So, after a long grueling week of travel and work, I land at the Minneapolis airport, where my plane gets parked for half an hour while we wait for our gate to clear, and I open up Twitter. And am greeted by a pile of fan mail from someone called @SammyBoal, who had created their account just an hour before in order to vomit up innuendo and insults at me and Rebecca Watson. This was pretty awful stuff — sexual smears and contempt for women. Fortunately, twitter makes blocking people easy, so I did and all of those wretched comments vanished…and I also made this statement:
These sickos will sink to amazing depths…the slymepit mentality is appalling.
@SammyBoal didn’t last long after that. The wave of revulsion, with people clicking on block, block, block to this bozo, led to the software at Twitter suspending the account. I wasn’t the only one appalled.
But then the hyperskeptics kicked into action. I got dunned with people claiming that the slymepit really wasn’t that bad, how dare I damn them with this accusation, I should research the place before making such accusations (never mind that I’ve had past experience with it, that I see its denizens commenting all over FtB, and that it’s fucking called the fucking Slymepit).
@SammyBoal isn’t a Slymepitter – please research that crap before putting it out there. Thanks.
Your pit doesn’t seem much better. You just like it because of the way it agrees with you & vice versa.
Having read all the posts there (yes, I have – bronchitis has afforded me a lot of time), don’t see that kind of asshatery.
Oh, really? I am skeptical of your hyperskeptical hyperskepticism. But OK, I’ll go look. Briefly. And right away I found one of the Slymepit denizens disavowing @SammyBoal.
What this person – https://twitter.com/SammyBoal – is doing is quite another, fucking repugnant, and I hope he/she/it isn’t hanging around here on The Slyme Pit. If he/she/it is, please speak up so I can ignore your vile crap now.
That’s a good start, but when your regulars think a person like @SammyBoal could be a likely hanger-on, you’ve got a problem. Even they think it is entirely possible that this was a pseudonym for one of their long term Watson/Myers haters.
But have no fear. The party line quickly absolved them of guilt: it was an ally of Watson putting on an act to make the Slymepit look bad.
I think it’s a sock to make her disagreers look extra bullying, rapey, and stuff
Right. So for years and years, Rebecca Watson’s bestest friends have been cobbling up sock puppet accounts to send her hate mail. Those thousands of revolting youtube comments? All buddies putting on an act. If we carry this logic further, the Slymepit itself is a great big pretense put on by all of her pals who make daily piles of insults and threats just to make her feel good about herself.
Ahh, but the best part: the haters were all fired up because the video of Rebecca Watson speaking at HFA has just been released…and their response was to post photos of obese women in degrading situations. Over and over. Amplified and made worse because everyone quotes the original ‘witty’ photo, so you end up with a whole page of fat woman photos, with people tittering over them and speculating whether it’s a drunk Rebecca Watson or Stephanie Zvan, and somehow they start whining about Natalie Reed and Ophelia Benson. The whole impression is of a bargain-basement 4chan where all of their childish ire is aimed at women on freethoughtblogs.
Who knew bronchitis affected the eyes?
Oh, well. I am vindicated, and next time some blinkered asshole tells me to hyperskeptically examine my well-founded assumptions about the slymepitters, I’m just going to direct them to this post, because I’m not going to read that vile collection of misogynistic scum again, no matter how hard they try to guilt me into it.
Just for oolon: Jesus fuck, but I’m fed up with your pose of supposed objective neutrality everywhere I see you. Don’t comment on this thread, unless you want to discover that that fence you’re so happily straddling is electrified razor wire, because I’ll give you a yank so hard you’ll find yourself occupying two cells in the dungeon.
“it”
PZ. You just got an e-hug… From me!
I hope you captured those twitters. This really IS the thing you can “refer” the slympit’s defenders too. I mean REALLY?
Ophelia Watson?
Blondin:
Sure, Ophelia Benson and Rebecca Watson can combine their powers to become OPHELIA WATSON!
Think feminist Voltron.
Jesus fucking Christ in a donut hole. I read some of the posts. I mean, damn, but they patent that deadly combination of smug superiority, cluelessness, and lack of self-awareness. I mean, how do they demonstrate that A+ is an affront to all that is Good and Holy?
By being fucking sexist misogynists.
Yes, the stupid idea that we ladies and our friends fake threats and slurs against ourselves to make our enemies look bad seems to be a recurring theme.
They claim that A+ is exlusionary. One of the stands of A+ is that treating people as things, including misogyny, racism, homophobia, etc., is absolutely unnacceptable. So to prove that A+ is exclusionary, they descend into misogyny, wholeheartedly, and, when an A+er or A+ fellow traveller objects, there is the proof that A+ is exclusionary becuase A+ers don’t tolerate what they say they don’t tolerate.
