Denialism

Vox Day’s New Low

—

by

MarkH
in

I love a crank that you only have to quote to utterly humiliate. From the guy who brought the logic of the Third Reich to bear on the immigration issue we have this thoughtful analysis of the real threat to science:

As I have demonstrated in “The Irrational Atheist,” religion is not a threat to any aspect of science: It does not threaten the knowledge base, it does not threaten the method and it does not threaten the profession. It never has.

But this is not to say there is not a genuine threat to all three aspects of science today. Unsurprisingly, it comes from the same force that is the primary threat to the survival of Western civilization: female equalitarianism.

…
The idea of biology classes being taught by lesbian professors who believe that heterosexual procreation is a myth or calculus courses being taught by women who can’t do long division may sound impossible today, but tell that to any software developer, and he’ll be able to provide you with plenty of current examples of computer science engineers, some with advanced CS degrees, who have no idea how to even begin writing a computer program.
…

Women love education; it’s the actual application they don’t particularly like. Whereas the first thought of a woman who enjoys the idea of painting is to take an art appreciation class, a similarly interested man is more likely to just pick up a paintbrush and paint something – usually a naked woman.
…
It is written that “women ruin everything”; having destroyed the liberal arts, the classics and the pseudo-sciences, it is now abundantly clear that the more rigorous sciences are next on the equalitarians’ destructive agenda. And so, in the not-too-distant future, two plus two will finally be determined to equal five if a women feels that it should, or at least it will as long as she happens to feel that way.

Wow. This guy really hates women. I mean, really hates them. Does anyone think this is too far even for the WorldNutDaily? Basically a screed calling all women stupid?

Women make great scientists, and I’m tired of these creationist idiots lecturing us on what is needed in the field they don’t even believe in. Especially if it’s just sexist garbage that is so out of place in this century even the WorldNutDaily should be deeply ashamed.

I can’t wait to see the little bigot try to explain away this latest insight into his small-mindedness.

Thanks to Ed.

* Update *

I’ll point out right on the heels of Vox days seemingly insane rant against women this turd of a satirical piece by Mike S. Adams at Townhall:

when they aren’t attending masturbation workshops and orgasm awareness festivals on unc campuses, our feminist “scholars” are usually thinking of new words to ban in order to make womyn feel more comfortable in the workplace. recently, one of the sociologists at unc-wilmington actually banned the use of the term “mankind” because of its “sexist” overtones.

having recently been named as a defendant in a lawsuit alleging first amendment retaliation, dr. (name deleted to ensure maximum comfort) still seems undeterred. but i write today, not for the purpose of ridiculing this seemingly outlandish feminist censorship. in fact, i’ve decided to join in with some new class rules i’ll use from now on (but not NOW on).

1. all capital letters will be banned. for some feminists, capital letters are a reminder of an erect penis. so, from now on, all my class correspondence will have erectile dysfunction.

The conservative movement has a problem with hating women that is pervasive. I don’t believe Vox day is exceptional, just exceptionally stupid for saying what he thinks out loud. After all, are these two pieces really that different? I think the only difference is that Adams was smart enough to only castigate the bogey-(wo)man feminists while Vox said what they really think. Women have no place in positions of authority or power.

Comments

  1. Alexandra

    Wow. This guy really hates women. I mean, really hates them.

    The feeling is mutual.

    Reply
  2. Tyler DiPietro

    Vox Day is a professional troll and I don’t doubt for a second that he put up this flame-bait for the purpose of self-promotion. It may be best just to ignore the little fucker.

    Reply
  3. minimalist

    No way can he be a troll. Anyone who goes out in public with a haircut like that has got to be as dumb as his writings imply.

    Reply
  4. MarkH

    I know! What is up with that haircut? How can he really hate women when he walks around with a minge on his head?

    Reply
  5. Lance

    How can he really hate women when he walks around with a minge on his head?

    OK, that was funny.

    Reply
  6. Christina

    I wish I could say this was uncommon but lately it’s getting more and more widespread.

    There are even women on the payroll whose job it is to basically tell other women (but not themselves) to get back in the kitchen and pop out those babies (but not themselves, of course) because women are too stupid to do manly things like vote (but not themselves, of course.)

