about the feminism/WR area?

[fleacircus]

I don't like dogs, and I think most television is irredeemably stupid drivel and that there's no excuse for anyone with an actual life of their own to watch 'Made in Chelsea', and although I like knitting I don't really get the point of scrap-booking. Those are my opinions, and I'm entitled to hold them, and I would construct arguments to support them if pushed, but I don't go onto the TV thread and find people who like 'Made in Chelsea' and then go on about how wrong they are and when they get angry keep saying 'you just can't take it that other people don't share your opinions' until they get bored and give up on the thread altogether.

And I've got all the kids I want, thank you very much, so I'm not TTC, and I was lucky to conceive my kids in a very straightforward manner, so I don't actually know anything about how it feels not to, and I don't have any useful advice or insights for those who are TTC, and I don't have any medical expertise about TTC, so I've set my MN preferences not to display those threads.

So why is it that people who clearly have no interest in feminism or women's rights, and no knowledge of the often complex political, social and personal ideas being explored, and don't actually hope to learn anything or contribute anything of any value, hang around that area spoiling for a fight? Because there's a whole section of MN dedicated to expressing your opinions. It's this one. There's a question mark in the title and everything.

Or AIBU?

Ooh, I quite like LED.

But yes, you're right, I don't think either of us think we're picking up on Larry's main point. To be fair, I wouldn't pick up on someone saying that out of the blue - but I know something of what Larry has explained elsewhere.

To me, it matters to look at the stuff that isn't quite the main point. It's not that different from Brave Babes, really. Other people might just say 'oh, no, you're fine if a glass of wine calms you down, it's nice!' And that's completely true, but from a certain perspective, it's a red flag and you start asking questions.

Cross posted, but ... I don't think the oppposite of 'informed' is 'naive'.

I think this goes back to what people mean when they talk about 'academic' opinions.

I am not remotely academic about feminism. I'm not very 'informed' about it in a theoretical sense (though I have picked up a lot from FWR). But - sorry - I really don't think I am naive. Because a lot of it is about experience, which we all have.

Of course sometimes in any context, not just feminism, people who are barking up the wrong tree will struggle. I find this with US politics - I just don't have the background to follow it very well. But that doesn't mean I should be labelled as 'naive' or shut out of any political discussions whatsoever. It just means I need to brush up on terminology if I want to discuss US politics - and I can carry on discussing UK politics absolutely fine.

Same with feminism - some of us are informed in some areas; some in others. We all have the experience to make some kind of opinion.

One of the things that the FWR boards do best is to dispel the persistent perception that feminism, including radical feminism, is aimed at making women more powerful than men.

hmmm see I have no problem at ALL with uninformed questions...that's how one becomes informed!

but 'experienced' as an alternative to 'informed' is just a terrible way to go.

So very often our common sense, experience, is completely at odds with reality....in fact people substituting their personal experience for actual informed opinion is the number one cause of shit debate on the internet.

'Well homeopathy worked for me'
'I slept on my tummy as a baby and I made it'
'All the feminists I ever spoke to were lesbians'

at work I mostly get 'well I find students work harder when summatively assessed'

to which my answer is rapidly becoming 'why should I care what you think when you haven't been bothered to take one step beyond anecdotal evidence?'

I don't think 'experienced' is an alternative to 'informed'.

I think 'experienced' also means something different from 'having had an experience'.

In common parlance, 'experienced' implies you're knowlegeable and capable. It's not the same thing as having had a common experience as someone else.

You're citing anecdata, which people naturally bring up. I do not think anyone would claim that someone who says 'homeopathy worked for me' is experienced as a medic. But they have had the experience of being ill, so we could have a discussion about that.

"in fact people substituting their personal experience for actual informed opinion is the number one cause of shit debate on the internet."

And in real life!

But I don't mind people posting things like this as long as they don't then sneer at all reasoned arguments to the contrary. We all hold some opinions we've never properly interrogated.

Oh gosh yes! I am full of utter shit on so many topics...and probably a lot that I 'think' I am reasonably informed on.

I know nothing of feminism for instance.....

I also accept experienced is different to 'had one experience'.

Do people actually know more about labour and giving birth two days after the event than two days before? Not by any significant amount I would say....

I agree, mooncup.

But I think to be honest, MN is full of pretty intelligent women. We're not idiots. Yes, some people do generalize from personal experience and say 'well, I am very well paid and a woman so I don't believe that there is any financial inequality'. And equally, some people who claim to be feminists will say 'all women who try hard to get equal pay will get it - I know because I did'. And neither of these is really the whole picture.

But I don't believe one has to read academic feminist theory to understand that, and I don't think that it is impossible to get into a debate and learn, because I do it all the time.

Cross post - oh, that's a good analogy!

I always feel such a total twit talking about children, because I don't have them. But then I was struggling to sit on my hands and keep my mouth shut when my brother soberly explained to me (after the birth of his DD), 'you know, LRD, this thing you mention, 'shoulder distocia', it doesn't exist ... the way women are, the baby cannot get stuck and it all just happens naturally'.

We can all snigger at that a bit, but if someone posted that opinion in the Parenting topics here, I'm sure people would take the time to be nice and explain it's not quite like that every time.

happyon 13.44pm "It looks me to that, yet again, some people are looking desperately for ways to critise the FWR board".
There's another shut down the conversation, try and block the discussion, defensive sentence. Cant be doing with it. Dont need to do with it, and confirms my decision not to go and look on the board for another 3 months.
The op only wants those in the know over there too. Fine. I'm out of here. I'm probably not much of a loss.

(Btw, that was me agreeing with kot that 'informed' - and indeed 'experienced' are subjective terms.)

kontika I think I would apply a wikipedia test for informedness...

If you have bothered enough to look up even one unbiased information source on a topic then you are in! More because it suggests a willingness to be informed than actually being so....I think maybe willingness is more important than actual level...

God, it was!

I was sitting there, my eyebrows vanishing into my hair I'd raised them so high! And he had this wonderful 'I am teaching my childless sister about the Realities of Life' tone.

But you know what I mean ... there's always going to be people who have an experience and think they know everything, and also people who read a book and think they know everything. In reality, it all shakes down in the end. There are stupid things you can say (like that one!), but I think we cope and move on from the stupid things.

My comment about the boards being welcoming was in response to someone saying

"But why does anyone expect posters on a particular board to be welcoming?"

I don't expect them to be more welcoming than any other board. I just expect them to be welcoming. No different to anywhere else.

And yes, FrancescaBell "All that's required of posters is that they stick to the guidelines in order to participate."

I totally agree with you. The OP on the other hand, does not.

I think it would be nice if FWR were slightly more welcoming than, say, AIBU, because I think they are different kinds of board.

This is true.

The feminist pub is a great place to be.

That might be partly me. I do get arsey sometimes. I try not to, but sometimes it's that I've heard nine trolls say the same thing, and then I don't realize the tenth person is a regular who isn't using the question as a way to start a horrible thread that they'll rapidly turn into something nasty.

But I do think even that is getting better as trolls are deleted much faster than they used to be.

any feminist credentials I have are about to evaporate...I am considering seeking funding from the p&g

What is P&G?

I disagree that the OP doesn't believe that all that's required is for posters to stick to the guidelines. She specifically mentions in her OP that her beef is with posters who only post on Feminism when they are 'spoiling for a fight'. Goading is contrary to Talk Guidelines. The OP is talking about people who have no desire to have a constructive debate or a share of opinions- they are just looking for an argument. She has also gone on to say that the prevalence of these posters and the ensuing arguments is deterring her from contribution.

I feel the same, but I've added that I find the amount of obvious trolling that goes on additionally problematical, as well as the persistent derailing of threads by posters who don't want to stay on topic.

Goading and trolling are contrary to Talk Guidelines.