But I don’t think that there really is a logical reason to the resistance to A+. Or the idea that women are people. Or the idea that all people are people. This seems to be outright hatred of individuals (Watson, Benson, etc.) which translates into hatred of anything for which they stand. Which makes it seem so much like some of the idiocy that I remember from middle and high school.
Could make an interesting study for a socialogist.
Well at least we can thank them for doing all the work proving our point.
I did. And now I want one. Mattel, are you listening?
S wht s wrng wth tryng t b bjctv nd ntrl? ‘d hpply sy mstly fl th ntrlty tst whn t cms t th slympt… s xplnd < hrf="http://frthghtblgs.cm/bttrflsndwhls/2012/10/mtmrphss-2/#cmmnt-304020" rl="nfllw">hr trd nd fld, ‘m n grt dbtr. Bt gvn ws tld by *yr* cmmntrs tht hd n rght t xprss cncrns bt lbllng th *whl* slmpt s fll f nvtrt r rrdmbl sxst/msgynsts wtht nggng r dbtng wth thm thn wht m sppsd t d?
Fr tht mttr wht s nyn pprchng ths ‘wr’ r dvsn sppsd t d? PZ y r t b dmrd fr yr pssn nd zl n bng n thst ldr. dn’t dmr y fr yr pprch t cnflct n th cs f th slympt, nd dn’t thnk m ln. wll sy tht t s yr chc jst s hv my chc bt hw pprch cnflct. prsnlly m thnkng lk th thngs Dn Fnck s syng bt ‘n ht’ nd ‘kpng ppl n th cnvrstn’ NT plrsng nd dmnsng. S tht s hw m *tryng* t pprch t – prbbly nt sccdng!
‘m flly wr tht ths s prvlgd pstn n mny wys nd n th rpdtn thrd whr ‘dfndd’ th slympt s ‘myb’ nt bng ll msgynst md mstk. sggstd *vryn* shld g vr thr nd dbt thm. frgt cmmnt tht Xnth md t m n dffrnt thrd tht x wld nt g vr thr s thy wld lkly sbjct hr t hrrbl lngg. Nw tht dsn’t ffct m t ll – dbt thr s nythng thy cld sy tht wld hrm m prsnlly (Dsgst m ys). Bt frgt tht wht thy d css rl hrm t ppl pprssd by th lngg thy s n th nm f ‘fr spch!’… S ‘ll (nrly) nd n n plgy fr tht.
Fnlly PZ, dn’t pprct y lnkng crtcsm f m n thrd bt smn bng hrrbly sxst nd th slympt. f hv sd nythng tht cld b sn s bvsly msgynstc, rcst, blst, hmphbc, tc nywhr n FtBs r lswhr thn plgs t ths ‘v ffndd (Nt y thrfr!) – sy stpd thngs s ts nt mpssbl. ‘m nt n th fnc n rgrd t NY f ths bgtrs nd vn n ntmtn frm y tht m s ffnsv.
Dlurking.
Yep, I’ve read every page over about since early August and there’s some bile. I like to think I’ve gotten some insight into what’s going on:
Because gender politics generally and mysongyny in particular are a large part of what goes on at FTB, they think they are entitled to take the same skeptical toolkit and Ockham’s razor to those subjects as you’d take to religion and woo.
They know they’d get banned or moderated for it here, so they throw bombs from the sidelines.
It reminds me a bit of ‘Hitchens ‘Watch’ and it’s poe-spawn, ‘Hitchens Watch Watch’; and like those now sadly defunct sites, there’s laughs to be had, but some hard-core bitching, which can spill into hatey-hate-you, as well.
There’s usually a score or so posts on the scandal du jour; witness homeless-masturbatorgate yesterday.
The biggest surprise for me was the balance of women to men (with some margin for error as I couldn’t work out the gender of some participants).
I’m not thrilled with this “hyperskeptic” idea. It seems to portray these people as some sort of radical skeptics – just an extreme version of what we do. Wowbagger even asked recently if we might deserve part of the blame because we’ve been champions of skepticism. They’re not being skeptics. Skepticism is about a reasonable approach to belief, which is necessarily fair in its application. They’re selective, greeting claims that challenge their thinking with smug disbelief and those that support it with smug credulity. This pattern isn’t the product of organized skepticism, but has existed throughout history when it comes to responses to claims that could contribute to or subvert inequality and oppression.
I have no problem with being skeptical. I have no problem with employing Ockham’s razor.
So. What part of “In the USA, society is patriarchal” are you skeptical about? What part of “Women are human beings and should be treated as such” are you skeptical about? What part of “Human beings have the right to be human beings” are you skeptical about? What part of “Gendered insults are a silencing tactic” are you skeptical about?
https://proxy.freethought.online/pharyngula/2012/09/20/thunderdome-6/
This is too late, isn’t it?
Ogvorbis:
But the reasons they hate Watson, Benson, Natalie, &c, is because of what they say: “Guys, don’t do this.” It all comes back to privilege and misogyny.
