tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8981856246989013843.post7174624768022944562..comments2023-05-22T10:42:54.046-04:00Comments on 6th or 7th: On religion and goat fuckingEthanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07498712279382078624noreply@blogger.comBlogger40125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8981856246989013843.post-33122110223606614632010-07-23T17:07:50.677-04:002010-07-23T17:07:50.677-04:00How do you know I don't?How do you know I don't?Ethanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07498712279382078624noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8981856246989013843.post-6743652769079941862010-07-23T15:31:59.251-04:002010-07-23T15:31:59.251-04:00the capital-A Atheists have some of the most enorm...<i>the capital-A Atheists have some of the most enormous blind spots imaginable. They seem to think that deciding not to believe in god automatically confers rightness and moral and intellectual superiority onto them in all matters. And they then apply the reverse to all those who have any kind of religion: they are wrong and morally and intellectually inferior in all matters</i><br /><br />Snicker snort. Oh, do go on and continue to tell atheists what they really think based on your, uh - do I have your permission to use the term "strawman" here? Okay, cool. - ridiculous strawman.<br /><br />Oh, wait, you only said they <i>seem</i> to think this way in all matters. It's all about your <i>perceptions</i>, of course, which can't be objectively wrong.<br /><br />You're so packed full of shit, I'm surprised you don't have a cloud of flies following you everywhere you go.Harvey Gangbangernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8981856246989013843.post-46732148133781792732010-07-23T09:05:57.843-04:002010-07-23T09:05:57.843-04:00CFO, those are absurd assertions, and ones that ha...CFO, those are absurd assertions, and ones that have been used by establishment figures to cause a lot of harm over the past few decades.Ethanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07498712279382078624noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8981856246989013843.post-44816966232549693862010-07-23T01:36:39.370-04:002010-07-23T01:36:39.370-04:00A child masturbating at age 7?
My first impressio...A child masturbating at age 7?<br /><br />My first impression: that child has been raped or molested from an early age, well before 7.<br /><br />At age 7, sexuality is off the radar for an average human. For most humans.<br /><br />Sexuality depends highly and strongly on puberty.<br /><br />Acting at being sexualized, because one's exposed to a sexualized culture -- that's totally different from desert island urges in the absence of cultural implorings to be sexualized.<br /><br />Every time someone tells me he or she felt strong sexual urges at age 7 or 8, I wonder about that person's (a) honesty; and (b) awareness of the sexual trauma he/she suffered at a very early age.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8981856246989013843.post-22342425044175329622010-07-20T20:10:40.434-04:002010-07-20T20:10:40.434-04:00No need to apologize, friend. I've done cleanu...No need to apologize, friend. I've done cleanup.Ethanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07498712279382078624noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8981856246989013843.post-19925628854754360952010-07-19T21:00:35.948-04:002010-07-19T21:00:35.948-04:00Oh no, don't believe it: I've duplicated p...Oh no, don't believe it: I've duplicated posts again! Sorry, Ethan.<br /><br />Becky T.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8981856246989013843.post-9354607226949567722010-07-19T20:55:50.369-04:002010-07-19T20:55:50.369-04:00Hey Ethan, many thanks for deleting the duplicate ...Hey Ethan, many thanks for deleting the duplicate - I'm really glad you did so. I always feel so stupid afterwards when I do stuff like that. Often it's not long before someone comes along and says: 'hey heard you the first time!':)<br /><br />Quite a few of those self-proclaimed non-transphobic Pharyngulites on the 'Bravo Belgium' thread actually referred to me as 'it'. Not that I care that much as in contrast to them I'd rather be an 'it' than a '(sh)it':)!!!<br /><br />Similarly, PZ Myers' use of the acronyn 'PoC' on a different thread on his blog left me (at least temporarily) totally puzzled, Dan. Being totally unfamiliar with it, I (it turns out) mistakenly assumed this was a term for some sort of campus police officer until after reading further I began to have suspicions that I had missed the plot a bit. Turns out that in the context that PZ was using it, PoC stands for 'People of Color': http://acronyms.thefreedictionary.com/POC<br /><br />Now, wtf is a 'person of colour'? Unless there are any human beings on this earth (please note discounting other planets) who are transparent then don't we all fall into the category of 'people of colour'? Why can't he just say 'black' or 'white'? Furthermore, if he used the term 'people of colour' to describe anyone who isn't white where I come from ironically the alarm bells would suddenly go off and it would be assumed that he was being at best extremely old-fashioned (as per 19th century) patronising and at worst a white supremacist of some sort. Everyone I knows refers to themselves as white if they are white and black if they are black etc. Oh well, I don't move within the intellectual circles that inhabit the ivory towers (oooh yes, PZ Myers: ivory!) so maybe it's just that 'my kind' whatever our colour are perpetually 'mentally deranged', or something;)?