supposed to be deleted. Ignore it.
consciousness razor said:
My eyes rolled out of my head with that one. They are now covered in cat hair which is really clouding up my vision…dang it.
@lazinessevolved – 14 October 2014 at 11:30 am
To the extent that “nones” lack basic domestic needs, this has nothing to do with their lack of religion, and everything to do with our dangerously right wing economic system. The rights you regard as “basic” are not the ones I regard as “basic”, and I don’t think most others see this the same way as you either. If Sam Harris is your idea of “big tent atheism”, then I don’t want to be in your tent.
@ mig06 108
That’s nice.
Now are you going to say anything about the fact that you chose to accuse people of letting their emotions affect their logic without demonstrating it?
lazinessevolved @ 127
Could you be any more clueless? They don’t need to be replaced. They’re not the only people who can say the things they say. In fact, plenty of us would prefer a world in which nobody ever said the things they say because a lot of the things they say are ignorant and harmful. There are tons of people with stuff to say that it’s a hell of a lot more insightful and nuanced and factually accurate than anything Harris or Dawkins could ever hope to say on a whole host of topics. All it takes is for people to start listening to them.
How is he right? Show us with real evidence that Islam is a threat to Western democracies. Compared to the home grown theocrats. You can’t.
Ah, a political dog whistle of the misogynist variety. Outing yourself. Thanks.
You apparently don’t know what the word “customer” means.
But of course, you’ve already told us to “stop quibbling over language”.
Nobody has time to put up with the goddamn antics of civil ‘ol Humpty Dumpty.
lazinessevolved @ 128
1) Tony already pointed out that you have no actual proof that the range and quality of topics here have changed. You cannot simply assert this without providing evidence, otherwise I and probably everyone else will assume your confirmation bias is showing and you are concluding what you want because of your obvious personal feelings about these issues without regard for objective facts about how many topics are written about here and how frequently.
2) I’m not even going to touch the “it’s not really rape unless there’s a criminal charge” bullshit you spouted there. I’m also going to ignore the “but but but THE MOVEMENT” crap since I handled that in my previous comment. I do wonder why it’s my job, not yours, to replace the “big names” with someone more inclusive, if, as you claim, you find the reliance on misogynist white males troubling.
3) that you feel everything important has already been said proves what exactly? Why are you the arbiter of when people have to stop talking about something that clearly makes you uncomfortable? And no, you’re not a “customer” this is not a service you pay for. Yes, you have the right to pitch a fit about the blog not suiting your exact tastes but PZ and everyone here has an absolute right to mock you for thinking your opinion on that subject matters. If you can’t deal with the response to that, maybe you should choose your words and battles more carefully.
drst @ 130
Your attempt to sum me up is not correct. I support and boost wholeheartedly the need for more women and minorities to be included in this damned tent. To lead the thing. Guys like Dawkins need to go or stay off of Twitter, Harris needs a wake up call, etc. But there is not a wide enough foundation o this movement yet to lop off the heads of it because they are priviliged while males syaing stupid privileged white male things. It’s just pragmatism. I want better leaders. But if you headshot these guys right out of the movement, who will be on the talk shows to present our case ot the nation and the world? Likeit or not, these guys wrote the bestselling books and have the recognition required to get out there and move the ball forward on issues.
Want to really help overthrow these assholes? Buy books and attend events where people like Watson et al are involved. Put them on the bestseller lists. Push the old guard out by making a statement with your wallet and your time that tells th emedia: THESE WOMEN MATTER.
Or keep trying to pull me back into line. because that’s definitely going to get Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Ophelia Benson out there on CNN for us.
lazinessevolved @ 127
1) You, nor anyone else, get to dictate the contents of PZ’s blog. I enjoy many of his topics, others I simply mark as read and move on. I suggest you do the same.
2a) Not all rapes can be prosecuted and my understanding is a great many could be but the police victim blame and screw up. We need to dispense with the false dichotomy that it’s either prosecutable or it’s just creepy sleazy (but legal) shit.
2b) Why not ask people to stop being creepy sleazes while we’re asking people not to rape.
2c) If the leaders consistently show themselves to not be up to the task of being good role models, then why not turf them?
2d) It would be great to get new faces in the media, the old ones seem to be terrible communicators upon closer inspection.
3) 3 months is being generous, everything meaningful was said 2+ years ago but the targets of critisicm still fail to address it or accept it. They would rather write 1500 words justifying their ill conceived position than admit they might have misspoken or were wrong.
Hey mig06:
Either say this and actually LEAVE or don’t type it (though leaving without making some grand announcement about how you won’t be returning is also much preferred). Using these as if they are your signature on a forum isn’t doing you any favors.
lazinessevolved @ 144
Because it’s a choice between convincing you of something OR buying books and attending events that support women and minorities? You’re pretty fucking impressed with yourself, aren’t you?
drst @ 143
1) You want what from me, some kind of word cloud? I am not getting into a quibble over data. Anyone who can read an dhas a memory at all knows that the post content here on Pharyngula has shifted to the pro-feminism content heavily in recent months. I read this site daily. I know what I see. Stop being “that guy” who thinks calling for numbers wins arguments. I am not going to spend hours cataloguing a spreadsheet of posts and percentages just so you can throw away my time and work with some flippant bullshit comment like everything else you’ve written so far.
2) It is all of our jobs to change the guard, and I want the guard to change too. But before you dethrone someone, thought needs to be taken as to who will hoist the banner next. This reliance is troubling, as you point out. But holy shit are there bigger fish to fry in the freethought sphere than what creepy old white dude wants to put penis where right now. You guys think it is a cop-out to talk about laws because harassment isn’t illegal and women at these events and such feel afraid. I hate that they feel this way and the guys that did these things have been called out. Perhaps, and I know this is nigh-unthinkable, but they can actually improve and recover? Lessons can be learned? We live at a very interesting juncture in history. These old patriarchal ideas are dying, but people at the head of that effort are still sliding back and fucking up. It deserves criticism but if we let it consuje our movement then we are handing the initiative to the religious majoriy, who are firmly entrenched.
3) i am not an arbiter, but yes I am a customer. I am allowed ot have an opinion, same as you. I click the ads, I’ve donated to Ed’s blog. So yes, I do have some right to talk about what has been a change in editorial content here. And you are entitled to disagree.
Seven of Mine @ 24:
consiousness razor’s take is also dishonest in light of the greater context of both that conversation (on Maher’s show) and other things that Harris has said. It’s clear from both what was said, the context in which it was said, and how it was said (the latter may not be known if the cr didn’t watch the video, but still) that cr is exactly twisting the words, and projecting that twist onto PZ’s reading.
mig06@27:
Seven @ 147
Let’s both keep inventing dichotomies. I’m not impressed with myself at all, and I’ve been wrong plenty of times and changed my mind a lot. Like a rational person should. You on the other hand seem content to throw pithy shit my way in lieu of anything substantive, since nothing is fun like a good old-fashioned dogpile. Clearly the “OM” flair has lost its luster over the years. Care to actually prove why you have that tag, or you just wanna keep insulting me?
lazinessevolved, you say you’re concerned that the atheist movement is weakened when prominent atheists are called out for bigotry/racism/sexism/etc. Fine. Since I share your concern for the efficacy of the atheist movement, I have some questions for you.
First: What percentage of the USAn population belongs to demographics that are directly, materially harmed by the bigotry/racism/sexism/etc that are being called out?
Second: What percentage of the USAn population does not belong to any of those demographics?
Third: Given existing demographic trends, how are the numerical answers to the two questions above likely to change in coming years?
It may require a bit of research on your part to find the answers to these questions, but if you do that research, you may find it instructive to ponder the downstream consequences of those answers. Or not. [shrug]
lazinessevolved @121:
I’ve lived in the South most of my life. I currently live in that bastion of freethought, Florida (that was snark). I *used* to think that big tent atheism was important. That was until I realized that big tent atheism won’t work when some of the people are hostile to treating others under the tent as human beings with all the same rights as everyone else.
How can women feel welcome under the big tent when their concerns are swept aside or they’re treated to sexual harassment and rape or death threats? Can you honestly say that women should just shut up and stop complaining about those problems in the name of solidarity with big tent atheism?
Carlie @120 pointed out your privilege (which, by your comment @123, I see you take issue with, which means that you don’t fully understand what privilege is), and she was right to do so. Your perspective is a privileged one. Specifically Male Privilege.
I get it. I can relate. I have Male Privilege too. So do all other men. It’s not an insult. It’s an observation that as men, we are able to move through life with greater ease than women will bc socially, we’re accorded unearned benefits based on our gender. By and large, most men will never know what it’s like to deal with daily street harassment rape and death threats simply for trying to participate in various subcultures (such as comics, gaming, or sci-fi/fantasy). This is the everyday reality for women across the globe. It’s also a problem for women in the atheist movement. The backlash against Rebecca Watson for “guys don’t do that” points to a segment of the atheist movement who are actively hostile towards women and who do not want the movement to make improvements so that women will be welcome. They dismiss the concerns of women bc it doesn’t affect them (the men). The treat the concerns of women as unimportant and that has the effect of pushing women away. For you to come here and declare that big tent atheism is so dearly important means you don’t care enough about the concerns of women in the movement. You are more concerned with people all working together that you can’t see that people *cannot* work together in an environment that isn’t welcoming to everyone. And the atheist movement is *not* welcoming to everyone. It’s welcoming to white, heterosexual, cisgender men.
We can have dreams and work towards results on multiple fronts. Do you think that atheists who complain about sexism in the movement do nothing other than complain about that? Do you think they sit idly by while theists trample on the rights of atheists? If you think that, you might ought to read a bit more.
Not it may
It does matter.
Moreover, what some of them say is a lot worse than unsavory. As I was pointing out to mig06 the things people say illuminate their character. So when Sam Harris talks about a “nurturing estrogen vibe” being necessary to attract more women to atheism, or when Richard Dawkins compares rape at knifepoint with date rape, those comments paint a picture of both men. They show their biases and prejudices. They show that they have harmful beliefs about gender roles and Rape Culture (respectively). These beliefs influence how they interact with women. When atheist leaders defend the rapist shitstain Michael Shermer, that shows that they don’t care about making the atheist movement safe for women. These words and actions taken by these white men have an impact. They affect how people view them, because they show what kind of people they are.
You’d have us ignore these problems in favor of working together, and that’s just not doable for a lot of people.
They get a fair bit of stuff wrong too.
Who has said you have to do anything of the sort?
What I’ve been saying is that you cannot and should not expect others to agree that big tent atheism is so important when atheists under that tent shit on the rights of their so-called “fellow atheists”.
Also, your comments about “moral police” are ridiculous. No one is policing their statements. We’re holding them to the same standards we hold ourselves to. Many of us feel that the world won’t be made significantly better if religion disappeared tomorrow. Sexism, misogyny, homophobia, transphobia, income inequality, and more will *still* be a tremendous problem. Moreover, people in the atheist movement-a lot of them libertarians-don’t give a shit about tackling those problems. I want a better world and to get there, we have to do more than tackle religion. If that’s the most important thing to you, fine. But don’t be surprised when women, LGBT people, or People of Color don’t stand by your side. If you’re not going to care about their concerns, why would they want to stand with you?
@dipshit, 150:
Christ, but you’re a whiny fuck, lazinessevolved.
What good does it do us to fully liberate and equalize all freethinking fuckfaces like you over here if we won’t dedicate the same energy to demanding that Islamist oppressive regimes do the same?
According to your own words, until every atheist in Islamist countries is liberated, you have no choice but to sit here and take the insults, you dumbass shitbag. Go read, and lie back and think of the movement, baby.
Crimson @ 149
Not a dudebro and hate the MRAs. Why the fuck is everything here “with us or against us”? Can no one here actually have a fuckign conversation anymore? You would be genuiinely HAPPY if a person like me who has a different POV on this one topic simply goes away? I have no sympathies toward the old guard here, but I want to win the goddamn war against religious patriarchy. This moralistic bullshit you people are pulling isn’t free: if you manage to snipe Dawkin et al from the picture then no one is in place to stand up in the public eye for the 20% of us that really just want things like church/state separation and such to matter.
I’ll ask you liek I asked the other half-dozen: stop insulting me and say something substantive. Because I am not a “dudebro” and your attempt to lump me in as such is flawed.
@154:
Why? Provide a substantive reason why you should be treated like a human being when atheists in Islamic countries aren’t yet.
You’ve made that exact argument for the treatment of women here. Own it.
lazinessevolved
Are you serious? We should drop everything, like wanting to be treated as equals, because this is the most important thing to you? But when others advocate on behalf of half the fucking species it is a pet project?
Are you trying to sound like a gigantic selfish asshole or…?
Jeez, people. Stop jumping all over lazinessevolved. Can’t you see the man is ‘splaining? How dare you question him, for he is man and he is ‘splaining.
lazinessevolved @148:
You’re still parroting this fucking lie.
I corrected you back @125. If you’re at all concerned with making truthful statements to support your positions, you’d do well to stop lying.
PZ still comments on a range of issues and you’re wrong when you claim it’s heavily skewed in the direction of “particular internal issues”. You’d know that if you took the time to make sure the statements you make are true or not.
You perceive it as bad. Others don’t. We’ve had more than a few people applaud PZ for focusing on feminism and calling out the so-called “thought leaders” in the atheist movement.
@lazinessevolved 148
A customer of what? What is it that PZ wants to sell? This is an aweful point.
It seems to me that PZ wants to “sell” a set of community values that are independent of atheism functionally, but apply logically and rationally because this is his community. This “product” by it’s very nature is targeted at everyone, including you. So you are correct in the fact that PZ is trying to “sell”, if you mean persuade, convince, AND condemn, shame and similar. Those negative messages are not targeted at you, they are targeted at the society around you and meant to get them to look at you. You seem to care more about editorial content than people suffering in our social circle. I will let that color my opinion of you, and I am willing to tell others about it.
It’s a terrible point because social change will always include people that want to keep the status quo going for strategic reasons, and because they profit off of it. Those are people that PZ likely knows he will not persuade so the emotion is meant to get others to look at them. If your opinions ignore this reality, they will not be very good opinions and people here will say so, and use the emotion of their choice.
Anthony @ 153
Okay, fine. Gloves off. Fuck you, you trolly piece of shit.
No, not according to my own words any such damn thing. Your can’t read clearly and you either don’t understand what I am saying or are cool just making shit up. We can fight on multiple fronts. But right now, this blog is an endless drumbeat of a single issue with occaisonal breaks for pictures of cool animals.
I will keep fighting for all of the above causes. So that even inconsiderate enemas like yourself can be free to spout shit like this on a blog somewhere.
lazinessevolved @ 154
Stop whining about being insulted and address the substantive things people have said.
sez lazinessevolved@144: “…Harris needs a wake up call…”
…but FSM forbid it be an atheist who provides that wakeup call to Harris. Because that’s divisive behavior and weakening the movement and The Movement Has More Important Fish To Fry. Right?
Brony @ 159
At least you’ve been civil. I meant customer as in I click the ads, I donate, so in a sense this site is like a newspaper I am subscribed to. So I just have a desire ot see more variety in the “reporting”. And for that, I have been called every name in the book. So seriously, thank you for disagreeing with me but not being an asshole about it. This place is exhausting and people get so needlessly mean and angry. They seem genuinely happy to drive people off if they can.
Why do we need Thought Leaders?
Why do we need Public Representatives?
What conversation? You are preaching your gospel of inanity, and we are responding. And typical of preachers, you aren’t listening.
Still waiting for my evidence that Islam is a real threat to Western democracies.
@ 160: lazinessevolved
Wait, when did the zebrafish become feminists? DAMN ZEBRAFISH — FEMINISM RUINS EVERYTHING!!!!!
/snark
@160 lazinessevolved:
Why wage war against me? Aren’t we on the same side? You’re hurting the movement! Being divisive! Demanding ideological purity! Big tent!
Or, you’re kind of a moron and don’t understand what you yourself are writing.
Do you have a problem with what I wrote here?
If so, explain why this applies to women and not you.
And then, you can goddamn thank me for fighting for the rights of asshole dipshits like you.
Seven @ 161
I have answered as many as I can and as in-depth as I can. And without the trolly bullshit. I’ve made my POV as clear as I can, but yes, I am distracted by the attitude and tone. And this will be my final reply to you in particular, because like Anthony you seem mor einterested in tweaking and berating me than anything else. We disagree. Life goes on. Feel free to call yourself the winner of this Internet argument. You can frame it alongside your OM plaque.
lazinessevolved@154:
Probably has something to do with this:
This comes across as a statement that protecting the reputations of influential atheist spokespeople is vastly more important than preventing rape and sexual assault of women in the rank and file. Is that your perspective?
Before you answer, bear in mind that Shermer’s reputation was already shit among people in the know. In almost any subculture or social circle that features a sexual predator or predators, a grapevine forms the purpose of which is to warn potential victims who have made connections to that grapevine. But this means that newcomers are still at risk — there’s no booth at atheist conventions that trades in this kind of information; it is spread informally. The accusations against Shermer were made explicitly (i.e. the purpose of the disclosures was stated and this was it) to protect potential victims who weren’t already informed.
Dog whistle for you want to see your pet paranoias mentioned more often in a non-critical light. It’s PZ’s blog, his decision. You want to control content, start your own blog. Don’t count on me to even look at it.
Anthony @ 167
No reason to try talking to you anymore, honestly, same as Seven. The two of you seem more interested in pissing me off and haven’t said anything interesting that wasn’t on Carlin’s list for about 3-4 posts each now.
But seriously, evaluate your life choices if you think this level of insult over simple disagrement on Internet forums is worth the barrel of vitriole you lobbed. I can’t even imagine what you two must be like in real life.
laziness @ 161
…the fuck are you even on about?
lazinessevolved would be a perfect moniker for Sam Harris. Harris is a freeper stripped of religion, but a freeper nonetheless. He’s perfected the “art” of lazy thinking, of spouting off bigotry from a well of ignorance, much like lazinessevolved.
Harris has not backed one reformer in the ‘Islamic world’. In fact , he’s proposed backing secular tyrants via benign dictatorships in the Middle East because he thinks Muslims are unfit for democracy. What a clown.
Woo! I got my Internet Isn’t Real Life spot. SO CLOSE TO BINGO!
Nerd @ 170
Totally legit, and you’re right, I could start my own blog. If I didn’t, I bet I’d end up linking here a lot. Just less than I would have a year ago. But it isn’t a dogwhistle. People here really want any excuse to dismiss any kind of opinion that is critical of the site. I don’t want my pet “paranoias” front and center. I just miss a Pharyngula that was a genuine one-stop-shop for all sorts of news on freethought matters. I find more and more now I have to go elsewhere fo rthat sort of thing because the blog has become more and more focused on this particular issue. It deserves attention, I just miss PZ’s POV on other topics, and he has limited time to post.
