I am continually amazed by people and their ability to be rational in one aspect of their life and the ability to completely ignore rationality in other aspects of their life. The example that I often see is people who are in evidence based professions, especially the ones that require the application of scientific rigor, that ignore the same critical thinking skills when it comes to their theism. However I now have a new shining example of this and it saddens me because he used to be a person I had a lot of respect for.
What Happened!?!?
The person I am talking about is Thundefoot of course. For the people who don’t know him, he is a scientist who has gained popularity on Youtube mostly by debating theists. Although debate may be a poor choice of term to describe what usually when on when he talked with these people. Evisceration perhaps? But I digress, this post isn’t really about that. It’s about what happened since he joined Free Thought Blogs. Thunderfoot decided to throw his hat into the ring in a controversy in the greater atheist community.
This controversy started when Rebecca Watson gave a talk at a skeptic conference about sexism and added personal antidotes about how being sexualized at these conferences creeps her out. Later that night (at 4am) she was at the bar and decided to call it a night. Unfortunately another attendee decided to tailgate her into the elevator and ask her to his room for “coffee” in an overt pickup artist move of cornering. When Rebecca Watson got home, she posted a video of experiences and talked about the cornering and said Guys, Don’t Do That. Apparently this act of defiance of male privilege was taking things too far and she was sent a shitstorm of death and rape threats by the skeptical community at large.
The saga continued up until this year’s convention where recently the organizer of the event had the gall to blame her for the extreme reduction of female attendees. And this is where Thunderfoot enters the equation. He entered with a blatant sexist joke with a picture of Darth Vader, jabbed with a “This isn’t a big problem” (correction , it read “*THIS REALLY ISN’T A BIG PROBLEM*”), a left cross of Talking About Sexism Is The Problem, Not Sexism, and delivered the knockout blow (paraphrased) So STFU About All This Stuff. It was a truly epic saga of bullshit.
After he got called out on this by P.Z. Myers he got all butthurt. And since then he’s been removed from Free Thought Blogs. And the butthurt continues. Once wonders where it will end. For more on this simply google elevatorgate.
TL;DR
Thunderfoot goes all sexist and then gets all butthurt when there is a blow-back from the womenz. Sad days for Bleatmop as someone he used to respect makes a mockery of himself.
bleatmop
Mystro
Dead Wild Roses 
68 comments
July 7, 2012 at 9:40 am
Christian
And yet, no blowback from the womenz when it concerns Greg Laden. He too was sent packing from Free Thought Blogs. He threatened at least one male blogger with violence, but that’s okay with the Watson crew, apparently. After all, threats against men aren’t as serious as those against women, amirite? I wonder if the skepchicks would still welcome him to be at their convention if he had made the same threats to a woman? My guess is, probably not.
LikeLike
July 7, 2012 at 10:36 am
The Arbourist
Off topic.
He threatened at least one male blogger with violence, but that’s okay with the Watson crew, apparently.
Please quote the statements from “Watson’s Crew” that endorse violence against another blogger. I’m betting you can’t. Other than being wrong, your statement sets up your next trope quite nicely…
After all, threats against men aren’t as serious as those against women, amirite?
Oh yes because men and women face exactly the same threats and are both on equal footing in society. Problem is that they are not, and treating them as such is one of the reasons why sexism isn’t dealt with in society. Thanks for being part of the problem.
I wonder if the skepchicks would still welcome him to be at their convention if he had made the same threats to a woman?
I wonder what this has to do with Thunderfoot and his recent cratering at FTB, you know..the topic of the post.
LikeLike
July 7, 2012 at 1:30 pm
bleatmop
I’m sure “the Watson crew”, whomever they are, haven’t commented on a lot of different issues that you personally find important. But guess what? It’s not their job to read your mind and ensure they are ideologically pure enough for you to pass them on whatever litmus test you wish to put them through. Don’t like that they didn’t comment on whatever random pet issue you have? Tough. Go make a blog and comment on it yourself. In the mean time may I suggest you take your intellectual dishonesty and stuff it where the sun doesn’t shine.
LikeLike
July 7, 2012 at 1:50 pm
The Arbourist
It is almost like privileged misogynistic bullshite doesn’t fly around here. Go figure. :)
LikeLike
July 7, 2012 at 7:19 pm
VR Kaine
“After all, threats against men aren’t as serious as threats against women?”
