See strange SallyStrange.
See Sally talk the talk. See Sally walk the walk. See strange SallyStrange put her foot in it.
On December 10, 2011, SallyStrange said:
"I mean, finding humour in assault is pretty fucked up in the first place." (Pharyngula: Victor Ivanoff is a slimey stalker)
However, strange SallyStrange had previously said, on November 28, 2011:
"The Onion is the only place where I've seen rape jokes that were actually funny." (Pharyngula: Episode CCLXXVVIII....)
Yes I know, it's not much. But lack of consistency is always worth pointing at. Of course, given that the Onion article in question was founded around an anti-rape standpoint, it's not really "humour in assault" in the first place.
Of more import, and what is consistent, is that the first FfTB thread of comments linked to above, in part, makes claims that Franc Hoggle was making jokes about assaulting people. No inarguable citable instance was produced. This is a further example of the FfTB version of the Big Lie technique where through constant repetition, a falsehood eventually attains a status of tacit truth. This is also a variation of the historically successful Blood Libel style attack. In the case of female critics, this also manifests as the gender traitor and collaborator denunciation.
Addendum July 9, 2012: SallyStrange has pointed out in several blogs around the 'net that this article leaves out context, and paints an unfair picture of the statement "the only place where I've seen rape jokes that were actually funny" as falsely representing that SallyStrange finds rape jokes funny. Clearly, such misrepresentation is in SallyStrange's imagination; perhaps poor reading comprehension is the problem. One only need re-read the article above to note that the focus of the article is not whether or not SallyStrange finds all rape humour funny (and the article makes no such claim), but that SallyStrange has, with trademarked FfTB inconsistency, openly admitted to finding some rape jokes funny. To repeat, SallyStrange said "I've seen rape jokes that were actually funny", which is a pretty unambiguous statement, that there has been one, or more, rape jokes that SallyStrange found funny. That's what she says: she found rape jokes, plural, at The Onion, funny. It's a quote. If SallyStrange wants to go on the record and state that in fact she did not post the statement quoted from the FfTB thread, or if she wants to state that she made an error and a mis-statement and provide an explanation of why "I've seen rape jokes that were actually funny" does not actually mean "I've seen rape jokes that were actually funny", fine. I'll post her quote as saying so, and provide a link to wherever the quote is.
Manufacturing drama at thunderf00tdotorg.wordpress.comEdit
Since Thunderf00t's expulsion from FfTB, he has continued calling them out for their unethical and dishonest behaviour at his WordPress blog. SallyStrange has been a relentlessly prolific commenter there, and provided a particularly curious exchange in the following blog item in response to an alleged "threat" -
This was followed up immediately with the following Twitter posting blaming and shaming Thunderf00t -
There was however something unusual with the comment exchange - the time stamps. It was noticed in a followup comment in the same thread -
What is one to make of this? Really? All in one minute? It's really a question to ask Sally. After all, she does keep drumming lessons in ethics and morality into all who oppose the FfTB party line. Naturally, she must live up to same lofty expectations she demands of others. Must be a time wormhole. Or something.
Comment From John Greg
The content under the heading Manufacturing drama at ... (immediately above) is unsubstantiated hearsay and speculation, and has never had any legitimate or verifiable evidence to back it up. And, so far as I can remember, it has been reasonably and successfully rebutted elsewhere. I cannot remember where, or at the moment find, the effective rebuttal, so for that reason alone I am going to leave the comment as is, for the time being.
Nonetheless, I think the content should be taken with several grains of salt as being highly suspect, somewhat slanderous, and without verification of any kind whatsoever beyond "I say it's so; therefore it's so". Not exactly the best form of critical thinking I've ever come across.