Atheism Plus/Free Thought Blogs (FTB)

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

Here is their "expelled for science experiment" thread.

When I was little I built model rockets. Who wants to bet this girl has never even been exposed to model rockets or had such an opportunity?

Why not? Because she's black? Seems a little bit of a racist assumption.

 

[ApostateltsopA]

You must have missed my reply to qwints where I told him my post about you and he running the long con to sexualize some rad fems was a joke. Easy to understand you missing this given all the ground you've covered.

Saw it, but not until after I'd responded. No worries jokes, especially dry ones, don't always translate well to text. It reminded me of a video response from Integral Math I received recently where I was accused of being a misogynist for the EG video. (The logic loops had me laughing for a solid half-hour). On one hand, I'd like to pick apart his video, on the other hand it's so fallacious that I don't want to dignify it with a response. Perhaps if I find myself with a couple evenings of free time.

As to my age, I am constantly under aged in guessing. (I still get regularly carded for beer) but while I'm younger than you I'm also getting uncomfortably close to 40. (Not really I've achieved most of my early life goals growing older is fun.)

As to ageism, am I an appearance-ist for not liking people outside of my type hitting on or staring at me? Some attention makes me uncomfortable.

As to Mark Drela and humber I had to google it. Interestingly googling 'Mark Drela humber' returns this thread as the top result.

Back on the topic of your posing history, link me the thread, or threads, where you burned out and I'll take a look. That is the same offer I made you last time, I'm not going to do all the heavy lifting for you. I get too little sleep as it is.

As to staying here or there, this community is problematic. Some of the stuff that flies unchallenged here positively blows my mind. Props to Squeegee Beckenheim (I did indeed misspell it, fixed now) for calling out a few of the recent examples. I'm also not a fan of this interface. I can click a single button on A+ and see all the posts I've participated on, click one other and see what discussions I may be missing. Here I have to subscribe, or remember, or search (one search allowed every 30 seconds) to see what I have been up to. Though some of the not this one threads have been quite amusing.

 

[Mashuna]

Am I racist when I am in a group of nearly all white folks and it bothers me then? I'm white, CIS, male, I've got bingo on everything but wealth, and that's just perspective I'm absurdly more well off than the vast majority of humanity. The answer is no. I'm not racist because I don't hate white people. I don't dislike them, what bothers me, and what I read Ceepolk as saying, is that I don't like the absence of diversity. It bothers me when a space is primarily male, or female, or white, or other. Case in point, this thread strikes me as overwhelmingly white and male. There may be some participants who are not, but the feeling of this culture is white, male and intellectual. Consequently it takes me a lot more effort to participate here than in forums where I perceive greater diversity.

RINCF posted problematically and Eowyn broke it down in detail. RINCF has admitted they should have posted their own thread. My guess is you feel that culture does not show through in posting and language use. Having spent time among a more diverse group, I can say it does and I've seen people react to it, apparently without realizing it. Scenerio was one, and you can see me calling him out on it if you go digging.

You say culture shows through in posting and language because you've spent time in a more diverse group than this? Even though your knowledge about the diversity of this group is based solely on a feeling you have? That's almost biblical in its circularity.

 

[Lorentz]

Why? The evidence for the benefit of flossing is overwhelming. Do you really think your dentist should qualify all their thoughts on flossing with, "Unless I'm somehow inexplicably wrong about everything I've learned in oral hygiene"? To me that approaches the way that creationists (YEC variety) use the word "theory" when talking about whatever scientific finding is inconvenient for their young earth beliefs. Yes any bit of knowledge could be wrong, yes we must do our best to remain vigilant for new and conflicting data, but yes we also get to take things which are substantiated as substantial so we can move on and up.

The question isn't whether it should be constantly reexamined, the question is whether questioning is allowed at all. If something is unquestionable, whatever its basis, it's dogma. If something is based on evidence and rarely if ever questioned, but it can be questioned in principle, it's rational.

