They think that Fry's quote only applies to the bad people.Ian wrote:I think they should all be made to stare at Coito's signature for an hour.
Those who have come from Pz's blog, aka THAT thread
-
- Posts: 32040
- Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
- Contact:
Re: Those who have come from Pz's blog, aka THAT thread
- Gawdzilla Sama
- Stabsobermaschinist
- Posts: 151265
- Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:24 am
- About me: My posts are related to the thread in the same way Gliese 651b is related to your mother's underwear drawer.
- Location: Sitting next to Ayaan in Domus Draconis, and communicating via PMs.
- Contact:
Re: Those who have come from Pz's blog, aka THAT thread
Crusaders are exempt from butthurt status.Coito ergo sum wrote:They think that Fry's quote only applies to the bad people.Ian wrote:I think they should all be made to stare at Coito's signature for an hour.
- Audley Strange
- "I blame the victim"
- Posts: 7485
- Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 5:00 pm
- Contact:
Re: Those who have come from Pz's blog, aka THAT thread
Like I'd ever want to be on board with a man who exploits the vulnerablilities of self proclaimed sexual assault victims to stroke his own ego. What the Pzombies fail to understand is that they are the ones who are being pushed out of the skeptic community precisely because they are poisonous ideologues.
They are marginilising themselves and most people are glad to help pushing them out.
I don't see it as a civil war, I see it as a foreign body being rejected by the body of skepticism because it is not skeptical.
(Oh name change idea Marginalia)
They are marginilising themselves and most people are glad to help pushing them out.
I don't see it as a civil war, I see it as a foreign body being rejected by the body of skepticism because it is not skeptical.
(Oh name change idea Marginalia)
"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
-
- Posts: 32040
- Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
- Contact:
Re: Those who have come from Pz's blog, aka THAT thread
Men will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest.Gawdzilla Sama wrote:A pox on high priests of any (or no) religion.
Diderot.
Oh, wait, sorry some folks might be sensitive to that sort of allusion. What of the feelings of priests? What has I thinking? Ah, fuck 'em, right? It's not EVERYONE'S offense and feelings that we're concerned about....

- colubridae
- Custom Rank: Rank
- Posts: 2771
- Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2010 12:16 pm
- About me: http://www.essentialart.com/acatalog/Ed ... Stars.html
- Location: Birmingham art gallery
- Contact:
Re: Those who have come from Pz's blog, aka THAT thread
ICWYM. Can't say I agree. There's nothing wrong with being a girly-girl, a butch girl, a butch bloke or a girly bloke. The connotations may be out of tune for some, but that’s not the fault of the words. Not sure why you think the word ‘girly’ is bad or the word ‘pink’, or ‘dressmaking’.hadespussercats wrote:Here's my question, as someone who dabbles in many ways on the spectrum between, for lack of better terms, butch and girly:
We have these terms, also manly, womanly, femme, boyish, etc., etc. We all have a sense of what they mean. Why? Where is that meaning coming from? Can we change those meanings? Ditch them all together? Do we want to?
I like fixing things around the house. I like using industrial-grade woodworking tools. I enjoy chemistry and physics and biology (as a layperson.) I like pink. I like workboots. So? Does any of that actually relate to my gender or my sex? Or my position near the middle of Kinsey's scale?
Do you know what I mean?
As an aside, when Blind Groper referred to embracing girly pursuits like dressmaking if that's your interest, I felt trivialized. Even though I introduced the term myself. What's so bad about girly? And what's so bad about pink?
I knit (started again after 40 odd years), I blub at most movies (blubbed at the Dark Knight Rises yesterday). I would describe myself as ‘girly’ in a lot of situations. I would never describe myself as butch or manly. I do however fart in bed

I have a well balanced personality. I've got chips on both shoulders
- Mysturji
- Clint Eastwood
- Posts: 5005
- Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 4:08 pm
- About me: Downloading an app to my necktop
- Location: http://tinyurl.com/c9o35ny
- Contact:
Re: Those who have come from Pz's blog, aka THAT thread
What a smug load of shite from a smug piece of shite.Bella Fortuna wrote:In case anyone actually wanted this to die down and get back to more constructive things... sorry to say, he's keeping it going. http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... -the-smug/
Sir Figg Newton wrote:If I have seen further than others, it is only because I am surrounded by midgets.