I do get your point about them having the maturity of 13-year-olds, though. The obsessiveness with which they denigrate women in general, and the A+ women specifically, is really quite pathetic.
Stop lying and bullshitting. For example, you are free to express concerns. But you aren’t free to bully us, or to not provide evidence to back up your claims, or to only use hyperskepticism only on what we say. And when you aren’t taken seriously, as you aren’t, shut the fuck up like any person with half a wit would do.
This is absolute fuckwittery unless you can show they are actually listening and responding intelligently to what is said. But that isn’t the case, and never was the case. You can’t admit you were wrong with your fuckwitted suggestion, because they WON’T LISTEN…
Which brings up the real question, why haven’t you gone back there to your friends and leave us alone?
What’s funny is how they try to have it both ways. It’s not an attempt to intimidate or silence, they say. It’s just words, so why should women care? At the same time, they spend a nontrivial amount of time on slurs, threats, tracking and commenting on a woman’s every utterance, hate accounts, caricatures, insults about women’s appearance, attempts to shame women sexually, etc. If they weren’t expecting this to have an effect, why would they devote so much time to it?
permanganater:
Oh, is that what they’re doing? I’ve been looking at it all wrong!
The posting of scantilly-clad large women snogging and throwing up, and labeling them as Jen and Steffy Zvan isn’t childish belittlement, it’s a nuanced logical takedown of the feminazi culture.
The suggestion that Brownian needs a blow-job, and is a virgin, is a beautiful syllogism based on sound premises.
Their inability to differentiate between verbal abuse, and sexist/racist/ableist abuse is a rhetorical device used to illuminate the subtleties of social differentiation.
And here I thought they were all a bunch of clowns blind to their own privilege while simultaneously using gender-based slurs to abuse specific people.
They do agree with us on one thing, though: they don’t seem to fond of you, either.
And Skepchick.
God damn it, of course they have to bring fat hatred into this. As if any of the women being fat would invalidate what they have to say, because lord knows if a woman doesn’t personally give them a boner she should shut up (and if she does, she should shut up). cannot win.
Nerd:
They don’t like oolon over there:
Seems like oolon’s attempt to be objective and neutral isn’t winning any friends in either place.
nigelTheBold:
Damnit! Scratch that. That was supposed to go in a response to oolon, not permanganater.
@14 Ogvorbis (sorry, haven’t worked out how to use the blockquote thingy):
“So. What part of “In the USA, society is patriarchal” are you skeptical about? What part of “Women are human beings and should be treated as such” are you skeptical about? What part of “Human beings have the right to be human beings” are you skeptical about? What part of “Gendered insults are a silencing tactic” are you skeptical about?”
Those are the precise issues they appear to be gagging to tangle with FTB and A+ on. Science-based evidence in gender sociology and politics is messy, so the debate would be messy. I’ve worked as an advocate for pay, status and rights equality in the workplace which has exposed me over many years to this very messiness.
Also, it would be remiss of me not to mention the elephant in the ‘pit, the issue of who presents what category of rape threat to whom, how and where.
If I didn’t make It clear above, It’s not me, it’s them. (And I couldn’t comment with much force about the bulk of what you’ve raised, as I don’t live in the US). To make me even less relevant to this, the gendered insult thing has gone right over my head. Where I live even the worst swear or curse words ceased to be gendered – thank god – by about the 1970 or thereabouts).
skeptifem:
Ayep. If you’re going to be sexist, you might as well be sexist and… well, whatever the word for people who judge others based on appearance. “Shallow,” I guess, but that doesn’t convey the contempt I hold for those who use body-shaming as a silencing tactic.
Skeptifem:
No, we can’t.
Sadly, it’s no surprise that our only worth is in our appearance– we aren’t real people, after all!
Oolon, just get off the fence. You were wrong before and you admitted it, so well done. The Slimepit needs no defending, as it is indefensible. I can see that you are sympathetic to feminism and its supporters, so why not just drop the whole “above-it-all” schtick?
I’m trying to guess where this might be… You live on an off-the-grid hippie commune in the backwoods of British Columbia and haven’t been into town since 1970?
@permanganater:
Is this an adaptation of the “twat isn’t gendered in the UK/Australia/usw.” line? Cause if it is, you’re a fool.
I asked a Scottish woman a while back “what does twat mean” and her response “pussy.” Yes, “twat”, “cunt”, “bitch”, usw are gendered insults. They continue to be gendered insults and no amount of “but they’re not really gendered” is going to change that – regardless of where you’re from.
Try calling them misogynists, and you’ll see them all whip out their college dictionaries like they’s gunslingers. It’s just words, boys! Eat ’em up!
Wait! Who’s offering?
Brownian:
I’m assuming everyone in the queue.
Alright! But, do be gentle. After all, it’s my first time.
