commented on a video on YouTube.
Shared publicly  - 
+Shannon Dornbush, you've attracted the attention of +The Amazing Atheist!  Do you accept the challenge!?
Tomoko Animates Stuff's profile photoEd Brayton's profile photoA Hermit's profile photoMyContext's profile photo

17:10 "she makes gman sound ... like... tolerable" .. "no, gman is fucking isaac newton compared to this [..]" 
I really enjoyed that. Even though i do not care for his uploads, The A.A. is pretty funny in his live discussions.
Wolf King
+Shannon Dornbush You still think the moon is just a light or is reality just a test of your faith?
+Shannon Dornbush
Can you show us where the pillars are that support the Earth? Are all astronauts liars BTW? If astronauts are not liars, how is Satan able to manipulate the entire universe to appear to be real? Or is Yahweh deceiving us for some holy purpose?
How many lightbulbs does it take for Shannon to light her house? One moon.
Shannon may be an idiot. Okay, she IS an idiot. But let's hope that this creepy fuckstain called the "Amazing Atheist" doesn't threaten to rape her as he's done to more than one woman in the past. You really shouldn't be promoting a fucking asshole like this.
+Ed Brayton  Which makes it extremely important to denote what atheism IS so it is understood that it is singular in its focus.

There are many people who are absolute idiots in a particular area and quite capable in other areas.

Acknowledge the good and as well as the bad of whomever.
JD Kain
I was unaware of that, +Ed Brayton.  Of the videos I've seen TJ in, he's never said anything of the sort.
+Ed Brayton Links, please. And don't tell me it was just a joke. A joke in bad taste is still not an actual threat. Not defending TJ, he has done multiple things that earn him the moniker "fucking asshole", but I'm not convinced he'd actually threaten to rape anybody for "realsies".

"Rape isn't fatal. So imagine my indignation when I saw a chatroom called "Rape Survivors." Is this supposed to impress me? Someone fucked you when you didn't want to be fucked and you're amazed that you survived? Unless he used a chainsaw instead of his dick, what's the big deal? ... The word survivor applies to people who are alive after being stabbed 73 times with an ice pick or mauled by rabid wolverines, not to a woman who gets dick when she doesn't want it. Just because you got raped, you have to rape the English language? You vindictive bitch! Also, don't you ever get tired of being the victim? How many failed relationships are you going to blame on a single violation of your personal space?"

Yes, yes, anyone who calls themselves is a "vindictive bitch" who is "raping the English language." He's not a misogynist at all for saying shit like that, right?

"I told her, "You’re lucky it wasn't me. I’d have busted your fucking nose and raped you.""

And I don't care whether he was "joking." You don't tell someone you want to rape them. Ever.

On February 2012, in a thread on the MensRights subreddit about a disasteful username on a feminist board, he made a "joke" about how he wanted to violently rape one of its users. When he was informed the person in question was an actual rape victim and called out by said person for his abusive language and lack of respect for people with post-traumatic stress disorder, he complained about the very concept of trigger warnings and posted further graphic descriptions of how he would rape her again in a deliberate attempt to make her relive her trauma. Choice statements include "I will make you a rape victim if you don't fuck off." and "I think we should give the guy who raped you a medal. I hope you fucking drown in rape semen, you ugly, mean-spirited cow."

He seems to make a habit out of this. He's a total piece of shit and he should be ostracized and isolated by every decent atheist.
Aside from being an ass at times (can't say that I am exempt), has he done anything else since the incident in question?
+MyContext Well sure, he's threatened to rape multiple women and deliberately abused women who have been raped, but he hasn't done it in a while now, so it's totally cool.
+Ed Brayton I recognize people as having melt down moments as well as patterns of behavior.  So, the nasty ranting is common for him especially on some topics, but there is usually a line which apparently he crossed then.  The question of whether he has lost control since then becomes an issue as well as whether he has any actual reports of violence or purely verbal abuse.

