SusanDoris the millstone

ThunderBunkThunderBunk Shipmate
SD I for one have had an absolute bellyfull of your simplistic bollocks. You are an absolute millstone around the discussion on the shape the church might take in the future. No idea can take off, because you wrap yourself round it and attempt to destroy it with your witless, joyless materialism. Just fuck off out of it. We've had enough.
«13456728

Comments

  • Thank you @ThunderBunk for starting this.

    I have been finding this disingenuousness of the message from @SusanDoris frustrating, when the underlying meaning of the her posts is obviously "when you are all as enlightened as I am, you too will see clearly that those experiences that uphold your faith are figments of your imagination; belief in God is clearly nonsense and the Bible consists of fairy stories for the credulous". But when challenged on this she objects to being called disingenuous and talks of wanting to support all people. If challenged further she'll admit that she thinks faith is rubbish, but won't admit her purpose is to convince others that her way is the best way. Enough already.
  • She has the same M.O. as other atheists who've graced our boards:

    1. Propose a topic with an innocent "I want to know what you think about blah blah blah."
    2. Profusely thank everyone who posts (or at least those she takes a shine to).
    3. Dismiss all theists with "that's just in your mind" or similar.
    4. Refuse to engage with any criticisms or critiques of her position.
    5. Get all offended when called on it.
    6. Repeat

    I for one find it tedious as hell. I would love to have productive conversations with people who believe differently from me (or don't believe, although that's really not possible; people who so claim are fooling themselves (see #4 above)). I hate to "send someone to Coventry" as Erin (pbuh) used to say, which is why I don't just scroll past. But perhaps the time has come.
  • Cut her some slack. She sounds as if she's practically housebound with visual impairments and turns to the Ship for company.

    It's a shame she only has one string to her bow though: 'I saw through this theist nonsense years ago, it's entertaining watching the rest of you bozos getting so intense about it ...'

    Yes. We. Know.

    A liturgy written by SusanDoris:

    Let us pray ...although we all really know that's not what we're doing ...

    The Lord be with you ... although we all know there's no evidence that he actually exists ...

    And also with you. Yes we get that.

    Lift up your hearts.

    We lift them in the name of the Lord ... even though we know it's all pretend and that it's physically impossible to lift them anyway without damaging ourselves ...



  • lilbuddhalilbuddha Shipmate
    So, the question I have is why aren't Mudfrog and MPaul on this same Hell call? They do the exact same thing, but bent towards believers.
    Understand, I've called Susan Doris to task on her take towards Christianity more than once. And I do find it tiresome. Just not unique to her.
  • As another atheist here, I'm not too happy about the broad generalization.
  • finelinefineline Purgatory Host
    I get the feeling that SusanDoris - like a few other atheists I know - has experienced frustration from a very rigid church experience and not having her own questions and views considered. And maybe she likes the Ship because people here discuss more openly rather than just tell her she’s wrong. Though she can be a bit frustrating to talk to (which I have said to her in one thread) as she seems to want all of us to consider the possibility that we may be wrong, but is not equally willing to consider the possibility that she herself may be wrong. Though I do find that when people rebel against a rigid religious upbringing, they often apply the same rigidity to their atheism. I like that we have atheists on the Ship though - it’s good to have a mix of views, even though some express their views more rigidly and simplistically than others.
  • They aren't on the same hell call simply because it's not the same context. They could equally well be: MPaul in particular is irking me considerably at the moment. The red mist descended while reading SusanDoris's excretions, so I brought them here.
  • MPaul and Mudfrog have their own drums to beat and deserve their own Hell Calls at times. They are nothing if not consistent and predictable.

    To be fair, though, MPaul sent me a very thoughtful PM recently after I'd not posted for a while, enquiring after my welfare.

    Unhellishly, I have a lot of time for Shipmates who hold to minority views, be they atheists, conservative evangelicals or Swedenborgians, Mennonites or representatives of other groups who are not well represented on these boards.

