Fuck the High Road: The Upside of Sinking to Their (Misogynist) Level

[WilliamPitt]

Fuck the High Road: The Upside of Sinking to Their Level
By Jessica Valenti
The Nation

June 3 2013

Don’t feed the trolls: it’s probably the most common refrain in online discussions, especially when dealing with misogynists in feminists conversations. The idea is that the best way to deal with sexists is to starve of them of the attention they’re so clearly desperate for. Besides, we think, why sink to their level?

But the high road is overrated. It requires silence in the face of violent misogyny, and a turn-the-other cheek mentality that society has long demanded of women. A vibrant feminist movement has ensured women don’t take injustices laying down offline—so why would we acquiesce on the Internet?

(snip)

For Lindy West, staff writer at Jezebel, engaging with hateful detractors is not just important as a way to bring attention to misogyny—“A lot of those attitudes are poisoning our culture, and it’s too easy to write them off as some fringe opinion,” she says—but also because it can be cathartic. Recently, West has been taking on sexists on Twitter over rape jokes and their cultural consequences. “If talking back to some random idiot makes me feel better—if it’s fortifying for my mental health—then I don’t care if I give some dumbass with thirteen followers the flash-in-the-pan attention he’s been craving.”

(snip)

The truth is—despite stereotypes that paint feminists as forever negative—doing feminist work requires boundless optimism. It means believing that people have the ability to be better, that culture can change, and maybe even that people who hate can learn to love. It’s exhausting. Sometimes reminding ourselves how hilariously stupid the opposition can be is a necessary break from the burden of idealism.

The rest: http://www.thenation.com/blog/174624/fuck-high-road-upside-sinking-their-level

[Zoeisright]

1. Ignoring misogynists is not the right thing to do.

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good women do nothing. - Edmund Burke

[boston bean]

2. Sure this will go well. On a website that thinks feminists

are making DU suck. Or that feminists are ruining their own cause, cause they face it front on.

Or that feminists are harpies, or need fainting couches or hate sex, or hate men, or must be totally damaged individuals because they speak out.

Good luck!

[Katashi_itto]

4. Incorrect, not all feminists on DU...

the ones generally pointed out on DU that are the cartoon feminists, the ones that insist on using the perpetual strawman arguments.

That select group that seems to think including all men the idea that all men are evil, in their broad brush stroke argument is a winning tactic.

Sort of like what your doing in describing the critics.

[geek tragedy]

5. Cool story, bro.

Problem is that there are no such cartoon feminists at DU.

[Katashi_itto]

10. Riggghhhtt...

[geek tragedy]

12. Devastating, fact-based, empirically sound rejoinder. nt

[Katashi_itto]

13. Considering your 1st response was entirely fact-free, how else should I respond?

I mean I am not here to convince you of anything.

You won't even admit there is a problem

So why worry about it?

[geek tragedy]

14. Because many anti-feminists have made the same bullshit accusation

towards women whose voices they'd like to silence around here.

It's always completely without substantiation and a work of fiction if not libel.

The "man-hater" or "misandrist" slur is used as a weapon to try to get them to shut up.

Much like Glenn Beck calling Barack Obama an anti-white racist.

[Katashi_itto]

16. Again, spouting a bunch of talking points, doesn't make the fact you've got a small group of

cartoon feminists, operating on DU any less real.

By ignoring that, you actually damage the cause.

But hey, say what you like and ignore whats been said quite often.

I mean it's just a simple observation on my part.

[geek tragedy]

18. The only cartoon feminists are in your imagination.

Sorry that you find feminism so threatening, but it's not our problem.

http://upload.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2733220

I've seen who you've labeled a 'cartoon feminist' and a man-hater, and it's typically a woman who has the temerity to kick your ass in an argument.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2560624

You after reading your various posts. Before, I could have cared less about the pic.But now I like it. Not great art or anything, but it does annoy you. That's a plus.

note that you explicitly endorsed a pro-rape, pro-violence against women image just to spite DU feminists in that thread.

So, yeah, your problem is with feminists who talk back to you. Your acceptance and endorsement of misogyny is there for everyone to see.

[Katashi_itto]

21. If thats your best example, espeically with who I was talking with

You prove that the cartoon fem group is quite alive and well.

That interchange is an excellent example of the cartoon feminists in operation here.

[geek tragedy]

24. Given that you explicitly endorsed rape porn

that promoted sexual violence against women, the one living in a cartoon world is not a feminist.

[Katashi_itto]

28. Seriously...thats the best you can do?

Your saying ...I "explicitly endorsed rape porn"


My statement:

"... after reading your various posts. Before, I could have cared less about the pic.But now I like it. Not great art or anything, but it does annoy you. That's a plus."

Are you one of those people that has reading comprehension issues, unable to pick up on sarcasm?

Just because you say it's something doesn't make it real.

Your arguments smack of something one might see out Freeperville.

As I said in the beginning as you are managing steam along fact-free in denial. By all means please continue and thanks for making my case about the cartoon feminists operating on DU.

[geek tragedy]

29. you said you liked a picture that promoted violence against women.

Referesher: this is the picture that you not only found inoffensive, but actually liked:



I doubt there's a feminist on this planet who gives a shit what you think about her feminist credentials.

[Katashi_itto]

30. Comprehension is a skill bourne of practice...See #24

Last edited Tue Jun 4, 2013, 02:59 PM - Edit history (1)

Well I worry about what real feminists think. The Cartoon ones on DU? Not so much.

[geek tragedy]

31. Again, you are supremely unqualified to judge feminist credentials, and

in general men like you consider women "real feminists" only if they don't say anything that makes you uncomfortable.

That you are cool with this ("I like it" was your exact quote):



means you are pretty much not a feminist or allied with feminists in general.

Because you actually chose to say you liked a piece of woman-hating garbage like that instead of doing the mature thing and you know, not liking it.

And then you blamed a woman for your liking the piece of rape porn.

[Katashi_itto]

32. Ah the "strawman argument...I was wondering when that would come up

"in general men like you consider women "real feminists" only if they don't say anything that makes you uncomfortable."


Again I know it takes practice, but go read #24

While your at it, I know its hard but go read some of the posts that person I was responding to, ---before she got banned from the thread--posted

[geek tragedy]

35. I did. And you proved her right. Juries hid the wrong comments. nt

[Sheldon Cooper]

36. You have just had your ass handed to you in this thread.

Signed,

Cartoon Feminist

[Katashi_itto]

43. Reality free as usual :)

[geek tragedy]

51. Have you once in your entire DU posting history discussed feminism, feminists,

or women's issues more broadly without attacking feminists at DU?

Have you made a single positive contribution, show of support, statement of solidarity with women on women's rights, decried sexism or misogyny, etc?

The answer is no. You only comment on gender issues if it gives you a chance to engage in personal attacks on feminists, accuse them of having psychological and emotional issues, and in general pick fights and engage in sexist stereotypes, like comparing women to prostitutes out of the blue--because that's the baseline after all

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1017&pid=122399

So, when someone has 100% record of discussing gender with the sole purpose of antagonizing women, they are not qualified to discuss feminism, since they are opposed to it.

[thucythucy]

130. "Have you once in your entire DU posting history...."

Thus far he hasn't answered any of your questions.

That speaks volumes, don't you think?

[geek tragedy]

133. It's amazing, they claim to be in touch with how the vast

majority of DU feminists think, but NEVER actually make a positive contribution to discussions of feminism.

Totally not transparent.

[BainsBane]

167. Look at this

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=thread&address=1017122864&alert=op#post15

[geek tragedy]

168. A real charmer. nt

[Katashi_itto]

136. Not particularly. I provided plenty of evidence, as have others here.

It's simply being ignored. No problem.

It's a bit like responding to freepers.

Provide facts and evidence and get no real response except the promotion of agenda.

Now it's really a matter of letting the shrieking go on.

[thucythucy]

137. So post a link to a thread wherein

you condemn violence against women, or relate to feminists or feminism in any way that isn't an outright attack.

Should be no problem, assuming you've ever done any of those things.

[Katashi_itto]

139. Again, I'm talking with Freeper mind set.

1. Go look it up your self.

2. Obviously for you it has to be posted on DU somewhere for a person to be active in feminism. Which is a sad statement on your real involvement, isn't it?

[thucythucy]

184. So your answer is no, you can't point to a single post

you've made on DU about women or feminism that isn't an outright attack on both.

You have no idea what my "real involvement" in feminism is or isn't.

And what's sad is you no doubt genuinely think you're being clever.

[geek tragedy]

138. You have provided zero evidence that you oppose misogyny, violence

against women, rape culture, or give a single shit about women's rights and gender equality.

You have not made a single positive commen or contribution re: the concerns of feminists.

So, why should someone with a 100% feminist-negative record be taken seriously in such disucssions?

[Katashi_itto]

140. So why should I care if you do?

I mean, I don't take you seriously.

Not to mention your comprehension problem which has been pointed out repeatedly by various people here.

[geek tragedy]

141. That you don't take the concerns of feminists seriously has

been established beyond a reasonable doubt, as you have never done so while at DU.

My comprehension problem is that I actually do comprehend, rather than retreating to a fantasy world where men are the real victims of gender-bias and where any feminist who says stuff that man find uncomfortable gets relegated to the ranks of man-hating misandrist feminist oppressors.

[geek tragedy]

144. The fact that you use language like "real feminists" indicates

you don't take any feminists seriously.

