Jawn, I’m a fake… 14


I'm-a-fake

I can’t believe someone who calls themselves an artist would advocate making rules on how people express themselves using art. It made me angry! So I MADE ART in protest! GEEKY ART! (well, at least geeky enough that you’ve seen The Reichenbach Fall…)

Go ahead and make your own “fake” jewelry, because no one has the right to not be offended. (Especially at conferences centered around free-thought and critical thinking.)

Of course, this “Saramic” necklace is digital; but you still don’t need a kiln to make your own real fake!


Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

14 thoughts on “Jawn, I’m a fake…

  • Jim

    You’re getting your info second hand and out of context. She wasn’t talking about making real “rules” about art or expression. She was just calling out some immature and relatively hurtful behavior. These folks were wearing these shirts and satiric “jewelry” for one reason: to make fun of someone. They have the legal right to be dicks like that, but it’s kind of shitty and she was saying so.

    And isn’t Thunderfoot the guy they banned from freethought blogs for being a bit of a troll?

    I know she made some snippy comments about you in the recent past, but that’s no reason to do the same thing. It was disappointing and I sent her comments about it at the time.

    Now I’m disappointed in you. You are both artists who promote skepticism and critical thinking! I’m not saying you have to be besties, but you should have a bit of respect for each other and not put up with this kind of bullshit.

    I can imagine how you’d feel if the same folks were mocking your art at a conference for everyone else to see. I know it would piss me off just as much as the crap in this inflammatory video.

    I’m not going to say “Can’t we all just get along” because we’re getting past that point. But can’t we at least not be assholes to each other?

    Thanks for the space to let me vent on this.

  • Sandra Finn

    Jim, you also seem to have heard about these events 2nd hand.
    The “fake” jewelry referencing Amy was in reference to an attempt by Amy to shame another speaker at TAM for following a twitter account Amy did not approve of before TAM. It was worn by one person for their own personal reason, and she was not even aware of this until that person posted a image of the necklace on FB days after TAM was over.
    As Amy did not now about it during TAM (her first post about it was July 22, which was after her initial post on Ophelia Benson’s blog complaining about Harriet Hall’s t-shirt), this fails to rise to the level of harassment in my opinion.

    I do agree people should be adults and not try to purposely irritate others at conventions. If you have a problem with a person, just avoid them.

  • Jeff

    “You’re getting your info second hand and out of context. She wasn’t talking about making real “rules” about art or expression. She was just calling out some immature and relatively hurtful behavior. These folks were wearing these shirts and satiric “jewelry” for one reason: to make fun of someone. They have the legal right to be dicks like that, but it’s kind of shitty and she was saying so.

    And isn’t Thunderfoot the guy they banned from freethought blogs for being a bit of a troll?”

    …. and, back to the beginning…

    “You’re getting your info second hand and out of context.” Hmmm.

    Also: Amy is on record saying that “fake jewelry” should be subject to harassment policy.

  • mordacious1

    Surly Amy is to Art, as a blender full of nails is to Music. It’s almost like she got stalled in the 2nd Grade and now thinks she’s Rodin. Let’s say for a moment that she is a true artist, then welcome to the real world, for every artist there are several art critics…deal with it.

  • Chilly P.

    >>And isn’t Thunderfoot the guy they banned from freethought blogs for being a bit of a troll?

    No, he was invited to blog there, told he could blog about ANYTHING he wanted to, and then was kicked off for disagreeing that there was a crisis of harassment at atheist conference.

  • CommanderTuvok

    “I can imagine how you’d feel if the same folks were mocking your art at a conference for everyone else to see. I know it would piss me off just as much as the crap in this inflammatory video.”

    You’d normally be dismissed as a “tone troll” by the crazies at FTB and Skepchick, but since you are attempting to defend the behaviour of one of their acolytes, the standards are different, of course.

    The “mockery” of Surly Amy came about because of a number of different factors, namely the harassment and bullying of DJ Grothe, the bullying nature of certain FTB movers and shakers, and Surly Amy’s resort to using DMCAs, etc. There is another story about the leaking of information from a counter-DMCA, but you can find out about that elsewhere. Surly Amy’s behaviour over the last year leaves a lot to be desired.

    In summary, it was noted that some of the FTB and Skepchick people felt they were given a hostile reception (hostile as in a mild and funny T-shirt message, and some mock jewellery!), and were shocked to discover their paths not covered with rose petals. They got a taste of reality – that a large portion of the wider atheist and skeptic movement are angry at their antics, their smears, their constant victimhood while bullying others. It was, to use Stephanie Svan’s word, PUSHBACK.

    “And isn’t Thunderfoot the guy they banned from freethought blogs for being a bit of a troll?”

    “Troll” as in he disagreed with FTB diktat, despite PZ’s assurances he could write about whatever he wanted. Let’s face it, FTB is an echo chamber with a strict party line. Dissent is memory holed and sent to Siberia. TF proved too hot to handle.

    “I’m not going to say “Can’t we all just get along” because we’re getting past that point.”

    That is probably true. Given Ophelia and PZ’s obsession with smearing Shermer (OMG, he’s a “libertarian”!!! Burn HIM), it seems to be business as usual at the cesspit that is FTB.

    I know a lot of people who would be delighted if those he skulked off and missed TAM last year, stayed at home again. They are toxic, and the movement needs to leave them behind.

  • CommanderTuvok

    It should be noted that Ophelia Benson can’t take criticism, and is always trying to present herself as a victim. She has yet another blog up making herself look the victim of a tag team by Sara, Shermer and Hall.

    At her blog, she say “Here again is what I quoted Harriet Hall saying in Shermer’s hit piece on me”. Oh, right. Ophelia has trawled through Shermer’s back history to find a quote, taken it out of context, and has since written up 4-5 posts on the subject. Is if Shemer producing the hit pieces, or Ophelia? You can add PZ as well, because the clique at FTB always like to dogpile in numbers.

    Further, Ophelia privilege in having her own blog means she can conveniently memory-hole any facts that contradict her or her regulars. Yesterday, one of her regulars (Caine) said that there was no evidence FTB was visited by more men than women. Not only did Caine deliberately twist it to say “here is the no women at Pharyngula meme again”, she (Caine) was left to rely on Ophelia deleting a link to Alexa showing the stats about gender visits on FTB. The truth hurts, I guess!

    As you know Sara, Ophelia has a history of doing this. She allows one of her regulars post a lie (with you it was Lousy Canuck posting a lie about you), and when you respond with the actual truth and facts you are faced with accusations of trolling (in your case), or getting banhammered (as in the case yesterday).

    We now have documented and screencapped enough evidence to show that Benson is dishonest, manipulative and obsessive. By FTB standards, she is “cyberstalking” Shermer, and is often irrational and biased. She is a disgrace to the skeptic community, and if was involved with TAM, she would never be invited to speak again.

  • willy

    Amy wants censorship, pure and simple. This is not the playground. Her feelings with be hurt at times. She has hurt the feelings of others, including my own daughter. The “fake” jewelry, the “you can’t wear that shirt” is crazy on her part. Wasn’t she part of the group that went after Lawrence Krauss (including having stickers printed up about him?). Hasn’t she said horrible things about Dr.Dawkins? (no one has said “Oh you can’t say bad things about him, you might hurt his feelings” Honestly, there were anti Dawkins and anti Krauss tshirts at TAM9. No one said “you can’t wear those!” She’s basically a craftsperson, not an “artist”. She’s good at what she does, but that doesn’t mean she can complain. I have heard she demands there be no other people selling jewelry at conferences. Which is why we lost the fun steampunk person we had one year. They were OUT as they competed with HER jewelry she felt. Fair enough, as she’s been there longer. Her free use of the skepchick space at Dragoncon to sell her jewelry, while other vendors have to pay for a space, well if Dragancon wants to let her make money and the skepchicks don’t care (she donates some of the money… so technically she’s in the right)…but she’s a bully most of all. She wants to be comfortable but at the cost of the freedom of others. She wants CENSORSHIP….which any REAL artist would be 100% against (then again most artists are against copywrite infringment which seeing how many Doctor Who and other copy write images she uses means she’s not above breaking the law when it means profit). Oh well, Amy can go on being the pottery queen of the skepchick movement and making a very good living indeed from it. Meanwhile, defending freedom and fighting censorship and hey how about those laws protecting the work of OTHER artists (oh go ahead, just use it Amy, if you look much of her work is not original)….you get a pass because you cried. Sigh…

  • T

    To Jim at #1.

    YOu might want to get your facts straight. Hall’s t-shirt was not a pot shot at Amy or the Skepchicks. She merely wore a t-shirt that proclaimed she felt welcome and safe at TAM and that she was not part of any particular clique, such as skepchicks. She made it to make the point that her gender shouldn’t matter (hence the “I’m not a a woman skeptic” part of the t-shirt) and that she should be valued for her work.

    And the fake jewelry, yeah, it was a jab at Amy and maybe immature, it wasn’t meant to mock her for no reason. It was meant to mock something she had said/done.

  • Sharon Hill

    Sandra: Close but not exactly correct about the faux Surlies. If anyone wants to contact me directly, I will tell you about it. But, since it was a personal thing, I’m not feeling obligated to blog about it.

    I have recently attempted to contact Amy about her last blog post. She has blocked me on all fronts and did not answer my email. Guess she’s not open minded about stuff.

  • EllenBeth Wachs

    This blog post was just pointed out to me on Paul Fidalgo’s latest blog.

    Sara, you claim to have been bullied. I have to ask you, why would you do something like this?

    Sharon, “Guess she’s not open minded about stuff.”

    I guess it depends on “the stuff” doesn’t it?

  • harrystarkus

    Firstly ( and I’m not trying to be mean ) I would say that her work is craft not art. Having graduated from the National College of Art and Design in Dublin ( Ireland )we spent the first few months of our college life learning about criticism.

    We would work on drawing projects, painting etc and the end of every day we were made to stand around and look at each others work. We were then asked to choose 3 pieces of work we liked and 3 we didn’t, then we had to explain our choices and the reasons. This toughened us up to receiving criticism of our work. Basically it was a quick way designed for us to grow up, and not to take criticism personally. Sometimes you agreed to the criticism, sometimes you did not.

    I’m not sure if Amy has this kind of mature attitude to her work. I;m sure your work is criticized, and I’m sure you don’t lose too much sleep over it. Has she never criticized or lampooned any art before in her life? If she hasn’t, she should. It can be good fun and it happens all the time in the big bad world :)