In Which Res Ipsa Abandons the Illusion of Control Over What People Post In a Thread f/k/a Thinking About ...

[honorentheos]

Honor, shut the fork up. Let's not tone police victims or tell them how they fail to be model victims. Whatever Lem's imperfections may or may not be are irrelevant to the question of her being a victim.

Bringing it back to the idea of this thread though, if men who perpetuate sexism want mercy for their actual imperfections (undeserved though said mercy may be), maybe we ought to give it to the actual victims by not getting distracted by irrelevant details of their potential or alleged imperfections. Just a thought.

Again, not interested. There's the sexism topic, and there is being an asshole to others in the various threads involved and using excuses for doing it. The latter should be called out regardless of who does it or why. Good people use it to take a look at themselves and see if maybe they could be doing things differently that would help.

Pandering isn't helping.

[Lem]

Lem, I'm not going to pander or play the game. You keep responding to people like an asshole. It's cluttering up the conversation because it does.

I don't know. I don't know for sure you're a woman, even. For all I know you could be a 4chan supertroll really getting off on this stuff and going back to 4chan making memes about it.

Which is why I choose to just respond to your behavior as an individual and point out - you respond to people like an asshole. And then you excuse it and attack people for pointing it out. I'd say a 4chan supertroll would be loving this play for sure.

Just own you're reactions, maybe take a breath before swinging on someone for a perceived offense, be an example of what you think others should be doing. Or, you know. accept people will excuse their own bad behavior and be assholes towards you, too, and around goes the world.

Your advice to take a breath would be helpful to you. It seems as though you need to continue responding to people as an asshole. It's a pattern you have expressed quite a bit lately, maybe worth talking about with someone.

But it is helpful once again, on a thread where a woman objecting to the crude sexist comment "are you on your period or something" , to see it described as "swinging on someone for a perceived offense." I think that language is useful for others to see. It certainly describes the toxicity.

This may be a helpful thing to discuss in your safe space, this idea that you consider a woman objecting to sexism to be objecting to a "perceived offense."

[asbestosman]

How are you helping, honor? Look, I'm not great at deescalation either, but can we at least leave Lem alone in this thread or leave it to the OP to confer with Lem about the topic scope / intent?

[honorentheos]

How are you helping, honor? Look, I'm not great at deescalation either, but can at least leave Lem alone I this thread, or at least leave it to the OP?

I'm not trying to deescalate. I'm point out a fact about Lem's responses over multiple threads and choice to be a combatant in the threads. Are there times to be a combatant? Yeah, absolutely. But there's pandering going on that's really damned the conversation up, and it's not a man-woman thing. It's a flare up attack decision thing. Now, one could rightly argue it's not my place to say this. But then again, this is a message board about Mormonism and frankly at some point after multiple instances and thread evolution I think there's a justified point to say, "Hey you, step back and look at how you keep responding and then excusing it while claiming anyone who points it out is falling into the rut of sexism."

Sorry, but that's just a different version of being an asshole and using some social thing to excuse it. It's BS. Calling it out might piss people off, but it's BS none the less.

[honorentheos]

Lem, I'm not going to pander or play the game. You keep responding to people like an asshole. It's cluttering up the conversation because it does.

I don't know. I don't know for sure you're a woman, even. For all I know you could be a 4chan supertroll really getting off on this stuff and going back to 4chan making memes about it.

Which is why I choose to just respond to your behavior as an individual and point out - you respond to people like an asshole. And then you excuse it and attack people for pointing it out. I'd say a 4chan supertroll would be loving this play for sure.

Just own you're reactions, maybe take a breath before swinging on someone for a perceived offense, be an example of what you think others should be doing. Or, you know. accept people will excuse their own bad behavior and be assholes towards you, too, and around goes the world.

Your advice to take a breath would be helpful to you. It seems as though you need to continue responding to people as an asshole. It's a pattern you have expressed quite a bit lately, maybe worth talking about with someone.

Funny. I really haven't spent much time on the board recently at all. Now, you may mean the airplane story thing and now this thread, and yeah there's a pattern there. People were off the damned mark and still are on that thread. And funny enough, there's plenty of people in that thread questioning if there even was an actual incident at all rather than Nelson exaggerating what happened. You know. Like I said they were doing but you said no one was arguing that.

Anywho.

You seem to think you can behave differently than other people because it's not in your control to choose to behave otherwise. Or do you think I'm only calling you out so it's attacking you and I feel safe doing so because you're a woman? Maybe that's it. I am known for not getting into it with people unless I feel I can bully them around and have the crowd and popular opinion on my side.

This may be a helpful thing to discuss in your safe space, this idea that you consider a woman objecting to sexism to be objecting to a "perceived offense."

Or, you know, you could own your own crap. It's good for the soul.