Because people who use terms like "real feminists" as an attempt to divide the feminist community against those who are too outspoken are in fact working to undermine the entire feminist movement.

You would understand this if you actually talked with feminists.

You have as much credibility on feminism as Cardinal Dolan does on GLBT advocacy.

[Katashi_itto]

145. Again your credibility to make judgmental statements concerning my level of

involvement comes from where?

You can't even read basic statements correctly.

[geek tragedy]

163. Your behavior here is exactly that of a man who enjoys baiting women

not a man committed to understanding the concerns of women.

Whether it's degrading women by referring to them as "cheap streetwalkers"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1017122330#post25

and positing that they should work in porn

http://election.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1017&pid=102015

or refers to the "fem attack squad"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022733189#post2

[BlancheSplanchnik]

214. Ooooooooooooooo! "Shrieking". Now you're pulling out the heavy artillery.

Cartoonish reliance on outdated gendered slurs... ("shrieking" is a word reserved for condescending dismissal of women's Voice. There's no mistaking your intent in choosing that word.)

You think you're smooth but you are not. Every word of yours oozes with arrogance and pretentiousness.
You avoid honest response on a mature level and instead, hide your lack of substance in pseudo-articulate attacks.

It is easy to see your tactics: smokescreening, focus-shifting, projection, smearing your "enemies" and juvenile name-calling in attempts to destabilize those confronting you on your hostility. You haven't given one intellectually or ethically valid reply. You clearly refuse to partcipate in "Discussion In Good Faith."

It's sad, really, to see someone so intent on convincing the world of his advanced intellect end up doing the opposite by putting his hostile agenda clearly on display. You're so blinded by your arrogance that you can't even see what you look like to everyone else.

"Sad", in the sense of the word, "pathetic".

[AlbertCat]

54. You have just had your ass handed to you in this thread.

Uh... I don't think so....

You seem to be ignoring this:

"unable to pick up on sarcasm? "

The example posted is OBVIOUSLY sarcasm and not what the poster REALLY THOUGHT.

Thus perpetuating the stereotype that feminists have no sense of humor.


It's wise to pick your battles carefully.... because you don't want to waste energy alienating actual comrades.
But also, you must be vigilant.

It's a delicate balancing act.

[geek tragedy]

72. You're awfully kind to assume that was sarcasm, but that poster

has not made a single pro-feminism, pro-women's rights, or anti-misogyny post in their entire history at DU.

Every single last post on the issue of feminism and women from them has been to attack women and accuse them of having emotional/psychological issues (no sexism there!)


So, the fact that they said they like it because it rankles femnists is fully in keeping with their posting history.

[AlbertCat]

77. to assume that was sarcasm

It's OBVIOUS....

[geek tragedy]

78. Obvious if from someone who doesn't like to bait and antagonize women.

When someone has a 100% rate of baiting women/feminists and a 0% rate of supporting women's rights or opposing misogyny, the presumption cuts the other way.

If the person making that "obviously sarcastic" comment disagrees on gender with public intellectuals like Larry Flynt and Rush Limbaugh, they have provided zero evidence to the contrary.

[October]

109. Your posts are the only thing obvious.

Last edited Wed Jun 5, 2013, 05:46 AM - Edit history (1)

Edited for obvious reasons.

[AlbertCat]

111. You're posts are the only thing obvious.

No...yours are too.

[October]

217. I know the difference between "you're" and "your."

Autocorrect. My bad for not re-reading.

[AlbertCat]

234. I know the difference between "you're" and "your."

I'm sure you do. I myself didn't even see the mistake.

Typos are not the problem here.

[BlancheSplanchnik]

208. "you're"

"While you're at it." Not "your"

[October]

218. I know. Thank you, though.

Autocorrect ALWAYS corrects to contractions, and I don't know why. Still, my bad for not re-reading my own post.

[BlancheSplanchnik]

228. oh, I was replying to Mr. Ito, not you!

I'm on mobile, it doesn't show who you're replying to.

Had no idea it showed up to the wrong person! Sorry, October!

[slor]

50. I do not recall seeing this picture before...

But as a man, I must say that I found it instantly offensive, and if I was part of the management of the firm whose people had designed it, I would make it crystal clear that if I saw anything like it again, it would be grounds for termination.

[geek tragedy]

52. Ford motors felt the same way and fired the agency.

It was in India, where being racist and misogynist is apparently something they try to get away with in the advertising biz.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/11399841

[CharlesInCharge]

283. ^^^This^^^. Wish I could rec your post to infinity - n/t

[mercuryblues]

68. well then

define a "real feminist" So women will know how to act with your approval.

[BainsBane]

170. Real feminists don't talk back

basically they aren't feminists at all.

[Matariki]

102. Speaking of cartoons - did you know that it's very common that internet trolls can't spell?

Or were you talking about Jason Bourne for some weird reason?

[BlancheSplanchnik]

207. "born"

Not "bourne"

[In_The_Wind]

223. Holy Crap!

[geek tragedy]

62. The whining about 'misandry' is really childish.

It's about as big of a problem as the oppression of white Christians.

Woman predicts men will approve of misogynistic material promoting rape, men respond by endorsing misogynistic material promoting rape, and the woman is the villain.

[sufrommich]

63. Or reverse racism. nt

[geek tragedy]

64. or the gay mafia.

The most oppressed people on the planet are white heterosexual men in the United States. I read it on the Internet.

[arely staircase]

128. or men holding doors open for women

nt

[geek tragedy]

129. give the stupid door issue a rest already

no one has said it's wrong to hold a door for anyone

[EOTE]

69. So we should just ignore the several posters who do nothing but attack men?

And we shouldn't care about people acting like untolerable assholes so long as they're untolerable assholes toward a majority group. Yeah, that makes complete sense there, chief.

[geek tragedy]

70. It is an unfortunate reality that one cannot discuss sexism and misogyny

without talking about the bad shit that men do to women.

Sorry if that offends your sensibilities. Perhaps you should leave gender discussions to less delicate and sensitive personae.

[EOTE]

73. Great non-sequitor you've got there.

We're not talking about discussions of sexism and misogyny. We're talking about certain posters who use every opportunity they can to slam all men or nearly all men. It is well beyond idiotic to think that those insane rantings are discussions of sexism and misogyny. Shit, a good bulk of those idiotic rantings get hidden, so it's clear that that DUers see how ugly and irrational they are.

Sorry if this offends your sensibilities, but there are quite a few cartoon feminists here who are incapable of anything approaching rational discussion. Maybe you should leave these discussions to people who are capable of consistent and rational thought.

[geek tragedy]

74. The only people who see slams on "all men" are those who wish to

change the subject.

I am a man, and I have had zero instances where I saw "all men" being labeled as evil or worthy of hate.

You have an intense personal dislike of these women, so perhaps you are not capable of offering a rational judgment on their words, given your negative emotionality towards them.

[EOTE]

75. Or, you know, people who are capable of modest amounts of comprehension.

I strongly suggest opening your eyes next time you read one of those posts. Or, you know, actually comprehending what it is that you're reading. Words are fairly objective things, you know.

On edit: You actually provided a link to one of those disgusting posts. Does this sound familiar to you? "Thank you so much sharing a horrifying vile ad that men will think cutsey and funny as on another thread i listen to womens pain at being raped. "

Oh yes, men just think that rape is SOOOO "cutsey" and funny. That's not at all a disgusting generalization that shouldn't be made by any self respecting member of the human race, that's just good ol' feminism, right? You don't have the urge to vomit right now?

[geek tragedy]

76. I don't typically take lessons on the English language

from people who need four sentences to express the amount of condescension and smug self-satisfaction best expressed in one sentence.

[EOTE]

79. Ahhh, so I'm not concise enough for you, is that it?

It's always a sure fire way to know that you're dealing with someone who is in entirely over their head and completely unable to make an intelligent argument when they start criticizing grammatical minutiae. If you wanted to express your frustration with being unable to make sense of sentences more than 5 words long, you could have just replied with typical 'net speak for morons incapable of reading big words. TLDR would have sufficed.

But if concise is what you want, I'll be more than happy to provide that. I can give you 4 words that sum things up rather nicely:

Your arguments are idiotic.

Concise enough for you?

[geek tragedy]

81. You should work on your reading comprehension before

engaging in this kind of preening.

I wasn't criticizing grammatical minutiae, but rather your pompous verbosity.

Taking 4-10 sentences to write what could be expressed in 1-2 doesn't make you a superior intellect, it makes you an inferior writer.

"Brevity is the soul of wit."

Cutting down on the excess verbiage will make your empty boasts merely annoying as opposed to self-parody.

[EOTE]

82. Ahhh, so you continue to attack my writing style rather than anything approaching substance.

I was pretty damned certain you'd do just that, thanks for not letting me down.

So let me get this straight, you stop discussing the content of my argument when it becomes clear that you haven't a fucking clue of which you speak and go right to my writing style. I call you on your idiotic tactic and you DO THE SAME DAMNED THING ALL OVER AGAIN.

Thanks for providing such a perfect illustration of which I speak. You can continue to lambaste my writing style as much as you want. But whatever you do, don't address the content of my argument. And by the way, I'm not attempting to be witty, I'm just exposing idiots and assholes. Thanks for making my job so much easier, chief.

[geek tragedy]

87. If you would provide content and substance, I would be more

than happy to address it.

Currently, you offer merely insults, accusations, and bluster--all poorly articulated.

