Pharyngula

Posted by: Nebula99 | February 16, 2010 8:03 AM

Wait, am I first?

This video is now stuck in my head. Again. But it's worth it for the cute fishapod.

Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM | February 16, 2010 8:07 AM

Umm, maybe fish for dinner tonight. Mardi Gras food.

Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM | February 16, 2010 8:17 AM

Oh no, a possible favorite fishapod fight? Somebody get the fire hoses...

Posted by: Rachel Bronwyn | February 16, 2010 8:49 AM

Could Tiktaalik really have been so adorable? I'd just love to have this cutesy beast added to the half-sleeze on my left arm. It's an image I'll be able to look at in thirty years and still smile.

And yes, I'm playing the song on guitar now. Freaking catchy.

Posted by: nigelTheBold, Minister of Spankings | February 16, 2010 9:00 AM

song's cool, but the attempted rhyme of 'jacket' and 'rocket' grates every...time

Allow me to cleanse the palate.

Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM | February 16, 2010 10:13 AM

The Redhead mentioned something about frying some okra for a gumbo dinner tonight. There is a bag of mixed seafood in the freezer. We have planned over rice.

Posted by: Carlie of the lacy, gently wafting adjectives | February 16, 2010 10:20 AM

I thought all the figure skaters falling down was pretty exciting, too. I seriously wondered if that rink ice was suffering the way the speed skating ice was, the way the teams were skating. I think every single team except one had a major falter that ended up with either their hand or their butts on the ice.

Posted by: David Marjanović | February 16, 2010 10:40 AM

I'm impressed that Walton is considering going into immigration law. I suspect it's not a high paying field

For lawyer standards, LOL!

I have a virtual notice on my computer - a Mac - which says, "Back off, woman. You are not personally responsible for saving Walton from his moments of idiocy."

:-D :-D :-D

don't beat yourself up over not having saved the world by the time you're in your twenties.

Or, like Caesar did, about not having conquered the world yet at the age at which Alexander the Great had done it! He promptly went on to conquer Gaul at least.

Rehydration mix recipe: a litre of tepid water, as much salt as you can pinch between three fingers (thumb, index, middle), as much sugar as you can scoop in three fingers (make a shovel of the index, middle, ring) and a dash of orange for flavouring. Cures hangovers,

Interesting. I'm wondering how that could work. Does it simply wash out the methanol?

good for sports, saves lives during cholera epidemics.

Not surprising.

pronounced as "e" like in "bed"

…of course this doesn't hold for South Africans and at least some New Zealanders. They use the sound of French é in "bed".

Singapore Airlines first class suites...

The mind boggles.

First class suite, bah. Where's my teleporter?

Subthread won. PZ, open the next one already. :-þ

Posted by: David Marjanović | February 16, 2010 10:46 AM

brand of toilet paper called "Bronco" that was seemingly made of greaseproof paper

I was going to say "Ha!!! You haven't experienced Communist toilet paper, still available for instance in Polish railway stations!!!", but… greaseproof paper? :-S Shiver indeed.

Posted by: First Approximation, L'esprit de l'escalier | February 16, 2010 10:49 AM

I have a virtual notice on my computer - a Mac - which says, "Back off, woman. You are not personally responsible for saving Walton from his moments of idiocy."

LMAO!

To be fair to Walton it does continue:

And compared with when you first arrived here they are just moments.

Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM | February 16, 2010 10:54 AM

Nerd: Are you sure you’re going to fry the okra for gumbo? Okra is usually the thickening agent. . .

Posted by: Antiochus Epiphanes | February 16, 2010 10:59 AM

OT-- I can't believe anyone couldn't love Dropkick Murphys Fields of Athenry*. It angries up the blood! I feel like pouncing on a limey oppressor. But I don't think there are any around. -Sigh-
Instead, I may just work on some MS revisions.

After I screw around on the intertoobs. Might have to listen to it again.

*I actually love every version of this song. It was my grandmother Eileen's favorite.

Posted by: Ring Tailed Lemurian | February 16, 2010 11:13 AM

Carlie #13

I thought all the figure skaters falling down was pretty exciting, too

Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | February 16, 2010 11:20 AM

Speaking of excitement, curling starts at noon EST.

Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM | February 16, 2010 11:34 AM

Speaking of excitement, curling starts at noon EST.

Posted by: David Marjanović | February 16, 2010 11:37 AM

Tiktaalik - a fish that can walk into your frying pan.

Except it's twice the size of your frying pan.

Posted by: Ring Tailed Lemurian | February 16, 2010 11:43 AM

Rev. BigDumbChimp

Speaking of excitement, curling starts at noon EST.

In case anyone is wondering why the hell I'm monopolising threads recently, I used to work for a SAAB dealership, and now, like PygmyLoris, I'm "overqualified" for any of the McJobs available. And I'm "too old" for anything else. Oh, well, only a few years to hang on until my pension kicks in.

Posted by: 朴競花/박경화 (Gyeong Hwa) | February 16, 2010 11:44 AM

Except it's twice the size of your frying pan.

Posted by: Silič O'Nopolitanopoulos, Färschdbischuf Beesknees aus Ulm und Klein Elguth, Elector Pharynguline. | February 16, 2010 11:56 AM

Again?! You've got to be fscking kidding me.

Sven, is this thing accelerating?

Tik tik tik tik tik Tiktaalik

Posted by: strange gods before me ॐ homintern radfem | February 16, 2010 12:02 PM

Hyperon, your hatred of Muslim people still has nothing to do with the advantages extended to white people which are not also extended people of color.

(Except insofar as your hatred of Muslim people is a function of your white privilege.)

So we're still watching your brain break. You couldn't figure out what to say about white privilege, so you changed the topic. Fucking Muslims!

Posted by: Hyperon | February 16, 2010 12:10 PM

Yes, society is less sexist and racist (in both the UK and US) than it was fifty years ago; but it is still, in many respects, profoundly sexist and racist today.

African-Americans are still disproportionately concentrated in poor communities and lower-paying jobs; and since poverty tends to be self-perpetuating across generations, not to mention the effect of informal racial discrimination in education and employment, the racial disparity continues.

As a society, we perpetuate gender stereotypes - which hurt men as well as women - in the way that we speak and think. How many times have you heard a cowardly person told to "man up" or "grow some balls"? How often have you heard sexually active women described as "sluts" or "slags", while no such stigma attaches to a sexually active man? And how rare is it, still, for a woman who doesn't meet conventional standards of attractiveness to be treated fairly in her professional life?

Recent figures suggest that in the UK, 20% of women earn more than their partner, with a further 25% earning approximately the same. Now consider that men are overrepresented in grueling manual labour, while women are overrepresented in comparatively easy jobs that hinge upon "communication skills". Consider that a large chunk of women are willfully housewives and have no career to speak of.

In view of these things, it seems hard to see that your unsupported declarations in connection with the allegedly "profound" sexism against women are at all coupled with reality.

Posted by: Ring Tailed Lemurian | February 16, 2010 12:15 PM

Hyperon #41
Right, now I'm definitely off to get that killfile link from the last thread.

Posted by: RMM Barrie | February 16, 2010 12:22 PM

Nerd of Redhead, OM @40

What a idjit

Seconded + previous directed at Hyperon X 10^?

Posted by: dNorrisM | February 16, 2010 12:25 PM

(OTP) Normally I'm extremely MEH about Politico, but Yea! All out favorite people in 1 spot :
************
...Ed Meese, Heritage Foundation President Edwin Feulner, Family Research Council head Tony Perkins, Media Research Center leader Brent Bozell, Americans for Tax Reform President Grover Norquist, direct mail guru Richard Viguerie, and David Keene, the head of the American Conservative Union,...
************
Here is a quote:
The document will be aimed explicitly, Meese said, at "reminding economic conservatives that morality* is essential to limited government, social conservatives that unlimited government is a threat to moral self-government..."
*************
Bummer about Meese; I actually respected him. Last I checked he was an antiprohibitionist.

Posted by: tsig0 | February 16, 2010 12:27 PM

Opus:

Don't worry about eating squid. The Catholics eat the flesh of their god every Sunday.

Posted by: Matt "Nora" Penfold | February 16, 2010 12:31 PM

Oh, and I am pretty sure you data with regards the UK is correct. The situation might even be worse, as there is evidence that the economic downturn has resulted in woman being made redundant in greater proportion than men.

Posted by: Hyperon | February 16, 2010 12:32 PM

So we're still watching your brain break. You couldn't figure out what to say about white privilege, so you changed the topic. Fucking Muslims!

You asserted, without any supporting evidence, that "white people" are "privileged". I then cited the disparity in the treatment of the BNP and mainstream British Muslims. Morally speaking, the views of the Muslims are probably even more worthy of contempt (for instance, between 10% and 20% thought the July bombings were justified; 40% advocate Sharia). The only reason for the clear difference in treatment (for instance, with Nick Griffin being insulted and ridiculed on national television) seems to be that Muslims more often than not have brown skin.

Posted by: Ring Tailed Lemurian | February 16, 2010 12:36 PM

Wow!
I only did Moscow to Irkutsk (in December, stunning. Forests with every last twig totally glazed with ice, sparkling with a billion prismatic rainbows in the sunshine). Now I can complete the trip!

Posted by: strange gods before me ॐ homintern radfem | February 16, 2010 12:41 PM

So you say; but I'm unconvinced that the racism or sexism that does exist is actually stronger than conscious and unconscious, formal and informal affirmative action.

You keep saying this, but we have evidence and you do not.

Yes, well, this does not necessarily have much to do with racial discrimination, as you yourself have noticed in the past. Perhaps the legacy of historical racism is enough to account for these economic disparities.

In fact this is so easy that I can just link again to the same evidence. This is modern, current racist discrimination which creates economic disparity right now.

I think I have successfully argued several times over that sexism against men can be just as blatant and harmful.

Patriarchy hurts men too, but it's not "just as harmful," no.

So for example in the UK today working men make about 17% more per hour than working women.

Where's the equivalent institutional sexism against men? Where's the equivalent of all those lost wages and passed-over promotions? For the average person in Western society, their personal economics are the single most influential issue on both freedom and quality of life. And here we are talking about a measurable reduction in freedom and quality of life for nearly every single woman in a nation of millions. Where is the equivalent for men?

Nobody seems to care that in many quarters men are still expected to slave away for minimum wage in a factory, while the wife has to look after mostly sleeping children.

What is this, the 1950s? News, Hyperon. If a husband is working minimum wage, the wife is also working minimum wage and looking after the children, which is tedious unpaid work.

"Nobody seems to care." And yet here I've worn out my shoes rustling voters to increase the minimum wage. For Hyperon, leftists simultaneously do not exist and are the worst people in existence.

Recent figures suggest that in the UK, 20% of women earn more than their partner, with a further 25% earning approximately the same.

So 55% of men earn more than their partner, and this is evidence that women have it better than men?

Now consider that men are overrepresented in grueling manual labour, while women are overrepresented in comparatively easy jobs that hinge upon "communication skills".

And in women's work, they face sexist discrimination just the same as everywhere else.

Consider that a large chunk of women are willfully housewives and have no career to speak of.

Meaning they have no economic freedom, and can not simply walk away from a bad relationship like an employed man or woman can. None of the things you present as "obvious" advantages for women turn out to be so obvious on closer inspection.

Maybe if you weren't a crank, you'd have studied before you opened your ignorant mouth again.

Posted by: Hyperon | February 16, 2010 12:45 PM

So for example in the UK today working men make about 17% more per hour than working women.

Posted by: Caine, ghetto féministe | February 16, 2010 12:52 PM

Nerd of Redhead, OM @ 40:

Yawn, Hyperon

*Agrees*

*crickets chirring*

Greasemonkey is a beautiful thing.

Posted by: Antiochus Epiphanes | February 16, 2010 12:55 PM

Doesn't it enter you head that because men are more competitive and status-driven, we would expect them to earn more?

The system that rewards employees displaying these male-typical traits were established by men. If the system were established by women, these male-typical traits would not necessarily be beneficial in advancing your career.

Duh.

Posted by: A. Noyd | February 16, 2010 1:03 PM

Diane G. (#683)

Too bad your virtuosity was wasted in a backwater, but I guess we should hope that that blog remains a backwater.

It's never wasted if it amuses me and that guy was just so full of himself I couldn't help it. "Not-unfriendly" advice my ass. He could give lessons in being a sycophant to Stephanie Z, too. I caught a few of his comments on other threads there and if that was my blog, I'd ban him for being such a shameless suck-up. Really. I love how people over here are irreverent towards PZ. I guess it goes with the culture of both giving credit where credit's due and chewing up and spitting out flagrant idiots. Folks here seem to have a way more accurate sense of everyone's capabilities and expertise, including their own.

I didn't really read enough of the other articles over there to judge whether the author is as foolishly blind about anything else besides religion, though. I don't wish obscurity on authors who aren't wholly obtuse.

~*~*~*~*~*~

Train stuff!

Some info from a transportation buff friend of mine who is an editor and contributor at Seattle Transit Blog. He recommends this site for helping to get better rail service going in the US and says: "in terms of replacing air travel, you want to start with city pairs that have lots of traffic between them, in ranges of 200-700 miles. 700's kind of the outside limit for that being time-competitive. These are the corridors the USDOT wants to build. Rocking those is step one to any system."

Posted by: strange gods before me ॐ homintern radfem | February 16, 2010 1:07 PM

Why is this necessarily the result of sexism? Doesn't it enter you head that because men are more competitive and status-driven, we would expect them to earn more? On what basis do you assume that "50:50" is the natural state of affairs?

Jesus, Hyperon. Why are you so stupid?

I gave you a link demonstrating unequivocally that sexist discrimination impacts a woman's ability to seek promotion.

And you ask "well how do you know it's sexism?"

Read the fucking link!

Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM | February 16, 2010 1:11 PM

Hyperon, still nothing said about the evidence required for you to acknowledge that you are wrong. Your inability to describe said evidence means you are not arguing in good faith, which requires the possibility that you are wrong. Begone troll, begone bigot...

Posted by: badgersdaughter | February 16, 2010 1:19 PM

I just read over the list of Dungeon denizens. Hyperon is Little-League material compared to those players. Man, we had some spectacular fuckwits back then. (Those were the days, heh.) Hyperon is just... tedious.

Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM | February 16, 2010 1:25 PM

Hyperon, what evidence is required for you to acknowledge you are wrong? Failure to put it out there means you aren't interested in a real discussion. That requires the possiblity of you being wrong. So, cough it up so we can demonstrate the facts and get rid of you.

Posted by: cicely (Inadvertent Phytocidal Maniac) | February 16, 2010 1:28 PM

Fried okra! *drool* I'll have mine extra crispy, please.

If a husband is working minimum wage, the wife is also working minimum wage and looking after the children, which is tedious unpaid work.

And is doing the lion's share of the housework, which is ditto. Plus, not infrequently, the yardwork as well.

Posted by: otrame | February 16, 2010 1:30 PM

People who dismiss or sneer at curling do not understand true sport.

I'm just saying.

Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM | February 16, 2010 1:37 PM

Pointing to any observed sex disparity, and thereupon crying sexism, isn't a very intelligent way of approaching this problem.

Posted by: Paul W., OM | February 16, 2010 1:40 PM

Carlie,

Yeah, I'm easy.