Um, nope. Not by a long shot We men are there to take the beatings, suck it up, and move on, not sit around looking for fairness.
LikeLike
July 8, 2012 at 3:54 am
theartofsciences
if equality and fairness are perhaps out of fashion, then is the time to practice racism, discrimination, sexism, mysoginy, greed, corruption,violence(of all sorts) etc… wait a second, that is what is practiced for centuries till 2012. The added racism, discrimination, sexism, mysoginy, greed, corrpution etc… comes from the russian dolls game people are STUCK in. So, the moment a person claims to be the bigger or greater doll, ultimately that doll has all power over the other smaller dolls. This is the ONLY rationality accepted in society. The middle dolls, the average population, suffer the “bad weather” of all sort. However, I am still not quite sure what the purpose of this artificial arrangement is or are. If there is a predestination from the begining for each of one of us, then what is the point is trying to disarrange the system? Maybe the doll which encompasse all the other doll in one particular system is also the representation of corruption (a parasite), how else could one person represent a whole system and without ever sharing equally the rewards provided by what the other “dolls” in the system have contributed.
Keep the system the way the system is, unfairness, racism, discrimination, sexism, mysoginy, greed, corruption, violence (of all sorts) represent what people are and want.
Cheers.
LikeLike
July 8, 2012 at 9:24 am
The Arbourist
Greetings, thanks for commenting.
If there is a predestination from the begining for each of one of us, then what is the point is trying to disarrange the system?
Thankfully there isn’t a predestination built into the system, so identifying areas where we can improve the system and make it better for everyone is a productive, worthwhile task.
Keep the system the way the system is, unfairness, racism, discrimination, sexism, mysoginy, greed, corruption, violence (of all sorts) represent what people are and want.
Change the system and the people change with it. Societal expectations are always changing and need the action of conscientious moral people to change them for the better.
LikeLike
July 8, 2012 at 11:20 pm
Reneta Scian
After checking out the Skepchick stuff I am happy there are people out there like her and others making a stand… The vile, morally bankrupt, bullshite, and ‘what the fuck’ things people said to her appalls me. Moreover, there are women on the internet, also bloggers who say that the problem with the system is that women “Cry Wolf” too much. Really? How can things be so bad that it’s hundreds of people threaten to “Rape” a woman for speaking her mind in a calm and non-condescending manner. How bad is it that women of so readily internalized this crap that they believe the trope that “it’s because women are too sensitive”. What the fuck is wrong with our society that people still treat women this way. Outraged is about the only thing I can say, and I too looked up to Thunderfoot, so this is a big let down.
I feel so isolated sometimes out there because of the fact that shit like this happens. I feel like I am crying out in the wilderness try to get others to see the harmful tropes that are pushed upon women, or the sexualization that makes us objects of desire, that requires that we be “desirable”, that we “pass”, or that we are only for fulfilling the desires of others (primarily men). It irritates me to no ends. But it’s good to know that you guys and girls are here with me. Good to know that I am not isolated in a sea of voices, that I am not alone in fighting the rancid bullshite women face in our culture. Thank you Bleatmop, Arbourist, and all those who blog on DWR. As always I appreciate and admire your efforts. It makes a difference in my life, and I am sure it does so for others.
LikeLike
July 9, 2012 at 12:55 am
bleatmop
You’re very welcome Reneta, and thank you for your readership and insightful comments! I too am grateful for Rebecca and all the others at the Skepchick Network. May I also suggest Amanda Marcotte at Pandagon at their new digs at The Raw Story
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/category/pandagon/
LikeLike
July 9, 2012 at 5:25 am
theartofsciences
if there was no predestination built into the system, the russian dolls system would not be regarded as fundamental by those who that very system suits them. And if within that system I produce more and better ways of changing the system for the better, then why is the system still in place the way it is?
It is correct that societal expectations have evolved with the centuries passing. What was once accepted is nowadays sometimes regarded as immoral. However if people change with change (as followers do without questioning the roots of changes), it also denotes artificial behaviours, (Simon says, simon does). Morality is what is lacking in the system. Morality comes from being able to question one’s own way of thinking and behaving, isn’t easier to continue living and working without ever questioning one’s own morality and instead being paid for immorality instead?
LikeLike
July 9, 2012 at 5:39 am
theartofsciences
Ms Scian,
Women are not to be pitied for being women, too often and still too many women use their own gender, sexualized views, the desirable female body because that is what some women love to be seen and accepted for.