Your entire argument amounts to "EOTE is smarter than you, and you suck" and you make your argument extremely poorly.

I'm not attempting to be witty, I'm just exposing idiots and assholes.

You have succeeded.

[geek tragedy]

93. No, you actually didn't provide actual words.

You made assertions/claims, but you didn't back them up with, you, now, quotes and stuff.

And, I've debated much smarter than you, so please get over yourself and your supposed intellectual superiority.

[EOTE]

96. Actually, I did, champ. It's not my fault you have such a difficult time, you know, reading and

stuff. And damn do you have a problem with commas. Do you need a primer or something? It's rough to both be unable to make a logical statement OR a grammatically correct one. You're a double threat. Do you also fall on your face while dancing?

I'll provide it to you again, in hopes that you might actually do some comprehending this time around. Unlikely, I know.

"Thank you so much sharing a horrifying vile ad that men will think cutsey and funny as on another thread i listen to womens pain at being raped. "

[geek tragedy]

103. Gamesetmatch.

It's always a sure fire way to know that you're dealing with someone who is in entirely over their head and completely unable to make an intelligent argument when they start criticizing grammatical minutiae.

followed by:

And damn do you have a problem with commas. Do you need a primer or something? It's rough to both be unable to make a logical statement OR a grammatically correct one.

1. Thanks for refudiating yourself.

2. Commas are punctuation, not grammar.

[EOTE]

105. Turn about is fair play, right, champ?

As you couldn't do anything but attack the style of my writing, I figured I could take a break from destroying your arguments and destroy your pitiful writing style as well.

But don't forget for one second that your arguments have been thoroughly destroyed. Considering that you've actually stopped even attempting to provide a rational argument, your writing is all I can attack. But don't worry, if you ever decide to make an actual argument again, I'll be around to show you just how stupid it is.

[geek tragedy]

117. Cool story, bro. nt

[AlbertCat]

80. You have an intense personal dislike of these women

Y'know.... when you can supposedly "discern" this about someone from some posts on the internet, but not recognize obvious sarcasm, you lose your credibility.

[geek tragedy]

83. That person's contempt for those women is evident from their own writing

We're not talking about discussions of sexism and misogyny. We're talking about certain posters who use every opportunity they can to slam all men or nearly all men. It is well beyond idiotic to think that those insane rantings are discussions of sexism and misogyny. Shit, a good bulk of those idiotic rantings get hidden, so it's clear that that DUers see how ugly and irrational they are.

Sorry if this offends your sensibilities, but there are quite a few cartoon feminists here who are incapable of anything approaching rational discussion. Maybe you should leave these discussions to people who are capable of consistent and rational thought.

This person takes a lot of words to say "those women are crazy and dumb."

[EOTE]

86. So calling out women who think that all men think that rape is cutesy and fun is hating women?

Sure would like to spend some time in that crazy lil mind of yours. Yes, these are IDIOTIC RANTINGS. Yes, they are UGLY AND IRRATIONAL. But apparently calling a spade a spade means you hate women. Funny, I thought geeks were logical. My bad.

[geek tragedy]

91. This is funny. I'm gonna bet you don't have a quote from anyone

stating that "all men think that rape is cutesy and fun."

I'm afraid, despite your lectures on reading comprehension, you took a sentence that implied that some men find it cutesy and fun and chose to spin it as "all men."

[EOTE]

95. I already provided it for you. You promptly ignored it.

And you can pretend that the ALL is incredibly important. Yet I'm sure you'd be totally fine if someone posted something like:

"Thank you so much sharing a horrifying vile ad that women will think cute and funny as on another thread i listen to the pain of men being raped."

As if all women think men being raped is hilarious. No, the double standard here is quite obvious, comments like that are hidden immediately. It is idiotic and hateful to speak of men like that just as it would be to speak of women like that. But you only care about one gender in particular. That's sexism in a nutshell.

[geek tragedy]

99. I don't see the word "all" in there.

Which kind of undercuts the entire point of your victimization routine here.

Admittedly, that is not the best drafted sentence in the history of the English language, but the person's intent was clearly not to label all men. They said so.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2559965

you really dont address the issue that i was not talking about you, if you did not fall in the SOME,

TOO MANY, MANY, A LOT, A FEW, A HANDFUL of men. right? because i say men created the ad, it does not mean ALL men created that ad. because i say men get a giggle out of this it does not mean ALL men get a giggle out of this. not like we have not discussed this before and you are well aware of it. hence the pretend. i didnt address YOU if you are outraged about the ad. simple enough. pretend away

Btw, are you accusing me of only caring about women, and not men? Have the guts to say so if that's true.

[EOTE]

101. Again, reading really helps. I've already explained this to you. Do you need me to show you again?

And yes, you've definitely got a kindred spirit here at DU when it comes to crafting up some delicious word salad. First learn to read well, maybe then you can work on putting together sentences that make a lick of sense.

And no, I'm not accusing you of caring only about women. I'm accusing you of being an insult to the word logic. I'm accusing you of making nothing but idiotic and insubstantial arguments.

[Katashi_itto]

104. +100

[AlbertCat]

108. This person takes a lot of words to say ....

....What I can only assume is what he means.

So... men are incapable of nuance? Is that what you mean? You take multible posts to say "Men are dumb insesitive rapists".... right?

******************************

I don't think or mean any of what I said after "So....."

See? I can play the same game you are playing. And I can represent a position that is indeed not what I think....

....ON A FRIGGIN' MESSAGE BOARD.


I'm sorry...and I do mean this.... but...you are ridiculous.

[Whisp]

89. ''all men or nearly all men''.

are perpetrators of most violent crimes such as rape.

It is sad that so many here think it's a personal attack - that saying this I am also saying that EOTE (assuming you are a male) is a violent criminal.

That's bullpucky but is always a good distractor, so you think.

[geek tragedy]

94. There you go, reading AND comprehending stuff, nt

[EOTE]

100. Once you learn to do either, you'll be in much better shape.

Perhaps that will come many years after you've mastered tough things like the bewildering comma. I won't be holding my breath.

[EOTE]

98. And do all men or nearly all men think that rape is "cutsey" or hilarious?

Because that was the kind of bullshit I was speaking out against. Comments like that are disgusting and "bullpucky". Nix that, they're bullshit.

[Whisp]

110. just like not all men or nearly all men are blank blank blank

not all women or nearly all women think that all men or nearly all men think rape is 'cutsey' or hilarious.

do you understand?

Individuals that you think are too radical for you in the feminist way and you spending so much energy and focus on particular people and not on the issue as a whole, is you missing a huge point of it all.

I know some animal rights people. One of them is a total asshat, that does not take away anything from the whole cause. That individual is not what it is all about, right?

[thucythucy]

127. So what's your take on post 57?

"Men are easy to control..."

No comment on that one at all? Isn't he attacking ALL men in that post?

Let's see, in one short post you manage to string together: "insane rantings," "idiotic rantings" ""beyond idiotic" "ugly" "irrational" "incapable of anything approaching rational discussion..."

Sure looks like a lot of ranting to me.

[thucythucy]

121. Now that was one perfectly stated post.

Hats off to you GT. I've been gratified by all your comments on this thread, but that one was just so spot on.

[Whisp]

67. There are cartoon masculinists here. That's for sure. n/t

[geek tragedy]

71. My favorite trick is how men who do nothing but bait women

then sit there and act like they're the goddamn pope of feminism.

[Matariki]

106. Geek Tragedy wins the thread!

awesome posts and THANK YOU.

[Quantess]

226. Haha! Well said.

[BainsBane]

146. Fact?

That you characterize people you disagree with as cartoons? How about you provide evidence that the women you so despise aren't really human?

[Katashi_itto]

147. Sure, np

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2560624

Go read the various posts the person i was responding to.

I was even used as an example of my "awful" views by a poster on this thread

She got banned from the thread in a post or so.

Heck go read almost anything she has posted.

That behavior is standard to the small subset group on DU I am talking about.

[BainsBane]

149. That you don't like what someone writes

doesn't mean she is less than human. Your determination to belittle feminists is offensive.

[Katashi_itto]

151. Are comprehension problems catching?

Where is it "feminists" In general?

Interesting, you don't seem to mind "men" in general being denigrated by the same group

[BainsBane]

152. The point stands

You are free to agree or disagree with any point raised. To call someone a cartoon or infer she is subhuman because you don't agree only speaks to your own character. You evidently feel unequipped to engage in a discussion with her, which is entirely your problem.

[BainsBane]

157. This exchange clarifies a post of yours

regarding women that I saw a few days ago. Now I see the problem.

[Katashi_itto]

159. Yes I'm sure it does.

I am sure that and this previous post, shed so much light on me, with that searing intellect of yours.

But we won't discuss the car wreck or the scarring, not to mention, the long slow painful rehabilitation or
that I practice martial arts out of the simple requirement of move or have joints lock up.

No no, you know it all.

I really stand in awe of your shining brilliance.

[snooper2]

26. LOL

[sufrommich]

8. " that seems to think including all men the idea that all men are evil"

Utter bullshit. The "cartoonish" feminists seem to live in your head.

[Buzz Clik]

22. No. They exist here.

For awhile, I was under the impression that they dominated the feminist population at DU. Gratefully, they do not. When I repeated to other DU feminists some of the totally bizarre comments that the "cartoons" would spew, the rank and file distance themselves from the insanity. That was a huge relief to me.