Not that I'd ever quote mine anybody, but how's that crush on me going?

--- Paul "Feminist chicks dig me!" W.

Posted by: Hyperon | February 16, 2010 1:46 PM

I just fucking did, you lazy crank.

No, you offered them as representative of white British people, full stop.

Stupid, lazy, illiterate, racist, toadlicking crank! I already did!

Posted by: Hyperon | February 16, 2010 1:50 PM

This didn't have to do with job aptitude; these were actors.

Posted by: Hyperon | February 16, 2010 2:04 PM

Still nothing from Hyperidjit on what evidence is required for him to acknowledge he is wrong.

You'd have to show that the current gap in pay, of around 17%, is more than what we'd expect on the basis of the differing standard deviations of men and women's respective IQ distributions, the higher aggressive competitiveness of men, and the time women take off work due to pregnancy. Maybe a few other factors, but I think those are probably the main ones.

Posted by: Bobber | February 16, 2010 2:08 PM

Ooooh, translation time again!

I'm not going to change my cosmology based on merely a single soft science study.

Translation: "There were no chemicals or physics involved, so it's squishy-touchy-feely and therefore not really science, nyah nyah nyah. Also, my fingers are in my ears."

If you have more (relevant) data, I'd gladly examine it.

Translation: Anything short of a document from the Cabal of Rich White Males stating unequivocally that "We, the CRWM, purposefully and with malice aforethought have determined that discriminatory practices in hiring and establishing wage compensation shall be THE LAW OF THE LAND" will not constitute relevant data.

I'd write more, but I can't for the fact that my eyes, having rolled so hard and high in their orbits, can now only see my brain.

Posted by: Owlmirror | February 16, 2010 2:12 PM

while the wife has to look after mostly sleeping children.

Quoted for smarmy disingenuousness.

Very young children do sleep more than 12 hrs/day, but that means 8-12+ hrs solid work in caring for them when they are not sleeping.

By Hyperon's metric, his own brain is "mostly inactive".

And he's definitely "mostly dishonest".

Posted by: AJ Milne OM | February 16, 2010 2:14 PM

People who dismiss or sneer at curling do not understand true sport.

Au contraire... I, for one, have nothing but respect for any sport you can reasonably play without putting down your beer.

(/Softball's cool with me, too, and for the same reason.)

Posted by: Jadehawk, OM | February 16, 2010 2:18 PM

referring to a horrible (but ubiquitous and unavoidable) brand of toilet paper called "Bronco" that was seemingly made of greaseproof paper. Shiver. Even just remembering it makes me clench defensively. No wonder we all had skid marks in those days.

and yeah, I do remember communist toilet paper

Except it's twice the size of your frying pan

-----

Also, Hyperon, fuck off. Your delusions of adequacy are tiresome, and your projections of your own intellectual laziness and bigotry onto the commenters here are disgusting.

Posted by: Tulse | February 16, 2010 2:30 PM

There are significant personal benefits to conservatism. It is particularly powerful and useful in combating: obesity and other addictions

Just ask Rush Limbaugh...

Posted by: A. Noyd | February 16, 2010 2:39 PM

Rawnaeris (#80)

So I installed Greasemonkey and the killfile recommended from the last neverending thread. It won't let me killfile someone if their name is in black. Did I do something wrong?

I had the same problem. I think what I did was right click the monkey face at the bottom right and went to User Script Commands > Get latest killfile script. Oh, and then reloaded the page. But I could be mixing up which of the several things I tried finally worked.

~*~*~*~*~*~

Owlmirror (#91)

Very young children do sleep more than 12 hrs/day, but that means 8-12+ hrs solid work in caring for them when they are not sleeping.

A great deal of which takes place at hours adults would rather spend unconscious, too.

Posted by: Walton, Marquis of Carabas | February 16, 2010 2:43 PM

Even just remembering it makes me clench defensively. No wonder we all had skid marks in those days.

Ewwww.... too much information.

Posted by: Qwerty | February 16, 2010 2:57 PM

Maybe, Tiktaalik would fit in the BigDaddySkillet which is 20 1/2 inches in diameter.

http://www.firepies.com/castiron.html

Posted by: maureen.brian#b5c92 | February 16, 2010 3:01 PM

Feynmaniac @ 44,

I thank you for your kind suggestion, but no.

Look, I'm a socialist, a feminist and an optimist but I can recognise a lost cause when I see one. With Hyperbollocks there is no hope. Period.

Anyone who thinks that IQ tests measure anything much beyond the ability to do IQ tests has already had his lobotomy.

I've fought and won more than a few battles in the workplace and in the public arena - 'cos I can be pretty competitive - but at 67* I think I'll just sit here and daydream of the time when enough of us are both working and adequately rewarded again. Then we can have a whip-round and buy him a sex-change so that he finds out for himself.

* See, Frankie-babe?

Posted by: David Marjanović | February 16, 2010 3:02 PM

50 cm? That's half its total length. Maybe you can curl it up tightly enough, but I doubt it – it has fairly substantial ribs. :-)

Posted by: maureen.brian#b5c92 | February 16, 2010 3:07 PM

If Dr Shubin would allow we could fillet it and do it rollmop style.

Posted by: Hyperon | February 16, 2010 3:11 PM

You're trying to rationalize. You're engaging in wishful thinking. You're trying to fool yourself with your ridiculous exaggerations.

Now, I would certainly change my mind if presented with a plethora of information all pointing in the same general direction. As it stands, I think most of the data offered is exceedingly weak.

Posted by: Hyperon | February 16, 2010 3:13 PM

Anyone who thinks that IQ tests measure anything much beyond the ability to do IQ tests has already had his lobotomy.

Posted by: Janine, The Little Top Of Venom, OM | February 16, 2010 3:15 PM

How strange, Not once in my life did I ever think of communist toilet paper. Now I am afraid that tonight I will have nightmares about it.

Oh, shit, the fundies reading about this are going to conflate it with atheist toilet paper!

Posted by: Janine, The Little Top Of Venom, OM | February 16, 2010 3:18 PM

Poor Hyperon! He has an itch in his brain and he can't get at it.

Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM | February 16, 2010 3:20 PM

As it stands, I think most of the data offered is exceedingly weak.

Posted by: nigelTheBold, Minister of Spankings | February 16, 2010 3:26 PM

Did you know?

- Men are naturally bad at dressing themselves.

- Men cannot dance.

- It is impossible for men to touch their nose with their elbows.

- Men tend to be smarter than women. They also simultaneously tend to be stupider.

- Women evolved a third eye, but it's in their vagina.

- Men naturally look sillier when naked than women.

- Men are able to fly. By themselves. But they keep getting caught up in high tension lines.

- Plato was a woman.

- Women are far more capable at reproduction than men. They are also far more accomplished at the things that make reproduction fun.

- Men are 48% more likely to assert they are right, even when they are very, very wrong.

It's a fact!

Posted by: Bobber | February 16, 2010 3:30 PM

Wouldn't be surprising, since men are also naturally the more unscrupulous.

I know an office full of corporate mid-management level women, as well as a teachers' lounge where I was the only male to listen to the concerns of a few dozen female coworkers, who would disagree with you.

Posted by: maureen.brian#b5c92 | February 16, 2010 3:35 PM

Hyperon, you have a death-wish.

Have you ever been in a university psychology department? The couple of years of it I did at that level was mostly about perception, possibly because the professor was Patrick Meredith, the department was then small and that was his particular interest.

I know you don't read links - or anything which requires a reading age above 7 - but persons of genuinely inquiring mind might care to check out what's currently going on at my alma mater - University of Leeds. That's Leeds, dear, not Leeds Metroploitan.

A multiplicity of degree options at all levels are there for your delectation but no-where do I see a BSc Psychology (IQ Tests).

Now, go and check it out.

Posted by: Miki Z | February 16, 2010 3:36 PM

I must agree with the pro-curling comments above. It is one of the few times that I regret not having television reception.

Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM | February 16, 2010 3:42 PM

Walton, a typo? Just blame it on Rev. BDC's typo cooties.

On an open thread, anything is fair game. And horror stories of communist consumer goods is certainly fair game.

Posted by: Hyperon | February 16, 2010 3:43 PM

A multiplicity of degree options at all levels are there for your delectation but no-where do I see a BSc Psychology (IQ Tests).

I'm afraid IQ is bread and butter for psychologists, whether you like it or not. Beyond doubt, it is an extremely potent predictor.

Posted by: maureen.brian#b5c92 | February 16, 2010 3:47 PM

Hyperon,

I could prove you wrong but I really can't be bothered.

Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM | February 16, 2010 3:48 PM

Beyond doubt, it is an extremely potent predictor.

Posted by: Hyperon | February 16, 2010 3:52 PM

Still no evidence fool. What an idjit bore/bigot.

Posted by: Hyperon | February 16, 2010 3:55 PM

Strange Gods,

The figures for Muslims are much more extreme. You have 10% of them "strongly agreeing" that the July bombings were justified, with a further 10% of them "tending to agree". Some of them said they didn't know. All in the study I linked to in the previous thread.

Posted by: Hyperon | February 16, 2010 3:59 PM

The Mismeasure Of Man

Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM | February 16, 2010 4:03 PM

Yawn, Hyperon, why are you persisting in believing we are interested at all in your bigotry? You are not and will never be an authority to us, as you lack the appropriate evidence. So you are just wasting your time here.

Posted by: Desert Son, OM | February 16, 2010 4:07 PM

Hyperon,

I just read your comment about soft science studies being unconvincing, so I wanted to stop by and apologize for having posted in the past links to articles in peer-reviewed journals about psychological studies, sociological studies, and anthropological studies offering evidence of things like the effects of sexism, racism, and so forth.

Had I realized at the time that you weren't going to look at them, much less recognize them as showing evidence, I wouldn't have bothered, and would have saved myself, and you, the time.

Given that you're not interested in the evidence supplied to you, and given what you said about rape, and given your repeated efforts to seat yourself firmly in the white male Euro-American mind circa 1952, I'm afraid all I have left is a turn of phrase sometimes heard in the geographical region in which I now reside.

It goes a little something like this:

Hyperon, I wouldn't cross the street to piss on you if you were on fire.

Still learning,

Robert

Posted by: strange gods before me ॐ homintern radfem | February 16, 2010 4:11 PM

That is a small minority of the population. 6% of 60 million is more people than even 20% of 3 million. Priorities are smashed like everything else in the hands of a troll. You don't have Muslim fanatics winning 940,000 votes in Britain, do you?

I'm not lazy...

Again, I followed your links, and it took me to some irrelevant study about the patriotism of Muslims. I encourage everyone else to do the same and press on his links. These kind of deceptive tactics are really no better than outright lying.

Lazy, and now intellectually irresponsible in this accusation.

Posted by: Hyperon | February 16, 2010 4:15 PM

That is a small minority of the population. 6% of 60 million is more people than even 20% of 3 million.

Posted by: nigelTheBold, Minister of Spankings | February 16, 2010 4:19 PM

Could be. Hypothesis non fingo, and all that.

Oh, but you do.

Not on this topic, but on the topic of sexism. I blithely used the same sort of ad hoc reasoning you use to explain the extremely significant disparity between female and male salaries (and by extension the significant disparity between female and male management).

I'm still not sure what you are trying to prove with these figures, anyway. More Muslims think the bombings were justified. Ok. If you have no hypothesis why they support the bombings, what exactly are you trying to prove?

Posted by: Kel, The Privileged View From Nowhere | February 16, 2010 4:27 PM

My hypothesis that there are sometimes significant sex differences between men and women, which might result in differing levels of pay, is not at all ad hoc, and is indeed buttressed by evolutionary psychology.

Posted by: Blake Stacey | February 16, 2010 4:33 PM

Evolutionary psychology needs buttressing itself before it can lend support to something else.

Posted by: nigelTheBold, Minister of Spankings | February 16, 2010 4:40 PM

Well, your reasoning IS ad hoc, because I could point to data from countries in which Muslims are the majority, and are even more out of control. (For instance, 59% of Pakistanis believe in stoning adulterers.)

Come to think of it, my reasoning isn't as ad hoc as all that. It's buttressed by much modern psychology.

Posted by: Hyperon | February 16, 2010 4:43 PM

Strange Gods,

As you said, I checked out Figure 51 of the Gallup Coexist Index 2009. Your argument simply doesn't seem very compelling. The question is ambiguous: it asks whether attacks on civilians CAN be justified. Is it asking in the context of recent terrorism, or is it going for something more general and philosophical? If the latter, I would probably myself agree that, in principle, attacks on civilians can be justified. (E.g. I can imagine that some level of strategic bombing might have been necessary in WW2.)

Compare this with a poll in which the wording is less ambiguous. Here we see that 11% of Muslims "strongly agree" that the July bombings were justified. A further 11% tend to agree; 17% "don't know".

Posted by: Alex | February 16, 2010 5:12 PM

idk wats worse, that theres a tiktaalik song, or that i watched the whole thing and enjoyed it.

Posted by: Antiochus Epiphanes | February 16, 2010 5:26 PM

Blake Stacy @145: I wasn't able to read any more than the abstract of that paper; my university doesn't subscribe to Peptides, and this looks like an advanced online publication. It still doesn't show up in the primary database that I use, Web of Science. Be that as it may, my limited reading on the topic suggests that this sentence "Current theories have proven inadequate to explain the origins of biological information such as that found in nucleotide and amino acid sequences" of the abstract is far from the consensus. There are several non-wooish theories to explain a non-random origin of the genetic code. If you want a delightful account targeted at an informed layperson, the second chapter of Nick Lane's book Life Ascending: Ten Great Inventions of Evolution provides a synthesis of theory up to 2009. Two interesting papers from scientific literature are:

Freeland, S.J., and L.D. Hurst. 1998. The genetic code is one in a million. Journal of Molecular Evolution 47(3): 238-248.

Copley, S.D., E. Smith and H.J. Morowitz. 2005. A mechanism for the association of amino acids with codons and the origin of the genetic code. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, USA 102(12): 4442:4447.

I hope this helps.

Posted by: Hyperon | February 16, 2010 5:33 PM

No idea why people are bothering with Hyperon. He's never read any source people link, even though he asks for sources. He's transparently trolling.

Posted by: Paul | February 16, 2010 5:43 PM

An obvious lie. Several of my posts in this thread have dealt with the sources Strange Gods has referred me to.

I'll retract and apologize based on recent evidence (I had not refreshed the thread recently enough). I'll also note that said evidence was provided previously, with you ignoring it and spouting the same racist BS in this thread until he linked it for you multiple times.

On balance, you've still ignored and obfuscated much more than you've actually engaged in meaningful dialogue. My confusion as to why people keep bothering is still intact based on your abysmal signal to noise ratio.

Posted by: badgersdaughter | February 16, 2010 5:54 PM

Has Professor Myers seen the article about him on Uncyclopedia?

Hey, somebody has a birthday coming up!

Posted by: Blake Stacey | February 16, 2010 5:56 PM

Oh, yes, the Peptides paper claims that information theorists use "specified complexity" as a measure of information content. They don't, and they have no reason to. Needless to say, this assertion is not supported by a citation — not even a single footnote.

Posted by: Alan B | February 16, 2010 6:06 PM

Things have certainly changed since the first of an annual series of Olympian Games*, held in 1850 for "every grade of man". (As in the Athens Olympics, women were not welcome to take part.)