When women will realise that acceptance comes from accepting one’s self first without another person acceptance of their physical image, then women as a whole will have matured. Until then, there will always be gender discrimination generated by the insiders ( the women who prefer to look then to think).
Women may, can and must be able to look and think simultaneously like men do.
What stop women from being able to look and think simultaneously?
Perhaps there aren’t enough working position offered to women who can think, so begining to look first without much debating is preferable and the economy keeps twirlling upwards and the women who think find it harder each day to be taken seriously.
So I repeat what I wrote in my initial post again: “Keep the system the way the system is, unfairness, racism, discrimination, sexism, mysoginy, greed, corruption, violence (of all sorts) represent what people are and want.”
LikeLike
July 9, 2012 at 1:16 pm
The Arbourist
Women are not to be pitied for being women, too often and still too many women use their own gender, sexualized views, the desirable female body because that is what some women love to be seen and accepted for.
Well thank you for your dudely sage advice, because women definitely need more dudes explaining to them how to act and what to do.
Women may, can and must be able to look and think simultaneously like men do. What stop women from being able to look and think simultaneously?
What are you babbling on about?
So I repeat what I wrote in my initial post again: “Keep the system the way the system is, unfairness, racism, discrimination, sexism, mysoginy, greed, corruption, violence (of all sorts) represent what people are and want.”
Another fine argument for the status-quo. Your opinion is noted.
LikeLike
July 9, 2012 at 7:25 pm
Reneta Scian
Actually it’s not that people want it, or that women in our culture stopped thinking and started being concerned with looks, it’s call OPPRESSION! Arguments from the Status Quo are revolting, seriously. Women operate in society the way they do because if they assert their own will, their own individuality they are threatened with rape. Because apparently violation of our bodies is what all free thinking women deserve to let us know that our ‘lowly’ place is to be vessels for male enjoyment and utility. Your entire position is ludicrous and privileged to say the least about it, and vile and revolting at the most base level.
Women don’t do it because that is what they want, they do it because they are oppressed. As if the world isn’t bad enough, we have people like you who think that is okay and that we should preserve that because that is what people want? Your position is nonsensical, not even satirical, vulgar, and ultimately your position is oppressive. You should write in a journal rather than exposing to the world your ignorant and vulgar opinion. People don’t want the world this way, and that is why it is slowly progressing with diligent effort. However, their are still those in power who maintain the system as it is to support their power. We will overthrown them, and likely those like you in the process.
Have a nice day.
LikeLike
July 10, 2012 at 5:07 am
theartofsciences
Ms Scian,
Oppression is a magnificent word. Think therefore about the rain. On a rainy day when the rains downpours at its strongest, people will try and remain indoor to be comfortable. Yet they complain about how strong the rain downfall is. If it rains throughout the day with moments of slight rain, then people are slightly more cheerful too. Yet it is still raining.
The fact that the system might apply a milder rain on people and especially women, does not remove the rainy day at all. Women in this case become accustomed to the milder rain as it is better than the downpouring rain they encountered ealier on.
So, if women wish to fight oppression and the oppression is slightly subsiding (meaning they are tolerated to have education, better job without EVER being paid equally to men) women will think they have won the war on discrimination and oppression. Wrongly so, the women have now become integral part of the mysoginic discriminative system.
Please try and explain to me, how you are going to overthrow someone or people who have all control over your life’s decisions?
How can you overthrow someone who will simplify everything by ONLY repeating after you or another woman or man?
How can you even despise that person? That person is your male or female counterpart?
Because that is what you have described so well in your previous post, the grotesque vulgarity of the oppressing system in place which WANT the status quo, women aside and oppressed in ways that are so vulgar even the bin men would not pick up and there would be no place on earth to dispose of it.
Slow changes imply a winning technology over everything that is beautiful in human nature.
Radical changes imply a complete change in attitude (100 years ago would have been better), and that is the removal of technology.
So, yes your arguments are absolutely correct. Continue thinking.
LikeLike
July 10, 2012 at 5:17 am
theartofsciences
The arbourist,
in reference to my first paragraph, I did not imply what you understood.
I was only trying to write that women are not to be pitied, because this gives an edge of superiority to other men when they pity women who have been used and oppressed.
So women who have realised that their desirable body was actually a mean of acceptance for men, and vice versa, bring the system into a loop without change.