I don't put anything past anyone.  Since, there have been many "really nice guys" that turned out to be rapists.
+MyContext The statement about how rape victims are "raping the language" and are "vindictive bitches" was made in a book. It wasn't in the course of some angry argument with someone, he sat down and wrote that and edited the book and at no point, apparently, did it occur to him that it was vile and deranged. But even if it did take place in an angry conversation, I just don't buy this excuse. I've been furiously angry at many people in my life; it has never once occurred to me that I should threaten to rape them or to say that the person who actually DID rape them should get a medal. Not once. These excuses simply don't cut it. He's a fucking asshole. He's a repulsive misogynist. And he should be treated as one.
+Ed Brayton Look, I agree, rape jokes are bad. They aren't funny. The Amazing Atheist can, and has, and probably will, act like a massive douche to people. But he is telling a joke. It's not funny to you, and it's definitely not funny to the people he was making fun of, but they aren't real threats. If the jokes he told caused real trauma, there's a case to be made. But the second you say "Fuck this guy, I'm out", he's gone. He can't/won't find you through the interwebs and harass you IRL (and, again, if he did, there'd be a case to be made). Real life is your safe space from him. Jesus, look what you've got me doing. I'm writing a whole damn essay defending the Amazing Atheist. Long story short: he's an asshole, to be sure, but, IMO, a harmless one. And, unfortunately, the only way to avoid the assholes online is to keep your stuff as private as possible or keep it offline entirely. Is that a good way of doing things? No, of course not. I'd love for everybody to be able to share their experiences with others in a safe environment, if that helps them, but that just isn't how it works at present.
+Shannon Dornbush
What is in store for us? hell fire? How very Jesus-like of you. Great to see that your religion has made you more developed and civilized. Can I also expect to deny facts that are in front of my face as well if I turn to your religion? I think the only thing you accomplished here is showing people that no matter how stupid an idea is, there will always be a sucker that believes in it. So thank you for the stark realization.
+Lick Tasty Sorry, I don't have you doing anything. You're defending the indefensible all on your own. Don't blame me for your appalling excuses for this world class asshole's behavior.
JD Kain
Point taken, +Ed Brayton.  Definitely a very flawed person.  Still, his religious rants are entertaining and usually on the mark.
+JD Kain
Why oh fucking why would you repeatedly come to a guy's channel if you find him to be "a world class asshole"? Are you a masochist or something? Or is it that you are a sad bored little man looking for a cause? Cause let me tell you something. You come off as more than pathetic returning again and again to something that you profess to despise. Kind of like an anti gay preacher that gets caught sucking cock in a public bathroom.
+Ed Brayton Oh, it's just a mannerism, you stick-in-the-mud, no blame has been placed upon you. My point still stands: a horrid and tasteless joke is still a joke. It's not a threat just because it offends someone. That's all I'm saying. Not saying TJ is a faultless angel, he's done plenty to provoke any decent person's ire, but mean jokes just don't rank so high on that list for me.
+Ed Brayton He may not be an ally of feminism but he's still a cool entertainer.
+Ed Brayton

1. The only references that I found were from the Reddit event you described which was from February 2012.

2. The depiction suggests a rant that went out of control; and he pressed on with his usual tactlessness.

3. He is known for being an asshole by some standards, tactless by some standards, and various other notions including good. (He does present some good points here and there...)

4. He is NOT known for being violent, which became a point of inquiry, since, that would actually be an issue to me.

5. He does not seem incurably stupid, since, it seems that he does not commit the same social violations with the exception of being an asshole and that would actually be a debatable on some topics.

6. Perhaps if I had more actual first hand details, my disposition might be different.
+MyContext I don't know what you mean by "the only reference I found were from the Reddit event." Want a link to the book where he made that horrible statement about rape victims being "vindictive bitches"?

It's on page 90. And lest you think he was just being angry, here's what he wrote a page later:

"I just showed this writing to a friend of mine, along with the question, “Is this too offensive to release?” I was looking for a yes. I got one. So, I’ve included it 
here. I’m here to cross lines. This is not The Amazing Atheist from those cute little youtube videos you love so much—this is the real me. And the real me doesn’t give a fuck about your small-minded boundaries. 

If you’ve been raped, does the above passage add insult to injury? Does it make it hurt worse? How could it? If rape is the paramount psychological trauma in life, then how could my words aggravate it whatsoever?"

The "real" him thinks this is perfectly acceptable. Seriously, I just don't understand how any decent human being could possibly defend this or excuse it away or say "oh well, at least he's entertaining." No, he's a scumbag. A total, complete scumbag.
+Ed Brayton The "real" him doesn't see rape as acceptable, but he sees speaking about it or "joking" about it acceptable. He is using a basis that many radical feminists attempt to drill into our minds and going against that basis e.g. rape is the worst, most undeniably horrible, perfectly death-penalty-should-be-allowed thing that has ever existed. Which, in-case you did not know, is not true as the woman (albeit with a mental trauma) is still alive and functioning correctly. Whereas in, say, a murder victim cannot function period, as they are dead, is apparently worse than rape.
                     For future reference, none of my comment was meant in a hateful manner or made with malicious intent.
+Shannon Dornbush
 I am genuinely concerned for your mental health & well being. I sincerely suggest you talk to someone, seek counselling.
+Ed Brayton  [Want a link to the book where he made that horrible statement about rape victims being "vindictive bitches"?]

As a point of fact I am sure that some of the women would be as described with regard to all men. So, granted the statement is objectionable, but it also has a point which would be true for some. I think this Tool - Prison Sex  sums up the point he is making.

It would seem that your political correctness is getting in the way of various points of actual issue. 

NOTE: I don't doubt he is an ass, but there are points of be understood regardless of one's appreciation/disdain of the depictions of others..
+JD Kain

He never said anything of the sort. That's a rumor spread by feminist cunts who hate him.
He has the face of Morgan Freeman... I must WORSHIP IT!!!!!!!!!
JD Kain
+derangius, I think you mean some other guy.  The worst I said was that TJ is a "very flawed person" which isn't saying much at all.
+Shannon Dornbush I would love to know what is in store for me, but your credibility is equally comparable to a witch doctor's. 
He's not just speaking about it, or even joking about it. He's revelling in it, he's rubbing it in the victim's faces, he's using it as a weapon to try an silence them. There's no excuse for that kind of vile, vicious behaviour. The only reasonable reaction to such hateful speech is unequivocal condemnation of it, not this weak-minded,  simpering apologetic nonsense.
+A Hermit
How would you handle the complete idiocy of some commentary?

I grant that it is not nice, however, I find it more problematic to allow such idiocy to go unchallenged, since, it can make others who don't know or can't think any better that there is some merit to such nonsense.
If the answer to "how would you handle the idiocy of some commentary" could ever possibly be "I hope you get raped" or "I'd like to rape you and break your nose" you are a fucking reprehensible human being. And if you defend that sort of thing, you are too.
The way to challenge idiocy is to point out why and how it is idiotic, not to throw temper tantrums and threaten to rape people.

So, for example, I'm pointing out to you that such vile behaviour is probably counterproductive in that it will simply make people defensive without giving them anything to think about. I'm also pointing out that slavishly defending the foul behaviour of someone you might admire for other reasons looks like the kind of mindless sycophancy we see from religious fanatics, not like real skepticism.

See? That's how I deal with the idiocy of some commentary...
+A Hermit I suggest you reread the thread. I didn't defend. However, given that you seem to think that I did present the phrasing that you found so objectionable as to go for a verbal assault.
+MyContext Didn't defend him? All you've been doing is making excuses for the little blowhard, in part by attacking the targets of his bullying; calling them idiots. Don't whine about my so called verbal assault when you're trying to justify TJ's rape tirades you little hypocrite.
+A Hermit

1. Yes, I have called people idiots and gave details if it wasn't reasonably clear.

2. Please cite the supposed defense of TJ that has you all upset.
+MyContext 1) I'm not upset, I'm amused.

2) you said this: "I grant that it is not nice, however, I find it more problematic to allow such idiocy to go unchallenged" What's that if not an attempt to justify the behaviour?
+A Hermit  2) And I stand by that... 

Since, I had already granted that the notions presented were NOT appropriate; and asked followup questions as to what would you recommend (given your passion) and you preceded to present what I had already acknowledged as problematic, but I could not be sure that the story was correct.

Given your linguistic skill, I suspect you have pureed various individuals.  However, I suggest you tone it down a bit and ask a few questions before the verbal slap that you attempted to give me. Since, I am not guilty of supporting anything.

However, It seems that the inquisition judged me guilty for NOT being ready to make a judgement on what I found insufficient evidence to make the level of condemnation being requested - complete dismissal of TJ.  I wouldn't do that to an actual ex-con (exception being actual psychological issues which would reasonably have the issue occur again such as pedophilia) who has served his time, unless, I had a personal issue with that ex-con;  and even then it would only be about my interactions, but I would not advocate that others not engage them.
+MyContext It seems to me you're trying to have it both ways here; you make a boilerplate declaration about not supporting such behaviour but then the rest of your comments are all arguments designed to, if not support at least to minimize and make excuses for the behaviour.

Sorry, I'm just not impressed by such phony fence-sitting apologetics.
+A Hermit
Very few things are an ALL or NOTHING kinda thing as it seems you wish to suggest.

I am not impressed by your melodrama "phony fence-sitting apologetics", so, I guess we can leave it at that... Cheers!
Add a comment...