IDMD2Cormac wrote:Doom predictors have been with humans right through our history. They are like the proverbial stopped clock - right twice a day, but not due to the efficacy of their prescience.
I am a twit.
-
- Posts: 32040
- Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
- Contact:
Re: Those who have come from Pz's blog, aka THAT thread
I admit that there are gender roles, of course. How could one not? Culturally/socially? Women wear skirts, eg., men generally don't. Gender role.hadespussercats wrote:
All right, from the top-- you admit that there are gender roles, you've never claimed different-- you see how they influence people throughout their lives--
but you don't see how they might be confining to people who don't fit one way or another?
I absolutely can see that they might be confining. Sure, lots of things are confining. The fact that some people are born to wealthier parents can be less confining than being born to poorer parents. It is what it is.
I didn't say I don't see anything as confining. I said I don't see it as a problem to be solved. Or, that "we" need to solve. Or, that has some inherent "rightness" by making the "roles" some other way. Life will always be confining to some who don't fit various norms. But, there will always be norms.
Yes. I don't fit perfectly into societal norms. I just don't, again, think it's a problem to be solved, because there will always be norms. Changing them doesn't change that.hadespussercats wrote: You must see that there are many people who don't perfectly fit these societal norms--
Things tend to exist in statistical spreads. The average penis in the US is say, 5 1/2 inches long, give or take, but that doesn't mean that most men "fit that norm" exactly. There's sort of a bell curve, with the majority within 1 standard deviation from the norm, and there is one guy toting around a 13 incher...http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/1 ... 75767.htmlhadespussercats wrote: if the gender roles are from nature, why so many misfits? Why the shifts in roles from culture to culture, or in one culture over time?
The brain is an organ too. I think it stands to reason, at least, that folks would generally have brain structures/functioning along a similar bell curve.
The discrimination/sexism problems -- I've said - I think have been pretty much solved, or being handed their hats, were issues that I deem of importance, like job discrimination, education access, and equal treatment under the law. Those are the biggies. Sure, there are "problems" of dickheads who walk up to women and use cheesy pick up lines, or think that a "woman's place is in the home." What I've said was is that those are more problems of etiquette and also of opinion. Maybe a woman's place IS in the home. Opinions aren't "problems to be solved" -- even "blacks aren't human" (before someone brings that up) -- yes, once we have the law treating women and blacks equal under the law with white males, and job discrimination is remedied and education access is equal, the fact that some folks still think blacks aren't human, and women should be baby-factories in the home are opinions. And, as long as you can go about your business and living a life equal under the law, then the fact that some assholes think X, Y or Z is just the way it is. It's the way it always will be and always must be because that is in the nature of freedom of thought.
Of course it's a spectrum. Many women are far smarter than most men, all around. And, vice versa. When I suggested a slight marginal increase in competitiveness, for example, picture two bell curves overlapping with their centers only a smidgen apart. To make a HUGE difference across a large population, the shift of the center of one bell curve as compared to another needs only to be very very small.hadespussercats wrote:
* As for that book MIL gave me-- it was pretty clear that the depiction wasn't just one man out of a wide array of men with different skills. It was more like all these commercials that show wise moms nodding their head knowingly and then giving a little "you know what I'm talking about" giggle while their husbands act retarded. Do you know the sort of thing I'm talking about?
Plus, the book was all about teaching kids to say they're sorry, and the things they were supposed to apologize for was shit like "coloring outside the lines."I'm not inflicting MIL's Olympic levels of uptight passive aggression on my helpless infant.
* I wonder about genetic predispositions, too, though I imagine if they exist, they would be a spectrum, not a point, in terms of skills proficiency. For instance, my husband and I have tested roughly equivalent IQ-wise, if you give any heft to that sort of thing. I outscored him on the SATs by a small amount, but when you look at our scores, while they were generally high across the board for both of us, his math score was higher and my verbal score was higher (his math score was quite a bit higher than mine, but my verbal score was higher than either of his.)