The following lists the 22 events with PRIZE MONEY - highest first prize £5, dropping down to the lowest children's first prizes of 3 shillings. Sometimes there would be a fun contest to amuse the crowds - for example a wheelbarrow race! (This is for 1867 - the programme of events varied.)

1. Football (not more than 20 on a side).

2. Foot race - 100 yards, for boys under 14 years.

3. Foot race - 60 yards, for boys under 10 years.

4. Foot race 1 mile

5. Running high leap

6. Running long leap

7. Standing long leap

8. Throwing the cricket ball (distance)

9. Foot hurdle race, half-a-mile over 7 hurdles.

10. Foot race 200 yards open to residents of the Parish

11. Tilting at the Ring on horses.

12. Glee singing: each competing party to select its own glee. All competitors will be required to join in singing the ode to the Victor in the Tilting Match immediately after that contest. Copies of the Ode and of the music will be furnished on application.

13 Foot hurdle race, 1 mile over 14 hurdles

14. Foot Race, half-a-mile open to farm labourers living within 7 miles of the Guildhall. N.B. Competitors must satisfy the Judges, either by certificates from their masters, or by such other evidence as may be required, that they are farm labourers.

4 events open only to limestone quarrymen and limeburners in the Parish:

15. Throwing the Hammer.

16. Putting the Stone.

17. Foot race, 400 yards.

18. Throwing the Quoit (distance).

Finally, 4 events open only to pupils at the local National School:

19. Writing (boys).

20. Arithmetic (boys).

21. Knitting (girls).

22. Sewing (girls).

Of all these events, it seems to me that Glee Singing (12) and the school pupils events (19-22) were the only ones where "style" had any bearing.

* Have you been told that the first Modern Olympic or Olympian games were held in Greece in 1896? You were told wrong. In 1994 His Excellency J A Samaranch, President of the International Olympic Committee, " ... came to pay tribute to Dr Brookes who was really the founder of the Modern Olympic Games."

Where did the President of the IOC come to pay homage to the founder? To Much Wenlock, a small town in Shropshire, England. Old timers on The Thread will remember Much Wenlock from when I rabitted on about the Much Wenlock Limestone Formation and corals reefs on Wenlock Edge.

In June 1881, the Greek newspaper, the Clio, reported that, 'Dr Brookes, this enthusiastic Philhelline [lover of Greece long before John Revolting] is endeavouring to organise an international Olympian festival to be held in Athens ...'

Dr Brookes' failing health (he was born in 1809) prevented him from further active involvement abroad but Baron Pierre de Coubertin visited Much Wenlock to see what Dr Brooks had achieved and wrote in December 1890 in La Review Athletique, "If the Olympic Games which Modern Greece did not know how to establish again is revived today, it is not to a Greek that one is indebted but to Dr W P Brookes."

More information about Dr Brookes, the Wenlock Olympian Games and Much Wenlock is available on the internet. e.g.

http://www.wenlock-olympian-society.org.uk/

http://www.bbc.co.uk/shropshire/features/2004/08/william_penny_brookes.shtml

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wenlock_Olympian_Society_Annual_Games

Posted by: Blake Stacey | February 16, 2010 6:24 PM

OK, the gist of the "Protein information content" paper is as follows:

The author takes the amino-acid sequence for human calmodulin and breaks it down into five-unit segments (pentapeptides). Each pentapeptide is then looked up in the human proteome (pir.georgetown.edu/pirwww), and the number of matches counted. PubMed is searched for papers mentioning each pentapeptide. Sequences which show up in PubMed as having a "crucial role in biological processes in humans" (author's words) have, the paper reports, low match counts.

(My hedging in the previous sentence is because I've been spot-checking those match counts against the PIR, and my numbers are coming out different, but the paper is so obscurely worded that I can't tell if I'm searching for exactly the same thing.)

If you fail to see how this represents a challenge for "current theories" about "the origin of biological information", well, join the club.

Posted by: SC OM | February 16, 2010 6:37 PM

In less trivial cases, he seems oblivious to the fact that several commenters over the threads came to the conclusion that SC was an anti-Semite solely based on what Laden said and her feeling the need to defend herself from potential libel even though he claimed he was only referring to what people other than himself might think by those words, making it a self-fulfilling prophecy that he takes no responsibility for aside from a nopology that people might have had hurt feelings.

Yes, that's the worst part of it. Once the accusation is out there, it takes on a life of its own, and the further people are from the facts of the case the more likely they are to believe it. And the suggestion that in a situation in which people have been wronged that everyone, including the wronged parties, should just get over it and move forward should be abhorrent to anyone with a sense of justice.

Oh, in other news apparently Laden's in the hospital. Condolences.

I won't mention that to anyone who already suspects me of being a witch. Ay. Speedy recovery.

***

Re Hyperon, I've been feeling guilty about not participating in the smackdown. If only I were Catholic, I could give up dealing with people like that for Lent. I mean, Snorzel says that's what Lent's about, and he's had a Catholic upbringing, so... Now, some Catholics I know might find his Lenten indulgence somewhat odd, but I say, you go, Chad!

Posted by: Alan B | February 16, 2010 6:47 PM

#74 Janine, Mistress Of Foul Mouth Abuse, OM said:

... and other people come in accusing the denizens of this blog of being racist.

I wonder if these outsiders would care to define what race is Islam? "Racism" is a much-misused epithet, at the same level IMHO as calling someone "Nazi".

According to Ibrahim Hooper, CAIR spokesperson:

"Islam is an ideology. It's not a race."

Indonesia, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Nigeria are the countries reputed to have the largest number of Muslims in their population. Egypt is the next and the first Arabic country on the list. Arabic countries have a combined population of c. 400 million against a worldwide Islamic population claimed to be in excess of 1 billion.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Muslim_majority_countries

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_countries

Posted by: AJ Milne OM | February 16, 2010 6:59 PM

Has Professor Myers seen the article about him on Uncyclopedia?

Oh. My. That is simply made of win.

Must... Resist... Urge... To... Quote... Spoilers...

(/And... To... Talk... Like... William... Shatner...)

Posted by: Walton, Marquis of Carabas | February 16, 2010 7:07 PM

Oh. My. That is simply made of win.

Well, I can take credit for a few parts of it myself. (I'll leave everyone to figure out which bits I wrote.) :-)

Posted by: David Marjanović | February 16, 2010 7:52 PM

Why does everyone think it's socially acceptable to take about toilet paper on a public forum? Yuk.

Come on. We're not talking about shit, we're talking about toilet paper.

And toilet paper is a basic necessity of life. Everyone needs toilet paper.

<sing chorus="childish">
Auf dem Donnerbalken
saßen zwei Gestalten
uuuund sie schriiiien nach ||: Klopapier, :||
und dann kam der dritte,
setzt' sich in die Mitte,
uuuund sie schriiiien nach ||: Klopapier, :||
und dann kam der vierte,
und der Balken klirrte,
uuuund sie schriiiien nach ||: Klopapier, :||
und dann kam der fünfte,
der die Nase rümpfte,
uuuund sie schriiiien nach ||: Klopapier, :||
und dann kam der sechste,
und der Balken ächzte,
uuuund sie schriiiien nach ||: Klopapier, :||
und dann kam der siebte,
und der Balken kippte,
uuuund sie schriiiien nach ||: Klopapier, :||
und dann kam der achte,
und der Balken krachte,
uuuund sie schriiiien nach ||: Klopapier, :||
und dann kam der neunte,
und die Scheiße schäumte,
uuuund sie schriiiien nach ||: Klopapier, :||
und dann kam der zehnte,
brachte das ersehnte
Kloooo-paaaa-piiiier!!!1!
</sing>

Translation tomorrow, too tired to do it now. If you'd like to practice your German in the meantime, keep in mind that many of the rhymes are a bit off (especially sechste and ächzte hardly even sound similar).

The really interesting thing about this song, however, is the tune. It's pentatonic – only five successive tones occur in it –, like Hungarian folk music. It differs from the latter in only two things: it's in major rather than minor, and the last two notes aren't among the five tones of the rest of the tune (but then, of course, the last three notes are tacked on and not really part of the tune anyway).

I've known this song for about 20 years now, and only noticed that the tune is pentatonic today...

do you like the roll to go over or under?

Which one has the sheet coming off on the right side ( = above the roll)?

Is there a molecular biologist in the house? Seems like peer review was asleep at the wheel again.

Bizarre indeed. I'll try to find the journal tomorrow; the acknowledgments should be interesting, if I have access to the paper.

Also bizarre that the single author writes "we". Only the French do that anymore (and then use singular adjectives to refer to themselves, LOL).

Has Professor Myers seen the article about him on Uncyclopedia?

LOL! I especially like the ^{[citation needed]} part.

Thanks for the literature pointers. I looked into the origin-of-the-genetic-code area a few years ago, but it's been plenty long enough for my memory to muddle the details.

Check this out.

La Review Athletique

La revue athlétique, I bet?

If you fail to see how this represents a challenge for "current theories" about "the origin of biological information", well, join the club.

That may be part of the reason why it got published...

Re Hyperon, I've been feeling guilty about not participating in the smackdown.

:-D

Posted by: Carlie of the lacy, gently wafting adjectives | February 16, 2010 7:58 PM

OH MY GOD TEACHING ONLINE TAKES SO MUCH TIME, Y'ALL.

Sorry, I just had to get that out. Back to my lecture notes.

Posted by: Audley Z. Darkheart OM, purveyor of candy and lies | February 16, 2010 8:16 PM

Nigel:

Women evolved a third eye, but it's in their vagina.

This is simultaneously the most intriguing and the most disgusting thing I've heard all day.

Bravo!

Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM | February 16, 2010 8:37 PM

What Hyperon is really saying is that one of the foundations of his universe is the 'fact' that white males are oppressed. He can't cope with questioning such a basic assumption, hence this demonstrated inability to logically process all of the information he's been given.

Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM | February 16, 2010 8:44 PM

I need more evidence before I would consider changing my mind.

Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM | February 16, 2010 9:23 PM

You apparently don't understand the concept of a null hypothesis. Based on the evidence I already outlined, my position is, for me, the null hypothesis.

Posted by: Antiochus Epiphanes | February 16, 2010 9:32 PM

Blake #171: Thank you for that reference. I love the last sentence of the abstract. Reading on...

Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM | February 16, 2010 9:59 PM

Yeah, and not a very good scientist, I think.

I couldn't give a brachiating fuck about you or your qualifications and credentials.

Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM | February 16, 2010 10:08 PM

I just thought it was a quaint choice of words. But yes, to me it is indeed a pretty basic assumption.

Posted by: 'Tis Himself, OM | February 16, 2010 10:15 PM

Three years later, he died playing golf in Spain when a cliff face collapsed underneath him.

That's what happens when you hit your ball into the rough.

Posted by: Antiochus Epiphanes | February 16, 2010 10:26 PM

I don't remember encountering any significant examples of sexism against women. I do remember my dad having to slave away in a factory for close to minimum wage; and I do remember hearing lots of stories about women marrying for money they haven't earned; and I do observe that Amnesty International has a campaign to stop violence against specifically women, despite that men are always more likely to be targets of unprovoked violence. I also can't help noticing that almost nobody seems to care.

*blink* *blink*

...

Wait. I get it.

You were raised by the Amazons on Paradise Island. That must have been tough, man.

Posted by: Brownian, Most Vicious & Petty of Pharyngulites | February 16, 2010 10:55 PM

Another example:

Somehow I don't think the temporary inconvenience of being raped by your boyfriend can compare with being pounced on by thugs (for no reason at all), who proceed to beat you within one inch of your life, breaking various bones, and knocking your teeth out in the process. Didn't happen to me, but it happened to someone I know, and occurs in the north of England on a daily basis. Always to men (it isn't "macho" for these thugs to assault women).

Oh, Hyperon thinks he's beset upon by thugs everywhere. He called me one once, and I haven't broken a single one of his teeth.

The poor little brat's too scared of the Arab boogeyman that might be hiding under his bed to give a shit about anyone but himself or people in anecdotes near enough to him that he can fancy himself persecuted. Next we'll hear that mean ol' female teachers taking away poor white 7-year-old boys' security blankies is the biggest social problem in England right now though nobody ever talks about it (proof of the hidden darkie gynocracy.) Of course, it didn't happen to him, but to a close friend of his...

Posted by: Pygmy Loris | February 16, 2010 11:43 PM

Is it just me or do some of the male figure skaters look bored during their routines?

Posted by: strange gods before me ॐ homintern radfem | February 17, 2010 12:06 AM

Still #147, irresponsible, crankish.

Posted by: Owlmirror | February 17, 2010 1:21 AM

even if the rest of that mean, nasty ol' world is just waiting with [...] menacing labia

I am reminded of these:

  http://www.heatherfirth.com/EE006.html

  http://www.heatherfirth.com/EE019.html

  http://www.heatherfirth.com/EE020.html

  http://www.heatherfirth.com/EE021.html

(I have no idea if these are safe for work or not... )

Posted by: Aquaria | February 17, 2010 2:22 AM

So, Hyperon, that I know a woman who was punched in the face and stabbed repeatedly with a screwdriver by a guy who decided--for no reason at all--to rape her, does that count in your book as a crime equal to those men suffer?

Somehow, I doubt it, you disgusting piece of filth.

PZ, this misogynistic, racist, fascist creep has got to go. That remark implying that rape is lesser than a guy getting beaten up--it's way too far over the line.

Posted by: Silič O'Nopolitanopoulos, Färschdbischuf Beesknees aus Ulm und Klein Elguth, Elector Pharynguline. | February 17, 2010 3:55 AM

Walton, do you like the roll to go over or under?

Death to the underers!

(Deeeeeep riiiiiifts)

Posted by: Jadehawk, OM | February 17, 2010 4:15 AM

(Deeeeeep riiiiiifts)

toilet paper + deep "rifts" = not where I wanted my mind to go just before going to sleep.

Posted by: AJ Milne OM | February 17, 2010 4:19 AM

Well, I can take credit for a few parts of it myself...

Hee hee. Awesome.

I spend a bit of time browsing this thing again yestereve, after reading that... Favourite bit I think so far (and oh so topical) was on the winter Olympics: '25% of the "sports" involve putting on a helmet and falling downhill for awhile... Medals for these events are sent to the widows and widowers of the competitors...' And see also the quote from 'Everyone from Ecuador'...

Speaking of, raves in this thread are starting to make me feel a bit silly that somehow, I've seen almost none of the events as yet...

Now, in my defense, part of the reason is I've actually been doing some of those sports during the time I might otherwise have been watching them, and I rather more like doing them than watching them.

Anyway, my point is, I might have to make a point, after all, seein' as it does sound like it's been real...

(/Tho' as this may involve actually entering the same room as my wife, who's been monopolizing the PVR and the couch in front of it, as late, I dunno... Umm... You can watch these online, somewhere, too, right?)

Posted by: Walton, Marquis of Carabas | February 17, 2010 4:37 AM

Of course this comment is purely speculative and does not refer to any actual posters here, myself included ! ( too late for me LOL, that ship has sailed)

For me, the ship sunk before it even left the harbour. :-(

Posted by: Bride of Shrek OM | February 17, 2010 4:43 AM

God I sound like a cynical bitch ( probably cause I am one)but really, just prior to separation I can tell you it was soooo much more fun here than in meatspace.

