[Ed] Atheism Plus/Free Thought Blogs (FTB) - Page 24

Ocelot · 14th September 2012, 06:42 AM

Originally Posted by Ocelot

http://icbseverywhere.com/blog/2012/...-and-certaint/
If ever there were a ^This that needed ^Thissing then ^This is it. The more I read from Barbara Drescher the more I want to read more.

On a side note it looks like the JREF are paying attention to my views on this matter.

http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/...ref-staff.html

The Central Scrutinizer · 14th September 2012, 06:54 AM

Originally Posted by Ocelot

On a side note it looks like the JREF are paying attention to my views on this matter.

http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/...ref-staff.html

She has one of the few blogs I ever read. Not often, but more often than others, which is mostly never.

westprog · 14th September 2012, 07:24 AM

Originally Posted by Mr. Scott

I've heard that for good people to do evil things ... that takes religion.

Yes, I've heard that too.

It's not true.

Hokulele · 14th September 2012, 08:24 AM

Originally Posted by Checkmite

Somebody emails this guy calling his daughter a slut, which makes him upset and angry, and the fact that he got upset and angry is now a vector of attack against his daughter? What on Earth...?

No, it is an attack on the people who claim to be for social justice, and yet let comments like the one by this man slide. If my father ever offered violence in response to insults hurled in my direction, I would be appalled for several reasons:

1) Physical violence is an inappropriate response to this sort of taunt. There are many better ways to handle trolling by idiots on the Internet.

2) My father raised me to be capable not only of fighting my own battles, but to be capable of determining which battles are worth fighting, and which ones are simply beneath even contempt, and should be given the consideration they are due. I.e., none.

3) The fact that the label "slut" was the one that enraged this man. Personally, I do not feel that consensual sexual behavior is anything to be ashamed over. I would be more amused by being labeled a slut, much the way I would be amused by being labeled a lesbian. As a feminist myself, I think the better way to handle slurs of this nature are to essentially take them back and remove their stigma, rather than offering to physically harm the person making the slur.

But hey, I am just a regular, garden-variety "atheist", what do I know about social justice?

bpesta22 · 14th September 2012, 09:11 AM

Originally Posted by The Central Scrutinizer

She has one of the few blogs I ever read. Not often, but more often than others, which is mostly never.

Does she post here?

An FTBer commissioned her to debate me on an IQ study I did awhile back. It was an interesting exchange. Haven't followed her much since then, but I got the impression the FTB kool aid wore off for her, and I wondered why...

Piscivore · 14th September 2012, 09:41 AM

Originally Posted by Hokulele

No, it is an attack on the people who claim to be for social justice, and yet let comments like the one by this man slide. If my father ever offered violence in response to insults hurled in my direction, I would be appalled for several reasons:

1) Physical violence is an inappropriate response to this sort of taunt. There are many better ways to handle trolling by idiots on the Internet.

2) My father raised me to be capable not only of fighting my own battles, but to be capable of determining which battles are worth fighting, and which ones are simply beneath even contempt, and should be given the consideration they are due. I.e., none.

3) The fact that the label "slut" was the one that enraged this man. Personally, I do not feel that consensual sexual behavior is anything to be ashamed over. I would be more amused by being labeled a slut, much the way I would be amused by being labeled a lesbian. As a feminist myself, I think the better way to handle slurs of this nature are to essentially take them back and remove their stigma, rather than offering to physically harm the person making the slur.

But hey, I am just a regular, garden-variety "atheist", what do I know about social justice?

If someone called my daughter a slut, I'd have a good laugh at their obvious ignorance- she still blushes when I compliment her mother's ass in her presence.

chillzero · 14th September 2012, 10:13 AM

Originally Posted by Hokulele

No, it is an attack on the people who claim to be for social justice, and yet let comments like the one by this man slide. If my father ever offered violence in response to insults hurled in my direction, I would be appalled for several reasons:

1) Physical violence is an inappropriate response to this sort of taunt. There are many better ways to handle trolling by idiots on the Internet.

2) My father raised me to be capable not only of fighting my own battles, but to be capable of determining which battles are worth fighting, and which ones are simply beneath even contempt, and should be given the consideration they are due. I.e., none.

3) The fact that the label "slut" was the one that enraged this man. Personally, I do not feel that consensual sexual behavior is anything to be ashamed over. I would be more amused by being labeled a slut, much the way I would be amused by being labeled a lesbian. As a feminist myself, I think the better way to handle slurs of this nature are to essentially take them back and remove their stigma, rather than offering to physically harm the person making the slur.

But hey, I am just a regular, garden-variety "atheist", what do I know about social justice?

The Central Scrutinizer · 14th September 2012, 10:54 AM

Originally Posted by bpesta22

Does she post here?

An FTBer commissioned her to debate me on an IQ study I did awhile back. It was an interesting exchange. Haven't followed her much since then, but I got the impression the FTB kool aid wore off for her, and I wondered why...

If you follow her on Facebook, she's no fan of A+ or the FTBullies.

westprog · 14th September 2012, 01:08 PM

Originally Posted by Piscivore

If someone called my daughter a slut, I'd have a good laugh at their obvious ignorance- she still blushes when I compliment her mother's ass in her presence.

That's not really the point, though. The man has, AFAIAA, nothing to do with this particular conflict. Somebody sought him out to insult his daughter. I think the fact that he stood by his daughter is entirely to be supported.

Every family is different, and different father daughter pairings will deal with such things in different ways. It's unfair to expect a father to conform to his daughter's principles, or vice versa - or to expect one to condemn the other where their principles differ. It would be holding someone to an absurdly high standard to expect them to publicly berate a family member for having different beliefs.

I recognise that intolerance of different behaviour and belief, leading to personal insult and exclusion, is a hallmark of A+, and precisely what people dislike about it. That's not a good reason to apply it back at them.