 

[Jono]

The closest I've seen to her apologising was in the thread discussed earlier in which the deaf poster kept being accused of saying the exact opposite of what he was consistently and clearly saying. After many pages and a few days it got to the point where nobody could actually claim he'd said what people were criticising him for saying and ceepolk apologised by saying that she could now see that he hadn't said what she'd been criticising him for saying, but that he ought to think about what's wrong with him that made her think that he'd said the opposite of what he'd clearly and repeatedly said. "I'm wrong, and it's your fault for making me wrong" is the closest I've ever seen. Feel free to provide better examples.

I'm still a member there but I refrain from posting since it is simply impossible to do what ceepolk tells you to do, without also doing the opposite of what she told you to do in the same sentence. For example, I was tasked with the feat of shutting up and to stop responding to people, while also have the decency to respond to posts and not give other posters the 'silent treatment'. You can't have the cake and eat it too. In any case, I took that fairly inconsistent attitude to mean that ceepolk likes to bully people around, with little concern for reason or accountability.

 

[Lorentz]

Having spent time among a more diverse group, I can say it does and I've seen people react to it, apparently without realizing it. Scenerio was one, and you can see me calling him out on it if you go digging.

You may well be correct there and this may even contribute in part towards the general antipathy towards A+.

When it comes to diversity though, there are many ways to be diverse. On JREF I get the impression that slightly over half the posters are North-American, whereas on A+ over 90% are North-American. Correct me if I'm wrong please. In my experience international diversity adds more than diversity of ethnicity or gender within a country. YMMV.

Still, I have no wish to ever interact with of a community where my ethnicity, gender or education level count against me from the start. If that makes me ableist, racist, or otherist, so be it.

 

[Stout]

Am I racist when I am in a group of nearly all white folks and it bothers me then? I'm white, CIS, male, I've got bingo on everything but wealth, and that's just perspective I'm absurdly more well off than the vast majority of humanity. The answer is no. I'm not racist because I don't hate white people. I don't dislike them, what bothers me, and what I read Ceepolk as saying, is that I don't like the absence of diversity. It bothers me when a space is primarily male, or female, or white, or other. Case in point, this thread strikes me as overwhelmingly white and male. There may be some participants who are not, but the feeling of this culture is white, male and intellectual. Consequently it takes me a lot more effort to participate here than in forums where I perceive greater diversity.

Would you be equally as bothered by the lack of diversity should you find yourself in a group that was predominately,say, South Asian ? Would you want to attack that group for it's lack of diversity in the way atheism is under attack for it's lack of diversity ?

Ceepolk posts over on Reddit, in both SRS women and blackladies so a lack of diversity can't be her motivation for feeling physical symptoms of illness upon noticing the phenotype of a given group. One would think that someone who's primary concern was diversity would deftly avoid groups that are so highly specific in their membership requirements. SRS Women...men will be banned.

RINCF posted problematically and Eowyn broke it down in detail. RINCF has admitted they should have posted their own thread. My guess is you feel that culture does not show through in posting and language use. Having spent time among a more diverse group, I can say it does and I've seen people react to it, apparently without realizing it. Scenerio was one, and you can see me calling him out on it if you go digging.

RINCF posted on the relationship between atheism and social justice which is what the blog post in the OP was all about. The only reason it became problematic is because ceepolk said it was. Lets go back to the simpleflower incident, the one about stealing internet hugs and draw a parallel. Eowyn was all about RINCF communicating with white people white men specifically. What's supposed to happen over on A+ when a PoC doesn't return to their thread ? Is it to be saved as some sort of shrine should they decide to return or should the conversation continue in the vein the OP was written in ?

 

[qwints]

Ask at A+ how many would agree with that assessment. Not in those exact words though. How about "Should all male strangers be treated as potential rapists?" You know that would get a clear "amen" (axir?), and is why so many are put off by A+. It says nothing about the myriad factors that go into our perception of strangers, and focuses on gender alone.

I think a new poster who asked that question at atheismplus would probably be quickly warned/banned for trolling. I could imagine a poster with some history posting some advice for how men could make women feel safer and receiving a positive response or additional suggestions.

