Curious when enough is enough? [Der Trihs]

[Ibn_Warraq]

@Troppus

The point seems to be how certain posters get away with BBQ Pitting **Der Trihs **without actually visiting the Pit and exposing themselves to in-kind responses. So it’s bullying at this point, right? Because he hasn’t yet responded with a personal attack on any of the posters who are criticizing him here.

As far as I can see no one has made any criticisms of Der Trihs that are supposed to be restricted to the Pit.

Beyond that, calling it “bullying” is absurd.

That said, I agree with the others. The mods have made it clear that Der Trihs can keep doing what he’s doing, making noxious comments that border on trolling but don’t quite cross the line, receive a note to “knock it off”, back away, and then continue with the same behavior in a different thread. Wash, rinse, repeat.

As to whether or not Der Trihs is a sexist/misogynist/bigot/fill-in-the-blank, well at this point I don’t think this is the right forum for such a discussion.

The only thing I’ll add, is that there’ve been times when I’ve felt that it seems that Muslims are expected to put up with a lot of crap that other groups don’t have to put up with and you can say a lot of things about Muslims you can’t say about others without A) getting criticized by others and B)on top of that having people insist you’re not being a bigot. However, this thread is a reminder that it’s also true of women.

Anyway, barring something really strange, like this thread morphing into something more productive, I’m bowing out. If someone wants to continue it with me further, feel free to PM me or start a thread somewhere else. Also, if anyone felt I was implying they were somehow sexist themselves for trying to handwave away such charges against Der Trihs, I wasn’t.

[Ibn_Warraq]

@MrDibble

Look, the way I see it, racism is the equivalent of sexism. The equivalent of misogyny would be really hate-driven racism of the KKK and Stormfront variety. Which is not what I’m seeing from DT - rabid racists aren’t generally for realising the Turner Diaries on the one hand and for Affirmative action on the other, at the same time, which is kind of where DT is with his MRA-gender-war bullshit on the one hand, and then his pro-choice and anti-religious-discrimination-against-women stances on the other hand.

D’oh. I forgot to address this post which was well thought out and deserves a response.

To a certain extent that’s a fair point, but in fact, many people could be very supportive of African-Americans in many regards while also quite racist.

For example, many who strongly opposed slavery were also extremely racist and had their own motivations.

Similarly, one of the people who was instrumental in the hiring and promotion of Jackie Robinson, Al Campanis, was eventually fired after one interview where he insisted that blacks weren’t intelligent enough to become baseball managers.

I also wouldn’t be surprised if Hendrik Vervoerd genuinely had affection for his servants and genuinely believed the government policies he advocated(which became known as Apartheid) genuinely helped out the “natives”(to use the parlance of the time) and I’d argue that he hurt vastly, vastly more black people than were ever affected by the KKK or, to stick with the South African comparison, the AWB.

Anyway, lots of men can be extremely sexist yet still support women having abortions for a number of reasons. For example, I don’t think anyone is shocked that Hugh Hefner supports abortion and I don’t think anyone seriously thinks he does so because of his believe in women being independent.

Supporting the right to abortion may be a sign of a person being non-sexist, or it may be a sign that the person has less conservative views on sexuality than others have, and also could imply extreme hostility towards religious groups.

For that matter, I may be misremembering, but I think I recall Ann Rule talking once about how Ted Bundy supported abortion rights(she knew him before she knew who he was) and if Ted Bundy wasn’t a misogynist, nobody is.

Pat Robertson is pro-Israel for entirely selfish motives that have nothing to do with the welfare of Jews and everything to do with his own eschatology. He can, too, be anti-Semitic and support Israel.

Yes, and as noted above, people can support abortion for reasons other than belief in women’s rights. In addition to the examples I already used, I don’t think any of us would be surprised if we found out about some anti-abortion politician helping his or her daughter getting it “taken care of” if she got pregnant.

[MrDibble]

@Ibn_Warraq

Yes, and as noted above, people can support abortion for reasons other than belief in women’s rights.

I acknowledge your points in your post are valid, but the comparison don’t really apply to DT because belief in women’s rights is one of his stated reasons for being pro-choice (and anti-religious, as well). Whether that is vastly outweighed by sticking it to the religious is not something I think we can know.

[UltraVires]

@Marley23

Our view has been that Der Trihs’ posts may be obnoxious and they may contribute little to the discussion in some cases, but they generally don’t break the rules.

What is your view on the accumulation of those posts? Where is the “don’t be a jerk rule”? If I have 1,000 posts that are juuuuuuuuust underneath the radar, is that the rule of this board that my posts and my behavior are in full compliance with the rules? We can game the system?

Is there a difference between being obnoxious and being a jerk? Please explain.

[Trinopus]

@Trinopus

I like Der Trihs. Always have. He says what he believes. . . .

@VinylTurnip

So does Fred Phelps. “Saying what you believe” isn’t in itself an admirable quality.

This is an example of the sort of thing Der Trihs does not do. You quoted only part of what I said, and then addressed it as if it was “in itself.” The soul has faults, but he never plays that kind of game.

[panaccione]

Der Trish is awesome. Y’all could learn a thing or two from him.

[Ibn_Warraq]

@panaccione

Der Trish is awesome. Y’all could learn a thing or two from him.

Who is “Der Trish”?

Trinopus
This is an example of the sort of thing Der Trihs does not do. You quoted only part of what I said, and then addressed it as if it was “in itself.” The soul has faults, but he never plays that kind of game.

Er…Der Trihs regularly quotes just one part of a person’s post and responds to that part.

There’s also nothing wrong with that, unless in doing so he’s deceiving the reader about what the poster was trying to convey.

