Naw, ya know what?

[Canadian_watcher]

C_W, with all due respect. Ignoring the toxic influences is as easy as not reading the posts. Is there an ignore button on this board? If not, there should be. Over and out.

barracuda- an outside party and a male to boot, has just told you otherwise.
over and out, huh? sure. thanks for having this 'conversation.'

[Stephen Morgan]

Can one of the women show me how RI can be fairly described as a "good ol' boys club"?

C'mon. The entirety of conspiracy culture is a boys club. Anyone with a passing familiarity in the matter knows this, whether they admit it to themselves or not.

C'mon, it's full of women. You're just furthering stereotypes. Mae Brussel was one of the founding fathers of it all, if you see what I mean, and back in the high-noon of patriot militias and UN/Clinton paranoia in the 90s the internet was all around Eagle Forum and RuMill News.

Stephen is a good example of how the conversation can continue without bullying and trolling entering the picture. He took some lumps and re-entered the dialogue with his position unchanged, but with a new set of parameters from which to argue in place.

Well, sometimes you've got to shut up. Yield before superior force. Supple as the whatsit, not rigid as the thingy.

Do not repay anyone evil for evil, but take thought for what is noble in the sight of all. If it is possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all. -- Romans 12

I don't even mind that the anti-sexist board cheerfully accepts sexism going the right way, best to just leave it. I generally like the lax approach to enforcement anyway. Definitely the side on which to err.

I like to think of myself as a court jester. If my microphone worked I'd do you all a nice video in a funny hat.

And, oh, hey, Canadian_Watcher, you're pretty cute.

I still disagree with everything she says. I mean, I like to go to bed knowing I've taken the easy way. No point causing myself unnecessary difficulty. That's one of the reasons I've taken to shutting up. Looking at the new posts on this board back at the start of the misogyny thread, dreading any responses being there because they would ganging up and shouting me down and denouncing me as a woman-hater, so I thought "fuck it". Better to stay at the back of the bus than to get lynched. And she doesn't want her position mocked? Does she want to be respected and treated like a man or not? Respect is more likely to be marked by friendly mocking than mollycoddling. I respect you, barracuda, but I think we can agree I don't give you kid glove type treatment.

[druff]

Whoever suggested the misogyny thread be restricted to females only unintentionally struck gold. That's what the "dialogue" on gender issues amounts to here: let's all discuss gender issues in an open manner (no boys allowed).

I propose that posting rights for all boards be restricted to females (men may view...maybe). Well at least make a female only subforum. Posting on gender issues outside of this subforum shall result in banning. This of course precludes men from discussing such, which has been shown to be the preferred arrangement here anyway. Win-win!

I propose that threatening to leave the forum be a bannable offense. I propose that if RI sucks now it's because of threads like these.

[brainpanhandler]

have you ever had a stalker?

Over the course of the last five years I have had a couple of trolls make an effort to fuck with me. Generally by nature they tend to be pretty stupid and it's fairly easy to demonstrate that to the board. I can't really say that I have been "stalked" though. I understand that ignoring a stalker does not work. What does work is to relentlessly confront them. I've seen it work. Generally thankless work. Admittedly not everyone has Compared2what?"s tenacity. But barring that there is no shame in asking the mods for moderation. That's what they do.

okay, and that's what has happened here.
so.. your problem is.... what?

I think I stated it clearly here:

RI is the good ol' boys club

I don't think it is.

no tits allowed (unless we're willing to suck it - or perhaps them! - up).

Tits are not only allowed, but encouraged. I think Jeff has made a concerted effort to attract women and create a space where they can feel free to speak their minds.

Clearly discussion of any sort that threatens the boys' points of view can't be had

I think that's clearly untrue.

and any attempts to engage in communication beyond what the boys want to hear is going to be met with failure (re: futile frustration); much less attempting to let them know any part of a woman's experience.

way too broad a brush stroke.

You can't teach men anything

It is a tricky and difficult task to get the other gender to truly understand what it is like to walk in your shoes, even when they want to, but again, way to broad a brush you're using here.

just like you can't change the world.

Would you put that brush down already.

The only way around it is to simply not engage with them, and pull your own little world together as best as you can, as individuals.

Yes. let's all retreat into our own little worlds. That'll fix things.

I'm outta here.

I can't respect that decision on these grounds, but that's your call.

Have fun, boys.

I'm not a boy and I'm not having fun, at least at the moment.

[Canadian_watcher]

fair enough, BPH.

[barracuda]

I respect you, barracuda, but I think we can agree I don't give you kid glove type treatment.

I made a gopher with three heads.

[justdrew]

Whoever suggested the misogyny thread be restricted to females only unintentionally struck gold. That's what the "dialogue" on gender issues amounts to here: let's all discuss gender issues in an open manner (no boys allowed).

I propose that posting rights for all boards be restricted to females (men may view...maybe). Well at least make a female only subforum. Posting on gender issues outside of this subforum shall result in banning. This of course precludes men from discussing such, which has been shown to be the preferred arrangement here anyway. Win-win!

I propose that threatening to leave the forum be a bannable offense. I propose that if RI sucks now it's because of threads like these.

oh it's not so bad. let's just keep calm and carry on.

consider that you might just be over-reacting a little?

[Project Willow]

Brainpan, it doesn't serve any purpose whatsoever, well, except to invalidate her, to disagree with Maddy. She feels what she feels, and experiences what she experiences, here, as a woman, period. You aren't providing any comfort to her nor any solution or enlightenment on the central issue, and of course as a man you aren't going to experience this place the same way a woman would. Why bother with a show of power, it only exacerbates the problem.

I hate to use yours as an example because I think you're a man who has attempted to listen to other points of view. However, I am about to use some strong language, to describe what I've encountered here in the various, unfruitful conflicts on gender issues and elsewhere woven into various threads and topics. It's this idea that one person has the right to step inside and occupy the physical and/or psychic space of another human being in order to speak against her as if he were she. This profound boundary violation is the language equivalent of rape. It entails the inherent negation of the authority of the objectified person to name her experience. As we saw with the poster WUaL, indeed, he would not honor the word "No" issued from a woman, for him it was just another stance to be argued with. In some cases, and this gave rise to the rule change concerning gender, the language not only negates the experiences and voice of a single woman, but the experiences and voices of millions of women along with entire portions of related history (herstory). Personally, I experienced that view as so violating that I will no longer expose myself to the writing of those who remain here who espoused them. Sometimes the only useful response to people who will ignore and violate boundaries is to appeal to authority for redress.

I can't bring myself to participate, without protest, in a community that tolerates this language and on top of that, hypocritically believes it is somehow progressive. Alice, I so appreciate your input, and so I'd call on the men here, some of whom already understand, but I call on the others to say, yes, this is our problem too, because it is, for those of you who are aware, it's your problem too.

I especially appreciated this input form IamwhomIam yesterday:

Quote:
Waugs wrote:
"It really sucks that there are misogynists assholes in the world, but i don't particularly like being lumped in with them."

Then I suggest you take your issue up with them, because your sex lumps you in with them, and that's not the fault of Maddy, your mother, or any other woman.

[JackRiddler]

Whoever suggested the misogyny thread be restricted to females only unintentionally struck gold. That's what the "dialogue" on gender issues amounts to here: let's all discuss gender issues in an open manner (no boys allowed).

I propose that posting rights for all boards be restricted to females (men may view...maybe). Well at least make a female only subforum. Posting on gender issues outside of this subforum shall result in banning. This of course precludes men from discussing such, which has been shown to be the preferred arrangement here anyway. Win-win!

You don't speak for men. Certainly not for this man. The posts that have made people angry (not just women) have not done so because they came from men (who can't help saying what they do, seems to be your assumption) but because they've generally been blind and insensitive and intransigent as hell.

How about everyone who's feeling individually persecuted by the discussion just backs off for a while and thinks about it before coming back to it? There's plenty more going on to discuss.

.

[Canadian_watcher]

such sweeping, presumptive statements about people with different genitalia than you...

What, you already run the world, you got to rub our noses in it when we say we're unhappy about it?

.......

Please don't leave me here alone women!

I'm still here
I'm just not going back to the Misogyny thread. It's a tarbaby.

PS I'm not here to negotiate sexual politics. I'm quite successful at that in life. I'm here to talk and learn about things I can't discuss in 'polite company' - UFOs, holistic medicine, transhumanism, international mystery and intrigue.

oh that's a sneaky little edit you put in there, Cricket. I'm sure you are very successful and 'negotiating sexual politics' in life. All the chicks who play along have a great time of it.. on the surface.

And if you're so good at it I wonder why you aren't lending your expertise to the sisters who are clearly failing?

[JackRiddler]

I'm not loving the still image. This is me. Deal with it.

Just saw it. It's brave of you to present yourself like this on a board of screennames, and I hope to live up to the respect you demand -- implicitly not just for yourself. Thanks.

[Saurian Tail]

I'm still here
I'm just not going back to the Misogyny thread. It's a tarbaby.