Checkmite · 14th September 2012, 01:22 PM

Originally Posted by Hokulele

No, it is an attack on the people who claim to be for social justice, and yet let comments like the one by this man slide.

Like PZ, this man is not part of atheist plus, so why is atheist plus accountable for letting or not letting his comments "slide"? Why this insistence on holding them responsible for everything that everyone else besides them is saying?

Persons - allegedly reasonable, non-insulting levelheaded non-atheist-plus persons, mind - sought this man out to call his daughter a slut in order to get some reaction. Reaction gotten. Blame atheism plus for the reaction?

Doubt · 14th September 2012, 01:33 PM

Originally Posted by Checkmite

Like PZ, this man is not part of atheist plus, so why is atheist plus accountable for letting or not letting his comments "slide"? Why this insistence on holding them responsible for everything that everyone else besides them is saying?

Persons - allegedly reasonable, non-insulting levelheaded non-atheist-plus persons, mind - sought this man out to call his daughter a slut in order to get some reaction. Reaction gotten. Blame atheism plus for the reaction?

Who claims to be or not be part of Atheism + ends up being a game. PZ claims to not be a part of it but is closely associated with the founders and they share a common outlook. They mutually classify all those that disagree with them in the same categories and the founders of A+ and he are all friends. They attack the same targets using the same tactics and rhetoric. If you heard or read any of the stuff that went on on FTB including the G+ meetups before TAM you would see that there is only a distinction without a difference between them. As for Whats-her-names father, I am inclined to give him a pass to the extent that he is trying to defend his kid. But not to the A+ crowd that refuses to distinguish between themselves when their would be allies say things that they should find objectionable.

Piscivore · 14th September 2012, 01:37 PM

Originally Posted by westprog

That's not really the point, though. The man has, AFAIAA, nothing to do with this particular conflict. Somebody sought him out to insult his daughter. I think the fact that he stood by his daughter is entirely to be supported.

Every family is different, and different father daughter pairings will deal with such things in different ways. It's unfair to expect a father to conform to his daughter's principles, or vice versa - or to expect one to condemn the other where their principles differ. It would be holding someone to an absurdly high standard to expect them to publicly berate a family member for having different beliefs.

I recognise that intolerance of different behaviour and belief, leading to personal insult and exclusion, is a hallmark of A+, and precisely what people dislike about it. That's not a good reason to apply it back at them.

I wasn't making any judgment of that father or commenting on A+ at all with that, just saying something funny about my kid.

But for the record:
Resorting to crude insults because of a disagreement is vulgar and anti-rational, and implies one's position is vacuous and without merit.
Directing insuts at or making them to an uninvolved family member is despicable.
Reacting to insults with threats of violence, even if emotionally understandable, is also vulgar, serves only to escalate conflict, and is often exactly the sort of reaction the offending party wishes to incite. It helps them turn the disagreement away from supported arguments and reason to emotional mudwrestling, where evidence is replaced with invective.

westprog · 14th September 2012, 01:46 PM

Originally Posted by Doubt

Who claims to be or not be part of Atheism + ends up being a game. PZ claims to not be a part of it but is closely associated with the founders and they share a common outlook. They mutually classify all those that disagree with them in the same categories and the founders of A+ and he are all friends. They attack the same targets using the same tactics and rhetoric. If you heard or read any of the stuff that went on on FTB including the G+ meetups before TAM you would see that there is only a distinction without a difference between them. As for Whats-her-names father, I am inclined to give him a pass to the extent that he is trying to defend his kid. But not to the A+ crowd that refuses to distinguish between themselves when their would be allies say things that they should find objectionable.

I think it's reasonable that when a leading atheist posts an article saying what A+ is all about, that people take it that he has the right to say what A+ is all about. To be fair to Jan McReight, she did object to some of the things Carrier was saying.

westprog · 14th September 2012, 02:00 PM

Originally Posted by Piscivore

I wasn't making any judgment of that father or commenting on A+ at all with that, just saying something funny about my kid.

Agreed.

Quote:

But for the record:
Resorting to crude insults because of a disagreement is vulgar and anti-rational, and implies one's position is vacuous and without merit.
Directing insuts at or making them to an uninvolved family member is despicable.
Reacting to insults with threats of violence, even if emotionally understandable, is also vulgar, serves only to escalate conflict, and is often exactly the sort of reaction the offending party wishes to incite. It helps them turn the disagreement away from supported arguments and reason to emotional mudwrestling, where evidence is replaced with invective.

However, that's not a concern of anybody's family. I have no reason to suppose that the father in question has the slightest interest in the issues being discussed, in common with the vast majority of people, and wouldn't care about what his comments might do for the state of discussions among atheist activists.

Part of the problem with discussions on the internet is that people say things that they would be unwilling to say to somebody's face.

Piscivore · 14th September 2012, 02:09 PM

Originally Posted by westprog

However, that's not a concern of anybody's family. I have no reason to suppose that the father in question has the slightest interest in the issues being discussed, in common with the vast majority of people, and wouldn't care about what his comments might do for the state of discussions among atheist activists.

Even outside the context of whatever precipitated the insult, reacting to insults with threats is just being a puppet of the offending party. That's the whole idea behind trolling- inciting an emotional reaction, the more extreme the better. That's the idea behind all insults. Getting the target to threaten violence is hitting the jackpot.

Quote:

Part of the problem with discussions on the internet is that people say things that they would be unwilling to say to somebody's face.

Too true.

WillyWonka · 14th September 2012, 02:34 PM

Originally Posted by westprog

However, that's not a concern of anybody's family. I have no reason to suppose that the father in question has the slightest interest in the issues being discussed, in common with the vast majority of people, and wouldn't care about what his comments might do for the state of discussions among atheist activists.

Part of the problem with discussions on the internet is that people say things that they would be unwilling to say to somebody's face.

