Interesting metaphor.
But it’s true. The man’s a puddle.
Yes, my intention was to characterize the thought as shallow. If this wasn’t clear from my post, I apologize. I don’t call people names or insult them. I don’t think I’ve ever said “You’re a(n) [insult, putdown, or obscenity]” to anyone.
This has so many implicit assumptions, it would be difficult for me or anyone to answer this without at least pulling out some of the assumptions.
First, you’re assuming that Aeschines is intentionally creating cruelty in his posts and then is taking pleasure in this cruelty.
Then, you’re assuming that it’s sadistic to hold the view that having sex with obese people is not desirable to some.
As for myself, I try not to be insulting in my posts, but in order not to be insulting at all, I wouldn’t be able to say anything. Some people are insulted by intelligence, others by stupidity; some by civil behavior and others by rude behavior. It’s impossible to please everyone all the time, so I don’t try.
I didn’t mean banned. There are other ways to feel ostracized on a message board, for me at least.
If that’s true and everyone used that function, no one should have been insulted by Aeschines’ comments because anyone who was should have put him on ignore.
As you noted earlier in this thread, that’s your opinion and perhaps the rules of the message board agree with you, although I doubt it. If you feel strongly about it, perhaps you could get clarification of the rule by starting a thread and asking the mods.
Ah, I didn’t evidently pick up on all the insults.
Let me make it clear that I’m separating my experience with the other message board with my experiences here.
Everyone here at SDMB has been WONDERFUL to me so far! And I’m grateful for that.
I do understand that I’m a newbie and one with just a guest pass at that. Everyone has been very patient and helpful in explaining things I’m unfamiliar with and that has made me feel very welcome.
Whenever I read your posts to Aeschines, I get the feeling that I walked in on a love fest, where you’re enjoying insulting each other. If so, I apologize for the interruptus. Continue bonking or fug-ging or whatever it was that you were doing before. I didn’t mean to mess up your rhythm.
And thank you for NOT dragging me into the lovefest. I prefer to pick my partners based on something other than their ability to be insulting.
Thanks for clearing that up. I apologize for misinterpreting you. Your meaning seemed clear to me on the face of your words at the time I originally read them.
You put up a good debate and a good defense. The major flaw in your defense is the fact that posters build up reputations and known online personalities.
**Aeschines ** is known for being at least provocative if not a troll. Many have already written him off as a troll. In past threads and pittings he has started he has frequently annoyed and insulted other posters. He allied himself to one that almost all agreed was a nasty troll; one that likes to return with socks. You might say he tap dances on the edge of jerkdom and for many is over the line.
Therefore, when he starts a “provocative thread”, the negative reactions roll in quicker than if a poster in good standing or even neutral standing started the same thread.
Jim
I don’t think it would be difficult for most Dopers to answer, but allow me to rephrase. Could you ever be that callous and dehumanizing in your thinking about a group of people? If so, would you verbalize that thinking? If so, for what purpose?
No, here you are mistaken. I am of the opinion that it is cruel to express his views in the wording that he chose.
I can understand your not trying to please everyone all the time. That is quite different from crafting your posts into hate speech.
If you are ignoring the personal insults, I guess that might mean that you are looking for support for your ideas, perhaps? More feedback? We all get to say what we think. If your ideas are controversial or usually repulsive, you can choose not to go down that road again or you can take that route and probably fall in the same hole and go though the same consequences. Maybe that’s really what you want instead of positive feedback. Negative attention is better than no attention at all.
But not everyone uses that function. That’s just it. It wouldn’t surprise me if most people don’t feel the need. I’ve never used it. I will take for granted what What Exit? said about Aeschines. And I may have even squabbled with him before. But, if I did, it and he just didn’t register. I don’t remember him from hoot. Why should I not read his post? Why should I not read it even if I think that it might offend me anyway? And why should I remain silent about offensive posts?
[Quote]
Originally Posted by Zoe:
Aeschines comments were offensive in the same way that racial comments are offensive: The don’t just offend that particular racial group. His comments don’t offend just obese people. I hope the dehumanizing effects of these kinds of comments will be seen to be the hate speech that they really are…
No. You keep forgetting you are the Newbie. If I feel that strongly about it, I can voice my disagreement. I’ve done it before and I will continue to do so from time to time.
Well, I read a good portion of the original thread. I tend to agree with what Aeschines said, but not the spirit. I find myself attracted to girls that aren’t fat. With that being said, if a fat girl came into my life and knocked me off my feet, well, then I’d be an idiot for not letting myself fall for her.