I get that you’re stupid, but by now you should have noticed that I’m simply treating you like you’re asking women in the atheist community to put up with for the sake of your big tent.
If you can’t put up with a little vitriol for the sake of the movement, how in hell are you going to stand up to the Islamic Hordes you’re so afeared of?
You mean three months ago? Man, those were the good old days.
lazinessevolved @85
lazinessevolved @144
I hope you’ll excuse me if I think you are full of shit.
R Johnston @ 173
No, not even close. So liberal that my friends that supported Obama get annoyed at me for criticizing him from the left. Your assertions of bigotry and ignorance are unfounded too. Bigotry against what? Muslims? Because I recognize a fundamental rot at the heart of the religion? HAH! I just had a discussion with a RL friend who claimed that we needed to crucify the guys in ISIS on TV to prove our mettle. I spent considerable effort convincing him that in a soiety with real moral values we can’t stoop to that level, and that it’s a tiny percentage of extremists, not Mulsims at large who are the issue…but this sort of thing would potentially drive more moderate Muslims ot sympathize with the extremists.
Yeah, I’m totally a bigot.
lazinessevolved @ 144
Have you considered that maybe the lack of leaders/public figures who are not objectionable is proof that your “big tent movement” isn’t ready for the limelight? Also I hope at some point it dawns on you that you are claiming “having people to go on talk shows” is so important that half the population should just put up with being treated like shit in the meantime by those people, otherwise OMG NOBODY WILL BE ABLE TO GO ON TV FOR THIS.
More bluntly: you are prioritizing promoting atheism because that promotion is of more value to you personally than women not being treated like shit. You are placing the (wildly theoretical) possible future success of atheism above the rights of half the population. If people are insulting you, that’s probably why.
@148
Translation: I’m not going to consider the possibility that there is no actual data to support my thesis and cling to my conviction that because I personally feel uncomfortable with this topic appearing, it’s obviously happening more often than it should. And I get to decide what number constitutes “should.”
I’ve been pretty civil to you so far and addressed the weaknesses in your arguments. If I’m only writing flippant bullshit why are you responding to me? Also I would again point you to Tony’s comment @125.
This post is about Harris either not realizing or not caring that anti-abortion violence is very much alive and well in the US in 2014, and thus giving the impression that your precious “big tent atheist movement” does not care about the war on choice going on in the US or the lives and safety of women. This has nothing to do with anything in your comment, but you trying to frame it as “jeeze it’s just sex why are you so worked up you prudes?” is a valiant effort at dismissing the reality. Just wanted to point that out.
Except despite several years of these issues being discussed – by your reckoning all that’s important has been said, right? – these men have shown not one iota of thought, self-examination or any other indication that they have listened to or considered the possibility of being wrong. If there was any evidence, for example, following Harris’ off the cuff “estrogen” comment that he was thinking critically about what he said and trying to do better – not even a full evolution but some kind of hint that maybe he was starting to get the problem – I’m certain that effort would have been rewarded with praise and cookies. But he doubled down. Over and over.
Oppressed populations are not required to constantly give their oppressors one more chance to do the right thing.
Lastly, you are not a customer. By definition you are not purchasing any content or service by being here. You are a consumer, but not a customer.
@lazinessevolved either ignored my comment or missed it. -ponder-
@ lazinessevolved 163
That’s just it. I’m not being civil. There are women around here that speak of people saying insulting things in nicely phrased ways. I just said that you care more about editorial content than people suffering. You care about emotions more than suffering. That makes you a shitty human being with little empathy. That warrants asshole.
Not so nice anymore huh?
I just said that the emotions being used around here are appropriate. That means that the bad words, the horrible things that you don’t like. I like them.
Don’t thank me. I basically do what I do to show you how deep your motivated reasoning runs.
Want to hear about how you are acting like a sexist?
Basically it has to do with the fact that not only do you care about editorial content more than human suffering, you care about gendered suffering less than editorial content. Since it’s the same human behavior that causes suffering for women in religion and the atheist community, you don’t seem to care about religion related suffering. Religion is about human social behavior, by ignoring the problems with atheists, you are effectively ignoring religious problems. Yet you want us to focus on religion.
Sorry but if it is literally sex related discriminatory logic, I gotta go where the definition matches the word.
I’m not squeaky clean! Stop insisting on ideological purity! Surely there are bigger fish to fry than what kinds of words I call you!
Gee, you admit it is his blog, and he can post about what he wants, but still you want it to be about YOU.
Ego trip.
@Eristae #182
You have to call him names so he can obsess over them or he won’t respond. You should know by now how every conversation with big tenters civility police go.
@lazinessevolved 154
It’s fine that you want things like church/state separation “and such” to matter. But when you write that you “really just want” those things to matter, you are clearly communicating that you want those things to matter, and don’t much care about the rest of it. ‘Cause that’s what exactly what the word ‘just’ does to that sentence – it excludes things that are not following it (almost always, the term is used more explicitly exactly thus e.g. “I don’t want to fight, I really just want to talk”).
Which is fine – honestly, we might not like it (or you, for that matter), but I don’t think anyone here really much gives a crap about where the limits of your concern really lie. That sounds like a personal issue to me.
But it should be pretty fucking obvious to anyone who has read more than one thread here that the host of this blog, and many of its commenters, emphatically don’t just want to not have to deal with the occasional creche on the courthouse lawn, or even to have to personally endure grief or even harassment from the great deluded religious masses. Our concern extends out beyond even what we ourselves personally experience. It’s sort of a requirement of the whole “social justice warrior” deal.
So it’s not that your point of view as you’ve expressed so far is forbidden or even unwelcome – it’s that it really is incumbent upon you to be very, very careful if you really want to come in here and argue either that the current audience is misguided in what they are concerned about, or that their concern is actually harming someone other than you personally.
Thus far, while you are passionate and articulate, I haven’t seen much evidence of such care.
Anthony K/186
I was going to type out a whole reply and everything, but Tony already said it all in 152. So Lazinessevolved, to quote another poster, (Seven of Mine @161)
Wow, my last post didn’t work correctly at all. The first part was by Anthony, the second part was by me.
Seriously though, lazinessevolved, here’s a thread on FtB by a women on the experience of Muslim apostates as told by them on Twitter. Here’s one by Heina, a woman and ex-Muslim.
I linked to it earlier, but you may have simply ignored it to instead focus on trivialities such as the insults I sent your way.
Why aren’t you there, giving Ophelia Benson and Heina Dadabhoy your clicks? Women! Islamist theocracy! It’s all the things you claim to care about.
@132 Brony
I’m not entirely sure i understood you, but i’ll go with what i think i did understand. As far as i can tell, the people that are leaving because PZ or others are openly critisizing public figures for their sexism, bigotry or even criminal acts are leaving because, like lazinnessevolved they care more about maintaining the pretense that those public figures are worthwhile role models, rather than face the truth that they are unfit to represent a group of moral human beings, because they feel that would weaken the movement and because they find the transgressions of those public figures to be sufficiently trivial for them to excuse.
Do i have that right? If i do, fuck them, i’m happy they are leaving…
lazinessevolved @131:
There’s still plenty of that material. But you’re only focused on confirming your own biases, so you only see what you want to see. It’s not like it would take long to peruse the archives to show that PZ still blogs about a wide variety of subjects (when I looked to refute your claims, it took me all of 5 minutes, which is less time than you’ve spent on your various comments in this thread, I’m sure). Your complains are without merit.
@144:
Even before the likes of Harris, Dennett, Dawkins, Shermer, Hitchens et al. there have been other atheists that existed. Today, there are other atheists who exist. They can fill the void left if Dawkins, for instance loses popularity. And the only ball they’re moving is the “religion is bad” ball. Which is nice, but not at the expense of the “women are humans and entitled to rights” ball.
@148:
It doesn’t take hours. All it takes is clicking on “archives” and taking a quick look. You can view all of September, for instance, if you wanted to determine if 99% of PZ’s posts (or even 50%) are about gamergate, elevatorgate, or whatevergate.
More to the point, you’re complaining about PZ writing about issues he feels important. And curiously enough, all these issues are related to feminism.
How are you a customer?
FtB is a free service. Unless you pay the $30 a year for the ad free version as I do, but I don’t think that makes one a customer.
Ian Cromwell
Sikivu Hutchinson
Greta Christina
Aron Ra
Adam Lee
John Scalzi
Miri Mogilevsky
Just a few people that could replace Dawkins or Harris. It’s not hard to find people to replace the sexist “thought leaders”. Such a move would be great (assuming any of them wanted to have the same prominence as the Horsemen), IMO.
Just as important…why does anyone have to take their place? I don’t deny the impact the Horsemen had, but why does anyone need to be the public face of atheism? Why can’t multiple people?
@154:
Gosh, I didn’t know there weren’t any other atheists that could speak up aside from the thought leaders…
Tinjoe @145:
I’m glad you mentioned this, bc this is one of the issues at the heart of the complaints in this thread “Waaaah, PZ won’t stop talking about feminism and talk about the things I think are important”. Like you, I skip over the posts that I don’t find interesting. It’s not hard to do. There are more than enough posts on this blog that I enjoy, which is why I keep coming back. It’s incredibly easy to just not read those posts I don’t want to read. But according to lazinessevolved, Pharyngula has taken such a drastic turn towards feminism and critiques of shitty atheists in the movement that PZ hardly ever talks about anything else. Except for all the times when he does talk about other things. Which happens every fucking day.
@all
I literally don’t have enough time to write out all of the things. I got dogpiled so fiercely and by 20 different people that I can’t keep up. I pposted on my lunch break and now RL takes over again. I’m sorry if it sounds like an excuse but it’s reality.
Look, we all disagree. I am clearly in the absolute minority in these comment sections on this issue. I feel like I jumped into a hornet’s nest! And for those of you who wrote more thoughtful things that I tried to reply to or missed, thank you and I’m sorry if I didn’t get around to yours.
I’m not a dudebro. I am not your enemy, whether you liked my opinion on this Harris thing or not. The personal insults were bullshit and only served to raise my blood pressure for no good reason. You’ll call it concern trolling but seriously people: there is never a reason to be so fucking mean over internet arguments. I am thick-skinned in real life but on the Internet there’s just no reason to engage with people that do this sort of thing because all they are doing is trying to rile you up. And it worked. No lie, those of you throwing the worst of it had me quite upset. So congratulations on that.
Anyway, hope you all have a nice day. I’ll bring my asbestos underwear next time. :P
Hear that, atheist women? The person who wrote “What good does it do us to fully liberate and equalize all freethinking women over here if we won’t dedicate the same energy to demanding that these oppressive regimes do the same?” is not your enemy.
Just obviously not your ally, either. So shut up about your elevators. Lazinessevolved is pitching a really big tent.
Anthony @ 191
Thanks for those links. I had seen one but not the other. And I do support the women charging in the front, you know. The bald assertions leveled against me her eof misogyny et al were all completely without merit. You people all really need to work on your approach. This last post by you was good, and I appreciate the info.
Some goddamn fucking sense will serve you better.
lazinessevolved @160:
Still lying I see. Have you no shame?
August 31, 2014:
Speaking of abuses of evolution…
Looks even worse than Philadelphia
Another curiosity
Life lessons
Homosexuality and evolution
America did it!
Hmm, I don’t see a drumbeat to a specific issue in there. In fact, I don’t see any posts on that date that deal with your pet peeve about this blog. I see a diverse array of blog posts.
How about you stop lying?
So you keep telling people.
@lazinessevolved
Atheist patriarchy, on the other hand, is just peachy!
Anthony @ 195
And then there’s shit like this.
It does us plenty of good to liberate and equalize at home. That statement by me was a poor choice of words, and I’m sorry for it. There is a gradation of evils in the world (beheadings are worse than sexual harassment, for instance). It doesn’t mean we shouldn’t decry all of the injustices.
@shitforbrains 194:
No good can come after that beginning. Seriously, there’s no need to post a whole paragraph or four after you open up with a one word whine that everyone’s being mean to you. People are being honest with you, not mean. You have shit for brains, or the rough equivalent. So, for example:
Demonstrably false. Even you don’t disagree, because all you have is an ignorant, uninformed opinion based on nothing. Your willful ignorance does not merit the label of honest disagreement.
lazinessevolved @176:
I’ve given substantial criticisms to many of your comments throughout this thread. You’ve ignored many of them. I’m not using any excuse. I’m treating you to the same standards I hold everyone-including myself to. If I made the insensitive, dismissive comments that you’ve made in this thread, or if I told the blog host that he should blog about what I want, or if I continued to lie about the subjects the blog host discusses, I’d damn well expect to be called out for it. This isn’t about being morally pure.
It’s called holding people accountable for what they say. You want people to stop doing that and it’s not fucking going to happen.
Hit’ Post Comment’ too soon.
In the future, lazinessevolved, I would ask you to consider why you feel people are somehow mischaracterizing you based on what you’ve written here, but then go on to write things like “I can’t even imagine what you two must be like in real life.”
Is it because all you have to go on is what and how people post on threads? Food for thought, eh?
I am just so tired. All I wanted (and continue to want) is a place where the oppressed aren’t expected to just suck it up and endure sexism/racism/classism/transphobia/blah blah blah. I thought the atheist movement was going to be such a place because the Big Name Atheists spent so much time freaking out because religious people/organisations were doing sexist/racist/etc things. But now it seems that sexism/racism/etc are only Really Important when religious people are doing it; when atheists are doing it, we should focus on the Big Issues and not alienate our allies and just in general put up with being oppressed.
I’m just so tired.
@201:
I’m not a woman, so I won’t presume to speak for them, but as for me, thanks for acknowledging that, lazinessevolved.
@lazinessevolved:
Stick the flounce, you self-satisfied piece of shit.
You focused on responding to all the insults you deserved instead of the actual constructive criticisms you were supposedly scouring for.
You’re yet another a rude asshole presenting yourself like some ultra-civil being of pure rationality, claiming liberalism while supporting war-mongering fuck-face Harris and saying the atheists should just ignore their substantial women’s issues. “I’m super liberal, just like you guys!” Nope, and fuck you.
The thin veneer of civility does not cover your bullshit concern-trolling.
Tony @ 198
I really need to get offline. Last post.
I am not lying, but yes my perception of the blog’s editorial slant of late is MY perception. My statement that I didn’t want to spend hours compiling information on post content like a damn stats major is because I knew that any data I presented would just be met by requests for more data or nitpicking. So I declined. Yes, your posts listed there are not feminism related. If I replied with a list of the ones that are and compared it to a year ago would you be swayed even if my numbers were correct? I am not going to waste my time mining the blog data. This doesn’t mean that I cede your trite little point. It just means you’re an asshole that claims victory in internet arguments because your opponent has better things to do than compile a spreadsheet to satisfy your demands for data. Fuck you for calling a person a liar over a matter of opinion. Even if I were wrong, it wouldn’t make it a lie. And I’d own up to it if it were. I can stop being wrong, but you will always be an asshole.
In the case of Harris, Dawkins and Shermer, they’re moving the ball BACKWARDS on the women’s rights and racism issues.
If there’s anything to be learned from the Shermer situation, it’s that the atheist movement is amazingly adept at mimicking the Catholic Church when it’s being criticized.
If I were you I’d demand a full refund and never shop here again.
As I’ve noted so fucking many times before, only theists apparently need provide evidence for their perceptions. This is why big tent atheism needs to die. It breeds idiocy.
Brony @183:
Quoted for Truth!
****
joebleau @187:
I like how you phrased that last sentence there. It shows how many of us differ from lazinessevolved. We’re not content to just criticize religious beliefs or fight for church/state separation. We aren’t solely concerned about how theism affects us. Many of us aren’t just concerned with how social injustice affects just us.
Lazinessevolved, I’m proud to call as my friends, various people on this blog who are committed to social justice activism in many forms. There are heterosexual people who call out homophobia and support rights for gay people. There are cisgender people who won’t stand for transphobia. There are gay people who are fierce supporters of abortion rights. These are people who may not be directly affected by particular issues, but because they care about the world becoming better, they call out all manner of shit. These are people who have expanded their efforts beyond just the issues that concern them. They recognize that other people are suffering and they want to help alleviate that where they can. They know that if the world is made better for others, it’s made better for *all of us*. I don’t just want to live in a world where my life is easier and bereft of oppression and discrimination. I want that for everyone.
Moreover, a great many people here recognize that denial of rights for one group tends to overlap with others. Fighting for gender equality benefits the atheist movement. Advocating for disability awareness intersects with fighting for LGBT rights. I really think you could benefit from expanding your horizons and realizing that it is necessary to fight multiple battles. That doesn’t mean you can’t focus largely on atheism. I mean, at my blog, if it could be said I focus on any particular issue, it would likely be LGBT equality and feminism. But that doesn’t stop me from calling out transphobia. It doesn’t prevent me from criticizing the harms of religion. Can you not see the benefit in expanding your social justice advocacy beyond their current limits? Especially if you’d like more people to side with you?
@194 lazinessevolved
Are you kidding? You are kidding, right..? Are completely outlandish exagerations your thing or something? Between this and the “99% of PZ material is about feminism” bollocks i’m going to go with yes.
It is perfectly reasonable to be mean over internet comments when people say mean things….you were first, just because you didn’t use expletives it doesn’t make your comments any less mean and odious. And just because people use them, it doesn’t make their comments pointless abuse…
You’d like to give the impression that you came here all civilized like and very politely expressed your opinion and the vicious hordes attacked you for no reason. Meanwhile in reality, you came here, said odious stuff that got people justifiably upset and people responded in kind. That you are blind to your own faults doesn’t mean they are non-existent.
Eristae @205
Thanks for fighting the good fight just the same, horde sibling. I’m just reading along, and _I’m_ ex-frikking-hausted myself.
*rummages in desk* here, I’ve got some spoons I won’t be using today, would you like them?
Also thanks to the Usual Suspects for challenging the usual stoopidity in this thread. You (as in, all y’all) rawk.
Seriously, @lazinessevolved, it’s right there in the rules: “This is a rude blog. Expect rough handling.”
And fuck you for making a very easily verifiable claim and calling it a matter of opinion. It’s as if you said “All the skittles in this bag are purple, and I hate purple flavor!” And then Tony! actually emptied out the bag, and said “No, look, there’s actually a pretty even distribution of colors.” And you responded with “OMG HOW AM I SUPPOSED TO COUNT THE SKITTLES I’M JUST SAYING I HATE PURPLE.” Not the same thing. You made a particular claim, and it was incorrect. Deal with it.
lazinessevolved @208:
One of your big bones of contention in this thread has been that PZ’s posts no long are a veritable buffet of subjects and that he’s focused a great deal on a narrow range of subjects. You even said 99%. Now, I realize that figure was probably hyperbolic, but my entire point in scouring the archives was to show you that PZ still posts about a variety of topics. I even gave you multiple dates to show that he doesn’t largely focus on gamergate, elevatorgate, or whatevergate. It’s your argument that he does. I’m pointing out that he doesn’t. Moreover, I’m providing evidence that he doesn’t. You don’t appear to like that. I’m sorry reality doesn’t match your biases. You ought to stop expecting it to. When reality contradicts your opinions, you should do some reexamination.