Is it in any way helpful for feminists to deepen the divide between the sexes by taking extreme positions and alienating potential allies? The number of bans at A+ and their 'eschew big tents' philosophy offers ample evidence that they are far more interested in division than any form of reconciliation. You are doing them no favor by agreeing in part with this strategy, qwints.

Depends on what those extreme positions and potential allies are. There are certainly some situations (I'm thinking of King's Letter from Birmingham City Jail) where alienating potential allies by taking what those allies saw as extreme positions was justified.

I'd agree that the moderation at atheismplus makes clear that we're much more interested in a safe space for mutual support rather than reaching out. That obviously doesn't preclude people who post there from reaching out in other places.

 

[ponderingturtle]

Everyone who posted in, and survived, the Schrodinger's rapist thread was insisting that this assumption is necessary to remain safe.

The overall message was not "be wary of strangers". It was specifically you might be violently sexually assaulted by male strangers, so assume that all male strangers are going to.

I wonder how a schrodingers mugger where you focused on blacks would fly.

 

[RandFan]

I'd agree that the moderation at atheismplus makes clear that we're much more interested in a safe space for mutual support rather than reaching out. That obviously doesn't preclude people who post there from reaching out in other places.

Which is fine so long as you don't pretend that it's a forum for skepticism. Skepticism doesn't start with a presupposition of what is right and what is wrong. Skepticism is a process. A tool. A way to think, NOT what to think. Have you seen the Jamy Ian Swiss video? It's very instructive on what is and what is not skepticism.

 

[RandFan]

I can click a single button on A+ and see all the posts I've participated on...

I can click on a single button on JREF and see all the posts I've participated on (subscribing to posts is unnecessary if you participate in a thread).

 

[Kochanski]

Am I racist when I am in a group of nearly all white folks and it bothers me then? I'm white, CIS, male, I've got bingo on everything but wealth, and that's just perspective I'm absurdly more well off than the vast majority of humanity. The answer is no. I'm not racist because I don't hate white people. I don't dislike them, what bothers me, and what I read Ceepolk as saying, is that I don't like the absence of diversity. It bothers me when a space is primarily male, or female, or white, or other. Case in point, this thread strikes me as overwhelmingly white and male. There may be some participants who are not, but the feeling of this culture is white, male and intellectual. Consequently it takes me a lot more effort to participate here than in forums where I perceive greater diversity.

RINCF posted problematically and Eowyn broke it down in detail. RINCF has admitted they should have posted their own thread. My guess is you feel that culture does not show through in posting and language use. Having spent time among a more diverse group, I can say it does and I've seen people react to it, apparently without realizing it. Scenerio was one, and you can see me calling him out on it if you go digging.

How do you know this thread is overwhelmingly white & male? How do you know it lacks diversity?

This is one of the problems I have with all the stuff that goes on at A+ forum, there is an awful lot of assumption going on, the biggest being that if you don't mention your gender, race, handicaps, or other issues, that you are among what the A+ crowd would consider privileged in some way and at that point you are fair game for being considered a troll or in need of serious education in the ways of SJW.

Not everyone chooses to reveal who they are and the internet is the perfect place to remain anonymous.

ApostateltsopA, you are making a large assumption based on just the way that people post on a forum.

 

[Kochanski]

Yep.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyng...lly-divorce-myself-from-the-skeptic-movement/

Didn't the skeptic movement lodge the divorce papers ages ago?

Is anyone mirroring this? I won't give him the benefit of my click traffic

 

[jhunter1163]

Case in point, this thread strikes me as overwhelmingly white and male. There may be some participants who are not, but the feeling of this culture is white, male and intellectual. Consequently it takes me a lot more effort to participate here than in forums where I perceive greater diversity.

In the last three pages, at least four women have posted, and likely more.

 

[WillyWonka]

Case in point, this thread strikes me as overwhelmingly white and male. There may be some participants who are not, but the feeling of this culture is white, male and intellectual. Consequently it takes me a lot more effort to participate here than in forums where I perceive greater diversity.

