WAM-BAM, No Thank You, Ma’am

 

Finally, after some email tag and general game playing by Twitter support, the reason for my now nearly three-week long suspension from Twitter has finally been revealed:

“Targeted Abuse”

Now, your guess is as good as mine as to what “targeted abuse” actually means. The term carries more than a whiff of euphemistic moral panic bullshit about it, right up there with “micro-aggression”, used to describe a lack of total obsequious agreement so minute in parts per billion, that it can only be detected by upturned social justice noses and “intersectionality”, which describes attaching tantrum theology brain slugs to the skulls of unsuspecting communities,  such as Social Justice with Atheism or lazy Pop Culture Feminist theory with gaming, or fat acceptance with the ballet.

Admittedly the last one is kind of fun to watch because it reminds me of the hippos in Fantasia. Of course, I can’t make that joke. On the off chance it would be considered “Targeted Abuse”.

Poor hippos.

According to the Twitter rules, “Targeted Abuse” is explained as follows.

Targeted Abuse: You may not engage in targeted abuse or harassment.
-if you are sending messages to a user from multiple accounts;
-if the sole purpose of your account is to send abusive messages to others;
-if the reported behavior is one-sided or includes threats

Users may not make direct, specific threats of violence against others, including threats against a person or group on the basis of race, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, age, or disability.

Although making a fat joke doesn’t actually violate the rules as we will see, “the rules”, what they are don’t matter all that much.

Clearly, Twitter is making a claim — or at least acting on one — that I threatened someone, implying that the threat was made on the basis of race, ethnicity, nationality, religion or some other criteria.

Really, I would like to see these tweets. Which seems to be too much to ask for.

If the claim is total horseshit, and it is, there’s precedent for this. I managed to get to Level One of the Atheism Plus Block Bot by noting that the usual gang of Social Justice clowns honking their way through the Atheist and Skeptical community were spending a lot of their time making sexual accusations against people like Lawrence Krauss and Michael Shermer and so, playing the social justice “calling out” game on Twitter, I wondered if some stealth Antisemitism was behind it. And so, for accusing others of Antisemitism, I got listed on the Block Bot.

As an anti-Semite.

They’re just that petty and stupid.

Or maybe it was this Tweet, where in reference to pornography, as I remember, I used the term “chicks with dicks” which got noted by the Block Botters as “transphobic”. Apparently the unsuspecting transsexuals making this sort of adult entertainment have no idea how it’s being marketed.  Besides, what good is Twitter if you can’t talk smut with @snakepliskinist?

As we know from Thunderfoot’s experience, these self-appointed censors are running a vast incestuous circle-jerk, with back channel discussions of who to target and how, which aspires to be as sophisticated as the collusion practiced by gaming journalists.

So from  there I made an appearance in Surly Amy Roth’s “A Woman’s Room on Line” installation.

My crime?

Referring to someone as an “attention whore”.

Like Rebecca Watson’s “Page of Hate” and the Terror Tweets directed at Anita Sarkeesian, the bulk of the comments aren’t actually harassing or threatening, and represent the give and take one would expect in a free-flowing discussion filled with people of various opinions and levels of social grace. The people who claim they are receiving harassing communications aren’t getting anything much worse than what they’re giving, but tend to excuse their own abusive, belittling crap as being ennobled  “punching up”.

More evidence that what is said is not nearly as important as who is saying it.
I also expect that “Targeted Abuse” is like a “contempt-of-cop” charge such as “disturbing the peace” or “interfering with an investigation” , an all-purpose rationalization that is deployed when they can’t get you on anything else and don’t like you attitude.

Admittedly my attitude, honed as it is by sifting through one form of bullshit or another most of my adult life, absolutely sucks.

Also, just to be completely pedantic about the whole thing, I assume that all abuse has a target, unless you believe there are random, drive-by abusings. Then again, that wouldn’t be much of a stretch for those who promote the existence of Twitter-induced Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and practice both the doctrine of Uncharitable Interpretations and the Higher Truth of just making shit up.

Although Twitter was able to rouse themselves from the sleep of the truly self-righteous to tell me the label they slapped onto my Twitter suspension, they rolled over and went back to sleep before they could give me an example of my “targeted abuse” much less who it was targeted at.

The way I figure things are, it might be that Twitter doesn’t even know.

Bad enough that Twitter might have been fed a line of bullshit that I was an anti-Semite from the deluded unreliable narrators and pathological liars operating the Block Bot, or bought into the “disagreement is harassment and mockery is abuse” mantra coming from Roth, Watson, Sarkeesian and others. Worse is that they seem to have put in place a system where organized mendacity can be fast-tracked without much oversight or accountability.

Although I was aware of the lesser mass flagging campaigns carried out by the semi-competents affiliated with Atheism Plus, Freethought Blogs, Skepchick and the Center for Inquiry I was not aware — and you can take this as evidence of utter cluelessness — that Women Action and the Media was a thing.

Going by the Adam West Batman-sounding acroynm “WAM” complete with a childish cartoon super-hero theme that lacks the gravitas of, say, some lemur-eyed cow-skulled guy, this organization seems to have taken every bad tendency of Fashion Victim Feminism and turned it into a mission statement.

Someone pointed me to a two part piece by Andrew Sullivan at The Dish that makes what WAM is, and their relationship to Twitter all to clear. Linked in the description bar is his article “The SJWs Now Get To Police Speech On Twitter” and the follow up.

Of interest to me is the second part where I am mentioned by name as one of a group of people, along with Breibart’s Milo Yiannopoulos and A Voice for Men’s Janet Bloomfield, who had their accounts suspended shortly after WAM took power by partnering with Twitter to fast-track the same old dishonest harassment claims.

Sullivan is quoting here,

Gone are the accounts of Mykeru, a critic of feminism within the Atheist-Skeptic movement, as well as Janet Bloomfield, Social Media Director of A Voice for Men. Their accounts also disappeared in the past three days. Thunderf00t, another prominent critic of feminism within the Skeptic movement, had his account suspended for close to a month. None of these accounts were abusive or harassing. The only thing they had in common was that they were all critical of feminism.

Sullivan gets right what outfits like The Atlantic, blinded by the Threat Narrative being promoted, gets wrong. I’ve said this before in regards to Yiannopoulous’ factual reporting for Breibart, but when the right-wingers are the voice of reason on an issue, then we are all well and truly fucked.

I mean, I still consider myself to be left wing and progressive, but dammit, it gets harder every day. Then again, I realize what really irks me is the authoritarian mindset, not someone’s position on the ideological spectrum. That is to say, I would support a racist, sexist, right wing pseudo patriot obsessed with Benghazi and birth certificates provided they defend my right to criticize them at every turn. A left winger, even one I agree with down to the punctuation I would not support if they had the authoritarian mindset and believed their cloak of righteousness means they get to duck tape everyone else’s mouth shut.

Like fundamentalist Christianity or Fundamentalist Islam, the problem isn’t just the incoherence of the doctrines, it’s the fundamentalism. These days — and based on the cheap, heavy handed tactics of Teabaggers and Social Justice Warriors — we should be less concerned where people are on the right and left axis and more worried about how authoritarian they are.

Anyway,

The description of me as a “critic of feminism in the atheist and skeptical community” is more or less accurate.

As always, the usual caveats apply: I’m not against women. I’m not a misogynist, except in the stupid Fashion Victim Feminist expansive definition to mean “Someone who disagrees with a them”. Although that’s not even strictly true. As some people’s gender isn’t readily apparent from their pseudonyms on the internet, unless they telescope it by declaring themselves to be a hyphenated “goddess” or “chick”, I’ve found that it’s even possible to be labeled a misogynist for disagreeing with someone when I had no idea that they happened to be arguing while packing a vagina.

Fashion Victim Feminist. Do I need to explain that? They all went to the same classes and read the same books, have suspiciously similar lived experience and sexual obsessions and have adopted the same woman-child uniform of hipster glasses, bad tats, fluorescent dye jobs, trendy consignment shop wardrobes and completely unjustified air of superiority and the believe that their being offended by something should actually mean something to me.