It’s not a trite little point. It’s a refutation of YOUR ridiculous point. Your “opinion” is not based in fact. It’s based on confirmation bias. Or something you’ve pulled out of your ass. You clearly don’t like the fact that PZ blogs about feminist issues in the atheist community (or the gaming community) and to make your point, you lie about how much he blogs about the subject. Yet you get angry when called out on the lie.
Yet I’m the asshole.
Get gone fuckface.
Tony @ 213
You don’t know me. I am a fucking PROUD “Social Justice Warrior”. I have marched in the parades. I walked door to door in NC before our horrible anti-gay marriage amendment vote 2 years ago. I have donated to the causes. I have been a hiring manager fighting HR to ensure diversity in the roles I hire for because lily white and male in IT seems to be the norm here in the South. I got in a fight in Vegas because a pre-op transexual hit on the wrong bigoted guy and was about to get beat up for it. This isn’t me claiming “I have black friends” or some other such bullshit. I have walked the walk here and made people very angry in my real life and family because of my assertive, progressive stance on issues like this. I won’t stand for you lumping me in with the assholes we are fighting against.
I come here and I have people like you tell me what I really think, call me a misogynist, rake me over the coals and then claim imperiously that I failed to meet the threshold of making a substantive argument, because things and stuff. You can’t rationally claim that the phrase “our concern extends out beyond even what we ourselves personally experience” is a differentiator from my point of view. For a person nitpicking at my claims about post ratios, you sure just made a giant fucking leap without knowing a single goddamn thing about me. You just presume that I am this that or the other because if I disagree with you on one thing, I clearly am guilty of wrongheadedness in a general sense. It’s lumping and it’s a strawman. And holy shit are you completely, utterly, and hilariously wrong about me.
Tony @ 217
I said this: “I am one of you, assholes, and on probably 99% of things we would completely agree.”
I never said the blog was 99% feminism posts. Is the collective reading incomprehension of that simple sentence to blame for all the shit you have leveled at me since? Did that number sitkc so firmly into people’s minds that they went completely insane? I NEVR SAID WHAT YOU ARE CLAIMING I SAID.
Now who’s the liar?
Tony @213:
Indeed. What would be the point of merely criticizing religious beliefs and government displays of creches? If all atheism is is a tribal marker then why bother identifying with it? How can it, in that case, be said that atheism is right? If there’s no worldview driving a person’s atheism, then that person’s atheism is just a matter of taste like being a chocolate lover or a Red Sox fan; such atheism is neither wrong or right, and being a proponent of such atheism, believing other people inferior for not adhering to it, is the sign of a mind that’s not functioning properly. Personally, I came to atheism largely because I reject mindless tribalism, not in order to participate in it.
@myself
Yes, I said this; “Now it’s 99% gamergate or elevatorgate or whatevergate.”
Hyperbole and bullshit and I was wrong. So about this, you’re not a liar.
Look at me being intelectually honest, though. Try it on for size.
Tony!, here’s where you need to post all the unverifiable ways offline in which you aren’t an asshole and you’re being judged unfairly.
See comment 180 for examples.
I said that this post was about criticizing a prominent member of the atheist community, with some connections to similar bad behavior in other prominent atheists. I then said that some people are willing to leave the atheist community over this. You are clearly upset about this in the comment I quoted, yet you did not talk about any of the things PZ said about why people are upset in your comment.
I then said that you don’t seem to care about persuasion because you are not actually talking about what the people here or PZ are actually complaining about. If you are not willing to do this you will not persuade.
Additionally I find the way you have to rephrase everything I did say really amusing. You really don’t care about what is actually in the minds of the people around you do you? It’s all about what you want to say is in our minds.
And I thought my sentences got too long. I broke things up a bit. Bolded bits are mine.
As far as i can tell, the people that are leaving because:
*
Yes is PZ is criticizing people in the atheist community for sexism, bigotry and criminal acts. He he is signal-boosting what other people tell him about what they care about.
You are really hard to understand yourself. “lazinnessevolved”?
I think this section means that you think that people are lazy around here because we are pretending that these figures are role models and not simply acting like they are not role models. This is not accurate because what we care about is that they are not worthy, and other people consider them role models. And we care that they represent behavior that is common in the atheist community.
You can’t change a culture by not following a particular public figure. You need to criticize the whole culture.
No, we feel the movement is already weakened. Because these public figures represent something larger so we keep criticizing them. public figures are authorities, and authorities are put in place by a society. There is a hierarchy below them and that is our object of complaint.
I am happy you are leaving. Good bye!
@Tony
I feel really bad about calling you a liar when i was wrong. But fuck you people have just gotten me upset. I am not this fucking monster you seem determined to make me out to be. Fuck every one of you that has decided this is a valid strategy to cull and maintain your group. This shit is easily the reason why so many people I know think atheists are irredeemable assholes with personality issues. I should print this out and show this to them just so they can get how non-offensive I can be.
You were honest once, and not at all willingly, and now you consider yourself expert enough to lecture other people? I mean, you admit Tony! was right, and somehow still manage to call him dishonest?
There are so many ways in which and things at which you are terrible. I’d enumerate them, but seriously, you fucking suck dude. Fuck off.
lazinessevolved @218:
I thought you were leaving.
You completely missed the point-again.
Another of your contentions in this thread (along with “Waaaah, PZ blogs too much about feminism”, despite the demonstrable evidence to the contrary) is that big tent atheism is most important. That people should all work together under the big tent. My opinion, and the opinions of other people is that this disregards the concerns of women, People of Color, and LGBT people. By saying “big tent atheism” is most important, you tell all those people who have issues with big tent atheism that their concerns aren’t all that important. That’s a shitty thing to do. That’s one of the reasons you’ve gotten the reception you have. That’s why I pointed out the importance in supporting a variety of social justice causes. If you support other causes, great, but that doesn’t change the fact that you’re asking people to ignore the problems in the atheist movement bc you think atheist activism is the most important thing EVAR. For a lot of people, it’s not. That’s the point I was making @213.
As for being wrong about you, perhaps I am. Based on your performance and comments in this thread, I don’t think I am. You’ve said nothing to disabuse me of the notion that you’re a privileged, insensitive asshole who doesn’t care about how atheists in the movement perpetuate oppression and discrimination against minority groups in the movement.
When you say:
you’re wrong. I can make that claim. Because your comments in this thread are dismissive of the concerns of people in the atheist movement who are not you. In the name of Big Tent Atheism, you’d disregard the sexism and misogyny faced by women. That’s not showing concern beyond what you personally experience.
Oh, and can you point out where I called you a misogynist?
“I didn’t mean to hit you, babe, but I had a hard day and you burnt the roast.”
“I called you a liar for pointing out that I was wrong, but it’s you who’s the asshole!”
I retract my ‘Fuck off’, lazinessevolved. You’re so fucking terrible it’s almost goddamn funny to watch.
Anthony @ 225
I’ve been honest plenty and throughout this bullshit argument. You’re just irredeemable. At least I can find and self-correct my mistakes, for which I genuinely feel bad. I don’t like arguing from bad info and I recalled my own writing poorly. I nmy defense, I have had 20 replies ot every thign I have written and I can barely keep track. The lot of you are like a pack of wolves. I’m doing this from a phone and truly, seriously need to stop and get back to work. Take from that what you will since I said it a half hour ago, so feel free to circle jerk on my corpse, this is the final post from me. PZ really should be embarrassed that this is what his fans have become. Reason shall prevail, LOL.
@Funny Diva/215
Thanks, and I offer up e-hugs in return!
@lazinessevolved/224
You’ve ignored me so far so I’m not sure why I’m even posting this, but . . .
If there was just one thing I could get across to you, it would be that this conversation isn’t about you. The people here who are engaging in behavior that upsets you aren’t actually terribly interested in upsetting you. They aren’t doing this to make you unhappy. They aren’t “trolling” you. They are upset about the bigotry and oppression that people are being forced to endure and being expected to put up with. If someone calls you a name, you may not like it, but the underlying issue isn’t that you’re upset.
If nothing, I find it absolutely exhausting that I can’t remember the last time I saw or engaged in an conversation about oppression that didn’t turn into a conversation about civility. Why civility is so much more important than oppression I don’t know, but there it is.
“Once upon a time there was a terrible monster with the scary power of being unable to see beyond its own eyelids…”
naw… won’t work.
I’ll never get the hang of this horror fiction thing. :(
Would you say you’ve been honest 99% of the time?
Where? Here? You did that? Does calling Tony! et al. a liar for pointing out that you were wrong count?
Well, you leaving will most certainly raise the level of honest discourse. On that we agree, 99%.
“I didn’t say what you say I said! You’re all liars out to make me a monster! Okay, maybe I said those things, but you’re still assholes!”
Fuck, dude, I don’t even know how to tell you how fucking anti-reality you are, and I’m pretty much high all the time.
At 231:
*Not high all the time. 99% of the time, using the lazinessevolved numeral system. So, anywhere from all to none of the time, apparently.
“The worst thing you can do is call someone a racist…”
Remember that going around, oh about 5 years ago up until about right now?
Calling someone a racist is worse than BEING a racist.
“How DARE you!!!”
It’s a tactic. Conceived and weaponized in right-wing think tanks, then released to spread.
lazinessevolved @224:
If you’d put down the hyperbole pipe you’re smoking on, you’d see no one has called you or even hinted at you being a monster. But you have been criticized. What it looks like to me is that you don’t like being criticized. I’ve made substantial points refuting various things you’ve said (and so have many other people, including Eristae whom you’ve ignored, despite the civil nature of xir comments), and you’ve taken what appears to be personal offense.
Take your issue with PZ’s posts. You said (paraphrasing) that they skew heavily towards one particular direction. That direction being about things like gamergate, elevatorgate, whatevergate-things that are feminist related. When I took the time to show you that this isn’t the case, did you revise your opinion? No. You doubled down and continued to assert that PZ posts too much about things you don’t want him to post about. How else should I react to someone who isn’t reassessing their incorrect beliefs? Am I supposed to coddle you and be nice to you? Am I supposed to ignore the fact that you have opinions about reality that are not true? What benefit is there in that?
I’m not treating you like a monster. I don’t think you’re a monster. I don’t think anyone is a monster.
But I do think we all-including myself-have room to be criticized, and it would behoove all of us to take that criticism-when well reasoned-to heart. Your criticism of me as an asshole is without merit to me, bc my comments to you, though they contain invective, have contained points which you have not successfully refuted. Perhaps if you had, I’d have to rethink my position. Perhaps then I’d agree that I was an asshole. But I don’t think that’s the case.
@all
I have a lot to think about. And I was wrong on my own quoted number, & I am sorry about that. But none of that excuses the way that I’ve been treated.
@Eristae
I am sorry that I have not replied to your posts. I admittedly have gotten caught up with all of the personal bullshit being slung at me. I really do appreciate your tone, even if we disagree.
I feel bad for Tony!
It’s like someone broke into your house, pissed on your carpet, flopped on your couch and grabbed the remote, so you baked them a pie with “Home Sweet Home” carved in the crust as a subtle hint, and they threw the pie in your face screaming “WTF? RHUBARB?!?! Are you fucking KIDDING ME, ASSHOLE?!?!”
Seeing your restraint handed back with such shit has given me heartburn on your behalf.
I may have to be randomly curt to someone today just to restore balance in the universe.
@236
Yes the entire exchange was exactly like that. I charged in flinging insults and invective and was killed with kindness. That seriously made me laugh out loud to read, but then I realized that you probably actually believe what you wrote.
Larger point.
Emotions are meant to direct attention. Words heavily laden with emotions like things one finds insulting (which may be deserved, even the cuss words) have a purpose. To direct attention to what one actually feels. You can actually respond to that. In fact you actually do if you care about values that I thought were important to atheists and skeptics.
If someone wants to say that emotion is a problem, or words that evoke emotions like insulting things are a problem, you actually have to make a fucking argument about why they are a problem you unaware emotionally myopic cowards! Seriously! This is not the same community that I saw challenging the emotionally laden bullshit that creationists were spewing. We literally got compared to Hitler and Nazis. Grow a fucking spine!
I spent the thread watching women have their actual arguments ignored and watched people scold them over and over on their naughty language. They are living examples of the sexist stereotype. This is nothing but pure bullshit.
I actually thought I was being insulting but apparently I’m still emotionally myopic myself. I definitely need to work on that, but maybe there is a good/cop bad cop thing in here. It’s a little stark when you see person A with relevant perspective and person B say the same basic thing, but they don’t actually respond to what A is saying when they actually deserve to be using the emotions and words that they are.
lazinessevolved,
Would you get your lying, trolling despicable piece-of-shit ass the fuck out of here?
FUCK OFF.
@235
If you want that precious ‘civility’ you crave, go fuck off to Camel’s with hammers and speak polite nothings with Finke. This is not the place for you, as evidenced by your entitled “I DONT DESERVE THIS” whining. From what you’ve posted, being an insensitive, overbearing rectal sneeze, you’ve deserved every last iota of scorn and derision you’ve gotten. Stop lying and learn something.
@Tony!
You’ve got patience like noone I know, sir. Please accept this humble offering of internet booze and pastries.
@239
Nope. Fuck you.
12:19 PM
calling this one a total troll.
“Lunch break” my ass.
I suggest no further responses to this proven liar, proven troll. Sorry for feeding it myself. This is my last.
@223 Brony
I honestly think you badly missunderstood my original post or maybe even confused my words with someone else’s intentions. If not, i am extremely confused myself :S
Yes, that’s a nym. The rest is just me not being a native speaker.
I don’t intent to and never even hinted i would. I like it here.
@235: lazinessevolved
You appreciate Eristae’s tone?
Even though what you’re apparently disagreeing about, given Eristae’s posts, is how women are treated in the atheist movement vis a vis their fucking humanity and equal treatment, and whether we should care about that as atheists, or, you know, fellow fucking human beings?
Fuck your “civility”.
@237 lazinessexemplified
You are aware that you’re the only person here obsessing over kindness vs. invective, right? Can you extrapolate from that fact to figure out that comment 236 was probably not about kindness vs. invective, since it was not by you?
So, no. You cannot.
@242
I caught my own mistake on the 99% thing and I already said I am sorry about it. Apparently all that means here is now because I misremembered something that I wrote that I’m a liar. I never intended to be dishonest about it. It was a poor choice of words to begin with and I admitted it.
Sorry I got everyone worked up.
I have to go to work now, so no more posts for a while. Bye bye!
@ azhael
I’m going back to look right now. I will respond.
Jesus Jumping Christ on a pie plate, will you just fucking shut up already?
Lazinessevolved @various, if PZ has been writing more about equal rights and related matters recently, it might be because they are now relevant issues. If the misogynist contingent of the Internet and atheism in particular suddenly came to their collective senses and stopped with the patronising, and the threats, and everything inbetween, I’m sure PZ would gladly put aside the issue and write more about zebra fish and grading and the trophy wife and whatever else it is you like about Pharyngula.
But the lack of egalitarian treatment of women in our societies is a problem now, and PZ is writing now, so that’s part of what he writes about. If you don’t like it, don’t read it. Complaining about it isn’t going to do a damned thing. PZ writes to please himself, not any particular person out here.
@246
Which comment? Because you made the 99% remark comment in #109, and several people called you out on it, which you responded to by calling them liars in comment #219. It wasn’t until comment #221 you admitted you were wrong, and then proceeded to pat yourself on the back for your intellectual honesty.
That’s not catching your own mistake. That’s other people catching your mistake, and then, after much resistance, you begrudgingly accepting you made a mistake and still turning it around to insult everyone else.
Christ, dude, you understand how blog comments work? That everyone can read what actually happened?
lazinessevolved @235:
You kinda mitigate your apology with the whine about the way you were treated. If you’ve been reading here long, surely you know that tone is not appreciated over substance. Many of your comments have focused on how awful the tone is (even while the same comments have contained quite a bit of substance), as if that’s the most important thing in the discussion, yet when someone like Eristae comments, you ignore xir comments. Perhaps you place too much value on tone.
You haven’t been treated horribly. You’ve been called harsh words by people online. At a blog where the host has specifically said “this is a rude blog”. If you’ve perused other threads over the years, you’d see that not everyone is rude or abrasive. You’d also see much in common between the comments that get the vitriol and invective. I’d say it might be a good idea to think about *why* people were rude to you, rather than focusing on the fact *that* people were rude to you.
Yeah, so sorry I continue to defend myself against being called a liar when in fact I didn’t remember which of my 99% comments I typed. Lesson learned: never use hyperbole here. Because I clearly was making a statement of scientific gravitas when I said 99% of posts were about feminism.
Jafafa Hots @236:
Ha ha ha :)
I’ve actually been trying to make a conscious effort to dial back on the invective in recent months. Not because I think insults are bad, but because I wanted to practice some personal restraint.
lazinessevolved:
I will try to make this as clear as possible. We don’t give a fuck that you used hyperbole to exagerate how much time PZ devotes to certain topics. We don’t care that you failed to see this very obvious fact for so long and even though it was pointed out to you, you failed to realise until you yourself posted about it. We certainly don’t care that your feelings are hurt because people were mean to you.
What we care about is that you came here, you said “fuck you women, you are less important than what i care about” but with barely nicer wording and then spent fucking forever pretending that you never said anything that deserved the responses you got. BUT YOU DID AND YOU DESERVE WHAT YOU GOT.
You are not a victim here, you are the aggressive arsehole.
Instead of you crying over how mean people have been to you, cussing and everything, we should be hearing about women justifiably crying over how mean you are that you think their rights and dignity can wait until you get what you want. Except we can’t, because you won’t shut the fuck up….
Tony @ 252
All I really wanted to do after the initial insulting responses to me was to point out the incivility and try to get back to an actual discussion. You weren’t the worst of those by a mile. But a lot of people just immediately took to being complete assholes. So yes, the way I was treated matters…at least it does in the way I deal with people in life. I sincerely wanted to be able to talk about the damn topic but people just decided to take turns shitting and screaming at me. I got worked up, and should have just stepped away altogether.
So seriously, all of you. Back off a bit. I am not intentionally lying or trolling or any of this. I had my opinion, got blasted in seriously incivil fashion, reacted badly to that because I felt it was out of line, and had a serious recall error. I’m asking your forgiveness without reservation, ok? I was wrong saying that 99% thing and deserved some shit for that. Seriously: I am sorry for that.
So you’re lying about catching your own mistake, because you didn’t.