AA, I take issue of your wording of "culture is white, male and intellectual", but mostly "intellectual". White and male is not a culture, far from it, but as an American, you see the word with that lens, there is nothing homogeneous with western culture, ask any Europeans. of note, I am a non-English first language speaker with native background. As for being intellectual, any forum allowing, and even promoting, the terms "cis, trans, xir, feminism 101, etc" should not complain about intellectuals.

 

[jhunter1163]

In the last three pages, at least four women have posted, and likely more.

Further to my point, besides the four women, there are several non-Americans actively posting in this thread, at least one gay man, and FSM knows what other non-white-straight-American-male subgroups.

My point being that it is simply impossible to tell from a few typewritten words on your computer screen what gender or ethnicity your interlocutors are, and it is best not to assume anything in that regard.

 

[qwints]

I wonder how a schrodingers mugger where you focused on blacks would fly.

I'd recommend the following blog post on the comparison: Shuffling feet: a black man’s view on Schroedinger’s Rapist

Which is fine so long as you don't pretend that it's a forum for skepticism. Skepticism doesn't start with a presupposition of what is right and what is wrong. Skepticism is a process. A tool. A way to think, NOT what to think. Have you seen the Jamy Ian Swiss video? It's very instructive on what is and what is not skepticism.

Haven't seen the video. Got a link? Found it.

 

[RandFan]

Haven't seen the video. Got a link? Found it.

I had meant to post the link. Here it is for those who missed it.

The 2012 TAM speech from Jamy Ian Swiss

 

[Diogenes]

I'd recommend the following blog post on the comparison: Shuffling feet: a black man’s view on Schroedinger’s Rapist...

It is not “sexist” for women to view all men as potential rapists, because (other than in prison) men possess the privilege of being subject to a vanishingly small likelihood of being raped by either men or women, while women are subject to a substantial likelihood of being raped by men. In contrast, it is “racist” for white people to view all black people as potential criminals, because (as far as I can discern from available crime statistics) white people are the ones who possess the privilege of being less likely to be crime victims than black people, and they are more likely to be victims of crimes committed by white people than by black people.

Really? It is simply an odds-game for what constitutes sexism and racism?

 

[squealpiggy]

Emphasis mine. At what point does SR seem like invoking "absolute terror" to you?

Is there any reasonable response aside from terror if you life your life according to the notion that every single stranger is as likely as not going to sexually violate you given the chance?

No one I have spoken to about it gives me that impression, aside from you and some other detractors. Proponents describe it as I have, "Don't trust strangers" combined with "Be aware of the cultural power imbalance involved in gender".

So everybody thinks it;s a great analogy to live by apart from its detractors? Seriously? Everyone thinks it is apt apart from those who don't!

(I'll point to the huge amounts of sympathy being thrown towards the convicted rapists in Stubenville as one of many current examples. It's dangerous to be a rape victim, even small odds are non-zero and with consequences like 1, actually being raped, and then 2, being shunned and attacked by your community for reporting it I would sure as hell seek to avoid any situation where the possibility was there.

The problem facing victims of rape is that the crime is an insidious one. A robbery is a pretty straightforward affair. The robber threatens violence in return for your valuables. A stranger rape of the type that Schrodinger's Rapist addresses is similarly cut and dry.

The issue with the overwhelming majority of rape is that the prosecution first has to prove that a crime has even taken place. You can frame this as a function of "the patriarchy" should you wish but in reality it's a function of a civilised justice system. Almost all rapes are perpetrated by people known to their victims. Usually there are no witnesses apart from those immediately involved. There are no injuries, no indication of physical coercion.

In short rape cases are hard to prosecute because it's hard to prove that a crime ever took place.

Because of this supporters of people accused of rape are not approving of rape, they are questioning whether the crime took place at all. But the notion of anyone supporting an accused rapist is taken by the social justice movement of proof of "rape culture".

What is construed as rape culture and leads to the whole Schrodinger's Rapist thing is a manifestation of the nebulous nature of rape cases in general, not of the fact that within strange men is a violent rape-beast looking for victims.

This is not an answer to my question, it's a comment which is unrelated and false. If you had to be a "crony" there would be no new members. There are new members so...

There are few new members and membership is declining rapidly so...