# Misogyny on the SDMB, Sept. 2018 edition **URL:** \ **Category:** About This Message Board\ **Created:** [September 25, 2018, 5:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/misogyny-on-the-sdmb-sept-2018-edition/821899 "2018-09-25T17:45:19Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 9
**Author:** ![JohnT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnt/32/15048_2.png) [@JohnT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnT)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2018, 6:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/misogyny-on-the-sdmb-sept-2018-edition/821899/161 "2018-09-29T18:06:59Z")
Naw, this place is a business, with revenues and profit expectations. [Cite](https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=859854). It is not a publicly funded university, it isn’t a TEDx symposium, it’s a business with financial needs. As has been argued to the point of near infinite repetition, businesses are not subject to First Amendment concerns. What they _are_ subject to are the demands of the market, branding, positioning, messaging. Starving Artists words would not be welcome on the pages of USA Today. His words would not be used as advertising copy. A brilliant marketing guru would not repackage his arguments into a blog, replicating them across various social media platforms via paid placements. [Instead, he would be canned.](https://www.nbcnews.com/card/fox-news-fires-contributor-after-reprehensible-comments-about-kavanaugh-accusers-n914606) Fired. Disavowed. Distanced. Deleted. The SDMB isn’t big enough for network effects to drown him out… this place isn’t Facebook, it’s not even MySpace, it’s not even 4Chan. It’s a relatively small community owned by a struggling newspaper who is so desperate to monetize it that they are begging us for suggestions on how to do so. As a business case, _the SDMB can no longer afford to allow Starving Artist to remain_, especially as poster after poster after poster has, in various discussions of overt misogyny on this Board declared their intent to leave, allow their paid subscriptions to lapse, or even just… leave, period, without saying a word. It has nothing to do with “echo chambers”, it really doesn’t. It goes down to what will make the SDMB a viable money-making enterprise, and having a member who constantly, for years, makes arguments which morally and viscerally disgust the vast majority of those who read them, these arguments growing more pronounced as the regular user base slowly declines, runs counter to the financial and business needs of this Board. In short, there is no market for pro-pedophilia arguments. There is no market for sexual assault apologia. There is no market for Starving Artist. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2018, 7:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/misogyny-on-the-sdmb-sept-2018-edition/821899/162 "2018-09-29T19:23:19Z")
> [@blob](#): > > Notwithstanding the constant, repeated accusations and abuse that fly out of the mouth of a certain poster, I am not happy with an echo chamber and I’m not going to chuck a huge wobbly every time some clueless bloke makes an inappropriate/sexist remark. However there’s a time and a place. A serious discussion about a topical issue is not the place to pipe up about some actress you fancy. A thread about movie stars is/might be. etc. It’s not that hard for those who aren’t completely clueless. And if someone (of any gender) makes a particularly clueless remark and is pulled up on it by others, don’t start abusing and attacking left, right and centre. Stick to the point of the discussion. Either disagree and move on, or rethink. Attributing motives and imaginary scenarios to “explain” why somebody is pulling you up and then spewing abuse based on your own delusions is unhelpful (and infuriating). Thanks, with more attitude like this, i think we can all work together to get rid of the worst… and slowly on the rest, with us _clueless blokes._(which, I admit I am) ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2018, 7:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/misogyny-on-the-sdmb-sept-2018-edition/821899/163 "2018-09-29T19:26:15Z")
> [@JohnT](#): > > If we have a voice here, I _strongly_ urge that you ban this defender of pedophilia and sexual assault. Seriously, what is he bringing to the boards which overcomes his conduct in discussions regarding sexual crimes? > > Ban him. The SDMB has banned others for far, far less. I hate to be thought of as defending SA, since I think he should banned, but “defender of pedophilia”?😕 ---