Why do you think there are so many divorces? is it because people are unhealthy in their own excellent health?
LikeLike
July 10, 2012 at 9:49 am
Mystro
I missed what thunderf00t actually said, but the story I’ve heard so far that rings most true is the one presented by c0nc0rdance, another great science youtuber
Short version: thunderf00t may not fully appreciate state of sexism and feminist movement. People who are actually involved in feminism took his very situational comments (things not so bad HERE) to mean they were global (things not so bad EVERYWHERE), and then lumped his comments with those given by true enemies of the cause.
It would be like if there was one murder at a rock concert, then someone said that ‘murders are not really a big problem at rock concerts’.
Family of the victim would probably, and understandably, not receive this statement well. It would be very easy to see the message as ‘murder isn’t a problem’. This perceived message belittles their very real pain and does injustice to a sever social problem.
While the message was actually ‘murder isn’t normally a problem at concerts‘, the person issuing this statement is not taking due consideration of the victims’ perspective.
Was TF wrong? If what he said was ‘sexism isn’t as rampant at atheists conventions as some people have claimed”, I couldn’t tell you, as I’ve never been to one nor have I seen any real data either way. If what he said was ‘women being threatened by rape isn’t a problem at all’ then he was VERY wrong. I get the feeling he said something closer to the former.
Was TF unappreciative of the complexity of an important issue and didn’t fully consider how his comments might be taken? Seems likely. It’s difficult to be that careful in an arena you’re not used to.
What’s to be done? If my view of the situation is close, I’d have to agree with c0nc0rdance. Those in the know should address what TF actually said and point out either a) why it’s wrong and/or b) why it’s short-sighted.
Evicting someone from Free Thought Blogs is probably the wrong way to go.
LikeLiked by 1 person
July 10, 2012 at 11:22 am
The Arbourist
Before making pronouncement on what is right and wrong at least according to your particular point of view I suggest you do some reading first. Thunderfoot had the opportunity to write well you know, about Science as opposed to sexism and gender issues on his blog at FTB. He chose not to, go and see his 6 post flameout-walk of shame and pay close attention to the comments section in those threads to get an idea of why his infantile all caps/lol-speak debacle was wrong.
After perusing TF’s posts, please look at PZ Myers first response and the comment thread. The response to TF’s rebuttal after being called out on his misogyny by PZ. And of course the message letting TF know that his level of BS is not really cool and not needed on FTB.
For a comprehensive analysis of the wrongness please see Greta Christina’s Blog she has 5 posts that are useful in wading through this particular issue in the depth necessary to understand the nuance of the situation – 1,2,3,4,5.
Evicting someone from Free Thought Blogs is probably the wrong way to go.
Love the dramatic underlining for ironic purposes, please see below about what free thought actually is.
From comment #31 on Ed Brayton’s Dispatches from the Culture Wars –
[Previous commenter said -]“Was Thunderf00t not thinking freely? He didn’t express his views in any closed minded way, he posted a perfectly acceptable blog (no matter if you agreed or not) and was attacked for it. When he defended himself he got the ban.”
Let’s make sure we’re on the same page here:
Freethought is a philosophical viewpoint that holds opinions should be formed on the basis of science, logic, and reason, and should not be influenced by authority, tradition, or other dogmas.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freethought
Freethought is *not* being ‘free to think whatever one wants’. Under your [wrong] interpretation of what freethought entails, the bloggers here should start asking theist bloggers to set up shot here.
Now that we have a definition of ‘freethought’, can you understand now why Thunderf00t’s views do not fit at FtB?
He has an opinion [about women’s rights] that doesn’t fit with FreeThoughtBlogs. He has expressed views that are the *opposite* of freethought. His dismissal of the sexual harassment faced by women is *not* based on science, logic and reason. It’s based on his limited, subjective, MALE experiences. Instead of listening to women and trying to understand their frustration and anger, he opened his mouth and ignorance poured out.
From there, he double downed, triple downed, and even quadruple downed, rather than admit that he was wrong {just as you are wrong}. If he had shut the fuck up and listened, instead of posting rant after rant about how he was right and everyone opposed to him was wrong, he might still be here.”
And for the sake of clarification, the official reason, also from Ed Brayton on why TF was let go:
“We are parting company with two of our bloggers: Thunderf00t and Greg Laden. We wish them both the best but, unfortunately, their behavior towards other members of the community has made it impossible to keep them as part of our network. This is not a matter of a disagreement or difference of opinion, but of behavior that we cannot condone or support.”