Maybe curves like this:

Believe me, that is genetic in women....hadespussercats wrote: This is what you'd expect, if you believe certain notions about sex-related differences in the brain.
And I have a hard time remembering numbers. It's weird-- phone numbers, street numbers, social security numbers, all that. J has no problem with it.
But I remember whole conversations we had when we were nineteen, word for word.

Or, it could be that you fit into a real norm. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normal_distribution Statistically, that would be expected, but it doesn't mean that every individual fits in the middle of the normal distribution. For it to be a norm, there will be most people in the fat part of the curve and fewer people on the ends. That doesn't imply a value judgment for or against those on the ends. People apply the value judgments.hadespussercats wrote: But couldn't it just be that we are two people who happen to fit into a mythical norm regarding sex and analytical skills?
It doesn't have to matter much. Like I said, I think a very very small difference in "competitiveness", for example, could very well result in a large difference (when looking at 2 large populations) in behaviors.hadespussercats wrote:
Furthermore, how much does that difference have to matter? Like I said, I did quite well in my math classes in school. I just had to find ways to write things down or make little graphs so I could keep the numbers in my head long enough to work with them. Which were coping methods I had to figure out on my own-- as long as you get good grades, teachers don't seem to care if you're struggling more than you usually do.
Not unreasonable. It probably does. But, people ought to be able to raise their children with the values they think are important.hadespussercats wrote:
And, while mozg has made clear that expectations didn't affect her path through learning, is it unreasonable to wonder that the expectation the girls probably won't enjoy math might become a self-fulfilling prophesy?
Hardly anyone "enjoys" math, anyway. They don't have to "enjoy" it. They just have to do it. Girls for some reason typically do better in school than boys these days all around.
Nothing, as far as I can see. What do you think?hadespussercats wrote:
Finally, what do these people who don't fit into the norms illustrate in terms of where these norms originate and what they mean?
Not nearly to the same degree. And, the way men shop is clearly different, and that difference is reflected in the way things are sold. And, in the stereotype of women needing 4 hours to shop. Or, those cartoons of a guy's trip to the mall being "need shirt - go to gap - buy shirt - go home" and women's trip to the mall is "need shirt -- go to mall -- wander around to every store browsing and 4 hours later buy 15 different things, but no shirt."hadespussercats wrote:
* As for shopping, even stereotypically speaking men love to shop. They just shop for different things-- music, stereo equipment, instruments, computer stuff, cars, motorcycles, bikes, and related fun stuff for souping those vehicles up, boats, fishing tackle, hunting and camping supplies, beer and liquor, porn--
etc. etc.
Something is going on there. It may well be just cultural. I don't know. But, there is a huge difference. As I mentioned, why do you think the malls are geared 80%, give or take, to women's purchases?
Don't know. I suspect it is partially culture, and partially a function of some very basic brain functioning.hadespussercats wrote:
But I will point out that when it comes to clothes shopping, stereotypically speaking again, gay men love fashion, lesbians could care less. Same for home decor, etc., etc.
So is this behavior related to sex, or gender, or both-- and how?
And, if a society perpetuates a norm...isn't that just "culture?" We're going to have a culture no matter what.hadespussercats wrote:
I think it's important also to point out that behaviors that may have originated in a patriarchal society might be perpetuated by members of a society that is more egalitarian. Perpetuated by men and women both, in part unwittingly. So I think it's possible to look to patriarchy as the possible source of societal gender roles without men being "to blame" for it.
David Reimer, I believe. Committed suicide.hadespussercats wrote:
* Re boys and girls and their behavior--
I'm reminded of another thread on here somewhere where I referenced the case of the Canadian (I think) twins. Two boys. One boy's penis was destroyed by a botched circumcision. So a doctor advised the family to finish the job, as it were, and give the child a vaginoplasty and raise him as a girl. This was following a blank slate theory that gender is taught.
