Gallstones wrote:

Exi5tentialist wrote:

Gallstones wrote:Intent obvious now.

Oh that's a relief! For a moment there I thought you were accusing me of insincerity.

Fuckin'-A dude.
You have ouch written in every post.

No, not at all. I visited Rationalia once and they chopped off both my hands and ripped out my vocal cords. But it doesn't hurt, really. There's nothing you can do on a keyboard with two hands that you can't do with two stumps. And who needs vocal cords on the internet anyway? No - I evaded pain months ago. I am serene, happy and completely untroubled by anything to do with Rationalia, Pappa, PZ Myers, Skepchicks, verbal sexual and emotional abuse. And I am quite happy for them to go around all over the atheist internet claiming to be guardians of free speech and rational discussion. Really, it's not a problem.

Apologies for the misquotes. I would edit them but the thread would lose what little cohesion it has.

It happens. Maybe a staff member could fix it, but it's not that big a deal.

Exi5tentialist wrote:

Gallstones wrote:

Exi5tentialist wrote:

Gallstones wrote:Intent obvious now.

Oh that's a relief! For a moment there I thought you were accusing me of insincerity.

Fuckin'-A dude.
You have ouch written in every post.

No, not at all. I visited Rationalia once and they chopped off both my hands and ripped out my vocal cords. But it doesn't hurt, really. There's nothing you can do on a keyboard with two hands that you can't do with two stumps. And who needs vocal cords on the internet anyway? No - I evaded pain months ago. I am serene, happy and completely untroubled by anything to do with Rationalia, Pappa, PZ Myers, Skepchicks, verbal sexual and emotional abuse. And I am quite happy for them to go around all over the atheist internet claiming to be guardians of free speech and rational discussion. Really, it's not a problem.

Do you want to start your own site? I think you'd like it.

Did PZM ever explain his logic ? I mean we know that given the prevalence of rape in US (and other) societies then the argument goes that rape jokes repeat the attack on this segment of society and condones rapes but are there studies to support what we should agree to do or not do ?

Romero-Sánchez et al in the Journal of Interpersonal Violence (Exposure to sexist humor and rape proclivity: the moderator effect) http://jiv.sagepub.com/content/25/12/2339 is one and it says in the abstract "Earlier studies have
shown that exposure to this type of humor increases rape proclivity and that funniness responses to jokes are a key element to consider."...and that their own study also supported this but that "However, exposure to sexist humor affects rape proclivity only when aversiveness shown to this type of humor is low. "

That should be enough to suggest that rape jokes are a very complex type of joke beyond others and so should be avoided but I'm disappointed that PZM did not explain it in that way. I suspect that if he did then others would be less inclined to complain about his stance and I seriously doubt Pappa would have posted.

byofrcs wrote:Did PZM ever explain his logic ? I mean we know that given the prevalence of rape in US (and other) societies then the argument goes that rape jokes repeat the attack on this segment of society and condones rapes but are there studies to support what we should agree to do or not do ?

Romero-Sánchez et al in the Journal of Interpersonal Violence (Exposure to sexist humor and rape proclivity: the moderator effect) http://jiv.sagepub.com/content/25/12/2339 is one and it says in the abstract "Earlier studies have
shown that exposure to this type of humor increases rape proclivity and that funniness responses to jokes are a key element to consider."...and that their own study also supported this but that "However, exposure to sexist humor affects rape proclivity only when aversiveness shown to this type of humor is low. "

That should be enough to suggest that rape jokes are a very complex type of joke beyond others and so should be avoided but I'm disappointed that PZM did not explain it in that way. I suspect that if he did then others would be less inclined to complain about his stance and I seriously doubt Pappa would have posted.

That might be a genuine criticism if it was a generalised rape joke.

But this was one that targeted a specific and small group of women, some if not all of which are personally known to Myers and they might consider each other to be friends. Does anyone really need to be told why that is bad? If someone even hinted at threatening friends of mine with rape I'd be a hell of a lot harsher than he was.

Imagination Theory wrote:

Sciwoman wrote:He called everyone on the forum cockroaches and then asked for his account to be closed.

Fuck, what the fuck? I hadn't heard about that. We also probably shouldn't make targeted statements either and I guess he didn't actually read the thread in question.

Oh the devastating power of précis !

Actually Myers didn't do that, but if it fits with what you want to believe then it's as good a cheap headline as any to take away from that conversation. Personally I think Myers was quite clever in the way that introduced the cockroach reference in the abstract.

