The Civil War Within Skepticism

A forum to talk about other sites and things you've found in the jungle that is the internet.

Please take a moment to read the rationalia guidelines: http://rationalia.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=3449
Post Reply
Seth
GrandMaster Zen Troll
Posts: 22077
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 1:02 am
Contact:

Re: The Civil War Within Skepticism

Post by Seth » Tue Aug 21, 2012 7:31 pm

I love it when ultra-orthodox religious Atheists argue about church doctrine. Martin Luther is laughing his ass off right now.
"Seth is Grandmaster Zen Troll who trains his victims to troll themselves every time they think of him" Robert_S

"All that is required for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Edmund Burke

"Those who support denying anyone the right to keep and bear arms for personal defense are fully complicit in every crime that might have been prevented had the victim been effectively armed." Seth

© 2013/2014/2015/2016 Seth, all rights reserved. No reuse, republication, duplication, or derivative work is authorized.

Coito ergo sum
Posts: 32040
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
Contact:

Re: The Civil War Within Skepticism

Post by Coito ergo sum » Tue Aug 21, 2012 7:45 pm

Only one side of this discussion could be considered religious atheists. You've been proven correct, and the capital-A Atheists include Skepchicks and Freedomfromthoughtbloggers....

It's sad. But, apparently, undeniable.

User avatar
DaveDodo007
Posts: 2975
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 7:35 am
About me: When ever I behave as a man I am called sexist, It seems being a male is now illegal and nobody sent me the memo. Good job as I would have told them to fuck off.
Contact:

Re: The Civil War Within Skepticism

Post by DaveDodo007 » Wed Aug 22, 2012 12:41 am

Robert_S wrote:Hmmmm.... Radfems and MRAs one one hand,. And on the other hand, a ragged bunch of sexy witty debauched perverted brilliant creative talented pain-in-the-ass friendly rabid atheist (mostly) freaks.
I find your thoughts intriguing and I want to subscribe to your newsletter.
We should be MOST skeptical of ideas we like because we are sufficiently skeptical of ideas that we don't like. Penn Jillette.

User avatar
JimC
The sentimental bloke
Posts: 73014
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 7:58 am
About me: To be serious about gin requires years of dedicated research.
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: The Civil War Within Skepticism

Post by JimC » Wed Aug 22, 2012 5:29 am

DaveDodo007 wrote:
Robert_S wrote:Hmmmm.... Radfems and MRAs one one hand,. And on the other hand, a ragged bunch of sexy witty debauched perverted brilliant creative talented pain-in-the-ass friendly rabid atheist (mostly) freaks.
I find your thoughts intriguing and I want to subscribe to your newsletter.
That's a euphemism, right?

:hehe:
Nurse, where the fuck's my cardigan?
And my gin!

Coito ergo sum
Posts: 32040
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
Contact:

Re: The Civil War Within Skepticism

Post by Coito ergo sum » Thu Sep 13, 2012 5:47 pm

Now they're going after Patrick Rothfuss --- http://jezebel.com/5942221/is-this-best ... hor-sexist

He writes things they think are creepy on his blog.

He wants to put out some kind of pinup calendar of sexy fantasy and sci-fi characters --- and they want to tell him he has to put men in it.

They think that "It seems clear for many reasons that The Kingkiller Chronicle is a set of books that cater to and are about men." -- err, so? There are whole genres of writing that "cater to and are about" women. Why does Patrick Rothfuss have to write about women too? Maybe he wants to cater to and write about men?

User avatar
DaveD
Posts: 667
Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2009 1:59 pm
Contact:

Re: The Civil War Within Skepticism

Post by DaveD » Thu Sep 13, 2012 7:29 pm

Oops, wrong ApeLust thread!
Image
Image
Image

User avatar
JimC
The sentimental bloke
Posts: 73014
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 7:58 am
About me: To be serious about gin requires years of dedicated research.
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: The Civil War Within Skepticism

Post by JimC » Thu Sep 13, 2012 11:46 pm

Coito ergo sum wrote:Now they're going after Patrick Rothfuss --- http://jezebel.com/5942221/is-this-best ... hor-sexist

He writes things they think are creepy on his blog.