Gee, who would have foreseen that?????
Brownian:
Most definitely!
What’s most amusing is the list of links provided as supporting evidence that you both need a blow-job, and are a virgin. They’re links to Butterflies & Wheels comments of yours, starting with mention how you tried to explain Schrödinger’s Rapist. It seems they think that any male who buys into all that “women are people too” crap have never had sex.
Thats just logical.
Yeah, “misogynist” brings the OEDbags out of the woodwork.
Okay. That’s about as much slyme as I can handle. I’m so fucking done with 13-year-olds posting on the internet, posing as rational adults.
Lol perfection. They pretend they’re totally not bigots, then engage in outright, undeniably, multi-layered bigotry. They claim bitches shouldn’t be upset by being calling bitches, but call them a misogynist and watch them tear their hair in impotent rage.
They are the teabaggers of atheism.
pathetic. They’re hatred for A+, FtB and Skepchick is proof all those are on the right track.
Brownian:
I know what you’re thinking. “Am I going to use definition six, or only five?” Well, to tell you the truth, in all this excitement I kind of lost track myself. But being as this is an Oxford English, the most powerful dictionary in the world, and would blow your head clean off, you’ve got to ask yourself one question: Do I feel lucky? Well, do ya, punk?
nigelTheBold, Venomous Demonic Hater #19
*standing ovation*
nonono. See, they think bitches are people too! They’re just bitches when they do or say thing that people (read: misogynistic boys) don’t like. They’re totally the REAL gender equality specialists and we’re the REAL bigots for accurately labeling them as bigots.
So, its more like any male who fails to geniunely believe that they are the center of the universe and, therefore, might not know everything about everything ever, has never had sex.
because, clearly, if a dude decides bitches are kerrrrazzzy and hysetrical and should just get over it (while simultaneously shitting their pants at being labeled accurately as bigots), he’s a pussy magnet. not a bitter angry MRA at all
Even though I’ve been lurking here for a long time, I’d never actually seen the slymepit first-hand, so I decided to check it out. You all probably already know this, but it’s a damn scary place.
Illuminata:
You are right. I was oversimplifying their position. There is subtleties I completely missed.
Thanks for the clarification.
Ew. I took a quick look. (Quick in the sense that I hit the X quite soon so that I wouldn’t heave.) Enough to see two separate announcements that I was lying, both wrong. I was lying about Al’s leaving FTB because he wanted to, and I was lying when I said I had “just” read @SammyBoal’s tweets. They quickly learned that they were wrong about Al, but of course there was no “Oh I shouldn’t have said OB was lying.”
Um, yeah? I mean, I’m so like just about to get my first BG. (DJ? Oh, I can’t remember all these wild kink terms.) Anyway, I think that’s the dictionary definition of ‘getting lucky’.
It’s PUA thinking. They need the trope of the beta male to see themselves as alphas.
That’s right boys, we’re all AFCs* over here, stuck in the ‘friend’ zone. Gosh, high school is like totally the worst. [Pines for the cool girl totally out of his league.]
Now, if you’ll excuse us, Amy Heckerling wants us on set in twenty.
*Average Frustrated Chump. Actual PUA term.
PZ you really should keep in mind that people who have good reading comprehension skills are going to read the slymepit posts and realize you have given a half-witted account of what is posted there. You found NOTHING on the entire board with any redeeming qualities? That indicates a serious bias. Do yourself a favor and attempt to step back a couple paces or have a couple 3rd party individuals who are uninvolved give their opinion. In other words USE SCIENCE instead of being a parrot for Watson and a victim of the wastland that calls itself youtube. Where else can people watch a video a million times and nothing in the world changes one bit? The comments have just as much effect on the world. You are being irresponsible and your reputation has been harmed enough already have mercy on your own dignity. BTW thanks for being on my podcast back before you went insane I really liked the old you….
BJ or GTFO.
Which part has redeeming qualities? The part about how much a commenter wants Rebecca Watson to be raped? The part about how ‘cunt’ is not a gendered insult? Which parts have redeeming qualities? Please give some examples.
Seriously, though, what the fuck is your problem with the idea that people are people and should be treated as people? Why defend a group who revel in the idea that women do not deserve respect (and yes, I am including the whole damn slyme pit because no matter how offensively misogynistic a regular is over there, no one calls them out for it. ever.)?
reappaden:
Hey, reap! Glad to see you here. You’re like a breath of fetid air on an otherwise fresh spring day.
Actually, his account is just about right. I have fairly decent reading skills (far above your rather dubious writing skills) and found his description rather conservative. The two pages I read had basically no real content (outside one or two fairly humorous comments by folks who seemed to ignore the misogyny going on about them). Instead, I found a lot of body-shaming, misogyny, and a rather unhealthy dislike of and obsession with specific female bloggers.