    See: Allen, Charlotte.

    Reply
  7. Mark P

    So he doesn’t get laid, is that it? Obviously there must be something wrong with the women, because it couldn’t possibly be his fault, could it?

    Reply
  8. Teresa

    Did Vox Day really say that date rape doesn’t exsist? Niiice. Boy buys girl a Coke and drops a lite GHB in it, and Vox Day says it’s not a crime. Good thing he doesn’t write the laws.

    Reply
  9. Reynold Hall

    I’ve posted a reply on Ray Comfort’s blog where they’re arguing about religion’s treatment of women. I’ve posted that Vox Day info there. We’ll see if it gets through.

    http://raycomfortfood.blogspot.com/2008/03/response-to-female-form.html

    Reply
  10. norio

    Slightly off topic, but in reference to “religion is not a threat to any aspect of science,” I have to agree. Scientists who believe in evolution are annoying and embarrassing, but it’s not like they are going to make mistakes in the lab because their belief in evolution makes them think that some chemical value isn’t true. At worst, it just keeps some scientists from participating in certain scientific fields that they don’t agree with. But there are plenty more to take up the slack

    Reply
  11. the real cmf

    “female equalitarianism”? Sure, calling ALL women stupid is stupid; calling ALL women smart takes an equation, like this: 2+2=5

    Oh, wait, that guys screed did that already….stupid, or merely wrong?

    Sure, we love equality, and some women do make great scientists, etc. But it is so pedestalizing the way that some theoretical thinkers say these things about women that it validates the argument–as if progressive thinkers just kowtow to the stereotype they created of women as superheroes.

    To conclude that these perspectives are exclusively creationist, or entirely inaccurate is a misrepresentation of the argument, because two wrongs don’t make a right.

    The real substance of the argument might better be phrased as “pedantic left leaning men kowtow to the blind pedestalization of women, for some derived benefit, while decrying others as misogynist, or worse, creationist, who don’t buy into that stereotype, thereby culling from the herd women who are vulnerable to banal approach, and devoid of insight that clues them to the stereotype/opposite stereotype frame.”

    It is the same rationale that decries a military of unequal opportunity, but doesn’t activate to actually be in the trenches during battle. The problem in the first place is overbreeding of the inferior in the species( both male and female), combined with lack of education, and opportunity doled out to the least deserving–the generals, and presidents who have shirked, or never seen active duty themselves.

    Reply
  12. Lilly de Lure

    Teresa said:

    Did Vox Day really say that date rape doesn’t exsist? Niiice. Boy buys girl a Coke and drops a lite GHB in it, and Vox Day says it’s not a crime. Good thing he doesn’t write the laws.

    Charmer isn’t he? Although judging by the excrement this specimen regularly produces he’d probably “argue” that the fact that he doesn’t make the laws is some evil atheist conspiracy led by homosexuals and women.

    The latter of whom are of course smart enough to engineer such a massive conspiracy against the “intellectual driving force of humanity” but too dumb to work out that 2+2=4.

    Reply
  13. Boris

    The problem in the first place is overbreeding of the inferior in the species

    Alas, but we can’t go back and slap on a condom on your dad, now can we?

    Reply
  14. debbyo

    Wow, all my years at university and I have somehow managed to miss all the masturbation workshops! Naturally, like most female scholars, I never missed my castration classes.

    Adam’s erectile dysfunction joke makes me wonder if it’s only the women he has dated who desperately need lessons in self-stimulation.

    Reply
  15. Interrobang

    Where does a guy who randomly coins stupid neologisms (“equalitarianism”? Uh, “egalitarianism” maybe?) and argues entirely in straw(wo)men get off calling other people — no, let me amend that — get off calling entire other classes of people stupid?

    Well, on the other hand, we’re talking about Vox, and if brains were high explosives, Vox wouldn’t even be able to blow his nose.

    I hate to Godwin myself, but I really wish these misogynist nits would, you know, wear a distinctive lapel pin or some kind of visible symbol. They’d be a lot easier to avoid that way. (On the other hand, I’m not likely to be in Vox’s mom’s basement anytime soon, so I’m probably safe for the nonce, at least from him.)