**Author:** ![Ramira](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ramira/32/344_2.png) [@Ramira](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ramira)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2018, 7:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/misogyny-on-the-sdmb-sept-2018-edition/821899/164 "2018-09-29T19:29:32Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > I hate to be thought of as defending SA, since I think he should banned, but “defender of pedophilia”?😕 the infamous defense he made of some football coach… ---
**Author:** ![Penfeather](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/penfeather/32/384_2.png) [@Penfeather](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Penfeather)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2018, 8:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/misogyny-on-the-sdmb-sept-2018-edition/821899/165 "2018-09-29T20:52:09Z")
> [@JohnT](#): > > Naw, this place is a business, with revenues and profit expectations. [Cite](https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=859854). It is not a publicly funded university, it isn’t a TEDx symposium, it’s a business with financial needs. > > As has been argued to the point of near infinite repetition, businesses are not subject to First Amendment concerns. What they _are_ subject to are the demands of the market, branding, positioning, messaging. > > Starving Artists words would not be welcome on the pages of USA Today. His words would not be used as advertising copy. A brilliant marketing guru would not repackage his arguments into a blog, replicating them across various social media platforms via paid placements. > > [Instead, he would be canned.](https://www.nbcnews.com/card/fox-news-fires-contributor-after-reprehensible-comments-about-kavanaugh-accusers-n914606) Fired. Disavowed. Distanced. Deleted. > > The SDMB isn’t big enough for network effects to drown him out… this place isn’t Facebook, it’s not even MySpace, it’s not even 4Chan. It’s a relatively small community owned by a struggling newspaper who is so desperate to monetize it that they are begging us for suggestions on how to do so. As a business case, _the SDMB can no longer afford to allow Starving Artist to remain_, especially as poster after poster after poster has, in various discussions of overt misogyny on this Board declared their intent to leave, allow their paid subscriptions to lapse, or even just… leave, period, without saying a word. > > It has nothing to do with “echo chambers”, it really doesn’t. It goes down to what will make the SDMB a viable money-making enterprise, and having a member who constantly, for years, makes arguments which morally and viscerally disgust the vast majority of those who read them, these arguments growing more pronounced as the regular user base slowly declines, runs counter to the financial and business needs of this Board. > > In short, there is no market for pro-pedophilia arguments. There is no market for sexual assault apologia. There is no market for Starving Artist. This bears repeating. It’s one thing to invite guests to your house only for them to find that the hosts are allowing the strident despicables to hold court in the living room, bellowing that life was much better when the ladies and the Negroes knew their proper place: some people will argue, most people will move to a better conversation, and quite a few will leave in disgust. But it’s quite another to try and sell tickets to a gathering only for to find that the same repugnancies are still permitted to hold court, and the organisers just shrug and say, “Well, if he _swore_ we might be able to do something, but as it is our hands are tied.” You want to sell more tickets to this _soiree_, you tell the troglodyte arseholes who are ruining it to shut up or leave your party. ---
**Author:** ![nelliebly](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/nelliebly/32/5422_2.png) [@nelliebly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/nelliebly)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2018, 10:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/misogyny-on-the-sdmb-sept-2018-edition/821899/166 "2018-09-29T22:35:04Z")
> [@BeeGee](#): > > " Banning stupidity doesn’t fix it. It just hides it. Personally, I thought we’d settled this 25 years ago, but apparently we just pushed it underground. It didn’t work then and it won’t work now. You’ve to go dig 'em up, dust 'em off, shake 'em til their teeth rattle, and leave 'em in the vile dust from whence they sprung, unhonored, unwept, and unsung. **Things have changed**. 25 years ago, it was fairly easy to distinguish between people who expressed unpopular views and trolls… **And yes, this IS about trolls**.Trolls are aren’t just bored idiots smoking weed in their parents’ basements any more. They’re “steadily upping their game,” as [Time](http://time.com/4457110/internet-trolls) magazine says: > [@](#): > > …trolling has become the main tool of the alt-right, an Internet-grown reactionary movement that works for men’s rights and against immigration…Trolling is the alt-right’s version of political activism, and its ranks view any attempt to take it away as a denial of democracy. Yes, banning unpopular viewpoints would be bad for the SDMB. That’s not what’s going on here. I suggested in another thread we simply ignore people like SA. The problem with my suggestion is that unlike the trolls of old, the intention is not merely to engage others; it’s to chase them away: > [@](#): > > When sites are overrun by trolls, they drown out the voices of women, ethnic and religious minorities, gays–anyone who might feel vulnerable. The SDMB ignores this new reality at its own peril. ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2018, 12:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/misogyny-on-the-sdmb-sept-2018-edition/821899/167 "2018-09-30T00:08:50Z")
