Atheism Plus/Free Thought Blogs (FTB)

[brodski]

Polygonist!

I thought we supported polygony?

 

[Acleron]

Atheismplus has anagrams.

Among them I offer

Impales Tush
Hate Ism Plus

with no discerning comment.

 

[WillyWonka]

I thought we supported polygony?

2 dimentionalist !

 

[Horatius]

Why do you hate ugly people?

I'm sure you meant to say, "Aesthetically Non-Normative" there, right? Douchebag.

This is offensive to the verbally challenged.

And that offensive to people who not verbs.

 

[squealpiggy]

Interestingly, they do allow the use of "douchbag" which any decent political corrector should point out is a gendered insult and misogynist.

No you see Douching is really bad for women therefore a douch-bag is a bad thing for women to use therefore "douchbag" may be used as an epithet against misogynists who are also bad for women. See? Nothing post-hoc about that rationalisation at all!

By the way this thread has taken a turn for the win.

 

[Marquis de Carabas]

By the way this thread has taken a turn for the win.

Do you have any idea how many people die in car accidents because their steering system locks up?

Neither do I, but I'm sure it's enough that I'm deeply offended by your inconsiderate use of such hateful phrasing.

 

[Beelzebuddy]

Do you have any idea how many people die in car accidents because their steering system locks up?

Neither do I, but I'm sure it's enough that I'm deeply offended by your inconsiderate use of such hateful phrasing.

Your flippant and inappropriate use of binding terminology is offensive and degrading to BDSM subdungeons everywhere.

Keep doing it.

 

[ponderingturtle]

I'm sure you meant to say, "Aesthetically Non-Normative" there, right? Douchebag.

I have to wonder how the whole don't be a dick thing works with them. Aren't genital based epithets bad now? Or is that only female genital based ones?

 

[dasmiller]

I have to wonder how the whole don't be a dick thing works with them. Aren't genital based epithets bad now? Or is that only female genital based ones?

FWIW, I believe DBAD has been amended to DBADUTOPIBADOTSSTDFYOYJDLTOYIABMOYTOARFDLOYJFLIOYJDLPPTYHTBDAAWTSWCAD*

Unfortunately, that may not be limited to A+.

*Don't Be A Dick Unless The Other Person Is Being A Dick. Or They Said Something That Didn't Fully Support You. Or You Just Don't Like Them. Or You're In A Bad Mood. Or You Thought Of A Really Funny Dickish Line. Or You Just Feel Like It. Or You Just Don't Like Phil Plaitt Telling You How To Behave, Dammit. And, Anyway, Who's To Say What Counts As Dickish?

 

[Marquis de Carabas]

I have to wonder how the whole don't be a dick thing works with them. Aren't genital based epithets bad now? Or is that only female genital based ones?

Males are privileged, so you can make fun of their genitals, but you do still have to be careful. Calling someone penis-breath, for example, could be homophobic if directed at a male, and even if directed at a female or someone of unknown sex (and/or/but gender), it could be seen to be making an insult out of the act of fellatio, furthering the stereotype of shame associated with sex acts other than heterosexual missionary position vaginal intercourse.

I have to stop reading that board. I'm getting too good at this.

 

[westprog]

Just to make it clear - while I reserve the right to comment on A+, my posts on that forum are not trolling or trying to provoke a reaction. I find the concept of privilege an interesting one, and I'm discussing it in a forum where there seem to be people who have a different view to my own. I'm posting there for the same reason I'm posting here - because there's no point in arguing with people who agree with you.

I'm making this post here because I've noticed that there's investigation into people who post divergent views on A+ and some of them have been pointed out as deliberate troublemakers. That is not my intention - on A+ at least. Of course I'm trying to destroy this forum.

 

[Acleron]

Just to make it clear - while I reserve the right to comment on A+, my posts on that forum are not trolling or trying to provoke a reaction. I find the concept of privilege an interesting one, and I'm discussing it in a forum where there seem to be people who have a different view to my own. I'm posting there for the same reason I'm posting here - because there's no point in arguing with people who agree with you.

I'm making this post here because I've noticed that there's investigation into people who post divergent views on A+ and some of them have been pointed out as deliberate troublemakers. That is not my intention - on A+ at least. Of course I'm trying to destroy this forum.

Alas, another fail

 

[Kochanski]

Just to make it clear - while I reserve the right to comment on A+, my posts on that forum are not trolling or trying to provoke a reaction. I find the concept of privilege an interesting one, and I'm discussing it in a forum where there seem to be people who have a different view to my own. I'm posting there for the same reason I'm posting here - because there's no point in arguing with people who agree with you.

I'm making this post here because I've noticed that there's investigation into people who post divergent views on A+ and some of them have been pointed out as deliberate troublemakers. That is not my intention - on A+ at least. Of course I'm trying to destroy this forum.

They are investigating people who post divergent views on their forum? Really? Are they that paranoid?

If this really is the case I can't see them ever accomplishing anything.

 

[Marquis de Carabas]

Just to make it clear - I only read Atheism+ for amusement. I've made two posts there and likely will make no more.

I only post here for amusement, too. Amusement (and an utter lack of free will) are the only reasons I do anything, actually.

 

[westprog]

They are investigating people who post divergent views on their forum? Really? Are they that paranoid?

I remember back in the days of Usenet, when someone cross-posted to a different group, there might well be counter-posts which treated everyone who posted in one place as if they were some kind of club, with a coherent purpose and agenda. I wouldn't assert that about the A+ forum, which is effectively open to anyone. There are people posting there who take note of where people have posted, and what they've said, and it's been suggested that their external posting history should be scrutinised - but it's not the whole group doing those things.

 

[ponderingturtle]

They are investigating people who post divergent views on their forum? Really? Are they that paranoid?

If this really is the case I can't see them ever accomplishing anything.

I thought this was about feeling morally superior not accomplishing things.

 

[Piscivore]

Males are privileged, so you can make fun of their genitals, but you do still have to be careful. Calling someone penis-breath, for example, could be homophobic if directed at a male, and even if directed at a female or someone of unknown sex (and/or/but gender), it could be seen to be making an insult out of the act of fellatio, furthering the stereotype of shame associated with sex acts other than heterosexual missionary position vaginal intercourse.

I have to stop reading that board. I'm getting too good at this.

I'm interested in learning more about the butt genders.

 

[Kochanski]

I thought this was about feeling morally superior not accomplishing things.

Yes, well I was assuming that some of the people who joined there did actually want to do something, they purport to be about social justice after all.

So far the only thing I see them attempting to do is the transcription project that already has problems because they don't see a reason to get permission from the owners of the media they want to transcribe.

If they don't actually move toward accomplishing anything, I am betting they will start losing lots of people and end up with just a small group of individuals feeling morally superior.

 

[WillyWonka]

If they don't actually move toward accomplishing anything, I am betting they will start losing lots of people and end up with just a small group of individuals feeling morally superior.

Isn't what Atheism+ is all about?

And now, there is the battle of the t-shirts. Watson is selling t-shirts with her outline and some wording, while Jim Jesus is now selling similar t-shirts with contrarian wording. And we though that TAM 2012 was edgy with harriet Hall's t-shirt.

 

[Paulhoff]

I met Watson at least once at TAM 5.5. I should write about what I thought at the time, but a lot of time has passed and my memory now isn't all that good seeing that I didn't take notes to keep everything straight. All I can say is that she wanted a big party and didn't care about the noise.

I would not even thought at that time, that if someone had asked her to had coffee with him that it would have become such a big woah that it has become today.


Paul