    Reply
  16. Oldfart

    What’s the opposite of misogynist?
    What’s the male oriented version of a gynecologist?
    This is all so much bullshit.
    There are extreme attitudes on both ends of the spectrum.
    Most of us live in the middle.
    No matter how much y’all scream, my wife still can’t find the car in the Wal-Mart parking lot and I can.
    There are differences.
    Live with it.
    Exploit them.

    Reply
  17. Another Anonymous Poster

    Oldfart:

    Easy

    1). Misanthropist
    2). Urologist

    Reply
  18. the real cmf

    Boris: Nor can we replace your mothers slack jaw, or tired kneecaps, worn as they are from her work.

    Reply
  19. Wes

    Slightly off topic, but in reference to “religion is not a threat to any aspect of science,” I have to agree. Scientists who believe in evolution are annoying and embarrassing, but it’s not like they are going to make mistakes in the lab because their belief in evolution makes them think that some chemical value isn’t true. At worst, it just keeps some scientists from participating in certain scientific fields that they don’t agree with. But there are plenty more to take up the slack

    Posted by: norio | March 12, 2008 12:06 AM

    Please tell me you’re joking.

    No matter how much y’all scream, my wife still can’t find the car in the Wal-Mart parking lot and I can.
    There are differences.
    Live with it.
    Exploit them.

    Posted by: Oldfart | March 12, 2008 9:45 AM

    I hope you’re joking, too. Otherwise, you must be extremely desperate to find things to brag about. Very pathetic.

    The real substance of the argument might better be phrased as “pedantic left leaning men kowtow to the blind pedestalization of women, for some derived benefit, while decrying others as misogynist, or worse, creationist, who don’t buy into that stereotype, thereby culling from the herd women who are vulnerable to banal approach, and devoid of insight that clues them to the stereotype/opposite stereotype frame.”

    I’m pretty sure this dingleberry isn’t joking.

    What kind of idiot would think that statement is “better phrased”? It reads like you just picked words randomly out of a thesaurus and strung them together into a torturously contrived run-on sentence which really boils down to “I’m jealous and resentful of educated liberals, and I try to look smart by artificially inflating my vocabulary.”

    Reply
  20. the real cmf

    Wes: Idiot? Is that the best you can do? Yikes. All credential, no substance. Typical bookworm, full of sawdust.

    That type of comment( I own up to it) is just a rough draft of original unedited thought–not the canned, cauterized, sterilized and cuckolded type that you are used to sifting out of your wormy anus in the disguise of qualified comment.

    Reply
  21. ildi

    cmf: rough draft of original unedited thought?

    Don’t quit your day job.

    Reply
  22. Boris

    Boris: Nor can we replace your mothers slack jaw, or tired kneecaps, worn as they are from her work.

    Classy. Calling my mother a prostitute when your beef is with me.

    Was that an example of

    original unedited thought

    ?

    I bet you want to be a writer. And those publishing companies just don’t understand your genius, eh? That hefty manuscript’s been doin’ the rounds, mm? The next Thomas Pynchon, right? Fantastic.

    Reply
  23. MarkH

    I wouldn’t bother feeding that troll. He was defending Holocaust denier David Irving on another thread.

    Reply
  24. Ginger Peach

    No matter how much y’all scream, my wife still can’t find the car in the Wal-Mart parking lot and I can. There are differences. Live with it. Exploit them.

    Posted by: Oldfart | March 12, 2008 9:45 AM

    That’s a difference between your wife and yourself. Period. I’m better than my boyfriend at remembering where his car is. And I’m not even the one driving it in the first place.

    Reply
  25. the real cmf

    MarkH: I wasn’t defending Irving, I was defending free speech, even if that means the “right to be wrong” You missed the boat dere..I think yer in denial about the substance of those posts.

    You denialists always obfuscate, and attack ad hom, rather than substance–and you never admit you are wrong, or even budge in the direction of ‘perhaps mistaken at point a, but defitely not wrong on f and u…!