    Mudfrog frustrates me at times but I'll equally rally to his defence when I feel he's talking sense.

    SusanDoris does only seem to be able to strike one note though, but I don't think they on some kind of quest to get us all to agree with her. I think she genuinely enjoys the interaction and the cut and thrust.

    Trouble is, she is using a gong and not a rapier.
  • Gosh, some mixed metaphors in that last post. Worth a Hell Call in themselves ...
  • ThunderBunkThunderBunk Shipmate
    edited August 18
    There is no genuine discussion, and she won't permit interaction with anyone other than her. She insists on dictating the terms, pace and direction of all discussions she takes part in. Not something will allow without protest.
  • RooKRooK Admin Emeritus
    As another atheist here, I'm not too happy about the broad generalization.

    Thirded. Atheism is hardly the distinctive trait with respect to ambushing discussions in poor faith.
  • Hehehe. You said faith :naughty:
  • OhherOhher Shipmate
    As someone who waffles between/among atheism and theism and even Christianity, it's not SD's atheism which gets to me. It's her proselytizing for it, while pretending not to.
  • Are you sure she's pretending? I'm not sure she realises how it comes across.
  • Yes, MPaul is just as obnoxious in his own special way. But "Why didn't you call everybody who is a PITA to this hell thread?" is stupid.
  • Doc TorDoc Tor Hell Host
    If someone else wants to call MPaul and/or Mugfrog to Hell, they can open a separate thread. It's not like we'll run out of bytes any time soon.
  • mr cheesymr cheesy Shipmate
    I don't know, I think it is ironically hilarious performance art. I particularly enjoy the huge amount of faith she has in the Scientific Process without the slightest practical understanding of how it works.

    It's a rare gift.
  • lilbuddhalilbuddha Shipmate
    So, the question I have is why aren't Mudfrog and MPaul on this same Hell call? They do the exact same thing, but bent towards believers.
    Understand, I've called Susan Doris to task on her take towards Christianity more than once. And I do find it tiresome. Just not unique to her.
    mousethief wrote: »
    Yes, MPaul is just as obnoxious in his own special way. But "Why didn't you call everybody who is a PITA to this hell thread?" is stupid.
    Not everyone who is a pain in the arse, just those who commit the same sin. ISTM, part of the reason SD grates is she is aiming at Christianity. It is a normal human thing to have the same behaviour grate when it is contra to our own beliefs and not as much when it is pro.
    Being in the middle, so to speak, perhaps I notice it more on both sides?
  • It seems to me that SD enjoys what she has being doing for years, throwing in some bait in the middle of a lively discussion thread to throw it off course and end up with another opportunity to repeat her atheist PoV. When challenged, there are stock ways of ending the conversation or leading it into another blind alley.

    If people are happy to take the bait and amuse her, that's their decision. Like some others, I find it tiresome, especially when she appears to home in on someone who is struggling with their faith, or when I've been interested in a topic which has been derailed.
  • Doc TorDoc Tor Hell Host
    lilbuddha wrote: »
    So, the question I have is why aren't Mudfrog and MPaul on this same Hell call?

    Well. Presumably either because Thunderbunk's field of Fucks is now barren, and they have no Fucks left to give, or perhaps because they carefully conserve their Fucks, and only give Fucks when and if they feel the need to do so.

    Thunderbunk can call whoever they want to Hell, without having to pass their choice by you first. What gets under their skin isn't the same as what gets under yours. If Mudfrog and/or MPaul have sufficiently got your goat to crack open a thread with their names on it, then knock yourself out.
  • lilbuddhalilbuddha Shipmate
    edited August 18
    Doc Tor wrote: »
    Thunderbunk can call whoever they want to Hell, without having to pass their choice by you first. What gets under their skin isn't the same as what gets under yours.
    The point I was making is the selective nature of the call for a behaviour that is not unique, therefore might involve a bit of blindness. And that those two get a little more rope likely because they share more with people here, at least as far as basic belief.
    But bitching about a Hell call is a time-honoured tradition on the ship, as is bitching about the bitching. So, there we are.
  • Doc TorDoc Tor Hell Host
    Well, duh. I appreciate there's nothing I can do or say to put a stop to your whiny-ass kvetching, but I might head other, more considerate, posters off at the pass.
  • lilbuddhalilbuddha Shipmate
    edited August 18
    Doc Tor wrote: »
    Well, duh. I appreciate there's nothing I can do or say to put a stop to your whiny-ass kvetching, but I might head other, more considerate, posters off at the pass.
    Hmmm, trying to interject a thought as to the reason of a Hell call is whiny kvetching? Perhaps I should have put it in a more transparent way for the hard of thinking.
    SD can be annoying, but she gets short shrift because she is an atheist. I'm challenging Thunderbunk and everyone else to look at it that way.
    Kvetching, maybe. But the whines are flowing from someone else' twisted knickers.ETA: Yours. Just to make it obvious enough.
  • finelinefineline Purgatory Host
    Maybe it’s simply a case that ThunderBunk was taking part in threads where it was happening currently with SusanDoris, as she has been posting quite a bit lately. That doesn’t necessarily mean she’s getting the short shrift because she’s atheist. Surely Mudfrog has also had his own Hell calls in the past, and people didn’t suggest SusanDoris should be part of them? I can think of similar sorts of conversations with Mudfrog that I have had with SusanDoris, but they were on the old Ship, so would seem a bit pointless to dredge them up here in a Hell call about current threads.
  • finelinefineline Purgatory Host
    I would add, in case it was unclear, that when in my post I said ‘like a few other atheists I know,’ I meant it in a positive way, to show it was not unique to SusanDoris. And I meant it quite literally - simply that it is like a few other atheists I know - rather than making a sweeping statement about atheists in general. I have a lot of sympathy with people who grow up experiencing rigid, closed answers to any questions and curiosity they may have, and who therefore have an urge to keep asking and keep having the conversation. It is something I have experienced myself, though I personally did not become an atheist. I think it is good to have an environment where people can question religious beliefs they’ve grown up with, and express their own views safely. And in SusanDoris’s defence, she takes it all in her stride when people express frustration with her own rigidity and assumptions, and she continues in a good-humoured way. I think perhaps the way she thinks is very concrete and not too subtle, but that simply is how some people think.
  • lilbuddhalilbuddha Shipmate
    fineline wrote: »
    Maybe it’s simply a case that ThunderBunk was taking part in threads where it was happening currently with SusanDoris, as she has been posting quite a bit lately. That doesn’t necessarily mean she’s getting the short shrift because she’s atheist.
    In threads where I have participated that she has been on it seems, in my perception, that she gets yelled at faster than others who post with a similar style, but are Christian. I'm not really attacking Thunderbunk, he seems like a generally reasonable poster,as far as I recall and I'm sure SD genuinely irritates him. I'm making a broader point about the general bias, and used the two most obvious people who came to mind. Not that they should actually share a Hell call with her.
  • finelinefineline Purgatory Host
    Maybe she does get yelled at faster - I’m not sure. I personally have found MudFrog far more annoying and judgemental, but I have been more open in telling SusanDoris when I was starting to get frustrated with her (which was quite a bit into the conversation - I have enjoyed talking to her in general) because I got the feeling, rightly or wrongly, that she would listen and accept it more than MudFrog, who I ended up just stopping talking to. I am more likely to tell someone they are behaving in a frustrating way if I think they may listen and it may be helpful.
  • finelinefineline Purgatory Host
    (I should add I am referring to a conversation from several years ago with MudFrog - I am not still not talking to him, and I’m sure he may have changed since then, but I don’t think I’ve encountered him much on the threads I’ve been active on in the new Ship.)
  • OK, now back at a keyboard, so I can reference the most recent irritations - and I have been interacting with @SusanDoris quite a bit on these threads:
    I have been finding this disingenuousness of the message from @SusanDoris frustrating, when the underlying meaning of the her posts is obviously "when you are all as enlightened as I am, you too will see clearly that those experiences that uphold your faith are figments of your imagination; belief in God is clearly nonsense and the Bible consists of fairy stories for the credulous". But when challenged on this she objects to being called disingenuous and talks of wanting to support all people. If challenged further she'll admit that she thinks faith is rubbish, but won't admit her purpose is to convince others that her way is the best way. Enough already.

    The whole Images thread was an exercise, it felt, in pointing out that God was non-existent as cannot be stored as an image, with sideswipes along the lines of being able to rationalise any experiences that she once interpreted being of God, so of course anyone else could when they too reached that prowess. and they too would stop believing in gods.

    On the Let old churches die and build some new ones I have had several interactions with SusanDoris - where, following this post:
    SusanDoris wrote: »
    I support absolutely any person's right to believe whatever they want and to set up groups for it, but the basic problem, the central point of the whole thing, is the vacuum where a God is supposed to be. All religious beliefs are based on 100% faith and their adherents have to adopt that faith.
    *pause to consider whether to post or not......*
    she wanted to know if there were any atheists at some different kinds of church events and here where she enquired, after I had remembered an atheist present, if they had managed to get in that it was all anecdotal, followed by this interchange:
    SusanDoris wrote: »
    @SusanDoris I do not know where you are finding your conjectures.

    The plays in the series putting the crucifixion and resurrection on trial were presenting what is in the Bible. The discussions were around what that means for belief. Each session had witnesses giving their evidence - so the session on the crucifixion that particularly sticks in my memory had a soldier on duty at the time describing his experience. The events are all from the Bible, from the Gospel accounts and Acts, and were referenced in the notes we were given, together with any other evidence from other literature at the time - so Josephus and other ancient writers were listed too. That character is memorable because I had not put together the different texts in that way, but it was all there in the Bible or other contemporaneous texts.

    Why should that be put forward as anecdotal? You are suggesting that anything in the Bible is anecdotal, and that's another discussion entirely, nothing to do with closing down churches and starting new ones.
    I referred particularly to the drama being played out as I know there are of course parts of the Bible which talk of historical facts. However, all the NT stories about Jesus', birth, ministryand death, which contain elements of miracles, are hearsay and therefore anecdotal, however much they are believed to be factual. I think it can be said to relate to the topic because the continuation of all branches of the Christian faith relies on those stories.
    .
    So she is hoping to discredit Christian stories as "Christian faith relies on those stories".
    SusanDoris wrote: »
    Nick Tamen wrote: »
    SusanDoris wrote: »
    Why would it have to be called , 'the Lord's work'? It is thought of by people, organised and managed by people and done for other people.
    No one said it “has” to be called that. But why can’t it be called that?

    With all respect, SusanDoris, questions like this come across as disingenuous and dismissive. After all these years on the Ship, not to mention what has to have been decades of interacting in real life with at least some believers even if you’re not one yourself, the answer to this question would appear pretty obvious. That you would ask it comes across to me, at least, as baiting—looking for another opportunity to suggest that intelligent people give up these imaginative ideas for which (according to you) there is no evidence.
    That conclusion is not correct, I just enjoy being involved in discussion. The word disingenuous is also incorrect, it is simply a pleasure to be able to read and join in. It would be silly for me to say, 'well, you're probably right' when I do not agree with views expressed, but remaining silent is just not me, I'm afraid!
    You say you respect the beliefs of others, including those who believe in God. Questions like this undermine your claim to respect the beliefs of others.
    I don't think I have said I respect the beliefs themselves. I always avoid implying that, since it is the people I respect, especially those here. Ever and Always it is the people who invented the beliefs. If you could separate completely the beliefs from the people, then, no, I do not respect the beliefs. I acknowledge them - all the thousands of versions of them - for what they are - a part of human behaviour.
    Where she is saying she doesn't respect belief in Christianity - people, but not beliefs.

    @mousethief there are several atheists on the Ship that are not involved in this schtick - currently it only seems to be @SusanDoris

    @lilbuddha neither MPaul nor Mudfrog has been posting in the last few weeks, SusanDoris has been.
  • edited August 18
    For some perhaps, the Ship is the one place in the world where it's allowed to speak up about what truly grinds your hips. SD can be annoying, so what. If she's not being harmful beyond that, then meh. Though the one thing I'd say to her if she's reading, is that she's loved enough that people are willing to discuss her in hell.
  • finelinefineline Purgatory Host
    @Curiosity killed - I tend to see it that your mind simply works in a much more logical and thorough and exacting way than SusanDoris’s. And she misses some of the points you make, because she has a recurring theme in her own mind that she keeps returning to, oblivious sometimes to the fact that it is a side path away from what is being discussed. I don’t get the impression that she is consciously trying to undermine people’s faith - I think she is more impulsive and less self-aware, and the recurring themes in her mind just keep surfacing, because she feels the need to express them.

    (Though this is just my interpretation and may be wrong, and she probably will find it amusing to be interpreted thus - I remember her being called to Hell on the old Ship and she took it all in her stride.)
  • lilbuddhalilbuddha Shipmate
    @lilbuddha neither MPaul nor Mudfrog has been posting in the last few weeks, SusanDoris has been.
    My comment was less about them than the general bias that engenders part of the irritation with SD. Not that it isn't understandable, it is human nature.
    Not that the call is completely unearned.
  • AthrawesAthrawes Shipmate
    We understand your point, lb. It is just not relevant to *this thread*, which is about how Susan Doris’ one topic of conversation acts like a bowling ball dropped on the rubber sheet of discussion. Feel free to start another hell thread about all the other people you feel do this, and the possible reasons for it if you like. It it is Susan Doris who has caused this particular irritation to need venting in hell, not, in this case, Mudfrog or anyone else.
  • lilbuddha wrote: »
    fineline wrote: »
    Maybe it’s simply a case that ThunderBunk was taking part in threads where it was happening currently with SusanDoris, as she has been posting quite a bit lately. That doesn’t necessarily mean she’s getting the short shrift because she’s atheist.
    In threads where I have participated that she has been on it seems, in my perception, that she gets yelled at faster than others who post with a similar style, but are Christian. I'm not really attacking Thunderbunk, he seems like a generally reasonable poster,as far as I recall and I'm sure SD genuinely irritates him. I'm making a broader point about the general bias, and used the two most obvious people who came to mind. Not that they should actually share a Hell call with her.
    This seems to cut awfully close to "Waaaah! You Christians are such meanies!"
  • lilbuddhalilbuddha Shipmate
    edited August 19
    mousethief wrote: »
    This seems to cut awfully close to "Waaaah! You Christians are such meanies!"
    Right, because that so fits my posting history. :unamused: There is typically a bit more fire and brimstone in any rants of mine.
    Though I will say that that is a unique charge, that I am reacting passively.
    I mean the charge is usually aggressive, too aggressive or Jesus, Mary and the other guy, can you tone down the aggression?
  • OhherOhher Shipmate
    I've been giving this some thought. I'm not a Frequent Sailor athwart these decks, and I don't run into SusanDoris all that often (because I tend to avoid her). I don't share lB's perception that SD gets yelled at sooner or more often than others, but then I haven't given myself as much occasion to observe this as lB apparently has.

    Again, it's not SD's atheism that gets up my nose. If I'm honest, it's not even her proselytizing (despite what I posted earlier). It's her dogged determination to be so fucking positive all the time. About everything.

    In my offline (not sure "Real" works in this context) life I write plays, working with a couple of other writers similarly engaged. If SusanDoris were a play my playwriting group was critiquing, I'd be suggesting more conflict. I'd be saying there's no real plot, that the characters are two-dimensional and uninteresting because they have nothing terribly important at stake in the story line. SD's defenses of atheism and materialism seem so bloodlessly PollyAnna-ish. While what I've seen of her responses to Christianity is limited, they're not actual attacks so much as they're pats on the head for the poor kiddoes fearing the nonexistent monsters under the bed. There's just no "there" there.
  • The idea of Shipmates as some kind of characters in an offline cosmic drama somehow appeals ...
  • ClimacusClimacus Shipmate
    Would anyone offline believe such a place and such a rag-tag assortment of characters really exists?
  • @Ohher - thwacked that nail on the head.

    And that's why it's so disruptive to discussion, all those little substance-free Polyanna like comments that cannot and will not be backed up, placed so very unhelpfully in the middle of interesting conversations.
  • I tend to laugh at SD, as she seems somewhat naive. However, there is also something enjoyable about her posts, it is certainly not a sophisticated atheism. Science conquers all, I suppose.

    However, she must be about 80 years old, and blind, so I give her slack, I think I'm having an oxytocin rush.
  • So if she wants company and engagement, why not post on the Heaven or All Saints threads? or get involved in the Circus games? I'm not denigrating Heaven, All Saints or the Circus, I engage on threads there too; those threads provide ways to interact with the community in a less formal way.

    Is it that part of the irritation is that it has been harder to debate seriously in Purgatory, around the disruptive saccharine comments of SusanDoris and the seagull like deposits from WildHaggis?
  • I think Susan makes some serious points, it's not all saccharine, damn, more oxytocin flooding my brain.
  • Not always she doesn't, see the links above.

    Where she does make serious points, she is not always able to follow through on the discussion, which disrupts any debate. That's the challenge that @LeRoc and @mousethief have been trying to address.
  • I think Susan makes some serious points, it's not all saccharine, damn, more oxytocin flooding my brain.
    Having got this far listening through this thread, I am pausing for a moment to say thank you for the laugh out loud! :D

  • Tried to add this as an edit, but it didn't work:

    Ah, I see I've reached the end. That was very interesting. The new Ship format has made it much easier for me to find my way around ... ... and post more often!
    I'll have another read through and perhaps respond here and there.
  • RussRuss Shipmate
    Just wanted to say that SusanDoris conveys more goodwill in her posts than I've ever seen from Thunderbunk; I know who I'd rather meet offline.

    But I can understand CK's irritation.

    Reading SusanDoris, I get the sense of messages coming through from a long way off; somehow the process that she has to go through to translate between text and spoken word adds a distance, loses some of the immediacy, the stream-of-consciousness -ness that one gets from Shipmates sitting at the keyboard.
  • Russ wrote: »
    Just wanted to say that SusanDoris conveys more goodwill in her posts than I've ever seen from Thunderbunk; I know who I'd rather meet offline.

    The feeling is entiely mutual. You are another one whose small-minded maunderings have triggered a similar response.
  • BoogieBoogie Shipmate
    @Ohher - thwacked that nail on the head.

    And that's why it's so disruptive to discussion, all those little substance-free Polyanna like comments that cannot and will not be backed up, placed so very unhelpfully in the middle of interesting conversations.

    I do the same, embarrassingly often - and not deliberately. It’s only afterwards that I realise my substance-free comments add nothing to the discussion.

    But I don’t get called to Hell. So I assume it’s Susan Doris’ atheism that folk really have a problem with, not her posting style.

    🤔

  • @Boogie on this occasion, it's purely because you weren't doing it on that particular thread. You are quite right, and my finger has hovered over the "new discussion in hell" many times over your vacuity. Your time may come.
  • BoogieBoogie Shipmate
    Russ wrote: »
    Reading SusanDoris, I get the sense of messages coming through from a long way off; somehow the process that she has to go through to translate between text and spoken word adds a distance, loses some of the immediacy, the stream-of-consciousness -ness that one gets from Shipmates sitting at the keyboard.

    This is not due to using screen readers and dictation. I have many blind friends and their posting styles are as varied as my sighted friends.

Sign In or Register to comment.