> [@coffeecat](#): > > Diversity of opinion. He’s right; this place is an echo chamber. > > I think murdering babies is even worse than rape and pedophilia, and, by pro-life definitions, most of the people here defend murdering babies. Even so, if I were a pro-lifer, I wouldn’t put you (us) in the same category as someone who beat a toddler to death, because you thoughtfully and honestly don’t regard abortion as murder. > > Back in the '60s, returning Vietnam vets were reviled as murderers. Now we’re all “support our troops.” Should we ban posters who’ve been in the military, or thank them for their service? > > I don’t know what I think of **StarvingArtist** ’s defense of pedophilia, because I never saw it, but I have followed the rape threads. I don’t think he regards what Kavenaugh allegedly did as real attempted rape, or attempted “rape” rape, or something. He’s been a hell of a lot politer than the virtuous liberals who’ve called him names, and I think we need to recognize that people can have different opinions on moral issues without being monsters. If you refuse to talk to anyone with a different moral opinion, you’ll have to lock yourself alone in your room, hating yourself for your past evil thoughts. It doesn’t matter what **Starving Artist** thinks. **What was described is objectively attempted rape.** There can be arguments that what is described didn’t actually happen, but there is no argument that what is described is not rape. Abortion is not like this at all. There very much is an argument for and against it. It is not something objective, like the definition of attempted rape. The issue with veterans also has always had both sides. It is not something objective, like the definition of attempted rape. These things are not equal. This is not an issue of differing opinion. This is a guy seeing all the requirements for attempted rape and saying “It’s not that bad.” He is saying that it’s okay to find a drunk woman, pin her to a bed, and start trying to take her clothes off and penetrate her. I think it’s very, very reasonable to draw a line there and say that you cannot say that. It attacks all rape victims. It condones violating the law. There isn’t a debate among non-rapists that such actions are not acceptable. And if that makes us an echo chamber to not allow the idea that it should be okay to pin a woman to a bed and start trying to penetrate her, then that’s a good echo chamber. That’s one that tells people that we don’t let in the people who would try to hurt them. ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2018, 12:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/misogyny-on-the-sdmb-sept-2018-edition/821899/168 "2018-09-30T00:54:20Z")
> [@coffeecat](#): > > I don’t know what I think of **StarvingArtist** ’s defense of pedophilia, because I never saw it, You really, REALLY don’t want to – the thread ran to something like what, 300 pages, and he got really, really disgusting. All because he was so obsessed with lionizing Joe Paterno. Somebody could probably find the particular post where he went over the edge, but quite frankly, I don’t have the stomach. ---
**Author:** ![rat\_avatar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rat_avatar/32/255_2.png) [@rat\_avatar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rat_avatar)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2018, 12:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/misogyny-on-the-sdmb-sept-2018-edition/821899/169 "2018-09-30T00:58:45Z")
While I realize the mods have a difficult job, as stated in this case a crime _(rape)_ was dismissed as\* [not] “all that serious”\* and then the victim was blamed as deserving/causing it. > [@Can Democrats actually stop the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh?](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/3155): > > You do raise an interesting point though, which is that Ford may have felt shame for having put herself in the position where such an attack could occur. She was underage, in a swim suit, at a party where alcohol was flowing, there was no adult supervision, and with boys who were known to become sexually aggressive when drinking. I can certainly see how she would feel a certain sense of responsibility for what happened to her (though I doubt anyone here will profess the same), and that she was probably also fear of her parents finding out. How is this not in violation of the registration rules? > [@](#): > > any material that you know or should know is … violative of U.S. law. You agree not to post material that in our opinion fosters or promotes activity that is illegal in the U.S. > > …Do not post threats or state or imply that any individual or group is deserving of harm… I am not qualified at all to discuss what the board should do for policy, and I am probably subject to confirmation bias. But outside of sexual assault and rape I can’t think of other topics where this _is_ allowed on the board. Please correct me if I am mistaken but is there a unique exception for [rape myth acceptance](https://www.hhs.gov/ash/oah/sites/default/files/ash/oah/oah-initiatives/paf/508-assets/conf-2011-herman-irma.pdf)? Because I can absolutely see how a poster would view the current policy as doing so. While I would personally prefer to debate such individuals; as a member of a group that isn’t commonly subject to this type of crime and harassment my desires shouldn’t be given any weight at all. IMHO rules enforcement should always error on the side of providing a safe environment for those subject to abuse and crimes of violence. ---