When someone tells me they are offended, especially if they seem to be the sort of person who likes that sort of thing, I’m happy for them and they should go right on being offended as much as their little hearts desire. The problem with coddling the offended is that they are all to easily offended the next time, especially if looking for offense is their thing, and so it all leads to a downward spire of over-sensitivity and recrimination. Far better, to my way of thinking, for people to just toughen the fuck up.

Generally, it would be a stretch to call me “anti-Feminist”. Back in the day — the day being the mid 80s — I even took women’s studies classes as part of my Liberal Studies program and didn’t have a huge problem with what was studied. One difference there was that the classes were taught within the Philosophy department by a woman who was a philosopher and advocate of critical reasoning first and her agenda — if she had one at all –was an also ran. When that professor said she was having a discussion, she actually meant it.

Hers wasn’t the dogmatic shaming and silencing form of Feminism that seems to be the norm today. The kind that tolerates no disagreement, no inconvenient facts and is pathologically dishonest when it comes to silencing all criticism.

I don’t like terms like “Feminism” and I kind of shy aware from adopting “Men’s Rights”, when what both profess to believe in is already subsumed by the term “Egalitarian”. Although I have been know to adopt the term “Equity Feminist” just to piss the inequitable Fashion Victim Feminists

I think foundational documents of historical feminism should be required reading. Mary Wollstonecraft’s “A Vindication of the Rights of Women” is an eminently sensible document and it’s a shame that she has has been relegated to a caped crusader by pop Feminists who seem have rejected the obligations of a rational education for the cheap and easy feel-badism of picking through reruns of Dharma and Greg for evidence of patriarchy.

By most measures my positions could be considered well within the scope of Second Wave Feminism that sought to redress social and legal inequality faced by women. I believe in the social and moral equality of men and women. Although the “equality” I believe in is the equality of opportunity, not what carpetbaggers in online communities are selling, which is forced equality in outcome for them whenever they want it and despite what little effort they may have made in achieving that outcome.

What critics, like me, are responding to isn’t the body of historical Feminism, but the fringe end product that came out of academia and went mainstream with lies, bogus statistics, men-are-the-problem propaganda that doesn’t even pretend, for the most part, to be having a discussion and, as we have seen on Twitter and universities, has engaged in a wide-spread, coordinated effort to silence any and all criticism through shaming tactics and vilification.

The truth is, for all the times the word “misogynist” has been thrown around, for less and less justification, almost no one opposing this dishonest, cliquish form of online feminism of convenience can be said to said to have a pathological hatred of women. Distrust, maybe, and only of the sort of women who fly this banner, but that’s just what happens when people learn from experience.

In the same way, most of the people, like me, described as “anti-feminist” are only “anti-feminist” in the same way that someone would claim that any one who opposes a single dot and tiddle of  Louis Farrakhan’s Nation of Islam is against Civil Rights for black people. No one, absolutely no one, is against the gains of historical feminism up to an including much of what was achieved under Second Wave feminism. No one, least of all me, wants to disenfranchise women, treat women as property, or deny women the right to property, keep women barefoot and pregnant, or any of the myriad bullshit that is implied.

——

What most people like me object to isn’t equality for women, but the cynical bait-and-switch practiced by Fashion Victim Feminists and the perverse sexual obsessions of confused 20-something hipster chicks and the fat old broads who lead them and, God dammit, the lying. It’s the demented Third Wave victim Feminism that  treats rights and responsibilities as a Chinese takeout where women, or whatever self-identified aggrieved group, gets to pick everything from column A rights and continue to pawn off that column B responsibilities on men.

Hell, I’m all for shaking up gender norms, but only where it’s fair an equitable. Men should not be expected to fulfill a cherry-picked laundry list of traditional male obligations while, at the same time, having new and mostly vague and harmful demands placed on them while gaining absolutely nothing in the process.

Most men, and non-fashion feminist women, for that matter, don’t want to go back to traditional gender norms. They’re pissed off by them. And they are pissed off that this sort of facile, pop culture Feminism, in a completely underhanded way, actually enforces them. Although these sort of Fashion Victim Feminist love to portray those who support Men’s Rights as some sort of back-sliding trogs who are against equity. Rather, the underlying complaint of Men’s Rights isn’t against fairness or equality, they’re just wondering when men benefit from it too. Men’s Rights is the radical notion that Men are human beings and a “real man” isn’t defined by what he can do for women, and especially not what he can do for hateful and ungrateful mercenary online Fashion Victim Feminists.

What’s more, I’m particularly class conscious, something white, middle-class educated, white collar fashionable feminists don’t want to talk about. I’m the son of an electrician from Brooklyn and a secretary from Inverness, Scotland. The men in my family worked as street vendors, florists, and broom pushers. Most men are just scraping by, so they can’t just hand over the awesome power of the Male Hegemony because they don’t have it. And that poor and working class men, to these privileged, entitled Feminists are seen as rapists and catcallers or just plain invisible, pisses me off no end.

Really, pay attention to the way these political gold-diggers  treat poor and working class men, and men of color, as either something to be scrapped off their expensive shoes, or pawns to be used to convince the men with perceived power, the only men they actually see, to give them what they want.

This isn’t about women. It’s not even, for the most part, about supporting or reversing the historical gains of Women’s Rights It’s about a particular, narrowly focused ideology seeking a free pass for it’s membership, enforces rigid group think and severely punishes anything but reflexive appeasement to its ever shifting and often incoherent and contradictory demands.

And it’s from these folks that we get, in response to any and all criticism, that the critic is “anti-women” or a “misogynist” or some variation of the threat narrative whereby they win arguments by default because they felt personally threatened by being exposed to facts and common sense and unapproved lived experience.  Not only is it a stupid, obvious manipulative game, but it basically proves every sexist stereotype about women being irrational and emotional. But again, fortunately, it’s not all women, but some women, and the conceit that they adopt that they are spokespersons for a gender doesn’t change that. All political ideologies pull that stupid move. Which is why the most narrowly focused, grievance politics driven single issue Tea Party douchebag thinks he’s the only “Real American”.

Why in fuck’s name do I have to explain this?

I’m a critic of and in the atheist and skeptical community, and so I’m  a critic of feminism as it exists in the atheist and skeptical community. That is, I’m less a critic of feminism in theory and in larger spheres. Mostly what interests me is how it cashes in in the online world when a group of people identifying themselves as feminists enter communities, begin insulting the membership, issuing demands and letting loose draconian measures to enforce compliance and being positively ruthless, even psychopathic when it comes to silencing any and all criticism.

It’s stupid. It’s obvious. People react badly to Fashion Victim Academic feminism not because it’s shaken up anyone’s world, or challenged any assumption, it’s because those sort of feminists have betrayed everyone’s best intentions.

Pointing out these distinction is almost entirely pointless though.  It’s irrelevant to the game these people are playing, where rather than respond to actual criticism, rather than have a discussion these Fashion Victim Feminists pretend they are harassed and under attack and use underhanded, manipulative tactics to misrepresent and silence other opinions.

And WAM shows exactly how this works in regards to Twitter.

Apparently WAM has instituted a “fast track” harassment reporting system. You go in their site, fill out the standard ButtHurt Report Form and funneled through WAM, the claim of harassment skips right to the head of the line. This is apparently what happened with the mass suspension immediately following WAM partnering with Twitter.

After reading Sullivan’s two-part peice I came across an article in The Atlantic. The article itself is nothing special, or even very good journalism, in that it starts by summarizing the established threat narrative.

Here I quote..

Is the Internet a safe space for women?

It’s a huge question—yet, more and more, the answer seems to be a clear no. Last month, online abusers drove female video game critics and developers out of their homes with violent threats. One critic’s public event had to be canceled because of a promise of mass shootings. And a new Pew study put the harassment in statistically sharper terms: 25 percent of young women have been sexually harassed online, and 26 percent have been stalked.