So, now you’re insisting that the “mistake” you “caught [your]self” and then patted yourself on the back for your “intellectual honesty” was not a mistake, but in fact some hyperbole instead.
That’s some real intellectual honesty there. Reason shall prevail!
Fucking dipwad.
@ azhael
You are right. I did make a very embarrassing mistake and in the heat of the commenting literally did not see the name of a person I was even responding to in other areas. I apologize for missing lazinessevolved’s name. It’s something I am working on but can happen when I let my self get too worked up. The tone in 223 was completely unfair because of this.
I still think that there is a deeper conflict over community behavior that public leaders represents (it goes for both sides and I think PZ represents something too). But I completely destroyed any possible persuasion so I will just leave it at that.
@246, 256: lazinessevolved
“Lacking self-awareness” has to be my least favorite trait of people.
No, you’re full of shit because you minimize the issues faced by women and minorities, saying that anti-muslim and anti-women bullshit spouted by Harris or other atheist shitheads is not worth talking about, because “bigger” issues are at hand.
The bigger issues being…to spread freethought.
What…?
It’s still a hive of xenophobic hate and misogyny, and you want to spread it? That’s fucking disgusting.
Yeah, no, that is not a reasonable priority for a supposed liberal to put above equal rights and not bombing Muslims by supporting western imperialism like Harris does.
Then you jumped into civility bullshit to cover your utterly un-civil and anti-humanistic arguments.
So nope, I don’t even care about your stupid lies that you tried to retract. Your assholishness shines through even ignoring that shit.
I don’t think you’re trolling. You’re another run of the mill asshole who thinks we ought to agree with your backwards bullshit. Sorry, not fucking buying.
In fact, I rather do enjoy seeing assholes like lazinessevolved being run off. It’s all in a day’s work for me. My mission is to ensure the death of feminism by alienating over-sensitive dudebros like him from the cause of women’s equality. Of course, in this case, he already didn’t like feminism much, and you guys did all the work.
Thanks everyone!
I’m having trouble believing lazinessevolved has actually been reading the blog for a long time. Clearly zie has either not done that or never once read the comments until today if all this “OMG YOU WERE SO MEAN TO ME!” sobbing is for real. Or possibly never read the comments on any blog anywhere before today. I’ve seen much less offensive comments get completely nuked by other people until crispy. This thread was borderline civil.
“I showed my ass all over the place and can’t refute any legitimate points so call the WAAAAAAHHHHMBULANCE!” Yeesh.
Apologise without reservation then. Don’t say “I’m sorry, but it’s your fault for being such fucking assholes.”
And fuck off with the ‘real life’ bullshit. If you’re this fucking unabashedly dishonest* on a blog with a fucking record of what you wrote, you’d pretty much have to pony up some serious evidence that you’re not this much of a douchnozzle in ‘real life’.
*We’ve moved way past the 99% thing, and are in fact talking about how you acted when called on it. You did not catch you own mistake, and you were not intellectually honest about it. You are lying when you assert this.
Anyone who can’t tell a threesome apart from rape and harassment isn’t with bothering with anyway.
lazinessevolved @253:
And still you focus so much attention on tone. Be nice to me or my fee fees will be hurt. Then someone-Eristae-is nice to you, and all we hear are crickets chirping. So you claim to value tone, but in practice, not so much. It really seems like you’d like for this discussion to be swept under the rug and not addressed. More evidence to support that theory is found in the fact that you want people to all get under the big tent and fight against religion-not caring that many people don’t feel welcome under the tent.
This isn’t the blog for you. Haven’t you figured that out yet? We don’t value tone here.
And yes, I realized that your 99% figure was hyperbolic. But the fact that you continued to assert that PZ’s posts lean heavily in that direction shows that you’re not interested in making sure your opinions match reality-because PZ’s posts DO not lean heavily in that direction. Not 75%. I doubt even 50% of his posts. If I were to guess, I’d say maybe 35% of his posts. And I read this blog every day, so I’m paying attention to what he’s writing, even the stuff that doesn’t interest me.
Your complaints mirror those of people who have whined over the years that PZ even talks about feminist issues at all. I’ve seen more than a few people complain “geez PZ, why do you talk about feminist stuff so much; why do you talk about Thunderf00t all the time”. They make these statements oblivious to the fact that PZ *doesn’t* talk about those things all the time. To make that assertion in the face of all the evidence to the contrary demonstrates biases on part of the whiner. They don’t want PZ to blog about these issues *at all*. Is that the case with you? Do you object to PZ blogging about feminist issues such as GamerGate or the treatment of women in the atheist movement? Or do you object to him discussing these things on a regular basis? If you don’t like these topics, why not simply ignore them? Remember, he still posts about a lot more than feminist related subjects.
Ok, I’m breaking my promise.
Troll, I’m calling you a liar and a troll because you said you were on limited time, didn’t have time to reply properly, were on your lunch break, and you were leaving… almost two fucking hours ago.
I doubt it either. Xis whole schtick was a variation of a common script/trope from the dudebros. Xe gave Ximself away with several dog whistles. Honest? I don’t think so Tim.
@263: SallyStrange
Fucking truth. That was a pretty big fucking warning sign in their first post.
lazinessevolved, if you are truly sincere about “have[ing] a lot to think about”, I’d sincerely hope that part of that reflection would be to seriously and honestly consider that perhaps it’s not the specific wording, phrasing, or tone of your arguments that are getting you beat up here (and for which you have subsequently apologized), but rather that perhaps it’s the ideas behind those words that could use some revision.
The internet is a funny place. Behind all of these posts are real people, (for the most part) sincere humans all, advocating for real, important issues – and it’s all just trivia and wankery if we pretend otherwise. And yet, ironically, who we are IRL is also really completely beside the point. Here, I am pretty much nothing more than my words and my arguments, ’cause that’s all you guys get to see. So if you’re not just trolling (and I don’t think you are), you have to be super careful to get it right, because who you are and how awesome you are IRL has not and will not be admitted into evidence.
In any event, you have made it pretty clear that you are by and large OK with yourself and who you are as a person, as an atheist, and as a liberal/progressive person who fights for the right causes and whose heart is in the right place. Great!
But coming here, of all places, and tossing out phrases like “What good does it do us to fully liberate and equalize all freethinking women over here”, or to openly fret that the atheist movement might suffer if we lose public advocates whose advocacy is limited to “the 20% of us that really just want things like church/state separation and such to matter” and who in many’s opinion are actively harming liberal and atheist causes; well, I’m guess I’m suggesting that you might want to reflect on where those phrases and ideas might be coming from, and not just on what dicks everyone here is or about how our unbearable rudeness prevented you from being able to make the clear, cogent argument that you really wanted to make.
At the very least, I invite you to take some time and re-state your thesis and arguments given the many useful and constructive bits of criticism given here, in such a way that you avoid the (admitted) mistakes that you have already made. Block out the tone and focus on the content. Further, please stop complaining about tone or language or how mean everyone here is; it’s really unbecoming, and just makes you look like a whiner and a narcissist. You claim to know where you are. If you deem a response to be not worth responding to, then don’t respond to it.
Yeah, lazinessevolved’s FIRST post was chock-full of insults and sexist dog-whistles. If he thinks he’s not, practically speaking, an “enemy” of feminism and related social justice causes, then I submit it’s because he’s not paying attention.
If doesn’t want to be an enemy of such then he has a lot of work to do.
lazinessevolved at #148
Why yes, yes, it has. You don’t like it. So what? Personally, I entirely approve, and I’m just as much of a reader/lurker/customer* as you are.
You could always, uh, skip past the posts which don’t have anything to say to you—presumably because you aren’t personally affected by misogyny, rape threats or the astonishing attacks on women’s rights over their own bodies, etc, etc, etc. You plainly don’t want to change, so don’t read the posts. There’s plenty of internet left.
I would, however, recommend that if you hang out here, you try reading the comments as well as the posts. PZ can’t cover everything, and I and many others have learned an enormous amount from the commenters here. Might be best not to join in the conversation until you are up to speed, though.
In your point 2) you suggest that “the guys that did these things” can improve and recover. Well, yes, that would be nice, wouldn’t it… have you seen the slightest sign of that happening? I’ve seen plenty of indication to the contrary.
And frankly, it is important to me that the atheist movement does not support, coddle and excuse people who would regard me as here for their pleasure rather than for my own self as a human being. How dare you say that women must wait until “thought” has been taken as to who will succeed the current figureheads? Screw that. I’d take Greta Christina over Richard Dawkins any day. We *have* plenty of atheists who aren’t tarred with the old brush. Why should we keep up a show of respect for the ones who don’t respect us? And why on earth should the fight against the religious majority be more effective if our ‘leaders’ sound just like theirs?
Look, you’re probably a pretty decent chap. I mean, I can’t claim ever to have got into a fight to defend a trans person, so you’re doing better than I am on that front. But you aren’t perfect, and it would be reasonable to be willing to learn what you’re doing wrong (in this thread at the very least) rather than waxing indignant because the other commenters here don’t understand you. People are judging you by what you have said. You don’t like the judgments, so perhaps you should take another look at what you’ve said. It’s just possible you have some improvements to make.
* Customer? Of a blog? Seriously? None of the people who chooses to read this blog has any right to determine what PZ posts. You look awfully silly when you insist that your opinion should be taken into account.
Your notpologies are not earning you any brownie points, either, lazinesspersonified. Why, because it makes you look insincere. You don’t really mean them, and you are making them other people’s fault.
That’s not how apologies work. Go ask an average 8 year old, they might be able to help you out with that.
Oooooo…..homework!
(I was the kid that liked homework)
You little entitled shitstain, you come in this thread to complaing that the entire BLOG, not just this thread, doesn’t meet with your personal approval anymore, make the whole fucking thread about you, ignore, lie, distort, whine about how you’re treated while treating others like shit….
…and now you demand that people back off?
Fuck that.
Let’s talk about me for just one second… you know what MY goal is?
My goal is to drive away rapists like Shermer. bigots like Dawkins and Harris, and their lickspittle apologists like you.
Not from this blog specifically – but from anywhere within my hearing and reading range.
If you feel unwelcome, IT’S WORKING.
Funny me, I prioritize feminism over atheism. Something about 51 fucking percent of the human population, you know? You can bide your time and shut up about not believing more easily than you can bide your time and shut up about being a woman.
If this blog owner wants to post 100% about feminism and that hurts your little privileged feelings then that’s just tough shit for you.
I’m rather slow at reading and responding, so somoene else has probably already addressed this better than me, but….
lazinessexemplified@256
Have you not figured out, cupcake, that this isn’t all about you? It has only been pointed out about 80 gazillion times (hyperbole!!!).
It’s not about the 99% comment, you are really bad at getting the point, even when it’s pointed out to you over and over again.
You, special little snowflake that you are, don’t get to tell everyone else to back off, calm down, or anything else. You do not own, or have any authority over anyone else here.
Also, you did come in here acting like a total asshole. Oh, you didn’t use bad words, but that isn’t the sole defining limit of what counts as civlity in modern society. Take a few moments to read that last sentence, and see if it sinks in to your thick, pointy head. (Yes, that was an insult, get to your fainting couch!)
You told women that their issues don’t matter. I’m pretty sure most people would think that’s a bit of an assholish thing to do, especially when many of those issues result in violence against women. Sure, you didn’t rage all MRA like calling them names, but you think because you did it in a nice way, that gets you a pass? Sorry, don’t work that way.
Also, you forgot the first rule of holes. You tried apologizing, but you didn’t really mean it, because you immediately excused your behavior and blamed it on everyone else. You sincerely (and calmly, and rationally) wanted to talk about the issue. Gosh, where have we heard that before…because it’s totally wrong to get emotionally worked up over an issue where women (you know, roughly 50% of the population) might actually have some real investment, emotionally, logically, and fucking real life pertaining that could result in violence to their personhood. Just because you didn’t call them all bithces and tell them to STFU and make you a sandwich doesn’t make what did come out of you any less offensive.
I wonder how that ‘pre op transexual’ would feel about being used as the example ‘friend’ in the age-old ‘I’m totally progressive, I have a friend who’s an adjective!’ construct. Or why her genitals mattered to the situation of defending her (if she’d had surgery , I guess she wouldn’t have been worth defending, or something? Not sure how this works). Or on what basis laziness gets to tell everyone about what I assume are his suppositions about her genitals. Or how saying the wrong thing might have earned her a beating to be defended from, or whether more likely, if this happened at all, whether it might have been unrecognised transphobes putting her in danger, before the White Knight arrived to make it all OK, and earn the Knight her favour, which he bears to this day, tied to his lance, as a get out of bigotry trouble free pass for life.
I’m with the others. Spare me your clueless advocacy, the dehumanisation isn’t helpful, thanks.
Wow, now I am just laughing. Doesn’t really matter what is said, it’s just gonna get trolled to hell and back. You people are real ambassadors for the cause. Rage, rage, rage, call people names, call them more shit for defending themselves, even give them hell when they admit they were wrong, doesn’t matter. You’re on here just to have something to yell at. And you’re all so intellectually self-satisfied that no matter what is said you’d have more shit to say. If I literally, right now, said I was completely wrong, asked to take it all back, and apologized for every rude thing I said (even to those who spewed it at me first)..I’d still be the troll here. Because I’m the outsider that dared to walk into the middle this circle jerk.
Been reading since 2005. Still will, just gonna email PZ directly to talk about the overfocus on particular issues and ask him to include some more material form other topics if he has time.
I legitimately wish it could’ve been an actual fucking discussion. I just chose the wrong place to post. Lesson learned.
I’m pretty sure that Harris, Maher, and those like them don’t really care all that much about how women in the Muslim world are treated. Not beyond token rhetoric anyway. It’s just an excuse to bash Muslims, which ironically makes the plight of these women worse, and to bash liberals for the sin of being consistently tolerant.
How many fucking times are you gonna flounce before you stick one? The Romanian judge is going to eat your lunch on this one.
Church/state separation only matters if the result is people being treated better.
Replace a religiously motivated misogynistic patriarchy that treats half its population as subhuman with a secularly motivated misogynistic patriarchy that treats half is population as subhuman and you’ve gained nothing but wasted effort.
I have little vested interest in seeing the atheism movement as currently led by men like Dawkins and Harris “win” right now because I see zero credible evidence that they would be or are an improvement in any way from the religionists.
@275
You weren’t there, shitwad. A guy the size of a linebacker was going to seriously hurt this poor girl for having the temerity to still have an attached penis and being interested in him. My credentials as a non-bigot were called into question, and I relayed information in a naive attempt to convince the People of the Internet that I am not some bigoted misogynist. The accusations of being a bigot were thrown at me out of left field, and I answered them, that is all. if I had said nothing that would be considered admittign it was true…to use my personal anecdotes to prove otherwise is also verboten it seems. Catch-22.
—You don’t know me. I am a fucking PROUD “Social Justice Warrior”. I have marched in the parades.—
Bullshit. All you are doing is telling those of us who are fed up that we should grin and bear it because to do otherwise isn’t ‘nice’.
FUCK NICE!
Not a single human rights step forward was accomplished by ‘NICE’ the way assholes like you define ‘NICE’. You are like that Microsoft asshat – ladies, don’t ask for a raise or stand up for yourselves and karma will take care of you. FUCK THAT, and FUCK YOU.
Oh, little pissant, you’re going to email PZ and complain to him about the “overfocus” on the civil rights of half the fucking human population.
Do us all a favor and please hold your breath until he does as you request.
Hold it really hard.
“Pissant” “FUCK YOU”, etc etc. I guess the CoD servers are offline,
Indeed, I see substantial evidence that they would be and are worse. I have never, never, seen moderate Christians treat women as badly as the way the Dawkins camp treated Rebecca Watson et al. Nor have I ever seen abuse of women from moderate Christians and Muslims as awful as what the slymepitters have routinely done and boasted of proudly. Or the atheist apologists for the MRAs or the gamergaters.
And if all you’ve got is the claim to be marginally better than the worst of the fundamentalists (and by rhetoric no better at all, and only better in action because you currently don’t have as much power in the world as they do), that’s pathetic.
If I had to choose between moderate Christians and the atheists who inhabit the slymepit I am choosing the Christians every single time.
—-The accusations of being a bigot were thrown at me out of left field—
The accusations of being a bigot were thrown at you because you used bigoted language, dogwhistles, and MRA talking points.
You look like a duck, quack like a duck, hatched from an egg, swim like a duck, fly like a duck, have a corkscrew duck penis, eat like a duck, and shit everywhere like a duck, but we aren’t supposed to call you a duck because you didn’t happen to fly south this winter?
Right, assbutt. And that gives you cred forever fucking more to dismiss any claim that what you said was bigoted, and to prove your awesomeness, you call someone an adjective, rather than a person, and you advertise her surgical status.
Like fuck you do. If you’re going to say bigoted things, I don’t care if you fellate John fucking Oliver every day, you get no free pass here. So go find something slick, and jack off to your own reflection somewhere the fuck ELSE, you revolting shitweasel.
Do you have this much trouble respecting others’ boundaries in “real life” lazinessevolved?
and you still think this 3+ hour troll isn’t a troll?
—-I guess the CoD servers are offline,—
I don’t play CoD, asshat. I’m a woman, and don’t feel like putting up with all the bullshit bigoted misogynistic shit spewed by CoD players, the same shit that is defended by Sam Harris as ‘stuff we shouldn’t care about because Islam’. Get your head out of your ass.
@lazinessevolved
Well when you act like what others are saying doesn’t matter (that’s what it is when you ignore substance for emotion), you will get shit.
When you defend things that are not defensible and fill the air with you, you will get hell. It does not matter why, you were a distraction from the topic. Until you became an example.
When you did something wrong and qualify it, it does not matter.
I’m not innocent here. I’ve been yelled at for screwing up. And I’m second guessing parts of my apology to azhael that seem qualified in retrospect. Try to learn from it.
@ 290 It should say “When you did something wrong, apologize, and qualify it, it does not matter.”
@286 I never said it was some sort of permanent anything. Just trying to prove I am not some asshole conservative gay-hatin’ asshole. I never said anything bigoted. Just said I thought Harris has a point.
Back in the Golden Age of Pharyngula, being boring was a bannable offence…
—- I never said anything bigoted. Just said I thought Harris has a point.—-
In this context, these two sentences directly contradict each other.
Welp.
It’s funny, I actually can empathize just a little with lazy here – mostly because there is a past historical version of lil’ joebleau who, when having his unearned privilege challenged, occasionally reacted more like our conflicted interlocutor here than I’d really care to admit. Glad that dude is mostly gone and done with, although I’ll always have to be on the lookout to make sure the little bastard is really dead. Just the way it is.
I really do get it. lazinessevolved waded into a big ol’ puddle of gasoline up to his ankles, lit a match, and then dropped this match. Nobody really expects that he should necessarily enjoy the experience. That shit stings.