But what am I saying? (Coughs, puts on important voice) How dare P Z Myers use such derogatory imagery to describe fellow human beings. Shame on him!

byofrcs wrote:Did PZM ever explain his logic ? I mean we know that given the prevalence of rape in US (and other) societies then the argument goes that rape jokes repeat the attack on this segment of society and condones rapes but are there studies to support what we should agree to do or not do ?

Romero-Sánchez et al in the Journal of Interpersonal Violence (Exposure to sexist humor and rape proclivity: the moderator effect) http://jiv.sagepub.com/content/25/12/2339 is one and it says in the abstract "Earlier studies have
shown that exposure to this type of humor increases rape proclivity and that funniness responses to jokes are a key element to consider."...and that their own study also supported this but that "However, exposure to sexist humor affects rape proclivity only when aversiveness shown to this type of humor is low. "

That should be enough to suggest that rape jokes are a very complex type of joke beyond others and so should be avoided but I'm disappointed that PZM did not explain it in that way. I suspect that if he did then others would be less inclined to complain about his stance and I seriously doubt Pappa would have posted.

I have emailed him at pzmyers@gmail.com, but nothing yet. And I don't really expect a reply, he is busy and his inbox is full, but I am trying. Maybe if I blogged about it?

Would joking about a dog humping your leg and you calling it "rape" also increase rape proclivity? Or is it human to human jokes only? And what about "I'm going to put a boot/foot up your ass" type of things?

virphen wrote:

byofrcs wrote:Did PZM ever explain his logic ? I mean we know that given the prevalence of rape in US (and other) societies then the argument goes that rape jokes repeat the attack on this segment of society and condones rapes but are there studies to support what we should agree to do or not do ?

Romero-Sánchez et al in the Journal of Interpersonal Violence (Exposure to sexist humor and rape proclivity: the moderator effect) http://jiv.sagepub.com/content/25/12/2339 is one and it says in the abstract "Earlier studies have
shown that exposure to this type of humor increases rape proclivity and that funniness responses to jokes are a key element to consider."...and that their own study also supported this but that "However, exposure to sexist humor affects rape proclivity only when aversiveness shown to this type of humor is low. "

That should be enough to suggest that rape jokes are a very complex type of joke beyond others and so should be avoided but I'm disappointed that PZM did not explain it in that way. I suspect that if he did then others would be less inclined to complain about his stance and I seriously doubt Pappa would have posted.

That might be a genuine criticism if it was a generalised rape joke.

But this was one that targeted a specific and small group of women, some if not all of which are personally known to Myers and they might consider each other to be friends. Does anyone really need to be told why that is bad? If someone even hinted at threatening friends of mine with rape I'd be a hell of a lot harsher than he was.

Yeah, but would you call that persons family, friends and neighbors the same things? PZ should have gone after Pappa, not two whole forums.

Exi5tentialist wrote:

Imagination Theory wrote:

Sciwoman wrote:He called everyone on the forum cockroaches and then asked for his account to be closed.

Fuck, what the fuck? I hadn't heard about that. We also probably shouldn't make targeted statements either and I guess he didn't actually read the thread in question.

Oh the devastating power of précis !

Actually Myers didn't do that, but if it fits with what you want to believe then it's as good a cheap headline as any to take away from that conversation. Personally I think Myers was quite clever in the way that introduced the cockroach reference in the abstract.

But what am I saying? (Coughs, puts on important voice) How dare P Z Myers use such derogatory imagery to describe fellow human beings. Shame on him!

Can you give me the real quote then?

http://rationalia.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... 3#p1226853

Excuse me, he called the entire forum a 'nest of cockroaches.' (It's getting late here and that glass of wine was rather large. )

virphen wrote:

byofrcs wrote:Did PZM ever explain his logic ? I mean we know that given the prevalence of rape in US (and other) societies then the argument goes that rape jokes repeat the attack on this segment of society and condones rapes but are there studies to support what we should agree to do or not do ?

Romero-Sánchez et al in the Journal of Interpersonal Violence (Exposure to sexist humor and rape proclivity: the moderator effect) http://jiv.sagepub.com/content/25/12/2339 is one and it says in the abstract "Earlier studies have
shown that exposure to this type of humor increases rape proclivity and that funniness responses to jokes are a key element to consider."...and that their own study also supported this but that "However, exposure to sexist humor affects rape proclivity only when aversiveness shown to this type of humor is low. "

That should be enough to suggest that rape jokes are a very complex type of joke beyond others and so should be avoided but I'm disappointed that PZM did not explain it in that way. I suspect that if he did then others would be less inclined to complain about his stance and I seriously doubt Pappa would have posted.