    Like the Creationists, you sort of come to the table with the argument “I have the answers, the answers are in my denials of unique angles on tired old thought (the sworn enemy of both the left and the right) therefore all other opinion or evidence is wrong.”

    Then, when that doesn’t work out, you produce a label
    (troll, creationist, mysogynist/homo,atheist, delusional) and then toss controversial comments into the qeue, while maintaining to your minions( I know, you have, like, seven or something…)that ‘we don’t practice censorship’.

    *A bunch of Spitzercrytes! Regular Larrycraiginists! Two solid turds, clogging the same bowl.*

    And Boris, you are one to talk: gibbering on about slappin’ me dear fath’ers prick! And you feel that you should have been there do ya? How salacious yet witty you are! But my pop ain’t here, so what say you? I say you started the directed insults. What, me fathers phallus beckons you?

    I have *no* beef with you, or anyone else here, but you have chosen my comment to vindicate your sawdust trail–all the way to me dear popi’s meat. So, Yer mother? Why, I was merely talking about the hard work your dear mother shirley did in raising you…to be so friendly, and clever!

    Every one is so fun, when they say the same ol’ things…

    ildi: I see you have taken your own advice: so it must be good.

    Reply
  26. the real cmf

    Oh. And you [ the ‘collective’ you] only laugh at your own jokes, the echo the hyenic laughter of the packs you draw your comfort from, which makes the actual incredible and interesting substance of your otherwise wonderful blogging seem trite.

    Right? Left? What’s the difference?

    It is the sad cadence for the new millenium with all the groupthinkers “right, left, left right left…” sound familiar? Two feet,same movement forwards.

    Reply
  27. debbyo

    “Two feet,same movement forwards.” That’s not marching – that’s jumping.

    Ok. Sorry. No more feeding the troll.

    Oldfart says: “There are differences.
    Live with it.Exploit them.”

    How? Leave you wife in a car park when you’re mad at her?
    And what is your deficiency? Sorry – I mean “difference”?

    Reply
  28. religion vs America

    I am relieved to know that “men will be fine.” I have had my moments when I was less than happy with a woman, or even more than one woman, but to claim that “‘women ruin everything’” is not something you expect to hear from someone who is sober and has left adolescence behind.

    His argument is not persuasive on a logical level. Some women are radical feminists, women are passing men in academic achievements, so radical feminists will take over and ruin science!

    Universities have a huge problem with censorship of any unpleasant thought, such as the idea that personal responsibility is a good thing. This is something that should be opposed by conservatives and liberals. The “liberal amendment” in the Bill of Rights is the first one. Without this freedom of speech we cease to be the America that is worth defending.

    Reply
  29. Boris

    Universities have a huge problem with censorship of any unpleasant thought, such as the idea that personal responsibility is a good thing.

    This sounds pretty crank-like to me. When has a university censored statements that say personal responsibility is a good thing? I’m calling BS on this one.

    Reply
  30. acmegirl

    I left this comment on Good Math Bad Math, but why not contribute to this conversation, too?

    Sometimes I find myself wondering: if conservative douchebags like Vox Day really do believe that women are intellectually inferior to men, why not just go ahead and implement measures to prevent bias and stand back and wait to see what happens. Nothing would change, right?

    I mean if women really are mind-numbingly stupid, then removing names and gender identification from papers submitted for peer review should result in only papers authored by men being published, since the women’s papers will stand out in their inferiority and be immediately dumped in the garbage. Oh, but wait, that’s been tried and the number of papers authored by women tends to increase. Hmm, that must just be a fluke. How about we just hold them to the same standards as men and let that cull the broads from the group. What’s that you say, that would mean that we’d stop expecting 2.5 times as much productivity from a female fellowship applicants as from the men – we’d be asking for less from the women than we are currently. That can’t be right. (Check out Zuska?s post on this)

    This stuff sounds just like the kinds of things bullies and their cronies used to say to me in grade school. It?s easy for three guys to beat up one little girl. But it?s just as easy for those guys to fool themselves into believing that they alone are three times stronger. In a fair fight, however, every bully knows, deep down inside, that he might lose.