Turns out he spent his whole life feeling wrong, like a boy trapped in a girls body. IIRC, when he found out what happened to him, so many pieces fell into place. But I think he may have committed suicide.
I should source this.
In a large population, there will be plenty of people towards the sides of the bell curve. That doesn't mean that most don't fall in the middle.hadespussercats wrote:
Anyway-- this story, and my experiences with trans people, make me think that there is something about gender that is innate. How much? I'm not sure. Like I've said, I always felt like a weird warp between the two. I liked to play in the swamp and dig up grubs and people always told me I looked like a boy. So? Is that not girl behavior? I know plenty of girls who liked that sort of thing. Maybe more would have if their mothers let them get their dresses dirty. Who knows?
Well, it's that expression that may be the important part. If boys' competitiveness drives them to be more "keeping score" oriented and playing war, and playing to "win" in concrete ways, then that would likely lead to behavioral influences later in life. http://ideas.repec.org/p/hhs/hastef/0709.htmlhadespussercats wrote:
As for competitiveness, I don't think that's a place where the gender roles differ at all. Well, maybe in how the competitiveness traditionally gets expressed. But girls and women are just as competitive as boys and men.
I mean hey-- look at us.
Recent studies find that women are less competitive than men.
Re: Those who have come from Pz's blog, aka THAT thread
I love PZ categorizing his movement's outlook as 'progressive'
What's progressive about:
- Using an academically discredited type of Feminism from the late 1970s, early 1980s;
- Encouraging a 'four legs good, two legs baaaaad' mentality coined by Orwell in 1945;
- Condoning a group whose best weapons against Dr. Hall were bodily odour quips, and the crassest employment of ageism imaginable (No wonder they were mad at her. Dr. Hall's message was that she was beyond the old form of feminism, and was a thinking human being in her own right; how fucking dare she say that?). School playground bullies or what?
- Condoning censorship, selective quotation, demonisation, drowning opposing viewpoints in background noise, and good old fashioned persecution together with the whipping up of mob emotion, a la long vanished Warsaw Pact nations.
Progressive? Pull the other one, it's got fucking bells on. Read some history and then come back and talk to me about progressive.
They'll be singing 'We Shall Overcome' next.
Morons.
What's progressive about:
- Using an academically discredited type of Feminism from the late 1970s, early 1980s;
- Encouraging a 'four legs good, two legs baaaaad' mentality coined by Orwell in 1945;
- Condoning a group whose best weapons against Dr. Hall were bodily odour quips, and the crassest employment of ageism imaginable (No wonder they were mad at her. Dr. Hall's message was that she was beyond the old form of feminism, and was a thinking human being in her own right; how fucking dare she say that?). School playground bullies or what?
- Condoning censorship, selective quotation, demonisation, drowning opposing viewpoints in background noise, and good old fashioned persecution together with the whipping up of mob emotion, a la long vanished Warsaw Pact nations.
Progressive? Pull the other one, it's got fucking bells on. Read some history and then come back and talk to me about progressive.
They'll be singing 'We Shall Overcome' next.
Morons.
- Badger3k
- Posts: 158
- Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2012 9:42 pm
- About me: Just talkin' claptrap. Lilith Rules!
- Location: Texas
- Contact:
Re: Those who have come from Pz's blog, aka THAT thread
"No gods, no masters, no popes, no pastors"Gawdzilla Sama wrote:A pox on high priests of any (or no) religion.
- mozg
- Posts: 422
- Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 3:25 am
- About me: There's not much to tell.
- Location: US And A
- Contact:
Re: Those who have come from Pz's blog, aka THAT thread
My mother and my sister can go shopping all day long having absolutely no intention of buying anything and no specific item in mind. They'll spend six hours at the mall going from store to store looking at everything and for nothing.Coito ergo sum wrote:Not nearly to the same degree. And, the way men shop is clearly different, and that difference is reflected in the way things are sold. And, in the stereotype of women needing 4 hours to shop. Or, those cartoons of a guy's trip to the mall being "need shirt - go to gap - buy shirt - go home" and women's trip to the mall is "need shirt -- go to mall -- wander around to every store browsing and 4 hours later buy 15 different things, but no shirt."