PS I'm not here to negotiate sexual politics. I'm quite successful at that in life. I'm here to talk and learn about things I can't discuss in 'polite company' - UFOs, holistic medicine, transhumanism, international mystery and intrigue.

oh that's a sneaky little edit you put in there, Cricket. I'm sure you are very successful and 'negotiating sexual politics' in life. All the chicks who play along have a great time of it.. on the surface.

And if you're so good at it I wonder why you aren't lending your expertise to the sisters who are clearly failing?

Crikkett in the Crosshairs ...

[Canadian_watcher]

I'm still here
I'm just not going back to the Misogyny thread. It's a tarbaby.

PS I'm not here to negotiate sexual politics. I'm quite successful at that in life. I'm here to talk and learn about things I can't discuss in 'polite company' - UFOs, holistic medicine, transhumanism, international mystery and intrigue.

oh that's a sneaky little edit you put in there, Cricket. I'm sure you are very successful and 'negotiating sexual politics' in life. All the chicks who play along have a great time of it.. on the surface.

And if you're so good at it I wonder why you aren't lending your expertise to the sisters who are clearly failing?

Crikkett in the Crosshairs ...

I'm sorry, do you have a dog in this fight?
What is the purpose of what you have just written? Is it to facilitate discussion?

[wintler2]

It's this idea that one person has the right to step inside and occupy the physical and/or psychic space of another human being in order to speak against her as if he were she. This profound boundary violation is the language equivalent of rape. It entails the inherent negation of the authority of the objectified person to name her experience. ..

Ya, the dialogue-as-battle thinkers can only see that boundary that respect demands as a frontier calling for their enormous throbbing intellects to conquer it... ignorance is as ignorance does. I'd have no problem with a women-only thread or threads, and invite the men to consider that a men-only one would be redundant, as so many threads are already.

[OP ED]

Can one of the women show me how RI can be fairly described as a "good ol' boys club"?

C'mon. The entirety of conspiracy culture is a boys club. Anyone with a passing familiarity in the matter knows this, whether they admit it to themselves or not.

OP ED suggests ignoring them and continuing conversation with those who are capable of carrying one in a mostly civil manner, however much they might disagree. [Mr Morgan is a good example]

There was no ignoring the behavior that WakeUpandLive was up to - he was stalking and harrassing another poster. Brekin wanted to be suspended on principle, so he was obliged after he forced the issue. I don't think the argument can be profitably made that either of these individuals were posting in good faith here over the last two days, or posting with the respect of the community and other board members in mind.

i was only advocating a general principle of tactics i've found useful. when the patterns becomes so manifest that they disrupt multiples of ongoing threads then we aren't discussing people anymore, we're discussing trolls. at which point they become YOUR problem, not OP ED's, as OP ED is not a moderator. [much too immodest to be a good fit]

brekin, for example, has never been taken seriously enough by OP ED to merit a serious response.

i usually do not even read his posts unless i am following the inter-RI-politics of a particular thread. never have.

how do you not give a bunch of posters who follow you from thread to thread instigating unrest between you and others what they want? please tell me.
ignoring did not work, so another solution is in order.

This one was for you, OP ED.
I wouldn't mind an answer.

i usually try several things after a prolonged period of ignore. and by prolonged, i mean months into years. [some trolls are persistent]

and please do not think that OP ED is unaware of the trouble that internet acrimony can create. at some point in the semi-recent past, when OP ED's identity was even more semi-available to the general public, his positions on this board led to his being discussed elsewhere which eventually resulted in calls to OP ED's house, which was in the book, from anonymous harrassers. so, indeed, OP ED can relate to the notion that these things can get to the out-of-hand level of stressful in a fairly short time period. [OP ED had to get rid of the phone line]

sometimes ignoring does not work. sometimes the mods are effectively powerless without any direct evidence of ongoing harrassment and/or habitual breaking of forum guidelines. in which case:


OP ED generally provokes them [trolls] until they do something stupid enough to reveal their nature sufficiently as to invoke their bannage.

[OP ED has successfully done this six times, or at least aided in group attempts to do so, at last count, it is OP ED's part-time hobby]

(why do you think OP ED was drawn like a moth to the misogyny thread to begin with?)

[joke/sort/of]

some people are, in fact, here just to argue and seem to somehow enjoy endless rounds of back-and-forth insult and etc. but, as with most bullies, they tend to have buttons which are rather easily pushed once they are found.

....

OP ED, while thinking ladies should be permitted their space, would suggest that a discussion of misogyny would tend towards socially useless if males were not permitted to engage in it to at least a limited extent. Depriving them of female experience can only exacerbate the problem of their collective ignorance of said experience.

[more Segregation is not a solution]