Atheism Plus/Free Thought Blogs (FTB)

Status
Not open for further replies.
ApostateltsopA said:
After that those in the thread made a far better case for the sexism, identified as subconscious and unintentional by consensus of the thread)
Click to expand...
(emphasis added)

And there we have the essential fallacy of the SJW position. That anything and everything, no matter how innocuous on the surface, and be identified as "sexist", "racist", or whatever -ist is convenient, simply by claiming that it is subconsciously so. Simply by asserting that a particular word may have had a -ist (pronounced "dashist") connotation at some time and place in history, or had been used in a -ist way in some other context, that its use in the current context invariably means that the entire context is inherently sexist, albeit subconsciously and unintentionally. Or worse yet, based on the use of a gendered pronoun common to the language, even when it is used appropriately in context. (Woe to anyone who speaks a Romance language.)

This is woo of the highest order. Not only does it claim to know the innermost thoughts, the very core of a person's being, but to do so based exclusively on... what? A post or two on a web forum? Who needs a degree in Psychology and long-term case studies when an SJW can point out all your personal flaws in just a few seconds?

The worst part is that it's clear that may people who abuse language in this way don't even believe it themselves. It's simply another tool to silence opposition. As evidenced by the stark raving inconsistency with which they apply it to their perceived enemies; while giving a free pass to themselves and their friends to use similarly sexual and ethno-centric language, accusing anyone who calls them on their hypocrisy of "tone policing".
 
Foolmewunz said:
On trolling polls.... whatever "trolling" means in that respect...

Guys, be fair. We've loaded the results of pollls from various threads her on these forums. I'm not sure how easy it is to vote early/vote often on that one, but internet polls are a joke, anyway. Everyone knows how to get around the security on any public poll.

I'd lighten up on the hypocrisy accusations. There's enough that one can disagree with about A+ without manufacturing issues.
Click to expand...

er...no. hang on a moment! at a+ being called a troll or so called trolling automatically makes your opinion invalid. it is used as an insult and a way to shut people up whenever the slightest whiff of dissent appears. but somehow they feel they have the right to troll people or sites they dont agree with.

one rule for them that doesnt apply to anyone else. sure, internet polls etc are daft and no harm done but its still hypocrisy!

you are trolling me right now so shut it trolly troll!

see....
 
luchog said:
And there we have the essential fallacy of the SJW position. That anything and everything, no matter how innocuous on the surface, and be identified as "sexist", "racist", or whatever -ist is convenient, simply by claiming that it is subconsciously so. Simply by asserting that a particular word may have had a -ist (pronounced "dashist") connotation at some time and place in history, or had been used in a -ist way in some other context, that its use in the current context invariably means that the entire context is inherently sexist, albeit subconsciously and unintentionally. Or worse yet, based on the use of a gendered pronoun common to the language, even when it is used appropriately in context. (Woe to anyone who speaks a Romance language.)

This is woo of the highest order. Not only does it claim to know the innermost thoughts, the very core of a person's being, but to do so based exclusively on... what? A post or two on a web forum? Who needs a degree in Psychology and long-term case studies when an SJW can point out all your personal flaws in just a few seconds?

The worst part is that it's clear that may people who abuse language in this way don't even believe it themselves. It's simply another tool to silence opposition. As evidenced by the stark raving inconsistency with which they apply it to their perceived enemies; while giving a free pass to themselves and their friends to use similarly sexual and ethno-centric language, accusing anyone who calls them on their hypocrisy of "tone policing".
Click to expand...


Yep. It flies in the face of reason.

Oooh... did anyone notice how I just subconsciously and subliminally confessed to being dishonest for the benefit of corporate oligarchy and hereditary patriarchy?

flies in the face of reason
Click to expand...
 
Stout said:
All was fine with the limerick until one of the Illuminati came in and fired off a "that's sexist" comment which cued the subsequent social justice analysis, hivemind and pile on. The young lady thing came in at the end, sort of a last kick at the corpse, just to make it seem extra offensive.
Click to expand...

That description makes me think of the Michelle Bachmann Hotdog Incident.
 
Last edited:
Myriad said:
Yep. It flies in the face of reason.

Oooh... did anyone notice how I just subconsciously and subliminally confessed to being dishonest for the benefit of corporate oligarchy and hereditary patriarchy?
Click to expand...

yes. ive been struggling with this. but it seems that a+ is woo as much as any witnessed on jref such as bigfoot, ufos, etc...

it reminds me of the nwo conspiracy lot. the worse bit is it is dogma born out of the skeptical community. proving right the continuous claims that atheism is a religion too, for a number of people who held that view.

these people are, at least, as dangerous and misguided/manipulative as any psychic.
 