LikeLike
July 11, 2012 at 12:23 am
bleatmop
That video was actually why I unsubbed from Concordance. He clearly didn’t know what was going on, because if he was trying to make the point that TF was being all impartial and rational, he wasn’t doing a very good job. If TF had ONLY wrote his first post of FTB, then I could see that position, but all the rest of his posts were outright trollish ragegasms. I don’t really need to watch videos from someone who thinks taking the middle ground of any issue is the rational choice. Sometimes one side is clearly wrong and one side is clearly right.
Not to say that I think anything else Concordance has done is in any way tainted. It’s not. I just don’t need him to get that information. I can find other sources for that information that haven’t take the argument to moderation fallacy on an issue I find more important than my atheist or science priorities.
LikeLiked by 1 person
July 11, 2012 at 8:07 am
The Arbourist
I was actually kind of surprised myself when Concordance put that video up; it does show a lack of attention to detail that, in science, would be concerning.
LikeLike
July 11, 2012 at 12:20 pm
The Arbourist
LikeLike
July 11, 2012 at 12:43 pm
The Arbourist
Need even more background? The saga summarized at Oh, the humanity of it all.
LikeLike
July 12, 2012 at 12:03 am
bleatmop
Thanks for the video Arb! PZ Myers laid out the facts in a pretty succinct manner.
LikeLike
July 12, 2012 at 8:28 am
The Arbourist
I figure, to balance out the misconceptions in the Concordance video we should have the opportunity to see both side of the story.
LikeLike
July 12, 2012 at 2:18 pm
Mystro
Thanks for the links to Greta Christina’s articles and the PZ vid. Their pieces answered every one of my questions and were carried out in impecable form. They cleared up a ton of stuff. I wasn’t even close on either of my ‘possible things TF might have said’.
LikeLike
July 12, 2012 at 4:32 pm
The Arbourist
It is sort of a long and convoluted series of events. I’m glad I could help. :)
LikeLike
August 22, 2013 at 6:42 am
Edgard Pinheiro
Hey guys! Dont you think that sometimes feminists and many other categories of people get offended too easily?
LikeLike
August 22, 2013 at 12:58 pm
VR Kaine
I think there’s the one side of it where there are legitimate victims, and then the other side where there’s people who just want to be victims because they’re insecure, ignorant, lazy, careless, and irresponsible and (perpetual) victimhood gives them an easy and safe way to meet their need for significance. Unfortunately with this, one group’s wants distract, distort, and take away from the legitimate needs of the other.
So to answer your question, if it was legitimate victims I’d say “No, they don’t get offended too easily” and if it’s the whiners who want to continuously wallow in victimhood, I’d say, “Absolutely they do”. That’s why I enjoy comedians so much – they have a great way of separating the two and offering perspective. Not comparing the two, but I think this blog does a great job of it as well.
LikeLiked by 1 person
August 22, 2013 at 9:49 pm
The Arbourist
@Edgard Pinheiro
Probably the same amount of people who are blind to their privilege and tend to draw erroneous conclusions based on their flawed assumptions.
LikeLike
August 24, 2013 at 4:58 am
bleatmop
Lol. I love how the comment thread is longer and better than my original post.
LikeLike
August 24, 2013 at 9:54 am
The Arbourist
@Bleatmop
A wily agent provocateur you are. :)
Posts like yours nudge people away from their comfort zones and the status quo. Hopefully it entails them questioning their assumptions, much of the time however, it is just a regurgitation of lame defenses/justifications put forth by representatives of the status quo.
LikeLike
August 24, 2013 at 11:38 am
VR Kaine
Still proud to be a representative of the status quo, (although perhaps not as much of one as I was a few years ago)::) Haha!
LikeLike
August 24, 2013 at 11:39 am
VR Kaine
I always thought Thunderfootsies was a pompous, chauvinist jerk anyways, even if he had good arguments on the atheism side.
LikeLike
August 24, 2013 at 2:43 pm
Reneta Scian
Um, “proud to be representative of the status quo” is still rather offensive to some. Myself in particular considering the status quo is why I don’t have a home with family to go to on the holidays. The reason why I have to be afraid what clubs I go to, and what times I go out. The status quo is why I live off disability, and why I practically have to grovel to get employment in spite of my work history and experience. The status quo is why self improvement in this country will do little to actually allow me a “piece of the pie”. Do you get the picture? I don’t find your remark one bit funny, not at all. Think about what you’re representing before you make light of it.