In My Humble Opinion, there was a pretty coarse statement to begin with. Presumably fat people piled on.
In any case, there’s no accounting for taste, but there is accounting for overreacting. Everyone involved is guilty of that (except Frank. He did a good job of letting people talk before it got out of hand.)
His original post wasn’t about being attracted to someone that’s overweight and if so, why? If it was worded even slightly like you just did it probably wouldn’t have been so offensive to people. I have no dog in this fight but it was pretty tastless.
The spirit of his post seemed to be asking how is it possible for repulsively obese (because Lord knows he doesn’t want to watch it) people to have sex with all that disgusting fat. I mean how do you even find each others genitals through all that lard! Then he asked if anyone ever forced themselves to have sex with one of these circus freaks and how was it.
He didn’t use those words but that was the gist of his post when I read it. I was really hoping no one would dignify his post with a response and let it sit there like the big turd that it was.
Not all of the people who were critical of the OP are fat. Like any other hate speech, it offends more than the target of his ridicule.
I find your imagery…odd. :dubious:
Thank you.
I wouldn’t call it as much of a flaw as I would a difference in supposition. I evidently have a different supposition than you do of how reputations and online personalities are weighed in the arena of the marketplace of ideas.
Let me start by saying that I enjoy this message board and am NOT complaining about it, and I am NOT asking for this message board to be changed in any way. I am merely discussing this topic because it interests me in regards to all the message boards I’ve frequented.
Now, let me go back and comment on how I perceive most message boards. On most of the message boards I frequent, they generally have two basic functions. One of the functions is social/support and the other function is learning/debate/discussion of ideas.
In my view, in the social/support aspect of the message board, people’s reputations are important. You might not want to take advice on how to handle your marriage from a 16 year old whose parents are divorced. Of course, they might still have great advice, but you might be more wary to take it. So in that respect, knowing how the person behaves based on previous posts has some function, to filter out good advice from bad advice.
On the other hand, in the discussion of ideas aspect of the board, my view is that ideas are best looked at objectively without a reputation attached. And here’s why. We’re assuming here that we’re looking for more knowledge or creative ideas or a robust exchange of information in this function. For that, I believe we would need to avoid groupthink.
Groupthink is a process by which all people, because we’re social animals and seek validation and affirmation of our ideas, tend to voice those ideas which will be accepted by the group and subjugate those ideas which will not be accepted. I read once where some group of NASA scientists used various techniques to guard against this process because their work required creative ideas and the scientists didn’t want to fall into the trap of creating a group mindset, which would not allow them to ‘think outside the box.’
In my view, by using peoples’ reputations and their previous ideas as the basis for the standard of discussion, I think that groupthink becomes a more likely process. Having said that, I don’t know any ways to guard against it entirely especially on this kind of medium where one message board plays two roles–social and ostensibly learning.
To that end, which is learning more about people’s thoughts on this issues, I joined this thread and asked in post #101 (to Aeschines):
I don’t know the answers to these questions, but I think they’re worth exploring. Given the comments on this thread, I thought that people here would be interested in doing so.
You’ve used the term provocative twice to describe Aeschines’ behavior.
Here’s the dictionary.com definition of provocative:
Since I don’t think you meant he was exciting sexual desire (although you can correct me if I’m wrong here), I’ll go with the first definition.
Is it bad that he might be stimulating discussion or exciting controversy? You seem to give it a negative connotation.
Stimulating discussion is good – when it’s being done for the intellectual pleasure of the debate, the pursuit of enlightenment or broadening understanding of disparate views.
Exciting controversy is bad – when it’s done not to shed light on an issue but rather to inflame the emotions of other participants and derive enjoyment from their reactions to the yanks on the chain.
Aeschines’s history here is rife with episodes of the latter, with gleeful poking of sharp sticks into soft spots, accompanied by sneering derision of those who disagree with him and preening self-congratulation at his own superior understanding.
Understandably, this disinclines Dopers familiar with his schtick from seeking to parse out innocent intent where malicious instigation infuses his language.
First, you’re welcomed. 
I used provocative on purpose. I am actually close to neutral about Aeschines. He does not bother me much. Provocative could be good or bad. Stimulating discussion can be fun, useful and interesting. I believe that for many people Aeschines just incites controversy.
Jim
Another meaning of provoke, according to Websters, is “to stir up purposely.”
I think your questions are worthwhile and deserve their own thread.