That threat narrative is something the casual reader would skim through and accept without question and without knowing who they are referring to are arch unreliable narrators Brianna Wu and Anita Sarkeesian. They also don’t report that the threat against Sarkeesian was found to be not  credible and, having done this myself, if you run the  text of the threat through linguistic forensic text analyzers, it’s more than likely it was written by a woman. It contains humble-bragging language such as “Anita Sarkeesian is everything wrong with the feminist woman” and mentions Marc Lepine, a spree shooter from the late 1980s who has dropped off everyone’s radar except for Canadian-based Social Justice Warriors like Sarkeesian,

None of that sort of analysis, done with online analyzers and lay person opinions should be considered a conclusion, but what it suggests is more than a little interesting and should be a starting point for investigation. That text should give one a bit of pause over exactly who wrote it.

Of course, that sort of action isn’t something WAM would undertake, considering how closely tied they are with Anita Sarkeesian.

For all I know, my tweeting the results of that admittedly half-assed text analysis may be the reason I got on WAM’s radar in the first place.

That wouldn’t be hard what with WAM’s report form where people can take their  long-standing Twitter arguments and interactions and get a little fast-tracked payback.

The Atlantic quotes the current “Executive Director” Jaclyn Friedman who lays to rest any nagging doubt that any of this will be handled in a fair and equitable manner.

“We’ll be escalating [harassment reports] even if they don’t fit Twitter’s exact abuse guidelines,” Friedman said. WAM intends to “cast a wider net” and see what Twitter’s moderators address.

That’s truly appalling.

So, guess what kids, WAM is “casting a wide net” and escalating things that may not be considered harassment. Because, in the interests of supporting the narrative, it’s better that ten innocent people have their accounts suspended than let one overly sensitive or vindictive person be unsatisfied. And maybe, like college men falsely accused of rape under a weak “preponderance of the evidence” standard in which they aren’t allowed access to representation or even hear the evidence against them, all can benefit from the experience.

What this means in practice  A chilling effect. That is, if WAM is working from this vague and overboard standard by which harassment is considered things that aren’t actually, well, harassment, then we Twiiter users can all benefit from the experience: By not engaging with protected groups of feminists and social justice warriors, regardless of what stupid, slanderous and mean-spirited “punching up” things they Tweet. Better just to give them a free pass. And since we can’t know what sort of comment can be short listed into the fast track harassment accusation, better to say nothing at all. To anyone.

You know, we should all  “shut up and listen”.

The WAM reporting form also has a section to list other possible Twitter handles a suspended or banned user may resort to, ensuring that once someone gets on WAMs radar, they are devoiced for good.

This is the authoritarian mindset in all it’s petty, intolerant glory.

And what Twitter has done is the same old shark-jumping that every user-driven community eventually falls victim to.

Take online forums.

What tends to happen in online forums is that the forum forgets that users are doing the forum a favor by participating, and instead of simply existing as a means for people to offer their opinion, what creeps in is that the idea forum has a purpose, and that means a message. After a while the forum users merely exist — in the minds of those running it — as warm bodies for propagating the forums “message” whatever that may be. Users who don’t accept this subserviant position where they are essentially now working for the forum, instead of the forum being grateful for their participation, are ruthlessly pruned. What is left, eventually, is a hard core hive mind until the next series of shit tests and purges. Eventually the very sameness of “on message” posting results in a sort of entropic heat death of the forum and, as it approaches absolute zero, you eventually have nothing left but moderators moderating moderators and then the forum owners and administrators ending up like Adolph and Eva, sitting on a couch in the bunker, silently fuming before they pop cyanide and shoot themselves.

That’s exactly what happened to the Atheism Plus forumand it seems that Twitter may be experimenting with this concept on a previously unheard of scale.

My prediction about my Twitter account and that of others silenced in this purge? I predict there will be no justice. Organizations such as WAM aren’t about justice. They are about power. Who has it, who gets it, who uses it and how the raw, naked expression of power makes them feel all tingly inside.

It’s just a shame that, at this high-tech lynching, Twitter decided to play the good citizen and hand out rope.
Women, Action and Media claims to be “building a robust, effective, inclusive movement”, but how inclusive is it? If it’s model is based on sweeping up and silencing voices that aren’t actually engaging in harassment, then it is simply silencing voices that WAM, and potentially dishonest internet tattle-tales don’t like. And if that’s the case, where there strength comes through silencing dissenting voice, just how robust does it think it is?

To get some answers to this question I called WAM a couple times, leaving voice messages for Jaclyn Friedman.

At this moment working on this video, Jaclyn Friedman has not returned my voice messages.

And why should she? In casting the wide net for things that don’t fit Twitters abuse guidelines, I’ve already been identified as a “Targeted Abuser” and WAM gains nothing, even if they know, from revealing what this “targeted abuse” consists of. Like all show trials, best to leave the “evidence” to one’s imagination. Revealing the evidence would start a chain reaction ending in transparency and accountability, whereby WAM would have to explain their reasoning, if indeed there is any reasoning at all. Wam is in the business of capitalizing on the treat narrative, not engaging in a discussion, especially on a case-by-case basis, whether the threat actually exists.

What is happening is something we in the Atheist and Skeptical community have become all too familiar with since being infested by con artists and Social Justice Warriors: Thin skinned ideologues using tools ostensibly created to fight online harassment as their tool to carry out online harassment.

What’s more, I suspect they aren’t even checking these things.

Maybe I’m being unfair here. Maybe WAM takes their new policing function seriously, despite the wide net “harassment is harassment even if it isn’t harassment” standard and will perform due diligence to make sure the net, though wide, is a fine mesh.

So then, another quote:

WAM is a small nonprofit outside of Boston with a staff of two. Those two employees will be doing all the work: Friedman and WAM’s community manager, Mina Farzad, will personally read and vet every harassment report that WAM receives.

Two people. That’s it. Two people who are both running the WAM website, doing interviews, ignoring voice messages and all other administrative and outreach function, and vetting all the accusations of harassment coming through WAM’s wide net fast track reporting system.

Two people. The same completely subjective two people who promote the threat narrative and do not benefit one little bit from denying a tweet is, in fact harassment. If it’s a tough job, it’s only due to the repetitive stress injury of using a rubber stamp.

 

Now it makes sense. People will be reported for abuse, even if the content of their Tweets or other online presence wasn’t actually abusive. Just part of “casting a wider net”. A small price to pay in silencing the wrong sort of people — like me– provided the right sort of people have the illusion of security and, more importantly, a tool to do an end run around all that messy discussion and arguing and actually backing things up with facts and common sense.

Before anyone in the lazy media who have bought into the threat narrative lauds WAM and supports these silly moral panics they should not ask how these measures will be used. Rather, one should think, right off the bat, how they will be predictably abused.

There’s another term for what Women, Action and Media is doing:

A purge.

 

Women, Action & the Media

7 Temple Street

Cambridge, MA 02139

Tel.: 617-876-5310

E-mail: wam@womenactionmedia.org

 

Posted in Uncategorized

The SJW 9000

When the road to Social Justice is heavily traveled and you’re just another pilgrim.

But yours is the only vehicle that should have a horn

You don’t want to play games, and you don’t want anyone else to either.

When your attention to detail makes you check everything, except your own privilege.

And you identify as an other-kin  pan-sexual elven pony

And your other car is a spaceship.

When no one can tell you which side of the road to drive on, least of all that oppressive school bus full of shitlords who just hit you head on.

Then you’re ready for the all new 2015 SJW 9000

15 Miles Per Gallon on High Octane Kool Aid and standard always-on dashboard warning lights.

Flame on.

Posted in Uncategorized

The SlymepPit Goes Full P.Z. Myers

First this:

shining20_1342027226_crop_550x344

And now this:

Stunning Revelations...

 

Never go full Myers.

Then again, it’s a guest post, so it could well be Myers. And, yes, I mean the guy in the fur suit.