<br /><br />I also find myself quite shocked at PZ Myers' response to a poster called Mr Naglfar (apologies I type this from memory so I'm not sure I spelt that name correctly) yesterday on the: 'I've been objectified' thread on his site. In fact, I think that PZ's response to that man actually constitutes verbal sexual harassment and if he'd expressed it to a student at UoM that person could well have reported him.<br /><br />Becky TranssexualAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8981856246989013843.post-23152894083221806082010-07-18T18:46:13.061-04:002010-07-18T18:46:13.061-04:00I like the person defending his/her use of "t...I like the person defending his/her use of "trannies" by saying that "transvestite" is too clinical. Later on s/he says it sounds like it's "referring to a disease." <br /><br />I wonder what words s/he uses if s/he finds "African American" or "person of the Jewish faith" too clinical.Danhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17188271849505052773noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8981856246989013843.post-8218500858230854932010-07-18T18:32:24.579-04:002010-07-18T18:32:24.579-04:00Becky, hope you don't mind that I deleted the ...Becky, hope you don't mind that I deleted the duplicate post in the interest of streamlining things.<br /><br />Looking over that threat, my favorite part is that when one person pointed out PZ's bigotry, well before you showed up, she* got shut up by commenter after commenter yelling at her that, no, transgender people can feel <i>comfortable</i> there--<i>despite the fact that she's telling them she doesn't</i>.<br /><br />*Using "she" for convenience based on the poster's usernameEthanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07498712279382078624noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8981856246989013843.post-59768338966043240432010-07-18T17:06:12.662-04:002010-07-18T17:06:12.662-04:00Becky-
I tried to see where/how/why you got banned...Becky-<br />I tried to see where/how/why you got banned, but my eyes glazed over at around comment #99 (which is actually might be a record for me & pharyngula). Dunno what you said, but even if you did "behave like an idiot" as you say, y'know...when in Rome...<br /><br />Anyway, yeah, you're right. For someone who puts on so many airs about being open-minded and what-have-you, PZ often resorts to racism and heteronormativity in the name of "humor". As Ethan has said previously, very convenient for power, in that.Danhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17188271849505052773noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8981856246989013843.post-7323291843161863522010-07-18T16:02:32.547-04:002010-07-18T16:02:32.547-04:00Sorry, made a booboo again: posted twice this time...Sorry, made a booboo again: posted twice this time(!)<br /><br />BeckyAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8981856246989013843.post-74174340835272511262010-07-18T16:00:58.831-04:002010-07-18T16:00:58.831-04:00Hi Ethan, Dan...
Many thanks for considering my p...Hi Ethan, Dan...<br /><br />Many thanks for considering my post and for your fair play and open-mindedness. Such a refreshing change from certain blogs that seem to display a profound suspicion and outright hostility to anyone not 'local' who might say something that challenges their decided mindset:)<br /><br />I chanced upon the 'Bravo Belgium' post that he wrote a few weeks ago when I googled the word 'transvestite' into the news section (I'm interested in reading news stories about transgendered related issues). Okay yes, I behaved like an idiot on the forum as can be seen to the extent that I didn't even get around to stating just why I was taking issue with PZ's post in the first place - as this is a fairly complicated argument that have against the post I will explain this to you later...if that's okay.<br /><br />Tbh...initially, incredible as it may seem, I really did assume that PZ was some sort of extreme right-wing conspiracy theorist linked to the KKK. He was going on about transvestites and seemed to be obsessively anti-Catholic to the point of sectarianism. I'm neither Catholic nor religious at all actually but I do know that groups like the KKK have a history of hating Catholics (and also LGBT) people so unfortunately I put two and two together and made five.<br /><br />Still, I wasn't the only one to have behaved badly on that forum and I got some pretty mean things said about me to...many of them entirely unprovoked from people whom I'd never even addressed. Many of them seemed to be intensely angry to the point of wishing physical violence upon me.