**Author:** ![blob](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/blob/32/489_2.png) [@blob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/blob)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2018, 1:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/misogyny-on-the-sdmb-sept-2018-edition/821899/170 "2018-09-30T01:51:14Z")
> [@coffeecat](#): > > He’s been a hell of a lot politer than the virtuous liberals who’ve called him names, and I think we need to recognize that people can have different opinions on moral issues without being monsters. If you refuse to talk to anyone with a different moral opinion, you’ll have to lock yourself alone in your room, hating yourself for your past evil thoughts. You can refuse to talk to somebody who spews abuse and does not address any point directed at the discussion. Sticking your fingers in your ears and going “lalalalalalala, you’re just brainwashed” is the height of rudeness. Ignoring every point raised by other posters is the height of rudeness. You are not free to have a different “opinion” about an issue of law. It’s not a moral issue. Whether something is unlawful is a matter of fact and has nothing to do with “morals”. When something is unlawful, you don’t get to say it’s really ok. The legislature decides and when it has said that you are WRONG, you get to shut up. Or, get yourself elected and stand up and say that you think women are fair game as long as they manage to fight you off… I’m sick to death of being called a “liberal” because I object to some troglodyte’s delusions. It’s absurd. Every time somebody abuses you for being the member of a group after you have repeatedly said that you are not, they are being monumentally rude. As for calling him names, when I am being repeatedly attacked, I am entitled to respond in kind. Posters really do not have to put up with constant abuse (and Lalalalalala I’m going to ignore any point made and regurgitate "you are brainwashed! you are a liberal! blah blah blah blah is just abuse, it isn’t furthering any discussion on a topic). It isn’t a “differing opinion” it’s responding to points with lalalalalala abuse abuse abuse, I don’t have to listen! Childish, unhelpful, rude and ridiculous. ---
**Author:** ![coffeecat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/coffeecat/32/3405_2.png) [@coffeecat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/coffeecat)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2018, 2:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/misogyny-on-the-sdmb-sept-2018-edition/821899/171 "2018-09-30T02:50:45Z")
> [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](#): > > Counterpoint: [https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=21195056&highlight=bra�nwashed#post21195056](https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=21195056&highlight=bra%EDnwashed#post21195056) > > You don’t have to be arrogant at all. You merely recognize that you’re in the midst of a bunch of people who’ve been brainwashed by man-hating feminist dogma while eagerly swallowing victim pills for, in most cases, all their lives. > > You’re a pro-lifer. I disagree with you. But I think we could probably have a decent discussion about it. \ If you read my previous post carefully, you will notice I stated the pro-life position without saying it was mine, and followed it up with “If I were a pro-lifer. . . .” **I AM NOT A PRO-LIFER.** I was on the fence at one point in college, wrote a paper on the subject to make up my mind, ended up pro-choice (mainly because I didn’t want to force babies to have babies in the name of morality), but I understand both sides, and the only thing I’m sure of is that anyone who thinks one side’s obviously right and the other’s obviously wrong doesn’t really understand the issue. \ We’re not just post-fact, we’re post-opinion. People act like politics, morality, and religion can be proven scientifically, while evolution and global warming are up for grabs. \ \ :: pauses to breathe and sip some water :: Yeah, he invalidated rape victims. ☹ I fold. I think SA’s going to leave here angrily thinking liberals can’t handle the truth or honest debate. I wish we had more conservatives. There are a lot of them out there, and _they_ can’t all be brainwashed, either. I even enjoy seeing an occasional racist getting pwned, not by insults, but by overwhelming evidence. It makes it obvious they’re not brave iconoclasts, just wrong. ---
**Author:** ![blob](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/blob/32/489_2.png) [@blob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/blob)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2018, 3:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/misogyny-on-the-sdmb-sept-2018-edition/821899/172 "2018-09-30T03:12:00Z")
> [@coffeecat](#): > > I wish we had more conservatives. Aren’t “conservatives” generally supposed to be in favour of “law and order”? If so, we’ve got lots and lots, all arguing with the lefty who wants sex offenders to walk free… Political delusions have nothing to do with discussing a specific topic. I think anyone mentioning republican/democrat or conservative/liberal or any of that should get an insta-ban, especially when it’s directed at foreigners. Stick to the point (if you have one) and keep the accusations and abuse to yourself. EDIT There’s no doubt that Starving Artist has painted himself as some sort of warrior for “his side” (whatever the hell side that’s meant to be :D). He’s obviously not well, and there’s nothing anybody can do about that (unfortunately). He’ll be preaching his “virtues” to whomever will listen. It’s rather sad, but nothing will make any difference. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2018, 4:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/misogyny-on-the-sdmb-sept-2018-edition/821899/173 "2018-09-30T04:03:50Z")