Do you have a specific instance of actual good content from the pit? Because really, all the accusations thrown around over there have turned out to be outright false (like the speculation that Al was kicked off FTB) or based on an adolescent’s idea of insult (Brownian’s a virgin, a picture of a woman throwing up labelled “Steffy Zvan”, and so on).
You’ve got a good bunch of people over there, reap. Real models of rationalism and human decency.
“Waiter, I asked for a steak. You gave me a whole plate full of feces.”
“Yes. But the potatoes are still nice.”
No, they’re quite right about that one. I do have my eye on one particularly attractive girl in my freshman trig class, but she doesn’t know who I am. Sigh.
I love the way reappaden shows up here to proclaim how awesome and decent the ‘pitters are, and can’t make it one single sentence into his defense without engaging in the exact sort of slymepit behavior that causes the whole bunch of them to be shunned in the first place.
To be fair, he’s not an especially clever person, despite his ability to capitalise the word SCIENCE.
Read more.
He did. There is none there, and the slymepit denizens present no EVIDENCE when they come here. Just their unevidenced OPINION. OPINION isn’t science. After all, if they had real evidence they would lead with it.
Ewww…
Someone left a Heap Of Reap.
I’m sure he’s devastated.
@SallyStrange
On th whl myb shldn’t hv pstd n hr s t s clssc drl mkng t ‘ll bt M!!’.. nywy y cn s wht st n th fnc bt n my blg f y r ntrstd. Pls drct ll nslts t m prsnlly.. ‘m lkng t y Nrd! ff nw t chck my tw(!) clls n th Dngn… BTW PZ, pls bn Rp bfr m :-)
“SCIENCE”? I do not think it means what Reap thinks it means. I think he and his type mean denialism, rather than science. Their “evidence” is to point at the lack of 100% certainty, and the fact that we’re not giving them charts and graphs to back up specific experiences. Since we’re not doing “science” in that superficial sort of stereotypical way, they claim that their bullshit preconceived notions haven’t been disproved, and are therefore true.
The sad thing is that they are engaging with social justice issues with methods they seem to have learned from the worst of the creationists and anti-science politicians.
I’ll take self inflated sense off worth for 1000 Alex.
I don’t know how to put this, but he’s kind of a big deal.
People know him.
He’s changing the world, defending it against the overwhelming impotence and powerlessness of Atheism+.
Kitty #49
:) :) :)
And fear him.
He’s a doer not a circle jerker. He’s changing minds and making things happen. Just ask him.
I recognize Gumby (the cat), who posted the first fat-bullying photo in that slimepit thread, as a previously regular commenter here: Cosmic Snark. Even though we’ve tussled in the past, I thought he was one of the good guys. Guess not.
Hell, you don’t even have to ask. He’ll volunteer that information, and do so with passion and authority, and the usual stew of bad grammar and incoherent structure.
Why should anybody be interested based on your posts here?
oolon (#11)
What you clearly don’t understand is that neutrality is meant to be a position you start with when you don’t have enough information to form conclusions about a matter. The more information at hand, the less neutral you should be. If you never shift away from neutrality no matter how much information you acquire, then you’re failing at being objective.
You are such a liar. You were not told you had no right to express concerns, and no one here says that about the slimepit. However, you contribute nothing of use when you act concerned over your pet strawmen. And since you won’t listen to what’s actually being said, people have rightly told you to fuck off. (I guess you were waiting to make your exit till PZ built you a cross sturdy enough to accommodate the weight of your ego.)
Nice not-pology. (Hint: Real apologies don’t start with “if”.) And why only “apologize” for the (possibility of) obvious instances (in some people’s eyes) of such things? When something is not obviously racist, sexist, etc. from the perspective of the speaker, that doesn’t make it magically less objectionable to the target.
oolon:
Sitting on the fence does nothing but make you a stationary target.
I first read that as Average Frustrated Chimp.
Of course Oolon has now got his wish and is banned.
phooey PZ
Haven’t you noticed how dead [Thunderdome] is?
Yes. Interesting, isn’t it?
I don’t think tossing Oolon in the pot would help, especially since he ignores restrictions I put on him and I’d have to ban him anyway.
The thing about sitting on fences is that the slightest breeze can knock you over.
Yeah.
It does save a step.
reappaden, I have here for you a glass of the purest, sweetest, mountain spring water, to which I have added and single drop of concentrated shit.
Here you go. Bottoms up.
@Amphiox:
Actually, his analogy is the exact reverse of that. It would be a bottle of shit with pure, sweet mountain spring water.
Well, clearly he did not search the entire board. Nor did he have to.
No. It indicates someone who saw a sizeable sample of unpleasantness and decided to remove themselves from it.
Do we really have to read every last post on the Slymepit to form an opinion of it? I hope not. I certainly think I’ve read enough to have formed an uncharitable view and don’t feel the urgent need to indulge in any more.