Posted in Uncategorized

The Twitter Situation

A quick update on my Twitter suspension, which is now in its second week and, based on Twitter’s complete unresponsiveness to my queries as to exactly why I was suspended, it seems to be a permanent state of affairs.

You see, when I visit my Twitter account, I see this:

I’ve gone to the linked page, read what needed to be read and appealed the suspension several times. Once, five days ago I received an acknowledgement from Twitter that they are aware I’m appealing the suspension and have not since responded to any of my questions, least of all what I supposedly did to get suspended in the first place.

How can I promise not to do it again, if don’t know what it is?

But look, we know how this works. All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others on Twitter. Either I fell victim to a coordinated effort, a mass flagging brigading that the people running The Block Bot have been working on for years or, as in the case of Thunderfoot, the right sort of person complained.

Looking back on the history of silencing dissent that is a signature feature of Atheism Plus, Freethought Blogs, Skepchick and The Center for Inquiry and now you can add Anita Sarkeesian and the Social Justice warriors assaulting the gaming community to that mix. With the tweets I made just before my Twitter Account was suspended, I have developed a few theories of the suspension.

THEORY ONE: THE SAME OLD SHIT

That is, my suspension was just another mass flagging event in which greasy cellar-dwelling wanna-be hacker douchebags have spent a large chunk of what we can sardonically refer to as “a life” working on ways to exploit and abuse the Twitter system in order to silence people who throw a wrench into their narrative.  Notable here is unwashed script kiddie virgin James “Oolon” Billingham and his anal remora Latsot. More on him in a bit.

THEORY TWO: UNCHARITABLE INTERPRETATIONS

I looked back over my last Tweets because one of the tactics of Fashion Victim Feminists, Social Justice Chickenhawks and other bottom feeders is a talent for uncharitable interpretations. If, for example, you Tweet on Halloween that something was “spooky” they will flag you for making a racist remark. That’s just how they work. And it’s no accident because you can’t always explain by stupidity what time and time again turns out to be malice.

That day I was stuck on the Washington DC Metrorail system, by bike being in the shop to have the front derailleur replaced and the disc brake pads adjusted.

Now I like biking. Not only because I love biking, but commuting by bike allows me to avoid public transportation, which I hate. On the way home I made two tweets of note. One was of a young, able-bodied woman who was preventing anyone from sitting on the last available seat on the train by giving one of her two handbags priority over other human beings. I tweeted a photo of her sitting there, bag on the other seat, with “I am so into my cell phone” intensity while other people stood.

I don’t know, is it considered harassment by Twitter to post a picture of someone being rude in a public place? I had previously Tweeted pictures of guys leaning up against poles inside the train so that no one else could hold on, and that didn’t get me suspended.

Maybe it’s part of the suspension process, but I no longer see the photo in my Twitter feed.

Or maybe, as uncharitable interpretations go, it’s a mix with this.

When I got off the train at Pentagon Station I headed with the crowd toward the escalators leading to the upper platforms that lead out and to the bus. Approaching from the opposite direction, so she had to hook around to the escalator was a blind woman tap-tap-tapping her way along. I don’t know if blind people are aware of large groups of people stopping dead in their tracks so they can do what they have to do. The probably are. And that’s exactly what happened. Everyone stopped in a semi-circle leading to the moving rails and churning metal steps for this woman. Except one guy. I could sense him pushing past people before I even saw him out of the corner of my eye. Stop? Him? Fuck that. It didn’t take much extrapolation from her position and his intention to see he was just going to shove past her just at the moment she was going to be navigating the first step onto the escalator.

So I put out my left arm and clothes-lined him in the chest.

“Wait” I said.

“Don’t touch me motherfucker” He said. And from there we were off.

Now, mind you, I’m not a big guy. I’m not nearly as tall but then, not as frail as the horned lemur-eyed guy might lead you to believe.  I cycle ten miles a day, lift weights and, through high school and college I worked in lumber yards where, like my Grandfather Mikey before me, spent all day lugging bags of cement. Also like my Grandfather, I have a complete constitutional inability to back down when someone decides to give me shit. Something my father has warned me about all my life.

So as I go up the escalator, shove-boy is raining abuse at the back of my head about how he’s going to fuck me up. I can’t hear him, because all I hear is the chorus of countless generations of Italians going back to the Romans and Highland Scottish whispering in my ear.

Of course, the whole bit with Hadrian’s Wall confuses me.

I won’t belabor it, but up on the platform the guy is still going at it and so I stop and turn and politely request that he make manifest all the sentiments he’s been expressing.  Remember, this guy’s beef is that I prevented him from bowling over a blind women getting on an escalator. I mean, I almost want him to take a swing at me, probably not the smartest thing on the train station in The Pentagon, but he doesn’t and I tell him to keep walking. Some people get between us, which isn’t easy as I’m as in his face as much as I can without actually touching noses, all the better to head-butt him, another Scots tradition, but people persuade him away.

So, getting on the bus, I Tweet about this.

Now, it occurs to me that those Tweets may have inspired a couple of uncharitable interpretations. First, that my irritation at some blind person butting asshole had something to do with the woman with her bag on the seat. I don’t see it, but then, I don’t see the photo of the woman I Tweeted either. Somehow that photo and the conflation with the other even might have formed the basis for some bullshit flagging of the image.

The other explanation is even simpler: That by recounting this event where some guy was threatening me, the uncharitable interpreters pass this along to Twitter, who you know doesn’t really check these things, as a threat against another Twitter user.

It’s stupid, but that’s how these people operate.

THEORY THREE: WITH ALL DUE RESPECT TO P.Z. MYERS, HE’S A BUTTHURT LITTLE BITCH

This one is the simplest yet, and is fully in line with the experience that Thunderfoot has when his Twitter account was suspended because, some animals are more equal than others, he criticized Anita Sarkeesian.

That is, P.Z. Myers is a slanderous, rumor mongering button-dicked piece of shit that has absolutely no moral qualms against smearing people on the thinnest pretext, but my creating the hashtag #WheresPZMyers in order to mock him was simply crossing the line.

The line being a convoluted sort of thing to Freethought Bullies and other Social Justice con artists. I mean, as far as I know, Greg Laden and Melody Hensley never had their Twitter accounts suspended for making direct, actionable threats against me on Twitter.

And the men looked like pigs and the pigs looked like men.

STRANGE ANOMOLIES FROM THE USUAL BUNCH

Now, here’s a bit of strangeness that I don’t have a theory for. Since it seems Twitter might never come around to unsuspending my account, I began working on Plan B, to create a back up Twitter account. As I couldn’t use the same “mykeru” gmail account that created the “Mykeru” Twitter account, I had to create an account for the new “Mykeru Media” Twitter account. Now, check this out: When I began creating a new gmail account I discovered that some enterprising souls had squatted on every permutation of Mykeru Media that you could think of.

Interesting huh? Think that’s a coincidence. It almost suggests that either they were trying to pre-empt creating a new Twitter account, or their next step is to attack my Gmail, and therefore YouTube presence. Now, I was able to get around this, mostly because they didn’t think to use the term “shitlord”.

And then, this, from Latsot who, as I mentioned, is a one man echo chamber and seems to be James “Oolon” Billingham’s personal assistant in charge of anal hygiene.

You see, I never tweeted anything with the Plan B Twitter account I created. I don’t know if this means some people abuse of the Twitter system goes deeper than we thought, with ambitions of abusing GMail and YouTube, but it does suggest, if there’s any truth to that, that you don’t tell Latsot anything you don’t want him to blab like a fucking idiot.

As to the people responsible for engineering my suspension, I will give credit where credit is due. At this point you have done more than merely inconvenience me, you have seriously cut into my online social media presence. As it stands you have negated the wishes of a thousand Twitter followers and made it more difficult for me to promote my message. So, to an extent, you have had some success in silencing me.

So kudos to you for drawing the blinds so light can’t be shined on you and sucking the air out of the room so you can create the anaerobic atmosphere primitive bacteria like yourselves thrive in.

