The Gaming Den

Evil apparently makes you stronger than Good
Sand won't smother these flames
Two Photographers permanently banned from Miami Metrorail

Isn't it interesting how when somthing is proven to not be a scandel, news outlets don't ever give near the attention?

'Climategate' probe clears scientists [/i]

Rathe wrote:Isn't it interesting how when somthing is proven to not be a scandel, news outlets don't ever give near the attention?

'Climategate' probe clears scientists [/i]

Well, what do you expect from the liberal medi... wait.

From the cool tech front...

Eye telescope implant clears FDA hurdle

Plato, a closet Pythagorean, hid musical messages in his writings.

Dan Brown better not screw this one up...

1337% of Pi is 42.

Nice. Anything special about 1337%? L337?

I understand what you mean, with the "salty mouth" headline, but it seems pretty obvious they're talking about the fact that he swears a lot. Having a salty mouth/using salty language basically means "He swears like a sailor".

I feel that in this instance, there's no hidden meaning.

Koumei wrote:I understand what you mean, with the "salty mouth" headline, but it seems pretty obvious they're talking about the fact that he swears a lot. Having a salty mouth/using salty language basically means "He swears like a sailor".

I feel that in this instance, there's no hidden meaning.

Fair enough.

This just in: SciAm Blogger Posts Long Unfunny Rant About Feminist Misandry in Response to Homophobic Criticism by Oversensitive Sexual Fluid Lover.

When you don't use any negative terms until female ejaculate is involved, gosh. But far be it he could, I dunno, apologize? What a sanctimonious twit.

You can have the best of intentions and still screw the fuck up. How is that so hard to learn?

-Crissa

Um, WTF Crissa. Not this again. How did he use a negative term for female ejaculate that he wouldn't use for male.

1) I don't see any negative words.

2) He's not talking about male ejaculate in that post, so the statement "Apparently collecting ejaculate requires no particular digestive toughness" makes no fucking sense, and is just a crazy lady lying. Because of course, he never fucking said anything that could even imply that.

3) Begin phase "Everyone is sexist but man hating feminists" Go!

Yeah. See, when you side with either of those douchebags, you're being a douchebag yourself.

Mz Nagoski would have us mark any negative comment about love puddles with the disclaimer "I find male and female fluids equally disgusting", just to make sure that we weren't harboring biases about the sexes. This is almost fair, because socially condoned disgust of the body can be a tool of oppression, and she is a sex researcher.
Then she drops this bigoted bomb:

Emily Nagoski wrote:Indeed, the blatant, unapologetic, flinching gynophobia made me wonder if he’s gay, which it turns out he is, but that doesn’t make it okay for him to discuss female fluids as physically disgusting.

Damn', way to imply that male homosexuality is the result of woman-fearing neuroses rather than a normal form of human sexuality.

Mr Bering goes off the rails screaming about 'feminist misandry' (which wasn't evident in Mz Nagoski's post at all) for 24 paragraphs. Clearly he has a bone to pick, as he manages to touch on topics as unrelated as feminist dismissal of evolutionary psychology.

It's not the worst example of feminist/antifeminist bullshit by far, but I was amazed to see it on Scientific American.

Actually, gay guys do have alot of 'female==ick' in practice, if not in theory or popular culture.

That's why we end up with guys like Andrew Sullivan and Gay Patriot West; and the reverse is much smaller in air times; womyn-born womyn movement, or the you aren't a woman without procreating movement.

Of course, what queer group is going to advertise that it's like herding cats to get gay guys as a group to work with women?

-Crissa

(I don't know WTF Kaelik is on about, because it seems completely unrelated to my post.)

Crissa wrote:(I don't know WTF Kaelik is on about, because it seems completely unrelated to my post.)

You claimed that he's a twit because he didn't use any negative terms until he started talking about female ejaculate, and then he did.

That is wrong on every possible level.

1) He didn't use any negative terms at all, except if you think that saying "being willing to do a study on large numbers of ejaculate samples requires a tough stomach" as an insult, in which case.... Fuck it.

2) He never talked about male ejaculate at all, even once, so how he could have been talking about it using glowing positive terms is fucking beyond me, since he literally never mentioned it.

Kaelik wrote:You claimed that he's a twit because...

...because your reading comprehension is very, very low.