That said, if you have any gems that might persuade me otherwise, why don’t you link to them? Show me some of the gentle spirit that I thought so sorely lacking in the threads I read.
Of course we must. Just as we must read every word of Christian apologetics ever written before we can form an opinion on Christianity. And we must read every word written about Bigfoot sightings before we can form an opinion as to the existence of a hon-human hominid in the Pacific Northwest US.
Thanks for that, leebrimmicombe-wood. I didn’t recognize the Courtier’s Reply until your comment.
@Ogvorbis:
Now you’re just being silly.
We all know that Bigfoot isn’t real and Christianity is a fairy tale for adults.
But when it comes to uppity women, feminism, and the patriarchy? Well hold on just a moment – gotta be uber-skeptical about that!
Katherine Lorraine, Chaton de la Mort:
So it’s like thinking that you dropped your ring in a PortaPotty that has been used by 700 drunk and overfed Young Republicans? You’d have to wade through that much shit to find the diamond? And you’re not even sure the diamond is there? You really want me to do that? Really? What did I ever do to you?
Or he doesn’t live in an English-speaking place. Some languages are all about fuck and cunt, some about shit and ass (more shit in German, more ass in Czech…), some (fewer and fewer these days) about God and devil.
Czech, and Viennese, for “fuck off” is “go into the ass” and “go shit” (as in “go take a dump”).
Hmmm. I’m willing to do that experiment :-)
BTW, the OED is a historical dictionary. It always lists the first attested meaning first, even if it has been extinct for centuries.
PZ has made – *gasp* – a testable hypothesis.
Go forth and test it.
Why are people spelling it “slymepit” and not slime pit or slime-pit or rotten lousy hole full of stinking diseased fly-ridden crap ?
Just curious.
I read the original thread when it started, down to the first 10 pages or so, and then forever banned myself from reading further.
For the jerk who wants to know why PZ (and myself and many others) won’t carefully sift through the million tons of stinking half rotted pestilent crap you call home for the occaisional gram of gold : 1) see “courtier’s reply” . 2) Gold, even at 1600.00 USD an ounce, is not valuable enough. 3) It is incumbent on the one making the claim to bring the evidence to back it up, not the other way around. That is indeed what we call science.
Thanks for playing.
They call it the “slymepit,” DLC.
IIRC, we started calling it the slime pit / slimepit around the time that it first appeared on ERV. They adopted it.
Wow, those slympitters are like a bunch of fucking children! What’s the average age over there, 12? They gleefully wallow in their immaturity and seem quite proud of it. One day
whenif they grow up, this will be embarrassing for them. How people that clueless, tactless, tasteless and classless can be right about atheism just goes to show that even a broken clock is right twice a day.No wonder they call it the slymepit, after reading some of the comments, I feel like I need a shower or three. Ick.
r3a50n,
They’d tell you it is all about “freedom”. People have told them that they should behave like decent, mature, compassionate human beings. Telling them how they should behave infringes on their freedom, and the only way for them to reclaim it is to behave the opposite. I’ve read a few of those folks in passing as they’ve trolled various comment threads here and elsewhere, and the more coherent ‘pitters will say things like “I support feminism ‘in general’, but you people demand support so you won’t get it from me!”
I’m sure there’s an expert in childhood development that can tell you where their emotional growth became stunted.
Truth in advertising. You’ve got to give them that.
Esteleth @82 :
Oh, so they can’t spell either. Or rather, think that spelling it with a y adds dignity. Or something. For me it adds hilarity.
Thanks for clearing that up :-)
the slymepit is frequented by someone mentioned in another thread… Scented Nectar.
wanna know what she had to say about Sammy?
so there you have it.
FUCK THESE INANE CLOWNS
The Inane Clown Posse?
Sorry.
I will slink away now.
Unfortunately, they aren’t at quite the stage of “you can’t make me, I’m not doing anything you say, so there!” where someone (someone with a thicker skin than I) could get them to behave decently by encouraging them not to. Or, at least, get them to turn their vitriol inward and stop bothering the rest of the world by asserting that they can dish it out but not take it.
Janine:
Please don’t. Otherwise, I’ll have to as well. I thought it, and considered various humorous ways to present it. You just beat me to it.
SN has not shown an ability to distinguish between her own imagination and actual events.
But the slyme pitters seem to take what she has to say seriously. Perhaps it is because she is a lesbian who is willing to back up a MRA POV.
The Inane Clown Posse?
works!
so, if Juggalos then what would be the equivalent?
Janine:
… has anyone ever seen Scented Nectar and S.E. Cupp in the same room at the same time? Hmmmm…
Two dipshits, one cupp? Is that what you’re implying?
Two dipshits, one cupp? Is that what you’re implying?
ouch!