But what to do next? Do you simply flail around, shrieking “fuck you gasoline, for being so combustible!”? I mean, again, I get the impulse, but surely the more mature, decent response is to perform one or more of the following steps (hopefully all three):
a) Do whatever you can to put out the damn fire.
b) Ask yourself “what was I trying to accomplish by lighting that match in the first place? Was it a valid thing to want to do?”
c) Learn enough about gasoline and the combustion properties thereof so that the next time that I want to, er, accomplish whatever the Hell I was trying to do in b) above, I do it in such a way that avoids a big, painful, conflagration. Especially because, in this stupid metaphor, the flames can feel pain too.
So simple, right? But it really does take some of us a little time to learn…
@290 It’s not even about the original discussion anymore. My original message wasn’t offensive, and was met with a solid 20 post wall of steaming shit. I posted in reply to those personal insults (and they were personal), and I got hung for daring to defend myself personally.
I should’ve just made my original post and not replied. Once the train got rolling here with the group making sure I was put in my place, nothing I said was going to matter. Not a single person here knows me from anyone on the street but wild assertions flew. I wasted my time trying to answer them…and then I get called the troll. This entire place is a pile of trolls…it’s both hilarious and truly sad.
@296
Thanks, you kinda get it. I am really not some sort of fucking Bond villain, but this collective has decided I need to be skinned and stuffed. Attempting to redeem myself via apology, explanation, or anything was a waste of time. The people here seem to actively relish my distress, because I do feel bad about the inaccurate statement. But there is no forgiveness here. Because blood is in the water.
@276:
Over whether or not women’s rights here are worth fighting over?
Given what a liar you’ve demonstrated to be, I seriously doubt you were either, you fucking human shitstain.
So what happened to your vaunted civility, you fucking bag of shit? Now that nobody’s stroking your cock like you can, your ethics are out the window? It doesn’t take much to demonstrate how empty your fucking platitudes are.
Don’t know about anybody else, but it’s hard to read this as anything but that lazinessevolved really does think about this kind of thing as a game. It’s not about whether you win or lose, it’s about how you
play the gameset your tone.I mean, he’s a level 90 Social Justice Discusser, but not only did his “Laying On of Reason: Priorities” failed the saves check, he failed to land the “Judgment of Tone” spell. Which is really just unbelievable! Not right! He’s max-level! Just look at his Real Life Achievement Points! He’s hardcore!
And now he’s surrounded by a horde of fully buffed and enraged Cephalopod Minions and he’s out of potions. Sure sucks to be him, don’t it?
P.S. Props to those who are righteously angry in this thread.
lazinessevolved @276:
Yeah, because PZ doesn’t spend enough time talking about things that you want him to. Did you think this blog was supposed to cater to your whims? And when are you going to acknowledge that this blog does NOT overfocus on particular issues? He blogs about other topics EVERY FUCKING DAY. Look at the sidebar. Out of 10 posts, 2 of them are subjects you want him to stop talking about. The other 80%-that’s the “other stuff” you said you want him to blog about.
Again, the fact that you overstate your point tells me that you don’t like PZ blogging about feminist issue *at all*.
I’m sure it will go over really well-you telling PZ what you want him to blog about.
That’s not it at all you petulant pissant. You’re in a hole and you won’t stop digging. You’ve barely acknowledged any wrongdoing on your part (your apology was pathetic, bc it wasn’t a true apology) and you still don’t understand why people take issue with placing Big Tent Atheism before the rights of the people in the tent.
Oh, and you can’t shut the fuck up about how we’re all a bunch of meanie doodie heads. Does the presence of the words “fuck, shit, hell, damn, pissant, fuckwit, douchenozzle, etc” prevent you from parsing meaning from comments? Or are you just the type of person who will only engage others on your own terms? How about the fact that you came here spewing some grade A assholery, but you just used kind words to do so? We’re the asshole for using harsh language, while you’re what…the innocent saint who just thinks the concerns of women, LGBT people, and People of Color in the atheist movement really aren’t that important? How is the holy fuck is that reasonable? How is that civil?
Just fucking fuck off already. Any patience I had for your obnoxious ass has long been whittled away to nothing.
@296
But also, I have no real desire to “learn the ropes” of how to hang with this crowd. I can’t see much constructive coming out of it. I don’t want the approval of people who so flippantly turn to pure rage and insult wen challenged. I am perfectly happy being hated by such people. I just want them to hate me for what I actually am, not the caricature they’ve drawn.
@292: lazinessevolved
Hilarious! You’re still here, still being pathetic, and still not responding the any of the actual criticisms offered regardless of tone, and pretending you’re not a piece of shit.
“never said anything bigoted”
Your first fucking comment concluded that “women and minorities” were far less important issues than spreading your brand of “freethought”.
What a fucking goddamned embarrassment you are. Fuck you yet again.
Except it was, you fucking fuckwad. This is what you fucking wrote in your first comment, you fucking loser:
If you think that’s not offensive, you really are a fucking waste of skin.
Bald assertions from a shitweasel who spews bigotry in hopes of convincing of his non-bigotness are a waste of time, shitweasel. You want credit for standing up to defend a trans woman (whom you never call a woman; she’s just ‘a pre-op transexual’). So…you want a prize for that time you weren’t a shitweasel, maybe try not talking about the WOMAN you helped using bigoted terms. And don’t ask for a prize for BASIC HUMAN FUCKING DECENCY. Or were you only defending her to establish your bona fides, and would have ignored her if she had different genitals, is that what we’re to take from this?
We’ll never know how the horde would have reacted if you hadn’t behaved like a shitweasel, because you fucking DID. And when called on it, you’ve made a fucking bingo card full of unprogressive mistakes, while attacking for all you’re worth, all the while your hole gets deeper and deeper.
Shitweasel.
(Since you called me a shithead before I’d ever been more than brusque with you, I’ll return the favour, shitweasel.)
@302:
Caricature? You’re the fucking piece of shit who thinks “What good does it do us to fully liberate and equalize all freethinking women over here if we won’t dedicate the same energy to demanding that these oppressive regimes do the same?” isn’t offensive.
That’s not a caricature. You really are this terrible, when you’re not straight up lying to yourself and others.
lazinessevolved @283:
Diddums have fee fees hurt? Awww. Maybe you should try a NOT rude blog. There are plenty out there.
You *deserve* the insults and invective. You’ve dismissed the concerns of people in the atheist movement who are not you. That’s insulting and offensive. You did that from your first fucking post here. Yet you still think the bad words are worse. Fucking douchebag.
We knew that roughly 215 posts ago, shitwit.
Like in comment 171, when you wrote: ” I can’t even imagine what you two must be like in real life”?
You pretty much set the bar for pathetic. I’m sorry I was even remotely charitable to you.
@301
No, Tony, those words don’t shut off my brain. But getting personal and angry doesn’t impress me. Neither do characterizations like “the innocent saint who just thinks the concerns of women, LGBT people, and People of Color in the atheist movement really aren’t that important?” which are pulled right out of your ass.
I love that I am hung and flayed for my “99%’ fuckup, but everyone in this thread has open season to say whatever the fuck they want to about me.
I’ll do whatever I damn well please, so keep telling me to fuck off. Feel free to ignore me or not. You never had any of this vaunted patience because right out of the gates with made up shit like this:
“You don’t care that various people in the movement have made sexist, misogynistic statements.
You don’t care that many of these people are considered leaders in the movement with people who listen to them and hang on their words as if these people can say and do no wrong.
You don’t care that many people are pissed off at these statements because-in many cases-they perpetuate harmful stereotypes about gender roles or Rape Culture.”
None of which are true or had any basis in anything I wrote in my first post or any that followed. So you can just take your self-righteous ass right out to the barn and fuck yourself.
@309
Don’t be sorry. You never were charitable. You’ve managed to dial dickhead to 11 and maintain it from the first post:
“How’s about you go back to pretending to be a longtime lurker, you fucking sleaze.”
This may shock some, but in a former workplace I knew two anti-abortion activists and they were my best friends there.
They knew I was an atheist, knew I was strongly pro-choice, and yet they were among my closest friends there, treated me with an astonishing amount of respect (they actually looked UP to me, believe it or not) and apart from a short, very cordial conversation where we acknowledged each others’ views, it was NEVER an issue.
Years later I ran into one of them and she greeted me as if I was family she’d missed for years.
Michelle in particular was religious, but her position really just boiled down to being crazy about babies and not being able to see a fetus as “not a baby.” She was not motivated by hate or thoughts of control, just by a rather simplistic viewpoint and “love” in the way she thought of it.
Another close friend of mine and theirs, deeply religious, actually used to seek me out for moral guidance despite knowing I was an atheist, sought my opinions and advice on moral issues, and told my father (unbeknown to me at the time) that I was “the nicest person he had ever known in his life.” (I’ve since become a nasty bitter asshole)
When I was sexually assaulted as a kid, heck – they weren’t even priests. Two were atheists (the third was a stranger).
It wasn’t until essentially seeking it out (fighting with No4M members etc.) that I ran into foaming at the mouth religious bigots… but damned if the bigoted atheists didn’t just come creeping in from all directions unbeckoned.
I’d take 10 Michelle’s, the “pro-lifer”, over one Dawkins. She treated people with love and respect at least in the sense of personal interaction if not in fully-thought-out policy positions.
(also, contrary to the stereotype we lefty types like to bandy about, all the “pro-lifers” I knew were against the death penalty and two even went to candlelight vigils at prisons to protest executions, so they did not have that inconsistency that is often pointed to).
@309:
That was me being charitable. You’re actually a piece of shit. I know that now.
Words of fucking wisdom, right there. How about you take up the suggestion?
Lazy. Dude.
In your FIRST comment, you conflated theesomes with rape.
You really think that isn’t offensive? Then you have a problem.
lazinesseveolved @298
There are two things you did wrong here.
1. You made a bigoted statement.
2. You didn’t take ownership of that statement.
Taking ownership of that statement, whether you meant what you wrote or not, would demonstrate you’re responsible for the words you write and that you own your mistakes. It’s up to the speaker/writer to ensure that they’re understood. This crowd, as harsh as it can be, is very forgiving of anyone who shows genuine contrition. All you had to do was say, “Dudez, my bad, I retract what I said, I apologize without reservation” and this shitstorm would’ve been over.
If you’ve been insulted from the moment you got here and that you’ve resigned yourself to the fact that, that won’t change then you might as well stick the flounce.
Otherwise I have to ask, what do you want here?
lazinessevolved @292:
I don’t think anyone has said you’re a conservative gay hatin’ asshole. Asshole though? You’re definitely that, and you displayed this all the way back at your first comment. People were right-I was way to patient with you.
@297:
The fuck it wasn’t offensive!
Your first fucking comment back @85:
That shit is offensive.
Why?
Because you dismiss the problems in the atheist movement. Problems that women, People of Color, and LGBT people deal with-all in the name of the Big Tent. YOU don’t find it offensive because you’re so blinded by your privilege that you don’t care that other people DO care about this shit and DON’T want it swept under the rug. There are people who would like to participate in the atheist movement but who don’t because of people like you who aren’t concerned about the movement being welcoming to them. You might not be hostile like the Pitters, but you’re defending the environment that is hostile to women.
Fuck, but you’re a dense fuckwigot.
I think it’s obvious.
Oblivious troll is trolling.
@lazinessevolved 302
Oy, talk about missing the point.
Oh, bullshit. Your responses here reek of desperate insecurity and cognitive dissonance. You’ve as much as admitted that you’ve been so put off by the big dumb meanies here that you haven’t even been able to articulate your best response. “But I’m not a troll!”, he shrieks. “I’m a good guy, just misunderstood!”, he flounces. “Really, I’m sincere!” he pleads. “Eh, whatever, I don’t care!”, he lies.
You’re really gonna have to decide once and for all if you want to at least try to be a decent person, at least in your current online incarnation, or are content to just be an arsonist. You can’t be both.
Better no-one than Dawkins or Harris.
*gigglesnort*
@314
If I were a genuine troll I’d say something about how I enjoy it making you upset that I am still here, etc. But the fact is I keep reading and replying because what started out as a possible discussion became, through all of the posters here, something about me personally. Waiting for the next steamer to drop is entertaining me mightily. So yeah, you’ve managed to turn me into an actual troll I suppose. Since we can’t actually discuss the topic, and it all became about me personally from the very start.
lazinessevolved @310:
If that doesn’t reflect your first post, then why did you make comment #85?
You even think you’re special in how you’re NOT liked.
Dipshits like you are a dime a million. A few to dozens drift in every week.
You won;t even be remembered tomorrow.
lazinessevolved @276
lazinessevolved @297
You haven’t learned a goddamn thing.
Also shitforbrains:
If you did care about the concerns of women, LGBT people, and People of Color in the atheist movement, then you’d have never said this:
That comment right there, from your #85, is exactly why I think you’re shitting all over the concerns of people in the movement who are LGBT, female, or People of Color.
You haven’t walked it back. You haven’t apologized for it. All you’ve done is continue whine about how mean people are to you for calling you out on your assholery.
And thank you Eristaefor your posts.
lazinessevolved , since you now seem to have some time on your hands, maybe you can address the points Eristae made? Since you value politeness and all…
“Hey, people in Africa are dying of hunger, why should we care about atheism?”
Does it bother you, having no spine? You’ve left several comments blaming everyone here for your fuck-ups. I’ve seen more personal responsibility and autonomy on the end of Jim Henson’s arm.
Also, fixing your own problems is much more your responsibility than fixing other’s, but this doesn’t seem to fly with the US World Police…
Yep.
Welp. At least you managed to wait a whole sentence before contradicting yourself this time.
Well, he did call her a “girl…” and I suppose it’s possible she was young enough for that to be accurate, and not a diminution of her as a woman… but I don’t gamble so I’m not banking on it.
“This time I really am leaving. Unless you make me not leave. I’m an independent person, and how dare you judge me on all the things you’ve made me say!”
@318
So things you don’t agree with are offensive, got it. Big tentism isn’t popular around here, and I understand why. For good reason. Good examples of the way Big Tents fail are things like the Log Cabin Republicans. There has to be a dividing line, a principle that gives that tent a reason to exist, or else it’s pointless. Where I think that line can safely exist is on issues such as church-state separation and countering bad religious memes. Who the current leaders are is irrelevant to me, and I am actually a big fan of the leading female and minority voices that are rising. If Harris falls to this or that, or Dawkin is out..so be it. I have no attachment to these thought leaders. But defending Harris on particular points does not lump me in with a bunch of asshole MRAs and such either. It doesn’t make me a bigot. This entire exchange has been emotionally charged and ridiculous, and I shouldn’t have let myself care about the opinions of people on here, but I did want to try to make my points early on. Then the insults continued. So in the end you all got what you wanted: it stopped being about the topic, and started being about me personally. Which is great fun for those in the wolfpack I suppose, but I am willing to bet more than a handful of readers saw me getting drawn and quartered, had some sympathies, but sure as fuck knew better than to post. Hell, I should’ve known better myself. It isn’t like I haven’t read these before, I just never thought I’d be the one chumming the waters.
Cold hard unemotional logic here:
Problem A in Place X is L bad.
Problem A in Place Y is 2L bad.
Applying effort E in place X improves Problem A by 0.5L, but to improve Problem A in Place Y by 0.5L requires applying effort 4E.
The logical course that produces the most benefit for the effort expended is to work on Problem A in Place X.
A proven liar and bullshitter like yourself will say anything. Truth doesn’t matter, You are not a freethinker. After all part of freethinking is empirical evidence (from Wiki)
Empirical data of your own words and attitudes expressed lead to the conclusion you are lying and bullshitting to us.
And you present no evidence to back your positions. Another dudebro trope is that we must take their unevidenced opinions for fact. Here, without evidence we tend to dismiss such opinions.
You’re not smart enough to pull shit like this. If you don’t understand what people are telling you, then fucking admit it, Mr. Intellectually Honest.
Man, but you suck.
@lazinessevolved
Parts of PZ’s post relevant to you as an example.
I am frustrated by people that act like saying true things in mean ways and using naughty words is worse than human suffering. That is anti-modern, we should strive to be in control of our emotions and able to use their full range, and experience their full range while being logical. Because of that I have also been frustrated with myself (after some cooling off time) when I did it and got burned too.
This is our back yard. Your first post made the same basic argument that Harris did and displayed the same sort of ignorance. Basically, “Don’t do it in this community, you should do it over there because things are worse.” That is offensive because they were offended. Saying “My original message wasn’t offensive…” when people were and are objectively offended just does not reflect reality. People also told you why you were wrong and why you were doing what Harris was doing and you chose to ignore those bits for the naughty language and things said in mean ways.
Who you are in the rest of your life does not matter when the part of yourself that you present here is offensive. Do we let the religious get away with it when they try to defend their organizations by pointing at the good to excuse the bad?
How do you expect to be able to deal with the religious when what they do is about intense emotion as well? Will you wilt like a flower when they accuse you of being possessed by the devil? Or that you are like Hitler?
The whole thread.
Can anyone tell me anything that Sam Harris has ever done to help anyone, and then tell me if he did or didn’t line his pockets while doing whatever it was?
Dawning self-awareness strikes! Of course, it’s all the fault of the people here. He had no role in turning into a troll. Next step: will he get out from under the bridge you’ve all apparently thrown him under against his will?
Probably not. He likes it under there, it appears.
What a dipstick.
You did, perfectly clearly, which is why we judged you to be an asshole.
Yeah, it’s possible that some other sexist assholes and apologists for racists saw this (I mean besides the usual monitors)… and if it did indeed stop them from posting, RESULT!!! (And let’s hope it sticks)
@327
What am I supposed to apologize for? That because I think we need to focus on existential threats before we focus on internals? I don’t and never have said that misogyny and the like aren’t issues. We need to work on them. They need a LOT of work. Do I believe that we do need to focus on the external threats more? I do. Maybe you don’t. But believing that doesn’t necessarily make me an asshole. You’re acting like there is one and only one way to prioritize things. I am not even disparaging the severity of the sexism issues, or the LGBT issues. I believe those issues are ones that will change slowly within our community, in much the same way as gay marriage has slowly over the last 15 years become something people accept more generally. They won’t change automatically, either. They need attention. But right now, in the world, people are actually dying for being apostates or even being suspected as such. Laws are being passed to imprison people for the words they speak. The UN has adopted language year after year calling for blasphemy to be an actual crime. I think these are bigger issues than the internal sexism issue. But believing that does nto mean I don’t care deeply about that issue too. I am passionate about both.
iJoe, I heard harris once let a woman fellate him and didn’t make her pay,, so obviously he can’t say anything misogynist,
it’s kind of like a vaccine against ever being criticised, in that way, doing something basically human.
@338
Yes, because empiricism has informed every comment in this thread but mine…the lone irrational voice, ranting feverishly without a shred of evidence in support of misogyny. You really pinned me to the wall with that, Webster.