Actually, to her benefit, McCreight tweeted that she was not too happy with her father's reaction. I think that she would have hoped that he had stayed away from this discussion.

This is becoming the Fox News of atheism; everything has becomed an hyperbole, on both sides: "I do not like Rebecca's comment on something; I am a rape-apologist. I question PZ's point of view, I am a douchebag. Someone does not like that Amy makes and sells A+ ceramics, she is an opportunist. Someone disagree with McCreight blog post, she is a slut, and so on. "

Humes fork · 14th September 2012, 02:46 PM

How long time before McCreight joins a progressive church of some sort and declares atheists the worst threat ever to women and minorities?

RebeccaBradley · 14th September 2012, 02:53 PM

Have to say, as a parent of grownup children (26 and 28) I have a lot of empathy for Jen Mc's dad. When I'm attacked or insulted, I can laugh it off, fight back, or ignore it; but attacks on or insults to my offspring actually bother me far more than when I'm the target myself. I would probably be tempted to leap to their defence, as he did - and they, in turn, would be embarrassed or annoyed at me for doing so, as Jen Mc was. I think it's pretty normal.

westprog · 14th September 2012, 03:13 PM

Originally Posted by Piscivore

Even outside the context of whatever precipitated the insult, reacting to insults with threats is just being a puppet of the offending party. That's the whole idea behind trolling- inciting an emotional reaction, the more extreme the better. That's the idea behind all insults. Getting the target to threaten violence is hitting the jackpot.

But I don't think we should judge the dad on the same basis as people who start movements and make statements. He's just an innocent bystander, reacting - in this case, in an Aldrin-like manner.

Piscivore · 14th September 2012, 03:21 PM

Originally Posted by westprog

But I don't think we should judge the dad on the same basis as people who start movements and make statements. He's just an innocent bystander, reacting - in this case, in an Aldrin-like manner.

I'm not. Neither, do I think, is Hokulele. She and I are both simply saying that "Physical violence is an inappropriate response to this sort of taunt"- which is, I have to say, of an entirely different sort than the one offered to Aldrin (his response to which I heartily approve). The insult leveled at Aldrin was of a calcultated, specific and personal nature to him; the one offered the father about his daughter was speculative, random, and obviously rectally produced.

This has nothing to do with the character of the man, who I'm sure is a fine, upstanding, good person who is just defending his little girl, as Rebecca Bradley above describes. As I said, it is despicable he was even brought into this. I'm simply stating that when the rabid sub-primates start flinging poo, getting mad and shaking one's fist at them is the incorrect response.

Sledge · 14th September 2012, 03:22 PM

I have no idea what the hell is going on here. Something about idiots trying to redefine atheism I think. But what's come through very clearly is the need for two questions to be answered.
1) Is this woman really a slut?
2) If so, is she free this weekend?

Walter Ego · 14th September 2012, 05:59 PM

Originally Posted by RebeccaBradley

Have to say, as a parent of grownup children (26 and 28) I have a lot of empathy for Jen Mc's dad. When I'm attacked or insulted, I can laugh it off, fight back, or ignore it; but attacks on or insults to my offspring actually bother me far more than when I'm the target myself. I would probably be tempted to leap to their defence, as he did - and they, in turn, would be embarrassed or annoyed at me for doing so, as Jen Mc was. I think it's pretty normal.

Parents defending their children. Children embarrassed by parental behavior. Normal as normal can be.

westprog · 14th September 2012, 07:45 PM

Originally Posted by Piscivore

I'm not. Neither, do I think, is Hokulele. She and I are both simply saying that "Physical violence is an inappropriate response to this sort of taunt"- which is, I have to say, of an entirely different sort than the one offered to Aldrin (his response to which I heartily approve). The insult leveled at Aldrin was of a calcultated, specific and personal nature to him; the one offered the father about his daughter was speculative, random, and obviously rectally produced.

This has nothing to do with the character of the man, who I'm sure is a fine, upstanding, good person who is just defending his little girl, as Rebecca Bradley above describes. As I said, it is despicable he was even brought into this. I'm simply stating that when the rabid sub-primates start flinging poo, getting mad and shaking one's fist at them is the incorrect response.

Fair enough. I don't think we significantly disagree here.

Piscivore · 14th September 2012, 08:23 PM

Originally Posted by westprog

Fair enough. I don't think we significantly disagree here.

I don't either.

UnrepentantSinner · 14th September 2012, 09:48 PM

Originally Posted by Sledge

I have no idea what the hell is going on here. Something about idiots trying to redefine atheism I think. But what's come through very clearly is the need for two questions to be answered.
1) Is this woman really a slut?
2) If so, is she free this weekend?

Stay classy Sledge.

UnrepentantSinner · 14th September 2012, 09:52 PM

Originally Posted by Checkmite

Persons - allegedly reasonable, non-insulting levelheaded non-atheist-plus persons, mind - sought this man out to call his daughter a slut in order to get some reaction. Reaction gotten. Blame atheism plus for the reaction?

And you know this to be true how? I'm increasingly of the impression that these are 4chan, etc. trolls who send this stuff for the lulz rather skeptics or atheists who are so upset with A+ that we're sending death and rape threats.

I think the most harmful, tear-inducing behavior 99.9% of atheists and skeptics would engage in would be wearing a t-shirt at TAM.

westprog · 14th September 2012, 11:06 PM

Originally Posted by Piscivore

I don't either.

No, you're wrong.

Acleron · 15th September 2012, 02:49 AM

Originally Posted by UnrepentantSinner

And you know this to be true how? I'm increasingly of the impression that these are 4chan, etc. trolls who send this stuff for the lulz rather skeptics or atheists who are so upset with A+ that we're sending death and rape threats.

I think the most harmful, tear-inducing behavior 99.9% of atheists and skeptics would engage in would be wearing a t-shirt at TAM.

