Fucking idiots

[LadyOfTheManor]

I am extremely pissed off by the attitudes on this thread;

Here

Some women need a good clout around the head.

[BlooferLady]

Fanks Charity! Dashing off to read Shroedinger's Rapist. Incidentally did you read the Guardian article on the Congo and rape as a weapon of war yesterday? I don't think I've ever felt so angry and so helpless :(

[BlooferLady]

Hell, you're right C. the other day I saw a bus-side emblazoned with a semi-naked man oiled up in white Y fronts and was absolutely horrified: it looked like porn to me. I then did a gigantic comic double-take and realised that we see images of women like that so often that we've become kind of snow-blind. Er, I do thank you for stooping to point out the most obvious bit of daily discrimination . This is very like a 5 year old sitting in on a semiotics lecture.

[SardineQueen]

I love a thread with a happy ending

[AyeRobot]

Here's a lovely thread where newbies were welcomed with open arms

There's tons of them. It's only the contentious ones where people come on spouting women-hating views or try to challenge posters whilst not reading what has been posted that get all the airtime with the "the feminists are doing it all wrong" folk.

[BlooferLady]

Hm, still time for it to go tits up Sardine !

Thanks ever so Aye - I'm going to get another 1,000 words down (not on MN, sweat not) and then hie mesen over there for a read as a special post-work reward. Oh yes: I know how to celebrate .

(Although I still maintain it wasn't necessary for t'other fred to have gone quite that bent nor for this terrifying fred title!)

[AyeRobot]

Are you going to apologise before you go, though?

[BlooferLady]

Hmmmm. I am not sure (I am trying to be honest).

I think I should apologise to Dittany directly - in my mind she has become synonymous with an aggressive and unforgiving feminist standpoint and has been one of the main reasons I have stayed away from the boards. However, I do see that a) I cannot back that up with evidence and that b) this stems partly from my own extreme dislike of what I think of as indoctrination and aggression, which is my own problem and has a thousand reasons, and is not hers.

So yes: Dittany: I apologise.

However, on the broader point - that to be furious at being challenged, to swear at and condescend to those who disagree, to be unable to see an alternative point of view without being moved to what at least appears like rage, to alienate people with a genuine interest, to start threads belittling and being aggressive towards others - no: I don't think that's acceptable, sorry.

I would be ever so pleased if D apologised for calling me a liar, but I do see that she would need to satisfy herself on that point first!

[AyeRobot]

That's a start. Dittany gets it in the neck all the time on here and it's not nice.

I think you'll see at the start of the thread that I disliked the language of the OP. I put it down to too many coffees. I think LOTM is a relative newcomer to feminism, so the rage you are seeing might become familiar in a little whole for you too. We all handle it differently, though.

[FuppyGish]

Bloofer, totally off subject but I'm intrigued... you come across as very intelligent and well educated in the way you write so why the 'fanks', ''appens', 'edumacated' bits? Genuinely interested.

Sorry for the hijack.

[BlooferLady]

Fanks for the recommendation - and yes, I understand and indeed agree with your statement there (about feminism v. patriarchal status quo).

As to what I am trying (and plainly dismally failing!) to say - there is a tone of harshness and impatience in a lot of what you and others post on these issues - and on feminist-adjacent issues - that is unappealing and alienating to those who are not already on side. Now, I am not saying that you intend that to be the effect, and (as on the recent porn thread, and indeed any porn thread) I understand the source and the validity of the anger. All I am saying is that the effect is there. That's why I can certainly apologise for a direct attack on you, but I can't apologise for feeling this way about it, or having received an impression, because that was a genuine response. And I still maintain that howling fucking idiots! at people who do not see a policeman's advice as symptomatic of a woman-hating society is fair. I do not see it that way, and I'm not an idiot, fucking or otherwise.

[BlooferLady]

Ha, Guppy, I'm so sorry and am blushing violently in shame!! I have spent a lot of time on MN in other capacities (largely in my dismal failure to get my ancient Lidl carrier-bag of a womb to conceive a child) and used to say 'fred' and 'fanks'. I suppose it's also an embarrassing attempt at whimsy so as to keep the tone light and un-pompous . ForumFAIL

[ForkfulOfEasterEgg]

I think that this thread title is horrible.

