Atheism Plus/Free Thought Blogs (FTB)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Being an athiest does not mean one doesn't believe in other BS.


Being a skeptic does not mean one doesn't believe in some BS.


Asking someone of the other sex for coffee does not mean that person thinks the other person is below them.



Paul



:) :) :)
 
Paulhoff said:
A man asking a woman for coffee in an elevator is not sexism.
Click to expand...

No, but someone, after being told that the situation made a person uncomfortable at four in the morning, claiming that it is BS to even mention that discomfort, is at the very least a little troublesome.
 
appalling said:
No, but someone, after being told that the situation made a person uncomfortable at four in the morning, claiming that it is BS to even mention that discomfort, is at the very least a little troublesome.
Click to expand...

RW told him that before they went to the elevator?

does this mean we can find out who elevator guy is?
 
appalling said:
No, but someone, after being told that the situation made a person uncomfortable at four in the morning, claiming that it is BS to even mention that discomfort, is at the very least a little troublesome.
Click to expand...


Prosopagnosia?
 
Paulhoff said:
Being an athiest does not mean one doesn't believe in other BS.


Being a skeptic does not mean one doesn't believe in some BS.


Asking someone of the other sex for coffee does not mean that person thinks the other person is below them.

Paul



:) :) :)
Click to expand...

Not yet.
 
appalling said:
The coffee and elevator jokes go a long way toward proving that the skeptical community doesn't contain people insensitive to sexism.
Click to expand...

You need to post a TRIGGER WARNING before making a statement like that.

As a non-coffee drinker, I find any mention of it offensive.
 
appalling said:
No, but someone, after being told that the situation made a person uncomfortable at four in the morning, claiming that it is BS to even mention that discomfort, is at the very least a little troublesome.
Click to expand...

The crux of the situation is simple:

A man has the right to hit on a woman whenever he wants, wherever he wants and in any way he wants, anything less will lead to the extermination human race because they'll be no sex.

If a woman disagrees with this it's OK to harass her with threats of violence, insults and taunts.
 
appalling said:
No, but someone, after being told that the situation made a person uncomfortable at four in the morning, claiming that it is BS to even mention that discomfort, is at the very least a little troublesome.
Click to expand...

Well, welcome to life. Things aren't always the way you want them to be at all times.

And if it was 4 in the evening, that would make it all better?


Paul


:) :) :)
 
Sorry, for what it is worth, I remember this person saying at a party in her hotel room, that she didn't care if they made too much noise and if the cops came to stop them. I so wish I had a movie camera recording this.


Can one change, of course they can, one should learn from mistakes and non-mistakes one makes. But, should they also remember the pass, of course they should.


The bottom line is, no law was broken, no one was hurt. Move on.


Paul



:) :) :)
 
Re: Atheism Plus

appalling said:
No, but someone, after being told that the situation made a person uncomfortable at four in the morning, claiming that it is BS to even mention that discomfort, is at the very least a little troublesome.
Click to expand...

Wait I thought she was face blind and did know if she had been talking to this guy all night or not.
 
ginjawarrior said:
RW told him that before they went to the elevator?

does this mean we can find out who elevator guy is?
Click to expand...

Of course not. It doesn't matter who the guy was, he was probably clueless.

She didn't say that he was lewd, just that his approach made her uncomfortable and that other guys should not emulate it.

Apparently some people think she shouldn't have voiced that opinion.

People who voice their opinions about all kinds of other things every day.
 
ponderingturtle said:
Wait I thought she was face blind and did know if she had been talking to this guy all night or not.
Click to expand...

I don't know why that matters. If it was four in the morning and she wasn't into it, it wouldn't have mattered if it was a bosom buddy or a stranger.
 
tsig said:
The crux of the situation is simple:

A man has the right to hit on a woman whenever he wants, wherever he wants and in any way he wants, anything less will lead to the extermination human race because they'll be no sex.

If a woman disagrees with this it's OK to harass her with threats of violence, insults and taunts.
Click to expand...

That man would be a straw man.
 
Last edited:
appalling said:
Of course not. It doesn't matter who the guy was, he was probably clueless.

She didn't say that he was lewd, just that his approach made her uncomfortable and that other guys should not emulate it.

Apparently some people think she shouldn't have voiced that opinion.

People who voice their opinions about all kinds of other things every day.
Click to expand...
No one said that she should not voice her opinion. Some people disagreed with her opinion. Big difference. Some people voiced there opinion. Pissed RW off big time and then she had to go and engage her narcissism and call people out in a live forum and behave in a very offensive fashion. And the "white male privilege" nonsense.

ETA: I'm not dismissive of the idea of white privilege in general but it's not something that can be used to address a single individual. It's ad hominem poisoning of the well.
 
Last edited:
Re: Atheism Plus

appalling said:
Of course not. It doesn't matter who the guy was, he was probably clueless.

She didn't say that he was lewd, just that his approach made her uncomfortable and that other guys should not emulate it.

Apparently some people think she shouldn't have voiced that opinion.

People who voice their opinions about all kinds of other things every day.
Click to expand...

So how should men hit on women? I also support women hitting on men.

This event was not at an inappropriate time like durring a panel or Q&A, it was not lewd or pushy. It seems a fairly reasonable way and time to make an offer of casual sex.

It is like with a waitress. They hate being hit on, except when those they wish would hit on them, then they hate not getting hit on. The problem is that you don't know what the situation is before you hit on them.
 
Amadanb said:
Well, first of all, I can't because I can't post links with less than 15 posts. Second, no, I am not going to go search the A+ forum collecting links. I know I have disagreed about tone arguments, about whether or not certain statements are gaslighting or victim-blaming, and there was one discussion about trans people where I definitely got some people riled at me, yet I was not banned. Even though I did not change my opinion. So I ask you again, what exactly do you mean by "groupthink"? I mean, if you want to go and argue that feminism sucks, yeah, you'll probably get banned. They state pretty clearly that the board doesn't exist to host debating societies. It's fine to have places like here where you'll even debate creationists and 9/11 truthers and whoever, but not every board has to be that kind of place, it doesn't make them censoring bullies.
Click to expand...


One point I'll concede: there does appear to be an increase in the level of disagreement that is, in some cases, tolerated at the A+ forum. What seems to be happening is that more people are mastering the jargon and the victimization-one-upmanship rhetorical repertoire that used to be the exclusive province of the in-group, and have been increasingly able to turn the tables when disagreements arise.

Today, for instance, in the perpetual Are The Mods thread (pages 67-69 with default page formatting), Qunotir has been tearing through the in-group's usual bogus rationalizations for dogpiling, bullying, and deceit... in a manner reminiscent of Godzilla through Tokyo.

Respectfully,
Myriad
 
appalling said:
Apparently some people think she shouldn't have voiced that opinion.
Click to expand...

No, she of course should be able to voice it. But also others have the right not to take it to heart, or is it that they don't have the right to voice that.



Paul



:) :) :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom