Continued: (Ed) Atheism Plus/Free Thought Blogs (FTB)

[Stout]

Original thread closed due to size, and can be found here: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=242361

Posted By: Locknar

This one is just too funny

Not wanting to miss out on being a victim too, our chemgeek relates a highly improbable story about her experience of passing through airport security.

Let's not forget also that women are more likely to be selected than men for "random" pat-downs and invasive screenings - something I discovered as a teenager when two middle-aged men threatened to strip-search me if I didn't walk through a metal detector on a badly sprained knee that couldn't carry my weight.

... Frankly, honey? No sympathy, Dawkins.

EDIT: I haven't seen any studies confirming it, but I wouldn't doubt that the phenomenon of women being more likely to be selected for screenings by male TSA agents is intersectional

Then, having gotten a bite on her "story" she continues......

Maybe if they're going to do "random" screenings, have them truly be random - set up a random generator. Take the TSA agents out of "randomizing" entirely, since we know they don't do their "random" screenings randomly - they profile based on race and, in the case of male agents, whether or not they feel like sexually harassing/assaulting a woman under the shield of their job. If they want to "randomly" screen 5 or 10% of passengers or what have you, fine. Set up a random program that gives "screen" or "no screen" as responses and have screen be programmed a certain percentage of the time.

I guarantee you, if they implement that, TSA reform will happen within weeks. The privileged don't like it so much when the shoe's on the other foot

Uh, chemgeek, patdowns are conducted by members of the same gender as those being patted down and those being searched are even allowed to bring their own witness to the procedure. I mean really, sexual assault ? You've never been on a plane in your life have you ?

 

[Foolmewunz]

This one is just too funny

Not wanting to miss out on being a victim too, our chemgeek relates a highly improbable story about her experience of passing through airport security.



Then, having gotten a bite on her "story" she continues......




Uh, chemgeek, patdowns are conducted by members of the same gender as those being patted down and those being searched are even allowed to bring their own witness to the procedure. I mean really, sexual assault ? You've never been on a plane in your life have you ?

And remember follks.... this person was made a moderator because of zeeb's clear and lucid thought processes.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

The plussers are going to start meetups!

Please let one be in St. Louis, please let one be in St. Louis, please let one be in St. Louis, please let one be in St. Louis....

<reads post>

DAMMIT!!!!

 

[Foolmewunz]

Please let one be in St. Louis, please let one be in St. Louis, please let one be in St. Louis, please let one be in St. Louis....

<reads post>

DAMMIT!!!!

Well, but it's in London.... We have a whole lot of UK members is those environs. I wouldn't crash their party (if two people and a third lost on the tubes en route can be called a party), but seeing as to how Oolon is there, couldn't something done along the theme of zir's blockbot?

Grease the publican with a tenner to tell them, "Oh, I'm sorry but our computer system tells us that you once angered someone in another country who doesn't know you or us, but our policy is to avoid potential discomfort and not serve people who have different sensibilities and sensitivities than we have."

Now that'd make a great podcast!

 

[zooterkin]

Well, I'm only a few miles from Louis, but I'll be re-organising my belly-button lint collection on those dates...

 

[Dissolution]

I live in London. I'd be worried about having so many nutters near me, going by that thread, but I doubt they leave their homes very often.

 

[Humes fork]

The ****! I wanted the original thread to continue forever, to eventually have more views than the populations of minor countries, to be found in the remains of human civilization once it has passed into oblivion.

Edited by zooterkin: 

Editing for rule 10. Do not attempt to evade the autocensor.

 

[Rrose Selavy]

I live in London. I'd be worried about having so many nutters near me, going by that thread, but I doubt they leave their homes very often.

So do I. Frankly if everytime I went on the Tube we had to take account of any possible trigger warnings if they were broadcast, we wouldn't get very far.

-

 

[rustypouch]

So do I. Frankly if everytime I went on the Tube we had to take account of any possible trigger warnings if they were broadcast, we wouldn't get very far.

-

Hearing the recording of the posh lady saying 'Cockfosters' made me giggle.

I think some SJW might not be able to use the Tube because of it.

 

[s_pepys]

Rebecca Watson decides the best way to raise money for cancer is to insult half the audience with gender based slurs and make jokes about male genitalia. Hypocrisy? I get the impression she is just after hits for herself. Not donations. Imagine turning a cancer charity drive into a way to push her dramas further. Terrible form IMO.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-XWjkqh85pw&desktop_uri=/watch?v=-XWjkqh85pw

Any thoughts?

 

[ponderingturtle]

As for random screenings when they do it too random people complain about 3 year olds geting searched.

 

[MarkCorrigan]

Rebecca Watson decides the best way to raise money for cancer is to insult half the audience with gender based slurs and make jokes about male genitalia. Hypocrisy? I get the impression she is just after hits for herself. Not donations. Imagine turning a cancer charity drive into a way to push her dramas further. Terrible form IMO.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-XWjkqh85pw&desktop_uri=/watch?v=-XWjkqh85pw

Any thoughts?

I thought the opening was pretty funny actually.

Also, she's doing something good for a wonderful charity. Here's an idea that might be a bit radical: Don't crap on everything someone you don't like does just because you don't like them.

I know, crazy idea right? But just think about it. Maybe, just maybe, instead of constantly whining about everything she does and attempting to twist what was a short, nice video about a group doing a genuinely decent thing into something it isn't. I think she's an attention whore of the highest order, but I don't think that everything she does at all times is to get attention. Sometimes people do things publicly because it is the right thing to do.

 

[Edx]

I thought the opening was pretty funny actually.

Maybe to a feminist that thinks everyone is just out to get women, even other women. Everyone else just rolls their eyes.
But Rebecca can't help but feed those who she knows will post horrible things in response to her, because that's what gives her a career as a professional victim.
Without them, she'd still be a relative nobody. Same with lots of these people, like Anita Sarkeesian, her whole career has been on the backs of the pushback against her ridiculous kickstarter campaign.

 

[Mumbles]

Rebecca Watson decides the best way to raise money for cancer is to insult half the audience with gender based slurs and make jokes about male genitalia. Hypocrisy? I get the impression she is just after hits for herself. Not donations. Imagine turning a cancer charity drive into a way to push her dramas further. Terrible form IMO.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-XWjkqh85pw&desktop_uri=/watch?v=-XWjkqh85pw

Any thoughts?

As a guy, I laughed. I'm glad that someone's able to crack jokes about this absolute nonsense that arose over her complaining about some weird guy cornering her in Ireland or wherever.

 

[Edx]

Thunderfoot on Watson's video:

I'm glad that someone's able to crack jokes about this absolute nonsense that arose over her complaining about some weird guy cornering her in Ireland or wherever.

So in other words you don't really understand why people were upset with her and her group.

 

[RayG]

I thought the opening was pretty funny actually.

Funny how? If a male skeptic made a youtube video to help raise money for pancreatic cancer, would it be funny for him to make disparaging remarks about female skeptics and their vaginas?

Sometimes people do things publicly because it is the right thing to do.

Yes, and some people even do the right thing without trying to denigrate others.

RayG

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

Thunderfoot on Watson's video:

Not one of his best. Plenty of straw, and he spends so much time saying that unevidenced claims are worthless yet seems to forget to provide evidence for some of his claims - such as that people who self-identify as feminists "tend to poison" things.

He's good at science vlogging and taking down Creationists. He should really leave the feminism thing alone. He doesn't do it well, and it mostly comes off as sour grapes over the whole FtB business, which he also didn't come out of well.

 

[Edx]

Not one of his best. Plenty of straw, and he spends so much time saying that unevidenced claims are worthless yet seems to forget to provide evidence for some of his claims - such as that people who self-identify as feminists "tend to poison" things.

Assuming we ignore the examples he did provide, what kind of evidence and how much of it would you need?

Also, where is the strawmen btw?

 

[s_pepys]

I thought the opening was pretty funny actually.

Also, she's doing something good for a wonderful charity. Here's an idea that might be a bit radical: Don't crap on everything someone you don't like does just because you don't like them.

I know, crazy idea right? But just think about it. Maybe, just maybe, instead of constantly whining about everything she does and attempting to twist what was a short, nice video about a group doing a genuinely decent thing into something it isn't. I think she's an attention whore of the highest order, but I don't think that everything she does at all times is to get attention. Sometimes people do things publicly because it is the right thing to do.

I also thought it was quite funny. My point is that it was misjudged. If her aim was to attract donations she immediately alienated at least half the you tube audience.

My apologies if my post came across as whining. I'll step out here I think.

 

[Mumbles]

Thunderfoot on Watson's video:

That's also hilarious. The same guy screaming that "free speech" means that people have to listen to you regardless of what you say, is now whining about jokes based on what many women get in their YouTube comments? Frankly, that's even funnier than Watson's joke.

Really, he should stick to using hard science to attack creationism. Whenever he he steps to "feminism" , it leads to nonsense like him claiming that Princess Peach from the Super Mario series is fully empowered.

So in other words you don't really understand why people were upset with her and her group.

Probably not. But I've been watching, off and on, for a couple of years now, and I can't help but think that this entire fight is absurd.