That might be a genuine criticism if it was a generalised rape joke.

But this was one that targeted a specific and small group of women, some if not all of which are personally known to Myers and they might consider each other to be friends. Does anyone really need to be told why that is bad? If someone even hinted at threatening friends of mine with rape I'd be a hell of a lot harsher than he was.

No it doesn't work that way in debate. You take a stance that is supportable by evidence not personal experience. Personal experience may select your initial position but it has to be supportable by other data else you fail: My criticism is genuine because he brought up RatSkep in commentary and thus implied that all here condone rape via rape jokes. Such jokes should fall foul of the FUA here. I said as much in the PZM blog and I would expect the mods here to agree based on the data.

We don't do rape jokes because the data does not support their effectiveness in promoting a rationalist/humanist society and that should be the only statement to make.

We don't support god, homoeopathy, intelligent design and many other things not because we need to be told they are bad but because they have absolutely no support. If we were to agree to do what others said was bad then we would not be atheists because a large percentage of society thinks atheism is bad. But we know they are wrong because the data says otherwise.

Sciwoman wrote:http://rationalia.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1226853#p1226853

Excuse me, he called the entire forum a 'nest of cockroaches.'

Wrong again, actually.

Exi5tentialist wrote:

Sciwoman wrote:http://rationalia.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1226853#p1226853

Excuse me, he called the entire forum a 'nest of cockroaches.'

Wrong again, actually.

I'm not a member of Rationalia, but that's my reading of PZed's post. You've obviously got an axe to grind about that site, but do try to stick a reality-based reality, won't you? Your bitterness is tiresome, and I don't think you'll find many people here give a shit.

exi see this is what happens when you stray too far from home.

we miss you by the way COME BACK!!!!

I have been trying to respond to this post for days on end and the thread keeps getting locked. will everyone stop it already.

Mr.Samsa wrote:Not your fault, it's all mine!

I suppose such an example wouldn't be a 'joke' exactly as it's more of an argument, and wouldn't be a case of 'normalising rape' and adding to rape culture, would it? As such, feminists should argue that it would be okay, but whether they would or not is another matter. I imagine that in joke form, such an example would be something like satire? I personally like using satire to highlight the ridiculousness of somebody's position, and that could include a kind of rape joke I guess, but I'd probably feel it was justified and did more good than bad.. I think a lot of feminists disagree though.

maybe I am a terrible feminist but I agree with a lot of what you have said.

I wasn't offended at all by what papa said, I just don't find his posts funny.

I did laugh at this one though:

Would it be immoral to rape divagreen?

Not for sexual gratification or power or anything like that, just because she's so annoying.

I’m really torn on this one.

I suppose I am a little desensitised with rape jokes in general, since on that site rape is pretty much mentioned in just about every third post. a year ago, aomeone said that prostitutes and some slutty women ought to be raped with a broken bottle filled with battery acid (he was being serious) and he was ridiculed to the point where he left the site eventually, so now it is kind of a meme that some people use when someone is being blatantly idiotic about something.

I don't see it as enabling rape culture in any way, more like the opposite. if somebody makes a rape, racist or a pedophile apologist argument then it is open season and only a matter of time before they meltdown and leave the site. I think "enabling" rape culture happens when the apologist arguments are seriously entertained and when points are conceded when they really shouldn't be all under the guise of "rational discussion".

am I making sense here?

anyways I know the discussion has evolved a bit since you made this post but I would still like to hear your thoughts.

or anybody else's if they feel so inclined.

divagreen wrote:exi see this is what happens when you stray too far from home.

we miss you by the way COME BACK!!!!

Perhaps you can escort him home then?

Did you know that Mr. PZ Myers has 107,573 followers ? 13,732 tweets ? Truly amazing I have a question. I mean a 32 pages thread or something like that. He must be very important. Oh yes to keep it on topic, here is my question. What does PZ stand for ? Just wondering. I thank you kindly

Tangerine Dream wrote:Did you know that Mr. PZ Myers has 107,573 followers ? 13,732 tweets ? Truly amazing I have a question. I mean a 32 pages thread or something like that. He must be very important. Oh yes to keep it on topic, here is my question. What does PZ stand for ? Just wondering. I thank you kindly

Precious Zebra.