> [@blob](#): > > He’ll be preaching his “virtues” to whomever will listen. It’s rather sad, but nothing will make any difference. Please excuse the nitpick: _to **whoever** will listen_. It’s the subject of the clause. ---
**Author:** ![raventhief](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/raventhief/32/4_2.png) [@raventhief](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/raventhief)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2018, 4:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/misogyny-on-the-sdmb-sept-2018-edition/821899/174 "2018-09-30T04:11:42Z")
> [@Acsenray](#): > > Please excuse the nitpick: _to **whoever** will listen_. It’s the subject of the clause. Continuing the hijack… Answer the question, and that will tell you which it should be. Who is listening? He is listening. Vs whom is listening? Him is listening. ---
**Author:** ![blob](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/blob/32/489_2.png) [@blob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/blob)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2018, 4:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/misogyny-on-the-sdmb-sept-2018-edition/821899/175 "2018-09-30T04:15:39Z")
> [@raventhief](#): > > Who is listening? He is listening. Vs whom is listening? Him is listening. Bloody hell. The person who is listening is the object, not the subject. “Preaching (to)” is the verb, not “listening”. ---
**Author:** ![raventhief](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/raventhief/32/4_2.png) [@raventhief](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/raventhief)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2018, 4:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/misogyny-on-the-sdmb-sept-2018-edition/821899/176 "2018-09-30T04:20:05Z")
> [@blob](#): > > Bloody hell. The person who is listening is the object, not the subject. “Preaching (to)” is the verb, not “listening”. Sorry, again… Preach to he/him who will listen. ---
**Author:** ![blob](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/blob/32/489_2.png) [@blob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/blob)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2018, 4:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/misogyny-on-the-sdmb-sept-2018-edition/821899/177 "2018-09-30T04:25:25Z")
> [@raventhief](#): > > Sorry, again… Preach to he/him who will listen. Preaching to him, not preaching to he. ---
**Author:** ![raventhief](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/raventhief/32/4_2.png) [@raventhief](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/raventhief)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2018, 4:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/misogyny-on-the-sdmb-sept-2018-edition/821899/178 "2018-09-30T04:27:32Z")
Then leave off the part “will listen.” That’s what fucks it up. ---
**Author:** ![blob](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/blob/32/489_2.png) [@blob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/blob)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2018, 4:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/misogyny-on-the-sdmb-sept-2018-edition/821899/179 "2018-09-30T04:56:11Z")
> [@raventhief](#): > > Then leave off the part “will listen.” That’s what fucks it up. Except it doesn’t…😃 ---
**Author:** ![Drunky\_Smurf](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/drunky_smurf/32/449_2.png) [@Drunky\_Smurf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Drunky_Smurf)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2018, 5:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/misogyny-on-the-sdmb-sept-2018-edition/821899/180 "2018-09-30T05:28:25Z")
> [@Acsenray](#): > > Please excuse the nitpick: _to **whoever** will listen_. It’s the subject of the clause. > [@raventhief](#): > > Continuing the hijack… Answer the question, and that will tell you which it should be. > > Who is listening? He is listening. Vs whom is listening? Him is listening. > [@blob](#): > > Bloody hell. The person who is listening is the object, not the subject. “Preaching (to)” is the verb, not “listening”. > [@raventhief](#): > > Sorry, again… Preach to he/him who will listen. > [@blob](#): > > Preaching to him, not preaching to he. > [@raventhief](#): > > Then leave off the part “will listen.” That’s what fucks it up. > [@blob](#): > > Except it doesn’t…😃 Welcome to The Dope! [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/misogyny-on-the-sdmb-sept-2018-edition/821899.md?page=8) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/misogyny-on-the-sdmb-sept-2018-edition/821899.md?page=10)