Five pages of discussion, and Moksha’s contribution is how he feels aggrieved. Lol. You can’t make this Crap up.
- Doc
Don't have to make it up, you just have to read your posts. Taking unjustifiable poop from you just because you felt like some kind of masked avenger is definitely cause for anger.
That’s a whole lot of garbled metaphor for, “I’m mad I was called out when I framed women as potential landmines, I dimwittedly requested a list of offensive terms so as not to offend women and it went over like a lead balloon, and my insatiable need to make threads about myself because my online persona is a poor facsimile of Millerian humor is so weighty I literally hopped on an unrelated thread to bellow about my unfair treatment.”
I guarantee you [deleted] didn’t read through the first five pages. The only thing that matters to our “satirist” is he gets a chance to make the topic about himself. Cool. And I’d be remiss if I didn’t shoehorn a tangentially related comment with an obscure reference like, I dunno, I’m Bagger Vance trying to help R. Junuh compete in this tourney and if he just listens to my sage advice it’ll end up in a three-way tie and everyone will shake hands,.
That’s a whole lot of garbled metaphor for, “I’m mad I was called out when I framed women as potential landmines, I dimwittedly requested a list of offensive terms so as not to offend women and it went over like a lead balloon, and my insatiable need to make threads about myself because my online persona is a poor facsimile of Millerian humor is so weighty I literally hopped on an unrelated thread to bellow about my unfair treatment.”
- Doc
Yes, that was the kind of poop to which I was referring. Best to bring you in when you want to sabotage the cause you are avenging and make enemies where none existed before.
That’s a whole lot of garbled metaphor for, “I’m mad I was called out when I framed women as potential landmines, I dimwittedly requested a list of offensive terms so as not to offend women and it went over like a lead balloon, and my insatiable need to make threads about myself because my online persona is a poor facsimile of Millerian humor is so weighty I literally hopped on an unrelated thread to bellow about my unfair treatment.”
- Doc
Yes, that was the kind of poop to which I was referring. Best to bring you in when you want to sabotage the cause you are avenging and make enemies where none existed before.
I am afraid it does look rather like DrC has come to the bar hoping to start a fight, or at least join in any one he can find already going on. I think that the stress of the last year is getting to a lot of people nowadays, and as a result the generation of heat is being prioritised over that of light.
Maksutov:
That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.
Mayan Elephant:
Not only have I denounced the Big Lie, I have denounced the Big lie big lie.
The laughter of men who are bonding with each other by mocking us. When Ford testified under oath that the laughter is the sharpest memory of her high school assault, every woman within the sound of her voice could hear that laughter, had heard that laughter, somewhere, somehow.
No man right now understands the flood that is rushing through women’s brains, and only women in the deepest denial have evacuated their minds before the flood could reach them.
When good men like Sen. Christopher A. Coons (D-Del.) give heartfelt, sincere speeches about how we must listen to women, I don’t know whether to coo or laugh or cry or yell. Think about “listen to women” as a program for change. It says to women: You will continue to suffer these abuses, men will continue to do disgusting things to you, the storms will keep coming, the tide will continue to rise, but now, we will listen and help you rebuild.
Pay attention people: If we do not raise boys to walk humbly and care deeply, if we do not demand that men do more than just listen, we will all drown in the flood. And there is no patriarchal Noah to save us.
A student at a Utah high school threatened to carry out a ‘rape day’ against girls
But others have jumped in to defend the boy, saying he’s young and didn’t know what he was doing. One said, “Boys will be boys.” Many said it was “just a joke.” Even the district superintendent referred to it as an “unfortunate and ill-conceived prank” in her statement.
I am the longest-running female poster on this board and all I can say is it's just a good thing that you aren't me, bird.
I assume you would be calm, cool, and collected.
I sure as heck don't need to appeal to a group of participants to come hold my hand. I can guarantee you that much.
The remark you made on Lem's thread deserved criticism. It was out of place. It looked like a joke that landed flat and served to trivialize the issue at hand.
Because how many adults need a written list of phrases to know when they're making offensive remarks?
LIGHT HAS A NAME
We only get stronger when we are lifting something that is heavier than what we are used to. ~ KF
The first is a remark addressed to the specific behaviour of an individual. It in no way reduces him to a patronising gender stereotype, as did the statement about Lem.
Maksutov:
That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.
Mayan Elephant:
Not only have I denounced the Big Lie, I have denounced the Big lie big lie.
The first is a remark addressed to the specific behaviour of an individual. It in no way reduces him to a patronising gender stereotype, as did the statement about Lem.
Oh yeah. Because characterizing a male poster as looking for a fight (and other remarks made by others) isn't the male stereotype of the angry male.
It couldn't be because Moksha's original remarks were off base.
It couldn't be because others were right about criticizing them.
It's because a guy is looking for a fight. Yep, that's his testosterone talking. No doubt about it.
LIGHT HAS A NAME
We only get stronger when we are lifting something that is heavier than what we are used to. ~ KF
I’m afraid that the comments to Moksha are doing exactly the opposite of what I’ve been proposing. It’s become about whether Moksha is a bad penguin instead of about why the list comment is harmful.
Doc, you seem to have objections to Moksha’s posting style that go far beyond feminism. As the starter of the thread, given the absence of moderators, I’d like to ask you to carve out your opinions about Moksha’s humor and use of obscure references and address them in a different thread.
I’d like to try and do what Lem’s article suggests and have the men take the responsibility for helping other men understand the nature and impact of sexist language and attitudes. But as the conversation currently stands, Moksha is so focused on defending himself as a good person that I wouldn’t expect him to be able to consider the important stuff.
I’d really like to discuss the list comment as a mistake as opposed to a moral defect. Could we try that?
ETA: I’d really like to avoid derailing the discussion by focusing on each other’s motives. Could we do that too, please?
Last edited by Res Ipsa on Fri Apr 23, 2021 5:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
he/him we all just have to live through it,
holding each other’s hands.
I’m afraid that the comments to Moksha are doing exactly the opposite of what I’ve been proposing. It’s become about whether Moksha is a bad penguin instead of about why the list comment is harmful.
Doc, you seem to have objections to Moksha’s posting style that go far beyond feminism. As the starter of the thread, given the absence of moderators, I’d like to ask you to carve out your opinions about Moksha’s humor and use of obscure references and address them in a different thread.
I’d like to try and do what Lem’s article suggests and have the men take the responsibility for helping other men understand the nature and impact of sexist language and attitudes. But as the conversation currently stands, Moksha is so focused on defending himself as a good person that I wouldn’t expect him to be able to consider the important stuff.
I’d really like to discuss the list comment as a mistake as opposed to a moral defect. Could we try that?
ETA: I’d really like to avoid detailing the discussion by focusing on each other’s motives. Could we do that too, please?
Ok. But before leaving this part of the thread, and without ascribing a motive, it does need to be noted that referring to other types of hurtful remarks in this thread as "unjustifiable poop," while sexist remarks are called "societal slips" that were not intended to hurt is not helping the conversation.