LikeLike
August 24, 2013 at 9:49 pm
VR Kaine
Nah. For one, what you consider “status quo” isn’t what I consider it to be, and for another, my comments weren’t intended to be offensive to you in that manner – and certainly not to such a degree.
I’m male and in what you’d consider a “privileged class”. I’m in a world with a lot of “alphas” (of all stripes) where we use our advantages to do good things and I’m proud of that. My declaration of it, however, was simply a lighthearted, provocative, and tongue-in-cheek call of defiance to Arb.
In that same breath and in a little more serious tone, however, I also conceded that because in part of what I read here, I’m probably not as “alpha” in that group as I once was. That said, am I going to check around and see who I might possibly offend before saying something? Nope. We’re not in some hospital or some therapist’s couch here.
And I’ll add that the plight of your circumstances aside, just because you’re lumping every crappy little thing around you under the generic label of “status quo”, doesn’t mean I have to apologize just because you automatically made the one you thought I was referring to the $hitty, painful one you happen to live in. I wasn’t talking about you, or yours, and with all due respect, if you don’t want to get SO offended, perhaps start there.
An off-hand random comment with a “haha” and happy face attached to it? There’s far worse, I’m sure.
LikeLike
August 24, 2013 at 11:54 pm
The Arbourist
@Reneta
Long time, no see. You’ve been well I hope. :) Glad to see you commenting here again.
LikeLike
August 25, 2013 at 9:53 am
Reneta Scian
@Arbourist Thanks, and yes I guess it has been a while. I’ve been writing a lot lately, so I’ve been focused on that more. I’m coming to a conclusion on one story and working on starting a new one. Also, I am working on moving to Australia and going back to school in Agricultural Science, a lot because I don’t trust the powers that be, nor the systems in this country to provide for me in the long term. I don’t want to be dependent on disability at this point in my life, because I want to be a writer and it’s hard to do that as a disabled person on a pension. I just want to be somewhere that I have the opportunity to actually improve myself, and I can’t do that here.
And as for Vern, that was a very vague statement, and I’m free to and do find the idea of the Status Quo to be offensive in any derivative. However, I do apologize to some degree because of the fact that my body was making me horribly, horribly irritable at the point I read your comment. I’d like to add, considering the context of things that have been said between the comments and the body of this post, making a joke about being proud to represent the status quo was in poor taste. For context of “Status Quo” in this instance, you must take note of the way in which status quo is represented throughout, and then you’ll see why I found your joke so offensive.
I cannot instantaneously extrapolate your personal definition of “Status Quo” without a frame of reference, and such a statement is a deflection of your own misunderstanding. Some of the comments from the status quo within this blog reflect vile and contemptible attitudes that do affect me personally, which I do find incredibly offensive. And even if your definition of “Status Quo” is different, your usage in this instance still makes you culpable. You can’t redefine, or reclaim the usage of status quo of the purpose of a joke in this instance while remaining contextually separated from the more vile aspects of “Status Quo” contained therein. But, it would appear that this was an honest error on your part, not a deliberate attempt to offend others.
LikeLike
August 25, 2013 at 1:05 pm
bleatmop
Arb – Shit disturbing is a skill I have refined over the years.
Vern – I agree with you 100% on Thunderfoot. I haven’t really read or watched anything he’s done since he made this video. There are soooo many other resources out there without his baggage.
Reneta – I hear Canada is a nice place to live with a strong social safety net. Although we do not have an atheist for a Prime Minister like Australia we are a far less religious country overall.
LikeLike
August 26, 2013 at 2:52 am
Reneta Scian
I’ve considered it before, Bleat. But, Australia is some place I actually want to go, and I have friends there. That and Canada would make my mom happy, but it wouldn’t make me happy, per say. It’s also my intention to expatriate as well, where ever I go.
LikeLike
August 26, 2013 at 2:00 pm
bleatmop
Reneta: Totally cool. Australia seems like a cool place and it’s a part of the commonwealth. Rural Australia is apparently much like rural western Canada (where I live) with better weather. I was mostly just doing my Canadian duty of promoting our country whenever and wherever possible ;) I hope you find what you are looking for in Australia.