[sufrommich]

25. No, they don't. You found feminists who disagree,

bully for you. It doesn't mean anything other than Buzz Clik's list of "good" feminists and "bad" feminists. There are no "cartoon" feminists here, it's a phrase used to demean and dismiss feminists.Period.

[geek tragedy]

27. Hey, a couple of men have spoken and ex-communicated you from the ranks

of feminism.

That's how it works, I guess.

[Buzz Clik]

39. Laughable. No one has done.

Extreme hyperbole.

[geek tragedy]

225. Hey, you all have even declared feminism itself obsolete.

Right here in this thread.

So feminists here understand exactly what game you all are running.

Thus proving the necessity of feminism, because there will always be men telling women to STFU and stop whining and show us liberal men some fuckin' gratitude.

[Buzz Clik]

38. Let me list for you the characteristics of "cartoon" feminists

This is my list.

1) The time from calm discussion to angry rant or insulting discourse is zero. The cartoons have no patience and take no time to become angry
2) Dissenting opinions are wrong opinions. "My observation is _________." "Yes, what you describe is real, but this is my experience, which is different than yours: ...." "No! You're wrong." (lengthy, angry rant follows laced with insults)
3) They put forward arguments and rationalizations that are jaw-dropping in their wrong-headedness.
4) They are walking contradictions. What they say holds only to them; people who oppose them are not allowed to espouse those opinions. "Women's freedoms need to be unfettered." "I agree." Bullshit! No man feels that way."

And, yes, they exist.

Now, that's not to say there are not feminists -- both male and female -- who I consider to be totally assholes and fully devoid of redeeming qualities; I can give you a list of five to ten such people without even trying. But, there are assholes in the Environment Forum, Religion, everywhere.

You can have your opinions, but telling me that my opinions are wrong simply because they disagree with yours ... well, that's making a caricature of yourself, don't you think?

[geek tragedy]

42. First, they are human beings, not cartoons.

Second, 3/4 of DU fits your description of being a 'cartoon' at one time or another on just about any issue (try arguing that Bradley Manning isn't a hero if you don't believe me).

Third, your points 2-4 indicate a bit of unawareness on your part. "Those cartoons are not only WRONG, but they are so intolerant of dissent that they accuse ME of being wrong."

[Buzz Clik]

45. LOL! You again? In another subthread repeating the same bullshit you just said to someone else?

What an amazing display of self-importance.

By the way, in just one post, you nailed down all of my cartoon characteristics. Was that on purpose? No idea, but I'm impressed.



You get the last word for now; I will, however, consider comments from others.

[Lizzie Poppet]

113. Jury results:

Jury voted 3-3 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT and said: Poster has a long history of posting misogynist crap.
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT and said: This post is a nearly perfect example of Cyberdisinhibition which is covered in the Community Standards .
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Actually I thought the graphic was a man! I guess you have to look at the shoes. I don't think this rises to the level of hide-worthy, not on one of those heated threads.
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT and said: Tired of the misogynistic crap.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given



Looks like you got away with another one...

[Buzz Clik]

114. A hung jury. What a bummer.

It would have been such a coup to hide my post.

[sufrommich]

65. Your list of "Buzz Click's bad feminists" could apply to

almost every thread on DU regardless of the topic.



"You can have your opinions, but telling me that my opinions are wrong simply because they disagree with yours ... well, that's making a caricature of yourself, don't you think?"

I think you just described every discussion forum on the internet,including DU. It's a caricature of forums, not feminism.

[Buzz Clik]

116. "Bad feminists"? I never said that. Why put it in quotes?

Regardless, I guess you've changed your mind. Instead of completely denying the existence of cartoon-like feminists you are claiming that everyone who types a word on the internet is a cartoon of some sort.

You've missed my point entirely, but that is not accident on your part, so have at it.

[LittleBlue]

115. Agreed. I think the real problem they have is distinguishing themselves

The Democratic platform already incorporates most of what people care about: economic equality and opportunity, legal equality, reproductive rights, and stopping violence against women.

That leaves little for certain feminists, which is why they start engaging in what you call "cartoon" behavior. Most progressive women needn't be feminists because Democrats take care of the issues that matter to them. They don't care about internet arguments, porn bans, raunchy jokes, opening doors, etc. Without sinking into the gutter and battling attention-seeking teenage internet trolls, they wouldn't have much visibility.

At least, that's part of it. There are other issues IMHO.

[Buzz Clik]

118. You know, I find it most annoying...

... when someone makes my argument far better than I.

Thanks. I agree 100%

[geek tragedy]

239. Well, since you're now on the record as stating that feminism is useless,

I guess it's good to have full disclosure as to who is an actual anti-feminist and who isn't.

[Buzz Clik]

244. Is said that? I challenge you to provide a quote where I said anything similar.

[geek tragedy]

247. You agreed with this:

That leaves little for certain feminists, which is why they start engaging in what you call "cartoon" behavior. Most progressive women needn't be feminists because Democrats take care of the issues that matter to them. They don't care about internet arguments, porn bans, raunchy jokes, opening doors, etc. Without sinking into the gutter and battling attention-seeking teenage internet trolls, they wouldn't have much visibility.

You believe that most progressive women have no need to be feminists.

[Buzz Clik]

248. Classic logical dysfunction.

Take off. I'm not playing.

[geek tragedy]

250. You agreed that "most progressive women needn't be feminists'

Cmon man, are you going to punk out on your own statements now?

[Starry Messenger]

202. "Most progressive women needn't be feminists because Democrats take care of the issues that matter

to them." Er. I'm going to be nice and answer that with "Not consistently. and to the extent that they do, it is from feminists who keep the heat on."

[DeadLetterOffice]

221. Seriously?

Most progressive women needn't be feminists because Democrats take care of the issues that matter to them.

As a progressive woman, a feminist, and a Democrat, I can't decide which response to go with here...
(1) Screaming something along the lines of: "Are you f#%$@ing KIDDING me?!?"
or
(2) Laughing hysterically.

It's early, and my blood pressure doesn't really need the kick that screaming brings, so I'm going with the laughing.
You do know the definition of the word "feminist," yes? Just in case you need a refresher, we'll go with the quick and simple version: a person who advocates social, political, legal, and economic rights for women equal to those of men.

You seem to be suggesting that because I am a Democrat, I do not need to advocate for women's equality rights. Because my (heavily corporately-sponsored) party officials are going to do it for me.

This sounds suspiciously like a version of "Don't worry your pretty little head about it, honey." I am hoping that is not what you meant, but it sure is what it sounded like. Which, you know, kind of defeats your whole argument right out of the gate.

[LittleBlue]

236. It's because you're a feminist

As a progressive woman, a feminist

You basically excluded yourself from my statement the moment you said this.

[geek tragedy]

238. You may not realize how incredibly stupid it sounds

for a man to tell women that feminism and feminists are outdated and have nothing to contribute to policy and cultural debates.

But it's really fucking stupid, as well as offensive. Certainly not something a progressive would say.

Kind of like a white person telling the NAACP it can fold up shop because the Democratic party exists, or that LGBT activists can just sit down and shut up because the nice people at the DNC have got this covered.

[LittleBlue]

240. Go look at some recent polling

It's not me, it's women telling you. 70% of women do not identify as feminists, only 24% do. That tells me feminism has little to attract most women.

And the truth is that most of the important issues are covered by Democrats.

Certainly not something a progressive would say.

I'm a Democrat. Never saw a requirement in the handbook to support your opinions.

[geek tragedy]

242. "That tells me feminism has little to attract most women"

http://www.msmagazine.com/press/2013_feministfactor.asp

http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-500160_162-965224.html


Not a coincidence that your fellow anti-feminist Rush Limbaugh was touting that other poll.

Your hostility towards feminism is your own issue, not feminism's. One you share with Phyllis Schlafly as well as Rushbo.

Also note that the least likely people to identify as feminists: white, old, Republican, low education.

Nice company you keep.

[LittleBlue]

243. I don't listen to Limpballs

Nor do I give clicks to any links about him. So how would I know what he says?

CBS News isn't right-wing so I don't know what you're going on about. How is this is even a controversial observation? You can't imagine that for many women, the issues that are important to them are covered by Democrats?

[geek tragedy]

245. The Democratic party has those positions because of the feminist movement.

Moreover, women's equality is not going to be achieved merely at the governmental level, but on a cultural/social one.

The Democratic party didn't do anything regarding Steubenville, hasn't said bupkus about misogyny in advertising/media/film/television/music/social media.

And if you think the Democrats won't pitch women's issues aside to win some votes . . .

[LittleBlue]

246. That's what I'm talking about.

The feminist movement had real meaning when women didn't have a voice at the table.

Now that women have a substantial advocate in the Democratic Party, I think that feminism has to latch on to more and more fringe issues. Attacking Femen, comedy skits at the Academy Awards, and yes internet arguments like those described in the OP. If you ask my sister about these other fringe issues, she doesn't give a fig.

[geek tragedy]

249. What the hell makes you think feminism isn't about equal pay, equal access

to health care, and generally being freed from discrimination?

[LittleBlue]

251. It is also about that, but let me repeat myself

The Democratic Party already covers all of that!

Women were looking for an advocate for issues that matter to them. They found one.

[geek tragedy]

252. And who's going to lobby the Democratic party?

Equality has to be cultural as well as a legal formality.

[LittleBlue]

253. Women voters. nt

[geek tragedy]

254. Sounds like feminism. nt

[LittleBlue]

255. Not according to the polls

Anyway, continue if you wish. You're just going around in circles now.