HOUSE!
I’ve got a House result on my card, I hadn’t noticed ‘the lurkers in email support me’, a Usenet classic but still a favourite.
Right now, in the USA, women are dying due to sexism. (Also, gay people are dying due to homophobia and people of color are dying due to racism.)
But those are just internal issues.
@344:
You can’t even honestly claim to believe this is true, considering the amount of time you’ve spent whining on how you’ve been treated here, at the exclusion of existential threats.
No cookies for your pretend priorities here, asshole.
@348
That’s actually true. Sexism and rape and homophobia DO kill people in the US and other Western nations. But it’s far, far worse in the Muslim world. That does NOT mean we shouldn’t work hard as hell to fix things over here.
Wait, I might have to take everything I’ve said back.
I just looked through the archives, and almost all of the posts I saw that were about things I don’t like posts about were about things I don’t like posts about!
Like 99%
I may be overstating slightly. But my point still holds.
But just not as much as PZ is currently posting about though, right? I mean… It’s like most of what he posts about apart from most of what he posts about.
@346:
Well, the comments asking you for evidence for your 99% comment were, and you turned around and accused them of lying.
So, go right ahead and pretend you’re not actually a fucking idiot. Empiricists will disagree, and you will call them liars.
@349
I can be both angry at how shittily the echo chamber here has treated me AND care about the existential external issues. Because the internal issues aren’t about me. They are about actual women and minorities and people undergoing harrassment and sexism and the like.
You don’t get to tell me what my priorities actually are. And I already ate the cookie.
So, can you understand why your initial comment, arguing the exact opposite of this, would be offensive to people who actually suffer and die for it here, as well as their supporters?
Do you finally fucking get it, or are you going to run off and cry about how nobody rubbed your back and said, “There, there, dear; I’m just proud of you for having an opinion”?
But you get to tell PZ what his should be.
Did you send the email yet?
#354:
Based on what you’ve posted here, I sure as fuck can, will, and have. It’s pretty clear you prioritize getting your ego stroked over anything going on in the Islamic world.
If you don’t like the fact that that is who you are, then change.
@353
I made two different 99% comments and only remembered one. I posted angrily, then realized I was wrong. I immediately posted that I was wrong and apologized. When presented with evidence that i was wrong, I called myself wrong. I still regret it, it was a mistake, and I am sorry I laid into Tony the way I did. I don’t need brownie points and I won’t get them anyway, but my regret at that is real and I tried to recover. But the endless stream of “fuckwit” and “pissant”‘ never stopped. You guys may be okay with just casually treating each other like shit here but it rattled me. I’d much rather have had a real discussion but it just became about me personally.
Heh. Whatever happened to “I’ll do whatever I damn well please”?
almost 5 hours.
some people sure get long lunch breaks.
We made him lie about that. By being assholes. It’s everybody’s fault but his.
@356
Yes I emailed PZ. And it’s just suggestions. The blog is his, and I have loved it for a long time, I just miss the more varietal coverage of issues. It’s fine that he has a particular hobby horse, and yes it’s not my blog, etc etc.
@357
No, you don’t know what my priorities are beyond what I have said. And they are not what you claim. The ones you want me to have so that you can keep spouting baseless shit.
And if I wanted my ego stroked, I’d have left this shitstorm long ago. Nothing going on here is anything other than caustic. At this point I’m just testing my constitution. :)
@360
Smartphone plus drove home and back home now. I work in IT. Go back and check the logs, you can probably analyze when my attention was more on other matters. Or you can keep being my personal scorekeeper!
The very first paragraph you ever posted here:
it STARTED about you personally, and it’s you who is responsible.
It’s all about you, it has been all about you, you WANTED it to be all about you… and you want the whole fucking BKLOG to reflect your desires.
We are all totally in agreement that it SUCKS that it’s all about you personally.
So why the fuck don’t you just knock it the fuck off?
@344, 358 lazinessevolved
Oh shit, you’d rather have a real discussion?
And you achieve that by…moaning about your treatment some more. Makes sense
Sorry, words are worth far less than actions.
And yes, you did minimize the crap that the atheism movement has done, saying it was just “arranging threesomes.”
Yup, we’re just stuck up about sex, not worried about all the death threats and stalking, doxxing, fighting against sexual harassment policies, lying and covering for rapists and serial offenders, and all that other shit women are putting up with in the “movement”! No sirree!
Fuck you, you lying sack of shit.
@lazinessevolved
Take this just as some driveby advice from a random internet person, who’s occasionally commented on pharyngula over the past few months: stop responding, log off, but *don’t* dismiss what people have said (if anything, bookmark the page so you can get back to it in a year, when you’ve had enough distance from this conversation). I’m of the opinion that people (mostly) don’t get convinced by things when they argue about them, but they do get exposed to good perspectives and facts, which, however, take a long time to sink in. So, give it a rest.
(And I’m not sure why you’re taking the “fuck you’s” so much to heart; where did you think you were commenting, if you’re a regular reader? And harsh language is sometimes necessary and the only thing that can get people take wake up).
lazinessevolved @ 358
It became about you because you made it about how terribly mean everyone was being to you. Nobody stopped you from responding to substance instead of tone. Nobody held a gun to your fucking head and forced you to whine at me and Anthony K instead of responding to Eristae who bent over backwards to be civil to you and got ignored for her efforts. When you finally did begrudgingly address her, all you did was thank her for her tone. You did that. Not us.
@358
You’re talking about comment #221, where you said you were wrong and then capped off your ‘regretful’ comment with your petulant “Look at me being intelectually honest, though. Try it on for size.”
That’s some ‘sorry’.
And it’s still not true that you caught that mistake yourself. You fought and resisted Tony (and others) when you were called on it. So, your excuse is that you didn’t remember what you yourself had wrote?
And yet you’re sure it’s others mischaracterizing your comments?
Do you not yet get why you’re getting absolutely no respect here?
Tony pointed out why you miss it. And backed it up with data.
It’s because you’re apparently not paying attention most of the time.
But seriously, does anyone still here have a single thing to say about the actual topic? Because no joke, if that is a 0% chance, I’ll just bail and you can have your win. Dinner needs cooking, after all.
And look, you guys may have a real hate-on for me right now, but one or two of you did make some points that have made me think of ways to moderate my approach to this in the future. In particular Tony’s belief that the mere statement of my priorities could be interpreted to mean I don’t care about others’ priorities. That was myopic, and I get his point.
So if there is any chance of a civil end to it, I’ll try by saying thanks and hopefully next time we can get off to a better start. I’ve definitely learned if I post here that I need to just ignore the loaded language.
@362:
Quoting your own comments here and asking you to account for the disparity between who you think you are and what your own comments demonstrate is not ‘baseless shit’, chump.
Try again.
@lazinessevolved
Nope. This longtime lurker saw you repeat the same pattern that every other privilege-laden asshat falls into and inwardly rejoiced when you were metaphorically eviscerated.
So you find it exhausting being treated like shit on the internet because you did something stupid? Trying being treated like shit in real life because of an attribute/mixture of attributes such as being gay, female, trans, disabled, or not white. At least you have the opportunity to change your behaviour in the future internet threads. People can’t change the way they were born and behaviour like yours contributes to the real life pile of shit they face every day.
lazinessevolved, you can still have a real discussions… by answering the points made by Eristae, points made in a very polite way, something which you apparently value above anything else, but which you brushed aside saying you disagree, but not saying why.
You might want to post your very first on-topic comment ever in the history of this blog first before you ask that question of others.
Just a handy hint.
@370:
If you’d actually read the comments instead of whining about your own fucking navel, you’d see that yes, people do.
Remember Eristae’s comment(s)? The one(s) you couldn’t attend to, because your lunch was over? Start there.
Ginger Snaps #372
QFMFT. I’m none of those things, but I have in the past struggled with depression and anxiety and I’ve been labelled since then. The stigma won’t fade. And it fucking SUCKS.
I can’t even imagine what it must be like to be anything but male, straight, cis, abled and (seemingly) white.
Erk. Sorry, reading back it looks like I’m trying to make this about me, and I apologize if I did. I thought it was important that I pointed out even transient disadvantages can be life-altering, and in a bad way.
@134/Eristae
I’ve been asked several times to address point Eristae made, but the only post I see from them is the one ending like this:
“Thus, I hope you can understand if I choose to take myself out of the big tent of your atheism. I’d much rather be in a big tent with theists than misogynists/etc.”
it didn’t seem to have any questions directed at me. But I’ll try to address the points they made. This was said: “If the atheist movement is unconcerned with issues that are vital to me (see above), I will drop it instantly. You may be a big tent atheist, but I’m a big test social justice-er.” I agree with this part. For me, humanism trumps atheism here. It matters to me that we treat all people as equals, with genuine equal opportunity, and no one should have to feel threatened because of their beliefs OR characteristics such as sexuality, gender, race, etc.
The disagreement I have with justifying extraction from the “Big Tent” is that the problems cannot be solved from the outside. At the same time as we need to work together to fight things like Islamic extremism, we also need to work together to fight sexism and the like from the inside. Going on strike from the community because some of the leaders are d-bags won’t solve the problems. It’s entirely possible that if enough people leave then those who left will BECOME the new movement…and if that happens then good! But I think that approach is least likely to also accomplish the other goals, those external goals. If we lop off all of the heads of the movement without any clear personalities to step into those spotlights for the public at large, we will lose momentum that can be used to solve both sets of issues. My belief is purely pragmatic. I’d rather not take the chance that we hobble the entire movement in a quest for purity of essence.
lazinessevolved @336:
No shitspigot.
Let me hold your hand here.
Women in the atheist movement have been treated to sexism and misogyny in a variety of forms.
Death threats.
Bullying.
Rape threats.
Attempted or actual rape.
Sexual harassment.
Cyberstalking.
They get this crap and they ask people to stop doing this. They want to participate in the movement, but people keep doing this shit. So some of the women leave. They choose not to participate in the Big Tent because some of the people under the tent are treating them like shit. Do you expect them to stay and fight for atheism when some of their fellow atheists don’t acknowledge their rights?
People like PZ, and other bloggers, as well as a great many commenters speak out-repeatedly-about the awful treatment women in atheism receive, and we get criticized by people like you for focusing too much on issues that are “divisive” or “splintering”. Nevermind the fact that the threats and harassment and bullying were themselves divisive. No, it’s *we* who are doing the dividing. You fucking fools expect women (and their allies) to just ignore all the horrible shit and stay under the big tent, bc that’s most important. You don’t get that it is NOT the most important thing. Many of us would be happy to remain in the atheist movement and gather under the big tent if the misogynistic shitweasels would go the fuck away. But they won’t. They continue to declare that atheism is “theirs”. When some people, fed up with this shit, go off to start their own little corner of the movement (A+) the shitweasels go harass them there. The assholes in the atheist movement won’t leave them alone. They are the ones who are divisive. If you want to criticize people for the Great Rifts or splintering the atheist movement-go fucking criticize Richard Dawkins, Michael Nugent, Michael Shermer, Sam Harris, Thunderf00t, Ben Radford, or the slym*pit crew. Those are the people engaged in behavior that’s harmful to others. Those are the people who have driven people out of the atheist movement. But no, you blame people like PZ, who regularly-but not overwhelmingly-blogs about this subject. You criticize the guy calling out the bad behavior as if he’s responsible.
Fuck that noise.
People like you, who say that Big Tent atheism is of grave importance, moreso than the social injustices going on under the tent-you piss me the fuck off. You tell others that they should stop focusing on all the harmful shit going on in the atheist movement, so that we can all be under the same Big Tent. How the fuck can you not see how offensive this is?
“Hey ladies, I know you’ve been getting rape and death threats from some atheists in the movement, but put that aside, bc it’s not that important. We need to stick together.”
This is probably my biggest issue with you. You say you care about issues that affect others, but right out of the gate, you dismiss the issues that affect others. I’ll believe that you care about the concerns of people who are not you when you apologize-without any qualification-for your first comment in this thread.
Do you think you’ll be able to parse the substance out of the above comments or are you going to whine about tone again?
And if that isn’t the right post, I’m sorry…I just did a ctrl-F and that’s the only one I really see. Sorry I missed your later attempts to remind me, Eristae.
@378
Shitspigot is gold, I’m stealing that.
Look, that entire list, I fucking HATE those things. The people you list I should criticize? I criticize them all (not here since first-timer, but on FB and to my Rl friends). Do they need to go, do we need a new guard, do we need to find a way forward without these people? Yes, we do.
You have operated this entire discussion form the POV that because I don’t call for each and every one of their heads without reservation that I am endorsing every ill they have visited upon the community and the individual people they have wronged. Or at least it seems that way. It’s not that simple, and you may not like or agree with my opinion, but I categorically deny your assertion that I dismiss issues that affect others. Do I prioritize some other things over the ones you want to prioritize? Yes, I do. if the only way you can believe I care about the concerns of people who are not me is for me to apologize for my entire first comment, that won’t be forthcoming. I do care about people who aren’t in my shoes, and you believing or not that doesn’t affect the reality I live in one whit.
lazinessevolved @350:
Really?
Do you have some evidence to back that up? Let’s take one example of sexism and misogyny: unsafe abortions (which are done in countries where abortion access is restricted, which is misogynistic)
When I look around the world I see women dying from unsafe abortions (one example of sexism and misogyny) in many non Muslim countries. This doesn’t appear to be a problem that much worse in Muslim countries. You’re trying to paint Islam as teh big bad and you’re not doing a good job of it.
You’re really trying to assert-without evidence even-that this threat is so much worse in Islamic countries. Wow.
@378
Also, I don’t blame PZ for anything. I think his blog is less interesting when it is so focused on this topic at the expense of others. I’m sorry, my perception that it is crowding out other topics, sorry. I don’t think PZ is driving anyone out, and he hasn’t driven me out. The comments here haven’t driven me out. I still consider myself an ally, although it seems more than a few of you would rather I not be. Whether I have approval or not I will keep working toward what I believe is right. Which shockingly really is the same thing you want.
I am curious how you expect that to happen without talking (i.e. “saying” things).
lazinessevolved @362:
I see you still haven’t corrected this erroneous line of thinking. Can you even be bothered to look at the sidebar with the most recent posts? I see a variety of topics there.
@370:
When you tell people to not be concerned about their problems and all gather under the big tent, that’s a strange way of saying “I care about your problems”.
@381
I wasn’t intending to beg the question with that comment, but I see where you can object with me asserting it. Women in Muslim countries by and large have less access to things I am sure you would agree are integral to equality or even just basic parity. Ignoring the more severe and rare examples like being allowed to drive cars, etc., there are still things such as lack of access to divorce, requiring a husband’s approval to enter into even basic legal agreements, access to education, etc. All of this is easily researchable and I am sure you, being a denizen here, are not truly skeptical of this. If you think women (and gays) have it just as bad in the West as they do under Islam, then you’re in a fantasy.
Its worth noting that “the west” (I think of N. America and Europe when I hear that) is faring better than muslim countries, here. It’s worth noting that the fairly Catholic S. America is in the worst category. Islam is likely a red herring here.
lazinessevolved @ 380
You fucking HATE those things but you expect women to put up with them for the sake of The Movement. This is what people are saying is dismissive. Because it’s fucking dismissive. I have no shits to give for how often you say you hate that shit. When you tell me I should be willing to put up with it because other things are more important, you’re being dismissive of that shit because that’s what that word means. No amount of you denying being dismissive will change that fact.
And don’t tell me you don’t expect me to put up with that shit because you’re telling me I shouldn’t tell the movement to go fuck itself when it refuses to stop that shit; when it shelters people like Michael Shermer and Ben Radford and blacklists the people who are brave enough to speak up about their behavior. We’ve tried fixing the movement from the inside and women got harassed off the internet for it. So we tried to carve out our own little corner with A+ and were met with a constant stream of trolls. And now we have the major figureheads of atheism openly coming down on the side of anti-feminism and many of us are just fucking done. How many times do we have to give movement atheism the benefit of the doubt before we tell it to fuck off sideways into the sea? How badly do we have to be treated before that will be reasonable? Do we all have to be harassed off the internet one by one before it will be acceptable to decide that movement atheism will just have to go on without us?
@383
Believing there is nothing NEW to say doesn’t mean we shouldn’t talk about it. There are always people that haven’t heard what needs to happen yet. But I believe the word is out there, and yes, we need reminders and topical stories to keep us focused on it. I just believe the frequency of the coverage here on Pharyngula is getting to the point where the stories run together somewhat. I genuinely look forward to a day when there’s nothing to report.
I can accept that those things are worse than they are in the west. I do not accept that Islam the important issue. The exact same issues play out in catholic, hindu, and other christian countries. Playing up Islam as the issue here is misleading at best, dishonest at worst.
Whereas I dismiss your opinion as misogynist fuckwittery, and think we need to bring the blight of women on-line and elsewhere to the attention and conscious of folks like you. Who doesn’t appear to give a shit.
@lazy
Did you also ask for a camera with that e-mail?
Your inability to separate out different, related stories is hardly a good reason for PZ to stop posting about them, or for us to stop talking about them.
Nope, it means shut the fuck up until you can provide evidence to back up your inane views. Which seem to coincide with those not thinking women, POC, GLBT, etc., are real people and have battles in this country that take precedence over concerns half-a-world away, and we can really do nothing about from here.
@ lazinessevolved 380
This general idea from your first post,
…is dismissing issues that affect others. When you come in here and tell us we should criticize people in the freethought community less you are dismissing their issues, including the ones on that list because you are trying to get people to address them less. That’s the whole “…won’t dedicate the same energy…” thing.
This general sentiment comes in many forms but always results in the same thing. Minimizing women who attempt to draw attention to things on this list that are in their direct experience.
@382
The problem is that you are trying to be an ally and using your idea of what an ally to women should be. Bad mistake. It’s self-serving. The reality is that they want you to be an ally, but you are not acting like one. You can’t decide what a good ally for women is. Women tell you when you are acting like an ally.
If you try to act like an ally with your motivations, it will become obvious when you don’t really want what they want.
@387
That’s legit, okay? I get it. I am not in your shoes, and if my prioritization seems dismissive of your concerns, I am sorry. I know my anecdotes have no value here, so I won’t even bother. Actions matter, and we all have a lot to do, men of privilege especially. I liked the idea of A+. Blacklisting is bullshit. And I am not going to say bullshit like “not all men” either.
I want to help, and I also want to kick the ass of the external problems so that women and minorities outside of the West can start to see the fruits of what we have accomplished. If that means losing Shermer and Dawkins and some others, fine. But right now, and this is just a sad fact, we don’t have many prominent replacements for these assholes. So before we decapitate the movement, I’d like to boost and find that next generation of voices. People like Watson etc would be perfect. And we need to find a way to squash the death threat Internet troll bullshit. That will probably require gettign law enforcement to finally take that shit seriously.