And that sums up the whole imbroglio.

Wildy · 15th September 2012, 03:49 AM

Wow, that "privilege" thread on their forums has been getting quite a few "trolls".

chillzero · 15th September 2012, 03:58 AM

I don't think a comment like

Quote:

TheGillotine wrote:"Because I am a straight, white male, I am automatically expected to have priviledge"

is trolling.

chillzero · 15th September 2012, 04:04 AM

... and is it really abusive to say you do not pity someone? I have been pitied by many, in my life, and I fee that to be more insulting than if they did not pity me, and took time to see what I was doing about the things they felt needed to be pitied.

Wildy · 15th September 2012, 04:38 AM

Originally Posted by chillzero

I don't think a comment like

Quote:

TheGillotine wrote:"Because I am a straight, white male, I am automatically expected to have priviledge"

is trolling.

If that were up to us to decide. I'm guessing that the definition of "privilege" used by the mod who is deleting all those posts is one where white males can not experience anything negative.

Foolmewunz · 15th September 2012, 04:45 AM

Originally Posted by chillzero

I don't think a comment like is trolling.

Albeit quite likely on the completely opposite side of the political spectrum, I wonder if they realize just how similar the moderation over there is to that at the old Loose Change Forums (Ver. 2.02) and Pilots for Truth?

Wildy · 15th September 2012, 04:51 AM

Well they are pretty similar. They're both safe spaces for people to discuss the things that they believe in without fear of people who oppose those ideas showing up.

chillzero · 15th September 2012, 04:52 AM

Originally Posted by Foolmewunz

Albeit quite likely on the completely opposite side of the political spectrum, I wonder if they realize just how similar the moderation over there is to that at the old Loose Change Forums (Ver. 2.02) and Pilots for Truth?

That has crossed my mind once or twice as well. I certainly don't feel encouraged to join the forum ... or the movement it represents. I think they need to think very carefully about this fact - the forum represents the movement, as it is set up to enable those who align with it to congregate, and it is not shining a great light on it.

Wildy · 15th September 2012, 04:57 AM

Well it doesn't help that nobody can really say what A+ers are supposed to believe in beyond broad general topics.

Checkmite · 15th September 2012, 07:23 AM

Originally Posted by UnrepentantSinner

And you know this to be true how? I'm increasingly of the impression that these are 4chan, etc. trolls who send this stuff for the lulz rather skeptics or atheists who are so upset with A+ that we're sending death and rape threats.

Maybe, but is it fair to insist that they merely presume that? The same people are getting the same treatment now that they were getting back before there was an atheism plus, back when it was just a set of "incidents" being discussed on a skeptic forum and a skeptic blog. Is there any reason to believe the people posting these same reactions are of a different demographic now as then?

PZ Myers and that one girl's dad are treated like they speak for the atheism plus because atheism plus hasn't been denouncing their statements. If we apply that same logic to the trolls, what do we have? I think I remember reading some suggestions by skeptics in this very thread that it would be a good idea to incite 4chan to attack the atheism plus forum. So what are they supposed to think?

It's unfairly out of context to point at the siege mentality of this brand-new group and it's brand-new forum; "atheist plus" was born out of the box with a huge anti-following already in place and going full steam.

16.5 · 15th September 2012, 07:40 AM

Originally Posted by Checkmite

It's unfairly out of context to point at the siege mentality of this brand-new group and it's brand-new forum; "atheist plus" was born out of the box with a huge anti-following already in place and going full steam.

"atheist plus" created a huge anti-following already in place and going full steam was born right out of the box with their incendiary rhetoric and by labeling people who did not agree with them as misogynist etc.

You seem surprised by it. From reading what the A+ bullies say, they don't consider that a bug, they consider that a feature.

Checkmite · 15th September 2012, 07:43 AM

Tit-for-tat; not interested in joining the puerile "who started it" contest.

qayak · 15th September 2012, 07:45 AM

Originally Posted by Wildy

They're both safe spaces for people to discuss the things that they believe in...

So that's what they mean by "safe space!"

In all honesty, the Middle East seems safer at the moment.

14th September 2012, 06:42 AM	#921
Ocelot Illuminator Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: London Posts: 3,016	Originally Posted by Ocelot http://icbseverywhere.com/blog/2012/...-and-certaint/ If ever there were a ^This that needed ^Thissing then ^This is it. The more I read from Barbara Drescher the more I want to read more. On a side note it looks like the JREF are paying attention to my views on this matter. http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/...ref-staff.html
	__________________ EDL = English Disco Lovers

14th September 2012, 06:54 AM	#922
The Central Scrutinizer Penultimate Amazing Pither Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: The White Zone Posts: 42,264	Originally Posted by Ocelot On a side note it looks like the JREF are paying attention to my views on this matter. http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/...ref-staff.html She has one of the few blogs I ever read. Not often, but more often than others, which is mostly never.
	__________________ If I see somebody with a gun on a plane? I'll kill him.

14th September 2012, 07:24 AM	#923
westprog Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 8,928	Originally Posted by Mr. Scott I've heard that for good people to do evil things ... that takes religion. Yes, I've heard that too. It's not true.
westprog Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 8,928	__________________ Dreary whiner, who gradually outwore his welcome, before blowing it entirely.