Of course now I'm a single bird , I'm just here to pick up blokes.;-)

Posted by: boygenius | February 17, 2010 4:47 AM

Lynna @ the previous Thread ^TM,

Thank you for the lead. I sent you an email w/my contact info. Please forward to your project manager. I love doing custom cabinet and furniture projects. Soo much less boring than the standard finish carpentry drudgery I find myself doing these days.

Posted by: boygenius | February 17, 2010 5:04 AM

Of course now I'm a single bird , I'm just here to pick up blokes.;-)

Hey, baby, come here often?

What's a nice girl like you doing in a place like this?

Posted by: boygenius | February 17, 2010 5:43 AM

Orac's loss is my gain. ;-)

Posted by: Miki Z | February 17, 2010 6:02 AM

Here's one big f'ing Woodstock. Just look at that pecker.

Posted by: Wowbagger, Man-Hating Man of Pharyngula | February 17, 2010 6:28 AM

It's all Ichthyic's fault. He finds romance here and now everyone's hoping they'll get lucky.

Posted by: AJ Milne OM | February 17, 2010 6:37 AM

Well, I'd just like to say I am not using Pharyngula to avoid my marriage...

I use Pharyngula to avoid my work. My marriage, I avoid by going boarding...

It's a professional thing, see? You don't mix business with pleasure...

... or with misery, for that matter. My point is, the principle's the same...

Kidding. Sort of... Or, better still, think of it as sorta like an online version of a Louis C.K. 'things that suck about my marriage' routine...

(/And all of us let's please not try to dwell too long on the fact that, shortly after doing that material, Louis did, in fact, get divorced.)

Posted by: David Marjanović | February 17, 2010 6:54 AM

<sing chorus="childish">

Oh for crying out loud. That should have been "choir", not "chorus". Can't get my basic HTML tags right. When will I learn to just cut off and go to bed...

Posted by: https://www.google.com/accounts/o8/id?id=AItOawnhDwuNUQSyq2gYDMnhTU69GIrU70lZE1M | February 17, 2010 7:14 AM

Man oh man, does ScienceBlogs need to implement comment threading.

Okay, so if you wanted to read the Peptides paper for yourself but don't have access, you might do well to click here, but you didn't hear it from me.

Posted by: Alan B | February 17, 2010 7:24 AM

#213 Owlmirror

(I have no idea if these are safe for work or not... )

I think that probably depends where you work! I can think of one or two workplaces where you might ...

Posted by: Usagichan | February 17, 2010 8:26 AM

Carlie @ 244

As with many Japanese apartments, ours comes with washlet as standard (complete with a wall panel of controls that would not look out of place on a Star Trek set) - and they are great - although I am wary of touching too many of the controls. My Japanese is not that good and I worry one of them is for 'Steam cleaning' or something.

Posted by: RMM Barrie | February 17, 2010 8:43 AM

Walton @226

(b) actually responding to criticisms

Posted by: RMM Barrie Author Profile Page | February 15, 2010 8:26 PM

Hyperon @612

Around 0% are prepared to disavow homophobia, compared with 58% of the general public.

Wrong; you misrepresented your own data source.

The question was: "....you PERSONALLY BELIEVE that it is MORALLY acceptable or MORALLY wrong? Homosexual acts...0%"
(Caps from Gallup, ref: page 31)

Hardly the definition of homophobia, which is the "fear of or contempt for lesbians and gay men".

Interestingly only 3% of UK Muslims thought it was morally acceptable to there being sex between unmarried men and women, which would explain their conservative views.

I point out that that in France the view is somewhat loosened for morally acceptable to 35% homosexual acts, and 48% sex between unmarried. So, any suggestion on your part for "Muslims in general" is gone

I was prepared to try and give you a little help here, but you cannot fairly represent your own data sources. Would be fun to prove "group think" here, but I have failed. They are right using all of the negative descriptions that have been directed at you. BYE BYE

Posted by: Hyperon Author Profile Page | February 16, 2010 11:43 AM

From the previous thread:

Wrong; you misrepresented your own data source.

People were asked if they find homosexuality "morally acceptable" or "morally unacceptable. (Those were the only two options presented.) 0% of Muslims said "morally acceptable", compared with 58% of the general British public. My characterization that 0% of British Muslims were willing to disavow homophobia seems pretty fair and accurate. Anyway, I linked to the study so people could decide for themselves. Whatever apologetics you try to spin, you can't get around the fact that a 58% disparity between Muslims and the general public is very, very disturbing.

Please discuss how 1/ Morally acceptable equates with homophobia 2/ How the response of Hyperon relates to question one.

Posted by: Sven DiMilo | February 17, 2010 9:06 AM

It was me. I had my boyfriend and his cousin do it so the fucker couldn't beat me in the Short Program.

Posted by: nigelTheBold, Minister of Spankings | February 17, 2010 9:09 AM

But yes, to me it is indeed a pretty basic assumption. I don't remember encountering any significant examples of sexism against women.

I believe we've presented several instances of sexism against women -- totaling a difference of 17% in pay for equivalent jobs, and 30%+ difference in management.

"Evolutionary psychology" (which is what you retreated to) does not have the same ontological standing as psychology, or even sociology. Good show with your attempt to conflate it with regular ol' psychology, though.

Now, given that you have even admitted that sexism has been a problem, the problem of sexism is a given. Your assertion is that sexism no longer exists, or at least is no longer statistically relevant. So, we have something with great ontological standing (sexism) against a "null hypothesis" based on evolutionary psychology (for which you still have not provided references), which has far less ontological standing.

Hm. I wonder why we don't tend to accept your "null hypothesis?"

I do remember my dad having to slave away in a factory for close to minimum wage; and I do remember hearing lots of stories about women marrying for money they haven't earned . . .

"Haven't earned." How utterly chauvinistic of you. What does it take to "earn" money? What about the fact that males tend to inherit money in greater quantity than females? That is money they didn't earn. I had an uncle that married above his station (as they used to say). A friend of mine was engaged to the daughter of the CEO of Smirnoff. He was an auto mechanic. Neither of them earned the money she had.

I'm struggling to find the problem with women marrying men with more money, or men marrying women with more money. Should people only marry those of similar economic means?

. . . and I do observe that Amnesty International has a campaign to stop violence against specifically women, despite that men are always more likely to be targets of unprovoked violence. I also can't help noticing that almost nobody seems to care.

Uhm... in general, rape is psychologically more devestating than a white male getting beat up by other white males. And considering that rape happens far more often (at least an order of magnitude more often) than the violence you mentioned -- I think rape is the bigger problem.

Nice collection of anecdotes used to support your hypothesis, though. I'm sure that'll fly in any scientific journal.

By the way, my wife was wondering: have you perhaps recently gone through a terrible break-up of some sort? A divorce in which your ex took most of your possessions? Or perhaps you were recently dumped by a significant other?

She was just wondering. The symptoms you exhibit are very much like the standard misogynistic phase many males go through after a terrible breakup.

Posted by: Alan B | February 17, 2010 9:24 AM

#252 triskelethecat

In England, it is generally accepted that cute little puppies do a better job (if you'll pardon the expression).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_b80O3Zqlqo

Posted by: triskelethecat | February 17, 2010 9:34 AM

@NigeltheBold: yes, you are correct. My husband, who has a warped sense of humor, named our first Siamese cat from the book. It's hard to explain that your cat is named for a 3-legged, 1-eyed dog....

But, when we had to put him to sleep, I took his name for some of the internet sites I frequent.

Posted by: Paul W., OM | February 17, 2010 9:48 AM

Matt Penfold:

I have just read Greg Laden's blog.

So which one of you was it that kneecapped him?

Far be it from me to say such a thing, and I don't think it's true, but SC has given objective people cause to wonder about her serious Greg issues, such that casual readers of the trainwreck thread might reasonably and objectively conclude that it was her.

I don't think she'd do such a thing, but some objective people have pointed out that she's the biggest bitch on the Internets, and really do have to wonder. Just sayin'.

Posted by: SC OM | February 17, 2010 9:58 AM

but some objective people have pointed out that she's the biggest bitch on the Internets

Ahem. Greatest Bitch in the Internet. Greatest. I'm the Muhammad Ali of internet bitchitude.

Posted by: Paul W., OM | February 17, 2010 10:07 AM

SC, I stand corrected. You're the Greatest.

And SHIT BITCH, YOU IS FINE.

http://www.loveislame.com/products/4

Posted by: Lynna, OM | February 17, 2010 10:13 AM

I have a lot of catching up to do on the endless thread! My fellow Pharyguloids have been busy.

Yesterday I had the Carotid Duplex test which was ordered by my doctor after I experienced a brain-offline event on January 15th. My fellow Pharynguloids, thank you for the funds for this test, an unexpectedly sensual experience.

The test, which is an ultrasound examination of blood flow to the brain, took a lot longer than I expected. For about fifteen minutes per side, the technician ran the ultrasound over my neck, up to the jawline, and up to my ear, pausing at one point to tap lightly near the base of my ear with the wand recording the taps.

Pharyngulettes and gay gentlemen of Pharyngula, your empathetic attention please: Blake (yep, that's his name) was, I swear to the FSM, tall, dark and handsome. And did I say well-muscled? So this Registered Cardio Sonographer lay his fine forearm between my breasts (to steady his hand) while he probed my lubricated neck with a round-tipped wand about the size of (insert Josh, Official SpokesGay's imaginative description here).

Occasionally, Blake would turn on the sound and I would think of 'Tis Himself. (No, not in that way!) The sound reminded me of an old movie soundtrack from scenes shot in the engine room of a ship. When the exam was over, I saw a bit of the wave form that was the visual recording of the sound. Looked like a lot of regular, pulsating blood flow to me, but what do I know?

I asked if I could have a digital copy of the test. Blake was surprised by the request, but said he would send me a CD. If any of the images can be formatted for presentation on the web, I'll put them up on my blog. My carotid arteries will be revealed in all their glory.

It'll be a couple of days before I have results. First, a cardio specialist trained to read the ultrasound(s) will write a summary for my doctor, then my doctor will presumably call me in to hear the news.

It'll also be a couple of days before I get a CD from Blake. In the meantime, I'm not dead yet.

Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM | February 17, 2010 10:21 AM

In the meantime, I'm not dead yet.

Posted by: Paul W., OM | February 17, 2010 10:22 AM

Sven,

Paul, that's so sweet!

Yeah, I gave my wife one of those. She finds it very romantic when I'm linguistic in her vernacular.

Posted by: badgersdaughter | February 17, 2010 10:30 AM

...when I'm linguistic in her vernacular....

*cough*

Posted by: Paul W., OM | February 17, 2010 10:41 AM

badgersdaughter:

...when I'm linguistic in her vernacular....

*cough*

Coughing rather spoils the mood, in my experience.

Posted by: Lynna, OM | February 17, 2010 10:45 AM

Miki Z @270, I have to admit that my tastes in men are, shall we say, broad. I agree with your wife that short, pasty and homely can be charming.

For a relationship lasting beyond the half an hour it takes to examine my carotid arteries, I put brains and the wit to use them above tall, dark, and handsome any day. But ... no harm in enjoying tall, dark, and handsome when it presses against you.

Posted by: nigelTheBold, Minister of Spankings | February 17, 2010 10:53 AM

@Lynna,

Your description had me kinda titillated, and I'm not gay.

Of course, my boyfriend is.

Posted by: Dania | February 17, 2010 11:04 AM

Which reminds me, we still do not have access to scans of David M.'s brain.

You know, after seeing that picture of him over at Tet Zoo I think I'd be much more interested in an eye close-up. Though I'm afraid it may not be safe to look so closely...

Posted by: Karen James | February 17, 2010 11:10 AM

Dania, it's me, https://www.google.com/accounts/o8/id?id=AItOawnhDwuNUQSyq2gYDMnhTU69GIrU70lZE1M, but now I've switched to a movable type account. WTF w/ the Google login? Anyways, what about a hybrid comment system where you can switch between threaded and chronological views? It was a real pain scanning through so many comments just trying to find the ones that related to the Peptides paper. It would have been nice if they had been clumpable by topic.

Posted by: David Marjanović | February 17, 2010 11:15 AM

We briefly interrupt for our irregularly scheduled Toothy Goodness for Jadehawk series. Do read all the way to the end of the article.

And while I'm at promoting Tet Zoo, here's a delightfully nerdy quote by Darren Naish.

You apparently don't understand the concept of a null hypothesis. Based on the evidence I already outlined, my position is, for me, the null hypothesis.

:-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D

There is no such thing that "is, for me, the null hypothesis". "Null hypothesis" is a technical term. Roughly, it means "there's no correlation, no causation, nothing, the data are purely random, nothing happened, nothing to see here, go along". (What it means precisely differs between statistical tests, but it's always a version of the above.) The purpose of a statistical test try is to reject the null hypothesis if it's wrong.

despite that men are always more likely to be targets of unprovoked violence.

There is no such thing as an abusive husband. There is no such thing as an abusive husband. There is no such thing as an abusive husband. There is no such thing as an abusive husband. There is no such thing as an abusive husband.

If you say it often enough, it becomes true, no doubt…

I also can't help noticing that almost nobody seems to care.

Ignorance and naïve blindness always lead to this kind of conclusion.

You were raised by the Amazons on Paradise Island. That must have been tough, man.

Unfortunately the link doesn't work.

CBS News on Ethiopia.

Hooooraaaay.

*cough*

toilet paper + deep "rifts" = not where I wanted my mind to go just before going to sleep.

Just wash your hands. :^)

Do the French not use capital letters in proper names, like reviews, journals?

It's complicated, and I still haven't quite understood how it works, or if there's even a single set of rules. There's the Bulletin du Muséum national d'Histoire naturelle, where only the nouns get capital letters; and then there's the Catholic newspaper la Croix with lower-case la. Articles in place names also retain lower case, often even on maps, giving you the city of le Havre (which fuses with prepositions to au Havre and du Havre) and the river la Seine.

But in any case it can't be "Review". Do you use an overactive spellchecker? :-)

For me, the ship sunk before it even left the harbour. :-(

Seriously, you're too young to worry yet.

(a) saying something which, at minimum, is comprehensible and possible to argue with; (b) actually responding to criticisms; and (c) not spamming multiple threads with identical crap. Hyperon meets these minimal criteria.

(a) applies. (c) doesn't really, and (b) applies little to Hyperon and, well, not at all to Piltdown Man.

It goes without saying that being wrong is not a bannable offense. I find the list pretty fine.

It's all Ichthyic's fault. He finds romance here and now everyone's hoping they'll get lucky.

So I get 1337 geek cred for having been doing waiting for this to happen since before it was cool!?!

Something is fishy here… crap, I didn't intend that pun.

Man oh man, does ScienceBlogs need to implement comment threading.

So that we need to read the entire subthread five times over? No, thanks.

although I am wary of touching too many of the controls. My Japanese is not that good and I worry one of them is for 'Steam cleaning' or something.

And once again my ability to laugh silently comes in handy. Mad, open grinning, diaphragm cramps, occasional fluttering of the lower jaw…

X-D

I can hardly stop!

the reference, for the too-young and/or not-yet-caffeinated

It goes without saying that I still don't get it…

…but I'm still laughing at the steam cleaning anyway!

Posted by: Carlie of the lacy, gently wafting adjectives | February 17, 2010 11:21 AM

Lynna, that is the most awesome story of a medical test I have ever read.

Posted by: negentropyeater | February 17, 2010 11:29 AM

Blake was surprised by the request, but said he would send me a CD. If any of the images can be formatted for presentation on the web, I'll put them up on my blog.

Just received a CD of my lower abdomen / pelvis CT scan. Maybe we could start an image bank of the inner parts of Pharyngulites ?

The CT scan revealed three kidney stones of 7, 4, and 2 mm diameter : these little fuckers have been responsible for quite some excrutiating pain over the last week. I will now have to undergo lithotripsy in order to shatter the larger ones into smaller fragments.
Prayer and HomeopathyMedical progress and technology will bring an end to my suffering.

And anybody who thinks Kidney Stones are the result of some sort of "Intelligent Design" should try them.

Posted by: Dania | February 17, 2010 11:37 AM

Karen James:

WTF w/ the Google login?

Good question...

Anyways, what about a hybrid comment system where you can switch between threaded and chronological views?

As long as which comments are in response to which comments is shown clearly in both views, a hybrid system would be fine by me.

Posted by: Paul W., OM | February 17, 2010 11:41 AM

lay his fine forearm between my breasts (to steady his hand)

The excuses are getting better and better, aren't they

Yep. I'm sure that's why she put them there.

Posted by: Lynna, OM | February 17, 2010 11:44 AM

Walton @166: great link, great exposé of our CEO. All that cephalopod porn will out. LOL

Posted by: Lynna, OM | February 17, 2010 11:48 AM

@280

But is he rugged and nerdy?

Posted by: triskelethecat | February 17, 2010 11:53 AM

@negentropyeater: YOW!! Those are some BIG stones. No wonder you have had pain. I have had friends who underwent lithotripsy; I understand that it is a very weird sensation but generally works well. Good luck getting over them!

Posted by: Lynna, OM | February 17, 2010 11:59 AM

Lynna, that is the most awesome story of a medical test I have ever read.

Posted by: Lynna, OM | February 17, 2010 12:07 PM

Man, I so can't relate... I mean, I'm really pleased that Lynna's all okay. But my last diagnostic type thing was this nerve conductance test done on my legs. Horrible. They send these shocks through your nerves, measure how far they go...

Seriously, I am sorry that you were tortured.

Posted by: Lynna, OM | February 17, 2010 12:12 PM

Speaking of petaflops ... (weren't we speaking of petaflops?):

At this very moment, tens of thousands of home computers around the world are quietly working together to solve the largest and most basic mysteries of our galaxy. The collected computing power of these humble home computers recently has surpassed one petaflop, a computing speed that surpasses the world’s second fastest supercomputer.

Speaking of Fractals, then:

Scientists have observed electrons in a semiconductor on the brink of the metal-insulator transition for the first time. Caught in the act, the electrons formed complex patterns resembling those seen in turbulent fluids.

Posted by: negentropyeater | February 17, 2010 12:14 PM

triskelethecat,

this is my third kidney stones attack in 15 years. Previous two didn't require lithotripsy. But all I can say is that the pain is not necessarily proportional to the size of the little fuckers. I heard it's the same as with babies. Though as a male, I'll never get to compare.

Thanks to all for the kind words.

Posted by: Walton, Marquis of Carabas | February 17, 2010 12:17 PM

I'm very lucky, as my teeth are more-or-less perfect. My dentist appointments tend to take about five minutes, and I never had to have braces or dental surgery or anything.

On another note: is it just me who actually likes the clean hygienic antiseptic smell in dentists' offices? Everyone to whom I've ever mentioned this seems to think it's very weird. :-)

Posted by: Janine, The Little Top Of Venom, OM | February 17, 2010 12:21 PM

On another note: is it just me who actually likes the clean hygienic antiseptic smell in dentists' offices? Everyone to whom I've ever mentioned this seems to think it's very weird. :-)

Walton, you do realize that you make this just too easy.

I kid because all of this talk of pain is bringing back to my ailments, those that I am trying to ignore.

Posted by: Brownian, Most Vicious & Petty of Pharyngulites | February 17, 2010 12:32 PM

Lynna, that is the most awesome story of a medical test I have ever read.

I've been away for a bit, but I'm glad to hear you're getting somewhere with this health issue, Lynna.

Ahem, if I may, I'd like to share a medical test story that might resonate with the fellas here. Now, I kinda love hospitals. I like being poked and prodded, and I don't even mind those stupid paper gowns you get (I'm kind of an exhibitionist). I'm also a consummate smartass; once, just before surgery to excise a small wound on my arm that had become infected, I actually asked the poor resident with the scalpel if I'd be able to play the piano after the surgery. The look on her face when I gave the punchline was so worth it I briefly considered innoculating a cut on my other arm with staph just to see if there was someone else on call I could sucker. Apparently, medical school doesn't at all prepare you for 12-year-old patients pulling Henny Youngman-esque routines (though the joke is even in the literature).

Anyway, my family doctor used to work out of a hospital and so always had residents to perform some of the more routine tests during physicals. On one such occasion I was being examined by one of the most beautiful girls I had ever seen--we even shared a birthday, indicating some sort of kismet*--when she announced she needed to check my testicles for signs of cancer. Having been through such exams many times, I immediately hopped onto the examining table, lied back, looked at the wall, and thought about baseball.

Apparently unfamiliar with how this test is performed, she directed me instead to stand up. Dutifully I did so, and she knelt down in front of me, yanked my ginch down like she was about to mail a letter, and proceeded to massage my scrotum with her face an inch away from my junk. Now, I have no doubt that there wasn't the slightest hint of anything sexual going on in her mind, but as for me I distinctly remember having two successive thoughts: the first was that there was some sort of punchline about normally having to to pay $50 for this kind of attention in a dingy alley in this somewhere, and the second was that no jury of my peers would fault me if I got an erection.

So I did.

I swear, there was nothing I could do.

Anyway, I nearly poked her eye out (I'm not that big; she was that close) and the test was very immediately concluded. And I'd be willing to bet good money that in every subsequent testicular cancer test she's performed, when the patient lies back and looks at the wall she let him.

*Yeah, I know. What can I say? Even rationalist Geminis look for their lost twins.

Posted by: Lynna, OM | February 17, 2010 12:36 PM

LDS authors examine 7 miracles in history of the U.S.

"The people who were living these things all had doubts about how they would turn out," says Ted. "But what's remarkable is that every one of them, to some degree or another, acknowledged the help of Divine Providence." The seven events they focus on are:
     Christopher Columbus, who "against all odds" discovered the New World -- when it could very well have been found by the Chinese.
     The survival of Jamestown, despite untold hardship and starvation, ensuring that America would be settled by a religiously oriented and religiously tolerant people. [Religiously tolerant? More than a little fudging there.]
    The epic events that led to the creation of the United States Constitution, forever establishing this country as "the shining city on the hill." [code for: Paving the way for Joseph Smith and ilk.]...
     How a would-be assassin's bullet stopped within an inch of Ronald Reagan's heart, thus allowing him to live and go on to play a key role in the end of the Cold War....
     A lot of people worry about all the bad things that are happening in the world, they say. "Many people think America may no longer be worthy of God's help," says Chris. But, at what percentage of unbelief does God give up on us? he asks. If it's 51 percent believers and 49 percent nonbelievers, are we OK? If the scale tips to 51 percent nonbelievers, are we done?...
     None of the events they talk about "are without controversy," says Ted. But, Chris notes, they have been "really, really careful with our research." People may not agree with their conclusions, "but there's nothing that anyone can say is poorly researched." [um, uh, ... I can. The Puritans as "religiously tolerant", for one.]
      "But this is not a religious book or a political book; it is a history book."...
     "A friend who was a great teacher told me a story of Abraham Lincoln that I had never heard before," Chris says. "He told me they used to teach these stories in school, and showed me a book from the 1930s to prove it." [code for: "See, the dirty, immoral liberal atheist historians have formed a conspiracy to delete miracles from American History.]...
     "This country was too important to the future of mankind to let it fail. Despite our weaknesses, which are many, and our failings, which have existed since our inception, God has been willing to intervene so that this nation might survive. History gives us the ultimate assurance that God still watches over this country today."

Posted by: Brownian, Most Vicious & Petty of Pharyngulites | February 17, 2010 12:40 PM

How a would-be assassin's bullet stopped within an inch of Ronald Reagan's heart, thus allowing him to live and go on to play a key role in the end of the Cold War...

Wow. I can only imagine how much the LDS church must absolutely revere 50 Cent.

Posted by: Lynna, OM | February 17, 2010 12:44 PM

Look for LDS "historians" to collaborate with the Texas State School Board in revising history textbooks. Look for both parties to ignore original sources as they proclaim the religious tolerance of Puritans:

"Those that scaped the fire were slaine with the sword; some hewed to peeces, others rune throw with their rapiers, so as they were quickly dispatche, and very few escaped. It was conceived they thus destroyed about 400 at this time. It was a fearful sight to see them thus frying in the fyer, and the streams of blood quenching the same, and horrible was the stincke and sente there of, but the victory seemed a sweet sacrifice, and they gave the prayers thereof to God, who had wrought so wonderfully for them, thus to inclose their enemise in their hands, and gave them so speedy a victory over so proud and insulting an enimie." -- William Bradford, "History of the Plymouth Plantation", on the massacre of the friendly Pequot Indians by Puritans in 1637

Posted by: Pygmy Loris | February 17, 2010 12:46 PM

Lynna,

Glad to hear you got the first test, had some delicious eye candy too! We're hoping the results are, at the least, informative.

Negentropyeater,

Oooh, that sucks! I've heard that passing kidney stones is more painful than childbirth. I hope they're giving you some decent painkillers. It's good to know you're going to be okay, though.

David M,

So I get 1337 geek cred for having been doing waiting for this to happen since before it was cool!?!

You can always whisper sweet nothings about fossils in my ear ;)

(envy alert: all four wisdom teeth are coming out vertically, and there's just space for them!)

Yes, but is there room for you to floss and brush behind them? If not, you might end up losing them to cavities. This happened to me.

Walton,

On another note: is it just me who actually likes the clean hygienic antiseptic smell in dentists' offices? Everyone to whom I've ever mentioned this seems to think it's very weird. :-)

Well, you are weird, but so are we all. I have a friend who loves the smell of bathroom cleaner. She's very strange.

Posted by: 朴競花/박경화 (Gyeong Hwa) | February 17, 2010 12:52 PM

Christopher Columbus, who "against all odds" discovered the New World -- when it could very well have been found by the Chinese

The natives "discovered" the New World first. The Vikings were second. And so what if the Chinese discovered it next? Are they afraid that they might put their culture there instead? Colombus' appearence wasn't a good thing for the natives; it wiped out 90% of the population, with the Europeans killing much of the rest. I smell imperialistic sentiments from the LSD.

God has been willing to intervene so that this nation might survive. History gives us the ultimate assurance that God still watches over this country today.

So God has favorites. Which means God is vile, because he's willing to kill other people in the favor of one group.

Great LSD post from Lynna again. :)

Posted by: Silič O'Nopolitanopoulos, Färschdbischuf Beesknees aus Ulm und Klein Elguth, Elector Pharynguline. | February 17, 2010 12:56 PM

BEGIN
GOTO Pharyngula
DEMAND money // Don't say you weren't warned.
INPUT
"One of fellow SciBling Grrrlscientist's chosen projects for the Donors' Choose charity challenge haven't received anything yet, and the request runs out in a week. So here I go plugging it. Hopefully some of the resident mathematicians still have a wee bit of spare cash lying around.

Magnificent Math

I teach kindergarten class of high need students. The school is 80% free and reduced lunch and at risk.
I don't have enough math resources to give my students a chance to properly explore math concepts in the classroom. Young students visual learner and need those resource to grasp concepts.
I'm asking for math counters and games for my students to use in the classroom during center time. This will give them a opportunity to explore and learn concepts taught in the classroom.
Help make math magnificent for my early childhood learners this year and make a difference in a child's life.

Posted by: Brownian, Most Vicious & Petty of Pharyngulites | February 17, 2010 12:58 PM

Ooh, just read about the stones, Negentropyeater. All, uh, the best. Ouch!

Is it just me who actually likes the clean hygienic antiseptic smell in dentists' offices?

I once had a brief job as a subject for a master's thesis in which I administered spirometric tests to the public at a booth in a mall as a control alongside a real respiratory technician. I don't recall the type of antiseptic we used but the smell reminded me of melons, though I'm sure its pink colour contributed more than a little to that impression. At the end of the night, when the mall closed, we'd dismantle all of the equipment and immerse it in the liquid. I miss that smell.

Posted by: Pygmy Loris | February 17, 2010 1:01 PM

Walton,

For me, the ship sunk before it even left the harbour. :-(

Really? Honestly, you seem like a fairly nice guy. Since you've been hanging out here I've noticed that your social skills have improved dramatically. I really can't imagine that you're so odious in person that you couldn't have a relationship. Give yourself some time.

Posted by: Dania | February 17, 2010 1:19 PM

PZ, I remember Snowball. :)

Posted by: David Marjanović | February 17, 2010 1:22 PM

the intuitively inevitable fact that men are less likely to report violent crimes

…?

Seriously? That you call "intuitively inevitable"? Isn't it rather "intuitively inevitable" that domestic violence would be heavily underreported?

Posted by: Matt "Nora" Penfold | February 17, 2010 1:29 PM

There is a good reason why young men report such high levels of violence. That reason is a combination of testosterone and alcohol. The overwhelming number of assaults on young males are committed by other young males, at pub and club closing time. It is seldom the case that such assaults are entirely unprovoked.

Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM | February 17, 2010 1:31 PM

Poor Hyperon. One might think he isn't a man, but rather a boy cowering in his parent's basement, afraid to face the world, where people not of his religion or with diffent body parts do actual work. Call a Waahhhmbulance.

Posted by: Desert Son, OM | February 17, 2010 1:37 PM

Glad to hear updates on Lynna and negentropyeater, with wishes for continued recovery/improvement/good health.

Still learning,

Robert

Posted by: Hyperon | February 17, 2010 1:40 PM

PZ, this misogynistic, racist, fascist creep has got to go. That remark implying that rape is lesser than a guy getting beaten up--it's way too far over the line.

I know there's a lot of talk about the "trauma" of rape, but why, fundamentally, in a typical case, would rape be more traumatic than a more physically painful and prolonged instance of physical assault? (This is a real question, not a rhetorical question.) Perhaps we are actually increasing the pain of rape by telling people that they're supposed to undergo immense, unavoidable, and somehow sacrosanct trauma.

Posted by: Janine, The Little Top Of Venom, OM | February 17, 2010 1:43 PM

For a long time, I thought that Walton lacked a sense of humor. Now I am finding him to be compellingly perverse. As a group, are we really that bad of an influence on young people?

'Terrified about the implications.'

Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM | February 17, 2010 1:46 PM

Hyperon, think about some big guy doing rape onto you. Maybe you will begin to feel even a tiny bit of compassion for the women who suffured such violence, and live with the trauma and PTDS.

Posted by: Janine, The Little Top Of Venom, OM | February 17, 2010 1:51 PM

Perhaps we are actually increasing the pain of rape by telling people that they're supposed to undergo immense, unavoidable, and somehow sacrosanct trauma.

Which is why so many women never tell others about their so called "trauma".

Hyperon, it is tiring that you try to disguise your dogma as though you are truly free of dogma. Yes, I think you are a sick fuck who refuses to understand the suffering of others.

Posted by: negentropyeater | February 17, 2010 1:56 PM

Pygmy Loris,

I hope they're giving you some decent painkillers

The tablets do the job (non-steroidal anti-inflammatory + morphine derivative).
At least, I sleep well with them, I don't get woken up by the pain every 3 hours like before. My cognitive abilities might have been slightly impaired, a bit euphoric, but it's temporary.
Had to lay off alcohol for a while, which is a bit tough, as reading Pharyngula and a few other blogs whilst drinking is one of my favourite past time...

Posted by: Paul W., OM | February 17, 2010 1:59 PM

SC,

30 seconds to look it up on Urban Dictionary.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=OG

:-P

Posted by: Hyperon | February 17, 2010 2:01 PM

This study has a small sample size but it is about how children think that violence against women can be justified.

Posted by: Janine, The Little Top Of Venom, OM | February 17, 2010 2:02 PM

Hyperon, Pygmy Loris gave you a damned good responce the first fucking time you called rape a temporary incompetence. It is your problem that you cannot comprehend it, not ours.

Posted by: Endor | February 17, 2010 2:04 PM

"I think there might be a biological tendency toward misogyny and homophobia, which is why it is pronounced in children."

LOL. Yeah, because there certainly aren't people teaching them that and no societal messages that teach any of that. Nah, it's NATURAL.

And what you think is obviously true, since you're a sociopath who has no ability to feel compassion. Which makes you so superior to anyone else.

Posted by: Jadehawk, OM | February 17, 2010 2:06 PM

I think there might be a biological tendency toward misogyny and homophobia, which is why it is pronounced in children.

What a fucking moron.

Posted by: Janine, The Little Top Of Venom, OM | February 17, 2010 2:07 PM

I think there might be a biological tendency toward misogyny and homophobia, which is why it is pronounced in children.

Because it would be fucking unthinkable to suggest that these are learned from the adults around them.

Posted by: Antiochus Epiphanes | February 17, 2010 2:08 PM

Botany Wednesday? Today is Wednesday, right?

Posted by: Hyperon | February 17, 2010 2:10 PM

Incidentally, if I were ever raped, the thing I would be most worried about is painful and long-term physical injuries. Yes, it would be highly uncomfortable, but it would only last for a short period of time. Carrying around broken body parts for months would be in my opinion worse than "trauma", which I could probably blank out soon enough.

Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM | February 17, 2010 2:10 PM

HyperIdjit just can't grasp that we don't give a shit about his inane, insane, sexist, and bigoted opinions. And we certainly would shit on them, but they are so shitty to begin with, it accomplishes nothing, and may even make it smell better.

Posted by: Jadehawk, OM | February 17, 2010 2:14 PM

Botany Wednesday? Today is Wednesday, right?

*runs*

Posted by: Jadehawk, OM | February 17, 2010 2:15 PM

Incidentally, if I were ever raped, the thing I would be most worried about is painful and long-term physical injuries. Yes, it would be highly uncomfortable, but it would only last for a short period of time. Carrying around broken body parts for months would be in my opinion worse than "trauma", which I could probably blank out soon enough.

Posted by: Endor | February 17, 2010 2:18 PM

"Hyperon, do you belong to any "father's rights" groups? "

Since he's puking out virtually every derranged misogynistic lie that they do, it's "intuitively inevitable" that he's a bitter, twisted MRA.

Even in considering being raped, he is utterly incapable of thinking past his preconceived notions. He is incapable of considering psychological ramifications, or societal reaction. This is either a frightening sociopath, or a resoundingly stupid MRA ideologue.

Posted by: Walton, Marquis of Carabas | February 17, 2010 2:19 PM

Hyperon, I really think you should retract these comments and apologise.

You're opining about something - the suffering and trauma associated with being a victim of rape - which, by your own admission, you have never experienced. You don't have any evidential basis at all for your remarks about rape, and you seem to be ignoring the testimonies of actual rape victims. And your assertions are not only unsubstantiated, they have also deeply offended many people. Yet you keep making them.

I've stood up for you from time to time in the past, but on this particular issue I think you're entirely wrong.

Posted by: nigelTheBold, Minister of Spankings | February 17, 2010 2:19 PM

Just like how suffering serious injuries in battle is exactly the same as being tortured.

SC, you don't need 'nother OM. Now you're just showing off.

FTW.

Posted by: Walton, Marquis of Carabas | February 17, 2010 2:22 PM

Incidentally, if I were ever raped, the thing I would be most worried about is painful and long-term physical injuries. Yes, it would be highly uncomfortable, but it would only last for a short period of time. Carrying around broken body parts for months would be in my opinion worse than "trauma", which I could probably blank out soon enough.

I think you're wrong to downplay the importance of mental and emotional health here. In some ways, mental trauma can be more harmful to an individual's wellbeing than physical injury. Many rape victims end up suffering from depression, low self-esteem, chronic nightmares and fears, and other serious mental health problems through their entire lives. It's easy to assert that you would be able to "blank out" a traumatic event, but until you've experienced it, you have no basis for making an assertion like that. Mental health is just as real as physical health, and just as important to people's lives.

Posted by: Rawnaeris | February 17, 2010 2:23 PM

I'm just glad my killfile is working properly. I've got hyperon blocked, and he's still making me feel ill just from what people are quoting to refute.

Posted by: Sanction, Inherent Antonym | February 17, 2010 2:26 PM

Comment by Hyperon blocked. [unkill] ​[show comment]

Posted by: Carlie of the lacy, gently wafting adjectives | February 17, 2010 2:30 PM

I can introduce you to Blake, if you like.

Thanks Lynna, but my husband might not like it if I ran off with a hunky medical practitioner.

Eek, why did I unkill Hyperon? My guess is that he's never had sex, period. That's the only explanation I can think of why he can't comprehend how rape IS assault.

In more fun news, I took a classful of students on a brewery tour today, and didn't realize until we were leaving that it's also Ash Wednesday. Is it bad to expose a group of (mostly) minors to beer on a religious holiday?

Posted by: Carlie of the lacy, gently wafting adjectives | February 17, 2010 2:35 PM

Via Shakesville, the BBC is doing a several part series on rape and women in the US military, so there's a place for Hyperon to go read how women who one would stereotypically consider to be the toughest women around are still traumatized and injured by rape, not to mention how unreported it is. Funny how it's the BBC, not an American news outlet, isn't it? It's almost like we want to pretend it doesn't exist or something.

Posted by: Hyperon | February 17, 2010 2:38 PM

Hyperon, I really think you should retract these comments and apologise.

In some ways, mental trauma can be more harmful to an individual's wellbeing than physical injury. Many rape victims end up suffering from depression, low self-esteem, chronic nightmares and fears, and other serious mental health problems through their entire lives.

Posted by: Hyperon | February 17, 2010 2:40 PM

Also, as for this bullshit about my line of argument being sexist: various studies indicate that most rapes are in fact carried out on males in prisons, and go unreported. (See the Wiki entry for the links.)

Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM | February 17, 2010 2:42 PM

Hypershit is still evidenceless, and his opinions smell worse than shit, are are worse than shit. They are worthless for anything other than the sewer, which rejects them. For that to change, he needs stop posting. PZ, maybe you would help him with that decision.

Posted by: Silič O'Nopolitanopoulos, Färschdbischuf Beesknees aus Ulm und Klein Elguth, Elector Pharynguline. | February 17, 2010 2:45 PM

Awesome, Lynna. Well worth the money!

I used to have some dental X-rays from my stay in Bath, but I think I handed them over to my Danish dentist.

Would anyone like me to photograph the wart in my palm?

Posted by: Brownian, Most Vicious & Petty of Pharyngulites | February 17, 2010 2:47 PM

You don't have any evidential basis at all for your remarks about rape, and you seem to be ignoring the testimonies of actual rape victims. And your assertions are not only unsubstantiated, they have also deeply offended many people. Yet you keep making them.

He doesn't need experience, nor does he need to read other people's experiences, but that's only because he's not intellectually limited like all those idiots who rely on evidence. Like scientists.

I'd long ago stopped being particularly upset by Hyperon, when I realised that all of his comments add up to him being an incredibly cowardly and terrified little boy who makes up for his very real physical fear by thinking of himself as an intellectual tough guy. (You can't swing a dead cat in a second-year poli sci or econ class without hitting a few of these, but not to worry; they're way too scared shitless to hit you back with one. The tendency of women to be smaller and less physically intimidating is on of the reasons these guys love to make women their targets.) There's no need to argue with them, since you can predict what they're going to say with absolute accuracy: every opinion they have is informed by nothing but a desire to be 'politically incorrect' and cloak themselves as mental freedom fighters.

If you think assault of any form is traumatising; imagine what Hyperon will have to go through: an entire life with undescended testicles and a saliva-soaked thumb. Don't loathe the, um, for lack of a better word, man; pity him.

Posted by: Carlie of the lacy, gently wafting adjectives | February 17, 2010 2:50 PM

Hyperon, every post you make only serves as additional evidence to everyone that you're not just an idiot, you're not just uninformed, but that you are deliberately ignorant. Almost aggressively so; you actively push away and twist any piece of data that could indicate that you are wrong.

Speaking entirely honestly, I hope that you are not involved in a romantic relationship with a woman now, and I hope that any you encounter stay far, far away from you, because you are a threat. Someone who is that clueless as to why rape is bad could easily push too far on a romantic partner and then just claim later that "she just wasn't really into it at first". Someone who is that clueless about what mental distress is like is likely to be emotionally abusive and not care. At the very least, someone like you is likely to spout off shit about how rape isn't that bad to someone who has gone through it, and generally be a real pain in the ass about it. In fact, just by posting here you have already done that, because I can guarantee you that women (and men) who have been raped read this site.
I don't use the term sociopath often or lightly, but you really seem to fit a lot of the criteria.

Posted by: Desert Son, OM | February 17, 2010 2:50 PM

Walton,

Hyperon . . . Just stop for a minute . . . and think

Asking a lot . . .

Still learning,

Robert

Posted by: David Marjanović | February 17, 2010 2:53 PM

I don't understand why it should possibly be considered "offensive". Are you saying that we should confer on rape some special kind of epistemic status, or take it as an axiomatic truth that rape is categorically different from any other crime?

We've explained all of this to you already, on the "oblivious white male" thread (in other words, the one about you personally). Look, I'm doing your homework for you: here is the link again.

Click on it and read.

Posted by: Celtic_Evolution | February 17, 2010 2:55 PM

every opinion they have is informed by nothing but a desire to be 'politically incorrect' and cloak themselves as mental freedom fighters.

That sound you hear is the sound of the the nail being hit squarely on the head, courtesy Brownian, OM...

Posted by: Hyperon | February 17, 2010 2:59 PM

Walton,

Just stop for a minute, reread your posts, and think about whether you really want to carry on with this ridiculous line of argument.

What do you think it is about rape that makes it so privileged? Is it the act of defiling another human being with the precious bodily fluids? Maybe the moment penetration occurs, the Form of Rape is realized in the Magic Citadel of the Clouds?

Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM | February 17, 2010 3:01 PM

He's a near perfect textbook example of exactly the type of guy who doesn't hear or heed the word "no".

Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | February 17, 2010 3:03 PM

The fact you have to even make such a ridiculous statement is evidence enough of myopic and ignorant you are.

Posted by: David Marjanović | February 17, 2010 3:07 PM

there aren't enough men in prisons for that to be true!

:-D :-D :-D

Pwnd!!!

Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | February 17, 2010 3:10 PM

Hyperon do you work closely with women or come into contact with them regularly?

Anywhere?

Posted by: Endor | February 17, 2010 3:11 PM

"he already has; that line about rape being a "temporary inconvenience"? that was a response to a poster admitting she was raped. "

So, are we still confused as to why there's not a lot of women round these parts?

Posted by: blf | February 17, 2010 3:15 PM

Hyperon do you work closely with womenpeople or come into contact with them regularly?

Anywhere?

This altered question may be more appropriate.

Posted by: Desert Son, OM | February 17, 2010 3:16 PM

In re: Hyperon. At what point do Insipidity, Stupidity, Trolling, and Wanking reach critical mass?

Still learning,

Robert

Posted by: A. Noyd | February 17, 2010 3:18 PM

Gah, I hate you, Tripod.

Anyone interested in helping identify this monster of a flower will have to copy and past these into the URL bar. Grr.

http://a.noyd.tripod.com/flower01.jpg
http://a.noyd.tripod.com/flower02.jpg

Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | February 17, 2010 3:23 PM

This altered question may be more appropriate.

Well true if I was trying to find out about his experiences with women or people, but I was just wanting to find out if there was a way I could warn them that they work with a psychopath.

Posted by: Bride of Shrek OM | February 17, 2010 3:26 PM

I've stayed out of this thread because of past experiences in my life which I have mentioned on a previous thread. It's not painful as such to talk about it, just really goddamn tiresome to try and make a clearly deluded person see any light. I could try and argue the case for rape victims everywhere but I'd rather save my breath and try to enlighten someone who may just have a thread of humanity and be ABLE to have their opinion changed. I do however just want to poop my head in to say 2 things.

1) I am heartened by the comments here. Obviously there's one sick and twisted individual but clearly everyone else is against his "opinions" and are soundly rejecting any of his "theories". You have rounded on him and told him off in various forms and I think that clearly shows who has the better morals and values. You guys give me a warm fuzzy feeling sometimes and that's why I love being part of this place.

2) I have never done this, as I always kind of found troll comments on some level amusing, but I have now activated a killfile and it's first resident is Hyperon. I refuse to waste valuable reading time trying to understand why someone is so very, very sick in their morals but seems to persistently refuse to acknolwedge it.

Posted by: Bride of Shrek OM | February 17, 2010 3:29 PM

@ #426

.. ah "poop" my head. Rather appropriate typo I think

Posted by: blf | February 17, 2010 3:31 PM

Well, I think we can rule out a Triffid, mostly because you don't appear to be dead.

Posted by: Hyperon | February 17, 2010 3:33 PM

you innumerate, hateful piece of shit, there aren't enough men in prisons for that to be true!

Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | February 17, 2010 3:37 PM

About 90,000 instances of reported male-female rape occur annually.

fixed, dumbass.

Posted by: SC OM | February 17, 2010 3:44 PM

goOGle it! Actually, here, let me gOGle it 4 U

Pill. :) Paul W. already found it. I had tried, but I thought it was internet slang so I added unnecessary search terms.

Human Rights Watch estimates that about 140,000 instances of male-male rape occur annually

Read it again.

Posted by: Jadehawk, OM | February 17, 2010 3:49 PM

Watch estimates that about 140,000 instances of male-male rape occur annually. About 90,000 instances of male-female rape occur annually.

Posted by: negentropyeater | February 17, 2010 3:51 PM

Hyperon,

I don't know why you hate women so much. I'm glad it's not up to you and other misogynists to decide what is a crime.
As long as you continue to regard women as souless commodities/reproductive machines/possessions/sex devices/domestic servants you will continue to think of rape as only a physical assault on the women's uterus, uterus that doesn't even belong to women, but to the body politic of men.

I sincerely hope you'll be able to take "NO" for an answer in your future dealings with women.

Posted by: maureen.brian#b5c92 | February 17, 2010 3:52 PM

...... we already know .......

This little turd is doing my head in. I'm going back to my knitting and, believe me, you get more intelligent feedback from a ball of yarn than any of us ever will from Hyperon.

Posted by: blf | February 17, 2010 3:54 PM

Strange, both links work for me. Does it depend on the browser!?!

Doesn't work for me in FireFox 3.5.7; I had to copy-and-paste the URLs into the destination bar.

Ditto with Opera 10.10, also no workee.

Ditto with Konqueror 4.3.2, also no workee.

At which point I gave up. All on Linux, of course (Ubuntu 9.10).

I did not try playing with whether or not to send a referrer, which is my (naive!) guess as to what the dumbfecks on the other end are doing.

Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | February 17, 2010 3:57 PM

Only if you ignore everything we know about how often rapes are reported.

Posted by: Jadehawk, OM | February 17, 2010 3:57 PM

you know what amuses me about Hyperon citing prison rape statistics? it's that in the thread about the university shooting, he was whining about us caring what happens to criminals/convicts and wanting better conditions for them, while he insisted that "psychos" deserved locking up for as long as possible as punishment.

interesting how that works...

Posted by: blf | February 17, 2010 3:58 PM

I did not try playing with whether or not to send a referrer, which is my (naive!) guess as to what the dumbfecks on the other end are doing.

Guess confirmed: Opera 10.10 can follow the links just fine if Send Referrer Information is disabled. I've no idea why the dumbfecks on the other end don't like some(? all?) embedded links. Maybe an ex-SciBorgs ITiot works there?

Posted by: Katrina, radicales féministes athées | February 17, 2010 3:59 PM

A. Noyd:

It's a Passion flower.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passion_flower

Posted by: Jadehawk, OM | February 17, 2010 4:00 PM

It appears to be the estimated number of male prisoners who have been raped.

Posted by: SC OM | February 17, 2010 4:00 PM

I wasn't counting female inmates, if that's what you mean.

It wasn't. See #447.

Unimportant, though. The essential point is that, just as I claimed, there is some data suggesting the possibility that more male-male rapes occur annually than male-females rapes.

You're an utter moron.

Posted by: Katrina, radicales féministes athées | February 17, 2010 4:02 PM

A. Noyd, I see by the time I posted, you'd already found it.

I had to check my garden book, which slowed me down. Glad you were able to solve your mystery. :-D

Posted by: SC OM | February 17, 2010 4:03 PM

It appears to be the estimated number of male prisoners who have been raped in prison.

Posted by: Sven DiMilo | February 17, 2010 4:10 PM

Wait, that was your point? That your attitudes about rape can't possibly be misogynistic because under some circumstances men get raped too?

Really?

Posted by: Thebear, just an agent of peas | February 17, 2010 4:12 PM

AS a man who has been raped - I post to confirm that a certain person in this tread should be barred from all human contact until the unlikely event that he mends his ways.

Rape is one of the most horrible things that could happen to a person. Full stop.

You don't get to compare this like that and say "but it happens to men too, so it's ok". You don't try to make it trivial by playing numbers games. Violent crime is not a game to see which sex suffers the most.

Do the world a favour: Don't breathe another word in public ever again.

Posted by: A. Noyd | February 17, 2010 4:12 PM

Katrina (#458)

I had to check my garden book, which slowed me down. Glad you were able to solve your mystery.

Only just, though. That was the second time I'd tried figuring it out since I took those pics, so I appreciate you taking the time to look!

Posted by: Bobber | February 17, 2010 4:18 PM

What keeps me coming back to these discussions? Because of posts like #447. That one observation, of only a few words, undercut several hundred words Hyperon has used in an attempt to justify his opinion.

Fucking brilliant.

Posted by: Brownian, Most Vicious & Petty of Pharyngulites | February 17, 2010 4:21 PM

Wait, that was your point? That your attitudes about rape can't possibly be misogynistic because under some circumstances men get raped too?

Really?

No, his point is that he thinks he's an intellectual but unfunny Lenny Bruce.

Posted by: Michelle B | February 17, 2010 4:25 PM

Hyperon does not get emotional even about the topic that is supposed to be so meaningful to him--that men have it tougher, they are abused and murdered, etc. His flat affect is overwhelmingly present all the time, even when he discusses matters supposedly close to his heart. He sounds like he is borderline psychopathic.

I can imagine when he cherry picks stats to support his emotionless opinions, that he probably just grunts with a cold-headed nod, yeah, that is what I mean exactly, men have it worse, without feeling anything at all.

One thing is sure, this guy will never hurt himself. Others, maybe.

Posted by: Rorschach | February 17, 2010 4:31 PM

PZ sez :

I'm 52, and my dentist has finally decided that this one annoying wisdom tooth that is all mashed up in the upper right corner of my jaw must go. Gettin' yanked either next week or the week after.

Might want to make sure the dentist's name isn't McLeroy !
Should we be asking for the soft menu for you at the convention dinner ?

;)

Posted by: Brownian, Most Vicious & Petty of Pharyngulites | February 17, 2010 4:32 PM

Anyhow, when you start getting treated like Josef Fritzl merely because you try to speak honestly about the reality of human suffering, then it's time to get your coat.

I was wrong. Fucker thinks he's funny, too.

Posted by: SC OM | February 17, 2010 4:39 PM

The 140,000 figure clearly relates to rapes being carried out annually.

Quote the portions that clearly show that.

Posted by: Brownian, Most Vicious & Petty of Pharyngulites | February 17, 2010 4:42 PM

it's time to get your coat.

Oh, he wasn't joking about being compared to Fritzl. Yes, dear, it's best you get your coat. You're just too intellectually brave to be subjected to our boorishness. Make sure to shake out that coat first; never know when a member of the Muslim Cliterati PC Police might have tried to bug you.

*Sniff* [Wipes away a tear while saluting] Go, brave young patriot. I fear we shall never see a Champion of Truth such as you again, at least until next September when another batch of young turks registers for Political Science 215: Contemporary Social Issues with a bone to pick.

And don't you worry about that cute girl who won't give your superior intelligence the time of day. She's probably just stuck up.

Posted by: Janine, The Little Top Of Venom, OM | February 17, 2010 4:48 PM

(If anyone has any interesting substantive points to offer, I might to them briefly.)

You are a liar. People have had so many points for you, you look like a porcupine furry.

Also, better to be treated like Josef Fritzl then to be treated like his daughter.

I have to take at least three showers to get the stench and filth off of me.

killfile

Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | February 17, 2010 4:50 PM

True enough, although I sincerely doubt that unreported male-female rapes are going to boost the numbers of male-female rapes by around 55%.

Are you fucking insane? Maybe. But more likely you're just a misogynistic asshole who wants things the way he wants them to be so he can play the oh poor males being persecuted card.

What an sad person you are.

Women who suffered physical injury in addition to the injury suffered from the rape or sexual assault reported 37% of those crimes, while only 22% of rapes and sexual assaults without an additional physical injury were reported. (Craven, D. (1994.) A Sex Differences in Violent Victimization, @ NCJ-164508, p.5. Bureau of Justice Statistics, Special Report. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice).

Posted by: Aratina Cage | February 17, 2010 4:54 PM

I do however just want to poop my head in to say 2 things. -Bride of Shrek OM

Children also tend to be homophobic. -Hyperon

If we took children to mean the age group 0 to 10, then you would be having us believe that kids that age actually know what sexual orientation is, which I rather doubt (although kids these days might be learning about it earlier but even if that were true then do they really know what it means or is it just a vague impression?). And homophobia still can't be said to be innate in older children without evidence ruling out culture. It smacks of an attempt to dismiss bigotry against gays as a real concern among our species. Now, how long till you trot off and ne'er return?

Pharyngulettes and gay gentlemen of Pharyngula, your empathetic attention please: Blake (yep, that's his name) was, I swear to the FSM, tall, dark and handsome. And did I say well-muscled? So this Registered Cardio Sonographer lay his fine forearm between my breasts (to steady his hand) while he probed my lubricated neck with a round-tipped wand about the size of (insert Josh, Official SpokesGay's imaginative description here). -Lynna, OM

And anybody who thinks Kidney Stones are the result of some sort of "Intelligent Design" should try them. -negentropyeater

Posted by: SC OM | February 17, 2010 4:57 PM

Extrapolating these findings to the national level would give a total of over 140,000 inmates who have been anally raped.

Yes, you moron!

In 1996*, the year before Nebraska correctional officials told Human Rights Watch that prisoner-on-prison sexual abuse was uncommon, Professor Cindy Struckman-Johnson and her colleagues published the results of a survey of state prison inmates there. They concluded that 22 percent of male inmates had been pressured or forced to have sexual contact against their will while incarcerated.(354) Of these, over 50 percent had submitted to forced anal sex at least once.(355) Extrapolating these findings to the national level would give a total of over 140,000 inmates who have been anally raped.(356)

(Is he reading "annually" for "anally"?)

*Accepting the extrapolations, that figure would of course be significantly higher now, due to the hugely increased prison population (see Loïc Wacquant's Prisons of Poverty). Most of that increase is poor black people, speaking out on whose behalf Hyperon has of course made his life's work.

Posted by: John Morales | February 17, 2010 5:07 PM

H:

No, my point is more along the lines of: since rape is a relatively unisex phenomenon, why is my position being denounced as a misogynistic position?

It's only "relatively unisex" because you've dredged up prison rapes to compare with rapes in society at large.

Your main point, as I make it, it to engage in endless protestations.

Posted by: Brownian, Most Vicious & Petty of Pharyngulites | February 17, 2010 5:09 PM

You haven't defined what age group you are talking about, ruled out the cultural impact on the knowledge of children so that it isn't a learned discrimination, ruled out something like cootie-phobia, shown that it is something that can't be unlearned, disclosed the source of this assertion, or anything else that would be necessary to posit this conclusion.

We've seen this before. Make vague statement that's guaranteed to raise somebody's ire. When called on it, provide unsourced supporting anecdotes ("Everybody knows it", "I've heard stories", "I just remember how my dad was scared of homosexuals while working in a factory to support bon bon-eating golddiggers when he was a child") while complaining about persecution, just long enough to dig up a few statistics that don't really apply, or shouldn't be generalised from. Criticise any statistics or arguments against as being 'irrelevant'. Claim more persecution. Argue about the statistics. If really cornered, claim he didn't really claim that "all" children are homophobic, so any exceptions aren't applicable. Claim more persecution. After a few hundred meandering comments arguing about the meaning of this study or that, what constitutes a 'child', 'tend' and 'homophobic', start all over again by mentioning something equally stupid like 'nobody seems to care that men pay nearly all child support'. Rinse and repeat.

Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | February 17, 2010 5:10 PM

Using a definition of rape that includes forced vaginal, oral, and anal sex, the National Violence Against Women Survey found that 1 of 6 U.S. Women and 1 of 33 U.S. men has experienced an attempted or completed rape as a child and/or adult. According to estimates, approximately 1.5 million women and 834,700 men are raped and/or physically assaulted annually by an intimate partner in the United States. (Tjaden, P. & Thoennes, N. (1998, November). A Prevalence, Incidence, and Consequences of Violence Against Women: Findings From the National Violence Against Women Survey, @ p. 2 & 5. Research in Brief. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice, U.S. Department of Justice.)

Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | February 17, 2010 5:14 PM

Right, that's exactly what I was doing. Sorry about that. I'm wrong. In my defense, it's hard to be on the receiving end of such a volume of hateful abuse accurate corrections to your sociopathic behavior and at the same time function with all systems optimal.

fixed

Posted by: Aratina Cage | February 17, 2010 5:18 PM

it's hard to be on the receiving end of such a volume of hateful abuse and at the same time function with all systems optimal. -Hyperon

Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM | February 17, 2010 5:21 PM

Scorecard for the Day

Pharyngula 100

Hypershit 0

About as expected.

Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | February 17, 2010 5:23 PM

Poor Hyperone. Mommy didn't love him, the girls shunned him and now he hates them all.

I sincerely hope all women you come into contact with can recognize what a disgusting little dangerous toad you are and keep their distance or at least have a .38 in their purse just in case.

Posted by: John Morales | February 17, 2010 5:23 PM

Ah, the GL meme is introduced.

Careful with that toy, KG.

Posted by: Brownian, Most Vicious & Petty of Pharyngulites | February 17, 2010 5:38 PM

Found it. For anybody sick of actually talking with the little fuckhead and interested in reading about how he's pulling one of the oldest tricks in the book in order to accord himself the victim status, take a look at this:

Words are not fists: some thoughts on how men work to defuse feminist anger

While I'm cautious about comparing the experiences of atheists as a minority to those of women, homosexuals, and ethnic minorities (especially considering that, at least in my community here in Canada, claiming to be an atheist raises no more eyebrows than claiming to be an Episcopalian) this blog entry (which draws heavily on the one linked immediately above) offers some insight as to why atheists might be perceived as "uppity" by merely openly existing.

Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM | February 17, 2010 5:51 PM

Hyperon, you have nothing, and will have nothing but your bigotry, sexism, racism, arrogance and your delusions. You are a stupid fool. Go away. You have nothing cogent to say to us. So why can't you just leave? Other than mental illness, of course.

Posted by: triskelethecat | February 17, 2010 5:56 PM

@BOS (425)...I, too, have been raped, and have followed your lead and finally killfiled the jerk who seems to think that it's nothing to deal with. I'm mostly over it now, 30 years later, but even now, some things can set me off and I freak out. I don't wish evil on persons but I don't choose to infect my brain with the jerk's asshattery.

Posted by: Rawnaeris | February 17, 2010 6:01 PM

PZ, I second Nerd on this one.

Posted by: Nick | February 17, 2010 6:02 PM

Just in case you were in danger of misunderstanding Islam, please dont. It would defile the purity of it.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8520487.stm

Because nothing says 'purity' like a good caning.

Posted by: Hyperon | February 17, 2010 6:09 PM

On the subject of B.S., reading Hyperon's posts on how a severe beating is more traumatising for a man than rape is for a woman, an idea drifted through my mind.

If there is a reason, there has to be some explanation; and if it's taboo to ask what that explanation is, that is not my fault.

Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM | February 17, 2010 6:13 PM

Hypershit, your experience is irrelevant. Your gut feelings are irrelevant. It is all about the data, which you suck at big time. You and reality do not intersect. So, take your loser show on the road. We, the blog regulars, have absolutely no interest in your problems and inane, insane, racist, sexist, and totally shit filled ideas. Go away. And stay away.

Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM | February 17, 2010 6:20 PM

If not, it's hard to understand what you could be getting at by telling us your credentials.

Posted by: First Approximation, L'esprit de l'escalier | February 17, 2010 6:26 PM

Poll: Large majority opposes Supreme Court's decision on campaign financing

Eight in 10 poll respondents say they oppose the high court's Jan. 21 decision to allow unfettered corporate political spending, with 65 percent "strongly" opposed. Nearly as many backed congressional action to curb the ruling, with 72 percent in favor of reinstating limits.

Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM | February 17, 2010 6:29 PM

"null hypothesis"

Posted by: 'Tis Himself, OM | February 17, 2010 6:32 PM

Feynmaniac #522

The law would have to be carefully written to pass a court challenge.

Posted by: Brownian, Most Vicious & Petty of Pharyngulites | February 17, 2010 6:33 PM

What are you saying here?

Shall I repeat the next line I wrote to you?

Here it is:

What you do not have is a sufficient understanding of statistics and how they apply to real studies to to even attempt to make nearly any of the claims you've made

Shall we go over it again?

Here it is again:

What you do not have is a sufficient understanding of statistics and how they apply to real studies to to even attempt to make nearly any of the claims you've made

Still unclear?

Let me repeat myself for you:

What you do not have is a sufficient understanding of statistics and how they apply to real studies to to even attempt to make nearly any of the claims you've made

I'll bold it, in case you want to get some tracing paper and practice writing out the letters yourself:

What you do not have is a sufficient understanding of statistics and how they apply to real studies to to even attempt to make nearly any of the claims you've made

That good, or do I need to print out a copy, hop a plane to England, and stand over you with a yardstick while you copy it out on the chalkboard 500 times?

I gave my credentials for the benefit of those that don't feel like wading through the multitude of threads you've befouled for examples of your blatant misuse of statistics as reasons that I know you're a fucking statistical moron, though perhaps not as fucking moronical as Joe Sixpack or John Hooligan. The first one I saw was your bullshit attempt to use studies to paint Muslims as wanting to kill whites like you (or whatever it is you said exactly) while ignoring studies that I misused in parallel fashion to demonstrate to you a comparable claim could be made about Americans wanting to kill Japanese on the "rapping about genes" thread. After that, I've had no interest in what you think are your 'arguments'.

Posted by: Walton, Marquis of Carabas | February 17, 2010 6:35 PM

Feynmaniac @#522: And this matters why?

The whole point of the judicial protection of constitutional rights is that it isn't up for a popular vote, and doesn't depend on polls. If the poll was "Large majority opposes Supreme Court's decision on abortion," or "Large majority opposes Supreme Court's decision on creationism in schools," you would rightly say that this doesn't matter. It is the job of the court to uphold the Constitution, even when this leads to unpopular results.

I'm not commenting on whether the Court got it right or wrong in this instance; there are reasonable legal arguments on all sides. But the result of a poll doesn't have, and shouldn't have, any bearing on the matter at all. What matters is the legal and constitutional substance of the issue, not public opinion.

Posted by: Brownian, Most Vicious & Petty of Pharyngulites | February 17, 2010 6:37 PM

See, for instance, #340 and #347. I was pretty unequivocal that I was asking WHY rape is necessarily worse than physical assault.

Indeed you were. Who typed those comments for you?

Posted by: Brownian, Most Vicious & Petty of Pharyngulites | February 17, 2010 6:42 PM

Going back to 340:

I also understand that my crime on this blog is heresy.

What? I'm very upset to hear that you've been accused of a crime. How much in fines did you have to pay? Was there jail time? Community service? Instead of blathering on about these fucking whiny rape and assault victims, why aren't we protesting on the steps of PZ's courthouse?

I mean, surely only someone who's not "too intellectually and emotionally limited" would make such a claim unless he were actually being persecuted.

Posted by: Alan B | February 17, 2010 6:44 PM

I have deliberately kept mouth mouth shut on this subthread about rape. I have no direct experience (gladly). I have no academic training. I have no great piles of statistics. I do have the ability to listen and I think that is one of Hyperon's problems: he does not listen.

Yes, I know. He reads what is said but the Internet is a mighty poor way of communicating. The are many sidebands of thought (as E E Doc Smith would put it). There are people on this thread who are OG, as one might say. People who have been around for a long time. They have built up an atmosphere of trust and have shared experiences on sensitive issues, like domestic violence, like rape, like marriage and partnership break-ups.

When you come into this community, Hyperon, you need to be sensitive to issues. Many of the people who you think have abused you know other people in the community who really have been abused and have suffered. You may not understand why that form of suffering is particularly hurtful to them but they are telling you it is. Their friends are telling you it is and are telling you to back off.

Listen to them. You may not understand why you are wrong but you are WRONG. Everyone here is telling you that you are wrong. Listen. You have gone past the stage where you can expect reasoned argument. You have cut that off by your insensitivity.

Back off.

A genuine apology for the hurt you have caused would help.

I am trying to put together more thoughts on this, hopefully this evening.

Posted by: John Morales | February 17, 2010 6:50 PM

Hyperon @533: TSTKHS.

(Yeah I know, charitable.)

Posted by: Hyperon | February 17, 2010 6:52 PM

You have gone past the stage where you can expect reasoned argument. You have cut that off by your insensitivity.

Posted by: Thebear, just an agent of peas | February 17, 2010 6:55 PM

Thanks for the great post Alan B

Personal issues makes it very hard for me to talk to the individual you're talking to, and far more tempting to talk about him (and in ways that are perhaps not the most constructive) - and looking at things it looks like this goes for more people than me.

When these things happen it's allways good for someone with less vested interests to intervene and explain.

One can only hope that he manages to see that you're doing him a great favour.

And once more - thanks.

Posted by: Carlie of the lacy, gently wafting adjectives | February 17, 2010 6:57 PM

Hyperon, Brownian only pulled out his credentials because you said:

Are you insinuating that everyone here who disagrees with me about social issues has arrived at his or her position only through pouring over tables of statistics? Give me a break. I'm pretty sure, in any case, that I'm more diligent about statistics than the average poster here.

He was showing that, once again, you are wrong in your superiority complex.

Posted by: Pygmy Loris | February 17, 2010 7:03 PM

NO.

If you were trying to pass a walnut through your urethra, maybe it would be as painful as childbirth.

I heard that from a friend of mine who did natural childbirth and passed a kidney stone. She said the latter was more painful. YMMV, of course.

Posted by: badgersdaughter | February 17, 2010 7:09 PM

YMMV, of course.

Well, with two live births under my belt, one in which the epidural didn't work, and constant kidney infections from damage due to stones that resulted in the loss of one of my kidneys, I'd still take a stone before another horrendous session in the labor room. Of course, the stakes are a bit higher now that I only have one kidney.

Posted by: badgersdaughter | February 17, 2010 7:11 PM

I'm sorry, Pigmy Loris, I'm feeling grumpy because of Hyperon's crap. I didn't mean to sound combative, just pointing out that my mileage did, in fact, vary. :)

Posted by: Pygmy Loris | February 17, 2010 7:15 PM

Walton,

I think you're wrong to downplay the importance of mental and emotional health here. In some ways, mental trauma can be more harmful to an individual's wellbeing than physical injury. Many rape victims end up suffering from depression, low self-esteem, chronic nightmares and fears, and other serious mental health problems through their entire lives. It's easy to assert that you would be able to "blank out" a traumatic event, but until you've experienced it, you have no basis for making an assertion like that. Mental health is just as real as physical health, and just as important to people's lives.

I've just got to say, thanks.

Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM | February 17, 2010 7:21 PM

Do you even know what's being discussed,

Posted by: Pygmy Loris | February 17, 2010 7:22 PM

Bride of Shrek

1) I am heartened by the comments here. Obviously there's one sick and twisted individual but clearly everyone else is against his "opinions" and are soundly rejecting any of his "theories". You have rounded on him and told him off in various forms and I think that clearly shows who has the better morals and values. You guys give me a warm fuzzy feeling sometimes and that's why I love being part of this place.

That sums up my feelings pretty well, too.

Posted by: Wowbagger, Man-Hating Man of Pharyngula | February 17, 2010 7:23 PM

Incidentally, if I were ever raped, the thing I would be most worried about is painful and long-term physical injuries.

Which, I'm guessing, is why people are pointing out that you don't have a fucking clue what you're talking about.

It seems to me what you're saying is much like telling a soldier who's going into combat that, if they get shot or injured in battle, once they've healed they'll be perfectly fine to get on with their lives because there's no such thing as PTSD.

Which would make you...let's see, what's the term I'm looking for...oh that's it - a complete fucking idiot.

Posted by: Blind Squirrel FCD | February 17, 2010 7:25 PM

, academics generally wouldn't be inclined to do studies that corroborate my position.

BS

Posted by: Carlie of the lacy, gently wafting adjectives | February 17, 2010 7:32 PM

Hyperon, you are using bad arguments. You are misunderstanding data, and have been told exactly how you are misinterpreting it, and that has nothing to do with feelings or emotions or "soft science". You are using numbers as if they mean something they don't, and that is simply wrong. You sniffed at the concept of reification, but you're a roaring example of it. Even worse, because you're reifying numbers that don't even exist the way you think they do.

You have also been given, over the last few threads you have participated in, many, many links to actual research papers that both have and explain data. You have refused to even acknowledge them, and have admitted that you haven't read most of them. For example, you haven't said a word about the callback studies involving sending out identical resumes with male or female names; possibly because you know you can't twist those conclusions around, but more likely because you never read it in the first place.

Asking for information and having it handed to you IS giving you data. You not following the information is your own fault, not the fault of the people who have handed it to you on a platter.

Instead of using that information, you're the one who is using random logical fallacies, misinterpreting what's there, and displaying extraordinary confirmation bias in every single one of your statements. You're affecting the attitude that you are the only one arguing from a point of dispassionate logic, but in fact you are the only one who is arguing from a basis of nothing but your own opinion and prejudices.

If you want to be taken at all seriously, you need to go back and click on all the damned links you have been given and read them, then either ask questions or make comments on the actual data. Otherwise, all you're doing is blowing smoke.

Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM | February 17, 2010 7:34 PM

About asking why rape is categorically different from physical assault without rape?

Posted by: nigelTheBold, Minister of Spankings | February 17, 2010 7:39 PM

Wrong ABOUT WHAT? About asking why rape is categorically different from physical assault without rape?

No. About asserting it is not categorically different. It quite obviously is different, as the effects are substantially different (except possibly in cases of extreme assault).

The empirical evidence is that rape is substantially different from assault.

Why is it different? I couldn't give you a real answer, as I've never studied the psychological trauma caused by rape, nor have I been raped. Other people have studied the psychology of rape. Their books are available. I suggest you avail yourself of a library. Other people have been raped, and have tried to report to you the effects of the rape.

If you were at all interested in finding the answer to your question, you would've listened. But, in spite of your protestations, you are not logical about this at all. You are not even analytical.

As you said earlier: I have no hypothesis. I just have facts, and the facts are that rape causes much greater psychological trauma than your basic nightclub altercation.

If you are truly interested in the "why," start reading the research.

Posted by: Pygmy Loris | February 17, 2010 7:40 PM

I'm sorry, Pigmy Loris, I'm feeling grumpy because of Hyperon's crap. I didn't mean to sound combative, just pointing out that my mileage did, in fact, vary. :)

You're fine :) I only have one friend who has experienced both, so I appreciate the different perspective.

Posted by: negentropyeater | February 17, 2010 7:50 PM

Hyperon,

About asking why rape is categorically different from physical assault without rape?

You are not merely asking this question. You are also asserting that :

Incidentally, if I were ever raped, the thing I would be most worried about is painful and long-term physical injuries. Yes, it would be highly uncomfortable, but it would only last for a short period of time. Carrying around broken body parts for months would be in my opinion worse than "trauma", which I could probably blank out soon enough.

So you can't understand why so many rape victims are emotionally traumatized for so long because you think the only worrying aspect of rape are the long term physical injuries (which btw you think will only last for a short period of time).

So not only are you an insensitive asshat, but also an incoherent one.

Posted by: Walton, Marquis of Carabas | February 17, 2010 7:52 PM

Having set the scene, now consider rape. Rape is defined in English Law (or it was last time I looked) as "carnal knowledge of a woman forcibly and against her will".

Not any more. See section 1 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003, which replaced the common-law definition of rape:

(1) A person (A) commits an offence if–

(a) he intentionally penetrates the vagina, anus or mouth of another person (B) with his penis,

(b) B does not consent to the penetration, and

(c) A does not reasonably believe that B consents.

(2) Whether a belief is reasonable is to be determined having regard to all the circumstances, including any steps A has taken to ascertain whether B consents.

In English law, both men and women can be victims of rape. However, since the definition of the offence includes penetration with a penis, the offence of rape cannot be committed by a woman. Other forms of coercive sexual activity are charged as "assault by penetration" or "sexual assault" under sections 2 and 3 of the Act.

Just FYI.

Posted by: Alan B | February 17, 2010 7:55 PM

#549 Hyperon asked me:

Do you even know what's being discussed, or are you just picking up a bad smell, and taking it on faith that the "cool kids" must be right?

Do you always go out of your way to be gratuitously offensive?

Might I respectfully suggest you try a little humility? One of the contributors here has the tagline "Still Learning". It's a good concept.

Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM | February 17, 2010 7:58 PM

So you assert, arbitrarily, without anything approaching a supporting argument.

Posted by: Jadehawk, OM | February 17, 2010 8:00 PM

It isn't obvious how we can compare psychological damage and physical damage in terms of suffering caused.

OK, I'm officially convinced he's a book-case sociopath. No person can actually be this clueless about the effects of psychological damage, unless they have never actually "felt" anything, ever. :-/

Posted by: Hyperon | February 17, 2010 8:06 PM

See Carlie? He's not better with stats than "all" of the posters, just "more diligent than the average" poster here. Bait-and-switch-you're-wrong.

Posted by: Qwerty | February 17, 2010 8:07 PM

PZ should change the name of this tread to "the thread hijacked by Hyperon."

I was going to suggest to Hyperon that he change his subject from rape (which he apparently has never experienced but thinks he knows a lot about) and assault (which, again, is something I doubt he has experienced) to something simpler like the weather, but....

He's probably a global warming denialist too.

Oh, well, yawn, yawn. A few more comments and there'll be another episode of the never-ending thread.

Posted by: David Marjanović | February 17, 2010 8:09 PM

Substance for me has always been first

Hah. A cheap prejudice supported by 0 to 2 anecdotes and/or a paper you didn't manage to read for understanding, that's what has always been first for you.

I've already acknowledged I was wrong with the statistics I quoted on rape. (I read "anally" as "annually".)

That wasn't the only error by far. In fact, if that had been your only error, your case would be better supported than it is, as SC of all people pointed out in comment 491. Your biggest mistake was to compare estimated and reported numbers...

So you assert, arbitrarily, without anything approaching a supporting argument.

I gave an explanation of what "null hypothesis" means.

Surely you have a statistics textbook at home? If not, just read the Wikipedia article on "null hypothesis".

While you're at it, also read the one on the Dunning-Kruger effect. But don't forget comment 402 either.

Posted by: Hyperon | February 17, 2010 8:15 PM

"null hypothesis" has been defined for your benefit upthread. you have ignored that definition, just like you ignore everything else that doesn't suit you, and continue using that term incorrectly.

You really must be reaching deep if you have to resort to twisting my use of "null hypothesis".

Posted by: Jadehawk, OM | February 17, 2010 8:20 PM

Hardly. He's just a run-of-the-mill dolt who's probably got some aptitude in one field (I'm assuming he isn't lying about having university-level math training) and makes the mistake of thinking he's a polymath. Your average university chess or philosophy club is so full of these guys they stack 'em like cord wood to make bleachers for debates and tourneys.

Posted by: Jadehawk, OM | February 17, 2010 8:29 PM