Check out this lovely post from the brilliant and beautiful Dr. Free-Ride entitled Some Tactics Always Stink.
That Free-Ride seems to hit the nail on the head every single time!
Terrified Tabetic has joined in with JB Handley, El Chingacabra mas grande El Chingacabra, indeed!
Annnnnnd it begins. The email received while I was away at a meeting:
Hey Isis,Was it hard to type that post while you were sucking the cocks of all the vaccine pushers in ScienceBlogs? Handley's got the guts to have his own opinions, unlike you who are acting like a shrill parrot. As I mother I would think you'd be smater [sic] than to poison your child that way.
I kind of like that one. I have always dreamt of being smater.
Medicine & Health
Education
Comments
some might say yor the smattest one of al!
Posted by: gabe | November 2, 2009 4:29 PM
I count 4 maybe 5 logical fallacies in just 3 sentences. This person can't spell but clearly has another talent.
Posted by: Noadi | November 2, 2009 4:54 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HXCzyMPU_x0
Posted by: Fitz | November 2, 2009 5:25 PM
What a moran.
Posted by: AnonymousCoward | November 2, 2009 5:32 PM
was that a smat down?
Posted by: mrcreosote | November 2, 2009 5:44 PM
Just wow - how does that comment even make a point other than to prove yours?
Posted by: cass_m | November 2, 2009 5:45 PM
I've always been baffled, and admittedly a bit fascinated, by how firecely people cling to an idea in the face of contradicting evidence. And the more invested they feel, the more shrill are their defenses of them. I suggest a copy of Michael Shermer's Why People Believe Weird Things... for this person - and a little (like a sea turtle's life) of counseling.
Posted by: TGAP Dad | November 2, 2009 6:12 PM
I think I've recently decided to shun anti-vaxxers. They don't get to come anywhere near me. I almost look forward to the first criminal or civil suit when some lunatic parent's measley child infects an infant and kills it.
Posted by: lost academic | November 2, 2009 6:14 PM
I think what those people opposed to vaccination for reasons of the presence of harmful toxins (formaldehyde, etc) fail to realize is that the amounts of the toxins in those vaccines are quite miniscule and if these kids are healthy (and some have been fed some amazing organic, healthy diet), their livers should be able to clear those toxins out relatively quickly, with a boost to the immune system as a plus.
Posted by: sciencegoddess | November 2, 2009 6:16 PM
Ouch.
Whoever sent you that e-mail was really sic.
Rt
Posted by: Roadtripper | November 2, 2009 6:17 PM
Dude, sometimes, I pray for Poe. Also for Pie. Otherwise, no faith in humanity. Or reason to live.
Posted by: becca | November 2, 2009 6:28 PM
Hm. I had not considered that it might be a Poe, Becca. An interesting hypothesis...
Posted by: Isis the Scientist | November 2, 2009 9:25 PM
i vote no Poe. emphatically no
Posted by: PalMD | November 2, 2009 11:15 PM
I wonder what her Alma Smater is? Notre Dumb?
Posted by: Pareidolius | November 2, 2009 11:57 PM
Smater sounds like tamater and potater. I'm hungry.
Posted by: Dennis | November 3, 2009 12:18 AM
1. I vote with PalMD. But I've sure enjoyed the smater repartee.
2. I've been compiling responses to Amy Wallace's article and specifically posts on the misogynist nature of J. B. Handley's response. I've made a special section for your original post & the followups. Scroll down to the bottom.
Posted by: Liz Ditz | November 3, 2009 5:12 AM
Wow. A fellating parrot. That's gotta hurt.
Posted by: Anonymous | November 3, 2009 9:06 AM
You know what's really shrill?
Dog whistles.
Posted by: Brian X | November 3, 2009 12:24 PM
"As I mother" ? Does this person mean you mother, as a verb? Is "to mother" even a verb?
If so, I guess I'm not as smat as I thought I was.
Posted by: x-ine | November 3, 2009 1:28 PM
Seriously, jokes aside, that fucking pisses me off. To imply that you wouldn't have your own (educated) opinion on the subject and to denigrate you as a "cock sucker"...
Way to miss the entire point about how hateful misogynist rhetoric has no place in this discussion.
Ironic much?
Posted by: ScienceMama | November 3, 2009 2:29 PM
I think I'm beginning to understand why Dr Goddess goes on about shoes so much ... There's a rich array of deserving targets out there.
Posted by: blf | November 3, 2009 4:04 PM
When someone tells you that they are "free thinking" it usually means they are sycophantic zealot of some less popular or common trend. An exception is made of course when the person is using free thinking as a flag for their usually closeted atheism.
Posted by: History Punk | November 3, 2009 9:47 PM
I don't think 'exception' means what you think it does, HistPu.
Posted by: BikeMonkey | November 3, 2009 11:33 PM
...
Smat is as smat does.
. . .or something like that.
...tom...
.
Posted by: ...tom... | November 4, 2009 12:48 AM
Well, you gotta laugh at that. You're just too smat to do anything else. What part about goddess do they not understand? G-O-D-D-E-S-S. Worship. What about that scenario sounded like them worshipping you? Seriously, was the writer not smat enough? :-)
Posted by: KWombles | November 4, 2009 6:29 AM
Internet is wonderful for this. Any coward, behind the security of his/her computer screen, can having fun sending you the most heinous or dirty things.
Now I said this, I have better watch what I will be saying next.
Isis, may I try to make you reconsider rule #35, which you mentionned in the previous related post? Sometimes, a guy likes to feel right about being right. Being welcomed by a "I need no stincking man" while trying to play the white knight is sort of demotivating, you know.
Let me mitigate my opinion by this: I became aware recently that, effectively, playing the white knight has an offensive connotation, on the lines of "see how a great guy I am, defending this poor weak creature". So, yeah, I think I start to understand the why of rule 35.
So I will not be asking for a cookie. But, from time to time, a simple "I don't need your help, but thanks for showing up" will be much appreciated. It will make up for all those "oh, are you in love with this bitch?" I received every times I confronted some big macho.
(not in love, just trying to be fair, you damned dirty male pigs)
To be back on these rape-threatening guys: they don't realize that, by going so low, they lose both the debate and whatever was left of esteem from whose witnessing these rants. Typical bully/rapist mentality, thinking you win by using intimidation and coercion. I hope a lot of peoples, including lots of men, fell as disgusted as me on this. (sadly, I could be mistaken)
Well, not disgusted, worse. I can clean my cat's box, but I don't want anything to do with guys like this. Being reincarnated in one of these guys is the worst punition I can think the gods can deliver to me.
So, in summary, and not expecting any reward from any of you, any woman (heck, any living being, be it man, woman, or fury little beast from alpha century) being targeted by such rants has my support, for whatever it's worth.
Posted by: The_Librarian | November 4, 2009 9:19 AM
To be back on these rape-threatening guys: they don't realize that, by going so low, they lose both the debate and whatever was left of esteem from whose witnessing these rants.
We need a Godwin's Law equivalent for these boys (they clearly have not grown up, so IMO they do not even rise to the level of d00ds). As long as they think they can get away with these ad feminem* attacks, they will continue. Let it be known that they face real consequences for it, and these attacks will become much less frequent. Start by contacting their ISP, especially if there is a physical threat involved--I am almost certain that making threats by e-mail violates their ISP's terms of service.
*I have never studied Latin, so I don't know the correct ending, but you get the idea.
Posted by: Eric Lund | November 4, 2009 2:58 PM
Has anybody pointed out to J.B. Handley that if he isn't careful, he's going to end up like this guy?
Posted by: isles | November 5, 2009 5:41 PM