Something is going on there. It may well be just cultural. I don't know. But, there is a huge difference. As I mentioned, why do you think the malls are geared 80%, give or take, to women's purchases?
I don't set foot in a store until I know exactly what I want, where it is, how much it costs and how long it should take me to obtain it, and then my mission is to do so as quickly as possible and get the fuck out of there.
They shop.
I buy.
'Religion has actually convinced people that there's an invisible man -- living in the sky -- who watches everything you do, every minute of every day. And the invisible man has a special list of ten things he does not want you to do.. And if you do any of these ten things, he has a special place, full of fire and smoke and burning and torture and anguish, where he will send you to live and suffer and burn and choke and scream and cry forever and ever 'til the end of time! ..But He loves you.' - George Carlin
- Badger3k
- Posts: 158
- Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2012 9:42 pm
- About me: Just talkin' claptrap. Lilith Rules!
- Location: Texas
- Contact:
Re: Those who have come from Pz's blog, aka THAT thread
Well, I see Brave Sir PZ ran away. And took his toys with him. Unfortunately that's a symptom we've seen in him and his "movement" - an increasing isolation and refusal to discuss anything outside of the places that are controlled by banning and editing. I was really amazed he even came here - he rarely comments anywhere that he isn't his own or an ally's (like OB).
Over at FftB, the usual suspects are crowing about people saying things about harassment, yet are unable to see that it applies to them as well (for an example, see Take Your Hate Elsewhere. I admit that I like jokes, and mockery, and am quite free with poking people with sticks, but it depends on the place and circumstances too. I have had to bite my tongue in school when my normal response is sarcasm - definitely not good when dealing with kids. When talking one on one, I try to moderate that as well, unless the conversation is going nowhere or I am attacked. In the Slyme Pit, where we go to talk and blow off steam, I am not going to moderate (well, not much). Here, I plan to since this is a more restrained place (maybe more family friendly?) - not that people hold back, just that there is more effort to understand. I think that's a better way to describe what I've seen.
I did want to bring up something I wrote in a pm about the "survivor" label. I remember long ago (I'm 45) that the term came about because people were tired of being "victims" all their life. They weren't a rape victim, they were a rape survivor. Meaning they had been raped but went on and grew past that. They didn't want to be, and weren't, defined by the horrible things that happened to them. It spread to other things that were physically or emotionally horrible - genocide, cancer, etc. It was a positive thing. Yet now it looks like some people don't want that - they use the term "survivor" as a bludgeon - they define themselves as perpetual victims and leave out the "move on" part. Moving on does not mean forgetting about it, or not working to stop it, but it does mean getting better. It means not using your victim status to shut people up or appeal for special treatment. It means you don't let what happened to you define who and what you are - a person who was raped, not a rape victim. Ok, that last line, maybe doesn't say what I mean clearly, but I hope people understand where I'm coming from. Does this make sense, or anyone see flaws? I'd like to know if I'm off base on this since it's just my opinion.
Over at FftB, the usual suspects are crowing about people saying things about harassment, yet are unable to see that it applies to them as well (for an example, see Take Your Hate Elsewhere. I admit that I like jokes, and mockery, and am quite free with poking people with sticks, but it depends on the place and circumstances too. I have had to bite my tongue in school when my normal response is sarcasm - definitely not good when dealing with kids. When talking one on one, I try to moderate that as well, unless the conversation is going nowhere or I am attacked. In the Slyme Pit, where we go to talk and blow off steam, I am not going to moderate (well, not much). Here, I plan to since this is a more restrained place (maybe more family friendly?) - not that people hold back, just that there is more effort to understand. I think that's a better way to describe what I've seen.