He wants to put out some kind of pinup calendar of sexy fantasy and sci-fi characters --- and they want to tell him he has to put men in it.

They think that "It seems clear for many reasons that The Kingkiller Chronicle is a set of books that cater to and are about men." -- err, so? There are whole genres of writing that "cater to and are about" women. Why does Patrick Rothfuss have to write about women too? Maybe he wants to cater to and write about men?
What part of "None of your fucking business" don't they get? :banghead:
Nurse, where the fuck's my cardigan?
And my gin!

User avatar
Gerald McGrew
Posts: 611
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 5:32 pm
About me: Fisker of Men
Location: Pacific Northwest
Contact:

Re: The Civil War Within Skepticism

Post by Gerald McGrew » Thu Sep 13, 2012 11:50 pm

Coito ergo sum wrote:Now they're going after Patrick Rothfuss --- http://jezebel.com/5942221/is-this-best ... hor-sexist

He writes things they think are creepy on his blog.

He wants to put out some kind of pinup calendar of sexy fantasy and sci-fi characters --- and they want to tell him he has to put men in it.

They think that "It seems clear for many reasons that The Kingkiller Chronicle is a set of books that cater to and are about men." -- err, so? There are whole genres of writing that "cater to and are about" women. Why does Patrick Rothfuss have to write about women too? Maybe he wants to cater to and write about men?
Shorter version: Any male who notices a woman's looks and comments on his being attracted to her is a sexist pig.

I read through that blog post thinking I was going to see something really offensive and clueless. Didn't see anything of the sort.
If you don't like being called "stupid", then stop saying stupid things.

User avatar
Audley Strange
"I blame the victim"
Posts: 7485
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: The Civil War Within Skepticism

Post by Audley Strange » Thu Sep 13, 2012 11:53 pm

If you can't get a hard-on from a obese pre-op transexual multiple amputee with violence issues and a narcotic addiction, you are oppressing women.
"What started as a legitimate effort by the townspeople of Salem to identify, capture and kill those who did Satan's bidding quickly deteriorated into a witch hunt" Army Man

User avatar
JimC
The sentimental bloke
Posts: 73014
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 7:58 am
About me: To be serious about gin requires years of dedicated research.
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: The Civil War Within Skepticism

Post by JimC » Thu Sep 13, 2012 11:54 pm

Audley Strange wrote:If you can't get a hard-on from a obese pre-op transexual multiple amputee with violence issues and a narcotic addiction, you are oppressing women.
:funny:











(mind you, they can be pretty damned sexy...)
Nurse, where the fuck's my cardigan?
And my gin!

User avatar
Audley Strange
"I blame the victim"
Posts: 7485
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: The Civil War Within Skepticism

Post by Audley Strange » Thu Sep 13, 2012 11:59 pm

They and all forms of binary gender based pronouns have been replaced. Since linear time is phallocentric and does not recognise the cyclical nature of existence in order to rectify this we had got rid of tenses as oppressive. Since objectification is wrong we have got rid of subject/object bigotry

This left us with one word to describe all combinations of he she and it. That word is Shit. Which is being re-empowered as a symbol not of waste but of unity, everyone has to shit. (Except the non shitters but fuck those freaks)
"What started as a legitimate effort by the townspeople of Salem to identify, capture and kill those who did Satan's bidding quickly deteriorated into a witch hunt" Army Man

User avatar
orpheus
Posts: 1522
Joined: Fri Jun 12, 2009 12:43 am
About me: The name is Epictetus. Waldo Epictetus.
Contact:

Re: The Civil War Within Skepticism

Post by orpheus » Fri Sep 14, 2012 12:39 am

Audley Strange wrote:They and all forms of binary gender based pronouns have been replaced. Since linear time is phallocentric and does not recognise the cyclical nature of existence in order to rectify this we had got rid of tenses as oppressive. Since objectification is wrong we have got rid of subject/object bigotry

This left us with one word to describe all combinations of he she and it. That word is Shit. Which is being re-empowered as a symbol not of waste but of unity, everyone has to shit. (Except the non shitters but fuck those freaks)
You know, there are universities where you could get a PhD with that as a thesis.
I think that language has a lot to do with interfering in our relationship to direct experience. A simple thing like metaphor will allows you to go to a place and say 'this is like that'. Well, this isn't like that. This is like this.

—Richard Serra

User avatar
Audley Strange
"I blame the victim"
Posts: 7485
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 5:00 pm
Contact:

Re: The Civil War Within Skepticism

Post by Audley Strange » Fri Sep 14, 2012 12:44 am

orpheus wrote:
Audley Strange wrote:They and all forms of binary gender based pronouns have been replaced. Since linear time is phallocentric and does not recognise the cyclical nature of existence in order to rectify this we had got rid of tenses as oppressive. Since objectification is wrong we have got rid of subject/object bigotry

This left us with one word to describe all combinations of he she and it. That word is Shit. Which is being re-empowered as a symbol not of waste but of unity, everyone has to shit. (Except the non shitters but fuck those freaks)
You know, there are universities where you could get a PhD with that as a thesis.
Yeah just pop in a ton of references from 90 social studies icons like Giddens et al , change the L in Audley to and R and within a few years I could be spouting bollocks on the late review.

I think I'd rather bathe in tramp sick.
"What started as a legitimate effort by the townspeople of Salem to identify, capture and kill those who did Satan's bidding quickly deteriorated into a witch hunt" Army Man

User avatar
Gerald McGrew
Posts: 611
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 5:32 pm
About me: Fisker of Men
Location: Pacific Northwest
Contact:

Re: The Civil War Within Skepticism

Post by Gerald McGrew » Mon Oct 29, 2012 9:48 pm

R. Watson's latest screed at Slate...

http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/ ... ingle.html

"It Stands to Reason, Skeptics Can Be Sexist Too"

Kinda just re-hashes everything all over again, but I found the end to be interesting.
I also believe that old line about sunlight being the best disinfectant. Ignoring bullies does not make them go away.
Yet despite claiming to have looked at the Facebook profiles of her harassers (which means she knows who they are), she only actually names one. Hmmmmm......
If you don't like being called "stupid", then stop saying stupid things.

Coito ergo sum
Posts: 32040
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
Contact:

Re: The Civil War Within Skepticism

Post by Coito ergo sum » Mon Oct 29, 2012 10:04 pm

I learned about the skeptics back in college, when I worked in a magic store and performed gigs on the side. I was a huge fan of James “The Amazing” Randi, a magician who offers a million dollars to anyone who can prove they have paranormal abilities.
I've heard this claim before - that she was a "street performer" and a "magician." I call bullshit. If she had this skill, she'd have performed a trick at some point in one of her speeches. It's a natural crowd pleaser, and would enhance her presentations, even if only done at the beginning as sort of a mood lightener. She only does the "lead off with a joke" technique, despite having "magician" in her repertoire? I'd bet good money she's full of it. She worked in the magic store, i'm sure, but she probably just had a boyfriend who was into magic, and half-learned the "pick a card, any card" trick.

And, notice the careful wording here -- "I WAS a huge fan of ..." the Amazing Randi. Was, huh? Not present tense? Not past tense and a reference to "and still am?" I wonder why? Was it her ridiculous behavior there on the forums, when she hacked admin status and fucked with people who didn't agree with her?
I was occasionally grabbed and groped without consent at events.
Again, I call bullshit on this -- occasionally she was "grabbed and groped?" She's never recounted the details of these assaults and batteries, and has never indicated who groped and grabbed her. She never reported these incidents at the time to anyone, whether the conference organizers or anyone else. Hotel management -- nobody. You get "groped and grabbed" in hotel conference area and do/say nothing?
Nevertheless, my shameful past as a college graduate was “exposed” and passed around on social media and forums and blogs, as triumphant skeptics demanded I stop writing and speaking about science since I lacked the proper credentials. (Interestingly, no one has ever petitioned for my three non-scientist podcast cohosts to be removed from the show. Probably just a coincidence.)
LOL -- for me, I just don't listen to your podcast, because the whole lot of you just go out and read "homeopathy for dummies" and "why do people believe weird things" and then you parrot back what you've superficially learned and smugly mock others for being so gullible and stupid. Nobody needs a dopey Communications major (or batch of Communications majors) who gets off on hanging around nerds to lecture them. Fuck off. I just don't want to hear from you, and would prefer you didn't ruin conferences with your presence.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests