Am i being trolled by a mysogynist or am i being over sensitive.

[carernotasaint]

www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/aug/12/angela-neustatter-accept-infidelity-in-marriage

[carernotasaint]

I contributed to this discussion about marriage and monogamy in the 21st century because i thought it was an interesting article.
I post on the Guardian site as newb.
It wasnt until after id posted that i got the same poster that responded to me last time. (when the Guardian ran an article on sexless marriages in Life and Style.) He never seems to post until AFTER i do. And he intimates that because i am a woman i should keep my legs closed and my mouth shut. Hes done it in the past on a previous thread a few months ago. And he did it again today. i know i am probably being over sensitive and should ignore it but i am getting sick and tired of sexism being either ignored or seen as ok. Sorry i just wanted to have a vent because its not the first time hes done it.

[TitWillow]

Without seeing you previous interaction with him its hard to be sure, but the one you have linked to don't look like trolling - he just seems to disagree with you. He doesn't say anything specifically misogynistic, although he does seem to view the world in black and white, and comes across as very judgemental.

Trolling would suggest that he deliberately tries to wind you up, whereas he just seems to have a very set view opposed to yours, and very little empathy!

[messyisthenewtidy]

His picture looks a bit creepy. His posts to you were very holier-than-thou and judgemental, not to mention condescending.

I don't know if he was stalking you but keep a screenshot of the posts and see if he does it again. I think the fact that you outed him straight away might scare him off from posting after you again.

[mayorquimby]

Can't see anything wrong with his posts other than he disagrees with you.
You were the one who tried to make the interactions more confrontational and personal etc.

[peoplesrepublicofmeow]

took me a while to find it
he's certainly very judgemental, and allthough i happen to agree with you, he must be allowd to have his say.

if you keep saying 'no' to someone your in a relationship with and they are desparate for a physical relationship your dreaming if you think after time they wont go looking for it elsewhere, this applies to both sexes.
for this reason i agree with your posts, but you can better let him be, maybe he's a strict christian or something. there will allways be people who disagree with you.

if he never posts attall, apart from being confrontational with you, then that is different, i'm not familiar with that forum, can you do a search? maybe he's just ranting at everyone?

his picture is 'steptoe' the rag and bone man .

[peoplesrepublicofmeow]

your first encounter with him was on 'sexless marrages' i rekon thats the link, not you personaly, he must have a bee in his bonet about infidelity.

[carernotasaint]

Thanks all. I was just having a bit of a rant. He just never seems to post unless i do. Think i will just ignore him from now on.

[lastnerve]

Actually I looked and if he was a troll he would have been much more vicious especially given the ammo, he was bang on the money really and not really that offensive, maybe you're just upset because it wasn't the response you wanted?

[Trills]

If it's a troll or just a person who disagrees with you on the internet the answer is the same - if this is upsetting you then stop directly responding to this person.

It's either "don't feed the troll" or it's "step away from an argument that upsets you". Either way it ends up the same.

[carernotasaint]

I agree he must be allowed to have his say. After all he is entitled to his opinion. A lot of black and white and no shades of grey responses on that Guardian thread though so the article must have really touched a nerve.

[carernotasaint]

I shall no longer post on the articles about Relationships on the Guardian site. I shall just stick to the politics section of that site from now on.

[carernotasaint]

he was bang on the money really

Really? You really think its ok for someone who doesnt want sex anymore to say to their partner that because of it they cant either?
Promising to keep yourself unto your partner is a marriage vow but so is "with my body i thee worship"
I dont see why someone should get to cherry pick only the vows that suit them and say tough shit to their partner if they dont like it.

[carernotasaint]

A gay man hiding his sexuality from his wife because hes afraid to come out.
An asexual hiding his sexuality from his wife because he wants companionship but not a lovelife.
I dont see why the former seems to get more empathy from society than the latter.
Because in both cases the wife has been decieved and its not her he wants.

[lastnerve]

Then get a divorce and find someone who suits you?

he didn't as far as I read say 'keep your legs shut and your mouth closed' you said that was your mothers attitude he actually didn't say anything like slut /tart /bitch whatever. your OP exaggerated how bad his responses were.

It may have upset you, but if you are going to post about infidelity without remorse it will ruffle someones feathers.

[carernotasaint]

Fair enough but it does seem to me that its the partner who has been lied to about their partners sexuality that always has to take responsibility. Why cant the person who doesnt want sex anymore end the marriage?
Because in many cases they want the status of marriage and it suits them to present that veneer of respectability to the outside world.

[peoplesrepublicofmeow]

in the jewish tradition women (especialy women) can get a very easy divorce if non-consumation is cited, and indeed in catholosism non-consumation is one of the few reasons to be granted a marrage anulment from the vatican.

i dont think you need feel any remorse, infedelity is a logical step (after some time) on from living in a sexless marrage that doesnt suit both parties.

in wwII a whole regiment of italian soldiers were exposed to a gas that made them all impotent, they were divorced by their wives in their 100's!
(i'm dragging that story up from memory, think i heard it on womans hour ages ago, but i think it's fairly accurate) .