<br /><br />Speaking as someone who was just passing through and found the Pharyngula blog purely by accident having previously never heard of it (or Professor Myers) ironically - for a blog which proudly purports to be a beacon of progressive rationality, free from the shackles of dogma and superstition etc....it almost seems to have a cult-like quality to it. It's almost as if PZ has become some sort of worshipful, godlike figure to them and woe betide anyone who should criticize him or the one, true faith (the Word of PZ) which he espouses. Surely, the intense sort of group reaction that I got couldn't be that far divorced from the mindset of a council of religious zealots who considered someone to have committed sacrilege in the 17th century, or something. It did indeed seem that they'd found a new witch. I was particularly surprised at the paranoia on that thread. I mean, I'd already stated that I wasn't religious myself yet they seemed to think that I was some sort of secret agent sent by the Vatican to enact a 'fatwa' against PZ Myers for challenging the Catholic Church.<br /><br />Consequently, they, and seemingly he, see anyone who takes issue with anything he says as at best clearly deranged and at worst; evil in some way. <br /><br />Oh well, sorry that my post turned out to be a bit long-winded. <br /><br />Now earth to Professor Myers: we are all to some degree fallible and emotionally mentally un-balanced yet he needn't worry too much because my form of mental imbalance is not (at least yet) as extreme as me thinking I'm Napoleon...or (perhaps?) him thinking that he's Charles Darwin;)<br /><br />Becky TranssexualAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8981856246989013843.post-43212469729280816412010-07-18T13:47:56.498-04:002010-07-18T13:47:56.498-04:00Becky,
Care to share the post in which you got ba...Becky,<br /><br />Care to share the post in which you got banned? I mean, just out of curiosity...I'm kinda nosy like that.Danhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17188271849505052773noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8981856246989013843.post-80070023847712916372010-07-18T10:01:43.420-04:002010-07-18T10:01:43.420-04:00Oh and also: here, we don't make fun of people...Oh and also: here, we don't make fun of people for typos, so don't sweat it.Ethanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07498712279382078624noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8981856246989013843.post-59282262167228082832010-07-18T10:00:55.086-04:002010-07-18T10:00:55.086-04:00Becky, as I mentioned briefly in my original post,...Becky, as I mentioned briefly in my original post, the capital-A Atheists have some of the most enormous blind spots imaginable. They seem to think that deciding not to believe in god automatically confers rightness and moral and intellectual superiority onto them in all matters. And they then apply the reverse to all those who have any kind of religion: they are wrong and morally and intellectually inferior in all matters.<br /><br />As a result, your capital-A Atheist is beyond reproach him or herself (even when as behaving in as manifestly racist or sexist or otherwise just utterly <i>wrong</i> a way as Myers frequently does), and is free to blame religion for <i>all</i> the problems in the world (ignoring the actual causes of these problems, which is nice and convenient for power!).<br /><br />Bunch of assholes, in short.<br /><br />Thanks for sharing your story. If you feel like sticking around here, I promise you I'll never ban you for disagreeing with me or for calling me out on something shitty I might say.Ethanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07498712279382078624noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8981856246989013843.post-47394209161959096832010-07-18T08:14:10.395-04:002010-07-18T08:14:10.395-04:00Ps: Sorry for all the typos in my above post:)
Be...Ps: Sorry for all the typos in my above post:)<br /><br />BeckyAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8981856246989013843.post-3841952788522638482010-07-18T08:08:51.558-04:002010-07-18T08:08:51.558-04:00I followed the above-mentioned thread, and have be...I followed the above-mentioned thread, and have been 'observing' PZ Myers' behaviour and the general tone of his blog 'Pharyngula' for just a few weeks now.<br /><br />I'm no big, smart academic, but speaking as someone who - similarly to 'Pakistan' - also, met with PZ's famed banhammer, something I've noticed is that even if a bit of racism (or in my case sexism) does slip out from his keen-to-be seen pc mouth at any time, he can simply never admits when he's wrong. <br /><br />Sure, he's keen to scour the news and the Net for others who say or do bigoted things and wastes no time in pulling them to pieces (ahem...sorry, *deconstructing* them and being *skeptical*), publicly humiliating them, condemning them and come down hard as a ton of bricks on them.<br /><br />No-one is perfect, yet PZ Myers seems to think he is and what's more, I've also noticed that a lot of what he does is 'showbiz, folks!' in that he's concsious that he's playing to an audience.