Funny how I have noticed all those who want us to focus on Islam sound like bigots, and want us focused on places other than home, where there are still problems with bigotry? I get tired of this whining, especially when I keep asking “show me how Islam is a direct threat to Western democracies”, and either get no answer, or some paranoid babble.
That’s not it at all. It’s that you really aren’t an ally if your default position is that you’d really rather talk about other things before this issue gets resolved.
You’re not really an ally if, in discussions of these issues, you jump in to explain to everyone that it’s really in their best interest to suck it up for the sake of pragmatism and the big picture.
You’re not really an ally if your most pressing concern seems to be whether or not you’re praised and treated as one.
@392
It’s not that i can’t filter the posts. It’s that PZ Myers has a limited number of keystrokes and clicks he can give us every day. I enjoy his POV on many topics, and I miss seeing more of it on things other than these issues. I don’t dislike the stories, I just recognize each one of them essentially replaces another story.
Separating ourselves from the douchebags isn’t going “outside” because the problems are in society and we’re not moving out of it.
lazinessevolved @377:
Do you realize that for the people who don’t live in Islamic countries their priorities about what to fight are different? It’s not that they don’t care about the treatment of women in those countries, it’s more like they feel they can’t do that much to effect change across the world. However, they *can* be much more effective in their own backyard. This is saying “this is a fight I can actually get more involved in”.
Also, you said you live in the South. I take it you meant the US South.
This isn’t a statement saying that we shouldn’t be concerned with the horrible crimes of Islamic states. It’s a recognition both that we can’t do that much to combat it over here (in the US) and that there are concerns that for us are of a more immediate nature. That doesn’t dismiss the concerns of Muslims living in Islamic states because it doesn’t tell anyone not to worry about the problems they have.
Have you seen the state of the US? Abortion clinics are closing around the country and women are increasingly finding it difficult to obtain an abortion. That’s an immediate issue for a lot of people in the US. It’s an issue that directly affects them in their everyday lives. And it’s one they can actively do something about in ways they cannot wrt the threat of Islamic extremists.
Also, are you aware that in the US, we’re not in much danger of attack by Islamic extremists? We’re in greater danger from right wing extremists:
It’s like you have no clue what’s been going on for the last few years. People have *tried* to effect change in the movement, but every time they do, there’s a lot of resistance. No one is under any obligation to keep trying to fight back against the misogynists or libertarians in the atheist movement. Some people are tired of it. That’s why some have left.
Also, are you posting this elsewhere on the Net? Perhaps on some blogs and in some communities with the people who play host to the people who caused the strife and division? You’re here criticizing people for not wanting anything to do with misogynists and MRAs, but are you over *there* telling them to stop being assholes and treat women, PoC, and LGBT people better?
@397
If you believe we can’t do any good on anything at all until we have solved the sexism/etc issue, that is also shortsighted. Being an ally doesn’t require me agree on the entire agenda point for point, including the order of priority…I can work to help without necessarily agreeing with what the community at large or its leaders think the #1 priority should be. And I don’t care about praise, which you’ll claim is a lie. All because I dared to share anecdotes to provide some bona fides when I got called a bigot earlier.
Well that simply isn’t true. You would also ave PZ stop posting about them so much. I miss some of the diversity.* I also recognize that the new semi-focus is important, and I’m hardly going to demand that PZ re-focus to satisfy my wish to be entertained.
*PZ still posts on a variety of topics.
lazinessevolved @380:
You don’t understand my criticism of you *still*. Let’s go back to your first comment @85:
These are your words. They are telling women that their concerns about the misogyny in the atheist movement are not more important than staying in the big tent.
These words of yours prioritize unity over equality.
THAT’S MY MOTHERFUCKING PROBLEM.
@ lazinesspersonified:
What you consider yourself is irrelevant. You could consider yourself a ham sandwich; that would not make it true, though it would be closer to the truth than most of your emissions in your comments. It is simply not up to you to label yourself anyone’s or any cause’s ally. If people are telling you that you are not their ally then you are not their ally, full stop.
lazinessevolved @ 395
This is utter bullshit. You talk about wanting to boost the next generation of voices in the same breath that you insist that we must continue to rally around the assholes. Continuing to rally around the assholes is exactly what’s preventing this next generation of voices from being heard.
(Sorry, skipping a lot of intermediate comments because short on time.)
Upthread from lazinessevolved:
Maybe, did you ever think about the fact that, by fixing the internal problems, the whole movement would find it a lot easier to move forward? By fixing them first, then looking outward with a bright shiny internally-strong and consistent movement?
Because a movement that isn’t healed internally will not survive, and those pesky internal problems you seem to think are less significant then spreading the freethought word actually do a lot of harm – because they cause a lot of otherwise smart, incredible, strong and determined people to go ‘Oh, nope, not for me, too much sexism/racism/transphobia/homophobia, not getting under that tent’.
Did you ever consider that ignoring those ‘internal’ problems like sexism, rape, racism, trans- and homo-phobia actually causes a lot more harm than it would to first clean up internally?
I’m not getting under any big tent with Shermer, Harris, or you. Because you think I’m insignificant enough to be brushed aside for the sake of perpetuating a rotten movement. Thanks, no thanks.
Carry on.
@400
Tony, you were dead on until the last paragraph where you just couldn’t resist saying I “have no clue”. I have watched this fight for a few years now, from Elevator-gate going forward. I’f forward you my FB history, because that’s really the only place I post about this sort of thing until today, but honestly I’d rather not bother scrubbing my name off of everything. I’ve thrown my share of pseudo-friends in the trash after calling them out on shit like this.
Also, and you may not give a fuck: but thanks for joining me in dialing it down a notch. I appreciate it. Because I did want to discuss this, and I’m sorry that my emotional reaction earlier made that harder. You all have good insights, and it has moved my opinion somewhat from where it was to start. Which is the point of these forums, I’d hope.
Also, please call me another creative name because I’m making a list. :)
There’s also a bunch of several of you to whom I would love to take my hat off, seeing as it’s autumn and I have taken to wearing a hat again. Apologies for being too lazy to list you out, but you’ve been giving a damn fine tongue-lashing, and it’s been strangely cathartic, especially tonight. Thank you.
And thank you to PZ for keeping up with these kinds of posts and turning over these rocks.
Marching in lockstep with bigots and arrogant colonialists won’t “kick the ass” of any external problems, just swap them with problems imposed by us so we can feel smug about how we taught those stupid brown people how to behave like a proper Westerner.
@405
It’s not bullshit, it’s something the media and, yes, our choices on whose books to buy have created. We desperately need some more minority/female/LGBT voices to rise up and people to buy their books by the drove so they can get on the Daily Show and Bill Maher, etc. But right now, as far as the media at large is concerned, these 5-6 guys are the entire voice and face. Is it bullshit? YES IT IS. But, and this is the pragmatism I know you hate: we need to lay a foundation for the next step of the movement before we lay waste to these guys. And bear in mind that generally speaking, what we are talking about here are people who have primarily committed the sin of being stuck in the past and not relinquishing or recognizing their privilege. There is no sensational story behind and of them to the extent that a major media outlet would understand why this community ousted them…there is no legal story involved. So unless one of them fucks up VERY seriously in that ay, they are likely to remain as famous voices that get listened to. The solution is to replace them gradually. And that means not tearing them down but building up the new generation. Buy their books. Go to their talks. And it will take years. It sucks, but I am just the messenger. But I do believe it is possible to escape the orbit of the “Horsemen”.
lazinessevolved sez:
Fucking hell. If you don’t agree with whatever movement you consider yourself an ally of about what the priorities are and what needs to be worked on, then whatever you’re doing is probably NOT. FUCKING. HELPING.
Wait, wait, hold up: those “far less important issues” is sexism in the West. Why is fighting for atheists in the west totes cool (because it’ll spread, I guess) but not fighting against sexism in the west (sexism in the west isn’t so bad)? I mean really, look at this:
“This civil war is going to sweep the leg form underneath a growing freethought movement that has the chance to effect real change in the West…which could eventually spread to the rest of the world. But we aren’t going to get there by fighting each other over [, yes, I’ll say it, sexism in the West].”
You don’t make sense. You’re arbitrary.
I think there’s a huge foundation of the movement out there that you’re not seeing for the reason of being blinded by the television fame of these guys, and by your easy dismissal of the contributions already made by people of colour, women, and LGBT folk. Lay waste, I say – a house with no good foundation is no good house at all, or have you never read the parable of the men building their homes on sand and rock? :P
The internal problems will have to be dealt with eventually anyway – better sooner, when there’s less balancing on top, than later. [/opinion, of course]
lazinessevolved @382:
In the hours that you’ve been here complaining, you could have fixed this perception problem you have. You still haven’t acknowledged the simple fact that PZ still blogs about a LOT of subjects not related to feminism or ‘-gates’. Take a look at the fucking sidebar for fucks sake. You keep stating this as if it’s true. It’s not. You want him to blog about other subjects, yet he already DOES!
@385:
I’m sorry, but I have zero interest in playing Oppression Olympics. It gets a conversation exactly nowhere. That’s what Dawkins did with Dear Muslima. It effectively says “this shit over here is worse, so stop complaining about what you’re having to deal with” or “I know you’re forced to bear the child of your rapist against your wishes, but you don’t have it as bad as women in the Middle East who get acid thrown on their faces.”
You’ve used the term “existential threat(s)” more than once. What you’ve never done in your scores of comments is explain what you think these “existential threats” are – except we know they’re from the Ebil Mooslems – or what you think we should do about them. Why not?
lazinessevolved @350
This isn’t what you said in your initial post @85
In that and subsequent posts you made it obvious that the concerns of women, LGBT and POC were not as important as worry about the ebil mooslums. You basically said that until we have eliminated the ebil mooslums as a threat to Sam Harris, giving a shit about over half of the world’s population was a triviality which could be ignored.
Yep, he doesn’t want social justice in his backyard. He might have to change…..
Also, if Dawkins and Harris are the foundation, what does that make all freethinkers who came before them? P2 parking? The bunker? [/musing]
Going home now.
The old proverb, you are either part of the solution, or part of the problem. It is obvious to Pharyngula that lazinessevolved is part of the problem….
lazinessevolved @407:
Do you recognize the difference between saying
“You have no clue”
and
“It’s like you have no clue” ?
Because I said the latter, not the former. The statements are not the same. What I said allowed for the possibility that my perception of you is wrong.
Apologies to Tony!, but I’d really like a response to his comment at #403. I know it’s hard following so many people, so let me helpfully requote Tony!:
Bolds are mine.
Want to actually substantively address your claim that the “less important” issues are just d-bags hitting on people? I haven’t seen you do it yet.
@416
Not my best phrasing of all time, sure, but the point is that if all we do is focus on the domestic, internal issues while in the rest of world we just ignore the plight of women, then w’re only solving part of the problem. So i shouldn’t have said “what good does it do”. I should have said, “it does us less good if we only focus on the internal issues”.
As for the @415/416 “ebil mooslums” line, get over yourselves. Speaking candidly about the fact that there are existential threats that come from extremist Islam does not make me anti-Muslim. It makes me anti-extremist. By “existential threat” I mean a threat to the very existence of rational, Western thought and philosophy. A stated goal of groups like ISIS. A repeated goal of nation-states and organizations under the extremist side of that umbrella. No, it does not make me some caricature of a Tea Partier expecting terrorists to come over the border from Mexico. For me, existential means something more along the lines of generations down the road, but we need to put a finger in the dike now.
@420
Granted, and hey, I can hopefully be forgiven for being on edge. Being under siege isn’t much fun. :P
lazinessevolved @410:
I guess you missed my comment @193, where I listed atheists that could replace the current faces of atheism:
The groundwork you speak of has already been laid.
“Not tearing them down”?
So basically you think people should stop criticizing Dawkins and Harris. We should call out bigoted, sexist behavior from theists, but not from “our fellow atheists”. Because calling them out is all that has been done. That’s the only tearing down that’s been done: holding them accountable for the words they say and raking them over the coals.
I’m going to keep criticizing people like Dawkins and Harris when they say stupid, offensive shit just as I do when religious people do it. Atheists don’t get a free pass on saying hateful shit. I hold them to the same standards I hold myself and others to.
@all
Okay, and for real, legit, closing the tab and not opening this thread again until 2015…I need to eat, and spend time with the family. For those of you who found a way to actually talk with me about this stuff, thanks. I always figured that somewhere under the surface was something worth discussing. I leave with some more things to think about, which can only be a good thing.
lazinessevolved
Oh, really? Let’s see:
#85
Yeah, because there’s no problem equating rape with consensual threesomes and wanting to set up Atheist patriarchy as opposed to Religious patriarchy.
You fuckers don’t give a shit and just want to set up a new pyramid to be on top since being non-religious is the one area ya’ll face discrimination from.
Let’s continue with your next two posts, just in case you getting any ideas that you’re totally in clear and only spouted bullshit because we said mean words
Your #109
Not in the West it’s not because they have no power here. There’s no worry about them enacting Sharia law towards everyone and other such nonsensical concerns. Yes, there’s been individuals who’ve committed crimes, which have been dealt with but extremist Islam really isn’t a threat. Domestic terrorists like forced birthers are far more prevalent, powerful and dangerous.
For the women actually living in those countries overseas and communities, it’s a huge problem. One they’ve been fighting and could use signal boosting and aid rather than white men advocating their genocide.
Your #128
TW:Rape
Oh, well then I guess I haven’t been raped ever since none of them were charger with a crime. Nope, not my father when he touched my clit and made me touch his penis. Not the ex who held me down so he could penetrate me. Not the men who drugged me out of my mind to rape me at my first party. How glorious! Why I guess that means not being able to leave my house, PTSD, nightmares, trust, body, and intamicy issues should disappear any moment.
Wait, rape apologists have said that time and again but it doesn’t change a goddamn thing. Don’t like my above paragraph? Too bad, that’s what the fuck you’re saying to every rape victim with your comments and signaling to everyone at risk that you won’t believe them if they are raped.
Since priests are charges usually do you say they aren’t rapists and get all defensive when people make jokes about them being pedophiles? Or does their religion mean they get criticised but athiests get a free pass? Do you realize you do the same fucking thing as all those religious people you’re so feverously fighting?
=============================
Also, is ignoring female coded commenters and headshot/sniper (the new “witch hunt”/”lynching”!) on the bingo card yet? Because I nominate those for new additions if not.
An edifice built on a foundation that is rotten will inevitably fall, and when it falls, innocents may get crushed beneath the debris.
It is NOT pragmatism to bull ahead when you know the foundation is rotten. The pragmatic choice is to dismantle it all and start over.
Offensiveness judged by the READER not the writer.
And if you had truly lurked as long as you claimed to have, you should have known that what you wrote WOULD have been offensive to MANY here.
Yawn, is the troll still not shut the fuck up yet? Boring…..
No it’s not the “true enemy”.
The “true enemy” is authoritarian thinking and dehumanization of others. These are the CAUSES of the ills we fight against, and religion, creationism, patriarchy, misogyny, all of it, are merely symptoms. Different ways of expressing the SAME fundamental evils.
When atheism is infected by these things it is no different, and no better, than religion. And there is no point in propping up an atheism that is infected by these things in favor of religion.
“I mean it this time, I’m done for sure! Oh no, I started posting again! There’s got to be a better way!”
Does your flounce just not stick the way it used to? Has it become slick and impermanent? Just it just not last as long as you expect? Try FlounStik™! Yes, FlounStik™, from BlogCorp©, makers of ToneHound™ and Splain™. With FlounStik™, you can take your ball and go home in style! FlounStik™ is guaranteed to stick the first time, every time, and will never slip, slide, or fail. Never again face the embarrassment of an unstuck flounce–get FlounStik™ today! Just four easy payments of $19.99 (excludes shipping and handling). Order now, and we’ll give you a second, bonus FlounStik™, you just pay the additional shipping and handling. This is a limited-time offer, so call now!
Stop blaming your incompetence on other people. You’re a shitty writer and a shitty reader. If your only discernible skill is IT, then shut your mouth until someone asks you to set up their email.
Only the STUPIDEST trolls actually SAY that. Since saying that outright is explicit admission of trolling, and that will get them banned on pretty much all moderated sites, all the time.
lazinessevolved @422
There is a concept called “multitasking.” You might want to see what that entails. You being an IT guy you probably already know about google so I’ll let you discover what multitasking is all about.
There’s not much that I, an out of shape, 60ish, arthritic accountant, can do about ISIS. However there are things I can do about the bigots and misogynists I run into on a daily basis. For instance there’s one homophobe I work with who now knows not to tell homophobic jokes when I’m anywhere around him. That may not be much but it is something I can do and it does make a difference for the GBLTs who work with the bigot.
Just ftr, I AM a gay trans disabled woman, and yes, if your ‘big tent’ is a cloak over a very tall pole, I’ll stay the fuck out. Human equality is my big tent pole, not atheism. We are building our own fucking tent. Ours includes the 64% of USans who aren’t white cis hetero TAB men, so who’s got the Big Tent here, anyway?
I think Harris is blind to who actually poses a threat to the women of the Middle East: liberal western nations with bombs.
Oh. Data.
And for good reason. Actually, I don’t think it is a lie. I think you actually believe it. It’s still untrue, but you’re not dishonest, just an incredibly stupid and unself-aware human being.
Well, there was also that time you were pretty upset about people hating you for the wrong reasons.
First, let’s notice the (no doubt unconscious) racism: the claim that rational thought is specifically “Western”. Second,
there are actual existential threats out there: anthropogenic climate change to name the most obvious; or a nuclear war – the only Muslim-majority state with nukes is Pakistan, and the number it possesses is tiny compared to the USA, Russia and China; or some novel infectious disease, natural or anthropogenic. Why the fuck are you worrying about a (completely unspecified) threat from the Ebil Mooslums “generations down the road”? Third, you still don’t give the slightest hint what you actually think should be done about this imaginary threat – what do you mean “put a finger in the dike”? Send atheist missionaries? Airdrop millions of copies of TGD? Expel anyone who “looks as if they might be Muslim” from “the West”? Nuke Saudi Arabia?
“I totally stuck up for a trans woman that time, you guise! Even my liberal friends think I’m too liberal for them. I’m not looking for praise though. It’s just all in a day’s work for me.”
Priests raping children? Shh, we’re spreading the WORD OF GOD! Stop being so distracting.
Seriously, the choice you’re giving all those religious non-men out there is … be treated like shit no matter what you do, with or without religion. Really going to get them to drop that whole god thing like that.
Anthony, you forgot to tell us she was transsexual, and ‘pre-op’, because that’s exactly how trans*people’s allies behave, broadcasting our genitals’ shape to strangers to show how progressive a person is.