14th September 2012, 08:24 AM	#924
Hokulele Official Nemesis Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Trying to decide whether to set defenses against an army, or against mole rats. Posts: 27,265	Originally Posted by Checkmite Somebody emails this guy calling his daughter a slut, which makes him upset and angry, and the fact that he got upset and angry is now a vector of attack against his daughter? What on Earth...? No, it is an attack on the people who claim to be for social justice, and yet let comments like the one by this man slide. If my father ever offered violence in response to insults hurled in my direction, I would be appalled for several reasons: 1) Physical violence is an inappropriate response to this sort of taunt. There are many better ways to handle trolling by idiots on the Internet. 2) My father raised me to be capable not only of fighting my own battles, but to be capable of determining which battles are worth fighting, and which ones are simply beneath even contempt, and should be given the consideration they are due. I.e., none. 3) The fact that the label "slut" was the one that enraged this man. Personally, I do not feel that consensual sexual behavior is anything to be ashamed over. I would be more amused by being labeled a slut, much the way I would be amused by being labeled a lesbian. As a feminist myself, I think the better way to handle slurs of this nature are to essentially take them back and remove their stigma, rather than offering to physically harm the person making the slur. But hey, I am just a regular, garden-variety "atheist", what do I know about social justice?
	__________________ Yvette: "Blasty! Blasty! Blasty!" Some person: "Why did you shoot that?" Yvette: "Blasty! Blasty! Blasty!" - Tragic Monkey

14th September 2012, 09:11 AM	#925
bpesta22 Cereal Killer Join Date: Jul 2001 Posts: 4,648	Originally Posted by The Central Scrutinizer She has one of the few blogs I ever read. Not often, but more often than others, which is mostly never. Does she post here? An FTBer commissioned her to debate me on an IQ study I did awhile back. It was an interesting exchange. Haven't followed her much since then, but I got the impression the FTB kool aid wore off for her, and I wondered why...
bpesta22 Cereal Killer Join Date: Jul 2001 Posts: 4,648	__________________ Manifest thy bosoms or decamp.

14th September 2012, 09:41 AM	#926
Piscivore Smelling fishy Join Date: May 2004 Location: Home is wherever I'm with you Posts: 26,454	Originally Posted by Hokulele No, it is an attack on the people who claim to be for social justice, and yet let comments like the one by this man slide. If my father ever offered violence in response to insults hurled in my direction, I would be appalled for several reasons: 1) Physical violence is an inappropriate response to this sort of taunt. There are many better ways to handle trolling by idiots on the Internet. 2) My father raised me to be capable not only of fighting my own battles, but to be capable of determining which battles are worth fighting, and which ones are simply beneath even contempt, and should be given the consideration they are due. I.e., none. 3) The fact that the label "slut" was the one that enraged this man. Personally, I do not feel that consensual sexual behavior is anything to be ashamed over. I would be more amused by being labeled a slut, much the way I would be amused by being labeled a lesbian. As a feminist myself, I think the better way to handle slurs of this nature are to essentially take them back and remove their stigma, rather than offering to physically harm the person making the slur. But hey, I am just a regular, garden-variety "atheist", what do I know about social justice? If someone called my daughter a slut, I'd have a good laugh at their obvious ignorance- she still blushes when I compliment her mother's ass in her presence.
	__________________ It's always been Wankershim. "...untrustworthy obnoxious twerp." - CFLarsen

14th September 2012, 10:13 AM	#927
chillzero Domestic Godless Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Top of the world, ma! Posts: 15,226	Originally Posted by Hokulele No, it is an attack on the people who claim to be for social justice, and yet let comments like the one by this man slide. If my father ever offered violence in response to insults hurled in my direction, I would be appalled for several reasons: 1) Physical violence is an inappropriate response to this sort of taunt. There are many better ways to handle trolling by idiots on the Internet. 2) My father raised me to be capable not only of fighting my own battles, but to be capable of determining which battles are worth fighting, and which ones are simply beneath even contempt, and should be given the consideration they are due. I.e., none. 3) The fact that the label "slut" was the one that enraged this man. Personally, I do not feel that consensual sexual behavior is anything to be ashamed over. I would be more amused by being labeled a slut, much the way I would be amused by being labeled a lesbian. As a feminist myself, I think the better way to handle slurs of this nature are to essentially take them back and remove their stigma, rather than offering to physically harm the person making the slur. But hey, I am just a regular, garden-variety "atheist", what do I know about social justice?

14th September 2012, 10:54 AM	#928
The Central Scrutinizer Penultimate Amazing Pither Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: The White Zone Posts: 42,264	Originally Posted by bpesta22 Does she post here? An FTBer commissioned her to debate me on an IQ study I did awhile back. It was an interesting exchange. Haven't followed her much since then, but I got the impression the FTB kool aid wore off for her, and I wondered why... If you follow her on Facebook, she's no fan of A+ or the FTBullies.
	__________________ If I see somebody with a gun on a plane? I'll kill him.

14th September 2012, 01:08 PM	#929
westprog Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 8,928	Originally Posted by Piscivore If someone called my daughter a slut, I'd have a good laugh at their obvious ignorance- she still blushes when I compliment her mother's ass in her presence. That's not really the point, though. The man has, AFAIAA, nothing to do with this particular conflict. Somebody sought him out to insult his daughter. I think the fact that he stood by his daughter is entirely to be supported. Every family is different, and different father daughter pairings will deal with such things in different ways. It's unfair to expect a father to conform to his daughter's principles, or vice versa - or to expect one to condemn the other where their principles differ. It would be holding someone to an absurdly high standard to expect them to publicly berate a family member for having different beliefs. I recognise that intolerance of different behaviour and belief, leading to personal insult and exclusion, is a hallmark of A+, and precisely what people dislike about it. That's not a good reason to apply it back at them.
westprog Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 8,928	__________________ Dreary whiner, who gradually outwore his welcome, before blowing it entirely.