<br /><br />Yes, I don't feel that well disposed towards him because I got banned; yet I might not have come away with such an unfavourable impression of him had he even been slightly bothered to 'lower himself' to address me and ask me what the issue was that I had with his post before he banned me. Maybe I'm just not worthy of entering into intellectual intercourse with the world-renowned and respected academic, Professor PZ Myers(!) <br /><br />Whatever great thoughts are going through his genius mind, he seems to have taken the easy option of the 'punitive psychology' approach, labelling me as 'in desperate need of a mental health professional' Oh dear:)<br /><br />Becky TranssexualAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8981856246989013843.post-91337459267999667992010-07-17T15:27:13.417-04:002010-07-17T15:27:13.417-04:00Kids start showing interest in their own sexuality...Kids start showing interest in their own sexuality from the earliest age. My earliest memory of masturbating dates from when I was about 6 or 7 (and, after talking to some of my friends, I find that not only was I not advanced, I was even late in exploring sexual pleasure!). But interest is one thing, experience and knowledge that constitutes informed consent is another. If two 14 year olds want to have sex, I say go for it. Be safe, and if things get fucked up (and at that age, it's likely they will), I hope you have supportive parents, siblings and friends to rely on. But relationships, especially early ones, require exploring the boundaries, navigating unknown experiences, negotiating terms and access, dealing with intense emotions. Two 14 year olds (or a 13 and a 15 year old or whatever) can be equals in navigating that terrain, but a 14 year old and someone ten years older cannot. The adult will have advantage and ability to manipulate due to their greater knowledge and experience. I'm not saying a 14 year old kid does not have moral capacity to consent, but that in a relationship with someone significantly older and more experienced s/he is in a position where s/he can be more easily manipulated into consent. And this is especially dangerous in a society where we, as you say Jack, see children as eternal virgins, so much so that we won't even let them have decent sex education (or if we do educate them about sex, we'll make them believe homosexuality is an abomination, sex before marriage is a sin and masturbation is evil - at least, that's what you get in some middle schools in Croatia), because this lack of honesty and trust is not helping them in the least.Mhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05389974401782795345noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8981856246989013843.post-42308815117929667392010-07-17T13:33:12.877-04:002010-07-17T13:33:12.877-04:00I wonder at Maori and Dinka sexual initiation cust...I wonder at Maori and Dinka sexual initiation customs.<br /><br />From a distance, at least. <br /><br />I feel it necessary to clarify that I still get the cold shudders at people who want to sexualize animals or children. Not my cup of tea, to type the least.<br /><br />But I'm not sold on the children-as-eternal-virgins model which informs the entirety of the debate.<br /><br />Or that a 14 year lacks the moral capacity to consent.<br /><br />I have kids. <br /><br />They show a rather pervasive interest in their own sexuality.<br /><br />And I imagine, since they have each "dated," that of others.Jack Crowhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07499087036876745723noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8981856246989013843.post-53250966724003864912010-07-17T12:20:22.577-04:002010-07-17T12:20:22.577-04:00CFO, unfortunately, the one study that was ever do...CFO, unfortunately, the one study that was ever done was incomplete (as any one study will be). Even more unfortunately, there will never be any follow-up, as the very existence of the study--the very idea of studying the impact of sex on children--was deemed a "mistake" by the APA and was made the subject of a <i>congressional resolution</i> condemning it. It now verges on illegal to study the matter <i>at all</i>. Which, considering the culture-wide hysteria that surrounds it, is I think pretty dangerous and bad.Ethanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07498712279382078624noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8981856246989013843.post-78479922700351346532010-07-17T12:12:36.464-04:002010-07-17T12:12:36.464-04:00what few studies that have been done show that peo...<i>what few studies that have been done show that people who, as children, had what they considered consensual sexual encounters with adults rarely report any negative impact from those encounters,</i><br /><br />Not believing the validity of the results there. Not believing it at all. <br /><br />Gaping blind spot: the average human lacks self-awareness and can pretend at lack of harm where the harm is palpable to a detached observer.<br /><br />Example: 26 year old man fucks 12 year old girl, who "consented". At age 24, she is interviewed by a Yale Psychology Department PhD candidate, whom she tells: "It was astonishing to have been deflowered by such a kind, loving, patient man 14 years my senior. If anything, it made me a better person." Then we examine her life in other realms, no?<br /><br />Oh, we don't?<br /><br />We just take her words at face value, and call the study "good"?<br /><br />Yeah, I'm not buying it. Not at all.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8981856246989013843.post-78116328756276830092010-07-17T10:26:52.048-04:002010-07-17T10:26:52.048-04:00Beyond that, I'm considering myself uninvolved...<i>Beyond that, I'm considering myself uninvolved in this, because, as I said, the whole topic is just making me tired.</i><br /><br />I am also going to uninvolve myself from this because it's the weekend, and the weather is nice, and my sister's kid is here, and the cat is being exceptionally cute today, and altogether it's too nice to be annoyed by an unproductive and misunderstood conversation. Hope you'll have a nice weekend both. Cheers.Mhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05389974401782795345noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8981856246989013843.post-46460170303712582172010-07-17T10:17:29.887-04:002010-07-17T10:17:29.887-04:00consent still plays no part of this argument, here...