Still, I would suggest you work fast. Before people take a hard look at how you operate and before Twitter realizes that people like you who abuse their system are a liability they can no longer afford.

Good luck on round Two.

 

Email: support@twitter.com

Tweet: @support

User: @Mykeru

Case# 07581280

Posted in Uncategorized

Feminist Hypocrisy

This Mykeru Media video is brought to you by Ken. W who has generously donated for the subject of  Feminist Hypocrisy, a topic so vast and terrifying in its scope, that I’m going to have to pivot a bit and look at it from another angle.

You see, I could spend the entirety of this video listing bullet point after bullet point of specific examples of how modern Third Wave Feminism, informed by the triple threat of Postmodern bullshit, Identity Politics bafflegab and selective Fashion Victim rationalizations is all about claiming to do one thing and consistently doing another.

In fact, why don’t I list a few of my favorites to start things off.

First, the idea that Feminism represents a movement of equality for women that also, in some magical betterment through vilification, benefits men.  Which is like saying the benefits of Kristallnacht was that Jews no longer had to do windows.

The name itself. If one is for equity and egalitarianism, then why the name “Feminism”? Odd that a movement that seeks to render everything gender neutral, when and if convenient and where men are involved, ddoesn’textend the same neutering to its own name. Also, although they may fight to change the term “fireman” to “fire fighter”, the term “gunman” is pretty safe from revision.

Although Feminists strive for parity in sought after careers and in communities that they did not build or sacrifice for, they are notoriously uninterested in achieving parity in dirty, dangerous occupations, general shit-work or, for example, in making women’s federal student loans dependent on signing up for Selective Service cannon fodder at the age of 18 just like everyone with a penis had to do.

It’s an odd and completely self-serving parity whereby if Feminists are unrepresented in communities that they had no hand in creating, parity must be established. What others build must be handed over to Feminists and Social Justice Warriors once they stick their foot in the door. And that parity comes at no price because Feminists feel no obligation, on arrival, to do any real work except for taking a managerial position, telling everyone else what to do, and deriding those who do real work as shitlords. The Feminist ideal seems to be that women just are, and are valued for converting oxygen into carbon dioxide and generally taking up space. It’s not like they actually have to do anything. Except call you a misogynist should you get the least bit uppity.

It’s not for nothing that the much cited “game developer” Zoe Quinn of #gamergate fame didn’t develop anything like what is usually recognized as a video game requiring talent, technical skill and the outlay of time and effort and instead takes her place as a “developer” based on a boring, puerile text-based “choose your own adventure” boilerplate. That, and having, well-traveled as it may be, a vagina.

Of course, parity need not be maintained in areas where women are over-represented and increasing unequal representation of women in college enrollment, for instance, doesn’t mean that anything should be done to help men, rather, that inequity is equality and more should be done for women.

To Feminists, the sexuality of women is to be celebrated, regardless of how tawdry and careless it may be, ever on the lookout for the merest hint of “slut shaming” while engaging in the dissection and micromanaging of every sexual thought, word or deed a man might potentially have.

Feminists decry “fat shaming” and feel it is their right to determine what men, in general, may or may not find attractive. Men who do not find overweight women attractive are denied the excluded middle of actually preferring fit and healthy women and it’s claimed they want boyish, anorexic girls. At the same time, men who do find overweight women attractive are derided as fetishistic “chubby chasers” seeking women with low self-esteem despite previous bullshit claims that Healthy at Any Size women love themselves.

And on and on it goes. Untangling the constant “giving it with one hand and taking it away with another” that Feminists engage in can be a full time job. As is having to issue the walking-on-eggshells disclaimers at every step.

You know, like that by criticizing Feminism, which is a political and social ideology, not a gender, one is not criticizing women as a whole. Mostly that confusion is cultivated by Feminists every chance they get in the same way that some right-wing Fox News nutjobs in the United States will answer every critique of their self-serving programs with the question “Why do you hate freedom?”.

This “woman as victim” feminism promotes an idea of women as people forever acted upon, not acting on things and so, to be against this view of women is not to be anti-woman, but rather, promoting the idea of women as fully formed adult human beings able to take the knocks, setbacks, and yes, injustices that are part of the human experience.

Feminism – this view promoting the outrage and foot stamping of the perpetually dissatisfied woman-child– benefits only a small subset of mostly white, middle-class educated, white collar women and is otherwise perfectly happy to have “This is What a Feminist Looks Like” T-shirts made by underpaid and exploited women in the Third World. A prominent feminist women can advocate for women in the workforce, while mistreating her own help and paying them pennies.

Feminism is, in the narrowest political sense, simply pork. Which doesn’t make it unique, it just makes it one more obsessive special interest group looking for the best way to AstroTurf its demands.

This hypocrisy is bad enough when it’s limited to some cranks on the internet but the real potential for harm comes when the hypocrisy is made manifest and legislated. Take, for example, the “Violence Against Women Act” which codifies the idea that, in domestic violence, men are the perpetrators and women are the victims when it’s been known since the 1970s, based on numerous studies, that there is, in fact, parity in domestic violence. Women are just as much perpetrators of domestic violence as men, initiate it more often, and not in self-defense and where a weapon is used it is more often women wielding it.

From almost the moment that Feminists claimed the existence of a “wage gap” it’s been proven time and again that once you allow from the different choices men and woman make, including investment of time and effort, no such wage gap actually exists. That Feminists persist in repeating a canard that has been rigorously disproven  shows that they are all for the equality of women getting paid more for doing less on the job. And the proposed “equal pay” acts are attempts to ensure, despite all the variables, that forced outcome.

Or demanding the full protection for women under the law, and even adding to the protection with “rape shield laws” while at the same time supporting the complete evisceration of due process rights for college men accused of rape until the mere accusation is enough.  The rights delineated in the American Bill of Rights are considered to be innate and inalienable and the Bill of Rights exists not to bestow them but simply to prohibit government from infringing on them. And so there is not greater hypocrisy than doing an end-run in academia and treating those innate and inalienable due process rights as inconvenient and optional.

Blah-blah-fucking-blah. I  can literally go on doing this forever.

The question is not where Feminist and Feminism are exercises in hypocrisy, but the why and how of the hypocrisy. That is, like being evil, no one consciously thinks of themselves as a hypocrite. Hypocrisy is made possible by a world view coupled with some particular mental gymnastics.

Let me explain by means of what might seem to be a digression.

Feminism, as it is practiced now, coming out of academia and online discourse, all too used to browbeating people into compliance, is a totalizing, dogmatic system.

Like Marxism, Freudianism and Randian Objectivism, feminism is not only an ideology, but represents an all encompassing way of looking at the world that is insular and dogmatic as any religious doctrine. The simplest way to think of a totalizing system is to think of it as a construct that not only serves to explain everything, and there is literally nothing that does not come under the rubric of its ready-made explanation but, more importantly it comes equipped with a series of ad hoc rationalizations. These rationalizations guarantee that it explains everything and where it seemingly doesn’t, well, that’s just more evidence that it explains everything.

The most overt example of this kind of thinking comes from Freudian Psychoanalysis where it relates to the psycho-sexual development of children, Freud, being a deranged, coke-fueled nutjob, figured that young boys are sexually attracted to their mothers, which causes much conflict and confusion. Freud referred to this as the Oedipal Complex. Carl Jung named the same phenomena occurring between young girls and their fathers The Elektra complex, but that was mainly to piss Freud off.

Now, fun fact about the Oepidal Complex, at least the way Freud constructed it: There’s no escape. You see, if a guy marries someone who looks like or in some other way has characteristics of his mother, that’s a clear manifestation of unresolved Oedipal Complex. Of course, if the same guy marries someone who in no way resembles his mother, that’s “reaction formation” and like a two headed coin with Freud’s cigar fellating face on both sides, that’s still a manifestation of the Oedipal Complex. That’s also what’s called an ad hoc rationalization.