[asbestosman]

Honor, I wonder if we should we defund the asphole police (says the guy policing you, ha).

Men shouldn't ever lecture women about how women choose to respond to sexism. I don't consider that pandering. Lem hasn't responded with anything that could be anywhere near as harmful as sexism let alone disproportionately worse. When men don't fix sexism among men themselves, I think we lose the right to complain about how unpleasant it is when when women call us out for it.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

Honor, I wonder if we should we defind the asphole police (says the guy policing you, ha).

Men shouldn't ever lecture women about how women choose to respond to sexism. I don't consider that pandering. Lem hasn't responded with anything that could be anywhere near as harmful as sexism let alone disproportionately worse. When men don't fix sexism among men themselves, I think we lose the right to complain about how unpleasant it is when when women call us out for it.

I mean, if you want to go back to Moksha’s ‘joke’ about cruising Haiphong harbor it belies some interesting analysis.

It indicates that

1) men (the US military who imposes the will of the US government)

2) have the right to cruise (do what it likes where it likes) and

3) an enemy country (women)

4) having the audacity to defend itself (women sticking up for themselves)

5) is considered to be either an act of war or at the very least inconvenient.

Mind you the the US military was shelling North Vietnamese supply lines from the harbor so read into that what you will about the broader implications of feminist theory.

Ms. Brown rightly noticed that

1) allies listening to women (the UN)

2) are worthless because they don’t stop men (the US)

3) from committing atrocities and indignities against women (I dunno, napalm and death in Vietnam)

4) so they (hippies and Liberals)

5) should teach men to stop doing that (protesting the US government to get it out of Vietnam - stop abusing it)

Granted. If you believe women being treated equally is a symptom of Marxist theory and you hate communists because you can’t grab ass at work any more, then by all means, get back to Haiphong harbor and resume shelling those supply lines.

- Doc

[honorentheos]

Honor, I wonder if we should we defind the asphole police (says the guy policing you, ha).

Men shouldn't ever lecture women about how women choose to respond to sexism. I don't consider that pandering. Lem hasn't responded with anything that could be anywhere near as harmful as sexism let alone disproportionately worse. When men don't fix sexism among men themselves, I think we lose the right to complain about how unpleasant it is when when women call us out for it.

The issue is this is about individual behavior. "Q" hasn't said anything nearly as bad as "x", therefore "Q" can't be called out for behaving poorly if they assert the reason for someone called them out is Q is a BS standard. That thinking is so flawed it is silly anyone would sincerely believe it to be true.

[honorentheos]

Honor, I wonder if we should we defind the asphole police (says the guy policing you, ha).

Men shouldn't ever lecture women about how women choose to respond to sexism. I don't consider that pandering. Lem hasn't responded with anything that could be anywhere near as harmful as sexism let alone disproportionately worse. When men don't fix sexism among men themselves, I think we lose the right to complain about how unpleasant it is when when women call us out for it.

I mean, if you want to go back to Moksha’s ‘joke’ about cruising Haiphong harbor it belies some interesting analysis.

It indicates that

1) men (the US military who imposes the will of the US government)

2) have the right to cruise (do what it likes where it likes) and

3) an enemy country (women)

4) having the audacity to defend itself (women sticking up for themselves)

5) is considered to be either an act of war or at the very least inconvenient.

Mind you the the US military was shelling North Vietnamese supply lines from the harbor so read into that what you will about the broader implications of feminist theory.

Ms. Brown rightly noticed that

1) allies listening to women (the UN)

2) are worthless because they don’t stop men (the US)

3) from committing atrocities and indignities against women (I dunno, napalm and death in Vietnam)

4) so they (hippies and Liberals)

5) should teach men to stop doing that (protesting the US government to get it out of Vietnam - stop abusing it)

Granted. If you believe women being treated equally is a symptom of Marxist theory and you hate communists because you can’t grab ass at work any more, then by all means, get back to Haiphong harbor and resume shelling those supply lines.

- Doc

It's funny how Moksha's humor style became the target of yours almost as if the thread provided an opening to crap on him about something you dislike under cover of the topic. Again, asshole behavior is asshole behavior, topic of the OP not withstanding. I have my issues with Moksha from the old board related to politics so I'm not defending him as an ally here. The position seems to now justify anything goes as long as it's for the cause. Clearly, this is broken. Person's being an asshole? Doesn't matter what side of whatever line they are on.

The ethics of that system are very problematic.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

Honor,

I'm addressing the underlying premise of the joke. The joke was meant to undermine the charge of sexism, in that we men gotta tread lightly around them feminists because you never know when they're going to explode with assholishness, amirite or amirite?

Anyway. Since you're focused on the tone. How would you suggest a woman address behavior she thinks crosses the line of civil discourse that relies on biology to diminish the poster and thus her message?

- Doc