    Reply
  31. amy

    “Whereas the first thought of a woman who enjoys the idea of painting is to take an art appreciation class, a similarly interested man is more likely to just pick up a paintbrush and paint something…

    *I’m* a woman. And I’d rather paint than learn about art appreciation. What does that make me?

    Reply
  32. the real cmf

    debbyo: troll this–you have just exhibited a flaw that many in the pseudo left do: you missed the metaphor.
    Metaphors depend on you, and you’re imagination to visualize them.Unfortunately, you can’t purchase, or rent an imagination. Neither can you take a class that will provide one for you.

    Do metaphors obviously elude your complete grasp? Perhaps you should get your eyeballs out from above that microscope, stop pinning dead creatures down so that you can grasp their meaning.Metaphors have many meanings, unlike dead, pinned butterflies, or the hard facts that two stepping Demopublifascists understand. Oh how they hate the poets! Consider my comments then to be just like a childs foot–a child in the house of the Demopublifascist household right now, to whit, one greater than myself has said:

    “A child’s foot doesn’t know it’s a foot yet
    And it wants to be a butterfly or an apple
    But then the rocks and pieces of glass,
    the streets, the stairways
    and the roads of hard earth
    keep teaching the foot that it can’t fly,
    that it can’t be a round fruit on a branch.
    Then the child’s foot
    was defeated, it fell
    in battle,
    it was a prisoner,
    condemned to life in a shoe.”

    so too, walks an idea–an emotion– under the microscope of scientists, devoid of imagination, or inclusion of other perspectives that might become apples.
    depp=true
    notiz=[disemvowelled for abuse and trolling]

    Reply
  33. Nice Boris

    Ah, yes, all the hallmarks of the wannabe writer are present. Look, the sooner you realize you aren’t going to write anything as brilliant as “The Door,” the sooner you can get on with your life.We’ve all been there in one field or another. That’s Nice Boris, giving you some advice.

    Reply
  34. Fernando Magyar

    scientists, devoid of imagination,

    http://www.stupidity.com/story1final/index.htm
    There should be a whole chapter on this site dedicated exclusively to cmf.

    Reply
  35. debbyo

    Oh deary me.

    Whatever gave you, cmf, the impression that I have ever pinned down a butterfly (yukky) or even know the business end of a microscope? While I’m chuffed that I convinced anyone I was a scientist, you are way off the mark. My area is English literature. I also earn a little pocket money from creative writing (just did my tax and earned a paltry $4,000 from this hobby last financial year). I love science blogs because I revere logic as well as imagination. And I know when we confuse imagination with reality – well, dare I say, that is pretty close to the definition of psychotic. Imagination comes easily to me. Logic I have to work hard at. That’s why I am mainly on science blogs and not literature ones – although Ed Brayton’s blog (Dispatches from the Culture War) combines science, culture and politics (all my faves) and I’m often on that one too. I blog to learn – and to test if my logic works for logical people. I’m happy to be told it doesn’t (by logical people). That’s how I learn. I realise that I’m an intellectual flea compared to most people on this blog.

    And it’s funny, considering your contempt for both left and right politics, that you quoted poetry from a Chilean Communist senator who also wrote: “To be men! That is the Stalinist law! . . ./We must learn from Stalin/ his sincere intensity/ his concrete clarity. . . And Stalin, the giant…”

    And it’s also funny that you consider your posts to be like a child’s foot that is told it will never fly. Hmm. Think about it.

    Reply
  36. Janine, ID

    MarkH: I wasn’t defending Irving, I was defending free speech, even if that means the “right to be wrong” You missed the boat dere..I think yer in denial about the substance of those posts.

    You denialists always obfuscate, and attack ad hom, rather than substance–and you never admit you are wrong, or even budge in the direction of ‘perhaps mistaken at point a, but defitely not wrong on f and u…!

    Posted by: the real cmf

    Bullshit! BullShit! BULLSHIT! You got the facts all wrong about Irving suing Lipstadt (not Lipshitz). Not that being corrected stopped you from continuing your multipost rants about the PC assault on whiteness. It is funny reading a rant about not being able to understand metaphor when the author of the rant cannot even get his facts straight. You poor oppressed white man.

