Letters to the Editor
-
Tell me about it.
But this isn't about who is anonymous and who has a username. This seems to be about moderation.
-
They aren't the same issue but I don't think think moderated boards usually allow anonymity
the big issue is that once someone is given the ability to remove the unacceptable the range of what is acceptable becomes narrower and narrower. Actually there are things that get taken down here, but they use a "supreme court" standard, if it has ANY "redeeming value" i.e content which has ANY meaning outside of pure insult it is left up. This lets a lot go by but I doubt there can be another approach which doesn't favor a particular point of view. Do you really think there is a gender neutral/content neutral way of evaluating the meaning/severity of sexually charged insults when people are talking about sex?
-
Let me help you out with some examples from this thread
The men are dimwits
The men are trolls
The men are misogynists
The men are whacking off and laughing
Yes, it would be nice to see some civil language from the abusers of civil dialogue.
Why, when I read that the men are dimwits and trolls and misogynists, I had to leave the room lest I faint and vomit.
Deering, AKA Smith, Juliebird,
Buh-Bye!
-
again with the "I'm going to accuse you of doing what I do myself"
"Troll" and "misogynist" are descriptive terms with clearly-defined meanings, the validity of which can be determined online. A misogynist is someone who hates women. Ben and brightstar have both claimed to hate women, therefore they are misogynists. A troll is someone who makes offensive comments for the sake of provoking a response. Both Ben and brightstar have admitted they do this for this purpose, therefore they are trolls.
"Dimwit" is less defensible - however, I know few people who are capable of standing still and taking repeated punches to the face without hitting back eventually. No woman here has initiated an attack.
Okay, last suggestion, and then I'm out of here, with the exception of making posts explaining the boycott: use that "contact writer" form and write everyone at Salon to explain what's up and why.
-
Examples from this thread
But see, the most vocal men here are dimwits, trolls, and misogynists.
I won't speculate on the whacking off part. :)
Sadly, the women who say those things aren't really being unfair. They're just calling them as they see them.
Damned shame, huh?
-
They're just calling them as they see them.
I have a great idea, when EVERYONE agrees that someone is not doing this, take it down, that should solve everything.
-
again with the "I'm going to accuse you of doing what I do myself"
Please show me where I have done any of that. If you want go back to the terror thread where desi_grrl said I was a misogynist (and I think a racist.)
I haven't called any women names, and I dislike it when either men or women disparage the others.
But I will note that you think it is somehow okay or justified for gender feminists to call equity feminists names like troll and misogynists and accuse them of sexual perversions.
Also, I am curious, can you show me where Ben Dover and Brightstar say they hate women? If I recall correctly, even in this thread we saw Brightstar talking about the good things that feminism has brought about and mentioning that it is perceived abuses and shark jumping (if I paraphrase him poorly, please blame me) that has caused his upset.
I wish you well on your letter writing campaign, it would be good to see Joan Walsh take a look at what is happening in her pink ghetto.
-
No woman here has initiated an attack.
Are you kidding me?
Did you forget the very first post in this thread?
Women attack men all of the time in Broadsheet threads.
And in response, as you yourself say, it's hard to be repeatedly punched in the face without hitting back.
Women do not initiate attacks? What prompted you to mischaracterize my statements (as I pointed out several pages ago.)
Puhleaze.
-
it's kind of absurd, if everytime someone here said a man was unnatractive, had a little dick, etc. couldn't get laid because he "hates women" what would be left
how is that any different from calling a woman fat stupid and ugly. Oh yeah, they are just calling it like they see it so no problem then. I wish the discussion were more civil and I agree that male incivility takes a different form and is PERHAPS meaner, or more obsessive, or something, than female incivility but there is a HUGE factor of a GENDER BASED POV in making THAT evaluation itself. I certainly think that some people here could do better and I wish they would.
-
it's not an insult when women point out the fact that they are superior to men in every specific instance where anything is evaluated
because they believe that women and men are equal and they believe in full equality for everyone.
-
I'm still waiting for deering's apology that I respectfully requested for...
calling me a dimwit and grossfully mischaracterizing my statements to claim I had said something 180 degrees apart from what I actually said.
I wonder how long I'll have to wait....
-
Now stop it! All of you. Or you won't get a Red Star
If we can extrapolate the number of gaseous words written on this article with the number of words that comes from each genders mouth i would have to say the ladies have it.
-
The Issue is Not Number of Words
There are more important issues than word counts when it comes to an objective examination of the use of language and voice in interpersonal relationships by the sexes. How often does one interrupt the other? How insistent are we in controlling the topic? How often and thoroughly do we respond to the messages, explicit or implicit, conveyed by our partner? What about the content of our communications? How intent are we to deepen the truth content of our words? Or are our choices determined solely by the degree of control over the conversation and our partner we may be able to attain? When the research is finally done, and these questions answered, I think we will find that, in one measure at least, women will win (and I mean that in the best sense of the word) hands down.
-
In other words
How much nagging is involved. As I like to say, if the word "bitch" did not exist it would have to be invented.
We would also have to determine the tone of the discourse. Was is shrill? Was it pleasant or polite? Was there an implied threat of further nagging?
-
we respond to the messages, explicit or implicit,..... OR IMAGINED......conveyed by our partner
in THAT category I agree there is no contest, though to be fair the sender can and does deny the existence of real implicit messages. Like most detectors, the more sensitive the more false positives.