14th September 2012, 01:22 PM	#930
Checkmite Skepticifimisticalationist Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Third in line Posts: 14,879	Originally Posted by Hokulele No, it is an attack on the people who claim to be for social justice, and yet let comments like the one by this man slide. Like PZ, this man is not part of atheist plus, so why is atheist plus accountable for letting or not letting his comments "slide"? Why this insistence on holding them responsible for everything that everyone else besides them is saying? Persons - allegedly reasonable, non-insulting levelheaded non-atheist-plus persons, mind - sought this man out to call his daughter a slut in order to get some reaction. Reaction gotten. Blame atheism plus for the reaction?
	__________________ "¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD? ¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?" --- Carlos S., 2002

14th September 2012, 01:33 PM	#931
Doubt Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2002 Posts: 5,443	Originally Posted by Checkmite Like PZ, this man is not part of atheist plus, so why is atheist plus accountable for letting or not letting his comments "slide"? Why this insistence on holding them responsible for everything that everyone else besides them is saying? Persons - allegedly reasonable, non-insulting levelheaded non-atheist-plus persons, mind - sought this man out to call his daughter a slut in order to get some reaction. Reaction gotten. Blame atheism plus for the reaction? Who claims to be or not be part of Atheism + ends up being a game. PZ claims to not be a part of it but is closely associated with the founders and they share a common outlook. They mutually classify all those that disagree with them in the same categories and the founders of A+ and he are all friends. They attack the same targets using the same tactics and rhetoric. If you heard or read any of the stuff that went on on FTB including the G+ meetups before TAM you would see that there is only a distinction without a difference between them. As for Whats-her-names father, I am inclined to give him a pass to the extent that he is trying to defend his kid. But not to the A+ crowd that refuses to distinguish between themselves when their would be allies say things that they should find objectionable.
Doubt Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2002 Posts: 5,443	__________________ Doubt world tour locations: Mostly home for now. No international travel scheduled other than the Galapagos trip in March. Disclaimer: Not a high energy scientist!

14th September 2012, 01:37 PM	#932
Piscivore Smelling fishy Join Date: May 2004 Location: Home is wherever I'm with you Posts: 26,454	Originally Posted by westprog That's not really the point, though. The man has, AFAIAA, nothing to do with this particular conflict. Somebody sought him out to insult his daughter. I think the fact that he stood by his daughter is entirely to be supported. Every family is different, and different father daughter pairings will deal with such things in different ways. It's unfair to expect a father to conform to his daughter's principles, or vice versa - or to expect one to condemn the other where their principles differ. It would be holding someone to an absurdly high standard to expect them to publicly berate a family member for having different beliefs. I recognise that intolerance of different behaviour and belief, leading to personal insult and exclusion, is a hallmark of A+, and precisely what people dislike about it. That's not a good reason to apply it back at them. I wasn't making any judgment of that father or commenting on A+ at all with that, just saying something funny about my kid. But for the record: Resorting to crude insults because of a disagreement is vulgar and anti-rational, and implies one's position is vacuous and without merit. Directing insuts at or making them to an uninvolved family member is despicable. Reacting to insults with threats of violence, even if emotionally understandable, is also vulgar, serves only to escalate conflict, and is often exactly the sort of reaction the offending party wishes to incite. It helps them turn the disagreement away from supported arguments and reason to emotional mudwrestling, where evidence is replaced with invective.
	__________________ It's always been Wankershim. "...untrustworthy obnoxious twerp." - CFLarsen

14th September 2012, 01:46 PM	#933
westprog Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 8,928	Originally Posted by Doubt Who claims to be or not be part of Atheism + ends up being a game. PZ claims to not be a part of it but is closely associated with the founders and they share a common outlook. They mutually classify all those that disagree with them in the same categories and the founders of A+ and he are all friends. They attack the same targets using the same tactics and rhetoric. If you heard or read any of the stuff that went on on FTB including the G+ meetups before TAM you would see that there is only a distinction without a difference between them. As for Whats-her-names father, I am inclined to give him a pass to the extent that he is trying to defend his kid. But not to the A+ crowd that refuses to distinguish between themselves when their would be allies say things that they should find objectionable. I think it's reasonable that when a leading atheist posts an article saying what A+ is all about, that people take it that he has the right to say what A+ is all about. To be fair to Jan McReight, she did object to some of the things Carrier was saying.
westprog Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 8,928	__________________ Dreary whiner, who gradually outwore his welcome, before blowing it entirely.

14th September 2012, 02:00 PM	#934
westprog Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 8,928	Originally Posted by Piscivore I wasn't making any judgment of that father or commenting on A+ at all with that, just saying something funny about my kid. Agreed. Quote: But for the record: Resorting to crude insults because of a disagreement is vulgar and anti-rational, and implies one's position is vacuous and without merit. Directing insuts at or making them to an uninvolved family member is despicable. Reacting to insults with threats of violence, even if emotionally understandable, is also vulgar, serves only to escalate conflict, and is often exactly the sort of reaction the offending party wishes to incite. It helps them turn the disagreement away from supported arguments and reason to emotional mudwrestling, where evidence is replaced with invective. However, that's not a concern of anybody's family. I have no reason to suppose that the father in question has the slightest interest in the issues being discussed, in common with the vast majority of people, and wouldn't care about what his comments might do for the state of discussions among atheist activists. Part of the problem with discussions on the internet is that people say things that they would be unwilling to say to somebody's face.
westprog Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 8,928	__________________ Dreary whiner, who gradually outwore his welcome, before blowing it entirely.