LikeLike
December 28, 2013 at 11:52 pm
House Mouse Queen
I find that men in science are sometimes MORE sexist than say a blue collar man. The reasons here are pretty obvious. He’s in a male dominated field where women are scarce. He’s geeky and probably has ZERO experience with women. Women are like strange little playthings to him in his glorious control. It’s all about control.
Thunderfart is a loser, plain and simple. He’s a misogynist scumbag who thinks he’s the best thing since sliced bread. I can’t stand his smug crap.
I’ve made videos about his misogyny and his little fanbois descended on it and made idiots out of themselves. I offered to debate Thunderfart any time, anywhere. I’ve heard nothing.
LikeLike
December 29, 2013 at 10:02 am
The Arbourist
@HMQ
I don’t have as much direct experience as I work outside of STEM fields, but as a teacher I’m always amazed the level of racism, sexism and general douchery that is present inside the school system.
More power to you, his BS needs to be refuted, loudly and often.
Completely shocked. Being called out for being a crappy human being in a debate cannot be good for his ego.
LikeLike
February 7, 2014 at 2:00 pm
Feminista
Men should be kept in cages and only allowed out when deemed fit by women. A man looking at, being within 15 feet of, or daring to *gasps* SPEAK to a woman is a classic pickup artist misogynist attack and an obvious attempt to rape her. These savage beasts are not fit to be released into society until we teach them not to rape.
Furthermore, sending a random online woman death threats is different because every single man on Earth has the power to oppress and marginalize every single woman on Earth because every man is wealthy and powerful and no women are. Similar to how someone who makes $50,000 a year is justified in threatening someone who makes $75,000 a year because patriarchy.
If you disagree with this you are a patriarchal privileged misogynist rape apologist and part of the problem.
LikeLike
February 7, 2014 at 5:36 pm
The Arbourist
@Feminista
LoL – Dude, it isn’t all about you.
LikeLike
February 7, 2014 at 6:50 pm
Feminista
You rape apologist, how dare you “LoL” at me you patriarchal privileged misogynist rape apologist! Didn’t you realize that laughter is a tool of the evil men to discredit women? A man had the nerve to laugh at something I said one time in an elevator–I was practically raped, for crying out loud!
How DARE you say it’s not all about me?? As a woman, everyone has to conform to whatever ridiculous thing I might find offensive and be able to read my mind! If you don’t do this you’re simply enabling rape culture. FACT!
LikeLike
February 8, 2014 at 6:51 am
bleatmop
A post about Thunderf00t brings out the trolls… who coulda saw that one coming. Something something shit something flies.
LikeLike
February 8, 2014 at 9:01 am
The Arbourist
@Bleatmop
But Bleatmop, angry liberal white dudes need love too! Why should we question the profound depth of their understanding of issues they know little to nothing about?
:)
LikeLike
February 8, 2014 at 9:36 pm
Feminista
Exactly! They should believe whatever we says about everything because vagina. They shouldn’t leave the house unless granted permission by every woman on earth, and then must telepathically decide what could possibly make ANY of them uncomfortable, no matter how ridiculous. And certainly no minority men could possibly take issue with this, I mean it’s not like they have to face even more negative stereotyping and hatred or anything!
Dude, you need to go exercise your MRA-fap to an audience that actually cares about your carefully considered opinions. So you need to run along and have a nice day, elsewhere on the internets.
LikeLike
February 16, 2014 at 8:23 pm
Moneybags
I’m pretty sure the only butthurt (that matters) was visited upon FTB’s declining readership.
LikeLike
March 23, 2014 at 3:45 am
Voidward
I really cannot grasp how a man asking out a woman for coffee in an elevator is some form of misogyny. I understand with a person being uncomfortable in a said situation, just like I’m sure the guy asking her out (and then doing absolutely no harm to her) was uncomfortable with being shut down.
Demanding that men in general don’t do this (ask women out for coffee / on a date) as some type of public figure for feminism is beyond baffling to me. Maybe being your typical privileged white male it just doesn’t compute to me, but I’d love to actually hear the reasoning. People make others uncomfortable for all sorts of reasons every day, and that’s part of live. Individuals have their own free thought, and trying to dictate completely harmless behaviour as unreasonable makes it perfectly clear to me why the video had such a bad reaction.
