Peterson, Hamblin, Schryver Online Antics: Request for Help

[_Sophocles]

I think it's funny that the people who were arguing about what constitutes misogyny now find themselves on the opposite sides of the argument about what constitutes a message board gang beating.

[_RayAgostini]

Do you think Garbo was subjected to a "gang beating" on this thread?

I think I covered that in my reply to Ms. Jack. She's not a regular, or prolific poster here, to start with, and not "hardened" to this board like some of us who've been here for years. I don't think she was really in any "group" either, and she doesn't seem like a conformist type; doesn't belong to any particular "tribe", and wouldn't have the backing many of us would otherwise get. That wouldn't make it any easier.

I'd be saddened to see her go.

[_Chap]

For Christ's sake, Ray -

STOP PUTTING EVERYTHING INTO QUOTES!

Just stop.

[_RayAgostini]

For Christ's sake, Ray -

STOP PUTTING EVERYTHING INTO QUOTES!

Just stop.

For Christ's sake, Chap, stop shouting at me!

[_Chap]

For Christ's sake, Ray -

STOP PUTTING EVERYTHING INTO QUOTES!

Just stop.

For Christ's sake, Chap, stop shouting at me!

You stop the quotes. I'll stop the shouting. DEAL???

[_MsJack]

Ray ~ I made an argument here the other day concerning BYU not having a theology degree program which multiple people (including Chap and Aristotle Smith) respectfully responded to and disagreed with.

Apparently this means I was the subject of a "gang beating" because I wasn't part of any "group" and this will be my last post on the board.

See ya, MDB.

[_EAllusion]

Feminists holding a multi-day protest to replace the word women with womyn probably is a missallocation of resources and outrage. Calling someone with a history dismissing female posters from discussing intellectual topics with gender-stereotype based insults a misogynist is not. I don't see why women should expect to take on countless examples of sexism simply because worse examples exist. Saying, "that's wrong" where sexism exists doesn't exactly strain oneself. If anything, the cause of feminism is damaged if women are trained to accept sexism as all right if it is a small enough offense. As MsJack said, that's death by a 1000 cuts.

Like I pointed out in a thread I linked, if Beastie was black and Schyver instead asked her to go pick up her welfare check while the employed talk, why on earth would we be forbidden from calling that racist? It's not even a borderline example. The fact that the American criminal justice system has a lot of de facto racist biases is far worse, sure, but why should that prevent us from having contempt for smaller examples of racism? It's not like we can't do both.

This wasn't an innocent, if crude office joke. The example I linked involved Will - a person who Beastie had repeatedly complained about making sexist comments towards her - dismissing her out of the conversation with the word "baby," telling her she is in over her head, knocking her attractiveness by calling her "Beastlie," and telling her to be a cheerleader for her boys. How on earth is that not a sexist act? It's not an isolated example. That's part of a pattern.

[_beastie]

I think that's exactly what she's talking about. You don't have to call someone names to make them feel they're not part of the "groupthink". She was almost "interrogated" (I know it's a strong word) with questions, including questioning her father's and brothers' ethics, as if she needed to provide the "right answer" to satisfy the questioners.

She's practical and "street smart", and obviously not politically correct, not enough for many here anyway.

Ray,

She questioned us just as vigorously as we questioned her. She insinuated those of us who found Will's behavior were sexually uptight, with little exposure to the real world of real misogyny and sexism, and that we were doing a disservice to feminism. No names, but certainly strong language.

What would have been an acceptable response to her?

by the way, I would be sad to see her go, too.

[_Bret Ripley]

Let's just let this be my parting comment on this thread, and maybe from this board altogether...

Well, I hope not; but please forgive me for pointing out that you have missed a grand opportunity to say "I want to be alone."

[Guest]

If you can't handle having your ideas critiqued without calling it a "gang beating," then maybe you're right. Maybe this isn't a good place for you.

Sorry Jack, I really like your posts here but I can't let that slide. That sounds way too much like something Deborah, whyme or CA Steinman would say on MD&D and I thought this board was supposed to be different but maybe I was wrong. Maybe you don't care, but you're not going to encourage much fresh blood on this board with comments like that.

Garbo (like me) is fairly new here. Some of you have been posting here (or elsewhere) for years and so maybe you can't relate to how it can be fairly intimidating to jump in and participate when you don't have several years of experience and/or know a lot of the participants in real life. That is why Garbo is sensitive here in my opinion. I have noticed that the "Gods" here do have a tendency to ignore newbies, or worse, to pounce on newbies and call them misinformed because they don't know someone's long posting history or accuse them of being a sock puppet of some other long-time participant.

Maybe after 7 years it can't be helped, but do you guys want this board to just be an echo chamber for long-time participants to keep rehashing the same fights over and over again?

I really hope that Garbo ignores Jack's remark and sticks around. I have enjoyed her posts and I like having new perspectives to think about.