14th September 2012, 02:09 PM	#935
Piscivore Smelling fishy Join Date: May 2004 Location: Home is wherever I'm with you Posts: 26,454	Originally Posted by westprog However, that's not a concern of anybody's family. I have no reason to suppose that the father in question has the slightest interest in the issues being discussed, in common with the vast majority of people, and wouldn't care about what his comments might do for the state of discussions among atheist activists. Even outside the context of whatever precipitated the insult, reacting to insults with threats is just being a puppet of the offending party. That's the whole idea behind trolling- inciting an emotional reaction, the more extreme the better. That's the idea behind all insults. Getting the target to threaten violence is hitting the jackpot. Quote: Part of the problem with discussions on the internet is that people say things that they would be unwilling to say to somebody's face. Too true.
	__________________ It's always been Wankershim. "...untrustworthy obnoxious twerp." - CFLarsen

14th September 2012, 02:34 PM	#936
WillyWonka Thinker Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: The Great White North Posts: 156	Originally Posted by westprog However, that's not a concern of anybody's family. I have no reason to suppose that the father in question has the slightest interest in the issues being discussed, in common with the vast majority of people, and wouldn't care about what his comments might do for the state of discussions among atheist activists. Part of the problem with discussions on the internet is that people say things that they would be unwilling to say to somebody's face. Actually, to her benefit, McCreight tweeted that she was not too happy with her father's reaction. I think that she would have hoped that he had stayed away from this discussion. This is becoming the Fox News of atheism; everything has becomed an hyperbole, on both sides: "I do not like Rebecca's comment on something; I am a rape-apologist. I question PZ's point of view, I am a douchebag. Someone does not like that Amy makes and sells A+ ceramics, she is an opportunist. Someone disagree with McCreight blog post, she is a slut, and so on. "

14th September 2012, 02:46 PM	#937
Humes fork Master Poster Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Sweden Posts: 2,350	How long time before McCreight joins a progressive church of some sort and declares atheists the worst threat ever to women and minorities?
	__________________ "Faith is the surrender of the mind; it’s the surrender of reason, it’s the surrender of the only thing that makes us different from other mammals. It’s our need to believe, and to surrender our skepticism and our reason, our yearning to discard that and put all our trust or faith in someone or something, that is the sinister thing to me. Of all the supposed virtues, faith must be the most overrated." - Christopher Hitchens

14th September 2012, 02:53 PM	#938
RebeccaBradley Critical Thinker Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Ootischenia Posts: 442	Have to say, as a parent of grownup children (26 and 28) I have a lot of empathy for Jen Mc's dad. When I'm attacked or insulted, I can laugh it off, fight back, or ignore it; but attacks on or insults to my offspring actually bother me far more than when I'm the target myself. I would probably be tempted to leap to their defence, as he did - and they, in turn, would be embarrassed or annoyed at me for doing so, as Jen Mc was. I think it's pretty normal.
	__________________ I'm a happy SINner on the Skeptic Ink Network! The Lateral Truth: Writings of a Mild-Mannered Apostate http://skepticink.com/lateraltruth/

14th September 2012, 03:13 PM	#939
westprog Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 8,928	Originally Posted by Piscivore Even outside the context of whatever precipitated the insult, reacting to insults with threats is just being a puppet of the offending party. That's the whole idea behind trolling- inciting an emotional reaction, the more extreme the better. That's the idea behind all insults. Getting the target to threaten violence is hitting the jackpot. But I don't think we should judge the dad on the same basis as people who start movements and make statements. He's just an innocent bystander, reacting - in this case, in an Aldrin-like manner.
westprog Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 8,928	__________________ Dreary whiner, who gradually outwore his welcome, before blowing it entirely.

14th September 2012, 03:21 PM	#940
Piscivore Smelling fishy Join Date: May 2004 Location: Home is wherever I'm with you Posts: 26,454	Originally Posted by westprog But I don't think we should judge the dad on the same basis as people who start movements and make statements. He's just an innocent bystander, reacting - in this case, in an Aldrin-like manner. I'm not. Neither, do I think, is Hokulele. She and I are both simply saying that "Physical violence is an inappropriate response to this sort of taunt"- which is, I have to say, of an entirely different sort than the one offered to Aldrin (his response to which I heartily approve). The insult leveled at Aldrin was of a calcultated, specific and personal nature to him; the one offered the father about his daughter was speculative, random, and obviously rectally produced. This has nothing to do with the character of the man, who I'm sure is a fine, upstanding, good person who is just defending his little girl, as Rebecca Bradley above describes. As I said, it is despicable he was even brought into this. I'm simply stating that when the rabid sub-primates start flinging poo, getting mad and shaking one's fist at them is the incorrect response.
	__________________ It's always been Wankershim. "...untrustworthy obnoxious twerp." - CFLarsen Last edited by Piscivore; 14th September 2012 at 03:28 PM.

14th September 2012, 03:22 PM	#941
Sledge Grammaton Cleric Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Swingin' on a star Posts: 7,123	I have no idea what the hell is going on here. Something about idiots trying to redefine atheism I think. But what's come through very clearly is the need for two questions to be answered. 1) Is this woman really a slut? 2) If so, is she free this weekend?
	__________________ "The perfect haiku would have just two syllables: Airwolf" ~ Ernest Cline "Science knows it doesn't know everything, otherwise it would stop" ~ Dara O'Briain.

14th September 2012, 05:59 PM	#942
Walter Ego Master Poster Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 2,557	Originally Posted by RebeccaBradley Have to say, as a parent of grownup children (26 and 28) I have a lot of empathy for Jen Mc's dad. When I'm attacked or insulted, I can laugh it off, fight back, or ignore it; but attacks on or insults to my offspring actually bother me far more than when I'm the target myself. I would probably be tempted to leap to their defence, as he did - and they, in turn, would be embarrassed or annoyed at me for doing so, as Jen Mc was. I think it's pretty normal. Parents defending their children. Children embarrassed by parental behavior. Normal as normal can be.

14th September 2012, 07:45 PM	#943
westprog Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 8,928	Originally Posted by Piscivore I'm not. Neither, do I think, is Hokulele. She and I are both simply saying that "Physical violence is an inappropriate response to this sort of taunt"- which is, I have to say, of an entirely different sort than the one offered to Aldrin (his response to which I heartily approve). The insult leveled at Aldrin was of a calcultated, specific and personal nature to him; the one offered the father about his daughter was speculative, random, and obviously rectally produced. This has nothing to do with the character of the man, who I'm sure is a fine, upstanding, good person who is just defending his little girl, as Rebecca Bradley above describes. As I said, it is despicable he was even brought into this. I'm simply stating that when the rabid sub-primates start flinging poo, getting mad and shaking one's fist at them is the incorrect response. Fair enough. I don't think we significantly disagree here.
westprog Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 8,928	__________________ Dreary whiner, who gradually outwore his welcome, before blowing it entirely.