[geek tragedy]

256. Polls?

http://msmagazine.com/blog/2013/03/18/the-feminist-factor-more-than-half-of-2012-women-voters-identify-as-feminists/

[LittleBlue]

259. Shock result: feminist magazine finds most women femenists

While CBS News finds the opposite

Really, this is like one of those Jesus people who can't admit that someone may not believe as they do.

[geek tragedy]

260. How do you define "feminism?" nt

[geek tragedy]

261. CBS News

http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-500160_162-965224.html

Women hold a positive view of the women's movement. Sixty-nine percent say the movement has made their lives better –- the highest number saying this since this poll started asking the question.

How do you define 'feminism?'

[DeadLetterOffice]

257. Seriously? part 2

Women were looking for an advocate for issues that matter to them. They found one.

Oh for the love of...

Do you have ANY idea how patronizing that sounds? "Looking for an advocate?" Bullshit. Feminism isn't about looking for some big strong man to take care of you, it's about having the power and status to take care of yourself. This also applies to political power and status. I don't want someone else to be my advocate -- I am perfectly capable of advocating for my own damn self, thank you very much. And I will never, ever, trust a bunch of mostly-rich mostly-white mostly-men to decide what is in my best interests, as a human or as a woman or as pretty much anything else.

[Apophis]

66. You're right.

There are a few "cartoon" feminists here and I'm glad the majority of the feminists distance themselves from those "cartoons".

[LanternWaste]

88. We often see that which we want to-- regardless of whether dragons exist or not.

" They exist here..." And here there be dragons.

We often see that which we want to-- regardless of whether dragons exist or not.

[Buzz Clik]

90. Yeah, well, about that...

When your eyebrows are singed, you have claw marks from head to toe, and reptile bites on your arse, it just might be a dragon.

[lumberjack_jeff]

120. Agree. I think part of it is "silence is consent"

So long as individuals were allowed to assert that their man-hating views as representative of feminism, without pushback from men, mainstream feminists assumed that men agreed and so were hesitant to disagree with the caricature feminists.

Gender discussions on DU are far more nuanced than they were even a couple of years ago.

[Buzz Clik]

19. +1

Couldn't agree more. We're talking about the same klatch.

[Gore1FL]

84. One might say they have a "history." n/t

[pintobean]

181. A jury went 0-6 on this post.

Someone won't be alerting for 24 hours.

[Gore1FL]

193. Were any of the comments amusing? n/t

[Matariki]

97. "cartoon feminists"

dumbest post of the day. good job!

[Arcanetrance]

131. You couldn't be wrong about the people your labeling cartoon feminists that broad brush all men

As evil. I'm a male who've had nothing but polite intelligent conversations with them. Never once has any of them called me evil or any of my gender evil. Yes they point out some uncomfortable truths that require a lot of self reflection about ones outlook on life. If that's broad brushing it may be time to be introspective and see why you feel that way.

[niyad]

160. please be good enough to link to various threads of these cartoon feminists. three or four will do.

otherwise, we will have to conclude that your assertions are as lacking in factual basis as you indicate other assertions are.

Sister Militant
AC, PHD, remdi95
Blessed Order of the Sisters of Perpetual Outrage

[Gormy Cuss]

229. Nope, ALL feminists on DU are treated that way.

Some of us just get dismissed that way less frequently than others. Who is this "select group that seems to think including all men the idea that all men are evil...?" Do you mean the ones who talk about the patriarchy? Because if that's the case, you've really missed their point.

[geek tragedy]

6. The anti-feminist creeps are a minority, though a loud and obnoxious one. nt

[sufrommich]

7. They may be a minority, but I've yet to

see a forum or comments section that doesn't attract them, like flies to shit, whenever women's issues come up.

[geek tragedy]

9. Takes strict moderation policy to keep 'em out. nt

[sufrommich]

11. I guess my point is that they are a large enough minority

to have a large presence everywhere.

[lumberjack_jeff]

122. When "women's issues" = "how much do men suck?" then yes.

I confess to being a fly attracted to that shit.

[geek tragedy]

125. bad men suck. men who do really bad things suck.

similarly, women who do bad stuff also suck.

[lumberjack_jeff]

156. If "bad men" are a women's issue, are "bad women" a men's issue? n/t

[Whisp]

161. of course, on an individual basis mostly.

but it's the bad men that make the bad rules for most of history. Look at the bad asswipes in congress deciding on women's issues. Now if that were a batch of bad women deciding on men's personal issues, yeh. When was the last time that happened?

[lumberjack_jeff]

169. How can an *individual's* behavior become an issue for the entire other gender?

Unless one extrapolates a social phenomenon from it.

Roman Polanski's behavior is deemed relevant because it is seen to be socially representative of rape.
Susan Smith's behavior is deemed relevant because it is seen to be socially representative of filicide.

If the former is an appropriate brush with which to paint others of his gender, then so is the latter.

Personally, I think it's counterproductive to spread the blame unnecessarily with concepts like "rape culture" or "filicide culture" (This is apparently only the third time that phrase has ever been typed into the internet, btw). Extrapolating the responsibility for individual acts as widely as possible is the whole point of this subthread; Bad man = women's issue

[geek tragedy]

165. To the degree they rape, murder, sexually harass, and

discriminate against men, sure.

[lumberjack_jeff]

171. So you're saying that Crystal Mangum should be a men's issue?

Is it reasonable to extrapolate a generally useful social issue from that example?

[geek tragedy]

175. I said "to the degree." False accusations of rape are an exceedingly rare occurrence

so to the extent they are a problem for men, they are a very small one that faces us.

[lumberjack_jeff]

183. She also is out on bail for murdering a guy.

People tend to forget.

The cultural reaction to her walking free after murdering her boyfriend is arguably a useful topic as a men's issue.

[Whisp]

189. Why

does every woman on this earth now and all of history have to be perfect like the Virgin Mary (ha!) to you before you can accept that the vast amount of violent crime is done by men, to women, to children and to other men?

Running theme for you - I can bet on it every time. Time for new material.

[thucythucy]

186. Please post a link to such a statement

made by one of your "cartoon feminists."

Something that asserts that "women's issues"="how much do men suck?"

[chervilant]

158. Or, that feminists on DU

are all 'shrill, Sisters of Blessed Outrage."

[niyad]

3. k and r--thank you for posting this. I have absolutely no problem engaging these woman-haters.

what is that saying "silence equals consent"? I do not consent to their insanity and woman-hating, anywhere.

[KitSileya]

40. I really don't like that saying.

I don't think it's one that should be kept alive in our language and culture. Silence does not equal consent, and that is one that we feminists are ardently fighting against. That is what many rape cases in the media recently is all about - victims who could not consent and rapists who use the 'they didn't say no, which means yes' defense.

In addition, women should not feel obligated to fight sexists, on the internet or elsewhere, or feel ashamed if they don't. Every woman has the right to judge for herself whether she feels safe enough, or even just has 'spoons' enough to engage in the fight against sexism. We have seen the consequences of standing up for feminism - on the internet, just look at the reaction to Anita Sarkeesian and Adria Richards - death threats, rape threats, photoshopped porn and violent pictures - and that just for starters. In real life, it is also fraught with danger, as any woman who has refused to engage in bus stop conversations with men who feel entitled to women's attention - they go from 'Hi, beautiful' to 'You fat b!tch' in ten seconds flat.

I know you are perfectly aware of this, but I still think it needs saying.

[ismnotwasm]

48. You know what? That's a good point

The reason I stay out of most gendered arguments-- here anyway-- is that they don't accomplish much. I'm very active in a protected DU group, not out of fear, but Because I want to be productive. I Like the 'view' feature for that very reason. I hope people read and think about women's issues. But not everyone can be a warrior, nor should they be. The world is a frightening place for millions of women and we still have much to accomplish.

William Pitt has spent many years as a political activist, and while I don't interact with him, I always read his posts, because he has gained as much respect as you can give for an invisible on-line person from me.

[KitSileya]

56. I also respect William Pitt a lot.

I might not agree with him all the time, but at least I know that if I should engage in debate with him, it will be respectful and very often a chance to learn. Unfortunately, not all the men posting on DU are of the same caliber.

(Funny thing is, until I realized it was his real name, I was automatically a bit negative towards William Pitt's posts, as I really love the story of the Lennox sisters and their families - Charles James Fox, William Pitt the younger's greatest rival, was the son of Lady Caroline Fox, Baroness Holland, the oldest Lennox sister. Interesting the things that color our opinions, isn't it?)

[ismnotwasm]

60. Heh!

True that

True indeed.

[October]

220. True; they really don't seem to accomplish anything.

I've seen too many threads on DU that go back-and-forth.

These DU misogynists just want to argue/fight. They are bullies.

Here's my take on it: They need to control threads the way they need to control women.

I find it best to state your piece, and move on because such threads often turn into a contest. You'll see one name over and over again, totally monopolizing a thread. I find that revealing.

[CrispyQ]

55. A very thoughful post & an excellent point, here:

Silence does not equal consent, and that is one that we feminists are ardently fighting against. That is what many rape cases in the media recently is all about - victims who could not consent and rapists who use the 'they didn't say no, which means yes' defense.

[Hissyspit]

209. The saying is "Silence IMPLIES Consent"

Because it does.

[KitSileya]

230. In other words, women are morally obligated to speak up against misogynists

or they are implicitly saying that they consent to their own oppression? Is that what you are saying?