Joe Random said:
Take, for example, the gendered insults ‘dick’ and [c-word]. When you call a person one of those two, the insult isn’t that they have the named body part. You’re not saying “when posting on this message board, try not to post as if you are inherently a bad person because you have a penis”. You’re saying “when posting on this message board, try not to be a dick”. Simply having a penis doesn’t make you a dick. Acting in an offensive manner is what makes you a dick.
Click to expand...

I'd question whether those are gendered insults, at least here in Britain. You'd be more likely to hear either applied to a man, but it's not uncommon for them to be applied to a woman, as well. I know that in the US the c-word is pretty much exclusively applied to women, but the opposite is true in the UK.
 
Stout said:
All was fine with the limerick until one of the Illuminati came in and fired off a "that's sexist" comment which cued the subsequent social justice analysis, hivemind and pile on. The young lady thing came in at the end, sort of a last kick at the corpse, just to make it seem extra offensive.
Click to expand...

No, that's not true. Eowyn's first post was the one that said it was sexual harassment (as opposed to merely "sexist") and that laid out that it was sexual harassment because a) it contained the words "young lady", and thus had something in common with sexist limericks and b) because it contained the word "wanker", which is necessarily sexual.

It's such a strange argument, saying that something that shares the form of something which is sexist is therefore also sexist. I mean, the A+ forum shares the same form as forums devoted to porn. Does that mean that the A+ forum is sexist?
 
Last edited:
I've rarely if ever heard "wanker" applied to a woman here in the UK. Probably in the US it's more gender neutral and has lost it's sexual connotation.
 
Last edited:
Squeegee Beckenheim said:
I'd question whether those are gendered insults, at least here in Britain. You'd be more likely to hear either applied to a man, but it's not uncommon for them to be applied to a woman, as well. I know that in the US the c-word is pretty much exclusively applied to women, but the opposite is true in the UK.
Click to expand...

To clarify, I wasn't suggesting that the target of the words were always of a specific gender, but rather the derivation of the words themselves are of an obviously gendered source. I was attempting to grant as much of the premise as possible, to show that even under a generous interpretation of things the sexism claim still can't be supported.
 
Joe Random said:
To clarify, I wasn't suggesting that the target of the words were always of a specific gender, but rather the derivation of the words themselves are of an obviously gendered source. I was attempting to grant as much of the premise as possible, to show that even under a generous interpretation of things the sexism claim still can't be supported.
Click to expand...

lifes a bitch.
 
Squeegee Beckenheim said:
I'd question whether those are gendered insults, at least here in Britain. You'd be more likely to hear either applied to a man, but it's not uncommon for them to be applied to a woman, as well. I know that in the US the c-word is pretty much exclusively applied to women, but the opposite is true in the UK.
Click to expand...

Isn't the intersection of language and culture fascinating? In Britain for example a woman may be referred to as a "bitch" (or in case the swear filter kicks in for that word, it means a lady-dog) while the word "bastard" is almost exclusively a slur against men.

The Central Scrutinizer said:
Given that the vast majority of pilots are men, any mention of flying is inherently sexist and misogynist. Please ban yourself.
Click to expand...

Those filthy pilots violating the earth-mother's sky-vagina with their rapey winged penises.
 
squealpiggy said:
Isn't the intersection of language and culture fascinating? In Britain for example a woman may be referred to as a "bitch" (or in case the swear filter kicks in for that word, it means a lady-dog) while the word "bastard" is almost exclusively a slur against men.
Click to expand...

Interestingly, the word "cow" is preferentially used for female in U.K. It also seems that the term "fancy man" is not used in the U.S.
 
WillyWonka said:
Interestingly, the word "cow" is preferentially used for female in U.K.
Click to expand...

I'd say that "bitch" and "cow" have subtly different meanings. "Bitch" would tend to imply someone who is abrasive and/or spends their time badmouthing people behind their backs. "Cow" would more generally be someone who is nasty, or used as a modifier for a different disparaging term, such as "she's a gobby cow".

"Moo" is probably more fun.
 
Mr. Scott said:
Agreed. I can only hear "wanker" in my head with an English accent.
Click to expand...

Remember Uncle Billy's razor. All this is superfluous. I once mistakenly called Sun Countess Sun Princess and was accused of infantilizing her. I kid you not. When I said it was accidental I was told 'intent isn't magic.' I think it is based on the way they apply it though. Their inner circle seems to have the ability to always know the intent of others. This authority is based on their extensive experience and 412 level science. :rolleyes:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom