I'm out.

[theVOID]

As some of you may have noticed, I am no longer an admin. And I'm not just no longer retired, I'm leaving entirely. I made this choice for a bunch of reasons, which amount to the fact that this place is not fun anymore. Some of my reasons mesh with EvF's reasons for stepping down. I never have liked busy forums, I can't keep up with the all the posts, and I'm sick of repeating myself and having the same arguments over and over again. It was fun for a while, now it's just aggravating.

Sad to see you go, however I don't share your sentiment.

Furthermore, being an admin was draining for personal reasons, which I'm not going to go into detail.

Really, it's not that tough.

With that said, I'm sure some of you are happy to hear this. However, I'm not leaving because of the recent rule drama. This was actually something that has been brewing before that ever happened.

I didn't expect that was the reason

As you all know I posted a controversial article about white, male, straight, cisgendered privilege and how it's present in the atheist community. Tavarish of course has posted his complaints here, and most of you have reacted as I expected, and no, I am not going to argue the point here, but simply point out some examples in the article were taken directly from here. Obviously, these problematic attitudes exist here in various forms, and I'm no longer okay pretending it doesn't bother me or fooling myself into thinking those of you who display these attitudes might actually listen to reason after I've explained it ten times.

Your article was full of poor reasoning, generalisations and assertions.

1. You can't expect everyone to be a great skeptic or civil rights campaigner, if you want that then go sign up at the appropriate places.

2. You're massively exaggerating the problem, and as is expected in such circumstances, you offered nothing of substance in support of this 'problematic attitude' here on the forums being so prevalent.

3. Like many many times before you insist that you are the one who is being rational without substantiating it, just like in the debate over the insult rule. And I called you out there for the same reasons.

4. We may have reacted 'as you expected' not because we're privileged, racist, sexist white males, but because your argument was bullshit - In fact every other woman here disagreed with you too, lending credence to the latter. Yet, from 3), you'd be the last to consider that possibility.

Not everyone here is guilty of throwing around their privilege and failing to get the point when it comes to minority issues and discrimination. However, there's enough and I'm done with it. I have no particular interest in participating in a community where ignoring minority views, and in fact encouraging discriminatory attitudes is permissible. This isn't just about the victim blaming thread, it's something that I constantly see. When a member can proudly call himself a homophobic misogynist and everyone seems to accepts it as a joke, well, that's not okay, and I don't want to be a part of it.

1. The vast majority here are anti-discrimination on racial or minority basis. I will discriminate against behaviour any day, but never against a persona .

2. Again, you make the assertion that this forum is sooooo racist and sexist or anti LGBT, that we hate these minorities, yet you still haven't provided examples, and any that you would be able to find will be from a select few, all of which are NOT my (or the majority of the members) position.

Of course I doubt most of you will care. In fact you've already displayed the problematic attitudes I've been objecting to in the thread Tavarish posted, or deciding to use a swastika in your avatar is an okay joke when someone like existentialist disagrees with you.

No, I do care, and I also care about the quality of an argument, something that you completely failed at in this instance.

Oh, and these attitudes 'we' displayed in Tarv's thread are problematic in what sense? The only problem that is evident is that we don't agree with you or the foundations of your argument.

I don't give a shit who has a Swas in their avatar, if you want to come here and be a racist then do it, just don't expect any respect from the vast majority here, and don't attack people of a different race or you're banned. It's really rather simple.

Too often I see you all gang up on anyone with a minority view. You pat each other on the back, give each other kudos,

I'm sorry, but THAT IS THE WHOLE FUCKING IDEA BEHIND KUDOS! It's designed to allow you to show support for a position, what do you want us to use it for, good grammar?

and take turns waving around the fact that you're the majority, and if that person insist on disagreeing, well obviously he/she's the troll, because a bunch of men on the internet have decided rape victims are responsible for their rape, or that cash for a vasectomy is a great idea without considering the social implications.

1) Show me where the majority condoned rape

2) Show me a person with a minority position who was automatically declared a troll based on that fact alone

3) Cash for vasectomy is a great idea, both for preventing terrible lives for children raised by drug addict and limiting the subsequent strain on the welfare system. If you would rather have children raised in the wombs of heroin addicts, gaining brain damage and behavioural problems prior to birth then good for you, however I see any action that prevents that outcome as being rather ethical in that regard. Also, VASECTOMIES ARE REVERSIBLE. If said addict gets clean and wants a family then there is nothing preventing them from reversing the procedure and having a family. What it effectively is about is contraception, and the incentive is necessary in motivating these addicts to take part.

I know the people who need to hear this the most will mock me and demonize me for this, but I'm past the point of caring, of trying to engage in intellectual conversation when I all I get is shut down with classic derailing arguments like "You're being too emotional".

I am opposed to your position yet I didn't once call you "too emotional", I showed flaws in your reasoning, so cut it with the strawman yeah?

My tone doesn't change what I'm saying, and I'm not going to accept that as a valid counter point to anything I say. There's a mob mentality here, and when someone disagrees with a certain group of active posters, they're dogpiled, called a troll, and driven out. Well you've finally done it to me, you should only be so proud.

Right, tone means nothing. That's not the problem. I could punch someone in the face whilst screaming "2 + 2 = 4" and still be correct in my statement. What's your point?

To those who have engaged me honestly here, whether we agreed or disagreed on many issues, thank you. To those who insist on never seeing past their own privilege, maybe one day you'll get it, but for now, fuck off. I'm done. Enjoy what you will perceive as a victory and continue missing the point. Tear apartment my argument here all you like, I won't be responding.

You've already assumed you're absolutely right, you seem to do that all-too-often. Too bad your argument is riddled with fallacies.

I'm sorry to anyone who will genuinely miss me that I had to leave on such terms. I'll still be on the internet, just not here.

I will, but that doesn't mean i'm not going to counter your bs.

[In This Mind]

In fact every other woman here disagreed with you too, lending credence to the latter.

No, they didn't. You've just driven most of the women who would post here to other forums or taught them they best agree with you or be subject to outright harassment.

[theVOID]

What part of what I said was remotely sexist or qualified as harassment? I very much like Jackie and generally like her articles, that doesn't make my disagreement with one particular article sexist or harassment, we've disagreed on pretty much nothing the whole time I've been here save the one issue mentioned where she was pretty much guilty of the same tactics.

Anyway, I argued her points systematically, and unless you can point to some response that was wrong then my argument stands whether you like it or not.

[Dotard]

OH Eilo! WAIT!! One more thing before you go......


[youtube]yKR0l7odlVI[/youtube]

[fr0d0]

Yeah I don't know what you're talking about there VOID - every other woman agreed with Eli on the major issue that I saw.

[Spectrum]

In fact every other woman here disagreed with you too, lending credence to the latter.

No, they didn't. You've just driven most of the women who would post here to other forums or taught them they best agree with you or be subject to outright harassment.

How so? If a male pulled the same shit, then the reaction would have probably been the same. Considering, I don't know, the obvious lack of sexism in the posts here -__- Your just trying to throw guilt around too, and that's another reason why sexism is still around. You're just as bad as the prideful, pigheaded males who introduce sexism into situations.

By the way, you have no right to speak for the women here. They are easily capable of posting on the issue of harassment and speaking for themselves (if there is even an issue of harassment).

[ib.me.ub]

No, they didn't. You've just driven most of the women who would post here to other forums or taught them they best agree with you or be subject to outright harassment.

Don't give them the satisfaction then. Don't let them relish in their little click, all safe and sound. Mix it up a bit.

[Autumnlicious]

In fact every other woman here disagreed with you too, lending credence to the latter.

No, they didn't. You've just driven most of the women who would post here to other forums or taught them they best agree with you or be subject to outright harassment.

My favorite troll is back.

[ib.me.ub]

Isn't that comment a bit of a troll.

[Autumnlicious]

Isn't that comment a bit of a troll.

Only if you have no memory of it's previous posts or can't read it's signature of the character "agree with me or else."

I calls them as I sees them.

Hurr durr.