Because that’s our purpose in life: to be props for ritual declamations of being a Twoo Pwogwessive Ally. And to be ignored and called a shithead for pointing this out. Y’know, as you do, when you’re a real ally to marginalised people.
Tom Foss @431:
ROTFLOL!
Lazinessevolved, have you read this?
http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2014/10/14/this-is-what-it-has-come-to/
A death threat, warning of a massacre if Anita Sarkeesian is allowed to speak at Utah State, as planned.
You were talking about existential threats? Here’s one for you.
Sorry PZ posted another thread that won’t interest Big Ally Long Timer you, lazinessevolved. It’s not about cephalopods, and the terrorism against women doesn’t appear at this point to be carried out by Islamic fundamentalists. With PZ’s limited time, where are his priorities?
lazinessevolved wrote:
I don’t think this has been addressed yet, but which privileged white men have been drummed out of the all-important movement? I mean, I can name women who have been scared away (some of which wrote on this very network), but I cannot name a single privileged white male who has been “witchhunted” out. If this is such a serious threat, surely there must’ve been some casualties by now.
Just for grins, I’m going to re-post my earlier comments to lazinessevolved, who somehow managed to overlook them in the flood of responses which came his way.
me@118
So… let me get this straight.
lazinessevolved @85 sees Sam Harris minimizing the very real problems faced by American women—who only make up, you know, ≈50% of the American population—a stance which is pretty damned likely to persuade American women that the atheist movement, a movement in which Harris is a prominent figure, doesn’t have a place for women.
lazinessevolved also sees PZ calling Harris out for that minimization, a stance which is pretty damned likely to help persuade American women that the atheist movement really and truly does have a place for women.
And it’s PZ who is somehow divisive and weakening the atheist movement and yada yada yada?
Hmmm. How long have you been on this planet, lazinessevolved? And what color is the sky on your homeworld?
me@151
lazinessevolved, you say you’re concerned that the atheist movement is weakened when prominent atheists are called out for bigotry/racism/sexism/etc. Fine. Since I share your concern for the efficacy of the atheist movement, I have some questions for you.
First: What percentage of the USAn population belongs to demographics that are directly, materially harmed by the bigotry/racism/sexism/etc that are being called out?
Second: What percentage of the USAn population does not belong to any of those demographics?
Third: Given existing demographic trends, how are the numerical answers to the two questions above likely to change in coming years?
It may require a bit of research on your part to find the answers to these questions, but if you do that research, you may find it instructive to ponder the downstream consequences of those answers. Or not. [shrug]
me@162
sez lazinessevolved@144: “…Harris needs a wake up call…”
…but FSM forbid it be an atheist who provides that wakeup call to Harris. Because that’s divisive behavior and weakening the movement and The Movement Has More Important Fish To Fry. Right?
Did zie finally stick the flounce? Good gravy.
Anthony K: lazy is gone (ok, odds are he’ll give in to the temptation to post again, but until then), let it go. What’s the point of 10 more comments arguing against someone who is as likely to see the light on this (right now) as, well… insert something that’s very improbable. Though if you’re only trying to get him pissed off for another 500 comments of hurt feelings, saying that he’s an incredibly stupid human being, who should only show his face to set up people’s emails, will do it. There is a point when talking to someone without kid gloves, because they’re a troll or to simply jolt them into reality, crosses over to bullying…
@449, I wasn’t meaning to continue to goad lazy; but intent isn’t magic. You’re right gakxz1. I’ll desist now.
Thanks for pointing that out.
—-? That because I think we need to focus on existential threats before we focus on internals? —
Because everyone knows it’s best to worry about your neighbor’s crappy lawn while your living room is on fire. Seriously, bro, do you even logic?
Yep. It’s not like he gave much room for much, but I suppose those last few comments hit something somewhere in me. Though I get dubious when I lecture people about their tone. That’s what lazy has been doing all day, after all. Anyway…
I wish I could even have a little respect for Sam Harris. It’s not particularly hard to read between the lines on what he says, but he constantly attempts to gaslight his critics and pretend that the obvious subtext isn’t there. His treatment of torture in The End of Faith would’ve been fine if he had begun and ended with the idea that the things we find most shocking (like torture) may not actually be the most harmful (compared to “collateral damage”), but instead he wished to write at length about imaginary comic book scenarios involving ticking timebombs and thousands of kidnapped daughters (why just daughters? probably best not to ask), and then has the gall to act outraged when people suggest he was legitimatizing torture. If this happened only once, that would be bad enough, but he’s been “misinterpreted” like this time and time again on multiple subjects.
So, breathless defenders of Harris, is the man being purposefully deceptive to sell people on torture, nuclear first strikes, racial profiling and minimizing fighting sexism at home, or is he hilariously incompetent at communicating his thoughts? At this point, I don’t see any other alternative explanations for his behaviour.
I took a nap.
My stated goal is to continue composing and playing piano.
Since I’ve gone deaf, it’s not gonna fucking happen. ISIS is a threat to a hell of a lot of people, but it is not and never will be “a threat to the very existence of rational, Western thought and philosophy.”
So you (not that you’re reading this) would prefer that we focus first on fixing a problem that doesn’t exist.
(There’s also the bit where your wording seems to be suggesting that rational thought is exclusive to “Western,” which is pretty bigoted)
My suggestion is that you stop watching cable “news.”
It has fucked your brain.
@lazinessevolved
You received a large amount of harsh criticism on one website. If you never came here again it would be done. If you were someone like Harris you would be getting more criticism and it would be sustained, but still just harsh criticism that your buddies would help you deal with on Twitter and elsewhere.
Women in gaming on the other hand are getting death threats and now have to shut down their presentations because of the fear of what she has to say. Fear that prompts rage because that is what our society allows. That is more like a siege.
Get some fucking perspective. No I will not stop criticizing people like Harris, Dawkins, or the average skeptic/atheist for the sake of a movement that is offering nothing in return but more of the same. More attention and pressure is required.
Ahh, Nick got there long before me. Sorry, still groggy.
I get it. It’s easier to worry about existential fears than real ones.
the real ones are well, scary.
this is how many rationalize not doing anything about the fears that are closest to them.
lazinessevolved @148:
People have been way kinder to you than they should have been. Way, way kinder.
I swear, this reminds me of fucking kindergarten.
:::poke:::
:::poke:::
:::poke:::
:::poke:::
please stop
:::poke:::
stop
:::poke:::
knock it off
:::poke:::
quit poking me
:::pokepokepokepokepokepokepokepokepokepoke:::
STOP POKING ME :::pokes back:::
“Teacher, she yelled at me! And poked me! Make her stand in the corner!”
The stated goal of the Edmonton Oilers hockey team is to win the Stanley Cup Championships. (Those of you from Western Canada ought to know what I’m talking about here).
Just because some entity SAYS it wants to do something does not mean it is actually a credible threat to actually do it.
On the other hand, the misogyny of men like Shermer and Dawkins, and their apologists and enables IS an immediate existential threat to the atheist movement. Drive away half the population of potential recruits, and your movement is DEAD.
It also discredits the atheist movement in the eyes of the mainstream.
I’ve already seen MULTIPLE mainstream articles and profiles of the recent misogynistic actions of Dawkins and Shermer presented as discreditations of the atheist movement as a whole.
Seven of Mine #405
Absolutely agree. We’ve got loads of people entirely qualified to step into the limelight, if only they’d get the chance. I think lazinessevolved is worrying about something that simply isn’t a problem. We don’t need to wait for the next generation to get here. They’re already here. All we need to do is give them room.
Holding on to the old guard is actively impeding the development of the next generation; alienating some and poisoning the minds of others. I’m not remotely worried about what will happen if we kick them out. I’m worried what will happen if we don’t.
From the OP:
I can’t do much for Somalia itself, but I do help the Somalian diaspora in my own back yard a little. Mostly they help one another, though. A good many of the Somali women I know are strong, clever, outspoken over-achievers who, if they ever became atheists, would have as little time for the likes of Sam Harris as they do now. Harris would be left struggling to catch up with them.
~*~*~*~*~*~
I like lazinessevolves’ accusation that we’re “creating a dangerous echo chamber here” when in this thread alone we have a bunch of people going at it with Pharyngula regular consciousness razor, Anthony K getting called out by doublereed, and Brony and azhael’s accidental spat (and later reconciliation). And I probably missed a few.
Wow. Very chamber. Much echo.
Anyone writing “echo chamber” about FTB are just coding for “I can’t reason my way out of a wet paper bag”.
::scratches head::
Is lazinessinvolved reading some other Pharyngula? Because I read this one mainly for the articles on feminism, and skip a whole heap that aren’t about it.
I want my key to Alternate World Pharyngula, I haz been robbed!
Brony, Seriously, don’t worry about it one bit. I’m sorry i didn’t respond earlier but it was sleepy time over here.
As for lazinessevolved…oh my fucking god, he actually dared to say that his first post wasn’t offensive? For realz? 350+ posts in and he was still pretending that the vile shit he said in his very first post was not deserving of the responses he got?? Motherfucking Mary mother of god…..i’m really hoping he was a troll…otherwise i don’t know that i can bare it…
Regardless, you, lazinnessevolved, despite the high opinion that you have about yourself, are a complete an utter wanker. You may not be the biggest arsehole that ever existed, which i’ll grant you, you are not (congratulations oh so much on that), but you are definitely part of the arsehole spectrum and all the evidence required for that diagnosis was right there in your very first post and its shitty contents. Every thing else just served as further confirmation.
“My original message wasn’t offensive”…..oh…..you motherfucker…..
@2kittehs
Same here. I actually prefer the articles about social justice things and tend to skim or skip the in-depth science ones. I don’t get mad that they are there for people who love that stuff, though.
This thread needs some birdsrightsactivist:
“I am feel uncomfortable when we are not about me?”
“dear Mr. President America: i think that. when you talk issue that is not bird. you are not care about bird? plz only talk of bird thanks”
“parade offends me hello. why is it not bird parade? when you are not focus only on bird matters you are antibird.”
@speed0spank
Likewise; most of the science ones go completely over my head, lol.
D’you comment on We Hunted the Mammoth? Your kitty gravatar looks familiar.
@2kittehs
I do comment occasionally at WHTM but read/lurk probably more than is healthy.
Funny thing is, there actually IS an Alternate World Pharyngula for people like laziness! And if he really had been reading foreeeeevvvveeerrrr, he would know that. Which makes it doubly ridiculous – PZ specifically curates a site that has All Of The Science, None Of The Social Justice, for people EXACTLY LIKE LAZINESS THERE, and STILL he complains that this particular web page doesn’t contain only the things he likes. And no, I’m not linking to it, because laziness ought to know about it already, unless he was lying.
If I remember correctly, he wasn’t saying he liked the science posts. He was saying he liked the posts that attacked religion, etc. but not the sexism ones.
In other words, he loves him some scathing critiques, just not scathing critiques of his own positions and attitudes.
Ah. Well, then, he’s out of luck.
I don’t understand.
If we take out the social justice issues (fight against misogyny, fight against child abuse, fight for scientific advances, etc…) what reason is there to criticize religion?
It’s like he wants to read criticisms of people who like red because his favorite color is blue. What meaningful criticism of religion is there if not for social justice?
Tom Foss, #431
That’s too funny. You may help yourself to some of my gold.
lazinessevolved, I salute you for putting my feelings into words far more eloquently than I could. FTB has become a strange place these past few years, particularly the past few months, and now seems to be inhabited mostly by shrieking insult-junkies intent on backstabbing people on their own side. Richard Carrier and one or two others still make interesting contributions (for me), though interestingly not much of late. I wonder if they’re considering a switch to Patheos? Most of the rest of the bloggers here seemed to be concentrated around some sort of aggrieved US women’s rights movement. I’m all for women’s rights, obviously, but being male evidently makes me part of the problem. I’m sorry the US is such a shit place to live (I don’t mean that sarcastically) and has such clowns for politicos (it occasionally gets that way in the UK) and I wish you all well in your struggle, but reading FTB has become a bit of a chore, and I need fewer chores in my life. All the best!
scoobie,
Evidently? Care to elaborate which of these nasty, mean, insulting feminists here (some of whom are men) have given you that impression?
Also, you do know PZ is male, right?
You fool. Everyone knows I’m a mangina.
Nope, wrong analysis. Being male, but only superficially for women’s rights, isn’t enough. You need to shut the fuck up and listen to the amount of micro aggressions women face and help work to reduce and eliminate them. Sounds like you are a fair weather feminist, if you are one.
Somehow I don’t think you are a regular reader, and just want to get in the snipe that is a dudebro trope: I’m leaving because you talk about feminism.
You might even level up to being a Scalzine at this rate, PZ.
speed0spank – couldn’t be there more than I am, LOL! I’m kittehserf over there. But delurk moar!
Don’t you realize that we know your tells? When you say something like this, it’s about as transparent as when the right-wing nutbags talk about “family values” or “urban youth”. We all know what it really means. You’re not fooling anyone with this crap, so why even bother?
scoobie #476
this level of ignorance:
makes you not on my side regardless of our respective positions on anything else.
And this level of smug:
means that nothing of any importance will be lost by your absence. Have a nice day!
Any time I see a comment like scoobie @ 476 going “I liked this place but not any more for reasons you should care about” all I can think of is a little kid standing at the door with his backpack threatening to run away because he wants attention and to be convinced not to go. “I’M LEAVING. I’M GOING. YOU’LL NEVER SEE ME AGAIN. I REALLY MEAN IT. STOP LAUGHING!”
It’s not about what you are, fool. Stop thinking in terms of guilt and aggrievement, because we don’t give a shit about whether you feel bad. Your feelings aren’t going to stop harm or help anyone.
Indeed. I frequently get attacked because I write about quackery and the infiltration of pseudoscience into medicine far more often than I do about the depredations of big pharma. I call this the “Why don’t you blog about what *I* think is important?” gambit? My response is that this is my interest and there are lots of others out there who take on big pharma far better than I (Ben Goldacre, for instance). Oh, and I do write about how big pharma distorts medicine, just not as often.
On phone, so forgive lack of citations, but I wonder if this is not related to that finding that men perceive women to be speaking some factor more than women are actually speaking? That is, something like if women speak 30% of the time in a conversation, men perceive it as being over 60%.
I suspect that/wonder whether these phenomena are related.
@PZMyers Sam Harris was directing his comments at Liberals who think it’s intolerant to criticize Islam. He was basically calling for an honest discussion about dangerous, oppressive beliefs in the middle east , and their source in Islamic doctrine. Harris is called all kinds of ridiculous things in these comments.
I’m tired of him getting attacked for not calling himself a feminist. You’re mad because Sam Harris isn’t talking about what you want him to be talking about. That’s basically what this bullshit is about. I haven’t made my mind up on these issues, but all the infighting seems counterproductive. It pisses me off that most of us ( including Harris and Dawkins and the like) agree that everyone should be treated equally, but somehow there’s still an argument. People like Ophelia Benson still feel the need to attack him for using male default pronouns. Does that really make someone a sexist? Is it really worth a blog post?
Harris didn’t command liberals to do anything, he just wants people to not be afraid to speak up about where the hatred in the middle east comes from. Everyone should read this:
http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/islam-and-the-misuses-of-ecstasy
I’m down for debate, but I’m tired of all the useless shit talking.
Oh and by the way, the whole ‘mansplaining” meme I keep seeing is totally sexist. Feel free to hate on me, I’m just another ‘dudebro’ ,whatever the fuck that means.
Has anyone on here read Waking Up? Sam Harris is genuinely trying to improve peoples’ lives by spreading the practice of mindfulness. This helps women as well as men; in fact, there is nothing sexist about anything in his work. He is not your fucking enemy.
Nope, he doesn’t want an honest discussion. He wants to lead the charge of a Jihad by the West to subue Islamic Jihadists. It is his paranoia that they are taking over, and until a rational discussion is held on how that could happen (to date, I haven’t seen a rational explanation), all I see the paranoia from the folks wanting to
discuss[control] the issue.jakup3, #487
That just means you haven’t seen any of the awful things Dawkins (and to a lesser extent, Harris) have been saying (and then defending them stubbornly when called out). If you don’t see what the argument is about with respect to Dawkins, then I’m sorry, you really need to go back and consider your views on equality and fairness between the genders.
I like most of Sam Harris’ work. But I think defending profiling of Muslims is awful and I just can’t accept that he’s saying mistakenly saying those things. He’s putting thought into his arguments. I don’t consider Harris an enemy. I just think he can do much better.
Forbidden Snowflake @458:
Shit, I missed that fucking awful comment. Otherwise, I’d have stopped being patient. That’s something else he needs to apologize for.
Oh dear god. I don’t know if I have the energy for another day of this.
Scoobie
SHUT UP.
jakup3:
Shut Up.
Read the thread.
Go away.
We don’t need another Sam Harris fanboi. You want to defend that anti-Muslim sexist fucker, go for it. Elsewhere.
A torture and nuclear bombing apologist calling for “honest discussion” on people he hates. What a joke.
Giving examples of white swans does not contradict the fact that not all swans are white.
Because all it takes is to say that you think everyone should be treated equally and it automagically happens! There’s never ever a circumstance where, despite what people profess when asked directly about it, they don’t treat everyone equally in practice. Harris and Dawkins will say they believe in equality therefor they’re not actually wrong when they spout bullshit, oft-refuted ideas that perpetuate attitudes which have the effect of disadvantaging certain groups. Nope. All you gotta do is say “I believe in equality” and it’s all done. Anyone who perceives themself to have been treated unequally is simply mistaken.
TL;DR fuck off.
Tony @ 490:
He was blatantly lying and bullshitting from his very first post @85, unwilling to engage in good faith discussion. The post that won the internet for all time back in 2004 elaborated on the notions that “good ideas do not need lots of lies told about them in order to gain public acceptance” and “fibbers’ forecasts are worthless.” The context was about the Bush administration lying us into war in Iraq, but the lesson is broader.
When someone exhibits a complete disregard for honesty from the very beginning, no benefit of the doubt or patience is warranted.
@487 jakup3
Yes. It shows that you have internalized biases that you are not even trying to challenge.
And oh my god a blog post!!!!!! A whole blog post!!!! A public figure makes bigoted, harmful comments and people are writting blog posts about it? That is basically like harashing him in his home and threatening his family….won’t the authorities do something about this vicious attacks?????”??’??? Monsssteeeeeeerrrrrrsssssss!!
You are an idiot, Fuck off.
@azhael
But don’t you know that the world’s supply of blog posts are running dangerously low? What are we going to do if we run out, huh? Ever thought of that?
I’m tired of him getting attacked for not calling himself a feminist.
I don’t see anyone attacking him for his self ascribed label, only his actions.
Jacob Schmidt @499:
It’s funny how obvious it is to see this when you look at what he says and what people are criticizing him for.
Strange that it’s so difficult for some people to comprehend.