[Hissyspit]

235. When people witness oppressive behavior and say nothing, it gives the implication to others

that the that behavior is acceptable to them, whether it is or not.

The saying identifies a phenomenon of human behavior.

[liberal_at_heart]

15. you change people by meeting people face to face, forming friendships, and showing them

you are no different than they are. Yelling, screaming, and calling people names on a message board doesn't change anybody.

[HappyMe]

17. I agree.

This thread has already deteriorated into just that.

[maddezmom]

20. Well said.

[Sissyk]

41. Very well said!

A bunch of that yelling, screaming and calling people names takes place around here quite a bit. Doesn't do anything but cause resentment.

It also derails threads that could have good discussions. This thread is a good example. Coulda been great but was derailed within a few post.

[Squinch]

176. But that takes two. I only ever see one side of that being denigrated here on DU.

And it's the side that's usually just answering shit stirrers. Look back at this thread. A fight was started, but it wasn't started by the feminists.

[Buzz Clik]

23. As always, when one breaks the "don't feed the trolls" rule, new rules kick in:

1) Choose your battles. There is no sense in engaging the truly brain dead. Select those who are making an impact.
2) Deal a killing blow, but recognize that the opponents will refuse to acknowledge defeat. "I've cut off all your arms and legs." "No you didn't! It's just a scratch."
3) Do not be distracted. Trolls like to change the argument to areas where they feel more comfortable. Keep the argument miserable for them.

Otherwise, good luck. It's an endless war.

[Katashi_itto]

44. +100

[Buzz Clik]

46. How the hell did we end up on the same side of an argument?

[Katashi_itto]

47. Good Question!

But not a bad thing, after all I've always respected your opinion, even when we disagree.

But I just keep thinking this bunch...it's like like listening to Freepers rant...

[HappyMe]

33. Well, it looks to me like

most posters in this thread did indeed say, 'fuck the high road'.

[LadyHawkAZ]

196. Yep

as per usual for DU.

[Flaxbee]

34. Interesting TED talk: Jackson Katz - Violence against women - it's a men's issue

Listened to this yesterday - worth a 15-minute break.

[BlancheSplanchnik]

215. sounds excellent.

I want to watch that.!

[ismnotwasm]

37. Thank you Mr. Pitt

And if I may cross post something i posted at HoF

Inside the Bro-Choice Campaign: Giving Men the Green Light to Step Up for Reproductive Justice

RHRC: Choice USA works with a lot of students. What kind of issues do you see resonating with young men on campus, and why?

KJ: Students everywhere are taking action against epidemic levels of sexual assault on campuses and the perceived indifference of administrations and law enforcement. Young people are fired up about this. And we talk to many young men who recognize the sexism and rape culture operating on their campus and in their social circles—even if they wouldn’t use those terms.

Environmental rights, the school-to-prison pipeline, voter disenfranchisement, racial profiling, LGBTQ rights, and education access are also all issues that young progressive men are talking about on college campuses. While Bro-Choice is a relatively new campaign, we are excited at the possibility of working with men and women who are passionate about all of these issues to find some new, creative work at the intersections.

RHRC: So is this any different from young women’s activism against sexual oppression? Are there differences in approaches or issues that we should be aware of as we work to build a more inclusive movement for reproductive justice?

KJ: Reproductive justice isn’t just a women’s issue; it’s a people issue. And organizing and advocacy is about meeting people where they are. To do that, you cannot make any part of a person’s identity invisible. You have to be willing to see them, hear them. Even when it is hard and painful, and especially when you disagree or when you are uncomfortable.

http://rhrealitycheck.org/article/2013/06/03/inside-the-bro-choice-campaign-giving-men-the-green-light-to-step-up-for-reproductive-justice/


Allies are always great to have.

[galileoreloaded]

49. this seems like a pretty predictable reversion to the mean that

is sparking a pretty predictable reaction from the second wave crowd that is rapidly losing members and voice.

extinction burst

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extinction_%28psychology%29

the closer you get to the truth and the end, the louder the voices become

[ismnotwasm]

53. You mean feminism?

What's actually happened is that it's no longer a white, middle class, mostly college educated movement.

It's spread all over the world, and speaks with many different voices, cultures and opinions. And it's absolutely and chaotically beautiful.

[galileoreloaded]

57. more radical second wave ideologies in my experience

and they are being rejected by, most surprisingly, women. women who aren't getting what they want.

men are simple to control, as evidenced by the vast caldron of squishy "nice guys" who just don't understand how to win and act terribly.

people are waking up and realizing that one system of control substituting for another is still a system of control.

i walk around and am highly encouraged, mostly by the women who are casting off the chains of both men and the women who want to control them.

[HangOnKids]

107. Jesus your posts are comedy GOLD

"men are simple to control, as evidenced by the vast caldron of squishy "nice guys" who just don't understand how to win and act terribly."

I won't link to your posts but they are fucking hysterical. DU might be your chance at a gold medal dude! You have taken thinking highly of yourself to a new level. MAGIC!

[galileoreloaded]

132. I'm a giver!! Nt

[geek tragedy]

134. "men are easy to control"

Why aren't any men objecting to this blatant misandry?

[galileoreloaded]

162. Errrr, they have read some of your posts and

Understand that men who share your views make the argument valid.

IMO you are helping attain an imperative but I sincerely doubt it's yours. I can't blame you though, i can only pity you.

[geek tragedy]

164. Yes, pity me in that I see women as my equals, not my enemies, and that

I share my life with a strong, vibrant woman who challenges me as much as I challenge her, rather than writing alpha-male fantasies and passing them off as real life

http://sync.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2512380

In a 19 year career, it has taken a lot of unlearning to cease deferring to female colleagues based on a perceived weakness to be accounted for.

As a man, and to survive in a 2013 workplace I have had to connect to the feminine worldview. In fact, I started executive coaching on the issue because frankly I am that good at reading it.

What I discovered is that as long as other men continue this abhorrent tradition, women come to expect it as the norm and it makes them targets for men like me. I unashamedly, and using very feminine tactics have single handedly crushed my female business competitors by utilizing their own social structures against them quite effectively. I especially love the crocodile tears that get resorted to as if I even care. This isn't 1950 and I don't care. I quickly remind these women of their professional positions that dictate flat and emotionless interactions.

For the wary exec, this transition provides some very useful chaos in which to hide and self promote, but until this practice ceases to exist and we truly interact as equals, it ultimately hurts women by faulty conditioning.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2926867

have always let my wife/gf pay the bills

its all in how the interaction is framed. ie:if you are feeling less a "man" then that is an antiquated view.

i get up, lift weights, hang by the pool, do a little consulting, go grab lunch, take a nap.

gf goes to work, does whatever she does there, comes home and generally makes dinner. she insists on cleaning on the weekends. shrug.

she would tell you that just having me here is worth it. its why i believe in gender equality, if lioness wants to hunt and make money, who am i to argue.

all i have to be is in shape, socially outgoing, and smarter than most people around. slam dunk. more men should try it.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2927976

was married, now w girlfriend

its just not a good contract for a man to sign because, frankly you don't have to in this culture. many many many (the vast majority under 35) women no longer require or even want commitment before they will engage you in a physical relationship, and if you are attractive enough as a man, they really don't even require monogamy.

i am 38 and have 2 boys and an exwife (she lifesplit, pretty sad girl), so while more kids would be great it isn't a huge drive for me. current gf is 24 and makes a killing.

women in my circles are trending towards better jobs, much better pay, and imo hate their lives, and they readily sign up for a pleasant stable home life to counteract the disasters that they see in their careers. (especially STEM or financial jobs)

im in great shape. stay tan cleaning the pool, eat paleo, lift weights.

it works.

Your ability to stay in character is admirable.

[sufrommich]

173. "Your ability to stay in character is admirable."

Yep.

[galileoreloaded]

177. nothing inconsistent or untrue in anything i've written.

i consult on human behavior when i'm bored or want a new toy. especially gender issues in the workplace for corporate clients. im considered top 3 nationally.

human behavior is 95% predictable and falls neatly around lines of gender.

what i find interesting in your comments and posts though, is almost a pathological need to be accepted and seen as some uber ally to people promoting gender primacy, against your own interests (theoretically). when i see that in public, i dig very deep for the hidden agenda, and generally speaking with men its about intimacy. its where white knights and the "nice Guy" is born from, a need for intimacy from the opposite sex that cant be fulfilled by the needy persons real personality.....so they adopt one.

fascinating.

[geek tragedy]

178. Cool story, bro! nt

[BainsBane]

179. I don't suppose it would occur to you

that he might just believe in human equality. I understand that's a radical concept.
Your arm chair analysis is inappropriate and far from insightful. It doesn't even pass the bar of casual observation. Geek Tragedy quite obviously disagrees with many people, yourself included. Some people have principals and values they care about.

[galileoreloaded]

182. it may surprise you that i believe in true equality for everyone

not just the boogey man du jour. i reject any and all supremacist attitudes on lines of race, creed, gender, or color....and combat them with great vigor.

and its not just arm chair analysis, you would be very surprised who i am IRL. very.

[BainsBane]

185. I've read enough of your posts

to know exactly what you believe in. Who you are in real life is aside from the point. I know you through on what you write on this forum. You accused me of lacking power in my real life. What power do you imagine I lack? Your pop pyschologizing is entirely inappropriate and simply a way for you to insult others rather than engaging in the substance of a discussion.