It’s fascinating that they’ll fight and mock even the most basic efforts (harassment policies at conferences, for example) if they see these as initiated or led by women. That they’re so vehemently opposed to being led by women or responsive to women’s demands, or even the appearance of being led by women or responsive to women’s demands, says much more about their attitude toward women and feminism than any putative support for specific policies ever could.
@84:
Acting like a bunch of petulant, self-absorbed, juvenile bullies is, I suppose, one way to exercise your “freedom,” though it’s far from admirable. But what the hell, that hasn’t stopped the entire Republican Party from doing exactly that, and they’re (allegedly) adults.
I actually pity them, it’s like their parents didn’t/don’t care about them enough to teach them how to act in public in a socially-acceptable way.
Quite. Have you read Alvin Mantinga?
It is telling in the same way that the use of gendered slurs and/or insinuating/threatening sexual assault seems to come so easy to some people. Yet, they’ll swear up and down that they aren’t sexist, they just really don’t like -fill in the blank-, usually Rebecca Watson. But as people keep saying over and over and over in a dozen different contexts, you can be provoked to anger but you can’t be provoked to express that anger in ways that don’t come naturally to you. Mel Gibson didn’t jump to antisemitism when he was drunk because of the booze, it was because that’s what goes on in his head and doesn’t come out when his filters are in place.
I’ve used gendered slurs plenty in the past, and while it didn’t always mean overt misogyny, it always meant “I don’t give a shit who gets hit with the splash damage.” That’s not a good place to be, and people of good faith and intent can get to the place where they can understand that and knock it the fuck off.
“Oh FSM, give me feminism… but don’t give it yet!”
Or at least “Give me the tiniest fraction of the charm, grace and effortless manners of a Cary Grant” so I can pretend to be grown-up – but not yet.
Let’s face it. Time spent rehearsing please and thank you or on personal grooming and careful selection of cufflinks or a tie would be a far better use of these people’s ‘talents’.
Katherine Lorraine, Chaton de la Mort
12 October 2012 at 9:59 am
@permanganater:
“Where I live even the worst swear or curse words ceased to be gendered
Is this an adaptation of the “twat isn’t gendered in the UK/Australia/usw.” line? Cause if it is, you’re a fool.
I asked a Scottish woman a while back “what does twat mean” and her response “pussy.” Yes, “twat”, “cunt”, “bitch”, usw are gendered insults. They continue to be gendered insults and no amount of “but they’re not really gendered” is going to change that – regardless of where you’re from.”
Another apology for blockquote fail; I’ve gotta work that one out.
1. I’ve every expectation the gender slur thing has been covered a lot here and elsewhere, and I doubt I’m going to add anything to this. I just want to be upfront about that.
2. I’m not from Scotland. I cant speak for what goes on in the US, other than my visits there, and media.
3. But you’ve called me a fool for expressing what I believe to be the case where I’m from, so that calls for some response particular to my neck of the woods.
Where I’m from the words you’ve mentioned carry the following meanings. And the delay in replying is in part because I emailed some people about this, including my three sisters, two of whom are feminists, one of whom is pretty rad.
Pussy – when used as an adjective, roughly translates to ‘soft’. A context might be ‘No, he didn’t go ahead with the skydive because he’s too much of a pussy’. And the assumption/consensus seems that this usage comes from a timid baby cat, not vagina. Pussy, if it is used as slang for vagina, isn’t typically used aggressively and certainly not in anger; as in: Did you see that picture in the National Enquirer of so and so getting out of a car., ‘You could see she had a shaved pussy’. Sorry If that’s crude, but you get the picture.
Twat (pronounced to rhyme with either cot or hat) when used as an adjective means a righteous or pompous fool; also just a plain idiot. The word is bordering on becoming archaic here, but when I hear it used these days it is as likely as not to be someone referring to someone, invariably a male, as the ‘village twat’. As a noun it definitely means vagina, but it seems a soft word. I suspect, of all the words we’re taking about, this is the most region-specific, and if it is a hatey word in the States, that’s a shame.
Cunt was very taboo, but over the pat 20 years Gen X, and even more so, Gen Y, have owned it with a vengeance. It now is most commonly used in either of the following context: ‘so and so is a right cunt’ – as in awful bastard or an arsehole. The second context is more recent and a result of the word being de-fanged of its crudeness, and it is this: both sexes are increasingly using it, believe it or not, as a term of endearment; but that usage is still reasonably hipster, avante garde and in some circles, risqué. Cunt, if used as a term for vagina is considered inappropriate, except in the context of talking dirty during sex, such as ‘fuck me hard in my cunt’. Apologies again.
When cunt is us as a slur, itisn’t used against one gender more than the other.
Bitch – it’s change in usage is much more recent and ongoing, so it does give lie to where I said above that the subject words had been de-gendered, as slurs, since the 70s. US popular culture has had a clear influence on the use of the word, as in the young guy from Breaking Bad referring to everyone and anyone as bitches. Guys and girls both, will say they are going to the bar, a concert, or the game, with their ‘bitches’, roughly translating to their posse, but almost always meaning a same-sex posse.