No, I said he was a twit because he couldn't be bothered to just apologize for his intention being misread. Instead, he went on an unrelated tirade about something that happened to him in elementary school. Who the fuck is so traumatized by once sometime ago, mistakenly being called a bad name?

People make mistakes. What you mean and what people hear are two completely different things. You should strive for them to be identical, but they will never always be so. Apologize for when someone mistakes what you said for what you didn't intend. Don't be a twit.

-Crissa

Crissa wrote:Actually, gay guys do have alot of 'female==ick' in practice, if not in theory or popular culture.

That's why we end up with guys like Andrew Sullivan and Gay Patriot West; and the reverse is much smaller in air times; womyn-born womyn movement, or the you aren't a woman without procreating movement.

Of course, what queer group is going to advertise that it's like herding cats to get gay guys as a group to work with women?

-Crissa

Crissa, are you saying that it's OK to stereotype male gays as being neurotically woman-hating or woman-fearing?

Crissa wrote:Actually, gay guys do have alot of 'female==ick' in practice, if not in theory or popular culture.

I take issue with this. In my experience all that boils down to is not wanting to directly interact with a specific kind of genitalia, particularly in a sexual context. I can only imagine that similarly, lesbians and straight men wouldn't want to interact with penises in a sexual way. Every group is going to at times express their distaste distastefully.

CatharzGodfoot wrote:Crissa, are you saying that it's OK to stereotype male gays as being neurotically woman-hating or woman-fearing?

If it's true, is it wrong? I don't know. I don't even know if the stereotype is true, other than it really does creates real problems in social/political situations where gay men and women need to interact or share power.

You'll note that I didn't say the woman's critique was fair or unfair - only that his response was really stupid.

As to genitalia... Generally, you find this to be an issue with men far more than women. I'd be tempted to chalk it up to culture except that it is parallel in violence, as well as politics. Certainly there is that tiny minority of penis-is-a-weapon folks, but they're outnumbered by Log House Republicans (and closeted ones) by a large ratio.

-Crissa

Crissa wrote:

Kaelik wrote:You claimed that he's a twit because...

...because your reading comprehension is very, very low.

No, I said he was a twit because he couldn't be bothered to just apologize for his intention being misread. Instead, he went on an unrelated tirade about something that happened to him in elementary school. Who the fuck is so traumatized by once sometime ago, mistakenly being called a bad name?

People make mistakes. What you mean and what people hear are two completely different things. You should strive for them to be identical, but they will never always be so. Apologize for when someone mistakes what you said for what you didn't intend. Don't be a twit.

-Crissa

You claim that people should apologize to people who misunderstand them.

I could point out how stupid it is to expect an apology from the person who did nothing wrong to the stupid person who is in the wrong, and I will.

But right now I want to point out that Crissa is a twit, because she didnLt just apologize to me for me misunderstanding her, but instead tried to point out that I misunderstood her. Exactly like the guy she is calling a twit.

Apparently, raising the retirement age would be highly regressive. Who would have thunk?

-Crissa

So...rich people live longer than poor people. And that's supposed to be news?

I probably shouldn't touch this but

As to genitalia... Generally, you find this to be an issue with men far more than women. I'd be tempted to chalk it up to culture except that it is parallel in violence, as well as politics. Certainly there is that tiny minority of penis-is-a-weapon folks, but they're outnumbered by Log House Republicans (and closeted ones) by a large ratio.

I have absolutely no idea what you are trying to say here? Could you clarify?

Josh_Kablack wrote:I probably shouldn't touch this but

As to genitalia... Generally, you find this to be an issue with men far more than women. I'd be tempted to chalk it up to culture except that it is parallel in violence, as well as politics. Certainly there is that tiny minority of penis-is-a-weapon folks, but they're outnumbered by Log House Republicans (and closeted ones) by a large ratio.

I have absolutely no idea what you are trying to say here? Could you clarify?

I can only speak to context, because I have no idea what "Log House Republicans" is really supposed to mean, but it appears to be the case that she is saying that women are less icked out by the genitals they don't want to have sex with, whether it be lesbians or straight, and that she would think it a cultural thing except that it often becomes apparent in violent rejection, not just political rejection.

Personally, I don't see how men being more likely to instinctively or violently reject the genitalia they don't appreciate is compelling evidence that it's not cultural if you already believe it is cultural.

Emily Nagoski is an idiot.