<i>consent still plays no part of this argument, here</i><br /><br />I have referred to consent in exactly the first comment I posted in this thread. <br /><br /><i>I quoted you exactly.</i><br /><br />Yes, you have quoted me exactly and then proceeded to derive precisely the opposite conclusion from what I've actually said. I have explicitly divorced sexual pleasure from need and survival. You interpreted this to mean that sexual pleasure is bound with need and survival. <br /><br /><i>I certainly have not made the implied or explicit connection between the experience of need and force, or violence.<br /><br />This connection, though, you do appear to make.</i><br /><br />The issue is non-consensual sexual exploitation, namely force or violence with regard to sexual pleasure, and whether sexual pleasure is a need. You don't have to make an implied or explicit connection, it's the point of the discussion.Mhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05389974401782795345noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8981856246989013843.post-37338036272180066892010-07-17T10:14:51.837-04:002010-07-17T10:14:51.837-04:00Jack, if you remember that ASP's original comm...Jack, if you remember that ASP's original comment was a response to my earlier one (in which I equated bestiality with eating meat and conducting animal tests), and was thus assuming the context I set up in that comment, I think her argument will become clearer to you. In fact I see her comment as being structurally similar to my original post: just as I was saying that the data from the US and Pakistan can't be compared because the situations in each case are so vastly different, she was saying that the arguments for or against bestiality on the one hand and eating meat and animal testing on the other can't be compared because the situations involved are vastly different. And, since she mentions it, I think that's true, though there is obviously a huge amount of room for debate on the terms.<br /><br />Another problem too is that ASP may be thinking she's having a casual conversation, whereas you seem to think you're having a debate in which logic can fail on fulcrum points. I don't claim that either way is superior or correct, but maybe if you two could come to an agreement as to what mode of interchange you're using, that interchange would be more productive.<br /><br />Beyond that, I'm considering myself uninvolved in this, because, as I said, the whole topic is just making me tired.Ethanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07498712279382078624noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8981856246989013843.post-33106887360916972252010-07-17T09:09:30.604-04:002010-07-17T09:09:30.604-04:00I haven't twisted the meaning of your words. I...I haven't twisted the meaning of your words. I quoted you exactly. You directly connect need with survival, and sexual pleasure on the way to rejecting bestiality.<br /><br />Your last reply does reinterpret the terms, and it's a useful clarification, but it really doesn't alter the logical construction of the argument to which I replied.<br /><br />Whether or not you think consent is the main objection (and I see no reason to doubt you) consent still plays no part of this argument, here:<br /><br />"...but to use animals for sexual pleasure is unjustifiable on any grounds - you demonstrably don't need to have sex with animals to survive, but you might need animal food or the medical research conducted on them. We may debate the morality of other treatments of animals, but I don't think there is anything unsettled about the lack of morality of their sexual exploitation."<br /><br />You clearly and unequivocally reject it on "any grounds," isolating the sexual "use" of animals from the food use of animals, in the process.<br /><br />The logic of your argument fails on that fulcrum point, regardless of your feelings about consent (on which I tend to agree with you).<br /><br />Furthermore, one does not necessarily have to reach the conclusion that need ought be associated with rape, or forced sexual contact. A need is not tethered to force, which premise you seem to assume when you write, <br /><br />"If I actually believed sexual pleasure is necessarily bound with need and survival, I would believe there are circumstances in which forcing also a person to sex for pleasure are justifiable and moral."<br /><br />I certainly have not made the implied or explicit connection between the experience of need and force, or violence. <br /><br />This connection, though, you do appear to make.<br /><br />Sometimes, each and every day, billions of people need to void their bowels, no? They need to eat? They need to sleep? They need varying degrees of shelter from the elements?<br /><br />Are all of these needs mediated by force - or is it possible to conceive of need without recourse to force, which premise you seem to imply?<br /><br />Never mind your introduction of morality and justification to the concept of survival...Jack Crowhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07499087036876745723noreply@blogger.com