Playing With Trolls

when i last left you hanging, dear readers, the troll, resorting to the tired old third rule in the Debate Manual For The Tiny-Dicked Army Of People Who Are Threatened By Angry Feminists, called me a bitch. i guess he was a little sensitive about being called a coward for hiding behind a fake handle he created just for the purpose of trolling me. he clearly didn't know that i wear the big 'B' badge with honor. it's one reason i bother to engage with trolls such as these. i feel that i've won once i've goaded one into using a derogatory term for women because it reveals them as the sexists they are. he crossed a line with that post and a silent bystander outed him with a followup to that comment:

So "spacebaby" is your real name, is it, bitch?
Posted by: Don P on April 13, 2006 at 11:12 PM

this was a surprise to me. Don P was a handle i recognized immediately. then, i remembered reading a thread some weeks ago in which several other regular participants discussed the theory that Charlie, Political Animal's most well-known troll, had stolen his handle. i reviewed the thread and thought that it was entirely possible that the troll could have been Charlie all along. to say the least, we hate each other. sometimes, i verbally abuse him for my own amusement in the meanest possible way. i've totally gotten on his bad side, which is exactly where i want to be. i wrote my reply before running off to google Political Animal for the thread where i saw the Charlie==Don P theory [lightly edited as usual]:

"i provided a list of examples ... "

You didn't provide any evidence.

it's your responsibility to follow the controversy. follow Kevin's link, and you will read about women having *all* prescriptions from a particular women's health clinic refused, including prescriptions for antibiotics and vitamins. if you can't bother to do even that much, get lost. it's not my responsibility to handhold you through the basic steps of reading the post and the referred materials. i even went to the other blog and read that comment thread and the article about the pharmacy in question. did you?

you could also read the rest of this thread for more information about other real life examples that have been the subject of previous discussions here about refusal clauses. since you asked, i shall provide links:

Claims established via Kevin's post, Professor's B's post (linked in Kevin's post), and the article that sparked this discussion:

All prescriptions from a particular women's health clinic are being refused at a pharmacy because the clinic provides abortion services. End result:

A woman had a prescription for antibiotics refused.
A woman had a prescription for vitamins refused.

Targets: Women. Women who got their prescriptions from a women's health clinic.

this is supporting evidence for my claim that refusal clauses target women simply trying meet their basic health care needs. the pharmacy in question is attempting to drive women away from a clinic set up specifically to meet their needs.

Birth control pills
EC for a rape victim (and birth control pills and EC for other women as well)

also, check out the first page of results in a google search for pharmacist + refusal + clause -- all links lead to sites assessing their impact on women's access to reproductive health services. if the class of people being denied service were men trying to fill prescriptions to treat health issues related to their reproductive organs, there would be some discussion about that, and it would show up in google's search results.

i guess there must be some conspiracy to hide the fact that these refusal clauses are having a noticable impact on men's ability to get their prescriptions filled.

"stop lecturing ... "

I told you. I'll stop lecturing you just as soon as you stop behaving like a petulant child. If you have a serious, fact-based argument to make, then make it. All you've done so far is call people names and make various wild, unsubstantiated accusations.

you, as a proven troll, are no authority on what is or is not a serious, fact-based argument. you started your 'argument' by personally attacking me because your dainty little eyes couldn't handle profanity on a comment thread at a high traffic politics blog. (get out much?) contrary to your accusations, i didn't single out any specific person for harassment. _you_ did.

you're the one who claimed that creative profanity is 'insane' and 'abnormal'. talk about unsubstantiated accusations and name-calling. as if people who use the word 'fuckwit' are magically transformed into mad and horrific beasts, fit only to be confined in an institution for the mentally deranged and certainly to be deprived of birth control pills if female.

"you can't even use your real name, coward."

So "spacebaby" is your real name ...

it's the handle i use to post here. i'm using my real email address. because i have participated in threads on various incarnations of Kevin Drum's blog since he was on blogspot [CORRECTION: Kevin didn't actually have comments on his blog until he abandoned blogspot for Moveable Type. i have been a reader of his blog since he was on blogspot.], it counts as my 'real name' as opposed to your chosen handle and fake email address which mark _you_ as a troll.

... is it, bitch?

you've been absolutely _dying_ to say that haven't you? you just couldn't stop yourself. i would have to say that your inability to refrain from calling me a derogatory term for women means you lose! bye bye.

after finding the thread where the theory that Charlie had stolen Don P's handle was floated, i came back to leave a parting shot at the troll i now thought was Charlie. i also wanted to apologize to my brother:

hi, Don P, aka 'Charlie.' you are such a chickenshit. now you're stealing the real handles of people who USED to post here?

btw, Yancey, if you're reading, i really *apologize* for mistaking this worthless sack of shit for you. once i realized that the nastiness was real and not a joke i realized that it wasn't you.

when i began monitoring a different thread, i learned that things were not that simple and a lot more than bizarre than i thought.