Your point about Geek Tragedy is absurd. He clearly actively disagrees with the majority of posters in this thread, yet you accuse him of a pathological need for approval. Your BS may work in the corporate world, but it doesn't pass as serious psychological analysis to any educated person.

[galileoreloaded]

187. well, quite educated I am...and i was replying to your statement not accusing....anyone

be well.

[thucythucy]

188. YOU "consult on human behavior when" you're "bored?"

"especially gender issues in the workplace for corporate clients."

LOL! You mean, corporate clients like Herman Cain?

Really, that has to be the most hilarious post on this thread thus far.

Is there such a thing as a reverse DUZY?

[galileoreloaded]

191. no, think along the lines of clients who need help understanding

why their turnover in large call centers is so high because they use shaming tactics to drive production with predominately female workforces, or need negotiation support in high level mergers. or companies who are trying to understand recruitment strategies in say, the rustbelt when they are opening new divisions but coming from either coast. playing to an individual agenda if you will, and culture has a lot to do with it. i can usually unpack dialect down to the county in the US.

i'm the asshole who reads the room while seeming to ignore the conversation and playing on his phone but in real life texts the guy doing the talking and telling him what is and isnt working.

i have many many political clients too, 95% Dem. I'm very good at what I do and I'm quite intellectually, emotionally, and socially intelligent.

ill take a reverse DUZY.....i love being validated!

[thucythucy]

194. I don't think a statement like

"men are simple to control, as evidenced by the vast caldron of squishy 'nice guys' who just don't understand how to win and act terribly" is evidence of any great intelligence--socially, emotionally, intellectually, or otherwise. In fact, it demonstrates just the sort of gender stereotyping you claim to deplore in other posts. Not to mention it's so poorly written! Do "squishy nice guys" not understand how to win and so "act terribly," or do they not understand both how to win and how to act terribly? Talk about "squishy."

And your undergraduate analysis of "Geek tragedy" and his "pathological need" to be accepted as a "White Knight" (because he's a man who considers himself an ally of feminists!) sounds like Robert Bly on a bender.

But hey, if you can find somebody willing to pay you to tell them nonsense they think they need to hear, more power to you.

Depressing though to think that Democrats actually sink good money into this sort of twaddle.

[galileoreloaded]

197. i would agree if i wasnt so correct about the analysis....95% of the time.

like i tell my clients, data and numbers don't lie, people and their ego's do.

be well.

[thucythucy]

198. And yet you come off as supremely egotistical.

What should I then deduce about your honesty?

George Orwell famously said that sloppy writing is indicative of sloppy thinking.

Look through your posts, replete with their e.e. cummings affectations, wobbly punctuation, and tenuous ability to be parsed, and consider.

[galileoreloaded]

201. Continuous success makes you seem arrogant and lazy because you lose the

Impetus that a fear of failure brings.

Success over and over breeds an indifference to the banal and proper because its where the mediocre reside. Check my signature line.

It's fun, cast off the chains and try it.

[thucythucy]

233. Your arrogance is astounding.

Last edited Wed Jun 5, 2013, 03:14 PM - Edit history (1)

"Cast off the chains and try it."

As if you know anything about me, my life, my "chains", my "success" or what have you.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proofs. Nothing in your posts support your claims to being of superior intelligence, to being right "95% of the time", etc. etc. Again, all I see is a dash of Robert Bly here, some warmed-over motivation-speak there, all tied together with an incredible presumption of superior knowledge that has you being funny in spite of yourself.

"The impetus that a fear of failure brings." "Cast off the chains." Talk about "banal"!

Tschuss.

[antiquie]

59. Clarification request.

Do you oppose the "second wave feminists" because we opposed violence in pornography, even though we supported a women's right to profit from her body, if she so chose? I am confused.

[beachgirl2365]

58. Your new daughter has an awesome Dad in you!!!!.

...........on behalf of women everywhere..... Please keep it up!

[clarice]

85. Especially bad in some Middle Eastern countries. nt

[CBHagman]

112. "...doing femnist work requires boundless optimism."

That's an excellent point, and it applies to all efforts.

The other night Rachel Maddow had a segment on the late Frank Lautenberg and pointed out that he on multiple occasions took on issues where the powers that be seemed to be arrayed against his cause. He didn't always triumph, but he beat the odds often enough for Rachel to make the point that it's political nonsense to treat the goalposts as unmovable.

Also, negativity sucks up a lot of energy.

[MadrasT]

119. Wow... this thread is like a textbook example of what the article is describing. Holy smokes. (n/t)

[Zorra]

124. So classic it should have been a set up! nt

[geek tragedy]

126. If you build it, they will troll, nt

[BainsBane]

148. Some things are utterly predicable

I was just thinking that it's possible that the kind of attitude we see displayed here is because so many DUers are older, retirees. The men on this site who are most understanding of sexism tend to be younger.

[defacto7]

205. Gee, Thanks a lot!

[BainsBane]

206. I don't know your age

but you seem cool. It was just a theory. I was thinking of some of the guys who post in HOF, who are in their twenties and thirties. I'm just trying to make sense of some of the stuff I read here.

[defacto7]

213. Oh, Sure!

No, I figured you were working out a grand philosophy of some kind. I was just trying to squeeze into this fray somewhere and it wasn't easy. Wow, what a crazy ball of weird this thread has become and not anything worthy of the OP in my opinion... but then I'm just old and cranky!! 'bunch a goddamn whippersnappers!

I hope I am on the side of Feminism at least I want to be, but I will have to say when these arguments come up it is rather confusing to me where anyone stands. I think the real point should be to never seek to do harm to anyone, ever, period. People can insert the gender, age, monetary status, or whatever of their choice.

Oh shit, now I'm adding something and the minions of hell will descend on me in moments. Roger and out.

[lumberjack_jeff]

123. A defensible position should be defended.

If someone posts crap, it's incumbent on rational people to shoot it down.

Ignoring objections, or dismissing them by ad hominem isn't the high road.

[Major Nikon]

143. The debate doesn't seem to go so well when its not so one sided

It seems to lean heavily on aspects of "culture" with no substantive ties from cause to effect and the predictable reliance on conflations with other classes.

[lumberjack_jeff]

155. +1

By all means, speak up when you see something with which you disagree. However, the fact that you disagree isn't a compelling argument in itself.

[BainsBane]

166. Here is the subsequent reaction to this debate

See the Twitter images.

http://jezebel.com/if-comedy-has-no-lady-problem-why-am-i-getting-so-many-511214385

[KitSileya]

231. Horrible screenshots.

But I am willing to bet very few women who have spoken out against sexism on the internet were in any way, shape, or form surprised by these tweets. It seems par for the course, and then men, sorry, some men, are surprised when we are vary towards men participating in internet debates on sexism and misogyny.

And par for the course that you get crickets as answer to your post from those to whom it is intended....

[BainsBane]

241. yes, not at all suprising

on either point.

[geek tragedy]

237. When one side uses rape threats, they lose, nt

[Warpy]

135. There is a middle way

Feeding trolls gets you covered in troll shit. Trying to ignore them makes people think you tacitly agree.

I allow myself one post to a troll, one over the top polite post that contains a few subtle oblique insults. Then I back away and allow the troll to expose himself completely with his next ten comments, all full of impotent spluttering because he has no real target.

The one post is mostly for the fence sitters reading the thread. I don't engage trolls and play their games.

[BainsBane]

150. Excellent strategy

[ismnotwasm]

153. Nice!

I usually don't either. I like your strategy. And now I'm gong to put this thread away.

[DirkGently]

172. The "high road" doesn't require non-engagement.

She outed a guy who wrote slur-filled hate mail. That's still high road. She's not anonymous, and that College Republican president whose name she revealed deserved not to be as well. If she just returned the name-calling (and run-on sentences -- that guy was in *college*?!) that would be "low road."

The high / low dichotomy has more to do with the quality of argument, or confrontation. If you want to go toe-to-toe with an ugly persona on the Internet, you can still do it without just being ugly back. Even ugly, if also smart, isn't "sinking to their level." Their level is just ugly.

Of course, all of this discounts the time-tested saying,

"Never argue with an idiot. From a distance, no one can tell the difference."

[geek tragedy]

174. Or:

Never argue with an idiot, they'll just drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

[BainsBane]

180. Oh Will, here you thought you were in the 21st century

and instead you find responses that exemplify perfectly the content of your OP. Much thanks for the effort.

[Gravitycollapse]

210. I think the worst one in this thread was the talk of "cartoon feminists."

I mean, really? What a fucking slap across the face of DU feminists.

The argument is always the same. Paraphrased like this: "Hey, I'm all for feminism and such. But those bitchy, uppity women who think they're owed recompense for things are just making you all look bad."

These assholes don't know the first thing about feminism. They don't have the faintest knowledge of the historical portrayal of empowered women as hysterical, insane or unreal. So they have no idea that the core message of their rhetoric is exactly the same. EXACTLY the same.

[BainsBane]

211. Yes, it's popular to dump on a few women

and then they have the fucking nerve to claim they aren't real feminists because they challenge them. Firstly, as a feminist, I would never tell another woman she wasn't a feminist, even when her ideas of what that means differ from my own. It's takes a lot of nerve for men who clearly hate having their privilege challenged to decide they can determine who the "real" feminists are.

[opiate69]

262. While it's commendable that you "would never tell another woman she wasn't a feminist",

there are others who seem to have no compunction in that regard.
http://sync.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2583421

[BainsBane]

263. Then I suggest you raise your concerns with them

[opiate69]

266. I`m merely trying to point out that...

Characterizations such as "cartoon feminists" aren`t exactly bubbling up out of some vaccuum.