    Reply
  37. Harebell

    Yup at the end of the day Vox and his apologists cling to a literal interpretation of their tome of choice and raise the words of semi literate goat herders above that of shown facts. Why?
    I reckon they’ve all been playing dungeons and dragons too long to realise how to interact with real women and look for Lara Croft, but with none of that independent spirit. You know perfect figure, big boobs and a lobotomy (because why else would she want to be anywhere near them otherwise?).
    The rank smell of running shoes emanating from the wannabe serial killers and religious fruitcakes that kiss his bottom on his site is overwhelming.
    Those are the guys that the “import your wife, cos she is desperate” websites were set up for.
    Also it does help if you don’t really have to work for a living cos daddy will give you a job regardless of how badly you think, talk and act.
    Ole Teddy is a daddy’s boy.. mmm wow wonder what that inplies?

    Reply
  38. harebell

    Oh yes
    and he’s a libertarian not a tory, so how can the wee minge justify deciding that more than half the population be disenfranchised through a non-meritorious method.
    oh i forget he is a xtian libertarian that means anybody with a double X is inferior by definition. Paul was made a saint for that utterance. xtianity like islam and judaism is bigoted and intolerant by definition and intention.
    xtian libertarian – oxymoron or maybe plain moron.

    Reply
  39. the real cmf

    Janine,Boris, fernando, debbyo, and the rest of the sundry, wish they were sultry crowd: My epistles here are NOT an audition, and I am NOT seeking your manuscripts at this time. However, I do appreciate your submissions….
    Janine: hows that vibereaToooor? Get it out, turn it on, and stop fantasizing about your ideal cuckolded ‘white man’ . The real ones are far more complex, but FAR more worth the time;-)

    Boris: “hallmarks of the wannabe writer are present” in this comment from Boris( who is thinking he is Nice…)

    um, aspiring ‘debbyo’ : isn’t a sense of connection, via these opinionated sciborgs ( with their sacred temple of degree attainment, and their false heirarchy of need for “facts”( discerned by the overly degreed, who often take the emergent ‘other facts’ for granted, or dismiss them by rote until a “peer reviewed paper” comes out…?and who secretly wish they were working on manuscripts instead of dissecting the living body–that same living body that will continue to abuse the advice of the professional who operates on it, and that body which has no appreciation for the quantum advances in surgery that kee its chain smoking visage dangling as a shadow upon the screen of life..? That body which has never felt actual life, denied as it is from overcoming social class heirarchy..)
    Well, well, Stalin…hmm… again, subjectivity is in the air. Poetry exists in a realm outside the subjective; it exists in a world of its own making, but worst of all, those who have power co-opt, for a time, brilliance that enhances their power–for instance, Joseph Goebells had Edward Bernays literature on his book shelf: did Bernays cause Goebells to be the fascist/Nazi that he was ? Certainly not! Did Bernays secretly covet the idea of gaining wealth from working for imperial power? …That book hasn’t been written yet….
    Either way, a great work is tied inextricably to a horrible piece of history. Is it the fault of the mensch, or the fault of the empire? You decide…but did you read about the sad eventuality of that childs foot? Tell me what you found…?
    Janine, does ID stand for ” Identity ” movement? You write as if it does…

    Fernando: nice idea. How did it feel to have ONE?
    depp=true
    notiz=[disemvowelled for abuse and trolling]

    Reply
  40. Alex

    the real cmf , you sound exactly as an exemplary crank ( http://scienceblogs.com/denialism/2007/04/unified_theory_of_the_crank.php )

    You speak tons of vague nonsense and… That is pretty much all you can do.
    P.S.:
    Hell, nowadays, every bastard is a poet.

    Reply
  41. Janine

    cmf, all of your bleating yet you do not show any understanding. Guess you are to busy working to try to get your facts straight. I guess it is for the best for you, facts might get in the way of one of the rants you barely have time to compose.

    Funny how you seem to know what my sexual fantasies are. If you know so much about me, you know what the ID I use as my signature means. And it has nothing to do with “Identity”. Not that it means shit to you.

    Reply
  42. Alex

    Anyway, what is this guy’s point?
    I don’t get it.