14th September 2012, 08:23 PM	#944
Piscivore Smelling fishy Join Date: May 2004 Location: Home is wherever I'm with you Posts: 26,454	Originally Posted by westprog Fair enough. I don't think we significantly disagree here. I don't either.
	__________________ It's always been Wankershim. "...untrustworthy obnoxious twerp." - CFLarsen

14th September 2012, 09:48 PM	#945
UnrepentantSinner A post by Alan Smithee Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: USAian is not a word Posts: 26,351	Originally Posted by Sledge I have no idea what the hell is going on here. Something about idiots trying to redefine atheism I think. But what's come through very clearly is the need for two questions to be answered. 1) Is this woman really a slut? 2) If so, is she free this weekend? Stay classy Sledge.
	__________________ I am an American citizen who is part of American society and briefly served in the American armed forces. I use American dollars and pay taxes that support the American government. And yes, despite the editorial decison to change American politics to the nonsensical "USA politics" subforum, I follow and comment on American politics.

14th September 2012, 09:52 PM	#946
UnrepentantSinner A post by Alan Smithee Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: USAian is not a word Posts: 26,351	Originally Posted by Checkmite Persons - allegedly reasonable, non-insulting levelheaded non-atheist-plus persons, mind - sought this man out to call his daughter a slut in order to get some reaction. Reaction gotten. Blame atheism plus for the reaction? And you know this to be true how? I'm increasingly of the impression that these are 4chan, etc. trolls who send this stuff for the lulz rather skeptics or atheists who are so upset with A+ that we're sending death and rape threats. I think the most harmful, tear-inducing behavior 99.9% of atheists and skeptics would engage in would be wearing a t-shirt at TAM.
	__________________ I am an American citizen who is part of American society and briefly served in the American armed forces. I use American dollars and pay taxes that support the American government. And yes, despite the editorial decison to change American politics to the nonsensical "USA politics" subforum, I follow and comment on American politics.

14th September 2012, 11:06 PM	#947
westprog Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 8,928	Originally Posted by Piscivore I don't either. No, you're wrong.
westprog Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 8,928	__________________ Dreary whiner, who gradually outwore his welcome, before blowing it entirely.

15th September 2012, 02:49 AM	#948
Acleron Graduate Poster Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: In a beautifully understandable universe Posts: 1,928	Originally Posted by UnrepentantSinner And you know this to be true how? I'm increasingly of the impression that these are 4chan, etc. trolls who send this stuff for the lulz rather skeptics or atheists who are so upset with A+ that we're sending death and rape threats. I think the most harmful, tear-inducing behavior 99.9% of atheists and skeptics would engage in would be wearing a t-shirt at TAM. And that sums up the whole imbroglio.

15th September 2012, 03:49 AM	#949
Wildy Adelaidean Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Australia, not that you'll read the "location" field. Posts: 9,921	Wow, that "privilege" thread on their forums has been getting quite a few "trolls".
	__________________ Latest Blog Posts:Atheism+ More Atheism+ stuff

15th September 2012, 03:58 AM	#950
chillzero Domestic Godless Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Top of the world, ma! Posts: 15,226	I don't think a comment like Quote: TheGillotine wrote:"Because I am a straight, white male, I am automatically expected to have priviledge" is trolling.

15th September 2012, 04:04 AM	#951
chillzero Domestic Godless Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Top of the world, ma! Posts: 15,226	... and is it really abusive to say you do not pity someone? I have been pitied by many, in my life, and I fee that to be more insulting than if they did not pity me, and took time to see what I was doing about the things they felt needed to be pitied.

15th September 2012, 04:38 AM	#952
Wildy Adelaidean Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Australia, not that you'll read the "location" field. Posts: 9,921	Originally Posted by chillzero I don't think a comment like Quote: TheGillotine wrote:"Because I am a straight, white male, I am automatically expected to have priviledge" is trolling. If that were up to us to decide. I'm guessing that the definition of "privilege" used by the mod who is deleting all those posts is one where white males can not experience anything negative.
	__________________ Latest Blog Posts:Atheism+ More Atheism+ stuff

15th September 2012, 04:45 AM	#953
Foolmewunz Grammar Resistance Leader Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Pattaya, Thailand Posts: 20,511	Originally Posted by chillzero I don't think a comment like is trolling. Albeit quite likely on the completely opposite side of the political spectrum, I wonder if they realize just how similar the moderation over there is to that at the old Loose Change Forums (Ver. 2.02) and Pilots for Truth?
	__________________ Ha! Foolmewunz has just been added to the list of people who aren't complete idiots. Hokulele Don't you wish someone had slapped baby Hitler really really hard? [i] Dr. Buzzo 02/13 [i]

15th September 2012, 04:51 AM	#954
Wildy Adelaidean Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Australia, not that you'll read the "location" field. Posts: 9,921	Well they are pretty similar. They're both safe spaces for people to discuss the things that they believe in without fear of people who oppose those ideas showing up.
	__________________ Latest Blog Posts:Atheism+ More Atheism+ stuff

15th September 2012, 04:52 AM	#955
chillzero Domestic Godless Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Top of the world, ma! Posts: 15,226	Originally Posted by Foolmewunz Albeit quite likely on the completely opposite side of the political spectrum, I wonder if they realize just how similar the moderation over there is to that at the old Loose Change Forums (Ver. 2.02) and Pilots for Truth? That has crossed my mind once or twice as well. I certainly don't feel encouraged to join the forum ... or the movement it represents. I think they need to think very carefully about this fact - the forum represents the movement, as it is set up to enable those who align with it to congregate, and it is not shining a great light on it.