Sure, threats of any type as a response to something you disagree with isn’t an appropriate response, but that’s really just a case of trolls and people who have terrible communication skill saying “I strongly disagree with you.” People failing to properly form criticism doesn’t automatically prove the original point being made. Pretty sure atheist personalities of all types get threats on a regular basis. I’ve heard Dawkins read off lots of letters where people threaten to murder him. It appears that he then moves on with his day and acknowledges it for what it is, angry people disagreeing with him.
When something like that happens to a feminist though, the word misogyny is automatically thrown out and everyone comes to help out the poor defenceless woman and banners get raised against the cause that is people saying shit on the internet.
Does someone have any statistic correlating rape threats to actual rapes? Pretty sure (pardon being so unscientific) in the last decades rape threats have risen thousands of percent on the internet. How have sexual assault statistics been impacted by this? Every statistic I can find shows sexual assault on the decline. So what’s happening?
Feminists are being trolled. Internet assclowns disagree with their views and can only express it by defecating in the comment section. That doesn’t make misogyny a larger issue than it’s ever been, it means feminists label any, and I mean ANY form of dissent as misogyny. Seriously any time I’ve ever taken a peek at this topic, anyone disagreeing with the point of view of a feminist is always, at some point, implied to be a misogynist simply for expressing disagreement.
I do not comprehend how rape threats on the internet hold any more veracity than a death threat does. I’ve seen Dawkins and Krauss in public. They didn’t have bodyguards, people weren’t patted down for weapons, in fact I saw both openly hugging people they’ve never met before. No specific accommodations were made at the venue they were at to ensure their safety.
At the same time feminists are demanding all males to alter their behaviour so they don’t feel icky in public. They demand rule changes and accommodations at conventions when there is no proof of rape being any kind of actual threat. There is no fucking way any of these feminists have any more reasons to fear for their life than Richard Dawkins. No fucking way. Yet their behaviour of demanding the world at large conform to their comfort is completely absurd.
Maybe it’s unreasonable to expect that feminists would have the same courage and commitment to their cause as a privileged rich old white man. Just feels like their actions constantly contradict the dogma they preach. Women are equal to men but yet need special care and attention. Women are tough and capable but can’t converse on an elevator without public outcry or comprehend the intentions of an internet troll without crying to everyone about how badly everyone treats them.
Feminism today is not what it started out as. Really, there is some truly abhorrent treatment of women all across the globe. But, these are just privileged white girls complaining that a guy who just wanted to be friends made them feel icky for 15 seconds of their life. There’s a reason so many people (not just men) don’t take feminists seriously.
LikeLiked by 1 person
March 23, 2014 at 8:30 am
The Arbourist
@Voidward
Well that’s awesome.
1. Is everyone’s experience in society the same as yours? (yes/no)
2. Does the experience of others matter? (yes/no)
3. If someone else has a differing experience in society is it equally a valid point of view as yours? (yes/no).
The answers to the above questions should be no, yes, yes. If they are not, you won’t find an answer that will satisfy you here.
Was he also afraid the he was going to be sexually assaulted in the confines of an elevator? I doubt that seriously.
You mean asking men in general to act like decent human beings? The nerve.
I actually doubt that, given the rest of your comment. It comes back to the first set of questions posed – does everyone have the same experience as you? Consider that you’re playing on the easy level in society, while others may not be and that changes the way situations are regarded.
Harmless from your point of view. Others have differing experiences.
Nice to be male, isn’t it.
Demanding that people act with courtesy and respect is not beyond the pale.
So we don’t believe women who say they experience harassment at events? Women not being taken seriously when they raise concerns about their safety at events is reason why female attendance at said events is low. Their concerns are brushed aside, just like you’re doing here because acting like a decent human being is inconvenient for you.
Because you know the experience of women and how society treats them, as evinced here…
Yes, that standard for the barest level of decency is sounding more and more insurmountable. It’s almost like the status quo is easier to maintain rather than changing it for the better. Funny how that works.
Women currently are not equal to men, so that needs to be addressed in society.
Feminism struggles to free women and men from the structures of sexist oppression. With special attention paid to the systems of domination (patriarchy) and the interrelatedness of sex, race, and class oppression.
Correct. The current phase of feminism is rife with discord as much of the liberal feminist perspective has been co-opted and has lost focus on what is really important, namely, addressing the systemic features of sexist oppression and working to correct them.
LikeLike