    P.S.:
    He seems to dislike butterfly-harassing scientists, so maybe he should leave “scienceblogs” and go to “butterflyblogs”?

    Reply
  43. the real cmf

    Alex, and Janine: what’s YOUR point? In case you missed my point ( and thanks for asking in that off putting, snipy,
    predictably entitled white liberal way), it is precisely that guys like Vox are indeed absolutely offensive jerks.

    So what’s your excuse?

    And Janine–I mentioned what I did because of your obvious well documented fruster–aated angry middle class white woman angst –directed at the white middle class fem boogi-‘man’ of ‘white man!!’

    Angst, angst angst, best cured in suburban environs with relaxation gadgetry,and talk therapy amongst other angry white women who wear ‘cool ethnic scarves’, talk about their one black friend, and always bandying on about the ‘evil white man’ rather than actual discussions about human interaction–like white female privilege for instance, and how that has interacted with( dare I say ‘fueled’?) every single era of prison growth in history, and the lynching of black men decades ago..

    So as the pundits and especially their minions criticize obvious idiots like him, using outdated, or inane critiques like ” he needs to get laid”–as if that would help anything! Some people just shouldn’t procreate…

    From the center, where I sit, I see that neither the L nor R has a solution for anything other than sniping, and half truths, and that both sides in these lil’ blog wars always look weak. I mean, I am certain that if guys like Vox sell books at all, it is because they have such a great source of PR right here amongst the critics–

    Otherwise, I am certain his words wouldn’t make it past the meeting halls of the militia/ID religious movement of back woods Idaho and all of the fifteen ex-cops and their wimins who are members of it.( do I need to check the internet for that mangling of the facts regarding militias and Identity churches in Idaho? I bet all the folks who disliked my mangling of the Irving/Lipshitz facts probably won’t get worked up into a santorumonious lefty lather over this one…lets see how many get worked up …and counting…)

    Point is: Left= cuckolded waffly fellahs; Right= cuckolded waffly wadies(whatever the word for cuckolded woman is….fact check debbyo? Janine? I am too busy to remember it).

    Alex, is this statement from you vague?
    I didn’t take it to be so: ” every bastard is a poet..”

    To which I reply to you:
    ” return when you have something to say, you cuckolded beeH-Yatch.
    depp=true
    notiz=[disemvowelled for abuse and trolling]

    Reply
  44. Janine

    YAWN!!!

    Oh. The surreal cmf is conflating my dislike of one middle class white man(him) to all middle class white men. Not surprising seeing he cannot get his facts straight. Rant on.

    Reply
  45. the real cmf

    Check me out, yo:

    http://www.soundclick.com/members/default.cfm?member=tha%20real%20cmf

    depp=true

    Reply
  46. Janine

    Could it be? A troll palace? How could I not follow the link? Very easily. Bub-bye fool of multiple names. Just waiting for the last two posts to get disemvowelled.

    Reply
  47. Laser Potato

    A fellow going around by the name of “The Crack Emcee” is emerging as a particularly nasty (and misogynist) concern troll on the Vox Day thread at Orac’s place. I’d advise you not to reply to him if he stops by…just a heads-up.

    Reply
  48. LanceR

    The uber-troll “Crack Emcee” posted here a while back as Sam Scam Sham, or some such gibberish… he has a fetish for baiting scientists and hating “new age” stuff… which is just about everything, according to him.

    He’s annoying.

    Reply
  49. scientistic false expectations

    blah blah blah…what else would you talk about if you couyldn’t speculate about me?
    cmf
    p.s.
    What a typical white middle class racist post you have , baiting poor cmf from Brooklyn!

    Reply
  50. Petzl

    If you go to Day’s site, what the youngster is _really_
    upset about is how Title IX has upset the sports apple
    cart. the original impetus for the article no doubt
    had nothing to do with women in science; they were just
    collateral trolling damage.

    Reply
  51. David Marjanović

    depp=true

    Depp is German for “moron”. How true, how true.

    Reply
  52. wackyvorlon

    A point I want to make very clear: I do not believe evolution to be correct, I believe in an intelligent creator. That being said, these people do not represent my views. Thank-you.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *