A recent thread here, and it's comments by a certain poster, I think needs to be highlighted. The Religious Thread
I appreciate that often self moderation is a good thing, but I believe, there needs to be a line. When someone posts such vile comments that show such a disregard for women, and attitudes often shown by those who have physically assaulted women, that line should be drawn in my opinion. I don't think it matters whether it's face to face, or an online forum. I believe it should be confronted, at all times.
I did so, and I won't apologize for it. I was attacked by a couple members for doing so (and likely reported for standing up to this), and I have to say I'm rather dismayed by that. I would have thought there would have been a common stance on this. I guess not.
For that reason, I'm outta here. Unless it;s shown this isn't tolerated here. I don't know of one forum that would. It's been a slice to get to know a few of you, some of you I know personally and from other places so we'll still get to chat.
I just stumbled over the latest "hornet's nest" myself and though I can't say I'm in agreement with that fellow's attitudes toward "the wife and kids," it's his right to spout off and declaim on the supposed emasculation of men. Have at it, I say! Best such attitudes be exposed. Nor are we all supposed to agree with one another on this stuff. And hey - it's the religion thread - you expected maybe peaches and cream?
Nor do I see, Groove, how promising to leave the forum would solve anything.
Max, it isn't that it was posted there. I get your point, and understand.
It's the reaction to my calling the poster either disturbed, or a troll. I assumed the former. I believe this sort of attitude should be confronted. You cannot allow this sort of thing to be posted, and then attack people for saying that they think this is a disturbed person.
I'm a little dismayed that anyone would defend this person. I take the issue seriously.
If I'm in error, certainly I'm willing to admit to it. But this one has touched my life personally, and I have seen far too much of this to stand by while people defend it.
I've been reading that thread and not replying... there's a lot being said that makes me uncomfortable. Haven't replied, as I'm not a big fan of arguing with someone who is likely to immediately dismiss me as 'oh, just some emasculator'.
I don't agree, at all, with what the current pot-stirrer is saying. But he's not to the first to espouse this view, even in this forum or in others, so I wonder to myself why it makes me so uncomfortable seeing it here? And I think a lot of that is in the language he uses to express this opinion.
__________________ WARNING: If you see links to ads in the above post, blame the cheesy ad-linking software used by the owners of this website. You can opt out here. I do not endorse these ad links. Don't click on them.
Look Groove, those who defend that person probably believe in the many of same things he does. It's not a new belief, after all. It's as old as the hills. But simply denouncing it (i.e., women ought to know their place, men are naturally in charge) won't make it go away. It just won't. Better to shine a light on it. Sweeping it under the carpet, pretending it won't exist, saying the fellow has no right to speak out on topics of the day - how is that fair or democratic?
Sure, there are hate speech provisions. But it's a real gauntlet and it's full of greys. When does your right not to be outraged trump another's right to share with us his view of women?
It's the internet, man. Stuff happens. You're not going to find another forum where the same divisions don't regularly come to the fore. Leaving this particular one won't do anything to change things for the better.
You're right Max. I'm just incredulous at anyone who would defend it. Thanks for your voice of reason.
And Sonal I am not surprised it makes you feel uncomfortable. Anyone from any group where there is a history of serious violence being committed against would. I realize I may sound a little upset here, but I have always believed it is crucial for men to stand up to this, IRL, or online. Everywhere. It wasn't like I went crazy on the guy and called him all the things I would have liked to, (I didn't because I -do- respect the forum...) but the reaction of a few was disappointing to me.
Since I was one who disagreed with groove's use of the terms 'disturbed' and 'troll', I wish to be clear on why I hold that opinion. While I do not in any way agree with the poster's views on women (and challenged him on his opinion in that thread), I still believe one should take part in a discussion without name calling. The term 'troll' is a favourite comeback and used by gt all too frequently when he doesn't agree with a poster IMHO. As for his use of the term 'disturbed' to describe that poster, that is in my mind, not only unnecessary, but over the top and intended as an extreme insult. While I have no use for that man's views, I have little more for such name calling. Other than those two words, I agree with gt's position entirely.
Location: Markham - Soon to be Mississauga, Ontario
Originally Posted by SINC
Since I was one who disagreed with groove's use of the terms 'disturbed' and 'troll', I wish to be clear on why I hold that opinion. While I do not in any way agree with the poster's views on women (and challenged him on his opinion in that thread), I still believe one should take part in a discussion without name calling. The term 'troll' is a favourite comeback and used by gt all too frequently when he doesn't agree with a poster IMHO. As for his use of the term 'disturbed' to describe that poster, that is in my mind, not only unnecessary, but over the top and intended as an extreme insult. While I have no use for that man's views, I have even less for such name calling. Other than those two words, I agree with gt's position entirely.
I have less time for that man's views than name calling. You rank calling someone a troll or disturbed a worse offence than his views on women? Come on.