Misogyny, victim-blaming, and the board culture (yet again)

Sanctioning people who disagree with one side of a political debate is certainly one way to run a discussion board. I don’t think it’d be a very good way, and I don’t think it’s the SDMB way, but that’s just my opinion.

If you asked that question about white people vs black people, you might see it from a useful perspective, although the situations are not exactly equivalent. In both cases, the white or male person is the one who must choose to do the work.

You may think that walking off is “so much the worse” for women. But it really isn’t. It’s so much the worse for men.

It’s pretty simple – I propose moderators sanction misogynistic and victim-blaming posts (regarding victims/survivors of sexual assault/rape/etc.). Whether they’re sincere, in “good faith”, out of ignorance, malicious, or otherwise.

I thought that was already the policy. And I thought the moderators had a pretty good handle on what is “misogyny”. I’m no longer confident that’s the case. Possibly it’s because of the moderation staff turnover, or maybe it’s due to something else. I hope the staff will reconsider their evaluation of this issue. I believe that toleration of the kind of post referenced in the OP could do significant long-term damage to the board.

So your goal here is to egg the moderators (who I suspect are all older men) to start sanctioning people for reasonable, logical arguments because they make you feel bad. And there is no way for the people making the arguments to know ahead of time whether that specific post is breaking the rules. Since in your own admission misogynist men won’t even know they are doing it.

What do you propose? One key element of any legal system of rules is you cannot fairly hold someone accountable for something they had no way to know ahead of time they were doing wrong.

Is why I was so annoyed at a recent moderation because it wasn’t apparently rule breaking at the time I made the post.

Your arguments are neither reasonable mor logical.

If, in the midst of the Duke lacrosse rape hoax, someone had posted something to the effect that “I think this is horseshit. I don’t think those young men raped anyone and I think the alleged victim here is a liar”, do you think they should be sanctioned for expressing such an opinion?

That’s part of the good faith element. If I’m arguing in good faith, I will consider the counterarguments. I might not agree with them but I will consider them. I will do some work to understand the opposing positions, not necessarily all of it, but I won’t just sit back and hand-wave away a sincere argument.

I mean, it’s not always possible to convince someone to change their mind. The differences may be axiomatic in nature, or beyond the scope of what the participants are willing to debate. That’s part of life. In that case though, the other position isn’t necessarily ignorant or even wrong - just built on a different set of assumptions.

I’m not saying this is the case with SamuelA or HurricaneDitka’s position re: Kavanaugh. I haven’t undertaken the debate necessary to reach that conclusion, and I’m not particularly want to do so.


Let’s assume that under the current set of rules, the board will turn into an echo chamber of misogynists. That it is impossible to entertain unwitting misogynist arguments, made from ignorance but in good faith, without driving out everybody else and removing the capacity to address those arguments.

I also take it as a premise that it is impossible to fight ignorance without addressing it - entertaining the ignorant arguments.

Therefore, it is impossible to fight ignorance that takes the form of misogyny. Would you agree? I don’t.


The board already sanctions hate speech for things like race, sexual orientation, gender identity, etc. Much of that is driven by ignorance.

Hate speech by definition cannot be made in good faith. I don’t see the contradiction.


Of course it can, if you are a hateful person.

That’s a weird thing to say. If I really hated Albanians because something or someone had led me to the sincere belief that the reason everything in my life sucks is because of them damn, dirty, scheming Albanians with their dog-fucker genes ; and furthermore I sincerely thought everything about my life would go a lot better if all them Albanians were hanged from lamp posts… That’d obviously be cretinous of me, but I’d still yell “death to the 'banies !” in good faith.

No, I think you are mixing up good faith and sincerity. Sincerity is only one component of good faith, the “faith” part. The other component is that the action is done without any malice (hate). That’s the “good” part. So good faith requires both sincerity and the absence of malice. It is incompatible with hate speech.

ETA: You too, Kobal2.


Why does this shit always happen just when I start to feel comfortable about posting here again?

Which of the following statements are misogynistic and/or victim-blaming, and should be moderated?
[ul][li]I do not believe that Christine Ford’s allegation against Brett Kavanaugh is true. [/ul][/li][ul][li]I do not believe Christine Ford. [/ul][/li][ul][li]I do not automatically give greater weight to the accusation of a woman than the denial of a man [/ul][/li][ul][li]I do not automatically give greater weight to the denial of a man than the accusation of a woman[/ul][/li][ul][li]If Ms. Ford’s allegation is true, her actions are praiseworthy[/ul][/li][ul][li]If Ms. Ford’s allegations are false, her actions are not praiseworthy[/ul][/li][ul][li]That someone has been the subject of sexual harassment, abuse, or assault, does nothing to establish the truth or falsehood of any accusation of a different person[/ul][/li]

That’s it? Seriously? You’d rather lose a bunch of women posters so you can keep HIM? Message received.

There have been multiple post reports in this thread. This isn’t my forum to moderate, and given most of the reports were received in in the last 5 hours which for me was when I was sleeping, I think letting the normal process proceed is appropriate.


IANAMod and don’t get to make any decisions over who stays and who has to go, but in another recent post, you said this:

ISTM that there’s some application for those words of yours here as well.

The only “behavior” she is guilty of that’s leading to posts like these is being a woman, you misogynistic creep.