But, when used as a slur, bitch does almost always refer to gay men or women. The user is often trying to convey that the subject carries a petty but consuming resentment or hatred. But the expression continues to lose impact, and I’m confident it will be largely defanged with increased usage as a noun.
Not happening at this blog, so forget you commentary. Nothing but BS as far as we are concerned.
http://www.shakesville.com/2007/11/on-bitch-and-other-misogynist-language.html
permanganater
We have heard it all before.
Here is the easy part for you:
if you use cunt, pussy, twat, dick, prick (anything gendered) as an insult anywhere on Pharyngula you will be reprimanded.
The other commenters will plague you and PZ might ban you.
RE 102:
Those terms are gendered, even where you’re from whether or not you try to rationalize them as something different, which is precisely what you’re doing. Furthermore, they are offensive despite your attempt to characterize them otherwise. You sound a little like the kind of ignorant idiot that thinks the word “n***er” doesn’t mean what it used to because it’s used in different contexts in popular music and therefore, it’s okay for everyone to use it. That’s a ridiculous argument and you are making yourself look incredibly foolish by trying to justify the use of such offensive terms and rewrite history in terms of their origin.
You should rather observe the first rule of holes, which is that when you find yourself in one as you have in this case (though you don’t seem to recognize it), stop digging.
As just one example of your flawed justification:
No, it translates to “weak like a woman” (or using your term, “soft like a woman,” which is the part of your “translation” that you conveniently left out), you know, one of those types of people that have a vagina. You may realize that the example you used was “…he didn’t…” and you’ll notice that that particular epithet isn’t used on women. It is used on males because of the gendered nature of the epithet, it is used to emasculate by insinuating that a man is really more like a woman with the not-so-subtle implication that that’s a bad thing and it is bad because women are weak, which is why it is so offensive, not to mention that, yes, the origin of that particular epithet is the female genitalia. Your ignorance of that fact doesn’t excuse you from the offensiveness of using it, and especially not of trying to justify its use.
I won’t take your post apart piece by piece as I certainly could because I have no patience for what appears to be willful ignorance, but all of your justification is, as comment 103 states, BS. You’re not convincing anyone here so please, stop trying. Put down your shovel.
It’s interesting, this equation of vagina with weakness, considering what the vagina actually does–
It’s some intense training that teaches women that they are soft and unable to defend themselves. It takes a while to overcome that training when teaching women self-defense. I know it was a major mental block for me.
And another thing arsehole, bastard, cunt et. al. convey no useful information other than disapproval.
‘He lied about something.’
‘She cheats on her taxes.’
would be better.
Say what you mean.
The argument from personal experience is never great, and it isn’t gonna survive a (largely) cross-cultural exchange like this. The gender-slur issue arose from my original post where I said, amongst a lot of other things, that the gendered slur tensions between FTB, A+ and the Slyme Pit had largely gone over my head which I put down to cultural differences. A respondent called me a fool.
Anyways, I respect that the rules here are that using curse words with a gender association is banning territory, and my takeaway from the last several post is that this topic has been and gone (and my life-span here will be proportionate to my continued interest in raising this topic).
I’m optimistic there will be a time when, globally, all these words’ gender aetiology will be forgotten or irrelevant and they will cease to have defamatory impact or consequence.
I appreciate the latitude granted in this thread by the mods and won’t ever raise this topic again unless someone else does first.
No no it makes sense. Like Hyperthyroidism or hyper tension
Personal experience isn’t valid…as evidenced by this here personal experience of mine.
What culture are you from, Stoopid?
Permanganater, another Briton here. I think some of the terms you mention are less-gendered in usage in the UK than maybe they are in the US, but only by a matter of degree. Which is to say that they are still *very* gendered, wherever you are.
It’s important to note that in this community they really are beyond the Pale and should be avoided. I suggest to you that the world would be a better place if they be allowed to fall into disuse.
oolon (#141)
Pretending I was talking about something wholly different is not ignoring my “derail.” Ignoring means not engaging—something you’re apparently incapable of doing. As for a derail, you went there first with your comment about PZ not liking neutrality and then talking ridiculous shit about you being thick-skinned. If you don’t want to get called on your shit, try being less full of it.
Which PZ didn’t do, you liar. Your primary sin, apart from being an egotistical liar, is failing to understand that neutrality is only valuable as a starting place. Once facts enter the picture, you shouldn’t be trying to keep two opposing sides balanced or you end up sticking your thumb on the scale. False balance isn’t actual neutrality.
Whoops, posted to the wrong thread. Had this one open to link it. Don’t mind me.
TooLong still trying to cut himself in half on the imaginary barbwire fence he constructed?