[duhneece]

219. Agreed. nt

[geek tragedy]

224. Co-signed. nt

[thucythucy]

190. Excellent OP, excellent article.

And the swarm of trolls and fellow travelers who rose to meet it here, decrying "cartoon feminists" and the like, simply proves how apt her observations truly are.

[BainsBane]

195. Indeed

It's like a time warp back to 1960.

[RoccoR5955]

192. My sometimes strategy.

Sometimes I just agree with them, and take it to the most absurd acme of their point of view, whatever the issue. Then, most of the time, they agree, many people see that the original troll is nuts, and perhaps change their mind. I then go back, and tell them that I purposely did that, and I am actually opposed to their view.

But that's me.

[KitSileya]

199. Lewis's Law shown as true, again.

This thread just proves, yet again, that any inernet discussion on feminism shows why feminism is needed.

[applegrove]

200. The problem with taking the low road is

you dehumanize the 97% of men who don't deserve to be put in the same category with the idiots. If I say "I'd like to thank all men for all the heavy lifting in the agrarian age, all the mechanical know how in the industrial age, all the spacial reasoning on the information age. That was great. But now we are in the empathy/creativity age and we don't need you anymore. We just don't need your hunting skills anymore. Your delusional confidence during the hunt, applied to banking, gave us the worst bubble since the last time the economy was totally about you." Makes me feel bad and I am lessoned for making such generalizations about both men and women. Take the low road and you hurt yourself.

[Gravitycollapse]

204. Very few men are not guilty of debasing women or furthering the mysogyny.

Men have thanked themselves more than enough through the ages for their "genius" and "resilience."

[Summer Hathaway]

216. "Very few men are not guilty of debasing women or furthering the mysogyny."

VERY few men? Seriously?

While over-the-top rhetoric has become the norm on DU on every feasible issue, THAT one is a prize-winner.

[Gravitycollapse]

265. Yes, very few. Arguably, simply existing as a male in society...

means that one has compulsory participation in the debasement of women on one level or another.

[Summer Hathaway]

267. Simply existing as a male in society

means that one has compulsory participation in the debasement of women on one level or another?

I don't pretend to know what planet you currently live on, but it has little to do with Planet Earth.

[Kurska]

269. I'm going to say this as politely as possible

That is utter poppycock. That is like saying that simply existing as a white person in society means that you are contributing to racism. Ascribing attributes and guilt topeople based solely on their gender, race or whatever is something we expect of the far right. Not something I thought I'd ever hear coming from people supposedly on the left.

[Gravitycollapse]

271. Actually, being white means being part of a priveleged class...

which means that you participate, wittingly or unwittingly, in a racist system. You not only benefit from this system, as a white person, you are complicit in its continued existence.

This is not to say that one is overtly racist or overtly sexist. The issues are pervasive, intricate and immense.

[Kurska]

272. I don't subscribe to systems of belief that force labels on people based on their gender/race.

I always thought that telling someone they are or must be something because of their race or gender was a disgusting concept. I have no idea how someone could think posting such ideas on a progressive forum where equality is supposedly a core virtue is a good idea.

Again, no idea where you got that saying that people are coming out of the womb "guilty" of something simply because they exist is somehow a progressive concept. I highly suggest that if you're going to be offended that people are calling out cartoonish views, you shouldn't hold ones such as that.

[Gravitycollapse]

273. I am not ascribing roles. Society ascribes roles. Myself and those like me are merely deconstructing

When I speak about things like white privilege or compulsory heterosexuality, I am not speaking as the creator of these things. So to say that I am forcing labels on others is absurd.

[Kurska]

274. You seem to be saying despite the fact that I am a gay man and strong believer of gender equality.

That simply because of the fact that I have a penis, I am contributing to the patriarchy and am guilty of something.

No, society is not forcing that role on me. You seem to be attempting to force some sort of role on me as the oppressor of women when I do nothing of the sort. Frankly I am rather offended by that.

I've been beaten because I wasn't willing to allow patriarchal roles like what gender I am supposed to love change me. I am certainly not going to allow some random person on the Internet to tell me that I am secretly contributing to the patriarchy since I've been born.

Simply knowing what gender I am says nothing about me, where I have been and where I am going. I have no earthly idea how you think it is okay to, based only on my gender, tell me that I've been oppressing women.

[Gravitycollapse]

275. If you don't believe in ascribed roles, why do you feel the need to tell me you're a gay man?

hmmm

[Kurska]

276. Because I'm trying to emphasize to you that I have been the victim of trash you are talking about

And have no part in it.

Ultimately the only roles you are "ascribed" is the ones you ascribe to yourself or ALLOW others to ascribe to you. Everyone is a wonderful unique human being who deserved to be judged ONLY by the content of their character and not by bullshite peripherals like gender or race that don't actually mean jack. When you start telling other people what they are or are not, are guilty or are not guilty of something when the only factoid you have about them is their gender or race, you do a massive disservice to the cause of equality.

[Gravitycollapse]

277. So you admit that your identity as a gay man carries certain negative consequences...

Mainly, being verbally and/or physically abused by others, correct?

Because that's called having a socially abject identity and it is ascribed. You have just freely demonstrated exactly what I'm talking about.

[Kurska]

278. Yes, but I don't think every heterosexual is contributing to them simply be existing.

I don't think any of my straight friends, who are entirely supportive of gay rights, somehow contribute to homosexual's status as a oppressed group of people.

You don't do something by simply existing.

That not some groups, on the whole, are less culturally advantaged than others is obvious. What I'm saying is not every single person in a majority group is responsible for that.

[Gravitycollapse]

279. It's not a matter of existing. It's a matter of participation in society.

The oppression of abject groups is resilient precisely because it is pervasive and nearly invisible when observed on an individual basis.

We all contribute to these oppressions. Even in the tiniest possible way. Even when we simply do nothing when something should have been done. It is the aggregate of these tiny contributions that produces tangible oppression.

[Kurska]

280. I don't think oppression is the summation of a million tiny things that add up.

That isn't my view of it and it isn't my experience of it. I don't feel like an overwhelming majority of people on the street would treat me poorly if they knew I was gay. There is certainly a sizeable minority of people who would, but I certainly don't include many of those in my life.

I really wonder how mentally healthy viewing everyone around you as doing something negative to you, merely because they participate in society.

[Gravitycollapse]

281. Your concern for my mental health is duly noted, thanks.

Have you heard the claim when everyone has changed, no one has changed?

Well, when everyone is responsible, no one is responsible. Or so it would appear. Responsibility is so diffuse that it seems like these oppressions are aberrations of some invisible force out of our control. We scapegoat a lot of this on the louder oppressors without ever addressing our own complicity.

[Kurska]

282. I'd say the people responsible for anti-gay actions or politics are the people who actually do them.

If someone kills a gay guy in Mississippi it sure as hell isn't my straight friends fault, on any level. I don't think the majority of people do things that I would consider anti-gay to a serious level. Even if you do have a bigoted society, it is only more ennobling when an individual overcomes that to support equality. I certainly wouldn't consider that person at fault for the bigoted actions of others.

My view of oppression is apparently very different than yours.

[Kurska]

222. So then men as a whole deserve to be dehumanized?

You know what, nothing surprises me in these threads anymore.

I don't understand how someone can so strongly oppose the "cartoon feminists" comments up thread and then turn around and make a comment like "Very few men are not guilty of debasing women or furthering the mysogyny.".

I'll try to say this as respectfully as possible. Statements like that come off, to the majority of people, as rather cartoonish. They contribute nothing resembling solutions to our society's real problems with gender equality. If anything all they do is breed animosity between the sexes and set everything back.

[Gravitycollapse]

264. Those are your words, not mine. I am saying that very few men are not guilty...

I never said I wanted to dehumanize men. That would be absurd both in theory and application.

[Kurska]

268. That is why It there was question mark.

Your post was in response to a post that was asking that question. Then you said the vast majority of men are guilty of something. I don't understand how that isn't a reasonable inference.

I'm very curious how on earth I am contributing to a sexual and economic subservience of women. I'm a gay man who is a strong believer in equality between the sexes.

Saying that the vast majority of men are somehow "guilty" of something is again, the sort of cartoonish statement that I was referencing earlier.

[Gravitycollapse]

270. The ways in which men debase and disempower women are immense...

and often very minute.

I cannot offer you examples of your life. I do not live it so I could not know.

[sibelian]

258. That's just grotesque.

But...then...

[Gravitycollapse]

203. This thread is a goddamn shitshow. Kind of sad I missed most of it.

[defacto7]

212. Thank you Mr. Pitt for a fine exposé

Unfortunately, a person would have to ignore the entire comment section to retain any semblance of rational information, but then maybe there's an ironic light bulb moment in the whole mess.

The comments remind me that humanity is pretty close to total insanity. They conjure up about every accusing, hateful, arrogant, dogmatic, purposeless, self-destructive, non-argument, trollagizing, that I can imagine at the moment. I hope your ideas are not lost in the fray of devolution... Or, maybe you inadvertently produced a mirror for all of us to gaze into.

(trollagizing... I hereby claim this word in the name of The Internets everywhere)

[mountain grammy]

227. I couldn't agree more!! Fuck the high road.

[dembotoz]

232. no high road --rub their fucking noses in it