And that’s the neat thing about totalizing systems with their ad hoc rationalization neatly lined up in case of emergency: They explain so much everything that in practice, they explain absolutely nothing. And that phenomena was what Carl Popper called “nonfalsifiability”, which is in no way a compliment or something that anything but sheer bullshit should aspire to.

Thing about totalizing systems is they are kind of like a virus. They don’t care about killing the host, or generally making no sense whatsoever, provided they propagate themselves.  The purpose of ad hoc rationalizations is not to really explain anything about the world, but to protect the a priori assumptions of the totalizing system and save it from refutation. The conclusions of these systems are not dependent on the premises, in fact premises can come and go, or be flipped on their heads, but the conclusion, at all costs, must be maintained.

Think of how utterly immune from refutation concepts such as the wage gap, or rape culture, or that disagreement constitutes harassment are to those who have chugged the victim narrative Kool-Aid. Think how easily Feminist dodge and weave with “Not All Feminists Are Like That” Not only can’t you refute any claim of feminism — as far as the Feminist is concerned — but when push comes to shove, they will deny that they make those claims at all, or rather, those claims are made by some other feminists,  which is like, to paraphrase Karen Staughan, foil fencing flatulence.

Then, there’s the big one. The thing that explains everything: The  Patriarchy. Otherwise known as The Man, the All Male Hegemony of Control and Oppression, the birthright to awesome cosmic power that Feminists attribute to all men. Which isn’t at all inexplicable considering the Feminist selectivity in that if you are not a man with power, that is, one they can get something out of, you are practically invisible. The one thing Feminists really hate to talk about, even think about, is class. Mostly because the middle and lower portions of it are just filled with men for whom they have no use.

The Patriarchy is the big guns of a non-falsifiable, observation-laden construct preserved by ad hoc rationalizations. Something hurts Feminists? That’s the Patriarchy. Feminists hurt other women? That’s the Patriarchy too. Men get hurt by Feminism? That’s also the Patriarchy. There is, quite literally, nothing The Patriarchy can’t do. Or, at least, get blamed for.

The Patriarchy is the high-octane fuel for the engine of the perpetual victim narrative.

Now, the conclusion of Feminism of the Third Wave, fashionable kind is the preservation of a victim narrative. The victim narrative serves several purposes, first, it explains away the personal failures of the individual Feminist by externalizing them, it allows an emotional appeal to quash the sort of criticism that would be leveled were not the individual feminist a tender and bruised raw nerve libel to fly off the handle and go totally stabby at the first sign of resistance,

Basically, it requires you to treat the Feminist as a strong and resilient intellectual Amazon warrior princess while, in practice, obligating you to coddle them like a teary-eyed six year old.

Take, for an example of Feminists utter tone deafness when it comes to class. , the “Ten Hours of Walking” video, just one of several videos trying to create outrage for fun and profit by having a woman videotaped  walking the streets for hours, generally in lower socio-economic class black and latino neighborhoods in order to document “street harassment”.  After hours of trolling for harassment, what is actually demonstrated is not “harassment”, that is violent or threatening behavior, but ethnic guys having the audacity to say hello or otherwise seek acknowledgement from the young woman baiting them. The videos are supposed to prove something about how men and woman interact in public, but what it proves is that some women will completely overstate the case for harassment by treating any interaction as harassment. What’s more, although the videos claim just as much harassment comes from white men, the target audience for shaming, they could just as easily be used by racists to make the case of the perils faced by pretty white women at the hands of lustful black men and other minorities. However, unlike the “strange fruit” of days gone by, the goal of these sort of damsels in distress masquerading as strong women who can hold their own, is more ambitious. Rather than calling for the lynching of black men, men in general will do just fine.

The real hypocrisy of these sorts of efforts is that they pretend to be about progress, about moving forward and redefining gender norms, while actually digging deep to mine the chivalrous psychology of a selective traditionalism and, perhaps, traditional racism.That is, traditionalism that women benefit from must be preserved, even if rebranded as something else,  and that by not only demanding males behave in traditional ways, but also by plastering that over with additional and often contradictory demands. That men perform traditional roles as buffers and protectors – because the call is for men to take on men over supposed “street harassment” – while not expecting women to fulfill traditional roles, least of all respecting men for on the one hand saving the damsel in distress, while simultaneously extolling her virtues as a strong, independent woman capable of taking care of themselves.

And that bit of hypocrisy bears repeating. Modern Third Wave Feminism is not a progressive movement, rather it is a selective rebranding of traditionalism for women, with no reciprocal rethinking of those traditional male roles that are of benefit to them.

 Now, let’s talk about how this all actually plays out.

I’ve read somewhere that Tibetan Buddhists, and this may be coming from the Dalai Lama rather than a doctrine of Buddhism per se, that should Buddhist claims conflict with empirical fact, then the claims would be tossed out.

Now, I don’t know whether or not that is true. At least, I haven’t seen a single instance of that being put into practice and, given the nature of dogmas, you can always count on just enough revisionist wiggle room that the jettisoning of established dogma wouldn’t actually happen.

This is not unique to Buddhism either. I’ve heard the same claims made about Judaism and even Christians try to get in on the act that their dogma is taking part in the free flow of discourse and, therefore, open to refutation. The Catholic Church attempts to do this by claiming there’s no contradiction between Evolution and the Truth in the Bible more by opting out, claiming different magesteria rather than humbling themselves before fact.

Now, why would otherwise dogmatic and insular religious doctrines make these sorts of claims, especially if, like me, you are cynical enough to think when such a thing was about to happen, they would find a way to weasel out of making good on the claim?

I mean, very best thing that doomsday cults do isn’t calculating the end of the world. It’s recalculating the end of the world.

You see, everyone wants to act like they are taking part in discourse, that they are fair salesmen in the marketplace of ideas. You want to make yourself out to be reasonable rather than, revealing that you are a bunch of close-minded, insular lunatics whose only interest in getting into the market of ideas is so you can shout people down and unload a canned speech on them.

The problem is, that many of the sellers in the market place of ideas are exactly that. Snake oil merchants who have lied their way in to the market itself under false pretenses.

And that is the greatest, most glaring hypocrisy of modern Feminism, and the same tendencies is on steroids for the online version: Feminists enter into spaces, intrude on them, claiming that they are there to right injustice, or raise consciousness. They are just there to talk. And what follows are blocking and shaming tactics, having people’s social media accounts suspended, people fired from their jobs, if possible, claims of abuse and harassment all direct towards one aim and only one aim: To have a monologue, to engage in the marketplace of ideas by shutting everyone else up, through harassment and proxy violence if necessary so they can run a re-education camp for a captive audience.

That, to me, is the greatest hypocrisy of modern Feminism: It enters into spaces paying lip service to the idea of having a discussion, of having a dialogue, or being able to be persuaded by facts and common sense when, in fact, it’s just another totalizing system, another big bag of predetermined ideological nonsense, as much as any other crackpot theory or religious dogma, that can only operate in the a complete vacuum of dissenting voices and is more than willing to suck the air out of any room to accomplish this.

And really, when it comes to that, it’s all just marketing. I wouldn’t claim that we live in an age or a culture where people are no longer coerced by violence. However, I would say that when violence is used, it can’t be used in broad daylight. Which explains why we live in a surveillance state where there are cameras literally everywhere, but cops will still crack your head for filming them.

Because of this, we live in an age and culture of lies and fallacy and emotional appeal where the art of massive bullshit was perfected over a century of selling people shit they don’t need through marketing. And it’s no accident that Edward Bernays, the patron saint of 20th century public relations and propaganda used his Uncle Sigmund’s theories of Psychoanalysis to craft more and more refined ways to lie to people in large groups. The ad hoc hypocrisy of totalizing systems and marketing go hand in hand to the extant that, quite literally, the truth is regarded as whatever you can make people believe.