I did want to bring up something I wrote in a pm about the "survivor" label. I remember long ago (I'm 45) that the term came about because people were tired of being "victims" all their life. They weren't a rape victim, they were a rape survivor. Meaning they had been raped but went on and grew past that. They didn't want to be, and weren't, defined by the horrible things that happened to them. It spread to other things that were physically or emotionally horrible - genocide, cancer, etc. It was a positive thing. Yet now it looks like some people don't want that - they use the term "survivor" as a bludgeon - they define themselves as perpetual victims and leave out the "move on" part. Moving on does not mean forgetting about it, or not working to stop it, but it does mean getting better. It means not using your victim status to shut people up or appeal for special treatment. It means you don't let what happened to you define who and what you are - a person who was raped, not a rape victim. Ok, that last line, maybe doesn't say what I mean clearly, but I hope people understand where I'm coming from. Does this make sense, or anyone see flaws? I'd like to know if I'm off base on this since it's just my opinion.
- Badger3k
- Posts: 158
- Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2012 9:42 pm
- About me: Just talkin' claptrap. Lilith Rules!
- Location: Texas
- Contact:
Re: Those who have come from Pz's blog, aka THAT thread
I tend to be the same way. I know what I want and it's like a military mission - in and out with a minimum of fuss and problems (ok, so that's not like a missionmozg wrote:My mother and my sister can go shopping all day long having absolutely no intention of buying anything and no specific item in mind. They'll spend six hours at the mall going from store to store looking at everything and for nothing.Coito ergo sum wrote:Not nearly to the same degree. And, the way men shop is clearly different, and that difference is reflected in the way things are sold. And, in the stereotype of women needing 4 hours to shop. Or, those cartoons of a guy's trip to the mall being "need shirt - go to gap - buy shirt - go home" and women's trip to the mall is "need shirt -- go to mall -- wander around to every store browsing and 4 hours later buy 15 different things, but no shirt."
Something is going on there. It may well be just cultural. I don't know. But, there is a huge difference. As I mentioned, why do you think the malls are geared 80%, give or take, to women's purchases?
I don't set foot in a store until I know exactly what I want, where it is, how much it costs and how long it should take me to obtain it, and then my mission is to do so as quickly as possible and get the fuck out of there.
They shop.
I buy.

- Kristie
- Elastigirl
- Posts: 25108
- Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 3:14 pm
- About me: From there to here, and here to there, funny things are everywhere!
- Location: Probably at Target
- Contact:
Re: Those who have come from Pz's blog, aka THAT thread
For some people it depends on what store! Hubby can browse Best Buy and Frye's for hours!mozg wrote:My mother and my sister can go shopping all day long having absolutely no intention of buying anything and no specific item in mind. They'll spend six hours at the mall going from store to store looking at everything and for nothing.Coito ergo sum wrote:Not nearly to the same degree. And, the way men shop is clearly different, and that difference is reflected in the way things are sold. And, in the stereotype of women needing 4 hours to shop. Or, those cartoons of a guy's trip to the mall being "need shirt - go to gap - buy shirt - go home" and women's trip to the mall is "need shirt -- go to mall -- wander around to every store browsing and 4 hours later buy 15 different things, but no shirt."
Something is going on there. It may well be just cultural. I don't know. But, there is a huge difference. As I mentioned, why do you think the malls are geared 80%, give or take, to women's purchases?
I don't set foot in a store until I know exactly what I want, where it is, how much it costs and how long it should take me to obtain it, and then my mission is to do so as quickly as possible and get the fuck out of there.
They shop.
I buy.
We danced.
- Audley Strange
- "I blame the victim"
- Posts: 7485
- Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 5:00 pm
- Contact:
Re: Those who have come from Pz's blog, aka THAT thread
No bosses except end of level bosses.Badger3k wrote:"No gods, no masters, no popes, no pastors"Gawdzilla Sama wrote:A pox on high priests of any (or no) religion.
"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
- Horwood Beer-Master
- "...a complete Kentish hog"
- Posts: 7061
- Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 2:34 pm
- Location: Wandering somewhere around the Darenth Valley - Kent
- Contact:
Re: Those who have come from Pz's blog, aka THAT thread
I haven't been following this thread, and it's too long to read through now.
Someone summarise it for me
Someone summarise it for me


Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests