The current group of posters seem to be the people most invested in this venue. If another group needs a safer environment to express their views, maybe one of those people should propose a standard for censorship. The moderated USENET groups used to ban specific people, I think, based on the moderator's personal preference.

you have a big ego about being able to get guys to do stuff just by smiling at them.

with me it only works if you have a good, kind personality. If you are a selfish mean bitch, it does not work. Then I merely walk away or ignore you.

With your attitude towards Ben Dover, you qualify as mean selfish bitch so you would have a hard time getting me to do ANYTHING for you.

The problem with moderation is that it is always a judgment call as to which posts are acceptable and which are not.

In my experience moderators invariably end up taking sides and one or more viewpoints ends up being completely shut out and others get to run rampant with no reins.

I have seen posts deleted on Salon and I've even had one of my own deleted even though I never indulge in personal insults, foul language or attacks.

On the usenet political newsgroups where I cut my rhetorical teeth the attacks are far more savage than anything I've seen here on Salon. I suppose I have a very thick skin but I never get upset at what I read on the monitor. In fact I actually like it when people resort to abuse and personal attacks since it means they have no more potent weapon in their repertoire else they would be using it.

Mostly I post for the lurkers, I know I'm exceedingly unlikely to change the mind of anyone that I oppose but I engage in the exercise in order to put my point of view forward to those who may not have yet made up their mind on the subject.

The fact remains that there is always going to be misogyny: there is always going to be an undercurrent of hatred for women on (some) men's part which really lacks a parallel on the female side.

I am surprised anyone is so deluded to make such a ludicrous statement, presumably with a straight face.

The world has many man hating women.

Wouldn't that fit nicely into your little world view! Because if I'm fucked up, you can feel better about yourself. Because it's you who has weak "self and gender" esteem and maybe if Man's papa beat him, it would explain why he thinks Kathy Sierra is a fraud and a coward and a chickenshit and how - oh how, could Man suggest that Sierra needs a MAN to guard her - he must be Hitler - he must be sick!

Wrong on EVERY COUNT! My father, while no prince, never laid a hand on my mother - and no, gender roles were never rigid at all - we were encouraged to do our own thing. We had a house full of books, and we're all educated, and we were all encouraged to acquire introspection and while my family certainly has it's share of issues, the "boys" are all married (including me) to strong professional women who take no BS and do their own thing!

It's amazing how intellectually weak are some Saloners - they take a few psych classes or watch a few Oprahs and think they know something about humanity and worse, they think that if they look into the mirror they can build "Gender Esteem" with a few magic words: "I'm great because I'm me!"

But you can't.

And not everyone who laughs at you was beaten by their father.

And not everyone who disagrees with your hackneyed nickel psychology needs a shrink.

And not everyone who disagrees with your world view is a wife beater or a child molester.

Silly little girl...

also teach about something called "denial."

Look into it.

I think that profile fits brightstar and ben dover too.

This is another example of the toxic culture which spews out of the sewer which is the standard, garden-variety right-wing hater. These people were the first to sign with Hitler, wearing their brown shirts with pride. In America today, they need something to hate. Hate is the motivator to the right, and any target will do. Women are especially vulnerable, since they are perceived as threats to men, by morons who are incapable of getting it up without holding a weapon.

has a story about the press secretary for Matt Blunt, republican governor. She had her husband take some nude pictures of her as she progressed in her pregnancy, and these pictures were stolen from her personal PC by hackers. Since then, the hackers have sold these to perverts, who call her at her office, and post the pictures on-line.

This is just evil.

It's misogyny, as well. There is a substantial portion of the populace who believe that uppity women need to be punished.

But I didn't write "profile of man." I haven't taken a single psychology class in my life, and I don't know anyone with that kind of story, so I actually found it very interesting, and probably dead-on. Anyway, your wife is russian, and those women will put up with anything, so that doesn't prove anything.

Gender esteem, which is something I made up on the fly, is something that Brightstar doesn't have, and something you probably don't have, but try to compensate for. It's otherwise known as "secure in your masculinity." See, i don't see why anyone who has nothing to prove would repeatedly write that Sierra is just chicken, that the threats were just "juvenile taunts" (as in, "look, i'm such a man, i'm ont afraid") and that what she really needs is a "man." You've heard of compensation, surely? You don't even need to take a class in psychology for that. "Behavior that develops either consciously or unconsciously to offset a real or imagined deficiency, as in personality or physical ability."

You just seem like you have something to prove, that you're chanting a mantra of manhood to try to compensate for some deficiency therein, even your handle is "Man."

I have things that i'm insecure about too -- but it sure ain't women and their worth and equality. I don't need to blather on and on about it, saying "i'm a woman, hear me roar" and all sorts of stuff like that.