Since Vinyl Turnip didn’t distort your post your complaint is quite silly.

[panaccione]

@Ibn_Warraq

Who is “Der Trish”?

shit…

[Ibn_Warraq]

@panaccione

shit…

Don’t worry. We all make typos. On another thread I thought I typed “First World Problems” in response to someone whining about the board going down and I just recently discovered I’d actually typed “First Word Problems”.

[Trinopus]

@Ibn_Warraq

. . . Er…Der Trihs regularly quotes just one part of a person’s post and responds to that part.

There’s also nothing wrong with that, unless in doing so he’s deceiving the reader about what the poster was trying to convey.

Since Vinyl Turnip didn’t distort your post your complaint is quite silly.

I agree with the first and second point you make. I disagree with the third. Vinyl Turnip, by stripping my comment of its context, gave it an emphasis I never intended for it to have.

I do not consider this to have been dishonest or deceitful in intent. Vinyl Turnip is, in fact, one of the better contributors here, a strong example of moral integrity. It was, however, a response that made my post seem to be saying something different than I intended.

Anyway, I agree with panaccione. I admire and respect Der Trihs very much, even when I disagree with him. And I try rather hard not to be like him. I prefer piano, and he practices forte.

(Also, although I’ve been here for a few yerars, I am curious about the origin of Der Trihs’s user name.)

[j_sum1]

@Trinopus

(Also, although I’ve been here for a few yerars, I am curious about the origin of Der Trihs’s user name.)

It’s an anagram of Red Shirt. FWIW.

[MrDibble]

@Trinopus

(Also, although I’ve been here for a few yerars, I am curious about the origin of Der Trihs’s user name.)

@j_sum1

It’s an anagram of Red Shirt. FWIW.

More specifically, it’s the name of a webcomic character whose name is an anagram for Red Shirt.

[John_Mace]

@MrDibble

More specifically, it’s the name of a webcomic character whose name is an anagram for Red Shirt.

Is there a name for the specific type of “anagram” where the letters are simply reversed in order?

Curious minds need to know!

[Left_Hand_of_Dorkness]

@John_Mace

Is there a name for the specific type of “anagram” where the letters are simply reversed in order?

Curious minds need to know!

If there’s not, I nominate “margana.”

[Irishman]

@Trinopus

I agree with the first and second point you make. I disagree with the third. Vinyl Turnip, by stripping my comment of its context, gave it an emphasis I never intended for it to have.

That is an arguable point. You made that statement as a stand alone sentence. You followed by a paragraph explaining more details, but that is a separate paragraph. Vinyl Turnip did not strip your comment of context. He cited the full sentence that you made. He cited the whole paragraph it was in. He then explained his objection to that remark, why that trait in and of itself is not necessarily laudable. You might have a better case if all of your explanation were in the same paragraph, but you chose to set it apart.

[MrDibble]

@John_Mace

Is there a name for the specific type of “anagram” where the letters are simply reversed in order?

One term (that I prefer) is anadrome. Also semordnilap.

[John_Mace]

@Trinopus

I agree with the first and second point you make. I disagree with the third. Vinyl Turnip, by stripping my comment of its context, gave it an emphasis I never intended for it to have.

What other part of your post gave that comment the needed context? I’m not seeing it.

You said you like him, and gave your reason. It wasn’t a good reason, as pointed out.

[Hentor_the_Barbarian]

@John_Mace

What other part of your post gave that comment the needed context? I’m not seeing it.

You said you like him, and gave your reason. It wasn’t a good reason, as pointed out.

Oh come on, John. “You know who else said what he believes? HITLER!”

That’s not a good argument. What, are we arguing that people should not say what they believe? Or should say what they don’t believe?

Or is there some context needed to clarify the value of saying what you believe?

[Trinopus]

@John_Mace

. . . You said you like him, and gave your reason. It wasn’t a good reason, as pointed out.

The reason was in a complex of more than one clause. The response quoted only one clause, and, worse, used the phrase “in itself.” But the quoted part of my post did not exist “in itself.” It was only part.

It made it seem (as Hentor the Barbarian colorfully points out) as if I were supportive of Der Trihs solely because he says what he thinks. But my point was that he says what he thinks, without taking the additional step of altering what his correspondent thinks, the kind of straw-man manipulation which, alas, happens an awful lot here on the SDMB. (No names will be named.)

Ibn Warraq disagreed with me directly – which is entirely valid, legitimate, fair, and respectful – and said that Der Trihs does alter what people say when responding to them. For my part, I disagree with that. So it goes!

[John_Mace]

@Trinopus

The reason was in a complex of more than one clause. The response quoted only one clause, and, worse, used the phrase “in itself.” But the quoted part of my post did not exist “in itself.” It was only part.

It made it seem (as Hentor the Barbarian colorfully points out) as if I were supportive of Der Trihs solely because he says what he thinks. But my point was that he says what he thinks, without taking the additional step of altering what his correspondent thinks, the kind of straw-man manipulation which, alas, happens an awful lot here on the SDMB. (No names will be named.)

Ibn Warraq disagreed with me directly – which is entirely valid, legitimate, fair, and respectful – and said that Der Trihs does alter what people say when responding to them. For my part, I disagree with that. So it goes!

I notice that you didn’t quote the part of your post that added context. Please do so, and explain what contexts was missing.

And you seem to have missed one of TD’s favorite posting tricks. The “I recall reading somewhere that…” where some uncited source supports his arguments. When pressed, he is never able to produce these mysterious sources that he somehow recalls reading, and never withdraws his claims made from these uncited sources.