I do understand why you are pissed off OP.

Am just about to go and add my 2p worth to that thread.

I have certainly been guilty of posting thread about threads before but really really horrible to see a thread here entitled "fucking idiots".

If you want to alert feminists to a particular thread you can do so on the Feminism Chat thread.

OP - was there never a time when you thought like the majority of the posters on that thread?

I'm going to report this thread for deletion on the basis that it is a thread about a thread and that the title is an attack on many of the posters on the other thread.

[FuppyGish]

Sorry Bloofer, wasn't trying to embarrass you, honestly It just kept jarring with me because the rest of your posts were so eloquent.

Now that's cleared up I can sleep easy

[BlooferLady]

Fup!

Egg if this is deleted I'll lose evidence of my first ever online interaction with actual living intelligent speaking feminists. Not that it matters (and in my heart of hearts I agree with you) but someone might have to teach me how to do a screen shot....

[charitygirl]

One last thing Bloofer re: your point about our tone. That's probably the single most frequent thing that feminists hear on the internet. That if we weren't so strident, agressive, rude etc, then maybe everyone would agree with us. It's like a carrot held out to get us to be 'nice'. Not saying you don't deserve niceness, but a lot of the people telling us to 'moderate our tone' really bloody don't. And, in our experience, our tone makes no bloody difference whatsoever.

Google 'the tone argument' - a long and storied history on the web relating to discussions about gender and (even more so) race.

[AyeRobot]

Bloofer, check out this link

What you are saying is not original, I'm afraid. The "tone" argument is not confined to feminism either, but it is a useful derailing tool.

[AyeRobot]

See? xposted.

[BlooferLady]

Sorry for lack of originality....

Hm. I can see that it's a tool for derailing or silencing even - and is all the more contentious because historically women are 'supposed' to have a more emollient 'tone'. However, the fact that it can be used for wholly negative purposes, to eliminate or belittle a point of view, doesn't mean that that is its only purpose (and it's most emphatically not what I was trying to do: I assure you I am not bright enough for that sort of sophisticated agenda!)

Perhaps there is scope for 2 'tones': the necessarily loud (because otherwise it will be unheard) for debates challenging the status quo or, worse, outright oppression and women-hatred, and the more moderate?

I dunno. At any rate, the longer I linger the more painful my ignorance and lack of ability to contribute anything fresh or useful becomes clear . Thank you all for your time.

[AyeRobot]

Err, that's exactly what happens.

And btw, I'm 37 and didn't know any of this stuff a year ago. I learned by lurking, following links, checking out recommended books. Oh, and seeing people make newbie mistakes (on all sorts of feminist blogs not just here) so you have probably done some lurkers a favour.

[ShowOfHands]

LOTM, you referred to my 'apologist' attitude on that thread. Am I to assume that I'm one of the fucking idiots to which you refer? I'd just like to know for future reference.

Because, in case I didn't say it enough times, I was merely trying to stress that it is entirely possible that as Bloofer and I both said, that when our dh's say something well intentioned to a man or a woman in an unlit, deserted area, it can just be that, well intentioned. What then happened was I was told I (and dh) were apologists when my point all along was that I didn't think the op of the other thread could necessarily be seized categorically as an example of misogyny (but could merely be seen as a police officer approaching a person they did not know in a dangerous area). Not when Bloofer and I know very well two men who do this job day in and day out and probably several times a day are just trying to make contact with the general public in a positive way, male and female.

You know you've been on MN too long when being called a fucking idiot for defending the job of your dh and his colleagues reduces you to tears. And no it's not about me or him and yes there are wider patriarchal issues that are rightly challenged. But presenting the very possibility that a well-intentioned, kind officer was merely making his presence known means that I'm called names and accused of denying full culpability of rapists?

[usualsuspect]

This thread should be deleted

There was no need to call other posters fucking idiots

you lost the argument as soon as you started this thread lotm