Modern Feminism, which most of the time acts as a series of witch hunts and moral panics, hypocritically acts as if it is a fair seller in the marketplace of ideas when, in fact, it is simply marketing. Not surprisingly, some of the more successful online feminists have degrees in marketing, communication, and are selling the product of endless outrage that can only be cured by giving them your dollars. You can refute their claims on a Monday and they will be back repeating them by Wednesday. That’s because their claims, the victim narrative, isn’t something open for debate or beta testing. It’s a product that they simply intend to sell as is.

And that is the most cynical, the most hypocritical thing of all.

Posted in Uncategorized

Thanks

While I work on my first donation-based video for the generous Kenny W. I would like to thank all the rest of you for your donations to the cause that is me. And I would like to assure you I’m not running a telethon and  I’m not going to monetize my videos because well, that would suck for one, and I spend enough time counting down to the “skip this ad” on other people’s videos.

Although I have been eye-ball raping this bitching pair of Fluevogs, so you never really know.

I’ve noticed that if you go through a given monetized YouTuber’s catalog you see the same ads again and again. I’ve been going through Sandman’s MGTOW (That’s Men Going Their Own Way) videos while I rethink my position on that,  having previously described the MGTOW I came across on A Voice for Men as a “bunch of whiny little bitches”. Anyway, I would like to let advertisers on monetized videos know that I have seen the same beginning 5 seconds of your ads until I have deja vu and I still don’t know what the hell it is you’re selling. And I’m happy that way.

Of course, I don’t expect much support from the usual nay-sayers but I fully reject the argument that if the intrusive ideologues and con artists that we see infesting the Atheist and Skeptical community, the gaming community and anywhere else they can get a foot in to turn other people’s spaces into their own take donations and rely on the support of appreciative fellow travelers then that’s something that we should not do. That’s not how incentives work and there’s many ways one can show support for the work that people do. And I have donated myself, I believe the first cash deposit I made when I first joined this cluster-fuck schism in the skeptical community was to Girl Writes What when she was being hit with bogus DMCA claims in order to dox her in the days before she was Karen Straughan. Although she wasn’t part of the skeptical community per se, the sad fact is time has shown that she’s done a more basic skeptical work than the frauds at Skepchick and Center for Inquiry combined. And that’s something to be rewarded.

And I also did a lot of fundraising for Ben Radford, gaining the ire of some for getting a Voice for Men involved. But considering this ire came from people who had their thumbs firmly inserted into their own asses and were doing nothing but warming their hands while Radford burned, their ire didn’t sting as much as they thought.

You know, you make coalitions, you reach out over disagreements, at least you do if you have something like a goal. Regardless of whether I think Paul Elam is a massive douche, which he is, you still have people like Straughan, John Hembling, Dean Ismay and Alison Tieman that you can deal with. But however, even if AVfM was the great Satan, I would have still made a deal with them because they helped me, and Ben Radford in a way that the lethargic nose pinchers in the Skeptical community simply did not do. That experience, having to listen to people who did nothing, just nothing, get on their high horses over me, AVfM and the Radford fund-raising was an eye-opener and informs my opinion of the sort of people who reach for the high ground simply so they can unfold a lawn chair and work on their tans: Fuck them.

I’ve watched the gaming community push back effectively against their own hot injection of Mykeru’s Law…

MYKERU’S LAW (revised)

As any movement grows and achieves success, the probability of it being co-opted by Feminists who want to make it all about their vaginas approaches 1

…and am appalled, simply appalled that a supposedly nerdy bunch of gamers were able to do so when they supposedly fearless and in-your-face (if you’re an acceptable target) Atheist and Skeptical community not only completely rolled over, but are still doing degrading tricks for treats.
I think it should be blindingly obvious that the Atheist and Skeptical community is in no position to give sage and bloviating advice like the sort of tilly hat and crocs wearing retired grade school teacher you tend to find at skeptical gathering. We should be taking advice from gamers. Because, as far as I’m concerned, they are succeeding in at least checking the Social Justice Warriors, Fashion Victim Feminists and con artists where the A/S community has failed miserably.

Also, just a by the way here: By the way. I hate the clumsy construction “The Atheist and Skeptical Community”. The two things are far from synonymous and I assume if one is a little bit skeptical one will be an atheist anyway. And God knows Atheism Plus proved there’s no guarantee in that. I’m a skeptic. Period. Which means I’m an atheist. Period. If I were just an atheist I could believe in anything. Except God. So should I use just the term “skeptic” you know what it means.

I would be more than happy if we can get much much more flow between Men’s Rights, Skeptic and gamers because you know what? These days we have exactly the same problems online. And maybe that’s something we should be working on. Recently The Internet Aristocrat had Justicar on a live stream along with Thunderfoot to get some insight into the early stages of 20-something white college girl infection in the skeptical community. We should be doing more of those cross overs. A lot, lot more.

But right now I’m working on a few things, such as a few donation videos, getting my Twitter account reinstated, and I’m re-reading Catch-22 in order to make sense of how Twitter goes about this.  Hell, you can ask them yourself:

Email: support@twitter.com

Tweet: @support

Case# 07581280

Oh, one more thing. I’m aware of the benefits of Patreon. But I think it has a different purpose than for videos here which takes a certain amount of insider knowledge to get what I’m talking about. Which is good, and I like to keep doing what I’m doing here for people who are up to speed on the various people in need of a good mocking. For Patreon I would like to offer something a little bigger and better than, say people paying money for a three minute video of Rebecca Watson changing a switch in her car. I would like to use patreon to fund more general, but in depth issues in skepticism, or just of interest to me. Something longer, with good production values more fitted to the general viewer. For example, I would like to do a treatment on the Dyatlov Pass Incident, having read just about all the English language material on the subject and even waded through bad translations of Russian cites for every photograph online. I’m also interested in doing something from a skeptical point of view on the death of free diver Audrey Mestre, having read and been haunted by Carlos Serras’ book on the subject “The Last Attempt” and having been unpersuaded by uncritical articles dealing with Francisco ‘Pipin’ Ferreras.

Just some thoughts. And with your support, and I don’t mean simply financial, I can do things of interest to this shit-mire of Social Justice con artists we find ourselves mired in, of interest to me and hopefully of interest to you.

Posted in Uncategorized

This is an Outrage. Give Me Money

As you may be aware, last week my Twitter account was suspended.

Considering the transparency of Twitter, the suspension appeal process is relatively straight forward. Apparently all I have to do to have my account reinstated is read the Twitter Terms of Services and Best Practices and promise to never again do the thing that got my Twitter account suspended. However, it seems it’s up to me to determine what it was I did that got my Twitter account suspended. Because, a week on, Twitter still hasn’t told me.

However, I am willing to take full ownership for whatever bad thing I did. Whether it was dancing with the devil, or consorting with communists, or a general lack of love for Big Brother. It’s just one of those things where you sign the blank piece of paper and then let the nice interrogators type in your confession at their convenience. All they need, is your cooperation.

I certainly wouldn’t want to suggest that my suspension was a the result of a concerted effort, say, some sort of “bot” if you will, that exploits the Twitter algorithms in order to silence dissent or, in my case, outright gleeful mockery.

Far be it from me to entertain the idea that it was the result of persons who rationalize away all comment, criticism and satire as stalking and harassment and act as if what got them criticism was that they were women, or Social Justice Warriors, or left-handed, or whatever arbitrary Identity Politics characteristics they use to distract from plain fact that people mock and criticize them simply because they are thin-skinned morons.

Nor would I suggest that one of the forces behind my suspension was the passive aggressive doings of some unnamed and otherwise wholly unremarkable persons who spend much of their time smearing others, but take an exceptionally dim view of someone making fun of them for it.

Of course, the real losers in all this are certain members of The SlymePit because, two weeks after I stopped posting there due to certain members of the SlymePit, they are still going on about me. Mostly that my discussions on surplus camping gear, the benefits of my Trangia alcohol stove and my Victrola proves I’m a bit off. Just as the only acceptable activity for Social Justice Warriors is calling people out, the only acceptable activity for SlymePit Shit posters is shit posting.

This all came to a head when, just for shits and giggles, I did up some Mykeru Media merchandising on Zazzle and then posted in The SlymePit to complain about the company’s outrageous mark-up. Even lowering my cut to the bare minimum $1.70 per, well, below Zazzle’s default royalty mark-up, the t-shirts were still over 30 bucks a shot, albeit for front and back printing. Despite my initial complaints about the cost, the certain people on the SlymePit turned this into a two day bitch-fest about what a money-grubbing little whore I was.mykeru_media_basic_tee-r703feda762da44a2986c3941e19be8c5_va6lr_324

You know, because shit posting is it’s own reward.

I never linked to my Zazzle merchandise page because, as I said, it’s cheap crap with a huge mark-up. However if you want cheap crap at a huge mark-up with the Mykeru Media logo on it, please visit The Mykeru Media Store.

However, I don’t recommend it. You see because when you are actually getting something for your money — a good is actually being transferred, in this case a massively overpriced t-shirt — this represents an inefficient way for your to transfer money from you to me.

You see, given the terrible online harassment that someone, such as myself. who is selflessly working to make the world a better place, has to face on a daily basis. I began to look at new and better models for the promotion of justice in the face of this terrible outrage, models that would efficiently promote the greater good, give voice to the voiceless, and strike a blow against the forces of oppression, by the conversion of your money into my money.

However, since I don’t have a big booty ass that I can squeeze into tight jeans and then spend ten hours walking through an ethnic neighborhood for two minutes of the modern Emmet Till whistle and decrying uppitty black men not getting full written permission to talk to me, I had to think of something different.

I thought of it curled up in my bed, too distraught and afflicted with Twitter-induced Post Traumatic Stress Disorder to do anything but watch Parks and Recreation on Netflix and eat all of the Halloween fun-sized Snickers that, for the tenth year in a row, I bought without a single little kid knocking on my apartment door.

I thought things couldn’t get any worse. Then they did.

With this email:

I m Going to Get You  Sucka.   mykeru gmail.com   Gmail

Yes, not only have these vague, dark forces targeted me, but now they are threatening you.

original

This aggression will not stand, man

I ask you, the good, decent people on the internet who appreciate the massive sacrifices I have made on your behalf, that are so traumatic that, off-hand, I can’t remember what they, to strike a blow against everyone you don’t like by taking your money and giving it to me. Where I will do something with it. I can’t promise it will be entirely squandered on hookers and blow, mostly because I don’t do either, but given enough disposable income, it might became a possibility. I mean, sure, I have some medical bills and I’m trying to sneak out of the Metro DC area to do advance work in Pueblo Colorado, but who needs to hear about mundane stuff like that. Let’s stick with hookers and blow.

ebeg

Here on my Skepti-schism page where you are reading exactly what you listened to on YouTube you can slam the hell out of my donation button,for no adequately explained reason, except it seems the thing to do whenever someone gets one of those bumps in the road that past generations used to consider to be the price of living, or someone talks to them on the street, or the idea of getting out of bed in the morning is too much to bear.

Or maybe you just like what I do and want to annoy the right sort of people by showing your support.

As a bonus though, for any $50 donation I will do a video, at least ten minutes in length, on any subject you want, whether it’s dealing with Feminism, Social Justice Warriors or some topic in Atheism and/or skepticism. It’s really not worth it, but I’m not a cheap whore,  so it’s kind of a dilemma.

Thank you.

Posted in Uncategorized

Radford / Stollznow Anti-Memory Hole Links

Karen Stollznow has made spurious and demonstrably false accusations of sexual harassment and sexual assault against Ben Radford, apparently arising from his failure to pursue a relationship with her, and her need to raise her standing in the Social Justice Warrior community by upping her victim cred for fun and profits. Having rejected Radfords offer for her to submit a retraction to avoid litigation, Stollznow has doubled and tripled down and it is likely that Radford’s defamation suit against her will go forward into court. As Stollznow’s accusations crumble and the spotlight of litigation turns their way, you can expect the usual idiots at Freethought Blogs, Skepchick and Atheism Plus to attempt to expunge their part in a shameless witchhunt by deleting everything.

The list serves to frustrate attempts to memory-hole who said what when and was compiled, and updated, by the SlymePit’s very own famous historian Brive1987.

Once you slog through this mess of slander and pseudo-skeptical Freethought Blogs/ Skepchick inanity, please donate to help Ben Radford clear his name:

Ben Radford Legal Fund

http://www.rockethub.com/projects/41435 … legal-fund

Ben Radford’s long-awaited and devastating rebuttal to Karen Stollznow’s accusation:

Response to Stollznow Accusations

http://benrlegal.info/

Ron Lindsay rebutting those accusation by Stollznow that might cut into his bottom line:

Making sense of “he said, she said”, Brive1987’s Timeline of Events:

GoogleSpread Sheet: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc … ring#gid=0

The original (native) spreadsheet: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B48R-M … sp=sharing

Timeline image: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B48R-M … sp=sharing

Lindsay: What I Wrote To Scientific American

http://web.archive.org/web/201308170838 … _american/

Karen Stollznow’s original Scientific American Mind blog post  introducing her brand into the Social Justice Warrior marketing campaign:

Stollznow: “I’m Sick of Talking about Sexual Harassment!”

http://web.archive.org/web/201308061836 … arassment/

or

http://w01.freezepage.com/a/13763/46408SMWQUYRCET/0 (cancel authentification requirement) 

A bunch of unsourced dog-pile posts from various wanna-be professional witch hunters:

PZ: Carrie Poppy tells All
http://web.archive.org/web/201308100536 … -tells-all

Lousy Canuck: Ben Radford and CFI: A point of contention
http://web.archive.org/web/201308110642 … contention

Greta: Karen Stollznow’s Complaint About Ben Radford – Do You Have Evidence Backing It?
http://web.archive.org/web/201308120314 … acking-it/

Benson: By indirections find directions out
http://web.archive.org/save/http://free … tions-out/

PZ: Trying to overcome my Male Pattern Blindness
http://web.archive.org/web/201308121436 … blindness/

Benson: Very pointed
http://web.archive.org/web/201403231129 … y-pointed/

Orac: On undisclosed conflicts of interest in medicine, science, and skepticism
http://web.archive.org/web/201403231132 … kepticism/

Watson: Ben Radford Accused of Sexual Harassment 
http://web.archive.org/web/201402022120 … arassment/

Lousy Canuck: Sexual harassment accusations in the skeptical and secular communities: a timeline of major events
http://web.archive.org/web/201402282258 … or-events/

Big Name Sexual Harassment Accusation in the Skeptic Blogosphere 
http://groupthink.jezebel.com/big-name- … 1044478902

That Was the Wrong Answer, CFI
http://web.archive.org/web/201308160438 … answer-cfi

Seize: Big Name Sexual Harassment Accusation in the Skeptic Blogosphere
http://web.archive.org/web/201308092203 … 1044478902

Marcotte: Skepticism and Secularism Have a Serious Sexual Harassment Problem
http://web.archive.org/web/201308072307 … t_why.html

Ophelia :Items
http://web.archive.org/web/201308110734 … 08/items-3

Bad Skeptic: Disgusting sexual harassment and abuse in the skeptical movement? You betcha!
http://web.archive.org/web/201310080203 … com/?p=809

Robert Stacy McCain: NO LOVE FOR THE GODLESS
http://web.archive.org/web/201403231145 … ve-godless

Gordon Bonnet: Skepticism, sin, and schadenfreude
http://web.archive.org/web/201403231147 … reude.html

Makes me wonder what all this will mean to this other P.Z. Myers-sponsored blog lynching:

PZ: Grenade Post
http://web.archive.org/web/201402282252 … a-grenade/

UPDATES: 

Lousy Canuck doubles down: “Did I just get a letter from President Obama?” [3/23/2014]
http://freethoughtblogs.com/lousycanuck/2014/03/23/did-i-just-get-a-letter-from-president-obama/

 

Posted in Uncategorized